|
|
Hamppe
Pierce
Allgaier
Gambit
Gambit
Steinitz Gambit
13
14
15
16
17
18
Nc6............................................................................................................................................. Bc5
3
Bc4 .......................f4
Nf3(n)
Bc5(a)
exf4(e)
d6
4
Qg4
Nf3...................... d4
d4(o)
g6(b)
g5(f)
Qh4+
exd4
5
Qf3
d4........................ h4
Ke2
Nxd4
Nf6
g4
g4
d6.........................d5
Nf6
6
Nge2
Bc4(g)
Ng5
Nf3
exd5
Bg5
d6(c)
gxf3
h6(i)
Bg4
Bg4+
h6
7
d3
0—0
Nxf 7
Bxf4(k)
Nf3
Bh4
Bg4
d5
Kxf 7
0—0—0(1) 0—0—0
Nc6
8
Qg3
exd5
d4(j)
Ke3
dxc6
Nxc6
h6
Bg4!
d5
Qh5
Bc5
bxc6
9
f4
Qd2
Bxf4
Be2
Qel
Bd3
Qe7
Nce7(h)
Bb4
g5!
Qh5
Qe7
10
Nd5
Qxf4
Be2
Nxg5
cxb7+
0—0
NxdS(d)
Qd7 ~
Bxc3t ~
Nf6 ~
Kb8(m)
g5(p)
(a) 3 ... f5 is provocative. Kivisto.—Pyhala, Pori 1986, continued 4 exfs (4 d3 is better) 4.. Nf6 5 d3 Bb4 6 Bg5 ds 7 Bxf6 gxf6 8 Qh5± Ke7 9 Bb3 Nd4 with advantage to Black.
(b) Other moves:
(A) 4 . . . Kf8 5 Qf3 Nf6 6 Nge2 d6 7 d3 t, Hennings—Korchnoi, Sarajevo
1969; (B) 4 ... Qf6 5 Nd5! Qxf2± 6 Kdi and neither 6 ... Kf8 7 Nh3
Qd4 8 d3 ±,
Mieses—Chigorin,
Ostend 1906, nor 6 ... Nf6 7 Qxg7 Nxd5 8 Qxh8t Bf8 (Fidelity S.2. computer—Shirazi,
USA 1986) 9 Qg8 ±, solves Black s problems.
(c) Keres suggested the regrouping 6 ... Bf8 followed by . . . Bg7. As the column is better for White, this is worth a try.
(d) After 11 Qxg4 White held a slight advantage in Larsen—Portisch, Santa Monica 1966.
(e) 3 . . . Bc5 is interesting. White can accept the gambit with 4 fxes d6 5 exd6 Qxd6 6 Nf 3 Bg4 ~, or play 4 Nf 3 forcing Black into the King s Gambit Declined where White retains the option of playing his Bishop to c4 or b5.
(f) 4 ... Nf6 and 4 ... Be7 are playable alternatives, but the text is more incisive.
(g) 6 Ne5 NxeS 7 dxe5 Qh4f is clearly better for Black, L. Paulsen—Gunsberg, Breslau 1889.
(h) After 9 ... Bg7 10 Qxf4 Bxd4± 11 Khl Qh4 12 dxc6 fxg2± 13 Kxg2 0—0—0 (Eger— Weinitsch, corr. 1985) 14 cxb7± White has the more dangerous attack.
(i) 6 .. . d6?! 7 d4 h6 8 Nxf7 Kxf7 9 Bc4t Kg7 10 Bxf4 Nf6 is a wild, unclear game, Hellers—Akesson, Sweden 1985. It is better for Black to force the sacrifice immediately.
(j) 8 Bc4t d5 9 Bxdst Kg? 10 d4 fS also leaves Black on top. White s sacrifice creates too little compensation for the lost material.
(k) 7 Nds 0—0—0 8 Kd3 Qh6 9 Bxf4 Qh5 10 c4 fs leaves Black with a large plus, Kavalek— Stein, Tel Aviv 1964.
(l) 7 . . . fs is also good. The column is Barle—Portisch, Portoro±/Ljubljana 1974.
(m) Black has a strong attack, but it is not clear who is better after 11 Kd2 or 11 Bxf4.
(n) 3 Qg4 Nf6 4 Qxg7 Rg8 5 Qh6 Bxf2!t is bad for White.
(o) 4 Na4 Bb6 5 Nxb6 axb6 6 d4 exd4 7 Qxd4 Qf 6 =, Kan—Capablanca, Moscow 1936.
(p) Not 10...
Qe5 11 Na4 Bb6 12 Bg3 ±, Horowitz—Kupchik, Syracuse 1934. After
10 ... g5 Larsen rates White as slightly better.
I