A Dragon You Can Believe In?
Raja Panjwani, "The Hyper Accelerated Dragon" (Thinkers Publishing, 2017)
After years of no chess books by Canadian authors, we are in the middle of a 9 month period when we will see three!
IM David Cummings published "Opening Repertoire: The English" (Everyman) in late 2016. GM Razvan Preotu and IM Michael Song -- or IM Michael Song and GM Razvan Preotu, if you ask Michael :) -- have a manuscript accepted for publication by Gambit, and expected out in the fall of 2017.
Last week, Thinkers Publishing released "The Hyper Accelerated Dragon" by Canadian IM Raja Panjwani. I bought it at Strategy Games on Sunday and have been going over it since. Here’s a review and excerpt.
Note to Parents: this may not be the Dragon your child is looking for. Grown ups, however…
The Sicilian Dragon is a perennial chess opening, played every day by youngsters, who love the fact that its typical opposite-side castling middlegames feature a few easily-learned maneuvers that result in pure calculate-to-mate middlegames, and played (occasionally) by World Champions (for surprise value, I suspect).
By contrast, despite their more radical-sounding names, the Accelerated and Hyper Accelerated Dragons are more sedate beasts: by delaying moving the d-pawn, Black can end up with less space, but has tactical and strategic options which cut across White’s most aggressive systems. This difference means they appeal to very different players: thrill-seekers like Nakamura give the Dragon a go from time to time, but stolid and hard-to-beat types like Tiviakov play the Accelerated. There are sharp lines in these Accelerated Dragons, but there are a lot more principled lines with extended maneuvering.
Moves and Chapters
The Hyper Accelerated Dragon begins: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6. Committing to the fianchetto before ...Nc6 rules out the very popular anti-Sicilian Rossolimo lines with Bb5, but does allow White to continue with 3.d4 cxd4 4.Qxd4, hitting h8, and this is the topic of one 12-page long chapter.
In both the Accelerated and Hyper Accelerated Dragons, Black delays ...d6, which makes ...d7-d5 (in one move) a clear equalizer in many variations. The Classical Variation (Be2 with 00) is the subject of Chapter 1, and Raja shows how Black equalizes with a quick …d5 (or less frequently …e5). That even includes a line where Black is not supposed to be able to get away with …d7-d5: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Bg7 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Be2 d5!? which will prove to be an unwelcome surprise to many White players.
If White avoids the Maroczy (c2-c4), then the only other way to stop the ...d7-d5 equalizer is 7.Bc4, which is the subject of Chapters 2 and 3. Black could allow the game to transpose into a Yugoslav attack (Bc4, f3, Qd2, 000, and a kingside pawn storm) but Raja wants to avoid that, and offers two antidotes: 7...Qa5 (ch.2) and his own system ("My System") which is a hybrid of the Dragon on the kingside (e7, f7, g6, h7/h5) and a Taimanov on the queenside (...a6, ...b5, ...e6). That's the subject of Chapter 3, and the excerpt in the game player below.
The downside of delaying central counterplay has generally been regarded as the Maroczy bind, where White clamps in the center and queenside with c2-c4. Raja has two chapters on the Maroczy: one on the Breyer variation (where Black trades a pair of Ns with ...Ng4 then plants the other N on d4 and tries to hold it there with ...e5), and the other (the longest in the book) on the main line Maroczy:
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Bg7 5.c4 Nc6 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Nc3 0-0 8.Be2 d6 9.0-0 Bd7 10.Qd2 Nxd4 11.Bxd4 Bc6 12.f3.
I've long thought that White's best in the Maroczy mainline was 10.Nc2, avoiding the exchange to exploit the extra space. Black could avoid that with 9...Nxd4, but Raja credits Canadian GM Kevin Spraggett for showing him that does not equalize, thanks to 10.Bxd4 Bd7 11.Qd3!, which is analyzed in ch.5.1.
I'm not sure if I was pleased or disappointed to have my prejudices confirmed, when, at the end of the section on 10.Nc2 (ch.5.2) Raja admits that White is a bit better. But there's some good judgment -- and not just whistling in the dark -- when he writes:
"The reader should be suspicious of authors who claim pure equality in all lines in anything other than the most topical lines of the Ruy Lopez or perhaps the Najdorf Sicilian. This is the sort of += we have to live with as Accelerated Dragon players. White played very well to get here, he had to navigate his way around many landmines. After all that, we can seek consolation in the fact that objectively speaking, there are only three results in chess, and '+=' is just short-hand for '= after accurate play'."
That’s worth saying, but it’s something I think I’ve seen expressed only by a few other authors I respect – I think Aagaard said almost exactly the same thing in his book on the Tarrasch, and there was a funny moment in Svidler’s chess24 video series on the Grunfeld where he apologized, saying something like “I promised exciting counterattacking chess, but I keep delivering slightly worse endgames”.
In fact, I think the underlying point can be generalized to all opening books: if (as all the top players believe) chess is a draw with best play, then every opening repertoire book for White should conclude with at least one line where the author admits White has no realistic chance of winning. Anything other than that and your author is fooling someone, maybe himself. Any suggestions?
Author's Qualities
Raja Panjwani is a Canadian IM who has been playing this line for years, so he clearly understands what he's talking about, and it’s no surprise to see many of his games cited in the notes. Canadians will also enjoy seeing GM Kevin Spraggett and IM Dave Ross cited and thanked for advice and analysis. Even better, Raja has his own ideas for Black which he shares throughout, but in particular in Chapter 3, where he introduces his own Anti-Yugoslav Attack system.
One thing that stands out to me is his intelligent assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of computer evals in these middlegames. Raja regularly says things like:
- "the computer rates this as 0.00, but it is easier to play as Black, who can go... [and follows with a description of Black's goals and maneuvers]", or
- "the computer says Black is OK in this line, but the margin for error here is so narrow that I can't recommend it as a practical repertoire choice", or
- "the computer says White is better, but then just shuffles its pieces without making any improvement".
In our era of 3200+ Elo computers it's a good sign that an author consults them –- only an arrogant fool would not -- but it's an excllent sign when an author also knows how to interpret their evaluations. Sometimes "0.00" means the position is dead drawn, and sometimes it means there's a razor's-edge variation leading to a mind-boggling perpetual, and sometimes it means the computer can’t see any way to play the position which makes any difference to its evaluation – but humans can or think they can-- and it's essential to know which is which. Raja does. You can see some examples of this in the playable excerpt below.
This is not a complete repertoire book: if White doesn’t play d2-d4 then you’re on your own – then again, there’s no table of variations, so I might have missed something. The book does have one chapter on anti-Sicilians: the Alapin and the Morra. I was pleased to see Raja did not take the usual course of hand-waving bravado about the Morra Gambit – it’s totally refuted!! [followed by showing insanely sharp variations where… Black equalizes] --- but actually goes the opposite direction. He calls Marc Esserman’s book “Mayhem in the Morra” a “masterpiece” and concludes that the best response for a Hyper Accelerated Dragon player is to decline it:
"It is not at all clear to me that the Morra Gambit is refutable; on the contrary, Esserman's aforementioned book is a convincing defense of its soundness. Furthermore, as Hyper Accelerated Dragon players we offer White the option of a 'delayed' Morra Gambit 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c3 after which our options are far more limited. As best I can tell, Black cannot safely accept the delayed Morra Gambit... Fortunately, the ...d4-d3 line is a reliable way of transposing into Maroczy-strucutres which we are familiar with and happy to play as Black. I cannot overstate how frustrating it is for Morra Gambit players to be denied their Romantic fantasies and instead be lulled into a slow, maneuvering Maroczy structure." (p.192)
That last line particularly stands out: no macho posturing, no “I’ll-show-you-you-can’t-play-that-nonsense-against-me!”, just a passive-aggressive judo roll –- you want mayhem, enjoy your maneuvering.
Rather in the spirit of the Hyper Accelerated Dragon, I think.
Production
The book is well manufactured, with thin glossy paper that makes it look and feel much thinner than its actual 226 pages,
There's no bibliography, but it's clear from the text which books Raja has consulted: Donaldson and Silman's book on the accelerated dragon (2008?) is sited regularly, and Raja offers antidotes to the lines recommended for White in Negi's very recent 1.e4 repertoire books for Quality Chess, Khalifman's "Opening Repertoire According to Anand" series, Sveshnikov's c3 Sicilian book, and others. Oddly, I didn't see any reference to Andrew Greet's 2008 Everyman book "Starting Out: The Accelerated Dragon", though (even there) his recommendation against the Qxd4 sideline is different from Greet’s (…Nd5-b6 vs …Nd5-c7, respectively).
There are a few typos -- e.g. there are illegal moves in the headings at the start of chapters 4 and 5 -- and inconsistency in the capitalization of the piece names, but nothing that will cause much confusion.
The only complaint I have about the production is the formatting of the variations. Most variations begin with a blank line separating it from the parent branch, with open parenthesis and an indented paragraph. This works fine for short variations, but falls apart with complex nested variations: double-indenting those is a waste of paper space, but without using some other method for distinguishing them it is much harder to scan the pages and distinguish the main variations from their subvariations. You can see this on the downloadable sample pages [link below]. Sometimes (as on the notes to move 12 on page 19 in the sample) the variations are short and non-nested, so they're easy to scan. But when the variations are complex, as they often are later in the book, the subvariations span many pages, making them difficult to follow. In fact, I noticed one place (p.67) where a variation is formatted inside a subvariation, which means even the editor got confused there. These are the standard problems of converting computer chess analysis into legible text, and different publishers have different ways of coping with them. I'd have liked Thinkers Publishers to think of a better way. If nothing else, they could do away with the blank line, which is a waste of space, since the indented paragraph sufficiently distinguishes the each note from its parent line. The extra space would have been better used by an index of variations or chapter summaries.
Summary: excellent content; could be a Book of the Year with more fastidious editing.
PS: the real test of any opening book is adopting it in your games. Obviously, that’s not possible in 3 days, but I might follow up with a review if I have time to try this.
Raja Panjwani, "The Hyper Accelerated Dragon" (Thinkers Publishing, 2017). 226 pages.
sample: the Introduction and the first game from Chapter 1: https://www.newinchess.com/Shop/Images/Pdfs/7701.pdf
You can get your copy of Raja Panjwani's "The Hyper Accelerated Dragon" delivered from Strategy Games.
Playable Excerpt
In Chapter 3: "My System" vs 7.Bc4, Raja introduces a hybrid Dragon/Taimanov system with g6, a6, and e6 (without ...d6) which he has played with success against 2500+ GMs. It will certainly cause even well-prepared White players trouble. One common motif is that Black has several ways to exploit the fact that the pawn is still on d7: sometimes bring a N to d6, either supporting ...f5 if White castles short, or heading to c4 if White castles long; sometimes playing …Qc7-d6/e5 to defend the kingside, and at other times Black will go a long way into the middle game before playing …d7-d5. You’ll see some of these in the playable excerpt below.
Even if you don’t play through many of the variations, you can get a good sense of the balance between variations and words by reading Raja’s comments (RP). Comments marked JKU are by me (John Upper).
Note: The game in the player below was copied from the book – move-by-move – by me, and it is unlikely that I made no mistakes. Please treat any egregious errors below as mine.
..
[Event "Newsfeed"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2017.05.30"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Ch.3.2 My System vs 7.Bc4"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B35"]
[Annotator "Panjwani +"]
[PlyCount "44"]
[SourceDate "2017.05.31"]
[SourceVersionDate "2017.05.31"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 g6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Bg7 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Be3 Nf6 7. Bc4 O-O 8.
Bb3 a6 9. f3 {The moves 00, h3, and Nxc6 are covered in the previous section.
- JKU} Qc7 (9... b5 $6 10. Nxc6 dxc6 11. e5 $14) 10. Qd2 (10. O-O {It makes no
sense to combine f3 with kingside castling, as White's only constructive plan
after 10.0-0 is to go for f4 anyway. - RP .. Some authors might stop with that,
but Raja gives 1/2 page of analysis to show how Black should play against it.
- JKU}) (10. g4 $5 {Black must be accurate here. - RP; with analysis
beginning...} b5 $1 11. Qd2 b4) 10... b5 (10... Na5 {is analyzed in a six page
Appendix, just in case Raja's System (with ...e6) runs into trouble.}) 11.
O-O-O {The book also analyzes: 11.Nxc6, 11.a4, 11.g4 and 11.h4, which
transposes to the mainline after 11.h5 12.000 Bb7.} Bb7 12. h4 {By far the
most common move. - RP The book also analyzes 12.Bh6??, 12.Nd5?!, 12.Kb1, and
12.g4} (12. Bh6 $4 Nxd4 13. Bxg7 Nxb3+ 14. axb3 Kxg7 $19) (12. Kb1 {This is a
concession we induce by prolonging the Knight's stay on c6. White now
threatens 13.h4 h5 14.Bh6 as after 14...Nxd4 15.Bxg7 Nxb3 is no longer check,
allowing 16.Qh6+-. - RP} Na5 $1 {Having induced White's Kb1, Black can now go
for lines similar to those after 10...Na5 where White is effectively down a
tempo in the critical variations because Kb1 turns out to be unnecessary. - RP
There is a lot more analysis here, but his mainline goes:} 13. Bh6 Nxb3 14.
cxb3 b4 15. Bxg7 bxc3 16. Qh6 Rfc8 $1 {This is one of the few lines worth
committing to memory as well. - RP It ends with either side giving a perpetual
- JKU}) 12... h5 $1 $146 {[#] A new move, but more importantly a new concept
for this line: containment. Previously, Black would rush with queenside
counterplay, hoping to mate White before getting mated himself. It turns out
that Black can contain White's kingside attack and solidify the center with ...
e7-e6, and only then proceed with queenside and/or central counterplay. For
his part, White must keep the attack going with urgency, because Black's
queenside counterplay is just a few moves away, and it will come with
devastating effect (...Rac8, ...Rfd8, ...Na5, etc.) - RP} (12... Na5 $5 {
This may be playable as well, but it is not in the spirit of the concept I am
advocating. To allow White h4-h5 without immediate counterplay is akin to the
ordinary Yugoslav Attack in the Dragon; our aim is to play in 'Taimanov style'
with ...h7-h5 and ...e7-e6. - RP}) 13. g4 {[#] The character of the position
demands that this be played. Timidity will not suffice; time is of the essence
in the race to determine which of the flank attacks will succeed. My initial
attitude towards this system was that I should delay ...e7-e6 for as long as
possible, because I felt I would always have the option later on, and I
thought there could be more useful attacking moves on the queenside such as 13.
.. Na5 (which also guards the important d5-square). However, as I delved
deeper into this variation, I realized that Black should keep the knight on c6
for a little longer to deter White's Be3-h6. The result is a rather peculiar
middlegame 'standoff', where White cannot make progress with Be3-h6 until
Black moves his knight from c6, but at the same time Black cannot make
progress on the queenside until he does either. -RP} (13. Bg5 $4 Nxe4 $19) (13.
Nxc6 {This may look unnatural -- and it is -- but the 'computer move' which it
is based on (14.Bd4!) is not to be underestimated. Black's f6-knight is the
MVP (most valuable piece) of his position, as without it, White's g2-g4xh5
would be decisive. Fortunately, the f6-knight is difficult to get at, as 13.
Bg5?? loses to 13...Nxe4. White's 13.Nxc6 takes aim at Black's f6-knight by
paving the way for 14.Bd4. - RP .. Good stuff! Few strong players would likely
play this on their own, but once they expect this system then many will follow
their computers' suggestions, so Raja forewarns and forearms, AND explains the
rationale behind this computer move. - JKU Here's the mainline of Raja's
analysis:} Bxc6 14. Bd4 a5 $1 15. e5 Ne8 16. Nd5 (16. Qg5 a4 17. Nd5 {Black
has an embarrassment of riches, needing to choose between two beautiful
variations - RP} axb3 $3 (17... Bxd5 18. Bxd5 Rc8 19. Rd2 e6 20. Be4 Qc4 21.
Kb1 Nd6 $3 {with counterplay.}) 18. Nxc7 bxa2 19. Kd2 Nxc7 $15) 16... Bxd5 17. Bxd5 Rc8 {
[#] Fair warning: what follows is a total mess. That being said, look closely
and you will see that it is White who needs to be accurate and find several
(nontrivial) 'only'-moves in order to survive the complications. As Black,
playing a risky line like this, we should welcome our opponents into what Tal
called the "deep dark forest where 2+2=5 and the path leading out is only wide
enough for one". - RP .. Raja has a page of analysis, showing Black how to
navigate this deep dark forest. - JKU}) 13... e6 $1 {[#] Like 13...Na5, this
move also prevents White's g4-g5 followed by Nc3-d5, but by keeping the knight
on c6, White's Be3-h6 is hindered. What follows is somewhat a game of 'cat and
mouse' -- White's main resource of Be3-h6 is unavailable at present, and it is
difficult to see how to continue the attack without that. Black would welcome
White's g4-g5, which locks up the kingside and directs Black's knight to d6
via e8. On the other hand, Black's queenside attack is stalled by the fact
that he can't play ...Nc6-a5 without allowing Be3-h6. That being said, whereas
White is at a loss for ways to improve his position, Black can place his rooks
on the d-and-c (or b-) files and threaten both central counterplay and a
queenside pawn storm. -RP} (13... Na5 $6 14. Bh6 $1 {This is ultimately the
problem with 13...Na5 -- White gets to exchange Black's 'Dragon bishop'. White
threatens Nd4-f5, so the following (14...e6) is forced. - RP} (14. gxh5 Nxh5
15. Rhg1 {Computers take some time to appreciate the power of this idea, but
anyone who has studied the Yugoslav Attack will know that White's recipe is to,
as Fischer said, "pry open" files to Black's king, then "sac, sac, mate". - RP}
e6 $1 16. Rg5 $1 {The aggressively inclined Black player may be in dismay --
White is initiating dangerous threats like Rg5xh5, and Black's counterattack
seems far off. However, as Suba teaches in his book Dynamic Chess Strategy,
"initiative is a psychological advantage", so it is up to us as defenders to
grant or deny this advantage to our opponents. The aggressor is not better
simply by virtue of being on the offensive: White was the first to initiate
action but if we defend well, he may quickly run out of steam and be left with
no attack and static pawn weaknesses. - RP} Kh7 $1 (16... Bf6 $6 17. Rxh5 gxh5
18. f4 $16) 17. Rdg1 Bf6 18. Rxh5+ gxh5 19. e5 Nxb3+ 20. axb3 Bxe5 21. Rg5 Rg8
{[#] This position is a draw according to my computer. Technically, then,
Black is not worse in this variation, but you can see why I prefer to avoid
this mess by playing 13...e6! - RP} 22. Rxh5+ Kg6 23. Qd3+ Kf6 24. f4 Bd6 $13 {
The Higher Power calls this "0.00", but I would not write a book recommending
this madness as the first option. - RP .. I like the Suba quote, which is
similar to ideas in Rowson's books which Raja quotes, and I appreciate that
these are not the kind of lines that would make an attractive Black repertoire.
But isn't the best reason not to recommend these moves the fact, which Raja
himself points out, that White has a clear improvement earlier in 14.Bh6. ..
I suspect that this is a case where the improvement (14.Bh6) was found later
in the writing process, but the explanations of the other variations were not
revised accordingly. - JKU}) 14... e6 (14... Nxb3+ 15. axb3 b4 16. Nce2 hxg4
17. Bxg7 Kxg7 18. Qg5 Nh7 19. Qxe7 $6 (19. Qxg4 e6 20. Nf4 $16) 19... Qa5 20.
Qxd7 $2 gxf3 $1 21. Nf4 $6 Qa1+ 22. Kd2 Qxb2 23. Nde6+ Kg8 24. Nxf8 Qc3+ 25.
Kc1 Bxe4 $17 {book analysis ends here - JU} 26. Rh2 Qa1+ 27. Kd2 Qe5 $2 28.
N8xg6 Nf6 $4 (28... fxg6 29. Qe6+ $11) 29. Nxe5 {1-0 (29) Cao,J (2332)
-Panjwani,R (2400) Canadian Ch., 2015.}) 15. Rhe1 $1 Nxb3+ 16. axb3 d6 17. Bxg7
Kxg7 18. gxh5 Nxh5 19. Rg1 {Black is suffering... with no counterplay... - RP .
. There's more analysis here, but it all ends in tears for Black. - JKU}) 14.
Kb1 {Raja analyzes five moves here: Kb1, a3, g5, Rdg1, and Nxc6.} (14. a3 {
[#] This is admittedly a 'computer move' -- I can't imagine many humans will
weaken their king position unprovoked. Nevertheless, it is instructive to see
how Black builds up attacking potential. - RP} Rfc8 $1 {In such positions it
is notoriously difficult to decide which rook to put on a given file. Pal
Benko is rumored to have joked that his method is as follows: think really
hard, decide which rook would be the right choice, then play the other rook!
By placing the f-Rook on c8 instead of d8, Black sidesteps a potential Be3-g5
pin, and also defends his Qc7 in case, after ...Nc6-e5 for example, White pins
the Knight with Be3-f4 or Qd2-h2. - RP .. I like that. It's a nice combination
of old-time humour/wisdom along with the tactical rationale for the move
chosen.... which is (of course) evidence that Benko's Rule really is just a
joke, or we would listen to Raja's hard thinking, and choose the Ra8 instead!
- JKU} 15. Bf4 (15. Nxc6 Bxc6 16. Bf4 Qb7 17. Be5 b4 $1 18. axb4 a5 $3 {
with more analysis - JKU}) (15. Kb1 Ne5 16. Bg5 hxg4 17. Bxf6 Bxf6 18. h5 g5
19. fxg4 Qc5 $1 20. Rdf1 Qe7 {with counterplay.} {Black plans to double on the c-file and sac
on c3.}) 15... Ne5 16. Qh2 d6 {[#] Black has a lot going for him: more central
pawns, White's attack has been halted, and Black's queenside attack is just
getting started. In addition to this, the tactics on e6 do not work for White.
- RP} 17. Nxe6 (17. Bxe5 dxe5 18. Nxe6 fxe6 19. Bxe6+ Kh7 20. Bxc8 Rxc8 {with counterplay.})
17... fxe6 18. Bxe5 (18. Bxe6+ Kh7 19. Bxc8 Rxc8 20. Bxe5) 18... dxe5 19. g5
Qe7 20. gxf6 Bxf6 21. Qh3 ({To me [JKU] this position looks better for White,
but I couldn't find anything convincing even after the trickier} 21. Qd2 {
for example:} Rc6 22. Qh6 Qg7 {Only move.} 23. Qxg7+ Bxg7 24. Rhg1 Kh7 25. Rd7 Rb8 26.
Re7 Bc8 {when Black has gone through contortions, but has everything covered
and will expel the R with ...Rb7 - JKU}) 21... Rc6 22. Qg3 Kh7 $11 {RP}) 14...
Rfd8 {We are in unexplored territory here, so I can only guess what White's
likely choice would be in an over-the-baord situation. I suspect that the urge
to 'do something' would be overwhelming, and White would be the first to cave
in. These days we tend to think the onus is on White to initiate complications.
In the early days of chess, they used to think that the more talented player
has a moral responsibility to initiate aggression! - RP .. Raja analyzes 5
moves here: g5, Bh6, Bf4, and Rdg1. Here is some of his analysis of Bh6:} 15.
Bh6 {White invites simplifications which yield no advantage - RP} Bxh6 16. Qxh6
Nxd4 17. Rxd4 Qe5 $1 18. gxh5 (18. Qd2 hxg4 19. fxg4 b4 20. Rxb4 Nxe4 21. Nxe4
Bxe4 22. Rf1 d5 23. Rb7 Rf8 $11 {The computer gives 'zeroes' ("0.00") but I
would prefer Black in a practical setting because Black has a beter Bishop,
more central pawns, and potential for taking over the initiative with ...a5-a4,
whereas attempts by White to 'do something' seem to only make his position
worse. - RP .. Again, I'll highlight this as an excellent combination of
computer use and titled-player knowledge: computers say it's equal, but it's
Black who has the choice of sitting or pushing. It might be worth noting that
h4-h5 doesn't threaten anything, since Black can play ...Bxg6 and the B and Q
cover all the squares on the h-file. - JKU} 24. g5 $6 a5 25. a4 Rab8 26. Rb5
Rxb5 27. axb5 Qc7 {with ...Rf8-b8 to follow. - RP}) 18... Nxh5 19. Rhd1 Qf4 $1
(19... Bc6 {Black should be able to hold here with accurate play but the
position is a little annoying to devend because Black lacks aconstructive plan.
This is why I recommend forcing matters by liquidating with 19...Qf4. - RP ..
Again, followed by more analysis to show what Black should try. - JKU}) 20.
Qxf4 Nxf4 21. Rxd7 Rxd7 22. Rxd7 Bc6 $11 {[#] It is not necessary to memorize
the precise way Black draws in the ensuing variations. I include them just for
the sake of completeness, but without comments. It is enough to recognize that
White's h4 pawn is bound to eventually capitulate to Black's ...Kg8-g7 and ...
Ra8-h8 or ...Nf4-g2, and White's Bishop remains frozen, missing in action on
b3. - RP .. There follows about 1/2 a page of analysis of this ending. IMO,
another good combo of variations and verbal explanation. - JKU} *
merida
46
..