18Q-N4+ 19R-B3

There is no recourse but to shed the Q, but Lasker picks up a stray B as well.

The final point of the combination. Black should have stopped here and the final moves are not so interesting: 22... B-KB3 23 QXB K-N2 24 R-KB1 QR-N1 25 Q-Q7 KR-Q1 26 Q-N4+ K-Bl 27 PXP B-N2 28 P-K6 R-N2 29 Q-N6 P-B3 30 RXP+ BXR 31QXB+ K-Kl 32 Q-R8+ K-K2 33 Q-N7+ Black Resigns. An impressive tactical display, but the strategic content is extremely restricted.

On those isolated occasions when the double-bishop combination occurs in contemporary play it tends to be more heavily disguised, since Lasker's transparent build-up would be less likely to fool a modern master. Here is one example:

Kuzmin-Sveshnikov, USSR Championship, Moscow, 1973. Sicilian Defence.

1 P-K4 P-QB4 2 N-KB3 P-K3 3 P-Q4 PXP 4 NXP N-QB3 5 N-QB3 Q-B2 6 B-K2 P-QR3 7 0-0 N-B3 8 B-K3 B-N5 9 NXN NPXN 10 N-R4 0-0 11 P-QB4. It seems that White is playing on the Q-side against the weak square b6, and to exploit the offside position of Black's KB. 11... B-Q3. If 11... NXP 12 P-B5 Q-K4! 13 B-Q4 Q-B5 14 BXNP!±. 12 P-B4 NXP 13 B-Q3 N-B3. Much stronger is 13 ... P-KB4, although White could easily regain his pawn in that case. 14 P-QB5 B-K2 15 B-Q4 N-Q4? Missing White's decoy sacrifices the only chance was 15 ... P-N3. 16 N-N6! A neat idea which synchronizes combinative play on both sides of the board. 16 ... NXN. If 16 ... R-Nl 17 BXP+ KXB 18 NXN BPXN


21 RXQ+

22 Q-Q7


19 Q-R5+ K-Nl 20 BXP! QXP+ 21 K-Rl KXB 22 Q-N4+ K-Rl 23 R-B3 Q-QB7 24 P-B5! +-. 17 BXP+ KXB 18 Q-R5+ K-Nl 19 BXP!

Was this article helpful?

0 0

Post a comment