In this example, after White's light-squared bishop captures on h5, Black can play ...f5. Then after exf5 and ..JLxf5, he could justifiably expect to gain put pressure upon White's weakened light squares such as d3. In the Fischer game, White didn't allow that, but ultimately it was Black's unopposed light-squared bishop that won the game. But going back to our main game, Black doesn't even have the two bishops! So can he possibly expect real counterplay? Yet he has achieved it in practice for several reasons: White's dark squares are weak due to the move f3; Black has good development; and the ...f5 break can potentially compromise White's centre or activate more pieces. Finally, the forward doubled pawn can be useful in attacking White's kingside, perhaps in conjunction with the g-file. Whether the theoretical verdict will match the practical one remains to be seen.
Without going into the theory, 11 Jle3 f5 also gives Black plenty of play.
13 Axf5 2xf5 14 0-0 is answered by the further flank development 14...£k6; this is followed by ...£ic7, when we see that Black's pawns aren't the only weak ones!
Mortensen feels that 13..Jtxd3 14 #xd3 £id7 is also reasonable.
Was this article helpful?