Ed. Lasker-Marshall, Lake Hopatcong 1926

Black to play and win after 22.Be3
Hint: it's not as obvious as it looks!

The following game offers a good example of Marshall's technique and a good illustration of play in the Three Knights Game that typically arises from Petroff's Defense (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4!). The text below is a PGN file and can be loaded into any PGN viewer (including Fritz). You can also now view the game online (in a Java board) or download the PGN file. I hope to provide similar links for future posted games. Eventually they will all be online at the main Kenilworth Chess Club site under "Articles."

[Event "Lake Hopatcong"]
[Site "Lake Hopatcong, NJ USA"]
[Date "1926.07.08"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Lasker, Edward"]
[Black "Marshall, Frank James"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C42"]
[Annotator "M. J. Goeller"]
[PlyCount "54"]
[EventDate "1926.07.??"]
[Source "Tournament Book"]

{This is a fascinating example of Marshall the technician rather than Marshall the tactician. The opening leads to a seemingly equal position, but Marshall is able to place his pieces better than his opponent, and he uses his better position to limit White's options to the point where it is difficult for him to avoid a mistake.} 1. e4 Nf6 {Andy Soltis writes that this move is "an indication of how far Marshall had come since being confronted with hypermodern openings two years before at the New York international." Marshall may have taken readily to the Alekhine's Defense in part because it allowed for transpositions to his favorite Petroff, as in the present game.} 2. Nc3 {"If White has nothing better than this against the so-called 'Alekhine Defense,' that defense is a good one" writes Howell.} e5 3. Nf3 Bb4 4. Nxe5 { "It is a good chess principle not to delay one's development in the opening by capturing a Pawn unless the Pawn can be kept or the opponent made to suffer in development while he is regaining it" writes Howell.} O-O ({ The inferior way for Black to recover the pawn is by} 4... Qe7 5. Nd3 Bxc3 6. dxc3 Qxe4+ 7. Be2 ({or simply} 7. Qe2 O-O 8. Qxe4 Nxe4 9. Be3 $14 { and the two Bishops are a long-term plus for White.}) 7... O-O 8. O-O d6 9. Bf3 Qh4 10. Nf4 Ng4 11. h3 Ne5 12. Be4 Nbc6 13. g3 Qd8 14. Qh5 Ng6 15. Nd5 f5 16. Bg5 Qd7 17. Bg2 $14 {1-0 Gikas,B-Batyte,D/Budapest HUN 2004 (50)}) 5. Be2 ({ White cannot hold the pawn successfully: a)} 5. d3 d5 6. a3 (6. Bd2 $142 Qe7 7. Nf3 dxe4 8. Nxe4 Nxe4 9. dxe4 Qxe4+ 10. Be2 Re8 11. O-O Qxe2 12. Bxb4 Nc6 13. Qxe2 Rxe2 14. Rfe1 Rxe1+ 15. Rxe1 Bf5 (15... Bg4 $5) 16. Bc3 Bxc2 $17 { 1/2-1/2 Brochet,P-Mellado Trivino,J/Escaldes AND 1999 (24)}) 6... Bxc3+ 7. bxc3 Re8 8. f4 dxe4 9. d4 Nd5 10. c4 Ne7 11. Be2 $2 Nf5 $40 12. c3 Qh4+ 13. Kf1 e3 ( 13... f6 $1) 14. Qe1 Qxf4+ 15. Kg1 Nxd4 16. cxd4 Qxd4 17. Rb1 Qxe5 $19 { 0-1 Lupi,F-Alekhine,A/Lisbon 1946 (22)}) ({b)} 5. f3 $6 d5 $1 (5... Bxc3 $5 6. dxc3 Nxe4 7. Qd4 $11) 6. exd5 (6. Nxd5 $2 Nxd5 7. exd5 Re8 8. f4 Rxe5+ $1) 6... Re8 7. f4 Nxd5 8. Nxd5 Qxd5 $44) 5... Re8 6. Nd3 { White returns the pawn for the two Bishops.} ({ The other retreat does not gain the two Bishops and is therefore rather equal: } 6. Nf3 Nxe4 ({as the main line is drawish, Black can consider} 6... d5 $5 7. exd5 Qe7 $44) (6... Bxc3 $5 7. dxc3 Nxe4 $11) 7. Nxe4 Rxe4 8. c3 Bf8 9. d4 d5 $11) 6... Bxc3 7. dxc3 Nxe4 8. O-O ({More common today is} 8. Nf4 {followed by c4 with the idea of securing d5, thus preventing Black's advance of the d-pawn and allowing White's Bishops more scope. Black must then develop more circumspectly with} d6 9. O-O Nd7 $1 (9... Nc6 10. c4 Bf5 11. Re1 Nf6 12. b3 Ne5 13. Bb2 Ne4 14. Nd5 c6 15. Ne3 Bg6 16. f4 $1 $14 Qh4 17. g3 Qh6 18. Qd4 ({ better} 18. Bxe5 $1 dxe5 19. Ng4 Qh3 20. Bf1 $1 Qh5 21. Rxe4 $3 (21. Nxe5 $14) 21... f5 22. Rxe5 $16) 18... c5 $6 (18... f5 $1 $13) 19. Qd1 Nc6 20. Bf3 $1 f6 $2 21. Ng4 $1 Qh3 22. Bg2 Qh5 23. Rxe4 $1 { 1-0 Peters,J-Jones,S/Los Angeles USA 2000 (23)}) 10. c4 Nf8 11. f3 Nc5 12. b3 Nfe6 $5 13. Nh5 g6 14. Ng3 Qf6 15. Rb1 Qd4+ 16. Kh1 Qxd1 17. Bxd1 a5 $11 18. Kg1 b6 19. Re1 Bb7 20. a4 f6 21. Kf2 Kf7 22. Ne2 Ng7 23. Nd4 Rxe1 24. Kxe1 Re8+ 25. Kf2 Nge6 26. Nb5 Bc6 27. Be3 f5 28. Bd2 Re7 29. h4 Bxb5 30. axb5 Re8 31. Ra1 Re7 32. Kf1 Re8 33. c3 Nd3 34. b4 Ne5 35. Be2 axb4 36. cxb4 Nd4 37. Ra7 Re7 $2 (37... Nxe2 38. Rxc7+ Re7 39. Rxe7+ Kxe7 40. Kxe2 Nxc4 $15) 38. Bg5 $1 Rd7 39. c5 $1 dxc5 40. bxc5 Ne6 $2 (40... Nxe2 $1 41. Kxe2 bxc5 42. Bf4 Ke6 43. Bxe5 Kxe5 44. b6 Rd6 $1 45. bxc7 Rc6 $11) 41. f4 $1 $18 { 1-0 Conquest,S-Piket,J/Ohrid MKD 2001 (41)}) 8... d5 9. Nf4 c6 10. Be3 { Soltis writes: "With the two bishops, the d4 outpost, and the prospect of opening the center with 11.c4, White apears to be developing a promising middlegame. Marshall liquidates the situation effectively."} ({ White should get in} 10. c4 $1 d4 11. Bd3 $11) 10... Nd6 {Preventing 11.c4.} 11. Bd3 (11. Re1 $5) 11... Bf5 12. Qf3 (12. Bxf5 $6 Nxf5 $15) 12... Be4 $1 13. Qh3 Qd7 $1 { A strong move, not least because it asserts Black's superiority in the ending.} 14. Bc5 (14. Qh5 Qf5 $1 (14... Nf5 $6 {Soltis} 15. Rae1 $11) 15. Qxf5 Nxf5 $15) 14... Qxh3 15. Nxh3 Nc4 $5 {Though Black hereby exchanges off White's best piece, this is a risky choice by Marshall, since the resulting Bishops of opposite color ending offers White some drawing prospects.} ({Perhaps best is} 15... Nf5 16. Rfe1 Nd7 $15) 16. Bxc4 ({On} 16. b3 {there might follow} Nd7 $1 17. Bd4 Na3 18. Rac1 Bxd3 (18... c5 $5) 19. cxd3 Re2 $15) 16... dxc4 17. Rac1 Nd7 18. Bd4 h6 {This is a useful move, creating a retreat square for the Bishop along the h7-b1 diagonal, making luft for the King, and controlling more dark squares. It also puts the question to White: what can you do that is useful?} 19. Rfd1 ({White's alternatives include: a)} 19. Nf4 g5 20. Nh5 Bg6 21. Nf6+ Nxf6 22. Bxf6 { "with some drawing hopes due to the opposite colored Bishops" writes Howell.}) ({b)} 19. f3 Bf5 20. g4 Bh7 $1 $15) 19... Bf5 20. Nf4 g5 21. Nh5 Bg4 22. Be3 $2 {This is White's critical error, turning a difficult game into a lost one.} ({ Black has a much more difficult time gaining an edge following instead} 22. Ng7 $1 Re7 $1 ({better than} 22... Bxd1 $6 23. Nxe8 Bxc2 (23... Rxe8 24. Rxd1 $11) 24. Nd6 ({or} 24. Nf6+ Nxf6 25. Bxf6 Bd3 26. Re1 $44) 24... Bd3 25. Re1 Kf8 26. Nxb7 Rb8 27. Nc5 Nxc5 28. Bxc5+ Kg7 29. Bxa7 $11 {and the Bishops of opposite color practically assure a draw with such reduced numbers of pawns.}) 23. f3 f6 24. Re1 (24. fxg4 Kxg7 25. Re1 Ne5 $15) 24... Rxe1+ 25. Rxe1 Kxg7 26. fxg4 Kf7 $15 {and Black has a difficult fight ahead to prove an edge.}) 22... Re7 { Suddenly White must lose at least the exchange.} ({ Black might also defend the Knight by} 22... Red8 23. Rxd7 Bxd7 $17) ({But not } 22... Bxd1 $2 23. Rxd1 Rad8 $2 (23... Rxe3 $1 $11) 24. Rxd7 $1 Rxd7 25. Nf6+ $16) 23. Rxd7 Bxd7 24. h4 gxh4 25. Bxh6 Bf5 26. Rd1 $2 {"The same error in the same place," setting up the fork that follows, notes Howell.} Re6 $1 ({ Not immediately} 26... Bg4 $4 27. Nf6+ $16) 27. Bg5 (27. Ng7 Bxc2 $1) 27... Bg4 {forking Rook and Knight a second time. And if 28.Nf6+ Rxf6! wins. White used 1 hour and 56 minutes while Black used 2 hours and 13 minutes.} 0-1

Tag: Chess

Stoyko's Viking Quad

West-Stoyko, Viking Quads 2005
Black to play after 28.axb5

Here are the games that Steve showed us from the Viking Last Saturday Quads in Mount Arlington near Hackettstown (July 30, 2005), available to play online using a Java-board, to download as PGN, or to load as PGN text:

[Event "Viking Quads"]
[Site "Mount Arlington, NJ USA"]
[Date "2005.07.30"]
[Round "2"]
[White "West, James"]
[Black "Stoyko"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "2200"]
[BlackElo "2310"]
[PlyCount "100"]

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 exd5 { West is satisfied with a draw while Stoyko is not.} 4. Nf3 (4. c4) 4... Bg4 5. Bd3 (5. h3 Bh5 6. Qe2+ $1 Qe7 $8 7. Be3 Nc6 8. Nc3 O-O-O 9. g4 Bg6 10. O-O-O f6 $5 $11 (10... Nb4 $5)) 5... Nc6 6. c3 Bd6 7. O-O Nge7 8. Re1 Qd7 9. Nbd2 h6 $1 (9... O-O-O 10. b4 $40) (9... Bf5 10. Nf1) 10. b4 O-O $1 11. b5 Nd8 12. Qb3 Ne6 13. Ba3 Rfd8 $5 ({Varying from their last game, which continued} 13... Nf4 14. Bf1 Neg6 15. Bxd6 Qxd6 16. Re3 c5 17. Qa3 b6 18. Rae1 (18. c4 Qf6) 18... Rfd8 19. h3 Bxf3 20. Nxf3 Ne6 21. g3 c4 $5 22. Qxd6 Rxd6 23. Ne5 Nxe5 24. Rxe5 a6 $1 $15 25. bxa6 Rxa6 26. R1e2 Ra3 27. Rc2 f6 28. Re3 Kf7 29. Bg2 Nc7 30. Kf1 Re6 31. Rxe6 Kxe6 32. h4 b5 $17 (32... Nb5)) (13... Bxf3 $5 14. Nxf3 Nf4 $5 $132 ( 14... Rfd8 15. Ne5 (15. Bxd6 Qxd6 (15... cxd6 $5) 16. Ne5 $11))) 14. Ne5 Bxe5 15. Rxe5 Nc8 $1 16. Rae1 (16. h3 Nf4 $1 17. Bf1 Be6 (17... Bf5)) 16... Nf4 $8 17. Bf1 Be6 18. Nf3 Ng6 19. R5e3 Nd6 20. Bd3 Nc4 (20... Bf5) 21. Rxe6 Nf4 22. Bxc4 $2 (22. R6e3 Qg4 23. g3 (23. Bf1 Nh3+ $11) 23... Nxe3 24. Rxe3 Nxd3 25. Rxd3 $16) 22... dxc4 23. Qxc4 Nxe6 24. Ne5 Qd5 25. Bb4 a6 26. a4 Qxc4 27. Nxc4 axb5 28. axb5 Nxd4 $1 29. Be7 (29. cxd4 Rxd4 30. Rc1 Rxc4 $1 (30... Ra4)) 29... Re8 30. cxd4 Rxe7 $1 31. Ne3 Ra4 32. Rb1 Re4 33. Nf5 g6 34. f3 Re2 35. Nxh6+ Kg7 36. Ng4 Rxd4 37. Kf1 Rdd2 38. Rc1 Rc2 39. Rd1 Red2 40. Ra1 f5 41. Ne3 Rb2 42. Rc1 Rf2+ 43. Kg1 Rfe2 44. Rxc7+ Kh6 45. h4 Rxe3 46. Rxb7 Re1+ 47. Kh2 Ree2 48. Kg3 Rxg2+ 49. Kf4 Rb4+ 50. Ke5 Rgb2 0-1

[Event "Viking Quads"]
[Site "Mount Arlington, NJ USA"]
[Date "2005.07.30"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Stoyko, Steve"]
[Black "Hatama, Sandy"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "2310"]
[BlackElo "2238"]
[PlyCount "49"]

1. Nf3 c5 2. c4 b6 3. g3 Bb7 4. Bg2 Nf6 5. O-O e6 6. Nc3 Be7 7. Re1 d6 8. e4 Nbd7 9. d4 cxd4 10. Nxd4 Qb8 (10... Qc7 $5) {Steve has a lot of respect for the Hedgehog, having played it himself for several years.} 11. f4 (11. Nd5 $5 exd5 12. exd5 Ng8 13. Nf5 (13. Qa4 Qd8 14. Bf4 Kf8) 13... Kf8 14. Nxg7 Ne5 ( 14... Kxg7 15. Qg4+ Kf8 16. Qxd7 h5 17. Bf4)) (11. g4 h6 12. f4) 11... a6 12. e5 (12. Nd5 $6 exd5 13. exd5 (13. Nf5 dxe4) 13... Ng8 14. Qe2 Kf8 $13) 12... dxe5 13. fxe5 Ng8 14. Bxb7 (14. Ne4 Ra7 15. Bf4) 14... Qxb7 15. Qg4 $1 Bc5 $1 ( 15... Bf8 16. Nxe6 $3 (16. Ne4 $40) 16... fxe6 17. Qxe6+ Kd8 (17... Be7 18. Ne4 ) 18. Be3 (18. Nd5)) 16. Be3 Nxe5 $2 (16... Ne7 $142 $1 17. Ne4 O-O) 17. Qxg7 Bxd4 18. Bxd4 Nf3+ 19. Kf2 O-O-O 20. Nd5 $1 (20. Qxh8 $6 Nxd4 21. Ne4 f5 22. Qxg8 fxe4 23. Qg4 Qf7+ $132) 20... Nxd4 (20... exd5 21. Qg4+ $18) 21. Qxd4 $16 Nh6 22. Nxb6+ Kb8 23. Qf4+ e5 $4 ({Necessary was} 23... Qc7 24. Rad1 (24. c5) 24... Ng4+ 25. Qxg4 Qxb6+ 26. Kf1 $16 {though White is better.}) 24. Qxh6 Ka7 25. c5 1-0

A Summer Tournament Miniature

I played a cute game against Greg Tomkovich in the Summer Tournament Thursday night. It was all over on move 9, but Greg continued for 10 more moves out of inertia before he resigned. I think I might try that Janowski Indian again some time. My victory allowed Kernighan to take the lead in the event with only two weeks to go.

[Event "Kenilworth CC Summer Tournament"]
[Site "Kenilworth, NJ USA"]
[Date "2005.08.04"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Tomkovich, Greg"]
[Black "Goeller, Mike"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A53"]
[Annotator "Goeller,Michael"]
[PlyCount "38"]
[TimeControl "G60"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d6 3. c4 Bf5 4. Nc3 Nc6 $5 {Despite its success in the present game, this move is not best.} ({ The more standard plan is} 4... g6 {when} 5. Nh4 Bd7 6. e4 Bg7 7. Be2 e5 8. Nf3 O-O {leads to familiar positions from the King's Indian Defense, but with Black having the extra move ...Bd7. E.g.:} 9. O-O Nc6 10. d5 Ne7 11. Ne1 Ne8 $5 $13) 5. Qb3 $6 { This move appears premature, as the sequel shows.} ({Best must be} 5. d5 $1 Ne5 (5... Nb4 $4 6. Qa4+) (5... Nb8 $5) 6. Nxe5 $1 (6. Nd4 Bd7 $11) 6... dxe5 7. f3 $14 {which would have discouraged me from playing this line again.}) 5... a5 $1 ({ Of course, Black can defend the b-pawn with} 5... Qc8) (5... b6) 6. a3 (6. Qxb7 $2 Nb4 $1 $17) (6. d5 $5 Nb4 7. Nd4 Bd7 8. a3 Na6 $11 { followed by Nc5 and e5, and White dare not play} 9. Qxb7 $4 Nc5 $19) 6... a4 $5 {A little too aggressive in retrospect.} (6... Bd7 $11) 7. Qxb7 $2 { A blunder that hands Black an edge.} ({Better is} 7. Nxa4 Na5 8. Qd1 Be6 $5 9. d5 Bd7 10. Nc3 Nxc4 11. e4 $14) ({Also playable is} 7. Qd1 $5 Bd7 (7... e5 8. d5 Na5 $5 9. Qxa4+ Bd7 10. Qc2 Nxc4 11. e4 Nb6 12. Be3 $14) 8. e4 (8. Nxa4 $6 Nxd4) 8... e5 9. d5 Ne7 10. Bg5 h6 $5 $13) 7... Na5 8. Qb4 $4 ({Forced is} 8. Qb5+ Bd7 9. Qg5 h6 $1 10. Qh4 Nb3 11. Rb1 Rg8 $1 $17) 8... Nb3 { This simply wins at least a piece.} 9. Nh4 $2 Nxa1 $19 {The threat of Nc2+ winning the Queen prevents White from grabbing the Bishop. The rest is simply ugly, but it is always difficult to resign at move 10.} 10. Kd2 c5 11. Qb7 Nb3+ 12. Kd1 Na5 13. Qf3 Bg4 14. Qg3 $6 cxd4 15. Nb5 e5 $1 { Trapping the Knight and threatening to win the Queen by ...Ne4.} 16. f3 Be6 17. e4 Nxc4 18. Qe1 $2 Qb6 19. Qb4 $2 d5 $19 0-1

"Chess Fever" at Kenilworth

It was a good night at the Kenilworth Chess Club this Thursday. I won an interesting miniature against Summer Tournament leader Greg Tomkovich, trying out a new opening for me, "The Janowski-Indian." Steve Stoyko then showed us (on the big-screen, using Fritz) his three wins from The Viking Last Saturday Quad held July 30 in Mount Arlington. And there was still time to show a film for the Summer Chess Film Festival, to socialize, and play a few blitz games.

I will post the Tomkovich and Stoyko games tonight or this weekend. But the highlight of the night for me was seeing "Chess Fever" or Shakhmatnaya goryachka (Russian, silent 1925). I picked it up recently through Amazon.com as part of Three Soviet Classics.

I had heard about Chess Fever years ago. Bill Wall, for instance, discusses it in his review of chess in the movies at Chessville. I had never imagined that it would be easy to find or so worth seeing. I did a little online searching and discovered that the film is also included as a bonus on a few other Soviet films of the same era, including Bed and Sofa and By the Law. So it is much more widely available than I would have expected for a chess-themed 28-minute silent short. It is worth seeing if only to catch a glimpse of the 1920s greats in live action. It takes place during the Moscow 1925 tournament and shows many of the GMs of the day taking part. And Capablanca has a very memorable role in it.

The basic plot is that this young man has forgotten all about his fiance, Vera, due to his obsession with chess. When he forgets their wedding (a small affair at the Soviet bureau) while playing a game against himself, and then continues to study chess problems at her feet rather than begging forgiveness, it is too much for her and she sends him away. Both vow to kill themselves. There are a number of twists and turns and some wonderful gags, all centered on the chess obsession sweeping the city in the wake of the 1925 Moscow tournament. For me, though, the best moment is Capablanca's cameo (see image above). Vera, who knows nothing about chess and just hates it, meets the handsome Capablanca outside the tournament. She does not recognize the champion, of course. She tells him about her troubles and how chess has taken her future husband away from her. The "Latin Lover" Capa responds, "When I meet a beautiful woman, I can think of nothing else but her." She says, "Finally, a man who doesn't care about chess!" Capa's look seems to say, "Sure, Baby..." in that Mike Myers sort of way... They go off together and she is suddenly transformed. She is as fascinated with chess as her lover, with whom she is happily reunited at the end.

The picture above is taken from the excellent Chess Graphics site, where you can find a number of screenshots from the film. I'd highly recommend buying or renting it, especially if you can show it, as I did, to a room of chess aficionados. Since it is a silent film, there are lots of opportunities to insert your own dialogue and wise-cracks. And since the famous players from the tournament are not identified on film, it's an opportunity for friends to show off their knowledge of chess history (or their ability to read the Russian name-tags).

It was a pleasure to see so many players at Kenilworth last night, especially in the middle of the summer when we usually see a big decline in turnout. Welcome especially to the new group of young people who have begun attending. I think things are heating up at the club...

Urusoff / Urusov Gambit Bibliography

The August 2005 Chess Life (which arrived today) contains an article by GM Susan Polgar on the "Urusoff Gambit" (1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d4), pp. 36-37. The article offers a fairly good introduction to the line and its themes--probably more than we should expect from a two-page piece. But, like most chess publications, there is no bibliography of sources nor recommendations for further reading. Perhaps GM Polgar and her able assistant FM Paul Truong can include online supplements at their blog or website to accompany future articles. In the meantime, here is my own contribution on the Urusov bibliography, to which I've contributed a thing or two.

BTW: Most current writers in English, of course, spell it "Urusov," following the lead of Tim Harding, but I suppose that "Urusoff" makes sense on the model of "Petroff" (which is generally preferred over "Petrov"). Gary Lane also prefers "Urusoff," for example. And at least Polgar didn't spell it "Ourousoff" or some equally ridiculous way.

The following sources are the most current or those most easily accessed on the web. They are not listed alphabetically but in order of usefulness and/or accessibility. Each is followed by a brief assessment or annotation. A more complete bibliography can be found in the Acknolwedgments to my Urusov Gambit pages.

Goeller, Michael. The Urusov Gambit System, The Urusov Gambit, and the Dimock Theme Tournament. Available online.
This is a complete analysis of the gambit, covering all major lines and offering some treatment also of the Two Knights Defense and other Bishop's Opening lines if Black avoids the gambit. I have not updated the analysis in at least a year and a number of good sources have appeared since (see below). Beginning players looking for a fun introduction to the gambit might most enjoy the games from the Dimock Theme Tournament, which I have annotated rather deeply.

__________. Goeller-Mazzillo, Kenilworth Chess Club Championship 2005. Annotated at the Kenilworth Chess Club site and available in various formats.

Harding, Tim. Bishop's Opening. The Chess Player 1973.
This is a bit old now and likely unavailable. If I remember right (I don't have it handy) he calls it the "Ourousoff" here. The articles below, all available online, offer much better coverage and improved analysis.

__________. "Once more unto the Urusov, dear friends, once more..." The Kibitzer #83 at ChessCafe. April 2003.
This is probably Harding's most thorough review of the gambit to date. It includes several important games with his annotations, plus a useful critique of and addition to my own analysis (some of which I have incorporated or responded to).

__________. "Interesting Byways in the Classic Open Games." The Kibitzer #46 at ChessCafe. 2000.

__________. "Some Opening Topics Revisited." The Kibitzer #33 at ChessCafe. 1999.

__________. "Is the Urusov Gambit Sound?" The Kibitzer #29 at ChessCafe. 1998.

__________. "The Eternal Appeal of the Urusov Gambit." The Kibitzer #28 at ChessCafe. 1998.

__________. "What Exactly Is the Bishop's Opening?" The Kibitzer #27 at ChessCafe. 1998.

Lane, Gary. The Bishop's Opening Explained. Batsford 2004.
Pages 28-41 of this recent book offer excellent coverage not only of the Urusoff gambit but of the Modern Variation of the Two Knights Defense (1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.e5 or various other transpositions), which is likely the best method of meeting 4...Nc6. Lane also does a better job of my site of laying out an entire Bishop's Opening repertoire, covering all the major transpositions. This is an excellent book, especially for lower-rated players since it does such a great job of covering the lines and discussing themes. Lane also focuses on recent games which have often not been discussed elsewhere.

__________. "Five Pawns Attack." Opening Lanes #26 at ChessCafe. 2001.

__________. Winning with the Bishop's Opening. Henry Holt 1993.
I think that anything of value related to the Urusoff in this book has been adapted into either Lane's more recent book or my website.

Müller, Karsten and Martin Voigt. Danish Dynamite: Explosive Gambits: the Danish, Goring, Scotch, and Urusov. Millford, CT: Russell Enterprises, 2003.
Muller and Voigt offer by far the best recent analysis of the Urusov Gambit on pp. 206-223 of their book, though various transpositions are covered throughout and are worth knowing. As the book is written in Informant-style notation, it offers some deep coverage of lines. In some cases, they carry the analysis quite deep but in others they leave it as "unclear" or "with compensation," and I wish they had pushed forward a bit more. But that would be my only criticism of this wonderful effort.

Schiller, Eric. White to Play 1.e4 and Win. Chess Digest, 1992.
I recommend this with caveats galore (for which you can see my recent game and analysis mentioned above), especially as regards the errors in his analysis, but I like some of Schiller's discussion. I also think the overall repertoire he offers fits well with the Urusov in many cases, and the book is therefore worth knowing for that alone.

Anonymous. Le Gambit Urusov from the Mjae website
This is mostly a French plagiarism of my own writings, but they do a fairly good job of simplifying my lines while offering good general coverage. And at least they give me some acknowledgment. FYI: The picture they have of "Prince Urusov" is actually a relative of his and not the man himself.

Fingerhut, Armin. Das Urusow-Gambit Available online.
Rather dense analysis of the main lines, and based on some older sources. But it is easily available, so I mention it.

Tartakower, Dr. S. and J. Du Mont. 100 Master Games of Modern Chess. Dover 1975.
I mention this because it is probably on your shelf or the shelf of your public library. It contains analysis of Heikenheimo-Crepaux, Dubrovnik 1950, which is the focus of the French plagiarists too.

Van der Tak, A. C. "A Forgotten Gambit." New In Chess Yearbook. Volume 59. Edited by Genna Sosonko and Paul van der Sterren. Netherlands: Interchess BV 2001. 106-111.
Good discussion of relatively recent games, though most of this analysis is dealt with in my website.

Pitt Archive FTP. Bishop's Opening Zip PGN File via FTP. 1998.

________. Various materials on the Urusov Gambit and on Prince Urusov, prepared by Max Burkett. 1997.

Forintos, Gyozo and Ervin Haag. The Petroff Defense. New York: Macmillan 1991.
I mention this because it was once widely available and you may have a copy. I think it is the best book on the Petroff, not least because it is one of the only to offer coverage of the Urusoff Gambit.

Galberg-Lund, Soren. Urusovuv Gambit. Brno: Self published 1995. Available from Chess Digest. An English translation of Galber-Lund's pamphlet was available as The Urusoff Gambit and is therefore in the Archive. It is a terrible translation of likely terrible prose, but it does actually have a couple game references of value. It is mostly supplanted by the materials above.

Additions
There is also some deep analysis of Avrukh-Skripchenko, Linares 2001, by GM Lukacs in Chess Base Magazine (which Polgar alludes to as her source for notes on the game) and a part of Neishtadt's book "Winning Quickly as White" which discusses the Gipslis game I think--though I don't have either handy to give you more specific citation information. I could also give you a lengthy bibliography of material related to the Open Two Knights Defense with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.d4 (to which the Urusov often transposes), but direct you for now to my incomplete bibliography at my Perreux Variation site.


Tag: Chess