|
**************************************************************************** GM
V. Ivanchuk (2680) -
GM A. Yusupov
(2585)
|
|
|
*************************
One of the most brilliant games of
modern times. The attack Yusupov
mounts has been studied
and admired
by countless chess players.
A side note is that there was a virtual
revolution going on back home, (In old
"Mother Russia.");
for both parties.
{While this game was being played.}
So it was amazing that these players
could
even concentrate on the game.
The final product is one of the most
amazing chess games since Anderssen
played his "Immortal"
and "Ever-Green"
games. (GM Y. Seirawan, who was
present as a commentator, confessed
to
often feeling like a confused amateur
during the creation of this super-brilliancy.)
This was the ninth game of the match,
and a tie-breaker as well ... and was
played at the time limit
of:
The first 45 moves / in ONE (1) hour!!
(Then 15 minutes for every 20 moves
thereafter.)
*************************
The ratings are very close to exact and come from a CB chart showing the actual FIDE ratings.
Jeff Sonas gives the following ratings
for these two players:
GM Vassily Ivanchuk - 2765
(Informant - 2735) GM Artur Yusupov - (No rating.) (Informant - 2625)
****************************************************************************
1.c4,
{Diagram?}
The English Opening is certainly OK for White, and probably leads to a solid
edge for the
first player.
[ Ivanchuk is an extremely versatile
player, who could open with any
opening. But the
database shows
that he currently favors: 1.d4,
{Diag?} as his main opening move. ]
Black responds with ...e5. Note how
both players consistently develop
their pieces
during the opening.
1...e5!?;
{Diagram?}
This is one of Karpov's favorite lines.
The only problem with this move is
that White can often play a Sicilian ...
but with an extra tempo because the
colors are reversed.
[ Black could play the move:
1...Nf6!?;
{Diagram?}
which is also a popular response.
(With this move the second player
is offering to play one
of the many
different lines of various "Indian"
openings.) ]
2.g3!?,
{Diagram?}
While this is a little unusual, it is not
bad. Yusupov has a reputation as
being very
well-versed in opening
theory, and Ivanchuk was probably
trying to get him out
of his normal
lines.
Also - in several modern lines of the
English - Black plays a very early ...Bb4; and usually
gets a
good game.
Ivanchuk obviously wishes to avoid
this approach by Yusupov.
*******
[ The main lines probably are:
2.Nc3 Nf6; 3.Nf3 Nc6; 4.g3,
"+/=" {Diagram?}
with a good game for White.
[ See MCO-14; page # 666. ] ]
2...d6; 3.Bg2 g6!?;
{See
the diagram given - just below.}
It could be a trifle early for this
fianchetto.
*************************
|
|
*************************
Some authors and writers have
criticized this move for Black. But
since it does not lose
by force ... and really just amounts to a simple
transposition ... I don't see what
the
"hub-bub" is all about.
*******
[ Another possible line is:
3...Nc6; 4.Nc3 g6; 5.e3 Bg7; 6.Nge2!?,
"+/=" {Diag?}
when White is only a tiny bit
better in this position.
According to ChessBase's on-line
database, there are over 1000
examples of this position!
The first
example occurred in the 1930's.
(There is also a game of Botvinnik's
from that
period as well.)
The most meaningful (relatively
current) example I could find was
the encounter:
GM M. Krasenkow - GM M.
Sadler; Malmo, (Sweden); 1995.
(The game was drawn in under 30
moves - I don't think either player
really
wanted a fight that day.)
]
Both
sides continue to develop sensibly.
4.d4! Nd7;
5.Nc3 Bg7; 6.Nf3 Ngf6; 7.0-0 0-0;
{See
the diagram, below.}
Both sides have developed fairly
consistently and also in a pretty
straight-forward manner.
(White is probably a tad better
in this position.)
*************************
|
|
*************************
To be honest, I think we have
transposed out of the English and
into the Fianchetto Variation
of
"The King's Indian Defense."
(See MCO-14, page # 608.)
The Mammoth Book says this was
(probably) a surprise to Ivanchuk,
as Yusupov hardly ever
uses this
particular opening. (Although I found
quite a few examples in the database,
especially
from Yusupov's early years.)
8.Qc2!?,
{Diagram?}
Certainly respectable, but not
the main line anymore.
(GM A. Soltis recommends that
Black now exchange on d4 and
he says that the second player
has a satisfactory game.)
Being that this is a "quick" game,
Ivanchuk (understandably) wants to
get Yusupov out of book
as quickly
possible!
*******
[ The main line is:
(>/=)
8.e4 c6; 9.h3 exd4!?;
{Diagram?}
Black can play nearly six different
moves here, according to theory.
(...Re8; ...Qb6; ...Qa5; ...a6; etc.)
And now - according to MCO -
the most often played moves are:
10.Nxd4 Re8; 11.Rb1 a5;
12.Re1 Nc5; 13.b3 Nh5!?; 14.Be3 Qe7;
15.Qd2 Qf8!?; 16.Rbd1 Nf6;
{Diagram?}
The end of the column.
17.Qc2 Nfd7; 18.f4,
"+/=" {Diagram?}
White seems to be a fuzz better
in this position.
"As often happens in this variation,
White has a space advantage."
- GM Nick de Firmian. (MCO)
GM. A. Wojtkiewicz - Bjarnsson; New York Open, 1994.
[ See MCO-14, page # 608; column # 61, and note # (b.). ] ]
*******
8...Re8!?;
{See the diagram, just below.}
This is one of the main lines here. (The other main line here is ...c6.)
*************************
|
|
*************************
Several authors - most notably
GM Andrew Soltis - have criticized
this move and even awarded
dubious
or question marks. But since this
is a theoretical MAIN LINE ... and is
analyzed in about
a dozen books that
I own on the "King's Indian Defence,"
{opening} ... it is VERY hard to agree
with Soltis ... or even understand why
he is so critical.
********
[ Soltis says that Yusupov should
play the move:
8...exd4!; "~"
{Diagram?}
and Black has already equalized.
(BUT ... neither theory, nor computer
analysis supports this assessment!)
NOTE:
GM Yasser Seirawan also
states that ...exd4!
is the best move
in this position for Black. (But
statistically speaking, Black's recent
results
after the exchange in the
center, have been dismal. See the
note after Black's
next move,
...c6.);
***
Black could also play ...P-QB3
(...c6); in this position:
8...c6;
9.e4!? Qe7; 10.Rd1!? exd4!?; 11.Nxd4 Re8!?;
12.b3 Nc5;
13.f3 Nfd7;
14.Rb1 Ne5; 15.Nce2!? a5;
"~" {Diagram?}
Black is probably close to equality
in this position.
(Play has transposed
to a well-known line.)
See the game:
GM V. Salov - GM G.
Kasparov; Super-GM Tournament
/
Linares, (ESP); 1991. (The game eventually ended in a
draw
in around 35 moves.) ]
*******
{Editorial
note: To understand why Rd1 is so good ... you would really have to
play
through some of the lines and variations
in a few of the sources listed in the bibliography.
Or ... you can simply take my word for
it.}
9.Rd1! c6;
('!?')
{Diagram?}
A common idea in these lines,
Black wants to play ...Qe7; but
does not want to worry
about
White playing Nd5. The pawn on
c6 keeps White's pieces off d5 and
also b5. And
now Black has the option
of possibly playing ...Qb6 or ...Qa5.
GM Yasser Seirawan gives Black's ninth move an exclam here.
'!' - GM Yasser Seirawan.
*************************
[ More often played is:
9...e4!?; 10.Ng5
e3!; 11.f4!?, {Diagram?}
Given as FORCED by many books,
but ... is it? Really?
(MCO does not
give any comment at this point.)
***
( After the moves: (>/=) = 11.Bxe3!? Rxe3!; 12.fxe3 Ng4!;
13.Nf3!?,
13...Nxe3; 14.Qd3 Nxd1; 15.Rxd1 c6; "=" {Diagram?}
the game appears to be very
finely balanced. )
***
11...h6; 12.Nge4 Nxe4;
13.Bxe4!? Nf6; 14.Bg2 Ng4; 15.d5 Nf2;
16.Rf1 Bf5;
{Diagram?}
The end of the column.
17.Qb3 Nh3+; 18.Kh1 Nf2+;
19.Kg1 Qc8; 20.Nd1 Nxd1;
21.Qxd1 Be4;
"=/+" {Diagram?}
... "and White found himself seriously
cramped by the Black Pawn on e3."
- GM Nick de
Firmian.
Maiwald - Ketevan; Germany, 1994.
[ See MCO-14; page # 608, col. # 66, and also note # (n.). ];
************
Here ... now that White's Rook is
on the d-file, I do not think the
exchange in the
center is wise:
9...exd4!?; ('?!')
10.Nxd4 a6!?; 11.b3 Rb8;
12.Bb2, "+/="
{Diag?}
White has a very clear advantage
in this position, and according to the
database -
(recently)
the first player
has scored close to 75% ... from this position!!
(A nice game is:)
S. Mamedyarov
(2585) -
Zia Rahman (2521);
ADCF Masters Tourney/2003.
{White won a fairly long game,
but there he used 12.h3 instead
of Bb2.} ]
*************************
10.b3!?,
{See the diagram, just below.}
A modern move. More and more, players are questioning the older and
accepted ways of playing
the position
or opening, and looking to strike out
on completely new and different paths.
*************************
|
|
*************************
Seirawan like this so much, he awards this move both praise - and an exclam.
'!' - GM Yasser Seirawan.
[ More often played is:
10.e4 Qe7; 11.b3 exd4;
12.Nxd4 Nc5; 13.f3 a5; "~"
{D?}
and this position is either just a tiny
bit better for White ... or Black has
come very
close to equalizing.
See the encounter:
GM Josif Dorfman (2590) - GM Joe Gallagher
(2470);
(City) Championship Tournament/Paris,
(FRA); 1990.
(White won a very long game, but
I am sure the opening was not at
fault!) ]
10...Qe7;
11.Ba3!?, {See the
diagram, just below.}
Ivanchuk does not wish to play the
main line ... and is obviously trying
to draw Black into
a position where
the Bishop on a3 is a significant
menace to Black.
*************************
|
|
*************************
(Was this a prepared weapon?)
'?!' - GM Yasser Seirawan. (I don't agree with this.)
*******
[ Seirawan says that it is better for
White to play: (>/=)
11.e4! exd4; 12.Nxd4,
"+/=" {Diagram?}
and White maintains a clear edge.
(This is a transposition back to one
of the "book" lines ...
see the note
after Black's eighth move.);
***
ECO recommends:
11.e3!?, "="
{Diagram?}
which leads to equality, and poses
no real problems for Black. ]
*******
Now Yusupov realizes that with
White's Bishop on a3 and the White
Rook on d1,
he cannot allow the
center to be opened. (Play a few lines with
your computer,
and this will quickly become obvious.)
11...e4!;
{Diagram?}
"A double-edged decision." - Iakov Damsky.
'!' - GM Yasser Seirawan.
[ Black can also exchange here:
11...exd4!?; 12.Rxd4!? Nc5;
13.Rad1 Bf5; 14.Qc1 Nfe4;
"=" {Diagram?}
One author claims that Black is (much)
better in this position ...
it looks
very close to level to me. {A.J.G.} ]
12.Ng5,
{See
the diagram ... just below.}
This could be forced for White.
*************************
|
|
*************************
The position is very rapidly building to a crescendo.
[ </= 12.Nd2!? e3; "<=>" ]
12...e3;
{Box.}
{Diagram?}
Otherwise it appears that Black
will lose this pawn.
[ Of course NOT:
</=
12...d5; (????)
13.Bxe7, ("+/-")
{Diagram?}
and Black has dropped his Queen.
]
13.f4!?,
{See
the diagram just below.}
Because of the tactics, this is
nearly forced for White.
*************************
|
|
*************************
Opening theory {also} recommends
f3 here, but I am sure no good GM
has ever examined
these lines
critically. (The games and analysis are absolutely putrid.)
[ GM Yasser Seirawan
says White
MUST play: 13.f3!?,
"~" {Diagram?}
in this position. I am not arguing
with him, or saying that he is right
or wrong.
BUT f3 LOOKS VERY
UGLY TO ME!! {A.J.G.}
(Yusupov's analysis seems to
indicate that Black will {eventually}
get an advantage.
Damsky also
gives a nice line here for Black.)
Now one writer gives the
following line:
13...Nf8; 14.Nge4!? Bf5!?; (?!)
15.Qc1 Bxe4!?; 16.Nxe4 Nxe4;
17.fxe4 c5; 18.e5 Ne6; ('!?')
19.exd6!? Qxd6; {Diagram?}
While this is forced, White's next
move looks to be very doubtful.
20.Bxb7?! Nxd4;
"=/+" {Diagram?}
... "with sufficient counterplay for
Black." - Iakov
Damsky.
( This is Damsky's analysis ... I will simply state that
almost
ANYONE with a
strong computer
program could probably improve
upon this line!! {A.J.G.} );
********
Of course not: 13.fxe3?? Qxe3+;
14.Kh1 Qxg5; {Diagram?}
and Black wins a piece. ("-/+")
]
***************
Now ... as if by magic - Black's
pieces begin to spring to life.
13...Nf8; 14.b4!? Bf5;
15.Qb3 h6; 16.Nf3 Ng4; (Maybe - '!')
{Diagram?}
This is obviously nice for Black,
but he had other very playable
options here as well.
'!' - GM Yasser Seirawan.
*******
Just a note for those players who do not
have a lot of experience with this line, or
have never
studied the games of this
particular opening. (ANY "King's Indian
Defence" line!) In this opening,
White
almost always has a pawn on d5 and
plays on the Queen-side. And while the
structure here
is a little different, the
same principles still apply. (White looks
to one side of the board to create
play,
Black will almost always seek his play
on the King-side.)
*******
[ Maybe
(possibly >/=)
16...a6!?; {Diagram?}
first?
(To open the a-file for Black,
especially if White plays the way
he does in the game.) ]
*******
GM Yasser Seirawan
considers
both
White's and Black's next plays to be
worthy of an exclamation mark.
17.b5! g5!;
{Diagram?}
Black obviously intends to open lines
that will eventually lead to a violent
attack on
White's King. (Or at least
this is what A. Yusupov is hoping for!)
GM Larry Christiansen - in his very
good book on tactics and attacking
the King - lets the
moves up to this
point pass without comment. He then (now)
gives a VERY long discussion
of the
'landscape' and the general ideas here.
Basically he says that White might be
better,
but Black MUST seek his
chances on the King-side.
'!' - GM Andy Soltis. '!' - FM Graham Burgess.
*****
[ Interesting was:
17...Nf2!?;
"=/+" {Diagram?}
I think Black has the slightly better
chances in this position, but I would
also be the first to admit that I could
be mistaken! ]
*****
18.bxc6 bxc6;
19.Ne5!?, (Maybe - '!')
{See the diagram below.}
It takes nerves of steel to play a
move like this one, at least according
to GM Yasser Seirawan.
"There is hardly any other reasonable
move." (here) - GM Larry Christiansen.
(This is illuminating, because a few
annotators criticized this try for White!)
*************************
|
|
*************************
This move, (19.Ne5); is also the FIRST
choice of virtually EVERY SINGLE
STRONG
PROGRAM ... that I used to
test and analyze this game!!!
**************
[ Also possible was:
19.Qa4!?,
"+/=" {Diagram?}
and maybe White is a little better.
(A big emphasis on the word,
"maybe" here!);
*******
White could also try:
(>/=) 19.fxg5 hxg5;
20.Rf1, "=" {Diag?}
and the position appears pretty
close to being level.
(Yusupov felt
this might have been an improvement over the game.)
( The well-known writer and trainer (M. Dvoretsky) has suggested that
White instead play Ne5 here. But
this looks like it has not been
critically examined:
</= 20.Ne5!? Nxe5!; 21.dxe5 Rab8!; 22.Qa4 Bxe5!;
23.Rac1 Bxc3!;
24.Rxc3 c5; "~" ('!') {Diagram?} and many hours of computer-assisted analysis
strongly indicates
Black is OK ... maybe even better. ) ]
**************
Black continues trying to make
inroads into White's King-side.
19...gxf4;
(Maybe - '!')
{See the diagram - just below.}
This is probably best for Black.
*************************
|
|
*************************
Further eroding White's King-side.
'!' - GM Larry Christiansen.
('!' - GM Andrew Soltis.)
*******
[ Certainly NOT: </=
19...Nxe5?; 20.fxe5!,
'±' {Diagram?}
and Black will lose his d-pawn.
***
Also inadvisable for Black was: </= 19...Rac8?!;
20.fxg5 Qxg5;
21.Nxc6, '±' (Maybe "+/-")
{Diagram?} and White has a HUGE edge.
]
*******
20.Nxc6,
{Diagram?}
"White collects the harvest."
- GM Yasser Seirawan.
**************
[ After the moves:
20.Bxc6!? fxg3!; 21.Bxa8?
gxh2+!; 22.Kg2 Nf2!;
"/+" {Diagram?}
Black is clearly better.
(Black may have a winning attack
against the badly exposed White
King!);
*******
Seirawan points out the line: (</=) 20.gxf4?! Bxe5!;
21.fxe5,
21...Qh4;
"/+" {Diagram?} and Black is close to winning. ]
**************
20...Qg5!;
{See the diagram ... immediately below.}
Black abandons material concerns ... and heads for fame and glory.
*************************
|
|
*************************
I remember when I first went over this
heroic struggle ...
I had the very clear
impression that White was winning
here.(!)
[ </= 20...Qe6!?; 21.Nd5, '±' ]
GM Yasser Seirawan says both of
the upcoming moves by BOTH of
the players
merit praise. ('!' - GM Yasser Seirawan.)
21.Bxd6! Ng6!;
{Diagram?}
This is best says Seirawan.
'!' - GM Yasser Seirawan.
"Yusupov piles up the pressure ..." (on the King-side)
- GM Larry Christiansen. (Christiansen also awards an exclam
to this move.)
[ Interesting was:
21...Nxh2!?;
"~" - GM A. Yusupov.
(The 'Mammoth Book' strongly
questions this and gives a line
that appears to be winning for
White.) ]
**************
22.Nd5!,
'±' ("+/")
{Diagram?}
White looks to be clearly on top -
in this particular position.
"The only chance. The centralized
Knight both attacks and defends."
- GM Larry Christiansen.
(Several different authors award this move an exclam here.)
**************
[ Also interesting was:
22.c5!?,
"+/=" {Diagram?}
and White is still better.
*******
Almost no one - that I am aware of -
has pointed out the try:
22.Nb8!?,
"+/=" (Maybe - '±') {Diagram?}
when White certainly looks to be
better. (Now please understand,
I
am NOT saying this is better; just
a very interesting alternative that
no commentator has mentioned.)
{My original version of this game
gives an extremely detailed analysis
line here ... which ends in a win for White.} ]
**************
22...Qh5;
('!?')
{See
the diagram, just below.}
The natural move here for Black.
*************************
|
|
*************************
Seirawan harshly criticizes this, but
I am not sure his comments are
completely justified.
(It is always
easy to come up with improvements
when you are not under tension, a
time
constraint, and can relax and
move the pieces in your study. GM
Seirawan even concedes
this point
in his excellent book!)
Both GM's Yusupov and Christiansen
seem to feel that ...Nxh2; is much
better than ...Qh5.
But I have found
some (big) holes in both of these GM's
analysis. So I would have to say that
their work does NOT support their
conclusions!! But I will also freely admit
that in a game as
complicated as this
one, the final word on this decision has
yet to be reached!
'!?' - GM John Nunn. (BCM)
**************************************************
[ GM
Yasser Seirawan says Black should
instead play the line: (>/=)
22...fxg3!; 23.Bxg3 h5!;
24.Kh1!? h4!; 25.Be1[] Nf4!;
"<=>" {Diag?}
and Black has the initiative and
appears to making progress on
the left-hand
side of the board.
(Yusupov rejected this because the
move ... fxg3; appears to allow his
opponent's
Bishop to get back to
the King-side and help defend the
White King!)
*******
BTW - I am not at all 100%
convinced this line is best for Black.
Days of computer-assisted analysis
has yet to find anything even remotely resembling
a forced win!!
****************************************************************
Black could also (again) try:
</= 22...Nxh2!?;
('!!')
{Diagram?}
The main idea of:
- GM Arthur Yusupov.
[ GM Larry Christiansen likes this
move so much that he awards
it
an exclam. ('!') ]
**********
Now the following is a fairly large
improvement over Yusupov's main
line of analysis:
23.Nxf4!?;
(Maybe - '?!')
{Diagram?}
The only move considered by
the analyst in this position.
(But taking with the Bishop on
f4 seems to win for WHITE!
See
the variations just below.)
*******
( Or perhaps: >/=
23.Bxf4!?, ('!')
"+/=" Maybe - '±' {A.J.G.}
(I think this could be best ... but most of the annotators virtually
ignore this move for White!!);
***
White should NOT play: </= 23.Kxh2? Qxg3+; 24.Kh1 Qh4+;
25.Kg1 Qf2+; 26.Kh1 Qxe2; "~" {Diagram?}
when Black has a very strong
(winning?) attack ... despite his
material
deficit. - GM Larry Christiansen. (A VERY wild line!);
***
Or White could play: 23.gxf4, {unclear?} {Diagram?}
with a very unbalanced position. )
*******
23...Qxg3;
{Diagram?}
This now looks to be best.
( Or 23...Nxf4!?; 24.Bxf4 Qh5; "~" )
24.Nxg6!?,
>/=
24...Qxg6;
('!')
{Diagram?}
This has to be the correct move.
*******
( Instead
GM A. Yusupov
only gives
the following continuation:
</= 24...Qxd6??; 25.Nge7+! Rxe7[];
26.c5?? Nf3+!; 27.exf3!?,
27...Qf6??;
{Diagram?}
and White is (much)
better. ('±') ( - ChessBase.)
{The VERY simple move of: 27...Qxc6; wins ("-/+") for Black!}
This line is SO BAD ... it looks like
the result of a mis-print ...
or
some kind of foul-up during the
translation of GM's A. Yusupov's
notes! )
*******
25.Kxh2,
{Box?}
{Diagram?}
The computer says this is forced.
*******
( </= 25.Bxh2?? Be4; ("-/+")
{Diagram?}
and it looks like White will be
mated in three or four moves.
***
Also of no help to White is: </= 25.Ne7+? Rxe7; 26.Bxe7?? Be4;
("-/+")
and once more, White will be
check-mated quickly. )
*******
25...Qxd6+; 26.Kh1 Be4;
"/+" {Diagram?}
and Black appears to be just
about winning, ("-/+"); in this
position. {A.J.G.}
******************
Now it could be that ...Nxh2 is
better than ...Qh5. But as this very
detailed
analysis demonstrated,
there is still much unexplored
territory before anyone
could say
for certain!
(NOTE: In this version, the analysis
of ...Nxh2 has been reduced to
just a
few lines! The original version is MUCH more
detailed.) ]
**************************************************
White's next move is virtually forced.
(GM Yasser Seirawan gives White's 23rd
move an exclam, but that looks to be
rather superfluous to me.)
23.h4,
{See the diagram just below.}
This is not as bad as it looks ... White's strongly centralized pieces
may dominate
the board and the
play that ensues.
'!' - GM Yasser Seirawan.
*************************
|
|
*************************
An incredible position has resulted ... where Black is involved in a ...
"do-or-die" ... all-out effort on the
King-side.
*******
[ </= 23.h3?! Nf2!; "/+" ]
23...Nxh4!?;
('!' /
'!!') {Diagram?}
This looks like a tremendously brave
and daring sacrifice to me - especially
considering the
situation. (The winner
moves on in the WCS Candidate
Matches and might eventually face the
World Champion ... in a BIG-money
match! The loser goes home.) Another
factor to consider
was the extremely
abbreviated time control this game
was played under.
'?' - GM Yasser Seirawan. ('?!' - GM Larry Christiansen.)
GM Yasser Seirawan criticizes this
move and says that >/= 23...fxg3!;
was MUCH better.
("Black gets a
clear advantage without the sacrifice.")
Yet analysis does NOT bear this out.
In fact - my analysis seems to indicate
that Black SHOULD try this sack on h4
...
I strongly suspect that without this
sacrifice, White will find a way to
defend ...
with his surplus of pawns ... and {eventually} win the game!!
(The 'Mammoth Book' gives the story
that this move was condemned by the
group of
assembled annotators. Big
deal! I am reminded of the time about
30-35 TITLED
players thought Karpov
was winning ... (a WCM game) ... until Kasparov finally
unleashed a torrent of moves that led
- practically by force - to mate.)
*******
Addendum: I must be a poor potzer
who cannot understand anything
about chess.
GM Larry Christiansen
covers about the same analytical
ground as GM Yasser Seirawan.
He
then seems to conclude that - in the
main line after 23...fxg3; - that White
is better ...
refuting what some
previous analysts thought about this
game. But then he goes on to say
that he must award Black's twenty-
third move a "dubious" appellation.
WHAT DID I MISS???!!!????!!?
****************************
[ Variation # 23B1.)
After the continuation of: (>/=)
= 23...fxg3;
{Diagram?}
&n