I read the articles of Ronan Bennett and Daniel King The Guardian, Tuesday 1 March 2011 regarding Anand sacrifice ala David Bronstein sacrificing a piece for two pawns.
RB: I would never have the nerve to make the kind of positional sacrifice Anand has made here, no matter how unimportant the game. The only way I can think of to try to make something of the impressive central pawn phalanx is to push the pawn – 1 d5. Wait a minute! Doesn't that regain the piece at once? If Black tries to retreat the bishop with 1...Bc8 the d-pawn will cause mayhem: 2 d6 and Black will be forced to take with the rook (or 2...Qb8 3 dxe7): 2...Rxd6 3 Rxd6 and everything's rosy in the garden. It can't be this easy. What am I missing? What if 2...Bxd5 3 exd5 Nxd5...? Material is now equal, but I really don't like White's position. So maybe the immediate pawn advance isn't a great idea.
DK: I have shown this position to several of my pupils and, without exception, they all reach for the d-pawn, eager to win back their piece. It's easy to get carried away with the attractive variations after 1 d5 Bc8 2 d6, forgetting that Black can improve his play right at the start. Ronan hits upon the problem: 1...Bxd5 returns the piece under favourable circumstances.
Ultimately, White wants to roll the pawns down the board, but he has to prepare the way first. Once again Anand displayed confidence and control, appreciating that he had time to manoeuvre. He played 1 Bf2, threatening Bg3. The two bishops are so powerful, slicing across the board from positions of total safety. The game continued 1...a6 2 Bg3 Qc8 3 Bf1. Now if 3...Nac6 4 Bd6 and then d5 really is crushing.
Instead came 3...b6 but 4 Rab1 undermined the knight's support and Black had to give back material. After 4...Nb3 5 Rxb3 Bxb3 6 Qxb3 bxc5 7 d5 White still had the massive pawn centre and the two bishops, and the small material deficit was irrelevant. See the diagram above for the finish of the game
No comments:
Post a Comment