SI 25.1 (B56)
Lazaro Bruzon Batista
Gilberto Milos
Campinas BRA 9th Panamerican T, 2013 (6)
Notes by Jeroen Bosch

---

SOS Game of the Month March: [SOS-2, Chapter 9, p.72] In a recent game Cuban top-GM Lazaro Bruzon used a former specialty of Sergei Movsesian's to surprise (and defeat) Brazilian GM Gilberto Milos. Don't be put off by the title of Movsesian's article in SOS-2: 'Play like a Beginner'. As he pointed out 6.h3 versus the Classical Sicilian is a good way to surprise your opponent, who will be expecting the heavy theoretical complexities of 6.g5, 6.c4 or 6.e2.

1.e4 c5 2.f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.xd4 f6 5.c3 c6 6.h3

Movsesian's surprise weapon. White wants to take the game into the unknown - aiming for an early g4.

6...xd4

This is not very popular in practice. Milos aims to transpose into a Dragon (or Accelerated Dragon) hoping to demonstrate that 6. h3 is useless there. The voluntary exchange on d4 does give White a lot of leeway though.
A) 6...e5 is one of the main replies, when Movsesian favours 7.de2 However, if you are positionally inclined you will not mind to play (7.f3 reasoning that, by contrast to a Boleslavsky line (6.e2 e5 7.f3), the white-squared bishop will occupy the a2-g8 diagonal in one go, when h3 is a useful tempo! See for example Andreikin's model play in the next game: 7...e7 (7...h6 8.c4 e7 9.0-0 e6 10.b3 0-0 11.e2 a5 12.d1 xb3 13.axb3 b8?! 14.h2!? a manoeuvre also known from the Ruy Lopez. White is fighting for square d5 14...d8 15.g4 xe4? 16.xe4 f5 17.xh6+! gxh6 18.h5 f7 19.xf5+- Priyadharshan-Nikhilesh, Saint Louis 2012) 8.c4 0-0 9.a3!? (9.0-0 e6 10.b3) 9...e6 10.a2 d7 11.g5 Again fighting for square d5!) 11...xa2 12.xa2 e6 13.xf6 xf6 14.0-0 d8 15.d3 b6 16.d5 h8 17.aa1 f5 18.ad1 ad8 19.c3 d7 20.exf5! xf5 21.d2 Andreikin-Diamant, Puerto Madryn 2009) 7...e6 Again the set-up favoured by Movsesian, as explained in SOS-2. 8.f4 (Practice has also seen 8.g5 e7 9.xf6 xf6; 10.d5 Bad is 8.g4?! d5 9.exd5 xd5 10.g2 xc3 11.xd8+?! xd8 12.xc6+ bxc6 13.xc3 h5 Mucha-J.Hirneise, Krakow 2012. 8...c8 (A1) 8...h5 9.d3 (9.g3 exf4 10.xf4 was Movsesian-Peptan, Groningen 1997 9...exf4 10.xf4 e7 (10...xf4 11.xf4) 11.0-0-0 xf4 12.xf4 0-0 13.b1 e5 14.d4 a6 15.e2 e8 16.cd5 f8 and White was better in Broekmeulen-Nijboer, HSG-HMC 2011. See SOS-2 for A2) 8...exf4 9.xf4 and A3) 8...g6 9.g4) 9.g3!? Movsesian had previously tried (9.f5 c4 10.g3 d5 Stronger is perhaps (10...xf1 11.xf1 d4 12.e3 xc3!? 13.bxc3 xe4 14.0-0 xc3) 11.exd5 (11.xc4 dxc4 12.g5) 11...xd5 12.xd5 xd5 13.c3 c5 14.c4 f4 15.xd8+ xd8 16.e4 xg2+ 17.e2 with compensation for the pawn in Movsesian-Navara, Pardubice 2009. 9...e7 (9...d5!? 10.f5 d7 11.exd5 b4 12.a3 a5º) 10.g2 b6 11.b3 0-0 12.f5 d7 13.a4 c7 14.c4 White is risking a lot in order to create a bind. Black now tries to break out with 14...b5 15.cxb5 d4 16.ec3 xb5 17.xb5 xb5 18.d2 d5 (18...c2) 19.exd5 e4 20.0-0 xd5 (20...xg3) 21.e1 fe8 22.c1 b8 23.c4 d6 24.g4 g3? 25.xc8 xc8 26.xe4 and White was (finally) on top in Movsesian-Peek, Caleta 2010;
B) 6...g6 7.c4 (B1) 7.g3 g7 8.de2 is the fianchetto Dragon. B2) 7.g4 to play a kind of extended fianchetto Dragon is interesting. Play transposed into a normal Dragon after B3) 7.e3 g7 8.c4 0-0 9.b3 d7 10.0-0 a6 11.e1 b5 12.xc6 xc6 13.d5 d7 14.g5 Gashimov-Zapata, Ourense 2009. B4) 7.de2 is a subtle version to transpose into a g3 (or g4!) Dragon without allowing Black to take on d4. 7...g7 8.0-0 0-0 9.b3 transposes into a line of the Dragon. Two examples: 9...a5 (9...xd4 10.xd4 d7 (10...e6) 11.g5 (11.d3) 11...h6 12.d2 b5 (12...c6) 13.d3 a5 14.xb5 xe4 15.xe4 xb5 16.xg6 d5 17.g3 a6 18.fd1 g6 19.h4 is perhaps equal but White won in Broekmeulen-Werle, Roosendaal 2012. 10.g5 xb3 11.axb3 h6 12.e3 d5? 13.e5 e4 14.f4 h5? 15.xe4 dxe4 16.e2 d7 17.f2 Broekmeulen-Van der Heijden, Netherlands 2011.
C) A witty answer was 6...h6 but I would prefer White in the Velimirovic Attack with h3 and ...h6 added after 7.c4 e6 8.b3 e7 9.e3 a6 10.e2! The actual game went (10.f3 c7 11.g3 g5 12.0-0-0 e5 13.b1 b5 was Uraev-Bukavshin, Tolyatti 2012. D) A main line is 6...e6 7.g4 d5!? (7...h6 8.e3 d7 9.g2 a6 10.e2 leads to an old line from the Keres Attack. 8.b5 d7 9.exd5 xd5 10.xd5 exd5 11.e3 b4+!? (11...e7 12.b3 e6 13.d2 0-0 14.0-0-0 c8 15.b1 a6 16.e2 c7 17.d4 f6 18.c3 Ashwin-Shiven, New Delhi 2010. 12.c3 d6 13.b3 0-0 14.0-0-0 xd4 15.xd4 c6 16.d3 h4 with an unclear position. White eventually won this high-level contest. Dominguez Perez-Savchenko, Havana 2009.
E) Finally, two games by Gashimov went 6...a6 7.e3 and now: 7...e5 (7...e6 8.g4 e7 9.g5!? (9.g2) 9...d7 10.h4 c7 11.d2 b5 12.0-0-0 b7 13.f3 de5 14.e2 a5 15.b3 c8 16.cxb5! axb5 17.xb5 d8 18.xd6+ xd6 19.xd6 xd6 20.xd6 and the position favours White. Gashimov-Mucha, Warsaw 2009. 8.f3 e7 9.c4 b5 10.b3 a5 11.g5 0-0 12.xf6 xf6 13.d5!? (13.d5) 13...b8 14.0-0 e7 15.d3 h8 16.a4 (16.b4! c4 17.a4) 16...b4 17.d1 Gashimov-Boidman, Mainz 2009.

7.xd4 g6

As intended, bad is [7...e5 8.b5+ with a positional plus for White.

8.g5

White should not try to take advantage of the pin - he loses too much valuable time in the process. [8.d5?! g7 9.g5 0-0 10.xf6?! exf6 11.0-0-0 f5 and Black is just better. Nabuurs-Swinkels, Maastricht 2008.

8...g7 9.0-0-0 0-0 10.e5!

A novelty that works well in the game. [10.d2 is best met by 10...e6!] (10...d7? 11.e5! e8 (11...dxe5? 12.xf6+-) 12.d5 was of course much better for White in Kordis-Kafetzopoulos, Athens 2008.

10...d7?

Black should have gone for [10...a5! 11.f4 (11.exf6? xg5+) 11...dxe5 12.xe5 (12.fxe5 e6) 12...b6! when Black stays well in the game. It was difficult to foresee perhaps that after 13.xe7 Black has the saving tactic (13.b5) 13...e6 14.xf6 fe8]

11.h4

Now White really is much better.

11...f6 12.exf6 xf6

Even worse is [12...xf6 13.c4+ h8 14.e4]

13.c4+ h8 14.he1

With simple moves White has reached an overwhelming position. Black now uses violent measures:

14...b5?! 15.d3!

Very strong!

15...f5

[15...g8 16.xb5 b8 17.c4+ was the tempo-gaining point of 15.d3.

16.h6?

Bruzon could have crowned his previous efforts with [16.xf5 gxf5 17.d5! xd5 (17...e5 18.f4 e4 19.g4) 18.xd5 f6 19.e6 and White should win without any trouble. Black will lose a pawn for sure, while his king will be in dire straits.

16...xh6+ 17.xh6 xd3 18.xd3 b4

Black is completely back into the game after the simplifications. White can only boast a small structural edge on the basis of Euwe's theory on pawn islands (the fewer the better). For our purposes the main part of the game is behind. Let's see the rest with a few light comments.

19.d1 c8 20.b1 a5 21.d2 c5 22.f3 c7 23.e3 c8 24.e2

Play really is about equal.

24...d8 25.b3 f8 26.d4 g7 27.h4 g8 28.g4 h8 29.d1

[29.h5]

29...f7 30.d2 g7 31.h5

After a repetition Bruzon now goes for it.

31...g8

[31...gxh5 32.f5 f8 33.xe7 xc2! 34.xc2 xc2 35.xc2 hxg4 36.fxg4 leads to a complex position. White is perhaps a bit better, but Black is clearly not without chances either.

32.hxg6 hxg6 33.h2 e8 34.c4 xc4 35.xc4

[35.d5+!? f8 36.xc4 c5 37.a8]

35...c5 36.a4!? bxa3ep 37.xa3 c7 38.c4 e5 39.f4 e4 40.xa5 d4

It really is quite difficult for a human to calculate the draw on move 40 with [40...xf4! 41.xc7 f1+ 42.c2 e5! 43.d2 e4+ 44.c3 e3+ 45.d3 e1+ 46.d2!=]

41.a2 e6?

After this move White takes over again, and this time for good. Here too Black had a perpetual after [41...xf4 42.xc7 f2+ 43.xf2 xf2+ 44.a1 d4+ 45.b1 d1+=]

42.b5 d3 43.f5 f8 44.f6!?

[44.c3 xg4 45.d5]

44...exf6 45.c3 xg4

[45...e6! was a tougher defence.

46.d5 g3 47.b6 f3 48.a3! f1 49.xd6?!

Winning was [A) 49.c7 or B) 49.b7]

49...f3 50.e7 a1+ 51.b4 d4

[51...f5 to take on d5 and go for a perpetual can be met by the very safe 52.d2 (although other solutions exist too).

52.b7!

A kind of double attack.

52...d1?

[52...d3 53.a2 wins.

53.e7+ f7 54.f5+ d7 55.h7+ e6 56.e4+

and mate on the next move.

1-0