Botvinnik Semi-Slav, The (Pedersen)

36 THE BOTVINNIK SEMI-SLAV
'ti'f4+ ~b7 28 'ti'd4 c3 29 'iVxa7+ ~c8,
or 27 i.f4+ ~b6 28 i.e3+ i.c5 (of
course 28 ... ~c7 is just a repetition),
both offering Black good chances.
2S ••• ~e6 26 'ti'xbS+ 'iti>xbS 27 i.xdS
e3! (D)
As you may have noticed already,
material is not so important in this
line!
2Sl:txd7 e2!
In Aseev-Se.lvanov, St Petersburg
1997 Black went for 28 ... a5, which is
less precise, since White can attack
Black's pawns with his rook from behind.
Se.lvanov gives 29 l:tc7! as
White's best (the game continuation
was 29 l:td5+), with the following options
for Black:
a) 29 ... i.d6 30 l:tc8 a4 31 i.e7 a3
32 i.xd6 a2 33 l:tb8+ 'iti>c6 34 i.xb4
bl'ii' 35 l:ta8! (this is only given as interesting
by Se.lvanov, but the fact is
that White wins quite easily) 35 ... c2
(35 .. :ifxb4 36 l:txa2 is trivial; White
threatens l:tc1 followed by l:tac2, eliminating
the c-pawn, and if 36 ... 'iVb3 37
l:te2 there is nothing to be done about
the same threat) 36 i.d2 and again
White wins. Black cannot force the
white rook away from the a-file, and
therefore the win is quite easy: simply
pushing the h-pawn.
b) 29 ... 'iti>a4!?
c) 29 ... i.c5 30 i.e7 i.b6 31 l:tc8
a4 32 h4 a3 33 l:txc3! (without this resource
White would actually be in
great trouble) 33 ... a2 (33 ... bxc3? 34
i.xa3 i.d4 35 i.xb2 cxb2 36 g4 +-)
34 l:tb3 (34 l:tccl ? bxc1 'ti' 35 l:txc1 b3
36 i.a3 i.d4 37 l:tdl 'iti>a4 wins for
Black) 34 ... al'ti' 35 lhb4+ is clearly
better for White according to Se.lvanov,
but I am not sure whether this assessment
is right. The problem is that
it is very difficult for White to maintain
his rook behind the b-pawn. A
sample line would be 35 ... 'iti>c6 36
r;t>g2!? i.a5 37 l:tb3 'ifa2 38 l:ta3 (38
l:tb8 i.b6) 38 ... 'ifd5+ 39 ~h2 'iff5
and, I think, eventually White has to
give up a rook for the b-pawn, while it
is far from easy to make any progress
on the kingside.
29 l:tddl exdl'ti'
Lutz gave 29 ... ..ti>c4(?), which looks
like a possible winning attempt, but
Burgess's refutation in NCO looks
convincing: 30 .l:[del ..ti>b3 31 i.e7
i.h6 32 f4 as 33 i.d6! (if White's
bishop reaches e5 the pawns are effectively
stopped; e.g., 33 ... a4 34 i.e5 a3
35 h4 ~a2 36 .l:[al+!) 33 .. .a2 34 g4
bl'if 35 l:txbl cxbl'iV 36 l:txbl ..ti>xbl
37 g5 and White wins.
30 l:txdl r;t>e4