“Be a Morphy”
Fischer once remarked that he really liked Kavalek’s style of play. That is quite a complement. Kavalek’s games have that harmonious quality to them, logical, very few errors and beautifully executed plans and tactics.
Below is one of my favourite Kavalek victories, and you can judge for yourself. The game is a Winawer French, played at the US Open in Boston in 1970. His opponent is the tough master Ed Formanek, one of the top masters on the weekend circuit back in the Fischer era.
I really like the game, and it has served as a model to me on how to play the White pieces against this opening. I have won numerous games against masters and grandmasters utilizing the same ideas, manoeuvres and techniques.
I have included Kavalek’s own notes that were published in the December 1970 Chess Life & Review, and added to them when I feel it useful for my readers or to give a broarder perspective on things. Enjoy!
In Kavalek’s own words
“One day I saw this advertisement for the brilliancy prize nailed on the wall in the hotel. I did not give it much attention, as I have already won a number of such prizes in my career. But when I lost to Bent Larsen in round seven (with what I believe was a winning position for me), I started thinking: What does it mean to ”be a Morphy”?
In Morphy’s day the technique of defense was not nearly as developed as it is today. The chess master could hope to get an opponent who could not defend well; then he could sacrifice some pieces, deliver a fine mate and then go to the brilliancy contest. It is just a joke, really. But some players do hope for this.
My theory about brilliancy games is: The stronger your opponent, the nicer your game will be. I was not thinking about a brilliancy when I played 1.e4 against Formanek. When the game was over, Larsen told me: ”It was brilliant!”. Then I found the tournment director, George Koltanowski, and said: ”George, I was trying to be a Morphy—here is the game.”
”No,” he repied. ”You were not Morphy. I saw the game: you were you!” ”
gm Kavalek,L – Formanek,Ed US Open , Boston, 18.8.1970 1-0
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 {[#]
<strong style="color:black;"> Kavalek: </strong>Most grandmasters play here 3.Nd2, which leads after 3…c5 to a position
slightly advantageous for White. Sometimes I play that move, but in Boston I
was feeling too aggressive for such a modest move.}
4.e5{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} Ne7 {[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>}
5.a3{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 {[#]<strong style="color:black;"> Kavalek:</strong> I was waiting for 6…b6, but my opponent did not give me the chance to win the game by means of a theoretical line.}
7.Nf3{[#] <strong style="color:black;"><strong style="color:black;"> Me:</strong> Today the wild 7.h4 and 7.Qg4 are more frequently seen, but Kavalek’s move is preferred by more positional players </strong>} Nbc6 8.a4{[#] <strong style="color:black;">Me: This was how Bobby Fischer and Smyslov liked to play. It is not considered the most precise today, as Black has found a way to equalize.
Modern grandmasters prefer 8.h4 or 8.Be2, and only playing a4 (if at all) at a later stage </strong>}
Qa5{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} 9.Qd2{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>}
({<strong style="color:black;">Me: Six years later Kavalek won a great game with the popular alternative </strong> } 9.Bd2$5 Bd7 10.Be2 c4$6 11.Ng5 {!} h6
12.Nh3 O-O-O 13.Nf4 Kb8 14.O-O Nc8 15.Nh5 Rhg8 16.Bg4 Nb6 17.Re1
Nxa4 18.Re3 b5 19.Rf3 Be8 20.Rg3 Ne7 21.Bc1 Ng6 22.Ba3 Ka8 23.Qd2
Qc7 24.Bh3 Bd7 25.Bd6 Qc6 26.Rf1 Bc8 27.f4 f5 28.exf6 gxf6 29.f5
exf5 30.Bb4 Qb6 31.Bxf5 a5 32.Bxa5 Qxa5 33.Bxg6 f5 34.Nf4 Rg7
35.Re3 Qb6 36.Be8 Rd6 37.Rb1 Bd7 38.Qe1 Ka7 39.Rb4 Qd8 40.Bxd7
Qxd7 41.Rb1 Kb6 42.Qe2 Kc6 43.Re1 Qa7 44.Re6 Qd7 45.Qf3 Nb6 46.Rxd6+
Kxd6 47.Qh5 {<strong style="color:black;"> 1-0, Kavalek Lubomir (USA) – Uhlmann Wolfgang (GER) , Manila 1976 Izt</strong> }
)
Bd7 10.Bd3{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} c4? {[#]
<strong style="color:black;">Kavalek:</strong> ”This move is almost always bad in the French Defense,” Dr. Vidmar tells u in
his comments to the game Burn-Alekhine, Karlsbad 1911. And I agree with him. But what should Black play?}
( {<strong style="color:black;">Kavalek: Well, maybe the answer was given in the game Fischer-Uhlmann, Stockholm 1962:</strong>}
10...f6 {!}
11.O-O fxe5 12.Nxe5 Nxe5 13.dxe5 O-O 14.c4 Qxd2 15.Bxd2 Bc6 {<strong style="color:black;"> and the position is about even.</strong>}
)
( {<strong style="color:black;">Kavalek: No good is</strong>} 10...cxd4 11.cxd4 Qxd2+
( 11...Nb4 12.O-O ) 12.Bxd2 Nf5 13.Bc3 {<strong style="color:black;">and White is better (Smyslov – Letelier, Venice 1950)</strong>}
)
11.Be2{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} f6{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} 12.Ba3{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} O-O-O{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>}
( {<strong style="color:black;">Kavalek: Of course not</strong>} 12...Qxa4?
13.O-O! {<strong style="color:black;">and White wins atleast a piece.</strong>} )
( {<strong style="color:black;">Kavalek: </strong> } 12...fxe5 13.dxe5
Ng6 14.Bd6 {!} )
( {<strong style="color:black;">Me: Much of the early theory of this line was worked out by Bobby Fischer in the 1960s: </strong> } 12...Ng6 13.O-O O-O-O 14.Bd6 Rde8 15.Rfe1
h5 16.h4 Nd8 17.Bf1 Nf7 18.Bb4 Qc7 19.Qe2 a5 20.Ba3 Bxa4 21.Bf8
Rhxf8 22.Rxa4 Nd8 23.g3 b5 24.Ra2 Nc6 25.exf6 gxf6 26.Bh3 Kb8
27.Qd1 Ka7 28.Bxe6 Qd6 29.Bf5 Rxe1+ 30.Nxe1 Nge7 31.Qxh5 Nxf5
32.Qxf5 Re8 33.Ng2 Qe6 34.Qh5 f5 35.Ra1 Qd7 36.Ne3 Rf8 37.Qf3
f4 38.Nxd5 fxg3 39.Qxf8 gxf2+ 40.Kxf2 Qxd5 {<strong style="color:black;"> 1-0, Fischer Robert J (USA) – Sherwin James T (USA), New York 1960 Ch USA</strong>}
)
13.O-O{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} Rdg8$5{[#] <strong style="color:black;">Me: Clearly Black intends to advance his pawns on the Kingside. </strong>}
({<strong style="color:black;">Me: Another important Bobby Fischer game saw: </strong> } 13...Nf5 14.Rfe1 Be8 15.g4! Nfe7 16.Bf1 Bd7 17.Bh3
h6 18.Bd6 Rdf8 19.Rab1 Rf7 20.exf6 gxf6 21.Bg3 Ng6 22.Rb5 Qa6
23.Reb1 b6 24.Qc1 Qxa4 25.R5b2 Qa3 26.Qe3 Kb7 27.Nh4 Nxh4 28.Bxh4
e5 29.dxe5 fxe5 30.Rxb6+ Ka8 31.R6b5 Be6 32.Bg3 e4 33.Qxh6 {<strong style="color:black;"> </strong> 1-0, Fischer Robert J (USA) – Weinstein Raymond , New York 1960 Ch USA}
)
14.Rfe1$5{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} h5{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>}
15.h4$5{[#] <strong style="color:black;">Me: It is advisable to slow down Black’s counterattack in this way.</strong>}
( {<strong style="color:black;">Me: Black was doing well after </strong> }15.Bf1 h4! 16.Rab1 Nf5 17.g4 hxg3 18.fxg3
fxe5 19.Nxe5 {?!} Nfxd4 {} $17 {!} {<strong style="color:black;"> as in the game Garcia Guillermo – Zapata A , Colombia 1988 Ch</strong>}
)
Nf5{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} 16.Bf1{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} Rh7{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} 17.g3{[#] <strong style="color:black;">Me: These manouevres (Re1), (g3) are considered standard play today in this kind of position. White strengthens his centre and prepares to put his Bishop on a more active diagonal</strong>}
Nh6 {[#] <strong style="color:black;">Kavalek: Formanek played this move immediately.</strong> }
( {<strong style="color:black;"> Kavalek: Both he and I saw that after</strong> } 17...g5
18.exf6 gxh4 19.Ng5 {!} {<strong style="color:black;"> Black must lose material with no chances for a successful attack:</strong> }
hxg3 ( 19...Ncxd4 20.Bg2 h3 21.Nxh7 hxg2 22.f7 {!} Rd8 23.Kxg2
{<strong style="color:black;"> and White wins.</strong> } ) 20.Nxh7 gxf2+ 21.Kxf2 Qc7 22.Ke2 {!} )
18.Bh3{[#] <strong style="color:black;">Me: Ditto my last comment </strong>}
Ng4{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} 19.Bd6{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} Qd8{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} 20.a5! {[#] <strong style="color:black;">Kavalek: I had the feeling that something great is hanging in the air. As a prelude to the greatness, a pawn sacrifice is good enough. </strong>}
({<strong style="color:black;"> Me: This pawn sacrifice is all part of the White’s tool box against the Winawer French. White can usually not make progress without it. Of course it is a bit risky, but it is also risky for Black to accept it.
This is how modern chess is played!</strong>} )
Nxa5{[#] <strong style="color:black;">Me: To take or not to take? Of course it is not forced to capture it, but Black will have to worry about the White pawn advancing to a6…</strong>} 21.Qc1{[#] <strong style="color:black;">Me: The Queen is heading over to the Queenside via a3 or b1. All standard stuff. </strong>}
Nc6$5 {[#] <strong style="color:black;"> Kavalek: I consider Formanek’s
defense to be the strongest. And believe me, it was not easy for me to find the right
way forward as I had only 20 minutes left for the next 29 moves.</strong>}
( { <strong style="color:black;"> Kavalek: After the game both grandmasters Larsen and Benko pointed out that Black should try</strong> }
21...b6$5 {<strong style="color:black;"> with the idea of saving his King by going to a8. But this does not work! How do you like this variation:</strong> }
22.Qa3 Kb7 23.Reb1 Ka8 24.Nd2 {!} {<strong style="color:black;"> threatening Nxc4!</strong> } Bc6 25.Bg2
g5 26.Bb4 gxh4 27.Bxa5 bxa5 28.Nxc4 hxg3 29.fxg3 {
<strong style="color:black;"> with the threat of Qc5 and White’s attack is decisive. </strong> } )
22.Qa3{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} g5{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} 23.Reb1! {[#] <strong style="color:black;">Kavalek: There is time for such a move!} Be8$5 {[#] <strong style="color:black;">Kavalek: Formanek again chooses the only move.</strong>
</strong>}
( {<strong style="color:black;">Kavalek: Black can not play</strong> } 23...gxh4 {<strong style="color:black;">because of}
24.Qc5 {!} a6 ( 24...b6 25.Rxa7 bxc5 ( 25...Be8 26.Ra8+ ) 26.Ra8+ )
25.Rxa6 bxa6 26.Rb8# )
24.hxg5 {[#] <strong style="color:black;">Kavalek: This definitely stops Black’s action on the Kingside.</strong>}
( {Kavalek: Of course now} 24.Qc5 {would be met by} b6
{!} )
fxg5{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>}
25.Nd2! {[#] <strong style="color:black;">Kavalek: It is almost always good to kill two birds with one stone. But it is not bad to have two stones kill one bird. The text move has such an advantage. I knew
I could choose later between f3 (and after the Knight moves , Bxe6 check) and Nxc4.</strong>}
({<strong style="color:black;"> Me: The theme of a sacrifice on c4 , of when it is good and when it is not, plays a significant role in the plans of both players. In my own games, in similar positions, for example, I have often successfully played a sacrifice of c4. </strong> } )
Rg6{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} 26.Bg2! {[#] <strong style="color:black;"> Kavalek: The dynamite is ready to explode; all we need is the matches!</strong>}
b6 {[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>}
({<strong style="color:black;"> Kavalek: </strong> }26...h4 27.Nxc4 dxc4 28.Qc5 Rc7 ( 28...b6 29.Bxc6 {!} Rc7
30.Rxb6 {!} Bxc6 31.Rxc6 Rgg7 32.Rxa7! ) 29.Rxa7 Nxa7 30.Bxb7+
Kb8 ( 30...Kd7 31.Qxa7 {<strong style="color:black;">with the threat of Qa4 wins</strong> } ) 31.Bc6+
Kc8 32.Qxa7 {!} )
27.Nxc4! {[#] <strong style="color:black;">Kavalek: The fireworks start! For only a Knight, the White Bishop on g2 becomes a tiger.</strong>}
dxc4{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>}
28.Qa4!! {[#] <strong style="color:black;">Kavalek: It is my feeling that quiet moves are the nicest parts of combinations. White’s threat is simply 29.Bxc6</strong>}
({<strong style="color:black;">Me: It is clear from his notes to this game that Kavalek was very proud of this move. Subsequent analysis showed that , while the move is very strong, it was not the only way to win the game. </strong> } )
Rc7$5 {[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>}
( {<strong style="color:black;"> Kavalek: Many players in Boston asked me after the game what I would do after</strong> }
28...Na5 {<strong style="color:black;"> I would take the Knight was my reply. But it was just a joke:</strong> }
29.Qxa5? {<strong style="color:black;"> Now White can not win:</strong> }
( {<strong style="color:black;"> The right way to win brilliantly is</strong> }
29.Qb4! Bc6
( 29...Nc6 30.Qxc4 Kb7 ( 30...Rc7 31.Rxb6 {!} axb6
( 31...Nb8 32.Bb7+ Kd7 33.Qb5+ ) 32.Ra8+ Nb8 ( 32...Kd7 33.Bxc6+
Rxc6 34.Ra7+ Kc8 35.Qa6# ) 33.Rxb8+ Kxb8 34.Qa6 Bc6 35.Bxc6 )
31.Bxc6+ Bxc6 32.Rxa7+ {!} Kxa7 33.Qxc6 ) 30.Rxa5 Bxg2 31.Kxg2
bxa5 32.Qb8+ Kd7 33.Qb7+ Ke8 34.Qxh7 Rh6 35.Qg8+ Kd7 36.Qf7+ )
bxa5 30.Rb8+ Kd7 31.Rab1 Qxb8 {!} 32.Rxb8 Nf6! {<strong style="color:black;">and Black can hold </strong> } ( 32...Rf7
! ) )
29.Rxb6!{[#] <strong style="color:black;">Me: The finish to this very thematic game is truly spectcular!</strong>} axb6 {[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} 30.Qa8+ {[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} Nb8{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>}
( {<strong style="color:black;"> Kavalek: No better is </strong> } 30...Kd7 31.Bxc6+ Rxc6
32.Ra7+ Rc7 33.Rxc7+ Qxc7 34.Bxc7 Kxc7 35.Qxe8 )
31.Qxb8+!{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>}
Kd7{[#] <strong style="color:black;"></strong>} 32.Qxb6! {[#] <strong style="color:black;">Kavalek: Another quiet move and the game is over. The threat is Qb5 check.
Me: Here Formanek threw in the towel. Kavalek: After </strong> }
Qc8 33.Ra7! 1-0
You must activate JavaScript to enhance chess game visualization.
