[Event "Munich Olympiad"] [Site "?"] [Date "1958.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Macleod, N.A (SCO)"] [Black "Sanchez, L (COL)"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "B21"] [Annotator "M.J.Donnelly"] [PlyCount "54"] [SourceVersionDate "2024.08.10"] {[%evp 0,54,23,36,51,22,27,-2,32,32,11,28,37,42,7,21,11,6,3,-7,-24,-29,-50,-70,-73,-191,-186,-186,-177,-173,-173,-175,-175,-175,-122,-116,-111,-123,-104,-137,80,89,89,88,78,86,93,51,101,87,120,83,90,95,88,85,139]} 1. e4 c5 2. d4 {The interesting gambit nowadays know as the Smith-Morra Gambit. This is a classic gambit, where White sacrifices a pawn for rapid development, and is a good practical line against the perennial Sicilian Defence. Whilst there is substantial theory on this opening currently, back in the early 1950s, just a few years before this game was played, there was little For example, it is largely dismissed by William Winter in just a few lines in the other-wise very fine book "Chess for Match Players". Similarily Modern Chess Openings at this time only contained a few columns on the Gambit. Current theory derives from the practical play of Pierre Morra and the extensive years of research by Ken Smith.} cxd4 3. c3 dxc3 {The most principled reply, as played by Caruana and Duda for example. The gambit may be declined by such moves as:} (3... d3 {as favoured by other top players including Firouzja and Naiditsch,}) ({or} 3... d5 {played by Andreikin and Harikrishna}) ({as well as} 3... Nf6 {chosen by, for instance, Anand and Vachier Lagrave. The selection of these very different replies by several of the strongest players in the world show the wide variance in approaches used against this opening.}) 4. Nxc3 Nc6 5. Nf3 a6 (5... d6 {is also possible with a Dragon type of structure for Black. One example continued} 6. Bc4 Nf6 7. O-O g6 8. Qe2 Bg7 9. h3 O-O 10. Rd1 {Adams-Nunn, Oviedo Fischer Blitz 1992.}) (5... e6 {is an alternative approach avoiding expanding on the queens-side and aiming for a "small centre" with pawns on d6 and e6. An example is} 6. Bc4 d6 7. O-O Nge7 8. Bg5 a6 9. Qe2 h6 10. Be3 Ng6 11. Rad1 Be7 12. Nd4 O-O 13. f4 {Donnelly-Rayner, Manchester League A 1981. An opening choice inspired by the strong otb and correspondence player Mike Conroy a regular Morra player from that area.}) 6. Bc4 (6. a4 {has been played here to prevent Black hitting the bishop by b5 but is not in the spirit of rapid development and weakens b4 as occurred in Donohue-Grant, Glenrothes open 2002.}) 6... e6 7. O-O (7. a4 {has been played now too but the likes of Darga, Dreev, Aseev and several others as Black winning all games from this position.}) 7... b5 (7... Nge7 {is an interesting development scheme, with the Black pieces becoming better co-ordinated and under less central pressure after} 8. Bg5 b5 9. Bb3 Bb7 10. Qe2 Qb8 11. Rfe1 Ng6 12. Rad1 Bc5 {Negele-Kamsky, Mainz Ordix open rapid 2007.}) 8. Bb3 {Seemingly the most natural retreat but a fairly recent top-level correspondence game saw instead} (8. Bd3 {discarding the option of pressure on the d-file and producing complexities following} Bb7 9. Bf4 Be7 10. Rc1 d6 11. Nxb5 {Williamson-Lounek, Pinson Memorial GM ICCF e-mail 2012.}) 8... Bb7 9. Qe2 Nge7 10. Rd1 ({Instead after} 10. Bg5 {Black can push back some of the attacking pieces by} f6 11. Be3 Na5 12. Bc2 Ng6 13. Rad1 Nc4 14. Bc1 Rc8 {although leaving the king centrally placed: Dubois-Abbasov, Capella open, Capella le Grande 2008.}) 10... Ng6 11. Ng5 $5 {A somewhat speculative idea with a Tal-like sacrifice in mind. Steadier were} (11. Be3 Na5 ({and} 11... Be7 {when the gung-ho move} 12. Nd5 {didn't work after} exd5 13. exd5 Na5 14. d6 Nxb3 15. dxe7 Qxe7 {McManus-Yudasin, US Open Jacksonville 1990}) 12. Rd2 d6 13. Rad1 Rc8 14. Bd4 Nxb3 15. axb3 Qc7 {Brodda-Lecroq, FRA-GER ICCF e-mail 2013}) 11... Be7 12. Bxe6 $6 {This may well have come as a shock to Black an experienced International Master.} (12. Qh5 {was a less speculative way to proceed as in Kayis-Akat, TUR-ch women Ayvalik 2022.}) 12... fxe6 13. Nxe6 dxe6 14. Rxd8+ Rxd8 15. Be3 O-O 16. Qg4 {Immediately hitting Black's weakest spot. Later games saw} (16. h4 Nge5 17. b3 Bf6 {Gluszko-Wieclaw, Rewal open-A 2007.}) ({as well as} 16. Bb6 Rde8 17. Rd1 Nce5 {Dimanoudis-Georgakopoulos, Peristeri open 2015. Black had no problems at all in each of these games.}) 16... e5 ({Again later games saw the better move} 16... Bc8 {activating the bishop with the threat of e5 which would also control the key central squares d4 and d4. For example,} 17. f4 Nxf4 (17... Rd3 {was less effective after} 18. Qe2 Rfd8 {Mfundisi-Masiya, Johannesburg Gauteng open 2017 as White now has Nd5.}) 18. Bxf4 e5 19. Qe2 Rxf4 {and Black is winning as in Arslan-Yildiz, TUR-chT Second League Konya 2022.}) 17. Nd5 {This is the difference as White keeps his pieces active.} Bc8 18. Qh5 Bd6 19. h3 {Safety first to avoid a back-rank mate and putting the onus on Black to find a plan.} Nf4 $6 {A natural move but a mistake. Better was Nb4 or Be6 aiming to exchange off the strong Nd5.} 20. Nxf4 exf4 21. Bb6 {Keeping up the pressure.} Be6 {Black has to return some material since} (21... Rde8 {loses to} 22. Qd5+ Re6 23. Qxc6 {as Black does not have Bh2+ winning the White queen.}) (21... Rd7 {also loses more simply to} 22. Qd5+) 22. Bxd8 Nxd8 {Now White has the better game and Black must be careful in attempting to co-ordinate his forces.} 23. a4 (23. Rd1 {was another good choice with a possible line being} Be7 24. Qe5 {threatening Rxd8 and Qxe6.}) 23... Bf7 24. Qd1 Be5 {The safer square as after} (24... Be7 25. axb5 axb5 26. Qd7 {wins a pawn.}) 25. axb5 axb5 26. Ra5 {Allowing the exchange of the b-pawns.} (26. Ra8 {isn't any stronger as following} Ne6 27. Rxf8+ Nxf8 {Black's pieces are compact and White must take steps to defend b2.}) 26... Bxb2 27. Rxb5 Ba3 $2 (27... Bf6 {was best although White remains somewhat better.}) ({After this final move White may well have chosen to play on. The f4 pawn can be won with careful play eg} 27... Ba3 28. Qf3 Bd6 ({or} 28... Be7 29. Qxf4 Bc4 30. Rf5) 29. e5 Be7 30. Qxf4 Be8 31. Qc4+) 1/2-1/2