A Rock-Solid Chess Opening Repertoire for Black
Viacheslav Eingorn First published in the UK by Gambit Publications Ltd 2012
Copyright © Viacheslav Eingom 2012
The right of Viacheslav Eingom to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordancewith the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No partof this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise), without prior permission of the publisher. In particular, no part of this publication may be scanned, transmitted via the Internet or uploaded to a website without the pub lisher's permission. Any personwho does any unauthorized act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damage.
ISBN-13: 978-1-906454-31-9 ISBN-10: 1-906454-31-0
DISTRIBUTION: Worldwide (except USA): Central Books Ltd, 99 Wallis Rd, London E9 5LN, England. Tel +44 (0)20 8986 4854 Fax +44 (0)20 8533 5821. E-mail: [email protected]
Gambit Publications Ltd, 99 Wallis Rd, London E9 5LN, England. E-mail: [email protected] Website (regularly updated): www.gambitbooks.com
Edited by Graham Burgess Typeset by Petra Nunn Cover image by WolffMorrow Printed in Great Britain by the MPG Books Group, Bodmin and King's Lynn
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Gambit Publications Ltd Managing Director: Murray Chandler GM Chess Director: Dr John Nunn GM Editorial Director: Graham Burgess FM GermanEditor: Petra Nunn WFM Webmaster: Dr Helen Milligan WFM Contents
Symbols 4 Bibliography 4 Introduction 5
Part 1: 1 e4 e6 7 1 French Satellites 9 2 King's Indian Attack 16 3 Exchange Variation 27 4 Advance Variation 33 5 Tarrasch Variation 50 6 Steinitz Variation 66 7 Classical French 80
Part 2: 1 d4 e6 90 8 The Nimzo-like 2 c4 i.b4+ 3 tiJc3 93 9 The Bogo-like 2 c4 i.b4+ 3 tiJd2 109 10 The Bogo-like 2 c4 i.b4+ 3 .li.d2 118 11 Transposition to the Sicilian 133 12 Transposition to the English 144 13 2 tiJf3 c5 3 e3 155 14 Rare 2nd and 3rd Moves after 1 d4 e6 164
Part 3 15 Should Black Play l...e6 vs Flank Openings? 173 16 The X-Files 177 lndex of Variations 189 Symbols
" cupture + check ++ double check • checkmate I! brilliant move I good move I? interesting move 'll dubious move ., bad move 'l? blunder Ch championship (n) nth match game 1-0 the game ends in a win for White lf2.1f2 the game ends in a draw 0- I the game ends in a win for Black (1-0, 63) White went on to win on move 63 (etc.)
Bibliography
Nikita Vitiugov: TheFrench Defence: A Complete Black Repertoire; Chess Stars 20 10 Neil McDonald: How to Play Against 1 e4; Everyman 2008 John Watson: Dangerous Weapons: The French, Everyman 2007 Oleg Stetsko: Frantsuzskaya zashchita: Klassicheskayasistema; Moskva Astrel - AST 2004 Boris Avrukh: GrandmasterRepertoire 1 d4 Volume Two; Quality Chess 20 10 Ilia Odessky: Nevozmozhnoe nachalo ( 1 d4 e6 2 c4 b6!? ); Russian Chess House 2005 Sverre Johnsen and Vlatko Kovacevic: Win with the London System; Gambit 2005 Introduction
The appeal of a 'universal' defence is easy to understand. By playing the same move against both 1 e4 and 1 d4, Black reduces his workloadand can use some move-order subtleties to make it harder for White to reach his preferred systems. Our focus here is on 1 e4 e6 and 1 d4 e6, but we also brieflydiscuss how best to answer White's other options on move 1. The French Defence, I e4 e6, is clearly the backbone of the repertoire. It is a popular opening with a long history, and a list of adherents that includes several of the all-time greats. After 1 d4, the reply l...e6 is less common, and normally used as a way to transpose to standardopening lines. If White replies 2 e4,then obviously we have a French Defence, but if White refrains from this central ad vance, he must take into account that Black might follow up with 2 ...f5, 2 . . d5,
2 ...b6, 2 ...c5 or 2 ... lbf6.If Whitehas a highly rigid repertoire (as many club-level players do), then thismight give him an immediateprobl em, and lead to a rash decision. In this book, we shallonly investigate transpositional ideas when they are particularly attractive, and focus more on independent lines, where Black tries to takes full advantage of the unique possibilities presented by the move l ...e6. We shall examine a wide varietyof ideas and variations, and in some cases little-investigated opening positions arise after the firstfew moves.
I would like the make the following generalpoints about the repertoire:
• The repertoire based on l...e6 lays the foundation for multi-opening prepara tion. Chess-players often consider the initial order of moves exclusively as a way to restrict the opponent's possibilities, forgetting that thereby they them selves become a stationary target. In the era of computers and free exchange of theoretical information, such a view of opening strategy looks like an anachro nism. If we are willing to play a variety of structures and variations, and even wholly differentopenings, then our opponent's choices will be more difficult, and in this repertoire we shall make extensive use of this.
• The variations recommended (the French Defence as well as lines arising after 1 d4 e6) are rather stable and allow a variety of interpretations, and this en hances the reliability of the opening repertoire as a whole for Black. In a ma jority of potential 'problem lines', two or more options are discussed. Some 6 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK
additional options remain off-screen, so they can be considered as a strategic reserve- for example, Dutch formations, although possible, are almost absent from this book. Most readers will no doubt have experience with other open ings, and may well be able to put this knowledge to use when they see an op portunity to transpose to lines of, e.g., the Nimzo-Indian, Dutch or Queen's Gambit that appeal to them.
• Themodem study of theopening is a serious matter. One should not get car ried away with trying to make an idea work and lose one's objectivity. Assess ments must, with only rare exceptions, be based on concrete proofs or examples. In the book we discuss some opening variations in considerable de tail and, where it is both possible and expedient, give preference to less well known continuations.
• Since I am presenting a repertoire for Black, I only recommend lines if I con sider them playable for Black, and the reader can consider all quoted varia tions to be quite satisfactoryby default-if this is not the case, then I make this very clearin the text. In some cases the assessment 'unclear' is given; this sug gests that I suspect the position is also acceptable for Black, but that more de tailed investigation is needed before this can be stated with certainly or a more precise assessment given. Part 1: 1 e4 e6
The French Defence, whose main sys repertoire should not be made need tems arise after 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 (D), is lessly elaborate, and rather than play one of the most complex chess open ing every line and tackling every ings, with an extreme wealth of strate structure, a player has to make some gic content. choices. In this book I present my rec ommendations according to the fol lowing structure:
• In Chapter 1 we discuss all continu ations (with the exception of the King's Indian Attack) in which White avoids the move 2 d4. We also cover the rare variation 2 d4 d5 3 ..td3. These sidelines are not dan gerous for Black, but they occur in practice every now and then, and it makes sense to be ready for them. • Chapter 2 is devoted to the popular set-up known as the King's Indian The position in the diagram serves Attack, which in the French can be as jumping-offpoint for several dif introduced by 2 'ii'e2 or 2 d3. ferent continuations (the clarifying 3 • The Exchange Variation, 3 exd5 exd5, the blocking 3 e5, and the two exd5, is considered in Chapter 3. main lines, 3 liJd2 and 3 l2Jc3), but it One cannot hide the fact that this represents only the visible tip of an can lead to drawish and rather te enormous opening iceberg. The ques dious positions. However, both play tion of how to construct an opening ers have ways to spice up the game, repertoire is sometimes answered by and I shall be looking closely at Black in the simplest way: meeting ways for Black to create winning both 3 l2Jc3 and 3 liJd2 with 3 ...dxe4. chances against an opponent who This saves a good deal of effort, but plays 'resolutely' for a draw. also deprives Black of much of the • The move 3 e5 (Chapter 4) defines variety of French Defence possibili the Advance Variation. This is the ties and ideas. On the other hand, a firstchapter in the book where Black II A HOC'K·S0/.11> Cm:ss OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK
hMII hi .. . l�f llfl'illllll uponlng pn,b- This overview of our French De 11111"; th•• llnat l .. �·� 4 �·.l hl11 my fence repertoire sounds straightforward •·huh·ll h11111. enough, but within these variations • I h11 htll'llll�·h, ·' �\d2 (Chupter 5), lies a great variety of pawn and piece 111�... Uhwk " chul�e between two battles in the centre, and strategies 11111111 �·unllmulllunN, cuch represent ranging fromlong positional manoeuv lUll II IIIIIIIIIIIICillully ditTerent ap res to sharp attacks on the kings. I also ltNII",•h: .Lc� und 3 ...lt:Jf6. In this offer a choice of lines for Black where h.Ktk pral'arence is given to 3 ...c5, this is practical. It is worth noting that whon ad,er 4 exd5, the pawn recap White does not have a simple task lura4 ... exd5 is my main recommen fighting against the French Defence d�tllun, though we also take a brief since it is literally woven of contradic luuk ul 4 ... 'ii'xd5. tions: for example, the space seized by • The muin lines of the French De White often comes at the cost of a vul fence following 3 lt:Jc3 lead to the nerability on his first two ranks, and most problematic situations of the the 'bad' c8-bishop can quickly be whole opening, with both players come a strong and activeparticipant in facingma jor pitfalls. Black's princi the battle. Therefore, if White has to pal choice is between the Winawer study the French Defence simply be Variation (3 ...-*.b4) and the classical cause of necessity, this opening is 3 ... lt:Jf6.In this book we focus on the rather attractive for Black for several latter. The Steinitz Variation, 3 tt:lc3 reasons: lt:Jf6 4 e5 tt:lfd7, is considered in From the early stages of the game Chapte�6. he hasways to seekcounterplay, of • We conclude Part1 with the Classi ten by violent sacrificial means. cal System, 3 tt:lc3tt:lf6 4 .i.g5 -*.e7 He can also adopt slower manoeuv (Chapter 7). This is one of the old ringapproac hes; Black's wide choice est main lines of the French De of options in themain variationsno fence, but recent fashion has seen a ticeably complicates White's open swing towards the Burn ...(4 dxe4) ing preparation. and MacCutcheon (4 ....i.b4) varia Last but not least: having the French tions. So our choice of line may, Defence in his arsenal, Black can paradoxically,even carrya small el freelyplay 1 ...e6 alsoafter 1 d4, and ement of surprise against players thismove-order bringssome practi who spend most of their time pre calbenefits, as we shall see in Part2 paring for the most topical lines. of the book. 1 French Satell ites
le4 e6 (D) d3 (5 lt:Jxe4 .i.c6; 5 .i.xe4!? main tains an equal position) 5 ...i.c6 6 dxe4 'ii'xdl + 7 lt:Jxdl li:Jf6 8 f3 li:Jbd7. • 2 lt:Jc3 d5 3 f4 dxe4 4 lt:Jxe4 li:Jf6 5 lt:Jxf6+(5 d3 li:Jxe46 dxe4 'ii'xd1 + 7
1.1: 2 c4 10 a) 5 d4?! ttJxd5 6 tlJc3 (6 tDf3 1.2: 2 b3 11 .i.b4+ 7 .i.d2 'ii'e7+) 6 ... .i.b4 7 il.d2 1.3: 2 f4 12 0-0 8 il.d3 (8 ttJf3 can be met by 1.4: 2 ttJf3 d5 3 e5 13 8 ... c5 !? or 8 ... .:te8+ 9 .i.e2 .i.xc3 10 1.5: 2 d4 d5 3 il.d3 14 bxc3 'ii'e7 11 c4 .i.f5, when Black takes over the initiative) 8 ... c5 gave 1.1 Black the initiative in Kuijf-Korchnoi, 2 c4(D) Tilburg 1992. b) 5 tDf3 ttJxd5 6 ttJc3 ttJc6 7 d4 .i.b4 8 .i.d2 0-0 9 .i.e2 ttJde7 (9 ... h6 10 0-0 .i.e6 is also equal) 10 a3 .i.a5 11 .i.e3 and now both ll...ttJd5 and ll...tlJf5 12 0-0 .i.b6 are equal. Therefore White must act more vig orously and the bishop check is proba bly the best move at his disposal. The attempt to create pressure along the a2-g8 diagonal by 5 .i.c4is unpromis ing: 5 ... ttJxd56 ttJc3(6 'ifb3?!'ii' e7+ 7 ttJe2 ttJb6) 6 ...ttJb6 (this is simpler than 6 ... ttJb4 7 d3 .i.e6 8 'ii'e2 .i.e?) 7 .i.b3 ttJc6 8 ttJge2 (8 ttJf3 'ii'e7+)
This is a rather inoffensivecontinu 8... .i.d6 (8 ....i.c5! ?) 9 d4 0-0 10 0-0 ation, but gives White an acceptable 'ii'h4 with good play for Black, Mas game. serey-Kindermann, Horgen 1995.
2 ... d5 3 cxd5 5 ...ttJbd7 6 ttJc3 Only the variation with the double 6 ttJf3 a6 (6... ttJxd5?! 7 ttJc3 grants pawn exchange on d5 has independent White the initiative) 7 .i.e2 (7 .i.xd7+ significance. After 3 exd5 exd5 4 d4 'ii'xd7 also gives White no advantage) we reach a line of the Exchange Varia and now both 7 ... .i.d6 and 7 ... ttJxd5 8 tion (see Section 3.4). ttJc3 tlJ7f69 0-0 .i.d6 lead to approxi 3 ...exd5 4 exd5 mate equality.
The gambit 4 'ifb3?!makes no sense 6••• a6 !? if only because of the reply 4 ...'ii' e7. It is a good idea to clarify the inten 4 ...ttJ f6 tions of the white bishop straightaway. Now White needs to show what he 6... .i.e7 7 ttJf3 0-0 is also quite reli has gained by avoiding the move 2 d4. able, though after 8 d4 (8 .i.xd7?! 5 .i.b5+!? .i.xd7 leaves the initiative to Black) Simple developing continuations 8... ttJb6 9 0-0 .i.f5!? (9 ...ttJbxd5 10 cannot cause any inconvenience for .:tel c6 11 .i.d3) 10 .:tel ttJfxd5 11 Black; for example: ttJe4 .i.b4 12 .i.d2 .i.xd2 13 'ii'xd2 FRENCH SATELliTES 11
White's pieces are more active and the and chances for both sides, while the initiative remains on his side, Spassky waiting move 3... a6!? (Atalik)is an in Korchnoi, Elista (2) 2009. teresting way to interfere with White's 7 .lta4 deployment. White then has nothing 7 .ltxd7+?! is not even enough to more logical than 4 'ii'e2 ( 4 �c3 is met equalize in view of 7 ...'ii' xd7 8 �f3 by 4 ...d4, while 4 exd5 exd5 gives 'ii'e7+!. Black fullequality) with the following
7 ••• b5 8 .ltb3 .ltb7 9 �f3 b4 10 pleasant choice for Black: �e2 .ltd6 a) 4... dxe4 5 �c3 (5 'ii'xe4?! �f6) Both sides have chances. 5... f5 (the point!) 6 0-0-0 �f6 7 f3 (7 d3 exd3 8 l:.xd3 .ltd6) 7 ... exf3 8 �xf3 1.2 .ltd6 and it is hard to say whether 2 b3 (D) White has real compensation for the sacrificed pawn. b) 4 ...�f6 5 e5 (5 exd5 can be met by 5 ... .ltc5!?or the unclear5 ... 'ii' xd5!? B 6 �f3 �6 7 �c3 'ii'f5) 5 ... �fd7 6 'ii'g4 c5 leaves Black a move up com pared to the 3 ...�f6 line that we saw above. 4 �c3 �f6 5 'ii'e2 Premature aggression with 5 g4?! promises Whitenothing but hardship; for example, 5... �c6 6 g5 �d5 7 �xe4 e5 (7 ... h6!?) or 5 ... .ltd7 6 .ltg2 .ltc67 'ii'e2 h5 8 g5 �d5 9 �h3 �xc3 10 .ltxc3 'ii'd5, Gelashvili-B.Socko, This move, which we shall call the European Clubs Cup, Panormo 200 I.
Reti Variation, has some quite novel 5 •••.lte7 ideas, notably of castling queenside. If Black aspires only to equalize, Black should not underestimate this then the line 5 ...�c6 6 �xe4 (6 0-0-0 odd-looking move. �d4 7 'ii'el .ltd7 8 �xe4 .ltc6 is also
2 •.• d5 3 .ltb2 dxe4 equal) 6 ...�xe4 7 'ii'xe4 'ii'd5 8 'ii'xd5 Taking the central pawn is abso exd5 9 0-0-0 f6 1 0 �e2 (10 g3 .ltf5! lutely logical, although it allows White 11 l:.e1+ �d7) 10... .ltf5, as· in the to develop as planned. Black has a cou game Ge1ashvili-Ramon Perez, Bala ple of ways to direct the game in other guer 2007, is worth noting. directions.Firstly, 3... �f6 4 e5 (4 exd5 6 0-0-0 exd5 5 'ii'e2+ .lte7! 6 .ltxf6 gxf6 is OK 6 g4?! is still inappropriate in view for Black) 4... �fd7 5 'ii'g4 c5 6 f4 �c6 of 6 ...�c6 7 �xe4 (7 g5?! �d4) 7 �f3 leads to a complicated position 7 ... �xe4 (7 ...�b4!?) 8 'ii'xe4 'ii'd5. 12 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BlACK
Also after 6 lt:\xe4 0-0 7 lt:lf3 a5 the suggests, chess-players in the 19th most judicious policy for White is to century often reacted to the French sound the retreat and play 8 g3 fol and Sicilian Defences with this f lowed by il.g2 and 0-0, trying to keep pawn thrust. approximate equality. 2 ...d5 3 e5 c5 4 lt:lf3lt:\c6 5 c3 6 ...0-0 7 g4! The d4 advance needs to be pre Now this move comes just at the pared. White should avoid 5 d4?! 'ii'b6 right time, since 7 lt:\xe4?! a5 favours with the possible continuation 6 .id3 Black. il.d7 7 0-0 lt:\h6. After the text-move (7 g4), a very 5 •••lt:lh6 6lt:\a3 ii.d7 unclear position has arisen: Black has other satisfactory moves a) 7 ...lt:\c6 8 g5 lt:ld5 (8 ...lt:\d4 9 too, such as 6 ...f6 7 lt:\c2(weaker are 7 'i�Vel lt:ld5 10 1i'xe4) h49 f5 ( weaker is d4 cxd4 8 cxd4 fxe5 9 fxe5 i.xa3 and 9 ...lt:ldb 4?! 10 'ii'xe4, Milovic-Kosic, 7 exf6 'ii'xf6 8 d4 cxd4 9 cxd4 il.b4+ Montenegrin Team Ch, Herceg Novi 10 �f2 0-0 11 lt:lc2 il.a5) 7 .. .fxe5 8 2008) 10 gxf6 il.xf6is unclear. fxe5 lt:lf5 (White can benefit from b) 7 ...a5 8 g5 (8 a4 lt:\c6 gives complications like 8 ...lt:\xe5 ?! 9 lt:lxe5 Black the initiative, while 8 i.g2is met 'ii'h4+ 10 g3 'ii'e4+ 11 'ii'e2 'ii'xh 1 12 by 8 ...a4) 8 ...lt:\d5 9 h4 a4 (9 ...i.d7 !?) d4 - Bangiev) 9 d4 .ie7 10 i.d3 0-0, 10 lt:\xa4 ( 10 'ii'xe4 axb3 11 axb3 with equality. With the text-move, i.a3) 10... b5 11 lt:\c3 b4 (ll ...f5 12 Black strives for more. gxf6 i.xf6) 12lt:lxe4l:.xa2 is unclear. 7 lt:\c2 'ii'b6 8 d4 White may be well-advised to opt 1.3 for Chigorin's more cautious move 8 2 f4 (D) i.e2!?. After 8 ....ie7 9 0-0 (9 d4?! l:tc8 gives Black the initiative) 9 ...0-0 10 'it>hl (10 lt:le3 f6) 10 ...f6 and only now 11 d4, White maintains the equi librium. The restrained 8 d3 is also worthy of some attention; for exam ple, 8 ...i.e7 9 i.e2 lt:lf5 10 0-0 h5 11 l:.bl - Bangiev. However, we should note that the finalposition of this vari ation is also reached in another open ing with reversed colours, viz. 1 d4 d6 2 c4 e5 3 lt:lf3 e4 4lt:\g 1 (or 4lt:\g5 f5 5 lt:lc3 c6 6lt:lh3 lt:la67 e3 lt:lf6) 4 ...f5 5 lt:lc3 c6 6 lt:lh3 lt:la6 7e3 lt:lf6 8 .ie2 lt:\c7 9 'ii'b3 .l:r.b8 10 lt:lf4 il.e7 11 h4 This is called the McDonnell & La 0-0. One can hardlycomplain as Black bourdonnais Attack, and as the name about getting a position that strong FRENCH SATELLITES 13 players have been happy to play as 3 ltJc3 ltJf6 4 e5 ltJfd7 5 d4 trans White. It remains to add that 8 ltJe3?! poses to a line of the Steinitz Variation is not a good choice: 8 ...f6 9 exf6 (9 (see Section 6.1). d4? cxd4 10 cxd4 Jtb4+ occurred twice in the match McDonnell-de La bourdonnais, London 1834) 9 ...gxf6 10 d3 0-0-0 11 Jte2 i.d6 gave Black the initiative in Kornliakov-Rustemov, Russia Cup, Moscow 1998.
8 ••.cxd4!? White's position is like an Advance Variation (1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 e5 c5 4 c3) but with the seemingly inappropriate move f4 . However, it is difficult for Black to exploit this circumstance in clear-cut fashion. Another active pos sibility is 8 ...ltc8 9 Jtd3 (9 Jtd2 Jte7 10 Jtd3?! c4 11 Jte2 'ii'xb2) 9 ...cxd4, This sequence can transpose to the when 10 ltJcxd4 ?! ltJxd4 11 ltJxd4 Advance Variation, but this precise i.c5 gives Black the initiative, but 10 move-order normally indicates that cxd4 makes it harder for him to pursue White intends to play the French Wing aggressive plans; both 10 ...ltJf5 11 Gambit, which is quite popularnowa ..txf5exf5 12 0-0 ..te7 13ltJe3 ..te6 14 days at club level.
'ii'd3 0-0 15 ..td2 and 10... ltJb 4!? 11 3 •••c5 4 b4 ltJxb4i.xb4+ 12 ..td2 i.b5 13..txb5+ By distracting the c5-pawn away 'ii'xb5 14 it.xb4'ii' xb4+ 15 'ii'd2 l:tc4 from the d4-square,White hopes to set 16 'ii'xb4 l:txb4 17 b3 ltJf5 18 �f2h5 up a strong and stable centre that will 19 l:thc1 'it>d7 20 l:tab1 are equal. enable him to attack unhindered on the 9 ltJcxd4 kingside. After 9 cxd4 ltJf5 10 g4 ltJfe7 11 4 .•• cxb4 ..td3 ( 11 h3 h5 12 .:th2 l:lc8 gives Accepting the gambit is not obliga Black the initiative) 1l...h5 12 g5 ltJf5 tory. 4 ...d4 is good enough, when 5 (12... a5 and 12... g6 can also be con bxc5 (5 ltJa3 a6 6 bxc5 ..txc5 7 ltJc4 sidered) White's position may turnout b5 and 5 b5 ltJe7 6 ..lii.d3 ltJg6 are un to be even worse. clear) 5 ...i.xc5 6 Jta3 'ii'a5 7 'iVe2 (7 9 ••• i.c5 10 b4 ltJxd4 11 ltJxd4 ..txc5'ii' xc5 8 c3 ltJc69 cxd4 ltJxd4 10 it.xd4 12 'ii'xd4 'ii'xd4 13 cxd4 .:tc8 'ii'a4+ ..td7! 11 'ii'xd4 'ifc l + 12 �e2 Black has a minimal advantage. ..tb5+ 13 d3 .:td8 14 ltJbd2 'iVa3) 7 .....td7 8 i.xc5'iVxc5 9 'iVc4'ii' xc4 10 1.4 ..txc4 ltJc6 leads to an approximately 2 ltJf3 d5 3 e5 (D) equal ending. More complicated play 14 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BlACK arises if Black declines the pawn by simply play 8 ... a6 or provoke an im 4... c4 5 c3 (5 a3!?) 5 ... a5 6 b5 ltJd7 7 mediate crisis by 8 ... b5!?. Then: d3 cxd3 8 .i.xd3 f6!? 9 'ife2 fxe5 10 a) 9ltJg5? is no good due to 9 ...b4. ltJxe5 ltJxe5 ll 'ifxe5 liJf6,as in Zaka b) After 9 .i.xb5 ltJxe5 10 ltJxe5 rian-Antic, Kalamaria 2009. .i.xb5 11 ltJxa3 (11 .i.xa3 .i.xa3 12 Sa3 ltJxa3 .i.d7 13 'ii'g4 g6) 11....i.xa3 12 5 d4 ltJc6 6 a3 bxa3 leads to the .i.xa3 ltJe7 Black parries the threats same position. and retains the extra pawn.
s ...bxa3 c) 9 ltJxa3!? b4 10 cxb4 (10 ltJb5 The line 5 ...ltJc6 6 axb4 .i.xb4 7 c3 a6 11 ttJd6+ .i.xd6 12 exd6 liJf6)
.i.e?8 d4 occurs more often.The point 10 ... i.xb4+ (10... ltJxb4 11 0-0 ltJe7 is of the text-move is to leave the e7- unclear) 11 i.d2 a6 12 i.xb4 (12 0-0 square vacant for the g8-knight. can be met by 12... ltJge7 13 ltJc2 a5, 6 d4 ltJc6 7 c3 .i.d7 (D) as in Rahls-Junge,Bundesliga 1987/8) 12 ...ltJxb4 13 i.xh7 ltJe7 with equal ity. 90-0 White's king has no reason to re main in the centre. After 9 h4 a6 (9... b5 !?) 10 ltJxa3 .:.c8 11 h5 ltJa5 12 liJb1 (the return of the piece to its home square is a bad sign) 12 .. .'ii'b6 13 i.c2 ltJc4 14 ltJh4?!ltJe7 Black had the advantage in Lerch-Naumkin, Cappelle Ia Grande 2007.
9 •••a6 10 ltJxa3 .:.cs In this comparatively calm situa tion, White has yet to find real com 8.i.d3 pensation for the sacrificed pawn. For White does not hurry to liquidate example, 11 c4 ltJb4 12 c5 b6 13 cxb6 the a3-pawn, although sooner or later 'ii'xb6 proved unsuccessfulin the game he will have to do so. The immediate Emodi-G.Portisch, Hungarian Team attack by 8 ltJg5?! h6 9 ltJxf7?! �xf7 Ch 1998/9. l 0 'iif3+liJf6 looks clearlypremature, but it is possible to play 8 ltJxa3 a6 9 1.5 .i.d3 h6 (or 9 ....:.c8) right away. 2 d4 dS 3 i.d3 (D)
8 •.•h6 It is clear enough that thisis not the Preventive measures: Black estab best way to defend the e4-pawn. Nev lishes control over the g5-square, rul ertheless, this bishop move crops up ing out any attempt by White to start a from time to time in modem tourna quick assault by ltJg5. Instead he can ment practice. FRENCH SATELLITES 15
Another position with an isolated d-pawn can arise after 7 c3 cxd4 8 cxd4 (8 lLlxd4 is met by 8 ...lLle5). Black has no problems here: 8... �d6!? (this is preferable to 8 ... �e7, as the e7-square will prove useful to the c6- knight) 9 0-0 0-0 10 lLlbc3 h6 11 �e3 tLle7 (11 ... �d7!?) with equality, Bluv shtein-Barsov, Montreal 2002.
7 ...cxd4 8 lLlxd4lLle5 Now the other knight attacks the white bishop. But note how Black de lays actually making the exchange on
3 .••dxe4 f3, as he has no wish to help White The most natural reaction, although smoothly activate his queen. 3 ... c5 4 exd5 (4 c3 dxe4 5 �xe4lLlf6) 9M 4 ... exd5 is also good, transposing to a Keeping the possibility of castling line of the Exchange Variation that is queenside. The calm continuation 9 satisfactory for Black (see Section 0-0 a6 (or 9 ... �e7!? 10 h2 0-0 with 3.1). equality) 10 lLlc3 (10 �e2 and 10 c4 4 �xe4 lLlf6 5 �f3 are both met by 10. . .'ifc7) 10... �d6! The bishop stayson the long diago (10... 1i'c7?! is highly careless in view nal. Otherwise White's bishop moves of 11 �f4, as in Hector-Short, World have simply cost him time with noth Junior Ch, Be1fort 1983) 11 �e2 0-0 ing to show for it; for example, after 5 does not allow White to count on the �d3 (5 �g5 c5) 5 ...c5 6 c3 (6 dxc5 initiative.
�xc5 7 lLlf3 0-0 8 0-0 b6) 6... lLlc6 7 9 ...a6 10 'ife2 lLlxf3+ ll lLlxf3 lLlf3 cxd4 8 cxd4 �e7 9 lLlc3 0-0 11 'ifxf3 e5 is good for Black; he Black gets a standard IQP position will answer 12lLlf5 with 12 ...'ii'a5. with at least one extra tempo. ll... �e7
5 ...cS Black prepares to castle and has The simplest path to equality is rather good prospects. "The future be 5 ... �d6 6lLle2lLlbd7 7lLlbc3e5, as in longs to he who has the bishops"- this Fernandez Romero-de Ia Villa, Bur statement by Dr Tarrasch is highly guillos 2007. The text-move leads to a pertinent to this position, but at pres more complicated game. ent the chances of the two sides are ap 6 lLle2 lLlc6 7 �e3 proximately equal. 2 King's Indian Attack
A popular way for White to avoid 2.1 standard lines of the French is to de 1 e4 e6 2 'ii'e2 (D) velop in a similar style to the King's Indian, with the moves tl:Jf3, g3 and .tg2, supporting the e-pawn with the modest pawn move d3. In principle, the King's Indian Attack set-up should not promise White an advantage, as it is more suited to counterpunchingthan generating an initiative. However, in the case of the French Defence the sit uation seems more complicated, since Black has already played ...e6, and a further advance with ...e6-e5 would involve a loss of time. White can ex pect further action in the centre (usu ally by playing e5, preparing an attack This is known as the Chigorin Vari on the black king) and tends to keep ation. The original idea of this move some opening initiative. Not that Black was simply to hinder Black's intended must worry too much though, because 2 ...d5 advance. After 2 ....te7 Chigo White has laid out his plans, whereas rin himself played 3 b3 d5 4 .tb2, and Black can still choose from a vast ar then the line 4 ...tl:Jf6 5 e5 (as we al ray of set-ups, including options about ready know from Section 1.2, 5 exd5 where to put his king. Our general exd5 6 .txf6 gxf6 is not advanta counterstrategy is as follows: geous for White)5 ...tl:Jfd7 gives Black • In the lines 2 'ii'e2 (Section 2.1) and a convenient game. Therefore modem 2 d3 d5 3 'ii'e2 (Section 2.2) Black chess-players use the move 2 'ii'e2 al in one way or another targets the most exclusively in a King's Indian white queen. Attack context: 2 ....te7 3 tl:Jf3 d5 4 d3 • In the main continuation, 2 d3 d5 3 tl:Jf6 5 g3. This thematic variation is tl:Jd2 (Section 2.3), Black hinders discussed in Section 2.2.1, and here White's general plan of develop we shall consider another continua ment or attempts to adapt it for his tion as an alternative. own use. 2 ...tl:Jc6 KING 'S INDIAN AITACK 17
Black proposes a wholly different 4 •••lt::l f6 5 d4 (D) opening structure - a method which Now 5 g3 is comfortably answered we will often use in Part 2 of this book. by 5 ...d5 6 d3 dxe4 7 dxe4 a5, because Instead of a French or Sicilian forma the queen's position on e2 does not tion (2 ...c5) Black is going to play prove effectivewith this structure. Af 3 ...e5 and switch to some kind of Open ter 8 iLg2 ..tc5 9 0-0 0-0 10 lDbd2 (10 Game where the additional move 'ii'e2 lt::lh4 b6 11 l:ldl ..tg4 12 iLf3 'ii'c8) will have its pros and cons. The imme 10 ...b6 we have by roundabout means diate 2 ...e5 is less accurate as 3 f4 !? is reached a well-known theoretical po a form of King's Gambit where White sition, in which the initiative is already has some useful extra possibilities. on Black's side. 3 lDf3 Other moves are not very attractive for White: a) 3 f4 d5 (3 ...lbd4 4 'ii'd3 c5 is equal) 4 exd5 (4 d3 dxe4 5 dxe4 ..tc5) 4 ...'it'xd5 (4 ...lbd4 5 'it'd3is unclear)5 lt::lc3 'ii'f5 gave Black the initiative in Dimov-Dokuchaev, Varna 20 10. b) 3 c3 e5 (3 ...d5 !? 4 d3 e5) 4 f4 (an odd kind of King's Gambit) 4 ...d6 (4 ...exf 4!? 5 d4 'ji'h4+ is more reso lute) 5 d3 (5 lt::lf3 exf4 6 d4 g5) and now 5 ...lt::l f6 or 5 ...f5 !? looks favour able for Black. c) 3 lt::lc3 ..tc5(3 ...iLe7 !? 4lDf3 d5 We have a Ponziani Opening ( 1 e4 is also possible) 4 lDf3 (4 f4 can be e5 2lDf3 lDc6 3 c3 lDf6 4 d4) with the met by 4 ...a6 5 lt::lf3 lt::lge7) 4 ...e5 5 d3 extra move 'ii'e2 for White. This means (5 g3) 5 ...lt::l f6, and the irrelevance of the e4-pawn is protected, but White's the queen's position on e2 becomes queen's location also has some signifi evident. cant drawbacks.
3 .•.e5 5 ...d6 White is presented with a choice: 5 ...exd4 !? is less solid, but interest- only play in the centre gives him any ing. Then: chance of an advantage, but that means a) After 6 cxd4 ..tb4+ the unfortu renouncing his original plan. nate position of White's royal couple 4c3 will tell. 7 Wdl? would be highly in Black has no problems after 4 g3 cautious, while 7 lDc30-0 8 e5 lDd5 9 ..tc55 ..tg2d6 6 c3 (6 d3 lt::lge7) 6 ...a6 Ji.d2 iLxc3 10 bxc3 d6 gave Black the 7 O-O lDge7(or 7 ...lt::l f6), as his game is initiative in the game Girinath-Kamble, flexible and strong. Visakhapatnam 2006. The precise 7 18 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK i.d2!? i.xd2+ 8 ti:Jbxd2 0-0 9 d5 (9 i.g4 13 i.e3 i.xf3 14 gxf3 ti:Jg5, with 'ii'd3 can be met by 9 ...lle8 10 i.e2d6 unclear play in both cases. 11 0-0 tbxe4 12 tbxe4 i.f5) 9 ...ti:Je7 7 •••0- 0!? 10 'ii'd3 d6 11 i.e2 c6 12 dxc6 ti:Jxc6 Black plays in Chigorin's style, fa 13 0-0 d5 leads to equality. vouring activity at the cost of struc b) 6 e5 ti:Jd5 (better than 6 ...d3 7 ture. A slightly passive continuation is 'ii'xd3 ti:Jg4 e2 8'ii' !) 7 'ii'e4 ti:Jde7 8 7 ...i.d7 8 d5 (there is nothing better) i.f4!? (8 cxd4 d5 is unclear, while 8 8 ...ti:Jb8 9 i.xd7+ti:Jbxd7 10 c4 c6 11 ti:Jxd4ti:Jxd4 9 cxd4 d5 10 'ii'f4 ti:Jf5 is dxc6 bxc6, with a more agreeable po equal) looks stronger,but after 8... ti:Jg6 sition for White. there is still no clear path to an advan 8 i.xc6 tage for White. Both 9 i.g3 i.e? After 8 0-0 i.d7 the tactical threats (9 ...'ii' e7 !?) 10 h4 d5 11 exd6 cxd6 and ...ti:Jxd4 and ...ti:Jb4 appear. 9 cxd4 i.b4+ 10 ti:Jc3 (10 ti:Jbd2 0-0 8 ••• bxc6 9 dxe5 dxe5 10 0-0 11 d5 f5) 10 ...0-0 11 i.g5 (11 d5 Accepting the gift brings White no i.xc3+ 12 bxc3 tbcxe5) 1l...d5 12 advantage: 10 tbxe5 i.d6 11 tbxc6 'ii'd3 i.e? are unclear, while 9 i.c4 'ife8 12 ti:Jd4 c5 13 tbe2tbxe4. i.e? 10 i.g3(10 cxd4 ti:Ja5 11 i.e2d5 10... i.d6 12 exd6 cxd6 13 ti:Jc3 d5 !) 10 ...0-0 11 Both sides have chances here. The cxd4 d5 !? 12 i.xd5 (12 'ii'xd5 i.e6) black bishop-pair counterbalances the 12 ...i.f5 13 'ifxf5 'ii'xd5 14 tDc3 (14 weakness of hispawns. 'ii'd3 l:tad8 15 ti:Jc3tbcxe5) 14 ...ti:Jxd4 15 ti:Jxd4 'ii'xd4 16 0-0 l:tad8 leads to 2.2 equality. 1 e4 e6 2 d3 d5 3 'ii'e2 (D) 6 'ii'c2 Exchanging by 6 dxe5 ti:Jxe5 gives Black easy equality. By moving aside his queen, White makes way for the bishop - with the queen on d1 (i.e. af ter 1 e4 e5 2 ti:Jf3 ti:Jc6 3 c3 ti:Jf6 4 d4 d6) he would immediately play i.b5, but here this is impossible.
6 ••.i.e7 7 i.b5 After 7 i.e2, Black can choose 7 ...0-0 8 0-0 l:te89 ti:Jbd2(9 l:td1 i.f8) 9 ...i.f8 , with a Ruy Lopez where the white pieces are unusually placed. If desired, Black could complicate the game by 7 ...exd4 8 cxd4 d5 9 e5 ti:Jb4 We shall call this the Barcza Varia 10 'ii'd1 i.f5 or 7 ...0-0 8 0-0 exd4 9 tion. White blunts Black's threat of cxd4 d5 10 e5 tbe4 11 a3 i.f5 12 i.d3 ...dxe4 by sidestepping the exchange KING 'S INDIAN AITACK 19 of queens. By avoiding the more obvi reaction) 7 0-0 (7 e5 !? lDd78 c4 is also ous move 3 lDd2(which we see in Sec possible) 7 ...0-0 8 e5 lDd7 9 c4! gives tion 2.3), he retains the possibility of White the initiative. This discussion tDc3 and keeps the c l-h6 diagonal helps explain Black's next move. open for thebishop. These factors may s ... bS!? prove useful in some variations, al Black rules out any c4 ideas, such though the queen's early entry into the as the one we saw in thelast note, while game is still a disadvantage. Black can making a useful move that forms part try to expl,oit this circumstance right of a queenside pawn advance - Black's away by 3 ...tDc6, but we shall first in thematic source of counterplay. It is vestigate the classical line of defence: also possible to play 5 ...0-0 6 .i.g2b5, 2.2.1 : 3 ...lD f6 19 but there is no need to hurry with cas 2.2.2: 3 ...tDc6 21 tling. 6 .i.g2(D) 2.2.1 For the time being White should 3 ... lDf6 4 ltjf3 maintain the tension in the centre and 4 f4 ?! dxe4 5 dxe4 .i.c5 is dubious continue development. Opening the for White. The simple advanceof the e-file by 6 exd5 exd5 is not in his fa f-pawn does not in itself contributeto vour here, while the immediate 6 e5 the idea of an attack on the kingside. lDfd7 7 .i.g2 c5 8 h4 lDc6 looks pre 4 ....i.e7 5 g3 mature since thereis still no one to at White's standardplan inthe King's tack on the kingside. Indian Attack is as follows: o In the near future he will advance the pawn to e5. o After the moves .:tel and h4, the manoeuvrelDbd 2-fl-h2-g4 can fol low, when a large part of White's army will be concentrated on the kingside. o If the black king is also on the kingside, White can seek to launch a direct attack. You may have noticed that the move 'ii'e2 is not a fundamental part of this scheme - it is usually played only in case the e5-pawn requires defence. On 6 ...c5 7 0-0 0-0 the other hand, the delay in developing It would be uncomfortable for the the queen's knight allows White to black king to remain in the centre any employ another strategicidea if appro longer. After 7 ...tDc6, in addition to 8 priate: 5 ...c5 6 i.g2 lDc6 (a stereotyped llel or 8 .i.f4, Black must also reckon 20 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK with the opening of the centre by 8 exd5 !? exd5 9 d4 c4 (9 ...cxd4 10 'it'xb5 i.d7 11 'it'd3 'it'b6 12 c3) 10 ttle5, which is by no means easy for Black to meet. 8e5 By crossing into Black's territory, White takes on a serious liability, al though after8 l:.el (8 ttle5i.b7 is also equal) 8 ...ttlc6 9 ttlbd2a5 he can delay this decision no longer: 1 0 exd5 exd5 leads to a balanced game, while 10 e5 ttld7 will transpose to the main line. Tarrying by 10 ttlfl?! allows Black Badalona 2005) 13 ttlfl (13 'ii'e3!?) the initiative after 10... dxe4 11 dxe4 13... c4 14 dxc4 (14 'it'e3 can be met by i.a6. 14... cxd3 or 14... b3 !?) 14... i.xc4 gave 8 .••ttlfd7 9 h4 Black the better prospects in Glek The moves 9 l:.e1 and 9 ttlbd2 are Chernushevich, Swiss Team Ch 2009. of approximately equal value, in as In any case, it turns out that the much as they represent links of the tempo White spent on playing 'ii'e2 same chain. Here the attempt to dis hasbeen in vain, and his attackis now rupt Black's counterplay by 9 c4?! behind schedule,as it were. For com turns out only to promote hisinitia parison one can quote the textbook tive: 9 ...bxc4 10 dxc4 i.a6 (10 ...ttlc6 game Fischer-Mjagmasuren, Sousse 11 cxd5 exd5 12 e6 ttlb6) 11 b3 tLlc6. Interzonal 1967: 1 e4 e6 2 d3 d5 3 9... ttlc6 10 l:.el ttld2ttlf6 4 g3 c5 5 i.g2ttlc6 6 ttlgf3 White's attempt to set up a pawn J..e7 7 0-0 0-0 8 e5 ttld7 l:.e9 1 b5. Al barrier by 10 c3 l:.b8 11 i.f4c4 12 d4 though in this position the move 10 b4 proved unsuccessfUl in the game 1i'e2?! has been seen in practice, it is Glek-Korchnoi, Linz 1997 as Black's better for White to play 10 ttlfl b4 11 queenside counterplay develops rap h4 a5 12 i.f4 a4 13 a3 bxa3 14 bxa3, idly when it has more to bite upon. as Fischer did. White should as far as possible avoid a ll. .. b4 confrontation on the queenside, since Black is going to continue with that is where Black has the initiative. 12... i.a6 followed by ...c4, making lO. . . aS (D) contact with White's structure. This 11 ttlbd2 creates tension that makes it hard for 11 i.f4is another option for White, White to focus on his kingside play. but 1l...i.a6 (ll ...a4!?) 12 ttlbd2 b4 ll...a4 !? has similar ideas, though af (12... c4 !? 13 d4 c3 { 13... a4 !?} 14 bxc3 ter 12 a3 (12 ttlfl a3 13 b3? ttldxe5) b4 is unclear, Beletsky-Moskalenko, 12 ...b4 13 ttlfl bxa3 14 l:.xa3!(14 KING'S INDIAN ATTACK 21 bxa3? lt::ldxe5) 14 ...c4 15 �g5 the sit 4 lt::lf3 uation remains unclear. The same reply will also follow af 12 ltlfi�a6 13 �g5 ter 4 c3. After 13 ltl1h2 (or 13 h5) 13... c4 4••• e5 5 c3 Black threatens to detonate White's The attempt to open the game by 5 queenside by 14 ...b3, while 13 c4 bxc3 exd5 !? is interesting: 5 ...'ii' xd5 6 lt::lc3 14 bxc3 l:tb8 is not much more palat .i.b47 �d2 .i.xc38 �xc3 (better than able since 15ltl1h2 a4 gives Black the 8 bxc3?! lt::lf6 9 g3 0-0 10 �g2 e4 11 initiative. dxe4 lt::lxe4 12 c4 'ii'f5, Strikovic-Sto 13••• c4 14 'ii'e3 janovic, Belgrade 2009)8 ...�g4 9 'ii'e4 Or 14 dxc4 �xc4. We can already (9 d4?! 0-0-0 10 dxe5 lt::lf6) 9 ...�xf3 state that White's opening strategy has 10 'ii'xf3'ii'xf3 11 gxf3 f6. However, it been a failure. is then difficult for White to develop 14.•• cxd3 15 cxd3 b3 his initiative; for example, 12 �d2 It is simpler to play 15... 'ii' b6 16 d4 lt::ld413 0-0-0 lt::lxf3 14 �g2 lt::lxd2 15 llfc8. �xb7 l:td8gives bothsides chances in 16 a3 �xg5 17 hxg5 l:tc8 a complicated ending, while the pawn Black has somewhat the better po sacrifice12 f4 exf4 or 12 l:tg1clif7 13 sition, Smirin-I.Popov, European Ch, 0-0-0 l:td8 14 f4 exf4 offers White no Plovdiv 2008. advantage. 5 g3lt::lf6 6 �g2 is another possibil 2.2.2 ity, but Black obtains a pleasant game 3 .••lt::l c6!? (D) by 6 ...dxe4 (a typicalmethod: the pawn exchange on e4 gains in appeal after the white bishop moves to g2) 7 dxe4 .i.c5 8 c3 a5 followed by ...b6 and ...�a6. 5 •••lt::l f6 (D)
We already know this motif: Black makes use of the queen's odd location on e2 to change the nature of the open ing struggle. 22 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK
6b4 His chances in this position are prefer An adventurous move: White grabs able. space, but delays his development and gives Black chances of a counterattack 2.3 by ...d4 or ...a5 . Positionally it is more 1 e4 e6 2 d3 d5 3 ltJd2 (D) appropriate to play 6 "ii'c2 a5 7 .te2, with a reversed Philidor. Then the ad vance b4 will demand additional prep aration and although the extra tempo will undoubtedly prove valuable to White, he cannot pose Black any sig nificant openingproblems. 6 ••..t g4 After pinning the knight, Black's gaze rests firmly on thed4-square. 7 ltJbd2 Whitecan try to reinforcehis queen side by 7 a3, but some holes will ap pearin his structurein any case: 7 ...d4 8 c4 (8 b5 ltJa5) 8 ...a5 9 b5 ltJb8 10 This is the standard way to imple ltJbd2 (or 10 h3 .i.xf3 11 9xf3 ltJbd7 ment the King's Indian Attack and is 12 ltJd2 g6) 10... ltJfd7. the strongest andmost logical contin 7 .••.t d6 uation for White. Now the line 7 ...d4 8 b5 dxc3 9 3 •••ltJf6 4 ltJgf3 bxc6 cxd2+ 10 9xd2 (weaker is 10 We have alreadynoted the exchange .i.xd2?! bxc6 11 h3 .txf3 12 9xf3 on e4 as a useful general method ver l1b8, as shown by Strikovic-Ulybin, sus a premature fianchetto. So it will Santa Cruzde Ia Palma 2005) leads to come as little surprise that the imme unclear complications. diate 4 g3 is inaccurate in view of 8 h3 .te6 4 ...dxe4 5 dxe4 b6 6 .i.g2(6 ltJgf3 will 8 ....td7 is also not bad. be considered in note 'a' to White's 9 .tb2 0-0 10 g3 aS 11 b5 5th move in Section 2.3.1) 6 ... .tb7 7 The careless 11 exd5?! .i.xd5 12 b5 ltJgf3? (7e2 'ii' ltJc6 8 ltJgf3 is better) (Strikovic-Rodshtein, Benasque 2008) 7 ...ltJxe4 8 ltJe5 ltJc3! with an advan leads to serious hardships for White tage for Black. ThereforeWhite prefers after 12... lle8 13 ltJe4 ltJb4!. And the to develop his knight before playing line 11 a3 axb4 12 cxb4 ltJd7 has its g3. own defects. Here our opening roads fork. We ll ...dxe4 12 dxe4 ltJb8 shall dwell on two of Black's possibil The weaknessof White's queenside ities, though in both cases the move pawns provides Black withgood play. ...b6 is in our plans: KING'S INDIAN AITACK 23
2.3.1: 4 .•• b6 23 ( 6 g3 dxe4 7 dxe4 transposes to line 2.3.2: 4 .••.te7 24 'a') 6 ...tLlfd7 7 g3 c5 8 .tg2tL.lc6 9 0-0 g5 !? and again Black takes over the 2.3.1 initiative.
4 •••b6 5 •••tLlfd7 6 d4 Black wants to prevent the fianchetto After 6 g3 c5, the pawn sacrifice 7 of White's king's bishop. .tg2 tLlc6 8 0-0 tLldxe5 9 tL.lxe5 tL.lxe5 5 e5 10 .l:.el tL.lc6 11 c4 is only enough for With this move, White changes stra equality at best, and unwarrantedstub tegic course and keep chances of re bornness like 7 tLlb3?! tL.lc6 8 .tf4 taining an advantage. If White persists .te7 9 h4 a5 10 a4 (10 .tg2 a4 11 with the idea of a kingside fianchetto, tLlbd2a3 ) 10... .ta6 brings White to an Black has nothing to complain about, even worse position. as the following variations demon 6 •••cS 7 c3 (D) strate: 7 c4?! is dubious because of the a) 5 g3 dxe4 (the standard reply) 6 simple 7 ....te7 8 cxd5 exd5. dxe4 .tb7 7 'it'e2 (7 .td3 can be met by 7 ...tLlbd7, while7 .tb5+?! tLlbd7 8 tL.le5 a6 9 .tc6 .txc6 10 tL.lxc6 'it'c8 gives Black the initiative) 7 ...tL.lc6. Now 8 .tg2tLlb4 9 0-0 (9 'ii'c4? tL.lxe4 10 tL.lxe4 'ii'd5) 9 ...tL.lxc2 10 e5 tLld5 (Yuldachev-Girinath, Hyderabad 2005) is dubious for White, and after8 c3 (8 a3 a5) 8 ....te7 9 .tg2tLld7 Black has a pleasant game. b) The inclusion of the moves 5 c3 c5 somewhat changes the situation, but in any case White does not achieve his desired set-up: 6 g3 (it makes no sense to play 6 'ii'a4+ .td7 7 1Wc2 For the first time in this book, we 1Wc7 ! 8 g3 tL.lc69 .tg2.td6) 6 ....te7 7 see a natural-looking French Defence .tg2.ta6 8 e5 (both 8 exd5 exd5 and 8 position! Black has managed to per c4 dxe4 9 dxe4 tL.lc6 1 0 0-0 0-0 are suade White to abandon his original equal) 8 . . . tLlfd7 9 'ii'e2 tLlc6 10 0-0 opening plan and has even obtained a 'ii'c7 11 .l:.e1 g5!? 12 c4 0-0-0 with small bonus in the form of an extra good counterplay for Black. tempo in comparison with the line 1 e4 c) The uninspiring 5 1We2 gives e6 2 d4 d5 3 tLld2 tLlf6 4 e5 tLlfd7 5 Black a pleasant choice: 5 ...dxe4 6 tLlgf3 c5 6 c3 b6. But is it enough to ' dxe4 .ta67 tL.lc4(7 c4?! tLlc6) ...7 .tb7 equalize? 8 e5 tLle4with equality or 5 ....tb7 6 e5 7 ....te7 24 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK
Black does not hurry with the stra a) 9 ...iLb7 seeks to complicate the tegically important exchange of the struggle, and after 10 0-0 lbc6 11 l:.el light-squared bishops, hoping to gain a6 12 iLd3 g5 Black had good coun one more tempo by waiting for White terplay in the game Vega-Elissalt Car to move his bishop from fl . denas, Guines 1998. However, after 8�b5 the precise 10 li:Jfl White stands some Other continuations are not effec what better. tive: b) 9 ...'ii' c8 10 'ii'e2 (10 0-0 cxd4 a) 8 iLd3 allows Black to demon 11 cxd4 li:Jc6) 10 ...'ii' b7 11 c4 (11 0-0 strate the idea mentioned in the previ iLxb5 12 axb5 a6) ll...li:Jc6! 12 dxc5 ous note: after 8 ...�a 6, both 9 li:Jfl li:Jxc5 13 0-0 (13 �xc6+ 'iixc6 14 b4 �xd3 10 �xd3 li:Jc6 ll li:Jg3 cxd4 12 iLxc4) 13... 0-0 maintains the bal cxd4 li:Jb4 13 'ii'dl �c7 14 0-0 'ii'c2 ance. and 9 �xa6 li:Jxa6 10 'iie2 'iic8 11 0-0 c) 9 ...cxd4 (Black fixesthe central 0-0 are equal. pawn-structure right away) 10 cxd4 b) 8 h4 flc7(8 ...�a6 9 �xa6 li:Jxa6 'ikc8 11 'iie2 (11 0-0 li:Jc6) ll...fib7 10 h5 h6 maintains equality, while 12 0-0 �xb5 13 axb5 a6. Littleby lit Black can also try 8 ...0-0 !? 9 �d3 tle, Black frees hisgame, and White's �a6) 9 h5 (9 �d3 is again met by attempt to create threats on the king 9 ...�a6) 9 ...h6 and now 10 llh3?! side by 14 lbel axb5 15 l:txa8 'ii'xa8 li:Jc6 already gives Black the better 16 'ifg40-0 17li:Jdf3(Andriasian-Hou chances. Yifan, Moscow 2010) can be parried c) 8 a3 'ii'c7 9 b4 (9 �d3 �a6 10 by 17 ... llc8. Although in these varia iLxa6 li:Jxa6is equal) 9 ...li:Jc6 10 �e2 tions Whiteretains the initiative, in the (10 flc2 is also answered with 10 ...f6, final analysis Black can nevertheless while 10 iLd3?! cxd4 11 cxd4 a5 12 count on equality. b5? li:Jxd4 shows a way for White to land in trouble) 10 ... f6 11 exf6 �xf6 2.3.2 (ll...li:Jxf6 is also viable), and White 4 •••�e7 (D) again risks findinghimself in the worse This continuation is in principle position. differentfrom the previous one: Black 8 ...�a6 9a4! is happy for White to develop in the White agrees to exchange the bish style of the King's Indian Attack, ops, but only on his terms. Now an planning to disrupt the smooth prog exchange of bishops on b5 will be an ress of his play once the bishop has swered with axb5, blocking Black's reached g2. queenside play. It will require some 5 g3 b6 effort and accuracy from Black to It is also acceptable to make the keep the queenside fluid and maintain preliminary pawn exchange 5 ...dxe4 6 sufficient counterchances; for exam dxe4 before playing 6 ...b6. After 7 e5 ple: li:Jfd7 8 fle2 (8 iLg2 iLa6 transposes KING 'S INDIAN ArrACK 25
c) 10 h4 'fie? 11 'ii'e2 h6 (it is sim pler to play 1l...b5 !?, calmly making queenside progress) 12lDfl (12 h5 b5 13ltJfl ltJb6) 12... g5 !? 13 hxg5 (13 h5 ltg8) 13... hxg5 14 lD1h2 0-0-0 15 ltJg4 l:th5 16 c3 d4 leads to a double edged game. The careless 17 cxd4? ltJxd4 18 ltJxd4 cxd4 19 .id2 .:tdh8 led to major hardships for White in Movsesian-Delchev, Sibenik 2006.
6 ••• dxe4 7 dxe4 After7 ltJg5 .ib7 8 0-0 (or 8 ltJgxe4 right away) 8 ...0-0 9 ltJgxe4 ltJxe4 10 to the main line) 8 ...ltJc6 9 .ig2 ltJc5 ltJxe4both 10... 'ii' c8 and 10... ltJc6 lead 10 0-0 .lta6 11 ltJc4 0-0 chances are to equality. approximately equal - Black's pieces 7 •••.ta 6!? (D) are active enough and White's spatial Black's idea resides precisely in preponderance is not of vital impor this risky-looking move. 7 ....ib7 is tance. Nevertheless, the text-move is safer but passive, and after 8 0-0 0-0 more critical. (the e4-pawn is taboo: 8 ...ltJxe4? 9 6 .ig2 ltJe5) 9 e5 ltJfd7 10 'ii'e2 ltJc6 White As already noted in Section 2.2.1, it has goodcontrol of the game. is not very logical to advance the white pawn to e5 before Black has cas tled, and the variation 6 e5 (6 'ife2?! can be met by 6 ...dxe4 7 dxe4 ii.a6 8 ltJc4 ltJc6)6 ...ltJfd7 7 .ig2 .ltb7 8 0-0 c5 9 .:tel ltJc6 does not represent a danger to Black: a) 10 c4 0-0 11 cxd5 ( 11 'ii'e2 is met by ll...l:te8, while 11 h4 'ii'c7 12 'ii'e2 dxc4 13 dxc4 l:tfd8 gives Black the initiative) 1l...exd5 12 lDbl !? (12 ltJfl l:te8) 12... l:te8 13 ltJc3 ltJf8 is equal. b) 10 lDfl g5!? 11 h3 h5 12 c3 (12 lD1h2 l:tg8! 13 g4 'ii'c7 and now 14 Rather than fight for equality in a 'ii'e2? is poor in view of 14... ltJdxe5) cramped position, Black prefers to en 12 ...g4 13 hxg4 hxg4 14lD3h2 ltJdxe5 gage in a dispute about which of the 15 ltJxg4 ltJxg4 16 'ii'xg4 .if6 is un light-squared bishops occupies a more clear. effective diagonal. 26 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK
8e5 .ltf6 12 'ii'h6 J.xh4 (12... 'ii' d4!?) 13 White accepts the challenge. The 'it'xh4 (13 gxh4 .l:.g8 gives Black the alternative is 8 c4 .!iJc6 9 0-0 (9 a3 is initiative) 13... 'ii' xh4 14 gxh4 J:g8 15 met by 9 ....!iJd7 10 b4J.f6 and 9 e5 by J:gl .!iJbd7 16 f4 .!iJg6is equal. 9 ....!iJd7 ) 9 ...0-0 10 e5 .!iJd7. Then II b) 9 .!iJb3 .!iJc6 10 J.f4 (10 .!iJbd4? 'ii'e2 .!iJc5 or 11 'ii'c2 .:tb8offers White .!iJdxe5) 10 ...0-0 11 .!iJbd4 (11 'iVd2 no prospects, while after 11 a3 Black 'iii'e8) ll....!iJa5 (ll....!iJdb8!?) 12 a4 can decide between the calm 11... .:tb8 .!iJc5 (Black can also choose 12... c6 ! ?) (but only not ll....!iJcxe5? 12 .!tJxe5 13 .!iJb5 c6 14 'ii'xd8 (14 .!iJd6f6 15 b4 .!tJxe5 13 'ii'a4) 12 .:tel J.b7 13 'ii'c2 fxe5 16 .ixe5 .!iJd7) ... 14 .l:.axd8 15 (13 'iVe2 'ii'c8) 13 ...a5, with equality, .!tJxa7 .:td7is equal. and the sharp ll... b5 . Then: c) 9 .!iJe4!? .!iJc6 10 .if4 h6 (the a) 12 'ifc2!? .!tJdxe5 13 .!tJxe5 .!tJxe5 immediate 10 ...0-0 !? is an interesting 14 .:tdl 'ifd4 (14... 'ife8 and 14... 'ifd3 alternative) 11 h4 (11 c3 g5 is unclear) are also possible) 15 cxb5 J.xb5 leads 11...0-0 12 'iVd2 .!iJc5 13 .!tJxc5 bxc5 ! to unclear play. 14 'ifxd8 (14 0-0-0 'iVb8) ...14 .:tfxd8 b) 12 .:tel bxc4 13 'ii'a4 .!tJc5 !? (or 15 .!iJd2.!iJd4 16 .ixa8 .!iJxc2+ 17 �d1 13... .!iJcb8 14 .!iJxc4.!iJc5 15 'ii'c2 'ii'd3 .!tJxa1 18 .ie4c4 19 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 exd5 exd5 (D) has is psychological - White may feel obliged to play actively to avoid squan dering his first-move advantage. Or if White is seeking a draw, he may play inaccurately in an attempt to force his desired result. We shall examine the following lines: • After 4 .i.d3 (Section 3.1) Black keeps some hopes of enlivening the game. • 4 ltlf3 (Section 3.2) gives Black ways to tease White into breaking the symmetry, but he must be care ful. • 4 ltlc3 ltlf6 (Section 3.3) is very TheExchange Vari ation of the French sound for Black, but his possibili Defence continues to attract followers, ties for counterplay are minimal. in spite of its obvious drawish tenden Note that after 4 ltlc3, Black can cies, unfavourable statistics (strangely also play 4 ....i.b4, but given that our enough, Black wins more often than repertoire choice after 3 ltlc3 is White) and its strategic poverty. With 3 ...ltlf6, we will need to be ready to Black free of weaknesses and the struc tackle this position in any case. ture static and symmetrical, White has • The line 4 c4 (Section 3.4) is the no real reference points from which to most welcome choice from a practi develop an initiative. Occasionally he cal viewpoint, as White creates a succeeds in creating an advanced post major imbalance. Black gets a fight on the e5-square or starting an attack ing position and chances to seize on the black king, but most often the the initiative. open e-file merely leads to exchanges. As Black, one must not be overconfi 3.1 dent of course, as all the negative fea 4 .i.d3 (D) tures of White's position apply equally Generally speaking, it is more logi to Black's game, and he is a tempo be cal for White to develop one of his hind to boot. The one advantage Black knights firstas committing his bishop 18 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK at this early stage gives Black more Note that the play after 4 .i.d3 c5 possibilities. However, White's choice has some parallels with positions we is comprehensible if he wants to play see after4 c4 in Section 3.4. c3 and lt:Je2. In the case of the immedi 5c3 ate 4 c3, Black can reply 4 .....td6 5 5 lLlf3 (or 6lt:lf3 on the next move) .i.d3 lt:lc6 (transposing to the main is considered in Section 3.2. line) or 4 ...lt:lf6 5 .i.d3 c5 (see line 'c' In the case of 5 lt:le2, Black can in the next note). simply play 5 ...lt:lb4 6 0-0 (or 6 .i.b5+ c6 7 ..ta4 lt:lf6 with equality) 6 ...lt:Jxd3 7 'ii'xd3 .i.d68 ..tf4 lt:le7, levelling the game. 5 .....td6 6 'ii'f3 Here after6lLle 2 the line 6 ...'ili'f6 7 lt:Jg3 (7 lt:Ja3 is met by 7 ...a6, while 7 0-0 lt:lge7 8 lt:ld2 ..tf5 was equal in A.Femandes-Matamoros, Ayamonte 2006)7 ...lt:Jge7 8 0-0 (or 8 lLlh5'ji'e6+ 9 .i.e3 0-0 with equality) 8 ...h5 is pos sible. By moving his own queen, White seeks to beat Black to the punch and hinder the development of the c8- bishop. 4 •••lt:J c6 6 •••ltJf6 4 ...c5 leads to more lively play: Black takes his chance. This contin a) 5 'ii'e2+?! is a waste of time. Af uation is more interesting than 6 .....te6 ter 5 .....te7 6 dxc5 lLlf6 7 lt:Jf3 0-0 8 7 lt:le2 (7 ..tf4 lt:lf6) 7 ...ild7 8 h3 (8 0-0 l:te89 .i.g5 h6 Black takes over the ..tf4 ..te7!? 9 h3 0-0-0 is unclear, initiative. J.Vidarsson-M.Gurevich, Amsterdam b) 5 dxc5 .i.xc5 6 lt:lf3 lt:lf6 7 0-0 2002) 8 ...lt:Jge7 9 ..tf4 ..tf5 10 ..txd6 (7 'i¥e2+ ..te6 8 lt:Jg5 'ili'd7 and now 9 ..txd3 with equality, V.Georgiev-Mit .i.f5?! is calmly met by 9 ...0-0) 7 ...0-0 kov, Barbera del Valles 1999. leads to equality. 7h3 c) 5 c3 offers Black a choice be If Whiteis striving for no more than tween 5 ...cxd4 !? 6 cxd4 lt:lc6 7 lt:lf3 a draw, he can choose 7 ..tg5 ..tg4 8 i.d6 8 0-0 lt:lge7 and 5 ...lt:lf6 6 lt:lf3 'i¥xg4 (8 We3+?! �d7 gives Black the .i.d6 7 0-0 0-0 8 dxc5 ..txc5 - he can initiative) 8 ...lt:Jxg4 9 ..txd8 l:txd8. count on equal chances in both lines. 7 ..• 0-0 8 lt:le2 d) 5 lt:lf3 !? c4 6 .i.e2 (an unpleas 8 ..tg5 offers Black a pleasant choice ant loss of time, but there is nothing to between 8 ...ike8+ 9 lt:le2 lt:Je4 and be done) 6 ...lt:lc6 7 0-0 .i.d6 8 b3 cxb3 8 .....te7 followed by 9 ...lt:Je4. The po 9 axb3 lt:lge7 gives equal chances. sition is no longer quite so boring! EXCHANGE VA RIATION 29 8 .••tt'le 4!? 9 0-0 'ili'xd7Black has the initiative) 1 1....:.e8 Accepting the pawn sacrifice by 9 gives Black equal play. i.xe4 dxe4 10 'ifxe4 l:.e8 11 'ili'f3 c) 7 i.g5 h6 8 .ih4 c6 9 tt'lbd2 (9 (weaker is 11 'ifd3?! 'iff6) 1l....ie6 12 h3 is met by 9 ....ie6, while 9 c3 .ig4 .ie3 tt'le7 provides Black with plenty 10 h3 .ixf3 11 'ili'xf3 tt'lbd7 leads to of compensation, Balin-Cech, Czech equality) 9 ....tg4 10 c4 (10 h3 .ixf3 Te am Ch 2009/10. 11 tt'lxf3tt'lbd7 is equal) 10 ...tt'lbd7 11 9 .•• f5 10 .:.et .ie6 cxd5 (11 h3 is met by 1l....ie6 and 11 Black has a good game. c5 by 1l...i.f4) 1l...cxd5 12 'ikb3 .:.b8 leads to an equal game. 3.2 Playing carefully for equality in 4 ti'lf3(D) lines like these is not a great deal of fun. The text-move invites a sharper struggle, but it is still up to White whether he wishes to play ball. 5 .ib5 5 c4 .ib4+ 6 tt'lc3 tt'lf6 transposes to Section 3.4, while Black stands well in the variation 5 tt'lc3 .ib4 6 .id3 (both6 h3 tt'lge77 .id3.if5 8 0-0 0-0 and 6 .ib5 tt'lge7 7 0-0 0-0 8 h3 .if5 lead to equality) 6 ...tt'lge7 7 0-0 .ig4. Also after 5 .id3 i.d6 6 0-0 (6 h3 tt'lb4 7 .ib5+ c6 8 .ia4 'ike7+ and 6 tt'lc3 tt'lge7 7 0-0 0-0 8 h3 tt'lb4 show furtherideas for Black) 6 ...tt'lge7 Black 4 •••tt'lc6 has no difficulties. White then does Black can maintain the symmetry a best to play 7 c4 dxc4 8 .ixc4, trans while longer by playing 4 ...tt'lf6 5 posing to the main line below. .id3 .id6 6 0-0 (6 11i'e2+ .ie6 7 tt'lg5 5 •••i.d6 6 0-0 'ike7 is equal) 6 ...0-0, and then: Forcing play arises after 6 c4!? a) 7 h3 .:.e88 .ig5(8 .:.el .:.xe1 + 9 dxc4 7 d5 a6 8 .ia4b5 9 dxc6 bxa4 10 'ifxe1 tt'lc6 and 8 c3 tt'lc6 both give 0-0 (10 'ili'xa4 .ig4) 10... tt'le7 . Then: Black comfortable equality) 8 ...h6 9 a) 11 'ii'xa4 0-0 12 tt'lbd2(12 11i'xc4 .ih4 tt'lc6 10 c3 ( 10 tt'lc3 g5 11 .ig3 .ie6 gives Blackthe initiative) 12 ....:.b8 tt'le4) 10... g5 11 i.g3 .ixg3 12 fxg3 13 a3 ( 13 tt'lxc4 .:.b4 14 'ifc2 .if5) g4 is unclear. 13... .ie6 (13... .:.b5 !?) 14 tt'lxc4 .idS b) 7 l:.e1 .ig4 8 h3 (8 .ig5 h6 9 15 tt'ld4 .ic5 was equal in Luther i.h4 tt'lbd7 10 tt'lbd2 c6 is equal) G.Meier, Austrian Team Ch 2009/10. 8 ....th5 9 .tg5 h6 10 .th4 tt'lbd7 11 b) 11 tt'lbd2 0-0 (11.. . .ie6!? 12 tt'lbd2 (after 11 .if5 c6 12 .ixd7?! 'ili'xa4c3 13 bxc3 i.d5 is an interesting 30 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK alternative) 12 lDxc4 lDxc6 13 'ii'xa4 position is especially important for us .i.b7 14 .i.g5 and now 14 ...'ii' b8?! 15 because it can also arise via 1 e4 e6 2 llac l allowed White the initiative in d4 d5 3 tL\c3 lDf6 4 exd5 exd5. Gonzalez Perez-Moskalenko, Sitges 2010. 14 ...ltJe7 should be preferred, when White has slightly the more pleasant position - but Black has no real problems. 6 •.•ltJge7 7 c4 dxc4 This capture is forced due to the threat of 8 c5. 8 .txc4 0-0 8 ....tg4? is a blunder in view of 9 ..ixf7+. 9h3 Preventing ....tg4. In case of 9 lDc3 .i.g4 10 h3 (10 .i.e3 lDf5) 10... .i.xf3 11 'ii'xf3 lDxd4 12 'ii'xb7 lDec6 13 5.i.g5 'ii'a6 (13 .i.d5 .:tb8 14 'ii'a6 lDb4) Now the black bishop must occupy 13 ...'ii' h4 Black stands noworse. Note the e7-square. Other continuations that 14 .:tel is met by 14... lDf3+. promise White nothing: 9 •••tDf5 a) 5 .i.d3 c5 (an interesting alterna Neutralizingthe active white bishop tive to the routine lines 5 ....i.d6 and by 9 ....i.e6 is alsoquite good. Then the 5 ...tL\c6 6 tL\ge2 tDb4, though these exchange 10 .i.xe6fxe6 leads to an ap yield equality too) 6 dxc5 (Black can proximately equal position because also be happy with 6 tL\f3 c4 7 .i.e2 the pawns on e6 and d4 are equally .i.b4 and 6 .i.g5 cxd4 7 .i.xf6xf6 'ii' 8 weak. 'ii'e2+ 'ili'e6)... 6 .i.xc5 7 lDf3 0-0 8 0-0 10 .te3 h6 with equality. Or 10 d5 tDe5 11 tL'Ixe5 .i.xe5 12 b) 5 lDf3 .i.d6 6 .i.d3 0-0 7 0-0 .:teld6. 'ii' ..ig4 8 h3 i.h5 9 .i.g5 c6 keeps the 10••. h6 11 tDc3.:te8 12 .:tela6 game level. Then 10 g4?! .i.g6 11 Both sides have chances, Bologan lDe5 is inappropriate aggression, be Aleksandrov, European Ch, Plovdiv cause after ll... .:te8 it is liable to re 2008. bound on White. Note that this line can be reached via the move-order 1 3.3 e4 e6 2 lDf3 d5 3 tL'Ic3 lDf6 4 exd5 4 lDc3 lDf6 (D) exd5 5 d4. Here we see the Exchange Varia c) 5 .i.f4 can be met by 5 ....i.d6 6 tion in its Classical form - without 'ii'd2 0-0 7 0-0-0 .:te8 8 .i.d3 tDc6 or 'extravagances' like the move c4. This 5 ....tb 4!? 6 .i.d3 0-0 (6 ...c5) 7 tDe2 c5 EXCHANGE VA RIATION 31 8 dxc5 .i.xc59 0-0 lbc6,with equality 90-0 in both cases. In the case of 9 i.e2h6 10 .i.e3 (or 5 •••.t e7 6 .i.d3 10 i.f4) 10... c5 White findshimself in This is yet another variation where somewhat the worse position. Nor is it White can try a set-up with i.d3 and advantageous for him to play 9 lbf5 lbge2. Other moves: i.xf5 10 .i.xf5 g6 11 a3 lbc6 12 .i.h3 a) 6 lbf3 0-0 7 .i.d3 (the move 7 lbe4, when Black had the initiative in .i.e2 is entirely passive) 7 ...h6 8 .i.e3 W.Richter-Glek, Bundesliga 1992/3. (8 .i.f4 lDc69 h3 .i.d6is equal, while 8 9 ••• h6 10 .tf4 .i.d6 i.h4can be met by 8 ...lbc6 9 h3 lDh5) The game is equal. 8 ...i.d6 (or 8 ...lDc6) leads to a level game. 3.4 b) After 6 'iid2 0-0, the plan with 7 4 c4 (D) 0-0-0 brings some welcome diversity to the position, but does not represent a serious danger for Black. The sim plest reply is 7 ...lle8, when the at tempt to launch a pawn-stormby 8 f3 lbbd7 9 g4 (9 .i.d3 c5 !?) 9 ... c6 10.i.d3 b5 looks highly dubious for White. In the variations 7 lDf3h6 8 .th4(8 .i.f4 .i.b4) 8 ...lbe4 (8... .i.e6 !? is unclear) 9 .i.xe7'ikxe7 10 lbxe4dxe4 and7 .i.d3 lbc6 8 lbf3 (8 lbge2 lbb4) 8 ...lle8 9 0-0-0 h6 10 .i.h4 lbe4 11 .i.xe7 llxe7 12 .i.xe4 dxe4 13 lbe5 lbxe5 14 dxe5 'iixd2+ 15 llxd2 .i.f5 Black stands at least no worse. Known as the Monte Carlo Varia 6 •••lb c6 tion, this is a modem opening weapon: The more flexible 6 ...0-0 deserves White takes on a position with an iso attention. After 7 lbge2 h6 8 .i.h4 (8 lated queen's pawn, relying on the ac i.e3 keeps the game equal) 8 ... .:te8 tivity of his pieces to provide dynamic Black has some chances to take over compensation for this static weakness. the initiative. We have already seen this type of 7 lbge2 lbb4 8 lbg3 strategy used by Black (with colours 8 .i.b5+ c6 9 a3 (9 .ta4?! a5 10 a3 reversed) in Section 3.1 (in the note lba6 concedes Black the initiative) about 4 .i.d3 c5), and we shall meet it 9 ...lbxc2+ 10 'ii'xc2 cxb5 is equal. again in Chapter 5, when we examine 8 •..0-0 the Tarrasch line 3 lDd2 c5 4 exd5 Black has no need to hurry with the exd5. exchange 8 ...lbxd3+. 4 •••lD f6 32 A Hm 'K·SCJI./1) CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK lthu.:k rcl'rulnN from immediately 7 ...dxc4 is likely to lead to the same taklnJ&nn c4, Necking to gain a tempo position. by wulting for White to move his 8 o�o i.g4 9 i.e3 dxc4 10 i.xc4 biNhop from fl . Instead, 4 ...dxc4 5 (D) .1xc4 transposes to a variation of the Queen's Gambit Accepted: 1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 e3 e5 4 i.xc4exd4 5 exd4. SliJc3 In the case of 5 liJf3 i.b4+6 i.d2?! ( 6 lDc3leads to the main continuation) 6 ...lDc6 Black's position becomes pref erable. 5 ••. i.b4 6 liJf3 6 i.d3 has the idea of developing the king's knight to e2, but such a set up is more suited to defending than at tacking. Black replies 6 ...dxc4 7 i.xc4 0-0 8 lDe2 ltJc6 9 0-0 i.d6 and, as a matter of fact, exchanges openingroles This is the basic position of the with his opponent. whole variation, which can arise via a 6 ••• ltJc6 7 i.d3 wide variety of sequences. The white Any furtherdelay in developing the bishop has reached c4 in two moves fl-bishop is not of any benefit to (unlike in the QGA line mentioned White: above), but now Black needs to decide a) 7 a3 i.xc3+ 8 bxc3 0-0 9 i.e2 on a plan of action. dxc4 10 i.xc4(1 0 0-0 i.e6) 10 ...l:.e8+ It is not advantageous for Black to 11 i.e3lDa5 12 i.d3 'ii'd5 13 0-0 i.f5 play 1 o ...i.xf3 11 'ji'xf3 ltJxd4 12 and Black intends a blockade on the 'ii'xb7. In order to create the threat of light squares, Siebrecht-I.Farago, Arco takingon d4, the move 10 ...l:.b8 has of di Trento 2010. ten been played, but 10... 'ii' d6!? looks b) 7 i.g5i.e6 (7 ...0-0 8 cxd5 'ii'e8+ more natural. White does not succeed 9 i.e2ltJxd5 10 i.d2i.e6 11 0-0 i.e7 in deriving any benefitfrom the open is equal) 8 i.e2(8 c5 h6) 8 ...h6 9 exd5 ing after 11 h3?! i.xf3 12 'it'xf3ltJxd4 i.xd5 leaves Black comfortable. 13 'it'xb7 i.xc3 14 bxc3 l:.fb8 15 'it'a6 The move 7 i.d3 is more accurate 'ii'xa6 16 i.xa6lDc2, 11 liJb5 'ii'd7 12 than 7 i.e2, as then besides 7 ...dxc4 a3 i.a5 (Weissenbach-A.Graf, Berlin thereply 7... i.e6 is worthyof attention. 2008) or 11 a3 i.xc3 12 bxc3 llae8 - 7 ...0-0 Black has good play in all cases. 4 Advance Va riation 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 e5 c5 (D) is obvious (3 ...c5), later he must act deliberately and purposefully; other wise White's spatial plus can become the dominant strategic factor. After dealing with the minor op tions 4 dxc5?!, 4 'it'g4?! and 4 ttJf3 in Sections 4. 1, 4.2 and 4.3 respectively, we tum to the normal 4 c3. I recom mend a standard set-up but using the move-order 4 ...'ifb6 ttJf35 ttJc6.Then: • 6 ttJa3 (Section 4.4) is an interesting sideline, but is not very promising for White. • Thesame may be said about 6 �d3, the famous Milner-Barry Gambit We have now reached the first of (Section 4.5). There is insufficient the main lines of the French in which justificationfor White to give up his White has realistic prospects of main d-pawn. taining his opening advantage. In the • In Section 4.6 we examine 6 i..e2, French, one of Black's main priorities which may result in either equality from the outset is to definethe central or interesting complications. pawn-structure, since this makes it • Finally, Section 4.7 is devoted to possible for him to decide how best to White's main continuation, 6 a3, by develop his pieces while generating which he aims to stabilize the queen counterplay. So in one sense the Ad side by b4 and so minimize Black's vance Variation is highly obliging, as counterplay. We examine 6 ... �d7 White grants his opponent his wish (an attempt to play for equality), without furtherado. Nevertheless, this 6 ...c4 (which tends to lead to a long straightforward strategy also poses positional struggle) and the uncon problems for Black, as White seizes a ventional 6 ...f6. space advantage and takes squares away from Black's minor pieces - in 4.1 many lines, there is a 'traffic jam'over In this and the next two sections we the e7-square.While Black's firstmove briefly consider variations in which • 34 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK White refuses to support the d4-pawn 7 'it'e2 with the natural move 4 c3. White's 7 �f4? fxe5 8 .ixe5 lt:Jxe5 9 lt:Jxe5 main idea in these lines is to establish 'it'g5 is entirely bad for White, while piece control of the centre, but this after 7 exf6 lt:Jxf6 8 0-0 0-0 9 c4 (9 Nimzowitschian concept does not bear 'it'e2 e5) 9 ...dxc4 10 .ixc4 'it'xd l 11 fruit here. In the best case (4 lt:Jf3) %:txdl lt:Jg4 12 ::tfl lt:Jd4 White's posi White can expect at most an unclear tion is worse, Becker-Eliskases, Vi position, so one can wonder why these enna 1935. old ideas still enjoy some popularity in 7.•• fx eS 8 lt:Jxe5 lt:Jxe59 'it'xe5 lt:Jf6 our time. Here any blockade of the squares 4dxc5?! d4 and e5 is out of the question, since This is the most illogical of these White is clearly behind in develop oddball continuations: White not only ment. The urgent priority for White is takes away the defence of the e5- simply to emerge from his opening pawn, but in addition promotes the op mess without too great a disadvantage. ponent's development. 10 �b5+ 4 •••lt:Jc6 5 lt:Jf3 Or 10 0-0 0-0 11 c4 (played too op White should avoid 5 �b5?! �xc5 timistically) 11...lt:Jg4! 12 'it'h5 l:r.xf2 6 'it'g4 lt:Je7 (Berezovsky-Glek, Bun 13 l:r.xf2 �xf2+ 14 'iPh1 lLif6 with an desliga 2003/4). It is not much better extrapawn for Black. for him to play 5 lt:Jc3 �xc5 6 'iVg4 lO ••• 'iPC711 0-0 l:r.f8 12 �d3 'it>g8 lt:Jxe5 7 'ii'xg7 'iff6, when Black has We have the same position as in the the initiative. last note, but with two extra moves on s ...�xc5 6 �d3 the scoresheets. Black stands better. 6 �f4 is not good viewin of 6 ...'iVb6 7 �g3 'iVxb2, while 6lt:Jc3 a6 7 �d3 4.2 f6 resembles the main line. 4 'ii'g4?! 6 •••f6 (D) This has ideas in common with Section 4.3 (4 lt:Jf3) but is markedly worse, since White simply lacks time for such queen walks at the beginning of the game. 4 ...lt:Jc6 5 lt:Jf3 cxd4 6 �d3 'ilc7 (D) White now has an awkwardchoice : a) 7 0-0 (giving up the last central pawn) 7 ...lt:Jxe5 8 lt:Jxe5 'ilxe5 9 �f4 lt:Jf6 10 'ii'g3 (10 �b5+ is met by 10... �d7 11 �xd7+ �xd7 12 'ii'g3 'iVf5, while White should avoid play ing 10 'it'xg7? 'it'xf4 11 'it'xh8�e7 , as ADVANCE VA RIATION 35 Remlinger indicated) 10 ...'ii' h5 11 h3 4 ... cxd4 5 .id3 (11 .ib5+ .id7 12 .ixd7+ lLlxd7; 11 White can choose 5 'ii'xd4 lLle7 .ie5 .id7) ll...lLle4 with an advan (5 ...lLlc6 !? 6 'ii'f4 'ii'c7 7 lLlc3a6 is un tage for Black. clear) 6 .id3 (6 'ii'f4 lLlg67 'ii'g3 lLlc6 b) 7 .if4 lLlb4 8 0-0 (after 8 lLlxd4 8 .id3 'ii'c7) 6 ...lLlg6 (6 ...lLlec6 !?) 7 lLlxd3+ 9 cxd3 '6'b6 10 lLlb3 '6'b4+! .ixg6 hxg6 8 0-0 lLlc6 9 'ii'f4, which White is driven into an unpleasantpo leads to equality (Short), but those sition since he must play 11 �e2 as in who choose 4 lLlf3 are not generally terposing fails to ...g5 - Belavenets) looking to bail out at such an early 8 ...lLlxd3 9 cxd3 'ii'c2 10 lLlxd4 (10 stage. lLlbd2 'ii'xd3) 10... 'ii' xb2 lllLlb3 .id7 5 ••• lLle7 6 0-0 does not give White enough compen White's best plan is to advance his sation for the pawn. queenside pawns with a3 and b4,fol c) Impartially speaking, the line 7 lowed by .ib2. After 6 .if4 lLlec6 7 'ii'g3 f6 8 exf6 (8 .ixh7 is answered 0-0 lLld7 8 lLlbd2 .ie7 9 .ig3 (not 9 by 8 ...lLlxe5 and 8 .if4 with 8 ...g5) .l:.e1? g5, while 9lLlb3 g5 !? 10 .ig3 h5 8 ... 'ii'xg3 9 hxg3 (9 f7+ 'it>xf710 hxg3 11 h3 g4 gives Black the initiative) lLlf6) 9 ...gxf6 may be called the stron 9 ...f5 (9 ...g5 !?) 10 exf6 .ixf6 Black's gest for White, but for the sake of this chances arepreferab le, Spraggett-Gof it was evidently not worth playing 4 shtein, Seville 200 1. 'ii'g4. 6 ...lLlec6 This line is more interesting than 4.3 6 ...lLlg6 7 l:.el lLlc6 8 lLlbd2 (8 a3?! 4 lLlf3 (D) .ie7 9 b4 'fic7 10 1i'e2 f6, Dolezal White's main idea is to establish a Rivas, Albacete2009) 8 ...'ii' c7 9 .ixg6 strongpoint on e5, and to achieve this fxg6 (or 9� .. hxg6) with approximate he is ready to sacrifice the d4-pawn, at equality. least temporarily. � 7 :et lLld7 8 a3 36 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 8 liJbd2is weaker due to 8 ...'ii' c7 or White's main possibilities (6 .i.d3, 8 ....tb4. 6 .te2and 6 a3) are considered in later 8 •..'ii' c7 sections. One can also mention that 6 Black can also play 8 ...a5 !? (radi dxc5?! tears apartWhite 's pawn-chain cally preventing b4 but weakening the for no especially good reason, and point b5) 9 a4 i.b4 with an unclear 6 ....txc5 7 'ii'c2 (7 'ii'e2 f6 8 b4 i.e7) game. 7 ..."fkc7 8 i.f4 ltJge7 gives Black the 9 'ii'e2 ltJc5 10 b4 ltJxd3 11 'it'xd3 initiative . .td7 The knight move to a3 is an inter White will soon re-establishthe ma esting idea: the knightis ready to bol terial equilibrium, but he has no rea ster the d4-pawn by ltJc2, which can son to expect any advantage. be a useful way to counter Black's . ..ltJge7-f 5 manoeuvre, but Black is 4.4 not committed to this, and can seek to 4 c3 'ifb6(D) throw a spanner in White's plans. Black creates pressureupon both the 6 •••cxd4 7 cxd4 i.b4+ central point d4 and the b2-pawn. The The simplest rejoinder: after the more customary move-order 4 ...ltJc6 bishop check, the knight can come to (intending to meet 5 ltJf3 5by ...'ii'b6) e7 and Blackthereby solves the often allows the side-variation5 h3, which irksome problem of kingsidedevelop we can now exclude from consider ment. 7 ... .td7 8 fDc2l:.c8 is also quite ation. good;for example: a) 9 a3? ! ltJa5 10 b4 ltJb3 11 l:.bl ltJxc1 12l:.xcl a5 (Kupreichik-V.Alek seev, Minsk 2003), and now it is best for White to give up the pawn by 13 .td3. b) 9 .i.d3ltJb4 10 ltJxb4.txb4+ 11 .i.d2 (11 Wfl .i.b5) 11...i.xd2+ 12 "fkxd2 .i.b5. c) 9 i.e2 i.b4+!? (or 9 ...ltJb4 10 ltJe3.i.b5 with equality) 10 i.d2(10 �fl is met by 1 o ....te7 while 10 ' ltJxb4!? ltJxb4 11 0-0 ltJc2 12 l:.b1 ltJe7 is unclear) 10... .txd2+ 11 'ii'xd2 'ii'xb2 12 0-0 liJd8 13 l:.fc 1 ltJe7 with 5ltJf3 unclear play. White can also play 5 a3, which af 8 .td2ltJge7 9 ltJb5 ter 5 ...ltJc6 6 lDf3 leads to Section White's knight strays from its in 4.7. tended route, but 9 ltJc2is a pawn sac 5 .••ltJ c6 6 ltJa3 rificethat is not altogether convincing ADVANCE VA RIA TION 37 after 9 ...i.. xd2+ 10 'ii'xd2 'it'xb2 11 on its best square, but he will pay a i..d3 'ii'b6 12 0-0 0-0. However, 9 price for this pleasure, as the d4-pawn i..c3!? i..d7 10 'iid2 (10 tbc2 i.xc3+ is left unprotected. To avoid an infe 11 bxc3 'iib2) 10 ...0-0 11 i.e2 f6 rior game, Black must accept the chal leads to a position with chances for lenge. both sides. 6 •••cxd4 9 ...i.xd2+ 10 'iixd2 0-0 11 i.e2 Fixing the future booty in its place. 11 i.d3?! is inappropriate in view 7 cxd4 i.d7 of ll...f6 12 exf6 l:.xf6, when the ex Now the threat to capture on d4 is change sacrifice ...l:.xf3 is in the air. real. ll... f6 80-0 ll...i.d7 12 tbc3tbf5 13 l:.dl f6 14 Backing down by 8 i.c2tZ:lb4 9 0-0 exf6 (14 g4?! tbfxd4 15 tbxd4 fxe5 tbxc2 10 'iixc2 .:tc8 11 tbc3 tbe7 gives Black the initiative) 14... l:txf6 makes no sense for White, while 8 transposes. tbc3 tbxd4 9 tbxd4 'it'xd4 10 0-0 (or 12 exf6 l:txf6 13 tbc3 10 'iie2 a6 11 0-0) is merely a transpo White should avoid 13 0-0?! .:txf3 sition of moves. 14 gxf3 a6 15 tbc3 tbxd4. 8 •••tb xd4 9 tbxd4 13 ••.tbf5 14 .:td1 i.d7 This is the standard continuation. The game is approximately level. Theaggressive 9 tbg5?! is objectively Black's activity fullycompensates for a poor idea: 9 ...tbc6 10 .:tel i.c5 11 the defects of his pawn-structure. 'ii'f3 tbh6 (11...0-0-0!? 12 tbc3 f6 13 exf6 tbxf6 gives Black the initiative) 4.5 12 tbc3tbd4 13 'iif4 tbhf5. However, 4 c3 'fi'b65 tbf3tbc6 6 i..d3 (D) given that his prospects arenot too im pressive in the main line, White may be advised to play 9 tZ:lbd2. After 9 ...i.c5 , the sharp line 10 b4?! tbxf3+ (10... 'ii' xb4!? 11 tbxd4 i.xd4 12 .:tbl 'it'c3 13 tbf3 i.b6) 11 tbxf3 'ii'xb4 12 tbg5 'ii'a4 13 'ii'h5 tbh6 (Smerdon Zhao Zong, Queenstown 2006)leaves Black in charge, but the more reason able 10 tbxd4 i.xd4 11 tbf3 tbe7 of fers White some compensation for the missing pawn. 9 •••'ii' xd4 10 tbc3 (D) Slower lines such as 10 .:tel tbe7 11 tbc3 a6 or 10 'ii'e2 tbe7 11 tbc3 This move introduces the Milner tbc6 12 .:tel (12 tLlb5 'ii'xe5; 12 i.e3 Barry Gambit. White puts the bishop 'ii'xe5 13 f4 it'd6 14 f5 'ii'e5) 12 ...a6 38 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK only give Black extra defensive possi alternative - Black has a reliable game bilities. and retains his material plus. 12 �h1 After 12 l:.d1 .!t:lc6 13 ..txa6'ii' xe5 14 ..txb7 (14 'ii'xe5 .!t:lxe5 15 ..txb7 .:ta7) 14 ...'ii' xe2 15 .!t:lxe2l:.b8 the ma terial is equal, but White's position has evidently worsened. 12•.• .!t:l c6 13 f4 .!t:lb4 14 ltd1 14 ..tb1 'ii'c4 15 'ii'f3 (or 15 'ii'd1) 15... d4 is bad for White. 14••• ..tc5 15 ..txa6 'ii'f2 The game moves into an ending in which White will have to struggle for equality. 10••• a6 4.6 Black contents himself with just 4 c3 'ii'b6 5 .!i::lf3 .!t:lc6 6 ..te2 (D) one extrapawn and a sound position - a highly practical decision. But tak ing the second pawn by 10... 'it'xe5 is clearlya critical test of White's gambit strategy. He obtains open lines and a large development advantage - all he lacks is the means to land any sort of decisive blow: 11 l:.e1 'it'b8 12 .!i::lxd5 (12 'ii'f3 can be met by 12... .!i::l f6 !? or 12... ..td6 13 'ii'xd5 ..txh2+ 14 �h1 ..tc7) 12... ..td6 13 'ii'g4 (13 'ii'h.S!? � 14 .!t:lc3 .!i::lf6 15 'ii'h4 h6) 13... �f8 14 .lld2 h5 15 'ii'h3 .!t:lh6 and White's initiative is exhausted. Nevertheless, Black does not have to expose himself With this modest bishop develop to such danger, because the text-move ment, White keeps the d4-pawn under keeps the closed nature of the play, the protection of his queen. Black and minimizes the risk of coming un needs to strengthen the siege, and for der attack. that his second knight must get to the 11 'fi'e2 .!t:le7 f5-square. 1 1...l:.c8!? 12 �h1 .1lc5(12 ... 'ii' h4 !?) 6 •••cxd4 13 ..tg5 (13 f4 ? .!t:lh6 gives Black the In this case the exchange serves as initiative) 13... h6 14 ..td2 .!t:le7 is an useful preparation for the next move. ADVANCE VA RIATION 39 7 cxd4 lt:Jh6(D) he prefers a more careful defence of The knight uses this route so as not the d4-pawn. There are several ways to allow the variation 7 ...lt:Jge7 8 lt:Ja3 he can do so: lt:Jf5 9 lt:Jc2. 4.6.1: 8 b3?! 39 4.6.2: 8 lt:Jc3 40 4.6.3: 8 �d3!? 40 4.6.1 8b3?! A very dubious continuation. White loses his castling rights, and the initia tive remains in Black's hands. 8 •••lt:Jf5 Black can play even more vigor ously by the immediate 8 ...�b4+ 9 Wfl 0-0!?, not spending a tempo mov ing the knight. 9 �b2 �b4+ 10 �n o-o Now 8 lt:Ja3 is not advantageous in Black logically prepares to open the view of 8 ...�xa3 9 bxa3 lt:Jf5 10 �e3 f-fileby ...f6 . 'iii'aS + 11 'ii'd2 'ii'xa3 (or Il....i.d7). 11 g4 The obvious argument against put Other possibilities are no better. ting the knight on h6 is 8 �xh6, but Black keeps the initiative after 11lt:Jc3 Black's idea is to answer this with f6 12 g4 lt:Jfe7 13lt:Ja4 'ii'd8 14 a3 �a5, 8 ...'ii' xb2!. Then: 11 �d3 f6 12 �xf5 exf5 ( 12... fx e5 ! ?) a) 9 �e3? is bad due to 9 ...'ii' xal. 13 lt:Jc3 �e6 or 11 lt:Ja3 f6 12 lt:Jc2 b) After 9lt:Jbd2 gxh6 10 llb1 (10 �e7 13 g4 lt:Jh6 14 exf6 llxf6 15 h3 0-0 lt:Jxd4) 10... 'ii' xa2 it is unlikely (15 g5 is met by 15... llxf3) 15... �d7, that White's initiative is worth two as in Dirnitrov-Rusev, Bulgarian Ch, pawns. Borovets 2008. c) 9 lt:Jc3!? and now 9 ...'ii' xc3+ 10 ll... lt:Jh6 12 llg1 �d2 'ii'a3 (10... 'ii' b2!?) II 0-0 �e7 In comparison with 12 h3 f6, White 12 'ii'c2 gave White compensation in at least activates his rook. Mantovani-Emelin, European Clubs 12 •••f6 13 exf6 llxf6 14 gS .:txf3 15 Cup, Kallithea 2008. It is safer to play �xf3 9 ...lt:Jxd4 !? 10 'ii'xd4! 'ifxa1 + 11 �d1 It is better for White to take the ex gxh6 12 0-0 'ii'b2 13 �a4+ �d8 14 change than to sufferfor nothing after l:.b1 'ii'a3 15 lt:Jxd5 ! with a draw, as 15 gxh6 llf7 16 llxg7+llxg7 17 hxg7 Vitiugov analysed. 'ii'c7, as in Inkiov-Justo, French Team Overall, these complications are not Ch 2009/10. so attractive for White, and normally 15••• lt:Jf5 40 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK Black has the better chances due to 4.6.3 White's numerous weaknesses, Savic 8 .id3!? (D) Reutsky, European Ch, Budva 2009. 4.6.2 8 ltlc3 (D) A non-standard decision. It looks odd to move the bishop again so soon after it came to e2, but the knight's move to h6 has changed the situation This initiates forcing play. significantly. S •••lLlfS 9 ltla4 8 •••.i.d7 Distracting the black queen fromits Black creates a threat to take the attack on the d4-pawn. 9 �fl?! ltlfxd4 d4-pawn. 10 lt:la4 ( 10 .i.e3 'ji'xb2 11 lt:lxd5 Instead, 8 ...ltlf5 9 .i.xf5 exf5 leads 'iixe2+!) 10 ...� 11 .i.d2 'ji'e7 12 to a known theoretical position that .i.g5 f6 promises nothing good for usually arises from the line 4 ...ltlc6 5 White. lLlf3 lLlge7 6 .id3 cxd4 7 cxd4 ltlf5 8 9 •• .'ii'a5+ 10 .i.d2 .i.c2!? (inviting the black queen to oc Again 10 �fl?! b5 11 ltlc3 (11 cupy b6) 8 ...'ii b6 9 .i.xf5 exf5. Such a ltlc5 .i.xc5 12 dxc5 b4) 1l...b4 12 pawn-structure is not to everybody's ltlb1 'iib6 13 .i.e3 .i.e7 looks a little taste, but the chances are approxi absurd. Now, however, simplifications mately equal. For example, 10 lt:lc3 are inevitable. .ie6 and now: 10 •.• .i.b4 11 i.c3 .i.xc3+ 12 ltlxc3 a) lllt:le2 .ie7 12h4h6 13�fl (an 'ii'b6 13 .i.bS .id7 14 .i.xc6 .i.xc6 15 attempt to attack) 13... 0-0 (13... 0-0-0 !? l:r.bl 14 h5 �b8, Benjarnin-F.Levin, Co Or 15 'iid2 .i.b5. logne rapid 1997) 14 lLlf4 llac8 15 1S•.• 'ii a6 l:lh3 ltlb4 16 llg3 'it>h8. The position is approximately equal. b) 11 0-0 llc8 12 a3 (or 12 llb1 Black will meet 16 'iie2 by 16 .. .'ii'c4. .ie7 13 ltle2 h6, not allowing the ADVANCE VA RIATION 41 exchange of bishops) 12... h6 13 b4 !? By castling, White intends a piece a5 is unclear, since 14 b5 will be met sacrifice. Here are his other options: by 14... ltJxd4 . a) 12 .ltxg5'it'xb2 13liJbd2'ifb5 !? 9 .ltc2 14 a3 l:tg8gives Black the initiative. The pawn sacrifice in the spirit of b) 12lDxg5'it'xd4 13 0-0 'fi'xdl 14 the Milner-Barry Gambit, 9 ltJc3, is .:l.xd1 ltJxe5 15 ltJc3 i.c6is equal. unconvincing after 9 ...ltJxd4 10 0-0 c) 12 ltJc3 h6!? (l2... g4 13 hxg4 (10 ltJxd4 1i'xd4 11 0-0 a6) 10 ...a6 (or fxg4 14 ltJg5 'ii'xd4is equal) 13ltJxd5 10 ....1tc5 ). (13 0-0 .lte6 14 ltJa4 'it'b5) 13... 'ii' a5+ With the text-move, White again 14 ltJc3 .lte6 15 .ltd2 0-0-0 with the offers his opponent the chance to initiative for Black. reach the structure discussed in the 12... g4 13 hxg4 previous note by 9 ...ltJf5 10 .ltxf5 Perhaps White should do without exf5. It is also acceptable to play 9 ...g6 the preliminary pawn exchange and 10 0-0 lDf5 11 .ltxf5 gxf5 12 ltJc3 play the immediate 13 ltJc3 gxf3 14 l:tg8,as in Sandipan-Batchuluun,Cebu ltJxd5 fxg2 15 l:te1 'fi'a5 !? (15 ...'ikxd4 2007, but Black has a more interesting 16 lDf6+ �d8 is equal) 16 lDf6+ 4.7 4 c3 1i'b6 5 ltJf3 ltJc66 a3 (D) This is the main line of the Advance 12 0-0 Variation. White prepares the move 42 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BlACK development and (given the opportu nity) the b4-pawn can be attacked by ...a5 . 8 ... llc8 (D) b4, which will solve the problem of defending the d4-pawn, as .1Lb2 or .1Le3 will be possible. Black has sev eral viable replies, and we discuss the following three, between which read ers can choose depending on their For the time being, Black hinders preferences and mood: the move 9 0Jc3in view of the obvious 4.7.1: 6 ....1Ld7 42 reply 9 ... 0Jxd4. Also the line 9 lla2 4.7.2: 6 ...c4 44 a5 ! 10 b5 0Jxd4 11 0Jxd4 llxc1 12 4.7.3: 6 ...f6 48 'ii'xc1 Wxd4 gives Black more than sufficient compensation for the ex 4.7.1 change, but this tactical idea is inef 6 ... .1Ld7 fective after 9 .1Le2, as 9 ...a5 ?! 10 0-0! This is a slightly passive, but quite axb4 11 axb4 .1Lxb4 12 0Ja3 leaves reliable strategy. Black ignores his op Whitewith the initiative. In this case it ponent's intentions and calmly contin is betterfor Black to continue 9 ...0Jge7 ues developing. 10 0-0 (10 .1Lb2?! 0Ja5 gives Black a 7b4 good game, while 10 .1Le3 0Jf5 11 It makes no sense for White to de i.d3?! is well met by 1 l...a5) 10... 0Jf5, lay this move. After 7 .1Le2 0Jge7 he solving his development problem on will in any case have to play 8 b4 (al the kingside. Meanwhile, the white ready not at the most advantageous knight mustremain on b 1, and White's moment) or 8 dxc5 'fkc7 9 0-0 0Jxe5 prospects of achieving an advantage 10 0Jxe5 'fixeS, which does not pres are remote: ent any problems for Black. a) 11 .1Le3 .1Le7 (1l ...g6 12 'ii'd2 7 ...cxd4 8 cxd4 0Jxe3 13 fxe3 .1Lh6 14 0Jc3 0Je7 is Now White has occupied even more also good, while 11...g5!? is interest space, but he continues to fall behind in ing) 12 .1Ld3 ( 12 'fid2 and 12 'ifd3 are ADVANCE VA RIATION 43 both met by 12... f6 ! 13 lt:Jc3 fxe5) is unclear) IO... lt:Ja5 11 lt:Ja4 'iic6 12 12 ...lt:Jxe3 13 fxe3 gives Black an ex lt:Jc5 lt:Jc4. Now White must accept tra tempo in comparison with the main the presence of the hostile knight on line below. c4 and try not to allow the other black b) 11 .tb2 h5 12 c;i;>h1 (12 'iid2 is pieces to become active too. After 13 answered by 12 ...g6 and 12 'iid3 with 'iib3 (13 .tc1 lt:Jf5 14 .td3 .txc5 15 l2... g5 !?) 12... .te7 13 lt:Jc3 (13 'iid2 dxc5 b6 is unclear) 13... b6 14 lt:Jxd7 g5) 13... lt:Ja5 14 lt:Ja4'ii' c6 15 lt:Jc5 (or 'iixd7 15 b5!? (15 .td3lt:Jc6 16 .tc3 15 l:r.c1 lt:Jc4 16 .txc4 dxc4 17 lt:Jc3 b5) 15 ...g6 there are chances for both 0-0) 15 ...lt:Jc4 16 'ii'b3 (D.Kononenko sides. Mankeev, Alushta 2006) 16... 0-0 is 9 ...4Jh6 ! unclear. This time the knight is heading for The conclusion is that after8 ...l:r.c 8, g4, when it can await the best moment White has to strengthen his defence of to exchange on e3, rather than being the d4-pawn right away so as to place forced into it prematurely. his king's bishop on the better square 10 .td3 lt:Jg4 11 0-0 d3. 11 lt:Jbd2 is met by 11.. .a5 12 b5 9.te3 lt:Je7. This is the most unpleasantcontin ll... .te7 12 lt:Jbd2 uation for Black. The other bishop The cunning 12 l:r.a2 (with the idea move, 9 .tb2, is also possible: of placing the rook on f2 straight a) 9 ...4Jh6 10 lt:Jc3 (10 .td3 lt:Ja5 away after 12... lt:Jxe3 ?! 13 fxe3) al ll.tc3lt:Jc4 12 0-0 .te7with an equal lows Black to play 12... f6 or 12... 0-0 position) IO... tt:Ja5 11 lt:Ja4 'ii'c6 12 13 .tf4 (13 .tel f6 ! 14 b5 lt:Jcxe5) l:r.c l (12 lt:Jc5 !? lt:Jc4 13 'ii'b3 is un 13... f6 14 exf6 l:r.xf6. But after the clear) 12 ...lt:Jc4 13 .txc4dxc4 14 lt:Jc3 text-move, the e3-bishop should be .te7. In contrast to line 'b' above, taken without further delay. White has taken on c4 without delay, 12••• tt:Jxe3 13 fxe3 (D) but Black still maintains the equilib rium: 15 0-0 lt:Jf5 (another path to equality is 15 ...0-0 !? 16 d5 exd5 17 lt:Jd4 'iig6 18 lt:Jxd5 .tg5, as in Dtir Damjanovic, Graz 1979) 16 d5 exd5 17 lt:Jxd5 .td8 with equal play (Vitiu gov). b) 9 ...lt:Jge7 (thissortie rules out a later central break on d5, but at the cost of slowing Black's development) lO lt:Jc3 (10 lt:Jbd2?! lt:Jf5 11 lt:Jb3 a5 12 b5 a4 is pleasant for Black, while 1 0 .td3! ? lt:Ja5 11 .tc3lt:Jc4 12 0-0 g6 44 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK Let us sum up: the main defect of A little piece of subtlety: after 16 Black's position is the inactivity of his �c2 a5 the position becomes level pieces, and he must take measures to right away. improve this situation. He doesn't yet 16•. .'ili'a6 17 ..txb5+ 'ii'xb5 have time to castle, since White is The exchanges have favoured Black. threatening the unpleasant manoeuvre White's advantage is minimal, as his liJb3-c5. pawns in the centre and on the queen 13••• liJd8 side represent a convenient target for Opening the file for the rook and Black's future counterplay. the diagonal for the bishop, while pre paring the possible undermining move 4.7.2 ...aS . The line 13... liJb8 14 liJb3 (14 6 •••c4 (D) 'ii'e2 ..ta4) 14... ..ta4 15 �b1 ..txb3 (worse is 15... :Z.c3 ?! 16 liJc5 ..txc5 17 dxc5, when White has the initiative) 16 'ifxb3 0-0 17 :Z.ac1 g6 is approxi mately equal in value: White still has some initiative, but Black is close to equality. 14 :Z.cl In this case 14 liJb3 ..ta4 15 'ii'b1 llc3 16liJc5(16 liJcl ..tb5) 16... ..txc5 17 dxc5 'iic7 18 l:.cl :Z.xcl+ 19 'iixc1 ltJc6 20 'iic3 a6 only leads to an un clear game, as does 14 'iie2 aS !?. 14 ••• l:.xc1 15 �xcl ..tb5 (D) Black prevents the b4 advance and radically changes the direction of the strategic struggle. The advance of the black c-pawn mirrors the ideas behind White's move 3 e5, and is justified by the weakening of the b3-square. A long and complex middlegame usu ally follows. 7 liJbd2 The move 7 ..te2 is of equal value, but if White wants to play g3, then it is better for him to develop the queen's knight first.The immediate 7 g3 is less accurate - then besides 7 .....td7 or 16 �c3 7 ...ltJa5 Black may try 7 ...f6 !? 8 exf6 ADVANCE VA RIA TION 45 (8 .i.h3 fxe5 9 li:Jxe5 li:Jxe5 10 dxe5 l:tbl i.d7 10 c4 li:Je7 ) 9 ... -lld? 10 c4 li:Je7)... 8 li:Jxf6 9 .i.h3 (or 9 .i.g2.i.d6 dxc4 (or 10 ...li:Je7) . 10 0-0 0-0 11 ii'e2 li:Ja5 12li:Jbd2.i.d7 8 .lle2 with equality) 9 ....i.d6 10 'ii'e2 0-0 11 O�ing to the adv anced position of .i.xe6+ �h8 with good compensation Black s c�-pawn, Whitealso has prob for the pawn. It is even weaker for lems findmg a convenient way to d _ White to play 7 h4?! f6. In short,there velop his pieces. On the e2-square ;:e is no reason to delay the move li:Jbd2. bishop has more p rospects than it It is also worth noting that after 7 would on g2, but now the white queen li:Jbd2, the natural-looking 7 ...li:Jg e7? has less freedom to.t. m . . ove. The m run. is a serious mistake in view of 8 a 1 ternatiVe ts 8 g3 .a.d7 (D) . .llxc4!. 7 •••li:Ja5 The possibility of attackingthe front of the pawn-chain by b3/b4 or ...f6/f5 must constantly be taken into account by both sides. The position represents a curious puzzle, since looking at its separate fragments it is very difficult to imagine a whole picture.As a rough analogy, one can cite the King's In dian line 1 d4 li:Jf6 2 c4 g6 3 li:Jc3.ll g7 4 e4 d6 5 f3 0-0 6 .lle3 e5 7 d5 li:Jh5 8 'ii'd2 f5 9 0-0-0 f4 10 .i.f2 .i.f6 11 li:Jge2: this situation looks clearly fa vourable for White, but even in this Now the bishop ca n decide between case his advantage demands proof. the squares h3 and g2. The former The immediate 7 ...f6 ?! is not so ef looks mo e active,_ ! but is hard to im fective in view of 8 .i.e2 fxe5 9li:Jxe5 plement m a way th at doesn't have (we shall see the position after9 dxe5?! some sort ofdrawb ack: .i.c5 10 0-0 in note 'c' to White's 7th a) The straightforwar . . . d 9 i.h3 m_ move in Section 4.7.3) 9 ...li:Jxe5 10 v tes a vigorous respo ! nse on the king- dxe5 .llc5 11 0-0 li:Je7 12 b4 cxb3 13 Side: 9 ....ll e7 10 0-0 ?! (10 .llg2l?) li:Jxb3with some advantage for White. 10... h5 ( lO... g5 ! is even more ac�� But if Black can't attack the white rate) ll li:Jel (11 .ll g2 is answered b e5-pawn immediately, then he needs ll...g5 12 h3 li:Jh6, . while 1 1 :bl �.Y to take precautions against the analo a1 so answere d With l l ...g5) l l ...gS 12 gous action by his opponent. And that's .llg2 0-0-0 (or l2 ... h4!?) with an ini one reason why he places his knight tiative for Black. on a5: now there is nothing good for b) Another ver sion of this idea 9 h4 White in the line 8 b4?! cxb3 9 .llb2 (9 0-0-0 (or 9 ...li:Jh 6 10 i.h3 f5) 10 :th3. 46 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK is not very successful either. Black has appears open for the f2-pawn, but the the interesting reply 1 o ...f5 !? 11 exf6 line 13 f4 ?! g6 is advantageous for ( 11 0-0?! is weaker in view of 11... lLlh6 Black. White has no natural way to followed by ...lLlf7 and ... g5) 1 l...gxf6 push forward with his pawns, so a 12 0-0 lbh6, when it becomes clear manoeuvring struggle usually fol that the main impact of the move h4 lows; e.g., 13 lLlg2 (or 13 'ii'f3 i.e8 has been to weaken White's own king 14 lLlg2 h5) 13 ...�a8 (13... g6 !? 14 side. Since the sluggish 13 .l:!.e1 .l:tg8 lLle3 lLlf5 15 lLlg4i.e? is another ap (taking aim at the g3-pawn) delivers proach) 14 lLle3 i.e8 with approxi the initiative to Black, White must take mate equality. emergency measures: 13 .l:tb1 ! lLlf5 14 d) Since in the finalanalysis White b3 cxb3 15 lLlxb3 i.a4 16 lLlfd2 with does not succeed in deriving any real chances for both sides. benefit from the bishop's position on c) 9 llb1 ! ? (the best preparation for h3, it is simpler for him to play 9 i.g2. i.h3) 9 ...lLle7 (D) (9 ...0-0 -0?! 10 b3) After 9 ...0-0-0 10 0-0 (10 lLlg5 lLlh6 and now: 11 0-0 i.e7)it is in any case better for Black to refrain from the move 10... f5 and to continue, for example, 10... h6 11 l:.e1 (here 11 lLle1 is less logical since the g2-square is taken, and it is difficult to transfer the knight to e3) 11...lLle7 12 llb1 'it>b8 (12... lLlf5 13 b4!? cxb3 14 lLlxb3 is unclear) 13 h4 �a8 ( 13... llc8 ! ?) with chances for both sides, Motylev-Berelowitsch, Bucha rest 1998. Let's return to 8 i.e2. 8 .•. i.d7 (D) c1) 10 h4?! is again of question able value. After 10 ...h6 11 i.h3 (11 h5 0-0-0 12 i.h3 �b8 13 0-0 g6! ?) 11...0-0-0 (ll...lLlf5 is also possible) 12 0-0 �b8 13 lLle1 (White could try 13 l:.e1) 13... lLlf5 (13... g5 !?) 14 lLlg2 (14 'ii'f3 is met by 14 ...i.e 7) 14 ...i.e7 15 'ii'f3 g5 Black has the initiative. c2) After 10 i.h3 h6 11 0-0 0-0-0 12lLle1 (less logical is 12l:.e1 �b8 13 lLlfl l:.c8) 12... �b8, the path forward ADVANCE VA RIATION 47 The play now becomes more con .i.e7 it is by no means clear who has crete. gained from this. The simple 13 ti'Jg3 9 0-0 (or even 13 'ii'd2right away) 13... .i.a4 9 :b 1 lt'Je7 10 ti'Jfl is of independent 14 'ii'd2 deserves attention, but then importance.White wants to regroup his White will have to play .i.d1, offering pieces without delay and is willing to an exchange of light-squared bishops play a complex queenless middlegame that it is principle in Black's favour. after 10 .. .'iib3 !? 11 .i.f4 (or 11 'ii'xb3 lt'Jxb3 12 .i.f4 b5) 1l....i.a4 12 'ii'xb3 i.xb3 13 lt'Je3 lt'Jg6 14 .i.g3 h5 ! 15 h4 (15h3h4 16.i.h2 ..te7 is equal) 15... f6. 9 ••• tt'Je7 10 :b1 Removing the rook from the line of fire. After 10 :el 'ii'c7 (10... ti'Jf5 !? is also possible), 11 lt'Jg5 is answered by ll...h6 12 ti'Jh3 . 0-0-0 13 ti'Jf4 g6, while 11 .l:tb1 transposes to the main line. 10••• 'ii'c 7 Black gradually prepares the ma noeuvre ...ti'Jc8-b6 followed by ....i.a4. 11 :e1 13 •••f5 !? White needs to unravel his tangled Black takes the opportunity to alter pieces. He intends ti'Jfl, and then to the pawn-structure and gain some bring out the c 1-bishop. He can also try space on the kingside. He can also various moves by the f3-knight, with preserve the status quo by 13... .i.a4 14 out achieving any particular gains: 11 'ifc1 h6, when White appears to have ti'Jh4 ti'Jc8!? 12 f4 g6 13 ti'Jdf3 h6 14 nothing better than 15 .i.d1, releasing i.e3 ti'Jb6, 11 tt'Je1 ti'Jf5 12 .i.g4 ( 12 g4 the white queen from the necessity to is met by 12... ti'Jh4 and 12 ti'Jdf3 by guard the c2-square. 12 ...ti'Jb3) 12... .i.e7, or 11 lt'Jg5 h6 12 14 h4 h6 ti'Jh3lt'Jc8 (simpler is 12... 0-0-0 13 ti'Jf4 The immediate 14 ...0-0-0 is of equal g6) 13 ti'Jf4 (13 ti'Jf3 !? ti'Jb6 14 .i.e3 value, given that 15 lt'Jg5?! h6 16 ..ta4 15 'ii'c1 ti'Jb3 16 'ii'el is unclear) ti'Jf7? .i.a4 is evidently not advanta 13... ti'Jb6 14 ti'Jf3 .i.a4 15 'ii'd2g6, as in geous for White. Zude-Vaganian, Bundesliga 2004/5. 15 h5 .i.e7 16 'ii'cl 0-0-0 n ... tt'Jcs 12 tt:Jn ti'Jb6 13 .i.f4 (D) Black enjoys at least his full share 13 .i.g5 provokes the black pawns of the play: his minor pieces control forward, but after 13... h6 14 .i.h4.i.a4 the queenside, and aftera subsequent 15 'ili'c 1 (15 'ii'd2 g5 16 ..tg3 g4 !? 17 ...g5 his rooks will find productive ti'Jh4 h5) 15... g5 16 .i.g3 0-0-0 17 h3 work on the kingside. 4.7.3 b) 7 i.d3 fxe5 and now: 6 ...f6 (D) b 1) 8 l2Jxe5 tiJf6 9 0-0 i.d6 and here 10 l2Jf3 transposes to line 'a', while 10 liJxc6?! bxc6 gave Black the initiative in Yilmaz-Sutovsky, World Team Ch, Bursa 2010. b2) 8 dxe5 is more principled, al though Black's chances look no worse: 8 ...c4! 9 i.c2tiJh6 100-0 g6 (10... tiJf7 11 tiJbd2 g6 12 b3 is unclear) 11 b3 cxb3 12 i.xb3 tiJg4 13 h3 liJgxe5 (13... tiJxf2 !?) 14 liJxe5 liJxe5 15 l:r.e1 i.g7 with equality, Panarin-Timofeev, Sarajevo 2010. c) 7 i.e2(a very modest move, but the bishop is not too well placed on The moves we examined in the last e2) 7 ...fxe5 8 dxe5 c4! (better than the two sections, 6 ...i.d7 and 6 ...c4, are unclear lines 8 ...tiJh6 9 c4 d4 10 i.xh6 theoretically well-establishedand have 'ii'xb2 11 tiJbd2 gxh6 12 0-0 and undergone extensive practical testing. 8 ...liJge7 9 c4 d4 10 i.d3 g6 11 'ii'e2 The same cannot be said of this little i.g7 12 0-0 'ii'c7 13 i.f40-0, as in Li known pawn move. However, it is Shilong-Zhang Pengxiang, Singapore quite possible that in this way Black 2006) 9 0-0 i.c5 (9 ...tiJh6 is also pos can solve his defensive problems: by sible) 10 tiJbd2 tiJh6 11 b4 (11 b3? immediately attacking the centre, he liJg4) 11...i.e7 !? (11...i.xf2+) with wishes to distract his opponent from good prospects for Black. his plans of pawn-expansion on the In all these lines Black is fighting queenside. hard for the initiative. It is worth draw 7b4 ing attention to the characteristic move This move is consistent, and clearly ...tiJh6, which occurs in many lines. a critical test of Black's idea. Of course, 7 ...fxe5 (D) other moves are possible too: Thisexchange is more resolute than a) 7 exf6 liJxf6 (normally Black 7 ...c4, which is also acceptable. Then needs to spend two more tempi to get 8 i.f4a5 9 tiJbd2g5 10 i.e3(10 i.g3) positions of this type) 8 i.d3 (8 b4?! 10... axb4 11 axb4 l:hal 12 'ii'xal g4 c4) 8 ...i.d6 9 0-0 0-0 (9... c4 10 i.c2 gives Black the initiative, while 8 i.e3 0-0 is equal, while Black can also try fxe5 (8 ...'ii' c7!? 9 i.f4 fxe5) 9 liJxe5 9 ...'ili'c7 !?) 10 dxc5 (White should l2Jxe5 10 dxe5 'ii'c7 11 f4 tiJh6 and 8 avoid 10 b4 ?! cxd4 11 cxd4 e5 and 10 a4 !? fxe5 9 b5 e4 (9 ...tiJa5 10 liJxe5 l:r.e1 ?! �h8) 10... i.xc5 11 b4 i.xf2+!? tiJb3 11 i..xc4!) 10 bxc6 exf3 11 cxb7 12 l:r.xf2 liJg4is unclear. i.xb7 are both unclear. ADVANCE VA RIA TION 49 14 .i.f4 lt:Jf5 15 .i.xf5 gxf5 16 lt:Jd2 l:r.g8 is quite convenient for Black. 9 •••.txc5 10 .i.d3 lt:Jge7 11 0-0 0-0 (D) 8 bxc5 It is not advantageous for White to play 8 dxc5 'ilc7 9 c4 lt:Jf6, but 8 lt:Jxe5 !? lt:Jxe59 dxe5 a5 10 .i.d3 ! axb4 11 'ifh5+'it>d8 12 c4 b3 leads to abso lutely irrational play. 8 dxe5 c4 also Black stands well. The standard sac leads to an unclear position. rifice 12 .txh7+ 'it>xh7 13 lt:Jg5+ 'it>g6 8 •. .'ili'a5 9 dxe5 14 'ild3+(14 'ilg4can be answered by 9 lt:Jxe5 lt:Jxe5 1 0 dxe5 .i.xc5 11 14 ...l:r.f5) 14 ...lt:Jf5 is not dangerous .i.d3 lt:Je7 12 'ilh5+ g6 13 'ii'h6 'ilc7 for him. 5 Ta rrasch Variation 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 lL'ld2 c5 (D) or the lines with 4 ...'ii' xd5, where he keeps an undamaged structure but must be careful not to fall too far be hind in development. In this book, I shall mostly cover the 4 ...exd5 lines, but shall also briefly present a reper toire with 4 ...'ii' xd5 (in Section 5.2), as some readers may prefer this, and in any case it is good to be able to sur prise our opponents once in a while. 4 ...exd5 demonstrates a classical treatment of this position in the spirit of Tarrasch's principles of 'free piece play'. After 5 .i.b5+ (Section 5.3) White cannot expect an opening ad The Tarrasch Variation is one of the vantage, and 5 lL'lgf3 is more critical. main lines of the French Defence. Then the line 5 ...lL'lf6 (Section5. 4) is a White supports his e-pawn with a use pure test of the pros and cons of the ful developing move, andseeks to steer isolated pawn and by playing 5 ...a6 the game into more rational channels (Section 5.5) Black seeks even more than those that can occur after the piece activity. more combative knight move 3 lL'lc 3. Striking at White's centre by 3 ... c5 is 5.1 one of Black's main rejoinders - and a 4tL'lgf3 (D) very logical one, since with White is This move, maintaining the central not in a position to generate rapid pawn-tension at least for a little while, pressure against d5. Most lines feature is the only serious alternative to 4 the pawn exchange exd5, although exd5, which is considered in the fol there are some exceptions, as we see lowing sections. Often the lines trans in Section 5.1, where the line 4 lL'lgf3 pose, but there are some subtleties that lL'lf6 5 e5 lL'lfd7 leads to more typical need to be noted. French structures. After 4 exd5, Black Other moves are seldom played, as has a major choice between taking on they fail to keep White's opening ini an isolated queen's pawn by 4 ...exd5 , tiative: TA RRASCH VA RIATION 51 a) 4 .i.b5+ .i.d7 5 .i.xd7+'ii' xd7 6 If Black prefers to meet 4 exd5 dxc5 (Black can also be happy with 6 with 4 ...'ii' xd5 (as in Section 5.2), tt::lgf3 cxd4 7 tt::lxd4 dxe4 8 tt::lxe4 e5 then it is logical for him to continue and 6 exd5 'ii'xd5) 6 ....i.xc5 7 tt::lgf3 4 ...cxd4 here. Besides 5 exd5 'ii'xd5 tt::lf6 8 'ii'e2 tt::lc6 with an equal game. (transposing to Section 5.2) it is also b) 4 c3 (White chooses to take on necessary to consider 5 tbxd4 tt::lf6. the IQP, but this is not an effectivever Then: sion) 4 ...cxd4 5 cxd4 dxe4 6 tt::lxe4 a) 6 .i.b5+ .i.d77 exd5 (7 .i.xd7+ tt::lf6 7 tt::lc3 (7 tt::lxf6+ 'ii'xf6 8 a3 .i.d6 tt::lbxd7 is also equal) 7 ....i.xb5 8 tbxb5 9 tt::lf3 can be met by 9 ...h6 10 .i.d3 a6 9 tt::lc3 tt::lxd5 with equality. .i.d7!?, while 7 .i.d3 tt::lxe4 8 .i.xe4 b) 6 e5 tt::lfd7 7 tlJ2f3 (7 f4 ? is .i.b4+9 .i.d2.i.xd2+ 10 'ii'xd2 tt::ld7 is strongly answeredby 7 ...tt:Jxe5 8 tt::lxe6 equal) 7 ....i.e7 8 tt::lf3 a6 9 .i.d3 b5 is .i.xe6 9 fxe5 tt::lc6 10 tt::lf3 .i.c5, while the same as a variation of the Queen's 7 .i.b5 'ii'b6 8 tt::l2f3 tbc6 is satisfac Gambit Accepted, but with an extra tory for Black) 7 ...tt::l c6 8 .i.f4 'ii'h6 9 move for Black. l:.b1 (9 c3 tbxd4 10 tt::lxd4 'ii'xb2 11 c) 4 dxc5 .i.xc5 5 .i.d3 (after 5 tt::lb5 .i.c5 witha level game)9 ...g6 10 exd5 exd5 6 tt::lb3 .i.b6 7 tt::lf3 tbc6 tt::lxc6 bxc6 led to unclear play in Black is a tempo up in comparison D.Howell-A.Grigorian, World Junior with Section 5.5) 5 ...tbc6 6 tbgf3 tbf6 Ch, Erevan 2007. 7 0-0 'ii'c7 8 'ii'e2 (8 exd5 tbxd5 is c) 6 exd5 tt::lxd5 7 tlJ2f3 .i.b4+!? equal) 8 ...0-0 and now 9 c3 is an odd (gaining time for development) 8 .i.d2 transposition to the Colle System - see (8 c3? tbxc3) 8 ...0-0 9 .i.xb4 (9 .i.c4 Section 13.2. Instead, 9 e5?! can be can be met by 9 ...e5 !? 10 tbb5e4, as in met by 9 ...tt::l d7 10 .i.xh7+ �xh7 11 the gameFedor chuk-Martinovic, Aix tt::lg5+ �g6 or 9 ...tt::l g4 !?. les-Bains20 1 1) 9 ...tt::l xb4gives Black a satisfactory position. Interesting com plications arepossible; for example, 10 c3 e5!? (10... tlJ4c6 proved sufficient for equality in Dgebuadze-Eingom, Metz 2011) 11 tt::lxe5 (11 tbb5 tt::ld5 12 .i.c4.i.e6 13 tbxe5tbc6 14 tt::lxc6 bxc6 15 tbd4 tbxc3!) ll...'ii'e7 (ll ...l:.e8 is also possible) 12 f4 (12 'ilfe2 can bean swered with 12 ...l:.e8) 12 ...tt::l 8c6 13 .i.c4 tt::lxe5 14 fxe5 .i.e6! is unclear. SeS After5 exd5, 5 ...exd5 leads to Sec tion 5.4. 5 ...tt:Jxd5 is an alternative, when 6 tt::le4 cxd4 7 tt::lxd4 .i.e7 leaves 4 •.•tt::l f6 Black safe. and 6 tbb3 cxd4 7 tt::lbxd4 52 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK transposes to line 'c' in the previous i..e7 10 l:.el tt::lc5 II tt::lb3 tt::lxd3 12 note. However, 6 dxc5 !? is already 'ii'xd3 tt::lb4 13 'ii'd 1 d3 14 tt::lfd4 'ii'b6. less inoffensive. After both 6 ...�xc5 7 White also achieves very little by 6 tt::le4 i..e7 8 c4 tt::lb4 9 1i'xd8+'iii> xd8 10 �b5 tt::lc6, 6 tt::lb3 cxd4 7 tt::lbxd4 tt::lc6 �d1 tt::l4c6 and 6 ...tt::l d7 7 g3 (7 tt::lb3 or 6 dxc5 tt::lc6 7 tt::lb3 tt::ldxe5. tt::lxc5 8 'ii'd4 'ii'b6 9 i..c4 tt::lxb3 and 7 6 ••• tt::lc6 7 i..d3 c4 tt::l5f6 8 tt::lb3 'ii'c7 lead to equal Less logical continuations are 7 play) 7 ...�xc5 8 i..g2 b5 !?, Black i..e2 'ii'b6 (7 ...f6 ! ?) 8 tt::lb3 cxd4 9 doesn't have serious problems, but cxd4 a5 10 a4 i..b4+ and 7 tt::lb3 cxd4 White has a preferable game. 8 cxd4 'ii'b6 9 i..d2 (9 �e3 a5) 9 ...f6, 5 ... tt::lfd7 (D) with chances for both sides. With the text-move, White shows his willingness to play a gambit in or der to keep the initiative. However, Black is by no means obliged to accept · the pawn, or to do so on white's terms: 5.1.1: 7 •••1i'b6 52 5.1.2: 7 •••h6 53 5.1.1 7 •••Wb6 8 0-0 cxd4 It is useful to fix the pawn in its place, whether Black plans to take the pawn next move or not. This is quite a well-known theoreti 9 cxd4 (D) cal position that arises more often via the move-order 3 ...tt::l f6 4 e5 tt::lfd7 5 tt::lgf3 c5. The strategic struggle moves in a very different direction from the standard 3 ...c5 lines. Throughout this 1 ...e6 repertoire we shall see many such metamorphoses; if we are pre pared for them, then it is most likely our opponents who will find them selves on unfamiliar ground. 6c3 Additional pawn-tension in the cen tre will rather suit Black: 6 c4 tt::lc6 7 cxd5 exd5 8 i..d3 (8 i..b5 can be met by 8 ...1i'b6 or 8 ...i.. e7) 8 ...cxd4 9 0-0 9 .••a5 !? TA RRASCH VA RIA TION 53 For the time being, Black keeps his Ch, Guingamp 2010) 16... g4 !? is un options open, while making it hard for clear. White to secure his hold on d4 (10 10 lL!bl lL!b3?! can be met by 10 ...a4). IO 'ilfa4?! offers White nothing good The straightforward 9 ...lL!xd4 10 after 10 .....te7 (or 10 ...g5) II a3 0-0 12 lL!xd4 'ilfxd4 II lL!f3 'ilfb6 permits lL!b1 oj(St anovic-N.Ristic, Bar 2007) White's pieces to assume an aggressive I2... f6, when Black has the initiative. posture right away. Although Black's However, these two variations de defensive resources appear adequate, serve serious attention: 10 a4 lL!xd4 rather accurate play is demanded of Il lLlxd4'i!fxd4 12 lLlf3 'ii'b6 13 i.b5 Black in this case. Here are some criti i.c5 (13... i.e7 was tried in Alonso cal lines showing the typical cut and L.Bronstein, Villa Martelli 2010) 14 thrust: lL!g5 (14 i.f4 0-0 15 l:tc 1 f6) 14... h6 a) 12 a3 i.e? (l2 ...lL!c5 !? 13 i.c2 15 'ii'h5 0-0 16 lLlf3 f6and 10 l:.e1 h6 i.d7 is another idea) 13 1i'a4 (13 (10... a4 !?) 11 'ilfa4(1 1 lLlb1 lL!xd4 12 i.e3 !? is unclear) 13... 0-0 14 i.g5(14 lL!xd4 Wxd4 13 lL!c3 i.c5) ll...'ii'b4 'ii'c2!?) l4... i.xg5 (14... f6 is possible 12 'ii'c2 lL!xd4 13 lL!xd4'ii' xd4 14lLlf3 too) I5 i.xh7+(better than 15lL!xg5?! 'ilfc5. h6, Fehlhammer-Badestein, Germany lO••• lbxd4 11lL!xd4Wxd4 12 lL!c3 (team event) 1992/3) 15... �xh7 16 Now 12... i.b 4!? leads to unclear lL!xg5+'it>g8. play, while 12... i.e7 13 l:.el 'ii'b6 is b) 12 'ilfe2 h6 13 l:.b1 (13 i.e3 also acceptable. i.c5) 13 ... lL!c5 (Black can also try 13... a5 ) 14 i.e3 1i'd8 I5 i.b5+ i.d7 5.1.2 I6 l:.fc 1 a6 I7 i.xd7+ lLlxd7, Gopal 1 •••h6 (D) Wang Hao, Sarajevo 2010. The position after 7 ...i.e7 8 0-0 g5 c) 12 'ii'a4 'ii'b4 (not letting the has occurredmore often, but this little white queen transfer to the kingside) pawn move has its advantages. I3 'it'c2 lL!c5 14 i.d2 (14 i.xh7 i.d7 I5 i.d2 'i!fg4) ... 14 'ilfa4 15 b3 'it'd? (15... 'ilfa3 !?) 16 lL!d4 (16 i.b4 can be answered by 16... b6, and I6 i.e2 by I6... b6 17 b4 i.a6) 16... 'i!fd8 17 l:.acl i.d7 18 i.e2 lL!e4 I9 lLlb5 i.c5, Ehl vest-Akobian, USA Ch, Saint Louis 2009. d) 12 'ilfc2 !? h6 13 i.d2 (13 a4 lL!c5 !? or 13 i.e3 i.c5 14 i.d2 a5) 13... i.b4 (or 13 ...lL!c5 !? 14 i.e3i.d7 ) I4 i.f4 g5 I5 i.e3 i.c5 16 l:.fe 1 (A.Sokolov-Housieaux, French Team 54 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BlACK Black wishes to advance on the b3) 10 liJb1?! g4 11 hxg4 hxg4 12 kingside, but the real target is the d4- lDg5 cxd4 13 cxd4 liJxd4 14 'ii'xg4 pawn. He is waiting for White to castle lDc6 15 lDxf7 lDdxe5 gives Black the before playing 8 ...g5 . initiative. 80-0 b4) 10 liJb3 ! (best) 10 ...g4 (10... c4 White can sidestep Black's main 11 i..xg5 'it'c7 12 i..e2 is unclear) 11 idea, although without particular suc- lDg5 (11 hxg4 c4 12 i..b1 cxb3) and cess: 8 a3 (8 liJfl?! is met by 8 ...cxd4 now both 11...i..h6 12 lDxe6 fxe6 13 9 cxd4 'ii'b6 and 8 h4?! with 8 ...'ii' b6) i..xh6 llxh6 14 'ii'd2 llh8 15 i..g6+ 8 ...'ii' b6 9 0-0 a5 10 dxc5 (Black can �f8 16 'ii'f4+ �g7 17 'it'f7+ �h6 18 be content with 10 'it'a4 i..e7 11 lle1 i..xh5 'ii'g8 and 11...i..e7 12 lDxe6 0-0 12lDfl cxd4 13 cxd4 f6, while 10 fxe6 13 i..g6+ c.ti>f8 14 hxg4 hxg4 15 c4 cxd4 11 cxd5 exd5 is unclear) 'it'xg4.l:.h4 161i'f3+<3i;g7 17 g3 (or 17 10 ...liJxc5 11 i..c2 a4 12 c4 i..e7, with 'ii'f7 + �h8 18 g3 lDdxe5) 17... 'ii' f8 18 approximately equal chances. i..f4 i..g5 lead to very interesting com 8 ...g5 9 dxc5 plications, but White cannot rely on This capture is considered strongest emerging with an advantage. in the analogous line with 7 ...i.. e7, but After the text-move, White will here it turns out to be less effective. most likely lose a pawn, but in return However, it is by no means simple for he can expect to gain a significantini White to cast doubt on his opponent's tiative. risky-looking play. For example: 9 ••.i.. xc5 10 liJb3 a) 9c4 i..g7!?(9 ...g4 10cxd5 exd5 Now: 11 e6 fxe6 12 i..g6+ preferable game for Black, Shaw Dizdarevic, Khanty-Mansiisk Olym piad 20IO. a2) 7 �c4 gains time by attacking the queen, and is more promising. Af ter 7 ...'ii' c6 8 'iVe2 0-0 9 0-0, if Black continues with conventional develop ment by 9 ...lt:Jbd7 I 0 lt:Jb3b6 11lt:Jxc5 'ifxc5 I2 b3 �b7 I3 �b2, then White keeps a small advantage, as in the game Adams-Lemos, Gibraltar 201 1. Black can obtain satisfactory play by 9 ...�e7 !? 10 lt:Jb3 'iic7, not allowing hopes of preserving an advantage are the exchange of the bishop for the pinned firmly on his piece activity knight. and lead in development. Black's Returning to the very beginning of long-term prospects arequite pleas the variation 5 dxc5, let us note that ant, with his central majority likely to the reply 5 ...�xc5 is not obligatory: be an asset in many middlegame sce b) 5 ...lt:Jf 6!? leads to unclear play narios. after6 lt:Jgf3 'Wxc5 or 6 lt:Jb3'ii xd 1 + 7 Slt:Jgf3 'iti>xd1 �e7. This is the main line. The uncon c) 5 .....xc5 6lt:Jgf3 (6 lt:Je4 'iVM+ ventional continuation 5 tt'lb3 cxd4 6 7 lt:Jc3 lt:Jf6 8 �d3 lt:Jbd7 9 a3 'ii'd6 is lt:Jxd4 (6 'iixd4 lt:Jf6) 6 ...tt'lc6 7 �e3 unclear, Timofeev-Morozevich, Rus (or 7 lt:Jgf3)7 ...�d7 !? is safe for Black, sian Ch, Taganrog 2011) 6 ...lt:Jf6 7 but by playing 5 dxc5 !? White can �d3 �e7 8 0-0 (8 -.e2 lt:Jbd7) 8 ...0-0 also hope to keep the initiative: also deserves attention, immediately a) After 5 ...�xc5 6 lt:Jgf3 lt:Jf6 the achieving the scheme of development following lines are possible: from line 'a2'. a I) 7 �d3 0-0 8 'iie2 (8 0-0 b6 9 s ... cxd4 6 �c4 'ifd6 lt:Jb3 �a6!?) 8 ...lt:Jbd7 . This develop For the time being, Black hinders 7 ment is considered optimal for Black. lt:Jb3 or 7 lt:Je4, which will be met by Now 9 0-0 b6 leads to approximate 7 ...'iVM+ . White will need to spend equality, while attempts by White to some time winning back the d4-pawn, sharpen the situation are unsuccessful; and Black intends to use this respite to e.g., 9 lt:Je4 b6 10 lt:Jxc5_.xc5 II �e3 develop his pieces. 'iia5+!? or 9 b3 b6 10 �b2 �b7 II 7 0-0 (D) 0-0-0 (the more cautious II 0-0 leads The plan with queenside castling, 7 to a level game) II...:ad8 (ll...�e7 'ii'e2 lt:Jf6 8 lt:Jb3 lt:Jc69 .i.g5, sharpens and Il...a5 are also possible) I2 g4?! the play, but does not promise White (12 �b1 is unclear) 12... 'iid6 with a the adva�tage - partly because at 56 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK some point he will need to take time same) 9 ...lbxe4 10 l:txe4is interesting. out to play ..tbl. Black has two satis Now Black must carefully negotiate factory continuations: some complications: 10 ....te7 11lbxd4 a) 9 ... 'ii'b4+ 10 .td2'ii'b6 11 0-0-0 (Psakhis gave the line 11 ..tf4 'ii'c5 12 ..td7 and now both 12 ..tg5h6 13 .th4 ..td3 ..tf6 13 a3 a5) ll...e5 ! 12 .tf4 (or 13 .txf6 gxf6 14 lbbxd4 0-0-0 exf4 13 lbxc6 'ii'xdl+ 14 l:txdl bxc6 with equality) 13 ....te7 and 12 .tf4 15 l:.del ..tf8 16 .l:txe7 .te6 17 l:tlxe6 .tc5 13 lbe5 0-0 14 g4 l:tad8 (not fxe6 18 l:tc7 (18 l:txe6?! l:te8 19 l:txc6 14 ...l:tf d8?! 15 lbxf7 ! ..txf7 16 g5, l:tel + 20 .tn �f7) 18... h5 ! 19 l:txc6 with a strong attack) are unclear. l:th6, with a complicated position and b) 9 ...a6 10 0-0-0 b5 11 ..td3 .te7 unbalanced material. 12 l:the1 (12 lbfxd4 lbxd4 13 lbxd4 8 ...lbc6 9 lbbxd4 'ii'd5 ! 14 .txf6.txf6 15 �b1 .tb7! 16 The rook move 9 l:te1 is again wor lbxb5 ..te7! 17 lbc7 'ii'c5 18 lbxa8 thy of attention, this time in connec .txg2gives Black the initiative - Vitiu tion with the continuation 9 .....te7 10 gov; 12 �bl .tb7 13 lbfxd4 lbxd4 14 lbbxd4 lbxd4 11 'ii'xd4 ( 11 lbxd4 lbxd4 .td5 15 l:the1 ?! .txa2+! 16 leads to our main line) 1l...'ii'xd4 12 'iti>xa2 'ii'xd4, Dovliatov-Maiakhatko, lbxd4 .td7 13 .tf4 l:tc8 14 .tb3 0-0. Baku 2008) 12... h6 ! 13 .th4 0-0 14 However, White's advantage in this .tg3 'ii'd5 15 �bl .tb7 with equal ending is minimal; e.g., 15 lbf5 .tc5 play (Vitiugov). 16 lbd6 l:tb8, Meszaros-A.Graf, Neu stadt an der Weinstrasse 2009. 9 •••lbxd4 10 lbxd4 The queen exchange by 10 'ii'xd4 'ii'xd4 11 lbxd4 does not create diffi culties for Black here: ll.. . ..td7 12 .te2 (12 .tf4 l:tc8 13 .tb3 .tc5 14 l:tadl 0-0 15 lbf3 l:.fd8 16 lbe5 .tb5 led to equality in the game Pavasovic Roiz, Valjevo 2007) 12... .tc5 13 lbb3 .tb6 14 a4a5 ! 15 .tf3 l:tc8 16 c3 .tc6 with equal play, Lobzhanidze-Luther, Cappelle Ia Grande 2002. 10••• .t e7 (D) Opening theory mostly focuses on 7 ...lb f6 10... a6 and 10... .td7 . Still not letting the d2-knight move With the text-move, Black prepares to the centre. to castle kingside right away in order 8 lbb3 to provide safety for his king first and 8 l:.el lbc6 9 lbe4!? (the white only then to occupy himself with the knight occupies this square all the development of the queenside. TA RRASCH VA RIA TION 57 11 •.•0-0 12 i.b2 (D) 11 b3 White has plenty of alternatives, of which this is just a sample: 12••• 'ii' f4 a) 11 .ie3 0-0 12 'ii'f3 can be met 12... i.d7 is reliable but passive; for by 12... 'ii' c7 13 .ib3 .id7. example, 13 'ii'e2 l:.fe8 14 l:tad1 'ii'b6 b) 11 tlJb5 'ii'c6 12 'ii'e2 0-0 13 15 tlJf3 l:tad8 16 tlJe5 i.c8, Khalif i.f4 b6 (or 13... a6 !? 14 tlJd4 'ii'c5) 14 man-Kholmov, Minsk 1985. As a mat lt::ld4 'ii'c5 (14 ...'ii' e4!?) 15 c3 .ib7 16 ter of principle, Black wants to place :tfe 1 l:.ad8, Radulski-Dizdarevic, Bel his queen's bishop on the long diago grade 2010. nal, but then he has to watch out for c) 11 c3 0-0 (ll...iLd7!?) 12 'ii'f3 piece sacrifices on e6. 12... 'ii' c7!? also "flc7 13 .ib3 i.d7 14 i.g5(14 i.f4 e5 deserves attention: 13 'ii'f3 (13 'ii'e2 15 i.g3 i.d6 16 tlJf5 i.xf5 17 "flxf5 can be answered by 13... b6 and 13 e4 18 i.xd6 "flxd6 19 l:tad1 'ifh6) lt::lb5 by 13... 'ii' c6) 13... a6 14 l:tfe1 14 ...lt::l d5 (14 ...a5 !?) 15 i.xe7 lt::lxe7 i.b4!? (or 14... b5) with a complicated 16 l:tfe1 l:tad8, Mista-Gdanski, Polish game. Ch, Warsaw 2010. 13 'ii'e2 d) 11 :tel 0-0 12 c3 i.d7 13 i.b3 After 13 lt::lf3 b6 14 i.e5 'ii'g4 15 (13 i.g5?! is poor due to 13... 'ii' c5, tlJd4 i.b7 White gets nothing, while while 13 'ii'f3 'ii'b6!? 14 i.b3 a5 gave he should not allow himself to be pro Black the initiative in Topalov-Kam voked into playing 13 g3?!, because sky, Sofia (7) 2009) and Black can after 13... 'ii' c7 14 'it'f3 a6 ! 15 a4 (15 choose 13... 'ifb6 !?, 13... 'ii' c7 or 13... e5 l:tad1 can be met by 15... i.c5 !? or 14 tlJf3e4 15 'ii'xd6i.xd6 16lt::ld4 h6. 15... b5 16 tlJc6 i.b7 17 tlJxe7+'ii' xe7 Obviously, these variations are not with equality) 14 ...i.c5 15 l:tadl (15 of a forcing nature. White keeps some l:tfe1 b6!?) 15... e5 16 tlJf5 b5 ! Black pressure, but Black retains a satisfac takes over the initiati�e. tory position without any weaknesses. 13••. ..tc5 14 :tad1 58 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK Or 14 tbf3 b6 15 'ife5(15 .i.e5'ife4 This check is unlikely to pose real is also equal) 15... 'ifxe5 16 tbxe5 .i.b7 problems for Black. We examine 5 with equality, Berbatov-Dizdarevic, tbgf3 in the next two sections. Khanty-Mansiisk Olympiad 2010. 5 •••.i.d7 6 'ii'e2+ 14••• b 6 This is the logical follow-up to the The game is roughly equal; for ex bishop check. The attempt to secure a ample, 15 a3 (15 tbf3can be answered minimal advantage by 6 .i.xd7+'ii' xd7 by 15... .i.b7 , while 15 g3 'ife4 is 7 tbe2 (7 'ii'e2+ is met by 7 ...'ii' e6 and equal) 15... a5 (15... .i.b7 16 tbxe6fxe6 7 tbgf3 by 7 ...'ili'e6+ 8 'ii'e2 tbc6) 17 b4 allows White the initiative) 16 7 ...tbf6 8 0-0 .i.d6 9 dxc5 .i.xc5 10 b4 !? axb4 17 axb4 .i.xb4 18 tbxe6 tbb3.i.b6 11 a4 0-0 12 a5 .i.c7has lit .i.xe6 19 .i.xe6l:tae8 20 'ii'c4xc4 'ii' 21 tle chance of success . .i.xc4 tbe4, with a likely draw in the 6 ••• .i.e7 7 dxc5 tbf6 8 tbb3 ending. After 8 tbgf3 0-0 9 tbb3 l:te8, 10 .i.e3 amounts to a mere transposition 5.3 of moves. If White does not even tem 4 exd5 exd5 (D) porarily defend the c5-pawn and plays simply 10 0-0, then 10 ....i.xc5 11 'ili'd3 .i.b6 (ll ...a6!?) 12 .i.g5 (or 12 .i.xd7 tbbxd7 13 .i.f4 l:te4) 12 ....i.xb5 13 'ifxb5 tbbd7 gives Black a pleasant game. 8 •••0-0 9 .i.e3 l:te8 10 ttJf3 If Whiteplans to castle queenside, then it is bestto do so right away: 10 0-0-0 a6 11 .i.xd7 (after 11 i.d3?! a5 12 'ifd2 a4 13 tbd4 .i.xc5 problems appear for White) 1l...tbbxd7 12'ili'd3 (12 'ifd2 a5 13 a4 can be met by the equalizing 13.. .'ii'c7 14 tbe2 tbxc5 15 tbxc5 .i.xc5 16 .i.xc5 'ili'xc5 or the We saw a similar position with re more adventurous 13... b6 !?) 12... 'ifc7 versed colours in Section 3.4, and 13 tbe2 (13 tbf3 aS !?) 13... tbxc5 14 there White even triedto seize the ini tbxc5 .i.xc5 15 .i.xc5 (15 tbd4 tbg4) tiative. Here Black will be content 15 ...'ifxc5 leads to a standardtype of with equality, as he is playing with a situation. Both sides have chances, tempo less. The move tbd2may not be since with his kingon the queenside, it the most active development for the is hard for White to create real play knight, but it is of course quite a useful against the isolated d-pawn. move. 10 ••• a6 11 .i.d3 .i.a4 12 ttJfd4 5 i.b5+ tbbd7 TA RRASCH VA RIA TION 59 Now: 8 0-0 lbe7 (screening the king froma a) As mentioned above, 13 0-0-0?! check on the e-file) 9 lbb3 .i.d6 he is by now rather risky. Black stands only partially succeeds: the g8-knight well after 13... .txb3 14 lbxb3 lbxc5, could not move to its most active but he can already count on more: square, f6, and the bishop was unable 13... lbxc5 14 lDf5 lbxd3+ 15 'ifxd3 to stay on the a7-g1 diagonal because .i.f8 gives Black the initiative. The of the threat of a strategically disad prophylactic move 16 �b1 would now vantageous exchange. This explains in be wise, since the inappropriately ac brief the motivation behind my two tive 16 .i.g5?! h6 17 .th4 g5 18 .i.g3 recommendations for Black in this po .tb5 19 'ii'd2 l:r.e2 20 'ii'd4 (as in sition, namely that Black aspires to B.Vuckovic-Baklan, Paris Ch 2004) develop his minor pieces to their best leads to hardships for White after squares. 20 ...l:r.c 8. 5 •••lb f6 b) 13 0-0!? lbxc5 14 lbxc5 .i.xc5 Immediately solving the knight's 15 c3 (after 15 'iff3?! 'ii'b6 Black development problem. The attempt to gains the initiative) maintains approxi bring both the knight and the bishop to mate equality. their optimal squares by 5 ...a6 is con sidered in Section 5.5. 5.4 6 .i.b5+ 4 exd5 exd5 5 lbgf3(D) If White aspires to an opening ad vantage, then actually he has no other choice. 6 .i.d3 is met by 6 ...c4 and in the case of 6 .te2 lbc67 0-0 .te7 (or 7 ....td6) 8 dxc5 .txc5 9 lbb3 .i.b6 Black has no difficulties - this posi tion (with the unimportant addition of the move ...a6) will be found in the next section. 6 •••.td7 7 .i.xd7+ The artificial 7 .i.e2 changes little: 7 ...lbc6 8 0-0 .i.e7 9 dxc5 .i.xc5 10 c4 (10 lbb3 .i.b6 11 .tg5 0-0) 10... dxc4 with an equal position. Black also had quite a satisfactory game after 7 ...cxd4 This is White's strongest continua 8 lbxd4 .i.d69 0-0 0-0 10 lD2f3 h6 in tion. The d5-pawn will soon become Dvoirys-Bareev, USSR Ch, Leningrad isolated, and to compensate for this 1990. weakness, Black needs to generate ac 7 •••lbbxd7 80-0 .te79 dxc5 tive piece-play. In the main theoretical White does not have to hurry with line 5 ...lbc6 6 .i.b5 .i.d67 dxc5 .i.xc5 the exchange of pawns. After 9 l:r.e1 60 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 0-0 10 ti:lfl (or 10 c3 .i.d6)it is logical (or 12 ti:l2b3 tt:lce4 13 'iif5 'iic7 with for Black to relieve the tension in the equality), then 12 ....i.d8 13 ti:lb3 tt:lce4 centre by playing 10 ...cxd 4!? 11 ti:lxd4 14 .i.e3 g6 follows, with chances for .ic5, with a good position, though both sides. Also in the variation 11 10 ...l:te8 11 c3 'ifb6is not bad either. ti:l2f3 0-0 12 tt:le5 (12 .i.f4 l:He8 13 9 •.•tt:lxc5 (D) tt:le5 'iic8) 12... 'ii' c8 Black stands no worse and in the case of 13 'iif3 .:te8 14 ti:lf5 tt:lce4 15c3 .i.c5 16 ti:ld3.ib6 or 13 .i.f4 (13 .i.g5 tt:lce4 14 .i.h4?! .i.c5) 13 ....:te8 14 1Vf3 (14 .:tel is equal) 14... tt:le6 he can even try to seize the initiative himself. b) 1 0 ti:lb3 tt:lce4 is another line where Black has active piece-play. After 11 .i.e3 0-0 12 'ii'd3 (12 .i.d4 .:te8) 12 ...l:.e8 13 .:tad l 'iic7 Black calmly finisheshis development, while the d5-pawn remains only a nominal weakness. 11 ti:lfd4 promises White little more: ll...ti:ld6!? (a compara The structure has now become more tively rare move: the knight volun defined. The d4-square is at White's tarily retreats from the centre, but is disposal, but the d5-pawn is unlikely ready to occupya usefulpost at c4 and to come under anyreal threat forsome at the same time hinders White's in time to come. Nevertheless, its long tended ti:lf5) 12 .i.f4 0-0 13 .:tel .:te8, term vulnerability remains White's with a satisfactory game for Black. main hope. Black also has support 10••• 0-0 11 tt:ln l:r.e8 12 .i.e3 squares for his knights, and for the White plans .i.d4, freeing the e3- next few moves both players will seek square for the knight. to manoeuvre their pieces into better 12••• tt:le6 positions. Black prevents his opponent's in 10 .:tel tentions. After 12... 'ii' c7, the variation The d2-knightwill head for fl, with 13 .i.d4 tt:le6 14 .i.e5 (14 tt:le3 is an an eye to moving to e3 at a later point. swered by 14 ...ti:lxd4 15 ti:lxd4 .i.c5 - This is probably the plan that poses the exchange of the white bishop for Black the most difficulties. Other ideas the knight is in principle advantageous are less fruitful, as they fail to threaten for Black since his own bishop will the safety of the d5-pawn: have good prospects) 14 ...'ii' b6 15 a) After 10 ti:ld4 1Vd7 Black takes tt:le3.:tad8 is also acceptable for Black control of the f5-square. If White per However, 13 c3 tt:le6tran sposes to our sists and continues 11 'iif3 0-0 12 ti:lf5 main line in any case. TA RRASCH VA RIATION 61 13 c3 illustration of Black's ideas. He has Or 13 lLld4 file? 14 lLlxe6 (14 c3 achieved his goal, and experiences no ..tc5) 14 .. .fxe6 15 i.d4 i.c5 with an difficulties whatsoever after 11 h3?! equal position since 16 ..txf6 is met by lLle4, 11 i.g5 h6 (1l...i.g4!?) 12 i.h4 16... filf4 . g5 13 ..tg3 lLle4 14 lLlfd4 l::te8 or 11 13•• JWc7 14 fild3 a6 l::te1 i.g4 12 h3 i.h5 13 i.f4 (13 ii.g5 White has not succeeded in putting 'ii'd6; 13 i.e3 l::te8 14 i.xb6 'ii'xb6) real pressure on the d5-pawn. An ap 13 ...l:te8. These lines illustrate an al proximate equilibrium has been cre most ideal outcome for Black. ated. Both sides have plenty to play So, if White wishes to fight for an for, although a draw seems the most advantage, he needs to hinder his op probable result. ponent's intentions. We discuss: 5.5.1: 6 c4!? 61 5.5 5.5.2: 6 dxc5 62 4 exd5 exd5 5lLlgf3a6 (D) 5.5.3: 6 i.e2 64 5.5.1 6c4!? This rare move is rather venomous. Abandoning the idea of methodical play againstan isolated queen's pawn, White relies on his lead in develop ment. Although theinactive d2-knight is an obstacle to White's centralinitia tive, Black faces some distinct chal lenges in the lines that follow. 6 ... lLlf67 cxd5 Less accurate is 7 i.e2cxd4 8 cxd5 (8 0-0 lLlc6 9 cxd5 'it'xd5 !? 10 i.c4 Behind this modest-looking move 'ifc5 11 b4 'ii'h5 is equal), since then lies the ambitious idea of placing the besides 8 ...lLlxd5 , which transposesto g8-knight and f8-bishop on their best the note to White's 8th move, 8 ...'ifxd5 possible squares: the knight on f6 and is also possible. In that case after 9 the bishop on the a7-gl diagonal. The i.c4! 'ii'h5 (9 ... 'iic5!? 10 'ii'e2+ i.e7) variation 6 c3 lLlc6 7 dxc5 (7 i.d3 al 10 0-0 lLlc6 11 lLlb3 i.e7 (the risky lows Black to equalize by 7 ...c4 8 1l...i.g4!? 12 l::tel+ i.e7 13 lLlbxd4 file2+file? or 7 ...cxd 4!? 8 lLlxd4 lLlxd4 0-0-0 leads to unclear play) 12lLlfxd4 9 cxd4 'iVe7+) 7 ...i.xc5 8 lLlb3 i.b6 9 'ii'xdl 13 l::txd1 lLlxd4 14 lLlxd4 0-0 i.d3 lLlf6 10 0-0 (10 'ii'e2+ i.e6) White keeps no more than a minimal 10 ...0-0 (Wang Yu-Roiz, World Team advantage. Ch, Beersheba 2005) can serve as an 7 ...lLlxd5 (D) 62 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 7 ...cxd4 8 .i.c4 (8 .i.e2 !?) 8 ...b5 9 ttlxg2+ 12 �fl .i.h3 13 �gl (13 ttlg5 .i.b3 'ii'e7+ 10 �fl d3 is unclear and can be met by 13... ttle3++ !? 14 �e l leads to a sharperfight. ttlc2+) 13... f5 , with equality. 9 ...cxd4 10 ttlb3ttlb6 1l .i.d3 .i.e7 12 ttlfxd4 ttlxd4 13 ttlxd4 0-0 White's game deserves preference, but Black is close to equality; for ex ample, 14 l:.el .i.f6 15 ttlb3ttla4 or 14 ttlf5 .i.f6 15 'ii'f3 l:.e8. 5.5.2 6 dxc5 (D) 8.i.c4 8 .i.e2cxd4 9 0-0 ttlc6 10 ttlb3 .i.e7 (10... .i.d6 !?) 11 ttlbxd4 (11 ttlfxd4 0-0) 11...0-0 12 ttlxc6bxc6 remainsan alternative. White's position is prefer able, but the activity of Black's pieces compensates for the defects of his pawn-structure. 8 •••ttl c6 8 ...b5 9 .i.xd5 (9 .i.e2can be met by Black receives a little present from 9 ...c4) 9 ... 'ii'xd5 10 0-0 ttlc6 11 dxc5 his opponent: now the f8-bishop gets .i.xc5 12 ttle4 (or 12 ttlb3 'ii'xdl 13 to c5 in one move. Of course, White l:.xdl .i.e7 14 .i.e3 0-0 15 l:.acl l:.d8) does have a specificidea in mind; oth 12... 'it'xd l 13 l:.xdl .i.e7 14 ttld6+ erwise this move would be relegated (14 .i.f4 0-0 15 l:.ac l l:.d8 16 l:.xd8+ to a small footnote. ttlxd8 17 .i.d6 .i.b7 is another possi 6 ••• .i.xc5 7 ttlb3 bility) 14 ....i.xd6 15 l:.xd6 (Navara 7 .i.d3 'ii'e7+ 8 'ii'e2 ttlc6 9 ttlb3 Volkov, Russian Team Ch, Dagomys .i.b6 is considered in line 'c2' of the 2008) also deserves attention. Black next note. should then play 15... ttle7 , little by lit 7 •••.i. b6 8 .i.g5!? tle achieving equality. White must act vigorously. Other 90-0 moves: White achieves nothing by 9 'ii'e2+ a) The indifferent 8 .i.e2?! ttlf6 9 due to 9 ....i.e7 ! 10 dxc5 ttlf4 11 'ii'e4 0-0 0-0 10 .i.g5 ttlc6 11 c3 l:.e8 gave TA RRASCH VA RIATION 63 Black the initiative in Pavasovic-Diz dar, Murska Sobota 2006. b) The fanciful 8 'ii'e2+ also does not pose any particular problems for Black: 8 ...tt:le7 9 i.e3 tt:lbc6. Now White can spend a further tempo pre paring to castle kingside, but 10 'ii'd2 0-0 11 i.e2i.xe3 12 'ii'xe3 .l:te8 13 0-0 tt:lg6 14 'ii'd2 'ii'f6 15 c3 tt:lf4 allowed Black the initiative in Emelin-Erdos, Berlin 2009.Castling queens ide allows Black good counterplay: 10 0-0-0 0-0 11 i.xb6 'ii'xb6 12 12 ••• Ji.e6 13 c3 'ii'd7 ...i.f8x c5), but on the other hand, Black frees himself from the pin White's bishop is inactively placed on and obtains a satisfactory game thanks e2, and may even get in the way of to his active b6-bishop. White's other pieces. In the variation 6 dxc5 ii.xc5 7 5.5.3 lt:lb3, the retreat of the bishop to the 6 .i.e2 (D) b6-square looked best, but in this case This modest placement of the white 9 ...i.a7 is equally deserving of atten bishop is better than 6 Ji.d3 c4 7 .i.e2, tion, and we shall bear both moves in when White can expect no advantage mind as we discuss the main continua after 7. Ji:Jc6 8 0-0 Ji.d6or 7 .. .'�Jf6!? 8 tions below. 0-0 Ji.d6 9 b3 (9 lt:le5 0-0) 9 ...b5 . 10 i.g5 10 i.d3returns the tempothat Black has lost with his bishop. Then 10 ...0-0 11 h3 !? (11 Ji.g5 can be answered by ll...lt:lc6, while 11 c3 leads to a posi tion from the game Wang Yu-Roiz that I described as an "almost ideal out come" at the start of Section 5.5) ll...lt:le4 (ll...'i!i'c7!? 12 lt:lbd4 lt:lc6) 12 lt:lbd4 lle8 leads to chances for both sides. 10 'ii'd3 0-0 11 .i.e3is too slow to give Black problems. After ll...i.xe3 (ll ...lle8!? is also possible) 12 'i!i'xe3 lle8 13 'ii'd2 (13 'it'd3 .i.g4) he can 6 ••• lt:lf67 0-0 .i.e7 choose between 13... lt:le4 (equalizing) 7 ...lt:lbd7 !? is very rare but interest and 13... .i.g4. More vigorous action is ing. Then 8 lt:le5?! is well met by required of White. 8 ...i.d6, while 8 .:tel .i.e7 9 lt:lfl 0-0 After 10 c4 0-0 (or 10 ...lt:lc6 11 10 lt:lg3 lle8 looks quite acceptable .i.g5 0-0, if the bishop is on a7) 11 for Black. It is hardto say if Whitecan i.g5 (11 cxd5 can be answered by derive any real benefitfrom his devel 1l...'ii'xd5, and 11 c5 ii.c7 12 i.g5 by opment advantage after 8 c4 .i.e7 9 12... h6 13 .i.h4 lt:lc6) 1l...h6 12 .i.xf6 cxd5 0-0 10 l:.el (10 d6 .i.xd6 11 lt:lc4 'ii'xf6 13 cxd5 lld8 little by little Black i.c7) 10... lt:lxd5 11 lt:le4 lt:l5f6. achieves equality. 8 dxcS .i.xcS 9 lt:lb3 .i.b6 10••• 0-0 11 c3 lieS Black has accomplished his idea of To counter the threat of .i.xf6,Black placing his kingside minor pieces on sets his sights on the e2-bishop. This is their best locations, albeit with some the most natural reaction, but it is loss of time ( ...Ji.f8-e7xc5 rather than worth examining the pawn sacrifice TA RRASCH VA RIA TION 65 l l...liJc6 12 �xf6 'ili'xf613 'ii'xd5 �f5, after 16 �xa6 �e6 17 'ili'b5 bxa6 18 when the activity of Black's pieces 'ii'xc6 'ii'xb2 19 liJbd4 �xd4 20 cxd4 provides compensation: 14liJbd4l:.fe8 'ii'b5 or 16 �d3 �g4 17 l:r.fl �xf3 18 15lDxf5 l:.xe2 16 'ili'b3 'ili'xf5 17 'ili'xb6 'ili'xf3 'ii'xf3 19 gxf3 (19 l:.xf3 l2Je5 20 'ii'b5 18 'ii'xb5 axb5 is equal, while 14 l:.g3+ l2Jg6) 19 ...l:.ad8 20 �e4 f5 . l:.ad 1 �c2 15 l:.d2l:.ad8 16 'ii'c4l:.xd2 13 �xf2 l2Je4+ 14 �g1 ltJxgS 15 17 l2Jbxd2 l:.e8 and 14 liJfd4 l:.ae8 15 ltJxgS 'ii'xgS 16 �f3 .i.f3 �d3 16 l:.fe 1 l2Je5 17 liJd2 (not Black's defence is simpler after 16 17 'iixb7? l:.e7) 17 ...'ii' f4 18l:.adl (18 �xa6 l:.e6 17 �b5 l:.xe1+ 18 'ii'xe1 l::te3 l2Jg4) 18... l:.e7 are both unclear. �d7. Now he needs to play very ac 12 l:.el!? (D) curately to retain approximate equal ity. 16•.• :xe1+ 17 'ii'xe1 �e6 18 l2Jd4 Black also holds his ground in the case of 18lDc5 'ii'e7 19 lDxe6fxe6 20 �g4 e5 21 l:.d1 'ii'd6 22 'ii'd2 d4 23 'ii'c2 (23 cxd4 l2Jc6 24 dxe5 'ii'xe5) 23 ...�h8 24 cxd4 ltJc625 dxe5 'ii'xe5. 18••• �d7 19 b4 'ii'f6 20 �xdS l2Jc6 21 'ii'f2 (D) After 21 l:.d1 liJxd4 22 l:.xd4 �c6 or 21 'ii'fl 'ii'g6 22 l:r.e1 l:.f8 it is diffi cult for White to strengthen the pres sure. This move looks at first like an oversight, but it is in fact the strongest continuation for White. 12••• �xf2+ After 12... �e6 or 12 ...l2Jbd7 White stands better. However, if the bishop is on a7, Black has an extra possibility to complicate the play by 12... 'ii' b6!?. Then 13liJbd4 ltJe4 and 13 �e3 l:.xe3 work out well for Black, while 13 tL!fd4 liJbd7 14 .i.e3 (14 �f3 l2Je4) 14 ...'ili'c7 15 l2Jc2 �b8 16 g3 l2Je5 is unclear. The critical 13 �xf6 'ii'xf2+ 14 �h1 gxf6 15 'ii'xd5 (or 15 liJbd4 21 ••• 'ii'xf2+ 22 �xf2 l:.d8 tLlc6 16 :n 'ii'e3 17 �xa6 l2Jxd4 18 Whitehas just a small advantagein cxd4 'ii'h6) 15... l2Jc6 leads to equality the ending. 6 Steinitz Variation 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 tLlc3 tLlf6 (D) We should also note that the pawn By playing 3 ...tLlf6 Black again at exchange 4 exd5 exd5 transposes to tacks the e4-pawn, forcing its advance Section 3.3. or exchange. The Winawer Variation, 4 e5 tLlfd7 3 ....Jib4, is the main alternative, and White can now decide among sev- has the same initial goal. eral schemes of development: 5 tLlf3 (Section 6.1) is an idea of a type we have seen before: White seeks to establish piece control over the central squares. Although this variation enjoys some popularity, Black has no real trouble. In the line 5 tLlce2 (Section 6.2) White demonstrates diametrically opposite intentions - he is going to support his pawn-centre with the moves c3 and f4 . This leads to a very complicated opening battle with chances for both sides. • 5 f4 c5 6 tLlf3 tLlc67 i.e3(Section In this chapter we shall examine 4 6.3) is the most dangerous continu e5, but White can also maintain the ation for Black. He has quite a wide status quo in the centre by 4 .JigS choice of possibilities, of which I (Chapter 7). have elected to focus on 7 ...cxd4 8 Besides these two main possibili tLlxd4 .i.c5 (usually very sharp), ties, the rarely played4 .Jid3should be 7 ...cxd4 8 tLlxd4 'ii'b6 (the most briefly mentioned. However, in this forcing) and the calmer 7 ....i.e7 . case Black easily secures a comfort able game: 4 ...c5 5 exd5 (5 tLlf3 cxd4 6.1 6 tLlxd4 e5 7 tLlf3 i.b4) 5 ...cxd4 6 5 tLlf3 (D) tLlb5 (6 .i.b5+ i.d7 and now 7 .i.xd7+ 5 'ii'h5?! is a speculative move with ifxd7 8 'ii'xd4 tLlc6 9 'ii'dl exd5 or 7 out any real substance. 5 ...c5 6 tLlf3 ifxd4 .i.xb5 8 tLlxb5 tLlxd5) 6 ...tLlxd5 cxd4 (6... tLlc6? allows White to dem 7 tLlf3 .i.b4+. onstrate the one idea behind his queen STEIN/1Z VA RIATION 67 move: 7 tLlg5 g6 8 'i!Vf3 f5 9 tLlxe6 i.f6 i.e? (1l...h6!?) 12 i.xe7 tLlxe7 tLldxe5 10 'i!Vxd5 gives White the ad led to equality in Zdebskaya-E.Daniel vantage) 7 tLlxd4 (7 tLlb5 is met by ian, Romanian Women's Team Ch, 7 ...tLlc6) 7 ...'i!Vb6 (7 ...g6 plans 8 'i!Vg4?! Eforie Nord 2009. tLlxe5 9 'iiVg3 tLlbc6, but 8 'iiVg5 ! ? is a 6 .•.tLl c6 better try) 8 tLlb3 tLlc6 leaves Black Before taking on c5, Black wants to with the initiative. provoke 7 i.f4, although6 ...i.xc5 and 6 ...tLlxc5 are viable too. 7 i.f4(D) Approximate equality arises after 7 i.g5 !? i.e? (7 ...'i!Va5 ?! 8 a3 'i!Vxc5 9 tLlb5 allows White the initiative) 8 i.xe7 'fixe? 9i.b5 'flxc5 10 0-0 0-0 11 :e1 a6, as in Hai"k-Eingorn, Metz 1997. White is willing to allow the ex change of his pawns on d4 and e5. 5 ••• c5 6 dxc5 Black has no difficultyafter 6 i.b5 tLlc6; e.g., 7 dxc5 i.xc5 8 0-0 0-0, 7 i.xc6 bxc6 8 0-0 i.e? (or 8 ...cxd4) or 7 0-0 cxd4 8 tLle2(8 tLlxd4is well met by 8 ...tLldxe5 ! 9 .:e1 i.d6) 8 ...a6 9 i.xc6 bxc6 10 'i!Vxd4c5 !? ( 10 ...'ii'c7 is We have reached the basic position unclear, Barle-Pcola, London 2009) of this line. The standard variation 11 'i!Vf4 and now Black can choose now runs 7 ...i.xc5 8 i.d3 f6 9 exf6, 11... i.b7 or 11... h6. with Black choosing between 9 ...lLlxf 6 The active development of the other and 9 .. .'it'xf6. However, other methods white bishop by 6 i.g5 also has little of seeking counterplay are also possi impact: 6 ...'i!Vb6 (6 ...'i!Va5 !?) 7 dxc5 ble, in which Black is in no hurry to i.xc5 8 'i!Vd2 tLlc6 (Black can also try liquidate the e5-pawn by playing ...f6, 8 . ..h6 !? 9 i.h4 g5 10 i.g3 'i!Vxb2) 9 or even avoids it altogether. These al 0-0-0 (9 tLla4 is met by 9 ...i.xf2+ 10 ternative plans feature activity on the 'i'xf2 'i!Vb4+, and 9 i.b5 by 9 ...d4 10 queens ide or (given the opportunity) on i.xc6 'i!Vxb2) 9 ...'i!Va5 10 a3 0-0 11 the kingside with ...g5 . The e5-pawn 68 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK can prove a useful target; not only can the white pieces become tied to its de fence, but it also blocks lines that they would like to use. Thus we shall ex amine the following moves: 6.1.1: 7 ••• a6 68 6.1.2: 7 •••tLlxc5 68 6.1.3: 7 •.•i.. xc5 69 6.1.1 7 ••.a6 This preliminary move is useful for Black in practically all cases, and keeps the possibility of taking on c5 with ei Now White faces a major decision. ther knight or bishop. Then: 8h4 a) 8 i..d3 lLlxc5 9 0-0 i..e7 is con Making use of the fact that he has sidered in note 'b' to White's 8th move not yet castled, White makes an ag in Section 6.1 .2. gressive advance on the kingside. This b) After 8 a3 i..xc5 9 i..d3 f6 is a risky plan that can easily rebound (9 ...h6 !?) 10 exf6 lLlxf6, the inclusion on White. Other moves: of the moves a3 and ...a6 turnsout not a) 8 ..ie2is too meek. After 8 .....ie7 to be in White's favour. 9 0-0 Black canchoose 9 ...a6 or 9 ...0-0. c) 8 'ifd2 i..xc5 9 i..d3 (9 a3 0-0) b) The standard continuation is 8 9 ...b5 (9 ...h6 !? 10 h4 i..b4 11 a3 i..a5 ..id3 ..ie7 9 0-0, but it does not prom 12 b4 i..c7, Zakharov-V.Gaprindash ise White an advantage. One move is vili, Moscow 1997) 10 h4 ( 10 0-0 h6 is 9 ...a6, when 10 l:tel g5 11 ..ig3 h5 12 unclear) 10 ...'ii' b6 11 �fl f6 12 exf6 h3 'ii'b6 gives Black the initiative, lLlxf6 gave Black the initiative in the while 10 'ii'd2 0-0 11 a3 f5 12 exf6 game Nepornniashchy-Volkov, Novo i.xf6 was satisfactory for Black in kuznetsk 2008. I.Schneider-Ivanchuk,European Clubs d) 8 tLla4!? is more of a challenge to Cup, Ohrid 2009. The simple 9 . ..0-0 Black's idea. After 8 ...tLlxc5 9tLlxc5 10 :tel tLlxd3 111i'xd3..id7 is finefor i..xc5 10 'ifd2 (or 10 c3 0-0 11 'ii'd2, Black too, while 9 ...g5 !? is interest but 10 ..id3?! is weaker in view of ing; then 10 ..ie3 (10 ..ig3 h5 11 h3 10 ...'ii' b6 11 0-0 'it'xb2) the game is 'it'b6gives Black the initiative,Huerga approximately equal, but theexchange Leache-Jerez Perez, Barcelona 2006) of the passive c3-knight is neverthe 10 ...tLlxd3 11 'it'xd3 is unclear. less to White's benefit. c) 8 'ii'd2 a6 (8 .....ie7 !?) 9 0-0-0 b5 10 'it'e3is similarto our main line be 6.1.2 low, and indeed White should proba 7 •••lLlxcS (D) bly prefer precisely this move-order. STEINITZ VA RIATION 69 d) Attacking the c5-knight by 8 a3 ll••• b4 12 tt:'le2 0-0 13 tt:'led4 .i.d7 i..e7 (8 ...a6 !?) 9 'ii'd2 (after 9 b4?! 14 h5 tt:'ld7, 10 b5 tt:'la5 11 .i.d3'ii' c7 12 tt:'le2 Or 14 .tg5 tt:'lxd4 15 tt:'lxd4 a5 16 tt:'lc4 gives Black the initiative, while cltbl a4, as in de Firmian-Raicevic, I 0 tt:'lb5 0-0 11 c4?! a5 is also pleas Lone Pine 1980. ant for him, Aronian-Lputian, Erevan 14••• tt:'lxd4 15 tt:'lxd4 a5 16 �b1 a4 2001) 9 ...a6 10 b4 tt:'ld7 does not pro Black's chances are preferable in vide any benefit for White and only this double-edged position, G.Gusei weakens his position. nov-Monin, St Petersburg 2000. 8 •••.te7 Black brings the idea of liquidating 6.1.3 White's e-pawn by ...f6 back into the 7 •••.txc5 (D) picture. He can also be quite happy af ter 8 ...a6, which practically rules out queenside castling by White. 9 h5?! and 9 'ii'd2?! are both well met by 9 ...d4, but 9 a3 is more natural. After 9 ...b5 10 h5 h6 11 b4 (White should avoid 11 .:th4?d4 and 11 .:th3?! 'ii'c7, while Il l2Jd4!? .i.b7leads to unclear play) 1l...tt:'ld7 12 .i.d3 Black can choose 12... .te7 or 12... 'ii' c7. Black can also combine the two ideas by 9 ....te7 !?, meeting 10 b4 by 10 ...tt:'ld7 and 10 .:th3 with 10 ...0-0. 9 'ii'd2 Whether he likes it or not, it is best 8 .td3 h6!? 9 h3 to evacuate the king from the centre. White must take Black's ...g5 idea After 9 h5 (or 9 .:th3?! 'ii'b6) 9 .. .f5 seriously; for example, 9 0-0 g5 !? 10 (9 ...0-0 !? and 9 ...'ii'b6 !? are also inter .i.g3 h5 11 h4 g4 12 tt:'lg5 tt:'ldxe5 13 esting) 10 h6 g6 Black takes the initia .:tel?! (13 .i.b5 is unclear) 13... f6 14 tive. .i.xe5 tt:'lxe5 15 .:txe5 fxe5 16 .i.g6+ 9 ...a6 c;tf8 17 ltJce4 (Faizrakhmanov-Yuzha The beginning of a pawn advance. kov, Belgorod 2008) 17... .tb6 with an Piece-play by 9 ...0-0 10 0-0-0 'ii'b6 (or advantage for Black. The prophylactic 10 ...f5 !? 11 exf6 .i.xf6) may even be retreat 9 i..g3 does not completely more effective. solve this problem: 9 ...a6 10 0-0 (10 10 0-0-0 bS 11 1i'e3 a3.ta7 11 b4?!tt:'ld4) 10... g5 !? (10... b5 The careless 11 .i.d3?! b4 12 tt:'le2 is also possible) 11 .:tel g4 12 l2Jd2 b3 13 cxb3 tt:'lb4 leads to hardship for 'ii'g5 is unclear. The attempt to castle White. queenside by 9 'ii'e2 a6 10 0-0-0 ( 10 70 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 0-0 is still met by 10 ... g5) 10... ..tb 4!? 11 .i.d2..te7 does not look too attrac tive. Finally, the radical rejoinder 9 h4 weakens the kingside and strengthens the effectof the undermining ...f6: af ter 9 ...0-0 !?, Black can meet 10 0-0 by 10... f6 11 exf6 'ii'xf6, and need not fearcomplications such as 10 llh3 f6 11 .:tg3 lbdxe5 12 ..txh6 llf7 or 10 'ii'd2 f6 11 ..txh6 lbdxe5. 9 ...0-0 Queenside play with 9 ...a6 10 0-0 b5 remains an alternativefor Black. 10 0-0 f6 11 exf6 'ii'xf6 7lbf3 is weaker in view of 7 ...'ii'b6 8 We now see a reason for the modest a3 f6. A more critical reply is 6 ...cxd4 advance of White's h-pawn: on h3 it is 7 cxd4 f6. Then: far less of a target than it would be on a) The consistent line is 8 f4 fxe5, h4. Nevertheless, White cannot count when after 9 fxe5 .i.b4+ 10 �f2 (1 0 on an advantage. ..td2 'ii'h4+) 10... 0-0+ (10... 'ii'h4+?! 12 ..te3 can be met by 11 g3) 11 lbf3 'ii'h4+ 12 ..tg3is similarto a standardtheo (ll ...lbc6!? has the ideas 12 a3 ..taS retical line, which arises after7 .....txc5 and 12 lbf4 lbxd4) 12 lbg3 (12 ..ti>gl 8 ..td3f6 9 exf6 'ii'xf6 10 ..tg3 0-0 11 llxf3 13 gxf3 lbxe5) 12... lbc6 13 ..te3 0-0. In that case, Black needs to avoid lbb6 14 ..te2 (14 ..ti>gl'ii' g4) 14... lbc4 ll...lbde5? 12lbxe5 lbxe5 13 ..txh7+, Black stands well. 9 dxe5 has also but in our slightly different position been tried, without particularsucc ess: Black plays 12 ...lbde5 ! and takes over 9 ...'ii' b6 ( 9 ...lbc6 ! ?) 1 0 lbf3 lbc6 11 the initiative. lbc3 lbc5 also offers Black a good 12••• b6 !? game. Both sides have chances. White can of course abandon the idea of supporting his spearheadwith 6.2 his f-pawn: S lbce2 (D) b) 8 lbf4 ..tb4+9 ..td2..txd2+ (or White prepares c3. Another move 9 ...'ii'h6 10 ..txb4 'ii'xb4+ 11 'ii'd2 order, 5 f4 c5 6 lLlf3 lbc6 7 lbe2, has 'ii'xd2+ 12 ..ti>xd2 �e7 with equality) the same idea. 10 'ii'xd2 'ii'b6 (10... 'ii' e7 !?) and now s ...cS 6 f4 both 11 lbf3 fxe5 and 11 exf6 lbxf6 6 c3 looks more logical at first give Black equal play. glance, but this is probably not so. c) 8 exf6 !? lbxf6 9 lbf3 ..td6 10 Black can simply play 6 ...lbc6, when lbc3 0-0 11 ..td3 �6 transposes to a 7 f4 transposes to our main line, while line of the Tarrasch normally reached STEINITZ VA RIA TION 71 via 3 li:Jd2 li:Jf6 4 e5 li:Jfd7 5 .td3 c5 6 c3 lbc6 7 lbe2 cxd4 8 cxd4 f6 9 exf6 li:Jxf6 10 li:Jf3 .td6, where White has played the somewhat premature 11 lDc3. One can draw theconclusion that af ter 6 c3 cxd4 7 cxd4 f6 White does not achieve an advantage. That's why he often startswith the move 6 f4 instead. 6 •••lt:J c6 We should consider whether it is an opportune moment for Black to tear apartWhite 's pawn-chain by play ing 6 ...cxd 4. This exchange promotes White has now shown his cards. He White's development, but after7 li:Jxd4 has constructeda largepawn-centre at lDc6 Black has every right to count on the cost of a delay in hisdevelopment equality. 8 .te3 is met by 8 ...'ifb6, and internal weaknesses left in the while 8 c3 lDxd4 9 cxd4 'ifb6 10 li:Jf3 pawns' wake.This gives Black grounds lDb8 11 .te2 lDc6 12 0-0 .td7 is to seek active counterplay, often by equal. A more principled line is 8 drastic tactical means: a piece sacri lDgf3 lDxd49 lDxd4'ifb6 10 c3 .tc5. fice with ...lDdxe5 or an exchange of Then 11 b4 .txd4 12 'ii'xd4 'ii'xd4 13 fer on f3. In the spirit of this strategy, cxd4 lDb6 14 b5 .td7 and 11 b3 f6 12 ...'iVb6, ....te7 and ...f6 are all natural exf6 lDxf6 are equal, while 11 .te2 moves. However, not all of them seem can be met by 11... 0-0 12 0-0 li:Jb8, obligatory, and in any case one needs also with equality, and 11 a4 with to startwith something. We examine: ll...a5, intending ...f6 soon (but not 6.2.1: 7 ...1i'b6 71 ll...f6 ?? 12 a5). 6.2.2: 7 ....te7 72 Overall, 6 ... cxd4 is an adequate re ply to White's tDce2 plan whether he 6.2.1 opts for 6 c3 or 6 f4 . However, the 7 ••• 'ii'b6 8 lDf3f6 main line with 6 f4 lDc6 is more inter For the time being Black refrains esting and leads to a richer game. from ....te7 , planning to play ....tb4+ 7 c3 (D) should the opportunity arise. White can wait a little while with 9a3!? this move, but the attempt to avoid it 9 g3 is an attempt to develop the completely makes no sense. For ex fl-bishop. 9 ...cxd4 and now: ample, 7 lDf3 .te7 (7 ...'ifb6 8 g3 cxd4 a) Black's ....tb4+ idea is demon 9 lt:Jexd4 lDc5) 8 g3 0-0 9 .th3 cxd4 strated in the variation 10 cxd4 fxe5 10 lt:Jexd4 lDc5 11 0-0 'ii'b6 gives 11 fxe5 .tb4+ 12 lDc3 (12 .td2?! 0-0 Black the initiative. 13 .tg2 invites 13... lDdxe5 ! 14 dxe5 71 A ROCK·SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK IJ'\xe.5 with an attack) 12... 0-0 13 .i.f4 10••• .i.e7 11 tL!c3 ( 13 ..th3? is met by 13... l:.xf3) and Other continuations are less logi now Black can choose between main cal: taining the tension by 13... .i.e7 !? and a) 11 g3 0-0 12 .i.g2 (after 12 equality with 13... tL!dxe5 14 .i.xe5(14 .i.h3?! fxe5, White has reason to re dxe5 .i.a5) 14... tL!xe5 15 tL!xe5 .i.xc3+ gret the tempo spent on 9 a3) 12... aS !? 16 bxc3 'ifh2 17 'ii'c1 'ii'f2+ 18 �d 1 13 b3 'ii'a7 gives Black the initiative. 'ii'xfl +. b) 11 h4 0-0 12 llh3 tLla5 !? 13 b4 b) 10 tL!exd4 is more reliable, but tL!c4 14 tLlc3 'ii'c7 is unclear. after 10... fxe5 (or 10 ...tL!xd4 11 cxd4 c) 11 b4 (still delaying piece devel fxe5 12 fxe5 .i.b4+ 13 �f2 .i.e7 14 opment) 11...0-0 12 llb1 (12 'ii'd3 'ikc7 �g2 tLlb8 15 .i.d3 tLlc6 with equality, gives Black the initiative; 12 tLlc3?! or N.Kosintseva-Edouard, Cap d' Agde 12 tLlg3 may run into 12... fxe5 13 dxe5 rapid 2010) 11 fxe5 (11 tL!xe6 tL!c5 ! tL!dxe5 !) 12.. .fxe5 13 fxe5 (Black takes 12 tL!xf8 .i.g4) 1l...tL!c5 12 .i.h3 .i.e7 the initiative after 13 dxe5 a5 14 b5 a4) 13 0-0 0-0 Black nonetheless stands 13... a5 14 tL!f4 (14 b5 !? llxf3 15 gxf3 well, Atlas-Luther, Austrian Team Ch .i.h4+ 16 tLlg3 tL!xd4 17 f4) 14 ...axb4 2001/2. 15 tL!xe6 llxf3 16 'ii'xf3 tL!dxe5 17 9 •.•cxd4 (D) 'ii'xd5 �h8! and Black can again be happy. ll... fxeS 12 tL!a4 Or 12 fxe5 (12 dxe5 tL!c5) 12 ...0-0 13 tL!a4 'ikc7. 12 ••• 'ii'c7 13 fxeS 0-0 14 .i.e2 tL!b6 The game is double-edged. 6.2.2 7 .••.i. e7 (D) 10 cxd4 10 tL!exd4 fxe5 11 fxe5 (11 tL!xe6 tL!c5) 11... tL!c5 (11 ...tL!dxe5 ? 12 tL!xe5 tL!xe5 13 'ii'h5+) 12 .i.e3 !? (12 .i.b5 .i.e7 is equal) 12... 'ii' xb2 13 tLib5 de serves attention - it is possible that the assessment of 7 ...'ii' b6 as a whole hinges on this line. STEIN/1Z VA RIA TION 73 Black is in no hurry with the queen 9 ...f5 !? or 9 ...b5 !? 10 a3 (10 .i.h3 b4) sortie ...'ifb6 . 10 ...a5, seeking the initiative. 8 ll:lf3 0-0 d) 9 a3 f6 (9 ...a5 is more common, 8 ...f6 is also possible, but after 9 g3, although it is not in the least obliga 9 a3, 9 h4 or 9 .i.e3the reply 9 ... 0-0 tory to impede the advance b4) 10 b4 seems best in all cases; therefore it is cxd4 ( 1 o ...fxe5 ! ?) llll:lexd4 ( 11 cxd4 logical to castle right away. can be met by ll...b5!? 12 lLlc3 a6 or 9 .i.e3!? ll...'ii'b6, as considered in note 'c' to White reacts to the change of the White's 11th move in Section 6.2.1) situation: he makes use of the absence ll...ll:lxd4 12 cxd4 (12 ll:lxd4 'ii'b6) of the black queen from b6 to plant his 12... f5 with good prospects for Black bishop on the vulnerable gl-a7 diago on the queenside. nal, also strengthening his piece con 9 ..•f6 trol of the d4-square. The traditional approach. 9 ...f5 10 Other standard moves offer Black .l:.g1 b5 11 a3 ll:lb6 12 .i.f2c4 deserves additional possibilities: attention, as it leads to double-edged a) 9 ll:lg3?! f6 (9 ...'iib6 is an alter wing play, Negi-Nguyen Ngoc, World native) 10 .i.d3 cxd4 11 cxd4 fxe5 (or Junior Ch, Gaziantep 2008. ll...'ii'b6!? 12 a3 g6) 12 dxe5 .i.b4+ 10 g3 gave Black strong play in the game After 10 exf6 ll:lxf6 11 dxc5 ll:lg4 Musakaev-Hou Yifan, Khanty-Man 12 .i.gl (12 .i.d4 b6 13 cxb6 ll:lxd4) siisk 2009. 12... e5 Black seizes the initiative. b) 9 h4 f6 10 llh3 (10 ll:lg3 can be 10... 'ii'b6 met by 10 ...'ilb 6; 10 a3 is also possi Nevertheless! It is also quite good ble) 10 ...cxd4 (or 10 ...b6) II cxd4 (11 (and in the spirit of the ideas behind ll:lexd4 ll:lc5) ll...b5!?. 7 ... .te7) to play 10... fxe5 11 dxe5 b5, c) 9 g3 and now 9 ...'iWb6 10 .i.h3 advancing the pawn-mass. cxd4 11 cxd4 f6 I2 .i.xe6+ �h8 13 11 'ii'd2 fxe5 exf6 (not 13 .i.xd5? fxe5 I4 fxe5 ll...cxd4 12 ll:lexd4 fxe5 13 ll:lxe6 ll:ldxe5 !) 13... ll:lxf6 14 .i.xc8 .i.b4+ · d4 14 .i.f2 lle8 (Negi) leads to com and 15... .l:.axc8 gives Black enough plications. compensation for the pawn. This rather 12 dxe5 lld8!? well-known variation can arise from Black intends the pawn-break ...d4. several move-orders. The other stan Kamsky-Ding Liren, Moscow 2011 dard reaction, 9 ...cxd4 10 ll:lexd4 ( 10 went 13.i.h3 d4 14 .i.f2( 14 cxd4 cxd4 cxd4 can be answered with 1 O ...f6, in 15 ll:lfxd4 ll:ldxe5)... 14 d3 (14... dxc3 tending 11 .i.g2'ilb6, while 11 .i.h3?! 15 'ii'xc3 ll:lf8) 15 ll:lcl with unclear fxe5 12 .i.xe6+ �h8 gives Black the play. 13 .i.g2 d4. 14 cxd4 cxd4 15 initiative) 10... ll:lc5 (or 10.. .'.1>6) is ll:lfxd4 .i.b4! 16lLlc3ll:ldxe5 17 ll:lxc6 enough for approximate equality, but .l:.xd2, with equality, is also interest it appears more interesting to play ing. 74 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 6.3 6 ••.lt:J c6 7 i.e3(D) 5 f4 (D) White's piece deployment was pro This is the most popular and prom posed by Boleslavsky: the e5-point ising move. receives pawn support, while d4 is S •••cS 6 lt:Jf3 protected by pieces. Black has several The pawn exchange 6 dxc5 assists possibilities to seek counterplay. We Black's development: 6 ...lt:Jc6 7 a3 (7 consider the following: lt:Jf3 does not allow White to play 6.3.1: 7 •••cxd4 8 lt:Jxd4i.cS 74 'ii'g4, and 7 i.d3 is met by 7 ...lt:Jx c5) 6.3.2: 7 •••cxd4 8 lt:Jxd4'iib6 76 7 ... i.xc58 'it'g4 0-0 9 i.d3(9 lt:Jf3can 6.3.3: 7 •••i.e7 78 be met by the solid 9 ...f5 10 'ii'h3i.e7 or 9 ...'it'b6 !? 10 lt:Jd1 a5, withthe ini 6.3.1 tiative) and now 9 ...'it'e7 !? 10 i.d2 f6 7 •••cxd4 8 lt:Jxd4 i.cS 11 'ili'h4 h6 12 exf6 lt:Jxf6 13 0-0-0 e5 Now the pieces come into close 14 fxe5 lt:Jxe5 15 lt:Jf3 lt:Jxd3+ 16 contact, and pawn-play takes a back cxd3 b5 (an improvement over the seat. century older Spielmann-Alapin, Mu 9 'it'd2 nich 1909) 17 l:.he1 'it'b7 gave Black Other moves give White little hope the initiative in Short-Morozevich, of an advantage: Reggio Emilia 2010. 9 ...i.xgl !? 10 a) 9 i.b5can be met by 9 ...'it'c7 10 'ili'h3h6 11 l:.xg1 lt:Jc5is worth consid 1i'd2 (10 0-0 a6) 10... a6 or 9 ...0-0 !? 10 ering too, while there is another good 'ili'd2 lt:Jxd4 11 i.xd4 a6. historical example: 9 ...f5 10 'ii'h3 i.b6 b) 9 i.e2'ii b6 10 lt:Ja4'ili'a5+ 11 c3 (10... i.e7 !?) 11 g4?! lt:Jc5 12 gxf5 (ll lt:Jc3invites a repetition) 1 l...lt:Jxd4 lt:Jxd3+ 13 'it'xd3 :txf5 and Black had 12 i.xd4 (12 lt:Jxc5 lt:Jxe2 13 'ili'xe2 the advantage in the game Tartakower lt:Jxc5 14 a4)b4 'ii' 12... i.xd4 13 'it'xd4 P.Johner, Nuremberg 1906. b6 with equal chances. STEINITZ VARIATION 75 c) 9 a3 'ii'b6 10 lt:Ja4 (after 10 d) 10 'ii'f2!? a6 11 .i.e2 (11 0-0-0 lt:Jcb5lt:Jxd4 11 .i.xd40-0, 12 b4.i.xd4 transposes to note 'd' to White's 11th 13 'ii'xd4 a5 leads to equality, while in move; 11 .i.d3?! is poor in view of the case of 12 .i.xc5 'ii'xc5!? 13 .i.e2 11...'ii h6, while 11 lt:Jxc6 .i.xe3 12 f6 Black takes over the initiative) lt:Jxd8 .i.xf2+ 13 ..t.>xf2 l:.xd8 leads to 10 ...'ii' a5+ 11 c3 (or 11 b4 'ii'xa4 12 a level position) ll...lt:Jxd4 12 .i.xd4 .i.b5 .i.xd4 13 .i.xa4 .i.xe3) ll....i.xd4 'ii'c7 13 0-0 b5. 12 .i.xd4lt:Jxd4 13 'ii'xd4 (13 b4lt:Jf3+) After the text-move (10 0-0-0), an 13... 0-0 !? (13... b6 is possible too) 14 interesting battle lies ahead: White re .i.d3b6 leads to equality. tains control of the centre, and both 9 ...0-0 (D) players will attack the enemy king. 10... a6 This is the standard way to seek counterplay: Black plans to exchange on d4 and then advance his b-pawn. Zviagintsev's lO ....i.xd4 11 .i.xd4 'ii'a5 !? is well worthconsidering: Black avoids spendinga tempo on ...a6, seek ing to act in a more economical way. Then: a) After 12 .i.e3 l:.b8 13 ..t.>bl b5 14 lt:Je2 b4! (exchanging queens with 14 ...'ii' xd2?! 15 l:.xd2is not in Black's interest) 15 lt:Jd4 lt:Jxd4 16'ii'xd4 .i.a6 17 f5 l:.fc8 18 fxe6 fxe6 an unclearpo Now White's decision about where sition arose in Svidler-Zviagintsev, to castle will define the nature of the Moscow 2010. middlegame struggle. b) 12 h4 l:.b8 13 l:.h3 b5 led to an 10 0-0-0 even sharperbattle in Shirov-Grachev, This is theusual choice. Afterother Lublin 201 1: 14 f5 ! (White is willing moves, Black doesn't runinto particu to make major sacrifices to break lar difficulties: through to the black king, but it is only a) 10 h2 a6 11 0-0 lt:Jxd4 12 i.xd4 enough to draw) 14 ...lt:Jxd4 (14 ... b4 15 'iib6 13 .i.xc5 lt:Jxc5 (13... 'ii'xc 5+!?) f6 lt:Jxd4 may be more accurate) 15 f6 14 'ii'd4 .i.d7. b4 16 'ii'g5 lt:Jf5 17 .i.d3 h6 18 .i.xf5 ! b) The immediate 10 lt:Jce2 is pre hxg5 19 hxg5 bxc3! and the game mature due to 10... 'ii' e7 and ll...f6. ended with perpetual check. c) 10 g3!? (reserving the e2-square c) 12 �bl l:.b8 13 lt:Jb5 !? appears for the c3-knight) 10... a6 11 .i.g2 (11 tame by comparison withthe lines we lt:Jce2'iih 6) ll...lt:Jxd4 12 .i.xd4.i.xd4 have just seen, but might promise a lit 13 'ii'xd4 b5 14 0-0 l:.b8. tle more. 13... 'ii' xd2 14 l:.xd2 a6 15 7'6 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK Q:)d6 lLlxd4 16 :xd4 f6 17 exf6 lbxf6 13 llhfl ltJa5 is also unclear, Hou I K .td3! (18 lbxc8 .l:.fxc8 permits Yifan-Nepomniashchy, Wijk aan Zee Bluck easier equality, Zelcic-Zviagin 2008. tsev, Rijeka 2010) 18... b5 (18... .ltd7 13••• .t b7 14 .l:.hgl :c8 15 .l:.g3:es 19 c4) 19lbxc8.l:.fxc8 20 a4 looks like Both sides have chances, Nijboer tedious prose, in which Black must Glek, French Team Ch 2003. (alas !) defend himself in a slightly worse ending. 6.3.2 ll lbb3 7••• cxd4 8 ltJxd4 'ii'b6 (D) This move leads to the most compli cated struggle. However, other moves also have their points of interest: a) 11 ..ti>bl lbxd4 12 .ltxd4 b5 13 'ii'e3 'ilc7 14 .td3.txd4 15 'ii'xd4 .l:.b8 gives Black counterplay. b) 11 lbce2 lDa5 !? (ll...'ii'e7 12 tiJb3 .txe3 13 'ii'xe3 f6 is another pos sibility) 12 ltJg3 (12 b3 'ii'b6) 12... b5 13 b3 .l:.b8 and Black holds the initia tive. c) 11 h4 ltJxd4 12 .txd4 b5 13 :h3 (13 h5 b4 14 ltJa4 .txd4 15 'ifxd4 'ii'a5) 13... b4 14 ltJa4 .txd4 15 'ii'xd4 a5 16 .tb5 (16 h5 .ta6and 16 c4 .tb7 Black is willing to complicate the are also OK for Black) 16... :b8 17 game immediately. .td3 tiJb6 (l7... .tb7 !?) 18 ltJc5 ltJd7 91i'd2 is equal. To keep the initiative, White needs d) 11 'iff2 (planning an advanta to sacrificethe pawn. We already know geous regrouping by .td3 and ltJce2) from Section 6.3.1 that 9 .te2 .tc5 and ll....txd4 (ll...tiJxd4 12 .txd4 b6!?, 9 a3 .tc5 are safe for Black, which with the idea 13 .td3?! f6 !, also de leaves us with just a few other continu serves attention) 12 .txd4 b5 13 .te3 ations that we need to know about: (or 13 .td3b4 14 ltJe2a5) 13... 'ii' a5 !? a) 9 lba4 'ii'a5+ and now 10 ltJc3 14'1t>bl b4 15ltJe2 'ii'c7 16ltJd4 ltJxd4 maintains equality, while White should 17 .txd4 a5 is unclear, Szelag-Lamp avoid 10 c3? ltJxd4. recht, Germany (team event) 2007/8. b) 9 .l:.bl?! .tc5 10 ltJa4 1i'a5+ 11 ll ••• .tb4 12 .td3 c3 .txd4! 12 .txd4 ltJxd4 13 'it'xd4 After 12 a3 .te7 13 .td3b5 the a3- (13 b4 tiJf3+) 13... b6 gives Black the pawn is a target for Black's counterat initiative. tack. c) 9 ltJcb5 a6 (9 ....tc5 !? canalso be 12••• b5 13 g4 tried) 10 ltJf5 .tc5 11 tiJbd6+ 'iftf8 12 STEIN/1Z VA RIA TION 77 'ii'h5 lt::ld8 13 lt::lxg7 �xe3 14 lt::lxe6+ (or 14 'ii'h6 rj;e7 15 lt::lgf5+) 14 .. .fxe6 15 'ii'h6+ with a draw. 9 ...'ii'x b2 10 l:.b1 'ii'a3 11 �b5 This more attractive than 11 lt::ldb5 'iia5 12 lt::lxd5 'ii'xd2+ 13 �xd2 exd5 14 lt::lc7+ �d8 15 lt::lxa8 b6 or 11 l:.b3 'ii'a5 12 �b5 "ikc7. White has also tried 11 lt::lcb5 'ii'xa2 12 l:.b3, but after 12... 'ii' al+ 13 rj;e2 l:.b8 (13... rj;d8 !?) 14 lt::lc7+ rj;d8 15 lt::ldxe6+ fxe6 16 lt::lxe6+ his attack is only enough for a draw, Reyhan-Bakr Jwan, Izmir 2007. ll ... lt::lxd4 12 �xd4 a6!? Black has no choice as 14 ...'ii'a5 ?? This is an interesting alternative to fails to 15 �b6. 12... �b4 13 l:.b3 'iia5,which has been 15 l:.xb7'ii' h4+!? more extensively examined in prac It is usefulto divertthe white bishop tice. from the centre. 13 �xd7+ 16 �f2 After the immediate 13 l:.b3 'fie7, 16 g3 'ii'h3 is unclear, and 16 'fif2 is White can offera piece sacrificeby 14 answered by 16... �e7 , when 17 'ii'xh4 �a4 ( 14 �xd7+ can now l>eanswered �xh4+ 18 �d2 �d8 19 l:.hb1 �c6 20 by 14 ...'ii' xd7, while 14 �d3 permits l:.b8 l:.xb8 21 l:.xb8 0-0 was level in 14 ...'ifh4+, and White should defi Shirov-Morozevich, Biel 201 1. nitely avoid 14 0-0? axb5 15 lt::lxb5 16••• 'ii' d8 17 �b6 'iid8 16 'iic3 'ii'a5 17 lt::lc7+ �d8 18 White cannot make progress after lt::lxa8 'ii'xa8 19 f5 b6, as in Chepa 17 0-0 'it'c8 18 l:.b3 (18 l:.fb1 �c5) rinov-Vallejo Pons, Dresden Olym 18... 'ii' c4. piad 2008),when the obliging 14 ...b5 ?! 17••• "ikc8 18 l:.c7 'ii'd8! 15 �xb5 axb5 16 lt::lxb5 'ii'd8 17 'ii'c3 Black is perilously close to the 'ii'a5 18lt::lc7+ �d8 19lt::lxa8 'ii'xa8 20 abyss, but his resources appear suffi 0-0 'ii'a4 was unclearin Topalov-Naka cient. Now: mura, AmberRapid, Monte Carlo20 1 1. a) The careless 19 0-0? l:.a7 20 Black should consider declining the �xa7 'ii'xc7 21 �d4 �c5 leads to sacrifice with the calm 14 ...'it'd8, which hardship for White. looks good for him. b) 19 "ikd4and here: 13••• �xd7 (D) b1) 19... �a3 is an interesting idea, 14 l:.b3 although in the variation 20 lt::lb1 �e7 The weaker 14 l:txb7 can be met by 21 c4! l:.c8 22 l:.b7 �b4+ 23 'iii>f2 14... �b4. "ikxb6 24 l:.xb6 �c5 25 l:.dl! Black 14 •••'ii' e7 stands slightly worse. 78 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK b2) After 19 ....:tc8 it is more diffi tlJe2'ilb6 look even less attractive for cult for White to prove an advantage: White. 20 .:tc6'ili'h4+ 21 g3 'iie7 and 20 .:ta7 8 ... 0-0 9 i..e2 'ii'e7!? both yield unclear prospects. The plan with queenside castling is less effective: 6.3.3 a) The immediate 9 0-0-0?! allows 7 ...i..e 7 (D) Black to begin a very promising attack on the white king by 9 ...c4! 10�bl (or 10 f5 b5 11 fxe6 fxe6 12 tlJxb5 .:tb8 13 tlJd6 i..xd6 14 exd6 tlJf6, Szelag M.Gurevich, Warsaw 2007) 10 ...b5 (10... .:tb8 !?) 11 tlJxb5 .:tb8 12 tlJd6 i..xd6 13 exd6 tlJf6 14 'ii'el 'ii'xd6 15 i.e1 i..d7 16 tlJe5 tlJb4 17 a3 tlJxc2!, as in M.Petrov-A.David, Kavala 2008. b) After 9 dxc5 i..xc5 (9 ... tlJxc5 !? 10 0-0-0 b6) 10 0-0-0 'iia5, White should avoid II tlJd4?! i..xd4 12 i..xd4 .l:.b8 as it leaves Black a tempo up in comparison with Zviagintsev's line in Section 6.3.1 (note to Black's lOth This somewhat nonchalant-looking move), but 11 i..xc5 ! tlJxc5 leads to move has recently become rather fash sharp play with chances for both sides. ionable. Black has no objection to the For example: 12 h4 (12 �bl i..d7) bishop reaching c5 in two moves (after 12... .:tb8 ! 13 'ii'e3 (13 h5 b5) 13... i.. d7 8 dxc5 i..xc5), given that the white 14 h5 .:tfc8 15 h6 g6 16 �bl tlJb4! 17 knight remains on f3 rather than being a3 tlJxc2 18 �xc2 b5 19 .:td4 tlJe4 centralized on d4. gives Black the initiative, Kurnosov 8 'ii'd2 Kotsur, Moscow 201 1. The attempt to economize on the c) With the text-move, White pre queen move by 8 i..e2 0-0 9 0-0 gives pares to castle kingside. A more active Black a good game after 9 ...f6 !? 10 bishop development by 9 i..d3 again exf6 tlJxf6 11 �h1 (11 tlJe5 tlJxd4 12 allows an immediate assault upon the i..xd4 cxd4 13 'ii'xd4 tlJd7 led to equal centre: 9 ...f6 (9 ...a6 !? 10 0-0 f6) 10 ity in Pacher-Prusikin, Chur 2010) exf6 i..xf6 11 i..e2 cxd4 12 tlJxd4 ll...i..d6!? (ll...tlJe4 is equal) 12 g3 i..xd4 13 i..xd4 e5 with an equal posi (12 dxc5 tlJg4) 12 ...cxd4 13 i..xd4 (13 tion, Efimenko-Goloshchapov, Bun tlJxd4 e5) 13... tlJxd4 14 'ii'xd4 a6, as desliga 200617. in Kokarev-Maslak, Serpukhov 2008. d) It remains to add that the tempo The variations 8 g3 0-0 9 i..g2?! (9 rizing move 9 a3 makes no particular 'iid2 .:tb8!?) 9 ...b5, 8 i..d3 'ii'b6 and 8 sense: 9 ...a6 10 i..e2 (10 dxc5 can be STEINITZ VA RIATION 79 answered by 10... .txc5 or 10... ll:lxc5) b) 10 ...f5 !? 11 exf6 (11 ll:ld1 cxd4 10 ...b5 11 0-0 .i.b7 is unclear, while 12 ll:lxd4 ll:lxd4 13 .i.xd4 ll:lc5 is un Black can also play by analogy with clear) 11...ll:lxf6 12 .i.b5 (12 �h1 our main line: 9 ...b6 !? 10 .i.d3 f6 11 .i.b7) 12... 'ii' c7 with chances for both exf6 ll:lxf6 with equality, Macieja sides, who each have their trumps in Morozevich, St Petersburg 1997. the forthcoming battle. 9 ...b6 !? (D) c) 10 ....tb7 11 ll:ld1 (11 l:.ad1 f5 !?) It is this move that gives 7 ....te7 in 11.. .cxd4 12 ll:lxd4 transposes to the dependent importance. Instead 9 ...a6 main line below. 10 0-0 b5 leads to a more standard for The immediate knight retreatto d 1 mation. somewhat restricts Black's possibili ties - but that is all. 10... cxd4 OtherwiseWhite will play 11 c3. 11 ll:lxd4 .i.b7 (D) 10 ll:ldl - It is still not safe for White to play 10 0-0-0?! c4, while 10 0-0 gives Black a wider choice: a) 10... f6 11 dxc5 (or 11 ll:ld1?! 12 0-0 cxd4 12 ll:lxd4 ll:lxd4 13 .i.xd4 fxe5) Now 12... ll:lc5 13 ll:lf2 'it'd7 led to 11...ll:lxc5 (not 11...bxc5? 12 ll:lxd5, approximate equality in Koepke-Diz while 11...fxe5 12 ll:lxd5 .i.xc5 13 dar,Austrian Team Ch 2010/11, while l:.ad1 offers White the initiative) 12 Black could also consider 12 ...ll:lxd4 !? .i.b5 .i.b7 13 exf6 .i.xf6 14 .i.xc6 13 .i.xd4ll:lb8 14 ll:le3ll:lc6 15 c3 l:.c8 .i.xc6 15 .i.d4 leaves White's position 16 .i.b5ll:lxd4, as in Zherebukh-Sethu preferable (T.Kosintseva). raman, Kirishi 2010. 7 Classical French 1 e4 e6 2 d4 dS 3 liJc3 liJf6 4 i.gSi.e7 Black unpins his knight, giving White little choice but to advance the e-pawn, since 5 i.d3? fails to 5 ...dxe4 6liJxe4 liJxe4 7 i.xe7 liJxf2. 5 e5 There are two minor alternatives. Firstly, 5 exd5 exd5 (5 ... liJxd5 !? is pos sible too) transposes to the Exchange Variation (Section 3.3). Anderssen's 5 i.xf6 i.xf6 6 liJf3 promises nothing. After 6 ...c5 7 i.b5+ (7 exd5 0-0!?) 7 ...i.d7 !? 8 exd5 (8 i.xd7+ liJxd7 9 exd5 cxd4 10 liJxd4 liJb6) 8 ...i.xb5 9 and to carry out the freeing move liJxb5 0-0 White cannot hope for an ...f6. advantage, while 6 ...0-0 !? looks even • In Section 7.1 we discuss alterna more promising for Black; he meets 7 tives to 7 f4. None of them poses 'ii'd2with 7 ...c5, while after7 e5 i.e7 8 any real danger to Black. i.d3c5 9 h4cxd4! 10 i.xh7+�xh7 11 • Section 7.2 is devoted to the main liJg5+ �h6 he parries White's threats continuation, 7 f4 . WhileWhite can without great difficulty. choose to castle on either wing, the 5 •••liJfd7 (D) kingside offers him better chances Now 6 i.e3 makes no sense, while of maintaining a slight edge. the gambit 6 h4!? is discussed at the end of the chapter in Section 7.3. 7.1 The main line is 6 i.xe7 'ii'xe7. 6 i.xe7 'ii'xe7 (D) This leads to a position that is some This is the basic position for the what similar to the Steinitz Variation Classical French. The first point to (Chapter 6), but the exchange of the note is that Black will not be able to dark-squared bishops changes mat play 7 ...c5 next move in view of the un ters significantly.From a good vs bad pleasant reply 8 liJb5 (a consequence bishop perspective, it appears to ben of the exchange of dark-squared bish efit White, but on the other hand ops). So, for one move at least, White Black is immediately ready to castle does not have to worry about an attack ClASSICAL FRENCH 81 10 'ii'e2 is less accurate because af ter 10... ltJxc5 he has little choice but to play 11 0-0 in any case, as 11 0-0-0?! a6 gives Black the initiative. Black can also play the unclear 10... f6 !? 11 exf6 ltJxf6 12 0-0-0 'ii'xc5. 10 .•• ltJxc5 11 l:te1 a6 Black takes control of the important b5-square and is ready for further ac tion with ...b5 and/or ...f6 . The game is approximately level. 7.1.2 on his pawn-centre, and so has a wide 7 'ii'd2 (D) choice of moves at this point. We ex amine the main line, 7 f4, in Section 7 .2. Here we discuss the following: 7.1.1: 7 ltJf3 81 7.1.2: 7 'ii'd2 81 7.1.3: 7 ltJbS 82 7.1.4: 7 'ii'hS 83 7.1.1 7ltJf3 White simply develops his pieces, intending �d3 and an exchange of pawns wlien Black eventually plays ...c5. 7 �d3 is a less accurate move order because Black can then con This move can transpose to Section sider playing 7 .. .'ii'b4 8 ltJe2'ikxb2 9 7.2.2 after 7 ...0-0 8 f4 c5 9 ltJf3 (or 9 0-0 a6. dxc5). Here we shall discuss it in con 7 .•. 0-0 8 �d3 c5 9 dxc5 nection with another idea. 9 ltJbS? is bad in view of 9 ...c4, 7 .•. 0-0 8 ltJd1?! while after 9 0-0 cxd4!? (9 ...ltJc6 is This attempt to maintain the pawn also possible) 10 ltJb5 (10 ltJxd4ltJc6) centre is artificialand unsuccessful. 10 ...ltJc6 11 l:tel f6 12 exf6 ltJxf6 13 8 ... f6 !? 'ii'e2 (or 13 ltJbxd4ltJxd4 14 ltJxd4e5) Black's position is already slightly 13 ...l:te8 White does not succeed in preferable; the only question is which keeping a grip on the e5-square, since sequence of moves is most profitable 14 ltJe5 is met by 14 ...a6 . for him. 9 ... ltJc6 10 0-0 9f4 82 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK It is entirely illogical to play 9 exf6 The queenside skirmish 8 a4 a6 9 tt::lxf6 10 tt::lf3 (or 10 i.d3 ttlc6),when a5 axb5 10 axb6 .l:.xal 11 'ifxa1 c6! both 10 ...c5 and 10 ...tt::l c6 are promis 12 'WaS 'ii'b4+ 13 c3 'ii'xb2 (13.. .'ili'a4 ing. also leads to equality) 14 ttle2 b4 15 9 •••c5 10 c3 cxd4 11 cxd4 fxeS 12 'ifxb8 0-0 must in the long run end in fxeS a draw. 12 dxe5 can beanswered by 12... g5, Other moves fail to derive much continuing to dismantle White's cen benefitfrom the knight manoeuvre: 8 tre. i.d3 a6 9 tt::lc3 tt::lc6 10 tt::lf3 'il'b4 and 12••• tt::l c6 13 h4 8 'it'g4 'il'b4+ 9 c3 (9 c;t>d1 ?! 0-0) Black threatened 13... 'ifh4+, and 9 ...'it'xb2 10.l:.d1 0-0 1li.d3(1 1 .:d2 White should not allow the obvious can lead to a repetition) 1l...a6 are exchange sacrifice 13 tt::lf3?!.l:.xf3 14 unclear, while 8 ttlf3 a6 9 tt::lc3 tt::lc6 gxf3 'ifh4+,as in Von Gottschall-Tar (9 ...ttl6d7 !? 10 i.d3 c5) 10 'il'd2 f6 rasch, Frankfurt 1887. leads to equal chances. 13••• tt::l b6 14 tt::lf3 i.d7 8 .•.a6 9 ttla3 Black has the initiative. White has reached his goal, but the knight moves have also cost him time. 7.1.3 9 ...f6 !? 7 tt::lbS (D) This attack on the spearhead of White's pawn-centre looks more ef fective here than the standard9 ...c5, as White has already invested consider able resources in supporting his d4- pawn. 10 i.d3 The exchange 10 exf6 gxf6 (or 10 .. .'ii'xf6) suits Black fine, and 10 tt::lf3 is rather well met by 10... tt::l c6. After 10 f4, besides transposing to our main line by 10 ...0-0 11 ttlf3 fxe5 12 fxe5 c5 13 i.d3, Black can also initi- ate complications with 1 0 ...fxe5 11 'ii'h5+ ( 11 fxe5?! 'ii'h4+) 11... �d8 fol- This is known as the Alapin Varia lowed by 12... ttla4. tion. By threatening to invade on c7, 10... 0-0 White gains a tempo for the move c3. Here the gambit line 10 ...fxe5 11 Several other forms of this idea are 'ii'h5+ 11 f4 fxe5 12 fxe5 c5 13 lt:Jf3 lt:Jc6 14 lt:Jgxe6 llf7) 12... f6 13 exf6 lt:Jxf6 14 0-0 led to an openingcatastrophe for White 14 lt:Jc2 cxd4 (14... i.d7 !? 15 0-0 in Duras-Spielmann, San Sebastian i.e8) 15 cxd4 lt:Jb4 16 lt:Jxb4 'ii'xb4+ 1911. His attack must be built on a 17 'ii'd2 1i'xd2+ 18 �xd2 lt:Jc4+ leads more reliable foundation. to an equal ending. 14 ••• cxd4 15 cxd4 lt:Jb4 The game is approximately level. 7.1.4 7 'ii'h5 White places his queen aggressively, but greatly weakens his control of the centre. After the analogous move 7 'ii'g4 !?, the play can take on an almost forced character: 7 ...0-0 8 lt:Jf3 (8 i.d3 may be met by 8 ...c5 9lt:Jf3 or 8 ...f5 !? 9 exf6 lt:Jxf6 10 'li'h4 h6) 8 ...c5 9 i.d3 and now 9 ...cxd4 10 i.xh7+ (10 lt:Jb5 gives Black a choice between 10 .. .f5 8 •.•c5 9lt:Jf3 II 'ii'g5 Wc5 and 10 ...f6 11 Wh4h6 12 9 i.d3 g6 10 'ii'h6 cxd4 (10... f6 !? 0-0 lt:Jc6 13 exf6 Wxf6, with equal 11 lt:Jb5 lt:Jc6is possible too) 11 lt:Jb5 play) 10... �xh7 11 •h5+ �g8 12 f6 (or 1l...lt:Jc6 12 lt:Jf3 f6) again lt:Jg5 'ii'xg5 13 'ii'xg5 dxc3 14 bxc3 promises White nothing good. The lt:Jc6 15 f4 f6 leads to a double-edged line 9 0-0-0!? cxd4 (9 ...lt:Jc6 10 dxc5) position with unbalanced material. If 10 lt:Jb5 lt:Jc6 might appear to offer he wishes, Black can avoid these com White more prospects, although in plications by continuing 9 ...h6 10 0-0 this case too Black stands somewhat (10 0-0-0?! lt:Jc6 11 llhe1 c4 12 i.fl better. b5 gives Black the initiative) 10 ...lt:Jc6 9 ••• cxd4 10 lt:Jxd4 lt:Jc6 11 0-0-0 f6 or 9 ...f6 10exf6 (10'ifh4 h6) 10... lt:Jxf6 Now it becomes obvious that the 11 'ifh4 lt:Jc6 with a level game. journey of White's queen to h5 was 7 ... 0-0 8 f4 (D) simply a waste of time. The same position may be achieved 12 exf6 'ii'xf6 13 lt:Jde2lt:Jb6 via the move-order 7 f4 0-0 8 Wh5. Black has the initiative, Vasvari The adventurous 8lt:Jf3?! (8 i.d3?! Suez Panama, Gibraltar 2008. g6 9 'ii'h6 c5 10 lt:Jf3is the same) 8 ...c5 9 i.d3 (9 dxc5 is more circumspect, 7.2 but inconsistent with White's last few 6 i.xe7 'ii'xe7 7 f4 (D) moves) 9 ...g6 10 'ii'h6 cxd4 11 lt:Jb5 This is the main continuation. First lt:Jc6 12 lt:Jg5 (12lt:Jc7llb8 13 lt:Jg5 f6 of all White fortifies his centre. 84 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK c) The Alapin-type9liJ b5 is a more serious attempt here, although it only leads to unclear play after9 ...lbc6 10 c3 f6ll h4 !?(ll.i.d3 a6 12liJd6 cxd4 13 cxd4 g5!? - Stetsko) ll...liJb6 or 9 ...cxd 4!? (Bronstein) 10 lbc7 lbxe5 11 lbxa8 lbxf3+ 12 'ii'xf3.i.d7 . 7.2.1 9 .i.d3 (D) 7 .•.0-0 8 liJf3 An idea akin to Alapin's from Sec tion 7 .1.3 is unsuccessful here: 8 'ii'd2 c5 9 lbb5? a6 10 liJd6 cxd4 11 liJf3 lbc6 12 0-0-0 (12 .i.d3 is met by l2... f6 and l2 liJxd4 with 12... liJdxe5 13 fxe5 'ii'h4+) l2... f6, with an advan tage for Black. 8 . .. c5 Now the play splits into two main directions, depending on where White wishes to castle: 9 .i.d3 followed by 9 .•.f6 0-0 or 9 'ii'd2, preparing to castle The most logical move: Black par queenside: ries the threat of .i.xh7+ and attacks 7.2.1: 9 .td3 84 White's pawn-centre. 7.2.2: 91i'd2 85 9 ...cxd4 is condemned by opening theory due to 10 .ixh7+, but is not so Other moves: bad as it seems at first glance; e.g., a) The preliminary pawn exchange IO.. .<�h8 llliJg5g6 12 'ii'xd4 �g7 13 9 dxc5 lbc6changes nothing: 10 'ii'd2 h4 lbc6 14 'ii'd2 f6 15 'ii'd3 liJdxe5. or 10 .i.d3f6 (or 10 ...lbxc5 11 0-0 h6) Nevertheless it is better to refrainfrom will lead to our main lines. it. On the other hand, 9 ...h6 10 0-0 (10 b) 9 g3 lbc6 10 'ii'd2 (10 .tg2?! dxc5 lbc6 11 'ii'd2 liJxc5) IO... lbc6 11 cxd4 II lbxd4 'ii'b4) IO... a6 II .tg2 dxc5 lbxc5 12 Wd2 l:r.d8 looks like an b5 (ll...cxd4 I2liJe2d3 13 cxd3 'ii'b4 acceptable alternative. is equal) 12 0-0 .i.b7 (or l2... liJb6) is 10 exf6 'ii'xf6 11 g3 of independent importance,but Black's II lbg5 Wxf4 12 .i.xh7+ �h8 13 position is no worse. Wh5 liJf6 does not end well for White, CLASSICAL FRENCH 85 so he must defend the f4-pawn. How 16 f5 may be parried by 16... lbxd3 ever, the move g3 seriously weakens 17 "ikxd3 lbb4 18 "ikd2 exf5. the light squares and this helps Black 16••• :cs create counterplay. Black succeeds in maintaining the ll.•. lbc6 12 dxc5 lbxc5 dynamic equilibrium as White's con The activity of Black's pieces com trol of the centre is not solid enough. pensates for the defects of his pawn In order to secure an advantage, White structure. His light-squared bishop needs to make his c3-knight more ac can be brought into play via the ma tive, but it is not simple to do so. noeuvre ....i.d7-e8 or after the central pawn-break ...e5 . 7.2.2 13 0-0 9_.d2 (D) 13 lbg5 amounts to a loss of time, since there is no good reason to move the knight away from the e5-square: 13... g6 14 0-0 (14 h4?! h6 15 lbf3 e5 gives Black the initiative, while 14 lbf3 can be met by 14... e5 !? 15 lbxd5 "ikg7 16 .i.c4 �h8) 14 ...lbd4 15 'ifd2 .i.d7 with equal chances. 13 'ii'd2 can also be answeredwith 13 ...e5 !? (13... .i.d7 maintains the ten sion) 14 lbxd5 (14 0-0-0 lbxd3+ 15 'ifxd3 d4 16 lbe4 'fi'h6) 14... lbxd3+ 15 'it'xd3 'ii'f5, although here Black is only seeking equality: both 16 lbxe5 lbxe5 17 'ii'xf5 .i.xf5 18 lbe7+ �h8 As in many other lines of the French 19 fxe5 .i.xc2 and 16 0-0 "ikxd3 17 Defence, White's plan of queenside cxd3 exf4 18 lbxf4 .i.g4 19 lbg5 (19 castling sharpensthe battle and pushes �g2 l:tae8) 19... h6 20 lbge6.i.xe6 21 purely positional factors into the back lbxe6 llxfl+ 22 �xfl (22 l:txfl lle8) ground. 22 ...l:te8 give him enough compensa 9 •••lbc6 10 dxc5 tion for the pawn. This is not an obligatory exchange, Finally, 13 'ii'e2 .i.d7 14 0-0-0 (14 but there is little reason to avoid it. Af lbg5 lbxd3+ 15 'W'xd3 'ii'f5 16 'ii'xf5 ter 10 0-0-0 Black can simply play l:txf5 17 0-0-0 d4 18 lbce4 h6 19 lDf3 10 ...a6, when White has nothing better e5 is equal) 14 ....i.e8 15 libel (15 than 11 dxc5. But he can also reply lbg5?! lbxd3+ 16 'ifxd3.i.g6) 15... .i.h5 10 ...c4 !?, which gives him rather seri is quite satisfactory for Black. ous counterplay; for example: 13••• a6 14 'ii'd2 .i.d7 15 l:tae1 .i.e8 a) 11 h4 a6 12 h5 b5 13 h6 g6, and 16 lbe5 Black's threats come first. 86 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK b) 11 tt::lb5 tt::lb6 12 tt::ld6 .l:r.b8 fol equality in Dolmatov-Bareev, Sochi lowed by 13... i.d7 and 14 ...tt::l c8. 1988) 13... tt::l xd3+ 14 cxd3 (14 'ifxd3 c) 11 g4!? a6 12 f5 b5 13 �b1 (13 h6 is unclear) 14 ...f6 15 �b1 (15 tt::le2 'iff4 f6 and 13 i.g2b4 14 tt::la4 c3 also fxe5 16 tt::lxe5 tt::lxe5 17 fixeS 'ii'c5+ illustrate Black's ideas) 13... b4 14 tt::la4 18 �b1 .l:r.f5) 15 ...fxe5 16 tt::lxe5 d4 a5 15 'iff4 f6 with a double-edged with unclearplay . game. The text-move is more cunning, as d) 11 f5 .l:r.b8 12 fxe6 (Whiteshould it avoids for the time being counter avoid both 12 'ii'g5?! f6 and 12 h4?! play of the type we have just seen in b5, when Black has the initiative) line 'b'. 12 ...fxe6 13tt::l b5 (13 'ii'g5 b5) 13 ...tt::l b6 12•.• b5 14 i.e2 i.d7 with equal chances. 12... .l:r.d8 13 tt::le2 (not 13 i.d3? d4, 10 ••.tt::l xc5 11 0-0-0 a6 (D) but the knight exchange 13 tt::ld4!? tt::lxd4 14 .l:r.xd4 is unclear) 13... i.d7 14 tt::led4 .l:r.ac8 deserves attention, as tried in the game Aseev-Bareev, Lvov Zonal 1990. 13 �bl Again White has a choice, but he al ready runs the riskof finding himself on the defending side: a) 13 f5?! (premature) 13... �a7 ! 14 tt::ld4 (14 'ii'g5 h6 and 14 'iVf4exf5 15 tt::lxd5 i.e6 are also pleasant for Black) 14... tt::l xd4 15 l:lxd4 (or 15 'ii'xd4 tt::ld7 16 'ii'f4 'it'b8 17 .l:r.e1 f6) 15... exf5 16 tt::lxd5 tt::le6 (16... .l:r.e8 !?) 12 �e3 17 .l:r.d2 �xe3 18 tt::lxe3 tt::lc5, Wang 12 i.d3 is more straightforward: Hao-Riazantsev, Dubai 2005. a) 12... b5 13 'iVf2 (threatening to b) 13 i.d3 tt::lxd3+ 14 cxd3?! (this play i.xh7+; 13 'ife3 transposes to is dubious so White should try 14 note 'b' to White's 13th move) 13... f6 .l:r.xd3!? or the unclear 14 'ii'xd3 b4 15 (both 13... tt::l xd3+ and 13... h6 are pos tt::la4 .l:r.b8) 14... i.b7 15 tt::le2 (not 15 sible) 14 exf6 .l:r.xf6 15 'ii'e3 (after 15 tt::ld4?? 'ii'c5, while 15 d4 tt::la5 16 .l:r.he1 'ii'f8 !? 16 g3 b4 Black seizes the 'ii'd3 i.c6 gives Black the initiative) initiative) 15... b4 (or 15... tt::l xd3+!? 16 15 ...d4 ! 16 tt::lexd4 tt::lb4, Almasi-Glei .l:r.xd3 'fic7 17 g3 i.d7) 16 tt::le2 a5 17 zerov, Geneva 2004. i.b5 i.d7 18 .l:r.he1 a4 is unclear, c) 13 tt::le2 b4 14 tt::led4 tt::lxd4 15 Motylev-Ulybin, Tomsk 2004. tt::lxd4 'flc7 and Black can be happy, b) 12... i.d7 !? 13 'ife3 (13 tt::le2 Goloshchapov-Govedarica, Yugoslav .l:r.ac8 14 �b1 tt::lxd3 15 cxd3 f6 led to Team Ch 2000. ClASSICAL FRENCH 87 13••• b4 14 tt:Je2aS 15 tt:Jed4 practical choice, and fruitful ground The pawn-break 15 f5 is still not ef for serious investigation. White can fective: 15... exf5 (or 15... ti:Je 4!? 16 f6 reply: gxf6 17 exf6 1Wxf6 18 ti:Jg3 a4) 16 7.3.1: 7 .ie3 87 l:.xd5 tt:Je4, Martin Gonza1ez-F1uvia 7.3.2: 7 .i.xe7 88 Poyatos, Benasque 1999. 15••• tt:Jxd4 16 tt:Jxd4 'iic7 Another retreat, 7 .i.f4, is very Black is no worse. rarely seen in practice; then 7 ...c5 8 'iig4 (8 dxc5 tt:Jc6 9 'ii'g4 ti:Jdxe5 10 7.3 1Wxg7ti:Jg6) 8 ...g6 9 ti:Jf3ti:Jc6 10 dxc5 6h4 a6 11 0-0-0 tt:Jxc5 leads to unclear Known as the Alekhine-Chatard play. Attack, this gambit continuation pres 7 'it'h5 is much too artificial, and ents Black with an awkward choice: if after 7 ...a6 8 0-0-0 (Stetsko gives 8 he accepts the gift by 6 ....i.xg5 7 hxg5 .i.d3 c5 9 tt:Jxd5?! exd5 10 e6 tt:Je5, 'iixg5, he will be forced on the defen while 8 ti:Jf3 can be met by 8 ...c5 9 sive, and unable to generate active dxc5 ti:Jc6)... 8 c5 9 dxc5 ti:Jc6 10 f4 counterplay in the true spirit of the tt:Jxc5 White's pieces interact badly French Defence. In practice;Black has witheach other. tried several ways to decline thepawn, and the one on which I shall focus is 7.3.1 the simplest. 7 .i.e3 6 •••h6 (D) Now Black has time to attack the centre. 7 ••• c5 8 'ii"g4 g6 (D) For the time being Black retains his castling rights, although the variation 8 ...f�f8 !? 9 ti:Jf3 (9 f4 cxd4 10 .i.xd4 tt:Jc6 11 ti:Jf3 h5) 9 ...cxd4 10 .i.xd4 ti:Jc6 11 0-0-0 ti:Jxd4 12 l:.xd4 ( 12 'ii'xd4 a6) 12... .i.c5 13 l:.f4 .i.xf2 14 ti:Jd1 (Em.Lasker-Kipke, Berlin simul 1920) 14 ....ib6 !? 15 .i.d3 .i.c7 is also rather interesting for him. 9 ti:Jf3 9 .i.d3?! is well met by 9 ...cxd4, while an immediate kingside assault Opening theory disapproves of this by 9 h5 does not represent a danger to move, but more due to general consid Black in view of 9 ...cxd4 10 .i.xd4g5 erations than specific analysis. This 11 f4 ti:Jc6.White also achieves noth fact makes it an especially interesting ing by 9 f4 cxd4 (9 ...h5 !? 10 'it'g3ti:Jc6 88 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 11 tt:lf3 'ii'a5 is unclear) 10 ..txd4tt:lc6 lead to some significantdif ferences in 11 tt:lf3 'ii' a5. the variations and introduce new pos 9 dxc5 !? tt:lxe5 10 'ii'g3 appears sibilities for both players. strongest, as White opens lines in the 8f4 centre. A sample line is 10 ...tt:lbc6 11 It is much too optimistic for White ..tf4 (11 0-0-0 h5 12tt:lb5 0-0 13 .i.e2 to play 8 tt:lf3 0-0 9 g4 (trying to make 'ii'a5 is unclear) ll.....tf6 12 tt:lb5�f8. directuse of the move h4) 9 ...c5 10 g5 when White keeps some initiative in h5, as nothingcomes of White's attack. an unclear position. 8 'ii'g4 0-0 9 f4 (or 9 tt:lf3 c5 10 9 ...cxd4 10 .i.xd4 tt:lc6 11 .i.d3 dxc5 tt:lc6 11 'ii'g3 tt:lxc5, as in Sandu Or 11 0-0-0 tt:lxd4 (ll ...a6! ?) 12 Gleizerov, Bucharest 2008) 9 ...c5 10 l:f.xd4 .i.c5 13 l:.d2 'ii'a5, with good tt:lf3 ( 10 0-0-0 cxd4 11 tt:lb5 tt:lc6 12 counterplay for Black. tt:lf3 tt:lc5)10 ... tt:lc6 11 0-0-0 a6 leads ll... tt:lxd4 to a complicated game where it is not ll...a6 is also possible, since ..txg6 completely clear what the queen is do is not yet a threat. ing on g4. 12 'i'xd4 'ii'b6 13 tt:lb5 The variation 8 tt:lb5 tt:lb6deserves Now there is no need for Black to attention: get involved in complications like a) 9 a4 a6 10 a5 axb5 11 axb6 l:.xal 13... .i.c5 14 'ii'f4 .i.xf2+ 15 �e2 .i.c5, 12 'ii'xal c6 13 'ii'a8 'ii'M+ 14 c3 'ii'a4 since in the ending after 13... 1i'xd4 14 is equal, just as it is with the h-pawns tt:lfxd40-0 he stands at least no worse. unmoved. b) 9 c3 a6 10 tt:la3 c5 11 tt:lc2 (11 7.3.2 f4 tt:lc6 12 tt:lf3 0-0 13 ..td3 cxd4 14 7 .i.xe7 'ii'xe7 (D) cxd4 'ii'b4+ 15 'ii'd2tt:la4) 11...tt:lc6 12 We now have the standard main line tt:lf3 0-0 13 .i.d3 tt:ld7!? and Black in of the Classical French, but with the tends to attack White's centre with addition of h4 and ...h6. These moves ...f6. CLASSICAL FRENCH 89 c) 9 'ili'g4 0-0 (9 ...'ili'b4+ 10 c3 and 11 tt:'lb5 with 11...a6 12 tt:'ld6cxd4) 'ili'xb2is equal) 10 0-0-0 ( 10 l:h3f6 11 ll...cxd4 12 tt:'lxd4 fxe5 13 fxe5 tt:'lc6 tt:'lf3 tt:'lc6) 10... a6 11 tt:'lc3 c5 12 dxc5 (13... tt:'lxe5 !?) 14 I:el tt:'lxd4 15 'ili'xd4 (Mammadov-R.Bagirov, Azerbaijan 'ili'c5 with a good game for Black, Ch, Baku 201 1) and now Black should Abasov-Bajarani, Baku 201 1. play 12... tt:'l6d7 13 f4 tt:'lc6. 10••• tt:'lc6 (D) 8 •••0-0 9 tt:'lf3 c5 (D) This allows White to fortify his centre, but 10 ...cxd4 11 tt:'lc7tt:'lxe5 12 tt:'lxa8 tt:'lxf3+ offers White the new possibility of 13 gxf3 !? (the line 13 'ili'xf3'ilb4+ 14 �f2 .i.d7is still rather safe; for example, 15 'ilb3 'ii'd2+ 16 �g1 d3). 10 tt:'lb5!? Here this knightmove is somewhat stronger than in the standard Classi cal. On the other hand, the following continuations do not provide any ben efitfor White:· a) 10 dxc5 tt:'lc6 11 'ili'd2f6 12 exf6 11 c3 cxd4 12 cxd4 tt:'lb613 tt:'ld6 gives Black a choice between the White does not have to hurry with lines 12... tt:'lxf6 13 0-0-0 'ii'xc5 and this incursion; the line 13 'ili'd2.i.d7 14 12... 'ili'xf 6!? 13 g3 tt:'lxc5 14 0-0-0 tt:'le4, .i.e2 a6 15 tt:'ld6 l:ab8 is of approxi with equality. mately equal value. b) 10 'ili'd2 f6 !? (without delay; 13 ••• l:b8 14 'ii'd2 .i.d7 15 b4 a6 Stetsko's 10 ...tt:'lc6 11 0-0-0 f6 12 exf6 By playing ...tt:'lc8, Black will evict tt:'lxf6 is not bad either) 11 0-0-0 (11 the intruderfrom its advanced post on exf6 can be answered by 1l...tt:'lxf6 d6, with good chances of equality. Part 2: 1 d4· e6 1 d4 e6 (D) tt:lf3 f5 without needing to worry about these troublesome sidelines. Those who play the Queen's/Nimzo-Indian complex will find similar advantages, also provided of course that they are willing to play the French Defence. However, our aim here is to provide an independent repertoire based on l...e6, while noting that some readers may prefer to use only parts of this repertoire, woven together with other openings that they are happy to play. The best-known independent line after 1 d4 e6 2 c4 is the English De fence, 2 ...b6. However, we shall bor The firstpart of the book discussed row only one variation from it and a rather well-explored areaof opening follow other directions, with the fol theory - the French Defence. While lowing two positions as our founda some of the individual lines that we tion stones: examined may have had a somewhat innovative character, this was within 2 c4 ..tb4+ (D) the framework of a very sound and popularopening. In Part 2, the task of constructing an opening repertoire moves onto a more experimental plane. On a simple level, some practical advantages for Black of 1 d4 e6 are immediately clear. Such lines as 1 d4 tt:lf62 ..tg5(Trompowsky Attack) and 1 d4 f5 2 ..tg5 (or 2 tt:lc3) are immediately avoided, so, e.g., ad herents of the Dutch Defence may use this move-order as a way to reach their favourite opening after 2 c4 f5 or 2 PA RT 2: 1 d4 e6 91 The aim of the bishop check is to 2 c4 and 2 lbf3 (not counting 2 e4, of lure White into little-explored terri course) do not create serious opening tory. The play can either return to nor problems for Black. mal theoretical variations (normallyof the Nimzo-lndian or Bogo-Indian), or Let us summarize our coverage of 1 take an original direction. White needs d4 e6: to reckon with both possibilities, mak • 2 c4 ..i.b4+ 3 lbc3 (Chapter 8) is ing his decisions more difficult, both likely to be chosen by those who en practically and objectively. joy playing the white side of the Nimzo-Indian Defence. However, 2lDf3 c5 (D) he gets not a Nirnzo-lndian, but a significantly modified version, in which some standard ideas are un available to him. He must also be wary of Black transposing to a fa vourable form of Dutch Defence. • 2 c4 ..i.b4+ 3 lDd2 (Chapter 9) has much in common with the Bogo Indian line 1 d4 lDf62 c4 e6 3 lDf3 ..i.b4+ 4 lDbd2. • Chapter 10 deals with the most problematic variation forBlack af ter 2 c4 ..i.b4+, namely 3 .i.d2. He can choose to complete the transpo sition to a respectable branch of the Black strikes at the d4-pawn before Bogo-Indian Defence, or continue its neighbour has arrived on c4 to sup to pursue an independent path - port an advance to d5. The game can which is strategically riskier, but now move in a very different strategic also more interesting. direction from normal queen's pawn • The transposition to the Sicilian openings. White's best chance of ad Defence by 1 d4 e6 2 lDf3 c5 3 e4 vantage lies in 3 e4 or 3 c4, transpos cxd4 is covered in Chapter 11. How ing to lines of the Sicilian Defence or ever unlikely this sequence is to oc the English Opening respectively. We cur, it is obviously very important will be ready for these transpositions that we are fully ready for it. I pres but how many of our opponents will be, ent a simplifiedrepertoire based on given that they have already avoided the Sicilian Four Knights - a line e4 and c4 on moves 1 and 2? in which there is intricate piece play, making it difficultfor White It remains only to add that after 1 d4 to find the right moves if he is un e6 White's other continuations besides prepared. 92 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK • The line 2lbf3 c5 3 c4 (Chapter 12) to Black, but it needs to be taken se 3 ...cxd4 4 lbxd4 transposes to one riously. We shall reply with 3 ...d5, of the varieties of the Symmetrical reaching positions of the Queen's English with an early d4 advance by Gambit type, happy that White can White. After 4 ...lbf6 5 lbc3, we ex- not actively develop his queen's amine both 5 ...�b4 (usually trans- bishop. posing to a g3 Nimzo-Indian) and • Finally, in Chapter 14 we study 5 ...lbc6. some of the more interesting side • Chapter 13 is devoted to the move lines that arise when White chooses order 2 lbf3 c5 3 e3. This modest a rarer option on move 2 or 3, such and rather old-fashioned continua as the currentlyrather popular Lon tion should not present a great threat don System, with an early .i.f4. 8 The Nimzo-like 2 c4 ..tb4 + 3 ttJc3 1 d4 e6 2 c4 i.b4+ 3 tt::lc3 (D) without saying that White also has some additional possibilities, so both players need to be willing to enter in teresting and little-explored positions. Here is an overview of the lines in this chapter: 3 ••• c5 is covered as follows: o In the case of 4 dxc5 i.xc3+ (Sec tion 8.1) the game immediately takes an unusual direction. o 4 a3 i.xc3+ 5 bxc3 (Section 8.2) is analogous to the Samisch Nimzo Indian, but here Black can solve his opening problems more easily. In the standard Nimzo-Indian, af o 4 d5 (Section 8.3) gives us a choice: ter 1 d4 tt::lf6 2 c4 e6 3 tt::lc3 i.b4, play for blockade by 4 ...i.xc3+ or White has a very wide choice of con simply switch back to Nimzo the tinuations, some of them with enor ory after 4 ...tt::l f6 as Black need not mous bodies of complex theory. fear 5 i.g5 or 5 f3. Naturally, from our move-order, you o 4 e3 (Section 8.4) is similar to the may opt to play the Nimzo by contin Rubinstein Nimzo-Indian, but Black uing 3 ...tt::lf6, secure in the knowledge has additional options here to re that you are entering a very highly re strict White's expansion plans in spected opening. Likewise, fans of the centre, and the game may very the Dutch can certainlyconsider play soon enter unexplored territory. ing 3 ...f5 . o 4 tt::lf3 cxd4 5 tt::lxd4 tt::lf6 brings us In the current chapter, we shall fo to a position we consider via a dif cus on two more independent paths: ferent move-order in Section 12.2. 3 ...c5 and 3 ...b6. While Black seeks to o We need not consider 4 'ii'c2? (a benefit from the new possibilities af main line in the Nimzo) since the forded by his move-order, it goes d4-pawn is already attacked, while 94 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 4 'ifb3 cxd4!? (4 ...lt:'Jc6 5 dxc5 lt:'Jf6 4 ....i.xc3+ 5 bxc3 'ii'a5 6 lt:'Jf3 is a comfortable Nimzo line for The lines 6 e4 lt:'lf6 7 f3 lt:'lc6,6 'ii'c2 Black) 5 'ii'xb4 lt:'Jc6 6 'ii'a3 dxc3 7 lt:'la6 and 6 'ii'b3 lt:'Ja6 7 .i.e3 (7 .i.f4 'ii'xc3 lt:'lf6 followed by ...d5 gives lt:'lf6 8 f3 'ii'xc5) 7 ...lt:'Je7 8 lt:'Jf3 lt:'lc6 Black active play. followed by 9 ...lt:'Jxc5 are insufficiently vigorous and permit Black a good po 3 •.• b6 has differentconsequences: sition. • Section 8.5 covers 4 'ifc2, when we 6 •••lt:'J f6 7 'ii'b3 do enter Nimzo-lndian territory,but 7 lt:'ld2 also deserves attention, al in a form that is quite comfortable though after 7 ...lt:'Ja6 or 7 ...b6 !? Black for Black. has no serious problems. • 4 e4 (Section 8.6) transposes to a 7 •••lt:'Ja6 8lt:'Jd4! sharp line of the English Defence. The knight is heading for b5, where Black has ready-made counterplay it will occupy a menacing position. and scores well in practice. White achieves nothing in the varia tion 8 i.f4 (8 .i.e3 'ii'c7 is equal) 8.1 8 ...lt:'Jxc5 9 'iVb4 b6 10 lt:'Jd4 (or 10 3 .•• c5 4 dxc5 (D) 'ii'xa5 bxa5) 10... .i.a6 11 'iixa5 bxa5 12 lt:'lb5 (12 lt:'lb3 lt:'lb7) 12... .i.xb5 13 cxb5 lt:'ld5. 8 ••• 0-0 9 lt:'lb5 b6!? Black should avoid 9 ... lt:'Jxc5 10 'iib4 or 9 ...lt:'Je4 10 'ii'a3, but one way or anotherthe hostile c5-pawn must be eliminated.An interesting situation has arisen, since White (in his turn) also does not hurry with the capture cxb6. 10 .i.f4 Chasing the black queen by 10 a4 lt:'Jxc5 11 'ii'c2 ( 11 'ii'b4 'iixb4 12 cxb4 lt:'lb3) ll....i.b7 12 .i.a3 l:fc8 looks like a waste of time. And after 10 cxb6 This line is seldom encountered, axb6 the activity of the black pieces though rather interesting. At the cost must be sufficient for him to achieve of allowing severe damage to his pawn equality; for example, 11 'ii'a3 lt:'lc5 12 structure, White hopes to make use of 'ii'xa5 lha5 13 .i.f4 .i.b7 14 .i.e?l:a6 the weaknessof the dark squares in his (or 14 ....l:.f a8), 11 .i.a3 lt:'Jc5 12 'ii'dl opponent's camp. If Black turns down 'ii'a4 13 e3 (13 'ii'xa4 l:xa4 14 .i.b4 the proposal by 4 ...lt:'Jf6, then 5 'ii'c2 .i.a6) 13... 'ii' xd1 + 14 l:xdl .i.b7 or 11 and 5 'ifb3lead to well-known theoret f3 lt:'Jc5 12 'ii'b4 'iixb4 (12... d5 !?) 13 ical variations of the Nimzo-lndian. cxb4 lt:'lb3 14 l:b1 lt:'lxc1 15 .:r.xci d5. THE NIMZO-LIKE 2 c4 il..b4+ 3 tiJc3 95 10 ... .tb7 11 f3 .ic6 from delaying or avoiding altogether The final preparations are made. the move ...lbf6. The corollary though White lacks time to secure an advan is that White can play the e4 advance tage; the following variations are all without additional preparation. Let's roughly equal: see how these factors work out in a) 12 cxb6 axb6 13 e4 (13 i.d6 is practice. answered by 13... lbc5 14 'iVb4 l:.fc8) s ...lb c6 and now Black can choose 13 ...d5 or The blockading continuation 5 ...d6, 13 ....ixb5 14 cxb5 lbc5 15 'iVb4 d5. intending ...e5, is also quite accept b) 12 .id6.ixb5 13 cxb5 lbxc5 14 able. Then 6 dxc5 dxc5 7 'ii'xd8+ 'ii'b4 l:.fc8 15 'ii'xa5 bxa5 16 e4 lbb7 'it>xd8 8 .if4 lbd7 is not dangerous - 17 .ie5 d6. White's initiative will gradually be c) 12 e4 .ixb5 13 cxb5 lbxc5 14 come exhausted, but his pawn weak 'ii'b4 lbb7. nesses will remain. We should note that 5 ...f5 ?! fails to 8.2 prevent 6 e4, since 6 ...fxe4 7 'ii'h5+ g6 3 . . .c5 4 a3 .ixc3+ 5 bxc3 (D) 8 'ii'xc5 gives White the initiative. 6e4 It is not logical for White to play 6 lbf3 lbf6, because it runs counter to his opening strategy declared by the move 4 a3.Instead, 6 d5 enters unex plored territory: 6 ...lbe5 !? (6 ...lba5 and 6 ...lbce7 are also possible) 7 lbf3 (7 e4 'iih4!?) 7 ...lbxc4 (or 7 ...'il'f6) 8 e4 'ii'a5, with chances for both sides. 6 ...cxd4 6 ...d6 7 d5 (7 lbe2!?) 7 ...lba5 is an alternative plan: a) The careless 8 f4? exd5 9 exd5 (9 cxd5 lbf6) 9 ...lbf6 10 .id3 0-0 led White shows he is prepared to play rapidly to serious hardship for White a Samisch Nimzo-Indian, to which in Moskalenko-Goossens, Barcelona 5 ...lbf6 would now transpose. The 2005. Sfunischis a highly double-edged line, b) 8 .id3 can be met by 8 ...e5 9 f4 where White hopes his strong centre f6 !? (a slightly risky experiment; sim and kingside attacking chances will pler is 9 ...exf4 10 i:xf4 lbe7 with compensate for his pawn weaknesses. equality) 10 'iih5+ (10 f5 'it'd?; 10 One of the main themes is an attack or lbe2 lbe7) 10... �f8 11 fxe5 dxe5 12 pin on the f6-knight by e4-e5 or .ig5. l:.a2'ii' e8 13 'iidl lbe7 withan unclear This suggests that Black might profit game, Kacheishvili-Eingorn, Berlin 96 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 1995. A more flexible approach is bxc3 gives the play an original feel. 8 ...lbe7 , when 9 f4 exd5 10 cxd5 f5 is Then: unclear, or 8 ...lDf 6!?, intending ...b6 a) The blockading strategy 5 ...d6 and .....ta6 with an attack on the weak has a natural appeal, as it uses Nimzo c4-pawn. themes while avoiding a direct trans The text-move, 6 ...cxd4, represents position to well-wornlin es. Then 6 e4 a more concrete approach: instead of (6 dxe6?! .i.xe6 7 e4a5 'ii' 8 'ii'b3 blockading the white pawn-centre, lDf6) 6... e5 7 .i.d3 (7 f4 exf4 8 .i.xf4 Black immediately attacks it. 'ii'h4+!? 9 g3 'ii'e7, Natsidis-Stein- 7 cxd4 d5 bacher, Leutersdorf 2005) 7 ...lbe7 8 Simple and good. 7 ...lDf6 8 e5 (8 lDe2 lDg69 0-0 (9 lDg3 lDf4) 9 ...lbd7, d5? is met by 8 ...lbxe4, and 8 f3 with intending ...h6, ...lDf6-h7 etc., leads 8 ...d5 9 cxd5 exd5 10 e5 lbg8 !?) to a long manoeuvring struggle with a 8 ...lbe4 9 .i.d3 'ii'a5+ 10 �fl f5 (or very solid but slightly passive posi 10... d5) 11 exf6 lDxf6 looks slightly tion for Black. extravagant, but it is also interesting. b) 5 ...'ii' a5 6 e4 lDf6 has been ex 8 cxd5 exd5 9 e5 amined, intending piece-play after 7 As we see in this variation, the ab .i.d2 (7 'ii'c2 lbxe4 is unclear)7 ...d6 8 sence of the knight from f6 has turned .i.d3 0-0 9lbe2 l:r.e8 (Flear-Dorfman, out to be useful forBlack. Polanica Zdroj 1992). However, if 9 ...lb ge7 10 lbf30-0 Whitecontinues 7 f3!?, the variation The game is approximately level. 7 ...'ii xc3+ 8 .i.d2'ii' e5 9 lDe2exd5 10 cxd5 d6 11 .i.c3 'ii'e7 looks dubious 8.3 for Black. 3... c5 4d5 (D) Overall, inthis case it makes sense for Black to transpose to the Nimzo Indian: 4 ... lDf6 The good news for Black is that this is a line without a great deal of com plex theory, and where he has good counterplay. Now the lines 5 .i.d2 0-0, 5 lbf3 d6 and 5 g3 lbe4 do not leave White any chance of an advantage. He has only two continuations that demand de tailed coverage, but by the highest standards neither gives Black opening difficulties: The advance of the d-pawn presents 8.3.1: 5 ..tg5 97 Black with a choice. 4 .....txc3+ !? 5 8.3.2: 5 f3 97 THE NIMZO-UKE 2 c4 j_b4+ 3 ltJc3 97 8.3.1 ll... c4 5 i.g5 d6 (D) Again using the same motif: now }2j_xc4?is bad in view of 12... lb5b6. 12 i.c2 The evidently weaker 12 i.f5 0-0 13 e4 (13 'ji'd2?! lbxc3 14 lbg3 lbb6) 13... lbxc3 14lbxc3"ii xc3 15 ltcl "iie5 16 ltxc4 lbb6 gave Black the advan tage in Jacob-Luther, Austrian Team Ch 2004/5. 12 ... 0-0 13 i.b4 Black repulses attempts to attack his king without particular difficulty: 13 lbg3 lbxc3 14 "iih5 g6 (14... f5 !?) or 13 lbd4 lbxc3 14 "iih5 lbf6 15 'it'h4 lbce4 16 i.xe4 lbxe4 17 i.e7 6e3 lte8 18 'ifxe4We 5, keeping the extra We have reached aline of theLenin material. grad Nimzo-lndian. This and White's 13... lbxc3 14 lbxc3 next few moves are sensible, as it is After 14 i.xh7+ �xh7 15 'it'c2+ risky for him to remain behind in de �g8 16 lbxc3 lbe5 17 i.e7 lte8 18 velopment in lines such as 6 f3?! h6 7 i.xd6 i.d7 the number of pawns be i.h40-0 8 e4 lte89 lbe2 (not 9 i.d3? comes equal, but White has to switch exd5 10 cxd5 lbxe4!) 9 ...exd5 10 cxd5 to defence. lbbd7. 14... "ilxc3 15 ltcl WaS 16 "iixd6 6 •••exd5 7 cxd5 lbbd7 8 i.d3 :es 17 ltfd1 lbf8 After 8 i.b5 h6 9 i.h4 a6 (or Both sides have chances, as White 9 . . . i.xc3+!? 10 bxc3 0-0) 10 i.xd7+ has sufficient compensation for the (10 i.d3!?) 10 ...i.xd7 11 lbe2 g5 12 pawn. i.g3 lbe4 (or 12... 'it'e7 !?, when 13 a3 i.a5 14 0-0 0-0 is unclear, and White 8.3.2 should avoid 13 0-0?! h5 14 h4 lbh7, 5f3 Bouwmeester-Momo, Moscow Olym Now we have a position more often piad 1956) 13 0-0 i.xc3 14 lbxc3 reached via the move-order 1 d4 lbf62 lbxg3 15 hxg3 "iie7 Black is no worse, c4 e6 3 lbc3 i.b4 4 f3 c5 5 d5. Moiseenko-Landa, Russian Team Ch, 5 ... 0-0 6 e4 b5!? Dagomys 2010. White's delay in development gives 8 .. Ji'a5 9 lbe2 lbxd5 10 0-0 i.xc3 Black reasonto sharpenthe struggle. If 11 bxc3 Black is not so bellicose, then the 11lbxc3? lbxc3 12 bxc3 c4 is of no somewhat calmer 6 ...d6 (D) can be use to White. recommended: 98 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK initiative) 9 ...exd5 10 cxd5 �bd7 11 �e2 .ta5 !? I2 0-0 b5. 7 e5 7 i.d2 is unattractive in view of 7 ...bxc4 8 �xc4 �a6!? (8 ...�b7 is equal) 9 �xa6 �xa6 10 �ge2 exd5 11 e5 �e8 I2 �xd5 d6, as in Vokac Stocek, Havlickuv Brod 2008. After 7 �h3 the game becomes highly tactical: 7 ...bxc4 8 �xc4 �xd5 9 i.xd5 exd5 10 'it'xd5 i.a6! 11 �g5 (not II 'ii'xa8? 'ii'h4+ I2 8 cxb5 a6 (8 ...d6 !?) or 8 dxe6 fxe6 9 4 •••0Jc6 cxb5 a6 10 f4 axb5 II i.d3 (II i.xb5 Those familiar with the Hubner d5 gives Black the initiative) ll...c4 Variation of the Nimzo-Indian will I2 .i.c2d5 , as in Radjabov-Istratescu, immediate understand Black's poten European Ch, Antalya 2004. tial blockading ideas. But by using 8 ..• exd5 9 cxd5 d6 10 0Jf3 this move-order, Black puts pressure After 10 .i.xb5 dxe5 Black's posi on d4 that limits White's options to a tion deserves preference; for example, much smaller set than in the regular 11 fxe5?! 0Jc7. Nimzo-lndian. 10••• 0J c7 11 a4!? Note that the immediate 4 ....i.xc3+ It's a finebalancing act between at 5 bxc3 d6 is less reliable. Before tack and development. If White delays adopting a blockade strategy, it is use active play, then Black can be happy, ful for Black to wait until White has as the lines II .i.e2 .i.b7 I2 0-0 c4 played 0Jf3,hindering the advance of and II .i.d3 c4 I2 .i.c2 (12 .i.e4 f5) the f-pawn. I2... dxe5 demonstrate. 5 0Jf3 ll... .i.b7 12 .i.d3 g6 White has no time to develop by Blunting the threat of 13 .i.xh7+. .i.d3 and 0Je2, since 5 .i.d3? would 13 0-0 c4 14 .i.e40Jd 7!? leave the d4-pawn undefended for a In this rather unusual andsharp po moment. The other popular set-up in sition, Black has enough counterplay. the Nimzo,5 0Je2, promises littlehere due to 5 ...cxd4 6 exd4 d5, and now: 8.4 a) 7 c5?! 0Jge7 gave Black the ini 3 ...c5 4 e3 (D) tiative inSadler-Da vies, London I992. b) 7 a3 .i.xc3+8 0Jxc3dxc4 (after 8 ...0Jge7 !? the position is also equal) 9 .i.e3 (9 .i.xc4 'it'xd4) 9 ...0Jge7 IO .i.xc40Jf5 II 0-0 0-0 with equality. c) 7 cxd5 exd5 (the more dynamic 7 ...'ii' xd5 !? 8 .i.e3 ltJf6 9 a3 .i.xc3+ 10 ltJxc3'ii' d7 also leads to a level game) 8 a3 (8 g3 .i.g49 .i.g2 ltJge7 with equal ity, Durnitrache-B.Kovaeevic, Zagreb I997) 8 . . . .i.xc3+ 9 ltJxc3 ltJge7 10 .i.d3 .i.f5 yields equal chances. The line 5 d5!? ltJe5 (5 ...ltJce7 6 e4 can be met by 6 ...d6 or 6 ....i.xc3+ 7 bxc3 d6, with unclear play) 6 .i.d2 (6 Now instead of 4 ...0Jf6 (transpos f4 is answered with 6 ...ltJg6 and 6 e4 ing to a normal Rubinstein Nimzo-In by 6 ...'ii' h4) 6 ...ltJf6 leads to a dou dian) Black develops the other knight: ble-edged game. 100 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 5 .••�xc3+ but normally follows an exchange of Black borrows ideas from the Hub knights. ner Variation, the standard form of We should of course consider what which could arise after 5 ...4Jf6 6 .i.d3 happens if White sticks to more stan .i.xc3+7 bxc3 d6, when a typical line dard patterns of development. 8 e4 runs 8 e4 e5 9 d5 ltJe7. exd4 (or 8 ...cxd4) 9 cxd4 .i.g4 leads to 6 bxc3 d6 7 .i.d3 equality, and after 8 0-0 we can side In our case it is less accurate for step the standard Nimzo lines in two White to play 7 e4 e5 8 d5 ltJce7, ways: when Black has excellent play, but a a) 8 ... f5 looks like it ought to be more interesting line is 7 d5 ltJce7 slightly questionable, although there (7 ...4Ja5 8 e4 e5 9 i.d3 h6 is unclear) is no obvious refutation. 9 e4 f4 10 d5 8 dxe6 .i.xe6 9 ltJg5 ltJf6 10 ltJxe6 ltJce7 (10... 4Ja5 ? 11 ltJxe5) 11 g3 fxg3 fxe6 11 .i.d30-0 12 e4 ltJc6,reaching 12 fxg3 ltJf6 13 .i.g5 0-0 (13... ltJg6 a non-standard position where the could be tried) 14 ltJh4 ltJg6 15 ltJf5 black knightsare well-placed to coun h6 16 .i.e3 (16 .i.d2 is also possible) ter the enemy bishops; e.g., 13 f4 ?! e5 16 ....i.xf5 17 exf5ltJh8 is unclear. 14 f5 ltJxe4. b) 8 ...ltJge7 9 d5 (9 .i.e4 0-0 is un- 7 ... e5 (D) clear) 9 ...4Ja5 (9 ...4Jb8 !?) 10 e4 and Black continues to refrain from now 10... ltJg6 or 10... h6 !? with the 7 ...4Jf6. idea 11 ltJh4 g5. The remoteness of the aS-knightfrom the kingsidehere is of no vital importance, since White cannot start an attack immediately (see the note to Black's 4th move). 8 •••'it'e7 !? Black should avoid 8 ...ltJge7 ?! 9 dxc5 dxc5 10 'it'xd8+ �xd8 11 .i.a3, but 8 ...'it'c7 9 dxc5 dxc5 10 .i.d5 (10 .i.xc6+bxc6 is unclear) 10... 4Jf6 looks acceptable, as White's advantage is in significant. 9i.d5 9 dxc5 dxc5 10 i.xc6+ bxc6 11 'it'a4 (11 e4 ltJf6) 11....i.d7 leads to in 8 .i.e4!? teresting complications: In his turn, White takes advantage a) White achieves nothing after 12 of a difference from standard Nimzo e4 ltJf6 13 .i.g5 h6 14 .i.xf6 'it'xf6 15 lines: Black is not controlling the e4- 'it'a5 (15 0-0 0-0 16 'it'a5 .i.g4 17 ltJd2 square.The bishop manoeuvre itself is 'it'g5) 15... .i.h3 160-0 .i.xg2 17'ifi>xg2 not totally unknown in this structure, 'it'g6+ 18 'ifi>h3 'it'h5+. THE NIMZO-UKE 2 c4 i.b4+ 3 ti:Jc3 101 b) 12 l:lbl can be met by 12... ti:Jf6 freedom, but the other one is for the 13 l:lb7 e4 14 ti:Jd2 'ii'e5. time being imprisoned by its own c) 12 i.a3 begins a queenside at pawns. tack. After 12... ti:Jf6 13 ti:Jd2 (13 'ii'a5 10 ti:Jd2 ti:Jf6 11 'ii'c2 lt:Je4) 13... a5 ! 14 0-0 (14 l:ldl 0-0 15 The attempt to exert pressure on the ti:Jb3 lt:Je4 16 lt:Jxc5 lt:Jxc5 17 i.xc5 queenside by 11 l:lb1 0-0 12 'ii'a4 is 'ifxc5 18 l:lxd7 l:lad8 is equal)... 14 0-0, parried with 12 ...ti:Jd8 . the move 15 f3 is useless in view of The text-move immediately attacks 15 ...i.e6 or 15... e4 !?, and after 15 the e4-pawn, restricting Black's op ti:Jb3 lt:Je4 the lack of defenders on tions. After 11 0-0 0-0 he enjoys a White's kingside becomes a problem wider choice of plans: for him: a) 12a4?! is well met by 12 ... cxd4. c1) 16 i.xc5'it' g5 17 i.xf8 lt:Jxc3 b) After 12 l:lb1 i.g4!?, two possi and now 18 'ii'a3? i.h3 19 g3 'ii'h5 20 ble lines are 13 'ii'a4 i.e2 14 l:.e1 i.d3 ti:Jd2 lt:Je4 leads to a crushing defeat 15 l:lxb7 'ii'xb7 16 i.xc6 'ii'c7 17 for White, but the following variation i.xa8l:lxa8 and 13 'ii'c2 i.e2 14 lt:Jxe4 saves him: 18 f4 ! _.h4 19 'ii'a3 ti:Je2+ lbxd5 15 cxd5 i.xfl 16 �xfl lba5 17 20 �hl lt:Jg3+,etc. dxc5 dxc5. c2) 16l:lac l 'ii'g5 17 ..thl i.h3! 18 c) 12 'it'c2 l:le8!? (12... i.f5 trans gxh3'ii' f5 19 f3 l:lfd8 !? (theimmediate poses to our main line below) 13 l:lb1 19... lt:Jg3+ is also viable) andWhit e's lba5 14 'it'a4 and here Black should most prudent option is to accept a avoid 14 ...'ii' c7? 15 lbxe4 and choose draw by perpetual check. the equalizing 14 ...lbxd5 15 cxd5 b6 9 ..•e4 (D) or the more adventurous continuation 14... 'ii' d8!?. d) 12 'ii'h3 l:le8 13 a4 (13 i.a3 i.d7) 13... tt:Ja5 14 'ii'h5d8. 'ii' e) 12 f3 !? exf3 13 lt:Jxf3 (13 'ii'xf3 i.e6) 13... lt:Ja5 14 'it'd3 i.e6 15 lbg5 h6 16 l:lxf6 hxg5. In none of these lines is any advan tage for White apparent. ll... i.fS 12 0-0 0-0 13 f3 l:lac8 Black has to give up the e4-pawn, but he obtains enough counterplaybe cause of his active pieces. 8.5 This blockading move is possible 3 ...b6 (D) thanks to the queen's position on e7. This flexible continuation is offered One of the white bishops has gained as an alternative to 3 ...c5 . 101 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK keeps the game level, while 7 ...ttlc6 is more ambitious, targeting the weak c4-pawn. c) After 4e3 .txc3+!? 5 bxc3 .tb7 6 ttlf3 (6 f3 'ifh4+!? 7 g3 'ifh5 8 e4 ttle7 is unclear, while 6 ttle2 is simi larly met by 6 ...'ifh 4!? 7 ttlg3 ttle7) Black has a choice between the com paratively simple Nimzo-line 6 ...ttlf6 7 .td3 0-0 8 0-0 d6 9 ttld2 (9 l:te 1 ttle4 10 ttld2 f5 ; 9 'ii'e2 .te4) 9 ...e5 10 e4 ttlc6, planning ...ttle7-g6, and the more ambitious 6 ...f5 7 .ta3 (7 .td3 ttlf6 8 Black does not immediately attack 0-0 c5 is unclear) 7 ...ttlf6 8 .te2 (8 White's centre, giving him a brief re .td3c5 !? 9 dxc5 'ifc7 is also unclear) spite to set up a broad pawn-front by 8 ...ttle4. playing 4 e4; we examine in Section 4 •••.t b7 5 a3 8.6 how Black then uses all his re After 5 e3 ttlf6 6 ttlf3 0-0 7 .td3 (7 sources to blow that centre apart. If .te2fai ls to control e4 and can be met White does not take up the challenge, by 7 ...ttle4 8 0-0 f5 or 7 ....te4) 7 ...c5 then the play tends to resemble the White achieves nothing because he Queen's Indian or the Nimzo-Indian, has mixed two different development with direct transpositions possible, schemes. though Blackhas some importantideas Much the same can be said of 5 ttlf3 with ...f5 and/or ...'ifh4 (+). In the cur ttlf66 .tg5h6 7 .th4 c5 (7 ....te 4!? 8 rent section we examine how best for 'ifb3 ttlc6 9 0-0-0 .txc3 10 'ii'xc3 a5 Black to steer his way through these 11 a3 a4 is unclear, Dreev-Markos, variations. Montcada 2009) 8 a3 (8 0-0-0 cxd4) 4 'ifc2 8 ....txc3+ 9 'ifxc3 g5 10 .tg3 ttle4 White prevents the doubling of his 11 'ii'd3 (11 'ii'c2 ttlxg3 12 hxg3 .txf3 queenside pawns. He also has the fol 13 gxf3 cxd4) 1l...d6 with chances lowing possibilities: for both sides, I.Sokolov-Stefansson, a) 4 'ifh3a5 5 a3 (5 e3 .tb7 6 ttlf3 Reykjavik 2003. f5 is equal) 5 ...a4 6 'ifc2 (6 'ifxb4? 5 ••• .txc3+6 'ifxc3 d6 7 ttlf3 ttlc67 'ifb5l:ta5 ) 6 ....txc3+ 7 bxc3 (7 Other continuations allow Black 'ii'xc3 ttlf6 8 'ii'g3 ttlc6!? 9 ttlf3 ttla5) more rapid counterplay: 7 ...f5 is unclear. a) After 7 'ii'g3 ttlf6 8 ttlf3 0-0 b) 4 g3 (the fianchettooffers White (8 ...l:tg8 !?) 9 .th6 ttle8 Black parries little here; 4 ttlf3 .tb7 5 g3 comes to White's superficialthreats withoutdif the same thing) 4 ....tb7 5 ttlf3 .txc3+ ficulty; e.g., 10 e3 �h8 11 .tg5 f6 12 6 bxc3 ttlf6 7 .tg2 and now 7 ...d6 .td3 e5. THE NIMZO-LIKE 2 c4 �b4+ 3 l£Jc3 103 b) 7 f3 !? 'ifh4+(7 ...l£Je7 !? 8 e4 0-0 8 g3 a5 (Black can also try 8 ...c5 !? 9 9 l£Jh3 l£Jg6) 8 g3 'iie7 9 e4 l£Jf6 10 dxc5 bxc5 10 i.g2a5 11 0-0 0-0) 9 b3 l£Je2 (10 �d3 c5 lll£Je2 l£Jc6) 10... c5 lbbd7 (9 ...lbc6 !? 10 i.g2 l£Je7 11 0-0 11 �g2 0-0 12 0-0 l£Jc6 13 d5 (13 �e3 0-0 looks more interesting) 10 �g2 0-0 e5) 13 ...exd5 14 cxd5 �a6!? 15 dxc6 11 0-0 "iie7 leads to a long manoeuv i.xe2 16 :f2 �b5 is unclear. ring game with approximately equal c) 7 b4 l£Jd7 8 �b2 a5 !? 9 f3 (9 b5 chances. can be met with 9 ...l£Jgf6 10 f3 e5 or 8 •••0-0 9 �e2 9 ...f5) 9 ...l£Je7 10 e4 f5 (10... 0-0 11 White's plan includes the moves b4 l£Jh3e5) 11 d5 e5 12l£Jh3fxe4 13fxe4 and �b2, but the immediate 9 b4 is 0-0 is again unclear. somewhat premature in view of 9 ...a5 . 7 •••l£Jf6 (D) Then 10 �b2 lbe4 11 'ifc2 (11 Wb3 axb4 12 axb4 :xal + 13 �xal 'ii'f6 gives Black the initiative) l l...axb4 12 axb4 :xal + 13 i.xal lba6 leaves White with problems on the queen side, and theadvance 10 b5 is not de sirable for him since after 10 ...lbbd7 11 �e2 (11 �d3 e5) ll...l£Je4 12 'ji'c2 f5 13 0-0 :f6 the thematic pawn break 14 d5 decreases in value. Another nuance relates to the de velopment of the fl-bishop: after 9 i.d3 l£Jbd7 (9 ...c5 !?) 10 0-0 (10 b4 a5 11 b5 e5) 10... c5 11 b4 (11 b3 :c8 12 i.b2 cxd4 13 lbxd4 lbc5, Yudasin Only now, with control of e4 se Psakhis, Ramat Aviv 1999) 1l...cxd4 cured, does Black develop his knight 12 lbxd4 l£Je5 Black obtained good to f6 . This position is far betterknown counterplay in Kozul-Jukic, Yugoslav via move-orders such as 1 d4 l£Jf6 2 c4 Team Ch, Cetinje 1990. e6 3 l£Jc3�b4 4l£Jf3 b6 5 'ii'c2 i.b76 9 •••lL'lbd7 10 0-0 a3 �xc3+ 7 'ii'xc3 d6, and modern Again the line 10 b4 lbe4 11 'ii'c2 theory regards it as rather comfortable ( 11 'ii'b3 lbg5 ! ?) ll...a5 is not advan for Black. tageous for White. 8e3 10 ••• lbe4 11 'iVc2 8 �g5 is rather dubious as Black 11 'ji'd3 f5 12 b4 (12 lbd2 'ji'b4) can reply actively with 8 ...h6 9 �h4 12... :f6 13 d5 :g6 is also possible, g5 10 �g3 l£Je4 11 'ji'c2 (11 'ji'd3 f5) and similarto our main line below. ll...h5 12 d5 (12 h4 l£Jxg3 13 fxg3 ll... f5 (D) gxh4) 12... exd5 13 cxd5 �xd5 14 This is the critical position for the lbd2'ii e7. whole variation. 104 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK Savina-Demina, Russian Women's Ch, Voronezh 2009. 8.6 3 ••• b6 4e4 This principled rejoinder transposes to a line of the English Defence (1 d4 e6 2 c4 b6 3 e4 .i.b7 4 lt:Jc3 .i.b4), so we now need to make a small excur sion into its theory. In comparison with the main lines of that risky open ing (which arise after1 d4 e6 2 c4 b6 3 e4 .i.b74 .i.d3), Black has fewer prob 12 b4 lems in our case, although he must be 12 lt:Jel !? �h4 13 f3 lt:Jg5 14 .i.dl ready for sharp and even irrational (14 f4 ?! lt:Je4 15 lt:Jf3 �h6 gave Black play. the initiative in Karpov-Yu supov, Can 4 ••..i. b7 (D) didates (2), London 1989; 14 c5!?) and now both 14 ...e5 and 14 ....l:.f6 15 �f2 'ifxf2+ 16 �xf2 e5 lead to a posi tion with chances for both sides. 12 •••l:.f6 13 d5 The line 13 .i.b2 l:.g6 (13... l:.h6 !?) 14 d5 fie? 15 l:.adl c5 16 dxc6 .i.xc6, as in Van Wely-S.Zhigalko, Sestao 2010, is of approximately equal value. 13 ••• l:.g6 14 lt:Jd4!? White fails to achieve an advantage after 14 .i.b2 c5! 15 dxc6 (15 dxe6 lt:Jf8) 15... .i.xc6 16 l:.fd l 'fie?. Then the careless 17 lt:Jel? 'ii'h4 lefthim in a difficult situation in Ki.Georgiev-Gri The e4-pawn can be defended in shchuk, European Team Ch, Kher several ways: sonissos 2007. 8.6.1: 5 �c2 105 14 ••• �g5 15 g3 lt:Je5! 8.6.2: 5 .i.d3 1 05 Black's attacking threats are more 8.6.3: 5 f3 107 important than White's material gains. After 16 lt:Jxe6l:.xe6 17 dxe6'ii g6 18 5 d5?! also guards the pawn, but .l:.dl ! (18 �b3?! h5 !) 18... lt:Jg5 19 l:.d5 5 ...'ife7 disrupts White's game: 6 .i.e3 (19 �fl lt:Jgf3) 19 ...lt:Jef3+ White re lt:Jf6 7 .i.d3 exd5 8 exd5 c6 gives tains equality, but no more than that, Black counterplay, while 6 .te2lt:Jf6 7 THE NIMZO-LIKE 2 c4 Ji.b4+ 3 lL:Jc3 105 i.g5 h6 8 �h4?! �xc3+ 9 bxc3 'ili'a3 The queen retreats precisely here in 1 0 �xf6 gxf6 and 6 lL:Je2exd5 7 exd5 order to cover the e-file. tbf6 also leave Black with a pleasant 9 bxc3 fxe4 10 i.xe4 �xe4 11 position. Vxe4 lL:Jc6 12 �g5 The point of this bishop move is to 8.6.1 force Black to castle queenside. If he 5 'ili'c2 'ili'h4 can calmly finish his development, White's centre must be attacked be then White's pawn weaknesses will fore he fortifies it. tell. 6�d3 12... tbf6 13 �xf6 gxf6 14 g3 6 d5 is also interesting here. Black's Or 14 l:tel 0-0-0 15 d5 f5 16 'ili'd3 best reply is 6 ...�xc3+ !; for example, tba5. 7 bxc3 (7 'ili'xc3 'it'xe4+ 8 �e3 and 14 ... 0-0-0 15 �g2 'ii'a3 now 8 ...f6 or 8 ...tbe7 ) 7 ...'ii' e7 (7 ...f5 8 Both sides have chances. exf5 exd5 is unclear) 8 �d3 (8 �e2 d6) 8 ...tba6 (8 ...exd5 !? 9 cxd5 f5) 9 8.6.2 tbf3 e5, as in Flores-A.Kovalyov, Bo 5 �d3 (D) gota 2010. 6 ... f5 7 tbf3 7 g3?! is clearly weaker: 7 ...1Wh5 8 tbe2 (8 �e2?! 'ilf7; 8 f3? fxe4 9 fxe4 tbf6 10 lL:Je2 tbc6 11 a3 0-0 with an at tack) 8 .. .'ii'f3 9 0-0 �xc3 10 tbxc3 tbc6 11 �e3 tbb4 12 'ii'e2 fxe4. 7 ...�xc3+ 8�n Otherwise White will have to give up the e4-pawn. White should avoid playing 8 bxc3? 'it'g4 9 0-0?? fxe4 10 tbe5 'it'xg2+, but 8 'it'xc3 'it'g4 9 0-0 fxe4 10 tbe5 is an interesting alterna tive. Then 10 ...'it'h4 11 �e2 (not 11 �c2? d6 12 �a4+ c6 13 d5 dxe5) An uncompromising plan: White 1l...d6 (ll ...tbh6!?) 12 tbg4tbf6 13 supports his pawn-centre with an ac g3 'ii'h3 14 tbxf6+ gxf6 15 c5 0-0 and tive developing move. Black has no 10 ...'ii' f5 !? 11 �c2 d6 12 �a4+ (12 choice but to strike back vigorously. 'ii'g3 tbe7 13 tbf3 tbd7) 12... c6 13 5 ...r5 6 f3! 'ii'g3 tbe7 14 tbg4 'it'g6 both give Nothing else gives Black any diffi White enough of an initiative to com culties: pensate for the pawn, but he has no ad a) 6 exf5? is completely unsound vantage. because after 6 ...�xg2 7 'ii'h5+, Black 8 ...'it' e7 can simply reply 7 ...<.tf8 . 106 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK b) 6 d5 fxe4 7 �xe4 'ikh4 8e2 'ii' unclear play) 1l...�xc3 (11...0-0-0!?) lbf6 9 �f3 0-0 leaves Black with the 12lbxc3 0-0-0. So far this line has not initiative. been tested in tournamentpractice. c) 6 'ii'c2 lbf6 (6 ...'ii' h4 transposes 7 g3 'ifhS (D) to Section 8.6.1) 7 f3 lbc6 8 lbe2 (Odessky points out that White should avoid 8 �e3?! fxe4 and 8 e5? lbxd4 9 'ii'a4 {9 'ii'f2 lbh5!} 9 ...l2Jg4 !) 8 .. .fxe4 9 fxe4 e5 10 d5 lbd4 11 lbxd4 (not 11 'ii'd1 ?! 0-0, when 12 0-0? lbg4 is en tirely bad for White) 1l...exd4 12 e5 dxc3 13 bxc3 �c5 14 exf6 1i'xf6and again Black is in charge of events. d) 6 1i'e2 lbf6 7 �g5 (7 f3 l2Jc6! and now 8 �e3 fxe4 9fxe4 e5 is pleas ant for Black,while White should defi nitely avoid 8 e5? lbxd4 9 'ikf2 lbh5 !) offers Blacka choice betweenthe equal 7 ...fxe4 8 �xe4 �xe49 �xf6 'ii'xf6 10 8exf5 'ii'xe4 0-0 and the more adventurous A highly complex situation arises 7 ...0-0 !?, pursuing the initiative. after 8 �d2 lbc6 (8 ...lbe7 is possible e) 61i'h5+ g6 7 'ii'e2 lbf6 8 �g5 (8 too) 9 d5 (9 a3 �d6 10 e5 �e7; 9 lbb5 f3 lbc6 9 �e3) 8 ...fxe4 (8 . . . 0-0!?) 9 �xd2+ 10 'ii'xd2 0-0-0) 9 ...l2Je5 ; for �xe4 (9 �xf6? exd3) 9 ...�xe4 10 example, 10 h2 lbf6 (10... 0-0-0 !?) �xf6 1i'xf6 11 'ifxe4 0-0 12lbf3 lbc6 11 f4 lbeg4 12 h3 �xc3 13 �xc3 with an equal game, Uribe-Buhmann, 1i'h6. Bridgetown 2009. 8 ...lbc 6!? 9 fxe6 6 •••ft4+ 9 lbe2 'ifxf3 10 .:tfl 1i'h5 11 fxe6 The queen check is a standard idea dxe6 leaves the game unclear. in positions such as this -by provok 9 ...dxe6 10 a3 ing a weakening of the h 1-a8 diagonal, The reason for provoking the ex Black noticeablyincreases thestrength change on c3 is to fortifythe d4-pawn. of his b7-bishop. 10 d5 is moreforc ing. Then 10... exd5 6 ...l2Jc6 !? is another interesting pos 11 cxd5 lbe5 12 �b5+ (or 12 'ii'a4+ sibility: 7 lbe2 (7 a3 �xc3+ 8 bxc3 �f7 13 �e2 �xc3+ 14 bxc3 �xd5) 'ii'h4+ 9 g3 'ii'h5) 7 ...fxe4 8 �xe4 (8 12... c6 (12.. .'�>f7 is another idea) 13 fxe4 'ii'h4+ 9 g3 'ii'h5 10 0-0 lbf6) �e2 (13 dxc6 lbxc6 14 'ifa4 �xc3+ 8 ...'ii' h4+ 9 g3 'ii'e7 10 0-0 (10 d5 is 15 bxc3 lbe7 is unclear, Tremblay met by 10... l2Ja5 and 10 a3 �xc3+ 11 Noritsyn, Canadian Ch, Guelph 2011) lbxc3 with 1l...lbf6 12 �g5 0-0-0) 13... lbf6 14 f4 lbeg4 15 h3 'ii'xd5 10 ...lbf6 11 �g5 ( 11lbb5 0-0 leads to leads to equality. THE NIMZO-LIKE 2 c4 j_b4+ 3 ltJc3 107 10... .i.xc3+ 11 bxc3 follow rather than 7 'ii'a4+? lbc6 8 d5 Now Black can choose between exd5 9 cxd5 'ii'h4+. 11...0-0-0 and 11...lDf6, intending to 6 •••lb h6 7 fxe6 castle kingside. Black has quite good More relaxed play does not promise attacking prospects in return for the White any advantage: 7 a3 .i.xc3+ sacrificedpawn. (7 ....i.d 6!? 8 .i.xh6'ii' h4+ 9 g3 'ii'xh6) 8 bxc3 lDxf5 9 lDh3 0-0 10 .i.g5 'ii'e8 8.6.3 11 .i.d3 h6, Simantsev-Khamitsky, 5 f3 (D) Saratov 2008. It is even worse for him to choose 7 .i.e3?! lbxf5 8 .i.f2 0-0 or 7 .i.xh6 'ii'h4+ 8 g3 'ii'xh6 9 'it'd2 'ii'xd2+ 10 'it>xd2 lbc6 with an un pleasant initiative for Black in both cases. 7 •••lDf5 (D) The main continuation: White im mediately cements the vulnerable point e4. 5 •••f5 This move is fullyin the spirit of the English Defence, though there are other viable moves, e.g., 5 ...'ii' h4+ 6 8 .i.f4 g3 .i.xc3+ 7 bxc3 'ii'e7 and 5 ...lbe7 6 If White grabs more material, the lbe2( 6 .i.d3lDg6 7 lbe2'ii' h4+) 6 ...f5 exposure of his king and Black's lead 7 a3 .i.xc3+ 8 lbxc3 0-0 9 .i.e3 (9 in development may become critical .i.d3?! fxe4) 9 ...fxe4 10 fxe4 d5 11 factors: 'ii'g4 dxe4, which led to an unclear po a) 8 exd7+ lbxd79 .i.f4 (9 lbe20-0 sition in Moberg-Langrock, Gothen is unclear) 9 ...'ii' h4+ (9 ...0-0 10 'ii'd2 burg 2006. l::r.e8+) 10 g3 'ii'e7+ 11 'ii'e2! (11 i.e2?! 6exf5 g5 12 'ii'd3 l::r.f8, Hager-Lempert, Wer 6 e5?! is dubious in view of 6 ...c5 7 fen 1992) 11...1i'xe2+ 12 'it>xe2 lDxd4+ a3 .i.xc3+8 bxc3 lDc6.6 ...d6 !? is also 13 �f2 .i.xc3 (13... 0-0-0) 14 bxc3 possible, when 7 exd6 .i.xd6 should lbe6 15 l::r.e1 lDdc5 16 .i.xc7 0-0 17 108 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK .id6 l:.fd8, with approximate equality despite White's two extra pawns. b) 8 ..td3 'il'h4+ 9 'it>fl 0-0 10 .ixf5 10( lDb5! ? is more consistent; then 10 ...lDc6 11 a3 ..te7 12 ..txf5 .:txf5 13 exd7 .:td8 leads to unclear play) 10 ..Jhf5 11 ..te3 dxe6 12 .if2 .,f6 13 .,a4 (after 13 lDge2 ..txc3!? White should avoid 14lDxc3? .:txf3 in favour of 14 bxc3 'fi'f8) 13... ..tf8 14 .:tdl lDc6, Krizsany-Mihalko, Hun garian Team Ch 1995/6. With the text-move, White aspires to castle queenside as quickly as pos c) 11 lDb5 0-0 12 ..txc7 (or 12 sible. 8 lDe2 leads to unclear play after lDxd4 lDxd4 13 'it'xb4 .:txf4 14 lDe2 8 ...dxe6 or 8 ...0-0. c5) 12 .. .'ii'g5+ 13 f4 'ikh6! 14 lDxd4 8 •••dxe6 9 'ii'a4+ .:txf4 15 .ixf4 'ikxf4+ 16 'it>bl lDxd4 Slower play with 9 lDe20-0 10 'fi'd2 17 lDf3 (17 lDh3 'ii'e3) 17... lDxf3 18 allows Black enough counterchances 'it'xb4 ..te4+ 19 '�tal lDd4 20 'it'd2 after 10 ...�4+ 11 g3 (ll lDg3 ..te7 !) lDc2+ with a draw (Odessky). ll...'ikh5 12 ..tg2..txf3 13 ..txf3'fi'xf3 d) lllDge2 ..txc3 12 bxc3 lDxe2+ 14 0-0-0 lDa6, but returning the pawn 13 ..txe2f6 'ii' 14 ..txc7 'ikxc3+ 15 straight away by 9 'fi'd2!? is inter �bl 0-0 and Black is OK. esting: 9 ...lDxd4 10 0-0-0 lDbc6 11 e) lllbce2!? lDxe2+ 12lDxe2'it'f6 lDge2 lDf5!? (ll...lDxe2+ 12 ..txe2 13 ..txc7 0-0 14 lDd4 lDxd4 15 'ii'xb4 .,e7 is slightly weaker, D.Pedersen .:tac8 again leaves Black with a satis S.Williams, Arhus 1998) 12 'ti'xd8+ factory game. .:txd8 leads to a small advantage for 10••• ..txc3+ 11 bxc3 exd5 12 cxd5 White in the ending. The alternative 12 0-0-0 'ii'f6 13 9 ...lDc6 (D) cxd5 'ii'xc3+ (Odessky) leads to equal 10 d5 play. In the case of 10 0-0-0 lDxd4,Black 12••• 'ii'xd5 13 .:td1 'ii'cS 14 'ike4+ defends successfully: lDfe7 a) Not ll lDh3? a6. The initiative has passed to White, b) 11 ..te5?! is dubious in view of but Black can maintain the equilib ll... ..tc5, as Kengis indicated. rium. 9 The Bogo-like 2 c4 �b4 + 3 ttJd2 1 d4 e6 2 c4 �b4+ 3 lDd2 (D) • In Section 9.1 we study 3 ...c5 4 a3 .i.xd2+. Compared to the regular Bogo-Indian, Black has derived some benefitfrom his initial move order as now White must take on d2 withhis queen, since the d4-pawn is under attack. • With 3 ...lbf6 (Section 9.2) Black is willing to transpose to a line of the Bogo-Indian Defence (viz. 1 d4 lbf6 2 c4 e6 3 lbf3 .i.b4+ 4 lbbd2, having avoided the 4 .i.d2 main lines). We shallfocus on lines where he prepares to retreat his bishop to e7, and provokes White to occupy With this modest-looking knight the centre. The central pawn-struc move, White wants to gain the bishop ture can take many forms resem pair without weakening his pawn bling the French Defence, Czech structure or spending more than one Benoni or even the Steinitz Defence tempo on the process (compare Sec to the Ruy Lopez! tion 8.5). Black can either acquiesce, relying on his rapid development, or 9.1 prepare to retreat his dark-squared 3 ...c5 (D) bishop when it becomes necessary. In The immediate attack upon the cen the latter case he usually wastes a tre is a logical but weighty decision tempo himself, although the tempo since White can force the exchange of granted to White may not prove too the b4-bishop, leaving Black's dark valuable, as the knight is not very ef squares glaringly weak. fectively placed on d2. We examine 4a3 these two fundamentally differentap If White has serious hopes of an ad proaches in the following sections of vantage, then he has no real choice. 4 this chapter: lbf3 cxd4 5 lbxd4 lbf6 6 a3 .te7 is 110 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK inoffensive, while 4 e3 cxd4 5 exd4 some degree loosened, since the move d5 !? 6 c5 (6 a3 i.e?)6 ...ltlc6 7ltl f3e5 a3 has weakened the b3-square, mak leads to unclear play. After 4 dxc5 ing the c4-pawn vulnerable. Now: ltlf6Black also has no difficulties: 9.1.1: 6 'ii'xd4!? 110 a) 5 ltlf3 i.xc5 6 e3 b6 (6... ltlc6 !? 9.1.2: 6ltlf3 111 7 a3 a5)7 i.e2 i.b7 8 b3 0-0 9 i.b2 i.e?is equal, Dziuba-Riff,Cappelle Ia 9.1.1 Grande 2010. 6 'ii'xd4!? b) 5 g3 i.xc5 6 i.g2 0-0 7 ltlgf3 The white queen will soon have to ltlc6 8 0-0 d5 9 cxd5 (9 a3 a5 10c2 'ii' move again, but the relocation is no d4 11ltlb3i.e? 12 i.g5e5 gave Black bad thing, as it was poorly placed on the initiative in the game Papaioan d2. nou-Elianov, Novi Sad 2009; 9 e3!? is 6 •••ltlf6 7ltlf3 equal) 9 ...exd5 10 ltlb3i.b6 11ltlbd4 This developing move is the main .l:.e8 12 b3 i.g4 13 i.b2 ltle4.The ini continuation. tiative already belongs to Black and The game Kozul-Leventic, Croatia White must be careful to avoid serious Cup, Pula 2002 serves asa curious ex trouble; e.g., 14 h3? i.xf3 15 i.xf3 ample of underestimating the oppo 'ii'f6 16 e3 ltlxg3,G.K uzmin-Eingorn, nent's possibilities: 7 b4 ltlc6 8 'ii'c3 Berlin 1997, or 14 ltlxc6 bxc6 15 (8 'ii'h4 can be met by 8 ...d6 9 i.g5a5 ltle5? ltlxf2, as in Hanisch-M.Mtiller, 10 b5 ltle5or 8 ...a5 9b5 ltle7 10 i.b2 Germany (team event) 2005/6. ltlf5 11 i.xf6 { 11 'ii'f4 d6} 11...'it'c7 4 •••i.xd2+ 5 'ii'xd2 cxd4 (D) with highly unclear play) 8 ...d5 (Black An unbalanced position has arisen: could also consider 8 ...0-0 !? or 8 ...d6, White hopes to use his obvious advan with unclearplay) 9 e3 (9 ltlf3is an al tage on the dark squares but for the ternative) 9 ...e5 10 cxd5 (10 ltlf3 !? d4 time being he is behind in develop 11 'ii'b2 0-0 is unclear) 10... ltlxd5 11 ment. Besides, his queenside is to 'ii'c5? (White should play 11 'ii'd3) THE BOGO-UKE 2 c4 �b4+ 3 tiJd2 111 ll.....lte6 12 ..ltb2 :c8 13 'iWb5? and d) 8 'ii'd1 0-0 (8 ...d5 9 cxd5 exd5 !?) here Black could have won with the 9 e3 e5 10 b4 d6 11 ..lte2 (or 11 ..ltb2 tactical shot 13... tbxe3 !. b6 12 ..lte2a5 ) 1 1...a5 12 b5 tbe7 13 a4 7 •••tb c6 (D) 'flc7with counterplay, I.S okolov-Dorf man, Burgas 1992. e) 8 'ifd6 has the idea of luring the black knight to e4 so as to attack it later. After ...8 tbe4 9 'ii'd3 d5 10 e3 ( 10 b4? 'ii'f6 11 J:ta2tbe5) 10... 0-0 11 'ii'c2 (11 b4 'ii'f6 12 J:ta2 J:td8 is un clear) 11...'ii'a5+ 12 tiJd2 tbd6 there are chances for both sides (M.Gure vich). 8 ...d5 Since the move ...d6 re-establishes some control over the dark squares, it is an idea to bearin mind in many vari ations. For instance, 8 ...d6 9 b4 0-0 10 Almost all the possible moves by ..ltb2e5 is worth examininghere. the white queen have been examined 9 cxd5 exd5 10 g3 0-0 11 ..tg2J:te8 in practice. 12 0-0 ..ltg4 8 'ii'd3!? Black's position is acceptable, al This move looks like the strongest though he may be a little worse. one but these other variations also de serve attention: 9.1.2 a) 8 'ii'f4 ?! e5 (8 ...0-0 is possible 6tiJf3 too) 9 Wg3 e4 10 tbd20-0 11 e3 d5 12 White is going to take on d4 with ..lte2 d4 gave Black the initiative in the knight, but now the advance of Quinn-Miezis, Cork 2005. Black's e-pawn is a way to generate b) 8 'ifh4 d6!? 9 ..ltg5 (9 g4 'iia5+ activity. 10 ..ltd2 'iib6 is unclear) 9 .. .'ii'a5+ 10 6 •••tiJf6 7 tiJxd4 tiJd2( 10 ..ltd2.,f5) 10... tiJe4 11 'ifxe4 7 'ifxd4transposes to Section 9 .1.1. (or 11 ..lte3 d5) 11...'ii'xg5 with equal White must not delay taking on d4 any play. longer: 7 g3?! tbc6 8 tbxd4 'fib6 9 c) 8 'ii'c3 0-0 (8 ...d6 !?) 9 ..ltg5 d6 lbb5 d5 ! is advantageous for Black, (9 ...h6 10 ..ltxf6 'ii'xf6 11 'ii'xf6 gxf6 Kuzubov-Zubarev, Kharkov 2007. 12 0-0-0) 10 c5 (10 ..ltxf6 'ii'xf6 11 7 .•. 0-0 8 e3 'ili'xf6 gxf6 is equal, while 10b4 is met This calm developing move is the by 10.. . e5 and 10 J:td1 by 10 ...tbe4) most common, but 8 f3 !? is very in 10 ...dxc5 11 'ii'xc5tDe4 12 ..ltxd8tbxc5 teresting. Then 8 ...d5 9 cxd5 exd5 10 13 ..ltc7 b6 leads to equality. e3 appears to give Black insufficient 112 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK counterplay, but 8 ...e5 9 li:Jc2 (9 li:Jb5 b) 10 li:Jb5 !? is more dangerous. li:Jc6 is unclear) 9 ...d6 10 e4 .ie6 II After 10... li:Jc6 11 'i!ixd5, Black should .ie2 'ilic7 (or 11...a5) leads to a com avoid 11...li:Jxd5? 12 e4 li:Jf6 13 f3 a6 plicated struggle.On the other hand, 8 14 li:Jc7 !, when White's dark-squared g3 d5 9 cxd5 (9 .ig2?! dxc4 10 0-0 e5 bishop is master of the board. Black 11 li:Jb5 li:Jc6) 9 ...'ilixd5 10 li:Jf3 'ilif5 can defend by 1 l...exd5, but it is better (10... 'i!ie4 is possible too) 11 �g2 for him to resort to tactical methods li:Jc6 12 'ili'f4 'ii'c2 13 li:Jd4 li:Jxd4 14 even earlier: 10... 'ii' b3!? 11 'ii'c3 (11 'i!ixd4 e5 15 'ii'd2 'ii'c7 produces a li:Jc7 is met by 11...li:Jc6 12 li:Jxa8? rather simple and roughly level game. l:!.d8, while 11 'ii'd3 'ii'xd3 12 i..xd3 8 ...d5 (D) li:Jc6 13 0-0 l:!.d8 14 l:!.d1 e5 leads to equality) 11...'i'xc 3+ 12li:Jxc3 l:!.d8 13 i..e2 (13 b4 a5 14 �b2 axb4 15 axb4 l:!.xa1+ 16 i..xa1 li:Ja6 17 b5 li:Jb4 is equal) 13... li:Jc6 14 b4 (14 0-0 can be met by 14... e5 or 14... li:Ja5 ) 14... li:Je5 and Black will gradually equalize. Therefore White usually advances his b-pawn, preparing to develop his queenside pieces. 9b3!? The more aggressive 9 b4 allows Black to engage in close combat with unclear consequences: 9 ...a5 10 b5 (10 i..b2 axb4 11 axb4 li:Je4 12 'ilic2 We have another critical decision l:!.xa1+ 13 i.xa1 'ii'e7 14 'i'b2 e5 15 point. It is desirable for White to ex li:Jf3 li:Jc6is unclear, while 10 cxd5 !? change queens, but the attempt to do can be met by 10... 'ii' xd5 11 b5 li:Jbd7) so simply after 9 cxd5 'i!ixd5 does not 10 ...e5 11 li:Jf3 li:Jbd7 12 cxd5 (or 12 promise any significant advantage: i..b2 e4) 12... e4 13 li:Jd4 li:Je5, Flear a) After 10li:Jf3b6 11 'ii'xd5 (11 b4 Eingom, Berne 1993. is met by 11... i.a6) 11... li:Jxd5 12li:Jd4 The prudent advance of the white (or 12 b4 i.a6 13 b5 i.b7 14 i.b2 pawn by only one square forces Black li:Jd7 15 .:tel li:Jc5) 12... l:td8 Black either to seek complications in another succeeds in neutralizing White's posi way or else to settle for a slightly tional trumps in timely fashion. After worse position. Naturally, we shall fa 13 .ic4 (13 b4 a5 14 b5 �b7 15 .ib2 vour the active approach. li:Jd7 16 e4 li:Jf4) 13... .ia6 14 .ixa6 9 .••li:Je 4!? li:Jxa6 it is already time for White to 9 ...b6 10 i..b2 i.b7 11 l:!.d1 is an ex worry about maintaining an equal po ample of Black settling for a slight dis sition, Miles-Eingom, Ostend 1992. advantage; THE BOGO-LIKE 2 c4 .i..b4+ 3 ti:Jd2 113 10 'iic2 e5 11 cxd5 11 ti:Jf3 is met by ll....i..f5 12 .i..d3 ti:Jd7. ll... ti:J d6 Black must gambit a pawn, since ll...ti:Jxf2?! 12 'iixf2 is not in his fa vour. 12 .!Df3 12 .!bb5?? .!bxb5 13 .i..xb5 'ifa5+ costs White a piece, while after 12 .!be2 .i..f5 13 'ifd l (13 'ifb2 .!bd7 14 .i..d2 l:tc8 15 l:tc1 l:txcl + 16 'ifxc 1 'iff6) 13... .!bd7 14 .i..b2 l:tc8 15 l:.c l 'ii'b6 16 .!bc3 a5 Black is targeting the a3, he drives back the b4-bishop and weak b3-pawn. can then occupy the centre with his 12... .i..f5 13 'ifd1 pawns right away.We divide our cov 13 'ifb2 .!bd7 14 .!bxe5 (14 .i..d2 erage as follows: l:tc8 15 .:c l nxc l+ 16 'ifxc l 'ifb6) 9.2.1: 4 a3 113 14 ....!bxe5 15 'ifxe5 l:te8 16 'ii'd4 .i..e4 9.2.2: 4 .!bf3 0-0 misc. 114 also affords Black enough compensa 9.2.3: 4 .!bf3 0-0 5 a3 .i..e7 e46 116 tion. 13... .!bd7 14 .i..b2 l:tc8 9.2.1 The calmer 14 ...'ii e7 15 .!bd2 l:tfc8 4 a3 .i..e7 5 e4 is also good enough. 5 .!bgf3 0-0 is considered in Sec 15 .!bxe5 .i..c2 tions 9.2.2 and 9.2.3. Black's initiative is worth the sacri 5 ...d5 ficed pawns. 5 ...d6 6 .!bgf3 0-0 transposes to the note to Black's 6th move in Section 9.2 9.2.3. 3 ....!b f6 (D) 6 e5 .!Dfd7 Black wishes to preserve his bishop. We see a similar sequence in Sec Another line with this aim, 3 ...d5 , al tion 9.2.3, to which 7 .!bgf30-0 would lows the unpleasant 4 'ifa4+.!bc6 5 e3, now transpose. Here we shall examine which has scored well for White in other variations, and see what differ practice. ences there are. After the text-move (3 ...Nf6), let's 7 cxd5 note that 4 g3 is ineffective due to White achieves nothing by 7 'ifh5 4 ...c5 !. Therefore, we consider two c5 (7 ...0-0 ! ?) 8 cxd5 g6 9 'iih6 .i..f8 10 main moves for White. With 4 .!Df3 he 'ii'f4 exd5 11 b4!? (11 .i..b5 .i..g7 gives transposes directly to a line of the Black the initiative) l l...cxd4 12 'it'xd4 Bogo-lndian Defence, while with 4 .i..g7 13 f4 .!bf8. 114 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK Besides exchanging on d5, the other answered with 8 ...c5 (8 ...0-0 trans thematic continuation is 7 b4 a5 8 b5 poses to note 'b' to White's 8th move c5: in Section 9.2.3) 9 dxc5 lDc6 10 b4 a5 a) 9 f4 (this move is more logical (1o ... l2Jdxe5 !? 11lDxe5 l2Jxe5 12 i.b2 after the preliminary exchange cxd5) i.f6 13 i.b5+ i.d7) 11 'ifa4 0-0 12 9 ...l2Jb6 10 l2Jgf3 (10 cxd5 l2Jxd5) ..tb2 11i'c7, which was equal in Glady 10 ...lD8d7 with good play for Black. szev-Kogan, Tarragona 2007. b) 9 cxd5 exd5 10 'it'f3(10 f4 cxd4 With the text-move, White makes 11 l2Jgf3 l2Jc5 12 l2Jxd4 f6 13 lD2f3 use of the absence of his knight from fxe5 is also equal) 10... cxd4 11 'ii'xd5 f3, but it does not provide any real 0-0 12 ..tb2 (12 l2Jc4 is answered by benefitfor him. 12... l2Jc5 1311i'xd8 l:txd8 14lDb6l:l.a7) 8 .••c5 9 lDdf3 and now Black can choose between 9 dxc5 is answered by 9 ...a5 , while 12... l:te8, 12... i.g5 and 12... l2Jc5 , with after 9 l2Jgf3 l2Jc6 1 0 i.d3 ( 1 0 dxc5 equality in all cases. a5) 10 ...1!i'b6 11 0-0 a5 (ll ...c4 12 c) 9 lDgf3 cxd4 (9 ...0-0 transposes l2Jxc4is unclear), the mistaken 12 f5 ? to Section 9.2.3) 10 cxd5 (or 10 ..tb2 c4 13 f6 gxf6 14 exf6 lDxf6 left White 0-0) 10 ...exd5 11 lDb3 l2Jc5 12 lDxc5 with a bad position in S.Mohr-King, i.xc5 13 i.d3 ..tg4 14 0-0 l2Jd7 is Dortmund 1989. again equal. 9 .••l2J c6 10 i.d3cxd4 11 b4 7 •.•exd5 (D) White is starting to overreach. 11 l2Je2 l2Jc5 12 b4 l2Jxd3+ 13 'ii'xd3 0-0 14 0-0 f6 is approximately equal. ll ...l2Jb6 12 bS lDaS The game is complicated, but fa vourable for Black. After 13 f5, instead of 13... l2Jbc4 (as played in Erdos Kosic, Hungarian Team Ch 2010/11) the line 13... l2Jac4 14 l2Je2 l2Jd7 de serves attention. 9.2.2 4 l2Jf3 0-0 (D) Sa3 White frequentlydecides to do with 8f4 out this pawn move. Without delving After 8 b4 a5 9 b5 c5 10 bxc6 deeply into details, let us quote two (other moves are discussed in line 'b' continuations that are acceptable for of the previous note) 10... l2Jxc6 11 Black: l2Jgf3 (or 11 lDdf3) 11...f6 Black se a) 5 e3 d5 6 ..td3 c5 7 a3 !? (7 0-0 cures counterplay, and 8 lDgf3 is well l2Jc6 8 dxc5 ..txc59 a3 a5) 7 ...i.xd2+ THE BOGO-LIKE 2 c4 i.b4+ 3 t?:Jd2 115 b5 c5 8 bxc6 (8 e3 d5 transposes to the main line below) 8 ...bxc6 9 c5 d6 10 cxd6 11i'xd6 11 e4'ikc7 12 .i.b2c5, as in Moiseenko-Vitiugov, Hangzhou20 1 1. 6 ...d5 (D) 8 i.xd2 cxd4 9 exd4 dxc4 10 i.xc4 t?Jc6 11 0-0 (11 i.g5 can be met by 1l...b6 or 1l...h6!?) 1l...b6 12 i.g5 i.b7 13 l:.c 1 t?Je7 14 t?Je5 (Dreev Rashkovsky,Palma de Mallorca 1989) 14 ....l:.c8 is equal. b) 5 g3 b6 6 .ltg2.ltb7 7 0-0 i.e7. 7b4 The black bishop voluntarily retreats, This advance is a logical follow-up rather than waiting to be forced. to the move 5 a3. It is also possible to White's 'free' move, t?Jbd2hinders his play 7 'ili'c2 t?Jbd7 8 b4 a5 9 b5 (9 .l:.bl control of the centre, and after both 8 is met by 9 ...axb4 10 axb4 b6 11 .td3 b3 c5 9 i.b2 (9 dxc5 bxc5 is equal) .ltb7 12 0-0 dxc4, while 9 cxd5 !? exd5 9 ...d6 (or 9 ...a6) and 8 .l:te1 d5 9 cxd5 10 b5 i.d6 11 a4 'ii'e7 12 i.d3 b6 is exd5 Black gets a pleasant game, al unclear) 9 ...c5 10 bxc6 bxc6. beit with widely differing strategic If White does not make the b4 ad themes. Only 8 11i'c2 poses some prob vance, then the tempo he has gained lems for Black; after 8 ...c5 (8 ...d5 plays little role. For instance, 7 b3 b6 8 leads to a more complicated struggle) .tb2 .tb7 9 i.d3 t?Jbd7 (or 9 ...c5) 10 9 e4 d5 10 exd5 (Black equalizes more 0-0 c5 can lead to a standard type of easily after 10 cxd5 exd5 11 e5 t?Jfd7) position with hanging pawns. 7 i.d3is 10 ...exd5 11 dxc5 .txc5 12 t?Jb3 t?Ja6 the most common move in practice, (or 12... i.e7 ) accurate defence is re but after 7 ...c5 8 dxc5 (8 b3 can be met quired for him to equalize. by 8 ...b6 or the unclear 8 ...cxd 4!? 9 5 ....te7 6 e3 exd4 dxc4 10 bxc4 e5 11 d5 b5) 8 ...a5 Now the line 6 g3 b6 7 .tg2 .tb7 8 9 b3 (after 9 cxd5 both 9 ...exd5 10 b3 b4 (8 0-0 c5) 8 ...c5 9 dxc5 bxc5 offers t?Jbd7 11 i.b2 t?Jxc5 and... 9 11i'xd5 White no prospects for an advantage. give Black equal play) 9 ...t?Jbd7 10 He also achieves little after 6 b4 a5 7 0-0 (10 .ltb2 is weaker in view of 116 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 10 ...lbxc5 11 .i.c2 dxc4) 10 ...lbxc5 Black has nothing to worry about. 7 •••a5 8 b5 c5 9 bxc6 Black safely defends himself after 9 dxc5 lbbd7 !? 10 cxd5 (10 c6 bxc6 11 bxc6 lbc5) 10... lbxd5 (10 ... lbxc5 !? 11 dxe6 .i.xe6 12lbd4.i.d5 is unclear) or 9 .i.b2 lbbd7 10 .i.e2 (10 ..id3 b6 11 lbe5.i.b7) 10 ... b6 11 0-0 .i.b7 12lbe5 (too ambitious) 12... cxd4 ! (freeingc5) 13 exd4 lbxe5 14 dxe5 lbd7 15 .i.f3 lbc5 with good play for Black. 9 •••bxc6 10 c5 lbfd7 11 i.e2 (D) Or 11 .i.b2 e5 12 lbxe5 lbxe5 13 6 ...d5 dxe5 lDd7. It is of dubious value for 6 ...d6 !? is an experimental but inter- White to play 11 'i!fa4 e5 12lDb3e4 13 esting idea. Black intends a subsequent lbg1 'ilfe8 14 i.d2 ..id8 15 l:tbl i.c7, ...e5 and argues that the d2-knight is Jankovic-Palac, Rijeka 2009. poorly placed in the types of structure that arise: a) 7 .i.d3e5 !? 8 0-0 (8 dxe5 dxe5 9 lbxe5 l:te8 is unclear; 8 d5 aS) 8 ...exd4 9 lbxd4 lbfd7 (or 9 ... lbc6) is in the spirit of the Steinitz Defence to the Ruy Lopez. b) 7 i.e2 c5 (7 ...lbbd7 8 0-0 e5 is similar to a standard position of the Old Indian Defence, where the knight would normally be on c3) 8 d5 e5 (8 ...lbbd7 and 8 ...lbe8 !? are also pos sible) 9 b4 lbbd7 10 0-0 (Christian sen-Vidarsson, Reykjavik 1988) and now 10 ...a5 !? is a useful move, forcing ll... e5 12 0-0 e4 White to stabilize the position on the White is playing a kind of French queenside. Defence. Both sides have prospects. 7e5 7 cxd5 exd5 8 e5 lDfd7 transposes 9.2.3 to note 'b' to White's 8th move, but 4 lDf3 0-0 5 a3 .i.e7 6 e4 (D) some other moves are of independent This is White's most aggressive con importance: tinuation, although here Black can get a) 7 ..id3 dxe4 8 lbxe4 lbxe4 9 counterplay more easily. .i.xe4 c5 10 dxc5 (other lines are 10 THE BOGO-LIKE 2 c4 i..b4+ 3 tiJd2 117 i..e3 f5 , 10 0-0 f5 11 i..c2 cxd4 and 10 find a good way to release it) 10 ...a5 d5 exd5 11 i.xd5tiJd7) 10... 'ii'xd l+ 11 11 lDb3 dxc4 12 i.xc4 a4 13 lDxc5 'itxdl i..xc5 (ll ...f5!? 12 i..c2 i..xc5, lDxc5 14 dxc5 'ii'xdl 15 :xdl lDa5 16 Shankland-Fodor, Budapest 2009) 12 i..b5 lDb3 17 l:tb1 i..xc5 and Black b4(12 'ite2can be met by 12.. .f5, while will have a slightly worse, but quite 12 i.e3i.xe3 is equal) 12 ...i.. xf2 13 c5 defensible ending. f5 14 i..bl (14 i..c2 lDc6 15 i..b2 b) Making the pawn exchange 8 lld8+) 14... tDc6 15 l:.a2 l:r.d8+ and it is cxd5 exd5 before playing 9 b4(here the not clear to what extent White's initia line 9 i..d3 c5 10 0-0 lDc6 11 :el a5 tive compensates for the pawn, I.Khen leads to equality and in the case of 12 kin-Ulybin, Borzhorni (junior event) lDfl?! cxd4 Black's position even be 1988. comes preferable) 9 ...a5 10 b5 is the b) 7 'ifc2 dxe4 8 lDxe4 lDxe4 9 main alternative to our main line. In 'ii'xe4 f5 10 'ifc2 (or 10 'ii'e3 c5 11 stead of the standard 10... c5, Black has dxc5 i..f6 12 i.e2 e5) 10... c5 11 dxc5 an interesting alternativein 10 ...f6 !? 11 tDc6 12 i.f4 i.f6(or 12 ...'ii' a5+) gives 'ii'b3 'ith8 12 'ii'xd5 (Miljkovic-Badev, Black counterplay. Nis 2008), when 12... tDxe5 13 'ii'xd8 7 •••tiJ fd7 (D) lDxf3+ 14 tDxf3 l:.xd8 leads to equal ity. 8 ... a5 9 b5 c5 10 cxd5 10 i..d3 cxd4 11 cxd5 (11 'ii'c2 h6 12 lDb3 a4 13 lDbxd4 ltJc5) 1l...exd5 is of equal value. After 10 i..b2 cxd4 11 i.xd4 (11 cxd5 exd5 and 11 ..ie2 tDc5 12 ltJxd4tiJbd7 are also possible) 11...lDc5 12 i.e2 liJbd7 13 0-0 b6 the black pieces take up useful squares. 10•.• exd5 11 i.d3 cxd4 12 lDb3 'ii'c7!? 13 0-0 Weaker is 13 'ii'c2?! 'ii'c3+ 14 i..d2 'ii'xc2 15 i..xc2 f6 (15... lDb6 !?) 16 exf6 i.xf6, as in Bartels-Kahlert, Hamburg 8b4 1992. Or: 13 •..tDxe5 14 lDxe5 'ii'xe5 15 .:tel a) 8 i..d3 !? c5 9 0-0 lDc6 10 :el 'ii'd6 16 a4 'ii'd8 (White maintains the central tension, Little by little Black neutralizes his reckoning that it is hard for Black to opponent's initiative. 10 The Bogo-like 2 c4 jLb4 + 3 Ji.d2 1 d4 e6 2 c4 i.b4+ 3 i.d2 (D) advantage. He can continue with either liJf3 and g3 or liJc3 and e4 (or e3). Black may respond with two wholly different development schemes. 3 ... a5 is somewhat riskier, but leads to more original play, with a transposi tion to standard theory less likely. Black seeks to complicate the game and obtain counterplay. Then: • 4 e4 and 4 a3 are the subject of Sec tion 10.3. • Section 10.4 covers 4 liJf3. We fo cus on a standard Bogo-lndian plan, but where Black starts with 4 ...d6 This is White's most common re instead of 4 ...liJf6. This brings some sponse to the bishop check. We shall interesting new ideas and nuances investigate two natural continuations into the play. for Black(3 ...i.xd2+ and 3...a5),which • 4liJc3 (Section 10.5) is an immedi can lead to sharplydiffering strateg ies. ate switch to Nimzo-lndian chan The immediate exchange 3 ...i.xd2+ nels. Whose extra move (i.d2 vs often transposes to lines of the Bogo ...a5 ) will prove more useful? lndian, though both sides have some independent options. Our coverage is 10.1 divided up as follows: 3 ...i.xd2+ (D) • Section 10.1 covers 4 liJxd2,which The bishop exchange gives Black creates no difficulties for Black as freedom to develop and manoeuvre, long as he adopts the most appropri while the slight loss of tempo is not of ate central structure. vital importance, as neither the queen • The recapture with the queen, 4 nor the knight will be very effectively �xd2 (Section 10.2), gives White placed on d2. On the other hand, better chances of establishing an White will connect his rooks more THE BOGO-LIKE 2 c4 i..b4+ 3 i..d2 119 6 ...e5 7 ii.d3 tiJf6 8 0-0 0-0 9 .l:.el 9 h3 is weaker, since 9 ...tiJh5 seizes the initiative. 9 ...i. g4 10 'i!Vb3 c5 11 d5 Otherwise Black's queen's knight will reach d4. ll... tiJa6 Both sides have chances. Given the opportunity, Black will create play on the queenside by ...tiJc7 and ...b5 . 10.2 3•.• i.xd2+ 4 'i!Vxd2 tiJf6 (D) rapidly, and this may play a role in the After the exchange of dark-squared battle for the centre. bishops, adopting a Dutch formation 4 tiJxd2 with 4 ...f5 seems less well-founded 4 'i!Vxd2, which we examinein Sec than in lines like 2 ...ii.b4+ 3 tiJc3. tion 10.2, definitelyoffers White more Having said that, it appears to be an prospects. As a rule, taking with the interesting option for Black in Sec knight is effectivein this type of posi tion 10.3.2, where the position is only tion only if Black plays, or has already slightly different. played, ...d5 . In the current situation he should therefore make full use of his flexible position and prepare the ...e5 advance. 4 •.• d6 5 tiJgf3 5 g3 e5 6 e3 exd4 7 exd4 tiJf6 (7 ...'i!Ve 7+!?) 8 i..g2 0-0 does not create any problems for Black, I.Sokolov Short, London 2008. 5 •••'i!V e7 A balanced position arises after 5 ...tiJf6 6 e4 (6 g3 0-0 7 i.g2 'ili'e7 8 0-0 e5) 6 ...0-0 7 i.d3 (7 e5 dxe5 8 dxe5 tiJfd7 9 'ili'c2 tiJc6 10 'ili'c3 f6) 7 ...e5 . Afterplacing his knight on f6, Black 6e4 has two fundamentally different plans After 6 g3 e5 (threatening to attack in the centre: either ...d5, or else ...d6 by ...e4 -e3) 7 dxe5 dxe5 8 e3? tiJf6 9 followed by ...e5 . Since we shall be re ii.g2 0-0 Black's position is prefera ferring to this choice of plans on many ble, To Nhat-Kosic, Budapest 2009. occasions, for convenience we shall 120 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK designate them as Plan D ( ...d5) and a) 7 g3 is considered in the note to Plan E ( ...d6 and ...e5). Black's 5th move in Section 10.2.2. Of course, firstWhite must choose b) 7 e3 'ii'e7 8 .te2 (8 h3!? e5 9 g4 how to develop his pieces: either 5 lbc6 is unclear, while 8 .l:!.dl e5 9 dxe5 lbc3 (with possible e4 ideas) or 5 lbf3 dxe5 10 lbd5 lbxd5 11 cxd5 e4 led to (followed by g3, .tg2, etc.) and thus an equal position in Tregubov-Asrian, one of four different opening configu French Team Ch 2007) 8 ...e5 (8 ...b6 !? rations can arise on the board. 9 0-0 .tb7 10 'ii'c2 c5) 9 'ii'c2!? (9 0-0 10.2.1: 5 lbc3 120 e4 10 lbe1 .l:!.e8, Koziak-Liogky, Sau 10.2.2: 5 lbf3 121 tron 2002) 9 ....l:!.e8 10 0-0 lbbd7 is un clear (and like a King's Indian Attack 10.2.1 with colours reversed). 5 lbc3 0-0 c) 7e4 lbc6 8l:.d1 (8 .te2 e5 equal Challenging White to occupy the izes; castling queenside by 8 0-0-0 'ii'e7 centre. This move is more flexible sharpens the situation, but that is all) than the immediate 5 ...d5, and in case 8 ...'ii' e7 9 ..i.e2 (9 e5 dxe5 and now 10 of 5 ...d6 6 e4 0-0 (Plan E) Black needs lbxe5 .l:!.d8 is equal, while 10 dxe5 to take the reply 7 f4 into consider lbd7 !? 11 'ii'e3 'ii'b4 leads to unclear ation. play) 9 ...e5 10 dxe5 (or 10 0-0 �g4) 6 lbf3 (D) 10 ...dxe5 lllbd5'ii' d6 (ll...'ii'd8!?) 12 If White is tempted by 6 e4, Black 'ii'e3 lbb4 13 0-0 lbbxd5 14 cxd5 ..i.d7 creates double-edged play after 6 ...d5 ! 15 lbd2 'iih6 with a satisfactory posi 7 e5 lbe4 8e3 'ii' (or 8 lbxe4 dxe4) tion for Black. 8 ...c5 . 7e3 This position is highly reminiscent of the Queen's Gambit Declined. 7 ...'ii' e7 8 cxd5 By determining the pawn-structure, White rules out the liquidation of the centre with ...dxc4 followed by ...c5. Other moves offer White little; in the following lines Black should gradu ally achieve equality: a) 8 �d3 dxc4 9 ..i.xc4c5 (9 ...b6 !?) 10 0-0 l:.d8 11 'ii'e2 lbc6 12 .l:.ad1 (or 12 .l:.fd1) 12 .....i.d7 (the pawn exchange 12... cxd4 13 exd4 increases the danger of the break d5) 13 a3 ..i.e8,Almeida 6 ...d5 Fedorchuk, Madrid 2010. Black makes his choice. The alter b) 8 a3 .l:!.d8 (8 ...lbbd7 !?) 9 ltdl (9 native is Plan E, viz. 6 ...d6. Then: cxd5 !?) 9 ...a6 10 'ii'c2 dxc4 11 �xc4 THE BOGO-LIKE 2 c4 it..b4+ 3 it..d2 121 c5 12 dxc5 .l:txd1 + 13 'ii'xd 1 'ifxc5 14 while 10 0-0 is met by 1 O ...i.g4 or 'i!Vd8+'iVf8 15 'ii'c7 lbbd7. 10... .l:td8. c) 8 'ii'c2 .l:td8 9 .l:td1 (9 a3 c5 10 10••• .l:t d8 11 a3!? cxd5 exd5 11 i.e2 lbc6 12 dxc5 'fixeS Again White adopts a useful pro 13 0-0 d4) 9 ...a6 10 e4 dxe4 11 lbxe4 phylactic measure. He can also play and now Black can choose between 11 0-0 ltJe4 12 �d 1 i.f5 13 'ii'b3 ltJa5 1I...liJbd7 and the unclear continua 14 �c2 lbc6 15 a3 l:f.d6, as in Riazan tion 11... lbc6. tsev-Kulicov, Dubai 2005. d) 8 .l:tc1 .l:td8(8 ...lbbd7 !?) 9 a3 (or ll••• ltJe4 12 �c2 i.rs 9 cxd5 exd5 10 i.d3 ltJc6)9 ...dxc4 10 White's position is preferable, but i.xc4c5 11 0-0 lbc6 12 .l:tfd 1 b6. Black retains counterplay because his 8 •••exd5 9 i.d3 (D) pieces are active, Granda-Fedorchuk, Pamplona 2010. 10.2.2 5 ltJf3 (D) White can instead start with 5 g3 (which also prevents a transposition to a Queen's Indian line by 5 ...b6). Then if Black wishes to adopt Plan E, he needs to be on the alert: after 5 ...0-0 6 i.g2,the line 6 ...d6 7 e4 e5 8 lbe2 (Avrukh) 8... c5 9 d5 gives him a solid but passive position without real chances of counterplay. To avoid this scenario he should prefer 6 ...ltJc6 !? 7 9 ••.ltJc6 lbf3 (7 e4 is met by 7 ...d5 8 e5 lbe4, This is a rather adventurous con while 7 lbc3d5 is equal) 7 ...d6, etc. tinuation: Black will rapidly develop his queen's bishop, but the poorly placed knight can become a problem. The standard 9 ...c6 10 0-0 lbbd7 11 �c2 .l:te8 is quite acceptable; for ex ample, 12 .l:tab1 ltJe4 (Black should refrain from weakening the queen side by 12... a5 ?!) 13 b4 liJdf6 14 b5 (14ltJe5 ltJxc3 15 'ii'xc3 lbe4) 14 ...c5 15 dxc5 lbxc5. 10 h3 10 i.b5 i.g4 11 i.xc6 i.xf3 12 gxf3 bxc6 13 l:f.cl �e6 is unclear, 122 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK Black must soon choose between ...i.b7 . For the time being, Black's Plan D and Plan E. In the latter case he king is safe in the centre. can wait a little (i.e. 5 ...0-0 6 g3 d6), 7 i.g2 c6 (D) but ...d5 is most effective if played right away. 5 ...d5 Let us briefly consider 5 ...d6 6 g3 0-0 7 lt'lc3 lt'lc6: a) 8 .l:td1 a6 (White has hindered ...e5, so Black turns his attention to flank play; 8 ...'ii'e 7?! is weaker due to 9 �g2 e5 10 lt'ld5) 9 i.g2 .:tb8. Now 10 0-0 b5 (Tregubov-G.Meier, Merida 2007) leads to equality, and after 10 d5 (Avrukh) 10 ...lt'le7 11lt'ld4e5 12lt'lc2 lt'lg4 there are chances for both sides; it is not entirely clear what the knight's journeyfrom f3 to c2 has achieved. 8 0-0 b) 8 i.g2e5 9 0-0 (9 h3 .:l.e8 10 0-0 Black's delay in castling proves e4 11 lt'lg5 i.f5 is unclear) 9 ...i.g4 useful in the case of 8 'ii'c2 b6!? 9 (putting pressure on the d4-pawn to lt'lbd2 (or 9 lt'lc3 i.b7 10 e4) 9 ...i.b7 provoke its advance or exchange) 10 1 0 e4 lt'lxe4 11 lt'lxe4 dxe4 12 'ii'xe4 d5 (10 e3 .l:te8and 10 dxe5 !? lt'lxe5are 'ii'c7 (now everything is ready for the also possible) 10... lt'le7 11 lt'le1 'ii'd7 ...c5 advance; it is less accurate to play 12 e4 �h3 13 lt'ld3 (the hasty 13 f4? 12... 0-0 13 0-0 'iic7 14 lt'le5) 13 lt'le5 exf4 14 gxf4 lt'lg6unexpectedly led to lt'lxe5 14 dxe5 0-0-0! with equality. problems for White in S.Ernst-Van 8 lt'lc3 is also of independent im den Doel, Dutch Team Ch 201011 1) portance, as this is the most opportune 13... i.xg2 14 'it>xg2 c6 with satisfac moment for White to offerthis gambit. tory play for Black, Kharitonov-Lo 8 ...dxc4 9 e4 affords White enough ginov, Russian Team Ch, Kazan 1995. compensation for the pawn, so it is Although in these variations White simpler to play 8 ...0-0 !? 9 lt'le5 lt'lxe5 does not achieve any real advantage, 10 dxe5 lt'ld7 11 f4 lt'lb6 12 cxd5 exd5, Black's margin of strategic safety is with equality. small. Therefore Plan D ( ...d5) looks 8 •••0-0 more reliable in this particular situa There is nothing to be gained from tion. delaying castling any further. So far 6 g3 lt'lbd7 White has played very natural and Black prioritizes queenside devel even obvious moves, but now he must opment. ...c6 will come next, and if clarify his intentions and decide how circumstances allow, then ...b6 and to develop his queen's knight. THE BOGO-LIKE 2 c4 if..b4+ 3 if..d2 123 9 'ii'c2 both yield equal chances) 12... f6 13 White has plenty of other possibili fid2 tt:'l5b6and 14... e5, Black obtains ties: satisfactory play. a) The 9 tt:'lc3 gambit is less effec 9 ...b6 (D) tive now since Black can reply 9 ...dxc4 10 e4 e5. b) 9 b3 actually means a loss of time: 9 ...b6 (the more vigorous 9 ...b5 !? leads to unclear play) I 0 tt:'le5( 10 tt:'lc3 il..a6) IO ...lt:Jxe5 11 dxe5 tt:'ld7 12 f4 b5 13 cxd5 cxd5 14 e4 (14 tt:'la3'ii' b6+ 15 'iti>h1 il..b7 was equal in Ki.Georgiev Parligras, Athens 2007) 14 ...dxe4 15 .l:!.d1 (15 il..xe4 il..b7) 15... 'i¥h6+ 16 1i'd4 il..b7 with equal play. c) The flanksortie 9 tt:'la3is not ac tive enough. By playing 9 ...b6 10 .l:!.ac 1 il..b7 11 .l:!.fd 1 fle7, Black calmly con tinues to prepare ...c5. Then 12 tt:'le5 Step by step Black makes progress .l:!.ac8 13 f4 .l:!.fd8 led to equal chances with his plan. Now in the case of 10 in the game IlinCic-Andersson, Bel cxd5 cxd5 11 .l:!.c1 il..b7 White cannot grade 2000. derive any benefitfrom his temporary d) Avrukh suggested 9 tt:'le5, which possession of the c-file. leads to approximate equality after 10 tt:'lbd2 9 ...tt:'lxe5 10 dxe5 tt:'ld7 11 f4 f6 12 The more active 10 tt:'lc3!? i.b7 is exf6 lt:Jxf6,as in Delchev-Riff, Pamp an interesting alternative. Black must lona 2010. defend carefully: 11 :fd1 (the 'other e) 9 .l:!.c!? 1 is a strong rejoinder to rook', 11 .l:!.adl!?, can be considered; Black's standardplan . Although 9 ...b6 instead, 11 tt:'ld2 c5 is unclear, while has been tested with some success at 11 e4 dxc4!? 12 e5 tt:'ld5 13 tt:'le4c5 14 high level, it nevertheless makes sense tt:'ld6 tt:'lb4 is equal) 11...fie7 12 tt:'ld2 for Black to change the subject and (12 e4 should be met by 12... dxc4, freehis gamewith centralplay. Should with an unclear position, since the the centre become open, it may appear weaker 12 ...dxe4 13 tt:'le5allows White that the wrong rook has occupied c 1. the initiative) 12... c5 13 cxd5 tt:'lxd5 After 9 ...fle7 !? 10 fle3 (10fif4 is an (not 13... exd5 ?! 14 tt:'lc4 and again other idea, while 10 tt:'la3 .l:!.e8 11 fif4 White has the initiative) 14 tt:'lxd5exd5 e5 12 dxe5 tt:'lxe5 13 tt:'lxe5 flxe5 is (14... i.xd5 15 e4) 15 dxc5 .:tfc8!? 16 equal) 10 ...dxc4 11 .l:!.xc4(1 1 a4 e5 !?) tt:'lfl .l:!.xc5with an acceptable position 11...tt:'ld5 12 fig5 (12 fle4 lt:J5f6 13 for Black. flc2e5 and 12 fid2 tt:'l5b6 13 l:lc1 e5 10••• i.b7 11 b4 124 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK White seizes space on the queen 16... tbxe4 17 tbxe4 dxe4 18 'ii'xe4 side. He can also play in the centre but tiJf6 with the knight on d2, it is hard for him Black has enough counterplay for to make progress: equality, Delorme-Stupak, Chotowa a) 11.l:!.ad1 can be met by 11...c5!?. 20 10. b) 11 .l:!.fd 1 'ike7 12 e4 dxe4 13 tbxe4 c5 leads to equality after 14 10.3 tbe5 tbxe5 15 dxe5 tbxe4 16 i.xe4 3 ...a5 (D) i.xe4 17 'ikxe4 .l:!.ad8 or 14 tbxf6+ tbxf6. c) 11 e4 c5 !? 12 cxd5 (although White's position is more pleasant after 12 exd5 exd5, in the long run every thing must end with exchanges and a likely draw) 12... exd5 13 e5 tbe4 14 tbxe4 (14 'ii'a4 cxd4 15 'ii'xd4 'ii'e7 is also equal) 14 ...dxe4 15 tbh4cxd4 16 i.xe4i.xe4 17 'ii'xe4 tbc5 18 'ii'g4(Ju Wenjun-Ding Yixin, Olongapo City (women) 2010) 18... g6 with equality. ll ... aS 12 a3'fie7 13 cS After 13 'ilih2 .l:!.fb8 14 .l:!.fc l (14 cxd5 can be answered with the equal The advance of the rook's pawn is izing 14 ...cxd5 or the more dynamic risky, since White has an extra tempo 14 ...exd5 !?) 14 ...c5 15 bxc5 bxc5 the to fight for the centre. At some later game is balanced, Psakhis-Andersson, point, the weakening of the b5-square Polanica Zdroj 1997. may prove a further defect of the pawn 13... i.a6 14 l:.fe1 axb4 15 axb4 move. However, it is not so simple for i.bS White to make use of these shortcom Black has finishedhis development ings, while Black's plan also has some and does not object to the exchange of major positive points, as we shall see. rooks. The main moves are 4 tbf3(Section 16 e4 10.4) and 4 tbc3 (Section 10.5). Here The c6-pawn is the only weakness we look at the following pawn moves: in Black's position, so White tries to 10.3.1: 4 e4 124 blast open lines towards it. The at 10.3.2: 4 a3!? 126 tempt to seize the a-file with 16 e3 l:lfb8 17 'ii'c3 h6 18 .l:!.a3 is parried by 10.3.1 18... 'ii' d8 19 .l:!.ea1 l:lxa3 20 .l:!.xa3 tbe8, 4e4 as in Evdokimov-Fedorchuk, Marra This is the most natural reaction, but kesh 2010. it does not give any Black particular THE BOGO-LIKE 2 c4 Ji.b4+ 3 Ji.d2 125 trouble. He has even fewer problems ..ltxe6with chancesfor both sides, Van in the case of the extravagant 4 'ifa4 Beek-M.de Jong, Groningen 2004 . ..ltxd2+ (4 ...'ii' e7 !?) 5 ltJxd2 ltJe7 6 tt'lgf3 0-0 7 c5 (or 7 e3 d6) 7 ...d6 8 cxd6 cxd6 9 e3 ii.d7 10 ..ltb5'ii' e8 with equality, Vaganian-Eingorn, Moscow 1990. Of course, 4 ..ltxb4?! axb4 is not to be feared, as Black has useful a-file pressure while the c3-square is denied to the white pieces. 4 •••d6 (D) 4 ...d5 is an alternative: a) 5 e5 tt'le7 6 liJf3 (6 tt'lc3 dxc4 7 a3 .ltxc3 8 bxc3 b5 is unclear, Mar zolo-Apicella, French Team Ch 2007) 6 ...tt'lbc6 7 ..ltc3 (7 ltJc3 dxc4 8 liJb5 tt'la7is equal) 7 ...tt'lf5 offers Black sat 5 tt'lc3 isfactory prospects. 5 a3 .ixd2+ 6xd2 'ii' e5 leads to b) 5 cxd5 exd5 6 e5 tt'le7 (or equality. White achieves little with the 6 ...tt'lc6 !? 7 tt'lf3 ..ltg4 8 .ib5 ltJge7 9 modest 5 tt'lf3 tt'lf6 6 'ii'c2 (or 6 .id3) 0-0 0-0 10 .ie3 f6, Cousigne-Murey, 6 ...e5 , while after 5 .id3tt'lc6 !? (5 ...e5 French Team Ch 200617) 7 tt'lc3 (7 is equal) 6 tt'lf3'ii' f6 White unexpect liJf3 canbe met by 7 ...c5, while 7 a3 edly faces problems with the defence ..ltxd2+8 'ii'xd2 0-0 9 tt'lc3c5 is equal) of his d4-pawn. 7 ...c5 8 ..ltb5+ (8 a3 ..ltxc3 9 bxc3 s •••es 6 a3 ..ltxc3 7 ..ltxc3 tt'lbc6 and now 10 tt'lf3 is unclear, 7 bxc3 f5 (or 7 ...tt'lc6 8 .ie3 tt'lf6!? while 10 ..ltb5 'ii'b6 11 'ii'a4 ..ltd7 12 9 f3, when 9 ...a4 and 9 ...tt'lh5 are both l:tb1 0-0 13 tt'le2?tt'la7 turned bad for possible) 8 exf5 .ixf59 ii.e3ltJc6 also White in Aleksandrov-Roiz, European deserves attention, Zayats-I.Vasilevich, Ch, Warsaw 2005) 8 ...tt'lbc6 9 a3 ..ltxc3 Russian Women's Team Ch, Dagomys 10 .ixc3 'ii'b6 11 a4 0-0, Brunner 2009. Edouard, French Team Ch, Guingamp 7 •••tt'lf6 8 f3 exd4 9 'ii'xd4 tt'lc6 2010. White has the advantage of the c) 5 a3 ..ltxd2+ 6 tt'lxd2 tt'le7 7 bishop-pair, but lags behind in devel tt'lgf3 tt'lbc6 8 'ii'c2 (8 .i.e2 0-0 9 0-0 opment and his queenside is weak dxe4 1 0 ltJxe4 liJf5 11 d5 exd5 12 ened. The question is who can make cxd5 tt'lce7 13 tt'lc3 c6 was equal in more of his trumps. Bagirov-Eingorn, Minsk 1983, while 10 'iff2 8 'ii'a4 0-0 9 0-0-0 dxe4 10 ltJxe4tt'lf5 10 'ii'd2 is less accurate, as 10... 0-0 gives Black enough chances) 8 ...dxe4 11 tt'le2 liJd7 12 tt'lg3 tt'lc5 shows. 9 'ii'xe4 tt'lf5 10 d5 tt'lce7 11 dxe6 White must lose a tempo by 13 'it'c2, 126 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK when 13... 1Wg5 !? could be tried in pressure, but the addition of the moves stead of 13 ...11Vh4, as played in Tis a3 and ...a5 renders the situation un- dall-Korchnoi, European Team Ch, clear. Play can continue 8 ...1We7 9 Haifa 1989. lbf3 (9 lbh3 is unclear) 9 ...0-0 (the 10.•• .i.e6 11 lDh3 lDe5 sharper 9 ...e5 is in the style of the The game is unclear. Classical Dutch) lO 0-0 c6, setting up a Stonewall structure after lll:tfe 1 d5. 10.3.2 6 lDc3 d6 7 lDf3 4a3!? Before playing e4, White should A subtle positional idea: White in hinder the counter-advance ...e5 as tends to play the 3 ....i.xd2+ line with much as possible. 7 e4 is inaccurate the additional moves a3 and ...a5, because after 7 ...e5 !? (7 ...0-0 8 lDf3 which can be to his advantage. A transposes to the main line below) 8 slight variation on this theme is also dxe5 (8 lDf3 exd4 is equal) 8 ...dxe5 9 possible: 4 lbf3 d6 5 a3 !? �xd2+ 6 'iVxd8+ 'it>xd8 White's initiative is of a 'iVxd2. temporary nature. 4 •••.il.xd2+ 5 'iVxd2 (D) 7 ••. 0-0 8 e4 Playing by analogy with standard Bogo-lndian lines with 8 g3 leaves the c4-pawn without proper protection and makes Black's counterplay easier. 8 ...lbbd7 9 .i.g2 (9 l:td1 'iVe7 lO �g2 lbb6 11 'iVd3e5 12 c5 dxc5 is unclear) 9 ...e5 lO 0-0 (10 dxe5 lbxe5 is equal) lO ...exd4 11 lbxd4 (11 'iVxd4 is met by 11...lDc5) 11...lbb6 (11 ...a4!?) 12 b3 a4 led to a level game in Borovi kov-Kosten, Sautron 2005. 8 •••lbc6 9l:tdl! 9 ..lte2?! is evidently weaker be cause Black may continue 9 ...e5 10 d5 Now Black's only reasonable op (10 0-0?! �g4) lO... lbe7 11 0-0 (or 11 tions are a Dutch formation and Plan E c5 lbg6) 11...lbg6. ( ...d6 and ...e5). 9 •••1We7 10 �e2 5 •••lb f6 After lO e5 dxe5 11 dxe5 lbd7 5 ...f5 !? is an acceptable alternative, Black finishes his development by even if one may have some doubts ...lbc 5, ...b6, ....i.b7 and ...l:td8, with a about this plan in general. Then 6lDc3 satisfactory position; for example, 12 lbf6 7 e3 b6 and 6 lbf3lbf6 7 g3 b6 'iVe3 lDc5 13 lbe4 b6! 14 lbxc5'iVxc5 should be OK for Black. 6 g3 lDf6 7 15 'iVe4�b7 16 �d3 g6 . .i.g2d6 8 lbc3 keeps him under more 10 ••• e5 11 dxe5 (D) THE BOGO-LIKE 2 c4 iL.b4+ 3 Ji.d2 127 Black is not endangered by II d5 of the white queenside, Black keeps ltlb8 12 b4 ltla6 orespecially 11ltld5 possibilities of counterplay. ltlxd5 12 cxd5 ltlxd4 13 ltlxd4 exd4 14 'ifxd4 f5 . 10.4 3 •..a5 4 ltlf3 (D) 4 g3 has no particular advantages compared to playing 4 ltlf3 followed by g3. Black can reply 4 ...ltlc6, meet ing 5 ..tg2 with 5 ...d5 !?, and 5 ltlf3 with 5 ...d6, transposing to Section 10.4.1. He can also choose 4 ...ltlf6 or 4 ...f5 , which transpose to other open ings. ll... ltlxe5 Here is where the a-pawn moves hurt Black. We saw the same moves up to this point in note 'c' to Black's 5th move in Section 10.2.1, but continu ing the analogy by 11...dxe5 12 ltld5 leads to a difficult game for Black, who is deprived of ...ltlb4 ideas. There fore he acquiesces to White having a greater share of the centre. This flexible continuation allows 12 ltld4 both sides plenty of choice in their Or 12 0-0 ltlg6, attacking the e4- scheme of development. For instance, pawn. And in the case of 12 ltlxe5 Black could now switch to standard 'ifxe5 !? (12... dxe5 13 ltld5 is still theoretical lines by 4 ...ltlf6 (Bogo preferable for White) 13 f4 (13 'ii'd4 Indian Defence) or even 4 ...f5 with a iL.e6) 13... 'ii' e7 14 iL.f3 (14 'ii'd4 l:.e8) form of Dutch Defence. 14 ...ltlxe4 ! 15 iL.xe4 (15 ltlxe4 f5) 4 ...d6 15 ...iLf5 Blackis just in time to sim- But this reply is the next link in the plify the game painlessly. chain that constitutes Black's plan, 12.•. ltlg6 13 f3 iL.d7 14 0-0 'ife5!? and enables him to create original po This useful manoeuvre activates the sitions with their own subtleties. queen. White's position is slightly 10.4.1: 5 g3 128 better, but because of the vulnerability 10.4.2: 5ltlc3 129 128 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK For the alternative 5 a3 !?, see Sec 1Sllc6 �d7 19lla6 llb220 e3 lieS 21 tion 10.3.2. lie1 lla2 22 l:.xa5 .l:l.bS23 a4 .:lbb224 llfl g6 25 .l:l.aS (25 g4 llb4 26 liaS 10.4.1 llbxa4 27 llhS c5) 25 ...h5 the game 5 g3 must end in a draw. This is White's standard reaction in 6 •••e5! (D) the Bogo-Indian Defence. 5 e3 is too meek since 5 . ..lbf6 6 Ji.d3 ..ixd2+ 7 'ifxd2 1i'e7 equalizes without any par ticular difficulty. 5 ••• tbc6 6 Ji.g2 The routine bishop development is often played automatically, but more problems for Black arise in the varia tion 6 tbc3!? tbf6: a) 7 a3 ..ixc3 S ..ixc3 tbe4 9 'ifc2 tbxc3 10 'il'xc3 0-0 11 .i.g2 'iff6 (11...1i'e7 !? 12 0-0 e5) 12 0-0 lieSand the coming 13... e5 will leave the game level. b) 7 'ilVc2 0-0 S .i.g2 (S a3 !? .i.xc3 Here in a nutshell is the whole point 9 ..ixc3d5 !? 10 Ji.g2dxc4 11 0-0 tbd5 of the 3 ...a5 variation: Black attacks is unclear) S ...e5 9 dxe5 (9 d5?! tbe7) d4 before White has had time to castle. 9 ...dxe5 10 a3 (or 10 l:.d1 'i/ie7 11 tbd5 In the standard Bogo-Indian line ( 1 d4 tbxd5 12 cxd5 tbbS with equality) tbf62 c4 e6 3 tbf3 .i.b4+4 Ji.d2 a5 5 10... e4 !? (10... Ji.c5 and 10... 1Lxc3 11 g3 d6 6 .i.g2 tbc6 7 0-0 e5) White ..ixc3 1i'e7 are also possible) 11 tbg5 would continue S ..ig5, but now he Ji.f5 12 0-0 (12 e3 lieS) 12... tbd4 13 needs to decide what to do with the 1i'd 1 ..ixc3(13 ... e3) 14 .i.xc3c5, with d4-pawn, as 7 dxe5 dxe5 S 0-0 tbf6 9 chances for both sides. tbc3 0-0 10 a3 .i.xc3 11 .i.xc3 'ilie7 c) 7 .i.g2 e5 (7 ...0-0 !? S 0-0 e5 is only leads to equality. safer) S a3 (S 0-0 tbxd4 9 tbxd4exd4 70-0 10 tbb5.i.c5 11 .i.g5Ji.b6) S .....ixc3 9 The pawn sacrifice is temporary, ..ixc3 tbe4 10tbxe5 ! (this remarkable but White will have to take on b4in or combination enables White to keep der to re-establish the material equi up the pressure) 10... tbxc3 11 tbxc6 librium. Besides castling, 7 d5 !? is of tbxd1 12 tbxdS tbxb2 13 tbxb7 lla7 major importance. Whileseizing space 14 0-0! tbxc4 15 llfc 1 .i.xb7 16 llxc4 withgain of tempo, Whitereleases the ..ixg2 17 �xg2. This four-rook end central tension and this is in accor game does not look too pleasant for dance with his opponent's wishes. Black, but after the accurate 17... llb7 ! The white position remains slightly THE BOGO-LIKE 2 c4 Ji..b4+ 3 Ji..d2 129 preferable, but Black obtains counter 11 dxc6 lt::lxc6 12 lt::lbd2 0-0, Vein play: gold-Osnos, Sverdlovsk 1984. a) 7.J£jce7!? 8 0-0 lt::lf6 9 lt::lel (9 7 ...exd4 8 lt::lxd4 lt::lc3 0-0 10 lt::le1 and now 10... i.c5 The less accurate 8 i.xb4 axb4 9 was unclear in Benj amin-Eingom, lt::lxd4 lt::lge7! allows Black immediate Reykjavik (team event) 1990; instead equality, while 8 i.g5?! is met by 10... i.f5 is equal) 9 ...0-0 (9 .....1txd2 !? 8 ...f6. 10 'ii'xd2 h5) 10 lt::ld3 i.xd2 11 lt::lxd2 8 ••• lt::lxd4 9 i.xb4 axb4 (L.Jakobsen-Antonsen, DanishLeague On the b4-square, the black pawn 1998/9) 11... h5, with chances for both blocks White's queenside play, but it sides. can also become a target. b) 7 .....1txd2+ and here: 10 'ii'xd4 lt::lf6 11 l:.dl b1) 8 lt::lbxd2 lt::lb8 (8 ...lt::l ce7!? 9 White creates the threat of 12 'ii'd2. 0-0 f5 10 e4 lt::lf6 is unclear, Parker The forcing variation 11 c5 dxc5 I 2 Arkell, Hastings 1994/5) 9 0-0 (9 c5 'ii'xc5 'ii'e7 13 .l:tcl (13 'ii'b5+ �d7) lt::lf6 10 0-0 0-0 11 lt::lc4 and now both 13... 'ii' xc5 14 .l:txc5 c6 15 l:.c4! (I5 1l...b5, as played in Fedder-Ward, .l:txc6?! is highly dubious in view of Copenhagen 1992, and 11...lt::la6 are 15... bxc6 16 i.xc6+ �e7 17 .tXIlK equal) 9 ...lt::l f6 (9 ...lt::l h6 is another idea) .:.d8 18 f3 i.a6 19 i.c6l:.c8 ! 20 .ta4 10 e4 0-0 11 lt::le1 lt::la6 12 lt::ld3 c6 is l:f.cl+ 21 'it>f2 l:.h1) 15 ...b3 16 �c3 ! equal. (16 a3 is weaker: 16... i.e6 17 :d4 b2) 8 lt::lfxd2 lt::lb8 (8 ...lt::l ce7 9 lt::lc3 .l:.d8, Magerramov-Eingom, Uzhgorod lt::lf6 is another possibility) 9 lt::lc3 (9 1988) 16 ...'it>e7 (16... i.e6 !?) 17 a3 .te6 c5 lt::lf6 1 0 cxd6 cxd6 11 lt::lc3 0-0 12 leads to a roughly equal ending. The lt::lc4 lt::la6) 9 ...lt::l d7 10 a3 f5 11 b4 game is also level after 11 lt::ld2 0-0 12 lt::lh6 (ll...lt::lgf6!?) 12 0-0 0-0 13 .l:tcl .l:tfe1 (or 12 lt::le4 lt::lxe4 13 i.xe4 l:.e8 (or 13 lt::lb3 b6) 13... b6 leads to un 14 ..tf3 'ii'g5) 12... c6 (or 12... 'ii' e7 13 clear play, Sadler-Conquest, Hastings lt::lfl 'ii'e5, as Marin suggests). 1995/6. ll ....l:. a6 b3) 8 'ii'xd2 lt::lb8 9 lt::lc3 (9 0-0 can Now 12 'ii'd2 c5 leads to chances be met by 9 ...lt::l h6 1 0 lt::le 10-0 11 lt::ld3 for both sides, while 12 c5 We7 is 'ike7 or 9 ...lt::l f6) 9 ...lt::l a6 10 0-0 lt::lh6 equal. However, 12 lt::ld2 retainsa min (10... lt::l f6 !?) 11 lt::lel 0-0 12 lt::ld3 (12 imal advantage for White. e4 .ltd? 13 lt::ld3 'ii'b8) 12... ..1td7 13 b3 f5 with equal play, Petran-King, Bu 10.4.2 dapest 1989. 5 lt::lc3 (D) It should be added that the prelimi This is more dangerous for Black nary exchange 7 i.xb4 axb4 and only than 5 g3. then 8 d5 does not promise White any 5 •••lt::l f6 6 'ii'c2 advantage: 8 ...lt::l ce7 9 0-0 lt::lf6 10 Intending e4, when the e5 advance 'ikb3(10 lt::lbd2 0-0 11 lt::le1 c6) 10... c5 may become a threat. 130 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 0-0 b6 (ll...a4?! is well met by 12 c5) 12 b4 axb4 13 axb4 .ib7 leaves Black with a passive defensive task. 9e4 9 d5 lDb8 10 dxe6 .ixe6 offers White only a minimal advantage. 9 ...e5 10 d5 White has to close the centre, since 10 .id3is met by 10 ...l2Jxe4 ! 11 .ixe4 exd4 with equality. 10... lDb8 11 .ie2 After 11 ..td3 0-0 12 0-0 Black can play 12... lDh5 . As White has a space 6 .ig5 offers White less: 6 ...h6 7 advantage, he has a wide choice of ..th4b6 8 e3 .ib79 l2Jd2(9 ..td3g5 10 possible plans, but it is not so easy to .ig3h5 is unclear) 9 ...l2Jbd7 10 f3 0-0 implement some of the more natural (10... g5 is an alternative) 11 a3 (11 e4 ones. The f4 advance would enhance e5 12 a3 exd4) 1l....ixc3 12 bxc3 e5 the strength of the c3-bishop, but re with a comfortable game for Black, quires considerable preparation,while Sturua-Eingorn, Geneva 2001. queenside play would work better with 6 •••'ii e7 the dark-squared bishop on a different Black prepares the counter-advance diagonal. We see these themes in the ...e5 in order to halt White's expansion lines 11 b4 axb4 (ll...l2Ja6 is possible in the centre at the right moment. The too) 12 axb4 l:ha1+ 13 ..txa1 0-0 14 less confrontational 6 ...0-0 7 a3 (7 e4 g3 (14 lDd2 lDh5 15 g3 f5) 14... c6 15 e5 is unclear) 7 ... .ixc3 8 .ixc3 d5 .ig2 tDa6 (Arlandi-Ikonnikov, Cata leaves Black with a position that is nia 1995) and 11 c5 0-0 (or 11...lDbd7 slightly worse but acceptable. 12 cxd6 cxd6 13 l2Jd20-0 14 .ie2 b6) 7a3 12 .id3 (12 cxd6 cxd6 13 l2Jd2 b6) 7 e4 looks slightly premature, be 12... l2Ja 6!? 13 cxd6 (13 .ixa6 .l:.xa6 cause after 7 ...e5 8 dxe5 dxe5 9 l2Jd5 14 0-0 lDh5 is unclear) 13... cxd6 14 l2Jxd5 10 cxd5 0-0 11 a3 .id6 White .ixa5 lDxe4!. achieves nothing, Grigore-Eingorn, Is 11... 0-0 12 0-0 a4 13 c5 tanbul Olympiad 2000. Otherwise White's play on the 7 ... .ixc3 8 .ixc3 l2Jc6 queenside will be blocked. At the cost of two tempi, Black 13... .ig4 14 .ib4 l2Ja6! 15 ..txa6 wants to clarify the centre while re .l:.xa6 16 lDd2 lDh5 17 f3 .id7 taining chances of counterplay. In Black has secured sufficient coun stead, 8 ...l2Jbd7 9 e4 e5 10 .id3 ! 0-0 terplay against the white king, 'Odi (10... exd4 11 l2Jxd4 l2Jc5 12 0-0 al rovski'-'Heffalump', playchess.com lows White to seize the initiative) 11 (freestyle rapid) 2008. THE BOGO-LIKE 2 c4 i.b4+ 3 i.d2 131 10.5 cxd5 i.xd3 11 'ii'xd3 exd5, Peralta 3... a5 4 tt:Jc3 (D) lvanchuk, Barcelona2006. c) 5 ti:Jf3 !? ti:Jf6 6 .i.g5 (6 cxd5 exd5 7 i.g5 h6 8 i.h4 g5 9 i.g3tt:Je4 10 ti:Jd2 tt:Jxg3 11 hxg3 c6, Riazan tsev-Maletin, Moscow 2008) 6 ...h6 7 i.xf6"ifxf6 8 a3 (8 e3 0-0) 8 ...i.xc3+ 9 bxc3 0-0 10 e3 (Khalifman-Maletin, Novokuznetsk 2008) 10... b6. 5e4! The main rejoinder. In lines 'a' and 'b' White also tries to expose the shortcomings of the move 3 ... a5, but without particular success: a) 5 'ii'c2 d5 (5 ... 0-0!?) 6 cxd5 (6 e3 0-0 7 tt:Jf3b6 and 6 ti:Jf30-0 7 i.g5 White places the knight on c3 right c5 are also satisfactory for Black) away, retaining the option of vigorous 6 ...exd5 7 i.g5 'ii'd6 (or 7 ...h6) 8 .i.xf6 play in the centre. "ifxf6 9 a3 i.xc3+ 10 'ii'xc3 c6, Roiz 4 ...tt:Jf6 Istratescu, Belgian Team Ch 2007/8. Black also keeps his options open b) 5 i.g5h6 6 i.h4b6 7 e3 (7 f3 is in the centre: Plans D and E are both met by 7 ...d5) 7 ...�b7 8 f3 (8 tt:Jge2 still possible, and Black will tailor his i.e7) 8 ...c5 (8 ....i.e7 !? 9 i.d3 c5 10 choice depending on how White now tt:Jge2 tt:Jc6 is another idea) 9 �d3 (9 develops. 4 ...d5 is less consistent, but a3 cxd4) 9 . ..cxd4 10 exd4 tt:Jc6. leads to simpler positions; however, in c) After 5 ti:Jf3 b6 the play returns all the following variations White's to the framework of the Bogo-lndian chances are preferable: Defence, but with Black having side a) 5 a3 �xc3 6 bxc3 (6 �xc3 ti:Jf6) stepped its main line (i.e. 1 d4 ti:Jf6 2 c4 6 ...b6 !? (6 ...ti:Jf6 7 �g5 h6 8 .i.xf6 e6 3 ti:Jf3 ..ib4+4 .i.d2a5 5 g3 ). Then: ir'xf6)7 e4 (7 ti:Jf3 .i.a68 cxd5 exd5 is cl) 6 'it'c2i.b7 7 e3 .i.xc3 8 .i.xc3 unclear) 7 ...dxe4 8 'ii'g4 ti:Jf6 9 "ifxg7 tt:Je4 is equal. .l:.g8 10 "ifh6 i.b7 11 tt:Je2 ti:Jbd7 12 c2) 6 �g5 h6 7 i.h4 i.b7 8 e3 d6 ti:Jg3"ife7 is reminiscent of lines of the transposes to the note to White's 6th Winawer French. move in Section 10.4.2. b) 5 e3 ti:Jf6 6 i.d3 0-0 7 ti:Jf3 (7 c3) 6 g3 i.a6!? 7 b3 d5 8 cxd5 cxd5 exd5 8 tt:Jge2 b6 9 0-0 i.a6 was exd5 9 i.g20-0 with chances for both equal in Gustafsson-Fressinet, Ober sides after 10 0-0 .l:te8 11 .:tel ti:Je4 or hof 201 1) 7 ...b6 8 0-0 i.a6 (8 ...i.b7 10 a3 i.xc3 11 i.xc3l:l.e8. could be tried) 9 "ife2 (9 b3 ti:Jbd7 10 c4) 6 e3 i.xc3(this is sufficientto a3 i.xc3 11 i.xc3 a4) 9 ...ti:Jbd7 10 equalize; 6 ...0-0 7 i.d3 d5 leads to a 132 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK more complicated struggle - see note bxc3 dxc4 14 'i!kxc4 'i!kd7 is equal, 'b' to Black's 4th move above) 7 while 9 bxc3 b6 10 i.d3 (both 10 cxd5 i.xc3 ltJe4 8 i.d3 (8 l:lcl i.b7 is exd5 11 i.d3 i.a6 12 i.xe4 dxe4 13 equal) 8 ...ltJxc3 9 bxc3 i.b7 10 c5 ltJg5'i!kd5 and 10 i.e3i.a6 11 'i!kc2 f5 bxc5 11 l:lb1 i.xf3 12 'i!kxf3 ltJc6with are also unclear) 10... i.a6 11 'ii'c2 equality. i.xc4 12 i.xc4 ltJxd2 13 ltJxd2dxc4 s ...ds 14 ltJxc4 ltJc6 gives rise to unclear Black initiates complications while play. avoiding the wilder 5 ...i.xc3 6 i.xc3 Another interesting line, 7 ltJxe4 ltJxe47 'i!kg4. dxe4 8 a3 (White should avoid 8 6 e5 ltJe4 (D) i.xb4?! axb4, when Black has the ini tiative) 8 ...i.xd2+ 9 'iifxd2 c5 10 ltJe2 (10 dxc5 can be met by 10 ...'ii' xd2+ 11 �xd2 ltJd7 12 f4 exf3 13 ltJxf3 ltJxc5 or 10 ...ltJd7 with an equal position, as given by Marin) 10 ...ltJc6 11 l:ldl a4 12ltJc3cxd4 13ltJxe4 ltJxe5 14 'iifxd4 'ii'xd4 15 llxd4 ltJc6,leads to an equal ending. 7 'ii'g4?! is poor in view of 7 ...ltJxd2. 7 ...'ii h4!? White is probably slightly better, but the position remains rather unclear and requires additional study. Here are some illustrative lines: 7a3 a) Not 8 g3?! ltJxc3. This immediate pawn advance is b) 8 ltJxe4 'ii'xe4+ 9 i.e2 i.xd2+ more promising than delaying it a 10 'iixd2 'ii'xg2 (10 ...ltJc6 11 ltJf3 move: 7 ltJf3 0-0 8 a3 (8 i.d3 ltJxd2 9 dxc4) 11 i.f3'ii g6. 'i!kxd2 c5 10 a3 cxd4 11 axb4 dxc3 12 c) 8 'ii'e2 i.xc3 9 bxc3 (9 i.xc3 bxc3 dxc4 13 i.xc4 'ilc7 is unclear) 0-0) 9 ...ltJxd2 10 'iifxd2 'iife4+ 11 8 ...i.xc3 and now 9 i.xc3 b6 10 i.d3 'ii'e3 (11 i.e2 dxc4 12 ltJf3 ltJd7) i.a6 11 'i!ke2i.xc4 12 i.xc4 ltJxc3 13 11...'ii'xe3+ 12 fxe3 0-0. 11 Transposition to the Sicilian 1 d4 e6 2 lLlf3 c5 3 e4 (D) course that it includes the move ...e6. Note that Sveshnikov players often use the Sicilian Four Knights move order, and this has caused some anti Sveshnikov lines to become popular, as we shall see in Section 11.5. De pending on how scared our opponents are of the Sveshnikov, we may not even be forced to play the main lines of the Four Knights! 3 ••• cxd4 4 lt:Jxd4 4 c3 dxc3 5 lt:Jxc3 is the Morra Gambit. It is not very promising for White, and Black has several good re joinders. For example, 5 ...lt:Jc6 6 .i.c4 Welcome to Sicily! Since we have d6 7 0-0 and now: accidentally found ourselves here, let a) 7 ...lt:Jf6 e28 'ii' .i.e7 9 l:td1 e5 10 us try to make our walk short and safe .i.e3 0-0 is a traditional main line. - as far as this is possible in such a Now in case of 11 l:tac1 .i.e6the game complicated opening with a lot of con is approximately level, and 11 b4?! crete variations. (too active) 1l....i.g4 12 a3 l:tc8 13 My choice of line to recommend is l:tac 1 iLxf3 14 gxf3 (14 'ii'xf3 lt:Jxb4) the Sicilian Four Knights, which has 14 ...lt:Jh5 15 'ii'd2 lt:Jd4 delivers the quite different positional themes from initiative to Black. most Sicilian lines. You won't be at a b) 7 ...a6 8 'ii'e2 iLe7 9 .l:l.dl iLd7 is disadvantage here just because you a subtle line where Black refuses to lack years of experience with typical make any unnecessary concessions. If Sicilian sacrifices and attacking sce White wishes to force ...e5, then he narios. Naturally, if there is already a must spend a tempo with 10 .tf4e5 11 variation of the Sicilian in your reper .i.e3 lt:Jf6, when it will be hard for toire that you are happy to play, you White to generate much activity. If may prefer to use that, provided of White instead chooses a waiting move 134 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK such as 10 a3 or 10 h3, Black can play course our opponents may well play the useful 10 .. Jlc8 before committing it too! to ...lbf6. • Section 11.6 deals with 6 lL'ldb5, 4 •.•lL'lf6 5 lL'lc3 which is the main continuation. 5 i.d3 lbc6 6 lbxc6 bxc6 7 0-0 (7 Note that 6 i.f4 i.b4 7 lL'ldb5 comes c4 can be met by 7 ...d5 or 7 ...e5) 7 ...d5 to the same thing. 8 lL'lc3 is considered in the note to White's 7th move in Section 11.5. 11.1 5 ••.lL'lc6 (D) 6a3 This is not a very common move in the Sicilian Defence. Those who are willing to play more standard Sicilian set-ups can happily choose the Sche veningen-style ...d6 (now or later), but we shall adhere to the ...d5 plan. 6 ••. i.e7 7 i.e2 7 lL'lxc6 bxc6 8 e5 lbd5 9 lbe4 is less potent than a move earlier (see Section 1 1.5) since White is behind in development. Nevertheless, the posi tion remains unclear; e.g., 9 .. :fllc7 (9 ...1Wa 5+!? 10 c3 'ifc7) 10 f4 f5 11 lL'ld6+ (11 lL'lf2?! 0-0 12 c4 lL'lb6 13 This is the starting position of the 'ifc2 c5 14 i.e2 i.b7 15 0-0 d6) Sicilian Four Knights, in which Black 11...i.xd6 12 exd6 'i'b6 13 'ifh5+!? plans the central advance ...d5, often g6 14 'ii'e2 0-0. backed up by a pin with ...i.b4. White 7 .•.0-0 8 0-0 now has several possibilities: Or 8 i.e3d5 9 exd5 lL'lxd5 10 lbxd5 • By playing 6 a3 (Section 11.1) 'ifxd5 11 i.f3 a5 'ii 12 b4 'ifc7 13 White prevents ...i.b4, but spends a lbxc6 bxc6 14 0-0 i.a6 with enough tempo on a move that isn't espe counterplay for Black. cially useful. 8 ••• d5 9 exd5 lL'lxd5 (D) • 6 i.e3 (Section 11.2) is not entirely 10 lL'lxd5 appropriate in this situation. It is not advantageous for White to • Section 11.3 covers 6 i.e2, leading play 10 lL'lxc6?! bxc6, which strength to gambit play. ens Black's central control. • On the contrary, 6 g3 (Section 11.4) lO•• .'fJ/xd5 11 i.e3 .l:.d8 heads for relatively calm and bal Black can also choose 11...lL'lxd4 anced play. 12 'ii'xd4 'ii'xd4 13 i.xd4.l:.d8 ! (Black • 6 lbxc6 (Section 11.5) is mostly needs to play accurately to maintain used to avoid the Sveshnikov, but of the equilibrium) 14 :fd 1 i.d7 15 i.f3 TRA NSPOSITION TO THE SICILIAN 135 less appropriate move, since Black re plies 6 ...d5 . .i.a4! 16 b3 (16 .i.xb7 .i.xc2 17 .ltxa8 .i.xdl 18 llxdl .ltc5 is also equal) 16... .i.c6, achieving equality. 12 .i.f3'ili'c4 13 lt::lxc6!? bxc6 6 •••.ltb4 After 13... l:.xd l ?! 14 lt::lxe7+ 'itf8 Black scores very well with this 15 l:r.fxdl 'itxe7 16 b4 (Tyomkin-Kra natural move. pivin, Ashdod 2003) White's attackon 7 .i.d3 the black king is rather unpleasant, so In the variation 7 a3 ii.xc3+8 bxc3 it is more reasonable to decline the Va5 (8 ...lt:Jxe4 9 1i'g4 lt::lf6 is equal) 9 queen sacrifice. lt::lb5 0-0 10 i.c5 lt:Jxe4!? (10... l:r.d8 is 14 'ili'e2 possible too) 11 i.xf8 'itxf8Black ob 14 Ve l e5 does not give White any tains good compensation for the ex advantage. change. 14 ••. Jla6 15 'ii'xc4 .ltxc4 16 l:.fd 1 White can also play 7 lt::lxc6 bxc6 .i.dS 17 Jle2 i.f6 before 8 .i.d3. Then: The activity of Black's pieces com a) 8 ...d5 9 e5 (9 exd5 can be met by pensates for the weakness of his pawns, 9 ...exd5 10 ii.d4 0-0 11 0-0 .i.d6 or so there are chances for both sides. 9 ...cxd5 ! ?) 9 ...lt:Jd7 1 0 Vg4 i.f8 gives Black a pleasant form of French. After 11.2 11 'ii'g3 l:r.b8 12 l:r.bl 'iic7 13 i.f4 (13 6 ii.e3 (D) f4 c5) 13... g6 or 11 f4 l:.b8 12lt::ldl (12 This move's surprising popularity .:lbl c5 13 i.f2h5 gives Black the ini is presumably an echo of the aggres tiative) 12 .. .'ii'a5+ 13 .ltd2'ili'b6, as in sive scheme with .i.e3, f3 and 'ili'd2 Mitkov-lllescas, Spanish Team Ch, that is used against the Najdorf and Ponferrada 1997, he has nothing to Scheveningen. Here it is somewhat complain about. out of place since Black is fully ready b) 8 ...e5 9 0-0 0-0 fits better with to play in the centre. 6 f3?! is an even the Sicilian ethos, and leads to an 136 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK equal game. Inappropriate activity with 11.3 10 f4 d6 11 h3 exf4 12l:!.xf4 (12 i.xf4 6 i.e2 (D) ii.c5+ 13 �hl ii.d4) 12... ii.a5 could even leave White with the worse posi tion. 7 •••e5 This may be simpler than 7 ...d5 8 exd5 (8 lt:'lxc6 bxc6 transposes to line 'a' of the previous note) 8 ...lt:'lxd5 9 lt:'lxc6 bxc6 10 i.d2 0-0 11 0-0 l:.b8, which is also quite satisfactory for Black. 8lLlf5 8 lt:'lxc6 is a safer choice, with ap proximate equality after any recapture on c6. 8 ••.0-0 9 ii.g5 With this modest-looking move, This active approach is practically White indicates his willingness to of forced. After 9 0-0 ii.xc3 10 bxc3 d5 fer an interesting gambit. Unless Black (10... d6 !?) 11 exd5 lt:'lxd5 12 ii.c5 is familiar with some form of the ii.xf5 13 ii.xf5 .:l.e8White must switch Scheveningen or Paulsen (to which he to defence. can easily transpose), he should accept 9 ...d5 the invitation to go pawn-hunting. There now follows a 'stormin a tea 6 •••ii.b4 7 0-0 cup', the main line of which ends in a 7 i.f3 is met by 7 ...lt:'le5 , while de draw. By playing instead 9 ...h6 !? 10 fending the pawn with 7 1Vd3 d5 8 ii.xf6 (10 ii.h4 d5) 10... ii.xc3+ 11 exd5 lt:'lxd59 i.d2(9 lt:'lxc6bxc6 10 a3 bxc3 1Vxf6 12lt:'le3d6, Black can con ii.xc3+ 11 bxc3 1Vf6) 9 ...lt:'lxc3 (or tinue the struggle. 9 ...0-0) leads to an equal position. 10 exd5 1Vxd5 11 i.xf6 ii.xf5 12 7 •.• i.xc3 8 bxc3 lt:'lxe49 i.d3 i.xf5 1Vxg2 This is one of two ways to begin the Black forces events. 12... 1Vxd l + attack. In the case of 9 'ii'd3 Black 13 l:.xd1 gxf6 14 0-0 ii.xc3 15 bxc3 should defend by 9 ...d5 1 0 ii.a3 (10 .:tfd8 is sufficient for equality in the lt:'lxc6?! bxc6 11 i.a3 1Va5 12 i.b4 ending. 1Vb6 13 .:l.abl c5)... 10 1Va5 lllt:'lb5a6 13 i.xh7+! �xh7 14 1Vh5+ 'it>g8 12 lt:'ld6+ lt:'lxd6 13 ii.xd6 lt:'le7. 15 0-0-0 1Vg6 16 l:.hg1 9 •••lt:'lxc3 (D) The aggressive 16 1Vh4 is parried Black is optimistic and seizes even by 16... lt:'ld 4!. more material. A safer approach is 16••• 1Vxh5 17 l:!.xg7+ 9 ...d5 10 lt:'lxc6 (after 10 i.a3?! 1Va5 The game ends in perpetual check. 11 1Vc l lt:'lxc3 12 lt:'lb3 1Vd8 White TRANSPOSITION TO THE SJCIUAN 137 cannot create real threats) 10 ...bxc6 'iWd4 and 13 i.d2?! h4 14 'ii'g4 h3 of 11 i.a3 c5 !? 12 .i.xe4 (12 c4 0-0 is fer White less. equal) 12... dxe4 13 i.xc5 (13 'ii'g4 0-0 14 i.xc5 f5 15 'ii'f4 l:.f7 leads to un 11.4 clear play) 13... i.a6 14 .l:.e1 (14 'ii'g4 6 g3 (D) 'ii'd5) 14 ...'ii' xd1 15 l:taxd1 .l:.c8,lead ing to approximate equality in the end ing. Now Black's standard counterplay with 6 ...i.b 4?! 7 i.g2d5 fails due to 8 exd5 tiJxd5 90-0!, so we shall adopt 10 'ili'g4 another approach. 10 1i'd2 also deserves attention. Al 6 ••• d5 7 exd5 though it is not entirely clear how Interesting complications begin af White can prove a real advantage after ter 7 i.g2!? 1i'b6 8 lDxc6(following 8 10... tiJd5 11 lDb5 0-0 12 i.a3 tiJde7 lDb3 d4, 9 e5 lDd7 gives White no 13 lDd6 (or 13 i.d6), nevertheless more than equality, and 9 tDe2?! e5 10 10 ...'iWf 6!? looks preferable, with an c3 a5 11 cxd4 .ib4+ is advantageous equal position after 11 'it'xc3'it'xd4 12 for Black) 8 ...bxc6 9 exd5 ! (9 0-0 i.a6 'it'xd4tiJxd4 13 i.b2e5 14 l:tfe 1 (14 f4 10 i.e3 'ii'xb2 11 i.d4 .ic5 !) 9 ...cxd5 d6) 14... 0-0 15 l:txe5 d6 16 l:td5 lDe6 10 0-0 i.e7 ! (10... i.a 6?! is risky in 17 l:txd6lDc5 . viewl of 11 i.e3 'ii'xb2 12 lDxd5 ! with lO ••• 'iWf6 11 tDxc6 h5!? an attack for White) 11 l:te1 and Black This useful zwischenzug disrupts can choose between the equalizing the coordination of the white pieces. 1l... i.b7 and the more adventurous 12 'ii'g3 bxc6 1l...i.d7 !?. Now 13 h4!? reaches a position that 7 ••• exd5 8 i.g2 i.g4 requires careful study, but it seems 8 ...'ii' b6 is an acceptable alternative: that White has enough compensation a) 9 i.e3 i.c5 is very similar to a for the two pawns. Instead, 13 i.g5?! variation of the French Defence. After 138 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 10 tba4 'ilfa5+both 11 tbc3 'ilfb6and 11 c3 �xd4 12 �xd4 tbxd4 13 'ii'xd4 0-0 14 0-0 b6 are equal. b) 9 tbxc6 bxc6 10 0-0 �e7 11 l:te1 �e6 12 tba4 'ilib5 led to a bal anced game in Vasiukov-A.Panchenko, Dnepropetrovsk 1980. c) After 9 tLlb3 !? d4 10 tbe4 (10 tbe2 �b4+ 11 c3 dxc3 12 bxc3 i..e7 13 0-0 0-0 14 tbed4�d7) 10 ...i.. e7 11 0-0 0-0 12 l:.e1 White keeps a modest initiative. The text-move leads to a more com plicated struggle. The exchange of the knights fol 9 'ifd3 lowed by the advance of the e-pawn After 9 tbde2 �c5 10 0-0 0-0 11 h3 completely changes the strategic com (11 �g5 .:te8) 1l...�e6 12 tLlf4 'ilfd7 plexion of the game. We should note White does not get an advantage, and that this line has received considerable in the lines 9 f3 �e6 10 �e3 �b4 and theoretical and practical attention as a especially 9 tbxc6?! bxc6 10 'ili'd4 iLe7 way to avoid the transposition to the Black's position is even preferable. Sveshnikov that arises after 6 tbdb5 9 •••JLc5 10 'ili'e3+!? d6 7 �f4 e5 8 i..g5. This queen check looks rather odd, 6 •..bxc6 7 e5 but the careless 10 �e3 'ili'b6 11 tbb3? White stops the ...d5 advance, and (11 h3 ! still retains rough equality) hopes to achieve a clear positional ad 11... tbb4 can lead to serious hardships vantage. for White. 7 Ji.d3 d5 8 0-0 �e7 leads to more Black stands no worse in the case of standard play. The typical outcome is 10 tbb3 'ili'e7+ 11 Ji.e3 0-0!? (a small a complex positional struggle with no improvement over 11...Ji.x e3 12 'ifxe3 obvious advantage for either side. Here 'ili'xe3+ 13 fxe3 l:tc8, which is also are some illustrative variations: quite satisfactory for Black) 12 tbxc5 a) 9 e5 tbd7 10 'ili'g4 (10 f4 tbc5) (12 0-0 �xe3 13 'ili'xe3 'ili'xe3 14fxe3 10... g6 11 l:.el l:.b8 12l:.b l 0-0. l:tad8 is also equal) 12... d4 13 i..xc6 b) 9 b3 (9 'ili'e2 0-0 10 b3 l:te8 is (13 tD3a4 dxe3 14 'ili'xe3 'ili'xe3+ 15 similar) 9 ...0-0 10 i..b2 e5 11 'ili'e2 fxe3 lDb4) 13... 'ili'xc5 with equality. l:.e8. 10 .•• tbe7 11 0-0 0-0 12 'ili'd3 h6 c) 9 �f4 0-0 10 e5 (10 'ili'f3 tbd7 11 Both sides have chances. exd5 exd5 ! equalizes; 10 'ili'e2 can be met by IO ... dxe4 !?) 10... tbd7 11 'ili'h5 11.5 f5 (ll ...g6!?) 12 exf6 tDxf6 13 'ili'e2 6 tbxc6 (D) i..d6, Abergel-Petrov, Benidorm 2008. TRA NSPOSITION TO THE SICIUAN 139 d) 9 l:.e1 0-0 10 i.f4 (10 e5?! ti:Jd7 12 ...gxf6, but two other moves de 11 iVg4 f5) 10... ti:Jd7 (10... d4 !?) 11 serve attention: exd5 cxd5 12 ti:Jb5 i.c5 !. a) 10 c3 i.e7 11 i.d3'ii' b6 12 'ii'e2 e) 9 iVf3 0-0 10 iVg3 (10 l:.e1 d4 (12 c4 f5) 12... a5 13 c4 (13 a3 i..a6 is 11 e5 dxc3 12 exf6 i..xf6 leads to un equal) 13 ...'ii'h 4+ 14 �fl f5 is OK for clear play) 10 ...ti:Jh5 11 iVf3 (11 iVh3 Black, Sax-T.Reiss, Hungarian Team g6) 1l...ti:Jf6. Ch 2008/9. 7 ••• tt:Jd5 8 tt:Je4 b) 10 'ii'd2 i.b4 11 c3 (11 ti:Jd6+ It is absolutely illogical for White �f8) ll...i.e7 12 i.e2 (for 12 i.d3 to play 8 ti:Jxd5?! cxd5 9 iVd4 (9 'ii'b6 13 'iife2, see line 'a') 12... 'iii' b6 13 i..d3?! 'ilc7 10 'ile2 i..b4+!) 9 ...i.a6 a3 f5 14 exf6 ti:Jxf6 15 ti:Jd6+i.. xd6 16 10 i.xa6'ifa5 +, with a good game for 'ii'xd6 (Govedarica-Bjelajac, Yugoslav Black. But now Black must act very Team Ch, Tivat 1995) 16 ...ti:Je4 17 vigorously if he is to obtain enough i.h5+ �d8 18 'ii'd4 'ii'xd4 19 cxd4 counterplay. i.a6and again White has not achieved 8 •••iV c7 an advantage. Dragging the white pawn to f4 in 10 ..• 'ii'b6 11 i.d3 order to weaken the gl-a7 diagonal The purpose of the sly manoeuvre and the e3-square in particular. by the black queen is revealed in the 9 f4 'ii'a5+!? (D) variation 11 c4 'ii'd4! 12 'ii'f3 ! (12 'ii'bl? l:.b8) 12... 'ii' xb2 13 l:.dl, when 13 ...ti:Jb4 led to puzzling complica tions in Vachier-Lagrave - Wagner, Mulhouse 2005. The line 13... f5 14 ti:Jd6+ i.xd6 15 cxd5 i.e7 16 dxe6 'iifxa2 17 exd7+ ..txd7 18 i.d3 0-0 19 0-0 i.e6 is calmer, but also gives Black a satisfactory defence. ll •.•i.. e7 12 'ii'e2 In response to 12 c4 Black can choose 12... f5 , 12... 1i'd4 or 12... i.a6 (intending 13 'iife2 'iifxb2). 12 •.• l:.b8 13 b3 f5 The game is approximately equal. And the purpose of this check is to create some disharmony in White's 11.6 position. 6 ti:Jdb5(D) 10 i.d2 This is the main line. White is will White stands worse after 10 �e2? ing to face the Sveshnikov after 6 ...d6 f5 or 10 �f2? 'ii'b6+ 11 �f3 (11 �g3 7 i.f4 e5 8 i.g5. But we have other f5) ll...f5 12 exf6 (12 ti:Jf2 i..b7) plans ... 140 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK satisfied with a small opening advan tage. Black is obliged to struggle for equality, but at least we are in famil iar strategic territory: Black will have an isolated d-pawn and active piece play (compare lines in Chapter 5!). 8 •••d5 (D) 6 •.•J. b4 7 a3 The complications following 7 J.f4 tt::lxe4 8 'S'f3 (after 8 tt::lc7+ �f8 White should avoid 9 tt::lxa8? 'S'f6 and settle for the equal 9 'S'f3 tt::lxc3 ! ? I 0 bxc3 'S'f6) 8 ...d5 (8 ...tt::l xc3 !? 9 bxc3 'S'f6) 9 tt::lc7+ �f8 are not dangerous for Black: a) After 10 0-0-0 .i.xc3 11 bxc3 e5 9exd5 12 tt::lxd5 f5 13 J.e3 'ifa5 14 J.c4 (14 An interesting queenless middle �b2 J.e6 15 .i.c4? tt::le7) 14 ...J.e6 the game arises after the liquidation 9 white king is not safe. J.d3 !? dxe4 10 tt::lxe4 tt::lxe4 11 J.xe4 b) 10tt::lxa8!?e5 11 J.d2 (11 J.e3?! 'ii'xdl + 12 �xdl. If White can calmly is met by ll...tt::ld4, while 11 J.b5 finish his development, then he will tt::ld4 12 'S'd3 is unclear) ll...tt::ld4 12 enjoy good prospects because of his 'S'd l 'S'h4! 13 g3 (13 tt::lxe4?! 'S'xe4+ bishop-pair and queenside pawn-ma 14 J.e2 tt::lxc2+ 15 �fl J.xd2 16 jority. However, as long as the white 'ii'xd2 tt::lxal 17 'ii'dl ?! 'ii'c2 18 'ii'xal king separates his rooks, the initiative .i.d7) 13 ...'ii' f6 14 tt::lxe4 (14 f4 'ii'g6 15 belongs to Black, and by maintaining .i.d3 .i.g4 16 tt::lxe4 dxe4 gives Black it he denies White his cherished advan the initiative) 14 ...tt::l f3+ 15 'ii'xf3 !? tage: 12... .i.d7 13 .i.e3 (13 b3 0-0-0 14 (15 �e2 tt::ld4+ is a draw) 15... 'ifxf3 J.b2J.e8+ 15 �cl f6) 13... f5 14 J.f3 16 J.xb4+ �g8 17 lLld6 'ifxhl 18 (14 J.d3 tt::le5 15 J.e2 tt::lg4 16 J.d4 0-0-0 .i.e6 with double-edged play. .i.c6) 14... e5 15 �cl (15 :tel �f7) 7 ••. .i.xc3+ 8 tt::lxc3 15 ...l:.c8 !? (15... 0-0-0) 16 :tel (16 l:tdl In contrast to most of the previous f4 is equal) 16... �f7 retains the dy lines in this chapter, here White acts namic equilibrium. in a calm positional manner and is 9 ••• exd5 10 .i.d3 TRA NSPOSITION TO THE SICILIAN 141 White should not delay castling; in the black knights combat the white the line 1 0 i..g5?! 0-0 11 i..d3 ( 11 i..e2 bishops more or less successfully: i..f5 ; 11 'it'f3 :e8+ 12 i..e2 liJd4) a) 13 'it'd2?! is ill-advised due to 1l...h6 (1l...l:te8+) 12 i..h4 l:r.e8+ 13 13... i.. xe2. ltJe2ltJe5 14 0-0 'it'b6White runs into b) 13 h3 i..xe2 and now both 14 problems. Black also achieves a good .i.xe2 l:.e8 and 14 'it'xe2 :e8 15 'it'f3 position after 10 'it'e2+ .i.e6 11 i..g5 'it'b6 are equal. h6 12 i..h4 (or 12 i..xf6 'it'xf6 13 0-0-0 c) 13 b4 .i.xe2 also leads to equal 0-0) 12... 0-0 13 0-0-0 l:r.e8 14 'it'b5 ity after 14 i..xe2 ltJe4 or 14 'it'xe2 'it'c7 (14 ...:b8 !?) 15 �bl a6 16 'it'd3 :e8 15 'it'f3 ltJe5 16 'ii'xb7 ltJxd3 17 ltJe4, as in Dvoirys-Hasangatin, Par cxd3 tiJd5. dubice 2007. d) 13 i..f4 l:.e8 14 :e1 (14 f3 i..h5) 10 ... 0-0 11 0-0 d4 (D) 14 ...'it'b6 15 .l:.b1 .l:.ad8 with equality, Lanin-Popov, St Petersburg 2007. e) 13 l:.e1 l:r.e8 14 i..g5 h6 15 i..h4 i..xe2 16 ltxe2 "iWd6 offers White no more than a minimal advantage. f) 13 .i.g5 h6 14 i..h4 .i.xe2 15 "ilt'xe2 (15 .i.xe2 .l:.e8 16 :el :e4 17 i..g3 'it'b6is unclear) 15... lte8 16 "ilt'f3 (16 "iWd2 ltJe4 17 i..xe4 "iWxh4 18 f3 'it'd8 with equality) 16... ltJe5 17 "ilt'xb7 ltJxd3 18 cxd3 'it'd5 gives Black com pensation for the pawn and he may even sacrifice another one, if given the opportunity; for example, 19 'it'xd5 ltJxd5 20 i..g3 .l:.e221 .:tab 1 f5 22 i..d6 Advancing the d-pawn makes it l:td8 23 i..c5 liJf424 .i.xa7 .l:.c2. more vulnerable, but seizes space. 13••. i.. h5 14 ..tgS(D) Now White's knight must choose a The bishop pins the knight and can square: be transferred to f2 to attack the d4- 11.6.1: 12 ltJe2 141 pawn. 11.6.2: 12 ltJe4 142 Another line with similarideas, 14 b4'it'b6 15 i..b2 (15 liJf4 i..g6 16 ltJxg6 11.6.1 hxg6 leads to equal play) 15... l:tad8 16 12 ltJe2 liJf4 (16 �h1 i..g6) 16.. Jife8 17 l:.e1 White directly targets the d4-pawn, i..g6 18 ltJxg6 hxg6, looks somewhat leading to complicated play. weaker. 12 ••• .i.g4 13 f3 An alternative plan is to attack the There is a wide range of other con black king, but after 14 liJf4 l:le8 !? tinuations at White's disposal, in which (14... i.. g6 15 ltJxg6hxg6 16 f4 "ilt'b6is 142 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BlACK unclear) 15 tt:Jxh5 tt:Jxh5 16 f4 tiJf6 17 18 tt:Jxd4 �f3 tt:Jd5 18 'ii'h3, as in Topalov 18 'ii'd2!? .l:.ad8 19 .l:.fe1 offers lvanchuk, Nanjing 2008, Black can Black a choice between the unclear defend himself by 18... h6 19 �f5 19 ...'ii' b5 and 19 ...g5 !?, while 18 b4 tiJf6. can be met by 18... l:.ad8 19 c3 (19 'ilid2 'ii'a6is equal) 19... d3 . 18 .•• l:.ad8 19 tt:Jxc6 'ii'xc6 20 i.d4 tt:Jd5 Black's counterplay appears suffi cient for equality. 11.6.2 12 tt:Je4 (D) 14 ••• i.g6 15 i.h4 This is consistent, but there are other continuations: a) 15 l:.el can be answered with 15... l:.e8 . b) 15 'it'd2l:.c8 16 l:.adl .l:.e8 17 :±"2 (17 i.xg6 hxg6 is unclear) 17... i.xd3 (17 ...'ifb6 !? 18 .i.xf6 gxf6 led to un clear play in Petrushin-Yailian, Ak This move leads to exchanges, after tiubinsk 1985) 18 'il'xd3h6 is equal. which White can expect only a mini c) 15 tt:Jf4i.xd3 16 tt:Jxd3�d6 17 mal advantage. i.xf6'ifxf6 18 �d2 (Asrian-Khenkin, 12 ... .i.f5 13 .i.g5 .i.xe4 14 .i.xe4 FIDE Knockout, Moscow 2001) gives h6 Black a choice between the equalizing Forcing White to part with one of 18... .l:.fe8 and the more adventurous his bishops. 18... tt:Je7 !?. 15 i.xf6 15 ••• l:.e8 16 i.xg6 After 15 i.h4 g5 16 i.xc6bxc6 17 16 i.f2 is inaccurate in view of .i.g3 'ii'd5 (17... .l:.e8 !? is unclear) the 16 ...i.xd3 17 �xd3 tt:Je5. activity of the centralizedblack pieces 16 .•• hxg6 17 .i.f2 'ii'b6 completely compensates for the weak Black cannot defend the pawn, but ening of his king's residence. Then 18 all his pieces gain activity. h4 is met with 18... .l:.f e8, while 18 f4 TRA NSPOSITION TO THE SICIUAN 143 tt::le4 19 'ii'h5 (19 'ili'd3 lbd8) 19 .. .'it>g7 b) A more accurate implementation 20 .l:.ad1 l:Iae8 21 �f2 (21 'i!i'f3 f5) of this idea by 16 lle1 l:.fe8 17 iff3 2l...c5 and 18 'ili'd3 tt::le4 19 l:Iad1 'i!i'xf3 18 .i.xf3 'iti>f8 19 l:.xe8+ ( 19 'iii>fl l:lad8 20 l:lfe 1 l:lfe8 21 f3 (21 i.c7 tt::le5; 19 b3 ltxel + 20 l:.xel l:Ic8) l:lc8 22 f3 tt::lc5) 21...tt::lxg3 22 hxg3 a5 19 ...l:lxe8 20 l:ld1 g6 21 �fl .:lc8 22 leave the game roughly balanced. l:ld2 (22 i.e4f5) 22 ...tt::l e5 also allows 15••• 'i!i' xf6 (D) Black to retain approximate equality. c) 16 ifd2 l:lfe8 17 llae1 (17 l:Ife1 lle6 18 .:le2d3) 17... .:le6 18 l:.e2 l:.ae8 19 .:lfe1 116e7 leads to a similarsitua tion to our main line. 16 ifd3(D) Or: a) Simplifying by 16 iff3 'ili'xf3 17 i.xf3 leads to equality: 17... tt::l e5 18 i.e4 (18 �xb7 l:.ab8 19 �e4 l:txb220 16••• .:l fe8 17 f4 .:le7 18 l:.ael.:lae8 .:lfb1 .l:.fb8 21 l:.xb2 lhb2 22 .:ld1 g6 White's position looks the more 23 h3 f5) 18... .:lad8 19 .:lfel b6, Zas pleasant, but it is difficult to say how lavsky-Vydeslaver, Haifa 2010. he can make further progress. 12 Transposition to the English 1 d4 e6 2 lLlf3 c5 3 c4 different 4th move, namely 4 ...lLlc6, With this move, White directs the or of White meeting 4 ...lLlf6 with game towards a form of English Open something other than 5 lbc3. ing. 4 ...lLlf6 5 lbc3i.b4 is the subject of 3 ...cxd4 4 ltJxd4 (D) Section 12.2. This popular variation often arises from the Nimzo-Indian Defence, and we are interested in it mainly because of the move-order 1 d4 e6 2 c4 i.b4+ 3 lbc3 c5 4 lLlf3 cxd4 5 lbxd4 lLlf6. If in Chapter 8, you meet 3 lbc3 with 3 ... c5, then you need to be familiar with this line too. • In Section 12.3 we look into 4 ...ltJf6 5 lbc3 lbc6 (or 4 ...ltJc6 5 lbc3 lLlf6), which leads to more complex play and offers Black better chances of counterplay. The position bears more than a superficial resemblance Most of the lines we examine in to the Sicilian Four Knights - as we this chapter follow the natural moves shall see, the two lines share several 4 ...lLlf6 5 lbc3, when we have trans opening ideas. posed to the Symmetrical English line 1 c4 c5 2 lLlf3 lLlf63 d4 cxd4 4 lbxd4 12.1 e6 5 lbc3. Then Black can choose ei 4 •.•liJ f6 (D) ther the 'Four Knights' with 5 ...ltJc6 The main alternative is 4 ...ltJc6 !?. or the more Nimzo-like 5 ...i.b4. Both Then: players can also choose to avoid the a) 5 lbc3 lbf6 transposes to Sec transposition. We survey these possi tion 12.3. bilities as follows: b) 5 lbb5 lLlf6 6 i.f4 e5 !? 7 .tg5 • In Section 12.1 we examine the 'i!Va5+8 ltJ5c3(8 .td2'i!Vd8 9 .tg5re consequences of Black choosing a peats, while 8 liJd2 can be met by TRA NSPOSITION TO THE ENGliSH 145 8 .....'tJe4 9 ..'iJc7+"ikxc7 10 ..'iJxe4'i!Vb6) manoeuvre: the white bishop is poorly 8 .....'tJe4 9 .ltd2 ..'iJxd2 10 ..'iJxd2 .ltb4 placed on d2) 7 .ltg2 0-0 8 0-0 ..'iJc6 9 with equality, Nyback-Miezis, Jyvas .ic3 (the bishop finds a good square, kyla 2006. but at the cost of blocking the best c) 5 g3 'i!Vb6 6 ..'iJb5!? (6 ..'iJc2 is square for the b1-knight) 9 ...d5 10 met by 6 ....tc5 7 e3 d5, while 6 ..'iJb3 tLld2 'i!Vb6leads to an approximately tLle5 7 e4 .ltb4+ 8 ..'iJc3 ..'iJf6 trans equal position. For example, 11 e3 ( 11 poses to Section 12.3.4) 6 .....'iJe5 7 cxd5 ..'iJxd5 12 .txd5 exd5 is unclear, .ltf4 a6 8 .ixe5 axb5 9 .ltg2!? (9 e4?! while 11 ..'tJxc6bxc6 12 e3 a5 is equal) .ltc5)9 ...bxc4 10 0-0 with chances for 11....id7 12 a3 :ac8 (12... 'ili'a6 !?) 13 both sides, Tomashevsky-Zakhartsov, b4?! (White canmaintain equality by Irkutsk 2010. 13 :c1 :fd8) 13... ..'tJxd4 14 .txd4 "ika6, and White's pieces arenot situ ated actively enough to support his pawn advance. 6 .tg2 e5 7 tLlf3 This is the main continuation. Sev eral other knight moves are viable, although in all these lines Black's chances areno worse: a) 7 ..'iJb5 d4 8 f4 a6 9 fxe5 axb5 10 exf6 bxc4 11 0-0 .lte6. b) 7 tLlc2d4 8 f4 (8 0-0 ..'iJc69 tLld2 .ltf5 10b4 .lte7gives Black the initia tive) 8 .....'iJc6 9 .ltxc6+ (9 0-0 'ii'b6) 9 ...bxc6 10 fxe5 ..'iJg4!? (10... 'ii' a5+ 11 Now 5 ..'iJc3 is covered in Sections 'ifd2 'ifxe5 12 'ifxd4 is unclear) 11 12.2 and 12.3. There is just one major 'ifxd4 'ifxd4 12 ..'iJxd4..'tJx e5. alternative: c) 7 tLlb3d4 8 0-0 (8 e3?! a5 9 exd4 5 g3!? a4 gives Black the initiative; 8 t'4 White avoids the lines we see in .ltb4+ 9 .id2 ..'tJg4 10 0-0 .txd2 I I Section 12.3, but allows other possi 'ifxd2 ..'iJe3 12 :f2 tLlg4 is equal, he bilities. cause White should avoid 13 JltT! I 5 ...d5 ..'iJc6)... 8 tLlc6 9 f4 (9 e3?! .ltg4; 9 .t11� This is a sharp continuation, which a5) 9 ...e4 10 f5 g6 11 .ltg5 .tc7 12 is also relevant to lines we cover in .ltxf6 (12 e3 d3) 12... .txf6 13 .tKr4 Chapter 14. 0-0. 5 ... .ib4+ is an alternative. Then 6 7 •••d4 8 0-0 tLlc6 9 e3 .id2 ( 6 ..'iJc3 transposes to Section White should avoid 9 b4?1 r4 Ill 12.2, while 6 ..'iJd2?! is dubious in ..'iJg5 .ixb4. view of 6 .....'iJc6) 6 ....ie7 (a standard 9 •••.t e7 10 exd4 exd4 146 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK Now 11l2Jbd2 i.e6!? 12 l2Jg5 i.g4 b) 6 i.g5h6 7 ..th4'i¥a5 8 'ii'c2 (or 13 'ir'b3 'ir'd7 14 l2Jde4 0-0 left Black 8 l2Jb5 l2Je4 9 'ii'd4 0-0! 10 'i¥xe4 a6 in possession of the initiative in Mas 11 'ii'd3 axb5 12 cxb5 d5) 8 ...l2Jc6 trovasilis-Edouard, Cappelle la Grande (8 ...l2Je4 9 l:.c 1 f5 !? is unclear) 9 e3 (9 2010, while 11 i.f4 0-0 12 l2Je5 (12 ..txf6 gxf6 10 e3 also offers unclear l:.e1 i.b4!?) 12... 'ir'b6 13 'ifb3 (13 play) 9 ...l2Je4 IO.l:.cl l2Jxc3 (lO... f5 !?) l2Jxc6 bxc6 14 l2Jd2 i.e6) 13... l2Ja5 ! 11 bxc3 .te7 was equal in Stem 14 'ii'xb6 (14 'ii'b5 ..te6) 14 ...axb6 also Alekseev, Santo Domingo 2003. gives Black satisfactory play. c) 6 .i.d2 l2Jc67 a3 (7 e3 0-0 8 ..te2 d5 is also equal) 7 .....te7 8 ..tg5 (or 8 12.2 e3 0-0 9 ..te2 d5 with equality) 8 ...0-0 4 •••l2Jf6 5 l2Jc3 i.b4 (D) 9 e3 h6 10 ..th4 d5 11 cxd5 l2Jxd5 12 l2Jxc6 bxc6 13 i.xe7 'ii'xe7 14 'ii'c2 l2Jxc3 15 'ii'xc3 c5 gave rise to level play in Cifuentes-Ubilava, Roquetas de Mar 2008. d) 6 'ii'b3 ..tc5 (6 .....te7 !?) 7 ..te3 (this is artificial; 7 e3 l2Jc6 8 l2Jf3 is simpler, and equal) 7 ...b6 8 f3 0-0 9 l:.dl (9 ..tf2 e5 gives Black the initia tive) 9 .....ta6 (9 ...e5 !? is an interesting alternative) lO i.f2 'ii'c8 11 e3 l2Jc6 was equal in Granda-Gashimov, Lugo 2009. e) 6 l2Jb5 is more interesting but also brings no advantage: 6g3 e1) 6 ...0-0 7 a3 i.xc3+8 l2Jxc3 d5 This is virtually the only way to 9 i.g5 (9 cxd5?! exd5 10 i.g5 d4) fight for the advantage, and reaches a 9 ...h6 1 0 i.xf6 (10 .th4 d4 11 l2Je4 position that is better known via the g5) 10... 'ii' xf6 11 cxd5 exd5 is suffi Nimzo-lndian move-order 1 d4 l2Jf6 2 cient for equality since 12 e3 is met by c4 e6 3 l2Jc3..tb4 4l2J f3 c5 5 g3 cxd4 6 12... l:td8, while after12 'ii'xd5 l2Jc6 13 l2Jxd4. e3 l:.d8 14 'ii'f3 'ii'g6 Black's lead in Other continuations are not danger development completely compensates ous for Black: for the missing pawn. a) 6 'ii'c2 0-0 7 ..tg5 (7 a3 .txc3+8 e2) 6 ...d5 can lead to interesting 'ii'xc3 d5 9 cxd5 'ii'xd5) 7 ...l2Jc6 8 e3 complications: 7 cxd5 (7 i.f4 0-0 8 h6 9 i.h4 (9 h4? l2Jxd4 lO exd4 d5) e3 a6 9 a3 ..ta5 10 l2Jd6 ..txc3+ 11 9 ...l2Jxd4 10exd4 b6 11 i.d3 i.b7 12 bxc3 l2Jbd7 ! 12 cxd5 e5 gives Black 0-0 ..te7 and then ...d5 with slightly the initiative) 7 ...exd5 8 .tf4 (8 .tg5 the more pleasantposition for Black. 0-0 9 e3 l2Jc6 lO .te2 a6 11 l2Jd4 TRA NSPOSITION TO THE ENGLISH 147 ii.xc3+ 12 bxc3 'ti'a5 is unclear, Aron tbd4 15 0-0 tbxe2+ 16 �h1 tbd4with ian-Gustafsson, Deizisau 2002) 8 ...0-0 equality) 9 ...dxc4 10 'ili'a3 (10 'ii'xc4e5 9 a3?! (9 tbc7 is unclear) 9 ... .ltxc3+ 11 lbb5 a6 12 tbc7 b5 13 "flc5 lbbd7 10 bxc3 tbc6 and now White cannot 14 "fla3 l:.b8 15 lbxa6 ..txa6 16 "flxa6 even equalize, Lenic-Y ak:ovenko, Eu "fie? is equal) 10... lbbd7 11 0-0 lbb6. ropean Team Ch, Khersonissos 2007. 8 •..tbxd5 9 "fib3! 6 ••• 0-0 7 .ltg2d5 (D) 9 ..td2 is less ambitious: 9 ...tbxc3 10 bxc3 .ltc5 (it is useful to leave the e7-square vacant) 11 .lte3 (11 lbb3 .i.b6 12 0-0 tbc6 and 11 0-0 e5 12 tbc2 tbc6 13 l:r.b1 "fie? also lead to an equal game) 1l..."fle7 12 "flb3 tba6 13 0-0 l:r.b8 with a level game in pros pect, Almeida-Almagro Llanas, Ma drid 2010. 9 •.•..tc5 (D) 8cxd5 This is the strongest continuation. Nowadays other lines occur less often, although they too require accurate play from Black. In both the following lines, White's initiative compensates for the sacrificed pawn, but he has no advantage: a) 8 0-0 dxc4 9 'iia4 (9 .i.g5.i.e? ; 9 tbc2 .ltxc3 10 bxc3 "fie? 11 l:r.b1 .l:.d8 Up to here we have followed the 12 .i.f4 fie? 13 "flc 1 tbd5) 9 ...tba6 10 standard main line of Nimzo-Indian lbdb5 (10 .l:.d1 ..td7) 10... tbd5 (or theory, but this rare move looks like a 10 ..."fle8 !?) 11 l:r.d1 .i.xc3 12 tbxc3 reasonable way to move in a different tbxc3 13 bxc3 tbc5 14 'iic2 "fie? 15 direction - and one that our opponents ..ta3 (15 .l:.d4e5; 15 ..te3.l:lb8) 15... l:.b8 are unlikely to have analysed in ad 16 l:r.d4 b5 17 "fid2 ..tb7 18 ..txb7 vance. White must at once make a l:r.xb7. tricky decision. b) 8 "fib3 ..txc3+ 9 bxc3 (9 'ii'xc3 10 .ltxd5 e5 10 lbb3 tbc6 11 .i.g5 dxc4 12 The following lines are also possi "flxc4 Jle6 13 "fih4 Jtxb3 14 axb3 ble: 148 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK a) 10 t2Jdb5 a6 11 l2Jxd5 exd5 12 12.3 l2Jc3 d4 13 l2Jd5 l2Jc6 14 0-0 ..te6 is 4•.. t2Jf6 5 l2Jc3 l2Jc6 (D) equal. b) 10 l2Jxd5 ..txd4 11 l2Jc3 (II ..te3 l2Jc6 and now not 12 ..txd4?! l2Jxd4 13 'i¥c4 l2Jxe2!, but 12 .l:!.dl 'i¥a5+ 13 ..td2 'ii'c5 with an equal po sition) II...lt'lc6 12 0-0 e5 13 e3 (13 l:!.d1 'ii'f6) 13... ..tb6 14 .l:!.d1 'ili'g5 with counterplay;for example, 15 l2Jd5 ..te6 16 'ili'b5 .l:.ad8. c) 10 tL'lf3 !? l2Jc6(IO ... 'ili'b6!?) 11 0-0 l2Jxc3 12 'ii'xc3 'ili'e7 13 ..te3 (13 ..tf4 f6) 13... ..txe3 14 'i!lxe3 e5 leads to equality. d) 10 l2Jc2l2Jc6 (the possible loss of the d5-pawn does not perturb Black) White has a wide choice of continu 11 l2Jxd5 (11 0-0 l2Ja5 12 1Vb5 l2Jxc3 ations here, so before moving on to 13 bxc3 'ili'b6 is equal; 11 ..txd5 exd5 our four main lines, we shall briefly 12 'ii'xd5 'ili'b6) 1l...exd5 12 0-0 (12 deal with moves that do not pose seri ..txd5 'ii'a5+ 13 ..td2..txf2+ 14 'ittxf2 ous problems for Black: it'xd2 is unclear, while 12 'ii'xd5 'ili'a5+ a) There's no justification for 6 13 'ii'd2 'ili'b6 14 0-0 ..tg4 is equal) l2Jc2?! (6 lt'lb3?! and 6 t2Jf3?! are also 12 ...d4 13 ..tf4(13 .l:.d1 .:!.e8) 13... 'ii' e7 absolutely inappropriate) 6 ...d5 7 cxd5 with equal chances. exd5 8 ..te3 (8 e3 is slightly prefera 10••• exd5 11 ..te3 ..txd4 12 ..txd4 ble) 8 .....td 6!? 9 g3 (9 tL'lxd5 .i.f5 l2Jc6 13 .l:!.d1 gives Black the initiative) 9 . ..0-0 10 It is dubious for White to continue ..tg2 ..te5, when Black enjoys the 13 0-0-0?! .i.e6 and entirely bad to better chances. play 13 .i.c5? d4. b) 6 l2Jxc6 bxc6 7 e4 ..tb4 trans 13••• ..th3 poses to Section 12.3.1. Now the white king remains in the c) 6 e3 d5 7 cxd5 (7 .i.e2 dxc4! ?) centre. 7 ...exd5 and now 8 ..te2.i.d6 9 0-0 a6 14 l2Jxd5 transposes to Section 13.1.2. A more Other moves are at best unclear: 14 vigorous idea is 8 .i.b5 .i.d7 9 0-0 f3?! .l:!.e8 15 'ittf2 'ii'e7, 14 l::tg1 ..te6, ..td6 10 e4 ( 10 tL'lf3 ..tg4), but by play 14 .i.c5 l:te8 15 'ii'xd5 'ii'f6 or 14 ing 10 ...l2Jxe4 11 l2Jxc6..txc6 12 'ii'xd5 iexb7 'ii'd6. 0-0 13 ..txc6 l2Jxc3 14 bxc3 bxc6 15 14••. t2Jxd4 15 .l:!.xd4 l::tc8 16 f3 'ii'xc6 .l:!.c8 Black soon re-establishes .l:!.cl+ 17 .l:!.d1.l:!. xd1 + 18 'ii'xd1 .i.e6 the material equilibrium, with equal The game is equal. chances. TRA NSPOSITION TO THE ENGliSH 149 d) 6 .i.f4 can also be met by 6 ...d5. 12.3.1: 6 e4 149 Then: 12.3;2: 6 a3 150 d1) 7 tt::'ldb5 transposes to Section 12.3.3: 6 tt::'ldb5 151 12.3.3. 12.3.4: 6 g3 153 d2) 7 e3 is quite adequately an swered by 7 ....i.c5 !? 8 cxd5 (8 .l:tc1 12.3.1 0-0) 8 ...tt::'l xd5 9 tt::'lxd5 (9 tt::'lxc6 bxc6 6 e4 (D) is equal) 9 ...exd5 10 tt::'lxc6 bxc6, with Another metamorphosis: we have equality. now reached a line of the Sicilian De d3) 7 cxd5 tt::'lxd5 8 tt::'lxc6 bxc6 9 fence ( 1 e4 c5 2 tt::'lf3 tt::'lc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 .i.d2 is a more interesting possibility. tt::'lxd4e6 5 c4 tt::'lf6 6 tt::'lc3), but not one White's pawn-structure is superior, that is considered dangerousfor Black. but due to the tempo lost by .i.f4-d2he The line 6 tt::'lxc6 bxc6 7 e4 .i.b4comes has no time to make use of this advan to the same thing. tage: 9 ....i.b4 10 �c2 (10 .l:tc1 .l:tb8) 10 ...�a5 (or 10 ...0-0 !? 11 a3 .i.xc3 12 bxc3 tt::'lf6 with equality) 11 a3 .l:tb8 12 e3 0-0!? (weaker is 12... .i.a 6?! 13 .i.xa6 �xa6 14 �a4 'ii'xa4 15 tt::'lxa4) 13 .i.d3 .i.a6 14 .i.xh7+ 'lti>h8 15 .i.d3 .l:tfd8 is equal. e) 6 .ltg5.i.e7 7 e3 �aS !? 8 .i.h4(8 tt::'ldb5 0-0 9 a3 d5 10 b4 �d8 was equal in Agrest-Timman, Malmo19 99, while 8 .i.xf6?! .i.xf69 'it'd2tt::'l xd4 10 exd4 b6 gives Black the initiative) and now Black must make an important decision: el) After 8 ...tt::'l e4 9 .i.xe7 tt::'lxc3 6 ••• .i.b4 7 tt::'lxc6 bxc6 8 .i.d3 10 �d2 tt::'lxe7 (10 ...'1ti>xe7 !? 11 bxc3 It is not good for Whiteto choose 8 tt::'lxd4and 10 ...tt::'l xd4!? 11 exd4 'lti>xe7 e5? tt::'le4 9 .i.d2.i.xc3 (Black even has 12 .:tel b6 are both unclear) 11 tt::'lb5 a stronger path in 9 ...tt::'l xd2!? 10 'it'xd2 d5 12 tt::'lxc3 (12 tt::'ld6+ 'lfi>f8 13 �xc3 �aS) 10 .i.xc3 tt::'lxc3 11 bxc3 'ii'a5 12 'ii'xc3+ 14 bxc3 g6 is equal) 12 ...dxc4 �d4 .l:tb8with the initiative for Black, Black can play for equality. A.Stefanova-Zhu Chen, Wijk aan Zee e2) 8 ....i.b4 offers Black more pos 2004. itive prospects. After9 'it'c2 tt::'lxd4 10 8 ...e5 exd4 b5 !? 11 .i.xf6 gxf6 12 cxb5 .i.b7 Otherwise Black will need to take he sacrifices a pawn to secure the ini White's e5 advance into consideration; tiative. for example, 8 ...0-0 9 e5!? �aS 10 Now we move on to the main lines: .i.f4 with unclear play. 150 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 9�e3 does not change the assessment of the 9 0-0 is a more common move position. order, although Black can then play 15 .•Ji'c5 9 ...�c5 !?, taking control of the impor The game is approximately equal as tant g1-a7 diagonal. Instead, after the both sides have pawn-weaknesses. standard 9... 0-0, 10 �e3 transposes to our main line below, while the straight 12.3.2 forward 10 f4 d6 (10... �c5+ !? 11 �h1 6 a3 (D) d6 12 f5 h6 gives Black the initiative) 11 f5 ?! (better is 11 lt:la4 .l:te8 12 a3 �a5, with unclear play) 11...d5 al lowed Black to take over the initiative in A.Muzychuk-Cherenkova, Russian Women's Team Ch, Sochi 2007. Given the strategic importance of the g1-a7 diagonal, both sides should seek to controlit; for example, after �d29 or 9 �g5 Black replies 9 ...�c5 to good ef fect. 9 ••. 0-0 10 0-0 d6 11 h3 . 11 lt:la4 lt:lg4 12 �d2 (12 �cl!? is unclear) 12 ...�xd2 13 1i'xd21i'h4 14 h3 lt:lf6 (Anka-Berczes, Hungarian This is a rather popular continua Team Ch 2005/6) and 11 1i'a4 i.xc3 tion. Covering the b4-square is useful 12 bxc3 c5 do not promise White an in many lines, while in specific terms advantage. White seeks an improved version of ll... i.xc3 12 bxc3 �e6 the 6 �f4 d5 7 cxd5 variation, which 12... c5 !? is more ambitious (al- we examined at the beginning of Sec though somewhat risky): Black fixes tion 12.3. the pawn-structure and restricts the 6••• d5 7 cxdS exdS activity of the white bishops. 13 f4 (13 This time taking with the knight is 1i'd2 i.b7 14 f3 1i'd7; 13 l:tb1 1i'c7) somewhat weaker: after 7 ...lt:lxd5 8 13... lt:ld7 14 f5 f6 (14... l:tb8 !? 15 f6 lt:lxc6 bxc6, 9 i.d2 or 9 'ii'c2 will fol lt:lxf6 16 i.g5 l:te8) can follow, with low, with a small but stable advantage unclear play, which may be sharpened for White. if White launches a kingside attack. Si.gS 13 f4 exf4 14 �xf4 1i'b6+ 15 .l:tf2 8 g3 leads to positions similar to Or 15 �h1 1i'c5, as in the game the Tarrasch Queen's Gambit where Chandler-Emms, Hastings 2000. In the move a3 is not very useful. After terposing the rook appears slightly 8 ... �c5 9 �e3 (the careless 9 lt:lxc6?! stronger than moving the king, but it bxc6 10 �g2 lt:lg4hands the initiative TRA NSPOSITION TO THE ENGLISH 151 to Black right away) 9 ....ib6 10 .ig2 after 12 .ie3 !? .l:e8 13 0-0 .i.f5 14 0-0 11 0-0 .:!.e8 the game is level, .:!.cl White's position remains themore Kasimdzhanov-Gopal, FIDE World pleasant because of his bishop-pair. Cup, Khanty-Mansiisk 2007. U.ixf6 8 ••• .ic5 9 e3 0-0 10 .ie2 (D) 11 .ih4 is quite well answered with Changing the pawn-structure by 10 11....ixd4 12 exd4 .i.f5 13 0-0 :c8 or t"Llxc6bxc6 does not provide any bene 11...t"Llxd4 12 exd4 .i.e7 13 0-0 .i.e6, fitfor White, since the vulnerability of when 14 'iib3, 14 .if3and 14 l:.e1 are his own queenside reduces the effect all met by 14... t"Lle4. of the pressure along the c-file. Black ll .. .'iVxf6 12 t"Llxd5 obtains enough counterplay; for ex After 12 t"Llb3 .id6 13 1!Vxd5 , (13 ample, 11 .i.e2 h6 12 .i.h4l:le8 13 0-0 0-0?! .:!.d8) 13... .i.e5 the position of .if5 14t"Lla4 .id6 15 :c 1 l:le6 16 t"Llc5 the b3-knight is insecure and Black's (16 .ig3 a5 is equal, while 16 b4 can initiative completely compensates for be answered with 16... .ixh2+ !? 17 his small material deficit. 'iii>xh2 t"Llg4+ 18 .ixg4"ii'xh4+ 19 .ih3 12••• 1We5 13 t"Llxc6 l:lg6) 16 ....ixc5 17 :xc5 g5 18 .ig3 After 13 t"Llb3 .:!.d8 14 t"Llxc5 .:!.xd5 t"Lle4 :c19 1 a5, maintaining the equi 15 t"Lld3 'iVg5 the activity of the black librium without any particular diffi pieces again turns out to be enough to culty. It is worth paying attention to maintain the equilibrium; for exam the weakness of the b2-pawn - a con ple, 16 .i.f3 i.g4 17 .i.xg4 t"Lle5, 16 sequence of the move 6 a3. 0-0 .ih3 17 i.f3 .ixg2 18 .ixg2.:!.ad8 or 16 g3?! t"Lle5, when 17 'iVb3? loses to 17 ....:!.xd3 ! 18 .ixd3 t"Llf3+. 13... bxc6 14 t"Llf4 Or 14 t"Llc3 :b8 15 'iVc 1 .id6. White is ready to returnthe pawn, but Black is in no hurry to take it back. 14... .if5 15 t"Lld3 .ixd3 16 'ifxd3 l:lab8 17 l:ld1 .:!.xb2 The game is approximately equal. 12.3.3 6 t"Lldb5 (D) Now 6 ...d6 !? is possible, with very interesting play after 7 .if4 e5 8 .ig5 10••• h6 a6. However, White can also choose 7 This move has so far not been e4, transposing to a Sicilian main line, played in practice, but it is a useful namely 1 e4 c5 2 t"Llf3t"Llc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 way to liven up the game. In principle, t"Llxd4 e6 5 t"Llb5 d6 6 c4 t"Llf6 7t"Ll1c3. 10 ....ixd4 11 exd4 h6 suits Black, but So let us not tempt fate any longer. 152 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK White initiates a forcing sequence that leads to a sharp ending. 8 i.g5?! is not advantageous in view of 8 ...a6 9 cxd5 axb5 1 0 dxc6 'ifxd1 + 11 l:txd1 bxc6. 8 •.•exf4 9 dxc6 bxc6 10 'ifxd8+ �xd8 (D) 6 •••d5 This move is a pawn sacrifice, but one that White usually does not ac cept. 7 i.f4 The choice is not large - either this bishop move or the exchange 7 cxd5 tt::lxd5. Now it is illogical to play 8 e4 tt::lxc3 9 'ifxd8+ Wxd8 10 bxc3 (more 11 l:td1+ careful is 10 tt::lxc3 ..tc5, with equal 11 0-0-0+?! �e7! 12 tt::ld4 (12 tt::ld6 ity) IO .....tc5 11 ..tf4a6 12 tt::ld4 ..td7 ..te6) 12... ..td7 is of doubtful value for 13 tt::lb3 ..ta3 14 l:td1 (14 .:.b1 !?) White as the f2-pawn is undefended 14 ...�e7 , when White's activity is ex and so theunpleasant threat of ...lbg4 hausted but his pawn weaknesses re appears. main, Miladinovic-Antic, Kragujevac After 11 tt::ld4 Black can equalize 2009. However, 8 tbxd5 exd5 9 'ifxd5 by 11...i.d7 12 g3 fxg3 13 hxg3 i.b4 i.b4+ 10 ..i.d2 is more critical. Black 14 i.g2 (14 .:.c 1.l:lb8) 14 ... i.xc3+ 15 has the initiative in return for the bxc3 Wc7 or try to obtain more with pawn after 10 ...0-0 11 'ifxd8 l:txd8 12 11...�c7!? 12 g3 l:tb8 (12... i.c5 is un tt::lc3 i.e6 13 e3 .l:.d7, 10... i.e6 !? 11 clear, Korchnoi-Portisch, Candidates 'ifxd8+ .:.xd8 12 tt::lc3 0-0 13 e3 l:td6 (3), Bad Kissingen 1983) 13 l:tc1 or IO ...'ife7 11 0-0-0!? (11 tt::lc3?! 0-0; l:txb2. 11 a3 !? ..i.xd2+ 12 'ifxd2 is unclear) ll •••i.d7 12 tt::ld6 �c7 1 1.....i.xd2+ 12 .:.xd20-0 13 'ifd6'ifh4 Or 12... i.xd6 13 l:txd6.:.b8 14 .l:ld2 (13... 'it'g5 14 e3 l:td8? 15 h4) 14 g3 (14 b3 .l:lb4 15 g3 �e7 is equal) 'il'e4. However, all these lines could be 14 ...l:te8 15 g3 (15 f3 l:te5 16 g3 tt::ld5) investigated further. 15 ...f3 16 �d1 fxe2+ 17 ..txe2Wc7 , 7 •••e5 8 cxd5 with approximate equality. TRA NSPOSITION TO THE ENGliSH 153 13 0.xf7 l:tg8 14 0.e5 wants to fight for an opening advan White's knight should save its skin tage. Here, however, Black has more right away. After 14 g3?! l:tb8 15 l:td2 ways to create counterplay. (15 �g2 .l:.xb2 16 0-0 .lib4 17 .l::.cl 6 ••.'ii' b6 7 0.b3 fxg3) 15... .lib4 16 .lig2the unexpected 7 e3 can be met by 7 .....tb4 8 Jlg2 16... f3 ! 17 .lixf3 :ge8 drives White 0.e5 or 7 ...d5 , with equality, while 7 into a difficultsituation. 0.c2 d5 8 ..tg2 (not 8 cxd5?! exd5 9 14••• l:tb8 15 l:td2 0.xd5? 0.xd5 10 'ifxd5 �e6 11 'ife4 More accurate than 15 0.xd7 (or Jtb4+) ...8 dxc4 9 0.e3 (9 0-0 Jtd7) 15 0.d3 ..tf5) 15... 0.xd7 16 g3 (16 9 ...'ii' a6 10 a4 Jtb4 11 0-0 Jlxc3 12 :d2 0.e5) 16... .:lxb2 17 .i.h3 0.f6 bxc3 0-0 looks unattractive for White. (17... 0.b6 !?) 18 0-0 .i.b4, when Black The adventurous 7 0.db5 !? is much has the initiative, Postny-Grtinfeld, more interesting and popular. Then Givataim 1998. 7 ...d5 !? is certainly possible, but the 15••• .lib4 16 0.xd7 0.xd7 17 g3 main line is 7 ...0.e5 , when we have 0.e5 two important moves to consider: The game is equal. Blees-Hegeler, a) 8 Jlg20.xc4 9 'ii'a4 a6 10 'ii'xc4 Krumbach 1991 ended in perpetual axb5 11 'ii'xb5 (11 0.xb5?! ..tc5 12 check after 18 Jth3 Jlxc3 19 bxc3 Jle3 .lixe3 13 0.c7+ �e7 14 0.xa8 l:tb1 + 20 :d1 0.d3+21 exd3 l:te8+22 Jlxf2+ 15 �fl 'ii'd4 gave Black the �d2 .:l.b2+ 23 �c 1 l:tee2 24 l:tde1 advantage in the game Mkrtchian l:tec2+ 25 �d1 .:ld2+. Burtasova, European Women's Ch, Dresden 2007) 11...'ii'xb5 12 0.xb5 12.3.4 .i.b4+ 13 Jtd2�xd2+ 14 �xd2 �e7 6 g3 (D) 15 .l::.hc 1 d5 and an equal ending arises. b) 8 ..tf4 0.fg4 leads to complica tions: bl) 9 e3 a6 10 h3 (10 0.c7+?! 'ifxc7 11 'ii'xg4 'ii'xc4!?, Smirin-Holz ke, Port Erin 2004) 10... axb5 11 hxg4 0.xc4 12 'ii'b3 d5 13 ..txc4 dxc4 14 'ii'xb5+ 'ii'xb5 15 0.xb5Jtb4+ 16 �e2 l:ta5 (Timofeev-Stevic, Bosnian Team Ch, Bihac 2010) 17 a4 Jtd7 is equal. b2) 9 'ii'a4 !? (adding more fuel to the fire) 9 ...'ii' xf2+!? (it is strange that this simple reply has still not been tried in practice) 10 �d2 'ii'c5 11 0.e4 As in Section 12.2, the fianchettois 'ii'b6!? 12 h3 0.f6, withrather intricate the most promising for White if he play. 154 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 7.JiJe5 8 e4 'ii'f2+ 16 'iti>dl .i.xb5 17 cxb5 .:tc8 18 White is not completely obligated lt:lc4 J:l.xc4 19 bxc4 lt:le3+. to defend the c4-pawn, but after 8 .tg2 10... lt:lc6 11 .i.e3 lt:lxc49 0-0 (9 e4 .tb4 10 0-0 .txc3 II 11 .tg2 is answered with ll...e5, bxc3 d6 12 .tg5 e5, Kalashian-D.Pe seizing the initiative. trosian, Armenian Ch, Erevan 2010) ll ....txc3+ 12 bxc3 'il/c7 13 .tg2 9 ....te7 (9 ...d5 !? 10 e4 lt:lxe4! llltlxe4 e5! (D) dxe4) 10 e4 d6 11 'ii'e2 ltle5( 11...'ii' b4 and l l...'ii'a6 are also possible) he gets no real compensation. 8 ....tb4 9 'ii'e2 d6 (D) For the time being castling can wait; firstit is more important to arrangethe pawns correctly. 14 0-0 10 f4 14 c5 dxc5 15 .txc5.tg4 (15 ... exf4 The modest 10 .i.d2 a5 11 lt:lb5! ? is unclear) 16 fie3 lt:ld7 fails to incon (11 f4 lt:lc6 12 lt:la4 fic7 gives Black venience Black greatly. the initiative) ll....i.xd2+ 12 ltlxd2 is 14... b6 15 fxe5 enough for equality at most; for exam Now 15... dxe5 ?! is dubious in view ple, 12... lt:lfg4 !? 13 b3 (not 13 f4 ?? of 16 .th6, but after 15... lt:lxe5 Black ltld3+) 13 ... .td7 14 f4 ltld3+ 15 fixd3 stands no worse. 13 2 ttJf3 c5 3 e3 1 d4 e6 2 ltJf3c5 3 e3 • 4 c4 (Section 13.1) leads to the This modest continuation can serve Symmetrical Tarrasch, which is not as an introduction to one of three dif dangerous for Black. ferent opening schemes for White, de • The same verdict may be passed on pending on what he does with his 4 c3 (Section 13.2). Moreover, if c-pawn. White employs Colle's system of de 3 ...d5 (D) velopment in full, he even risks fall ing into a slightly worse position. • The most noteworthy line is 4 b3 (Section 13.3), known as the Zuker tort Attack. White can opt for central play (c4, when hanging pawns are likely) or a classical attacking plan with lt::\e5, f4, etc. Black must take both these possibilities into account. 13.1 4 c4 (D) We occupy the centre, not fearing lines where we end up with an isolated d-pawn, given that White has made a rather slow move with this e-pawn, and won't be able to adopt the most potent line in the Tarrasch Queen's Gambit. Given that 4 i.d3 can be answered by 4 ...c4 5 i.e2 b5 6 0-0 ltJf6 7 b3 i.b7 8 a4 a6, not only seizing space but also establishing firmcontrol over e4, White needs to make a committal With this move, the game trans move right now: poses to the Symmetrical Tarrasch (a 156 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK standard move-order being 1 d4 d5 2 a5 10 b5 t'bbd7 (10... b6 !? 11 cxd5 c4 e6 3 lL'lf3 c5 4 e3). The strategic 'ii'xd5) 11 'ii'c2 ( 11 cxd5 exd5 12 .i.e2 struggle will revolve aroundboth sides' lbc5and 11 .te2b6 12 cxd5 t'bxd5 are attempts to resolve the central tension also equal) ll...b6 12 lL'ld4 .i.b7 13 in theirfavour, and as economically as t'bc6 .txc6 14 bxc6 t'bc5 Black main possible in terms of tempi. tains the equilibrium. 4 ••.a6 !? 5 .••t'bf6 (D) The exchange 4 ...dxc4 5 .i.xc4lL'lf6 transposes to the traditional main line of the Queen's Gambit Accepted. With the text-move, Black hopes to encour age White to exchange pawns himself, or else to play .i.d3, when Black can save a tempo by replying ....dxc4. 4 ...t'bf6 is a reasonable alternative. Then 5 t'bc3a6 transposes to our main line below, while5 cxd5 !? exd5 6 .i.b5+ t'bc6 7 0-0 .td6 (a kind of reversed Nimzo-Indian) 8 dxc5 (8 .txc6+bxc6 9 'ii'c2 'ii'b6 10 dxc5 'ii'xc5; 8 'ii'c2 'ii'b6 dxc59 .i.xh2+!, Hebden-Chand ler, British League (4NCL) 1997/8) Now White should avoid 6 b3?! 8 ....txc5 leads to a different type of cxd4 7 exd4 .i.b4 (or 7 ...t'be4) 8 .i.d2 game. In the following illustrative dxc4, and choose one of the following lines, White fails to secure the initia continuations: tive, and there is a complicated strug 13.1.1: 6 a3 156 gle with chances for both sides: 9 'ii'c2 13.1.2: 6 cxd5 157 'ii'b6 10 .i.xc6+ 'ii'xc6 11 b3 .i.g4, 9 ..ltxc6+ bxc6 10 'ii'c2 'ii'd6 11 b3 (11 13.1.1 t'bc3 .i.g4) ll....i.a6 12 lid1 0-0 or 9 6 a3 dxc4 7 .txc4 b5 b3 0-0 10 .i.b2 .i.d6 11 .ltxc6 bxc6 12 Again we have a Queen's Gambit 'ii'c2 .i.d7 (when White should avoid Accepted, but one of the secondary 13 t'bg5?! .txh2+). variationsrather than the main line. 5 t'bc3 S.ta2 5 b3?! is answered by 5 ...cxd4 6 This retreat is logical, since White's exd4 .i.b4+ and 5 a3 with 5 ...dxc4, as main hopes are pinned to aggressive Black's a-pawn move is a little more play in the centre. The following lines useful than White's in this structure have also been seen in practice: compare Section 13.1.1. White can a) 8 .te2 i.b7 9 0-0 t'bbd7 10 dxc5 also play 5 dxc5 .i.xc5 6 a3. After i.xc5 11 b4 i.e7 12 i.b20-0 is equal, 6 ...t'bf6 7 b4 .te7 8 .i.b2 0-0 9 t'bbd2 Sarakauskas-Ivanisevic, Troms0 2010. 2 0.f3 c5 3 e3 15'7 b) 8 �d3 0.bd7 9 0-0 ..tb7 10 'i!ke2 White is gearing up for a battle ..td6!? (10... �e7 ) 11 l:.d1 0-0 12 dxc5 against an isolated d-pawn. More ac 0.xc5 13 e4 'iic7 leaves Black withthe tive continuations also deserve atten initiative, Scekic-Nikolov, Nova Gor tion: ica 1998. a) 7 �d3 0.c68 0-0 i.g49 dxc5 (9 8 •••� b7 9 0-0 0.bd7 10 l:te1 h3 �xf3 10 'ii'xf3 cxd4 11 exd4 0.xd4 A risky continuation, but 10 'ii'e2 is equal, while 9 J:e1 c4 10 i.b1 i.e7 'Wic7 11 l:.d1 ..td6yields no more than is unclear) 9 ...�xc5 10 h3 i.h5 ll e4 equality. ..txf3 12 Wxf3 0.e5 13 'iWg30.xd3 14 10••• ..td6 11 d5 'i!kxd3 dxe4 15 'ii'g3 'iWd6 leads to After 11 e4 cxd4 12 0.xd4 (12 equal play. 'i!kxd4..tc5) 12... 'i!kb8 13 h3 0-0 White b) 7 g3!? is an interesting attempt already needs to struggle for equality, to play the main lines of the Tarrasch Ekstrtim-Godena, Swiss Team Ch with the extra moves e3 and ...a6. 2001. However, after 7 ... 0.c68 i.g2 i.e7 it ll••• exd5 12 e4 0-0 is hard to intensify the pressure on Black is somewhat better, since 13 Black (since �g5 is impossible), and e5 carries no punch. After the further 9 dxc5 �xc5 10 0-0 0-0 11 b3 i.g4 is moves 13... 0.xe5 14 0.xe5 d4 15 0.b1 equal. 'i!kc7 Blackhas more than enough for 7 ••• 0.c6 8 0-0 cxd4 the piece. 8 ...�d6 9 dxc5 �xc5 occurs more often, when Black hopes to profit from 13.1.2 his bishop's influenceon the gl-a7 di 6 cxd5 exd5 (D) agonal: a) 10 b3 0-0 11 �b2 �a7 12 J:c l (12 Wc2 can be met by 12... 'iWe7 or 12... ..te6) 12... 1:te8 13 'iWc2 (after 13 0.a4 0.e4 White should settle for equality by 14 0.c3!? 0.f6, since 14 0.d4?! 'i!kg5 gave Black the initiative in the game Renet-Conquest, Clichy 2001) 13 .....te6 14J:fd l 'iWe7 and little by little White's play reachesa dead lock. b) 10 a3 !? 0-0 11 b4 i.a7 12 i.b2 (or 12 b5 axb5 13 0.xb5 and now 13... i.b6 14 ..tb2 0.e4 15 J:c 1 :teH was unclearin Grecescu-Lysy, Euro This type of position more often pean Ch, Plovdiv 2008,but Black can arises with reversed colours. also try 13 ...�b8 !? 14 i.b2 0.e4 IS 7 ..te2 l:!.cl l:te8) 12... �e6 13 b5 ( 1 3 0.a4 158 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK lt:Je4 14 lt:Jd4.l:.c8) 13... axb5 14 lt:Jxb5 i.b8. White has more prospects in this line, but neverthelessdoes not achieve any real advantage. 9 lt:Jxd4 i.d6 10 b3! This is evidently stronger than 10 lt:Jxc6?! bxc6 11 b3 "ilc7 (ll ...h5!?, Trois-Kosten, London 1982) 12 h3 (12 g3 h5 gives Black the initiative, while White should definitely avoid 12 f4 ?! 0-0 13 "ilc2 :e8, Gelashvili-Lu ther, Balaguer 2007) 12... "ile7, when Black's position is preferable. After 10 i.f30-0, White must also lt:Jbd76 .i.d3 i.d6), and the idea is that be careful not to end up worse. 11 White should be able to make good lt:Jxc6?! bxc6 12b3 "ilc7 (or 12... i.e5 ) use of his extra tempo. As in many permits Black the initiative, while 11 . other cases of 'reversed' openings, b3 .i.e5 (11 ..."ile7 !?) 12.i.a3 (12lt:Jce2 this strategy does not represent a seri "ild6 13 h3 lt:Je4) gives Black a choice ous danger for Black, mainly because between the equalizing 12... lt:Jxd4 and it works best as a counterpunching 12... :e 8. White should possibly try 11 set-up, and is less well suited to pursu lt:Jxd5! ? lt:Jxd5 12 .i.xd5 .i.xh2+ 13 ing active plans. �xh2 "ilxd5. 4 ... lt:Jf6 5 lt:Jbd2 lt:Jc6i.d3 6 .i.d67 10 ••• "ilc7 U lt:Jf3 .i.e6 12 .i.b2 0-0 0-0 13 l:.cl 7 dxc5 !? i.xc5 8 b4 is a kind of re Now 13... l:.ad8 is quite acceptable; versed Meran, but Black has no diffi for example, 14 "ilc2 l:tc8 15 l:.fd 1 culties after 8 ...i.d6 (8 ...i.e7 !?) 9 a3 :fd8 16 "ilb1 d4 !? 17 lt:Je4 lt:Jxe4 18 (9 0-0 0-0 transposes to note 'a' to "ilxe4 i.d5 19 "ilg4 i.e620 "ilh4dxe3 White's 9th move) 9 ...0-0 10 .i.b2 (10 21 fxe3 h6 with equal play, V.Geor c4?! lt:Je5) 10... a5 (10... e5 is unclear) giev-J.Blauert, Turin 2002. However, 11 b5 lt:Je5 12lt:Jxe5 .i.xe5 13 lt:Jf3 (13 Black may well try 13... :f d8, because 0-0 b6 14 lt:Jf3 i.d6 15 c4 .i.b7) the other rook could prove useful on 13 ....i.d6 14 c4 dxc4 15 .i.xc4 "ile7 16 the c-file. 0-0 e5. 7 ... 0-0 8 dxc5 13.2 White switches to active measures, 4 c3 (D) since otherwise Black will play ...e5 White chooses the Colle System. himself. For example, 8 :e1 e5 9 e4?! White is playing a kind of reversed cxd4 10 exd5 lt:Jxd5 11 lt:Jc4 .i.g4. In Semi-Slav (the original looks like 1 d4 stead 8 "ile2 'fic79 dxc5 (9 e4 cxd4 10 d5 2 c4 c6 3 lt:Jf3 lt:Jf6 4 lt:Jc3 e6 5 e3 cxd4 e5) 9 ....i.xc5 10 e4 transposes to 2 lhf3 c5 3 e3 159 our main line below. The immediate The game has taken on contours of advance 8 e4 is parried without diffi the French Defence, though it is by no culty by 8 ...cxd4 9 cxd4 e5 (provoking means easy for White to execute the simplifications; 9 ...dxe4 !? 10 li:Jxe4 e5 advance, as Black's accurate queen il..e7 is also an effective equalizing move not only hinders it, but sets up variation) 10 dxe5 (10 exd5 li:Jxd4) some neat ideas for counterattacking 10 .. .'!tJxe5 11 li:Jxe5 il..xe5 12 exd5 the pawn if it does eventually reach e5. il..g4 13 lbf3 h6 14 ..lle2 ( 14 h3 ..llxf3 10 'ii'e2 15 'ili'xf3 'i!i'xd5 16 'i!i'xd5 lbxd5 also Preparing the advance e5. After 10 leads to equal play) 14 ...il.. c7 15 h3 h3 l:ld8 11 exd5 ( 11 'ii'e2 is met by il..h5 with equality, Samsonkin-J.Frie 1l...lbh5 and 11 'ii'c2 with 1l... ..llb6) del, Toronto 2010. 11... lbxd5 White has nothing tQ count 8 ... i..xc5 9 e4 on. 9 b4 still remains the alternativefor The exchange 10 exd5 eJtd5 1 1 White: lbb3 (not 11 h3? ..llxh3) 11.....th6 right a) 9 ...il.. d6 10 ..tb2 (10 a3 a5 is away delivers the initiative to Black. equal) 10 ...a6 (10... 'ife7 is also possi Then 12 h3 allows a dangerous piece ble) 11 a3 b5 12 a4 l:lb8 13 axb5 axb5 sacrifice, but it looks as if Black's at 14 'ii'e2 'ii'b6 15 lbd4 (15 e4 lbg4) tack only leads to a draw: 12.. . il..xh3 15 ...lbxd4 16 exd4 il..d7 with an equal 13 gxh3 'ii'g3+ 14 �h1 'ii'xh3+ 15 game. lbh2 lbe5 16 ..lle2 lbf3 17 ..tf4 ttlh4 b) 9 .....te7 10 b5 (10 ..tb2a6 11 a3 18 i..f3 lbg4 (or 18... lbh5 19 .ie5 b5 12 a4 l:.b8 13 axb5 axb5 14 'ife2 ltae820 i..d6ltd8 21 .i.e5 with equal 'i!i'b6 and now White should avoid 15 ity) 19 .i.xd5 lbxh2 20 i.xh2 l:tad8 lbd4?! e5) 10... lba5 11 il..b2 a6 12 a4 21 l:.g1 i.c7 22 ltg3 ..ixg33 2 fxg3 'ilc7 13 c4 dxc4 leads to chances for lbf5 24 'ii'f3 l:.xd5 is equal. Instead, both sides. 12... lbe 4!? 13 lbbd4 lb�d4 14 lbxd4 9 •••'ii' c7 (D) 'ii'd6 maintains the tension and keeps the initiative. Other typical lines are 12 lbbd4 .i.g4 13 'ii'a4 (13 .i.e2 lbxd4 14 lbxd4 ..txe2) 13... lbxd4 14 lbxd4 ltfe8, 12 'ii'c2 ..tg4(12 ... lbe5 13lbxe5 'ii'xe5 14 lbd4! ..txd4 is equal) 13 lbfd4 ..td7 14 ..tg5 lbg4, 12 l:.e1 i.g4 13 .i.e3 .l:tfe8 14 il..xb6 'ii'11b6 15 ltxe8+ .:!.xeS 16 h3 .i.xf3 17 'ii'xf3 lbe5 and 12 i.g5 lbe4 13 'ii'c1 i.g4 (13... 'ii'd6 !?) 14 .i.f4 'ii'd7 15 lbfd4 with a choice between 15 ...i.. f5 and the equal 15... lbxd4 16 lbxd4 .txd4. 10•.• b6 !? 160 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BlACK Now Black appears in the role of 12 .•. �xh7 13 lDg5+ �g8 14 'ii'xg4 the provocateur, tempting White with 'ii'xe5 15 'ii'h5 the standard idea of a bishop sacrifice Or 15ltJdf3f6 'ii' (15... 'fi'f5 16 'ii'xf5 on h7. lO... ..tb6 has a similar idea: 11 exf5 17 .:tel f6 is another idea) 16 e5 (Black can be content with II h3 'ii'h5 (16 'ii'a4 is answered by l6... e5, ltJh5, 11 ..tc2 ..td7 or 11 b3 lle8) while 16 'ii'h4 'ii'g6 leads to an equal ll...ltJd7 ! 12 ..txh7+ (Black has the game) 16... 'ii' h6 17 'ii'xh6 gxh6 18 initiative after 12 .l:.el f6) 12... �xh7 ltJh3 �h7 19 ltJf4 ..ta6 and Black's 13 ltJg5+�g6 14 'ii'd3+ f5 15 ltJxe6 position is preferable, Parameswaran 'ii'xe5 16 ltJxf8+ ltJxf8 17 lDf3 'ii'e4 Zarnicki, Erevan Olympiad 1996. 18 'ii'd2 ltJe5, with chances for both 15.•• 'ii' f5 16 g4 sides. After 16 ltJdf3 ..ta6 17 l:td1 (17 11 e5 .:tel? f6) 17... ..td3 18 g4 'ii'g6 19 If White does not take up the chal 'ii'xg6 ..txg6Black also has good pros lenge, he forfeits the initiative. For ex pects, Fenollar Jorda-Gonzalez Gar ample, 11 h3 lDh5 12 'ii'dl lDf4 13 cia, Barbera del Valles 201 1. ltJb3 ltJxd3 14 'ii'xd3 ..te7 15 exd5 16 .••'ii' g6 17 'ii'xg6 fxg6 18 ltJb3 l:td8 or 11 b3 ..td6 12 ..tb2 ..tb7 13 ..te7 19 h3 e5 exd5 (13 c4?! d4 allows Black to take Black has the advantage in the end over the initiative), when Black can try ing. 13... exd5 !? or settle for equality after 13... ltJxd5 14 g3. 13.3 ll... ltJg4! (D) 4 b3 (D) 12 ..txh7+ This set-up is known as the Zuker Half-measures are of no use - 12 tort Attack. Among all the develop b4?! ..te7 13 .:tel f6 is in Black's fa ment systems for White considered in vour. the present chapter, this one is the 2 CiJj3 cS 3 e3 161 most flexible. For the time being the White must now makean important c2-pawn remains in its place, but can decision that will determinethe nature be moved forward to c4 at an appro of the struggle: priate moment. 13.3.1: 8 c4 161 4 ••• CiJc6 5 .td3 13.3.2: 8 CiJbd2 162 The straightforward 5 J..b2 leaves Black more possibilities for improvi For 8 CiJe5, see Section 13.3.2. sation: a) 5 ...CiJf6 6 J..d3 'ii'a5+ (6 ...b6 7 13.3.1 0-0 transposes to our main line below) 8c4 7 c3 (7 CiJbd2 cxd4 8 exd4 ..ta3 is By playing in thecentre, White opts equal) 7 ...cxd 4!? 8 exd4 CiJe49 0-0 f5 for a standard position with hanging is unclear; e.g., 10 b4 'ii'c7. pawns. b) 5 ...cxd 4!? 6 exd4 CiJge7 7 .td3 8 ...cxd4 9 exd4 J..d6 10 CiJc3 g6 (or 7 ...CiJf5 8 0-0 .te7) 8 0-0 J..g7 9 After 10 CiJbd2 0-0 White's centre c3 (9 CiJbd2 0-0 10 .:tel b6) 9 ...0-0 10 is defended better, but he has fewer at CiJbd2 J..d7 with unclear play, San tacking chances. In the following lines, Emeterio Cabanes-Arencibia, Madrid Black is no worse: 2002. a) 1111i'e2 ..tf4 12 a3 l:.c8and now 5 .••CiJf6 6 0-0 13 c5 is met by 13... bxc5 14 dxc5 e5. There is no need to play 6 a3, which b) 11 CiJe5 dxc4 12 CiJdxc4 J..e7 13 again gives Black an opportunity for .l:r.e1 CiJb4 14.tb1 CiJbd5 1511i'f3 b5 (or the useful queen check 6 ...'iia5+ !? 7 15... l:.b8 !?) 16 CiJe3.tb4 17 .l:.d1 .l:r.c8, CiJbd2 (7 c3 .td6 8 0-0 e5 9 dxe5 Hebden-E.Berg, European Union Ch, J..xe5 is equal) 7 ...cxd4 8 exd4 'ii'c3 9 Liverpool 2008 . .l:r.bl CiJxd4,as in Zarubin-Makarychev, c) 11 a3 .l:.c8 (other possibilities Russian Team Ch, Moscow 1994. include 11...ltJe7!? and 11....tf4) 12 6 •••b6 7 J..b2 .tb7 (D) lle1 dxc4 13 bxc4 ..tf4 14 CiJe4 ltJxe4 (14... CiJa5 !?) 15 l:.xe4 .th6 16 l:tg4 offers Black a choice between 16 ...g6, as played in Mladenovic-A.Kovace vic, Serbian Cup, Valjevo 201 1, and 16... CiJa5 !?. 10••• 0-0 (D) 10 ...dxc4 11 bxc4 0-0 is sharper. White is in danger of losing one of his pawns, but Black risks coming under attack: a) 12 .l:r.e1 .l:.c8 13 d5 (13 a3 CiJa5) 13... CiJb4 14 .tn (14 .tb1 l:txc4 15 dxe6 fxe6 16 11i'e2 and now 16... l:.g4 ! 162 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 17 h3 i.xf3 18 li'xe6+ Wh8 19 hxg4 13.3.2 i.xg4 20 'iltb3 i.c5 gives Black the 8lt:'!bd2 (D) initiative) 14 ...exd5 15 a3 lt:'!a6 16 This is a more directly aggressive lt:'!xd5 lt:'!xd5 17 cxd5 lt:'!c5 is unclear. handling of the position. White is go b) 12 li'e2 l:tc8 13 l:tad1 (or 13 a3 ing to play lt:'!e5, which was the origi lt:'!a5 14 lt:'!e5 lt:'!b3 15 l:!.adl lt:'!xd4 16 nal idea of the Zukertort Attack. 8 i.xh7+lt:'!xh7 17 llxd4 li'g5) 13... lt:'!b4 lt:'!e5 i.d69 lt:'!d2leads to the same po (13... l:te8 !?) 14 i.bl (not 14 lt:'!e5?! sition. lt:'!xd3 15 l:txd3 i.a6) 14... i.xf3 15 li'xf3 ! (15 gxf3? lt:'!fd5) 15... l:txc4 16 d5 li'e7 !? 17 a3 lt:'!bxd5 18 lt:'!xd5 lt:'!xd5 19 i.xh7+Wh8 is unclear. 8 •••i.d6 9lt:'!e5 After 9 c4, the line 9 ...cxd4 10 cxd5 lt:'!xd5 11 lt:'!xd4 lt:'!xd4 12 i.xd4 0-0 seems sufficient for equality, while 11 'ii'e2 9 ...0-0 10 cxd5 (otherwise 10 ...cxd4 Exchangingby 11 cxd5 offers White will follow) 10 ...exd5 can again reach very little hope of an advantage after a position with hanging pawns, but ll...exd5 or 1l...lt:'!xd5 12lL'lxd5ex d5. now it will be Black who possesses n ...l:te8 12 l:!.ad1 l:tc813 i.b1 them. White's extra tempo would be White must not continue 13 l:tfe1 ?! of vital importance if his knight were lt:'!b4 14 i.b1 dxc4 15 bxc4 i.xf3 16 more actively placed on c3, but here gxf3 i.b8 17 lt:'!e4 lt:'!h5, when Black Black can be quite confident as his gets the advantage, Franco-A.Soko pawns won't come under much pres lov, Pamplona 1993/4. sure: 11 lt:'!e5 (11 l:.e1 l:te8) 1l...lt:'!b4 13 .•• i.b8 12 i.b1 (12 i.e2 cxd4 13 i.xd4 l:.c8) Both sides have chances. White 12... l:te8 . should still refrain from 14 l:tfe1 ?! in 9 ..• 0-0 10 a3 view of 14 ...dxc4 15 bxc4 lt:'!a5, when The pawn covers the b4-square. 10 16 lL'le5?! is met by 16 ...lt:'!xc4. li'e2 is met by 10... lt:'!b4, while 10 f4 2 lbf3 c5 3 e3 163 is premature in view of 10... cxd4 11 exd4 li:Jb4 12 ..te2 li:Je4 with a pleas ant game for Black. 10 ...li:Je7 (D) This is Bogoljubow's manoeuvre, by which Black wants to prevent 11 f4. But since the f4 advance is not really so dangerous for Black, he can also calmly wait for this move and then seek to exploit its loosening effecton White's position: 10 ...l:tc8 11 f4 (11 'ii'f3?! 'ii'c7 12 'ii'g3 li:Je7 13 'ii'h3 li:Je4 14 f3 li:Jg5 gives Black the initiative) 11... li:Je7 and now: Black's idea is that 11 f4 is well met a) 12 'ii'f3 b5 (12... li:Jf5 !? ) 13 dxc5 by 1l...lbe4, when 12 .l:.f3?f6 13li:Jg4 .i.xc5 14 b4 (avoiding 14 'ii'g3? lbe4 ! cxd4 14 exd4 h5 is clearlyno good for and 14 'ii'h3?! lbe4 15 l:r.ad1 lDf5) White. 12 'ii'e2 can be answered with 14 .....tb6 15 1 d4 e6 (D) tbf3 ( 4 e4 is a French) 4 ...lbb d7, when 5 e4 can be met by 5 ...h6. We shall focus on three lines where Black can face more significantopen ing problems: • In Section 14.1 we examine all pos sible forms of the London System. White's key move here is i.f4, and we need to consider 2 i.f4, 2 tbf3 c5 3 c3 (with i.f4to follow) and the immediate 2 c3, intending a quick i.f4. These last two move-orders may also be used by players looking to employ some form of Torre At tack, with i.g5. To complete our repertoire with 1 • Section 14.2 features 2 tbf3 c5 3 g3 e4 e6 and 1 d4 e6, it remains only to or 2 g3 c5 3 tbf3. This has ideas consider a variety of more minor con akin to a Catalan, and can transpose tinuations for White on moves 2 and 3 to mainstream openings after White that haven't been covered in earlier plays c4. However, Black can direct chapters. the game into a form of reversed There isn't much point dwelling on Griinfeld where White will find it some of these options because Black hard to get much traction on the can obtain a good position simply by black position. logical development or else direct the • After 2 tbf3 c5 3 tbc3 (Section game to lines we have already exam 14.3) we are, conceptually at least, ined by bearing in mind suitable trans fighting against our own weapon: positions. For instance, 2 g3 c5 3 c3 (3 White uses an unusual move-order d5 exd5 4 i.g2lDf6) 3 ... d5 4 i.g2lDf6 to make it more difficult for Black 5 tbf3 i.e7 or 2 tbc3 tbf6 (2 ...d5 of to achieve his ambitions. Highly fers White a French Defence right original positions result in many away) 3 i.g5 (3 i.f4 i.b4) 3 ...d5 4 lines. RARE 2ND AND 3RD MOVES AFTER 1 d4 e6 165 14.1 and a rapid sharpeningof the struggle. The London System is a rather popu The absence of the moves l2Jf3 and lar scheme of development where ...l2Jf6 can turn out to be in Black's fa White plays d4, ..tf4, c3, e3, lDf3 and vour. l2Jbd2, in one sequence or another. 2 ...c5 Generally speaking,White seeks a very Black can also just ignore White's reliable position with a slight initia move-order and play 2 ... d5 3 e3 lDf6 4 tive. Black can tailor his reply accord l2Jf3 c5 5 c3 (5 l2Jc3 a6 is equal) ing to White's precise move-order, or 5 ...l2Jc6, transposing to Section 14.1.3. else reduce his workload by adopting This represents the 'universal method' a universal method that can be em mentioned above. ployed against all forms of the Lon 3e3 don System. We examine: 3 c3 'iib6 generally leads to calmer 14.1.1: 1 d4 e6 2 ..tf4 165 play, since White can defend his b 14.1.2: 1 d4 e6 2 l2Jf3 c5 3c3 166 pawn by 4 'iic2 cxd4 5 cxd4 l2Jc66 e3 14.1.3: 1 d4 e6 2 c3!? 167 l2Jb4 (6... l2Jf6 7 l2Jc3 l2Jb4) 7 Vb3 (7 'ii'd2 l2Jd5) 7 ...Va5 8 l2Jc3 (8 l2Jd2b6) Note that within these last two sec 8 ...lDf6, when the game is approxi tions, we need to bear in mind that mately equal. Instead, 4 'iib3?! Vxb3 White isn't yet committed to playing 5 axb3 cxd4 6 cxd4 l2Jc6is not only in ..tf4, and may seek to profit from sipid, but it also leads to the more some other development scheme. pleasant position for Black. 3 ...cxd4 4 exd4 Vb6 5 l2Jc3 14.1.1 White is not bound to enter the 1 d4 e6 2 ..tf4 (D) complications, but in the variation 5 b3 l2Jf6 6 l2Jf3 (6 c3 ..td6!?) 6 ...l2Jd5 7 ..lid2l2Jc6 Black has no problems. The pure gambit 5 l2Jf3 Vxb2 6 l2Jbd2lDf6 gives White some tempi but no clear compensation for the pawn. All that leaves is 5 l2Ja3 Vxb2 6 l2Jb5, which transposes to the main line below. 5 ... Vxb2 6 l2Jb5 6 ..td2 may be parried by 6 ...Vb6 or 6 ...a6 . 6 ... ..1ib4+ 7 'iti>e2 l2Jc6 (D) 8l:.b1 Black is safe after 8 lDf3 lDf6 (8 ...'iii> f8 !?) 9 l2Jc7+'iti>d8 10 l:.bl (10 This straightforward move allows a3?! l2Je4 11 Ve l ..tc3)10 ... 'ii' xa2 11 counterplay against White's b2-pawn l2Jxa8 l2Jd5. White should avoid 8 166 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BlACK white king cannot escape from the checks. c) 14 �e3 offers Black a choice between two acceptable endings: c1) 14... 'ifxd4 15 �xd4 tt:lf6 16 �xa7 d6 (or 16... b5) 17 �e3 b5 18 tt:lb6�c5 looks safe enough for Black. c2) 14 ...'ifb5+ 15 'iii>e1 'ifa5 16 'iixg7 ..tc3 17 'iig5+ 'ifxg5 18 �xg5+ tt:lf6 is not easy to assess, but it doesn't appear bad for Black. 14.1.2 tt:lc7+?! �d8 9 tt:lf3 g5 !?, while 8 1 d4 e6 2 tt:lf3 c5 3 c3 (D) 'iib1 can be met by 8 ...'ii xb1 9 tt:lc7+ �d8 10 :xb1 e5. 8 ••• 'ifxa2 9 tt:lc7+!? A courageous attempt to play for a win. It is not advisable to play 9 d5? tt:lf6, but White can repeat moves by 9 .l:ta1 'ifb2 10 :b1, etc. Black has to take this drawing line into consider ation if he chooses this variation. 9 •••�e7 10 tt:lxa8tt:lxd4+ 11 'ifxd4 'ifxb1 12 tt:lf3 Not 12 c3? 'ifc2+ 13 �d2 (or 13 'ifd2 'ife4+ 14 ..te3 ..td6) 13... ..td6 14 'ifxg7 b6, when Black wins (Johnsen and Kovacevic). This flexible move-order retains 12••. 'ifxc2+ 13 tt:ld2 ideas of either ..tf4 or �g5, or some It is evidently weaker for White to other system completely. continue 13 �d2?! ..txd2 14 tt:lxd2 3 •••tt:l f6 b6. 3 ...d5 embodies the 'universal' re 13•.• 'ifc5 ply that we referredto in the introduc Now: tion to Section 14.1: rather than try to a) White should avoid 14 'ii'xc5+ ?! exploit any special features of White's ..txc5. move-order, Black is happy for his b) After 14 'ii'xg7 �xd2 15 �xd2 opponent to set up his preferred for (15 'iii>xd2 'ii'xf2+ 16 �d3 'ifxf4 is mation. Then 4 �f4 tt:lc6 5 e3 tt:lf6 equal) 15... tt:lf6 16 'ifxh8 'ii'h5+ the transposes to Section 14.1.3. Torre en game ends in a draw again, since the thusiasts will gain little after 4 �g5 RARE 2ND AND 3RD MOVES AFTER 1 d4 e6 167 ii.e7, while 4 e3 was covered in Sec tion 13.2. Note that Black should in one way or another take control of the e4- square since after 3 ...tLlc6 4 e4 d5 5 exd5 we find ourselves in Alapin Si cilian territory. 4ii.g5 White adopts the Torre Attack. 4 ii.f4 is less effective here in view of 4 ...ii.e7 (4 ...tLlc6 5 e3 tLlh5 6 ii.g5 'i!Vb6 is also quite good) 5 h3 (5 e3 is met by 5 ...tLlh5 , while 5 tLlbd2cxd4 6 cxd4 tLlc6 7 e3 tLlh5 was equal in 8 .•.tLlh5 V.Georgiev-lvanchuk, Merida 2006) It is simpler to play 8 ...1Ld6 9 i.e2 5 ...cxd4 6 cxd4 'it'b6 7 'ii'd2 (7 'ifc2 1Ld7, with an equal position. With the tLlc6 8 e3 tLlb4 9 'it'b3 tLlbd5 is equal) text-move Black wants to enliven the 7 ...tLle4 8 'ifc2 tLlc6 9 tLlc3 f5, with a game. good game for Black. 9i.e2 4 •••tLlc6 5 e3 White can preserve the status quo in Now it is not advantageous for the variation 9 g4 tLlf6 10 h3 i.d6. White to seize the centre by 5 e4 since 9 •.•g5 10 tLle5tLlxe5 Black hits back with 5 ...cxd4 6 cxd4 (6 Black's other try is 10... cxd 4!? 11 e5 h6 and 6 i.xf6 'ifxf6 7 cxd4 d5 tLlxf7'it'xb3 12axb3 'iii>xf7 13 1Lxh5+ show Black's other ideas) 6 ...'ifb6 7 'iii>e7 14 i.g3 dxc3 15 bxc3 il..g7 16 tLlc3 d5. .l:.cl ..td7. 5 ••• h6 6 ii.h4 'ifb6 7 'ifb3 11 dxe5 gxh4 12 'ifxb6 axb6 13 White can also play 7 'ifc2 d5 8 i.xh5 l:tg8 14 g4 hxg3 15 hxg3 b5 tLlbd2 i.d7 9 ii.e2 (or 9 ii.d3; 9 ii.xf6 Both sides have chances in a com gxf6 is unclear) 9 ...cxd4 10 exd4 tLlh5. plicated endgame, Pankov-Nepomnia 7 .•• d5 8 tLlbd2 (D) shchy, Russian Team Ch, Dagomys The queen exchange 8 'it'xb6 axb6 2009. quite suits Black; for example: a) 9 tLla3?! c4 gives Black the ini 14.1.3 tiative after 10 tLlb5.l:!.a5 11 a4 tLla7 or 1 d4 e6 2 c3!? 10 tLlc2tLle4 11 tLld2 tLlxd2 12 'iii>xd2 A rather subtle introduction to the b5 13 a3 h5. London System. b) 9 tLlbd2c4 10 a3 b5 and now 11 2 ...d5 (D) .l:.b1 is met by 1l...g5 12 ii.g3 tLlh5, 2 ...c5 is of course possible, but after while 11 i.xf6!? gxf6 12 l:tb1 leads to 3 e4 d5 4 exd5 we have transposedto equality. an Alapin Sicilian. 168 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 3 i.f4 formation, and Black sees nothing bad After 3 lt:lf3 it is not bad for Black in that for himself. to opt for 3 ...i.d6 !? 4 i.g5 (4 lt:lbd2 6 •••i.d6 7 i.g3 f5) 4 ...f6 5 i.h4 lt:le7 6 e3 c5. This is the most aggressive continu 3 ... c5 ation. The following lines have also This is the 'universal' approach as been tried in practice: applied to this move-order, as we shall a) 7 i.d3 shows that White is not in two moves' time reach a position too concerned about pawn-structure. that Black can achieve against all forms 7 ...i.xf 4 8 exf4 'f/b6 (8 ...cxd4 also of the London System. leads to equality) 9 'fib3 (9 dxc5?! If Black wishes to exploit the pecu 'fixb2) 9 ... cxd4 (9... 'f/xb3 !? lO axb3 liarities of White's precise sequence, cxd4) lO 'fixb6 axb6 11 lt:lxd4 lt:lxd4 he can play 3 ....td6. Then: is equal. a) 4 i.xd6 cxd6 gives Black an b) 7 dxc5 i.xc5 8 i.d3 0-0 9 0-0 equal game, as his doubled pawns use h6!? (9 ...i.d6 lO i.xd6 'fixd6 11 e4 fully controlcentral squares. .l:.d8 and 9 ....l:.e8 lO e4 e5 11 i.g5 d4 b) 4 .tg3lt:lf6 5 lt:ld2 0-0 6 lt:lgf3 are also possible) lO h3 (10 e4 ?! lt:lh5) b6 7 e3 i.b7 8 a4 (8 i.d3 lt:le4 is un 10 ....td6 11 .txd6 xd6 'ii' 12 e4 .:d8 clear, while 8 lt:le5 lt:lc6is equal) 8 ...c5 with equality. with equality, Grivas-Sandalakis,Porto c) 7 i.g5 h6 8 i.h4 0-0 9 i.d3 (9 Carras 2008. i.e2 b6 10 0-0 i.b7 is also equal) c) 4 e3 lt:lf6 5 lt:lf3 0-0 6 lt:lbd2 ( 6 9 ....l:.e8 10 0-0 ( lO 'flc2 e5 11 dxe5 i.g3lt:\e4 7 lt:lbd2 f5) 6 ....txf4 7 exf4 lt:lxe5 12 lt:lxe5 .l:.xe5 ! ?) lO ...e5 and c5 8 dxc5 'fie? is equal. the game is level. 4 e3 lt:lc6 S lt:lf3 lt:lf6 6 lt:lbd2 (D) d) 7 lt:le5 appears aggressive, but This position is the result of an this turns out to be a premature intru opening compromise: White has suc sion, since after 7 ...'fi/c7 White has no cessfully achieved his desired opening convincing follow-up: RARE 2ND AND 3RD MOVES AFTER 1 d4 e6 169 d1) 8 Ji.b5?! 0-0 9 Ji.xc6bxc6 gives Black the preferable game; e.g., 10 0-0 .l:.b8 11 .l:.b1 cxd4 12 cxd4 c5. d2) After 8 lDdf3 !? cxd4 White should settle for 9 lDxc6with an equal game, since 9 exd4?! lbe4 10 lbxc6 Ji.xf4 11lDce5f6 handsBlack the ini tiative. e) 7 .txd6'ii' xd6 8 .tb5 Ji.d79 0-0 (9 'ii'a4 li:Jb8!?) 9 ...0-0 10 a4 a6 11 .ilxc6 .txc6 12 lbe5 lbd7 13 lbxd7 .txd7 14 a5 . White is relying on his knight to prove superior to the black bishop, but by opening files for his 9 0-0 Ji.xg3 10 hxg3 .ilb7 leads to rooks Black secures enough counter an equal game, and the tempting 9 e4 play: 14 ...b6! 15 axb6 (15 'ii'b3, as is parried by the cool-headed retreat played in the game Kveinys-Krivo 9 ... .te7!, when 10 dxc5 bxc5 is equal, ruchko, Cappelle la Grande 2008, can 10 e5?! is met by 10 ...lDh5 , and 10 be met by 15... cxd4 16 exd4 .l:.ab8 17 'ii'c2 by 10... cxd4 11 e5 lDh5. 'ii'c2 l:.fc8) 15... l:.fb8 16 'ii'c2 'ii'xb6 9 ••. Ji.b7 10 f4 lDe7 11 'ii'f3 with equality. Otherwise 1l...lbe4 and then ...f6 7 •.• 0-0 8 .td3 will follow. It is still too early for 8 lbe5 inview ll... lb e8 of 8 ...'ii' c7 9 f4 ?! cxd4 10 exd4 lbe4 So Black's knight goes to another (10... lbe8 !? 11 .td3 f6) 11 .td3 f5, square. Black can also choose 11...lDf5 but 8 .tb5 !? is more interesting; for 12 .tf2 .te7, intending 13... lDd6 with instance, 8 ...'ii' e7 9 .ilxc6 bxc6 10 unclear play, Mitkov-Borges Mateos, 'ii'a4. Black must act vigorously to Toluca 2009. avoid coming under positional pres 12 .tf2 f6 sure: 1 O ...cxd4 11 exd4 (11 cxd4 llb8 Now White can decide between a 12 .txd6 xd6'ii' is unclear) l l...lDh5 !? draw by perpetual check (13 Ji.xh7+ 12 .txd6 (12 'ii'xc6?! lbxg3 13 hxg3 Wxh7 14 'ii'h3+ �g8 15 'ii'xe6+) and l:.b8leaves White in considerable dan 13 'ii'h3 lDf5 14 g4 cxd4!, withchances ger) 12... 'ii' xd6 13 0-0 (13 g3 f6; 13 for both sides. lbe5 c5 14 'ii'a3 'iib6 15 dxc5 'ii'c7) 13 ...f6 with counterplay. 14.2 8 ...b6 (D) 1 d4 e6 2lDf3c5 3 g3 (D) This position is reminiscent of the With this hybrid variation, White Zukertort Attack (Section 13.3.2), and postpones the move c4. Now Black's Black may defend himself similarly. task (from the point of view of our 9lbe5 repertoire) is to avoid coming under 170 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK times. The game acquires an original nature, but it appears that this is White's only real achievement. For example: a) 11 tLld4 tLlc6 and now White should settle for the unclear 12 'iti>h1, since 12 tLlxe6?! fxe6 13 e4 'ii'b6+ 14 'iti>h1 d4 gives Black the initiative. b) 11 'iti>h1 tLlc6 12 .lte3 0-0 13 tLld4'ili'd7 (13... .l:tc8 !?) 14 tLlxe6(14 f5 gxf5) 14... fxe6 15 .ig1 .l:tad8 (Ro manishin-Bluvshtein, Montreal 2003) and here 16 e4 enables White to main pressure in a main line of the Catalan tain equality. or Tarrasch. 8 •••tLl bd7 (D) 3 ...cxd4 4 tL!xd4d5 5 .ltg2 5 c4 tLlf6 (5 ...e5 !?) 6 .ig2 trans- poses to Section 12.1. 5 •••tLlf6 6 0-0 6 c4 is again Section 12.1. 6 •••e5 7 tLlb3 .lte6 We now have the Griinfeld line 1 d4 tLlf6 2 c4 g6 3 tLlf3 d5?! 4 cxd5 tL!xd5 5 e4 tLlb6 with reversed colours and two extra tempi for White. This factor would normally be a damning indict ment of an opening line, but that form of Griinfe1d leaves Black with a very passive game. Can White put his extra tempi to good use, or will Black be 9 tLlc3 able to catch up in development while 9 e4 dxe4 10 tLlc3 .ie7 11 tLlxe4 still enjoying his excellent pawn 'ii'c7 allows Black to finish his devel centre? opment in safety, whereupon he will 8 .ltg5 not experience difficulties.The attempt 8 c4 tLlc6 9 cxd5 tLlxd5 is inoffen to begin the siege of the d5-pawn right sive for Black, but 8 tLlc3 !? .ie7 9 f4 away by 9 e3?! h6 (9 ...'ifb6 !? 10 tLlc3 (9 .ig5 tLlbd7 transposes to the main tLle4 is more vigorous, hunting the line below) 9 . ..exf4 is more danger wayward white bishop) 10 .ixf6 tL!xf6 ous. The natural 10 .ltxf4!? tLlc6 has 11 'ife2 (11 tLlc3 .ib4) 1l...a6!? 12 not so far been seen in practice, but 10 tLlc3 'ili'c7 13 .l:tad1 e4 appears unsuc gxf4 g6 has been examined several cessful. RARE 2ND AND 3RD MOVES AFTER 1 d4 e6 171 9 .••i. e7 A rare but interesting continuation. An acceptable alternative is 9 ...h6 3 ... cxd4 10 i.xf6 lLlxf6 11 'ii'd3 (11 f4 'ii'b6+ The line 3 ...d5 4 e4 lLlf6 5 exd5 is 12 'iti>h1 exf4 13 gxf4 .:td8) 11...e4 12 not enough for equality. 'i!Vb5+ (12 'ii'd4 i.e7 13 lLlc5 a6 is 4lDxd4 equal) 12... 'ii' d7 13 'ii'xd7+ i.xd7, 4 'i'ixd4 lLlc6 5 'ii'a4 hardly de when Black stands no worse. serves serious attention. Black can 10 f4 choose 5 ...a6 !? 6 e4 d6 or 5 ...lLlf6 6 It is clear that 10 lLlxd5?? lLlxd5 is e4 i..b4 7 i.d2 (Teuschler-Hess, Graz no use to White, and 10 e3 only leads 2008) 7 ... d5, with equality. to equality after 10 ...e4 11 tLld4 'ii'b6. 4 ...lLlf6 5 tLldb5!? Meanwhile, 10 e4 dxe4 transposes to 5 e4 lDc6 transposes to the Sicilian the note to White's 9th move. Four Knights, considered in Chapter 10... exf4 11 i.xf4 11. However, White has other plans - The extravagant 11 gxf4 lLlb6 12 f5 it turns out that the Sicilian Defence i.d7 also gives White no advantage can also be played without the move here. e4! Let us note only that it would be ll... 'ii' b6+ inaccurate for White to play 5 i.f4 in The game is roughly level. The pos view of the reply 5 ...a6. sible loss of the d5-pawn should not 5 ...d6 6 i.f4 e5 7 i.g5 a6 (D) perturb Black too much; for example, after 12 'iii>hl (12 e3 h6!?) 12... 0-0 13 i.xd5( 13 lLlxd5lLlxd5 14 i..xd5 .:.adS) 13... .:.ad8 he has quite enough posi tional compensation. 14.3 1 d4 e6 2 ltJf3 c5 3 lLlc3 (D) White's opening experiment has led to a position that looks rather similar to the Sveshnikov Sicilian - only the moves e4 and ...lLlc6 are lacking. Both sides have ways to avoid completing the transposition. 8 i..xf6 172 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK The immediate retreat of the knight 11 ltJd5 (11 i.c4 b5 12 i.d5 i.d7) by 8 ltJa3 is the alternative: 1l...i.e6. These variations are diffi a) 8 ...i.e6 9 i.xf6 (9 e4 ltJbd7) cult to evaluate with a high level of 9 .. .'ii'xf6 10 ltJd5 (10 e4 g6)'ii' IO ...'ii'd8 certainty, as is our main line. II e4 (llltJc4 ltJd7) ll...ltJd7 12l2lc4 10.•• b5 l:!.c8 13 ltJce3 (13 c3 'ii'h4) 13... i.e7 Avoiding IO . ..ltJc6 !?, which trans 14 i.e2 0-0 15 0-0 i.g5 is equal. poses to a sideline of the Sveshnikov b) 8 ...ltJbd7 !? 9 ltJc4 h6 10 i.h4 that is thought satisfactory for Black. ( 10 i.xf6lDxf6 11 e4 i.e6gives Black ll ltJd5 fxe4 the initiative) IO... g5 11 .i.g3 ltJc5 12 Now 1 1...ltJc6would transposeto a f3 b5 (12... i.e6 13 e4 l:.c8) 13 ltJe3 main-line Sveshnikov Sicilian. i.e6 14ltJed5ltJxd5 15 ltJxd5ltJa4 16 12 lDb1 ltJc6 (D) l:!.b1 l2lb6,with chances for both sides. The variation 12... i.g7 13 a4 bxa4 8 ••.gxf6 9 ltJa3 f5 (D) (13... b4 !? has the idea 14 ltJxb4 e3, and can be met by 14 ltJd2, with un clear play) 14ltJbc3 ltJc6 15 ltJxe40-0 is worthy of notice. 10 e4 White can also play 10 g3 i.e6 11 i.g2 ltJd7 12 0-0 h5 !? (12... 'ii'a5 13 ltJd5 l:.c8) 13 i.xb7 l:.b8 14 i.xa6 h4 13 a4 b4 14 ltJd2 i.e6 or 10 e3 ltJc6 (10... b5 11 ltJd5 i.e6) The game is unclear. 15 Should Black Play l ...e6 vs Flank Openi ngs? Clearly the move l ... e6 is playable af not the end in itself, then we should at ter any opening move by White, and as least seek answers to these moves that a matter of principle one would like to fitas well as possible with our chosen make our 1.. .e6 repertoire complete by repertoire. The basic problem lies in recommending it against moves such the fact that after 1 c4 or 1 tt:'Jf3 White as I c4 and I ltJf3 too. However, the can seek to transpose to 1 d4 openings mere fact that the move can be played that may not be within our opening does not necessarily mean that this preparation. Andwhile in the case of 1 would be a coherent repertoire. For that c4 c5 (Section 15.1) the solution may to be true, there would need to be trans be no more complex than simply add positions that work in Black's favour ing a few lines to those covered in by lessening his workload, and areas of Chapter 12, the situation with 1 tt:'Jf3is strategic common ground between the not so simple: Black must either allow lines he needs to handle. Above all, his the possibility of the Sicilian Defence choice against I c4and I tt:'Jf3shouldn 't (1 ltJf3 c5 2 e4 - and there is no guar mean that he is forced to transpose to antee we will get an Open Sicilian, huge tracts of I d4 or I e4 theory that for which Chapter 11 has prepared he has hitherto been able to avoid. us), or prepare some other rejoinder. Unfortunately, after I c4 e6 2 tt:'Jf3 (2 As an example, in Section 15.2 the tt:'Jc3 and 2 g3 must also be considered) variation I tt:'Jf3 d5 2 d4 c5 is quoted, or I tt:'Jf3 e6 2 g3 it is very difficult to but it can serve mainly as a surprise propose for Black any worthwhile orig weapon. inal ideas that give this move-order Thus the main purpose of this chap some real purpose within the context of ter is to provide guidance and a few our repertoire. Certainly there are inde thoughts on how you might complete pendent ideas, but they are more a case your repertoire. of 'originality for the sake of original ity' than anything else. Otherwise the 15.1 play just reaches usual theoretical con 1 c4 c5 (D) tinuations. Chapter 12 has already covered lines So if simply playing l...e6 against where White plays an early d4. Here all of White's reasonable firstmoves is we briefly examine lines in which 174 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 7 ...i.. xc5 8 b4 i..a7 9 i.b2 0-0 10 'ii'c2 (10 i.e2dxc4 is equal) 10 ...i.d7 is un clear. 4 .•• g6 5 i.g2 (D) White delays the d4 advance or avoids it entirely. 2 tt:Jf3 I suggest meeting 2 tt:Jc3 by 2 ...g6. Then: a) 3 tt:Jf3 i..g7 4 d4 cxd4 5 tt:Jxd4 s ...d6 tt:Jc6lZJc 6 2?! (6 e3 is equal) 6 ...i.. xc3+ Black plays this move before ...i.g7 7 bxc3 tiJf6 offers Black a pleasant so that he is better prepared to meet game. White's d4 advance. b) 3 g3 i..g7 4 i.g2tt:Jc6 5 a3 (5 e3 6d4 can be met by 5 ...d6 6 lZJge2tt:Jf6 7 d4 White can instead opt for wing 0-0 or 5 ...e6 6 lZJge2lZJge7 with equal play: 6 a3 i.g77 0-0 (7 ltb1 0-0 8 b4 ity; 5 tt:Jf3 d6 6 0-0 tt:Jf6will transpose cxb4 9 axb4 a5 10 bxa5 d5 and 7 d3 to lines covered below) 5 ...tt:Jf6 6 .:tb1 0-0 8 .:tb1 d5 are equal) 7 ...0-0 8 .:tb1 0-0 7 b4 cxb4 8 axb4 a5 9 bxa5 d6 10 (8 d3 i.d7 9 .:tb1 lZJd4 10 b4 i.c6 d3 (10 tt:Jf3 d5 is equal) 10... 'ii' xa5 is yields equal chances) 8 ...b6 !? 9 b4 (9 unclear. tt:Je5 tt:Jxe5 1 0 i.xa8 i.f5 also leaves 2 •.• tt:Jc6 3 tt:Jc3tt:Jf6 4 g3 the game level) 9 .....tb7 , with approx After 4 e3 e6 5 d4 d5 another form imate equality. of Symmetrical Tarrasch arises: 6 .••cxd4 7 tt:Jxd4 i..d7 8 0-0 a) 6 cxd5 exd5 7 i..b5 (7 i..e2 a6 In the variation 8 tt:Jb3 a5 !? 9 a4 (9 transposes to Section 13.1.2) 7 ...i.d6 c5 a4 is unclear, Vitiugov-Zhou Jian 8 dxc5 i.xc5 9 0-0 0-0 is equal. chao, Moscow 201 1) 9 ...i.g7 10 c5 d5 b) 6 a3 a6 7 dxc5 (7 b3 cxd4 8 exd4 Black stands no worse. i.e7 and now 9 i.b2 b6 leads to equal 8 ...i.. g7 9 b3 play, while 9 c5 can be answered by White has also examinedthese other 9 ...b6 10 cxb6 'ii'xb6 11 lZJa4 'ii'b8, continuations, without achieving any with an unclear game, or 9 ...tt:Je4 !?) real advantage: SHOULD BLACK PLA Y l ...e6 VS FLANK OPENINGS ? 175 a) 9 e3 0-0 (9 ...h5 !?) 10 b3 a6 II i.b2 'ili'a5 12 a3 (or 12 'ili'e2 l:.ac8) 12... l:ta b8. b) 9 tbxc6 bxc6 (9 ... i.xc6 10 e4 0-0) 10 i.f4!? (both 10 c5 d5 II e4 dxe4 12 tbxe4tiJd5, as in Galic-Stevic, Croatia Cup, Sibenik 201 1, and 10 e4 0-0 II c5 dxc5 are equal) 10... 0-0 II 'ili'd2 l:.e8. c) 9 tbc2and now Black can seek counterplay by 9 ...h5 10 h4 'ili'c8 11 b3 i.h3 12 .:!.bl 0-0, with equal play, or 9 ...tbg4 ! ?; for example, I 0 i.d2h5 11 h3 tbge5 12 b3 (12 tbe3 is unclear) e5 7 d3 tbe7 with approximate equal 12... 'ili'c8 13 'ifi>h2 (13 f4 i.xh3 is un ity. clear) 13... f5 !? 14 h4 g5 ! 15 hxg5 h4, c) 3 b4 !? liJf6 4 i.b2 (both 4 g3 c5 when he had seized the initiative in and 4 e3 dxe3 5 fxe3 e5 !? 6 tbxe5 Leko-Gashimov, Astrakhan 2010. lbbd7 are also unclear) 4 ...c5 5 e3 9 ••• 0-0 10 tbc2 dxe3 6 fxe3 cxb4 7 a3 e6 is unclear. Or 10 i.b2 'ili'a5 11 lk l .:!.ac8 White's other standardway of play (ll....:!.fc8 12 a3 l:tab8) 12 e3 a6 13 a3 ing the Reti is 2 g3, when I propose the tbxd4 14 'iixd4 i.c6 with equality, solid 2 ...c6 3 i.g2 ..tg4 4 0-0 (4 tbe5 Andersson-Tal, Malmo (4) 1983. ..tf5 is equal; 4 c4 e6 5 0-0 tbf6) 10.. Ji'a5 11 i.b2 'ili'h5 12 e4 i.g4 4 ...tbd7 5 d4 (other lines run 5 c4 13 f3 'ii'c5+ 14 'ifi>h1 i.e6 ..txf3 6 ..txf3 tbe5, 5 h3 i.xf3 6 i.xf3 Both sides have chances. e5 and 5 d3 tbgf6) 5... tbgf6 6 c4 e6 7 h3 ..th5 8 'ili'b3 'iib6, leading to a pro 15.2 tracted positional strugglewith roughly 1 tiJf3 d5 (D) equal chances, Adly-Zhang Zhong, 2d4 Khanty-MansiiskOlympiad 2010. With this move, White prefers a 2 ...c5 queen's pawn opening rather than a This is an interesting way to avoid pure Reti approach. The traditional the standard continuations. Black of Reti continues with 2 c4, when I sug fers his opponent a game of symme gest 2 ...d4 . Here is a brief summary: try. a) 3 g3 tbc6 4 i.g2 e5 5 d3 liJf66 3c4 0-0 a5 7 e3 i.c5 !? 8 exd4 tbxd4 is un The meek 3 e3 e6 allows us to reach clear. Chapter 13, and 3 c3 e6 is discussed in b) 3 e3 tbc6 4 exd4 (4 b4 dxe3 5 Section 14.1 .2. That leaves 3 dxc5 e6 4 fxe3 lbxb46 d4 e5 gives Black the ini ..tg5( 4 e4..txc5 5 ..tb5+tbc6 is equal) tiative) 4 ...tbxd4 5 tbxd4 'it'xd46 tbc3 4 ...tbf6 5 e3 ..txc5 6 c4 tbc6 7 tbc3 176 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 0-0 8 a3 i.e7, when White does not 5'ili'xd4 achieve any advantage. A further idea 5 tbxd4tbxd5 6 e4( 6 lbb5 1i'a5+; 6 is 3 tbc3, with a kind of reversed lDf3 !? tbc6 7 e4 lbdb4 8 a3 'ii'xd 1 + 9 Chigorin Queen's Gambit, but White's �xd1 tba6) 6 ...tbf6 is also rather in extra move doesn't prove very useful. teresting: Then 3 ...tbc6 4 i.f4 (4 dxc5 tbf6 5 a) 7 i.b5+ i.d7 8 i.xd7+ (8 e5 i.g5?! d4 !) 4 ...tbf6 5e3 i.g4keeps the i.xb5 9 lbxb5 'ii'xd1+ 10 �xd1 tbd5 game level. 11 lD1c3 tbc6 is equal) 8 ...lbbxd7 9 3 •••cxd4 tbc3 e6 10 0-0 a6 with White some Instead, 3 ...e6 is a TarraschDefence, what for preference. and 3 ...dxc4 is a line of the Queen's b) 7 tbc3 e5 8 i.b5+ i.d79 lDf3 (9 Gambit Accepted - both main-line tbf5 i.xb5 10 'ii'xd8+ �xd8 11 lbxb5 openings that demand detailed prepa tbxe4 leads to unclear play, while 9 ration. i.xd7+ 'i!Vxd7 is equal) 9 ....tb4 10 4 cxd5 lDf6(D) 'i!i'b3 (10 Jtc4 0-0 11 0-0 Jtxc3 12 bxc3 'i!Vc7) 10... i.xc3+ 11 bxc3 0-0 also gives White slightly the better game. 5 ••• 'i!Vxd5tbc3 6 6 'ii'xd5 tbxd57 Jtd2!? (7 a3 g6!? 8 e4 lbb6 is unclear) appears more dan gerous for Black, as White will keep the initiative for a lengthy period; for example, 7 ...tbc6 8 e4 tbc7 9 i.f4 (9 tbc3 Jtg4 10 tbd5 l:tc8) 9 ...tbe6 10 i.e3 g6. 6 ...'ii'x d4 7 tbxd4 a6 8 g3 After 8 i.g5 i.d7 9 i.xf6 exf6 10 tbd5 .:ta7 Black successfully defends This position is also known from himself, Varga-Bogut, Sibenik 2008. the Symmetrical Queen's Gambit, i.e. 8 .••e5 9 lbb3 tbc610 Jtg2 Jte6 11 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c5 3 cxd5 tbf6 4 tbf3 0-0 0-0-0 cxd4, but that move-order gives White Black has quite good chances of a variety of dangerous alternative op equality, Genov-Serafimov, Guingamp tions. 201 1. 16 X-Files An opening repertoire is more than Each key moment is marked with a just a collection of variations; it is also diagram and a caption 'What should a variety of structures and themes con Black play?', so before reading the nected with those variations,and in or commentary that follows, give some der to be effective with the repertoire, serious thought to how he should con we need to know how to handle these tinue. The numbers that appear above situations when we are at the board. the players' names denote the section We can gain these skills by experience of the book in which the opening line and by additional study. While decid is discussed. ing which lines to select and which to discard, it is easy to lose sight of gen 3.2 eral considerations and concepts. Pavel Tregubov - This chapter is designed as a first Svetlana Matveeva step towards broadening your under Russia Cup, To msk 1998 standing of the lines featured in this book. Our focus is not on games 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 exd5 exd5 4 l'Df3 where Black swept his opponent off t'Dc6 5 i.d3 i.d6 6 0-0 l'Dge7 7 c4 the board, but on positions where dxc4 8 i.xc4 0-0 9 t'Dc3 i.g4 10 h3 Black had to make a vital decision, (D) and in many cases failed to choose correctly. These are in effect warning examples - it is better to learnfrom the mistakes of others than to learn from our own. In many of the examples that follow, the decision we are exam ining was not necessarily bad, but was at least insufficiently thought out, and a first step towards greater difficulties. In some cases the error was a consequence of a superficial approach to problem-solving, and with the help of these examples you can test your own level of positional assessment. What should Black play? 178 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 10... �h5 17 l:.ad1? As a result of this retreat, the bishop White continues to linger and even is driven away to the empty b1-h7 di ends up losing the initiative. 17 g5 ! agonal, and White keeps a superiority would have given him an overwhelm in the centre. However, it is too early ing attack. to claim that Black's choice is incor 17 ... l:.fe8? 18 tLlg2? tt:Ja5 19 �a2 rect, as the weakening of White's king tZ:lb620 f5 tt:Jac4 21 �g5?! position is also relevant. 10 ...�xf3 11 White shows activity at a most in 'ii'xf3 tZ:lxd4 is an alternative. appropriatemoment. After 21 .tcI the 11 g4 .tg6 12 a3 h5 position remains unclear. A logical attempt to create counter 21 •••tt:Jxb2 l:.b122 lL12c4 play against g4. After 12... 'ii' d7 13 Black has the advantage, although l:.e1 l:.ae8 14 d5, only passive defence she went on to Jose (1-0, 34 ). awaits Black. 13 �e3 'ii'd7 14 lLlh4 l:.ad8?! 4.6 This rook move is a waste of time; Joel Benjamin - Daniel Edelman it is better to retreat the bishop by New Yo rk 1992 14 ...�h7 right away. 15 f4 �h7 16 'ii'f3?! (D) 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 e5 c5 4 c3 tt:Jc6 5 After the more logical 16 f5 Black lLlf3 'ii'b6 6 �e2 cxd4 7 cxd4 lLlh6 8 would find herself in rather an un �d3 lLlf5 9 �xf5 exf5 10 0-0 .te6 11 pleasant position. tt:Jc3h6 12 h4 .te7 13 tLle2 (D) 16.•. tt:Jc8? What should Black play? Black's game is difficult,but active play by 16 ...l:.fe8 17 f5tZ:lxd4 ! 18 �xd4 13••• 0-0 -0?! tLlc6 19 �f2 tLle5 makes White's task The white king's residence is weak far harder. ened and Black aspires to attack with X-FILES 179 ...g5 . However, in spite of the outward logic of this decision, the sharpening of the play turnsout not to be in his fa vour. If Black castles on the other side - 13... 0-0 !- his position is preferable, as his king' s safety is ensured and he retains the initiative on the queenside. 14 .l:l.bl! g5? An impetuous reply - Black does not obtain compensation for the pawn. It is also not entirely successfulfor him to play 14 ....l:i.dg8 15 b4 g5?! (15... 'it>b8 16 ..ta3!? gives White the initiative) 16 b5 tt::la5 17 hxg5 hxg5 18 i..xg5 i..xg5 becomes vulnerable, and this circum 19tt::lxg5 tt::lc4 (19... l:txg5 ?? is ruled out stance, together with the undermining by 20 'ii'c +)1 20 f4, while the line b3, allows White to seize the initia 14 ...'it>b8 15 b4 llc8 (or 15 ...tt::l a5 16 tive. 10 ...h6 is better. i..xh6) would mean a switch to de 11 exf6 gxf6 12 .l:l.e1 fence. The immediate 12 .l:l.bl, meeting 15 hxg5 hxg5 16 i..xg5 i..xg5 17 12 ...tt::l e7 by 13 b3, is even more reso tt::lxg5 .l:l.h5 18 f4 .l:l.dh8 19 tt::lf3 'it>b8 lute. 20 'iitf2 12... ..td6? White went on to win ( 1-0, 55). A waste of time; Black patently dis regardsthe need for defence. He should 4.7.2 play 12.. .c.t>b8 or 12... tt::l e7. Alexander Grishchuk - 13 i..h3 i..c7 14 l:tb1 'iitb8 15 b4 Nikita Vitiugov cxb3 16 tt::lxb3 tt::le7 Moscow 2010 It is already too late. 17 tt::lfd2 'ifc6 18 tt::lc5 tt::lf5 19 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 e5 c5 4 c3 'ifb65 tt::ldb3 tt::lxb3 20 'ifxb3 b6 21 a4 tt::lf3 tt::lc6 6 a3 c4 7 tt::lbd2 tt::la5 8 g3 White has a direct attack ( 1-0, 36). i..d7 9 i..g2 0-0-0 10 0-0 (D) What should Black play? 5.2 Leonid Stein - Wolfgang Uhlmann 10••• f5 ?! Moscow 1967 This untimely thrust leads to diffi culties for Black. The opening of the 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 tt::ld2 c5 4 tt::lgf3 g-filedoes not promise him any coun cxd4 5 exd5 'ifxd5 6 i..c4 'ifd6 7 0-0 terplay, since White manages to avoid tt::lf6 8 tt::lb3 tt::lc6 9 lZ:lbxd4 lLlxd4 10 weakening his king's position by play tt::lxd4 ..te7 11 b3 a6 12 ..tb2 0-0 13 ing h4. Meanwhile, the black e6-pawn 'iff3 'ifc7 14 l:tfe1 (D) 180 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK for Black, but he could try 18... 1Wc5 !? , keeping survival chances. 19 tZ::lxe6 fxe6 20 1Wxe6+ .l:.f7 21 ..tc4 'iVf4? 22 'ikxf7+ 1Wxf7 23 .l:!.xe7 1-0 5.4 Garry Kasparov - Andrei Kharitonov USSR Ch, Moscow 1988 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 tZ::ld2 c5 4 tZ::lgf3 lLlf6 5 exd5 exd5 6 ..tb5+ ..td7 7 What should Black play? ..txd7+ tZ::lbxd7 8 0-0 ..te7 9 dxc5 tZ::lxc5 10 lLld4 'iVd7 11 'iVf3 0-0 12 14 ••.b5 tLl2b3 tZ::lce4 13 'ii'f5 l:.fd8 This sharp continuation is perfectly One could question this move, and viable, but Black badly misjudges its suggest instead 13... 1i'c7. But objec consequences. 14 .....tb4 is safer. tively, Black is still OK. White's next two moves are obvi 14 l:.e1 ..tf8 15 c3 (D) ous enough. 15 ..td3 ..tb7 16 'ikh3 g6? Black correctly considers the d3- bishop to be a source of direct danger and therefore tries to protect h7, but the way he does so is too mechanical. A more subtle defence is needed: 16 ....l:.ad8 ! successfully meets White's tactical threats, and maintains the equilibrium. 17 a4! White wants to regain the c4-square for his bishop. 17••• bxa4 18 1:txa4 The immediate knight sacrifice 18 What should Black play? tZ::lxe6?! allows Black to hold on by playing 18... fxe6 19 1Wxe6+ .l:.f7 20 15 ..•'ii' xf5 ..tc4 ..td5. In positions like this, Black tends to 18•.. tZ::l h5? retain sufficient counterplay even in This leads to a crushing defeat. an ending, but he could prefer to avoid 18... tZ::ld5? 19 tZ::lxe6 is also hopeless the queen exchange by 15... 1Wa4 . But X-FILES 181 the main reason for disliking Black's decision to exchange queens is that he helps his opponent transfer his knight to an excellent post on e3. 16 li:Jxf5 g6 17 lt:Je3 l:te8 18 l:.d1 lt:Jc5?! This careless move leads to real dif ficulties. After 18... a5 Black still has a reliable position. 19 g4! h6 20 h4 lt:Jxb3?! Another poor move; 20.. .'itg7 21 g5 hxg5 22 hxg5 li:Jfe4 is stronger. Black is ready to sacrifice the d5-pawn, but White does not hurry to take it, prefer approach to solving opening prob ring to improve his pieces. lems, under which the strategic strug 21 axb3 i.c5 22 g5 hxg5 23 hxg5 gle is replaced by a tactical battle, lt:Je4 24 lt:Jg4! i.b6?! sometimes continuing all the way into The final mistake; 24 ... l:ted8 25 b4 the endgame. In such positions even a i.e? is more tenacious. minor detail can be of paramount im 25 <.tg2<.tg7 26 i.f4 l::tad8 27 f3 portance for the assessment of the po White has a decisive positional ad sition. For example, now either way vantage (1-0, 35). for the queen to flee is acceptable for Black, but combining the two turns 6.3.2 out to fail. 22 ...'i¥e7 is the other viable Roeland Pruijssers - move. Hagen Poetsch 23 g3 'ife7? Groningen 2011 Now that Black has brought his queen into battle, it is correct to keep it 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 lt:Jc3 li:Jf6 4 e5 active by 23 ...'i¥h3 . li:Jfd75 f4 c5 6 li:Jf3 lt:Jc6 7 i.e3 cxd4 24 <.td2! 8 lt:Jxd4 'ilfb6 9 'ifd2 'ifxb2 10 l::tb1 A subtle rejoinder: the white king 'ifa3 11 i.b5 lt:Jxd4 12 i.xd4 a6 13 defends the c3-knight, neutralizing the i.xd7+ i.xd7 14 l:.b3'ilie7 15 l:.xb7 attack ...'i¥a3 . And thanks to Black's 'ifh4+ 16 i.f2 'i¥d8 17 i.b6 'i¥c8 18 overly elaborate queen manoeuvre, the l::tc7 'i¥d8 19 .:.b7'i¥c8 20 .:.c7'i¥d8 21 h4-square is now inaccessible to his 'ifd4l:.c8 22 .:.a7 (D) queen. What should Black play? 24 ••Ji'a3? By persevering with active mea 22••• 'i¥h4+ sures, Black marches to his death. But This riskyvariation serves as a vivid all was not yet lost - he should have demonstration of the contemporary tried 24 ...g5 . 182 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 25 �b1 �c4? 26 'ilixc4! dxc4 27 bishops leads to unpleasant conse �aS+ .i.cS 2S �xeS+ 'iti>d7 29 �c7 + quences. 'iii>dS 30 l:r.xc4+ 1-0 13 .i.xa6 �xa6 14 c4! This break in the centre is typical in 6.3.3 such positions. Here the tactics sup Ta tiana Kosintseva - Hou Yifan porting it are not very complicated. Je rmuk (women) 2010 14••• cxd4 15 lt::lxd4 lt::lxd4 16 cxd5! lt::lb5 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 lt::lc3 lt::lf6 4 e5 16... lt::l c6 17 dxc6 lt::lc5 is slightly lt::lfd7 5 f4 c5 6 lt::lf3 lt::lc6 7 .i.e3.i.e7 S better. 'ilid2 0-0 9 .i.e2 b6 10 lt::ld1 (D) 17 'ii'e2 lt::lc7 1S d6 b5 Now by playing 19 a4 White could have secured an obvious advantage, though even after missing this she went on to win anyway ( 1-0, 48). 7.2 Peter Leko - Sergey Volkov FIDEKnockout, New Delhi 2000 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 lt::lc3 lt::lf6 4 .i.g5 .i.e75 e5 lt::lfd7 6 .i.xe7'ii' xe7 7 f4 0-0 S lt::lf3 c5 9 dxc5 lt::lc6 10 .i.d3 f5 11 exf6 'iixf6 12 g3 lt::lxc5 13 0-0 ..td7 l3... a6 14 'ii'd2 .i.d7 is arguably a What should Black play? more palatable option. 14 'iid2 �adS 15 �ae1 .i.eS 16 a3 10••• f5 ?! (D) 10... cxd4 is correct. By allowing her opponent to join up her pawn chain, Black loses the possibility of placing her knight on c5 and then (given the opportunity) on e4. As are sult she suffersfrom a constrained and slightly worse position, while White retains attacking chances on the king side with 0-0, 'iii>hl, �gl, g4, etc. 11 c3! a5 12 0-0 .i.a6? Black is careless; the preliminary 12... lt::l db8 is better. The immediate at tempt to exchange the light-squared X-FILES 183 What should Black play? 'ife3+ 36 'ii'g3 e5 37 tt::lxa6 (37 f5 'ii'h6+38 �g2 b6!) 37... :xc5 38 tt::lxc5 16..• �h 5?! exf4 39 'ifxe3 dxe3 is equal! Black wants to activate his 'French' 32 'ii'g5 'iff8 33 l:!.xe6 bishop, but chooses an inappropriate White went on to win ( 1-0, 39). moment. The simple 16... a6 is more useful; e.g., 17b4 tt::lxd3 18cxd3 llc8. 7.3.1 17 tt::le5 tt::lxe5 18 :xeS .i.g4?! Ferdinand Hellers - This move seems like the natural Evgeny Bareev conclusion of the manoeuvre, but the Wo rld Junior Ch, Gausda/ 1986 modest retreat 18... .i.f7 is stronger. 19 'ii'g2?! 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 tt::lc3 lLlf6 4 �g5 White could exploit his opponent's �e7 5 e5 tt::lfd7 6 h4 h6 7 �e3 c5 8 carelessness and seize the advantage 'ii'g4 g6 9 tt::lf3 (D) by 19 b4 ! tt::lxd3 (19... tt::l d7 20 :g5) 20 cxd3, followed by transferring the knight to d4. 19••. llc8 Now Black's dream comes true: he gains counterplay along the c-file. 20 h3 tt::lxd3 21 cxd3 .i.f5 22 llf3 d4 23 tt::lb5?! A flanksally of doubtful value. Af ter 23 tt::le4 �xe4 (23 ...'ii' d8 24 tt::lg5) 24 l:he4the position remains equal. 23 •••l:.cl+ 23 ...:fd8 24 tt::lxa7 (not 24 g4? �xd3) 24 ...l:!.c 1 + 25 Wh2 'ii'h6 is more accurate, and keeps the initiative; e.g., What should Black play? 26 g4? .i.xd3. 24 'it>h2 l:.d8 25 'ii'd2 :at 26 g4 9 •••tt::l c6? .i.xg4 This is a fundamental error that This piece sacrifice is more or less leads to a difficultposition for Black. forced, but it is enough for equality. He should take on d4: after9 ...cxd4, 10 27 hxg4 'ii'h4+ 28 l:h3:hl+?! �xd4 leaves the white bishop poorly 28 ... 'ii'xg4 is far simpler. placed, and the pawn sacrifice 10 29 �xhl 'ii'xh3+ 30 �gl 'ifxg4+ tt::lxd4 tt::lxe5 has unclearconsequences. 31 'ifg2 'ifxf4? 10 dxc5! tt::lxc5 Only 31...'ii'd +!1 keeps Black in the 10 ...tt::l dxe5 11 tt::lxe5 tt::lxe5 12 'ii'g3 game, when the computer line 32 �h2 is advantageous for White, so Black a6 ! 33 tt::lc7 :c8 34 :c5 'ife 1 35 �h3 tries to avoid the opening of lines. 184 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 11 0-0-0 a6 12 .i.xc5 .i.xc5 13 lbe4 What should Black play? .i.e7?! Black should prefer 13 ... 'it'b6 14 9 •.•e5 ?! lbxc5 (14 lbf6+ 'it>f8) 14... 'ifxc5 with After choosing the somewhat risky an inferior but resilient position. 4 ....txc3+, heightened caution is re 14 'iff4 b5? quired of Black. The white f-pawn is After this error Black can put up ready to advance, and Black has to de little further resistance. 14 .. .'itf8 is cide on which square to halt its push better. forward. In this case another way to 15 lbd6+ .txd6 16 exd6 l:la7? blockade White's pawn-centre looks This concluding oversight ends the more reliable: 9 ...0-0 10 f4 f5 !, with game. unclear play. 17 lbd4! 'it>d7 18 .i.xb5 axb5 19 10 f4 f6 11 d5 lba5 12 lbg30-0 'ii'xf7+ 1-0 It is very dubious for Black to opt for 12... exf 4?! 13 lbf5. 8.4 13 f5 (D) Sergei Ivanov - Tiger Hillarp Persson Stockholm 2001/2 1 d4 e6 2 c4 .i.b4+ 3 lbc3 c5 4 e3 .i.xc3+ Earlier in the book I recommended 4 ...lbc6 5 lbf3 .txc3+ 6 bxc3, the point being to wait until White had blocked his f-pawn. 5 bxc3 d6 6 .i.d3lbc6 7 lbe2lbge7 8 0-0 b6 9 e4 (D) The development of events is rather interesting. Black is going to attack the c4-pawn, but White's threats on the kingside tum out in the long term to be more dangerous. 13•• .'ii'e8 It looks more logical to continue 13... ii.a6 14 lbh5 'it>h8 right away. Those moves without which one can not manage anyway should be made first of all. X-FILES 185 14 ti:Jh5 �h8 15 g4 the strength of the white bishops. White stakes everything on his at 9 ... exd5 is preferable. tack. The calmer idea 15 a4 i.a6 16 10 'i!kxd5 ti:Jxd5 'i!ke2 blocks Black's counterplay on Even here 10 ...exd5 deserved atten- the queenside. tion. 15 ••• ti:Jg8 16 g5 fxg5?! 11 e4 Activating the hostile bishop. 11 b4!?f6 12 e4 ti:Jb6 (Malakhatko 17 i.xg5 i.a6 18 'i&'g4 'i!kd7 19 Rozentalis, Cappelle la Grande 2010) �h1 l::tf7 20 'i!kh4 i.xc4 21 i.xc4 13 i.e3 is another promising possibil tbxc4 22 f6 g6 23 tbg7 ity for White. White has the advantage ( 1-0, 36). ll... ti:Jf6 12 i.d30-0 13 b4?! This pawn move is an inaccuracy, 9.1.1 which Black immediately exploits. 13 Kiril Georgiev - Levon Aronian i.f4 is stronger, and keeps a small but Bundesliga 200112 lasting advantage. 13 •.• l:.d8 14 'iti>e2 tbg4! 15 i.c2 b6 1 c4 ti:Jf6 2 ti:Jf3 e6 3 d4 i.b4+ 4 16 b5 tba5 17 h3 ti:Jf6 18 i.f4 a6 (D) ti:Jbd2c5 5 a3 i.xd2+6 'ii'xd2 cxd4 7 18... i.b7 19 ti:Jd2 l:.ac8 maintains 'it'xd4 ti:Jc6 8 'ii'd3 d5 9 cxd5 (D) approximate equality. What should Black play? 19 a4 axb5 20 axb5 i.b7?! Now thisis ineffective.Black should 9 •••'ili'xd5 ?! immediately target the b5-pawn by A highly dubious decision. Black 20 ...i.d7 . After 21 i.d3ti:Jb3 theposi must be very cautious about exchang tion still seems balanced. ing queens, because he has no firm 21 ti:Jd2 l:.ac822 l:.hcl tbc4 23 f3 squares for his knights andin the long ti:Jh5 24 i.g5 f6 25 tbxc4 term it will be difficultfor him to resist White went on to win 0-0. 34). 186 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 10.4.2 but allows him to burst through in the Vladislav Tkachev - centre. Aleksander Delchev 13 lt:lh4! lt:lxd5?! French Te am Ch 2001 13... i.d7 ? is entirely bad due to 14 f4 , but 13 ...i.xe2 14 lt:lf5 'ili'f8 15 1 d4 e6 2 c4 i.b4+3 i.d2a5 4lt:lf3 'i¥xe2g6 is a better defence. d6 5 lt:lc3 lt:lf6 6 'ili'c2 lt:lc67 a3 i.xc3 14 exd5 'ili'xh4 15 f4 i.xe2 16 'ili'xe2 8 i.xc3 'ili'e7 9 e4 e5 10 d5 lt:lb8 11 lt:ld7 17 fxe5 dxe5 18 i.xe5 0-0 19 i.e2 (D) .i.xc7 l:tac820 d6 White has a decisive advantage ( 1-0, 40). 13.1.2 Mark Hebden - Chris Ward Southend 2008 1 d4 lt:lf6 2 lt:lf3 3e6 e3 c5 4 c4 a6 5 lt:lc3 d5 6 cxd5 exd5 7 g3 lt:lc68 i.g2 i.g4 8 ...i.e7 is my recommendation. 9 0-0 (D) What should Black play? ll... .i.g4?! This continuation is quite plausible, but clearly not the best, since now White could continue 12 b4 !. Com pare this with 11...0-0 12 b4 lt:lh5, which offers Black good counterplay. 12 0-0 a4? Black evidently forgets about the two tempi already lost by him earlier in the opening, which mean that he must be very cautious about any lines What should Black play? where the game opens up. Now he should either castle or play 12... i.xf3 ! 9 •••:c 8?! 13 .i.xf3 a4, with good chances of A similar variation exists in the equality. The immediate a-pawn ad Tarrasch Defence: 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 vance blocks White's queenside play, lt:lc3 c5 4 cxd5 exd5 5 lt:lf3 lt:lc6 6 g3 X-FILES Ill'? tt::lf6 7 .tg2 .te6 8 0-0 l:lc8. Here 13.2 Black's play seems at first glance more Carl Oscar Ahu11 - LudWII lnpll logical since White cannot continue BadNauhelm /IJJ,, .tg5, but in fact it is very risky to de lay the development of the f8-bishop. 1 d4 tt::lf6 2ltlf3d! J eJ cS 4 /i,hdl 10 h3 .te6 11 tt::le2?! tt::lc6 5 c3 e6 6 ..td3 'ii'c7 7 0·0 .le7 II This is too sluggish. By continuing dxc5 .txc5 9 e4 0-0 10 iVe2 ..th6 II 11 tt::lg5 .te7 12 e4! White can seize e5 (D) the initiative with confidence. ll••. cxd4 More logical is 1 1....te7 12 b3 tt::le4 13 dxc5 .txc5 14 i.b2 0-0, with ap proximate equality. 12 tt::lfxd4 �d7 Black continues to provoke his op ponent. 13 tt::lxe6 fxe6 14 e4 tt::lxe4 (D) What should Black play? ll••• ltlg4? It is not so easy to feel the differ ence between the variations 10... b6 11 e5 and 10 ....tb6 11 e5, but this dif ference is rather considerable. In the first case Black should reply with 11... tt::l g4, and in the second, 11... tt::l d7. 15 tt::lf4 12 .txh7+�xh7 13 ltlg5+�g8 14 White should prefer the simple 15 �xg4 �xeS 15 �h5! �f5 16 tt::ldf3 .txe4dxe4 16 �xd7+ �xd7 17l:td1 +, �g6?! with a minimal advantage. Black finds nothing better than of 15 •.. i.d6 16 �h5+ fering an exchange of queens. 16... f6? Now after 16... g6 17 tt::lxg6 'ikf7 an loses to 17 g4 �d3 18 tt::le1 or 17 tt::lh4 unclear position would arise. He in �d3 18 tt::lg6, but 16... .td8 17 .te3 stead played 16... �f 7?! 17 tt::lxe6! and .txg5 18 tt::lxg5 should have been went on to lose after mistakes by both tried, even though White keeps the ini sides (1-0, 38). tiative. 188 A ROCK-SOUD CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 17 11i'xg6 fxg6 18 .ie3 is to attack the white e5-knight with The ending is distinctly better for his f-pawn, but now this idea is indefi White because his g5-knight occupies nitely delayed. Black should prefer a dominant position. ll...lbe8 or ll...lbf5 12 .if2 .ie7. 18••• .ic7 19 .l:.ad1 l:td8 20 lbh4 e5 Nevertheless, Black's real hardship 21 lbxg6 .ig4 22 f3 .ic823 l:tfe1 only begins after his next move. White has an extra pawn, although 12 .if2 he failed to win the game (lf2_lf2,72). After 12 .ih4 Black defends by 12... 'ii' c7 (not 12... f5 ? 13 g4) 13 'ii'h3 14.1.3 lbg6. Dragan Kosic - Stefan Mijovic 12... f5 ?! Montenegrin Te am Ch, Cetinje 2009 12... f6? is no use due to 13 .ixh7+ 'ifi>xh7 14 'ii'h3+ 'Oti>g8 15 'ii'xe6+, but 1 d4 d5 2 .if4 lbf6 3 e3 e6 4 lbd2 the two-square advance of the pawn is c5 5 c3 lbc66 lbgf3 .id67 .ig30-0 8 a poor substitute. Black should calmly .id3 b6 9 lbe5 .ib7 10 f4 lbe7 11 play 12 ...'ii' c7 (meeting 13 'ii'h3 with fif3 (D) 13... ti:Jf6), retaining the option of driv ing the e5-knight away with ...f6 at some later moment. 13 g4 lbf6 14 gxf5 exf5 15 l:tg1 .ixe5 16 fxe5 lbe4 17 'ii'g2?! 17 h4 is more accurate, denying the black knight the g6-square. White's advantage is then obvious. 17... lbg6 18 lbf3 'ii'e7 19 0-0-0 cxd4 20 cxd4 l:tac8+?! Black misses an excellent chance for counterplay by 20 ...f4 ! 21 'ifi>bl (21 .ixe4dxe4 22 lbg5.idS ) 2l ...fxe3 22 .ixe3 lbf4. 21 'Oti>b1'ii' b4 22 .ie1'ii' a4 23 'ii'e2 What should Black play? a6 White was threatening to trap the ll... lbd7? ! black queen by 24 .i.b5. This continuation must give rise to 24 h4 some doubts, since Black's basic idea White went on to win (1-0, 33). Index of Va riations A: 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 lt:Jc3 5 i..xf6 80 B: 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 lt:Jd2 5 exd5 80 5 ...exd5 31 C: 1 e4 e6: other lines 5 .•• lt:Jfd7 D: 1 d4 e6 2 c4 i.b4+ 6 i.xe7 E: 1 d4 e6: otherlines 6 i.e3 80 F: 1 c4 and 1 lt:Jf3 6 h4 87 6 ...h6: a) 7 i.e3 87 A) b) 7 i.f4 87 1 e4 e6 c) 7 'ii'h5 87 2 d4 d5 d) 7 i..xe7 88 3 lt:Jc3 66 6 .•. 'ii'xe7 3 ... lt:Jf6 7 f4 83 4 i.g5 80 7 i.d3 81 4 i.d3 66 7 lt:Jf3 81 4 exd5 exd5 30 7 lt:Jb5 82 4 e5 66 4 •••lt:Jf d7: 7 'ii'g4!? 83 a) 5 'ii'h5?! 66 7 'ii'h5 83 b) 5 lt:Jf3 66 5 ...c5 6 dxc5 lt:Jc6 7 7 'ii'd2 81 7 ...0-0: i.f4: a) 8 lt:Jd1 ?! 81 bl) 7 ...a6 68 b) 8 f4 - see 7 f4 0-0 8 'ikd2 b2) 7 ...lt:Jxc5 68 7 ••• 0-0 b3) 7 ...i.xc5 69 8 lt:Jf3 c) 5 lt:Jce2 70 5 ...c5 6 f4 lt:Jc67 c3: 8 'ii'h5 83 c1) 7 ...'ii'b6 71 8 'ii'd2 c5: c2) 7 ...i.e7 72 a) 9 lt:Jb5? 84 d) 5 f4 74 5 ...c5 6 lt:Jf3 lt:Jc6 7 i.e3 b) 9 lt:Jf3 85 (7 lt:Je2 71): 8 ... c5 d1) 7 ...i.e7 78 9 'iid2 85 d2) 7 ...cxd4 8 lt:Jxd4: Or: d21) 8 ...i.. c5 74 9 g3 84 d22) 8 ...'ii' b6 76 9 lt:Jb5 84 4 ••. i.e7 9 i.d3 84 5 e5 9 dxc5 lt:Jc6: 5 i.d3? 80 a) 10 'i¥d2 85 190 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK b) 10 Jt.d3: b) 3l2Jf3 13 b1) 10 ...ttJxc5 11 O-O h6 84 2 l2Jf3 d5 3 e5 (3 l2Jc3 13) 3... c5 : b2) 10... f6 11 exf6 'S'xf6 12 g3 a) 4 d4 35 l2Jxc5 85 b) 4 c3 ltJc6 5 d4 'ii'b6 36 c) 4b4/3 B) 2 d3 d5: 1 e4 e6 a) 3 'ii'e2 18 2 d4 d5 a1) 3 ...l2Jf6 19 3 l2Jd2 50 a2) 3 ...l2Jc6 21 3 c5 b) 3 l2Jd222 3 ...ltJf6 4 l2Jgf3: 4 exd5 bl) 4 ...b6 23 4 Jt.b5+ 51 b2) 4 ...Jt.e7 24 4 c3 51 2 ... d5 4 dxc5 51 3 e5 33 4 l2Jgf3 50: 3 Jt.e3? 9 a) 4 ...cxd4 51 3 Jt.d3 14 b) 4 ...l2Jf6 5 e5 l2Jfd7 6 c3 l2Jc67 3 exd5 27 3 ...exd5 : Jt.d3: a) 4 c3 28 b1) 7 .. .'ili'b6 52 b) 4 i.d3 27 b2) 7 ...h6 53 c) 4ltJc3 30 4 ... exd5 58 d) 4l2Jf3 29 4 .. .'ili'xd5 54 e) 4 c4 31 5 l2Jgf3 59 3 ... c5 5 Jt.b5+58 4 c3 36 5 ... a6 61 4 dxc5?! 34 5 ...ltJf6 59 4 'ii'g4?! 34 6 Jt.e2 64 4l2Jf3 35 Or: 6 c3 61 ; 6 c4!? 61 ; 6 dxc5 62; 6 4 ... 'ii'b6 Jt.d3 64 5 t'tJf3 5 a3 l2Jc6 6 ltJf3 41 C) 5 ... l2Jc6 1 e4 e6 9 6 a3 2 d4 6 dxc5?! 36 2e5 9 6l2Ja3 36 2g3 9 6 Jt.d3 37 2c4 10 6 Jt.e2 38 6... cxd4 7 cxd4 l2Jh6: 2 b3 11 a) 8 b3?! 39 2 f4 12 b) 8l2Jc3 40 2 'ii'e2 16 c) 8 ..ltd3 !? 40 2 l2Jc3 d5: 6 ... f6 48 a) 3 f4 9 Or: 6 ...Jt.d7 42; 6 ...c4 44 INDEX OF VA RIATIONS 191 D) 4 dxc5 94 1 d4 e6 4a3 95 2 c4 ii.b4+ 4 ftJf3 cxd4 5 ltJxd4 ftJf6 146 Now: 4 �b3 93 Dl: 3 ftJd2 4 d5 96: D2: 3 lbc3 a) 4 ....1h c3+!? 96 D3: 3 ii.d2 b) 4 ... ftJf6: bl) 5 ii.g5 97 01) b2) 5 f3 97 3 lbd2 109 3 ... c5 109 03) 3 .. . ftJf6 113: 3 ii.d2 118 a) 4a3113 3 ... aS 124 b) 4 g3 113 3 ...ii.xd2+ 118: c) 4 lbf3 0-0 114: a) 4 ltJxd2119 cl) 5 e3 114 b) 4 �xd2 119 4 ...ftJf6: c2) 5 g3 115 bl) 5 lbc3 120 c3) 5 a3 ii.e7: b2) 5 g3 121 c3 1) 6 e3 115 b3) 5 lbf3 121 c32) 6 g3 115 4 lbf3 127 c33) 6 b4 115 4 �a4 125 c34) 6 e4 116 4 ii.xb4?! 125 4 a3 ii.xd2+ 4 g3 127 5 �xd2 cxd4 4 e4 124 Now: 6 �xd4!? 110; 6 lbf3 111 4 a3 !? 126 4 lbc3 131 02) 4 ... d6 3 ltJc393 Now: 3 ... c5 94 a) 5 a3 !? 126 3 .. . b6 101: b) 5 e3 128 a) 4 �c2 102 c) 5 g3 128 b) 4 �b3 102 d) 5 lbc3 129 c) 4 g3102 d) 4 e3 102 E) e) 4 e4 104 4 ....tb7 : 1 d4 e6 el) 5 d5?! 104 2 ftJf3 e2) 5 �c2 105 2 e4 - see 1 e4 e6 2 d4 e3) 5 ii.d3 105 2 g3 164 2 . . . c5 3 lbf3 169 e4) 5 f3 107 2 ltJc3 164 4 e3 99 2 ii.f4 165 Or: 2 c3!? 167 192 A ROCK-SOLID CHESS OPENING REPERTOIRE FOR BLACK 2 .•. c5 6 a3 134 3 e4 133 6 �e3 135 3 c3 166 6 �e2 136 3 g3 169 6 g3 137 3 ltlc3 171 6 tbxc6 138 3 c4 144 3 ... cxd4 4 ltlxd4 ltlf6 6 �f4 �b4 7 tbdb5 140 (4 ...ltlc6 !? 144) 5 ltlc3 (5 g3!? 145): 6 ... �b4 a) 5 ...�b4 146 7 a3 �xc3+ b) 5 ...ltlc6 148: 8 ltlxc3 d5 b1) 6 e3 148 9 exd5 exd5 b2) 6 i.f4 149 10 �d3 0-0 b3) 6 �g5148 11 0-0 d4 b4) 6 tbxc6bxc6 7 e4 �b4 149 Now: 12 ltle2 141; 12 ltle4 142 b5) 6 e4 149 b6) 6 a3 150 f) b7) 6 ltldb5 151 1 c4 b8) 6 g3153 1 ltlf3 d5 175 (l...e6 173; l...c5 3 e3 155 3 ... d5: 173): a) 4c3 158 a) 2c4d4 175 b) 4 �d3 155 b) 2 g3 c6 175 c) 4 c4 155 4 ...a6 !? 5 ltlc3 ltlf6: c) 2 d4 c5: c1) 6 b3?! 156 c1) 3 dxc5 175 c2) 6a3 156 c2) 3 ltlc3 176 c3) 6 cxd5 157 c3) 3 e3 e6 155 d) 4 b3 160 4 ...ltlc6 5 �d3 ltlf6 6 c4) 3 c3 e6 166 0-0 b6 7 �b2 �b7: c5) 3 c4 cxd4 4 cxd5 tbf6 176 d1) 8 c4 161 1 ... c5 173 d2) 8 ltle5 162 l...e6 173 d3) 8 ltlbd2 162 2 ltlf3 3 cxd4 2 ltlc3 g6 174 4 ltlxd4 2 ... ltlc6 4 c3 133 3 ltlc3 4 ... ltlf6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ltlxd4 e6 144 5 ltlc3 3 ... ltlf6 5 �d3 134 Now: 5 ... ltlc6 a) 4 d4 cxd4 5 ltlxd4 e6 148 6 ltldb5139 b) 4e3 174 6 f3 ?! 135 c) 4 g3174 www. gambitbooks. com Playing as Black in a game of chess can be difficult Do you simply try to neutralize White's initiative, or go all-out to complicate the game? Either way, there are many pitfalls, and a lot of study may be needed. In this book, Grandmaster Eingorn shows that it is possible both to play solidly, and to take White out of his comfort zone. He recommends ideas and move orders that are a little off the beaten track, but which he has very ca refully worked out over many years of his own practice. The repertoire, based on playing 1 ...e6, is strikingly creative and will appeal to those who want a stress free life as Black. You will get every chance to demonstrate your chess skills, and are very unlikely to be blown off the board by a sharp prepared line. All you need is a flexible approach, and a willingness to try out new structures and ideas. Eingorn's subtle move-orders are particularly effective if White refuses to pick up the gauntlet, as Black can then use his delay in playing ...l2J f6 to good effect and take the fight directly to his opponent Viacheslav Eingorn is an extremely experienced grandmaster from Odessa (Ukraine), who played reg ularly and successfully in the To p League of the USSR Championship in the 1980s. He has represented Ukraine many times in team events, winning a gold medal at the 2001 World Te am Championship. Eingorn is a FIDE Senior Trainer, and coached the victorious Ukrainian women's team at the 2006 Olympiad. �� . 99 $23.95 llAI580T ISBN-13: 978-1-906454- 31- 9 Understanding ISBN-10 : 1-906454-31-0 Chess Middlegames