AttackingThe English/Reti

A Black Repertoire with 1...e5/1...d5

Alexander Delchev
Semko Semkov

Chess Stars
www.chess-stars.com
Chess Stars Publishing
Current Theory and Practice Series

Attacking The English/Reti

Cover design by Rustam Taichinov

Copyright 1)2616 by Alexander Delchev and Semko Semkov

Printed in Bulgaria
ISBN: 978-619-7188-09-7
Contents

Bibliography 4
Introduction 5

The English Opening

1. l.c4 e5 2.g3 lllf6 3 ..ig2 c6 9
2. l.c4 e5 2.g3 c6 44
3. l.c4 e5 2.liJc3 liJf6 3.g3 c6 61
4. l.c4 e5 2.liJc3 liJf6 3.liJf3 liJc6 73
5. l.c4 e5 2.liJc3 liJf6 3.liJf3 liJc6 4.e3 85
6. 3.liJf3 liJc6 4.g3 .ib4 5.liJd5 101
7. 3.liJf3 liJc6 4.g3 .ib4 5..ig2 115
8. Rare Second Moves 133

TheReti
9. l.liJf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.b4 145
10. l.liJf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.e3 159
11. l.liJf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.g3 175
12. l.liJf3 d5 2.g3 c6 193
13. The King's Indian Set-np 215
14. l.g3 223

Index of Variations
Bibliography
Books
The Modern Reti, Alexander Delchev, Chess Stars 2012
The English Opening Volume I, Mihail Marin, Quality Chess 2009
Mastering the Chess Openings Volume 3, John Watson, Gambit 2008
The English Opening, Zenon Franco, Gambit 2006
How to play the English Opening, Anatoly Karpov, Batsford 2007

Periodicals
Chess Informant
New in Chess

Internet resources
Databases
The Week In Chess (www.theweekinchess.com)
10 Days (www.Chessmix.com)
Chess Publishing (www.chesspublishing.com)
Chess Today (www.chesstoday.net)

4
Introduction

This book aims to offer an active 1.g3 e5 2.i.g2 d5 3.d3 ltlf6 4.ltlf3
Black repertoire against The Eng i.d6 5.0-0 0-0;
lish Opening 1.c4, the Reti 1.ltlf3,
and their siblings that arise after
1.g3. More importantly, we try to
offer not only variations, but also
a philosophy of how to treat such

openings.
A century ago they called them
simply "irregular". Since then, no
body has revoked the importance
of the centre, but nowadays we
are so sweeped off by the torrents We apply the same approach to

of variations the engines provide the Reti:

that we tend to forget convention

al wisdom. 1.lilf3 d5 2.c4 d4! and if 3.b4 f6!

Our reasoning is simple: if White 4.e3 e5

gave us a chance, we should seize

central space; if he played passive
ly, we should advance. Our goal is
to reach an ideal pawn centre:
1.c4 e5 2.g3 c6 3.i.g2 d5 4.cxd5 cxd5
5.d4 e4;

You may find old books or anno

tated games that criticize Black's
set-up on the first diagram. All the
better for you - this book will arm
you with an innovative approach
and thorough original analysis

5
which often refutes widely ac
cepted assessments. Many of our
main lines are nearly unexplored
and they are blank spots in theory.

Chapter 1 offers a repertoire based

on l.c4 e5 2.g3?! li:lf6 3.i.g2 c6!.

Chapter 2 presents an independ

ent alternative repertoire based
on l.c4 e5 2.g3?! c6!?.
We explain the pros and cons of
the two move orders in the corre
spondent "Main Ideas" chapters.
Both are of equal worth and claim
the initiative since the first moves.
We have not tried to find equal
izers. On the contrary, we believe
that Black has all the reasons to
fight for an initiative so we chose
enterprising lines, often connect
ed with pawn sacrifices. We dis
covered amazing variety of posi
tions where Black can give up one
of his central pawns to get a strong
attack in return.
This position has been in the lime
light ever since the K-K match in
1987 and it seems that it is hyper
topical again. We analyse both 9...
e3!? and 9...exf3 in order to give
you alternatives.
I have always been eager to find
an exploitative strategy against
passive opening play. I have star
ted with the set-up d5-e6. My idea
was to advance slowly, gradually
rolling the pawns into the enemy
territory. The following game il
lustrates the zest of this strategy:
Sveshnikov-Semkov
Albena, 1 987

Chapters 6 and 7 deal with a more l.g3 d5 2.li:lf3 e6 3.i.g2 i.d6 4.0-0
restrictive approach from White: li:le7 5.c4 c6 6.b3 e5 7.i.b2 f6
1.c4 e5 2.li:lc3! li:lf6 3.li:lf3! li:lc6
4.g3. This is played "by the ABC
book" and we have little ground
for an early activity here. Still, we
chose the most active options af
ter the move 4...i.b4. We do not
cover lines with 4...d5 at all.
Especially interesting is the line
5.i.g2 0-0 6.0-0 e4 7.li:lgS hc3
8.bxc3 E1e8 9.f3. 8.li:lc3 a6 9.d4 e4 10.li:lel f5 ll.f3

6
 Introduction
0-0 12.ltlc2 e6 13.fxe4 fxe4
14.sxfs+ Wxfs 1s.wa2 ltld7 16.ia3
ha3 17.ltlxa3 ltlg6 18.ltlc2 1Wf5
19.ltle3 '!Wh5 20.sfl ltle7 21.ltlcdl
se8 22.sf2 1Wg5 23.Wlb4
23...c5 24.1Wxb7 cxd4 25.ltlxd5
ltlxd5 26.cxd5 ltlc5 27.1Wc6 sc8
28.1Wd6 1Wxd5 29.Wixd5 hd5
30.e3 d3
31.fl ltld7 32.<i>el ltlf6 33.h3
sc2 34.sd2 scl 35.sb2 !k2 36.g4
h6 37.a4 @f7 38.b4 e7 39.b5
a5 40.b6 b7 41.fl ltld5 42.sb5
sh2 43.ltlf2 d2+ 44.xd2 sxf2+
45.el sf6 0-1
This book presents a refined and
more aggressive version of the
above strategy. We emphasized
on piece play, regarding the pawn
centre as a mean and not as a goal.
We can always sacrifice it in order
to get to the enemy king.
Finally, I should mention the line
1.lilf3 d5 2.g3 c6 3.c4 g4 - Chap
ter 12.
It falls out of our general line of
preparing ...e5, but it is the best
way of meeting White's move or
der according to Delchev.
The book is written in first person,
but it is a collaborative work. Eve
ry line has been checked and dis
cussed by both authors
Semko Semkov
June 2016
7
Chapter 1. 1.c4 e5 2.g3 lLlf6 3.i.g2 c6
Main Ideas
This is the most important chapter
of our book. It presents a sharp at
tacking rep ertoire against White's
pop ular approach in the English
Opening lately:
1.c4 e5 2.g3
By delaying li:lc3, White leaves him
self more options against the Re
versed Sicilian set-up when Black
plays an early ...d7-d5. For instance,
after 2...lilf6 3.i!.g2 d5 4.cxd5 lilxd5
5.lilf3 li:lc6 6.0-0 lilb6 7.d3 i!.e7,
8.lilbd2 is preferred over 8.lilc3.
Another point against 2.li:lc3 is
the line 2...li:lf6 3.g3 c6 4.d4 exd4
5.xd4 d5 6.il.g2 i!.e6 when 7.li:lf3
would face 7...dxc4. Stayed the
knight on bl, White would have had
a4, li:lbd2 while from c3 it cannot re
capture the sacrificed pawn.
These two examples reveal the rea
son behind 2.g3. However, flexibil
ity always comes at a cost. In our
case, White does not actively attack
the centre.
I adhere to the classical school of
chess. I believe in quick develop
ment and central strategy. A se
quence of moves like l.c4 e5! 2.g3?!
defies my understanding of the
game. When I see the diagram posi
tion, I think we should immediately
switch to "p unishing mode" and try
to take over the initiative! The most
consistent retort, in my opinion, is to
occupy the centre by ...c6 and ...d5.
The big question is should we insert
2...lilf6 3.lilc3 and only then 3...c6,
or answer 2...c6. Both move orders
are possible and have their own spe
cifics. I discuss them in Chapter 1
and Chapter 2 which propose two al
ternative, albeit similar, repertoires
against White's fianchetto. Chapter
3 covers 2.li:lc3 lilf6 3.g3 c6.
2 li:lf6 3.i!.g2 c6!
-------
 Chapter l

White has three major plans from Mastrovasilis played it in 2013 and
here: then it has occurred in practical
chess only 4 more times. Black has
1. White attacks the d5-pawn. scored a total of 4.5/5!

The tactical background of our set-

up was shown in the game Peter
sons-Tal, Riga 1958: 4.lilc3 d5
5.cxd5 cxd5 6.ll!'b3 lilc6!
Now 7.lilxd5 lild4 8.lilxf6+ 1ll'xf6 (or
8...gxf6), guarantees Black a lasting
initiative for the pawn.

The critical line is 9.1ll'b5 when we

shed in a pawn - 9...0-0!? 10.lilxd5
h6 n.lilxf6+ li:lxf6 12.M6 1ll'xf6
13.e3 a6!

He puts a rook on c8 and the threat

of ...li:lc2+ forces the enemy to lose
his castling rights.
Throughout this chapter, we11 often
see Black sacrificing a pawn for the
initiative. That is not a speculative
approach to the game aimed at fish Now 14.1ll'd5 ib4+, 14.1ll'e2 ib4+
ing in muddy waters. It stems from and 14.1ll'b3 ie6 15.1ll'dl tb4+
purely positional factors. White has leave White's king in the centre, so
neglected basic laws of chess and we 14.1ll'a5 looks best - 14...tg4 15.h3
got the chance of taking the centre. ie6 16.lile21ll' e7 17.a3 f5 18.0-0 ic4
He might win a pawn in some lines, 19 .111'd2 1ll'f7 2 0.l'lfcl l'lad8!
but that would give us a lead in de
velopment. Thus we would transfer
our static edge (pawn centre) into a
dynamic advantage - active pieces.

The core of my repertoire is the line

4.d4 e4! 5.lilc3 d5 6.ig5 lilbd7
7.cxd5 cxd5 8.'lifb3 id6!
This position is nearly unexplored.

10
 1.c4 e5 2.g3 <i:lf6 3.i.g2 c6
Black controls the centre. Grune 3
Hessenius-Grebenshchikov, ICCF
2014, shows his main plan - ...g5,
...h6-h5-h4, but he should proceed
carefully to forestall counterplay
with d4-d5 or f2-f3.
2. White attacks the e4-pawn.
4.d4 e4! 5.<i:lc3 d5 6.tg5 <i:lbd7
7.cxd5 cxd5 8.:f3
We'll meet this break-through in
a various settings - without i.g5,
without i.g2 (in the chapters to fol
low), with <i:lh3, with c4-c6 pawn
still on the board. The general rule
is not to take on f3! There are excep
tions where ...exf3 equalizes, but
commonly we should either hold
the e4-pawn, or sacrifice it. For that
aim, we should prepare to kill the
main e4-attacker with 8 tb4, e.g.
9.<i:lh3 0-0 10.fxe4 dxe4 11.0-0
txc3 12.bxc3 h6 13.txf6 <i:lxf614.c4
White is unable to preserve his beau
tiful pawn centre after 14...te6;.
After moving one of the pawns, his
dark squares will become sensitive.
If White attacked our e4-pawn be
fore castling, we could leave it and
take over the initiative:
11.<i:lf2 h6 12.txf6 <i:lxf6 13.<i:lfxe4
<i:lxe4 14.i.xe4 !le8 15.1Mi'd3 th3
You can get this position via vari
ous move orders. It is promising for
Black.
If White does not attack d5 early, his
only plausible plan remains f3-f3.
We'll meet it with ...tb4, but then
we have a choice:
1. To transpose to the above-men
tioned examples by allowing i.g5.
2. To prevent the pin with ... h6:
6.<i:lh3 i.b4!? 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.f3 h6
9.0-0 0-0 10.fxe4
11
 Chapter l

10...b:c3 ll.bxc3 .bh3! 12..bh3 Attacldng guide

li:Jxe4. I analyse this position in
Chapter2,Game 5Nailer-Delchev,
Ordu 2016.
3. White does not play d4.
In the main line when White takes
the d5-pawn, we aim for this attack
ing scheme:

4.li:J:f3 e4 5.li:Jd4 b6!

26.g4 f4!! (26...ib3 27.'&e2 ic4;)

27.li:Jxe4 ib8 28.li:Jxg5 c7 29.e4
f3+.
This rare move is the best way of ob
taining active play. I do not like the If White does not take on d5, but
common 5...d5 in view of 6.d3!. The decides to complete development
queen move pushes back White's first, we could offer b7 instead:
only active piece. Our idea is to grab
as much space as possible and use it
to attack the enemy. We often sac
rifice a pawn to activate our forces
more quickly:
6.li:Jb3 a5 7.a4 (7.d3 a4 8.ie3 '&d8!)
7...ib4 8.li:Jc3?!

12...te6! 13.'l>l'xb7 h5!

Our dominance in the centre justi
fies such sharp onslaughts. White's
queen is far from the kingside and
he lacks any counterplay.

We often do not defend our central

8... 0-0! 9.li:Jxe4 li:Jxe4 10.b:e4 d5
ll.cxd5 ih3 with a rout.
Here are more examples:
pawns, but sacrifice them for activi
ty. Thefollowing diagram is afterthe
moves 4.e4 d5! 5.exd5 cxd5 6.cxd5
li:Jxd5 7.li:Jf31Zlc6 8.0-0 $.c5 9.Eiel
 1.c4
e5 2.g3 lilf6 3.g2 c6
9...0-0! 10.12lxe5 lildb4t.
As a rule, if White takes the e4-pawn
before having castled, we can keep
his king in the centre with ...i,h3.
Then his defence is not trivial:
12...12ld7!. Then we simply put our
rooks on the central files.
We could even castle long in some
positions with an open centre:
4.12lf3 e4 5.12ld4 Wlb6 6.lilc2 d5
7.12lc3 dxc4 8.0-0 i.e6 9.12lxe4 lilxe4
10.he4 12ld7
11.i.g2 (11.12le3 h5) 11...0-0-0 12.b3
h5.
Or 4.12lf3 e4 5.12ld4 Wlb6 6.e3 d5
7.cxd5 cxd5 8.0-0 i.g4 9.3 exf3
10.hf3 fili3 11.i.g2 hg2 12.@xg2
12lc6 13.lilc3
13...0-0-0!?
Theoretical status
The set-up with ...c6 is not in the
limelight of modern theory. Your
opponents will often think that you
chose a second-rate line and they
will tend to underestimate Black's
threats.
Mihail Marin recommends in The
English Opening Volume 1 4.d4 e4
5.lilc3 d5 6.i.g5 12lbd7 7.cxd5 cxd5
8.Wfb3, and ommits 8 ...i.d6! alto
gether.
John Watson in Mastering the
Chess Openings Volume 3 does
not even mention 1.c4 e5 2.g3 lilf6
3.i.g2 c6 4.d4 e4 (there is only a
note on 4...i.b4+ ) .
I found a fleeting remark about
the sequence 1.c4 e5 2.g3 c6 3.d4
13
 Chapter 1
e4 4.1Zlc3. He points out that 4...d5
5.cxd5 cxd5 6.\Wb3 1Zlc6! is good for
Black and concludes: "So perhaps 4
...d5 is a satisfactory move after all."
That's all.
I could not find anything in The
English Opening by Zenon Franco.
Conclusion
In my own tournament and blitz
practice I observe that White does
not know what to do against the
... c6 set-up. My opponents confi
dently play 4.d4 e4 5.1Zlc3 d5 and
then start improvising. It is real
ly rare to take over the psyhologi
cal initiative so early in the opening
with Black!
My analyses will probably boost the
popularity of this line so we could
expect many important games in
near future. To ensure the longevi
ty of my idea, I propose a twin back
up repertoire in Chapter 2, based on
the slightly altered move order l.c4
e5 2.g3 c6. It is up to you to decide
which one you like more.
Chapter 1. 1.c4 e5 2.g3 ttJf6 3.i.g2 c6
Step by Step
1.c4 e5 2.g3 qif6 3.g2
The rare move order 3.qic3 trans
poses to Chapter 3 after 3 ...c6.
3.. c6!
.
A. 4.qic3; B. 4.qif3; C. 4.d4
Exotic alternatives are:
4.\!!lfa 4 is a clumsy attempt to pre
vent ...d5 which does not actual
ly stop it as 4 ...d5 5.cxd5 b5 6.\!!lfb3
<Dxd5 7.qic3 .ie6 is equal. A more
ambitious approach is to prepare
quick castling with 4 ....ie7! when
5_qif3 e4 6.qid4 0-0 7.0-0 d5 is ra
ther pleasant for Black. Playing in
gambit style is also possible: 4....ic5
5.b4 (5.qic3 0-0 6.b4 .ie7 7.\!!lfb 3?!
could be punished by 7...a5 8.b5 a4
9.qixa4 d5 10.cxd5 qixd5t) 5....ie7
6..ib2 d5 7.cxd5 qixd5 8..ixe5 0-0
9.a3 <Dd7 10..ib2 a5t.
4.d3 d5 5.cxd5
5.qid2 .ic5! was in Black's fa
vour in Bilek-Portisch, Teeside
1972. The game went on 6.cxd5
cxd5 7.qib3.ib6 (7....id6!) s.qif3
qic6 9.0-0 0-010..ig5 h6 11..ixf6
\!!lfxf6+.
5.<Df3 dxc4 (or 5....id6) 6.0-0
(6.qic3 \!!lfc7 7.dxc4 .ie6=) 6...
.id6 7.dxc4 0-0 s.qic3 h6=.
5...cxd5
6.qif3
6.<Dc3 d4 (6...qic6 keeps the cen
tre fluid) 7.qie4 <Dxe4 8..ixe4
.ie7 - see line A, 6.d3.
6...<Dc6 7.0-0 .ie7 8..ig5 0-0 9.<Dc3
.ie6 and Black easily held the cen
tre in Mamedov-Rublevsky, Khan
ty-Mansiysk 2010.
4.e4 does not prevent 4...d5!.
15
 Chapter 1
4...tc5 5.li:lc3 d6 keeps more
tension, but it offers White a free
hand on the kingside - 6.li:lge2
(The passive 6.h3 passes the
initiative to Black after 6... b5)
6 ...0-0 7.0-0 ig4 8.h3, intend
ing l!lh2, f4.
5.exd5 cxd5 6.cxd5 li:lxd5 and the
game is level - 7.li:lf3 li:lc6 8.0-0 ic5
9.li:lxe5(9.E1el 0-0! 10.li:lxe5 li:ldb4)
9...li:lxe5 10.d4 ig4 11.1ll'a4+ id7=.
The gambit 6 ...ig4!? keeps the fight
on. For instance:
7.1ll'a4+ li:lbd7 8.li:lc3 id6 9.li:lge2
0-0 10.d4 a6 11.h3 th5oo.
7.1ll'b3 li:lbd7 8.li:lf3 e4 9.0-0 id6
10.li:lg5 li:lc5 11.1ll'c2 E1c8 12.li:lc3 0-0
Black has excellent counterplay:
13.f3 exf3 14.d4 Wb6 15.li:lxf3 li:lce4,
or 13.b4 li:ld3 14.Wbl E1e8 15.li:lgxe4
ii:lxe4 16.ixe4 li:lf4! 17.ib2 1ll'g5i:::.
A. 4.li:lc3 d5 5.cxd5
5.d4 e4 transposes to line C.
5 cxd5 6.Wb3
6.d3 is a passive move. According to
our general strategy, we should gain
even more space with 6...d4 7.li:le4
ii:lxe4(7... li:ld5 8.1ll'b 3=) 8.ixe4 ie7.
16
White should lose a tempo on 9.ig2
(9.id2 li:la6 10.E1cl 0-0 does not
change things much.) 9...0-0 10.ii:lf3
ii:lc6 11.0-0 i.e6 12..id2 f6 13.1ll'a4
1ll'b6 14.E1fbl, Georgievski-Sofrevski,
Skopje 1976, when 14...a5+ starts an
offensive on the queenside where
Black is clearly stronger.
6 lilc6 7.li:lxd5 lild4 8.lilxf6+
8.'l!lc4 li:lxd5 9.ixd5 b5 gives Black
a strong attack. The main line of my
analysis runs 10.txf?+ l!le7 11.1ll'd5
li:lc2+ 12.Wdl li:lxal 13.11\'xaS 1ll'c7
14.1ll'e4 l!lxf715.'l!lbl ib7 16.ii:lf3 ie7
17.'l!lxal ie4 18.d3 E1d8 19.lilg5+
ixg5 20.ixg5 txhl 21.ixd8 1ll'xd8+.
8 'l!lxf6
Practice has proved that Black's in
itiative more than compensates for
the missing pawn. Computer analy
sis suggests that play is roughly bal
anced, but over the board Black' s
task is easier since he owns the ini
tiative. In many lines White must
find series of only movesjust to stay
in the game.
I must add that 8...gxf6!? 9.1ll'dl 1ll'c7
10.l!lfl ie6(or 10...ii:lc2 11.E1bl ie6)
is also good and Black's play is quite
similar to 8... 'il'xf6.
I will consider from here: Al. 9.'il'dl
andA2. 9.'il'd3.

Al. 9.%1'dl Ms 10.d3 1k8 11.lflfl

tc5

A picturesque position. The bishop

pair rules over the board, for exam
ple: 19.!lel td3 20.'il'dl h6 21.lflgl
!lc8+.

A2. 9.1!:1'd3 te7

12.e3

9....if5 is more popular. Its only

It is dubious to grab another pawn:
drawback is that after 10..ie4 he4
12.hb7 !lc7 13..ig2 0-0 14.h4 h6
ll.'il'xe4 !lc8 12.lflfl 'il'e6 13.lllf3
15.td2 tg4 16.lllf3 1Zlxf3 17.hD e4
1Zlxf3 14.exf3 tc5 15.g2= White's
18.dxe4 hf3 19.exf3 !ld8 20.'il'e2
king finds a safe haven too easily.
'il'xb2 21..if4 11\'xal+ 22.lflg2 'il'c3
23.hc7 !ld2. Perhaps the most challenging op
tion is 9...td7!?, if you do not mind
12.lllf3 0-0 13.te3 li:lxf3 occurred in
positions with 2-3 pawns down for
Hausner-Baumbach, Leipzig 1978,
a great compensation. Then:
when 14..ixf3? he3 15.fxe3 should
10.e3 tc6 ll.f3 tb5 12.'il'e4 lllc6
be punished by 15...!lfdS!. 14.hc5
is clearly sad for White so he
!lxc5 15..ixf3 is more accurate, but
should take the second pawn:
Black retains a dominating posi
10.hb7 !lb8 ll.1Zlf3 !lxb7 12.lllxd4
tion with 15....ih3+ (15 ...!ldS 16.!lcl
!lb5 17.1!:\'a4 !lxb2 18.g2 'il'e6 19.h4
!lxa2 20.'il'b4 'il'd7 21.!lc5=) 16.gl
'il'b6 17.tg2 te6 18.b3 !lfc8 19.h4
!lc2 20.tf3 f5t.

12 1!:1'a6! 13.exd4 hd3+ 14.liJe2

(or 14.lflel exd4 15.1Zle2 0-0-+)

14 hd4 15.M3 1k2 16.lflg2
.

1'xe2 17.he2 he2 18.'il'c2 0-0

17
 Chapter 1

12...l'lb4! as are similar. He has full compen

Following the same ultra-ag sation thanks to his better develop
gressive tactic. 12...'i!id6 13.lilb3 ment and potential pressure along
1lifxd3 14.exd3 is "only" equal. the c- and d-files. Possible continu
13.lilc2 1lifc6 14.3 ations are:
White can castle, but it is unclear
a) 11...ie6 12.lile2 l'ld8 13.1lifb5 l'ld7;
how he could complete develop
ment after 14.0-0 fil:i3 15.f3 l'lc4 b) 11...lilb4 12.1lifb5+ id7 13.Wxb7
16.lile3 ic5 17.b3 l'ld4 18.1lifc3 l'ld8 14.a3 lilc2+ 15.hc2 ic6 16.1lifc7
1lifb6 19.l'ldl 0-0t. (16.1lifxa7 hhl 17.ia4+ l!?f8+) 16...
14...l'lc4 15.l!?dl e4 16.fxe4 l'lxe4 hhl 17.ia4+ l!?f8 with irrational
17.l'lfl ic5 18.b4 ie play.
Black needs two tempi to castle.
c) ll...g6!? 12.li:le2 (12.a3 0-0 13.b4
Then his attack on the enemy
l'ld8 14.1lifbl 1lifd6 15.li:le2 ih3 16.f4
king could quickly become irre
M6 17.l'la2 We6) 12...0-0 13.0-0
sistible. White may grab a third
lilb4 14.Wbl Wa6 15.lilc3.ili3 16.l'ldl
pawn, but that would not help
f5 17.if3 f4.
his defence. For instance:
a) 19.'i!ic3 Wg6 20.d3 l'le6 21.lild4
l'lb6 22.1lifc7 l'ld6->;
B. 4.lilf3 e4 5.lild4
b) 19.a4 0-0 20.b5 1lifb7 21.ib2 ig5
22.h4 .ili6->.

10.e3 lilc6 n.te4

11.lile2 lilb4 12.1lifbl 1lifa6 13.ie4 f5

leaves White with horrible holes
on the light squares - 14.a3 fxe4
15.axb4 1lifc416.b3 1liff717.Wxe4 0-0.

5...1lifb6!

5...d5 is ten times more frequent,

but I do not like 6.d3!
6.cxd5 1lifxd5 7.lilc2 1lifh5 is com
fortable for Black: 8.h3 (8.li:lc3
fil:i3; 8.h4 if5 9.lilc3 li:la6
10.a3 lilc5 11.lile3 ie6) 8...1lifg6
9.lilc3 id6 (The email game
The pawn structure is the same as Utesch-Schuster, ICCF 2007,
in the Mora gambit and Black's ide- went through sharp complica-

18
 1.c4 e5 2.g3 tilf6 3.2 c6
tions after 9... tila6 10.h4 ic5
11.h5 tilxh5 12.tilxe4 ie7 13.d3
0-0 14.if3 tilf6 15.tile3 <;Jxe4
16.he4 f5 17.if3 1!1'f6 18.1!1'b3+
l'lf7 19.id2 <;Jc5 20.1!1'c2 tile6
21.5 g6 22.ic3 <;Jd4 23.Wa4
ic5 24.<;Jc2 <;Jxc2+ 25.1!1'xc2
Wd6 26.if3 f4 27.gxf4 1!1'xf4
28.id2 We5 29.ic3 1!1'd6 30.1!1'a4
ie6 31.Wh4 id5 32.hd5 cxd5
33.e3 d4 34.exd4 ib4 35.0-0
l'laf8 36.l'lael hc3 37.bxc3 1!1'a3
38.1!1'e4 \Wxc3 39.\Wd5 1!1'xd3
40.l'le7 Wf5 41.1!1'xf5 gxf5+) 10.d3
(or 10.<;Je3 0-0 11.1!1'c2 l'le8 12.b3
<;Ja6) 10...exd3 11.Wxd3 1!1'xd3
12.exd3=, Miraglia-Dias, ICCF
email 2002.
6...exd3
6...dxc4 7.dxe4 ic5 8.e3 <;Jbd7
(8...0-0 9.0-0 l'le8 10.<;Jc3) 9.f4
0-0 10.0-0 <;Jb6 ll.h3! - White's
kingside pawn horde looks dan
gerous.
6... ic5 7.<;Jb3 ib4+ 8.id2
hd2+ 9.\Wxd2
9...dxc410.dxc41!1'e7(10...\Wxd2+
n.<;Jlxd2 e3 12.fxe3 <;Jbd7
13.h3'1;) ll.<;Jc3 0-0 occurred in
Girl-Balogh, Germany 2015.
White chose to prevent ...e3 by
12.1!1'e3 l'le8 and the queenless
middlegame was roughly equal
- 13.1!1'c5 <;Ja6 14.1!1'xe7 l'lxe7.
More challenging is 12.l'ldl, in
tending 12...<;Ja6 13.\Wd6.
6...ib4+ 7.<;Jc3 1!1'e7 8.0-0
dxc4 was already really grim
for Black in Gajewski-Erdos,
Dresden 2016 - 9.<;Jxe4 <;Jxe4
10.dxe4 ic5 ll.ie3 0-0 12.\Wc2
hd4 13.hd4 c5 14.ie3 ie6
when 15.f4! f6 16.e5 fxe5 17.1!1'e4
<;Jc6 18.f5 W 19.h4 would have
promised a strong attack, e.g.
19...<;Jd4 20.ig5 1!1'c7 21.e3 <;Jc6
22.l'ladl h6 23.f6 hxg5 24.Wf5-+.
7.cxd5! and Black's pawn centre is
busted.
The queen sortie aims to reject the
d4-knight to a passive position.
6.<;Jc2
6.e3 d5
6... ic5 7.<;Jb3 ie7 pushes back
the centralised knight, but at the
cost of a passive bishop. It would
stand better on d6. Still, 8.<;Jc3
d5 9.cxd5 cxd5 10.0-0 0-0 ll.d3
was not too impressive, Thiede
H.Stefansson, blitz, Berlin 2015.
7.cxd5 cxd5
8.0-0
19
 Chapter 1

8.f3 lilc6 9.lilxc6 exf3 10.1!1ixf3 b) 13...li:lxd4 14.exd4 ie7 15.!lel

bxc6 11.0-0, Skembris-Baklan,
Neustadt an der Weinstrasse
2015. Black has an attack after
11...ia6 12.!lf2 id6 or ll...h5
12.b3 h6 13.!lel h4.
8...ig4! Weakens White's king.
8...lilc6 9.lilc3!? (9.d3 ig4=) is
not really dangerous, but it gives
Wbite an initiative. The point is
that 9...ig4fails to 10.lilxd5, and
9...lilxd4 10.exd4 1!1ixd4 ll.d3
1!1ixd3 12.1!1ib3 requires precision
from Black: 12...ic5! 13.!ldl 1!1ia6
14.Ml 1!1ib6 (14...111ia5=) 15.ib5+
@f8 16.li:la4 1!1ic7 17.ig5 ie6
18.!lacl b6 19.1!1ic3 a6 20.ie2
1!1ie7=.
9.f3 (9.1!1ib3 1!1ixb3) 9...exf3
!ld8 16.d3 !ld7 17.1!1ib3 1!1id8=.
6.li:lb3 a5 disturbs White's develop
ment. 7.a4
The point is that 7.d4 a4 8.c5
could be met by 8...1!1ia7 9.li:l3d2
d5 10.cxd6 1!1ixd4=.
7.d3 a4 8.li:l3d2 (8.ie3?? cu
riously loses to 8...c5 9.li:l3d2
1!1ixb2 and the lonely queen sud
denly inflicts serious damage
upon White's queenside.) 8...d5

9.cxd5 (9.dxe4 dxe4! 10.li:lxe4

li:lxe4 11.he4 ih3) 9...exd3
10.dxc6 (10.0-0 cxd5 ll.exd3
ie7 12.li:lc3 1!1ia5) 10...li:lxc6
ll.exd3 (11.0-0 dxe2 12.1!1ixe2+
ie6=) ll ...ig4 is balanced, e.g.
10.txf3 12.li:lf3 ib4+ 13.li:lc3 0-0 14.0-0
10.li:lxf3 li:lc6 ll.d4 ie7 12.li:lc3 !lfd8 15.a3 hc3 16.bxc3 1!1ic5.
0-0 13.1!1ic2 g6 14.li:le5 ie6=. 7...ib4
10...th3 ll.ig2 hg2 12.@xg2 li:lc6 7...li:la6 8.0-0 li:lc5 is also ba
13.li:lc3 lanced.
It looks that Black' s king is in
danger since if it castled short,
!lxf6 or iilfS would be serious
threats.However, Black can hide
his king on the opposite flank or
even take on d4:
a) 13...0-0-0!? 14.1!1ib31!1ixb3 15.axb3
ic5 (or 15... @bS=) 16.li:lxc6 bxc6
17.d4 ib6=.

20
 i.c"+ eo z.g;j 't.:lto 0..&gz co

8.0-0 i.e7 12.b5 d4 13.li:lxe4 li:lxe4 14.he4

8.li:lc3 0-0 9.li:lxe4 li:lxe410.he4 Wxb5 15.a4oi;.
d5 ll.cxd5 fili3 spells a quick
rout.
8 ...0-0 9.li:lc3 !le8 10.d3 exd3
11.Wxd3 MS. The full control of
the queenside dark squares makes
Black's game somewhat preferable.

6 . d5 7.cxd5

7.d3 exd3 8.exd3 i.g4 provokes ugly

moves from White.
7.li:lc3 dxc4 8.0-0 i.e6 9.li:lxe4 li:lxe4
10.he4 li:ld7 is interesting. (The 10.li:lc3 0-0 11.dxe4 dxe4 12.li:le3
quiet 10...i.e7 is also playable.) !ld8 13.li:led5 li:lxd5 14.li:lxd5 \!!lc5

This position occurred in Chibukh

Now 11.d4 cxd3 12.exd3 li:lf6 13.i.e3
i.c5 14.d4 li:lxe415.dxc5 Wd8 16.Wd4
Wxd4 17.hd4 li:ld2 is equal.
11.i.g2 begs for 11 ...0-0-0 12.b3 h5
13.bxc4 h4 with active play.
11.li:le3 h5! 12.Wc2 \!!lc5 13.b4 cxb3
14.axb3 h4 was pleasant for Black
and he went on to win in Gabuzy
an-Istratescu, Legnica 2013.
7 cxd5 8.0-0 (8.d3 li:lc6 trans
e5. However, the same reasoning
poses) 8 li:lc6 9.d3 i.e7
..
9...i.e6 10.li:lc3 !ld8 11.b4! assures
White of some pressure after 11...
chian -Minasian, Yerevan 2007. The
forcing variation 15.he4 i.e6 16.b4
li:lxb4 17.i.e3 !lxd5 18.hc5 !lxdl
19.he7 !lxal 20.!lxal led to a lev
el endgame. Minasian chose 20...
li:lc6 (20...li:ld5 21.i.g5 f5 22.i.f3
h6 23.i.d2 !lc8= is more natural.)
21.i.c5 !ld8 22.hc6 bxc6 23.ha7
!la8 24.i.c5 !lxa2, draw.
C. 4.d4 e4!
4... i.b4+ 5.i.d2 hd2+ 6.Wxd2
d6 7.li:lc3 0-0 8.e3 is acclaimed
by J.Watson. He believes that the
trade of dark-squared bishops was
great for Black taking into account
that his central pawns stand on d6-
applies to White's set-up and at the
end of the day we have a spatial ad
vantage for White, ensured by his
c4-d4 vs. c6-d6 pawns.

21
 Chapter!

Marin considers also 4...exd4 which

looks somewhat ridiculous after
... c6. I have much more ambitious
plans for the opening!

5.liJc3

White can play 5.d5 himself. Then

the question is whether to trade on
d5 immediately.
5...cxd5 6.cxd5 b4+ 7.d2
V!ie7 8.hb4! (8.a3 hd2+
9.liJxd2 0-0 10.d6 V!ie5 ll.liJc4
V!Jb5 12.l'lcl b6 looks attractive
for Black.) 8...V!Jxb4+ 9.V!id2
lilxd5 10.a3 V!Jxd2+ 11.liJxd2 f5
12.liJc4 0-0 13.l'ldl liJf6 14.lild6
lilc6 15.f3 gives White compen
sation. Black still has enough
counterplay with 15...bS 16.fxe4
fxe4 17.lilxe4 lilg4 18.M3 lile3
19.l'ld3 liJc4.
5...b4+ 6.d2 V!Je7 may be more
accurate.
Now 7.hb4 V!ixb4+ 8.V!id2 V!Jxc4
does not work so White plays:
7.lilc3 0-0
It makes sense to define the cen
tre with 7...cxd5!? 8.lilxd5 lilxd5
9.cxd5 0-0.
8.a3 hc3 9.hc3 cxd5 10.cxdS d6
ll.lilh3 MS=.
7...b4+! 8.liJc3 cxd5 9.e3 hc3+
10.bxc3 V!ic6 11.Vlib3 (11.l'lcl b5)
ll...lild7 was fine for Black in Suba
Llorente Zaro, La Roda 2009.
5...d5 6. g5
6.cxd5 cxd5 defines the centre a bit
early.
In some variations Black gets
the c6-square for his knight as
in the line 7. V!ib3 h6 8.f4 liJc6.
Or 7.f3 b4 8.lilh3 exf3 9.exf3
0-0 10.0-0 h6 followed by ...liJc6.
7.g5 lilbd7 should transpose to the
main line.
6.lilh3 h6!? leaves White with the
only possible plan of undermining
the centre with 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.f3 (or
8.0-0 lilc6 9.f3 exf3).

5.g5 d5 6.hf6 V!ixf6 7.cxd5

Or 7.e3 b4+.
7.a3 allows, besides the sym
metrical 7...e6 8.lilc3 lild7, 7...
dxc4!? with double-edged play.
For instance: 8.lilc3 e3 9.fxe3
g6 10.liJf3 a6co or 8.he4 lild7
9.g2 liJb6, followed up by
...g6co. IfWhite has traded his dark-squared

??
 l.c4 e5 2.g312lf6 3.ig2 c6

bishop on f6, we could let him take cxd5 7.12lh3 h6 8.0-0 ib4 9.f3 0-0 -
on e4, but here best is to aim forthe see Chapter 2, line B3.
symmetrical pawn structure - 8...
exf3 9.exf3 id6! 10.0-0 0-0 11.lilf4
12lc6 when 12.lilfxdS 12lxd5 13.lilxdS
ixg3 14.hxg3 'li.1xd5 15.ie3 if5 is at
least equal as White's bishop pair is
passive.

It is more challenging to save ...h6:

6...ib4!? 7.cxd5
If White delays this exchange
with 7.0-0 0-0 8.ig5, he should
also reckon with 8...ixc3 9.bxc3
dxc4oo (although 9...12lbd7! is 6... 12lbd7
fine for Black).
7...cxd5 8.0-0 0-0 9.'li.1b3 (9.f3 h6 The game Svane-Jakovenko, Cale
is covered in Chapter 2, Game 5 ta 2015, saw the plan with ...ie7:
Nailer-Delchev, Ordu 2016) 9... 6.cxd5 cxd5 7.ig5 ie7 8.e3 12lc6
ixc3 10.bxc3 9.12lge2 12ld7 10.ixe7 12lxe7 11.0-0
which looks passive, but resilient.

6...ib4 is a simple and good alter

10...!le8!?
T.L.Petrosian-Hovhannisyan,
Dubai 2012, saw 10 ...h6!? ll.f3
exf3 12.exf3 12lc6 when 13.g4
12la5 14.'li.1c2 !le8 15.gS?! hxg5
16.ixgS 'li.1d6 gave Black the bet
ter pawn structure.
ll.ig5 (ll.f3 e3!) 11...12lbd7 12.f3
h6t.
The above-mentioned game Nailer
Delchev shows that we could com
bine both ...ib4 and ...h6 - 6.cxd5
native. After 7.cxd5 cxd5
It is not practical to elaborate on
the intermezzo 7...ixc3+ since
White could sidestep this move
order by 6.cxd5 cxd5 7.ig5.
White has three main continua
tions:
a) 8.!lcl lilbd7!
Marin considers only 8...0-0
9.12lh3 12lbd7 10.0-0, when 10...
ixc3 11.!lxc3 h6 12.if4! al
lows White to preserve his bish
op, and 10...12lb6 11.12lf4 ixc3
12.!lxc3 h6 13.ixf6 'li.1xf6 14.f3,
exploiting the clumsy placement
of the f6-queen. It is essential
to define the fate of White's g5-
bishop before castling.
9.12lh3 h6!

23
 Chapter 1
Now 10.kx:f6 only helps Black
to develop - 10...hc3+ ll.fu:c3
lilxf6 12.0-0 0-0 13.'l>l'b3 JS
14.8fcl 'i!l'd7!. The main mo
tif in this position is the lack of
prospects before the f3-knight.
1S.lilf4 gS 16.8c7 8ac8! 17.1/!l'xb7
gxf4-+, Migot-Demuth, Belfort
2012.
10.id2
10.if4 takes this square from
the f3-knight. 10...0-0 11.0-0
[ll.'l>l'b3 hc3+ 12.'l>l'xc3 (12.
8xc3 lilb6=) 12...lilb8=] ll...lilb6
12.'l>l'b3 (12.ieS lilg4) 12...hc3
13.'l>l'xc3 ifs.
10 ...hc3 ll.8xc3
11.hc3 would weaken e3 (after
f3-f3) and it also blocks the c-file
- 11....0-0 12.0-0 8e8 13.f3 as
14.lilf2 lilb6 1S.fxe4 dxe4, when
White could maintain the bal
ance with 16.dS.
11... 0-0 12.0-0
I have been following the game
Eljanov-Edouard, Istanbul 2012.
Edouard suggests here the ma
noeuvre 12...lild7-b8-c6=, but
the move he actually played is
more challenging.
12... 'l>l'b6 13.'i!l'c2
?.d
Edouard gives 13.8b3 1/!l'xd4
14.ib4 \\Yxdl lS.fu:dl 8d8 16.lilf4
b6 17.lilxdS lilxdS 18.8xdS ib7
19.8dl lilf8=.
13...8e8!=
This move prepares ...lilf8 thus
solving the problem with the
development of the c8-bishop.
The stem game saw 13...1/!l'xd4?!
14.8dl 11>\'eS when 1S.ie3! 8d8
16.if4 'l>l'e7 17.ic7 8e8 18.lilf4
lilb6 19.hb6 axb6 20.lilxdS
lilxdS 21.8xdS ie6 22.8dl f5
would have been slightly better
for White.
b) 8.f3 should be ignored by Black
- 8...lilbd7 9.fxe4 dxe4 10.lilh3 h6
11.kx:f6 hc3+ 12.bxc3 lilxf6 leads
to a typical position with mutual
chances. It is considered in line Cl.
c) 8.'l>l'b3 is best met by 8...hc3+
9.'l>l'xc3
9.bxc3 lilbd7 10.lilh3 h6 is pleas
ant for Black (10...0-0 11.IUf4 h6
12.h4!? 8e8 is also possible).
9...o-o 10.lilh3 lilbd7 (10...Ms
ll.kx:f6 'l>l'xf6 12.lilf4 8d8 deserves
attention) 11.0-0 h6 12.if4 8e8
13.8acl was tested in two games.
 l.c4 e5 2.g3 ltlf6 3.ig2 c6
Simplest is 13...ltlbS, but sending
tbe knight to tbe kingside after 13...
'/!ie7(or 13...ltlfS) 14.f3 ltlf8, intend
ing 15.fxe4 .b:h3 16..b:h3 '/!ixe4, is
also fine.
7.cxd5
After 7.ltlh3, 7...h6 8.M6 ltlxf6
9.cxd5 cxd5 10.0-0 id6 equalizes
as ll.'l!ib3 ie6 12.'/!ixb7 0-0 would
be dubious for White. However,
Black may also consider 7...dxc4!?
witb asymmetrical double-edged
position, for instance: 8.ltlxe4 h6
9.ltlxf6+ ltlxf6 10.cl b4+ 11.d2
a5 12.a3 hd2+ 13.'/!ixd2 0-0.
White's centre is not mobile since
his pieces are passive.
7...cxd5
Cl. 8.f3; C2. 8.e3, C3. 8.'/!ib3
I mentioned 8.ltlh3 h6 9.M6 ltlxf6
10.0-0 d6 above.
8.'/!ia4 aims to drag Black's queen
to b6, which is tbe natural place for
tbe d7-knight. After 8...'/!ib6 9.W.d2
(9.0-0-0 is clearly dubious - 9...
W.b4 10.ltlb5 W.e7 11.llibl 0-0) 9 ...
W.e7, White fails to win tbe d5-pawn:
10.g4 h6 11.h4 '/!ic6;
10.f3 e3 (tbe thematic sacrifice
10...0-0 is also okay) 11.he3 '/!ixb2;
10.ltlh3 0-0 11.ltlf4 'l!id6 12.'l!ib3 ltlb6
13.a4 a5 - White's activity is tamed
and it is Black's turn to reject tbe
enemy pieces witb ...g5.
Cl. 8.f'3
This breakthrough does not fit well
witb W.g5. Black's most consistent
retort would be:
8 ...'/!ib6, pinpointing tbe weakness
es on b2 and d4. However, it only
weakens d5. Play is balanced after
9.fxe4 ltlxe4 10.ltlh3 h6 11.W.cl W.b4
12.'llid3, for example: 12...f5 13.ltlf4
hc3+ 14.bxc3 '/!ic6 15.c4! dxc4
16.he4.
25
 Chapter!
Mastrovasilis chose against Don
chenko, Legnica 2013, to define the
fate of the g5-bishop with:
8...h6 and got the slightly better
game after 9.tf4?! tb4 10.1/iib3 'l!le7
1Ltd2 when best was ll...a5 12.a3
ixc3 13.ixc3 0-0. In this sharp
position tempi are more impor
tant than the bishop pair so White
should better play 9.ixf6 ltlxf6
10.fxe4 dxe4 11.ltlh3 te7 12.0-0 0-0
13.ltlf2 e3 14.ltlfe4c:o.
Another consistent approach is to
start the fight for e4 with:
8 tb4 9.ltlh3 (for 9.!lcl - see
.
G3Ille 4 Troyke-Delchev, Wunsie
del 2016) 9 0-0 10.fxe4 dxe4
.
11.ltlf2
11.0-0 offers Black a choice:
a) It is unnecessary to rush with 11...
ixc3 although 12.bxc3 h6 is also
possible - 13.ixf6 ltlxf6 14.c4
26
White would have been better
stayed his knight on e3 instead of
h3. From there it would protect c4
and cover g4. In the diagram posi
tion, White is unable to preserve his
beautiful pawn centre after:
14...te6
White should decide what conces
sion to make as 15.!lcl !lc8 gives
only a short respite:
15.d5 'l!lb6+ takes over the initiative
after either 16.lilhl tg4 17.ltlf2 !lacs
18.!lbl 'l!lc5, or 16.ltlf2 M5.
15.c5 offers the d5-square and de
fines a target which could be imme
diately attacked with 15 ...b6.
To sum up, White's kingside and
especially the e3-square are chron
ically weak.
b) ll...h6!? 12.ixf6 ltlxf6 13.ltlf2
(13.!lcl ltlg4 14.'l!ld2 f5) 13...ixc3
14.bxc3 ltld5 15.\Wcl f5c:o.
11...h6 12 .b:f6 ltlxf6 13.liJfxe4
liJxe4 14.he4 !le8 15.'l!ld3 th3
White must find a series of strong
moves to stay in the game. He can
not castle in view of 16.0-0-0? !lc8
17.lilbl ixc3 18.bxc3 'l!la5.
Perhaps best defence is 16.a3 ta5
 1.c4 e5 2.g3 12lf6 3.ig2 c6

17.b4 tb6 18.ldl as 19.b5 e7 9...tb4 10.12lge2 g5 n.te5 We7

20.th7+ l!ih8 21.ltldS e6 22.12lxb6 12.0-0 0-0
xb6 23.te4, but Black still retains
a pull after 23... !le7 24.3 f6.

C2. 8.e3 h6

Markowski-B.Socko, Warsaw 2014,

saw 8... td6 9.12lge2 0-0 10.b3 h6
11.txf6 12lxf6 12.0-0=. The point is
that after ll.tf4 Black could easi
ly defend d5 with ll...12lb6. There
fore, critical should be 9.1Wa4 when
I like Black's position. 13.\Wb3 12lxe5
the only reasonable answer 9...
14.dxeS hc3 15.exf6 txf6 16.xd5
1Wb6 takes away b6 from the d7-
!le8 is fine for him. Even better is
knight. Then 10.12lge2 0-0 11.!lcl h6
13.txf6 12lxf6. Adams tried to keep
12.tf4! gives White some initiative,
the bishop, but:
for instance: 12...!ldS 13.0-0 M4
14.12lxf4 12lf8 15.f3.
13.tc7
Black's problems ensued from the
bishop staying on d6. 8...id6 is
was dubious in view of 13...b6
good to 8.1Wb3, but slightly inferi
14.1Wa4 ib7 15.!lacl !lfc8. Instead
or to 8.e3.
Bogner opted for 13...ltlbS 14.hbS
Since White's eight move is not
(14.teS!) 14... !lxbS 15.a3 td6
threatening anything yet, let's de
16.b3 ig4 17.l!?hl?! when simplest
fine the plans of the enemy dark
would have been 17...1We6.
squared bishop. The game Adams
Bogner, Germany 2013, went:

C3. 8.1Wb3 td6!

9.M4

At some point White will have to

part with his bishop via tf4-e5-f6,
but he hopes that ...g5 could be a
weakness.
9.txf6 12lxf6 10.12lge2 obviously has
no venom as Black can choose be-
tween 10... ig4, 10...id6 and the
passive, but solid 10...td7 heading
for c6.

27
 Chapter!
This move holds the position. It
improves on 8... h6?! 9.M4 g5
10..ie5 ig7 when White has sever
al good options. For instance: 11.h4
qixe5 12.hxg5 hxg5 13.!lxhS+ ixhS
14.dxe5 lg4 15.l;l'xd5 "l;l'b6 16.1ll'b5+
1l!lxb5 17.lxb5 he5 1S.he4 id7
19.lc3 lf6 20..id3 g4 21.e3;!;.
Let's consider now: C31. 9.1ll'b5;
C32. 9.f3; C33. 9.e3.
Practice has also seen:
9.lh3 h6 10..if4, Lederer-Mikha
levski, Beersheba 2014 (10.M6
lxf6 11.0-0 .ie6! 12.l;l'xb7 0-0t),
10...M4 11.lxf4 lb6 12.a4 a5=.
C31. 9.l;l'b5 0-0!?
9...1l!lb6 was introduced in the
correspondence game Flatz-Tyu
lenko, ICCF 2012, which showed
that Black easily defends the end
game after 10.M6 gxf6 ll.lh3
1ll'xb5 12.lxb5 @e7 13.lxd6 @xd6.
The game went on 14.lf4 lb6
15.Elcl .ie6 16.b3 a5 17.a4 (17.f3 f5)
17...!lac8 18.@d2 ld7 19.e3 8bS
draw. I propose a more enterprising
gambit approach which sets practi
cal problems to White.
10.lxd.5h6
If Black changes the move or
der with 10...a6 ll.l;l'a4 h6 12.M6
8xf6 13.8xf6+ 1ll'xf6, d4 is pro
tected and White can eat a second
pawn - 14.he4 1l!le7 15..id5 M5
16.1ll'b3 !lfdS 17.@fl !lacs 1S.1l!lxb7
!lc719.1ll'b3 !lc2 20.1ll'f 3 ih7 21.h4;!;.
?Q
u.qixf6+ qixf6 12 .ixf6 l;l'xf6
13.e3 a6
The 1l!lb5 controls the fifth rank
and two important squares on the
queenside - b4 and c4.
14.l;l'a5
If White allows a check from b4, he
will be unable to connect his rooks
anymore:
14.1ll'd5 ib4+ 15.@fl EleS 16.le2
id2 17.1l!lb3 .ie6 18.d5 when Black
can force a draw with 1S...hd5
19.l;l'xd5 he3 20.f4 exf3 21.txf3
!lads 22.1l!lxb7 !ld7 23.1Wc6 !le6
24.1ll'c8+ !ldS 25.1ll'b7 !ld7 26.1l!lcS+
or keep the tension with 1S ... id7!?
19.lllgl !lacS.
14.1We2 ib4+ 15.@fl 1l!le7 16.'1!1dl f5
17.8e2 ie6 lS.@gl td6 19.a3 !lacs
20.ifl 1Wf7. This position resembles
the main line. Black can attack on
both flanks - with ... g5 or ... b5.
Black also has clear counterplay af
ter 14.1l!fb3 .ie6 15.1/!fdl ib4+ 16.@fl
ic4+ 17.qie2 .id318.a3 !lac819.lllgl
!lc2 20.lf4 .id6 21.lxd3 exd3
22.tf31l!ff5.
 LC4 eo z.g;; 'tltb ;5 .!:1.g Cb
14....tg4 15.h3
The e4-pawn is immune due to the
double hit 15.he4?? Y!Je7.
15.12ie2 loses the right to castle ow
ing to 15... il.f3.
15.Y!Jd2 is solid, but rather passive.
Black can follow up with natural
moves like 15...!lacS 16.12ie2 he2
17.'i!lxe2 il.b4+ 18.rnfl 1We6 19.a3
il.d6 20.h4 f5 21.11.h3 !lf7 22.l!lg2
!lfc7 23.!ladl g6 24.!ld2 l!lg7 25.!lfl
g5? keeping pressure.
15....te6 16.12ie2
16.he4 may lead to a draw af
ter 16...1We7 17.a3 11.c4 18.11.f3 hg3
19.1Wc3 11.h4 20.1Wxc4 with repeti
tion of moves - 20...1Wxe3+ 21.1We2
'i!lxd4 22.!ldl 1Wb6 23.@fl !lfe8
24.'i!lc2 !lac8 25.1Wd2 !lcd8 26.1Wc2.
16... 1We7 17.a3 f5
A critical position for the gambit
9...0-0. My analysis convinced me
that it is balanced, but Black re
tains the initiative in all the lines.
His main task is to deprive the
enemy of counterplay based
on d4-d5 or f2-f4. Then he can
launch a march of the h-pawn up to
h4, preparing it with ...g7-g5 first.
Let's go further:
18.0-0
18.!lcl b5 19.0-0 11.c4 20.'l;\1d2 is si
milar.
Although Black can already start
his kingside offensive with 20...
g5, I would recommend to im
prove our heavy pieces first.
White does not have any threats
so there is no need to rush. Why
give him chances to alter the
course of the game with 21.!lxc4
bxc4 22.!lcl:;;;.
20...h5 21.h4 g5 is also pre
mature in view of 22.b3! hb3
23.hxg5 'l;\1xg5 24.!lc6t 'i!ld8
25.12if4. It is better to play first:
20...'i!lf7
21.!lc2
Alternatively:
21.!lfel unpins the knight and
threatens to meet 21...g5 by
22.d5! !lad8 23.12id4 so we
should anticipate this idea with
21...!ladS 22.12ic3 il.b3.
21.!lfdl !lad8! 22.11.fl g5 23.!lel
'i!lg6 24.l!lhl l!lh8.
21.l!lh2 g5 22.!lgl is a passive
waiting stand. We can display
29
 Chapter!
activity with 22...@hS 23.lilc3
!lae8 24.Wdl
24...h5 25.@hl h4 26.g4 f4!!
(26...i.b3 27.We2 tc4=) 27.lilxe4
tb8 28.lilxg5 Wc7 29.e4 f3+. It
may be even stronger for Black
to improve the placement of his
king before pushing ... h4. For
example, ...@h8-h7-h6 looks
promising.
21...g5 22.!lfcl !lad8 (22 ...!lae8 is
also possible, of course). Now every
thing is ready for ... h5, and ...f4 can
also become an option after ... @h8,
...Wg6. White's only counterplay is
23.!lxc4 bxc4 24.lilc3 with mutu
al chances, for instance: 24...tbS
25.g4 fxg4 26.hxg4 !lxd4! 27.exd4
tf4 28.Wc2 hcl 29.Wxcl Wxf2+
30.@hle3=.
18....tc4 19.Wd2 Wlf7 20.!lfcl
30
Compared to 18.!lcl, White's knight
is unpinned. That enables ideas
with d4-d5 so we should address
this threat with:
20 !ladS!=
...
Black's main plan is 20 ... g5 intend
ing ... h5. It is effective against pas
sive play as convincingly shown by
Grune 3 Hessenius-Grebenshchik
ov, ICCF 2014. However, it is still
premature since White could coun
ter-attack with:
21.d5! td3 22.lild4 f4 23.lile6 when
White's knight proves to be very
powerful:
23...fxg3 24.fxg3 !lfc8 25.tfl Wf5
26.Wlf2 We5 27.@hU.
After the text, White should be ac
curate in order to keep the bal
ance. He can only wait. On the other
hand, it is not easy to break through
his ditches:
a) 21.lilf4 @h7 22.lile2 g5 23.!lc2
tb3 24.!lc3 @h8 25.!lacl td5
b) 21.lilc3 tb3 22.lile2 (22.Wel g5
23.lile2 tc4 24.lilc3 tb3) 22... g5
23.!lc3 @h8 24.!lacl td5 25.!l3c2.
c) 21.@hl g5 22.!lgl b5 23.lilc3 i.b3
24.Wel @h8 25.!lcl !lde8.
 1.c4 e5 2.g3 ltlf6 3.$.g2 c6

d) 2U1c2 g5 22.!lacl $.b3 23.!lc3 L.Mkrtchian-Zawadzka, Wroclaw

$.d5 24.!lfl! 2014.) 15.e4 a4 16.'1d3 M5! intend
ing ... '1a5+.

10...0-0 11.fxe4 dxe4 12.ltlxe4

ltlxe4 13.he4 ltlf6 14..ig2 e6

Preparing to meet 24... h5 by

25.4!.
24.b4 h5 25.l!ihl h4 26.!lgl hxg3
27.fxg3 $.c4 would give Black a
tangible initiative.
24...b5 25.!lc2
After 25.4 exf3 26.$.x3 M3 White is doomed to a passive de
27.!lxf3 we have the strong re fence, see game 1 Lechtynsky-Mas
source 27... '1h5! 28.l!ig2 b4 trovasilis, Germany 2013.
(to drag the rook to a vulnera
ble square) 29.!lc6 g4 30.hxg4 C33. 9.e3 h6 10.6
fxg4 31.!lxf8+ !lxf8 32.l!igl with
a drawish position although the 10.4 $.xf4 ll.gxf4 l1lb6 left White
fight might heat up after 32... with a chronically weak kingside in
'1d5 (32...!lfl=) 33.!lxd6!? (33. Ledger-Shaw, Hinckley Island 2015.
'1d3=) 33... '1xd6 34.'1d3 bxa3
35.bxa3 !lf3oo. 10 ltlxf6 11.ltlge2 0-0!?
25...$.c4 26.!lel (26.4 gxf4) 26 ... h5
intending ... h4 at an opportunity. It is not absolutely necessary to de
fend the b7-pawn although ll...!lb8
C32. 9.f3 h6 10.$.d2 12.0-0 $.e6 is posssible. Then 13.3
0-0 14.fxe4 dxe4
White can also take on e4 after
10.$.xf6 ltlxf6 ll.fxe4 dxe4 12.ltlxe4
ltlxe4 13.$.xe4, but Black's com
pensation is more than enough. He
castles and follows up with ...$.e6,
... '1b6. If White prevents it with
14.$.d5, then the queen finds anoth
er nice place - 14 ... a5! (14...'1a5+
15.l!if2 $.d7 16.a4 was unclear in

31
 Chapter l
is balanced - see game 2 Gagare
Dragun, Pune 2014.
12.0-0 .ie6! 13.'xb7h5!
Black has more then adequate com
pensation for the pawn. His do
minance in the centre is a sound
ground for a kingside attack. Black's
idea is simple - to trade h-pawns
and bring a heavy piece in the vicin
ity of the enemy king. He can com
bine this with a chase of the queen.
14.h4
Perhaps White should seek a way to
equalize. For instance:
14.1:1fcl h4 15.'a6 1:1b8 16.1:1c2 .ic8
17.'xa7 1:1b7 is a draw.
14.lilf4 .txf4 15.gxf4 1:1b8 16.Wxa7
Wc8 is at least a draw - 17.'i\la5 .ih3.
32
14 a5 15.1:1abl 1:1b8 16.'c6 liJg4
..
Perhaps a computer could save
White's game, but in practice his
task would be difficult. The engines
recommend here the strange wait
ing move 17.'i\la6 (17.lilxd5 hg3;
17.Wa4 g5!), but then Black could
activate his last passive piece with
17...1:1e8!. It can go to c7 via e7, or to
the kingside via e6.
18.Wc6 1:1b6 19.'i\la4 g5 20.hxg5
h4 21.gxh4? is lethal due to 21...
.ih2+ 22.l!lhl l!lg7!.
18.1:1fcl is more logical, but 18...'f6
would force 19.1:1fl.
However, Black can continue the at
tack with:
18...$.c8 19.'c6 .ib7 20.'b5 1:1e6.
Black's main threat is seen from the
line 21.liJxd5 b6! 22.Wxa6 hg3,
and 21.liJf4 .txf4 22.exf4 is not help
ful either - 22...e3 23.f3 lilf2 24.Ml
b6.
Chapter 1. 1.c4 e5 2.g3 lll f6 3.i.g2 c6
Annotated Games
1 . Lechtynsky- Mastrovasilis
Germany 2013
1.c4 e5 2.g3 lilf6 3.i.g2 c6 4.d4
e4 5.lilc3 d5 6..ig5 Clibd7 7.cxd5
cxd5 8.Virb3 i.d6 9.f"3 h6 10.i.d2
10...0-0!
Black will obtain an excellent com
pensation for the pawn. Perhaps
White should restrain his appetite
and complete development with
ll.lilh3 ltlb6 12.0-0+. However, first
players often think that Black's set
up is dubious and greedily eat poi
soned pawns, assuming that his
material advantage is a natural re
sult of their opening "advantage".
Thus wrong assessments lead to
wrong decisions.
11.fxe4 dxe4 12.lilxe4?! lilxe4
13..ixe4 lilf6 14..ig2 .ie6 15.Vird3
You might ask where is Black' s
compensation here? The answer is
simple - White's kingside is weak
ened and he is lagging behind in
development. Black simply puts his
bishop on d5 and his rooks on open
files and starts looking around for
the harvest. For example: 15.Vira4
8e8 16.lilf3 .id5 17.e3 lilg4.
White logically decides to keep his
queen closer to his central pawns,
but on d3 it will be a prey for the
light-squared bishop.
15... Virb6?!
Black trades his strong initiative for
a mere pawn.
15...acS! was much more unpleas
ant: 16.b3 8e8 17.ltlf3 .id5
Now 18.0-0 loses by force after
18...i.e4 19.Virb5 a6 20.Vira5 i.c7
21.Virb4 a5 22.Virb5 (22.Vira4 i.c6)
33
 Chapter!
22... i.xf3. More stubborn is 18.e3
ie4 19.1!\'e2 gc2+. The a2-pawn will
soon fall.
After 15...gcs White could also grab
a second pawn: 16.hb7 gbs 17.ig2
1!\'d7 (threatening ...M5) 18.b3 MS
19.111'c4 gfcs
Black's rooks are so strong that
he could even trade queens af
ter 20.1!\'a4 1!\'xa4 (20...1!\'e7!-+)
21.bxa4 gb2 22.lilf3 ig4+. His pres
sure will cost White more than two
pawns.
16.lilf31!\'xb2 17.o-o gfcs 1s.gfb1
1!\'c2 19.lilel 1!\'xd3=
20.lilxd3
20.exd3 was easier to hold. The
pawns may be doubled, but they
keep the black pieces at bay. The po
sition after 20.exd3 gab8 21.hb7
0A
gc7 22.if3 gxbl 23.bl ha2
24.gal id5 25.ga5 is a draw.
20...gc2 21.M4 gd8!?
A good try. It does not change the
evaluation, but faces the opponent
with practical problems. 21...i.xf4
22.lilxf4 ha2 23.gxb7 g5 24.lild3
e2 25.gb2 gxb2 26.lilxb2 id5
27.lilc4! eliminates all the pawns.
22.b7 a5 23.ga7 g5 24.hd6
d6 25.lilc5 ic4
26.as
The endgame is drawn, but White
still has to find a couple of precise
moves. 26.lilb3 was safe enough.
26...d4 27.a4? (27.ga4!=) 27 .
e2 28.Ml ged2 29.gcl gdl 0-1
2. Gagare - Dragun
Wch U20 Pune 14.1 0.2014
1.c4 e5 2.g3 lilf6 3.ig2 c6 4.d4
e4 5.lilc3 d5 6.ig5 lilbd7 7.cxd5
cxd5 8.1!\'b3 id6 9.e3 h6 10.ixf6
lilxf6 11.lilge2
 l.c4 e5 2.g3 1Zlf6 3.Ag2 c6

11...!lbS 17.1Zlxe4? 1Zlxe418.he4 Ah319.i.g2

hg2 20.i:!ixg2 'llle4+ 21.i:!igl !lc2.
11...0-0!? 12.0-0 Ae6! 13.'lllxb7 h5!
It is moredifficult to assess17 .i.xe4.
is a sharper approach.
In practice, White probably does not
even consider such a move serious
12.0-0 i.e6 13.3
ly because the bishop pair after 17...
1Zlxe4 18.lilxe4 i.b4 will be a gener
This is undoubtedly the most prin
ator of constant threats throughout
cipled way. 13.1Zlb5 is just a blunt
the game. Objectively, however, the
struggle for the draw, although
position is rather unclear.
Black retains some active options
Another attractive option for Black
after13...a614.1Zlxd6+ 'l!lxd615.!lfcl
is 17... b5!? 18.i.g2 b419.IZldl i.d5
o-o 16.a3 Ag417.Afl g5.

13...0-0 14.fxe4 dxe4 15.'lllc2

The e4-pawn looks very weak, but

it is still alive and it considerably
hampers White's play. It turns out
that c2 is the only good retreat of
the queen since15.'llldl allows a cru
cial tempo for 15... 1Zlg4 16.'llld2 f5
17.i.h3 h5 when Black consolidates
Black has full compensation for the
his space advantage.
pawn, but it would be difficult to
15.d5 is also dubious because it of
break through the enemy centre.
fers a nice square to the d6-bishop
-15...Ag416.1Zld4 !le8 17.!lf2 i.e5. We see that both captures on e4 of
fer Black a lasting initiative. On the
15...!lcS 16.'llld2 'llle7 other hand, any delay would give
him time to bolster it up. I think that
A critical moment of the game. First the best practical approach would
of all, White should discard: be to immediately sacrifice the ex-

35
 Chapter 1

change - 17. l'lxf6 1/Nxf618. iilxe4 'llie 7 coordinated and he is unable to stop
19. iilxd6 1/Nxd6 20.hb71'lb8 21..ig2. the distant passer on the queenside:

From a formal standpoint, this is 26.iilcl b3 27.liJe2 '@'c2 28.'@'xc2

not even a sacrifice since White bxc2 29.liJcl a3 30.b3 a2
gets two pawns. The resulting po 31.liJxa2 l'la8 32.iilcl !fal 33.:Sfl
sition is balanced. More important .ia3 34.liJe2 l'lxfl+ 35.Wxfl liJd5
ly, it is easy to play with White who 36.b6 liJxb6 37 .if5 liJd5 38..ixe4

could just stay, hiding behind his
pawn shield.
Gagare obviously missed the im
portance of the moment and made
a trivial move which turns the tables
in Black's favour.
liJxe3+ 39.IM:? cl='iN 40.liJxcl
.ixcl 41. b4 @f8 42.b5 liJc4
43.we2 l!le7 44.wd3 liJb6 45..ic6
f5 46.h3 wd6 47.g4 f4 48.l!le4
g5 49.WfS .ie3 50.M'3 liJc4 51.b6
liJd2 52.b7 @c753 ..id5 hd4 0-1

17.l'lacl?! .ic4 18.a3

It is already late for an exchange sac 3. Hessenius - Grebenshchikov

- 18. l'lfS l'lfd8 19. l'lcfl .ib4 20. l'lxf6 Rochade-25/TT ICCF 2014
gxf6 21. l'lf2 ha2+.
1.c4 e5 2.g3 liJf6 3 .ig2 c6 4.d4

18 b5 19..ih3
.. e4 5.liJc3 d5 6.cxd5 cxd5 7 .ig5

liJbd7 8.'@'b3 .id6 9.Vi.'b5

A purely defensive move, taking g4
under control.19. l'lfS g6 20.l'lf2 iilg4
21. l'lffl 5 would be clearly better for
Black.

19...l'lc7 20.l'lf2 a5! 21.a4 b4

22.iilb5 hb5 23.a:xb5 l'lbS
24.l'lxc71/Nxc7 25.l'lf5 a4-+

White has kept the material ba

lance, but his pieces are totally un-
"
 l.c4 e5 2.g3 li.lf6 3..tg2 c6
9 0-0! 10.li.lxd5 h6 11.lilxf6+
24.gfl
li.lxf6 12 .txf6 lil'xf6 13.e3 a6
14.lil'a5 i.g4 15.h3 i.e6 16.li.le2
lil'e7 17.a3 f5 18.lil'd2 .tc4 19.0-0
lil'f7 20.gfc1
20 .. g5
This is premature due to 21.d5! with
counterplay. However, the game
is a good example of Black's plan
against passive defence. Even in an
email game White fails to hold.
21.W gae8 22.gc3 .td5 23 .tg2
h5!
The h-pawn is Black's most danger
ous resource. The break ...f5-f4 is
rarely effective. Note that ...h6-h5-
h4 should be prepared first with
...g5 as otherwise White will meet
... h5 by h4 and it will be difficult to
break through.
24 lilhS!
In some lines the king would be saf
er on h6, but Black must be con
stantly on guard for f3 or f4. For
instance, after 24...lilh7 25.f4 exf3
26.hf3 hf3 27.gxf3 h4 28.&d3,
the king is obviously on the wrong
square.
Besides, White should have played
25.f3 in all events, because it is his
only defence against the imminent
attack. Perhaps White got scared by
variations like 24... @hS 25.f3! exf3
26.hf3 h4 27.hd5 '&xd5
28.gxh4?! f4! 29.exf4 gxf4 with a
strong attack, but the tactical trick:
28.&dl! hxg3?! 29.li.lxg3!= saves
the day. Instead, 28...f4! keeps the
fire on.
37

25.hl?! h4 26.!lfcl !lg8 27.!lgl
.ic4 28.'/;l'c2
28 ...he2
Removing the last defender of g3.
The opposite-coloured bishops at
tack is now decisive.
29.'/;l'xe2 g4 30.Ml '/;l'h 7 31.'/;l'c2
gxh3 32 .ic4 !lg5 33..ib3 'l;l'h5
34.'/;l'dl '/;l'g6 35.!lcl g7 36.'/;l'e2
hxg3 37.fxg3 hg3 38 .td5
!lg4 39.!lcfl !lh8 40.'/;l'c2 .id6
41.!lxg4 fxg4
The ending is won since White is
unable to prevent the invasion of
Black's rook on the second rank:
42.'/;l'xe4 '/;l'xe4+
44.!lel !lf8 0-1
38
Chapter 1
4. Troyke - Delchev
Wunsiedel 06.05.2016
1.g3 e5 2.c4 iilf6 3..ig2 c6 4.d4
e4 5.iilc3 d5 6.cxd5 cxd5 7 .ig5
iilbd7 8.f3 .ib4 9.!lcl
An ambitious idea. White would
like to recapture on c3 by rook, but
it costs a tempo. Alternatives are
9.fxe4 and 9.iilf3.
9...0-0 10.fxe4
If White delays this exchange too
much, we could take by piece on
e4 - 10.iilh3 h6 11.hf6 iilxf6 12.0-
0 l:le8 13.fxe4 .ixc3 14.l:lxc3 .txh3
15..txh3 iilxe4.
10... dxe4 11.e3
I expected1L.ixe4 h6 12.hf6 iilxf6
13..ig2 !le8
g3
 Lc4 e5 2.g;; 'ilto :>.Jltg2 co
and suddenly White faces difficult
problems.
11...Vira5 12 .b:f6 hc3+
This intermediate move spoils
White's plans to connect the
knights. I did not like 12...ltlxf6
13.ltlge2 Virxa2 14.0-0 with compen
sation, but Black is not obliged to
take the pawn. Instead, the new 13...
ig4! assures him of a clear edge.
13.Etxc3
13.bxc3 ltlxf6 14.ltle2 is grim for
White. I could either eat the a2-
pawn or achieve the thematic ...f5
after 14 ...ie615.0-0 ltlg4 16.Vird2 f5.
13...ltlxf6 14.Vird2
Or 14.ltle2 ig4 15.0-0 '1xa2. Af
ter 14.\!d2 I decided that my play
should be rewarded and snapped
the pawn.
14 V!rxa2 15.ltle2 ltld5?
It all had been fine, but this move
is a terrible blunder. 15 ... ig4 16.0-0
he2 17.'1xe2 We6 was a healthy
pawn up and better pieces - 18.!lc7
l'lab8 19.l'lfcl ltld5.
16.lfa3 '1c4
At the last moment I saw that there
is 16...'1bl+ would lose to 17.f2. (I
only considered 17.ltlcl ltlb6). Now
the game starts again and White's
bad bishop suddenly breaks loose.
17.he4 !le8 (17...ltlf6! 18.ig2
ig4) 18..id3 '1c6 19.e4 ltlf6
20.!lc3 'l!lb6!
I was afraid to enter the endgame
after 20...ltlxe4 21.!lxc6 ltlxd2
22.!lxc8 !laxc8 23.xd2 in view of
the enemy passed pawn.
21.e5 ltld5 22.!lc5 ie6
22...ltlb4 23.0-0 ltlxd3 24.Wxd3 ie6
is roughly equal.
23.0-0 !lads 24.!lfcl a6
24...Wb4 equalized, but I wanted to
keep the queens in order to exploit
the weakened white king.
25..ie4 !ld7= 26.hd5 !lxd5
27.ltlf4
27 . !lddS ?
Following the same course of keep-
39
 Chapter 1

ing more pieces on the board, but I
lack space so I had to seek exchang
es. Correct was 27...axc5 28.axc5
!ld8 (28...'/;l'b3 29.dS) 29.'/;l'c3 h6.
After my mistake my opponent
could have impose a total domina
tion in the centre with 28.dS Ms
29.'/;l'c3. Fortunately, he preferred
the "solid":
28.'l;l'f2?! b3 29.!llc3 a5 (29...
'/;l'b4!) 30.'/;l'e3?
At last I got serious counterplay!
32.qid3 '/;l'e6 (32 ...a2!+) 33.!lc7
'/;l'g4
33...'l;l'fS 34.!lxb7 ds 35.!la7 '/;l'h3
gave more chances.
34.!lxb7 d5 (34...'/;l'xd4=) 35.qif2
1!!'f5 36.!la7 !ld7 37.!lxd7 '/;l'xd7
38.'/;l'f4 fxe5 39.dxe5 !lf8

White misses the trick 30.dS! !lxeS?

31.!lcS!. I would have to answer
30 ...a4 31.'/;l'd4 h6 32.d6.

30 a4 31.h4 f6
..

40.'/;l'e3?

White finally breaks down and lets

my queen in.

40...aS 41.e6 'i;l'd5 42. fi 'i!!'dl +

0-1 (43.'/;l'el g2+)
Chapter 2. 1.c4 e5 2.g3 c6

Main Ideas

This chapter presents an alternative The big difference is when White

repertoire with 1.c4 e5 2.g3 c6. It continue development with
is completely independent of Chap 5 .ig2. Now we could use the fact

ter 1 and formally, you could skip that our knight is not on f6 and it
it (and vice versa!). However, you cannot be pinned by .ig5. A logical
would improve your understanding answer is:
if you studied both. It is instructive 5....ib4!?
to observe the impact of the differ
ent move order on the plans in posi
tions with an identical pawn struc
ture. To facilitate comparisons, I
will consider the same three major
plans I focused on in Chapter 1:

6.cxd5 cxd5 7.li:lh3 h6 and White

should switch to the plan with the
break-through f2-f3.
7...li:Jf6 is also possible - 8.0-0 0-0
9..ig5 bc3 10.bxc3 li:lbd711.f3 h6

1. White attacks the d5-pawn.

3.d4 e4 4.li:lc3 d5 5.cxd5 cxd5

6.'l;l'b3. The same method of Chap
ter 1 is effective here: 6... li:lc6!
7.Wxd5 Wxd5 8.li:lxd5 li:lxd4 and
Black achieves comfortable equal
ity.

41
 Chapter 2

12.b:f6 12lxf6 13.fxe4 12lxe4 14.11!1d3
3 with the better pawn struc
ture, Alvarado Diaz-Ramiro Oveje
ro, Vecindario 2013.
Pros and cons: We can prevent
the pin i.g5 with ... h6, but that in
volves ...i.b4, beginning the battle
for e4. Play is more positional than
in Chapter 1 and Black does not
need to sacrifice a pawn. The choice
is a matter of taste.
2. White attacks the e4-pawn.
3.d4 e4 4.12lc3 d5 5.12lh3 h6 (5...
12lf6!? is also possible) 6.cxd5 cxd5
7.i.g2 12lf6 8.0-0 ib4! 9.f3 0-0! is a
critical position which could arise
via several move orders. I analyse
it in Game 5 Nailer-Delchev, Ordu
2016.
3. White does not play d4.
3.12l:f3 e4 4.12ld4 1il'b6!
It may seem that 4...d5 is strong
er than in Chapter 1. Indeed, after
5.d3, we could already take 5...exd3
(with i.g2 12lf6 inserted, White had
the unpleasant intermezzo 7.cxd5!).
Still, 6.1il'xd3 dxc4 7.1i!lxc4 is pleas
ant for White due to his pawn ma
jority in the centre. So we adopt
the same tactic of repelling the d4-
knight from its active stand. Only
5.12lb3 is of independent signifi
cance when 5...a5 is not effective in
view of 6.d3 a4 7.12l3d2 exd3 8.i.g2
with an initiative.
5... 12lf6

6.d3 (6.i.g2 a5 - see Chapter 1, line

B, and 6.12lc3 a5 - Chapter 3, line
Al.) 6 12lg4! 7.e3

7.d4 d5 8.cxd5 cxd5 9.12lc3 leads

to a familiar pawn structure:
The point is to take on e4 by piece:
10.fxe4 i.xc3 ll.bxc3 3! 12.3
lilxe4oo. Next, we connect the
knights with ... 12lb8-d7-f6 and im
pose a light-square blockade on the
centre.

Pros and cons: The play is identi

cal with Chapter 1.

4?
 l.c4 e5 2.g3 c6
Since White will attack e4, we fore
stall it with 9 ....ib4 10..ig2 0-0
11.0-0 ixc3 12.bxc3 iild7oo.
7 d5 8.cxd5 (8..ig2 iile5) 8
... ...
cxd5 9.11Jc3 .ib4!? 10.ig2 0-0!
The best way to fight for the ini
tiative. Once again we can sacri
fice the e4-pawn and obtain last
ing pressure in return. I have an
alysed deeply the consequences.
It would be unnecessary to repeat
here the details from the Step by
Step chapter so I will only note that
after ll.dxe4 dxe4 12.ixe4 /1Jf6
13.ig2 .ig4 14.'liic2 'liia6, the weak
light squares cause White constant
trouble although a computer should
be able to hold on.
Pros and cons: The play may take
original turn after 5.iilb3 iilf6 6.d3
lilg4!, but it depends only on White
since he could also transpose to
Chapter 1 with 6.tg2. On the other
hand, Black also has the additional
option 4...d5 5.d3 exd3 which is not
too ambitiuos, but offers easy devel
opment.
Conclusion
2 ...c6 is worth considering, espe
cially if you want to avoid the pin
from g5. The trade-off is that with
out a dark-squared bishop (which
should go to b4), Black has more
modest attacking resources.
43
Chapter 2. 1.c4 e5 2.g3 c6
Step by Step
1.c4 e5 2.g3 c6
A. 3.li:lf3; B. 3.d4
3.li:lc3 d5 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.d4 e4 is
covered in Line B. and 3...li:lf6 is
considered in Chapter 3.
3.tg2 d5 should transpose to line B
(3 ...li:lf6 is the subject of Chapter 1).
I did not face any problems after
4.cxd5 cxd5 5.d4e46.f3 tb4+ 7.td2
hd2+ 8.'l!!lxd2 exf3 (8 .. .f5!? and 8 ...
li:lf6 are more tangled) 9.exf3 li:le7
10.li:le2 0-0 ll.li:lbc3 li:lbc6 12.0-0
te6 13.!ladl li:lf5 14.g4 li:lh4 15.li:lf4
!le8 16.thl li:lg6 17.li:lce2 draw, Vau
lin-Delchev, Zadar 1998.
44
A. 3.li:if3 e4 4.li:id4 'l;l'b6! ?
We should not try to transpose to
Chapter 1 or 3 with 4... li:lf6, hoping
to see 5.tg2 or 5.li:lc3, since White
has a better move order: 5.d3 when
5...exd3 6.'l;l'xd3 d5 7.tg2 dxc4
8. 'l;l'xc4 is pleasant for White due
to his pawn majority in the centre
- 8... li:lbd7 9.0-0 li:lb6 10.Wd3 tc5
11.!ldl 0-0 12.li:lc3 h6 13.e4.
4 ... d5 is a popular move, but it of
fers White some initiative. For in
stance:
5.d3 poses a problem - 5 ...li:lf6
6.tg2 throws us out of the reper
toire from Chapter 1. Besides, I do
not like this position anyway. Re
mains:
5 ...tc5 6.li:lb3
6.dxe4 dxe4 7.te3 li:lf6 8.li:lc3
Wfe7 (8 ... 0-0 9.li:lxc6) 9.h3 0-0
is roughly equal - 10.Wfc2 !ld8
11.!ldl lila6 12.tg2 '/!!le5 13.lilb3
!lxdl+ 14.li:lxdl he3 15.li:lxe3
td7 16.0-0 c5 17.li:ld2 tc6=.
6...tM+ 7.td2 hd2+ 8.'l!!lxd2 exd3
9.Wxd3 dxc4 10.'1ilxc4 li:lf6 n.tg2
0-0 12.0-0
 l.C4 eb .g;; CO

I analyse this position in detail in

the annotations to Game 5 Anand
dams, Shamkir 2015. In my opin
ion, best practical chances offers
the pawn sacrifice 9... 0-0!?.

5.ltlb3

5.e3 ltlf6 6.i.g2 d5 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.d3

(8.0-0 ig4 - see Chapter 1, line B)
I prefer to avoid such positions with
8... ltlc6 9.dxe4 dxe4 10.ltlc3 ib4 is
a mobile pawn centre for the enemy.
covered in Chapter 3, line A2.
Note that lately Black is also
5.ltlc2 d5 should also transpose to
experiencing problems after 4...d5
the corresponding chapters.
5.cxd5 '1d5 6.ltlc2
6.e3 ltlf6 7.i.g2 /i,1e5 8.f4 exf3
5 ltlf6
(8 ...We7!? 9.ltlc3 g6 10.'1c2
...

tg7 11.ltlxe4 ltlxe4 12.'1xe4

The method from Chapter 1, 5 ...a5,
'1xe4 13.he4 0-0 14. M2 e8:i:)
is not effective here in view of 6.d3
9.ltlxf3 '1h5 10.d4 i.b4+ ll.td2
a4 7.ltl3d2 exd3 8.i.g2 with an ini
ltla6=.
tiative.
6... ltlf6 7.ltlc3! (7.tg2 is mentioned
on page 18.) 7...Wh5
6.d3
Perhaps 7...'1e5! 8.tg2 te7 will
replace 7...'1h5 in future.
Practice has only seen 6.i.g2 a5 -
8.ltle3
see Chapter 1, line B, and 6.ltlc3
8.h3 prevents ...i.h3, but weak-
a5 - see Chapter 3, line Al. The
ens g3. After 8 ...'1g6 9.i.g2 id6
text, however, is the sternest test of
10.ltle3 0-0 ll.Wc2 e8, the
Black's plan. It demands from Black
threat ...hg3 will be a constant
ingenious play:
concern for White.
8 ...tc5 9.'1c2

45
 Chapter 2
6... ii:lg4!
Or 6 ... exd3 7.xd3 d5 8.ig2.
7.e3
7.d4 d5 8.cxd5 cxd5 9.ii:lc3 trans
poses to a position which has oc
curred in a few games via a differ
ent move order.
I analysed this pawn structure
in the previous chapter. White's
most dangerous plan is based on f3
when we commonly trade our dark
squared bishop for the c3-knight
and hold e4. The placement of the
king's knight on b3 does not change
the evaluation:
a) 9....ib4 10 ..ig2 0-0 11.0-0 hc3
12.bxc3 ii:ld7
The idea of this move is to meet
13.f3 ii:lgf6 14.ig5 by 14...h6. Al
ternatively, 14.fxe4 ii:lxe4 15.c4
dxc4 is balanced. More aspir
ing is to keep the blockade on
e4 with 15 ... l;e8!? 16.cxdS g6
17.d3 ii:ldf6.
If White postpones the break in
the centre, we can transfer the
knight to e6:
13.a4 c6 14.aS !;e8 15.if4 h6
16.c2 iilf8=.
46
b) 9...ie6?! may be objectively a de
cent option, but I would not recom
mend to enter OTB the position af
ter 10.f3 iilf6 11.fxe4 iilxe4 12.ig2
i.b4 13.0-0 (13.i.d2 iilxd2 14.xd2
iild715.0-0 0-0 16.g5hc3 17.bxc3
l;ac8 18.i;acl f5+) 13 ... iilxc3 14.bxc3
hc3 15.i;bl iild7 16.ia3 a6 17.e4!
17.i.c5 a4 (threatening ... iilxc5)
18.id6 a6 is a draw.
17... dxe4 18.d5 xa3 19.dxe6 fxe6
Black is holding here, but only if he
calculates like a computer.
7. .d5 8.cxd5 (8.ig2 iile5) 8...
.
cxd5 9.iilc3
9.i.g2 offers Black more chances
to develop the initiative - 9 ... iilc6
10.iilc3
10.dxe4 dxe4 11.he4 iilf6 12.i.g2
i.g4 13.f3 ie6 14.0-0oo is a worse
version of the main line.
10 ...i.e6 11.0-0 f5 12.dxe4 dxe4
13.iild5 d8 14.iilf4 ic4 15.he4
fxe4 16.xg4 Ml 17.@xfl d7
18.iile6 iild8 19.iilbd4iilxe6 20.iilxe6
!;c8 whereas White can force a draw
with 21.xe4 dl+ 22.@g2 fuel
23.fucl 'i!\lxcl 24.iilxg7+ @f7 25.iile6
i.e7 26.fS+ @e8 27.iilg7+ @d8
28.iile6+ @e8.
 l.c4 e5 2.g3 c6

10 .ig2

The correspondence game Putt

Lovelock, New Zealand 2003,
saw 10 ..id2 'il'f6 ll.f4 exf3 12.lilxd5
hd2+ 13.'il'xd2 f2+ (13 ...'il'd6!?
14.e4 .ie6=) 14.@e2 'il'd6 15.'il'c3
15.e4 gives Black time to castle
- 15... 0-0 16.h3 lile5 17.d4 lilg6
18.@xf2 f5t.
9...tb4 !?

The email game Portych-Cardenas

Huaman, ICCF 2011, saw 9...'il'f6
10.'il'c2
The queen would be vulnera
ble on d2 as seen from the line
10.'il'd2 'il'f3 lU'lgl lilc6 12.lilxd5
(12.h3 lilge5 13.lilxd5 exd3
14.lilc7+ @d8 15.lilxa8 .ib4) 12 ...
Now instead of15 ... 0-0? 16.lilc7,
exd3 13..ig2 lilge5 14.@fl th3
Black seizes the initiative with:
15.lilc7+ @d8 16.txh3 @xc7t.
15...lila6! 16.'il'xg7 'il'xd5 17.'il'xhS+
10 ...'il'f3 11.!lgl exd3
@e7 18.e4 'il'h5 19.'il'g7 lilf6+
ll ...tb4 12.h3 exd3 13.hd3
20.@xf2 .ig4 21.e5 lile8 22.'il'hS !ld8
lile5 14 ..id2 lilxd3+ 15.'il'xd3
and White must find only moves.
hc3 16.hc3 0-0 is also some
what better for White although 10 ... 0-0
his winning chances in an end
game would be very slim due to Only 10 ... lilf6 11.0-0 0-0 has been
the opposite-coloured bishop, tried so far in two old correspon
e.g. 17.!ldl !ld8 18.lild4 'il'e4. dence games. White has the more
12.hd3 lilc6 13.lild4 lilxd4 14.exd4 active pieces after 12.dxe4 hc3
.ib4 15.'il'e2+ 'il'xe2+ when instead 13.bxc3 dxe4 14.'il'c2 !le8 15.c4.
of 16.he2 lilf6 17.f3 te6 18.@f2
a6 19.lila4 lild7 20 ..ie3 0-0 21.lilc5 11.dxe4
lilxc5 22.dxc5 d4 23.hd4 !lfe8
24.c6 bxc6 25.!lgdl MS 26.a3 c5 After 11.0-0, the original queen lift
27..ic3 c4 28.!lacl draw, White 'il'd8-b6-h6 allows us to put pres
would retain a slight pull in the end sure on the enemy king - ll ...'il'h6
game with 16.@xe2! te6 17.f3 lilf6 12.h3 lilf6 13.dxe4 hc3 14.bxc3
18.lilb5. dxe4 15.h4oo.

47
 Chapter 2

ll.td2 l'ld8 12.dxe4 dxe4 13.txe4 I have analysed two possible ap

lilf6 14.tg2 tg4 15.c2 a6 is simi proaches from here:
lar to the main line.

Al. 14.:f3 .ie6 15.0-0 lilc6

Decent alternatives are:

15...tc4 16.l'lf2 lilc6 17.lila4 l'lad8
18.c2 b5 19.lilc3 a6 20.a3 te7
21.tfl txfl 22.l'lxfl l'ld3 23.l'ldl l'lfd8
24.l'lxd3 l'lxd3.

15 ... l'ldS 16.e2 lilc6 17.lila4 a6

Black has full compensation for 18.xa6 bxa6.
the pawn. An illustrative line is:
16.h3 te6 17.a3 lilc6! 18.axb4 lilxb4 16.lila4 'fil>5 17.lild4 lilxd4
19.bl d3 20.lild4 E1xd4 21.exd4 18.exd4 l'lad8 19.a3 te7 20.l'lel
lilc2+ 22.Wdl tb3 23.cl xd4oo. lild5 21.lilc3 'fil>6
It is undoubtedly easier to play this
position wit Black.

11 dxe4 12.he4 lilf6 13.tg2

tg4

Black's active pieces fully compen

sate the missing pawn. The point
of his counterplay are the weak
light squares d3 and c4, and split
queenside pawns (after ...txc3).
The further play is not forced so
Black is threatening 22 ... lilf4 and
I will try to illustrate several key
22 ...tf6. 22.lilxd5 l'lxd5 is not too
points.
helpful. Perhaps White should seek
a drawwith 22.lila4, but Black could
deviate from repetition by 22 ...c6.

A2. 14.Vifc2 Vifa6 15 .id2

15.f3 te6 16.lild4 (16.f2 lilc6 is

similar to Al.) 16 ...tc4 17.tfl l'lc8
18.f2 txf1 19.l'lxfl lilc6 20.l'ldl
lild5 21.lilde2 lilxc3 22.bxc3 tc5

L[Q
 1.c4 eS 2.g3 c6
Black has a long-term compensa
tion due to his better pawn struc
ture. He does not need to rush since
the weak a- and c-pawns will not
run away. White can push e4, a4,
l'lbl, but that's all. For his part, Black
can double his rooks on the d-file or
place them on d8 and c8:
a) 23.l'lbl Ill es 24.lild4 h6
Alternatively:
24 ... l'ld8 2S.'/:!.1e2 lilc4 26.l!lg2
l'lac8=.
24 ...lilc4 2S.e4 l'ld8 26.l!lg2 l'ld7.
2S.'/:!.1e2 lilc4 26.e4 l'lc7=.
b) 23.a4 Ill es 24.l!lg2 l'ld8 2S.e4
l'lxdl 26.Wxdl li:ld3 (26 ...'/:!.1c4=)
27.ta3 ha3 28.l'lxa3 l'ld8 29.li:ld4
li:leS.
15... lilbd7 16.a3 hc3 17.hc3
l'lac8 18.lild4 lilc5 19.h3 "15
20.Hl f;\1d6 21.tc4 tg6 22.We2
li:lfe4 23.tb4 1"fe8oo
White is unable to keep the extra
pawn - 24.g4 li:lxf2 or 24.0-0 lilxg3.
B. 3.d4 e4 4.lilc3
After 4.dS, we should not linger
too much with ...cxdS since we can
miss the moment as in the game
Hellbing-Dutra Neto, IECG email
2004: 4...b4+ 5.d2 We7 6.li:lc3
li:lf6 7.li:lh3 0-0 8.tg2 d6?! (correct
was 8 ...cxdS! 9.cxdS d6 10.li:lxe4
3 ll.lilxf6+ '/:!.1xf6 12.3 '/:!.1xb2
13.hb4 '/:!.1xb4+ 14.Wd2 '/:!.1xd2+
1S. l!lxd2 iila6 16.e4 li:lc5 17.l'lhel l'lfe8
draw, Lukesova-Vegjeleki, ICCF
email 2010) 9.li:lxe4 3 10.li:lxf6+
'/:!.1xf6 11.3 Wxb2 12.l'lcl cxdS
13.l'lc2! (this intermezzo punishes
Black's tactic) 13 ...hd2+ 14.'/:!.1xd2oi;.
Perhaps the most challenging is:
4 ... cxdS S.cxdS lilf6 6.tg2
6.li:lc3 tb4 7.td2 0-0= 8.tg2
l'le8 9.li:lh3 d6 10.0-0 tfS 11.lilf4
gS 12.li:lh3 h6+, Schrancz-Schus
ter, LSS email 2009.
6 ...tb4+ 7.d2 '/:!.1e7 8.a3 hd2+
9.li:lxd2 0-0
10.d6 '/:!.1e5 11.li:lc4 '/:!.ibS 12.l'lcl b6oo.
4.lilh3 dS S.li:lc3 h6! transposes to
5.li:lh3.
49
 Chapter 2
4 ..d5
. may be playable, but Black lacks
Bl. 5.cxd5; B2. 5.i.g2; B3. 5.ltlh3,
but have in mind that these lines of
ten interweave.
Bl. 5.cxd5 cxd5 6.Wb3
In all other lines the exchange on
d5 might prove premature as it of
fers Black the extra option of ... ltlc6.
However, I'm not sure Black should
go for it as the knight move delays
the development of the kingside:
For instance:
6.ltlh3 ltlc6?!
Line B3 deals with 6 ... h6!? and
6 ...i.b4!?.
7.i.g2 i.b4
7... h6 8.0-0 ltlf6 9.f3 exf3 10.exf3
i.e7 1Li.e3 0-0 12.ltlf4, Czebe
Farago, Hungary 2006,
an active plan. He should trans
fer his bishop to b6 via e7-d6-c7,
e.g. 12 ...tfs 13.E1cl i.d6! .
8.0-0 ltlge7 9.ltlf4 0-0 10.f3 f5
1L'!Wb3 hc3 12.1Wxc3 \Wd6 13.\Wc5
\Wxc5 14.dxc5 g5 15.ltlh5 h6 16.b3;!;
Markowski-Krasenkow, Warsaw
2010.
6...ltlc6! 7.V!!'xd5 Wxd5 8.ltlxd5
ltlxd4 9.ltlc7+
9.i.g5 ltlc2+ 10.lild2 ltlxal 1Lltlc7+
@d7 12.ltlxa8 h6 13.i.f4 i.b4+
14.lilcl ltlf6 15.i.g2 lile7 16.ltlc7 i.d7
17.@bl
Now 17... E1c8 keeps the material
balance due to the idea ...i.d6, e.g.
18.i.h3 g5 19.i.e5 g4t.
17 ... ltlc2 is also interesting -
18.@xc2 E1c8 19.lilbl h5 20.i.eS
hc7 2Lhf6+ lilxf6 22.he4 i.b6
23.hb7 E1c4. Black is two pawns
behind, but his raging bishops will
easily regain them.
9 @dS 10.lilxaS lilc2+ 11.lildl
lilxal
The stem game De Bari-Penafiel
Lopez, ICCF 2009, continued
 l.c4 e5 2.g3 c6
12.tf4 te6 13.b3 li:lxb3 14.axb3
hb3+ 15.@cl ta3+ 16.@bl li:le7
17.e3 g5 18.hg5 d7 19.il.h3+
te6 20.he6+ fxe6 21.he7 he7
22.li:le2 E1xa8 and White was happy
to draw this endgame.
B2. 5.tg2 .ib4!?
5 ...li:lf6 transposes to Chapter 1. The
text is the only reasonable way to rip
dividends from 2... c6.
6.f"3
6.td2 hc3 7.bxc3 li:lf6! 8.cxd5 cxd5
9.li:lh3 0-0
10.f3
Black can now reach a better ver-
sion of line B3 after 10...h6 since
White has spent a tempo on the
useless td2. The gameA.Larsen
Konstantinov, ICCF 2013, went
further 11.0-0 E1e8 12.11\'cl lilbd7
13.hh6?! gxh6 14.1!\'xh6 lilf8
15.1!\'g5+ (15.fxe4 li:lxe4) 15...lilg6
16.lilf4 exf3 17.lilxg6 lilh7+.
Besides, he could discard ...h6
at all and aspire to the advan
tage with:
10 ... E1e8 11.0-0 e3!? 12.tel lilc6 (or
12 ...h5!?). The e3-pawn splits the
board, hindering White's commu
nication.
6.cxd5 cxd5 branches to:
a) 7.lilh3 li:lf6 (7...h6 is line B3)
8.0-0 0-0 9.tg5 hc3 10.bxc3 li:lbd7
11.f3 h6
12.hf6
12.M4 lilb6 13.lilf2 tf5 14.1!\'b3
E1e8 secures Black's control of
the light squares. Then 15.a4
lilc4 16.Wxb7 puts him in total
command after 16 ... E1e7 17.1!\'b4
a5 18.1!\'b5 exf3 19.exf3 E1c8.
12 ...lilxf6 13.fxe4 lilxe4 14.1!\'d3
hh3 with the better pawn struc
ture, Alvarado Diaz-Ramiro Oveje-
ro, Vecindario 2013.
b) 7.f3 li:lf6 8 ..ig5 0-0 9.fxe4 dxe4
10.e3
51
 Chapter 2

Black has enough compensation line Cl, but this move is nnneces
following 10.ixe4 !le8 sary here.

8.fxe4 dxe4 9.lilh3

9.ixe4 !le8 10.ig2 lilbd7 11.lilf3 h6

leads to an interesting position with
mutual chances. For example:

ll.ig2 \Wa5 12.lilf3 ixc3+

13.bxc3 \Wxc3+ 14.id2 \Wd3
15.if4 \Wc3+ 16.id2 \Wd3 17.if4
\Wc3+ 18.id2 draw, Kerr-Sch
ramm, ICCF 2010.
10 ...h6 ll.i:xf6 1Wxf6 12.lilge2 ig4c:o,
B.Damljanovic-Komarov, Le Port
12.icl lile4 13.\Wb3 \Wa5 14.id2
Marly 2009.
lilxd2 15.lilxd2 lilf6 - the pressure
6... lilf6 7.3.gS along the e-file promises Black a
lasting initiative.
Perhaps it was time to include 9.\Wb3 a5 10.a3 ie7 11.!ldl lilg4
7.cxd5 cxd5 because after the text, 12.ixe7 \Wxe7 13.lilxe4 a4 14.Wc3 f5
Black could exchange on f3 and is double-edged.
grab the c4-pawn with unclear con
sequences. 9 ...lilbd7

9 ...h6 10.M6 Wxf6 n.lilf2 !ldS

12.e3 Wg5 13.Wcl f5 also deserves
attention.

10.0-0 hc3 11.bxc3 h6 12.3.xf6

White's bishop does not have good

prospects after 12.3.cl lilb6.

12 ... lilxf6 13.lilf2 !le8oo

7... 0-0!?
Black has a target on c4. He could
7... lilbd7 transposes to Chapter 1/ attack it with ...We6, ...b6, ...h6.

52
 l.c4 e!J .g0 cb
B3. 5.lilh3 h6
This move secures the d5-pawn, but
it slows down development. More
challenging is:
5 ...lilf6!? 6.cxd5 cxd5 7.tg5 tb4
8.txf6
Alternatively:
8.Wa4+ lilc6 9.e3 h6 10.txf6
Wxf6 11.lilf4 Wd6 12.Wb3 lile7
13.tb5+ liifS 14.h4 g6=;
8.2'1cl lilbd7 9.e3 h6 10.txf6
ixc3+ 11.2'1xc3 lilxf6 12.lilf4 0-0=;
8.tg2 ixc3+ 9.bxc3 lilbd7 10.f3
exf3 11.txf3 h6 12.txf6 lilxf6
13.lilf4 g5oo, Mercadal Benejam
Joppich, ICCF 2015.
8 ...Wxf6 9.lilf4 Wd6
Black has saved the d5-pawn and
should gradually level the game:
10.Wb3 te6 11.Ecl 0-0 12.e3 lilc6
13.a3 ixc3+ 14.2'1xc3 2'1fc8 15.te2
(15.lilxe6 Wxe6) 15...lila5 16.b4
Wxb4 17.axb4 2'1xc3 18.bxc3 lilc4
19.ixc4 dxc4 20.lilxe6 fxe6 21.liie2
a5=.
5 ...tb4!? 6.ig2 lilf6 transposes to
Chapter 1, Line C, but White has
also:
6.Wa4
6.b3 a5 is similar, only the
b-pawn is not hanging. Black
was fine after 7.cxd5 cxd5 8 .. a3
(8.tg5!? f6) 8...ixc3+ 9.bxc3 a4
10.b5+ lilc6, Klekowski-Nava
ra, Hockenheim 2015. The d5-
pawn could be defended by ...2'1a5.
6...a5 7.cxd5 b5 8.b3 cxd5,
when 9.e3 could be met by the sharp
9 ...lilf6 10.ixb5+ td7 11.ixd7+
xd7 with compensation for the
pawn - White cannot castle safely
due to the weak h3-square.
6.cxd.5 cxd5 7.tg2
7.lilf4 lilf6 8.b3 (8.tg2 g5!?) is an
other version of the pawn sac 8 ...
lilc6! with an initiative - 9.lilfxd5
lilxd5 10.xd5 xd5 11.lilxd5 lilxd4
12.lilc7+ @as 13.M4 lilc2+ 14.liid2
lilxal 15.lilxaS ie6+, Tikkanen
Grandelius, Malmoe 2013.
7... lilf6 8.0-0 tb4! 9.f3
53
 Chapter 2

metrical pawn structure after 9 ...

exf3 10.exf3 which might be bor
ing to defend. Besides, the com
puter claims that 9 ...exf3 is a tacti
cal mistake in view of 10.!lxf3! 0-0?
ll.!lxf6! or 10 ... hc3 ll.!le3+! e6
12.bxc3 0-0 13.iilf4 when 13 ...MS
14.!leS and 13 ...'i!ld7 14.iilxe6 are
slightly better for White.
After the text Black holds the crit
9 ... 0-0! ical square e4 and has full-fledged
play. See Game 6 Nailer-Delchev,
It is always better to avoid the sym- Ordu 2016.

54
Chapter 2. 1.c4 e5 2.g3 c6
Annotated Games
5. Anand (2791) - Adams (2745)
Shamkir 24.04.2015
1.c4 e5 2.g3 c6 3.iilf3 e4 4.iild4
d5 5.cxd5 "xd5 6.iilc2 iilf6 7.iilc3
"h5 (7... "e5!) 8.iile3 ic5 9."c2
9 ...he3
This move saves the e4-pawn, but
Black remains without an active
plan. Instead I recommend:
9 ... 0-0!? 10.iilxe4 iilxe4 ll.xe4
ie6 12.ig2 iila6 13.if3 "h3
Let's ponderoverthis position. White
cannot castle short since 14.ig2 "h5
15.0-0 would drop the e2-pawn.
Trading queens by 14.Wh4?! is
always dubious since White's
queenside will be left to the mer
cy of Black's overwhelming forc
es. That reduces his options down
to long castling, but then the extra
pawn will be of no significance since
the kings will be on stake:
14.b3 !lfe8 (threatening ...hb3)
15. Wf4 !lad8 16.ib2 f6 17.ic3
17.0-0-0 defines White's castling
position too early - 17... iilb4
18. @bl a5oo.
17 ...id6 18.We4 (18.fil4 Wxh4
19.gxh4gg) Now simplest is:
18 ...id5 19."h4 Wxh4 20.hd5+
cxd5 21.gxh4 ic5 22.d4 ib4
23.hb4 iilxb4 24.h5 !ld7 25.h6 g6
and Black regains the pawn with
... !le8-e4-h4xh6.
More provocative is 18...li:lc5 19.Wc2
li:la6 when 20.0-0-0 li:lb4 21.hb4
hb4 22.d4 a5 23.@bl @h8 24.!ld3
!lcSgg keeps the battle on.
10.fxe3
In a later game Kovalenko chose
10.dxe3 whereas Black failed to find
an adequate set-up:
55
 Chapter 2
10 ...Ms
Perhaps it is better to keep the
queen in the centre, e.g. 10 ...We5
11.b3 0-0 12.ib2 .if5 13.ig2 lila6
14.!ldl lilb4 15.Wcl We7 16.0-0
!lfd8
As long as the g2-bishop is out of
play, Black is safe.
1Lig2 Wg6? (11 ... lila6 12.h3 0-0
13.a3 lilc7 14.b3 lilcd5 15.ib2
Wg6 16.0-0 !lfe8) 12.b3 (12.Wb3
b6 13.Wa3) 12 ...lilbd7 13.ia3 c5
14.!ldl, Kovalenko-Petursson, Ber
lin 2015.
10 ...Wes n.ig2 MS 12.0-0 0-0
13.b3
In Littke-Kolek, ICCF 2011, White
shifted the focus to the queenside
with 13.b4!? lilbd7 14.ib2 We6 15.b5
15.!lxf5 Wxf5 16.lilxe4 is also
possible, but the pawn on b4
could give Black a lever for
counterplay.
15 ... !lacS 16.Wb3 !lfd8 17.!lacl lilc5
18.Wxe6 ixe6 19.!lc2 id7 20.bxc6
ixc6 21.lilbl ia4 22.!lccl lilfd7
23.id4 b6 24.lilc3 ic6 25.!lc2 with
tangible pressure.
13... lilbd7 14.ib2 e6
15.!lxf5! xf5 16.lilxe4
Anand demonstrates one of White's
main ideas in this line ofthe English
- a kingside attack exploiting the
open f-file. The computers ''believe"
that the game is roughly even, but
this impression is rather deceiving.
In fact, we have a typical example
of modem top-level approach to the
opening. White does not risk any
thing as he does not have any weak
nesses while Black must defend ac
curately. Even strongest players like
Adams often fail to hold on in such
fluid positions without clear refer
ence points. Black's difficulties en
sue from the lack of concrete vari
ations. For instance, he must now
decide where to put the queen. The
natural 16... We6 17.lilxf6+ lilxf6
18.!lfl lild5 (preventing !lf4) 19.ie4
Wh6 20.Wc4 a5 21.a3 !lae8 22.id3
!le6 does not solve his problems as
White preserves many attacking re
sources, like 23.!lf5;!; threatening
h4, !lg5 or Wg4, !lh5. Adams takes
the brave decision to allow doubled
pawns.
16 ...Wg6 17.!ltl !lfe8 18.i.xf6
lilxf6 19.lilxf6+ gxf6 20.e4 !lad8
 l.c4 e5 2.g3 c6

21.!lf4 mis 22.d3 l!l'e5 23."1.3 There is no perpetual check so 34 ...

g7 24.g2 l!lg8 is the only move. In this line
White wins the h-pawn without
having to trade any piece.
The bottom line is that Black's de
fence is not trivial at all. Adams' de
cision might be the right approach,
but he shaped it wrongly.

25.!lf5 '1!1d4 26.!lxh5 'll'e3

26 ...!le5 deserved attention, and

24...h5 only after 27.M5, 27... '1!1e3. The
point is that the f-file is plugged
This move looks like a blunder, but by the f5-bishop and 28.!lh4 !lh8
things are not that simple. Appar 29.!lf4?? would lose to 29 ...!lc5
ently, Adams thought that passive 30.'ll'b2 !lcl. Thus Black would have
waiting would not be safe. After traded rooks with excellent chances
the obvious 24...'ll'd4 25.!lg4+ h8 to draw. It seems that Adams want
26.'ll'cl !lg8 27.!lh4, Black begins ed to preserve more tension and
to experience difficulties in finding was actually playing for a win!
good moves. For instance, 27... a5
28.fS !lg7 29.'ll'd2 a4 simply los 27.!lh4 !le5 28.!lf4 !lc5 29.M>2
es a pawn to 30.bxa4 'll'xa4 31.'ll'b2 !ld6 30.!lfl
'll'd4 32.'ll'xb7.
Let's analyse another stand: 27...c5
28.fS !lg7. Now 29.3 b6 30.'ll'h6
does not win in view of 30 ...'ll'al
31.l!lg2 'll'b2, but White has a cun
ning idea - to put his queen behind
the rook, e.g. 29.!lh5! b6 30.l!lfl !le8
31.'ll'f4 11\'al+ 32.l!lf2 'll'd4+ 33.l!lf3
111'al 34.11\'h4.

30 ... a5

The game is balanced, e.g. 30 ...'1!1d4

31.'1!1bl '1!1c3 32.g4.

31. b5 32.h4 !ldS?

This is Black's only mistake in the

game. Perhaps he was planning
57
 Chapter 2

... !ld8-a8 followed up by ... a4, but

this idea misses a tactical hit. 32 ...
b4 was more precise. It would have
fixed a possible target for Black's
rooks on a2.

33.a3 b4 34.axb4 axb4

10.fxe4 was more principled. Then

10....ltxc3 ll.bxc3 .ixh3! (11... dxe4?!
released the central blockade in
Wiedenkeller-Carlsson, Sweden
2014 - 12.c4 b6 13.d5) 12 ..ixh3
li:lxe4 13.'ll\'d3 is the critical test of
this line.

35 .ie6!

White succeeds in transferring his

passive bishop to c4 and the game
is suddenly over.

35 !lc3 36 .ic4 !la8 37.!lf5 !la7

38.!lf3 'l;lc5 39.'ll\'d2 'll\'d6 40.'ll\'e3

!la5 41.!lf2 !lc2 42.g4 'll\'d7
This position is difficult to play with
43.'1ll'g3 !lc5 44.g5 fxg5 45.!lxf7+
both sides as White has the bishop
'll\'xf7 46..ixf? xf7 47.'1ll'f3 + g7
pair advantage, but his pawn struc
48.h5 !la5 49.!2 !lb2 50.h6+
ture is compromised. Black can de
g6 51.h7 1-0
velop his knight on c6, followed up
by ... b6, but I prefer to treat the po
sition a la Nimzowitsch, e.g. 13 ...
li:ld7 14.c4 !le8 15.!lbl dxc4 16.'ll\'xc4
6. Nailer - Delchev
li:ldf6= with a blockade of the enemy
Ordu 1 7.04.2016
pawn centre.

1.c4 e5 2.g3 c6 3.d4 e4 4.li:lc3 d5 10 ...exf3 ll.!txf3?!

5 .ig2 li:lf6 6.cxd5 cxd5 7.li:lh3

h6 8.0-0 .ib4 9.f3 0-0! 11.exf3 was roughly equal - 11 ... li:lc6
12.li:ld3 .ia5 13..ie3 !le8 14..if2 f5.
(see next diagram)
10.li:lf2?! ll...li:lc6 12.e3?
 1.c4 e5 2.g3 c6
A horrible positional mistake which
leaves the cl-bishop complete
ly useless. 12.if4, having in mind
g3-g4-g5, was a must.
12 ...MS 13.lild3 hc3 14.bxc3
.ie4
A triumph of my light-squared
strategy.
15.lilc5 b:f'3 16.Wfxf3 b6 17.lild3
lila5 18.lile5 !k8 19.h3 l'le8
20.ib4 lilc4 21.lilxc4 l'lxc4
22.l'lael Wfd7 23.Wff5 Wfe6 24.g4
lile4 0-1
The material is still even, but the
computer evaluates the final posi
tion at -3.60 due to the threat 25...
a5!
59
Chapter 3. 1.c4 e5 2.ttJc3 ttJf6 3.g3 c6

Main Ideas

1.c4 e5 2.11lc3 11lf6 3.g3 c6 2. White attacks the e4-pawn.

4.d4 e4 5.tg5 cuts our choice down

to 5...tb4 in view of 5... d5? 6.cxd5
cxd5 7.hf6.
After 6.1!!fb3 11la6 7.tg2 h6 8.hf6
1!!fxf6 9.e3 hc3+ 10.1!!fxc3 d5 11.cxd5
cxd5,

The move 11lc3 has a stronger influ

ence on the centre than tg2, but it
throws White off his repertoire with
2.g3. As I explained in Chapter 1, in
many lines the knight is not well
placed on c3. The stats show that
in the following sequence of moves:
l.c4 e5 2.g3 11lf6, 3.11lc3 is ten times Black does not have serious prob
(!) less frequent than 3.tg2. I will lems, but he lacks any target.
not elaborate further on the best I propose to adopt the more en
way of exploiting White's knight . terprising scheme with an isolated
early sortie since that is often a mat pawn: 4 exd4 5.1!!fxd4 d5.
..

ter of taste or fashion. Instead let's

see how it compares to the previous
two chapters if we insisit on 3...c6.

1. White attacks the d5-pawn.

This approach directly transposes

to Chapter 1, line C, after 4.tg2 d5
5.d4 e4 and to Chapter 1, line A, af
ter 5.cxd5 cxd5 6.1!!fb3 11lc6.
61
 Chapter 3

I recommend to take on d4 only in 10.0-0 0-0

this particular case when White has
already committed his knight to c3.
This detail forces him to exchange
on d5 (unless he wants to sac the c4-
pawn) which gives us a nice tempo
after ... lilc6. This tempo consider
ably alters White's common plans
against an IQP. The immediate re
sults of it are:
3. The bishop on c5 deprives White
of ie3, lild4, so he must look for
nontrivial ways of completing his
development. Whatever he does,
we must aim for activity, even at the
price of a pawn, e.g. ll.111'b5 (ll.tg5
h6) 11...11\'b6! 12.'ll'xb6 axb6 13.lilg5

1. White cannot comfortably devel

op his cl-bishop to g5 due to the hit
on b2: 6.tg5 te7 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.tg2
(8.lilf3 lilc6 9.111'a4 111'b6!?) 8...lilc6
9.11\'a4 11\'b6!

13...tg4 14.h3 5 15.g4 tg6

16.lilxd5 lilxd5 17.hd5 l'lfe8 18.e3
h6 19.lilf3 l'led8 20.tb3 ie4t.

3. White does not play d4.

Or 6.ig2 ie6 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.ig5 4.lilf3 e4 s.lild4 111'1>6 !

lilc6 9.111'a4 'll'b 6! with complica
tions which may lead to a draw.

2. If we do not fear the pin from g5,

we can find an active stand for our
bishop on c5: 6.Ag2 te6 7.cxd5
cxdS 8.lilf3 lilc6 9.111'a4 AcS

As you see, our retort is the same.

Most of the lines may transpose
to Chapter 1, line B2. In the rest of
them, the placement of the knight
on c3 is more likely in ourfavour be
cause we can get in ...d4 with a tern-
 Lc4 e5 2.lilc3 lilf6 3.g3 c6

po: 6.lilb3 a5! 7.d3 a4 8.lild2 exd3 Note also the plan 6.e3 d5 7.1!1'c2
9.Ag2 d5! Ad7 8.a3

10.0-0 (10.exd3 Ag4; 10.cxd5 cxd5 Do not allow the idea b2-b4+c4-
11.0-0 Ag4) 10 ...d4 ll.lilce4 lilxe4 c5. We can forestall it with 8...
12.lilxe4 Ae7 13.111'xd3 f5! ? 14.lilg5 c5 ! 9.lilde2 dxc4 10. lilxe4 lilxe4
0-0 with mutual chances. 11.1!1'xe4+ 1!1'e6 12.1!1'xe6+ fxe6=.

63
Chapter 3. 1.c4 e5 2.tlic3 tlif6 3.g3 c6

Step by Step

1.c4 e5 2.lilc3 lilf6 3.g3 c6
5...d5 6.cxd5 icS looks also logical,
but then 7.IDb3 ib6 8.ig2 cxd5 9.d3
e3 10.ixe3 is sharp, but favourable
to White. If we leave the d4-knight
in piece for a while, we'll not be able
to shift it later at all, e.g. 6...cxd5
7.d3 icS 8.dxe4 dxe4 9.ie3.

A. 4.lilf3; B. 4.d4

4.ig2 d5 5.d4 (5.cxd5 cxd5 6.'1!fb3

lilc6 is covered in Chapter 1, line A)
5...e4 transpose to Chapter 1, line C.

Al. 6.illb3; A2. 6.e3

A. 4.lilf3 e4 5.lild4
6.lll c2 d5 7.cxd5 (7.ig2 dxc4) 7...
5.lllg5 presents a tempo for the use cxdS 8.ig2 ie7 9.d3 /Dc6 10.0-0
ful prophylactic move ...h6 - 5... 0-0 is covered in Chapter 1, line B2.
d5 6.cxd5 cxd5 7.d3 h6 8.li:lh3 ib4
9.id2 exd3+.
Al. 6.lilb3 a5! 7.d3
5 . 'lilh6!
..

We can meet 7.a4 by 7...lll a6 or 7...

This is my standard recommenda
tion against lll d4. It is always good
to repel the active knight from the
centre. Most of the lines may trans
pose to Chaper 1, line B2.
,;4
ib4 as in Chapter 1. Enterprising al
ternatives are 7...d5 8.cxd5 lilxd5!?
9.li:lxe4 ie6 and 8...li:lg4!? 9.e3 li:le5.
7... a4 8.lild2 exd3 9.$.g2
 1.c4 e5 2.iilc3 iilf6 3.g3 c6
Or 9.exd3 icSt.
9 . d5 10.0-0
10.exd3 4 11.'lilc2 could be coun
tered by ll ...iila6!? 12.a3 dxc4
13.iilxa4 'lila5 14.dxc4 if5 15.'lilc3
'lilxc3 16.iilxc3 id3 with compen
sation, for instance: 17.ifl iilb4
18.ixd3 iilxd3+ 19.i>e2 0-0-0=.
10 d4 11.iilce4 iilxe4 12.iilxe4
. Black has full compensation for the
ie7 13.""'xd3
13 f5!?
As usual, the space advantage as
sures Black of good chances, but he
must stay active. Instead in Yudin
Jumabayev, Tomsk 2013, was 13 ...
c5?! 14.e3 iilc6 15.exd4 cxd4 when
16.if4 0-0 17.sfcl, intending c5,
would have forced 17...sa5 with a
tenable, but passive position.
The text might look as a weakness,
but it drives back the e4-knight be
fore it had the chance to go to d6.
14.iilg5 0-0 15.iilf'3 if6 16.""'c2
(defending b2) 16 iila6!
Again, it is better to sac a pawn,
than to play 16 ...cS?! 17.iilel and
the knight is heading for d5 via f4.
17.""'xa4
17.if4 iilb4 18.'lild2 c5 is already
fine so White has to accept the gift.
17... seS 18.'lilh3 ""'xb3 19.axb3
.id7
pawn. For instance:
20.sel iilc5 21.sxa8 sxa8 22.b4
iilb3 23.iild2 iilxcl 24.Sxcl sa2
25.sbl ie6;
20.sdl iilc5 21.sxa8 sxa8 22.iilxd4
ixd4 23.sxd4 sal;
20 ..ig5 ixg5 21.iilxg5 Sxe2.
A2. 6.e3 d5 7.cxd5
7.'lilb3 dxc4 8.ixc4 'lilxb3 9.ixb3
iila6 10.f3 exf3 11.iilxf3 ib4 12.a3
ixc3 13.bxc3 iilc5 14..ic2 ie6 15.sbl
0-0-0 was in Black's favour, Granda
Zuniga-Jumabayev, Pavlodar 2015.
7.'lilc2 id7 8.a3 would have been
promising for White if he secured
the d4-knight with b2-b4+c4-c5.
65
 Chapter 3
However, 8 ... c5! throws a span
ner into the works - 9.lilde2 dxc4
10.lilxe4 lilxe4 11.1/ifxe4+ 1/ile6=.
Black is safe without queens. An il
lustrative line runs 12.1/ifxe6+ fxe6
13.lilf4 g5 14.lilh3 g4!? (14...h6=)
15.lilf4 tc6 16.!lgl lild7 17.txc4 lile5
18.te2 mf7 19.b3 lilf3+ with a pret
ty position.
7 cxd5 8.d3 lilc6 9.dxe4 dxe4
Fans of isolated pawns could con
sider 9 ... lilxe4 10.td3 lilf6 11.0-0
te7 12.lila4 11ifd8, but I would take
White after 13.lilxc6 bxc6 14.b3.
10.tg2 tb4
11.0-0 hc3 12.bxc3 0-0 13.1/ifc2
1/ifc5
Black's pieces are well placed. He is
not afraid of14.he4 lilxe4 15.1/ilxe4.
That capture would be dubious
since the opposite coloured bish
ops are clearly in his favour after
15...th3 16.!lfdl !lfe8 17.1/ifh4 lilxd4
18.cxd4 1/iff5.
Instead, White can open his bishop
with 14.tb2 lile5 15.c4 1/ilxc4=.
66
B. 4.d4 exd4
4... e4 is more consistent with our
opening strategy, but the specif
ic move order (lilc3 instead of ig2)
throws us out of Black's most ac
tive schemes. After 5.ig5, we can
not follow up with:
5...d5? 6.cxd5 cxd5 due to
7.txf6. That is not a tragedy
since we can resort to the devel
opment with:
5...tb4. Play may continue 6.1/ifb3
lila6 7.tg2 h6 8.txf6 1/ifxf6 9.e3
hc3+ 10.1/ilxc3 d5 11.cxd5 cxd5
Black should not have problems to
hold this position, but the lack of
the dark-squared bishops deprives
him of active plans:
12.lile2
12.1/ifb3 1/ifb6 (12 ...1/ifd6) 13.1/ilxb6
axb6 is a draw endgame, e.g.
14.lile2 iilb4 15.md2 lild3 16.lilc3
te6 17.f3 lilxb2 18.fxe4 dxe4
19.he4 !la3 20.!lhcl lilc4+
2i. md3 lild6 22.ds td7 23. md4
!lxc3 24.!lxc3 lilb5+ 25.md3
lilxc3 26. mxc3 me7 27.!lbl=
!lc8+ 28.md4 !la8 29.!lxb6 !la4+
30. md3 !lxa2 31.!lxb7 md6 32.h4
f5 33.W !la3+ =.
12 ...tg4 13.lilf4
 l.c4 e5 2.lilc3 lilf6 3.g3 c6
White should not forget that
Black can castle long - 13.1/ijb3
0-0-0.
13 ... 1/ijd6 14.h3 if5 15.a3 (15.1/ija5
lilb4) 15...g5 16.lile2 0-0 17.1/ijb3 lilc7
18.lilc3 !lfc8 19.ifl a5 20.i.e2 b5
White cannot break through Black's
defenceline - 21.h4 @g7 22. l!lflid7
23.hxg5 hxg5 24.l!lg2 l'lh8 25.l'lxh8
l'lxh8 26.l'lhl l'lxhl 27.@xhl=.
It is a matter of taste, but I prefer
active and more complex play. By
taking on d4, we accept an isolat
ed central pawn which, however,
will be quite mobile as White can
not comfortably blockade it.
5.1/ijxd4 d5
6.ig2
6.ig5 could be metby 6...ie7 7.cxd5
cxd5 8.ig2 lilc6 9.1/ija4 0-0, but the
temporary weakness of b2 hints at
more challenging ideas as 9 ...1/ijb6!
10.m5 0-0. The same attack is pos
sible after 8.lilf3 (instead of 8.i.g2)
- 8 ... lilc6 9.1/ija4 1/ijb6!? 10.1/ijb5 0-0
ll.ig2 d4=.
6 .ie6 7.cxd5
If the knight were still on bl, White
might have hoped for some edge
with quick kingside development
and castling. The point is that when
Black takes on c4, White can regain
the sacrificed pawn by lilbd2. In the
diagram position, that course is im
possible and 7.lilf3 dxc4 8.1/ijxd8+
l!lxd8 leaves White struggling to
equalize. For instance, 9.lilg5 lilbd7
(9...td6!?) 10.lilxe6 fxe6 ll.th3?
l!le7 was outright bad for him in the
blitz game Ovetchkin-Volkov, play
chess.com 2006. Thus White is
forced to let our knight to c6 with
a tempo.
7...cxd5 8.lil:f3
8.ig5 is a principled move. After
8... lilc6 9.'Wa4, Black must immedi
ately hit b2 with 9 ...'Wb6 !
We should not allow White to
torture us in a typical IQP po
sition following 9 ...ie7 10.e3.
Practice has seen 9 ...tb4, but
10.e3 h6 ll.hf6 'Wxf6 12.lilge2
0-0 13.0-0 hc3 14.bxc3 is obvi
ously pleasant for White.
10.hf6 gxf6. Perhaps White should
force a draw here with:
67
--- - -- ------ - ----
Chapter 3
ll..b:d5 Wxb2 12 ..b:c6+ <frle7 13.ltldl
Wxal 14.1!1'b4+ @d8 15.1!1'a5+ <fries
16..b:b7+ since the only alternative:
11.0-0-0 0-0-0 12 ..b:d5 i.b4
(12 ....b:d5 13.ltlxd5 Wc5+ 14.ltlc3
!lxdl+ 15.'l!!lxdl Wxf2 is equal)
13..b:c6 bxc6 14.ltlf3 <frlc7, is
rather dangerous for him.
8...ltlc6 9.Wa4 i.c5
With an isolated pawn, we should
aim to place our pieces on their
most active places so I did not con
sider 9...i.e7 at all. 9...i.b4 deserves
attention, but 10.lile5 underlines its
shaky state.
10.0-0 0-0
11.i.g5
11.Wb5 is the second most popular
o
move, and it is well scoring at that.
Its idea is to kill the dark-squared
bishop after 11 ...i.b6 12.ltla4. Of
course, we should keep it:
n...Wb6! 12.'l!lxb6
12.1!1'd3 gives us a tempo - 12 ...
ltlb4 13.'!l'dl (or 13.'l!lbl ltle4
14.ltlxe4 dxe4 15.ltlg5 f5=) 13 ...
ltle4 14.e3 !lac8!? (conceding to
trade the bishop in return for full
control of the c-file) 15.ltla4 Wa6
16.ltlxc5 !lxc5 17.ltld4 !lfc8.
12.e3 ltle4 is also satisfactory.
12 ...axb6 13.ltlg5
Now it is turn to preserve the light
squared bishop: 13 ...i.g4 14.h3 i.h5
15.g4 i.g6 16.ltlxd5 ltlxd5 17..b:d5.
White has won a pawn, but all his
pieces are uncoordinated - 17...
!lfe8 18.e3 h6 19.ltlf3 !led8 20.i.b3
i.e4t.
11.ltlg5 could be put to the test with
ll...h6
I do not see any compelling rea
son to precipitate the exchange
so ll...!lc8!? should be at least as
good as ll ...h6.
12.ltlxe6 fxe6 13.e4
White was too passive after
13.a3 !lc8 (13 ... ltle5!?) 14.e3
We7 15.i.d2 ltle5 16.!ladl?! 'l!!lf7
Jones-Edouard, London 2014.
 l.c4 e5 2.1Zlc3 1Zlf6 3.g3 c6

13... 1Zlg4 14.exd5 l'lxf2 15.l'lxf2 1Zlxf2 This position resembles the Tarra
with a perpetual. sch, but Black is a tempo up since
White's queen landed on a4 via
ll h6 12.hf6 lll'xf6
...
the triangle dl-d4-a4. Besides, this
square, as a rule, belongs to the c3-
knight to chase the active c5-bish
op. In the Tarrasch White occasion
ally employs the plan with g5, but
connects it with the idea of forcing
... d5-d4 which plugs the black dark
squared bishop. In the diagram po
sition Black is not obliged to com
ply. As a result, he preserves active
pieces and excellent chances. See
Grune 7 Neiksans-Kovalenko, Riga
2014.

69
Chapter 3. 1.c4 e5 2.llic3 llif6 3.g3 c6

Annotated Games

20.!lfdl, Dvimyy-Van den Reev

7. Neiksans - Kovalenko
Riga 2014
1.c4 e5 2.g3 qif6 3 .ig2 c6 4.d4
bishop - 20 ....if6!, followed up by
exd4 5."*'xd4 d5 6.cxd5 cxd5
7.qif'3 qic6 8."*'a4 .ic5 9.0-0 0-0
10.tgs h6 n.hf6 "*'xf6 12.qic3
.ie6
er, Tromso 2014, 20 ...!lc4 21.Wfe3
.ixg3 leads to a drawish endgame.
Therefore, we could first retreat the
... !lc4.
13 ... !lfdS 14.!lacl
14.e3 does not really blockade the
isolated pawn as we could always
exchange it with ... d4. More inter
esting is:
14...tb6 15.!ld2 !lacs 16.!ladl d4
17.ltlxd4 ltlxd4 18.exd4 !lc4 19.Wfc2
.ixd4 20 ..ixb7

13.l'1fdl

The blockading plan 13.lilel lfad8

14.!lcl !lfe8 15.qid3 is not effective
since we are not obliged to push
...d4 - 15....ib6 l6.qif4 "*'e5.

13.!ladl looks strange as the queen's
rook would be more useful on cl.
Black can follow the same plan as in
the game - 13 ...!lfdS and if 14.ms
Vffe7 15.qia4 .id6 16.qid4 ltlxd4
17.!lxd4 a6 18.Wfb6 .ie5 19.!ld3 !lac8
Black enjoys very active pieces -
20 ...tg4 21.!lel g6 22.Wfb3 .ie6t.
14 ... !lacS 15."*'b5 qie5! 16."*'xb7
It suddenly transpires that 16.qixe5
 l.c4 e5 2.ltlc3 ltlf6 3.g3 c6
ixf2+ and 16.ltla4 td7 17.'lilb3ha4
18.'lilxa4 ltlc4 lose a pawn so White
decides to grab one himself. How
ever, Black's initiative now becomes
overwhelming.
16... lilg4 17.'1fl
17....ix(2+
A natural human move which guar
antees Black a strong initiative.
Only a computer could calculate
that 17... tb6! threatening ...d4, is
even more awkward for White.
18.'1xf2 d4 19.'1ffl dxc3 20.'1xc3
'1xc3 21.bxc3 'lilxc3 22.'lilxa7 lile3
23.'1bl M5 24.'1el tg4 25. 'lile7
'1d5 26.f2
26 te6?
A critical moment. The winning
shaping of this idea was 26 ... ltldl+!
27.fl h7! ! and only after 28.h3
(28.'lilxf7 loses to 28 ...'lilcS), 28 ...
ltle3+ 29.f2 te6! 30.1i!la7 !lcS
(the fight is for the gl-a7 diago
nal) 31.'lila4 ltlc2 32.'1dl 'lile3+ and
White is tide up and down.
A further attack on e2 (after some
preparation), will decide the game.
The text is mistake because White
could trade his bishop by 27.th3!=.
27.'lila7?! '1c5 28.'lilbS+ '1c8
29.'lila7 lilc2 30.'1dl tc4 31.'lile7
'lll'a5 32.th3 'lilb6+ 33.e3 te6
34.he6 'lilxe3+ 35.g2 'lile2+
36.h3 'lilxe6+ 37.'lilxe6 fxe6
38.'1cl '1f8= 39.'1xc2 '1xf"3 40.a4
'1a3 41.'1c8+ f7 42.'1a8 '1a2
43.a5 h5 44.a6 e5 45.g4 '1a3+
46.h4 hxg4 47.xg4 g6
48.a7 e4 49.M4 e3 50.1'3 h7
51.e2 g5 52.h3 g7 53.1'3
h7 54.e2 g7 55.1'3 h7
56.e2 Draw.
71
Chapter 4. 1.c4 e5 2.lll c3 lll f6 3.lll f3 lll c6
Main Ideas
In this chapter we begin to investi
gate White's most challenging sys
tem: 1.c4 e5 2.lilc3 lilf6 3.lilf'3
lilc6
White's quick development is much
more restrictive than the slow g3.
It does not leave us time to build a
pawn centre with ... c6. Of course, we
could play ...d5 without other prep
aration, but the Reversed Sicilian
is not a subject of this book. Fortu
nately, we have other ways to fight
for the centre, based on ...i.b4. In
chapter 4 I analyse four rare White
options while the main line 4.g3 is
considered in Chapters 6 and 7.
4.d4 exd4 5.lilxd4 i.b4 6.i.g5 h6
7.th4 hc3+ 8.bxc3 0-0 is easy to
play and does not require any spe
cial knowledge.
We meet 4.d3 with 4 . tb4, too.
. .
5.i.d2 0-0 6.g3 a5
Our next moves should be prophy
lactive - we hinder White's ad
vance on the queenside and keep
our bishop.
7.i.g2 d6 8.0-0 h6 9.a3 i.c5
Let's take stock. White's play un
til this moment was mostly preven
tive. He avoided sharp lines, did
not give us a chance to double his
pawns, and kept control of the cen
tre. Black, for his part, developed
comfortably, but he lacks an active
plan. He should manoeuvre care
fully to neutralise White's advance
on the queenside. It would be use
ful to trade a pair of knights - with
lild5 lilxd5 or with ...lilc6-lild4xf3.
Galanov-Eckhardt, corr. 2011, went
10.e3 Ms n.1Wc2 Eie8 12.lilh4 th7
73
 Chapter 4

hf3 8.hf3 0-0 9.tg5 h6 10.hf6

'1!1xf6 11.Ei:Jd5 '1!1d8 - see Game 8
Edouard-Karpov, Cap d'Agde 2015.

In the light of the above examples,

13.b3! '1!1d7 14.tcl l'lab8 15.l'ldl tb6
16.l'lbl Ei:Je7=.
4.a3!? looks more than logical and
I used this move myself. However,
we have a trump up our sleeve:
4... e4!? 5.liJg5 '1!1e7 6.d3 exd3
7.'1!1xd3

4.e4 does not fit in with Ei:Jf3 when

White cannot develop his king's
knight on e2. I suggest 4...tb4 in
tending to take on c3 after 5.d3
d6 6.a3 hc3+ 7.bxc3 h6 8.g3 0-0
9.Ag2

It turns out that Black can fianchetto

the bishop with 7...g6!? 8.Ei:Jf3 tg7
9.Ag5 d6! since 10.Ei:Jd5 '1!1d8 is okay.

The thematic way of obtaining

counterplay in this stucture is 9...
a6!? followed up by ...b5.

6.Ae2 does not seem any better - White is unable to capitalise on the
Black was fine after 6 ...tg4 7.0-0 pin.

74
Chapter 4. 1.c4 e5 2.tll c3 tll f6 3.tll f3 tll c6

Step by Step

1.c4 e5 2.lilc3 lilf6 A. 4.d4 exd4 5.lilxd4 tb4

2 ...j.b4 3.lild5 is another popular

option.
The King's Indian structure 2 ... d6
3.d4 exd4 4.xd4 lilc6 5.d2 g6
does not appeal to me. White has
a space advantage after 6.g3 j.g7
7.j.g2 lilf6 8.b3 0-0 9.j.b2 a510.lilf3
!le8 11.0-0 M5 12.lilh4 td7 13.!ladl
Wes 14.!lfel lile5 15.lilf3 lilxf3+
16.txf3 j.c6 17.lild5 hd5 18.cxd5.

3.lilf3 lilc6 Black's task is easy. He will dam

age the enemy pawn structure with
...hc3 and will aim to trade some
minor pieces.

6.j.g5 h6 7.j.h4 hc3+ 8.bxc3

0-0

It is also possible to play 8 ... li\e5

A. 4.d4; B. 4.a3; C. 4.d3; D. 4.e4.
immediately - 9.f4 lilg6 10.M6
1!\'xf6 ll.g3 lilf8 12.tg2 lile6 13.d2
0-0 14.!lbl lilc5 15.lilb3 d6. Still, it
looks more clever to wait for e3 be-
fore shifting the knight to e5.

4.e3 is the subject of our next chap- 9.e3

ter while 4.g3 is considered in Chap-
ters 6 and 7. After 9.f3 !le8 White cannot play e4

75
 Chapter 4
anyway due to the hit on e4 - 10 .e4
lilxe4 or 10.fi.f2 d6 ll.e4 lilxe4.
9 ... lile5 10.fi.e2 lilg6 11 .hf6
Y;\1xf6 12.0-0 d6 13.gbl lile5
Black's knight returns to the
queenside via d7-c5 to underline
the biggest flaw of doubled pawns
- the weakness of the square before
them. White is already on the de
fensive.
B. 4.a3
I used to play this move ten years
ago in order to prevent 4...fi.b4.
Black has a wide choice.
4...d5 leads to the Sicilian Reversed.
4...g6 5.g3 fi.g7 6.fi.g2 0-0 7.0-0
d6 8.d3 is a closed system where
the opponents attack on the op
posite flanks. White's typical play
may be illustrated with the follow
ing line: 8... lild4 9.lild2 c6 10.b4
fie6 ll.fi.b2 1ll'd7 12.e3 lilf5 13.lilde4
lilxe4 14.lilxe4 1ll'e7 15.a4 lilh6 16.b5
f5 17.lild2 gac8 18.gbl d5 19.bxc6
bxc6 20.a5;t;. The presence of the a
pawns gives White a target. That ex
plains the popularity of 8 ... a5!?
with mutual chances after 9.gbl
lild4 or 9 ... ge8 10.fi.g5 h6 ll.fixf6
fixf6 12.b4 axb4 13.axb4 fi.g7 14.b5
lile7 15.1ll'c2 c6.
My only objection against this set
up is that the English adepts usually
have plenty of experience with this
plan. We can surprise them with the
poorly explored:
4, ..e4!? 5.lilg5 Y;\1e7 6.d3 exd3
My game Delchev-Papa, Zuerich
2002, went on 7.e4 h6 8.lilf3 d5
9.cxd5 lilxe4 10 .fi.e3 lilxc3 11.bxc3
lile5 12.fi.xd3 lilxd3+ 13.Wxd3 Wd8
14.0-0
Here my opponent chose a pas
sive stand with 14...fi.e7 15.c4 c5?
(15 ... 0-0 16.gfel ge8 is roughly
equal) 16.fi.4 0-0 17.lild2 with a
clear edge. More natural is:
14 ...fi.d6 15.c4 b6 16.gfel 0-0 17.fi.d4
ge8=. The a3-pawn might hang in
some lines.
In my next game I tried to improve
with:
7.Wxd3
The idea is to meet 7... lile5 by 8.1ll'c2
d6 9.e4 h6 10.lilf3 lilxf3+ ll.gxf3;t;.
 1.c4 e5 2.lilc3 lilc6 3.lilf3 lilc6

White's powerful centre assures

him of the edge.

7 g6 8.lilf3 tg7 9.tg5 d6!

..

9 ... lile5 10.lilxe5 '/Nxe5 11.f4 gave me

an initiative against Peranic in 2003.

10.lild5 'INdS
10.a3
10.lile4 hd2 11.'/Nxd2 b6 12.l'lacl
Wd7=.
10 ... lilxc3 ll.bxc3 tc5=.

5.td2 0-0

It transpires that White cannot con

vert the pin of the f6-knight into
even the slightest advantage! For
instance:
11.We3+ (11.Wc3 lile5) 11 ...te6 12.g3
0-0 13.l'ldl l'le8 (13 ...h6 is also pos
sible) 14.Wf4 lilh5 15.hdS lilxf4
16.hc7 lilxd5 17.cxd5 tg4! 18.tg2
txf3 19.txf3 lild4 with a level end White's set-up is innocuous, but not
game. Black can either regain the without venom. He avoids doubled
pawn, or enter a curious rook end pawns while making normal devel
game after 20.0-0 te5 (20 ...lilb5 oping moves. That discourages ag
21.hs b6=) 21.ta5 b6 22.tb4 gressive plans with long castling
lilxf3+ 23.exf3 a5 24.tc3 hc3 as in the line 4.e3 tb4 5.Wc2 hc3
25.bxc3 l'lec8=. 6.Wxc3 We7 7.a3 d5 8.cxd5 lilxd5
9.'1Nb3 lilb6 10.d3, where Black's
huge lead in development enables
C. 4.d3 .ib4 10 ...tfs 11.te2 0-0-0.

4...d5 is also possible - 5.cxd5 lilxd5 6.g3

6.g3 tb4
6... te7 is the standard approach. 6.e3 is less challenging and it gives
7.td2 te6 8.tg2 f6 9.0-0 0-0 Black a wide choice. The most na-

77
 Chapter 4
tural answer is 6 ... dS 7.cxdS lilxd5
S ..te2
S.Vffc2 lilxc3 9.hc3 .td6 (or 9...
Vffe7) is balanced.
S ... lilxc3
S ....te6 9.0-0 .te7!? 10.a3 as is a
curious wayto getthe Schevenin
gen with two tempi down! Nev
ertheless, this is the most chal
lenging line and the top play
ers gladly take it in order to en
sure more action. Black's stand
in the centre is so solid that he
can afford the frivolity of play
ing like that. I assume that Sicil
ian adepts will know what to do
in this structure (of course, they
should forget about the sharpest
options), and the others will opt
for simpler approaches which
involve piece exchanges.
9.hc3 hc3 10.bxc3
Black's next moves are easy - he
puts his rooks on the central files
and protects the b-pawn with ...b6.
The only question is where to put
the queen - ...Vffe7 is safe as Black's
pieces stay compact, but ...Vfff6-g6
is more active. Possible continua
tions are:
10 ...Ms n.d4 Vffe7 12.0-0 !lads
13.Vffb3 e4 14.lild2 !ld6 1S.g3 draw,
7S
Ghaem Maghami-Ramesh, Dubai
2006;
10...Vffe7 11.d4 .td7 12.0-0 !ladS
13.Vffc2 !lfeS 14.!labl b6 lS..tbs e4
16.lild2 Ill as 17.hd7 !lxd7 1S.Vffa4
!ld6=, Timofeev-Najer, Dagomys
2010;
10 ...Vfff6 11.0-0 Vffg6 12.!lel .th3
13.g3 !lads 14.d4 b6 lS.!lbl e4
16.lild2 lilaSco.
6... a5!?
6...hc3 7.hc3 e4 S.lilh4 d6 is con
sistent, but the threat ...gS can be
ignored - 9 ..tg2 ! when 9...gS fails
to 10.Vffcl. Black can revive the
threat with 9 ...Vffe7 to force play -
10.M6 Vffxf6 11.he4 Vffxb2 12.0-0
lild4 13.!lel with a tangled position.
Still, White's position is more flexi
ble due to the pawn majority in the
centre.
6... !leS 7..tg2 hc3 S.hc3 dS 9.cxdS
lilxdS is a viable alternative:
a) 10.0-0
10 ...lilxc3
Closing the c-file. Romanishin
played 10 ...!lbS!? first, intend
ing 11.!lcl lilxc3 12.bxc3 b6. Cri
tical for his idea is 11.i.d2 ! when
Black can opt for a solid stand
 l.C4 eb Z."-lC:S "-lCb 0."-lt0 "-lCb
in the centre with ... Wd6, ...f6,
...ie6.
ll.bxc3 !'1b8 12.Wc2
In the event of 12.lild2, simplest
looks 12 ... lila5 (12 ...id7!?) aim
ing for a Mar6czy structure with
...c5 - 13.Wc2 c5 14.lilb3 lilxb3
15.axb3 a5 16.M axb4 17.cxb4
cxb4=.
12 ...ie6 13.lild2 Wd7 14.lilb3 b6
15.!'1adl ib3 16.e4 hg2 17.@xg2=,
Ignatov-Mabling, ICCF 2006.
b) 10.id2 lild4 11.0-0 c6=.
6 ... lild4!? 7.ig2 lilxf3+ 8.ixf3 is =#.
My recommendation keeps more
tension in the centre. More impor
tantly, White's plan is not so clear as
in the open Sicilian structures. The
pawn move preserves the bishop in
the event of 7.a3 ic5 8.lila4.
7.ig2 d6 8.0-0 h6
9.a3
9.lild5 ic5 (9 ...lilxd5 10.cxd5 lile7
11.hb4 axb4, intending ... c6, is ba
lanced.) 10.ic3 lild4 11.e3 lilxf3 was
equal in Kryvoruchko-Sargissian,
Spain team eh. 2015.
9.e3 if5 10.We2 occurred in
Laznicka-Topalov, Novy Bor 2013.
(10.Wc2 ixc3 11.hc3 lilb4 evens
the game outright.) After 10 ...!'leS
11.!'lfdl e4 12.dxe4 lilxe4 13.!'lacl
simplest would be 13 ... lilxd2= .
9 .ic5 10 .e3 if5
..
Two correspondence games saw
10 ....ie6 11.Wc2 Wd7 12.lilh4 ib6
(12 ...ib3 13.f4) 13.lila4 ia7 14.b4
ib3 15.b5 lile7 16.!'labl d5 17.c5
hg2 18.@xg2 !'1fe8 19.ha5 c6
20.bxc6 lilxc6 21.ib4. Although
Black drew, I do not see any reason
to give the enemy an initiative. It is
better to open the centre with ...e4
and display activity on the kingside.
The text is the most logical step in
that direction.
11.Wc2 B:e8 12.li:lh4 .ih7 13.b3!
Many correspondence games fea
ture 13.!'lfdl, but this move takes
away the only natural retreat
square for the c2-queen. That
could be underlined with 13 ...g5!?
14.li:lf3 e4 15.dxe4 li:lxe4 16.Wa4 f5
with counterplay, e.g. 17.Wb5 f4 or
17.li:ld5 li:le7.
79
 Chapter 4

After 13.b3!, Black does not have
a clear plan since 13...g5?! 14.ltlf3
e4 15.dxe4 ltlxe4 16.11!!1dl f5 17.E1a2
would neutralise his temporary ac
tivity. Instead he should embark on
manoeuvring.
Galanov-Eckhardt, corr. 2011 went
13 ...11!!1d7 14.fl.cl
14.gfdl 11!!1g4 revives the break
...e4, for instance, 15.il.cl e4.
White could repel the quen with
15.h3 11!!1d7, but the h3-pawn
would be a good target. Black can
then transfer his c6-knight to g5
via d8-e6 - 16.il.cl (preparing
gbl) 16 ...ltld8 17.gbl ltle6 18.b4
(18.hb7?! gab8 19.il.g2 ltlg5
20.g4 ltlxg4!) 18 ...fl.b6 19.ltle4
ltlxe4 2 0.dxe4 11!!1e7 21.lilfS 11!!1f8
with complex play.
14... gab8 15_gd1 fl.b6 16.gbl ltle7
17.lilf3 il.f5 18.lile4 11!!1e6 19.b4,
ltlxe5 6.d4 il.b4 7.dxe5 ltlxe4 8.11!!1f3
ltlxc3 9.bxc3 il.a5 10.il.e2
Or 10.il.a3 d6 11.exd6 o-o 12.gd1
il.d7.
10 ... d6 leads to open piece play with
equal chances. Ju Wenjun-Kosteni
uk, Chengdu 2015 went from here:
11.0-0
More prudent is:
ll.il.a3 0-0 12.0-0 il.d7 13.exd6
il.c6= or:
11.'l!lg3 il.f5 12.il.f4 0-0=.
11... dxe5 12.il.a3 'l!lf6 13.11!!1e3 c6
14 .il.f3 il.b6 and White is yet to prove
enough compensation for the pawn.

5.d3 d6

when 19 ...axb4 20.axb4 ltlxe4 would

have been roughly equal.

D. 4.e4 il.b4

This is a solid approach which al 6.il.e2

lows both sides to demonstrate
their positional understanding. I suggest to meet 6.a3 by 6 ...hc3+
On the opposite, 4...fl.c5!? 5.ltlxe5! for consistency sake - we could get
 1.c4 e5 2.'8c3 '8c6 3.'8f3 '8c6
the same structure after 4.e3 !b4
5.1!1'c2 hc3 6.bxc3, see Chapter 5
line B.
Carlsen chose against Ghaem
in Berlin 2015, 6...!cS 7.b4 !b6
8.'8a4 !g4 9.'8xb6 axb6 10..tb2
(10.!e2 0-0 11.!b2 0,e7 12.0-0
'8g6=) 10 ...txf3 ll.111'xf3 0,d7
aiming for ... '8d7-f8-e6. Criti
cal for his idea would be 12.111'g3!
1!1'f6 13.!e2 0,f8 14.f4! 0,e6 15.f5
with a space advantage.
7.bxc3 h6
I'm not too sure that we need
this prophylaxis. The plan with
7...a6 is also effective without it.
8.g3 0-0 9.!g2 a6!? (this is always
good against the setup with !g2)
10.l'lbl
Libiszewski-Postny, Bastia 2013
saw here 10 ...b5 when White
backed off with ll.lild2. The idea
of Black's sacrifice was to play
...!d7, ...1!1'c8, ...111'a6, ...l'lfb8 with
an initiative on the queenside. I
do not see anything wrong with
the more restrained:
10 ...l'lb8 11.0-0 b5=.
6.g3 is strategically similar to the
main line as both allow the exchange
...!c8-g4xf3 - 6...tg4 7.h3 txf3
8.111'xf3 0,d4 9.11\'dl c6 10.!g2. Black
has two possible plans now - either
to stay passive on the queenside
with 10 ...a5 11.0-0 tcS, or to pre
pare ...b5 with 10 ...a6 11.0-0 !cS
12.l'lbl b5.
In his rapid match against Karpov
in Cap d'Agde 2015, Edouard first
ly tried 6.h3 a6 7.!e2 !cS 8.0-0 0-0
9.!e3, but 9...'8d4 turned out to be
balanced:
10.a3 h6 ll.b4 '8xf3+ 12.txf3 he3
13.fxe3 !e6 14.1!1'e2 b6 15.a4 c5=.
In the next match game, Edouard
opted for 6.!e2.
6.. tg4 7.0-0 hf3 8.h1'3 0-0
.
9.tgs h6 10.txr6 1!1'xf6 11.ads
11\'dS
White's bishop does not have any
prospects. See Game 8 Edouard
Karpov, Cap d'Agde 2015.
81
Chapter 4. 1.c4 e5 2.tll c3 tll f6 3.tll f3 tll c6

Annotated Games

8. Edouard - Karpov
Cap d'Agde 2015

1.c4 qof6 2.ac3 e5 3.af3 ac6

4.e4 .ib4 5.d3 d6 6 .ie2 .ig4

7.0-0 hf3 8..ht'3 0-0 9 ..ig5 h6

10.hf6

10 . .ih4 .ic5 ll.qod5 g5 is hardly any

better.
Tbe threat f4 would offer White
10 'lifxf6 11.ads 'lifds
counterplay, but it is Black to move
and he retains an advantage by re
turning the pawn with 15 ... ae5!
16.axb6 axb6 17.'lifxd4 'liff6 18.gfdl
ga4. Tbe pressure along the a-file
binds the white pieces. Besides
the a3-pawn, c4 is also weak, e.g.
19..ie2 gfa8 20.'lil'c3 ltlg6 21.'lifb3
ltlf4 22 ..ig4 ltle6 23.'/;\le3 c5.

Alternatively, 12.a3 .ic5 13.b4 .ib6

We see the biggest flaw of the
scheme with e4 - the d4-square
and the dark squares in general are
weak. If we compare the two bish
ops, White has played against the
textbook. The central pawns on
light squares are a long-term fac
tor in Black's favour. Accordingly,
his game is already more pleasant.
I would think of changing the pawn
structure in the centre with 12.d4
exd4 13.a3 .ic5 l4.b4 .ib6 15..ih5
82
14.a4 a5 15.ltlxb6 cxb6 also leaves
Black with a superior knight vs. a
bad bishop.
12.'lifb3 a5 13.a3 ad4 14.'lifdl
.ic5 15..ig4 a4
I'm not sure about this move. It is
strategically "correct'', but the a4-
pawn will be weak. That will face
Black with technical problems. 15 ...
c6 16.ltlc3 g6 was Jess committal.
 1.c4 e5 2.lilc3 lilc6 3.lilf3 lilc6
16.l!lhl c6 17.lilc3 \Wa5
18.f4?
It is understandable that White
wants to show some activity, but
this move only weakens the kingside
dark squares. Besides, it is a tactical
mistake which both opponents fail
to spot in a rapid game - 18 ... lilb3!
19.bl kxa3! wins a pawn since
20.lilxa4? loses to 20 ... lild2.
18 exf4? 19.gxf4 lilb3 20.1
..
.id4 21.gfS .ie5+
21. ..ds 22.cxd5 kxc3 23.bxc3 1/!lxc3
24.1/!lel 1/!lxel + 25.el lild4 simpli
fies to a better endgame, but Karpov
prefers to improve his pieces before
forcing the play.
22.lile2 1/!lb6 23.lilc3 g6 24.gfl
h5! 25.hh5?
Edouard obviously hated his po
sition if he went for this desperate
attempt to complicate things. The
calm retreat 25 ..th3 would have
passed the ball into Black's court.
Although he is clearly better, he
lacks a clear plan how to improve
further.
25 gxh5 26.1/!lxh5 ga5 27.c5
.
27 1/!lxc5?
..
White's bold play is suddenly re
warded. Black would keep an extra
piece with 27....ig7! 28.lilxa4 1/!ld8! .
2s.gf5 1/!ld4 29.fl g7 30.a5
lilxa5 31.1/!lxa5 1/!lxd3 32.gdl?
The last mistake. 32.1/!lf5 b5 was
only slightly better for Black.
32 1/!lc2 33.gfl 1/!lxb2 34.e5
..
he5 35.lile4 1/!le2 36.gel 1/!lc4
37.1/!ld2 1/!le6 38.lilg5 1/!lh6 39.h3
.tf6 40.lile4 1/!lxd2 41.lilxd2 .ic3
42.ge2 hd2 43.gxd2 d5 44. l!lgl
geS 45.f2 ge4 0-1
83
Chapter 5. 1.c4 e5 2.llic3 llif6 3.llif3 llic6 4.e3

Main Ideas

1.c4 e5 2.li:lc3 li:lf6 3.li:l:f3 li:lc6
4.e3 .ib4
that White has spent too many
tempi on ambling around with the
queen and we should make him pay.
So: 10 il.fS!? 11.Ae2 0-0-0!
..

The knight on f3 naturally attracts

the e5-pawn to go to e4. For in
I'm sure your opponents will not
stance, 5.li:ld5 stumbles into 5...e4.
like this. White has to spend yet an
White commonly answers 5."lilc2,
other tempo to free the lane for the
reviving the threat li:ld5. I suggest to
b-pawn while Black's play is easy
remove it altogether with 5 .ixc3.
and effective. He hits the d3-pawn
.

with ... !ld6, !lhd8 to force the ugly

A. 6."lilxc3 preserves the pawn for
li:lel, and then changes the direc
mation flexible, but will cost a tem
tion of his main strike towards the
po after ... d5. 6... "lile7. IfWhite now
kingside with ...g5, ... !lh6.
wants to play a true Sicilian Re
versed, he must spend another tem
If White plays d4 early, the centre
po on 7.a3 since 7.Ae2 d5 8.cxd5
is eliminated and Black's game is
li:lxd5 9."lilb3 li:lb6 10.d3 allows
easy due to his better development.
the promising combination 10 ...
Here are several ways that lead to
Ae6 11.\1!l/c2 li:lb4 12.l:\lbl Af5 13.a3
the same pawn structure:
12ixd3+! 14.txd3 txd3 15.\1!l/xd3 e4.
7.d4 exd4 8.12ixd4 12ixd4 9.\!!"xd4
7 d5 8.cxd5 li:lxd5 9.'lilb3 (9.\!!"c2
o-o (9 ... c5= l 10.te2 !ld8=.

e4) 9 ... li:lb6 10.d3.

Here the common equalizer is the 7.a3 d5 8.d4 exd4 9.12ixd4 12ixd4
plan with short castling, but I think 10.Wxd4 o-o 11.td2

85
 Chapter 5

B. 6.bxc3
This recapture makes sense only in
conjunction with e4, but that means
White will present us with a clear
tempo.
6.bxc3 0-0 7.e4 d6
White puts his hope in f2-f4, but we
can easily hinder this idea. For in
stance:
8..ie2 ltlh5 9.d4 1l!'f6
11...c5 12.11!'h4 dxc4 13.hc4 .ie6=.

7 .ie2 d5 8.d4 exd4 9.lilxd4 lilxd4

10.1l!'xd4 0-0

10.d5 (10.g3 exd4) 10 ...lila5 ll.g3 b6

planning ... lila5-b7-c5 or ...c7-c6.

8.g3 h8 9.d3 ltlg8 - see game

Black often includes ...c5, but I pre 11 Suba-Delchev, Albacete 2004.
fer to gain the tempo by taking with Another thematic plan against the
a rook on d5 - ll.cxd5 l'ld8 12.11l'h4 fianchetto is 8 ... lild7 9..ig2 ltlc5
l'lxd5=. 10.lilh4 a6 11.0-0 b5 :;.
Chapter 5. 1.c4 e5 2.'ll c3 'llf6 3.'llf3 'll c6 4.e3

Step by Step

1.c4 e5 2.lilc3 lilf6 3.lilt'3 lilc6 bishop out to b7 or a6) 8.lile2

4.e3 lilxd5 9.cxd5 lile5 10.lilc3 f5
ll.d3 lilxd3+ 12.hd3 exd3
13.l!lxd3 b6 14.0-0 a5.
6... lilxb4 7.lild4 c5 8.lilb5 (8.lilc2
lild3+) 8 ... d5 9.a3 lild3+ 10.hd3
exd3 11.cxd5 lilxd5 with a striking
spatial advantage.

5.d4 exd4 6.exd4 d5 cannot be of

any concern for Black. Play typical
ly continues with 7.a3 hc3+ 8.bxc3
0-0 9.ie2 dxc4=.

White displays an intention to con- s.. hc3

.

test actively the centre with d4. We

should refrain from 4 ...d5 5.cxd5
lilxd5 as 6.ib5 lilxc3 7.bxc3 id6
8.d4 exd4 9.cxd4 0-0 10.0-0 is ob
viously pleasant for the first player.

4...ie7 5.d4 exd4 is a decent option,

but I will focus on the more chal
lenging continuation:

4...ib4 5.l!lc2

5.lild5 allows 5 ...e4 6.lilxb4 I will consider now:

6.lilgl practically reverses the A. 6.Wxc3 which we'll attack by
roles and Black is already ahead castling long, and:
in development - 6... 0-0 7.a3 B. 6.bxc3 which leads to a closed
id6 (aiming to lead the other manoeuvring game.

87
 Chapter s
A. 6.'lii'xc3 'lii'e7
Al. 7.a3; A2. 7..ie2
7.d4 exd4 8.lilxd4 lilxd4 9.'l:ilxd4
defines the centre too early - see
Grune 9 Mastrovasilis-Hracek, Is
tanbul 2003.
Al. 7.a3 d5 8.cxd5
8.d4 exd4 9.lilxd4 lilxd4 10.'l:ilxd4
0-0 is completely balanced. See
Grune 10 Onischuk-Shirov, New
Delhi/Teheran 2000.
8 ...lilxd5 9.'lii'b3
9.'l:ilc2 lets in 9 ... e4 when 10..ibS?
loses to 10 ... exf3.
9 ...lilb6 10.d3
88
10....if5!?
Almost everybody opts for short
castling with 10 ... 0-0 ll ..ie2 a5
12 ..id2 a4 13.'l:ilc2 .ie6 14.l'lcl. Black
stands perfectly well here, but
he does not have a clear plan. Of
course, he controls the centre, but
he should basically wait and try to
keep the grip. It is difficult to find
the best moves in such circum
stances. On the opposite, White's
setup is flexible and his play on the
queenside and in the centre is not
too committal.
I recommend to set concrete prob
lems to the opponent by castling
long and hitting his weak point at
d3.
Note that the Najdorf-style at
tack 10 ....ig4 ll..ie2 0-0-0 12.'l:ilc2
f5 seems rather impotent and the
counter-attack with 13.b4 has more
chances to succeed.
Finally, 10 ...g5?! has not been test
ed, but it makes sense exactly in this
moment - when we have not com
mitted our king to the queensideyet.
The position after 11.1/i/c2 g4 12.lild2
f5 13.b4 a6 is difficult to evaluate.
Wecanstillcastleshortorevenleave
the king in the centre - 14..ie2 f4
 l.c4 e5 2.'ilc3 'ilc6 3.'ilt3 'ilc6 4.e3
15.lilb3 !lf8. This plan is very sharp
and donble-edged though. I do not
see any reason to prefer it over the
text or the more tested 10 ... 0-0.
11.e2 0-0-0 12.0-0 lllb8!?
12 ...g5 looks ont of step as it is com
monly effective in conjunction with
...f7-f5, where Black's bishop is cur
rently residing. White would lead
the race after 13.lild2 g4 14.1il'c2 h5
15.b4--7.
12 ... !ld6!? is perhaps the most
straightforward continuation. It
prepares ... !lhd8 or ... !lg6. White
mnst qnickly display activity with
13.a4
Xu,Jun-Atalik, Moscow 2001,
saw 13.d2 !lhd8 14.b4 lilxb4
15.1il'xb4 when 15... lild5 (15 ...
lllb8=) 16.1il'c5 !lb6 takes over
the initiative.
13... a5
13... !lhdS 14.a5 lild7 15.a6 b6
16.1il'c3 lilc5 is a more complex
alternative. Then 17.b4 lilxd3
18.b5 e4 19.hd3 !lxd3 20.1il'xc6
exf3 leads to perpetual check. Of
course, Black can switch plans
with 16...!lg6 17.lilel 1il'h4, with
mutual chances.
l4.e4 ig4 15.ie3 hf3 16.hf3 lild4
17.hd4 !lxd4 18.1il'b5 lllb8 19.1il'xa5
!lhd8 20.!lfcl (20.ie2 !lb4 21.!lfcl
!ldd4) 20 ...f6= is comfortable for
Black.
12 ...e4!? is the other logical follow
up to 10 ...if5. It aims to open the
centre and capitalise on Black's bet
ter development. The point is that
after 13.dxe4 he4,
White cannot play 14 .d2 since
it would be hanging.
14.1il'c3 lild5 15.1il'c4 lilb6 was
drawn in the blitz game Mamed
yarov-Rublevsky, Khanty-Man
siysk 2013.
Perhaps he should try:
14.lild2 f5 (Ataliksuggests 14...id5
15.1il'c3 1il'e5, but I would not play an
endgame here.) After 15.a4? Black
can exploit the fact that ie2 is un
protected with 15...lild4!. It seems
that best would be the humble re
turn 15.lilf3! when 15...ie4 would
repeat. I have also checked the
more ambitious 15...g5, but 16.!lel
g4 17.lild4 reminds that White has a
bishop pair and he would gladly sac
a pawn to activate it.
At that point I thought 14.!lel
in the diagram position might
be a decent idea - protecting
e2 and preparing lilf3-d4. We
should continue our plan ofplay
ing with pieces rather than with
pawns - 14... !ld6 15.lild4 1il'h4 or
15.lild2 id5 16.1il'c3 f5 17.b3 !lg6.
The above analysis suggests that
d2 is an important retreat square
for the f3-knight. It transpires that
stayed White's bishop on d2, ...g5
would have been awkward since
ic3 would drop the d3-pawn. Thus
89
 Chapter s

the f3-knight would have to go to A critical line is 14.afcl g4 15.lilel h5

the passive square el. 16.a4 ie6 17.'@.id1 lild5 18.a5 a6
Therefore, a useful waiting move
like 12 ...mbS!? is a clever way of
fighting for an advantage.

Commonly, the exchange sacrifice

13..id2
In the normal Najdorf, Black of
ten uses the a-pawn for ramming
the enemy castling position. The
only drawback of this plan is that
the pawn structure after 13.a4!? a5
(13 ... lild7 14.'@.ie3 f6co) is not flexible
and that limits the options of both
sides. Most endgames will be better
for Black so White should quickly
complete development with 14.e4
ig4 15.ie3 whereas the forced line
15 ...Jixf3 16.ixf.3 lild4 17.'@.ie3 1ilxf3+
18.gxf3 ad6 is balanced. White will
evacuate his king via fl.
should provide a lasting initiative,
but the very clumsy placement of
the el-knight reduces White's at
tacking potential - 19.axc6 (19.b4
lila7) 19...bxc6 20.d4 exd4 21.exd4
lilb4 and he is still to prove that he
has adequate compensation.
Another attempt to generate
counterplay is 14.d4 exd4 15.ib5
ie4 16.lilxd4 lilxd4 17.exd4 a6
18.ib4 '@.if6 19.ie2 ahe8+.
14...ie6 15.'!Wc3 f6 16.ie3 g4
17.lilh4 lild4 1s.txd4 axd4

13.lild2 ad6 14.lile4 offers Black at

tacking prospects after 14... ag6/h6.

13 ...g5
White is in a positional bind, but
Black exploits the fact that 14.ic3 the following break gives him some
would drop the d3-pawn. counterplay:

14.e4 19.f4! gxJ'3 20.lilrl3 ad6=

90
 l.c4 e5 2.lilc3 lilc6 3.lilf3 lilc6 4.e3

A2. 7 .ie 2 d5
Perhaps White should opt for the
exchange sacrifice with 16.a4 1/!llf7
17.!'!xc6 bxc6 18..

8 exd4 9.lilxd4 lilxd4 10.'1;\'xd4

.

0-0

10 ...c5 was automatically played in

all the games, but I prefer to acti
vate a rook rather than a pawn. To
be fair, the pawn attack is also suf
ficient for equality - ll.'i!lh4 .ie6
12.0-0 dxc4 13 ..ixc4 .ixc4 14.Wxc4
8.d4
0-0 15.!'!dl !'!ad8=.

8.cxd5 lilxd5 9.m3 lilb6 10.d3

11.cxd5 !'!d8 12.Wh4
might look as an improved version
ofline 1. However, the absence of a3
After 12.0-0, we could also recap
enables the tactics:
ture 12 ...lilxd5 13.b3 c5=.
10 ....ie6 ll.'lilc2 lilb4 12.m1 .if5
13.a3 lilxd3+! 14..ixd3 .ixd3
12 Bxd.5 13.0-0
15.'i!lxd3 e4 16.'l!lb5+ c6 17.'i!le5 exf3
..

18.'i!lxg7 0-0-0 (18 ...!'!hfS!? 19.gxf3

lilc4co) 19.'l!lg4+ lild7 20.'lilxf3 'l!le6
with full compensation for the
pawn.

Moreover, the plan with 10 ....ifS

11.0-0 0-0-0 is still possible even
though White has not spent a tem
po on a3. For instance:
12.a4 lild7 13.'l!lc3 1ilc5 14.lilel a5;
12 ..id2 g5 13.!'!fcl g4 14.lilel .ie6
15.1/!lldl f5
We can use the tempo we saved on
... c5 to trade bishops:

13 MS 14.f'3 .id3

The activity of Black' s heavy pieces

balances the strong enemy bishop.
We can even safely allow doubled
pawns on the f-file.

91
 Chapter 5
B. 6.bxc3 0-0 7.e4
White does not gain anything from
delaying this move. After 7$.e2
d6 8.0-0 e4 9.lilel tf5, his dark
squared bishop is a poor sight.
7...d6
8.i.e2
The older line 8.g3 offers Black an
additional plan, based on the break
...b7-b5. Of course, it should be
combined with . . .f5. It seems that
Black is fine regardless of the re
treat square the f6-knight chooses:
8 ... lild7 9.i.g2 lilc5 10.lilh4 a6
11.0-0 b5 ;:, Khairullin-Svidler, Ch
ita 2015;
8 ... a6!? 9.a4 lila5 10.d3 lild7;
Other possible moves are 8 ... lilh5
and 8 ...lile8.
I chose against the most promi
nent adept of this line, Suba, 8 ...
@h8 9.d3 lilg8 - see game ll Suba
Delchev, Albacete 2004.
Even the noncommittal develop
ment 8 ...h6 9.i.g2 e6 10.d3 'll'd7 is
a fair option.
8 . lilh5
92
This is more forcing than 8 ... lile7
which aims for a dark-squared
strategy on the kingside:
a) 9.0-0 lilg6 10.d3 !le8 11.!lel h6
12.lild2 lilh7 13.lilfl lilf4
14.lilg3
Or 14.4 exf4 15.d4 'll'g5
16.lild2 'll'g6 17.i.d3 i.h3 18.i.fl
b6 19.c5 dxc5 20.dxc5 lilg5.
14...lilg5 15.f3, Suba-Rodriguez
Guerrero, Salobrena 2009, when
the logical continuation of Black's
play would have been 15...h5 16.fl
h4 17.lile2 lilxe2+ 18.'ll'xe2 'll'f6 .
b) 9.d4 lilg6 10.0-0 111'e7 11.i.d3 !le8
White's setup with d4 is more
active than in the previous ex
ample and it would be a mistake
to follow in the same fashion.
For instance, Bocharov-Matla
kov, Tyumen 2012 saw ll ...h6
12.!lel lilh7 when 13.c5 would be
strong as 13 ...dxc5 14.lilxe5 fa
vours White. It is better to de
prive the enemy ofthis resource.
12.!lel h6 13.lild2 c5.
9.d4 'll'f6
Again the most straightforward
move - we attack d4.
9...exd4 allows 10.lilxd4
 l.c4 e5 2.lilc3 lilc6 3.lilf3 lilc6 4.e3
Or 10.cxd4 'l!lf6 11.0-0 lilf4
12.M4 'l!lxf4 13.!lael ig4
14.\Mib2:.
10 ... lilf6 11.0-0oo Diamant-Molner,
Phoenix 2015.
10.d5
10.g3 exd4 ll.lilxd4 lilxd4 12.cxd4
'l!lxd4 13.ib2 'l!lc5 14.0-0 lilf6
15.M6 gxf6 16.!lfdl !le8 17.!ldS
'l!lc6
Computer analysis proves that
White has nothing more than a draw
after 18. 'l!ld2 (18.f4 'l!lb6+) 18 ... !leS.
10 .. lilaS 11.g3 b6
This move does not intend .. .i.a6,
it only clamps on c5 and prepares
...lila5-b7-c5 or ...c7-c6 - for in
stance:
12.ie3 ig4! 13.lild2 ixe2 14.@xe2
c6.
The radical solution 12.cS dxc5
13.c4 does not really change Black's
plan - 13...ig4!.
The only challenging continuation
is:
12.lilg5 'l!!'g6 (12 ...g6!?oo) 13.h4
13...fS 14.exfS iLxf5 15.'l!ldl 11lf6
16.h5 'l!le8
White's initiative has come to an
end while the defects of his pawn
structure remain. An interesting
fight is ahead.
93
Chapter 5. 1.c4 e5 2.tlic3 tlif6 3.tlif3 'll c6 4.e3

Annotated Games

9. Mastrovasilis - Hracek,
EU-eh Istanbul 01.06.2003

1.c4 lilf6 2.lilc3 e5 3.lil:f3 lilc6

4.e3 ib4 5. 'lll'c2 hc3 6.'lll'xc3
'lll'e7 7.d4

17.h6 l!/f8 18.f3 ic8 19.ic4 te6

20.h6 ic8 21.ic4 te6 draw.

10.mt4

White aims for an endgame. 10.1l:l'd3

7... exd4
Kiri! Georgiev successfully defends
7...d6 which keeps more tension -
8.d5 ltlb8 9.ltld2 MS. It is unclear
keeps the queen - 10... 0-0 ll.ie2
d5 12.0-0 1ld8 13.1l:l'c2 'lll'e5=, Stri
kovic-Viterbo Ferreira, Vila Nova
de Gaia 2010.
10 d5 ll.cxd5 lilxd5 12.'lll'xe7+

how White could extract value from <llxe7

his spatial advantage.

8.lilxd4 lilxd4 9.'llfxd4 c5

Black could play ... c5 later or even

omit it. Bandza-Z.Polgar, Wies
baden 1994, saw 9 ... 0-0 10.te2 1ld8
11.0-0 c5 12.1l:l'h4 d5 13.cxd5 ltlxd5
14.1l:l'xe7 li:Jxe7 15.e4 te6 16.te3 b6

OA
Black has active pieces and a pawn
majority 3:2 on the queenside. That
should allow him to neutralise the
bishop pair. He should aim to trade
one of them, for instance, 13.a3 li:Jb6
14.e4 ie6.
13.id2 ie6 14.0-0-0
Naturally, White wants to have his
king closer to the enemy's poten
tial passers, but he underestimates
Black's threats. A curious alterna
tive was 14.Elacl Elac8 15.e4 li:Jb4
16.a3 li:Ja2! followed up by ...c5-c4-
c3;.
14 ... ElacS 15.ie2 li:Jb4 16.b:b4?
16.a3 li:Jc6 17.ic3 f6was about equal.
Black's plan is to push ...b7-b5-b4.
16... cxb4+ 17.@bl b3! 18.axb3
b:b3 19.Elcl ElhdS 20.ElxcS ElxcS
21..id3?!
White has a small problem - he can
not trade rooks with 21.Elcl?? due to
21...ia2+. Perhaps he should have
addressed it urgently with 21.!dl
id5 22.f3 a5 23.Elel intending Ele2.
id3 is a step in the wrong direction.
21 a5 22.h4
h6 23.e4 a4
24.Elh3?!
White does not realise that he can
not survive with his king caged in.
The rest is pathetic.
24...g5 25.hxg5 hxg5 26.Elg3 Elc5
27.Elg4 !e6 28.Elg3 b5 29.!c2
llld6 30.Eld3+ llle5 31.EldS ElcS
32.i:!dl Elxc2 0-1
10. Onischu k - Shirov
New DelhifTeheran 2000
1.c4 e5 2.li:Jc3 li:Jf6 3.li:Jf3 li:Jc6
4.e3 .ib4 5.'1!1'c2 b:c3 6.%l'xc3
%l'e7 7.a3 d5 8.d4 exd4 9.li:Jxd4
li:Jxd4 10.%l'xd4 0-0
11.c5
Black has discarded 10 ...c5 in fa
vour of the plan with ... Eld8. White
accepts the challenge and seizes
space on the queenside. This game
shows a convincing plan for Black
- he arranges an exchange of the
bishops via a6.
A more cunning version of this idea
is ll.!d2 intending 11... EldS 12 ..ib4
95
 Chapter 5

\!!le8 13.c5, but Black could switch to

lL.cS 12.\!!lh4 dxc4 13.hc4 ie6=.
1Lb4?! is worse, on account of 11...
dxc4 12.hc4 8d8 13.\!!lf4 a5.

11 ...b6 12.b4 bxc5 13.bxc5 \!!le6

14.id3 ia6 15.ic2

15.0-0 is positionally harmless since

Whte would not be able to generate
any threat in near future. 18.g4

18.a4!? bans 18 ...8b5 and 18 ...'/!lb5,

but Black gets through the e-file:
18 ... 8e6! 19.g4 8be8 20.g5 8e4!
2Lhe4 8xe4 22.'l!ld2 lilg4

15...\!!lc6

Black had to decide what pawn set

up to oppose against the enemy
bishop pair. One possible stand was
15 ...lild7 16.ib2 f6, then ...\!!lc6.
Amore active version ofitis 15 ... lilg4
16.f3 lile5 17.ib2 f6 18.@f2oo, Be
lozerov-Korchnoi, Smolensk 2000,
18 ... tc4, aiming for ...'/!le7, ...lilc6.
A completely different plot offers
15 ... 8ae8!? 16.f3 c6 17.@f2 lild7
18.8el (18.ib2 \!!lh6) 18 ...f5.
Shirov's novelty defines the queen's
White's defence is not easy - 23.8gl
would face 23 ...lilxh2, but he can
make a draw with accurate moves
- 23.id4 lile5 24.he5 8xe5 25.8bl
h6 26.8gl d4 27.\!!lxd4 8xc5 28.gxh6
8cl+=. The text is also very sharp.
18 8b5 19.g5 8xc5 20.h4!

placement a little too early. \!!lb6 21.heS?!

16.ib2 8ab8 17.tc3 8fe8 2Lgxf6? loses to 2L.8e4.

A critical position. Both sides have
completed the "compulsory pro
gram" and it is time for heavy cal
culation.
The best continuation was 2L\!!lb4 !
when Black risks to enter a slightly
worse endgame. He should carry on
the attack with 2L.8xc3! 22.\!!lxc3
c5!!

96
 1.c4 e5 2.<ilc3 <ilc6 3.<ilf3 <ilc6 4.e3
After 23.gxf6 d4 24.'1<!1d2 dxe3
25.fxe3 '1<1'xf6 it all ends with a draw
in view of the double attack on al
and h4. The whole variation is long
and complex, starting with 26.he8
'1<\'xal+ 27.'1<\'dl '1<1'c3+ 28.@f2 \Wb2+
29.gl '1<\'e5!=.
After the text Black's attack is more
difficult to tame.
21... <ilxeS
22.f'3
22. Wd2!? was tried in a correspond
ence game and White failed to make
a draw after 22 ...'1<\'c6 23.!lacl !lc4
24.\Wxa7'1<!1g6, Bolda-Rattinger, corr.
2005. My computer claims that best
is 25 ..td4 !lb4 26.!lc2=.
22 ...\Wc6 23 ..td2 l\l'b5 24.Wf2
\We2+?
24 ... !lc2! 25.l'lhel c5 26.\Wxd5 c4!
27.'1<!1xb5 !lxd2+ 28.l'le2 !lxe2+
29.xe2 hb5 30.a4 .td7 31.!lcl
.txa4 32.l'lal should be a draw.
After mutual mistakes, the game
was eventually drawn:
25.@g3 !lc2? 26.1We5? (26.\Wa4+-)
26...<ild6 27.!labl .tb5 28.!lxb5
\Wxb5 29 .tc3
29 d4
(29...@fS=; 29 ... !lxc3
30.\Wxc3 d4=) 30.hd4 <ilf5+
31.@f4 <ilxd4 32.exd4 \Wxe5+
33.@xe5 Ms 34.!lbl e7 35.!lb7
d7 36.!lxa7 l'lxh2 37.!laS
h6 38.!lgS hxg5 39.!lxg7 @e7
40.!lgS !le2+ 41.@d5 l'le3 42.a4
l'lxf'3 43. c6 l'lc3+ 44.b5 !lb3+
45.Wc4 !la3 46.Wb4 !ld3 47.a5
!lxd4+ 48.Wc5 !la4 49.Wb5 !lal
50.a6 Wf6 51.!ldS !lbl+ 52. Wc5
!lal 53.Wb5 l'lbl+ 54.Wc5 e5
Draw.
11. Suba - Delchev
Albacete 05.09.2004
1.c4 <ilf6 2.<ilc3 e5 3.<ilf'3 <ilc6
4.e3 .tb4 5.1Wc2 hc3 6.bxc3 d6
7.e4 0-0 8.g3 Wh8 9.d3 <ilg8
97
 Chapter s
Another way to enable ...f7-fS was
... li:ld7. My manoeuvre ... li:lf6-g8-
e7 is a bit slow, but the position is
closed and White cannot do much
with the tempi.
10.li:lh4 li:lge7 11.g2 f5 12.exf5
li:lxf5 13.li:lf3
13.li:lxfS Ms 14.!lbl !lb8 lS.0-0
1!\'d7 is easy to play.
13 ...d7 14.0-0 h6 15.li:ld2
White can create serious threats
only on the kingside. Perhaps he
could try 1S.h3 intending li:lh2-g4.
15. li:lfe7 16.h3 1ll'c8 17.lllh2
17... li:ldS?!
I have obtained a normal, safe po
sition out of the opening. Now I
98
could have waited with ...!lb8, ...b6,
...1!\'e8, probably ... li:lg6, but I decid
ed to improve the placement of my
c6-knight. It stays well on c6, but it
executes only defensive functions
there. It seemed to me that from e6
I could send it to the kingside. Also
my bishop could use the freed c6-
square. However, my last move un
necessaryly provokes 18.d4 ! when
18 ...li:lg6 is impossible. 18 ...li:lf7
would be too passive - White fol
lows up 19.li:le4, then f2-f4. There
fore, I should return to c6 - 18 ...
li:ldc6 19.li:lb3 as 20.a4 1!\'e8, hoping
to grab the a4-pawn later on. For
tunately, my opponent was too en
gulfed in his own knight manoeuvre
and missed his chance to seize the
initiative.
18.li:le4 li:le6 19.'!l'dl li:lf5 20.a4
c6 21.a5 1!\'d7 22.'lire2 !lae8
23.h3 b6 24.axb6 axb6 25.b2
li:lc5 26.!la7 li:lxe4 27.dxe4 li:le7
The transformation of the pawn
structure was definitely in my fa
vour - the c4-pawn is a juicy tar
get. I could attack it with a knight
on a5, but I should trade first a
pair of rooks on the a-file. Perhaps
that explains Suba's next move -
 1.c4 e5 2.illc3 illc6 3.illf3 illc6 4.e3
it prevents ...l:la8, but at the high
price of creating more doubled
pawns! Of course I had to trade
queens and play a better endgame
although my decision does not spoil
my position either. It just leaves
White more chances for obtaining
some counterplay.
28.'19g4 'lfid8 29.'19h4 'lfib8 30.ga3
illg8 31.i.cl '19d8?
This is panic. I suddenly change my
mind and offer to trade queens in a
worse setting than 3 moves ago. The
cold-blooded attack on the e4-pawn
31...illf6! would have assured me
of an edge. The trick is that 32.g4
is effectively parried by 32 ... 'l!\ldS!
33.g5? illh7.
The rest is not too interesting:
32.'19xd8 l:lxd8 33.l:la7 l:lc8
34.e3 illf6 35.f3 d7 36.l:lfal
e6 37.l:lla4 itld7 38.f4
38 illf6?! (38 ...ill c5!) 39.fxe5
dxe5 40.cS i.d7 41.1:!4a6 i.b5
42.l:la2 i.d3 43.cxb6 cxb6
44.hb6 l:lxc3 45..ic7 l:le8
46.1:!2a3 l:lxa3 47.l:lxa3 he4
48.l:la5 hg2 49.@xg2 e4
50.e5 l:ld8 51.i.xf6 gxf6 52.g4
Eld2+ 53.g3 l:ld3+ 54.M4 Elxh3
55.xe4 g7 56.l:la8 l:lb3 57.@f4
@f7 58.l:lh8 g7 59.l:la8 l:lb5
60.l:lc8 l:lg5 61.l:la8 Draw.
99
Chapter 6. 3.tlif3 tlic6 4.g3 b4 5.tlid5
Main Ideas
1.c4 li:lf6 2.li:lc3 e5 3.li:lf3 li:lc6
4.g3 ib4 5.li:ld5
White escapes the exchange on c3,
but the knight jump has two draw
backs:
1. As a rule, exchanges help the de
fender, and this is no exception. Al
though we do not take on d5 at once,
the trade is constantly in the air.
Moreover, after 5...ic5 6.ig2 0-0
7.0-0 d6
8.d3, we could eliminate both
knights with 8 ...li:lxd5 9.cxd5 li:ld4
10.li:lxd4 hd4.
That's why first players prefer 8.e3
a6! 9.b3 ia.7 10.ib2 li:lxd5 11.cxd5
li:le7 12.li:lh4 f5:;:. You can learn
more about this line from the anno
tations to Gaxne 12 Agdestein-To
palov, Stavanger 2014.
2. White removes the control of e4
and we could take our chance with
5...e4!? 6.li:lh4 0-0 7.ig2 d6!?
8.0-0 g5!? 9.d4 h6!
When I started my work on this
book, the line with 8 ...g5 was totally
neglected by practical players and it
was harshly criticized by Marin and
Watson in their works on the Eng
lish Opening. My analyses suggest
ed that in fact it was promising for
Black and I hoped to arm you with
a powerful surprise weapon. The
Candidates tournament in Mos-
101
 Chapter 6
cow, however, saw both Aronian
and Anand opting for 5...e4. Their
games did not change my evalua
tion, but they pushed the variation
under the limelight.
The diagram position is too sharp
for generalisations and it demands
concrete play. Still, there is some
thing I would like to stress - Black
should not hold for the material ad
vantage. On the opposite - he must
be ready to return it for an initia
tive. For instance: 10.lilxb4 lilxb4
11.f3 gxh4! 12.Axh.6 hxg3 13.hxg3
lilh5
1 0?
14.M8 lilxg3!.
10.lilg2 is more solid - See the free
style Grune 13 Sonofluck,Rybka
2.x-Intuitivestra, playchess.com
2007.
Note also Nakamura's move order
8.a3 when simplest is 8 .ia5 (8 ...
..
Anand's 8 ....ic5 is a decent alterna
tive, but after 9. 0-0 Black should
look for improvements. I suggest
9....ig4!?) 9.b4 (9.0-0 g5 10.b4 .ib6;
9.e3 g5 10.b4 lile5!) 9 ....ib6 10 ..ib2
10 ....id4 ll..ixd4 lilxd4 12.e3 lilf5=.
Chapter 6. 3.Clif3 Clic6 4.g3 i.b4 5.Clid5
Step by Step
1.c4 lilf6 2.lilc3 e5 3.lilf3 lilc6
4.g3 ib4
5.lild5 (5.ig2 is covered in the next
chapter) 5 e4!?
.
This rare move is risky, but it is
much more enterprising than the
established equalizer 5 ...ic5 6.ig2
0-0 7.0-0 d6
The first question which comes to
mind is why Black led out his bish
op to b4 in the first place. Wasn't it
easier to play at once 4 ...ic5. One
reason is that 4 .. .ic5 5.lilxe5 ixf2+
6.@xf2 lilxe5 7.e4! is somewhat bet
ter for White. Another argument is
that after 4...ib4 5.lild5 ic5, Black
obtains counterplay by trading on
d5 and then undermining the d5-
pawn with ...c7-c6.
8.e3
Or 8.d3 lilxd5 9.cxd5 lild4
10.lt:lxd4 ixd4=.
8 ...a6! 9.b3 ia7 10.ib2 lt:lxd5
ll.cxd5 lt:le7 12.lt:lh4 f5;:. I analyse
this line in detail in the annotations
to Grune 12 Agdestein-Topalov,
Stavanger 2014. It could serve as a
backup of our main repertoire.
6.lilh4
6 .'ll gl is undoubtedly a strange way
of fighting for an opening advan
tage: 6... 0-0 7.ig2 d6!?. White has
lost two tempi so we can sacrifice
the e4-pawn without much hesita
tion: 8.'llxf6+ 111'xf6 9.ixe4 !le8
103
 Chapter 6
White is unable to finish his deve
lopment without big concessions.
6.lxb4 offers White thebishop pair
advantage, but it cannot even bal
ance Black's central domination
- 6... lxb4 7.ld4 0-0 8.ig2 (8.a3
lc6 9.lxc6 dxc6) 8 ... d5 9.lc2
(9.cxd5 '/ilxd5+) 9...lxc2+ 10.'/ilxc2
dxc4 11.'/ilxc4 ie6 12.'/ilc2 !le8 13.b3
ig4 14.ib2, Smyslov-Benko, Wijk
aan Zee 1972, 14...if3t. White
needs its d5-knight for an indirect
attack on the e4-pawn - by trading
its only defender.
6 ... 0-0 7 .ig2 d6!?
. under control, but his move is
The hunting season on the lh4 is
open! The threat ...g5 is now loom
ing. Black's last move has a poor
reputation, but nonetheless it is the
most testing continuation.
8.0-0
8.lxb4 lxb4 9.a3 lc6 10.d3
10 ...d5
10 ... !leS is considered equal af
ter 11.0-0 h6.
11.0-0 exd3!? 12.'/ilxd3
This pawn sacrifice was seen in
Topalov-Aronian, Moscow 2016,
but something went wrong very
quickly - 12 ... le5 13.'/ild4?!
13.'/ilc2 lxc4 14.e4 c6 15.b3 le5
is about equal. Topalov takes e5
probably wrong in view of:
13 ...lxc4 14.e4 .ie6 15.b3
15... c5!?
The game actually went 15... la5
16.'/ila4 when 16... c5! would have
 3.Gf3 <!lc6 4.g3 .itb4 5.<tld5

been in Black's favour - 17.b4 14.f4) 14.d3 gxh4 15.dxe4 lile6

cxb4 18.i.g5 dxe4 19.M6 gxf6
20.he4 ltlb3 21.!ladl 'l:i'b6.
16.'l:i'xc5 (16.'l:i'dl ltle5 17.f4 i.g4
18.'l:i'd2 ltlc6t, heading for d4) 16 ...
ltla5t.
16.dxe6 !lxe6 17.e5.
I propose to improve with:
9 ...i.g4! hitting immediately e2.

8.ltlxf6+ 'l:i'xf6 9.he4 !le8 offers

Black excellent compensation as
the bishop lacks a good retreat
square (10.tf3 i.h3). So White has
to part with it - 10.hc6 bxc6 ll.O-O
i.g4 12.f3 i.e6 13.d3 i.c5+ 14.@hl d5
15.cxd5 cxds:;;.
The idea behind this move is seen
The insertion of 8.a3 i.c5 in the line:
8...ta5 is simpler - 9.b4 (9.0-0
a) 10.b4 ltlxd5 11.cxd5 (11.bxc5
g510.b4i.b6; 9.e3 g5 10.b41ile5!)
lilf4) ll...lild4 12.!lel lilxe2+ 13.!lxe2
9 ...tb6 10.i.b2 i.d4 ll.hd4
M2+.
lilxd4 12.e3 lilf5 is roughly equal.
b) 10.h3 i.e6 ll.d3 lilxd5 12 .cxd5
hd5 13.dxe4 i.e6 14.b4 i.b6 15.lilf5
f6oo.

c) 10.ltle3 he3 ll.fxe3 Wle7 12.b3

Wle6=.

d) 10.lilxf6+ Wlxf6 11.he4 (11.@hl

!lae8) 11 ... !lfeS 12.d3 lild4 13.ltlf3
c6! 14.i.e3 lilxf3+ 15.exf3 th3
16.!lel he3 17.!lxe3=
White will open the f-file, but
without minor pieces his attack
ing chances are minimal.
9.0-0 helped Nakamura to beat
Anand in Moscow 2016.
The game went 9 ... !le8 10.e3
g5?! 11.b4 i.b6? (Nakamu
ra suggested after the game
11...gxh4 12.i.b2 lilxd5 13.cxd5
lile5 14.bxc5 ig4 15.Wlb3 lilf3+
16.txf3 M3 17.h3oo) 12.tb2 17...d5! 18.cxd5 cxd5 19.hd5 !lxe3
lilxd5 13.cxd5 lild4 (13 ... lile5 20.fxe3 Wlg5!. This double attack on

105
 Chapter 6

d5 and e3 allows Black to take over 9.d4

the initiative and assures him of full
compensation for the pawn. 9.1ll'a4? c5 10.d4 lilxd5 ll.dxc5
lildb4 12.a3 1Zla6 13.b4 gxh4.
s ...gs!? 9.d3? lilxd5 10.cxd5 lilb8 ll.dxe4
gxh4 12 ..tli6 1ll'f6 13.hf8 @xf8 was
Forcing the play. clearly better for Black in Sipos-B.
8... !le8 is much more common, Lalic, Hungary 2016.
but the pawn structure arising af
ter 9 .d3 is pleasant for White. Still, 9 ...h6!
Black gets enough counterplay.
9.f3 lilxd5 10.cxd5 exf3 ll.lilxf3
lile5 was seen in Nepomniach
tchi-Efimenko, Ningbo 2011.
Black's dark-squared bishop
will remain out of play on the
queenside so he must alter the
pawn structure by ...c7-c5!. That
would enable a back door via d8.
For instance 12.e3 (Marin's rec
ommendation) 12 ....ta.5 13.1ll'c2
c5 14.lilxe5 (14.dxc6 lilxc6) 14 ...
A critical position. The threat ...gxh4
!lxe5 15.d3 i.g4 16.e4 1ll'd7=.
is very real and Black is not too
9 ... exd3 10.1ll'xd3 lilxd5 11.cxd5 lile5
afraid of a counterattack as long as
12.1ll'c2 ic5 13.b3 a5! (intending
he controls the centre.
...a4) 14.a3 i.d7.
White has a wide choice now. He
can either focus on the kingside
hoping to develop an attack, or shift
his attention left on the b4-bishop:

10.1

Marin proposes 10.lilxb4 lilxb4

It seems that White has good chanc
es on the kingside, but 15.i.b2
Or 15.lilf3 1ll'f6 16.i.b2 1ll'g6.
15 ... 1ll'g5 (heading for h5) offered
nice counterplay in Quinteros-Ma
karichev, Vrsac 1977.
11.f3, but correspondence chess has
seen White struggling to equalize:
11 ...gxh4! 12.hh6 hxg3
12 ...e3!? 13.g4 c5 14.g5 1ll'e7
also deserves attention, but
the text is preferable because it
counts on attack rather than on
material advantage.

106
 3.lilf3 lilc6 4.g3 .ib4 5.lild5
13.hxg3 lilh5
14.fxe4
14 ..ixffi lilxg3! gives Black a
strong attack.
14...lilxg3 15.l'1f3 lilxe4
Black owns the initiative, but proba
bly White can maintain the balance
with accurate defence after 16. 'i!lcl
(16 ..ixf8 l!?xf8) 16...f5+. White went
on to draw eventnally in Bnbnov
Schunck, corr. 2011.
The game McNab-Haik, Metz 1988,
saw 10.'i!la4 a5
10 ...lilxd4!? ll.'i!lxb4 lilxe2+
12.l!?hl c6
sets more problems as the obvi
ous 13.lilxf6?! '1!!1xf6 14..ie3 gxh4
15.!ladl stnmbles into 15 ....ig4
with many threats.
It is better to retreat - 13.lilc3
lilxcl 14.!laxcl gxh4 15.gxh4
with sharp play. For instance,
15 ...lilg4 is not decisive due to
16.lilxe4 d5 17.lild2 and White is
holding.
11..ie3 gxh4 12.a3 with unclear po
sition.
10.lile3 gxh4 ll.a3 .ia5 12.b4 .ib6
13.cS d5 is another principled line.
14.gxh4
The attack on h6 is easily par
ried: 14.'i!ld2 lile7 or 14.cxb6
axb6 15.lilc2 l!?h7 16.'1!!1d2 lilg8.
14...l!?h8 1s.l!?h1 !lg8 16.f3 exf3
17.!lxf3 .ie6. A sharp position with
mutnal chances has arisen. The ac
tivity of Black's pieces compen
sate the enemy bishop pair. We can
even sacrifice the exchange, using
the fact that White's kingside is still
undeveloped:
18.lilfS
18..ib2 concludes the develop
ment. We can meet it by 18 ...
lilh5 19.'l!!lel lile7 20.'i!lf2 !lg6
21.!lgl 'i!ld7;.
18 ... lile4 19.lilxh6 !lxg2 20.l!?xg2
'i!lxh4. The h6-knight has no retreat,
but we cannot win it. Thus we have
some sort of a fragile balance.
I have also analysed the somewhat
slow:
107
 Chapter 6

10.h3 li:lxd5 (10 ... gxh4 and 10 ...taS

are perfectly possible, too) 11.cxdS
li:lb8 12.'&a4 li:la6 13.a3 td7 14.'&b3
tas 15.'&xb7 1!ilc8=.

Finally, 10.a3 tas 11.li:le3 gxh4

transposes to the main line.

10 ...ta.5

10 ...li:lxd5 11.cxd5 li:le7 12.he4 gxh4

13.'&a4. Both 11 ... li:lxdS 12.cxd5 li:le7 13.li:le3
th3oo and 11...th3 12.li:lge3 11.xfl
11.ltlg2 13.@xfl are unclear. See the free
style Grune 13 Sonofluck,Rybka
This position is strategically unbal 2 .x-Intuitivestra, playchess.com
anced and it needs testing. 2007.
Chapter 6. 3.tll f3 tll c6 4.g3 b4 5.tll d 5
Annotated Games
12. Agdestein - Topalov
Stavanger 2014
1.c4 e5 2.liJc3 liJf6 3.liJf3 liJc6
4.g3 .ib4 5.liJd5 .ic5 6 .ig2 0-0
7.0-0 d6
8.e3
White prevents the unloading ope
ration 8.d3 liJxd5 9.cxd5 lild4
10.lilxd4 hd4 ll.e3 .@.b6 with easy
equality. Black only should refrain
from undermining the centre with
...c6. Such an idea would have had
some sense if Black had knights and
the d5-pawn was restricting them.
With only long-range pieces left on
board, ...c6 is anti-positional be
cause:
1. It does not solve any strategic
problems;
2. It only prolongs the diagonal to
the g2-bishop;
3. In principle, one should not dis
play unnecessary activity on the
wing where the opponent is stron
ger . Thus, after:
12.a4 a5! 13.id2,
instead ofpreparing ...c6, we should
turn our attention to the kingside
where .. .f5 is a natural idea. We can
push it immediately:
13 .. .f5 14.Whl, but here we need
to turn again to l4....@.d7, since
14...g5 is a bit premature due to
15.'&h5, e.g. 15....@.d7 16.f4 exf4
17.gxf4 g4 18.h3. This line sug
gest that perhaps it would be
better to wait for White to shift
his queen from the dl-h5 diago
nal:
13 ....@.d7 14.'&c2 f5! 15.Whl when we
have two possible set-ups.
a) Simplest is to open the e-file and
trade all the rooks with a proba
ble draw: 15...!lfl 16.f4 exf4 17.exf4
109
 Chapter 6
'!\1f8=. Note that Anand's rook lift
...1lf8-f6-h6 is clumsy since White
can easily prevent ...'!\1h5 with f4,
if3.
b) The same idea could be modified
by gaining space first with 15 ...g5
16.f4 exf4 17.exf4 (17.gxf4 g4 18.e4
ie8 19.e5 h5:;:!) 17...g4 18 ..ic3 1le8
19.b3 h5 20.h4 (20 ..ib2 '!\1e7 21.'!!.1c3
@h7 22.!lael '!\1f7 23.'!!.1d2 c6:;:!
24..ia3 h4) 20 ...1le3 21.l!lh2 '!\1f8
22.ib2 1lae8 23.'!\1c3 @h7=.
The first plan is certainly safer and
is effective against all White's move
orders, for instance, 14.!lcl (instead
of 14.'!!.1c2) 14...'!\1e8 15.b3 (15.1lc4
cS=) 15 .. .f5 16. l!lh1 sf7.
On a final note, I should add that if
White begins with 12.b4 (instead of
12.a4), it is best to counter it with
12 ...a5!
12 ...id7 13.a4 a5 14.b5 f5 15..id2
'!!.1f6 is possible, of course, if a
player like Anand chose it, but
the b5-pawn clamps on c6 and
reduces Black's counter-attack
ing options.
13.bxa5 (13.b5 a4!) 13 ...ixa5
14..ib2
1 1 ()
14..id2 f5 15.ha5 1lxa5 16.f4
'!\1e7 17.!lel b6, Rogozenco-Ba
logh, Germany 2009.
14...'!\1e7 15.e4. Here the game Ma
rin-Komarov, Cairo 2001, finished
in a draw, but Black obviously has a
slight edge owing to his better pawn
structure.
s.. a6 9.b3
.
White's most unpleasant plan is
based on the attack with lilh4, f4,
aiming to open the f-file. Therefore,
9.lilh4 should be his most princi
pled continuation. However, the
sharp attack 9... lilxd5 10.cxd5 lile7
11.f4 (ll.b3 c6 12.dxc6 lilxc6 13.ib2
d5 14.!lcl ie7=, Tari-Matlakov, Ye
revan 2014.) ll ...exf4 12.b4 ib6
13.1lxf4!?, Romanov-Fressinet,
Hamburg 2014, could be tamed by
13 .. .f5 or even 13...WeS, intending to
meet '!\1h5 by ... f5.
9.d4 ia7 should not be a problem:
10.dxe5
10.lilc3 h6 ll.h3 (ll.d5 lile7)
11 ...ifS 12.a3 (12.dxe5 dxe5)
12 ... lile4 13.lile2 exd4 14.lilexd4
(14.exd4 d5 15.cxd5 lile7 16.lilc3
lilxd5 17.Wb3 lildxc3 18.bxc3 c5)
 14 ... ltlxd4 15.ltlxd4 th7 leads to
normal play in the centre.
10.b3 exd4 11.ltlxd4 ltlxd4
12.exd4 ltlxd5 13.cxd5 id7
14.ie3 a5= is rather dull.
10 ... ltlxe5! ll.b3 ig4 12.ltlf4 ltle4
was equal in Kuzubov-Gupta, Iasi
2015.

Finally, the plan of a queenside

pawn storm 9.d3 b7 10.td2 has
no bite.
10.illxf6+ 111'xf6 ll.td2 invites
Black's queen to the kingside -
ll...1!1'g6 12.Ac3 Wh5 13.ltlh4 ig4
14.if3 f5!=, Grischuk-Adams,
Warsaw 2013.
White hopes to open up the f-file
with f4. 12.d4 is harmless owing to
12 ... e4 13.ltlg5 f5 14.Wh5 h6 15.ltle6
he6 16.dxe6 c6.
12 . .f5!
.

10 ... ltlxd5 ll.cxd5 ltle7 12.1!1'b3 c6

13.dxc6 ltlxc6 14.ic3 gb8 15.d4 12 ... c6? 13.dxc6 ltlxc6 14.f4 led to
Black's rout in Swiercz-Balogh, Bu
dapest 2014.

13.f4

In Marin's opinion, critical here is

13.gcl ib6 (to free the queen) 14.f4
e4 15.g4, but he only considers:
15... lilxd5?! 16.lilxf5 hf5 17.gxf5
We7 18.gc4. We have the much
Now 15...exd4 is enough for better option of:
equality, but in Tomashevsky 15...fxg4! 16.he4 \We8 with active
Svidler, Moscow 2007, Black play. For example:
opted for:
15... e4!? 16.ltld2 d5 17.f3, when 17...
ie6! 18.'ll'dl f5 would have accom
plished Black's main strategic goal
in our anti-English repertoire - to
occupy the centre and hold it.

9 Aa7 10.ib2 ltlxd5 11.cxd5

..

lile7 12.lilh4

111
 Chapter 6

a) 17.'l!l'el lllf5 18.ixfS ixf5 19.'l!l'g3 18 c6

g6 20.lllxf5 !lxf5! 21.'l!l'xg4 !lxd5
22.!c3 !lf5 with a firm blockade on The most principled retort was 18...
the light squares; lll d5. Then White has nothing bet
ter, but push 19.f6 when both cap
b) 17.f5 'l!l'h5 18.!lf4 'l!l'xh4 19.!lxg4
tures are possible:
'l\lh6 20.!lxg7+ 'l!l'xg7 21.hg7 @xg7
19 ...!lxf6 20 ..txf6 '/;!fxf6;
22.'/;!lg4+ @h8 23.'/;!lh4 .txf5 24.'l!l'xe7
19 ...gxf6 20.he4 lllxe3 21.!lgl+
!lae8 25.'/;!lxeS !lxe8 26.ixfS !lxe3!=.
@h8 22.'l\lh5 d5co.
Note this tactical hit. It exploits the
inclusion of 13.!lcl !b6. So Marin's
19.dxe4
improvement may be not better
than Agdestein's choice at all!
Agdestein fails to assess realistical
ly the position. He overestimates
13 ...e4 14.g4 lllxd5
the significance of the open g-file.
19 ..txf6 !lxf6 20.dxe4 he3= was
l4...fxg4 15.he4 'l\le8 16.f5 '/;!fh5
called for. The threat of e4-e5 would
17.!lf4 '/;!fxh4 18.!lxg4 is already in
provide sufficient counterplay.
White's favour. The above-men
tioned endagame with opposite
19 ... lllxe4 20.'l!l'c2 !laeS 21.!lgl
coloured bishops might be a draw,
lllf6 22.!lael
but a pawn is a pawn.

15.lllxf5 txf"5 16.gxf5 'l!l'e717 .@hl

lllf6

The stranded e3-pawn is a cause of

constant concern for White. Black
can choose a solid set-up as ... !lf7,
18.d3 ... @hS, '/;!ff8 or the more active:

White's flank attack 18.!lgl d5 22 ...'l!l'f7 23.e4?

19.Ml should not succeed owing to
Black's superior centre. A simple
defence would be 19 ...!c5 20.'l!l'el
!a3 21.e5 !d6=, but Black has
a number of other good plans, as
...!lads, ...d5-d4.
White counted on 23 ...hgl 24.!lxgl
which would have given him de
cent compensation, but he misses
Topalov's counter-blow. The calm
23.'/;!ld2 kept things under control:
 3.lilf3 lilc6 4.g3 b4 5.lild5
23 ...'/;l'h5 24.Ml or 23 ... d5 24.if3
when Black cannot double rooks on
the e-file in view of ia3.
23 ...d5!+ 24..hf'6 hgl 25 .ie5
ia7 26.exd5 cxd5 27.1/ild3 !ld8
28.!lcl !ld7 29."13 !le7 30.\1ijg3
h8 31.!lc2 .ib8 32 ..ig4 d4
33.gl d3 34.!ld2 Wd5 35.!lxd3
ia7+ 36.fl Whl+ 37.e2 1/ile4+
38.dl b8 39.'lll'f3 1/ilxf3+
40. he5 41.fxe5 !lxe5
42.hb7 !lexf5 43.a4 a5 44.h3
!lf2 45.ia6 g5 0-1
1 3.Sonofluck,Rybka-lntuitivestra
PAUCSS Freestyle 2007
1.c4 e5 2.lilc3 lilc6 3.lilf3 lilf6
4.g3 b4 5.lild5 e4 6.lilh4 0-0
7.g2 d6 8.0-0 g5 9.d4 h6
10 ..ilil a5 11.lilg2 "13
White's kingside is a funny sight.
Especially the hl-bishop is rath
er awkward. Lines like 12.b4 lilxb4
13.lilxb4 ixb4 14.!lbl c5 15.a3 ic3
16.dxc5 dxc5 17.!lxb7 1/ilxdl 18.!lxdl
!lab8 underline that. Every ex
change increases the weight of the
remaining black pieces. White's
only counterplay could be based on
the temporary weakness of e4. If
the bishop could take it, the whole
course of events would abruptly
change since Black will have to wor
ry about his king. Therefore, the fol
lowing sacrifice is timely and good.
12.li:lge3! bfl. 13.xfl h8?!
This move is too hesitant. The e4-
pawn could not be defended with
13 ... !leS due to 14.li:lf5 h7 15.h4 so
Black should have thought how to
limit the scope ofWhite's would-be
a-beast light-squared bishop. I pre
fer 13...li:lxd5! 14.cxd5 li:le7 15.ixe4
f5 16.g2.
The potential strength of the g2-
bishop discourages immediate ac
tive actions with ...f5-f4, but in fu
ture the f-pawn could tum into an
important resource.
I think that White has just enough
for the exchange to balance the
game, e.g. 16... li:lg6 17.li:lc4 ib6
18.e3 'l;l'f6 19.a4 f4 20.gl.
It looks safer to gain some space
on the queenside with 16...b5!?
17.li:lc2 g7 18.gl li:lg6 19.a4 bxa4
20.!lxa4 ib6 21.e3 \1ijd7=.
113
 Chapter 6

14.1 .ib6 15.b4 hd4 16.b5

h:e3 17.bxc6 h:cl 18.cxb7 !lbS
19.Wl'xcl liJxd5 20.cxd5

45 !le7?

Black should always threaten to

take the bishop. 45...!lfS! 46.Wl'c4
According to the engines, the posi !lxf5 47.gxf5 Wi'xf5 48.We2 Wf3
tions on the last two diagrams have 49.Wxf3 exf3 50.lilf2 g4 51.lilg3 lilg7
the same evaluation, but from a 52.Wxg4 f2! is a draw.
practical point of view, White has
made a big progress. The b7-pawn 46.Wl'c4 !lg7 47.Wl'd4 Wl'xd4
secures him at least a draw while 48.exd4 !le7 49.@f2 1-0
any mistake will cost Black dearly.
Without the a-pawns, Black would
not have risked anything, of course.
The rest ofthe game shows that even
computer's help is often not enough
to save such "equal" (?!) positions.

20 ...Wl'e7 21.Wl'c4 f5 22.e3 Wies

23 ..ig2 !lf7 24.lilgl !le7 25 .ib3

h5 26.a4f4 27..icS h4 28.g4 lilg7

29 ..if5 a5 30.Wl'b3 lilf7 31 .ie6+
I'm not sure what has actually hap
lilg6 32 .ifS+ lilg7 33.Wl'c4 @f7
pened, but this position is probably
34.Wi'b3 lilgS 35..ie6+ @f8 still a draw after 49 ...e3+! 50.lile2
36 .ifS Wl'f6 37.Wl'c2 h3 38 ..icS
Wg7 51.e6 (51.!lb3 @f6 52.cS;
Wl'e5 39.Wl'b3 !lf7 40.Wl'c4 lilg7 51.cS !le8 52.e6 Wg6 53.Wxe3
41 .if5 !le7 42 .icS lilgS 43.Wl'b3
!lf8) 51...Wf6 52.!lb5 (52.Wxe3?? c5;
fxe3 44.fxe3 !le8 45.MS 52.f1b3 f1xe6) 52 ...f1xe6 53.dxe6 d5!.

11A
Chapter 7. 3.'2lf3 '2lc6 4.g3 ib4 5.ig2
Main Ideas
1.c4 e5 2.liJc3 liJf6 3.liJf3 liJc6
4.g3 b4 5.g2 0-0 6.0-0
6...e4!?
I do notsay 6...d6 or 6...ge8 are bad,
but I will always choose the aggres
sive approach unless it's proven
wrong. And practice shows 53 per
cent in Black's favour!
7.liJg5
7.4.lel hc3 8.dxc3 h6 9.liJc2 d6
10.liJe3 ges may be of equal worth.
However, the strategical plot in
this position is much simpler than
after 7.illg5. White's only serious
plan is connected with f3 and we
must learn how to meet it. I suggest
ll.'l:l'c2 liJe5!? - see Grune 14 Kel
ly-Gormally, Birmingham 2002. It
is enough to trade any pair of minor
piece to achieve comfortable play.
7 ..hc3 8.bxc3 ges 9.f3 e3!?
.
The other reasonable option is 9 ...
exf3 10.lllxf3 when most solid looks
10 ...'l:l'e7 (10 ...d5 seems to hold,
too, but I suspect that we could ex
pect surprises from White here),
although this idea is based on the
positional pawn sac ll.e3 lll e5
12.ill d4 d6! 13.d3 c5 14.lllf5 .\hf5
15.gxf5 d5! 16.cxd5 c4oo. It is a fair
alternative to 9 ...e3.
10.d3 (10.dxe3 'l:l'e7! ll.liJh3 'l:l'c5=)
10 ...d5
115
 Chapter ?

-file only look dangerous, but he

cannot do much without his queen
which is stranded on the other
flank. My main line runs:
15.c4 qie7 16.hb7 axb7 17.f5 c5!
18.6 ac6 19.b2 h6 20.ae4 g6
2U1ael fjj d4oo.

Perhaps Svidler also was not satis

Since the source game Kasparov fied with White's game since at the
Karpov, Seville 1987, 11.Wfb3 was Candidates tournament 2016 he
White's main retort. The bulletin came up with the novelty:
of the world title match awards it 11.Wfa4!?, but after 11 ...h6 12.cxd5
an exclamation mark and puts an axd5 13.ae4 5 14.ac5 4 he failed
evaluation "". Indeed, I also pre to revive his king's bishop.
fer White after n... qia5 12.Wfa3 c6.
However, I suggest the more active
set-up:
12 ...b6!. Instead of b7-c6, we'll
build the pawn chain b6-c5. That
will leave c6 free for our knight.
Have in mind that 12 ...b6 is nearly
inexplored. Play may continue:
13.cxd5 qixd5 14.4 b7

The g2-bishop is a poor sight, but

the position remains extremely tan
gled - Game 15 Svidler-Karjakin,
Moscow 2016.

The same idea works in the event of

11.cxd5 qixd5 12.qie4 5! 13.c4
ade7 followed up by .. .4.

Black's game is very easy. He will Conclusion:

trade bishops with ... fjje7 and will The ball is in White's court in the
block the long diagonal with ...c5, 9 ... e3 line. 9 ...exf3 also seems in
...qic6-d4. White's threats on the good shape.

116
Chapter 7. 3.lll f3 lll c6 4.g3 .itb4 5 .itg2
Step by Step
l.c4 e5 2.lilc3 lilf6 3.lilf'3 lilc6
4.g3 b4 5.g2 0-0 6.0-0
6.llld5 e4 7.lilh4 d6 transposes to
the previous chapter.
6 ...e4!?
This advance perfectly fits in with
our aggressive approach to the
opening as it promises active piece
play in a strategically unbalanced
position.
Alternatives are rather passive:
a) 6 ...se8 7.lll d5 lll xd5 8.cxd5 lild4
9.lllxd4 exd4. If Carlsen was will
ing to defend this, it should not be
dangerous, but it looks deadly dull
to me.
b) 6 ... d6 gives White some spa
tial advantage due to the plan e3-
.
d4. Tue best shaping of this idea is,
however, the slower 7.d3 h6 8.lila4!
(8.lll d5 c5 9.e3 a6!) 8...a5 9.b3
White defends c4 and enables
the tactical shot 9 ...c5 10.lilxe5!
lilxe5 ll.d4 with the easier game.
9 ...M5 is dubious in view of
10.d4! (threatening a3).
9 V!!Je7 could prove a waste
.
of time as in Aronian-Topa
lov, Moscow 2016: 10.b2 c5
ll.e3 a7 12.lllc3 !le8 13.lilh4.
Tue ex-world champion did
not find anything better than
13 ...V!!ld8 14.V!!ld2 lile7 15.sadl c6
16.lll e2 lllf5 17.lilxf5 hf5 18.d4
V!!lc8 19.lll c3 exd4 20.exd4 lll e4
21.lllxe4 he4 22.he4 !lxe4
23.!lfel !lxel+ 24.1'1xel V!!lf5
25.se7t.
In general, the queen stands bet
ter on d7 in this line.
9...!le8 10.b2
117
 Chapter ?
Reviving the threat of 10 ...
.ic5 11.i2lxe5 i2lxe5 12.d4 i2lxc4
13.bxc4 h7 14.e3.
Svidler-Nakamura, Candidates,
Moscow 2016, saw 10 ...Ms 11.e3
"lfle7? when White missed 12.d4!,
trapping the b4-bishop. Corres
pondence chess has seen:
10 ....ig4 11.h3 .if5 12.e3 Vfld7 13.1!1h2
l'lab8 and Black is holding thanks
to the possibility of ...b5. Still, the
whole Black's set-up is hanging on
a hair.
7.lilg5
7.lilel hc3 8.dxc3 (8.bxc3 l'le8 9.f3
exf3 10.lilxf3 d5 transposes to line
B.) 8...h6 9.i2lc2 d6 10.i2le3 l'le8
does not pose any theoretical prob
lems. I suggest to meet ll.Vflc2 by
ll ... 1De5!? - see Grune 14 Kelly
Gormally, Birmingham 2002.
118
7. .hc3 8.bxc3
.
8.dxc3 l'le8 9.1Dh3 d6 10.lilf4 (10 .
.ig5 hh3!? 11.hh3 h6=, Mut
haiah-Costachi, Porto Carras 2015)
10 ...lile5 11.b3 M5 12.1Dd5 h6 is
similar to the previous comment -
13.lile3 .id7 14.h3 /Dg6 15.1!1h2 l'le5
16.f4 exf3 17.exf3, J.Gabriel-Gyime
si, Deizisau 2009. The open e-file is
a decent insurance against White's
kingside attack.
8 ...l'le8 9.3
9.d3 is senseless. After 9 ...exd3
10.exd3 d6 11.l'lbl h6 12.lile4 /Dxe4
13.he4 th3 14.l'lel lile5 it turns out
that 15.l'lxb7 is not a threat in view
of 15 ....ig4 16.f3 IDxf3+.
We have now two good options:
A. 9 ...e3!?; B. 9 ...exf3.
The latter is more dynamic and
complex, but it is up to you to de
cide whether that is a plus. The aris
ing positions with a fluid centre are
rather chaotic and demand perfect
calculation.
9 ...e3 is easier to play and Black is
commonly the active side.
 3.lilf3 lilc6 4.g3 .ib4 5 ..ig2
A. 9 ...e3!?
This push became popular af
ter Karpov's win over Kasparov in
the 1987 world title match. Kar
pov writes that it was invented by
his second I.Zaitsev for the match
in Bagio against Korchnoi, but later
he discovered an older correspon
dence game Berndt-Zaets, 1979.
The idea behind this sacrifice is
that Black easily restores the mate
rial balance in the event of 10.dxe3
\We7! ll.lilh3 \Wc5 12.lilf4 \Wxc4 13.e4
d6 14.'/,lld3.
In 2001 Kasparov drew as White
with Sadvakasov in the endgame
after 14... lileS 15.\Wxc4. A year later
Khalifman-Grischuk made only the
moves 14....ie6 15 ..ie3 before sign
ing a peace treaty. Curiously, mod
em engines evaluate both moves as
0.00 which is highly unusual for a
position without forced variations.
10.d3
White keeps his pawns connected.
The obvious threat is lile4, .ixe3 so
Black must quickly find targets in
order to distract the enemy from the
overextended pawn.
10 d5 11.\Wb3
11.cxdS lilxd5 12.\Wb3
12.lile4 f5 13.c4 lilde7, intend
ing to meet any knight retreat
by 14 ...4, promises Black an ini
tiative.
12 ...\WxgS 13.4 \Wh5 14..ixdS .ig4
15 ..if3 .ixf3 16.l'lxf3 b6 17..ixe3 l'le7
gives Black nice compensation.
Svidler's novelty ll.'/,lla4!? does not
change significantly Black's play
- ll ...h6 12.cxdS lilxd5 13.lile4 f5
14.lilcS 4 - see Gaine 15 Svidler
Karjakin, Moscow 2016.
11... lila5 12.\Wa3
12.\Wa4 does not protect c3. That en
courages 12 ...c6 (although 12 ...b6 is
also possible) 13.cxdS lilxd5 with
a double attack. Then 14.c4 lilc3
15.'/,llc2 lilxe2+ is equal, as well as
14..ib2 b5.
12 ...b6!
This rare set-up is more active than
the well tested 12 ...c6 13.cxdS cxd5
14.f4 lilc6
14....ig4 15.lilf3 lilc6 allows
119
 Chapter 7
White to launch a pawn storm .
on the kingside after 16.h3 id7
(16...hfS 17.!lxf3) 17.!lbl '/!Jc7
18.lilel lile7 19.g4.
15.!lbl!? '/!1c7
15...ig4?! 16.!lxb7 he2 17.lilxf7
'/!Ja5 18.!lel+-;
15...b6?! 16.ib2! ig4 17.c4.
This is a critical position for the
Karpov/Zaitsev/Zaets variation.
16.lilf3!
The stem game Kasparov-Kar
pov, Seville 1987, saw 16.ib2
ig4 17.c4 dxc4 18.M6 gxf6
19.lile4 @g7 with active play.
Perhaps White's best conti
nuation is 20.'/!Jc3 (20.h3 he2
21.lilxf6 Ml 22.'/!1c3 !le5!) 20 ...
'/!Jd8! 21.!lxb7 (21.dxc4 Wid4=)
21...lild4 22.'/!Jxc4 !lf8 23.lilc5
!lc8 24.h3 with unclear compli
cations.
White could try to improve over
Kasparov's 17.c4 with 17.lilf3,
but then 17...'/!1d7! restricts
the enemy on the kingside
(White's game is easier after
17...!lad8 18.h3! ic8 19.lild4
lilxd4 20.cxd4 b6 21.!lbcl.) 18.c4
dxc4 19.dxc4 !lad8 20.ial (20.
lile5 lilxe5 21.fxe5 he2 22.exf6
Ml 23.!lxfl e2 is dynamical
ly balanced.) 20 ...h6 (Prepar-
ing to meet 21.!lb3 by 21...'/!1e6.)
21.!lfel te6! Black has a com
fortable equality. For exam
ple: 22.M6 gxf6 23.'/!Jb2 @g7
24.'/!1xb7 hc4 25.'/!Jxd7 !lxd7 or
22.!lecl '/!Je7 24.'/!Jxe7 !lxe7.
16.lilf3 anticipates the manoeu
vre ...ig4 (with tempo!), ...'/!Jd7
and leaves Black in a somewhat
cramped position. White may then
proceed with h3, g4, or with the
more solid ib2, c4 (he can also pre
pare it with !lfcl).
13.cxd5 lilxd5 14.f4
If White lingers with this move, he
might never achieve it, for instance,
14.lile4 f5 15.c4 lile7 16.lilc3 f4!.
14 .tb7
..
15.c4
15.ib2 should transpose after 15 ...
c5 (15 ...lile7 16.f5 hg2 17.@xg2 f6
18.c4 '/!1d7 19.lile4 lilxf5 20.M6
@h8 is also possible.) 16.c4 lile7.
This move order offers Black addi
tional possibilities, but I think that
e7 is the best retreat anyway. For
instance, White's attack is more
 3.ltlf3 ltlc6 4.g3 .ib4 s.tg2
dangerous after 16...ltlb4 17.1Wc3 f6
18.hb7 ltlxb7 19.ltlf3 ltlc6 20.hl.
16 ...ltlc7 is also dubious in view
of 17.ltlf3 ltle6 (or the knight will
be clogged with f4-f5) 18.l'labl f6
19.fS when 19 ... ltld4 20.hd4 cxd4
21.1Wb2 ltlc6 22.ltlh4! l'leS 23.l'lf4
surrounds the d4-pawn.
15... ltle7 16.hb7 ltlxb7 17.f5
17.tb2 c5 18.f5 ltlc6 19.f6 transpos
es to the main line.
It might seem that White has a ter
rible attack, but once again we wit
ness that good control of the centre
is a fair insurance against flank as
saults.
17... c5!
17.. .f6 18.ltle4 1Wd7 19..ib2 ill xfS
20.txf6 l'lf8 21..ib2 c5 is "only" bal
anced.
18.f6 ltlc6 19.tb2 h6 (19 ...g6)
20.ltle4 g6 21.l'lael ltld4
White should be very careful. For
instance, 22.11:iia4 ltld6 23.ltlc3 ltl6f5
obviously favours Black. On the
other hand, 22.11:iia6 ltld6 23.ltlc3
does not guarantee him a repetition
of moves with 23 ...ltlc2 24.l'lcl ltld4.
Instead, Black plays on with 23 ...
11:iid7! 24.1Wa4 bS 25.ltlxbS l'leSt.
B. 9 ...ext'3 10.ltlxt'3
In my opinion, Black has two decent
options here:
Bl. 10 ...dS; B2. 10 ...1We7
The latter is more cunning and easy
to play. It is based on a positional
pawn sacrifice which gives Black
significant strategic advantage.
Bl. 10 ... dS 11.d4
11.cxdS 1Wxd5! helps Black activate
his queen. The point is that 12.ltld4
1Wh5 13.ltlxc6 (13.e3?! tg4 14.tf3
Illes 15.hg4 ltlexg4 16.1We2 l'lad8
17.11:iig2 ltle4 18.l'lbl cS) 13...bxc6
14.e3 tg4 15.1Wa4 th3 gives Black
a significant positional advantage
which amply compensates a small
material deficit.
15 ... l'le6 has similar ideas -
16.hc6 (16.l'lbl?! .ie2 17.l'lel
121
 Chapter 7
lilg4 18.h3 1/iff5 19.!lxe2 1/ilxbl
20.1/ifxg4 1/ifxcl+ 21.@h2 ad8
22.1/ifb4 h6 23.c4 1/ifdl 24.af2
1/ifel 0-1, Sigurjonsson-Smys
lov, Reykjavik 1974.) 16...adS
17.1/ifb5 ae5 18.l>l'h7 fili3.
16.3 (16.'/!lxc6 hg2 17.'/!lxg2
'/!lg6) 16 ...'/!lxh3 17.'/!lxc6 aab8
The game Girth-Scwenk, corr 2010,
went on 18.af4 '/!lh5 19.h3 abdS
20.ad4 when 20 ...axd4 21.cxd4
'/!la5! 22.icl axe3 forces a perpetu
al, but Black could certainly play on
with 22 ... hs 23.a4 abs.
White has tried to improve on
12.lild4 with 12.ib2?!, but 12 ...ig4!
13.d3 1/ifa5 14.af2 aad8 is clearly in
Black's favour.
Another attempt was 12.d3 '/!lc5+
13.@hl lilg4 14.'/!lel 1/ilh5!? 15.M4
(15.e4 f5) 15 ... lilce5 16.he5, Van
Wely-Ruck Los Angeles 2011, when
16 ...!lxe5! would have left Black with
a more mobile rook which could at
tack both h2- and a2-pawns.
11...h6
I do not like ll ...dxc4?! 12.igsgg
(12.'/!lc2 h6 transposes) 12 ...h6
13.hf6 '/!lxf6 14.e4 (14.lile5 1/ifd6
1??
15.lilxc4 1/ilg6 16.e4) 14...'/!ld6 (14...
ig4 15.'/!la4 1/ile7 16.Wxc4 '/!ld7)
15.lild2 id7 16.lilxc4, Tomashev
sky-Gajewski, Berlin 2015.
The common ll...lile4 is anoth
er way to prevent the pin from g5,
but the knight is somewhat hang
ing on that square. For instance,
12.'/!lc2 dxc4 13.lile5 lilxe5 14.Wxe4
looks unpleasant: 14...lilg4 (14 ...
lilg6 15.'/!ld5 1/ife716.e4 c6 17.'/!lxc4)
15.'/!lf3, but 15...f5 16.1/ifd5+ Wxd5=
saves the day.
The text keeps more tension.
12.cxd5
Alternatively:
12.1/ifc2 dxc4 13.if4
13.abl 1/ife7 14.ab2 'l!lle4 15.Wxe4
(15.'/!la4 'l!lle6) 15 ... lilxe4 16.lile5
lilxe5 17.he4 lild7 leads to mas
sive elimination of forces af
ter 18.hb7 hb7 19.l'lxb7 axe2
20.!lxc7 lilf6 21.!lxc4 axa2
22.l'lb4!=.
13... lile4 14.aadl
After 14.lile5 lilxe5 15.he5, sim
plest is 15 ... lilc5 (aimed against
16.e4) 16.aabl tg4=.
14...'l!lle7
14...tf5 15.lile5 lilxg3 (15...lild6?!
 3.ltlf3 'll c6 4.g3 ib4 5.ig2
16.e4 ib7 17.1/:l'e2 ltle7 18.hh6
was unpleasant, to say it mild
ly, in Caruana-Anand, Moscow
2016. In the postmortem Caru
ana also proposed 18.h4!) 16.e4
'llxfl 17.exf5 'llxh2 18.hh2 'llxe5
19.he5 1/:l'g5 should be tenable.
Black could always sac the ex
change and play with 3-4 pawns
for a piece. For instance: 20.afl
c6 21.f6 l'1xe5 22.dxe5 ae8oi;.
However, at the press confer
ence in Moscow Caruana called
the position "resignable".
15.ltle5 ltlxe5 16.he5 ltld6 17.adel
(17.af2 is the same - 17...f6 18.id5+
@hs 19.Exf6 gxf6 20.'!l'g6= J 17.. .f6
18.id5+ @h8 19.Exf6=.
12.ltle5 ltlxe5 13.dxe5 axe5 is at least
equal after (14.if4?! ae8 15.cxd5
if5+) 14.cxd5 ig4.
12 1/:l'xd5!
...
13.e3
This was played by Aronian against
Adams in 2015. I have also ana
lysed:
13.ltlh4 1/:l'h5 14.'!l'b3
Or 14.abl ig4 15.if3 hf3
16.axf3 1/:l'd5 17.ltlf5 ltle4 18.1!1'd3
'll d6=.
14...ltla5 15.'ll'b4 ltle4 16.1/:l'a4 ig4
17.1/:l'c2 f5 18.abl c6 is unclear,
Musitani-Dorer, corr. 2010.
13.e4 xe4 (13...1/:l'c4!?=) 14.ltle5
h7 15.ltlxc6 bxc6 16.Exf6
16.hc6 is dubious owing to 16...
ig4 17.1/:l'a4 ib3.
16...gxf6 17.hc6=.
13.ltle5 1/:l'e6 14.ltld3!?
14.ltlxc6 bxc6 15.ael ltle4 16.'ll'd3
'll'g6 17.if4 M5=.
14...xe2 15.hh6
Or 15.1/:l'xe2 l'1xe2 16.hh6 ltle4=.
15 ...1/:l'xdl 16.aaxdl ig4 17.ad2 ie2
18.axf6 gxf6 19.ltlc5 ic4
Now 20.ltlxb7 ltle7 21.'lla5 id5
would be totally even so in the cor
respondence game Zlotkowski
Nowak, 2013, White tried 20.@f2!?
ltla5 21.'ll e4 and got an overwhelm
ing position after 21...@hS? 22.g4
c6 23.'llxf6 ae6 24..ig5.
Black should have defended the f6-
pawn with 21...ae6 22.d5 Ea6 when
White has just about sufficient com
pensation for the exchange.
13.if4 1/:l'a5
123
 Chapter 7

13...1ll'h5 stumbles into 14.!lbl

lild5 15.!lb5 lilce7 16.e4 c6
17.!lb2t.
14.1ll'b3 !lxe2 15.!lfel !lg2+! 16.@xg2
1ll'h5 is excellent for Black.

13 ...Ms 14.lild2

Black was threatening ....ie4. An

other attempt to put the centre in
motion is 14.1ll'e2 .ie4 15.c4 1ll'h5
16.ib2 !lads with full mobilisation.
14...1ll'd7 15.lilb3 lile4 16.c4 b6
17.!lf4 !lad8
Black is still underdeveloped, but he
has no weaknesses and that allows
him to neutralise the enemy's initi
ative. Both queen retreats are pos
sible:
13...1!\'dS 14.1ll'd3 lilf6 15.!lxeS+
1ll'xe8 16.d5 Ci:Je7 17.d6 cxd6 18.ia3
d5 19.!lel d6! 20.ixd6 .ie6 21.lild4
dxc4=;
13 ...1!\'fS 14.1ll'c2 f5 15.lild2 Ci:Jf6
16.!lxe8 1ll'xe8 17.1ll'xf5 1ll'el+=.

Perhaps the most principled retort

to 11.d4is 11 ...Ci:Je4 12.1ll'd3 d6 13.!lbl
f5, tightening the grip on e4.

11... lile5

In the stem game Aronian failed to

equalize completely with White af
ter 18.1ll'flig6 19.ia3 lila5!? 20.ib4
lilxb3 21.axb3 c5+.

B2. 10 ...1ll'e7 11.e3

ll.d4!? is an interesting alternative.

It looks strategically wrong as it of
fers Black a seemingly full control
over e4. However, White puts his
hopes on ll ...h6 12.e4! lilxe4 (12 ...
1ll'xe4 13.lile5 1ll'h7 14.!lxf6 triggers a
strong attack.) 13.!lel
12.lild4
It is natural for White to avoid ex
changes, moreover that the f5 would
be a nice place for the knight.
12.Ci:Jxe5 1ll'xe5 13.!lbl !lb8 occurred

124
 ltlf3 'll c6 4.g3 ib4 5.ig2
in Aronian-Anand, Stavanger 2015.
After 14.l'lb5 'l!Je7 15.d3 d6 16.e4 $.g4
17.if3 (17.'l!Jc2 a6 18.l'lbl 'l!Je6) 17...
tb3 18.$.g2, a draw was signed.
In Biedermann-Kurgansky, email
2012, White came up witb 14.c5, in
tending to meet 14 ...'l!Jxc5 by a sec
ond sac, 15.c4 and tbe al-h8 diago
nal suddenly opens up. Black pre
ferred development over material
and the game was drawn after 14...
b6 15.c4 'l!Je6 16.d3 $.b7 17.e4 d6
18.cxd6 'l!Jxd6 19.'l!!f3 'l!Je7 20.$.g5=.
12.li:lh4!? d6 13.d3 is best met by
13...li:lg6!
14.li:lf5
In Karjakin-Eljanov, Baku 2015,
White played 14.li:lxg6= and of
fered a draw.
14...'l!Je5 15.d4 (15.e4 'l!Jxc3 16.l'lbl
hf5 17.exf5 li:le5 18.l'lb3 'l!Ja5) 15...
'l!Je6 16.'l!Jd3 Ei:Je7 17.e4 Ei:Jxf5 18.exf5
'l!Je2 19.'l!Jxe2 l'lxe2 20.ig5 l'lc2 leads
to a balanced endgame.
12 ...d6!
This move, in conjunction witb
the pawn sacrifice on move 15, ef
fectively patches tbe 10 ...'l!Je7-line.
The source game Kasparov-Karpov,
Seville 1987, saw 12 ... l'i:Jd3?! 13.'l!Je2
(13.l'i:Jf5!?) 13...li:lxcl 14.l'laxcl d6
15.l'lf4 c6 16.l'lcfl witb an initiative.
12 ... l'i:Jxc4?! 13.li:lf5 'l!Je5 14.e4 d5
15.d4 is also dangerous.
13.d3 c5 14.li:lf5
After 14.li:lc2 $.g4 15.'l!Jd2 the the
matic break from the main line:
15 ...d5 16.cxd5 c4 is bad because
White's bishop enters play from
a3 - 17.h3 'l!Jd8 18.dxc4 l'i:Jxc4
19.'l!Jd4. I propose to modify
this idea witb:
15 ...b5!?
16.cxb5
16.$.xa8 is risky - 16 ... l'lxa8
17.cxb5 $.h3 18.l'lf4 c4 19.d4 l'i:Jd3
20.l'lh4 li:le4 and all tbe fun is for
Black.
16...d5 17.a4
17.d4 prevents the knight from
reaching d3, but c4 is also a
perfect stand for it - 17...l'i:Jc4
18.'l!!d3 l'lac8 19.a4 $.h5 20.$.xd5
li:lxd5 21.'l!!xc4 when 21...'l!Je4
22.li:lel $.g6 is equal. 21...l'i:Jf6
22.ia3 li:le4 23.dxc5 'l!Jg5 24.l'lf4
l'i:Jxg3= is more forceful.
17...l'lac8 18.$.b2 c4 19.d4 li:ld3
20.l'i:Jb4 l'i:Je4=.
125
 Chapter ?
14...hfS 15.!lxf5 d5!
The point ofthe l0...1/!\'e7-line. With
out it, White would enjoy a bishop
pair and the better centre.
16.cxd5 c4
17.d4
126
17.dxc4 lilxc4 18.1il'd4 lilxe3 19.he3
1/!\'xe3+ 20.1/!\'xe3 !lxe3 restores the
material balance and the chances
are even after 21.c4 b6 22.a4 !lc8.
17... lild3 18.i.d2
The stem game which introduced
15...d5, Khismatullin-Tomashev
sky, Chita 2015, saw 18.!lxf6?
1il'xf6+. Instead of panicking, White
should have calmly defend, but he
can hardly expect an edge with his
central pawns blocking his bishop.
A possible continuation is 18 ...lile4
19.he4 1il'xe4 20.1il'f3 1/!\fxf3 21.!lxf3
!lad8 22.!lafl (22.!lbl b6 23.!lb5
!ld6 24.a4 a6 25.!lbl !lxd5=) 22 ...
!lxd5 23.!lxf7 !lb5+.
Chapter 7. 3.tll f3 tt:lc6 4.g3 i.b4 5.i.g2

Annotated Games

14. Kelly - Gormally

Birmingham 20.01 .2002

1.c4 liJf6 2.liJc3 e5 3.g3 !b4

4.liJ:f3 e4 5.liJd4 liJc6 6.liJc2 hc3
7.dxc3 d6 8.!g2 h6 9.li:le3 0-0
10.0-0 B:e8

15.cxd5 li:lexd5 16.1'1'f2 1'1'c8 17.l!lh2

b6 18.c4 li:lxe3 19.he3 c5=, Lauti
er-Karpov, Biel 1990.

More often White tries to disrupt

11.1'1'c2
White's bishops lack prospects. His
only viable plan is to push f4, but
11.f4 exf3 12.exf3 has not cought in
practice since Black could take the
best stand against this pawn struc
ture - 12 ...i.d7 13.h3 li:le7 14.1'1'c2
(14.f4? li:lf5) 14...d5 (or 14...1'\'cS
15. l!lh2 d5). This break in the cen
tre is Black's main method of de
fence against a pawn storm on the
kingside.
the coordination of the black piec
es before pushing f4.
A possible stand is ll.b3, but it al
lows the regroupment ll ...li:le5 12.f4
exf3 13.exf3 i.d7 14.h3 ic6. As a
rule, Black needs to trade one mi
nor piece to be perfectly happy with
his position. That's why plans with
li:ld5 do not bother him at all. For
example, 12.<iJd5 (instead of 12.f4)
12 ...ifS 13.h3 a5 14.i.e3 a4 with
counterplay on the queenside, e.g.
15.'@'d2 li:lxd5 16.cxd5 '@'d7 17.l!lh2
c6 18.dxc6 bxc6 19.c4 l'lab8.
The queen move is meant to hinder
...<iJe5, but - surprise!

127
 Chapter ?

11.. qie5!? move, but White has not won a sin

gle game after it in correspondence
A similar idea is ll...id7 12.b3 chess!
qie7!?.
Note that the most popular continu 12... qixc4
ation, 11...aS, loses a tempo since
White is not obliged to answer This leaves more tension than 12 ...
12.a4, but can develop a piece. Af qixe4 13.'l!lxe4
ter 12.id2 Wffe7 13.f4 Black's pieces
do not succeed to take te best stand
with ...id7, ...Wffc8.

12.he4

Let's investigate the alternatives:

12.b3 qieg4 achieves the goal of
trading a piece.
12.h3 ie6
The thematic 12 ...id7 is good,
but why not use the hit on c4 to
win a tempo!
Even 12 ...qig6 13.f4 exf3 14.exf3
id7 15.f4 qie7 16.g4 ic6 17.g5
hxg5 18.fxg5 qid7 is equal.
13.b3 'l!ld7 14.h2 if5!
If Black traded his last knight here,
he should be able to hold the draw
in view of the opposite-coloured
bishops, for instance:
13 ... lilg4 14.Wffd3 qixe3 15.tl<e3 ih3
(15...'l!le7 16.l'lfel b6 17.id2 ib7
18.f3 1!!1e6 19.e4 1!!1h3, Berkes-Gyi
mesi, Hungary 2003) 16.l'lfel 1!!1d7
17.id2 l'le6 18.e4 l'lae8 19.f3 f5,
Polugaevsky-Uhlmann, Solingen
1974. Perhaps even better is to in
sert 13 ...aS 14.a4 first.

13.ig2 qixe3 14.he3 'l!le7 15.c4

qie4

Exploiting the tactical trick 15.lilxf5

Wffxf5 16.f4? qieg4+! 17.hl lilh5
with attack. If White did not take on
f5, we retreat the bishop to h7 and
f4 would not have a bite anymore
owing to the hole on d3.
Thus 12.tl<e4 is the most principled

128
 3.'ilt3 'ilc6 4.g3 b4 5.g2
16.'d3
Polugaevsky-Panno, Mar de! Pla
ta 1971, saw 16.b3 d7 17.d4 f5
18.l'1ael !lf8 19.f3 lilf6 20.e3'1;. Black's
best stand is more restrained:
16 ...M5! 17.'b2 as 18.d4 f6
19.!ladl b6 20.f3 lilg5 21.e4 as=.
16 ...b6 17.b3 Ab7 18.!lfel !lad8
19.!ladl c5 20.'c2 d5=
Opening the d-file allows Black
to eliminate the rooks and reach
a draw position. One mistake on
move 29 complicated White's task,
but it all ended up peacefully at the
end.
21.cxd5 hd5 22.Acl Ab7 23.1'3
lilg5 24.e4 'f6 25.'f2 !lxdl
26.!lxdl !ldS 27.!lxdS+ 'xd8
28.'e2 'd4+
29.@fl? h6! 30.'xa6 'dl+
31.f2 'c2+ 32.fl 'xcl+
33.@f2 lile6 34.'xa7 'd2+
35.fl lild4 36.'aS+ @h7 37.e5
'e2+ 38.gl 'e3+ 39.@fl
'xe5 40.'e4+ 'xe4 41.fxe4
g6 42.f2 @f6 43.e3 e5
44. d3 lilb5 45. lild6 46.g2
g5 47. f6 48.@e3 b5 49.d3
b4 50.e3 g4 51.g2 lilb5
52.d3 lild6 53.e3 h5 54.d3
f5 55.exfS xf5 56.c6 g5
57.e3 f5 58.d3 g5 Draw.
15. Svidle r - Karjakin
Candidates, Moscow 20.03.2016
1.c4 lilf6 2.lilc3 e5 3.lilf"3 lilc6
4.g3 b4 5.Ag2 o-o 6.0-0 e4
7.lilg5 hc3 8.bxc3 !le8 9.1'3 e3
10.d3 d5 11.'a4
Svidler's novelty hinders the plan
with ... lila5 and ...b6, but the queen
does not have any impact on the
centre. Karjakin takes the chance to
hem in the g2-bishop.
11 ...h6 12.cxd5 lilxd5 13.lile4 f5
14.lilc5 f4 15 ..1b2 !lb8
Defending the b7-pawn in order to
free the c8-bishop. If Black wanted
129
 Chapter 7
to push ...b5, he could have done it
without any preparation since 15 ...
b5 16.'1xb5? gb8 would be in his
favour. However, this move would
be double-edged as it creates weak
nesses on the queenside.
Karjakin provokes c4 which weak
ens the square d4. It is indica
tive that the engines prefer for
White more restrained play on the
queenside:
a) 16.gabl '1e7 17.lll e4 (17.c4 lllf6
18.lll a6 ga8 19.'1b5 gd8 20.'1c5
'1xc5 21.lllxc5 b6 22.lllb3 a5=) or:
b) 16.lll e4 b5 17.'1c2 'l:\le7
The best place for the queen is f7
from where it is eyeing both c4 and
g6. Now the most principled conti
nuation is:
bl) 18.c4 lll db4 19.'l:\lcl bxc4
20.dxc4 lll e5! 21.id4 fxg3 22.hxg3
lllbc6 23.he3 if5 with chaotic play
where Black's pieces are very active.
More prophylactic approaches are:
b2) 18.gabl ie6 19.a4 a6 20.axb5
axb5 21.'l:\lcl 'l:\lf7 22.lllc5 .tf5oo.
b3) 18.Wcl '1f7 19.a4 fxg3 20.hxg3
lll a5oo.
Black should play complexly, com
bining threats on both flanks.
16.c4?! lllde7! (eyeing f5) 17.g4?
No matter the threats, one should
never make such moves.
17...b6 18.lll e4 ie6
The opening is over and we can
take stock now. White has made a
novelty, then played all the obvi
ous moves, and ended down clearly
worse! To be sure, the engines eval
uate this position as nearly even, but
I guess that nobody would like to
contemplate such a hopeless bish
op on g2. It would be interesting
to know what went wrong with his
home preparation. After all, Svidler
is one of world's leading experts on
the English Opening. He was obvi
ously frustrated with his achieve
ments as his next attempt to resur
rect the poor bishop is almost los
ing. White adds to the bad bishop
another positional drawback - an
even worse king.
19.g5? h5?!
Karjakin does not want to part
with the sight of the sealed bishop,
but the position was ripe for deci
sive action. 19... hxg5! 20.lllxg5 lllf5
was much stronger. 20.Wb5 if5
 3.'ilt3 'ilc6 4.g3 b4 5.g2
21.xg5 does not help either owing
to 21...d4 22.ixd4 Wlxd4 23.fili3
c6 24.Wla4 ixh3 25.xh3 Wlf6.
20.!lfdl d4?!
20 ...d7! 21.Wfa3 f5+ was a good
introduction to ... d4. Now White
is still kicking.
21 ..ixd4 Wlxd4 22.Wxa7 Wld7
23.Wla3
23 ...h4 (23 ...c6) 24.Wlc3 Ms
25.h3 hh3?
Black is getting impatient.
...
25 c6+, taking the centre under
control, was a must. The text allows
White to activate the queen and
drops all the advantage. The subse
quent play was sprinkled with mis-
takes which eventually led to a curi
ous endgame:
26.Wle5 g6 27.Wd5+ e6
28.Wlxd7 .ixd7 29.h2= !!aS
30.3 hh3 31.xh3 !!a3
32.!!dcl !leas 33.!!c2 @f7 34.d4
!!dS 35.d5 e536.!lbl g6 37.d6
cxd6 38.!!xb6 h5 39.qixd6
!!daS 40.!!b5? (40.g6!) 40 ..
c6 41.g6+ xg6 42.!lcl h7
43.!!gl !!3a7 44.!!g4 gS 45.!!h5
e7 46.!!gxh4 g6 47.!!g4 qifS
48.!!gh4 g6 49.!lg4 qi{S
50.!!xf4?
50.!!e5! !!xa2 51.!!e7 g6 52.!!xf4 was
still winning.
50 ...!!xa2 51.!!th4 g6 52.!!e5
Draw.
131
Chapter 8. Rare Second Moves

Main Ideas

I conclude my survey on the English 2.a3 is a typical Sicilian move so

Opening with rare second moves. we should not discard it altogether.
Their only merit is that they might Just as 2.g3, it has no direct influ
throw us out of our repertoire. We ence on the centre so we can safe
need a concrete approach towards ly employ our plan of claiming the
any one of them. centre with 2 ...c6. However, we
1.c4 e5 2.d3 is aimed against 2... should meet d4 by exd4, e.g. 3.ltlc3
c6 in view of3.ltlf3. One possible ex d5 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.d4 exd4 or:
ploitative strategy is 2 ...f5 which is
normally bad due to d2-d4. I analyse 3.d4 exd4 4.'!Hxd4 d5
this plan in Grune 16 Schwaninger
- Balinov, Oberwart 2000.
We could reach more familiar po
sitions with 2 .ib4+!? 3 .id2 (or
.

3.ltld2 c5 and we meet a3 by ...ia5)

3 hd2+ 4.'!Hxd2

If White does not exchange now on

d5, we take on c4:
5.ltlf3 dxc4 6.1/,\fxdS+ l!lxd8 7.if4
ltld7 8.ltlc3 ltlgf6 9.!ldl l!le8 or
5.ltlc3 dxc4.

Here simplest is to trade a pair of 5.cxd5 is the only principled line,

knights with 4 ltlf6 5.ltl:f3 ltlc6
. but it offers us an initiative. I sug
6.ltlc3 0-0 7.g3 d6 8..ig2 ltld4 gest to prevent any blockading ide
9.0-0 ltlx:f3+ 10.h:f3 c6=. as with the manoeuvre ...tf8-e7-

133
 Chapter s
f6. It hinders White's harmoni
ous development: 5...cxd5 6.lilf3
lilc6 7.1/ild3 .ig4 8.g3 .ie7 9..ig2 .if6
10.0-0 lilge7
The isolated d-pawn is always ready
to move forth, gaining even more
space.
2.lilf"3 e4 3.lild4 lilf6
looks already pleasant for Black.
Good old chess laws hint that White
is playing with fire and should be
punished by an energetic attack.
134
4.d3 lilc6 5.lilxc6 dxc6 is quite
clear so we should consider most
ly 4.lilc3, keeping the pawn on d2.
4 ...ic5 5.lilb3 .ib4 6.c2 0-0!
.
The point! White wins a pawn, but
falls behind in development. We
can play for suffocation with simple
centralising moves: 7.lilxe4 lilxe4
8.xe4 1'le8 9. c2 d5 10 .a3 .if8
ll.e3 lilc6 12 ..ie2 dxc4 13.hc4 a5t.
You do not need glasses to notice
that White's kingside lacks any de
fenders...
Chapter 8. Rare Second Moves
Step by Step
1.c4 e5
A. 2.d3; B. 2.a3; C. 2.lilf3
A. 2.d3
This ridiculous move aims to dis
courage plans with lilc3 ib4. It
would not have posed any problems
to us had we the Sicilian Reversed
with ...d5 in our arsenal. The funny
thing is that we still have:
2...ib4+!? with a rather easy
game.
Note that ifwe delayed the check for
one move later - 2...lilf6, intending
3.lilf3 ib4+, White might definitely
throw us out of our repertoire with
3.a3!? - why not!
In the annotations to Grune 16
Schwaninger - Balinov, Oberwart
2000, I consider in detail an alter
native plan which is based on 2 ...
f5!?. This is an attempt to exploit
White's second move since normal
ly 2 .. .f5 is dubious in view of d2-d4!
An argument in its favour is that
it is applicable after both 2.d3 and
2.a3. On the other hand, it allows
White to follow typical for the Eng
lish Opening schemes. That leaves
him inside his comfort zone.
3.id2
I propose to meet 3.lild2 by 3 ... c5!?
3 ...a5 is another positionally
well grounded option - 4.lilgf3
lilc6 5.e3 lilf6 6.ie2 0-0 7.0-0
"1e8 8.a3 if8 9.b3 d6 10.'!l'c2
ig4 ll."1el '!l'd7 12.ib2 h6 13.h3
5, Csom-Taimanov, Saint Vin
cent 2001.
4.lilf3 lilc6 5.g3 lilge7 6.a3 ia5! We
keep the bishop in order to hamper
White's queenside play. 7.ig2 0-0
8.0-0 d6
We are ready to attack 9.e3 with
9 .. .f5 so perhaps White should
immediately change the course
of events with:
135
 Chapter 8

5.lil:f3 lilc6 6.lilc3 0-0 7.g3 d6

8.tg2

9.b4!? cxb4 10.lilb3 ib6 11.axb4

lilxb4 12.ia3 lilbc6 13.d4 e4 (13 ...
tg4 14.dxeS=) 14.lilgS fS 15.d5 lile5
16.cS dxcS 17.lilxcS 1/!lxd5!? 18.lila4
td8 with roughly equal chances,
8 lild4 9.0-0 lilx:f3+ 10.tx:f3 c6
but all the fight is still ahead.
.

11.d4 '1e8 12."\1;1'd3 1/!le7=.

3 hd2+ 4.1/!lxd2
B. 2.a3
..

We have from here several ways to

This modest pawn move does elimi
complete development. Simplest is:
nate ...tb4, but it neglects the cen
tre. That shonld encourage us to
4 lilf6
claim it with:

Another plan consists of ... d6, .. .f5,

2 ...c6!? 3.d4
... lilf6, but probably the best way to
play for a win is:
3.lilc3 dS 4.cxd5 cxdS 5.d4 should
4 ...b6!? 5.lilf3 d6 6.g3 tb7 7.tg2
be met by 5...exd4!.
lilf6 8.0-0 0-0 9.lilc3 lilbd7.
3.lilf3 e4 4.lild4 d5 5.cxdS lilf6 is a
reversed Alapin where Black's ac
tive pieces ensure him a pleasant
albeit equal game.

This line is inspired by the Bogo

Indian Defence. Black's position is
very solid and flexible. See Game
17 Lein-Korchnoi, Johannesburg
1979.
 1.c4 e5 Rare second moves
3 ...exd4
3...e4 4.lilc3 d5 is more in the spirit
of this book, but it leads to an overly
static position where White's game
is too easy: 5.M4 fie7 6.e3
6e5 lilf6 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.e3
0-0 9.lilge2 lilbd7 10.1\\'b3 lilxe5
ll.dxe5 lilg4 12.'i;\'xd5 'i;\'xd5
13.lilxd5 fidS
White could win a pawn with
14.lilg3, but Black's initiative
and bishop pair amply compen
sate for it after 14...fie6 !. More
prudent is 14.lilec3 M5 15.lilb5
lilxe5=.
6.cxd5 cxd5 7.fixbS?! !lxbS
8.'i;\'a4+ fid7 9.'i;\'xa7?? drops the
queen after 9...i.c6.
6...lilf6 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.lilge2 0-0
9e5 lilc6 10.lilf4 i.e6 lle2
We cannot stand the e5-bishop
for long so ll...i.d6 12.i.xd6 'i;\'xd6
looks consistent. We have enough
counterplay after 13.h4 !lacs, but
our chances to break through the
enemy's ditches appear to be mini
mal.
4.'@'xd4 d5
We can play first 4... lilf6, followed
up by 5... d5. I'm planning to recap
ture on d5 with pawn anyway and
I'm not afraid of 5.e4 d5=. Still, we
could develop the knight to e7 in
stead of f6 in some lines so it looks
clever to push ... d5 immediately.
5.lilf3
5.lilc3 dxc4 6.'xdS+ @xdS 7.fif4
lild7 8.lilf3 lilgf6 transposes to the
main line.
Of course, Black can also keep the
tension with 5... lilf6.
5.cxd5 is risky as Black will get an
initiative in various ways. I like the
following original set-up: 5 ...cxd5
6.lilf3 lilc6 7.'d3 /ig4 8.g3 (8.lilc3
d4) 8 .../ie7 9.fig2 i.f6 10.0-0 lilge7
It is difficult for White to com
plete development as ll.lilc3 could
137
 Chapter 8

face 11...MS 12.'j,l'bS d4. Perhaps

he should seek simplification with
11.i.gS hf3 12.hf6 .b:g2 13..b:e7
i.e4 14.'j,\'xe4 dxe4 15..b:d8 fu:d8=.

5 dxc4

It is worth considering more com

plex lines as 5...ltlf6 6.i.g5
If White fianchettoed his king's
bishop, he would be unable to
prevent ...d4.
6 ...i.e7 7.cxd5 cxd5! 8.e3 1tlc6 9.'j,\'d3
h6 10.th4 0-0 11.i.e2
We are not worse here, at least For
instance: 10.ltld4 ltlb6 11.e4 ltlfd7
12.ltlfS ltlc5 13.ltld6+ .b:d6 14..b:d6
ltlca4 15.ltlxa4 ltlxa4 16.l'ld2 b5
17.i.e2 i.e6 18.f4 l'ldS - our extra
pawn is still alive.

C. 2.ltlf"3 e4 3.ltld4 ltlf6

3... ltlc6 is the common move here,

It seems that White will obtain a
standard IQP position, but 11 ... d4!?
throws him out of his comfort zone.
Following 12.ltlxd4 ltlxd4 13.exd4
ltld5, White should play accurate
ly in order to maintain the balance:
but Black's pawn formation af
ter 4. ltlxc6 dxc6 is too static and it
would be difficult to devise a clear
plan. Perhaps long castling is best,
in order to mount a kingside at
tack, but 5.ltlc3 ltlf6 6.e3 tfs 7.m3
b6 8.'j,\'c2 'j,\'d7 9.b3 i.e7 10.h3 h5
11.i.b2 0-0-0 12.a3 is double-edged.

a) 14.i.g3 'j,\'b6 ls.ms 'j,\'xb5 16..b:b5

i.f5 17.ltlc3 l'lfdS 18.0-0 l'lac8 19.l'lfcl
tf6=.

b) 14..b:e7 'j,\'xe7 15.ltlc3 ltlxc3

16.bxc3 l'leS 17.'j,\'e3 i.g4 18.'j,\'xe7
l'lxe7 19.f3 l'lae8= 20.0-0 l'lxe2
21.fxg4 l'l8e3.
Now both 12 ... @b7 13.b4, Rakh
6.'j,\'xd8+ xd8 7.tf4 ltld7 8.ltlc3 manov-Seirawan, Berlin 2015, and
ltlgf6 9.l'ldl e8 12 ...cS 13.b4 bS, seem unclear.
 l.c4 e5 Rare second moves
The text is more in the spirit of the
book.
4.li:lc3
After 4.d3 we can already play 4...
li:lc6. The point is that we no long
er fear the set-up with e3, b3, i.b2
and a possible f3 later where White
needs his d-pawn on d2 to pro
tect e3. For instance: 5.li:lxc6 dxc6
6.li:lc3 i.c5 7.e3 exd3 gives Black
free piece play.
4...tc5 5.li:lb3 i.b4 6.%l'c2
We meet 6.d4 (and 6.d3) by6...exd3
7.%l'xd3 li:lc6.
6.g3 hc3 (or 6 ... 0-0 7..ig2 hc3)
7.bxc3 0-0 brings about a familiar
pawn structure where the knight on
b3 is a little strange and aloof from
the kingside. Play may continue
8..ig2 d6 9.0-0 l!e8 10.d3 h6 ll.llbl
li:lc6=.
6 .. 0-0!
Guliyev obtained a good game with
6 ...Vfle7, but it would be more natu
ral to defend the e4-pawn with a
rook. If White does not accept the
gift, he risks to become worse with
out any material consolation, e.g.
7.g3 a5!? (7... lle8=) 8.a3 hc3.
7.li:lxe4 li:lxe4 8.%l'xe4 l!e8
My claim may sound exaggerated,
but I believe that Black's game is
clearly better! White is severely lag
ging behind in development and it
would be difficult for him to castle.
An illustrative line is:
9.%l'c2 d5 10.a3 MS n.e3 li:lc6
12.i.e2 dxc4 13.hc4 a5t.
139
Chapter 8. Rare Second Moves
Annotated Games
16. Schwaninger- Balinov
Oberwart 2000
1.c4 e5 2.g3 f5 3 ..ig2 lilf6 4.d3
.ie7 5.lilc3 0-0 6.lilf3
White's move order is unimpor
tant provided that he fianchettoes
his bishop and develops the king's
knight on f3. The only independ
ent set-up is 6.e3 d6 7.lilge2 c6 (7...
lila6!? limits White's options)
8.0-0
8.b4 discloses White's plans too
early and suggests a counter in
the centre with 8 ....ie6 9.b5 d5
10.bxc6 li:lxc6. It is not clear at
all that the advance of the b
pawn is White's best idea. Cen
tral play with b3, f4 may be a
more clever approach.
8 ...lila6
140
White's set-up is a little passive,
but it protects well his castling
position. Thus the manoeu
vre 8...1/;\fe8 already encourages
9.b4! 1/;\fh5 10.f4. The text slows
down White's offensive.
9.f4
Or 9.b3 .ie6 10 ..ib2 1/;\ld7 11.f4
!lae8 12.1/;\fd2 id8=, Ribli-Drab
ke, Austria 2011.
9... 1/;\fe8 10.!lbl Wf7!
The point! Black targets the c4-
pawn and prepares ... e4, e.g.
11.b4 e4, or 11.a3 lilc7 12.b4 e4.
It transpires that White should
protect c4:
ll.b3 id7 12 .1/;\ld2 !lae8 13.ib2
13...idS
Black is fully mobilised and well co
ordinated.
6.. d6 7.0-0
 l.c4 e5
Rare second moves
7 c6
...
I have played in one game 7...lila6,
having in mind to meet 8.!lbl by 8 ...
c6 9.b4 lilc7 10.b5 i.d7, but this set
up is a bit too passive.
Later I was attracted by the straight
forward idea 7...'l!fe8!? 8.b4
8.lild5 lilxd5 9.cxd5 'l!fh5 10.e3
lild7 11.lild2 'l!fxdl 12.!lxdl lilc5
13.lilb3 lilxb3 14.axb3 i.d7=,
Gourlay-Greet, Edinburgh 2009.
8 ...Wh5
Black's idea is to sac a pawu for
a great initiative after 9.i.d2
(9.Wc2 f4) 9 .. .f4 10.gxf4 i.h3
11.hh3 (11.i>hl hg2+ 12.@xg2
lilbd7 13.<!>hl lilg4) ll ...Wxh3
12.lilg5 'l!fh4 13.<!>hl lilg4 14.lilf3
'l!fh3.
Critical, however, is 9 .e3 ! which
prevents .. .f4 and prepares a trade
of queens with lild2. My analysis
shows that Black can hold the end
game after 9...te6 10.lild2 Wxdl
11.!lxdl c6 12.b5 !lc8 13.i.a3 lilbd7
14.bxc6 bxc6 15.!labl @f7, planning
...d5.
Still, it is not worth to test White on
the move 9.e3!. The text does not
waste time on dubious queen ma
noeuvres, but prepares ... @h8, i.e6.
The best move order, however, is
7... a5!? in order to exchange the a
pawus, and more importantly, to
provoke !labl.
8.!lbl
Of course, 8.b4 is better. In fact,
White might need the rook exact
ly on al. For instance, 8 ... @h8 (in
tending ...te6), is best met by:
9.a4 ie6 10.i.a3. In practice,
White chooses instead exclu
sively:
9.!lbl
9.b5 cxb5 10.lilxb5 lilc6 11.lilc3
te6=.
9...a6 10.a4 te6 ll.b5 axb5 12.axb5
Black has achieved comfortable
development and after 12 ...Wc7
13.bxc6 bxc6 14.Wb3 the game
141
 Chapter 8

Spraggett-Dolmatov, Hastings 1989, 15 liJg4

..

has finished in a draw.

The thematic idea 15 ...f4 was also
8 a5!? 9.a3 l!lhS 10.b4 axM

possible, but perhaps Balinovwant
11.axb4 liJa6 12.b5 liJc5 13 .ie3
ed to keep the centre more fluid.
liJe6 14.bxc6 bxc6
16.'1!1b6?! '1!1e8

Black smells the blood and stakes

on a kingside attack. 16 ...liJxe3
17.'1!1xd8 .ixd8 ensured him a clear
edge though.

17.E1al E1xal 18.E1xal

15.m,3

The email game Kuttruf-Zeh,

2004, saw 15 ..ib6 '1!1d7 16.'1!1c2 .ib7
17.E1b2?! c5 and Black's game is
even more pleasant. An obvious im
provement is 17.c5 liJd5=.
18 ...f4?
Black could also meet 15..ib6 by
15 ...'1!1e8!? 16.c5 f4, for example - Black has a big Elo advantage and
17.cxd6 .ixd6 18.'1!1d2 '1!1e7 19.e3 rushes to finish off the opponent
E1a3 20.E1fcl fxg3 21.hxg3 .ia6 with with a direct attack. Correct was 18 ...
active piece play. .id8! 19.'1!1b4 liJxe3 with the bishop
pair advantage and a target on e3.

19.d2? (19.i.a3! d5 20 ..ia3) 19 ...

fxg3 20.hxg3 d5 21.e3? (21..iel)
21....icS 22.'1!1a5 '1!1h5-+

Now 22.d4 would be risky in view

of 22 ...e4 23.liJe5 liJg5 24.E1al E1xal
25.E1xal .test.

142
 l.c4 eo Kare second moves
Black has achieved the ultimate at
tacking set-up. The rest is irrelevant
to the opening:
23.cxd5 !lxf3? 24.lile4 cxd5
25 .ht'3 dxe4 26.hg4 xg4
27.!lcl? h6 28.'1xc5 lilxc5
29.xc5 dl+ 30.lilg2? f3+
31.<i>h2 xf2+ 32.<i>hl filt3 0-1
17. Lein - Korchnoi
Johannesburg 1979
1.c4 lilf6 2.lilf3 b6 3.g3 b7
4.2 e5 5.d3 b4+ 6.d2
hd2+ 7.xd2 0-0 8.0-0
s ...d6
Korchnoi had played earlier 8...!le8
9.lilc3 c6 10.!lacl d5 11.cxd5 cxd5
12.d4 e4 13.lile5 lilbd7 14.lilxd7
xd7=, Hort-Kortchnoi, Moscow
1971, but White could improve with
10.d4! e4 11.lilh4 d5 12.lilfs. It is
more logical to leave the pawns on
dark squares.
9.lilc3 lilbd7 10.e4
White chooses a plan with f4, but
it turns problematic. As usual, cen
tral play is better: 10.d4 !le8 11.c2
where Black is solid, but cramped.
10 lilc5 11.lilh4 lile6 12.lile2
So far 12.f4 drops a pawn after 12 ...
exf4 13.gxf4 lilxe4
12 ... lilh5 13.lilf5 g6 14.lile3
14 g5
..
14...fS equalized because 15.exf5
2 16.lilxg2 !lxfS 17.g4? would
lose to 17...lilhf4 18.gxf5 g5.
15.!ladl f5 16.exf5 hg2 17.lilxg2
White's knights are slightly bet
ter coordinated than Black's after
17.lilxg2! gxf5 18.lilhl lilh8 19.f4
exf4 20.gxf4 e7.
17...xf5 18.lilhl?!
An incredible move from a decent
grandmaster as Anatoly Lein. I fail
to understand its motives. 18.f4=
eliminated the tension.
18 g4 19.lilh4 g5 20.lilg2
!lf6 21.lilgl lilhg7 22.lile3 5
143
 Chapter s
23.e2 g6 24.li'ld5 gf7 25.e4
xe4+ 26.dxe4 gaf8 27.@g2
li'ld4
2s.gd2
White stubbornly refrains from
28.f4 which should be enough
to hold after 28 ...gxf4 29.gxf4 c6
30.fxeS dxe5. Perhaps Lein shared
the opinion of GM Spiridonov who
liked to say that f4 was ALWAYS
bad?!
28 li'lge6 29.h3 h5 30.gel g4
..
31.h4 a6 32.li'le3 li'lc5 33.li'ld5 c6
34.li'lc3
144
34 bs
This game is a good example ofwhat
to do against passive waiting game
- Korchnoi implacably advances,
seizing more and more space all
over the board.
35.cxb5 axb5 36.b4 li'lce6
37.ge3 gas 38.li'lge2 c5 39.bxc5
dxc5 40.li'ld5 c4 0-1
I suppose that the game was ad
journed and the knight analysis
convinced Lein that his position
was hopeless.
Chapter 9. 1.ctJf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.b4
Main Ideas
1.lllf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.b4 f6!
White players had great expecta
tions about this system five years
ago. It seemed that the sharp attack:
4.e3 e5 5.c5 was an effective way
to exploit the light-squares weak
nesses in Black's camp. After 5...
a5 White followed up with 6.ib5+?
c6 7.ic4 axb4 and his design was
based on the hit 8.iilxe5?.
However, Reinhold Thiele noticed
that 8... fxe5! 9.'l:!fh5+ g6 10.\1\'xe5+
111'e7 ll.'l:!fxh8 iilf6 was winning for
Black as the queen remains en
trapped on h8. The same theme oc
curs in various lines ofthe 3.b4 sys
tem and it is worth remembering it.
In 2013 Bukavshin introduced the
new idea 6.\1\'a4+, aiming to un
coordinate Black's pieces. Critical
then is 6...id7 7.b5 hc5 8.ic4
Ill e? 9.exd4 exd4
Black should forget about short
castling, but it turns out that his
king can find a safe haven on the
opposite wing. An important nu
ance is that White cannot regain
the pawn with 10.W.b2 ig4 11.iilxd4
because after 11...iild7! all his minor
pieces are hanging and 12.iile6 he6
13.he6 stumbles into 13 ....txf2+!.
That leaves White with 10.W.a3
lll a6!? 11.0-0 lllb4 12.d3 when
145
 Chapter 9
Black has a pleasant choice between
12 ...c6 13.lllbd2 b6= and 12 ...MS
13.Wb3 1/!lrd6= enabling ... 0-0-0. See
Game 2 0 Fraczek-Van Assche,
corr. 2013.
Another modern direction of
White's investigations is the Benko
or Benoni Reversed pawn structure.
For instance: 4.d3 e5 5.a3
White tries to keep his queenside
pawns fluid and to keep all his op
tions open. Of course, we11 not
oblige. We can attack his shaky
queenside formation with either 5...
a5 or 5...c5.
But not both! In a position of this
type:
Black lacks comfortable places for
his pieces and his stand is passive
- he will have to defend against
King's Indian style attacks without
1""'
counterplay on the queenside.
The 5...c5 approach is universal as
it works against different set-ups.
Its strong point is that it is centre
oriented and preserves Black's spa
tial advantage. For instance, 6.bxc5
ixc5 7.g3 llle7 8.tg2 0-0 9.0-0.
Black will aim to keep the status
quo in the centre while White will
attempt flank stabs as f2-f4. See
Game 19 Iturrizaga-Ly Mo, Cale
ta 2016.
Sometimes White offers a pure Ben
ko gambit with 6.g3 cxb4 7.tg2 lll c6
8.0-0 a5, but his compensation is
at most sufficient for a draw as the
game Korchnoi-Seirawan, London
1984, suggests.
In the above diagram we see that
White's pawn on a3 hampers the
move tcl-a3 which is essential in
the fight for the c5-square. That led
the first players to the idea of re
fraining from a2-a3 and the move
4.lll a3 e5 5.lllc2 is their latest hope
of reviving the 3.b4 system. Al
though 5... c5 is still possible, I pro
pose to enhance this plan by insert
ing 5. lll a6!? first.
..
 lilf3 dS 2.c4 d4 3.b4
The trick is that 6.bl c5!? 7.bxc5
hc5 8.d3 .id7! threatens the nas
ty pin ....ia4 and it is unclear how
White should neutralise it.
With a hindsight, White may choose
7.b5, but then 7... Ei:ic7 8.d3 .id6 9.g3
b6 10..ig2 .ib7 11.0-0 a6 opens up
the a-file and that is a good base
for counterplay. Of course, there is
seemingly nothing to attack on the
queenside, but if we considered the
breakthrough ... e5-e4, we would
notice that the c4-pawn is a poten
tial target.
In conclusion, the 3.b4 line is
still not living up to White's expec
tations. The ultra-sharp variations
with c4-c5 are balanced, at best,
while calmer development offers
Black a structural advantage after
...c5 (or ...a5).
147
Chapter 9. 1.lLif3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.b4
Step by Step
1.ii:l:f3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.b4 f6!
This aggressive approach best fits
in the spirit of our book. We take
advantage of any move that does
not attack the centre to grab more
space.
A. 4.d3; B. 4.e3; C. 4.ii:la3
Rare alternatives are :
4.1!1'a4+ id7 5.1!1'b3 e5 6.e3 c5 7.bxc5
hc5 8.exd4 exd4t.
4.ib2 e5 5.e3 (5.a3 c5) 5...dxe3
6.fxe3 hb4. Wbite does not have
full compensation for the pawn:
7.ie2 ii:lh6 8.0-0 0-0 9.1!1'b3 ltlc6;
7.a3 ie7 8.'l!\lc2 ii:lh6 9.id3 g6
10.ltlc3 ie6 11.0-0 ii:ld7;
7.c5 (Vaganian) 7...hc5 8.ic4 ltle7
9. 0-0 Illbc6 when 10.ii:lxe5 ltlxe5
11.he5 is countered by 11...he3+ ! .
148
A. 4.d3 e5 5.a3 c5
If you are a Pirc fan, you may con
sider 5... a5!? 6.b5 ltld7!. Then 7.e3
would be well met by 7...dxe3 8.fxe3
e4 9.ltld4 ltlc5! when 10.g3 ii:le7 is
considered in Gaine 18 Van der
Werf-Burg, Wijk aan Zee 2013.
6.bxc5
6.g3 cxb4 7.ig2 ii:lc6 8.0-0 a5 is
a good version of the Benko Re
versed. Korchnoi-Seirawan, Lon
don 1984,went 9.e3 ig4 10.h3ixf3
11.hf.3 ic5 12.id5 ii:lge7 13.e4,
when instead ofthe hasty 13 ...ltlxd5
14.cxd5 ltle7, which was roughly
equal, Black could have posed more
problems with 13 ... 1!1'd7!? 14.'l!\lh5+
d8?!!+. Please forgive me for this
line, I'm perfectly aware that only a
silicon creature would take it.
 1.lilf3 dS 2.c4 d4 3.b4

6 hc5 7.g3 lile7 8.tg2 0-0

8.id3 hcS 9.0-0 lilge7 10.ia3
9.0-0= b6=, Tomashevsky-Sakaev, Ser
pukhov 2007.
See Grune 19 Iturrizaga-Ly Mo, 8...fS! 9.ie2 lilf6 10.0-0 ie7 11.d3
Caleta 2016. lild7 12.lilbd2 0-0 with a balanced
game.

B. 4.e3 e5 5.c5 5.a3 c5 6.exd4 cxd4 is a better

version of the previous line from
White cannot play 5.exd4? since he Black' s standpoint as the a3-square
is worse after 5 ... e4! - 6.1/:\le2 is occupied.
Or 6.lilh4 'l:!lxd4 7.lilc3 hb4
5.ib2 transposes to 4.ib2 - we can
8.1/:\lhS+ lllf8 9.ib2 lilh6+, Gud
eat the pawn.
mundsson-Kaila, Munich 1936.
6 ...'l:!le7 7.lilgl lilc6 8.'l:!le3 when
5 a5 6.Wa4+ !?
strongest is 8...lilh6!, headingforfS.

6.ibS+? c6 7.ic4 axb4 8.lilxe5? los

5.lilxe5? fxeS 6.1/:\lhS+ is all wrong
es to 8...fxeS! 9.'l:!lhS+ g6 10.1/:\lxeS+
sinceeven 6...g6?! (6...llle7! 7.1/:\lxeS+
We7 11.\!;l'xb8 lilf6
lllf7 8.cS ie6 is close to winning)
7.1/:\lxeS+ ll1f7 8.1/:\lxb8 lilf6 is rather
unclear. Black threatens to win the
enemy queen with ...1/:\ld7, ...ig7.

We typically meet 5.Wb3 by 5...cS

6.bxcS lilc6
Correspondence players pre
fer 6...b:cS!? when 7.exd4 exd4
8.ia3 b6 keeps Black's centre to
gether. Panjwani-So, Edmonton 2014, went
7.exd4 exd4 further 12.d3 ie6 13.lild2 lilbd7
14.a3 dxe3 15.fxe3 b3 16.lile4 lilxe4
17.b:e6 1/:\lh4+ 18.g3 lilxg3 19.i'lgl
lile4+ 20.llldl lildxcS 21.\!;l'eS lilf2+
22.llle2 lilfxd3 23.'l:!ld4 '1ilf2+ 0-1.

6.ic4 axb4 7.exd4

It is not a good idea to delay
this exchange too much as later
Black might recapture on d4 by
piece - 7.'l:!lb3 lilh6 8.0-0 b:cs
8.h3 9.exd4 hd4! 10.lilxd4 1/:\lxd4

149
 Chapter 9
ll.b2 1/;l'b6+, Chouari-Pupke,
COIT. 2004.
7...exd4 8.0-0 hc5
As Russians say, we take everything
and easily win. Our king will be safe
on f8. The game Gareev-Ramirez,
Saint Louis 2014, continued 9.lilh4
g6 10.d3 @f8 11.lild2 lilc6 12.lile4
e7 13.f4 lila5 14.hg8,
when instead of 14...!lxg8 15.f5gg,
Black had 14 .. .f5!!+.
6...d7
6...lilc6 steers the game into a com
plex ending - 7.b5 lilb4 8.a3 lild5
9.exd4 exd4 10.Wxd4 We7+ ll.e2
Wxc5 12.0-0 Wxd4 13.lilxd4 c5
14.lilb3
White's only trump is his lead
in development so he should
not give us a respite with 14.b2
lSO
lilge7 (another good option is
14... lilf4 15.c4 hd4 16.hd4
e6) 15.c4 d7 16.!lel lilb6
17.b3 0-0-0= as in Demuth-So,
Montpellier 2015.
14...d6. White has a slight ini
tiative, but Black should be able to
neutralise it. Mareco-Ni Hua, Baku
2015, saw further 15.MS lilge7
16.!lel lilf4 17.d4 lild3 18.!ldl lilxcl
19.!lxcl when 19 ... @f7! would have
been unclear. In the game Black
wrongly opted for a long castle -
19...e6 20.lilc5 hc5 21.!lxc5 0-0-0
22.b6 c6 23.lilc3 !lxd4 24.!lel;!;.
7.b5 hc5 8.c4
8.a3?! 3 9.lilxa3 lile7 10.exd4
is bad in view of 10 ...e4.
8 lile7 9.exd4 exd4
10.h.3
Ramirez-Edouard, Arlington 2015,
featured 10.Ab2 g4 ll.lilxd4 when
ll ...lild7! 12.lile6 he6 13.he6
2+! was strong, as Edouard
points out. Black is on top after
14.@xf2 lilc5 15.Wg4 lild3+ 16.@gl
lilxb2 17.Wxg7?! Wd4+ 18.@fl !lf8+.
 1.lilf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.b4

The careless 10.0-0 allows the rede- C. 4.lila3 e5 5.lilc2 lila6!?

ployment 10 .. g4 ll.i.a3 lild/+.

10 lila6!? 11.0-0 lilb4 12.d3 Ms

12 ...c6 13.lilbd2 b6=, Bukavshin

Shukh, Saratov 2013.

13.1!1'b3

In Demuth-Duda, Ruzomberok
2014, White decided to provoke
...b6 with 13.!lcl, but that only bol
sters Black's queenside. He was bet
ter after 14.1!1'b3 1!1'd6 15.lilbd2 0-0-0
16.lilh4 i.g6 17.!lel liled5+.
13.!lel i.xd3 14.i.xd3 lilxd3 15.i.xc5
lilxc5 16.1!1'c4 1!1'd6 17.lilbd2 leads to
an equal endgame after 17... 0-0-0
18.!lacl b6 19.lile4 lilxe4 20.!lxe4
lild5 21.!lxd4 111'c5=. Instead, 17...
!ld8 18.!lacl b6 19.lile4 1/l'd5 and
17...d3 18.!lacl b6 are similar.
13 ...1!1'd6
White's play might be characterised
as hypennodern, but it looks to me
simply bad. I propose to take over
the initiative with concrete play.
6.!lbl
The other possible approach is 6 .a3
c5 7.g3 i.e6
7...e4 8.lilgli.d7 9.i.g2 f5 10.lilh3
i.a4 11.d3 is tangled.
8.d3 (8.b5 lilc7 9.d3 1!1'd7 10.i.g2
i.h3oo) 8 ... 1/l'd7 9.!lbl lile7!?
More solid set-up is 9 ...i.d6
10.lild2 lile7 11.lile4 !lb8 12.b5
lilc7 13.i.g2 0-0 14.0-0 b6.
10.i.g2 th3 11.0-0 hS (11 ...i.xg2 !?
12.@xg2 h5)

Black is ready to castle long. Ob

jectively the position is equal, but
Black's game is easier, After all, he
is still a pawn up. See Game 2 0
Fraczek-Van Assche, corr. 2013.
Black has good attacking prospects:
12.e3 i.xg2 14.@xg2 h4;
151
 Chapter 9
12.e4 hg2 13.i>xg2 h4;
12.hh3 1/Nxh3 13.lilcel h4 14.1/Na4+
i>f7 15.lilxh4?! g5 16.lilhf3 i>gS fol
lowed by ...lilg6.
12.lilcel hg2 13.lilxg2 lilc7 14.lild2
lilg6
15.f4
The engine suggests 15.lile4
cxb4 16.axb4 h4 17.lilel which is
not very consistent, does it?
15...h4 16.f5 hxg3! 17.hxg3 lile7
18.lilh4 ID:h4! 19.gxh4 lilf5 20.lile4
lile3 21.he3 1/Ng4+=.
Note that 6.b5?! lilc5 7.d3 is dubi
ous in view of 7... a6.
6... c5!? 7.bxc5
7.b5 solidifies our centre - 7...lilc7
8.d3 .td6 9.g3 b6 10 ..tg2 .tb7 11.0-0
a6 12.a4 axb5 13.axb5 lile7 14.e4
1?
Here 14... g5 is a bit premature
owing to 15.h4.
14...dxe3 15.fxe3 0-0 16.e4 lile6
17.lile3 lild4 is "only" equal. It is
more interesting to castle:
14... 0-0 15.lilh4
15.lilfel would be too passive -
15 ... lile6 whereas 16.f4?! drops
a pawn to 16 ...exf4 17.gxf4 1/Nc7.
After the text, we can take over
the initiative with:
15 ... g5!? 16.lilf5 lilxf5 17.exf5 hg2
18.i>xg2 e4!? 19.dxe4 i>hS 20.'1!ild3
lile8. The c4-pawn is weak and we
could attack it with ....te5, ...lild6.
For instance: 21.lilel l'la2 22.lilf3
1/Na8 23.i>gl 8g8, intending ...g4.
7.d3 isnotentirelycorrect- 7...lilxb4
8.lilxb4 cxb4 9.e3 lile7 10.exd4 exd4
11.g3 lilc6 12.8b2 .ie7 13..ig2 0-0+.
7...hc5 8.d3 .td7!
The threat ... .ta4 is rather awkward
for White and 9.l'lxb7? loses mate
rial. Remains: 9.e3 .ta4 10.1/Ne2 lile7
(10 ...dxe3 ll.fxe3 1/Ne7=) 11.exd4
.ib6 (11...exd4!?12.8xb7 .ic6 13.l'lb2
.tb6 14.1/Ndl .ta5+ 15..td2 .txf3)
12.a3 exd4 13.lilb4 lilc5 with active
pieces.
Chapter 9. 1.f3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.b4
Annotated Games
1 8. Van der Werf - Burg
Wijk aan Zee 14.01.2013
1.lll:f3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.b4 f6 4.d3 e5
5.a3 a5 6.b5
6 ... llle7
Black's first task in the diagram po
sition was to decide:
1. How to meet e2-e3.
2. Then he should choose the best
set-up of his MS and lllg8.
3. Finally, he should weigh the pros
and cons of an early ... a5-a4.
The best solution is 6... llld7 as point-
ed out in the "Step by Step" chapter.
It prepares to counter 7.e3 by 7...
dxe3 8.fxe3 e4 9.ill d4 lllc5!. At the
same time it does not block the way
to the dark-squared bishop. Thus, if
White decides to play 7.a4 himself,
7...ib4+! would be unpleasant -
8.id2 llle7 9.hb4 axb4 10.11!!.1b3 c5.
Black's 6th move does not address
any of the above-mentioned strate
gic problems. It allows 7.e3! dxe3
8.fxe3 when 8... e4 would be already
bad in view of 9.lll d4! with domina
tion in the centre.
7.g3 lll d7 8.ig2 lllc5
Black plays by general considera
tions, without bothering himself
with "details". I would prefer 8...a4
in order to squelch the enemy's the
matic queenside play. That is not so
significant from computer's stand
point, but it would drastically com
plicate White's task OTB because he
remains without a clear plan. For
instance, undermining the centre
with 9.e3 also does not work due to
9 ... dxe3 10.fxe3 lll c5 or 10.he3 lllf5
11.lllc3 lll c5.
Here is a similar game: 4.d3 e5 5.a3
llle7 6.g3 a5 7.ib2 lllg6 8.b5 llld7
9.ig2 a4 10.0-0 lll c5
153
 Chapter 9
11.lilbd2 j,,e7 12.lilel f5 13.lilc2 0-0
14.lilb4 j,,e6 (14...f4!?) 15.1/;l'c2 1/;l'd7
(15 .. .f4!) 16.!ladl !lad8 17.lildS @h8
18.!lfel f4 19.lile4 lilb3=, Iturrizaga
Wang Hao, Dubai 2014.
9.a4 lilg6
The engines prefer 9 ... lilf5, but
humans understand that Black's
only active plan in this structure is
...f6-f5-f4 so the knight should not
be hampering it.
10.j,,a3 j,,e6 11.lilfd2 1/;l'c8
The battle is for c5 so the queen
should have stayed in touch with
the dark squares. ll ...!lb8 was more
accurate.
12.h4 j,,d6 13.h5 lilf8 14.lilb3
lilxb3 15.1/;l'xb3 lild7
Chances are roughly even and any
small nuance could tip slightly the
balance in either side. Now 16.h6!
would have given White a hidden
trump in a future endgame.
16.lild2 lilc5 17.'l!fc2 0-0 18.lilb3
lilxb3 19.'l!rxb3 f5
The ABC book recommends to fix
the enemy pawns on light squares
and 19 ...h6 was a step in the right
direction. Instead, Black puts his
own one on a "wrong" place, beg
ging to be stopped with 20.f4!.
20.'l!fc2 ha3 2t.!lxa3 !lf6 22.!lal
f4
Black is more active here, but
23.gxf4 !lxf4 24.h6 g6 25.1/;l'd2=
would hold. Instead White errs and
lands in a critical position.
23.@d2? fxg3 24.fxg3 !lf2
25.ti3 j,,g4 26.!lhfl !lh2 27.c5
@hS 28.1/;l'c4 'l!ff5 29.'l!fdS
1/;l'g5+ 30.@c2 c6 31.bxc6 bxc6
32.1/;l'f7? h6 33.!labl e4 34.hg4
exd3+ 35.@xd3 'l!fe3+ 36.@c2
d3+ 37.@b2 dxe2 38.!lfel 'l!fd4+
39.@a3 'l!fxg440.!lb3 !ld8 41.'l!fc7
!ldl 42.'l!ff7 l!lh7 0-1
19. lturrizaga Ly Mo
-
Caleta 01 .02.2016
1.lil:f3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.b4 f6 4.d3
e5 5.a3 c5 6.bxc5 hc5 7.g3 lile7
8.j,,g2 0-0 9 .0-0
 lilf3 dS 2.c4 d4 3.b4
9 lilec6
The queen's knight should control
the key square c5 from a6 or d7.
But the other knight could take an
other route - to g6, leaving c6 for
the bishop, e.g. 9...td7 10.lilbd2
lila6 11.1/c2 (ll.lile4 tc6) ll...tc6
12.lilb3 b6
13.lilxc5 lilxc5 14.a4 e4t.
10.lilbd2 te7 11.lilel lila6 12.lilc2
te6 13.!ful '1b8 14.f4 11d7
15.lile4
15...h6
White has made all his active
moves, but he cannot progress any
further. The d4-pawn cuts his forc
es on two and hampers his manoeu
vring. Conversely, Black possesses a
clear plan for offence. He can push
forth his kingside pawns.
16.td2 f5 17.lilf2 e4?!
This is a typical strategic mistake.
The pawn trade is almost always
in White's favour since it frees his
pieces. Normal would have been
17...exf4 18.M4 '1be8. Then Black
will aim for ...g5, .. .f4.
18.dxe4 fxe4 19.he4 hc4
20.lilb4
A solid human approach. The
greedy computer suggests 20.tc3
tcS 21.hc6 1/xc6 22.li:lxd4.
20 .. lilc5 21 .if3 lilxb4?!
This idea is probably based on mis
calculation. Black's knight is head
ing for c3, but instead it will be
forced to land the passive place b6.
22.axb4 lila4 23.lilg4H6 24.YNc2
24.b5!? would repel the knight -
24 ... lilb6 25.'1b4 with the more ac
tive pieces. Instead, White sudden
ly shifts the battle to the kingside.
24 b5 25.YNg6 @h8 26.te4
..
tg8 27.'1bcl lilc3 28.td3 YNe7
29.'1fel !lli6 30.lilxf6?!
155
 Chapter 9
Simplifying Black's task. The op
posite-coloured bishops justify the
quick draw that followed.
30 ...!lbxf6 31.11ilh5 lile4 32.he4
11ifxe4 33.11ile5 Draw.
20. Fraczek - Van Assche
corr FICGS 2013
1.lilf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.b4 f6 4.e3
e5 5.c5 a5 6.11ila4+ .id7 7.b5
hc5 8 .ic4 lile7 9.exd4 exd4
10 .ia3 lila6 11.0-0 lilb4 12.d3
.if5 13.11ifb3 Y!\'d6 14.lilbd2
14... 0-0-0
14...a4 temporary uncoordinates
White's heavy pieces, but it is more
committal since the b4-knight los
es pawn support. That binds the
d6-queen with its defence. Still,
the game remains balanced: 15.11!.rbl
0-0-0 16.lilh4 ig6 17.lilxg6 hxg6
18.h3 f5 19.lilf3 lilbd5
Black had no time for 19 ...!lh5
(covering g5 and threatening
...g5), due to 20.!lel liled5 21.!le5
(threatening 22 ..ixb4 lilxb4
23.!le6) 21...lilc3 22 ..ixb4! .ixb4
23.11ifb2 and White preserves
some initiative due to the hang
ing state of the .ic5. This line
suggests that it would be pref
erable to get rid of the problem
bishop.
20 ..ixc5 11ilxc5 21.lilg5 lilc3 22.11!.rel
22 ...liled5!?
The exchange sacrifice is not
obligatory. For instance, Black
could save it with 22 ...!ldeS, but
then White could repeat moves
with 23 ..if7 (23.Y!l'e6+!?) 23 ...
!ld8 24..ic4.
23.lile6 11ild6 24.lilxdS l!lxd8 Black
has full compensation thanks to
the weakness of the b5-pawn. He
would have practical chances OTB,
but computers easily defend such
positions: 25 ..ixd5 11ifxd5 26.11ild2
f4 27.!lfel g5 28.b6 cxb6 29.Y!l'b2
11ild6 30.!lacl !le8 31.!lxeS+ l!lxe8
32.!lxc3 dxc3 33.11ilxc3 draw, Kog
ler-Riifenacht, ICCF 2012.
15.lilh4 .ig6 16.lilxg6 hxg6 17.h3
liled5
17...f5 weakens both e5 and g5 and
that gives White sufficient compen
sation for the pawn after 18.!lfel
liled5 19.lilf3. Black finds an indi
rect defence of the piece:
 lilf3 dS 2.c4 d4 3.b4

18.lile4 Wfe5 It seems that White is in a predi

cament, buthefindsenoughcounter
play thanks to the open c-file:

19.!lael

It turns out that 19.lilxc5? stum 27.b6! cxb6 28.i.d2 d3 29.Wfbl

bles into 19 .. . !lxb3! ! 2 0.g:xb3 WfgS+ Wfc6 30.!le3 !lhd4 31.!lcl !lc4
2Ll!ih2 !lh8-+. 32.!lxc4 Wfxc4 33.!lel Wfc6
34.lile4 !ld4 35.!lcl !lc4 36.lilc3
19 lilb6 20.i.b2 i.f8 21.lilg3 a4
i.a3 37.!ldl !lxc3 38.hc3 Wfxc3
22.Wfdl Wfc5 23.a3 lilxc4 24.dxc4 39.!lxd3 Wfb2 40.Wfdl b5 41.!ldS+
!lh4! 25.axb4 Wfxb4 26.i.cl Wfxc4 Draw.

157
Chapter 10. 1.ttJf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.e3

Main Ideas

1.li:lf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.e3

In my 2012 book, The Moder Reti, I

This chapter deals with some very
sharp variations which need memo
rization. White is ready to contest
the centre with pawn sacrifices in
the Blumenfeld/Benko style. For
instance, 3 ... c5 4.b4 (4.exd4 is the
Benoni Reversed. It is covered in
the next chapter.) 4. . .li:lf6!? 5.b2
cxb4 6.a3 may be not entirely cor
rect, but it is not easy to refute, es
pecially in rapid games.
My repertoire choice is quick devel
opment with:
suggested that White could obtain a
slight pull after 8.e2 (8.e3 "'1'd8
9.d4 li:lf5) 8... lilf5 9.0-0 e5 10.g4
li:lh4 11.e3 "'1'd6 12.li:le4 "'1'c7 13.f4.
However, the latest innovation:
9..."'1'd8!?, which clears d4 for the
knight, leaves Whitewithout a clear
plan. His only sensible attempt to
get something out of the opening
could be an attack on the e-file, but:
10.'1el g6! 11.g4 g7 12.
13.g5 e6!? 14."'1'd2 h6
15.M4 g5 16.e3 "'1'c7 17."'1'e2
0-0-0

3 ...li:lc6
In the last years Black has found
new ideas which cast doubt on
White's opening approach.
First of all, 4.exd4 lilxd4 5.li:lxd4
"'1'xd4 6.li:lc3 c6 7.d3 lilh6! turns
out to be even slightly more pleas
ant for Black.

159
 Chapter 10

leads to interesting double-edged il.e7 11.0-0 0-0

play.

The tricky 4.b4?! has also received

serious blows. The lazy solution is
to answer 4...lilxb4!? 5.exd4 e5

A critical position. Black will bol

You can play normal chess here
without having to discover only
moves. For instance: 6.dxe5 il.f5
7.lila3 il.d3 or 6.a3 e4 7.axb4 exf3
8.Wxf3 '/;l'xd4=.
A sterner test of White's idea is to
grab the pawn:
4... dxe3 5.fxe3 lilxb4 6.d4 e5!
7.a3 lilc6!
ster his kingside with the manoeu
vre ...il.c8-f5-g6 and he'll wait to
see whether White's centre will of
fer sufficient compensation. But
do not overestimate your chances!
Most probably the position is bal
anced. See Grune 22 Hacker-Krib
ben, BdF-Schachserver 2013.
You should also be ready to face the
symmetrical pawn structure that
arises after:
4.d3 e5 5.exd4 exd4
White will prepare b4 and I think
that we must counter it with ...b5!.
An illustrative line is 6.il.e2 lilf6
7.0-0 il.c5!? 8.lila3 0-0 9.lilc2 a5
10.b3 !lb8! ll.a3 b5!

The point! Instead of7...e4?!, Black

opts for a position with an open e
file. Now 8.d5?! e4 9.lilfd2 Ill es
promises Black a strong attack, so
White should play:
8.lilc3 exd4 9.exd4 lilf6 10 .ie2
We preserve our space advantage.

160
Chapter 10. 1.lLif3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.e3
Step by Step
1.lilf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.e3 lilc6!
This is a solid equalizer. 3...c5 also
has enough fans who love gambit
pawns after 4.b4 (Of course, the
Benoni Reversed with 4.exd4 is a
decent alternative. I consider it in
the next chapter). Perhaps the most
tricky move order is 4...iilf6!? 5.ib2
dxe3 6.fxe3 cxb4. This approach is
principled, but it demands very pre
cise play.
To start, White should avoid here:
a) 7.d4?! in view of 7...g6!
7... e5 8.iilxe5 id6 9.ie2 0-0
10.a3 iilc6 11.0-0 'Ifie? is nice for
Black so White should continue
ingambit style with 8.iilbd2 exd4
9.exd4 id6 10.c5!? ic7 ll.ib5+
iilc6 12.'llie2+ V!!ie7 13.V!!ixe7+
<tlxe7 14.0-0 with enough com
pensation for the pawn.
8.V!!ia4+ (8.a3!?) 8 ... lilbd7!
8...iilc6 9.d5 \1Na5 10.\/Ndl iilb8
ll.lilbd2 iilbd7, followed up by
...ih6, is unclear.
9.\1Nxb4 ih6! 10.\1Nb3 0-0 ll.ie2
'l!"a5+ 12.ic3 \1Nh5 13.id2 e5!
14.iilxe5 V!!ih4+ 15.g3 V!!ih3 16.lild3
V!!ig2+.
b) 7.a3! e6 8.ie2 iilc6 9.0-0 a5
10.d4 is perhaps White's best move
order towards this position:
It was tested in several corres
pondence games which com
monly featured 10 ...b6 and
White enjoyed an initiative af
ter ll.d5!? exd5 12.ixf6 V!!ixf6
13.iilbd2.
Critical is 10 ...ie7! 11.iilbd2 0-0.
White is yet to prove his compensa
tion. Dammer-Buettner, corr. 2014,
saw 12.iile5?! lilxe5 13.dxe5 iild7
14.axb4 ixb4 15.lile4 iilc5+.
161
 Chapter lO
12.axb4 lilxb4 also looks fine for
Black. So the ball is in White's court
in this line.
A. 4.exd4; B. 4.b4?!
4.d3 aims to throw us out of reper
toire if we answered 4...eS S.exd4
lilxd4 6.lilxd4 'j,\'xd4. Not that it is
such a big achievement, but I con
sider ... lilh6 instead of ... eS. We can
follow in Anand's footsteps:
S ... exd4. Of course it is natural to
preserve more pieces on the board
since we have a space advantage.
The plot in this pos1bon turns
around the d4-pawn. White will aim
to encircle it and we cannot oblige to
play by general considerations. Be
fore all, we should decide how to
meet the following White's plan:
16?
6.Ae2
Bach-Anand, Caleta 2016, fea
tured 6.a3 as 7.M4 Ad6 8.hd6
'j,\'xd6.
6...lilf6 7.0-0 Ae7 8.lila3 0-0 9.lilc2
as 10.b3 h6 (10 ... !lbS ll.Ab2 Acs
12.a3 bS) ll.a3
ll.Ad2 does not hit d4 so we
could continue 11...AfS 12.a3
lilh7 13.b4 Af6.
11 ... !leS 12.!lbl
The best solution here is to stop the
march of the b-pawn with:
12 ...!lbS 13.b4 (13.Ab2 Ac5 14.b4=)
13...axb4 14.axb4 bS=.
We see that White can always drag
our bishop to cS by playing Ab2,
and equalize with b4. That brings
us back to move 7. Why not try:
7...AcS!? Then 8.lila3 0-0 9.lilc2 aS
10.b3 !lb8! ll.a3 bS
keeps the tension in our favour
since we have preserved our supe
rior centre. Remember this thema
tic way of neutralising the plan with
b4!
White could try to exploit the ab
sence of our bishop from e7 with:
8.a3 aS 9.AgS, but 9...h6 10.hf6
(10.Ah4 0-0 11.lilbd2 Ae7) 10 ...'j,\'xf6
11.lilbd2 0-0 12.lile4 We7 still keeps
 1.li:lf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.e3
things in control. Black is ready to
take over the initiative after 13.'li!ld2
tb6 14.tdl a4 15.h3 fS.
A. 4.exd4 li:lxd4 5.li:lxd4 'li!lxd4
6.li:lc3
White does not gain anything by de
laying this natural move - 6.d3 li:lh6
7.ie2 lilf5 8.lild2 g6 9.lilf3 'l!ltd6.
6 ...c6 7.d3
7.ie2 li:Jh6 8.d3 transposes.
7. . . li:lh6!
Black generously offers White to
play 8.ie3 'l!\td8 9.d4 since his game
is very easy after 9...li:Jf5. Although
he cannot realistically claim an ad
vantage, practical experience sees
him scoring more than 70% from
here:
10.'li!ld2 g6 ll.d5
11.0-0-0 tg7 12.ie2 0-0 13.h4 is
not dangerous because White's
attack does not have serious
chances to succeed without a
dark-squared bishop:
13 ... li:lxe3 (Computers like 13 ...
h5 and 13...'l!\ta5) 14.fxe3 h5, for
instance, 15.g4 hg4 16.hg4
hxg4 17.h5 f5 intending 18.hxg6
'l!\td6.
11.te2 tg7 12.sdl o-o 13.0-0
1i!Ia5 14.g4 li:Jxe3 15.fxe3 ie6
(15 .. .f5!?) was better for Black
in Kravtsov-Ovetchkin, Vladi
vostok 2014.
11...cxd5 12.Wxd5 li:lxe3 13.fxe3
Wxd5 14.li:lxd5 sb8 15.sdl e6
16.li:Jc7+ @e7 17.li:lb5 tg7 18.b3 td7
19.a4 a6 20.li:Jd4 f5+, Michalik-Na
jer, Lysa nad Labem 2014.
8.te2
8.txh6 gxh6 9.te2 tf5 hard
ly needs more attention - Black's
pieces dominate the board.
The "improved" version of the
above line is 8.te3 'li!ld8 9.txh6
(9.ie2 li:Jf5 10.0-0 has no ven
om due to 10 ...g6) 9 ...gxh6 10.d4
ig7 ll.d5 hardly even equalizes af
ter ll ...Wd6! (threatening 12.id3
hc3+ 13.bxc3 'li!le5+) 12.scl 1ll'g6
13.Wf3 1ll'g5, Zvjaginsev-Granda Zu
niga, Pamplona 1996.
8.h3 li:Jf5 9.g4 aims to prevent
163
 Chapter 10

Black's knight from reaching d4, Salov, Hermanas 1995, when 12 ...
but 9 ...'/;l'eS+! (9 ...lilh4 10.ie3 Wf6 l;l'c7! 13.f4 tl.e7 14.fS hS 15.h3 hxg4
11.f4 eS 12 .fS) throws a spanner in 16.hxg4 c5 is balanced.
the works.

The h4-knight is easily defended

10.lile4
The more natural move 10.l;l'e2
does not even equalize after
10 ...l;l'xe2+! 11.he2 (ll.lilxe2
lilh4 12.lilg3 lilf3+ 13.l!ldl g6)
11...lild4+.
10 ...lild4 11.f4 Was+ (ll...'/;l'c7 12.ie3
eS) 12.id2 '/;l'd8 13.ig2 g6 14.ic3,
Naiditsch-Bauer, Mulhouse 2011,
brought about a position where
White is overextended. That could
be exploited with 14...hS+.
with 17.l;l'el (or 17.if2 id7 18.'/;l'el)
17...id7 18.if2 gS while 18 ...ic6
19.f6 he4 20.fxg7 !lg8 21.dxe4 lilg6
is equal.
10.!lel
10 ..ig4 g6 11..ixfS .ixf5 12.d4 .ig7
13.ie3 0-0= was the stem Grune
21 Gorovets-Bosiocic, Greensboro
2014.
10 g6!
...

8.. lilf5 9.0-0

.

Gonzalez Vidal-Naroditsky, Tsagh

9.g4 lilh4 10.!lgl '/;l'd6 11.!lg3 is clear kadzor 2015, saw 10 ... lild4 ll.if4!
ly dubious in view of 11 ...eS! g6 12.ieS f6 13.hd4 Wxd4 14.if3
11...hS 12.llle4 '/;l'b4+ 13.id2 with an initiative.
l;l'xb2 14.ic3 '/;l'b6 15.gxhS was
unclear in Getz-Hammer, San
defjord 2012.
12.ie3 f5 13.gxfS lilxf5t.

9 ... 'd8

The latest innovation in this line,

aimed at anticipating g4.
The older move was 9... e5!? 10.g4
lilh4 ll.ie3 '/;l'd6 12.lile4, Illescas-
1 "A
 1.li:lf3 d5
n.tg4
Concrete approach. White targets
the e7-pawn.
11 .ig7 12 .ixfS .ixf5 13..ig5
..
.ie6!?
13.. .f6 14..ie3 Wxd3 15.Wb3 1/lfd7
16.sadl 1/llc7 17.tc5 e5 is probably
a draw. White cannot regain the
pawn, but he owns the only open
file. An illustrative line is 18.h3 h5
19.li:le4 he4 20.sxe4 tf8 21.txfS
wxf8 22.se3 sh7 23.1/lfc2 f5 24.sed3
sg7 2s.Wd2 f4=.
14.'1l!d2 h6 15.M4 g5 16.te3 1/lfc7
17.We2 0-0-0
Black's pressure down the d-file and
the active bishop on the main diago
nal promise him good counterplay.
It is difficult for White to organise
an attack. For instance:
18.a4 \t>b8!
Eliminating both tactical threats
ha7 and d4 which were possible af
ter 18 ...MS: 19.ha7 b6 20.a5 Wxa7
d4
2.c4 3.e3
21.axb6 can be calculated up to a
perpetual check. More dangerous,
however, is 19.d4 when 19 ...hd4?
failsto 20.li:ld5.
19.E:edl .id4= .
B. 4.b4?! dxe3
4...li:lxb4!? is an interesting and
simpler alternative. Its idea is to
meet 5.exd4 by 5...e5. For instance:
6.a3
Or 6.dxe5 .if5 7.li:la3 .id3 8.1/lfb3
.ic5=.
6...e4 7.axb4 exf3 8.1/lfxf3 1/llxd4
9.E:a4 li:lf6
10.li:lc3
Or 10.1/lfe3+ Wxe3+ 11.fxe3 td7
12.b5 a5=.
10 ...te7 11.li:lb5 1/lfd7 12.E:xa7 1'1xa7
13.li:lxa7 1/lle6+ 14.te2 td7= .
5.f:xe3 1Dxb4
5...e5 has never been played, not be
cause it is particularly bad, but be
cause it is better to take the sacri
ficed pawn. The position after 6.b5
li:lb4 7.li:lc3 .if5 8.e4 tg4 is strategi
cally unbalanced and unclear.
165
 Chapter 10

6.d4

6.1Wa4+ lilc6 7.d4 has no bite: 7...

td7 8.'i!lb3 e5

14 ...e4!+.

6 . e5
. .

9.d5 The simplest choice from a practi

If White tries to play by anal cal standpoint. It ensures us easy
ogy with the main line 9.te2, development and a good control of
the d4-pawn falls after 9 ...exd4 the centre. 6...c5 and 6... e6 are also
10.exd4 lilxd4. And in the event possible.
of 10.0-0, Black conld return
the pawn with a positional ad
vantage - 10 ...d3!? 11.hd3 lilf6
12.lilc3 td6 13.tb2 0-0+.
9...lilb4 10.lilc3
10.a3 lila6 11.lilxe5 was horrible
for White after ll ... lilc5 12.'i!lc2
ta4 13.\Wf2 lilf6 14.lilc3 td6
15.lild3, Kozul-A.Petrosian, Slo
venia 1994, 15 ... lilg4!+.
10.td2 is hardly an improve
ment - 10 ... lila6 11.lilxe5 lilc5
12.'i!lb2 lilf6 13.te2 td6 14.lilxd7 7.a3
1!\lxd7 15.lilc3 0-0 16.0-0 l'lfe8.
10 ... lilf6! 7.lilxe5!? 'i!lh4 8.@d2 lilf6 9.lilc3 may
Pakhomov-Ovetchkin, St Pe look absurd, but in fact Black's.task
tersburg 2012, saw 10 .. .f6? is not so easy due to White's power
which was bad in view of 11.c5! ful pawn centre. I even suspect that
(dragging a piece on c5) 11... it is objectively White's best option
hc5 12.a3, winning the unfor and his only way to keep the balance
tunate knight. although Black retains some initia
11.te2 td6 12.0-0 0-0 13.c5 hc5 tive with best play:
14.a3 9 ...lilg4!
 1.li:lf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.e3

9...td6 10.a3 he5 (10...li.lc6!?)

11.axb4 tfs 12.td3 hd3
13. xd3 was unclear in Arribas
Lopez-Hernando Rodrigo, Sants
Open 2013 and after 13...li.lg4?
14. c2 ! White got an edge.
White may try 10.li:lf3 11!.lhS 11.cS
hc5 12.a3! li.lc6 13.dxcS WxcS
14.11!.lb3 with very sharp play
where better calculation should
17.8b3!? li.lxcS 18.11!.lc4 li.lxb3
decide the game.
19.li.lxc7+=;
9...tf5 10.11!.lf3 .ie4 11.li.lxe4 17.c6hc6 18.8b21i.lxd4 19.li.lfxd4
li.lxe4+ 12.e2 li.lc3+ 13.d2 tcS 20.8e2+ d7oo.
li.le4+ 14.e2 li.lc3+ led to a re
ll...Wg6 12.h3 li.lc2+ 13.e2
petition of moves in Czarnota
li.lxal 14.hxg4 li.lc2 15.f2 li.lb4
Socko, Katowice 2010.
16.a3g;.
ll...te7?! 12.a3 li.lxe3 13.We2
li.lbc2+ 14.f2 li.lg4+ 15.ga.
12.li.lbs td6

10.li.lf3!?
10.a3 li.lxeS ll.axb4 could face
11 ...hb4!! 12.dxeS tf5 13.11!.la4+
c6 14.Wxb4 0-0-0+ 15.'i!fd6 8he8
16.g3 8xd6+ 17. el 11!.lh6 18.exd6
a6. White's king will never find a
safe haven so his defence should
be unpleasant in a practical
game.
10 ...11!.lh6 11.el c5!
1L.te6 12.8bl li.lxe3 13.Wa4+
td7 14.li.lbS li.lec2+ 15.f2 'i!fg6
16.cS li.la6 is another crazy po
sition where White has at least
two decent moves:
13.a3
Black manages to blockade the
enemy pawns after 13.e4 Wg6
14.li.lxd6+ 11!.lxd6 15.a3 li.lc6 16.dS
Ii.lees 17.h3 li.lxf3+ 18.11!.lxf3 li.leS
19.11!.lg3 0-0.
13...li.la6 14.li.lxd6+ 1i!fxd6 15.td3
0-0 16.8a2 cxd4 17.exd4 li.lf6 18. f2
tg4 19.te3 8ae8 20.l'lel
This position is dynamically bal
anced, but Black can pose practical

167
 ChapterlO

problems to White with 20...bSt - 9.iild4 iile5 10.iilc3 iilf6 ll.'iilc2 c5

he does not risk much with the d5-
square in his possession.
The bottom line of my analysis is
that 7.iilxe5!? should not be under
estimated and it leads to great com
plications where the cost of mis
takes looks higher for White.
7 iilc6!
..
The first game in this variation,
Takacs-Rubinstein, Merano 1924,
saw 7... e4?! 8.iilfd2 iild3+ 9.hd3;.
White should be more aggressive:
8.iile5! iilc6 9.\Wa4! with a pull. For
instance: 9 ...td6 10.iilxc6 \Wh4+
ll.g3 hg3+ 12.hxg3 \Wxhl 13.'iilb5!
iilf6 14.iileS+ c6 15.iilxc6 td7
16.'iileS+ ie6 17.'iild6, with a strong
attack.
ll...td6 12.ie2 0-0 13.0-01:1e8 is
also in Black's favour as 14.iildbS
.ig4 15.iilxd6 cxd6 will practical
ly cost White the c4-pawn while
14.1:1bl a6 will deprive him of any
sensible ideas.
12.dxc6 iilxc6 13.iilxc6 bxc6 14.ie2
occurred in Neubert-Dmitriev,
ICCF World Cup, 1990 when taking
the pawn with 14 ...tcS would have
given Black a clear edge.
Simpler is 9 ... iilxd4 10.'iilxd4 fS
ll..ie2 iilf6 when White should not
have enough compensation:

12 ..ib2 b6 13.0-0 tcS 14.\Wc3 0-0

15.iild2 td7+.

9 iile5 10.li:lxe4 Wfh4+ 11.iilf2

Bl. 8.d5?!; B2. 8.iilc3

8.ie2 exd4! (It is safer to open up

the e-file. Thatalsoweakens White's
gl-a7 diagonal.) 9.exd4 iilf6 10.iilc3
transposes to line B2.

Bl. 8.d.5?! e4 9.iilfd2 u. iilf6

..

168
 1.li:lf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.e3
ll ... ltlg4 12.g3 lilxf2 13.1/!!lf3 1/!!lf6
14.1/!!lxf6 1ilxf6 15.lflxf2 lile4+ 16.lflf3,
Mueller-Fier, Caleta 2014, 16 ...ltlc5
offers Black a better queenless
middlegame.
12 ..ie2
12.1/!!ld4 lilfg4 13.!la2 d6 14.g3
1/!!lh6+.
12 lileg4 13.g3 lilxf2 14.gxh4
..
lilxdl 15. lflxdl .ic5
White's pieces are too passive.
B2. 8.lilc3 lilf6
Perhaps 8...exd4 9.exd4 lilf6 is just
as good since the only line of inde
pendent significance, 10.d5 ltla5
ll..id3, is better for Black. It was
proved by two 2013 email games
of Mujunen which featured 11 .. ..tcS
12.1/!!le2+ 1/!!le7 13.1/!!lxe7+ lflxe7.
9 .ie2!?
.
9.d5 ltla5
9...e4 10.ltlg5 ltle5 is not too clear
after 11..ie2 !.
10.ltlxe5 .id6 11.ltlf3 0-0 12 ..id3 .ig4
13.0-0
Black obtains an initiative thanks to
the timely undermining of the ene
my centre: 13 ... c6 14.!lbl b5!, Nguy
en-Steinke, corr. 2014.
9 .exd4! 10.exd4 .ie7 11.0-0
..
11..if4 0-0 12.d5 ltla5 13.ltlb5 is ef
fectively parried with 13...ltleS (or
even 13....id6 14..id2 b6 15.ltlxd6
cxd6 16 ..ig5 h6 17..ih4 1/!ie7 18.0-0
g5 19.M2 lilg4) 14.0-o c6.
11 0-0
Both sides have completed devel
opment, but we still have an extra
pawn. I should note, however, that
White's fluid centre keeps us at bay
so all the fight is ahead. Our task
would be easier if we provoked d5
since we'd have clear counterplay
with ... ltla5, ... c6. After the more
cunning 12.lflhl, we could lead our
bishop to f5 or g4, having in mind
....ih5-g6. I would gladly take Black
here. See Game 22 Hacker-Krib
ben, BdF-Schachserver 2013.
169
Chapter 10. 1.lif3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.e3

Annotated Games

21. Gorovets - Bosiocic 14...'iifb6 15.lila4

Greensboro 31 .08.2014
1.lilf3d52.c4d43.e31ilc64.exd4
lilxd4 5.lilxd4 Wl'xd4 6.lilc3 c6
7.d3 lilh6 8.ie2 lilf5 9.0-0 Wi'd8
10.ig4 g6 11 ..bfS .bf5 12.d4
ig7 13.ie3 0-0 14.WId2
It was better to play a waiting game
with 15.!ladl 1Wa6 16.Wl'e2 !lad8
17.!ld2 ie6 18.b3 ic8. White's
knight is better off on c3 than on c5.
15 ...Wl'a6 16.b3 !lfd8

The correct rooks set-up is 16 ...

!lad8. The other one will go to e8 in
order to prepare ...e5. Opening the
centre would be in favour ofBlack's
bishop pair.

17.lilc5 Wl'b6 18.!ladl Wl'c7 19.f3

b6 20.lile4

We see a typical Caro-Kann/Scandi

navian pawn structure. It is gener
ally harmless for Black, but it is use
ful to know what exactly he should
do in it. Ifhe waits passively, White
could trade bishops and organise a
kingside attack. The best approach
is to harass the c4-pawn, trying to
provoke b3. 14...ie6 is therefore
principled, but 15.Wi'e2 Wi'a5 16.!ladl It is now clear that 16 ... !lfd8 was
1Mla6 17.b3 !lad8 allows 18.lile4 and wrong. It would be senseless to try
17...Wi'a5 is met by 18.d5. Thus it is to justify it with 20 ... a5 since after
best to put a rook on d8 before mov 21.a4 the pawn on b6 would be a
ing the f5-bishop. potential target. On the other hand,
1711
 1./tlf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.e3
White is threatening g4 which
would not have been a problem
stayed the right rook on d8 - Black
could simply retreat to c8. I would
think of repairing the damage with
20 ...Ele8, but then White would ob
tain an initiative with 21.il.h6.
20 E!d7 21.\i!ff2 :!lads 22.g4
..
b:e4 23.fxe4 e6 24.Eld2?!
The pawn structure has changed in
White's favour who is now control
ling the game. He should have tried
to maintain the grip with 24.il.g5
Elf8 25.llihl when 25 ...b5 would al
low 26.c5 e5 26.d5. After the text
Black opens lines on the queenside
and should be confident for his fu
ture.
24 b5! 25.E!fdl bxc4 26.bxc4
.
\i!fa5 27.1i!fe2 \i!fc3 28.\i!fd3 Was
29. \i!fe2 MS 30.Eld3 Wa4 31.El3d2
Elb8 32.h3 Elb4 33.lk2
33...Eldb7?!
The table have turned and Black
now misses the chance to deal a
blow in the centre - 33...c5! 34.d5
exd5 when 35.exd5? would fail to
35 ...E!e7. Remains 35.Elxd5 Elbl+
36.E!cl Eldb7 with an initiative. Af
ter the text the game is totally even,
but the draw has come after mutu
al mistakes:
34. E!b2 35.Eldd2 Elxc2
36.Elxc2 Elbl+ 37.ll1g2 \i!fb4
38.c5 il.g7 39.1i!fc4 \i!fb8 40.d5
Wf4? (40...cxd5 41.exd5 exd5
42.\i!fxd5 E!hl! !=) 41.3? (41.
\i!fd3) 41 Elgl+ 42.llixgl Wxg3+
..
43.i>fl \i!fxh3+ 44.@el? (44.
llif2=) 44 \i!fg3+ 45.llidl Wxg4+
..
46.We2 \i!fgl+ 47.\i!fel \i!fd4+
48.\i!fd2 Wgl+ (It is not easy to
evaluate correctly 48...\i!fxe4! 49.d6
\i!ff3+ 50.\i!fe2 fill+ 51.\i!fel Wd5+
52.\i!fd2 il.d4 53.'/;!fg2 'l;!fh5+ 54.ll1d2
c5+) 49.Wel \i!fd4+ 50.\i!fd2
l!!'gl+ Draw.
22. Hacker - Kribben,
Schachserver, 04.10.2013
1.ltl:f3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.e3 ltlc6 4.b4
dxe3 5.fxe3 ltlxb4 6.d4 e5 7.a3
ltlc6 8.il.e2 exd4 9.exd4 ltlf6
10.ltlc3 il.e7 11.0-0 0-0 12.llihl
12 ...il.g4
Black's pieces are well placed and
171
 Chapter 10

out of reach of the enemy forces.
The c6-knight can always retreat to
a5 after d4-d5, then ...c6 will gener
ate counterplay. Remains to accom
modate the light-squared bishop. I
prefer to put it on g6. The shortest
route to this place is:
12 ....@.f5 intending 13.lllh4 .@.g6 with
a stable albeit small edge.
If White keeps the tension with
13 ..@.f4 .@.g6 14J'fa2 (14.lllb5 runs
into 14...a6 15.lllxc7 i;c8 16.d5 lllh5),
we could spend a tempo on prophy
laxis - 14 ...a6, planning to seek ex
changes with ...lll e4.
now tries to cover it with 16....@.h5
17..@.d3 .@.g6 18.lll g5 b619..@.xg6 hxg6
20.lll d5 lll a5, White has 21.i;f3 and
the idea 1/!!ic2-f2-h4 hints that it
is not very good to have doubled
pawns on g6 while White's knight is
still alive.
Perhaps Black should have braced
himself for 16 ...h6, but he stubborn
ly avoids any pawn moves. It is dif
ficult to win a game without making
any committal move.

13 .@.e3 i;e8

Jakel-G.Flear, Antwerp 1993, saw

13 ...1/!!id7 14.1/!!ia4 !;fe8 15..@.gl i;ad8
16.!;adl, when 16 ...b6 17.c5 lll a5
would have been a good defensive
stand on the queenside. 16 ... lile7 17 .@.d3 lilg6 18.lile4

lilxe4 19.he4 b6 20 ..@.d5

14 .@.gl .@.d6
20.c5 .@.f4 21.!;bdl was more

straightforward. Chances would be

Black is not afraid of the pin .@.g5
roughly even already. The text move
anymore so he decides to activate
is a small inaccuracy due to 20 ...
the bishop. He could also commit
.@.e6 21..@.c6 .@.d7 22 ..@.d5 lilf4!, but
himself with a long-term strategic
Black comes up with an amazingly
choice as 14... b6. However, Krib
passive answer:
ben prefers to delay this move for
a while. The game has reached the
20 ... i;fS 21.a4
manoeuvring stage where tempi
are not so important. Still, I would
leave the bishop on e7 in order to
defend f6 and keep an eye on d4.

15.i;bl !;b8 16.1/!!ic2

White creates threats on the diag

onal bl-h7, e.g . .@.d3, lllg5. If Black

172
 Llilf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.e3

It is obvious that Black cannot win Black's pieces are scattered around
without neutralising the enemy the board and that makes it impos
centre. Thus 21...cS appears logical, sible to convert the extra pawn.
but it would be a tactical mistake in
view of 22.dxcS hc5 23.hc5 bxc5 31...g5 32.c5 b3 33.hg6
24.fu:b8 'i!lxb8 25.lilgS. hxg6
It transpires that White's bishop
should be repelled first. Again, the
most straightforward attempt 21...
lilf4 22.e4 f5 is not convincing due
to 23.c6.
Thus we can conclude that we
should play something like 21...
d7, preparing ... lilf4 or ...c7-c6-
c5. Instead Black plays yet another
meaningless move.
34.lilxb3 l!lg8 35.lild4 i<b2
21 H4 22.a5! .id7 23.axb6
.. 36.l<e2 '1xe2 37.lilxe2 .ie5
axb6 24.l<bdl 'i!lcS 25.lilh4 @hS 38.lild4 f6 39.lil:f3 'i!lf4 40.d4
26.l<del 'i!ldS 27.lil:f3 c6 28 ..ie4 l<cS 41.b6 hd4 42.'i!lxd4
b5 29.cxb5 cxb5 30.d5 b4 xd4 43.lilxd4 l<c5 44.lilc6 hc6
31.lild4 45.dxc6 g5 46.Wgl l<xc6 Draw.

173
Chapter 11. 1.lll f3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.g3
Main Ideas
1.liJf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.g3
This move should ring a bell in our
mind - White is provocatively ne
glecting the centre! According to
my understanding, at this point we
should switch our thinking process
from playing for equalization to ex
ploiting the opponent's passivity.
The immediate consequence of his
approach is that we get a really wide
choice. Indeed, any development
aimed at bolstering the d4-pawn
would be appropriate - 3... cS, 3...
liJc6, 3 ...g6, even 3 .. .f6. It is difficult
to single out one of these moves and
claim it is best. You should take the
decision according to your person
al taste and style. I consider several
decent set-ups, but my own prefer
ence is 3... liJc6 - probably because
I like to play against the Pirc as
White. It involves more calculation
and piece clashes. Pure d4-players
may like to control the centre with
pawns so I analyse 3...c5, too. It
leads to the Benoni Reversed after
4.e3 lilc6 5.exd4 cxd4 6.ig2 e5 7.d3
id6 8.0-0 lilf6 when White can ex
ploit his extra tempo with 9.ig5 (in
the normal Benoni he has already
h3!) 9...h6 10.hf6 'i!lxf6 ll.liJbd2
11...ic7!oo. We stay passively on the
queenside and focus our attention
on the centre.
Let us now deal with 3... liJc6 4.ig2
e5 5.d3
5.0-0 e4! 6.lilel h5! takes over the
initiative on move 6 ! See Grune 25
Malakhov-Tomashevsky, Jurmala
2015.
5...ib4+!?
This check is an elegant solution of
the problem what to do with this
175
 Chapter 11
bishop. A well tested alternative
is 5... lilf6 6.0-0 a5 (preventing 5...
!Jie7 6.b4!) 7.lila3 which I discuss in
Grune 24 Azaladze-Gagunashvili,
Tbilisi 2009 or 7.e3 !lic5!?, see
Grune 23 Hamitevici-Edouard,
Montpellier 2015.
The point is that 6.lilbd2?! a5 de
prives White of his two main plans
- li:la3-c2 or !Jicl-g5xf6. Remains:
6.!Jid2 a5 7.0-0 lilf6
We should consider from here
White's two main plans:
a) Flank stabs: 8.lila3 0-0 9.lilc2
hd2 10.lilxd2
10 ... !leS ll.a3 (11.f4? lilb4!) 11...
'i!lfd6. White's pieces are passive.
176
12.!lbl does not make sense since
12 ... a4 13.b3 would only make a
weakness on a3.
On the other hand, 12.b3 !Jif5 13.!lbl
is too slow. Black could push 13 ... e4,
or aim for an attack with 13...h5
14.b4 axb4 15.axb4 h4 16.b5 lild8.
White has nothing to attack on the
queenside while his king lacks ade
quate defence.
b) Play in the centre: 8.e3 0-0
9.exd4
9 ... lilxd4!? (9 ...exd4=)
10.lilxd4 (10.lilxe5 !le8 ll.f4 lilg4!)
10 ...1/!lfxd4 11.!Jic3 'i!lfd6 12.a3 !Jig4!?
Black has a tiny plus due to the
stranded pawn on d3. See Grune
26 Zmokly-Ness, ICCF 2011.
Chapter 11. 1.lll f3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.g3
Step by Step
1.lilf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.g3
A. 3...c5; B. 3 ...lilc6!
3 ...g6 offers White more chances to
develop an initiative.
A. 3. ..c5 4.e3 lilc6 5.exd4 cxd4
6.Ag2 e5 7.d3
7...td6!
Overprotecting the important pawn
at eS. The other standard way of
fighting the Benoni is 7... lilf6 8.0-0
<i:ld7, but White's extra tempo al
lows him to take over the initiative
thanks to the straightforward plan
of pushing b4: 9.lila3! Ae7 10.<i:lc2
0-0 11.!lbl as 12.b3 !lb8 13.!lel !leS
14.a3 "l!fc7 1S.b4 axb4 16.axb4 when
the only way to stop b4-bS is:
16 ...bS, but White preserves some
pull.
Putting a knight on c5 does not
change the pattern - 9.!lel Ae7
10.<i:la3! 0-0 ll.li:lc2 as 12.b3 "l!fc7
13.!lbl <i:lc5 14.Aa.3 Ms 1S.hc5
Axes 16.a3 !lfe8 17.b4 axb4 18.axb4
Af8 19.bS li:laS, Krnic-Cruz Lopez,
Lyon, 1990, 20.li:lb4.
s.o-o <i:lf6 9.Ag5
In the normal Benoni White pre
vents this move with h3. Indeed,
it is positionally right to trade the
bishop since White has less space.
Furthermore, Black's knight is an
177
 Chapter 11
important attacking piece which
controls e4 and could be unpleas
ant if it dig itself on c5. That said, it
does not automatically means that
White becomes better with icl
g5xf6. More likely, chances are ob
jectively even. My big correspond
ence database shows 48% only and
that is normal as Black retains the
better centre. But undoubtedly, his
game is practically more difficult
since he lacks an active plan. All he
should do is wait, hiding behind his
central pawns.
Alternatively:
9 .a3 could be met by 9 ...h6, but let
us allow ig5 and consider 9 ...a5
10.ig5 h6 ll.M6 "iilxf6 12.lilbd2
when again 12 ...ic7 should be a so
lid retort. I must admit that I'm par
tial in my assessment since I love
bishops in open positions...
9.l'lel 0-0 10.lila3 l'le8 11.lilc2?! a5
12.b3 h6 13.l'lbl - this plan is al
ready dubious because Black's piec
es are actively placed in the centre
and 13 ...if5 14.a3 if8 sets up the
thematic breakthrough 15.b4?! e4!.
9 ...h6 10 ..hf6 "iilxf6 11.lilbd2
n...c7!
The best set-up. The bishop retreats
in advance from lile4 or c4-c5. The
famous game Zvjaginsev-Bareev,
Sochi 2005, saw instead ll..."iile7?!
12.a3 if5 13.iile2 0-0 14.b4 l'lfe8
15.lilh4 ie6 16.lile4 g5? 17.iilh5!
with a decisive attack.
12."iila4
The simplest way to push b4. Two
correspondence games went 12.a3
a5 13."iila4 id7 14.l'lfel 0-0 15.l'lacl
l'lfe8 16.lile4 We7 17.c5 l'lab8 18.lilfd2
lilb4 19."iilb3=. The weak c5-pawn
offers Black sufficient counterplay.
12 ... 0-0 13.b4 if5 14."iilb3
White has fulfilled stage one of
his plan, but it seems that he lacks
any stage 2. A further advance of
his queenside pawns will produce
weaknesses. Black has two possi
ble stands: the more active one is to
leave the rook on a8 and push ... a5.
Or he plays ... l'lac8 (or ...l'lab8) fol-
lowed up by ...b6:
a) 14...!lacS 15.l'lacl b6 16.a3 a5
17.b5 lild8
 Lillf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.g3
18.illh4 fili7 19.c5 ill e6 20.cxb6
hb6= 21.!lxcS !lxc8 22.te4 ill c5
(d3 is a target), Kriksciunas-Hay
akawa, ICCF 2014.
b) 14 %\le7 15.a3 a5 16.b5 ill d8
17.lll'c2 te6 18.!lael \Wxa3 19.li:lxe5
a4=.
B. 3 ... ltlc6! 4.tg2 e5
5.d3
The provocative 5.0-0 avoids our
main line, but at a high price.
a) Black could answer 5...illf6, enter
ing our solid backup line. Only 6.b4
has an independent significance,
but then 6...e4 7.illg5 hb4 8.illxe4
illxe4 9.he4 0-0 is in Black's fa
vour owing to his active pieces.
White has also tried 6.e3 when
Black has won all 5 games in my da
tabase after 6...te7, but I believe 6...
tc5 is more testing - 7.exd4 illxd4!
8.illxe5 0-0 or 7.b4 illxb4 8.illxe5
0-0oo.
The real fun is when Black picks up
the gauntlet and burns his bridges:
b) 5 ... e4! 6.illel h5!
7.he4 when both 7...th3!? and 7...
h4 promise Black an attack and ad
equate compensation for the pawn.
See Game 25 Malakhov-Toma
shevsky, Jurmala 2015.
5 tb4+!?
...
This check considerably restricts
White's choice of plans. At the same
time it leads to complex positions
where the better player could prove
his superiority.
5 ... illf6 is a solid equalizer - 6.0-0,
when Black has two decent plans:
a) 6 ... a5! 7.e3
The devoted Reti fans prefer
7.ill a3, aiming for a pure flank
strategy. Indeed, White's next
moves are easy, but in the long
run he risks to get gradually suf
focated. See Game 24 Azalad
ze-Gagunashvili, Tbilisi 2009
for details.
7.tg5 is rarely played. After
7...te7 8.illbd2 (8.ill a3 0-0 9.illc2
ill d7 10.he7 ll!'xe7 11.!lbl ill c5
12.ll!'d2 tg4 13.b3 !lads 14.lilhl
f5 15.illgl e4t, Sahu-Thipsay,
179
 Chapterll

New Delhi 1987) 8...0-0 9.li:lel
(9.h:f6 M6 10.li:lel g4=,
Shariyazdanov-Vaulin, Kras
noyarsk 1998) 9 ... li:ld7 10.he7
Wxe7 ll.lilc2,
The other plan, 7.li:la3, gives more
chances for a full-fledged fight -
7... 0-0 8.li:lc2 (8.li:lb5 is senseless
due to the simple retreat 8...te7,
e.g. 9.e3 a6 10.li:la3 dxe3 11.he3
li:lg4 12. li:lc2 f5)

Black has retained the better

centre, Rakhmanov-Korneev, 8... ae8 9.abl a5 10.b3 (10.a3 a4)
Sochi 2014. His most consistent 10 ... li:lb4 ll.a3 li:lxc2 12.'!l'xc2 with
plan is to prepare .. .f5, ...e5-e4, a pleasant choice between 12...We7,
for instance, ll... li:lc5 12.abl f5. . ..c5 or ...c6.
7... tc5!?
The current status of 7...dxe3 6.td2
8.he3 e7 is dead equal -
9.h3 0-0 10.li:lc3 tf5 ll.d4 exd4 6.li:lbd2?! is a typical positional mis
12.li:lxd4 li:lxd4 13.hd4 c6, Ga take. The knight at d2 blocks theway
buzyan-Tomashevsky, Yerevan ofthe cl-bishop and cannot support
2014. the break b2-b4 with the manoeu
8.exd4 hd4!?. This is the modern vre li:lbl-a3-c2. My game Nenkov
trend. Practical experience has seen -Delchev, Sunny Beach 2014, went
White scoring less than 50%. See further 6... a5 7.0-0 li:lf6 8.a3
Grune 23 Hamitevici-Edouard, or 8.li:lel 0-0 9.li:lc2 tc5 10.b3
Montpellier 2015. Besides, 8... We7 ll.a3 f5.
li:lxd4 is also fine.
8...c5 9.b3 0-0+
b) 6...d6. The only drawback of
this move is that it could lead to a
drawish symmetrical pawn struc
ture after7.e3 0-0! 8.exd4 li:lxd4 (or
8 ... exd4=) 9.li:lxd4 exd4
10.tg5 h6 ll.h:f6 Wxf6 12.li:ld2 c6
13.ael 14.li:le4 1!1'd8 15.'!l'b3 ab8
16.li:lxd6 Wxd6 draw, Zhou Weiqi
Ma Qun, China 2015.

1 Qfl
 i.<ur::s ao z.c4 a4 ::s.g::s

10.lile4 lilxe4 ll.dxe4 f6 12.lilel $.e6 8.e3

13.lild3 $.e7 14.$.d2 (14.'c2 ms
15.id2 b5!) 14 ...a4 and White's White should not delay for long the
queenside crumbled down. break in the centre, but he could
try a hook from the flank: 8.lila3
6.lilfd2 a5 7.lila3 lilf6 8.lilc2 could
0-0 9.lilc2 i.xd2 10.lilxd2 1Wd6
be safely met by 8...i.d6. In prac
11.f4 exf4 12.l'lxf4oo. The possibili
tice Black has played 8 ... 0-0 and 8...
ty of f2-f4 should not be underes
if5, but I see no reason to offer the
timated and perhaps Black should
enemy the bishop pair. 8...$.c5!? is
anticipate it with 10 ... l'le8 (intend
more principled, but you should be
ing ll.f4? lilb4!, eliminating the de
ready to part with the a5-pawn af
fence of the e3-square, Likavsky
ter 9.0-0 0-0 10.lilb3 i.d6 ll.a4 l'le8
Voloshin, Ceske Budejovice 1998.)
12.$.d2, although Black's compen
11.a3 1Wd6 - White has weakened
sation is more than enough.
his queenside so the line 12.f4 lilg4
13.f5 \Wh6 14.h3 lile3 15.lilxe3 dxe3
6.. a5 7.0-0 lilf6
16.lile4 lild4 17.g4 id7 18.l!ih2 a4 is
.

obviously pleasant for Black.

The blitz game Anand-Kramnik,
Ziirich 2016, saw 7... lilge7 8.i.xb4
8.e3 lilf5 (8 ...dxe3!? 9.i.xe3 lilf5)
9.exd4 lilfxd4 10.lilxd4 lilxd4
11.l'lel f6.
8...axb4 9.lilbd2 0-0
8.i.xb4 axb4 9.lilbd2 0-0 10.lilel
hardly deserves any attention since
it does not even win a pawn after
10 ...$.f5 ll.lilc2 'd7 12.i.xc6?! bxc6
13.lilxb4 l'lfb8.
8.$.g5 0-0 9.lila3 h6 10.i.xf6 \Wxf6
11.lilc2 ie7 12.lild2 'g6 13.l'lbl h5!
14.a3 a4 is obviously in Black's fa
vour owing to the imminent attack
on the kingside.

8... 0-0 9.exd4

10.a3
10.'b3 ie6 ll.a3 bxa3 12.l'lxa3
l'lxa3 13.\Wxa3 'a8=, Cvitan
Barle, Rijeka 2010.
10...bxa3 ll.'b3 when ll ...$.e6
12.l'lxa3 transposes to the above
game.
The text is more ambitious.

181
 Chapter 11
9 ... lilxd4!?
Ofcourse, 9...exd4= is also possible.
Its only drawback is that the pawn
structure is too symmetrical. Here
are some examples:
a) 10.lila3 lild7 (or 10 ...ifS ll.if4
lilh5)
11.M4 lilc5 12.lilb5 lile6=.
b) 10.ig5 h6 11.M6 1!\lxf6 12.a3 ic5
13.lilbd2 Ms 14.lilel lile5+.
10.lilxd4
The tactical justification of Black's
idea is the line 10.lilxe5 !le8 11.4
182
Or lU'lel d6 12.f4 ig4 13.lilxg4
l'lxel+ 14.Axel lilxg4 15.1!\lxg4
Axel+.
11 ... lilg4! (to be fair, the blunt 11 ...
lild7 achieves the same effect) re
gaining the pawn since 12.id5 lilh6!
leaves White with a horrible hole on
e3, e.g. 13.ic3 ic5 14.l!lhl c6 15.ig2
f6 16.lilf3 lildf5+, and 12.lilxg4? fails
to 12 ...lile2+ 13.l!lhl Axg4.
10 ...'1Nxd4 ll.Ac3 '1Nd6 12.a3
12 ...ig4!?
Black has a slight initiative, see
Grune 26 Zmokly-Ness, ICCF 2011.
Chapter 11. 1.ltif3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.g3
Annotated Games
23. Hamitevici - Edouard
Montpellier 31 .05.2015
1.11lf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.g3 11lc6 4..ig2
e5 5.d3 11lf6 6.0-0 a5 7.e3 .ic5
8.exd4
8...hd4!?
The rare 8...11lxd4 is very good, too
- 9.11lxe5
Of course, 9.lilxd4 cannot be
of any theoretical interest. The
full control of d4 suggests that
Black's game is better: 9 ...hd4
10.lilc3 0-0 ll.1/;\'f3 h6 12.h3 c6+
13.lile2 h7 14.b3 !le8 15..ib2 lilh7
16.!ladl lilg5 17.1/;\'h5.tf5 18.d4.ic2
19.!ld2 ig6 20.1/;\'h4 exd4 2L!lxd4
hd4 22.lilxd4 id3 0-1, Kara
okcu-Ivanisevic, Skopje 2015.
9 ... 0-0 10.lilf3 .ig4
a) 1Llilbd2 !le8! 12.lilb3 (12.h3
lile2+ 13.@hl 1/;\'xd3!) 12 ...lile2+
13.@hl .ia7 14.a4 1/;\'d7. White's de
fence is difficult. For instance, the
relatively best 15..ie3 loses pawns
after 15 ...txf3 16.txf3 lilxg3+ !
17.hxg3 1/;\'h3+ 18.@gl he3 19 ..ig2
1/;\'xg3.
b) 11..ie3! lilxf3+ 12.txf3 txf3
13.1/;\'xf3 1Wxd3 14.!ldl 1/;\'e4 15.1/;\'xe4
lilxe4 is totally equal.
9.lilxd4
9. lilc3 0-0 does not change the char
acter of play.
9 ...lilxd4 10.!lel
10.f4 0-0 11.fxe5 lilg4 12.lilc3 lilxe5
13.!lf4 lile6 l4.!le4 lilxd3 left White
pawnless in an online game.
183
 Chapter 11
10.h3 0-0 ll.lilc3 l'le8 12.lilh2 h6
occurred in Bu Xiangzhi-Ganguly,
Doha 2014.
White opted for the sharp 13.f4 exf4
14 .M4 l'la6 15.1!1'd2 when instead of
15 ...gS? 16.ie3 l'lxe3 17.1!1'xe3 lilc2
18.1!1'f2 lilxal 19.d4, Black could
have played 15 ... lilhS! 16.ie3?! l'lg6
with an initiative, or even the sim
ple 15 ...l'lae6=.
10 0-0 11.lilc3 pletely different plan which could
11.l'lxeS? loses to ll...ig4 12.f3
(12.1!1'd2 if3J 12 ... lilxf3+ 13.M3
1!1'd4+ 14.l'le3 l'lae8, M.Gomes
Adhiban, Pune 2014.
11...l'leS 12.h3
12.lile4 is positionally bad since
White needs his knight to contest
the d4-square. Zimina-Mirzoeva,
Plovdiv 2014, went on 12 ...lilxe4
13.ixe4 c6t. It is much more logi
cal to take g4 under control.
12 ...c6
I have mentioned above the rook
lift ... l'la6. It is also possible here
although the rook looks a bit awk-
ward on a6: 12 ... l'la6 13.ie3 lilfS
14.1!1'a4 h6 15.l'ladl id7 16.Wla3 1!1'c8
17.lilh2=, Alf-Lange, corr. 2010.
13.f4
White possesses a bishop pair and
aims to open play. On the other
hand, this pawn push weakens the
king. Edouard suggests 13.g4 lild7
14.lile2 lilxe2+ 15.Wlxe2 lilf8oo.
A correspondence game saw a com
be born only in a computer's brain:
13.b3 ifs 14.ib2 Wld6 15.lile2 -
killing Black's strongest piece.
The game R.Angelov-V.Popov,
2013, went further 15...h6 16.1!1'd2
a4 17.lilxd4 exd4 18.l'lxe8 lilxe8
19.bxa4 l'lxa4 and was eventually
drawn. Perhaps 14...1!1'c7 instead of
14...Wld6 is slightly more accurate.
By defending eS, Black preserves
his knight from exchange - 15.lile2
lile6.
13... exf4 14.l'lxeS+ lll'xeS?!
The d4-square is a matter of para
mount importance so the manoeu
vre 14... lilxe8-c7-e6 was called for.
Then Black would have had an ex
cellent game.
 1.<l:lf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.g3
15.hf4 tf5 16.g4 ig6 17.d2
!ld8?!
A mundane move obviously made
by general considerations. Stronger
was 17... h5! 18.g5 <l:lh7 killing three
birds with one shot - Black makes
a luft, gains the f5-square for his
knight, and transfers the f6-knight
via the route h7-f8-e6. As a "bonus",
the g5-pawn could hang.
18.ic7 !ld7
19.ha5?
Apparently White missed the pin
along the a-file. Indeed, moves like
19 ...aS!, with the idea of 20.ib4
<l:lb3, are difficult to spot.
Correct was 19.ib6! with unclear
play. Edouard suggests 19 ...bd3
20.xd3 <l:lb3 21.\&bl <l:lxal. In
principle White's pieces should be
stronger, but his naked king offers
Black counter-chances.
19 \&aS!! 20.<l:la4<l:le2+! 21.\&xe2
.
xa5 22.b3 !lxd3+ 23.!ldl !lxdl+
24.\&xdl h5
Edouard converts his advantage
with energy and confidence.
25.gxh5 <l:lxh5 26.c5 <l:lf4 27.a3
ih5 28.it'3 <l:lxh3+ 29.h2
ixf3 30.\&xf3 <l:lg5 31.\&f4 d2+
32.\&xd2 <l:lf3+ 33.g3 <l:lxd2
34.b4 <l:lc4 35.4 <l:lxa3 36.<l:lc3
f8 37.<l:le4 <l:lc4 38.<l:lc3 e7
39.b5 e6 40.e4 f5+ 41.d4
<l:le5 0-1
24. Azaladze - Gagunashvili
Tbilisi 2009
1.<l:lf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.g3 <l:lc6 4.ig2
e5 5.d3 <l:Jf6 6.0-0 a5 7.<l:la3 ic5
Black's only active plan in this
structure is connected with ... e5-e4
so the d4-pawn should be well pro
tected end the e-file should remaiu
opeu for a rook on e8. Another con
sideration is that ic5 discourages
possible breaks in the centre. That
said, 7...ie7 also has enough ad
herents, but it is more prophylactic
than aggressive.
8.<l:lc2
8.ig5 0-0 9.<l:ld2 is well met by
9 ...ie7! 10.<l:lc2 h6. Without a
dark-squared bishop, White's
counterplay in the centre would
185
be impotent. Note that 10 ... lild7
ll.b:e7 '/!ixe7 could be attacked
with 12.e3 or even 12.f4, as in Ri
vas-Romero, Alicante 1989.
Similarly, 8.lilb5 0-0 9.ig5 is par
ried by 9...ie7 10.e3 h6.
8 ... 0-0 9.a3
Another critical line is 9.ig5 h6
10.ixf6 '/!lfxf6 11.lild2
ThegameAdamski-Rausis, Lyn
gby 1989, saw ll.b3 '/!lle7 12.a3
ie6 13.lild2 f5 and Black con
trols the board. White's attempt
to push b4 was instructively
parried by the curious rook lift
14.'/!icl l'la6!? 15.l'lbl l'lb6. Here
Adamski tried 16.f4 exf4 17.gxf4
ili7 18.b4 axb4 19.lilb3, but 19 ...
bxa3 20.lilxc5 l'lxbl 21.'/!ixbl
Wxc5 22.'/!llxb7 lila5+ leaves
Black with a sound extra pawn.
11 ...'/!lle7
12.a3 (12.lile4 ib6; 12.lilb3 ib6)
12 ... a4 (or 12 ...!g4 13.h3 !e6 14.1lbl
a4) 13.b4 (exploiting the hang
ing l'la8) 13...axb3 14.lilxb3 id6. It
seems that White has achieved his
goal, but Black is still better thanks
to his bishop pair. The break 15.e3
does not help - 15...dxe3 16.fxe3
186
lila5 17.lild2 f5 18.d4 c6 19.'/!ih5
ie6+, Henderson-Krutous, ICCF
2015. The c4 and a3-pawns are
hanging.
9.lild2 if5 leaves White without
sensible moves - he cannot play
lile4, 10.f4 is also dubious due to
10 ...e4. 10.b3 '/!lld6 would prevent
ia3. Remains 10.a3 when 10 ...
h6!?+ would be a good prophylac
tic move, aimed against the idea of
ig5, as in the line 10 ...'/!id7 11.l'lbl
a4 12.b4 axb3 13.lilxb3 ie7 14.ig5.
9 . l'leS
..
Another interesting set-up is 9...'/!ie7
10.l'lbl a4 ll.lild2 lila5 12.b4 axb3
13.lilxb3 lilxb3 14.l'lxb3 c6, but the
text is more consistent. Black pre
pares ...e4.
10 ig5
.
10.l'lbl a4 ll.!d2 stumbles into 11...
e4 12.dxe4 lilxe4 13.ib4 b6.
Similar is 10.b3 e4, e.g. ll.lilg5
(11.lild2 exd3 12.exd3 ig4 13.lilf3
Wld7 14.ib2 1lilf5) ll ... exd3 12.exd3
ig4.
10.e3 dxe3 11.b:e3 if8 12.d4 also
does not solve White's problems
due to 12 ... e4! 13.lild2 ig4 14.f3
ih5!.
10...h6 11.!xf6 "l>l'xf6 12.lild2
We7
It is natural to avoid exchancres hav-
.
a
mg more space, but 12 ... a4 13.lile4
 l.'ilt::l <15
V!Je7 14.iilxc5 V!ixc5 is also pleasant
for Black. The game Larsen--Short,
Hastings 1988, was eventually
drawn after 15.V!id2 M5 (Perhaps
15...iiJa5 16.V!Jb4 iiJb3 poses more
problems to White.) 16.!labl \1!1a5
17.liJb4 liJd8 18.!lbdl c6 19.e4 dxe3
20.fxe3 ,ig4 21.tf3 .th3 22.tg2 ig4
23.if3 i.h3 24.tg2, draw.
13.h3
13...tg4!
13 ...f5 also looks pretty, but it is bet
ter to activate first the bishop.
14.!lel
14.liJe4 tb6 15.!labl is too slow -
15 .. .f5 16.iild2 e4! 17.dxe4 d3. The
ig4 is decisive in this line!
14 f5 15.h3?!
. the game was drawn:
Black is obviously better, but White
should not facilitate his task by
weakening his kingside. A waiting
game would have been more stub
born for White.
15 fili5 16.\1!1hl \1!1g5!
..
c.c4 <14 3.g3
Black is all set for 16...e4 17.dxe4
\1!1g5, but the threat is stronger than
its execution!
17.\1!1cl e4!
This breakthrough crowns Black's
strategy. All the diagonals to his
bishop pair are ripped open.
18.dxe4 he2 19.h4 \1!1g4 20.b4
axb4 21.iilb3 ta7?
Black has played perfectly so far,
but this awful move ruins all his ef
forts. The simple 21...d3 22 .iiJxc5
dxc2 23.V!Jxc2 liJd4 24.\1!1b2 iiJf3+
wins easily.
22.c5
The tables have turned and Black is
now worse. After mutual mistakes,
22 !ledS
. 23.axb4 fxe4
24.liJcxd4? (24.b5) 24...!lxd4
25.b5 hb5 26.iilxd4 iilxd4
27.\1!1e3? iiJf3+ 28.kd3 exf3 (28 ...
\1!1xf3+) 29.3+ tc4? 30.\Wxb7
!ld8 31.!lxa7 \Wh3 32.1Wxf3 td5
33.!leS+ !lxe8 34.\Wxd5+
187
 Chapter 11
34...l!lh7 35.!:lal Vire6 36.E:dl
Virf6 37.l!lg2 E:e5 38.Vird3+ Virg6
39.Virxg6+ l!lxg6 40.E:cl @f5
41.l!lf3 g5 42.E:c4 E:el 43.c6 E:e5
44.h5 E:e6 45.E:c5+ l!lf6 46.l!lg4
E:e4+ 47.f4 gxf4 48.E:f5+ l!lg7
49.gxf4 E:c4 50.E:d5 E:xc6 51.l!lf5
E:f6+ 52.l!le5 E:f7 53.E:c5 E:e7+
54.l!lf5 E:f7+ 55.l!lg4 l!lh7 56.f5
E:d7 57.l!lf4 l!lg7 58.E:c6 E:d6
59.E:xc7+ f6 60.E:h7 E:d4+
61.l!le3 E:h4 62.E:xh6+ xf5
Draw.
25. Malakhov-Tomashevsky
Jurmala 08.03.2015
1.lilf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.g3 lilc6 4.ig2
e5 5.0-0 e4 6.lilel h5!
Black obtains a nearly free, self
conducting attack.
7.he4
7.d3 only accelerates Black's attack
owing to 7...e3! 8.fxe3 h4 9.lilf3
hxg3 10.hxg3 <l:lf6 ll.exd4 lilxd4
12.lilc3, Jessel-O'Donnell, Dublin
2015, 12 ... <l:lf5! 13.ig5 ie7 14.Virel
c6.
7...h4
This obvious move is far from be
ing trivial. Black should seriously
consider 7...ih3!?, aiming to lim
it White's choice. The point is that
8.ig2?! (or 8.lilg2?!) 8...Vird7 is very
promising for Black who achieves
an ideal attacking position with a
long castle. Therefore, White must
answer:
8.Vifb3 Vires
9.ig2
Hawkins-Pert, London 2015,
saw 9.Virb5 when 9 ... <l:lge7 was
too timid although Black went on
to win after 10.<l:lg2 1!1'd7 11.Wxb7
!'lb8 12.'l>lla 6 f5 13.if3 d3!.
He had more natural develop
ing moves like 9...id6 or even
9 ...lilf6.
9...h4 10.d3,
10.ixh3? \\!.lxh3 ll.'l>llxb7 l!ld7.
 1.li:lf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.g3
transposing to the comments to
White's move 9.
8.d3
8.e3? li:lf6 9..lig2 dxe3 10.'1e2 (10.
fxe3 hxg3 ll.hxg3 i.d6) 10 ...li:ld4
11.'1xe3+ .W.e7 12.li:lc3 occurred in
V.Popov-Navara, Minsk 2015, when
12 ...li:lg4! was winning.
8..lig2 li:lf6 9.li:lf3 hxg3 10.fxg3 .lih3
11.d3?! (11.i.xh3 !lxh3 12.d3 was
the lesser evil) ll ...'1d7 12.l'lf2 li:lg4
13.i.xh3 l'lxh3 14.l'lg2 0-0-0 was
seen in Harika-Zimina, Rome 2015.
This positron illustrates Black's
main goal after 6...h5!. White is
probably lost here. Harika played
15.li:la3 when the strongest plan
was 15...f6 followed up by ...g5.
The decisive blow should be dealt
on h2, e.g. 16.'/a4 g5 17.b4 hb4
18.l'lbl .lic5 19.li:lc2 l'ldh8 20..lia3
ha3 21.li:lxa3 li:lxh2! 22.li:lxh2 '1h7
23.'1b5 l'lxg3!-+.
s th3
...
8...li:lf6!? is another critical line.
a) 9..lig5 hxg3 10.fxg3 li:le5 n.li:ld2
(11..lig2 .lie7) ll... li:leg4 12.li:lef3
Black has various ways of develop
ing his attack. 12 ...!lh3 or 12 ...l'lh5!?
threaten ...li:lxh2. Another obvious
try is 12 ...li:le3 13.'1a4+ c6 14.l'lfcl
.W.e7.
Perhaps the most unpleasant con
tinuation is 12 ...c6!, anticipating
White's check from a4 and enhan
cing the above-mentioned threats.
If then 13.'1a4 (13.li:lh4 '1a5 14.c5
'1xc5 15..lif5 l'lxh4 16.hf6 l'lh6-t),
13... l'lh5 14.l'lfcl '1d7 15.i.4 li:le3
looks rather ominous.
In these lines White's light-squared
bishop is clearly missing from g2.
So we should consider:
b) 9 ..lig2 hxg3 10.fxg3 .lih3 (10 ... li:lg4
is also worth considering) 11.l'lf2
(11.i.xh3 l'lxh3 12.li:lf3 and 11 ..lig5
'1d7 12.hf6 were more resilient,
but Black is better in either case.)
ll ...li:lg4 12.l'lf4 (avoiding the pat
tern ofHarika-Zimina after 12.l'lg2)
12 ...hg2 13.l'lxg4 .lih3 14.l'le4+ .W.e7
15.li:ld2 '1d7 16.b4 f5 was yet anoth
er opening rout, Podzielny-Meister,
playchess.com 2007.
Attack is the best defence and White
should probably not lose any tem
po, but take immediately on c6:
189
 Chapter 11

c) 9.hc6+ ! bxc6 10.lilf3 aiming for

lilbl-d2-e4. Then 10 ...hxg3 ll.fxg3
lilg4 is unclear:

10.fi.f4?

10.fi.g5 fi.e7 is also dubious.

White has 12.e4 dxe3 13.he3 fi.e7
14.sel lilxe3 15.sxe3 0-0 where the
bishop pair serves as a good com
pensation for the pawn.
9.lilg2
9.fi.g2 hxg3 10.fxg3 1!!.ld7 ll.lild2
0-0-0 is excellent for Black, but:
9.1!!.lb3, aiming to hamper the cas
tle, deserves attention: 9... 1!!.lcS (9...
hxg3? 10.1!!.lxb7) 10.fi.g2
10. lilg2 is dangerous for White
since his pieces remain passive -
10... lilf6 11.fi.f3 lilg4 12.lild2 fi.e7.
10 ...hg2 11.lilxg2 hxg3 12.fxg3.
Now 12... 1!!.lh3 13.1!!.lxb7 1!!.lxh2+
14.12/f2 @d7 15.fi.f4 sc8 16.lild2 lilf6
17.shl ltlg4 forces a draw, but of
course Black should keep the ten
sion with 12 ...1!!.ld7! 13.lild2 0-0-0.
10.lilxh4! was the only defence. I
would not even consider taking
the exchange. Black retains the in
itiative with 10... lilf6! ll.fi.f3 lilg4,
for instance: 12.fi.e4 fi.e7! (there
is no reason to repeat moves with
12 ...ltlf6) 13.'l;\lb3 lild8 14.MS '/ilc6
15.lilf3 lilxh2.
10.fi.f4? hxg3 11.fxg3 ltlf6 12.fi.f3
ltlg4+.
10... lilf6 11.m td6 cn... hxg3
12.fxg3 lilg4+) 12.1!!.lcl 0-0-0
13.lila3 hxg3 14.fxg3
Black has obtained a very strong
position and now 14 ...fi.xf4! 15. '/ifxf4
sde8 16.sf2 ltle5 was clearly better
for him. His next two moves wipe
out his advantage.
14 lilg4?!
15.hd6 cxd6
(15 .. .hg2 ! 16.hg2 cxd6)

9 . '!Nd7
..

It was better to exchange first on

g3, avoiding the exchange sacrifice
lilxh4 - 9 ...hxg3! 10.fxg3 1!!.ld7 with
a strong attack. The same reason
ing applies to Tomashevsky's next
moves, too.

101)
 1.ltlf3 dS 2.c4 d4 3.g3

16.hg4 gxh4 34.gxh4 e2 35.f2 l'lxb2

36.h5 llb4 0-1
White should be able to hold af
ter 16.111'f4, e.g. 16 ...lilce5 17.lilb5
a6 18.lilxd4 @b8 19 ..b:g4 lilxg4 26. Zmokly Ness
-

20.11!fxf7 111'xf7 21.!lxf7 .b:g2 22.!lxg7 ICCF 2011

!lxh2 23.!lxg4 l'lhl+ 24.@xg2 !lxal
25.a3 !la2 26.b3 l'lxa3 27.!lg7 dS=. l.lil:t3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.g3 lilc6 4..ig2
e5 5.d3.ib4+ 6 .id2 a5 7.0-0 lilf6

16 ...'l;l'xg4 17.!lf2?! 8.e3 0-0 9.exd4 lilxd4 10.lilxd4

Vlrxd4 11..ic3 Vlrd6 12.a3
17.111'f4 was essential - 17...lile5
(17...11!1xe2 18.l'lf2 11!1xd3 19.lilb5co)
18.11!1xg4+ lilxg4 19.l'lf4 fS 20.l'lxd4
.b:g2 21.l'lxg4! fxg4 22.@xg2 with
good chances for a draw.

17 g5 18.c5 (or 18.b4 @b8 19.lilc2

.

lile5 20.lilgel f5) 18 ...!lhe8 19.lilb5

dxc5 20.'l;l'xc5 @bS 21.!lel !le5
22.11!fc4
12....ig4

Black could include first 12 ....ic5

13.lild2 111'xd3 14..b:e5 and only now
14....ig4. Then 15.lilf3 11!1f5 16..b:c7
a4 offers good compensation, but
15.$.3 looks totally equal.
The text keeps the pawn structure
unbalanced.

13 .i:f.3

Black dominates in the centre and

he only needs to open another file The bishop does not stand well on
against the enemy king to finish the f3. Perhaps 13.11!fd2 .b:c3 14.lilxc3 c6
game. 15.111'e3 was more solid.

22 f5!-+ 23.e3 hg2 24.!lxg2

13 hc3 14.lilxc3 .ih3
.

dxe3 25.'l;l'xg4 fxg4 26.lila3

lild4 27.lilc4 lil:t3+ 28.fl lilxel 14...MS 15.lile4 is about even.
29. lilxe5 lilxg2 30. xg2 l'ld5
31.lilxg4 llxd3 32.:f.3 l'ld2 33.h4 15.!lel c6

191
 Chapter 11

ea! chances, but in an email game,

White easily holds the balance.

23.hhS !<d8 24.1Mfe2 1Mfxe2

25.he2 !<d2 26.!<a2 !<c2 27.f3
.ie6 28 .id3 !<cl+ 29.l!lf2 qid7

30.qie2

The opening stage is over. The op

position of the pawns e5:d3 defines
a slight space advantage for Black.
Naturally, White seeks to trade
them.

16.'m>31Mfxd317.l<e31Mfd718.!<xe5
!<fe8 19.!<xeS+ !<xe8 20.i.e2 h5
21.'1Mfc2 .if5 22.'1Mfdl 1Mle7 30 !<hl 31.b3 qic5 32.l!lg2 !<el

33.qif4 qixb3 34.qixe6 fxe6

Black grasps the chance to com 35.!<e2 !<al 36.l<xe6 l!lf7 37.!<e3
plicate things with a pan sacrifice. !<xa3 38.g4 !<a2+ 39.l!lg3 qic5
OTB, that could offer him practi- Draw.

192
Chapter 12. 1.ltJf3 d5 2 .g3
Main Ideas
1.liJf'3 d5 2.g3 c6
With this move we prepare to lead
out our bishop to g4. That would
solve Black's main problem against
White's fianchetto - the poor fate of
the light-squared bishop which of
ten remains caged on c8.
3.c4
The only way to exploit the immi
nent 3...ig4 is to attack the light
squares on the queenside which
would be left somewhat weakened
by the absence of the bishop.
I consider Kl set-ups in the next
chapter.
3...tg4
The most critical test of 3.c4 is 3...
dxc4 4.ig2 liJd7, but it is not in the
spirit of our book. I analyse here
only plans where we hold the cen
tre.
4.ig2
4.'ll'b3 is well met by 4....fu<f.3 while
4.liJe5 Af5! 5.ll!ib3 misses the mark
in view of 5...lild7!
4...e6
White has now three main ap
proaches.
1. One of them is to drag Black's
queen to b6 and harass it later with
Ae3 or c4-c5:
5.'l!l'b3 ll!ib6
a) 6.d3 liJd7 7.Ae3 is easily parried
by 7...tc5, but if you read careful
ly the "Step by Step" chapter, you
could also force playwith 7... dxc4!?.
b) 6.ll!ic2 lild7 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.0-0
lile7 9.Wa4 hf3 10.!xf3 lilc6=.
c) 6.lilc3 lild7 7.d4 lilgf6 8.c5 ll!ia6!
9.0-0 ie7 10.!lel b6. Remember the
retreat ...ll!ia6 after c4-c5. It is effec
tive in many lines. There is an ex
ception though:
193
 Chapter 12
Black does not play 'i!'a6
Here 11...'/Na6 is inaccurate (11...
'/Nxb3 ! 12.axb3 a6;) because White's
rook is already on el. That does not
leave Black time for ...b6 after ll.e4
dxe412.ltlxe4 ltlxe4 13.ID:e4 (threat
ening 14.il.fl).
2. Sometimes White plays c4, d4,
b3: 5.0-0 ltlf6 6.d4 ltlbd7 7.ltlbd2
il.e7! 8.b3 0-0 9.il.b2 a5 10.a3 h6
Whenever White's knight jumps on
e5, we take it, and ifhe attempted e4,
we answer ...il.fS, aiming to trade on
e4 more pieces. That would secure
our king against a kingside attack.
3. White's most principled ap
proach is 5.cxd5.
Then the simplest answer is 5...il.xf3
6.il.xf3 cxdS 7.0-0 ltlc6 8.d3 ltlf6
9.ltlc3 il.e7
See Game 29 Mola-Delchev, 2015.
More double-edged is 5... exd5.
It offers White a pawn majority in
the centre and the dynamic factors
often play a decisive role. If Black
stays passively, he risks to fall under
attack - White will simply roll forth
all his kingside pawns. I suggest the
active set-up with ...il.d6:
6.0-0 ltlf6 7.d3 ltlbd7 8.ltlc3 il.d6
9.h3 il.h5 10.e4 0-0
a) Now 11.'i&c2 !;1e8 12.ltlh4 (For
12 .il.e3 il.cS ! see Game 28 Markows
ki-Pedersen, Istanbul 2003.) is the
sterner test of our plan. We oppose
a dark-squared strategy - 12 ... ltlcS!,
heading for e6-d4. Our idea is to
lure the pawns into our camp where
we could attack them easier. A typ
ical position with an overextended
White's centre is:
 1.lilf3 d5 2.g3
17..ie3 stumbles into 17 ... c5 and
17.1'1dl could be met by either 17...
c5, or 17.. .f6.
b) It would be a moral victory for
Black if White exchanged on d5 -
11.exd5 cxd5 12.g4 .ig6 13.lilh4 lilc5
14.lilxg6 hxg6 15.d4 lile6 16..ie3
Stayed the g-pawn on g3, White
might have hoped for some advan
tage in view of his pressure on d5.
But the weakened h2-b8 diago
nal gives us excellent counterplay:
16 ....ic7! 17.'il'b3 'il'd6.
To sum up, taking on d5 by e-pawn
leads to rich sharp play.
195
Chapter 12. 1.llif3 d5 2 .g3
Step by Step
1.li:lf3 d5 2.g3 c6 3.c4 .ig4
5.exf3!?
4 .ig2
4.'!l'b3 hf3
Morozevich's 4...'!l'b6 is less clear
- 5.li:le5 te6 6.d3 f6 (White had
the slightly more active pieces
after 6...g6 7..ie3 \Wxb3 8.axb3
tg7 9.li:lf3 hb2 10.xa7 xa7
ll..ixa7 in Aronian-Motylev,
Sochi 2015.) 7.lilf3 W 8.th3
(8.lilc3 lila6) 8...eS
10/;
The tactical background of
Black's set-up is the line 9 ..ic8
tb4+ 10 . .id2 a5.
The stem game Grischuk-Mo
rozevich, Moscow 2012, went
9.0-0 lila6 10.lilc3 lile7, but
11. \Wc2 ! would have been in
White's favour. I have also an
alysed 10 ...\Wxb3 ll.axb3 d4
12.lile4 .ig6 13.e3i.
5.\Wxf3 e6!=, intending to re
capture on d5 by c-pawn, is ba
lanced.
a) 6.tg2 lilf6 7.0-0 te7 8.\Wb3
'!l'b6 9.\Wc2 0-0 10.b3 a5 ll.lilc3
lila6=
12.d3 d8 13..ib2 d4 14.lile4
lilxe4 15.dxe4 e5 16.a3 lilc5 17.b4
lila6 18.b5 cxb5 19.cxb5 c8
20.\Wdl lilc5 21.a4 d7+, Rap
port-Balogh, Zombathely 2011.
b) 6. b3! \Wb6! [Black has tried
 1.ltlf3 d5 2.g3

only 6 ... ltla6, heading for c5, but 11.0-0 ie7 12.ltlbd2 0-0 13.ltlf3
the knight is misplaced there ltlc5 14.ltla5 ltlfd7) 8 ...ltld5 9 ..id2
- 7..ig2 ltlc5 8.1/i.lc2 ltlf6 (8...d4 f6 10.ltlc4 ltla6 ll ..ig2 ltldb4=.
9.b4;!;) 9.0-0 ie7 10.d4 ltlcd7 5... e6!
11.ltld2 0-0 12.b3 with a slight
advantage due to the bishop pair
although 12 ...c5 promises Black
counterplay.] 7.ltlc3 ltlf6 8.cxd5
1/i.lxb3 9.axb3 cxd5 10.ltlb5?!
d7 ll.E!xa7 E!xa7 12.ltlxa7 when
White's small material advan
tage will be short-lived - 12 ...
ic5 13.ltlb5 E!c8 14.f3 ltlc6, fol
lowed up by ...ltla5xb3.
5 1/i.ib6
.. 6.0-0
It is safer to trade queens. 6.cxd5 exd5 7.0-0 ltld7 8.d4 .id6
5...1/i.ld7 6.d4 offers White some (or 8...ltlgf6 9.ltlc3 ie7 10.h3 h6
initiative although the full con ll.Wb3 Wb6 12.1/i.ldl 1/i.ld8 13.1/i.lb3
trol of the blockading d5-square Wb6 14.Wdl 1/i.ld8 15.Wb3 draw,
neutralises all concrete threats. Pigusov-Dreev, Pavlodar 1987)
For instance: 6...dxc4 7.hc4 e6 9 ..if4 he5 10.dxe5 ltle7 11.ltlc3
8.ltlc3 ltlf6 9.0-0 ie7 10.E!el 0-0, ltlg6 12.e4 he4=, Kengis-Yako
Maletin-Pushin, Tula 2009. vich, Pinsk 1986.
6.1/i.lxb6 axb6 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.ltlc3 6 ... ltlf6 7.d4 ltlbd7 8.ltlc3 ie7=, see
e6=. Grune 27 Kazmierczuk-Carolei,
ICCF 2013
4.ltle5 .if5! 5..ig2
5.1/i.lb3 is already a strike at thin 4 ...e6
air due to 5...ltld7! 6.d4 ltlxe5
7.dxe5 1/i.lc7 8.cxd5 ie4 9.f3 hd5
10.1/i.lc3 g6!? ll.e6 lilf6=.
5.cxd5?! 1/i.lxd5 is a double hit to
hl and a2. White is happy to find
6.1/i.lb3 (6.d4 hbl 7.E!xbl 1/i.lxhl
8.Wb3 ltld7 9.ltlxf7 We4 10.E!al
Wxd4 11.ltlxh8 Wd5 12.1/i.lxb7
E!b8 13.\Wa6 ltlgf6+; 6.ltlf3 hbl
7.E!xbl Wxa2 8.1/i.lc2 ltla6-+)
when simplest would be 6...
ltld7=. 6...\Wxb3 7.axb3 ltlf6 is
also roughly equal after 8.d4 Main continuations now are:
(8.d3 ltlbd7 9.ltlc4 e5 10 ..ig2.ie6 A. 5.Wb3; B. 5.0-0; C. 5.cxd5

197
 Chapter 12
A. 5.1!1'b3 V;\'b6 6.d3
6.Wc2 brings White good results.
His idea is to win a tempo later with
ie3 or to exploit the weakening of
the back rank. For instance: 6...lilf6
7.cxd5 which forces 7... exd5, al
though this set-up is not dangerous
for Black as we'll see in line C.
An independent line arises after 6...
lild7, having in mind 7.cxd5 cxd5.
The game T.L.Petrosian-Aghasa
ryan, Yerevan 2013, continued
8.0-0 lile7 9.Wa4 M3 (9 ...ih5!?
10.lileS Wc7 ll.d4 he2) 10.hf3
lilc6 11.lilc3 $.e7=.
6.lilc3 lild7 7.d4 lilgf6 8.c5 should be
met by 8 ...1/!lla6! 9.0-0 ie7 10.!lel b6
11.cxb6 axb6 12.e4 0-0 13.exdS
13 ...lilxdS!= (freeing f6 for the bish
op) 14.Ml Wa7 15.lilxd5 cxd5 16.$.b5
M6, Kozlov-Kharitonov, St Peters
burg 1995.
6 ... lild7 7.$.e3 dxc4!?
Black has two solid alternatives:
7...ic5 8.hc5 lilxc5 9.Wc3 lilf6
10.lilbd2 aS 11.!lcl lilcd7 12.0-0 0-0;
7... 1!1'xb3 8.axb3 a6 9.lilbd2 lilgf6
10.0-0 ie7=.
198
8.Wxc4 (8.dxc4 ic5=) 8 ... Wxb2
9.d4 1!1'b4+ 10.liJbd2
White has undisputable compensa
tion due to his lead in development
and open files on the queenside.
The best defence is to take the cen
tre under control with:
10...f6
In Romanishin-Delchev, Forni di So
pra 2014, I chose 10 ...M3 11.M3
Was
Safer is ll ...1!1'xc4 12.lilxc4 !lc8
13.0-0 (13.ha7b5 14.lilb6 liJxb6
15.hb6 h3 16.0-0 lile7=) 13 ...
b6 14.!labl lilgf6 15.!lfcl ie7
16.a4 0-0 17.aS lild5 18.axb6
axb6 19.lilxb6 liJ7xb6 20.hb6
lilxb6 21.!lxb6 c5=.
12.!lbl !lb8 13.tc3 Wc7 14.1!1'a4
14.ihS!? Wd6 15.liJe4 111'd5
16.1!1'xd5 exd5 17.lilgS liJgf6
(17... lilh6 18.e) 18.hV+
e7=.
14...lilgf6 15.111'xa7 when 15... lildS!?
is unclear.
One year later, Romanishin repeat
ed the variation, but his opponent
 1.lilf3 d5 2.g3
Marzano was apparently well pre
pared and opted for 10 .. .f6. The
same idea works also after 10...1/!llxc4
ll.lilxc4f6! (but not ll...lilgf6 12.!lbl
with nasty pressure).
11.!lbl
11.0-0 1/!llxc4 12.lilxc4 lilh6!? (12 ...e5
13.te3 lilb6 14.lila5 0-0-0 15.!lfbl
@c7 16.lild2 lile7 17.lildc4 liled5
18.lilxb6 lilxb6 19.!lb2 is roughly
equal as white will regain the pawn.
The knight move aims to repel the
d4-bishop from the gl-a7 diago
nal.) 13.!labl lilf5 14.tc3 !lbS 15.h3
M3 16.M3 lild6 and Black retains
the extra pawn although White has
probably sufficient compensation.
11 1/!llxc4 12.lilxc4 e5
13 .ie3 (13.tc3 b5) 13 b6
. for the bishop in order to enable a
13...b5 14.lilfxe5 fxe5 15.hc6 leads
to a very sharp and unclear end
game after both 15...!lcS 16.hb5
tc5 17.lilxe5 he3 and 15 ...bxc4
16.haS cxd3 17.exd3.
14. lilfd2 !lc8
White is yet to prove that he has
enough compensation, Romani
shin-Marzano, Berlin 2015. Per
haps best is 15.lile4 !lc7 16.f4.
B. 5.0-0 lilf6 6.d4
I analyse 6.b3 lilbd7 7.tb2 td6
8.d3 0-0 9.lilbd2 !leS in the anno
tations to Grune 30 Janaszak-Dzi
uba, Warsaw 2011. The same plan
is also discussed in the Chapter 14,
line B, but Black has an extra tem
po there since he pushes ...e5 in one
step - on the first move!
6 ... lilbd7
7.lilc3
7.lilbd2 te7! I prefer this square
possible exchange on e5 if White's
knight landed there. 8.b3 0-0 9.tb2
a5
This is the thematic plan against
White's set-up, but 9...h6 also
deserves attention, securing the
g4-bishop: 10.!lel (10.lile5 lilxe5
ll.dxe5 lild7 12.h3 th5 13.g4
199
 Chapter 12
ig6 14.e4 <;:Jc5) 10 ...M5 followed
up by ... a5.
10.a3
lO.ae5 axe5 11.dxe5 <;:)d7 is ge
nerally fine for Black - 12.h3 5
13.g4 ig6 14.e4 dxe4 15.<;:Jxe4
ac5 16.<;:Jd6 <;:Jd3 17.ia3 f6! !
(17...axe5 18.c5) 18.1!1'd2 1!1'b8
19.c5 fxe5+.
10 ...h6
10 ...b5 11.c5 1Wb8 12.b4 is diffi
cult to win with either side.
11.l'lel M5 12.<;:Je5 axe5! 13.dxe5
<;:Jd7 14.cxd5
14.e4 is dubious with a closed
c-file - 14...dxe4 15.axe4 ac5
16.<;:)d6 hd6+.
14...cxd5 15.e4
White needs to open the centre
as otherwise Black has a clear
plan on the queenside - 15.id4
ac5 16.1!\'cl !lc8 17.1Wb2 1!1'd7
18.!lecl b5 19.ie3 !lfd8 20.<;:Jf3
a4 21.<;:)d4 axb3 22.axb3 axb3
23.Wxb3 !lc4+, Malaniuk-Dreev,
Tilburg 1993.
15...dxe4
16.he4 (16.<;:Jxe4 <;:Jc5 17.Wxd8=)
Here Bagirov-Rabiega, Berlin 1995,
signed a draw. Both 16 ... he4
17.<;:Jxe4 !lc8 and 16 ... ac5 17.txts
are equal.
7.b3 ie7 8.ib2 0-0 9.<;:Jbd2 should
200
transpose to 7.<;:Jbd2 unless Black
chooses 8...ae4!? 9.<;:)bd2 axd2
10.Wxd2 0-0.
7 dxc4!?
...
7...ie7 is certainly possible. White
usually continues 8.1!1'b3
8.cxd5 exd5 9.h3 is best met by
9 ...if5 (9...5 allows 10.aes
axe5 11.dxe5 <;:)d7 12.g4 ig6
13.f4) lO.<;:Jh4 ig6=.
8...Wb6
In this popular position top players
prefer lately 9.l'lel
9.c5 is typically met by 9 ...Wa6
and then ...b6. The rook move is
aimed against it.
9... 0-0 10.c5 1Wxb3
10 ...Wa6 is less attractive here
as 11.e4 dxe4 12.axe4 axe4
13.!lxe4 practically forces 13 ...
hf3 in view of the threat 14.ifl.
You could retain more tension
with 10 ...1Wc7 11.M4 Wc8, but
it is not advisable to give more
space to a good player as you will
have to struggle for the rest ofthe
game, e.g. 12 ...h6 (12 ...b6 13.id6
Wd8 14.he7 Wxe7 15.cxb6 axb6
16.e4) 13.e4 dxe4 14.axe4 axe4
15.!lxe4 <;:)f6 16.!leel <;:)d5 17.id2
ixf3 18.Wxf3 !ld8 19.h4 with an
 1.tilf3 d5 2.g3
initiative in Rapport-Bromber
ger, Reykjavik 2016.
11.axb3 a6 12.b4 l'lfe8
The blunt 12 ....fud"3 (anticipat
ing the typical manoeuvre tilf3-
d2-b3-a5) 13.exf3 l'lfd8 proved
quite effective for a draw in Bu
Malakhov, China 2015: 14.f4 g6
15.Ae3 Ill es 16.Afl lllc7 17.illbl
lllf6 18.lll d2 lllg4 19.lllf3 h5
20.h3 lllh6 21.ill eS g7 22.Ad3
12lf5 23.lllf3 l'lh8 24.g2 Af6
25.l'la3 l'lac8 26.l'lhl ie7 27.!laal
l'lcg8 28.g4 draw.
13.M4
13.lll d2 e5 assures Black of
counterplay.
13 ...h6=.
8.e4
It is clear that White's hopes are
based on the strong centre, but in
practice he often inserts a4 a5 first:
8.a4 a5 9.e4 ib4
9 ...Wb6, threatening ... e5, is also
in Black's favour.
10.'&e2 e5 11.d5 cxd5
11 ... l'lcS keeps the extra pawn -
12.l'ldl cxd5 13.exdS 0-0+, Mat
nadze-Dzagnidze, Istanbul 2012,
but it is even better to have even
pawns and a clear positional ad
vantage.
12.exdS 0-0 13.Wxc4 l'lc8+.
8...e5
8...b5 9.h3 (9.e5? lll d5 10.lll e4 ier+)
9 ...hf3 10.'&xf3 ie7 11.eS?! 12ld5
12.Wg4 f8 defends everything and
Black can hope to advance his pawn
majority on the queenside. How
ever, in this line White has lasting
pressure by just staying solidly in
the centre, e.g. 11.l'ldl 0-0 12.M4,
which compensates for the missing
pawn. It is better to contest the cen
tre at once.
9.ie3 (9.dxe5?! hf3 10.Wxf3
12lxe5+) 9 .. exd4 10.hd4 lllc5
.
(threatening 11...lll e6) 11.eS llld5
12.We2
Black has at least two ways of reach
ing comfortable equality:
a) 12 ... 12lb6 13.l'ladl 12ld3 14.We4
Wd7 15.hb6 axb6 16.Wxc4 lllxb2
17.l'lxd7 12lxc4 18.l'lxb7=;
b) 12 ... MS!? 13.12lxd5 cxd5 14.l'lfdl
ie7 15.b3 12ld3 16.e6 0-0 17.exf7+
h8oo.
201
 Chapter 12
C. 5.cxd5 exd5
It is always risky to unbalance the
game with Black, but this is the best
way to play for a win. In my prac
tice I prefer the solid 5...i.xf.3 6.M3
cxd5 7.0-0 lilc6 8.d3 lilf6 9.lilc3 !!J..e7
White's bishop pair does not have
great prospects due to the symmet
rical pawn structure. I consider in
detail this backup line in the anno
tations to Grune 29 Mola-Delchev,
2015.
6.0-0
6.Wb3 W!lb6 7.W!lc2 is an attempt to
win a tempo with !!J..e3 since White
was going to play W!lc2 anyway.
However, the black queen may re
treat to a6 where it would be quite
active:
7... lild7 8.0-0 lilgf6 9.d3 (9.lilc3
!!J..d6) 9...W!lc5!
An important move, aimed at
driving the enemy queen back
to dl.
9 ... !!J..d6 10.e4 0-0 is also possible
- 11.lilc3 !lfe8 (ll...lile5 12.lilxe5
!!J..xe5 13.!!J..e3! d4 14.lila4 W!lb5
15.!!J..cl offers White a mobile
pawn pair e4-f4.) 12.!!J..e3
12 ...W!la6! (12 ...W!la5 13.lild4!
dxe4 14.dxe4 defines the centre
in White's favour) 13.lild4 lile5
14.h3 !!J..d7= (or 13 ...c5 14.lildb5
d4 15.lilxd6 W!lxd6 16.!!J..f4 W!la6f!).
10.Widl !!J..d6 ll.lilc3 0-0 12.!!J..e3
12.e4 is not a good idea because
of 12 ... dxe4 13.dxe4 lile5.
After 12.h3 !!J..h5 13.e4 dxe4
14.dxe4 lile5 15.g4 !!J..g6 16.lilxe5
!!J..xe5 17.!!J..e3 Wie7 18.f3 Black
could trade a piece with 18 ...h5
19.g5 !!J..xc3 20.bxc3 lild5=.
12 ...W!la5
13.h3
The game T.L.Petrosian-Hov
hannisyan, Lake Sevan Mar
tuni 2015, saw the wrong plan
13.a3?! !lfe8 14.b4 W!ld8 15.!!J..d4
lilf8 16.lila4 lile6 17.!!J..c3 when
17...b5 18.lilb2 !lc8 19.Wib3 c5
2 O. bxc5 lilxc5 favours Black.
13...!!J..h5 14.lild4 !!J..g6 15.f4 !lfe8
 - l.'<lt3 d5 2.g3

16.W. Now a good redeployment a minority attack with b4. I would

is 16 ...!lad8! 17. 1Wd2 '/Jfc7 18.!lacl
\Wb8!=.
6 ... lllf6 7.d3 illbd7 8.ill c3 .id6
8....ie7 and 8....ic5 are well tested
alternatives.
avoid it for practical reasons.
10.e4
The only sensible plan. 10.ltld4 0-0
11.ltlfS .ic7 12 ..ie3 !le8 13.'/Jfd2 12lf8
14.b4 12le6 15.ltld4 .ib6 was pleasant
for Black in Vaganian-Murey, Mar
seille 1987.

10... 0-0 11.exd5

Practice has also seen here 11. \Wc2

although this position arises more
often following the move order with
9.'/Jfc2. We answer ll ...!le8 12.12lh4
For 12 ..ie3 .tcS! see Game 28
Markowski-Pedersen, Istanbul
9.h3 2003.
12 ...ltlc5!
I do not believe that White could as
pire to the advantage without this
move so he better play it right away.
9 .e4 does not gain anything since
9... 0-0 10.h3 .th5 will simply trans
pose. Besides, 9... dxe4 10.dxe4 lll e5
evens the game outright.
9.\Wc2 0-0 10.e4 !le8 ll.h3 .th5 is
another important branch of the
main line.
The knight is heading for e6-d4. We
try to keep as much tension as pos
9 .th5
sible in the centre and play on the
.

dark squares. Any White's pawn

9...ixf3 10.ixf3 d4
advance will be double-edged as his
10 ... 0-0 11.e4 dxe4 12.dxe4 gives
pieces are still undeveloped and not
White a fluid centre and the
ready to back it.
bishop pair.
This line now branches to:
11.llle4 leads to a very static posi
tion where Black lacks any active a) 13 ..igS? 12le6 14.ixf6 '/Jfxf6
plan while White could try to mount 15.exd5 12ld4 16.'/Jfd2 g5-+.

203
 Chapter 12

b) 13 ..ie3 12le6 14.exd5 12lxd5 Eiel Eib8) 19 ... EibS 20 ..ic6 lile6 (20 ...
15.12lxd5 cxd5 16.d4 .ie7 17.\l!lf5 .ie2 .ic7!?) 21.1llld5 lilxd4=.
18.Elfel .ic4 19.12lf3 g6=.
14 hxg6 15.d4 lile6 16 .ie3

c) 13.f4 12le6! 14.e5 (14.12lf5 .ic5+

15.l!lh2 .ig6=) 14....ic5+ 15.l!lh2
12ld7 and White's offence has come
to a halt while Black could think of
...g5 or ...f6.

d) 13.12lf5 .if8 14..ie3

14.g4 .ig6 15.e5 12lfd7 16.d4 12le6

16 ..ic7!

Underlining the weakness of the

We see a typical overextended
White's centre. 17..ie3 stumbles
into 17...c5 and 17.Eidl could be
met by either 17...c5, or 17 .. .f6.
14....ig6 15..ixc5 (15.Eiadl .ixf5)
15... .ixc5 16.12lxd5 .ixf2+ 17.1lllxf2
cxd5=, Leopolis-Pelger, gameknot.
corn 2007.
11 cxd5 12.g4 .ig6 13.12lh4 lilc5
. 12lf5 23.12lxb6 axb6 and Black easily
14.lil:xg6
h2-b8 diagonal. 16 ...lilf4 cost Black
a pawn after 17.1l!lb3 Eib8 18.Eiadl b5
19.M4 M4 20.Eifel Eib6 21.12lxd5
12lxd5 22.\l!lxd5;!;, Radjabov-Ivan
chuk, Ningbo 2011, with an eventu
al draw.
17.1l!lb3 \\l'd6 18.f4 .ib6 19.Eiadl
Eiae8 20.l!lhl
Or 20.g5 12lh5 21.12lxd5 12lg3 22.Eif3
regains the pawn.

The immediate 14.d4 could face 20 Eie7 21.f5 .ic7 22 ..igl lilf4oo.
14...lilce4 15.lilxd5 12lxd5 16.12lxg6
fxg6 17..ixe4 lilf4 with compensa White's position is dangerous in
tion, e.g. 18.1l!lf3 l!lh8 19 ..ixb7 (19. view of his naked king.

?114
Chapter 12. 1.ctJf3 d5 2.g3
Annotated Games
27. Kazmierczuk - Carolei
VWC6/pr23 ICCF 2013
1.lil:f3 lilf6 2.g3 d5 3 .tg2 c6
4.0-0 .tg4 5.lile5 .tf5 6.d4 lilbd7
7.c4 e6 8.lilc3 .te7
This position arises more often with
a knight on f3 instead of e5. The dif
ference should be in Black' s favour
as he is constantly threatening to
take on e5, for instance:
9.b3 0-0 10 ..tb2 lllxe5 11.dxe5 lile4
12.lllxe4 dxe4= or:
9.j,f4 0-0 10.1l:Yb3 lilxe5 11.dxe5
(11.he5 'l:l'b6) 11...lll d7 12.'l:l'xb7?
lllc5 13.'l:l'b4 (13.'l:l'xc6 Eic8 14.1l:Yb5
Eib8 15.'l:l'c6 Eib6) 13 ...EibS 14.'l:l'a3
lilb3.
9.'l:l'b3 'l:l'b6
Black does not have enough corn-
pensation after 9...lllxe5 10.dxe5
lild7 11.'l:l'xb7 0-0 12.'l:l'xc6! lilxe5
13.'l:l'a6 lllxc4 14.e4.
10.lilxd7 lilxd7 11.e4 dxe4
12.lilxe4 0-0 13..ie3 Eifd8
It is possible to trade queens im
mediately - 13 ...'l:l'xb3 14.axb3 a6
15.lllc3 Eiac8 16.d5 cxd5 17.cxd5 e5
18.d6 hd6 19.hb7 Eib8 20.j,d5
lilc5=.
14.h3 V;\'xb3
14...lilf6 15.lll c5 gave White a slight
pull after 15 ...hc5 16.dxc5 'l:l'c7
17.Eifdl in Mozharov-Belov, Mos
cow 2014, due to the weak square
d6.
The waiting 14...h6 was a good al
ternative to the game move.
White should continue 15.Eifcl!
205
 Chapter12
Or 15.1Wc3 liJf6 16.d5 c5! ;
Otherwise Black takes on b3:
15.!lfdl 1Wxb3 16.axb3 liJf6
17.liJc3 ic2;
15.!lfel 1Wxb3 16.axb3 a6 17.liJc3
ic2 18.d5 hb3 19.dxc6 bxc6
20.hc6 !lac8 21.hd7 !lxd7
22.c5 hc5 23.hc5 !lxc5
24.!lxa6 !lb'l'i'.
15 ...1Wxb3 16.axb3 a6 17.liJc3! (in
tending d4-d5 or 17...liJf6 18.liJa4)
17...!lac8, Romanishin-Dorfman,
Tashkent 1980. It was interest
ing to try here 18.d5 when 18 ...
exd5 19.cxd5 cxd5 20.liJxd5 !lxcl+
21.!lxcl if8 offers White a slight in
itiative. The computer proposes the
original 18 ...liJc5!? 19.dxc6 bxc6
with the more active pieces which
compensate for the split queenside
pawns.
15.axb3
15 as
. c5 23.!lda4?! he3 24.fxe3
Sam Collins successfully defended
against K. Arkell and L. Gutman the
position after 15...liJf6 16.liJc5 hc5
17.dxc5 ie4.
The text fixes the b3-pawn which
might prove useful at some point.
However, human players mistrust
206
such committal moves as it is diffi
cult to judge which pawn would be
weaker - b3 or a5.
16.!lfdl
This has no venom. More challeng
ing was to take c2 under control
with 16.!lfcl, or to display activity
with 16.g4!? ig6 17.f4 h6 18.f5 exf5
19.gxf5 ih7 20.id2 b6 21.ic3.
16 liJf6 17.liJxf6+ ix:f6 18.!ld2
h5 19.h2 ie7
20.d5
Both sides lack an active plan and a
waiting game would be a logical ap
proach. White forces the course of
events, but becomes even slightly
worse due to his doubled pawn.
20 cxd5 21.cxd5 ib4 22.!ld4
..
exd5 25.!lxa5 !lxa5 26.!lxa5 ie6
27.!lb5 !ld7 28.MS g6 29.g2
f8 30.f2 e7 31.h4 d6
32. e2 !lc7 33. d2 c6 34.!la5
!lc8 35.!la4 @d6 36.!la5 !lc6
37.!lb5 !la6 38.e4 dxe4 39.he4
!lal 40.@e3 !lel+ 41.@d4 id7
42.!lb6+ Draw.
 l.'ilt::S d5 L.g:;

retreat 17..ie2. Instead, Black chose

28. Markowski - Pedersen
the solid 14 ... lilcS 15.exd5 and a
Istanbul 12.06.2003
draw was agreed.
1.g3 d5 2.lilf"3 c6 3..ig2 .ig4
14.lila4?!
4.0-0 lild7 5.d3 lilgf6 6.c4 e6
7.cxd5 exd5 8.lilc3 .id6 9.Wc2
I understand White's reluctance
0-0 10.e4 !le8 11.h3 .ih5 12 .ie3
to take on d5, but this move hands

.ic5
Black the initiative. Perhaps best re
tort was 14...hf3 15.hf3 .id4, but
the retreat to e7 is also good enough.

14 .ie7 15.lilc3 .ic5 (15 ... lile6!)

.

16.exd5 cxd5 17 .ig5

13 ..if4

In principle, White should avoid

exchanges. 13.hc5 li:lxc5 14.li:lxdS
lilcxe4 15.dxe4 cxd5 16.exd5 .ig6;
eliminates the whole centre.
17....ie7
Another try is 13.lild4 .ig6, creat
ing a hidden pin along the diagonal,
17...lile6!? 18.hf6 Wxf6 19.g4 .ig6
e.g. 14.!lael dxe4 15.dxe4 lild5!. Or
20.lilxd5 Wd8 21.li:le5 !lc8 would
14.!lfdl .ib6 15.exd5 lile5 with the
have given Black full compensation
more active pieces.
for the pawn. The text is passive and
White could have exploited it with
13. lilfS
18.Wb3 lile6 19.hf6 hf6 20.!lael
..

with a slight pull.

13...dxe4 14.dxe4 hf3 15.hf3 lile5
16 ..ig2 1/lld3 17.1/llb3 Wc4 18.!ladl
18.lild4 h6 19 .ie3 lile6 20.!lfel

1/llxb3 simplifies to a balanced end

!lc8 21.lilxe6 fxe6 22 .id4 .id6

game.
13 ....ib6!? (intending ...lilc5)
14.!lael occurred in the corres
pondence game Ptak-Merlicek,
1997, when 14...dxe4 15.dxe4 hf3
16.hf3 lile5 would force the clumsy
23.'&b3
It was possible to eat the a7-pawn -
23.ha7 b6 24.1/llb3 .ic5 25.lilb5 e5
26.a4 and White always has a5 to
save the bishop - 26 ... !le7 27.!lecl

207
 Chapter 12

ie8 28.a5 txf2+ 29.l!lxf2 axcl 39.'lilc4 ad4 40.'lifb3 l!lh7 41.'lilc3
30.axcl bxa5 31.ac5 l!lh7 32.lilc7 'lild8 42.lilc2 i.dl+ 43.ael
axc7 33.'i!rb6 ac8 34.'i!rxdS axd8
35.axa5 ac8 with a probable draw.
To avoid this line, Black should have
defended e6 with 22 .. if7oo.
.

23 b6 24.lilb5 ibS

A decisive mistake. 43 ... lilf4 44..ifl

ad3! 45.'i!re5 lilxh3+ 46 ..ixh3 axh3
47.lile3 keeps the balance.

25.e5 44.he4 he4 45.axe4 ad3

White's bishop controls both wings
so it seems that 25.4 was better, but
then g3 would become a target after
...lilh5, ... g5. Markowski adopts the
Nimzowitsch's approach to block
ade e6, but it is ineffective here.
46.'i!re5 adl+ 47.l!lg2 lilg5
48.ae3 'i!rgS 49.f"3 'lild5 50.'i!rc3
'i!rxa2 51.ae7 ad4 52.'i!rxd4
'i!rxc2+ 53.l!lg3 'lilh2+ 54.l!lxh2
lilxf"3+ 55. l!lg3 lilxd4 56.ab7 b5
57.l!lf4 l!lg6 58.l!le4 lile2 59.h4
l!lf6 60.ab6+ l!lf7 61.h5 1-0

25 he5 26.axe5 a6 27.lild4

M7 28.'lila3 lild7 29.ae2 'i!ff6 29. Mola - Delchev

30.lilf"3 e5! Lucca 1 3.06.2015

Black takes over the initiative for a 1.lilf"3 d5 2.g3 c6 3.g2 g4 4.c4
small price. e6 5.cxd5 .ixf"3 6.ixm cxd5

31.'lilxa6 lilc5 32.'lifb5 ih5 33.g4

.ig6 34.lilel (34.gdl!oo) 34 e4

Black forces the play prematurely.

34... aedS was better.

35.dxe4 dxe4 36.adl acdS

37.axdS axd8 38.b4 lile6

208
 1.li:if3 d5 2 .g3
7.0-0
7.Wi'b3 only hinders White's plan
with a3, b4 and sooner or later he11
have to return the queen back home
- 7...Wi'd7 8.lilc3 lilc6 9.$.g2 lilf6
10.0-0 fi.e7 ll.d3 0-0 12.fi.d2 !lac8
(or 12 ... lild4) 13.!lfcl !lfd8 14.Wi'dl
h6 15.a3 id6 16.b4 !IJ.e5 17.!labl lile8
18.lila4 b6 19.e3 lild6 20.Wi'b3 lile7
21.lilb2 !lxcl+ 22.!lxcl !lc8=, Ana
stasian-Seirawan, Groningen 1997.
7 lilc6 8.d3 lilf6 9.lilc3 ie7
.
10.M4
10.Wia4 0-0 ll.if4 a6 12.!lfcl b5
13.Widl offers Black the initiative
- 13 ...!lc8 14.e4 d4 15.lilbl lild7
16.id2 lilc5 17.ie2 Wi'd7 or 17...
Wi'b6 18.b4 lild7 19.Wi'el a5. Even the
positional pawn sac 17...lila4 18.b3
lilc3!? 19.lilxc3 dxc3 20.hc3 ia3
21.!lc2 lild4 assures Black of a com
fortable game with zero risk.
10.e4 is unimpressive. In the con
crete position Black can safely trade
on e4, but it is generally clever to
keep the centre closed when facing
a bishop pair. Therefore, I recom
mend to meet e4 by ...d4:
10 ...d4 11.lilbl lild7 12.a3 a5 13.a4
ig5 14.lild2 lilc5 15.$.e2 ixd2
16.hd2 '/ilb6 17.Wi'c2 lilb3 and Black
had a slight initiative in Pr.Nikolic
Bluebaum, Germany 2014.
White often develops his bishop on
d2 - 10.ig2 0-0 ll.id2 !lc8
Or ll...'/ilb6 12.!lbl a6 13.ii:Ja4
Wi'a7 14.!lcl !lac8 15.a3 b5 16.lilc3
lild7.
12.a3
12.fil3 does not really threat
en anything - 12 ...lild7! 13.!lfcl
(13.Wlxb7 lilc5 14.fil5 a6) 13 ...a6
14.Wi'dl !IJ.g5!?
A thematic idea in this pawn
structure. At some point White
will try to activate his g2-bish
op with e2-e4 and we'll answer
... d4. Then, according to theABC
book, our dark-squared bishop
will be constrained behind our
own pawns. To be sure, White
could prevent the exchange, but
15.e3 creates a weakness on d3
which might tell after 15 ...fi.e7
16.ii:Je2 Wi'b6.
The game Zaragatski-Gyi
mesi, Germany 2011, went
15.hg5 Wlxg5 16.d4 lilb6 17.e3
!lc7 18.li:Ja4 lilxa4 19.'/ilxa4 '/ile7
20.!lc5 lila7 21.b4 lilb5 22.ifl
ii:Jd6 23.!lacl !ld7 24.id3 !lb8
209
 Chapter 12
25.1/!\1c2 g6 26.a4 @g7 27.a5 b5
28.axb6 draw.
12 ...a6 13.b4 lild7 14.1/!\1b3 lll d4
15.1/!\1a2 .if6 16.E1acl lile5 17.@hl
Black has gained some advantage in
the centre which allows him to dis
play activity on the kingside:
17...h5 18.f4
18.h3 weakens g3 - 18 ...1/!\1b6
19.f4 lilf5 20.@h2 lll e3 21.fxeS
lilxfl+ 22.1lxflhe5 23.lila4 1/!\1c6+.
18 ...lilg4 19.e4 dxe4 20.lilxe4 (20.
dxe4 lilb3) 20 ...fucl 21.hcl .ie7
22.h3 lllf6 23.lilxf6+ txf6 24.g4
(24.hb7 lilf5 25.@h2 1/!\1xd3)
24...1/!\1d7. White's position is dan
gerous, McShane-Fressinet, Wijk
aan Zee 2011.
10 0-0 11.a3 lk8
I had played earlier ll ...1/!\1b6 12.b4
lild4 13..ig2 E1fc8 14.!d2, Buchal
Delchev, Bad Wiessee 2013,
?1(\
when 14...aSl 15.bxaS 1/!\1b3 is ab
solutely comfortable for Black. In
stead, I opted for the mundane
14... E1c7 15.e3 lilb5 16.lilxbS 1/!\1xb5
17.1/!\1b3 E1ac8 18.E1fcl E1xcl+ 19.E1xcl
E1xcl+ 20.hcl a5 21..id2 axb4
22.axb4 h5 23 ..ifl 1/!\1d7 (23 ...d4!=)
24.1/!\1c3 d4=.
12.ll:cl a6 13 .ig2 lild7 14..id2
b5 15.f4 lild4 16.@hl lilc5 17.ll:bl
lildb3 18 ..iel d4 19.lile4 a5
20.lilxc5 lilxc5 21.ll:cl a4
Fixing the pawns on dark squares.
21...1/!\1b6 22.b4 axb4 23.hb4 would
be totally equal and Black should
even think about defence since 23 ...
g6?! would run into 24.e4.
22 ..ib4 1/!\1d7 23.hc5 hc5
24. VNd2 ll:c7 25.ll:c2 ll:fc8 26.ll:fcl
g6 27 .if'31/!\1d6 28.1/!\1dl h5 29.h4
e5 30.fxe5 VNxe5 31.gl f5
32.g2 @g7 33 ..td5
33 ... 'd6
Black has a lasting advantage due to
the weak kingside pawns. Perhaps I
should have changed a pair of rooks
with 33 ....id6 34.E1xc7 + hc7+ in or
der to free my bishop from the pin.
The c-file is unimportant.
 1.lilf3 d5 2.g3
34.tb7 !lb8 35 .id5 !le8 36.tf3
2014, went ll.h3 th5 12.lilh4 l'le8
!le3 37.Wgl %1'e7 38.l!ift Wh6
38 ...td6!? is similar to the game -
39.!lxc7 hc7 40.Wf2 tes 41.Wg2
Wf7 42 .!lc5 1Wb3 43.!lxeS'i'.
39. Wf2 .id6 40.!lxc7 hc7 41. Wfl
te5 42.Wf2 b4
42 ...Wf7 43.!lcS Wb3 44.!lxeS !lxe5
45.Wxd4 is a draw.
43.axb4 Wxb4 44.!lc4 %1'xb2
45.!lxa4 td6 46.!la6 !le6 47.!lc6
!lf6 48.Wg2 .ie5 Draw.
30. Janaszak - Dziuba
Warsaw 1 7.12.2011
1.c4 lilf6 2.g3 c6 3 .ig2 d5 4.lilf3
9...a5 10.a3 th5 11.c2 e5 12.e4
tg4 5.0-0 e6 6.d3 lilbd7 7.b3
,id6 8.tb2 0-0 9.lilbd2
9 ...!le8
Our plan is to push ...e5, so this
move is not bad, but the immediate
9 ...e5 was also possible. Even better
is to include 9...a5 10.a3 e5 in order
to weaken the enemy's queenside.
The blitz game Edouard-Gunina,
13.Wel?! (this move would make
sense only if the centre were closed
with e4-d4) 13 ... e4! 14.dxe4 dxe4
15.lilf5 when 15....ic7! (instead of
15...,ieS) would have preserved an
important attacking piece.
Note that 10.a3 is an almost au
tomatic answer since otherwise
Black would obtain some pull on
the queenside. For instance, look at
the game Sadorra-Dreev, Richard
son 2010: 9 ...!le8 10.Wc2 e5 11.!lael
a5 12.lilh4 a4 13.h3 te6 14.e4 dxe4
15.lilxe4 lilxe4 16.!lxe4 axb3 17.axb3
Wb6 18.!le2 !la2 19.!lal !lea8
20.!lxa2 !lxa2 21.%1'dl tc5 with ac
tive pieces.
The text waits for White to define
his plan first. A similar approach is
12 ... dxe4 13.dxe4 !le8 14.lilh4 tcS
15.lildf3 b6 16.!ladl MS 17.!lbl
lilc5=, Leko-Kasparov, Wijk aan
Zee 2001.
10.h3
If White delayed this move too
much, the bishop could return to
e6! Let's consider:
211
 Chapter 12
10.a3 a5 ll.Wc2 e5 (threatening
... e5-e4-e3)
a) We commonly meet 12.e4?! by
12 ...dxe4 and then we try to exploit
the hole on d4 - 13.dxe4
13.iilxe4 iilxe4 14.dxe4 ic5
15.iilh4 (15.!lfdl Wf6 16.h3 ixf3
17.!lxd7 !led8) 15 ...Wb6 (15 ...
g6!?) 16.h3 ie6 17.!lfdl id4.
13 ...Wb6! 14.ic3 (14.h3 allows 14.. .
txf3 15.iilxf3 iilc5 16.iild2 iile6) 14 .. .
ic5 15.h3
15.Wb2 txf3! 16.txf3 id4 17.b4
c5 crowns Black's dark-squared
strategy.
15 ...ih5 16.g4 ig6 17.iilh4 id4
18.ixd4 exd4+. White's pieces are
awkwardly placed. That turns the
otherwise strong e4-pawn into a
weakness.
b) 12.e3!? h6!. Now our bishop
could retreat to e6. 13.iilh4 !lc8!
14.h3 ie6 15.f4 (15.ic3 b5) 15...
exf4 16.exf4 iilc5 17.b4 iila6 18.c5
ie7 and White is unable to parry all
Black's threats - apart of the hit on
b4, ...iilh5 is also awkward.
10 ...th5 11.rl!!lc2
The insertion ofll.a3 a5 suits Black.
ll.e4 is premature due to the pin -
ll... dxe4 12.dxe4 ie5!.
11...e5!
12.e4
12.g4?! ig6 13.iilh4 offers us space
to grab - 13 ...d4!+ 14.a3 a5 15.iilxg6
hxg6 16.!lael We7 (16 ...ic5 17.iilf3
rl!!le7 18.Wcl Wd6 19.iild2 !lad8)
17.Wcl ic5 18.Wal iilf8, pinpointing
the weakness on f4.
12.e3!? h6! 13.iilh4 iilf8! faces White
with a choice:
a) 14.g4 ig6 15.iilxg6 weakens h4
and the whole kingside - 15... iilxg6
16.iilf3 (16.!lfel iilh4 17.ihl h5) 16...
h5
16 ... We7 17.a3 (17.cxd5 cxd5
18.!lacl !lad8) 17...e4 is pro
mising, too - 18.iild4 (18.dxe4
dxe4 19.ii:ld2 ie5 20.b4 ii:lh4
21.ihl 1/!iie6 22.ixe5 1/!iixe5-+)
18... iilh4-+.
17.gxh5 iilxh5+.
b) 14.a3 a5 15.ii:lf5 ic7 16.cxd5 cxd5
17.b4 (17.!lfcl !lc8) 17...!lcSt or
17...ig6.
c) 14.iildf3 1il'd7 15.e4 dxe4 16.dxe4
ixf3 17.ii:lxf3 c5 18.!lfel Wc7 19.!ladl
iile6=.
12 ...dxe4
 L't.it::S db
Our general approach to this posi
tion is to take on e4, but 12 ...d4!?
cannot be really bad. White has put
his bishop on b2 and the queen on
c2 so he will need 2 tempi to re
deploy them for the typical KI at
tack. Other schemes have no ve
nom - 13.li:lh4 a5 14.li:lf5 MS 15.f4
g6 16.li:lh4 exf4 17.gxf4 e2 18.!lf2
li:lh5 19.li:ldf3 3 20.li:lxf3 li:lxf4.
13.dxe4
Trading knights underlines the
weakness of d4 - 13.li:lxe4 li:lxe4
14.dxe4 '/!1c7 (14...'/!1f6 15.'/!1e2 !lad8
16.!lfdl li:lc5 17.!ld2 li:le6) 15.li:lh4
c5 16.li:lf5 li:lf8 17.c3 a5 18.a3 li:le6
19.b4 d4.
13... a5 14.li:lh4
14.a3 '/!1b6 15.c3 c5 is a familiar
plan - 16.'1!1b2 3 17.3 d4
18.g2 !led8 19.b4 li:lc5 20.hd4
exd4
14...li:lcS 15.M3
15 ...g6
This is a consistent move for the
plan based on occupying d4. How-
.g::S
ever, concrete thinking reveals that
Black could penetrate even deep
er in the enemy camp as d3 is also
available - 15...! 16.li:lhxf3 c7
17.!ladl '/!1d3 18.'/!1xd3 li:lxd3 19.al
!lad8 20.l!lg2 b6+.
16.li:lxg6 hxg6 17.!ladl '/!1c7
18.g2 !lads 19.li:lbl?! li:le6
20.h4?! c5
20 ... li:ld4!+ was more energetic. The
pawn is immune owing to 21.hd4
exd4 22.!lxd4?! hg3.
21.!lxdS !lxd8 22.!ldl (22.3!)
22 li:lg4 23.!lfl
23 .. li:ld4?
Black should have looked for a coup
de grace. Any capture on f2 wins by
force since after 23 ... li:lxf2 24.!lxf2
2+ 25.l!/xf2 '/!1b6+ 26.l!lfl '/!1e3
the blackheavy pieces dominate the
board, e.g. 27.he5 !ld3 28.c5 li:ld4-
+. Another interesting way of at
tacking the enemy king was 23 ...g5!
24.hxg5 li:lxf2 25.!lxf2 '1!1d6 26.MS
li:lxg5 27.l!lg2 2 28.'/!1xf2 '/!1d3-+.
After the "positional" 23 ...li:ld4
24.hd4 exd4 25.'/!1d3! Black would
have stood "only" better. Instead,
213
 Chapter 12
White lets thehit on f2 through once
again and this time Black grasps his
chance.
24.hd4 exd4 25.'lifdl? liJxf2!
26.@xf2 d3+ 27.f3 f5??
27...'life5 or 27...d2 were winning
while now 28.exf5! d2 29.l!lg4 !ld3
30.!lf3= saves the game as 30 ...Wd7
is not mate!
28.e5?? 'lifxe5 29.'lifel 'lifd4
30.fili3 d2 31.liJxd2 'lifxd2
214
32.'lifxd2 d2 33.h5 gxh5
34.hfS f7 35 .tcs b6 36..tb7
a2 37.hc6 !lb2 38.@e4+ g6
39.!lf'3 !ld2 40 .teS+ h6 41.W
!le2+ 42.@d3 !le5 43..td5 @g5
44..te4 g4 45.!lf7 g5 46 .tf'3+
xg3 47..txh5 !le3+ 48.c2
g4 49.!lg7 h4 50 ..tg6 !le5
51..td3 g3 52..tfl !lf5 53.!lh7+
g5 54.fili3 !lf2 + 55.d3 !lh2
56.!lg7+ f4 57..tfl M2 58.!lf7+
e5 59.!lg7 d6 60.!lg5 .tel
61.@e4 !lb2 62.!ld5+ c6 63.!ldl
0-1
Chapter 13. The King's Indian Set-up

Main Ideas

1.liJJ'3 d5 2.g3 c6 3.g2 g4!

4.0-0 e6

White's only active plan here is to

The King's Indian Reversed set-up
assumes that White will play d3, e4
instead of c4.
An independent line is 5.d4 lilf6
6.liJbd2 $.e7 7.8el 0-0 8.e4 when
play f2-f4-f5, gaining space on the
kingside. If we neutralise it in ad
vance, White will run out of use
ful moves. Then we should expect
to take over the initiative. First, we
should concentrate our forces in
the centre - ...8e8, ...V!Jc7, 8ad8.
..

Black tries to provoke e4-e5 with Our aim is to reach a position of this
...$.g4-h5-g6 and retreats the knight type:
to es.

Black has a wide choice against the

Kl Reversed, but I discuss only set
ups with ... $.d6 and then ... lilg8-f6
or liJg8-e7. The latter may be easi
er to play, but White has a way to
prevent it by the move order 5.b3
(or even 4.b3) 5... liJd7 6.$.b2 liJgf6
7.d3 $.d6 8.liJbd2 0-0 9.e4
Both sides have completed develop White's advance has come to a halt,
ment and we should now take the his pawns are hanging. See Grune
chance of occupying the centre with 31 Maiwald-Sasikiran, Dresden
9 ... e5 2005.

215
 Chapter 13
The set-up with 5.d3 d6 6.e4
lile7 is based on similar ideas, but
the e7-knight can counter lilh4 with
... 12lg6. Another plus for Black is the
option of ...f6, preserving the light
squared bishop. For instance:
7.1!\'el 12ld7 8.h3 th5 9.12lh4
9...dxe4! 10.dxe4 lilg6 11.12lxg6 hg6
12.f4 f6!. White has not achieved
anything except of weakening his
king.
White can try to exploit our set
up by changing plans: 7.12lbd2 12ld7
8.d4 0-0 9.!lel 1;,c7 10.c3,
216
but further advance with e4-e5
will only give us a free hand on the
queenside. We could take space with
... a5, ... b5 while on the kingside we
a rock-solid.
Pantsulaia-Dreev
Gjakova 2016
This is a model example where
White has kept the tension and now
Black counterattacks in the centre:
14...c5 15.exd5 lilxd5 16.1;,g5 1!1'c7
17.llie3 lli7f6 18.1!1'b5 llixe3 19.he3
llid5 20.1;,d2 !led8=.
Of course, in the diagram position
Black could also unload the cen
tre with 14...dxe4!? 15.lli3d2 llid5
or persist with the waiting game by
14...1;,b8!? or even 14... !lbS!?.
AB a whole, if White offered you a
choice, ...llie7 gives the g4-bishop
more freedom.
Chapter 13. The King's Indian Set-up
Step by Step
1.li:lf3 d5 2.g3 c6 3.Ag2 i.g4!
4.0-0 e6
This move keeps more tension than
4...li:ld7 5.d3 e5 which is also pos
sible - 6.h3 i.h5 7.e4 dxe4 8.dxe4
li:lgf6 9.11!\'el i.c5 10.a4 a5. Besides,
White could shun this option alto
gether by playing 4.b3 e6 5.i.b2.
A. 5.d4 B. 5.b3; C. 5.d3;
A. 5.d4 li:lf6 6.li:lbd2 i.e7 7.!lel
0-0 8.e4
We should not be afraid of an at
tack here so we can allow e4-e5. We
should even provoke it with the ma
noeuvre:
s...i.hs
I see no reason to open the centre
with 8 ...dxe4 9.li:lxe4 li:lxe4 10.!lxe4
i.f5 11.!lel li:ld7 12.c3 h6 13.'i!l'b3 1/!l'b6
with a solid, but passive position.
8 ... li:la6 would be justified in the
event of 9.e5?!, but 9.c3! under
lines the clumsy placement of the
a6-knight.
8 ...li:lbd7!? 9.c3 i.h5 transposes to
the main line.
9.c3 li:lbd7 10.h3
10.e5 li:le8 11.li:lb3 is often seen.
White's intention is to keep the
space advantage and gradually ad
vance on the kingside. ...c5 does not
217
 Chapter 13

promise serious counterplay and Sulava-Feletar, Poree 1998. White

White might even use the d4-square was too busy redeploying his
for one of his knights. knights and temporarily uncoordi
It is more effective to attack the b2 nated them. That makes the break
and the c3-pawns. For instance: 15 ...f6! very strong - 16.exf6 1\exf6
ll ... ltlc7! 12.j_e3 a5! 13.ltlcl ltlb6! 17.ltleg4 ltle4. White can preserve
14.ltld3 (or 14.b3 ltlb5 when 15.Wd2 his centre, but 16.f4 fxe5 17.fxeS
runs into 15 ... ltlxc3!) 14 ... ltlc4. Only ltlb8 leaves him with bad pieces and
when White's pieces take passive no trace of an attack.
defensive stands, could we think of
...c5 or even ...f6.
B. 5.b3 1\d7 6.j_b2 1\gf6 7.d3
10 ...j_g6 11.e5
7.d4 ie7! should transpose to Chap
11.exdS lacks any constructive idea. ter 12 line B if White pushed c4.
Black had comfortable equality af
ter 11 ...cxdS 12.ltleS ltlxe5 13.dxeS 7....id6 8.1\bd2
ltld7 14.ltlb3 ltlc5 15.ltlxcS hc5
16.j_e3 !lc8 17.h4 h6=, Speelman 8.c4 0-0 was discussed in Chapter
Gausel, Slough 1997. 12 - Game 30 Janaszak-Dziuba,
Warsaw 2011.
11 1\eS!?
8 ... 0-0 9.e4
ll...ltle4 12.ltlxe4 he4 13.1\h2 j_g6
14.h4 h6, Anand-McShane, London
2013, is possible, but I prefer to
keep the option of .. .f6. The knight
may be useful for this plan.

12.1\fl c5 13.1\3h2 cxd4 14.cxd4

!lcS 15.1\e3

9 ...e5

Of course, it is better to occupy the

centre than to seek simplification
with 9...dxe4 10.dxe4 ie5 when
ll.c3 ! leaves Black with less space.

I have been following the game 10.h3 .ih5 lL 'i!lel

218
 The King's Indian Set-up

ll.g4 Ag6 12.lilh4 !le8 is similar to (10 ... is also good) ll.1We3
the main line. Ac3 12.!lbl c5 13.li:lh4 d4 14.1Wel
li:lc6 15.f4 f6+, Iljin-Goganov,
11... !leS 12.lilh4 '&c7 Sochi 2015.
8 ...5 9.lilh4
Black will choose the right timing
for opening the d-file. White does
not have any attack so he commonly
ends up in a slightly worse position.
See Game 31 Maiwald-Sasikiran,
Dresden 2 005.

c. 5.d3 Ad6

5 ... lild7 is an alternative move or

Now the manoeuvre 9 ... lilg6,
der.
which I recommend in the po
Then 6.c4 allows 6 ...M3 7.M3
sition with lilbd2 0-0 insert
(7.exf3 Ad6 8.lilc3 lile79.l'lel 0-0
ed, drops the d5-pawn, so Black
10.a3 lilf5) 7... dxc4! 8.dxc4 lile5
should exchange on e4 first:
9.lild2 lilxf3+ with significant
9 ...dxe4! 10.dxe4 lilg6 11.lilxg6
chances to make a draw. How
hg6 12.f4 f6! 13.li:ld2 0-0 14.li:lc4
ever, the common plan with
Ac5+ 15.l!lh2 1We7 16.a3 li:lb6=,
...lilf6 from the previous chapter
T.L.Petrosian-Hovhannisyan, Ye
is more interesting.
revan 2012.
White usually answers 6.lilbd2 Ad6
7.e4 lile7, transposing.
7 lild7 8.h3

6.e4 lile7 7.lilbd2

The insertion of7.h3 5 may occur
now or on the next tum.
Sometimes White delays lilbd2, in
tending to roll quickly his pawns:
7.'&el lild7 8.h3
8.li:lbd2 0-0 9.b3 makes a hole
on c3 which Black can exploit
with concrete play - 9...Ab4!
10 .h3 (10 ..ib2 loses a pawn to
10 ...M3 11. '&a5 12.!ldl
1Wxa2+, Leon Hoyos-Vera Gon
zalez, Yucatan 2004) 10 ...5
8.d4 0-0 9.l'lel Ac7 10.c3 5 oc
curred in D'Amore-Caruana, Siena
2010. With a knight on e7 instead
of f6, this manoeuvre is not too ef
fective, as Black cannot force e5
anyway. D'Amore could not find a
good retort and lostthe initiative af
ter 11.1Wb3 !lb8 12.1Wa3 b5. Perhaps
10 ... a5, followed up by queenside
play, is stronger. The game Pantsu
laia-Dreev, Gjakova 2016, is a good
model:
9.c3 l'lc8 10.!lel !le8 ll.a4 a5 12.1Wb3
b6 13.li:lfl 5 14.ie3 c5.

219
 Chapter 13
8.b3 0-0 9.b2 a5 10.a3 b5 11.c4
ll.'!!:1e2 '!!:1b6 12.d4 (12.h3 5
13.g4 g6 14.e5 c7) 12 ...c5
13.a4 b4+.
11 ...'!!:1b6 12.Wc2 !;1ab8 13.!;1abl e5 of
fers Black the better centre.
8 .ih5 9.'!!:1el 0-0
10.liJh4
10.liJh2 e5! is already slightly better
for Black. The game S.Martinovic
Grachev, Sibenik 2011, went 11.l!ihl
'!!:1c7 12.liJb3 !;1ae8 13.d2 when 13 ...
f5 14.exf5 e4+ was the best option.
10... liJg6!
This way Black saves the bishop.
10 ... e5 is also possible, but why to
give the opponent the bishop pair
without a substantial reason?!
11.liJxg6 hg6 12.f4 Wb6+
13.l!ihl !;1ae8 14.liJ:f3 f6oo
Black's king is safe and he keeps his
options in the centre open - Karja
kin-Aronian, blitz, Stavanger 2013.
Chapter 13. The King's Indian Set-up
Annotated Games
31. Maiwald - Sasikiran
Dresden, 28.07.2005
1.g3 d5 2.tg2 11lf6 3.d3 c6 4.11lf'3
tg4 5.0-0 11lbd7 6.11lbd2 e6 7.b3
td6 8.i.b2 0-0 9.'\l\'el e5 10.e4
!leS 11.h3 5 12.li1h4
Black stays beautifully, but he does
not have a clear plan yet. His saf
est strategy is to open the d-file and
see what target White will offer him.
Most probably, ...a5 will be a useful
move, but it would be better to bring
the rest of his forces to the centre
first.
12 ...'\l\'c7!
It transpires that White's inten
tion to push f4 should be postponed
for a distant future since his centre
would be hanging after 13.lllfS tfS
14.f4?! dxe4 15.dxe4 tg6.
White could make a waiting move
like 13. hl, but 13 ... !ladS will face
him with the same choice again.
In most practical games he cannot
find anything better than 14.a3 a5
15.11lf5 tfS 16.f4
Black has some initiative here. For
instance:
16 ...dxe4 17.dxe4 tg6
17...exf4 is probably less accu
rate since it offers the g3-square
- 18.gxf4 tg6 19.11lg3 11lxe4
20.11ldxe4 f5oo, Kasimdzhanov
Li, Zagan 1997.
18.11lxg7! hg7 19.f5oo.
13.a3 !lads 14.11lf5 i.fS 15.b4 a5
16.c3
Harikrishna-Smeets, Wijk aan Zee
2008 saw 16.11lf3 axb4 17.axb4 c5
221
 Chapter 13

(17...b5!?) 18.bxc5 dxe4 19.dxe4 This recapture allows Black to

lilxc5 with harmonious pieces. bring new resources into play. The
a4-knight is a powerful beast so
22.l'lxa4 b5 23.l'la5 would have been
easier to hold.

22 b5 23.lile3 e4 24.c4 lilxb2

.

25.1!\'xb2 bxc4 26.l'lacl h5

27.l'lxc4

16 ...dxe4! 17.dxe4 lilb6

Pinpointing the weakness ofWhite's

light squares.

18.g4 tg6 19.1!1'e2 lila4 20.lilc4

axb4
Now the weak h2-b8 diagonal is
It is difficult to criticize this natural Black's main trump. The best way
move, but it unnecessarily activates to build the fi.1!1' battery is 27...1!\'f4!
the rook at al. 10 ...M5 ll.gxf5 g6! 28.gxh5 td6.
was stronger since 12.lilxa5 lilh5
would tie White up and down. 27 hxg4
.. 28.hxg4?! l!l'f4+
29.l!l'e2 td6 30.l'lel lild5 31.lilfl
21.axb4 .ixf5 22.exf5?! hb4 32.l'ldl? lilc3 0-1
Chapter 14. 1.g3
Main Ideas
1.g3 is often used against concrete
opponents in order to exploit their
narrow opening repertoire. For ex
ample, the King's Indian adepts
should reckon with 3.e4, reach
ing the Pirc. However, it does not
pose any problems to us and we
can choose both 1.. .e5 or 1.. .d5 to
achieve the following position:
1. e5 2.g2 d5 3.d3
Chapter 11 has taught us to meet c4
by ...d4!. We can also transpose to
other chapters of this book by de
fending the centre with ... c6. How
ever, my main idea against the Eng
lish and similar "irregular" open
ings is to seize as much space as
possible. Therefore, we should bet
ter cross the centre and bolster the
pawn at d4 rather than at d5. Thus
I recommend:
1. To meet c4 by ... d4, although ...c6
is probably not worse;
2. To lead out our king's knight to
f6, although the set-up with .Jue7
is also possible. A good example to
follow is Grune 32 Venya-Bereza,
email 2013:
3 ...lilf6 4.c4 d4 5.lil:f3 d6 6.0-0
0-0 7.e3 c5!? (7...dxe3 is "only"
equal!) 8.exd4 cxd4
9.c5 c7!? 10.b4 e6 and White
had to struggle all the game due to
Black's superior centre.
The other important pawn structure
you should know arises when White
plays e4 instead of c4. Then I sug
gest to bolster the centre with ...c6,
complete development with ...d6,
0-0 and see the enemy's plan. I be
lieve that we should refrain from
...d4 and fix the centre with ...dxe4
223
 Chapter 14
to avoid total exchanges which
could occur after White's d3-d4.
Black's further play has some nu
ances depending on the placement
of White's queen's knight:
a) 4.lilf3 .td6 5.0-0 0-0 6.lilbd2
1'1e8 7.e4 c6
Our natural play should be on the
queenside, aiming to seize space
with moves like ... a5, ...b5.
On the kingside, I prefer a passive
stand without making any weak-
nesses with ...g6 or ... h6. A good
manoeuvre is ... lilb8-d7(a6)-c5-e6.
My main line runs:
224
8.b3 a5! 9.a3 lllbd7 10 ..tb2 dxe4
11.dxe4 Wlc7 12.lllh4 b5 13.illf5 MS
See Game 33 Gabrielian-Riazant
sev, V1adivostok 2014.
b) 6.illc3 c6 7.e4 dxe4 - the knight
on c3 enables the possibility of d3-
d4 so we should exchange on e4 im
mediately. 8.dxe4 llla 6!? 9.h3 lllc7
10.lllh4 lll e6 ll.illf5 .tc7=.
I want to stress that after l.g3, our
tactic in the opening should be not
to equalize, but to take the centre
and fight for the initiative. White's
extra tempo is not worth much.
Chapter 14. 1.g3
Step by Step
l.g3 e5 2 .tg2 d5
3.d3
3.c4d4! (3... c6 4.d4 e4 is mentioned
in Chapter 2) 4.d3 lilc6 transposes
to Chapter 11.
3.lilf3?! .W.d6 4.d3 lilf6 is considered
below. However, we should better
switch to punishing mode with 3...
e4! 4.lild4 c5 5.lilb3 c4 (5 ...lilc6)
6.lild4 tc5 7.c3
7...lilc6 (7... lilf6!?) 8.lilxc6 bxc6
9.0-0
9.b3 cxb3 10.axb3 h5! was the
curious miniature Hulak-Beliav
sky, Pula 2000: 11..W.a3 .W.b6
12.h4 lilh6 13.d4 e3 14.f4 .tg4
15.'l:!'d3 lilf5 16.0-0 !lh6 17.c4
dxc4 18.\We4+ @d7 19.lilc3 lilxg3
20.\Wc2 tf5 21.\Wcl lilxfl 22.@xfl
hd4 23.'l:!'dl @es 0-1.
9 ... lilf6 10.b3 0-0 ll.bxc4 dxc4
12.lila3 \Wd5+, Durarbayli-Kharlov,
Kazan 2013.
3.. lilf6
.
3...lilc6 4.lilf3
After 4.c4 best is 4...dxc4 (4...d4
5.lilf3 is Chapter 11/Line B).
4... lilf6 5.0-0 ie7 is the Pirc Re
versed. It is not the subject of this
book, but it is a safe and proven way
of meeting l.g3.
3 ...c6 4.lilf3 id6 5.c4 lile7 6.0-0 0-0
7.lilc3 lild7 is another solid set-up,
which I considered in the previous
chapter.
4.lilf3
4.lild2 td6 5.e4 c6 6.lilgf3 is co
vered in line B. Sometimes White
tries the original set-up with 6.lile2,
225
 Chapter 14
but it has no advantages over the
standard lines. Polzin-Boensch,
Berlin 1994, went 6... 0-0 7.0-0
dxe4 8.dxe4 ie6 9.b3 a5 10.liic3
lii a6 ll.ib2 b5.
Wbite's passive tactic allows for
more active approaches and the
best retort to 4.lii d2 is 4...ic5! since
it hinders 5.liigf3 in view of 5...e4,
and 5.e4 due to 5...dxe4 6.dxe4? liig4
7.liih3 hf2+ ! 8.liixf2 liie3 9.11>\'h5
liic6 ! . Therefore, White has to resort
to another passive move - 5.e3, giv
ing Black a free hand in the centre.
He can choose any plan at his liking.
4...td6
4 ... liic6 is possible again.
5.0-0
5.c4 d4 or 5...c6 transpose to the
main line.
5... 0-0
I'm going to analyse from here the
English approach in line A. 6.c4,
and the Kl plans with B. 6.liibd2
and C. 6.lii c3, followed up by e2-e4.
? ? t'.
A. 6.c4
I offer you now two good continua
tions to choose from:
Al. 6... d4; A2. 6...c6
Al. 6...d4 7.e3
7.liibd2 lii c6 8.a3 a5 9.Zlbl a4. A
typical way of discouraging b2-b4.
Black's pieces control more space,
e.g. 10.11>1'c2 h6+.
7.b4 only weakens the queenside.
Black answers 7... Zle8! and gains
control of c5:
8.a3 a5 9.b5 lii bd7 10.a4 ib4 ll.ta3
c5, or 8.11>\'b3 a5 9.b5 liibd7 10.liibd2
h6, followed by ...lii c5.
7... c5!?
7... liic6 transposes to Chapter 11/
Line B after 8.exd4 liixd4=.
Another option is 7 ...dxe3 8.he3
liic6 9.liic3 Zle8. This position may
be objectively balanced, but Black
lacks an active plan. Conversely,
White may try to display activity on
the kingside - 10 .h3
10.a3 if5 ll.b4 a6 12.d4 exd4
 l.g3
13.lilxd4 lilxd4 14.hd4 c6 was
harmless in 'Movsziszian-Kir.
Georgiev, Benasque 2010.
10 ...MS ll.g4 h6 12.!lel, Andria
sian-Ter Sahakyan, Yerevan 2015.
8.exd4 cxd4
The only way to play for a win. 8...
exd4= leads to a symmetrical struc
ture.
9.c5
9 .ic7!?
.
9...hc5 10.lilxe5 d6 ll.lilc4 .ie7=
was eventually drawn in Grego
Calio, ICCF 2015.
The text keeps the game strategical
ly unbalanced and full oflife. White
is somewhat overextended on the
queenside. See Grune 32 Venya
Bereza, email 2013.
A2. 6 .. c6 7.cxd5
. to keep the centre fluid. 9 .. $.e6
White cannot rip any dividends
from delaying this exchange:
7.lilc3 will face 7...d4 8.liJa4 !le8.
7..ig5 liJbd7 should transpose to the
main line, but Black could also take
on c4.
7.a3 resigns the battle for the cen
tre and gives Black time to bolster
his pawn pair with 7...h6 or 7... !le8.
7 cxd5 8.lilc3
...
This move order is more clever than
8.g5 lilbd7 9.lilc3 h6 10 ..txf6 12lxf6
ll.\1:ilb3 d4 12.lild5 lilxd5 13.\1:ilxd5
\1:ilb6 14.a4 e6 15.\1:ilb5 !lacs when
Black was at least equal in Kachei
shvili-Jobava, Tbilisi 2000.
8... lilc6
The attempt to anticipate g5 by
8...lilbd7 could be exploited with
9.e4 d4 10.lilb5 c5 ll.a4.
9..ig5
9 . e7!
..
This surprising retreat allows us
10 ..txf6 \1:ilxf6 ll.liJd2 d4 12.lilce4 is
easier to play with White.
After the text White does not have
a convincing way to force ...d4 un-
227
 Chapter 14
less he plays e4, which would shut
off his only good piece.
10.\!!lb3 could be repelled by 10 ...
li:laS. Another way to oppose Black's
dominance in the centre is:
10.d4 e4 11.lile5,
but then both:
u....ie6 12.li:lxc6 bxc6 13.lila4 h6
14.if4 lild7 15.l'lcl l'lc8 16.\!!ld2 l'le8
17.l'lc2 Ms 18.\!!lcl, draw, Steinke
Gasanov, Lechenicher SchachSer
ver, 2012, and:
11 ...h6 12 ..txf6 .txf6, Seeman
Miezis, Tallinn 2005, are fine for
ilack. The latter game went 13.l'lcl? !
when 13 ....ixeS! 14.dxeS .ie6 would
have even gained some advantage.
B. 6.lilbd2 !<e8 7.e4 c6
8.b3
8.l'lel lilbd7 9.c3 aS 10.d4 exd4
ll.li:lxd4 dxe4 12.li:lxe4= annihilates
the centre. Perhaps that is the rea
son why Karpov preferred:
9 ...dxe4!? 10.dxe4 \!!lc7 to take over
228
the initiative after 11.\!iic2 a5 12. li:lc4
fil8 13.a4 b5 14.lila3 ia6 15.fill
l'leb8. Chekhov proposes as an im
provement 11.b4, but then 11... li:lb6
12.\!!lc2 c5 13.b5 a6 14.bxa6 l'lxa6 fa
vours Black. In general, his pieces
are all targeted towards the queen
side so the plan with c3 only plays
into his hands.
By fianchettoing his bishop, White
hopes to mount a kingside attack.
8...a5! 9.a3 lilbd7 10 ..ib2 dxe4
Logical alternatives are 10 ...d4 11.c3
c5 and 10 ...\!!lc7 ll.l'lel dxe4.
11.dxe4 \!!lc7 12.lilh4
12.l'lel does not make sense any
more - the rook might be needed
on the f-file. Black can answer 12 ...
bS, followed up by ...a4, ... cS.
12 ...bs 13.lilf5 MS
Black's play on the queenside is eas
ier than White's attempts on the op
posite side of the board. See Grune
33 Gabrielian-Riazantsev, Vladi
vostok 2014.
 l.g3
C. 6.lilc3 c6 7.e4
We are faced here with a crucial
choice of plans. The engines like 7...
d4 8.lile2 c5, but that would mean
to withstand a classical King's Indi
an attack with clear two tempi down
and a bishop on d6. While email
games bring Black excellent results,
I'm far from the thought that the KI
is so bad that we should enter it at
any cost. At least for practical rea
sons, it is safer to keep tension in
the centre.
The next question we should an
swer is: how much tension are we
ready to maintain? The knight is
much more active on c3 than it
was on d2 in line B. It exerts a sig
nificant impact on the centre and
moves like 7... 1le8 could be met by
8.exd5 cxd5 9.i.g5. That hints the
move 7...h6, but it has flip-sides,
too. One of them is the possibility
of 8.d4 exd4 9.lilxd4 dxe4= which
leaves no tension at all. Another op
tion is 8.lilh4 when Black should be
very accurate in order to not fall un
der attack. A good model to follow is
the game Seirawan-Dolmatov, Graz
1978: 8.lilh4 i.c5 9.Vfiel (protecting
the h4-knight in the event of future
f4 exf4) 9 ...1le8 10.h3 lila6 11.lilf5
lilc7 12.g4 lile6 13.lile2 @h7
Black has covered everything and
now he can turn his attention to the
queenside.
Probably the above-mentioned
"threat" to suck out any life from the
position with 8.d4 tips the balance
in favour of:
7...dxe4
It opens a file to ensure counterplay
against a direct pawn storm on the
kingside, and stabilises the pawn
structure in the centre.
8.dxe4
8.lilxe4 lilxe4 9.dxe4 simplifies the
position without changing much its
strategic canvas. As in the main line,
Black can choose either a stand with
...g6, or with ...lilb8-a6-c5, ... 1le8.
Here is an example: Jones-Howell,
Halifax 2010: 9...Vffe7 10.lilh4 g6
11.Vffe2 lila6 12.i.e3 i.e6 13.lilf3 f6
14.1lfdl 1lfd8 15.c3 lilc7.
8 .. lila6!?
229
 Chapter 14

Black had to decide how to meet the 12.a4 lilbd7 13.1'1fdl 1/i!e7 14.a5 lilc5
manoeuvre lilf3-h4-f5. I suggest to 15.h3 ie6.
simply ignore it and transfer our
own knight to e6 via c5 or c7. 9.h3 (9.lilh4 ig4=) 9 ... lilc7
10.lilh4 lile6 11.lilf5 ic7 12.ie3
Another possible approach is to
g6
take f5 under control with ...g6:
Ricki-Benham, Adelaide 1990,
saw 8 ...1/!Ye7 9.lilh4 g6 10.ig5 1'1d8
ll.1/!Ye2 lilbd7 12.1'1adl?! (Strong
er is 12.f4! @g7 13.f5 ic5+ 14.ffihl
h6 15.fxg6 fxg6 16.id2 lilb6 with
complex play) 12 ...lilc5 13.1'1d2 lile6
14.ie3, when 14...b5 would have
passed the initiative to Black.
Nakamura-Harikrishna, Wijk aan
Zee 2013, shows another version
of this stand: 8...1'1e8 9.1/i!e2 ifS
10.lilh4 g6 11.ig5 ig7 In the stem game Rohde-Browne,
USA 1989, White chose to return
the knight disgracefully to h4 and
became worse. He should have opt
ed for 13.1/i!xdS 1'1xd8 14.lile7+ @g7
15.lbxcS with a roughly equal posi
tion.

?'lO
Chapter 14. 1.g3
Annotated Games
32. Venya - Bereza
www.bestlogic.ru 2013
l.g3 e5 2 .ig2 d5 3.c4 d4 4.d3
lilf6 5.lilt'3 .id6 6.0-0 0-0 7.e3 c5
8.exd4 cxd4
9.c5 .ic7 10.b4 .ie6 11.b5
White's advanced pawns are not
dangerous since they are not backed
up by pieces. I think that quick de
velopment like 11.l'lel lilbd7 12 ..ia3
(defending c5 against the treat of
... a5) or ll..ig5 lilbd7 12.lilbd2oo was
more to the point.
11....id5 12.lilbd2 l'le8 13.lilg5
White decides to trade light-squared
bishops in order to enable lild2-c4,
but that leads to destruction of his
queenside.
It is not easy to give a better advice
though, as 13 ..ia3 .ia5 14.l'lcl .ic3
also offers Black some initiative.
13 hg2 14.li1xg2 1Nd5+ 15.?Nt'3
?Nxt'3+ 16.lilgxt'3 b6
17.lilb3
17.cxb6 axb6 18.a4 looks attractive
for White in view of the ''bad" bish
op on c7. In fact that bishop is quite
"good" since it protects both black
pawns while the d3-pawn would
turn very sensitive once Black puts
his knights to c5 and d5. The a4-
pawn is also a potential target in
view of the idea ... l'la7, ...l'le-a8.
17... a6 18.cxb6 hb6 19.l'lel
lilbd7 20.bxa6 lild5! 21..id2 f6
The d3-pawn is a cause of constant
concern and White cannot get rid
of it. Still, his biggest problem is the
231
 Chapter 14

lack of space. If you cast a look at should not underestimate his re

the next diagram, you11 notice the sources. Look at the blitz game
siguificauce of Black's pawn centre. Fedoseev-Bologan, Berlin 2015:
It helps his pieces to dominate the 8...lila6 9.ib2 lll c7 10.h3 a5 11.a3 h6
board. 12.!lel dxe4 13.dxe4 b5 14.lllfl Wie7
15.lile3t g6 16.Wicl h5 17.lilh4 ic5
22.!lecl !lxa6 23.!lc6 !la7 24.a4 18.@hl li:lh7 19.li:lf3 li:lg5?
lll e7 25.!lc4 ic7 26.!lb4 @f7
27.lll el lll c6 28.!k4 !lbS 29.!lxc6
!lxb3 30.a5 lllbS 31.!lc5 l!le6
32.!lacl id6 33.!lcS @d5 34.@fl.
lll a6 35.!ld8 lll c5 36.l!le2 f5 37.f3

20.lilxe5 lilxh3 21.lild3 ib6 22.li:lf5!

and the charged rifle (the b2-
bishop) fired the decisive shot -
22 . . 23.Wih6 f6 24.exf5 1-0.
.

37 !lab7
. s ...a5 9.a3 lllbd7 10.tb2 dxe4
11.dxe4 Wic7 12.li:lh4 b5 13.lllf5
Black's rooks threaten to invade the MS
third or the second rank.

38.!laS e4 39.a6? (39.fxe4+)

39 exd3+ 0-1
..

33. Gabrielian - Riazantsev

Vladivostok 2014

1.e4 c6 2.d3 d5 3.llld2 e5 4.lllgf3
id6 5.g3 lllf6 6.tg2 0-0 7.0-0
!leS 8.b3
In principle, this is a logical ap
proach - White develops his bish
op towards the enemy king. You
Black does not have any weakness
es on the kingside and is very sta
ble there. On the other part of the
board, he has a clear plan to open
lines with 14.li:le3 a4 15.b4 c5.
White might have had the idea of
opening the f-file, but now it tran-

232
 l.g::S
spires that Black's counterplay is
faster - 14.lilhla4 15.f4 h6! 16.illf3
b4 17.1lel axb3 18.12Jxe5 bxa3.
White decides to counter the enemy
activity in advance.
14.c4 i.b7 15.c2 b4 16.axb4
axb4 17.1lxa8 1lxa8 18. illf3 g6
19.ille3 1le8 20.h3?!
Intending illg4. That would have
been a decent positional idea if
White had the more active piec
es. In the current situation, it only
wastes time and makes a new weak
ness.
Although Black has more space on
the queenside, the position would
be close to equal after 20.ill el illc5
2Lill d3.
20 ... illc5 21.illg4 illxg4 22.hxg4
Now 22 ...h6! 23.l'ldl i.c8 would
have found employment to the doz
ing b7-bishop.
22 ...i.g7 23.d2 ill xb3 (23...
12Jxe4!) 24.xb4 illd4 25.12Jxd4
exd4
Perhaps Black assessed this posi
tion in his favour in view of his bet
ter pieces after a possible ...c6-c5.
However, it is White to move and
he can cut across his opponent's
hopes with 26.e5! he5 27.l'leL The
tables have turned and White has
activated all his forces - for a mere
pawn.
26.c5? 1ld8+ 27.l'ldl i.cS 28.e5
he5 29.l'lel i.g7 30.i.d5
30...i.e6! 31.he6?
Trading c4 for the c6-pawn would
give more chances for a draw. For
instance, the rook endgame should
not be a problem to hold. The bish
ops complicate White's task, but af
ter the exchange on e6, he is just
lost.
31...fxe6 32.1lxe6 d3-+ 33.1lxc6
7 34.i.cl bl 35.l'lcS xcl +
36.lilg2 1lxc8 37.xcS+ i.fS
38.e6+ lilg7 39.d7+ gS
40.e6+ lilg7 41.d7+ f6
42.d4+ f7 43.d5+ eS
44.c6+ dS 45.d5+ c7
46.f7+ b6 47.xfS xc4
48.d6+ b5 49.f3 c2
50.bS+ c4 51.c7+ b3
52.b6+ c3 53.a5+ b2
54. e3 c3 55.a4 cl 56.f4 g5
57.f3 h5 58.gxh5 g4+ 59.xg4
d2 60.b5 d1=1'1'+ 0-1
233
Index of Variations

The English Opening

1.c4 e5

2.a3 c6 136
2.d3 ib4+ 135 (2 ...f5 140)
2.lllf3 e4 3.llld4 lllf6 138 (3...ILJc6 138)
2.g3 c6 3.lllc3 d5 (3...lllf6 64) 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.d4 e4 50
3.ig2 d5 50; 3...lllf6 15
3.lil:f3 e4 4.lild4 'm>6 44 (4...d5 44) 5.lilb3 45
5.e3 lllf6 45; 5.lll c2 45
3.d4 e4 4.lilc3 (4.d5 49; 4.lllh3 d5 5.lll c3 h6! 53) 4 d5 50

5.cxd5 cxd5 6.'1;\'b3 50 (6.lilh3 50)

5.ig2 ib4!? 51 (5 ... lllf6 22)
5.lllh3 h6 53 (5 ... ILJf6 53)
2 lilf6 3. .tg2 c6 4.'1;\'a4 15; 4.d3 15; 4.e415
..

4.lll c3 d5 5.cxd5 16 (5.d4 e4 22)

4.lllf3 e4 5.d4 '1;\'b6 (5...d5 18) 6.lllc2 19 (6.e3 19; 6.lllb3 20)
4.d4 e4 5.lll c3 (5.d5 22; 5.ig5 22) 5...d5 6.ig5 22 (6.cxd5, 6.lllh3 22)
6 ... lllbd7 (6 ...ib4 23) 7.cxd5 (7.lllh3 25) 7...cxd5 8.f3 25
8.e3 27
8.'1;\'b3 id6 9.'1;\'b5 28
9.f3 31
9.e3 31
2.lilc3 lilf6 3.g3 c6 4.ig2 d5 5.d4 e4 21 (5.cxd5 cxd5 6.\Wb3 16)
4.lil:f3 e4 5.lild4 'l;l'b6 (5 ... d5 64) 6.lll c2 64
6.lllb3 64
6.e3 65
4.d4 exd4 66 (4...e4 5.ig5 ib4 66)

234
3.lilf3 lilc6 4.d4 exd4 75
4.a3 e4 76
4.d3 tb4 77
4.e4 tb4 80
4.e3 tb4 5.Wc2 (5.12ld5 87) 5...txc3 6.Wxc3 88
6.bxc3 92
4.g3 tb4 5.lild.5 e4 103 (5...tc5 103)
5.tg2 0-0 6.0-0 e4 (6 ...d6 117) 7.12lg5 (7.lilel 127)
7...hc3 8.bxc3 '1e8 9.f3 e3!? 119
9 exf3 10.lilxf3 d5 121

10 ...We7 124

The Reti
1.lilf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.b4 f6 4.Wa4+ 148, 4.tb2 148
4.d3 148
4.e3 e5 5.c5 a5 6.Wa4+ 149 (6.tb5+ 149, 6.tc4
149)
4.12la3 e5 5.12lc2 12la6 151
3.e3 lilc6 (3 ...c5 161) 4.exd4 162
4.b4?! 165
3.g3 c5 4.e3 12lc6 5.exd4 cxd4 6.tg2 e5 7.d3 td6! 177
(7... 12lf6 177)
3 lilc6! 4.tg2 e5 5.d3 (5.0-0 e4! 188) 5...tb4+
179 (5...12lf6 179)
2.g3 c6 3.c4 tg4 4.Wb3 txf3 196 (4...Wb6 196)
4.tg2 e6 5.Wb3 198
5.0-0 199
5.cxd5 exd5 202 (5...txf3 208)
3.g2 g4 4.0-0 e6 5.d4 217
5.b3 218
5.d3 219
1.g3 e5 2 .ig2 d5 3.d3 (3.12lf3?! e4 225) 3 lilf6 4.lilf3 (4.12ld2 225) 4
.

td6 5.0-0 0-0 6.c4 d4 226

6...c6 227
6.lilbd2Eie8 7.e4 c6 228
6.lilc3 c6 7.e4 229
 Forward
Chess

II
.

Most Chess Stars books are also available in the interactive electronic for
mat ForwardChess. It is a free application which presents the books as they
look in print. Furthermore, it also provides a board which displays the text
moves or your own analysis. Read more information about Forwardchess
at:
http://chess-stars.com/Forwardchess.html

Here is the link to the iOS version:

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/forwardchess/id543005909?mt=8

This is the Android version:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.forwardchess

You can also use Forwardchess on Windows desktops and notebooks

through the Android emulation from http://www.bluestacks.com/

236