Kings English

King's English - [A20–29]
Written by GMs Kosten, Davies & Rowson, IMs Watson & Cummings, FM Hansen
Last updated Tuesday, December 11, 2018
XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwqkvlntr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9PzP-zPPzPPzP0
9tRNvLQmKLsNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
I
n many ways this is Black's most obvious opening, advancing a centre pawn, and controlling
important central squares. Play is often similar to the Sicilian Defence ('reversed'), although the
extra tempo gives White a lot more options.
All the game references highlighted in blue have been annotated and can be downloaded in PGN form
using the PGN Games Archive on www.chesspublishing.com.
Contents
1 c4 e5
XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwqkvlntr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9PzP-zPPzPPzP0
9tRNvLQmKLsNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
2 ¤c3
2 g3 ¤f6 3 ¥g2 d5 (3...c6 King's English, 1 c4 e5-2 g3- Keres [A20] ) 4 cxd5 King's English, 1 c4 e5-
2 g3, Reversed Dragon [A20]
2...¤f6
2...¤c6 3 g3 (3 ¤f3 g6 4 d4 Closed English-3 ¤f3... [A27]) 3...g6 (3...¤f6 4 ¥g2 King's English-2 ¤c3
¤c6 various 3rd moves [A25]) 4 ¥g2 ¥g7 5 d3 (5 ¦b1 Closed English-2 ¤c3 ¤c6 3 g3 g6
[A25]) 5...d6 Closed English-3 g3 g6 4 ¥g2 ¥g7 5 d3 d6 [A26]
2...¥b4 1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3-2...¥b4 & other 2... [A21]
2...d6 1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 - 2...d6 (Smyslov's System) [A20]
3 ¤f3
3 g3 ¥b4 (3...c6 Keres System [A23] 3...g6 King's English- 3 g3 g6 [A24] ) 4 ¤f3 King's English-
Moves other than 3 ¤f3 [A22]
3...¤c6
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqkvl-tr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+n+-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-sN-+N+-0
9PzP-zPPzPPzP0
9tR-vLQmKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
4 g3
4 d4 Four Knights-3 ¤f3 ¤c6 Various 4th [A28]
4 e3 Four Knights-4 e3 [A28]
4...¥b4
4...d5 5 cxd5 ¤xd5 6 ¥g2 ¤b6 Four Knights 4 g3-4...d5- Reversed Dragon [A29]
4...¤d4 Four Knights 4 g3- 4...Nd4 [A29]
4...g6, 4... ¥c5 Four Knights 4 g3-Various 4th moves [A29]
5 ¥g2
Four Knights 4 g3-4...¥b4- The Main Line [A29]
Press F5 to toggle the Navigation Pane, then click on the appropriate bookmark to go straight to that
section.
All rights reserved Chess Publishing Ltd

King's English 1 c4 e5 - Reversed Dragon 2 g3
& Intro [A20]
Last updated 09/11/18 by the ChessPub Team
1 c4 e5 2 g3
XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwqkvlntr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-+-+-zP-0
9PzP-zPPzP-zP0
9tRNvLQmKLsNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
White prepares the immediate placement of his king's bishop on the key h1–a8 diagonal. Of course,
there is every chance that play will soon be identical to that after 2 c3, as soon as White does play
c3. However, it does allow White to avoid the main highways, and take play into a resolutely
'English' direction.
2 ¤f3 is a rare guest in tournament chess, except in the games of the Russian GM Rakhmanov, who
has over 30 games in the database with this move! 2...e4 3 ¤d4 ¤c6 4 ¤xc6 (4 ¤c2 ¤f6 5 ¤c3
¥c5 6 d4 Svidler,P-Gelfand,B/Moscow RUS 2008.) 4...dxc6 5 e3 ¥d6 6 ¤c3 ¤f6 7 h3 see
Rakhmanov,A-Jussupow,A/Tallinn 2016, for a survey of this line.
2 d3 aims for a reversed Najdorf, 2...¤f6 (2...¤c6 3 ¤f3 f5 4 g3 ¤f6 5 ¥g2 Grischuk,A-
Anand,V/London ENG 2015.) 3 ¤f3 ¥b4+ 4 ¤bd2 Kramnik,V-Inarkiev,E/Antalya TUR 2017.
2 a3!? also looks for a Sicilian Defence with a useful extra tempo, Galkin,A-Alsina Leal,D/Lugo
ESP 2009.
2...¤f6
2...g6 can transpose to other lines, but White can also try 3 d4 see Hoelzl,F-Schwarz,M/Fuerstenfeld
AUT 2003.
2...f5 is considered dubious by some authorities, 3 d4 exd4 4 £xd4 ¤c6 5 £e3+!? the critical line,
Kramnik,V-Bacrot,E/Moscow RUS 2007.
2...h5!? 3 ¤c3 (3 d4 is not particularly convincing, Soffer,R-Belousov,D/St Petersburg RUS 2012.)
3...¥b4 (3...h4 4 g4!) 4 ¤d5 Bruzon Batista,L-Rakhmanov,A/53rd Capablanca Memorial 2018.
3 ¥g2 d5
XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwqkvl-tr0
9zppzp-+pzpp0
9-+-+-sn-+0
9+-+pzp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-+-+-zP-0
9PzP-zPPzPLzP0
9tRNvLQmK-sNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
The Reversed Dragon is a popular counter to the English Opening.
4 cxd5 ¤xd5 5 ¤f3

This shows one advantage of 2 g3: White can delay the development of his queen's knight.
5 ¤c3 ¤b6 6 ¤f3 would transpose into the main variation. (6 e3 is seen in [A22].)
5...¤c6 6 0–0
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqkvl-tr0
9zppzp-+pzpp0
9-+n+-+-+0
9+-+nzp-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+NzP-0
9PzP-zPPzPLzP0
9tRNvLQ+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
A tricky little move.
6...¤b6
Best.
6...¥e7 Black omits retreating his knight to b6, and thereby fails to control d4. 7 d4! Thematic, if
Black doesn't stop this, then White has to play it! (7 d3 is less ambitious, Carlsen,M-
Gelfand,B/Moscow RUS 2007) 7...e4 (7...exd4 8 ¤xd4 ¤xd4 9 £xd4 gives White an edge,
Davies,N-Thiel,T/London 1994) 8 ¤e5 f5 The only move to avoid disadvantage, the black
queenside pawns will be severely hamstrung, but his e-pawn is strong. 9 ¤xc6 bxc6 10 ¤d2 The
knight heads for b3, to stop Black playing ...c5. (10 £c2!? looks like the critical test, 10...£d6 11
¤d2 0–0 12 ¤c4 Howell,D-Burg,T/Porto Carras 2018. 10 £a4 £d7! By immediately breaking
the pin on the c6–pawn, Black manages to force the move ...c5. 11 ¦d1 c5! equalising, see
Topalov,V-Timman,J/Wijk aan Zee NED 1999. 10 f3 White hits the important e-pawn head-on.
10...exf3 11 ¥xf3 0–0 12 ¤c3 Gulko,B-Harikrishna,P/Wijk aan Zee NED 2001.) 10...0–0 (10...c5?
Immediately liquidating the forward c-pawn before it is too late, but I think it loses, 11 dxc5 ¥xc5
12 £c2!? Janssen,R-Van den Doel,E/Dieren NED 2001, both here and on later moves White
missed strong tactics, but won easily anyway.) 11 ¤b3 a5! (11...£d6 12 £c2 £g6 Wang,H-
Rublevsky,S/Rogaska Slatina SLO 2011.) 12 ¥d2 a4 13 ¤a5 Paunovic,D-Topalov,V/Villarrobledo
ESP 2008.
6...f5!? is rare, 7 d3 ¥e7 Movsesian,S-Ponkratov,P/Tallinn 2016, when 8 £b3! cuts across Black's
development plans.
7 d3
The standard continuation.
7 b3!? is an idea of Speelman's, White prepares an immediate attack on the e5–pawn.
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqkvl-tr0
9zppzp-+pzpp0
9-snn+-+-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+P+-+NzP-0
9P+-zPPzPLzP0
9tRNvLQ+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
This move is being seen quite often in top-flight games these last few years. 7...¥d6!? a logical
reaction, e5 is supported, but it can be useful to have the d-file unobstructed.
a) 7...¥e7 8 ¥b2 f6 The most natural means of defending e5. 9 d4!? exd4?! (9...e4) 10 ¤xd4
¤xd4 11 ¥xd4 c6 12 ¤c3 now White has an enduring edge, 12...¥e6 13 e4 (13 £d3 Sorokin,M-
Makarov,M/St Petersburg RUS 1999) 13...0–0 14 ¤e2 Georgiev,V-Krush,I/Chicago USA 2006.
b) 7...g6!? Kuzmicz,K-Socko,B/Karpacz POL 2008.
c) 7...¥e6 8 ¥b2 f6 9 £c2 can be met by 9...¤b4! Kotsur,P-Naiditsch,A/Khanty Mansyisk RUS
2005.
d) 7...e4!? sacrifices a pawn for rapid development and kingside attacking chances, Kuzmicz,K-
Vovk,Y/Grodzisk Mazowiecki POL 2007.
8 ¤c3!? (8 ¥b2 0–0 9 d3 transposes to the note to the next move) 8...0–0 9 ¥b2 ¦e8 (9...¥g4 10
d4!? In the Sicilian, if this freeing move is playable, it is often good, and sometimes bad, but here
will White's extra tempo help? The answer can be found in Hertneck,G-Timman,J/Plauen GER
2001.) 10 ¦c1 (10 ¤e4 ¥f8 11 d3 f5!? Black pushes forward aggressively, Adams,M-Vachier
Lagrave,M/Sharjah FIDE Grand Prix 2017.) 10...¥g4 11 h3 ¥h5 12 ¤e4 to gain the dark-squared
bishop, Ehlvest,J-Charbonneau,P/New York USA 2007.
7 £c2!? can't be any better, but is worth a look, Azmaiparashvili,Z-Kotronias,V/Halkidiki GRE
2002.
7...¥e7
7...¥d6!? the bishop goes directly to a more active square than normal. 8 b3 0–0 9 ¥b2 ¥g4 10 h3
White prevents the exchange of his light-squared bishop, (10 ¤bd2 £d7 Black continues his
development, whilst keeping his e5–pawn well-guarded. (Rublevsky preferred 10...£e7 more
recently, see Gurevich,M-Rublevsky,S/Evry FRA 2004) 11 ¦c1 Korchnoi,V-Rublevsky,S/St
Petersburg RUS 2001.) 10...¥h5 11 ¤bd2 £e7 12 ¤e4 f5 13 ¤xd6 cxd6 14 b4!? Aronian,L-
Shirov,A/Bilbao ESP 2009.
8 ¤bd2!?
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqk+-tr0
9zppzp-vlpzpp0
9-snn+-+-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+P+NzP-0
9PzP-sNPzPLzP0
9tR-vLQ+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
An attempt to avoid the heavily analysed mainlines after 8 ¤c3 see [A29].
8...0–0 9 a3 a5
Probably the most accurate move, keeping a lid on White's queenside expansion.
10 b3 ¥e6 11 ¥b2 f6 12 £c2 £d7

Black completes his development in a sensible way.
13 e3!?
Chernin's move, planning the positionally advantageous d4–thrust, but it might be premature.
13 ¦fd1 ¦fd8 14 ¤c4!? is stronger, when 14...¤xc4
a) 14...£e8 15 e3 is suggested by Hansen, and
b) 14...¤d5 15 e4!? (15 d4?! e4! 16 £xe4? ¥f5 17 £h4 g5 traps the queen) 15...¤b6 16 ¤xb6
cxb6 17 d4 may allow White a small edge.
15 bxc4 (15 dxc4!? £e8 16 ¤h4 and e4 is interesting) 15...a4?! (15...¥c5!?) 16 d4! exd4 17 ¤xd4
¤xd4 18 ¦xd4 £c8 19 ¦xd8+ ¥xd8 20 ¥e4 White enjoys some advantage with his centralised
pieces, Pecorelli Garcia,H-Franco Ocampos,Z, Havana CUB 2001.
13 ¦ac1 ¦fd8 14 ¦fd1 is also reasonable.
13...¦fd8 14 d4 exd4 15 ¤xd4 ¤xd4 16 ¥xd4 c5!

The critical reply.
17 ¥xc5 ¦ac8 18 b4 ¤d5!

The strongest move.
18...axb4!? 19 axb4 Matamoros Franco,C-Volzhin,A/Hamburg GER 1999.
19 ¤b3!? b6 20 e4 ¤xb4 21 axb4 axb4 22 ¦fd1 £c7 23 ¤d4!

23 ¦xd8+?! ¦xd8 24 ¥f1 left Black on top in Thiede,L-Graf,A/Godesberg GER 2003.
23...¦xd4 24 ¦xd4 bxc5 25 ¦c4!

with sharp play, see Bourquin,P-Vnukov,D/IECG 2000.
King's English 1 c4 e5 - Keres System 2 g3
[A20]
1 c4 e5 2 g3 ¤f6
2...c6 3 d4 (3 ¤f3 e4 4 ¤d4 d5 5 cxd5 £xd5 6 ¤c2 (6 e3 ¤f6 7 ¥g2 transposes below.) 6...¤f6 7
¤c3 (7 ¥g2 transposes below.) 7...£h5 8 ¤e3 ¥c5 9 £c2 ¥xe3 10 fxe3 £e5 (10...¥f5 11 ¥g2
£g6 Navara,D-Nisipeanu,L/Reykjavik ISL 2015.) 11 ¥g2 ¥f5 Anand,V-Adams,M/Shamkir
2015.) 3...e4 this move seems viable. White should attack Black's centre quickly, but it's not easy,
(3...exd4 4 £xd4 should transpose below.) 4 ¤c3
a) 4 d5!? is a very aggressive continuation, 4...¤f6 (4...¥b4+ 5 ¥d2 e3!? Lenderman,A-
Xiong,J/USA Championship 2018. 4...cxd5 5 cxd5 ¤f6 is the most accurate move order according
to both Mikhalevski and Delchev.) 5 ¥g2 ¥b4+ (5...cxd5 6 cxd5 ¥b4+ 7 ¥d2 Svidler,P-
Mastrovasilis,A/Aix-les-Bains FRA 2011) 6 ¥d2 £e7 (6...¥xd2+ 7 £xd2 0–0 8 ¤c3 Lenic,L-
Gajewski,G/Warsaw POL 2013.) 7 ¤c3 0–0 8 ¤h3 possibly White's best, (8 a3 see Carlsen,M-
Anand,V/Nice FRA 2008) 8...cxd5 9 cxd5 d6 Ivanchuk,V-Gelfand,B/Wijk aan Zee NED 2008.
b) 4 £b3!? d5 5 cxd5 £xd5 Damljanovic,B-Vasilevich,T/Kavala GRE 2009.
4...d5 5 cxd5
a) 5 ¥g2 is favoured by Marin, 5...¤f6 (5...¥b4!? Movsesian,S-Grandelius,N/Wijk aan Zee
2013.) 6 cxd5 cxd5 7 ¥g5 ¥b4 (7...¤bd7 is recommended in Mikhalevski's repertoire book for
Black, 8 £b3 ¥d6 9 ¤h3 h6 10 ¥f4 ¤b6 11 ¥e5! Adams,M-Sethuraman,S/Caleta ENG 2017.)
8 ¤h3 ¤bd7 9 ¦c1 h6 10 ¥xf6 ¥xc3+ 11 ¦xc3 ¤xf6 Piorun,K-Degraeve,J/Top 12 French Teams
2017.
b) 5 ¤h3!? see Narciso Dublan,M-San Segundo Carrillo,P/Sanxenxo ESP 2004.
c) 5 f3!? f5 6 cxd5 cxd5 7 £b3 ¤c6 is similar but with the f-pawns advanced, Davies,N-
Cherniaev,A/London ENG 2009.
5...cxd5 6 £b3 (6 ¥g2 ¤c6 7 ¤h3 Markowski,T-Krasenkow,M/Lublin POL 2009) 6...¤c6!?
(6...¤e7 looks like a playable alternative, Korchnoi,V-Bacrot,E/Albert (m/4) 1997) 7 £xd5 £xd5
8 ¤xd5 ¤xd4 9 ¤c7+ ¢d8 10 ¤xa8 ¤c2+ 11 ¢d1 ¤xa1 is a quite critical line in which computer
analysis is likely to feature heavily, 12 ¥f4 (12 ¥e3 ¥e6 13 ¥xa7 was rather good for Black in
Gelfand,B-Karjakin,S/Odessa UKR 2008, 12 b3!? is Tony Kosten's idea, but I think Black is OK
after 12...b6) 12...¥e6 is examined in Readers question from Jose Blades/2005.
3 ¥g2 c6
Keres' System, planning ...d5, is a good line that tends to lead to IQP positions for Black that are
popular with attacking players.
3...¤c6 is perhaps the most common, 4 ¤f3!? (after the normal 4 ¤c3 we reach ECO code [A25].)
4...¥c5 5 0–0 d6 6 e3 planning d4, Dominguez Perez,L-Zhigalko,S/Bilbao 2014.
3...h6!? is very unusual, 4 d3
a) 4 ¤c3 ¥b4 5 e4 ¤c6 6 ¤ge2 ¥c5 7 d3 (7 0–0 Buhmann,R-Balogh,C/Jenbach AUT 2009)
7...d6 8 h3 Kramnik,V-Carlsen,M/Moscow RUS 2011.
b) 4 ¤f3 ¤c6!? 5 d4 ¥b4+!? Colin,V-Libiszewski,F/Besancon FRA 2006.
4...¤c6 (4...¥c5 5 ¤c3 a6 6 e3 ¤c6 7 ¤ge2 d6 8 b3 0–0 9 0–0 favoured White in Gurevich,M-
Malakhov,V/Khanty Mansyisk RUS 2005) 5 a3 ¥c5 6 e3 a6 7 ¤c3 0–0 8 ¤ge2 similar to the ...c5
line, see Gurevich,M-Anand,V/Bastia FRA 2005.
4 d4
An advantage for White of playing 2 g3 is that this move is an effective reply.
4 ¤f3 is the alternative, 4...e4 5 ¤d4 d5 (5...£b6 6 ¤b3 a5 threatening to win the knight, 7 d3 a4 8
¤3d2 d5 see Svidler,P-Caruana,F/Sinquefield Cup 2017.) 6 cxd5 (6 d3!? ¥c5 (6...exd3 7 cxd5 see
Ding,L-Inarkiev,E/Moscow RUS 2017.) 7 ¤b3 ¥b4+ 8 ¥d2 a5!? Movsesian,S-Balogh,C/Czech
Republic 2018.) 6...£xd5 7 e3 White just wants to keep the knight in the centre, (7 ¤c2 by far the
most common, 7...£h5 8 h4!? Ivanchuk,V-Vachier Lagrave,M/Beijing CHN 2013.) 7...¥c5
(7...£e5 8 f4!? Ding,L-Balogh,C/Tromsoe 2014. 7...¤a6 8 d3 ¥b4+ 9 ¤c3 ¤c5 10 0–0
Gelfand,B-Inarkiev,E/Nazran 2017.) 8 d3 £e5 9 dxe4 ¤xe4 10 ¤c3 Savchenko,B-
Kravtsiv,M/Minsk 2014.
4...exd4
The most aggressive move, whereby Black accepts an IQP in exchange for active piece play.
Alternatively, 4...¥b4+ is a popular line for Black, when he wants a solid position with good drawing
possibilities. 5 ¥d2 ¥xd2+ 6 £xd2 d6
XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwqk+-tr0
9zpp+-+pzpp0
9-+pzp-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+PzP-+-+0
9+-+-+-zP-0
9PzP-wQPzPLzP0
9tRN+-mK-sNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
Having exchanged dark-squared bishops, Black seeks to place his central pawns on dark squares. 7
¤c3 0–0 the most common, (7...£e7!? this tricky move contains quite a lot of venom for the
unwary, 8 e3 (8 e4!? this natural move may be inappropriate here, 8...d5!? Black exploits the
opposition of his queen against the opponent's king. 9 cxd5 exd4! 10 £xd4 cxd5 11 ¤xd5 ¤xd5 12
£xd5 0–0 with compensation, the white king is still two moves from castling, and Black will gain
time kicking the exposed white queen around, Markowski,T-Savchenko,S/Masters KO, Cannes
FRA 2000.) 8...0–0 9 ¤ge2 ¦e8 (9...e4!? is unusual, and provocative, 10 d5! White 'isolates' the e4–
pawn. 10...c5 11 h3 h5 Black has to stop White from playing g4, and g3, winning the e4–pawn.
12 0–0–0 and White managed to engineer a g4–thrust all the same, Markowski,T-
Gajewski,G/Warsaw POL 2001.) 10 h3 h5! allowing White to play g4, and g3, is very risky, and
although moving the move of the black h-pawn weakens his king position, it may be the lesser evil.
11 e4!? a6 12 0–0 b5! Schlosser,P-Khenkin,I/Tegernsee GER 2000.) 8 e3 normal here, the white
pawns go to dark squares,
a) 8 dxe5!? White gains almost no advantage playing this endgame, 8...dxe5 9 £xd8 ¦xd8 10 ¤f3
Markowski,T-Wells,P/IECC, Ohrid MKD 2001.
b) 8 e4 is ambitious, but closes the bishop's diagonal, 8...¤bd7 (8...£e7 may not be the best
square for the queen, Gonzalez Zamora,J-Estrada Nieto,J/Yucatan MEX 2004) 9 ¤f3 ¦e8 10 0–0
Horvath,J-Rabiega,R/Graz AUT 2003.
8...¥e6 this move, and the plan it entails, is a critical test of White's set-up, 9 b3 (Marin recommends
9 ¦d1, but 9...¤a6 10 b3 exd4 11 £xd4 ¤b4! (or 11...£a5) 12 £d2 ¥f5! led to a quick equality in
both Kosten,A-Jones,G/Bunratty Masters 2011, and Mamedyarov,S-Radjabov,T/Baku 2014.)
9...exd4 10 £xd4 d5 11 cxd5 ¤xd5 12 ¤xd5 (12 ¤ge2!? £a5 13 £a4 £xa4 14 ¤xa4 ¤a6 15 ¤d4
(15 0–0 Matamoros Franco,C-Belkhodja,S/Calvia ESP 2004) 15...¦ad8 see Ivanchuk,V-
Sutovsky,E/Moscow RUS 2001.) 12...¥xd5 Black prefers to exchange his bishop, rather than
recapture with the pawn when this piece would be passively placed, 13 ¥xd5 £a5+?! Rotstein,A-
Bacrot,E/Nl France 2002.
4...e4 is likely to transpose to the note to move 2 after, say 5 d5
5 £xd4 d5
5...¤a6!? is becoming all the rage, 6 ¤f3 ¥c5 a move first played by Larry Christiansen, see
Kosten,A-Collins,A/4NCL 2002.
6 ¤f3
XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwqkvl-tr0
9zpp+-+pzpp0
9-+p+-sn-+0
9+-+p+-+-0
9-+PwQ-+-+0
9+-+-+NzP-0
9PzP-+PzPLzP0
9tRNvL-mK-+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
6...¥e6!?
Black wants to force White to capture on d5, which allows Black to bring his f8–bishop to a more
active square.
The more traditional 6...¥e7 is less aggressive, but
6...dxc4!? is possible, 7 £xc4 (the pawn sac line, 7 £xd8+!? is also examined in Turner,M-
Yastrebov,A) 7...¥e6 8 £c2 ¤a6 Turner,M-Yastrebov,A/Telford ENG 2003, which came to an
abrupt end!
7 cxd5
7 ¤g5!? is a key alternative, see Xu,J-Christiansen,L/Shanghai CHN 2002 for a discussion of this
move.
7...cxd5 8 0–0
8 £a4+!? is an interesting finesse, White decides to 'fall before he is pushed'. 8...¤c6 9 ¤d4 see
Urban,K-Krasenkow,M/Zakopane chT 2000.
8...¤c6 9 £a4
9 £d3 has some advantages, 9...h6 10 a3 ¥e7 11 ¤c3 0–0 12 ¦d1 ¦c8 13 ¥f4 see Kovalyov,A-
Kovalenko,I/Baku AZE 2016.
9...¥c5
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+-wqk+-tr0
9zpp+-+pzpp0
9-+n+lsn-+0
9+-vlp+-+-0
9Q+-+-+-+0
9+-+-+NzP-0
9PzP-+PzPLzP0
9tRNvL-+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
The point of Black's move-order, the bishop points at f2.
10 ¤e5!?
An innovation, immediately attacking c6.
10 ¤bd2 is a solid idea, White will bring a piece to d4, 10...0–0 11 ¤b3 ¥b6 12 ¤bd4 leads to the
superb black demonstration Markowski,T-Krasenkow,M/Polanica Zdroj POL 2000.
10 a3!? 0–0 11 b4 ¥b6 12 ¥b2 ¤e4 With the bishop on the g1–a7 diagonal, and the knight on e4, f2
is a target, Foisor,C-Kosten,A/Aubervilliers 1996.
10 ¤c3 0–0 and others is considered in the Keres Special/2001.
10...¦c8 11 ¤c3 0–0 12 ¤d3
Revealing the real idea, the knight drops back to d3, when it can be used to attack the d5–pawn from
f4.
12...¥d4! 13 ¥g5
The continuation is examined in Markowski,T-Krasenkow,M/Zakopane chT 2000.
1 c4 e5 2 Nc3 - 2...Bb4 & other 2nd [A21]

This and 2...d6 are two exciting attempts for Black to avoid the two most natural moves (1...f6, and
1...c6). These have changed from being little backwaters, meriting just a few lines in ECO, into
lines at the very cutting edge of theory this last decade.
1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¥b4
XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwqk+ntr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-vlP+-+-+0
9+-sN-+-+-0
9PzP-zPPzPPzP0
9tR-vLQmKLsNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
Black intends to double the white pawns by 3...xc3, and then place his own pawns solidly on dark
squares. By omitting to play an early ...f6, Black gives himself the option of advancing his f-
pawn, either to f5 (with kingside attacking ideas) or to f6 (strongly supporting the e5–pawn). Apart
from 2...d6, there are also some other, lesser, second move alternatives:
2...g6 3 g3 ¥g7 4 ¥g2 f5 An aggressive move, Black makes his intentions on the kingside clear.
(4...d6 5 d3 f5 6 e3 a5 7 ¤ge2 ¤f6 is also sensible, Markowski,T-Sasikiran,K/Istanbul TUR
2000.) 5 d4!? A sharp reaction, White exploits tactical features of the position to make this
advance, 5...exd4 6 ¤b5 ¤c6 7 ¤f3 ¤f6 8 ¥f4?! White tries to extract the utmost from the
position, but the bishop proves misplaced here, 8...d6 9 ¤fxd4 Gurevich,M-Topalov,V/Sarajevo
BIH 2000.
2...f5?! 3 d4 e4 4 ¤h3! The white knight has spotted a promising position for itself at f4. (4 f3
Gonzales,J-Sadorra,J/Mandaluyong PHI 2008) 4...¤f6 5 ¥g5 c6 6 ¤f4 with a superior version of
the 2...d6 mainline, Friedgood,D-James,D/4NCL 2000.
3 ¤d5
XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwqk+ntr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+Nzp-+-0
9-vlP+-+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9PzP-zPPzPPzP0
9tR-vLQmKLsNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
White's critical move, hitting the b4–bishop.

White can also continue his development, one sensible way is by 3 g3, allowing the doubling of
pawns. Black cannot afford to be overly ambitious here, after 3...¥xc3 Little point putting the
bishop on b4 unless Black plays this. 4 bxc3 (4 dxc3 d6 5 e4 Miezis,N-Popov,V/Stockholm SWE
2010) 4...d6 5 ¥g2 f5 Perhaps a trifle over-optimistic, Black wants to play as in a Grand-Prix
Attack reversed. 6 c5!? If this is good, it is the refutation of Black's previous move. White frees the
position for his bishops, and rids himself of his doubled pawn. (6 d3 ¤f6 7 ¤f3 ¤c6 transposes to
3...f5 and 5...b4 in [A25].) 6...dxc5 7 ¥a3 £d6 8 d4! The white bishops were set loose on the
black position, with devastating results, Hodgson,J-Psakhis,L/Metz 1994.
3 ¤f3 ¥xc3 4 bxc3 d6 5 d4 £e7 6 c5!? Savchenko,B-Shirov,A/Moscow RUS 2007.
3 £b3 a5 (3...¤c6 4 ¤d5 a5 would transpose.) 4 ¤d5 ¤c6 Morozevich,A-Vitiugov,N/Tromso NOR
2013.
3 £c2 ¤f6 4 ¤f3 £e7 5 e4!? Gajewski,G-Heberla,B/Warsaw 2014.
3 e4 ¤f6 4 ¥d3!? takes play along a different path, Jobava,B-Zvjaginsev,V/Sochi 2015.
3...¥e7
A surprising move, popularised by Shirov. Black seems happy to lose the pair of bishops, he will
place his pawns solidly on dark squares. Black has a number of other retreats:
3...¥c5 is currently the most popular, 4 ¤f3
a) 4 e3 ¤f6 5 b4 (5 ¤f3 ¤xd5 6 cxd5 d6 7 d4 exd4 8 ¤xd4 Grigoryan,K-Volkov,S/Rasht 2016.)
5...¤xd5 6 bxc5 ¤f6 7 ¤f3 Giri,A-Anand,V/Altibox Norway Chess 2017.
b) 4 b4 is natural, 4...¥f8 (4...¥d4 5 ¦b1 c6 6 e3) 5 ¥b2 c6 6 ¤e3 ¥xb4 7 ¥xe5 ¤f6 8 ¤f3 with a
central pawn majority, Bocharov,D-Artemiev,V/Sochi 2017.
4...c6 (4...e4!? 5 ¤g5! e3 6 d4 exf2+ 7 ¢xf2 ¥e7 8 ¤xe7 £xe7 9 e4 d6 10 ¥d3 (10 b3!? Poldauf,D-
Kasimdzhanov,R/Rethymnon GRE 2003.) 10...¤c6 11 ¥c2 ¤f6 Lautier,J-Kramnik,V/Cannes
1993, 12 h3! with advantage.) 5 ¤c3 d6 (5...£e7 6 d4 exd4 7 ¤xd4 ¤f6 8 ¤f5 critical, see
Spoelman,W-Sokolov,I/Netherlands NED 2017.) 6 e3 (6 g3 ¤f6 7 ¥g2 Caruana,F-
Anand,V/London ENG 2016.) 6...¥b4 (6...£e7 Vachier Lagrave,M-Baklan,V/Drancy FRA 2016.)
7 d4 Caruana,F-Anand,V/Altibox Norway Chess 2017.
3...¥a5 4 b4 c6 Clearly forced. 5 bxa5 cxd5 6 cxd5 £xa5 7 e4 The dust has settled, and White has
gained the bishop pair, and a space advantage in the centre, but has yet to develop a piece. (7 £b3
is Petursson,M-Sokolov,I/Manila 1992) 7...¤f6 8 f3 Lalic,B-Ivanov,A/Maidstone 1994.
3...¥d6!? is also interesting, intending ...c6 and ...c7, 4 d4 obviously best, White is not going to let
Black develop too easily, 4...c6 5 dxe5 ¥xe5 6 ¤f3 (6 ¤f4!? Agrest,E-Sasikiran,K/Mainz GER
2002.) 6...d6 7 ¤xe5 dxe5 8 ¤c3 £xd1+ 9 ¤xd1 with the bishop pair, Salov,V-Kramnik,V/Linares
1993.
3...¤a6!? 4 a3 (4 ¤xb4 ¤xb4 5 a3 ¤c6 6 b4 Harikrishna,P-Vallejo Pons,F/Palma de Mallorca
2017. 4 g3 ¥a5 5 ¥g2 c6 6 ¤c3 ¤f6 Bruzon Batista,L-Adhiban,B/Baku AZE 2016.) 4...¥a5 5 b4
c6 6 ¤c3 ¥c7 7 d4! is examined in Cook,R-Williamson,H/BCCA v Bccs 2004.
3...a5!? 4 a3 ¥e7 (4...¥c5 Popov,V-Konovalov,N/St Petersburg RUS 2007) 5 d4 is similar to the
mainline, with the addition of two moves by the a-pawns, Lautier,J-Fressinet,L/Val d'Isere FRA
2004.
4 d4
The sharp positions that arise, where Black does battle with the white bishop pair, are very popular
with players such as Shirov, although, personally, I feel that White is on top at the moment.
4...d6 5 e4
The most ambitious move, White takes control of the centre.
5 e3 is an unusual alternative. 5...¤f6 6 ¤xe7 £xe7 7 ¤e2 0–0 8 d5 ¤bd7!? Conquest's innovation,
which prepares an aggressive strategy. 9 ¤c3 Agrest,E-Conquest,S/Reykjavik ISL 2000.
5 ¤f3 e4 (5...c6 seems unnecessary, though it does give Black the option of playing ...f5
before ...f6. 6 ¤xe7 £xe7 7 c5!? sharpens the battle with immediate effect, see Iordachescu,V-
Kritz,L/Port Erin IOM 2007. 5...¤c6 6 ¤c3!? Damljanovic,B-Drazic,S/Valjevo SRB 2011.) 6
¤d2 f5 7 ¤b1 ¤f6 8 ¤bc3 0–0 9 ¤xe7+ (9 g3 Speelman,J-Howell,D/Coventry ENG 2007.)
9...£xe7 10 ¥g5 £f7 11 e3 ¤c6 Andreikin,D-Volkov,S/Baku AZE 2011.
5...¤f6 6 ¤xe7 £xe7

XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnl+k+-tr0
9zppzp-wqpzpp0
9-+-zp-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+PzPP+-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9PzP-+-zPPzP0
9tR-vLQmKLsNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
7 f3
Black has a lead in development, but, much as in the 4 c2 Nimzo, unless he manages to achieve
something concrete with it, White's bishop pair, and space advantage, will gradually come into their
own.
7...exd4
7...¤h5 8 ¥e3 (8 ¤e2 0–0 9 g4!? is probably the critical line, though largely ignored) 8...f5!? 9 exf5
¤f6! Aronian,L-Shirov,A/Morelia/Linares MEX/ESP 2008.
8 £xd4 ¤c6 9 £c3 0–0 10 ¥e3

A perfectly logical move, preparing to evacuate the king to the queenside if necessary, see
Hansen,C-Sokolov,I/Groningen 1995.
1 c4 e5 2 Nc3 - 2...d6 [A21]
1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 d6
XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwqkvlntr0
9zppzp-+pzpp0
9-+-zp-+-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-sN-+-+-0
9PzP-zPPzPPzP0
9tR-vLQmKLsNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
Originally an idea of Smyslov's, Black defends his e-pawn, and opens the h3–c8 diagonal for his
queen's bishop. From a backwater this became one of Black's most fashionable lines.
3 ¤f3
White wishes to play d4, but should Black capture this, to be able to recapture with the knight on d4,
rather than the queen.
This line first came into prominence, after the realisation that the position arising after 3 d4 exd4 4
£xd4 ¤c6 was very active for Black, as he gains a move on the white queen, and develops quickly.
(4...¤f6 is a viable alternative: 5 b3 g6 6 ¥b2 ¥g7 7 g3 0–0 8 ¥g2 ¤bd7!? The knight will come
to c5, to survey the e4–square, Ruban,V-Miles,A/Belgrade 1988.) 5 £d2 This seems like an odd
square for a queen, but it is very common in similar positions. The c1–bishop will be developed on
b2, so the queen will be able to defend both the bishop on b2, and the g3–knight, from d2. (5
£d3?! is worse, 5...¤e5 6 £c2 Besides the time lost, the queen will prove worse here than on d2.
6...g6 7 g3 ¥g7 8 ¥g2 Ernst,S-Dunnington,A/Lichfield ENG 2000.) 5...g6 (or 5...¤f6 6 b3 ¥e6
Threatening the freeing move 7...d5. 7 e4 g6 Sensibly continuing development, Black plays his
bishop to the a1–h8 diagonal. 8 ¥b2 ¥g7 9 ¥d3 Vera,R-Hodgson,J/Winnipeg 1997.) 6 b3 There is
no reason to defer the development of the queen's bishop. 6...¥g7 7 ¥b2 ¤f6 It may be that White's
best plan is not to play the obvious e4 and Bd3, after having fianchettoed the queen's bishop, but
rather to play a double fianchetto, and bring the king's knight to f4. 8 g3 The best time to develop
the king's bishop. 8...0–0 9 ¥g2 ¦e8 (9...¥f5?! 10 ¤h3 ¦e8 11 ¤f4! This way round Black fails to
liberate his position, White's hold on d5 should give him a certain plus. 11...¤e5 12 0–0 Illescas
Cordoba,M-Arencibia,W/Salamanca ESP 1998.) 10 ¤h3 The knight is heading for the f4 square
where it will clamp down further on the important d5 centre point. This persuades Black to part
with the two bishops. 10...¥xh3 11 ¥xh3 ¤e4 attempting to exchange some pieces, but White has a
plus, Tratar,M-Srebrnic,V/Open Ljubljana CRO 2000.
Perhaps 3 g3 is White's simplest continuation, as he can then react in the centre with d4 when it is
more appropriate, 3...f5 4 d4 (4 ¥g2 ¤f6 (4...¥e7 5 d4 ¤f6 So,W-Adhiban,B/Tata Steel Masters
2018.) 5 d3 (5 e3 g6 6 ¤ge2 ¥g7 7 b4 resembles a Closed King's English, Wang,Y-
Smirin,I/Khanty Mansyisk RUS 2005, 5 ¤f3 transposes below.) 5...¥e7 6 ¤f3 (6 f4!? is
interesting, stopping Black's possible kingside attack, see the instructive game Erdos,V-
Stevic,H/Bol 2013.) 6...0–0 7 0–0 Cheparinov,I-Stevic,H/Bol 2013.) 4...c6 (4...¤d7 5 ¥h3!? led to
a convincing victory for White in Suba,M-Bosboom Lanchava,T/Malaga ESP 2003, after 4...¥e7
the same idea 5 ¥h3!? was tried in Zvjaginsev,V-Tseshkovsky,V/Krasnoyarsk RUS 2003, 4...e4!?
5 ¤h3 leaves White two tempi up on a known line, Kramnik,V-Svidler,P/Moscow RUS 2008) 5
dxe5 The standard method of treating such positions, the resulting ending is not quite as simple as it
might seem. 5...dxe5 6 £xd8+ ¢xd8 7 ¤f3 Sorokin,M-Tseshkovsky,V/Krasnodar RUS 1999.
3...f5
Now that Black will not want to take on d4, he needs to control e4, ready to answer d4 with ...e4.
The alternative is playing ...d7, with a transposition to an Old Indian.
4 d4
White can delay this thrust, 4 g3 ¤f6 5 ¥g2 ¥e7 (5...g6 6 0–0 ¥g7 7 d3 0–0 8 ¦b1 Eggleston,D-
L'Ami,E/Douglas ENG 2017.) 6 0–0 (or 6 d4 e4 7 ¤g5) 6...0–0 7 d4 e4 8 ¤g5 and the advantage is
that Black doesn't gain a free hit on the g5–knight with ...e7 as below, see Marin,M-
Kraus,Y/Jerusalem 2015.
4...e4
It soon became clear that Black also has good chances here, as the white knight is obliged to waste
several moves before it finds a safe square, and in this period Black can bolster his centre.
5 ¤g5
XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwqkvlntr0
9zppzp-+-zpp0
9-+-zp-+-+0
9+-+-+psN-0
9-+PzPp+-+0
9+-sN-+-+-0
9PzP-+PzPPzP0
9tR-vLQmKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
This is the normal continuation, the knight is unlikely to rest on g5, but will go to the important
square f4, via h3. However, due to the time lost, my opinion is that this is one of Black's most
promising lines in the English.
The alternative, 5 ¤d2 is less aggressive, and it is difficult to believe that it is superior. 5...¤f6 6 e3
c6 Black prepares to consolidate a space advantage in the centre. The question is whether White is
able to disrupt Black's build up with a blow from the flanks. (6...¥e7 7 f3 White contests Black's
central space advantage head-on. 7...exf3 8 £xf3 0–0 9 ¥d3 White is better, Crouch,C-
Norwood,D/Birmingham ENG 2000.) 7 ¥e2 (7 f3 d5 8 cxd5 cxd5 9 fxe4 fxe4 10 ¥e2 This seems
too slow to hurt Black, Sultanov,A-Poluljahov,A/53rd ch-RUS Samara RUS 2000.) 7...¤a6 8
£a4!? ¤c7 Laznicka,V-Rapport,R/Novy Bor 2014.
5...c6
Preparing to strengthen the e4–pawn by ...d5.
5...¥e7 can transpose: 6 ¤h3 c6 7 d5 By advancing his d-pawn White prevents Black from
consolidating his pawn chain with d4–d5, however, this move seems premature here (7 e3
Skembris,S-Lazic,M/Verona ITA 2005) 7...¤a6 8 g3 The fianchetto doesn't really fit in with the
d4–d5 advance. 8...¤f6 9 ¥g2 Kleist,F-Benjamin,J/Edmondton CAN 2000.
6 g3
This way White can develop his light-squared bishop whilst keeping the c1–h6 diagonal open for the
use of his brother.
6 f3 is a more direct approach, aiming to dissolve the black centre before Black has time to defend it.
6...¥e7 7 ¤h3 ¤f6 Black prefers to keep his e-pawn for the moment. 8 ¥g5 0–0 9 e3 White is
loathe to capture on e4 because of the opening of the h3–c8 diagonal. 9...¤a6 Kelly,B-
Speelman,J/ch-GBR, Torquay ENG 1998.
6...¥e7
6...¤f6 7 ¥g2 h6 8 ¤h3 g5 This kind of position has usually been satisfactory for Black, whose
kingside pawn formation is more solid than it looks, Prohaszka,P-Vitor,A/Budapest HUN 2006.
7 ¤h3 ¤f6 8 ¥g2
8 d5 Gaining space, and stopping ...d5, 8...¤g4!? Black intends to play the knight to e5, and bishop
to f6. 9 f3 This must be the critical reply. 9...¤e5 10 fxe4 ¤xc4?! this move led Black into serious
trouble, Poldauf,D-Nenashev,A/Godesberg GER 2001.
8 ¥g5 ¥e6! Gupta,A-Nanjo,R/Kochin IND 2004.
8...0–0 9 0–0 ¤a6

XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwq-trk+0
9zpp+-vl-zpp0
9n+pzp-sn-+0
9+-+-+p+-0
9-+PzPp+-+0
9+-sN-+-zPN0
9PzP-+PzPLzP0
9tR-vLQ+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
A key manoeuvre, borrowed from the Advance French, the knight comes to c7, either to prepare
the ...d5–push, or to continue towards the kingside via e6.
10 f3 exf3
Conceding the centre is active, but not forced,
10...¢h8 11 ¥g5 ¥e6 12 b3 d5 White is attempting to dismantle the black centre. Black agrees to
this, but makes sure it is dissolved under conditions which are favourable to him, see Estremera
Panos,S-Georgiev,V/Andorra AND 2000.
11 exf3 ¤c7
Gulko,B-Short,N/Elenite 1995.
King's English - Moves other than 3 Nf3 [A22]
1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3
2 e3!? ¤f6 3 ¤c3 transposes to 3 e3.
2...¤f6 3 g3
This is possible, but is probably not the most accurate move-order.
3 ¤f3 e4!? a sharp idea of the Spanish GM Bellon-Lopez, (3...¤c6 is a mainline 4 knights) 4 ¤g5
b5 5 d3! the best, see Kosten,A-Salem,Z/Cairo EGY 2003.
Alternatively, certain players have experimented with 3 e3!? in order to reserve the possibility of
playing the g1–knight to e2, 3...¥b4 (3...d6 4 d4 Rowson,J-Kjartansson,G/Edinburgh SCO 2009) 4
¤ge2 here lies the advantage of deferring the g1–knight's development, White is ready to gain the
bishop pair without losing time with his queen, or ruining his pawn structure, 4...0–0 (4...c6!?
Olafsson,H-Korchnoi,V/Kopavogur ISL 2000) 5 a3 ¥e7 Papaioannou,I-Gelfand,B/Plovdiv BUL
2003.
3...¥b4
XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwqk+-tr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+-+-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-vlP+-+-+0
9+-sN-+-zP-0
9PzP-zPPzP-zP0
9tR-vLQmKLsNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
After this, White might be able to transpose to lines discussed in the Four Knights, 4 g3, but might
not.
3...d5 4 cxd5 ¤xd5 5 ¥g2 ¤b6 (5...¤xc3!? 6 bxc3 ¤c6 Lalith,B-Dubov,D/Tradewise Gibraltar
Masters 2018.) 6 e3!? the fashionable move, (6 d3 ¥e7 7 ¤h3!? Grischuk,A-Hammer,J/Stavanger
2015. 6 b3!? ¥e7 7 ¥b2 ¤c6 8 ¥xc6+!? bxc6 9 ¤f3 Tarjan,J-Kosteniuk,A/Douglas ENG 2017. 6
¤f3 ¤c6 is [A29].) 6...¤c6 the most natural, and popular,
a) 6...c5 7 ¤ge2 ¤c6 8 0–0 ¥e7 9 f4! exf4 10 ¤xf4 0–0 11 b3 ¥f5 12 ¥b2 £d7 13 ¤e4 ¦ad8
(13...¤b4?! 14 a3 ¤4d5 15 ¤d3! Turov,M-Potapov,P/Tashkent UZB 2012.) 14 ¦f2 ¤b4 15 £f1
¥xe4 (15...¥g6 Griffiths,R-Howell,D/Sunningdale ENG 2012.) 16 ¥xe4 Nakamura,H-
Navara,D/Wijk aan Zee, Netherlands 2012.
b) 6...¥e7 7 ¤ge2 0–0 (7...¤c6, or on the next move, transposes above.) 8 0–0 c6 9 f4 Li,C-
Karpatchev,A/Deizisau 2014.
c) 6...g6!? 7 ¤ge2 ¥g7 8 0–0 (8 f4 Nepomniachtchi,I-Lintchevski,D/Tyumen RUS 2012.) 8...¤c6
9 d4!? see Khismatullin,D-Matlakov,M/Khanty-Mansiysk 2014.
7 ¤ge2 ¥e7 (7...¥f5 is critical, 8 d4! see Jones,G-Le Roux,J/Helsingor 2014. 7...£d3!? 8 f4
Mamedyarov,S-Ganguly,S/Doha QAT 2015. 7...g6 8 b3!? a5!? Hera,I-Ribli,Z/Austria 2013.) 8 0–0
planning f4, 8...0–0 9 f4 f6 (9...a5 10 fxe5 ¤xe5 11 d4 worked well in Zvjaginsev,V-
Mikhalevski,V/Aix-les-Bains FRA 2011.) 10 f5! ¥d7 (10...a5 11 b3 Jones,G-Edouard,R/1st
matchgame, London 2014.) 11 d4 Piorun,K-Dziuba,M/Poland POL 2016.
3...¥e7!? 4 ¥g2 c6 normally aims for an Old Indian setup, 5 e4 (5 d4) 5...d6 6 ¤ge2 see Kosten,A-
Anic,D/France 1999.
4 ¥g2
This allows Black a number of extra possibilities, notably those involving central expansion with
...c6, and ...d5.
4 ¤f3!? White wants to force Black to play ...c6, and enter normal lines. 4...¥xc3 (Black prefers to
avoid the main line with 4...¤c6, 4...e4 is possible, 5 ¤d4 ¤c6 6 ¤c2 see Nakamura,H-
Sokolov,I/Wijk aan Zee 2013.) 5 dxc3 (5 bxc3 e4 6 ¤d4 0–0 7 ¥g2 Kamsky,G-Gelfand,B/Moscow
RUS 2007, and now 7...c5!? 8 ¤c2 d5 9 cxd5 £xd5 looks strongest) 5...d6 6 ¥g2 h6 7 0–0 see
Taimanov,M-Rublevsky,S/St Petersburg RUS 2001.
4 e4!? 0–0 (4...¥xc3 5 dxc3 ¤xe4 6 £g4) 5 ¤ge2 c6 6 ¥g2 Carlsen,M-Caruana,F/FIDE World
Chess Championships 2018.
4...0–0 5 e4
White closes the centre and aims for a position devoid of tactics.
5 d3 ¥xc3+ 6 bxc3 c6 7 e4 is the actual move-order of Rogers,I-Acs,P/Wijk aan Zee NED 2003.
5 ¤f3 ¦e8 (5...¤c6 would transpose to a Four Knights.) 6 0–0 c6 7 d3 h6 Wen,Y-
Sasikiran,K/Sharjah 2014.
5...¥xc3
The simplest line, this must be played now before White can play his other knight to e2.
6 bxc3
6 dxc3 d6 7 £e2 ¤bd7 8 ¤f3 a6 9 0–0 b5! with good play, Miezis,N-Olsen,H/Dianalund DEN 2005.
6...c6
XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwq-trk+0
9zpp+p+pzpp0
9-+p+-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+P+-+0
9+-zP-+-zP-0
9P+-zP-zPLzP0
9tR-vLQmK-sNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
Black plans to break White's grip on the centre with ...d5, which leads to a fairly open position.
6...¦e8 may be slightly more accurate, as it stops White playing d4 or a3, 7 ¤e2 (7 d3 c6 8 ¤e2 d5
9 cxd5 cxd5 10 exd5 ¤xd5 was the move order of the Mamedyarov-Giri game, see below.) 7...c6 8
0–0 d5 9 cxd5 cxd5 10 exd5 ¤xd5 11 c4! see Matlakov,M-Khmelniker,I/Novi Sad 2016.
6...d6 7 ¤e2 ¥g4!? is seen in Smirin,I-DEEP SHREDDER/KC-CB INT 2002.
7 ¤e2
The most popular move.
7 d4!? exd4 8 £xd4 ¦e8 9 ¤e2 d5!? stirring things up with a pawn sacrifice, Vallejo Pons,F-
Aronian,L/Khanty Mansyisk RUS 2005.
7 ¥a3 White tries to stop Black playing the freeing ...d5. 7...¦e8! Black is not worried about the
bishop's incursion to d6, judging correctly that he can regain control of this square. 8 £b3 White
needs to control the d5–square. 8...b6 Grigoriants,S-Sadvakasov,D/Subotica YUG 2000.
7 ¦b1!? transposes to the mainline after 7...d5 8 cxd5 cxd5 9 exd5 ¤xd5 10 ¤e2 etc.
7 ¤f3!? might be strongest, 7...¤xe4 8 0–0 d6 9 ¤xe5 dxe5 (9...¤c5 10 ¤g4 f5 11 ¤e3 f4 12 d4
Svidler,P-Aronian,L/Moscow Candidates 2016.) 10 ¥xe4 see Giri,A-Anand,V/Bilbao Chess
Masters 2015.
7...d5 8 cxd5 cxd5 9 exd5 ¤xd5

XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwq-trk+0
9zpp+-+pzpp0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+nzp-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-zP-+-zP-0
9P+-zPNzPLzP0
9tR-vLQmK-+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
Black has the freer game, and scores very well from this position.
10 0–0 ¤c6 11 ¦b1

11 d3 ¥g4!? (11...¦e8 12 ¥b2 would transpose to Rogers,I-Acs,P/Wijk aan Zee NED 2003.) 12
¥b2 £d7 with at least equality in Turov,M-Edouard,R/Wijk aan Zee 2013.
11...¦e8 12 d3 ¥g4!
12...¤b6 Naiditsch,A-Topalov,V/Porto Carras GRE 2011.
13 f3
see Mamedyarov,S-Giri,A/Doha 2014.
Keres System [A23]
Last updated: 22/07/07 by Carsten Hansen
1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤f6 3 g3 c6
XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwqkvl-tr0
9zpp+p+pzpp0
9-+p+-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-sN-+-zP-0
9PzP-zPPzP-zP0
9tR-vLQmKLsNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
Keres' System, which gives Black good chances.
3...¥c5 is a rare line, 4 ¥g2 c6 5 e3 d6 6 ¤ge2 a5 7 d4 with a standard plus, Kosten,A-
Fedorchuk,S/Marseille FRA 2006.
4 d4
This is the most popular option, by which White acts in the centre just before Black's d-pawn can do
so.
4 ¤f3 lures the pawn onwards, but favours Black: 4...e4 (4...d6 Black goes for the Old Indian formation.
5 ¥g2 ¥e7 6 0–0 0–0 Boensch,U-Ftacnik,L/Graz AUT 2006) 5 ¤d4 d5 (An imaginative, and
successful, new gambit here is: 5...b5 6 cxb5 Acceptance of the gambit is often strongest, 6...c5 7
¤c2 d5 featured in Silva,F-Efimov,I/Albufeira Algarve POR 1999, for the pawn Black has a
strong centre which will sweep the white knights away. , 5...£b6 is also good, 6 ¤c2 Probably the
best square for the knight. 6...d5 see Bacrot,E-Svidler,P/New Delhi IND 2000.) 6 cxd5 £b6 7
¤b3 a5 8 d3 a4 Marin,M-Bacrot,E/Torrelavega 2007, when 9 ¤d2 is likely White's best
choice.
4 ¥g2 is risky, 4...d5 (sharper than 4...¥e7 5 e4!? White puts a clamp on d5 to prevent Black's freeing
move, 5...0–0 6 ¤ge2 Markowski,T-Hickl,J/Erfurt GER 2001.) 5 cxd5 cxd5 6 £b3 ¤c6! The
gambit that goes with this move is known to be strong for Black, as he will get a powerful lead
in development in return for sacrificing his d5-pawn. 7 ¤xd5 ¤d4 Kapostas,Z-
Kallai,G/Hungarian Team Championship 2001.
4...exd4 5 £xd4 d5
XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwqkvl-tr0
9zpp+-+pzpp0
9-+p+-sn-+0
9+-+p+-+-0
9-+PwQ-+-+0
9+-sN-+-zP-0
9PzP-+PzP-zP0
9tR-vL-mKLsNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
Normal, but
5...¤a6!? is worth considering, Black plays much as White sometimes does with the c3 Sicilian, the
knight can hop to b4 to threaten to fork the white queen and king, and then recapture on d5, 6
¥g2 ¥e7 and this is considered in Miezis,N-Zapata,A/Port Erin IOM 2002.
6 ¥g2
Probably the most accurate.
6 cxd5 cxd5 7 ¤f3!? ¤c6 8 £a4 d4! This space-gaining advance is the reason why the Keres can be
so effective when the white knight is on c3 too soon, Ljubojevic,L-Gelfand,B/Monaco MNC
2001.
6 ¤f3!? also avoids a premature exchange on d5, 6...¤a6!? 7 ¥g5 ¥c5!? 8 £e5+ ¥e6 9 0–0–0
Kveinys,A-Stocek,J/Nova Gorica SLO 2004.
6...¥e6
To force the exchange on d5.
7 cxd5 cxd5 8 ¤f3 ¤c6 9 £a4 ¥c5 10 0–0

XIIIIIIIIY
9r+-wqk+-tr0
9zpp+-+pzpp0
9-+n+lsn-+0
9+-vlp+-+-0
9Q+-+-+-+0
9+-sN-+NzP-0
9PzP-+PzPLzP0
9tR-vL-+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
With a typical, active IQP position, Chabanon,J-Kasparov,G/FRA tt 1993, this should be compared
with [A20].
King's English - 3 g3 g6 [A24]
1 c4 ¤f6 2 ¤c3 g6 3 g3 ¥g7 4 ¥g2 0–0 5 e4

XIIIIIIIIY
9rsnlwq-trk+0
9zppzppzppvlp0
9-+-+-snp+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+P+P+-+0
9+-sN-+-zP-0
9PzP-zP-zPLzP0
9tR-vLQmK-sNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
This is a Botvinnik System.

5 d3 d6 6 e3
a) 6 ¤f3 e5 7 0–0 ¤c6 is the mainline, see [A26]. (7...¤bd7 is considered in Kosikov,A-
Solomaha,A/Kiev UKR 2005. 7...¤h5 8 e4 ¤c6 9 ¥g5! Rotstein,A-Scharrer,P/Verona ITA 2006.
7...c6 Petrosian,T-Jobava,B/Abu Dhabi 2015.)
b) 6 e4 is possible here, too and will transpose below.
6...e5 7 ¤ge2 This setup was a favourite of Staunton. 7...c6 In this typical position, Black normally
prefers to play his knight to c6, but controlling d5 thus, is a good idea. 8 0–0 (8 e4!? is a curious
line, White plays a Botvinnik System with a tempo down, 8...¤a6 9 0–0 ¤h5 10 ¥e3 and White
will play for d4, Gurevich,M-Lanzani,M/St Vincent ITA 2004.) 8...d5!? Very ambitious, but rarely
played, normally Black prefers careful preparation, Bruzon,L-De la Paz,F/Santa Clara CUB 2000.
5...d6 6 ¤ge2 e5 7 0–0 ¤bd7

Flexible.
7...¥e6 8 d3 £d7 9 ¤d5 (9 f4 ¥h3?! 10 f5! White inaugurates a flank advance by h3, g4 and g5,
Motwani,P-Apicella,M/Noyon FRA 2005) 9...¤xd5?! Biocanin,G-Rankov,P/Belgrade SCG 2005
7...c6 8 d3 ¥e6?! this is asking for f5. (Two better lines are 8...¤bd7, transposing to 7...bd7, and
8...a6 9 b4 b5 Jones,G-Adhiban,B/Atlantic City 2016.) 9 f4!? (9 h3! first makes sense, also
preparing e3) 9...£b6+ 10 ¢h1 ¤g4 11 f5 with a potent kingside space advantage, Sareen,V-
Ahlers,B/Hoogeveen NED 2005.
7...¤c6 would transpose to [A26].
8 d3 c6
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwq-trk+0
9zpp+n+pvlp0
9-+pzp-snp+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+P+-+0
9+-sNP+-zP-0
9PzP-+NzPLzP0
9tR-vLQ+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
The basic position. White would like to play standard moves like h3, e3, and d4. Failing that, an
alternate idea is f4–f5 and an advance on the kingside.
9 h3 ¤c5
9...a6 10 a4 a5 11 f4 Contin,D-Sabia,C/Montecatini Terme ITA 2005 (x2).
10 ¥e3 £e7 11 £d2 ¤fd7 12 f4 ¤e6 13 f5

and Black was crushed on the kingside, Harikrishna,P-Poldauf,D/Bindlach GER 2007.
King's English - 2 Nc3 Nc6 various 3rd [A25]
1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤c6
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqkvlntr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+n+-+-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-sN-+-+-0
9PzP-zPPzPPzP0
9tR-vLQmKLsNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
By taking firm control of d4, Black hopes to stop White from playing in the centre with d4, and thus
keep the position closed. This can transpose to the main line after the further 3 f3 f6, but White
normally plays
3 g3
To control d5, when play reaches a Closed English.
Otherwise, 3 e3!? is an unusual move, 3...¤f6 (3...g6 4 d4 d6 5 d5 ¤ce7 6 f4?! I'm not sure what the
point of this is, Timman,J-Jussupow,A/Wolvega NED 2006) 4 £c2!? (I don't like 4 d4 due to
4...¥b4 5 d5 ¥xc3+ 6 bxc3 ¤e7 aiming for a Nimzo-style position, but White has other ideas,
examine Korchnoi,V-Kasparov,G/Zurich SUI 2001. 4 g4!? Carlsen,M-Vachier Lagrave,M/Leuven
2017.) 4...d5 5 cxd5 ¤b4!? Vallejo Pons,F-Smirin,I/Biel SUI 2002.
3...¤f6
Normal.
3...f5 4 ¥g2 ¤f6 5 d3 this is the safest, (5 e3 is more ambitious, 5...d5!? (5...e4!? 6 d3 ¥b4 7 ¤ge2
d5 Shankland,S-Sasikiran,K/Matanzas CUB 2017.) 6 cxd5! best, (6 ¤xd5 ¤xd5 7 cxd5 ¤b4 8 d3
(8 e4 £f6?! This is not sufficiently forcing, see Filippov,V-Volzhin,A/Merida MEX 2000.) 8...c6!
(8...£f6!? to a6 is also interesting. 8...¤xd5 transposes below.) 9 a3?! £a5) 6...¤b4 the thematic
point, Black threatens to recapture on d5, but also to check on d3, exploiting the slight weakening
of the white light squares on White's fifth move, 7 d3 ¤bxd5 (now 7...c6?! is met by 8 e4! cxd5 9
a3 with advantage, Kosten,A-Tawil,A, Clermont-Ferrand 2016.) 8 ¤xd5 ¤xd5 9 ¤f3 with an
edge to White, Grischuk,A-Cobbers,M/Mainz 2005.) 5...¥c5 (5...¥b4 6 ¤f3 (6 ¥d2) 6...¥xc3+ 7
bxc3 d6 8 0–0 (8 £b3 ¦b8 Almasi,Z-Vallejo Pons,F/Havana CUB 2014.) 8...0–0 9 ¦b1 £e8 "with
a typical Dutch attack" - Alex. 10 ¤e1 heading for d5, Goganov,A-Khismatullin,D/Samara 2014.)
6 e3 f4?! an interesting, if doubtful, pawn sacrifice, 7 exf4 0–0 8 ¤ge2 d6 9 0–0 good, (but I
recommend 9 h3 £e8 10 ¤e4 in my book) 9...£e8 10 ¤e4! (10 ¤a4?! ¥d4 11 ¤xd4 exd4
Saidy,A-Fischer,R, New York-ch 1969, a classic game.) 10...¤xe4 11 dxe4 see Miezis,N-
Simonsen,O/Gausdal NOR 2003.
3...¥c5!? 4 ¥g2 a6 5 e3 d6 6 ¤ge2 ¥a7 the modern approach, (6...¤ge7 7 0–0 0–0 Hanreck,A-
Rowson,J/Warsaw 2008.) 7 ¦b1 (7 a3 h5 Aronian,L-Nakamura,H/Stavanger 2015.) 7...h5!?
Hansen,C-Rasmussen,A/Svendborg DEN 2015.
3...¥b4!? A newish idea, planning to double the white c-pawns. This move is becoming popular, the
idea is to delay the development of the g8–knight so that it may go to e7 (instead of the habitual f6),
or Black may be able to play first ...f5, and only then ...f6. 4 ¤d5 Obviously the critical reply. (4
¥g2 transposes to a later line.) 4...¥c5 5 ¥g2 ¤ge7 6 e3 0–0 7 ¤e2 Balashov,Y-Najer,E/Elista
RUS 2000.
4 ¥g2 ¥b4
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqk+-tr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+n+-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-vlP+-+-+0
9+-sN-+-zP-0
9PzP-zPPzPLzP0
9tR-vLQmK-sNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
4...¥c5 is the major alternative, 5 a3 to control the b4–square,

a) as the obvious 5 e3!? which is by far the most common, allows 5...d5! (5...d6 6 ¤ge2 ¥f5 7 d4
Macieja,B-Pavlidis,A/Porto Rio 2014.) 6 cxd5 ¤b4 threatening both ...d3+, and to recuperate
the d5–pawn, 7 d4 (7 ¤f3!? is interesting, see Ivanchuk,V-Svidler,P/Astana KAZ 2012.) 7...exd4
8 exd4 ¥e7 9 ¤ge2 (9 d6!?) 9...¤bxd5 (9...¥f5?! 10 0–0 ¤c2 11 g4! ¥g6 12 f4!! a powerful
novelty that refutes the variation see Rogozenko,D-Parligras,M/Lasi ROM 1999) 10 £b3 c6 11 0–
0 0–0 equal, Sarakauskas,G-Kiik,K/Jyvaskyla FIN 2006
b) 5 d3 and
c) 5 ¤f3 transpose to a 4 Knights.
5...a5 (5...a6 might be better, 6 e3 ¥a7 7 ¤ge2 d6 8 b4 see Nakamura,H-Grandelius,N/Caleta 2015.
5...¥d4!? is a speciality of Julian Hodgson. 6 £c2 a very sensible reply, the Scottish GM wishes to
avoid doubled c-pawns, and so defends c3 with his queen, 6...¥xc3 7 £xc3 d5 McNab,C-
Hodgson,J/London ENG 2000.) 6 e3 0–0 7 ¤ge2 d6 8 0–0 (8 d3 is more flexible,) 8...¥f5 (8...¦e8 9
d4 ¥a7 10 h3 Psakhis,L-Janev,E/Ubeda ESP 2001.) 9 d4 ¥a7 10 h3! Kosten,A-Velten,P/Saint-
Quentin FRA 2014.
5 e4
5 ¤f3 could transpose into the Four Knights.
5 ¤d5 is my preference, 5...¥c5 6 e3 (6 d3 provokes 6...h6 7 e3 0–0 8 ¤e2 a6 9 0–0 Rustemov,A-
Mchedlishvili,M/Germany 2013.) 6...¤xd5 7 cxd5 ¤e7 (7...¤b4!? is worse, but you should know
why, see Watson,J-Enhbat,T/Seattle USA 2003) 8 b4 led to a crushing tactical victory for White in
Christiansen,L-Charbonneau,P/Richmond CAN 2002.
5...¥xc3 6 bxc3 0–0 7 ¤e2 d6 8 d3

XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwq-trk+0
9zppzp-+pzpp0
9-+nzp-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+P+-+0
9+-zPP+-zP-0
9P+-+NzPLzP0
9tR-vLQmK-+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
8...¤e8
After 8...a6 9 a4! is the right move, in my view, keeping a lid on the black queenside counterplay.
9...¤e8 10 0–0 f5 11 ¦b1?! Cekro,E-Georgiev,K/Istanbul TUR 2000.
9 0–0 f5
Black plays the same plan as in the Nimzovich Variation (1 c4 e5 2 c3 f6 3 f3 c6 4 e4), but
here the white knight is on e2, instead of f3, and this may prove important.
10 exf5 ¥xf5 11 h3! ¥e6 12 f4

Rahman,Z-Korchnoi,V/Calcutta IND 2000.
Closed English - 2 Nc3 Nc6 3 g3 g6 [A25]
1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤c6 3 g3 g6 4 ¥g2 ¥g7

XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqk+ntr0
9zppzpp+pvlp0
9-+n+-+p+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-sN-+-zP-0
9PzP-zPPzPLzP0
9tR-vLQmK-sNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
4...d6!? is a rare line, trying to speed-up the queenside development, 5 ¦b1 (5 d3 ¥e6 6 b4 £d7 7
b5 Navara,D-Ledger,A/Wokefield Park ENG 2007) 5...¥e6 6 b4! see Dorfman,J-
Libiszewski,F/Monte Carlo MNC 2004.
5 ¦b1
A popular and flexible line for White, who initiates queenside play before deciding how best to
develop his kingside.
5 e3 is another good move, this set-up was a favourite of Staunton, 5...d6 (5...f5 6 ¤ge2 ¤f6 7 d3 0–
0 8 b3 e4?! was roughly treated in Kosten,A-Touzane,O/Montpellier 2002) 6 ¤ge2 h5 this
aggressive response, is very popular, and White has to know how to handle it. (6...¥e6 is similar to
the 5 Be3 line that is currently 'all the rage' in the Closed Sicilian, 7 d4! the critical reply offering a
temporary pawn sac, see Pelletier,Y-Hansen,S/Bremen GER 2003, 6...¤ge7 is common, keeping
the f-pawn's route forward free, but is the knight well-placed here? 7 d3 h5 8 h3 see Movsesian,S-
Acs,P/Tripoli LBA 2004, 6...f5 7 d3 ¤f6 8 0–0 0–0 9 ¦b1 is Adianto,U-Sorbe,S/Kuala Lumpur
MAS 2005) 7 d4 White replies in the centre, in classical fashion. (7 h4 is the most radical solution
to the problem of stopping the advance of the black h-pawn, although it weakens g4, 7...¥g4 8
b4!? a sharp innovation, attacking straightaway on the queenside, Seirawan,Y-Kriventsov,S/Seattle
USA 2002.) 7...h4 (or 7...exd4 8 ¤xd4 ¤ge7 9 ¤de2?! h4 The critical reply, before White can play
h3, or h4, Hansen,C-Hodgson,J/Hamburg GER 2001.) 8 d5 Gaining space, and taking play into a
type of KI position. 8...¤ce7 9 e4 f5 10 ¥g5 Hulak,K-Almasi,Z/Pula CRO 2001.
5 e4 Aims for a Botvinnik, 5...d6 6 ¤ge2 ¤ge7 7 0–0?! In the light of what follows, this may be
premature. 7...h5 A new move here, although quite common in similar Botvinnik positions. 8 h4
White wants to stop the further advance of the h-pawn, of course. 8...¤d4 9 ¤xd4? exd4 10 ¤e2
g5! Franco Ocampos,Z-Akopian,V/Linares ESP 2001.
5...a5
A normal response, stopping b4 at the cost of a slight weakening of the b5–square.
5...f5 Typical reversed Closed Sicilian play: Black expands on the kingside, but concedes the
queenside to White. 6 d3 (6 b4 a6 7 a4 ¤f6 8 b5 The White queenside initiative is well advanced,
but he has yet to complete his kingside development. 8...axb5 9 axb5 ¤e7 Georgiev,K-
Sokolov,I/Sarajevo BIH 2001.) 6...¤f6 (6...d6 7 b4 ¤f6 8 e3 0–0 transposes below.) 7 b4 (7 e3 0–0
8 ¤ge2 a6 An interesting move, whose point becomes clear later. 9 b4 see Rogozenko,D-
Sadler,M/NED-chT, Hengelo NED 2000, for the interesting continuation.) 7...0–0 8 e3 d6 9 ¤ge2
g5 10 b5 ¤e7 11 f4 exf4 (11...h6 Moor,R-Gallagher,J/Zurich SUI 2000.) 12 exf4 g4 13 0–0
Aronian,L-Duda,J/Batumi Chess Olympiad 2018.
6 a3
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqk+ntr0
9+pzpp+pvlp0
9-+n+-+p+0
9zp-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9zP-sN-+-zP-0
9-zP-zPPzPLzP0
9+RvLQmK-sNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
White continues his queenside expansion, although he can also delay this and hope to exploit the
slight weakness on b5.
6 e3 d6 7 ¤ge2 ¤ge7 (7...h5!? An aggressive move that is popular in similar positions. 8 h3 f5!? 9
h4! Obviously White has to play this before Black plays ...h4 himself, Dorfman,J-
Kishnev,S/Solingen GER 2001.) 8 d3 0–0 9 0–0 Spangenberg,H-Slipak,S/Buenos Aires ARG 1999.
6 d3 d6 7 e3 (7 a3 will transpose to the mainline) 7...f5 8 ¤ge2 ¤f6 9 b3 0–0 10 ¥b2 Gurevich,M-
Gagunashvili,M/Batumi GEO 2002, is typical of play in this line.
6...d6
6...¤f6 7 b4 (7 e3 0–0 8 ¤ge2 d6 9 d3 ¤e7!? aiming to play ...c7–c6 and ...d6–d5, Ivanov,A-
Razuvaev,Y/Ashkhabad 1978, 10 d4!) 7...axb4 8 axb4 d6 9 d3 0–0 10 b5 Davies,N-
Tebb,D/England 1997.
7 b4 axb4 8 axb4 ¤ge7
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqk+-tr0
9+pzp-snpvlp0
9-+nzp-+p+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-zPP+-+-+0
9+-sN-+-zP-0
9-+-zPPzPLzP0
9+RvLQmK-sNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
9 d3
9 e3 ¥f5 (9...0–0) 10 d3 £d7 11 h3 Chabanon,J-Godard,M/Marseille 2010.
9...0–0 10 ¤f3
10 e3
10...¤d4
Davies,N-Sadler,M/London 1991.
Closed English - 3 g3 g6 4 Bg2 Bg7 5 d3 d6
[A26]
1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤c6 3 g3 g6 4 ¥g2 ¥g7 5 d3 d6 6 e4

XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqk+ntr0
9zppzp-+pvlp0
9-+nzp-+p+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+P+-+0
9+-sNP+-zP-0
9PzP-+-zPLzP0
9tR-vLQmK-sNR0
xiiiiiiiiy
Botvinnik's set-up is a good line when Black plays ...e5. The g2–bishop's h1–a8 diagonal is only
likely to be closed temporarily, as Black nearly always plays ...f5 at some point, when White's reply
e4xf5 will re-open it. Note that this line is also considered in the 'Botvinnik Special'.
6 ¤f3 is a major alternative, 6...¤f6 (6...f5 7 0–0 ¤f6 (7...h6!? 8 ¦b1 g5!? is crude, but dangerous,
Lyanguzov,O-Klimov,S/Pardubice CZE 2006) 8 ¦b1 (8 ¤d5!? unusual, but a good way to defuse
Black's attacking setup, Mulyar,M-Revesz,Z/Philadelphia USA 2006) 8...h6 9 b4 a6!? 10 a4 0–0 11
b5 axb5 12 axb5 ¤e7 13 ¥b2 ¥e6 (13...g5 Neiksans,A-Inarkiev,E/Germany 2016.) 14 £b3 b6 15
¦a1 ¦c8! following Spassky's example, see Roberts,P-Rowson,J/Edinburgh SCO 2009) 7 0–0 0–0 8
¦b1
a) 8 ¥g5 h6 9 ¥xf6 ¥xf6 aims for a good knight on d5 versus the dark-squared bishop, but it may
be premature, 10 ¦b1 a5 11 a3 ¤e7 (11...¥g7 12 ¤d2 ¦e8 Nikolaev,L-Cyborowski,L/Krakow
POL 2004) 12 b4 axb4 13 axb4 ¥g7 and White soon fell into a trap in Cebalo,M-
Tkachiev,V/Rabac CRO 2003
b) 8 b3 ¤d4 9 ¤d2 c6 10 e3 ¤e6 11 ¥b2 ¤c5 12 £c2 a5 Kramnik,V-Ding,L/FIDE Berlin
Candidates 2018.
8...a5 (8...h6 to stop g5, 9 b4 a6 10 a4 ¤e7!? Vachier Lagrave,M-Aronian,L/Bilbao ESP 2013.) 9
a3 normal, White continues his queenside play, (9 h3!? is a very unusual move, Gurevich,M-
Shirov,A/New Delhi IND 2000.) 9...¥f5 10 ¤d2 £d7 11 ¦e1 ¥h3 White attacks on the queenside,
Black on the kingside, Yudin,S-Stellwagen,D/Heraklio GRE 2004.
6...¤ge7
Keeping the f-pawn's path open.
6...¤f6 Often arises from KID move-orders. 7 ¤ge2 0–0 (7...¥e6 8 ¤d5 ¤d7 Tatisic,M-
Blesic,V/Belgrade SCG 2005) 8 0–0 ¥e6 Normal,
a) 8...¤d7!? Black plans to bring his knight to c5, and then possibly to e6, to control d4. 9 ¤d5 (9
¥e3?! ¤d4! Kokarev,D-Levin,E/Samara 2014.) 9...¤c5 10 b4 Taking the opportunity of gaining
some space on the queenside. 10...¤e6 11 ¥b2 Kosten,A-Lilley,G/Scarborough ENG 1999.
b) 8...¤d4!? 9 ¤xd4 exd4 such a position with a 'dead point' on d4 is usually held to favour
White's mobile kingside pawns but any advance is difficult to achieve, since ...f5 will be available,
Prusikin,M-Schunk,E/Altenkirchen GER 2005.
9 ¤d5 (9 f4 is probably best, threatening f5.) 9...¤d7 10 ¥e3 Bruzon,L-Kempinski,R/Linares ESP
2001.
6...f5 is aggressive, 7 ¤ge2 ¤f6 (7...¤ge7 transposes to the mainline.) 8 0–0 0–0 (I think 8...fxe4?! is
premature, Kosten,A-Renner,C/Munich 2002.) 9 ¤d5 (9 h3 allows 9...f4! Roca,A-
Peralta,E/Pinamar ARG 2005, 9 ¦b1 ¥e6 10 ¤d5 £d7 11 b4 ¤d8 this sort of reorganisation is a
normal idea, intending ...c6 to expel or trade off the knight, Ledger,A-Rendle,T/Cork IRL 2005)
9...¥e6 (9...¤e7!? is possible, see Belotti,B-Collutiis,D/Montecatini Terme ITA 2002, 9...¤xd5 10
cxd5 ¤e7 11 f4!? his activates Black's bishop on g7, Paunovic,D-Marholev,D/San Sebastian ESP
2005) 10 ¥g5 £d7 11 £d2 ¦f7 12 f3!? A new move in this position, although the plan is a typical
one. (For me, the most logical is 12 ¦ae1 ¦af8 13 f4!? White decides to allow a hanging pawns
structure, but Black is well-placed to handle this, see Miezis,N-Rustemov,A/Tallinn EST 2001.)
12...¦af8 13 ¦ac1 fxe4 14 dxe4 This capture leads to a favourable structure for White, Psakhis,L-
Danielsen,H/Torshavn FAI 2000.
6...¤d4 is well met by 7 ¤ge2 ¥g4 8 h3! ¥f3 (8...¤f3+?? 9 ¢f1) 9 ¥xf3 ¤xf3+ 10 ¢f1 ¤e7 11
¢g2 with a plus, Kasparov,G-Paehtz,E/Munich GER 2002.
7 ¤ge2 0–0
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwq-trk+0
9zppzp-snpvlp0
9-+nzp-+p+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+P+-+0
9+-sNP+-zP-0
9PzP-+NzPLzP0
9tR-vLQmK-+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
7...h5!? is more risky: 8 h4 (The best reply, White doesn't want to place too many pawns on light
squares by 8 h3?! h4 9 g4) 8...0–0 (8...¥e6 9 ¥g5 f6 10 ¥e3 £d7 11 ¤d5 is similar, and is
examined in the excellent game Bareev,E-Azmaiparashvili,Z/Shenyang CHN 2000.) 9 0–0 ¥g4 10
f3 ¥e6 11 ¤d5 £d7 12 ¥g5 f6 13 ¥e3 A typical main line position is reached, except that the two
sides have advanced their h-pawns two squares, Miezis,N-Seirawan,Y/Istanbul TUR 2000.
7...a6 8 h4 h6 9 ¤d5 b5 10 0–0 0–0 Vachier Lagrave,M-Mamedov,R/Novi Sad 2016.
8 0–0 f5
8...¤d4!? This appears to be a respectable alternative, 9 ¤xd4 exd4 10 ¤e2 a5!? This move shows
some thought. As White needs to play b4 at some point, either to attack the d4–pawn, or to deflect
the c5–pawn (if Black plays ...c5), Black simply stops it! Zueger,B-Gallagher,J/Pontresina SUI
2000.
9 ¤d5 ¥e6
These last two moves are often played in the other order, but it changes nothing.
9...h6!? 10 ¥e3 g5!? An innovation, planning a kingside pawn avalanche, but White should be well-
placed to handle this. 11 ¤xe7+ ¤xe7 Black needs to be able to recapture on f5 with a knight. 12
exf5 ¤xf5 Kharlov,A-Popov,V/Kazan RUS 2001.
10 ¥e3
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+-wq-trk+0
9zppzp-sn-vlp0
9-+nzpl+p+0
9+-+Nzpp+-0
9-+P+P+-+0
9+-+PvL-zP-0
9PzP-+NzPLzP0
9tR-+Q+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
10...h6!? 11 £d2 ¢h7 12 ¦ac1

With less pressure on his kingside White is free to start his queenside play, Miezis,N-
Praytino,S/Jakarta INA 2001.
Closed English - 3 Nf3 ... [A27]
1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤c6 3 ¤f3 g6

3...f5 4 d4 (4 g3 ¤f6 (4...d6 5 d4 e4 6 d5 ¤e5 7 ¤xe5 dxe5 8 g4!? Aronian,L-Short,N/Tradewise
Gibraltar Masters 2018. 4...e4 5 ¤h4) 5 d4 e4 6 ¤h4 hitting f5, this route seems more interesting
for White than the g5–h3–f4 that is often seen in similar structures, 6...g6 (6...d5 7 ¥g5 Li,C-
Landa,K/Germany 2014.) 7 ¥g5 ¥g7 see Donchenko,A-Sargissian,G/London 2017.) 4...e4 5 d5
This is considered a harmless continuation, and leads to multiple exchanges, (5 ¤g5) 5...exf3 6
dxc6 fxg2 7 cxd7+ £xd7 8 ¥xg2 (8 £xd7+ ¥xd7 9 ¥xg2 is nothing, Vitiugov,N-
Blagojevic,D/Plovdiv BUL 2008) 8...£xd1+ 9 ¢xd1 (9 ¤xd1 retains the option of castling on
either side.) 9...c6 10 ¥f4 (10 ¢c2 looks fairly level, Ghaem Maghami,E-Agdestein,S/Calvia ESP
2004) 10...¤f6 11 e3 see Schlindwein,R-Bareev,E/Luebeck GER 2001.
4 d4
This is the best reply to Black's third move, before he has time to play ...g7 to control d4.
4...exd4 5 ¤xd4 ¥g7 6 ¤xc6

Doubling the black pawns assures White a positional advantage, but Black will always have active
pieces in compensation.
6...bxc6
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqk+ntr0
9zp-zpp+pvlp0
9-+p+-+p+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-sN-+-+-0
9PzP-+PzPPzP0
9tR-vLQmKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
7 g3 ¤e7 8 ¥g2 d6 9 0–0
9 ¥g5!? f6 10 ¥f4 ¥e6 hitting c4, 11 c5!? Urban,K-Krasenkow,M/Warsaw POL 2001.
9...0–0 10 £c2
10 ¥g5 f6 Tony K criticized this move in his book on the 1 c4 e5 English, but it has been played
several times, even by rather strong players. (Nevertheless, 10...¦b8 is still considered best and is
played far more frequently.) 11 ¥f4 ¦b8 12 c5 see Seirawan,Y-Kritz,L/Netherlands NED 2007.
10...¥f5!? 11 e4 ¥e6 12 c5!

This led to instructive play in Bruzon,L-Quezada,Y/Santa Clara CUB 2002.
Four Knights - 3 Nf3 Nc6 Various 4th [A28]
1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤f6 3 ¤f3 ¤c6

XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqkvl-tr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+n+-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-sN-+N+-0
9PzP-zPPzPPzP0
9tR-vLQmKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
The main move may be 4 g3, fianchettoing the light-squared bishop, but there are also important
alternatives here, all leading to completely different play. Indeed, many players prefer to shy clear
of the vast body of theory that has built up in the 4 g3 main lines, and I myself have enjoyed a lot
more success with these rarer alternatives.
4 a3
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqkvl-tr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+n+-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9zP-sN-+N+-0
9-zP-zPPzPPzP0
9tR-vLQmKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
An odd little, Najdorf-style move. White prepares b4, and stops Black from playing ... b4, which
can be so annoying in other lines.
Others:
4 e4
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqkvl-tr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+n+-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+P+-+0
9+-sN-+N+-0
9PzP-zP-zPPzP0
9tR-vLQmKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
Nimzovich's move, White takes a firm hold of the d5–square at the cost of conceding d4. 4...¥b4
Black's main move, but I personally feel that this gives White reasonable chances, Black probably
doesn't want to capture on c3, but instead play ...c5 without allowing the xe5 trick, but it is
time-wasting. (4...¥c5! I think that this is Black's best move although it has often been dismissed
by theory, but unjustly so, because of the continuation: 5 ¤xe5 ¤xe5 (5...0–0!? is speculative,
Ye,R-Al Modiahki,M/Xiapu CHN 2005.) 6 d4 ¥b4 7 dxe5 ¤xe4 8 £d3!? Onischuk's move, (8
£f3!? Tony Kosten's 'Roll the Dice' suggestion in 'DW: Flank Openings', see Bacrot,E-
Tabatabaei,M/Nakhchivan 2015. 8 £d4 is the mainline by far.) 8...¤xc3 9 bxc3 ¥a5 10 ¥a3 which
is examined in Onischuk,A-Baklan,V/Solingen GER 1998. (10 f4? is an unfortunate innovation,
which was ruthlessly exploited by Black in Williams,S-Rowson,J/London ENG 2001.)) 5 d3 d6 6
g3 (6 ¥e2!? is unusual, 6...h6 7 0–0 ¥c5 Taking immediate control of d4. 8 ¤d2!? A new idea in
this rare position- White intends to play b3, h1, and f4, with a kingside advance. 8...¤d4 9
¤b3 Morozevich,A-Adams,M/Dortmund GER 2001. 6 a3 ¥c5 7 b4 ¥b6 8 ¤a4 goes for the
bishop pair, Pantsulaia,L-Korobov,A/Kocaeli 2017.) 6...¥c5 Now that the e5–pawn is firmly
supported by the d6–pawn, Black can safely play this move. (6...h6!? 7 ¥g2 ¥xc3+ Black opts to
double the white pawns, but it concedes the bishop pair, and allows White to regain control of d4, 8
bxc3 ¥e6 9 ¤d2! see Ehlvest,J-Harikrishna,P/Hyderabad IND 2002. 6...¥g4 not worrying about
the bishop pair if it means better control over White's weakness on d4, 7 h3 ¥xf3 8 £xf3 ¤d4 9
£d1 c6 10 ¥g2 0–0 11 0–0 ¥c5! with good chances, Bu,X-Bacrot,E/Turin ITA 2006.) 7 ¥g2 ¤d4
8 ¤xd4 ¥xd4 So, Black has achieved his goal, his bishop is firmly established on d4. The problem
is that this has taken several moves to achieve, and that the 'victory' might be a temporary one-
White can still fight for, and win, control of d4 when he will have a space advantage, see my game
Kosten,A-Farago,I/Amantea 1992, which won the brilliancy prize.
4 d4
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqkvl-tr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+n+-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+PzP-+-+0
9+-sN-+N+-0
9PzP-+PzPPzP0
9tR-vLQmKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
Many years ago this was White's main line, but had fallen into disuse when Black found good
equalising methods. It has become popular again recently, presumably because Black had forgotten
the best lines, indeed I have scored 100% with this line in the last few years, against strong
opposition, 4...exd4 (4...e4 is commonly thought to be a drawish alternative, 5 ¤g5 h6 6 ¤gxe4
¤xe4 7 ¤xe4 £h4 the point, Black will recuperate his pawn, 8 £d3?! (8 ¤c3 is equal) 8...d5! 9
cxd5 ¤b4 10 £b1 ¥f5 11 ¤d6+ ¥xd6! (11...cxd6 12 £xf5 g6 13 £f4! Smirin,I-
Johannessen,L/Istanbul TUR 2000) 12 £xf5 g6 13 £b1 £xd4 with a strong initiative,
Kovacevic,B-Zelcic,R/Bizovac 2001.) 5 ¤xd4 ¥b4 planning to double the white c-pawns, 6 ¥g5
White aims to make Black pay for the absence of his dark-squared bishop from e7, and this still
causes the unprepared opponent plenty of problems, (alternatively 6 g3 is a newish idea, looking for
a position resembling that of the 4 g3 Nimzo-Indian. 6...0–0 7 ¥g2 ¥xc3+ Black 'jumps before he
is pushed', and decides that he would prefer the better pawn structure to the bishop pair, (7...¤e5 8
0–0!? sacrifices a pawn for the initiative, Onischuk,A-Andriasian,Z/Khanty-Mansiysk RUS 2007)
8 bxc3 ¤e5 Seirawan,Y-Van Wely,L/Elista RUS 1998. This line may disappear again, pretty soon,
unless White finds some improvement against the powerful black plan here) 6...h6 7 ¥h4 0–0!? is a
critical line, Black plays dynamically and aims for a lead in development. The reason I gave-up
playing 4 d4 was this sharp line for Black - I couldn't find anything for White: (7...¥xc3+ is the old
positional line, 8 bxc3 ¤e5 (8...0–0 can transpose.) 9 e3 (a modest move, but possibly better than
the 'standard' 9 f4 which is the main line, 9...¤g6 10 ¥xf6 £xf6 11 g3 Nevednichy,V-Labib,I/New
Delhi IND 2000. 9 f3!? offers a pawn, Sulskis,S-Socko,B/Porto Carras GRE 2011.) 9...0–0 10 f3 a
perfectly normal move in such positions, White controls e4, and prepares an escape route for his
queen's bishop, should Black threaten it, (otherwise 10 ¤b5!? is a sharp possibility, 10...d6 A good
reaction, Black ignores the threat, and continues his development. 11 ¥xf6 £xf6 12 ¤xc7 leading
to a festival of fireworks, Filippov,V-Svidler,P/Tomsk RUS 2001.) 10...d6 11 ¥e2 £e7 12 0–0
White's development might seem unimposing, but his two bishops and mobile e and f-pawns are
ready for action: Zvjaginsev,V-Van Wely,L/Tilburg NED 1998.) 8 ¦c1 White doesn't give Black a
second chance to double the pawns. (8 e3 can allow a transposition to the last line, or Black can try
8...¦e8 9 ¥e2 (9 ¤xc6 is a rare line, see Naiditsch,A-Savchenko,S/Baku 2007) 9...¤e5 as in
Simutowe,A-Sokolov,I/Tripoli LBA 2004, when 10 £b3! is best.) 8...¦e8 (8...¤xd4!? is a
relatively recent idea, Black tries to gain a tempo, 9 £xd4 g5 10 ¥g3 c5 with sharp complications,
Solleveld,M-Sutovsky,E/Amsterdam NED 2002) 9 e3 ¤xd4! Black draws the white queen to an
exposed square, 10 £xd4 c5! 11 £d1 g5 this is examined in Gurevich,M-Bareev,E/Wijk aan Zee
NED 2002.
4 d3 is less interesting than the various alternatives, 4...d5 (4...¥b4 5 ¥d2 0–0 (5...£e7!? 6 e3 0–0 7
¥e2 ¥xc3 8 ¥xc3 d5 with good play in the instructive game Gritsak,O-Sokolov,I/Halkidiki GRE
2002.) 6 e3 d5 (6...¦e8 is Ghaem Maghami,E-Hernandez,H/Calvia ESP 2006) 7 cxd5 ¤xd5 This
type of Sicilian Reversed never seems to give Black any problems, but it is very unbalanced and can
lead to a full fledged game, Bischoff,K-Pert,N/Liverpool ENG 2006.) 5 cxd5 ¤xd5 6 e4 looks like
a Boleslavsky Variation with the colours reversed, (6 e3 ¥e7 7 ¥e2 is another reversed Sicilian
structure, Morozevich,A-Gelfand,B/Moscow RUS 2009) 6...¤b6 (6...¤f6 Morozevich,A-
Grischuk,A/Mexico City MEX 2007) 7 ¥e2 ¥e7 8 0–0 0–0 9 a4 ¥e6!? 10 ¥e3 ¤d7!? aiming for
b3, with a good position for Black, Carlsen,M-Topalov,V/Morelia/Linares MEX/ESP 2008.
4...d5
Transposition to a reversed Sicilian thus, is perfectly viable, and may appeal to 1 e4 players.
Alternatively:
Perhaps 4...g6 is the most sensible reply, though, preparing the kingside fianchetto, when
transposition to slower lines with 5 g3 is the normal preference, (5 d4!? is quite a logical move that
only surfaced just recently, under the aegis of Korchnoi, White profits from the fact that Black can
no longer play a later ... b4. But will a3 prove a useful move later-on? 5...exd4 6 ¤xd4 ¥g7 7
¥g5 the most aggressive, White limits Black's possibilities with this pin, Korchnoi,V-Salov,V/St
Petersburg 1997, 5 e3 ¥g7 6 d3 0–0 7 ¥e2 looks innocuous, but worked well in Milov,V-Lopez
Martinez,J/Lugo ESP 2007) 5...¥g7 (5...d5 may be more accurate but transposes) 6 ¥g2 0–0 7 0–0
(7 d3!? h6 8 0–0 Gurevich,M-Plischki,S/Pardubice CZE 2003.) 7...d5 an interesting pawn sac,
(7...d6 8 d3 h6 9 ¦b1 resembles A26, but where a3 might prove to be a waste of time, see
Gelfand,B-Vachier Lagrave,M/Khanty-Mansiysk RUS 2009) 8 cxd5 ¤xd5 9 ¤xe5!? (9 ¤xd5
£xd5 10 d3 £b5! is supposed to be level, but see Moskow,E-Romanishin,O/Gausdal NOR 2006)
9...¤xc3 10 ¤xc6 ¤xe2+ 11 £xe2 bxc6 12 ¥xc6 ¦b8 with compensation, Ruck,R-
Romanishin,O/Lippstadt GER 2003.
4...e4!? is very sharp, 5 ¤g5 £e7 6 d3 exd3 7 e4!! an ambitious novelty, and very strong, (7 £xd3 is
the old move, seen in Delchev,A-Dabo Peranic,R/Bosnjaci CRO 2003) 7...h6 8 ¤f3 d5 9 cxd5
¤xe4 10 ¥e3 with advantage, see Beliavsky,A-Turov,M/Copenhagen DEN 2002.
4...h6!? is rare, 5 d3 d5 6 cxd5 ¤xd5 7 g3 with Reversed Dragon-style play, Kosten,A-
Ahmed,E/Cairo EGY 2003.
4...a5?! is mistaken, 5 d4 exd4 6 ¤xd4 g6? 7 ¤db5! exploiting the weakness of b5, Harikrishna,P-
Mamedyarov,S/Lausanne SUI 2005.
5 cxd5 ¤xd5 6 £c2

6 d3 ¥g4 7 e3 £d7 is a reversed Rauser position, Rowson,J-Ansell,S/Dresden GER 2009.
6...¥e7
6...¤xc3 7 bxc3 ¥d6 8 g3 £e7 9 d3 b6 10 ¥g2 ¥b7 11 0–0 ¤a5!? equalising in Korchnoi,V-
Rublevsky,S/Dagomys RUS 2008.
7 e3
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqk+-tr0
9zppzp-vlpzpp0
9-+n+-+-+0
9+-+nzp-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9zP-sN-zPN+-0
9-zPQzP-zPPzP0
9tR-vL-mKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
7...0–0
7...¤xc3 8 bxc3 0–0 9 d4 This is a basic position that arises time and again in the English Opening
and the Sicilian Defence (with colours reversed). After all these years I'm not sure if anyone knows
who stands better. It's probably dynamically equal, but one feels that with accurate play Black has
to be careful not to cede a positional advantage based upon White's extra central pawn. 9...¥d6 10
¥b2 Kovalyov,A-Cubas,J/Pinamar ARG 2006.
7...a6!? preventing White's f1–b5, 8 ¥c4!? (8 ¤xd5 £xd5 9 ¥d3!) 8...¤b6 9 ¥d3 £d7!?
Korchnoi,V-Spassky,B/Kalmykia RUS 2009.
8 ¥b5
Pressurising the e5–pawn, White profits from his extra tempo.
8 ¤xd5 £xd5 9 ¥d3!? ¢h8 10 ¥e4 £d6 11 £c3!? to try to prevent ...f5, Navara,D-
Rublevsky,S/Khanty-Mansiysk RUS 2007.
8...¥g4!?
Double-edged.
9 ¥xc6
The most logical.
9 ¥e2!? is odd, but won quickly in Matamoros Franco,C-Korneev,O/Seville ESP 2003.
9 £d3!? didn't look too impressive in Korchnoi,V-Rublevsky,S/Rethymnon GRE 2003.
9...¥xf3 10 ¥xb7!?
Or:
10 gxf3!? bxc6 11 b3 ¤xc3 12 dxc3?! White is clearly worried about tactics along the a1–h8
diagonal, but now he loses the pressure along the c-file, and Black's feeble c-pawns become less of
a problem. 12...£d5 Beim,V-Rublevsky,S/Frankfurt GER 2000.
10...¥xg2?!
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+-wq-trk+0
9zpLzp-vlpzpp0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-+nzp-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9zP-sN-zP-+-0
9-zPQzP-zPlzP0
9tR-vL-mK-+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
An exceedingly hopeful exchange sacrifice.
11 ¤xd5 ¥xd5 12 ¥xa8 ¥xa8

Harikrishna,P-Dao Thien,H/Calcutta IND 2000.
Four Knights - 4 e3 [A28]
1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤f6 3 ¤f3 ¤c6 4 e3

XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqkvl-tr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+n+-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-sN-zPN+-0
9PzP-zP-zPPzP0
9tR-vLQmKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
Preparing to expand in the centre with d4.
4...¥b4
Black's best reply, developing the kingside, and preparing to capture on c3, if necessary.
However, 4...¥e7 has proved very successful: 5 d4 (5 a3 0–0 6 b4 d5 Black is happy with a reversed
Sicilian position, Agrest,E-Anand,V/Villarrobledo ESP 2001.) 5...exd4 6 ¤xd4 0–0 7 ¥e2 d5!
Black aims for a kingside attack, see Filippov,V-Joachim,S/Rethymnon GRE 2003.
4...d5 is a Paulsen with reversed colours, 5 cxd5 ¤xd5 6 ¥b5 ¤xc3 7 bxc3 ¥d6 8 d4 see
Gajewski,G-Tomczak,J/Warsaw 2014.
5 £c2
To avoid the doubled pawns.
5 ¤d5!? is less popular nowadays, in fact White hopes to lure the e-pawn to its doom, but accepts a
disadvantage in development. 5...e4 The critical reply, and almost universally tried. 6 ¤g1 0–0 7 a3
¥d6 8 ¤e2 Miles,A-Kindermann,S/Biel 1983.
5...¥xc3
Black's safest choice, he concedes the bishop pair, but gains important time to get on with his
development.
5...0–0 allows the sharp reply 6 ¤d5 The only way to exploit Black's omission of ...xc3. This line
has become interesting once again for White after Miles introduced a particularly effective
innovation, but it now seems that this has been diffused: 6...¦e8 7 £f5!
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqr+k+0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+n+-sn-+0
9+-+NzpQ+-0
9-vlP+-+-+0
9+-+-zPN+-0
9PzP-zP-zPPzP0
9tR-vL-mKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
This odd move is still at the centre of the theoretical debate, although its heyday was after its
introduction in the late Seventies. Although behind in development, White moves his queen again,
but considers the threat to Black's pawn structure more important than the time lost, 7...d6 8 ¤xf6+
£xf6 Taking play into the ending, (8...gxf6 is also possible, 9 £c2!? e4 10 ¤g1 recommended by
Timman, (10 a3!? ¥c5 11 ¤g1 might be the most accurate.) 10...d5 11 a3 ¥f8 12 cxd5 £xd5 13
¤e2 ¥f5 (13...f5 Kharlov,A-Korotylev,A/Krasnodar RUS 2002, when 14 ¤f4 may be the best
square for the knight.) 14 b4!? Giri,A-Sunilduth Lyna,N/Doha QAT 2015.) 9 £xf6 gxf6 10 a3 (10
b3 is a more restrained approach, 10...a5 11 a3 ¥c5 Vladimirov,E-Harikrishna,P/Calcutta IND
2001.) 10...¥c5 11 b4 ¥b6 12 ¥b2 a5 An important move, weakening the proud white queenside
pawns. 13 b5 ¤e7 (13...¤d8!? is an alternative, 14 d4! ¥g4!? (14...a4!? was tried in Narciso
Dublan,M-Illescas Cordoba,M/Burgos ESP 2003) 15 c5! White attacks the pawn chain at its
weakest link, see the continuation in Karpov,A-Bacrot,E/Match g/5, Cannes FRA 2000.) 14 d4
Tony Miles' novelty, White expands bravely in the centre, and 'ignores' the possible disadvantages
of having his king on the same file as the black rook. (14 g4!? is another weapon in White's arsenal
in this position, White tries to fix the f-pawn. 14...¤g6 15 ¦g1 Bosboom,M-
Podgaets,M/Hoogeveen NED 1999.) 14...a4! Freeing the a5–square for the b6–bishop. (14...¤g6 15
a4 with an edge, Grischuk,A-Giri,A/Elancourt FRA 2013.) 15 0–0–0 ¤g6 Black bolsters the e5–
pawn. 16 ¤d2 (16 h4 is my suggested improvement, and this worked well in Fritz 6a-Junior
6/Cadaques 2000. 16 ¥e2!? is flexible, keeping the option to answer 16...¥g4 with 17 h3)
16...exd4 17 ¥xd4 The black kingside is feeble, but the pawns are difficult to attack, see Agrest,E-
Akopian,V/New York 1998.
5...£e7!? 6 ¤d5 ¤xd5 7 cxd5 e4 8 ¤g1!? ¤b8 9 £xc7 0–0 Black has development for a pawn and
White's pawn on d5 is weak, see Nogueiras,J-Harikrishna,P/Turin ITA 2006.
5...d6 6 a3 (6 ¤e2! a5 7 a3 ¥c5 8 b3 Karjakin,S-Vidit,S/Riyadh KSA 2017. 6 ¤d5 is the most
popular.) 6...¥xc3 7 £xc3 ¥g4 (7...e4! 8 ¤d4 ¤e5) 8 b4 0–0 9 ¥b2 Duda,J-Eljanov,P/Top 12
French Teams 2018.
6 £xc3
6 bxc3!? is a speciality of Suba, 6...d6 (6...0–0 7 d3 d6 8 ¥e2 Aronian,L-Matlakov,M/Tbilisi FIDE
World Cup 2017.) 7 e4 0–0 8 g3 h6 (8...¤h5 9 ¤h4 ¤e7 10 ¥e2 ¤f6 11 d3 ¤g6 12 ¤g2 ¥h3 13
¤e3 £d7 14 ¦g1! planning g4, see the brilliant Gajewski,G-Volokitin,A/Saint Quentin 2014.
8...¤e8 plays for the ...f7–f5 break, 9 ¤h4 ¤e7 10 d3 f5 Carlsen,M-Topalov,V/Shamkir Chess
2018.) 9 ¥g2 (9 d3 ¥e6 10 ¦b1 Lie,K-Hauge,L/Tromso NOR 2016.) 9...¥e6 10 d3 £c8 11 h3!?
So,W-Sevian,S/Douglas ENG 2018.
6...£e7 7 a3
Alternatively, there is:
7 ¥e2!? Agrest has made this move his speciality, he is simply happy to play a reversed Sicilian
structure with the two bishops. 7...0–0 (7...d5 8 0–0!? d4 9 exd4 exd4 10 £b3 0–0 Short,N-
Morozevich,A/Sarajevo BIH 2007) 8 d3 (8 0–0 d5 9 d4 exd4 10 ¤xd4 ¤xd4 11 £xd4 c5 This
position greatly resembles that reached after 7 a3, except that White has gained a bishop move for
pawn-a3, but it won't change much, Hansen,C-Dautov,R/Essen GER 2000.) 8...d5 9 cxd5 ¤xd5 10
£c2 ¤db4! (10...¥g4 see Agrest,E-Piket,J/Batumi GEO 1999) 11 £c3 ¥g4 which led to a quick
win for Black in Bukal,V-Olsen,H/Oslo NOR 2004.
7 d4 has seen a sudden flurry of top-level games, 7...¤e4 8 £d3 exd4 9 ¤xd4 0–0 (9...£b4+ can be
met by 10 ¥d2 ¤xd2 11 £xd2) 10 ¥e2 £b4+ 11 ¢f1 £e7 12 f3 Caruana,F-Ding,L/Batumi Chess
Olympiad 2018
7 b3!? d5 critical, (7...0–0 8 ¥b2 ¦e8 9 a3 a5 Caruana,F-Karjakin,S/Altibox Norway Chess 2018.) 8
d4 exd4 (8...¥f5 tries to quickly generate threats before White has completed his development, 9
dxe5 ¤e4 10 £b2 0–0–0 see Agdestein,S-Hammer,J/Xtracon Open 2018. 8...¤e4 is also critical.)
9 ¤xd4 ¤xd4 10 £xd4 c5 11 £f4 Vaibhav,S-Prithu,G/Biel SUI 2018.
7 d3 will likely transpose into the above lines.
7...d5
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+l+k+-tr0
9zppzp-wqpzpp0
9-+n+-sn-+0
9+-+pzp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9zP-wQ-zPN+-0
9-zP-zP-zPPzP0
9tR-vL-mKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
Here is the pay-back for Black, he gets to free his position, and obtains a reasonable Sicilian-style
position.
Otherwise: 7...a5!? Trying to stop b4, but it doesn't! 8 b3 (8 b4!) 8...d5 9 d4 see Kharlov,A-
Diu,V/Tomsk RUS 2001.
8 d4
The solid choice.
8 cxd5 is a more ambitious reply, 8...¤xd5 9 £b3 ¤b6 10 d3 a5 An interesting attempt at
embarrassing the white queen, and fixing the white queenside, (and probably the most accurate, for
if 10...0–0 then White can play 11 £c2! and answer 11...a5 with 12 b3, protecting his queenside
light squares.) 11 £c2!? a4 12 ¥d2 ¥e6!? Black aims for control of b3, but practice indicates that
the bishop is more effective on f5, i.e. (12...0–0 13 ¥e2 ¦d8 when Black has a simple plan, he will
pressurise the d3–pawn, and try to force the move e4, when d4 will provide a square for one of his
knights, see Morris,C-Komarov,D/Sremic Krsko SLO 1998.) 13 ¦c1 ¥b3 14 £c5 forcing the
exchange of queens, Van Wely,L-Rublevsky,S/Frankfurt GER 2000.
8...exd4 9 ¤xd4 ¤xd4

Standard, but perhaps Black should play 9...¤e5!? which is an innovation here, although the same
idea is quite common after 7...a5, Black wants more than the approximate equality of the main
move. 10 cxd5 ¤xd5 11 £c2 0–0 Black's extra space, and smooth development, are more than a
match for White's bishops, see Slobodjan,R-Georgiev,K/Ohrid MKD 2001.
10 £xd4
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+l+k+-tr0
9zppzp-wqpzpp0
9-+-+-sn-+0
9+-+p+-+-0
9-+PwQ-+-+0
9zP-+-zP-+-0
9-zP-+-zPPzP0
9tR-vL-mKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
10...0–0!?
The recent preference.
I like 10...c5 best, 11 £h4 ¥e6!? Another weapon in Black's arsenal. (11...d4!? is completely new in
such positions, Black aims for a closed pawn structure. 12 ¥d3 ¥e6 13 0–0 ¦d8 Just in time to
protect the d-pawn, and threaten damage along the d-file. 14 e4 Onischuk,A-
Benjamin,J/Philadelphia USA 2001. 11...0–0 12 cxd5 ¤xd5 13 £xe7 ¤xe7 14 ¥d2 ¥e6 looks
equal, Stuart,P-Lin,Z/Auckland NZL 2005, 11...g5!? deserves attention, as explained in my
previous columns.) 12 cxd5 ¥xd5 (12...¤xd5 turned into a classic "two-bishops-with-pawns-on-
both-sides-of-the-board" situation in Ivanchuk,V-Karjakin,S/Wijk aan Zee NED 2006) 13 f3
White aims for central expansion, to free his c1–bishop, Onischuk,A-Gurevich,M/Polanica Zdroj
POL 1999.
11 c5!
The most radical move, White takes the opportunity to stop ...c5.
11 ¥d2!? is another new move: 11...¦d8 12 ¥b4 Chernin,A-Bareev,E/Panormo GRE 2001.
11...b6
11...¤e4!? is an aggressive alternative, 12 b4 £h4 Belozerov,A-Rublevsky,S/Smolensk RUS 2000.
12 b4 bxc5 13 bxc5 £e6

Played in order to exchange light-squared bishops. The swap of one pair of bishops is the standard
method of fighting against the bishop pair, see Onischuk,A-Shirov,A/New Delhi IND 2000.
13...¦b8 14 ¥b2 £e6 is a similar idea, Seirawan,Y-Winants,L/Netherlands NED 2006.
Four Knights 4 g3 - Various 4th moves. [A29]
1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤f6 3 ¤f3 ¤c6 4 g3

The main move, of course, continuing White's standard plan of fianchettoing the light-squared
bishop. From now on play can vary enormously depending on how Black reacts.
4...¥c5
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqk+-tr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+n+-sn-+0
9+-vl-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-sN-+NzP-0
9PzP-zPPzP-zP0
9tR-vLQmKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
Sensible development, this move, popular with Karpov, intends to keep the position closed, preparing
...d5 only after finishing the development of the pieces.
Otherwise:
4...g6 This is something of a pet system of Etienne Bacrot. 5 d4 exd4 Black must concede the centre,
6 ¤xd4 ¥g7 7 ¥g2 (7 ¤xc6 dxc6! at first sight this recapture (away from the centre) seems wrong,
but actually after this Black has two pawn islands, as opposed to the three after the other recapture.
(7...bxc6 8 ¥g2 0–0 9 0–0 £e7 (9...¦e8 10 £a4 a5!? Jones,G-Swiercz,D/Germany 2013.) 10 ¥f4
£b4 11 £b3! Seirawan,Y-Werle,J/Netherlands NED 2011.) 8 £xd8+ ¢xd8 Black's active pieces
give him real compensation for the doubled c-pawns, and displaced king, Karpov,A-Bacrot,E/Cap
d'Agde FRA 2000.) 7...0–0 8 0–0 (8 ¥f4!? Nepomniachtchi,I-Carlsen,M/Sinquefield Cup 2017.)
8...¦e8 9 ¤c2 In principle this is correct, with more space White wants to retain as many pieces as
possible on the board, (9 ¤xc6 is not thought to offer White too much, after 9...dxc6 Georgiev,K-
Akopian,V/Las Vegas USA 1999.) 9...d6 10 e4 ¤e5!? 11 b3 c6 12 ¥a3 Perhaps White should look
for a better move here? 12...d5! (12...¤fd7 led to a crushing Black defeat in Malakhov,V-
Bacrot,E/Halkidiki GRE 2002.) 13 f4 ¥g4 With sharp complications that proved fatal to White in
Gretarsson,H-Bacrot,E/Reykjavic ISL 2003.
5 ¥g2
This is standard.
5 ¤xe5 was considered doubtful for many decades, but, 5...¥xf2+ 6 ¢xf2 ¤xe5 7 e4 c5 else White
would play d4, and his mobile centre would push the two knights off the board. (i.e. 7...d6!? Black
avoids the normal move, 8 d4 ¤g6 9 h3 with space and the two bishops, Poldauf,D-
Timman,J/Forchheim GER 2000.) 8 d4! why did nobody think of this before? (8 h3 0–0 9 d3 a6 10
¥g2 b5 11 ¦f1 d6 12 ¢g1 also offers White a plus because of the f-file and bishop pair, see
Aronian,L-Svidler,P/Mexico City MEX 2007) 8...cxd4 9 £xd4 0–0 the knight is safe, of course,
because of the fork on g4. 10 ¥f4 Ivanchuk,V-Anand,V/Wijk aan Zee NED 1999.
5...d6
5...0–0 6 ¤xe5!? ¥xf2+ 7 ¢xf2 ¤xe5 8 b3 by defending the c-pawn like this White prepares to
drive the knight from the centre by d4, 8...¦e8 9 ¦f1 d5!? with sharp play, Timman,J-
Bareev,E/Wijk aan Zee NED 2002.
6 0–0 0–0
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwq-trk+0
9zppzp-+pzpp0
9-+nzp-sn-+0
9+-vl-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-sN-+NzP-0
9PzP-zPPzPLzP0
9tR-vLQ+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
7 d3
7 e3 blunting Black's dark-squared bishop, 7...a6 (7...¦e8 8 £c2 h6 9 b3 a6 10 ¥b2 ¥a7 11 ¤h4
planning f4, Glud,J-Hjartarson,J/Runavik FAI 2016.) 8 d4 the most aggressive, (8 h3 h6 9 d3 ¥a7
10 b3 ¦e8 11 ¥b2 is a slower build-up, Kovalenko,I-Meskovs,N/Palanga 2018.) 8...¥a7 9 h3 h6
(9...exd4 10 exd4 h6 Adams,M-Pert,R/Bournemouth 2016.) 10 b3 (10 dxe5 is nothing, 10...dxe5
11 £e2 £e7! Howell,D-Pert,R/Coventry 2015.) 10...¦e8 11 ¥b2 (11 dxe5 see Jones,G-
Gormally,D/Scottish championships 2013.) 11...e4?! David,A-Svetushkin,D/Le Port Marly FRA
2009.
7...h6
7...a6 8 a3 ¤d4 is a quieter line, Gulko,B-Cramling,P/Sigeman & Co, Malmoe SWE 2001.
8 a3 a5
8...a6 9 b4 ¥a7 (9...¥b6!? Bartholomew,J-Troff,K/Lubbock USA 2011.) 10 ¥b2 ¥e6 (10...¤d4 11
¤xd4 exd4 Istratescu,A-Navara,D/Saint Quentin 2014. 10...¦e8 11 ¦c1 ¥d7 Duda,J-
Grigoriants,S/Tradewise Gibraltar Masters 2018. 10...¦b8 is Perez Fungueiro,M-
Hamdouchi,H/Sanxenxo ESP 2006, by transposition.) 11 ¦c1 £d7 Black unpretentiously develops
all his pieces on natural squares, Flores,D-Vallejo Pons,F/Tromso NOR 2013.
9 e3
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwq-trk+0
9+pzp-+pzp-0
9-+nzp-sn-zp0
9zp-vl-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9zP-sNPzPNzP-0
9-zP-+-zPLzP0
9tR-vLQ+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
9...¦e8
9...¥b6 10 b3! ¥f5 11 h3! and White crawled forward and squeezed Black, not the least because of
the restricted position of the bishop on b6, see Marin,M-Fluvia Poyatos,J/Barcelona ESP 2005.
10 b3 ¥f5 11 ¥b2
With instructive play in Marin,M-Karpov,A/Lanzarote ESP 2003.
Four Knights 4 g3 - 4...Nd4 [A29]
1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤f6 3 ¤f3 ¤c6 4 g3 ¤d4

XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqkvl-tr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+-+-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+Psn-+-+0
9+-sN-+NzP-0
9PzP-zPPzP-zP0
9tR-vLQmKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
Black breaks the first rule of the opening, moving a developed piece twice, but it has its points, and
this idea of Korchnoi's, dating from 1972, constitutes one of Black's best defences against 4 g3.
5 ¥g2
Alternatives:
5 ¤h4!? trying for more, but the move is not very natural. 5...d5! A new idea, ( previously 5...c6
Black's typical plan in this line, where he wishes to set-up a full centre, had been preferred. 6 e3
¤e6 7 d4?! Gulko,B-Hansen,C/Esbjerg DEN 2000.) 6 e3 ¤c6 7 cxd5 ¤xd5 8 d3 This doesn't fit
too well with the pawn on g3, as the light-squared bishop cannot easily defend both the kingside
and d3– Korchnoi,V-Svidler,P/Zurich SUI 2001.
Few players ever take the pawn by 5 ¤xe5!? as after 5...£e7 6 f4 (6 ¤d3?? ¤f3# is the point.) 6...d6
7 ¤d3 ¥f5 Black has a virulent initiative, and this position is usually evaluated as clearly better for
Black in most sources, but things are not that simple, which John Watson pointed out back in 1979.
8 ¢f2! see Bauer,C-Dorfman,J/Besancon BRA 2006.
5...¤xf3+ 6 ¥xf3
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqkvl-tr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+-+-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-sN-+LzP-0
9PzP-zPPzP-zP0
9tR-vLQmK-+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
6...¥b4
The c6–knight is often awkwardly placed in 4...b4 lines, but here not only is e5 no longer attacked,
but Black might also be able to play ...c6, and ...d5.
Black has a number of lesser alternatives:
6...¥c5 by far the most important, 7 0–0 (7 d3 h6 8 h4?! Bacrot,E-Sutovsky,E/playchess.com INT
2003, 7 e3 may well be a good option to use if you want to sidestep the main lines, 7...0–0 8 d4
exd4 9 exd4 ¦e8+ 10 ¥e3 ¥b4 11 £b3 McNab,C-Stark,L/Hereford ENG 2006) 7...0–0 8 e3
intending to play d2–d4, to blunt the bishop's diagonal, (8 d3 h6 9 a3 a6 10 e3 ¥a7 11 b4 with
queenside space, Bacrot,E-Sutovsky,E/Albert FRA 2001, 8 ¤a4 ¥e7 9 d4 White's advantage can
quickly develop into something more substantial, Gulko,B-Charbonneau,P/Montreal 2006) 8...d6 9
d4 this is the problem with 6...c5: White wins the centre with tempo, Bareev,E-Volkov,S/Moscow
RUS 2005.
6...c6 7 d4 d6 8 ¥g2 (8 dxe5 dxe5 9 £xd8+ ¢xd8 10 b3 Fahnenschmidt,G-Treppner,G/Bad
Kissingen 1978.) 8...¥e7 9 0–0 0–0 10 b3 ¥f5 11 e4 with a plus, Schlosser,P-Naumann,A/Leoben
AUT 2007.
6...d6 7 0–0 ¥e7 is considered solid, but rather passive, Uhlmann,W-Rossetto,H/Skopje 1972.
7 £b3
The most popular move, with a number of objectives: attacking the b4–bishop whilst avoiding the
doubling of the white pawns, and controlling d5.
7 d4!? and some of the lesser alternatives are discussed in Jobava,B-Aronian,L/Dortmund 2006.
7 0–0 0–0 8 d3 White ignores the possible threat to capture on c3, to double the white pawns,
a) 8 £c2!? White controls e4, and dissuades Black from capturing on c3, 8...¦e8 (8...c6 9 d3 h6
To prevent the pin. 10 a3 ¥e7 Kasimdzhanov,R-Timman,J/Wijk aan Zee NED 1999.) 9 d3 h6
Karpov,A-Vyzmanavin,A/Tilburg 1993
b) 8 £b3 transposes to the mainline
c) 8 d4!? ¥xc3 9 bxc3 e4 (9...£e7?! Gormally,D-Gretarsson,H/Scottish championships 2013.) 10
¥g2 h6.
8...c6
a) 8...h6 9 ¥g2 ¦e8 (9...¥xc3!? Black decides to call White's bluff, and captures the knight, 10
bxc3 d6 Azmaiparashvili,Z-Simonenko,S/Saint Vincent ITA 2000.) 10 e4 d6 11 f4 c6 12 ¢h1
¥c5 this it isn't a particularly easy position for Black to play: White has a solid grip on the d5–
square and a kingside attack after f4–f5 and g3–g4–g5, Black will be facing a very problematic
defence. Jobava,B-Mchedlishvili,M/Tbilisi GEO 2007.
b) 8...¦e8 9 £b3 ¥f8 10 ¦d1 c6 11 d4 Ivanchuk,V-Aronian,L/Turin ITA 2006.
9 £b3 ¥e7 10 ¦d1 d6 11 d4 £c7 12 ¥g2 (12 £c2 ¥h3 13 b4 Kosten,A-Pert,R/Wokefield Park
ENG 2007) 12...h6 13 £c2 ¤h7 14 b4 exd4 15 ¦xd4 ¤g5 was soon drawn in Huzman,A-
Svidler,P/Feugen AUT 2006.
7...¥c5
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqk+-tr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+-+-sn-+0
9+-vl-zp-+-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+QsN-+LzP-0
9PzP-zPPzP-zP0
9tR-vL-mK-+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
7...a5 is considered to be better for White, 8 0–0 0–0 9 d3 d6 10 ¥g5!? ¥xc3 11 £xc3 h6 12 ¥d2 ¦e8
13 ¥g2 with a plus, Sunye Neto,J-Morovic Fernandez,I/Buenos Aires 1990.
7...£e7 has done reasonably well and deserves more attention, 8 0–0 0–0 9 d3 c6 Topalov,V-
Karjakin,S/Leon 2003.
8 d3
A sensible alternative to the more normal 8 0–0 0–0 9 ¤a4!?
a) 9 d3 h6 10 ¥d2!? in my opinion this is quite harmless for Black, 10...¦e8 11 ¥g2 c6 12 ¦ac1
(12 ¦ad1 ¥f8 Ljubojevic,L-Van Wely,L/Monte Carlo MNC 2003. 12 h3 Svidler,P-
Carlsen,M/Moscow RUS 2008) 12...¥f8 (12...¥b6 Gelfand,B-Svidler,P/Dos Hermanas ESP
1999.) 13 h3 d6 14 ¢h2 a6 15 ¥e3 Aronian,L-Svidler,P/Sochi RUS 2008.
b) 9 ¦d1 is an interesting alternative.
9...¥e7 10 d4!? the most critical line, (10 ¦d1 c6 11 ¤c3 d6 12 d4 was the actual move order for
Kosten-Pert, above.) 10...exd4 11 ¦d1 c5 12 e3 dxe3 13 ¥xe3 with compensation, 13...£c7 14
¤c3 a6 15 ¥f4 (15 g4!? Aronian,L-Giri,A/Monaco MNC 2011.) 15...d6 16 ¦d2 putting maximum
pressure on the d6–pawn, Svidler,P-Sjugirov,S/Russian Team Championship 2016.
8 £b5!? Savchenko,B-Carlsen,M/Moscow RUS 2007.
8...c6!?
8...h6 9 h4!? Gulko's novelty, White prepares a kingside pawn advance, thinking that he has good
control over the centre, and that Black cannot break-out with ...d5 for a while. (9 0–0 0–0 10 ¥d2 is
more common, and transposes below after 10...c6) 9...c6 (9...¤h7? A new defensive plan, Black
wishes to pre-empt g4–g5, but misses White's counter. 10 ¤e4! ¥e7 11 £b5! Moving the queen
again in the opening looks wrong, but this move is very strong! The e5–pawn is attacked and the d-
pawn can't defend it because it is itself pinned, see Piket,J-Avrukh,B/Amsterdam NED 2001.) 10
g4 ¥e7 (10...d5!? 11 g5!? Very risky, Gulko,B-Hector,J/Copenhagen DEN 2000.) 11 g5 hxg5
Mikhailuk,S-Sagalchik,G/Seattle 2002, and now 12 hxg5!? looks very good.
8...0–0 is also possible, 9 ¥g5
a) 9 g4!? d6 (9...c6 10 g5 ¤e8 Williams,S-Van Kampen,R/London 2012.) 10 g5 ¤d7 11 h4
Howell,D-Gordon,S/Sheffield ENG 2011
b) 9 0–0 h6.
9...h6 10 ¥xf6 £xf6 11 ¤e4 £b6 12 ¤xc5 £xc5 equal, Vitiugov,N-Grischuk,A/Moscow RUS 2009.
9 ¥g5
9 0–0 0–0 10 ¥d2 (10 ¥g2 White doesn't achieve any real chances of obtaining an edge out of the
opening with this line, Lautier,J-Sebag,M/Montpellier FRA 2007.) 10...h6 11 ¤a4 ¥e7 12 ¥g2 d6
13 ¤c3 White had no advantage in Gelfand,B-Vachier Lagrave,M/Khanty-Mansiysk RUS 2009.
9 g4!? Well, these g4–moves are certainly all the rage in the English Opening these days! White will
advance on the kingside while the centre is closed. 9...d6 10 g5 ¤d7 (10...¤g8 Vallejo Pons,F-
Gelfand,B/Pamplona ESP 1999) 11 ¤e4!? 0–0 12 ¦g1 Aronian,L-Gelfand,B/Saint Vincent ITA
2005.
9...¥e7
9...0–0 10 0–0 h6 11 ¥xf6 £xf6 12 ¤e4 Timman,J-Hector,J/Copenhagen/Malmo DEN 2005.
10 ¦d1 h6 11 ¥c1 d6 12 d4
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqk+-tr0
9zpp+-vlpzp-0
9-+pzp-sn-zp0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+PzP-+-+0
9+QsN-+LzP-0
9PzP-+PzP-zP0
9+-vLRmK-+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
12...£c7 13 ¥g2 0–0 14 0–0 exd4 15 ¦xd4

White has the slightly better chances thanks to his ability to build up pressure along the d-file and
Black's relatively passive set-up, Kovacevic,B-Potkin,V/Pardubice CZE 2007.
Four Knights 4 g3 - 4...d5, Reversed Dragon
[A29]
1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤f6 3 ¤f3 ¤c6 4 g3 d5

Black plays an open Sicilian reversed, and forces White to play a 'Dragon' with an extra tempo.
5 cxd5 ¤xd5
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqkvl-tr0
9zppzp-+pzpp0
9-+n+-+-+0
9+-+nzp-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-sN-+NzP-0
9PzP-zPPzP-zP0
9tR-vLQmKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
6 ¥g2
Not only is White threatening a discovered attack against the d5–knight, but also the freeing move d4
which, once played, will allow him a central predominance.
6...¤b6
This is not forced, but is easily Black's most common move, keeping a firm hold on d4.
6...¥c5!? has suddenly become a major line, 7 0–0 0–0 8 d3 (8 ¤xd5 £xd5 9 d3 (9 ¤g5!?
Aronian,L-Caruana,F/St. Louis Rapid & Blitz GCT 2017.) 9...£d8 Nakamura,H-
Aronian,L/Sinquefield Cup 2018.) 8...¥b6 (8...¦e8 9 ¤g5 (9 ¥g5!? ¤xc3 10 bxc3 f6 11 ¥c1 ¥e6
12 ¥b2 Carlsen,M-Caruana,F/FIDE World Chess Championship 2018.) 9...¤f6 10 £b3 £e7 11
¤d5 ¤xd5 12 ¥xd5 ¤d8 was fine for Black in Caruana,F-Adams,M/London 2017.) 9 ¤xd5 (9
¤a4 see Eljanov,P-Grischuk,A/Geneve 2017.) 9...£xd5 10 b4 e4!? Dubov,D-Karjakin,S/Tbilisi
FIDE World Cup 2017.
7 0–0
7 ¦b1!? this move has been something of a speciality of the Latvian GM Miezis here, it is more
commonly seen after White has castled, 7...a5 the most accurate, in my opinion, Black clamps
down on White's queenside play, at the cost of weakening b5, (7...f6 is likely to transpose to the
mainline, as in the Korchnoi-Stefanova game, below) 8 0–0 ¥e7 9 d3 ¥e6 10 ¥e3 0–0 11 ¥xb6 the
point of White's play, he gets an extra central pawn, (11 d4 is a good alternative, 11...exd4 12 ¤xd4
¤xd4 13 ¥xd4 c6 14 f4 see Giri,A-Aronian,L/Saint Louis 2016.) 11...cxb6 12 e3 a new move, (12
¦c1!? Hodgson,J-Gormally,D/Scarborough ENG 1999, featuring interesting play. 12 £a4!? has
been played by Kasparov, which should indicate that this is White's best.) 12...b5!? 13 ¤xb5 ¥xa2
14 ¦c1 a4 15 ¤c3 ¥b3 16 £e2 and Black soon played ...a3 with further exchanges leading to an
even endgame, Aronian,L-Topalov,V/Wijk aan Zee NED 2007.
7...¥e7
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqk+-tr0
9zppzp-vlpzpp0
9-snn+-+-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-+-+-+-+0
9+-sN-+NzP-0
9PzP-zPPzPLzP0
9tR-vLQ+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
Now White often tries to get his queenside play underway immediately (might as well do something
with the extra tempo, after all) by deferring d3.
8 a3
White's main line.
8 ¦b1 White wants to play b4 without a3, so that there is no later weakness on b3. 8...g5 a very sharp
possibility for Black, involving a kingside pawn onslaught,
a) 8...0–0 9 b4 the tactical point, 9...¤xb4!? (9...e4?! 10 ¤xe4 ¥f5 11 £c2 with advantage,
Nakamura,H-Sevian,S/Las Vegas 2015.) 10 ¤xe5 c6!? Kasparov,G-Timman,J/Wijk aan Zee
NED 2001.
b) 8...a5 transposes to 7 b1.
9 b4!? Gulko's move- a wing thrust is countered by ...another wing thrust! White decides to rip open
the queenside before Black's kingside attack gets going. (9 d3 is less energetic, 9...g4 (9...h5 10
¥e3 White wants to play d4, with the standard central counter to a wing attack, but Black is alert,
10...g4 Miezis,N-Smirin,I/New York 1998.) 10 ¤d2 ¤d4 11 e3 ¤e6 Almasi,Z-Wang Hao/Beijing
CHN 2011, when 12 £e2! is most ambitious, intending to blast the center open with d1 and d3–
d4.) 9...g4 10 ¤e1 ¤xb4 11 ¤c2 with compensation for the pawn, Khalifman,A-Lutz,C/New
Delhi IND 2000.
8 d3 0–0 (8...¥e6 9 b3 a plausible alternative to the lines with a3 and b4, 9...£d7 10 ¥b2 0–0
Georgiev,V-Dzagnidze,N/Istanbul TUR 2006, when I like 11 ¤e4! hitting e5) 9 ¥e3
a) 9 a4 is relatively rare, 9...a5 10 ¥e3 ¥e6 11 ¥xb6 the point, (11 ¤d2 f5!? 12 ¦c1 Malakhov,V-
Nepomniachtchi,I/Dresden GER 2007.) 11...cxb6 12 ¤b5 (12 ¤d2 f6 13 ¤c4 ¦f7 14 ¦c1 is
similar, Karlsson,L-Narciso Dublan,M/Badalona 2011.) 12...¦c8 13 ¦c1 ¢h8 14 ¤d2 f5 15 ¤c4
White has conceded the bishop pair but has weakened Black's queenside pawns, White has nice
outposts on b5 and c4 for his knights, while Black has b4, see Chernyshov,K-Kachur,A/Odessa
2007.
b) 9 a3 transposes.
9...¥e6 10 a3
a) 10 £d2!? an odd move, 10...f6 11 ¦fc1 £e8 12 £d1!? Anastasian,A-Simonenko,S/Abu Dhabi
UAE 2005.
b) 10 ¦c1 f6 (10...f5 11 b4! Anand,V-Hammer,J/Stavanger 2015.) 11 a3 ¤d4! Ivanchuk,V-
Kramnik,V/Nice FRA 2009.
10...f5
a) 10...¤d5 11 ¤xd5 ¥xd5 12 £a4 covering the d4–square, (12 ¦c1 ¤d4!? aims for a draw,
Malakhov,V-Sargissian,G/Ohrid MKD 2009) 12...¦e8 13 ¦ac1 a6 14 ¤d2 see So,W-
Topalov,V/Saint Louis 2016.
b) 10...£d7 11 b4 f6 Aronian,L-Karjakin,S/Moscow Candidates 2016.
11 ¦c1 ¥f6 (11...¢h8 12 b4! Savchenko,B-Rublevsky,S/Moscow RUS 2007.) 12 ¤d2 ¢h8 13 b4
Kamsky,G-Svidler,P/Thessaloniki GRE 2013.
8 b3!? could be the shape of the future, 8...0–0 9 ¥b2 ¥g4 10 h3 ¥h5 11 d3 Jakovenko,D-
Shirov,A/Khanty-Mansiysk RUS 2007.
8...0–0
8...¥e6 9 d3 (9 b4) 9...a5 (9...f5?! this set-up is relatively rare, at grandmaster level it was last seen
back in the 1980s. 10 b4 ¥f6 11 e4!? 0–0 12 exf5 ¥xf5 13 ¤e4 ¢h8 14 b5! with advantage, Van
Wely,L-Motylev,A/Wijk aan Zee NED 2007.) 10 ¥e3 0–0 11 ¤a4
a) 11 ¦c1 can be met by 11...a4!? 12 ¥xb6 (12 ¤d2 f5 13 ¥xb6 cxb6 14 ¤xa4 ¥g5 15 ¤c3 e4!
with compensation for the pawn, Giri,A-Carlsen,M/Shamkir AZE 2018.) 12...cxb6 13 ¤xa4 e4!
Nepomniachtchi,I-Bocharov,D/Apatity RUS 2011.
b) 11 ¥xb6!? would be similar to the Hodgson-Gormally game, above.
11...¤xa4 12 £xa4 ¥d5 13 ¦fc1 ¦e8 14 ¦c2! ¥f8 15 ¦ac1 led to one of the most famous
combinations in chess history, Botvinnik,M-Portisch,L/Monte Carlo 1968.
8...a5!? this has always been considered somewhat inferior. Perhaps that verdict should be
reconsidered, 9 d3 0–0 (9...¥e6 transposes to 8...e6 above.) 10 ¥e3 ¦e8 (10...¥e6 is by far the
most common, and also transposes to 8...e6.) 11 ¦c1 h6 12 ¥xb6 cxb6 13 ¤d2 with play on the
queenside light squares, Morozevich,A-Motylev,A/Moscow RUS 2005.
8...g5!? 9 b4 (9 d4! leads to positions with exciting possibilities) 9...g4 10 ¤e1 f5 11 d3 0–0 12 ¥b2
¥f6 13 ¦c1 ¢h8 14 ¥xc6!? a very good positional move but a little risky because of the weakened
light squares around White's king, see Ostenstad,B-Agdestein,S/Moss NOR 2006.
9 b4 ¥e6
Black defends actively against the threat to his e-pawn.
9...¦e8 is also a good plan, Black intends to support his e5–pawn by playing ...f8, when ...d4 will
become feasible, 10 d3 ¥f8 this is very similar to the main line, except that Black's e-pawn is more
solidly defended, (10...a5 11 b5 ¤d4 12 ¦b1 ¥f8 Nepomniachtchi,I-Vachier Lagrave,M/Sharjah
FIDE Grand Prix 2017.) 11 ¥b2
a) 11 ¤d2!? ¤d4?! (11...a5) 12 e3 ¤e6 13 ¤b3! White is better now, Bischoff,K-Ruck,R/Jenbach
AUT 2009
b) 11 ¦b1 ¥g4 Ding,L-Yu,Y/Shenzhen 2018.
11...a5 (11...¥g4!? 12 h3 ¥h5 13 ¦c1 f5!? is an aggressive treatment, played to stop g4, but the
black weaknesses were brilliantly exploited in Cvitan,O-Sermek,D/Solin-Spilt CRO 2002) 12 b5
¤d4 13 ¤d2 (13 e3 led to great excitement in Sturua,Z-Xu Jun/Istanbul TUR 2000) 13...c6 14
bxc6 ¤xc6 15 ¦b1 a4 16 ¤b5 ¥g4 (16...¥e6 Soza,J-Divanbaigyzand,M/Friendship 2003) 17 ¦e1
£d7 Huebner,R-Ruck,R/Leipzig GER 2002.
10 ¦b1
Saving time to get going with the queenside play, and by defending b3 and moving the rook off the
a1–h8 diagonal White threatens b5, winning the e5–pawn, and thus forcing Black to defend it.
10 d3 could transpose, but may be slightly less accurate, 10...f6 solidly defending the e-pawn,
a) 10...a5 this active move is often preferred nowadays, 11 b5 ¤d4 12 ¤d2 (12 ¤xe5!? ¥f6 13 f4
¤b3 14 ¥e3 ¤xa1 15 £xa1 with compensation for the exchange, Howell,D-Naroditsky,D/Caleta
ENG 2015.) 12...c6 13 bxc6 ¤xc6 Nimzo 7.32–Fritz 6a/Cadaques 2000.
b) 10...¤d4!? 11 ¥b2 (11 ¤xd4 exd4 12 ¤e4 ¥d5 neutralizing White's bishop and preparing to
exchange it, Socko,B-Mamedyarov,S/Warsaw POL 2013.) 11...¤xf3+ 12 ¥xf3 c6 13 ¤e4
Janous,P-Soza,J/Champions League Q14–2 2002.
11 ¤e4!? (11 ¥b2 £d7 (11...a5 12 b5 ¤d4 13 ¤d2 c6 (13...£d7!? is an interesting temporary pawn
sac, Granda Zuniga,J-Georgiev,K/Pamplona ESP 2009.) 14 bxc6 ¤xc6 Bacrot,E-Topalov,V/Dubai
UAE 2002.) 12 ¤e4 ¦ad8 (12...a6 13 £c2 ¥h3 14 ¤c5! is considered in Miles,A-
Timman,J/Tilburg 1984) 13 ¦c1 with typical play, Istratescu,A-Mullon,J/Nantes FRA 2003.)
11...a5 looks critical, (11...£e8!? Anand,V-Topalov,V/WCHM Sofia 2010, 11...£d7 Berkes,F-
Munoz,L/Turin 2006) 12 ¤c5 ¥xc5 13 bxc5 ¤d5 14 ¥b2 (14 £c2 Miezis,N-Danin,A/Utrecht
2009) 14...a4 Uhlmann,W-Jackova,J/Marianske Lazne 2008, when I like 15 £d2 ¤a5 16 ¦ad1
intending to advance with e2–e4, d3–d4 and maybe f2–f4 at some point.
10...f6 11 d3
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+-wq-trk+0
9zppzp-vl-zpp0
9-snn+lzp-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-zP-+-+-+0
9zP-sNP+NzP-0
9-+-+PzPLzP0
9+RvLQ+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
11 b5!? ¤d4 12 e3 the key idea, putting immediate pressure on the b7–pawn and planning the move
d2–d4, 12...¤xf3+ 13 ¥xf3 see Gelfand,B-Edouard,R/European Team Championship 2017.
11...a5
Active play, Black prefers to weaken the white queenside first, but can also play 11...¤d4
immediately, 12 ¤d2
a) 12 ¤xd4 exd4 13 ¤e4 ¥d5! 14 ¥b2 f5 15 ¤d2 ¥xg2 (15...¥f6 Soza,J-Muzyka,Y/ICCF
Champions League 2004) 16 ¢xg2 ¢h8 Navara,D-Topalov,V/Wijk aan Zee NED 2012.
b) 12 ¥e3 ¤xf3+ 13 ¥xf3 c6 14 £c2 this doesn't offer White any hopes of a lasting advantage,
Van Wely,L-Tiviakov,S/Wijk aan Zee NED 2007.
c) 12 ¤h4!? c6 (12...g5 looks critical to me. 12...£c8?! was nice for White in Eljanov,P-Salgado
Lopez,I/Moscow RUS 2012.) 13 e3 ¤f5 14 ¤xf5 ¥xf5 15 £b3+ ¢h8 16 ¤e4 ¥g6 17 ¦d1 White
has a miniscule edge, Vachier Lagrave,M-Fedorchuk,S/Muelheim GER 2012.
12...c6 (12...¤d5 13 ¥b2 c6 (13...a5!? is Bauer,C-Sokolov,A/Chartres FRA 2005) 14 ¤xd5 ¥xd5
15 ¥xd5+ £xd5 16 ¥xd4! gave White a small but clear strategic advantage in Marin,M-
Lemos,D/Palau ITA 2009.) 13 ¤de4
a) 13 ¥b2 ¦f7 14 e3 ¤f5 15 £c2 Bareev,E-Topalov,V/Dortmund GER 2002.
b) 13 e3!? ¤b5?! 14 ¤xb5 (14 £c2 ¤xc3 15 £xc3 £d7!? Carlsen,M-Cheparinov,I/Baku AZE
2008) 14...cxb5 15 ¤b3 ¤a4 16 ¥b2 ¥d5 17 ¥a1 with advantage, Van Wely,L-Nyback,T/Chalons
en Champagne FRA 2009.
13...¤d5 (13...¦f7 Yakovich,Y-Demianjuk,A/Salekhard RUS 2006, 13...¥f7!? Leko,P-
Kramnik,V/Nice FRA 2008) 14 e3 (the young Flank Opening connoisseur, Tomashevsky has
preferred 14 ¥b2) 14...¤xc3 15 ¤xc3 ¤f5 16 £c2!? aiming to advance the d-pawn, Aronian,L-
Topalov,V/Morelia/Linares MEX/ESP 2008.
11...£e8 this older move is perfectly reasonable, intending ...d8 and perhaps ...f7 at some point,
12 ¤e4 ¦d8?! 13 ¤c5 ¥c8 14 £c2 White's pieces are well-placed and now he can work towards a
central break with d4, Kosten,A-Jean,O/Marseille FRA 2006.
12 b5 ¤d4
The point of Black's play, he threatens to bring a piece to b3.
13 ¤d2
13 e3 ¤xf3+ 14 ¥xf3 ¦b8 15 £c2!? intending d1, d4 with a good game, Nakamura,H-
Bauer,C/FRA chT 2008.
13...£c8!?
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+q+-trk+0
9+pzp-vl-zpp0
9-sn-+lzp-+0
9zpP+-zp-+-0
9-+-sn-+-+0
9zP-sNP+-zP-0
9-+-sNPzPLzP0
9+RvLQ+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
Defending b7, whilst avoiding any weakening of the queenside.

13...c6 is one of a number of other possibilities for defending the b7–pawn, 14 e3!? ¤xb5 15 ¤xb5
cxb5 16 ¦xb5 with play along the b-file, Marin,M-Varga,Z/Rumania 1998.
13...¥d5 looks odd, but is quite good, 14 ¤xd5 (14 ¥h3!? ¥e6!? Korchnoi,V-
Stefanova,A/Drammen NOR 2005) 14...¤xd5 menaces the nasty fork on c3, so 15 ¥b2 a4 and now
White's best seems to be 16 ¥xd4 exd4 17 £c2 ¤c3 18 ¥xb7 ¦b8 19 ¥f3 ¥xa3 (19...¤xb1?! 20
¦xb1 and White wins the a-pawn with more than enough for the exchange) 20 ¦a1 ¥b4 21 ¤e4
with chances for an edge.
13...¤d5? is a known blunder, Suba,M-Garcia,S/Malaga, Spain 2001.
14 e3 ¤f5 15 £e2
This may be best, White keeps an eye on the kingside.
15 £c2 seems less accurate, 15...¦d8 16 ¥b2 (16 ¦d1 ¢h8 17 a4 is Marin,M-
Komljenovic,D/Benasque ESP 2005) 16...a4 (16...¤h6!? a strange idea. Black is transferring his
knight to f7, Van Wely,L-Tiviakov,S/Hilversum NED 2006.) 17 ¦fc1 ¤d6 18 ¤de4 Carlsen,M-
Kramnik,V/London ENG 2009.
15 a4!? by playing a4 before Black does, White concedes the b4–square, but does not have to worry
about having Black target his a3–pawn, see Georgiev,K-Gurevich,M/Mulhouse FRA 2001.
15...a4!
15...¤d6 16 a4 White stops ...a4, (16 f4!? exf4 17 ¦xf4! is Pogorelov,R-Tiviakov,S/Calvia ESP
2006) 16...¥g4 17 f3 ¥e6 18 f4 looks like a slightly improved version for White, but Black does
have the b4 square to play with, Bareev,E-Shirov,A/Poikovsky RUS 2006.
16 ¥b2!? ¤d6! 17 f4!?
An interesting although unclear way to begin play on both flanks which works well in Bareev,E-
Yakovich,Y/Kazan RUS 2005.
Four Knights 4 g3 - 4...Bb4– The Main Line
[A29]
1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤f6 3 ¤f3 ¤c6 4 g3 ¥b4

XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqk+-tr0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+n+-sn-+0
9+-+-zp-+-0
9-vlP+-+-+0
9+-sN-+NzP-0
9PzP-zPPzP-zP0
9tR-vLQmKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
For a long time the main line, and still incredibly popular. By capturing on c3, and conceding the
bishop pair, Black hopes to speed-up his development, and grab a good share of the centre.
5 ¥g2
Normal, but also there is:
5 ¤d5 A favourite of Lautier's, White avoids any lines with doubled c-pawn complexes. 5...¥c5 the
position is similar to 4...c5 lines, except that the white knight is on d5, not c3.
a) 5...e4!? 6 ¤h4 0–0 7 ¥g2 ¦e8 (7...d6 8 b3! (8 a3 ¥c5 9 0–0 ¦e8 10 e3!? Nakamura,H-
Anand,V/Moscow Candidates 2016.) 8...g5 9 ¥b2 ¤xd5 10 cxd5 Giri,A-Aronian,L/Grand Chess
Tour 2017.) 8 0–0 ¥c5 9 d3 (9 e3!) 9...exd3 10 £xd3 ¤e5 11 £c2 c6 12 ¥e3 cxd5 13 ¥xc5 d6 14
¥d4 dxc4 15 ¦ad1 (15 ¦fd1 d5! equalised in Tomashevsky,E-Rublevsky,S/Moscow RUS 2005)
15...d5 16 e4 ¥g4 is considered in Lautier,J-Kasparov,G/Moscow RUS 2002.
b) 5...¤xd5 6 cxd5 e4?? loses a piece, see Petrosian,T-Ree,H/Wijk aan Zee 1971.
6 ¥g2 (6 d3 h6 (6...0–0 7 ¥g2 (7 ¥g5 ¥e7) 7...¤xd5 8 cxd5 ¤d4 9 ¤d2 d6 10 e3 ¤f5 see
Zhigalko,A-Ipatov,A/Warsaw POL 2013.) 7 a3 a5 8 ¥g2 is very similar, Lautier,J-Bu,Z/Taiyuan
CHN 2004.) 6...d6 7 0–0 (or 7 d3 White retards kingside castling the maximum possible, 7...h6 8
¤d2!? ¤xd5 9 cxd5 ¤d4 10 e3 ¤f5 11 d4! this positional and tactical device is worth
remembering, see Bareev,E-Gelfand,B/Cannes FRA 2002.) 7...0–0 8 d3 (8 e3 a6 9 d3 ¥a7 10 ¥d2
Tomashevsky,E-Svidler,P/Moscow RUS 2007) 8...¤xd5 (8...h6 To stop g5. 9 e3 White aims for a
flexible development, and avoids committing his central pawns too soon, Van Wely,L-Salov,V/Wijk
1998.) 9 cxd5 ¤d4 this idea has been played for many years in this and similar positions. White has
had difficulty finding anything promising, see Pelletier,Y-Chernin,A/Sanxenxo ESP 2004.
5...0–0 6 0–0 e4
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwq-trk+0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+n+-sn-+0
9+-+-+-+-0
9-vlP+p+-+0
9+-sN-+NzP-0
9PzP-zPPzPLzP0
9tR-vLQ+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
The critical line, Black displaces the f3–knight and gains space in the centre.
6...¥xc3 is a solid alternative, 7 bxc3 ¦e8 8 d3 (8 ¤e1!? to avoid 8...e4, this move scores well, 8...h6
9 e4 planning a kingside pawn expansion, see Dubov,D-Fedorchuk,S/Tromso NOR 2013.) 8...e4
Black plays this only after White has played d3, 9 ¤d4 exd3 10 exd3 ¤xd4 11 cxd4 d5 (11...h6 12
d5!? see Seirawan,Y-Gulko,B/Salt Lake City USA 1999.) 12 ¥e3 Nakamura,H-Howell,D/London
ENG 2011.
6...d6 7 d3 h6 (7...¦e8 8 ¤d5 (8 ¥d2 ¤d4 9 a3 gains the bishop pair, Ding,L-Wojtaszek,R/Shamkir
Chess 2018.) 8...¤xd5 9 cxd5 ¤e7 Gelfand,B-Inarkiev,E/Palma de Mallorca 2017.) 8 ¥d2 (8
¤a4!? a5 9 b3 ¦e8 Svidler,P-Nakamura,H/Moscow Candidates 2016.) 8...¥e6 9 a3 ¥xc3 10 ¥xc3
£d7 11 e4!? planning h4 and f4, Istratescu,A-Berkes,F/Hungary HUN 2005.
6...¦e8 7 ¤e1 (7 ¤d5 is the main move) 7...h6 (Korchnoi considers 7...¥xc3 8 dxc3 h6 equal) 8 ¤c2
¥c5 9 d3 Malakhov,V-Roiz,M/Dresden GER 2007.
7 ¤g5
White's most aggressive line.
7 ¤e1 is a solid variation, and a good alternative to the sharp main line, 7...¥xc3 (7...¦e8 8 ¤c2 (8
¤d5! is more accurate.) 8...¥xc3 (8...¥c5!?) 9 bxc3 this is generally thought to be less accurate, (9
dxc3 h6 transposes below.) 9...d5 10 cxd5 £xd5 11 d4 considered best by Ribli, 11...£c4!?
planning a light-squared bind, Kanep,M-Sammalvuo,T/Helsinki FIN 2006) 8 dxc3 h6 Black
doesn't want to allow g5 when his e-pawn would be in trouble. (8...¦e8 allows 9 ¥g5 ¦e5 10 f4!
with advantage, Portisch,L-Warakomski,T/Warsaw POL 2005) 9 ¤c2 ¦e8 10 ¤e3 (10 ¥e3!? this
is a better square for the knight in most variations, but White speeds his development and stops
...e3, Anastasian,A-Sadvakasov,D/Moscow RUS 2005.) 10...d6 11 b3 Jobava,B-Almasi,Z/IECC,
Ohrid MKD 2001.
7...¥xc3
Forced, to defend e4.
8 bxc3 ¦e8 9 f3
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqr+k+0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+n+-sn-+0
9+-+-+-sN-0
9-+P+p+-+0
9+-zP-+PzP-0
9P+-zPP+LzP0
9tR-vLQ+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
White wants to open the f-file, and gain a central preponderance, which will advance, supported by
the bishop pair.
9...e3
Zaitsev's famous innovation, first played by Karpov against Kasparov, which led to him winning the
second match game at Seville, 1987. The e-pawn is sacrificed to further weaken the white c-
pawns.
9...exf3 is the alternative, 10 ¤xf3 d5 11 d4 Kasparov's strong move. 11...¤e4
a) 11...dxc4!? 12 ¥g5 (12 £c2 h6 13 ¥f4 worked well in Caruana,F-Anand,V/Moscow
Candidates 2016.) 12...h6 13 ¥xf6 £xf6 14 e4 (14 ¤d2 Nakamura,H-Karjakin,S/Altibox Norway
Chess 2018.) 14...¥g4 15 £a4 Aronian,L-Anand,V/Saint Louis 2015.
b) 11...h6 might be better, 12 cxd5 £xd5 see Aronian,L-Adams,M/Baden-Baden 2015.
12 £c2 dxc4 13 ¦b1 f5 (13...f6!? Considered a blunder by Kasparov, but is it? Examine Lewis,J-
Garcia,H/ICC 1999.) 14 g4! Kasparov's preparation, White attempts to explode Black's light-
squared control, and undermine e4, see Lesiege,A-Zugic,I/Montreal CAN 2001.
10 dxe3!?
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+lwqr+k+0
9zppzpp+pzpp0
9-+n+-sn-+0
9+-+-+-sN-0
9-+P+-+-+0
9+-zP-zPPzP-0
9P+-+P+LzP0
9tR-vLQ+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
Originally considered an error, in the continual search for new ideas this move has recently been
rehabilitated.
Otherwise there is the solid 10 d3 d5 11 £b3 (11 £a4 h6 12 cxd5 ¤xd5 13 ¤e4 f5 14 ¤c5 f4 15
¥b2 is unclear, Svidler,P-Karjakin,S/Moscow Candidates 2016.) 11...¤a5 12 £a3 c6 13 cxd5
cxd5 14 f4 ¥g4 15 ¤f3 in my opinion this is the critical move, (15 ¦e1 h6 (15...¦c8!? see Nimzo
7.32–Junior/Cadaques 2000) 16 ¤f3 ¤c6 Schacher,G-Maki Uuro,M/Izmir TUR 2004.) 15...¤c6
16 h3 ¥xf3!? (16...¥d7 17 ¢h2 Elwert,H-Tiemann,H/ICCF COR 2004.) 17 ¦xf3 (17 ¥xf3 is
Jensen,J-Soza,J/Zonal Latinoamericano G1 2002) 17...d4 18 ¥b2 ¦c8 19 ¦b1 a5 a strange move
that has some interesting ideas behind it, Gulko,B-Korneev,O/Montreal CAN 2006.
10...£e7
10...h6 11 ¤h3 b6 (11...d5 12 ¤f4 dxc4 13 e4 Conquest,S-Butnorius,A/Dublin IRL 2008,
11...¤e5) 12 ¤f4 ¤a5 Played to pick-off the c4–pawn, Hansen,C-Brynell,S/Sigeman, Malmoe
SWE 1998.
11 ¤h3!?
One of the ex-World Champion's many innovations, the knight is misplaced, and so returns to the
fray via h3, and f4.
11...£c5
Black heads for the c4–pawn.
12 ¤f4 £xc4 13 e4
Kasparov,G-Sadvakasov,D/Astana KAZ 2001.

Kings English

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Kings English

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

King's English - [A20–29]

Last updated Tuesday, December 11, 2018

All rights reserved Chess Publishing Ltd

& Intro [A20]

Last updated 09/11/18 by the ChessPub Team

The Reversed Dragon is a popular counter to the English Opening.

4 cxd5 ¤xd5 5 ¤f3

A tricky little move.

10 b3 ¥e6 11 ¥b2 f6 12 £c2 £d7

13...¦fd8 14 d4 exd4 15 ¤xd4 ¤xd4 16 ¥xd4 c5!

17 ¥xc5 ¦ac8 18 b4 ¤d5!

19 ¤b3!? b6 20 e4 ¤xb4 21 axb4 axb4 22 ¦fd1 £c7 23 ¤d4!

23...¦xd4 24 ¦xd4 bxc5 25 ¦c4!

Last updated 11/12/18 by the ChessPub Team

The point of Black's move-order, the bishop points at f2.

Last updated 15/12/17 by the ChessPub Team

White's critical move, hitting the b4–bishop.

5...¤f6 6 ¤xe7 £xe7

8 £xd4 ¤c6 9 £c3 0–0 10 ¥e3

Last updated 09/02/18 by the ChessPub Team

8...0–0 9 0–0 ¤a6

Last updated 11/12/18 by the ChessPub Team

7...d5 8 cxd5 cxd5 9 exd5 ¤xd5

10 0–0 ¤c6 11 ¦b1

Last updated: 22/07/07 by Carsten Hansen

7 cxd5 cxd5 8 ¤f3 ¤c6 9 £a4 ¥c5 10 0–0

Last updated 14/11/16 by the ChessPub Team

1 c4 ¤f6 2 ¤c3 g6 3 g3 ¥g7 4 ¥g2 0–0 5 e4

This is a Botvinnik System.

5...d6 6 ¤ge2 e5 7 0–0 ¤bd7

10 ¥e3 £e7 11 £d2 ¤fd7 12 f4 ¤e6 13 f5

Last updated 12/08/17 by the ChessPub Team

4...¥c5 is the major alternative, 5 a3 to control the b4–square,

5...¥xc3 6 bxc3 0–0 7 ¤e2 d6 8 d3

10 exf5 ¥xf5 11 h3! ¥e6 12 f4

Last updated 14/10/18 by the ChessPub Team

1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤c6 3 g3 g6 4 ¥g2 ¥g7

Last updated 04/04/18 by the ChessPub Team

1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤c6 3 g3 g6 4 ¥g2 ¥g7 5 d3 d6 6 e4

10...h6!? 11 £d2 ¢h7 12 ¦ac1

Last updated 09/02/18 by the ChessPub Team

1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤c6 3 ¤f3 g6

4...exd4 5 ¤xd4 ¥g7 6 ¤xc6

10...¥f5!? 11 e4 ¥e6 12 c5!

Last updated 06/09/17 by the ChessPub Team

1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤f6 3 ¤f3 ¤c6

5 cxd5 ¤xd5 6 £c2

An exceedingly hopeful exchange sacrifice.

11 ¤xd5 ¥xd5 12 ¥xa8 ¥xa8

Last updated 09/11/18 by the ChessPub Team

1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤f6 3 ¤f3 ¤c6 4 e3

Preparing to expand in the centre with d4.

8...exd4 9 ¤xd4 ¤xd4

12 b4 bxc5 13 bxc5 £e6

Last updated 04/07/18 by the ChessPub Team

1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤f6 3 ¤f3 ¤c6 4 g3

Last updated 10/06/16 by the ChessPub Team

1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤f6 3 ¤f3 ¤c6 4 g3 ¤d4

12...£c7 13 ¥g2 0–0 14 0–0 exd4 15 ¦xd4

Last updated 11/12/18 by the ChessPub Team

1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤f6 3 ¤f3 ¤c6 4 g3 d5

Defending b7, whilst avoiding any weakening of the queenside.

Last updated 04/07/18 by the ChessPub Team

1 c4 e5 2 ¤c3 ¤f6 3 ¤f3 ¤c6 4 g3 ¥b4