Contents

Title Page and Bibliography

Preface 7

1.e4 c5 2.c3

Part 1.
1 Rare; A) 2...Qc7; B) 2...Qa5; C) 2...Nc6 14
2 2...b6 3.d4 28
3 2...g6 3.d4 50
4 2...a6 3.Nf3 65
5 2...e5 3.Nf3 84
6 2...d6 3.d4 95
7 2...e6 3.d4 128

Part 2. 2...d5 3.exd5

8 3...Nf6 4.Qa4; 3...Qxd5 4.d4 Bf5; 4...e5 175
9 3...Qxd5 4.d4 g6 5.Nf3 182
10 3...Qxd5 4.d4 cd 5.cd e5; 5...Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4; 6...e5 191
11 3...Qxd5 4.d4 cd 5.cd e6 6.Nc3 w/o Nc6; 5...Nc6 6.Nf3 e6 7.Nc3 203
12 3...Qxd5 4.d4 e6 5.Nf3 234
13 3...Qxd5 4.d4 Nc6 5.Nf3 242
14 3...Qxd5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nf3 268

Part 3. 2...Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3

15 4...b6; 4...a6; 4...g6; 4...d6 307
16 4...e6 5.Bc4 Nc6; 5...b6; 5...Nc7; 5...Nb6 318
17 4...e6 5.Bc4 d6 6.d4 Nc6; 6...Be7; 6...de; 6...cd 7.cd de; 7...Bd7;
7...Nb6; 7...Be7 (w/o Nc6) 348
18 4...e6 5.Bc4 d6 6.d4 cd 7.cd Nc6 8.0-0 Be7 9.Qe2 374
19 4...Nc6 5.d4 e6; 5...cd 6.cd g6; 6...d6 7.Bc4 de 8.Nxe5; 8.de 403
20 4...Nc6 5.d4 cd 6.cd d6 7.Bc4 Nb6 8.Bb3; 8.Bb5 415

Index of Variations 452

 Squeezing the Sicilian
The Alapin Variation
Alexander Khalifman Sergei Soloviov

Chess Stars Publishing

www.chess-stars.com

Copyright © 2020 by Alexander Khalifman and Sergei Soloviov

Cover by Rustam Taichinov

Bibliography

Books

Beating the Anti-Sicilians, by V.Kotronias, Quality Chess 2015

Experts on the Anti-Sicilians, by J.Aagaard & J.Shaw, Quality
Chess 2011
Fighting the anti-Sicilians, by R.Palliser, Everyman Chess 2007
Sveshnikov vs. the Anti-Sicilians, by E. Sveshnikov, New in Chess
2014
The Complete c3 Sicilian, by M.Chandler, Batsford 1996
The Easiest Sicilian, by A.Kolev & T.Nedev, Chess Stars 2008
 The Most Flexible Sicilian, by A.Delchev and S. Semkov, Chess
Stars 2014

Periodicals

Chess Informant
New in chess Yearbook
Bestlogic Database
Chessbase online database
ChessOK Correspondence Database
Correspondence Database
FICGS DataBase
GameKnot Database
ICCF Database
LSS Database
Mega Database
 A rich merchant combats the Sicilian
chaos

Judging by the reviews of our previous book about the Four Knights
Game, our concept of an “opening for the pragmatist” has turned out to be
quite viable. Subsequently, having dealt in this way with 1...е7-е5, the
authors wondered whether it would be possible to deal in the same way
with other openings.

It is a well-known fact that the Sicilian Defence has been Black’s most
popular response to 1.е4 for nearly seventy years now. Although lately the
chess elite seems to have turned its attention to 1...е5, from the 2600+ level
downwards the main response is still 1...c5 and as a rule it is this move that
creates the most problems for White in preparing for the game. So we
wondered whether we could apply the same method here as in our previous
book. The basic principles of our approach are:

1. We should like to stay away from sharp modern variations in which the
main lines and the evaluations are changing every month. Among other
things, this means that the opponent might not know what to do against the
lines we have chosen. One of the trends nowadays is for players (even at the
level of the solid amateur) to analyse the main lines in great depth and leave
the sidelines for later. It is worth noting that this “later” never happens in
some cases...

2. We want to avoid complex lines in which the value of every move is

very high. Admittedly you cannot play this game successfully without
knowing some concrete variations, but we should like to lessen the
importance of this factor and to transfer the weight of the struggle to the
middlegame.
 3. Following on from the previous point, if something goes wrong and
your memory lets you down during the game, this will not lead to an
immediate catastrophe, as often happens in the sharp main lines. The
margin of safety is very high and you should be able to find your way out of
the situation just by using general principles. The worst that should happen
to you is that you might have to give up the fight for an opening advantage.

4. Our approach does not imply however that White will not be fighting
for an advantage in the opening. Yes, we wish to shift the weight of the
struggle to the middlegame, but Black will need to play very precisely in
order to enter the middlegame with equal prospects. Naturally Black may
equalise (in general Black often equalises in the main lines as well!) but not
with indifferent play.

5. We plan to build up our position on a sound positional basis, eschewing

any bizarre modern concepts. The centre, development, piece activity and a
sound pawn structure – exactly as we were taught in school.

6. Finally, and in particular, we persistently avoid the standard Sicilian

pawn structure and the type of fight this leads to. We have in mind the
positions with the semi-open c- and d- files, in which any experienced
Sicilian player feels like a fish in water. We definitely want to avoid this
type of position and prefer to draw our opponent out of his comfort zone.

This more or less concluded our initial approach. Next we needed to

select our specific system. Now that our choice has been made you might
think that it was the other way round, that the basic principles of our choice
were tailored to fit the final result. But believe me, dear reader, this was not
entirely true. It took us a long time to make our choice and we investigated
numerous possibilities. We kept hitting snags. Some lines were simply not
‘universal’ enough, some involved too much theory to study, while in others
the play was just too irrational. But once we had made our decision we felt
sure it was the right one. And our choice was – the Alapin Variation with
2.”2-”3!

Judging from the games that have come down to us from those days,
Semyon Alapin was not the first to come up with the idea of countering the
Sicilian Defence in this way. Nevertheless there is no doubt that he was the
first to start playing the system that now bears his name regularly against
the strongest players of his day. In fact, at the end of the 19th and the start
of the 20th century Alapin was one of the top ten players in the world,
according to authoritative modern estimates. His biography is generally
quite interesting but it is especially significant that, in addition to his chess
achievements, he was also a “merchant of the first guild”. In those days and
in those conditions, this fact clearly testified to his having outstanding
commercial talent (hence, “an opening for the pragmatist”!) Alapin proved
to be an outstanding chess theoretician too and there was even a white
opening named after him. Still, if Alapin’s Opening (1.e4 e5 2.Ne2) can be
classified these days as an eccentric rarity, Alapin’s line against the Sicilian
Defence is something quite different. At the beginning of the last century, in
the footsteps of its inventor, some first-class masters such as Nimzowitsch
and Tartakower begin to play it and it was possible to write “the system has
taken a very worthy place in the theory of the openings”, but this turned out
to be not quite the case. For quite a long time, although the Alapin system
did not completely disappear from practice, it was rarely used in high-level
games. It was considered that Black’s task in the Alapin was much easier, in
comparison with the main lines.

The rebirth of the system happened at the beginning of the 1970s and it
was connected with the name of a young and talented master who later
became an outstanding and creative grandmaster – Evgeny Sveshnikov.
Over time he acquired some followers, but still his contribution to the
development of the system has been unique. Sveshnikov has played more
than 400 games using the Alapin Variation and for anyone who wishes to
counter the Sicilian Defence with the move ”2-”3, studying them is
invaluable. The order of moves has been refined, some sidelines have been
refuted and consigned to oblivion, but the general strategical concept and
the evaluation of the arising positions have remained quite valid even today
and all of this can be found in Sveshnikov’s games. Nowadays the Alapin
Variation has quite a respectable reputation, but is still not very popular at
the highest levels of the chess hierarchy. However, this can only be good for
us.

White’s strategic idea is extremely simple. He prepares to advance with

d2-d4, to build a solid pawn centre and then dictate the play. He will have to
pay for this with the fact that his queen’s knight has been deprived of the
best square for its development, but it may have other suitable squares (let’s
not get too far ahead of ourselves, but suffice to say that in many variations
this will be, not the d2-square, but a3.). Secondly, it very often happens that
after d4 cxd4 cxd4, White’s queen’s knight gets access anyway to its best
square on c3. Naturally, Black will not stay passive and usually tries to
organise immediate counterplay in the centre, but White can always find
sufficient resources. The modern evaluation of this system is that Black has
comfortable enough lines in which he can obtain an acceptable game. We
are not claiming to overturn this assessment, or to try to refute this
evaluation (Black can equalise, we accept that), but we shall try to prove
that not all of his lines are equally good. Whether we have succeeded, let
the reader be our judge.

Finally, in conclusion, we should like to apologise for plagiarising a

paragraph from our previous book, since it is also extremely relevant here,
practically without any changes:

We should also like to mention some other positive aspects of our method
and these concern the field of psychology. The first point is if you happen to
play against an opponent who is stronger than you (or if he considers
himself to be stronger, even without any objective reasons – this happens
quite often, by the way). The Four Knights Game has acquired a reputation
over the years of “White is just playing for a draw...”. We have in mind
something different, but if the opponent is convinced of our intention to
play for a draw, this might turn out to be very helpful for us. All this has
been tested in practice numerous times. What usually happens is that your
opponent thinks: “Draw?” Well, OK “draw”, and he will usually start to
make indifferent moves, assuming that the result of the game has been
already settled. However, we then have the possibility of punishing him for
his careless attitude. The second possibility is that your opponent may
decide that White should be punished for this drawish strategy and he might
embark on incorrect complications. This may be very helpful to us as well.
Of course, these possibilities cannot be guaranteed, but they happen very
often, even at the top level.

Alexander Khalifman
St Petersburg
 Part 1
1.e4 c5 2.c3

In Part 1 of our book we have analysed all of Black’s responses to 1.e4 c5

2.c3 apart from 2...d5 and 2...Nf6. Although in contemporary grandmaster
practice these possibilities are all played only very rarely, you should not
regard them as merely exotic and you should not ignore them in your game
preparation. From the historical point of view it is worth mentioning that in
the first game which has come down to us, in which the Alapin Variation
was played, Black (no less a player than Staunton himself) replied with
2...е6. The player who invented the rather original answer 2...Qa5 was
Doctor Tarrasch. Nowadays, if we disregard play at grandmaster level, the
variations 2...d5, 2...Nf6 and all the rest are encountered with
approximately equal frequency. There is therefore a fairly clear logic to the
way we have organised the material.
The main drawback of all the continuations covered in Part 1 (we shall
touch upon a couple of exceptions) is that they allow White to carry out
unopposed his basic strategic idea, namely to build a powerful pawn-centre
with d4+e4. Of course, this in itself cannot provide him with a decisive or
even a large advantage. Nevertheless, White’s play becomes very clear and
comfortable, while Black must come up with something urgently, to avoid
landing in a permanently worse position, without any counterplay.

In Chapter 1 we start to cover Black’s second move options. It is worth

paying special attention to the move 2...Qa5. This brainchild of Doctor
Tarrasch has found some outstanding followers nowadays, such as
grandmaster Romanishin (it is worth noting though that, during the period
of his best results, Romanishin abstained from playing this line against
Sveshnikov) and grandmaster Movsesian (lately though it seems that he has
become rather disenchanted with this move). However, with all due respect
to these great players, the general principles of play in the opening are still
valid and the eccentric queen move does not have any particular merits.
Admittedly Black has prevented his opponent’s plan, but this is only
temporary. White can first develop his kingside and then advance d2-d4
quite comfortably. We should also mention the move 2...Nc6. This is not at
all bad, but only if, after 3.d4, Black continues with 3...d5, when after
4.exd5 Qxd5 there is a transposition to variations which we analyse in Part
2 of the book. In all other lines the knight sortie on move two turns out to
be untimely.

In Chapter 2 we analyse the variation 2...b6. Now, after 3.d4 Bb7 4.Bd3,

there is usually a transposition to lines of Owen’s Defence (1.e4 b6). This

may sound mysterious and even romantic (I suspect that some of our
readers are not even aware that such an opening exists), but in practice, if
White plays with even minimal accuracy, in order for Black to avoid the
worst he will have to transpose to some rather dubious lines of the French
Defence.
In Chapter 3 we analyse Black’s attempt to fianchetto his other bishop
immediately with – 2...g6. Here, after 3.d4, if Black wishes to avoid
entering a permanently inferior and passive position he needs to play
3...cxd4 (there is also another possibility here, 3...d5 immediately, but then
after 4.exd5 Qxd5 we have a transposition to lines which are analysed in
Part 2 of the book) 4.cd4 d5; then after 5.e5

it turns out that the fact that White has not developed his king’s knight yet
is definitely in his favour. Black does not have the resource Bg4 available
and White is able to hold on to his powerful centre and maintain a
comfortable advantage from the opening.

In Chapter 4 we deal with a rather mysterious, generally useful, but rarely

played move: 2...a6. We believe that it deserves quite serious attention. The
point is that after 3.d4 cxd4 4.cxd4 d5, the move а7-а6 turns out to be quite
useful and we have failed to find any convincing advantage for White. So
we have decided that in this situation White should not hurry to advance d2-
d4 immediately but should instead play the useful move 3.Nf3.
 After this, Black will have to decide what scheme to adopt for his further
development and White will occupy the centre under more favourable
circumstances.

In Chapter 5 we shall deal with another attempt by Black to prevent his

opponent from building a powerful pawn-centre: the move 2...e5.
 Here too the roots stretch back to the 19th century, but it was introduced
into modern tournament practice only at the end of the last millennium by
grandmaster Mikhail Krasenkow. However, it is worth noting that in the
new millennium Mikhail has admitted that the moves 2...d5 and 2...Nf6 are
much more reliable. After 2...е5, it is hardly surprising that the play usually
resembles some type of open game. If White develops his pieces patiently,
with the idea of exploiting the weakened d5-square later in the middle
game, then the type of position that may arise is very similar to schemes in
the Closed Ruy Lopez. This might cause some discomfort for players with
Black who play nothing but the Sicilian Defence but in fairness White’s
chances of gaining an advantage this way are slim. We have therefore
recommended a line which is quite forcing and requires Black to respond
very precisely. Black’s chances of equalising are greater than in the
positions in the previous chapter, but he will still have problems.

In Chapter 6 we analyse the variations after 2...d6. For many decades this
move has ranked as the third most popular response for Black, after the
main continuations 2...Nf6 and 2...d5. This is easily understandable. Right
from the start of the game Black wishes to enter positions where all three
results are possible, avoiding the main lines, which are much simpler from
the strategical point of view. But Black has to pay a price for this, because
although the positions arising are really complex, White enjoys more space
and a powerful centre and this provides him with the better prospects.

Finally, in Chapter 7, the last in this part of the book, we have analysed
the system with 2...е6. This is a very sound move from the point of view of
strategy; Black plans to advance d7-d5 and fight for the centre. In our
opinion, of all the continuations presented in this part of the book, it is
precisely these two moves with Black’s king’s pawn that offer the best
chances of equalising. But there is a difference. If, after 2...e5, as we have
already mentioned, the positions arising are typical of the open games, in
this chapter the positions reached have a distinctive French flavour. For
many devoted Sicilian players, such structural transformations are not only
unpleasant but sometimes even unacceptable. For example, after 2...e6 3.d4
d5, White can continue with 4.e5 and the position arising is not just similar
to the French Defence but is in fact one of the key positions of this opening.
This is quite a promising option, but we shall abstain from analysing it in
this book, on account of the sheer bulk of the material this would involve
and its strategic richness. And why embark on such a big main line when
instead we can play 4.exd5 exd5 (4...Qxd5 5.Nf3 is covered in the second
part of our book) 5.Nf3,
 reaching a position which is also similar in character to the French
Defence, but one where the game usually comes down to standard positions
with an isolated pawn for Black and where White has a small but stable
long-term advantage and simple, clear play.
 Chapter 1
1.e4 c5 2.c3

In this chapter we will analyse some rarely played moves for Black: A)
2...Qc7, B) 2...Qa5 and C) 2...Nc6.
After all these moves he does not influence sufficiently his opponent’s
centre and White obtains effortlessly an advantage in the opening.

A) 2...Qc7
Following this move there usually arise positions from Chapter 4 (2...a6),
or Chapter 6 (2...d6). Here, we will deal only with variations which would
lead to original positions.
3.d4 e6

About 3...d6 4.h3 – see 2...d6.

About 3...g6 4.Nf3 d6 5.h3 Bg7 6.Bd3 Nf6 7.0-0, or 4...Bg7 5.Bd3 d6
6.h3 Nf6 7.0-0 – see 2...d6.
 3...cxd4. As a rule, this exchange in the Alapin system facilitates
considerably White’s task to maintain an edge, because now, his knight on
b1 can be developed on the c3-square, where it would be considerably more
active than on d2, or on a3. 4.cxd4 Nf6 (4...e6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Nf3 – see 2...a6)
5.Nc3 e6 6.Bd3 Bb4 7.Bd2 a6 (7...Bxc3 8.bxc3± 8.e5

8...Bxc3? Bassani – Barbosa, Brasilia 2012. Black exchanges an

important defender of his dark squares and thus worsens his position even
more. 9.bxc3 Nd5 10.Qg4 0-0 (10...g6 11.c4 Ne7 12.Nf3+–) 11.c4 f5
(11...Ne7 12.Nf3 Nf5 13.Qh3 h6 14.g4 Nxd4 15.Nxd4 Qxe5+ 16.Qe3+–)
12.Qh4 Nb6 13.Rc1+–
8...Nd5 9.Qg4 0-0 10.Bh6! White is not afraid of the move 10...Bxc3+,
because he can counter it with the powerful intermediate move 11.Kf1!, for
example: 11...g6 12.bxc3 Qxc3 13.Rd1 Nc6 14.Nf3 Ncb4 15.Bb1 f5
16.exf6 Rxf6 (16...Nxf6 17.Qg5+–) 17.h4+–

4.Nf3
 4...b6

About 4...a6 5.Bd3 – see 2...a6.

4...d6 5.Bd3 Nf6 6.0-0, or 5...Nd7 6.0-0 Ngf6 7.Re1 – see 2...d6.

4...Nc6 5.d5 Ne5 6.dxe6 fxe6, Rapaire – Voarino, France 2007, 7.Bf4
Nxf3+ (7...Bd6?? 8.Nxe5 Bxe5 9.Qh5+–) 8.Qxf3 d6 9.Nd2±
4...Nf6?! 5.e5 Nd5 6.c4! White continues to chase the enemy knight.
6...Nb6 7.d5 d6 8.Nc3 a6. Here, Black must waste a tempo in order to
defend against the threat Nb5. 9.Bf4 exd5 10.cxd5 Bg4 11.Qe2! White not
only prepares castling queenside, but also creates threats against the enemy
king. 11...dxe5, Pekar – Hlavac, Slovakia 2007, 12.Bxe5 Qe7 13.0-0-0±

4...cxd4 5.cxd4 Nf6 (5...a6 6.Nc3 or 5...d6 6.Nc3 a6 7.Bd3 – see 2...a6)
6.Bd3. White is not in a hurry to play Nc3, since he is reluctant to allow the
pin of his knight. 6...Nc6 (6...Bb4+ 7.Bd2 Bxd2+ 8.Nbxd2± Bernhard –
Berger, Austria 2017. White is already perfectly prepared for the pawn-
advance e4-e5 and Ne4-d6.) 7.Nc3 a6 8.0-0 Be7, Skok – Zahirovic,
Ljubljana 2007, 9.d5! White makes use of his opponent’s rather slow play
and opens the game in the centre. 9...Ne5 10.Nxe5 Qxe5 11.Be3 0-0. Black
has managed to evacuate his king away from the centre, but it would come
soon under an attack on the kingside. 12.f4 Qc7 13.e5 Nxd5 14.Nxd5 exd5
15.Qh5 g6 16.Qh6 f5 17.exf6 Bxf6 18.f5+–

5.Bd3 Bb7 6.0-0 Nf6

About 6...d6 7.Re1 – see 2...b6.

6...Ne7, Magem Badals – Ju.Polgar, Madrid 1994, 7.d5!?±

7.Re1 Be7 8.e5

8...Nd5, Korneev – Khamrakulov, Seville 2006, 9.dxc5 bxc5 (9...Bxc5

10.a3 a5 11.c4 Ne7 12.Nc3± 10.Na3! White’s knight is headed for the d6-
outpost. 10...0-0 11.Nb5 Qd8 12.c4 Nb4 13.Bb1 a6 14.Nd6 Bxf3 15.Qxf3
N4c6 16.Bh6! This move is energetic and strong. 16...f5 (16...gxh6??
17.Qe4+–) 17.Qg3. Now, the material losses are unavoidable for Black.
17...g6 18.Bxf8 Qxf8 19.Bc2 Nd4 20.Ba4±
 B) 2...Qa5

Black is trying to impede the enemy pawn-advance d2-d4, but this rather
early queen-sortie cannot be approved.
3.g3!?
This move is not so popular as 3.Nf3, but it creates serious problems for
Black. White’s further plan is quite simple. He wishes at first to complete
the development of his pieces on the kingside and to castle (Bg2, Ne2, 0-0)
and then to place another pawn in the centre (d2-d4).
3...Nc6

3...d6. Now, Black will be able to develop his knight on f6 without being
afraid of e4-e5. 4.Bg2 g6 (about 4...Nc6 5.Ne2 – see 3...Nc6) 5.Ne2 Bg7
6.0-0 Nf6 (6...Nc6 7.d4 – see 3...Nc6) 7.d4 0-0 8.h3 Rd8
 9.Be3. White follows the principles of A.Nimzowitsch and provides
additional defence of the strategically important d4-square. (9.a4!? White is
trying to acquire additional space on the queenside prior to the completion
of the development of his pieces. 9...Nc6. Black only facilitates the
realisation of his opponent’s plans with this move. 10.d5 Ne5 11.f4 Ned7
12.c4±) 9...Nc6, Ibragimov – Shchekachev, St Petersburg 1994, 10.d5 Ne5
11.b3! Here, before advancing f2-f4, it would be useful for White to prevent
the appearance of the enemy knight on the c4-square. 11...b5 12.Nd2 Qc7
13.f4 Ned7 14.g4± White’s kingside pawns are ready to advance and to
crush the opposition there.

3...b5. Black continues with his flank strategy, which is detrimental to the
development of his kingside pieces. 4.Bg2 Bb7 5.Ne2 (5.d3!? e6 6.Nf3²)
5...Nf6. Black exerts pressure against the enemy pawn on e4 and wishes to
force the move d2-d3 (5...f5?! Kopp – Nazarenus, Germany 2012, 6.d3 Nf6
7.0-0 fxe4 8.Nf4 e5 9.Nh5±).
 6.d4!? This is an interesting pawn-sacrifice for the initiative. 6...cxd4
(6...Bxe4 7.Bxe4 Nxe4 8.dxc5 Nc6 9.b4 Qa4 10.Qxa4 bxa4. White
preserves better prospects thanks to his pawn-majority on the queenside.
11.Nd2 Nxd2 12.Bxd2 d5 13.cxd6 e5 14.0-0-0! The queenside is the best
place for White’s king. It will support the advance of his passed pawns from
there. 14...Bxd6 15.Be3 Ke7 16.g4!± This is useful prophylactic against
Black’s pawn-advance f7-f5. Later, White will transfer his knight to the
centre of the board (Ng3–e4) and will begin to advance his passed pawns:
a2-a3, c3-c4-c5. Black will be faced with a rather difficult defence.) 7.Nxd4
Bxe4. He wins White’s central pawn, but lags horribly in development.
8.Bxe4 Nxe4 9.Qe2 d5 10.Bf4!? White is not in a hurry to restore the
material balance. 10...Nd7 11.f3 Nef6 12.Nxb5 e5 13.Bxe5 Nxe5
14.Qxe5+ Kd8 15.Nd4± Black’s king has been stranded in the centre for
long.
It is also possible for White to play calmly here 6.d3 and his plan would
be to begin active actions on the queenside after the pawn-advance b2-b4
and thus to utilise his lead in development. 6...d6 7.0-0 Nbd7, Erenburg –
Roiz, Tel Aviv 2002, 8.b4!? cxb4 9.cxb4 Qxb4 10.Nbc3 Qa5 11.Rb1 a6
12.a4 b4 13.Na2. Black will be incapable of holding on to his extra pawn
13...e5 14.Rxb4 Qc7 15.Ba3±

3...g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Ne2 e5. Black wishes to impede his opponent’s pawn-
advance d2-d4, even at the price of the weakening of the d5-square. (About
5...Nc6 6.0-0 – see 3...Nc6; after 5...h5, Jiganchine – Berry, Vancouver
2001, the simplest for White would be to play 6.h3², so that he could
counter h5-h4 with g3-g4.) 6.0-0 Nc6

7.Na3 (7.d4!? This is an interesting pawn-sacrifice. White’s idea is to

eliminate the enemy e5-pawn and to deploy his bishop on the d6-outpost.
7...exd4 8.Bf4 Nge7 9.Bd6 0-0 10.Nd2 dxc3 11.Nxc3± Black will have
great problems to complete the development of his queenside pieces, since
White’s bishop on d6 hampers the movements of Black’s pawn on d7.)
7...d6, Can – Chahrani, Khanty-Mansiysk 2010, 8.d4 (8.b4!? cxb4 9.cxb4
Nxb4 10.Rb1 Be6 11.d4 Bxa2 12.Ra1 Rc8 13.Bb2±) 8...exd4 9.cxd4 cxd4
10.Nc4 Qc7 (10...Qc5. Black’s queen will soon come under an attack on
this square after the move Ba3. 11.b3 b5 12.Ba3 b4. He covers the diagonal
of White’s bishop on a3, but now Black will have great problems to oust the
enemy knight from the c4-square. 13.Bb2±; 13.Nf4!?) 11.Bf4 Ne5
12.Qxd4!? White obtains more than sufficient material compensation for
the queen. 12...Nf3+ 13.Bxf3 Bxd4 14.Nxd6+ Kf8 15.Nxd4 Qb6 16.Rfd1
h5. Here, before developing his knight on g8, Black must take measures
against the enemy threat Bh6+. 17.e5 Bg4 18.Be3. His queen must avoid all
the time the attacks of White’s pieces. 18...Qxb2 19.Rdb1 Qc3 20.Bxb7
Rd8 21.Bg2 Kg7 22.h3+–

4.Bg2

We will analyse now: B1) 4...g6 and B2) 4...Nf6.

4...d6 5.Ne2 h5 (After 5...Bg4 6.h3 Bh5?! Paaske – Rossen, Odense 2011,
Black’s misplaced bishop would only enhance White’s pawn-offensive on
the kingside. 7.g4 Bg6 8.f4±) 6.h3. He wishes to be able to counter h5-h4
with g3-g4. 6...Nh6 7.0-0 h4 8.g4 (White loses a part of his advantage with
the move 8.d4 after 8...cxd4 9.cxd4 hxg3 10.fxg3, Selebran – Dubessay,
Chalons en Champagne 2015. The shelter of his king would be weakened.
10...Qh5 11.Nf4 Qxd1 12.Rxd1 Bd7²) 8...Nxg4. This knight-sacrifice does
not seem to be well prepared, but Black has no other way of organising
counterplay anyway. 9.hxg4 Bxg4 10.f3 Bd7 11.f4 h3 12.Bf3 g5 13.fxg5 c4
14.Na3 Ne5 15.Nxc4!? This is White’s most practical decision. He gives
back the extra piece, but is happy to have a powerful pawn-centre and good
attacking prospects against the enemy king. 15...Nxc4 16.d4 0-0-0 17.Qd3
Qc7 18.b3 Nb6 19.a4±

B1) 4...g6 5.Ne2 Bg7 6.0-0

6...d6

6...c4?! Black prevents d2-d4, but creates a target for his opponent’s
attack. 7.Na3
 7...b5 8.Nc2 Ne5 9.a4. White changes the target of his attack from the c4-
pawn to the enemy b5-pawn. 9...Nd3. This black knight is beautifully
placed here, but it remains his only active piece in the fight. 10.axb5 Qxb5
11.Na3. After the fall of the pawn on b5, White begins again to try to
gobble the enemy pawn on c4 as well. 11...Qa5 12.b3! White does not have
sufficient forces to increase his pressure against the pawn on c4, so he
decides the exchange it in order to undermine the base under the enemy
knight on d3. 12...Ba6 13.Nc2 Qb6 14.bxc4 Nxc1 (14...Bxc4 15.Ba3±)
15.Rxc1 Bxc4 16.d3 Bb3 17.Rb1. Black’s active pieces have been
exchanged and his other pieces have not been developed yet. In addition, he
must lose a tempo to defend against the threat Ned4. 17...e5 18.Qc1 a5
19.Qa3 a4 20.Nc1 Rb8 21.Na1!± Black is incapable of avoiding the loss of
a pawn.
7...Ne5 8.Nd4 Nh6 9.Qe2 b5. He sacrifices a pawn in order to deploy his
bishop on the f1-a6 diagonal as quickly as possible. (9...0-0 10.f4±)
10.Naxb5 Ba6
 11.b4! With this move White sacrifices the exchange, seizes completely
the initiative and is about to settle the issue. 11...cxb3 12.axb3 Qxa1
13.Nc7+ Kd8 14.Nxa6+– Black’s king is stranded in the centre for long
and would be an easy prey for White’s raging pieces.

7.d4 cxd4 8.cxd4 Qb6

Black increases his pressure against the d4-square, but now, White can
sacrifice his pawn on b2 obtaining an excellent position.
 9.Be3! Qxb2 10.Nbc3 Qb4 11.Rb1 Qa5 12.e5!
White opens the position in the centre in an attempt to exploit his lead in
development. He must play energetically, since Black would need only two
moves to evacuate his king away from the centre.
12...Nh6

12...dxe5 13.dxe5± and Black cannot play 13...Nxe5?, because of

14.Rb5+–; 13...Qxe5? 14.Bxc6+ bxc6 15.Bd4+–

13.exd6 exd6 14.Rb5 Qd8 15.Bg5! It would be useful for White to

provoke a move which would weaken the a2-g8 diagonal. 15...f6 16.Bxh6
Bxh6 17.Qb3! Black fails to castle. 17...Qe7 (17...Kf8 18.Rxb7 Bxb7
19.Qxb7 Qc8 20.Qxc6+–) 18.Nd5 Qxe2 19.Nc7+ Kd8 20.Nxa8 Nxd4
21.Qc3! After this move Black’s resistance comes to an end. 21...Nxb5
22.Qxf6+ Qe7 23.Qxh8+ Bf8 24.a4+–

B2) 4...Nf6 5.Ne2

 5...h5

5...d6 6.0-0² c4? Van Baar – Romanishin, Vlissingen 2019. Black is

trying to impede the enemy pawn-advance d2-d4, but this only worsens his
position even more. 7.Na3 Ne5 8.f4 Qc5+ 9.d4! White sacrifices
temporarily a pawn and re-establishes his control over the d3-square.
9...cxd3+ 10.Nd4 Ned7. Black’s knight has been ousted away from the
centre. It has become quite evident now that his opening strategy has failed
completely. 11.Qxd3 a6 (Following 11...g6, Black cannot play Bg7 and
castle. 12.b4! Qc7 13.e5! dxe5 14.Ndb5 Qb8 15.Qc4+–) 12.Nc4 b5. This
move weakens horribly Black’s queenside, but he has no other way of
defending against his opponent’s threat b2-b4, followed by e4-e5. 13.Na5
e5 14.b4 Qb6 15.Be3 exd4 16.Bxd4 Qc7 17.e5+–

5...e6 6.0-0? d5 (6...c4 7.b3 cxb3 8.Qxb3. Black has developed rather
badly his pieces and would be incapable of exploiting the relative weakness
of his opponent’s pawn on a2. 8...Qa6, Larrea – Delgado Ramirez,
Montevideo 2011, 9.Nd4 Nxd4 10.cxd4 d6 11.Nc3 Qb6 12.Rb1 Qxb3
13.Rxb3 Be7. The trade of the queens has not facilitated Black’s defence,
because after 14.Ba3 a6 15.e5, White’s initiative is still very powerful.
15...dxe5 16.dxe5 Bxa3 17.Rxa3 Nd7 18.Nb5 0-0 19.f4± Black cannot
cover the dark squares in his camp, since his dark-squared bishop has been
exchanged.) 7.exd5 Nxd5 8.d4 Be7 9.c4 Nf6 10.d5 Ne5, Hresc –
Fernandez Aguado, Finkenstein 1993 (10...exd5 11.cxd5 Nb4 12.d6 Bd8,
Kuttruf – Wagner, Email 2004, 13.Nd2! White’s knight is headed for the
c4-square in order to take part in the protection of his passed pawn on d6.
13...0-0 14.Nc4 Qa6 15.b3±) 11.d6 Bd8 12.b3 0-0 13.Bb2 Ned7 14.Nbc3±
White’s bishop on g2 and his pawn on d6 impede the development of
Black’s queenside pieces.

6.h3

6...c4

6...h4. This move does not look good for Black before White has castled
kingside, because Black is in fact attacking nothing... 7.g4 Ne5 8.d3 (Here,
it is also possible for White to try the more ambitious line: 8.d4 cxd4 9.f4.
He wishes to oust the enemy knights with his pawns as quickly as possible.
9...d3, Kacheishvili – Movsesian, Pula 1997, 10.Nd4 Nc6 11.Qxd3 Nxd4
12.Qxd4 d5 13.e5 Ne4 14.Bxe4 dxe4 15.Be3± Black will be incapable of
preserving his pawn on e4.) 8...Qa6 9.Nf4 (9.c4 Qd6 10.Nf4 e6 11.Nc3 a6,
Ponomariov – Movsesian, Zagan 1997, 12.0-0± Black cannot exploit in any
way the vulnerability of the enemy pawn on d3 and the d4-square, while the
awkward placement of his queen on d6 and the weakness of his pawn on h4
might create soon great problems for him.) 9...g5 10.d4 cxd4 11.cxd4 gxf4
12.dxe5 Qa5+ 13.Bd2! White prepares the transfer of his bishop to the long
diagonal. 13...Qxe5 14.Bc3 Qe6 15.0-0 Bg7 16.Re1 0-0 17.Qd2 Bh6
18.Na3 d6 19.e5± White has more than sufficient compensation for his
minimal material deficit.

7.d4

7.0-0!? Ne5 8.d4 cxd3 9.Nd4 h4 10.g4 g5!? Black is playing very
inventively indeed, but White still obtains a considerable advantage with
precise moves. 11.b4. He ousts the enemy queen away from the fifth rank.
11...Qb6 12.Bxg5 Nfxg4!? Black sacrifices a piece and begins a desperate
counter attack. (The move 12...a5 would not be any better for him. 13.f4
Nc6 14.bxa5 Rxa5 15.Nd2 Nxd4 16.cxd4 Qxd4+ 17.Kh1 Ra6 18.Nf3 Qb2
19.Qxd3+–) 13.hxg4 h3 14.Bf3 Bh6 15.Bh4 Bf4 16.Bg3 Bxg3 17.fxg3 d6
18.Nd2± The position is still a bit sharp, but Black’s compensation for the
sacrificed piece is insufficient.

7...cxd3 8.Qxd3
8.Nf4 d6, Remis Fernandez – Povchanic, ICCF 2008, 9.0-0 e5 10.Nd5²
8...d6 9.f4!?
Now, White will not be afraid of the enemy knight-sortie to the e5-square.

9.Nd2 Ne5 10.Qc2 g6 (10...Qa6. Black cannot exploit the vulnerability

of the d3-square, because White can simply play 11.c4 b5 12.0-0²) 11.f4 (It
would be worse for White to try here 11.Nd4, Kamsky – Movsesian,
Moscow 2008, because after 11...Qa6 12.c4, the placement of his knight on
d4 would be unstable. 12...Qb6 13.N4f3 Nfd7 14.0-0 Bg7÷) 11...Nc6
12.Nc4 Qa6 13.Ne3 Bg7 14.a4± White will follow this move with b2-b4,
in order to continue to cramp the enemy pieces on the queenside.

9...e5
Black wishes to ensure the e5-square for his knight, but weakens in the
process his pawn on d6 and the d5-square.
10.Na3 Be7 11.0-0
 11...h4 12.g4 exf4 13.Bxf4 Ne5 14.Qb5+ Qxb5 15.Nxb5. Black has no
compensation for the vulnerability of his pawn on d6 and after 15...0-0
16.Rad1 Rd8 17.Nc7 Rb8 18.Nd4 a6 19.Nf5 Bxf5 20.exf5±, White gets
rid of his weakness on e4 and also obtains the two-bishop advantage in the
process.

C) 2...Nc6
One of the defects of this move is that Black’s knight might come under
an attack later after d4-d5.
3.d4
 3...cxd4

About 3...d5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Nf3 – see 2...d5.

3...Nf6?! Black continues with his losing strategy. He develops his

knights but ignores the control over the central squares. 4.d5 Ne5 5.f4 Ng6
6.e5 Ng8 (6...Ne4 7.f5 Nxe5 8.Qe2+–) 7.h4 h5 8.Bd3 Qb6 9.Nf3 d6
10.e6+– Geidl – Pitic, Germany 2007.

3...b6?! This move does not combine at all with 2...Nc6. 4.Nf3. Now,
before advancing d4-d5, White takes the e5-square under control.
 4...cxd4 5.cxd4 Bb7 (5...e6 6.d5 Bb4+ 7.Nc3±) 6.d5 Nb4 7.Nc3±
4...d6 5.d5 (5.Bb5 Bd7 6.0-0±) 5...Ne5 (5...Nb8 6.e5±; 6.Bb5+!? Bd7
7.Be2±) 6.Nxe5. Black wishes to facilitate his defence by exchanging
pieces. Still, after 6...dxe5 7.Qh5!?, it becomes evident that he can hold on
to his central pawn only at the price of the loss of his castling rights. 7...Nf6
(7...Qc7 8.Bb5±) 8.Qxe5± Okhotnik – Zigura, Nancy 2003.
4...e6 5.d5 exd5 (5...Nce7 6.d6 Ng6 7.Na3±) 6.exd5 Qe7+ (6...Nce7
7.d6+–; 6...Na5 7.Na3 a6 8.Bd3±) 7.Be2 Ne5 8.0-0 d6 9.Nxe5 dxe5
10.Na3+–

3...e6 4.d5. White occupies space with tempo. 4...exd5 (4...Ne5. On this
square Black’s knight would come under an attack after 5.f4, for example:
5...Ng6 6.d6 e5, Simon – Kaluza, Polanica Zdroj 2009. Without Black’s last
move White would have protected his pawn on d6 with the move e4-e5.
7.Na3 a6 8.Nf3 exf4 9.h4+–) 5.exd5
 5...Nce7? 6.d6+–
5...Qe7+ This check only enhances the development of White’s pieces.
6.Be2 Ne5 7.f4 Nc4 8.Nh3 Nf6 9.0-0 Nd6, Rogers – Cohle, ICCF 2012,
10.c4± Black has lost too much time on manoeuvres with his knight and his
queen on e7 impedes the development of his bishop on f8.
5...Nb8 6.d6 Qf6, Avtsynov – Katkov, Voronezh 2013, 7.Na3. White’s
knight is headed for the b5-square. 7...Bxd6. Black wins the enemy pawn
which cramps his position. Still, this is only a small consolation for him,
because after 8.Nb5 Be5 9.f4 Bxf4 10.Bxf4 Qxf4 11.Nd6+ Kd8 12.Ne2
Qf6 13.Ng3+–, he falls considerably back in development and his king,
stranded in the centre, would be an excellent target for White’s attacking
pieces.
5...Ne5 6.Nf3. White wishes to trade his opponent’s only developed
piece.
 6...Nxf3+ 7.Qxf3 Qf6 (7...d6 8.Bd3±) 8.Bf4 Bd6 9.Qe3+ Ne7 10.Bxd6
Qxd6 11.Na3± Gergs – Schlickenrieder, Germany 1994.
6...Bd6. On this square Black’s bishop with thwart the development of his
queenside pieces, so White should better not be in a hurry to exchange on
e5. 7.Na3!? Nxf3+ (7...a6? 8.Nxe5 Bxe5 9.d6+–) 8.Qxf3 Nf6 9.Nc4±
Teixeira – Sversut, corr. 2001.
6...Qe7 7.Nxe5 Qxe5+ 8.Be2 Nf6 9.c4 Bd6, Colina – McLaughlin, ICCF
2013, 10.Nd2. White is transferring his knight to the f3-square in order to
castle and to avoid being checkmated. (10.a4!? This is a very original move.
White wishes to bring his rook into the actions along the third rank, but
still, that move is a bit weaker than the natural Nd2. 10...0-0 11.Ra3 b6
12.g3²) 10...0-0 11.Nf3 Qh5 12.Ng5 Re8 13.Kf1 Qg6 14.Bd3 Qh5
15.Qxh5 Nxh5 16.Bxh7±
6...d6 7.Na3!? Nxf3+ (7...a6. Black covers the b5-square against the
possible penetration of the enemy minor pieces, but falls back in
development even more in the process. 8.Nxe5 dxe5 9.Nc4 Nf6 10.Bg5 b5
11.Nxe5 Qxd5 12.Qxd5 Nxd5 13.0-0-0 h6 14.Bh4 g5 15.Bg3 Nf4
16.Re1±) 8.Qxf3 Nf6 9.Bd3 Be7 10.h3 0-0 11.0-0 a6 12.Bf4 b5 13.Rfe1
Re8 14.c4 b4 15.Nc2² White’s extra space provides him with a stable
positional advantage.

3...e5. With this move Black wishes to avoid the opening of the position.
4.d5 Nce7 (After 4...Nb8, White can try a very promising pawn-sacrifice.
5.d6!? Qf6 6.Na3 Qxd6 7.Qxd6 Bxd6 8.Nb5 Ke7 9.Be3 a6 10.Nxd6 Kxd6
11.f4 exf4 12.Bxf4+ Ke7 13.0-0-0±) 5.d6!? If White allows his opponent to
play d7-d6, Black would have a cramped but still solid position. 5...Ng6
(5...Nc6 6.Na3 a6 7.Be3±) 6.Na3 a6, Mazza – Mazzetta, Saint Vincent
2006, 7.h4!? h5. Black prevents the further advance of the enemy h-pawn,
but weakens the g5-square. 8.Nc4 b5 9.Qd5! With the help of this simple
intermediate move White wins the pawn on e5 and Black’s position
crumbles. 9...Rb8 10.Nxe5 Qf6 11.Nxg6 Qxg6 12.Bf4+–

4.cxd4

4...e6
About 4...g6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.d5 – see 2...g6.
4...d5 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.Nf3 – see 2...d5.
 4...Nf6?! 5.d5 Ne5 6.f4 Ng6 (6...Neg4 7.Nc3±) 7.e5 Ne4 8.Qd4 f5,
Lafuente – Borges, Pan American 1998, (8...Qa5+ 9.b4+–) 9.Nd2 Nxd2
10.Bxd2+–

Black early queen-sorties are detrimental to the development of his pieces

4...Qa5+?! 5.Bd2 Qb6 6.d5±, or 4...Qb6?! 5.d5 Ne5 6.Be3 Qxb2 7.Bd4
Qb4+ 8.Nc3 d6 9.f4 Nd7 10.Rb1 Qa5 11.Nf3± and only worsen his
position even more.

4...e5?! This move leads to the appearance of an isolated pawn in Black’s

camp. 5.dxe5 Nxe5 6.Nc3 Nf6 (6...Bb4 7.Qd4 Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 f6 9.Ba3 Ne7
10.Nf3±) 7.f4! It has become clear now that Black has failed to take the e5-
square under control. 7...Nc6 (7...Ng6 8.e5 Ng8 9.Nf3 Nh6 10.Qc2± Be7
11.f5! White continues the chase after the enemy cavalry. 11...Nh4 12.f6!
Nxf3+ 13.gxf3+– Lagergren – Aukstuolis, ICCF 2014) 8.e5 Ng8 9.Nf3
Bc5 10.Bc4± White’s attack against the f7-square settles immediately the
issue. 10...Nge7 11.Ng5 0-0 12.Qh5 h6 13.Nxf7+– Robertson – Laureles,
Email 2013.

4...d6 5.d5!? White wishes to emphasize immediately the defects of

Black’s second move (about 5.Nf3 – see Chapter 5).
 5...Ne5 6.f4, After this move Black is forced to lose another tempo for the
retreat of his knight. 6...Nd7 (or 6...Ng6 7.Nc3 e6 8.dxe6 fxe6 9.Qb3±;
6...Ng4 7.Nc3±) 7.Nc3 g6 8.Qd4! White prevents his opponent from the
possibility to develop comfortably his bishop on the g7-square. 8...f6
(8...Ngf6 9.e5±) 9.Nf3 Bg7, Naerland – Hestad, Sandnes 2006, 10.Be3±
5...Nb8 6.Nc3 Nf6 (about 6...g6 7.Nf3 Bg7 8.Nd4 Nf6 9.Be2 – see
6...Nf6) 7.Nf3
 7...Nbd7 8.Nd4±
7...Bg4. Black has less space, so the exchanges of pieces would be in his
favour. Still, his last move has a serious defect – his pawn on b7 would
remain unprotected. 8.Qb3! Bc8 (8...Bxf3 9.Qxb7 Nbd7 10.gxf3±) 9.e5!
White wishes to open the game in the centre as quickly as possible in order
to utilise his lead in development (9.Bb5+ Bd7 10.0-0±) 9...dxe5 10.Nxe5
Nbd7, Okhotnik – Debnar, Slovakia 1997, 11.Bf4±
7...g6 8.Nd4 Bg7 9.Be2 0-0 10.0-0 Nbd7 11.Be3 Nc5 12.f3. White
protects his pawn on e4 and plans to oust the enemy knight away from the
c5-square with the move b2-b4. 12...a5. Black parries his opponent’s
positional threat, but weakens the b5-square in the process. 13.b3 Nfd7
(13...Bd7 14.Rc1±) 14.Qd2 f5. Black is reluctant to defend only passively,
but now, the position of his king would be quite unreliable. 15.exf5 gxf5,
Borgo – Isonzo, Mantova 1996, 16.Rae1±

5.d5
 5...exd5

About 5...Bb4+ 6.Nc3 exd5 7.exd5 – see 5...exd5.

5...Ne5 6.f4 Bb4+! The trade of the bishops facilitates Black’s defence
but cannot provide him with complete equality. (Following 6...Ng6, White
can cramp considerably the enemy position with the line: 7.d6 Qb6 8.e5 f6
9.Nc3 fxe5 10.Nb5±) 7.Bd2 Bxd2+ 8.Qxd2 Ng6 9.d6 Nf6 10.Nc3² Black
has no weaknesses in his position, but still it looks rather cramped.

6.exd5
 6...Bb4+

About 6...Ne5 7.Nc3 Bb4 8.Nf3 – see 6...Bb4.

6...Nce7? 7.d6+–

6...Qa5+? 7.Nc3 Nb4 8.Nf3 Nf6 9.Qe2+ Kd8 10.Ng5+–

6...Qe7+ 7.Be3 Ne5 8.Nc3±

7.Nc3 Qe7+

After 7...Ne5 8.Nf3 Qe7, White can try a brave pawn-sacrifice 9.Nxe5!
(9.Be2 – see 7...Qe7) 9...Qxe5+ 10.Be2 Bxc3+ 11.bxc3 Qxc3+ 12.Bd2
Qd4 13.Bf3. Black lags horribly in development, while White’s bishops are
very powerful. 13...Ne7 (13...Qe5+ 14.Be3 Qc3+ 15.Kf1! Black has
deprived his opponent of his castling rights, but this has not improved his
position at all15...Ne7 16.Rc1 Qa5 17.d6 Nf5, Sanner – Grego, LSS 2010,
18.Qd3±) 14.0-0 0-0 15.Qe1 Ng6 (15...Nxd5? 16.Rd1±) 16.Bb4!? It would
be useful for White to force the enemy rook to occupy a square which is not
protected. 16...Rd8 17.Bc3 Qc4 18.Rc1 Qf4 19.d6 Rb8 (19...Qxd6?
20.Ba5+–) 20.Bb2 Qxd6. Black has already two extra pawns, but after
21.Qc3 Qf8 22.Qc7 Ra8 23.Bd5±, he has practically no useful moves,
Buchaillot – Panyushkin, ICCF 2017.

8.Be2 Ne5 9.Be3

It is also possible for White to play here 9.Nf3!? He would not be afraid
of the weakening of his kingside pawn-structure 9...Nxf3+ 10.gxf3, because
after 10...Bxc3+ 11.bxc3 d6 12.0-0 Qc7 13.Re1 Ne7 14.Bb5+ Bd7 15.Bd3
f6 16.f4 Kf7 17.c4 g6 18.Bb2ƒ, Black’s king would be more endangered
than its counterpart.

9...Nf6 10.Nf3 0-0 11.0-0 d6 12.h3 Bd7, Evtushenko – Sheleg,

Novosibirsk 2007, 13.Re1² White’s pieces have a much freer game.
 Chapter 2
1.e4 c5 2.c3 b6

Black usually plays like this when he wishes to avoid the standard
theoretical lines. Still, he can hardly rely on equality ignoring the fight for
the centre. Meanwhile, there have been amassed plenty of theoretical
variations even after the move 2...b6.
3.d4 Bb7

About 3...e6 4.Nf3 Bb7 5.Bd3, or 3...g6 4.Nf3 Bb7 5.Bd3, or 4...Bg7
5.Bd3 Bb7 6.0-0 – see 3...Bb7.

3...cxd4 4.cxd4 g6?! (4...Bb7 5.Bd3, or 4...e6 5.Bd3 Bb7 6.Nc3 – see
3...Bb7) 5.Nc3 Bb7 6.h4!? h5. Black prevents h4-h5, but weakens the g5-
square. 7.Nf3 Bg7 8.Bc4 Nh6 9.Ne5 Bxe5 10.Bxh6. It is very useful for
White to deprive his opponent of the possibility to castle kingside.
10...Rxh6 (10...Bf6 11.Qd2±) 11.dxe5±
 3...d6 4.Nf3

About 4...e6 5.Bd3 Bb7 6.0-0, or 4...Nd7 5.Bd3 Bb7 6.0-0– see 3...Bb7.
4...g6? This move enables White to exploit the delay of the development
of the enemy bishop on c8. 5.dxc5 dxc5 (5...bxc5?? 6.Qd5+–) 6.Qxd8+
Kxd8 7.Na3±
4...Nf6 5.Bb5+!? White wishes to cause disharmony in the deployment of
the enemy pieces with this check. Now, for example, Black loses after
5...Nbd7? in view of 6.e5! dxe5 7.dxe5 Ng8 8.Bc6 Rb8 9.e6 fxe6 10.Bf4+–
4...Bb7 5.dxc5!? White is trying to obtain the possible maximum out of
this position (5.Bd3 – see 3...Bb7). 5...bxc5 6.Bb5+ Bc6 (6...Nd7 7.e5±)
7.Na3 Bxb5 8.Nxb5. After the trade of the bishops, the vulnerability of the
light squares in Black’s camp would hurt him seriously. 8...a6? 9.Qd5! Nd7
10.Nc7+–

4.Bd3
 We will analyse now: A) 4...e6 and B) 4...Nf6.

About 4...d6 5.Nf3 e6 (5...Nd7 6.0-0 e6 – see 4...e6; 5...g6 6.0-0 Bg7
7.Re1 – see 4...g6) 6.0-0 – see 4...e6.

4...g6 5.Nf3 Bg7 6.0-0 d6 7.Re1 Nd7 8.e5! This move is energetic and
strong. White wishes to exploit the postponement of the development of
Black’s knight on g8 and deprives it of the f6-square. (It would be also good
for White to choose here 8.a4 a6 9.Bg5, for example: 9...f6 10.Bh4 Nh6,
Hecht – Jongsma, Amsterdam 1972, 11.Bc4 Nf7 12.Nbd2 0-0 13.Be6±
Black has managed to solve the problem with the development of his knight
on g8 but only at the price of the considerable weakening of the e6-square;
or 9...Ngf6. This knight will come under an attack after 10.e5 dxe5 11.dxe5
Ng4 12.e6±) 8...dxe5, Heindrich – Kovacs, Ligetfalvi 1997, 9.dxe5 e6
(9...Bxf3, Black wins a pawn, but due to his great lag in development this is
almost suicidal. 10.Qxf3 Nxe5 11.Bb5+ Kf8 12.Qe2©) 10.Bf4 Ne7
11.Nbd2 0-0 12.Qe2 Qc7 13.a4± Now, Black must be constantly on the
alert about the possible penetration of the enemy knight to the d6-outpost.
 4...cxd4. This exchange of pawns looks premature, because it would
enable White to develop his knight on b1 to the c3-square. 5.cxd4 Nc6
(5...Nf6 6.Nd2 – see 4...Nf6; 5...e6 6.Nf3 – see 4...e6).

6.Qa4!? It might seem that White brings his queen into the actions a bit
too early, but this is quite justified in this position. 6...e6 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Nf3
Nb4 (8...Be7 9.e5 Nb4 10.exf6 Nxd3+ 11.Kd2 Nxf2 12.fxe7 Qxe7
13.Rf1± Black does not have sufficient compensation for the sacrificed
piece.) 9.Bb1 Ba6 10.Qd1! White should not allow the enemy pieces to
occupy the d3-square. 10...Rc8 11.a3 Nc6 12.Bd3 Bxd3 13.Qxd3 d5 14.e5
Nd7 15.h4! White plans to attack his opponent’s kingside with the
manoeuvre Rh3-g3. 15...Be7 16.h5 h6 17.Rh3 Na5. Black cannot castle,
since his king will come quickly under a crushing attack by the enemy
pieces. 18.Ne2 Qc7 19.Rg3 Bf8 20.Nd2± White’s knight frees the way
forward for his pawn. Black is practically incapable of countering the threat
f2-f4-f5.
6.Nf3
 6...e6 7.Nc3 Bb4 (7...Nb4. This decision is a bit too late, since White can
play simply 8.Bb1. Now it has become evident that Black’s knight is doing
nothing on the b4-square. 8...Nf6, Philipp – Froehlich Dill, Wiesbaden 2019
(Following 8...Ba6? 9.d5+– exd5 10.a3 Nc6 11.exd5, Black’s lag in
development becomes too great. 11...Na5 12.d6 Qf6 13.Be4 Rc8 14.Nd5
Qxd6 15.Bf4+–) 9.a3± White ousts the enemy knight and consolidates his
advantage.) 8.0-0 Bxc3. Here, in order to prevent his opponent’s pawn-
advance d4-d5, Black must comply with the unfavourable exchange of his
bishop for the enemy knight. (8...Nge7, V.Abramov – Moiseev, Riazan
2007, 9.d5 exd5 10.exd5 Na5 11.Re1 Bxc3 12.bxc3 Bxd5 13.Ba3 d6
14.Bxh7+–) 9.bxc3 Nge7, Wigger – Steffens, Germany 2013, 10.Ba3± The
vulnerability of the dark squares hurts Black seriously, moreover that White
has a powerful pawn-centre and the two-bishop advantage.
6...Nb4. Black makes use of the fact that White cannot avoid the trade of
his bishop, since he would lose his pawn on e4, but the manoeuvres with his
knight are time-consuming. 7.Nc3 Nxd3+ 8.Qxd3 Nf6 (8...e6 9.0-0 Nf6
10.d5 – see 8...Nf6) 9.0-0 e6 (9...g6 10.d5. White is threatening e4-e5 and
forces his opponent to play 10...d6, Grimberg – Zigura, Bois Colombes
1999, after which there would appear a weak c6-square in Black’s position.
11.Nd4 Bg7 12.f3. Now, before developing the bishop to e3, White
prevents the appearance of the enemy knight to the g4-square. 12...0-0
13.Be3 Nd7 14.Qd2 Re8 15.Rac1 Rc8 16.Ncb5. Black is helpless against
the penetration of White’s knight to c6. 16...a6 17.Na7±) 10.d5 (10.Bd2
Be7 11.d5²) 10...Bb4 11.Bg5 (11.Re1!?²) 11...h6 12.Bh4 g5. Black
weakens his kingside pawn-structure in order to get rid of the pin of his
knight. 13.Bg3 0-0 14.Nd4 Nh5, Lima – Stefansson, Linares 1995,
15.Rad1² White’s king is much safer than its counterpart.

A) 4...e6 5.Nf3

5...d6

About 5...Qc7 6.0-0 – see 2...Qc7.

5...Nf6 6.Nbd2 – see 4...Nf6.

5...Nc6 6.d5 Nce7 (6...exd5? 7.exd5 Qe7+ 8.Kd2+–) 7.c4 Ng6 8.Nc3 e5,
Baerwinkel – Steinhart, Frankfurt 2000, 9.h4. Now Black will have to
weaken his kingside; otherwise, he would lose even more tempi for moves
with his knight. 9...h5 10.g3±

5...Ne7. Black prepares a transfer of his knight to the g6-square, but there
it would come under an attack after h2-h4-h5. 6.dxc5 bxc5, Volpert –
Hornung, Bad Neustadt 1986, 7.Bf4 Ng6 8.Bg3 Be7 9.h4 0-0 10.h5 Nh8
11.e5± Black’s knight on the h8-square is just pathetic.

5...d5. This move would have been much better for Black on move two...
6.exd5 Qxd5 (6...Bxd5 7.c4 Bb7 8.d5! White has a better development, so
he should try to open the central files before Black has evacuated his king
away from the centre. 8...exd5 9.cxd5 Qxd5 10.0-0©) 7.0-0 Nf6 (7...Nc6.
Black weakens his control over the d5-square and White exploits this
immediately. 8.c4 Qd7 9.d5! exd5 10.cxd5 Qxd5 11.Nc3 Qd7 12.Qe2+
Be7 13.Bb5 a6 14.Ne5 Qe6 15.Bxc6+ Bxc6 16.Nxc6 Qxc6 17.Re1±
Thompson – Smyth, IECG 2000. Black would have to lose his castling
rights sooner or later with the move Kf8, in order to get rid of the pin of his
knight and White will have excellent attacking prospects against the enemy
king.) 8.c4 Qh5 9.d5 Bd6. Black is trying to organise counterplay on the
kingside, but White parries that quite easily. 10.Nc3 Nbd7 11.Be2 0-0
12.g3! Suddenly, Black’s queen is trapped and will not run away. 12...Qf5
13.Nh4 Qh3 14.Ne4 Nxe4 15.Bg4 Qxf1+ 16.Kxf1. He does not have
sufficient compensation for the queen. 16...Rad8, Stolz – Pietrzak, ICCF
2009, 17.f3!? Nef6 18.dxe6 Nxg4 19.Qxd6 Nde5 20.Qe7 Bxf3 21.Bf4±
5...Be7 6.0-0 Nf6 (6...d6 7.Re1 – see 5...d6) 7.e5 Nd5 8.a3. White takes
the b4-square under control and prepares the pawn-advance c3-c4. 8...f5,
Eichstaedt – Knuth, Germany 2008, 9.c4 Nc7 10.d5 exd5 11.Bxf5 0-0
12.Qc2. White exerts pressure against the h7-square in an attempt to
provoke additional weakening of his opponent’s king shelter. 12...h6
(12...g6? 13.Bxg6 hxg6 14.Qxg6+ Kh8 15.Ng5+–) 13.Nc3 (13.cxd5 Bxd5
14.Rd1 Nc6±) 13...d4 14.Nd5 Nxd5 15.Be4 Kh8 16.cxd5 d6 17.Rb1.
White does not need to be in a hurry to advance e5-e6, since Black cannot
play 17...dxe5? in view of 18.d6+–
 5...cxd4 6.cxd4

About 6...Nf6 7.Nbd2 – see 4...Nf6.

6...Nc6 7.Nc3 – see 4...cxd4.
6...d5 7.exd5!? (7.e5²) 7...Qxd5 (7...Bxd5 8.Nc3 Nf6 9.Ne5 a6. Here, the
simplest move for White would be 10.Nxd5, obtaining the two-bishop
advantage. 10...Nxd5 11.0-0 Be7 12.Qh5. It would be useful for White to
cause a further weakening of his opponent’s kingside. 12...g6 13.Qf3±)
8.Nc3 Bb4 9.0-0 Bxc3 (Black has no time to retreat his queen: 9...Qa5?
10.Nb5 Na6 11.a3 Bc6 12.Ne5 Bxb5 13.axb4 Qxb4 14.Qf3 1–0 Dyson –
Wilson, USA 1996.) 10.bxc3 Nf6 11.Ba3!± Black’s king has been stranded
in the centre for long.
6...Bb4+ 7.Nc3 (7.Nbd2 Nf6 8.0-0 – see 4...Nf6).
 7...Ne7. Here, Black’s knight is not so active as on the f6-square, but will
not come under an attack after e4-e5. 8.0-0 0-0 (8...Bxc3. The exchange of
this bishop leads to the weakening of the dark-squared complex in Black’s
position. 9.bxc3 0-0 10.Re1 Ng6. His knight would not be reliably placed
on this square, but Black does not have a better place for it anyway. 11.h4!?
This is a very promising pawn-sacrifice for White to seize the initiative.
11...Nxh4 12.Nxh4 Qxh4 13.Re3‚; 11.Bg5 Qc7 12.Rc1 f6 13.Bd2 e5
14.h4! d6 15.h5 Ne7 16.Nh4 Ba6. The trade of the bishop would not
simplify Black’s defence, because after 17.Bxa6 Nxa6, Vrban – Turk, Ptuj
2011, 18.f4± White seizes completely the initiative.) 9.e5 (9.Bg5 Bxc3
10.bxc3 f6, Pirrot – Mueller, Radebeul 2019, 11.Bc1!? White has weakened
his opponent’s kingside and prepares the transfer of his bishop to the a3-
square. 11...Nbc6 12.Ba3±) 9...Ng6 10.Ng5 Ba6 11.Qh5 h6 12.Nxf7!
White wins at least a pawn with this simple combination. 12...Nf4 13.Bxf4
Rxf7 14.Bxa6 Nxa6 (14...Rxf4? 15.Bb7+–) 15.Ne2±
7...Nf6 8.Qe2
 Following 8...0-0 9.e5, in order to avoid the standard bishop-sacrifice on
h7, Black would have to continue with 9...Bxf3 (9...Nd5?? 10.Bxh7!+–)
10.Qxf3 Nd5, Somalo Fernandez – Fourcassies, Creon 1997, 11.0-0 Bxc3
12.bxc3 Nc6 13.Ba3±
8...h6. After this move Black would be able to castle without being afraid
of the sacrifice on h7, but the move h7-h6 does not contribute to the
development of his pieces. 9.0-0 0-0 10.e5 Ne8 11.a3 Be7 12.d5! White is
playing super aggressively. 12...exd5, Matamoros Franco – Ortega Valle,
Seville 2004, 13.Bb1! Nc7 14.Qd3 g6. Black has nothing better than this
move, but now White regains his pawn and will continue to attack in a
position with material equality. 15.Bxh6 Re8 16.Qd4 Nc6 17.Qg4+–
8...d5 9.e5 Ne4 10.0-0! He does not lose time to protect his knight on c3,
but wishes to mobilise his forces as quickly as possible and to begin an
attack against the enemy king. 10...Nxc3 (10...Bxc3 11.bxc3 Nxc3, Adams
– Vanderwaeren, Moscow 1994, 12.Qc2 Ne4 13.Ba3! Black fails to
evacuate his king away from the centre of the board. 13...Nc6 14.Rac1±)
11.bxc3 Be7 12.Be3 Nc6 (12...0-0 13.h4!? Bxh4 14.g3 Be7 15.Kg2‚ His
defence is tremendously difficult, because White’s rooks will join into the
attack on the h-file.) 13.Nd2 Rc8 14.Nb3 Ba3 15.Qg4 g6. This move
weakens the dark squares in Black’s camp, but he was incapable of castling
due to the loss of the exchange. 16.Bg5 Be7 17.Bh6± Kuporosov – Turikov,
St Petersburg 2001.

6.0-0

6...Nd7
About 6...Qc7 7.Re1 Nd7 8.d5 – see 6...Nd7.
6...Nf6 7.Re1!? (7.Nbd2 – see variation B) 7...Be7 8.e5 – see 6...Be7.

6...a6. Black is playing rather timidly in the opening. 7.Re1 Nf6, Llanos –
Caro, Vicente Lopez 2016 (7...Nd7 8.d5 – see 6...Nd7) 8.e5 dxe5 9.dxe5
Nd5 10.Ng5 Be7 (10...h6? 11.Qh5+–) 11.Qh5 Bxg5 12.Bxg5 Nf4 13.Bxd8
Nxh5 14.Bc7± White’s bishops are tremendously powerful in this endgame.

6...Be7
 7.e5!? After this move Black will have problems with the development of
his knight on g8. 7...Nd7 (7...dxe5? The opening of the d-file would be in
favour of White, since he has a better development. 8.dxe5 Nc6 9.Qe2 Qc7
10.Na3 a6 11.Re1 h6, G.Braun – Dornieden, Dresden 2007, 12.Nc4 b5
13.Ncd2±; 12.Nb1!? Bd8 13.Nbd2 Nge7 14.Nc4 Nc8 15.Bf4 Be7
16.Rad1± White is perfectly prepared to penetrate with his knight to the d6-
square.) 8.Re1 cxd4 (8...Qc7? Black’s queen would be misplaced on this
square, because it would soon come under an attack after Na3(c3)-b5.
9.Bf4 cxd4 10.cxd4 Nh6 11.Nc3 Ng4 12.Nb5 Qb8, Iseni – Riedl, Steyr
2009, 13.exd6+–; 8...dxe5? 9.dxe5 Nh6 10.Bxh6. White destroys his
opponent’s kingside pawn-structure. 10...gxh6 11.Nbd2 Qc7. Black plans to
castle queenside, since his kingside has been compromised. 12.Qe2 0-0-0
13.a4± Sakaev – Turikov, St Petersburg 2015.) 9.cxd4 dxe5 10.dxe5 Nc5
11.Bb5+ Kf8 12.Nc3 a6 13.Be2 Qc7 14.Na4 Rd8 15.Qc2 Qb8 16.Nxc5
Bxc5 17.Bd2² Pina Fernandez – Sanz Velez, ICCF 2010. Black will have to
lose plenty of time to accomplish an artificial castling and to coordinate his
pieces.
7.Re1 Nd7 (7...Nf6 8.e5!? Nfd7, Peredy – Penson, Brasschaat 2010,
9.Na3! White is preparing the transfer of his knight to the d6-outpost. 9...0-
0 10.Nb5 dxe5 11.dxe5 a6 12.Nd6 Bxd6 13.exd6±).

8.d5!? exd5. Black lags in development, so it would be very risky for him
to accept the pawn-sacrifice (following 8...e5 9.c4 Ngf6 10.Nc3± Black
would end up in a cramped position). 9.exd5 Bxd5 10.Bf4 Kf8 11.c4 Bb7
12.Nc3© White has more than sufficient compensation for the pawn,
because his pieces are better developed, while Black’s king has been
deprived of its castling rights.
8.Qe2 Ngf6 (The move 8...e5 would lead to the weakening of the d5-
square. 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Rd1±) 9.e5 dxe5 10.dxe5 Nd5 11.a3. White is
preparing c3-c4. 11...0-0 12.Qe4. He brings his queen closer to the enemy
king (12.c4 Nc7 13.Nc3±). 12...g6 13.Qg4± Now, it would not work for
Black to play 13...N5f6? 14.exf6 Nxf6, because of 15.Qc4 1–0 Martinovic
– Koenig, Bad Woerishofen 1998.

7.Re1
 7...Ne7

About 7...Be7 – see 6...Be7.

7...Ngf6 8.e5 dxe5 9.dxe5 Nd5 10.Ng5 Be7 11.Qh5±

7...Qc7 8.d5 h6?! This move leads to the appearance of a weak pawn on
e6 in Black’s position (He had better close the position with the move
8...e5²) 9.dxe6 fxe6, Toder – Guzenko, St Petersburg 2007, 10.Bc4±

7...g6?! Black would hardly succeed in developing his bishop to the g7-
square, because after 8.Bf4, he would have to protect the d6-square. 8...Qc7
9.Nbd2 e5. Black weakens his position in order to manage to fianchetto his
bishop on g7. 10.Bg3 Bg7 11.Bb5± 0-0-0? His position was inferior
anyway, but castling queenside was a mistake because after 12.Qa4 Kb8
13.Bxd7 Rxd7 14.dxe5 dxe5 15.Nxe5! Black’s position crumbled.
15...Bxe5 16.Bxe5 Qxe5 17.Qxd7+– Cramling – Kosteniuk, Khanty-
Mansiysk 2014.
 7...a6 8.Qe2 (It also possible for White to choose here 8.d5, closing the
position, but occupying additional space. 8...e5 9.Nbd2 Qc7 10.a4 Ne7
11.Nc4 Ng6, Weingarz – Mehlhorn, Email 2004, 12.h4 Be7 13.g3± Black
lacks space and has great problems to find good squares for his pieces.)
8...e5 9.dxe5 Nxe5, Werner – Becker, Bad Woerishofen 2002, 10.Nxe5
dxe5 11.Nd2± Black has no compensation for his lag in development and
the vulnerability of the d5-square.

8.d5!?
White seizes additional space.
8.Nbd2 Ng6, Mareco – Rodriguez Vila, Montevideo 2019, 9.g3 Be7
10.h4±

8...e5
The centre has been closed and the focus of the fight is transferred to the
flanks.

8...exd5? 9.exd5 Bxd5 10.Na3+–

 9.a4 Ng6 10.a5 Be7 11.a6!? With this move White occupies even more
space. 11...Bc8 12.Bb5 0-0 13.Bc6 Rb8 14.Na3 Bxa6. Black opens the a-
file; otherwise, after Nb5, he might lose his a7-pawn without any
compensation for it. 15.Qa4 Bc8 16.Qxa7 Bb7 17.Bxb7 Qc7 18.Nb5
Qxb7 19.Qxb7 Rxb7 20.Nd2 Rd8 21.Nc4 Nf6 22.f3± White has more
space and his knights have excellent squares to be deployed to.

B) 4...Nf6 5.Nd2

White would not achieve much with the move 5.Qe2?! since he loses in
fact a tempo after 5...cxd4 6.cxd4 Nc6 7.Nf3 Nb4 8.Nc3 Nxd3+ 9.Qxd3.
In general, in this variation, White’s queen captures on d3 from its initial
position. 9...e6 10.0-0 Bb4=

We will analyse now: B1) 5...e6 and B2) 5...cxd4.

About 5...Nc6 6.Ngf3 cxd4 7.cxd4 – see variation B2.

5...d6 6.Ngf3
 About 6...e6 7.0-0 – see variation B1.
6...Nbd7? 7.e5± After this move Black has no satisfactory defence against
the cramping pawn-sacrifice e5-e6. 7...Nd5 8.e6! fxe6 9.Ng5+–
6...g6 7.0-0 Bg7 8.Re1. White does not wish to refute immediately his
opponent’s strategy, but focuses on the forthcoming long and intense fight.
At first, he plans to transfer his knight to the g3-square and then, depending
on Black’s actions, to choose his further plan for actions. 8...0-0 9.Nf1
Nbd7 (9...cxd4 10.cxd4 – see 5...cxd4) 10.Ng3²

B1) 5...e6 6.Ngf3

 6...d5
Black stabilises the situation in the centre, so the position begins to
resemble the French Defence.

About 6...cxd4 7.cxd4 – see 5...cxd4.

6...Be7 7.e5!? (7.0-0 cxd4 8.cxd4 – see 5...cxd4) 7...Nd5 8.dxc5 bxc5
9.Ne4 0-0, Carbonell Bofill – Garcia Padron, Las Palmas 2019, 10.0-0 f5
11.exf6 Nxf6 12.Nxf6+ Bxf6 13.Re1² Black will have problems to advance
his central pawns, because the move d7–d5 would lead to the weakening of
the pawn on e6.

6...d6 7.0-0
 7...Nbd7 8.e5. This is White’s standard reaction against the move Nbd7 in
this variation. 8...dxe5 9.dxe5 Nd5 (9...Ng4 10.Re1±) 10.Re1 Be7 11.Ne4
Qc7 12.Bg5! After the exchange of the dark-squared bishops White’s
knight will penetrate to the d6-outpost. 12...f6, Hebert – Jiang, Montreal
2010. Black avoids the trade of the bishops, but weakens his pawn-
structure. (12...c4 13.Bb1 0-0. His king would not be reliably placed on the
kingside. 14.Qc2 g6 15.Qd2±) 13.Bh4 0-0-0 14.exf6 gxf6 15.Bg3 Nf4
16.Qa4 Ne5 17.Nxe5 fxe5 18.Ba6± White’s king is much safer than its
black counterpart and also his pawn-structure is superior.
7...Be7 8.Re1 0-0 (8...Nbd7 9.Nf1!?; 9.e5 dxe5 10.dxe5 Nd5 11.Ne4 –
see 7...Nbd7) 9.Nf1 (9.Qe2. White plans to advance e4-e5 and to transfer
his queen closer to the enemy king via the e4-square. 9...Nbd7 10.e5 dxe5
11.dxe5 Nd5 12.Qe4 g6 13.Qg4 Qc7 14.Qg3± Ritter – Diaz, Tampa 2003)
9...Nbd7 (9...cxd4 10.cxd4 – see variation B2; 9...Nc6 10.Ng3²) 10.Ng3
Qc7 (10...cxd4 11.cxd4 – see variation B2; 10...Re8 11.e5 dxe5 12.dxe5
Nd5 13.Bb5± White is threatening to win material after Qa4, or c3-c4.)
11.h3 a6, Davydov – Kutovoi, Armavir 2015, 12.a4² Black has no pawn-
weaknesses in his position, but White’s game is much more comfortable,
since he has more space and can easily find excellent squares for his pieces.
 6...Nc6

7.a3. In this position White usually advances b4 and Black counters with
d5, c4 and the position is closed. 7...d5 8.e5 Nd7 9.b4 (9.Nf1) 9...a5 (9...c4
10.Bc2 b5 11.Nf1 a5 12.Bd2. Black can hardly accomplish any active
actions on the queenside. His attempt to organise counterplay on the
kingside 12...f6 13.exf6 Nxf6 14.Ng3, would only lead to the weakening of
the pawn on e6. 14...axb4 15.axb4 Rxa1 16.Qxa1 Bd6 17.0-0 0-0, Macieja
– Polak, Budapest 2000, 18.Re1²) 10.b5 Ne7 11.0-0² c4?! 12.Bc2±
Mirzoev – Meijers, Basel 2010. Black has no counterplay at all. The further
actions will determine whether White would manage to break his
opponent’s position on the kingside, or Black would succeed in saving the
game with passive defence.
7.0-0. This is another plan for White. He plans to develop active actions
in the centre, without closing the position.
 About 7...cxd4 8.cxd4 – see variation B2.
7...Qc7 8.e5 Nd5 9.Ne4 cxd4 10.cxd4 h6 (10...Ncb4. Black’s plan,
connected with the preparation of the penetration of his knight to the c2-
square only increases his difficulties. 11.Bb1 Rc8?! 12.a3 Nc2, Reichstein –
Blatny, Virginia Beach 2001, 13.Ra2. It has become evident now that
Black’s knight has been trapped inside White’s camp. 13...Ba6 14.b3 Bxf1
15.Rxc2 Qb7 16.Rxc8+ Qxc8 17.Qxf1 Be7 18.Bd2 0-0 19.Qd3 g6
20.h4+–) 11.a3 0-0-0?! This is hardly the best idea for Black, but his
position was inferior anyway. 12.Bd2 f5 13.Nc3 Nxc3 14.Bxc3 Kb8,
Kassis – Najjar, Beirut 2009, 15.d5! exd5 16.Rc1± Black has too many
weaknesses in his position.
7...Be7. If he does not reduce the tension with the move c5xd4, then
Black must consider White’s possibility e4-e5 and d4xc5. 8.e5 Nd5 9.dxc5
 9...bxc5 10.Re1² 0-0 (The move 10...d6 would lead to the appearance of
an isolated pawn on c5 in Black’s position. 11.exd6 Qxd6 12.Nc4 Qc7
13.Ng5! White is attacking something with his every move, while Black
weakens his position more and more... 13...g6 14.Qg4 0-0 15.Qh3 Nf6
16.Qh4, with the idea Bf4. 16...Rfd8 17.Bf4 Qd7 18.Bc2± Black will
hardly manage to neutralise his opponent’s active pieces.) 11.Ne4 f5
(11...Rc8 12.c4 Ndb4 13.Bb1 Na5 14.a3±) 12.exf6 Nxf6 13.Nxf6+ Bxf6
(13...gxf6 14.Bf4±) 14.Be3 Qe7 15.Bf4± White’s pieces have been
deployed much more actively and harmoniously.
9...Bxc5 10.Ne4 Be7 (The move 10...0-0? enables White to inflict the
standard tactical strike B:h7+. 11.Nxc5 bxc5 12.Bxh7+! Kxh7 13.Ng5+
Kg6 14.h4+–) 11.c4 Ndb4 12.Bb1 Na6 13.Bg5!± 0-0?
 It is obvious that Black had considered only the penetration of the enemy
knight to the d6-square, but White has a crushing move: 14.Nf6+!! Kh8
15.Nxh7+– Kucuksari – Zheng, Helsingor 2019.

7.e5
 7.Qe2!? White does not close the position yet. 7...cxd4 (7...Nc6 8.dxc5!?
Bxc5 9.e5 Nd7 10.0-0² g5?! Angelats Morato – Alsina Leal, Spain 2004.
This pawn-advance only weakens Black’s position, because White has the
resource 11.Bb5! g4 12.Nd4± and it becomes evident that his pawn on e5 is
untouchable.) 8.Nxd4

Following 8...Be7 9.e5 Nfd7 10.0-0 Nc6, Black will have great problems
to activate his light-squared bishop, since it is severely restricted by his own
pawn on d5. 11.N2f3 0-0 (11...Nc5 12.Nxc6 Bxc6 13.Bc2 0-0 14.b4. White
is not afraid to weaken his pawn on c3, because Black’s attempt to win it
might cost him a knight. 14...Ne4 15.Nd4 Bb7 16.Bb2 Rc8 17.f3 Nxc3
18.Qd3±) 12.Nxc6 Bxc6 13.Nd4 Bb7 14.f4± g6. Black takes measures
against the pawn-advance f4-f5, but White can play like this anyway 15.f5!,
for example: 15...gxf5? 16.Nxf5! He sacrifices a piece and begins a
decisive attack against the enemy king. 16...exf5 17.Bxf5+–; 15...exf5
16.Nxf5 f6 17.e6 Ne5 18.Nd4± Black’s pawn on e6 impedes the
coordination of his pieces.
8...dxe4. He wishes to facilitate his defence by exchanging pieces. 9.Nxe4
Nxe4 (9...Be7, Mikadze – Gaprindashvili, 2012, 10.Nxf6+ Bxf6 11.Bb5+
Nd7? 12.Nxe6! fxe6 13.Qxe6+ Qe7 14.Bxd7+ Kd8 15.Qxe7+ Kxe7
16.Bh3+–; 11...Kf8. Now, Black must comply with the loss of his castling
rights. 12.Bf4 Bxd4 13.0-0-0±) 10.Bxe4 Bxe4 11.Qxe4. After the
exchanges on e4, Black will have problems with the protection of the h1-a8
diagonal. 11...Qd5. After this move there arises an endgame without any
good prospects for Black, but this was the least of evils for him in this
position. (11...Nd7? 12.Bg5! Qc8 13.Nxe6+–; 12...Nf6 13.Qc6+ Ke7 14.0-
0-0+– Winkelman – Viswanathan, Philadelphia 2017) 12.Qxd5 exd5
13.Nb5±

7...Nfd7

7...Ne4. The exchange of a couple of knights is in favour of Black, since

he has less space, but this would not be sufficient to solve the defensive
problems for him. 8.0-0 Nxd2 (8...Be7 9.Re1 Nxd2 10.Bxd2 Nc6, Hellers –
Ehlvest, New York 1993, 11.dxc5!? White begins a fight for the d4-square.
11...bxc5 12.b4 c4 13.Bc2±) 9.Bxd2 Qd7 10.Re1 Nc6 11.Rc1 Be7 12.Qe2
h6, Chudinovskikh – Biza, Orlova 2017, 13.dxc5!? bxc5 14.b4± c4
(14...cxb4. The win of the b4-pawn would lose the queen for Black. 15.cxb4
Nxb4? 16.Bxb4 Bxb4 17.Bb5+–) 15.Bc2 0-0 16.Rcd1 a6 17.Bc1 Rad8
18.Bb1 f5 19.exf6 Rxf6. Black has managed to parry his opponent’s active
actions in the centre and on the queenside, but after 20.Qc2±, it becomes
evident that he would be incapable of holding the b1-h7 diagonal.

8.0-0

8...Nc6

About 8...Be7 9.Re1 Nc6 10.Nf1 – see 8...Nc6.

8...Ba6 9.Bxa6 Nxa6. There has arisen a position from the French
Defence, but without a tempo for Black, since he has played Bc8-b7-a6.
10.Ne1. White’s knight frees the way forward of his f2-pawn. 10...Be7
11.f4 0-0 12.Ndf3 (12.Rf3!?² with the idea Rh3) 12...b5 13.Nc2 b4,
Caruana – A.Ivanov, Washington 2006, 14.f5² White’s achievements on the
kingside look much more real than Black’s progress on the queenside.
9.Re1

9.h4!? White advances his rook-pawn with the idea to cramp his
opponent’s position even more. 9...h6 10.Re1 Be7 11.h5²
 9...Be7

9...g5. Black is trying to begin some active actions on the kingside, but
White parries that easily. 10.h3 (10.Nf1!?) 10...h5 11.Nf1 g4 12.Ng5!
Naturally, he must be reluctant to allow opening of files against his king.
12...Bh6 13.h4! White parries radically Black’s counterplay on the kingside.
13...cxd4 14.cxd4 Nxd4 15.Bf4 Nc6 16.Rc1. Black’s extra pawn is
practically of no importance at all, because he is incapable of finding a safe
haven for his king, while White’s pieces are tremendously active.
(16.Ng3!?±) 16...Bg7? (It is preferable for Black to choose here 16...Nc5
17.Bb5 a5 18.Ng3±, although even then his position cannot be envied.)
17.Bg6 Qe7, Zatonskih – Nakamura, Saint Louis 2011 (17...fxg6 18.Nxe6
Qe7 19.Nc7+ Kf8 20.Bg5+–) 18.Bxf7+ Kd8 19.Nxe6+ Kc8 20.Qxd5+–

10.Nf1
 10...g5

10...0-0. Black castles right in front of his opponent’s attack. 11.Ng3 Re8
12.Be3 a5 13.a3 Ba6 14.Bc2. White would need his light-squared bishop
for his attack, so he should better not exchange it. 14...cxd4 15.cxd4 b5
16.Nh5± Nb6? 17.Bh6! Black’s king is under an attack by too many enemy
pieces and his other pieces are too far away and fail to assist in the
protection of the monarch. 17...g6 (17...gxh6? 18.Qd3+–) 18.Qd2 f5
19.Ng7+– Sardana – Singh, New Delhi 2019.

10...Qc7. Black’s king would be safer on the queenside, but this would
not solve his defensive problems anyway. 11.Ng3 0-0-0, Tiviakov –
Reinderman, Singapore 1990, 12.Bg5²

11.h3 h5, Abergel – Rasidovic, Sarajevo 2011, 12.Ne3 Rg8 13.Be2.

White is preparing in advance to open files on the kingside. 13...g4 14.hxg4
hxg4 15.Nh2 g3 16.fxg3 Rxg3 17.Nhg4± Black’s rook on g3 has suddenly
become an excellent target for White’s minor pieces.
 B2) 5...cxd4 6.cxd4

Black’s main idea in this variation is Nc6-b4 and Ba6. Now, he has a
choice between the aggressive move B2a) 6...Nc6 and the more timid line:
B2b) 6...e6.

After the move 6...g6, there would arise a complicated positional battle.
7.Ngf3 Bg7 8.0-0. White will have serious problems to break his
opponent’s double fianchetto, so he turns into a positional approach, relying
on his powerful pawn-centre. 8...0-0 9.Re1
 9...Nc6 10.a3. White is preparing b2-b4 with the idea to cramp his
opponent’s position on the queenside as well. 10...d6 11.b4 Rc8 12.Bb2 e6.
Black has no pawn-weaknesses in his position, but he would have only
three ranks to deploy his pieces. 13.Qe2 Qd7 14.Bb5 d5!? Finally, Black
begins a fight for the centre and places there a pawn. 15.e5 Ne4 16.Nxe4
dxe4 17.Ng5 a6. He must get rid of the pin of his knight; otherwise, Black
will fail to organise counterplay against White’s pawn on d4. 18.Bxa6
Nxd4 19.Bxd4 Bxa6 20.Qe3 Bb7 21.Bxb6 Bxe5 22.Rad1 Qa4 23.Nxe4
Bxe4 24.Qxe4 Bc3 25.Rf1 Qxa3 26.b5² Delizia – Sciallero, ICCF 2011.
White’s passed b-pawn provides him with a stable advantage.
9...d6 10.b4 e5, Godena – Cebalo, Cannes 1992 (10...Nc6 11.b5 Na5
12.Nb3!? Nxb3 13.axb3. White squeezes the enemy rook on a8 to protect
the pawn. 13...Ne8, Bedouin – Murey, Sautron 2002. Black’s knight is
headed along the route c7-e6. 14.Qe2 Nc7 15.Ra2 Qd7 16.Bd2 Ne6 17.Ra4
Rfd8 18.Rea1± Black’s backward pawn on a7 would need permanent
protection.) 11.dxe5!? (It also seems good for White here to follow a plan,
connected with occupying additional space: 11.d5 Na6 12.Rb1 Nc7 13.b5²)
11...dxe5 12.Qb3 Nc6 13.Bb2 Nxb4!? Black is trying to free his position
from the positional bind. 14.Qxb4 Qxd3 15.Nxe5 Qd8 16.Rad1 Qc7
17.Rc1 Qd8 18.Nec4, with the idea Nd6. White has seized completely the
initiative, so Black cannot utilise the power of his bishop-pair, because he
must be constantly on the defence. 18...Qd7 19.Nd6 Rfd8 20.e5 Qg4
21.Qxg4 Nxg4 22.N2c4 Bd5 23.h3²

B2a) 6...Nc6
Black attacks immediately White’s central pawn, but still his main target
is the bishop on d3.
7.Ngf3

7...Nb4

About 7...e6 8.a3 – see 6...e6.

7...g6. This move creates a target for White to attack on the kingside. 8.e5
Nd5, Levi – Wallace, Melbourne 1993, 9.Be4!? Na5 10.h4! h5 11.Ng5±
White is threatening Qf3 and provokes the pawn-advance e7-e6, which
leads to a considerable weakening of the dark squares in Black’s position.
11...e6 (11...Bg7? 12.Qf3+–) 12.Qf3 Qe7 13.b3 Bg7? 14.Nc4+– 0-0
15.Ba3.
 8.Bb1 Ba6

9.Nf1
White prevents Nd3+.

Meanwhile, this check is not dangerous for White at all. 9.a3!? Nd3+
10.Bxd3 Bxd3 11.e5
 11...Ne4? This natural move worsens Black’s position even more. 12.Qb3
Nxd2 13.Bxd2 Be4. It is essential for him to preserve the possibility to
defend the f7-square with the move Bg6. (13...Ba6? 14.Ng5! e6 15.Qf3 f5
16.exf6 gxf6 17.Qh5+ Ke7 18.Bb4+ d6 19.Qf7#) 14.Ng5 Bg6 15.h4! e6
(15...h6? 16.h5 hxg5 17.hxg6 Rxh1+ 18.Ke2 fxg6 19.Rxh1+– White’s rook
is ready to penetrate to the last enemy rank along the h-file, while all
Black’s pieces are on their initial squares.) 16.h5 Bf5 17.Qf3±
11...Ng8!? Tscharotschkin – Zeller, Schmiden 1995. Black lags
considerably in development, but has no pawn-weaknesses in his position
and White can hardly obtain a considerable advantage. 12.d5 e6 13.Nb1
Ba6 14.d6 f6 15.Nc3²

9...e6

9...Rc8 10.a3 Nc6 (10...Qc7? Black is reluctant to retreat his knight back
into his camp. 11.axb4 Bxf1 12.Rxf1 Qxc1 13.Qxc1 Rxc1+ 14.Ke2 Rc7
15.Bd3 e6 16.Rfc1 Rxc1 17.Rxc1 Be7 18.Rc8+ Bd8, Kiefhaber – M.Ivanov,
Dresden 2002, 19.b5±, followed by Ra8-a7, with a solid extra pawn for
White.) 11.d5 Na5 12.Bd3 Bxd3 13.Qxd3 Qc7 14.e5 Ng4 15.Bf4 Qc2
16.Qxc2 Rxc2. Black maintains the initiative on the queenside, but his
kingside pieces are not developed at all and White will parry soon his
opponent’s active actions. 17.N1d2 d6 (17...Rxb2? Black abandons the c-
file. 18.Rc1 d6 19.e6+–) 18.exd6 exd6 19.b4 Nc4 20.Nd4. White’s knight is
headed for the weakened c6-square. 20...Rc3 21.Ke2 Nxd2 22.Kxd2 Rc7
23.Rac1 Kd7 24.Rxc7+ Kxc7 25.Rc1+ Kd7 26.Nc6+–

10.a3 Nc6 11.Ng3 d5 12.e5

12...Nd7, Stevic – Kurajica, Tucepi 1996, 13.Be3. White has more space
and he can always solve the problem with castling kingside with the move
Ne2. 13...Na5 14.Ne2 Be7 15.0-0 Nb3 16.Qxb3 Bxe2 17.Rc1 Bxf3
18.gxf3 0-0 19.f4 g6 20.Bd3± Black obviously lacks space.

B2b) 6...e6 7.Ngf3

 7...Be7

About 7...Ba6 8.Bxa6 Nxa6 9.0-0 Be7 10.d5, or 7...d6 8.0-0 Nbd7 9.Re1
Be7 10.Nf1 0-0 11.Ng3, or 8...Be7 9.Re1 0-0 10.Nf1 Nbd7 11.Ng3 – see
7...Be7.

After 7...Nc6, the simplest for White to prevent the enemy knight-sortie
Nb4 would be with the help of the move 8.a3, for example: 8...Qc8 (8...Be7
9.0-0, or 8...d6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Re1 – see 7...Be7) 9.Qe2 d5 10.e5 Nd7,
Burnett – Blatny, Connecticut 2000, 11.0-0 a5 12.Nb1! White’s knight is
doing nothing on d2, so he prepares its transfer to the c3-square in order to
occupy later the weakened b5-square after Black’s previous move. 12...Ba6
13.Nc3±

7...d5. Black would not mind to make this position to resemble the French
Defence. 8.e5 Nfd7 (8...Ne4. He does not have sufficient space, so the
exchange of a couple of minor pieces may facilitate his defence. 9.0-0 Be7
10.Qe2 Nxd2 11.Bxd2 Nc6 12.a3 Rc8 13.b4. White deprives his opponent
of the possibility to activate his knight with Na5-c4(b3). 13...Nb8 14.b5
Nd7 15.a4± Svidler – Kovtun, Voroshilovgrad 1989.) 9.0-0 Ba6 10.Bxa6
Nxa6

11.Ne1! White is perfectly prepared to bring his f-pawn into the attack
against the enemy position. 11...b5. Black is preparing Qb6, but weakens
the c5-square in the process. 12.f4 Qb6 13.Ndf3 Be7 14.Nd3 0-0 15.Be3
Rfc8 16.g4 (16.Ng5!? h6 17.Qh5 hxg5 18.fxg5+–) 16...Nb4 17.Nxb4 Bxb4
18.f5 f6, Morovic Fernandez – Rodriguez Vila, Pinamar 2002, 19.exf6
Nxf6 20.g5 Ng4 21.Bf4. Black’s knight has suddenly lost its way during
his attack. 21...exf5?! 22.h3+–

7...Bb4 8.0-0
 8...0-0 9.Qe2 Nc6 10.a3 Be7 11.b4. White occupies additional space on
the queenside and cramps his opponent’s pieces even more. 11...Rc8 12.Rd1
d6 13.Bb2 a5 14.d5! White opens diagonals for his bishops. 14...exd5
15.exd5 Ne5, Zvjaginsev – Gabuzyan, Moscow 2015, 16.Nxe5 dxe5
17.Nc4 Nxd5 18.Nxe5 Qd6 19.Qe4± The activity of White’s pieces
increases with every move.
8...Bxd2?! This exchange of Black’s important defender of his dark
squares is obviously very bad for him. 9.Nxd2
 9...0-0 10.b3±
9...Nc6? Black does not take any measures against the transfer of White’s
knight to the e4-square and ends up quickly in a lost position. 10.e5 Nd5
11.Ne4 0-0 12.Qh5 g6 (12...f5 13.exf6 g6 14.Qh4 Nxf6 15.Bg5+–) 13.Qh6
f6, Perpinya Rofes – Vicient Calvo, Barcelona 2014, 14.Nd6. Black’s
bishop on b7 is hanging, so he fails to take any prophylactic actions against
the sacrifice on g6. 14...Rb8 15.Bxg6 hxg6 16.Qxg6+ Kh8 17.a4!+– The
joining into the attack of White’s rook on the third rank settles the issue.
9...d6 10.b3!? White’s knight, placed on d2, impedes the development of
his bishop on c1, so he redeploys it to another diagonal. 10...0-0 11.Ba3
Re8, Babula – Cvek, Plzen 1995. Black has removed his rook away from
the X-ray juxtaposition with the enemy bishop, but White can bring it back.
12.Rc1 h6 (12...Nc6 13.Nc4+–) 13.Bb5 Rf8 14.e5±

8.0-0
 8...Ba6
Black would not mind to lose tempi in order to exchange his opponent’s
active bishop.

8...0-0 9.Re1 Nc6 (about 9...d6 10.Nf1 Nbd7 11.Ng3 – see 8...d6) 10.Nf1
Rc8 11.a3 d6 12.Ng3 – see 8...Nc6.

8...d6 9.Re1 0-0 10.Nf1. White accomplishes the standard transfer of his
knight to the g3-square. 10...Nbd7 11.Ng3 Rc8 (Following 11...Re8, White
can simply improve patiently his position. 12.Qe2 Nf8 13.Bd2 a6 14.Rad1
b5 15.h3 Ng6 16.a3² Korneev – Cicak, Salou 2005. Black has a problem to
find an active plan for his actions.) 12.Qe2 Re8 13.Bd2 Rc7, Fressinet –
Vachier Lagrave, Clichy 2011, 14.Rad1 Qa8 15.Ng5!? White has improved
maximally his position and begins active actions on the kingside. 15...h6
(15...Nf8 16.f4²) 16.Nxf7! He sacrifices a piece and destroys the shelter of
the enemy king. 16...Kxf7 17.e5 Bxg2 (After 17...dxe5, Black’s attempt to
preserve the extra piece loses the game for him. 18.dxe5 Nd5 19.Qh5+ Kg8
20.Bxh6!+–) 18.exf6 Bxf6 19.Qg4 Bf3 20.Qg6+ Kf8 21.Bb4. White
squeezes the enemy rook with the protection of the d6-square. 21...Rc6
22.Be4± Black is forced to think only for defence now...

8...Nc6 9.a3

9...g5. Black wishes to exploit the insufficient protection of the enemy

pawn on d4, but he only weakens his position in the process. 10.d5! White
seizes completely the initiative. 10...exd5 11.exd5 Nxd5 12.Ne4 Nf4
13.Re1 Kf8, Calistri – Shirazi, Paris 2006, 14.Bxf4 gxf4 15.Qd2 Qc7
16.Qc3 Rg8 17.Nf6+–
9...0-0 10.Re1 d5?! After this pawn-advance Black’s bishop on b7
becomes “bad”. (About 10...d6 11.Nf1 – see 9...d6; 10...Rc8!? 11.Nf1 Na5
12.Ng3 d6 13.h3² Black’s position is cramped but still solid and he has no
pawn-weaknesses.) 11.e5 Nd7 12.Nf1 Re8 13.Ng3 Nf8 14.Nh5! White’s
pieces are coming closer to the enemy king. 14...Rc8 15.g3. He is preparing
the pawn-advance h2-h4. 15...Rc7 16.h4 f6 (White can counter 16...Qd7
with the exquisite line: 17.Bh6! gxh6 18.Qd2+–) 17.exf6 Bxf6 18.Bf4 Rf7,
Howell – Miezis, Newport 2004, 19.Rc1 Qd7 20.b4± Black’s pieces are
squeezed with the protection of his king and the pawn on e6.
9...d6 10.Re1 0-0 11.Nf1
 11...Rc8 12.Ng3 Re8 13.b4 (13.Qe2²) 13...Nd7 14.Bb2 Bf8, Kosic –
Nikac, Cetinje 2008, 15.h4±
11...e5 12.Ng3. White maintains the pawn-tension in the centre (He can
also try to occupy additional space with the line: 12.d5!? Nb8 13.b4±).
12...exd4 13.Nf5 Ne8, Karpatchev – Weisskopf, Senden 2002, 14.Nxe7+
Qxe7 15.Bg5 f6 16.Bh4± White has more than sufficient compensation for
the sacrificed pawn.
11...d5 12.e5 Ne4, Vaganian – Rigo, Reggio Emilia 1981, 13.N1d2 Nxd2
14.Bxd2 Rc8 15.Rc1 Na5 16.Qe2 Nb3 17.Bxh7+ Kxh7 18.Qd3± After
White regains his sacrificed piece, Black will have no compensation for the
lost pawn, because his bishops will fail to prove their power in this closed
position.

9.Bxa6
White does not exchange on a6 and waits until Black captures on d3
himself: 9.Nb1!? Bxd3 10.Qxd3 d5 11.e5 Ne4 12.Nbd2²

9...Nxa6
 10.d5
White frees the d4-square for his knight.

This sacrifice can be prepared with the move 10.Qe2!?, for example:
10...Nc7 11.d5 (There would arise a calmer game after the more prudent
line: 11.Rd1 0-0 12.Nf1 Qc8 13.Bf4 Qb7, Poloch – Zavadil, Piestany 2006,
14.d5 d6 15.Ng3²).
 Following 11...d6 12.dxe6 Nxe6, there would appear an isolated pawn on
d6 in Black’s position. 13.Rd1 0-0, Motwani – Miles, Forli 1991, 14.Nb1!?
White transfers his knight to the c3-square in order to thwart the freeing
enemy pawn-advance d6–d5. 14...Qc7 15.Nc3²
11...exd5 12.e5 Nh5 (12...Ng8 13.Nd4 Bc5 14.Qg4²; 12...Ne4. Black
gives back immediately his extra pawn, complying with defending an
inferior position due to his weak d7-pawn. 13.Nxe4 dxe4 14.Qxe4 0-0
15.Rd1 Ne6 16.Be3 Rc8, Kulikov – Vlassow, St Petersburg 2009, 17.h3²)
13.Nb3 (13.Nb1!? Ne6 14.Nc3±) 13...Ne6 14.Nfd4 g6.
 Black covers the f5-square against the penetration of the enemy knight.
15.Qf3 0-0 16.Qxd5. White restores the material balance and preserves all
the pluses of his position. 16...Rc8 17.Bh6 Nxd4 18.Qxd4 (18.Nxd4!? Ng7
19.Rad1²) 18...Ng7 19.Bxg7 Kxg7 20.Rad1² Kosten – Rottstaedt, Ostend
1987. The weakness on d7 dooms Black to a long and laborious defence.

10...exd5 11.e5 Ne4 12.Nxe4 dxe4 13.Nd4 Nc5

After 13...g6 14.Qe2 Nc5 15.b4 Nd3, White can play 16.Bh6!, preventing
his opponent from castling kingside. 16...Bf8 17.Bxf8 Kxf8 18.Qxe4 Nxb4
19.Rad1 Kg7. Black has an extra pawn, but is helpless against the actions
of the coordinated enemy forces. 20.Qg4 (20.f4+–) 20...Na6 21.Nf5+ Kf8
22.Nd6+– Godena – Aleksic, Porto San Giorgio 1995.

14.Qg4

14.Nf5!? 0-0 15.Qg4 g6 16.Bh6 Re8 17.Rad1²

14...g6
 15.b4!? (15.Bh6 d5!÷ Archangelsky – Kveinys, Cappelle-la-Grande
1994) 15...Ne6 (15...h5 16.Qe2 Ne6 17.Rd1²) 16.Nxe6 fxe6 17.Qxe4 0-0
18.Rd1² Black has no compensation for the unsafe position of his king and
the vulnerability of his pawn on d7.
 Chapter 3
1.e4 c5 2.c3 g6

This move is usually used by the players whose opening repertoire

includes the Dragon variation in the Sicilian Defence, for example the
grandmaster from Azerbaijan Gadir Guseinov often plays it.
3.d4 cxd4

About 3...b6 4.Nf3 – see 2...b6.

3...d5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Nf3 – see 2...d5.

3...Qc7. This move seems somewhat slow, but now Black does not need
to worry about the fate of his pawn on c5. 4.Nf3 Bg7 (about 4...d6 5.h3
Bg7 6.Bd3 Nf6 7.0-0, or 6...Nd7 7.0-0 Ngf6 8.Be3 – see Chapter 5) 5.Bd3
d6 6.h3 Nd7 (6...Nf6 7.0-0 – see Chapter 5) 7.0-0 Ngf6 8.Be3 – see
Chapter 5.
 Following 3...d6, the simplest for White would be to enter an endgame
with a stable advantage for him. 4.dxc5!? dxc5 5.Qxd8+ Kxd8 6.Be3

About 6...Nf6 7.Nd2 Nbd7 8.Ngf3 – see 6...Nd7.

6...Nd7 7.Nf3 Ngf6 8.Nbd2 Ng4 9.Bf4 e5. Black is trying to establish
control over the centre, but weakens the other central d5-square. 10.Bg3 f6
11.a4 b6 12.a5 Bb7 13.Bb5 Kc7 14.Nc4 Bxe4 15.Bxd7 Kxd7 16.axb6±
6...b6 7.Nf3 Bh6 8.Ng5! White is reluctant to comply with the exchange
of the dark-squared bishops. 8...Bxg5 9.Bxg5 Ba6 10.Bxa6 Nxa6 11.Ke2
Nf6 12.Rd1+ Kc7 13.e5 Ng4. Now, in order to maintain the material
balance Black must send his knight to a perilous expedition to gobble the
enemy pawn on h2. 14.Bxe7 Rae8 15.Bd6+ Kb7 16.f4 Nxh2 17.Nd2±
Black’s cavalry is scattered at the edge of the board, while White’s pieces
have been deployed much more harmoniously and actively.

After the careless move 3...Bg7 4.dxc5! Black will have serious problems
to regain his pawn.
 About 4...Na6 5.Bxa6 bxa6 6.Be3 Qc7 7.Ne2 – see 4...Qc7.
The move 4...a5?! would lead to the weakening of the b5-square. 5.Be3
Na6 6.Na3 Qc7, Darban – Mahmoodi, Teheran 2003, 7.Nf3 Nxc5 8.Nb5
Qc6 9.Nfd4 Qb6 10.b4 Nxe4 11.Ne6+–
After 4...Nf6?! Black loses valuable time. 5.e5 Ng8 6.Nf3 Qc7, Tomczak
– Czaplinski, Poznan 2013, 7.Na3 Qxc5 8.Nb5 Bh6 9.Qd4 Qxd4 10.cxd4
Na6 11.Bc4±
Following 4...b6, Black would not obtain sufficient compensation for the
pawn. 5.cxb6 Qxb6 6.Nf3 Nf6 7.Bd3 d6 8.0-0± Stevenson – Haack, USA
1976.
4...Nc6 5.Nf3 Nf6 (5...Qa5. On this square Black queen might come
under an attack later after Nc4. 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Nfd2 0-0 8.Be2 Rd8,
Gadimbayli – Bayramov, Baku 2017, 9.Na3 d6. Black already complies
with the fact that he would have to continue the game with a pawn down.
10.cxd6 exd6 11.f4±) 6.Bd3 0-0 7.0-0 b6. White’s pawn on c5 cramps
Black’s position and since he cannot regain it, he would prefer to exchange
it. (7...Qa5 8.b4 Qc7 9.Na3± Vavra – Kratochvil, Czech Republic 2016)
8.cxb6 Qxb6 (8...axb6 9.Na3 Bb7 10.Qe2 d6, Skawinski – Brodowski,
Zgierz 2017, 11.Re1±) 9.Na3 (It also seems good for White here to play
9.h3!? depriving the enemy knight of the g4-square. 9...Rd8 10.e5 Nd5
11.Na3±) 9...d6 10.Nc4 Qc7, Moncayo Romero – Ruiz, Duran 2016,
11.Re1±
After 4...Qc7 5.Be3, it becomes inconceivable how Black can restore the
material balance.

About 5...a5 6.Na3 Na6 7.Nf3 – see 4...a5.

5...Na6 6.Bxa6 bxa6 7.Ne2 Nf6 (7...a5 8.Qd3±) 8.f3± Roeder –
Lehmann, Germany 1986.
5...Nc6 6.Na3 Nf6 7.f3!? White protects reliably his pawn on e4 and the
fact that his knight cannot occupy the f3-square any more would not be so
important, because he plans to transfer it to the f4-square via h3. 7...0-0,
Poloch – Mocary, Tatranske Zruby 2005, 8.Nh3 Rd8 9.Nf4 d6 10.Nb5 Qb8
11.cxd6 exd6 12.c4±
5...Nf6 6.f3 0-0 7.Na3 b6 (7...Nc6 8.Nh3 – see 5...Nc6; 7...Na6 8.Bxa6
bxa6 9.Ne2±) 8.Nb5 Qb7 9.cxb6 axb6, Dausch – Cmiel, Cologne 1993,
10.c4± White lags a bit in development, but he has a material advantage and
a more elastic pawn-structure.
 3...Qa5?! Black plays this move with the same idea as 3...Qc7, but his
queen would be less reliably placed on a5. 4.Nf3!

4...cxd4 5.Bc4! This move is energetic and strong! White sacrifices a

pawn with the idea to exploit his lead in development. 5...dxc3 (5...Bg7 6.0-
0 – see 4...Bg7) 6.Nxc3 Nc6 (6...Bg7 7.0-0 – see 4...Bg7) 7.0-0 Bg7 8.Qb3.
Now, Black must weaken the d6-square in order to protect his pawn on f7.
8...e6 9.Nb5+–
4...Bg7 5.Bc4 cxd4 6.0-0
 6...Nf6 7.e5 Ne4, Jansa – Sikora, Decin 1977, 8.b4 Qd8 9.Qb3 0-0
10.cxd4±
6...dxc3 7.Nxc3 Nf6 (7...d6 8.e5!±; 7...Nh6, Pitschka – Gietl, Bayern
2003. Black is reluctant to let his knight to come under an attack after e4-
e5, but it would be horribly misplaced at the edge of the board. 8.Nd5 Nc6
9.b4 Qd8 10.Bg5 f6 11.Bf4±) 8.e5 Ng4 9.Bxf7+ White weakens the
position of the enemy king with this simple combination and deprives it of
its castling rights. 9...Kxf7 10.Ng5+ Ke8 11.Qxg4 Nc6, Marcelin –
Shoker, St Quentin 2014, 12.Re1±
6...d3 7.Qb3! White does not lose time to regain the pawn on d3, since it
would not run anywhere. 7...e6 8.Bf4. Having provoked the weakening of
the d6-square White plans to deploy there his bishop. 8...Ne7 (8...Nc6
9.Na3 a6 10.Bxd3±) 9.Bd6 Nbc6 10.Na3 a6 11.Bxd3 b5 12.c4 b4 13.Nc2
g5 14.c5 g4. With this move Black only sends the enemy knight to the c4-
outpost. 15.Nd2+– Lopukhin – Klimentov, Voronezh 2009.

4.cxd4
4...d5

About 4...d6 5.Nc3 – see Chapter 5.

4...Bg7 5.Nc3
 5...d6 6.h3 – see Chapter 5.
5...d5 6.e5 – see 4...d5.
5...Nc6?! Black’s knight will come under an attack on this square after
6.d5 Nb8 (6...Nb4 7.Nf3±) 7.d6!± Ayazmali – Onat, Manavgat 2015.
5...e6 6.Nb5 d5 7.Bf4 Qa5+ 8.Qd2 Qxd2+, Glotzbach – Radisic,
Germany 2013, 9.Kxd2 Na6 10.Nd6+ Ke7 11.Rc1±
5...a6 6.Nf3

About 6...d6 7.h3 Nf6 8.Bd3 – see Chapter 5.

6...b5 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.0-0 Nf6 (After 8...d6, White can begin an immediate
attack against his opponent’s queenside: 9.a4 b4 10.Qb3 Nc6 11.a5±) 9.e5
Nd5 10.h4!? Black will have to castle kingside anyway, so White brings in
advance his h-pawn into the attack against the enemy monarch. 10...d6
11.h5 0-0 12.e6! White attacks the f7-pawn with the idea to weaken the
protection of the g6-square. 12...f5 13.Re1 Bf6. Black prevents the move
Nh4, but his position is beyond salvation anyway. 14.hxg6 hxg6 15.Qd2
Bg7 16.Nh4 Kh7 17.Nxd5 Bxd5 18.Nxg6! Kxg6 19.Qg5+ Kh7
20.Bxf5+–
6...Nc6 7.d5 (about 7.Be3 d6 8.h3 Nf6 9.Bd3 – see Chapter 5) 7...Ne5
8.Nxe5 Bxe5, Cernuda Orejas – Robson, Caleta 2017, 9.Be2. White is not
in a hurry to advance f2-f4, since the preparation of the penetration of his
knight to the b6-outpost (Be3, Na4-b6) seems to be more promising for
him. 9...d6 10.Be3 Bg7 11.Na4 Qa5+ 12.Kf1 Bd7 13.Nb6 Rd8 14.a4.
Suddenly, Black’s queen is endangered. 14...Qb4 15.Rc1 Qxb2 16.g4 Nf6
17.Bd4 Qa3 18.Rc3 Qb2 19.Rc4 Qa3 20.Nxd7 Rxd7 21.g5 Nh5 22.Bxh5.
Black cannot avoid the material losses any more. 22...Bxd4 23.Qxd4 Qh3+
24.Kg1 0-0 25.Be2+–
6...e6. Black weakens the d6-square with this move. 7.Bf4 (7.h4!?) 7...b5
(7...Ne7 8.h4 h5 9.Bd6±) 8.Rc1± Ne7? Terao – Ramos, Americana 2009.
Black’s position was very difficult anyway, but still, he did not need to
blunder the strike on the b5-square. 9.Nxb5 axb5 10.Bc7+–

5.e5 Bg7

About 5...Nc6 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.Bb5, or 6...Nh6 7.Bb5 Bg7 8.h3 – see
5...Bg7.

6.Nc3

6...Nc6
 6...f6 7.Bb5+ Bd7, Erenburg – Moser, Budapest 2002 (7...Nc6 8.Nf3 –
see 6...Nc6) 8.Nf3 Bxb5 (8...Nh6 9.Qb3±) 9.Nxb5.

After the trade of the light-squared bishops, Black may have difficulties
with the protection of the e6-square against the penetration of the enemy
pieces.
9...Nc6 10.0-0 fxe5 (10...Nh6? 11.exf6 exf6 12.Re1+ Ne7 13.Bf4+–)
11.Ng5 Qd7 12.Ne6±
Following 9...Nh6, White penetrates quickly with his queen to the e6-
square and wins the pawn on d5. 10.exf6 exf6 11.Qe2+ Kf7 12.Bf4 Nf5
13.Nc7 Bh6 14.Qe6+ Kg7 15.Qxd5 Re8+ 16.Kd1 Qxd5 17.Bxh6+ Kxh6
18.Nxd5 Na6 19.Nxf6 Red8. Here, the activity of Black’s pieces would be
sufficient only to regain one of the two lost pawns. 20.Ke2 Kg7 21.Ng4
Nxd4+ 22.Nxd4 Rxd4 23.Ne3±

6...Nh6. Black is reluctant to allow his knight to come under a pin and is
not in a hurry to play Nc6. 7.h3!? White is preparing g2-g4. He is playing
enterprisingly on the kingside and wishes to emphasize the defects of his
opponent’s move six. 7...0-0 (7...Nc6 8.Bb5 – see 6...Nc6) 8.g4!? White
deprives the enemy knight on h6 from the f5-square. 8...Nc6 (about 8...f6
9.f4 Nc6 10.Bg2, or 9...fxe5 10.fxe5 e6 11.Nf3 Nc6 12.Bg2 – see 8...Nc6)
9.f4 f6 10.Bg2

10...e6 11.Nf3 Nf7 12.0-0 g5. Black wishes to organise active

counterplay on the kingside, but weakens the position of his king. 13.exf6
Bxf6 14.fxg5 Nxg5 15.Nxg5 Bxg5 16.Rxf8+ Kxf8 17.Qf3+ Kg7 18.Bxg5
Qxg5 19.Rf1 Qe7 20.Qe3± Pavasovic – Durarbayli, Rijeka 2010; 10...Be6
11.Nf3 Kh8 12.0-0 fxe5 13.fxe5 Bg8 14.Be3 e6 15.Qd2 Nf7 16.h4. Black’s
pieces obviously lack sufficient space. White can improve patiently his
position and bring reserves to the kingside. 16...h6 17.Ne2 Bh7 18.Nf4±
Srinath – Barbier, Lisbon 2019.
10...fxe5 11.fxe5 e6 12.Nf3
 12...Qb6. The pressure against the pawn on d4 would not bring anything
to Black, because White can oust the enemy queen from the b6-square with
the move Na4 at any moment. 13.0-0 Bd7 14.Na4 Qc7, Varitski – Tkachuk,
Germany 2017, 15.Nc5!? b6 16.Nxd7 Qxd7 17.Be3±
12...b6 13.0-0 (13.Bg5!? White wishes to trade the dark-squared bishops
by playing after Nf7 – Bg5-f6 and thus to weaken even more the position of
the enemy queen. 13...Qd7 14.0-0 Nf7 15.Bf6 Bxf6 16.exf6 Nd6 17.g5±)
13...Ba6 14.Rf2 Rc8 (Following 14...Qd7 15.Be3 Nb4 16.Qd2 Nf7, White
should play 17.Bf1!, otherwise, Black’s knight might penetrate to the d3-
square. 17...Bxf1 18.Raxf1 Nc6 19.h4 Ne7 20.Ne2± Kulkarni –
Evdokimov, New Delhi 2015.) 15.Bg5 Qe8, Pap – Mladenovic, Vrnjacka
Banja 2019, 16.Qd2 Nf7 17.Bf6±
12...Rxf3. This exchange-sacrifice does not seem to be well prepared,
since Black’s queenside pieces have not been developed yet. 13.Bxf3 Qh4+
14.Kf1 Qg3 (14...b6 15.Kg2+–) 15.Be3 b6 16.Bf2 Ba6+ 17.Ke1 Qf4
18.Nxd5!? White gives back a part of his extra material and forces a
transition to an endgame. 18...exd5 (18...Qf7? 19.Nf6+ Bxf6 20.exf6+–
Roberson – Coleman, London 2015) 19.Bxd5+ Nf7 20.Qf3. Black cannot
avoid the exchange of the queens. 20...Qxf3 21.Bxf3 Nfd8 (21...Rc8
22.Rc1±) 22.Rc1 Bb7 23.Be3± White’s rook and two central pawns seem to
be much stronger than Black’s couple of knights.
12...Nf7 13.0-0 b6 (13...b5 14.Be3. White does not need to be afraid of
the further advance of the enemy b-pawn, because after b5-b4, he can
transfer his knight to the c5-square. 14...Qb6 15.Qd2 a5 16.b3 Ba6,
Eriksson – Karlsson, Helsingor 2013, 17.h4± White’s attacking prospects
on the kingside look much more promising than Black’s counterplay on the
other side of the board.) 14.Rf2 a5 15.Be3 Ba6 16.Qd2 Qe8 17.h4 h6
18.Bf1. White exchanges the bishops and gains access to the f1-square for
his queen’s rook. 18...Bxf1 19.Raxf1 a4 20.Qd3 Ne7 21.Ne2. White brings
his last reserves into the attack. 21...Qd7, Smagin – Borriss, Germany 2005,
22.Nf4 Nh8 23.h5 g5 24.Nh3. Now, Black cannot prevent the bishop-
sacrifice on the g5-square after which position crumbles. 24...Nf7 25.Bxg5
Nxg5 26.Nfxg5 hxg5 27.Nxg5+–

6...a6. Black prevents the pin of the knight after Nc6, but his last move
does not contribute to the development of his pieces. 7.h3 Nc6

8.Be3!? White is not in a hurry to develop his knight on f3 and preserves

the possibility to fortify his pawn on e5 with the move f2-f4. 8...f6 (8...e6
9.Qd2²; 8...Nh6 9.g4!?²; 8...Bxe5. Black sacrifices temporarily a piece and
simplifies the position, but this proves to be insufficient for equality. 9.dxe5
d4 10.Bxd4 Qxd4 11.Qxd4 Nxd4 12.Rd1²) 9.f4 e6 10.Nf3 Nge7 11.g4.
White prevents the appearance of the enemy knight on the f5-square. 11...0-
0 12.Bg2 f5. Black wishes to block completely the kingside, but he fails to
accomplish this completely. 13.g5 (13.0-0!?) 13...b5 14.h4 Qb6 15.h5 Rd8,
Zelbel – De Filomeno, Katowice 2017, 16.Kf2± White has much more
space, while Black’s position is cramped and he obviously cannot
manoeuvre freely.
8.Nf3. With this calm move White wishes at first to develop his kingside
pieces as quickly as possible, but he can also attack the d5-square with the
move Qb3 at an opportune moment.

8...Nh6 9.Bf4 f6 10.exf6 exf6 11.Qb3 Nf5 12.Nxd5 Na5 13.Qa4+ b5

14.Nc7+ Qxc7 15.Bxc7 bxa4 16.Bxa5 Be6 17.Bd3 Kf7 18.0-0² Black does
not have sufficient compensation for the sacrificed pawn.
8...e6. This rather unattractive move for Black restricts the mobility of his
bishop on c8 and weakens the f6-square. 9.Bd3 Nge7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Be3 b5
12.Rc1 Qb6 13.Qd2± Bashiri – Azadbakhsh, Rasht 2014.
8...f6 9.exf6
 After 9...Nxf6, Black will end up with a backward pawn on the e-file.
10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 Nh5 12.Re1!? White prepares the possibility for his
bishop on e2 to retreat. 12...Nf4 13.Bf1 Qd6 14.Be3 Bd7 15.Rc1 Kh8
16.Na4² His knight is headed for the c5-square. 16...Rad8 17.Nc5 Bc8
18.g3± Black cannot capture on h3, since this would deflect his bishop from
the protection of the pawn on b7. 18...b6? He prepares an exchange-
sacrifice on f4, but this untimely activity only increases his difficulties.
19.Bxf4 Rxf4 20.gxf4 bxc5 21.Ne5 Rf8 22.Rxc5+– Berchtenbreiter –
Troyke, Germany 2019.
9...exf6 10.Bd3. This is the best square for White’s bishop, since it would
not stand in the way of his rook to perform active operations on the e-file.
10...Nge7 11.0-0 0-0 12.Re1 Rf7 13.a3 Bf5, Ding – Morozevich, Beijing
2012, 14.Na4 (14.Bf1!?²) 14...Bxd3 15.Qxd3 Nf5 16.Bf4² White’s king is
safer than its counterpart, while the e6-square is vulnerable in Black’s
camp.

7.Bb5
 White can also play here 7.h3, because after 7...f6, he cam simply
continue with 8.Nf3, for example: 8...fxe5 9.dxe5 e6. The exchange of the
central pawns is in favour of White, because Black has remained with an
isolated pawn on e7. 10.Bb5 Nge7 11.Bg5 0-0 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.0-0² Black
has too many weaknesses in his position.

We will analyse now: A) 7...Nh6 and B) 7...f6.

A) 7...Nh6 8.h3!?
Now, before playing Nf3, White makes a prophylactic move against Bg4.
8...0-0 9.Nf3
 9...f6
Black begins a fight for the strategically important e5-square.

9...Nf5 10.0-0 f6 (10...Be6. On this square Black’s bishop will soon come
under an attack after Nc5. 11.Bxc6 bxc6 12.Na4 Rb8 13.b3 Qc7 14.Nc5
Bc8 15.Re1 Rb5 16.Bf4± Westerweele – Haimovich, Vlissingen 2011)
11.Re1 e6 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.Na4± Black’s defence will be difficult in this
middle game.

9...Na5 This knight is at the edge of the board and will not control the d4
and e5-squares. 10.0-0 a6 11.Bd3 f6 (11...Bf5. Black’s position is cramped
and he wishes to facilitate his defence by trading a couple of minor pieces.
12.Bxf5!? Nxf5 13.g4 Nh6 14.Na4±; 12.Re1 Bxd3 13.Qxd3 Rc8 14.Bf4
Kh8, Ni Hua – Ryjanova, Sydney 2015, 15.Na4± Siegbert Tarrasch
mentioned long time ago and quite justifiably so that “If just one piece is
misplaced, the entire game is bad.” Black’s knight on h6 makes his position
very difficult.) 12.Re1 (12.exf6 exf6 13.Re1±) 12...fxe5 13.dxe5 e6?! This
move would lead to even greater weakening of the dark squares in Black’s
camp. 14.Bg5 Qe8 15.Qd2 Nf7 16.Nxd5! White wins a pawn with this
simple combination. 16...Nxg5 17.Nxg5 exd5 18.Qxa5 Qd8 19.Qxd8 Rxd8
20.Rac1+– Lu Shanglei – Askarov, Albena 2015.

9...Bf5. Unfortunately for Black only one of his two minor pieces can
occupy the wonderful f5-square. 10.0-0 Be4. He wishes to exchange his
bishop for his opponent’s knight on f3, but White can prevent that.
(10...Qb6, Yudasin – Kacheishvili, Philadelphia 2009, 11.Re1 Be4 12.Nxe4
Qxb5 13.a4 Qb6 14.Nc5±; 10...Rc8, Cadavid – Lopez Idarraga, Pereira
2019, 11.Re1 a6 12.Bxc6 Rxc6 13.Qb3±) 11.Ng5! This is the point! With
this move White puts Black’s previous move in doubt. 11...Qb6 (11...Bf5.
Having lost tempi on moves with his bishop Black ends up in a bad
position. 12.Re1 f6 13.Nf3 Qd7, Lot – Barbier, Westerlo 2010, 14.Qb3±;
13...Nf7 14.Bf4±) 12.Bxc6. It is useful for White to clarify immediately
Black’s intentions. 12...bxc6 (12...Qxc6. His queen will come under an
attack here after d4-d5. 13.Ngxe4 dxe4 14.d5 Qd7, Wang Kevin – Hossain,
Arlington 2013, 15.Bf4+–) 13.Na4 (13.g4!?±) 13...Qb4 14.a3 Qb5, Raja –
Aydin, Novi Sad 2016, 15.g4. White restrict considerably with this move
the mobility of the enemy knight on h6. 15...f6 16.exf6 Rxf6 17.Nc3 Qb8
18.Ngxe4 dxe4 19.Nxe4± White has a solid extra pawn.

9...Qb6 10.0-0
 About 10...Bf5 11.Re1 – see 9...Bf5.
Following 10...Bd7, Stephan – Mannermaa, ICCF 2008, the simplest for
White would be to protect his bishop on b5 with the line: 11.a4 e6 12.Bg5±
10...e6. This move looks rather humble. Black protects his pawn on d5,
but weakens even more the dark squares on the kingside. 11.Bg5 Kh8
(11...Bd7? 12.Bxc6 Bxc6 13.Qd2 Nf5 14.g4+– Pastor Alonso de Prado –
Esteban Amo, Madrid 2017) 12.Qd2 Ng8 13.Bxc6 Qxc6, Rams –
Walaszczyk, Jastrzebia Gora 2016, 14.a4. White is preparing Nb5-d6.
14...h6 (Following 14...a6 15.a5± after Na4, White’s knight can go to c5 as
well as to the b6-square.) 15.Bh4 Bd7 16.Nb5±
10...Nf5 11.Bxc6. White exchanges on c6 in order to decrease his
opponent’s pressure against the d4-square. 11...bxc6 (11...Qxc6 12.g4.
White ousts the enemy knight to the edge of the board. 12...Nh6, Rusche –
Scharrer, Austria 2013, 13.Re1 f6 14.Qb3±) 12.Na4 Qb5 13.b3. White is
not in a hurry to play Nc5, since it would be much more important for him
to complete the development of his queenside pieces. 13...f6 14.exf6
(14.Ba3 fxe5, Rublevsky – Yermolinsky, Las Vegas 1999, 15.dxe5 d4
16.Re1±) 14...exf6 15.Re1 Bd7 16.Nc5. After Black’s pawn has
disappeared off the e7-square, White’s bishop is doing nothing on a3, so he
develops it to the f4-square. 16...Rad8 17.Bf4 Bc8, Fressinet – Al Modiahki,
Dubai 2014, 18.Bc7 Rde8 19.Qd2 Rxe1+ 20.Rxe1+– Black has no
satisfactory defence against White’s threat a2-a4 trapping the queen.

10.0-0

10...fxe5

10...Nf7. Black increases his pressure against the e5-square, but now,
White can simply exchange on f6. 11.exf6
 11...Bxf6. Black is reluctant to restrict the mobility of his dark-squared
bishop, but now he will have a backward e7-pawn in his position. 12.Re1
Qd6 (12...e6 13.Bxc6 bxc6 14.Bf4 Nd6 15.Rc1± c5? 16.dxc5 Nc4 17.Bh6
Nxb2 18.Qe2 Nc4 19.Bxf8 Qxf8, Libiszewski – Lafaurie, Cap d’Agde
2010, 20.Ne4+–) 13.Be3 a6 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.Na4± Niewiadomski –
Schmitzer, ICCF 2004.
11...exf6 12.Re1 Qd6 (After 12...g5, Stefansson – Manik, Pardubice 2017,
White must squeeze immediately the enemy pieces with the protection of
the pawn on d5: 13.Qb3 a6 14.Bf1 Ne7 15.Bd2±) 13.Ba4 a6. Black
defends against the threat Nb5, followed by Bf4. (13...Bf5 14.Qb3 Rae8
15.Rxe8 Rxe8 16.Qxb7± Luethi – Godlauskas, Chessfriend.com 2003;
13...Be6, Rahman – Mok, Kuala Lumpur 2007, 14.Nb5 Qd7 15.Bf4±)
14.Bb3 Be6 15.Bf4 (15.Rxe6!? This is a very promising exchange-sacrifice
for White. 15...Qxe6 16.Nxd5 Qf5 17.Be3±) 15...Qxf4 16.Rxe6 Ng5
17.Re3 Nxf3+ 18.Rxf3 Qxd4 19.Rd3 Qh4 20.Nxd5 Kh8 21.Nc7 Rad8
22.Ne6+– Jansa – Kelleher, Marianske Lazne 2016.

10...Be6 11.Re1
 11...Qc8 12.Bf4 (12.Qe2!?) 12...fxe5, Kacharava – Koridze, Prague 2019,
13.Bxe5 Nxe5 14.Nxe5±
11...fxe5 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.Nxe5 Qd6 14.Na4 Nf7 15.Bf4 Nxe5 16.Bxe5
Bxe5 17.Rxe5 Rf5 18.Qe1 Rxe5 19.dxe5 Qd8 20.Nc5± Cabrilo – Svicevic,
Belgrade 2014. Black has a “very bad” bishop and this dooms him to a long
and laborious defence.
11...Re8 12.Na4± White’s knight is headed for the c5-outpost and Black’s
position worsens with every move. 12...Kh8 13.Nc5 Qc8 14.Qa4 (14.Bf4!?
Nf7 15.Rc1±) 14...a6 15.Bxc6 bxc6 16.Nxe6 Qxe6 17.exf6 Qxf6 18.Bg5
Qd6 19.Ne5 Kg8 20.Rac1+– Fedorchuk – Dominguez Delgado, Seville
2019.

11.dxe5 e6 12.Re1 Qc7

12...Bd7 13.Bg5 Qb6 14.Be3 Qc7 15.Rc1 Nf7, Ohtake – Joao, ICCF
2008. Now, White can centralise immediately his knight. 16.Bxc6 Bxc6
17.Nb5 Qa5 18.Nbd4 Rfe8 19.Nxc6 bxc6 20.Rxc6 Nxe5 21.Nxe5 Bxe5.
Black manages somehow to maintain the material balance with
considerable efforts, but after 22.Bc1 Qb5 23.Qc2, he would lose his e6-
pawn anyway. 23...Bd4 24.Rexe6 Rxe6 25.Rxe6±
 13.Bxc6

13...bxc6

Black would not facilitate his defence with the line: 13...Qxc6 14.Bg5
Bd7, Kuhne – Deghose, LSS 2010, 15.Ne2 Nf5 16.g4. His knight is forced
again to retreat to the unfortunate h6-square. 16...Nh6 17.Be7 Rfc8
18.Ned4 Qb6 19.Bf6±

14.Be3 Nf7 15.Bc5 Re8 16.Qd4. White’s pieces are totally dominant on
the dark squares. 16...Ba6 17.b3 Bb5 18.Rac1± Schreiber – Grego, ICCF
2014. Black’s “bad” bishop on b5 is practically useless, moreover that he
has numerous pawn-weaknesses in his camp.

B) 7...f6
Black undermines immediately the enemy pawn on e5, since it cramps his
position.
8.Nf3
 8...Bg4

About 8...Nh6 9.0-0 0-0 10.h3 – see 7...Nh6.

8...a6?! In this variation White often captures immediately on c6 creating

a pawn-weakness for his opponent. Therefore the move 8...a6 is just a loss
of an important tempo for Black. 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.h3. This is a
prophylactic move against the possibility Bg4. 10...Nh6 11.0-0 0-0 12.Re1
Nf7, M.Petrov – Muskardin, Zagreb 2017. Now, White has a very pleasant
choice. He can cramp his opponent’s position even more after 13.e6 Nd6
14.Qc2± or can play at first 13.Na4, preparing the transfer of his knight to
the c5-square. 13...g5 14.e6 Nd6 15.Qc2±

9.0-0
 9...fxe5
Black exploits the fact that his opponent cannot capture on e5 with a
piece, but this is insufficient for him to equalise.

About 9...e6 10.h3 Bxf3 11.Qxf3 fxe5 12.dxe5 – see 9...fxe5.

9...Rc8 10.h3 Bxf3 11.Qxf3. Here, in order to protect his pawn on d5,
Black is forced to play 11...e6, Larrea – Gaye, Montevideo 2019. His pawn
would be weak on this square, because White’s rook will attack it on the e-
file. 12.Bf4 fxe5 13.Bxe5 Nf6 14.Bxc6+ Rxc6 (14...bxc6?! 15.Na4±)
15.Rac1 0-0 16.Qe3² It would be very difficult for Black to organise any
counterplay, because he must think all the time about the protection of his
pawn on e6.

10.dxe5 e6 11.h3 Bxf3 12.Qxf3

With a pawn on e5 it would be difficult for White to make use of the
weakness of the enemy pawn on e6, but now, in some variations he would
be able to bring his bishop into the attack against the enemy king with the
move: Bg5-f6.
 12...Nge7

12...Nh6 13.Bxh6! Without this move Black would be able to play Nf7
exerting rather unpleasant pressure against the enemy pawn on e5.
13...Bxh6 14.Ne2! White’s knight is doing nothing on the c3-square, since
it is severely restricted by the enemy pawn on c6. So he wishes to transfer it
to d4 in order to increase his pressure against the c6 and e6-squares.

14...Rf8. Black’s plan with an artificial castling seems rather slow and
worsens his position even more. 15.Qg4 Kf7 16.Bxc6 bxc6 17.Nd4 Qd7
18.f4 c5 19.f5! This is the right time for this move! After this pawn-break
White begins a powerful attack against the enemy monarch. 19...gxf5
20.Nxf5 exf5 21.Rxf5+ Ke8. Black has failed to evacuate his king away
from the centre. 22.e6+– Ng Jen Sheng – Jacutina, Pattaya 2015.
14...Rc8 15.Nd4 Qe7, Velikhanli – Pogonina, Vladimir 2004, 16.b4.
Black’s position is solid, so White plans to organise a positional siege
against it. With his last move he takes some measures against the eventual
pawn-advance c6-c5, which might become possible after an exchange on
c6. 16...Rf8 17.Bxc6+ bxc6 18.Qd3. White’s queen is headed for the a6-
square in order to attack simultaneously two of Black’s weaknesses – the
pawns on a7 and c6. 18...Kf7 19.Rab1 Kg8 20.Qa6 Qd7 21.g3± Black has
too many pawn-weaknesses in his position and his king is placed quite
unreliably.

13.Bg5 Qc7

14.Bxc6+

The move 14.Rac1 loses the advantage for White. 14...a6 15.Bxc6+
Nxc6. Now, contrary to after 14.Bxc6+, Black can capture on c6 with his
knight, since White does not have the manoeuvre Nb5-d6. 16.Na4 Qxe5
17.Rfe1 Nd4! Black protects his pawn on e6 with tempo. 18.Qg4 h5
19.Qh4 Qd6 20.Bf6 Nf5 21.Qg5. White’s initiative seems to be very
powerful, but it would be sufficient only to restore the material balance for
him. 21...0-0 22.Bxg7 Kxg7 23.Nc5 Rfe8 24.Nxb7 Qe7 25.Qxe7+ Rxe7
26.Nc5 Kf6= Kunz – Nielsen, ICCF 2007.

14.Rfe1 a6 (After Black’s careless move 14...Nf5? Gritsayeva –

Khokhlova, Yaroslavl 2019, White can inflict a powerful tactical strike:
15.Nxd5! exd5 16.Qxd5 a6 17.Ba4± He would have two pawns for the
piece, while Black’s king will remain stranded in the centre for long.)
15.Bxc6+ Nxc6 16.Na4 h6 17.Bf6 0-0 18.Qg4 Qf7. Black protects reliably
his pawns on g6 and e6. 19.Nc5 Rae8

20.Kh1!? The idea behind this seemingly strange move is that now Black
cannot capture the f2-pawn with check. 20...h5 (20...Bxf6 21.exf6 Qxf6?!
22.Nd7±; 21...e5 22.Rad1 b6 23.Nxa6. Now, Black must remain very
carefully on the alert about he possibility Nc7. 23...Ra8? 24.Nc7! Qxc7
25.Qxg6+ Kh8 26.f7 Rxf7 27.Rc1+–; 23...e4 24.Qg3²) 21.Qg3 Nd4
22.Rac1 Nf5 23.Qf4 Bh6 24.Bg5 Kh7 25.Rc3² Despite all his efforts Black
has failed to equalise completely, because his king is not so safe as its white
counterpart.

14...bxc6

Black’s defence would become more difficult after 14...Qxc6?! 15.Rac1±,

while the move 14...Nxc6?? would even lose outright after 15.Nb5+–

15.Rfe1 Nf5
 Black covers the f-file and will finally manage to evacuate his king away
from the centre of the board.

15...Bxe5? 16.Rxe5 Qxe5 17.Bf6+–

16.Na4

16...0-0

Following 16...Bxe5 17.Nc5, Black will fail to hold on to his extra pawn.
17...Qd6 18.Nxe6 Qxe6 19.Bf4 0-0 20.Bxe5²

17.Nc5 Rae8 18.Qc3

After Black has castled White’s queen has nothing to do on the f3-square.
18...h6 19.Bd2 g5
Black is trying to organise some counterplay on the kingside, but weakens
the position of his king in the process.
20.Rac1 Nh4 21.Nd3
White protects reliably the f2-square.
21...Qf7
 22.Qa3² (22.Qxc6? Nxg2!µ) White maintains a stable positional
advantage because it is inconceivable how Black can make his kingside
attack more effective, while his pawn-weaknesses on the queenside would
need additional protection.
 Chapter 4
1.e4 c5 2.c3 a6

Black’s move does not contribute to the fight for the centre and to the
development of his pieces, but still White must play precisely in order to
obtain an advantage.
3.Nf3
He plays usually Nf3, or d4 in any move-order. Here however, by playing
3.d4, White must be prepared to a transfer to a rather popular variation
from... the Queen’s Gambit Accepted: 3.d4 cxd4 4.cxd4 d5 5.exd5 Nf6
6.Nc3 Nxd5 7.Bc4 e6 8.Nf3 Be7 9.0-0 Nc6 10.Re1 0-0 11.Bb3 Nf6. Plenty
of great players enter this position with Black like Anand, Karjakin,
Kasparov, Kramnik... It would be hardly reasonable for White instead of
maintaining an edge to enter a fighting position with counter chances for
Black.

We will analyse now: A) 3...d5 and B) 3...e6.

 About 3...Nf6 4.e5 Nd5 5.d4 – see 2...Nf6.

3...Nc6 4.d4 d5 (4...e6? 5.d5 – see 3...e6) 5.exd5 Qxd5 – see 2...d5.

3...g6 4.d4 cxd4 5.cxd4 d5 (5...Bg7 6.Nc3 – see Chapter 3) 6.e5 Bg4
(6...Bg7 7.Nc3 Nc6 8.h3, or 6...Nc6 7.h3 Bg7 8.Nc3 – see Chapter 3)
7.Nbd2. Here, after an exchange on f3, White will manage to capture with
his knight without weakening his control over the d4-square. 7...Nc6 8.Bd3
Qa5 (8...e6 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Nxf3 Nge7 11.0-0 Bg7 12.Bg5 h6 13.Be3 Nf5
14.Bxf5 gxf5 15.Ne1. He prepares the transfer of his knight to the d3-
square and from there it may go later either to c5, or to the f4-square. 15...0-
0 16.Nd3²) 9.0-0 Nxd4. It is tremendously risky for Black to win a pawn
with his horrible lag in development. 10.Nb3 Nxb3 11.Qxb3 Bc8 (11...Qc7
12.Nd4 Bg7 13.Bf4 e6 14.Rac1 Qd7 15.Nb5+–) 12.e6 (12.Be3!? e6
13.Rfc1 Qb4 14.Qc2. White is attacking, so he should avoid the trade of the
queens. 14...Ne7 15.Qc7 Nf5 16.Bxf5 gxf5 17.Qxc8+! This simple queen-
sacrifice settles the issue immediately. 17...Rxc8 18.Rxc8+ Kd7 19.Rac1
Qa5 20.b4! Bxb4 21.Rxh8+–) 12...Bh6 13.exf7+ Kxf7 14.Re1 Kg7
15.Bxh6+ Kxh6, Kolev – Kurajica, Skopje 2002, 16.Bxg6! hxg6 17.Qe3+
Kg7 18.Qe5+–

3...Qa5
 4.Bd3 d6 5.h3. White should prevent the enemy bishop sortie Bg4. 5...b5
6.0-0 Bb7, Burri – Nevednichy, Plancoet 2015, 7.b4!? Here, instead of the
plan with the calm development of his pieces (Bc2, d2-d4), White sacrifices
a pawn for the initiative. 7...cxb4 8.cxb4 Qxb4 9.a4! This is a very
unpleasant move for Black, because he cannot play b5-b4. 9...Qa5 10.Na3
Qxa4 11.Qe2 Qa5 12.Bb2. Black has two extra pawns at the moment, but
White’s initiative increases with every move. 12...e5 13.Nxb5 Qd8 14.Rfc1
axb5 15.Bxb5+ Nd7 16.Rxa8 Bxa8 17.d4 exd4 18.e5+– Black’s extra piece
cannot save him, since most of his pieces are on their initial positions.
4.a3!? White is preparing b2-b4. 4...e6 (4...d5 5.exd5 Nf6 6.c4±) 5.d4
cxd4 6.b4 Qc7 7.cxd4 Nf6 8.Bd3 Nc6 9.0-0 Be7, Kosmo – Jarvela, Turku
2008, 10.Nbd2± White has a powerful pawn-centre and a superior
development.

3...b5 4.d4
 About 4...e6 5.Bd3 – see 3...e6.
4...Bb7 5.dxc5!? (5.Bd3 e6 6.0-0 – see 3...e6) 5...Bxe4 6.b4 g6 7.a4 bxa4
8.Bc4 Bb7 9.0-0±
4...cxd4 5.cxd4 Bb7 (5...d5. This move does not combine well with the
pawn-advance b7-b5, because it weakens the c5-square. 6.e5 Bg4 7.a4 b4
8.Nbd2 e6 9.Nb3 Ne7, Rigo – Mrva, Tatranske Zruby 2001, 10.Bd3 Nbc6
11.0-0±) 6.Bd3 Nf6 (about 6...e6 7.0-0 Nc6 8.Nc3, or 7...Nf6 8.Qe2 – see
3...e6) 7.Qe2 g6, Levin – Pixton, Philadelphia 1998 (7...e6 8.0-0 – see
3...e6) 8.Nc3 Bg7 9.e5 Nd5 10.h4!? d6 11.h5 dxe5 12.h6! Black has
delayed his castling, so White does not exchange on g6, but pushes his
pawn to h6, sending the enemy bishop on g7 to its initial square 12...Bf8
13.dxe5±

The move 3...d6 is too passive. 4.d4

 4...cxd4 5.cxd4 Nf6 (About 5...e6 6.Bd3 Nf6 7.0-0 – see 3...e6; 5...g6
6.Nc3 Bg7 7.h3 Nf6 8.Bd3 – see Chapter 6; 5...Bg4 6.Qb3 Bxf3, Van
Lerberghe – Joyeux, Saint Affrique 2014, 7.gxf3 Qc7 8.Nc3 Nf6 9.Be3±)
6.Bd3 e5 (6...e6 7.0-0 – see 3...e6; 6...g6 7.h3 Bg7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Nc3 – see
Chapter 6) 7.h3 Nbd7 8.0-0 Be7 9.Be3± White has a very powerful pawn-
centre and his pieces are very active.
4...Qc7 5.h3 Nd7 (After the fianchetto 5...g6, White should play as
against the variation 2...d6 3.d4, for example: 3...Nf6 4.Bd3 g6 6.h3 Bg7
7.0-0 Nf6 8.a4 0-0 9.Be3 – see Chapter 6.) 6.Bd3 Ngf6 7.0-0 e6 (7...g6
8.a4 Bg7 9.Be3 0-0 10.Nbd2 – see Chapter 6) 8.a4 Be7 9.Qe2 0-0, Fiori –
Roisman, Mendoza 2002, 10.a5. White restricts the enemy knight on d7 and
now, in order for Black to organise counterplay, he must weaken his pawn
on a6 (10.d5!?). 10...b5 11.axb6 Nxb6 12.Bf4 Bb7 13.Nbd2²
4...Nf6 5.Bd3 Bg4 (About 5...g6 6.h3 Bg7 7.0-0 0-0 8.Be3, or 5...cxd4
6.cxd4 g6 7.h3 Bg7 8.Nc3 0-0 9.0-0 – see Chapter 6.) 6.dxc5!? After this
exchange, White weakens his opponent’s control over the e5-square. (6.0-0
e6 7.Be3 Be7 8.Nbd2 Nbd7 9.a4 Qc7 10.Re1 Bh5 11.a5² Van Foreest –
Ikonnikov, Dieren 2018) 6...dxc5 7.h3 Bh5 8.e5 Nd5 9.g4 Bg6 10.Bxg6
hxg6 11.e6!± White increases his advantage with this cramping pawn-
sacrifice.
4...Nd7 5.Bd3

About 5...Qc7 6.h3 – see 4...Qc7.

5...g6 6.0-0 Bg7 7.a4 Ngf6 8.h3 0-0 9.Be3 – see Chapter 6.
5...e6 6.0-0 Qc7 (6...Ngf6 7.e5 – see Chapter 6; 6...Ne7, Sapale –
Lajthajm, Paracin 2019, 7.Qe2 Ng6 8.a4. Black completes the development
of his pieces, but in the meantime White occupies additional space on the
queenside. 8...Be7 9.a5²) 7.a4 Ngf6 8.Na3 Be7 9.Re1 e5, Redondo
Benavente – Bellon Lopez, Linares 2017, 10.d5. He increases his space
advantage even more. 10...0-0 11.b4±
5...b5. Black prepares the development of his bishop to the b7-square, but
creates a target for his opponent to attack. 6.0-0 Bb7 7.a4 (7.d5!? White
restricts the mobility of the enemy bishop on b7. 7...g6 8.a4 c4 9.Bc2 Bg7
10.Nd4±) 7...c4 8.Bc2 e5 9.axb5 axb5 10.Rxa8 Qxa8 11.Na3 Ba6
(11...Qa6? 12.dxe5 dxe5 13.Nxb5+– Fressinet – Groz, Rochefort 1998)
12.dxe5 dxe5 13.b3. White wishes to activate his bishop after the exchange
on c4. 13...Ngf6 14.bxc4 bxc4 15.Ba4 Qb8 16.Bg5 Bxa3 17.Bxf6 Bb5
18.Bxg7 Rg8, Vitomskis – Polzer, ICCF 1988, 19.Qc2 Bxa4 (19...Rxg7
20.Rb1+–) 20.Qxa4 Bd6 21.Bh6+–

A) 3...d5 4.exd5 Qxd5

Following 4...Nf6, White has the powerful resource 5.Qa4+! and Black
will have problems to regain his pawn on d5.

5...Qd7 6.Qxd7+ Bxd7 7.c4±

5...Nbd7 6.c4 b5 7.cxb5 Nxd5 8.Nc3 Nb4, Galdunts – Dausch,
Boeblingen 1999, 9.d4 Nb6 10.Qd1 c4 11.a3 axb5 12.Bd2 N4d5 13.Nxb5±
Despite all Black’s efforts he has failed to restore the material balance.
5...Bd7 6.Qb3 b5 7.a4 e6 (7...bxa4?? 8.Qb7+– Galdunts – Korsunsky,
Yerevan 1986) 8.dxe6 Bxe6 9.Qd1 b4 10.cxb4 Nc6 11.b5 Na5² The
activity of Black’s pieces is insufficient to compensate the two sacrificed
pawns.

5.d4
 5...Bg4

About 5...e6, or 5...Nf6, or 5...Nc6 – see 2...d5.

5...cxd4 6.cxd4 Bg4 (6...Nf6 7.Nc3 – see Chapter 14; 6...e6 7.Nc3 – see
Chapter 12; 6...Nc6? 7.Nc3±) 7.Nc3
 In the arising sharp position with an isolated queen’s pawn for Black, the
move a7-a6 would hardly be useful for him.
7...Bxf3? 8.Nxd5 Bxd1 9.Nc7+–
7...Qd6 8.h3 Bh5? 9.Qa4+ Nd7 10.Ne5 Ngf6 11.g4 Bg6 12.Bf4+–
7...Qa5 8.Qb3! White does not wait until Black completes his
development and begins an immediate attack against his unprotected pawn.
8...Bxf3 9.gxf3 b5 (9...Qc7 10.Nd5+–) 10.Bd2 Qd8 11.a4 b4. Black is
sacrificing a pawn in an attempt to prevent the opening of files on the
queenside, but in vain... 12.Qxb4 Nd7 13.Qb7 Rb8 14.Qxa6 Rxb2 15.Nd5
e6 16.Ba5+–
7...Qd8. This retreat of the queen looks very passive, but Black still does
not lose outright. 8.h3 Bxf3 (8...Bh5? 9.g4 Bg6 10.h4 h6 11.Ne5 Bh7
12.Qb3 e6 13.Qxb7+–) 9.Qxf3 Qd7 10.Bf4 Nf6 11.0-0-0 g6 12.g4 Bg7
13.Bg2 0-0 (The move 13...Nc6 would only help White to open files in the
centre for his major pieces. 14.d5 Na5 15.d6 0-0 16.dxe7 Qxe7 17.Bd6+–)
14.Qxb7 Qxb7 15.Bxb7±

6.Be2
 6...e6

6...Nf6 7.h3 Bh5 8.c4 Qd6 (8...Qd8 9.d5 e6, Vazquez Igarza – Serrano
Salvador, Madrid 2004, 10.Ng5! White begins an immediate attack against
his opponent’s e6-pawn. 10...Bxe2 11.Qxe2 h6 12.Ne4 Bd6 13.dxe6 0-0
14.exf7+ Rxf7 15.Nbc3 Nxe4 16.Nxe4 Re7 17.0-0±) 9.d5 Nbd7 10.Nc3
h6, Mautz – Chapman, Bad Wiessee 1997, 11.0-0 g5. Black’s kingside
attack is not well prepared, but he is beyond salvation anyway. 12.Re1 0-0-0
13.Be3 g4 14.Nh2±

6...Nc6. On this square in similar positions Black’s knight on c6 often

comes under an attack after d4-d5 (following c3-c4). 7.h3 Bh5 8.c4 Qd6
9.d5 Bxf3 (9...Ne5? Schulz – Exler, Email 2004, 10.Nxe5 Qxe5 11.g4 Bg6
12.f4 Qe4 13.Rf1 h5 14.f5 Bh7. Black’s bishop on h7 is just pathetic, since
it has no moves at all. 15.Nc3 Qd4 16.Qa4+ Kd8 17.Qa5+ Kc8 18.Nb5+–)
10.Bxf3 Nd4 11.0-0 Nf6 12.Re1 0-0-0 13.b4‚ White undermines the base
under the enemy knight on d4 and increases his advantage.
6...cxd4 7.cxd4. Now, White will be able to develop his knight on c3 with
tempo.
 7...Nc6? 8.Nc3 Qa5 9.d5 Rd8 10.Bd2+–
7...Nf6?! Black does not prevent his opponent’s plans8.Nc3 Qd8
(8...Qa5?! 9.Qb3 b5 10.Ng5 e6 11.Bxg4 Nxg4 12.Nxe6+– Bone – Marvin,
Las Vegas 1974; 8...Qd6 9.Qb3 b5, Dushi – Cassidy, Plovdiv 2010, 10.Ne5
Be6 11.Qd1 Nbd7 12.0-0 Nxe5 13.Bf4 Nfd7 14.dxe5 Nxe5 15.Nxb5+–)
9.Qb3 Bc8, Lazor – Brkic, Bosnjaci 2013, 10.Bg5 e6 11.d5± with an
overwhelming lead in development for White. Black has no pawn-
weaknesses in his position, but he is still on the verge of defeat.
7...e6. Black prepares to pin the enemy knight. 8.Nc3 Bb4 (8...Qa5 9.d5±
Nf6 10.h3 Bh5 11.dxe6+–; 8...Qd8 9.Qb3 b6, Formanek – Zalys, Seattle
1966, 10.h3 Bh5 11.d5! This opening of the game in the centre settles the
issue. 11...exd5 12.Nxd5+–) 9.0-0 Bxc3 (9...Qa5 10.Ne5 Bxe2 11.Qxe2
Nf6 12.Qf3 Qc7, Menvielle Laccourreye – Camacho Collados, San Agustin
2012. White can inflict an elegant tactical strike in this position. 13.Bh6! 0-
0 14.Bxg7 Kxg7 15.Qg3+ Ng4 16.Qxg4+ Kh8 17.Qf4+–) 10.bxc3 Ne7
(10...Nf6 11.h3 Bh5 12.Ba3! He keeps the enemy king stranded at the
centre of the board. 12...Nc6 13.Re1 (13.c4 Qd7 14.Rb1+–) 13...Qa5
14.Qb3 Qc7, Dettmann – Nitsch, Binz 2018, 15.Rab1 0-0-0 16.Bc5+–)
11.h3 Bh5 12.c4 Qa5 13.Qb3 (13.d5!?) 13...Nbc6 14.Bd2 Qc7 15.g4!
White does not give any resite to his opponent. 15...Bg6 16.d5 Nd8
17.Bb4+–, threatening d5-d6, Glek – Chetchuman, USSR 1986.

7.0-0

7.h3. White begins the immediate implementation of his plans. 7...Bh5

8.c4!? Qd6 (8...Qd8 9.d5±) 9.d5 Nf6 10.Nc3 Be7 11.dxe6 fxe6, Seidl –
Skoda, Litomysl 2012, 12.Qxd6 Bxd6 13.Be3 Nc6 14.0-0-0 Ke7 15.Rhe1±

7...Nf6
Black has no compensation for the weakness of his pawn on e6 in this
endgame.

7...Nc6 8.h3 Bh5, Antonio – Mascarinas, Quezon City 2000, 9.g4! White
deprives his opponent of the possibility to organise counterplay with Bxf3
and Nd4. 9...Bg6 10.c4 Qd6 11.d5 exd5 12.cxd5 Nb4 13.Qa4+ Qd7
14.Qxd7+ Kxd7 15.Ne5+ Kc7 16.Nc3± The queens have been exchanged
indeed, but Black’s lag in development still hurts him seriously.
 7...cxd4 8.cxd4 Nf6 9.h3 (9.Nc3 Qd6 10.h3 Bh5 11.Bg5 Nbd7 12.Re1
Nd5 13.Qb3. White increases his pressure against the d5-square. 13...Nxc3
14.bxc3 b5 15.a4 bxa4 16.Qxa4 Be7, Tober – Mertens, St Veit 1999,
17.d5+–) 9...Bh5 10.g4 Bg6 11.Ne5 Nc6 12.Bf3 Qd6 13.Bf4 Nd5
14.Nxg6. After this move Black suffers material losses. 14...Nxf4
15.Bxc6+ bxc6 16.Nxh8 Nxh3+ 17.Kg2 Nf4+ 18.Kh1±

8.h3 Bh5 9.c4 Qd8

9...Qd6 10.d5 exd5 11.cxd5 Nxd5? (11...Qxd5 12.g4 – see 9... Qd8)
12.Re1 Be7 13.Bc4+–

10.d5!?
White must play actively and quickly; otherwise, Black will evacuate his
king away from the centre and White’s advantage will evaporate.
10.Qb3 Nc6„ Frolyanov – Gordievsky, Khanty-Mansiysk 2017.

10...exd5 11.cxd5

11...Nxd5
 11...Qxd5. Black wishes to enter an endgame, but unfortunately for him
this would not solve his defensive problems. 12.g4 Bg6 13.Re1 Qxd1
14.Bxd1+ Be7 15.Nc3 Nc6 16.Ba4! White prevents his opponent’s
castling. 16...b5 17.Nxb5! axb5 18.Bxb5 Rc8 19.Ne5 Be4 20.g5. Black will
fail to preserve his extra piece, moreover that after 20...0-0 21.Bxc6 Bxc6
22.Nxc6 Rxc6 23.Rxe7±, White will have solid extra pawn in this endgame.

12.Qb3 b5 13.Na3!? White is preparing a knight-sacrifice on c4 at an

opportune moment. 13...Nf6 (13...c4 14.Nxc4! bxc4 15.Bxc4+–) 14.Ne5
c4 15.Qe3! Now, he does not need to sacrifice his knight on c4, because
after 15...Be7 16.Bxh5 Nxh5 17.Qf3+–, Black would lose material
anyway.

B) 3...e6 4.d4
Many games reach this position after the move-order 2.Nf3 a6 3.c3 e6.

We will analyse now: B1) 4...b5 and B2) 4...cxd4.

4...d5 5.exd5 exd5 (5...Qxd5 – see 2... d5) 6.Bd3 – see 2...e6.
 4...Nc6? 5.d5 exd5 6.exd5 Qe7+ 7.Be2 Ne5 8.0-0±

4...Qc7 5.Bd3 Nf6 (about 5...b5 6.0-0 Bb7 7.Qe2 – see 4...b5; 5...d6 6.0-0
Nd7 7.a4 Ngf6 8.h3 – see 3...d6) 6.0-0 b5. Black creates a target for his
opponent to attack on the queenside. 7.e5 Nd5 8.a4±

Following 4...Nf6?! 5.e5 Nd5, White can oust the enemy knight away
from the centre with the move 6.c4, for example: 6...Nb6 (Black’s position
would be even worse after 6...Nc7? 7.Bg5 Be7 8.Bxe7 Qxe7 9.dxc5 Qxc5
10.Qd6. His pieces are horribly dis-coordinated. 10...b6, Zakharov –
Gerhardt, Bad Zwischenahn 2008. After the exchange on d6, Black loses
his knight on c7. 11.b4 Qc6 12.Nc3+–) 7.Nc3 d6 8.exd6 cxd4 9.Ne4 N6d7
10.c5± White has managed to protect his pawn on d6, while Black’s d4-
pawn is too far away from the rest of his forces and will be soon lost.

4...b6 5.Bd3 Bb7 6.0-0 d6 7.d5!? White wishes to restrict the enemy
bishop on b7. (7.Qe2 Nd7, Martinovic – Rajkovic, Smederevska Palanka
1978, 8.d5 e5 9.a4±) 7...exd5 8.exd5 Bxd5. Black is trying to activate his
light-squared bishop. Now however, the position is opened, which is in
favour of White, since he has a better development. 9.Bxh7 Nf6 (9...Rxh7??
10.Qxd5 Nd7 11.Qe4+) 10.Re1+ Be7 11.Bf5±

B1) 4...b5
Black continues with his flank strategy and ignores the fight for the
centre.
5.Bd3

It seems also good for White to attack immediately the b5-square. 5.a4!?
Bb7 (5...b4. Now, his knight will get access to the the c4-square. 6.cxb4
cxd4 7.b5±; 6...cxb4 7.Be3 Nf6 8.Nbd2 Ng4 9.Bf4± Black lags
considerably in development and his knight on c4 is obviously misplaced.)
6.d5 exd5 7.exd5 Nf6 8.Bg5 c4 9.Qd4 h6 10.Bh4 g5 11.Bg3 Qe7+ 12.Kd1!
White’s king frees the e1-square for his rook. 12...Bg7 13.Bxc4 0-0
14.Re1±

5...Bb7 6.0-0

6...Nf6
Black attacks immediately his opponent’s central pawn, but he had to
think about the development of his kingside pieces.

6...Qb6 7.Re1 d5 8.e5 Nc6 9.Nbd2±

6...cxd4. This exchange only enables White to develop his knight on the
c3-square. 7.cxd4 Nc6 (7...Nf6 8.Qe2 – see 6...Nf6; 7...d6 8.a4 b4 9.Re1±)
8.Nc3 Nb4 9.Bb1 d5, Utasi – Herrera Perez, Havana 1985, 10.e5±

6...c4. Black occupies space, but does not attack any more White’s central
d4-pawn. 7.Bc2 d5 (About 7...Nf6 8.Qe2 – see 6...Nf6; 7...d6 8.Qe2 Nd7,
Sorgi – De Francisci, Asti 2008, 9.b3 Ngf6 10.bxc4 bxc4 11.Nbd2 Rc8
12.Ng5± Black’s defence is already very difficult, while the move 12...h6?
loses outright: 13.Nxe6! fxe6 14.e5 Nd5 15.Bg6+ Ke7 16.Ne4 Qa5
17.Nxd6+–) 8.e5 Nc6, Korzin – Vasilchuk, Moscow 1961, 9.h4!?±; 9.Re1±
White has more space and his game would be much easier in the middle
game.

6...h6. Black lags in development anyway, so he simply has no time for

prophylactic moves with his rook-pawns. 7.Re1 Nf6 8.a4 (8.e5 Nd5 9.dxc5
Bxc5 10.Nbd2±) 8...c4 9.Bc2 d5 10.e5 Nfd7 11.Nbd2 bxa4?! (Black would
have had more chances of a successful defence after the line: 11...b4
12.cxb4 Bxb4 13.b3²) 12.Bxa4 Bc6 13.Bc2. Still, now it is far from clear
where he should evacuate his king away from the centre, since it would
come under an attack by the enemy pieces on either side of the board.
13...a5 14.Nf1 Nb6 15.Ng3 a4 16.h4 (16.Nh5!?) 16...Bb5 17.h5! After this
move Black will fail to prevent the advance of the enemy f-pawn with the
move g7-g6. 17...Nc6 18.Nh2 Na5 19.Be3 Nb3 20.Rb1 Qh4,
Miroshnichenko – O.Romanov, Cappelle-la-Grande 2003, 21.Ngf1! White
must open the f-file in order to finish successfully the attack against the
enemy king. 21...Kd7 22.f4±

6...Qc7 7.Qe2 d6 (7...Nc6 8.d5 Nce7, Nestorovic – Navratil, Novi Sad

2015, 9.a4 c4 10.Bc2± exd5?! Black opens the position, but his pieces are
not developed and this is like a suicide. 11.exd5 Bxd5 12.axb5 axb5
13.Rxa8+ Bxa8 14.Nd4+–) 8.a4 c4 9.Bc2 Nf6 10.axb5 (10.d5!?) 10...axb5
11.Rxa8 Bxa8 12.Na3 Qb7 13.d5 e5 14.b3. Black is incapable of holding
on to the c4-square. 14...cxb3 15.Bxb3 b4. Without this move he would lose
his b5-pawn. 16.Ba4+ Nfd7 17.Nb5 Be7, Van der Velden – Drost, Hengelo
2004. It may seem that Black has already avoided the worst and will
evacuate his king to a safe place on his next move, but after 18.Nh4!, it
becomes clear that his defence would be very difficult even after he castles.
18...0-0 19.Nf5 Re8 20.Qg4+–

6...d5 7.e5. There has arisen on the board a position from the French
Defence, but in a very bad version for Black, because instead of organising
pressure against the enemy pawn on d4, he has lost time on a fianchetto of
his light-squared bishop, which is not so useful for him. 7...Nc6 (7...Nd7
8.Ng5 h6? 9.Qh5+– Stinson – Loncarevic, Chicago 1993) 8.dxc5!? (8.Re1)
8...Bxc5 9.Nbd2 Nge7 10.Nb3 Bb6 11.Nbd4 Qc7 12.Re1±

The move 6...Nc6 would lose precious time for Black. 7.d5 Na5
(7...Nce7, Jansa – Weber, Austria 1997. His knight would impede the
development of his bishop on f8 on this square. 8.a4 c4 9.Bc2± exd5?!
10.Re1+–) 8.Re1 Qc7 (8...Ne7 9.b4! White exploits the misplacement of
the enemy knight at the edge of the board. 9...cxb4 10.cxb4 Nc4. Black
cannot avoid the appearance of a weakness on c4 in his position. 11.Bxc4
bxc4, Hoffmann – Lopatina, Bad Wiessee 2008, 12.Na3 c3 13.Nc4±) 9.b3!
White restricts his opponent’s knight on a5 and prepares the pawn-advance
c3-c4. 9...g6, Kuljasevic – D.Fernandez, Rethymno 2012, 10.c4 Bg7
(10...bxc4? 11.Bb2+–) 11.e5 exd5 12.cxb5 axb5 13.Nc3±

6...Be7 7.Re1. White waits for his adversary to place his knight on f6 in
order to continue with e4-e5. (7.dxc5 Bxc5) 7...Nf6 8.e5 Nd5 9.dxc5 Bxc5
10.Nbd2 Be7 (10...f5 11.exf6 Nxf6, Sadvakasov – Tatai, Saint Vincent
1999, 12.Ne4 Bxe4 13.Bxe4 Nxe4 14.Rxe4 0-0 15.a4±) 11.Ne4 0-0,
Riemersma – Singh, Amsterdam 2010, 12.Neg5! White exerts pressure
against the h7-square in order to provoke a weakening of Black’s kingside.
12...f5 (12...h6 13.Nh7 Re8 14.Nd4! White opens the way for his queen to
the enemy kingside. 14...Nc6 15.Qg4+–) 13.exf6 Nxf6 14.Qc2 h6 15.Nh7
Nxh7 (15...Bxf3 16.Nxf8+–) 16.Bxh7+ Kh8 17.Ne5 Rf6 18.Ng4 Rf8
19.Re5 Nc6 20.Rh5+– After the sacrifice on h6 White’s numerous attacking
pieces will finish successfully his attack.
The move 6...d6 is too slow. 7.a4
 7...b4 8.cxb4 cxb4 9.a5!? Now, Black cannot protect his b4-pawn with the
move a6-a5 (9.Re1±). 9...d5 10.e5 Ne7, Van Wely – Zapolskis, Liepaja
2004, 11.Nbd2 Ng6. He has no space and can hardly find good squares for
his pieces. 12.g3! White not only prevents Nf4, but also prepares h4-h5.
12...Be7 13.h4±
7...c4. This pawn-advance will only solve temporarily the problem with
the protection of Black’s pawn on b5. 8.Bc2 Nd7 (8...Nf6, Bartell –
Gelashvili, Philadelphia 2012, 9.axb5 axb5 10.Rxa8 Bxa8 11.Re1 Be7
12.Na3± Bc6 13.d5! White sacrifices a pawn and frees the d4-square for his
knight. 13...exd5 14.exd5 Nxd5?? 15.Nd4 Qd7 16.Nxc6 Qxc6 17.Be4+–;
14...Bxd5 15.Nxb5 0-0 16.Nfd4±) 9.d5 e5. Black defends against the threat
Nd4, but White can attack the pawn on b5 with his other knight. (9...exd5
10.exd5 Ngf6 11.Nd4±) 10.Na3 Ngf6 11.Bg5 Be7 12.axb5 axb5 13.Nxb5±
Nisipeanu – Carlstedt, Germany 2013.
 7.Qe2
White does not determine yet his pawn-structure in the centre and
preserves the possibility to play either e4-e5, or d4-d5.

7.e5!? Nd5 (7...Ne4?! 8.Re1 f5 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.Ng5 Be7 11.Bxh7±)

8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.Nbd2 Be7 10.Ne4 (10.a4 b4 11.Ne4) 10...Nc6 11.a4,
Hawksworth – Short, London 1984, 11...bxa4?! This move only helps
White to transfer his rook on a1 to the kingside. (Black would have had
more chances of a successful defence after the line: 11...Qc7 12.axb5 axb5
13.Rxa8+ Bxa8 14.Nd6+ Bxd6 15.exd6 Qxd6 16.Bxb5 Qc7 17.Re1²)
12.Rxa4 Qc7 13.Re1+– 0-0? 14.Neg5 h6 15.Nh7 Rfd8 16.Bxh6+–

7...Nc6

7...Be7 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.e5 Nd5 10.a4. Now, before transferring the knight
on b1 to the e4-square, via d2, White must oust the enemy knight on d5
away from the centre, so that it would not go to f4. 10...b4 11.c4 Ne7
12.Nbd2 Ng6 13.Ne4 Qc7 14.Nxc5. White weakens the dark squares in the
enemy camp. 14...Qxc5 15.Be4 Bxe4 16.Qxe4 Qc6 17.Qe2 Qc7 18.b3 0-0
19.Rd1. White’s plan is quite simple. He wishes to organise pressure with
his major pieces against Black’s backward pawn on d7. 19...Nc6 20.Bb2
Rad8 21.Rd6± Shirjaev – Remizov, Russia 2007.

7...c4 8.Bc2

Following 8...d5?! 9.e5, Black’s position is too cramped. 9...Nfd7

10.Ng5. White’s knight frees the way forward of his f-pawn. 10...g6 11.f4
Qb6. Black must keep his control over the e6-square. (11...Nc6? 12.f5!
gxf5 13.Nxe6 fxe6 14.Qh5+–) 12.f5! This move works despite everything!
12...exf5 (12...gxf5 13.Nxf7 Kxf7 14.Qh5+ Kg8 15.g4+–) 13.e6 fxe6
14.Nxe6 Nf6 15.Nc7+–; 15.g4!?
8...Be7 9.Re1 0-0, Lawson – Rutherford, Glenrothes 1995, 10.e5 Nd5
11.Qe4. White succeeds in weakening the dark squares in the vicinity of the
enemy king. 11...g6 12.Bh6 Re8 13.Nbd2±
7...cxd4 8.cxd4
 8...Be7 9.Nc3 0-0, Rublevsky – Drazic, Bastia 2004, 10.d5!? White
sacrifices a pawn and deprives the enemy knight of the d5-square. 10...exd5
(After the move 10...d6, there would appear a weakness on e6 in Black’s
camp. 11.dxe6 fxe6 12.Ng5 Qd7 13.e5 dxe5 14.Rd1±) 11.e5 Ne4 12.Nxe4
dxe4 13.Bxe4 Bxe4 14.Qxe4 Nc6 15.Rd1± Black has no compensation for
the vulnerability of his pawn on d7.
8...Nc6 9.Nc3
 9...d5, Harikrishna – Wohl, Torquay 2002, 10.e5 Nd7 11.h4 Be7 12.Bg5.
Most of Black’s pawns have been deployed on light-squares, therefore, the
trade of the dark-squared bishops would be in favour of White. (12.h5 h6
13.Bd2±) 12...h6 13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.h5± Black has no compensation for his
lack of space and his “bad” bishop on b7.
9...b4, Juergens – Weiss, Austria 2001, 10.Nd5!? This is in fact not a
knight-sacrifice, since White would soon restore the material balance.
10...exd5 (Following 10...Nxd5 11.exd5 Ne7 12.dxe6 dxe6 13.Re1, Black
fails to evacuate his king away from the centre. 13...Nd5 14.Ne5 Be7
15.Qh5 g6 16.Qh6. White prevents his opponent’s castling kingside.
16...Bf8 17.Qh3 Bg7 18.Nxf7! Kxf7 19.Qxe6+ Kf8 20.Bc4+–) 11.exd5+
Qe7 12.dxc6 Qxe2 13.cxd7+ Nxd7 14.Bxe2± Black has no compensation
for the lost pawn.

7...d5 8.e5 Nfd7 (8...Ne4. Black’s position is cramped, so the exchange of

pieces would be in his favour. Still, this would not solve his defensive
problems. 9.Nbd2 Nxd2 10.Bxd2 Nc6 11.h4!?; 11.dxc5 Bxc5 12.b4. White
fixes the enemy weaknesses on the queenside. 12...Bb6 13.a4 bxa4
14.Rxa4± Miles – Chaivichit, Thessaloniki 1984.) 9.Ng5
 9...c4? 10.Bxh7+–
9...g6 10.f4 cxd4 (10...Be7 11.Be3 – see 9...Be7) 11.f5! This move is
energetic and strong! Black’s pieces lag horribly in development and he is
helpless against the attack of his adversary’s perfectly coordinated pieces.
11...exf5 (11...gxf5 12.Nxf7+–) 12.e6 fxe6 13.Nxe6 Qb6 14.Nxf8+ Kxf8
15.Re1+–
9...Be7. Black ignores the threat of capturing on e6.
 10.Nxe6!? After this piece-sacrifice White’s attack is very powerful, but
Black, being at the edge of the precipice, still finds a way not to lose
immediately. 10...fxe6 11.Qh5+ Kf8 12.f4. White wishes to open the f-file
with the idea to bring his rook into the attack. 12...Qe8 13.Qh3 cxd4
14.cxd4 Nc6 15.f5 Kg8 16.f6 Nxf6 17.exf6 Bxf6 18.Rxf6! gxf6 19.Bh6
Kf7 20.Nd2 Nxd4 21.Qh4±
10.f4 g6. Black prevents the enemy pawn-advance f4-f5. 11.Be3 Nc6
12.Nd2 Qb6 13.Kh1!? It would be useful for White to remove his king
away from the g1-a7 diagonal. (13.Ndf3 c4 14.Bc2 a5, Lomineishvili –
Gvetadze, Tbilisi 2009, 15.g4 h5 16.f5. The catastrophe on the f-file is
unavoidable for Black. 16...hxg4 17.fxe6 gxf3 18.Qxf3+–) 13...c4 14.Bc2±
a5? 15.f5! White breaks the well fortified f5-square and will finish the game
with a direct attack against the enemy king. 15...gxf5 (15...exf5 16.e6+–
16.Nxf7+–

7...d6 8.a4 c4 9.Bc2 Be7 10.Bg5 0-0 11.axb5 axb5 12.Na3²

8.d5 Ne7
 9.Bg5

White can try here the move 9.b3!?N with the idea to fortify the d5-square
with c3-c4. 9...Ng6 10.c4±

9...h6

9...exd5?! Black’s king is stranded in the centre, so it would be

tremendously dangerous for him to open the e-file. 10.exd5 Nfxd5
(10...Bxd5 11.a4±) 11.c4 Nc7 12.Nc3 bxc4 13.Bxc4 Ne6, Lindberg –
Nyander, Borlange 1995, 14.Ne5 d5 15.Bb3+–
10.Bxf6 gxf6 11.a4. White is trying to break his opponent’s position on
both sides of the board. 11...Ng6, Young – Cleveland, Swansea 2015,
12.axb5 Nf4 13.Qe3 Nxd3 14.Qxd3 axb5 15.Na3 c4 16.Qe3 Bxa3
17.Rxa3 Rxa3 18.bxa3± Black has too many pawn-weaknesses in his
position, so he can hardly find a safe haven for his king.

B2) 4...cxd4
 This exchange looks imprecise for Black, because now White will
manage to develop his knight on the c3-square.
5.cxd4

5...d5
Finally, Black begins to fight for the centre.

About 5...b5 6.Bd3 Bb7 7.0-0 – see 4...Bb5.

5...Bb4+ 6.Nc3 Ne7 (6...b5 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.0-0 d6, Kersten – Whelan,
Dublin 2019, 9.a4±) 7.Bd3 0-0 8.e5. White is threatening to sacrifice his
bishop on h7. 8...h6 (8...Nbc6? Gnirk – Wiebusch, Tuebingen 2007,
9.Bxh7+ Kxh7 10.Ng5+ Kg6 11.h4+–) 9.Bb1 Nbc6 10.Qd3 Ng6 11.h4 f5
12.exf6 Rxf6 13.Nh2 Nf8 14.Ng4 Rf7 15.Bxh6!+– White has a powerful
attack and a material advantage.

5...Qc7. Black’s queen is misplaced here, since later it may come under
an attack after the move Rc1. 6.Nc3 d6 (6...b5 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.0-0 d6, Strand
– Krawiec, Dresden 2003, 9.Be3 Nf6 10.d5 e5 11.Rc1 Qa5 12.a4 b4
13.Na2+–; 6...Bb4 7.Qb3 Be7, Kiss – Eltigani, Miskolc 2008, 8.Be3 Nf6
9.Rc1±) 7.Bd3 b5 (7...Nc6 8.Be3 Nf6 9.Rc1±) 8.0-0 Bb7, Strand –
Krawiec, Dresden 2003, 9.d5±

5...Nf6 6.Bd3

About 6...d6 7.0-0 – see 5...d6.

6...Bb4+ 7.Nc3± 0-0? Kovacs – Patola, Budapest 2001, 8.e5 Bxc3+
9.bxc3 Nd5 10.Bxh7+! This standard bishop-sacrifice settles the issue.
10...Kxh7 11.Ng5+ Kg6 12.h4+–
6...Be7 7.0-0 0-0 8.Nc3 h6, Lojek – Stetz, Karvina 2016 (8...d6 9.e5 – see
5...d6) 9.e5 Ne8 10.Bc2 f5 11.exf6 Nxf6 12.d5 d6 13.dxe6 Bxe6 14.Re1
Bf7 15.Bxh6! White destroys the shelter of the enemy king with this piece-
sacrifice. 15...gxh6 16.Qd2+–
6...d5 7.e5 Nfd7 8.Nc3 Nc6 9.0-0 Be7 10.a3 b5 11.Ne2 Bb7,
Perlakowska – Kalina, Krynica 1998, 12.Be3 Rc8 13.Nf4 Na5 14.b3±
Black obviously lacks space.

The move 5...d6 provides White with complete freedom for active actions
in the centre. 6.Bd3
 About 6...Be7 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Nc3 – see 6...Nf6.
The move 6...Nd7 looks too passive. 7.0-0 Ngf6 8.Nc3 b5 9.e5 dxe5
10.dxe5 Ng8, Demirbas – Sevinc, Konya 2019 (10...Nc5 11.Bc2±)
11.Qe2+–
6...b5 7.a4 b4 8.0-0 Bb7 9.Re1±
6...g6 7.0-0 Bg7 8.Nc3 Ne7, Bichieray – Thiers, France 1999, 9.Qa4+!?
Белые ”разу начинают атаковать пешку d6. 9...Bd7 10.Qa3 Nc8 11.d5±
6...Nf6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Nc3 0-0 (8...Nc6 9.Bf4 – see 6...Nc6; 8...b5 9.e5
dxe5 10.dxe5 Nd5 11.Nxd5 Qxd5 12.Qe2 Bb7 13.Rd1± Sadikov – Muhic,
Ljubljana 2007; 8...Nbd7?! Here, after 9.e5 dxe5 10.dxe5 Nd5 11.Nxd5,
Black will not be able to capture on d5 with his queen. 11...exd5 12.Be3 b6
13.Rc1 Bb7, Kr.Georgiev – Spasov, Sunny Beach 2005, 14.e6! fxe6
15.Nd4+–) 9.e5 dxe5 (9...Nd5 10.Qc2 h6 11.Qe2±) 10.dxe5 Nfd7 11.Qc2!
White wishes to force the move 11...h6, so that after 12.Qe2, he would be
threatening Qe4. 12...Re8. Black wishes to protect the h7-square with his
knight from f8. 13.Rd1 Qc7 14.Qe4 Nf8 15.Qg4 Kh8 16.Qh5. Black’s
queenside pieces fail to come to take part in the defence of his king.
16...Bd8 17.Ne4 Nc6 18.Bxh6! g6 19.Qh3+– Akulova – Parhomenko,
Khanty-Mansiysk 2016.)
 6...Nc6. Now, Black must be constantly on the alert about his opponent’s
pawn-advance d4-d5. 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Nc3 Be7 9.Bf4

9...Bd7 10.a3. Before playing d4-d5, it would be useful for White to

deprive the enemy knight on c6 of the b4-square. 10...Qb6 11.d5± Na5?
12.b4 Qc7 13.Rc1 (13.e5+–) 13...Nc4 14.Bxc4 Qxc4 15.dxe6 Bxe6 16.Nd5
Qxe4 17.Nc7+– Kryvoruchko – Georgiou, Paleochora 2010.
9...d5. This would have been much better for Black on his move five.
10.e5 Nd7 11.Rc1 0-0, Torre – Singson, Manila 1995, 12.Bb1±
9...0-0 10.Rc1 Bd7 (Following 10...b6, Mary – Fragola, ICCF 2009,
White can try to exploit the defencelessness of the enemy knight on c6 with
the line: 11.e5!? dxe5 12.dxe5 Nd7 13.Qc2 h6 14.Qe2. He is threatening
Qe4. 14...Bb7 15.Qe4 g6 16.Qe3±) 11.Bb1. White wishes to provoke a
weakening of his opponent’s queenside with the moves e4-e5 and Qd3.
11...Rc8 12.e5 dxe5 13.dxe5 Ne8 14.Qd3 g6 (14...f5 15.exf6 Nxf6 16.Ng5
h6 17.Nh7 Rf7 18.Nxf6+ gxf6 19.Rfd1+–) 15.Rfd1 Nb8, Schippan –
Liszka, Dresden 2006, 16.Qe3±

6.e5
 There has arisen on the board a favourable version for White of the
French Defence. Black has played the not so useful move a7-a6 and has
exchanged too early on c3.
6...Nc6

6...Bd7!? With this Black is trying to prove that his move a7-a6 is
somehow useful. 7.Bd3 Bb5 8.Bc2. White has more space and prudently
avoids exchanges, since they would facilitate Black’s defence.
 8...Bb4+ 9.Bd2 Bxd2+ (about 9...a5 10.Nc3 – see 8...a5) 10.Qxd2 a5.
Black prepares a square for the retreat of his bishop on b5. (10...Ne7 11.h4
h6 12.h5 a5 13.Rh3± and later White will play Nc3 and Rg3, seizing
completely the initiative. The move 11...0-0 seems too risky for Black.
12.a4 Be8 13.Ng5 h6 14.Nh7±) 11.Nc3 Ba6 12.h4! White wishes to bring
his rook on h1 into the actions on the third rank. 12...Nc6, Predojevic –
Drazic, Zupanja 2007, 13.Rh3! h6 14.h5 Nge7 15.Rg3 Kf8 16.Na4 Nb4
17.Bb1± White’s advantage is doubtless, because Black’s king is misplaced
and his pieces obviously lack space.
8...a5 9.Nc3 Bb4 (Following 9...Ba6 10.Ne2 Bb4+, Bissieres –
Lichmann, France 2006, White can avoid the trade of the dark-squared
bishops with the line: 11.Kf1!? Nc6 12.g3±) 10.Bd2
 10...Bxc3 11.bxc3 Qd7 12.h4 (It would be also interesting for White to try
here 12.Ng5!? – Black’s defence would be very difficult, since after
12...h6? 13.Qh5 Kf8, White would obtain a decisive advantage with the
knight-sacrifice 14.Nxf7!, for example: 14...Qxf7 15.Bg6 Qe7 16.Bc1 a4.
Black defends against the threat a2-a4, Ba3, but he is already beyond
salvation. 17.Qf3+ Nf6 18.c4! White’s bishop on c1 will come to the a3-
square anyway. 18...Bxc4 19.Ba3+–) 12...Ne7 13.h5 h6 14.Rh3 Qc6,
Kosintseva – Ju Wenjun, Beijing 2014, 15.Rb1± White is threatening Rxb5.
He dominates all over the entire board.
10...Ba6 11.a3 Bxc3 12.Bxc3 Nc6 13.h4 Nge7 14.h5 h6 15.Rh3. His rook
enters the actions. White’s position is perfect even without castling.
15...Rc8 16.Rg3 0-0 17.Bd2 Kh8 18.Bxh6! He sacrifices a piece and
destroys the pawn-shelter of his opponent’s king. 18...gxh6 19.Qd2 Ng8
20.Rxg8+! White sacrifices also the exchange at the altar of the attack.
20...Kxg8 21.Qxh6 f5 22.Qxe6+ Rf7 23.Bxf5 Rcc7 24.Rd1 Qe7 25.g4±
Krecak – Adams, ICCF 2012.

7.Nc3
 7...Bb4

7...f6. Black lags in development and should better refrain from the
attempts to open the game in the centre. 8.Bd3 fxe5 9.dxe5 g6 10.h4! Qc7,
Richters – Theile Rasche, Goch 2012, 11.h5 Nxe5 12.hxg6 Nxd3+
13.Qxd3 h6 14.Bd2 Bg7 15.Rc1 Qd7 16.Rh4 Ne7 17.Rf4 Rf8 18.Rf7! Rxf7
19.gxf7+ Kxf7 20.Qh7+–

7...Nge7 8.h4!? Now, after Nf5, White will be able to play g2-g4, without
being afraid of the move Nh4 (8.Bd3 Bd7 9.0-0 – see 7...Bd7). 8...Bd7
(The move 8...h5 would lead to a considerable weakening of Black’s
kingside. 9.Bd3 g6 10.Bg5 Bg7 11.0-0±) 9.Bd3 h6, Praznik – Zierott,
Feffernitz 2004, 10.a3 Rc8 11.0-0 Na5 12.Re1 Nc4 13.h5± White cramps
his opponent’s position even more and increases his advantage.

7...Bd7 8.Bd3 Nge7 9.0-0 b5 (9...Ng6. This is not the best place of
Black’s knight in this variation, since it would soon come under an attack
after h4-h5. 10.g3 Be7 11.h4± Stitz – Grund, Haid 2018) 10.Be3 Na5
11.Ng5 h6 12.Nh7 Nc4 13.Nxf8. The exchange of the bishop on f8 would
emphasize even more the weakness of the dark-squared complex in Black’s
position. 13...Kxf8 14.Bc1 b4 15.Ne2 Qb6, Genocchio – Medici,
Cesenatico 2019, 16.b3 Na3 17.h4±

8.Bd3 Nge7

The move 8...h6 is too slow. 9.0-0 Nge7 10.a3 Ba5 11.Ne2 Bb6 12.Bc2
Nf5, Jahn – Hintyes, Nuremberg 2001, 13.Be3 Bd7 14.Nf4 Nh4 15.Nh5ƒ

9.0-0

9...Bxc3

9...0-0?? 10.Bxh7+ Kxh7 11.Ng5+ Kg6 12.Ne2+–

9...Nf5, Sahin – Sabotic, Belgrade 2019, 10.a3 Be7 11.Bc2 b5 12.Ne2 0-

0 13.g4 Nh4 14.Nxh4 Bxh4 15.Qd3 g6 16.Bh6 Re8 17.f4 Be7 18.f5‚
White’s attack is developing effortlessly and Black cannot play 18...exf5
19.gxf5 Bxf5??, because of 20.Rxf5! gxf5 21.Qxf5+–
 9...Ng6 10.g3 0-0 11.h4 f6 (11...Nge7?? 12.Bxh7+ Kh8, Koutny –
Hrubsa, Vlcnov 2018, 13.Ng5 g6 14.h5+–) 12.h5 Nge7 13.h6! After this
move the dark squares in Black’s camp become even weaker. His bishop on
b4 cannot come back to help in the defence of his king and to cover the
dark squares on the kingside. 13...g6 14.a3 Ba5 15.Kg2±

10.bxc3 b5. White’s queenside pawns are a bit weak, but this is irrelevant,
because following 11.Ng5 Ng6 12.Qh5

Black has no time to organise counterplay on the queenside. 12...Nce7

13.Ba3 h6 14.Nxf7 Kxf7 15.Bxe7 Kxe7 16.Qxg6+– Nagy – Kollar,
Hungary 2005.
 Chapter 5
1.e4 c5 2.c3 e5

Black impedes White’s pawn-advance d2-d4, but weakens the d5-square.

3.Nf3 Nc6

3...Nf6?! 4.Nxe5 Qe7 5.d4 Nc6, Merwin – Stefanova, Las Vegas 1997
(5...Nxe4 6.Bc4±) 6.Bc4 Nxe5 7.dxe5 Qxe5 8.0-0 Be7 9.Re1 0-0 10.Nd2±,
followed by Nf3 and White continues to gain tempi for his development by
attacking the enemy queen.

3...Qc7. Black protects his pawn on e5, but develops his queen a bit too
early. 4.d4 cxd4 (about 4...d6 5.h3 – see 2...d6) 5.cxd4 exd4 6.Nxd4 Nf6
7.Nb5! White exploits the defects of his opponent’s move three. 7...Qe5
8.N1c3 Bb4 (8...Nxe4? 9.Qd5 Qxd5 10.Nc7+ Kd8 11.N3xd5+–) 9.Qf3±

The move 3...d6 is too passive for Black. 4.d4

 About 4...Qc7 5.h3 – see 2...d6 3.d4 Qc7 4.h3 e5 5.Nf3.
4...Nd7 5.dxe5 dxe5 6.Bc4 – see 2...d6 3.d4 Nd7 4.Nf3.
4...exd4 5.cxd4 Nf6 (5...cxd4 6.Nxd4 – see 4...cxd4) 6.Nc3 Be7,
Spraggett – Julian, Metz 2005, 7.Bb5+ Bd7 8.e5! Ng4 9.0-0 0-0 10.h3±
White ousts the enemy knight to the edge of the board and consolidates his
advantage.
4...Bg4?! 5.dxc5. Now, Black must present his opponent with the two-
bishop advantage; otherwise, he would lose a pawn. 5...Bxf3 6.gxf3!?
(6.Qxf3 dxc5 7.Nd2 Nc6 8.Bb5 Qc7 9.Nc4 Nf6 10.Bg5 Be7 11.Ne3±,
White emphasizes the weakness of the d5-square. Black is faced with a
rather unpleasant defence.) 6...dxc5 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 8.Na3± There has
arisen a very unpleasant endgame for Black.
4...cxd4 5.cxd4
 5...Qc7? On this square Black’s queen will soon come under an attack
after Rc1, or Nd5(b5). 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.Bg5±
5...Bg4 6.dxe5 Bxf3 7.Qxf3 dxe5 8.Nc3 Nc6 9.Bc4. White’s bishops are
tremendously powerful in this open position. In addition, he has a better
development. 9...Nf6, Xie – Liu, Daqing 2019, 10.0-0 Be7 11.Rd1 Qa5
12.Qg3 0-0 13.Bh6 Ne8 14.Nd5±
5...exd4. This exchange even increases the vulnerability of Black’s pawn
on d6. 6.Nxd4
 About 6...Nc6 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Bc4 – see 6...Nf6.
6...a6. Black prevents Bb5+, but after 7.Bc4, White can prepare quickly
an attack against the f7-square. 7...Nf6 8.Qb3!? Qc7 9.0-0 Nc6 10.Nxc6
bxc6 11.Re1±
6...Nf6 7.Nc3
 If Black has lost tempi for the moves a6, or Nc6, then White can place his
bishop on c4 and Black will fail to play 0-0+Nxe4.
7...a6 8.Bc4 Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Re1 Nc6 11.Bf4 Bg4 12.Nxc6 bxc6
13.Qd4 Rb8 14.b3± Black has no compensation for the weaknesses in his
pawn-structure.
7...Nc6 8.Bc4 Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Be3 Ng4 11.Bf4. Naturally, White should
not exchange his powerful bishop for the enemy knight. 11...Nge5 12.Be2
Kh8 13.Nd5± Stevic – Ivankovic, Bizovac 2005. Black’s d6-pawn is
vulnerable, as well as the d5-square and White’s knight will be perfectly
placed there.
7...Be7 8.Bb5+!? Bd7 (8...Nbd7 9.Nf5 0-0 10.0-0 a6 11.Be2 Nc5
12.Nxe7+!? White obtains the two-bishop advantage. 12...Qxe7 13.f3±)
9.Nf5 0-0 10.Bxd7 Nbxd7 11.0-0± From the f5-square, the powerful knight
exerts pressure not only against the pawn on d6, but also against the g7-
pawn.

4.Bc4

White will hardly obtain an advantage in the line: 4.d4 cxd4 5.cxd4 exd4
6.Nxd4 Nf6 7.Nc3 Bb4 8.Nxc6 dxc6 9.Qxd8+ Kxd8. The endgame seems
to be harmless for Black, since he does not have pawn-weaknesses in his
position. 10.f3 Be6 11.Be3 Nd7 12.Be2 Ke7 13.0-0 f6= Bhakti – Golubka,
Krakow 2019.
 We will analyse now: A) 4...Qc7 and B) 4...Nf6.

After Black’s alternatives White will advance effortlessly d2-d4

maintaining a stable advantage.

4...h6?! This prophylactic move is just a loss of time. 5.0-0 Nf6 6.d4 cxd4
(6...Qc7? 7.dxe5 Nxe5 8.Nxe5 Qxe5 9.f4 Qc7 10.e5+– Clarke – Forbes,
Eastbourne 1991) 7.cxd4 exd4 8.e5
 8...Ng8? After the retreat of Black’s knight to its initial position, White’s
lead in development increases. 9.Nxd4 Bc5 10.Nxc6 bxc6, Laurusas –
Jonelys, Klaipeda 2019, 11.Qf3 Qe7 12.Nc3 Bb7 13.Ne4. White has a
simple plan to organise an attack. He must trade the dark-squared bishops
and to follow this with the penetration of his knight to the d6-outpost.
13...0-0-0 14.Be3 Bxe3 15.Nd6+ Kb8 16.Qxe3 f6 17.Qb3+–
8...d5 9.Bb5 Ne4 10.Nxd4 Bd7, Goswami – Deshmukh, India 1999,
11.Nb3 a6 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.Be3 a5 14.f3. White begins the advance of his
f-pawn. 14...Ng5 15.f4 Ne4 16.Nc3. Black’s knight is very powerful at the
centre of the board, so White should better trade it even at the price of
ending up with a weak pawn on c3. 16...Nxc3 17.bxc3 g6 (The move
17...a4 would only enhance the centralisation of White’s knight. 18.Nd4 c5
19.e6! He exploits his lead in development and breaks in the centre.
19...cxd4 20.exd7+ Qxd7 21.Bxd4 Be7 22.Bxg7 Rg8 23.Bxh6+–) 18.f5!
White opens the position in order to attack the enemy king stranded in the
centre. 18...Bxf5 19.Nd4 Bd7 20.e6+–

4...d6 5.d4 cxd4 6.cxd4

 About 6...exd4 7.Nxd4 Nf6 8.Nc3 Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Nc2 – see 4...Be7.
6...Bg4 7.Be3 exd4 8.Bxd4 Nxd4 9.Qxd4 Ne7, Soederberg – Lehtinen,
ICCF 2013, 10.Qc3 Nc6 11.0-0± White’s queen on c3 exerts pressure
against the pawn on g7 and impedes the development of Black’s queenside.
6...Be7. Black defends against Ng5, but White can attack the f7-pawn
from the other side of the board. 7.dxe5 dxe5 8.Qb3 Bb4+ 9.Nc3 Be6
10.Bxe6 fxe6, Van Foreest – Willemze, Amsterdam 2016, 11.0-0±

4...Be7 5.d4 cxd4 (5...exd4 6.cxd4 cxd4 7.Nxd4 – see 5...cxd4; 5...d6
6.dxe5 dxe5 7.Qb3! Black is incapable of defending his f7-pawn. 7...Na5
8.Bxf7+ Kf8 9.Qd5 Nf6 10.Qxd8+ Bxd8 11.Bd5± Kovacs – Albini,
Budapest 1995) 6.cxd4 exd4 (6...Nf6 7.d5²; 7.Nxe5 Nxe5 8.dxe5 Qa5+
Black regains the pawn, but his queen enters the actions a bit too early.
9.Nc3 Qxe5 10.f4 Qc5 11.Qe2 0-0 12.Be3. White attacks the enemy queen
and gains tempi for the development of his pieces. 12...Qa5 13.0-0 d6
14.h3±) 7.Nxd4
 7...Qa5+. Black plans to attack two enemy minor pieces from the c5-
square with his queen. 8.Nc3 Qc5 9.Nxc6 dxc6 (Following 9...Qxc4
10.Ne5, Black would lag horribly in development. 10...Qe6 11.Nf3 Nf6
12.e5 0-0 13.0-0 Ne8 14.Nd5 b6 15.Nxe7+ Qxe7 16.Bg5 Qe6 17.Nd4.
White sacrifices a pawn in order to deflect the enemy queen from the
protection of the e7-square and wins the exchange. 17...Qxe5 18.Nf3 Qxb2
19.Be7 Nf6 20.Bxf8 Kxf8 21.Qd6+ Kg8 22.Ne5±) 10.Qe2 Nf6 11.Be3
Qh5, Goodger – Constantinou, Birmingham 2006, 12.Qxh5 Nxh5 13.e5!
This is the point! White does not allow the enemy knight to come back to
the f6-square. 13...g6 14.0-0-0 Bf5 15.h3 Ng7 16.g4 Be6 17.Bxe6 Nxe6
18.f4± Black can hardly prevent here White’s pawn-break f4-f5.
7...Nf6 8.Nc3 0-0 9.Nc2!? He removes his knight from the centre in
order to prevent Black’s exchange combination: Nxe4 and d7-d5. 9...a6
(9...d6 10.0-0 Be6 11.Qe2 Rc8 12.Rd1²) 10.0-0 b5 11.Bd5 Bb7, Cherniaev
– Webb, Portsmouth 2003, 12.Bf4²
White would maintain a stable advantage in both lines thanks to the weak
black pawn on d7.

A) 4...Qc7
 Black wishes to defend his f7-square with his knight from d8. It would
not be easy for White to advance d2-d4, because the defencelessness of the
bishop on c4 would be detrimental to this.
5.0-0

We will deal now with: A1) 5...Be7 and A2) 5...Nf6.

The move 5...d6 is too passive. 6.Ng5 Nd8 7.d4 h6 8.Nf3 Be7 9.Bb5+
Now, in order to avoid losing a pawn, Black must play 9...Kf8 (9...Bd7
10.Bxd7+ Qxd7 11.dxe5±) 10.b4 a6 11.Be2 Nf6 12.Nbd2 b6 13.Re1± Held
– Gabriel, Wuerttemberg 1997.

A1) 5...Be7
Black is not in a hurry to develop his knight to the f6-square and wishes at
first to prevent Ng5.
6.Na3 Nf6

6...a6. He loses unnecessarily a tempo to prevent the move Nb5, because

White’s knight is headed for the d5-square. 7.d4
 7...exd4. The opening of the game in the centre would be in favour of
White, since he has a much better development. 8.cxd4 cxd4 9.Re1 b5
10.Bd5 Nf6 11.Nxd4 Bb7 12.Nf5 0-0. Black has managed to evacuate his
king away from the centre, but it would not be safe on the kingside either.
13.Qf3 Bd6 14.Nxg7! Bxh2+ (14...Kxg7? Accepting the pawn-sacrifice
would lead to a quick checkmate for Black: 15.Bh6+ Kxh6 16.Qxf6+ Kh5
17.g4+ Kxg4 18.e5 Nxe5 19.Re4+ Kh5 20.Rh4#) 15.Kf1 Be5 16.Nf5±
Pospisil – V.Sergeev, ICCF 2008. The position of Black’s king has been
seriously weakened.
7...d6 8.dxc5 dxc5 9.Ng5. It would be useful for White to provoke here
the move Nd8. (9.Bd5 Nf6 10.Nc4 0-0 11.Bg5 Be6 12.Bxf6 Bxf6 13.Bxe6
fxe6 14.a4² Kovacevic – Markovic, Herceg Novi 2001. Black has no
compensation for his weak pawns on the e-file.) 9...Nd8 10.f4 Bxg5 (The
move 10...f6? loses a pawn for Black. 11.Nxh7 Rxh7 12.Bxg8 Rh8
13.Bd5+– Grabher – Eiler, Vorarlberg 1996) 11.fxg5. White’s rook joins
into the attack against the pawn on f7. 11...Ne7 12.Bd5. White’s bishop
frees the c4-square for his knight. 12...0-0 13.Nc4 Be6 14.a4± Black will
hardly manage to defend this position, because White’s pieces are very
active.
 7.d4 d6 8.dxc5
White would maintain a stable advantage if he acquires additional space
with the move 8.d5²
8...dxc5 9.Bg5!

He prepares the exchange of an important defender of the d5-square.

White wishes to occupy this square after Nc2-e4-d5.
9...0-0 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.Nc2 Rb8

11...Na5 12.Bd5 c4 13.Ne3 Rb8 14.Qe2 b5. By advancing his queenside

pawns Black has only created additional targets for his opponent to attack.
15.b4 Nb7 16.a4 a6 17.axb5 axb5 18.Ra7± Ushenina – Majdan, Plovdiv
2008.

12.Ne3

12.Qe2!? White prevents b7-b5. 12...a6 13.a4 Na5 14.Ne3 Nxc4 15.Nd5
Qc6 16.Qxc4² His knight is so powerful at the centre of the board that
White maintains a stable advantage thanks to it.
 12...b5 13.Bd5 Ne7, G.Szabo – Florescu, Corund 2017, 14.b3 Bb7
15.Bxb7 Qxb7 16.Qc2 Rfd8 17.Rfd1² Black’s bishop on f6 is restricted by
his own pawn on e5.

A2) 5...Nf6 6.Ng5

White will not manage to keep his knight on the g5-square for long, but
he wishes to bring his f-pawn into the attack against the enemy centre.
6...Nd8 7.f4 h6

About 7...d6 8.d3 h6 9.Nf3 – see 7...h6.

8.Nf3 d6

8...exf4. Black wins a pawn but gives up the centre. 9.e5 d5 (9...Nh5
10.d4 cxd4, Becher – Techen, Germany 1998, 11.Nfd2 Bc5 12.Kh1 g6
13.b4 Be7 14.cxd4 b5 15.Bb3 Ne6 16.Bb2± White has more than sufficient
compensation for the pawn in the arising sharp position.) 10.d4 cxd4 (The
move 10...dxc4 seems to be less reliable for Black, because the opening of
the e-file would increase White’s attacking chances. 11.exf6 cxd4 12.cxd4
Bg4 13.d5 Bc5+ 14.Kh1±) 11.Bb3 Nh5 12.cxd4²

9.d3

9.Na3!? This move sets up a well concealed trap for Black. 9...a6 (After
the careless move 9...Be7?, Black’s position crumbles immediately. 10.Nb5
Qb8 11.d4 a6 12.Nxd6+! Bxd6 13.fxe5 Nxe4 14.Qe1+– Soloviov –
Maseda, Collada Villalba 1996.) 10.d4 cxd4 11.cxd4 exd4 12.Nxd4² White
has a superior pawn-structure, while Black’s king is stranded in the centre.

9...Be7

9...exf4?! This move is reasonable for Black only if White cannot regain
immediately the pawn on f4. 10.Bxf4 Ne6 11.Bg3 Bd7 12.Nh4± Black’s
defence would be very difficult, since he can hardly find a safe haven for
his king. 12...0-0-0 13.a4 Bc6 14.b4! White sacrifices a pawn and opens
files against the enemy king. 14...cxb4 15.cxb4 Qb6+ 16.Kh1 Qxb4,
Pavasovic – Osterman, Ljubljana 1997, 17.Bxe6+ fxe6 18.Na3 a6 19.Nc4
Nxe4 20.Be1+–
 10.f5!?

White occupies additional space. Later, he can advance his kingside

pawns: g2-g4, h2-h4, g4-g5, or transfer his queen to the g3-square, exerting
pressure against the enemy pawn on g7.
10...Bd7 11.a4 Nc6 12.Be3 a6 13.Nbd2 0-0 14.Qe1 b5
Black’s counterplay on the queenside is obviously too slow.
15.Ba2 c4 16.Qg3 Kh8 17.Qh3 Na5 18.g4, followed by g4-g5. The
placement of Black’s pawn on h6 facilitates considerably the opening of
files by White on the kingside.

B) 4...Nf6
Black allows with this move the enemy knight-sortie Ng5.
5.Ng5 d5 6.exd5
 There has arisen a popular position from the Two Knight’s Defence, but
with the inclusion of the moves c2-c3 and c7-c5.
6...Nxd5

6...Na5 7.Bb5+ Bd7 8.Qa4 a6 (Following 8...Be7 9.Bxd7+ Nxd7

10.Ne6!, Black would end up in a very difficult position. 10...fxe6 11.dxe6
0-0, Mulet – Koziak, Pszczyna 2009, 12.exd7 Nc6 13.Qg4 Rf6 14.d3 Rg6
15.Qh3 Rd6 16.Be3 Rxd3 17.Qe6+ Kh8 18.Nd2 Qxd7 19.Qxd7 Rxd7
20.0-0-0±, followed by Ne4. Black’s “bad” bishop on e7 makes his defence
in this endgame very difficult.) 9.Bxd7+ Nxd7 10.d3 b5 11.Qe4 c4 12.d6!?
White frees the d5-square for his queen. (It is also possible for him to
continue here with 12.d4 Nb7 13.0-0 Be7, Wolff – Andonov, Saint John
1988, 14.Ne6! fxe6 15.dxe6 0-0 16.exd7 Qxd7 17.Qxe5± with two extra
pawns.) 12...Rb8 (12...Bxd6? 13.Qd5+–) 13.Qd5 Qf6 14.b4 Nb6 15.d7+
Ke7 16.Qe4 Nc6 17.Be3± Black’s king is stranded at the centre of the
board and is an excellent target to attack by White’s pieces.

7.Qh5
 Now, before playing Qf3, it would be useful for White to provoke the
weakening pawn-advance by Black g7-g6.
7...g6 8.Qf3

8...Qxg5

Following 8...Be6?! 9.Nxe6 fxe6 10.d3, Black’s doubled and isolated

pawns on the e-file would be horribly weak. 10...Be7 (10...Qd7 11.Nd2 0-
0-0 12.Ne4 Be7 13.Bh6±; 10...Bg7 11.Nd2 Rf8 12.Qg4 Rf5 13.Ne4 Qe7
14.Bg5± Provotorov – Rodin, Voronezh 2008) 11.Nd2 Rf8 12.Qe2 Nf4
13.Qe4 Qd6, Rodriguez – Wochnik, ICCF 1995, 14.g3 Nd5 15.Bb5± In all
these lines White ends up not only with a superior pawn-structure, but also
with the two-bishop advantage.
9.Bxd5 Nd8
The edge of the board is not the best place for a knight, but this is the way
for Black to maintain the material balance.
10.0-0
 10...Qe7

After 10...Qf5, White can maintain an edge in an endgame, as well as by

avoiding the exchange of the queens and entering a middle game.
 11.Re1 Bg7 12.d4 cxd4 13.cxd4 Qxf3 14.Bxf3 0-0 15.dxe5 Re8 16.Bf4
Ne6 17.Bg3 Nd4 18.Bd1. White defends against the double attack by the
enemy knight and prepares the pawn-advance f2-f4. 18...Nf5, Roldan –
Barks, IECC 2000, 19.f4² Black does not have full compensation for the
sacrificed pawn.
11.Qe3 Be6 12.Bf3 Nc6 13.d3 Rd8, Tarmak – Silva Filho, LSS 2012,
14.Be4 Qh5 15.Bxc6+. White presents his opponent with the two-bishop
advantage, but weakens considerably Black’s queenside pawn-structure.
15...bxc6 16.Nd2 Be7 17.Ne4 0-0 18.Nxc5²

11.Re1

11...Be6
Black should take immediate measures to avoid the juxtaposition of his
queen against the enemy rook on the e-file.

11...Bg7?! 12.d4 cxd4 13.cxd4 Be6 14.Nc3 exd4 15.Bxe6 fxe6. After the
opening of the f-file castling on the kingside would become difficult for
Black. 16.Ne4 Nf7 17.Bg5! Nxg5 18.Nxg5 e5 (18...Qxg5? 19.Rxe6+ Kd7
20.Rae1+–) 19.Rac1 Rd8 (19...d3 20.Qxd3 0-0 21.Qc4+ Kh8 22.Ne4±
White’s knight is very strong at the centre of the board and is obviously
superior to Black’s bishop restricted by his own pawn on e5.) 20.Ne4 Rf8
21.Qh3 Rf4 22.Nc5 Rf6 23.f4± There are still many pieces on the board, so
Black’s defence would be tremendously difficult with his king stranded at
the centre of the board.

12.Rxe5

White would lose his advantage after the line: 12.Na3 Bg7 13.Nc4 f6
14.Bxb7 Nxb7 15.Qxb7 Qxb7 16.Nd6+ Kd7 17.Nxb7 Rhc8÷ Black’s two
powerful bishops compensate fully his minimal material deficit.

12...Bg7 13.Re1 0-0 14.Be4

White has an extra pawn indeed, but he must play very carefully, because
his queenside has not been developed.
14...Re8

14...Qd7 15.Na3
 15...Nc6 16.d3 Ne5 17.Qg3 Rad8 18.Bg5²
15...Rc8 16.Qd3. White would not mind losing several tempi in order to
manage to trade the queens. 16...Qxd3 17.Bxd3 Nc6 18.Be2 a6 19.Nc4 b5
20.Nd6 Rc7 21.Ne4 c4 22.Nc5 Bf5 23.d4±
15...f5 16.Bd3 Re8 17.Bf1 Nf7 18.Qd1 Bd5 19.Rxe8+ Rxe8 20.Nc2.
White is perfectly prepared to advance his d-pawn and to open finally the
diagonal for his bishop on c1. 20...g5 21.d4²
15...Re8 16.Nc2 Nc6 17.Qd3 Qc7 (17...Qxd3 18.Bxd3 Rad8 19.Bf1 Bf5
20.Rxe8+ Rxe8 21.Ne3² White does not have weaknesses in his position,
so he has all the chances, despite his lag in development, to realise his extra
pawn in the endgame.) 18.Qg3 Be5 19.Qh4 Rad8 20.d3 f5 21.Bxc6 bxc6
22.d4², followed by Bg5. White has an excellent game on the weakened
dark squares in his opponent’s camp.

15.Na3 Rc8

15...f5 16.Bd3 Nc6 17.Bf1²

16.h3
 This leeway of the king would be useful for White.

16...Qd7

16...f5. This pawn-advance only weakens the shelter of Black’s king.

17.Bd3 (17.Bc2!?² ) 17...Qd7 18.Bf1 Nc6 19.d3 Bd5 20.Rxe8+ Rxe8
21.Qg3² White only needs several moves to complete fully his
development. Later, he can begin the realisation of his extra pawn.

17.Qd3 Qxd3

Black’s prospects would not be any better in the middle game: 17...Qe7,
Balutescu – Pirs, ICCF 2016, 18.Qc2 f5 19.Bf3 Nf7 20.d3 Ne5 21.Be2
Qh4 22.Qd2 Nf7 23.Qf4²

18.Bxd3 Nc6 19.Bf1 Red8

19...a6 20.Nc2 Red8 21.d3 Bf5 22.Bg5! It would be useful for White to
provoke the move f7-f6, in order to restrict the enemy bishop on g7. 22...f6
23.Be3²
 20.d3 Ne5

Black’s only chance here is to create counterplay against the enemy pawn
on d3.
21.Rd1 Bf5 22.Bg5! Rd7

Following 22...f6 23.Be3 Bxd3 24.f4 Bh6 25.Bxc5 Bxf4 26.Bxa7², White
would preserve his material advantage.

23.Rd2 Nxd3 24.Rad1 Ne5 25.Rxd7 Nxd7 26.Nb5 Be6 27.a3 a6

28.Nd6 Rb8 29.Ne4² White maintains a slight edge in this endgame thanks
to his more actively deployed pieces.
 Chapter 6
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d6

Black wishes to play Nf6, without being afraid of e4-e5, but his second
move has an obvious defect – it does not prevent d2-d4, after which White
obtains a powerful pawn-centre.
3.d4

We will analyse now: A) 3...Nd7, B) 3...Nc6, C) 3...cxd4 and D) 3...Nf6.

About 3...b6 4.Nf3 Bb7 5.Bd3 – see 2...b6.

3...Qc7 4.h3 Nf6 5.Bd3, or 4...e5 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.Bd3 – see 3...Nf6.

Following 3...e6 4.Nf3, there arise positions, which are analysed at other
places, for example: 4...Nd7 5.Bd3 – see variation A; 4...Nf6 5.Bd3 – see
variation D; 4...cxd4 5.cxd4 Nf6 6.Nc3 – see variation C2.
 White can also enter a better endgame with: 4.dxc5!? dxc5 5.Qxd8+
Kxd8 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 Nf6 8.Nbd2²

A) 3...Nd7 4.Nf3

4...e6
Black will hardly continue the game without the move Ngf6, therefore
later there usually arises by transposition of moves variation D.
About 4...g6 5.Bd3 Bg7 6.0-0 Ngf6 (6...Qc7 7.Re1 – see 4...Qc7; 6...a6
7.Re1 – see 4...a6) 7.h3 – see variation D4.

4...e5?! In this variation Black should choose this move only after White
has played Bd3. Now, he can develop immediately his bishop to the c4-
square. 5.dxe5 dxe5 6.Bc4 Qf6, Hoffman – Chiburdanidze, Biel 1994,
7.Ng5!? Nh6 8.0-0±

4...Qc7 5.Bd3 g6 (about 5...e6 6.0-0 – see 4...e6; 5...Ngf6 6.0-0 – see
variation D1) 6.0-0 Bg7 7.Re1 a6 (7...Ngf6 8.e5 – see variation D1; 7...e5
8.Bf1 Ngf6 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.a4 0-0 11.Na3² Khudgarian – Djerkovic, North
Bay 1996) 8.a4 e6 (The move 8...e5 leads to the weakening of the d6-
square. 9.dxe5 dxe5, Gormally – Snape, Hastings 2015, 10.Na3!?±,
followed by Bc2, Nc4-d6, exploiting the defects of Black’s move eight.)
9.Na3 Rb8, Sebag – Galliamova, Khanty-Mansiysk 2012. He is preparing
the pawn-advance b7-b5, but White has a better development, so he can
start immediate active actions on the queenside: 10.b4!?±

4...a6 5.Bd3

About 5...e6 6.0-0 – see 4...e6.

5...g6 6.0-0 Bg7 7.Re1 Qc7 8.a4 – see 4...Qc7.
5...b5?! 6.a4 c4 7.Bc2 Bb7 8.0-0 e5 (8...Ngf6 9.e5±) 9.Na3±
5...Qc7 6.0-0 e6 (abou6...Ngf6 7.Re1 – see variation D1; 6...g6 7.Re1
Bg7 8.a4 – see 4...Qc7) 7.Re1 Ngf6 8.e5 – see variation D1.
5...e5 6.0-0 b5?! Black creates in vain a target for his opponent to attack
on the queenside (6...Ngf6 7.Re1 Be7 8.a4² De Silva – Dahale, Hyderabad
2019). 7.a4 c4 8.Bc2 Bb7 9.axb5 axb5 10.Rxa8 Qxa8 11.Na3 Qa6 12.dxe5
dxe5 13.Nxb5!+– Fressinet – Groz, Rochefort 1998.

5.Bd3
 5...a6

About 5...Ngf6 6.0-0 – see variation D1.

5...b6 6.0-0 Bb7 7.Re1 – see Chapter 2, variation A.

5...Be7 6.0-0 Ngf6 (6...Qc7 7.Re1 – see 5...Qc7; 6...b6 7.Re1 Bb7 – see
Chapter 2, variation A; 6...a6 7.e5 – see 5...a6) 7.Re1 – see variation D1.

5...Qc7 6.0-0 a6 (6...Ngf6 7.Re1 or 6...Be7 7.Re1 Ngf6 8.e5 – see

variation D1) 7.Re1 – see 5...a6.

6.0-0
 6...Ne7

6...Ngf6 7.e5 – see variation D1.

6...Qc7 7.Re1 b6 (7...Ngf6 8.e5 – see variation D1) 8.a4 Bb7 9.d5!?
White restricts the enemy bishop on b7 and occupies space. 9...e5 10.c4
Ne7 11.a5 g6 12.axb6 Nxb6 13.Bd2 Bg7 14.Ba5 0-0 15.Nc3+–, followed
by Na4, b2-b4.

6...Be7 7.e5!? White deprives the enemy knight on g8 of the f6-square.

7...cxd4 8.cxd4 dxe5 9.dxe5 Nc5 10.Bc2 Qxd1 11.Rxd1. The exchange of
the queens has not facilitated Black’s defence, because he can develop his
knight on g8 only at the edge of the board. 11...Nh6 12.Nc3 b6 13.b4 Nd7
14.Be4 Ra7 15.a3±

7.Re1 Ng6 8.a4 Be7 9.Nbd2 b6 Prasad – Novita, Dubai 2004, 10.Nc4!?²

B) 3...Nc6 4.Nf3
White develops his pieces and is not in a hurry to play d4-d5.
 4...g6

About 4...Nf6 5.Bd3 – see variation D2.

4...cxd4 5.cxd4 – see variation C1.

4...e6 5.d5 exd5 6.exd5 Ne5 7.Bf4²

The move 4...e5?! would lead to the weakening of the d5-square. 5.dxe5
Nxe5 (5...dxe5 6.Qxd8+ Kxd8 7.Ng5 Ke8 8.Bc4 Nh6 9.0-0 f6 10.Ne6+–)
6.Nxe5 dxe5 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 8.Bc4 f6 9.Be3±
4...Bg4 5.d5 Bxf3 (In this position Black has blundered a piece numerous
times. 5...Ne5?? 6.Nxe5 Bxd1 7.Bb5+ Qd7 8.Bxd7+ Kd8 9.Nxf7+–;
5...Nb8 6.h3 Bxf3 7.Qxf3 Nd7 8.Be2± Hoffmann – Othman, Caleta 2015.
White not only has a space advantage, but also a bishop-pair.) 6.Qxf3 Ne5
7.Qe3 a6 8.c4 g6 9.f4! Nd7 10.Qc3! This is the point! Black fails to
develop his bishop to g7. 10...Ngf6 11.e5 Ne4 12.Qe3 Qa5+ 13.Nd2 f5
14.exf6 Nexf6 15.Bd3± V.Chekhov – Dounia, Caracas 1976.
 5.d5!?

White can still continue to play in the spirit of the Alapin system with:
5.Be3 Nf6 6.Bd3 Bg7 (6...Ng4 7.Bc1 Bg7 8.h3 Nf6 9.0-0) 7.h3 0-0 8.0-0 –
see variation D4.

5...Nb8

5...Ne5. Black is reluctant to retreat his knight to its initial position, but
now his pawn-structure would be weakened. 6.Nxe5 dxe5 7.Be3±

6.h3 Bg7 7.Bd3 Nf6 8.0-0 0-0 9.c4

Here, in comparison to the Benoni Defence, Black has lost two tempi (He
has played twice with his knight on b8.), while White has lost a tempo for
an extra move with his c-pawn.

9...e5

9...e6 10.Re1 e5 (10...exd5 11.cxd5±) 11.Nc3 Kh8 12.a3 a5 13.Rb1±

Barskij – Dydyshko, Polanica Zdroj 2000.
 9...b5. This is a pawn-sacrifice in the spirit of the Benko Gambit. 10.cxb5
a6 11.Nc3 axb5 12.Bxb5 Ba6 13.Bxa6 Nxa6 14.Nd2!? White wishes to
deploy his knight on c4 in order to deprive his opponent of counter chances,
connected with the pawn-advance c5-c4, Nc5(b4)-d3. 14...Qc7 15.Nc4
Rfb8, Nisipeanu – Hernandez Onna, Merida 2003, 16.Bg5!± Black has no
compensation for the sacrificed pawn.

10.a3!?
White is not in a hurry to develop his knight on c3.
10...Na6 11.Re1 Nh5 12.Bc2. This transfer of the bishop is standard for
similar positions. If he manages to play later b2-b4 b7-b6, then White will
activate later his bishop on c2 with Ba4-c6. 12...h6 13.Nc3²

C) 3...cxd4
After this move Black will not be afraid of the exchange on c5, but he
pays a dear price for that. White’s knight on b1 will obtain the good c3-
square for development.
4.cxd4
 We will analyse now: C1) 4...Nc6, C2) 4...e6 and C3) 4...Nf6.

4...g6 5.Nc3 Nc6 (5...Nf6 6.Nf3 – see variation С3; 5...Bg7 6.h3 Nc6
7.Nf3 – see variation С1; 6...Nf6 7.Nf3 – see variation С3.).
Black should better play this move before the development of his knight
on c6, because now, White has a very powerful idea, connected with his
queen sortie to the d4-square. 6.d5!? Nb8 (6...Ne5?! 7.f4 Nd7 8.Qd4! f6.
Black defends against e4-e5, but weakens the e6-square and White’s knight
will be soon headed there. 9.Be3 Bg7 10.Nf3 Nh6 11.Qd2!? Nf7
12.Nd4+– Velchev – Andreev, Plovdiv 2008.) 7.Bd3 Nf6 8.Nge2!? Now,
Black would not have the possibility to pin the enemy knight with the move
Bg4. 8...Bg7 9.0-0±

4...a6 5.Nc3 g6 (5...e6 6.Nf3 Nf6 7.Bd3 – see variation С2; 5...Nc6 6.d5
Nb8 7.Bd3±; 5...Nf6 6.Nf3 – see variation С3) 6.Nf3 Bg7 7.h3 e6,
Schoenthier – Buscher, Germany 2008 (7...Nc6 – see variation С1; 7...Nf6
8.Bd3 – see variation С3) 8.Qa4+!? Nc6 (8...Bd7 9.Qa3±) 9.d5. After this
move Black will have to comply with entering an inferior endgame;
otherwise, he would lose his knight 9...Qa5 10.Qxa5 Nxa5 11.Bf4±

С1) 4...Nc6 5.Nf3

 5...Nf6
5...e6 6.Nc3 g6 (About 6...a6 7.d5 – see 5...a6; 6...Nf6 7.Bd3 or 6...Be7
7.Bd3 Nf6 8.0-0 – see 5...Nf6.) 7.d5! exd5 8.exd5 Ne5 9.Bb5+ Bd7
10.Qe2±

5...Bg4. This is untimely activity by Black. 6.d5!? Bxf3 (6...Ne5??

7.Nxe5! Bxd1 8.Bb5+ Qd7 9.Nxd7+–; 6...Nb8 7.Qa4+!? Bd7. Black
accepts that his previous strategy was a failure, but he has nothing better
anyway. 8.Qb3 Na6 9.Be3±) 7.gxf3!? (White can also obtain a considerable
advantage, avoiding the weakening of his pawn structure, with the line:
7.Qxf3 Ne5 8.Qb3 Qc7 9.Na3 a6 10.Be3± Isserman – Toenniges, Bad
Homburg 2007.) 7...Nb8 (7...Ne5 8.f4 Nd7 9.Nc3 a6 10.Bh3 Ngf6,
Micheli – Bozzali, Imperia 1996, 11.Qd4!?+– Black lags considerably in
development and is helpless to counter White’s plan, connected with the
pawn-advance e4-e5.) 8.Nc3 g6 9.Qb3!?± with powerful pressure against
Black’s queenside.

5...a6 6.Nc3
 About 6...Nf6 7.d5 – see 5...Nf6.
6...e6 7.d5 exd5 8.Nxd5± Cojhter – Jencek, Ptuj 2008.
6...Bg4 7.Be2 Nf6 8.0-0 e6 9.d5± White opens the position in order to
exploit his lead in development, J.Fischer – Thiery, Dortmund 1982.
6...g6 7.h3 Bg7 8.d5!? (about 8.Be3 Nf6 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0 – see variation
С3) 8...Ne5, Feuerstack – Berenstein, Kiel 2006, 9.Nxe5!? Bxe5 (9...dxe5
10.Be2±) 10.Be2 Bg7 11.Be3 Nf6 12.0-0 0-0 13.Qd2² White has a freer
game.

5...e5 6.Nc3 (6.d5!? Nce7 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Nb5 – see 5...Nf6) 6...Bg4
(6...Nf6 7.d5 – see 5...Nf6) 7.d5 Nd4 8.Be3 Nxf3+ 9.gxf3 Bd7 10.Qb3±
Black has managed to compromise his opponent’s queenside pawn-
structure, but has fallen horribly behind in development.

6.Nc3
 6...e6

6...e5 7.d5 Ne7 8.Nb5!?± and Black cannot play 8...a6?, because of
9.Qa4+–

6...a6. He defends against Bb5. 7.d5 Ne5 8.Nd4! White is reluctant to

exchange the enemy knight on e5, but wishes to oust it from the centre with
the move f2-f4. 8...g6 9.f4 Ned7 10.Be2 Bg7, Pierrot – De Luca, Buenos
Aires 1998, 11.Be3!?±

6...Bg4 7.d5 Ne5 (7...Bxf3 8.gxf3 Ne5 9.f4 Ned7, Brestak – Becko,
Slovakia 2014, 10.Qa4!?+–) 8.Nxe5! dxe5 (8...Bxd1? 9.Bb5+–) 9.Bb5+
Bd7, Hernandez – Carvajal Gamoneda, Isla Guitart 1994, 10.Bxd7+!?
Nxd7 11.Bg5 g6 12.Rc1± Now, Black must be constantly on the alert about
his opponent’s threats d5-d6 and Nd5.

6...g6 7.d5! White not only ousts the enemy knight, but also frees a square
for his knight at the centre of the board.
 7...Nb8 8.Be2 Bg7 9.Nd4 0-0 10.0-0 Nbd7 11.Be3 Nc5 (11...Nb6.
Black’s knight would not be better placed here than on c5, since it would
soon come under an attack after a2-a4-a5. 12.f3 Bd7 13.a4 Rc8 14.Qb3±
Arakeljan – Meshkov, Kireevsk 2006). 12.f3 a5. Black prevents b2-b4, but
weakens the b5-square in the process. 13.b3 Bd7, Mayer – Kreiling, Bad
Zwesten 2001, 14.Rc1!?±
7...Ne5 8.Nxe5 dxe5 9.Bb5+ Bd7 10.Qb3 Bg7 11.0-0 0-0, Kasparov –
Holis, Corfu 1996, 12.a4!?± White has more space and a more elastic
pawn-structure.

7.Bd3 Be7

About 7...a6 8.0-0 Be7 9.a3 – see 7...Be7.

8.0-0
 8...0-0
Black can hardly continue the game without castling.

8...a6 9.a3 Qc7 (9...0-0 10.h3 – see 8...0-0) 10.h3 0-0 11.Bd2 b5 12.Rc1±

8...e5 9.d5 Nb8 10.h3 0-0 11.Be3 Nbd7 12.Rc1 a6, Skliar – Varchenko,
Alushta 2008, 13.Re1!?+– Black’s position is cramped and he can hardly
find good squares for his pieces.

9.a3 a6
About 9...Bd7 10.h3 Rc8 11.Be3 a6 12.Rc1 – see 9...a6.

10.h3
White prepares the development of his bishop on the e3-square.
10...Bd7

After 10...Qc7, White can choose the more active move 11.Bf4!?±
 He can exploit the defects of the move 10...b5 with the help of 11.Qc2!?±,
creating the threats e4-e5 and Nxb5.

11.Be3 Rc8 12.Rc1

12...Na5

Following 12...b5?! White can choose 13.b4!±, preventing the transfer of

Black’s knight to the c4-square, Roth – Schreier, DDR 1990.

13.Qe2 b5 14.e5² Weglarz – Faron, Rewal 2010. Black has organised

some counterplay on the queenside indeed, but White is still better, since he
dominates in the centre.

С2) 4...e6
After this move Black obtains a solid but rather passive position, because
he does not fight against White’s pawn-centre.
5.Nf3
 5...Nf6

About 5...Nc6 6.Nc3 – see 4...Nc6.

5...a6 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.Bd3, or 5...Be7 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.Bd3 – see 5...Nf6.

6.Nc3 Be7

6...Nc6 7.Bd3 – see 4...Nc6.

6...a6 7.Bd3 b5 (7...Nc6 8.0-0 – see 4...Nc6; 7...Be7 8.0-0 – see 6...Be7)
8.0-0 Bb7 (8...Be7 9.e5 – see 6...Be7) 9.d5!? White wishes either to
sacrifice a pawn in order to exploit his lead in development, or to restrict
the mobility of the enemy bishop on b7. 9...e5 (9...exd5 10.Nxd5 Nxd5
11.exd5 Be7 12.Nd4±) 10.b4± White fixes the enemy pawn on b5 and
plans to attack it later with a2-a4, Alexopoulos – Friedson, New York 1994.

7.Bd3
 7...Nbd7
After Black’s knight on f6 cannot retreat to the d7-square any more, he
must be constantly on the alert about White’s pawn-advance e4-e5.

About 7...Nc6 8.0-0 – see 4...Nc6.

7...a6 8.0-0 b5 (8...0-0 9.e5 – see 7...0-0; 8...Nbd7 9.e5 – see 7...Nbd7;
8...Nc6 9.a3 – see 4...Nc6) 9.e5 dxe5 10.dxe5 Nd5 11.Nxd5 Qxd5 12.Qe2
Ra7, De Rosa – Damia, Amantea 2009. The transfer of Black’s rook to the
d7-square looks a bit artificial (Meanwhile, the move 12...Bb7 has also its
defects. 13.Rd1 Qc5 14.Be3 Qb4 15.Rac1 Nc6 16.Rc3 Qg4 17.h3 Qh5,
Sadikov – Muhic, Ljubljana 2007, 18.Be4!?+–) 13.Be3!? Rd7 14.Rfd1±

7...0-0 8.0-0
 About 8...Nc6 9.a3 – see 4...Nc6.
8...Nbd7 9.e5 – see 7...Nbd7.
8...a6 9.e5 dxe5 (After 9...Nd5, White plays at first 10.Qc2!, provoking
the move 10...h6, and later 11.Qe2±, with the rather unpleasant threat Qe4.)
10.dxe5 Nfd7 (10...Nd5 11.Qc2 h6 12.Qe2!±) 11.Qc2 h6 12.Qe2 Re8
13.Rd1 Qc7 14.Qe4! Nf8 15.Qg4+– Akulova – Parhomenko, Khanty-
Mansiysk 2016.

8.0-0 a6

8...e5 9.Qe2 0-0 10.Rd1 exd4 11.Nxd4 Ne5, Schuchardt – Mueller, Bad
Wildungen 1998, 12.Bb5!?±

8...0-0 9.e5 dxe5 (9...Nd5 10.Qc2 h6 11.Nxd5 exd5 12.Be3±) 10.dxe5

Nd5 11.Qc2 h6 12.Nxd5 exd5 13.Be3± Black has no compensation for the
vulnerability of his isolated pawn on d5.
 9.e5 dxe5 10.dxe5 Nd5 (10...Ng4 11.Qe2±) 11.Nxd5 exd5 12.Be3 b6
13.Rc1 Bb7, Kr.Georgiev – Spasov, Sunny Beach 2005, 14.e6! With this
elegant pawn-sacrifice, White begins a decisive attack against the enemy
king. 14...fxe6 15.Nd4 Nc5 16.Rxc5! Bxc5 17.Nxe6 Qe7 18.Bxc5 bxc5
19.Re1+– Black is helpless against his opponent’s knight-sortie to the e6-
square.

С3) 4...Nf6 5.Nc3

 5...g6

About 5...e6 6.Nf3 – see variation С2.

5...a6 6.Nf3 Bg4. Black pins the enemy knight, but does not protect his
b7-pawn any more and White exploits this immediately (6...g6 7.h3 – see
5...g6; 6...Nc6 7.d5 – see variation С1; 6...e6 – see variation С2). 7.Qb3 b5,
Merwin – Miller, Seattle 1989, 8.e5! dxe5 9.dxe5 Nfd7 10.Qd5 Nb6
11.Qxd8+ Kxd8 12.Nd4± The trade of the queens has not facilitated
Black’s defence, because there are still too many pieces left and his king is
endangered at the centre of the board.

5...Nc6. Black’s knight will come later under an attack after d4-d5 on this
square and this facilitates considerably White’s choice for the plan of his
further actions. 6.d5!? (6.Nf3 – see variation С1) 6...Ne5. Now, White can
continue the chase after the enemy knight. (It seemed more reliable for
Black to choose here 6...Nb8, for example: 7.Nge2 g6 8.Nd4 Bg7 9.Be2 –
see variation С1.) 7.f4 Ned7 (Following 7...Ng6 8.Nf3 e6, Black will fail
to hold on to the e6-square. 9.Bb5+! Bd7 10.dxe6 fxe6 11.Ng5!?+–) 8.Nf3
g6 9.e5 dxe5 10.fxe5 Ng4 11.Qa4!+– Black’s knight on g4 is hanging, so
he fails to parry the threat e5-e6.

6.Nf3 Bg7

About 6...Nc6 7.h3 Bg7 8.Bd3, or 6...a6 7.h3 Bg7 8.Bd3, or 7...Nc6
8.Bd3 Bg7 9.0-0 – see 6...Bg7.
6...Bg4 7.Qb3±

7.h3

7.Bb5+!?

7...Nbd7? 8.e5 dxe5 9.dxe5 Ng4 10.e6 fxe6 11.h3±

7...Bd7 8.e5 dxe5 9.dxe5 Ng4 10.Bf4 (10.e6 fxe6 11.Qe2°) 10...0-0
11.h3 Nh6 12.Bxd7 Qxd7 (12...Nxd7? 13.Qd2 Nf5 14.g4+–) 13.0-0± Rd8?
14.Qc1 Nf5 15.Rd1 Qc7 16.g4 1–0 Ruppelt – Petri, Email 2018.
7...Nfd7 8.Be3 0-0 9.Qd2 a6 (9...Nf6 10.h3²) 10.Be2 Nf6, Umanec –
Sejkora, Czech Republic 2013, 11.0-0 Bg4 12.Rfd1²
 7...0-0

About 7...Nc6 8.Bd3 0-0 9.0-0, or 8...a6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Be3, or 7...a6 8.Bd3
0-0 9.0-0, or 8...Nc6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Be3 – see 7...0-0.

8.Bd3

8...Nc6

8...e5 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.0-0 Nc6 11.Be3 – see variation С3b.

8...Nbd7 9.0-0 e5 (9...a6 10.e5 – see 8...a6) 10.Be3 a6 11.a4 exd4. Black
wishes to create counterplay by attacking the enemy pawn on e4 with his
rook from e8, but this leads not only to the appearance of a weak pawn on
d6 in his position, but also to the weakening of his control over the f7-
square. 12.Bxd4 Re8 13.Bc4² Nxe4? Leko – Strikovic, Cacak 1996,
14.Qb3!?+–

8...a6 9.0-0 b5 (9...Nc6 10.Be3 – see variation С3a; 9...Nbd7. Black’s

knight is misplaced on this square in comparison to c6. 10.e5 Ne8 11.Qe2±
Jahn – Pramann, Braunfels 1996) 10.e5 Ne8 (10...Nfd7 11.exd6 exd6
12.Bg5 Nf6, Kernazhitsky – V.Onischuk, Kiev 2005, 13.Be4!? Ra7 14.a4²)
11.Be4 Ra7 12.Be3 Nd7 (It is just bad for Black to opt here for 12...Bb7,
Torre – Barcenilla, Bacolod 1991 – he weakens his control over the e6-
square. 13.e6! fxe6?! 14.Ng5+–) 13.Qb3 Nb6 14.a4! White has squeezed
the enemy position in the centre and begins active actions on the queenside.
14...bxa4 15.Nxa4 Nxa4, Sanduleac – Dominguez Aguilar, Turin 2006,
16.Rxa4!?±

9.0-0

We will analyse now: С3a) 9...a6 and С3b) 9...e5.

About 9...Bd7 10.Be3 a6 11.Rc1, or 10...Rc8 11.Rc1 a6 12.Re1 – see

variation С3a.

The move 9...b6 would lead to the weakening of the c6-square. 10.Be3
Bb7 11.Rc1 Rc8, Soltis – D.Gurevich, New York 1983, 12.d5!? White
wishes to exploit the defects of Black’s move nine. 12...Nb4 13.Bb1 Na6
14.Nd4±
 9...Nd7 10.Be3 e5 (10...a6 11.Rc1 – see variation С3a; 10...Nb6. Black
has lost two tempi on the transfer of his knight, but it is not better placed on
b6 than on f6. 11.d5 Ne5 12.Nxe5 Bxe5 13.f4 Bg7 14.Qd2±) 11.Bc4 Nb6
12.Bb3 exd4 13.Nxd4± Cuartas – Bacallao Alonso, Montcada 2009. Black
has no compensation for the weakness of his pawn on d6.
9...d5 10.e5 Ne8 11.Re1 Nc7 12.Bc2!? White brings his queen to the
protection of his pawn on d4.

12...f6?! Black’s desire to activate his bishop on g7 is understandable, but

after 13.exf6 Bxf6 14.Bh6 Re8, Voit – Severiukhina, Moscow 2010,
15.Qd2±, there would appear a backward e7-pawn in his position.
12...a6 13.Be3 b5, Sax – Torma, Hungary 2007. The advance of Black’s
b-pawn has only weakened the c5-square. 14.Rc1±
The move 12...Kh8 is too slow for Black 13.Be3 Be6 14.Qd2 Qd7,
Tomilova – Pogonina, Samara 2005, 15.Rac1!?±
12...b6 13.Be3 (13.Ne2!? Ba6 14.Nf4±) 13...Na5 14.b3± Nayhebaver –
Szczepkowska, Stara Lubovna 2016. White does not allow the enemy
knight to occupy the c4-square and thus prevents his opponent’s
counterplay on the queenside.
 12...b5 13.Be3 a5 (The move 13...b4 would only help White’s knight to
come closer to the c5-square. 14.Na4±) 14.Rc1 a4, N.Mamedov – Abu
Sufian, Hastings 2007, 15.Ne2!? White protects reliably the d4-square.
15...Na5 16.b3 axb3 17.axb3 Ne6. Black prevents the appearance of his
opponent’s knight on the f4-outpost. 18.h4! White brings his rook-pawn
into the attack against Black’s monarch. 18...Qb6 19.h5‚

С3a) 9...a6
Black continues with his flank strategy.
10.Be3

10...b5

10...e6 11.Rc1 Nd7 12.Qd2± Gouma – Van Swieten, Soest 1995.

10...e5. This pawn-advance would have been much better for Black on his
previous move, since White’s move Be3 looks much more useful than a7-
a6. 11.d5 Ne7 12.a4± Nevednichy – Kljako, Malinska 2014.
 10...Bd7 11.Rc1 Rc8 (11...b5 12.e5!? White has ousted the enemy knight
to the edge of the board and wishes to deploy his knight on the d5-square.
12...Ne8 13.Nd5!?±) 12.Re1 b5 13.e5!? It is becoming more and more
difficult for White to improve the positions of his pieces, so he decides to
begin immediate active actions in the centre. 13...Ne8 14.Nd5! h6. Black
prevents Bg5 (14...e6 15.Bg5 f6 16.exf6 Nxf6 17.Nf4+–). 15.Nf4±

10...Nd7 11.Rc1

11...e5 12.Bc4±
11...Rb8 12.Qd2 e5, Khamrakulov – R.Mamedov, Moscow 2002,
13.Bb1!?±
11...b6, Dabrowska – Matveeva, Jakarta 1993, 12.Be2!? Bb7 13.d5 Nce5
14.Nd4 Rc8 15.b3. White deprives the enemy knight on e5 of the c4-square
and is threatening to win a piece after f2-f4. 15...Nf6 16.f4 Ned7 17.Bf3±
Black’s position is cramped and he must be constantly on the alert about the
possible penetration of White’s knight to the c6-square.
11...b5 12.Nxb5. White does not win a pawn with this move, but the
opening of files on the queenside would be in his favour. 12...axb5 13.Rxc6
Bb7 14.Rc1 Rxa2 15.Qb3 Ra8 16.Nd2 Rb8, Jovanic – Matikozian,
Rimavska Sobota 1996, 17.Rfd1!? This is a good prophylactic move. White
must take care about Black’s threat – to undermine the d4-pawn with the
move e7-e5. 17...e6 18.Ra1±

11.Rc1 Bb7

About 11...Bd7 12.e5 – see 10...Bd7.

12.d5!?
White has waited for his opponent to weaken the c6-square and begins
active actions on the queenside.

12...Nb8

12...Na5. Black’s knight is headed for the c4-square, but White does not
plan to let it there. 13.b3! e6. Black is trying to organise counterplay, but
weakens his pawn-structure even more. 14.dxe6 fxe6, Yeoh – Brown,
Adelaide 2016, 15.Ng5!? Qe7 16.Ne2!±
 12...Ne5 13.Nxe5 dxe5 14.b4. Here, before playing a2-a4, White deprives
his opponent of the possibility to block the queenside with the move b5-b4.
14...Nh5 15.a4 bxa4 16.Nxa4 Nf4 17.Nc5 Nxd3 18.Qxd3. White has a
very simple plan for actions in this position. He wishes to double his rooks
on the a-file and to win the pawn on a6. 18...Bc8 19.Ra1+– Nothnagel –
Gnauk, Germany 1995.

13.b4!? White deprives the enemy knights of the c5-square. 13...Nbd7,

D.Mastrovasilis – Khamrakulov, Oropesa del Mar 1998, 14.Qb3!? Re8
15.Nd4 Ne5 16.Be2. Black’s position is very difficult, because he must
parry White’s threats in the centre (f2-f4), as well as on the queenside (a2-
a4). 16...Rc8 17.a4±

С3b) 9...e5 10.dxe5!

This is a very practical decision. After the exchange of the central pawns,
Black would hardly manage to activate his bishop on g7, which is restricted
by his own pawn on e5.
10...dxe5
 10...Nxe5 11.Nxe5 dxe5. The exchange of a couple of knights would not
facilitate Black’s defence, moreover that now White’s queen will gain
access to the wonderful f3-square. 12.Bc4

12...Nh5 13.Qf3!?±
12...a6, Kalod – Manik, Olomouc 1998, 13.Bg5!? b5 14.Bd5 Rb8 15.Rc1²
b4?! This seemingly active move only helps White’s knight to occupy the
c5-square. 16.Na4 h6 17.Be3 Nxd5 18.exd5± followed by d5-d6, Nc5.
12...Qc7 13.Qb3 Bd7 14.Be3 Rac8 15.Bd5 b6, Blatny – Orso,
Hajduszoboszlo 1987, 16.Rfd1!? Qb8 17.Bc4! White’s bishop frees the d5-
square for his knight. 17...Qc7 18.Nd5 Nxd5 19.Bxd5± followed by Rac1,
winning a tempo by attacking the enemy queen.
12...Bd7 13.Be3 Bc6 14.Qf3 Qe7 15.Rfd1² Gelfand – Svidler, Sochi
2014. White’s pieces have been harmoniously deployed. Black has no
pawn-weaknesses in his position indeed, but he has great problems to
neutralise his opponent’s initiative.

11.Be3
 11...Be6

The move 11...a6 is too slow. 12.Rc1 Be6 13.Ng5 Nd4 14.Nxe6 Nxe6
15.Bc4 Nd4, Guseinov – Kempinski, Moscow 2005, 16.a3!? Rc8 17.Ba2²
White’s bishop-pair provides him with a stable advantage.

11...h6. Black wishes to develop his bishop on e6 quite comfortably and

covers the g5-square against the possible sortie of White’s knight. 12.Bb5!
Nh5 13.Qxd8 Rxd8, Sahin – Caglar, Konya 2016, 14.Bxc6!? bxc6
15.Rfd1± The weak pawns on a7 and c6 doom Black to a long and
laborious defence.

11...b6 12.Bb5 Bb7 13.Qa4 Nd4 14.Nxd4 exd4 15.Bxd4. Black has no
compensation for the sacrificed pawn. 15...a6 16.Be2 b5 17.Qb4² Stevic –
Motylev, Guarapuava 1995.

11...Re8 12.Bc4 Be6 13.Bxe6 Rxe6, Godena – Bellini, Switzerland 2003

(13...fxe6. Black covers the d5-square against the penetration of the enemy
pieces, but weakens considerably his pawn-structure in the process. 14.Qb3
Qe7 15.Rfd1± Nh5?! Luther – Gauglitz, Zittau 1989, 16.Nb5! Nf4 17.Kf1!
Rad8 18.Nxa7 Nxa7 19.Bxa7+–) 14.Qc2!?² White’s bishop on e3 is much
more mobile than its black counterpart. The move 14...Nd4?! would only
worsen Black’s position. 15.Bxd4 exd4 16.Rad1 Nh5. He brings his bishop
to the protection of the pawn on d4, but lets White’s knight to occupy the
d5-outpost. 17.Nd5±

11...Qe7. Black’s queen will come under an attack on this square after
12.Nd5, for example: 12...Nxd5 13.exd5 e4 14.Bg5. There have arisen
interesting tactical complications on the board, which turn out to be in
favour of White at the end. 14...f6 15.Re1 Ne5, Gadjily – Zapolskis, Batumi
1999, 16.Nxe5!? fxg5 17.Nf3 Qd6 18.Bxe4 Bxb2 19.Rb1 Bc3 20.Re3 Bf6
21.Nd4² Black is likely to fail to hold the blockade of the enemy d5-pawn,
since the queen is a pure blocker in principle...
 11...Nh5 12.Bc4

12...Be6. This move leads to the weakening of Black’s pawn-structure.

13.Bxe6 fxe6 14.Bc5 Rf7 15.Qxd8+! After the exchange of the queens,
there arises an endgame without any good prospects for Black in which the
draw is the maximum that he can dream about. 15...Rxd8 16.Ng5 Rf6
17.Rfd1 Rxd1+ 18.Rxd1 h6 19.Nf3± Bezdan – Gauglitz, Budapest 1988.
12...Nf4 13.Qxd8 Rxd8 14.Ng5 Be6 15.Nxe6 Nxe6 16.Bxe6 fxe6
17.Rfd1² Emms – Hunt, Port Erin 1999.
12...Nd4 13.Nd5 Ne6 (13...b5, Maric – Maksimovic, Belgrade 1998,
14.Bb3!? Nxb3 15.Qxb3²) 14.Qb3 a6 (The move 14...Nd4 would only
create a target for White to attack. Still, this would have been the least of
evils for Black. 15.Bxd4 exd4 16.Rad1± Nun – Trapl, Namestovo 1987)
15.Nb6 Rb8, Emms – McShane, Hove 1997, 16.Rad1! Qe7 17.Bd2!+–
Black is now helpless against the threat Bb4-d6.

12.Bb5!
 12...Na5
In this way Black avoids the deformation of his pawn-structure.

12...Qb8 13.Bxc6 bxc6 14.Qc2 Nh5 (14...h6 15.Na4± Chokhonelidze –

Dzagnidze, Batumi 2003) 15.Na4 h6 16.Nc5± Lobron – Christiansen,
Germany 1994.

12...Qc7 13.Bxc6! Black cannot capture on c6 with his queen, because

this would lose the e5-pawn for him. 13...bxc6 14.Qc2 Nd7± Pirrot –
Zimmermann, St Ingbert 1993.

12...Nh5 13.Bxc6 bxc6 14.Qxd8 Rfxd8 15.Rfd1 a6, Merry – Aravindh,

Douglas 2016 (15...Rdb8 16.b3±) 16.b3!? Rxd1+ 17.Rxd1±

12...Qa5 13.Bxc6 bxc6 14.Qc2 h6 15.Na4 Nd7 16.Rfd1 Rfc8 17.Nd2.

Black’s queen is very active on a5, so White wishes to oust it from there
with the move Nc4. 17...c5 18.Nc4± Smirin – Kempinski, Groningen 1996.
13.Qe2 a6 14.Bd3 Nc6 15.Rfd1 Qc8 (15...Qc7 16.Rac1 Rac8,
Donzellotti – Caillet, LSS 2009, 17.Ng5!?²) 16.Rac1 Rd8 17.Na4 Nd7
18.Bc4! White exchanges the light-squared bishops and leaves his opponent
with a “bad” bishop on g7. 18...Bxc4 19.Qxc4± Adams – Gelfand, Wijk aan
Zee 1994.

D) 3...Nf6 4.Bd3
White defends his central pawn and develops his bishop.

We will deal now with D1) 4...Nbd7, D2) 4...Nc6, D3) 4...cxd4, D4)
4...g6.

4...e5 5.Nf3 Nc6 (about 5...Qc7 6.h3 – see 4...Qc7; 5...Nbd7 6.0-0 – see
– see variation D1; 5...cxd4 6.cxd4 – see 4...cxd4) 6.d5 – see variation D2.

4...e6 5.Nf3 Be7 (About 5...Nbd7 6.0-0 – see variation D1; 5...Nc6 6.0-0
Be7 7.Qe2, or 5...Qc7 6.0-0 Be7 7.Re1, or 6...Nbd7 7.Re1 Be7 8.e5 – see
5...Be7.) 6.0-0
 About 6...Nbd7 7.Re1 – see variation D1.
Following 6...Nc6 7.Qe2 0-0 8.dxc5 dxc5 9.e5 Nd5 10.Re1, White’s
pawn on e5 provides him with a space advantage. After 10...f5 11.exf6
Bxf6, there would appear a weakness on e6 in Black’s camp. 12.Qe4 g6
13.Bh6 Bg7 14.Bxg7 Kxg7, Ojea – Benedetti, Buenos Aires 2010,
15.Bc4!?±
6...0-0?! Black’s king castles right in front of the enemy attack. 7.dxc5
dxc5 8.e5 Nd5 9.Qc2! White provokes a weakening of his opponent’s
castling position. 9...h6 10.Qe2± Now, after Qe4, Black cannot play g7-g6,
due to the loss of his pawn on h6.
6...Qc7 7.Re1 Nbd7 8.e5 dxe5 9.dxe5 Nd5 10.Qa4!?±, White is preparing
the transfer of his queen to the kingside, Rakesh – Godzwon, Warsaw 2018.

4...Qc7 5.h3
 About 5...g6 6.Nf3 Bg7 7.0-0, or 5...Nc6 6.Nf3 g6 7.0-0 Bg7 8.Be3 b6
9.Nbd2 0-0 10.Re1 – see variation D4.
5...Nbd7 6.Nf3 a6 7.a4 b6 8.0-0 e6 9.Re1 Bb7 10.Nbd2. White prepares
the transfer of his knight to the g3-square. He can afford to play patiently,
since his powerful pawn-centre provides him with a stable advantage.
10...Be7 11.Nf1 0-0 12.Ng3² Seres – Brodowski, Germany 2015.
5...e5 6.Nf3 Be7 (6...g6 7.0-0 Bg7 8.Be3 0-0 9.Nbd2 – variation D4b)
7.0-0 0-0 (7...a6 8.Re1 b5. The advance of Black’s queenside pawns only
provides White with targets to attack there. 9.a4 c4 10.Bc2 Bb7 11.Na3±
N.Kosintseva – Bodnaruk, Gaziantep 2012) 8.Be3 a6 9.Nbd2 Nbd7 10.a4
b6, Dumjahn – Zimmermann, Pinneberg 2001, 11.d5!?²

D1) 4...Nbd7 5.Nf3

 5...e6

About 5...cxd4 6.cxd4 – see variation D3.

This is not the right time for Black to play 5...g6?! 6.e5! dxe5 7.dxe5±
Ng4?! Birnboim – Gruenfeld, Acre 2013, 8.Qa4! Nh6 9.Ng5!+–

It would be too slow for him to choose here 5...a6 6.e5! dxe5 7.dxe5 Nd5,
Yewdokimov – Bain, Aix les Bains 1991, 8.e6! fxe6 9.Qc2! White is
threatening not only the pawn on h7, but a checkmate in two as well.
9...Qc7 10.Bxh7+–

5...e5 6.0-0 Qc7 (6...Be7 7.Re1 0-0 8.h3 Re8 9.Be3 a6 10.a4±) 7.Re1 Be7
(After the move 7...g6, White can begin immediate active actions on the
queenside. 8.b4!? cxb4 9.cxb4 Bg7, Abasov – Benidze, Baku 2010,
10.Na3!?± White wishes to exploit the circumstance that after the removal
of the bishop away from the a3-f8 diagonal, Black will have great problems
to protect his weak d6-pawn.
 5...Qc7 6.0-0

About 6...e5 7.Re1 – see 5...e5.

6...e6 7.a4 – see 5...e6.
6...a6 7.Re1 e5 (7...e6 8.e5 dxe5 9.dxe5 Nd5 10.Nbd2² Maksimov –
Podolchenko, Minsk 2013) 8.a4 Be7, Pace – Efimov, Nicolosi 2014, 9.d5!?
± Black does not have sufficient space. He will hardly manage to organise
counterplay on the kingside in the middle game, because the preparation of
the pawn-advance f7-f5 would take too much time.
6...g6 7.Re1 Bg7?! (7...e5 8.a4 Bg7 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Na3² Arenas Vanegas
– Pina Vega, Bogota 2012) 8.e5! This move is stronger when Black’s knight
is on d7, since it has occupied a square, which is needed as a retreat of his
other knight. 8...dxe5 9.dxe5 Ng4 10.e6! White sacrifices a pawn and seizes
completely the initiative. 10...fxe6 11.Qe2 Nde5 12.Bf4 Nxf3+ 13.Qxf3 e5
14.Bg3 Be6 15.Nd2 0-0-0 16.Bc4± White’s pieces are very active, while
Black’s extra pawn is practically irrelevant.

6.0-0
 6...Be7

6...Qc7 7.a4 b6, Vlahovic – Mihajlovic, Belgrade 2006, 8.d5!?²

6...a6 7.e5! White exploits his opponent’s rather indifferent play and
begins immediate decisive actions in the centre. 7...dxe5 8.dxe5 Nd5,
Karpatchev – Herrmann, Lueneburg 2018, 9.c4 Nb4 10.Be4 Qc7 11.Re1
Be7 12.Nc3 0-0 13.Bf4±

7.Re1 0-0

7...Qc7 8.e5 Nd5 (8...dxe5 9.dxe5 Nd5 10.c4 Nb4 11.Be4±) 9.Na3 a6,
Delgado Ramirez – Gamarra, Asuncion 2018. Black’s prevents White’s
knight from coming to the b5-square, but it can be placed perfectly on c4.
10.exd6 Bxd6 11.Nc4±
 8.Nbd2 cxd4 9.cxd4 b6, Fressinet – Vachier Lagrave, Clichy 2011
(9...Re8, Saunders – McShane, Cardiff 1997, 10.Nb1!?±) 10.Nb1!? White’s
centre is not under any threat at all, so he can afford to lose two tempi in
order to transfer his knight from d2 to c3. 10...Bb7 11.Nc3±

D2) 4...Nc6 5.Nf3

 5...e5
Black deprives his opponent immediately from the possibility to advance
e4-e5.

About 5...cxd4 6.cxd4 – see variation D3.

5...g6 6.h3 Bg7 7.0-0 – see variation D4.

5...e6 6.0-0 Be7 7.Qe2 0-0 8.dxc5 dxc5 9.e5 Nd5 10.Re1± Kreutzkamp –
Althoff, Germany 2004.

5...Bg4. Black continues to increase his pressure against the d4-square,

but after 6.d5, White can exploit the circumstance that Black’s light-squared
bishop is too far away from his queenside.
 6...Ne5?! 7.Nxe5! Now, capturing with the queen would lose a piece for
Black, so he is forced to weaken his pawn-structure. 7...dxe5 8.Qb3 Qc7
9.f3 Bd7, Matko – Vrhovnik, Zadar 2012, 10.Bc4!?±, White creates the
rather unpleasant threat d5-d6.
6...Nb8 7.h3 Bxf3 (Following 7...Bh5 8.g4! Bg6, Molander – Norri,
Helsinki 2002, 9.Nh4!? Nbd7 10.Nxg6 hxg6, White not only obtains the
two-bishop advantage, but after 11.g5 worsens the position of the enemy
knight on f6. 11...Nh5 12.Be3±) 8.Qxf3 g6 9.0-0 Bg7 10.Bg5 Nbd7
11.Nd2 0-0 12.Qe3. White removes immediately his queen against the
threat Ne5. 12...Re8 (12...Qc7, Pedersen – Hansen, Odense 1991, 13.a4!?±)
13.Rad1. White prepares in advance to counter Black’s move e7-e6. 13...a6
14.a4 Rb8, Bokelbrink – Hermesmann, Pinneberg 2007, 15.Qe2!?± Black’s
position is cramped and he can hardly organise any meaningful counterplay,
because the pawn-advance e7-e6 would lead to the weakening of the d6-
pawn.
6...Bxf3. Black exchanges immediately his bishop for the enemy knight,
which controls the e5-square. 7.Qxf3 Ne5 8.Bb5+. White preserves his
two-bishop advantage with this move.
 8...Nfd7 9.Qd1 a6 (9...c4. Black’s attempt to create counterplay is
doomed to failure, because his kingside has not been developed yet. 10.Na3
Rc8, Rainfray – Aronian, Lausanne 2003, 11.0-0!? a6 12.Bxd7+ Nxd7
13.Be3±) 10.Be2 Nf6 (10...b5, Gonzalez Garcia – Maslak, Dos Hermanas
2003, 11.a4!?±) 11.0-0 g6, Novosadova – Kanok, Czech Republic 2006,
12.Be3!? Black would lose a piece if he captures the pawn on e4, so before
playing Nd2, White manages to develop his bishop on e3. 12...Bg7
13.Nd2±
8...Ned7 9.0-0 g6 (9...a6 10.Be2 g6, Van der Vorst – Koster, Sas van Gent
1990, 11.c4!? Bg7 12.Nc3±) 10.Re1 Bg7 11.a4 0-0 12.Na3. On this square
White’s knight will prevent the organisation of Black’s counterplay on the
queenside. 12...Re8 13.Bf4 Nh5 14.Bg5± Tkachiev – Grachev, Moscow
2008. Black’s position is cramped and he will hardly find an active plan for
his actions.

6.d5!?
White occupies space immediately and now, he does not need to think
about the protection of the d4-square.
6...Ne7
 Black’s position would not be any better if he retreats his other knight to
another square. 6...Nb8 7.0-0 Be7 8.h3!? Now, White can develop his
knight on e3 without being afraid of the move Ng4. 8...Nbd7 9.Be3 Nf8
10.b4! b6 11.Nbd2 Ng6 12.bxc5 bxc5, Vajda – Marcetic, Bar 2005,
13.Qa4+!? Bd7 14.Bb5± The trade of the light-squared bishops is a
considerable achievement for White in positions with a similar pawn-
structure, since he leaves in this way his opponent with a “bad” bishop on
e7.

7.Bg5

7...Ng6

The move 7...Nd7 would be too slow. 8.c4 h6 9.Be3 Ng6 10.Nc3 Be7,
Rozentalis – Chekhov, Ashdod 2003, 11.0-0!? 0-0 12.a3±, followed by b2-
b4, beginning active actions on the queenside. Black will hardly manage to
organise counterplay on the kingside, since the pawn-advance f7-f5 is
impossible at the moment and he would have to lose too much time for its
preparation.
 7...a6. Black covers the b5-square, but weakens the b6-square. 8.a4 Ng6,
Hutchinson – Ermenkov, Calvia 2005, 9.a5!?± followed by Nbd2-c4-b6.

8.Bb5+ Bd7 9.Bxf6! gxf6

Now, Black must weaken his pawn-structure, since capturing with the
queen would lose his castling rights for him.
10.a4

10...a6

10...Bh6 11.Nfd2!± Tischbierek – Movsesian, Ohrid 2001. This is a

multi-purpose move. White not only prepares the transfer of his knight to
c4, but also opens a diagonal for his queen.
10...Bxb5. This exchange activates considerably White’s rook on a1.
11.axb5 Qd7, Galliano – Bates, Canterbury 2010, 12.Na3!? f5 13.Nc4!
fxe4 14.Nfd2±

11.Bxd7+ Qxd7 12.Nbd2 f5, Rizouk – Movsesian, Shenyang 2000.

Black undermines his opponent’s centre, but has not completed the
development of his pieces and has not evacuated his king away from the
centre. Still, he had no other choice, because he had to get rid of his
doubled f-pawns as quickly as possible. 13.exf5!? Qxf5 14.Nc4 0-0-0
15.Ne3 Qd7 16.Nd2 Kb8 17.Ndc4 f5 18.Nb6! Black was threatening to
oust the enemy knight on e3 with the move f5-f4, so White’s other knight
had to free the c4-square for it to retreat to. 18...Qf7 19.Qh5 f4 20.Nec4
Be7 21.0-0-0± Black’s bishop on b7 is “bad” because his pawns on c5, d6,
e5, f4 are placed on squares with the same colour as the bishop and impede
its mobility.

D3) 4...cxd4 5.cxd4

There has arisen a position like in variation C3, but instead of the move
Nc3, White has played Bd3. Black cannot make any use out of that.
5...Nc6

About 5...Nbd7 6.Nf3 e6 (6...e5 7.Nc3 – see 5...e5; 6...g6 7.Nc3 Bg7 8.0-
0 0-0 9.h3 – see variation C3) 7.Nc3 Be7 8.0-0 – see variation C2.
 5...e6 6.Nf3 a6 (6...Nc6 7.Nc3 – see variation C1; 6...Be7 7.Nc3 – see
variation C2) 7.Nc3 – see variation C2.

5...g6 6.Nf3 Bg7 (6...Nc6 7.h3 Bg7 8.Nc3 – see variation C3; 6...Bg4
7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Nb8, Lazovic – Sale, Porec 1998, 9.Qa4+ Bd7 10.Qb3±)
7.h3 Nc6 8.Nc3, or 7...0-0 8.Nc3, or 7...e5 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.0-0 Nc6 10.Nc3
0-0 11.Be3 – see variation C3.

5...e5 6.Nf3

The move 6...Nc6 enables White to occupy space with tempo. 7.d5 Nb8
(7...Ne7 8.0-0²) 8.h3 Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Nc3 Nbd7 11.Be3 Ne8, Novikova –
Ovsejevitsch, Korinthos 2000, 12.Rc1!?±
6...Nbd7 7.Nc3 Be7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Re1 a6 10.a4 b6 (Following 10...exd4
11.Nxd4 Nc5, Lindfeldt – Zoler, Golden Sands 2000, 12.Bc2!?±, the
simplest for White would be to attack the weak enemy pawn on d6.) 11.Bf1.
He is not in a hurry to advance d4-d5, but waits when Black will develop
his bishop on the b7-square. 11...Bb7 12.d5!? Rc8 13.Nd2 Ne8 14.Nc4±
Smagin – Ubilava, Oviedo 1993. He lacks space and the weakness on b6
would need permanent attention.
 6...Bg4 7.Qa4+!? (7.d5 Be7 8.0-0 – see 6...Be7) 7...Nfd7 8.Be3 Bxf3.
Black weakens his opponent’s pawn-structure, but later, White will be able
to use the g-file for an attack against the enemy king. 9.gxf3 Be7 10.Nc3 0-
0 11.0-0-0ƒ
6...Be7 7.0-0 Bg4 (7...Nbd7 8.Nc3 – see 6...Nbd7) 8.d5 0-0 9.Be3 Nbd7
10.h3 Bh5 11.Nbd2²
6...exd4. Black determines immediately the situation in the centre, but
now he would not have any compensation for his isolated pawn. 7.Nxd4

7...g6 8.Nc3 Bg7 9.0-0 0-0, Braun – Bosboom, Germany 2006, 10.Bg5!?
±
7...Be7. On this square Black’s bishop will impede his rook to exert
pressure against the enemy pawn on e4. 8.Nc3 0-0 9.0-0 Nc6 10.Nde2!?±,
followed by Nf4, thwarting Black’s pawn-advance d6-d5.
7...Nc6 8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Qc2!? Bb7 11.Nc3 0-0 12.Bf4 Nd7
(12...Qa5, Rozentalis – Kovalevskaya, Gausdal 2003, 13.b4!? Qh5
14.Rab1±) 13.Rad1. Black’s pieces are squeezed with the protection of his
pawns on c6 and d6. 13...Ne5 (He must play very carefully, because after
13...Qa5, White would have the energetic response 14.e5! Nxe5 15.Bxh7+
Kh8 16.b4 Qb6, Ferretti – Smirin, Bratto 1997, 17.Be4!?+–) 14.Be2±
Vasilevich – Kovalevskaya, Sochi 2004. Black has no compensation for his
pawn-weaknesses.

6.Nf3

6...Bg4
He exerts pressure against White’s centre and wishes to provoke the
pawn-advance d4-d5.

About 6...e5 7.d5 – see 5...e5.

6...e6 7.Nc3 – see variation C1.

6...g6 7.h3 Bg7 8.Nc3 – see variation C3.

7.d5 Bxf3

7...Ne5 8.Nxe5! dxe5 9.Qb3 Bd7 10.Qxb7± Schmittdiel – Yrjola,

Gausdal 1987. Black has no compensation for the pawn.
 8.Qxf3 Ne5 9.Bb5+ Ned7

9...Nfd7. After this move Black’s knight, remaining on e5, would soon
come under an attack after f2-f4. 10.Qd1 Rc8, Rytshagov – Zapolskis, Riga
1995, 11.Nc3!?±

10.Bg5

10...a6

10...Qa5+. Black lags in development and he should better refrain from

aggressive queen-sorties. 11.Nc3 a6 12.Bxf6 axb5 13.Bd4 b4 14.Ne2 b3+,
Kiik – Zapolskis, Espoo 1992, 15.Nc3!? Qa6 16.a4± Black’s untimely
queenside activity has only led to the appearance of new weaknesses in his
position.

11.Bxd7+ Nxd7 12.0-0 g6 13.Qc3! White prevents his opponent from the
possibility to develop comfortably his bishop on the g7-square. 13...Nf6
(The move 13...f6 weakens the e6-square. 14.Be3 Bg7 15.Nd2 0-0 16.Bd4±
Buturin – Sharapov, Rodatychi 2006) 14.Bxf6 exf6 15.Qb4 Qe7 16.Nd2²,
followed by Nc4, beginning a siege against Black’s weak d6-pawn,
Keitlinghaus – Votava, Lazne Bohdanec 1996.

D4) 4...g6 5.Nf3

5...Bg7
Black can hardly continue the game without playing this logical move.
About 5...cxd4 6.cxd4 – see variation D3.
5...Qc7 6.h3 Bg7 7.0-0 – see 5...Bg7.

5...Nc6 6.h3 Bg7 7.0-0, or 6...Qc7 7.0-0 Bg7 8.Be3 b6 9.Nbd2 0-0
10.Re1 – see 5...Bg7.

5...Bg4 6.Be3 Nc6 7.Nbd2!? Now, after an exchange on f3, White will be
able to capture with his knight, preserving his control over the d4-square.
7...Bg7 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Nxf3 cxd4 10.cxd4 0-0 11.0-0 d5 12.e5 Ne4 (12...Nd7
13.h4!‚) 13.a3± Meszaros – Sprecic, Neum 2003. White’s pawn on e5
restricts considerably the mobility of Black’s bishop on g7.

6.h3
 This is a good prophylactic move. Black does not have sufficient space,
so it would be useful for White to restrict the enemy bishop on c8,
depriving it of the practically only square on which it might become active
later – g4.

6...0-0
About 6...cxd4 7.cxd4 – see variation D3.
6...Nbd7 7.0-0 Qc7 (7...0-0 8.Be3 – see 6...0-0) 8.Be3 – see 6...Qc7.

6...Nc6 7.0-0 Nd7 (7...0-0 8.d5 – see 6...0-0; 7...Qc7 8.Be3 – see 6...Qc7;
7...cxd4 8.cxd4 0-0 9.Nc3 – see variation C3) 8.Bc2 0-0 9.d5 Nce5
(9...Na5 10.Qe2²) 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.f4 Nd7 12.a4 a6 13.Nd2 Rb8 14.a5²
Siepelt – Tran, Germany 2002. Black will hardly manage to organise any
counterplay, because the pawn-advance b7-b5 would lead to the appearance
of a weakness on a6 in his position.

6...Qc7 7.0-0
 7...0-0 8.Be3, or 7...Nfd7 8.Be3 0-0 9.Re1 – see 6...0-0.
7...Nc6 8.d5 Ne5 9.Nxe5 dxe5 10.c4± Schneider – Cornette, Graz 2010.
7...e5. This move weakens not only the d6-pawn, but also the d5-square.
8.Na3 a6, Ivekovic – Kosanski, Zagreb 2007, 9.dxe5!? dxe5 10.Nc4 Nc6
11.Bg5! Black’s knight on f6 protects the d5-square, so White plans to
exchange it with his bishop. 11...Be6 12.Ne3².
7...Nbd7 8.Be3 a6 (8...0-0 9.Nbd2 – see 6...0-0) 9.a4 b6 10.d5!?² Later,
White can choose a plan, connected with c3-c4 and Nc3, or Nbd2 and b2-
b4. He would maintain an advantage in both lines, since he would have
more space.

7.0-0
 We will deal now with: D4a) 7...Nc6 and D4b) 7...Qc7.

Black’s careless move 7...b6? weakens the h1-a8 diagonal. 8.e5! Ne8
9.dxc5± Battey – Pirisi, Budapest 2011.

7...Nbd7 8.Be3 b6 (8...Qc7 9.Nbd2 – see 7...Qc7; 8...a6 9.a4 – see 7...a6)
9.Nbd2 Bb7 (9...Qc7 10.Re1 – see 7...Qc7) 10.Re1 e5 (10...Qc7 11.a4 – see
7...Qc7) 11.d5 Nh5, Rahls – Rodriguez Vargas, Dresden 2004, 12.a4!?±

7...a6 8.Be3 Nbd7 (About 8...Qc7 9.Nbd2 – see 7...Qc7; 8...b6 9.Nbd2
e6, Rivas Pastor – Todorcevic, Mesa 1992, 10.b4!?±; 8...cxd4 9.cxd4 Nc6
10.Nc3 – see variation C3.) 9.a4 b6 10.Nbd2 Bb7 11.d5!? e6 12.c4 exd5
13.cxd5! White frees the c4-square for his knight. 13...Re8 14.Qc2±
Erenburg – Potapov, Alushta 2002.

7...d5 8.e5 Ne4 9.Qe2 cxd4 10.cxd4 Bf5, Godena – Tkachiev, Cannes
1999 (10...Nc6 11.Bxe4 dxe4 12.Qxe4 Bf5 13.Qh4² Froewis – Shengelia,
Feistritz an der Drau 2014. Black has a bishop-pair indeed, but this is not
sufficient to compensate his sacrificed pawn.) 11.Nc3!? Nxc3 12.bxc3² He
is incapable of exploiting the vulnerability of White’s c3-pawn, because his
bishop on g7 is too passive.

7...Nfd7 8.Be3 Nc6 (8...Qc7 9.Re1 – see 7...Qc7; 8...a6 9.d5±) 9.Re1 a6
10.Nbd2 b5 11.a4 Rb8 12.axb5 axb5 13.Bf1² Suarez Garcia – Manolache,
Gijon 2017.

7...Na6. Black develops voluntarily his knight at the edge of the board.
8.Re1

8...Qb6, Perez – Rodriguez Vila, Monte Grande 2016, 9.d5!? e6 10.c4±

8...Nd7, Handoko – Oll, Adelaide 1990, 9.d5!?±
8...Nc7, Logothetis – Itkis, Kusadasi 2006. The transfer of the knight to
the e6-square, where it would come under an attack after White’s pawn-
advance d4-d5, does not seem good for Black at all. 9.Bf4!? Ne6 10.Be3±
8...cxd4 9.cxd4 Nb4. Black’s knight will be unstable on this square and it
will soon need to retreat to c6. It could have gone there immediately,
though... (9...e5 10.Nc3 exd4 11.Nxd4 Nc5, Zelbel – Bernadskiy,
Stroebeck 2011, 12.Bg5!?± Black has no compensation for the vulnerability
of his pawn on d6.) 10.Bf1 d5 11.e5 Ne4 12.Nc3 Nxc3 (12...Bf5 13.Qb3
a5 14.g4! White ousts the enemy bishop from its active position. He can
afford to weaken the shelter of his king, because Black would be incapable
of exploiting that. 14...Bc8, Zagrebelny – Polzin, Dresden 1999, 15.Be3!?±)
13.bxc3 Nc6 14.Bd3 b6, Liang – Sethuraman, Caleta 2017. Black has
wasted too many tempi on manoeuvres with his knight, so White can play
here aggressively: 15.Ng5!?±, creating the rather unpleasant threats for
Black e5-e6 and. h3-h4-h5.

7...cxd4 8.cxd4

About 8...Nc6 9.Nc3, or 8...a6 9.Nc3, or 8...Nbd7 9.Nc3 – see variation

C3.
Following 8...e5, White can simply capture a pawn. 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Nxe5
Re8 11.Nf3± Ghader Pour – Raetsky, Abu Dhabi 2005.
8...d5. Black wishes to obtain an outpost for his knight at the centre of the
board, but now, his bishop on g7 would be severely restricted by his own
pawn on e5. 9.e5 Ne4 10.Re1 Bf5 (10...Nc6, De la Riva Aguado –
Komljenovic, Pamplona 1997, 11.Bxe4!? dxe4 12.Rxe4²) 11.Nc3. White is
not afraid to have a weakness on c3 in his position, because from that
square his pawn protects reliably his central pawn on d4.
 Following 11...Nc6 12.Nxe4 dxe4 13.Bxe4 Bxe4 14.Rxe4 Qd5, the
activity of Black’s pieces would be insufficient to obtain adequate
compensation for the sacrificed pawn, since his bishop on g7 is practically
isolated from the actions. 15.Qe2 f6. Black is trying to liven up his bishop
on g7, but weakens his pawn-structure in the process. 16.b3. White is
preparing the development of his bishop on b2 in order to protect his pawn
on e5. 16...fxe5 17.dxe5 Rad8 18.Bb2± Aronian – Shchekachev, Saint
Vincent 2005.
11...Nxc3 12.bxc3 Bxd3 (12...Qc8, Manca – Dydyshko, Moscow 1994,
13.Bxf5!? Qxf5 14.Qb3 Qd7 15.h4! Nc6 16.h5ƒ) 13.Qxd3 Nc6 14.h4!
This is the beginning of an attack for White! 14...h5. Black prevents the
further advance of the enemy h-pawn, but weakens the g6-square. (14...f6
15.h5!?‚) 15.e6! f5 16.Rb1 b6 17.Ng5 Rc8 18.Qf3 Na5 19.Nh3! From the
f4-square White’s knight will attack not only the enemy pawn on g6, but
also the d5-pawn. 19...Qc7 20.Nf4 Qxc3 21.Qxc3 Rxc3 22.Nxd5+–
Narciso Dublan – Fier, Barcelona 2009.

D4a) 7...Nc6 8.d5!?

 With this move White transposes to the King’s Indian Defence, or to the
Benoni Defence in good versions for him.
He can also play here 8.Be3, continuing in the spirit of the Alapin system.

8...Ne5
Black is reluctant to lose a tempo for the retreat of his knight to the edge
of the board and complies with the weakening of his pawn-structure.

8...Na5. The edge of the board is hardly the best place for Black’s knight.
9.Na3 b6. He is forced to lose a tempo to defend against b2-b4. 10.Bg5 h6
11.Bf4 e6, Delchev – Le Roux, Haguenau 2013, 12.Qd2!? exd5 13.exd5
Kh7 14.c4 Nb7 15.Nb5² Black will hardly manage to organise counterplay,
since White has more space and will have much better chances of winning
the fight for the opened e-file.

8...Nb8 9.Re1
 9...a6 10.a4 e5 11.Na3±
9...e6 10.c4 e5 11.Nc3± Barskij – Dydyshko, Polanica Zdroj 2000.
9...Nbd7 10.c4 Ne5, Thorhallsson – Kristjansson, Akureyri 2019,
11.Nxe5!? dxe5 12.Bg5 b6 13.Nc3± Black’s pawn on e5 restricts
considerably his own bishop on g7.
9...e5 10.a4!? White wishes to preserve the c4-square for his knight, from
where it would exert pressure against the enemy d6-pawn, and refrains from
the move c3-c4. 10...Nh5 11.Nbd2 Nf4 12.Bf1±, followed by Nc4. Black’s
knight on f4 is harmless for White, because Black’s other pieces cannot
support any active operations with it.
9...Na6 10.Bf4 Nc7 11.a4. White improves calmly his position, waiting
for his opponent to weaken the pawn on d6 and thus to create a target for
him to attack. 11...e6 (11...b6 12.Bc2!?±) 12.dxe6 Nxe6 13.Bh2 Nh5,
Vrencian – Berescu, Sovata 2018, 14.Bf1!? Nhf4 15.Na3±

9.Nxe5 dxe5 10.c4

 10...Ne8

Black’s knight is headed for the d6-square. It would be well placed there,
but its transfer would cost two tempi for Black and in the meantime White
will manage to prepare an attack against the c5-square.

10...Bd7 11.Nc3 Nh5 12.Re1± Skoberne – Manolache, Subotica 2008.

10...Nh5 11.Re1 Nf4 (Following 11...e6 12.Nc3 f5, Stefanopoulos –

Zaichik, Panormo 1998, White can continue to increase his pressure on the
queenside with the move 13.a4!?, because Black’s counterplay on the
kingside seems almost harmless. 13...exd5 14.cxd5 Qh4 15.exf5!? gxf5
16.Be2! It would be useful for White to clarify immediately the intentions
of Black’s knight. 16...Nf6 17.Bf1 Bd7 18.Qb3±) 12.Bf1 Qd6 13.Nc3 Bd7
14.a3 Rac8 15.Rb1 Qf6, Darban – Abdullaev, Lahijan 2005, 16.b4!?± Black
is attacking, but his bishop on g7 does not participate in it, restricted badly
by his own pawn on e5.
 10...e6 11.Nc3 exd5 12.Nxd5 Nxd5 13.cxd5² Carmaciu – Badea, Eforie
Nord 2009. Black has got rid of his doubled pawn, but now White has a
protected passed pawn.

11.Nc3 Nd6 12.Be3 b6 13.a3 f5

13...Bd7 14.b4 Rc8, Besseling – Haast, Netherlands 2011, 15.bxc5 bxc5

16.f3²

14.f3 f4 15.Bf2 Bd7 16.b4 Rc8, Moreno Ruiz – Adan Bermudez, Madrid
2012, 17.Qb3!?± and White has the rather unpleasant threat a3-a4-a5,
opening files on the queenside and forcing Black to begin defending,
because his kingside counterplay is obviously too slow.

D4b) 7...Qc7 8.Be3

White protects reliably the important central d4-square.
 8...b6

8...Rd8 9.Re1²

8...e5 9.Nbd2 Nh5 (about 9...b6 10.b4 – see 8...b6) 10.Re1 b6, Omori –
Shabalov, Vancouver 2012, 11.d5!? Nd7 12.a4 Rb8 13.Nc4±

8...c4. This decision is not easy to understand. Black abandons voluntarily

his pressure against the d4-square. 9.Bc2 a6 10.a4 Nc6 11.Nbd2 Na5
12.Nh4! White’s centre is completely safe now, so he can begin to prepare a
flank attack. 12...b5 13.f4 Bb7, Karpatchev – Varavin, Gausdal 1993,
14.d5!?±

8...Nbd7 9.Nbd2 e5 (about 9...a6 10.a4 – see 8...a6; 9...b6 10.Re1 – see
8...b6) 10.d5 Nh5, Giuntoli – Efimov, Livorno 2011, 11.Re1!? Nf4 12.Bf1±

Following 8...a6, the simplest for White would be to continue with 9.a4.
 9...Nbd7 10.Nbd2 b6 11.Qe2 Bb7 (11...e5 12.d5±) 12.d5 e6. Black is
trying to organise counterplay against the enemy pawn on d5, but after
13.dxe6! fxe6 14.Ng5, it becomes clear that he would have a serious
problem to protect his pawn-weakness on e6. 14...Rfe8 15.f4 Nh5 16.Qg4±
Naiditsch – Ramesa, Sibenik 2011.
9...cxd4 10.cxd4 Nc6 11.Qb3 e6 12.Nbd2. White does not place his
knight on c3, but wishes after Nc4 to exploit the weakness of the enemy
pawn on d6. 12...d5. Black prevents the appearance of the enemy knight on
c4, but enables his opponent to occupy additional space in the centre. 13.e5
Nd7, S.Zhigalko – Kupreichik, Minsk 2004, 14.Rfe1!?± White is preparing
to counter in advance his opponent’s undermining move f7-f6. Black can
hardly organise any counterplay without creating pawn-weaknesses in his
position.

8...Nfd7. Black opens the diagonal for his bishop on g7 and increases his
pressure against the d4-square. 9.Re1 Nc6 10.Nbd2
 10...Rb8, Tkachiev – Ju.Polgar, Almaty 2008, 11.a4!?±
10...a6 11.Nf1 b5 12.Qd2 Bb7, Matras – Zawadzka, Warsaw 2012,
13.Rac1!?±
After 10...e5, Badmatsyrenov – Smirnov, Irkutsk 2010, the simplest for
White would be to close the centre: 11.d5!? Ne7 12.a4²
10...b6 11.Rc1. It is difficult to see how Black can increase his pressure
against his opponent’s centre. So White can improve patiently the positions
of his pieces, maintaining the tension in the centre. 11...Bb7 12.Nf1±
Korneev – Weber, Hofheim 2015.

9.Nbd2
 9...Bb7

About 9...Nc6 10.Re1 Bb7 11.d5 – see 9...Bb7.

9...Nbd7 10.Re1. White is not in a hurry to play d4-d5, because it would

be much more favourable for him to close the centre when Black’s bishop
has occupied the b7-square. 10...e5 (10...Bb7 11.b4 – see 9...Bb7) 11.a4 a6
(11...Bb7 12.d5±) 12.Rc1 Bb7, Alekseev – Inarkiev, Rijeka 2010, 13.d5!?±
The centre has been closed and the actions are now focused on the flanks.
Here, if Black wishes to activate his bishop on b7, he would need to return
it back to the c8-square, which would lose precious time for him.
9...e5 10.b4!? This is a promising pawn-sacrifice for White for initiative.
10...exd4 11.cxd4 cxb4, Peredy – Horvath, Balatonbereny 1996, 12.Rc1
Qd7 (12...Qd8 13.Bg5 h6 14.Bxf6 Qxf6 15.e5 Qe6 16.d5 Qe7 17.e6! With
this pawn-sacrifice White begins active operations on the light squares.
17...fxe6 18.dxe6 Bxe6 19.Re1 Nd7 20.Rc6± with the idea Rxe6!+–) 13.e5
Nd5 14.Ne4 Nc3 (14...dxe5 15.Nxe5 Qe7 16.Bg5 f6 17.Rxc8! Rxc8
18.Qb3±) 15.Rxc3! bxc3 16.Nxd6© White has more than sufficient
compensation for the exchange-sacrifice.
 10.Re1 Nbd7

10...Nc6. Black’s knight will come under an attack on this square after
11.d5, for example: 11...Nb8 12.Bf4 Nbd7 13.a4±

11.b4!?N 11...c4. Black avoids the opening of files on the queenside, but
reduces his attack against the enemy centre. 12.Bc2 Rfe8 13.a4± Black has
no compensation for his opponent’s powerful pawn-centre.
 Chapter 7
1.e4 c5 2.c3 e6

Black is preparing d7-d5, after which there would arise transposition to

the French Defence.
3.d4
We will analyse in details now: A) 3...cxd4 and B) 3..d5.

About 3...b6 4.Nf3 – see 2...b6.

3...a6 4.Nf3 – see 2...a6.

3...Nc6 4.d5 – see Chapter 1, variation C.

3...Nf6 4.e5 (Naturally, White can simply maintain his positional

advantage with the move 4.Bd3, because he will have extra space to the end
of the game.) 4...Nd5 5.Bc4. Now everything practically transposes to
Chapters 16-17.

Besides the fact that we recommend after 2...Nf6 3.e5 Nd5, to White to
play at first Nf3 and not d4, here this is already irrelevant, since Black has
lost a tempo for the not so active move e7-e6.
About 5...d6 6.Nf3 – see Chapter 17.
5...Nb6 6.Bb3 cxd4 (6...d5 7.Nf3 – see Chapter 16, variation A) 7.cxd4
d6 (7...Nc6 8.Nf3 – see Chapter 16, variation A; 7...d5 8.Nf3 – see Chapter
16) 8.Qe2 Nc6 9.Nf3 – see Chapter 16, variation A.
5...cxd4 6.cxd4
 About 6...d6 7.Nf3 – see Chapter 17.
6...Nc6 7.Nf3 – see Chapter 16.
6...Nb6 7.Bb3 d6 (7...Nc6 8.Nf3 – see Chapter 16, variation A; 7...d5
8.exd6 Bxd6 9.Nf3 – see Chapter 16) 8.Qe2 Nc6 9.Nf3 – see Chapter 16,
variation A.
6...b6. Black has postponed the development of his bishop on b7 and
White exploits this immediately. 7.Bxd5 exd5 8.Nc3
 8...Bb7 9.Nh3±
8...d6 9.Nf3 dxe5 10.Nxe5. Black’s two-bishop advantage is not so
important here, because White has a great lead in development. 10...Be6
11.0-0 Nd7, Lyell – Kislik, Budapest 2009, 12.f4 (12.Nd3!?) 12...Nxe5
13.f5± Black’s king is stranded in the centre and he must play very
carefully not to come under a checkmating attack.
8...Bb4 9.Nge2. White delays the development of his knight to the f3-
square in order to have the possibility later to begin an attack against the
enemy king with his f-pawn. 9...0-0 (9...Bb7 10.Ng3 0-0 11.Qg4‚) 10.0-0
Bb7, Schulte – Haecker, Ueberlingen 2000, 11.f4±

A) 3...cxd4
This exchange seems to be premature.
4.cxd4
 One of the important nuances in the Alapin variation is that White’s
knight on b1 is deprived of the most natural c3-square for its development.
Now, this is not already the case, so this makes Black’s exchange on move
3 to be imprecise. Naturally, it would be too early for White to expect to
obtain an advantage after an indifferent play.

4...d5

About 4...a6 5.Nf3 – see Chapter 4.

4...Nc6 5.d5 – see Chapter 1, variation C.

4...d6 5.Nf3 – see Chapter 6, variation D.

4...Ne7 5.d5 d6 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.dxe6 fxe6 8.Nc3± Black has no

compensation for the vulnerability of his pawns on d6 and e6.

4...Bb4+ 5.Nc3 d5 (5...Ne7; 5...Nf6 6.Bd3 – see 4...Nf6) 6.e5 Ne7

(6...Nc6) 7.Bd3 Nbc6 8.a3!? White forces the enemy bishop to clarify its
intentions immediately. He is not in a hurry to develop his knight on g1,
because he wishes to preserve the opportunity to play Qg4 at an opportune
moment. 8...Bxc3+ (8...Ba5 9.Bc2±) 9.bxc3 Bd7 10.Qg4 Qc7, Muzychuk –
Ankerst, Slovenia 2010, 11.Ne2±

4...Nf6 5.Nc3

About 5...d6 6.Nf3 – see Chapter 6, variation D.

5...d5 6.e5 Ne4 (6...Nfd7 7.Qg4!? White exerts pressure against the pawn
on g7 with the idea to impede the development of Black’s kingside. 7...Nc6
8.Nf3±; 7...h5 8.Qf4 Be7 9.Nf3±; 7...f5 8.Qg3 Nc6 9.Be2 g6 10.Nf3±
Lachmann – Hellwig, Guetersloh 1952. Black’s position is cramped.) 7.Bd3
Bb4 8.Nge2 f5 9.f3 Nxc3 10.bxc3 Be7 11.g4! White begins an immediate
attack on the kingside. 11...fxg4 12.0-0! gxf3 (12...0-0 13.Qc2+–) 13.Rxf3±
White has more than sufficient compensation for the sacrificed pawn.
5...Bb4 6.Bd3
 6...d5?! Black does not choose the best moment for this pawn-advance.
7.e5 Nfd7 (Following 7...Ne4 8.Bxe4 dxe4, White will gradually besiege
and win the enemy pawn on e4, which has been isolated from the rest of his
forces. 9.Nge2 0-0 10.0-0 b6 11.Nxe4±) 8.Qg4± There has arisen on the
board a version of the French Defence, which is horribly disadvantageous
for Black. 8...Bxc3+? 9.bxc3. The dark squares are horribly weak in Black’s
camp and this cannot be compensated by the defects of White’s queenside
pawn-structure. 9...Qa5 10.Ne2 g6 11.h4 0-0 12.h5 f5 13.Qg3 1–0
Felegyhazi – Kovacs, Debrecen 1997.
Following 6...0-0, Black must consider all the time the possible standard
combinations connected with the bishop-sacrifice on the h7-square. 7.Nf3
d5 (7...Nc6? 8.e5 Nd5 9.Bxh7+ Kxh7 10.Ng5+ Kg8 11.Qh5+–) 8.e5 Ne4
(8...Nfd7? 9.Bxh7+–) 9.0-0!? This is a very promising pawn-sacrifice for
White. 9...Bxc3 (After 9...Nxc3 10.bxc3, Black cannot play 10...Bxc3?,
because following 11.Bxh7+! his king will be subjected to a checkmating
attack. 11...Kxh7 12.Ng5+–) 10.bxc3 Nxc3 11.Qc2 Ne4 12.Nd2©
Naturally, White refrains here from the immediate regaining of the
sacrificed pawn (Bxe4) and continues to attack. 12...f5 13.exf6 Nxf6
14.Nf3 Nc6 15.Ba3 Re8 16.Rfe1. White is eyeing the weakness on the e6-
square. 16...Bd7 17.Ng5. The activity of his pieces increases with every
move. 17...Ne4 18.Nxe4 Nxd4 19.Qb1 dxe4 20.Bxe4 Bc6 21.Bxh7+ Kh8
22.Be4± White has restored the material balance. Later, Black must watch
very carefully about his opponent’s attacking possibilities (Re3-h3), after
which his king might come quickly under a checkmating attack.
6...Nc6 7.Nge2

7...Qb6 8.e5 Nd5 9.0-0±

The move 7...d5?! would only increase Black’s problems. 8.e5 Nd7
(8...Ne4 9.Bxe4 dxe4 10.0-0± His weak pawn on e4 requires permanent
protection.) 9.0-0± f5 10.Nf4 Nf8, Kristjansson – Yurtseven, Rogaska
Slatina 2011, 11.Qh5+ g6. Black preserves the possibility to castle, but
weakens the dark squares. 12.Qh6±
7...0-0 8.0-0 d6 9.Bg5 h6 10.Bh4 g5. Black gets rid of the pin, but
weakens considerably the shelter of his king in the process. 11.Bg3 Nh5,
Gaujens – Philippart, ICCF 2009, 12.f4 Nxd4. He is trying to create tactical
complications in order to confuse his opponent, but the defects of Black’s
pawn-structure are something that he cannot already get rid of. 13.Nxd4
Nxg3 14.hxg3 Bc5 15.Bc4 b5 16.Bb3 Qb6 17.Nce2 e5 18.Kh2±
 5.e5

It would not be reasonable for White to enter a position from the French
Defence without the exchange of the pawns on d4 (In the variation 1.e4 c5
2.c3 e6 3.d4 d5 4.e5...), since Black’s position there would be quite
acceptable. After the exchange it would be already good for White, because
his knight on b1 would have access to the active c3-square.
5...Nc6

About 5...Bd7 6.Nf3 Qb6 7.Nc3 – see 5...Qb6.

5...Ne7 6.Nf3 Nec6?! (6...Nbc6 – see 5...Nc6) 7.Nc3±

5...Qb6. Without the exchange of the pawns Black plays usually like this
with the idea Bd7-b5 (or beginning with 5...Bd7 and then Qb6, Bb5). Now
however, this is problematic, because White has the possibility Nc3. 6.Nf3
Bd7 7.Nc3 Bb4 8.Bd2 Bxc3 9.bxc3!± Black cannot realise his plan,
connected with the trade of his light-squared bishop, because after Bb5,
White will play Rb1, followed by winning a piece after the move a2-a4.

5...Bb4+ 6.Nc3
 6...Nc6 7.Nf3 – see 5...Nc6.
6...Bxc3+?! 7.bxc3. White’s c3-pawn is a bit weak indeed, but this does
not compensate the vulnerability of the dark squares in Black’s camp.
7...Ne7 8.Bd3 0-0? He did not need to be so much in a hurry to castle (Even
after 8...Qc7 9.Bd2± White’s advantage would be doubtless.). 9.Qh5‚
6...Ne7 7.Bd3 (7.a3 Ba5 8.b4 Bb6 9.Nf3 Nf5 10.Na4²) 7...Nbc6 8.a3
Ba5 9.Nge2 0-0 10.Bc2‚ with the idea Qd3. Black’s position is very
unpleasant, since he would be incapable of organising the typical
counterplay in similar positions against White’s central pawns.

6.Nc3
 6...Nge7

About 6...a6 7.Nf3 Nge7 8.Bd3 – see 6...Nge7.

6...f6 7.Bd3!? White is preparing Qh5. Now, it would be too dangerous

for Black to accept the sacrifice of his opponent’s central pawn. 7...Nxd4
(7...fxe5? 8.Qh5+) 8.Qh5+ Kd7 9.Be3 Nc6 10.Nf3± He lags horribly in
development and his king, stranded at the centre of the board, is an
excellent target for White’s pieces.

6...Bd7 7.Nf3 a6. This is hardly the most useful move for Black. (about
7...Nge7 – see 6...Nge7; 7...Bb4 8.Bd3 – see 6...Bb4; 7...Qb6 8.a3 – see
6...Qb6) 8.Bd3 Qb6 (8...Nge7 9.0-0 – see 6...Nge7) 9.Bc2 Nge7 10.0-0
Rc8 (10...Ng6. Black’s knight will be misplaced on this square. 11.h4! Bb4
12.h5 Nge7, Dvorsky – Ujhelyi, Slovakia 2011, 13.Na4 Qa7 14.a3 Ba5
15.h6 g6 16.Nc5+–) 11.a3 Na7 12.Rb1 (12.Re1!? Nb5 13.Ne2±) 12...Nb5
13.Ne2 h6, Iuldachev – Kotronias, Mumbai 2003, 14.Be3± White has
protected reliably his pawn on d4 and can begin active actions on both sides
of the board.
 6...Bb4 7.Nf3

About 7...Bd7 8.Bd3 Nge7 9.0-0, or 7...h6 8.Bd3 Nge7 9.0-0 – see
7...Nge7.
7...f6 8.Bd3 fxe5 9.dxe5. White is not afraid of the move 9...d4, because
after 10.a3 Ba5 11.b4 dxc3 (11...Bc7? 12.Nb5 Nxe5? 13.Nxe5+– Ortel –
Csoke, Hungary 2007) 12.bxa5 Qxa5 13.Qe2±, he will have excellent
attacking prospects for the sacrificed pawn.
7...Nge7 8.Bd3
 8...0-0? 9.Bxh7+ Kxh7 10.Ng5 Kg6 11.h4+–
8...Bd7 9.0-0 a6 10.Ne2. Now White does not need to consider the
possible exchange on c3 any more. 10...Ng6 11.Be3 0-0, Braun – Thiel,
Staufenberg 2011, 12.Rc1 Rc8 13.Bb1±
8...Nf5 9.0-0 0-0 (Following 9...Nfxd4? 10.Nxd4 Nxd4 11.Qg4, White
will not only regain the sacrificed pawn but will also destroy completely his
opponent’s kingside. 11...Nc6 12.Qxg7 Rf8 13.Bh6+–) 10.a3 Be7, Furtado
– Pedroso, Vila Nova de Gaia 2016, 11.Bb1. White is preparing an attack
against the h7-square with the pawn-advance g2-g4, Qd3. 11...a6 12.g4
Nh4 13.Nxh4 Bxh4 14.Qd3 g6 15.Bh6 Re8 16.Qe3± He is perfectly ready
to bring his f-pawn into the attack.
8...Qb6. Black’s queen will be soon attacked here after Na4. 9.0-0 Bd7
(9...0-0?? 10.Bxh7+–; 9...Qd8 10.Ne2±; 9...Bxc3. Black is reluctant to
allow Na4, so he exchanges the important defender of his dark squares.
10.bxc3 0-0?? 11.Bxh7+–; 10...Bd7 11.Ng5 h6 12.Qh5 g6 13.Qh4±)
10.Na4 Qc7 (10...Qd8 11.a3±) 11.a3±
8...h6. This move looks too slow. 9.0-0
 9...a6 10.Ne2 Bd7 11.Nf4 0-0, Opolski – Stefanski, Poznan 1995, 12.a3
Ba5 13.Bb1 (13.Nh5!?) 13...f5 14.exf6 Rxf6 15.Qd3 g6 16.Ne5± The
position of Black’s king has been seriously weakened.
9...Nf5 10.Ne2. White transfers his knight to the kingside, so that it can
take part in the attack against Black’s king. 10...0-0 11.Bb1 Re8 12.g4 Nh4
13.Nf4±
9...0-0 10.a3 Ba5 (10...Bxc3 11.bxc3 f6 12.exf6 Rxf6 13.Bc2 Bd7
14.Qd3. The activity of White’s pieces increases with every move. 14...Ng6
15.Rb1 Qc7 16.Re1±) 11.Bc2 Bd7 12.Qd3 Ng6 13.Ne2±

6...Qb6 7.Nf3
 About 7...Nge7 – see 6...Nge7.
7...Bb4 8.Bd3 Bd7 (8...Nge7 – see 6...Bb4) 9.0-0!? White makes a
promising pawn-sacrifice here. 9...Nxd4 (9...Na5 10.Ng5 Be7 11.Qh5 g6,
Lenderman – Tate, ICC 2008, 12.Qf3±) 10.Nxd4 Qxd4 11.Nb5 Qxe5.
Black captures a second pawn, but opens files and diagonals for White’s
attacking pieces. (Still, even after 11...Qb6 12.Qg4, Black’s position would
have been tremendously difficult. 12...Bxb5 13.Bxb5+ Qxb5 14.Qxg7 Kd7
15.Qxh8 Qd3 16.Qg7+–; 12...Bf8 13.Be3 Qd8 14.Rac1 Bc6, Escher –
Daum, Berlin 1997, 15.Rxc6! bxc6 16.Rc1 Qd7 17.Qa4 Be7 18.Rxc6!
Black’s defence on the queenside has crumbled. 18...Kf8 19.Rc7+–)
12.Qg4 Ba5 13.Qa4 Bb6 14.Bf4. White develops with tempo his bishop to
an active position. Black has no time to develop his kingside pieces and to
evacuate his king away from the centre. 14...Qf6, Izquierdo – Van
Riemsdijk, Villa Gesell 1985, 15.Rae1 Qd8 (15...Bc6 16.Be5 Qg5 17.Nd6+
Kd7 18.Bb5 Ne7 19.Nxf7 Qg6 20.Nxh8 Rxh8 21.Qb4+–) 16.Qa3 Ne7
17.Nd6+ White deprives at first his opponent’s king of its castling rights
and then penetrates with his rooks inside his enemy camp. 17...Kf8 18.Nf5
exf5 19.Rxe7 Kg8 20.Rfe1±
 7...Bd7 8.a3. It would be useful for White to take the b4-square under
control.

About 8...Nge7 9.Na4 – see 6...Nge7.

8...f6 9.Bd3 fxe5 10.dxe5±
8...a6. Black frees the a7-square for the retreat of his queen. 9.Na4 Qa7
(The move 9...Qc7 seems to be inconsistent. 10.Bd3 b5 11.Nc3 b4 12.axb4
Nxb4 13.Be2. White should better avoid the exchange of his bishop, since
it exerts rather unpleasant pressure against the enemy pawn on a6. 13...h5
14.0-0± Antonio – Tamam, Dubai 1992) 10.b4 b6 11.Bd3± Nh6 12.Bxh6.
White destroys his opponent’s kingside pawn-structure. 12...gxh6 13.0-0
Rc8 14.Rc1± MacKintosh – Mera, ICCF 2010. Black cannot ensure a safe
haven for his king.
Following 8...Na5 9.b4 Nc4 10.Bxc4 dxc4, White can accomplish an
immediate pawn-break in the centre. 11.d5 (11.Be3!?) 11...exd5 12.Nxd5
Qd8 13.Nf4± Kauschmann – B.Schmidt, Germany 1986. The position has
been opened and Black will have a hard time in the future to neutralise the
activity of his opponent’s pieces.
8...Rc8 9.Na4 Qd8 (9...Qc7 10.Bd3 b5 11.Nc3 a6 12.0-0±; 11...b4
12.Ne2 bxa3 13.bxa3 Na5 14.0-0 Ne7, Josefsson – Krantz, Sweden 2005,
15.Nf4±, followed by Nh5, preventing the development of Black’s bishop
on f8.) 10.b4!? White not only occupies additional space on the queenside
but also prevents Na5-c4. 10...Nge7 (10...a5?! 11.b5 Na7 12.Rb1. Black’s
knight is obviously misplaced on the a7-square. 12...b6 13.Bd3±
Movsziszian – Diaz Rodriguez, Seville 2006) 11.Bd3 Nf5 12.Bb2 Be7
13.Nc5 Rc7 14.Rc1 0-0 15.0-0± Vitiugov – Anisimov, St Petersburg 2018.
Black’s pieces lack sufficient space.
7.Nf3

7...Nf5

7...Bd7 8.Bb5. White refrains from the more natural development of his
bishop to the d3-square. 8...Qb6 (8...Nf5 9.0-0 – see 7...Nf5) 9.0-0 Nxe5.
Black wins a pawn, but his lag in development increases. (9...Nf5 10.g4 –
see 7...Nf5) 10.Nxe5 Bxb5 11.Re1 Bc6 12.Qh5 g6 13.Qf3 f5, Matos –
Rodrigues, Odivelas 1995, 14.Bg5+–

7...Ng6. Black’s knight will only enhance the development of White’s

queenside initiative on this square. 8.h4 Bb4 9.h5 Nge7 10.h6 g6 11.a3
Bxc3+ 12.bxc3 Bd7 13.Bg5+– Hernandez Guerrero – Rosas, Mexico City
2002.

7...a6 8.Bd3

8...Ng6 9.h4. Black is faced now with a rather unpleasant choice. He must
either weaken the g5-square, or allow the further advance of his opponent’s
h-pawn. 9...h5 (9...Be7 10.h5 Nh4? 11.Nxh4 Bxh4 12.Qg4+– Hillenbrand
– Braun, Eppelborn 2008) 10.Bxg6 fxg6 11.Qd3 Ne7 12.Bg5± Marinic
Kragic – Bilus Gagic, Split 2001.
8...Bd7 9.0-0 b5 10.Be3 g6 11.Qd2 Nf5 12.Bxf5 gxf5 13.Bh6! White
plans to exchange the important defender of his opponent’s dark squares.
13...Bxh6 14.Qxh6 Qe7 15.Rac1± A.Kovacevic – Golubovic, Cetinje 1991.
8...Nf5 9.Bc2 Be7 (9...Bb4 10.0-0±) 10.0-0 h5. Black prevents g2-g4.
(10...0-0 11.g4!? Nh4 12.Nxh4 Bxh4 13.Qd3 g6 14.Bh6 Nb4 15.Qd2
Nxc2 16.Qxc2 Re8 17.f4‚; 11.a3 g6, Hurdzan – Markovic, Prague 2016,
12.Bxf5 exf5 13.Bh6 Re8 14.Qd2± followed by Bg5.) 11.a3 (After the
careless move 11.h3?, Black would play 11...g5„ Pinter – Mariotti,
Budapest 1975. The presence of White’s pawn on the h3-square would
facilitate considerably the organisation of Black’s attack on the kingside.)
11...g5 (11...g6 12.Ne2±) 12.Ne2 g4. This move weakens the f4-square and
one of White’s knights would be headed immediately there. Black did not
have any other active plan anyway... 13.Ne1 h4 14.Bxf5 exf5 15.Nd3 Be6
16.Ndf4±

7...Qb6 8.a3

8...a6 9.Bd3 Bd7 10.Be3 Na5, Winiwarter – Mittermayr, Austria 2006,

11.0-0 Rc8 12.Rb1 Nc4 13.Bc1. Black’s knight on c4 is very active indeed,
but it is difficult to see how he can maintain his initiative on the queenside.
13...Ng6 14.h4±
8...Bd7 9.Na4 Qc7 10.Bd3 Nf5 (10...Ng6 11.h4±) 11.Bxf5 exf5. Black’s
two-bishop advantage is not so important here, because the position is
rather closed. 12.0-0 Be6 (12...Be7 13.Bg5! 0-0 14.Rc1 Bxg5 15.Nxg5²
White deprives his opponent of his bishop-pair and obtains a stable
advantage. 15...h6 16.Nh3! His knight is headed for the f4-square. 16...Qd8
17.Nf4 Be6 18.Nc5± Karpatchev – Chapman, Paderborn 2012.) 13.b4 h6
14.Bd2 Be7 15.Rc1 a6 16.Ne1. White is preparing the standard transfer for
similar positions of his knight to the d3-square. 16...0-0 17.Nd3² Miton –
Vykouk, Slovakia 2018.
 8...Nf5 9.Na4. White ousts immediately the enemy queen from its active
position.

9...Qd8 10.h4!? h5, Karpatchev – Kopylov, Lueneburg 2013 (10...Be7

11.h5ƒ) 11.g3!? Be7 12.Bh3² Now, Black must be constantly on the alert
about the possibility Bg5.
9...Qa5+. This move only helps White to seize additional space on the
queenside. 10.b4 Qd8 11.Bb2 Be7 (11...Bd7 12.Nc5±) 12.Bd3 (It is
possible that his more precise move here is 12.Rc1!?, preventing b7-b6.
12...0-0 13.Bd3 f6 14.Bxf5 exf5 15.0-0±) 12...0-0 13.0-0 b6 14.g4 Nh6
15.h3 f6, Dzhumaev – Lumidao, Bangkok 2014, 16.exf6 Bxf6 17.Qc2²
White wins the pawn on h7.
9...Qc7 10.g4 (10.h4!?) 10...Nfe7 (10...Nh6 11.Rg1² Black will hardly
manage to activate his knight on h6; 10...Ncxd4 11.Nxd4 Qxe5+ 12.Ne2
Nh4 13.Qd3 d4 14.Qg3 Be7 15.Qxe5 Nf3+ 16.Kd1 Nxe5 17.Nxd4 0-0
18.Be3± De Paz Gonzalez – Armstrong, ICCF 2014) 11.Be3 h5 12.gxh5
Nf5 (12...Rxh5 13.Rc1²) 13.Rc1 Bd7 14.b4 a6 15.Bd3 Nxe3 16.fxe3±
Buchnicek – Skupin, Czech Republic 1995. White is waiting for his
opponent to castle queenside in order to begin an attack there after the move
Nc5.
8.Bb5

8...Bd7
About 8...a6 9.Ba4 Bd7 10.0-0 – see 8...Bd7.

8...Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Ne2 Bd7 11.Bd3²

9.0-0
 9...a6

9...Bb4 10.Bd3 Qa5 11.Bd2 (11.Ne2!?²) 11...Nfxd4 12.Nxd4 Nxd4

13.Qg4 Nc6, Zvjaginsev – Vovk, Moscow 2008, 14.Qxg7. White has not
only regained the sacrificed pawn, but has also weakened considerably
Black’s kingside. 14...0-0-0 15.a3 Rhg8 16.Qh6 Bf8 17.Qf4²

9...Qb6 10.g4 Nh6 (The move 10...Nfe7 would lead to a cramped

position for Black. 11.Be3 h5 12.g5 Nf5 13.Bd3 g6 14.Na4 Qa5 15.Bxf5
gxf5 16.Rc1²) 11.h3² Nxe5? Black lags in development, so he should better
avoid any tactical complications. 12.Nxe5 Bxb5, Sveshnikov – Kragelj,
Bled 2005, 13.Bxh6 f6 (13...gxh6 14.Qf3+–) 14.Re1 fxe5 15.Rxe5 gxh6
16.Nxd5+–
9...Be7 10.Bd3. White is threatening to win a pawn. 10...g6 11.Bxf5 gxf5
12.Bf4
 The move 12...a6 is too slow. 13.Rc1 Rg8 14.Qd2 Na5 15.Nxd5! After
this simple tactical strike Black’s position crumbles. 15...exd5 16.e6 Bc6
17.exf7+ Kxf7 18.Ne5+ Kf6 19.Rfe1+– Ni Hua – Pham, Vietnam 2014.
12...Qb6 13.Rb1 Rg8 14.Qd2. White is preparing Bg5. 14...Na5 15.Bg5!
Bxg5 16.Nxg5 Rg7 17.Nf3 0-0-0 18.Rfc1 Kb8 19.Ne2 Nc4 20.Qh6 Rg6
21.Qxh7 Rdg8 22.Nf4 Rg4 23.h3 R4g7 24.Qh6± Scherer – Dorner, ICCF
2009. Black has no compensation for the pawn whatsoever.
12...Na5 13.b3. White prevents the appearance of the enemy knight to the
c4-square. 13...Rc8 14.Rc1 Rg8 15.Qd2 b5 16.Ne2!? He is preparing the
transfer of his knight to h5. 16...b4 17.Ng3 Bb5 18.Rxc8 Qxc8 19.Rc1 Qd8
20.Nh5 Nc6 21.Nf6+! White sacrifices a pawn and begins a decisive attack
on the weakened dark squares. 21...Bxf6 22.exf6 Qb6 (22...Qxf6 23.Ne5
Nxe5 24.Bxe5+–) 23.Ne5+– Sandipan – Belezky, Germany 2014.

10.Ba4 Qb6 11.Ne2 Be7 12.a3 0-0

Following 12...Rc8, the simplest for White would be to return his bishop
to the b1-h7 diagonal. 13.Bc2 Na5, Smirin – Radjabov, Rishon Le Ziyyon
2006, 14.Nc3!? g6 15.Re1² Black will hardly manage to organise any
meaningful counterplay, since his pieces do not have sufficient space to
manoeuvre.

13.Bc2 Rac8
With the idea Nf5-h4.

14.g4

It also seems good for White to choose here 14.g3!? Na5 15.b4 Nc4
16.Nf4, creating the threat Bxf5.

14...Nh4 15.Nxh4 Bxh4, Vovk – Zinchenko, Cappelle-la-Grande 2008,

16.g5!? Now, Black must weaken the shelter of his king; otherwise, he
would lose his bishop on h4. 16...Qd8 17.Qd2 h6 18.gxh6 g6 19.Kh1 Kh7
20.Rg1ƒ

B) 3...d5 4.exd5 exd5

About 4...Qxd5 5.Nf3 – see 2...d5.

5.Nf3
 We will analyse now: B1) 5...c4, B2) 5...a6, B3) 5...Nf6, B4) 5...Nc6.

About 5...Bg4 6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.0-0 – see variation B4

5...Bd6 6.dxc5 Bxc5 7.Bb5+ Bd7 (7...Nc6 8.0-0 – see 5...Nc6) 8.Qxd5!?
(It is also possible for White to play here the calmer move 8.Bxd7+. He
does not accept the pawn-sacrifice and wishes at first to develop quickly his
pieces. 8...Qxd7 9.0-0 Ne7 10.Re1 0-0, Markun – Bajt, Ljubljana 2009,
11.Nbd2 Na6 12.Nb3 Bd6 13.Qd3² Black has no compensation for the
vulnerability of his isolated pawn on d5.) 8...Qe7+ 9.Be2 Nf6 10.Qd1 Nc6
(10...0-0 11.0-0²) 11.0-0 0-0-0 12.Nbd2 Rhe8, Ginzburg – Roca, Buenos
Aires 1993, 13.Bd3² Black’s pieces have been deployed actively indeed,
but he can hardly prove to have sufficient compensation for the pawn,
because White has no pawn-weaknesses in his position.

5...cxd4 6.Bb5+ Bd7 (6...Nc6 7.Nxd4 – see 5...Nc6) 7.Nxd4 (7.Bxd7+

Qxd7 8.0-0 Nf6 9.Nxd4²) 7...Be7 (7...Bd6? Moiseenko – Seeman,
Jyvaskyla 2017. The development of Black’s bishop to a more active
position is refuted by White with a help of simple tactics. 8.Nf5 Bxb5
9.Qxd5+–) 8.0-0² Nf6 9.Nf5! This move is energetic and strong! 9...Bxb5
10.Re1 Bd7 (If Black tries to keep his extra piece with the move 10...Nc6?,
then after 11.Nxg7+, his king will come under a crushing attack. 11...Kd7
12.a4 Bc4 13.b3 Ba6 14.b4 Bc4 15.Na3+–) 11.Nxe7 Be6 12.Nf5 0-0
13.Nd4² Black cannot create any active counterplay without his bishop on
e7, so he has no compensation for the vulnerability of his isolated pawn.

B1) 5...c4
Black occupies space, but creates a target for his opponent to attack. Now,
White obtains an advantage without any problems in several different ways.
6.b3 cxb3

Unfortunately for Black, he cannot preserve his pawn on c4 without

serious positional concessions. 6...b5? 7.a4 Qa5 8.Be2 Nf6 9.0-0 Be7
10.Ba3±

7.axb3

White plays only seldom a line, which is not so bad after all: 7.Bb5+!?
Bd7 8.Bxd7+ Nxd7 9.0-0² He does not need to be a in a hurry to regain the
pawn on b3, because after 9...bxa2? 10.Re1+ Be7 11.Rxa2, the pin on the e-
file would be very unpleasant for Black. 11...Ngf6 12.Ba3 Ne4 13.Bxe7
Qxe7 14.Nfd2 0-0 15.f3+–
 7...Bd6

About 7...Nc6 8.Bd3 Bd6 9.0-0 – see 7...Bd6.

7...Nf6 8.Bd3 Be7 (Following 8...Bg4, Zakharov – Sergienko, Moscow

1996, 9.h3 Bh5, White can exploit immediately the absence of Black’s
light-squared bishop from his queenside. 10.Bb5+ Nbd7 11.g4! Bg6 12.g5
Ne4 13.Ne5 Bf5 14.Qf3 Nd6 15.Ba3 Nxb5 16.Qxf5 Nxe5 17.Qxe5+.
White’s activity has born its fruits and Black loses a pawn without any
compensation. 17...Be7 18.Qxg7 Rf8 19.h4±) 9.0-0 0-0 (9...Bg4 10.Bg5 0-0
11.Nbd2 Nc6, Freudenberg – Bischof, Schopfenheim 1997, 12.h3 Bh5
13.Re1²) 10.Ne5 (White would maintain a slight edge after the move 10.h3,
preventing Bg4. 10...Nc6 11.Re1 h6 12.Bf4 Be6 13.Nbd2 Re8, Velikov –
Inkiov, Rijeka 2001, 14.Ne5²) 10...Nc6 (10...Nbd7 11.Qc2. Here, White
should better forget about his plan with f2-f4, because then Black, by
playing Ne4-Ndf6, would exploit successfully the weakness on the e4-
square. 11...Nxe5 12.dxe5 Ng4 13.Bf4²) 11.f4 (11.Nd2!? Qc7 12.Ndf3²)
11...Ne4 12.Bxe4 dxe4, Maciejewski – Dobosz, Bydgoszcz 1976, 13.Be3
f6 14.Nxc6 bxc6 15.f5² White deprives his opponent of the possibility to
fortify the pawn on e4 with the move f6-f5. Later, Black might have
problems with its protection.
8.Bd3 Ne7

About 8...Nc6 9.0-0 Nge7, or 8...Bg4 9.0-0 Ne7 10.Na3 – see 8...Ne7.

9.0-0

If White does not like his opponent’s plan, connected with the trade of the
light-squared bishops, he may prevent the move Bf5 with 9.Qc2!?, for
example: 9...Nbc6 10.0-0 Bg4 11.Nbd2 Rc8 (11...Bh5 12.Nh4!?²) 12.Qb1
Qd7 13.Re1 h6 14.h3 Be6, Ghaem Maghami – Kamsky, playchess. com
2006, 15.b4. Now, before playing Ne5, White ousts the enemy knight away
from the c6-square. 15...0-0 16.b5 Nd8 17.Ne5 Bxe5 18.Rxe5 Rxc3
19.Ba3± Black has won the pawn on c3 indeed, but this has not improved
much his position, since his pieces are not so active as their white
counterparts.

9...0-0
 9...Bg4?! Dolmatov – Lautier, Dortmund 1993. This pin of White’s knight
seems to be premature. 10.Na3 Nbc6 11.Nb5 Bb8 12.h3 Bh5 13.c4±

9...Nbc6 10.Re1 (10.Nh4!? White prevents Bf5. 10...0-0 11.Ra2 Ng6

12.Nf5 Bxf5 13.Bxf5 Qf6 14.Qh5± Finkel – Rinberg, Haifa 2002. White
has obtained the two-bishop advantage and the weakness of the pawn on d5
begins to hurt Black.).

10...0-0 11.Nbd2 (11.Nh4!?²) 11...Bf5 (11...Ng6 12.Nf1 h6 13.Ng3²

Gallagher – Nemet, Switzerland 1995) 12.Nf1 a6, Yudin – Kamsky, St
Petersburg 2017, 13.Be2!? White prevents the exchange of his bishop.
13...h6 (13...Ng6 14.Ne3²) 14.Ne3 Bh7 15.g3 b5 16.Nh4², followed by
Bf3, Ng4. White maintains powerful initiative.
10...Bg4 11.Nbd2 (11.Na3!?²) 11...Bh5 12.Nf1. White transfers his
knight to g3 in an attempt to avoid the pin. 12...f6 13.Ng3 Bxg3. Black
preserves the pin of the enemy knight on f3, but presents his opponent with
the two-bishop advantage. 14.hxg3 0-0, Antonio – Kamsky, Khanty-
Mansiysk 2009, 15.Ba3!? Re8 16.Ra2!? This transfer of the rook on the
second rank is quite typical for many openings. 16...Bf7 17.Rae2± White
not only has the two-bishop advantage, but his pawn-structure is more
flexible.

10.Na3!?

About 10.Re1 Nbc6 – see 9...Nbc6.

10.Nh4!? Black lags in development, so White wishes to begin an

immediate attack against his king with the move Qh5. 10...Nd7 11.Bg5,
Zubarev – Kim, Pardubice 2005, 11...h6 12.Qh5 f6²

10...Nbc6 11.Nh4

11.Re1 Ng6 (11...h6, Zuckerman – Tarjan, Cleveland 1975, 12.Nh4 a6

13.Qh5‚) 12.Bg5 f6, Bortnyk – Harutjunyan, Yerevan 2016, 13.Bd2²
White has provoked a weakening of the e6-square with the help of
manoeuvres of his bishop. He maintains a slight but stable advantage.

11...Ng6
 11...a6. Black fails to cover the b5-square against the penetration of the
enemy knight, because his rook on a8 is not protected. 12.Nb5 Bb8 13.Qh5
g6 14.Qh6ƒ

12.Nf5 Bf4

12...Bb8?! 13.Qh5±

13.Ne3

13.Bxf4 Nxf4 14.Qg4 Ng6 15.Rfe1² White has a superior pawn-structure

and more actively deployed pieces.

13...Be6 14.Nac2 Na5 15.Nb4 b6 16.Bc2. White is preparing Qd3.

16...Rc8 17.Qd3 Nc6 18.Nxc6 Rxc6 19.Ba3 Re8 20.Rae1² His pawn on c3
is a bit weak, but this is not so important, because Black’s isolated pawn on
d5 becomes weaker with every exchange of a piece.

B2) 5...a6
Black prevents Bb5.
6.Bd3
White does not exchange immediately on c5 and waits until Black would
develop his bishop on f8.
 6...c4

Abou6...Nf6 7.0-0 Be7 (7...c4 8.Bc2 – see 6...c4) 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.Re1 –
see 6...Bd6.

6...Nc6 7.0-0 (There arises a simpler position for White to play after
7.dxc5!? Bxc5. Black’s bishop on f8 has captured on c5 in one move, but he
still does not have clear equality. 8.0-0 Nf6 9.Re1+ Be6 10.Nbd2 0-0
11.Nb3 Bd6 12.Bg5 h6 13.Bh4²) 7...cxd4 (7...Bd6 8.Re1+ Nge7 9.dxc5
Bxc5 10.Nbd2 0-0 11.Nb3 Bd6 12.Be3 – see 6...Bd6) 8.Re1+ Be7
 9.Nxd4. White wishes to exchange his knight on f3, so that he would not
worry later about its eventual pin after Вg4. 9...Nf6 10.Qe2 Nxd4 11.cxd4
Be6 12.f4 g6. Black defends against f4-f5, but weakens his kingside.
13.Nc3 Qd7, Rombaldoni – Laketic, Bologna 2008 (13...0-0 14.f5 gxf5
15.Bxf5 Bxf5 16.Qxe7 Qxe7 17.Rxe7 Rfe8 18.Rxe8+ Rxe8 19.Bh6² White
has a stable advantage in this endgame thanks to his superior pawn-
structure.) 14.Bd2 0-0 15.f5 gxf5 16.Bxf5 Bxf5 17.Qxe7 Qxe7 18.Rxe7
Rfe8 19.Rxe8+ Rxe8 20.Rf1 Ne4 21.Rxf5 Nxd2 22.Kf2± There have been
numerous exchanges on the board, but White’s pieces are much more active
than their counterparts, moreover that Black has problems with the
protection of his pawn on d5.
9.cxd4 Nf6 10.Ne5 (10.Nc3 0-0 11.h3 h6 12.Bf4 Be6 13.Qd2 Re8,
Korneev – Paunovic, Elgoibar 2003, 14.Re2 Bd6 15.Rae1²) 10...0-0 (Black
cannot solve his defensive problems with the line: 10...Nxd4 11.Qa4+ Nc6
12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.Qxc6+ Bd7, Reichert – Thier, Gerlingen 2007, 14.Rxe7+!
White sacrifices the exchange and prevents his opponent’s castling.
14...Kxe7 15.Qc5+ Ke8 16.Nc3 d4 17.Qxd4 Be6 18.Qa4+ Bd7 19.Qf4±
Black’s king is stranded in the centre and is an excellent target for an attack
by White’s pieces.) 11.Nc3 Nxd4 12.Bxh7+ Nxh7 13.Qxd4 Be6 14.Be3
Bf6 15.Qf4², followed by Rad1, with powerful pressure against the pawn
on d5.

6...Bd6 7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.0-0

8...Ne7 9.Nbd2 Nbc6 10.Nb3 Bd6 11.Re1 0-0 12.Be3 (12.Bxh7+? This
standard bishop-sacrifice would not work in this position, because later
Black will manage to protect his h7-square with the move Bf5. 12...Kxh7
13.Ng5+ Kg8 14.Qh5 Bf5–+ Gaponenko – Vasilevich, Beijing 2008.)
12...Ng6, Emms – Van de Griendt, England 2012, 13.h3²
8...Nf6. Black’s knight is much more actively placed here than on e7, but
after 9.Re1+ Be6, his bishop on e6 will be soon attacked by White’s pieces
(It would be too passive for Black to choose here 9...Be7 10.Bg5 0-0
11.Nbd2 Nc6 12.h3² He cannot get rid of his isolated pawn with the move
12...d4?!, since after 13.cxd4 Nxd4? 14.Rxe7 Nxf3+ 15.Qxf3 Qxe7
16.Ne4+– White’s attack would be decisive.). 10.Nbd2. He transfers his
knight to the centre of the board in order to attack later the enemy bishop on
e6. 10...0-0 11.Nb3 Bd6 12.Nbd4 Re8 13.Nxe6 fxe6 14.c4! White has a
powerful bishop-pair, so he should try to open the position. 14...Bb4 15.Bd2
Nc6 16.Rc1 Qd6 17.a3 Bxd2. Black deprives his opponent of his two-
bishop advantage, but his pawn on e6 is so weak that he fails to equalise
completely. 18.Qxd2 Rad8 19.Qc3² Richter – Zimmermann, ICCF 2014.

7.Bc2

7...Bd6
About 7...Bg4 8.0-0 Bd6 (8...Be7 9.Nbd2 Nf6 10.Re1 – see 7...Nf6) 9.b3
– see 7...Bd6.

7...Nf6 8.0-0 Be7 9.Re1 Bg4 (9...0-0 10.Ne5 Nfd7. White’s knight on e5
is very powerful so Black’s desire to trade it is easily understandable.
11.Ng4 Nc6 12.Qf3 Nf6 13.Nxf6+ Bxf6 14.Nd2 Ne7 15.Nf1², followed
by Ng3-h5, or Bf4, Ne3. White has excellent attacking prospects, while
Black’s pieces are squeezed with the protection of the pawn on d5.)
10.Nbd2. White wishes to get rid of the pin of his knight on f3 with Nf1-
g3, h2-h3. 10...0-0 11.Nf1 Nc6 12.Ng3 Re8 13.h3 Be6, Socko – Paehtz,
Monaco 2017, 14.Bf4 Nd7 15.Nh2 Bg5 16.Nh5 g6 17.Qd2 Bxf4 18.Nxf4±

7...Nc6 8.0-0 Nf6 (8...Bd6 9.b3 – see 7...Bd6) 9.Re1+ Be7, Karalkin –
Pridorozhni, Sochi 2019, 10.Nbd2 0-0 11.Nf1 Qc7 12.Bg5 h6 13.Bh4 Be6
14.b4 (It is also possible for White to play here 14.Qd2, delaying for a
while the opening of a second front. 14...Rae8 15.h3²) 14...cxb3 15.axb3
Rac8 16.Rc1 Rfe8 17.h3² White’s game is much freer.

8.0-0

8...Ne7

8...Nc6 9.b3 cxb3 10.axb3 Nge7 11.Re1 0-0 12.Nbd2 Bf5 13.Nf1 Rc8,
Karthikeyan – Saptarshi, New Delhi 2020 (13...Bxc2 14.Qxc2 Rc8 15.Bd2
Qd7 16.Ng3 Rfe8 17.Qd3 Bb8 18.Ng5! Ng6 19.Nf5 Rxe1+ 20.Rxe1±
Klovans – Efimov, Geneve 1992. White’s knights are very active.) 14.Ne3
Bxc2 15.Qxc2 Re8 (15...Bf4 16.Nf1 Bxc1 17.Raxc1²) 16.g3!? He prevents
Bd6-f4xe3. 16...Qd7 17.Bd2² White’s knight on e3 exerts powerful
pressure against the enemy d5-pawn.

8...Bg4 9.Re1+ Ne7 10.Nbd2 Nbc6 (10...0-0? 11.Bxh7+! Kh8 12.Bc2±

Ertel – Bistrikova, St Petersburg 2006) 11.Nf1 h6 (After 11...Qc7 12.Ne3
Be6, Buksa – Karthik, Budapest 2017, White must play immediately
13.b3!; otherwise, Black would manage to castle queenside. 13...cxb3
14.axb3 h6 15.g3 0-0 16.Nh4 Qd7 17.Qd3 g6 18.f4 f5. Black should not
allow the pawn-advance f4-f5. Now however, besides the vulnerable d5-
pawn, the e5-square would be horribly weak in his camp. 19.Bd2 Kg7
20.Re2 Rf6 21.Nf3±) 12.Ne3. White’s threat Nxd5 prevents Black from
preserving the pin of the enemy knight. 12...Be6 13.Nh4 Qc7 14.Nhf5!
Nxf5 (14...Bxh2+ 15.Kh1. White is threatening to trap the enemy bishop
on h2 and Black fails to preserve his extra material. 15...Bf4 16.Nxg7+
Kd7 17.Qf3±) 15.Nxf5 Bf8 16.b3! Black has problems to castle kingside,
so White is preparing in advance against the possibility – 0-0-0. 16...0-0-0
17.bxc4 dxc4, Remizov – Tologontegin, Cheliabinsk 2019, 18.Qf3 Bd5
19.Be4 Bxe4 20.Rxe4± The placement of Black’s king on the queenside
seems to be very unsafe.

9.Re1

About 9.b3 cxb3 10.axb3 Nbc6 11.Re1 – see 8...Nc6.

It also seems good for White to play here 9.Ne5 with the idea Qf3. 9...0-0
10.Qh5. It is useful for him to provoke a weakening of the shelter of
Black’s monarch. 10...g6 11.Qf3 Bxe5 12.dxe5 Bf5 13.Bxf5 Nxf5 14.Rd1
Nc6 15.Rxd5 Qe7 16.Bf4 Rad8 17.Na3 b5 18.Rxd8 Nxd8 19.Nc2²
Potapov – Grachev, Moscow 2019. Black’s compensation for the pawn is
insufficient.

9...0-0 10.Nh4

There arises a more complicated game after 10.Bg5, provoking the

advance of the enemy f-pawn. 10...f6 11.Bh4 Nbc6 12.Bg3 Bf5 13.Nbd2
Qd7 14.Nf1 Rae8 15.Bxd6 Qxd6, Goryachkina – Grachev, Sochi 2019,
16.Ne3 Bg6 17.Nh4 Bxc2 18.Qxc2. The position has been simplified
indeed, but Black will hardly manage to equalise due to the vulnerability of
the e6-square. 18...b5 19.g3 a5 20.Nhg2 b4 21.Re2 Qd7 22.Rae1ƒ
 10...Ng6

11.Nf5 Bc7 12.Nd2 Re8 13.Rxe8+ Qxe8 14.Nf1 Nd7 15.Qf3² White is
transferring his pieces to the kingside. Now, it would not work for Black to
play 15...Qe1? in view of 16.Nxg7+–

B3) 5...Nf6 6.Bb5+

 6...Bd7

About 6...Nc6 7.0-0 – see 5...Nc6.

Following 6...Nbd7?!, Black will have difficulties with the development

of his pieces and the protection of his pawn on c5. 7.0-0 Be7 (7...a6 8.Re1+
Be7 9.Bxd7+ Bxd7 10.dxc5 0-0 11.b4 Bg4, Diaz Carias – Calvo Minguez,
Buenos Aires 1978, 12.Be3 a5 13.Nbd2± Black does not have sufficient
compensation for the pawn.) 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.Re1+ Be7 (9...Kf8 10.b4 Bd6
11.Nbd2±) 10.Qe2. This is the point! Now, Black fails to castle. 10...a6
11.Bf4 (White can maintain a considerable advantage after the calmer line:
11.Ba4!? Kf8 12.h3 Nc5 13.Bc2±) 11...Ne4 (11...axb5? 12.Bc7+–)
12.Bxd7+ Bxd7 13.Nbd2 f5. Black must weaken the e5-square now in
order to neutralise the pressure of the enemy pieces on the e-file. 14.Nd4 0-
0 15.f3 Bd6 16.Bxd6 Nxd6 17.Qe5± His material losses are unavoidable
now.

7.Bxd7+ Nbxd7
 It seems less natural for Black to play here 7...Qxd7, because his queen
would come under an attack after Ne5. 8.0-0 Be7 9.Ne5² Qe6? Kholmov –
Korsunsky, Daugavpils 1978. Black loses valuable time. 10.Re1 Qb6
11.dxc5 Qxc5 12.Bf4± He has lost too many tempi on moves with his
queen and will end up in a position without any good prospects.

8.0-0 Be7 9.dxc5 Nxc5 10.Be3

There has arisen a typical middle game position with an isolated queen’s
pawn for Black. The trade of the bishops has turned out to be in favour of
White, because Black will have great problems to organise any active
counterplay with every exchange of a piece. The vulnerability of the d5-
pawn will hurt him even more when the endgame approaches.
10...0-0 11.Nbd2 Re8

Following 11...Ng4 12.Bd4 Ne6 13.Nb3 a5 14.a4 Ra6, Reza –

Cukrowski, Suwalki 2019, 15.Re1 Re8 16.Qd3, on top of all Black’s
problems, he will have to worry about the vulnerability of the b5-square.
16...Qc7 17.Qb5²
 11...Qd7 12.Nb3 Nce4, Alekseev – Lintchevski, St Petersburg 2015,
13.Ne5!? With this move White frees the f3-square for his queen and also
wishes to oust the enemy queen away from the h3-c8 diagonal, so that later
he can occupy the f5-outpost with his knight. 13...Qc7 14.Nd3 Bd6 15.h3
Rfe8 16.Nd4 a6 17.Nf5 Bf8 18.Qf3² White has a superior pawn-structure
and more actively deployed pieces.

12.Qc2!?

Following 12.Nb3 Nce4, there would arise a position from the French
Defence: 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4. exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 Nf6 6.Bb5+ Bd7
7.Bxd7+ Nbxd7 8.0-0 Be7 9.dxc5 Nxc5 10.Nb3 Nce4 11.c3 0-0 12.Be3
Re8, therefore, from purely practical point of view, White should better
avoid this opening transformation.

12...Qc7, Kasparov – Demaria, Cordoba 1992, 13.Rfe1!? White frees the

f1-square for his knight. 13...Ng4 14.Nf1 Ne6 15.Rad1 Rad8 16.h3²
Black’s pieces have failed to come to the assistance of his knight on g4 and
now, he will have to defend a rather unpleasant position with an isolated
pawn.
B4) 5...Nc6 6.Bb5

We will analyse now: B4a) 6...Nf6 and B4b) 6...Bd6.

 6...Bd7 7.0-0 Bd6 (Following 7...Nf6 8.Re1+ Be7 9.dxc5, Black would
end up a pawn down. 9...0-0 10.Be3 Bg4, Gjuran – Gheng, Miercurea Ciuc
2016, 11.Nbd2±) 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.Qxd5. He has no compensation for the
sacrificed pawn, since he lags in development in comparison to White.
9...Qb6 10.Ne5 Be6 (10...0-0-0?? Raykov – Dobrev, Sofia 2010, 11.Nc4
Qxb5 12.Nd6+) 11.Bxc6+ bxc6 12.Qxc6+ Qxc6 13.Nxc6± Black’s bishop-
pair can compensate one missing pawn in this open position, but not two.

6...c4. Black occupies space on the queenside, but White can easily get rid
of the enemy pawn on c4 with the move b2-b3. 7.Qe2+ Be7, Xie George
Wendi – Ly Moulthun, Queenstown 2012, 8.0-0 Nf6 9.Re1 Be6 10.b3 cxb3
11.axb3 0-0 12.Ng5. White wins a pawn, because the retreat of Black’s
bishop from the e6-square would lead to the loss of a piece for him.
12...Bd6 13.Nxe6 fxe6 14.Qxe6+ Kh8 15.Be3±

6...Qb6 7.Qe2+ Be7 8.dxc5 Qxc5, Rahman – V.Vladimirov, Tashkent

2014, 9.0-0 Nf6 10.Re1. White doubles his major pieces on the e-file and
thus prevents his opponent from castling. 10...Be6 11.Nd4 0-0. Black
evacuates his king away from the centre, but does not obtain any
compensation for the pawn. 12.Nxe6 fxe6 13.Qxe6+ Kh8 14.Bxc6 Bd6
15.Bd7 Nxd7 16.Be3 Qc7 17.Qh3±

6...Be6 7.0-0 Nf6 (7...Qb6. Black is preparing to castle queenside, but his
king would be placed rather unsafely there. 8.Qe2 Nf6 9.Ng5 0-0-0
10.Nxe6 Re8 11.dxc5 Bxc5 12.b4 Rxe6 13.bxc5+– Pilgaard – Karttunen,
Budapest 2002) 8.Nbd2 cxd4 9.Nxd4 Qd7 10.Qa4 Rc8 11.N2b3 Ne4
12.Re1 Be7 13.Be3 0-0 14.f3. Now, before playing Na5, White ousts the
enemy knight away from the centre in order to deprive Black of the
possibility to play Nc5. 14...Nf6 15.Na5± He cannot avoid the loss of a
pawn.
 About 6...cxd4 7.Nxd4 Bd7 8.0-0 Bd6 (8...Nf6 9.Re1+ Be7 10.Qe2 or
8...Be7 9.Re1 Nf6 10.Qe2 – see 6...Nf6).

White would maintain some edge after the move 9.c4, but if Black
defends correctly the position would be considerably simplified. 9...Nge7
(It would be worse for Black to choose here 9...dxc4 10.Nxc6 Bxc6
11.Bxc6+ bxc6 12.Qg4 Qf6, Hernandez – Murillo Tsijli, San Jose 1994,
13.Nd2± He cannot play 13...c3??, because of 14.Ne4 Qe5 15.Nxd6+
Qxd6 16.Qxg7+–) 10.cxd5 Nxd5 11.Re1+ Nde7 12.Nxc6 Bxc6 13.Bxc6+
bxc6 14.Nd2 0-0 15.Qc2² Pospisil – Keuter, ICCF 2013. White has a
superior pawn-structure, but breaking Black’s position would not be an easy
task for him at all.
9.Re1+ Nge7 10.Be3 0-0 11.Nd2 a6 12.Bf1 (12.Bd3!? Now, White can
develop his queen to the c2-square with tempo. 12...Re8 13.Qc2 h6
14.N2f3 Qc7 15.h3²) 12...Ne5 13.Bf4. White plans to trade the dark-
squared bishops in order to deprive his opponent of any possible
counterplay. 13...N7g6 14.Bg3 Re8, Tiviakov – Kalinitschew, Dieren 2004,
15.N2f3 Qc7 16.Nxe5 Bxe5 17.Qb3 Bc6 18.Re2 Bxg3 19.hxg3 Rxe2
20.Bxe2 Rd8 21.Nxc6 Qxc6 22.Rd1± Black has a weakness on d5,
moreover that in this position White’s bishop would be stronger than
Black’s knight.

6...Bg4 7.0-0

After 7...cxd4, White has the powerful argument 8.Qa4. He exerts

pressure on the a4-e8 diagonal and forces the enemy bishop on g4 to retreat
back into his own camp 8...Bd7 9.Re1+ Be7 10.Bg5. White continues to
increase his pressure. (It would be also interesting for him to choose here
10.Nxd4!? Nxd4 11.cxd4 Nf6 12.Nc3±) 10...Qb6?! 11.Nxd4, Mihalko –
Gara, Hungary 2005, 11...a6 (11...h6 12.Bf4±) 12.Nd2 h6 13.Bf4. White is
threatening Bd6. 13...Rd8 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.b4± Black’s king is stranded in
the centre and his queenside pawn-structure has been compromised.
7...Bd6 8.c4!? White is better prepared here for the opening of the game,
because he has already castled. (8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.Qa4 – see 6...Bd6) 8...Nge7
9.cxd5 Nxd5 10.dxc5 Bxc5 11.Qa4 Bxf3 12.Bxc6+ bxc6 13.Qxc6+ Kf8
14.Qxc5+ Kg8 15.gxf3 Rc8 16.Qd4 Rxc1. Black regains here the sacrificed
piece with the help of a tactical strike indeed, but he ends up a pawn down
anyway. 17.h4 Rxf1+ 18.Kxf1±
 7...Nf6 8.Bg5 Be7 9.dxc5 0-0 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.Nbd2 d4! Black has the
two bishop advantage, so he must strive to open the position. (After
11...Qe7, White’s advantage would increase. 12.Nb3 Qe4, Mroziak –
Watorek, Krakow 2014, 13.Be2±) 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.cxd4 Bxd4 14.Qc2²
Black’s two-bishop advantage cannot compensate fully his missing pawn.

B4a) 6...Nf6
Black’s knight is more active here than on the e7-square, but would soon
come under a very unpleasant pin.
7.0-0

7...Be7

About 7...Bd6 8.dxc5 – see 7...Be7.

7...cxd4 8.Nxd4 (about 8.Qe2+ Be7 9.Nxd4 Bd7 10.Re1 – see 8.Nxd4)
8...Bd7 9.Re1+ Be7 10.Qe2 Nxd4 11.Bxd7+ Qxd7 12.cxd4 Rc8, Lautier –
Ljubojevic, Monte Carlo 1998, 13.Bd2!? White is threatening to play Bb4
and protects his rook on e1 in the process. 13...Rc6 14.Qe5 Qd8 (14...Re6
15.Qb8+ Bd8 16.Qxa7²) 15.Nc3 Re6 16.Qg3 0-0 17.Rxe6 fxe6 18.Re1
Qb6 19.Qe3² Black will be doomed to a long and laborious defence due to
his weak pawn on e6.

8.dxc5 Bxc5

Black should better regain immediately the pawn on c5, because after
8...0-0 9.Be3, he would have difficulties to do that.

9...a5 10.Nbd2 Ne4 11.Nxe4 dxe4 12.Nd4±

9...Bg4 10.Nbd2 Qc7 11.b4 Ne4 12.Qc2 f5 13.Bd4± Tkachiev –
Massoni, Ajaccio 2007.
9...Ne4 10.Nd4 (It is also good for White to play here 10.Bxc6 bxc6
11.Nd4 Bd7 12.b4 f5 13.Qc1 Bf6, Acevedo – Reyes Najera, San Salvador
1998, 14.f3 Ng5 15.a4±) 10...Bd7 (10...Ne5, Gavrilov – Andres Gonzalez,
Mondariz 2006, 11.b4± Ng4 12.Bf4 g5 13.Bc1 Nexf2 14.Rxf2 Nxf2
15.Kxf2 f5 16.Kg1+– White’s two knights will be much stronger than
Black’s rook in this middle game.) 11.b4 a5 12.a3²

9.Bg5
 9...Be6
Now, after an exchange on f6, Black can capture with his queen, without
being afraid of the loss of his pawn on d5.

9...0-0 10.Bxf6 Qxf6 11.Qxd5 Bb6. Black’s bishops are very powerful,
but he is still a pawn down... 12.Nbd2 Rd8, Rublevsky – Timofeev, Sochi
2017, 13.Qe4 Bf5 14.Qf4²

9...Be7 10.Nbd2 0-0 11.Nb3. White increases his control over the
strategically important d4-square. 11...h6 12.Bh4 Bg4, Berglitz – Gayson,
Sunningdale 2008, 13.Re1 Re8 14.h3 Bxf3 (Unfortunately for Black, he
cannot preserve his powerful light-squared bishop, because the move
14...Bh5?!, would lose a pawn for him. 15.Bxf6 Bxf6 16.Rxe8+ Qxe8
17.Qxd5±) 15.Qxf3 Ne4 16.Bxe7 Rxe7 17.Rad1² The exchange of two
couples of minor pieces has turned out to be in favour of White and as the
endgame approaches the vulnerability of Black’s isolated pawn on d5
would hurt him even more.

10.Nbd2 0-0
 10...h6, Pavasovic – Arsovic, Bizovac 2005, 11.Bxf6!? Qxf6 12.Nb3 Bb6
13.Nbd4 Rc8 14.Nxe6. It would not be so easy for White here to attack the
enemy isolated pawn on d5, so he creates another weakness in Black’s
position – the pawn on e6. 14...fxe6 15.Qe2 0-0 16.Rae1 Rfe8 17.Ne5²

11.Nb3

11...Bb6

It would be too passive for Black to choose here 11...Be7 12.Nbd4 Rc8
13.Nxe6 fxe6 14.Qe2 Ne4 15.Be3 a6 16.Bd3± White has the two-bishop
advantage and a more elastic pawn-structure.
11...Bd6 12.Nbd4 Rc8 13.Re1 Bg4, Shaw – Bryson, Aberdeen 2001,
14.Qd2. White removes his queen from the pin and maintains a stable
advantage. 14...h6 15.Bh4 Be7 16.Ne5 Nxd4 17.Qxd4 Be6 18.Qxa7²

12.Nbd4
 White can obtain an advantage in the opening in another way here with
the line: 12.Bxc6!? bxc6 13.Nbd4

13...Rc8 14.Re1 Re8 15.Qd3 c5 16.Nxe6 fxe6 17.c4. The vulnerability of

Black’s pawn on e6 provides White with a slight but stable advantage.
17...Ba5 18.Re2 Qd6 19.Bh4 Qa6 20.b3 Ne4 21.Rc1²
13...c5 14.Nxe6 fxe6 15.c4 Qd6 16.Bh4. White removes his bishop in
advance against the threat Ne4. 16...Ne4 (16...Bc7 17.Re1 Rae8 18.Bg3
Qb6 19.Qc2²) 17.Re1 Bc7 18.Bg3 Nxg3 19.hxg3 d4 (19...Rab8 20.Qc2²)
20.Re4², followed by Qe2, Re1, or Ne1-d3. In both lines White’s play
would be much easier, since Black’s e6-pawn is weak and his bishop is
severely restricted by his own pawns on c5 and d4.

12...Rc8

12...Nxd4 13.Nxd4 h6 14.Be3!? (Black’s plan would be justified after

White’s indifferent reaction 14.Bh4 g5 15.Bg3 Ne4÷) 14...Qc7 15.f3.
White restricts the enemy knight. 15...a6 16.Bd3 Rfe8 17.Re1 Nd7, Canibal
– Hervet, ICCF 2012, 18.Bf2²
 13.Re1 Bg4 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.h3

15...Bh5

15...Bxf3. It seems bad for Black to part voluntarily with his two-bishop
advantage. 16.Qxf3 Bxd4 17.cxd4 Qd6 18.Bxf6 gxf6 19.Re3± Belyakov –
Kuznetsov, Khanty-Mansiysk 2016. In this endgame with major pieces,
White maintains a considerable advantage, because the position of Black’s
king has been seriously weakened.

16.Nf5 Kh8 17.Re5 Bc7 18.Re7. White’s pieces are very active indeed,
but it would not be easy for him to break Black’s position. 18...Bg6 19.Bxf6
Bxf5 20.Qd4 Kg8 (20...Rg8? 21.Ng5+–) 21.Rxc7! Qxc7 22.Bxg7 Rfe8
23.Be5 Qe7 24.Qf4 f6 25.Bd4 Bg6 26.b4² White has more than sufficient
compensation for the exchange, because Black has too many pawn-
weaknesses in his position.

B4b) 6...Bd6 7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.0-0 Nge7

About 8...Nf6 9.Bg5 – see variation B4a.

 About 8...Bg4 9.Qa4 Bd7 10.Nbd2 Nge7 11.Nb3 – see 8...Nge7.

9.Nbd2

White prepares Nb3 in an attempt to increase his control over the d4-
square.
9...0-0

About 9...Bb6 10.Nb3 0-0 11.Re1, or 10...Bg4 11.Re1 0-0 12.Be3 – see
9...0-0.
9...Bg4. It is not reasonable for Black to postpone his castling. 10.Qa4
 10...Bd7. This move looks too passive. 11.Nb3 Bb6 12.Re1. It is
important for White to exchange the dark-squared bishops in order to
deprive his opponent of any counterplay. 12...0-0 13.Be3 Nf5 (13...Bc7
14.Nc5²) 14.Bxb6 Qxb6 15.Rad1 Be6 16.Bd3 Rad8 17.Qf4. Black has no
compensation for the vulnerability of his isolated pawn on d5, because
White’s pieces have been very actively and harmoniously. 17...Nce7, Can –
Abergel, Sarajevo 2011, 18.Ng5 h6 19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.Qb4! White trades the
queens and transfers to a favourable endgame, because Black’s pawn on c6
is horribly weak. 20...Qxb4 21.cxb4 Kf7 22.Nc5±
10...Bh5 11.Qh4. White transfers his queen to the kingside and wishes to
oust the enemy bishop from the h5-square, so that after Nb3, Black cannot
capture the knight on f3 with his bishop. 11...Bg6 12.Nb3 Bb6 (12...Bd6
13.Bf4 0-0, Acs – Shariyazdanov, Budapest 1996, 14.Rfe1 Bxf4 15.Qxf4
Qb6 16.Bf1 a5 17.Qa4²) 13.Bxc6+! This is the right move! (White would
have lost his advantage with the line: 13.Nfd4 0-0 14.Be3 a6 15.Be2 Ne5÷
Ivanchuk – Shirov, Dortmund 1992.). 13...bxc6 14.Re1 Be4 15.Ng5. Black
will have a hard time to neutralise his opponent’s initiative. 15...Nf5? This
pseudo-active move only increases Black’s difficulties. 16.Qh3 Nd6 17.c4
Nxc4 18.Nxe4 dxe4 19.Rxe4+ Kf8 20.Qc3 Nd6 21.Re1± Luther – Foisor,
Arvier 2007. White has a superior pawn-structure, while Black will hardly
manage to coordinate his pieces, because his king on f8, deprived of its
castling rights, impedes the eventual actions of his rook on h8.

9...a6 10.Bd3 Bg4 (10...0-0 11.Nb3 Bb6 12.Re1, or 11...Bd6 12.Re1 h6

13.h3 – see 9...0-0).

11.Nb3 Bb6 (11...Bd6 12.Re1 Qc7 13.h3 Bh5 14.g4 – see 11.h3) 12.Re1
h6 (12...Qd6. Black is preparing castling queenside, but his king would not
be so active there as on the kingside. 13.Be3 Bxe3 14.Rxe3 0-0-0,
Ponkratov – Dyachkov, Dagomys 2008, 15.h3 Bh5 16.Qe1І Rhe8?!
17.Nfd4±) 13.h3 Bh5 14.Be3 0-0 15.Bxb6 Qxb6, Beliavsky – Eingorn,
Lvov 1984, 16.Bc2!? Rfe8 17.Qd3 Bg6. White has created threats on the
b1-h7 diagonal and wishes to force the trade of the light-squared bishops.
The exchanges would be useful for him, since he is playing against an
isolated pawn. 18.Qe2 Bxc2 19.Qxc2 Rad8 20.Rad1 Qc7 21.Re3² White
maintains a stable advantage.
11.h3!? Bh5 12.Re1 Qc7 13.Nb3
 13...Bb6. This move enables White to exchange immediately his
opponent’s active dark-squared bishop. 14.Be3 0-0 15.Qe2 (15.Bxh7+
Here, this standard bishop-sacrifice would only lead to a rather unclear
position. 15.Qe2. White is trying to diminish his opponent’s watchfulness...
15...Kxh7 16.Ng5+ Kh6÷) 15...Rfe8? 16.Bxh7+. This is the right moment
for the sacrifice! 16...Kxh7 17.Ng5+ Kg6 (17...Kh6 18.Ne6+–) 18.Qd3+
f5 19.Bxb6 Qxb6 20.Re6+ Kxg5 21.h4+ Kxh4 22.Qg3#
13...Bd6 14.g4. White would not mind the exchange of his h3-pawn for
the enemy d5-pawn. 14...Bg6 15.Bxg6 hxg6 16.Qxd5 Rd8 (16...Rxh3
17.Ng5 0-0-0 18.Qxf7 Rh4 19.Qe6+ Kb8 20.Nf3±) 17.Kg2 0-0 18.Qe4±
Aberlenc – Armstrong, ICCF 2011.

10.Nb3
 We will analyse now: B4b1) 10...Bd6 and B4b2) 10...Bb6.

B4b1) 10...Bd6 11.Bd3

White prevents the move 11...Bg4.
11...h6
This is Black’s most popular response in this position. He not only takes
the g5-square under control, but also prevents the bishop-sacrifice on the
h7-square.

11...Bf5. This is a calm move after which Black reaches a slightly inferior
but still defensible position. 12.Bxf5 Nxf5 13.Qd3 Qd7 14.g3. Naturally,
with a black bishop on d6, the leeway h2-h3 would not be so useful for
White (He would lose his advantage after the line14.Rd1 Rad8 15.Bg5 f6
16.Bh4 Nxh4 17.Nxh4 Bc7 18.Nf5, Carlsson – Karthik, Dubai 2014,
18...Rfe8÷) 14...Nfe7 15.Be3 Qf5?! 16.Qxf5 Nxf5 17.Bc5 (17.Rad1!?
Nxe3 18.fxe3 Ne7 19.e4 dxe4 20.Rxd6 exf3 21.Rd7 Nc6 22.Rxb7²)
17...Bxc5 18.Nxc5 b6 19.Nb3² Sermek – Hopewell, Auckland 1997. White
maintains a stable advantage in this endgame.
 11...Ng6 12.Bg5

12...Be7 13.Bxe7 Ncxe7 14.Re1 a5 15.Nbd4 Nc6, Szamoskozi – Marxen,

Budapest 2004, 16.Re3²
12...Nce7. Black’s knight is not so active on this square as on c6. 13.Re1
h6 (13...Bg4 14.Bxg6 hxg6 15.h3 Bf5 16.Nfd4 Re8, Korneev –
Grandmougin, Metz 1997, 17.Nxf5!? gxf5 18.Qf3 g6 19.Rad1± He cannot
keep his pawn on d5.) 14.Bxe7 Nxe7 15.Nbd4 Bd7 16.Ne5 (16.Bc2!?
White wishes to provoke a weakening of his opponent’s kingside after the
move Qd3. 16...Qb6 17.Qd3 g6 18.Ne5ƒ) 16...Bxe5 17.Rxe5 Re8 18.Qd2
Bc6 19.Rae1 Qd6 20.Qe3 Kf8 21.Qf4± Emms – Pickard, Sunningdale
2007.
12...Qd7 13.Re1 Nf4 14.Bf1 Qf5 15.Bh4 Qh5. The activity of Black’s
pieces is completely harmless for White. 16.Bg3 Bg4 17.Qd2 Qh6
(17...Bxf3 18.Bxf4 Bxf4 19.Qxf4±) 18.Nfd4 Qf6 19.h3 Be6 20.Nb5.
Black’s pieces are now forced to retreat from their active positions.
20...Bb8 21.Nc5 (21.Re3!? a6 22.N5d4 Bc7 23.Rae1±) 21...a6 22.Nd4 Bc8
23.Rad1 h5, Akopian – Y.Vladimirov, Moscow 1990, 24.Ne2 Nxe2+
25.Bxe2 Bxg3 26.fxg3 b6 27.Nb3 Be6 28.Bxh5± Black has no
compensation for the sacrificed pawn.
 12...Qc7 13.Re1

It would be practically senseless for Black to play here 13...Bg4, because

after 14.h3, his bishop would have to retreat to the e6-square. 14...Be6
15.Nbd4 (15.Bc2 Rfe8 16.Nbd4 Nxd4 17.Qxd4 Bc5 18.Qd2 h6 19.Be3²)
15...Nxd4 16.Nxd4 Bd7 (16...Bc5 17.Be3 a6 18.Qh5 Rfe8 19.Nxe6 Rxe6
20.Bxc5 Rxe1+ 21.Rxe1 Qxc5, Bresciani – Braunberger, Lombardia 1990,
22.Be4 Rd8 23.Rd1+–; 22...Qb5 23.Bxd5 Qxb2 24.Qf3 Rf8 25.g3+–)
17.Be3, with the idea Qh5xd5. 17...Rfe8 (17...a6 18.Qh5; 17...Rad8 18.Qh5
Bh2+ 19.Kh1 Bf4 20.Qf3 Bxe3 21.Rxe3 Rfe8 22.Rxe8+ Bxe8 23.Re1 Qb6
24.Re2²; 17...Rfe8 18.Nb5 Bxb5 19.Bxb5 Re5 20.Bd4 Rxe1+ 21.Qxe1 a6
22.Ba4 b5 23.Bb3 Ne7 24.Rd1²) 18.Nb5 Bxb5 19.Bxb5²
13...h6 14.Be3 Nce5 (14...Bg4 15.h3 Bxf3 16.Qxf3 Nce5, Depasse –
Daurelle, Email 2012, 17.Qd1 Nxd3 18.Qxd3 Rad8 19.Nd4 a6 20.Nf5
Bh2+ 21.Kf1 Be5 22.g3²) 15.Nxe5 Nxe5 16.Bc2 Re8, Leisner – Cartaya
Verdecia, ICCF 2015 (16...Ng4 17.h3 Nxe3 18.Rxe3 Bh2+ 19.Kh1 Bf4
20.Re1 Qd6 21.Nd4²) 17.Bf4 (White is threatening 18.Qxd5.) 17...Be6
18.Nd4 a6 19.Qh5 Nc6 20.Nxe6 Rxe6 (20...fxe6 21.Bxd6 Qxd6
22.Qg6+–) 21.Rxe6 fxe6 22.Bxd6 Qxd6 23.Re1 e5 24.Rd1 Ne7 25.c4 d4
(25...Rc8 26.Bb3±) 26.Qf3±
 11...Qc7 12.h3

12...Ne5 13.Nxe5. White would not mind the exchange of pieces here.
13...Bxe5 14.Re1 Nc6 15.Qh5 g6 16.Qh4 Be6 17.Bh6 Rfe8, Baklan –
Nunn, Germany 2000, 18.Rad1²
12...Bd7 13.Nbd4 a6, Ostovic – Radovic, Zupanja 2011, 14.Bc2 Rfe8
15.Qd3 Ng6 16.Be3 Nce5 17.Nxe5 Rxe5 18.Bf4 Re7 19.Bxd6 Qxd6
20.Rfe1 Rae8 21.Rxe7 Qxe7 22.Rd1² Black is doomed to a long and
laborious defence in this position, without any good prospects and any
chances of organising active counterplay.
12...Rd8 13.Qc2 Ng6 14.Nbd4 a6 15.Be3 Bd7 16.Rad1 Na5 17.Nf5 Bf8,
Tiviakov – Rozentalis, Groningen 1993, 18.Bg5! White has completed the
development of his pieces and begins active actions. 18...f6. Black weakens
the e6-square with this move (18...Re8 19.Ne3 Be6 20.Nd4±). 19.N5h4
fxg5 20.Bxg6 hxg6 21.Nxg6 Be8 22.Nxg5+–

11...f6. Black is preparing Ne5, but weakens the position of his king in
the process. 12.Nfd4 (12.Qc2 g6 13.Nbd4 Ne5 14.Bh6 Rf7, E.Popov –
Dolganiuc, ICCF 2012, 15.Rad1²) 12...Ne5, Bar Ziv – Mirkowski, ICCF
2016, 13.Bc2!? Bg4 14.Qe1² White wishes to oust the enemy knight away
from the centre of the board and to transfer his queen to the b1-h7 diagonal.
14...Re8 15.f4 N5g6 16.Qg3 Bd7 17.Qd3ƒ

12.h3 Nf5

12...Bc7 13.Re1

About 13...Nf5 14.Bc2 – see 12...Nf5.

13...Re8 14.Qc2. White controls the f5-square. 14...Qd6 15.Be3 Ne5
16.Nxe5 Qxe5 17.g3 Qh5 18.Bc5 Be6 19.Nd4 Qxh3, Laube – Talpak,
ICCF 2008. Black has managed to win a pawn, but White seizes completely
the initiative. 20.Re3 Nc6 21.Nxe6 fxe6 22.Rae1±
13...Ng6 14.Bc2. He is preparing Qd3. 14...b6, Klimakovs – Oren, ICCF
2008, 15.Qd3 Qd6 16.Nbd4 Nxd4 17.cxd4 a5 18.Ne5 Ba6 19.Qf5 Bc8
20.Qh5ƒ Black’s defence is very difficult here, because White has powerful
initiative.
13...Qd6 14.Be3
 14...Ne5? 15.Nxe5 Qxe5 16.g3±
14...Qf6 15.Nbd4 Nf5 16.Nxf5. The exchange of pieces is the simplest
way for White to obtain an edge. 16...Bxf5 17.Bxf5 Qxf5, Bernard –
Orzechowski, Ustron 2004, 18.Qb3² Black does not have sufficient
compensation for the vulnerability of his pawn on d5.
14...Rd8 15.Bc5 Qf6, Boronyak – F.Portisch, Zalakaros 1991, 16.Nbd4
Ng6 16...Nf5 17.Bc2 Nfxd4 18.Nxd4 Bd7 19.Qd3 g6 20.Bb3±) 17.Nxc6
bxc6 18.Bd4 Qd6 19.b4. White prevents ”6-”5. 19...Bb6 20.Re3 Bxd4
21.Nxd4 Bd7 22.Bxg6 Qxg6 23.Qd2², followed by the transfer of the
knight to the c5-square, preventing Black from getting rid of his weak c6-
pawn, Emms – Bologan, Germany 1995.

12...Bf5 13.Re1
 13...Be4 14.Bxe4 (14.Nbd4 Bxd3 15.Qxd3 Qd7 16.Be3 Rad8 17.Rad1²
Adams – Vaganian, Manila 1990) 14...dxe4 15.Nfd4 Re8 16.Rxe4± Black’s
compensation for the pawn is insufficient.
13...Bc7 14.Bxf5 Nxf5 15.Qd3 Nce7 16.Be3 Nxe3 17.Qxe3 Re8 18.Rad1
Bb6 19.Qd3. White exerts powerful pressure against the enemy position.
19...Qc7 20.Nbd4 Ng6 21.Qf5 Qc4 22.a3 Rad8, Rublevsky – Schmittdiel,
Ostrava 1992, 23.g3 Qa2 24.Qc2²
13...Qd7 14.Be3! with the idea Bc5. It is essential for White here to trade
the enemy dark-squared bishop, because without it Black would hardly
manage to organise any meaningful counterplay. 14...Rad8 15.Bc5 Rfe8
(15...Bxc5 16.Nxc5 Qc8 17.Nb3 Qc7 18.Bxf5 Nxf5 19.Qd3 Nfe7 20.Rad1
a6, Magem Badals – Alonso Garcia, Catalunya 2014, 21.Rd2 Rd6
22.Rde2²; 15...Bxd3 16.Qxd3 Bb8, Kharlov – Yee, New York 1997,
17.Qb5. White does not exchange immediately on e7 and wishes to prepare
a transfer into an endgame. 17...Rfe8 18.Bxe7 Nxe7 19.Qxd7 Rxd7
20.Re2²) 16.Bxd6 Qxd6, Zubarev – Rychagov, Paleochora 2012, 17.Re3
Bxd3 18.Qxd3² Black’s position is solid indeed, but he has no good
prospects.
 13...Bxd3. He trades voluntarily his bishop. Later, Black will try to hold
this slightly inferior position with an accurate defence. 14.Qxd3 Qc7
15.Re2. White prepares the doubling of his rooks on the e-file. 15...Rad8
16.Be3 Ng6 17.Rae1 Nge5 18.Nxe5 Bxe5 19.Nd4 (19.Bc5!? Rfe8?
20.f4+–; 19...Bd6 20.Bxd6 Qxd6 21.Qb5 Qc7 22.Rd1² Now, Black’s pawn
on d5 would need permanent protection.) 19...Bxd4 20.Bxd4 b6 21.Be3.
Black’s bishop on d4 impeded White’s major pieces to exert pressure
against his opponent’s pawn on d5. 21...Qd7 22.Rd1 Rfe8 23.Red2²
Pavasovic – Rezan, Pula 2001.

12...a6 13.Re1

13...Re8 14.Nbd4 Bc7 15.Be3 Nxd4 16.Bxd4 Nc6 17.Bc5 – see 10...Bb6
11.Re1 a6 12.Bd3 h6 13.Be3 Bc7 14.h3 Re8 15.Nbd4 Nxd4 16.Bxd4 Nc6
17.Bc5.
13...Nf5 14.Bc2 Qf6?! De la Riva Aguado – Illescas Cordoba, Barcelona
1996 (14...Be6 15.Qd3ƒ) 15.Qxd5. Black’s compensation for the pawn is
insufficient. 15...Be6 (15...Rd8 16.Qe4±) 16.Qe4 Rfe8 17.Bf4 Bd7
18.Qd3±
13...Bf5
 14.Bxf5!? Nxf5 15.Qd3 Qd7 16.Be3 (16.Bd2!? Rad8 17.Rad1²)
16...Nxe3 (16...Rfe8. Black removes his rook away from the a3-f8 diagonal
and avoids the trade of his bishop on d6, but all this proves to be
insufficient for him to maintain the equality. 17.Bc5 Bc7 18.Rad1 (18.Ba3!?
²) 18...Rxe1+ 19.Rxe1 Rd8, Dominguez Perez – Ponkratov, Berlin 2015,
20.g4 Nfe7 21.Bxe7 Nxe7 22.Nc5 Qc6 23.Nxa6±) 17.Rxe3 Bf4 (17...Rfe8
18.Rae1 Rxe3 19.Rxe3 Rd8 20.Nbd4²) 18.Re2 Rad8 19.Rd1. Now, White
must watch carefully the d4-square; otherwise, Black would manage to get
rid of his isolated pawn with the move d5-d4. 19...Qc7, Glek – Rustemov,
Germany 2004, 20.Nbd4 Nxd4 21.Qxd4 Bd6 22.Red2²
14.Be3 Re8. There arise exchanges after this move and they are in favour
of White. 15.Bc5 Bxd3 16.Qxd3 Bxc5 17.Nxc5 Qc7 (It would not be
reasonable for Black to choose here 17...Qb6, Schmittdiel – Renet, Cologne
1989, since he would be incapable of ousting the enemy knight away from
the c5-square anyway. 18.b4 a5? 19.Na4 Qc7 20.b5 Nd8 21.Nd4±;
18...Rad8 19.Re3² Now, it would not work for Black to play here 19...d4?!,
because the tactical complications would turn out to be in White’s favour.
20.cxd4 Nxb4 21.Qb3 Nbd5 22.Qxb6 Nxb6 23.Nxb7±) 18.Nb3
(18.Rad1!? Rad8 19.b4²) 18...Rad8 19.Re3 Ng6 20.Rae1 Rxe3 21.Qxe3²
Cesetti – Eckhardt, ICCF 2006. White’s game is much more pleasant,
because Black must worry permanently about his weakness on d5.

13.Re1
 13...Qf6
About 13...Be6 14.Bc2 Qf6 15.Qd3 – see 13...Qf6.

13...Bc7 14.Bc2 Qd6. Black’s piece-battery on the h2-b8 diagonal cannot

create any serious problems for White. 15.Qd3 g6 16.Nbd2 Rd8, Luecke –
Kindermann, Biel 1991 (16...Bd7 17.Bb3 Rfe8 18.Rxe8+ Rxe8 19.Qxd5.
Black has not obtained sufficient compensation for the pawn. 19...Qe7
20.Qd3 Na5, Kunz – Hoebel, ICCF 2017, 21.Bc2 Nc6 22.Nf1²) 17.Bb3 a5
18.a4 Be6 19.Nf1 Kh7 20.g4!? (White would maintain an edge even after
the more prudent move 20.Bd2²) 20...Ng7 21.Ng3 Rd7 22.Be3² Black’s
knight on g7 is misplaced, since White’s pawn on g4 restricts considerably
its mobility.

13...Re8 14.Rxe8+ Qxe8 15.Bc2 Qe6 16.Bd2 Bd7 17.Qf1 Ne5 (The
move 17...f6 would lead to the weakening of Black’s king shelter. 18.Rd1
Ne5 19.Nfd4 Nxd4 20.Nxd4 Qf7 21.Nf5 Bc5 22.Bf4 Be6 23.Qe2 Re8
24.b4 Bxf5 25.Bxf5 Bb6 26.Qd2 Nc4 27.Qc2² Hudak – Weber, ICCF
2009. White’s bishops are tremendously powerful in this open position.)
18.Nxe5 Qxe5 19.g3 Be6 20.Re1 Qf6 21.Qd3ƒ with the rather unpleasant
threat g3-g4, Kubicki – Scuderi, ICCF 2009.

14.Bc2
White is preparing Qd3.
 14...Rd8

The move 14...Be6 would not solve the defensive problems for Black.
15.Qd3 Rfe8 (15...g6?! 16.g4 Rfe8. Now, in order not to lose his pawn on
h6, he decides to try the rather dubious exchange of two minor pieces for a
rook and a pawn. 17.Rxe6 fxe6 18.gxf5 gxf5 19.Bd2± Navara – Vaganian,
Biel 2017) 16.g4!? White begins active actions. His idea is to deploy his
queen on the h7-square as quickly as possible. (16.Bd2 g6 17.Re2²)
16...Nh4 17.Nxh4 Qxh4 18.Qh7+ Kf8 19.Kg2 f5 20.gxf5!? (20.Bxf5 Bg8
21.Rxe8+ Rxe8 22.Qg6 Bc7 23.Nc5 Ne5 24.Nd7+ Nxd7 25.Bxd7 Re7
26.Ba4² Akrill – Corfield, ICCF 2016. White has an extra pawn, but the
shelter of his king has been weakened.) 20...Bg8 21.Rxe8+ Rxe8 22.Qg6
Be5. Black should not allow the enemy pawn-advance f5-f6. (22...Bc7
23.f6±) 23.Qg4 Qxg4+ 24.hxg4 d4 25.Nc5 Re7 26.Bd2 dxc3 27.bxc3²

15.Qd3 g6
Black defends against g2-g4, followed by Qh7+. Now however, he must
watch carefully not to lose his pawn on h6.
16.Bd2
 16...a5

16...Bf8 17.Rad1 Bg7 18.Qe2 Nd6 19.Bc1. The vulnerability of the

isolated pawn on d5 precludes Black from equalising completely. 19...Re8
20.Be3 Be6 21.Nbd4 Bd7 22.Bb3 Nxd4. He loses his chances of
organising counterplay with every exchange of a piece. 23.Nxd4 Bc6, Van
Raan – Englund, ICCF 2010, 24.Nc2! White does not wish to block the
enemy isolated pawn but to capture it. 24...Qf5 25.Nb4 d4 26.Nxc6 dxe3
27.fxe3 Qc5 28.Qd3 Nf5 29.Nd4±

16...Bc7 17.Qe2 Kh7 18.Rad1 Bb6 19.Bc1!? This is an interesting idea.

White’s bishop goes back to its initial position, but after this he will manage
to build a battery on the c1-h6 diagonal. 19...Be6 20.Qd2² Qg7 21.Qf4
(21.g4!? Nfe7 22.Qf4) 21...Rac8, Lakos – Rozenfeld, Germany 2001,
22.Bxf5 Bxf5 23.Be3 Bxe3 24.Rxe3 Be4 25.h4± White has a superior
pawn-structure, while Black’s bishop on e4, if he does not exchange it at the
right moment for the knight on f3, might become “bad”.
 16...Nh4 17.Nbd4 (17.Nxh4!? Qxh4 18.Qe3 Bf8 19.Rad1²) 17...Nf5,
Short – Ye, Yerevan 1996, 18.Nb5 Bb8 19.Qe2 a6 20.Bxf5 Bxf5 21.Nbd4²
White has occupied reliably the d4-square and has preserved his opening
advantage.

17.a4 b6 18.Qe2
He defends against Ba6.
18...Ba6

19.Qd1
White’s queen has been forced to return to its initial position, but now,
Black’s bishop on a6 is not attacking anything...

The move 19.Bd3 leads to a much simpler game for White. 19...Bxd3
20.Qxd3 Ne5 21.Nxe5. He presumes that exchanging pieces would be
advantageous for him in his fight against his opponent’s isolated pawn.
21...Bxe5 22.Qe2 Bc7 23.Qf3 Be5 24.g4. White continues with his strategy
of simplifications and transfers into a slightly better endgame. 24...Nh4
25.Qxf6 Bxf6 26.Red1 g5 27.Be3 Rd6 28.Kf1 Rad8, Blauhut – Liebert,
ICCF 2008, 29.Rd3² In this endgame Black has not only a weak pawn on
d5, but also on b6.

19...Re8

19...Kh7 20.Bxf5 Qxf5 21.Nbd4 Nxd4 22.Nxd4 Qf6 23.Be3 Bc7

24.Qd2. It would be difficult for Black to neutralise the activity of his
opponent’s pieces. 24...g5 25.Nf3 (25.Nb5!?) 25...Qf5 26.h4 gxh4 27.Nxh4
Qh5 28.g3± Rublevsky – Lysyj, Krasnoyarsk 2007. The position of his king
has been seriously weakened.

20.Bxf5 gxf5
Now, Black must weaken his pawn-structure not to lose his pawn on h6.

21.Nbd4 Nxd4 22.Rxe8+ Rxe8 23.Nxd4

23...Bc5, Rizzo – Liebert, ICCF 2009, 24.Qf3 Kh7 25.Re1 Rxe1+

26.Bxe1²
 23...Be5 24.Qf3 Bxd4 25.cxd4 Re4 26.Rc1 Qd6, Talpak – Liebert, ICCF
2011, 27.Qxf5 Rxd4 28.Be3. His defence is very difficult, because his
bishop on a6 is absolutely incapable of protecting the dark squares.
28...Rxa4 29.Rd1 d4 30.Qe4 Qe6 31.Qxe6 fxe6 32.Bxd4± The queens have
been exchanged but Black’s situation is desperate, since he has too many
pawn weaknesses in his camp.

23...f4, Ohtake – Kayis, ICCF 2015, 24.Qf3 Re4 25.Re1 Qg6 26.Qd1
Bc8 27.Kh1² Black’s two-bishop advantage cannot compensate fully the
numerous pawn-weaknesses in his position.

B4b2) 10...Bb6 11.Re1

White prepares the trade of the dark-squared bishops.

We will deal now with: B4b2a) 11...a6, B4b2b) 11...Nf5 and B4b2c)
11...Bg4.

11...Qd6 12.Be3 Bg4 (12...Bxe3 13.Rxe3 Bg4 14.h3 Bh5 15.Qd2 – see
11...Bg4) 13.Bxb6 axb6 14.h3. It would be reasonable for White to clarify
immediately the intentions of the enemy bishop on g4. 14...Bh5 15.Be2
 15...Rad8 16.Nfd4 Bg6 17.Qd2 Ne5 18.Rad1 Be4 19.f3 (19.Bf1!?±)
19...Bg6 20.Bf1. Black can hardly organise any active actions. 20...Nc8
21.Qf2 (21.f4!? Nc4 22.Qf2 h6 23.f5±) 21...h6 22.f4 Nc6 23.f5. The
advance of White’s f-pawn restricts considerably the mobility of the enemy
light-squared bishop. 23...Bh7 24.Nb5 Qf6 25.N3d4± Anand – Korchnoi,
London 1994.
15...Bxf3 16.Bxf3 Ne5 (16...Rfd8 17.a3. Now, White’s rook on a1 does
not need to worry about the protection of the a-pawn. 17...Qf6 18.Qe2 Ng6
19.Rad1 Nf4 20.Qe3± He is eyeing the weak enemy b6-pawn. 20...g6
21.Kh2 Re8 22.Qxb6 Rxe1 23.Rxe1 Nd3 24.Re2 Nf4 25.Re3± Dolezal –
Becker, Germany 2002) 17.Nd4 Rad8 (17...N7c6? Predojevic – Pavlovic,
Ruma 2017, 18.Bxd5 Qxd5 19.Nxc6±) 18.Be2 Qf6 19.Qb3 N7g6 20.Bf1
Nf4 21.Re3! White not only prepares the doubling of his rooks on the e-file,
but also covers the h3 and f3-squares against the tactical threats of the
enemy knights. 21...h5 22.Rae1± Tiviakov – Ljubisavljevic, Nicolosi 2014.

B4b2a) 11...a6
Black only ousts White’s bishop to the d3-square, since it was headed
there anyway.
 12.Bd3

12...h6
Black is preparing Bg4.

About 12...Nf5 13.Bg5 – see 11...Nf5.

The move 12...Bf5 is too passive. 13.Be3 Bxe3 14.Rxe3 Qd6 15.Nbd4
Bxd3 16.Qxd3 Rad8 17.Rae1 Qf6 18.g3. Black will have difficulties in this
position to find a reasonable plan for his actions. 18...g6 19.h4 h5 20.Kg2
Rd6 21.a4 Rdd8 22.b4. White advances his queenside pawns with the idea
to create new weaknesses in Black’s position. 22...Rd7 23.b5 axb5 24.axb5
Nxd4 25.Nxd4 Nc8, Pavasovic – Berkes, Leipzig 2002, 26.Re5 Re7
27.Nf3 Rxe5 28.Rxe5 Nb6 29.Qd4 Rc8 30.Ng5± Black’s defence is very
difficult. 30...Rc4?? 31.Re8+ Kg7 32.Ne6+! fxe6 33.Re7+–

13.Be3 Bc7

13...Bg4. Black parts immediately with his dark-squared bishop. 14.Bxb6

(about 14.h3 Bh5 15.Bxb6 Qxb6 – see 14.Bxb6) 14...Qxb6 15.h3 Bh5
16.Be2. This is the simplest for White. He avoids the pin of his knight on
f3. (16.Bc2!? Rad8 17.Qd3 Bg6 18.Qe2 Nf5 19.Bxf5 Bxf5 20.Qe3²).

16...Rfe8 17.Nfd4 Nxd4 18.Bxh5 Ne6 19.Qd2 Rad8 20.Rad1 Nc6

21.Qe3 Qxe3 22.Rxe3 Rd6 23.Re2 Red8 24.Red2 a5 25.a4 b6, Zvjaginsev –
Grigoriants, St Petersburg 2015, 26.Bf3²
16...Rad8,Vetoshko – Vysochin, Mukachevo 2018, 17.Qd2 Rfe8 18.Rad1
a5 19.Nfd4 Bxe2 20.Rxe2 a4 21.Nc1 Nxd4 22.Qxd4 Qxd4 23.Rxd4 b5
24.Nd3² The numerous exchanges have not facilitated Black’s defence.
16...a5 17.a4 Bxf3. He exchanges his bishop for the enemy knight in
order to weaken White’s control over the d4-square. 18.Bxf3 Rfd8 19.Re2
d4 20.Nxd4 Nxd4, Beliavsky – Eingorn, Lvov 1984, 21.cxd4 Rxd4. The
trade of the isolated pawn has not brought to Black complete equality,
because in this position White’s long-range bishop would be much more
powerful than Black’s knight. 22.Qe1 Ng6 23.Rd1 Rxd1 24.Qxd1 Rd8
25.Qc2² Nh4?! White counters this move with the powerful argument
26.Bd5! Ng6 27.Qf5±

14.h3
 14...Re8
14...Bf5 15.Bc5 Bd6 16.Bxf5 Nxf5 17.Qc2 Nfe7 18.Bxd6 Qxd6
19.Rad1. After the exchange of the bishop Black must begin to defend only
passively. (19.Re3!? Rad8 20.Rae1ƒ) 19...Rad8 20.Re3 Qc7 21.Nbd4 Rfe8
22.Rde1 (22.Nxc6!? bxc6 23.Qe2 Rd7 24.Qxa6±) 22...Qc8 23.Qb3 Nxd4
24.cxd4± Pavasovic – Podkriznik, Krsko 1997. Black cannot avoid the pin
on the d-file and maintain the material equality at the same time.

14...Qd6 15.Bc5 Qf6 16.Nbd4 Bd6 17.Bxd6 Qxd6, Tolnai – Illi, Zuerich
1988, 18.Bc2 Nxd4 19.Qxd4 Nc6 20.Qd3 g6 21.Bb3! White wishes to
attack the pawn on d5 and not to block it. 21...Be6 22.c4 Na5 23.cxd5
Nxb3? (Black should better opt here for 23...Rfe8 24.Rad1 Bf5 25.Qc3
Nxb3 26.Qxb3±, although even then he would not have compensation for
the pawn.) 24.Rxe6! fxe6 25.Qxg6+ Kh8 26.Qxh6+ Kg8 27.axb3+–

15.Nbd4 Nxd4 16.Bxd4 Nc6, Adams – Grachev, Germany 2011, 17.Bc5

Be6 (17...Rxe1+ 18.Qxe1 Be6 19.Qe2 Bb6 20.Be3 Bxe3 21.Qxe3²)
18.Bc2 Qf6 19.Qd3 g6 20.Bb3 Rad8 21.Rad1² Black has no good
prospects in this position.
 B4b2b) 11...Nf5
Black prevents Be3.
12.Bd3 Qd6

Later, depending on his opponent’s actions, White can choose between

two different plans: Bc2, Qd3, or Bxf5, Be3.

12...a6 13.Bg5 Qd6, Werner – Kalinitschew, Regensburg 1997, 14.Qc2.

White wishes to provoke an advance of his opponent’s g-pawn in order to
weaken the dark squares in Black’s camp. 14...g6 15.Qd2 Bc7 16.Bxf5
Bxf5 17.Bh4ƒ White prepares the transfer of his bishop to the h2-b8
diagonal. 17...Bb6 18.c4 d4 19.Bg3 Qf6 20.c5 Ba7 21.Bh4±

12...Bc7 13.Bc2
 13...g6. This move leads to a loss of a pawn for Black and he would not
obtain sufficient compensation for it. 14.Bxf5 Bxf5 15.Bh6 Rfe8 16.Rxe8+
Qxe8 17.Qxd5 Be4 18.Qd1 Ne5 19.Nbd4 Rd8 20.Qe2 (20.Nd2 Bd5
21.Bg5 Rd6 22.Qc2±) 20...Nxf3+ 21.Nxf3 Qc6 (21...Bd5 22.Qxe8+ Rxe8
23.c4²) 22.Re1 f5. Black fortifies his bishop at the centre of the board, but
weakens the position of his king. 23.Bg5 Rf8, Pavasovic – Groetz, Salzburg
2004, 24.Be3 a6 25.Bd4±
13...Qd6 14.Qd3 g6 15.g3, with the idea Bf4. 15...Bb6 16.Bf4 Qd8
17.Rad1 (17.a4!? White prepares an interesting pawn-sacrifice. 17...Be6
18.a5 Nxa5 19.Nxa5 Bxa5 20.Bg5 f6 21.Rxe6 fxg5 22.Nxg5± The position
of Black’s king has been seriously weakened.) 17...Be6, Strikovic –
Arsovic, Vrnjacka Banja 1999, 18.c4!? White’s pieces are better prepared
than their counterparts for the opening of the game in the centre. 18...Nb4
(18...dxc4? Black loses material after this move. 19.Qc3 Qc8 20.Bxf5 Bxf5
21.Bh6 f6 22.Bxf8 Qxf8 23.Qxc4+–) 19.Qc3 Nxc2 20.Qxc2 Rc8 21.c5.
White occupies additional space on the queenside. 21...Bc7 22.Bg5 Qd7
23.Qc3²
 12...h6. Black takes the g5-square under control and prepares the
development of his bishop to e6. 13.Bc2

About 13...Bc7 14.h3 – see variation B4b1.

13...Qd6. This move seems to be less consistent for Black. 14.Qd3 Rd8
15.a4 a6 16.a5 Ba7 17.g4 Qg6. He prevents the penetration of the enemy
queen to the h7-square, but after 18.h3 Nfe7, White can transfer to a better
endgame. 19.Qxg6 Nxg6 20.Bxg6 fxg6 21.Be3 Bb8 22.Rad1 Rf8 23.Kg2
h5 24.Bc5 hxg4 25.hxg4 Rd8 26.Kh3± Latas – Giobbi, ICCF 2014. Black
has no compensation for the numerous pawn-weaknesses in his position.
13...Be6 14.Qd3
 The move 14...g6? loses a pawn for Black. 15.Bxh6 Nxh6 16.Rxe6 Nf5
17.Re2± Sama Salinas – Vidarte Morales, Spain 2015.
14...Qf6. He allows the development of White’s bishop to the e3-square.
15.Be3 Bxe3 16.Rxe3 g6 17.Ree1 Rad8 18.Nc5 Bc8 19.Rad1 d4, Pavasovic
– Smetankin, Leon 2001, 20.Ne4 Qg7 21.Qe2 dxc3 22.bxc3² Black has
managed to get rid of his isolated pawn indeed, but White’s prospects seem
to be preferable thanks to his more actively deployed pieces.
14...Re8. Black frees the f8-square for his king. 15.a4 a6 16.Bf4 Qf6
17.a5 Ba7 18.g4 Qg6 19.h3 d4, Kolodziejski – Katris, ICCF 2012, 20.Qd2!
(He was threatening to free his position after the move 20...Nh4.) 20...Bxb3
21.Bxb3 dxc3 22.bxc3 Nfe7 23.Kg2 Rad8 24.Qc1² White maintains his
advantage thanks to his powerful bishops.

13.Bxf5!
He presents Black temporarily with the two-bishop advantage.
13...Bxf5 14.Be3!
 This is the point! Black’s bishop cannot retreat from the b6-square,
because this would lose the exchange for him!
14...Bxe3

14...Bg4. Black pins the enemy knight, but now, besides his other pawn-
weaknesses, he must worry about his doubled pawns on the b-file. 15.Bxb6
axb6 16.Qd3 (16.h3!? Bh5 17.Qd3 Bg6 18.Qe3²) 16...Bxf3 17.Qxf3 Rfe8,
Muzychuk – Gulko, Podebrady 2013, 18.Rxe8+ Rxe8 19.Rd1² It would be
very difficult for Black now to protect the numerous pawn-weaknesses in
his position.

15.Rxe3 Bg4 (After 15...Rae8 16.Nfd4, Black would not be able to pin
the enemy knight on f3. 16...Be4 17.Nxc6 bxc6 18.Qd4! White establishes
control over the c5-square. 18...Qb8 19.Rae1 Bc2 20.Nc5± Tiviakov – Van
der Wiel, Groningen 1994) 16.h3 Bh5, Marciano – Kinsman, Toulouse
1996, 17.Qe2 Rad8 18.Re1²

B4b2c) 11...Bg4
 12.h3
Here, before playing Be3, it would be useful for White to include this
move.

12.Be3 Bxe3 13.Rxe3 Nf5 14.Re1 Nh4. Black has an isolated pawn on d5
indeed, but he should be able to hold this position, since there is just a few
material left on the board. 15.Be2 Re8 16.Nxh4 Bxe2 17.Rxe2 Qxh4
18.Rd2 Rad8 19.Nd4 g6 20.g3 Qf6 21.Kg2 h5. The position has been
simplified even further and the opponents agreed soon to a draw, Vitiugov –
Rapport, Prague 2019.

12...Bh5 13.Be3
 Here, in comparison to the variation with 12.Be3, the moves h3 and Bh5
have been included and this is obviously in favour of White.
13...Bxe3

13...Re8 14.Bxb6 Qxb6 15.Be2. It is essential for White to unpin his

knight. 15...Bg6 (The move 15...a5 weakens the b5-square in Black’s
position, while he would be incapable of exploiting the fact that White’s
knight on b3 would not be protected by his pawn on c2. 16.a4 Rad8
17.Nfd4 Bxe2 18.Qxe2 g6, V.Spasov – Mijovic, Cetinje 2012, 19.Qb5
Qxb5 20.Nxb5²) 16.Nfd4 a5 17.a4 Nxd4 18.Nxd4 Nc6 (Following
18...Qxb2 19.Bb5, Black cannot preserve his extra pawn, because his queen
would be endangered. 19...Nc6 20.Nxc6 bxc6 21.Bxc6 Rxe1+ 22.Qxe1
Rc8 23.Bd7 Rd8 24.Rd1 Qb3 25.Rd4²) 19.Qb3 Qxb3 20.Nxb3² There has
arisen a very advantageous endgame for White. Black must take care about
the protection of his pawn on d5, as well as about his b7-pawn, which can
be attacked by White’s knight. 20...Bc2 21.Nc5 d4, Sermek – Jelen,
Slovenia 1993, 22.Bb5±
 13...Bc7. Black avoids the exchange of his bishop, but now White can pin
the enemy knight on e7. 14.Bc5 Re8 (14...Bd6 15.Qd3²) 15.Nbd4 Nxd4
(15...Qd7 16.Qa4²) 16.Qxd4 Nc6

It is possible for White to play here 17.Rxe8+ Qxe8 18.Qxd5, winning a

pawn, but weakening the position of his king. 18...Bxf3 19.gxf3. This move
is forced, because after the capturing with the queen, Black would have the
powerful argument – Qe5. 19...Rd8 20.Qe4± Emms – Kupreichik,
Muenster 1995.
17.Bxc6!? White wishes to play in a positional fashion against his
opponent’s weak pawns. 17...bxc6 18.Rxe8+ Qxe8 19.Re1 Qd8 20.Ne5.
His pieces are tremendously active, while Black’s c6-pawn is hanging as
well as his a7-pawn. 20...Bxe5 (20...Qf6 21.Bxa7±) 21.Qxe5 Bg6 22.Bd4
Qf8 23.b4 a6 24.a4± White has a superior pawn-structure as well as more
actively deployed pieces.

14.Rxe3 Nf5
Here, Black must be in a hurry to transfer his knight to the h4-square;
otherwise, White’s queen will run away from the pin.
 14...Qd6 15.Qd2 Rad8 (15...Bxf3 16.Rxf3 Ne5, Opitz – Schmidt,
Germany 2010, 17.Re3 Nf5 18.Re2²) 16.Nfd4 Bg6 17.Bxc6 (17.Rae1.
White does not need to be in a hurry to exchange here on c6 and can wait
until Black would be incapable of recapturing there with his knight.
17...Nf5 18.Nxf5 Bxf5 19.Bxc6 bxc6 20.Qd4± Bannik – Poliak, Kiev
1948) 17...Nxc6 18.Rae1 Nxd4 19.Qxd4± Marciano – Afek, France 1999.
Black will have to fight long and hard for a draw.

15.Re1 Nh4

In this position Black often tries in practice the plan, connected with the
transfer of his knight to the c4-outpost, with the idea to attack the enemy
b2-pawn, as well as a plan, connected with the transfer of his knight to the
centre of the board.

15...Nd6 16.Be2

16...Ne4 17.Nfd2 Bg6 (17...Bxe2 18.Rxe2 Nf6 19.Nf3²) 18.Nxe4 dxe4

19.Qxd8 Rfxd8 20.f3. White not only attacks the pawn on e4, but also frees
the f2-square for his king. (20.Rad1!?²) 20...exf3 (20...f5, Trifonov –
Sumachev, Kirov 2013, 21.Rad1²) 21.Bxf3 f6 22.Rad1² White has a stable
advantage in this endgame thanks to his pawn-majority on the queenside
and the actively deployed pieces.
16...Nc4 17.Nbd2 (17.g4. This move only weakens unnecessarily the
shelter of White’s king. 17...Bg6 18.Bxc4 dxc4 19.Qxd8 Rfxd8 20.Nbd4,
Deviatkin – Zueger, Budva 2009, 20...f6 21.Rad1 Kf7=) 17...Nxb2 18.Qb3
Qb6 19.Rab1 Bxf3 20.Nxf3 Nc4 21.Bxc4 dxc4 22.Qxb6 axb6 23.Rxb6²

16.Be2 Re8 17.Nxh4 Qxh4

17...Bxe2 18.Rxe2 Qxh4 19.Rxe8+ (19.Rd2 Rad8, Godena – Estremera

Panos, Montecatini Terme 1999, 20.Rxd5!? Rxd5 21.Qxd5 Re2 22.Qf3 –
see 19.Re8+) 19...Rxe8, Quesada Perez – Otero Acosta, Merida 2013,
20.Qxd5 Re2 21.Qf3 Rxb2. Black regains his pawn, but presents his
opponent with the control over the e-file. 22.Re1± Qd8 23.Qd3! White
exploits the vulnerability of his opponent’s last rank and gains the d2-square
for his knight. 23...Qc8 24.Nd2 Rxa2 25.Ne4 Qc7 26.Nd6+–

18.Bxh5 Rxe1+ 19.Qxe1 Qxh5 20.Rd1 Kf8. This centralisation of

Black’s king looks premature, since there are still queens present on the
board. 21.Qd2 Rd8 22.Nd4 Re8 23.Nf3 Rd8 24.Qe3 Qf5 25.Qc5+ Kg8
26.Nd4. This is the simplest for White. After the trade of the queens he will
win the pawn on d5 after c3-c4. 26...Nxd4 27.Qxd4 Qc2 28.c4 Qa4 29.a3
Rd6 30.g3± James – Tymms, ICCF 2016.
 Part 2
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5

The second part of our book is devoted to the variations arising after 2.c3
d5. This line became Black’s main response almost from the moment the
Alapin system started to appear regularly in tournament play (the move
2...Nf6 was too revolutionary on the threshold to the 20th century.) and
remained so almost to the middle of the century when the move with the
knight began to overtake it. After the rebirth of this system, both practical
players and analysts worked hard on its development, which led to the
emergence of a consensus of opinion. It was established that the move
2...Nf6 is more solid, but it requires Black to have a good knowledge of
numerous long forced lines. On the other hand the move 2...d5 is also
sufficient for Black to equalise and his game is strategically much simpler;
there is less to memorise and it requires less effort to check whether
anything new has appeared. So it is no surprise that from 1980s onwards the
variation with 2...Nf6 became the main choice for Black in grandmaster
play, although the system with 2...d5 was overall the most popular. Only in
the last few years, starting in 2016, has this changed and the move with the
knight has become the most popular at all levels. We can see in this a
change in the general attitude towards opening theory. Generally speaking,
both masters and amateurs have stopped considering precise opening
knowledge as an absolute evil. This is a separate and rather complicated
topic and lies outside of the scope of this book, so now it is time to return
our attention to the variation with 2...d5.

The advantages and disadvantages of this move of the queen’s pawn are
quite obvious. Firstly, Black begins immediately to fight actively for the
centre and for space. The drawback, however, is that his queen is developed
too early and can become an object of attack. Admittedly the c3-square,
from which White’s knight could attack the queen, is occupied at the
moment, but after the quite likely moves d2-d4 c5xd4 c3xd4, it will become
available. Of course, Black is not forced to help his opponent by
exchanging on d4 immediately, but in that case each possible black set-up
entails specific problems, which it makes sense to discuss separately.

Chapter 8 is devoted to some seldom played moves for Black after

3.exd5. Here attention should be paid primarily to the move 3...Nf6!?,

which is played only very rarely but can pose difficult practical problems
for White, particularly in games with a short time-control. Black’s idea is
quite simple. He wishes to capture the central pawn with his knight and thus
avoid the early development of his queen. White, in turn, has ways to hold
on to the extra pawn, but not all of these are equally good. We have found a
line in which White maintains an edge, but it is far from decisive and this
variation is anything but trivial. The other lines that we have analysed in
this Chapter seem based on originality for its own sake and White can
easily gain a considerable advantage by quite simple means.

In Chapter 9 we analyse Black’s plan of fianchettoing the dark-squared

bishop – 3...Qxd5 4.d4 g6.
 This looks logical, since the bishop on g7 would be perfectly placed to
exert pressure against a white isolated queen’s pawn (IQP). The only
problem for Black is that White can avoid having an IQP in this line and
different pawn-structures will arise in which the fianchetto is less
appropriate Black. It is worth noting that if Black wishes to adopt this set-
up, he should definitely begin with the move 4...g6, because after 4...Nf6
5.Nf3 g6?! 6.Qb3!, there are far more serious problems for Black.
However, even after Black’s best move-order White can choose between
several comfortable lines which promise him a stable advantage.

In the next two Chapters (10-11) we have tried to cover almost all the
lines in which White ends up with an isolated pawn on d4, so for
convenience of presentation we are going to deal with them using the
uncommon move order 4...cxd4.
 The difference between these two chapters is due to the two possible
approaches to dealing with the isolated pawn. In most of the variations in
Chapter 10, we cover approach number one – “attack and destroy.”. In these
lines, often the play becomes very sharp and forced almost immediately,
and both sides (but particularly Black!) need to play with a fair amount of
precision. We discovered that a number of variations contained in ‘official’
modern theory have not been adequately covered and so the authors have
tried to fill in the gaps. The conclusion is that, after best play by both sides,
White maintains a small but persistent advantage.

Chapter 11 is devoted to the more traditional, classical, approach number

two: “restrain and blockade.”. In these lines there usually arise positions
which are very similar, for example, to the Panov attack against the Caro-
Kann Defence, or the classical system in the Queen’s Gambit Accepted.
However, since Black loses some time moving his queen, while White is
able to immediately deploy his pieces to good squares, the versions of the
above-mentioned opening systems that arise are favourable to White. The
weakness of the isolated pawn is not felt and White has good prospects of
active play on the kingside and in the centre.
 On the subject of typical pawn-structures, you should definitely pay
attention to another one which arises in the Alapin Variation in general, and
in the 2.c3 d5 system in particular, even more often than the Isolated
Queen’s Pawn. We are referring to positions where White has a pawn
majority on the queenside, the d-file is open and the c- and e- files are half-
open. This pawn-structure usually arises in the Alapin when, in response to
”xd4, White recaptures on d4 with a piece, or when White himself resolves
the tension in the centre with the move dxc5. This type of position is very
important and requires separate study. Of course, it is also worth noting that
positions of this type, as well as positions with an IQP, are often
encountered in the Caro-Kann Defence and the French Defence but are
much rarer in the Sicilian Defence. So many Sicilian Defence fans, even at
a fairly high level, are often uncomfortable when faced with them as Black.

Chapter 12 covers variations in which, after 4...e6,

Black refrains from the development of his king’s knight for a while.
These lines are encountered only very rarely in practice and perhaps do not
deserve a separate chapter (but on the other hand we had to cover them
somewhere). White’s play is quite simple from the point of view of strategy.
He deploys his pieces actively in the centre in anticipation of the exchange
on d4, which will usually transpose to positions which have been analysed
in the previous chapter. If Black stubbornly persists in avoiding the
exchange, then White himself exchanges on c5 at an opportune moment and
gains a tangible advantage.

Chapter 13 is devoted to the variation with 4...Nc6 (once again without

5.Nf3 Nf6). Here it is worth paying attention to the order of moves 5.Nf3
Bf5, which has recently come into fashion. Now if White reacts in a
stereotyped and routine manner he can quickly land in an inferior position.
However, if White plays correctly then Black’s light-squared bishop may
turn out to be misplaced and White retains the better chances.

Finally, in Chapter 14, the last one in this part of the book (and as it
happens the largest, by far), we analyse the main variations of the 2.c3 d5
system, namely those arising after the moves 4...Nf6 5.Nf3.

Three main lines for Black deserve close attention – 5...Bg4, 5...Nc6 and
5...e6. Each of them was considered at one time or another to be Black’s
simplest and most reliable way to equalise. Having studied all the
accumulated material, the authors have come to the conclusion that Black is
indeed close to equality in all of these lines, but his task is not simple, while
White’s game is in all cases more comfortable and easy to understand.
 Chapter 8
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5

Black is not afraid to develop his queen so early, because White cannot
attack it with his knight, having already a pawn on the c3-square.
3.exd5 Qxd5

Following 3...Nf6 4.Qa4!?, Black might have unnecessary difficulties to

regain his pawn on d5.
 4...Bd7 5.Qb3 Qb6 (5...Qc7 6.Bc4 Qe5+?! 7.Ne2±) 6.Bc4 Na6 7.Nf3
Nc7 8.d4 (8.Ne5!? Qxb3 9.Bxb3 Ncxd5 10.Nxd7 Kxd7 11.0-0²) 8...Qxb3
9.axb3 cxd4 10.Nxd4 (It is also possible for White to choose here 10.d6,
creating an isolated pawn in his opponent’s position. 10...exd6 11.Nxd4 d5
12.Be2 Bc5 13.Be3 Ng4 14.Bxg4 Bxg4 15.f3 Bd7 16.Kf2²) 10...Ncxd5
11.0-0² Khamrakulov – Guerrero Arroyo, Spain 2008. Black has regained
his sacrificed pawn, but is still too far from reaching complete equality.
4...Nbd7 5.Qb3!? (The careless move 5.c4, would enable Black to
provoke completely unnecessary complications for White with the move
5...b5!?÷).
 5...b5. This sacrifice of a second pawn seems too optimistic. 6.Bxb5 Rb8
7.c4 a6 8.Bxd7+ Bxd7 9.Qc2 e6 10.dxe6 Bc6 11.f3 fxe6 12.d3 Bd6 13.Nc3
0-0 14.Nh3 (14.Bg5 h6 15.Be3±) 14...Be5 15.Bf4! White wishes to parry
his opponent’s initiative by exchanging pieces. 15...Bxf4 16.Nxf4 Nd7
17.Nh3 Qh4+ 18.Qf2 Qh5 19.0-0-0±
5...Nb6 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.c4 e6. White’s pawn on d5 cramps considerably
Black’s position, so he is ready to create a weakness on e6 in his position in
order to eliminate it. 8.dxe6 fxe6 9.Nf3 Bd6, Brinovec – Janzelj, Ljubljana
2018, 10.Bxd7+ Nbxd7 11.Qe3 Qe7 12.d3 0-0 13.Qe2± Now, White not
only has a material advantage, but also a more elastic pawn-structure.
5...g6 6.Nf3 Bg7 7.Be2 0-0 8.0-0 b6
 9.d3 Bb7 10.c4 e6 11.dxe6 fxe6 12.Nc3 Ng4. Black’s pieces are very
active and White’s defence is not easy at all. 13.Qd1 Qc7 14.Nb5 Qb8
15.g3 a6 16.Nc3 Qc7 17.Ng5 Nxf2! This piece-sacrifice is well calculated
and it leads to equality for Black. 18.Rxf2 Bd4 19.Nce4 Bxe4 20.Nxe4
Rxf2 21.Nxf2 Rf8 22.Bf3 Ne5 23.Bf4 Nxf3+ 24.Qxf3 e5=
9.c4. White should better not lose a tempo for the move d2-d3, but try
instead to advance d2-d4 at once. 9...Bb7 10.Nc3 e6 11.dxe6 fxe6 12.d4
cxd4 13.Nxd4 Nc5 14.Qd1 Nfe4 15.Be3 Nxc3. Black weakens his
opponent’s pawn-structure, but the exchanges of pieces are in favour of
White, since he has an extra pawn after all... 16.bxc3 Qh4 17.Qd2 e5
18.Nf3²

4.d4
 The situation in the centre is the most important moment in this position.
After the capturing on d4 (Chapters 10-11), White’s pieces are developing
effortlessly. His knight goes to the c3-square, his bishop to g5 and his rooks
will occupy the central files. The key role in this formation is played by his
knight on c3 and this is the reason that Black often avoids to exchange early
in the centre (see Chapters 9, 12-14), hoping that White’s useful moves will
end somehow (or Black will create a real threat to capture on d4) and he
will be forced to play Bc1-e3, after which Black can already exchange on
d4. We can say that a position with an isolated pawn on d4 and a bishop on
e3 is not so dangerous for Black. There is another side to this concept,
however. Black may also come to a moment without useful moves (if he
has already played – Nc6, Nf6, Be7, 0-0; the retreat Qd8 is an arguable
moment in the positions with an isolated pawn, since the queen often
retreats to the d6-square). So, in general White is trying to maintain the
tension in the centre as long as possible and sometimes he has to deviate
from his standard plan, in principle he might play Bc1-e3, since this would
not be a loss of a tempo, because a developing move can only rarely be bad.
4...e5
 Black cannot equalise with this move, because after the capturing on e5,
he would have either to worsen the position of his queen (White will be
able to attack it with his knight...), or to enter an endgame, being a pawn
down.

4...Bf5 5.Nf3

About 5...Nc6 6.Be3 – see Chapter 11.

5...Nf6 6.Na3 – see Chapter 12.
5...Bxb1?! Black presents voluntarily his opponent with the two-bishop
advantage. 6.Rxb1 cxd4 (He lags in development and has no time to capture
a pawn: 6...Qxa2? 7.Bb5+ Nc6 8.Ne5! Qxb1 9.0-0 Rc8 10.d5+–) 7.Qxd4.
White enjoys a comfortable advantage in this endgame thanks to his bishop-
pair. 7...Nf6 8.Qxd5 Nxd5 9.Bb5+ Nd7 10.0-0±
5...e6 6.Bb5+ Nc6 (6...Nd7. Black’s knight would not be so active on this
square as on c6, but would not be attacked after White’s pawn-advances c3-
c4 and d4-d5. 7.c4!? Qe4+? 8.Be3 Ngf6 9.Nc3 Qc2 10.Qxc2 Bxc2
11.dxc5±; 7...Qd6 8.0-0 Ngf6 9.Nc3 Be7 10.dxc5 Qxc5 11.Be3² White’s
pieces are very active and he has a pawn-majority on the queenside, so he is
clearly better.) 7.0-0 Nf6 (7...Bxb1?! 8.Rxb1 Nf6 9.Qa4±) 8.Qa4 a6 9.c4
Qd7 10.d5! White sacrifices a pawn and opens the e-file in order to exploit
the delay of the evacuation of Black’s king away from the centre. 10...exd5
11.Re1+ Be7 12.Ne5 axb5 13.Qxa8+ Qc8 14.Qxc8+ Bxc8 15.Nxc6 bxc6
16.cxb5 cxb5 17.b4! cxb4 18.a4! White’s plan is to open the position for his
rooks. 18...bxa4 19.Rxa4 Be6 20.Ra8+ Bd8 21.Bd2 b3 22.Ba5 Kd7
23.Rxd8+ Rxd8 24.Bxd8 Kxd8 25.Nd2 b2 26.Rb1± Black will fail to hold
on to his b2-pawn, so White can play for a win without any risk.

5.dxe5 Qxd1+

5...Qxe5+ 6.Be2

6...Nc6 7.Nf3 Qc7 (7...Qd6. On the d6-square Black’s queen will come
under an attack after the move Bf4. 8.Qa4 Bd7 9.Bf4 Nd4 10.Qxd4 cxd4
11.Bxd6 Bxd6 12.Nxd4 0-0-0 13.Nd2 Ne7 14.0-0± Perlis – Tartakower,
Vienna 1908. Black’s two-bishop advantage cannot compensate fully the
sacrificed pawn.) 8.0-0 Nf6 9.Na3 a6, Novak – Licka, Brno 2004,
10.Qa4!? Bd7 11.Bf4 Qc8 12.Qd1 Be7 13.Nc4± with the rather unpleasant
threats Nb6 and Nd6+. White obtains at least the two-bishop advantage.
 6...Bg4. Black prevents Nf3, but leaves his b7-pawn unprotected. 7.Qb3
Bxe2 8.Nxe2 Qe4 9.0-0 Bd6 (9...Qxe2?? 10.Qxb7+–) 10.Nd2 Qc6 11.Nc4
Bc7, Pekar – Sulko, Slovakia 2007, 12.Re1 Ne7 13.Bg5. White provokes a
weakening of the a2-g8 diagonal. 13...f6 14.Bf4+– Black has wasted too
many tempi on moves with his queen and his position is already beyond
salvation.
6...Nf6 7.Na3!? White wishes to attack the enemy queen with the move
Nc4, or to play Nb5 (This move seems more interesting than the
straightforward try Nf3.).

7...a6. Black defends against his opponent’s knight-sortie Nb5, but

weakens the b6-square in the process. 8.Nc4 Qc7 9.g3! White is preparing
the development of his bishop to the f4-square. 9...Be7 10.Bf3 0-0 11.Bf4
Qd8 12.Qxd8 Bxd8 13.0-0-0 Nc6 14.h3!± Now, Black cannot simplify the
position with the move Bg4. White’s pieces exert powerful pressure against
Black’s queenside.
7...Nc6 8.Nf3 Qb8 (8...Qd6 9.Nb5 Qxd1+ 10.Bxd1 Kd8. Black defends
against Nc7+, but loses his castling rights. It is an endgame indeed, but this
circumstance is obviously in favour of White, since there are still too many
pieces left on the board. 11.Ng5 Be6 12.Bf4±) 9.g3 a6. Now, Black must
comply with the transfer of his queen to the a7-square; otherwise, he might
even lose it. It would be very passive there. 10.Bf4 Qa7 11.Nc4 b5 12.Nce5
Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Bb7 14.Bf3 (14.0-0!? White leaves his bishop on the f1-a6
diagonal, because it would take part in the attack against the enemy b5-
pawn from there. 14...Be7 15.c4 0-0 16.cxb5 Nd5 17.Bd2 axb5 18.Bxb5
Rad8 19.a4ƒ White’s king is a bit vulnerable, but this is insufficient to
compensate fully Black’s sacrificed pawn.) 14...Be7 15.a4 0-0 16.Nc6
Bxc6 17.Bxc6 Rad8 18.Qf3² White’s bishops are tremendously powerful in
this opened position.
7...Bd7 8.Nf3 Qc7 9.Nb5 Bxb5 10.Bxb5+ Nc6 (10...Nbd7 11.0-0 0-0-0
12.Qb3±) 11.Qa4 Bd6 (11...0-0-0 12.0-0± The position of Black’s king on
the queenside is not reliable at all.) 12.Bg5 Be7?! (It would be preferable
for Black to choose here 12...Qe7+ 13.Kf1 0-0 14.Re1 Qd8 15.Rd1±,
although even then he would be on the verge of defeat.) 13.0-0-0 0-0
14.Bf4 Qb6 15.Rhe1. The activity of White’s pieces increases with every
move. 15...Rfe8. Black protects his bishop, but allows the opponent to make
a very unpleasant pin. 16.Ne5 Rad8. Black is ready to lose a pawn, but after
the move 17.Nc4!, he loses his queen. 17...Rxd1+ 18.Rxd1 1–0 Godena –
Castagnetta, Caorle 1982.

6.Kxd1 Nc6
 7.Bf4
White not only protects his pawn, but also develops a piece.

7.f4. He defends reliably his pawn on e5, but now White must play very
precisely; otherwise, his lag in development might hurt him seriously.
7...Bf5 (7...f6 8.Bd3!? White does not hold on to his material advantage and
tries to complete the development of his pieces as quickly as possible.
8...fxe5 9.Nf3²; 8...Bg4+ 9.Nf3 fxe5 10.Kc2²) 8.Na3 (8.Nf3 0-0-0+
9.Nbd2 f6 10.Bb5 Nge7 11.exf6 gxf6, Kulhanek – Pesout, Czech Republic
1995. Here, White should try to oust the enemy bishop from the f5-square:
12.Nh4!? Bd7 13.Re1±) 8...0-0-0+ 9.Ke1 f6 10.Nc4 fxe5 11.fxe5 Re8
12.Nf3² White is still holding on to his extra pawn, while Black’s kingside
is not developed yet.

7...Nge7
7...Bg4+ 8.Be2 0-0-0+ 9.Nd2 Be6 (9...Bxe2+. The exchanges of pieces
are in favour of White. 10.Kxe2 Nge7 11.Ngf3± Erenburg – Cernousek,
Aviles 2003.) 10.Ngf3 h6, Rainfray – Poliakov, Paris 1996, 11.h4!? He
prevents g7-g5, followed by Bg7. 11...Nge7 12.Ke1±
 7...Bf5. Black deprives the enemy king of the c2-square. 8.Nd2 0-0-0
(8...Nge7 9.Ngf3 Ng6 10.Bg3±) 9.Ngf3 f6 (9...Nge7 10.Bg3 Nd5
11.Bb5²) 10.Bb5 Nge7, Leckel – Hartmann, Germany 1980 (10...Nxe5,
Szitkey – Provaznik, Slovakia 2006, 11.Bxe5 fxe5 12.Nxe5 Nh6 13.h3 Bd6
14.Re1² Black does not have sufficient compensation for the sacrificed
pawn.) 11.exf6 gxf6 12.Nh4 Bd7 13.Re1² After Black’s bishop has
abandoned the f5-square, White can connect his rooks after the move Kc2.

7...f6. Black is not trying to regain his pawn on e5, but opens immediately
files for his pieces. 8.Nd2!? This is a very practical decision for White. He
gives back his extra pawn, but is happy to play against the isolated pawn in
Black’s position. (8.exf6 Nxf6 9.Nd2 Bf5 10.Ngf3 0-0-0, Cupal – Mezera,
Frymburk 2002, 11.Nh4 Bd7 12.h3² White’s prospects are preferable, but
he lags in development and must play very precisely not allowing his
opponent to have any tactical counter chances.) 8...fxe5 9.Bg3 Nf6 10.Bd3
Be6 11.Ngf3 0-0-0 12.Kc2 Bd6 13.Ng5 Bg8 14.Rhe1±

8.Nf3 Ng6 9.Bg3 Bg4

 10.Kc2

10.Be2. White prevents the compromising of his kingside pawn-structure.

10...0-0-0+ 11.Nbd2 h5 (11...Bxf3 12.Bxf3 Ncxe5 13.Be4 Bd6 14.Kc2 h5
15.h3 h4 16.Bh2 Kc7, Vucic – Juranic, Mali Losinj 2016, 17.Rhf1² Black
has managed to regain his pawn, but has done that at the price of
exchanging his powerful light-squared bishop for the enemy knight.) 12.h3
Bxf3 13.Bxf3 Ngxe5 14.Be2 Nd3?! 15.Kc2 Nde5, Sazonova – S.Horvath,
Eger 1994, 16.Rad1± Black has no compensation for his opponent’s two-
bishop advantage.

10...h5

It is possible that here, the least of evils for Black is the line: 10...0-0-0
11.Bd3 Bxf3 12.Bf5+ Kc7 13.e6+ Bd6 14.gxf3 fxe6 15.Bxg6 hxg6
16.Nd2² White’s prospects are preferable, but both sides have pawn-
weaknesses, so Black has chances of organising counterplay.

11.h4 Bxf3

11...0-0-0, Vajda – Vukovic, Bucharest 1999, 12.Bd3 Bxf3 13.Bf5+ Kc7

14.gxf3 Ngxe5 15.Na3 a6 16.Nc4 f6 17.Rad1± White’s pieces have been
deployed much more actively and harmoniously than their black
counterparts.

12.gxf3 Ngxe5 13.Nd2 Be7

13...0-0-0. This move enables White to develop his bishop with tempo.
14.Bh3+ Kc7 15.Rhe1 f6 16.Rad1±
14.Re1 Nd7 15.Nc4 0-0
 16.Na5! White exploits the insufficient protection of the enemy bishop on
e7 and penetrates with his rook to the penultimate rank. 16...Nxa5 17.Rxe7
Nf6, Vajda – Plat, Slovakia 2010, 18.Rg1± In this endgame White’s bishops
seem to be much stronger than Black’s knights, which have no good squares
to be deployed to.
 Chapter 9
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 g6

Black wishes to develop his bishop on g7, from where it would exert
pressure against White’s centre. This plan however looks a bit slow and
White often manages to begin active actions in the centre (Na3, Bc4),
before Black has completed the development of his kingside pieces.

5.Nf3 Bg7

5...cxd4 6.Na3 Bg4, Rajlich – Galliamova, Ekaterinburg 2006 (6...Bg7

7.Nb5 – see variation B) 7.Nb5 Bxf3 (7...Na6 8.Nbxd4 Nc7 9.h3 Bd7
10.Bd3 Bg7 11.0-0 Nf6 12.Bf4 Ne6 13.Nxe6 Bxe6 14.Nd4 Bd7 15.Re1±)
8.gxf3 Qe5+ (8...Na6?! 9.Qa4) 9.Be2 d3 10.Qxd3 Nc6 11.f4 Qb8 12.Bf3
Bg7 13.Qc4±

5...Bg4 6.Be2
 6...Nc6 7.h3 Bxf3 8.Bxf3 Qd6 9.dxc5 Qxc5 10.Be3 Qb5, Sevin –
Misiuk, Budva 2013, 11.Qb3 Qxb3 12.axb3±
6...Bg7 7.h3 Bd7 8.0-0 Nf6 9.c4 Qd6 10.d5 0-0 11.Nc3 e6 12.Be3±
6...cxd4 7.cxd4 Bg7 8.Nc3 Qa5, Brajovic – Nikac, Cetinje 1996, 9.Qb3
Bxf3 (9...Nd7 10.Ng5+–) 10.Bxf3 Nd7 11.0-0 Ngf6 12.Bf4±

After 5...Nf6 White has the additional resource 6.Qb3, creating the threat
Bc4.
 6...Bg7 7.Bc4 Qe4+. Now, in order not to lose his pawn on f7, Black is
forced to place his queen on a very unfavourable square and it would soon
come under an attack there after Nbd2. 8.Be3 0-0 9.Nbd2 Qf5 10.dxc5²
6...cxd4. Black lags horribly in development after this move. 7.Bc4 Qe4+
8.Kf1! e6 9.cxd4± a6 (9...Be7? 10.Nc3 Qf5, Jenni – Forster, Biel 1997,
11.Nb5 Na6 12.Bh6! White prevents his opponent’s castling. 12...Ng4
13.Bg5 Nf6 14.Re1 0-0 15.g4!! Black has succeeded in evacuating his king
away from the centre, but White begins a chase after his opponent’s queen.
15...Qxg4 16.h3 Qh5 17.Re5+–) 10.Bg5 Bg7 11.Nc3 Qf5 12.Re1 Nc6
13.d5! White has a better development, so he should try to open the position
as quickly as possible. 13...Na5 14.Qa4+ b5 15.Qxa5 bxc4 16.Qb4 Qd3+
17.Kg1 h6 18.Ne5 Qf5 19.Qd6! Qxg5 20.Qc6+ Nd7, Ekstroem – Belotti,
Charleville Mezieres 2000, 21.Nxf7!+–
6...Qxb3 7.axb3. After this move White’s rook on a1 will join into the
actions right from its initial square. 7...Nbd7 (7...cxd4 8.Nxd4 Bd7 9.Na3!?
a6 10.Nab5±: 9.Nb5 Bxb5 10.Bxb5+ Nbd7 11.0-0 Bg7, Sedina – Peptan,
Mallorca 2004, 12.Be2 0-0 13.Bf3±) 8.dxc5 Nxc5 9.Be3 b6. Here, Black
will have to weaken his pawn-structure; otherwise he would lose his pawn
on a7. 10.Bb5+ Bd7 11.Bxc5 (11.Bc4!? White refrains from the idea to
weaken his opponent’s pawn-structure. His plan now is to play b3-b4 and to
force the enemy knight to retreat to the b7-square where it would be
obviously misplaced. 11...Bg7 12.Ne5 0-0 13.b4 Nb7 14.Nxd7 Nxd7
15.Bd5±) 11...bxc5, Pedersen – Kristensen, Denmark 1996, 12.Bxd7+
Nxd7 13.Kd1! Bg7 14.Kc2± From the c2-square White’s king protects
reliably the b3-pawn. Black has no compensation for the vulnerability of his
pawns on a7 and ”5.
6...Be6. Black defends against Bc4, but his bishop would be misplaced on
the e6-square. 7.c4

7...Qd7 8.d5 Bf5 9.Nc3 Bg7 (9...Qc8 10.Be2 Bg7 11.0-0 0-0 12.Re1 Re8,
Fressinet – Relange, Senat 2003, 13.h3± The pawn on d5 cramps Black’s
position.) 10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 Qc7 12.Nb5 Qb6 13.Bf4 Na6 14.Rfe1. White
plans to organise pressure against the enemy pawn on e7. 14...Rfe8 15.h3
Rac8 16.Bf1± Emms – Ansell, England 1999.
7...Qe4+. After this move White will fail to advance d4-d5, but Black will
be forced to lose several tempi in order to retreat his queen from the e4-
square. 8.Be3 cxd4 9.Nbd2 Qc6 10.Nxd4 Qc8 11.Nxe6 fxe6. This is the
point. Black is forced to weaken his pawn-structure after which White’s
advantage becomes doubtless. 12.Be2 (12.g3!?±) 12...Nc6 13.0-0 Bg7
14.h3 0-0 15.Nf3± Sermek – Plachetka, Pula 1998.

5...Nc6. Now, White can obtain an advantage in several different ways.

6.Be3. White is threatening dxc5 and forces his opponent to exchange on

d4 after which he can develop his knight on b1 with tempo on the c3-
square. 6...cxd4 7.cxd4 Bg7 8.Nc3 Qa5 (The move 8...Qd8 seems rather
passive. 9.Bb5 Bd7 10.0-0 Nf6 11.d5 Nb8, Hutchinson – Ansell, Port Erin
2002, 12.Be2 0-0 13.Re1±) 9.d5 Ne5 (9...Nb4? 10.Bb5+ Kf8 11.0-0±;
9...Nb8 10.Bc4±) 10.Bb5+ Bd7 11.Nxe5 Bxb5 12.Bd4 f6 13.Nd3 Bxd3
14.Qxd3 Nh6 15.d6!? White gets rid of his isolated pawn with the help of
some tactic. This pawn could have become a liability in his position later...
15...Rd8 (15...exd6?! 16.Qe4+) 16.dxe7 Qe5+ 17.Ne2 Qxe7 18.Qc4 Nf7
19.Bc5 Qd7 20.0-0²
6.dxc5. White would not mind entering an endgame here. 6...Qxc5
(Following 6...Qxd1+ 7.Kxd1, Black will have problems to regain his pawn
on c5. 7...Nf6 8.Bb5 Bd7, Schouten – Martens, Netherlands 2019, 9.Nbd2
Bg7 10.Re1²; 8...Bg7 9.Re1 Bd7 10.Nbd2 a6 11.Ba4²) 7.Na3. White’s
knight is headed for the b5-square. 7...Qa5 (7...Bh6!? Black wishes to
facilitate his defence by exchanging pieces, but this is insufficient for him
to reach complete equality. 8.Be2 Bxc1 9.Qxc1 Nf6 10.b4 Qd6 11.Nc4
Qc7 12.Qh6! If Black manages somehow to castle, White’s advantage
would evaporate into thin air... 12...Be6 13.0-0²) 8.b4!? Qd8 9.Qb3 Bg7
10.Bc4. Now, you can see the idea behind White’s move eight. With a white
pawn on b4 Black cannot play Na5. 10...e6 11.0-0 Nge7 12.Rd1 Bd7
13.Nb5 0-0 14.Bf4±
6.Be2. Now, Black’s queen retreats to the e-file without a check and he
must consider the possible pawn-advances c3-c4 and d4-d5.

6...cxd4 7.cxd4 Bg7 8.Nc3 Qd8 (Following 8...Qa5, the pawn-advance

9.d5 would be even stronger. 9...Nb4?! 10.Bb5+ Kf8 11.0-0±; 9...Ne5
10.0-0 Nxf3+ 11.Bxf3 Nf6 12.Re1. Now, Black is faced with a rather
unpleasant choice: he must either lose his castling rights, or part with his
e7-pawn. 12...0-0 13.Rxe7±; 12...Kf8, Ivanets – Yukhno, Ilichevsk 2007,
13.Qe2 Qd8 14.Bf4+–) 9.d5 Nb8 (9...Ne5 10.Nxe5 Bxe5 11.0-0 Bg7
12.Bf4 Nf6 13.d6±) 10.0-0 Nf6 11.Re1 0-0 12.Bf4 Nbd7 13.d6! e6
14.Rc1± The pawn on d6 cramps Black’s position.
6...Bg7 7.c4 Qd6 8.d5 Nd4 9.Nxd4 cxd4 (9...Bxd4 10.0-0 Nf6, Vrana –
Kratochvil, Czech Republic 2004, 11.Nc3 Bd7 12.Bh6²) 10.0-0 e6 11.dxe6
Bxe6, Kotilainen – Kiik, Jyvaskyla 2013, 12.Nc3 Ne7 13.Ne4 Qc7 14.Bg5
0-0 15.Qd2² Later White can prepare a pawn-offensive on the queenside
(b2-b4, c4-c5, Nd6), or can try to organise an attack against the enemy king
(Nf6+ or Bh6).

6.Na3

We will analyse now: A) 6...Nf6 and B) 6...cxd4.

The move 6...a6?! is a loss of time for Black. 7.Bc4 Qe4+ (7...Qd6 8.Ng5
Nh6 9.Ne4 Qc7 10.Nxc5±) 8.Be3 Nh6 (After 8...cxd4?, White can inflict a
typical tactical strike for the variation with the move g7-g6: 9.Bxf7+! Kf8
10.Bc4 e5 11.0-0 Nc6 12.Ng5+– Kett – Jaufarally, Basingstoke 2019;
8...h6?! Black covers the g5-square, but lags in development even more.
9.Qb3 e6 10.d5 b5 11.Bxb5+ axb5 12.Nxb5+–) 9.Qd2 (Here, White can
simply capture a pawn: 9.dxc5 0-0 10.0-0±) 9...cxd4 (9...Nf5? 10.Bxf7+–)
10.0-0-0! White’s bishop is untouchable because of the checkmate. Now,
Black must comply with the strike on f7 in order to save his knight.
10...Nf5 11.Bxf7+! Kf8 12.Rhe1 Nxe3 13.Rxe3 Bh6 14.Rxe4 Bxd2+
15.Rxd2 Kxf7 16.Ne5+ Kg7 17.Rexd4+–
 6...Bg4. Here, White can obtain an advantage in two different ways.
7.Nb5 Na6 8.Qa4 Kf8 9.Be2±, or 7.Bc4 Qe4+ 8.Be3 cxd4 9.Qb3 dxe3
10.Bxf7+ Kf8 11.Bd5 Qf5 12.Bxb7 Bxf3 13.gxf3 Nd7 14.Bxa8± Black has
no compensation for the exchange-sacrifice.

6...Nh6. He not only develops his knight, but also defends the f7-square,
but still the edge of the board is not the best place for Black’s knight.

7.Bc4 Qe4+ 8.Qe2!? White would not mind entering an endgame. (about
8.Be3 cxd4 9.cxd4 – see variation B) 8...Qxe2+ 9.Bxe2 cxd4 10.Nb5
(10.Nxd4 Nf5 11.Nxf5 Bxf5 12.Nb5 Kd8, Stripunsky – Yanayt, Sturbridge
2019, 13.Bg5±; 10...0-0 11.Bg5 Bxd4 12.Bxh6 Bg7 13.Bxg7 Kxg7 14.0-0-
0²) 10...Na6 11.Nfxd4 0-0 12.0-0. White’s pieces have been more
harmoniously deployed. This provides him with a slight but stable
advantage. 12...Bd7 13.Rd1 Ng4 14.Nb3 Nf6, Lehtinen – Ilonen, ICCF
2016, 15.a4!? Be6 16.Na5 Bd5 17.g4! White has forced his opponent to
defend on the queenside and now he occupies space on the kingside. 17...h6
18.h4 e6 19.c4 Be4 20.f3²
 7.Nb5 Na6 8.Be2 0-0 (8...cxd4 9.0-0 Nf5 10.Re1 0-0 11.Nfxd4 Nxd4
12.Nxd4 e5 13.Nb5² Black will hardly manage to organise any active
counterplay.) 9.0-0 Nf5 10.dxc5 Qxc5 (10...Qxd1 11.Rxd1. This endgame
seems to be without any good prospects for Black. 11...Nxc5 12.g4! Nd6
13.Nxd6 exd6 14.h3 f5 15.Bc4+ Be6 16.Bxe6+ Nxe6 17.Rxd6 fxg4
18.hxg4 Rae8 19.Kg2² Black does not have sufficient compensation for the
pawn.) 11.g4! White ousts the enemy knight back to the edge of the board.
11...Nh6 12.Be3 Qc6 13.h3 f5. Black weakens the a2-g8 diagonal in an
attempt to create some counterplay. 14.Nfd4 Qe8, Iljiushenok –
Rakhmanov, Khanty-Mansiysk 2017, 15.Qb3+ Nf7 16.Ne6 Bxe6
17.Qxe6±

A) 6...Nf6 7.Bc4

7...Qe4+

7...Qd8. Black evacuates his queen to a safe place, but must comply with
a loss of a pawn. 8.dxc5 Qxd1+ 9.Kxd1 0-0 10.Re1 Nc6 11.h3 Bf5 12.Ke2
Rfd8 13.Kf1!? It is an endgame indeed, but White should better remove his
king from the centre. (The move 13.Be3 would lose a part of White’s
advantage. 13...Na5 14.Bd4 Nh5 15.Bxg7 Kxg7 16.Nd4 Be4² Jonkman –
Gutman, Germany 1999.) 13...Na5 14.Be2 Rac8 15.Nd4±

8.Be3 0-0

8...cxd4? 9.Bxf7!± Kf8 10.cxd4 e6. Black’s only chance here is to try to
trap the enemy bishop on f7. 11.Nc4 Nc6 12.0-0 Qd5 13.Nce5 Nd7
14.Bxe6! After this simple tactical strike Black’s position crumbles
irrevocably. 14...Qxe6 15.d5 Qd6 16.Nc4 Qb4 17.dxc6 bxc6, Bernardi –
Svanda, Innsbruck 2019, 18.Nd6+–

9.0-0 cxd4

Following 9...Bg4, Black would not obtain sufficient compensation for

the sacrificed pawn. 10.dxc5 Nbd7, Kiefhaber – Dekan, Baden 2011
(10...Bxf3 11.Qxf3 Qxf3 12.gxf3±) 11.Be2 Rfd8 12.Ng5 Bxe2 13.Nxe4
Bxd1 14.Nxf6+ Bxf6 15.Rfxd1 Rac8 16.Kf1±

10.Nxd4
 10...Qe5
Black wishes to bring his queen back to his camp as quickly as possible.

10...Nc6 11.Re1 Qh4 12.Nxc6 (12.g3!? Qg4 13.Be2²) 12...bxc6, Narva –

Chernyak, Antalya 2019, 13.Bd4 Ng4 14.h3 Nh6 15.Bxg7 Kxg7 16.Qe2±
Black has no compensation for the vulnerability of his pawns on a7 and c6.

10...Nd5. He is preparing Nf4, but White can simply transfer to a better

endgame. 11.Bg5 Nf4 12.Qf3 Qxf3 13.Nxf3 e5, Jimenez Molina – Aguiar
Garcia, ICCF 2010, 14.Be7!? Re8 15.Bd6 Nc6 16.Ng5 Ne6 17.Ne4 Bd7
18.Rad1²

10...Ng4 11.Bg5. White avoids the trade of his bishop and quite
reasonably so. 11...Qe5 12.Nf3 Qc5 (12...Qc7 13.Qe2. White defends his
bishop and prepares Nb5, so the roaming of Black’s queen does not stop.
13...Nc6 14.Nb5 Qb6 15.Bxe7. This is a practical decision for White. The
activity of his pieces may end after a while, but the extra pawn would last
for long... 15...Re8?? 16.Bxf7+! Kxf7 17.Nd6+–; 15...Nxe7 16.Qxe7 Bf5
17.Rad1 Rac8 18.Nd6 Rc7 19.Qe2± Pavasovic – Velickovic, Slovenia
2018) 13.h3 Nf6 14.Re1 Nc6 15.Be3 (15.b4!? Qb6 16.Bb3²) 15...Qa5
16.Nb5 (16.Qb3!? a6 17.Bb6 Qh5 18.Nd4ƒ) 16...Bf5 17.Nfd4 Nxd4
18.Nxd4 Bd7 19.Bf4 Qc5 20.Bb3² Tiviakov – Manik, Calvia 2006. Here,
White has a quite simple plan to improve his position: Qe2, Rad1, Be5,
while Black can hardly begin any active actions.

11.Qf3 Nc6 12.Nxc6 (12.h3!? White deprives the enemy minor pieces of
the g4-square. 12...Na5 13.Be2²) 12...bxc6 13.Bd4 Qd6, Brobakken –
Bergerhoff, ICCF 2008 (13...Qc7 14.Rae1 Bf5 15.h3 Rad8, Ugrinovsky –
Schubert, ICCF 2006, 16.Be5 Qb7 17.Re2²) 14.Rad1 e5 15.Be3 Qc7
16.h3² with a superior pawn-structure for White.

B) 6...cxd4 7.Nb5
 7...Na6
Black is reluctant to retreat his queen to its initial position.

7...Qd8 8.Bf4 Na6 9.Bc4 Nf6 10.Nbxd4² Zarubitski – Kulaots, Moscow

2020.
8.Nbxd4 Nf6 9.Bb5+
Now, before exchanging on a6 White provokes the enemy bishop to
occupy the d7-square. From there it would not protect the pawn on a6 and
would be harmless on the long diagonal, since if it comes to the c6-square
White would simply exchange it.
9...Bd7

9...Nd7. Black’s knight is placed much worse here than on the f6-square.
10.Qe2 0-0 11.Bc4 Qc5 (11...Qd6 12.0-0²) 12.Be3²

10.Bxa6 bxa6 11.0-0 0-0 12.Re1

 12...Rfe8

12...e6 13.Ne5. White wishes to oust the enemy queen away from the
centre of the board as quickly as possible. 13...Rfd8, Feuerstack – Zwirs,
Amsterdam 2020, 14.c4 Qd6 15.Qf3!? (He would not achieve much after a
trade of the queens. 15.Ndf3 Qxd1 16.Rxd1, because in this endgame
Black’s bishop-pair would compensate the defects of his pawn-structure.
16...Be8 17.Be3 Rdb8 18.Bd4 a5 19.g4 a4 20.g5 Ne4 21.Rac1 h6 22.h4=)
15...Qxd4. Now, Black is forced to enter tactical complications (15...Be8?
16.Bg5±). 16.Bg5 Qxb2 17.Rab1 Qc2 (17...Qxa2 18.Bxf6 Bxf6 19.Qxf6
Be8. Now, White can bring into the attack his rook-pawn with a great effect
– 20.h4‚) 18.Bxf6 Bxf6 19.Qxf6 Qf5 20.Qe7! White is attacking and
avoids the exchange of the queens. 20...Be8 21.g4 Qf4 22.Rb3 Qd2
23.Rbe3 Rd4 24.Qf6 Qxa2 25.h3 Qb2 26.g5! White’s knight has occupied a
beautiful square at the middle of the board, but is not effective there at all.
So, he has prepared Ng4-h6+ with his last move. 26...Rb8 27.Rf3 Qb7
28.Ng4 Rxg4+. This move is forced for Black; otherwise, if White’s knight
comes to the h6-square, Black’s position would become immediately
hopeless. 29.hxg4± White’s rook is stronger than Black’s bishop with two
pawns in this opened position.

13.Ne5

13...Red8

13...Rab8, Karpatchev – Strunski, Ditzingen 2012. The pressure against

the pawn on b2 would not facilitate Black’s defence. 14.h3 a5 15.c4 Qb7
(15...Qc5 16.Nb3 Qc7 17.Bf4±) 16.Bf4 Nh5 17.Bh2. Now, Black must
remove his rook from the b8-square; otherwise, he would lose the
exchange. 17...Rbd8 18.Qb3±

13...Rad8 14.Qb3
 14...e6 15.Bg5 Bc8? (15...h6 16.Qxd5 exd5 17.Bh4²) 16.Ndc6 Qxb3
17.axb3 Rd6 18.Nb4 h6 19.Nc4 Rd7 20.Bxf6 Bxf6 21.Nxa6± Quesada
Perez – Ortiz Suarez, Villa Clara 2020.
14...a5 15.a4 Bc8 16.Qxd5. In this endgame Black’s pawn-weaknesses
would hurt him horribly. 16...Nxd5 17.h3 Bb7 18.Ndc6 Rd6 19.Nxa5 Ba8
20.Bd2² Black’s fianchettoed bishops have been deployed very actively and
harmoniously, but still, this cannot compensate fully his sacrificed pawn.

14.h3
14.Qf3. The transfer into an endgame looks premature for White.
14...Qxf3 15.Ndxf3 Be8 16.Bg5 h6 17.Bxf6 exf6 18.Nc4 f5÷ Godena –
Georgiadis, Heraklio 2017. Black’s two-bishops advantage compensates the
weaknesses in his pawn-structure.
 14...Ne4

14...Be8 15.Qe2 a5 16.Nef3! White wishes to deploy in the centre his

bishop, and not his knight, so that he may deprive his opponent of his two-
bishop advantage at an opportune moment. 16...e6 17.Bf4 a4 18.Bc7 Rdc8
19.Be5 a3?! This attempt for Black to accomplish some active operations
on the queenside would only worsen his position. 20.b3 Rxc3? 21.Nf5±

15.Nxd7 Rxd7 16.Qc2 Bxd4 17.Rxe4

After Black has been deprived of his two-bishop advantage, he has no
compensation at all for the defects of his pawn-structure.
17...Bg7 18.Re1 Rb8 19.Bf4 Rbb7 20.b3 a5 21.Rac1 a4 22.b4²
 White gradually advances his pawn-majority on the queenside. 22...a5?
This careless move by Black enables White to advance his pawn all the way
up to the c7-square. 23.c4 Qh5 24.c5! Rxb4 25.c6 Rd8 26.c7 Rc8
27.Rcd1+–
 Chapter 10
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4
cxd4 5.cxd4

White’s game is very simple now. His knights will go to f3 and c3, his
bishop to d3 or c4, 0-0 etc.

There would arise original positions only in variations, connected with

Black’s direct attacks against the enemy pawn on d4: A) 5...e5 and B)
5...Nc6.

About 5...Nf6 6.Nf3 – see Chapter 14.

About 5...e6 6.Nc3, or 5...Nc6 6.Nf3 e6 7.Nc3 – see Chapter 11.

 Following 5...g6, White’s bishop would be useless on the d3-square, so
the best place for it would be the a2-g8 diagonal (The bishop can also be
developed to the b5-square, but as a rule only if this has some tactical
motivation.). White can also leave his knight on g1 for the time being if he
has some more aggressive resource up his sleeve. 6.Nc3 Qa5 (The move
6...Qd8 is too passive. 7.Bc4 Bg7 8.Qb3 e6 9.d5 exd5 10.Nxd5 Nc6 11.Bf4
Nd4, Godena – Nemet, Reggio Emilia 1991, 12.Qg3 Nc2+ 13.Kf1 Nxa1
14.Bd6 Qa5 15.Bb4 Qa4 16.Qd3 Bd7 17.Nc7+ Kd8 18.Bb5+–) 7.Bb5+
Bd7, Kun – Kahn, Budapest 2002, 8.Bc4 Bg7?! (8...Qb4 9.Qe2²) 9.Qb3 e6
10.Qxb7 Bc6 11.Bb5 Ne7 12.Bxc6+ Nexc6 13.Nge2 0-0 14.Qxa8+–

A) 5...e5 6.Nf3

6...exd4

6...Nc6 7.Nc3 – see 5...Nc6.

6...Bb4+ 7.Bd2 Bxd2+ 8.Nbxd2 exd4 9.Bc4 Qf5 10.0-0± Nc6? 11.Ne4
Qg6 12.Neg5 Nh6, Salai – M.Balogh, Slovakia 2006, 13.Re1+ Kf8
14.Qb3+–
 6...Bg4 7.Be2 Bb4+ (7...exd4 8.Nc3 Bb4 9.0-0 – see 7...Bb4+) 8.Nc3
exd4 (8...e4?! 9.Nd2 Bxc3 10.bxc3 Bxe2 11.Qxe2 Nf6 12.f3± Salai – Petr,
Hlohovec 2000; 9...Bxe2 10.Qxe2 Qxd4 11.Nb5 Qe5 12.a3 Bxd2+
13.Bxd2 a6 14.Bc3 Qxb5 15.Bxg7±; 12...Ba5 13.0-0ƒ) 9.0-0 Bxc3 10.bxc3
d3 (10...Ne7? 11.Nxd4 Bxe2 12.Qxe2 Nd7 13.Ba3 Nc5 14.Qb5+ Nd7
15.Rfe1 1–0 Soloviov – Montoya Bello, Collado Villalba 1999) 11.Bxd3
Nc6, Panainte – Ardelean, Iasi 2018, 12.Be4 (12.Qe1+!? There are more
resources with queens present on the board, but we have to add – for both
sides... 12...Nge7 13.Be4±) 12...Qxd1 13.Rxd1 Nf6 14.Bxc6+ bxc6
15.Ba3±

7.Qxd4

7...Nf6

After 7...Qe6+, Black would fail to neutralise White’s pressure. 8.Be3

Nc6 9.Bb5 Bd7 10.Qd3 Bb4+ 11.Nbd2 (11.Nc3 Nf6 12.0-0 0-0 13.Rfe1
Qg4 14.h3 Qg6 15.Qxg6 hxg6 16.Rac1 a6, Canibal – Vasile, ICCF 2005,
17.Bf1 Rfe8 18.a3 Bf8 19.Ng5²; 18...Bxc3 19.Rxc3 Nd5 20.Rd3 Nxe3
21.Rxd7 Nxf1 22.Rxe8+ Rxe8 23.Rxb7±) 11...Nf6 12.0-0 0-0 13.a3 Be7
14.Rfe1 Qd5 15.Qe2 Rfe8 16.Rad1 a6 17.Bc4 Qh5 18.h3 Rad8 19.b4²

Following 7...Qxd4 8.Nxd4, White’s edge might be quite minimal, but

Black would have difficulties to neutralise it. Later, White can try to
transform it into more meaningful advantages. Black’s possibilities to
organise counterplay would be absolutely minimal if White plays
accurately.

About 8...Bc5 9.Nb5 Na6 10.Be2 Nf6 11.N1c3 – see 7...Nf6.

8...Nf6 9.Bb5+ (9.Nb5 Na6 10.N1c3 Bc5 11.Be2 – see 7...Nf6) 9...Bd7
10.0-0 Bc5 11.Re1+ Kf8 12.Bxd7 Nbxd7 13.Nb3 Re8 14.Rxe8+ Kxe8
15.Nxc5 Nxc5 16.Be3² Hague – Gladis, IECG 2006.
8...Bb4+ 9.Bd2 Bxd2+ 10.Nxd2 Nf6 11.Nb5 Na6 12.Bc4 0-0 13.0-0
Bd7, Nikolenko – Lisenko, Sochi 2019, 14.Nd6 Bc6 15.Nb3²
8...Bd7 9.Nb5 Bxb5 10.Bxb5+ Nc6, Buonanno – Campomori, Rome
1996 (10...Nd7 11.Nc3 0-0-0 12.Bf4 Ne7 13.Rc1 Nc6 14.0-0 Nc5, Evsin –
Schalkwijk, LSS 2014 15.Be3±) 11.Nc3 Bd6 (11...Bb4 12.Be3²) 12.Bxc6+
bxc6 13.Be3 Nf6 14.0-0-0²
 8...a6 9.Nc3 Bb4 (9...Nf6 10.Bg5 – see 7...Nf6) 10.Be2 Ne7 (10...Nf6
11.0-0 0-0 12.Bf3 Rd8 13.Rd1 Nbd7 14.Bf4 Re8, Dovzik – Vojtek, Slovakia
2008, 15.Na4±) 11.0-0 Nbc6 (11...Bxc3?! 12.bxc3 0-0 13.Ba3 Re8 14.Bf3
Nec6, Pavasovic – Maccapani, Elista 1998, 15.Rfe1 Bd7 16.Rxe8+ Bxe8
17.Re1 Nd7 18.Nxc6 bxc6 19.Bxc6 Rd8 20.Bb7 a5 21.Be7 Rb8 22.Bd6+–)
12.Nxc6 Nxc6 13.Nd5 Ba5 14.Be3 Be6 15.Nf4 Bf5 16.Bf3 0-0 17.Rac1²
Rac8? Strohmann – Bryjak, Ruhrgebiet 1996, 18.Rc5 Be6 19.Nxe6 fxe6
20.Bxc6 Bb6 21.Bxb7 Rxc5 22.Bxc5 Bxc5 23.Bxa6±

8.Nc3 Qxd4

8...Qe6+ 9.Be3 Nc6 10.Bb5 Be7 (After 10...Bd7?!, Black may give up
his bishop, because he may have serious problems on the e-file. 11.Bxc6
Bxc6 12.0-0-0 Be7 13.Rhe1± 0-0? 14.Bg5 Ne4 15.Bxe7 Qxe7 16.Nxe4 1–
0 Dischinger – Thieme, Duesseldorf 1995) 11.0-0 0-0 12.Qa4 Ne5,
Tredinnick – Andersson, England 1954, 13.Nd4 Qd6 14.Rfd1 Neg4
15.Nf3² White maintains a slight but stable advantage.

9.Nxd4
 We have already mentioned that the endgame may seem to be quite
simple, but Black’s defence would not be easy at all. He lags considerably
in development and will have problems to complete the development of his
queenside and in particular of his light-squared bishop. If White’s bishop
occupies the h1-a8 diagonal, Black’s task would become even more
difficult.

9...a6
Black defends against the penetration of White’s knight to the b5-square.

9...Bc5 10.Ndb5 Na6 11.Be2 0-0, Pirrot – Pisu, Vienna 2016, 12.a3 Bb6
13.0-0 Nc5 14.Be3 Bg4 15.Bc4 Rad8 16.h3²
9...Bb4 10.Ndb5 Na6 11.Be2 0-0 12.0-0 Bf5 13.Bf3² Bd3, Sabri – Foo,
Kuala Lumpur 2008, 14.Bxb7 Rab8 15.Bxa6 Bxc3 16.Nxc3 Bxa6 17.Rd1±

10.Bg5

10.Be2!? Bc5 11.Be3 0-0 12.h3² Black will have difficulties to complete
the development of his queenside.
 10...Be7

He has an alternative here – 10...Nbd7, with the idea to develop his

bishop to a more active position, but its defect is that his king would remain
in the centre11.0-0-0 Bb4 12.Re1+ (12.Bd3!? 0-0 13.Rhe1²) 12...Kf8, Fette
– Schlick, Germany 1983, 13.Be2 (White is trying to win a tempo in
comparison to the variation 13.a3 Bc5 14.Rd1²) 13...Nc5 (13...Bc5
14.Rd1±; 13...Bxc3 14.bxc3 Ne4 15.Bf4 Nxc3 16.Bd6+ Kg8 17.Bc4+–)
14.Bd2 Bg4 15.f3 Bh5 16.Nc2²

11.0-0-0 0-0 12.Bd3 Nd5 13.Bxe7 Nxe7, Gubanov – Kalinin, Ternopol

2003, 14.Rhe1 Nbc6 15.Nxc6 Nxc6 16.Be4² White wishes to exchange on
c6, because the endgame after that would be at least rather unpleasant for
Black.

B) 5...Nc6 6.Nf3

We will analyse now B1) 6...Bg4 and B2) 6...e5.

About 6...e6 7.Nc3 – see Chapter 11.

 After Black’s alternatives White’s game would be rather simple: Nb1-c3,
d4-d5 etc. Black would be practically incapable of countering this plan.

6...Bf5? 7.Nc3 Qa5 8.d5 0-0-0 9.Bd2 Nb4 10.Rc1 Kb8 11.a3+– Pirrot –
Ratiarison, Metz 1991.

6...Nf6? 7.Nc3 Qd8 (7...Qa5 8.d5 Nb4 9.a3 Na6, Richards – Keskin,
Istanbul 2003, 10.Bb5+ Bd7 11.Bxd7+ Nxd7 12.0-0 g6 13.Qd4 Nf6 14.d6
Rd8 15.Re1+–; 7...Qd6 8.Nb5 Qd8 9.d5 Nb8 10.Bf4 Na6 11.Bc4 g6, Gara
– Hajdu, Hungary 1997, 12.Qe2 Bg7 13.Nd6+ Kf8 14.Nxf7 Kxf7 15.d6+
Ke8 16.0-0+–) 8.d5 Nb8 9.Bb5+ Bd7 10.Bc4 g6 11.Qb3 Qb6, Herbst –
Berger, Bayern 2015, 12.0-0 Qxb3 (12...Bg7 13.Re1 0-0 14.Qxb6 axb6
15.Rxe7±) 13.axb3 Bg7 14.Re1 a6 15.Be3 0-0 16.Bc5±

6...g6? 7.Nc3 Qd8 (7...Qd6? 8.Nb5 Qb8 9.d5 Nd8 10.Qd4+–; 7...Qa5
8.d5 Nb8 9.Bc4 Bg7 10.0-0 Nf6, Zatonskih – Dirmeier, Germany 2016,
11.d6 e6 12.Nb5 Na6 13.d7+ Bxd7 14.Nd6+ Kf8 15.Ng5+–) 8.d5 Nb8
9.Bb5+ Bd7 10.Bxd7+ Nxd7 11.0-0 Bg7, N.Kosintseva – Fatalibekova,
chessassistantclub.com 2004, 12.d6 e6 (12...Ngf6 13.dxe7+–) 13.Nb5+–

B1) 6...Bg4 7.Nc3!

 7...Bxf3

All the alternatives for Black would be much worse and in many cases he
would be practically lost.
7...Qe6+? 8.Be3 Bxf3 9.Qxf3 Qf6 10.Qe4 e6 11.d5 Ne5 12.Bb5+ Nd7
13.dxe6 Qxe6 14.Bxd7+ 1–0 Soloviov – Garcia Cervigon, Collado Villalba
1996.

7...Qd7? 8.d5 Bxf3 9.gxf3 0-0-0 10.dxc6 Qxc6 11.Qe2+– Marshall –

Federl, Cleveland 1980.

7...Qh5?! 8.d5 Bxf3 (8...0-0-0 9.Qa4) 9.gxf3 0-0-0 10.Qa4 Ne5

(10...Rxd5 11.Nxd5 Qxd5 12.Be3+–) 11.Be2 Nxf3+ 12.Bxf3 Qxf3
13.Rg1+– Wach – Schroll, Austria 1991.

7...Qa5? 8.d5 0-0-0 (8...Nb8, Berg – Jhunjhnuwala, Prague 2020, 9.Qb3

Nd7 10.Bb5+–; 8...Ne5 9.Bb5+ Bd7 10.Nxe5 Bxb5 11.Qb3 a6 12.d6+–)
9.Bd2 Rxd5 (9...Nb4 10.a3 Bxf3 11.gxf3 Nxd5 12.Na4+– Grizenko – Firat,
Urgup 2004; 9...Ne5? 10.Nb5 Qb6 11.Qc2+ 1–0 Soloviov – Kravchenko,
Odessa 1978) 10.Nxd5 Qxd5 11.Be2 e5, Zunker – Hess, Stadtallendorf
1975, 12.h3 Bh5 13.0-0 Nf6 14.Be3+–

7...Qd8? 8.d5 Nb8 (8...Bxf3? 9.Qxf3 Nd4 10.Qe4 e5 11.dxe6 fxe6

12.Be3+–; 8...Ne5? 9.Nxe5 Bxd1 10.Bb5+) 9.Qa4+ Bd7 10.Qb3 b6
(10...Qb6, Soloviov – Minitiuk, Odessa 1978, 11.Bb5 Bxb5 12.Nxb5 a6
13.Nd6+ Qxd6 14.Qxb7+–) 11.Ne5 Nf6 12.Nb5 e6 13.d6 Na6 14.Bg5+–
Soloviov – Reznitsky, Nikolaev 1975.

8.gxf3 Qxd4
8...Qa5 9.d5 Ne5 10.Bd2 Nf6 11.Nb5 Qd8, Soloviov – Mazin, Nikolaev
1974, 12.Qe2 Nfd7 13.f4 a6 14.fxe5 axb5 15.e6+–

9.Qxd4 Nxd4 10.Nb5

10...0-0-0

Black wishes to complete his development as quickly as possible and to

ensure the safety of his king, but he fails to do that.
 It is naturally bad for Black to play here 10...Nxb5? 11.Bxb5+ Kd8,
Soloviov – Maliarchuk, Nikolaev 1973, 12.Ke2!? e5 (12...e6 13.Rd1+ Ke7
14.Bg5+–) 13.Rd1+ Ke7 14.Rd7+ Kf6 15.Bc4+–

10...Ne6 11.Bc4 (11.Nxa7!? Rxa7 12.Bb5+ Kd8 13.Be3 Ra6 14.Bxa6

bxa6 15.Ke2 f5, Mazajchik – Deceuninck, Hengelo 2004, 16.Rac1 Ke8
17.Rc6 Kf7 18.Rxa6 g6 19.Ra8 Nf6 20.Rd1²; 13...b6 14.Bxb6+ Rc7 15.Rc1
Kc8 16.Bxc7 Nxc7 17.Ke2 Nf6 18.Rhd1 Kb7 19.Bc6+ Kc8 20.a4²)
11...a6 (11...Rc8 12.Bd5 Rb8 13.Be3±; 12...Nc5 13.Nxa7 Rd8 14.Bc4²)
12.Bxe6 axb5 13.Bd5 e6 14.Bxb7 Bb4+ 15.Ke2 Rb8 16.Bc6+ (16.Be4!?
Nf6 17.Bf4 Rc8 18.a4 bxa4 19.Rxa4 Nxe4 20.fxe4 Be7 21.Rd1 0-0
22.Rd7²) 16...Ke7 17.Rg1² g6? T.Horvath – Radnoti, Hungary 1999,
18.Rd1 Nf6 19.Bg5 Rhd8 20.Rxd8 Rxd8 21.h4 Rb8 22.Rd1±

10...e5 11.Nc7+ Kd7 12.Nxa8 Bb4+ (12...Nc2+ 13.Ke2 Nxa1

14.Bh3+–) 13.Kd1 Ne7 14.f4 Rxa8 15.fxe5 Rd8, Stevic – Topalov, Khanty-
Mansiysk 2010. Black has some compensation for the exchange, but he
would hardly manage to create any meaningful threats, since his light-
squared bishop is absent from the board. 16.a3 Nb3 17.Rb1 Ke8+ 18.Kc2
Nd4+ 19.Kd3 Bc5 20.Be3±

10...Nc2+ 11.Kd1
 11...Rc8 12.Nxa7 Rc5 13.b4! White does not give any respite to his
opponent. 13...Nxb4 14.Rb1 e6 (14...Rd5+ 15.Bd2 e5 16.Bc4 Rd4 17.Bb5+
Kd8 18.Ke2 Bc5 19.Rhc1 Bxa7 20.Bxb4 Nf6 21.Ba5+! b6 22.Bc3 Rd5
23.Bc4 Rc5 24.Bb4. Now Black should better part with his pawn on f7:
24...Rc7?! 25.Rd1+ Rd7 26.Bd6+–) 15.Bd2 Nd5 16.Rxb7 Bd6 17.Nb5 Be5
18.f4! Nxf4 19.Bb4 Rd5+ 20.Kc2 Rd7. This move loses the exchange for
Black (He did not have any simple solutions to the problems. After
20...Nf6, White would have continued with 21.Nc3 Bxc3 22.Kxc3±)
21.Nd6+ Bxd6 22.Bb5 Bxb4, Petr – Kreisl, Szeged 2007, 23.Bxd7+ Kd8
24.Rxb4 Kxd7 25.Rxf4+–
11...Nxa1 12.Nc7+ Kd7 (12...Kd8!? 13.Nxa8 Nf6 14.Be3 b6, Dargan –
Bowcott-Terry, Daventry 2020, 15.Nxb6 axb6 16.Bxb6+ Kc8 17.Ba6+
Kb8 18.Kd2²) 13.Nxa8
 Both White’s knights are in danger, but there are many other factors
which are obviously in his favour. He has a couple of powerful bishops, a
great lead in development and the possibility to organise an attack against
the enemy king. This may provide him with several extra tempi and Black
must react very carefully; otherwise, he might lose immediately.
13...e6 14.Bb5+ Kc8 15.Bf4±
13...Nf6 14.Bb5+ Kc8 15.Bf4±
13...e5 14.Be3 b6 (14...Bb4 15.Bb5+ Kd6 16.Bxa7±) 15.Bb5+ Kc8
16.Ke2 Kb7 17.Rc1 Bc5 (17...Bd6 18.Bc6+ Kb8 19.Rd1+–) 18.Nc7 Kxc7
19.b4+– Richte – Weber, Germany West 1985.
13...g6 (This is Black’s most tenacious defence.) 14.Be3 Bh6 (He has no
time to play 14...b6: 15.Bb5+ Kc8, Wuhrmann – Guiot, Paris 1993,
16.Ba6+ Kb8 17.Ke2 Bg7 18.Rc1 Nf6 19.Nc7+–) 15.Bb5+ Kd6 16.Bxa7
Nf6 17.Nb6 Rd8 18.Nc4+ Ke6+ 19.Ke2 Nc2. It is amazing how both
White’s knights have managed to leave the danger zone. 20.Rd1 Rxd1
(20...Nd5 21.Be3 Ncxe3 22.fxe3 Rb8 23.a4 Bg7 24.Rd3±) 21.Kxd1 Nb4
22.Na5 Bf4, D.Castellote – O.Castellote, Spain 2014, 23.Nxb7 Bxh2 24.a3
Nbd5 25.Nd8+ Kf5 26.Bd3+ Ke5 27.Nxf7+ Ke6 28.Ng5+ Kd7 29.b4±
 11.Nxd4 Rxd4 12.Be3 Rd6

After the natural move 12...Rd7?, Black’s rook will be attacked by

White’s pieces. 13.Bb5 Rc7 14.Bxa7 e6 15.Bb6 Rc2 16.0-0± Rxb2?
17.Rfd1 Be7 18.Bd7+ Kb8 19.Bd4+– Pilaj – Pridorozhni, Oropesa del Mar
1999.

13.Bxa7

13...Nf6

13...e6 14.Bb5² Later White can, for example, double his rooks on the c-
file.

13...g6, Holtel – Hansch, Pardubice 2015, 14.Rc1+ Rc6 15.Rxc6+ bxc6

16.Bd4 f6 (16...Nf6 17.Bc4 Bg7 18.Bxf7±) 17.f4 Nh6 18.Bh3+ Nf5
19.Ke2 Kb7 20.Bxf5 gxf5 21.Kf3±

14.Bb5 Nd5
 14...g6 15.Rc1+ Kd8 16.Bb8 Rd5, Becerra – Uribe Roman, Medellin
2009, 17.Bc7+ Kc8 18.a4 Bg7 19.0-0+–

15.Rc1+ Nc7 16.0-0±

B2) 6...e5 7.Nc3 Bb4 8.Bd2 Bxc3 9.Bxc3

9...e4
There may arise an interesting conflict after this move.

The line: 9...exd4 10.Nxd4, would lead to a symmetrical position, but

obviously White can only win or draw.
 10...Nf6 11.Qe2+ Be6 12.Nxe6 fxe6 (12...Qxe6?! 13.0-0-0 0-0 14.Qxe6
fxe6 15.Bc4 Nd5, Soloviov – Casas, Mataro 1991, 16.Rhe1!? Nxc3
17.Bxe6+ Kh8 18.bxc3 Rxf2 19.Rd7 Rxg2 20.Rxb7 Rxh2 21.Bd5 Na5
22.Rxa7+–; 20...Re8 21.Rd1 Ne5 22.Re7±) 13.Rd1 Qxa2 14.Qb5
(14...Qa6? 15.Qg5 Qa4 16.Qxg7+– Scerbin - Nguyen, lichess.org 2020)
14...Rd8 15.Bd3 Qa6 16.Qxa6 bxa6 17.Bxa6² Van Wieringen – Dolgy,
ICCF 2011.

10...Nge7 11.Nxc6 (11.Nb5 0-0 12.Nc7 Qxd1+ 13.Rxd1 Rb8 14.f3²)

11...Qxc6 12.Be2 Qxg2 (12...0-0 13.0-0 Be6 14.Qd4 f6 15.Rfd1²) 13.Bb5+
Nc6 14.Qe2+ Be6 15.0-0-0 Qg5+ 16.Kb1 Qf5+, Bressanelli – Gehrke,
Riva del Garda 2004, 17.Ka1 0-0 18.Bd3 Qf4 19.Rdg1 g6 20.h4‚

10...Nxd4 11.Qxd4 Qxd4 12.Bxd4 Nf6 13.Bc5 Be6 (13...b6?! 14.Ba3

Be6, Jukic – Juranic, Bol 2013, 15.Bb5+ Bd7 16.Ba6 Bc8? 17.0-0-0!+–)
14.Be2 b6, Soloviov – Temnogorod, Nikolaev 1977, 15.Ba3 0-0-0 16.0-0²

10.Ne5 Nxe5
 10...Nh6?! It is hardly a good idea for Black to leave the centralised
enemy knight on the board. 11.Bc4 Qd6 12.Qa4 0-0 (12...Bd7? 13.Nxd7
Qxd7 14.d5+–) 13.Nxc6 Qxc6 (13...bxc6? 14.Bb4+–) 14.Qxc6 bxc6 15.d5
Bb7 16.d6 Rfd8 17.Rd1 Rd7 18.Bb4 Rad8 (18...Re8, Callow – Leoncini,
IECG 1995, 19.0-0±) 19.0-0 Nf5 20.Be2 Nxd6 21.Ba5 Re8 22.Bg4 f5
23.Bxf5 Rf7 24.Bg4±

11.dxe5 Ne7

It would be worse for Black to choose here 11...Qxd1+?! 12.Rxd1 Ne7

13.Bb5+ Nc6 14.Rd6±

12.Qa4+
White’s advantage may not be so great, but he is playing practically
without any risk. Black has no counterplay at all. White has numerous
moves to choose from and if he wishes to create immediate problems for his
opponent, he should attack the pawn on e4. In general, White does not need
to try to exchange the queens, but does not need to avoid it either. It all
depends on the concrete situation.
 The other promising possibility for White is – 12.Qe2 (threatening
13.Rd1).

12...Bf5?! 13.Rd1 Qc5 (13...Qxa2? 14.Qb5+ Kf8 15.Bb4 Qe6 16.Qxb7

Re8 17.Bb5+–) 14.Qb5+ Qxb5 15.Bxb5+ Nc6 16.Kd2 Rc8 (16...0-0-0+
17.Ke3±) 17.Ke3² Morihama – Silva, ICCF 2004.
12...Bd7 13.Rd1 Qxa2 (13...Qc6 14.Rd6±) 14.Qxe4 Bc6 15.Qd4 Qd5
16.Qf4 Qe4+ 17.Qxe4 Bxe4, Boricsev – Maung, Bangkok 2002, 18.f3 Bc6
19.Bc4²
12...0-0 (This is the most reliable move for Black.) 13.Rd1 Qc6
(13...Qxa2 14.Bb4! Qe6 15.Qxe4 Re8 16.Bb5 Nc6 17.0-0 Qg6, Wiewiora
– Veres, Czech Republic 2020, 18.Qe3 Be6 19.Bd6²) 14.Rd6 Qa4 15.b3
Qa3 16.Qd2 (White is threatening to play 17.Bb4, trapping the enemy
queen.) 16...Qc5 (16...a5 17.Bc4 Nf5 18.0-0 Be6 19.Rxe6! fxe6 20.Bxe6+
Kh8, Karker – Tenev, ICCF 1990, 21.Bd7 Qe7 22.e6 Ra6 23.Be5 Rxe6
24.Bxe6 Qxe6 25.Qxa5±) 17.Bc4 Be6 18.Bxe6 fxe6 19.0-0 Nf5 20.Bb4
Qxe5 (20...Qb5 21.a4 Qxe5 22.Rd7² Crawford – Johnson, USA 1996)
21.Rd7 Rfc8 (21...Rf7?? 22.Rd8+–) 22.Ba3 e3 23.fxe3 Qe4 24.Qd3 Qxd3
25.Rxd3. White maintains a slight edge in this endgame. 25...Rc2 26.e4
Nh4 27.Rf2 Rac8 28.Rdd2 Rxd2 29.Rxd2² B.Ivanov – Pichushkin, ICCF
2015. In general, White has more active pieces than his opponent and his
bishop is obviously stronger than the enemy knight.

12...Bd7

The move 12...Nc6? would lose the e4-pawn for Black without any
compensation. 13.Rd1 Qc5 14.Qxe4 Be6 15.a3 0-0 16.Bd3 g6 17.0-0±
Nevednichy – Candea, Romania 1992.

13.Qa3

13...Qe6

13...e3 14.f3 Qe6 15.Rd1 Nf5 16.Bd3 Qg6 17.0-0. This is a brilliant
exchange-sacrifice. 17...e2 18.Bxe2 Ne3 19.Kf2 Nxd1+ 20.Rxd1 Qb6+
21.Bd4 Qe6, Nimzowitsch – Chajes, Karlsbad 1911, 22.Bc5±

13...Bb5?! In principle, the trade of the bishops should be in favour of

Black, but he has lost several tempi in order to accomplish it and will fail to
coordinate his pieces. 14.Rd1 Bd3 15.Bxd3 exd3 16.0-0 Nc6 17.Rfe1 0-0-0
18.Re3 Qc4 19.Qb3 Qxb3 20.axb3 Rd5 21.Rexd3 Rb5, Mikac – Humer,
Austria 2008, 22.e6 fxe6 23.Bxg7 Rg8 24.Bc3 Rxb3 25.Rh3±

13...Bg4? Black fails to take the d1-square under control. 14.h3 Bh5
15.g4 e3 (15...Bg6 16.Rd1 Qc6 17.Rd6+–) 16.Rh2 Bg6, Kramnik – Piket,
Monte Carlo 1995, 17.Rd1 exf2+ 18.Rxf2 Qe4+ 19.Re2 Qf3 20.Qd6 Qc6
21.Bg2+–

13...Bc6 14.Rd1 Qe6, Nurkic – Malakhov, Celle Ligure 1996, 15.Bb4

(White prevents his opponent’s castling.) 15...Qxe5 (15...Ng6 16.Be2 a5
17.Bc5²) 16.Bc4 e3 17.Qxe3 Qxe3+ 18.fxe3 Bxg2 19.Rg1 Bf3 20.Rc1 g6
(20...Nc6 21.Bc3² The bishop-pair is tremendously powerful in this open
position.) 21.Rf1 Bd5 22.Bxe7 Bxc4 23.Rxc4 Kxe7 24.Rc7+ Ke6
25.Rfxf7²
13...Nc6 14.Rd1 Qe6. This is not the best set-up for Black. 15.Rd6 Qg4
(15...Qe7 16.Qc5 Rc8, Guliaev – N.Ivanov, Gornozavodsk 2009, 17.Be2 0-
0 18.0-0±) 16.h3 Qg5 17.Qc5 0-0-0? Black’s attempt to evacuate
immediately his king leads by force to a very difficult position for him (It
was more accurate for him to play here 17...Rd8 18.Bd2 Qe7 19.Bf4 Rc8
20.Be2±). 18.Bd2 Qf5, Salai – Ciganikova, Slovakia 2002, 19.g4!? Qf3
20.Rh2 e3 21.Bxe3 Qe4 22.f4 Be6 (22...b6 23.Qc3+–) 23.Rhd2 Rxd6
24.exd6+–

14.Qb4 Qc6

14...Bc6 15.Bc4 Nd5 16.Bxd5 Bxd5 17.0-0 a5 (17...Qb6 18.Qa3±

Trapeznikov – Uljianova, Perm 2007) 18.Qc5! White provokes the advance
of the enemy b-pawn after which it would be more vulnerable. 18...b6
19.Qa3 Qe7 20.Qa4+ Qd7 21.Qd4ƒ

15.Rd1
 15...Nd5
15...e3 16.Rd6 (16.Qd6!? exf2+ 17.Kxf2²) 16...exf2+ 17.Kxf2 Qc7
18.Bb5 (18.Bd3!? 0-0 19.Rd1²) 18...Bc6, Vogelmann – Stuemer, Germany
2005, 19.Qc5. White parries the threat of a check from the b6-square and
maintains the tension. 19...0-0 20.Rhd1 Rae8 21.Kg1 Qc8. Black finally
gets rid of the rather unpleasant pin, but White can obtain a great advantage
practically by force. 22.e6! fxe6 23.Bxc6 Nxc6 24.Bxg7! Kxg7 25.Rd7+
Re7 (25...Kh6? 26.Qe3+–; 25...Rf7? 26.Qg5+–) 26.Rxe7+ Nxe7 27.Qxe7+
Kh8 28.h3±

15...a5 16.Qd4 Nf5 17.Qd5 Qxd5 18.Rxd5 Be6 19.Bb5+ Ke7 20.Rd1
Rhd8, Karpatchev – Uwira, Griesheim 2002, 21.Rxd8 Kxd8 22.0-0 Bxa2
23.Ra1 Be6 24.Bxa5+ Kc8 25.Rc1+ Kb8 26.Bc7+ Kc8 27.Bb6+ Kb8
28.h4²

16.Qxe4 Nxc3 17.Qxc6 Bxc6 18.bxc3 0-0

18...Rc8 19.Rd4²
 19.f4

19...g5

19...Rac8. After quiet developments, White’s game will be very simple.

20.Rd4 Rfe8 21.Kd2 b5, Langvad – E.Pedersen, Aarhus 1997, 22.h4 Rc7
23.Rh3 Kf8 24.Rhd3±

20.Bc4 gxf4 21.0-0 Rae8 22.Rde1 Rd8

Black wishes to trade the powerful enemy bishop.
Without this, the vulnerability of the pawn on f7 would hurt him. 22...Re7
23.Rxf4 Rd8 24.Rd4 Rde8 25.Rf1 Bd7 26.Bxf7+ Rxf7 27.Rxf7 Kxf7
28.Rxd7+ Re7 29.Rxe7+ Kxe7 30.Kf2+– Van Het – Van Egmond,
Netherlands 1995.
 23.Rxf4 Bd5, De la Paz Perdomo – Zambrana, Santa Clara 2003
(23...Rd2?! 24.Rg4+ Kh8 25.Rf1 Bd5 26.e6 Bxc4 27.Rxc4 Rg8 28.Rxf7
Rdxg2+ 29.Kf1 R2g7 30.Rcc7 Rxf7+ 31.exf7 Rb8 32.Rxb7+–) 24.Rg4+
Kh8 25.Rf1 Bxc4 26.Rxc4²
 Chapter 11
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4
cxd4 5.cxd4

This chapter is devoted to a classical position with an isolated pawn. In

variation B we have analysed the most popular lines, while in variation A,
we have dealt with some seldom played move-orders. In general, these are
variations in which Black either does not place his queen’s knight on the c6-
square, or delays its development.

A) 5...e6 6.Nc3
We will analyse now: A1) 6...Bb4 and A2) 6...Qd8.

Following 6...Qd6 7.Nf3, there usually arises transposition of moves, for

example: 7...Nf6 8.Bd3 Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Be3 Nc6 11.a3 – see variation
B4.
 6...Qa5 7.Nf3 Nf6 8.Bd3

8...Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Bf4 a6 11.a3 b5, Shalagin – Onischenko, Zelenograd

2019, 12.d5! exd5 13.Nxd5 Nxd5 14.Bxh7+ Kxh7 15.Qxd5 Ra7 16.Bxb8
Rd7 17.Qe4+ Kg8 18.Ne5 Bb7 19.Qe3 Rdd8 20.b4 Qa4 21.Bc7 Rc8
22.Rac1+–
8...Bd7 9.0-0 Bc6 10.Ne5 Bd6 11.Bf4 Bxe5 12.Bxe5 Nbd7, Finster –
B.Schneider, Bayern 1997, 13.Bd6 Qg5 14.g3 h5 15.h3 h4 16.g4±
Following 8...Bb4, Black is ready to castle and his capturing on c3 would
be without a check, so White is not forced to defend his knight. 9.0-0 Bxc3
10.bxc3 Qxc3 11.Bg5 Nbd7 12.Re1 0-0 13.Re3 Qa5 14.Ne5 b6 (14...Rd8
15.Rg3±) 15.Nxd7 Nxd7 16.Be4 Rb8 17.Bf4±

A1) 6...Bb4
The basic drawback of this move is that Black would lose a tempo if he
does not capture on c3, because his bishop would have to go to the e7-
square sooner or later. If he takes on c3, then White will capture with his
pawn and will obtain a powerful centre, a couple of strong bishops and the
position would obviously be in his favour.
 7.Nf3

7...Nf6

Now and later, after the development of Black’s knight to the c6-square
(in this case – 7...Nc6), there would arise transposition to variation B1.

After 7...Qa5, the simplest for White would be to protect his knight –
8.Bd2. Later naturally, he would have to lose time in order to redeploy his
bishop to a more active position and his queen would need to abandon the
a5-square, so there would be parity concerning the lost tempi. 8...Nf6 9.Bd3
0-0 10.0-0 Nc6 (10...b6 11.Re1 Bb7? 12.Re5 Bd5 13.a3+–; 10...Nbd7
11.Re1±) 11.Re1
 11...b6?! 12.Ne5 Bb7 13.Bg5±
11...Re8 12.Ne5 Qd8 13.Bg5 h6 14.Bxf6 Qxf6 15.Bb5±
11...Rd8 12.a3 Be7 13.b4 Qh5 (13...Qc7 14.Rc1 a6 15.Be3 Bd7 16.Bb1±)
14.Ne2 Bd6 15.Rc1±, White prevents the move b7-b6. He will follow later
with h2-h3, Bd2-g5...
11...Qd8 12.a3 Be7 13.Be3 Re8, Bojkovic – Seckiner, Antalya 2002,
14.Ne5 Bd7 (14...Nxe5 15.dxe5 Nd7 16.Bd4 Nc5 17.Bc2 Bd7 18.Re3‚)
15.Rc1 Rc8 16.Bb1 a6 17.Qf3 g6 18.Rcd1 Qa5 19.Nxd7 Nxd7 20.d5±

8.Bd3 0-0

8...Qa5 9.0-0 Nbd7, Milov – Korchnoi, Switzerland 2006, 10.Re1 0-0

11.Bd2±

8...Bd7 9.0-0 Bxc3 10.bxc3 Bb5 11.Ba3 (11.Bxb5+ Qxb5 12.a4 Qa5
13.Ba3±) 11...Nc6, Beliavsky – Borisek, Ljubljana 2011, 12.Re1 Bxd3
13.Qxd3 Qa5 14.c4 0-0-0 15.Rab1±

9.0-0
 9...Bxc3
Black’s queen will have to abandon the centre anyway after b2xc3, c3-c4.

About 9...Qa5 10.Bd2 – see 7...Qa5.

About 9...Qh5 10.Bf4 Nc6 11.a3 – see variation B1.

9...Qd6 10.Bg5 Nbd7, Darmanin – Croes, Batumi 2018, 11.Re1 b6

12.Ne4 Nxe4 13.Rxe4 Qd5 14.Re3 Rb8 15.Ne5 Bb7 16.Be4 Qd6
17.Bxh7+ Kxh7 18.Qh5 Kg8 19.Rh3+–

9...Qd8 10.a3 (10.Re1 b6 11.Bg5 Bb7 12.Ne5 Be7 13.Re3‚) 10...Bxc3

(about 10...Be7 11.Bc2 Nc6 12.Qd3 – see variation B1) 11.bxc3 Nbd7,
Zdebskaja – Prudnikova, Moscow 2006, 12.Bf4±

10.bxc3 b6

10...Nbd7 11.c4 Qd6 12.a4 (12.c5!? Qc7 13.Bg5 h6 14.Bh4 b6 15.Rc1

bxc5 16.dxc5±) 12...Re8 13.a5 Qc7 14.Bg5 e5 15.Bxf6 gxf6 16.Qd2 Nf8
17.Rfe1± Seger – Seiler, Sulzfeld 1999.

11.c4 Qd8

11...Qh5 12.Be2±

11...Qd6 12.Re1 Bb7 13.Ne5 Nbd7 14.Bb2±

12.Ne5 Bb7 13.Bg5 h6 14.Bh4± Peptan – Traistaru, Mamaia 2015.

A2) 6...Qd8 7.Nf3 Nf6 8.Bd3 Be7 9.0-0

9...0-0

About 9...a6 10.Re1 0-0, or 9...Nbd7 10.Re1 0-0 11.Ne5 – see 9...0-0.

About 9...Nc6 10.a3 – see variation B3.

10.Re1
 White is developing his pieces according to a standard scheme. Later, he
may try to build the battery Bc2+Qd3, as well as to organise an attack after
Ne5, Re3.

10...b6

About 10...Nc6 11.a3 – see variation B3.

10...Na6 11.a3 Qd6 12.Bg5 Rd8, Savchenko – Khlian, Saratov 2006,

13.Rc1 (13.Ne5 Qxd4 14.Qf3±) 13...Bd7 14.Ne5±

10...Nbd7 11.Ne5 Nd5 (11...Nb6, Hagarova – V.Perez, Bratislava 1993,

12.Re3 g6 13.Be2 Nfd5 14.Rh3ƒ) 12.Qc2 N7f6 13.a3 Bd7 14.Nxd5 exd5
15.Nxd7 Qxd7 16.Bf5²

10...a6 11.Bc2 b5 (about 11...Nc6 12.a3 – see variation B3) 12.Qd3

 About 12...Nc6 13.a3 – variation B3.
12...Nbd7 13.Ng5 h6 14.Nh7 Re8 15.Bxh6 gxh6 16.Rxe6 fxe6 17.Qg6+
Kh8 18.Qxh6 Bf8 19.Nxf8+ Kg8 20.Nxd7 Bxd7 21.Re1 Qe7 22.Re5 Qf8
23.Qg5+ Qg7 24.Qh4+–
12...Bb7, Hahn – Skidmore, USA 1998, 13.Ng5 g6 14.Qh3 Nc6 15.Be4
Qxd4 16.Nxe6 fxe6 17.Qxe6+ Kh8 18.Bxc6 Bxc6 19.Qxc6²

11.Ne5!?
 White plans to begin an attack, under the cover of his knight, after Re1-
e3-h3(g3).
11...Bb7 12.Re3 g6!

12...Nc6? After this move White’s attack will develop in a flash. 13.Rh3
(He is threatening 14.Bxh7 Nxh7 15.Qh5+–) 13...g6, V.Gaprindashvili –
Abdulla, Baku 2011, 14.Ba6! Qc7 (14...Nxe5? 15.Bxb7 Rb8 16.dxe5+–;
14...Bxa6 15.Nxc6 Qc7 16.Nxe7+ Qxe7 17.Bg5+–) 15.Bxb7 Qxb7 16.Qf3
Na5 17.Qf4 h5 18.Rg3+–

13.Be2
White is transferring his bishop to the long diagonal, protecting his pawn
on d4 in the process.
13...Nc6

13...Nbd7 14.Bf3 Qc8 15.Rd3 Rd8 16.Bf4²

14.Bf3 Qc8
 14...Rc8 15.Re1 Ba8 16.Bh6 Re8 17.Qa4²

15.Nxc6. White exploits the defenceless of the enemy bishop on e7 and

advances with tempo d4-d5. 15...Bxc6 16.Bxc6 Qxc6 17.d5 Qd6 18.dxe6
Qxd1+ 19.Nxd1 Rfd8 20.Nc3 Bb4 21.Kf1²

B) 5...Nc6 6.Nf3 e6 7.Nc3

 We will deal now with B1) 7...Bb4, B2) 7...Qa5, B3) 7...Qd8, B4)
7...Qd6.

B1) 7...Bb4
This is a standard developing move, moreover that Black might leave his
queen on the d5-square at the moment. His problem is however, that after
White’s castling the pin of the enemy knight would not work any more,
Black would have to decide what to do with his queen:
– after the exchange on c3, White will obtain a powerful pawn-centre and
the two-bishop advantage;
– he can remove his queen from the d5-square and later his bishop as well
(for example to the e7-square), but he would lose at least one tempo for
that.
There is also another way for him to play in this position. He can
exchange on c3, waiting for the move a2-a3, but as a rule this would not be
sufficient for equality either.
8.Bd3 Nf6

8...Bxc3 9.bxc3 Nf6 10.0-0 –see 8...Nf6.

 8...Nge7 9.0-0 Bxc3 10.bxc3. White has an obvious advantage. In
addition, Black’s knight on e7 is not so well placed there as on the f6-
square. 10...0-0 11.Re1 b6 (11...Ng6 12.c4 Qh5 13.Rb1 b6 14.Rb5+–) 12.c4
Qa5 (12...Qd6? 13.Bxh7+ Kxh7 14.Ng5+ Kg6 15.Ne4 Qb4 16.Qg4+ Kh7
17.Re3+–) 13.Rb1±

8...Qa5 9.0-0 (We have already seen a similar situation in variation A2 –

White’s compensation for the sacrificed pawn would be more than
sufficient.) 9...Bxc3 (about 9...Nf6 10.Re1 – see 8...Nf6) 10.bxc3 Qxc3
11.Rb1 Qa5 (11...Nf6 12.Rb3 Qa5 13.Ba3+–) 12.Rb5 Qc7 13.Rg5 g6
14.d5+– Kis – Izso, Hungary 2007.

9.0-0

9...Qa5

9...Qd6 10.a3 Bxc3 11.bxc3 0-0, T.Kosintseva – Komarishkina, Mureck

1998, 12.a4 Rd8 13.Re1 b6 14.Bg5 Bb7 15.Nh4ƒ Qe7? 16.Nf5 Qf8
17.Nh6+ Kh8 18.Bxf6 gxf6 19.Qh5+–
 9...Qh5 10.Bf4 0-0 11.a3 Bxc3 (11...Be7 12.Re1 Rd8 13.Be2 Bd6 14.Ne5
Qf5 15.Nxc6 bxc6 16.Bxd6 Rxd6 17.Qa4 Bb7 18.Bf3²; It would be
naturally bad for Black to choose 17...c5? Widera – Marek, Chorzow 2010,
18.dxc5 Qxc5 19.Ne4 Nxe4?? 20.Qe8#) 12.bxc3 b6 13.Rb1 Bb7, Lalic –
Frometa Castillo, Thessaloniki 1988, 14.Rb5 Nd5 15.Bd2 a6 16.Rb1 b5
17.a4±

9...Bxc3. After this exchange it would be tremendously difficult for Black

to obtain an acceptable game. 10.bxc3 0-0 11.Bg5

11...b6 12.Re1 Bb7 13.Bxf6 gxf6 14.Qd2 Qh5 15.Re4 f5 16.Rh4 Qg6,
Aanstad – Odden, Vadso 2009, 17.d5!? Ne7 18.Rh3 – White wishes to force
the enemy king to occupy a square on which it would be attacked with a
check – 18...Kh8 19.Rh6 Qg7 20.Ng5 Qxh6 21.Nxf7+–
11...h6 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Qd2 Kg7 14.Qf4!? Ne7 15.c4 Qh5, Kalinic –
Radulovic, Belgrade 2012, 16.Qc7 Ng6 17.Rfe1±
11...Nd7 12.Re1 h6 (12...Nb6 13.Bf4±) 13.Bf4 Nf6 14.Qd2 Qh5
15.Rab1+– Scheidt – Haecker, Bayern 2014.
 9...Qd8 10.a3 Be7. In the variation B3 in this position it was Black to
move. It is understandable that White can react in different ways, but in
general, his extra tempo would enable him to play more aggressively.
Therefore, the following variations can be considered as an illustration of
his possibilities 11.Bc2 0-0 12.Qd3

12...g6 13.Bh6 Re8 14.Rfe1 b6 15.Rad1 Bb7 16.Bb3 Bf8 17.Bg5 h6

18.Bh4 Kg7? Van den Brande – G.Adams, Brasschaat 2002, 19.d5 Na5
20.Ba4+–; 18...Bg7 19.d5 exd5 20.Nxd5 Rxe1+ 21.Rxe1 g5 22.Nxg5 hxg5
23.Bxg5 Kf8 24.Qg3+–
12...b6 13.Re1
 Following 13...Bb7?, White has a typical tactical combination in the
positions with this pawn-structure, based on the vulnerability of the h7-
square: 14.d5! exd5 15.Bg5 g6 16.Rxe7 Qxe7 17.Nxd5 Nxd5 18.Bxe7
Ncxe7 19.Qe4 Rad8 20.Rd1 Rfe8 21.h3±
13...g6 14.Bh6 Re8 15.Bb3 Bb7 16.d5!? (16.Rad1 – see 12...g6) 16...Na5
17.Ba4 Nc6 18.Nd4 Nxd4 19.Qxd4 Bc5 20.Qd2 Ng4 (20...Nxd5 21.Bxe8
Qxe8 22.Nxd5 Bxd5 23.Qc3±) 21.Ne4 exd5 22.Nxc5 Rxe1+ 23.Rxe1 bxc5
24.Re8+ Qxe8 25.Bxe8 Rxe8 26.Bf4±

10.Re1!?
 10...0-0

10...Bxc3. It would be tremendously dangerous for Black here to accept

the pawn-sacrifice. 11.bxc3 Qxc3, Riemens – Malek, Netherlands 2014,
12.Bf4 (12.Rb1!? 0-0 13.Re3‚; 13.Rb3‚) 12...0-0 13.Be5 Nxe5 14.dxe5
Nd5 15.Bxh7+ Kxh7 16.Ng5+ Kg6 17.Qg4 f5 18.Qh4+– or 13...Rd8
14.Re3 Qb4 15.Ng5 Qe7 16.Nxh7 Nxe5 17.dxe5 Nxh7 18.Bxh7+ Kxh7
19.Qh5+ Kg8 20.Rh3 f5 21.exf6 Qxf6 22.Qh7+ Kf7 23.Rf3+–

11.Bg5 Be7 12.a3 h6

Naturally, White’s bishop will have to retreat, but after Qd2, he would be
threatening the tactical strike Bxh6.

12...Nd5? 13.Nxd5 Bxg5 (13...Qxd5 14.Bxe7 Nxe7 15.Re5 Qc6

16.Bxh7+ Kxh7 17.Ng5+ Kg6 18.Qg4 f5 19.Qg3 Kf6 20.Rae1+–)
14.Nxg5 h6 15.Nf6+ gxf6 16.Nh7+– Vunder – A.Krylov, St Petersburg
2005.
 13.b4

13.Bf4!? Here, the move 13...b6, would lose for Black, because of
14.Ne5+–, while all his alternatives would be just passive and would not
prevent the development of White’s initiative, for example: 13...a6 14.Qd2
Bd7 15.Ne5 Nxe5 16.dxe5 Nd5 17.Bxh6 Nxc3 18.Re3 f5 19.Bc4 Rad8
20.Rxc3±

13...Qd8 14.Be3 b6

14...a6, Kiefhaber – Bramo, Budapest 1993, 15.Qd2 Re8 16.Ne5 Bd7

17.Rad1±

15.Qd2
White is threatening Bxh6 and it would be extremely difficult for Black to
parry this tactical strike.
15...Re8
 15...Bb7? 16.Bxh6 gxh6 17.Qxh6 Re8, Kosyrev – Kutsankov, Minsk
2000, 18.Ng5+–

16.Bxh6 gxh6 17.d5 exd5 18.Qxh6 Bf8 19.Rxe8 Qxe8 20.Qxf6±

B2) 7...Qa5 8.Bd3 Nf6

About 8...Bb4 9.0-0 – see variation B1.

9.0-0

The change of the move-order would not change anything, because White
fails to take the b4-square under control. After 9.a3, Black, if he so wishes,
can still play 9...Nb4 10.axb4 Qxa1 11.0-0 Bxb4 and White would be
incapable of exploiting the endangered position of the enemy queen.

9...Be7

9...Bd6?! Black’s attempt to deploy his bishop to a more active position

would not work here. 10.Bg5 0-0 (10...Nxd4? 11.Bxf6 Nxf3+ 12.Qxf3
gxf6, Mohandesi – Ghobadibigvand, Larestan 2015, 13.Ne4±) 11.Bxf6
gxf6 12.d5 exd5 (12...Ne5? 13.Nxe5 Bxe5 14.Qg4+ Kh8 15.Qe4+–
Lanzani – Anibas, Porto Mannu 2014) 13.Nh4 Ne5 14.Bf5!? Rd8 15.Qh5±

It would be more reasonable here for Black to try the knight-sortie

9...Nb4. In general, the idea of this set-up is not only to establish a more
solid control over the d5-square, where his knight is headed for, but also the
possibility for the light-squared bishop to be developed along the route
Bc8-d7-c6. If Black manages to do this, his position would be quite solid.
Still, to realise this plan would be very complicated for him in this situation.
He must also develop his dark-squared bishop and to castle. 10.Bc4. White
preserves his control over the d5-square and also the possibility to give a
check from the b5-square.

10...Nbd5?! Rusche – Trassl, Bayern 2014, 11.Nxd5 Nxd5 12.Ne5 a6

13.Qh5 Qc7 14.Bxd5 exd5 15.Bg5 Be6 16.Rac1 Qd6 17.Nxf7 Bxf7
18.Rfe1+ Be7 19.Qh3+–
10...a6, Pektor – Ratolistka, Prague 1992, 11.a3 Nbd5 12.Nxd5 Nxd5
13.Ne5 Be7 14.Bd2 Qd8 15.Re1 0-0 16.Qg4 Nf6 17.Qg3 Qxd4 18.Bc3
Qd8 19.Rad1 Qb6 20.Rd4 Rd8 21.Rh4‚
 10...Be7 11.a3 Nbd5 12.Ne5 0-0 (12...Bd7 13.Nxd7 Nxd7 14.Bxd5 exd5
15.Re1+–) 13.Qf3 Nxc3 (13...Qb6 14.Rd1²) 14.bxc3 Qc7 15.Bd3 Rb8?!
16.Re1 b6 17.Nc6 Bb7 18.Nxe7+ Qxe7 19.Qh3 Rfc8 20.Bg5 h6 21.Bxh6
gxh6 22.Qxh6±

10.a3 0-0

About 10...a6 11.Bf4 0-0 12.Rc1 – see 10...0-0.

11.Bf4

11...Bd7

11...Rd8?! 12.b4 Qh5 13.b5 Nb8 14.Qc2 Nbd7 15.Ne2 Qd5 16.Bc7 Re8?
17.Nf4+–
After 11...a6, Napoli – Mrdja, Italy 2004, White can follow with 12.Rc1
(preventing the pawn-advance b7-b5, followed by Bc8-b7) 12...Rd8
(12...b5?! 13.d5 exd5 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Bxh7+ Kxh7 16.Qxd5 Bb7
17.Qd7 Rab8 18.Bxb8 Rxb8 19.Ne5 Nxe5 20.Qxe7 Ng4 21.Qxf7±)
13.Re1 Bd7 (Once again the move 13...b5? would not work for Black:
14.d5 exd5 15.Nxb5 axb5 16.Rxc6 Ra7 17.Qc1+–) 14.Qb3² b5? 15.d5
exd5 16.Nxd5 Nxd5 17.Qxd5 Rac8 18.Ng5+–

White preserves his initiative too after 11...Nd5 12.Nxd5

12...exd5 13.b4 Qd8 (13...Qb6 14.b5 Na5 15.Qc2±) 14.b5 Na5 15.Qc2±
threatening 16.Bxh7+ or 16.Bc7.
12...Qxd5, Schulze – Kirchmann, Darms 1995, 13.Re1 Rd8
 14.Ne5!? Nxe5 (14...Nxd4? 15.Bxh7+ Kxh7 16.Qh5+ Kg8 17.Qxf7+
Kh7 18.Qxe7+–; 14...Qxd4?! 15.Bxh7+ Kxh7 16.Qh5+ Kg8 17.Qxf7+–)
15.Bxe5 Bd6 16.Be4²
14.Rc1 Nxd4 15.Be4 Nxf3+ 16.Qxf3 Qb5 17.Be5 Qe8 18.Rc7 Rd7
19.Rxd7 Qxd7 20.h3!? White makes use of the calmer situation to play all
his useful moves and now, he does not need to be afraid of the check on his
first rank. 20...f5 (20...f6 21.Qh5 f5 22.Bb1±) 21.Rd1 Qb5 22.Qg3 Bf8?
23.Rd8+–

12.b4
 12...Qd8

It would not be better for Black to place his queen on b6, moreover that it
can come under an attack there by the enemy pieces as well. 12...Qb6
13.Rc1 Rfc8 (13...Rac8?! 14.Na4 Qd8 15.Nc5±) 14.Re1 a5 15.b5 Na7
(15...Bxa3 16.Ra1 Bb4 17.bxc6 Bxc6 18.Ne4 Bxe1 19.Nxf6+ gxf6
20.Nxe1±) 16.a4 Bb4 17.Bd2±

13.Bc2 Rc8

13...Nd5 14.Qd3!? (White’s game would be simpler after 14.Nxd5 exd5

15.h3²) 14...g6 15.Bh6 Re8 16.Ne4 b5 17.Nc5²

14.Qd3 g6

14...a6 15.d5 exd5 16.Nxd5 g6 17.Nxe7+ Nxe7 18.Bg5 Qb6 19.Bb3±

15.Bb3 Re8 16.Rad1 a6

 17.Rfe1!?

White can also play here 17.Ne5, although even then Black will manage
to solve his main problem – to parry the pawn-break d4-d5. 17...Nh5
18.Bh6 Nxe5 19.dxe5 Bc6 20.Qe3 Qc7 21.Rc1 Ng7 22.g4 Red8?!
(22...b5²) 23.f4 Qd7 24.f5 gxf5 25.gxf5 exf5 26.Rcd1 Qc7 27.e6 1–0 Duran
Vallverdu – Mataix Arbona, ICCF 2010.

17...Bf8 18.Bg5 h6 19.Bh4 g5 20.Nxg5 hxg5 21.Bxg5 Bg7 22.d5 Nb8

(22...exd5 23.Nxd5 Rxe1+ 24.Rxe1 Be6 25.Rxe6! fxe6 26.Nxf6+ Bxf6
27.Qg6+–) 23.Ne4 exd5 24.Bxd5 Rxe4 25.Bxe4 Qc7 26.Bxf6 Bxf6
27.Qf3+–

B3) 7...Qd8
 The positions which we will analyse further in this chapter can arise in the
Nimzowitsch Defence, in the Queen’s Gambit Accepted and in the Panov
attack in the Caro-Kann Defence. In comparison to these openings here the
situation is more comfortable for White, since he has an extra tempo.
8.Bd3 Nf6 9.0-0 Be7

9...Nb4? 10.Bb5+ Bd7 (10...Nc6 11.Ne5 Bd7 12.Bg5±) 11.Bxd7+ Qxd7

12.Ne5 Qd8 13.Qa4+ Nd7, Korenova – Cerna, Brno 1991, 14.d5!+–

It would be hardly reasonable for Black to choose here 9...Bd6, because

his bishop would need later to go back to e7 in order to cope with the
problem with the pin of his knight on the h4-d8 diagonal. 10.Re1 0-0
11.Bg5 h6 12.Bh4 Be7 13.Rc1 Bd7 (Following 13...b6 14.a3 Bb7 15.Bb1,
White would have again an extra tempo in comparison to similar positions.)
14.Bb1 Nd5 15.Nxd5 Bxh4 16.Qd3 f5 17.Nf4 Bf6? (17...Bg5 18.Nxg5
Qxg5 19.g3²) 18.Rcd1 Qc8 19.a3+– Lematschko – Ushakova, Beltsy 1970.

10.a3
 10...0-0

White can postpone his castling a bit, but as a rule this would only lead to
transposition of moves. 10...a6 11.Re1 b5 (11...0-0 12.Bc2 – see 10...0-0)
12.Bc2 Bb7 (12...0-0 13.Qd3 – see 10...0-0) 13.Bg5 0-0 (13...Nd5, Karpov
– Solis, Sao Paulo 2003 14.Nxd5 Qxd5 15.Be4 Qd7 16.Rc1 Rc8 17.d5+–)
14.h4!? Rc8 (14...Re8 15.Qd3 g6, Van den Doel – Ansell, Hilversum 2008,
16.b4², followed by Bb3, Rad1 etc.) 15.d5! Nxd5 16.Nxd5 exd5 17.Bf5
Rb8 (17...Ra8 18.Bxe7 Nxe7 19.Bxh7+ Kxh7 20.Ng5+ Kh6 21.Qf3 Qe8
22.Qe3+–) 18.Bf4 Ra8 19.Bxh7+! Kxh7 20.Rxe7! Qxe7 21.Ng5+ Kg6
(21...Kh6 22.Ne6+ Kh7 23.Qh5+ Kg8 24.Ng5+–) 22.Qg4 f5 23.h5+ Kh6
24.Nf7+ Kh7 25.Qg6+ Kg8 26.Ng5+–

11.Re1
 11...b6

11...a6 12.Bc2 b5 13.Qd3 g6 (Black is avoiding the well-known trap:

13...Bb7? 14.d5 exd5 15.Bg5 g6 16.Rxe7 Qxe7 17.Nxd5+– De la Riva
Aguado – Garcia Paolicchi, Andorra 1998; 15...Ne4 16.Nxe4 dxe4
17.Qxe4 f5 18.Qe6+ Rf7 19.Bb3 Qf8 20.Bxe7 1–0 Suba – Bautista
Sanchez, Altea 2017) 14.Bh6 Re8 15.Rad1 Bb7 (15...b4 16.Ne4 bxa3,
Nepomniaschy – Ermakov, Novokuznetsk 2011, 17.Qc3 Bb7 18.d5+–)
16.b4!? White parries simultaneously two of his opponent’s ideas: Nc6-a5
and b5-b4.) 16...a5 (16...Qc7 17.Bb3 Bf8 18.Bg5 Bg7 19.d5 Nxd5 20.Bxd5
exd5 21.Nxd5 Rxe1+ 22.Rxe1 Qb8 23.Nb6 Ra7 24.Qe3+–; 16...Rc8
17.Bb3 Bf8 18.Bg5 h6 19.Bxf6!? Qxf6 20.Ne4 Qd8 21.h4 Bg7 22.Nc5±)
17.d5! Nxd5 (17...exd5 18.Bb3 axb4 19.Nxd5 Nxd5 20.Bxd5+–) 18.Nxd5
exd5 19.Qxb5 Qc7, Christiansen – Olafsson, Lone Pine 1977, 20.Bf4 Qxf4
21.Qxb7 Rec8 22.Ba4 Rab8 23.Qd7 Rc7 24.g3!±

12.Bg5
 12.Bb1!? with the idea Qd3 or Qc2.

12...Re8 13.Qd3!?N 13...a5 14.Ne4 g6 15.Neg5 Ba6 16.Qe3²

12...Bb7 13.Qd3 Re8 (13...g6 14.Ba2 Re8, Suba – Barcelo Pujadas,
Mallorca 2000, 15.h4ƒ; 14...Qd7 15.Bh6 Rfe8 16.Rad1 Rad8 17.Qd2 Nd5
18.h4ƒ) 14.Bg5 (14.d5!?N 14...exd5 15.Bg5 Ne4 16.Nxd5 Nxg5 17.Nxg5
g6 18.Nxf7 Kxf7 19.Ba2 Kg7 20.Qc3+ Kh6 21.Rad1 Bh4 22.Rxe8 Qxe8
23.Qh3 Qd8 24.g3 Bc8 25.Qxh4+ Qxh4 26.gxh4²) 14...g6 15.h4N (15.Ba2
Nd5 16.h4 Nxc3 17.bxc3 Qd6, Djuric – Kolbus, Porto San Giorgio 2004,
18.h5ƒ) 15...Kg7 16.Ba2 h6 17.Bxe6 fxe6 (17...Nxd4 18.Nxd4 hxg5
19.Bxf7 Kxf7 20.hxg5 Qc7 21.Qb5 Rh8 22.Qb3+ Ke8 23.f4+–) 18.Rxe6
hxg5 19.hxg5 Qd7 20.d5+–
12...Ba6 13.d5!?N 13...exd5 (13...Nxd5 14.Qc2 g6 15.Bh6 Re8? 16.Nxd5
Qxd5 17.Qc3+–; 15...Nf6 16.Bxf8 Bxf8 17.Qa4 Bb7 18.Ba2±) 14.Qc2
Bb7 (14...g6 15.Bg5!? d4 16.Ba2 dxc3 17.Rad1 Qc8 18.Qxc3 Ng4 19.Bxe7
Nxe7 20.Rxe7 Qxc3 21.bxc3 Bb5 22.Rb1 Bd3 23.Rb4 Nh6 24.Ne5 Bf5
25.f4²) 15.Bg5 d4 16.Rd1 g6 17.Bh6 Qd7 18.Bxf8 Bxf8 19.Ba2 Rd8
20.h3²
 12...Bb7

12...h6. After this move, Black would need to consider for a long time the
vulnerability of the b1-h7 diagonal. 13.Bh4 Bb7 14.Bc2 Ba6. Black
deprives the enemy queen of the d3-square (14...Nh5?! 15.d5 exd5 16.Qd3
g6 17.Bxe7 Nxe7 18.Qe3 d4 19.Nxd4±; 15...Bxh4?! 16.dxc6 Bxc6 17.Ne5
Qxd1 18.Bxd1+–; 17...Bxf2+ 18.Kxf2 Qh4+ 19.Kg1 Rad8, Ju.Polgar –
Karpov, Budapest 1998, 20.Qc1 Qd4+ 21.Kh1 Bb7 22.Be4±) 15.Rc1 Rc8
16.Bb1 Qd6, Kosteniuk – Stefanova, Hengshui 2019 (16...Nh5,
Khukhashvili – Gvetadze, Tbilisi 2006, 17.d5! Bxh4 18.Qc2 g6 19.dxc6
Bf6 20.Qa4+–) 17.b4 Bb7 18.Qd3 g6 19.b5 Na5 20.Ne5 Nb3 21.Nxg6
Nxc1 22.Nxe7+ Qxe7 23.Qg3+ Kh8 24.Qe5+–

13.Bc2
 13...Rc8

About 13...h6 14.Bh4 – see 12...h6.

About 13...g6 14.Qd3 Rc8 (14...Re8 15.h4 – see 13...Re8; 14...Nd5

15.Bh6 – see 13...Nd5) 15.Rad1 – see 13...Rc8.

13...Nd5 14.Qd3 g6 15.Bh6 Re8 16.Rad1 Nxc3 17.bxc3 Qd5 (17...Bxa3?

18.Ng5 Be7 19.Nxf7 Kxf7 20.Rxe6 Bf6 21.Rxe8 Kxe8, Potkin – Galkin,
Sochi 2004, 22.Qf3 Na5 23.Re1+ Kf7 24.Qxb7+ Nxb7 25.Bb3+ Qd5
26.Bxd5#) 18.c4 Qh5 19.Bf4 Na5, Potkin – Galkin, Sochi 2007 (19...Bf6
20.d5 Rad8 21.Qe4 Na5 22.Bc7 Rc8 23.Qf4 Bg7 24.Ba4+–) 20.d5 Rad8
21.h3 Ba6 (21...Qf5 22.Qxf5 gxf5 23.Ba4 Rf8 24.Ne5 exd5 25.Nd7 Rfe8
26.cxd5+–) 22.Re5 f5 23.Rxe6+–

13...Re8 14.Qd3 g6 15.h4 (15.Rad1 Nd5 16.Bh6 – see 13...Nd5) 15...Nd5

(15...h5? 16.Rxe6+–; 15...Rc8 16.Rad1 – see 13...Rc8) 16.Nxd5 Qxd5
17.Bb3 Qd6, Lee – Sharomova, Churchill 2000, 18.Rad1 Na5 19.Ba4 Red8
20.Bxe7 Qxe7 21.b4 Bc6 22.Bxc6 Nxc6 23.b5 Na5 24.Ne5ƒ Black’s
knight is not only misplaced, but it is stuck to remain on this square in order
to prevent the enemy knight to occupy the f6-square. White plans to
develop his initiative on the kingside (h4-h5) and to prepare a pawn-break
in the centre. For example, after 24...Rac8, he would have this attractive
combination: 25.d5 Rxd5 26.Nxg6! Qd8! 27.Ne7+!! Qxe7 28.Qxd5+–

13...Ba6. Black controls now the d3-square, but his pieces are deployed a
bit disharmoniously from the point of view of strategy. The long diagonal
would be much more promising for his bishop practically always and from
the tactical point of view – his minor pieces on the queenside are not
protected. 14.Qd2. From this square White can transfer quickly his queen to
the kingside with the manoeuvre Qf4-h4.

14...Qd6 15.Rad1±
14...Bc4 15.Qf4 Bd5 (about 15...Rc8 16.Qh4 – see 14...Rc8; 15...Nd5
16.Qh4 g6 17.Ba4 and following 17...Rc8?, Black will suffer a surprising
catastrophe on the e7-square: 18.Bxc6 Rxc6 19.Nxd5+–) 16.Ne5 Nh5
17.Qg4 Bxg5 18.Nxd5 Nxe5 19.dxe5 g6 20.Nb4 Rc8 21.Red1 Qe7
22.Ba4±
14...Rc8 15.Qf4
 15...Re8, Szabo – Unzicker, Amsterdam 1954, 16.Qh4 g6 17.Bb3 Na5
18.Ba4 Rf8 19.Rad1±
15...Nh5 16.Qg4 Bxg5 (16...g6 17.Bh6 Re8 18.Rad1 Nf6 19.Qh3 Bc4
20.Ne5±) 17.Qxh5 Bh6 18.d5 exd5 19.Bf5 Rb8 20.Nxd5 Bc8 21.Bxc8
Rxc8 (21...Qxc8 22.Ne5+–) 22.Rad1+– Johannessen – Carlsen, Moss 2005.
15...Bc4 16.Qh4 g6 17.Rad1
 17...Bd5 18.Nxd5 Nxd5 19.Bb3 Bxg5 20.Nxg5 h5 21.Bxd5 Qxd5
(21...exd5 22.g4‚) 22.Ne4 Kg7 23.Qf6+ Kg8 24.h3 Rfd8 25.b4 Qf5
(25...Nxd4 26.Kh1! with the idea 27.Rd3. 26...Qc4 27.Ng5 Rd7 28.Nf3
Rcd8 29.Ne5+–) 26.d5 exd5 (26...Qxf6 27.Nxf6+ Kg7 28.dxc6 Kxf6
29.b5±) 27.Qxf5 gxf5 28.Nf6+ Kg7 29.Nxd5 (29.Nxh5+!? Kf8 30.Rd3
Ne7 31.Nf4²) 29...Rd6 30.Nf4 Rxd1 31.Rxd1 h4 32.Rc1²
17...Nh5 18.g4 Bxg5 (18...Nf4 19.Ne4 Nd5 20.b3 Ba6 21.Bxe7 Ncxe7
22.Nfg5 h5 23.Bb1ƒ; 18...Nf6 19.d5! Nxd5 20.b3 f6 21.bxc4 fxg5 22.Qh6
Rxf3 23.Bxg6 hxg6 24.Qxg6+ Kh8 25.Qh6+ Kg8 26.cxd5 Rxc3 27.dxc6
Qf8 28.Qg6+ Kh8 29.Qh5+ Kg8 30.Rxe6 R3xc6 31.Qg6+–) 19.Nxg5 h6
20.gxh5 Qxg5+ 21.Qxg5 hxg5 22.hxg6²

14.Qd3 g6
 15.Rad1
If White begins here with 15.Bh6 Re8 16.Rad1, he would need to consider
Black’s possibility 16...Bf8 17.Bg5 h6 18.Bh4 Bg7 (18...Be7 19.Rxe6+–)
19.Ba4 Qd6 20.Ne5 Red8„

15.h4!? After that, lines can partly be tranferred to 15.Rad1 but the total
sum of different main lines will be significantly smaller.
 15...Re8 16.Rad1 – see 15.Rad1.
15...Qc7, Aaron – Gerzhoy, Philadelphia 2012, 16.Bb3 Rfd8 17.Rxe6!
fxe6 18.Bxe6+ Kg7 19.Re1 Rd6 (19...h6 20.Nb5 Qb8 21.Bd2 Nd5 22.h5
gxh5 23.Qf5+–; 19...a6 20.d5 Na5 21.h5+–) 20.Qe3 Rf8 21.Nb5 Qb8
22.Bh6+ Kh8 23.h5+–
15...Nd5 16.Bh6 Re8 17.h5!? (17.Rad1 – see 15.Rad1) 17...Bf6,
Mastrokoukos – Muco, Nea Makri 1990, 18.Ne4 Bg7 19.Bg5 f6 20.Bd2
Nce7 21.Bb3 Qd7 22.h6 Bh8 23.Nh4 g5 24.Qg3 Kf8 25.Nf3±
15...Rc7 16.Rad1 (16.Bb3!?) 16...Nd5 (16...Qc8 17.Bb3 Rd8?! 18.Qe3 a6
19.d5 Na5 20.Ba2 Nxd5 21.Bxd5 Rxc3 22.bxc3 1–0 Ghinda – Panzalovic,
Budapest 1990; 17...Na5 18.Nb5 Ba6 19.d5 Nxb3 20.d6 Nc5 21.Qb1 Bxb5
22.dxe7 Re8 23.Bxf6±) 17.Nxd5 exd5 18.Bh6 Re8 19.h5 (19.Qe3 Rc8
20.Qf4±) 19...Bd6 20.Bg5 Be7? J.Polgar – Rasmussen, Warsaw 2013
(20...Rxe1+ 21.Rxe1 Be7±) 21.Bf4 Rc8 22.hxg6 hxg6 23.Re6 Bf8
24.Rxg6+ fxg6 25.Qxg6+ Bg7 26.Bd6 Nxd4 27.Rxd4 Rxc2 28.Rf4+–
15...Na5 16.Ne5
 16...Nh5 17.Bh6 Bxh4 (17...Re8? 18.d5!? Bxd5 19.Nxd5 Qxd5 20.Qxd5
exd5 21.Ba4 Red8 22.b4 Nb7 23.Nc6+–) 18.Rad1 Ng7 19.Qh3 Nc4
20.Be4 Bxe4 21.Nxe4 f5 22.Nc5 Nxb2 23.Rd2 Bg5 24.Bxg7 bxc5 25.f4
Kxg7 26.fxg5 c4 27.Rxb2 Qxd4+ 28.Rf2²
16...Nd5, S.Pavlov – Harutyunian, Minsk 2017, 17.Bh6 Nxc3 (17...Re8
18.h5ƒ; 17...Bxh4 18.Qh3 Nxc3 19.bxc3 Re8 20.Ba4 Nc6 21.Rad1±)
18.Bxf8 Bxf8 19.bxc3 Qxh4 20.Bd1²

15...Nd5

15...Na5 16.Bh6 Re8 (16...Nc4 17.Rb1 Re8 18.Ba4 Bc6, Pintonello –

Salonen, Email 2010, 19.Qxc4 Bxf3 20.Qa6 Bc6 21.Bxc6 Rxc6 22.Qxa7
Qxd4 23.Be3 Qd8 24.Rbd1 Qb8 25.Qa4 Rec8 26.h3²) 17.Ne5
 17...Bf8 18.Bg5 Bg7 (or 18...Be7 19.Qh3± with the idea Nxf7) 19.Ba4
Re7 20.b4 Nc6 21.Nxc6 Bxc6 22.Bxc6 Rxc6 23.Ne4± Pobelianskaia –
Dyrda, Chalkidiki 2003.
17...a6 18.Qh3 Bd5, Cortes Orihuela – Kropff, Asuncion 2014, 19.Re3
Nc4 20.Rg3 Nxe5 (20...Nxb2?? 21.Bxg6 hxg6 22.Nxg6 fxg6 23.Rxg6+–)
21.dxe5 Nd7 22.Nxd5 Rxc2 23.Nxe7+ Qxe7 24.Rc3 Rxc3 25.Qxc3±
17...Nd5 18.Ba4!? Nxc3 (18...Nc6? 19.Nxf7 Kxf7 20.Rxe6 Kxe6
21.Nxd5+–) 19.Bxe8 Qxe8 20.bxc3²

15...Re8 16.h4
 16...Qd6, Ionov – Klimov, Krasnoyarsk 2003, 17.Bb3² This is an
important move for the entire variation in general. White’s bishop has
completed his task and is transferred to another diagonal. The character of
the fight changes. In this way he would often manage to improve his
position and to maintain the tension.
16...Nd5 17.Nxd5 exd5 18.Ba4 (18.b4!? Bxg5 19.hxg5 a5 20.b5 Ne7,
Zifroni – Khenkin, Israel 1996, 21.Ne5 Nf5 22.Qd2²) 18...a6 (18...Bxg5
19.hxg5 Rxe1+ 20.Rxe1 a6 21.Bxc6 Rxc6 22.Qd2 Bc8 23.Ne5± Hendriks –
Pietrow, Bussum 2009) 19.Rxe7 Rxe7 20.Bxc6 Rxc6 21.Ne5 Rce6 22.Qf3
Qd6 23.Bxe7 Qxe7 24.h5±
16...a6 17.Bb3 Na5 18.Ba2 b5 (18...Nd5, Shinkevich – Burmakin, St
Petersburg 2001, 19.Ne4 f5 20.Nc3 Bxg5 21.Nxg5 Qd7 22.h5‚) 19.Ne5
Nd5 20.Bxe7 Rxe7 (20...Nxe7 21.Nxf7 Kxf7 22.Bxe6+ Kg7 23.d5 Nf5
24.Bxc8 Bxc8 25.Ne4+–) 21.Ne4 Kg7 (21...Rec7 22.Qg3±; 21...Nc4
22.Qg3 Nxb2 23.Bxd5 Bxd5 24.Nf6+ Kh8 25.Rc1+–; 22...Rec7 23.Bxc4
bxc4 24.Nc5 Rxc5 25.dxc5 Rxc5 26.h5+– Vasquez Schroder – Zambrana,
Cochabamba 2013) 22.Qg3 f6 23.Nd3 Rcc7 24.Nec5 Bc8, Ponkratov –
Sychev, Tallinn 2016, 25.Bxd5 exd5 26.Nf4 Kf7 27.Qf3+–
16...Na5 17.Ne5 (17.Ba4 Bc6 18.Bxc6 Nxc6 19.Qa6²).
 17...Nd5 18.Ba4 Nc6 (The move 18...f6 would also lead to a quick
demise for Black: 19.Nxg6 fxg5 20.Bxe8 Qxe8 21.Rxe6 hxg6, Potkin –
Pruess, Sautron 2009, 22.Nxd5 Bxd5 23.Rxg6+ Kh8 24.hxg5+–) 19.Qh3
Bxg5 20.hxg5 Nxc3, Crut – Denis, France 2004, 21.Nxf7 Kxf7 22.Qxh7+
Kf8 23.Rd3+–
17...a6. Now, the a4-e8 diagonal can be covered by Black, but his last
move is a bit abstract and White can already search for a tactical decision.
18.b4 (18.Qh3!? Nc4 19.h5 Nxh5 20.Nxf7 Qc7 21.Nh6+ Kh8 22.Bc1±)
18...Nc6, Ansat – Bayramov, Cubuk 2017, 19.Ba4 b5 20.Nxf7 Kxf7
21.Bb3 Nd5 22.Rxe6 Bxg5 23.Bxd5 Rxe6 24.Bxe6+ Kxe6 25.d5+ Kf7
26.dxc6 Qxd3 27.Rxd3 Bxc6 28.hxg5 Ke6 29.g4 Rf8 30.Ne2±

16.Bh6 Re8
 17.Ba4

17.h4!? This is a standard option for White in similar positions. Now, his
initiative is very dangerous. 17...Nxc3 (If Black accepts the sacrifice the
game will end in a very spectacular fashion after some tactical strikes by
White: 17...Bxh4 18.Nxd5 Qxd5 19.Nxh4 Qh5 20.d5 exd5 21.Nf5 gxf5
22.Qg3+ Qg6 23.Bxf5 Qxg3 24.Bxc8! Rxe1+ 25.Rxe1+–) 18.bxc3
 18...Bf6 19.Ba4 Qd6 20.Ng5 Qxa3 21.Ne4 Bg7 22.Ra1 Qe7 23.Bg5 f6
24.Bc1 Rcd8 25.Qg3 e5, Colin – Houska, Deauville 2010, 26.h5 gxh5
27.dxe5±
18...Na5!? 19.Ba4 Bc6 20.Bxc6 Rxc6 (20...Nxc6 21.Re4!?² with the idea
h4-h5 and an attractive trap in the variation 21...Qd5 22.c4 Qh5 23.Bg5+–
and Black’s queen gets trapped.) 21.Ne5 Rc7, Roiz – Doettling, Tel Aviv
2001, 22.d5 exd5 23.Ng4 Rc6 24.Qf3±
18...Bxa3 19.h5 Qd5 20.Bg5 Na5 21.Ba4 Rf8 (21...Bc6 22.hxg6 hxg6
23.Bxc6 Nxc6 24.c4 Qd6 25.Nh2+–) 22.hxg6 fxg6 23.Re5 Qd6, Hartung –
Cuno, ICCF 2000, 24.Rde1 Bd5 25.Nh2 Nc4 26.Ng4 Nxe5 27.dxe5 Qc7
28.Bf6±
18...Qd5 19.Qd2 Na5 (19...Qa5, Banas – Meduna, Marianske Lazne
1978, 20.Qf4 Qxc3 21.Be4 f5 22.h5+–) 20.Qf4 Rxc3 (20...Nc4 21.Be4
Qd7 22.Bxb7 Qxb7 23.h5ƒ; 20...f6 21.Re3ƒ) 21.Be4 Qh5? Dolana –
R.Dimitrov, Plovdiv 2015 (21...Qd6 22.Ne5 f5 23.Bxb7 Nxb7 24.h5±)
22.Ng5 f6 23.Nxe6+–

17...a6
 17...Bf8 18.Bg5 Be7 19.h4

19...Bxg5, Erwich – Lai, Netherlands 2015, 20.Nxg5 Nxc3 21.bxc3 Rf8

22.Qh3 Na5 23.f4!? h5 (23...Qd5 24.h5 Rxc3 25.Qh2 gxh5 26.Ne4 Qxe4
27.Rxe4 Bxe4 28.Qh4 Rxa3 29.d5 Rxa4 30.dxe6 fxe6 31.f5+–) 24.Nxe6
fxe6 25.Rxe6 Kg7 (25...Kh7 26.Qg3 Rf6 27.Rde1 Rc7 28.f5 Rg7 29.fxg6+
Rgxg6 30.Re7+–) 26.f5 Rxf5 27.Qg3 Rf6 28.Qe5 Nc6 29.Bxc6 Rxc6
30.Re7+ Kf8 31.Rxb7+–
19...a6 20.Nxd5 Qxd5 (20...exd5 21.Bxc6 Rxc6, Mortensen – Ostenstad,
Espoo 1989, 22.Rxe7 Rxe7 23.Ne5 Rce6 24.Qf3 Qd6 25.Bxe7 Qxe7
26.h5±) 21.Bb3 Qf5 22.Qxf5 gxf5 23.d5 Na5, Payen – Keskinen,
Jyvaskyla 2000, 24.Bxe7 Rxe7 (24...Nxb3? 25.d6+–) 25.Ba2 Kf8 26.d6
Rd7 27.Ne5 Rdd8 28.b4 Nc6 29.Nxf7 Kxf7 30.Rxe6 Kg7 31.h5!+–

17...Nxc3 18.bxc3 Bxa3. It is quite understandable that it would be very

risky for Black to capture a pawn like this (If he refrains from capturing,
this would not end up well for him either: 18...Qd6 19.c4 Red8 20.d5 exd5
21.cxd5 Na5, Safarli – Semerene Indriago, Khanty-Mansiysk 2010, 22.Ne5
Bxd5 23.Nd7!+–; 22...Bf6 23.Ng4 Bg7 24.Bxg7 Kxg7 25.Qd4+ f6
26.Nxf6+–; 23...Bc3 24.Bd7!! Qxd7 25.Qxc3! Rxc3 26.Nf6+ Kh8
27.Nxd7 Rcc8 28.Re7 Nc4 29.Nf6 Nd6 30.Rde1+–) 19.Ng5 Be7
(19...Bf8?! 20.Qh3) 20.Qg3

It would be tremendously difficult for Black to parry his opponent’s

initiative.
20...a6, Stets – Nikolov, Rochefort 2018, 21.Nxf7! Kxf7 22.Rxe6 Qd5
(22...Kxe6 23.Qh3+ Kd6 24.Bf4+ Ne5 25.Bxe5+ Kd5 26.Bd7+–) 23.Rde1
Bd6 24.Bb3!+–
20...Bxg5 21.Bxg5 Qd5 22.Rb1 Qa5 23.Ra1 Qd5 24.Bf6 b5 (24...Qf5
25.Qh4+–) 25.Bc2 Ne7 26.Be4 Qd7 27.Rxa7±
20...Qd5, Kornev – Virovlansky, Voronezh 2007, 21.c4 Qa5 (21...Qxc4?
22.Bb3 Qb4 23.Nxf7+–) 22.Bb5 a6 23.Qf4 f5 24.Bxc6 Bxc6 25.h4 Ba4
26.Rb1 Rxc4 27.Rxe6 Bxg5 28.Rxe8+ Bxe8 29.Qxg5 Qd5 30.Rxb6 Rxd4
31.Qf6 Rd1+ 32.Kh2 Qf7 33.Qc3+–

18.Nxd5 Qxd5

18...exd5 19.Bxc6 (19.b4!?±) 19...Rxc6, Kovacevic – Golubovic, Neum

2004, 20.Ne5 Re6 21.f4 Bc8 22.f5 Rd6 23.fxg6 hxg6 24.Rf1±
 19.Qe3

Black intended to transfer his queen to the h5-square with tempo and
White protected his bishop in advance. Now, he is threatening 20.Bb3 and
21.d5.

19.Bb3 Qh5„

19...Bf6

19...Qh5, Tancik – Andrijevic, Senta 2009, 20.d5 b5 (20...exd5 21.Qxb6

Ba8 22.Bd2+–) 21.d6 Bxd6 22.Rxd6 bxa4 23.h3±

19...Rcd8 20.Bb3 Qh5 21.d5 exd5 22.Qxb6 Qxh6 23.Qxb7 Na5 24.Qb6
Nxb3 25.Rxe7 Rxe7 26.Qxd8+ Qf8 27.Qxd5+– Boehnke – Elci, ICCF
2014.

20.Bb3
 20...Qd7

20...Qh5? 21.d5+– Smyslov – Karpov, Leningrad 1971.

20...Qd8?! 21.Ne5 Bxe5 (21...Qe7? 22.Ng4 Bg7 23.Bxg7 Kxg7 24.d5+–

Billen – Dziedzina, Email 1999) 22.dxe5± Adams – Doettling, France 2002

21.d5 exd5 22.Qxb6 Rxe1+

22...Bxb2, Kovacevic – Ratkovic, Vrbas 2015, 23.Rxe8+ Rxe8 24.Rxd5

Qc8 25.Rd1±

23.Rxe1 Bg7

23...Bxb2 24.Bxd5 Bf6 25.Rd1 (25.h3!? Qxd5 26.Qxb7±) 25...Rd8,

Strautins – Elias, ICCF 2000 26.h3±

24.Bxg7 Kxg7
 25.h4
This is a nice attempt by White to increase his advantage while Black’s
pieces are stuck on the queenside.

25.Ba4 Qc7, Mayer – Solar, ICCF 2006, 26.Qxc7 Rxc7 27.Rc1 Rc8 (In
the king and pawn ending after 27...Kf6 28.Nd4 Ke5 29.Nxc6+ Kd6
30.Kf1 Bxc6 31.Rxc6+ White’s king will be centralised and after this his
outside passed pawn will settle the issue.) 28.Bxc6 Bxc6 29.Nd4± The
endgame with a knight against a bishop would be very difficult for Black.
 25...d4 26.Rd1 d3 27.Qe3 Rd8 28.h5 Nd4 29.h6+ Kf8 30.Ne5 Qf5
31.Rxd3± Kozhuharov – R.Dimitrov, Sunny Beach 2015.

B4) 7...Qd6

Black’s queen will not stand in the way of his rooks on this square. White
can oust it from there with the move Nc3-b5 indeed, but then Black’s queen
will retreat to d8. In general, White would not achieve anything much with
this operation and he would lose his control over the d5-square.
8.Bd3 Nf6 9.a3
This move restricts Black’s possibilities. Without it White would have to
consider at some moment the enemy knight-sortie Nb4.
9...Be7 10.0-0 0-0

10...a6 11.Be3 b5?! (11...0-0 – see 10...0-0) 12.Ne4! Nxe4 13.Bxe4 Bb7
(13...f5? 14.Bxc6+ Qxc6 15.Ne5 Qe4 16.Qh5+ g6 17.Nxg6+– Lerner –
Iclicki, Givataim 2007) 14.Ne5 Nxe5 (14...Rd8? 15.Qf3 Nxe5 16.dxe5
Bxe4 17.exd6 Bxf3 18.dxe7+–) 15.Bxb7 Rb8 16.dxe5 Qxd1 17.Bc6+ Qd7
18.Bxd7+ Kxd7 19.Rfd1+ Ke8 20.Rac1 Rd8 21.Rxd8+ Bxd8, Senador –
Pang, Penang 2019, 22.Rc8 Kd7 23.Ra8 Re8 24.Rxa6 Bc7 25.f4±
 11.Be3

11...b6
This is Black’s most principled move. His bishop might be perfectly
deployed on the b7-square, or may turn out to be misplaced there depending
on the circumstances...

Black could have waited for a move with: 11...Rd8 12.Qe2 b6 13.Rad1
Bb7 14.Bb1 – see 11...b6, but White could have countered that also with the
move 12.Qc2!?, after which 12...b6 would be already bad for Black in view
of 13.Ne4±

11...Bd7. Black’s schemes with a bishop on d7 are a bit more reliable,

because his e6-square is protected. He also saves a tempo for his
development, but this achievement is only temporary. Later, his bishop
should be often retreated to the e8-square in order not to impede his
development. So, this set-up is more passive than the position with the
bishop on the b7-square. As a result, Black would hardly lose immediately
after concrete actions by his opponent, but he would hardly manage to
organise any meaningful counterplay. 12.Qe2

12...Rac8 13.Rad1 Rfe8 (13...Rfd8 14.Rfe1 – see 12...Rfd8) 14.Ng5!? h6

15.Nge4 Nxe4 16.Nxe4 Qd5 (16...Qc7 17.Bb1 Na5 18.Qh5‚) 17.Bb1
Na5 18.Nc3 Qc4 19.Qh5‚
12...Rfd8 13.Rad1 Be8 (13...Rac8 14.Rfe1 Be8 15.Bb1 – see 13...Be8;
14...Nd5, Bergstrom – Nilsson, Hallstahammar 1993, 15.Ng5 g6 16.Bb1
Nxc3 17.bxc3 Qxa3 18.Qf3 Be8 19.Qh3 h5 20.Bxg6 fxg6 21.Qxe6+ Kh8
22.d5 Qd6 23.Qe4 Bxg5 24.Bxg5 Bf7 25.Qa4±) 14.Rfe1 Rac8 (14...h6
15.Bb1 Bf8 16.Qc2 g6, Kopecky – Slovak, Czechoslovakia 1989, 17.Qc1
Kh7 18.Bf4 Qd7 19.Be5 Bg7 20.Bxf6 Bxf6 21.d5 exd5 22.Nxd5 Bg7
23.b4 Qc8 24.Qf4±) 15.Bb1 Nd5 (15...Qc7 16.h4 Qa5 17.Qd3 b5 18.Bg5
g6 19.Qe2 b4 20.axb4 Nxb4 21.h5ƒ; 15...Qb8 16.Bg5 h6, Torre –
A.Petrosian, Shenzhen 1992, 17.Bh4 a6 18.Ba2 Qc7 19.d5 exd5 20.Bxf6
Bxf6 21.Nxd5±) 16.Qd3 g6 17.Ne4 Qc7, Michalczak - Bayer, Germany
2006, 18.Ba2 (18.h4 Na5 19.Rc1 Qb6 20.b4 Rxc1 21.Rxc1 Nc6 22.Bg5²)
18...Na5 (18...Nxe3 19.Qxe3 Qa5 20.h4ƒ Qh5?! 21.Neg5) 19.Bd2²
12...a6 13.Rad1
 13...Rad8 14.Rfe1 Rfe8 15.Bb1 Qb8, Meek – Kafka, England 2017,
16.Qc2 g6 17.Ba2 b5 18.d5! exd5 19.Nxd5 Nxd5 20.Bxd5 Ne5 21.Qb3
Nxf3+ 22.gxf3!+–
13...Nd5, Levushkina – Zwahr, playchess.com 2008, 14.Bc1!? Rfd8
15.Rfe1 Be8 16.Bb1 Nf6 17.Qc2 g6 18.Ba2±
13...Rfd8 14.Rfe1 Qc7 (14...h6, Adamson – Balleisen, Charlotte 2019,
15.Qd2! Nd5 16.Bxh6 gxh6 17.Qxh6 f5 18.Qg6+ Kf8 19.Ne5 Be8
20.Qh6+ Kg8 21.Ne4 Qc7 22.Qxe6+ Kg7 23.Qxf5+–; 14...Be8 15.Bb1
Rac8 16.d5! exd5 17.Bb6 Rd7 18.Bf5 Bf8 19.Qd2± Paehtz – Arakhamia
Grant, Caleta 2017) 15.Bg5 Be8 16.Bb1 Qa5, Emms – Franklin, London
1993 (16...h6?! 17.Bh4 Nd5 18.Qc2 g6 19.Nxd5 Rxd5 20.Bxe7 Qxe7
21.Ba2 Rd6 22.d5+– Pavasovic – Barle, Ljubljana 2007) 17.Bh4 Qh5
18.Ba2 Rac8 19.Bxf6 Bxf6 20.d5!±

11...Nd5 12.Qc2
 12...g6, Rozentalis – Epishin, Daugavpils 1989, 13.Bh6 Rd8 14.Ne4 Qc7
15.Rfe1 b6 (15...Qb6 16.Rad1 Bd7 17.Bc4 Rac8 18.Qd2 Be8 19.Bxd5!?
Rxd5 20.Nc3 Rd7 21.d5 Rcd8 22.Qf4 exd5 23.Nxd5 Rxd5 24.Rxd5 Rxd5
25.Qf6!+–) 16.Rac1 Bb7 17.Qd2 Rac8 18.h4ƒ
12...h6, Ghaem Maghami – Dreev, Moscow 2009 13.Rad1 Nxe3 14.fxe3
Bd7 (14...f5?! 15.Bc4±) 15.g4!? (with the idea Qg2, Kh1, Rg1, g5.)
15...Rac8 (15...Be8 16.Ne4 Qd8 17.Qg2 f6 18.Nc3±) 16.Qg2 f5 (16...e5
17.Ne4±; 16...Be8 17.Qh3 f6 18.Nh4±; 17...Bd7 18.Ne4 Qd5 19.g5 e5
20.Qg3±) 17.Kh1 Bf6 (17...fxg4 18.Qxg4 e5 19.Qg2 exd4 20.Rg1 Qf6
21.Nxd4 Nxd4 22.Nd5 Qg5 23.Qe4±) 18.gxf5 exf5 19.e4 Nxd4 20.Bb1
Qc5 21.Nxd4 Bxd4 22.Ne2 Bb5 23.Rxd4 Bxe2 24.Rd7±

11...a6 12.Qc2 (It would be also good for White to choose here 12.Ne4!?
Nxe4 13.Bxe4², although he would have less resources for a full blooded
battle.).
 About 12...Rd8 13.Rad1 g6 (13...h6 14.Qc1 – see 12...h6) 14.Rfe1 – see
12...g6.
The move 12...b5?! would lose a pawn for Black. 13.Ne4 Nxe4 14.Bxe4
Bb7 15.Bxh7+ Kh8 16.Be4±
12...h6 13.Rad1 Rd8 14.Qc1!? White has provoked a weakening of the
enemy position and now, he wishes to build the battery queen+bishop in
order to create even more dangerous threats, eyeing in the process the
enemy pawn on h6. 14...Bf8 (14...Nd5 15.Bxh6±) 15.Bb1 (15.Bf4 Qe7
16.Rfe1²) 15...Nd5 16.Qc2 g6, Khamrakulov – Mihailovs, Moscow 2002,
17.h4 h5 18.Bg5 Nce7 19.Ne5±
12...Bd7 13.Rad1 Rac8 14.Rfe1 Rfd8, Vrana – Kraus, Nachod 2011
(14...b5 15.Bg5 h6 16.Bh4 Qb8 17.Qe2 Rfe8, Manca – Vallifuoco,
Chianciano Terme 1991, 18.Bb1 b4 19.Bxf6 Bxf6 20.Ne4 Be7 21.Nc5 Qa7
22.Qd3±; 14...Qb8 15.Ne5 Rfd8 16.Nxd7 Rxd7 17.d5! exd5 18.Bf5±
Benjamin – Feldman, New York 1999) 15.Ng5!? g6 (15...h6? 16.Bh7+ Kf8
17.Nxf7! Kxf7 18.Qg6+ Kf8 19.Bxh6 Ne8 20.Re3+–) 16.Qe2 b5 17.Qf3
Be8 18.Bb1 b4 19.Nce4 Nxe4 20.Nxe4 Qc7 21.Ba2 bxa3 22.bxa3±
12...g6 13.Rad1
 13...Bd7 14.Qd2 (14.Rfe1 Rac8 15.Qd2 Nd5 16.Bh6 Rfd8 17.h4‚)
14...Nd5 15.Ne4 Qc7 16.Bh6 Rfd8 17.Rfe1 Be8 18.Bc4 Qa5 19.Qe2 Rac8,
Vogt – Hort, Baden-Baden 1992, 20.h4ƒ
13...Rd8 14.Rfe1 Bd7 (14...Ng4 15.Qc1 Nxe3 16.Qxe3 Nxd4 17.Bxg6
hxg6 18.Rxd4 Qc7 19.Rxd8+ Bxd8 20.h4‚) 15.Qc1 Nd5, Schneider –
Novkovic, Graz 2010, 16.Nxd5 Qxd5 (16...exd5 17.Bf4. The trade of the
dark-squared bishops is unavoidable and Black’s defensive problems
become even greater. 17...Qf6 18.Bg5 Qd6 19.Bxe7 Nxe7 20.Qh6 f6
21.Nh4‚) 17.Bc4 Qh5 18.d5 exd5 19.Rxd5 Bf5 20.Bg5 Rxd5 21.Bxd5 Rc8
22.Qd2 Bxg5 23.Nxg5 Rf8 24.h3 Qh4 25.g4+–
13...b5 14.Ne4 Nxe4 15.Bxe4 Bb7 16.d5 Nd8 (16...exd5 17.Bxd5 Nb4
18.axb4 Bxd5 19.Bc5 Qc6 20.Rxd5 Qxd5 21.Bxe7+ Stevic – Kober, Rabac
2003) 17.Bh6 Re8, G.Szabo – Dumitru, Sovata 2001. Now, White must try
to find all the time new and fresh ideas in order to preserve the tension in
the fight; otherwise, the position would be gradually balanced. 18.Qc3 Bf8
19.dxe6 Qxe6 20.Bxf8 Rxf8 21.Ng5 Qg4 22.Qe3 h6 (After the exchange
on e4, Black will have problems with the f6-square. If he plays 22...Re8,
then White will counter this with 23.Rd4! and Black’s queen will have
nowhere to hide, because after 23...Qh5, White would have the surprising
resource 24.Bxg6!±) 23.Bxb7 Nxb7 24.Nf3 Qh5 25.Rfe1±

12.Qe2

12...Bb7

About 12...Rd8 13.Rad1 Bb7 14.Bb1 – see 12...Bb7.

Now, White can vary a bit with his plans, but he should usually follow
these guidelines: his rooks must go to d1 and e1, because this would be his
maximally effective set-up for actions in the centre and on the kingside. His
bishop will be active on the b1-h7 diagonal building a battery with his
queen Bc2+Qd3, or Qc2+Bd3, in order to provoke weaknesses in Black’s
king’s shelter. His knight on f3, under the most favourable circumstances,
should be transferred to e5 and consolidated there, because this square is
controlled as a rule. White’s pieces can also use the g5-square. His knight
can go there in order to exert pressure against the enemy kingside, or to be
transferred later to another position (for example to e4) and his bishop can
exert pressure against Black’s knight on f6 (This might be very important in
a fight for the d5-square.). As for White’s actions with his pawns, his main
possibility may be the preparation of a break in the centre (d4-d5), or an
advance of his rook-pawn with the idea to weaken the shelter of the enemy
king (h2-h4-h5).

13.Rad1

13...Rad8
About 13...Rfe8 14.Bb1 Rad8 15.Rfe1 – see 13...Rad8.

13...h6. Black should not play this move without serious reasons,
particularly if White has the possibility to use the b1-h7 diagonal. 14.Bb1
Rfd8 15.Qc2. Now, Black’s knight on f6 is overburdened and practically
does not control the d5-square. 15...Na5 (15...Bf8 16.d5 Ne7? 17.Bd4+–
Reimold – Fuchs, Untergrombach 2004; 15...Rac8 16.Rfe1 Na5 17.Ne5 –
see 15...Na5; 16...Nb8 17.Ne5 Nbd7 18.Bf4± Priebe – Jahnz, Germany
2007) 16.Ne5 Rac8 17.Rfe1 Bd5 18.Ng4 Kf8 19.Nxf6 Bxf6 20.Qh7 Nc4
21.Be4 Nxe3 22.fxe3 Bb3, Segal – Peptan, Yerevan 1996, 23.Rc1±
 13...Nd5 14.Qc2!?N (14.Nxd5 exd5 15.Ne5 Nxe5 16.Bf4 Qe6 17.Bxe5
f6 18.Qh5 f5 19.Rfe1 Qf7 20.Qe2 Bg5 21.f4± Pavasovic – Dreev, Sibenik
2007) 14...Nxc3. This is a principled move for Black. (White would
maintain a stable advantage after 14...g6 15.Nxd5 exd5 16.Qd2 Bf6
17.Rfe1 Rfe8 18.Bf4 Rxe1+ 19.Rxe1 Qd8 20.Bh6²). 15.Bxh7+. Now,
White must part with his bishop, but he obtains a very powerful attack for it
(He has a relatively calmer alternative 15.bxc3 f5 16.Rfe1 Na5 17.Ne5²;
17.Qe2²) 15...Kh8 16.bxc3 g6 17.Bxg6 fxg6 18.Qxg6 Qd5 19.Ne5 Nxe5
(19...Rf6 20.Qh5+ Kg8 21.Qg4+ Kf8 22.Rfe1+–) 20.dxe5 Qe4 21.Qh6+
Kg8 22.f3 Qxe5 (22...Qh7 23.Qxh7+ Kxh7 24.Rd7+–; 22...Qf5 23.Rd4
Ba6 24.Re1 Qh7 25.Qxe6+ Kh8 26.Qc6 Rac8 27.Qa4 Bb7 28.Rg4 Rg8
29.e6+–) 23.Rd4 Kf7 24.Rd7 Rh8 25.Qg5 Qxg5 26.Bxg5 Ba6 27.Rxe7+
Kg6 28.h4 Bxf1 29.Rxe6+ Kf5 30.Rf6+ Ke5 31.Kxf1+–

13...Rfd8 14.Bb1 Rac8 (about 14...h6 15.Qc2 – see 13...h6) 15.Rfe1

About 15...h6 16.Qc2 Na5 17.Ne5 – see 13...h6.

15...Nd5 16.Ng5 h6 17.Nge4 Nxc3 18.Nxc3 Bf6 19.Ne4 Qe7 20.d5!
exd5 21.Nxf6+ Qxf6 22.Qd3± H.Ivanov – Monti, Email 2006.
 15...g6 16.Ba2 Nd5 17.Ne4 Qc7, Goluch – Grekh, Lvov 2016, 18.Bh6
Bf8 19.Bg5 Be7 20.h4ƒ
15...Na5 16.Ne5 Nc6 17.f4 Qc7 18.Nb5 Qb8, Blauert – Polevoy, Email
2004, 19.Bf2 Nxe5 20.fxe5 Nd5 21.Bg3 a6 22.Nd6 Bxd6 23.exd6±
15...Qb8. Black has practically abandoned his kingside and the
punishment comes rapidly. 16.Bg5 (16.Ng5!? Re8, Levushkina – Dovzik,
Austria 2016, 17.d5! exd5 18.Nxd5 Nxd5 19.Qh5+–; 16...Bd6 17.Nce4
Nxe4 18.Bxe4 h6, Skawinski – Gumularz, Krakow 2014, 19.Nxf7! Kxf7
20.Qh5+ Kf8 21.Bxh6 Bxh2+ 22.Kh1 Nxd4 23.Bxg7+ Kxg7 24.Qg6+
Kf8 25.Qf6+ Kg8 26.Rxd4 Rxd4 27.Qxe6+ Kg7 28.Qg6+ Kf8 29.Qf6+
Kg8 30.Bh7+ Kxh7 31.Re7+ Kg8 32.Qg7#).

16...h6 17.Bh4 Qf4 18.d5! exd5, Kiss – Kovacs, Hungary 2011, 19.Qd3±
16...Re8 17.Qd3 g6 18.Ba2 Rcd8, Michna – Ilchev, Sunny Beach 2011,
19.d5±
16...g6 17.Ba2 Re8, Mastrokoukos – Istratescu, Kavala 1990, 18.Bxe6!?
fxe6 19.Qxe6+ Kg7 20.Qh3 Nh5 21.d5+–
16...Nd5. Black blocks the centre, but now White’s queen is transferred to
the vicinity of the enemy king with a decisive effect. 17.Qe4 g6 18.Qh4
Qc7 (18...h5, Danilenko – Bogdanovich, Odessa 2009, 19.Bxg6 fxg6
20.Qe4+–) 19.Ba2 Nxc3 20.bxc3 h5 (20...Re8 21.d5! exd5 22.Bxd5+–
Weglarz – Hnydiuk, Czestochowa 1998) 21.d5! Bxg5 22.Qxg5 exd5
23.Qh6+– Rozkov – Novgorodskij, Nizhnij Novgorod 2007.
13...Rac8 14.Rfe1

About 14...Rfd8 15.Bb1, or 14...Qb8 15.Bg5 Rfd8 16.Bb1 – see 13...Rfd8.

14...Nd5 15.Nxd5 Qxd5 16.Bc4 Qh5 (16...Qf5 17.d5 exd5 18.Rxd5 Qe4
19.Rd7 Ne5 20.Rxb7 Nxc4 21.Rxa7²) 17.d5 Na5 (17...Ne5 18.Nxe5 Qxe5
19.dxe6 Qe4 20.exf7+ Kh8 21.Qf1 Rxc4 22.Rd7 Bc6 23.Rxe7 Qxe7
24.Qxc4± Howell – Perez Garcia, Caleta 2016) 18.Ba2 Bxd5 19.Bxd5 exd5
20.Bxb6 axb6 21.Qxe7² Artemiev – Ponkratov, Sochi 2016.
14...Na5 15.Ne5 Qd8 16.Bb1 Nd5 (16...Bxa3 17.d5! exd5 18.Bg5 Be7
19.Ng4 Rc7 20.Nxf6+ Bxf6 21.Qc2 g6 22.Bxf6 Qxf6 23.Nxd5±) 17.Qd3
g6 18.Bh6 Re8 (18...Nxc3 19.bxc3 Qd5 20.Qh3! Rxc3 21.Qg4 f5
22.Nxg6!!+–) 19.Qf3 f5 20.Nxg6 hxg6 21.Rxe6 Nf6 22.Qg3 Kf7 23.d5
Rxc3 24.Qxc3 Bxd5 25.Re5 Qc8 26.Rdxd5 Qxc3 27.bxc3 Nxd5 28.Ba2
Kf6 29.Rxd5 g5 30.f4±
14...Rfe8 15.Bg5
 Now Black must decide how to defend against the threat 16.Bxf6 Bxf6
17.d5.
15...g6 16.h4ƒ
15...h6 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.Ne4 Qf4 18.g3 Qc7 (18...Qg4? 19.Nd6+–)
19.Qe3 Be7 20.d5 exd5 21.Nf6+ gxf6 22.Qxh6+–
15...Nd5 16.Nxd5 exd5, Hausmann – Ioseliani, Halle 2000, 17.Bf5 Rcd8
18.Qe3 Bc8 19.Bf4 Qf6 20.Bd3 Bg4 21.Be5 Qe6 22.Bb5²
15...Qd8. Black’s rook on a8 is already protected and the exchange on f6,
followed by d4-d5, would not work well for White. 16.h4!? This is a very
useful move in similar positions. (16.Bb1 g6 17.h4 Kg7 18.Ne5 Ng8
19.Qg4 Bxg5 20.hxg5 Nce7, Zifroni – Malakhov, Budapest 1996, 21.Nxf7
Kxf7 22.Qxe6+ Kg7 23.Qe5+ Kf8 24.Ba2 Nd5 25.Qxe8+ Qxe8 26.Rxe8+
Rxe8 27.Bxd5+–) 16...h6 (16...g6 17.Bb5 Nd5 18.Nxd5 Qxd5 19.Bc4 Qd7
20.d5! exd5 21.Rxd5+–) 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.Qe4 g6 19.h5 Na5, Kotainy –
Koch, Germany 2017, 20.Qg4 g5 21.Ne5 Re7 22.Be4 Bxe4 23.Nxe4 Bg7
24.Qf3±

14.Bb1
 14...Rfe8
14...Nd5 15.Qd3!? White is trying somehow to break his opponent’s solid
defensive fortress. 15...g6 (15...f5 16.Ba2 Nxc3 17.bxc3 Kh8 18.Qe2 Qxa3
19.Bxe6 Qxc3 20.d5 Ne5 21.Ng5 Ng4 22.Bf4 Bxg5 23.Bxg5 Rde8? 24.d6
Qc6 25.f3±; 23...Qc7 24.g3 Nf6 25.Rfe1²) 16.Bh6 Rfe8 17.Ne4 Qd7
18.Rfe1. White is ready to break Black’s kingside defence by using his h-
pawn as a wedge. 18...f5 19.Nc3 Nxc3 20.bxc3 Na5 (20...Bxa3? 21.Ba2
Na5 22.Ng5+–) 21.Ba2 Bd5, Kharchenko – Kruglyakov, Kiev 2004,
22.Ne5 Qa4 23.Qg3 (White is threatening to capture on g6.) 23...Bd6
24.Bxd5 exd5 25.f4 (White repeats his threat.) 25...Re6 26.Qf3 Bf8
27.Bxf8 Kxf8 28.g4+–

14...Qb8 15.Rfe1 Rd7?! This is not the best place for Black’s rook,
moreover that the doubling on the d-file would not be effective for him
(15...Rfe8 – see 14...Rfe8). 16.Bg5 (16.Qc2!? g6 17.Ba2 Qd8 18.Qe2 Re8
19.Bc4 Qa8, Ghader – Moradi, Teheran 2007, 20.Bh6 Na5 21.Ne5 Rd6
22.Ba2 Bxg2 23.Nxf7+–).
 16...Qd8?! Van Mil – Sokolov, Wijk aan Zee 1993, 17.d5! Nxd5 18.Nxd5
Bxg5 19.Nxg5 Qxg5 20.Qd3! f5 21.Nf6+ gxf6 22.Qxd7+–; 18...exd5
19.Bf5 Rc7 20.Bf4±
16...Rfd8 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.d5! exd5 (18...Bxc3? 19.dxc6 Bxe1
20.Rxd7+–) 19.Nxd5 Bd4 (19...Bxb2 20.Ng5 g6 21.Qxb2 Rxd5, Bruneau –
Collas, France 1999, 22.Qf6+–) 20.Nf6+!? (20.Bxh7+ Kxh7 21.Qe4+ g6
22.Rxd4±) 20...gxf6 21.Qe4 Kf8 (21...f5 22.Qxf5 Kf8 23.Ng5 Qd6
24.Ne6+ Ke8 25.Nxd4+ Re7 26.Ba2 Nxd4 27.Qxf7+ Kd7 28.Rxe7+ Qxe7
29.Rxd4+–) 22.Qxh7 Be5 23.Ba2 Qc7 24.Qh8+ Ke7 25.Qg7 Rf8 26.Bd5
Rxd5 27.Rxd5 Rd8 28.Nxe5 fxe5 29.Qg5+ Ke6 30.Rexe5 Nxe5 31.Rxd8
Qc6 32.h4±

15.Rfe1
 15...Qb8

15...g6 16.Ba2 Nd5 (about 16...Qb8 17.Ng5 – see 15...Qb8) 17.Ne4!?

(17.Nxd5 exd5, Pavasovic – Zivkovic, Slovenia 2010, 18.Qd2²) 17...Qb8
18.Bh6 Rd7 19.h4‚

15...Bf8 16.Bg5 Ne7 17.Ne5 Ng6, Pisk – Michalek, Czech Republic

2000, 18.f4 (18.h4!? Nxe5 19.dxe5 Qc6 20.f4 Rxd1 21.Rxd1 Nd5 22.Nxd5
exd5 23.Qd3±) 18...Be7 19.h4 Nf8 (19...h6? 20.Bxg6 fxg6 21.Bxh6 gxh6
22.Qc2+–; 19...Nd5 20.Bxg6 hxg6 21.h5 Bxg5 22.fxg5+–) 20.h5 h6
21.Nb5 Qb8 22.Bxh6 gxh6 23.Rd3. White’s attack is practically impossible
to parry by Black, for example: 23...N8d7 24.Rg3+ Kf8 25.Nxf7 Qxf4
26.Nxd8 Qxg3 27.Nxb7 Qb8 28.Bg6 Qxb7 29.Qe3+–

15...h6. Black covers the g5-square, but now the b1-h7 diagonal becomes
tremendously vulnerable. In positions of this type, White can follow with
the straightforward move Qd2, with the idea to capture on h6. 16.Qc2
 16...Bf8. Black’s queen would not be safe on the d6-square. 17.d5! exd5
(17...Ne7? Bojkov – Knors, Chambery 2007, 18.Bd4 Nexd5 19.Bxf6+–)
18.Nxd5 g6 (18...Ne4 19.Nc3+–) 19.Nf4!? (19.Nxb6±) 19...Qc7 20.Rxd8
Rxd8 21.Ba2 Kh8 22.b4±
Black can prevent his opponent’s pawn-break in the centre with the move
16...Na5, but then the attacking potential of White’s pieces, after his knight
occupies the e5-outpost, would be increased considerably. All this may lead
to a very rapid catastrophe for Black. 17.Ne5 Rc8 18.Bxh6! Rxc3
(18...gxh6 19.Nxf7 Kxf7 20.Qg6+ Kf8 21.Qxh6+ Kg8 22.Re3+–) 19.Qxc3
gxh6 20.Qg3+ Kf8, Pourramezanali – Ahmed, Hamedan 2018, 21.Bg6+–
16...Qb8 17.h3 (White would not achieve much with the move 17.d5 after
17...exd5 18.Nxd5 Rxd5 19.Rxd5 Nb4= Kupper – Mantovani, Graechen
1999.) 17...Bd6. Black’s e6-pawn is protected now and he would be able to
cover the dangerous diagonal with the move f7-f5 (17...Rd7 18.Ne4 Red8
19.Nxf6+ Bxf6 20.Qh7+ Kf8 21.Ba2 Ne7 22.Bd2 a5 23.Rxe6 fxe6
24.Bxe6+–; 18...Nxe4 19.Qxe4 g6 20.Bxh6 Nxd4 21.Qg4 Nxf3+ 22.gxf3
Rxd1 23.Rxd1 Rd8 24.Re1 Bf8 25.Bxf4 Qc8 26.Bxg6 fxg6 27.Rc1+–)
18.Ne4 Nxe4 19.Qxe4 f5 (19...g6 20.Qh4±) 20.Qh4 Ne7 (20...Na5 21.Ba2
Bxf3 22.gxf3. White’s pawn-structure is hopelessly compromised, but his
active actions on the g-file compensate all this. 22...Qc7 23.Bc1 Nc4
24.Kh1 Qc6 25.Qh5 Bf8 26.Rg1 Re7 27.Bxh6+–) 21.Bxh6 Nd5 22.Bxg7
Kxg7 23.Qg5+ 1–0 Kunz – Koenig, Email 2011.

16.Ng5!?
After this move the strike on f7 would work in numerous variations,
sometimes immediately, but more often after the preliminary pawn-advance
d4-d5.

White’s main line here is: 16.Bg5, but Black can counter that with 16...h6
17.Bh4 Nh5 18.Qc2 g6 and White will have great problems to break his
opponent’s defence. 19.Bg3 (Following 19.Rxe6?!, White might even fail to
equalise: 19...Nf4! 20.Bxe7 Nxe7.) 19...Nxg3 20.hxg3 Bf6 21.d5 exd5
22.Rxe8+ Rxe8 23.Nxd5 Qd6=.

16...g6

Suddenly, it becomes obvious that Black’s defence would be very

difficult:
 16...Bd6?! 17.Nce4 Nxe4 18.Bxe4 h6, Motwani – Bellin, Walsall 1992
(18...f5? 19.Bxf5 Bxh2+ 20.Kh1 h6 21.Bxe6+ Rxe6 22.Nxe6+–
Karpatchev – Skembris, Kerkyra 2009) 19.Bh7+! Kh8 20.Qh5 Re7 21.Bb1
Bxh2+ (21...Rf8 22.Nh7+–) 22.Kh1 Kg8 23.Qg4 hxg5 (23...Bc7 24.Nh7
Kh8 25.Nf6! Na5 26.Qh4+–) 24.Bxg5 f6 (24...f5 25.Qh5 Bd6 26.Ba2+–
Black would be incapable of holding on to the e6-square.) 25.Bg6! fxg5
26.Qh3! Ree8 27.Rxe6+–

He cannot save the issue with the move 16...Rd7, because the vulnerable
f7 and e6-squares cannot be fortified with the moves 17...Bd8, or 17...Nd8.
17.d5! exd5 18.Nxd5 Rxd5 (18...Nxd5 19.Qh5+–) 19.Rxd5 h6 20.Nxf7!
Kxf7 21.Ba2 Kf8 22.Rf5+– Black’s defence against the threats 23.Qc4, or
23.Qh5, would be extremely difficult.

16...h6 17.Nge4 Nxe4 18.Nxe4 f5 (18...Na5 19.b4 Nc6 20.Qg4 f5

21.Qg6 fxe4 22.Qxe6+ Kh8 23.Qxe4+–; 19...Bxe4 20.Bxe4 Nb7 21.Bc6
Rf8 22.d5± Turkov – Kasianov, Russia 1996) 19.Nc3 Bf6 20.d5 Ne5,
Novopashin – Zilberstein, Nikolaev 1981 (20...Bxc3 21.bxc3 Rxd5 22.Rxd5
exd5 23.Qh5±) 21.Bf4!? exd5 22.Qh5±

17.Ba2 Bf8

The threat of capturing on f7 is terribly dangerous for Black: 17...Qc7?

18.Nxf7 Kxf7 19.Bh6 g5, Moser – Philippe, Chambery 2008, 20.Qxe6+
Kg6 21.Bxg5 Kxg5 22.Ne4+– or 17...Nh5 18.Nxf7 Kxf7 19.Bh6 Kg8
20.Bxe6+ Kh8 21.d5 Bd6, Richards – Matnadze, Patras 2001, 22.dxc6
Bxh2+ 23.Kh1 Bxc6 24.Qc4+–
Black’s best move here is – 17...Qc8, protecting the pawn on e6, but even
then his king would not be safe enough. 18.h4 h6 19.Nge4 Kg7 20.Qf3±
 18.d5! Nxd5
It would be more tenacious for Black to defend here with 18...exd5
19.Qf3 Bg7 20.Nxf7! Ne5 21.Nxe5 Qxe5 22.Bd2 Qd6 23.Rxe8+ Rxe8
24.Be3 Kh8 25.Bd4±
19.Nxd5, Ghaem Maghami – Mallahi, Rasht 1998, 19...exd5 20.Nxf7!
Kxf7 21.Rxd5 Kg7 (21...Rxd5 22.Qf3+! Kg7 23.Qxd5 Qc7 24.Qg8+ Kf6
25.h4+–) 22.Qc4! Be7 (22...Na5 23.Qc3+–; 22...Rxe3 23.Rxe3 Bc5
24.Rxd8 Qxd8 25.Qf7+ Kh6 26.Rh3+ Kg5 27.Bd5!+–) 23.Rxd8 Qxd8
24.Qf7+ Kh8 25.Bh6 Rg8 26.h3+–
 Chapter 12
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 e6
5.Nf3

5...Nc6
One of the ideas of this move for Black is to have in response to 6.Na3
the move 6...Qd8, after which White would most probably play 7.Nc2,
because Black would be threatening to capture on d4, while White would
hardly manage to realise the knight-sortie Nb5.

About 5...cxd4 6.cxd4 – see Chapter 10-11.

5...Nf6 – see Chapter 14.

5...a6 6.Bd3 Nf6 7.0-0 Be7 (7...Nc6 – see 5...Nc6; 7...cxd4 8.cxd4 Be7
9.Nc3 – see Chapter14, variation B) 8.Be3 cxd4 9.cxd4 0-0 10.Nc3 – see
Chapter14, variation B.

5...Bd7. This move is a bit awkward and provides White with additional
possibilities. 6.c4 Qd6 (From the practical point of view, it would be
simpler for Black here to part with his queen: 6...Qe4+ 7.Be3 cxd4 8.Bd3
Qg4 9.h3 Qxg2 10.Rh2 Qxh2 11.Nxh2 dxe3 12.fxe3² Oschetzki – Liebold,
Regensburg 1998.) 7.d5. White creates a powerful passed pawn. Later,
Black will have to lose some tempi in order to remove his queen from the
attack by the enemy pieces. 7...Nf6 8.Nc3 Na6, Plazaola – Zuriel, Buenos
Aires 2010, 9.g3 (White wishes to deploy perfectly his bishops – one of
them on f4 and the other on the long diagonal. This, together with his
powerful passed pawn, provides him with an obvious advantage.) 9...0-0-0
(Black has a great problem here to coordinate his pieces: 9...Be7 10.Bf4
Qb6 11.Bg2 Qxb2 12.Rc1 0-0 13.d6 Bd8 14.0-0 Nb4 15.Ne5±; 9...exd5?
10.cxd5 0-0-0 11.Bf4 Qe7+ 12.Be2±; 9...e5? 10.Bg2 Be7 11.0-0 0-0
12.Re1±) 10.Bg2 exd5 11.0-0 dxc4 (11...d4? 12.Nb5 Bxb5 13.cxb5 Nc7
14.Bf4 Qb6 15.Ng5 Ne6 16.Bh3+–) 12.Bf4 Qxd1 13.Raxd1 Be6 14.Rxd8+
Kxd8 15.Rd1+ Nd7 16.Ng5± Black will hardly coordinate his forces
moreover that he loses his b7-pawn as well.

5...Be7. Black keeps his knight on g8 at the moment and is trying to avoid
the main lines. 6.Na3 (White plays analogously to the variation 4...Nf6
5.Nf3 e6 6.Na3.)
 About 6...Nf6 7.Nb5 – see Chapter 14, variation D.
6...cxd4 7.Nb5 Na6 8.Qa4!? White provokes the placement of the enemy
bishop to the d7-square, so that later he can obtain the two-bishop
advantage. Having in mind the non-symmetrical pawn-structure, this would
provide White with a stable advantage in the endgame. 8...Bd7 9.Qxd4 Nf6
10.Ne5 Qxd4 11.Nxd4 Nc5 12.g3 0-0 13.Nxd7 Nfxd7 14.Ke2 Ne5
15.Bg2² Ned3? 16.b4 Nxc1+ 17.Rhxc1+–
6...a6 7.Nc4 Nd7 (7...Qd8? Tassopoulos – Varelakis, Nikea 2004, 8.dxc5
Qxd1+ 9.Kxd1 Bxc5 10.b4 b5 11.bxc5 bxc4 12.Ne5±) 8.Be2 (White can
also prevent the move b7-b5: 8.a4 Ngf6 9.a5²; 8...cxd4 9.Qxd4 Ngf6
10.a5² His advantage is quite obvious with this non-standard pawn-
structure, moreover that Black will have great difficulties to develop his
queenside.) 8...b5 (8...Ngf6 9.0-0 b5 10.Nfd2 Rb8 11.Bf3 Qf5 12.Na5²)
9.Ne3 Qb7 (9...Qd6 10.a4 Rb8 11.axb5 axb5 12.d5 Ngf6 13.dxe6 fxe6
14.Qxd6 Bxd6 15.Ra5²) 10.d5 exd5 11.Qxd5 Nb6 12.Qxb7 Bxb7 13.a4!
Nxa4 14.c4. Black has great problems to complete his development, for
example: 14...Kf8 15.cxb5 axb5 16.Bxb5 Bxf3 17.gxf3 Nb6 18.Rxa8+
Nxa8 19.0-0 Nc7 20.Bc4 h5 (20...g6 21.Ng4! Nf6 22.Bh6+ Ke8
23.Bg7+–) 21.Nf5 g6 22.Nxe7 Kxe7 23.Bg5+ Kf8 24.Ra1+–
 6.Bd3

6...Nf6

About 6...cxd4 7.cxd4 Nf6 8.Nc3 – see Chapter 11.

6...Bd7 7.Be3 (White must already consider the possible capturing on d4,
while the move 7.dxc5 would not provide him with much because of the
line: 7...Ne5 8.Nxe5 Qxe5+ 9.Qe2 Qxe2+ 10.Bxe2 Bxc5=) 7...cxd4
(7...Nf6 8.0-0 – see 6...Nf6) 8.cxd4 Nf6 9.Nc3 (As compensation for the
position of White’s bishop on the e3-square, Black’s bishop on d7 is also
misplaced and his queen has no freedom to manoeuvre.) 9...Qa5 10.a3 Be7
11.0-0 0-0 12.b4 Qd8, Banovic – Fercec, Pula 2013 (12...Qh5 13.b5 Na5
14.Be2 Ng4 15.Bf4 Rad8 16.d5 Bc8 17.h3 Nh6 18.d6 Bf6 19.Rc1±)
13.Ne4 Rc8 14.b5² (It is also good for White to play here 14.Nc5²).

7.0-0
7...Be7

About 7...cxd4 8.cxd4 – see Chapter 11.

7...Bd7
 Now, Black can already capture on d4 several times and White must solve
this problem.
Capturing on c5 is possible, but having in mind that Black has not lost a
tempo for the move Bf8-e7, White’s edge would be just minimal: 8.dxc5
Bxc5 9.Qe2 Qh5 10.Nbd2 Bd6 11.Re1 0-0 12.Ne4 Nxe4 13.Bxe4 Rfd8
14.h3 h6 15.Be3²
White can maybe wait for another move – 8.Re1!? cxd4 (following
8...Be7, it would be already good for him to choose 9.dxc5²) 9.cxd4 Nxd4
(9...Bd6 10.Nc3 Qh5 11.Nb5 Bb8 12.Be2²) 10.Nxd4 Qxd4 11.Rxe6+ Be7
12.Nc3 Bc6 13.Bg5 Qc5 (13...Qd7 14.Re5 0-0 15.Bxh7+ Kxh7 16.Qxd7
Nxd7 17.Rxe7±) 14.Be3 Qa5 15.Rxe7+ Kxe7 16.Bb5‚
White can still afford to play 8.Be3, since Black’s bishop is also
misplaced on d7 (It is usually deployed on the b7-square.). 8...cxd4 9.cxd4
Nb4. Black wishes to establish reliable control over the d5-square as early
as possible. 10.Nc3 Qa5 11.Bc4 Bc6 12.Ne5 Nbd5 (12...Be7, Jerez Perez –
Suba, Badalona 1994, 13.a3 Nbd5 14.Nxd5 Bxd5 15.Bd2 Qd8 16.Qa4+
Kf8 17.Rac1²) 13.Qf3 Bd6, Cooper – Suba, Benasque 1996 (13...Be7
14.Bxd5 Bxd5 15.Qg3ƒ) 14.Qg3 0-0 15.Nxc6 Qxc3 16.Bxd5 Qxc6
17.Bxc6 Bxg3 18.Bxb7 Rab8 19.Bf3 Bd6 20.b3±

7...a6
 8.Re1 Be7 (about 8...cxd4 9.cxd4 Be7 10.Nc3 Qd8 11.a3 0-0 12.Bc2 –
see Chapter 11, variation B3) 9.dxc5 Bxc5 10.Qc2 0-0 11.Bg5 h6 12.Bxf6
gxf6 13.Nbd2²
It would be also good for White to play here immediately 8.dxc5!? Bxc5
9.Qe2 0-0 10.Bg5 Ng4, Sznapik – Klinger, Polanica Zdroj 1985, 11.Nbd2
Ba7 12.Rad1 Nce5 (12...h6 13.Nb3 hxg5 14.c4! Qd8 15.Bxh7+ Kxh7
16.Rxd8 Nxd8 17.Nxg5+–; 12...Nge5 13.Nxe5 Qxe5 14.Qg4±) 13.Nxe5
Nxe5 14.Bxh7+ Kxh7 15.Ne4 with a tremendously dangerous attack which
may be turned into victory in this way: 15...Qb5 16.Qh5+ Kg8 17.Nf6+
gxf6 18.Bxf6 Nf3+ 19.Qxf3 Qf5 20.Qg3+ Qg6 21.Rd3 Qxg3 22.Rxg3+
Kh7 23.Rg7+ Kh6 24.Re1 Rd8 25.g4 Rd3 26.h3 Bd7 27.Re5 Rd5 28.g5+
Kh5 29.Rh7+ Kg6 30.Rh6#

7...Qd8
 8.a3!? Be7 (about 8...cxd4 9.cxd4 Be7 10.Nc3 0-0 11.Re1 – see Chapter
11, variation B3) 9.dxc5 Bxc5. White has an extra tempo with a pawn on a3
and it might be useful. It is possible for him to continue with 10.Qe2 Qc7
11.Nbd2 Be7 12.Ne4², analogously to the main line.
8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.Qe2 Qc7 10.Nbd2 Be7 11.Re1 0-0 12.Ne4 Nd5 (Black
must play very carefully, because of his opponent’s possible threats on the
kingside, arising after the exchange of the knight on f6: 12...Nxe4 13.Qxe4
f5 14.Qc4 Bd6, Voelker – Strehlow, Berlin 2004, 15.Be3 b6 16.Rad1±;
12...Rd8 13.Nxf6+ Bxf6 14.Bc2 g6 15.h4ƒ; 14...b6 15.Qe4 g6 16.Bg5
Bxg5 17.Nxg5² Bb7? 18.Qh4 h5 19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.Rxe6+–) 13.Bc2 h6
14.a3 Rd8 15.Ng3 a5 16.Nh5 a4, Mehmedovic – Nikolic, Sarajevo 2013,
17.h3 Bd7 18.c4 Nf6 19.Nxf6+ Bxf6 20.Qe4 g6 21.Bxh6 Bxb2 22.Qh4‚

8.dxc5
It is time for White to clarify the situation in the centre, He would be
happy to have a position with an isolated pawn on d4, after a capture there,
but his useful moves have practically ended.
 Following 8.Re1 0-0 9.a3 Rd8, it would be White who must play
accurately and this is the reason he has postponed the exchange on c5:
9.dxc5 Rd8=

8...0-0

This move is more flexible than the immediate exchange on c5, although
it usually comes up to transposition of moves: 8...Qxc5 9.Qe2 0-0
10.Nbd2, or 8...Bxc5 9.Qe2 0-0 10.Bg5 – see 8...0-0.

The arising pawn-structure is very popular (It can be encountered for

example in the French Defence in the variation 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5
4.exd5 Qxd5, in the Colle Opening etc.). Its correct evaluation depends on
numerous factors and one of the most important is the control over the h2-
b8 diagonal and in particular over the e5-square. The balance of forces on
the kingside is also a key factor (Black’s pawn on e6 hampers his
communication and complicates his defence.). In general, White must try to
increase his space advantage and to create problems for his opponent on the
kingside. He must be also on the alert to turn the arising tactical intricacies
in his favour.

9.Qe2 Qxc5

9...Rd8 10.Rd1 Qxc5 11.Nbd2

 11...Qh5 12.Nf1. White should better choose another route for his knight.
(The variation 12.Ne4 Ne5 13.Nxf6+ Bxf6 14.Bxh7+ Qxh7 15.Rxd8+
Bxd8 16.Nxe5 f6 17.Nf3 Bd7² would lead to a position in which White
will have serious problems to realise his extra pawn, because his opponent
would have two powerful bishops.) 12...Qa5 13.Bf4 a6 14.N1d2² Rd5?
15.Nc4 Qd8, Frhat – Adu, Cairo 2015, 16.Be3 Nd7 17.a4±
11...Bd7 12.Ne4 Nxe4 13.Qxe4 Qh5 (It would be too optimistic for
Black to opt here for 13...f5?! 14.Qe2 Bf6 15.Bc4 Kh8 16.Bf4 e5 17.Rd5
Qe7 18.Bxe5± Re8? 19.Bxf6 Qxf6 20.Qd2 Be6 21.Rd6 Rad8 22.Re1+–
Leoncini – Trabattoni, corr. 1987; if 13...Qf5, then besides 14.Qe2 Qh5
15.Bf4 Rac8 16.Rd2², White can also choose 14.Qxf5 exf5, Zumsande –
Lammers, Germany 2019, 15.Be3² and later try to enter simply a pawn
ending.) 14.g4!? White is fighting for the initiative in a very complicated
situation. Black’s task would not be easy, though... (14.Bf4 Rac8 15.h3²)
14...Qg6 15.Qf4 f5 16.h3 Be8, Garcia Cardenas – Cubas, Asuncion 2009,
17.Bc2 Rxd1+ 18.Bxd1 Bd6 19.Qg5 Qf7 20.Qe3 fxg4 21.hxg4 Qg6
22.Nh4 Qf7 23.Bb3 Bd7 24.Nf3 h6 25.Qe4 Rf8 26.Be3 Na5 27.Rd1 Nxb3
28.Rxd6 Bc6 29.Rxc6 bxc6 30.Kg2 Na5 31.Ne5 Qc7 32.b4 Nb7 33.Nxc6²
This is naturally just one of the possible variations.
 The move 9...Bxc5 would lose several tempi for Black. 10.Bg5 Be7 (It
would be too risky for him to ignore the threat of the destruction of his
kingside – 10...h6 11.Bxf6 gxf6 12.Nbd2 Rd8 13.Bc2 Ne5 14.Ne4 Be7,
Kosteniuk – Maisuradze, Monaco 2017, 15.Nxe5 fxe5? 16.Qh5+–;
15...Qxe5 16.f4 Qc7 17.Qg4+ Kh8 18.Qh4 Bf8 19.Nxf6 Qe7 20.f5 e5
21.g4 Bg7 22.g5 Rd2 23.Be4 Rd6 24.Rad1 Bxf6 25.Qxh6+ Kg8
26.Rxd6+–) 11.Rd1 Qa5 (Black’s queen comes under an attack all over the
board – 11...Qc5 12.Nbd2 Nd5, Mokhova – Protopopova, Cherepovets
2001, 13.Ne4 Qa5 14.c4 Nf6 15.Nxf6+ gxf6 16.Qe4 f5 17.Qh4 f6
18.Bh6±) 12.Nbd2 Qc7 13.Nc4 b6 (Black’s attempt to simplify the
position a bit would fail after 13...Nd5, Paglilla – Mahia, Buenos Aires
1985, 14.Qe4 f5 15.Qe1 Bxg5 16.Nxg5 e5 17.Bc2 h6 18.Rxd5 hxg5
19.Nxe5 Re8 20.Bb3 Be6 21.Qe3 Bf7 22.Re1 g4 23.h4±) 14.Bh4 Bb7
15.Bg3 Qc8, Mende – Schruefer, Germany 1987, 16.Nd6 Bxd6 17.Bxd6
Rd8 18.Bc2² His task to fight against White’s powerful bishop-pair would
be a difficult problem in this position.

10.Nbd2
 10...Rd8
10...b6. This is a standard scheme for the development of Black’s pieces
in this pawn-structure, but here he fails to deploy his bishop on the long
diagonal. 11.Ne4 Nxe4 12.Qxe4 f5 (It would be more resilient for him to
choose 12...g6, although this would also lead to a position without any good
prospects for him: 13.Be3 Qd5 14.Rad1 Bb7 15.Qxd5 exd5 16.Rfe1²)
13.Qe2 e5 14.Bc4+ (14.b4 Qxc3, Matseyko – Chulivska, Alushta 2002,
15.Bd2 Qa3 16.Bb5 Nd8 17.Nxe5+–) 14...Kh8 15.Rd1 (15.b4 Qd6 16.b5
Na5 17.Rd1 Qc7 18.Bd5 Bb7 19.Nxe5±) 15...Bf6 16.Ng5 Qe7? (16...h6
17.Nf7+ Kh7 18.Nd6±) 17.Nxh7+– Leoncini – Magari, Siena 1989.
10...Bd7 11.Ne4 Nxe4 12.Qxe4 g6 13.Bh6 (In principle, Black would
remove his rook anyway: 13.Re1 Rfd8 14.Bf4², but as a matter of fact this
would not have changed the character of the fight. White’s ideas would
remain the same: h2-h4, b2-b4, doubling of the rooks on the d-file etc.)
13...Rfe8 14.Rad1 Rad8 15.Rfe1 Bc8, Melamed – Arakhamia_Grant, Erfurt
2014. White had already to begin his offensive: 16.Be3 Qa5 17.b4 Qc7
(White will counter 17...Qxa2? with the line: 18.b5 Na5 19.Ne5 and
Black’s defence would be tremendously difficult, for example: 19...b6
20.Qf4 Rf8 21.Bd4±, or 19...f5 20.Qf4 Bd6 21.Bf1 Qa3 22.Qg3 Bc7
23.Rxd8 Rxd8 24.Bf4 Bxe5 25.Bxe5 b6 26.Qg5 Qf8 27.h4+–) 18.Qc4 Bd6
19.Bg5 Ne7 20.Qh4±

10...Qh5. On this square Black’s queen would contain in a way White’s

activity on the kingside, but this would not change much the character of
the fight. 11.Ne4 Nxe4 12.Bxe4 (Black’s h7-pawn is protected, so
capturing with the queen is already not so good for White – 12.Qxe4 e5„)
12...Bd7 13.Bf4 Na5, Fodre – Almasi, Budapest 1995, 14.Rfd1 Bb5 15.Qc2
Rac8 16.Nd4 Ba6 17.Bf3 Qg6 18.Qxg6 hxg6 19.b4 Nc6 20.Nxc6 bxc6
21.Rd7±

11.Ne4
The move 11.Rd1 leads to variations which we have already analysed –
see 9...Rd8, but at this moment White does not have to play like this. We
have to mention here that when the f1-square is free, White has the
alternative to the placement of his knight to the e4-square to follow with the
manoeuvre, which is much more typical for the Ruy Lopez – Nd2-f1-g3.

11...Nxe4

This exchange is not forced, but if Black refrains from it, it is obvious that
White will have additional possibilities. 11...Qh5, Deviatkin – Zagrebelny,
Moscow 1996, 12.Re1 Bd7 13.Ng3 Qa5 14.b4 Qc7 15.a3 Rac8 (15...Bf8
16.Bg5²) 16.Bb2 Be8 17.c4²

12.Bxe4 Bf6
This is the best position for Black’s bishop and this move also frees the
e7-square for his strongest piece.

In principle, Black can leave his queen at its place now, but he would fail
to neutralise completely White’s initiative anyway. 12...Bd7 13.Bf4 Be8
(13...e5 14.Bxe5! Nxe5 15.Nxe5 Bb5. Here, it is possible that White’s most
accurate move is 16.c4±, but he should try to finish off the game
immediately if possible: 16.Bxh7+ Kxh7 17.Qh5+ Kg8 18.Qxf7+ Kh7
19.Qf5+ Kg8 20.Qe6+ Kh7 21.Rfe1 Rf8 22.Re3 Bh4! 23.Qh3 g5 24.Nd7
Qd5 25.Nxf8+ Rxf8 26.c4! Qxc4 27.g3 Qf7 28.Qg2 Bc6 29.Qf1+–;
24...Bxd7 25.Qxd7+ Kh8 26.g3 Rad8 27.Qe6+–) 14.Rad1 Qh5 15.h3 Rxd1
16.Rxd1 Rd8, Rozentalis – Krasenkow, Koge 2014. Black’s pieces seem to
have occupied the perfect places for a successful defence, but this is the
essence of his problem. He would not like to change his defensive concept,
while White’s attacking resources are not exhausted yet. 17.b4 Rxd1+
18.Qxd1 a6 19.a4 f6 20.Qe2²

13.Be3 Qe7 14.Rad1 Bd7

 This position was reached in the game Sebag – Mista, Montpellier 2015.
White has a slight but evident advantage and his main task now is to
increase it. From the strategical point of view he should better advance his
pawn-majority on the queenside.
15.b4!?
The idea of this move is to cause even greater disharmony in Black’s
camp after b4-b5 or Be3-c5.
White could have played in a more academic fashion 15.Nd2 Rac8
16.Nc4 Be8 17.Bf4 e5 18.Bc1 g6 19.b3²
15...Rac8
Following 15...Bxc3?, Black’s position seems to be much rather
indefensible: 16.Bxh7+ Kxh7 (16...Kh8? 17.Ng5 g6 18.Qf3 Kg7
19.Ne4+–) 17.Ng5+ Kg6 (17...Kg8 18.Qh5+–) 18.Qd3+ f5 19.Qxc3 Qxb4
20.Qc1. Black fails to ensure a safe haven for his king and this would have
coordinated his pieces somehow. 20...Rac8 21.Bc5 Qg4 22.f4 (Now, in
numerous variations White can transfer his rook to the g3-square, but he has
an even more dangerous threat and it can be demonstrated in the variation
22...b6 23.Qe3 bxc5 24.Rxd7+–) 22...Ne5 23.h3! This is an essential
intermediate move. 23...Qg3 24.fxe5 Rxc5 (Now, Black’s attempt to refute
the actions of his opponent with the move 24...Bc6 would fail, because after
25.Nf3 Bxf3 26.Rxf3 Rxc5, his queen would be hanging.) 25.Qxc5 Bc6
26.Qf2 Qxg5 27.Rd6±
16.b5 Na5 17.Bxa7 Rxc3 18.Bb6 Ra8 19.Nd2²
Now, White’s knight on f3 seems to be harmoniously placed. In a tactical
situation however, it cannot participate effectively. So, he plans to redeploy
it to the e4-square and also takes control over the c4-square in the process
restricting the mobility of the enemy knight on a5. Black must play very
precisely in this position.
 Chapter 13
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 Nc6
5.Nf3

We will analyse now A) 5...e5, B) 5...a6, C) 5...Bf5 and D) 5...Bg4.

About 5...g6 – see Chapter 9.

5...e6 6.Bd3 – see Chapter 12.

5...cxd4 6.cxd4 – see Chapter 10, variation B.

5...Nf6 – see Chapter 14, variation C.

A) 5...e5
This is not a logical move. Instead of exerting pressure against the pawn
on d4, squeezing White’s pieces with its protection, Black reduces the
tension in the centre.
6.Nxe5 Nxe5 7.dxe5 Qxe5+

7...Qxd1+ 8.Kxd1. White’s king is stranded in the centre indeed, but this
is not sufficient to compensate Black’s sacrificed pawn, because the queens
have been exchanged. 8...Bg4+ (8...Ne7 9.Bd3. White takes the b1-h7
diagonal under control and ensures the retreat of his king away from the d-
file to the c2-square. 9...Be6 10.Nd2 0-0-0 11.Kc2±) 9.Kc2 0-0-0 (9...Bf5+
This check is harmless for White, since Black’s rook has not occupied the
d8-square. 10.Bd3 Ne7 11.Bxf5 Nxf5, Laguardia Ortega – Igea Perez,
Navarra 2016, 12.Nd2± The trade of the bishops has turned out to be in
favour of White, because now, Black does not have so many active
possibilities.) 10.Bd3 Ne7, Nebolsina – Meier, Reykjavik 2018 (10...f6.
Black has complied with the fact that he will fail to regain the enemy pawn
on e5 and decides to simply exchange it. 11.Bf4!? White is waiting for his
opponent to develop his knight on g8 with the idea to exchange on f6 and to
compromise Black’s kingside pawn-structure. 11...Ne7 12.exf6 gxf6, Jacob
– Pozharsky, Muenster 1995, 13.Nd2 Nd5 14.Bg3 h5 15.h3±) 11.Re1 Ng6
12.f3 Be6 13.b3±

8.Be2
 8...Bd7
Black prepares the evacuation of his king from the centre to the
queenside.

His plan, connected with the preparation of castling kingside does not
look any better at all. 8...Nf6 9.0-0 Be7 (9...Qc7, Hubert – Schwartz,
Wuerzburg 2019, 10.Na3 a6 11.Re1 Be7 12.Qa4+ Bd7 13.Bf4!? White
transfers into a better endgame 13...Bxa4 14.Bxc7. Now, Black has a rather
unpleasant choice. He must either comply with the appearance of the enemy
bishop on the f3-square: 14...0-0 15.Bf3±, or allow the rather unpleasant pin
of his bishop on e7: 14...Bc6 15.Bf1 Nd5 16.Bd6 Kf8 17.Bxe7+ Nxe7
18.Re5 b6 19.Nc4± White begins an attack against the enemy queenside
pawns, while Black’s king impedes the development of his rook on h8.)
10.Bb5+ Kf8 (10...Bd7, Kelleher – Orton, Hawaii 1998, 11.Bxd7+ Nxd7
12.Re1 Qf6 13.Qe2± The pin of the bishop is very unpleasant for Black.)
11.Re1 Qc7 12.Nd2 h6, Nicolini – Dobrotka, Tatranske Zruby 2009, 13.h3
Bf5 (13...Be6 14.Bc4²) 14.Qf3² Black has no pawn-weaknesses in bis
position, but he will have to lose plenty of time in order to accomplish an
artificial castling and to activate his rook on h8.
 8...Bg4 9.Be3 Bxe2 (After 9...Rd8, White can simply capture the pawn on
a7: 10.Qa4+ Bd7 11.Qxa7 f5 12.Nd2 f4 13.Nc4 Qf5 14.Bd2+– Metso –
Jonsson, Sweden 1988.) 10.Qxe2 0-0-0 11.Nd2 Nf6 12.Nc4 Qe6 13.0-0
Bd6 14.Nxd6+ Rxd6 15.Qb5± Coyne – Dewald, ICCF 2011. Black’s
queenside has been considerably weakened by the pawn-advance c7-c5 and
his king would not be safe there.

9.0-0 0-0-0 10.Nd2

10...Bc6

10...Nf6 11.Nc4 Qc7

 12.Bg5 h5?! Black fails to organise counterplay on the kingside (It would
be preferable for him to choose here 12...Be7 13.Bh4 Bc6 14.Qc2²).
13.Qc1! This is the point! White is perfectly ready to play Bf4. 13...Bg4
14.Bf4 Qe7 15.Bxg4+ Nxg4, Guido – Ambrosi, Bratto 2006, 16.Re1 Qh4.
Black’s queen and knight are incapable of creating any meaningful threats
for White. 17.f3 Qf2+ (17...Nf6 18.b3+– Now, Black is helpless against
Bg5, or g2-g3, followed by Qa3.) 18.Kh1 h4 19.fxg4 h3 20.Rg1+–
12.g3!? White is preparing Bf4. 12...Bc6 (After 12...Bh3, White does not
need to evacuate his rook away from the attack. 13.Qa4! Bxf1 14.Bxf1 a6
15.Bf4. The activity of White’s pieces increases with every move, so Black
should better give up the extra material, complying with defending an
inferior position. 15...Qc6?? 16.Bh3+ Nd7 17.Qa5+–; 15...Bd6 16.Nxd6+
Rxd6 17.Qc4±) 13.Bf4 Rxd1 14.Raxd1 Qd7 15.Rxd7 Bxd7 16.Rd1. The
material is equal and Black has no pawn-weaknesses in his position, but
still his situation is very difficult. 16...Be7 17.Ne5 Be6 18.Nc6!+–

11.Bg4+
It would be useful for White to provoke a pawn-advance which would
weaken his opponent’s position.
 11...f5 12.Re1 Qf6

12...Qf4 13.Bf3 Bd6 14.g3 Bxf3 15.Nxf3 Qg4 16.Ng5 Nh6 17.Qxg4
fxg4 18.Ne6 Rde8 19.Bxh6 gxh6 20.Rad1± Farkas – Dargan, England
2014. Black has too many pawn-weaknesses in his position.

13.Bf3 Bxf3 14.Qxf3 Ne7

15.Nc4

It is also possible for White to choose here the not so obvious move
15.Nb3!?, beginning an immediate attack against the enemy pawn on c5.
15...Nc6 16.Be3 Ne5 17.Qe2 Nd3 18.Red1. White is not afraid of c5-c4,
because after that his bishop would gain access to the wonderful d4-outpost
at the centre of the board. 18...c4 19.Bd4 Qa6 20.Nc1± Black’s knight on
d3 is supported by a pawn and is very powerful, so White wishes to
exchange it.

15...Nc6 16.Bf4 Be7, Tiviakov – Ibrahim, Beirut 2015, 17.h4!? White is

playing actively on both sides of the board in an attempt to make the
defence of his opponent more difficult. 17...h6 (17...Qxh4? 18.Re6+–)
18.h5!± In this endgame Black’s pawns on g7 and h6 will be excellent
targets for White’s bishop.

B) 5...a6
This move would not be so useful for Black.
6.dxc5!?

Now, after an exchange on d1, Black will have to advance his pawn to the
a5-square in response to b4 and that would be a loss of time, while after
Qxc5, the b6-square would be a weakness in his camp.
6...Qxd1+

6...Qxc5 7.Be3 Qa5 (7...Qd6 8.Nbd2!? White plans to continue the chase
after the enemy queen. 8...Qc7 9.Nc4 Bg4 10.Bb6 Qd7 11.Qxd7+ Bxd7,
Saba – Singh, Mumbai 2004, 12.Bc7. Black would have had a wonderful
position with a pawn on a7 and not on a6. Now, White’s threat to penetrate
with his knight to the b6-square is something that Black must consider
permanently. 12...Rc8 13.Bg3 Nd8. Black must retreat with his knight to
the edge of the board in order not to lose the exchange. 14.Nb6 Rc5
15.Nxd7 Kxd7 16.Ne5+ Ke8 17.0-0-0±) 8.Nbd2

About 8...Bf5 9.Nc4 Qc7 10.Bb6 Qd7 11.Qxd7+ Bxd7 12.Bc7 – see
7...Qd6.
8...Bg4, Badmatsyrenov – Pogromsky, Kazan 2000, 9.h3 Bh5 10.Qb3
Qc7 11.Bb6±
8...b5. Black prevents the move Nc4, but weakens his queenside. 9.a4! b4
10.Nc4 Qc7 11.Nb6 Rb8 12.Nd5. This is a rather prosaic decision by
White. (He would also win the game in a more complicated way after the
move 12.a5, preparing the sortie of his queen to the a4-square. 12...Nf6
13.Qa4 Bb7 14.Bxa6! Bxa6 15.Nd4 Bb7 16.Nb5 Qe5 17.0-0-0+– Now,
Black has no defence against the move Nc4, after which his queen would
not be able to retreat from the e5-square because of the checkmate on c7.)
12...Qd8 13.Bf4 e5 14.Nxe5 Nxe5 15.Bxe5+– L.Matanovic – Keglevic,
Bol 2014.

7.Kxd1
 7...Bg4

7...Nf6 8.Nbd2 (8.Bc4!? Bg4 9.Be3 Ne5 10.Be2 Nxf3 11.Bxf3 Bxf3+
12.gxf3. Black has managed to break his opponent’s pawn-structure on the
queenside, but at the price of exchanging all his active pieces. 12...e6 13.b4
a5 14.Kc2. White’s king is in a hurry to support his pawn on b4. 14...Nd5
15.Kb3 b6 16.a4! White gives back his extra pawn, but creates a protected
passed pawn and this would be tremendously important in this endgame.
16...bxc5 17.b5±) 8...e5 (8...Bg4 9.Kc2 0-0-0 10.b4±) 9.b4 Bf5 10.Bc4! In
anticipation of Black’s castling queenside, White begins a counter attack
against the pawn on f7. 10...0-0-0 11.Ng5 Nd5 12.Bxd5 Rxd5 13.Nxf7 Rg8
14.Ke1± White has already two extra pawns and Black’s attempt not to let
the enemy knight to leave the f7-square with the move 14...h6 is doomed to
fail after 15.Nc4+–

7...e5 8.b4 Bg4 (8...Nf6 9.Bc4 Be7 10.Re1 e4, Grimsholm – Csala,
Puspokladany 2014, 11.Nd4 0-0 12.Nd2 a5 13.b5. White is not afraid to
reduce the protection of his c5-pawn, because he plans to defend it later
with his bishop from a3. 13...Ne5 14.Ba3±) 9.Kc2 Nf6 (It would be too
passive for Black to play here 9...f6, Djurovic – Vincze, Zalakaros 2011. He
is a pawn down, so he should attack and not defend. 10.Na3 a5 11.Nb5 0-0-
0 12.a3 Bf5+ 13.Kb2 Rd1. The penetration of the rook to the last enemy
rank does not provide Black with anything, because his queenside pieces
are not developed and cannot support the rook on d1. 14.Be3 Rxa1
15.Kxa1±) 10.Bc4 Be7 11.Re1 e4 12.Nd4 Ne5 13.Bf1 (13.Nd2!? 0-0 14.f3
Nxc4 15.Nxc4+–) 13...Bh5 14.Bf4. It would be useful for White to oust the
enemy knight away from the centre of the board. 14...Nc6 15.Nf5 0-0
16.Nd2 Bg6 17.Nxe7+ White obtains the two-bishop advantage, moreover
that the exchanges of pieces are in his favour, since he has extra material.
17...Nxe7 18.Kb2 a5 19.a3 Ned5 20.Bd6+– Malisauskas – Al Hadarani,
Moscow 1994.

7...Bf5. Black takes the c2-square under control. 8.Be3

8...Rd8+ 9.Nbd2 Nf6, Sygulski – Rychlik, Wysowa 2007, 10.Bc4 Na5

11.Bb3 Nxb3 12.axb3 Nd5 13.Ke2±
8...0-0-0+ Jordanova – Savova, Plovdiv 2008, 9.Nbd2 Nf6 (9...e5 10.Bc4
f6 11.b4. White provides additional protection for his pawn on c5 and frees
the b2-square for his king. 11...Nge7 12.Kc1 Nd5 13.Kb2± The maximum
that Black can achieve here is to obtain the two-bishop advantage, after the
exchange on e3, but this would not be sufficient to compensate the missing
pawn for him.) 10.Ke1 Nd5 11.Nc4 e6 (11...Nxe3 12.fxe3 e6 13.b4±)
12.Nb6+ Nxb6 13.cxb6±
8...Nf6 9.Bc4. White attacks the f7-square with the idea to force his
opponent not to play e7-e5, but to comply with having to continue with the
more modest pawn-advance e7-e6. 9...Ng4 10.Nbd2 e6 11.b4 a5 12.Bb5!?
White can afford to lose a tempo here (12.b5. This move reduces
considerably the protection of the pawn on c5. 12...Nxe3+ 13.fxe3 Na7
14.e4 Bg6, Radeva – Tadic, Veliko Gradiste 2019, 15.h4 Bh5 16.c6. White
would not be able to save his pawn on c5 anyway, so he wishes at least to
create a far-advanced passed pawn. 16...bxc6 17.b6 Nb5 18.Bxb5 cxb5
19.Rb1 b4 20.Nc4 0-0-0+ 21.Kc2² White’s pieces have been much more
actively deployed, so there arises the feeling that he has made a mistake
somewhere along the way, since Black has the two-bishop advantage in a
position with equal material...) 12...0-0-0 (12...Nxe3+ 13.fxe3 0-0-0
14.Bxc6. White exchanges his bishop for the enemy knight and does not
attack the pawn on b4 any more. 14...bxc6 15.Nd4 Bg4+ 16.Kc2± Bergez –
Benmesbah, Haguenau 2013.) 13.Bxc6 bxc6 14.Nd4 axb4 15.cxb4 Nxe3+
16.fxe3 Kc7 17.Nxf5. It would be reasonable for White to deprive his
opponent of his main trump – his bishop-pair. 17...exf5 18.Ke2 g6 19.Nc4±
Morozov – Sorokin, Kolomna 2014.

8.Be3

8.Kc2!? This move is played according to the principle of Wilhelm

Steinitz that the king is a powerful piece. Here, White’s monarch will
participate in the protection of his queenside pawns. 8...0-0-0 9.b4 Bf5+
10.Kb3±

8...Bxf3+
Black doubles the enemy pawns, but exchanges his powerful bishop.
 8...e5 9.Kc1 f5. The advance of Black’s pawns might seem threatening at
first sight, but he does not achieve anything meaningful after it. 10.b4 f4
11.Bd2 Nf6 12.h3. It would be useful for White to deprive his opponent of
the control over the e6-square. 12...Bh5 13.Bc4 e4, Sinka – Maraczi,
Hungary 2003, 14.Ng5 Ne5 15.Na3 0-0-0 16.Bxf4 Nd3+ 17.Bxd3 Rxd3
18.Be5± The activity of Black’s pieces might be sufficient to compensate
one of his sacrificed pawns, but he is in fact two pawns down...

9.gxf3

9...0-0-0+

The move 9...g6 is too slow for Black. 10.Nd2 Bg7 11.Kc2 Nf6, Lukac –
Meszaros, Slovakia 2009, 12.Nc4 0-0 13.Bg2 Rfd8 14.Nb6 Rab8
15.Rhd1+–

10.Kc2 e6 11.b4 Nf6 12.Nd2 Be7, Tobianski – Tettmann, Magdeburg

2014, 13.Bg2 Nd5 14.f4 Bf6 15.Ne4± From this square White’s knight not
only protects the pawn on c3, but can also occupy the d6-outpost at an
opportune moment.
 C) 5...Bf5!?
This is a contemporary treatment of the opening, which has been analysed
and played only in the 21st century. Now, White must be constantly on the
alert about the possibility Bxb1, followed by a check from the e4-square, or
after the preliminary exchange on d4, along the e1-a5 diagonal.
6.Be3
White fortifies his pawn on d4 and is threatening in some variations to
capture on c5.

We will deal now with C1) 6...cxd4 and C2) 6...Nf6.

6...0-0-0 7.Nbd2 e6 (7...cxd4 8.cxd4±) 8.Bc4 Qd7 9.dxc5 Nf6 10.0-0

Ng4 11.b4± Menendez Rodriguez – Lima, ICCF 2007. White not only has
an extra pawn, but also his king is safer than its counterpart.

6...e6 7.Na3!? cxd4 (7...Nf6 8.Be2 – see 6...Nf6) 8.Nb5

 8...Qd7 9.Nfxd4 Nxd4 10.Qxd4 (10.Nxd4!?±) 10...a6, Bjornsson –
Agustsson, Copenhagen 2004, 11.Qa4 Rc8 (11...0-0-0 12.Qc4+ Kb8
13.Qf4+ Ka8 14.Nc7+ Kb8 15.Nxa6+ Ka8 16.Bb5+–; 13...Bd6 14.Nxd6
Qxd6 15.Qxd6+ Rxd6 16.Bf4+–) 12.Rd1 Qc6 13.Qb3 Rd8 14.Rxd8+ Kxd8
15.Nd4 Qe4 16.Be2+–
8...0-0-0 9.Nbxd4 Bc5 10.Nxc6 (10.b4!? Bb6 11.Be2 Nge7 12.0-0 Nxd4
13.Nxd4 Be4 14.f3 Bg6 15.Qc1 Nc6 16.Nxc6 Qxc6 17.a4ƒ) 10...Qxc6
11.Nd4 Bxd4 12.cxd4 Kb8 13.Rc1 Qd6 14.Qd2 Ka8 15.Bc4!? (15.Bf4
Qd5 16.f3 Ne7 17.Bc4 Qd7 18.Be3 Bg6, Gonzalez Sanchez – Seric, ICCF
2017, 19.Bf2 Nf5 20.Bb3 Nxd4?? 21.Bxd4 Qxd4 22.Rc8+–; 20...Rhe8
21.h4²) 15...Ne7 16.0-0 Be4 17.Rfe1 Bc6 18.b4 Nf5 19.b5 Bd5 20.Bf4±

C1) 6...cxd4
Black reduces the tension in the centre, but this cannot solve his problems
in the opening.
7.Nxd4
 7...Nf6
He provides White with the two-bishop advantage for the sake of the
quick development.

7...0-0-0. Black’s king will come under an attack on the queenside. 8.Nd2
Nxd4 9.Bxd4 Kb8 (9...e5 10.Bxa7±) 10.Qa4 b6 11.Bc4 Qd7, Turner – Plat,
Hull 2019, 12.Be5+ (12.Bb5 Qe6+ 13.Be3+–) 12...Ka8 13.Qxd7 Rxd7
14.Bb5+–

7...Rd8. Black reduces the protection of his pawn on a7. 8.Nd2 Nxd4
9.Bxd4 a6. Now, he must lose a tempo to defend against the threat Qa4xa7.
10.Be2 e5, Kopp – Monteforte, Germany 1992, 11.Bf3 Qe6 (The move
11...e4 would lose a pawn for Black. 12.Bxe4 Bxe4 13.Qe2 Rd6 14.f3±)
12.0-0 Be7 13.Re1 f6 14.Be3± Black’s b7-pawn is hanging and his kingside
pieces have not been developed yet.
7...Bxb1 8.Rxb1 Nf6 (8...Qxa2? 9.Bb5 Qd5, Nowak – Gahan, Krakow
2019, 10.Qa4 Rc8 11.0-0+–) 9.Qa4 e5, Strydom – Windvogel, Cape Town
2015, 10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.Rd1 Qe4 12.Bc4± White’s two bishops are
tremendously powerful in this opened position, while Black has not
evacuated yet his king away from the centre and his queenside pawn-
structure has been compromised.

7...Nxd4 8.cxd4!? White complies voluntarily with the appearance of an

isolated pawn in his position. His idea is to win a tempo for his rapid
development by attacking the enemy queen with the move Nc3.

After 8...Bxb1, White has the powerful intermediate check 9.Qa4+! and it
becomes evident that Black cannot interpose with his queen, since he would
lose it. 9...Kd8 10.Rxb1 Nf6 11.f3. White wishes to develop his bishop on
f1, preventing in the process the possibility for Black – Qxg2. 11...Qe6
(11...e6 12.Bc4 Qc6 13.Bb5 Qd6 14.Bd2± S.Zhigalko – Guseinov, Legnica
2013) 12.Kf2 Qf5. This is the essence behind Black’s defensive idea. He
wishes after the move Ng4+, to simplify the position and to deprive his
opponent of his two-bishop advantage in the process. 13.Re1 Ng4+ 14.Kg1
Nxe3 15.Rxe3² Klowski – Schertel, Email 2012. The position has been
simplified indeed, but Black is still too far from complete equality.
8...a6. He takes the b5-square under control, but at the price of a tempo.
(8...Nf6 9.Nc3 Qa5 10.Bb5+ Bd7 11.Bxd7+ Nxd7 12.0-0 g6, Marcus –
Degerfeldt, Stockholm 1994, 13.Qf3! Bg7. Black complies with the loss of
a pawn, but evacuates his king away from the centre to a safe place.
14.Qxb7 Rb8 15.Qc6±) 9.Nc3 Qd7 10.Na4. White’s knight continues the
chase after the enemy queen. 10...Qd6 (10...Rd8 11.Nc5 Qd5 12.Be2 e5
13.Qa4+ Bd7 14.Nxd7. White would not mind entering an endgame, since
he manages to capture the pawn on e5. 14...Qxd7 15.Qxd7+ Rxd7 16.dxe5
Bb4+ 17.Kf1 Ne7 18.Bg4 Rd8 19.a3 Ba5 20.g3± Tadic – Oglaza,
Bratislava 2019) 11.Nc5 Nf6 12.Be2!? White is waiting for the move e7-
e6, after which Black would not be able to interpose against the enemy
check of the queen with his bishop. (12.Qb3 Rb8 13.Rc1, Colijn – Alexakis,
Anogia 2019, 13...e6²) 12...e6 13.Qa4+ Qc6 14.Qxc6+ bxc6 15.Nxa6±

8.Nxf5 Qxf5 9.Qa4

White can also enter an endgame relying on the power of his bishop-pair.
9.Bd3 Qd5 10.0-0 0-0-0 11.Be2 Qxd1 12.Rxd1 Rxd1+ 13.Bxd1. Will this
be sufficient for a victory would be another question... 13...Nd5 (13...e6
14.Bf3 Nd5 15.Bxd5 exd5 16.Nd2 Be7 17.Rd1 Rd8 18.Nb3²) 14.Bc1 e6
15.g3 Be7 (15...Ne5 16.Be2²; 15...Bc5 16.Nd2 Rd8 17.Kf1 Ne5 18.Ke2
Ng4 19.Ne4 Be7 20.h3²) 16.Nd2 Rd8 17.Be2 Bg5 18.f4 Be7 19.Nb3²
Kotainy – Wirig, Deizisau 2013.
 9...a6
Black deprives the enemy pieces of the b5-square.

9...Qg4 10.Qb3. White emphasizes the vulnerability of Black’s

queenside. 10...Rd8 11.Na3 Rd7 12.h3 Qe4 13.Rd1 Rxd1 14.Kxd1. White’s
king is headed for the queenside. 14...e6 15.Kc1²
9...Nd5. Blacks desire to deprive his opponent of his two-bishop
advantage is easily understandable. White complies with this in an attempt
to complete rapidly his development. 10.Bb5 Qe6 11.0-0 Nxe3 12.fxe3
Qxe3+ (12...a6 13.Na3 Rc8 14.Bc4 Qxe3+ 15.Kh1 e6 16.Rae1 Qd2 17.Rd1
Qe3 18.Qb3± b5 19.Rfe1+–) 13.Kh1 Qb6 14.Na3 0-0-0 (14...Qc7
15.Nc4±) 15.Nc4 Qc7 16.Rxf7±

10.Be2 e6, Jarvenpaa – Aydincelebi, Skopje 2019 (10...Nd5 11.Bf3 Qe6

12.Bxd5 Qxd5 13.0-0. Once again Black lags considerably in development.
13...e6 14.Rd1 Qh5 15.Nd2 Be7 16.Nf3 0-0 17.Rd7²) 11.Bf3 Nd5
(11...Rc8 12.Nd2 Bc5?? 13.g4+–; 12...Be7 13.0-0 Nd5 14.Bxd5 Qxd5
15.Nc4 Qb5 16.Qxb5 axb5 17.Nb6 Rd8 18.a4 bxa4 19.Rxa4 0-0 20.b4²
with the idea b5, Ra7) 12.Nd2 b5 (12...Nxe3? 13.Bxc6+ bxc6 14.Qxc6+
Ke7 15.Qb7+ Kf6 16.fxe3+–) 13.Qe4 Qxe4 14.Bxe4 0-0-0 15.Ke2. The
queens have been exchanged indeed, but White will soon attack Black’s
weakened queenside. 15...Nxe3 16.fxe3 Ne5 17.b4 Be7 18.a4±

C2) 6...Nf6 7.Na3

 7...cxd4
After 7...e6, the simplest for White would be to choose 8.Be2.

Following 8...cxd4, White’s idea would be perfectly justified. 9.Nb5 Qd7

(9...0-0-0, Fridman – Hausrath, PlayChess 2020, 10.Nfxd4² Qxg2 11.Bf3
Nxd4 12.Bxg2 Nc2+ 13.Ke2 Rxd1 14.Raxd1±) 10.Nbxd4 Be4 11.0-0
(11.Nxc6!? Bxc6 12.Ne5 Qc7 13.Nxc6 bxc6 14.Qc2²) 11...Bd6 12.Nb5
Bb8, Karpatchev – Legky, Liffre 2017, 13.Qxd7+ Nxd7 14.Nd2. White
begins a fight for the d6-square. 14...Bg6 15.Nc4 0-0 16.Nbd6± This
endgame looks rather unpleasant for Black.

8...Rd8 9.0-0 (9.Nb5!? Rd7 10.0-0 c4 11.Qa4 a6 12.Na3 Bd3 13.Bxd3

cxd3 14.Rfd1² Black’s pawn on d3 is too far from the rest of his forces and
may be an easy prey for White’s pieces.) 9...a6 (9...Be7. Here, White can
simply capture a pawn. 10.dxc5 0-0 11.b4 Qxd1 12.Raxd1 Ne4 13.Rxd8
Rxd8 14.Nb1± Benedetto – Perez Lopez, ICCF 2015) 10.Bc4. Now, before
capturing on c5, White improves the placement of his bishop. 10...Qd7
11.dxc5 Qc7 12.Qc1 Be7 13.b4. Black does not have any compensation
whatsoever. 13...0-0 14.Re1 Ne4 15.Rb1!? White takes measures in advance
against the move Bf6. 15...Bf6 16.Rb3 Rfe8 17.Bf1± Jimenez Molina –
Arjona, ICCF 2014.

8...Ng4. Black’s attempt to obtain the two-bishop advantage may lead to a

serious lag in development for him. 9.Nc4. White is not waiting for the
exchange on d4 and takes measures against the capturing on e3. Now, after
Nxe3, he can simply take with his knight attacking the enemy queen and
winning a tempo. 9...Be4 (The move 9...b5 would lead to the weakening of
Black’s queenside. 10.h3! Nf6 11.Ncd2 cxd4 12.Nxd4 Nxd4 13.Bxd4 Rd8
14.a4! b4 15.Bb5+ Nd7 16.Qf3 bxc3 17.bxc3 Qxf3 18.Nxf3. There has
arisen an endgame on the board, but Black cannot complete the
development of his pieces without material losses. 18...Bd6 19.Bxa7±
Andersson – Ressler, ICCF 2008) 10.Qa4 Nxe3 11.Nxe3 Qd7 12.0-0-0
Bxf3 13.Bxf3 cxd4 14.cxd4. Black is incapable of preventing the pawn-
advance d4-d5. 14...Rd8 15.Rhe1 (15.d5!? Ne5 16.Qd4 Bd6 17.Be4 0-0
18.Kb1²) 15...Be7 16.d5 Nb4 17.Qxd7+ Rxd7 18.Kb1 Rf8 (18...Nxd5
19.Nxd5 exd5 20.Bxd5²) 19.dxe6 fxe6 20.a3 Nc6 21.Bxc6 bxc6 22.f3
Rxd1+ 23.Rxd1² Bronts – Mandviwala, ICCF 2010. Black has no
compensation for the numerous pawn-weaknesses in his position.
 8.Bc4

White wins a tempo for the development of his pieces by attacking the
enemy queen.
8...Qa5

8...Qd7 9.Nxd4 Be4 (The move 9...Nxd4 would lead to a stable

advantage for White. 10.Bxd4 a6 11.Be2. After Black has weakened the b6-
square, White’s bishop frees a square for his knight. He is preparing Nc4.
11...e6 12.Nc4 Rd8, Leconte – Benmesbah, Nimes 2018, 13.0-0 Qc8
14.Qb3 Be7 15.Na5! White gives up the idea Nb6, because he would
achieve much more by attacking the enemy b7-pawn. 15...Be4 16.Bxf6
Bxf6 17.Qa4+ Bc6 18.Nxc6 bxc6 19.Qxa6±).
 White can try here 10.Qe2!? with the idea to make use of the
misplacement of the enemy queen with the move Rd1. 10...e6 11.Rd1 Qc8
12.Bg5 Nxd4 13.Rxd4 Bc6 14.Nb5 Be7 15.Bxf6! White forces a
weakening of his opponent’s kingside. Now, Black will have a great
problem to find a safe haven for his king. 15...gxf6 16.0-0²
10.Nxc6 Bxc6. Black preserves the elasticity of his pawn-structure.
(Following 10...bxc6 11.Qxd7+ Nxd7, White will have a stable advantage
in the endgame, because Black’s pawns on a7 and c6 would require
permanent protection. 12.f3 Bg6 13.Ba6 Rb8 14.0-0-0 e6, Moser –
Cramling, Tromsoe 2014, 15.Nc4!? After this move White will have the
two-bishop advantage besides his superior pawn-structure. 15...Be7 16.Bf4
Rd8 17.Nd6+ Bxd6 18.Bxd6 Nb6 19.Bb7. Black fails to maintain the
material balance. 19...Kd7 20.Be5+ Ke7 21.Bxg7 Rhg8 22.Bd4+–)
11.Qxd7+
 11...Nxd7 12.Nb5 Bxb5 13.Bxb5 a6, Garcia Martin – Verneuil, Caleta
2018, 14.Bxd7+! This is a rather non-standard decision. White parts
voluntarily with his two-bishop advantage. His idea is to attack his
opponent’s queenside pawns before he has completed the development of
his kingside pieces. 14...Kxd7 15.0-0-0+ Ke8 16.Rd3± Rd8 17.Rhd1 Rxd3
18.Rxd3 e5 19.c4! Be7 20.Rb3+–
11...Bxd7 12.0-0-0 a6 13.Be2!? White not only frees a square for his
knight, but also prepares a transfer of his bishop to f3. 13...e6 14.Nc4 Nd5
15.Bd4. He avoids the weakening of his pawn-structure. (With the move
15.Bf3!?, White would be trying to squeeze quickly the enemy pieces with
the protection of the pawn on b7. 15...Nxe3 16.fxe3 Rb8 17.Nd6+ Bxd6
18.Rxd6 Ke7 19.Rb6±) 15...f6 16.Bf3 Bc6 17.Na5± Pourkashiyan –
Verneuil, Caleta 2016. After the move Nxc6, White will not only
compromise his opponent’s pawn-structure, but will also obtain the two-
bishop advantage.

9.Nxd4
 9...Nxd4

9...0-0-0 10.0-0 e5 11.Nxc6 bxc6, Sathyanandha – Zhou, London 2013,

12.Qf3 e4 13.Qf4± The shelter of Black’s king has been seriously
compromised.

10.Bxd4 e5

10...0-0-0 11.Be2 e5. Black sacrifices a pawn and gains time for the
development of his kingside pieces. Still, he would not obtain sufficient
compensation for it. 12.Nc4 Qc7 13.Nxe5 Bc5 14.0-0 Rhe8 15.Nf3 Kb8
16.Re1± Cumming – Paulin, ICCF 2011.

11.Bb5+ Bd7 12.Bxd7+ Nxd7 13.Nc4 Qd5

13...Qc7 14.Qe2
 After 14...Bd6 15.0-0-0, Black will have to lose a tempo for the retreat of
his bishop. 15...0-0, Saioc – Prelipcean, Romania 2019, 16.Be3 Be7
17.Rd2² Black’s defence is tremendously difficult, because White’s pieces
are perfectly coordinated. 17...Rfd8 (The move 17...Nb6 would lead by
force to an inferior rook and pawn ending for Black with four rooks on the
board. 18.Nxe5 Qxe5 19.Bxb6 Qxe2 20.Rxe2 axb6 21.Rxe7 Rxa2
22.Kc2±, followed by Rd1-d7.) 18.Rhd1 Nf8 19.Rxd8 Rxd8 20.Rxd8 Bxd8
21.Qd3±
14...0-0-0 15.Be3 Bc5 16.0-0 Bxe3 17.Nxe3. There will be plenty of
tough fight ahead, but White’s game is much more pleasant, since his king
is much safer than its black counterpart. 17...Nf6 (17...g6!? 18.Rad1²)
18.Rfd1 (18.a4!? White is not fighting for the d-file and plans to
compromise the position of the enemy king even more by advancing his
rook-pawn. 18...Rd7 19.a5 Rhd8 20.a6ƒ) 18...Rxd1+ 19.Rxd1 Rd8
20.Rxd8+ Kxd8. Black trades the rooks, but fails to equalise completely,
since he must be constantly on the alert about the possible attacks of the
enemy queen against his own pawns. 21.h3 a6 22.Qd3+ Qd7 23.Qc4.
White’s plan is to transfer his queen to the kingside and to attack the pawn
on g7. 23...Qc7 24.Qh4 Qb6 25.Qg5 Qxb2 26.Qxg7 Qb1+ 27.Kh2 Qg6
28.Qf8+ Ne8 29.Qb4± Puranik – Nagy, Pardubice 2016.

14.Qe2

14...f6

14...Qxg2? 15.0-0-0±

14...Be7?! 15.Nxe5 Nxe5 16.Qxe5. Now, Black must comply with the
loss of his castling rights in order to restore the material balance. 16...Qxg2
17.Qb5+ Kf8 18.0-0-0 Qg5+. This is the only move for Black; otherwise,
White will quickly checkmate him in the middle game. 19.Qxg5 Bxg5+
20.Kc2 Be7 (20...b6 21.a4±) 21.Rhe1. White occupies the d and e-files with
his rooks and prevents the possibility for Black to activate his rook on h8.
21...f6 22.Bxa7 Rd8 (22...Rxa7 23.Rd7 Bc5 24.Rd8+–) 23.Bc5 1–0 Vachier
Lagrave – Moiseenko, Biel 2013.

15.0-0
 15...Be7

15...b5 16.Na5 b4, Balajayeva – Erdogdu, Nakhchivan 2017, 17.Nc4 Be7

18.Rfd1 0-0 (It would be tremendously risky for Black here to accept the
piece-sacrifice, because after that his king would be stranded at the centre
of the board for long. 18...exd4?! 19.Rxd4 Qc5 20.Re1 Ne5 21.Re4 Ng6
22.cxb4 Qc7 23.Ne3±) 19.Bxa7²

16.Rad1!?
White is not in a hurry to remove his bishop from the attack of the enemy
pawn.
16...Qe6

The move 16...exd4 would lead to the opening of the e-file and after that
Black’s king would have to protect his bishop on e7 instead of castling...
17.Rxd4 Qc5 18.Re4 Nf8 19.Rd1 (19.h4!?) 19...Ng6 20.b4 Qc7 21.Nd6+.
Black has failed to castle. 21...Kf8 22.Rc4 Qd7 23.Nf7. White regains the
exchange. 23...Qa4 24.Nxh8 Nxh8 25.Rc7 Re8 26.Rxb7 Ng6 (26...Bxb4??
27.Qg4+–) 27.Rdd7 a5 28.Rdc7 axb4 29.cxb4 Ne5 30.Qc2!± White would
not mind entering an endgame here, because his passed pawns are very
likely to bring him a victory.

17.f4

17...0-0 (17...Rc8 18.Na5 0-0 19.Nb3 a6 20.Rfe1 Rfe8 21.Bf2²) 18.Bf2

Rac8 19.f5!? White occupies additional space on the kingside. 19...Qc6
20.Na5 Qc7 21.Qb5² He has more active pieces, while Black’s bishop is
severely restricted by his own pawns on e5 and f6.

D) 5...Bg4 6.dxc5!?
The pressure of Black’s pieces against the d4-square seems powerful, so
White exchanges on c5.
 6...Qxd1+
Black enters an endgame with a rather unclear compensation for the
pawn.

6...Bxf3. This voluntary exchange on f3 is just horrible for Black. 7.Qxf3

Qxf3 (Following 7...Qxc5 8.Be3 Qe5 9.Na3 e6 10.Nc4 Qf6 11.Be2 Qxf3
12.Bxf3± White’s bishops would be tremendously powerful in this opened
position.) 8.gxf3
 8...e5 9.Be3 Nf6 10.Bc4. White prevents the move Nd5. (10.Nd2!? His
knight is headed for the b3-square in order to provide additional protection
to the c5-pawn. 10...Nd5 11.Nb3 a5 12.a4±) 10...a5, Benninger – Weber,
Germany 2003. Black impedes the pawn-advance b2-b4, but weakens the
b5-square and White’s knight is immediately headed there. (10...Nd7 11.b4
a5 12.Bb5 f5 13.0-0±) 11.Na3 Be7 12.0-0-0 0-0 13.Nb5+–
8...0-0-0 9.Nd2 e6 10.b4 Ne5 11.Nc4! Nxc4 (11...Nxf3+? 12.Ke2 Nh4
13.Ne5+–) 12.Bxc4 Nf6 13.Bd2 Be7 14.0-0-0±
8...e6 9.Be3 0-0-0 (9...a5 10.Nd2 Nge7 11.Ne4 Nd5 12.0-0-0±) 10.Nd2
Ne5 11.0-0-0 Nf6 12.b4. White protects his pawn on c5, which restricts
considerably the enemy bishop. 12...Be7 13.Kc2 Rd7 14.Bb5 Rd5, Bragina
– Tekhnoryadova, St Petersburg 2007, 15.a4 Rhd8 16.a5 a6. Black prevents
the further advance of his opponent’s a-pawn, but now he would have to
consider the possibility c5-c6. 17.Be2 Ng6 18.c6!+–

6...Qxc5. Black’s queen will be attacked with tempi on this square. 7.Be3
 7...Qd6. This move leads to an inferior endgame for Black, since he
would not have compensation for his isolated pawn. 8.Qxd6 exd6 9.Na3 0-
0-0 10.Nb5 b6 11.Nfd4 Nge7 12.h3 Be6, Buchkremer – Mueller, Hinckley
Island 2009, 13.0-0-0±
7...Qh5. Now, Black’s queen is too far away from the queenside and will
be incapable of protecting the pawn on b7, while the pressure against the
knight on f3 can be parried easily by White. 8.Nbd2 Nf6, Olde – Kocyigit,
Bratislava 2019, 9.Qb3 Na5 10.Bb5+ Bd7 11.Bxd7+ Nxd7 12.Qa4 Nc6
13.0-0-0±
7...Qa5 8.h3. It would be useful for White to clarify immediately the
position of the enemy bishop on g4.
 8...Bh5 9.Na3. White’s knight is headed for the c4-square, since he would
like to win a tempo by attacking the enemy queen. 9...e6 10.Nc4 Qc7 11.g4
Bg6, Turov – Bryzgalin, Krasnodar 2005, 12.Nd4 Nxd4 13.Qxd4 Nf6
14.Ne5. Black lags horribly in development and fails to evacuate his king
away from the centre. 14...Be7 15.Bb5+ Kf8 16.0-0-0±
8...Bxf3 9.Qxf3 Nf6 10.Na3 Qd5, Schuh – Fuhs, Schleiden Gmuend
2004, 11.Nb5!? White wishes to occupy the c7-square with his knight as
quickly as possible and is ready to weaken his pawn-structure to achieve
this. 11...Qxf3 12.gxf3 Nd5 13.0-0-0 e6 14.Rxd5 exd5 15.Nc7+ Kd7
16.Nxa8 Bd6 17.Nb6+ axb6 18.Bxb6±
8...Rd8 9.Nbd2 Bxf3 10.Qxf3 Nf6 11.a4 (White can also prepare the
bishop-sortie to the b5-square with the line: 11.Nb3!? Qc7 12.Bb5±)
11...Nd5 12.Bb5 a6 13.Bxc6+ bxc6 14.Nc4 Qc7 15.0-0. Black has no
compensation for his pawn-weaknesses, moreover that he also lags in
development. 15...e6 16.Bd4. White exerts pressure against the pawn on g7
and forces a weakening of his opponent’s kingside. 16...f6 17.Rfe1 Kf7
18.Re4 c5 19.Be5 Qc8 20.Bg3 Kg8 21.Rd1 h5 22.a5 Qc6 23.Kh1 g6
24.Bd6! This elegant tactical strike finishes the game off. 1–0 Khalifman –
Sitnikov, Taganrog 2011.
 7.Kxd1
There will arise similar endgames in numerous variations in our book. In
general, White is not afraid to have his kingside pawn-structure
compromised after Bxf3 gxf3. His king usually finds a safe haven on the
c2-square, sometimes after the preliminary move b2-b4. He does not give
up the pawn on c5 without a fight and in response to a7-a5 (after b2-b4)
White has two main possibilities: b4-b5, or Bb5. It is also worth mentioning
that he should not be afraid of his opponent’s pawn-advance e7-e5-e4, since
he preserves his piece ousting the enemy bishop with the move h2-h3,
followed by g2-g4.
In general, the endgame looks better for White. His extra pawn on c5
restricts the enemy bishop on f8 and his king is placed at the middle of the
board, which is preferable, as a rule, in the endgame. The activity of Black’s
pieces is not sufficient to compensate the missing pawn for him.

We will analyse in details now: D1) 7...0-0-0+ and D2) 7...e5.

About 7...Nf6 8.Nbd2 – see 4...Nf6 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.dxc5.
7...e6. After this modest move Black takes care about the safety of his e-
pawn and refrains from the pawn-advance e7-e5. 8.b4
 8...Nf6. Black continues to play rather patiently, but having a pawn down
and playing like this is rather dubious. 9.Kc2 a5 10.Bb5 Bxf3 (10...0-0-0
11.a3±) 11.gxf3 Nd5 12.Bd2 Be7 13.a3 Bf6 14.Ra2! White parries the
threat of capturing on b4. Black’s pieces have been very actively deployed,
but he would be incapable of increasing the pressure against the enemy
position. You can see here the role of the king in the endgame. White’s
monarch on c2, or b3, helps his pieces to protect the queenside pawns.
14...0-0 15.Kb3 Rfd8 16.Be3 Ne5 17.f4. White ousts the enemy knight
away from the queenside. 17...Ng4 18.Re2 axb4 19.cxb4 Rac8 20.Bc4±
Nejtek – Neborak, ICCF 2008. Black’s active actions have reached their
dead end, because the undermining of the pawn on c5 with the b-pawn
would only help White to obtain connected passed pawns.
8...a5 9.Bb5 Nge7 (about 9...Nf6 10.Kc2 – see 8...Nf6) 10.a3
 Following 10...Nd5 11.Bb2 Be7 12.Nbd2 0-0 13.Kc2 Bf5+ 14.Kb3 Bf6,
White can try a very promising exchange-sacrifice with the help of which
he can advance his pawn-majority on the queenside. 15.c4! Bxb2 16.cxd5!
Bxa1 17.dxc6 bxc6 18.Bxc6 Rac8 19.Rxa1 Rxc6 20.Nd4 Rc7 21.Nxf5
exf5, Brochet – Belkhodja, Thorigny 2006, 22.Kc4+– Black is incapable of
preventing the promotion of his opponent’s passed pawns. In this variation
you can see a very instructive example of the role of the king in the
endgame. Without its help it would have been much more difficult for
White to advance his passed pawns.
10...Bxf3+ Black weakens his opponent’s pawn-structure, but exchanges
his active bishop. 11.gxf3 axb4. He wishes to obtain the d4-square for his
knight, but enables White to correct his doubled pawns. 12.cxb4 0-0-0+,
Sommer – Wertjanz, Austria 2011, 13.Nd2 Nd4 14.Bd3. White is not afraid
of the loss of his weak f3-pawn. 14...Ng6 (14...Nxf3 15.Nxf3 Rxd3+
16.Ke2 Rd5 17.Be3. White gives back his extra pawn and completes the
mobilisation of his pieces. After some preparation he plans to advance his
queenside pawns. 17...Nf5 18.Rad1 Nxe3 19.fxe3 Rxd1 20.Rxd1 Be7
21.Rf1 Bf6 22.Nd2 Rf8 23.a4±, followed by Ne4, Kd3-c4. Black will have
to fight long and hard for a draw.) 15.Rb1 Ne5 16.Be2 g5 17.Ke1 Be7
18.h4!? Now, White is ready to sacrifice his rook-pawn in order to oust the
enemy knight away from the e5-square. 18...gxh4 19.f4 Nxe2 20.Kxe2
Nd3 21.Nc4 Nxc1+ 22.Rbxc1² In this endgame Black has more pawn-
weaknesses than his opponent.

D1) 7...0-0-0+

8.Bd2
With the idea b4, Kc2.

8.Nbd2!? Nf6 (8...e5 9.b4 Nf6 (9...e4?! 10.h3 Bxf3+ 11.gxf3 exf3
12.Kc2± Black will fail to preserve his pawn on f3.) 10.Kc2 Bf5+ 11.Kb3
a5 12.Nc4 axb4 13.cxb4 Ng4 14.Bg5! White transfers his knight to the h4-
square with tempo in order to protect his pawn on f2. 14...f6 15.Bh4 g5
16.Bg3 Be6 17.Kc3±) 9.Be2 Ne4 (9...e5 10.b4 a5 11.b5 Na7. Black
regains one of his sacrificed pawns, but White manages to coordinate his
forces. 12.Ng5!? White squeezes the enemy pieces with the protection of
the pawn on f7. 12...Rd7 13.Bxg4 Nxg4 14.Kc2 Bxc5 15.Nde4 Bxf2 16.h3
Ne3+ 17.Bxe3 Bxe3 18.Nxf7! Black’s defence is very difficult, because
White’s knights are tremendously active. 18...Rf8 19.Nfd6+ Kc7 20.Nc4
Bb6 21.Rhd1 Rxd1 22.Rxd1± Nxb5? 23.Rb1+–) 10.Ke1 Bxf3 11.Bxf3
Nxc5 12.Nc4 e5, Galunova – Vutov, Plovdiv 2013, 13.Ke2 e4 (It would be
more reliable for Black to choose here 13...f5 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.g3 Na4
16.Be3², although even then White’s prospects would be preferable thanks
to his superior pawn-structure.) 14.Bg4+ Kb8 15.Bf4+ Ka8 16.Rhd1 Nd3
17.Bc7 Rd5 18.f3 f5 19.fxe4 fxe4 20.b4± White’s bishops are dominant all
over the entire board.

8...e6

8...e5 9.b4

9...Be7 10.h3!? White should better prepare in advance against e5-e4.

10...Bh5 (10...Be6 11.Bb5²) 11.Na3 Nf6 (The move 11...e4 would turn out
to be in favour of White at the end. 12.g4 Bg6 13.Nd4 Nxd4 14.cxd4 Bf6
15.Nb5 Bxd4 16.Rc1 a6. Black has regained his pawn, but White has
managed to activate considerably his forces. 17.Nd6+ Kb8 18.Bf4 Ka7
19.Bc4±) 12.Kc2 a5 13.Nc4²
9...Nf6 10.h3 Ne4 (10...Bf5. Black deprives the enemy king of the c2-
square, but White’s knight is not pinned any more. 11.Bb5 Ne4 12.Ke2 f6
13.Bc4², followed by Nh4, ousting the enemy bishop from its active
placement.) 11.Ke1 Be6 12.Ng5. It is essential for White to trade the
enemy knight, since it is very powerful at the centre of the board. 12...Nxg5
13.Bxg5 f6 14.Bd2 a5 15.Na3² White lags in development, but still
preserves his extra pawn.

8...Nf6 9.Kc1 White removes his king from the X-ray juxtaposition with
the enemy rook.

9...e6 10.b4 Be7 11.Bb5 Ne4 12.Bxc6 Nxf2!? There arise tactical
complications after this move, but White is well prepared for them. 13.Ne5
bxc6 (13...Nxh1 14.Nxg4 bxc6 15.Ne5 Nf2 16.Nxc6 Rd7 17.Kc2 Bf6
18.Na3. It would be difficult for Black to activate his rooks, because
White’s knights are very active. 18...Ne4 19.Nc4 Rc7 20.N6a5² White only
needs to oust the enemy knight away from the e4-square in order to play
Nd6+.) 14.Rf1 Nd3+ 15.Nxd3 Rxd3 16.Rxf7 Re8 17.Rxg7 Bf5. Black’s
bishops seem to be very active, but White has already two extra pawns.
18.Na3 Red8 19.Nc4 Bf8 20.Rg8 Bh6 21.Rxd8+ Kxd8 22.Bxh6 Rxc3+
23.Kb2 Rxc4 24.Kb3 Rg4 25.Rd1+ Kc8 26.g3² White has an extra pawn
and thanks to it can play for a win for a long time without any risk.
 9...e5 10.b4 e4 11.h3 Bxf3 12.gxf3 exf3 13.Kc2 Ne4. Black has restored
the material balance, but his pawn on f3 would require permanent
protection. 14.Be3 g6 15.a3 Bg7 16.Bd3 Nf6 17.Bc4 Ne4 18.Nd2 Nxc3
19.Nxf3. Both sides have exchanged their weak pawns, but Black is still
too far from complete equality. 19...Nd5 20.Bg5 Bxa1 21.Bxd8 Rxd8
22.Rxa1 f6 23.Re1 Nf4 24.h4² White’s bishop is more powerful than any of
Black’s knights in a fight on both sides of the board.

8...a5. Black takes measures in advance against b2-b4. 9.Be2 (White can
fight for the advantage in the opening in another way with the move 9.a3,
so that after 9...a4, he can attack the enemy a4-pawn. 10.Bb5 e5 11.Kc1
Bxc5 12.Bxa4 Bxf3 13.gxf3 Bxf2² White’s position is preferable thanks to
his two-bishop advantage.)

9...Bf5 10.a3 a4 11.Bb5 e6 12.Bxa4 Bxc5 13.Bxc6 bxc6 14.Ne5! White

counter attacks the f7-square and succeeds in removing his pawn from f2.
14...Nh6 15.f3 Kb7 16.b4² White begins gradually to restrict his
opponent’s bishops. 16...Bd6 17.Nc4 Bd3 18.Nxd6+ He deprives Black of
his bishop-pair. 18...Rxd6 19.Bxh6 gxh6 20.Kc1 Rhd8 21.Nd2 Be2
22.Ra2± There is just a few material left on the board and the activity of
Black’s pieces does not compensate his missing pawn, moreover that his
kingside pawn-structure has been weakened.
9...e6 10.Ng5. White exploits the defencelessness of the pawn on f7 and
not only simplifies the position, but also transfers his knight to the centre of
the board. 10...Bxe2+ 11.Kxe2 Nh6 12.Ne4 f5. Black regains the pawn, but
weakens his pawn-structure. 13.Bxh6 gxh6 14.Nd6+ Bxd6 15.cxd6 Rxd6
16.Na3 Rg8 17.g3 h5 18.Nc4 Rdd8 19.a4 h4 20.Rad1² Black has no
compensation for the numerous pawn-weaknesses in his position.

9.b4

9...Ne5?!
There arise exchanges after this move, which are in favour of White.

9...Be7 10.Kc2 Bf6 11.Kb3. White parries the threat Nxb4. 11...Nge7
12.Bc4 Rd7 13.Be3 Bxf3 14.gxf3 Nd5 15.a3 Rhd8 16.Bc1!? He preserves
his bishop from being exchanged. Now, Black’s rooks on the opened d-file
will be restricted by his own knight on d5. 16...g5 17.Ra2! White uses the
second rank to activate his rook. 17...h6 18.Bb5 Kc7 19.Rd2 Be5 20.Rdd1
Bf4 21.Bxf4+ Nxf4 22.Rxd7+ Rxd7 23.h4± White wishes to get rid of his
weak h-pawn and to open a file for his rook. Black does not have sufficient
compensation for the sacrificed pawn.

9...Nf6 10.Kc2 Bf5+ Black frees the g4-square for his knight. 11.Kb3
Ng4 12.Bb5 Nxf2 13.Rf1 Ne4 14.Be3 a5 15.a3 Be7 16.Bxc6 bxc6 17.Nd4
Kb7 18.Nxf5 exf5 19.Bd4 Bf6 20.Bxf6 Nxf6 21.Ra2! White’s rook enters
the actions. Black is incapable of protecting his pawn on f5, so White will
soon obtain a material advantage. 21...Ne4 22.Rxf5 f6 23.Re2 Rhe8
24.Kc2±

10.Be2 Nxf3 11.Bxf3 Bxf3+ 12.gxf3 Nf6, Schepetkova – Platonova,

Obninsk 2007, 13.Na3!? This is White’s most precise move. He cannot find
a better square for his knight in this position than c4. 13...Be7 14.Nc4±

D2) 7...e5 8.b4

The move 8.Be3?! seems less adequate for White, because after 8...f5, he
will have to play b2-b4 anyway sooner or later.

8...a5
 About 8...Nf6 9.Kc2 – see Chapter 14, 4...Nf6 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.dxc5 Qxd1
7.Kxd1 e5 8.b4 Bg4 9.Kc2.

8...0-0-0+ 9.Kc2 f6 (The move 9...e4 would lose another pawn for Black.
10.Ng5 Bh5 11.Nxe4 Bg6 12.f3±; 9...Bf5+ He wishes to exploit the unsafe
position of White’s king, but after 10.Kb2, it is not easy to see how Black
can continue with his initiative, while he would be a pawn down anyway.
10...e4 11.Ng5 Bg6, Ganaus – Szeberenyi, Balatonlelle 2005, 12.Bc4!
White develops his bishop with tempo and now Black would not be able to
penetrate with his rook to the last rank. 12...Ne5 13.Na3 h6 14.Nh3 Bf5
15.Be3± White’s knights have not occupied the best squares indeed, but
Black still does not have full compensation for the sacrificed pawn.)
10.Nbd2 Bf5+ (10...Nge7 11.Nc4 Nd5, Garcia Blanco – Mchedlishvili, El
Sauzal 2007, 12.Ne3! It is in favour of White to exchange his opponent’s
active knight. 12...Nxe3+ 13.Bxe3 Be6 14.Nd2. White transfers his knight
to the c4-square and it will be very well placed there threatening all the time
to penetrate to the d6-outpost. 14...Ne7 15.Nc4 Nd5 16.a4±) 11.Kb2 Nge7
12.Nc4 Nd5 13.Ne3 Nxe3 14.Bxe3 Ne7 15.Bc4 Nd5 16.Rad1 Nxe3
17.Rxd8+ Kxd8 18.fxe3. It would be very difficult here for Black to prove
the power of his bishops, since his bishop on f8 is severely restricted by
White’s pawns on b4 and c5. 18...Kc7 19.Bd5 Be7 20.e4± Pourramezanali
– Ameir, Al Ain 2013.

8...e4. Black is provoking an immediate conflict in this position. 9.h3

 9...Bxf3+ 10.gxf3 exf3. Black has managed to restore the material
balance, but White’s bishops are tremendously powerful in this opened
position, while Black’s pawn on f3 is very weak. 11.Kc2 Be7 (About 11...0-
0-0 12.Nd2 – see 9...0-0-0; 11...Nf6, Kryvoruchko – Ostroverkhov, Lvov
2001, 12.Bc4 a5 13.Re1+ Be7 14.b5 Nd8 15.Nd2+–) 12.Bb5 0-0-0,
Murariu – Neagu, Eforie Nord 2017, 13.Nd2 Ne5 14.Re1 f6 15.Nc4 Nxc4
16.Bxc4. White is threatening to win a piece after Bxg8. Black is helpless
to counter this, for example: 16...Bf8 17.Bf4+– with the horrible threat
Be6+, which is impossible for Black to parry.
9...0-0-0+ This intermediate check does not improve Black’s position
much. 10.Kc2 Bf5 (Following 10...Bxf3 11.gxf3 exf3 12.Nd2±, Black’s
pawn on f3 would need permanent protection. The pawn on c5 would
impede the development of the bishop on f8. 12...Ne5 13.Nc4 Ng6 14.Bd3
Nf6 15.Re1 Nd5 16.Be4 Ndf4 17.Bxf4! White parts with his two-bishop
advantage, but gains access to the e5-square for his knight. 17...Nxf4
18.Ne5. Black has failed to develop comfortably his pieces and cannot
avoid the material losses. 18...Ng2 19.Nxf7 Nxe1+ 20.Rxe1 Be7
21.Bxb7+!+– Tsaruk – Grahn, Bratislava 2019) 11.g4 Bd7 (Following
11...exf3+ 12.gxf5, White would preserve his extra pawn and his bishops
would be very active. 12...Nf6 13.Nd2 Ne5 14.Nc4 Nfd7 15.Nxe5 Nxe5
16.Bf4 f6 17.Re1 Be7 18.Rg1+– V.Ivanov – Nazarova, Anapa 2009.)
12.Ng5 Ne5, Khatoev – V.Kovalev, Barnaul 2011, 13.Nd2 f6 (After
13...Bc6?, Black’s attempt to defend his pawn on e4 would worsen his
position even more. 14.Nc4 Nxc4 15.Bxc4 Nh6 16.Re1 Re8 17.Bf4!+–
Now, White does not need to be in a hurry to capture on f7, since Black has
practically no useful moves at all.) 14.Ngxe4± White has already two extra
pawns, while Black has not yet completed the development of his kingside
pieces.
9...Bh5 10.g4

10...Bxg4 11.hxg4 exf3 12.g5! It would be reasonable for White to

prevent the possibility for his opponent to develop his knight to the f6-
square and also to fix his pawn on the h7-square. 12...a5 13.b5 Ne5 14.Be3
Ne7, Abramova – K.Volkov, Voronezh 2015, 15.Nd2 0-0-0 16.Kc2± White
removes his king away from the juxtaposition with his opponent’s rook on
d8 and deprives Black of any chance of creating counterplay. 16...Nf5?
17.Bh3 g6 18.Bd4 Bg7 19.Ne4+– Black has no satisfactory defence against
the penetration of the enemy knight to the d6-outpost.
 10...Bg6 11.Nh4 a5, Santos – Guimaraes, Lisbon 2017, 12.b5 Ne5
13.Be3 Rc8 14.c6! White would be incapable of protecting his pawn on c5
anyway, so he should better give it back under the most favourable
circumstances. 14...bxc6 15.Nd2 Nf6 16.Bd4 Ned7 17.bxc6 Rxc6 18.Nxg6
hxg6 19.Bb5! Rc7 20.g5 Nd5 21.Nxe4± White has again an extra pawn,
while Black’s knights do not have any reliable squares and would be
incapable of countering White’s powerful bishops.
10...exf3 11.gxh5 Nf6 (11...a5. Black wishes to provoke the advance of
White’s b-pawn, in order to deprive the pawn on c5 of any protection. Still,
this plan would take too much time, while Black’s kingside pieces are not
developed just like before. 12.b5 Ne5 13.Bf4 0-0-0+ 14.Kc2 f6 15.c6 bxc6
16.Nd2±) 12.Bc4 0-0-0+ (12...a5 13.Re1+ Be7 14.b5 Nd8 15.Nd2+–)
13.Kc2 Ne5 14.Bb3 Nxh5 15.Be3 g6 16.Nd2. Black has managed to regain
the weak pawn on h5, but in the meantime White has coordinated perfectly
his forces and is threatening to deploy his knight on the d6-outpost.
16...Bg7 17.Ne4 f5 18.Nd6+ Kb8, Margstahler – Bisignano, Milan 2009,
19.Rhe1+–, followed by Rad1, Bd4.

9.b5
 9...Nd8

9...Na7. Black’s knight will be less active on this square than on d8.
10.Be3 (10.Kc2!? White is threatening to capture on e5 and obtains the
two-bishop advantage. 10...Bxf3 11.gxf3 Bxc5 12.Rg1!? He uses the g-file
in order to activate his rook. 12...g6 13.Nd2 Bxf2 14.Rg2 Bc5 15.Re2 f6
16.a4. Black has an extra pawn indeed, but White’s pieces are considerably
more active. 16...0-0-0. Black evacuates his king away from the centre, but
deprives his knight on a7 of the c8-square. 17.Nb3 Bb6 18.c4. White
advances his pawn-majority on the queenside. 18...Bd4. White was
threatening c4–c5 and b5–b6 winning a piece. 19.Nxd4 Rxd4 20.Be3
Rxc4+ 21.Kd3+– Now, Black loses his knight on a7, which has remained at
the edge of the board – on the a7-square, almost the entire game.) 10...Ne7
11.Kc2 f6 12.a4 Nd5 13.c6!? White exploits the favourable tactical chance
of getting rid of his weak pawn on c5. 13...Bf5+ 14.Kc1 Nxe3 (14...bxc6?
15.b6! Nxe3 16.fxe3 Nc8 17.b7+–) 15.cxb7 Rb8 16.fxe3 Bc5, S.Zhigalko –
Al Modiahki, Dubai 2014, 17.Nbd2 Bxe3 18.Kb2 Rxb7. Black restores
temporarily the material balance, but after 19.Nc4+–, he would fail to
protect his pawn on a5, because of the threat of a knight-fork on the d6-
square. After that, White will have three passed pawns on the queenside.
 10.c6!
White is not waiting for his opponent to gobble the pawn on c5 under the
most favourable circumstances (after Ne6 and Rc8).
10...bxc6 11.h3!
Now, Black must decide whether to exchange his powerful bishop, or to
give up his central pawn.
11...Bxf3+

11...Be6 12.Nxe5±

12.gxf3 Bc5

The move 12...cxb5? would lead to a loss of a piece for Black. 13.Bxb5+
Ke7 14.Ba3+–

12...Nf6 13.Nd2 Nd5 14.Kc2 Rc8 15.Rb1 cxb5 16.Bxb5+. The position
is opened even more and White’s bishops turn into powerful force. 16...Ke7
17.Bc4 Nf4 18.Rb5±
 13.Nd2
White is reluctant to lose time for the protection of his pawn on f2.

13...Nf6, Т.Petrov – Iniyan, Budapest 2017 (13...Bxf2. Black wins a

pawn, but this enables White to activate radically his forces. 14.Ne4 Bh4
15.Kc2 Nf6 16.Nd6+ Kd7 17.Nf5 g5 18.Bc4+–; 17...Bf2 18.Rh2! White
brings his rook into the actions along the second rank and seizes firmly the
initiative. 18...Bc5 19.Re2±) 14.a4 Bxf2 15.Kc2 0-0 16.Nc4 Rc8
(Following 16...cxb5 17.axb5, White will have connected passed pawns on
the queenside, while Black’s passed a-pawn is much rather a liability in his
position than strength. 17...a4 18.Ba3 Re8 19.Nd6 Re6 20.Rh2 Bb6
21.Rd2±) 17.Rh2 Bc5 18.Re2 Nd5 19.Rxe5 f6
 20.Rxd5! White sacrifices the exchange not to lose time for the retreat of
his rook. 20...cxd5 21.Nxa5± White’s passed a and b-pawns, supported by
his pieces, will advance sooner or later and will bring him a victory.
 Chapter 14
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 Nf6
5.Nf3

This is the most popular and in fact the best order of moves for both sides
in the system with 2...d5.
We will analyse now A) 5...Bg4, B) 5...a6, C) 5...Nc6 and D) 5...e6.

About 5...g6 6.Qb3 – see 4...g6, Chapter 9.

5...Bf5 6.Na3 e6 (6...Nc6 7.Be3 – see Chapter 13) 7.Nb5 (7.Be3 Nc6
8.Be2 – see Chapter 13) 7...Qd8 (7...Na6? 8.Qa4 Nd7 9.Be2 Be7 10.Qxa6
bxa6 11.Nc7+ Kd8 12.Nxd5 exd5, Hudson – Nowicki, IECC 1999,
13.dxc5 Bxc5 14.0-0±; it is even more energetic for White to play here
9.Be3 cxd4 10.Rd1 d3 11.Qxa6 bxa6 12.Nc7+ Kd8 13.Nxd5 exd5 14.Bxd3
Bxd3 15.Rxd3±) 8.Bf4 Nd5 9.Bxb8 Qxb8 10.Qa4 Nb6 11.Nd6+ Ke7
12.Nxf5+ exf5 13.Qa5 Kf6 14.dxc5 Qe8+ 15.Be2 Qa4 (15...Na4?
Thorhallsson – Johnsen, Gausdal 1996, 16.c6 Nxb2 17.cxb7 Rb8 18.0-0
Qxe2 19.Rae1+–) 16.Qb4 Qxb4 17.cxb4 Nd5 18.a3±

5...cxd4 6.cxd4

About 6...Nc6 7.Nc3 – see Chapter 10.

After 6...e6 7.Nc3 Bb4, we have analysed the different retreats of Black’s
queen (7...Qd8, 7...Qd6 and 7...Qa5) before, after another order of moves –
see Chapter 11.
6...Bg4 7.Nc3 Qd8 (7...Qa5 8.h3 Bh5 9.d5±) 8.h3 Bh5 9.g4 (It is also
good for White to play here 9.d5±) 9...Bg6 10.Ne5±
6...a6 7.Nc3 (White does not need to play now 7.Be3 – see variation B.)
7...Qd6 (7...Qd8 8.Bc4²; 7...Qa5 8.Bc4²) 8.Bc4²
6...e5 7.Nc3 (The idea of Black’s sacrifice is that after 7.Nxe5 Bb4+
8.Nc3 0-0, White will have problems to develop his light-squared bishop,
since his g2-pawn would be hanging. Still, it deserves attention for White to
choose 7.Nbd2!? exd4 8.Bc4 Qd8 9.Ng5 Qe7 10.Kf1ƒ) 7...Bb4 8.dxe5
Qxd1+ 9.Kxd1 Bxc3 10.bxc3 Ne4 11.Be3 Nxc3+ 12.Kd2 Ne4+ 13.Ke1
Nc6 14.Rc1²
 A) 5...Bg4 6.Nbd2

This is one of the new ideas in this opening (together with 6.Qa4+ and
6.dxc5), which have appeared during the 90ies of the past century. The
threat of capturing on f3 has been parried and now White’s light-squared
bishop can be used in a more aggressive manner, particularly after the move
e7-e6. This is a good alternative to the tabia arising after 6.Be2 e6 7.h3 Bh5
8.0-0 Nc6 9.Be3 cxd4 10.cxd4 Be7 11.Nc3 Qd6 12.Qb3 0-0 13.a3 Rfd8
14.Rfd1 Rab8 (or 14...a6) with an approximately equal position.

6...cxd4

It would be hardly interesting for Black to play here 6...Bxf3 7.Nxf3 cxd4
(7...e6 8.Be3 Nbd7 9.Qa4 a6 10.c4 Qc6 11.Qxc6 bxc6 12.h3 cxd4 13.Nxd4
Bb4+, Paehtz – Dembo, Balatonlelle 2000, 14.Kd1 Rc8 15.g4±) 8.Nxd4
Nbd7 (8...e5 9.Nb5 Qxd1+ 10.Kxd1 Kd7 11.a4 a6 12.Na3²) 9.Be3 a6
10.Be2 e5 11.Nb3 Qc6 12.0-0 Be7, Palkovi – Kolbus, Budapest 1996,
13.g3!? 0-0 (13...e4 14.Nd4 Qd5 15.c4±) 14.Bf3 e4 15.Bg2 Ne5 16.Bd4
Nf3+ (16...Rad8 17.Re1±) 17.Bxf3 exf3 18.Nd2±
 6...Nc6. This is one of the most popular moves for Black and we suggest
against it a rather simple response. 7.dxc5 (This is a universal decision for
White in numerous situations in this pawn-structure, not for all, though...)
7...e5 (7...e6 8.Nb3 Qxd1+ 9.Kxd1 a5 10.a4!? e5 11.Ke1 Be6 12.Nfd2²;
7...Qxc5, Rahls – Zunker, Saint Vincent 2003, 8.h3 Bh5 9.Be2 0-0-0
10.Qa4² or 9...e5 10.0-0 Be7 11.Nb3 Qb6?! 12.Nxe5²) 8.Bc4 Qxc5 9.Qe2
Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Ne4 Nxe4 12.Qxe4 Bxf3 13.gxf3 Na5 14.Bd5 Rad8
15.Rd1 Kh8 16.f4²
6...e6. Now Black must consider the circumstance that if White manages
to create threats on the a4-e8 diagonal, he would have problems to bring
into the defence his light-squared bishop. 7.Bc4

7...Qd6, Zifroni – S.Polgar, Tel Aviv 1996. This is not the most accurate
retreat of Black’s queen. For example, if White captures d4xc5, Black
would have to make a third move with his queen. 8.0-0!? (White wishes to
begin his attack under the most comfortable conditions. His usual line here
is: 8.Qb3 Qc7 9.Ne5 Nc6 etc..).
 8...cxd4 9.Qa4+ Nbd7 (9...Nc6?! 10.Nxd4 – see 8...Nc6 9.Qa4 cxd4?!
10.Nxd4) 10.Nxd4 Be7 11.h3 Bh5 12.Re1. Black’s king would have to
remain stranded in the centre, because after 12...0-0, White would have the
resource 13.Nxe6± fxe6? 14.Rxe6+–
8...Nc6 9.Qa4 Be7 (9...cxd4?! 10.Nxd4 Be7 11.h3 Bh5 12.Bb5 0-0
13.Nxc6 bxc6 14.Bxc6±) 10.dxc5 Qxc5 11.Nb3 Qh5 (11...Qb6 12.Ne5²
Now, Black’s attempt to preserve his light-squared bishop would lead to
even greater difficulties for him: 12...Bf5 13.Be3 Qc7 14.Nd4±) 12.Be2 0-
0 13.h3 Bxf3 14.Bxf3 Qf5 15.Bxc6 bxc6 16.Qxc6²
8...Be7 9.h3 Bh5. Here, in numerous variations White will have an
additional resource to develop his initiative – g2-g4, followed by Nf3-e5.
10.Bb5+ Nc6 (10...Nbd7? 11.g4 Bg6 12.g5 Nd5 13.Ne5 N5b6 14.Ndc4
Nxc4 15.Nxc4 Qc7 16.d5 exd5 17.Re1 dxc4 18.Bf4+–; 17...0-0-0 18.Rxe7
dxc4 19.Qd5+–) 11.Nc4 Qc7 12.Nce5 cxd4 (12...0-0 13.Bxc6 bxc6 14.g4
Bg6 15.Bf4 Qb6 16.Qe2 cxd4 17.Nxd4²) 13.g4 Bg6 14.Bf4 Bd6 15.Qxd4
Nd5 16.Nxc6 bxc6 17.Bxd6 Qxd6 18.Be2 c5 19.Qxg7²

7...Qd8 8.Qa4+! (The inclusion of the moves 8.h3 Bh5 is possible, but it
is not always useful for White. It is important sometimes that Black’s
bishop on g4 is on a more vulnerable position.) 8...Nbd7 9.Ne5 Bf5
(9...cxd4? Kostin – Motylev, Sochi 2018, 10.Bb5 Bf5 11.Ndc4 a6
12.Bxd7+ Nxd7 13.Nb6+–; 9...a6 10.Nxg4 Nxg4, Makhija – Siretanu,
chess.com 2020, 11.d5±) 10.Nb3 cxd4?! It is already difficult to give a
good advice to Black (Following 10...Be7 11.Nxc5 Bxc5 12.Bg5! it would
be bad for him to choose 12...Be7 13.Bxf6 Bxf6 14.Nxd7 Qxd7?
15.Bb5+–, so he would have to comply with entering an inferior endgame:
12...0-0 13.Nxd7 Qxd7 14.Qxd7 Nxd7 15.dxc5 Nxc5 16.0-0-0²) 11.Nxd4
a6 12.Nxd7 Nxd7 13.Nxf5 b5 (13...exf5 14.Bd5±) 14.Bxb5 axb5 15.Qe4±
Ristic – Zivkovic, Vrnjacka Banja 2009.

7...Qc6. In general, Black’s queen is well placed here and the e5-square,
from where it can be attacked will be taken under control with his next
move. 8.0-0 Nbd7 9.Qb3 a6 10.Re1 Be7 11.Ne5 Nxe5 12.dxe5 Nd5
13.Bd3. White prevents the transfer of the enemy bishop to the b1-h7
diagonal (It is also good for him to opt here for 13.a4 0-0 14.a5²). 13...0-0,
Lovholt – Moreira, ICCF 2001, 14.Qc2 h6. Now, Black’s bishop has been
deprived of the g6-square. 15.h3 Bh5 16.Nf1²

7.Bc4
 7...Qd7
But not 7...Bxf3? 8.Bxd5 Bxd1 9.Bxb7±

7...Qd6 8.Qb3 Be6 (8...Nc6? 9.Bxf7+ Kd8 10.0-0+–) 9.Nxd4 Qe5+

10.Kf1 Bxc4+ 11.Nxc4±

Following 7...Qh5, Black might have problems with the protection of his
queenside pawns. 8.Qb3 Bc8 (8...Nbd7 9.cxd4 e6 10.Qxb7 Rb8,
Sveshnikov – Belikov, Elista 1995, 11.Qxa7 Bxf3 12.Nxf3 Bb4+ 13.Bd2
Bxd2+ 14.Nxd2 Rxb2? 15.Qa3±; 14...Qg5 15.Qa3!? Qxg2 16.0-0-0 Qxf2
17.Nxf3ƒ) 9.Nxd4 e6 10.Be2 Qc5 11.Bf3 Qe5+ 12.Ne2 Qc7 13.Nc4 e5
14.Bg5 Nbd7 (14...Be7? 15.Bxf6 Bxf6 16.Bxb7 Bxb7 17.Qxb7 Qxb7
18.Nd6+ Kd8 19.Nxb7+±) 15.Bxf6 Nxf6 16.Qb5+ Nd7 17.Bg4 f6 18.0-0-
0 a6 19.Qd5±

8.Ne5

This is a very good alternative to White’s usual line: 8.Qb3 e6 9.Ne5 Qc7
10.cxd4 Nc6 11.Bb5 Bd6 12.Ndc4 0-0 13.Bxc6 bxc6 etc.
 8...Bxd1 9.Bxf7+ Kd8 10.Nxd7 Nbxd7 11.Kxd1

11...dxc3

After 11...Ng4 12.Ke2 d3+?! 13.Ke1 e5 14.Bc4 Nc5 15.b4 Na4, White’s
knight will do all the necessary work: 16.Ne4 Nf6 17.Ng5 Kc7 18.Nf7
Rg8 19.Ne5±

12.bxc3 e5, Gupta – Sarosi, Kecskemet 2012, 13.Rb1 Kc7 14.Re1 Bc5
15.f3 Rhf8 16.Bc4 Rac8 17.Kc2²

B) 5...a6
This is a relatively seldom played move.
 6.Be3

Black has not played yet e7-e6, so he can counter 6.Bd3 with 6...Bg4∞

After 6.Na3, he is ready to respond with 6...cxd4. Black controls the b5-
square and after 7.Nc4?!, he can choose 7...b5 8.Nb6? Qe6–+
On the contrary, in positions with an isolated pawn, Black’s move 5...a6
would not be so necessary, so he would castle a move later and this would
provide White with additional possibilities. So he should try to enter
positions with an isolated pawn.

6...cxd4

The exchange operation 6...Ng4, followed by capturing on e3 is hardly

reasonable for Black here. He loses several tempi (the usefulness of the
move a7-a6 is also questionable in this case...), while White obtains a
powerful pawn-centre and the f-file. 7.Nbd2 Nxe3 8.fxe3 e6 (8...Bg4?
9.Bc4 Qd7 10.Bxf7+–; 9...Bxf3 10.Qb3 Qh5 11.Nxf3 Nd7 12.Qxb7 1–0
Lisowski – Smagacz, Wysowa 2003) 9.Bd3 Be7 10.0-0 Nc6 (It is bad for
Black to opt here for 10...0-0? 11.Bxh7+ Kxh7 12.Ne5 and White’s attack
would be impossible to parry, for example: 12...Kg8 13.Qh5 Nc6 14.c4 g6
15.Qh6 Qd8 16.Nxg6 fxg6 17.Qxg6+ Kh8 18.Rxf8+ Bxf8 19.Ne4+–;
18...Qxf8 19.Qh5+ Kg7 20.Rf1+–) 11.Nc4 Qh5, Lisowski – Kos, Warsaw
2012, 12.Be4 0-0 13.Bxc6 bxc6 14.Nfe5 Qxd1 15.Rfxd1±

No doubt, it would be more solid for Black to choose 6...Bg4, but even
then, thanks to the early a7-a6, White would have more possibilities (in
comparison for example with the popular line: 5...Bg4 6.Be2 e6 7.Be3).
7.Be2 cxd4 8.cxd4 e6 9.0-0 Be7 10.h3 Bh5 11.Nc3 Qd8 12.Qb3 Nc6,
Carlsen – Beltran de Heredia, Madrid 2008 (It would be too optimistic for
Black to choose here 12...b5 13.d5 exd5 14.Rad1 0-0 15.Nxd5 Nbd7, Ursic
– S.Nikolic, Nova Gorica 2009, 16.Nxf6+ Bxf6 17.g4 Bg6 18.Qd5+–)
13.d5 (following 13.Qxb7?? Na5–+ White’s queen would be trapped)
13...Na5 (After 13...exd5, it would be already possible for White to capture
14.Qxb7 Na5 15.Qb6±) 14.Qb6 Nxd5 15.Nxd5 exd5 16.Qxd8+ Bxd8
17.Rfd1²

7.cxd4
 7...e6

7...Bg4 8.Nc3 Qd6 (8...Qd7 9.Be2²) 9.Be2 (9.Qb3 Bxf3 10.gxf3 b5

11.a4 b4 12.Ne4 Nxe4 13.fxe4±) 9...e6 10.h3 Bh5 11.Ne5 Bxe2 12.Qxe2.
The tempo, which Black has lost for the move a7-a6 hurts him now and he
would hardly manage to prevent his opponent’s pawn-break in the centre.
12...Be7 13.Nc4 Qd8 14.d5! exd5 15.Rd1±, or 13...Qc6 14.d5 Nxd5
15.Nxd5 Qxd5 16.Nb6 Qxg2 17.0-0-0 Qc6+ 18.Kb1 Ra7 19.Rhg1± 0-0?
20.Rxg7+ with a quick checkmate – 20...Kxg7 21.Bd4+ Kh6 (21...f6
22.Rg1+ Kh8 23.Qg4+–) 22.Rg1 Bg5 23.f4+–

7...g6. This is a practical scheme for Black’s development, but it has some
serious drawbacks. White maintains powerful pressure on the a2-g8
diagonal and it would be very likely that Black would have to play e7-e6
anyway. In addition, if his bishop on g7 is exchanged, which is very
probable to happen, then the vulnerability of the dark squares in his camp
would hurt him. 8.Nc3

8...Qd6 9.Rc1 Nbd7 10.Qd2 Bg7 11.Bf4 Qe6+ 12.Be2²

 8...Qa5 9.Qb3 e6 (9...Bg7? 10.Ne5 0-0 11.Nc4 Qh5 12.Nb6±) 10.Ne5
Nd5 11.Bc4 Nxe3 12.fxe3 Nc6 13.Nxc6 bxc6 14.0-0²
8...Qd8 9.Bc4 Bg7 10.Qa4+. White makes use of the fact that Black’s
response is practically forced. 10...Bd7 (10...Nc6 11.d5+–; 10...Qd7
11.Bb5+–; 10...Nbd7 11.Bxf7+! Kxf7 12.Ng5+ Ke8 13.Ne6 Qb6
14.Qc4+–) 11.Qb3 e6? (The least of evils for Black here is 11...0-0 12.Ne5
Qe8 13.Qxb7 Bc6 14.Nxc6 Nxc6 15.0-0²) 12.d5! (The complications
arising after 12.Qxb7 Nc6 13.Ne5 Nxe5 14.dxe5 Ng4 15.0-0-0 Nxe5
16.Bb3 0-0 17.f4 Rb8 18.Qxa6 Ng4∞ are not necessary for White at all.)
12...b5 13.dxe6 bxc4 14.exf7+ Kxf7 15.Qxc4+ Ke8 16.0-0-0+–
Steenbekkers – Dutreeuw, Brasschaat 2005.

8.Nc3

8...Qd8

8...Qd6. This move is more active than the retreat of the queen to its
initial square, moreover that his rooks may enter the actions easier. On the
other hand Black’s queen may come under an attack on this square (usually
with the knight from b5, e4, c4, or with the bishop on the h2-b8 diagonal)
and the consequences of that should be evaluated carefully by Black, since
they can influence considerably the correct evaluation of the position.
9.Bd3 Be7 (9...Nc6 10.0-0 Be7 11.a3 – see 9...Be7) 10.0-0

About 10...Nc6 11.a3 0-0 (11...b5 12.Ne4!) 12.Qc2 – Chapter 11,

variation B4.
10...Nbd7 11.Qc2!? 0-0 12.Rfd1 Rd8 13.Ng5 Nf8 14.Nge4 Nxe4
15.Bxe4 Ng6 16.d5 e5 17.Na4±
10...0-0 11.Rc1 (11.a3 Nc6 or 11.Qc2 Nc6 12.a3 – see Chapter 11,
variation B4) 11...Nc6 12.Bb1 b5, Ziska – Lanka, Riga 2019 (12...Rd8,
Wachinger – Lanka, Hamburg 2019, 13.Qe2 e5 14.dxe5 Nxe5 15.Ne4
Nxf3+ 16.Qxf3²; 13...b5 14.Ne4 Nxe4 15.Bxe4 Bb7? 16.Ne5 Nxd4
17.Bxh7+ Kxh7 18.Qh5+ Kg8 19.Qxf7+ Kh7 20.Qg6+ Kg8 21.Bxd4+–)
13.Ng5 Bb7 14.Nce4 Nxe4 15.Nxe4 Qd5 16.Nc5 Bxc5 17.Rxc5 Qd6
18.d5 Ne7 19.Qd3 g6 20.dxe6 Qxe6 21.Bh6 Rfc8 22.Qd4 f6 23.f3²

8...Qa5. The pluses of this move are that the queen does not impede the
movements of Black’s other pieces and later, depending on the
circumstances, it can be evacuated to d8, or transferred to the h5-square. On
the other hand it can be attacked by White’s pawn on b4, his knight from
the c4-square, with the bishop from d2 and even by the rook from e5. It is
quite obvious that in the popular scheme of development with the move b7-
b5, Black’s queen is not so well placed on the a5-square. 9.Bd3

Black does not have a great choice of plans here. We will analyse at first
the set-ups with the development of his knight to the d7-square.
9...Nbd7 10.0-0 Bd6 (10...Be7 11.a3 – see 9...Be7) 11.Nd2 Bb8 (It would
hardly be a good idea for Black to allow the exchange of his dark-squared
bishop: 11...Nd5?! 12.Nc4 Qc7 13.Nxd6+ Qxd6, Lauridsen – Stark,
Dresden 2008, 14.Qg4 0-0? 15.Bh6+–; 14...N7f6 15.Qxg7 Rg8 16.Qh6
Bd7 17.Bg5 Bc6 18.f3±) 12.Re1 0-0 13.Nde4 h6 14.Qf3²
9...Be7 10.0-0 Nbd7 11.a3 0-0, Vogt – Habibi, Switzerland 2019, 12.Re1
Nd5 (After 12...b5, White can play 13.d5! exd5 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Bxh7+
Kxh7 16.Qxd5 Rb8 17.Qe4+ Kg8 18.Qxe7+–) 13.Nxd5 Qxd5 14.Rc1 Nf6
15.Ne5 b5 16.Be2 Qd6 17.Bf4 Nd5 18.Bg3±
The development of Black’s knight to the c6-square is hardly a good idea
for him: 9...Nc6 10.a3 Be7 11.0-0 0-0 12.Re1
 12...Rd8 13.b4 Qc7 14.Rc1 Bd7 15.Bb1 Be8 16.Qd3 Rac8, Nagy –
Nomin Erdene, Kecskemet 2015, 17.Ne4 g6. This weakening is forced and
White’s bishop will be transferred to a new operational diagonal: 18.Ba2±
12...Bd7, McBeth – Carr, Caleta 2010, 13.b4 Qd8 14.Rc1 Na7. This
move does not seem to be convincing, but doing nothing for Black is hardly
preferable. 15.Ne5 Nb5 16.Ne4 Nxa3 17.Nxf6+ Bxf6 18.Qh5 g6 19.Qf3
Ba4 20.Bh6 Bg7 21.Bxg7 Kxg7 22.h4 Nb5 (22...Qxh4?! 23.Ra1 Nc2
24.Re4±) 23.Bxb5 Bxb5 24.h5 Kg8 25.Ng4±
12...b5, Myhrvold – Tzoumbas, chess.com 2020, 13.Ne4 Bb7 14.Nfg5
Nxe4 (14...Rfd8? 15.Nxf6+ Bxf6 16.Qh5+–) 15.Bxe4 Bxg5 16.Bxg5±
Black will have great difficulties to defend his kingside, for example:
16...Rac8? 17.Bf6! gxf6 18.Qg4+ Kh8 19.Qh4 f5 20.Qf6+ Kg8 21.Re3+–
8...Bb4. This move solves Black’s problems only for a while, only until
the pin becomes ineffective. 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0
 10...Qh5 11.a3 Bd6 12.h3 Nbd7 13.Be2² Black’s queen turns out again to
be misplaced.
10...Qd8 11.a3 Be7 12.Ne5 Nbd7 13.Rc1 Nb6 14.Bb1± and later Qd3,
Rfe1, Bg5...
10...Qd6 11.a3 Bxc3 12.bxc3 b5 13.a4. Black loses his dark-squared
bishop and he must also worry about the threats against his pawn on b5.
13...Bb7 14.axb5 axb5 15.Rxa8 Bxa8 16.Bxb5 Ng4 17.Re1 Bxf3 18.Qxf3
Qxh2+ 19.Kf1 Nxe3+ 20.fxe3²
10...Bxc3 11.bxc3 b5 12.a4 Bb7 13.Qb1 (White is eyeing the b5 and h7-
squares.) 13...Ne4 (13...bxa4 14.c4 Qc6 15.d5 exd5, Pavasovic – Cueto
Chajtur, Istanbul 2000, 16.cxd5 Qxd5 17.Rxa4 Bc6 18.Rh4 h6? 19.Bc4
Qd6 20.Rd1 Qe7 21.Bxh6 gxh6 22.Qg6+–) 14.Rc1 Rc8 15.axb5 axb5
(15...Nxc3? 16.Qb4 Nxb5 17.Rxc8+ Bxc8 18.Qe7+–) 16.Rxa8 Bxa8
17.Bxe4 Qxe4 18.Qxb5 Qg6 19.Ne1 Nc6 20.f3 Ne7 21.c4 h5 22.Bf2±
10...Qa5 11.Rc1 Bxc3, Kline – R.Hansen, ICCF 2014, 12.Rxc3, with the
idea to transfer this rook to the kingside (The move 12.bxc3 doubtlessly
deserves attention too...).
 Now, Black must be very careful not to lose by force.
12...Qxa2?! 13.Ne5 Qd5 14.Bg5 Nbd7 15.Re1 b6 16.Bc4 Qd6 17.Rh3‚
17...Bb7? 18.Nxd7 Nxd7 19.Qh5+–
12...Bd7 13.Bg5 Nd5 (13...Bc6? 14.Bxf6 gxf6 15.Ne5 fxe5 16.Bxh7+–)
14.Ra3 Qc7 15.Bxh7+ (White could have preserved this move as a threat –
15.Ne5!? g6 16.Bh6±) 15...Kxh7 16.Ne5 f6 17.Rh3+ Kg8 18.Qh5 fxe5
19.Qh7+ Kf7 20.Rf3+ Nf4 21.dxe5 Ke8 22.Qxg7 Qc5 23.Bxf4 Qe7
24.Qh6 Rg8 25.Rg3± Rxg3? 26.fxg3+–
12...Nbd7 13.Ne5 (If White is reluctant to play a position with a non-
standard material ratio, he could have tried here 13.Qc2± with numerous
different ideas: Rc1, Ng5...) 13...Nxe5 14.dxe5 Qxe5 15.Bd4 Qf4
(15...Qg5 16.f4 Qh6 17.Bxh7+ Nxh7 18.Rh3 Qg6 19.Rg3 Qxg3 20.hxg3
Rd8 21.Re1±) 16.Re1 b5 17.Be5 Qh4 18.Bb1 Bb7 19.Rh3 Qg5 20.Bxh7+
Nxh7 21.Rg3 Qh6 22.Bxg7 Qxg7 23.Rxg7+ Kxg7 24.Qd4+ f6 25.Rxe6
Rad8 26.Re7+ Kh8 27.Rd7 Rxd7 28.Qxd7 Bc8 29.Qa7±

9.Bd3 Nc6
 If Black’s queen’s knight remains on its place, White can create a
powerful outpost on e5: 9...Be7 10.0-0 (10.Ne5!? Nbd7 11.f4 Nb6 12.0-0
0-0 13.Qf3 Nbd5 14.Bf2 g6, Hacker – V.Gurevich, Germany 2015,
15.Rac1²) 10...0-0 (10...Nc6 11.a3 – see 9...Nc6) 11.Ne5 Nbd7 (11...Nc6
12.Rc1 Bd7 13.Re1²) 12.Rc1 Nb6 (12.Rc1 Nxe5 13.dxe5 Nd5 14.Nxd5
Qxd5 15.Rc7±; 12...Nd5 13.Nxd5 exd5 14.Qb3²) 13.Bb1 Nbd5 14.Bg5
Bd7, Stoinev – Titov, Albena 2010, 15.Qd3 g6 (15...Bb5 16.Nxb5 axb5
17.Qxb5±) 16.Bh6 Re8 17.Qf3 Nxc3 18.bxc3 Bc6 19.Qf4±

10.0-0

10...Be7

Following 10...Bd6, White will transfer his bishop to a more active

position, which enlarges doubtlessly his possibilities. 11.Bg5 Be7 (11...h6
12.Bxf6 Qxf6 13.Re1 0-0, Fahnenschmidt – Zhang, Stuttgart 2004, 14.Be4
Rd8 15.Bxc6 bxc6 16.Ne4 Qe7 17.Nxd6 Qxd6 18.Rc1²; 14...Bd7 15.d5
exd5 16.Nxd5 Qd8 17.Bc2 Bg4 18.Qd3²) 12.Rc1 0-0 13.Bb1 g6 (13...Nb4
14.a3 Nbd5 15.Qd3 g6, Kiss – Hajdu, Paks 1996, 16.Bh6 Re8 17.Ne5 Nd7
18.Ne4 Nxe5 19.dxe5±; 17...Bd7 18.Qf3 Bc6 19.Ne4±) 14.Qd2 Nd5,
Schaefer – Fischdick, Germany 1997, 15.Bh6 Re8 16.Rfe1 Bf6 17.h4‚
17...Bxh4? 18.Nxd5+–

11.a3

It is also good for White to play here 11.Rc1 0-0 12.Bb1, because the
position arising after 12...Nb4 13.Ne5 Nbd5 14.Qf3± (14.Bg5±) is in his
favour. The key-role in this situation is played by his powerful knight on e5,
while Black’s control over the d5-outpost does not bring him any particular
dividends, since the most important actions on the board will happen on the
kingside.

11...0-0

11...b5 12.Ne4 Nd5 13.Rc1 Bb7 14.Nc5 Qb6 (14...Bxc5 15.dxc5 Nxe3
16.fxe3 0-0 17.b4²) 15.Qc2 Rc8, Seul – M.Gomes, Basel 2017, 16.Be4
Na5 17.Bg5 Qd8 18.Qd2 Ba8 19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.Rxc8 Qxc8 21.Qxa5±

12.Qc2

12.Rc1 Bd7 13.Bb1 Rc8 14.Re1!? (White is trying to continue the game
without playing the move Qd1-d3, if Black plays g7-g6 if necessary.)
14...b5 15.Ne5 (Now, White would be able to transfer his queen to the
kingside via the f3-square.) 15...g6 16.Ba2±
 12...Bd7
This is not the best place for Black’s bishop, but he must play that move;
otherwise, he would not be able to deploy harmoniously his forces.

12...b5? 13.Nxb5 Bb7 14.Nc3±

12...h6 13.Rad1 Bd7 (13...Nd5, Todorovic – Pikula, Tivat 2011, 14.Nxd5

exd5 15.Ne5 Be6 16.f4ƒ) 14.Rfe1² b5? Congiu – Wojtkowski, Aix les
Bains 2009, 15.d5 exd5 16.Nxd5 Nxd5 17.Bh7+ Kh8 18.Rxd5 Qc8
19.Bxh6 gxh6 20.Qd2 Kxh7 21.Rh5+–

12...g6 13.Rad1 Nd5 (13...Ng4, Khodaei – Jandric, Uppsala 2009, 14.Bc1

Nf6 15.Rfe1±) 14.Bh6 Re8 15.Rfe1²

13.Rad1 Rc8 14.Rfe1 Qa5

It is bad for Black to play here 14...b5, Seger – Groene, Solingen 2012,
15.d5 exd5 16.Nxd5 Nxd5 17.Bxh7+ Kh8 18.Rxd5± g6? 19.Bxg6 fxg6
20.Qxg6+–
 15.Ne5

15...Rcd8

The forced line: 15...Nxe5 16.dxe5 Qxe5, would lead to an endgame with
an extra pawn for White. 17.Bd4 Qc7 18.Be5 Qc6 19.Bxf6 Bxf6 20.Bxh7+
Kh8 21.Qd3 Qc4 22.Qh3 Qh4 23.Qxh4 Bxh4 24.Rxd7 Kxh7 25.Rxb7²
Still, this would have been the best decision for Black.

16.Nc4 Qh5

Black has no alternatives here: 16...Qc7 17.d5! exd5 18.Nxd5 Nxd5

19.Bxh7+ Kh8 20.Rxd5+–

17.Be2 Qh4 18.Bf3 Rfe8 19.Qe2 Bf8 20.g3 Qh3 21.Ne5 h5 22.Bg5±
Van Oosterom – Hamarat, ICCF 2002.

C) 5...Nc6 6.dxc5
 After 6.Be3, White would be happy in the line: 6...cxd4 7.cxd4 e6, after
which there would arise positions which we have analysed in Chapter 11,
but he must also consider some other possibilities for his opponent, for
example: 6...Bg4 7.Be2 cxd4 8.cxd4 e6 9.Nc3 Qd6 and we do not analyse
positions with an isolated pawn of this type. The transfer into an endgame,
analogously to variation C2, is much less effective here, since after 7.dxc5
Qxd1+ 8.Kxd1 Nd5 9.b4, Black can play 9...g6, as well as 9...a5 10.b5
Ne5, with a very complicated position.

Following 6.dxc5, Black has a choice. He can continue the game with
queens present on the board – C1) 6...Qxc5, or enter an endgame after –
C2) 6...Qxd1+. In the second line there would arise positions rather similar
to the variations analysed in Chapter 13.

C1) 6...Qxc5 7.Na3

Now, besides the move Bc1-e3, Black must consider the immediate Na3-
b5.
7...Ng4
 His attempt to seize the initiative with 7...Bg4? 8.Nb5 would lead to a
disaster for him. 8...Rc8 9.Be3 Bxf3 (9...Qh5 10.Nxa7 Rd8 11.Qa4 g6
12.Bb5 Bxf3 13.gxf3 Bh6 14.Bxc6+ Kf8, Potkin – Frois, Linares 2002,
15.Bxh6+ Qxh6 16.Bxb7+–) 10.Qxf3 Qe5, Tiviakov – Andres Gonzalez,
Calvia 2007, 11.Nxa7 Nxa7 12.Qxb7 e6 13.Qxa7 Bc5 14.Qa4+ Ke7
15.Qf4+–

Following 7...e5, White obtains quickly an overwhelming lead in

development and Black would hardly manage to neutralise it: 8.Be3 Qe7
9.Bb5 e4 (9...Ng4 10.Nc4 Nxe3 11.Nxe3 Bd7 12.Qa4 a6 13.0-0-0 f6
14.Nd5 Qd8 15.Rhe1± Bc5? Sternerzon – Blondel, ICCF 2007, 16.Nxe5
fxe5 17.Bxc6 Bxc6 18.Rxe5+ Be7 19.Qg4+–) 10.Nd4 Qc7 11.Qa4 Bd7,
Brobakken – Hunger, ICCF 2007, 12.Nc4 Be7 13.Nxc6 bxc6 14.Nb6 cxb5
15.Nxa8 Qxc3+ 16.bxc3 bxa4 17.Nc7+ Kd8 18.Na6±

8.Qe2

White’s pieces have not been deployed in the best possible way, but this is
only temporary. Black fails to exploit this in any way.
8...Bf5
 This is his most aggressive move. Black is ready to castle eyeing the d3-
square in the process.

The other possible variations would not create any problems for White:

8...Bd7? 9.Nb5 (White starts an offensive.) 9...Rc8 (9...Nd8 10.b4 Qxb5

11.Qxb5 Bxb5 12.Bxb5+ Nc6 13.Nd4 Rc8 14.Nxc6 bxc6 15.Ba6±) 10.h3
Nge5 11.Nxe5 Nxe5 12.Be3 Qd5 (12...Qxb5 13.Qxb5 Bxb5 14.Bxb5+
Nc6 15.Bxa7+–) 13.Nxa7 Rc4?! 14.f4 Re4 15.fxe5 Qxe5 16.0-0-0+– Vajda
– Kuang, Menorca 1996.

8...a6. Black covers the b5-square, but he has already no chances of

seizing the initiative. 9.h3 Nge5 10.Be3 Nxf3+ 11.Qxf3 Qf5 12.Qg3 e5
13.Nc4 Be6 14.0-0-0 Qg6 15.Qxg6 hxg6 16.Nb6 Rd8 17.Bc4 Bxc4
18.Nxc4. White leads in development and has pawn-majority on the
queenside, while Black has a weakness on b6 and doubled pawns, so White
is clearly better in this endgame. 18...Be7 (18...f6 19.Bb6 Rxd1+ 20.Rxd1±)
19.a4 f6 20.Rxd8+ Kxd8 21.Rd1+ Kc7 22.Kc2 b5?! 23.Bb6+ Kc8
24.Nd6+ Bxd6 25.Rxd6 Kb7 26.a5+– Shaked – Atalik, Honolulu 1997.

9.h3
 9...Nge5

The risky move 9...Bd3 would not bring any success to Black: 10.Qxd3
Qxf2+ 11.Kd1 Rd8 12.Qxd8+ Kxd8 13.hxg4 e5 14.Nc4. White has more
than sufficient compensation for the queen and only needs to coordinate his
forces. 14...Be7 (14...f6 15.Be3 Qg3, Vysochin – Fuhs, Goch 2000, 16.Be2
h5 17.gxh5 g5 18.Ne1+–) 15.Be3 (White can forget about his coordination
for a while and just capture an important pawn: 15.Nfxe5!? Kc8 16.Nxc6
bxc6 17.Bd2 Rd8 18.Kc2 Bg5 19.Rd1+–) 15...Qg3, Gharamian – Laurent,
Cappelle-la-Grande 2009, 16.Be2 Qxg4 (16...Qxg2 17.Rg1 Qh3 18.Ncd2
Kc8? 19.Bf1+–) 17.Nfxe5 Qe6 18.Nxc6+ Qxc6 19.Kc2+–
Black cannot solve his problems with the line: 9...Nf6 10.Nb5 Nd5
(10...0-0-0 11.Be3 Qd5 12.Nxa7+ Nxa7 13.Bxa7 Be4 14.a4 Bxf3 15.gxf3
e6 16.a5 Nd7, Vysochin – Budnikov, Alushta 1999, 17.a6 b6 18.Bg2+–)
11.b4 Ncxb4 (11...Qb6? 12.Nd6+–) 12.cxb4 Nxb4 13.Nbd4 0-0-0 14.Qc4
e5 15.a3±

10.Be3 Qa5 11.Nxe5 Qxe5 12.Qb5!

 12...Qxb5

Following 12...0-0-0, Black obtains some compensation for the sacrificed

pawn but not more than that: 13.Qxe5 Nxe5 14.Bxa7 Nd3+ 15.Bxd3 Bxd3
16.0-0-0 e5 17.Nc2 Be7, Vajda – Arakhamia Grant, Tusnad 2004, 18.Rhe1±

13.Nxb5 Kd8 14.0-0-0+ Kc8 15.Bc4 a6 16.Nd4 Nxd4 17.Rxd4±

Soloviov – Seepe, Badalona 1992. Now, Black must consider the possible
penetration of the enemy pieces on the d-file and must also worry about
how to activate his rook on a8.

C2) 6...Qxd1+ 7.Kxd1

 Now, White’s king must remain stranded in the centre for a while and
Black will try to exploit this circumstance. He can also try to regain the
pawn on e5, or to obtain acceptable compensation for it. From the point of
view of White everything is just the opposite. He must consolidate his
position and in particular to ensure the safety of his king. He must also
preserve the pawn-mass on the queenside even if he needs to sacrifice
something in the process. Tournament practice has shown that White’s
prospects are preferable.
Black’s most popular lines here are: C2a) 7...e5 and C2b) 7...Bg4.

7...Bf5 8.Be3 Nd5 (8...e6 9.Bb5 Nd5 10.Nbd2 – see 8...Nd5; 8...0-0-0+
9.Kc1 Nd5 10.Bb5² Nxe3 11.fxe3 g6 12.Nbd2 Bg7 13.Bxc6 bxc6 14.e4±
Ragger – Piscopo, Steinbrunn 2005) 9.Bb5 e6 (9...0-0-0 10.Kc1 – see 8...0-
0-0; 9...f6 10.Nd4 0-0-0 11.Bxc6 bxc6 12.Kc1 Bd7 13.b4 e5 14.Nb3 Be6
15.Kb2 Kc7 16.Re1 Bf7 17.a4² Delizia – Nichols, ICCF 2011) 10.Nbd2
Nxe3+ 11.fxe3 Bxc5 12.e4 Bg6 13.Ne5 0-0-0 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.Nxg6 hxg6
16.Kc2 g5 17.Rae1 f6, Gaujens – Grego, ICCF 2015, 18.h3² White has a
slight edge thanks to his superior pawn-structure on the queenside (He has
the excellent c4-square for his pieces, while Black’s pawn on c6 is weak.).
Black has pawn-majority on the kingside indeed, but he can hardly create a
passed pawn there, because of his doubled pawns. The exchange of all the
the rooks is unlikely to change anything.

C2a) 7...e5 8.b4

Now, Black will have a great problem to regain the sacrifices pawn and
his initiative gradually reaches its dead end.
8...Bg4

8...Be7 9.Be3 Bg4, Gauer – Schirmer, Dresden 2010 (9...Ng4 10.h3

Nxe3+ 11.fxe3 a5 12.Bb5 Bd7 13.Ke2 axb4 14.Bxc6 Bxc6 15.cxb4²)
10.Kc2 Nd5 11.Bc4 0-0-0 12.Nbd2²

Black has also tried in practice the move 8...Bf5 with the idea to keep
longer the enemy king in the danger zone. 9.Be3. White not only protects
his pawn but also frees a square for his king. 9...Nd5 (White is better after
9...0-0-0+ 10.Kc1 Ng4 11.Nbd2 Nxe3 12.fxe3 g6, Michna – Fransson,
Germany 2006, 13.e4±, or 10...Nd5 11.Bb5 f6 12.Kb2 g5 13.Rd1 Be7
14.Nbd2 g4, Rausis – Maus, Gausdal 1989, 15.Ne1²; 14...h5 15.Nf1 Rd7
16.Rd2 Rhd8 17.Rad1 Be6 18.Bc4 Kc7 19.Bb3 h4 20.h3² Tinture – Kiss,
ICCF 2009.) 10.Bc4 0-0-0 (10...Nxe3+ 11.fxe3 Be7?! 12.Nbd2 0-0 13.e4
Bg6 14.Ke2 Kh8 15.g4± Luco – Bronznik, Fouesnant 2004; 11...a5 12.b5
Nd8 13.Nxe5 Bxc5 14.Rf1 Be6 15.Bxe6 Nxe6, Mosquera – Pavlov,
Oviedo 2019, 16.Nc4±) 11.Kc1 Be7 (It would be again too early for Black
to play 11...Nxe3 12.fxe3 f6 13.Nbd2 g6 14.e4 Bd7 15.Kb2 Ne7 16.a4
Bg7, Sosa – Marichal Gonzalez, Porlamar 2016, 17.Bb3 Rhf8 18.Nc4±)
12.Rd1 Be4 (12...Nxe3 13.fxe3 e4 14.Nd4 Bg4 15.Re1 Ne5 16.Nd2 Bh4
17.g3 Bf6 18.Kc2 Bh5 19.Be2 Bg6 20.Nc4± Berelowitsch – Moiseenko,
Dresden 2007) 13.Bd2!? (The position would remain unclear after 13.Kb2
Nxe3! 14.Rxd8+ Rxd8 15.fxe3 Bxf3 16.gxf3, Sosa – Osorio Guevara,
Porlamar 2016, 16...e4! 17.fxe4 Bf6„; 13.Bb3!?²) 13...Bg6 14.Bg5²

9.Kc2

9.Nbd2!?

9...a5 10.b5 Nd8, Arvola – Pap, Fagernes 2013, 11.c6 (White would have
to give back the pawn, so he should better do that in circumstances which
are not so favourable for his opponent. The line: 11.Kc2 Nd7 12.Nc4 f6
would make Black happier.) 11...bxc6 12.h3 Bxf3+ (Following 12...Be6
13.Nxe5, Black’s initiative gradually ebbs away, while White will preserve
his extra pawn. 13...Nd5 14.Kc2 Bf5+ 15.Kb2 a4 16.g4 a3+ 17.Kb3 Be6
18.Kc2 Bd6 19.Ndc4 Be7 20.b6±) 13.gxf3 (13.Nxf3 Ne4= 13...Bc5 14.a4
0-0 (14...Bxf2 15.Kc2 0-0 16.Nc4 – see 14...0-0) 15.Kc2 Bxf2 16.Nc4 Re8
17.Rh2 Bc5 18.Re2± White is a pawn down, but this is compensated with
an interest by his dangerous passed b-pawn, his bishop-pair and the
misplaced enemy pieces.
9...0-0-0 10.Kc2 Bf5+ 11.Kb3 Ng4 12.Bc4 Nxf2 (12...Be7 13.Re1 Bf6
14.Re2 Rhe8 15.h3 Nxf2 16.Rxf2 e4, A.Schmitt – Aguettaz, Nancy 2006,
17.Nd4 Nxd4+ 18.cxd4 Bxd4 19.Rxf5 Bxa1 20.Be2 Bf6 21.Nc4+–) 13.Rf1
Nd3 14.Ng5 Bg6 (14...Nxc1+ 15.Raxc1 Bg6 16.Rcd1±) 15.Bxd3 Rxd3
16.Nxf7 Rg8 17.Nc4+– Schneider – Spiler, Amsterdam 2011.
9...e4 10.h3 exf3 (10...Bh5 11.g4 – see variation C2b) 11.hxg4 Nxg4
12.Kc2 Nxf2 13.Rg1± White has a powerful pawn-mass on the queenside,
supported by his bishops and Black will have a hard time to neutralise this.

9...Bf5+

Black’s alternatives would only facilitate White’s task:

 9...0-0-0 10.Bb5 Bf5+ 11.Kb2 Ng4 12.Be3 Be7 13.Nbd2 Bd3 14.Bxd3
Rxd3 15.Nc4± Rabiega – Danner, Budapest 1997.

9...a5 10.b5 Bf5+ 11.Kb2 Nd8 12.Nxe5 Bxc5 13.Bd3 Bxd3 14.Nxd3
Ba7 15.Bg5± Selschotter – Boyd, IECG 2007.

9...Be7 10.Bb5 Bxf3 (10...0-0?! 11.Bxc6 Bf5+ 12.Kb2 bxc6 13.Nxe5

Rac8 14.Re1 Rfe8 15.Nd2 Nd5 16.Ndc4+– Authier – Horobik, IECG 1998)
11.gxf3 0-0, Wempe – Al Sayed, Amsterdam 2005, 12.a3!? White preserves
his bishop-pair (12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.Nd2±) 12...a5 13.Bb2 Nd5 14.Rd1 Rfd8
15.Bc4 Nf4 16.Nd2 Kf8 17.Bf1±

9...Nd5 10.Bc4 0-0-0 11.Be3 (11.Nbd2!? Be7 12.Re1²) 11...h6 12.Nbd2²

e4? 13.Bxd5 Rxd5 14.Nd4± Jordanov – Dimitrov, Borovetz 2008.

9...e4 10.Nd4 a6 11.Be3 Be7, Dubois – Apicella, Cannes 2018, 12.Nd2 0-

0 13.Nxc6 bxc6 14.Nc4 Nd5 15.Bd4 Bf5 16.g4+–

10.Kb2 Ng4 11.Be3

 11...a5
Black’s dark-squared bishop would be more active on the long diagonal,
but this would not change practically the evaluation of the position.

White’s task would be simpler after Black’s alternatives: 11...Be7

12.Nbd2 0-0, Degraeve – Saucey, St Chely d’Aubrac 2007, 13.h3 Nxe3
14.fxe3 a5 15.a3± or 11...f6 12.Nbd2 Nxe3 13.fxe3 0-0-0, Sequera Paolini
– Salman, Curacao 2002, 14.e4 Bg4 15.Bc4±

12.a3 g6, Vancini – Ortega, Jesolo 1999, 13.Nbd2 axb4 14.axb4 Rxa1
15.Kxa1 Bg7 16.h3 Nxe3 17.fxe3 e4 18.Nd4±

C2b) 7...Bg4 8.h3

It also deserves attention for White to play here 8.Nbd2.

About 8...e5 9.b4 – see variation C2a.

8...e6 9.Nb3 a5 10.a4 e5 11.Ke1 Be6 12.Nfd2 Be7 (12...0-0-0 13.Nc4
Kb8 14.Be2²) 13.Bb5 0-0 14.Nc4 Rfc8, Gonzalez Sanchez – Duran
Vallverdu, ICCF 2016, 15.Be3 Nd5 16.Ke2 f5 17.f3²
 Following 8...0-0-0, White would be likely to go back to the idea with
9.h3, for example: 9...Bf5 (9...Bh5 10.Ke1 – see 8.h3) 10.Ke1. White has
some advantages if he changes the order of moves. After the capturing
9...Bxf3+, it would be hardly reasonable for him to choose: 10.gxf3 e6
11.b4 Nd5 12.Kc2²

8...0-0-0+

After 8...Bxf3+ 9.gxf3 e6 10.b4 a5 11.Bb5, White succeeds in preserving

his material advantage. 11...Nd5 (11...axb4 12.Bxc6+ bxc6 13.cxb4 Nd5
14.Bd2 g6, Hatzl – Windhager, Vienna 2018, 15.a3 Bg7 16.Ra2 Ke7
17.Kc2 Rhd8 18.Kb3 Rd7 19.Bc1²) 12.Bd2 Be7 13.a3 0-0 14.Ra2 axb4
15.Bxc6 b3 (15...bxc6 16.cxb4 Rfb8 17.Rc2 Rd8 18.Kc1²; 18.Ke2²)
16.Bxd5 bxa2 17.Bxa2 Bxc5 18.Ke2 Rfc8 (18...Bxa3 19.Nxa3 Rxa3
20.Bc4±) 19.Bc1 b5 20.Bb3 Be7 21.Rd1 Rc5 22.Kf1 Rd8 23.Be3 Rh5
24.Kg2 Rxd1 25.Bxd1 Rd5 26.Be2± Howell – Ward, Southend 2008.

8...Bh5 9.Nbd2 e5 (9...0-0-0 10.Ke1 – see 8...0-0-0) 10.b4 e4 11.g4 Nxg4

12.hxg4 Bxg4 (This position resembles with its pawn-structure the
Botvinnik variation in the Slav Defence and it used to be popular for some
time.) 13.Rh4 Bxf3 (13...h5 14.Rxg4 hxg4 15.Nd4± Khairullin – Ronchetti,
Chalkidiki 2003) 14.Nxf3 exf3 15.Re4+ Be7 16.Kc2 a6 17.Bg5 f6 18.Bf4±
Khairullin – Stander, Chalkidiki 2003.

9.Ke1

Here again it deserves attention for White to choose 9.Nbd2!?

 9...Bh5

9...Bxf3 10.gxf3 e6 11.b4 Be7, S.Zhigalko – Negi, Baku 2012 (11...Nd5

12.Bd2 g5 13.Na3 Bg7 14.Rc1²) 12.Na3 a5 (12...Nd5 13.Bd2 a5 14.Rb1²)
13.Rb1 axb4 14.cxb4 Nd4 15.Be2 Nd5 16.Bd2 Rd7 17.Rg1 Bf6 18.Nb5²
Ne7 19.Nd6+ Kc7 20.Bd1 Nef5 21.Nc4±

10.Nbd2

There arises a complicated position after 10.b4, Vysochin – Khalifman, St

Petersburg 2011, 10...g5„, followed by the development of Black’s dark-
squared bishop on the long diagonal.

10...Nd5

10...e5 11.Nb3 h6 (11...Bxf3 12.gxf3 Nd7 13.Rg1 g6 14.Bc4² Parligras –

Braunschlaeger, Bad Wiessee 2009) 12.Be2 Bg6 13.Be3 Nd5 14.Rd1 f6
15.Nh4 Bf7 16.Bd3²
 11.Nb3 e5 12.Be2!? Bg6

After 12...a5, besides 13.a4, White can also continue with 13.Nxe5 Re8
14.Bxh5 Rxe5+ 15.Be2 a4 16.Nd4 Bxc5 17.Nf3 Re7 18.Kf1 a3 19.g3 Rhe8
20.Bc4²

13.h4

13...a5

Black can regain his pawn in different ways, for example by exchanging
his light-squared bishop for the knight on b3, but then White would
maintain an advantage in the endgame thanks to his powerful bishop-pair.

13...f6 14.g3 Be4 (14...Bc2 15.Nfd2²) 15.Rh2²

13...h5 14.Kf1 a5 15.a4 Bc2 16.Bc4 f6 17.g3 Bxb3 18.Bxb3 Bxc5

19.Bc2²
 13...Bc2 14.Ng5 Rd7 15.Bc4 Nd8 16.Bb5 Nc6 (16...Rc7 17.Kd2 Bg6
18.h5 Bf5 19.Bd3 Bxd3 20.Kxd3 f6 21.c4²) 17.Bd2 Bxb3 18.axb3 Bxc5
19.Rd1 Rhd8 20.b4 Bb6 21.Bc1²
 14.h5 Bc2 15.Rh4!? Be7 16.Ra4 f6

Black prevents the appearance of the enemy knight on the g5-square in

many variations, for example: 16...Rhe8 17.Kf1 Bxb3 18.axb3 Bxc5
19.Ng5±

17.Bb5 Kc7

17...Bxb3 18.axb3 Bxc5 19.Bxc6 bxc6 20.Rxa5±

18.Bxc6 bxc6 19.Ke2 g6 20.Rxa5 Ra8 21.Ne1 Bf5 22.c4 Nb4 23.Bd2
Rxa5 24.Nxa5 Bxc5 25.a3 Na6 26.b4 Bd4 27.Rd1²

D) 5...e6 6.Na3
Now, White does not need to wait for the exchange of the c-pawns in the
centre (in order to be able to play Nc3), since his knight would follow
another route. There will not appear a position with an isolated pawn, but
White would have numerous other possibilities: Nb5, Nc4 or Bc4.
 We will analyse now: D1) 6...cxd4, D2) 6...Be7, D3) 6...a6, D4) 6...Qd8
and D5) 6...Nc6.

6...Nbd7 7.Bc4. White exploits the fact that the optimal d8-square for the
retreat of the enemy queen is temporary inaccessible. (It would be less
effective for him to opt here for 7.Nb5 Qc6 8.Ne5 Nxe5 9.dxe5 a6!=).
7...Qc6 (7...Qe4+ 8.Be2 cxd4 9.Nb5²; 8...a6, Thomas – Johansen, ICCF
2012, 9.Nc4 cxd4 10.Nxd4 Qxg2 11.Bf3 Qg6 12.Qe2 Be7 13.Bf4 0-0
14.0-0-0±) 8.0-0 a6 (Now, Black can counter 9.Ne5 with 9...Nxe5 10.dxe5
Nd7=) 9.Re1! Be7 (9...b5? 10.d5+–) 10.Ne5 Nxe5 11.dxe5 Nd5 12.Qg4±
Phillips – Hercules, Gauteng 2011.

6...Bd7 7.Nb5 Bxb5 (Following 7...Na6, White’s knight will create

problems for the opponent in many variations. 8.Be3 cxd4 9.Qxd4 Be7
10.Ne5 Qxd4 11.Bxd4 0-0 12.Nxd7 Nxd7 13.Bxa7 Ndc5 14.0-0-0±
Sermek – Ljubicic, Solin 1993; 8...Ng4 9.a4!? Nxe3 10.fxe3 Be7 11.Bd3²)
8.Bxb5+ Nbd7 (8...Nc6 9.0-0 Be7 10.c4 Qh5 11.Ne5± Kogan – Urena
Casacuberta, Escaldes 2016; 9...cxd4 10.Nxd4 Rc8, Pokazanjev – Yashin,
Denizli 2003, 11.Qa4 Bc5 12.Rd1±) 9.0-0 cxd4 10.Nxd4 Bc5 (10...Be7
11.Be2 Qd6 12.Bf3 Qc7 13.Qb3± Nicklich – Bringsken, ICCF 2010)
11.Be3 0-0 12.Qe2 a6 13.Ba4 Rad8 14.b4 Bxd4, Coffey – Kafka, Glasgow
2004 (14...Be7 15.c4 Qe5 16.a3²) 15.Bxd4 e5 16.Be3 Rc8 17.Rad1 Qe6
18.c4±

D1) 6...cxd4
Black clarifies immediately the situation in the centre. The arising pawn-
structure (pawns on a2, b2, c3, f2, g2, h2 against pawns on a7, b7, e6, f7,
g7, h7) is quite often encountered in this book, as we have already analysed
similar positions in Chapter 12.
7.Nb5
7...Qd8

Black’s alternative here is – 7...Na6 8.Nbxd4

About 8...Nc5 9.Be2 Be7 10.0-0 0-0 – see 8...Be7.

 8...Bd7 9.Bxa6 bxa6 10.0-0 Be7 11.Qe2 Bb5 12.Nxb5 axb5, Demidov –
Rossal, Moscow 2009, 13.a4 Qc4 (13...bxa4 14.Rxa4 0-0 15.Be3 a5
16.Rfc1±) 14.Qxc4 bxc4 15.a5 0-0 16.Ne5 Rfc8 17.Ra4 Ne4 18.Rxc4 Rxc4
19.Nxc4 Rc8 20.Nd2 Nd6 21.Nb1 Nc4 22.b4²
8...Bc5. This is not the best choice for Black. His bishop deprives the
knight on a6 of a good square and would come later under attack. 9.Be2 e5
(9...0-0 10.0-0 b6, Konkova – V.Savchenko, Dagomys 2006, 11.b4 Be7
12.a3 Bb7 13.c4²) 10.Nb3 Qxd1+ 11.Bxd1 Bd6 12.0-0 0-0 13.Re1²
8...e5. In general, this is a thematic move for Black, but here his pieces
are incapable of supporting his aggressive intentions. 9.Bb5+ Bd7 10.Qe2
Bxb5 11.Nxb5 e4 12.0-0 Be7 13.Nfd4 0-0 14.Be3 Rfc8 15.Rfd1 Qe5 16.f4
Qb8 (16...exf3 17.Qxf3²) 17.Nf5 Bc5, Melamed – Son, Yalta 1996, 18.b4
Bxe3+ 19.Qxe3±
8...Nc7. Black solves the problems with his “bad” knight, but loses
several tempi in the process. 9.Bd3 Be7 10.Bf4 Qd8 11.0-0 0-0 12.Re1
Ncd5 13.Bg3 Bd6 14.Bxd6 Qxd6 15.Ne5 b6 16.Qf3² Kazakos – Kallergis,
Ermioni 2006.
8...Be7. This is Black’s most popular move. 9.Be2 0-0 10.0-0
 The immediate development of the knight cannot solve all the problems
for Black. 10...Nc5 11.c4 Qd8 12.Bf4 Nh5 13.Be3 Qc7 14.Nb5 Qb8 15.b4
Nd7 16.c5² Radovici – Sveshnikov, Bucharest 1976.
10...Rd8 11.Bf4 Nh5 12.Be3 Nf6 13.Qc2 Bd7 14.Bf4 Bd6 15.Bg5 Be7
16.Rfe1 Rac8 17.Bxa6 bxa6 18.Nf5 Qxf5 19.Qxf5 exf5 20.Rxe7 Ne4
21.Be3 Kf8 22.Re5 Rb8 23.Bc1 f6 24.Rd5 Be8 25.Rxd8 Rxd8 26.Nd4 Kf7
27.Be3 Nc5 28.b3 Ne4 29.Ne2 Rd3 30.c4 Nc3 31.Kf1 Nxe2 32.Kxe2 Rd7
33.Rd1± Verenev – Kainz, ICCF 2007.
10...e5 11.Nb3 Qxd1 12.Rxd1 e4 13.Ne5² Wolf – Koppe, corr. 1988.
10...b6, Sequera Paolini – Allen, Buenos Aires 1992, 11.a4 Bb7 12.a5
Rfc8 13.Be3²

8.Nbxd4

Capturing 8.Qxd4 is also quite popular. After 8...Qxd4, White obtains an

advantage easily: 9.Nfxd4 Na6 10.Bf4 Bc5 11.Be2 0-0 12.0-0 Nd5 13.Bg3
Bd7 14.Rfd1 Rad8 15.Bf3± Mosquera – Ricardi, Calvia 2004. His only
problem may be in this variation how to counter Black’s move 8...a6, for
example: 9.Qxd8+ Kxd8 10.Nbd4 Bd6 or 10.Ne5 axb5 11.Nxf7+ Ke8
12.Nxh8 Bc5.

8...Be7

8...a6 9.Bd3 Bd6 (9...Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Re1 – see 8...Be7) 10.Bg5 Nbd7
11.Qe2 Qe7 (11...0-0? 12.Nxe6 fxe6 13.Qxe6+ Kh8 14.Qxd6+–) 12.Rd1
0-0 13.0-0 Re8, Godena – Johansen, Istanbul 2000, 14.Nd2 h6 15.Bh4 Qf8
16.Ne4 Nxe4 17.Qxe4 g6 18.Bc2²

8...Nc6 9.Bf4!? (9.Be3 – see variation D5) 9...Nxd4 10.Qxd4 Qxd4

11.Nxd4 a6 12.Be2 Bd7 13.0-0 Bc5, Sveshnikov – Makarov, Elista 1994,
14.Be5²

9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0

 10...b6

10...Nbd7. After this move, in connection with the possible penetration of

White’s knight to the d6-outpost, Black’s move b7-b6, would at least
require additional preparation, because his other set-ups would be much less
attractive. 11.Re1 a6 12.Qe2 Nb6 (12...Nc5 13.Bc2 b5 14.Nc6 Qc7
15.Nxe7+ Qxe7 16.Bg5 Bb7 17.Nd4 Rfd8, Demmer – Scheipl, Dresden
1999, 18.Bxf6 Qxf6 19.Qh5 Rd5 20.Qxh7+ Kf8 21.Qh8+ Ke7 22.Qh3±;
12...Re8 13.Bf4²) 13.Ne5 Bd7 14.Qf3 Nbd5 15.Qh3 g6 16.Bh6 Re8
17.Rad1± (17.Ndf3±).

10...a6 11.Re1 Qc7 (11...Nbd7 12.Qe2 – see 10...Nbd7) 12.Bg5 Nc6

(12...Nbd7 13.Qd2 Bd6 14.Rad1²) 13.Nxc6 bxc6, Paehtz – Botsari,
Kusadasi 2006, 14.Ne5 h6 15.Bh4 c5 16.Qe2² After 16...Bb7, there may
arise the following non-forced variation: 17.Ng6!? fxg6 (17...Rfe8
18.Nxe7+ Qxe7 19.Rad1±) 18.Qxe6+ Rf7 19.Bxg6 Raf8 20.Rad1 Qc6
21.Bxf7+ Rxf7 22.Qxc6 Bxc6 23.Re6 Bb5 24.b3 c4 25.Rd4 Bc5 26.Rd8+
Kh7 27.Bxf6 gxf6 28.b4 Ba7 29.Red6 Re7 30.Kf1 Kg7 31.Ra8 Rb7
32.a4+–
 11.Qe2 Bb7 12.Bf4 Nbd7 13.Rad1

13...Nc5

This move cannot solve all the problems for Black.

13...a6 14.Rfe1 Kh8 15.Bb1 Nd5, Kanmazalp – Ali Marandi, Sinop 2010,
16.Qd3 g6 17.Bh6 Re8 18.c4 N5f6 19.Ng5 Kg8 20.Nxf7 Kxf7 21.Nxe6+–

13...Qc8 14.Nxe6 Bxf3 15.gxf3 Re8, Giulian Jackson – Diaz Cesar,

Batumi 2018 (15...fxe6 16.Qxe6+ Rf7 17.Bc4 Qf8 18.Rxd7 Nxd7
19.Qxd7+–) 16.Ba6 Qc6 17.Nc7+–

14.Bc2 Qc8 15.Rfe1

 15...Be4 16.Bxe4 Ncxe4, Varadi – Salanki, Hungary 2006, 17.Ne5 Qb7
18.h4 Rad8 (18...Rfd8 19.g4 Nc5 20.b4 Na4 21.Nxf7 Kxf7 22.Qxe6+–)
19.g4 Nc5 20.Nec6 Ra8 (Black would lose the exchange after 20...Rd7
21.Nxe7+ Rxe7 22.Bd6+–) 21.g5 Nd5 22.Bg3±

D2) 6...Be7 7.Nb5

 7...Na6

The move 7...Qd8 is weaker. 8.dxc5 Bxc5 (8...Qxd1+ 9.Kxd1 Na6

10.b4±) 9.Qxd8+ Kxd8 (Now, White has an extra tempo in comparison to a
variation which used to be very fashionable at some moment 6...Nc6 7.Nb5
Qd8 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.Qxd8+ Kxd8.) 10.Bf4 Nd5 (10...Nbd7 11.Nc7 Rb8
12.0-0-0 Ke7 13.b4 Bxf2 14.Bd6+ Kd8 15.Nxe6+ fxe6 16.Bxb8±) 11.0-0-
0 (It was much simpler for White to have retreated his bishop, because
Black would have great problems to coordinate his pieces. 11.Bg3 Nc6
12.Ng5 Ke7 13.Ne4 Bb6 14.Bd6+ Kd7 15.Ba3±) 11...Ke7 12.Rxd5 exd5
13.Nc7 Bd6, Westerinen – Fomina, Helsinki 2019, 14.Nxd5+!? Kd7
15.Bb5+ Nc6 16.Ne5+ Ke6 17.Nxc6 Bxf4+ 18.Nxf4+ Kf5 19.Ne2 bxc6
20.Bxc6 Rb8 21.Nd4+ Kf6 22.b4 Bb7 23.Bxb7 Rxb7 24.Kb2±

8.Be2 0-0

8...cxd4 9.c4!? (9.Nbxd4 – see variation D1) 9...Qd8 10.0-0 0-0 11.Bf4 –
see 8...0-0.
 9.0-0

9...cxd4

9...Bd7 10.c4 Qc6 11.Ne5 Qc8 12.Nxd7 Qxd7 13.Be3² Hess –

Romanov, Groningen 2011.

9...Qd8 10.Bf4 cxd4 (10...Bd7 11.a4²; 10...b6, Martinez Reyes - Edouard,

chess.com 2020, 11.Qc1!? Bb7 12.Rd1 Nd5 13.Be5 Qc8 14.c4 Nf6
15.Qf4±) 11.Nfxd4 (11.Nbxd4²; 11.c4 – see 9...cxd4) 11...Nd5 (11...Bd7
12.Bf3 Nc5 13.Qe2²) 12.Bg3² Westerinen – Bartos, Tabor 2011.

9...Rd8 10.Ne5 cxd4 11.cxd4 Bd7?! 12.Bc4 Qe4 13.Re1 Qh4 (13...Qf5
14.g4±) 14.Nf3 Qg4 15.h3 Qg6 16.Bd3, Hassan – Nguyen Anh Dung,
Elista 1998, 16...Qh5 17.Re5+–

10.c4!?
White is trying to increase his space advantage.
 In principle, he has here a much simpler decision: 10.Nbxd4 – see
variation D1.

10...Qd8 11.Bf4

11...Nh5

This is Black’s most principled move. After his alternatives (White exerts
powerful positional pressure thanks to his space advantage and much more
actively placed pieces.), the character of the fight would not change at all:
11...Qb6 12.a3 (12.Be5 Rd8 13.Qd2 d3 14.Bxd3 Nc5 15.Bc7 Rxd3
16.Bxb6 Rxd2 17.Bxc5 Rd7 18.Bxa7±) 12...Bd7 13.Nfxd4 Rfd8, Lutzky –
Lutz, Germany 2004, 14.Qe1 Be8 (14...Bc5 15.Nb3 Bf8 16.Na5 Rac8
17.b4±) 15.Rd1²
11...Bd7 12.Nfxd4 Qb6 13.Bf3 (13.a3 – see 11...Qb6) 13...Bc6, Speets –
Nusink, Netherlands 1995, 14.Be3 Bxf3 15.Qxf3 Bc5 16.a4±

11...d3 12.Bxd3 Nc5 13.Bc2 Bd7 14.Nc3 (14.Nbd4²) 14...Bc6 15.Qe2

b6 16.Rad1 Qc8 17.Ne5± Henris – Goerens, Luxembourg 2000.
 12.Be5 f6 13.Bxd4 Nf4

The move 13...e5, Sibarevic – Kamber, Bern 1990, would not create any
problems for White – 14.Be3 Nf4 15.Bxf4 exf4 16.Qc1± or 14...Qxd1
15.Rfxd1 Nf4 16.Bxf4 exf4 17.a3 Nc5 18.Nc7 Rb8 19.b4 Ne6 20.Nd5 Bd8
21.c5±

14.Bxa7 (This decision is practically forced for White if he wishes to

fight for the advantage.) 14...b6 15.Ne1 Bb7 16.Bf3 Qc8!? (16...Bxf3
17.Qxf3 e5 18.a3 Qc8 19.Rc1 Nc7 20.Nd3 Nxd3 21.Qxd3 Nxb5 22.Qd5+
Kh8 23.cxb5 Qd8 24.Qb7 Bc5 25.b4 Bd4 26.Rc7 Rg8 27.Qc6+–) 17.Bxb7
Qxb7 18.Qf3 Qxf3 19.Nxf3 Rfc8 20.b3 Bc5 21.g3 Ng6 22.a3 Nc7 23.a4²
with the idea b3-b4. Black is very likely to regain his pawn, but White will
preserve his outside passed pawn on the queenside.

D3) 6...a6 7.Nc4

7...Nbd7
 7...Qd8 8.Be2 b5 (8...Nc6 9.Nfe5² Nxe5 10.dxe5 Qxd1+ 11.Bxd1 Nd7?!
(11...Nd5 12.Bf3²) 12.Bf3 Rb8 13.Bf4 b6 14.0-0-0± Perissinotto – Larghi,
Villa Guardia 2000) 9.Nce5 cxd4 (9...Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.dxc5 Qxd1
12.Rxd1 Bxc5, Kovacs – Bacsi, Budapest 2014, 13.a4±) 10.0-0 Be7
11.Nxd4 Bb7 12.Bf3 Qc8 13.a4± Garcia Blanco – Ramirez Medina, Gran
Canaria 2015.

8.Be2

Here, it deserves attention for White to try 8.a4!?, restricting Black’s

possibilities on the queenside.

8...cxd4

8...Be7 9.0-0 (9.a4!? 0-0 10.0-0 b5 11.Ne3 Qb7 12.axb5 axb5 13.Rxa8
Qxa8 14.Bxb5 Bb7, Uzonyi – Manszky, Hungary 2010, 15.dxc5 Nxc5
16.Nd4²) 9...b5 (9...0-0 10.Re1 cxd4, Gratton – Vidmar, Nova Gorica 2018,
11.Nxd4²) 10.Nfd2 (White must control the e4-square. It would not work
for him to play 10.Nfe5? bxc4 11.Bf3 Ne4–+) 10...Qc6 (or 10...Ra7 11.Bf3
Qf5 12.Na5 cxd4 13.Nc6 Rc7 14.Nxd4²) 11.Bf3 Nd5 12.Ne3 N7f6
13.dxc5 Qxc5 14.Nb3 Qd6 15.a4 bxa4, Mammadov – Rasulov,
Nakhchivan 2012, 16.Rxa4 0-0 17.Rd4²

8...b5 9.Ne3 Qd6 (9...Qc6 10.a4 b4 11.cxb4 cxb4 12.Bd2 Bb7 13.Rc1
Qd6 14.Nc4 Qd5 15.a5 Be7 16.Qa4 0-0 17.Bxb4 Bxb4+ 18.Qxb4±
S.Zhigalko – M.Hoffmann, Bad Wiessee 2016) 10.a4 b4 11.Nc4 Qc7,
Gavritenkov – Zhelnin, Tula 2000, 12.cxb4 cxb4 (12...cxd4 13.Bd2²)
13.Bd2 Be7 14.Rc1²

9.Nxd4
 9...e5

9...Qxg2. Black accepts the pawn-sacrifice, but this would provide White
with powerful initiative – 10.Bf3 Qh3 (10...Qg6 11.Kf1 h6 12.Rg1 Qh7
13.Bf4 g5 14.Bc7 Rg8 15.Qe2 h5, Hoffmann – Chamorro, Email 2002,
16.Nd6+ Bxd6 17.Bxd6 g4 18.Bh1 Nb6 19.c4+– It also deserves attention
for White to try here 11.Qe2 Bc5 12.Be3 0-0 13.0-0-0ƒ) 11.Bf4 e5 12.Nxe5
Nxe5 13.Bxe5 Be7 14.Qe2 0-0 15.Rg1 h5 16.Rg3 Qd7 17.Bxh5 Nxh5
18.Qxh5 f6 19.0-0-0 fxe5 20.Rxg7+ Kxg7 21.Rg1+– Schmittdiel – Hager,
Passau 1999.

9...Qc5 10.0-0 Be7 11.Re1 0-0 12.Bf4 Nd5 (12...e5 13.Nb3 Qc7 14.Bf1
exf4 15.Rxe7²) 13.Bg3 N7f6, Breder – Fogarasi, Budapest 2009, 14.Bd3
Bd7 15.Qf3²
9...Bc5 10.0-0 0-0 (10...Bxd4 11.cxd4 0-0 12.Bf4±) 11.Nb3 Ba7 12.Bf4
Nc5 13.Bd6 Nxb3 14.Qxb3 Re8 15.Bf3 Qg5 16.Rad1 Bd7 17.Qxb7 Bb5
18.Ne5 Bxf1 19.Qxf7+ Kh8, Raja – Aaryan, New Delhi, 2019, 20.Rxf1+–
 9...Be7 10.0-0 0-0 (10...Qc5 11.Re1 – see 9...Qc5) 11.b3 Re8 (11...Qe4
12.Bf3 Qg6 13.Re1 Bc5 14.b4 Ba7 15.Nd6 Nd5 16.Bxd5 exd5 17.N4f5
Kh8, Sermek – Vatter, Cattolica 1994, 18.Qf3 Nb6 19.Nxc8 Nxc8
20.Qxd5±) 12.Be3. White prevents the evacuation of the enemy queen
away from the danger zone via the c5-square. 12...e5 13.Nf5 Qxd1
14.Rfxd1±

10.Nf5 Nc5

This move is more precise than 10...Qxd1+ 11.Bxd1 g6 12.Nfd6+ Bxd6

13.Nxd6+ Ke7 14.Nc4 b5 15.Na5 Nc5 16.0-0 Bf5 17.Bg5² Fillon –
Salaun, ICCF 2008.

11.Nfe3 Qxd1+ 12.Nxd1 Nfd7 13.0-0 b5 14.Na5

14...e4 15.c4 Ne5 16.Nc3 f5 17.Be3

17.cxb5 axb5 18.Bxb5+ Bd7 19.Nc4 Bxb5 20.Nxb5 Nxc4 21.Nc7+ Kf7
22.Nxa8 Bd6 23.b3 Be5 24.bxc4 Bxa1 25.Nb6 Bd4= Sanner – Pavlicek,
ICCF 2011. The extra pawn is practically immaterial.
17...Kf7 18.cxb5 axb5 19.b4 Ncd3 20.a3²

D4) 6...Qd8 7.Nc4

7...Be7
Black plans later to develop his knight to the d7-square.

7...Nc6 8.Be3
 8...cxd4 9.Nxd4 Nd5, Scrimgour – Tunik, Walbrzych 2018 (9...Nxd4
10.Bxd4 Be7 11.Bd3 0-0 12.Qe2 Nd5 13.0-0 Qc7 14.Be5 Qc6 15.Bg3±
Paulik – Kusnierz, ICCF 2009) 10.Qg4!? Nxe3 11.fxe3 Nxd4 12.exd4 h5
(12...g6 13.Qg3 Be7 14.h4 h5 15.Bd3±) 13.Qf4 Qf6 14.Qe4²
8...Nd5 9.Bd3 cxd4 (9...b5 10.Nce5 Nxe5 11.Nxe5 c4 12.Bc2²) 10.Nxd4
Be7 (10...Nxe3 11.fxe3 Be7 12.Qf3 – see 10...Be7) 11.Qf3 Nxe3 12.fxe3.
White’s powerful knight on d4 is a key-piece in his set-up. Black has a
superior pawn-structure and a bishop-pair, but it would not be easy for him
to obtain a comfortable position. 12...Qd5 (12...Bd7, Bar Ziv – Primakov,
ICCF 2014, 13.0-0-0 Nxd4 14.exd4 Bc6 15.Qe2 0-0 16.Kb1 Rb8 17.Ne5²)
13.Nxc6 Qxc6 (13...Qxf3 14.gxf3 bxc6 15.0-0-0 0-0 16.Be4²) 14.Qxc6+
bxc6 15.Be4 Bb7 16.Na5 0-0-0 17.Bxc6 Ba6 18.a4 Rd6 19.Bb5 Bb7
20.Nxb7 Kxb7 21.Rf1± Fritsche – Mislin, Email 2008.

8.Bd3 0-0

About 8...Nbd7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Bf4 – see 8...0-0.

 8...cxd4 9.Nxd4 0-0 10.0-0 Nbd7 (10...Nc6 11.Nxc6 bxc6, Olafsson –
Cramling, Osterskars 1995, 12.Re1 Qc7 13.Qf3²; 10...a6 11.Qf3 Nbd7
12.Re1 Nd5 13.Qh3 g6 14.Bh6 Re8 15.Rad1±) 11.Re1!? (This move is
more precise than the straightforward line: 11.Qf3 Nc5 12.Bc2 Qd5
13.Qe2 b6² Willemze – Romanov, Groningen 2013.) 11...Nc5 12.Bc2 Qd5
13.Ne5 a5 (13...Bd7? 14.b4+–) 14.Bg5 h6?! 15.Bf4 a4 16.Qd2+– with the
idea 17.Bxh6. Black will have a hard time to defend against his opponent’s
numerous threats.

9.0-0 Nbd7

9...b6 10.dxc5 Bxc5, Kaidanov – Kudrin, Tulsa 2008, 11.Bf4 Bb7 12.Qe2
Nbd7 13.Rad1 h6 14.Rfe1²

10.Bf4

10...b6

10...cxd4 11.Nxd4 Nc5, Zaninotto – Nakar, Warsaw 2016, 12.Bc2 a5

13.Qe2±
 11.Qe2 Bb7 12.Rfd1 cxd4 13.Nxd4 Nc5 14.Bc2 Qd5
Black is trying to get rid of the positional bind.
15.Qf1 Qh5 16.Re1

16...g5. Black has a difficult choice here, because he must parry somehow
the threat 17.Re5. (It is possible that the least of evils for him is the line:
16...Ba6 17.Nc6 Rfe8 18.Rad1²) 17.Be5 Nd5, Svane – Wagner, Zuerich
2019, 18.Rad1 Rfd8 19.h3±

D5) 6...Nc6
 7.Be3
This move leads to a complicated position, but there is no simple decision
for White.

Black would be quite happy with variations of the type: 7.Nb5 Qd8
8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.Qxd8+ Kxd8 10.Bf4 Ne4, or 10.b4 Bb6 11.Nd6 Ke7
12.Nc4 Ne4 13.Nb6 axb6∞

7...cxd4

7...Ng4 8.Bc4. Now, White has an additional resource like the pawn-
break d4-d5. 8...Nxe3 (8...Qe4 9.Qe2; after 9...cxd4, White can play
10.Bd3! Qd5 11.Nb5 Qd8 12.Bf4±; while following 9...Nxe3 10.fxe3
cxd4, he will continue with 11.Nb5 Rb8 12.cxd4 Bb4+ 13.Nc3 0-0 14.a3
Bxc3+ 15.bxc3 b6 16.Bd3 Qg4 17.0-0²) 9.fxe3 Qd8, Milliet – Botsari,
Novi Sad 2009 (It is bad for Black to play here 9...Qe4?!, because White
does not need to protect his pawn on e3. 10.0-0! Be7 11.d5 exd5 12.Bxd5
Qxe3+ 13.Kh1 Be6 14.Nc4 Qh6 15.Bxc6+ bxc6 16.Nd6+ Kf8 17.Ne5 Bf6
18.Nxc6± Ali Marandi – Vysochin, Lvov 2013) 10.d5 exd5 11.Qxd5 Qxd5
12.Bxd5 Be7 (12...Bd7 13.Ng5 Ne5 14.Nc4 Bc6 15.Nxe5 Bxd5 16.e4 Be7
17.exd5 Bxg5 18.Rd1²) 13.0-0-0 0-0 14.Nc4²

8.Nb5 Qd8

8...Qd7. After this move the difference in comparison to the main line is
that after an exchange on c6, Black can capture with his queen, preserving
the elasticity of his pawn-structure. His rook can be developed later to the
d8-square. 9.Nbxd4

The move 9...Nxd4 would not create any serious problems for White.
10.Bxd4 a6 11.Bd3 Be7 12.Qe2 0-0 13.Rd1 Qc7 14.0-0 b5, Godena –
David, Rome 2016, 15.Ng5 g6 (15...h6 16.Nh7 Nxh7 17.Qe4 Ng5
18.Qxa8±) 16.Be5 Qb6 17.Qf3 Bb7 18.Qh3±

9...Bd6 10.Nxc6 (10.Qa4!? 0-0 11.0-0-0 Nxd4 12.Qxd4 Be7 13.Qc4

Nd5 14.Bd3²; 10.Nb5!? Bb8 11.Bc5 Ne4 12.Ba3²) 10...bxc6 11.Bd4 Bb7
12.Ne5 Qe7 13.Nc4 Bc7 14.Qb3 Ba6, Van Foreest – Yu Yangyi, Wijk aan
Zee 2020, 15.0-0-0 0-0 16.Qa3 Qxa3 17.Nxa3 Bxf1 18.Rhxf1²
 9...a6 10.Bd3 (10.Nxc6 Qxc6, Al Shamsi – Yasmin, Ajman 2019, 11.Ne5
Qe4 12.Qd4 Qxd4 13.Bxd4²) 10...Bc5 11.0-0 Nxd4 (11...b6 12.Nxc6
Qxc6 13.Ne5 Qc7 14.Qa4+ Bd7 15.Qf4²) 12.cxd4 Be7 13.Ne5 Qd5
14.Bc4 Qd6 15.Bf4 Qd8 16.Re1 0-0, Xie Jianjun – Xu Yinglun, Changsha
2019, 17.Rc1. Black has difficulties to complete the development of his
queenside: 17...b5 18.Nc6±; 17...Bd7 18.Qf3²
9...Nd5 10.Bd2

10...Nxd4, Blomqvist – Gajewski, chess.com 2020, 11.Ne5!? Qd6

12.cxd4 a6 13.Qh5 g6 14.Qf3²
10...Be7 11.Bd3 0-0 12.0-0 Nxd4 13.Nxd4 b6, Plenca – Beerdsen, Split
2019, 14.Qf3 Bb7 15.Qh3 Nf6 16.Rfe1 Qd5 17.Rad1² Qxa2?! 18.c4 Rad8
19.Bc3 Qa4 20.Nb5 Be4 21.b3 Qxb3 22.Bxf6 Rxd3 (22...Bxf6 23.Bxe4
Qxh3 24.gxh3±) 23.Rxd3 Bxd3 24.Bxe7±
10...Bd6 11.Nxc6 Qxc6 (Now, Black must choose between losing his
castling rights, or the deformation of his pawn-structure in the variation
11...bxc6, Van Foreest – Duda, Wijk aan Zee 2020, 12.c4 Nf6 13.Bd3!? 0-0
14.Qc2 e5 15.0-0 Re8 16.Rfe1²) 12.Nd4 Qb6 13.Bb5+ Kf8 14.0-0 Qc7,
Salgado Lopez – Wojtaszek, Dubai 2014, 15.h3±
 9.Nbxd4

We will analyse now: D5a) 9...Nxd4 and D5b) 9...Nd5.

9...Be7 10.Nxc6 Qxd1+ (10...bxc6 11.Qxd8+) 11.Rxd1 bxc6 12.Ne5

Bb7, Renet – A.Sokolov, Switzerland 2006, 13.c4!? It is essential for White
to prevent his opponent’s manoeuvre Nf6-d5, followed by f7-f6. 13...Bb4+
14.Ke2 Rc8 15.Nd3 Be7 16.Nc5 Ba8 17.f3±

9...Bd7 10.Nxc6 Bxc6 (It would not be logical for Black to play here
10...bxc6, since the development of the bishop to the d7-square would then
become senseless. 11.Bf4 Qb6 12.Qc2 Nd5 13.Bg3± Ferretti – Bancod,
Bratto 1995) 11.Qxd8+ Kxd8 (11...Rxd8 12.Bxa7±) 12.0-0-0+ Kc8
(12...Kc7 13.Bf4+ Kb6 14.Ne5 Be8 15.Nc4+ Kc6 16.Be2±; 13...Kc8
14.Ne5 Be8 15.Be2±) 13.Ne5 Be8, Tiviakov – Rossi, Saint Vincent 2006,
14.Bb5!? Ng4 (14...Bxb5 15.Nxf7 Rg8 16.Rd8+–; 15...Be7 16.Nxh8 Be8
17.Rhe1+–) 15.Bxe8 Nxe5 16.Bd4±

9...Qc7 10.Qa4N. White wishes to reach a complicated position (After the

usual line: 10.Bd3 Nxd4 11.Bxd4 Bc5 12.Bxc5 Qxc5, there would not
remain sufficient resources for a tough fight.).

10...Be7 11.Nxc6 bxc6 12.Bf4 Qb6 13.0-0-0 0-0 14.Bg3 Nh5 15.Bd3²;
14...a5 15.Ne5²
10...Nd5 11.0-0-0 Nxe3 (11...Bd7 12.Nb5 Qd8 13.Bf4 Rc8 14.Nd6+
Bxd6 15.Bxd6 Nce7 16.Qxa7 Ra8? 17.Qxb7 Rxa2 18.Bb5 Bxb5 19.Qxb5+
Qd7 20.Qxd7+ Kxd7 21.Ba3+–) 12.fxe3 Bc5 13.Kb1 (He has another
decision at his disposal: 13.Bb5 0-0 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.Qxc6 Qxc6 16.Nxc6
Bb7 17.Ncd4²; 13...Bd7 14.Nxc6 bxc6 15.Rxd7 cxb5 16.Rxc7 Bxe3+
17.Kc2 bxa4 18.Rc4 a3 19.b4² White’s queenside pawns are advancing.)
13...Bd7 14.Nb5 Qb6 15.Qg4 0-0-0 16.Qxg7 Ne7 17.Rxd7 Kxd7 18.Qxf7
Kc8 19.Nbd4 Nd5 20.Qxe6+ Kb8 21.Qxb6 Bxb6 22.e4 Ne3 23.g3 Bxd4
24.Nxd4 Rde8 25.Bd3²
10...Bd7 11.Nb5. White has very good prospects in the forthcoming
complicated battle. 11...Qc8 (11...Qd8 12.Bf4 Nd5 13.Rd1² Nxf4?
14.Qxf4 Rc8 15.Ng5 Qf6 16.Qxf6 gxf6 17.Nxf7±) 12.Bf4 Nd5 13.Ng5
(13.Nd6+ Bxd6 14.Bxd6 Ne5 15.Qe4 Nxf3+ 16.Qxf3 Qc6 17.Ba3 0-0-0
18.0-0-0 f6 19.Be2²) 13...a6 (13...Ncb4 14.Ne4 Qc6 15.Bg3²) 14.Nd6+
Bxd6 15.Bxd6 Nce7 16.Qa3 Nf5 17.Ne4 Bc6 18.Bc5 Nde3 19.Bxe3 Bxe4
20.Bc5²
 D5a) 9...Nxd4 10.Bxd4

This position is often reached in the French Defence.

10...Be7
This is Black’s most popular scheme.

10...Qc7 11.Bb5+ Bd7 12.Bxd7+ Qxd7 13.Ne5 Qb5 (13...Qd5? 14.Qa4+

b5 15.Qa6±) 14.a4. Now, White cannot give a check with his queen from
the a4-square. 14...Qd5 15.Qe2 Qe4, Anand – Pelletier, Kemer 2007
(15...a6 16.0-0 Be7, Palac – Pelletier, Heraklio 2007, 17.h3!? 0-0 18.Rfd1
Qe4 19.Qxe4 Nxe4 20.Bb6²) 16.Qxe4!? Nxe4 17.0-0-0² White is better in
this endgame mostly because of his pawn-majority on the queenside and
more actively placed pieces. Black’s rook is squeezed with the protection of
the pawn on a7 and he would be reluctant to advance it, because the b6-
square would be weakened.
10...Bd6 11.Qd2!? Now, Black cannot castle, because he must lose time
at first to evacuate his bishop away from the d-file. (His standard scheme of
development would also lead to an advantage for White: 11.Bd3 Qc7
12.Qe2 Bd7 13.0-0-0 Bc5 14.Be5 Qb6 15.Nd2 Qc6?! Popovic – Schebler,
Belgium 2009, 16.Be4 Nxe4 17.Nxe4 0-0-0 18.Rd6 Bxd6 19.Nxd6+ Kb8
20.Nxf7+ Ka8 21.Rd1+–) 11...Be7 (11...0-0?? 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.0-0-0 Be7
14.Qh6 Qb6 15.Rd4 f5 16.Bd3 Kh8 17.Rh4+–; 11...Qe7 12.0-0-0±) 12.Bd3
0-0 13.0-0 b6 14.Rad1 Qc7, Wang Hao – Bocharov, Moscow 2019, 15.Be5
Qc6 16.Qg5 Bb7 17.Nd4 Qd5 18.Rfe1±

11.Bd3

11...0-0

11...Qc7 12.0-0 0-0 13.Re1 (13.Be5 Qb6 14.Qc2 h6 15.a4 a5 16.Rad1

Rd8 17.Bb5 Nd5 18.c4 Nb4, Salgado Lopez – Cheparinov, Camarinas
2013, 19.Qe4 Nc6 20.Bc3 Bd7 21.Qg4 g6 22.Qf4 g5 23.Qg3±; 18.Qe4!?
Bd7 19.Qg4 Bf6 20.Bxd7 Rxd7 21.Rxd5+–) 13...Bd7 14.Ng5 g6 (White
obtains a clear advantage after 14...h6 15.Bxf6 Bxf6 16.Nh7 Rfd8
17.Nxf6+ gxf6 18.Qg4+ Kf8 19.Re3±, as well as following 14...Rfd8
15.Bxf6 Bxf6 16.Bxh7+ Kf8 17.Qh5±) 15.Qf3 Qc6 16.Qe2 Rfd8 17.Qe5
(threatening 18.Ne4) 17...Qd5 18.Qf4 h6 19.Nf3 Kg7 20.Be4 Qb5 21.a4
Qa6 22.b4 Bxa4 23.Be5 Rac8 24.h4 h5 25.g4 hxg4 26.Nh2 1–0 Almasi –
Ronchetti, Reggio Emilia 2008.
 11...Qa5 12.0-0 0-0 13.Ne5 Qc7 14.Qf3 Bd7, Van Mechelen – Mattheys,
Charleroi 2010, 15.Rae1 Rfd8 16.Qh3 Bc5? (16...Be8 17.Ng4 h5 18.Nxf6+
Bxf6 19.Bxf6 gxf6 20.Re3±) 17.Nxf7 e5 (17...Kxf7 18.Bxf6 Kxf6
19.Re3‚) 18.Nh6+ Kf8 (18...gxh6 19.Qxh6 exd4 20.Qg5+–) 19.Qg3 Bxd4
20.cxd4 gxh6 21.dxe5 Bc6 22.Bc4±

11...Bd7 12.Ne5 (12.Qe2!? 0-0 13.0-0-0) 12...Bc6 (12...0-0 13.Qc2 h6

14.h4 Qa5 15.g4‚; 12...Qc7 13.Nxd7 Nxd7, Zimmermann – Haase, St
Ingbert 1993, 14.Bxg7 Rg8 15.Bd4 0-0-0 16.g3±; 15...Rxg2 16.Qf3 Rg5
17.0-0-0 Ne5 18.Bxe5 Rxe5 19.Bxh7±) 13.Nxc6 bxc6 14.0-0 0-0,
Neubauer – Bokros, Szentgotthard 2010, 15.Qe2 Qc7 16.Be5 Qb6
17.Rad1²

12.Qc2 h6
Black is forced to advance one of his kingside pawns and this facilitates
considerably the development of White’s attack.

12...g6 13.h4 (13.0-0-0 Qa5 14.Kb1 b5 15.h4 Rd8 16.h5 Nxh5 17.Rxh5
gxh5 18.Qd2+– Zatonskih – Nguyen, Saint Louis 2017) 13...Nh5 (13...h5?
14.Bxg6 fxg6 15.Qxg6+ Kh8 16.Ng5+–; 13...Qa5 14.h5 Nxh5 15.b4 Qd5
16.0-0-0 Bd7? 17.c4 Qd6 18.Rxh5 gxh5 19.Bxh7#; 16...f5 17.Be5 Qc6
18.Qd2 Bd7 19.Bc2 Rad8 20.Rxh5 gxh5 21.Qh6 Rf7 22.Ng5+–) 14.0-0-0
Qa5, Okhotnik – Karasev, Acqui Terme 2015, 15.g4 Nf4 16.h5 Nxd3+
(16...Qxa2 17.hxg6 fxg6 18.Rxh7 Kxh7 19.Bxg6+ Nxg6 20.Rh1+–)
17.Qxd3 g5 (17...Qxa2? 18.hxg6 fxg6 19.Rxh7+–) 18.Ne5 Bf6 19.f4 gxf4
20.Nc4 Qd8 21.Bxf6 Qxf6 22.g5 Qf5 23.Qd6 b5 24.g6 bxc4 25.gxf7+
Kxf7 26.Rhg1+–
 13.Rg1!?
This move is more dynamic than 13.0-0-0. White can still castle later
while the extra tempo for the attack may be very important at the moment.
13...b6
After Black’s alternatives White maintains powerful initiative: 13...Qc7
14.g4 Rd8 15.g5 hxg5 16.Be5 Bd6 17.Rxg5 Bxe5 18.Nxe5 Bd7 19.0-0-0±

13...Qa5 14.g4 Rd8 15.g5 hxg5 16.Rxg5 Rd5 17.h4 Bd7 (17...Ne8
18.Rxd5 Qxd5 19.Qe2 Nf6 20.0-0-0 Qxa2 21.Rg1 Bd7 22.Qe3 Kf8
23.Qg5+–) 18.Bc4 Rxg5 19.hxg5 Ng4 20.g6 Qh5 21.0-0-0±

13...Nd5 14.0-0-0 Bf6 15.Be4 Qa5 16.g4 Qxa2? 17.g5 hxg5 18.Nxg5
Rd8 19.Bxf6 Qa1+ 20.Qb1 Qxb1+ 21.Bxb1 gxf6 22.Nxe6+ Kh8 23.Rd4+–

14.0-0-0 (threatening 15.Bxf6 Bxf6 16.Bh7+–) 14...Nd5 15.g4 Bb7 16.g5

hxg5 (16...h5 17.Be5 Bd6 18.Bh7+ Kh8 19.Rd4 Bxe5 20.Nxe5 g6 21.Bxg6
fxg6 22.Qxg6+–) 17.h4 Qc7 18.Nxg5 e5 19.Bh7+ Kh8 20.Be4 exd4
21.Bxd5 g6 22.Bxb7 Qxb7 23.Rxd4±
 D5b) 9...Nd5
This is the most principled move for Black.
10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.Bd2
In this very often reached type of a pawn-structure White maintains an
advantage, but it is still too far from the technical stage of the game. He has
the comfortable c4-square for his pieces, but Black compensates this with
the powerful knight on the d5-outpost. White must try to follow this
possible plan: to advance c3-c4 and later Bd3, 0-0, Bc3, Ne5. His major
pieces must be transferred to the kingside although the circumstances may
influence all this.

11...Qb6
Black prevents temporarily the realisation of his opponent’s general plan.
After 12.c4, he would have the resource 12...Bc5 13.cxd5? Bxf2+ 14.Ke2
Ba6#

It would be less precise for Black to play with the same idea the move
11...Bc5. His bishop prevents the advance of the enemy c-pawn indeed, but
can come under an attack by White’s pieces. 12.Bd3 0-0 13.Qc2 h6 14.0-0²
Qf6, Klein – Cornette, chess.com 2018, 15.c4 Nb4 (15...Nf4 16.Bh7+ Kh8
17.Bc3 Qe7 18.Be4±) 16.Bh7+ Kh8 17.Qb1 Bd6 18.Bc3 Qe7 19.a3 Na6
20.Be4 Bb7 21.b4±

The alternatives for Black here are only seldom played:

11...f6?! 12.Qc2 Kf7 13.Bd3 g6 14.h4 Bd6 15.h5 Ne7 16.0-0-0 Bb7,
Exler – Morgunov, Vienna 2019, 17.Nd4+–
11...Bb7 12.Bd3 Bd6 13.0-0 0-0 14.Qe2 Qc7, Yartsev – Balabanov, ICCF
2011 (14...Nf6 15.Rad1²) 15.c4!? Nf4 16.Bxf4 Bxf4 17.c5²

11...Qc7 12.c4 Nf6 13.Bd3 Bb7, Zvjaginsev – Gorovets, Minsk 2017

(13...Rb8 14.Qc2²) 14.Bc3 c5 15.Qe2 Bd6 16.0-0-0 (It is also possible for
White to play here immediately 16.Ne5 Bxg2 17.Rg1 Bxe5 18.Qxe5
Qxe5+ 19.Bxe5²) 16...0-0 17.Rhe1 Rfd8 18.Ne5±

11...Be7 12.Bd3 0-0 13.Qc2 Nf6 14.0-0 c5, Salgado Lopez – Fier,
chess24.com 2020, 15.c4 Bb7 16.Ne5 Bd6 17.Bc3 Qc7 18.f4²

11...Bd6 12.c4 Nf6 13.Bc3 Ne4?! (13...e5 14.c5²; 13...0-0 14.Bd3²)

14.Qd4 Nxc3 15.Qxg7 Rf8 16.Qxc3 Qe7, Ferreira – Fier, Evora 2019,
17.c5!? Bxc5 18.0-0-0 f6 (18...Bd7 19.Ne5±; 18...Bb7 19.Kb1±) 19.Nd2
Kf7 20.Ne4 Bb4 21.Qg3 Rg8 22.Qh3±

11...Rb8 12.c4 Nf6 13.Qc2 Bb4 14.Bxb4 Rxb4 15.Bd3 c5 16.0-0-0 Qa5
(16...Qc7 17.Rhe1 0-0 18.Ne5 Rd8 19.g4ƒ) 17.a3 (17.Kb1!? 0-0 18.Ne5
Bb7 19.Rhe1 Rb8 20.b3 Bxg2 21.Qb2 Ba8 22.Rg1‚) 17...Rb6 18.Ne5 0-0
(18...Nd7 19.Qe2 Nxe5 20.Qxe5 0-0 21.Rd2±) 19.Qe2 Bb7 20.h4 Rb8
21.Rd2 Bxg2 22.Rg1 Bh3 23.Nc6 Rxc6 24.Qe5 Rd8 25.Qxf6 g6 26.h5+–

12.Bd3

It is still too early for the move 12.Ne5, because of 12...Qc7= Wang Hao
– Laznicka, Vietnam 2016.
 12...Ba6
12...Qxb2?! Accepting this pawn-sacrifice provides White with powerful
initiative. 13.Rb1 Qxa2 (13...Qa3 14.0-0 Be7 15.Qc2 a5 16.Rfe1 Ba6?
17.Bxa6 Rxa6 18.Rb8+ Bd8 19.Bg5+–; 15...Nf6 16.c4 0-0 17.Rfe1 Bd7
18.Re3 Qd6 19.Ne5©) 14.c4 Nf6 15.0-0 Qa3 16.Qe2 Be7 17.Rfd1 0-0
18.Ne5 a5 19.Be3 Ba6 20.g4!? Bd6 21.Bd4 Bxe5 22.Qxe5 Rfd8 23.g5 Ne8
24.Qe4 g6 25.Qe5 Rxd4 26.Qxd4±

13.c4!?

It is also good for White to play here 13.Bxa6 Qxa6 14.Qe2 Qxe2+
15.Kxe2 Bd6 16.Rhd1 Ke7 17.c4 Nf6 18.Ba5 Rab8 19.b3 Ne4 20.Rd4 f5
21.Rad1 Rb7 22.R4d3 Rc8 23.Nd2 Nf6, Rohacek – Mihok, Slovakia 2017,
24.Bc3²

13...Bb4 14.0-0 Bxd2 15.Qxd2 Nb4 16.Rfd1 0-0

16...Rd8 17.Qc3 Nxd3 18.Rxd3 0-0 19.Rad1 Rxd3 20.Rxd3 f6 21.b3 Rd8
22.h3 c5 23.Rxd8+ Qxd8 24.Qe3. The arising material ratio is in favour of
White and the defects of Black’s pawn-structure only emphasize the role of
this factor. 24...Qd1+ 25.Ne1 e5 26.Kf1 Qd4 27.Qf3 e4 28.Qg3²

17.Qc3
It is also possible for White to play here 17.Bf1 Rad8 18.Qe2 c5 19.Ne5²,
but in this line it would be very likely that the knights would be exchanged
and this would not be in favour of White, who has the better pawn-
structure. In general, his advantage would be much more difficult to realise
without knights present on the board, moreover that in the process of the
fight for the d-file the rooks may be exchanged as well. If only the queens
and light-squared bishops remain on the board, the extra pawn-island, due
to the isolated c5-pawn would not be so important. It would be much better,
as we have seen in our previous notes, to preserve a queen and a knight,
which are generally stronger than a queen and a bishop.

17...Nxd3 18.Rxd3 Rfd8 19.Rad1 c5 20.Ne5±

 Part 3
1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6

In the third and final part of our book we consider the variations arising
after the move 2...Nf6. Nowadays this can definitely be regarded as Black’s
main response to the Alapin system. This was not always the case, however.
When this opening was introduced, around the start of the twentieth
century, the classical principles were considered to be axiomatic, so to
voluntarily concede space and waste time moving the same piece was
considered heretical. But then everything started to change at great speed,
chess included. Laws that had seemed unshakable only yesterday might be
overturned and even forgotten tomorrow. In this regard it is significant that
the variation with 2.”3 Nf6 was played for the first time in a game between
two remarkable players: one was the main populariser of
“hypermodernism” while the other was one of the founders of the
movement. In the game Tartakower – Reti (Vienna 1920) White won quite
convincingly, which did not contribute to the popularity of the move 2...Nf6
at that time. This is quite paradoxical, though, as the 1920s saw the
successful introduction of Alekhine’s Defence (and if you look closely at
the variation with 2.c3 Nf6, it is nothing but an improved version of
Alekhine’s Defence) but that was indeed the case. It took no more than a
short time for the hypermodern ideas, only recently considered innovative,
to become in their turn the new orthodoxy. The concept of the variation 2.”3
Nf6 for Black, to concede space temporarily, with the idea of attacking and
destroying the opponent’s pawn-centre later, began to seem extremely
sound and natural. From the 1950s onwards we can see a rapid rise in the
popularity of this system, somewhat overshadowing the 2...d5 line and this
ratio of popularity has been more or less maintained up to the present day.
However, we have already discussed the comparative popularity of the
moves 2...d5 and 2...Nf6 in its historical context in the introduction to the
previous section, so there is no point in repeating it.
 An important feature of the 2.”3 Nf6 variation is that White (unlike in the
2.”3 d5 line) has a wide choice of different schemes and move orders, right
from the start (even the move 3.d3 has some venom, but we decided not to
consider such a minimalist approach). Of course, this places serious
demands on Black in terms of preparation, especially as he must play with
tremendous accuracy in many lines in order to obtain an acceptable
position. But as is often the case in such situations, White is also faced with
some difficult choices. After patiently and thoroughly exploring numerous
theoretical highways and byways, the authors have nevertheless decided to
focus on the move order which has traditionally been considered the main
one, but with a few refinements. After 3.e5 Nd5 we recommend the move
4.Nf3. Although the move 4.d4 is more common, developing the knight is
notably more popular in grandmaster play. Whether grandmasters choose
this move order for the same reasons as the authors, or for different reasons
of their own, we can only guess.

In Chapter 15 we analyse the less popular responses for Black on move 4.

Some of these are just experimental and provocative in nature and do not
particularly aspire to equality. Of course, this does not apply to the logical
and sound move 4...d6, but in most cases this will quickly transpose to the
main lines, which we shall cover later under the move orders 4...e6 or
4...Nc6.
The bizarre move 4...b6 deserves close attention,
 because as a rule it leads, after 5.d4 cxd4 6.cxd4 e6, to positions which we
try to avoid in a different move order. To prevent this transposition we
suggest an interesting new idea – 5.Bd3!?, which leads to fresh and little-
studied positions where White’s chances are slightly better.
Next we begin consideration of one of Black’s two main responses on
move 4, namely 4...e6. Here, once again we deviate from the mainstream.
The most popular move has always been 5.d4, but the move order with
5.Bc4 seems more flexible to us.

In Chapter 16 we deal with all Black’s responses except the main one,
5...d6. It is important that now after 5...b6 White can play 6.d4 Bb7 7.0-0
cxd4 8.Nxd4!, which poses serious problems for Black. After 5...Nc6, the
play usually transposes to lines analysed in the following chapters, while
5...Nb6 seems rather illogical – why move the already protected knight
from a good central square?

Next, we move on to considering the options for Black after 4...e6 5.Bc4
d6 6.d4.
 In Chapter 17 we cover all Black’s attempts to avoid the main tabia. Here
too we found quite a few unexplored and virtually untested lines. For
example, lines where Black is in no hurry to exchange on d4, or where he
delays the development of his queen’s knight, deserve serious attention. We
have made interesting discoveries in all these areas but we must admit that
here theory is in its infancy.

Chapter 18, with which we end our discussion of the lines after 4...е6, is
entirely devoted to a position which is one of the most important for the
Alapin system in general. We are referring to the variation 4...e6 5.Bc4 d6
6.d4 cxd4 7.cxd4 Nc6 8.0-0 Be7 9.Qe2,
 the popularity of which has increased lately. There are two quite natural
reasons for this. Firstly, Black can strive to reach this position regardless of
his opponent’s order of moves. Secondly, and no less importantly, it leads to
a complicated, multi-piece game, with no early simplification, and this is
more than suitable for players as Black who are not satisfied with a mere
struggle for equality. It is worth recognising that the amorphous, non-
concrete type of play in these positions is also dangerous for White too,
more so than when Black plays unambitiously, so this system deserves
close attention. Having carefully analysed all the material, including the
latest trends, we are inclined to conclude that after the main move 9...0-0,
the best chances for White are provided by the energetic and
straightforward move 10.Nc3. In this simple manner we exchange Black’s
strongest minor piece and prepare to develop an attack against the enemy
king. Of course, at the same time we have to accept some weakening of our
pawn structure, but nevertheless we are ready to prove that we hold the
stronger cards. Probably some day Black will be able to find a way to force
equality, but he faces considerable difficulties.
Approaching the finishing line, we move on to consider Black’s most
popular fourth move, 4...Nc6. Here once again we take a different view
from current tournament practice, where 5.Bc4 is the most popular
continuation. However, we consider that here Black’s path to equality is
comfortable, well maintained and well signposted, and that Black will face
much more problems after the older, straightforward move 5.d4. Once again
we ask you to understand that we are not promising anything revolutionary
and the move 2.”3 cannot and should not provide White with an advantage,
but some of Black’s paths to an acceptable game are less comfortable than
others.

In Chapter 19 we consider the ways for Black to avoid the main variation;
the line 5...cxd4 6.cxd4 d6 7.Bc4 dxe5 8.dxe5 is of fundamental importance
in this respect. Here an exchange of queens can soon occur, but this does
not necessarily mean a quiet and drawish game. In the resulting positions,
the principles of endgame play are not entirely appropriate, since the play is
more typical of a “middle game without queens”, in which the active,
coordinated play of the pieces is the most important factor, and even
material considerations are sometimes secondary.
The final Chapter 20 of the book is entirely devoted to the most important
and fundamental line of the entire Alapin system, namely 5...cxd4 6.cxd4
d6 7.Bc4 Nb6. Now 8.Bb3 dxe5 9.d5 leads to non-standard gambit play,
but objectively that’s where its merits start and end. It seems more
promising for White to play the standard continuation 8.Bb5.
 Here, of course, Black is close to equality, both after the relatively
fashionable move 8...Bd7 (even though Lev Polugaievsky played this move
back in 1958), as well as after the main continuation 8...dxe5 9.Nxe5 Bd7.
In both variations however, we believe that White maintains some initiative
and any slight inaccuracy by Black can lead to serious difficulties for him.
 Chapter 15
1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5

3...Nd5

3...Ng8. Black loses time with this move indeed, but White must know
how to react correctly after the undermining move d7-d6. 4.d4 d6
 White fails to arrange harmoniously his pieces to be able after d6xe5, to
recapture d4xe5. 5.Qe2?! cxd4 6.cxd4 Nc6 7.Nf3 Bg4.
After some calmer developments 5.Nf3 cxd4 6.cxd4 dxe5 7.Nxe5, White
would still maintain a slight edge. 7...Nf6 8.Nc3 a6 9.Bd3 e6 10.0-0 Be7
11.Be3 0-0 12.Rc1² Gorjatschkin – Krasinski, Rowy 2003.
5.dxc5!? If White wishes to obtain a greater advantage, he must play
aggressively. 5...dxc5?! 6.Qxd8+ Kxd8 7.Na3±; 5...dxe5 6.Qxd8+ Kxd8
7.Na3 e6 (7...Nd7 8.Nf3 f6 9.Be3 Nh6 10.b4 Nf5 11.Bc1±) 8.b4 a5
(8...Ne7 9.Nc4 f6 10.Nd6 Rg8 11.Bd3 g6 12.Ne2 a5 13.a3 Nd5 14.c4 Nc7
15.Rb1 Ne8 16.Nb5±) 9.Nc4 Nd7 10.Bd2±

4.Nf3!?
With this order of moves White deprives his opponent of some
advantageous possibilities.

If he begins with 4.Bc4, Black has a very good alternative – 4...Nb6

5.Bb3 c4 6.Bc2 d6 7.exd6 Qxd6 8.Nf3 Qe6+.
 Black may follow some very original schemes if White begins with 4.d4,
for example after: 4...cxd4 5.cxd4 d6 and here after 6.Nf3, Black has this
additional possibility 6...dxe5!? 7.dxe5 Nc6 8.Bc4 Ndb4, while following
6.Bc4, he has the option 6...Nb6 7.Bb5+ Bd7.

We will analyse now: A) 4...a6, B) 4...g6 and C) 4...d6.

About Black’s most popular line: 4...e6 5.Bc4 – see Chapter 16 and about
4...Nc6 5.d4 – see Chapters 19-20.

Following 4...b6, it would be interesting for White to test the move

5.Bd3!?N (The move 5.d4 might lead to the necessity to learn additional
theory after: 5...cxd4 6.Bc4 Bb7 7.0-0 e6.).
 5...Bb7 6.Be4 Qc7 (6...Ne3 7.Bxb7 Nxd1 8.Bxa8 Nxb2 9.Bxb2 g5 10.0-
0 g4 11.Nh4 e6 12.g3 c4 13.Ba3²) 7.0-0 e6 (7...Ne3 8.Bxb7 Nxd1 9.Bxa8
Nxf2 10.Rxf2±) 8.d4 cxd4 (8...Ne3 9.fxe3 Bxe4 10.Ng5 Bg6 11.Nxf7
Bxf7 12.Rxf7 Kxf7 13.Qf3+ Kg6 14.Qxa8 d5 15.exd6 Bxd6 16.Qe4±)
9.Nxd4
 9...Qxe5? 10.Re1 Qc7 (10...Bd6 11.Nf3 Qh5 12.c4+–) 11.Nb5 Qc5
(11...Qc8? 12.Bxd5+–) 12.N1a3 a6 13.c4 axb5 14.cxd5 Be7 15.dxe6 Bxe4
16.exf7+ Kxf7 17.Rxe4 Ra4 18.Be3 Qf5 19.Qb3+–
9...Bc5 10.Nb5 Qxe5 11.Nd2 0-0 12.Re1 Qf6 13.Nf3. White is
threatening Bg5. 13...h6 14.Nc7±

A) 4...a6
This prophylactic move is a bit artificial. As a result, Black would simply
continue the game with a tempo down. After the move d4, he would need to
consider the possibility for his knight to be attacked after c3-c4.
5.d4 cxd4
Black must exchange the pawns here; otherwise, he would come under an
attack after c3-c4.

5...e6 6.c4 Nb6 (6...Nc7 7.Bg5 Be7 8.Bxe7 Qxe7 9.dxc5 Qxc5 10.Qd6
b6, Zakharov – Gerhardt, Germany 2008, 11.b4 Qc6 12.Nbd2+–) 7.Nc3
cxd4 (7...d6 8.exd6 Bxd6 9.Ne4 Be7 10.dxc5 Qxd1+ 11.Kxd1 Na4
12.Nd6+ Bxd6 13.cxd6±) 8.Ne4 Qc7 9.Bf4 Bb4+ 10.Nfd2 0-0 11.Nf6+
Kh8 (11...gxf6 12.Qg4+ Kh8 13.exf6 – see 11...Kh8) 12.Qg4 gxf6 13.exf6
Rg8 14.Qxg8+ Kxg8 15.Bxc7 Na4 16.0-0-0+–

5...d6 6.c4 Nb4, Borsos – Kanyadi, Hungary 2019, 7.e6 fxe6 (7...Bxe6?
8.a3 N4c6 9.d5±) 8.a3 N4c6 9.d5 exd5 (9...Nd4 10.Nxd4 cxd4 11.Qxd4
exd5 12.cxd5 e5 13.dxe6 Bxe6 14.Be2 Nc6 15.Bh5+ Kd7 16.Qd1 g6
17.Be2²) 10.cxd5 Ne5 11.Nxe5 dxe5 12.Nc3 g6 13.h4±

6.Bc4
 6...Nb6

After 6...e6 7.cxd4, it becomes evident that in this typical position Black
has played the almost useless move a7-a6, instead of some other purposeful
move like Nc6, d6 or Be7...
 7...Nc6 8.0-0 d6 9.Qe2 Be7 10.Nc3. In Chapter 18 we have analysed an
analogous position but with the more useful move for Black – 0-0, instead
of a7-a6. 10...Nxc3 11.bxc3 dxe5 12.dxe5 Qc7 13.Bd3 Bd7 14.Rb1 h6
15.Qe4!? (15.Re1² Khamrakulov – Strikovic, Navalmoral 2004) 15...Na5
16.Be3 Qxc3 17.Nd4±
7...Nb6 8.Bd3. In Chapter 17, variation C, we analyse a similar position,
except that instead of a6, Black has played the more useful move – d6.
8...Nc6 (8...d6 9.0-0 N8d7 10.Qe2 dxe5 11.dxe5 Nc5 12.Bc2 Nd5,
Ssegwanyi – Oatlhotse, Casablanca 2019, 13.Rd1 Qc7 14.Bd2 Be7
15.Nc3±) 9.Nc3 d6 10.Qe2 Be7 11.0-0 Nb4 12.Be4 0-0, Sanduleac –
Solcanean, Eforie Nord 1999, 13.h4!? (13.Re1²; 13.Rd1²) 13...Bxh4 14.g3
Be7 15.Kg2 f5 16.exf6 Bxf6 17.Rh1 g6 18.Bh6 Rf7 19.Rae1±

7.Bb3 d5

7...dxc3? 8.Ng5 e6 9.Qh5 g6 10.Qf3 Qxg5 (10...Qe7 11.Ne4+–) 11.Bxg5

cxb2 12.Qc3 bxa1Q 13.Qxa1 Nc6 14.Bf6+–
7...e6 8.cxd4 (8.Qxd4!? Nc6 9.Qg4²) 8...d6 9.Qe2!? White plans after
d6xe5, to recapture with his pawn – d4xe5, preserving the queens on the
board. 9...Nc6 10.0-0 dxe5 11.dxe5 Be7 12.Nc3 Qc7 13.Bf4 Nd7 (13...0-0
14.Rac1 Nd7 15.Ne4 Rd8, Vysochin – Veits, Warsaw 2007, 16.Nd6±)
14.Rac1 Qa5 15.Rfd1 h6, Baleja – Sokol, Slovakia 2000, 16.Ne4 Ndxe5
17.Nxe5 Nxe5 18.Qh5 Nc6 19.Qg4 Kf8 20.Bd6+–

8.exd6
 8...Qxd6

8...e6

9.Nbd2!? White exploits the postponement of his opponent’s

development, because of the move a7-a6, and begins immediate active
actions on the kingside. 9...Bxd6 (9...dxc3? 10.Ne4±) 10.Ne4 0-0 11.Bg5
f6 (11...Be7 12.Bxe7 Qxe7 13.Qxd4²) 12.Nxd4 Be7 (12...fxg5? 13.Nxe6
Bxe6 14.Bxe6+ Kh8 15.Qxd6+–) 13.Bh4 Nd5 14.0-0 Nc6 15.Re1²
9.cxd4. We analyse similar types of positions in Chapter 16, variation B.
In short, White should implement the following plan: 0-0, Nc3, Re1 and
then build the battery Bc2+Qd3... 9...Bxd6 10.0-0 0-0 11.Nc3 Nc6 12.Re1

12...Nd5 13.Bc2 Nf6 14.a3 (14.Bg5!?) 14...Qc7 15.Bg5 Ng4? 16.h3 e5?
17.hxg4 Bxg4 18.Qd3+– Jimenez – Zapata, Email 1998.
12...Ne7 13.Bg5 f6 14.Bh4 (14.Bd2 Nbd5, Zhigalko – Kalashian,
Yerevan 2017, 15.Rc1 Bd7 16.h4!? Rc8 17.h5 Qb6 18.h6 g6 19.Ne4²)
14...Nbd5 15.Bg3 b6 16.Rc1 Ra7 17.Nxd5 exd5 18.Nd2 Kh8 19.Bxd6
Qxd6, Zhigalko – Kalashian, Tsaghkadzor 2017, 20.Nf1²
12...Qc7 13.Be3 (13.Qd3!? h6 14.Bd2²) 13...Na5 14.Bc2 Nd5 15.Nxd5
exd5 16.Rc1 Nc4 17.Ne5 Qb6 18.Qd3 g6 19.Nxc4 dxc4 20.Qxc4 Qxb2,
Berg – Lovik, Porto 2013, 21.Rb1 Qa3 22.Bh6 Be6 23.d5 Rfc8 24.Qd4
Qc3 25.Qxc3 Rxc3 26.dxe6 Rxc2 27.exf7+ Kxf7 28.Rxb7+ Rc7 29.Rxc7+
Bxc7 30.Rb1±

9.0-0
 9...Nc6

9...dxc3? As always in the variation with the move 4...a6, it would be

tremendously risky for Black to capture the enemy pawn on c3. 10.Ng5 e6
11.Qh5 g6 12.Qf3 Qe7 13.Qxc3+–

9...e6 10.Nxd4!? (10.cxd4 Be7 11.Nc3 0-0 12.Re1 Nc6 13.a3 – see
9...Nc6) 10...Be7 11.Nd2 0-0 12.Ne4 Qc7, Smirnov – Varchenko,
Simferopol 2003, 13.Qg4!? Kh8 14.Ng5 Nc6 15.Nxc6 Qxc6 16.Re1±

10.cxd4 e6 11.Nc3 Be7 12.Re1 0-0 13.a3 Rd8

 This position was reached in the game Schelle – Z.Szabo, Bad Wiessee
2002.
14.Ng5!
White is threatening Qh5 and Black does not have satisfactory defence
against this.
14...Bxg5

14...Qxd4? 15.Qh5 Bxg5 16.Bxg5 Rf8 17.Rad1 Qc5 18.Re3‚

14...h6? 15.Nxf7! Kxf7 16.Qh5+ Kg8 17.Bxh6! Bf6 (17...gxh6 18.Qg6+

Kf8 19.Rxe6+–) 18.Be3 Nd5 (18...Nxd4 19.Bxd4 Bxd4 20.Rad1 Qf4
21.Ne4 Qh6 22.Qa5+–) 19.Nxd5 exd5 20.Bf4+–

14...Nxd4 15.Qh5 Bxg5 16.Bxg5 f6 17.Bxf6 gxf6 18.Rad1 Qf8 (18...Kh8

19.Rxd4 Qxd4 20.Rd1+–; 18...Bd7 19.Re4+–) 19.Qg4+ Kh8 20.Rxd4±

15.Bxg5 f6 (15...Re8 16.d5+–) 16.Be3 Nd5 17.Nxd5 exd5 18.Qh5 Be6

19.Bc2 f5 (19...g6 20.Bxg6+–) 20.Bxf5±
 B) 4...g6
Black fails to fianchetto comfortably his dark-squared bishop. After the
exchange on d4 White will capture there with his queen and then will
transfer it to the h4-square, creating threats against Black’s kingside.
5.d4 cxd4

5...Bg7?! 6.dxc5 Nc7 7.Na3 Nc6 8.Nc4 Ne6 9.Be3± Filipenko – Lykov,
Izhevsk 2008.

6.Qxd4

6...Nc7

Following 6...e6 7.c4, Black will have a gaping hole on d6 in his position
and no chances of obtaining an acceptable position. 7...Nc6 8.Qe4
 8...Nde7 9.Nc3 Bg7 (9...a6 10.Bf4 Bg7 11.Bd3 0-0 12.0-0 Nf5 13.Rad1²)
10.Bf4 0-0 11.0-0-0 f6 12.exf6 Rxf6 13.Bd6 b6 14.h4 Bb7 15.h5ƒ
8...f5 9.Qe2 Nde7 10.Nc3 Bg7 11.Bf4 Qa5, Pirisi – Nazarenus, Budapest
2002, 12.Bd2 Nxe5 13.Nb5 Nxf3+ 14.Qxf3 Qb6 15.Qa3±
8...Bb4+ 9.Bd2 f5 (9...Bxd2+ 10.Nbxd2 f5 11.Qe2±) 10.Qc2 Bxd2+
11.Qxd2 Nde7 12.Nc3 a6 13.h4 h6, Djurovic – Kosanovic, Veliko Gradiste
2019, 14.Rd1±

6...Nb6 7.Qh4
 7...Bg7 8.Bh6 0-0, Shkuran – Caglar, Tekirdag 2019, 9.Nbd2 d5 (9...Nc6
10.Ne4 d5 11.Neg5 Nxe5 12.Bxg7 Nxf3+ 13.gxf3 Kxg7 14.Qxh7+ Kf6
15.Bd3 Kxg5 16.Qg7+–) 10.Bd3 Nc6 11.Bxg7 Kxg7 12.0-0²
7...Nc6 8.Na3 a6 (8...h6, Fressinet – Brodowski, Katowice 2017, 9.Bf4
Nd5 10.Bc4 Nxf4 11.Qxf4 e6 12.Nb5 a6 13.Nd6+ Bxd6 14.exd6²) 9.Nc4
Nxc4 10.Bxc4 h6 11.0-0 Bg7 12.Qg3 b5 13.Bd3 0-0 14.Re1± Bb7?
15.Bxh6 Bxh6 16.Bxg6 fxg6 (16...e6 17.Bc2+ Bg7 18.Ng5 f5 19.Rad1 Qe7
20.f4+–) 17.Qxg6+ Bg7 18.Ng5 Rf4 19.g3+–

7.Qh4
 7...Nc6

7...Bg7 8.Bh6²

7...h6. This move prevents radically the possible exchange of the bishops
after c1-h6, but now it becomes unclear how Black would castle kingside.
8.Bc4 Bg7 9.0-0 Nc6 10.Re1
 10...b5 11.Bb3 Bb7 12.Nbd2 Ne6 13.a4 a6 14.Qg3 (with the idea Nh4)
14...b4, Sethuraman – Iturrizaga Bonelli, Moscow 2019, 15.Nh4 0-0
(15...Na5 16.cxb4 Nxb3 17.Nxb3 0-0 18.Na5 Bd5 19.Qd3 Nc7 20.Nf3
Rb8 21.Bd2²) 16.Ndf3 bxc3 17.bxc3 Na5 18.Bc2 Bxf3 19.gxf3! Here,
White would be soon threatening f4-f5. 19...Nc6 (19...Qe8 20.f4+–)
20.Nxg6 fxg6 21.Qxg6+–
10...Ne6 11.a4!? with the idea to ensure the c4-square for his knight after
his light-squared bishop abandons this square. (11.Na3 a6 12.Bd5 Qc7,
Raiano – Bartsch, Forli 1989, 13.Qg3 0-0 14.Nc4²) 11...a6 12.Na3 d6
13.exd6 Qxd6, Wheeler – Braun, IECG 2003, 14.Ba2 Ng5 (14...Na5
15.Be3±) 15.Bxg5 hxg5 16.Nc4 Qc7 17.Qxg5±

8.Na3
White develops his knight and does not cover the way of his bishop to the
h6-square.

8.Bc4!? White may not lose time for the move Na3 and can complete
immediately his development, having the resource to play Bc1-h6 in
response to Bf8-g7.
 8...d5 9.exd6 exd6 (9...Qxd6 10.Bf4 e5 11.Bg5 Be6 12.Nbd2 Bxc4
13.Nxc4 Qe6 14.0-0-0 h6 15.Nfxe5 Nxe5 16.Nxe5 Bg7 17.Bd8 g5
18.Qa4+ b5 19.Qa5 Rxd8 20.Qxc7 Rxd1+ 21.Rxd1 0-0 22.Nc6 Qxa2
23.Qxa7 Qc4 24.Ne7+ Kh8 25.Nd5²) 10.Qxd8+ Nxd8 11.0-0 (11.Na3
Nde6 12.Be3 d5 13.Bb3 Bxa3 14.bxa3 0-0 15.0-0-0 b6 16.Rhe1²; 12...Bd7
13.0-0-0 Bc6 14.Bb3 d5 15.Nc2 a5 16.a3 Bg7 17.h4 h5 18.Ng5 0-0
19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.Rhg1 Bf6 21.g4ƒ) 11...d5 (11...Nde6 12.Rd1 Bd7
13.Be3²) 12.Bb3 Nde6 13.Rd1²
8...Ne6 9.0-0 Qc7 (9...h6 10.Re1 Bg7 11.a4 – see 7...h6; 9...Bg7 10.Bxe6
dxe6 11.Bh6±) 10.Re1 Bg7, Afek – Emiroglu, Germany 2004 (10...h5.
Black weakens too much his position with this move. 11.Na3 a6, Weglarz –
Reznicek, Orlova 2009, 12.Bd5 Bg7 13.Bg5 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Bxe5 15.Bxe7
d6 16.Bf6±) 11.Bh6 Bxh6 (11...0-0 12.Nbd2 f6 13.Rad1 Nxe5 14.Nxe5
fxe5 15.Nf3+–) 12.Qxh6 d6 13.exd6 Qxd6 14.Re4. White prevents the
appearance of the enemy queen on the f4-square. 14...Nc7 (14...Qc5
15.Nbd2 Qh5 16.Qe3±) 15.Na3 Bf5 16.Ree1 0-0-0 17.Ng5 Rhf8 18.Nxf7
Qd2 19.Bb3+–
 8...Ne6

8...Bg7?! 9.Bh6 Bxh6 (9...Kf8 10.0-0-0!?; 10.Nc4!?; 10.Bc4 d5 11.exd6

Qxd6 12.Rd1 Qc5, Turov – Savchenko, chessassistantclub.com 2004,
13.Nb5 Nxb5 14.Rd5 Qb6 15.Rxb5 Qd8 16.Rd5 Qe8 17.Nd4±) 10.Qxh6
Ne6?! (10...d5±) 11.0-0-0 Qc7, Sammour Hasbun – Guseinov, ICC 2007,
12.Nb5 Qa5 13.Bc4 a6 14.Bxe6 fxe6 15.Qg7 Rf8 16.Ng5 axb5 17.Nxh7+–

8...d6 9.exd6 Qxd6 10.Be2 Bg7, Howell – Iturrizaga Bonelli, London

2017, 11.Nc4 Qe6 12.Bh6 Bxh6 13.Qxh6 f6 14.Qg7 Qg8 15.Nd6+ Kd7
16.Qxg8 Rxg8 17.Nxc8 Raxc8 18.0-0-0+ Ke8 19.Nd4 Nxd4 20.Rxd4 e5
21.Rc4±

8...Rb8 9.Bc4 b5 10.Bb3 Ne6 11.0-0 b4, Schuette – Gutman, Verden

2011, 12.cxb4!? Rxb4 13.Nc4 Bg7 14.Bd2 Rb8 15.Rfe1 0-0 16.Rad1±

9.Bc4!?
White is waiting until his opponent would lose time for the move Bf8-g7.
 9.Bh6 Bxh6 (9...Qc7 10.Bxf8 Nxf8? 11.Nb5 Qb8? Howell – Willow,
London 2019, 12.Nd6+ exd6 13.Qf6 Rg8 14.exd6+–; 10...Rxf8 11.Qe4²)
10.Qxh6 Qa5 11.Nc4 Qc7 12.0-0-0 b5 13.Ne3 a6 (13...b4 14.c4 Na5
15.Kb1 b3 16.a3 Bb7 17.Be2 Be4+ 18.Ka1²) 14.Nd5 Qa5 15.a3 Bb7,
Grischuk – Iturrizaga Bonelli, Dubai 2014, 16.Qe3²

9...Bg7 10.Bxe6 dxe6

10...fxe6?! 11.Bh6±

11.Bh6 Bxh6 12.Qxh6 Qd3

Black in his turn also prevents his opponent’s castling.

13.Qf4 h6

13...0-0 14.Rd1 Qf5 15.Qe3²

14.Rd1 Qa6, Jenkins – Pajak, ICCF 2015, 15.h4!? Bd7 16.Nc4!? (with
the idea 17.0-0) 16...Qxa2 17.0-0 White has managed to castle at the price
of a pawn, while Black is very unlikely to do this. 17...b5 18.Ne3 Qxb2
19.Rd3 Rd8 20.Rfd1 Qa3 21.Nd4 Qc5 (21...Nxd4 22.Qxd4± 0-0? 23.Qf4
Kg7 24.Ng4+–) 22.Nxc6 Qxc6 23.Ng4 h5 24.Nh6 Rf8 25.g4 hxg4
26.Qxg4 a5 27.h5 gxh5 28.Qg7 h4 29.Kh2 Qc5 30.Rg1 Qxf2+ 31.Kh3+–

C) 4...d6 5.d4

5...cxd4

5...Bg4?! Now, Black’s pawn on b7 remains defenceless and White

exploits this immediately. 6.dxc5 (6.Qb3!? Nb6 7.a4±) 6...dxe5 7.Qb3 Nc6
(7...Bxf3 8.Qxb7 Nd7 9.gxf3±) 8.Qxb7 Rc8 9.Bb5 Bd7 10.Nxe5 Nxe5
11.Qxd5 Bxb5 12.Qxe5 e6 13.b4 Be7 14.Qd4±

Following 5...e6?! 6.c4, it becomes evident that Black’s knight does not
have a good square to retreat to. 6...Nc7 (6...Nb6 7.exd6!? Bxd6 8.b4±;
6...Nb4 7.a3 N4c6 8.exd6 Bxd6 9.dxc5 Bxc5 10.Qxd8+ Nxd8 11.b4²
Tanrikulu – Makolli, Kemer 2007) 7.dxc5. Now, White will have more
space thanks to placement of the pawns on e5 and e6. 7...dxc5 8.Bd3!?
(8.Qxd8+ Kxd8 9.Nc3±) 8...Be7 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Qc2 h6 11.Qe2 Nc6
12.Bxh6 gxh6 13.Qe4 f5 14.exf6 Rxf6 15.Qh7+ Kf8 16.Ne4 Rf5 17.0-0-
0‚

5...Nc6 6.Bc4

About 6...e6 7.Qe2 – see Chapter 17.

6...Nb6 7.Bb5 Bd7 (Naturally, Black must exchange here 7...cxd4 8.cxd4
and transpose to Chapter 20.) 8.exd6 (8.dxc5!? dxc5 9.Qe2²) 8...exd6
(8...cxd4 9.cxd4 – see Ch20 line A; 9.dxe7!? Qxe7+ 10.Be2 g6 11.cxd4
Bg7 12.0-0²) 9.0-0 Be7 10.Re1 0-0, Vlachos – Peppas, Thessaloniki 2019,
11.dxc5 dxc5 12.Bf4²
6...dxe5 7.dxe5. Now, the pawns on c3 and c5 are added to the habitual
pawn structure. This is in favour of White and we analyse in details this
type of a pawn structure in Chapter 17, variation B.
 About 7...e6 8.Qe2 – see Chapter 17.
7...Nb6 8.Qxd8+ Nxd8 9.Bb5+ Bd7 10.a4 a6 11.Bxd7+ Nxd7 12.Nbd2
b6, Garcia Fernandez – Alonso Moyano, Mislata 2003, 13.Nc4 g6 14.Ke2
Bg7 15.Rd1²
7...Be6 8.Na3 h6 (8...g6?! 9.Ng5 Nxe5 10.Bb5+ Nd7 11.Nxe6 fxe6 12.0-
0±; 10...Nc6 11.0-0 Qc8 12.Re1± Rogers – Petrie, ICCF 2012) 9.0-0 g6
10.Qe2²

5...dxe5 6.dxe5. This is another version of a familiar position, but with

pawns on c3 – c5. 6...e6 (6...Nc6 7.Bc4 – see 5...Nc6) 7.Bd3 (7.Bc4 – see
Chapter 17) 7...Nc6 (7...Be7 8.0-0 Nc6 9.Qe2 – see 7...Nc6; 8...Bd7 9.Qe2
Bc6 10.a3 a5 11.c4 Nb6 12.Nc3± Holemar – Bakalar, Litomysl 2004) 8.0-0
Be7 (8...Qc7 9.Re1 Be7, K.Logvinov – V.Popov, Elets 2009, 10.c4!? Ndb4
11.Be4 Nd4 12.Nxd4 cxd4 13.Qxd4 Nc6 14.Qc3 Nxe5?! 15.Bf4 f6
16.Bxe5 fxe5 17.Qh3±) 9.Qe2
 Later, under the cover of the pawn on e5, White will increase his pressure
on the kingside. He can oust easily the enemy knight away from the centre
by playing a3, c4. 9...0-0 (9...Qc7 10.a3 Bd7 11.c4 Nb6 12.Nc3 a6 13.Bf4
h6 14.Ne4 g5 15.Bg3 Kf8 16.h4 g4 17.Nh2 h5 18.f3+– Fingerov – Tishin,
Odessa 2001) 10.a3!? Na5 11.c4 Nb6 12.Rd1 Bd7 13.Nbd2 Bc6 14.b4
cxb4 15.axb4 Bxb4 16.Ne4 Nd7 17.Bc2 Qe7 18.Rxd7 Bxd7 (18...Qxd7?
19.Nf6+ gxf6 20.exf6 Kh8 21.Ne5+–) 19.Nfg5 f6 20.exf6 gxf6 21.Nxh7
f5 (21...Kxh7?? 22.Nxf6+ Kg7 23.Qg4+–) 22.Neg5 Nc6 23.Bb2 Be8
24.c5 Bxc5 25.Bb3+–

6.cxd4
After this move, later, when Black plays e6, or Nc6, there arises transition
to the positions in Chapters 17 or 19.
 6...g6
Black cannot fianchetto comfortably his bishop because of the weakness
of the a2-g8 diagonal.

About 6...e6 7.Bc4 – see Chapter 17.

About 6...Nc6 7.Bc4 – see Chapter 19.

6...Bg4 7.Qb3 Nb6 (7...Qc7 8.Nc3 Nxc3 9.exd6 exd6 10.bxc3 Be7
11.Be2 0-0 12.0-0 Nc6 13.Bf4²; 7...Bxf3 8.gxf3 e6 9.Qxb7 Nd7 10.Bb5
N5b6 11.Nc3²) 8.Bb5+ N8d7 9.0-0 e6, Alexopoulos – Meyer, Washington
1994, 10.Bg5 Be7 11.Bxe7 Qxe7 12.exd6 Qxd6 13.Ne5±

6...dxe5 7.dxe5 Bg4, Petrisor – Jankovic, Plovdiv 2012. Later, White can
get easily off this pin (About 7...e6 8.Bc4 – see Chapter 17; 7...Nc6 8.Bc4 –
see Chapter 19.). 8.Bb5+ Nc6 9.0-0 e6 10.Qa4 Bxf3 11.Bxc6+ bxc6
12.Qxc6+ Ke7 13.gxf3±

7.Bc4 Nb6 8.Bb3 Bg7 9.Ng5 e6

 9...0-0 10.e6± f6 11.Nf7 Qe8, Krogius – Bertok, Sochi 1966, 12.Nh6+
Kh8 13.d5+–

10.Qf3 0-0 11.Qh3 h6

This position was reached in the game Zadymov – Jedras, Poznan 2016.
12.Ne4!? dxe5 13.dxe5 Qd4 (13...Bxe5? 14.Qxh6 Bg7 15.Qh3±).
14.Nbc3 Qxe5 15.Bxh6² Nd5 16.0-0 Nxc3 17.Nxc3 Nc6 18.Rfe1 Qh5
(18...Qa5? 19.g4! and Black’s queen cannot go already to the h5-square.
19...Nd4 20.Ne4 b6 21.Bd2 Qb5 22.Ng5) 19.Qxh5 gxh5 20.Bg5²
 Chapter 16
1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 e6

5.Bc4
White cannot continue the game without the pawn-advance d2-d4
anyway, but after this order of moves the number of the possible variations
is reduced. For example, Black cannot enter comfortably the scheme with
the move b6, because later, after the exchange c5xd4, White would capture
on d4 not with the pawn, but with his knight, or queen.
5...Nb6
This is an achievement by White, since Black’s knight is removed from
the centre. Here, contrary to the variation with 4...Nc6 5.Bc4 Nb6 6.Bb3,
the plan with the pawn-advance c5-c4 would not provide Black with
equality, because he has lost a tempo for the move e7-e6. Later, most often
his knight will turn out to be misplaced since it is too far from the kingside.

About 5...d6 6.d4 – see Chapter 17.

 5...Nc7. Black plays this move with the idea to advance quickly b5, Bb7.
His knight however is too far from the kingside and he has practically no
pieces there. 6.d4

6...d5 7.exd6 Qxd6 (7...Bxd6, Khamrakulov – Mena Corrochano,

Navalmoral 2004, 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.Qxd8+ Kxd8 10.Nbd2 Be7 11.Ne4 Nd5
12.0-0²) 8.0-0 (8.Nbd2 cxd4 9.Ne4 Qd8 10.Nxd4²) 8...b5?! (8...cxd4
9.Qe2!?² dxc3? 10.Nxc3 Be7 11.Rd1 Qb6 12.Be3 Qa5 13.a3 0-0 14.Bf4±)
9.Bd3 Nd7 10.a4 b4 11.Nbd2 cxd4, Stevic – Floeel, Weyhe 2018, 12.Ne4
Qd5 13.c4 Qa5 14.Nxd4 Bb7 15.Nb3 Qa6 16.c5 Qc6 17.Na5 Qd5
18.Nxb7 Qxb7 19.c6 Qxc6 20.Bf4+–
The move 6...cxd4 only facilitates the development of White’s queen’s
knight. 7.cxd4 b5 (7...d5 8.Bd3 Be7 9.Nc3 Nc6 10.h4 Bd7 11.Rh3ƒ) 8.Bd3
Bb7 9.Nc3 a6 10.Ne4 h6 11.0-0 Nd5 12.Be3 Nc6, Karpatchev – Sazonov,
Moscow 1995, 13.a3²
6...b5 7.Bd3 Bb7 8.0-0. Black has a problem how to ensure the safety of
his king. His queenside has been compromised and castling kingside also
looks dangerous, because White’s pieces can go there quickly. Besides that
the d6-square is vulnerable in Black’s camp. 8...d6 (8...Be7?! 9.dxc5 Bxc5
10.Nbd2±) 9.exd6 Qxd6 (9...Bxd6 10.dxc5 Bxc5 11.Qe2 0-0 12.Rd1²)
10.dxc5 Qxc5 11.Nbd2. Black’s position is very difficult. He lags in
development, his king is still stranded in the centre and his queenside has
been weakened. 11...Nd7, Veroci – Tornai, Hungary 1999 (11...Be7 12.Ne4
Qc6 13.a4±) 12.a4 a6 13.Ne4 Qd5 14.Qe2±

5...Nc6 6.d4 cxd4 (about 6...Nb6 7.Bb3 – see 5...Nb6; 6...d6 7.Qe2 – see
Chapter 17) 7.cxd4

About 7...d6 8.0-0 – see Chapter 17, line C.

7...Nb6 8.Bb3 – see 5...Nb6.
7...Be7 8.0-0 0-0 (8...Nb6 9.Bb3 – see 5...Nb6; 8...d6 9.Qe2 – see
Chapter 18) 9.Nc3 Nb6 (9...Nxc3 10.bxc3 d6 11.Qe2 – see Chapter 18)
10.Bd3 d6 – see Chapter 17, line C.
7...Bb4+. Black is trying to complete his development with tempo, but
this does not work, because his kingside has been weakened. 8.Nbd2
 8...Nb6 9.Bd3 d6 10.a3 Bxd2+ 11.Qxd2² Black cannot castle 11...0-0,
because of the standard tactical strike 12.Bxh7+ Kxh7 13.Ng5+ Kg8
14.Qd3 f5 15.exf6 Rxf6 16.Qh7+ Kf8 17.Qh8+ Ke7 18.Qxg7+ Ke8
19.Nh7 Rf5 20.g4+–
8...Nf4 9.0-0 d5 10.Bb5 Bd7 11.Nb3 Ng6 12.Bd3² 0-0 13.h4 f5
(13...Nxh4? 14.Bxh7+ Kxh7 15.Ng5 Kg6 16.Qg4+–) 14.g3 Be7 15.Kg2²
8...Qb6, Kovalenko – Jobava, St Petersburg 2018, 9.0-0! After this
energetic move it become obvious that the dark squares in Black’s position
are horribly vulnerable. 9...Nxd4 (9...0-0 10.Ne4±) 10.Ne4 Nxf3+ 11.Qxf3
0-0 12.Qg3 Kh8 13.Bd3‚

5...b6. Now, Black cannot develop immediately his bishop comfortably on

the long diagonal. Here, contrary to the variation with 5.d4, after the
exchange of the pawns, White will not capture with his pawn, but with the
queen, or the knight, depending on the circumstances. 6.d4
 6...Be7?! 7.Bxd5 exd5 8.dxc5±
6...cxd4?! 7.Bxd5! After this move Black’s light-squared bishop will be
restricted by his own pawn. 7...exd5 8.Qxd4 Bb7 9.0-0 Na6 10.Bg5 Be7
11.Bxe7 Qxe7 12.Na3±
6...Bb7 7.0-0. White has completed the development of his kingside and
plans now to improve his position either with Nd2-e4, or by playing Bb3,
c4, d5.
 7...Be7 8.dxc5 bxc5 9.Nbd2 0-0 (9...f5 10.exf6 gxf6 11.Ne4 0-0 12.Bh6
Rf7 13.Nh4 Na6 14.Qh5 Bf8 15.Rad1 Nac7 16.Rd3 Bxh6 17.Qxh6 Rg7
18.Bxd5 Nxd5 19.Rxd5 Bxd5 20.Nxf6+ Kf7 21.Nxd5 exd5 22.Nf5+–
Godena – Fernando, Turin 2006) 10.Ne4. White intends to improve his
position with Re1, Bg5. 10...f5 11.Nd6 Bxd6 12.exd6 Qf6 (12...Qb6
13.Bb3²) 13.Re1 (13.a4!?; 13.Bg5!? Qg6 14.h4ƒ h6?! 15.Ne5 Qe8 16.Be7
Nxe7 17.dxe7 Qxe7 18.Ng6±) 13...Nb6, Grandelius – Gledura, Malmo
2018, 14.Be2² White has two powerful bishops while the dark squares are
vulnerable in Black’s camp, so White maintains an advantage.
7...cxd4 8.Nxd4!? He wishes to exploit the weakness of the d6-square.
 Black cannot solve radically the problem with this weakness: 8...d6?
9.Bb5+ Nd7 10.c4 Nc7 11.exd6 Bxd6 12.Nc6+–
8...a6. He deprives White’s knight of the b5-square. 9.Re1 Qc7 10.Bb3
g5. Black has serious problems to complete his development and he decides
to sacrifice a pawn in order to activate his rook. White defends quite easily
against the threats on the g-file. (10...Be7 11.Nf5 exf5 12.Bxd5 0-0
13.Bxb7 Qxb7 14.Qd3±; 10...Bc5 11.Nd2 0-0 12.Ne4 f5 13.exf6 Nxf6
14.Nxf6+ Rxf6 15.Bg5 Rf7 16.Bh4±) 11.Bxg5 Rg8 12.Nf3 h6 13.Bxd5
(13.c4 Ne7 14.Bf6±) 13...Bxd5 14.Bh4± Godena – Caprio, Perugia 2011.
8...Qc7 9.Nd2 a6 (9...Qxe5? 10.Re1 Qc7 11.Nb5 Qd8 12.Ne4 d6
13.Bxd5 Bxd5 14.Qxd5 exd5 15.Nf6#) 10.Re1 Nf4 11.Bf1 Ng6, Soors –
Van Leent, Leiden 2016, 12.Nc4 Be7 13.Nd6+ Bxd6 14.exd6 Qd8
(14...Qxd6? 15.Nxe6! Qxd1 16.Nxg7+ Kf8 17.Bh6! Qxe1 18.Rxe1 f5
19.Nxf5+ Kf7 20.g4+–) 15.f4±

6.Bb3
 We will analyse in details now A) 6...Nc6 and B) 6...d6.

6...d5 7.d4!? Here, the pawn structure resembles the advance variation of
the French Defence, but Black’s knight on b6 is horribly misplaced because
it does not participate in the fight for the centre and does not exert pressure
against the enemy pawn on d4. (Naturally, White can play here simply
7.exd6, transposing to variation B.).
 About 7...Nc6 8.0-0, or 7...cxd4 8.cxd4 Nc6 9.0-0, or 8...Be7 9.0-0 Nc6
10.Nc3, or 9...0-0 10.Nc3 Nc6 11.Bc2 – see 6...Nc6.
7...Bd7 8.0-0 Be7 (8...Nc6 – see 6...Nc6) 9.dxc5!? (9.Be3 cxd4 10.Nxd4²
Nc4? 11.Bxc4 dxc4, Rabiega – Frank, Graz 2004, 12.Qg4±) 9...Bxc5
10.Bc2±
7...Be7 8.0-0 0-0 (8...Nc6 – see 6...Nc6) 9.Bc2 Nc6 10.Qd3 g6 11.Bh6
Re8 12.dxc5 Bxc5 13.Nbd2± We can now confirm the statement that we
have made before – Black’s knight on b6 is misplaced.

6...c4 7.Bc2. Black has lost a tempo for the move e6, so that now the
move c5-c4 would not equalise.
 About 7...d5 8.exd6 – see 7...d6.
7...d6 8.exd6. White plans to undermine the enemy pawn on c4 with the
move b3 and later, when Black begins to protect it, White will increase his
pressure by playing Na3, Qe2. After an exchange c4xb3 – a2xb3, he will
play c3-c4, followed by d2-d4 (d2-d3), occupying the centre. 8...Bxd6
(8...Qxd6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Na3 a6 11.Qe2 Qc7 12.b3 cxb3 13.axb3 0-0 14.c4
Nc6 15.d4±) 9.0-0 N8d7 (about 9...Nc6 10.d4, or 9...0-0 10.d4 Nc6 11.Qe2
– see 7...Nc6) 10.b3 (10.a4!?) 10...Qc7 11.Na3 a6 12.Qe2 cxb3 13.axb3 0-
0, Rozentalis – Antoniewski, Lubniewice 2002, 14.c4 e5 15.Bb2 f5 16.d3±
Now, it is inconceivable how Black will complete the development of his
queenside. 16...Re8 17.d4 e4 18.c5.
7...Nc6 8.0-0 Qc7 (8...d5 9.exd6, or 8...d6 9.exd6 Bxd6 10.d4 – see line
A; 8...g5 9.Re1 Bg7 (9...g4 10.Nd4 h5 11.d3 Bg7, Toncheva – Kashtanov,
chess.com 2020, 12.Nxc6 dxc6 13.d4±) 10.d4 cxd3 11.Qxd3 g4, Lapite –
Ghasi, chess.com 2017, 12.Nd4 Nxe5 13.Qg3 d6 14.f4 Nc6 15.Nf5 Bf6
16.Qxg4±) 9.Re1 (9.Qe2!? d6 10.exd6 Bxd6 11.a4ƒ) 9...d6 10.exd6 Bxd6
11.d4
 11...Ne7 12.Nbd2 Bd7 13.Ne4 h6 14.Nxd6+ Qxd6 15.Ne5± Barrionuevo
– Medina, San Antonio de Padua 2001.
11...0-0. With a knight on b6, castling kingside will be too dangerous for
Black, because he has just a few pieces to protect the residence of his
monarch. 12.b3 (The immediate move 12.Bxh7+ would not bring much to
White: 12...Kxh7 13.Ng5+ Kg6 14.Qg4 f5 15.Qh4 Bd7 16.Qh7+ Kf6
17.Qh5 Ke7÷) 12...Ne7 13.Nbd2 cxb3 14.axb3. White plans Ne4, Nfg5
with an attack, or c3-c4 threatening c4-c5. 14...Ng6 (14...Bd7? 15.Ne4;
14...Qxc3? 15.Bxh7+ Kxh7 16.Ng5+ Kg6 17.Qg4+–) 15.Ne4 Be7 16.c4
Bd7 17.h4‚ 17...Nxh4? 18.Nxh4 Bxh4 19.Qh5 f5 20.Qxh4 fxe4
21.Bxe4+–
11...cxd3. This is the best decision for Black. If the pawns on c4+d4
remain on the board, then White’s advantage would increase. If necessary,
he can undermine the enemy pawn on c4 with b3, Nbd2. After an exchange
on b3, White will advance c3-c4, occupying the centre. 12.Qxd3 Bd7
(12...Ne5 13.Nxe5 Bxe5, Keitlinghaus – Mortensen, Reykjavik 1997, 14.g3
Bd7 15.Qe2²) 13.a4 Ne5 14.Nxe5 Bxe5, Lobzhanidze – Kacheishvili,
Tbilisi 1996, 15.Qh3!?² 0-0-0 16.a5 Nc4 (16...Nd5 17.a6 b6 18.Na3²)
17.b3 Nxa5 18.b4 Nc6 19.b5 Nb4 20.Rxa7 Kb8 21.cxb4 Kxa7 22.b6+
Kxb6 (22...Qxb6 23.Rxe5+–) 23.Qe3+ Ka6 24.Qa3+–

A) 6...Nc6 7.d4

7...cxd4
If Black does not exchange here, White will have some additional
possibilities, for example d4xc5.

About 7...d5 8.exd6 – see line B.

7...Be7 8.0-0 0-0 (8...cxd4 9.cxd4 – see 7...cxd4; 8...d5 9.dxc5!?; 9.Re1²;
9.exd6 Qxd6 10.Na3 – see line B) 9.dxc5!? Bxc5 10.Bc2± d5? 11.Bxh7+
Kxh7 12.Ng5+ Kg6 13.Qd3+ f5 14.Qg3+–

7...c4 8.Bc2 d5 (8...d6 9.exd6 Bxd6 10.0-0 – see 5...c4) 9.exd6 Bxd6
10.Nbd2 e5 (10...0-0?! 11.Nxc4 Nxc4 12.Qd3±) 11.dxe5 Nxe5 12.Nxe5
Bxe5 13.Qh5±

8.cxd4
 8...d6
This is the best decision for Black. If he does not play immediately d6,
then later it would be the best for him still to play d6, transposing to the
main line, otherwise; it would be much easier for White to obtain a
considerable advantage. The variations below illustrate this perfectly:

8...d5 9.0-0 Bd7 (9...Be7 10.Nc3 – see 8...Be7) 10.Nc3 a6 (10...Rc8

11.Bc2²; 10...Be7 – see 8...Be7) 11.a3 Rc8 12.Bc2²

8...Bb4+ 9.Nc3 0-0 9...d6 10.Qe2 dxe5 11.dxe5 – see 8...d6; 9...d5 10.0-0
0-0 11.Bc2 – see 9...0-0; 10...Bd7 11.Bc2²) 10.0-0 d5 (10...d6 11.Qe2 dxe5
12.dxe5 – see 8...d6) 11.Bc2 f6 (11...f5 12.Ne2±) 12.Qd3 g6 13.Bh6ƒ

8...Be7 9.0-0
 About 9...d6 10.exd6 (10.Qe2 – see 8...d6) 10...Qxd6 11.Nc3 – see line
B.
The move 9...0-0 almost always transposes to the line with 8...d6. 10.Nc3
d5 (10...d6 11.Qe2 – see 8...d6) 11.Bc2 f6 (11...f5 12.exf6 – see 11...f6;
11...Bd7 12.Qd3 – see 8...d6 9.Qe2 Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Nc3 d5 12.Bc2 Bd7
13.Qd3) 12.exf6 Bxf6 13.Qd3 – see 8...d6 9.Qe2 Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Nc3 d5
12.Bc2 f6 13.exf6 Bxf6 14.Qd3.
9...d5 10.Nc3
 About 10...0-0 11.Bc2 – see 9...0-0.
10...a6 11.Bc2 Nd7 (11...Bd7 12.a3 Rc8 13.Re1 – see 10...Bd7) 12.Re1 0-
0 13.Qd3 g6 14.a3 b5 15.Bh6 Re8 16.Qe3 Bf8 17.Bxf8 Nxf8 18.h4 Ne7
19.g4‚ Ricardi – Sampaoli, San Luis 2007.
10...Bd7 11.Bc2 Rc8 12.a3 a6 (12...Na5 13.Qd3 a6 14.b3 Bc6 15.Bd2±
Breja – Janos, Slovakia 2011; 13...Qc7 14.Ne1!? Qc4 15.Qg3 g6 16.Be3²)
13.Re1 Na7 (13...Na5 14.Bd3 Nac4 15.Ne2 Bc6 16.b3 Na5 17.Nf4 g6
18.Bd2± Tiviakov – Samaganova, Yangon 2014) 14.Bd3 a5 15.Ne2
(15.Nd2!? 0-0 16.Re3‚) 15...Ba4, Tiviakov – Kovalyov, Montreal 2014
(15...Bb5!? 16.Bc2²) 16.Qd2 Nc4 17.Qf4±
 9.Qe2!?

The same position can also arise after the move-order 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.d4
cxd4 6.cxd4 d6 7.Bc4 Nb6 8.Bb3 e6 9.Qe2 (White did not play in the best
way here. It was preferable for him to choose 8.Bb5 and in response to the
move 8.Bb3, Black also did not reply in the best way. It was correct for him
to opt for 8...dxe5 9.Nxe5 Nxe5.).
White can simply transpose here to variation B: 9.exd6 Bxd6 10.0-0, or
9...Qxd6 10.0-0.

9...dxe5
This is again the best for Black. If he refrains from this line, for example
in favour of the move d5, then it would become unclear why he has lost
tempi for d7-d6-d5.

9...a5, Vlassov – Nakamura, playchess.com 2004, 10.a3 a4 11.Bc2²

9...d5 10.Nc3 Be7 11.0-0 (11.h4!? h6 12.h5 Bd7, Predojevic – Tomic,

Vogosca 2007, 13.Rh3²) 11...Bd7 (11...a6 12.Bc2 Bd7, Almasi – Bilek,
Hungary 1995, 13.b3 Rc8 14.Bd2²) 12.Rd1 a6 13.Bc2 Rc8 14.Ne1
(14.a3!?) 14...Nc4 15.Qg4 Kf8 (15...g6 16.Nf3 N6a5 17.Bd3± Na3?
Kukawski – Liberadzki, Warsaw 2010, 18.Bh6) 16.Nf3 b5 17.Ne2 Qb6?
18.Nf4 Staudner – Wukits, Austria 2003.

9...Be7 10.0-0 0-0 (10...d5 11.Nc3 – see 9...d5) 11.Nc3

About 11...dxe5 12.dxe5 – see 9...dxe5.

11...a6 12.a3 Qc7 13.Bc2 dxe5 14.dxe5 Nd7 15.Bf4± b5, Boehm –
Schwarz, Oberhof 2011, 16.Rac1 Bb7 17.Ne4 Rad8 18.Nd6.
11...Bd7 12.Bf4 d5 (12...dxe5 13.dxe5 – see 9...dxe5) 13.Rad1 Rc8
14.Bc2 Nb4 15.Bb1 Na4 (15...a6 16.Rfe1±) 16.Rc1 a6 17.Nxa4 Bxa4
18.Rxc8 Qxc8 19.Rc1 Qd8 20.a3 Nc6 21.b3 Bb5, Mika – Tornai, Hungary
2009, 22.Qc2 g6 23.a4 Nb4 24.Qd2 Bd7 25.Bh6 Re8 26.h4‚
11...Nb4 12.a3 N4d5 13.Qe4 (13.Bc2 Bd7 14.Qd3 g6 15.Bh6 Re8
16.Ne4 dxe5 17.dxe5²; 13.Ne4!? dxe5 14.dxe5 Bd7 15.Nd4²) 13...Nxc3
14.bxc3 d5 15.Qg4 f5 16.exf6 Bxf6, Restuccia – Jukemura, Cali 2007,
17.Qg3±
11...d5 12.Bc2
 About 12...f5 13.exf6 – see 12...f6.
12...Bd7 13.Qd3 g6 14.Bh6 Nb4 (14...Re8 15.b3 Rc8 16.Qe3±) 15.Qe2
Nxc2 16.Qxc2 Re8 17.Qc1 Rc8 18.Qf4 Nc4, Sigurjonsson – Kjartansson,
Reykjavik 2005, 19.b3 Na5 20.Rac1±
12...f6 13.exf6 Bxf6 14.Qd3 (14.Rd1!? Nc4 15.b3 Nd6 16.Ba3 a5,
Belyakov – Vlasenko, St Petersburg 2019, 17.Rac1 Nb4 18.Bb1²) 14...g6
15.Bh6 Rf7 (15...Nb4 16.Qe2 Nxc2 17.Qxc2 Rf7 18.b3±) 16.Bb3 a5 17.a3
a4 18.Ba2 Ra5 19.Rad1 Bd7 20.Rfe1± Golubovic – Ilincic, Neum 2004.

10.dxe5
 If White manages to castle without any problem, his task would become
much simpler, so Black will have to take some resolute measures, for
example with the moves Nb4, Qd3 to try to trade the queens.
10...Nb4

10...Nd4?! Now, Black’s queen will remain at the centre of the board and
will come under an attack by White’s pieces. 11.Nxd4 Qxd4 12.0-0
 12...Nd7 13.Re1 Bb4 14.Nd2± Nc5? 15.Nf3 Qd3 16.Ba4+ Ke7 17.Bg5+
f6 18.exf6+ gxf6 19.Bxf6+– Sermek – Vombek, Maribor 1998.
12...Be7 13.Rd1 Qc5 (13...Qh4 14.Nc3 Bd7 15.Be3± Bd8? 16.Rd4 Qe7,
Yagupov – Furman, Smolensk 1992, 17.Ne4 0-0 18.Nf6+ gxf6 19.Rg4+
Kh8 20.Bh6+–) 14.Nc3 Bd7 Szabo – Daianu, Arad 2012, 15.Bd2 0-0
16.Rac1±
12...Bd7 13.Rd1 Qb4 14.Nc3 (14.Na3!?) 14...Be7, Tzermiadianos –
Shahtahtinsky, Aghia Pelagia 2004, 15.Bd2 Qh4 16.a4 Bc6 17.a5 Nd5
18.Nxd5 exd5 19.Bc3±

10...Bb4+?! In general, this move is just a loss of time, since Black would
hardly be ready to exchange the only defender of his kingside. 11.Nc3
 11...Nd4 12.Nxd4 Qxd4 13.0-0 Bxc3 (13...0-0? 14.Rd1 – see 11...0-0)
14.bxc3 Qc5, Dubois – Le Gallo, Sautron 2013 (14...Qxc3? 15.Ba3+–)
15.c4 (15.Re1 Bd7 16.Qg4 0-0-0 17.Be3 Qc7 18.a4‚) 15...0-0 16.a4 Rd8
17.a5 Nd7 18.Rd1+–
11...0-0 12.0-0± Nd4? 13.Nxd4 Qxd4? 14.Rd1 Qc5, Babikov – Motylev,
Sochi 2016 (14...Qh4 15.Ne4 Be7 16.Rd4+–) 15.Rd3 Nd5 16.Ne4 Qc7
(16...Qb5 17.Bxd5 exd5 18.Nf6+ Kh8 19.Rh3+–) 17.Nf6+ Nxf6 18.exf6
g6 19.Bh6 Re8 20.Ba4+–
11...Nd5 12.Bd2 (12.0-0!? Bxc3 13.bxc3 Nxc3 14.Qc4 Nd5 15.Qg4 Kf8
16.Rd1©) 12...Nxc3 13.bxc3 Be7 14.0-0 Qc7 15.Rfe1 0-0, Vajda – Pergel,
Zalakaros 2010, 16.Qe4!? Na5 17.Bc2 g6 18.Ng5 Qc4 19.Qf3 Bd7
20.Re4‚

10...Be7 11.0-0
 11...Qc7 12.Nc3 a6 13.Bf4 Nd7 (13...0-0 14.Rac1±) 14.Rac1 0-0 15.Ne4
Rd8, Vysochin – Veits, Warsaw 2007, 16.Rfd1 Qa5 17.Nfg5!? (17.Nd6±)
17...Nf8 (17...h6? 18.Nxf7 Kxf7 19.Bxe6+ Kxe6 20.Qc4+ Kf5 21.Qf7+–)
18.Qh5 g6 19.Qh6 Rxd1+ 20.Rxd1 Nxe5 21.Bd2 Qb5 22.Bc3+–
11...0-0 12.Nc3. White has obtained a very good version of the standard
position with pawns on e5 – e6. His plan is quite simple. After Qe4, Bc2, he
will provoke g6 and later he will improve his position with Bh6, Rac1 (also
Rfd1 if necessary) and following Qf4, he will begin an attack.
 12...Nd4? 13.Nxd4 Qxd4 14.Rd1 Qh4 (14...Qb4 15.Bd2± Bd7?
16.Nd5+–; 14...Qc5, Kaidanov – Flores, Mar del Plata 2012, 15.Bd2 Bd7
16.Rac1±) 15.Be3 Nd7 16.Rd4+– Stevic – Hu, chess.com 2020.
12...Qc7 13.Nb5 Qb8, Porta Bellido – Bes Alvarez, Barcelona 2017,
14.Rd1 Nd5 15.Qe4±
12...Bd7 13.Bf4 Nb4 14.Rad1 (14.Rfd1!? Qe8 15.Rac1) 14...Qe8 15.Ng5
N4d5, Sveshnikov – Fercec, Bled 1998, 16.Qd3. White leaves the e4-
square for the retreat of his knight which would have been impossible after
the usual move Qe4. 16...g6 17.Bc1 h6 18.Nge4±
12...Nd7 13.Bf4 Nc5 14.Rad1 Qa5 15.Bc2 Qb4, Dragicevic – Amrutha,
Canberra 2009, 16.Bg5 Bxg5 17.Bxh7+ Kxh7 18.Nxg5+ Kg6 19.Qc2+
Kxg5 20.Qh7+–
12...a6. Black ensures the c7-square for his queen. 13.Qe4 Qc7 (13...Re8
14.Re1±; 13...Nd7 14.Bc2 g6 15.Bh6 Re8 16.Qf4 Qc7 17.Rfe1 b5 18.Bb3
Nc5 19.Ng5 f6 20.Nd5 exd5 21.Bxd5+ Kh8 22.Nf7+ Kg8 23.Ng5+ Kh8
24.exf6+– Pap – Buiza Prieto, San Sebastian 2015) 14.Bc2 g6 15.Bh6 Rd8,
Shevtsova – Petrova, Moscow 2019, 16.Rac1 Bd7 17.Qf4‚

11.Be3!?N
 White is not afraid of the check on the d3-square, since he would counter
it with the move Kf1, while the problem with the bringing of his rook on h1
into the actions would be solved in a way which is standard for the French
Defence with h2-h4, Rh1-h3-g3.
11...Nd3+

11...Qd3 12.Nc3 Bd7 13.a3 Qxe2+ 14.Kxe2 N4d5 15.Nxd5 Nxd5

16.Bxd5 exd5 17.Rhd1 Bb5+ 18.Ke1 Bc4 19.Nd2 Bb5 20.Nb1 Be7
21.Nc3±

12.Kf1 Nc5 13.Nc3!? White is fighting for the d5-square. 13...Nxb3

14.axb3 Be7 (14...Nd5 15.h4 Be7 16.Rh3 0-0 17.Rg3 Nxe3+ 18.Qxe3 f6
19.Rd1 Qe8 20.Ne4 Bd7 21.exf6 Bxf6 22.Nxf6+ Rxf6 23.Ne5±) 15.h4 0-0
(15...Bd7 16.Rh3 Bc6 17.Rg3 g6 18.Bh6±) 16.Rh3ƒ, followed by Rg3.

B) 6...d6 7.exd6!?
After 7.d4, White would fail to reach the standard position with a pawn on
e5 and with queens present on the board, because of the move 7...dxe5 and
he would have to capture with his knight 8.Nxe5.
 We will analyse now in details: B1) 7...Qxd6 and B2) 7...Bxd6.

7...Nc6!? (With this move Black avoids the possible variation 7...Bxd6
8.d4 cxd4 and now 9.Qxd4!?) 8.d4 cxd4 (about 8...Qxd6 9.0-0 – see
7...Qxd6; 8...Bxd6 9.dxc5 – see 7...Bxd6) 9.cxd4 Bxd6 (9...Qxd6 10.0-0 –
see 7...Qxd6) 10.0-0 – see 7...Bxd6.

7...c4 8.Bc2. This is similar to the popular variation 4...Nc6 5.Bc4 Nb6
6.Bb3 c4 7.Bc2 d5 8.exd6, but this is the only similarity. In that line Black
captures on d6 with his queen and after 9.0-0, continues with Bg4, 0-0-0
obtaining serious counterplay. Here, he has already played e6, while his
knight is still on the b8-square. 8...Bxd6 9.0-0
 White usually plays later d4 and if Black does not capture en passant, then
after Nd2, Qe2, White would win a tempo attacking in the process the
pawn on c4. If Black captures c4xd3, then after Qxd3, White will end up
with a ready battery Bc2+Qd3.
9...N8d7 10.b3 (10.d4!?) 10...Qc7 11.Na3 a6 12.Qe2 (12.Re1!? Ne5
13.Nxe5 Bxe5 14.Qh5±) 12...cxb3 (12...Ne5!? 13.Nxe5 Bxe5 14.g3 cxb3
15.axb3 Bf6²) 13.axb3 0-0, Rozentalis – Antoniewski, Lubniewice 2002,
14.c4 Nf6 15.d4 Bf4 16.Bb2±
9...0-0 10.d4 cxd3 11.Qxd3 g6 12.Rd1 Be7 13.Qe3 Qc7 14.Qh6 N8d7,
Rozentalis – Oral, Quebec 2001, 15.Bf4!? (15.Ng5 Nf6 16.Rd4 Rd8 17.Bf4
e5 18.Rxd8+ Bxd8 19.Bb3 exf4 20.Bxf7+ Qxf7 21.Nxf7 Kxf7 22.Nd2±)
15...Qc5 16.Ng5 Bxg5 (16...Nf6? 17.Be3 Qb5 18.Nd2+–) 17.Bxg5 Nd5
18.c4 Qxc4 19.Nc3 N5f6 20.h3+–
9...Nc6 10.d4
 10...0-0 11.Qe2 Qc7 12.Re1±
10...Qc7 11.Nbd2 Bd7 12.Qe2 Ne7 13.Ne4 Rc8 (13...Ng6 14.Nxd6+
Qxd6, Magem Badals – San Segundo, Oviedo 1992, 15.Ng5±) 14.Nxd6+
Qxd6 15.Ne5± Capablanca – Menchik, Barcelona 1929.
10...cxd3 11.Qxd3. White’s next move would be – Rd1. Naturally, if
Black tries to trade the queens, White should avoid that. He must exploit the
presence of Black’s king at the centre of the board and the absence of a
good square for his queen.
 11...Ne5 12.Nxe5 Bxe5, Stevic – Kurajica, Bjelovar 2019, 13.Qb5+ Nd7
14.Nd2 0-0 15.Nf3 Bf6 16.Ng5 g6 17.Ne4 Bg7 18.Rd1 Qc7 19.Qg5± b6
20.Qe7 Qd8 21.Qd6.
11...Be7 12.Qe4 (12.Qe2 0-0 13.Bf4²) 12...Nd5 13.Rd1 (13.Re1!?)
13...Qc7 14.Na3 (14.a4!?) 14...a6 15.Bg5² b6? 16.Bxe7 f5 (16...Ndxe7
17.Nc4+–) 17.Qa4 Kxe7 18.Bxf5 Nf4 19.Re1+– Xie George – Neelotpal,
Parramatta 2009.
11...Qc7 12.Rd1 Be7 (12...Nd5 13.Na3 Bxa3 14.bxa3 Bd7 15.c4±)
13.Na3 (13.a4!? Bd7 14.Na3 a6 15.Qe4 Nd5 16.Nc4) 13...Bxa3 (13...a6
14.Nc4 Nxc4 15.Qxc4 e5 16.Ng5±) 14.bxa3± Nd7? (14...Bd7 15.Ng5 f6
16.Ne4 Ne5 17.Nd6+ Kf8 18.Qg3±) 15.a4 b6 16.Ba3 Bb7? (16...Nc5
17.Qe3 0-0 18.Ng5 h6 19.Ne4±) 17.Bd6 Qd8 18.Qe3+– Magem Badals –
Illescas Cordoba, Pamplona 1992.

B1) 7...Qxd6
Now Black must be constantly on the alert about his opponent’s
possibilities Nc3-b5, or Na3-b5(c4).
8.d4
 8...Nc6

8...N8d7. Black transfers his knight to f6, but weakens his control over
the e5-square. 9.0-0 Nf6 (It would be better for him to choose here 9...Be7,
not allowing the enemy knight to e5. 10.Nbd2 – see 8...Be7) 10.Ne5 Be7
(about 10...cxd4 11.cxd4 Be7 12.Nc3 – see 8...cxd4) 11.Bf4±

8...Be7 9.0-0 N8d7 (9...Nc6 10.Na3 – see 8...Nc6) 10.Nbd2 Nf6 (10...0-
0 11.Re1²) 11.a4. with the idea to oust the enemy knight from the a5-square
and to follow that with Nc4. (11.dxc5!? Qxc5 12.Re1 0-0 13.Ne4 Nxe4
14.Rxe4 Nd5 15.Rg4ƒ) 11...cxd4 (11...0-0 12.Re1²) 12.Nxd4 0-0,
Khamrakulov – Epishin, Seville 2004 (12...a5 13.Qe2 0-0 14.N2f3 Bd7
15.Ne5±) 13.a5!? Nbd5 14.Nc4 Qc7 15.Re1 h6 16.Qf3 Bd7 17.Ne5 Bd6
18.Nxd7 Qxd7 19.Rd1 (19.g4!?) 19...Qe7 20.h4 Bc7 21.g4‚ threatening
22.g5 hxg5 23.hxg5 Nd7 24.Kg2 and 25.Rh1.

After 8...cxd4 9.cxd4, White’s queen’s knight gains access to the best c3-
square for its development.
 About 9...Nc6 10.0-0, or 9...Be7 10.0-0 0-0 11.Nc3 Nc6 12.a3 – see
8...Nc6.
9...Bd7. Black covers the b5-square against the possible sortie of the
enemy knight. 10.0-0 Be7 11.Nc3 0-0 12.Ne5. White not only increases his
pressure in the centre, but also frees the d1-h5 diagonal for his queen.
12...Bc6, Pavasovic – Ruck, Plovdiv 2003, 13.Qg4!? N8d7 14.Nxc6 Qxc6
15.Bh6 Bf6 16.Rfd1 Qd6 17.Rd3 Kh8 18.Bf4 Qe7 19.Rad1±, threatening
Nb5+Bd6, or Rh3 with an attack.
9...N8d7, with the idea to transfer the knight to the f6-square in order to
protect his king. He weakens in the process however his control over the
e5-square. 10.0-0 Nf6 11.Ne5. White has occupied an excellent outpost
with his knight and with its help will exert powerful pressure in the centre,
or after Re1-e3-g3 will organise an attack. 11...Be7 12.Nc3 0-0 13.Re1
(13.Bf4 Nbd5 14.Bg3 Qb6, Malbran – Slipak, Villa Martelli 1998, 15.Re1
Qd8 16.Qf3ƒ) 13...Nbd5 (13...Rd8 14.Nb5 Qb4 15.Qe2± a6? 16.Nc7 Rb8
17.Nxf7! Kxf7 18.Nxe6+–; 13...a6 14.Re3 Bd7 15.Rg3‚) 14.Bg5. White’s
subsequent moves are quite typical for similar positions: Qf3, Rad1, Qh3,
increasing the pressure. 14...Bd7 15.Qf3 Bc6 16.Qh3 Rfe8 17.Rad1± b5?
Golovlev – Loy, Odessa 2008, 18.Bxf6 Bxf6 19.Ne4 Qc7 20.Bxd5 Bxd5
21.Nxf6+ gxf6 22.Qg3+ Kh8 23.Ng6+–

9.0-0 cxd4

9...Be7. If Black does not exchange immediately the pawns, then White’s
knight will join into the actions after Na3-b5(c4). Even after the exchange
of the pawns, he would be able to capture on d4 with his knight. 10.Na3 0-0
(10...cxd4 11.Nb5 Qd7 12.Nbxd4 Nxd4 13.Nxd4 0-0 14.Qe2 Bf6 15.Rd1
Qe7 16.Nb5 Bd7 17.Bf4 Bxb5 18.Qxb5 Rad8, Baklan – Becker, Germany
2011, 19.Be3!?±; 10...a6 11.Be3 cxd4 12.Nxd4 Nd5 13.Nf5 Qe5 14.Nxe7
Ncxe7 15.Bd4±) 11.Nb5 Qd8 12.Qe2 (12.dxc5!? Bxc5 13.Bf4²) 12...cxd4
13.Nbxd4 Bd7 14.Rd1 Nxd4 15.Nxd4 (15.Rxd4!? Bf6 16.Ne5²) 15...Qc7
16.a4² Lobron – Leko, Nettetal 1994.

10.cxd4 Be7 11.Nc3

11...0-0

About 11...a6 12.a3 0-0 13.Qd3 – see 11...0-0.

 11...Nb4 12.Ne5 0-0 13.Qg4 f5 14.Qd1 N4d5 15.Nb5 Qd8 16.a4 a6,
Bonvalot – Muller, France 1999, 17.Nc3±

12.a3
This move would be necessary for White if he plans to build the battery
Qd3+Bc2, as well as for the retreat of his bishop on the a2-g8 diagonal, if
he plans to continue later with the pawn-break d4-d5.
12...Rd8
 12...a6 13.Qd3 Rd8 (13...Nd5 14.Re1 b6 15.Bc2 g6 16.Bh6 Rd8
17.Ne4ƒ) 14.Rd1 Qc7 15.Qe4 Nd7 16.Bf4 Qa5 (16...Bd6 17.Bxd6 Qxd6
18.d5 Nf6 19.Qc2 exd5 20.Nxd5 Nxd5 21.Rxd5 Qf6 22.Re1± Be6
23.Ng5) 17.Rac1² Schild – Schalkwijk, Email 2009.

12...Nd5 13.Re1

13...b6 14.Ne4 Qc7 15.Qd3 Bb7, Jicman – Chiricuta, Romania 1992,

16.Bxd5 exd5 17.Neg5 g6 18.Ne5²
13...Rd8, Lagunow – Niehaus, Berlin 2011, 14.Qd3 (14.Nb5 Qb8 15.Qd3
a6 16.Nc3 Nf6 17.Bd2²) 14...h6 (14...Nf4?! 15.Bxf4 Qxf4 16.d5±)
15.Nxd5 exd5 16.Ne5²
13...Nxc3 14.bxc3 b6 15.Qd3 (15.Ng5!? Bb7? 16.Nxe6 fxe6 17.Rxe6+–;
15...h6 16.Ne4 Qc7 17.Qh5 Kh7 18.Qg4‚; 15...e5 16.Qf3 Bxg5 17.Bxg5
exd4 18.Be7 Nxe7 19.Qxa8±) 15...Bb7 16.Bc2 g6 17.Bh6 Rfe8 18.Ng5
Qd5 19.Qg3 Bf6 20.Ne4 (20.h4!?) 20...Be7, Kislinsky – Soltanici, Kiev
2010, 21.h4ƒ

13.Be3 Na5
 Black is only forcing his opponent’s bishop to occupy another operational
diagonal.

13...Nd5 14.Qd3 b6 15.Nxd5 (15.Ng5!? Bxg5 16.Bxg5 f6 17.Bd2²)

15...exd5, Houhou – Glicenstein, Paris 2004, 16.Rac1²

14.Bc2 Nac4 15.Qd3

White would not mind the exchange on e3, since the f-file would be
opened after that and he would exert pressure on this semi-open file.
15...f5?! (15...g6 16.Bb3² Nxe3 17.Ne4 Qc7 18.fxe3 Nd5 19.Rac1 Qb6
20.Ne5 Rf8 21.Nc5ƒ) 16.Bb3 Nxe3 17.fxe3± g6? (17...Nd5 18.Ne5±)
18.Nb5 Qb8 19.Rac1+– Schippan – Zolfagharian, Germany 2014.

B2) 7...Bxd6 8.d4

 8...cxd4

8...0-0 9.0-0 cxd4 (about 9...N8d7 10.Re1 – see 8...Nbd7; 9...Nc6

10.dxc5 – see 8...Nc6) 10.cxd4 – see 8...cxd4.

8...N8d7, with the idea to transfer the knight to the f6-square. 9.0-0 0-0
10.Re1
 10...cxd4 11.Qxd4 Be7 12.Bc2²
10...Nf6 11.Bg5 Nbd7 12.Nbd2 Qc7 13.Nc4 Bf4 14.Nce5± Nxe5?!
(14...Bxg5 15.Nxg5 Nb6±) 15.Bxf4 Nxf3+ 16.Qxf3 Qe7 17.d5 Re8
18.Rad1 b6, S.Zhigalko – Beck, Budva 2003, 19.d6 Bb7 20.dxe7+–
10...Qc7 11.a4!? White is occupying space. Later, he will play at an
opportune moment a4-a5. 11...Nf6 (11...cxd4 12.Qxd4²) 12.Bg5 Be7
13.Na3 Bd7 (13...a6 14.a5 Nbd5 15.Nc4 Bd7 16.Bh4 Nf4 17.Nfe5 Bb5
18.Bg3²) 14.a5 (14.dxc5 Qxc5 15.a5 Nbd5 16.Ne5²) 14...Nbd5 15.Bxd5
Nxd5 16.Bxe7 Nxe7 17.dxc5 Rfd8 18.Qd4 Qxa5 19.Nc4 Qc7 20.Qd6²

8...Nc6 9.dxc5 Bxc5 10.Qe2. White should be trying to prevent the

enemy pawn-advance e6-e5 in this pawn structure and he should play Rfe1,
while his queen’s knight would be transferred to the centre via the route
Nbd2-e4. If Black plays at some moment h7-h6, then White should have in
mind the possible tactical strike Bxh6, followed by Ne4(Nh5)-f6. 10...0-0
11.0-0
 11...h6. This move is possibly slightly premature. After White builds the
battery Bc2+Qe4(d3), the advance of Black’s pawns would result in a
further weakening of his king’s shelter. In addition, he must consider all the
time the possible tactical strike Bxh6. 12.Nbd2 Be7 (12...Nd5 13.Ne4 Bb6,
Valerga – Cuevas, Villa Martelli 2013, 14.Bd2 Qc7 15.Rad1 a5 16.a4 Bd7?
17.c4 Ndb4 18.Bxh6 gxh6 19.Rxd7+–; 16...Nce7 17.Nh4² White is
threatening to oust the enemy knight away from the centre with the move
18.c4 and following 18...Nb4, to begin an attack with the move 19.Qh5.
17...Bd7? 18.c4 Nb4 19.Bxh6+–) 13.Bc2!? White is aiming at the residence
of the enemy king. After Black’s queen occupies the c7-square, he must be
constantly on the alert about White’s possibility Qd3. 13.Ne4 Qc7 14.Ng3.
He plans to play Nh5 bringing his knight closer to the enemy king. In
addition, he would have the possibility Bc1-f4. 14...Re8?! 15.Nh5. This
move is played with the threat 16.Bf4 Bd6 17.Bxh6+–, which Black fails to
notice. 15...Bf8? 16.Bxh6 gxh6 17.Nf6+ 1–0 Rublevsky – Jaracz, Warsaw
2010; 14...Nd7!? 15.Nh5 Qa5²) 13...Qc7 14.Re1. White prevents e6-e5.
14...Bd7 (14...Nd7 15.Nc4²) 15.Nc4 (He is threatening 16.Qd3 f5 17.Nxb6
axb6 18.Bf4.) 15...Nxc4 16.Qxc4 Rfd8 (16...Rac8? 17.Qd3 f5 18.Bf4+–)
17.Qg4 e5 18.Qg3 Qd6 19.Nxe5±
 11...Qc7 12.Nbd2. White is bringing his knight closer to the centre, so
that it can participate into the attack. His bishop might be placed on b3 and
can capture the enemy knight on d5, if Black transfers it there as he usually
does. (12.a4!? Nd5 13.Na3 a6 14.Nc4 Bd7 15.Bc2²) 12...Nd5 13.Ne4 Be7
14.Re1 Nf6?! Stripunsky – Hasan, Arlington 2013 (14...b6 15.Ng3 Bb7
16.Bxd5 exd5 17.Nf5 Bf6 18.Bg5²) 15.Nxf6+!? White exchanges his
opponent’s knight, which might protect the king. 15...Bxf6 16.Qe4 Ne7
17.Bc2 g6 18.Bf4 Qb6 19.Rad1. He dominates in the centre, while Black
will have great problems to complete his development. 19...Qxb2 (19...Bg7
20.Bd6 Re8 21.Ba4 Nc6 22.Ne5+–; 19...Rd8 20.Be3 Qc7 21.Qf4+–)
20.Bb3. White isolates the strongest enemy piece at the price of a pawn.
20...Nd5 (20...Qxc3 21.Bd6, threatening Qf4) 21.Bh6 Bg7 22.Bxg7 Kxg7
23.Qd4+ Kg8 24.Rd3 Bd7 25.Ng5‚ 25...h6 26.Ne4.

8...Qc7 9.0-0 0-0, Tzermiadianos – Papadopoulos, Achaea 2012,

10.Na3!? If Black prevents the appearance of the enemy knight on the b5-
square, White will activate it via the c4 or the c2-squares. 10...a6 11.Qd3

11...N8d7. After Black transfers his knight to the f6-square, White will
play Bc1-g5 Bd6-e7 Nf3-e5 and will deploy his knight into the centre.
12.Re1 (12.Bg5 h6 13.Bh4 Nd5 14.Bc2 N5f6 15.Nc4² Be7? 16.Bg3 Qd8
17.dxc5 Nxc5 18.Qxd8 Rxd8 19.Nb6 Ra7 20.Bb8+–) 12...Nf6 13.Bg5 Be7
14.Ne5 cxd4 15.cxd4 Bd7 16.Re3 Nbd5 17.Rh3 g6 18.Re1±
11...Nc6 12.Ng5!? Now, practically all Black’s pieces are cramped on the
queenside, so it would be reasonable for White to begin active actions on
the kingside. (12.Nc4 Nxc4 13.dxc5 Bxc5 14.Ng5 g6 15.Qxc4 Be7 16.Qh4
h5 17.Re1 Kg7 18.Be3²) 12...g6 13.Qh3 h5

14.g4!? After this move it would be essential to evaluate correctly the

consequences of the pawn-advance e6-e5. (14.dxc5 Bxc5 15.Ne4 Be7
16.Bh6²) 14...c4!? The idea of this move is to provoke the appearance of
the enemy light-squared bishop on the c4-square, so that it may come under
an attack there. (If Black plays immediately 14...e5, then White can parry
that easily with the line: 15.dxc5 Bxc5 16.Qd3 Kg7 17.gxh5±; 16...Ne7
17.gxh5 Bf5 18.Qg3±) 15.Nxc4 Nxc4 16.Bxc4 e5 17.Qd3 Ne7 18.Ne4
(18.gxh5 Bf5. This is the idea of the move c5-c4, since White’s queen is
forced to protect the bishop. 19.Qe2 exd4÷) 18...Bxg4 19.Nxd6 Qxd6
20.Re1. This position is quite open and White’s two-bishop advantage is a
very important factor. In addition, Black must solve the problem with the
protection of his pawn on e5. 20...Nc6 (20...exd4? 21.Rxe7 Qxe7
22.Qxg6+–; 20...Rad8 21.Bg5±) 21.dxe5 Qxd3 22.Bxd3 Rfe8 23.f4 Rad8
24.Be4±

We will analyse now: B2a) 9.Qxd4 and B2b) 9.cxd4.

B2a) 9.Qxd4!?
After this order of moves (Black has not played yet 7...Nc6.), it is quite
possible that the simplest way for White to obtain an advantage would be to
capture with the queen. After Black attacks the enemy queen with his
knight, White’s queen will retreat to e4 or to g4, closer to the enemy king.
9...0-0 10.0-0 Nc6

10...Be7. Black wishes to exchange the queens, but of course White

should avoid this. Black has not completed his development yet and is
playing with an already developed piece, so it would not be surprising that
both retreats of White’s queen would lead to an advantage for him.
 11.Qe4 N8d7 (11...Bd7 12.Bc2 g6 13.Rd1 Nc6 14.Bh6 Re8 15.Nbd2 e5,
Godena – Gershon, Israel 2012, 16.Bb3±) 12.Bc2 g6 (12...Nf6 13.Qh4²)
13.Bh6 Re8 14.Rd1 Nd5 15.Nbd2 (15.c4 N5f6 16.Qh4 Nh5 17.Qd4 Nb6
18.Qe3 Qc7 19.b3 Bd7 20.Nc3²) 15...Qc7 16.Bg5 (16.Ng5!? N5f6 17.Qe2
Rb8 18.a4²) 16...b5 17.Bxe7 Rxe7 18.Qh4 Bb7, Godena – Das, Calvia
2006, 19.a4 a6 (19...bxa4 20.Rxa4²) 20.axb5 axb5 21.Rxa8+ Bxa8 22.Bd3
Qb8 23.Ne4ƒ
11.Qg4!? Kh8 (11...e5 12.Qh5±; 11...Nc6 12.Rd1 Qc7 13.Bh6 Bf6
14.Nbd2 Kh8 15.Ne4±; 11...N8d7 12.Bh6 Bf6 13.Nbd2 Kh8 14.Be3ƒ)
12.Qh5 Qe8 13.Re1 Nc6 14.Na3!? (14.a4 Nd5 15.Bxd5 exd5 16.Qxd5 Be6
17.Qb5²) 14...Bxa3 (14...Bd7 15.Nb5±; 14...a6 15.Nc2 Nd7 16.Ncd4±;
15.Be3!? Nd7 16.Bc2 f5 17.Qxe8 Rxe8 18.Nd4 Nxd4 19.Bxd4 Bxa3
20.bxa3 Nf6 21.Rad1 b5 22.Bb3 a5 23.a4±) 15.Ng5 h6 16.bxa3 Bd7
17.Ne4 f6 18.Qxe8 Rfxe8 19.Nd6 Re7 20.Nxb7 e5 21.Be3²

11.Qe4
 White is threatening to begin an attack with the move Ng5.
11...f5

11...Ne7 12.Rd1 (12.a4 Qc7 13.Na3 a6 14.Bc2 Ng6 15.a5 Nd5 16.Nc4
Nf6 17.Qe2 Bc5 18.Nce5²) 12...Qc7 13.Qd3 Bc5 14.Bc2 Ng6 15.h4 Be7
16.h5 Rd8 17.Qe4 Rxd1+ 18.Bxd1 Nf8 19.h6 g6 20.Bf4 Qc4 21.Nbd2
Qxe4 22.Nxe4 f6 (22...Bd7 23.Bg5±) 23.Bb3 Bd7 24.Nd4²

11...Nd7 12.Bc2 Nf6 13.Qh4 Ne7, Bildat – Pinkus, Cologne 1994,

14.Nbd2 Ng6 (14...Nf5?! 15.Qh3± Bd7 16.g4 Ne7 17.g5+–) 15.Bxg6 fxg6
(15...hxg6? 16.Ng5 Be7 17.Nde4 Nh5 18.g4 f6 19.gxh5 fxg5 20.Bxg5
Bxg5 21.Nxg5 Rf5 22.f4±) 16.Nc4 Be7 17.Re1²

11...Qc7 12.Ng5 g6 13.Qh4 h5 14.Nd2 (14.g4 Nd5 15.gxh5 f6÷)

14...Nd5 15.Nde4 Be5? (15...Be7 16.Re1²) 16.f4 Bg7 17.f5 Nce7
(17...exf5 18.Bxd5 fxe4 19.Rxf7+–) 18.f6 Nf5 19.Rxf5 exf5 20.fxg7 Rd8
21.Nxf7+– Lasinskas – Ridzvanavicius, Kaunas 1999.

11...h6 12.Rd1 Qc7 13.a4 Bd7 14.Na3 a6 15.Be3²

 12.Qe2 Qf6 (12...Nd5 13.Rd1²) 13.Rd1 Bc7 14.Na3 a6, Sveshnikov –
Iljin, Riga 2019, 15.Re1 Nd5 16.c4!? Nde7 17.Bg5 Qf7 18.c5 Nd5
19.Nc4±

B2b) 9.cxd4

9...Nc6

9...N8d7. Black wishes to place his knight on f6, but weakens his control
over the e5-square and White’s knight on f3 will be soon headed there.
10.0-0
 10...Nf6 11.Ne5!? White usually avoids the trade of the queens, but here
Black’s knight would not be able to remain on d5 and White’s bishops
would dominate all over the entire board. 11...0-0 (11...Bxe5 12.dxe5 Qxd1
13.Rxd1 Nfd5 14.a4 a5 15.Nc3 Nxc3 16.bxc3 Bd7 17.Be3 Nd5 18.Bxd5
exd5 19.Rxd5 Bc6 20.Rd2²; 17.f4!? Bc6 18.c4 Nd7 19.Be3 Ke7 20.Bc2 h6
21.Bc1 Rhd8 22.Ba3+ Ke8 23.Rdb1²) 12.Nc3 Nbd5 (Black would lose the
exchange if he tries to exchange the queens: 12...Bxe5 13.dxe5 Qxd1
14.Rxd1 Nfd7 15.Be3 Nxe5 16.Bc5 Re8 17.Nb5±) 13.Qf3 (13.Re1!?)
13...b6?! (13...h6 14.Re1²) 14.Bg5 Bb7. Black loses a pawn, because of the
pin. 15.Nxd5 Bxd5 16.Bxd5 exd5 17.Bxf6 Qxf6 18.Qxf6 gxf6 19.Nd7±
Rublevsky – Kozlov, Sochi 2017.
10...0-0 11.Nc3 Nf6
 One of the standard plans for White in analogous positions is after
12.Qe2, to place his knight on e5 and then to transfer the rook to the third
rank Rd1-d3-g3(h3) with an attack. 12...Bd7 13.Rd1 Bc6 14.Ne5 Bd5
15.Bc2 Be7, Kornev – Purtov, St Petersburg 2005, 16.Rd3. White is ready
to begin a decisive offensive and Black will have a hard time to parry it.
16...Rc8? (16...Bc4 17.Nxc4 Nxc4 18.Rg3 Nd6 19.Bh6 Nfe8 20.Qh5±)
17.Rh3 g6 18.Qe3 Re8 19.Qg3 (threatening 20.Bxg6 hxg6 21.Nxg6+–)
19...Be4 (19...Bf8? 20.Rxh7 Nxh7 21.Bxg6 fxg6 22.Qxg6+ Bg7 23.Qf7+
Kh8 24.Ng6#) 20.Bxe4 (20.Nxf7!?) 20...Nxe4 21.Nxe4 Qxd4 22.Nd2
Rxc1+ 23.Rxc1 Qxd2 24.Qc3± Qxc3 25.Rhxc3 Bf6 26.f4.
12.Bg5. White will follow this move with Qd3 after which he will be free
to develop immediately his initiative Bc2, Bh6 (after g6), Ne5, or at first he
will improve his position by deploying the rooks on d1 and e1 and only
later will build if necessary a battery with the move Bc2. 12...Be7 (12...h6
13.Bh4 Bd7 14.Ne5 Be7 15.Qd3 Nfd5 16.Bc2 f5 17.Bxe7 Nxe7 18.Bb3
Ned5 19.Rfe1± G.Braun – Baugut, Ellwangen 1996; 13...Be7 14.Qd3 Nh7,
Streicher – Goetz, Speyer 1986, 15.Bc2 g6 16.Bxe7 Qxe7 17.Rfe1 Nf6
18.Rad1±; 14...Bd7 15.Bc2 g6 16.Ne5 Be8 17.Bb3²) 13.Qd3
 13...Bd7 14.Bc2 g6 15.Bh6 Re8 16.Ne5 Nbd5 17.Qg3 Nh5? (17...Bc6
18.Rfe1²) 18.Qf3 Bf6, Kristiansen – Sugden, Hastings 2018, (18...Nhf6
19.Bb3±) 19.Nxd7 Qxd7 20.Ba4+–
13...Nbd5 14.Rfe1 Re8 15.Rad1 (15.Ne5!?) 15...Nxc3 16.bxc3 Bd7
17.Ne5
 17...Ng4. Black fails to simplify the position by trading pieces: 18.Nxf7!
Kxf7 19.Qf5+ Nf6 20.Rxe6 Kf8 21.Qe5 Qb8 (21...Rc8? 22.Bxf6 Bxf6
23.Qd6+ Be7 24.Qd5+–) 22.Bxf6 Qxe5 23.Bxe7+ Rxe7 24.Rxe5+–
17...Rc8 18.Qh3 Rc7 19.Bc2 g6, Sygulski – Oliwa, Wisla 1998, 20.Re3
Nh5 21.Qf3 Bf6 22.d5! exd5 23.Qxd5 Rxe5 24.Rxe5 Bxg5 25.Rxg5 Qf6
26.Qe5 Rxc3 27.Bb3 Bf5 28.Qxf6 Nxf6 29.Rg3 Rc8 30.Re3 Kf8 31.f3 h5
32.h3 h4 33.Rd4+–
9...0-0 10.0-0

About 10...Nc6 11.Nc3 – see 9...Nc6.

10...N8d7 11.Nc3 – see 9...Nbd7.
10...Bd7 with the idea Bc6, but his bishop would not work effectively on
the h1-a8 diagonal, because of the weakness of the other a2-g8 diagonal.
11.Qd3!? h6. Black prevents Ng5, but after White builds his battery, Black
would have to continue the game with a backward pawn on e6. (11...Bc6. If
Black continues to implement immediately his plan, then after 12.Ng5, he
would be forced to weaken considerably his position on the kingside.
12...g6 13.Qh3 h5 14.Nc3²) 12.Nc3 Bc6 13.Bc2 f5 14.Bb3. The idea Bd7-
c6 did not bring anything positive to Black. 14...Bd5 (14...Nd5 15.Re1 Qd7
16.Bd2 Na6 17.Nxd5 Bxd5 18.Bxd5 exd5 19.Qb3±) 15.Nxd5 Nxd5
16.Re1 Qd7 17.Qe2 Rf6 18.Ne5 Qc7 19.Bd2 Nc6 20.Rac1²
10...Nd5 11.Nc3 Nxc3 12.bxc3 Nd7 13.Bc2. Now, Black would have to
weaken additionally his position on the kingside by advancing another
pawn. 13...h6 (13...Nf6 14.Qd3 b6 15.Bg5 g6 16.Rfe1±) 14.Re1 Nf6
15.Qd3 Qc7 (15...b6 16.g4 Bb7 17.g5 hxg5 18.Bxg5 Re8 19.Ne5 Bxe5
20.Rxe5 Qc7 21.Qh3 Rac8 22.Rc1+–) 16.Ne5 Rd8 17.Qg3 Kf8, Gallagher
– Agdestein, Warsaw 2013, 18.Qh4. Now, almost all White’s pieces take
part into the attack. 18...Nd5 19.c4 Nb4 20.Bxh6 Bxe5 (20...gxh6
21.Qxh6+ Ke7 22.Ng6+–; 20...Nxc2? 21.Bg5 Ke8 22.Qh7! Here, White
attacks in the process the enemy knight on c2 as well. 22...Nxe1 (22...Bf8
23.Bxd8 23.Qg8+ Bf8 24.Bxd8+–) 21.Rxe5 gxh6 22.Qxh6+ Ke8 23.Ba4+
Bd7 24.Bb3±

10.0-0 0-0 11.Nc3

We will analyse in details: B2b1) 11...Bd7, B2b2) 11...Ne7 and B2b3)

11...Nd5.
 About 11...a6 12.Re1 – see Chapter 15 (4...a6 5.d4 cxd4 6.Bc4 Nb6 7.Bb3
d5 8.exd6 e6 9.cxd4 Bxd6 10.0-0 0-0 11.Nc3 Nc6 12.Re1).

11...e5?! Black is trying to solve radically the problem with the

development of his light-squared bishop, his his lag in development
prevents him from accomplishing this. 12.dxe5 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Bxe5
14.Bxf7+ Kxf7 15.Qh5+ Ke6 (15...Kg8 16.Qxe5 Re8, Brady – O’Connell,
Dublin 1998, 17.Qg3±) 16.f4 Bd4+ 17.Kh1 Rf5 18.Re1+ Kd6 19.Nb5+
Kc6 20.Qf3+ Kxb5 21.Qd3+ Kc6 22.Be3 Qd6 (22...Rd5 23.Rac1+ Kd6
24.Bxd4+–) 23.Bxd4 Be6 24.Qe4+ Nd5 25.Qxe6 Qxe6 26.Rxe6+ Kd7
27.Re5±

11...Be7. Black plays this with the idea Bf6, but White will counter this
move with Ne4 and it will turn out that Black can capture the pawn on d4,
but this would be very bad for him. He would have then to comply with the
exchange on f6, presenting the opponent with the two-bishop advantage.
12.Bf4

12...Nb4 13.Re1 N4d5 14.Bg3 (14.Bd2!? Bd7 15.Ne5 Be8 16.Qg4ƒ)

14...Bd7, Torres Ventosa – Pribeanu, Benidorm 2010, 15.Ne5 Rc8 (15...Be8
16.Qf3²) 16.Nxd5. White wins a pawn by force. 16...Nxd5 17.Bxd5 exd5
18.Qb3² Bc6 19.Nxc6 bxc6 20.Qb7±
12...a6. Black defends against the possibility Nc3-b5, but White did not
plan to play like this at all. 13.Re1 Bf6 14.Ne4² Bxd4? 15.Bd6 Bxb2
16.Rb1 Bf6 17.Nxf6+ Qxf6 18.Bxf8 Kxf8 19.Qd3 g6, Pereira – Ferreira,
Brazil 1995, 20.Qe3 Nd7 21.Ng5 Kg7 22.Nxf7 Qxf7 23.Bxe6+–
12...Nd5 13.Bxd5. White practically wins a pawn, or compromises the
pawn structure around the enemy king. 13...exd5 14.Qb3 Bf6 15.Rad1 Ne7
(15...Bg4 16.Nxd5±) 16.Be5 b6 (16...Bxe5 17.dxe5 Be6 18.Qxb7 Rb8
19.Qxa7 Rxb2 20.Nd4±) 17.Bxf6 gxf6 18.Rfe1 Be6 19.Ne2± Mellado
Trivino – Vega Gutierrez, Las Palmas 1999.
12...Bf6 13.Ne4 Nd5 (13...Bxd4? 14.Bd6 Bxb2 15.Rb1±) 14.Nxf6+
Nxf6 15.Rc1 Nd5 16.Bg5 Qb6 17.Qd3 Bd7 18.Bc2 g6 19.Bb3²

11...h6. Black defends against Ng5 or Bg5, but provides his opponent
with a target for his attack. Black must also consider soon the possible
strike Bxh6. 12.Re1

About 12...Nd5 13.Bc2 – see 11...Nd5.

 12...Bd7 13.Ne5 Ne7 (13...Nxe5? 14.dxe5 Be7 15.Qg4 Kh8 16.Qh5 Bg5
17.f4 Bh4 18.Rd1 Nd5 19.Nxd5 exd5, Kuthan – Granabetter, Austria 2007,
20.Be3+–; 13...Qh4? 14.Re4 Qe7 15.Nxd7 Qxd7 16.Bxh6 gxh6 17.Qh5
Ne7 18.Qxh6 Rfd8 19.Bxe6 Qxe6 20.Rxe6 fxe6 21.Qxe6+ Kf8 22.Ne4+–
Palffy – Z.Szabo, Hungary 1992) 14.Qh5ƒ
12...Ne7 13.Qd3 Ned5 14.Bc2 (14.Ne5!? Nxc3 15.bxc3±) 14...Nf6
15.Ne5 Bxe5 16.Rxe5 Re8 17.Bf4 Bd7, Blazkova – Slepankova, Morava
1997, 18.Re3 Bc6 19.Rg3 Kf8 20.Be5 Nbd7 21.Bd6+ Kg8 22.Bf4 Kh8
(22...Kf8 23.Qe3‚) 23.Rd1±

11...Nb4. Black usually places his knight on d5, but not in the best
version in this case. His second knight is on b6 and is too far from the
kingside. Therefore, White’s subsequent logical plan would be to organise
active actions on the kingside, since he has overwhelming majority of
pieces there. 12.Re1

About 12...Bd7 13.Bg5 – see 11...Bd7.

12...N4d5 13.Ne5 (13.Qd3!? White prepares the building of a standard
battery. 13...Bd7 14.Ng5 g6 15.Qh3 h5 16.Nge4 Be7 17.g4 Nxc3 18.bxc3±
e5? 19.Qe3 Bxg4 20.Qh6 Nd5 21.Ng5 Bxg5 22.Bxg5 Qd7 23.Bxd5+–;
13...Be7 14.Bc2 g6 15.Bb3 Bf6, Namay Caceres – Garcia Martinez,
Maresme 2019, 16.Ne4 Bg7 17.Bg5 Qe8 18.a4ƒ) 13...f6 (13...Bxe5
14.Rxe5!? Bd7 15.Qg4 f6 16.Re2 a5 17.Nxd5 Nxd5? 18.Rxe6!; 17...exd5
18.Qg3 Rc8 19.h4ƒ) 14.Nd3!? (14.Nf3 Re8, Balajayeva – Toma, Antalya
2019, 15.Ne4²) 14...Qc7 15.g3 Nxc3 16.bxc3 Qxc3 17.Bf4 Rd8 (17...Ba3
18.Nc5 Bxc5 19.dxc5 Qxc5 20.Bd6+–) 18.Rc1 Qa5 19.Bxd6 Rxd6 20.Rc5
Qa3 21.Qh5 Bd7 22.Nf4+–
12...Be7 13.a3 N4d5 14.Qd3 Bd7 15.Bc2 g6 16.Bh6 Re8 17.Ne5

17...Nxc3 18.bxc3 Bc6 19.Qg3 Bf6 20.Re3ƒ Bg7?! Paragua – Kuzubov,

Alushta 2004, 21.Bxg7 Kxg7 22.h4‚
17...Bf8, Rodriguez Cespedes – Rodriguez Talavera, Malaga 1987,
18.Qd2. After the trade of the dark-squared bishops, the dark squares would
be very vulnerable in Black’s camp. 18...Nxc3 (18...Rc8 19.Bxf8 Rxf8
20.Ne4ƒ) 19.bxc3 Rc8 20.Qf4 f6 21.Nxd7 Qxd7 22.Bxf8 Rxf8 23.Bb3²
17...Rc8 18.Qf3 (18.Ne4!? Ba4 19.Qf3 f5 20.Bxa4 Nxa4 21.Qb3 Nab6
22.Nd2 Bf6 23.Ndf3²) 18...Bf6 19.Nxd5 Nxd5 (19...exd5 20.Bd3²)
20.Be4 Bc6 21.Rac1² Buhmann – Banusz, Balatonlelle 2005.

B2b1) 11...Bd7
 Black plays this move with the idea to continue simply his development
with Rc8, or after Ne7 to develop his bishop on the long diagonal.
12.Re1

12...Ne7

12...Nb4 13.Bg5 Qb8 (13...Be7 14.Bxe7 Qxe7 15.d5 Rad8 16.a3 Na6
17.d6±) 14.Ne5 Bc6, Mrva – Koutny, Czech Republic 2016, 15.Qg4 Kh8
16.Re3‚

12...Rc8
 13.d5!?N (White could have played in principle d4-d5 on his move 12,
but then, after the exchanges on d5, if he had captured with his queen Black
would have had the response Be6, while here, White would have the rather
attractive tactical resource: 16.Rxe6 fxe6 17.Qe4!) 13...exd5 (13...Nxd5
14.Nxd5 exd5 15.Qxd5² Be6?! 16.Rxe6 fxe6 17.Qe4! Rc7? 18.Ng5+–)
14.Nxd5 Bg4 (14...Nxd5 15.Qxd5 – see 13...Nxd5) 15.Nxb6 axb6 16.h3
Bxf3 (16...Bh5 17.Be3 Bc5 18.Qd5 Bg6 19.Rad1²) 17.Qxf3 Nd4 18.Qxb7
Nxb3 19.axb3 Bb4 20.Rf1²
13.Ne5 Be8. Black saves his bishop from the possible exchange, but
provides his opponent with tempi to organise an attack. (13...Bb8 14.Qg4 f5
15.Nxc6 Rxc6 16.Qg5 h6 17.Qxd8 Rxd8 18.d5 exd5 19.Nxd5 Kh7,
Robledo – Glinz, ICCF 2006, 20.Nxb6 Rxb6 21.Be3 Rd6 22.Bc5 Rd3
23.Be7 Re8 24.Bb4²) 14.Qg4 Kh8 15.Bf4 (15.Nf3 with the idea Qh3.
15...Be7 16.Bd2 Nb4 17.Rad1² Nd3? 18.Bh6±) 15...Na5 16.Bc2 f5
17.Qg3² Bb4?! A.Zhigalko – Iturrizaga Bonelli, Moscow 2012, 18.Bg5
(18.Rac1!?) 18...Qxd4 19.Rad1 Qc5 20.Qh4 Bxc3 21.Be7 Qxe5 22.Rxe5
Bxe5 23.Bxf8 Rxc2 24.Qe7 Rc8 25.Qxe6 Bxb2 26.Bc5 Nac4 27.a4±
 13.Bg5
White pins the enemy knight before building the battery Qd3+Bc2.

He could have continued the game without this pin and if Black had tried
to prevent the actions of the battery with the move Ne7-g6, then White
would have managed to advance his rook-pawn. 13.Qd3 Ng6 14.Bg5
(14.g3 h6 15.h4ƒ; 14...Re8, Seger – Neverov, Pardubice 2001, 15.d5 exd5
16.Bg5 Qc7 17.Nxd5 Nxd5 18.Bxd5²) 14...Qb8 (14...Be7 15.Bxe7 Qxe7
16.d5ƒ; 15...Nxe7 16.Ne5²) 15.Bc2 (15.h4!?) 15...Re8 16.h4 Bc6 (16...h6
17.Bd2²) 17.h5 Nf8 18.h6 Ng6 19.hxg7± Kxg7? 20.Ne5 Nd7, Castrillon
Gomez – Rodriguez Rueda, Bogota 2015, 21.Nxd7 Bxd7 22.Qh3+–

13...Bc6

13...h6 14.Bh4²
14.Qd3 (14.Rc1 Re8 15.Ne5 Bxe5 16.dxe5 h6= Ponomariov – Neverov,
Donetsk 1998) 14...Qc7 (14...Qd7 15.Rad1 Rad8 16.Bc2 g6, Rolgeizer –
Zelenskaya, Gelendzhik 2015, 17.Bb3 a5 18.a3±) 15.Bc2 Nf5 (15...g6
16.Ne5 Nf5 17.g4 Ng7 18.Bh6²) 16.Nh4 g6 17.Nxf5 exf5 18.g3²
 B2b2) 11...Ne7
This is a quite reasonable idea for Black. He wishes to deploy his passive
knight on b6 on the d5-outpost.

12.Qd3

If White’s achievements in the main line do not seem so significant, then

he has some other promising plans, for example: 12.Re1!? Bd7 (12...Nbd5
13.Bc2 – see 11...Nd5) 13.Qd3 – see 11...Bd7.

12.Bg5!? h6 (12...Bd7 13.Re1 – see 11...Bd7) 13.Bxe7 (13.Bh4 Bd7

14.Re1 Bc6 15.Qd3 Rc8 16.Rad1²; 16.Bc2 g6 17.Bb3 Nbd5 18.Bxd5 Bxd5
19.Nxd5 exd5 20.Re2²) 13...Qxe7 14.Qd3 Rd8 15.Rfe1 Qf8?! (15...Bd7
16.Rad1²) 16.h4 g6, Vysochin – Neverov, Kiev 2001, 17.h5 gxh5 (17...g5
18.Ne4 Bb8 19.Rad1±) 18.Ne4 Qg7 19.Nxd6 Rxd6 20.Rac1 Bd7 21.Rc7
Rc8 (21...Bc6? 22.Rxe6+–) 22.Rxb7 Bc6 23.Rxa7±

12...Nbd5
 If Black manages to complete his development of his light-squared bishop
without any problems, for example after b6, Bb7, then he can be quite
optimistic about the future. Therefore, White must try to play very actively,
forcing his opponent to solve concrete tasks

12...Ng6 13.Bg5 (about 13.Re1 Bd7 – see 11...Bd7) 13...Be7 14.Bxe7

Qxe7 15.Rfe1 Qf6 16.a4²

13.Bg5
White is threatening to win a pawn after 14.Nxd5.

It is possibly more precise for White to play here 13.Re1 and only after
13...Bd7 (The move 13...b6 would weaken Black’s control over the a4-e8
diagonal and because of that, in the following variation he would not have
the move Nc6: 14.Bc2 g6 15.Bh6 Re8 16.Ba4 Bd7 17.Bb3²) to play
14.Bg5 Nxc3 (14...f6 15.Bd2²) 15.bxc3 Qc7 16.h4 Bc6 17.h5‚

13.Bc2!? Ng6, Gaponenko – Song, Moscow 2019 (13...g6, Tippleston –

Eden, England 2011, 14.Bb3 b6 15.Bh6 Re8 16.Bg5²) 14.Nxd5!? exd5
15.Bd2 Be6 16.Ng5 Bd7 17.h4 Re8 18.h5 Nf8 19.h6 (19.Nxh7?! Qh4„)
19...Ng6 20.Rfe1²

13...Nxc3

The move 13...h6 leads by force to a position with a very bad light-
squared bishop for Black, since it would be forced to protect the backward
pawn on e6, or would be restricted by his own pawn on f5 (d5). 14.Bc2 f5
15.Bxe7 Bxe7 16.Nxd5 Qxd5 (16...exd5 17.Rfe1 Bd7 18.Qb3 Bc6
19.Re5±) 17.Rfe1 a5 18.Bb3 Qd6, G.Braun – Rotstein, Essen 2005, 19.Re3
a4 20.Bc4 Kh8 21.Rae1±

13...f6 14.Bd2. Now, due to the weakness of the pawn on e6, Black
should forget about the plan with b6, Bb7 and his bishop would be bound to
remain passive. 14...Re8 (14...Bd7 15.Rfe1 a5, Staniszewski – Fajs, ICCF
2008, 16.Bc2!? g6 17.Bb3 a4 18.Bc4²) 15.Rfe1 Bd7 16.h4 Qb8 17.Bc2
(17.h5!?) 17...f5 18.Bb3± Nc7? 19.d5 Qd8 20.dxe6 Bc6 21.Qe2+– Peptan
– Khurtsidze, Nova Gorica 1999.

14.bxc3 Qc7

14...b6 15.Bc2 g6 16.Rfe1²

15.Bc2 g6 16.Rfe1
 16...b6 (Black has problems to complete his development and it seems
very risky for him to opt for 16...Bd7 17.c4!? b6 18.Bf6 and White already
has the serious threats Ng5, Qh3.) 17.Ne5 f6. This is not just a win of two
minor pieces for a rook, since White will also capture the enemy rook on
a8. (Meanwhile, the natural move 17...Bb7 would not help Black either:
18.Ng4 Rac8 19.Nf6+ Kg7 20.Qh3 h5 21.Qh4 Qxc3?? 22.Nxh5+ gxh5
23.Bf6+ Kg8 24.Bh7+ Kxh7 25.Qxh5+ Kg8 26.Qh8#; 21...Rh8 22.Rac1±)
18.Bh6 fxe5 19.Bxf8 Kxf8 20.Qf3+ Kg7 21.Qxa8 exd4 22.Qe4±

B2b3) 11...Nd5
Black admits that he has made a mistake removing voluntarily his knight
away from the centre.
 12.Re1

12.Bc2. It is quite possible that it was not necessary for White to include
the move Re1. He could have begun to build up the battery immediately.
12...Be7 (12...Ncb4 13.Bb1²) 13.Qd3 g6 14.a3
 If Black does not exchange on c3, for example: 14...b6, then White will
capture on d5 at an opportune moment. 15.Bh6 Re8 16.Nxd5 exd5
(16...Qxd5 17.Qe3 Bb7 18.Be4 Qh5 19.h4 Rad8 20.Bg5²) 17.Ba4 Bd7
18.Rac1 (18.Bxc6!? Bxc6 19.Ne5 Rc8 20.Qf3 Bf6 21.Qf4 Bxe5 22.dxe5 d4
23.Rfe1²) 18...Rc8, Abdisalimov – Harshad, Mumbai 2020, 19.Bb5 Bd6
20.Qb3 Ne7 21.Bg5 Rf8 22.Rxc8 Qxc8 23.Bxe7 Bxe7 24.Qxd5 Be6
25.Qe4 Bf6 26.Qf4²
14...Nxc3 15.bxc3 b6. Black must develop his bishop now, or a move
later, which would not change the evaluation of the position anyway. White
maintains the initiative. (15...Bf6 16.Re1 b6 17.Bh6 Re8 18.h4 Bb7 19.h5ƒ;
17...Bg7 18.Bxg7 Kxg7 19.h4ƒ h5? 20.Ng5 Ne7, Dougherty – Baliuniene,
Caleta 2015, 21.Qg3 Bb7? 22.Rxe6; 21...Nf5 22.Qe5+ Kg8 23.Be4+–;
22...f6 23.Nxe6+ Bxe6 24.Qxe6±) 16.Re1!? (16.Bh6 Re8 17.Ba4 Bb7
18.c4 Bf8 19.Qe3 Bxh6 20.Qxh6 Re7 21.Rad1²; 18...Bf6 19.Rad1 Re7
20.Qe3 Na5, Wieczorek – Kanarek, Krakow 2011, 21.Ne5²) 16...Bb7

17.Bh6. White had to include the moves Bh6 Re8 and only then capture
on h4, which contrary to the game is impossible now. (17.h4 Bxh4 18.Nxh4
Qxh4 19.Re3, So Wesley – Nakamura, Saint Louis (blitz) 2016, 19...Qd8
20.Rh3 Qd5÷) 17...Re8 18.h4 Bxh4? 19.d5! Na5 20.Ba4 Bf6 21.Bxe8
Qxe8 22.dxe6 fxe6 23.Ne5+–

12...Nce7
Black’s knight is closer to the residence of his king, but after White builds
his battery Black knight would not manage to neutralise its actions, because
he would lose the control over the d5-square.

12...b6?! Black suffers because he does not have a suitable square for the
retreat of his queen after the exchange on d5 and the bishop-sortie to the g5-
square. 13.Nxd5 exd5 14.Bg5 Be7 (14...Qd7 15.Ne5 Nxe5 16.dxe5 Bb4
17.Re3 Bb7, Beerdsen – Heimisson, Kragero 2020, 18.Bf6! gxf6
19.Qh5+–) 15.Ba4 Bxg5 16.Bxc6 Rb8 17.Nxg5 Qxg5 18.Re5 Qg6
19.Bxd5± Har Zvi – Stisis, Israel 1999.

12...Nxc3. This is one of the ways to develop Black’s queen; otherwise,

he would lose a pawn after the exchanges on d5. 13.bxc3 Qa5 (13...Qc7
14.Qd3 Na5 15.Ng5 g6 16.Qh3 h5 17.Ne4 Nxb3 18.axb3 Be7 19.Qe3 e5
20.d5± f6? 21.d6 Bxd6 22.Nxd6 Qxd6 23.Ba3 1–0 Motwani – Mortazavi,
Cappelle-la-Grande 1992; 14...e5 15.dxe5 Nxe5 16.Nxe5 Bxe5 17.Ba3
Qxc3 18.Qd5+–; 17...Bxh2+ 18.Kh1 Rd8 19.Qf3 Be5 20.Qe3 Bd6
21.Bxd6 Qxd6 22.Rad1 1–0 Sveshnikov – Maninang, Manila 1982) 14.Qd3
(14.c4!?) 14...Qh5 15.h3. This is not just a leeway for White’s queen, since
he also frees his knight from the protection of the pawn on h2. 15...Qg6
16.Qe2 Bd7, Hasanova – Petrenko, St Petersburg 2004, 17.Bc2 Qh5
18.Rb1 b6 19.Rb5 f5 20.c4 Rac8 21.c5 Nxd4 (21...Bc7 22.d5 exd5 23.cxb6
Bxb6 24.Rxd5±) 22.Nxd4 Qxe2 23.Rxe2 Bxc5 24.Rxc5 bxc5 25.Nf3 c4
26.Nd4 Rfe8 27.Re5±

12...h6 13.Bc2. White continues with his strategical concept, since he

would soon follow this with Qd3. 13...Nf6 (13...Ncb4 14.Bb1 Nf6 15.a3
Nbd5 16.Qd3² Nf4 17.Bxf4 Bxf4 18.Ne5 Bxe5 19.dxe5 Qxd3 20.Bxd3
Nd7 21.Rad1²; 17.Qc2 Bd7? 18.Ne5 N4d5 19.Ng4 Re8 20.Nxd5 exd5
21.Nxf6+ 1–0 Musovic – Svicevic, Belgrade 2019) 14.a3 Ne7 15.Ne5 Bd7
16.Qd3 (16.Qf3!? White provokes his opponent to play 16...Bc6 17.Qg3 –
see 16.Qd3) 16...Bc6, Beim – Atlas, Austria 2004, 17.Qg3 Kh8 18.Qh3
Nfg8 19.Ng4!? (19.Bf4²) 19...Nf5 20.Bxf5 exf5 21.Nxh6 Nxh6 22.Bxh6
Kg8 23.Be3²

13.Bc2 b6 14.Qd3 g6

14...Ng6?! We have already discussed this position in our notes to the

move 12...Ne7. 15.Nxd5 exd5 16.Bg5 Qd7 17.Ne5 Bxe5 18.dxe5 Re8
19.Rac1 Bb7 20.h4‚
 15.Bh6!? (15.Ng5, Rozum – Timofeev, Khanty-Mansiysk 2017, 15...Bb7
16.Qh3 h5 17.Nge4 Nf5 18.Nxd5 Bxd5 19.Bg5 f6÷) 15...Re8 16.Ba4 Bd7
17.Bxd7 (17.Bb3!?) 17...Qxd7 18.Ne5 Bxe5 (18...Qb7 19.Ng4ƒ) 19.dxe5
Nf5 20.Bd2² The dark squares are vulnerable on Black’s kingside and he
must be constantly on the alert about the possible enemy attack after the
moves Ne4, g4...
 Chapter 17
1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 e6
5.Bc4 d6 6.d4

We will analyse in details A) 6...Be7, B) 6...dxe5, C) 6...cxd4.

About 6...Nb6 7.Bd3 Nc6 (7...cxd4 8.cxd4 – see 6...cxd4) 8.dxc5 dxc5
9.Qe2 Be7 10.0-0 – see 6...Nc6.

6...Nc6 7.0-0. If Black does not exchange the pawns, transposing to the
main lines, then White will exchange d4xc5 (with a black knight on the b6-
square) and at the end there will arise positions in which Black takes d6xe5,
without the preliminary exchange of the c-pawn.
 About 7...cxd4 8.cxd4 – see 6...cxd4.
7...dxe5 8.dxe5 Be7 9.Qe2 – see 6...dxe5.
7...Be7 8.Qe2 Nb6, Ammon – Haasner, Bamberg 2019 (8...cxd4 9.cxd4 –
see Chapter 18 line A; 8...0-0 9.exd6 – see 6...Be7) 9.dxc5!? Nxc4 (9...dxc5
10.Bd3 – see 7...Nb6) 10.exd6 Bxd6 (10...Nxd6 11.Rd1±) 11.Qxc4 Be7
12.b4 0-0 13.Qe2±
7...Nb6 8.Bd3 dxe5 (8...cxd4 9.cxd4 – see line C1b; 8...Be7 9.dxc5 dxc5
10.Qe2 – see 6...dxe5) 9.dxe5 c4 (9...Be7 10.Qe2 see 6...dxe5) 10.Be2
Qxd1 11.Rxd1 Bd7 12.Nbd2 Na5 13.b4 cxb3 14.axb3 Nc6 15.Ne4±
Lagunow – Richter, Berlin 1993.

A) 6...Be7
This is a clever move if Black has in mind not to exchange pawns and
simply to complete his development. In this way he prevents the habitual
set-up of White, which involves the development of his knight to the c3-
square. So, he will have to continue with a seldom played move 9 in order
to avoid lines which White would not like to enter.
7.0-0 0-0
 About 7...cxd4 8.cxd4 – see line C2.

7...Nc6 8.Qe2 0-0 9.exd6 – see 7...0-0.

8.Qe2 Nc6

9.exd6!?

Following 9.Rd1 cxd4 10.cxd4, or 9.Qe4 cxd4 10.cxd4, we would enter

schemes which we would like to avoid. Naturally, they provide White with
plenty of possibilities, like the ones we have analysed in Chapter 18, but
then we would need to analyse additionally a great number of positions.
Therefore it seems reasonable after two exchanges of pawns to enter a
position with a typical pawn structure, which has been encountered
numerous times in our variations – that is with pawns on a2, b2 and c3
against a7, b7 and e6.

9...Bxd6
 9...Qxd6 10.dxc5 Qxc5 11.Rd1 a6 12.Nbd2 b5 13.Bxd5 exd5 14.Nb3
Qc4 15.Nfd4² Marbourg – Juarez de Vena, ICCF 2016.

10.dxc5 Bxc5 11.Rd1

11...Bd6

11...a6 12.Nbd2 Nf4 13.Qe4 Ng6 14.b4 Be7 15.a4 Bf6 16.Ba3 Bxc3
17.Rab1 Re8 18.b5 axb5 19.Bxb5ƒ

11...Qe7 12.Nbd2 Nf4 13.Qe4 Ng6, Hedjazian – Plantet, Montigny le

Bretonneux 2005 (13...Bd6 14.Bb3 Bc7 15.Nc4 Ng6 16.Bg5 f6 17.Be3²)
14.h4 Bb6 15.h5 f5 16.Qe1 Nf4 17.b4²

12.Bd3
12.a4!? Qc7 13.Na3 a6 14.Bd3 Ne5 15.Nxe5 Bxe5 16.g3 g6 17.Bh6 Re8
18.Nc4²

12...Qc7 13.c4
 13...Nf4

13...Ndb4 14.Be4 f5 15.Bxc6 Nxc6 16.Nc3 a6 17.Na4 Ne5 (17...b6?

18.Be3) 18.c5 Nxf3+ 19.Qxf3 Bxh2+ 20.Kh1 Be5 21.Nb6 Rb8 22.Nc4
Ra8 23.Rb1© Qxc5 24.b3 Bc7 25.Ba3 Qc6 26.Qxc6 bxc6 27.Bxf8 Kxf8
28.f4± Bxf4 29.Rd8+ Ke7 30.Rbd1 Bc7 31.Rg8 Kf7 32.Rh8+

14.Bxf4 Bxf4 15.Nc3 a6 16.Be4 (16.c5!? g6 17.g3 Bh6 18.Ne4ƒ)

16...Ne5 17.g3 Nxf3+ 18.Bxf3 Bg5 19.c5!? (19.h4 Be7 20.Rac1 Rd8
21.Rxd8+ Bxd8 22.b4²) 19...Qxc5 20.Ne4 Qe7 21.Nxg5 Qxg5 22.Rac1©

B) 6...dxe5
In this particular position the exchange 6...dxe5 is not encountered very
often. Still, the capturing d6xe5, without the preliminary exchange on d4,
sometimes happens after the inclusion of the moves Be7 and (or) Nc6.
Even when Black does not exchange the pawns and plays Be7, Nb6, Nc6,
then White captures d4xc5 and after d6xc5 there arise also typical positions
with pawns on c3 – c5. We have decided to deal with all these positions at
one place.
7.dxe5

Now, the main difference from the main lines is the presence of the pawns
on c3 – c5. On the one hand White’s knight cannot be developed now to c3,
so he will transfer it on the route Nd2-e4, or it would remain at its place for
a while. On the other hand Black’s pieces do not have access to the c5-
square, his dark-squared bishop is restricted by his own pawn and the
covered d4-square makes the manoeuvre Nc6-d4 impossible. It is also
important that the d5-square is not an outpost, so Black cannot have any
counterplay on the c-file. All this makes us think that this modification is in
favour of White.
7...Nc6

7...Be7 8.0-0 0-0 (8...Nc6 9.Qe2 – see 7...Nc6) 9.Qe2 Qc7 (9...Nc6
10.Re1 – see 7...Nc6; 9...Nb6 10.Bd3 Nc6?! 11.Qe4 – see 7...Nc6) 10.Re1
Nd7 (10...Nc6 11.Qe4 – see 7...Nc6) 11.Qe4 Rd8 12.Qg4 Nf8 13.h4ƒ

8.Qe2 Be7 9.0-0

 If Black castles kingside, despite the presence of the pawns on c3 – c5,
White follows plans which are analogous to the main line and develops his
initiative on the kingside (Qe4, Ng5, Bd3...), after Nb6, he retreats his
bishop to the operational b1-h7 diagonal and if Black advances a6, b5, then
White would play the undermining move a2-a4. If Black castles queenside,
White will redeploy his knight along the route a3-b5(c4).
9...Qc7

9...0-0 10.Re1 Qc7 11.Qe4 Rd8, Grosar – Bratko, Slovenia 2003, 12.Ng5
g6 13.Qh4 h5 14.Qg3 a6 15.Nd2ƒ
9...a6 10.Rd1 b5 11.Bd3 c4, Stripunsky – Bercys, San Diego 2006 (The
move 11...Bb7 loses a pawn for Black due to the X-ray juxtaposition on the
d-file. 12.a4 b4 13.c4 Nb6 14.Bxh7 Nd4 15.Nxd4 cxd4 16.Be4±) 12.Bc2
Qb6 (12...0-0?! 13.Qe4 g6 14.Bh6 Re8 15.Nbd2±) 13.a4 Bb7 14.axb5 axb5
15.Rxa8+ Bxa8 16.h4ƒ Black has a problem what to do with his king. It
hampers the movement of his pieces in the centre and on the kingside, after
16...0-0 and 17.Qe4 g6 18.h5, it might come under an attack.
 9...Nb6 10.Bd3 Qc7 (10...0-0?! 11.Qe4 g6 12.Bh6 Re8 13.Nbd2 Qc7
14.Rfe1 Bd7, Chircu – Mocanu, Kishinev 2007, 15.Qg4 Rad8 16.h4‚)
11.Bf4 f5 (11...0-0 12.Nbd2 Nd5 13.Bg3 Rd8 14.Ne4±) 12.exf6 Qxf4
13.fxe7 Nxe7, Krauss – Birkmann, Bayern 2013, 14.Ne5 0-0 15.g3 Qf6
16.f4±

10.Rd1
White ousts the enemy knight away from the centre.
10...Nb6 11.Bd3

11...Bd7
Black prepares castling queenside.

11...Nd7?! 12.Bf4 h6 13.h3 g5 14.Bg3 h5 15.Na3 a6 16.Nc4 Kf8

17.a4+– Navarrete – Grizou, France 2008.

11...0-0. In this pawn structure castling on the kingside is a very

questionable decision for Black. 12.Bf4 c4 13.Bc2 Nd5 14.Bg3 b5
15.Nbd2 Bb7 16.Ne4. White has already too many pieces in the vicinity of
the enemy king and is ready to act, for example: 16...Rfd8 17.Nf6+! Bxf6
(17...gxf6 18.exf6 Bd6 19.Rxd5 exd5 20.Qd2+–) 18.exf6 Qd7 19.Bxh7+
Kxh7 20.Ng5+ Kg6 (20...Kg8 21.Rxd5 exd5 22.Qh5+–) 21.Ne4 e5
22.Rxd5 Qxd5 23.Qg4+–

12.Bf4 0-0-0

13.h4. This is a standard resource well known in the King’s Indian attack.
Black was ready to begin active actions on the kingside with g7-g5 and with
the move h2-h4 and later with h4-h5, White prevents the quick development
of Black’s attack there. 13...h6 14.h5 g6 15.hxg6 fxg6 16.Bxg6 h5
(16...Rdg8 17.Bh5±) 17.Be4±

C) 6...cxd4 7.cxd4
 In this position Black leaves most often his knight on d5 in the centre and
plays Be7+Nc6 (or Nc6+Be7). We are going to analyse all this in the next
chapter.
Besides this he has two other relatively popular schemes. One of them is
connected with the retreat of his knight to the b6-square C1) 7...Nb6 (or
7...Nc6 8.0-0 Nb6), while the second is when Black castles quickly, but
does not play later Nc6, because he prefers in this case to develop his light-
squared bishop with b6, Bb7, or only rarely with Bd7-c6 and we will
analyse this in the variation C2) 7...Be7.

About 7...Be7 8.0-0 – see line С2.

7...Nc6 8.0-0 Be7 (8...Nb6 9.Bd3 – see line C1b; 8...dxe5 9.dxe5 – see
7...dxe5) 9.Qe2 – see Chapter 18.

The move 7...Nd7 is just bad. 8.Bxd5 exd5 9.0-0 dxe5 10.dxe5 Nb6,
Kr.Georgiev – Collas, Clichy 2004, 11.Nc3 Be7 12.Be3 Be6 13.Nd4 0-0
14.f4±
 7...b6?! It is preferable for Black to realise the plan with the fianchetto of
his light-squared bishop after Be7, 0-0. 8.Bg5 Be7 9.Bxd5 exd5 10.Bxe7
Qxe7 11.Nc3 Be6 12.Qa4+ Qd7 13.Qa3² dxe5 14.Nxe5 Qe7 15.Qa4+
Nd7 Manik – Michalik, Slovakia 2016 16.Nc6 Qd6 17.Rc1±

7...dxe5 8.dxe5

Black can still enter the main theoretical lines by playing Nc6, Be7, 0-0,
or Be7, 0-0. There may arise original positions after the check on b4. In the
Alapin variation Black’s check with the bishop on b4 with the idea to
complete quickly the development turns out to be in favour of White at the
end and this particular modification is not an exception.
About 8...Be7 9.0-0 – see line C2.
8...Nc6 9.0-0 Bc5. On this square Black’s bishop will be attacked with
tempo after Nd2-e4 (It would be preferable for him to choose here the usual
line: 9...Be7 10.Qe2 – see Chapter 18; 9...Nb6 10.Bd3 – see line C1b)
10.Nbd2 0-0 (10...Be7, Bogner – Luch, Germany 2011, 11.Re1 0-0 12.a3²)
11.Ne4 (11.Qc2!? Be7 12.a3 Bd7 13.Qe4²) 11...Be7 12.Qe2 Qc7 13.Ng3²
Zidu – Zhak, ICCF 2015.
8...Bb4+ 9.Nbd2
 9...Nb6. The removal of Black’s knight from the centre is almost always
in favour of White. 10.Bb3!? He preserves all the pieces on the board (10.0-
0 Nxc4 11.Qa4+ Nc6 12.Nxc4 Qd3, Svidler – Taimanov, St Petersburg
1995, 13.Nb6 Rb8 14.Rd1 Qa6 15.Qxa6 bxa6 16.Nxc8 Rxc8 17.Be3 0-0
18.Rac1²) 10...Bd7 11.Qe2 Nc6 12.0-0 Qc7 13.Ne4± Na5, Ponomariov –
Taimanov, Cannes 1998 (Black should better avoid castling kingside here:
13...0-0 14.Neg5 h6 15.Qe4 hxg5 16.Nxg5 Rfd8 17.Qh7+ Kf8 18.f4 Nd4
19.f5 Nxf5 20.Nxf7 Nc4 21.Nh6+–) 14.Bd2 Nxb3 (14...Bxd2 15.Nd6+
Ke7 16.Qxd2+–) 15.Bxb4 Nxa1 16.Nd6+ Kd8 17.Nxf7+ Kc8 18.Nxh8+–
9...0-0 10.0-0
 White plans to organise an attack, for example with: Ne4, Qc2, Neg5, or
Qe2(c2)-e4, Bd3.
10...b6, Cherniaev – Menon, London 2000, 11.Ne4 White’s knights are
ready to attack the position of the enemy king. 11...Be7 (11...Bb7? 12.Nfg5
h6 13.Qg4 hxg5? 14.Bxg5 Qc7 15.Bf6+–; 13...Nd7 14.Nf3 Kh8 15.Qh3
Ne7 16.Nf6 Ng8 17.Rd1+–) 12.Qd3 Bb7 13.Neg5 g6 14.Ne4 Nd7 15.Bh6
Re8 16.Bb5 Rc8 17.Bxd7 Qxd7 18.Nfg5‚
10...Nc6 11.a3 Be7 (11...Ba5 12.b4 Bc7 13.Bb2 Nf4 14.Qc2 Ng6
15.Rfe1± Iwanczuk – Ossolinski, Szklarska Poreba 2020) 12.Qc2 Qc7
13.Qe4. White is ready to begin an attack with Bd3 and also protects his
pawn in the process. 13...Nb6 14.Bd3 g6 15.Re1 a5, Okhotnik – Bigott,
Lingen 2012, 16.Nc4 Nxc4 17.Bxc4 Rd8 18.Bh6 Bd7 19.h4‚
10...Nb6 11.Qc2!? White has a difficult decision here to give up his light-
squared bishop with the idea to exploit his opponent’s lag in development.
(11.Bb3 Bd7 12.Qe2 Bc6 13.Ne4 N8d7 14.Rd1 Qc7 15.Bf4 Nc5 16.Nxc5
Bxc5 17.Rac1 Be7 18.Nd4² S.Zhigalko – Jakubiec, Warsaw 2004)
11...Nxc4 (11...Qc7 12.Qe4 Nxc4 13.Nxc4 – see 11...Nxc4) 12.Nxc4 Be7
(12...Qc7 13.Qe4 Nc6 14.Ng5 f5 15.exf6 gxf6 16.a3 Bc5 17.Nxe6±)
13.Rd1 Qc7 14.Qe4 Nc6 15.Ng5 Bxg5 16.Bxg5 h6 (16...Bd7? 17.Qg4+–)
17.Be3 Bd7 18.Rac1±

7...Bd7. This is another original scheme of development for Black. The

idea is to play Bd7-c6 before castling. His delays the evacuation of his king
away from the centre however and White obtains some additional
possibilities like d4-d5 or Qg4. 8.0-0 (8.Bxd5 exd5 9.Nc3 Be6 10.0-0 Nc6
11.Bf4² Chen – Gholami, Qingdao 2019) 8...Bc6 9.Nc3. One of White’s
ideas here is to deploy his knight on the e5-outpost and to go with his queen
to g4. His knight may go there after d6xe5 Nxe5, or after e5xd6, Nf3-e5.

9...dxe5 10.Nxe5 Be7, Schuck – Timoscenko, Seefeld 1998, 11.Qg4.

Black has lost some tempi for the manoeuvre Bd7-c6, so White succeeds in
organising an attack on the kingside. 11...0-0 (11...Bf6 12.Re1±) 12.Bh6
Bf6 13.Ne4 Nd7 14.Qg3 Kh8 15.Nxf6 gxh6 16.Nexd7 Bxd7 17.Nxd5
exd5 18.Qe5+ f6 19.Qxd5+–
9...Nxc3. Black is trying to reduce his opponent’s pressure by exchanging
pieces. 10.bxc3 Be7 11.exd6 (11.d5!?N 11...exd5 12.Bxd5 dxe5 13.Bxf7+
Kxf7 14.Nxe5+ Kf8 15.Qg4 h5 16.Qe6 Be8 17.Bf4 Nc6 18.Rad1 Qb6
19.Nd7+ Bxd7 20.Rxd7 Rd8 21.Bc7 Qc5 22.Bxd8 Nxd8 23.Qe4 Rh6
24.Re1 Ne6 25.Qxb7 Qxc3 26.Red1±) 11...Qxd6 12.Ne5 (12.Re1!?)
12...Nd7 (12...0-0 13.Bf4 Qd8 14.Re1 Nd7 15.Nxc6 bxc6, Vajda – Henao,
Bled 2002, 16.Ba6²) 13.Bf4 Nxe5 14.Bxe5 Qd7 15.Re1 (15.Qg4!? Bf6
16.Bxf6 gxf6 17.d5 exd5 18.Rfe1+ Kf8 19.Qh4 Rg8 (19...dxc4? 20.Qh6+
Kg8 21.Re3+–) 20.Bf1²) 15...Bxg2?! (15...0-0 16.Qg4 g6 17.Re3‚)
16.Kxg2 Qc6+ 17.Qf3 Qxc4, Zvjaginsev – Shaposhnikov, St Petersburg
2004, 18.Rab1±
9...Nb6 10.Bb3!? White keeps his threats on the a2-g8 diagonal. He is
planning right now to advance d4-d5, practically winning the game. (He can
also play simply 10.Bd3 N8d7 11.Qe2 dxe5 12.dxe5 – see line C1a,
9...Bd7).

10...N8d7? Ereburg – J.Polgar, Rishon Le Ziyyon 2006, 11.Ng5 (11.d5

Nxd5 12.Nxd5 exd5 13.exd6 Bxd6 14.Bxd5±) 11...Be7 (11...dxe5 12.f4!
exd4 13.f5 Nc5 14.Nxf7 Kxf7 15.fxe6+–) 12.Nxf7!? (12.Qh5 g6
13.Qg4±) 12...Kxf7 13.f4 d5 14.f5 exf5 15.Rxf5+ Kg8 16.Qf3‚
10...Bxf3 11.Qxf3 d5, Katz – A.Bykhovsky, chess.com 2019, 12.Qg3²
10...Be7 11.exd6 Qxd6 (11...Bxd6? 12.Ng5 h6 13.Nxe6 fxe6 14.Re1+–)
12.Ne5 0-0 13.Qg4!?N White does not clarify yet the placement of his
dark-squared bishop, because he would have sometimes the possibility to
play Bh6 at once. (13.Bf4 Qd8 14.Qg4, Pavasovic – Ruck, Plovdiv 2003,
14...Qxd4!?; 14...Bd5²) 13...Bf6 (13...Bd5 14.Bh6 Bf6 15.Bc2 Nc6 16.Ne4
Bxe4 17.Qxe4 g6 18.Bxf8 Rxf8 19.Rad1±; 16.Qh3 g6 17.Bxf8 Rxf8
18.Nxc6 Bxc6 19.Rfd1±) 14.Bf4 Qxd4 (14...Qd8 15.Rfe1±) 15.Rad1 Qc5
16.Nxc6 Qxc6 17.Rd6 Qe8 18.Re1±

С1) 7...Nb6
The main idea of the retreat of the knight is to weakens White’s pressure
by exchanging either the queens, or the knight for White’s light-squared
bishop. This is achieved with the help of the knight on b8 sending it along
the route Nb8-c6-b4, with or without the exchange of the pawns on e5.
If Black wishes to trade the queens, then he should better include the
exchange d6xe5 – d4xe5, while if he trades his knight for the enemy bishop,
then he should not exchange the pawns. All there exchanges are analysed in
variation C1b, while in the variation C1a we analyse mostly the lines in
which Black fails to exchange anything.
8.Bd3

In this position Black usually realises one of the two plans: C1b) 8...Nc6,
exchanging later the queens, or his knight for the enemy light-squared
bishop, with C1a) 8...dxe5 and later N8d7-c5, Nd5.
If instead of this Black plays just common sense moves then it would be
like in Chapter 16 – his knight on b6 would remain too far away from the
kingside and White will begin a quite successful offensive because there
would be practically no black pieces there.

About 8...N8d7 9.Qe2 dxe5 10.dxe5 – see 8...dxe5.

8...d5?! To play with Black at first d7-d6 and then d6-d5 is just a loss of
time. 9.0-0 Be7 10.Nc3 Nc6 11.Bc2 Bd7. We have already analysed this
position in Chapter 16, variation ”, except that there it was Black to move.

8...h6. He defends against Ng5, but lags in development. 9.0-0 Nc6

10.Nc3 d5. There has arisen a strange position from the French Defence
with a rather weakened kingside for Black. (10...Be7 11.Qe2²) 11.Be3 Bd7,
Chatzieleftheriou – Stanojoski, Thessaloniki 2020, 12.a3 Be7 13.b3. It is
not clear how Black will complete his development, because castling 13...0-
0 would be tremendously dangerous for him: 14.Bc2 f5 15.exf6 Bxf6
16.Qd3‚

8...Be7 9.0-0 0-0?! It is slightly premature for Black to place his king on a
completely defenceless flank. (He should better play 9...Nc6 10.Nc3 – see
line C1b; 9...Bd7 10.Nc3 Bc6 – see 8...Bd7.) 10.Qc2 g6 11.Bh6 Re8
12.Nc3 Nd5 13.Bc4 (13.Be4!?) 13...Nxc3 14.Qxc3± b6? 15.d5 Bf8
16.Bxf8 Rxf8 17.Rad1+– Kharlov – Amon, Berlin 1997.
8...Bd7. As usual Black’s attempt to develop quickly his bishop to the
long diagonal, ignoring the natural development, would not end well for
him. Later, he should better continue with the standard scheme with N8d7,
d6xe5. 9.0-0 Bc6 10.Nc3
 10...N8d7, Kosteniuk – Baum, chess.com 2020, 11.Qe2 Be7 (11...dxe5
12.dxe5 – see 8...dxe5) 12.Rd1 Nd5 (12...0-0 13.Bf4 dxe5 14.Nxe5 Nxe5
15.dxe5 Nd5 16.Qc2 g6 17.Be4²) 13.Nb5 dxe5 14.dxe5 0-0 15.Nbd4²
10...Be7 11.Qe2 (11.Bf4!? Nd5 12.Bg3 Nxc3 13.bxc3 d5 14.Qc2 g6
15.a4 Qa5 16.Bf4 Nd7 17.Bd2 Qc7 18.a5± Karpatchev – Hassler, France
2009) 11...Bxf3 (11...0-0 12.Rd1!?; 12.Re1 dxe5 13.dxe5 Nd5 14.Nd4
Nxc3 15.bxc3 g6, Turov – V.Popov, Krasnodar 2002, 16.Bh6 Re8 17.Qg4
Nd7 18.Re3‚) 12.Qxf3 Nc6 13.Bb5 (13.Qg3!? Kf8 14.f4 Nxd4 15.Be3
Nc6 16.Rad1±) 13...d5 (13...Rc8 14.Qg3 g6 15.Bh6± Godena – Efimov,
Padova 1998) 14.Qg4 g6, Sun Yidi – Liu Yan, Qingdao 2019, 15.Bxc6+
bxc6 16.Bh6±

C1a) 8...dxe5 9.dxe5

 9...N8d7
If Black wishes to exchange the queens, he must do that with 9...Nc6(a6),
10...Nb4.

About 9...Nc6 10.0-0 – see line C1b.

9...Be7 10.0-0 0-0 (10...Bd7 11.Nc3 – see 9...Bd7) 11.Qc2!? g6 12.Bh6

Re8 13.Nc3 Nc6 14.Qe2±

9...Na6 10.0-0 (In principle White can avoid the exchange: 10.Qe2 Nc5
11.Bc2 – see 9...N8d7.) 10...Nc5 (10...Nb4 11.Be4 – see line C1b) 11.Be2
Qxd1 12.Rxd1. Black fails to fortify his knight on the d5-square, while
White’s knight will be stable on d4 and he will maintain the advantage.
12...Nd5 (12...Bd7 13.Nc3 Be7 14.Be3 Rc8 15.Rac1 0-0 16.b3 Rfd8
17.Nd4² Be8 18.f4 a6 19.Bf3 Rc7 20.g4± Potapov – Dinger, Pardubice
2008) 13.Bc4 Nb6 14.Bb5+ Bd7 15.Nc3 a6 16.Be2 Nba4 17.Nxa4 Bxa4
18.b3 Bc6 19.Bb2 Be7 20.Nd4 (20.Rac1!? Rd8 21.Rxd8+ Kxd8 22.Nd2
Kc7 23.Nc4²) 20...Be4 21.f3 Bg6 22.a4 Rd8 23.b4 Nd7 24.b5² Tiviakov –
Van Wely, Amsterdam 2018.
 9...Bd7. Black transfers his knight to the c6-square, while White will soon
transfer his knight to the d4-square neutralising Black’s achievements. 10.0-
0 Bc6 (10...Be7 11.Nc3 Bc6 12.Qe2 see 10...Bc6; 11...0-0 12.Qc2 h6
13.Rd1 Qc7 14.Qe2 Bc6 15.Nd4±) 11.Nc3 N8d7 (11...Be7 12.Qe2 N8d7
13.Rd1 see 11...N8d7; 12...0-0 13.Rd1 N8d7 14.Nd4 – see 11...N8d7)
12.Qe2

12...Nc5 13.Bc2 Be7 (13...Nd5 14.Rd1 Be7 – see 9...N8d7) 14.Rd1 Qc7
15.Nd4 (15.Bf4!? 0-0 16.Ng5 h6 17.Nh7 Rfd8 18.Qg4ƒ) 15...0-0, Erenburg
– Polgar, Rishon Le Ziyyon 2006, 16.Ndb5 Bxb5 17.Nxb5 Qc6 18.b4
Ncd7 19.Bb2 Nd5 20.Rac1±
12...Be7 13.Rd1 0-0 (13...Qb8 14.Bf4 0-0 15.Nd4!? Nd5 16.Nxd5 Bxd5
17.Nb5 a6 18.Nd6²; 15.Ne4 Nd5 16.Bg3 Qd8, Godena – Mrdja, Verona
2002, 17.Rac1±) 14.Nd4 Nd5 (14...Bd5?! 15.Nxd5 Nxd5 16.Nxe6 fxe6
17.Qh5 g6 18.Bxg6 hxg6 19.Qxg6+ Kh8 20.Qh6+ Kg8, Rozentalis –
Siebrecht, Hamburg 2004, 21.Rd4 Nxe5 22.Qxe6+–) 15.Nxd5 Bxd5
16.Bf4 Qb6, Karpatchev – Kaphle, Dresden 2007, 17.Nb5 a6 18.Nc3²

10.Qe2 Nc5 11.Bc2

 11...Nd5
If Black does not occupy immediately the centre, then after Nc3, this
would become impossible for him.

About 11...Bd7 12.0-0 Be7 (12...Nd5 13.Nc3 – see 11...Nd5) 13.Nc3 –

see 11...Be7.

11...Be7 12.Nc3 Bd7 13.0-0 0-0 14.Rd1 Rc8

 15.Rd4 Rc7 16.h4 f5 17.exf6 Bxf6 18.Bg5 Qe7 Sermek – Shetty, Kolkata
2002, 19.b4 Na6 20.Qd3 g6 21.Bb3±
15.h4!? (This move is played with the idea 16.Ng5 h6 17.Nh7 Re8
18.Bxh6 gxh6 19.Qg4+ Kh8 20.Qh5 Kg7 21.Rd4+–, so Black must accept
this pawn-sacrifice.) 15...Bxh4 (15...a6 16.Ng5 h6 17.Nh7 Re8 18.Bxh6
gxh6 19.Qg4+ Kh8 20.Qh5 Kg7 21.Rd4+–) 16.Nxh4 Qxh4 17.Be3 (Now,
White is threatening 18.Rd4 Qe7 19.Bxh7+ Kxh7 20.Qh5+ Kg8 21.Rh4 f6
22.Qh7+ Kf7 23.Rg4 Rg8 24.Bh6+–) 17...Qe7 18.Qg4 f5 19.exf6 Qxf6
20.Qb4 Qe5 21.Rd4 Rf7 22.Rh4 h6 23.Qg4‚

12.0-0
 12...Bd7

12...b6 13.Rd1 Ba6, Ramirez Alvarez – Liu, South Padre Island 2009,
14.Qe1. White plans after Nc3, either to exchange, or to oust away the
enemy knight on d5, after which his queen will gain access to the e3-square.
14...Qc7 15.Nc3 Be7 (15...Nxc3 16.Qxc3 Rc8 17.Bf4 Be7 18.Rac1±)
16.Nxd5 exd5 17.b4 Ne6 18.Ba4+ b5 19.Bb3±

12...Be7 13.Rd1 Bd7 (13...Qc7 14.Rd4!? with the idea Rg4; 14.Na3 a6
15.Nc4 Bd7 16.Nd4 0-0 17.Qg4 f6 18.Qh5 f5 19.Bg5!?±, ensuring the d6-
outpost for his knight.) 14.Nc3 (or 14.Rd4!? with the idea Rg4. 14...Rc8
15.Rg4 g6, Brandenburg – Burg, Groningen 2007, 16.Na3 h5 17.Rd4²)
14...Bc6 (14...Nxc3 15.bxc3 – see 12...Bd7) 15.b4!? (15.Be3 0-0 16.Bxc5
Bxc5 17.Nxd5 Bxd5 18.Be4² Gharamian – Kritz, Differdange 2008)
15...Nd7 16.Rxd5. White weakens his opponent’s position and obtains for
the exchange a pawn and two powerful bishops. 16...Bxd5 (16...exd5?
17.b5+–) 17.Nxd5 exd5 18.e6 fxe6 19.Qxe6 Qb6 (19...Qc7 20.Bg5 Qd6
21.Qe2 Kf7 22.Rd1±) 20.Qxd5 0-0-0 21.Bf4 Qf6 22.Qc4+ Qc6 23.Qd4±
 13.Nc3

13.Rd1 Qb6 (13...Be7 14.Nc3 – see 12...Be7) 14.Rd4 Bc6 15.Na3²

White can also avoid the weakening of his queenside pawn-structure, but
then his achievements would hardly be so significant. 13.Na3 Be7 14.Bd2,
followed by Rac1, Rfd1, Nc4 (14.Rd1 Qb6 15.Nc4 Bb5 16.Bd3 Bxc4
17.Bxc4²).

14...Qb6 15.Nc4 Qa6, Godena – Caruana, Porto Mannu 2007, 16.a4 Nb6
17.b3 Nxc4 (17...0-0? 18.Bg5 f6 19.exf6 Bxf6 20.Bxf6 Rxf6 21.Bxh7+
Kxh7 22.Ng5+ Kg8 23.Qh5+–) 18.bxc4 Qb6 19.Rfe1²
14...a5 15.Rac1 0-0 16.h4 (16.Bxh7+!? Kxh7 17.Rxc5± Bxc5?! 18.Ng5+
Kg6 19.h4 Rh8 20.h5+ Rxh5 21.Qe4+ f5 22.exf6+ Kxf6 23.Qf3+ Ke7
24.Qf7+ Kd6 25.Nc4+ Kc6 26.Qxh5+–) 16...Bc6 (16...Bxh4!? 17.Nxh4
Qxh4 18.Bb1 b6 19.Rc4 Qe7 20.Qh5 f5 21.exf6 Nxf6 22.Qh4©) 17.Bb1 b6
18.Ng5 h6 19.Nh7 Re8 20.Qg4 Kh8, Rozentalis – Jaracz, Cappelle-la-
Grande 2007, 21.Ng5 Rf8 22.Nxe6 fxe6 23.Qg6 Rf5 24.Bxf5 exf5
25.Qxc6+–
 13...Nxc3 14.bxc3

Now, White plans to play at some moment Nd4, not only controlling with
his knight the central squares but also opening the d1-h5 diagonal for active
actions of his queen.
14...Be7 15.Rd1

15.Nd4 Qc7 16.Re1 Ba4. Black underestimates the enemy queen-sortie to

the g4-square attacking the pawn on g7 and the piece on a4. (16...0-0
17.Qg4ƒ; 16...Qa5 17.Qg4 Qxc3 18.Be3 g6 19.h4 h5 20.Qg3±) 17.Bxa4+
Nxa4 18.Qg4 g6 19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.Qxa4+ Qd7 21.Qe4± Skripchenko –
Guichard, Belfort 2010.
 15...Rc8

15...Qc7 16.a4 Bc6 17.Nd4 0-0 18.h4!? (18.Nxc6 Qxc6 19.Be3 Rfd8,
Grigoryev – Bjuhr, ICCF 2007, 20.Bd4 Rac8 21.h4ƒ) 18...Rfd8 19.h5ƒ

15...Qa5 16.a4!? (16.Be3, Brandenburg – Beeke, Maastricht 2010,

16...Bb5!?„) 16...Qxc3 (16...Rc8 17.Bd2² Bxa4? 18.c4 Qa6 19.Bxa4+
Nxa4 20.Bg5+–) 17.Ra3 Qa5 18.Nd2 0-0-0 (18...0-0?? 19.Nc4 Qc7
20.Bxh7+ Kxh7 21.Qh5+ Kg8 22.Rh3+–) 19.Nc4 Qa6 20.Qg4 h5
21.Qd4±

16.Nd4 (16.a4!? Qa5 17.Bd2 – see 15...Qa5) 16...0-0 17.Qh5 g6

(17...h6? 18.Bxh6+–) 18.Qh6 Re8 (18...Qc7 19.Nf3 f5 20.exf6 Bxf6
21.Ba3²) 19.Nf3 Bf8 20.Qh3 Bg7, Rublevsky – Topalov, Bastia 2004,
21.Rd4!? (White is threatening 22.Ng5 h5 23.Nxf7 Kxf7 24.Qf3+–) 21...f5
22.Ba3 Qe7 23.Bb3² with the idea 24.Rad1 Bc6? 25.Bxc5 Qxc5 26.Ng5+–

C1b) 8...Nc6 9.0-0

 In this position Black has two logical plans: C1b1) 9...dxe5 10.dxe5 Nb4,
exchanging the queens and C1b2) 9...Nb4, trading White’s light-squared
bishop. After 9...Be7 10.Nc3, there usually arises transposition to the
variation C1b1, or to Chapter 18.

9...d5?! Black closes the centre losing a tempo. 10.Nc3 Be7 11.Be3 Bd7
12.Rc1 a6 13.Nd2 Rc8 14.Qg4 g6 15.Bh6± Cherniaev – Velcheva, Biel
2000.

9...Bd7?! (Black’s idea can be seen in the line: 10.Nc3 dxe5 11.dxe5 Nb4
12.Be4 Bc6, exchanging White’s active light-squared bishop.) After the
prophylactic move however 10.a3, it becomes evident that Black cannot
play Nb4. 10...d5. He closes the centre even with a loss of a tempo.
(10...dxe5 11.dxe5 Be7 12.Nc3 Rc8 13.Qe2± Jordanova – Rakic, Vratsa
2006) 11.Nc3 a6 (11...Be7 12.Bc2. We have analysed this position in
Chapter 16, but there Black had already managed to play Rc8, since he had
not lost tempi for the moves d7-d6-d5.) 12.Bg5 Be7 13.Bxe7 Nxe7 14.Re1
Nbc8 15.Qd2 h6 16.h4± Emms – Bischoff, Hastings 2000.
 9...Be7 10.Nc3

Here, the best for Black would be to exchange pawns 10...dxe5 11.dxe5 0-
0 12.Qe2, or 11...Nb4 12.Be4 Qxd1 13.Rxd1, transposing to variation
C1b1.
10...Nb4 11.Be4 d5 12.Bb1 Bd7 13.a3 Nc6 14.Qd3 a6 15.Re1 Rc8 16.b3
Na7 17.Bd2 Nb5 18.Nxb5 Bxb5 19.Qe3 Nd7 20.Qf4 Nf8 21.a4 Bd7
22.Bd3± Looshnikov – Kuporosov, Moscow 2012.
10...0-0 11.a3!? The main idea of this move for White is to play Qc2 and
if Black replies with h7-h6 to try to build the battery with Qe2-e4. After g7-
g6, White would follow with another standard plan: Bh6, h2-h4-h5.
(Naturally, he can continue with the standard response 11.Qe2 – see
Chapter 18.).
 11...d5. Black closes the centre and plans to play f7-f5, defending against
White’s battery. This would not help however. White will prepare the pawn-
break g2-g4. 12.Bc2 f5, Bannink – Lalic, Dresden 1998, 13.Ne2!? White
needs his knight on this square so that after the realisation of the plan Kh1,
Rg1, g4, in reply to Bc8-d7-e8, to be able to play Nf4, controlling the h5-
square and forcing the opponent to protect the pawn on e6.
 13...Bd7 14.Kh1!? White’s king frees a square for the rook. 14...Rc8
(14...Be8 15.Nf4 Qd7 16.h4 Bf7 17.Rg1 h5 18.g3±) 15.Rg1! Kh8 (15...Be8
16.Nf4±) 16.g4ƒ fxg4 17.Qd3 Rf5 18.Rxg4 Qf8 19.Nf4 Qf7 20.Qf1+–
13...g5 14.Qd2 Nc4 15.Qd3 Bd7 16.b3 Nb6 17.g4! Be8 18.gxf5 exf5
19.Kh1 Kh8 20.Rg1 h6 (20...g4 21.Rxg4+–; 20...Rg8 21.Nxg5 Bxg5
22.Qxf5 Bg6 23.Bxg5 Bxf5 24.Bxd8+–) 21.Nxg5 hxg5 22.Qh3+ Kg7
23.Bxg5 Bxg5 24.Qh4+–
11...dxe5 12.dxe5
 12...Nd7 13.Qc2 h6 (13...Ndxe5 14.Bxh7+ Kh8 15.Nxe5 Nxe5 16.Bf4±)
14.Re1 (14.Rd1!? a6 15.Qe2 Qc7 16.Qe4 g6 17.Bxh6±) 14...Nc5 15.Bf1±
Nd4 16.Nxd4 Qxd4 17.Be3 Qxe5 18.b4 Na6 19.Bxh6 Qb8, Simonenko –
Simons, ICCF 2000, 20.Re3+–
12...Nd5 13.Qc2 h6 (13...g6 14.Bh6 Re8 15.h4!? Bxh4 16.Rfd1 Bd7
17.Be4 Nxc3 18.Qxc3 Be7 19.Bxc6 bxc6 20.Nh2 f5 21.exf6 Bxf6 22.Qd2
Bc8 23.Qf4 Qe7 24.Ng4 Bxb2 25.Bg5 Qf8 26.Bf6 Bxf6 27.Nxf6+ Kh8
28.Rd6 e5 29.Qd2+–; 13...Nxc3 14.bxc3 h6 15.Qe2 f5 16.exf6 Rxf6
17.Qe4 Rf5 18.Rd1±) 14.Qe2. After this standard transfer of the queen
Black must consider permanently the possibility Qe4. 14...a6 (14...Bc5
15.Bd2±) 15.Rd1! White is not in a hurry to play Qe4 and simply increases
the pressure. His rook would be very useful on the d-file. 15...Qa5 16.Bxh6
gxh6 17.Qe4 f5 18.exf6 Rxf6 19.Qh7+ Kf8 20.Nxd5 exd5 21.Bg6 Rxg6
22.Qxg6 d4 23.Qxh6+–

C1b1) 9...dxe5 10.dxe5

 10...Nb4

10...Nd7 Black transfers his knight to the c5-square with tempo and
forces the trade of the queens. 11.Bf4 Nc5 12.Bb5 Qxd1 13.Rxd1 Be7
14.Nc3 0-0 15.Rac1² with the idea Ne2, Be3, to oust the enemy knight
away from the c5-square.
It would be inconsistent for Black to avoid the exchange of the queens
10...Be7 – if he wishes to castle, then this plan had better be realised with a
knight on d5 (see Chapter 18). 11.Qe2
 11...Nb4 12.Be4 N4d5 13.Nbd2!? (13.Nc3 Nxc3 14.bxc3 Qc7,
Bykovskiy – Bernadskiy, Omelnyk 2017, 15.a4 Bd7 16.a5 Nd5 17.Bd2²;
13.Rd1 Bd7 14.Bd2 0-0 15.Nc3 Bc6 16.Nb5 Bxb5 17.Qxb5² Qe8 18.Qd3
h6, Espinosa Flores – Perez Avendano, Mexico 2008, 19.Qe2±) 13...Nf4
13...Bd7 14.Nd4²) 14.Qe3 Nbd5 15.Qb3 Ne2+ 16.Kh1 0-0 17.Nc4 Nxc1
18.Raxc1²
11...0-0 12.Nc3 Nb4 (12...Nd4? 13.Nxd4 Qxd4 14.Rd1 Qh4 15.g3 Qh3
16.Be4 Rd8 17.Rxd8+ Bxd8 Ibrahim – Effenberger, Pardubice 2019 18.Be3
Be7 19.Bxb6 axb6 20.Qb5+–; 15.Be4 Nd7 16.Rd3 f5 17.exf6 Qxf6 18.Rh3
g6 19.Bh6 Re8 20.Rf3 Qh4 21.Bxg6 hxg6 22.Qxe6+ Kh8 23.Rh3 Nf6
24.Qf7 1–0 Vihinen – Salminen, Finland 2007; 12...Nd5 13.Rd1 Re8,
Dobrowolski – Karacsonyi, chess.com 2020, 14.Qe4 g6 15.Bc4±) 13.Bb1.
White still has the possibility to build quickly his battery (It is also good for
him to play here 13.Be4.). 13...N4d5 14.Qd3 g6 15.Bh6 Re8 16.Ne4 Bd7
17.Nfg5± Bf8? 18.Qh3 Be7, Ponnet – Ismail, Gent 2012, 19.Nxh7 Kxh7
20.Ng5+ Kg8 21.Bg7 Kxg7 22.Qh7+ Kf8 23.Qh8#

11.Be4 Qxd1 12.Rxd1

 Black has succeeded in trading the queens but he is still far from equality.
It is not clear how he will complete the development of his queenside, since
he will fail to preserve his knight on the d5-outpost.
12...N4d5

12...Bd7?! This is just a loss of a pawn if White plays precisely. 13.Bxb7

Nc2 14.Bxa8 Nxa8 15.Ne1 Nxa1, Sveshnikov – Filippov, Bled 2001,
16.Be3!? Ba4 (16...Nb6 17.Nd2±) 17.Rc1 Nb6 18.Nc3 Bc6 19.Rxa1±

12...f5?! Black ousts the enemy bishop from the long diagonal but
weakens considerably his kingside pawn structure. 13.exf6 gxf6 14.Nc3 f5
15.Bb1 Bg7 16.a3 Bxc3 (16...N4d5 17.Nxd5 Nxd5 18.Bxf5±; 16...Nc6
17.Nb5 0-0 18.Nc7 Rb8 19.Ba2±) 17.bxc3 N4d5 18.Re1 (18.Bd3!? 0-0
19.Bh6±) 18...0-0 19.Ne5 Nxc3 20.Re3 Rd8 (20...Nxb1?? 21.Rg3+ Kh8
22.Bb2??) 21.Rg3+ Kf8 22.Bh6+ Ke7 23.Bg5+ Ke8 24.Bd3+– Katz –
Chasin, Ledyard 2019.

12...Be7 13.Nc3 0-0 14.Bg5. White exchanges the “good” enemy bishop.
14...Bxg5 15.Nxg5 h6 16.Nf3 Rb8 17.a3 Na6 18.b4 Bd7, Dmochowska –
Malinovsky, Marianske Lazne 2015, 19.Nd4²

13.a4

White is threatening to remove the defender of Black’s knight on d5 and

practically forces him to weaken his position.
13...a5

13...f5 14.exf6 (14.Bxf5!? exf5 15.a5) 14...Nxf6 15.Bc2 Nbd5 16.Nbd2

Bb4 17.Nb3 Ke7 18.Nbd4 Rd8 19.Bd2² Papin – Rychagov, Voronezh
2006.
13...Bd7. Black sacrifices a pawn for the initiative.
 14.a5 Na4 15.Bxd5 exd5 16.Rxd5 Bc6 17.Rd1 (17.Rd2!? with the idea
17...Nc5 18.Nd4. After Rd1, this would not work because of the
defencelessness of the rook: 17.Rd1 Nc5 18.Nd4? 0-0-0.) 17...Nc5 18.Be3
Nb3 19.Ra2 Bb4, Lemmers – Rothuis, Dieren 2004, 20.Nc3²
It is possible that White should better not go after winning material, but
just continue to increase his pressure: 14.Nc3!? Nxc3 15.bxc3 Bc6 (15...a5
16.Be3 – see 13..a5) 16.Bxc6+ bxc6 17.a5 Nd5 18.Bd2 Bc5 19.Rab1 0-0
20.Rb7 Rfb8 21.Rdb1 Rxb7 22.Rxb7 Rd8 23.Kf1 h6 24.Ke2 Kf8 25.Ne1+–

14.Nc3 Nxc3

14...Bb4, Howell – Lund, Blackpool 2003, 15.Nxd5 exd5 16.Bxd5 Nxd5

17.Rxd5²

15.bxc3 Bc5

15...Be7 16.Be3 Nc4 17.Bd4 f5 18.Bd3, Pedersen – Stefansson, Ballerup

2014, 18...b5 19.axb5 Nb2 20.Rd2 Nxd3 21.Rxd3±
 15...Bd7 16.Be3 Nc4, Langner – Skliba, Czech Republic 2018, 17.Bd4
Bc6 18.Bxc6+ bxc6 19.Rdb1±

16.Nd4

Now White plans to develop his bishop to the g1-a7 diagonal with Nb3
Be7 Be3.
16...0-0

16...Bxd4 17.Rxd4± 0-0? 18.Ba3 Re8, Godena – Sherwin, Switzerland

1997, 19.Bd3+–

16...Nc4. Black attacks the enemy pawn on e5 and prevents the move
Be3. 17.Rb1 Nxe5 (17...Rb8?? 18.Nc6+–) 18.Be3 Nc4 19.Nxe6 Bxe6
20.Bxc5±

16...Bd7 17.Bxb7 Ra7 18.Bf3 Bxd4 (18...h6? 19.Nb3 Nxa4 20.Nxc5

Nxc5 21.Be3 Rc7 22.Rxa5 Nb3 23.Ra8+ Bc8 24.Bb6+– Timman – Handke,
Amsterdam 2001) 19.Rxd4 0-0 20.Be3 Rc7 21.Rg4 h5, Benjamin – Manor,
Rhodes 2019, 22.Rg3 Nxa4 23.Bh6 g6 24.Bxf8 Kxf8 25.Kf1 Bb5+ 26.Be2
Bxe2+ 27.Kxe2 Nxc3+ 28.Kf1±

17.Nb3 Be7 18.Be3 Nc4 19.Bd4

Black has just one actively placed piece – his knight on c4. Therefore, if
he plays some indifferent move like h7-h6, White will exchange the
powerful enemy knight with the move Nd2.
19...f6

19...Bd7 20.Bc5 Bxc5, Van der Lende – Maze, chess.com 2017, 21.Nxc5
Bc6 22.Bxc6 bxc6 23.Nd7 Rfd8 24.Rab1±

20.exf6 gxf6, Baklan – Kempinski, Istanbul 2003, 21.Bc5 Rf7 22.Rd4

Ne5 23.f4 Nc6 24.Bxc6!? (24.Rc4±) 24...bxc6 25.Bxe7 Rxe7 26.Re1 Kf7
27.Rd6 Raa7 28.Nc5 Rac7 29.g4±

C1b2) 9...Nb4 10.Bg5!?

White wishes to trade the dark-squared bishops ensuring in this way a
powerful outpost on the d6-square for his knight on b1, which will usually
go there along the route Nc3-e4-d6.

10...Be7

10...Qc7 11.Nc3 Nxd3 12.Qxd3 Bd7, Bronts – Mirvois, ICCF 2005,

13.d5!? Qc4 14.Qe3 Nxd5 15.Nxd5 Qxd5 16.exd6 f6 17.Rfd1 Qa5
18.Bf4±

11.Bxe7 Qxe7 12.Nc3

 12...dxe5

12...Bd7 13.Nb5. After this move Black will remain practically by force
with a backward pawn on the c6-square. 13...Bxb5 14.Bxb5+ Nc6
15.Bxc6+ bxc6 16.Rc1 Rc8 17.exd6 Qxd6 18.a3 0-0 19.b4!?²

12...Nxd3 13.Qxd3. If Black does not exchange later the pawns d6xe5, he
will only have the possibility d6-d5. After this his light-squared bishop
would not become stronger for sure... 13...0-0 (13...dxe5 14.dxe5 – see
12...dxe5; 13...Bd7 14.Ne4 dxe5 15.dxe5 – see 12...dxe5; 14.d5!?) 14.Ne4
d5 (14...dxe5 15.dxe5 – see 12...dxe5) 15.Neg5!? (15.Nd6²) 15...f5 16.h4
Bd7 17.Nh3 Be8 18.Nf4 h6 19.b3± g5?! 20.hxg5 hxg5 21.Nxg5 Qxg5
22.Nxe6 Qg6 23.Nxf8 Kxf8 24.Rac1+–

12...0-0. Naturally, it would not be logical for Black to refrain from

exchanging the light-squared bishops, but after the exchange White’s knight
will be deployed quickly on the d6-outpost consolidating his advantage.
13.Be4!? White controls the d5-square and prevents the appearance of a
black knight there.
 13...d5 14.Bb1. Later, White will oust the enemy knight from the b4-
square and will build a battery. There will arise a position with a “bad”
light-squared bishop for Black. 14...Bd7 (14...f6 15.exf6 Qxf6 16.b3 Bd7,
Gaujens – Ruiz Jarabo, ICCF 2011, 17.Re1²) 15.a3 (15.b3!? a5 16.a3 Nc6
17.Re1 f5 18.exf6 Rxf6 19.Qd3 Rh6 20.Qe3 Rf8 21.Bd3²) 15...Nc6 16.Ne2
(16.b3!? a5 17.Re1 – see 15.b3) 16...f6 17.Qd3 f5 18.b3 a5 19.Bc2 a4
(19...Rfc8 20.h4²) 20.bxa4 Nc4 (20...Nxa4 21.Rfb1²) 21.Rfb1 Be8 22.Nd2
N6a5 23.Nxc4 Nxc4 (23...dxc4?! 24.Qe3 Bc6 25.Nf4±) 24.Rb4²
13...Rd8 14.Qe2. Black has not completed his development yet and his
bishop is not good at all. White will build a battery sooner or later, forcing
the opponent to weaken his kingside. 14...N6d5 (14...N4d5 15.Rac1 Bd7
16.Bxd5 exd5 17.h3²; 15.Nb5 dxe5 16.dxe5 Bd7 17.Nbd4 Rac8 18.Rac1
h6 19.Bb1² with the idea Qe4.) 15.a3 Nxc3 16.bxc3 Nc6 17.Rfb1
(17.exd6!? Qxd6 18.Rfe1²) 17...d5, Lugovskoy – Kobalia, Sochi 2017,
18.Bc2 Na5 19.Qd3 f5 (19...g6 20.Qe3 Bd7 21.h4‚) 20.exf6 gxf6 21.Re1
Kh8 22.Nh4ƒ

13.dxe5 Nxd3
 13...Bd7. White’s light-squared bishop will remain on the board after this
move. 14.Be4. He exploits immediately the possibility to deploy his bishop
on the long diagonal. Black’s king is stranded in the centre, so White
manages to avoid the trade of the bishops. 14...Bc6 (14...Rd8, Lugovskoy –
Kobalia, Sochi 2017, 15.Qb3 Bc6 16.a3 Bxe4 17.Nxe4 Nc6 18.Nd6+ Kf8
19.Ne4²; 16...N4d5 17.Nb5 0-0 18.Rfe1²; 17...Bxb5 18.Qxb5+ Rd7
19.Rac1 0-0 20.g3²; 18...Qd7 19.Qe2 Nf4 20.Qe3 Nfd5 21.Qd2 0-0
22.Rad1²) 15.a3 N4d5, Iakymov – Rublevsky, Plovdiv 2010, 16.Ne2 0-0
17.Ned4 Rfd8 18.Nxc6 (18.h4!?) 18...bxc6 19.Qc2²

14.Qxd3

14...Bd7

14...0-0. with the idea to play quickly Rd8, but still it is preferable for
Black to play here Bd7, transposing to the main line. 15.Ne4 Rd8,
S.Zhigalko – Van Delft, Rhodes 2013 (15...Bd7 16.Nd4 – see 14...Bd7)
16.Nd4!?N 16...Rd5 (16...Bd7 17.Rad1 – see 14...Bd7) 17.f4 Na4 18.Qd2.
White protects his pawn and avoids the exchange of the knights, which
would be possible after the move Na4-c5. 18...b6 19.f5 Qc7 20.Nd6 Rxe5
21.Ne8 Qd8 22.Qf4 Rc5 23.fxe6+–

15.Ne4 0-0 16.Nd4

White has more space and perfectly placed knights and after the move
Nd6 he will cramp his opponent’s position even more. Very often later he
will continue with f2-f4, not only fortifying his outpost on e5, but also
threatening to begin an attack with the pawn-advance f4-f5.

16...Rad8

16...Nd5 17.Qg3 Rac8, Manca – Zakhartsov, Budapest 2012, 18.Nd6 Rc7

19.f4 f6 20.Rae1±

16...Rac8, Potkin – Shestoperov, Pardubice 2001, 17.f4 Bc6 (17...f6

18.exf6 gxf6 19.Rad1²) 18.Ng5 g6 19.Qh3 h5 20.Qg3, threatening f4-f5
(20.g4 Nd5 21.gxh5?! Nxf4„) 20...Kh8 21.Rad1±

16...Rfd8 17.Rad1 Bc6 (17...Be8 18.f4 Nd5 19.Qg3. White is threatening

f4-f5. 19...f5 20.Nd6± Gaujens – Jardi Talarn, ICCF 2011) 18.Nxc6 bxc6,
Howell – Poluljahov, Catalan Bay 2004, 19.Nd6² f6?! 20.exf6 gxf6
(20...Qxf6 21.Qc2±) 21.Rfe1±

17.Rad1 (17.Nd6 f6, Hayward – Tesic, ICCF 2004, 18.Nxb7 Bb5

19.Qxb5 Rxd4 20.Nc5²) 17...Bc6 18.Nxc6 bxc6 19.Nd6 Nd5. Sooner or
later Black must try to undermine the enemy outpost on e5 by playing f7-f6.
White will need to play accurately after this with the idea to force his
opponent to remain with weak pawns. 20.Qc2 (20.Qe2!? f6 21.g3 fxe5
22.Nc4±; 21...c5 22.Rfe1²) 20...f6 21.Qxc6 (21.Nc4 c5 22.a3²) 21...fxe5
22.Ne4 Rc8, Liang – Caruana, Saint Louis 2019, 23.Qa6 Rc2 24.Rd2 Rfc8
25.Rfd1²

С2) 7...Be7 8.0-0

8...0-0

About 8...Nc6 9.Qe2 – see 7...Nc6.

8...Nb6 9.Bd3 – see Chapter 17 line A.

 8...dxe5 9.dxe5 0-0 (9...Nc6 10.Qe2 – see Chapter 18) 10.Qe2 – see 8...0-
0.

9.Qe2

Naturally, the main lines arise after Nc6 (see Chapter 18), but here we
will deal with variations in which Black refrains from the immediate
development of his queen’s knight. In these lines he usually prefers at first
to develop his light-squared bishop.
9...b6

About 9...Nc6 10.Nc3 – see Chapter 18.

Following 9...Nd7 10.Bxd5 exd5 11.Nc3 Nb6 12.Qd3², Black’s knight

on b6 does not beautify his position at all.

9...Bd7, with the idea Bc6. Black’s bishop on c6 however is not so well
placed there and will often come under an attack after Nf3-e5. There will
often arise an exchange of White’s knight for an enemy bishop and he will
obtain the two-bishop advantage. 10.Nc3 Nxc3 11.bxc3 Bc6 (11...Nc6
12.Bd3 – see Chapter 18) 12.exd6 Bxd6 (12...Qxd6 13.Ne5 Bd5 14.Bd3
Nc6, Ostovic – Fercec, Porec 2010, 15.Ng4 Rac8 16.Ne3²) 13.Ne5

Now Black must either exchange his opponent’s powerful knight,

presenting White with the two-bishop advantage, or will allow the move f2-
f4 after which White will fortify his knight and will exert positional
pressure with its help.
13...Bd5 14.Bd3², followed by c3-c4.
13...Qc7 14.f4 Nd7, Rublevsky – Movsesian, Cheliabinsk 2016, 15.Bd3!?
Rac8 16.c4ƒ
13...Qa5 14.f4 (14.Nxc6 Nxc6 15.Bd2²) 14...Bxe5 15.fxe5 Qxc3 16.Bb2
Qb4 17.Rf4‚
13...Bxe5 14.Qxe5 Nd7 15.Qg3 Nf6 (15...Be4 16.Bb3 Rc8 17.c4 Qf6,
Sveshnikov – Vera Gonzalez, Sochi 1985, 18.Rd1 Qg6 19.f3 Qxg3 20.hxg3
Bc6 21.a4±) 16.Bh6 Ne8 (16...Nh5 17.Qg4 Qf6 18.Qxh5 Qxh6 19.Qxh6
gxh6 20.Be2 Rfc8 21.Rfc1²) 17.Rfe1 Rc8 18.Bg5 (18.Bb3 Bd5 19.Re5 Qc7
20.Bd2²) 18...Qc7 19.Qh4 Nd6 20.Bd3 f5 21.Rxe6 Be4 22.Bf1 (22.Bf4
Qxc3 23.Rd1 Bxd3 24.Rxd6 Qc2 25.Re1 Rce8 26.Be5²) 22...Qxc3 23.Rc1
Qxd4, Mikac – Polajzer, Slovenia 2013, 24.Qg3 Rxc1 25.Bxc1 Nf7
26.Qa3²
 Black can try here 9...Na6, with the idea to support his knight on d5 and
not to exchange it for the enemy knight on c3. 10.Rd1 Nac7 11.Nc3 Bd7,
Guido – Epishin, Bratto 2004, 12.Ne4 Ba4 13.Rd3!?² with the idea to begin
an attack after Nfg5. 13...Nb4? 14.exd6 Bxd6 15.Nfg5! Nxd3 16.Qxd3 f6
(16...g6 17.Nxh7 Kxh7 18.Qh3+ Kg8 19.Ng5+–) 17.Bxe6+ Nxe6
18.Nxe6 Qc8 19.Nxf8 Bxf8 20.Nc3²

9...dxe5 10.dxe5. The trade of the pawns is in favour of White, because he

can deploy his rook on the d-file exerting pressure against the d5-square.

About 10...Nc6 11.Nc3 or 11.Rd1 – see Chapter 18.

10...Qc7 11.Bd2 Nc6 12.Rc1!? (12.Nc3 Nxc3 13.Bxc3) 12...Bd7 13.Qe4
Rfd8 (13...f5 14.exf6 Nxf6 15.Bxe6+ Kh8 16.Qc4²) 14.Nc3 Nxc3
15.Rxc3ƒ Bb4? 16.Ng5 g6 17.Qh4 h5 18.Nxf7 Bxc3 19.Qf6+–
10...Bd7 Zarubitski – Praggnanandhaa, Mumbai 2019 11.Bxd5!? exd5
12.Nc3 Be6 13.Be3 Nc6 14.Rad1 Qd7 15.a3 Rad8 16.Rd2 Qc7 (16...d4
17.Bxd4 Bg4 18.Rfd1²) 17.Nb5 Qb8 18.Bf4²
10...b6 11.Rd1 Bb7 12.Bxd5 exd5 (12...Bxd5 13.Nc3² Bxf3? 14.Qxf3
Nd7, Shiomi – Del Castilho, Khanty-Mansiysk 2010, 15.Qb7 Nc5 16.Rxd8
Nxb7 17.Rd7+–) 13.Nc3 Na6 14.Nxd5 Bxd5 15.Qxa6 Bb7 16.Rxd8 Bxa6
17.Rxa8 Rxa8, Unver – Ozalp, Konya 2015, 18.Bg5 Bc5 19.Rd1²

10.Rd1!?

White plays this move with the idea to advance later d4-d5 in the
variation 10...Bb7 11.Bxd5 Bxd5 12.Nc3 Bb7 13.d5. If Black captures with
a pawn in this variation and not with his bishop (11...exd5), then after the
exchange d6xe5 d4xe5, White’s rook will exert pressure against the pawn
on d5.

10...Bb7

Following 10...Nc6 11.Bxd5 exd5 12.Nc3, Black will have to give up his
pawn on d5 anyway. 12...Be6 (12...Nb4, Paichadze – Maghsoodloo, Batumi
2018, 13.Be3 Ba6 14.Qd2²) 13.Qb5 Rc8 14.Nxd5 Bxd5 15.Qxd5 dxe5
(15...Nb4 16.Qe4 dxe5 17.Nxe5 Qd5 18.Qxd5 Nxd5 19.Bd2 Rc2 20.Rab1
Rd8 21.Nf3² Terao – Barbosa, Foz do Iguacu 2018) 16.dxe5 Qxd5 17.Rxd5
f6, Handoko – Fedder, Luzern 1982, 18.exf6 Bxf6 19.Rb1²
 11.Bxd5!?
White presents his opponent with the two-bishop advantage, but Black’s
bishops are severely restricted inside his own camp.
11...exd5

11...Bxd5 12.Nc3 Bb7 13.d5 exd5 (13...dxe5 14.dxe6 Qe8 15.exf7+ Qxf7
16.Nxe5²) 14.Nxd5 (14.e6 Na6 15.Nxd5 Nc5 16.exf7+ – see 14...Nxd5)
14...Nd7 15.e6 (15.Qb5!?) 15...Nf6 (15...Nc5 16.exf7+ Rxf7 17.b4 Na6
18.a3 Bf6 19.Ra2 Nc7 20.Nxf6+ Qxf6 21.Ng5²) 16.Nxe7+ Qxe7 17.Ng5
fxe6 18.Qxe6+ Qxe6 19.Nxe6 Rf7 20.Bf4²

12.Nc3 Na6

12...Nd7, Paichadze – Colovic, Skopje 2019, 13.e6 fxe6 14.Qxe6+ Rf7

15.Re1 (15.Nxd5 Nf8 16.Nxe7+ Qxe7 17.Qxe7 Rxe7 18.d5²) 15...Nf8
16.Qg4 Bc8 17.Qg3²

13.Nb5
White is threatening 14.Bg5 Bxg5 15.Nxd6 and Black can parry it neither
with 15...Bc6, nor with 15...Rb8, because his knight on a6 is hanging.
Now, if he removes his knight to the c7-square, White exchanges by force
the dark-squared bishops and Black would remain with a “bad” bishop on
b7.
 13...Nc7

After the exchange 13...dxe5 14.dxe5, Black would remain with a bishop-
pair, but White would deploy a blocking knight on d4 and Black’s light-
squared bishop would be just a defender of the pawn on d5. Later, White
will try to transfer his knight to the d6-outpost, consolidating his advantage.
14...Nc5 15.Nfd4 Qd7, Korneev – Pavlidis, Heraklio 2017, 16.b4!? White
wishes to oust the enemy knight to the e6-square, so that his knight can go
to f5. 16...Ne6 (16...Ne4?! 17.f3 Ng5 18.Nd6 Bxd6 19.exd6 Ne6 20.Nf5±)
17.Nf5 Bxb4 (17...f6 18.Nbd6 Bxd6 19.exd6 Kh8 20.Qg4 Rae8 21.h3²;
17...Ba6 18.Rxd5 Qb7 19.Rd1 Rfd8 20.Be3²) 18.Bh6 Rfc8 (18...gxh6
19.Qg4+ Kh8 20.Qxb4° f6 21.Nbd6 fxe5 22.Re1 e4 23.Qc3+ d4 24.Nxd4
Qg7 25.N4b5 Qxc3 26.Nxc3²) 19.Nbd6 Bxd6 20.exd6 Kh8 (20...gxh6?
21.Qe5 f6 22.Qxf6 Ng7 23.Ne7+ Kh8 24.Nxc8 Qxc8 25.Re1+–) 21.Re1
Rg8 22.Qe5 d4 23.f3 Ba6 24.Nxg7 Nxg7 25.Qf6 Rad8 26.Re7 Qxd6
27.Bxg7+ Rxg7 28.Re8+ Rxe8 29.Qxd6 d3 30.Rd1±

14.Nxc7 Qxc7 15.Bg5 Rfe8

 15...Rae8 16.Rac1 Qd7 17.Qd2 Bxg5 18.Qxg5 f6 19.exf6 Rxf6 20.Re1
Re4 21.Qd2 h6 22.Re3 Rg6 23.Ne1 Qf5, Dolzhikova – Erenberg, Caleta
2019, 24.Rcc3 Ba6 25.h3²

16.Rac1 Qd7 17.Bxe7

17...Rxe7

17...Qxe7 18.Rc3 Bc8 19.h3. Naturally, Black would be happy to trade

minor pieces after Bg4. 19...Bf5 20.Rdc1 dxe5 (Following 20...Be4, Black
again fails to exchange minor pieces: 21.Rc7 Qd8 22.exd6 Qxd6 23.Ne5±)
21.dxe5 h6 (It would be a more practical decision for Black to try to save
the endgame after 21...Be4 22.Rc7 Qe6 23.Ng5 Qxe5 24.Nxf7 Qf4 25.Qg4
Qxg4 26.hxg4 Bg6 27.Nd6±, which, by the way, would be also very
difficult for him. 27...Red8± 28.Rc8 Raxc8 29.Rxc8 Rxc8 30.Nxc8 Kf7
31.Nxa7 Ke6 32.Nc6 Kd6 33.Nd4 Ke5 34.Ne2 d4 35.f3 Bb1 36.a3 d3?
37.f4+) 22.Nd4± Qxe5? 23.Qxe5 Rxe5 24.f4 1–0 Savchenko – Van
Foreest, Moscow 2016.

18.Qd3
 White prevents f7-f6.

18.Re1!? Rae8 19.Qd3 dxe5 20.Rxe5 f6 21.Rxe7 Qxe7 22.Qb5²

18...h6 19.Qa3 Re6

19...dxe5 20.Nxe5 Qe8 21.h3²

20.exd6 Rxd6

20...Qxd6 21.Qxd6 Rxd6 22.Rc7 Ba6 23.Re1±

21.Ne5 Qd8

22.Rc3 (It is more precise for White to play here 22.Rc2 not to overburden
the third rank since his queen may use it to manoeuvre. 22...Re6 23.Rdc1.
Now, he can counter 23...a5 with 24.Qf3. 23...f6 24.Ng4 Rc8 25.Rxc8 Bxc8
26.Ne3 a5 27.h3±) 22...Re6 23.Rdc1 f6, Rublevsky – Papin, Cheboksary
2016 (23...a5!?) 24.Ng4 Re4 25.Ne3 Rxd4 26.Rc7 Bc8 27.Rxa7 Rxa7
28.Qxa7±
 Chapter 18
1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 e6
5.Bc4 d6 6.d4 cxd4 7.cxd4 Nc6 8.0-0
Be7 9.Qe2

9...0-0
Black has tried some other moves in practice in an attempt to organise
counterplay before the completion of his development. Still, castling is his
most logical and best move.

About 9...Nb6 10.Bb3 – see Chapter 16 line A.

9...a6 with the idea b5, Bb7. 10.Nc3 Nxc3 11.bxc3 dxe5 (11...b5 12.Bd3
Bb7 13.a4²) 12.dxe5 Qc7 (12...b5 13.Bd3 Bb7 14.a4 b4, Backwinkel –
Schoepf, Bochum 1979, 15.Rb1 0-0 16.Bd2 a5 17.Qe4 g6 18.Bh6 Re8
19.Bb5 Qc7 20.Qe3 bxc3 21.Qxc3²) 13.Bd3 0-0 (13...Bd7 14.Rb1 h6,
Khamrakulov – Strikovic, Navalmoral 2004, 15.Qe4 Na5 16.Be3 Bc5
17.Nd4²) 14.Re1. There has arisen a position like in variation B, except that
Black has lost a tempo for the move a6 which would hardly be necessary
later. 14...b6, Zhigalko – Rosikhin, Minsk 2010, 15.Bg5!? (15.Ng5!?)
15...Nxe5 (15...Bb7 16.Qe4 g6 17.Bf6 Rfe8 18.Qh4‚) 16.Bf4 Nxf3+
17.Qxf3 Qa7 18.Be4 Bd7 19.Qh3 g6 20.Bxa8 Qxa8 21.Qg3±

9...b6. Black fails to realise his plan to the end and to play Bb7. 10.Nc3
Nxc3 11.bxc3 dxe5 (About 11...0-0 – see 9...0-0; 11...Bb7? 12.d5 exd5
13.Bxd5 0-0 14.Qe4 Rc8 15.Nd4 Qc7 16.Nb5 Qb8 17.Ba3 dxe5 18.Bxe7
Nxe7 19.Bxb7 f5 20.Qb4 Qxb7 21.Nd6+– A.Zakharov – D.Korneev,
Moscow 1995.) 12.Bb5!? White prevents the appearance of the enemy
bishop on the long diagonal. 12...Bd7 13.dxe5 0-0 14.Bd3 Qc7 15.h4 f5
(15...Rfd8 16.Qe4 g6 17.h5 Be8 18.Re1²) 16.exf6 gxf6 17.Rd1 Kh8
(17...Rad8 18.Bh6 Rf7 19.Bc4±) 18.Qe4 Rf7 19.Bc4 Bd6 20.Nd4 Rd8
21.Nb5 Bh2+ 22.Kh1 Qe5 23.Qxe5 Bxe5 24.Nd6 Re7 25.Ne4²

9...Qc7
 White fails to transpose comfortable to variation В after 10.Nc3 Nxc3
11.bxc3 dxe5 12.dxe5, because of 12...b6 (12...0-0 – see line B) 13.Bd3
Bb7 14.Rd1 0-0 (14...0-0-0!?÷) 15.Qe4 g6 16.Bh6 Na5!? (16...Rfd8 – see
line B) 17.Qf4 Bxf3 18.Qxf3 Rfd8÷; as well as following 10.Rd1, since his
rook goes too early to the d1-square and Black succeeds in playing
16...Na5. 10...0-0 (10...b6? 11.Bxd5 exd5 12.Nc3 Be6 13.Bf4 Qd7 14.exd6
Bxd6 15.Nxd5 0-0 16.Bxd6 Qxd6 17.Nc3 Bg4 18.d5±) 11.Nc3 Nxc3
12.bxc3 dxe5 13.dxe5 b6 14.Bd3 Bb7 15.Qe4 g6 16.Bh6 Na5!?÷
(16...Rfd8 17.Qf4 –see line B).
10.Qe4!? (After 9...0-0 10.Qe4, Black will organise counterplay after he
transfers his queen to h5 via the a5-square. Here however, he has lost a
tempo for the move Qc7 and this plan would not work.) 10...0-0 (10...dxe5
11.dxe5 Bd7 12.Bd2 0-0, Sermek – Kozul, Portoroz 1993, 13.Rc1 f5
14.exf6 Nxf6 15.Bxe6+ Kh8 16.Qc4 Bxe6 17.Qxe6 Rad8 18.Na3 Nh5
19.Rc2²) 11.Re1 Bd7 12.a3 Rac8 (12...f5 13.exf6 Bxf6 14.Bd3 g6 15.Nc3
Nxc3 16.bxc3²) 13.Bd3 f5 14.exf6 Nxf6 15.Qh4 d5 (15...g6 16.Bh6 Nh5
17.Qe4 Rf7 18.Nbd2²) 16.Nc3 (16.Bg5 h6, Patrick – Stembridge, England
2013, 17.Nc3 Nxd4 18.Nxd4 hxg5 19.Qxg5 Qb6 20.Nf5 exf5 21.Rxe7 Rf7
22.Rxf7 Kxf7 23.Rb1²) 16...Ne4 17.Qh3 e5 18.Nxd5 Bxh3 19.Nxc7 Nxf2
20.Bc4+ Kh8 21.Ne6 Bxe6 22.Bxe6 Rcd8 23.Kxf2 Nxd4 24.Rxe5 Rde8
25.Be3 Nxe6 26.Bxa7 Bf6 27.Rb5²

9...dxe5 10.dxe5. Black has opened the d-file too early and White is
already threatening Rd1.
 10...Nb6 11.Rd1!? (White can also play here 11.Bb3 – see Chapter 16,
line A, but it is preferable for him to opt for 11.Bd3 – see Chapter 17 line
C1b1, transferring his bishop immediately to the long diagonal.) 11...Bd7
(11...Qc7 12.Bb3 – see 10...Qc7) 12.Bb3 Na5 13.Bc2 Qc7 14.Nc3±
W.Schmidt – Ambelang, Stetten 1988.
10...a6 This move has been played with the idea b5, Bb7, but Black’s
position is not so good that he can afford to play so aggressively. Now,
White has a choice between two good lines. His simplest move 11.Rd1
consolidates immediately his advantage, which would happen after Bxd5,
Nc3. (He can also continue in the style of variation B: 11.Nc3 Nxc3
12.bxc3 – see 9...a6.) 11...b5 12.Bxd5 exd5 13.Nc3 Be6 14.Qd3. White is
simply threatening to win a pawn. 14...Ra7 15.a4 b4 16.Ne2 Bg4, Oral –
Biolek, Czech Republic 2008 (16...0-0 17.Be3 Ra8 18.Nf4 Qd7 19.Rac1
Rfd8 20.Bb6 Rdb8 21.a5±) 17.Be3 Ra8 18.Rac1 Bxf3 19.gxf3 Nxe5 20.Qf5
Bf6 21.Nf4 Nxf3+ 22.Kf1 Nh4 23.Qg4 0-0 24.Nxd5±
10...0-0 11.Rd1 (11.Nc3 Nxc3 12.bxc3 – see 9...0-0).
 About 11...Qc7 12.Bxd5 – see 10...Qc7.
11...Qa5 12.Bd2 Qc7. Black has lost a tempo and has reduced his
protection of the d5-square. 13.Bd3!? (White can also exploit the presented
tempo, preserving his initiative and keeping his harmonious queenside
pawn structure with the line: 13.Nc3 Nxc3 14.Bxc3 Bd7 15.Qe4 Rfd8
16.Bd3 g6 17.Rac1² Schaper – Wohlfart, Germany 2012.) 13...Bd7 14.Qe4
g6 (14...f5 15.exf6 Nxf6 16.Qh4ƒ) 15.Na3 Rac8 16.Rac1 a6 17.Nc4 b5
18.Ne3 Nxe3 19.Bxe3 Rfd8 20.h4‚
11...a6 12.Nc3 Nxc3 13.bxc3 Qc7 14.Qe4 b5 15.Bd3 g6 16.Bh6 Re8,
Pietrusiak – Neukirch, Brno 1976 (16...Rd8. In variation B we have
analysed a similar position, but there, instead of a6+b5, Black has played
the better moves b6, Bb7. 17.h4 Bb7 18.Qf4ƒ) 17.h4 Bb7 18.Qf4 Rad8
(18...Bf8 19.Bxf8 Rxf8 20.h5 f6 21.hxg6 Nxe5 22.Nxe5 fxe5 23.Qg5 e4
24.Bc2 Rf5 25.Qh6ƒ) 19.h5 Rd5 20.hxg6 hxg6 21.Be4 Rxd1+ 22.Rxd1 Rd8
23.Re1 f5 24.Bxf5! gxf5 (24...exf5 25.Qg3 Kh7 26.Ng5+ Bxg5 27.Bxg5
Rd7 28.Bf6 Rg7 29.Rd1 Kg8 30.Rd6+–) 25.Qg3+ Kf7 26.Qg7+ Ke8
27.Ng5 Kd7 28.Nxe6 Kxe6 29.Qg6+ Kd5 30.Rd1+ Nd4 31.Be3 Bc5
32.cxd4 Bb4 33.e6 Rf8 34.Bh6+–
10...Qc7 11.Rd1
 11...0-0. Black sacrifices a pawn hoping to regain tempi by attacking the
enemy rook. 12.Bxd5 exd5 13.Nc3. Naturally, this move is better than
Rxd5. 13...d4 (13...Be6 14.Nxd5 Bxd5 15.Rxd5 Nb4 16.Rd1± Sveshnikov
– Yasin, Katerini 2014; 13...Bg4 14.Nxd5 Bxf3 15.gxf3 Qc8, Van Beers –
Vermaat, Gent 2017, 16.Qe4 Qh3 17.Bd2 f5 18.Qe3 f4 19.Nxf4 Qf5
20.Nd5 Rae8 21.Bc3±) 14.Nb5 Qb6 (14...Qa5 15.Nbxd4²) 15.Nfxd4
Nxd4 16.Nxd4²
11...Nb6 12.Bb3 (Following 12.Bd3!? Nb4 13.Be4, Black exchanges the
queens indeed, but still fails to equalise: 13...Qc4 14.Qxc4 Nxc4 15.Nc3 0-
0 16.b3 Nb6 17.Be3²).
 About 12...Bd7 13.Nc3 a6 14.Bf4 0-0 15.Rac1 – see 12...0-0.
12...Nd7 13.Bf4 Nc5 14.Bc2 a6 (14...Nb4 15.Nc3 Nxc2 16.Qxc2 0-0
17.Rac1±) 15.Nc3 Nb4 16.Rac1 Nxc2 17.Rxc2 Qa5 18.Nd2 Qb4, Carlsson
– Mohammadi, Sweden 2006, 19.Be3+–
12...0-0 13.Nc3 a6 14.Bf4 Bd7 (14...Nd7 15.Ne4 Ndxe5? 16.Nxe5 Nxe5
17.Ng3 f6 18.Rac1 Qb6 19.Nf5 Ng6 20.Nxe7+ Nxe7 21.Bc7 Qb5
22.Bxe6+–; 15...Nc5 16.Nxc5 Bxc5 17.Ng5 Be7 18.Nxh7 Kxh7 19.Qh5+
Kg8 20.Bc2 g6 21.Bxg6 fxg6 22.Qxg6+ Kh8 23.Rd3+–) 15.Rac1 Rfd8
16.Ne4 Be8 17.Nd6 Nc8 18.Ng5!? (18.Nxe8 Rxe8 19.Qe4± O’Toole –
Jackson, England 2017) 18...Nxd6 19.exd6 Bxd6 20.Nxe6 fxe6 21.Qxe6+
Bf7 22.Bxd6 Bxe6 23.Bxe6+ Qf7 24.Bxf7+ Kxf7 25.Bf4±
 10.Nc3

White has also tried here many other moves in practice.

10.Qe4. Now, Black can organise counterplay by transferring his queen to
the h5-square. 10...Bd7 11.Bd3 (11.Re1 Rc8 12.a3 Na5 13.Ba2 Ba4) 11...f5
12.exf6 Nxf6 13.Qe2 Qa5 (followed by Qh5) 14.Nc3 Qh5.

After 10.Rd1 Na5, White will have to part with his light-squared bishop.
(He would have been happier after 10...Bd7 11.Bd2 Rc8 12.Nc3 Nxc3
13.Bxc3 d5 14.Bd3 Nb4 15.Bb1.) 11.b3 (11.Bd3 Nb4) 11...Bd7 12.Bxd5
exd5 13.Nc3 Be6 14.Ba3 a6 15.h3 Re8.

It may seem reasonable for White to play the prophylactic move 10.Re1
here, but Black has some concrete counterplay. 10...Qb6!? (White would
have been better after 10...Bd7 11.Nc3 Nxc3 12.bxc3 dxe5 13.dxe5 Qc7
14.Bd3 Rfd8 – see 10.Nc3.) 11.Qe4 dxe5 12.dxe5 Bc5 13.Re2 f5 14.exf6
Nxf6 15.Qh4 Rd8 16.Rd2 Nd4.

10...Nxc3
 We have already seen numerous times that in general the retreat of
Black’s knight from the centre is usually in favour of White, because Black
often exchanges on c3, while the trade of the pawns d6xe5 happens only
rarely.

10...Nb6. When Black retreats this knight his kingside becomes critically
defenceless. 11.Bd3 (White can simply play here 11.Bb3 – see Chapter 16
line A, but he transfers his bishop to the b1-h7 diagonal anyway, so he
should better do this immediately.)

11...d5?! This is in principle a strategical mistake, but it is already a bit

difficult to give a good advice to Black anyway. Now, White can prepare
patiently his kingside attack, while Black has no real counterplay at all.
12.Bf4!? When he plays f7-f5 (He will have to do that sooner or later...)
White will capture e5xf6 and his bishop will be very well placed. 12...a6
13.Rad1. He plans to retreat his bishop to the b1-square, so he does not wish
to close his rook. 13...Bd7 14.b3. White prevents the appearance of the
enemy knight on the c4-square. 14...Rc8 (14...f5 15.exf6 Rxf6 16.Qe3)
15.Qe3. He is preparing Bb1 (The immediate move 15.Bb1? is bad in view
of 15...Nxe5.). 15...Nb4 16.Bb1. White will soon begin a direct attack.
16...f5 (This move loses practically by force 16...Re8? 17.Ng5 h6 18.Bh7+
Kf8 19.Nxf7 Kxf7 20.Qf3 Rh8 21.Bd2+ Bf6 22.Qh5+ Kf8 23.Bg6+–)
17.exf6 Rxf6 18.Rc1 (White protects his knight.) 18...Nc6 19.Ne2 Rf8
(19...Ba3 20.Rcd1±) 20.Qd3 g6 21.Qe3 Bf6 22.h4 Bxh4 23.Nxh4 Qxh4
24.Bg5 Qh5 25.f3+– threatening Ng3.
11...dxe5 12.dxe5 Nd5 (12...Nd4?! 13.Nxd4 Qxd4 14.Rd1 Qh4 15.Be4
Rd8 16.g3 Qh3 17.Rxd8+ Bxd8+– Van Mil – Iskov, Copenhagen 1987)
13.Rd1 Re8, Dobrowolski – Karacsonyi, chess.com 2020, 14.Qe4 (14.h4!?)
14...g6 15.Bc4 Qa5 16.Nxd5 exd5 17.Bxd5±
11...Nb4 12.Bb1

Black plays 12...Bd7 with the idea to transfer his bishop to the long
diagonal with the move Bc6, fortifying the d5-square in the process.
Meanwhile White succeeds in organising an attack. 13.Ne4 (13.h4!?)
13...dxe5 (13...Bc6 14.a3 N4d5 15.Neg5 g6 16.h4‚) 14.dxe5 Bc6 15.a3
N4d5 16.Neg5 g6 17.h4 Rc8 18.h5 Qd7 19.Re1 Bb5 20.Qd2 Rfd8 21.hxg6
(21.Nxf7 Kxf7 22.hxg6+ Kg8 23.Be4±) 21...fxg6 (21...hxg6 22.Nxf7+–)
22.Ne4. White frees the way of his queen to the h6-square. 22...Rf8
23.Qh6‚
 12...N4d5 13.Qd3 g6 (13...f5? 14.exf6 Nxf6 15.Ng5 g6 16.Nxh7+–;
15...h6 16.Nh7 Rf7 17.Nxf6+ gxf6 18.Bxh6+–) 14.Bh6 Re8 15.Ne4 dxe5
16.dxe5 Bd7, Xylogiannopoulos – Gedajlovic, Prague 2014 (16...Qc7
17.Rc1 Qb8 18.h4‚) 17.Nfg5 Qc7 18.Qf3 Bxg5 19.Nxg5 Bc6 20.Re1±

11.bxc3

11...dxe5
Black refrains from the exchange of the pawns, but does not achieve
anything with this. On the contrary, White obtains additional possibilities,
so even if Black does not capture on move 11, he should better take
immediately when he has the opportunity.

11...Bd7 12.Bd3 f6 (12...d5 13.h4 – see 11...d5; 12...dxe5 13.dxe5 – see

11...dxe5) 13.exf6 Bxf6 14.Re1±

11...d5 12.Bd3
 12...Na5 13.h4! f5 (13...Bxh4? It is a well known fact that capturing this
pawn is tremendously dangerous for Black. 14.g3+– Be7 15.Kg2 f5 16.exf6
Bxf6 17.Rh1 g6, Sveshnikov – Rashkovsky, Sochi 1976, 18.Rxh7 Kxh7
19.Ne5 Bxe5 20.Qh5+ Kg8 21.Qxg6+ Bg7 22.Qh7+ Kf7 23.Bg6+ Ke7
24.Bg5+ Kd6 25.Bxd8 Rxd8 26.Qxg7+–) 14.exf6 gxf6, Z.Szabo –
Chodorowski, ICCF 2006 (14...Bxf6 15.Ng5 Bxg5 16.hxg5±) 15.Nh2 Qe8
16.Bh6 Rf7 17.Ng4±
12...Bd7 13.h4! f5 (13...Bxh4 14.g3 Be7 15.Kg2 f5 16.exf6 Rxf6,
Fernandez Siles – Suba, La Roda 2009, 17.Rh1 g6 18.Ng5+–; 17...h6
18.Ne5 Bd6 19.Rb1 b6 20.Qg4 Nxe5 21.dxe5 Bxe5 22.Bxh6 Rf5 23.Bf4
Bxf4 24.Bxf5 exf5 25.Qxf4+–) 14.exf6 gxf6 15.Bf4 Bc8 16.Rab1 Na5,
Senador – Wen, Olongapo City 2010, 17.Nh2 Qe8 18.Ng4 (18.g4!?)
18...Kh8 19.Nh6 Nc4 20.Qf3±

11...b6 12.Bd3 Bb7 13.Qe4 g6 14.Bh6 Re8 15.Bb5!? (15.Rad1ƒ) 15...Qc7

(15...Rc8 16.Qf4 a6 17.Ng5 Bxg5 18.Bxg5 dxe5 19.dxe5 Qd5 20.c4 Qc5
21.Rad1 axb5 22.Rd7 Nxe5 23.Rxb7 f5 24.Rd1±) 16.Qf4 dxe5 17.dxe5
(17.Nxe5 Nxe5 18.Bxe8 Nf3+ 19.gxf3 Qxf4 20.Bxf4 Rxe8 21.a4 Bxf3
22.a5 b5 23.a6² Matsuura – Mendonca, Sao Paulo 2014) 17...a6 18.Bd3
Rac8 19.Rfe1 Na5 20.Ng5 f5 21.Bf1 Bd5 (21...Qxc3 22.Nxe6 Qb4 23.Nd4
Bc5 24.Rad1 Rcd8 25.a3 Qa4 26.e6±) 22.Bxa6 Ra8 23.Bb5±

11...Qc7 12.exd6 (12.Bd3 dxe5 13.dxe5 – see 10...dxe5) 12...Bxd6

13.Bd3 Ne7 (13...e5 14.Re1 exd4 15.cxd4 Bg4 16.h3 Bxf3 17.Qxf3 Nb4
18.Be4 Nc2 19.Bxc2 Qxc2 20.Qxb7²) 14.c4 Ng6 15.c5 Be7 (15...Bf4
16.g3 Bxc1 17.Raxc1²) 16.h4 Rd8 17.h5 (17.Rb1 Nf8 18.Be3±) 17...Nf8
18.h6 g6 19.Rb1 Nd7 20.Bg5± Van den Bos – Napalkov, ICCF 2001.

11...Qa5 12.exd6 Bxd6 13.Rb1!? (13.Bd3 Qxc3 14.Bxh7+ Kxh7

15.Qe4+ Kg8 16.Ng5 f5 17.Qh4 Rf7 18.Qh7+ Kf8 19.Rb1±; 13...Qh5
14.Re1 b6 15.Rb1 Ne7 16.Be4 Rb8 17.h3²) 13...Qxc3 (13...Qh5? 14.Rb5
e5 15.dxe5 Be7 16.e6+–) 14.Rb5 a6 15.Rh5 g6 (15...h6 16.Rd1 Rd8 17.Bb3
Bf8 18.Rh3 Qa5 19.g4‚) 16.Bb2 Qb4 17.Ng5 gxh5 (17...Be7 18.a3 Qb6
19.d5 Nd4 20.Bxd4 Qxd4 21.dxe6 gxh5 22.exf7+ Kh8 23.Qxe7+–)
18.Qxh5 Kg7 19.Bb3 h6 20.Ne4 f5 21.Bc3 Qa3 22.d5+ Be5 23.Bd2 Rh8
24.dxc6 bxc6 25.g4‚

12.dxe5
 White had plenty of possibilities on his move 10, while Black would have
a great choice now. He usually makes a move with his queen B) 12...Qc7 or
C) 12...Qa5, freeing the d8-square for his rook on f8, since it would have to
retreat there after White’s move Bh6. Sometimes Black begins immediately
to take care about the development of his bishop A) 12...b6. The drawback
of this move is that his rook would have to occupy a much less active
square after Bh6.
12...Bd7 13.Bd3 Qa5 (13...Qc7 14.Bf4 – see 12...Qc7) 14.Rb1 Rab8

15.Rb5 Qc7 (15...Qa4 16.Bc2 Qa6 17.a4±) 16.Ng5 (16.Bg5, R.Lutz –

Dietz, Hannover 2017, 16...Rfd8 17.Qe4 g6 18.Bf6 Be8²) 16...h6 17.Nf3
a6 18.Qe4 g6 19.Rb1²
15.Bg5!? Rfd8 (15...Bxg5? 16.Bxh7+! Kxh7 17.Nxg5+ Kg6 18.Rb5 Qc7
19.Qg4 f5 20.Qg3 f4 21.Qg4 a6 22.Rc5 b6 23.Rxc6 Qxc6 24.Rd1+–;
15...g6 16.Qd2 Bxg5 17.Qxg5 f6 18.exf6 Qxg5 19.Nxg5 Rxf6 20.Rfe1±)
16.Qe4 g6 17.Qh4 Be8 18.Bxg6!? (18.Bxe7 18...Nxe7 19.Be4±) 18...hxg6
19.Bxe7 Nxe7 20.Qxe7 Bc6 21.Ng5 Rd7 22.Qf6 Qd5 23.f3 Qc5+ 24.Kh1
Qxc3 25.Rbd1 Rbd8 26.Rd6 Rf8 27.Ne4±

A) 12...b6 13.Bd3
13...Bb7

It was still not too late for Black to play here 13...Qc7 – see 12...Qc7.

14.Qe4 g6 15.Bh6
 15...Re8
He has not played a move with his queen Qc7 or Qa5 and here his rook is
incapable of occupying the right d8-square. Meanwhile his counterplay is
connected with the doubling of his rooks on the d-file, so all this looks like
a loss of time.

15...Na5 16.Qe3 Re8 (16...Bc5?! 17.Qf4 Bxf3 18.Qxf3 Re8 19.Bb5 Rf8
20.Rad1 Qh4 21.Bxf8 Rxf8 22.Rd7+– Narva – Harikrishna, chess.com
2019) 17.Ng5 (17.Bb5 Bc6 18.Bxc6 Nxc6 19.Rae1 Qc7 20.h4!?; 20.Qf4
f5, Regan – Morris, Baerum 1980, 21.h4‚) 17...Qd5 18.Qg3 Rac8 19.Be4
Qc4 20.Bxb7 (20.Rae1²) 20...Nxb7 21.Rad1 Qxc3 22.Rd3 (22.Rd7 Qxg3
23.fxg3 Nd8 24.Ne4±) 22...Qc7 23.Rf3 Bxg5 24.Qxg5 Qe7 25.Qf4 f5
26.exf6 Qf7 27.Bg7+– Maksimenko – Neverov, Copenhagen 1994.

16.Rad1 Qc7 17.Qf4 Rad8

17...Bf8 18.Bxf8 Rxf8 19.Qh6 f6 20.exf6 Rxf6 21.Ng5 Ne5 22.Bc2 Bd5
23.Bb3 Re8 24.Rfe1 Bxb3 25.axb3 Ng4 26.Qh4 Nxf2 27.Rd4 Ref8
28.Nf3+– Afromeev – Domogaev, Tula 2006.

18.h4 Rd5 19.Be4

 19...Rc5

19...Rxd1 20.Rxd1 Rd8 21.Re1 Rd7 22.h5 Nd8 23.Bxb7 Nxb7, Jianu – Lu
Shanglei, Bazna 2014, 24.hxg6 hxg6 (24...fxg6 25.Ng5 Nd8 26.Re3‚)
25.Bg5 Qd8 26.Bxe7 Qxe7 27.Re3‚

20.Rfe1

20.h5!?

20...Rc4 21.h5 Nd8 (21...Rd8, Jackson – Burchardt, Bydgoszcz 1980,

22.Ng5 f5 23.Nxe6 Rxd1 24.Rxd1 Qb8 25.hxg6 hxg6 26.Qg3 Nxe5
27.Bd5 Rg4 28.Nc7+ Bxd5 29.Qxe5+–) 22.Nd2 Ra4 23.Qg3 Bf8 24.Bxf8
Rxf8 25.Bxb7 Qxb7, Christoffel – Romsdal, ICCF 1994, 26.c4+–

B) 12...Qc7
Black plans to follow this set-up – b6, Bb7, Rfd8. His alternatives like
13...Bd7, or 13...Rd8 are weaker.
 It is now White to move however and he usually chooses one of the three
possible plans to build a battery: B1) 13.Qe4, 14.Bd3 (or 13.Bd3, 14.Qd3);
B2) 13.Bd3, with the idea to trade the dark-squared bishops with 14.Bg5, or
B3) 13.Re1, protecting the pawn on e5, so that he can free his knight from
this mission.

B1) 13.Qe4
We are going to analyse now the plan connected with building the battery.
13...b6
About 13...Rd8 14.Bd3 g6 15.Bh6 b6 16.Rfd1 – see 13...b6.
After 13...Bd7, White can play 14.Bd3 – see 13.Bd3, but it would be
more interesting for him to choose instead 14.Re1 – see 13.Re1.

14.Bd3

About 14.Bg5!? Bb7 15.Bd3 – see line B2.

14...g6 15.Bh6 Rd8

 16.Rfd1!?
The difference now, in comparison to the move 16.Rad1, is that after the
line: 16...Bb7 17.Qf4 Rd7, White would have the resource 18.Bf1.
Meanwhile, this little trick does not provide him with much...

Now, White plans to follow with Qf4, Bf1, Re1, fortifying the e5-square
before the beginning of his kingside attack.
The immediate 16.Rfe1 and then Bf1 would not work because of 16...Bb7
17.Bf1? Nd4!

16...Bb7 17.Qf4 Rd5 18.Be4 Rxd1+. This is the simplest decision for
Black. 19.Rxd1 Rd8 20.Re1 f5 21.exf6 Qxf4 22.Bxf4 Bxf6 23.Bg5 Kg7
24.h4 Re8=

B2) 13.Bd3
 White plays this move with the idea to be able in response to Black’s
standard reaction 13...b6, to have the resource 14.Bg5, in order to
accomplish later the manoeuvre Qe4-h4.
13...b6

13...Bd7
 14.Bf4!? Rac8 15.Nd2 f5 16.exf6 Qxf4 17.fxe7 Nxe7 18.g3 Qf7 19.Nc4
Qf6 20.Ne5²
14.Qe4 g6 15.Bh6 Rfd8 16.Qf4!? (16.Rfe1 – see 13.Bd3 Rd8 14.Re1 Bd7
15.Qe4 g6 16.Bh6) 16...Be8 17.Be4 f5 18.exf6 Qxf4 19.Bxf4 Bxf6
20.Ng5!? (20.Bg5 Kg7 21.Bxf6+ Kxf6 22.Rfe1 Rac8 23.Re3, Finocchiaro
– Tirabassi, Italy 1995, 23...Na5=) 20...Bxc3 21.Nxe6 Rd7 22.Rac1 Nd4
23.Nxd4 Bxd4 24.Rfd1 Bf7 25.Rd2 Re8 26.Bf3 Rde7 27.g4 Re1+ 28.Rxe1
Rxe1+ 29.Kg2²

13...Rd8 14.Re1. White maintains the initiative. (About 14.Qe4 g6 15.Bh6

b6 – see 13.Qe4.).
 About 14...b6 15.Bc2 – see 13.Re1.
14...g6 15.h4 h5 16.Bf4ƒ Black’s king shelter has been weakened.
14...Bd7 15.Qe4 (15.Bf4 Be8 16.h4 Rd5 17.Qe4 g6 18.h5 Rad8 19.Bf1²)
15...g6 16.Bh6 Be8
 17.Rac1. This move is a loss of time. White’s bishop will have to retreat
anyway, while his rook will not do anything on the c-file. Its place is on the
e-file, fortifying the e5-pawn. 17...Rd5 18.h4 Rad8 19.Bf1 Ra5 20.h5 Rdd5
21.hxg6 hxg6 22.Bf4, Nisipeanu – Jianu, Legnica 2013 (22.c4 Rdc5 23.Bf4
Rxa2) 22...Rxa2„
17.Bf1. This retreat is a part of White’s plan. 17...Rd5 (17...Na5 18.Qf4
Qxc3 19.h4‚ His centre has been fortified. Later, he will prepare an attack:
h5, g4, Kg2, Bc4, Rh1. 19...Nc6 20.Rac1 Qa5 21.Rb1 Qxa2 22.h5 Qc2
23.g4 Rd7 24.Rec1 Qa2 25.hxg6 hxg6 26.Kg2 Rad8 27.Bc4 Qa5 28.Bg7!
Kxg7 29.Rh1+–) 18.Qf4 Rad8 19.h4 Ra5 20.Re3 Rdd5 21.Rae1! The a-
pawn is immaterial, while the e-pawn will be tremendously important in
White’s attack. 21...Rxa2 22.h5 Rc5 23.hxg6 hxg6 24.Bg5 Ra3 25.Qh4
Raxc3 26.Rxc3 Rxc3 27.Bf6 Bxf6 28.exf6 Rxf3 29.gxf3 Qd6 30.Kg2+–
with the idea Bd3, Rh1.

14.Bg5!?
White realises his idea, but it looks like Black will manage somehow to
maintain the balance.

About 14.Qe4 – see 13.Qe4, but it would be stronger for White to play
here 14.Re1 – see 13.Re1.

14...Bb7

After 14...g6 15.Bf6!, there arises an endgame with a powerful knight

against a “bad” bishop and a cramped black king. 15...Bxf6 (15...Bb7
16.Qe3) 16.exf6 Qf4 17.Qe4 Qxe4 18.Bxe4 Bb7 19.Bxc6 Bxc6 20.Ne5
Rac8 21.c4±

15.Qe4 g6 16.Qh4
 White has realised his plan and Black will have to weaken the position of
his king. It would be interesting to see whether White will manage to
exploit this.
16...Bxg5

16...Rfe8. The dark squares are vulnerable but it would not be good for
Black to preserve the dark-squared bishops despite this. 17.Rae1. White
plans to activate his rook via the e3-square. 17...Bf8 18.Re3 Ne7 19.Nd4
(He is threatening Rh3.) 19...Nf5 20.Bxf5 exf5 21.Bf6 h5, Yeoh – Liu
Guanchu, Changsha 2019, 22.Qg5 Kh7 (22...Qd7 23.Rh3+–) 23.Nxf5 Qc6
24.Rh3!? Qxg2+ 25.Qxg2 Bxg2 26.Kxg2 gxf5 27.Rxh5+ Kg6 28.Rg5+
Kh7 29.f4 Bh6 30.Rh5 Rg8+ 31.Kf2 Rg6 32.Rxf5 Rag8 33.Rh5+–

17.Nxg5 h5 18.Rae1 Rac8

Black plays this with the idea to capture the pawn on e5.

19.Qg3 Ne7 20.Re3 Bd5 21.Rfe1 Nf5 22.Bxf5 exf5

 There has arisen a position with dynamic balance. There are just a few
minor pieces left on the board, so the direct attack would hardly succeed.
The vulnerability of the position of Black’s king is compensated by the
weakness of White’s queenside pawns. 23.Nh3 Kh7 24.Nf4 Be6 25.Rd3
Rfd8 26.Nxe6 fxe6 27.Rd6 Rxd6 28.exd6 Qxc3 29.Qxc3 Rxc3= Tinture –
Dessaules, ICCF 2014.

B3) 13.Re1
This is probably White’s best move. In the main line Black will try to
build a fortress with a rook, a bishop and a pawn against the enemy queen.
This looks like parity from the point of view of mathematics, but he has too
many weaknesses and there are practically two possible outcomes of the
game. White will either manage to win, or Black will draw somehow.
 13...b6

White is still not attacking directly the h7-square, but after 13...Rd8 or
13...Bd7, he can play with a great effect the move 14.Qe4, followed by Ng5
or Bd3.

13...Rd8?! 14.Qe4!? (14.Bd3 – see 13.Bd3) 14...b6 15.Ng5! White’s e5-

pawn has been protected, so his knight can take an active part in his attack.
It is well known that the queen and the knight form a powerful attacking
tandem. 15...g6 16.Qf3
 16...Bf8? 17.Ne4!? (17.Nxf7 Qxf7 18.Qxc6±) 17...Nxe5 (17...Bg7
18.Bg5 Nxe5 19.Nf6+ Kh8 20.Qh3 h5 21.Be2+–) 18.Nf6+ Kg7 19.Qf4
Qxc4 20.Qxe5 Qc5 21.Bh6+ Kh8 22.Nd5+ Kg8 23.Bxf8 Qxf8 24.Nf6+
Kh8 (24...Kg7? 25.Rad1+–) 25.Re4 Qg7 26.Rh4 h5? 27.Rxh5+
16...Rf8 17.Bb3. After Nxe5, White’s bishop would be hanging so he
retreats it prudently. 17...Nxe5 (17...Bb7? It is dangerous for Black to
reduce the protection of the e6-square: 18.Qh3 h5 19.Nxf7! Rxf7
20.Qxe6+–) 18.Qg3 (White cannot win the exchange just like that:
18.Qxa8 Bb7 19.Qxa7?! Bxg5 20.Bxg5 Ng4 21.Bf4 Qc6 22.f3 Qc5+
23.Be3 Nxe3 24.Kh1 Bc6÷) 18...f6 (18...Bd6 19.Ne4±) 19.Bxe6+ Kg7
20.Bd5 fxg5 (20...Rb8? 21.Bf4+–) 21.Bxa8 Bd6 22.Qxg5 Ng4 23.Be3
Nxe3 24.Qxe3 Bxh2+ 25.Kh1 Bd6 26.Qd4+ Kh6 27.Re2±

13...Bd7 14.Qe4
 14...Rfd8. (With this move Black fails to enter the scheme after 13.Bd3
Rd8 14.Re1 Bd7 15.Qe4 g6 16.Bh6, because White will attack with the help
of his knight.) 15.Ng5 g6 (15...Bxg5?? 16.Bxg5 Re8 17.Bd3+–) 16.Qh4 h5
17.Qf4 Bxg5 (17...Rf8 18.Rb1± Mestrovic – Sale, Zadar 1994) 18.Qxg5
Be8 19.Qh6 Ne7 20.Bg5 Nf5 21.Bxd8 Rxd8 22.Qg5± Ostovic – Bilobrk,
Sibenik 2016.
14...Rac8 15.Bd3 (White can also try to play an endgame with a slight
edge: 15.Bg5!? Nxe5 16.Bxe7 Nxf3+ 17.gxf3 Qxc4 18.Bxf8 Qxe4 19.fxe4
Kxf8 20.Rab1² Sveshnikov – Cvitan, Tilburg 1993.) 15...g6 16.Bh6 Rfd8,
Becher – Robert, Germany 1998.
 17.Rab1!? Na5 (The idea behind White’s rook-move is not to allow the
regrouping of Black’s forces after 17...Nb8, with the idea Bc6, since White
would counter this with 18.Qf4 Bc6 19.Ng5 Bxg5 20.Qxg5 f5 21.Rbd1
Ba4 22.Rd2 Na6 23.Bc4 Nc5 24.Rd6±) 18.Qf4 Be8. Black protects in
advance the f7-square. (18...Qxc3? 19.Bg5 Bf8 20.Bxd8 Rxd8 21.Ng5 Be8
22.Bxg6 hxg6 23.Ne4 Qd4 24.Nf6+ Kh8 25.Qf3+–) 19.Bf1 Qxc3 20.Bg5
Bxg5 (20...Qc7 21.Qh4 Nc6 22.Rbc1 Bf8 23.Nd2 Bg7 24.Ne4 Rd4 25.f4
Rxe4 26.Rxe4±) 21.Nxg5 Rd4 22.Ne4 Bc6 23.Rbc1 Qb4 24.a3 Rxe4
(24...Qa4 25.Rc3+–) 25.Rxe4 Qxa3 26.Rd4±

14.Bd3
 We will analyse now B3a) 14...Rd8 and B3b) 14...Bb7.

B3a) 14...Rd8 15.Bc2

After 15.Qe4, White fails to retreat his bishop to the f1-square: 15...g6
16.Bh6 Bb7 17.Bf1? Nd4.

15...Rd5!?
Black forces the enemy knight to protect the pawn on e5.

About 15...g6 16.Ng5 Bb7 17.Qg4 – see 15...Bb7.

It is obvious that the standard move 15...Bb7 is worse for Black because
of 16.Ng5! g6 17.Qg4, with the idea Qh3.
17...Nxe5 18.Qh3 Bxg5 19.Bxg5 Rd5 20.Bf4 Rc5 21.Re3©
 17...Nd4 18.Bxg6 Ne2+ 19.Qxe2 hxg6 20.Qg4 Qxc3 21.Bf4‚
17...Rd5 18.Bb3 Rxe5 19.Bf4 Bxg5 20.Bxe5 Nxe5 21.Qxg5 Nd3 22.Re3
Nf4 (22...Qxc3? 23.Rd1) 23.f3 Rd8 24.Re5 Nd3 25.Rd1² Balutescu –
Szymanski, ICCF 2015.
17...Bf8 18.Qh4! (This is the right square for White’s queen. He must
have the possibility to give a check with his knight in the variation 18...h6
19.Ne4 Qxe5 20.Nf6, while after 18.Qh3, this would be impossible.)
18...h5 (18...h6?? 19.Ne4+–).

19.g4?? Nxe5–+
White could have played with an extra exchange in an endgame with
good winning chances. 19.Ne4 Bg7 20.Bg5 Nxe5 21.Nf6+ Bxf6 22.Bxf6
Ng4 23.Bxd8 Qxd8 24.Qxd8+ Rxd8 25.Rad1 Rc8 26.Rd7 Bd5 27.c4 Bxc4
28.Rxa7±
19.Qh3, with the idea Nxe6. 19...Rd7 (Black can defend against the
sacrifice on e6 neither with 19...Bc8? 20.g4+–; nor with 19...Qe7 20.g4‚)
20.Nxe6 fxe6 21.Qxe6+ Rf7 22.Qxg6+ Rg7 23.Bb3+ Kh8 24.Qxh5+ Rh7
25.Qg4±

16.Qe4 g6 17.h4 Bb7 18.h5ƒ

 18...Rc8

But not 18...Rad8?! 19.Bh6 Rc5 20.Qf4 Rxc3 (20...Rdd5 21.Be4 Rd8
22.Ng5 Bf8 23.Bxf8 Rxf8 24.hxg6 fxg6 25.Qxf8+ Kxf8 26.Nxe6+–)
21.hxg6 hxg6 (21...fxg6 22.Bb3+–) 22.Rac1 Rc5 23.Ng5 Bf8 24.Bxf8 Rxf8
25.Qh4+–

18...Nxe5!? Black exploits the fact that White’s position is a bit unstable.
19.Nxe5 Bd6 20.Ng4 (20.Nf3? Rxh5 21.Qe3 Bh2+ 22.Kf1 Bd6µ) 20...Re5
21.Nxe5 Bxe4 22.Bxe4. After the numerous exchanges White will obtain
for Black’s queen and two pawns a rook and two bishops. This might seem
insufficient but Black’s king is vulnerable and this would be the decisive
factor to evaluate this position in favour of White. 22...Bxe5 (22...Rc8
23.Nf3 Qxc3 24.Bg5 Qb2 25.Rad1 Bc5 26.Rd2 Qa3 27.h6± Be7 28.Bf4
Bb4 29.Rd3 Qxa2 30.Red1 Rf8 31.Ne5 f6 32.Nd7 Rf7 33.Rc1 Qa6 34.Rd4
Ba3 35.Rc7+–) 23.Bxa8 Bxc3 24.Bh6 Bxa1 25.Rxa1 f6 26.Rc1 Qe5
27.Bf3±
 27...gxh5 28.Be3 Kf7 29.a4 Kg6 30.Rc4 Qa1+ 31.Kh2 Qa2 32.Rh4± f5
33.Bxh5+ Kf6 34.Be8 Kg7 35.Bh6+ Kf6 36.f4 Ke7 37.Bb5 a6 38.Bg5+
Kd6 39.Be8+–
27...Kf7 28.a4 g5 29.g3 Qb8 30.Be2 Ke7 31.Bd3 Qe8 32.Rc7+ Kd8
(32...Kd6 33.Rxh7+–) 33.Rxa7 Qxh5 34.Bg7 Qf3 35.Bb5 Qd1+ 36.Bf1
Qf3 37.Rf7 Ke8 38.Rxf6 Qg4 39.Rf8+ Ke7 40.Ra8 h5 41.Ra7+ Kd6
42.Bf8+ Ke5 43.Rd7 h4 44.Bg7+ Kf5 45.Bd3+–

19.Bb3 Rc5 20.Qg4

White plays this with the idea 21.hxg6 hxg6 22.Bxe6+

20...Nd8
 21.Bf4! White must protect his pawn on e5! 21...Bxf3 22.gxf3 Bf8
23.Kg2 Nc6 24.Re4 Bg7 25.Rh1 Nxe5. Black’ still manages to capture the
important enemy pawn but his position would be completely squeezed.
26.Qg3 Re8 27.h6 Bh8 28.Rhe1 f6 29.Rd1 (with the idea Red4, Rd7)
29...Kf7 30.Red4 f5 31.Rd6 Re7 32.Bg5 Bf6 33.Bxf6 Kxf6 34.f4 Qb7+
35.f3 Qxf3+ 36.Qxf3 Nxf3 37.Kxf3 Rxc3+ 38.Kf2+– With his next move
White will attack the e6-square – Re1.

B3b) 14...Bb7 15.Ng5

 15...Bxg5
Black is forced to give up his dark-squared bishop.
15...g6?! 16.Nxh7! Rfd8 (16...Kxh7? 17.Qh5+ Kg8 18.Bxg6 fxg6
19.Qxg6+ Kh8 20.Qh6+ Kg8 21.Re3+–) 17.Nf6+ Bxf6 18.exf6 Qe5,
Balajayeva – Kacharava, Batumi 2016, 19.Qxe5 Nxe5 20.Bf1±

16.Bxg5 Ne7
It is not good for Black to enter a very difficult endgame after the move
Nxe5, so he tries to save the game by complicating it.

16...Nxe5 17.Qxe5 Qxe5 18.Rxe5 f6 19.Rxe6 fxg5 20.Bc4 Kh8 21.Re7±

 Black has a doubled pawn, his king is misplaced and he has problems to
find a good square for his bishop. 21...Bc6 (21...Rac8 22.Bb3 Ba8 23.Rxa7
Rxc3 24.h3 Rfc8, Senador – Sukandar, Manila 2008, 25.Be6 Rd8 26.Re1
Bc6 27.Bg4±) 22.f3 (22.h3 Rfe8 23.Rae1, Macieja – Otero Acosta,
Monterrey 2015, 23...Rab8!? with the idea 24...Rxe7 25.Rxe7 Rb7) 22...h6
23.Rae1 Rf4 24.Bb3 g4 25.R1e6 Ba4, Gupta – Antal, Kecskemet 2012,
26.Bd5 Rd8 27.c4 gxf3 28.gxf3 Bd1. Black’s counter attack will be parried
easily and his bishop will remain restricted in its mobility. (28...b5? White
will obtain a passed pawn after this move. 29.Re8+ Rf8 30.Rxf8+ Rxf8
31.c5 b4 32.c6 Rc8 33.Kf2+–) 29.Kf2 Rdf8 30.Re8 Rxe8 31.Rxe8+ Kh7
32.Be4+ g6 33.Re6 h5 34.Re7+ Kh6 35.Ke3 Rh4 36.Rd7 Ba4 37.Rxa7 Be8
38.Re7 Ba4 39.Re6+–

17.Qh5!
 Now Black will be forced to give up his queen in an attempt to build up a
fortress later. It would be very difficult for him however to do this in a
practical game, so the maximum that he can hope for is to save the game.
17...Ng6 18.Re3 Qxc3

18...Qc6 19.Be4 Qc7 20.Rh3+–

19.Rd1 Qc6 20.Be4 Qxe4 21.Rxe4 Bxe4 22.h4²

 White is threatening Qe2, h5, so Black’s response is forced.
22...Bd5

Black cannot play here 22...h6? because of 23.Bxh6! gxh6 24.Qxh6 Rfd8
25.Rd6 Rxd6 26.exd6 Rd8 27.Qe3. White ousts the defender of the g6-
square. 27...Bd5 (27...Bf5? 28.Qg3) 28.h5 Rxd6 29.hxg6 fxg6 30.Qc3+–

23.Rd4
White transfers his rook to an operational rank and later it can participate
both into his attack (Rg4, Ra4...), as well a in the defence. Later, after the g-
file is opened and Black doubles his rooks on it, White will have the move
g2-g4, without being afraid of h5.

23...Rac8

23...Rfc8?! 24.Qg4 Nxe5 25.Qg3 Nc6 26.Bf6 g6 27.Rxd5 exd5 28.Qe3

Kf8 29.g4+–; White prevents for the time being 23...h6? 24.Bxh6 gxh6
25.Qxh6+–
 24.Qe2 h6 25.Bf6! gxf6 26.exf6² Marbourg – Zavrazhnov, ICCF 2017.
Later, with the move h4-h5, White will at first attack the enemy knight and
then will capture it. As a consequence there will arise an endgame with a
queen against a rook, a bishop and a pawn in which Black will try to build
up a fortress, but whether he will succeed or not would remain unclear.

C) 12...Qa5

Black frees the d8-square for his rook and gains a tempo by attacking the
enemy pawn on c3. Still, capturing it would be tremendously risky for him.
If after the move 13.Rb1, he does not capture the pawn then it would
become evident that his queen would have been much safer placed on the
c7-square. So, his queen sortie turns out to be much rather in favour of
White.

White can protect his pawn here with C1) 13.Bd2, completing his
development in the process, or sacrifice it with C2) 13.Rb1.

C1) 13.Bd2 Rd8

 Here, Black would have lost after his usually best move 13...b6? due to
14.Bb5 Bb7 15.a3, with the idea c3-c4+–

13...Bd7. This move may lead to original positions, but only if White
wishes (15.h4). 14.Rab1 Rab8 15.h4!? He will advance this pawn to the h5-
square and will build a battery after which Black should better give up the
exchange and try to hold the position in an endgame. (15.Bb3 Rfd8 16.Qe4
Be8 17.Rfe1 – see 13...Rd8) 15...Rfd8 16.h5 h6 17.Bd3 Be8 18.Qe4 Rxd3
19.Qxd3 Nxe5 20.Qe4 Nxf3+ 21.Qxf3²

14.Bd3!?

In principle this move has been played with the idea Qe4, but sometimes
it would be better for him not to play it immediately, but at first to advance
his h-pawn into the attack.
14...Bd7

Following 14...b6?! 15.Qe4, Black’s knight would be hanging so he

would need to give up the exchange. 15...Rxd3 16.Qxd3 Nxe5 17.Qe4
Nxf3+ 18.Qxf3 Rb8 19.Qg3 Ra8 20.Rfd1²
 14...g6, with the idea to develop the light-squared bishop to the long
diagonal. 15.h4 b6 16.h5 Bb7 17.Rfe1 Rac8 18.a4 Bf8

19.Bb5. White exploits the misplacement of the enemy queen. We can see
that in this variation Black often suffers because of the negative
consequences of his queen sortie on move 12. 19...a6 (19...Ne7 20.Nd4 a6
21.Bc4 Nd5 22.Rec1 Qc5 23.Bxa6 Bxa6 24.Qxa6²) 20.hxg6 hxg6 21.Reb1
Ne7 22.Be1 Bxf3 23.Qxf3 Bh6 24.Qb7 Nf5 25.Qxa6²
19.Rad1 (with the idea Bg5 or Ng5) 19...Qxa4 (19...Rd7 20.Ng5 Qxe5
21.Qg4 Qg7 22.h6 Qxh6 23.Bf4 Qg7 24.Bxg6 Rxd1 25.Bxf7+ Kh8
26.Rxd1+–) 20.Be4. Black planned to regroup his forces with Qg4 or Ne7
so White prevented that. He will soon begin active actions on the weakened
dark squares. 20...Ba6 (20...Na5 21.Ng5 Bxe4 22.Nxe4 Be7 23.Qg4 Rc4
24.Qf3 Rxe4 25.Rxe4 Qc6 26.Rd4±) 21.Qe3 Bg7 22.Qf4 Rd7 23.Ra1 Qc4
24.h6 Bf8 (24...Bh8? 25.Bxc6 Rxc6 26.Re4 Qd3 27.Rd4 Rxd4 28.cxd4 Rc7
29.Ng5+–) 25.Be3 Bb7 26.Nh2‚

14...Qa4. Black prevents Qe2-e4. Still, the a4-square is not good for his
queen, since it would be constantly under an attack there by the enemy
pieces. It is also inconceivable how he plans to complete the development
of his queenside. 15.Rfb1 (15.Rfe1!? Bd7 16.Ng5 g6 17.Nxh7 Kxh7
18.Qh5+ Kg8 19.Bxg6 Qh4 20.Bxf7+ Kg7 21.Bh6+ Kh8 22.Qxh4 Bxh4
23.Re4 Be7 24.Re3 Be8 25.Bxe6 Bd7 26.Bxd7 Rxd7 27.e6ƒ).

15...Rb8?? 16.Bb5+–
15...g6 16.h4 h5 17.Be4 Rb8 18.Re1 Bd7 19.Bg5 Bxg5 20.Nxg5 Be8
21.g4 Qa6 (21...Nxe5?! 22.gxh5 Qb5 23.hxg6 Qxe2 24.gxf7+ Nxf7
25.Rxe2 Nxg5 26.hxg5 Bb5 27.Re3 Rd2 28.a4 Bc4 29.Kg2 Rf8 30.Rf3 Rc8
31.Rb1±) 22.Qxa6 bxa6 23.gxh5 gxh5 24.f4²
15...h6
 16.c4!? (with the idea Qe4) 16...Nb4 17.Bxb4 Bxb4 18.Qe4 g6 19.c5 a5
20.a3 Qd7 21.Be2 Bxc5 22.Qh4 (White is threatening Rd1.) 22...Qe7
23.Qxh6 Qf8 24.Qh4 Rd5 (24...b6? 25.Ng5 Qg7 26.Nxf7±) 25.Bc4 Be7
26.Ng5 Bxg5 27.Qxg5 Qd8 28.Qe3 Rd2 29.Be2 Qd4 30.Qxd4 Rxd4
31.Rd1²
16.Rb2 (This move is played with the threat 17.Bc2 Qa6 18.Qe4.).
 16...Qa3 17.Rb3 Qa4 18.c4 Bb4 19.Bxb4 Nxb4 20.Be4 Bd7 21.Rab1 a5
22.a3 Na6 23.Ng5! Nc5 (23...hxg5 24.Rh3 g6 25.Bc2 Qc6 26.Qg4 Qc5
27.Qxg5 Qf8 28.Rh6 Qg7 29.Bxg6 Be8 30.Bh7+ Kf8 31.Qh4+–) 24.Bh7+
Kf8 25.Rg3 hxg5 26.Bc2 Qc6 27.Qg4 f6 28.Qh5 b6 (28...Qc7 29.exf6 gxf6
30.Qh8+ Ke7 31.Qg7+ Kd6 32.Qxf6 Rf8 33.Qd4+ Ke7 34.Rxg5+–)
29.Qh7! White prevents the appearance of the enemy king on the e7-square.
(29.h4 Ke7) 29...Be8 30.Qh8+ Kf7 31.h4 Rd7 32.exf6 gxf6 33.hxg5 Ke7
34.gxf6+ Kd6 35.Rg8+–
16...Ba3 17.Rb3 Bc5 (17...Bd7 18.c4 Ne7 19.Qe3+–; 18...Bb4 19.Qe4
Bxd2 20.Qh7+ Kf8 21.Qh8+ Ke7 22.Qxg7 Bb4 23.Qf6+ Ke8 24.Bg6
fxg6 25.Qxg6+ Ke7 26.Qg7+ Ke8 27.Ng5 hxg5 28.Rh3+–) 18.c4± Bd4?
Kidd – Barron, ICCF 2006 (18...Bb4 19.Qe4 Bxd2 20.Nxd2 Nd4 21.Qh7+
Kf8 22.Rb2±) 19.Rab1 Qxa2 20.Qe4 g6 21.Bxh6 Qxf2+ 22.Kh1 Nxe5
23.Nxe5 f5 24.Qf4 Qxf4 25.Bxf4+–

15.Rab1
Now you can see another drawback of the move Qa5, in comparison to
Qc7 – Black’s pawn on b7 is hanging.
 15.Qe4 g6 16.Rab1 Rab8÷ Smerdon – Jakovenko, Goa 2002.

15...Rab8

16.h4!?
This is a logical and standard plan, since most of Black’s pieces are on the
queenside. White does not need to present his opponent with additional
possibilities by the inclusion of the moves 16.c4 Qc7.
16...Be8

About 16...g6 17.h5 Be8 18.Rfe1 – see 16...Be8.

17.h5
 This is a complicated position and it has not been tested in practice yet, so
it would be difficult for us to give all the possible variations, but still we
will try to provide you with the most typical.
White’s subsequent plan can be for example to play: h5-h6, forcing his
opponent to weaken the dark squares on his kingside (g7-g6). Later he will
place his rook on f1 on the e1-square fortifying the pawn on e5. His queen
will go to the f4-square, via e4 or e3 and his bishop will retreat to f1 if
necessary. His knight will follow the route- Nh2-g4-f6.
Another idea for him might be to play Qe4, exchanging at an opportune
moment h5xg6 with an attack against the weakened position of the enemy
monarch.

17...g6

17...Qd5 18.Be4 Qc5 (18...Qd7 19.h6 g6 20.Bxc6 Qxc6 21.Bg5 Bxg5

22.Nxg5 Qxc3 23.Rfc1 Qd4 24.Rc7 Rd7 25.Qf3+–) 19.Rfe1 g6 20.Bf4±

17...Qxa2 18.h6 (18.Rfe1!?; 18.Rfd1!?) 18...g6 19.Ra1 Qd5 (19...Qb3

20.Be4. White is threatening Reb1. 20...Qb6 21.Be3 Qc7 22.Bxc6!? Bxc6
23.Bxa7 Ra8 24.Qe3 Qd7 25.Bb6 Rdc8 26.Nh2ƒ with the idea Ng4)
20.Bc4 Qd7 21.Bg5 Qc7 22.Qe3 b5 23.Bxe7 Qxe7 24.Be2 Rd5 25.Rfb1
Rc5 (25...Qc7 26.Rd1 Rxd1+ 27.Rxd1 a5 28.Qf4 Qe7 29.Nh2±) 26.Ra6 b4
(26...Rb7 27.Bf1 Nb8 28.Rd6 Nd7 29.Qd4 Rb6 30.Nh2 f5. Black weakens
his pawn on e6. 31.Nf3±) 27.cxb4 Nxb4 28.Rd6 Rcc8 29.Bf1!? a5
(29...Nd5 30.Rxb8 Rxb8 31.Qc5 Qb7 32.Ng5 (with the idea Ne4) 32...Ne7
33.Bd3±) 30.Nh2 Nd5 (30...Qh4 31.g3±) 31.Rxb8 Rxb8 32.Qc5 Qg5
33.Qa7 Rc8 34.Qb7 Rc7 35.Qb8 Re7 36.Bb5 Kf8 37.Rd8+–

17...Rxd3 18.Qxd3 Nxe5 19.Qe4!? After this move White must be ready
to sacrifice his queen for a rook and a bishop. (19.Nxe5 Qxe5 20.Rfe1
Qxh5 21.Qg3 Rd8 22.Rxb7 Bh4 23.Qf4²) 19...Nxf3+ 20.Qxf3 Bc6
21.Qxc6! This is the only way for him to obtain an advantage. 21...bxc6
22.Rxb8+ Bf8 23.Be3 Qxh5 24.Rfb1 g6 25.Re8 Kg7 26.Bd4+ f6 27.Rxe6
c5 28.Bxf6+ Kf7 29.Rbe1 Qd5 30.Be7 Bg7 (30...Bxe7 31.Rxe7+ Kf6
32.Rxa7 Qd2 33.Ra6+ Kf7 34.Rb1 Kg7 35.Ra7+ Kh6 36.g3 Qxc3 37.Rbb7
Qe1+ 38.Kg2 Qe4+ 39.Kh2 Kg5 40.Rxh7 c4 41.Rac7 Qe2 42.Rhf7 Kh6
43.Rf4+–) 31.Rd6 Qf5 32.Rd8 (threatening Bd6+–) 32...g5 33.Re3 g4
34.Re1 (34.Bh4 Bf6 35.Bxf6 Qb1+ 36.Kh2 Kxf6 37.Rd6+ Kf5 38.Rd5+
Kf6 39.Rxc5. It looks like White’s position is winning.) 34...c4 (34...h5
35.c4+–) 35.Bh4 Bxc3 (35...Bf6 36.Bxf6 Qxf6 37.Rd4 g3 38.fxg3+–)
36.Re7+ Kg6 37.Rg8+ Kh6 38.Bg5+ Kh5 39.Be3 Bf6 40.Rxa7 c3 41.Ra6
c2 42.Rc6+–

17...Qc7 18.Rfe1 Rd5 19.Qe4 g6 20.c4 Rd7 (20...Rc5 21.Bf1 Rd8 22.Bc3
Na5 23.Qf4 Nxc4 24.Bb4±) 21.hxg6
 21...hxg6 22.Bf1 Rbd8 23.Be3 Qa5 (23...b6 24.Qf4 Na5 25.c5 bxc5
26.Qh6+–; 24...f6 25.exf6 Qxf4 26.Bxf4 Bxf6 27.Rxe6+–) 24.c5 Rd5
25.Qf4 Bxc5 26.Bxc5 Qxc5 27.Qh4 Qf8 28.Rxb7 Qg7 29.Ng5 Qh8
30.Qxh8+ Kxh8 31.Nxf7+ Bxf7 32.Rxf7 Rxe5 33.Rc1±
21...fxg6 22.Bf1 (22.Bc2!? Bc5, with the idea Nc6-d4. 23.Be3 Bxe3
24.Rxe3 Rbd8 25.Qg4ƒ) 22...Rbd8 (22...Bc5 23.Be3 Bxe3 24.Rxe3 Nd8
25.Qf4 Nf7 26.Nh2±) 23.Be3 Bb4 (23...b6 24.c5 bxc5 25.Bb5 Rd5
26.Bc4±; 23...Bf8 24.Ng5 Re7 25.Bc5+–) 24.Rec1 Ba3 25.Rc3 Bf8
26.Ng5±

18.Rfe1
 18...Qxa2
This move is played according to the principle – if you have to suffer – let
us have at least a pawn.

18...Qc5 19.hxg6 hxg6 20.Rb5 Qa3 21.Qe4 Qxa2 22.Bc1. White wishes
to follow with 23.Ng5 and he deprives the enemy queen of the a3-square in
the process. 22...a6 23.Bb1 Qa1 24.Bb2 Qxb1 25.Qxb1 axb5 26.Nh2± with
the idea Ng4.

19.Ra1 Qb3 20.Be4 (White is threatening Reb1.) 20...Qb6 21.Be3 Qc7

22.Bf4 Bf6 23.Bc2. White plans to continue with his positional pressing.
(He could have also begun an immediate attack with the line: 23.Bxc6!?
Bxc6 24.Ng5 Bg7 25.hxg6 hxg6 26.Qg4. Here, he is threatening to win
after Qh4, Nh7-f6+ 26...Rd3 27.Qh4‚) 23...Rd5 24.Qe3 Bg7 25.h6 Bh8
26.Be4 Ra5 27.Bxc6 Bxc6 28.Nh2 Rxa1 29.Rxa1 a5 30.Ng4 Rc8 31.Bg5±
with the idea Bf6.

C2) 13.Rb1!?
 White can simply ignore the threat against his pawn on c3 with the idea to
emphasize immediately on the fact that the enemy queen is misplaced on
the a5-square.
13...Rd8

13...b6. Black cannot develop comfortably his light-squared bishop on the

long diagonal, because of the misplacement of his queen and White can
play with tempo Qc2. 14.Bd3
 14...Rd8 15.Ng5 (15.Qe4 Rxd3 16.Ng5 Bxg5 17.Qxc6 Rd8 18.Qxa8 Ba6
19.Qxa7 Bxf1 20.Qxa5 bxa5 21.Bxg5²) 15...g6 (15...Rxd3 16.Qxd3 Bxg5
17.Bxg5 – see 15...Bxg5; 15...Bxg5 16.Bxg5 Rxd3 17.Qxd3 Ba6 18.c4
Nxe5 19.Qg3 Ng6 20.Rfc1 h6 21.Be3 Bb7 22.Qc7 Be4 23.Ra1±) 16.Nxf7
Kxf7 17.Qf3+ Kg7 18.Qxc6±
14...Bb7, Baranowski – Chomicki, ICCF 2011, 15.Qc2!? White controls
the a4-square and attacks the pawn on h7. 15...Ba6 (15...g6 16.Rb5 Qa6
17.Rd5 b5 18.Rxb5±) 16.Bxh7+ Kh8 17.Re1 Rad8 18.Bd2±

13...Qxc3. This move is principled indeed, but seems to be very risky.

14.Bd2 Qa3 (14...Qc2? 15.Rfc1 Qa4 16.Bb5 Nd4 17.Nxd4 Qxd4 18.Rd1
Qb6 19.Qe4 g6 20.Ba4 Qc7 21.Rbc1 Qb6 22.Bh6 Rd8 23.Rxd8+ Bxd8?
24.Be8+–; 23...Qxd8 24.Rd1 Qc7 25.Be8 f5 26.exf6 Bxf6 27.Bxg6 e5
28.h3+–) 15.Rfc1 Rd8. White has isolated for a long time the strongest
enemy piece just for a pawn, moreover that the queen has no good squares
to retreat to. 16.h4!? White’s rooks have been perfectly placed to exert
pressure on the queenside as well as to participate in an attack against the
enemy king. They can be transferred with tempo via the third rank. (16.Qe4
Qa4 17.h3 a6, Koslowski – Martin Gonzalez, LSS 2009, 18.Qe3 Qa3
19.Rc3 Qa5 20.Rc2 Bb4 21.Rxb4 Nxb4 22.Qe4 Rxd2 23.Rxd2 Nd5
24.Rd4²; 17.h4!?).

16...a6. Black deprives the enemy pieces of the b5-square and is ready to
advance b7-b5 at an opportune moment. 17.h5 Nd4 18.Nxd4 Rxd4
19.Be3!? (19.Bb3 Bd7 20.Qe3 Rxd2 21.Qxd2±) 19...Re4 20.Qf3 Rxe5
21.Rb3 Qa4 22.h6. Now practically all White’s pieces are working with
100% capacity, while only Black’s dark-squared bishop is well placed.
22...g6 (22...Qc6 23.Qg3 Bf6 24.Bd3 Qe8 25.hxg7+– White is threatening
Bxh7.) 23.Rd3 Bd7 24.Qxb7 Rd8 25.Bb3 Qb5 26.Qxb5+–
16...Bd7 17.Rb3. He preserves the possibility to attack the enemy queen
with the move Bb5 after Rxb7 Na5. (17.Rxb7?! Na5) 17...Qa4 18.Rxb7
Rac8 (18...Na5 19.Bb5 Bxb5 20.Qxb5 Qxb5 21.Rxb5+–) 19.Bd3. White
begins to build his battery and avoids in the process the attack after Black’s
move Nc6–a5. 19...Nd4 20.Nxd4 Rxc1+ 21.Bxc1 Qxd4 22.Qe4 Qxe4
23.Bxe4. Black’s pieces are horribly misplaced. If he loses his a-pawn then
White’s pawn will swiftly advance to promotion. 23...a5 (23...Bxh4 24.Be3
f5 25.Bf3 Bc8 26.Rxa7±) 24.Be3 f5 25.Bb6 Re8 26.Bf3 Bd8 27.Bc5±
16...Qa4 17.Qe3. White avoids the attack after Nc6-d4. 17...Nb4. Black
wishes to complete his development under the cover of this knight. Later he
plans to continue with a7-a5, or immediately Bd7-c6. 18.Bxb4 Bxb4
19.Bd3 (White has the threats: 20.Bxh7 Kxh7 21.Nxg5; 20.Qe4; 20.Rc4.)
19...Be7 20.Rc4 Qe8. Black switches to completely passive defence, but
White’s pieces are much more mobile and develop very quickly a powerful
attack. (20...Qxa2. It is extremely risky for Black to capture this pawn.
21.Rc7 Qa3 22.Rb3 Qa1+ 23.Kh2 Bf8 24.Ng5+–; 23...Rd7 24.Rbc3 Rxc7
25.Rxc7 Bf8 26.Qe4 g6 27.Qf4+–; 25...Qa3 26.Qe4 g6 27.Qf4+–) 21.Ng5
g6 (21...Bxg5? 22.Bxh7+! Kxh7 23.hxg5, with the idea Rh4+–) 22.Rg4
(22.Rb3!? White protects his bishop, so that after Bxg5, he can recapture
with his queen. In addition, his rook will be able to join quickly into the
attack. 22...Qf8 (22...b6 23.Rg4 Bxg5 24.Qxg5 Bb7 25.h5‚) 23.Nxh7!?
Kxh7 24.h5 Qh6 25.hxg6+ fxg6 26.Rg4 Rxd3 27.Qxd3 Qc1+ 28.Kh2
Qh6+ 29.Kg3 Qh5 30.Qb5 Kg7 31.Re3+–) 22...Bxg5 23.Rxg5 Bd7 24.h5
Bc6 25.hxg6 fxg6 (25...hxg6?? 26.Rb4+– with the idea Rh4) 26.Rb4!?
(26.Qg3 Rxd3 27.Qxd3 Rd8 28.Qe3±) 26...Qf7 27.Rh4 Be8 28.Rg3 Qg7
29.Rgh3 Rac8 30.Rxh7 Qxh7 31.Rxh7 Kxh7 32.Qh3+ Kg8 33.Be4 Bf7
34.Qh6+–
16...Nd4 17.Nxd4 Rxd4 18.h5 g6. Black will have to play this move
sooner or later. Now however, White will advance h5-h6, cramping the
enemy king. (Black has a problem to develop his bishop: 18...b6 19.Be3
Re4 20.Rd1±; 18...h6 19.Rc3 Qa4 20.Be3 Rd8 21.Bd3 Rd5 22.Bc2 Qa5
23.Bd2 Rxd2 24.Qxd2 Qxe5 25.Rd1+–) 19.Be3
 19...Re4. Naturally, this rook might get lost at the centre of the board, but
he has a chance to regain the pawn on e5. (Retreating would be useless
because after 19...Rd8 20.Qg4, White will develop a powerful attack.
20...b6 21.Rb3 Qa5 22.hxg6 hxg6 23.Bf4 Rd4 24.Rh3 Qd2 25.Rh8+ Kxh8
26.Qh3+ Kg8 27.Bxd2 Rxd2 28.Qf3 Rb8 29.Qf4 Rd8 30.Rc3 Bb7
31.Rh3+–) 20.Qf3 Rxe5 21.Rb3 Qa4 (21...Qa5 22.h6 Rf5 (22...Rxe3
23.fxe3 Kf8 24.Bb5 a6 25.Rbc3 axb5 26.Rxc8+ Rxc8 27.Rxc8+ Bd8
28.Qf6 Ke8 29.Rb8 Qc7 30.Ra8+–) 23.Qd1 b5 24.Be2 Rd5 (24...Bb7?
25.Qd7) 25.Qc2 Bd7 (25...Bb7 26.Qc7+–) 26.Qb2 f6 27.Bf3+–) 22.h6!
Now Black must be very careful about his dark squares as well as about his
last rank. 22...Qe8 (22...Rf5 23.Qe2 b6 (23...Bf8 24.g4 Re5 25.Qf3 Bd7
26.Bd4 Rg5 27.Qf4 Bxh6 28.Rh3 f5 29.Qe5 Rxg4+ 30.Kf1 Rxd4 31.Qxd4
Bxc1 32.Bxe6+ Bxe6 33.Qxa4+–) 24.g4 Rd5 25.Qb2 f6 26.Bxd5 exd5
27.f3+–) 23.Rd3 Bd7 24.Qxb7 Bb5 25.Rdc3 Rd8 26.Bb3 Ba3 27.Rd1
Rxd1+ 28.Bxd1 Rd5 29.Bf3 Rd7 30.Qe4±
 14.h4!?

It might be also interesting for White to try here the move 14.Qe4,
planning to begin an attack with Bd3 or Rb5, Ng5. We think that the move
14.h4 is obviously more interesting, so we will provide you in short with
the variations after 14.Qe4. 14...Qxc3. Black is threatening Nc6-d4 (14...g6
15.h4 h5, Piorun – Li Chao, Deizisau 2015, 16.Bh6 Qxc3 17.Rfc1 Qa5
18.Rb3 a6 19.Qf4 Qc7 20.Re3 Bd7 21.g4 hxg4 22.Qxg4‚) 15.Be3
 15...Na5 16.Rfc1 Qa3 17.Ng5± Bxg5 (17...g6 18.Qh4 h5 19.Be2‚ with
the idea Bxh5) 18.Bxg5 Nxc4 19.Qxc4 Re8 20.Rb3 Qa5 21.Bf6 gxf6
(21...Bd7 22.Qg4 g6 23.Qg5+–) 22.Qg4+ Kf8 23.exf6 Rd8 24.Qg7+ Ke8
25.Qg8+ Kd7 26.Rd3+ Qd5 27.Qxf7+ Kd6 28.Qc7# Smerdon –
McClement, England 2013.
15...Nd4 16.Rfc1 Nxf3+ 17.gxf3 Qa3, Grebenshchikov – Rozhnev, ICCF
2017 (17...Qa5 18.Rb5 Qa3 19.Bf1 Bf8 20.Rc7ƒ; 18...Qa4 19.Bd3 Qxe4
20.Bxe4© a6 21.Rbb1 Rb8 22.Bb6 Rd7 23.f4²) 18.Bb3 (with the idea Rc7)
18...Qa5 (18...Bd7 19.Qxb7 Bf8 20.Rc7 Be8 21.Qe4²) 19.a4 g6 20.h4 Bd7
21.h5 Rac8 22.Rxc8 Rxc8 23.Qxb7 Qd8 24.Qxa7 Bc6 25.Bd1 gxh5 26.a5
Bd5 27.Qb6 Qf8 28.Be2²
 14...Qxc3
Strangely enough but it is only after capturing the pawn that Black
preserves some chances of holding this position.

14...b6 15.Ng5 Qxc3 (15...Bb7? 16.Nxf7! Kxf7 17.Qh5+ Kg8 18.Bxe6+

Kh8 19.Bf5 h6 20.Qg6+–) 16.Qe4 Bxg5 17.Bxg5 Bb7 18.Bxd8 Na5
19.Qg4 Qxc4 20.Qxc4 Nxc4 21.Rfc1²

14...h6. Black deprives the enemy pieces of the g5-square, but weakens
his position and this might have negative consequences for him. 15.Bd3
 15...Rxd3. This move is forced because all Black’s alternatives are even
worse. 16.Qxd3 Nxe5 17.Nxe5 Qxe5 18.c4 Bxh4 19.Rb3 Qc7 20.Bb2 Be7
21.Qe4 Qc6 22.Qxc6 bxc6 23.Ba3±
15...Qxc3 16.Rb3 Qa5 (16...Rxd3 17.Rxc3 Rxc3 18.Rd1± b6 19.Bb2 Rc5
20.Ba3+–) 17.Qe4 Rxd3 18.Rxd3 Qc7 19.Qg4 Kf8 20.Qh5 Bd7 21.Bxh6
gxh6 22.Qxh6+ Ke8 23.Qh8+ Bf8 24.Rfd1 Rd8 25.h5+–
15...Qa4 16.c4 (16.Re1 Qg4 17.Be4± Bxh4? 18.Bxc6 bxc6 19.Rb4+–)
16...Nb4 17.Be4 Qxa2 (17...Nxa2 18.Bd2 Nb4 19.Bxb4 Bxb4 20.Bc2 Qa5
21.Qe4 Kf8 22.Qh7+–; 18...Bd7 19.Rxb7±; 19.Ra1!? f5 20.exf6 Bxf6
21.Bg6 Bxa1 22.Rxa1 Rac8 23.Ne5 Be8 24.Bxe8 Rxe8 25.Bxh6+–) 18.Rb2
(18.Bd2 Nc6 19.Bd3 Nd4 20.Qe4 Nxf3+ 21.gxf3 g6 22.Bxh6±) 18...Qa4
19.g4! Bd7 20.g5 h5 21.g6 fxg6 22.Bg5 Bxg5 23.Nxg5 Be8 24.Nxe6+–

14...Bd7 15.h5
 15...b6 16.h6 g6 17.Rb5 Qa4 18.Bg5 Rac8 19.Rbb1 Qa3 20.Qe3±
15...Qxc3 16.Rb3 Qa5 17.Qe4 Be8 (Black has no time to protect his
pawn 17...Rab8? 18.Bd3 g6 19.hxg6 fxg6 20.Qg4 Be8 21.Bc4‚; 18.Ng5
Bxg5 19.Bxg5 Rdc8 20.Bd3 g6 21.Bf6+–) 18.h6 g6 19.Rxb7 Rab8 20.Rxe7
Nxe7 21.Qh4 Nf5 22.Qf6 Rdc8 23.g4 Qd8 24.Qxd8 Rxd8 25.gxf5 gxf5
26.Kh2 Rb1 27.Rg1+ Kh8 28.Nd2 Rxc1 29.Rxc1 Rxd2 30.Bb5 Rd8
31.Bxe8 Rxe8 32.Kg3+–
15...Rab8 16.Qe4 Qa4 17.Ng5 Bxg5 (17...g6?? 18.hxg6 hxg6 19.Qh4+–)
18.Bxg5 Rdc8
 19.h6 b5 20.Rb4 Nxb4 21.Bb3 Rc4 22.Qf3 Qa5 23.cxb4 (23.Qg3 g6
24.Bxc4 bxc4 25.cxb4 Qxb4 26.a3 Qc5 27.Rd1±) 23...Qxb4 (23...Rxb4?
24.Qg3 g6 25.Qf3+– with the idea Qf6) 24.Bxc4 bxc4 25.Qg3 g6 26.Qf4±
19.Rfd1 Na5 (19...b5 20.Rxd7 Qxc4 21.Qxc4 bxc4 22.Rxb8 Nxb8
23.Rb7 Nc6 24.f4 h6 25.Bh4 a5 26.a3. White avoids the check with tempo
in the variation Kf2 Rb8 Rc7 Rb2+. 26...Kf8 27.Kf2 Ke8 28.Ke3 a4
29.g4+– with the idea Ke4, f5) 20.Rxd7 Qxd7 (20...Qxc4?? 21.Qf3 Rf8
22.Bf6+–) 21.Bd3 g6 22.Bf6 (22.Bb5 Qd5 23.Qf4 Nc6 24.Bf6 Qc5
25.Qg5 Qf8 26.hxg6 fxg6 27.Qg4 Qf7 28.Rd1 Rd8 29.Bxd8 Rxd8 30.Bxc6
Rxd1+ 31.Qxd1 bxc6 32.Qd6+–) 22...Rxc3 23.Qf4 Qe8 24.Qd2 Rc5
25.Rb4 Nc6 26.Rh4+–

15.Rb3 Qa5 16.Bd3

White continues to realise his strategical plan and is preparing h5, Qe4.

16.h5 b6 17.h6 g6 18.Bd2 Rxd2 19.Nxd2 Qxe5 20.Rd1 Bb7 21.Nf3 Qxe2
22.Bxe2 Bf6 23.Rd7 Na5 24.Rbd3 Kf8 25.g4²
 16...Bd7

16...Qa4. Black prevents Qe2-e4. 17.h5 Bd7 (17...h6 18.Bb1 Qg4 19.Re1
b6? 20.Qc2; 19...Bd7 20.Rxb7 Be8 21.Qc2 Qf5 22.Qxf5 exf5 23.Bxf5±)
18.Rxb7 (18.h6!? g6 19.Rxb7) 18...Na5 19.Rc7 (19.Bc2 Qc4 20.Qxc4
Nxc4 21.Rd1 Nb6 22.Be4 Nd5 23.Bxd5 exd5 24.Be3²) 19...Rac8
20.Rxa7!? Bc5. Black is trying to trap the enemy rook. 21.Ng5! He has
weakened the control over the g5-square and has suddenly come under an
attack. 21...Bxa7 22.Qf3! Qh4 23.Qxf7+ Kh8 24.h6 Qxh6 25.Qe7 Qh5
26.Nf7+ Kg8 27.Nxd8 Qe8 28.Qxe8+ Bxe8 29.Nxe6+–

16...Nd4. Black exchanges his opponent’s attacking piece. 17.Nxd4 Rxd4

18.Bb2
 18...Rxh4 19.g3 Ra4 20.Rd1 g6 21.a3 Bd7 (21...Bxa3? 22.Bc3 Bb4
(22...Qc7 23.Bb5+–) 23.Rxb4 Rxb4 24.Qe1+–) 22.Bxg6 Bc6 23.Bc2± Kf8
24.Re3 Bc5 25.Bc3 Qb5 26.Red3 Rxa3 27.Rd8+ Rxd8 28.Rxd8+ Ke7
29.Qd2 h6 30.Rb8 Qb6 31.Qf4 Bxf2+ 32.Kf1 Bb5+ 33.Kg2 Rxc3 34.Qf6+
Kd7 35.Qxf7+ Kc6 36.Rc8+ Kd5 37.Rxc3+–
18...Rd8 19.Qf3! g6. Black must weaken his position; otherwise, he
would not be able to defend against Bxh7. (19...Rb8? 20.Bxh7+! Kxh7
21.Qxf7 Bf8 22.Rg3+–; 19...Bd7 20.Bxh7+! Kxh7 21.Qxf7 Bf8 22.Rg3
Be8 23.Qxf8±) 20.h5 Bd7 21.Be4 Rac8 22.Ba3 Bxa3 23.hxg6 hxg6
24.Bxg6 fxg6 25.Qf6 Bf8 26.Rf3+–

17.h5 Be8 18.Qe4 g6

18...Rxd3 19.Rxd3 Qb4 20.Nd4±

19.hxg6 hxg6 20.Qf4

 White has a very powerful attack. Now he is threatening to win
immediately after Qh2, Ng5.
20...Rd5
Black counter attacks his opponent’s main ouspost – the pawn on e5.

20...Rd7 21.Qh2 Rad8 22.Bb5+– with the idea 23.Ng5 Bxg5 24.Rh3.

20...Qxa2? 21.Bc4 Qc2 22.Ng5 Bxg5 23.Qxg5 Qxc4 24.Rh3 Qd3

25.Rh6!? Qf5 26.Qh4 Qxe5 27.Bg5+–

21.Be4 Rb5 22.Bd2 Qa4 23.Rxb5 Qxb5 24.Rb1 (24.Qh2!? Rc8 25.Bf4
f5 26.exf6 Bxf6 27.Qh3 Nd8 28.Qg3 Qh5 29.Be5±) 24...Qc4 25.Rxb7
Bd8 26.Be3± Na5 (26...Qxa2?? 27.Bxg6 fxg6 28.Bc5 Ne7 29.Qf6+–)
27.Rxf7 Bxf7 28.Bxa8 Qxf4 29.Bxf4±
 Chapter 19
1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 Nc6

5.d4

After White’s other popular line 5.Bc4, there arise rather unclear
positions, which are not so typical for the Alapin variation. 5...Nb6 6.Bb3
c4 7.Bc2 d5 (7...Qc7 8.0-0!) 8.exd6 Qxd6 9.0-0. We will show you some
variations in the text below, which are the reason we have decided not to
recommend to you the move – 5.Bc4. 9...Bg4 (9...g6!? 10.b3 Bg7÷).
 10.Qe2 g6!? 11.a4 (11.Na3 Qe6=; 11.Re1 Bg7 12.Na3 Rc8 13.h3 Bxf3
14.Qxf3 0-0 15.d4 cxd3 16.Qxd3 Qxd3 17.Bxd3 Rfd8 18.Be2 a6÷)
11...Bg7 12.h3, Kjartansson – Amdouni, Sousse 2019, 12...Qe6 (12...Be6
13.Na3 a6=) 13.Qxe6 Bxe6 14.a5 Nd7 15.a6 bxa6 16.d4 cxd3 17.Bxd3
Nc5 18.Bc2 Rb8÷
10.h3 Bh5 11.Re1 (11.Qe2 Qf6 12.Be4 0-0-0 13.Qe3 e6 14.Bxc6 bxc6
15.Ne5 Bg6=) 11...0-0-0 12.Be4 (12.b3 Qf6 13.Be4 Ne5 14.g4 Nxf3+
15.Qxf3 Qxf3 16.Bxf3 Bg6 17.Na3 e6= Pap – Vuckovic, Valjevo 2018)
12...e6 13.b3 f5 14.Bc2 g6 15.bxc4 e5 16.d3 e4 17.dxe4 Qc7 18.Nbd2 Ne5
19.Qe2 Bc5 20.Kh1, Bar Ziv – Lebedev, ICCF 2016, 20...f4 21.Qf1 Nxf3
22.Nxf3 Bxf3 23.gxf3 Qe5÷
10.Re1 Ne5!? 11.Rxe5 Bxf3 12.Qe1 Bc6 13.Re3 (13.Na3 g6 14.Nb5 Qd7
15.Nd4 Bd5 16.a4 a5 17.d3 Bg7 18.Re2 Bxg2 19.Kxg2 Bxd4 20.cxd4
Qg4=; 13.b3, Moiseenko – Afanasiev, Orsha 2020, 13...g6 14.Ba3 Qc7
15.Be4 e6 16.Bxf8 Kxf8 17.Bxc6 Qxc6 18.Na3 Kg7 19.Qe2 Rhc8 20.Nb5
Nd7 21.Nd4 Qd6 22.Rb5 cxb3 23.axb3 b6=) 13...e6 14.Na3 Qd5 15.Be4
Qd7 16.b3 Bxe4 17.Rxe4 cxb3 18.axb3 Be7 19.Rd4 (19.Bb2 Bf6 20.d4 0-0
21.Qe2 a5 22.c4 a4 23.b4 Nc8 24.Re3 Nd6 25.Rd1 Rfd8 26.Red3 Nf5=)
19...Qc6 20.Nc4, Belka – Nefedov, ICCF 2013, 20...Nxc4 21.Rxc4 Qb6=
 5...cxd4

About 5...d6 6.Bc4 – see Chapter 15.

It is bad for Black to play here 5...e6?!, because of 6.c4 and after all
possible responses by him, White would occupy even more space with the
move d4-d5 (Naturally, he can play here 6.Bc4 – see Chapter 16, but he
does not need to.).

6...Nb6? 7.d5 exd5 (7...Ne7? 8.d6 Nc6 9.Nc3+–) 8.cxd5 Nb4 9.d6 h6
(9...f6 10.Nc3+–) 10.Nc3 g5, Bernshteyn – Bakutin, Tula 2011, 11.g4+–
6...Nc7? 7.d5 exd5 8.cxd5 Nb4 9.Nc3 (9.d6 Ne6 10.h4±) 9...d6 10.a3
Nba6 11.Bf4±
6...Nde7 7.d5 Nb8 (7...exd5? 8.cxd5 Nb4 9.d6 Nf5 10.Nc3+–; 8...Nd4
9.d6 Nec6 10.Nc3+–; 7...Nb4 8.a3!? Qa5 9.Bd2+–; 8...Na6 9.d6 Nc6
10.Nc3+–; 8...Nbxd5 9.cxd5 Nxd5 10.Bd3 d6 11.0-0 dxe5 12.Nxe5 Bd6
13.Bb5+ Ke7 14.Qh5 Bxe5 15.Qxe5 f6 16.Qh5+–; 7...Nd4 8.d6 Nec6
9.Nxd4 cxd4 10.f4 g5 11.Bd3±) 8.d6 Ng6 9.Nc3 a6 10.Bd3 Nc6, Yeoh –
Xu Xiangyu, Vietnam 2013, 11.Bxg6 hxg6 12.Bg5 f6 13.Qd3 Kf7 14.Ne4
fxg5 15.Nfxg5+ Kg8 16.Nf6+–
6...Ndb4 7.dxc5 (7.d5 exd5 8.cxd5 Nd4 9.Nxd4 cxd4 10.Be2 Bc5 11.d6
Nc6, Andersson – Pallesen, Copenhagen 2003, 12.f4 0-0 13.Nd2±;
10...Nxd5 11.Qxd4 Nb4 12.Qe4±) 7...Na6 (7...Bxc5? 8.a3 Na6 9.b4+–;
7...a5 8.Nc3 Bxc5 9.a3 Na6 10.Nb5±) 8.a3 Nxc5 9.b4 Ne4 10.Bd3 d5,
Totsky – Losev, Moscow 1996, 11.exd6 Nxd6 12.0-0 Be7 13.Qc2!?
(13.Nc3±) 13...f5 14.Bb2 0-0 15.Nc3±

6.cxd4

The position after 8.Bb3 (see Chapter 20) can be reached also after
another move-order 6.Bc4 Nb6 7.Bb3 d6 8.cxd4, but Black would have
numerous additional possibilities on his move seven: 6.Bc4 Nb6 7.Bb3
dxc3; 7...g6!?; 7...d5!?
Meanwhile, the move 8.Bb3 is not our main choice for White. His
alternative 8.Bb5 would create many more problems for Black.
 6...d6
This is no doubt the most principled move for Black.
In our last two chapters we will study the best lines for him. You should
not be surprised that in some variations White’s achievements would not be
so great and sometimes there would arise positions with dynamic balance.
We will try to recommend to you schemes in which Black would have more
difficult problems and also, as is sometimes necessary in tournament
situations, we will show you several lines ending in forced draws (of
course, if they happen after some natural developments...), as well as some
variations leading to positions with dynamic balance. Therefore, in these
chapters you will encounter different lines for White, so that you can
choose these which would suit mostly your mood and chess style.

About Black’s other reasonable line: 6...e6 7.Bc4 – see Chapter 16.

6...a6 7.Bc4 (7.Nc3!?) 7...Nb6 (about 7...e6 8.0-0 d6 9.Qe2 Be7 – see
Chapter 18, 9...a6) 8.Bxf7+ Kxf7 9.d5 Nxd5 10.Qxd5+ e6 11.Qe4 Be7
12.0-0² Rb8 13.Nc3 b5, Link – Hanusch, Nickenich 2018, 14.Rd1±;
14.Qg4±
 The move 6...g6 would be a good decision for Black after a calm play, but
White can force immediately his opponent to weaken the dark squares.
7.Qb3 e6 8.Nc3. Now, it has already become obvious that Black will fail to
equalise. 8...Nxc3 (8...d6 9.Bb5 Nxc3 10.bxc3 Bd7 11.0-0 a6 12.Be2 Qc7
13.exd6 Bxd6 14.Bh6±; 12.Bxc6 Bxc6 13.c4 d5 14.c5 Be7, Aerni – Fier,
Basel 2013, 15.Bh6 Bf8 16.Qe3±; 14...Bg7 15.Bg5 Qd7 16.Qe3±) 9.bxc3

About 9...d5 10.exd6 – see 9...d6.

9...b6, Eden – Cornette, Rochefort 2017, 10.h4!? Qc7 (10...h5 11.Bd3
Be7 12.Ng5 Bb7 13.Rh3 Qc7 14.Kf1 Rf8 15.Ne4 0-0-0 16.Bg5±) 11.h5
gxh5 12.c4 (12.Rxh5 Bb7 13.Bd2²) 12...Na5 13.Qc3 Ba6 14.Ba3 Nxc4?!
15.Bxf8 Rxf8 16.Nd2 Rc8 17.Bxc4 Bxc4 18.Rc1 b5 19.Ne4±
9...d6 10.exd6 (10.Bb5 – see 8...d6) 10...Bxd6, Rengifo Blancas –
Guerrero Cataldo, Cochabamba 2019, 11.h4!? Na5 12.Qc2 h6 13.Bd3 b6
14.c4 Bb7 15.Bb2 0-0 16.h5 (16.c5!?) 16...Bxf3 (16...g5 17.d5 e5 18.0-0±)
17.gxf3 g5 18.c5 Bf4 19.Rd1 Qf6 20.Qe2 Rfd8 21.d5 e5 22.c6 Rxd5
23.Qe4 Rxd3 24.Rxd3 Nxc6 25.0-0±

7.Bc4 dxe5
 Black plays more often here 7...Nb6, see Chapter 20.
About 7...e6 8.0-0 – see Chapter 18.

We will analyse now A) 8.Nxe5 and B) 8.dxe5.

8.Bxd5. With this move White presents his opponent with the two-bishop
advantage and does not obtain anything much in return. 8...Qxd5 9.Nc3
Qd6! The other retreats of Black’s queen are worse. 10.d5 Nd4. This is
again the best move for him. 11.Nxd4 exd4 12.Qxd4 e5
 Now Black’s prospects are not worse to say the least.
13.Qe3 Be7 14.0-0 0-0= Tregubov – Bernadskiy, Bastia 2019.
13.Qe4 f5 14.Qe2 Kf7 15.0-0 Bd7 16.Re1 a6 17.Bd2 (17.Qxe5?? Re8)
17...Re8 18.Rac1 h6 19.Qf3 Kg8÷ Hausdorf – Legemaat, ICCF 2016.
13.Qd3 Bd7 14.0-0 Qg6 15.Qe2 Bd6 16.f4 0-0 17.fxe5 Rfe8 18.Bf4 Bxe5
19.Bxe5 f6 20.Rae1 Rxe5 21.Qf2 Rxe1 22.Rxe1 Re8= Philippe – Polak,
Brno 2008.

A) 8.Nxe5
This is a more interesting alternative than 8.Bxd5.
 8...e6

8...Nxe5 9.dxe5 e6 10.0-0 Be7 11.Qg4 Kf8 (11...g6 12.Bh6± Shkapenko

– Turzo, chess.com 2020) 12.Rd1 Qc7 13.Qe2 Nb6 14.Bb3± Wieweg –
Olsson, Stockholm 1993.

8...Be6
 9.Qb3. White prevents his opponent’s castling, but this is not a great
achievement. Black captures the pawn on e5 with his bishop and will place
his king on g7 after 9...g6 10.Qxb7 Nxe5 11.dxe5 Bg7 12.Qc6+ Kf8
13.Na3 Rc8 14.Qb7 Bxe5 15.Bh6+ Bg7 16.Bxg7+ Kxg7 17.0-0 Rc7
18.Qb3 Nf4 19.Bxe6 Nxe6 20.Rfd1 Rd7=
9.0-0 g6 10.Bb5. Later, White will capture on c6 with his bishop and his
knight on b1 will be transferred as usual to the c5-square. 10...Rc8
(10...Qc7 11.Bxc6+ bxc6 12.Nd2 Bg7 13.Re1 0-0 14.Nb3 Rfd8 15.Nc5
Bf5. Black is threatening Nb4-c2. 16.Bd2 Qb6 17.Bc3 Nxc3 18.bxc3 Rd5
19.f4 Rad8 20.Qf3. White’s knights dominate in the centre, but Black’s
bishop-pair is likely to maintain the balance.) 11.Nc3 Bg7 12.Bxc6+ bxc6
13.Re1 0-0, Seitaj – Ratkovic, Sarajevo 2017, 14.Ne4!? Bf5 15.Nc5 Nb4
16.g4 Nc2 17.gxf5 Nxe1 18.Ned7 Re8 19.Bf4 Bxd4 20.Qxe1 Bxc5
21.Nxc5 Qd5 22.Qe3 Qxf5 23.Re1 Rcd8 24.Ne4 Rd7 (24...c5 25.Bg3²)
25.Ng3 Qd5 26.Be5 Qe6 (26...Qxa2? 27.Qh6 f6 28.Bxf6±) 27.Qh6 f6
28.Bc3 Qf7 29.a3²

9.0-0
 9...Bd6

9...Be7 10.Qg4 (If White is not well prepared, after 10.Nf3 0-0 11.Nc3
Nf6, to enter a theoretical discussion in the position which might arise after
different openings, for example in the Caro-Kann Defence, then he should
better choose 10.Qg4. In Chapter 11 we analyse a different position with an
isolated pawn – White has a pawn on a3 and a bishop on d3.) 10...0-0
11.Rd1
 11...Nf6 12.Qf3 Nxd4 13.Qf4 Bc5, Nielsen – L’Ami, Stockholm 2012
(13...Nc2?! 14.Rxd8 Rxd8 15.Nc3 Nxa1 16.g4±) 14.Nc3 Nh5 (14...Qd6
15.Be3 Nd7 16.Nxd7 Qxf4 17.Bxf4 Bxd7 18.Bd6 Bb6 19.Bxf8 Kxf8
20.Bd3²) 15.Qe3 Nf6 16.b4 Bb6 17.Bb2 Qd6 18.Na4 Nf5 19.Qe1 Nd5
20.Nxb6 Qxb6 21.b5° a6 22.Ba3 Rd8 23.bxa6 bxa6 24.Rab1 Qc7
25.Rdc1±
11...Bf6 12.Nxc6 bxc6, Van der Lende – Stella, Escaldes 2019, 13.Nc3 e5
14.Qf3 exd4 15.Nxd5 cxd5 16.Bxd5 Rb8 (16...Bg4 17.Bxf7+ Rxf7
18.Qxg4 Qd5 19.Rd3 Rb8 20.b3 Qb5 21.Qh3² Black must still prove that
his compensation for the pawn is sufficient.) 17.b3 Rb5 18.Be4 Re8 19.Bd3
Rbe5 20.Bf4 R5e7 21.Rac1 Bb7 22.Qh3 g6 23.Bb5 Bc8 24.Qf3 Bb7
25.Qg3 Bh4 26.Qh3 Re4 27.Bg3²

10.Qh5
It is always useful to deploy your queen in the vicinity of the enemy king.
It is possible this move to be the most promising for White, because after
his alternatives Black equalises easily.
 10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.Nc3 0-0 12.Qh5 a5= 13.Re1 Ba6 14.Bb3 Bd3 15.Qf3
Bg6 Ostovic – Drnovsek, Trieste 2017.

10.Bxd5 exd5 11.Bf4 Bxe5 12.Bxe5 0-0 13.Re1 Bf5 14.Nc3 Qd7 15.Qd2
Rfe8= Nisipeanu – Radjabov, Bucharest 2013.

10...0-0 11.Rd1

If Black finds the correct response on his move 12 – he equalises.

11...Qc7

11...Nce7 12.Nc3 Nxc3 13.bxc3 Ng6 14.f4 Qc7 15.Rd3 Rd8 16.Rh3 Nf8,
Tomazini – Szeberenyi, Budapest 2018, 17.Rg3 b6 (17...Bxe5? 18.fxe5
Qxc4 19.Rxg7+ Kxg7 20.Bh6+–) 18.Bd3 Bb7 19.Bb2²

12.Bxd5
 12...exd5

12...Nxd4! 13.Ng4!? exd5 14.Nc3 Bxg4 15.Qxg4 Nc2 16.Nxd5 Qc8

17.Qxc8 (17.Nf6+ Kh8 18.Rb1 Qxg4 19.Nxg4 Rad8 20.Kf1 h5 21.Ne3
Nb4=) 17...Raxc8 18.Rb1 Rfd8 19.Bd2 Bc5= Tomazini – Dobrovoljc,
Ljubljana 2018.

13.Nc3 Bxe5 14.Nxd5 Bxh2+ 15.Qxh2 Qxh2+ 16.Kxh2 Bf5 (16...Bg4

17.f3 Rad8 18.Nc3 Bf5 19.d5 Nb4, Tomazini – Zorko, Slovenia 2017,
20.Bf4²) 17.Ne3 Bg6 18.d5 Nb4, Tomazini – Istratescu, Graz 2018,
19.Rd4 Nc2 20.Nxc2 Bxc2 21.Be3 b6 22.Rc1 Bg6 23.Rc7ƒ

B) 8.dxe5
Now Black’s knight is hanging. He must either choose one of the two
possible retreats, or he can protect it with his bishop or the pawn.
 We will deal now with B1) 8...Ndb4 and B2) 8...Nb6.

About 8...e6 9.0-0 – see Chapter 17, line C.

8...Be6. This is a doubtful move for Black, because on this square his
bishop will soon come under an attack after Ng5. 9.0-0 g6 10.Ng5 Bg7
(10...Nxe5 11.Bb5+ Nc6 12.Nxe6 fxe6 13.Qd4 Nf6 14.Qa4²) 11.Nxe6
fxe6 12.f4 Qb6+ 13.Kh1 Rd8 14.Qe2 0-0 15.Nc3 Nd4 (15...g5 16.Nxd5
exd5 17.Bd3 Nb4 18.Bb1² Lehtinen – Satosuo, ICCF 2014) 16.Qe4 Qc5
17.Bd3 Nf5 18.Nxd5 (18.Bd2 Nde3 19.Bxe3 Nxe3 20.Rf3 Nf5, Pap –
Jankovic, Rethymno 2011, 21.Rc1²) 18...exd5 19.Qe2 e6 20.Bd2± Tushev
– Weiner, ICCF 2010.

B1) 8...Ndb4 9.0-0!?

White is not afraid of the possible trade of the queens followed by Nb4-
c2.

After 9.Qb3 e6, Black usually manages to exchange his opponent’s light-
squared bishop and equalises without any problems. 10.0-0 Na5 11.Bb5+
Bd7 12.Qa4 Bxb5 13.Qxb5+ Nac6 14.Nc3 a6= 15.Qc4 (15.Qa4 b5
16.Qd1 Be7 17.a3 Qxd1 18.Rxd1 Nc2 19.Rb1 b4= Duran Vallverdu –
Kragten, ICCF 2016) 15...Qd3 16.Qg4 Qg6 17.Qxg6 hxg6 18.Rd1 Rd8=
Potapov – Demchenko, St Petersburg 2018.

9...Qxd1 10.Rxd1 Bg4!?

After this move Black practically wins the enemy pawn on e5.

Following 10...Nc2 11.Na3, Black cannot win the exchange: 11...Nxa1?

12.Nb5+–

11.Nc3!?

White can compromise his opponent’s pawn structure, but his own is not
so much better either. He would have the two-bishop advantage indeed, but
would be a pawn down, so the final evaluation of the position would be –
equality. 11.e6 Bxe6 (11...fxe6 12.Nc3 g6 13.h3 Bxf3 14.gxf3 Bg7=)
12.Bxe6 fxe6 13.Nc3 Rd8= Vysochin – Aravindh, chess.com 2020.

11...Bxf3
 If Black does not win a pawn here White would maintain the advantage
thanks to the more coordinated actions of his minor pieces.

11...e6 12.Be2 Nc2 13.Rb1 Bb4, Vysochin – Kuzubov, Lutsk 2019,

14.Nb5 0-0 15.Bf4 Rfd8 16.Rbc1 Bxf3 17.Bxf3 N2d4 18.Nxd4 Nxd4
19.Bg4 Ba5 20.Kf1 Bb6 21.g3 h6 22.h4 Rac8 23.Rxc8 Rxc8 24.Be3 Rd8
25.a4 a5 26.Rc1ƒ

11...g6, Ibarra Jerez – Bogner, Lorca 2017, 12.Nb5 Rc8 13.Bf4 Bg7 14.e6
0-0 15.exf7+ Kh8 16.a3 Na5 17.Be2 Nbc6 18.h3 Be6 (18...Bxf3 19.Bxf3
Rxf7 20.Bg3 Bxb2 21.Rab1 Bg7 22.Bg4 Ra8 23.Nc7 Rd8 24.Ne6 Rxd1+
25.Rxd1 h6 26.Rd7ƒ) 19.Ng5 Bb3 20.Bg4 Bxd1 21.Rxd1 Rcd8 22.Rb1 Nd4
23.Nxd4 Rxd4 24.Ne6 Rxf7 25.Nxd4 Bxd4 26.Bg3²

12.gxf3

12...Nxe5
Black must capture the pawn, because without this White would be
simply better thanks to his bishop-pair.
 12...e6, Katkov – Salimova, Pardubice 2019, 13.f4 Rd8 14.Bd2²

13.Bb3 a6 14.f4 Nf3+ 15.Kh1

White is a pawn down, but has a powerful bishop-pair while Black’s

knights are a sorry sight.

15...e6

15...Rc8 16.Be3²

16.f5! This is a simple move. White has the two-bishop advantage so he

must try to open the position. 16...exf5 (16...e5, Sparnacini – Gacnik, ICCF
2016, 17.Be3 Be7 18.Nd5 Nxd5 19.Bxd5 Nd4 20.Bxb7 Ra7 21.Be4²)
17.Nd5 Bd6 18.Be3 Nc6 (18...Rd8? 19.Bb6 Rc8 20.Nxb4 Bxb4 21.Rd3
Ng5 22.Ba4+ Kf8 23.Rd7±) 19.Nf6+ Ke7 20.Nd5+ Ke8 21.Rac1²

B2) 8...Nb6 9.Qxd8+ Nxd8

 10.Bb3

It looks like after 10.Bb5+ Black’s task to equalise would be easier.

10...Bd7 (10...Nc6 11.Nc3 g6 12.0-0 Bg7 13.Be3 0-0, Salgado Lopez –
Vachier Lagrave, Legnica 2013, 14.a4 Nxe5 15.Nxe5 Bxe5 16.a5 Nd7
17.Nd5 Nf6÷) 11.Nc3 a6
 12.Be3 axb5 13.Bxb6 Ne6 14.0-0 Bc6 15.Rfd1, Franssila – Mansner,
Finland 2017, 15...g5„
12.Bxd7+ Nxd7 13.Ke2 (13.0-0 e6 14.Rd1 Nc6 15.Bf4 h6 16.h4 Be7
17.Rac1, Tomazini – K.Georgiev, Skopje 2017, 17...Rd8„) 13...e6 14.Rd1
Nc6 15.Bf4 h6 16.h4 Be7 17.Ne4 Rd8 18.Rac1 0-0=
12.Be2 Rc8 13.Be3 (13.0-0 g6 14.Be3 Nc4 15.Bxc4 Rxc4 16.Nd2 Rc8=
Zahour – Cvak, ICCF 2011) 13...Nc4 14.Bxc4 Rxc4 15.Nd5 e6 16.Nb6
Bb4+ 17.Ke2 Rc2+ 18.Kd3 Rc7 19.a4 Bc6 20.Rhc1 0-0 21.Nd4 Ba5
22.Nc4 Bb4 23.Nxc6 Nxc6 24.Ke4 f6=
 10...g6
Black plays this move with the idea to fianchetto his bishop and to attack
White’s pawn on e5 which has been cut off from the rest of his forces.

10...Nc6 11.Nc3 Bg4 12.Nb5 Rc8 13.Be3 a6, Ramirez Garcia – Munoz
Pantoja, Barcelona 2013, 14.Nbd4 e6 15.Nxc6 Rxc6 16.Nd4 Rc5 17.h3
Bh5 18.g4 Bg6 19.Nf3²

10...Bg4 11.Nd4 Nc6 (11...e6, Herrera Reyes – Holm, chess.com 2020,

12.h3 Bh5 13.Be3 Bc5 14.Nc3²) 12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.0-0 e6 14.Be3 Nd5
15.Ba4 Nxe3 16.fxe3 (16.Bxc6+ Ke7 17.Bxa8 Nxf1 18.Kxf1 g5= Macieja
– Tukmakov, Copenhagen 1996) 16...Rc8 17.Rc1 f6 (17...Kd7 18.Nd2 Be7
19.Nb3±) 18.Rc4²
10...Be6. This is a principled move for Black. White’s light-squared
bishop exerts powerful pressure against Black’s position and impedes the
activation of his knight on b6. If he manages to trade it, then he would solve
the majority of his problems. 11.Nc3
 The immediate move Nc4 is not good for Black 11...Nc4? 12.Nb5 Rc8
13.Nxa7 Rc5 14.Ba4+ Bd7 15.Bxd7+ Kxd7 16.Ke2 Ra5 17.Rd1+ Ke8
18.Rd4 Nxe5 19.Nxe5 Rxe5+ 20.Be3±
11...Bxb3 12.axb3 a6 13.Be3 Nd7 14.b4 g6 (14...Rc8 15.b5²) 15.Nd5
Rc8 16.b5 e6 17.Nf6+ Nxf6 18.exf6 Bb4+ 19.Ke2 axb5, Venturelli –
Quattrocchi, ICCF 2012, 20.Rhd1 Nc6 21.Bh6 Bc5 (21...Bf8 22.Bxf8 Rxf8
23.g4±) 22.g4 Bb6 23.Ng5±
11...Rc8 12.Be3 (12.Nd4!? Bxb3 13.axb3 a6 14.Be3) 12...Nc4, Soors –
Grandelius, Reykjavik 2014, 13.Ke2!? Nxe3 (13...Nxb2?! 14.Rhc1 Nc4
15.Ne4 b5 16.a4 a6 17.Nc5 Nxe3 18.Nxe6 Rxc1 19.Rxc1 Nxe6 20.fxe3 g6
21.Bxe6 fxe6 22.Rc6²; 13...g6 14.Ba4+ Nc6 15.Nd4 Bd7 16.Nxc6 Bxc6
17.Bxa7 Bg7 18.Bxc6+ Rxc6 19.f4²) 14.Ba4+ Bd7 15.Bxd7+ Kxd7
16.Kxe3 g6 17.Rad1+ Kc7 18.Nd4 (18.h4!? Kb8 19.h5) 18...Bg7 19.f4²
11...a6. Black is waiting for the move Be3, in order to be able to play Nc4
with tempo. 12.Be3² Nc4 13.Ba4+ Nc6 (13...b5? 14.Nxb5 axb5
15.Bxb5+–) 14.Bxc6+ bxc6 15.b3 Nxe3 16.fxe3. Black has a bishop-pair
indeed, but must play very precisely not to end up immediately in a lost
position. 16...Bf5 (16...g6 17.Rc1 Bg7 18.Na4 Bd5 19.Ke2 0-0 20.Nb6
Bxf3+ 21.gxf3 Rad8 22.Rxc6 Bxe5 23.Nc4+–) 17.Na4 e6 18.Rc1 Be4
19.Ke2 Ba3 (19...Rd8 20.Rhd1 Rxd1 21.Rxd1 Ba3 22.Rd4 Bxf3+ 23.gxf3
Ke7 24.Rc4 Kd7 25.b4±) 20.Rc4 Bd5 21.Rg4±

11.Nd4

White is threatening Nb5 and later he will be able to support his pawn on
e5 with the move f2-f4.
11...Bd7

About 11...Bg7 12.f4 Bd7 13.Be3 – see 11...Bd7.

Following 11...a6 12.Be3², Black’s knight on b6 would be hanging.

12.Be3
This move is more precise than Nc3. Now, Black’s response Rc8, with the
idea Nc4, can be countered by White with the move Nd2.

12.Nc3 Rc8 (12...Bg7 13.f4 0-0 14.Be3 or 13...Nc6 14.Nxc6 Bxc6 15.0-0
0-0 16.Be3 – see 12.Be3) 13.0-0 Nc6. The idea of the move Rc8 was for
Black to play Nc4. He could have suggested the immediate exchange of the
knights with the move Nd8-c6. 14.Nxc6 Bxc6 15.e6
 15...f5? Now, Black’s entire kingside would be seriously weakened
(15...fxe6 16.Bxe6 Rd8²) 16.a4 Bg7 (16...Rd8 17.a5 Nc8 18.a6 Bg7
19.axb7 Bxb7 20.Ba4+ Kf8 21.Bd7±) 17.a5 Na8 18.Be3 (18.a6!? bxa6
19.Rxa6 0-0 20.Rd1±) 18...a6 19.Rac1 Nc7 20.Rfd1 0-0, Khamrakulov –
Lenderman, Greensboro 2018, 21.Rd7 Rfe8 22.Na4±

12...Bg7

12...Rc8 13.Nd2!? White prevents the activation of the enemy knight with
Nb6-c4. 13...Bg7 14.f4 0-0 15.g3 Na4 (15...Nc6 16.Nb5 Na8 17.0-0 a6
18.Nc3²) 16.Ke2 Nxb2 17.Rhc1 Rxc1 (17...a5 18.Rxc8 Bxc8 19.a4+–)
18.Rxc1 Na4 19.Rc7 Nb6 20.N4f3 Bb5+ 21.Kf2 Re8 22.Bxb6 axb6
23.Nd4 Ba6 24.a4 Kf8 25.Ke3 f6 26.Ke4±

13.f4 0-0 14.Nc3

 14...Nc6

In this position the move 14...Rc8, with the idea Nb6-c4, would not be so
interesting for Black, because his pawn on e7 would be hanging after Nc3-
d5 and White would win a tempo in order to occupy the opened c-file.
15.Kf2 Nc4 16.Nd5 Re8 17.Bxc4 Rxc4 18.Rac1 Rxc1 19.Rxc1 Nc6 20.a3
(White removes his a2-pawn in advance against the attack in the variation
20...Nxd4 21.Bxd4 Be6.) 20...h5 21.g3 Kf8 22.Nxc6 bxc6 (22...Bxc6
23.Nb4±) 23.Nc7 Rc8 24.Na6 g5 25.Nc5 Bf5 26.Rc4² with the idea Ra4.

15.Nxc6 Bxc6 16.0-0

Black has still not found a good square for his knight on b6 and besides
this he must find a way to protect his pawn on a7 after White advances his
a2-pawn up to the a5-square.
16...e6 17.a4 Rfc8 18.a5 Nd7 19.Rfd1 Bf8 20.Ba4
 20...Nc5

20...Bxa4 21.Rxa4 Nc5 22.Ra3 a6 23.b4 Nd7 24.Na4 Bxb4 25.Rb3 Bxa5
26.Rxd7+–

21.Bxc6 Rxc6, Nisipeanu – Dominguez Perez, Linares 2013, 22.Ra3 Na6

(22...a6? 23.b4 Nd7 24.Na2 Rc7 25.Rad3+–; 24...Nb8 25.Rd8+–; 22...Rac8
23.Nb5 Ra8 24.Rc3±) 23.Rb3 Nb4 24.Ne4²
 Chapter 20
1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 Nc6
5.d4 cxd4 6.cxd4 d6 7.Bc4 Nb6

8.Bb5
White pins the enemy knight on c6 and wishes to diminish his opponent’s
pressure against the central pawns.

The move 8.Bb3 cannot create problems for Black due to his simple
response 8...dxe5.
 Here, after 9.d5 Na5 10.Nc3, White’s initiative would be sufficient to
compensate the sacrificed pawn, but not more than that. 10...Nxb3 11.Qxb3
e6 12.Nxe5 exd5 13.0-0 (13.Be3 Bd6 14.Qb5+ Kf8÷) 13...Be7 14.Qb5+
Bd7 15.Nxd7 Qxd7 16.Qxd7+ Kxd7 17.Rd1 Bf6 18.Nxd5. White regains
the pawn indeed, but the position is simplified even more. 18...Nxd5
19.Rxd5+ Kc6 20.Rf5 b6= Tomazini – Drnovsek, Slovenia 2017.
Following 9.Nxe5, there would arise an equal endgame. 9...Nxe5 10.dxe5
Qxd1+
 11.Kxd1 Bd7 12.Nc3 e6 (12...Bc6, Dorin – Greenfeld, Montecatini
Terme 1998, 13.e6!? This is an interesting move, but is insufficient for
White to obtain an edge. 13...fxe6 14.Bxe6 Bxg2 15.Rg1 Bc6 16.Bf4 Bd7
17.Bb3 e6 18.Kc2 g6 19.Rge1 Rc8 20.Bxe6 Bxe6 21.Rxe6+ Kf7=) 13.Be3
Bc6 14.Rg1 Nd7 (14...Bb4 15.Ke2 Bxc3 16.bxc3 Bb5=) 15.f4 Bc5 16.Ke2
Ke7= Kopar – Domotor, Zalaegerszeg 1959. Black has no pawn-
weaknesses in his position, so White can hardly find targets for his pieces to
attack in the enemy position.
11.Bxd1 Bd7 12.Bf3 Rc8 13.Be3
 Now Black can obtain an acceptable game in several different ways.
13...g6 14.Bxb7 Rc7 15.Be4 Bg7 16.f4=
13...e6 14.Bxb7 Rc7 15.Be4 Nc4 16.Nd2 Nxe3 17.fxe3 g5=
13...Nc4 14.Bd4 e6 15.Bxb7 Rc7 16.Ba6 Bb4+ 17.Ke2 Nxb2 18.Nd2
Rc2= Sardy – Forgacs, Hungary 2009.
13...Bc6, Jenni – Gallati, Baden 1997, 14.Nd2 Bxf3 15.Nxf3 e6 16.Ke2
Rc2+ 17.Kd3 Rxb2 18.Rhb1 Rb4 19.a3 Rxb1 20.Rxb1 Bxa3 21.Ra1. Black
will fail to hold on to his extra pawn. 21...Be7 22.Rxa7 Nd5=

We will analyse in details now: A) 8...Bd7 and B) 8...dxe5.

 Black should not ignore the threat d4-d5, for example: 8...Bg4 9.d5 a6
10.dxc6 axb5 11.cxb7 Rb8 12.0-0 Rxb7 13.Nc3 b4 14.Ne4± He has
managed to maintain the material balance indeed, but has postponed the
evacuation of his king away from the centre.

8...g6 9.d5 a6 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.dxc6 dxe5 12.Qxd8+ Kxd8 13.Nxe5.

Black will have difficulties to regain the pawn on c6. 13...Be6 14.Nc3
(14.0-0 Rc8 15.Nc3 Bg7, Mahjoob – Miroshnichenko, Dubai 2004, 16.Bf4
g5 17.Bg3 Rg8 18.Rad1+ Ke8 19.Nd7 Nxd7 20.cxd7+ Bxd7 21.Nd5 Be6
22.Nc7+ Kf8 23.b3²) 14...Bg7 15.Be3!? (15.Bf4 Ke8, Alava Moreno –
Goins, Email 2004, 16.0-0 g5 17.Bg3 f5 18.f4²) 15...Bxe5 16.Bxb6+ Ke8
17.Rc1 Rc8 18.Na4² Bxa2?! 19.c7± White’s pawn has reached the
penultimate rank and restricts severely the mobility of the enemy rook on
c8.

8...e6 9.Qe2 Bd7 (9...a6. This move is a loss of time, because in this
variation White often exchanges voluntarily his bishop on b5 for the enemy
knight on c6. 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.0-0 Be7 12.Nc3 0-0 13.Ne4²) 10.a3 a6
11.Bd3 dxe5 (Following 11...Be7, White exploits the absence of Black’s
knight on f6 and prepares an attack against the enemy king. 12.Nc3 0-0?!
13.Qe4 g6 14.Bh6 Re8 15.h4‚) 12.dxe5 Nd5 13.0-0² White has a freer
game.
The move 8...a6 is too slow 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.0-0 (10.Qc2!? Qc7 11.Bf4
Bg4 12.Nbd2²).

10...g6 11.Qc2 (11.exd6!? White plans to squeeze his opponent’s pieces

with the protection of the pawns on e7 and c6. 11...Qxd6 12.Re1 Bg7 13.b3
Nd5 14.Ba3 Qc7 15.Nbd2 0-0 16.Rc1 Rd8 17.Ne5²) 11...Bb7, Meleghegyi
– Ribli, Budapest 1967, 12.exd6 Qxd6 13.Qb3 Qc7 14.Ne5! He provokes a
weakening of the dark squares in Black’s camp. 14...e6 15.Nc3± White is
preparing Ne4, followed by Nc5, or Nf6.
10...d5. Black prevents the opening of the game in the centre, but he
would have no compensation for the vulnerability of his pawn on c6 and the
c5-square. 11.Qc2 Qc7 12.Bf4 e6 13.Rc1 Bb7 14.Nbd2. White’s knight
will be better placed here than on the d2-square, since later it would be
headed for the c5-square via b3. 14...a5 15.a4 Nd7 16.Nb3² Schneider –
Ter Sahakyan, Dubai 2011.
10...Bf5 11.Nc3 e6 12.Bg5 Be7 13.Bxe7. White not only deprives his
opponent of the two-bishop advantage but also weakens the dark squares in
his position. 13...Qxe7 14.Qb3 Nd7 15.Qa4 0-0 16.Qa3² Schenning –
Willmann, LSS 2012.
10...Bg4 11.h3 Bh5 12.Bf4!? White fortifies his pawn on e5 and increases
his pressure against the d6-square. (He would not achieve much after
12.Nbd2 e6, Belyakov – Sjugirov, St Petersburg 2019, 13.Qc2 Rc8 14.Qd3
a5 15.Nb3=) 12...e6 13.Nbd2 d5 14.Rc1 Rc8, Gastal – Ribeiro, Avoine
2009, 15.Qe2² Black has no compensation for his queenside pawn-
weaknesses.

8...d5. This attempt by Black to close the centre would not promise him
equality, because his pawn has gone to the d5-square in two moves. 9.0-0

9...e6. With this move Black closes his bishop inside his own cam and this
precludes him from equalising. 10.Nc3 Be7 11.Bd3 Bd7 12.Re1±
9...a6 10.Be2 (about 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.Qc2 Qc7 12.Bf4 – see 8...a6)
10...Bf5, Prihodko – Timoshenko, Alushta 2002, 11.Nh4²
9...Bf5. Black is incapable of preserving his bishop on the b1-h7 diagonal.
10.Nh4 Bd7 (10...Bg6? 11.e6!) 11.Nc3 e6 12.Qg4 a6 (12...h5 13.Qf4 g5!
14.Qxg5 Qxg5 15.Bxg5 Nxd4„ Tregubov – S.Zhigalko, Moscow 2019;
13.Qg3! It is essential for White to preserve the queens on the board in
order to rely on a successful attack. 13...g5? 14.Bxg5; 13...Nxd4 14.Bd3±
Black’s king is stranded in the centre and is an excellent target for White’s
pieces. 14...Rc8? 15.Ng6! Rg8 16.Bg5 Qc7 17.Rac1+–) 13.Bd3 (13.Bg5!?
Qc7 14.Bxc6 Bxc6 15.f4! White brings his f-pawn into the attack. 15...h6
16.Ng6! fxg6 17.Qxe6 Be7 18.Qxg6+ Kf8 19.Rae1‚) 13...Nb4 14.Be2
Na4 15.Nf3 Rc8, Chukanov – Podgursky, LSS 2010, 16.Bg5 Qc7 17.Rfc1±
Black’s queenside initiative has reached its dead end, while his kingside has
not been developed yet.
9...Bg4 10.h3 Bxf3 (Unfortunately for Black it would not work for him to
play 10...Bh5?, because after 11.g4 Bg6 12.e6! f6 13.Nc3+–, he would have
serious difficulties with the development of his kingside pieces.) 11.Qxf3
e6 12.Be3 Rc8 (12...Be7 13.Qg4±) 13.Rc1 Nd7 (Following 13...Be7
14.Qg4, Black would not be able to castle because of the loss of the
exchange. 14...Kf8 15.Bxc6 bxc6 16.Nd2± Castro Rojas – Visier Segovia,
Linares 1978; 13...Qd7, Looshnikov – Shaposhnikov, Kazan 2008, 14.Nd2
a6 15.Bf1 Be7 16.Qg4±) 14.Nd2 Qb6 15.Bf1± Thorarensen – Salminen,
ICCF 2016. Black’s position is cramped and he obviously lacks space for
the manoeuvres of his pieces.

A) 8...Bd7
 9.exd6

The move 9.Nc3 cannot promise an opening advantage to White. 9...dxe5

10.Nxe5 Nxe5. This is the simplest response for Black and there arises
after it an approximately equal endgame (about 10...e6 11.Nxd7 Qxd7
12.0-0 – see variation B). 11.dxe5 Bxb5 12.Nxb5 Qxd1+ 13.Kxd1 0-0-0+
14.Ke2 Rd5 15.a4 Rxe5+ 16.Be3 Nd5 17.Rhd1 e6 18.Rac1+ Kb8 19.Kf3
Rf5+ 20.Ke2 Re5= Vorobiov – Goganov, Kazan 2012.
10.dxe5 g6

About 11.Bf4 Bg7 12.0-0 0-0 13.Qe2 – see 11.Qe2.

11.0-0 Bg7 12.Re1 (12.Qe2 – see 11.Qe2) 12...0-0 13.h3. White should
better prevent the pin of his knight on f3 which protects the pawn on e5.
13...a6 14.Bf1 Be6, Galishnikov – Golovchanov, Voronezh 2013, 15.Qe2
Nd5 16.Ne4 Rc8 17.Neg5 Nc7 18.Qe4 Bd5÷
11.Qe2 Bg7 12.0-0 0-0
 13.h3 Qc7! 14.Bf4 a6 15.Bd3 Be6 16.Rfd1 Rad8 17.Be4 (17.Rac1 Nd5
18.Nxd5 Bxd5 19.b3 Bxf3 20.Qxf3 Qa5„ Rupprecht – Baramidze,
Hockenheim 2020) 17...Rxd1+ 18.Rxd1 Rd8 19.Rxd8+ Nxd8= Ruefenacht
– Standke, ICCF 2008.
13.Bf4 a6 14.Bxc6 Bxc6 15.Rfd1 Nd5 16.Nxd5 Bxd5 17.Qe3 Qa5
18.Nd4 Rfd8 19.Rd2 Bc6 20.Rad1 Rd5 21.Nxc6 bxc6 22.a3 Rad8=
Makowski – Baklanov, ICCF 2010. White is incapable of exploiting the
vulnerability of the enemy pawns on c6 and a6.
13.Rd1 Qc7 14.a4 (14.Be3 Be6 15.Bxc6 bxc6 16.Rac1 Bg4. The pawns
on c6 and e5 are about equally weak. 17.Bf4 Bxf3 18.Qxf3 Bxe5 19.Bxe5
Qxe5 20.Qxc6 Rac8= Fritsche – Fajs, ICCF 2009) 14...Nxe5 15.Bxd7
Nxf3+ 16.Qxf3 Nxd7 17.Nd5. The activity of White’s pieces compensates
for him the sacrificed pawn but not more than that. 17...Qe5 18.Bf4 (18.Ra3
Qe6 19.Bg5 Ne5 20.Nxe7+ Kh8 21.Qh3 Ng4 22.Rad3 Rfe8 23.Rd6 Qe2=
Hauenstein – Kuznetsov, ICCF 2011) 18...Qxb2 19.Rab1 (19.Nxe7+ Kh8
20.Rab1 Qa2 21.Rxb7 Nc5= Goncharov – Mikhalchuk, ICCF 2011)
19...Qa2 20.h4 (Following 20.Rxb7 Nc5 21.Rxe7 Ne6, Godena – Kriebel,
Zillertal 2015, 22.Bd6 Rad8 23.Rxa7, White has already an extra pawn, but
Black’s pieces begin a counterattack. 23...Nd4 24.Nf6+ Bxf6 25.Qxf6
Ne2+ 26.Kh1 Nc3 27.Qxc3 Rxd6. The vulnerability of White’s first rank
would not allow him to preserve his extra pawn. 28.Qf3 Rxd1+ 29.Qxd1
Qxf2 30.Rd7 Qf6=) 20...Rad8 21.Nxe7+ Kh8 22.Rxb7 Qxa4 23.Rc1 Ne5
24.Bxe5 Bxe5 25.Nc6 Qf4 26.Qxf4 Bxf4 27.Nxd8 Bxc1 28.Nxf7+ Kg8
29.Nd6 Bf4= Semenov – Vorozhtsov, ICCF 2012. The position has been
considerably simplified and the quick draw would be the most likely
outcome of the game.

9...e6
Black wishes to regain the pawn on d6 and to begin actions against his
opponent’s isolated pawn.

The move 9...exd6 looks rather routine. Black will obtain a solid position
but without any good prospects. 10.Nc3 Be7 11.0-0 0-0 12.h3 (12.d5!?
White occupies space and fixes the enemy weakness on the d6-square.
12...Nb4 13.Bxd7 Qxd7 14.a3 Na6 15.Be3 Nc5 16.Bd4 Rfe8 17.a4 a5
18.h3²) 12...a6 (12...Bf5 13.d5 Ne5 14.Nd4 Bd7 15.Be2² Re8 16.a4!?
White advances his rook-pawn and wishes to provoke a weakening of the
c6-square as well as to fix the pawn on a7. 16...Rc8 17.a5 Nbc4 18.a6 b6,
Jaeckle – Schulz, Germany 1988, 19.Ndb5+– Ra8 20.f4) 13.Bd3 Nb4
14.Be4 d5 15.Bb1 Be6 16.a3 Nc6, Spangenberg – Leko, Buenos Aires
1994, 17.Qd3. White compromises the shelter of the enemy king and
obtains a comfortable advantage. 17...g6 18.Bh6 Re8 19.Ba2 Nc4 20.Rfe1²

10.Bg5

If White is reluctant to play against his opponent’s slightly weakened

pawn structure after 10.Bg5 h6 11.Bd2 and he prefers to enter the typical
position with an isolated pawn, he does not need to be in a hurry to play
Nb1-c3 and should better castle at first 10.0-0 and follow this with Re1. In
actions against an isolated pawn it is important to develop the light-squared
bishop to a comfortable square, so he must play quickly Re1, to be able
later if necessary to retreat his bishop to f1.

We will deal now with: A1) 10...Qb8 and A2) 10...f6.

A1) 10...Qb8
Black is reluctant to weaken his pawn on e6.
11.Nc3 Bxd6
 11...a6, Ganaus – Sax, Balatonlelle 2006. He should better not delay the
regaining of the pawn on d6. 12.Bxc6 Bxc6 13.Qb3 Nd5 14.d7+! Bxd7
15.Nxd5 exd5 16.0-0²

12.0-0 0-0

About 12...a6 13.Bd3 0-0 14.Re1 – see 12...0-0.

12...h6 13.Bh4 a6 14.Bd3. White’s bishop will participate on this diagonal

in the attack against the enemy king (Bb1, Qd3). 14...Nb4 15.Bb1 Bc6

16.a3 N4d5 17.Ne4 Bf4 18.Nc5 Nd7 19.Nxd7 Bxd7 20.Re1. Black has
managed to exchange the actively placed enemy knight on c5, but he is still
too far from equality, because there will soon appear a white knight on the
e5-square from where it would exert rather unpleasant pressure against his
position. 20...Bc6 21.Ne5 Bxe5 22.dxe5. White has occupied plenty of
space thanks to his pawn on e5 and in addition he has the two-bishop
advantage. 22...Qc7 23.Qg4. It would be useful for White to weaken his
opponent’s pawn structure. 23...g5 24.Bg3 0-0-0 25.Be4 h5!? Now, Black
sacrifices a pawn on order to organise some counterplay. 26.Qxg5 h4
27.Bxd5 Bxd5 28.Bxh4 Rdg8 29.Rac1 Bc6 30.Rxc6! After capturing
Black’s bishop on c6 he has no attack at all. There will soon arise on the
board an endgame in which White’s passed h-pawn would be decisive.
30...Qxc6 31.Rc1 Rxg5 32.Rxc6+ bxc6 33.Bxg5+–
16.Re1 N4d5 (16...0-0 17.Ne5²) 17.Ne5 Bxe5 18.Rxe5 Nc4 19.Rh5!?
This is the right move! (19.Re1 Qf4 20.Bg3 Qd2!= Black wishes to reach
an endgame in which White’s isolated d4pawn may cause great problems
for him, Vorobiov – Khismatullin, Voronezh 2006.).

After the move 19...Nxb2, Black will fail to hold on to his extra pawn due
to his lag in development. 20.Qb3 Qf4 21.Be4 0-0 22.Bxd5 Bxd5 23.Nxd5
exd5 24.Qxb2 Qg4 25.Rxd5 Qxh4 26.Qxb7²
19...Nxc3 20.bxc3 Qf4 21.Bg5 Qd6 22.Bc1. Black’s knight has occupied
an excellent blocking position on the c4-square, but he has a great problem
what to do with his king. It would be checkmated quickly on the kingside,
so he would have to play 22...0-0-0, but his monarch would not be safe
there at all. 23.Bd3 Bd5 24.Qa4 Nb6 25.Qc2²
19...Qf4 20.Be4 0-0 21.Bxd5 exd5 22.Bg3 Qf6 23.b3 Nd6 24.Qg4 Qg6
25.Qxg6 fxg6 26.Bxd6 gxh5 27.Bxf8 Kxf8 28.Re1² In this endgame White
can play without any risk against his opponent’s “bad” bishop on c6.
 13.Re1

13...a6

13...h6 14.Bh4 a6 15.Bd3 Ne7. Black wishes to transfer his bishop to the
long diagonal, but enables his opponent to deploy a powerful knight in the
centre (15...Nb4 16.Bb1²). 16.Ne5 Bc6, Vorobiov – Khismatullin, Kazan
2006, 17.Bxe7 Bxe7 18.Bc2. White’s idea is to provoke the enemy pawn-
advance f7-f5, after which Black’s pawn on e6 would become weak.
18...Qd6 19.Qd3 f5 20.Bb3±

14.Bd3 Nd5, Godena – Lazarev, Switzerland 2003 (14...Nb4 15.Bb1

N4d5 16.Ne5 Be8 17.Qd3 f5 18.a3² Looshnikov – M.Panov, Satka 2014)
15.Bb1 Nce7 16.Qd3 Ng6 17.h4 Nb4 18.Qd1² Black would hardly
manage to avoid the appearance of new weaknesses in his position.

A2) 10...f6
 11.Bd2

The other possible retreats of the bishop cannot be successful for White.

For example: 11.Bh4 Bxd6 12.Nc3 Nb4 13.0-0 0-0 14.Qb3 (14.Qe2 Re8
15.Bg3 Bxb5 16.Qxb5 a6 17.Qe2, Potapov – Kokarev, Khanty-Mansiysk
2019, 17...Bf8÷ The pawns on e6 and d4 are about equally weak.) 14...Re8
15.Bg3 Bxb5 16.Nxb5 Bxg3 17.Qxb4 Nd5 18.Qb3 Bc7 19.Nc3 Bb6„
Karjakin – Carlsen, Abidjan 2019.
11.Be3 Bxd6 12.Nc3 Nb4 13.Be2 N4d5 14.0-0 0-0 15.Bd3 Rc8 16.Rc1
Be8 (It also seems good for Black to play here 16...Nc4!? 17.Qe2 Ncxe3
18.fxe3 Nxc3 19.bxc3 Be8÷ Now, White must play very carefully;
otherwise, Black’s two-bishop advantage might become a telling factor in
the future.) 17.Nxd5 Nxd5 18.Rxc8 Qxc8= Potkin – Nepomniachtchi,
Moscow 2018.

11...Bxd6 12.0-0 0-0

 12...Ne7 13.Bd3 Nbd5 14.Re1 0-0 15.Nc3 Bf4 16.Bc4 Bxd2 17.Qxd2
Rc8, Godena – Olafsson, Rhodes 2019, 18.Bb3. White exerts powerful
pressure against the pawn on e6 and after 18...Rc6 19.Rac1 Be8 20.Nxd5
exd5 21.Qb4² his bishop seems to be much more active than its
counterpart.

13.Nc3 Nb4

14.Qb3!?
14.Qe2 Re8= Jenni – Grischuk, Fuegen 2006.

14...Re8

14...Rc8? 15.Ne4±

Following 14...a6?! Seger – Nguyen, Budapest 2005, 15.Ne4, White

would obtain effortlessly a stable advantage. 15...N4d5 (The tactical
complications, arising after 15...Bxb5, turn out to be in favour of White.
16.Qxe6+ Kh8 17.Nxd6 Bxf1 18.Bxb4 Bb5 19.Nxb7 Qc7 20.Bxf8 Qxb7
21.Bc5±) 16.Nxd6 Bxb5 17.Nxb5 axb5 18.Qxb5² Black’s centralised
knight is very powerful indeed, but it cannot compensate fully the absence
of a pawn for him.

14...N4d5 15.Bd3!? (15.Ne4 Bxb5 16.Qxb5, Acs – Saric, Germany 2014,

16...Rf7=) 15...Bc6 16.Rfe1 Re8 17.a4 a5 18.Qc2! White provokes a
weakening of the pawn-shelter of the enemy king and maintains a stable
advantage. 18...h6 19.Bh7+ Kh8 20.Bg6 Re7 21.Nh4²

15.a3 Bxb5
Black wishes to simplify the position in order to neutralise the activity of
his opponent’s pieces.

15...N4d5 16.Bd3 Bc6 17.Rfe1 Rc8 18.Ne4 Bf4 19.Ba5!² Black would
hardly manage to parry White’s initiative.

16.Nxb5

16...Nc6
 16...N4d5 17.Ba5 Qd7 18.Bxb6 Nxb6?! (18...axb6 19.Rfd1²) 19.Nxa7²
Black does not have sufficient compensation for the sacrificed pawn.

17.Rfe1 Nd5 18.Nc3 Qb6 19.Qa2 Nc7 20.Rad1! Ne7 21.Rc1!

White plays this move with the idea b4, Ne4-c5.

He could not have played this immediately 20.Rc1, because his pawn on
d4 would be hanging.

21...Rad8 22.b4 (22.h4!?²) 22...Ned5 23.Ne4 Qb5 24.Nc5 Bxc5. Black

cannot put up for long with the enemy knight on the c5-square, but now
White gets rid of his isolated pawn and obtains pawn-majority on the
queenside. 25.dxc5 Qd7 26.h3²

B) 8...dxe5
This move leads to a calmer game than 8...Bd7. Black wishes to simplify
the position.
9.Nxe5

9...Bd7
 9...Qd5? Black loses time with this early development of his queen.
10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.0-0 c5 (11...Nd7 12.Nc3 Qe6 13.Nd3 Qc4 14.Re1 Qxd4
15.Qf3 Qf6 16.Bf4 Qg6 17.Nb5+– Kagramanianz – Vachylya, Mukachevo
2019) 12.Nc3 Qxd4 13.Nb5! White sacrifices a piece and begins a decisive
attack against the enemy king stranded in the centre. 13...Qxe5 14.Re1 Bg4,
Makropoulos – Ljubojevic, Praia da Rocha 1978. If Black’s queen retreats,
White will play Nd6+, so Black is forced to enter an endgame with an
exchange down. 15.Qd2 Nc4 16.Rxe5 Nxd2 17.Nc7+ Kd7 18.Nxa8 e6
19.Bxd2+–

10.Nxd7

White would not achieve much with the line: 10.Bxc6 Bxc6 11.Nxc6
bxc6, therefore, almost all the experts in the Alapin variation prefer here for
White the move 10.Nxd7.

12.Bf4. Now, he must lose time in order to prevent the development of

Black’s bishop to the a1-h8 diagonal. 12...g6 13.Be5 f6 14.Bg3 c5 15.dxc5
Qxd1+ 16.Kxd1 Na4= Black regains the sacrificed pawn and obtains a
quite acceptable position.
Following 12.Be3, Black can develop comfortably his bishop on the g7-
square and it would exert pressure against the enemy pawn on d4 from
there. 12...g6 13.Nd2 Bg7 14.Nf3 0-0 15.0-0 Nd5 16.Rc1. Here, White
must play very accurately; otherwise, after some time his pawn on d4 might
become weaker than Black’s pawn on c6. 16...Qb6 17.Qd2, Petousis –
Kourousis, Athens 2006, 17...Rfb8 18.b3 a5„, followed by a5-a4.
12.0-0 e6 13.Nc3 (The development of White’s knight to the d2-square
would not be so promising to him 13.Be3 Be7 14.Nd2 0-0 15.Rc1 Rc8
16.Qe2 Qd5! The activation of the queen is the simplest way for Black to
equalise. 17.b3 Qb5 18.Nc4, Belyakov – Savchenko, Voronezh 2015. It is
not good now for White to exchange on b5, because with this Black will
correct his pawn structure and will obtain an advantage. 18...Nd5=)
13...Be7

14.Qf3 Nd5!? (14...Qd7, Stromboli – M.Petrov, chess.com 2020, 15.Qg4

0-0 – see line B3) 15.Be3 0-0 – see 14.Be3.
14.Qg4. The pressure against the pawn on g7 will be parried easily by
Black. 14...0-0 15.Bh6 Bf6 16.Rad1. In an analogous position after
10.Nxd7, Black’s queen is on the d7-square and this is in favour of White,
because after Ne4, Black would be forced to lose a tempo for the move Qe7
or Qd8. It would be useless to analyse thoroughly a position in which White
would be a tempo down.
14.Be3 0-0 15.Rc1 (15.Qf3 Nd5 16.Rac1 Qa5 17.Rc2 Rfd8= Sumaneev –
Kovalev, Karvina 2003) 15...Nd5 16.Nxd5 (16.Na4 Rc8 17.Qe2,
Fedorovsky – Lanka, Germany 2009, 17...Nxe3 18.fxe3 e5„) 16...cxd5
17.Qa4 Qb6 18.Rc2 a5= Hrabe – Beroun, Czech Rep ublic 1997. The
dominance over the c-file compensates for White the vulnerability of his
pawn on d4 but not more than that.

10...Qxd7

11.Nc3

White prevents g6, Bg7, which would have been possible after 11.0-0.
White should better refrain here from 11.0-0 because even after Black’s
simple response 11...e6, White would not obtain much (Black would have
the possibility 11...g6 12.Nc3 Bg7.). 12.Qg4 (about 12.Nc3 – see 11.Nc3)
12...h5 13.Qe2 Be7 (13...a6!? 14.Bxc6 Qxc6 15.Nc3 Bb4=) 14.Nc3 a6
15.Bxc6 Qxc6 16.Re1 Rd8 17.Be3 h4„ with the rather unpleasant threat
h4-h3, Almeida – Meyner, LSS 2013.

11...e6
Black not only prevents the move d4-d5, but also prepares the
development of his bishop.

11...g6? 12.d5+–

Following 11...Rd8, Black will have to advance e7-e6 sooner or later.

If White postpones his castling, he might even fail to equalise.

12.Be3. White’s transfer to the defence of his pawn on d4 seems to be
rather passive. 12...e6 13.Qb3 Be7 14.a4?! The plan, connected with the
pawn-advance a4-a5, does not promise anything good to White, since it
would only help Black to centralise his knight on b6. (It is better for White
to play here 14.Rd1 0-0 15.0-0 – see 12.0-0.) 14...0-0 15.a5 Nd5 16.a6 bxa6
17.Rxa6, R.Nielsen – Dimitrijevic, Stockholm 2013, 17...Nxe3 18.fxe3
(18.Bxc6? Qxd4–+) 18...Nxd4! Black obtains two pawns for his knight and
what is most important White’s king will remain stranded in the centre for a
long time after this sacrifice. 19.exd4 Qxd4 20.Qc2 Bg5µ
Following 12.Qf3 a6 13.Bxc6 Qxc6, White has nothing better than to
transfer the game to an approximately equal endgame. 14.Qxc6+ bxc6. The
position has been simplified considerably. 15.Be3 e6 16.Ke2 Be7 17.Rac1
Kd7 18.h4 (White would not achieve much with the doubling of his rooks
on the c-file, because Black can easily defend his pawn on c6: 18.Rc2 Ra8
19.Rhc1 Rhc8 20.Ne4 a5 21.Nd2 Nd5 22.Nc4 f6= Godena – Atalik,
Havana 1999.) 18...Nd5 19.Na4 Rb8 20.Bd2 Nb6, Nisipeanu – Radjabov,
Warsaw 2005, 21.Nc5+ Bxc5 22.Rxc5 Nd5 23.b3 Rb5 24.Rc4 Nb6 25.Rc2
h5 26.Rhc1 Rc8= It is practically impossible to see how White can break his
opponent’s defence.
12.0-0

About 12...e6 – see 11...e6.

12...g6. Black has delayed his castling and has no time to fianchetto his
bishop. 13.Re1 Bg7 (13...a6 14.Bxc6 Qxc6, Ker – Papin, Auckland 2019,
15.Qe2. White exerts pressure against the pawn on e7 and impedes the
harmonious development of his opponent’s pieces. 15...Nd5 16.Bg5 Nxc3
17.bxc3 f6 18.Bd2 Kf7 19.a4 e5. Black has lost the opening battle and is
trying to save the game by entering tactical complications. 20.dxe5 Bc5
21.Be3 Bxe3 22.Qxe3 Rhe8 23.Qf4 Kg7 24.exf6+ Qxf6 25.Qc7+ Qf7
26.Qb6± Black is a pawn down in this endgame with major pieces and his
king is rather misplaced.) 14.Bg5 f6 (After 14...Nc8, Black protects his
pawn on e7, but weakens his control over the d5-square. 15.d5 Bxc3
16.dxc6 bxc6, Solf – K.Andersen, Germany 1993, 17.Qc2 cxb5 18.Qxc3.
Here, Black has nothing better than 18...0-0 19.Bh6±) 15.Be3 e6, Orsolic –
Krueger, Email 2003 (15...0-0? 16.d5) 16.d5!? White opens the game in the
centre with the idea to exploit the power of his bishops. 16...Nxd5 17.Nxd5
Qxd5 18.Qa4 0-0 19.Rad1 Qh5 20.Qb3 Rxd1 21.Rxd1 Qe5 22.Bxc6. This
is the simplest move for White. He restores the material balance and obtains
an outside passed pawn on the a-file. 22...bxc6 23.Bxa7±
12...Qxd4? Godena – Rechlis Eupen 1994. Black’s king is at the centre of
the board and it would be tremendously dangerous for him to accept his
opponent’s pawn-sacrifice. 13.Qe2 e6 14.Bg5 Be7 15.Rad1 Qc5 16.Ne4!
Black is helpless against the penetration of the enemy knight to the d6-
outpost. 16...Qe5 17.Bxc6+ bxc6 18.Nd6+ Qxd6 19.Rxd6 Rxd6 20.Bxe7
Kxe7 21.Rd1+–
12...a6. Black wishes to get rid of the pin of his knight on c6 as quickly as
possible. 13.Bxc6 Qxc6 14.Bg5!? White prevents e7-e6. (14.Bf4 Nd5
15.Nxd5 Qxd5 16.Rc1 Qxd4 17.Qxd4 Rxd4 18.Rc8+ Rd8 19.Rc7. In this
endgame, despite his extra pawn Black will be faced with a rather difficult
defence, because his kingside pieces are not developed yet. 19...b5 20.Ra7
e6 21.Rc1 Bc5 22.Rxa6 Bd4 23.Bd6 Bxb2 24.Rc7 Bf6 25.Rb7± Tacke
Ungruh – Taylor, ICCF 2010. White has restored the material balance,
while Black’s rook on h8 is still isolated from the actions.) 14...h6, Godena
– Agopov, Heraklio 2007, 15.Bf4 Nd5 16.Nxd5 Qxd5 17.Qa4+ Qd7
18.Qc2 e6 19.d5! White sacrifices a pawn and seizes completely the
initiative. 19...exd5 20.Be5. White exerts pressure against the pawn on g7
and thwarts the development of Black’s kingside pieces. 20...Rc8 21.Qe2
Qe6 22.Qf3ƒ
 11...a6 12.Bxc6 bxc6 (12...Qxc6?! 13.d5 Qd6 14.0-0 Rd8, Braun –
A.Pavlov, Leipzig 2004, 15.Qf3 Nxd5. The pawn on d5 is impeding
Black’s pawn-advance e7-e6, but now the e-file is opened. 16.Rd1 e6
17.Nxd5 exd5 18.Bg5 Be7 19.Re1 Rd7 20.Qg4± 0-0. Black has managed to
castle indeed, but this is not the end of his problems. The unfavourable
placement of the rook on the d7-square will be the cause of his demise.
21.Bf4 Qc6 22.Bh6 Bf6 23.Rac1 Qd6 24.Bf4+–) 13.0-0 g6 (13...e6 – see
11...e6) 14.Re1 Bg7 15.Bg5 e6. Now, Black is forced to weaken his d6 and
f6-squares. (15...Nc8?! This move is too passive, moreover that Black
weakens his control over the centre. 16.Qf3 0-0 17.d5 cxd5 18.Nxd5± f6,
Kahn – Reuben, Dresden 2003, 19.Rad1 Qf5 20.Bf4+–) 16.Ne4 Nd5
17.Qd2. White is preparing the exchange of the bishops in order to weaken
even more the dark squares in the enemy camp. 17...0-0 18.Rac1 Rfc8,
V.Kovalenko – Rudovskya, Kiev 2005, 19.Bh6²

12.0-0

White would not achieve much with 12.Qg4 h5 13.Qf3 a6 (13...Rc8?!

14.Be3) 14.Bxc6 Qxc6 15.Qxc6+ bxc6 16.Ke2 Kd7= Sveshnikov – Shirov,
Val Maubuee 1990.
 In this position Black has usually tried three different plans: B1) 12...a6,
with the idea to trade his opponent’s light-squared bishop, B2) 12...Rd8,
attacking White’s pawn on d4 and B3) 12...Be7, continuing his
development. In all the lines White’s main resource to develop his initiative
is the queen sortie Qg4. In order to obtain an acceptable position Black’s
main task is to parry his opponent’s attacking intentions. Sometimes it
would not be so easy for him to do that and in some other lines he would
manage easily.

12...Rc8
 13.Be3!? White wishes to prepare the pawn-advance d4-d5, because after
it his bishop on e3 would be eyeing the enemy pawn on a7. 13...a6
(13...Be7 14.d5 Nxd5 15.Nxd5 exd5 16.Bxa7²; 14.Qb3 0-0 15.d5 Nxd5
16.Rfd1 a6 17.Nxd5 exd5 18.Rxd5 Qe6, Camps – Sabakh, LSS 2012,
19.Bc4 Ne5 20.Bf1² White maintains a stable advantage in this open
position thanks to his powerful bishop-pair.
13.d5!? He begins immediate active actions in the centre. 13...Nxd5
14.Nxd5 Qxd5 15.Qxd5 exd5 16.Rd1 Rd8 17.Be3 a6 18.Ba4 Be7 19.Rac1
0-0 20.Bxc6 bxc6 21.Rxc6² White’s pieces are much more active than their
counterparts and Black’s pawns on a6 and d5 are weak.

12...Bd6
 13.d5!? White exploits immediately Black’s weakened control over the
important d5-square. 13...Nxd5 14.Nxd5 exd5 15.Re1+ Be7 16.Bg5 f6
17.Be3 0-0 18.Rc1. White has good compensation for the sacrificed pawn
(18.Qh5!? g6 19.Qf3©). 18...Rfd8 19.Qc2 Bd6 20.g3 a6, Oprisor – Krabbe,
ICCF 2008, 21.Bxc6. White restores the material balance and transfers into
an endgame in which his hopes would be based on the creation of an
outside passed pawn on the queenside. 21...bxc6 22.Qxc6 Be5 23.Qxd7
Rxd7 24.b3 d4 25.Bd2 d3 26.Kf1. White should not forget about the
centralisation of his king. 26...Kf7 27.Rc6 a5 28.Re4 Rd5 29.Ke1 g5
30.Kd1²
13.Qg4 f5. Black weakens his pawn on e6 with this move. (After 13...0-0.
White will advance 14.d5 and will maintain an advantage thanks to his
powerful bishop-pair. 14...f5 15.dxe6 Qxe6 16.Qh3 h6 17.Be3²) 14.Qh5+
g6 15.Qf3 a6, Can – Brkic, Skopje 2013, 16.Na4 Nd5 (16...Nxa4 17.Bxa4
b5 18.Bb3 0-0 19.Rd1² Black’s kingside has been weakened by the pawn-
advances f7-f5 and g7-g6.) 17.Bc4 Bc7 18.Rd1 Qd6 19.g3 b5. Black forces
the exchange of the enemy bishop on c4 for his knight on d5, but weakens
with this the c5-square and White’s knight will be immediately headed
there. 20.Bxd5 Qxd5 21.Qxd5 exd5 22.Nc5 Bb6 23.a4²
 B1) 12...a6 13.Bxc6

13...Qxc6

13...bxc6. Black increases his control over the d5-square, but weakens his
pawn structure. 14.Qb3!?
 14...Nd5 15.Nxd5 Qxd5 (15...cxd5, Mammadov – Belikov, Alushta 2010,
16.Qg3 f6 17.Bf4²) 16.Qb7 c5 17.Qxd5 exd5 18.dxc5 Bxc5. It is now
Black who has an isolated pawn. 19.Rd1 d4 20.Bf4 0-0 21.Rac1 Rac8
22.Kf1², followed by the transfer of White’s king to the d3-square and the
advance of his queenside pawns. He will be playing for a win without any
risk while Black would have no real counterplay whatsoever.
14...Nc8 15.Ne4 Bd6 (15...Be7 16.Bf4 0-0 17.Qg3 f6 18.Rad1²)
16.Bh6!? 0-0 17.Qf3. White is threatening Nf6+. 17...f6 (17...f5. After this
move, contrary to f7-f6, Black weakens the e5-square and White will
manage to deploy perfectly his bishop there in the nearest future. 18.Nxd6
Nxd6 19.Bf4 Nb5 20.Rac1 Nxd4 21.Qe3 Rfd8 22.Be5² Black has too
many weaknesses in his position, so despite the extra pawn his position is
inferior.) 18.Bd2. White will transfer his bishop to the c3-square in order to
protect his isolated pawn. 18...Ne7 19.Rfe1 Nf5 20.Bc3 Be7 21.Qg4² The
pawns on a6, c6 and e6 are very weak in Black’s position.

14.Re1
White is threatening d4-d5.
 14.Qg4. This attempt by White to exert pressure against the enemy pawn
on g7, with the idea to impede the development of his bishop on f8, would
not create difficulties for Black if he reacts precisely. 14...h5 15.Qg5
(15.Qe2 Be7=) 15...Rd8 16.Rd1 Nd5 17.Bf4 Nxc3 18.bxc3 Rh6 (18...h4!?
19.h3 g6 20.Qe5 Rh5 21.Qe3 Be7÷ Chovanec – Jaworski, ICCF 2002)
19.d5 Rxd5 20.Rxd5 exd5 21.Bd2 Bc5 22.Qxg7 Rf6! Black organises
counterplay against the enemy pawn on f2 and deflects White from the
attack against the enemy king. 23.Re1+ Kd7 24.Be3 Bxe3 25.Rxe3 Qb6
26.h3 Qb1+ 27.Kh2 Rxf2=

14.Be3. White’s pawn on d4 was not under an attack, so this is simply a

developing move without any necessity at the moment.

About 14...Rd8 15.Rc1 – see variation B2.

14...Be7 15.Qg4 g6 16.Bh6! White prevents his opponent from castling
kingside and can rely on obtaining an advantage after that. 16...f5. Black
frees the f7-square for his king, but weakens his pawn on e6 in the process.
17.Qg3 Kf7 18.Rac1 (18.Rfe1 Rhd8 19.Rad1 Nd5 20.h4²) 18...Rac8
19.Rfe1 Qd7 20.Rcd1 Rhe8 21.h4 Nd5 22.Nxd5 Qxd5 23.Bg5 Bd6 24.Bf4
Be7 25.Be5 h6 26.Qe3² Poderoso – Tassone, ICCF 2016. Black’s defence
is rather difficult, because his king is unsafe, while White creates all the
time some tactical threats increasing his pressure against the enemy
position.
14...Nd5

The move 15.Qg4 will lead to a symbolic advantage for White, which
will gradually evaporate. 15...Nf6, Estrada Nieto – Kulaots, Istanbul 2000,
16.Qg3 Bd6 17.d5 exd5 (17...Bxg3 18.dxc6 Be5 19.cxb7 Rb8 20.Na4 Rxb7
21.Rac1 0-0 22.b3= Black’s position is quite defensible, because he has
only one pawn-weakness on a6 and his knight will soon occupy an
excellent outpost at the centre of the board.) 18.Bf4 Bxf4 19.Rfe1+ Kd7
20.Qxf4. White’s initiative seems to be very powerful but it would be
sufficient only to regain the sacrificed pawn for him. 20...Rae8 21.Red1
Qd6 22.Qf5+ Kc6 23.Rac1 Kb6 24.Nxd5+ Nxd5 25.Rxd5 Qe6 26.g3=
15.Rc1 Be7 (about 15...Rd8 16.Qg4 – see 12...Rd8) 16.Qf3 (16.Qg4
Nxe3 17.fxe3 0-0÷).
 16...0-0? After this move Black loses a pawn by force. 17.Nxd5 Qxd5
18.Qxd5 exd5 19.Rc7±
16...Rd8 17.Ne4 Qb6 18.Qg3 g6 19.Bh6 Qxd4 (19...Qxb2? 20.Qe5 Rg8
21.Rb1 Qxa2 22.Rxb7+–) 20.Rfe1 Bb4, Vajda – Timoshenko, Brasov 2011,
21.Qh4. White has more than sufficient compensation for the pawn.
21...Qe5 (21...Bxe1? 22.Nd6+–) 22.Bg5 Bxe1 23.Bxd8 Bd2 24.Nxd2
Qxb2 25.Nb3 Qxa2 26.Nc5+– Black’s three pawns cannot compensate his
missing knight, since White still has a very powerful attack.
16...Nxc3! 17.Qxc6+ bxc6 18.Rxc3. White cannot exploit effectively the
vulnerability of the enemy pawn on c6, because Black can protect it not
only with his rook but also with his king. 18...Kd7 19.Bf4 (19.Rfc1 Rhc8=)
19...g5 20.Be5, Canibal – Bunk, ICCF 2016, 20...f6=
 14...Be7

14...Rd8? On this square Black’s rook will come under an attack after the
move 15.Bg5, for example: 15...Be7 (15...f6 16.Qh5+ g6, Vajda –
Lemmers, Belgium 2007, 17.Qg4+–) 16.Bxe7 Kxe7 17.Rc1 Nd5, Kahn –
McLellan, ICCF 1978 (17...Rhe8 18.Qd3. Now, Black is practically
helpless against the transfer of the enemy queen to the a3-square. 18...g6
19.Ne4 Qd5 20.Qa3+–) 18.Qb3 Qd6 (18...f6?? 19.Nxd5+ Qxd5 20.Rc7+–)
19.Qxb7+ Rd7 20.Nxd5+ Qxd5 21.Qb4+ Qd6 22.Qa5! Now, White’s king
is much safer than its counterpart, so he avoids the trade of the queens.
22...Qxd4 23.Qg5+ Ke8 24.Rc8+ Rd8 25.Rxd8+ Qxd8 26.Qxg7+– Black
has failed to castle with disastrous consequences.
 14...Bb4 15.Qg4 Kf8. Black might possibly manage to equalise
completely at some moment, but he loses his castling rights which might
not be to everybody’s liking.

It would be too passive for White to choose here 16.Qe2 Rc8 17.h4
Nd5=, or 16.Bd2 Bxc3 17.bxc3 h5 18.Qd1, Krutov – Lang, ICCF 2016,
18...f6= Black has no problems at all in both lines.
It seems more interesting for White to try 16.Re5 Bxc3 17.Rc5, but even
then he can hardly rely on obtaining even a small edge, because he would
be incapable of preventing Black’s artificial castling. 17...h5 18.Qe2 Qd7
19.bxc3 Nd5 20.h3 b6 21.Rc4 g6 22.Bd2 Kg7=
16.Bg5 Bxc3 17.bxc3 Nd5 18.Rac1 b5! This is an important moment in
Black’s defensive plan – he should not allow the enemy pawn-advance c3-
c4. 19.a4 h6 20.Bd2 Kg8 21.h4 h5 22.Qe2 Rc8 23.axb5 axb5. Black only
needs to make two moves in order to solve the problem with his king – g7-
g6 and Kg7(h7). 24.Rb1. White’s attempt to increase his pressure against
the enemy pawn on b5 would not bring him anything, because he would not
defend any more his pawn on c3. 24...Nxc3 25.Bxc3 Qxc3 26.d5 exd5
27.Qxb5 Qc6= Yeoh – Santos Ruiz, Stockholm 2019.
 14...Nd5

15.Qg4. This move would be justified in the line: 15...h5 16.Qg5 Be7?
(After 16...Rd8 17.Bd2 Nf6 18.d5 Nxd5 19.Ne4© White would have great
problems to prove that the activity of his pieces compensates the sacrificed
pawn.) 17.Qxg7. Now, Black will fail to find a safe haven for his monarch.
17...Bf6 18.Qg3 Bxd4 19.Ne4! h4 20.Qf3 Qb6 21.Bg5+– Dolgov – Siigur,
ICCF 2004.
15.Nxd5 Qxd5 16.Re5. White relies on his lead in development to obtain
an advantage, but there is just a few material left on the board, so he would
be happy with the appearance of a weak pawn for Black on the e6-square.
 Following 16...Qd7 17.d5, White realises his plan immediately. 17...Bd6
(17...0-0-0? Black castles under his opponent’s checkmating attack. 18.Be3
Qb5 19.Rc1+ Kb8 20.Qd4+– Espinosa Flores – Spangenberg, Linares
1993) 18.dxe6 fxe6 19.Re1 0-0 20.Qb3 Rae8 21.Be3 Rf5 22.Rad1 Qc6
23.g3 Rd5, Kudr – Mezera, ICCF 2012, 24.Rd4² Black’s pieces are
squeezed with the protection of his pawn on e6 and White can play for a
win without any risk.
16...Qc4 17.b3 Qc7 18.Qh5 g6 19.Qf3 Bd6
 The move 20.Re2 looks rather harmless for Black. 20...0-0. He has
managed to evacuate his king away from the centre without weakening his
pawn structure and White has nothing to brag about. 21.g3 Rfe8 22.Bh6 Bf8
23.Bf4 Qd7 24.Rc1 Rac8 25.Rec2 Rxc2 26.Rxc2 Rc8 27.Rxc8 Qxc8 28.d5!
If White does not get rid immediately of his isolated d-pawn, then after a
while its vulnerability might hurt him seriously. 28...exd5 29.Qxd5 h5=
Pospisil – Fagerstrom, ICCF 2012.
20.Qf6!? White sacrifices the exchange and maintains his ebbing away
initiative. 20...Bxe5 21.dxe5. He has good attacking prospects on the dark-
squares, but Black’s defensive resources are considerable. 21...Rg8 22.Bg5
Rc8 (22...h6!? With this pawn-sacrifice Black deflects the enemy bishop
from the control over the h4-d8 diagonal. 23.Rc1 Qd7 24.Bxh6 Qd8 25.Bg5
Qxf6 26.Bxf6 Kd7. After the trade of the queens Black’s king is quite safe
and White’s only constructive play should be connected with the creation of
a passed pawn on the h-file. 27.Rd1+ Kc7 28.h4 a5 29.g4 a4 30.Rd3 b5
31.Kh2 axb3 32.axb3 Ra1 33.Rg3 Rga8 34.h5 gxh5 35.gxh5 Rf1 36.Kg2
Raa1= Black is perfectly prepared to hold the enemy h-pawn from the
back.). 23.h4 (Without this move Black will obtain a very good position by
sacrificing his h-pawn: 23.Rd1 h6! 24.Bxh6 Qc2=, or 23.h3 h6 24.Bxh6
Qd8 25.Qf3 g5 26.Rd1 Qc7 27.Qe3 Qe7=) 23...Qd8!? Black is ready to
give back his extra exchange in order to ensure the safety of his king by
trading the queens. 24.Qf3 (24.Qf4!? White’s queen will exert pressure
against the enemy pawn on f7 from this square. After 24...Qd5 25.Bf6 Kd7
26.Bg5 Rgf8 27.Bh6 Rfe8 28.Qxf7+ Re7 29.Qf4 Ke8 30.Qf8+ Kd7=
White will have nothing better than the repetition of the position.) 24...Qd5
25.Qe2 f5!? Black sacrifices a pawn in order to ensure the f7-square for his
king. 26.exf6 (Following 26.Rd1 Qe4 27.Qd2 Rg7, White will have to force
a draw by a perpetual check. 28.Qd8+ Rxd8 29.Rxd8+ Kf7 30.Rd7+ Kf8
31.Rd8+ Kf7=) 26...Kf7 27.Rd1 Qc6 28.Qd3 Rgd8 29.Qxd8 Rxd8 30.Rxd8
h6! This is the most precise move for Black. He gets rid of the pawn on f6,
which cramps his position. 31.Bxh6 Kxf6=

15.Qg4 Bf6

16.Ne4

16.Bg5. White exchanges his bishop and wishes to exert pressure against
the g7-square, bringing his rook on d1 into the actions. Meanwhile, Black
manages after castling to play Kh8 and Rg8. 16...Bxg5 17.Qxg5 0-0 18.Re3
h6 19.Qg4 Kh8! 20.Rae1 Nd5 21.Rg3 Rg8= Chiburdanidze – Alexandria,
Tbilisi 1981.

16...Nd5 17.Bf4

17.Nxf6+ Nxf6 18.Qg3 0-0 19.Bh6 Ne8. White cannot exploit the
misplacement of the enemy knight on e8 and Black has no other defects in
his position. 20.Rad1 Rd8 21.Bg5 f6 22.Bf4 Qd5 23.Qg4 f5. Black is not
afraid of the weakening of his kingside pawn structure, since he wishes
simply to capture the pawn on a2. 24.Qe2 Qxa2 25.d5!? (25.Bg5 Nf6
26.Qxe6+ Qxe6 27.Rxe6 Rd5= Coyne – Pattrick, ICCF 2012) 25...exd5
26.Qe6+ Rf7 27.Rc1 Qa5 28.Bg5 Nf6 29.Bxf6 gxf6 30.Qxf5 Qa4 31.h3©
White has sacrificed a pawn with the idea to complicate the position.
Black’s defence would not be easy in this endgame with major pieces,
because the placement of his king is rather unsafe.

17...0-0

Black should not postpone his castling, because after 17...Rd8 18.Rac1
Qb6 19.Nxf6+, he would not be able to capture on f6 with his knight, since
his pawn on g7 would be still unprotected by his king from the g8-square.
19...gxf6 20.Bh6 Ke7, Pospisil – Stephan, ICCF 2007, 21.Qe4 Qxb2
22.Rb1 Qxa2 23.Rxb7+ Rd7. Black’s defence would be very difficult with
his king still stranded in the centre. 24.Reb1 Rc8 25.Rxd7+ Kxd7 26.Qxh7
Rh8 27.Qxf7+ Ne7 28.Rb7+! Kc6 29.h4 Kxb7 30.Qxe7+ Kb6 31.Qxf6
Rg8 32.Qf7 Rh8 33.Qf4² White has already two pawns for the sacrificed
exchange and the position of Black’s king still remains unreliable.

18.Be5

18.Rad1!?
White defends his pawn.

The mov18...g6 weakens unnecessarily the dark squares in Black’s camp.

19.Nxf6+ Nxf6 20.Qh4 Nd5 21.Bh6 Rfd8 22.Qe4 Rd6 23.h4 Ne7 24.Qf4
Nf5 25.Bg5 Ng7 26.g4!ƒ White restricts considerably the enemy knight on
g7 and consolidates his advantage.
18...Bxd4. Black simplifies the game, but now there would appear a
weakness on e6 in his position. 19.Rxd4 f5 20.Qg3 Nxf4 21.Qxf4 fxe4
22.Qxe4²
 The move 18...Kh8 is too slow. 19.Be5 Rac8 20.Rd2 Bxe5 21.dxe5 Qa4
22.a3 Rc4 23.Qf3 Qc6 24.Nd6 Rc5 25.h3. White does not need to be in a
hurry, because Black has no real counterplay at all. 25...h6 26.b4 Rc1
27.Rxc1 Qxc1+ 28.Rd1 Qc6 29.Rd4 Qc1+ 30.Kh2 b5. White’s rook joins
into the attack against Black’s king: 31.Rg4! Kg8 32.Ne4! and now his
knight will also take part in the offensive by transferring from d6 to the f6-
square. 32...Rc8 33.Nf6+ Nxf6 34.Qxf6 g6 35.Rf4 Rc7?! 36.Rd4 Rc8
37.Rd6 Ra8. Black’s rook has been deployed too passively, because it must
protect not only his last rank, but the a6-pawn as well. 38.Qf3 Qc8 39.h4 h5
40.g4! White has squeezed the enemy pieces with defending and begins a
pawn-offensive on the kingside. 40...hxg4 41.Qxg4ƒ
18...Qb6 19.Qg3 Kh8 (19...Qxb2?! It would be tremendously risky for
Black to accept this pawn-sacrifice, because after 20.Nxf6+ Nxf6 21.Be5
Ne8 22.d5, White’s pawn will break via the d5-square. 22...Qxa2? 23.d6 f6
24.Bc3 e5 25.d7 Nc7 26.f4 exf4 27.Qd3 Rad8 28.Bb4 Rf7 29.Be7+–)
20.Rd2 Qa5 21.Bd6 Rfc8 22.a3 Rc6 23.Be5 Rac8 24.h3ƒ Rc2 25.Bxf6 Nxf6
26.b4 Qd8 27.Rxc2 Rxc2 28.Nxf6 gxf6 29.Qh4‚

18...Bxe5 19.dxe5
White got rid of the isolated pawn and retains some pressure on the
kingside, although thanks to the powerful knight, Black’s position is very
solid

B2) 12...Rd8
 This move practically forces White to lose a tempo in order to protect his
pawn with the bishop. After it, his task to fight for the advantage becomes
more difficult than after Black’s indifferent move 12...Be7. He has not
equalised yet, because he would have to fight against White’s bishop-pair in
this relatively open position, arising in the main line after 16.d5 Nxd5
17.Bxa7.
This scheme has become popular in games against computers, since it
enables Black to hold somehow the balance. He can hardly do that however
in practical games.
13.Be3

About 13.Qb3 Be7 14.Be3 or 14.Rd1 0-0 15.Be3 – see 13.Be3.

13.Qg4. The pressure against the g7-pawn would not provide White with
anything. 13...h5 14.Qg3 h4 15.Qf3 a6. Now, in order to deprive White of
his two-bishop advantage and to transfer into an endgame Black would
have to comply with the appearance of a weak pawn on c6 in his position.
16.Bxc6 Qxc6 17.Qxc6+ bxc6 18.Be3 Rh5= Ruefenacht – Oikamo, ICCF
2011.
 13...Be7

13...Bb4, Srinath – Karthikeyan, New Delhi 2018, 14.Qb3 Bxc3 15.bxc3

0-0 16.a4ƒ White’s bishops seem to be obviously stronger than Black’s
cavalry.

13...a6 14.Bxc6 Qxc6 15.Rc1. Here, White must play very energetically
in order to weaken his opponent’s position before the completion of his
development. 15...Nd5 16.Qg4 (Following 16.Nxd5 Qxd5 17.Qa4+ Qd7
18.Qxd7+ Kxd7, the position is considerably simplified. 19.d5 Bd6
20.dxe6+ Kxe6 21.Rfe1 Kd7= Turebayeva – S.Sokolov, Kazan 2008).

16...h5. This move cannot solve the problem with the pressure of White’s
queen against the g7-pawn, while the weakness of the h5-pawn might hurt
Black in the future fight. 17.Qg5 Nf6 18.Rfe1!? (After the seemingly
attractive move 18.d5, Black has an acceptable defence. 18...Nxd5 19.Rfd1
Be7 20.Qxg7 Bf6 21.Qg3 Nxc3?! 22.Rxd8+ Kxd8 23.bxc3 Ke7 24.Bg5²
Still, his king would be too weak in this endgame with major pieces,
Godena – Agopov, Heraklion 2007; 21...h4 22.Qf3 Nxe3 23.Qxe3 Rh5„
White’s king is safer than its counterpart, but Black’s bishop would be
stronger than White’s knight in a fight on both sides of the board.) 18...Be7
19.Qg3 (19.Qxg7 Rg8 20.d5. Black’s threat to checkmate on g2 forces
White to part with his extra pawn. 20...Rxg7 21.dxc6 bxc6 22.h3²; 20...Qd6
21.Qh6 Rg6 22.Qf4 Qxf4 23.Bxf4 Nxd5 24.Nxd5 Rxd5 25.Rc8+ Rd8
26.Rec1 Bg5= White cannot exploit the vulnerability of the enemy h5-
pawn, because there is just a few material left on the board.) 19...0-0 20.d5!
White sacrifices a pawn and obtains the excellent d5-square for his bishop
from where it would exert rather unpleasant pressure against Black’s
position. 20...exd5 21.Bd4 Rfe8 22.Ne4 h4 (Following 22...Qxc1 23.Rxc1,
Black would not obtain sufficient compensation for his queen. 23...dxe4
24.Qe3 Ng4 25.Qc3 Bg5 26.Re1²) 23.Qg5 Qe6 24.Nc5 Qg4 25.Qxg4
Nxg4 26.Nxb7² Now, Black must still work very hard in order to equalise.
16...Nf6 17.Qe2. White not only prepares the pawn-advance d4-d5, but
also frees the d1-square for his rook on f1. 17...Be7 18.d5! Nxd5
(Following 18...exd5 19.Bd4, Black would have to give back his extra pawn
in order to complete his development. 19...Qe6 20.Rfe1 0-0 21.Qxe6 fxe6
22.Rxe6 Kf7 23.Re2² Stevic – Kurnosov, Istanbul 2003. Black’s weak d5-
pawn provides White with a slight but stable edge.) 19.Nxd5 Qxd5 20.Bb6
Ra8 21.Rfd1 (21.b3 Qb5 22.Qxb5+ axb5 23.Rc7 Bd8 24.Rxb7 Bxb6
25.Rxb6 Ke7=) 21...Qb5 22.Qxb5+ axb5 23.Rc7 Bf6 (23...Bd8 24.Rxb7
Bxb6 25.Rxb6 Ke7 26.Rb7+ Kf6 27.Rdd7 Rhf8=) 24.Bc5 b6 25.Bb4 h5
26.Rb7 Rd8 27.Rxd8+ Bxd8 28.Bc3² White has more than sufficient
compensation for the sacrificed pawn.
 14.Qg4!?

After 14.Qb3, Black’s task would be simpler. 14...0-0 15.Rfd1 (15.Rad1

Qc8 16.Rc1 Qb8=).
 It is also possible for Black to play here immediately 15...Nd5 with the
idea to simplify the position by trading pieces. 16.Nxd5 (16.Rac1 Nxe3
17.fxe3. White has fortified his pawn on d4, but has lost his two-bishop
advantage. 17...a6 18.Bxc6 Qxc6 19.Na4 Qe4=) 16...Qxd5 17.Qxd5 Rxd5
18.Bxc6 bxc6 19.Rac1 Ra5 20.a3 Rc8= Balutescu – Vohl, ICCF 2016. The
pawn-weaknesses of both sides are about balanced.
15...Qc8 16.Na4 (16.Rac1 Na5 17.Qc2 Nac4 18.Qe2 Nxe3 19.Qxe3 a6
20.Be2 Qd7 21.Bf3 Bf6= Ghysens – Boos, ICCF 2015. White will have to
get rid of his isolated pawn sooner or later, so he will advance d4-d5, after
which the position would be simplified even more.) 16...Nd5 17.Rac1 Rd7
18.Bxc6 bxc6 19.Nc5 Bxc5 20.Rxc5 Rb7 21.Qc2 Rb5= Stevic – Ivanchuk,
Porto Carras 2011. Black’s powerful centralised knight compensates his
pawn-weaknesses.
14.Qf3 a6 15.Bxc6 Qxc6 16.Qxc6+ bxc6 17.Rac1 Kd7 18.Rc2 Rb8
19.Rfc1 Rhc8= Bernotas – Ivanchuk, Jurmala 2013.

14...0-0 15.Rad1
White plans to deploy his other rook to the e1-square.

He would not achieve much with the line: 15.Rfd1 f5 16.Qg3 Nd5
17.Nxd5 Qxd5 18.Bxc6 bxc6= Mammadova – Cramling, Antalya 2019.
 15...g6

About 15...Bf6 16.Ne4 Nd5 17.Bh6 – see 15...Nd5.

15...Nd5 16.Bh6 Bf6 17.Ne4 Qe7 18.Bxc6 bxc6. This position resembles
the one in the variation B3. 19.Rd3. White brings his rook into the attack.
(19.h4 Rb8 20.b3 Kh8, Blauert – Matzat, Oberland 2003, 21.Nxf6 Qxf6
22.Bg5 Qf5 23.Qxf5 exf5 24.Bd2² This endgame seems to be better for
White, because he may attack quickly Black’s weak queenside pawns: Rc1-
c5-a5, Rc1.) 19...Kh8 20.Bd2 Kg8 (20.Bd2 Rg8 21.Rc1 Rc8 22.Rh3 g5,
Marusiak – Gaida, corr. 1986, 23.Rh5 Rg6 24.Nxg5±) 21.Rc1ƒ Black must
defend not only his king, but also his weak pawn on c6.

15...Kh8. Now, if there arises a transfer to an endgame, Black’s king

would be too far way from the centre. 16.d5 exd5 17.Qxd7 Rxd7 18.Bxb6
axb6 19.Rxd5 Rfd8 (19...Rxd5 20.Nxd5 Bc5 21.Rd1 Rd8 22.Kf1² White
has a more elastic pawn structure and a more active king.) 20.Rfd1 Rxd5
21.Rxd5 Kg8 22.Kf1 Kf8 23.Bc4 Bf6 24.Rxd8+ Bxd8 25.Nd5 Ke8
26.Ke2 Kd7 27.Ne3 Nd4+ 28.Kd3 Ne6, Peiris – Kurukulasuriya, Malabe
2015, 29.b4!? Be7 30.a3² Black must still work hard to make a draw in this
position.

The move 15...f5 would lead to the weakening of the pawn on e6, but
Black manages to oust the enemy queen from the g-file. 16.Qf3 Bf6?!
(16...Nd5 17.Nxd5 exd5 18.Bxc6 bxc6 19.Bf4 Bf6 20.Rfe1 Rfe8= Morcillo
Holgado – Shabaev, ICCF 2016) 17.d5 Nxd5

18.Nxd5. Now, White’s b2-pawn is hanging. 18...exd5 19.Bxa7 Qd6

20.Be3 Bxb2 21.Bg5 Nd4 22.Qd3 Rc8 23.Be3 Nc2„ White’s two
powerful bishops compensate for him the absence of a pawn but not more
than that.
18.Bc5!?, with the idea to weaken the protection of the enemy pawn on
f5. 18...Rfe8 19.Nxd5 exd5 20.Bxa7 Qe6 (20...Qd6 21.Be3 g6 22.Bc4
Nd4. Black deprives his opponent of his two-bishop advantage, but the
vulnerability of his own king precludes him from equalising fully. 23.Bxd4
dxc4 24.Bc3 Qb6 25.Bxf6 Rxd1 26.Rxd1 Qxf6 27.Qxb7²) 21.Bc5 (21.Bb6
Ne5 22.Qe3 f4 23.Qc5 Nd7=) 21...Bxb2 22.Bb6 Rd6 (22...Ne5 23.Qh5 g6
24.Qe2 Qxb6 25.Bxe8 Rxe8 26.Rb1+– Black’s knight is completely
helpless against the enemy rook in this open position.) 23.a4 Rc8 24.a5 h6
25.Rfe1 Ne5 26.Qb3 (26.Qg3!?) 26...Bc3 27.Re2. The activity of White’s
pieces increases with every move. 27...Qf7 28.Re3 (28.Qa3!?) 28...d4
29.Qxf7+ Nxf7 30.Re7 Nd8 31.Rc7 Ra8 32.Rc5ƒ

16.d5
This is not a pawn-sacrifice. White exchanges his d4-pawn for the enemy
a7-pawn and opens the position for his powerful bishop-pair.

16.Bg5?! h5 17.Qh4 Bxg5 18.Qxg5 Qe7 19.Qc5 Nd5³ Srinath – Aryan,

Budapest 2019.

16...Nxd5

The move 16...exd5? is very bad for Black. 17.Qxd7 Rxd7 18.Bxb6 axb6
19.Nxd5 Kg7 20.Nxb6±

17.Bxa7 Qc7

17...h5
 After the move 18.Qg3, Black will hold convincingly his defence. 18...h4
19.Qg4 Qc7 20.Nxd5 Rxd5 21.Rxd5 exd5 22.Be3 Qe5. He centralises his
queen and solves all his defensive problems. 23.Ba4 Ra8 24.Bb3 Na5
25.Bd4 Qe6= Lakatos – Lux, Email 2016.
18.Qf3. White increases his pressure against the enemy knight on d5, but
cannot win a pawn, because after 18...Qc7 19.Nxd5 Rxd5 20.Rxd5 exd5, he
would have to lose a tempo for the retreat of his bishop from the a7-square.
21.Be3 Qe5 22.a4 Nd4 23.Bxd4 Qxd4 24.b3 Rd8 25.g3 h4= Fritsche –
Kulick, ICCF 2017.
18.Qh3!? White’s queen avoids the eventual attack in the future after the
move Nc6-d4, since it might lead to the exchange of one of his bishops and
keeps the possibility for his queen to come to the d7-square (after the
exchanges on d5). 18...Qc7 19.Nxd5 Rxd5 20.Rxd5 exd5 21.Be3 Qe5 22.a4
Nd4 (22...Qxb2. This move enables the activation of White’s queen.
23.Qd7 Qe5 24.Qxb7ƒ; 22...Bd6 23.Rd1 Qxb2 24.Qd7ƒ) 23.Bd3
(23.Bxd4. White should better not part immediately with his two-bishop
advantage. 23...Qxd4 24.Qd7 Bc5 25.Qxb7 Rd8„ Black exerts pressure
against the f2-square and avoids all the difficulties in this position.)
23...Ne6 24.f4 Qxb2 (24...Qxe3+ He forces a transfer to a slightly inferior
endgame. 25.Qxe3 Bc5 26.Qxc5 Nxc5 27.Bb5 Ra8. It is essential for Black
to prevent the formation of an outside passed pawn for White. 28.Ra1 Kg7
29.Kf2 d4 30.Ra3² In this position White’s bishop is stronger than the
enemy knight.) 25.Bxg6 (It seems attractive for White to try to weaken the
shelter of Black’s king with the move 25.f5, but after 25...Qc3 26.Bh6 Ng7
27.Kh1 Kh7 28.Bc1 Kg8, it is difficult to see how White can break his
opponent’s defence. 29.a5 gxf5 30.Bh6 Bf6 31.Bxg7 Kxg7 32.Qxf5 Rh8
33.Rf3 Qe5=) 25...d4 26.Bc1 Qc3 27.Bxh5 (27.Qf5 Bc5 28.Bxf7+ Rxf7
29.Qxe6. White has an extra pawn, but Black’s passed pawn is very
dangerous. 29...d3+ 30.Kh1 d2=; 27.Bd3 Nc5=) 27...Qxh3 28.gxh3²
White’s bishops are tremendously powerful in this open position.

18.Nxd5 exd5

18...Rxd5. The trade of a couple of rooks would reduce Black’s

possibilities to organise meaningful counterplay. 19.Rxd5 exd5 20.Be3 Bf6
21.b3²

19.Be3
 19...Bf6

19...f5. The advance of Black’s f-pawn would only weaken the shelter of
his king. 20.Qa4² f4 (20...Bf6, Bondi – Laghetti, ICCF 2015, 21.h3 Kg7
22.Rc1 Bxb2 23.Rc2 Be5 24.Bxc6 bxc6 25.Rxc6 Qd7 26.Rfc1± White’s
outside passed pawn is very dangerous, while the position of Black’s king
has been weakened.) 21.Bd2 Rf7 22.Bc3 Bf6, Hausdorf – Olano Aizpurua,
ICCF 2016, 23.Bxf6 Rxf6 24.Qb3 Rf5 25.Rd2 (25.Rfe1!?) 25...Kg7
26.Rfd1. Now, Black must not only take care of his weak b and d-pawns,
but must also worry about the safety of his king. Therefore, he transfers his
queen to the b4-square with the idea to trade the queens, but White’s
prospects in the endgame would be again preferable. 26...Qe7 27.Re2 Qb4
28.Qxb4 Nxb4 29.a3 Nc6 30.Rc2 Rf6 31.Kf1²

20.b3

The straightforward move 20.b4, would not provide White with an

advantage. 20...d4 21.Bd2 Rd5 22.a4 d3 23.Rc1 Bb2 24.Rc4 h5 25.Qf3
Qd6„

20...Rfe8

20...d4 21.Bh6 (21.Bf4!? Ne5 22.Qg3²) 21...Rfe8 22.a4 Qd6, Valdes –

Maitre, ICCF 2016, 23.h3!? Re6 24.Qf4 Qxf4 25.Bxf4² White has the two-
bishop advantage.
 21.Qg3

21.Qf3!? Qd6 22.Bc4 d4 23.Bf4 Qd7 24.a4 Qf5, Hausdorf – Mueller,

ICCF 2016, 25.Rd3. Now, White should better block immediately his
opponent’s dangerous passed pawn. 25...Re7 (25...Ne5? 26.Bxe5 Rxe5
27.Qxb7+–) 26.Bd2 Qxf3 27.Rxf3² White has a powerful bishop-pair and a
superb pawn structure.

21...Be5, Hausdorf – Tassone, ICCF 2015 (The move 21...Qxg3 leads to

an endgame without any good prospects for Black. 22.hxg3 Re6 23.Bb6
Rc8 24.a4²) 22.Qh4!? Re6 23.Bg5. with the idea to provoke Black’s pawn-
advance f7-f6, in order to weaken the position of his king. 23...f6 24.Bc1
Qd6 25.Rfe1 Rde8 26.Re3 f5 27.g3² The arising position is much easier to
play with White, because Black’s king is vulnerable and he has numerous
pawn-weaknesses in his position.

B3) 12...Be7 13.Qg4

 13...0-0
Black should better not postpone his castling.

After 13...g6 14.Bh6, he would have problems with the evacuation of his
king away from the centre.
 14...f5. Black frees with tempo the f7-square for the evacuation of his
king, but weakens the e6-pawn in the process. 15.Qe2 Kf7, Desjardins –
Groleau, Gatineau 2015 (15...Nd5 16.Nxd5 exd5 17.Bg7 Rg8 18.Be5±)
16.d5! White wishes to open files in the centre with the idea to organise an
attack against the enemy king as quickly as possible. 16...exd5 17.Rad1
Rhd8 18.Nxd5 Nxd5 19.Bc4 Qe6 20.Qxe6+ Kxe6 21.Rfe1± The queens
have been exchanged indeed, but Black’s king still comes under a
dangerous attack by White’s remaining pieces.
14...a6 15.Bxc6 bxc6 16.Rfd1 (16.Rfe1!? f5 17.Qf4 Bd6 18.Qf3 Nd5
19.Rac1± Black’s king is stranded in the centre and his pawns on a6, c6 and
e6 are very weak.) 16...f5 17.Qe2 Kf7, V.Schneider – Cornette, Lausanne
2004, 18.Nb1!? White prepares the transfer of his knight to the e5-outpost.
(18.Rac1²) 18...Rhd8 19.Nd2 Qxd4 20.Re1 Rd6 21.Nf3 Qe4 22.Qxe4 fxe4
23.Ne5+ Kg8 24.Rxe4± Black will be faced with a difficult fight for a draw
in this endgame, because he has too many pawn-weaknesses in his position.

13...Bf6 14.Rd1

The move 14...h5 would only lead to the weakening of Black’s kingside.
15.Qe2 Nd5, Toth – Gorcsi, Hungary 2014, 16.Be3 h4 17.Nxd5 Qxd5
18.Bc4! White reduces the blockade against the d5-square and advances d4-
d5 maintaining an advantage. 18...Qh5 19.d5 Qxe2 20.Bxe2 exd5 21.Rxd5²
14...Nd5 15.Ne4 Qe7 (about 15...0-0 16.Bh6 Qe7 17.Bxc6 bxc6 – see
13...0-0) 16.Bf4 Nxf4. Black defends against the threat of the penetration of
his opponent’s pieces to the d6-square, but after 17.Qxf4 Rd8 18.Nxf6+
Qxf6 19.Bxc6+ bxc6, White can win a pawn with 20.Qc7 0-0 21.Qxa7±
Otto – Pauscher, Leipzig 2014.
14...0-0. Black enters an endgame without any good prospects after this
move. 15.d5 exd5 16.Qxd7 Nxd7 17.Nxd5²
14...a6 15.Bxc6 Qxc6 (Following 15...bxc6?! 16.Ne4 Nd5 17.Nxf6+
gxf6 18.Bd2±, Black would have too many pawn-weaknesses in his
position.).

16.d5!? White breaks immediately in the centre. 16...exd5 (Or 16...Nxd5?

17.Nxd5 exd5 18.Qb4 a5 19.Re1+ Black’s king will remain stranded in the
centre for long. 19...Kd8 20.Qa3 Ra6 21.Bf4± Godena – Marinelli, Verona
1995.) 17.Re1+ Kf8 18.Bg5© Lanin – Dorer, ICCF 2012. White has no
doubt good compensation for the sacrificed pawn, because Black’s king has
lost its castling rights, but whether this would be sufficient for White to
maintain an edge would remain unclear.
 16.Ne4 Nd5 17.Bf4 Rd8 (17...h5. The advance of Black’s rook-pawn
would not solve his main problem – finding a safe haven for his king.
18.Qg3!? h4 19.Qg4 h3 20.Rac1 Qd7 21.Bd6±) 18.Qg3!? (18.Rac1 Qb6,
Yeoh – Vo, Johor 2017, 19.Nxf6+ gxf6 20.b3²) 18...Nxf4 19.Qxf4 Be7
20.Rac1 Qb6 21.Qg3 0-0. Black has finally managed to castle, but now
White penetrates with his major pieces to the penultimate rank. 22.Qc7
Qxc7 23.Rxc7 Rfe8 24.Rxb7² Black does not have sufficient compensation
for the sacrificed pawn.

14.Bxc6

14...bxc6

14...Qxc6. From this square Black’s queen would not manage to come to
the e7, or to d8-squares in order to protect his bishop when it comes to f6
and White’s knight would attack it from the e4-square. 15.Bh6 Bf6 16.Rfd1
 16...Kh8 17.Ne4 Rg8. This move looks rather artificial. 18.Bg5 Bd8
(18...Nd5? 19.Qh4 e5 20.Rac1 Qe6 21.Rc5 Bd8 22.dxe5 Ne7 23.Nf6 Qf5
24.e6 Qg6 25.Nxg8 1–0 Nitish – Xu Zhihang, Novi Sad 2019; 18...Bxd4?!
Black is afraid of coming under a checkmating attack and complies with
playing a position with a weak pawn on e6. 19.Rxd4 f5 20.Qe2 fxe4, Potkin
– Kotronias, Batumi 2002, 21.Rc1!? This is a useful intermediate move for
White. 21...Qe8 22.Rxe4±) 19.Bxd8 Rgxd8 (19...Raxd8? 20.Ng5+–)
20.Ng5 Qe8 21.Qe4! Now, White wins a pawn with the help of a double
attack. 21...g6 22.Qxb7²
16...Qd7. Black complies with the loss of time and wishes to deploy his
queen on the h4-d8 diagonal. 17.Ne4
 17...Qd8 18.Rd3! The activation of White’s rook on the third rank into the
attack is one of the thematic moments in this variation. 18...Kh8 19.Bf4
Nd5 20.Be5 Bxe5. Black exchanges the bishops in order to reduce the
pressure of the enemy pieces, but now White not only gets rid of his
isolated pawn, but also obtains the excellent d6-outpost for his knight.
21.dxe5 Qc7 22.Nd6 f6! Godena – Dominguez Perez, Lausanne 2001.
Black cannot put up with his opponent’s knight on the d6-square for long,
but now there appears a weakness on e6 in his position. 23.Rd2 Qe7
24.exf6 Rxf6 25.Nc4²
17...Qe7 18.Rd3 Rfc8 (After 18...Kh8 19.Bf4 Rfd8 20.Rh3 Rd5, White
can exploit the placement of the enemy king on the h8-square with the line:
21.Nxf6 Qxf6 22.Be5 Qg6 23.Qxg6. Black’s h-pawn is pinned, so he
would have to weaken his pawn structure. 23...fxg6 24.Rc3 Rd7 25.Rac1 h6
26.h4² Fridman – Uwira, Griesheim 2006.) 19.Rg3 g6 (19...Bxd4. Black’s
attempt to get free from his opponent’s positional bind leads by force to an
inferior endgame for him. 20.Bxg7 f5 21.Nf6+ Bxf6 22.Bxf6+ fxg4
23.Bxe7 Kf7 24.Bg5²) 20.Nxf6+ Qxf6 21.Rf3 Qe7, Durandal – Ould
Ahmed, ICCF 2009, 22.h4 Nd5 23.h5² White has excellent attacking
prospects on the weakened dark squares.
 15.Bh6 Bf6 16.Rfd1
Here, before playing Ne4, White must protect his pawn on d4.

16...Kh8

About 16...Qd8 17.Ne4 Kh8 – see 16...Kh8.

16...Qe7 17.Ne4 Rfd8 (17...Nd5 – see 16...Nd5) 18.Rac1 – see 16...Rfd8.

16...e5. Black is reluctant to comply any more with the pressure of his
opponent’s pieces, so he decides to enter voluntarily an inferior endgame.
17.Qxd7 Nxd7 18.dxe5 (18.Be3 exd4 19.Bxd4 Rfd8 20.Kf1 Bxd4 21.Rxd4
Nb6 22.Rad1 Rxd4 23.Rxd4² Belov – Hausrath, Biel 2009) 18...Nxe5
19.Ne4 Be7 20.Bf4 Ng6 21.Bd6 Rfd8 22.Rac1 f5 23.Bxe7 Nxe7 24.Nd6
Rd7 25.Nc4 Rad8 26.Re1² Niewiadomski – Oren, ICCF 2006. In both lines
Black has no compensation for the vulnerability of his pawns on a7 and c6.

16...Nd5 17.Ne4 Qe7 18.Rac1. Now, before playing Rd3, White increases
his pressure against Black’s weak c6-pawn. (Still, it is possible for White to
play here immediately 18.Rd3, for example: 18...Kh8 19.Bd2; or 18...Rfb8
19.b3 Kh8 20.Bd2 Kg8 21.Rc1 Rb6 22.Rh3. This variation is much easier
to play with White, because his attack usually develops according to
standard schemes. 22...g6 23.Nxf6+ Qxf6 24.Bg5 Qh8 25.Bh6² Hausdorf –
Orzel, ICCF 2013) 18...Kh8 (18...Rfc8 19.Rc4 Kh8 20.Bg5 Bxg5 21.Nxg5
Rc7÷ Godena – Shirov, Batumi 1999; 20.Bf4!? The only way for White to
maintain his advantage is to transfer his bishop to the e5-square. 20...a5
21.Be5²) 19.Bg5 Bxg5 20.Nxg5 Rab8 (20...Rac8, Godena – Fernandes,
Batumi 1999, 21.Rd2 Rc7 22.Rc5 Rb8 23.h4 h6 24.Nf3 Rb5 25.Rdc2 Rxc5
26.Rxc5 Kg8 27.Ne5²) 21.Rd2 Rb6 22.Nf3 f6 23.Ne1 Qd6 24.Nd3 Re8,
Stephan – Korze, ICCF 2008, 25.Re2 Kg8 26.g3² The weak pawn on c6
will still cause many difficulties for Black.

16...Rfd8 17.Ne4 Qe7 18.Rac1

18...Kh8 19.Be3. White avoids the exchange of his bishop (19.Bg5 Bxg5
20.Qxg5 Qb4? This attempt by Black to organise active actions only
increases his difficulties. 21.Qh5 f6 22.Qc5 Qa4 23.Nc3. His activity has
reached its dead end, so Black is forced to try to save the game by entering
a very difficult endgame for him. 23...Qc4 24.Qxc4 Nxc4 25.Na4 Nb6
26.Nc5 Rd6 27.Nb7! White’s knight was well placed on the c5-square, but
from a5 it would simply capture Black’s weak c6-pawn. 27...Rd7 28.Na5 h6
29.Kf1 Rad8 30.Re1 Nd5 31.Nxc6± Korotylev – P.Smirnov, Tomsk 2004.
It is better for Black to play here 20...Qxg5 21.Nxg5 Kg8² and he will try
to hold with accurate defence this clearly inferior endgame for him.)
19...Rac8 20.Rc5 Rd5 21.Rc2 Qd8 22.Nxf6 Qxf6 23.Rdc1. Now, it has
become evident why White has avoided the exchange of his bishop on e3. It
is necessary for him to free his major pieces from the necessity to protect
his pawn on d4. 23...Rd6 24.b4 Qd8, Cottarelli – Geerken, ICCF 2014,
25.Qe4 h6 (25...Qd7? 26.b5 cxb5 27.Rxc8+ Nxc8 28.Qa8+–) 26.h3² Now,
White can play for long and without any risk for a win, combining his
threats against the enemy pawns on c6, a7, as well as against Black’s entire
kingside.
18...Rac8 19.h4. White is threatening to play h4-h5 and Bxg7 at an
opportune moment. 19...Rd5 20.Rc3

20...Nd7, Brynell – Kulaots, Sweden 2002. Black ignores in vain White’s

threats. 21.h5!?N He concentrates his forces for an attack against Black’s
king. 21...Kh8 (Following 21...g6 22.hxg6 hxg6 23.Rh3, White’s rook will
join into the attack against Black’s monarch on the opened h-file.) 22.Be3
(22.Nxf6 Qxf6 23.Be3 h6 24.Rdc1²) 22...h6 23.Ra3! White has squeezed
the enemy pieces with the protection of his kingside and begins an attack
against Black’s weaknesses on the queenside. 23...Nb6 24.Nxf6 Qxf6
25.Rxa7 Rf5 26.Qe2²
20...Kh8. Black fails to oust immediately the enemy bishop from the h6-
square. 21.Rf3! Rg8 22.Nxf6 gxf6 23.Qxg8+! White attacks the enemy king
with this simple tactical combination. 23...Kxg8 24.Rg3+ Rg5 25.hxg5 f5.
The opening of the g-file would have led to an immediate loss for Black.
26.Rc1 f4 27.Rgc3 f6 (27...f5 28.Rxc6 Nd5, Brynell – Sammalvuo,
Gothenburg 2002, 29.Rc8+ Kf7 30.Rf8+ Kg6 31.Rg8+ Kh5 32.Kh2 Qf7
33.Rg7 Qe8 34.Rh1+–) 28.Rxc6. Black’s defence crumbles. 28...fxg5
29.Rc7 Qf6 30.Bg7 Qf5 31.Be5 f3 32.Rg7+ Kf8 33.Rcc7 1–0 Godena –
Antunes, Pula 1997.
20...Bxd4. Now, there arise interesting complications on the board.
21.Rxd4 f5 22.Rxd5!? The queen sacrifice is the only way for White to fight
for the advantage. (The straightforward move 22.Qxg7+ would lead to an
approximately equal endgame 22...Qxg7 23.Bxg7 Kxg7 24.Rg3+ Kf8
25.Ng5 Ke7= Ohtake – Cipolli, ICCF 2007).
 22...cxd5, Ali Marandi – Oparin, Moscow 2012. Black ends up in a
difficult endgame if he declines his opponent’s queen sacrifice. 23.Qg5
Qxg5 24.Rxc8+ Nxc8 25.Nxg5 e5 26.Nf3 e4 27.Be3 exf3 28.gxf3. White’s
bishop is obviously stronger than the enemy knight in actions on both sides
of the board. 28...Kf7 29.Bc5 Ke6 30.Kf1 Ke5 31.Ke2 a6 32.h5 Nd6
33.f4+ Ke6 34.Bxd6 Kxd6 35.b4+–
If Black is reluctant to capture the enemy queen, he should continue with
22...Nxd5 23.Qg3 fxe4 24.Rc4 Qf6 25.Bc1 Qf5, in an attempt to activate
his pieces. 26.b3 a6 27.Bh6 Qf6 28.Be3 Nxe3 29.Qxe3 Qxh4 30.Rxe4.
White’s prospects are still preferable, but Black would not lose outright.
30...Qh5 31.Qd3 Qd5 32.Qxa6 Rd8 33.Re1² Pecis – Pietrocola, ICCF
2011.
22...fxg4 23.Rg5 g6 24.Rxg4 Nd5 25.Rf3 e5 26.h5 Qe6 27.Rh4 g5
28.Bxg5 h6 29.Bd2 Kh7. Black has a rook, a bishop and a pawn for the
queen, but his king is obviously unreliably protected. 30.Rg3 Rg8 31.Rg6!
White opens the h-file in order to try to capture the pawn on h6. 31...Rxg6
32.hxg6+ Kg8 33.f3±

17.Ne4
 17...Qd8

17...Qe7 18.Bg5 (about 18.Nxf6 Qxf6 19.Bf4 or 18.Bf4 Rfd8 19.Nxf6

Qxf6 20.Be5 – see 17...Qd8) 18...Bxg5 19.Qxg5

After 19...Qb4 20.b3 Rad8 21.Qc5 Qxc5 22.dxc5!, there will arise an
endgame on the board, but in a better version for White, because his
isolated pawn is already on the c5-square. 22...Nd5 23.Nd6 Kg8 24.Rd4
Rd7, Potapov – Al Sayed, Khanty-Mansiysk 2013, 25.Ra4 Rb8 26.Kf1²
White’s knight has occupied a powerful position, while Black’s pieces are
squeezed with the protection of his weak queenside pawns.
19...Nd5 20.Rac1 Rab8 (about 20...Qxg5 21.Nxg5 – see 19...Qxg5) 21.b3
Qxg5 22.Nxg5 Ne7 23.Rc4 Kg8 24.Kf1 Rfd8, Skoriupin – Verzhansky,
Dagomys 2004, 25.Ra4 Rd7 26.Rc1² White’s rooks exert powerful pressure
against Black’s pawn-weaknesses.
19...Qxg5 20.Nxg5. This endgame would not be so easy for Black to hold
as it might look at first sight. 20...Nd5 (20...Kg8 21.Rac1 Rac8 22.Rc5 Rfd8
23.Nf3 Rd5, Khairullin – Berezhevsky, Sochi 2005, 24.Rdc1 Rxc5 25.Rxc5
f6. The exchange of a couple of rooks has not helped Black much and he
prepares the transfer of his king to the queenside for the sake of protection
of his weak pawns. 26.Kf1. White also has in mind the activation of his
king. 26...Kf7 27.b4 Ke7 28.Ke2 Kd7 29.Ra5 Rc7 30.Nd2 Kc8 31.Nb3
Rd7 32.Ra6 Kb8 33.Na5² White is still not winning by force, but Black’s
defence would be rather unpleasant in this position.) 21.Rac1 Rab8
(21...Ne7 22.Rc4 Kg8 23.Nf3 Rfb8 24.Rd2 a5 25.Ne5. Now, all White’s
pieces are concentrated against Black’s weak c6-pawn. 25...Ra6 26.Rdc2 g6
27.Kf1 Rd8 28.Ra4² White has failed to win a pawn immediately, so he can
enter a stage of a manoeuvring game. It would be very difficult for Black to
hold this position, because he has no active counterplay at all. 28...f6
29.Nd3 Rb6 30.Nc5 Kf7 31.Nb3± Potkin – Timoshenko, Kiev 2001.)
22.Rd2 Rb6!? Black wishes to prevent the transfer of the enemy rook to the
a4-square. 23.Rc4 Ra6 24.b3 Kg8 25.Ne4 Rc8 26.Kf1! White transfers his
king to the queenside in order to free his rook on d2 from the necessity to
protect the pawn on a2. 26...h6 27.Ke1² Rb8?! 28.Nc5 Ra3 29.Kd1 Rb4
30.Rcc2 Rb5 31.Kc1 Nb6 32.Kb2 Raa5 33.a3. Black’s position has
gradually turned from slightly worse into completely hopeless. 33...Na4+
34.Nxa4 Rxa4 35.Rxc6+– Potkin – A.Smirnov, St Petersburg 2001.

17...Rg8 18.Bg5
 18...Nd5. Black reduces his protection of the h7-square and White
exploits this immediately. 19.Rd3! He is threatening after Rh3 to create a
threat of a checkmate in two moves (19.Qh5!?). 19...Bxg5 20.Nxg5 g6,
Paci – Zoler, La Massana 2010. Black parries his opponent’s threats on the
h-file, but weakens the complex of dark squares in the vicinity of his king.
(20...Nf6? Howell – Ansell, London 2015. Black has lost too many tempi
on moves with his knight. 21.Qh4 h6 22.Rf3 Qe7 23.Ne4± Now, White
wins at least a pawn.) 21.Qg3 Rge8 22.h4²
18...Bd8 19.Bxd8 Raxd8 20.Ng5 h6 21.Rac1 Rgf8. Naturally, White’s
knight is untouchable because of the checkmate. 22.Nf3 f6. Black defends
against the penetration of the enemy knight to the g5-square, but here, on
top of all his troubles, he would have to worry additionally about the
weakness of the e6-square. 23.Re1 Rfe8 24.Qe4 Rc8 25.Rc5² N.Kosintseva
– Kozlitin, Samara 2002.
18...Bxg5 19.Nxg5 h6 20.Rac1

20...Rgd8. Black’s rook abandons unnecessarily the kingside, but it would

have soon to go back there in order to protect his weak pawns. 21.Nf3 f6
22.Re1² Re8 23.Rc2. White prepares the doubling of his rooks on the e-file
in order to attack the weak enemy pawn on e6. 23...Nd5 24.Rce2 Rab8
25.b3 Nc7 26.h3 Rb5. The transfer of the rook to the d-file would not
facilitate Black’s defence. 27.Rc1. He has concentrated all his forces on the
defence of his pawn on e6, but White changes the object of his attack.
27...Rd5 28.Rec2 Rd6 29.Qe4 Nd5, Botta – Rombaldoni, Sibenik 2012,
30.Ne5! White’s knight is untouchable, because of the eventual loss of his
opponent’s rook, so this means that Black would lose his c6-pawn. 30...Qb7
31.Rxc6 Rxc6 32.Nxc6±
20...Nd5 21.Nf3 Nf6, Piorun – Miton, Chorzow 2013, 22.Qg3 Qb7
23.Ne5 Rgc8 24.b3 Kg8 25.Qf3 Nd5 26.Rc4 Rc7 27.Rdc1 Rac8 28.h3 f6
29.Nd3² There has arisen a standard position for this variation. It looks like
Black would not lose immediately his weak pawns, but playing this position
for him would be very unpleasant.

18.Nxf6

18.Bg5. This plan, with the exchange of the bishops, cannot promise an
advantage to White in this position. 18...Bxg5 19.Nxg5 h6 20.Nf3 Qd5
21.Rdc1 Nd7 22.Qf4 Kg8 23.Qe3 a5= Godena – Alterman, Israel 2013.
He can try here 18.Bf4!? Be7 19.Nc5 Nd5 (Following 19...Bxc5, White
would get rid of his isolated pawn and would obtain the d6-square for his
bishop. 20.dxc5 Nd5 21.Bd6 Re8 22.Rd3²) 20.Be5 Bf6 21.Rac1 Qe7
22.Nd3²

18...Qxf6 19.Bf4

The move 19.Be3 is too passive for White. 19...Nd5 20.Rac1 Rfb8=

19...Rfd8

19...h6 20.Rac1 Rac8 21.h3 Rfd8 22.Be5 Qg5 23.Qf3 f6 24.Bf4 Qf5
25.Qg3² Black has managed to activate his queen a bit, but this would not
solve fully his defensive problems.

19...Nd5 20.Be5 Qg6 21.Qe2 f6. Black ousts the enemy bishop away
from the centre, but weakens his e6-pawn in the process. (21...Rad8 22.Qa6
Qc2 23.Qa3 h6²) 22.Bd6 (It also seems good for White to try here 22.Bg3
Qf7 23.Re1, combining his pressure against the weak enemy pawns on c6
and e6 and obtaining an edge. 23...Rfe8 24.Rac1 Qd7 25.Rc5 Rad8 26.f3
Kg8 27.Qe4²) 22...Rfe8 23.Rac1 e5. This attempt by Black to organise
counterplay loses the c6-pawn for him. (23...Rac8 24.h3²) 24.dxe5 Nf4
25.Qf3 fxe5, Bengtsson – Flanagan, Caleta 2015, 26.Rxc6 Re6 27.Rcc1±

20.Be5 Qg6 21.Qe2 Nd7

21...Nd5 22.Rd3. Now, Black must weaken his pawn on e6 in order to

cover his g7-square against the combined attack of the enemy pieces. 22...f6
23.Bg3 Ne7 24.Rad1 Qf7 25.f3 Nf5 26.Bf2 Qd7 27.R3d2 Rab8 28.g4 Nd6
29.Rc2 Kg8 30.Re1 Re8 31.Rec1 Rec8 32.b3 Rb7 33.Qa6² Tacke Ungruh –
Kregelin, ICCF 2010. White has seized completely the initiative.

22.Bg3 Qf5 23.Rac1 Rdc8 24.Rc3 a5 25.Rf3

White begins active actions on the kingside.
 It also seems good for him to follow with the standard pressure on the c-
file. 25.Rdc1 Qd5 26.Qc4 Qxc4 27.Rxc4 Ra6 28.b3 Kg8 29.f3 Kf8 30.Bf4
Ke7 31.h4 h6 32.Kf2 Nf6 33.Bd2 Nd7 34.g4! Kf6 35.h5!² Stephan –
Sirobaba, ICCF 2006. White is trying to create weaknesses for his opponent
on the kingside and fixes at first the enemy pawns on g7 and h6 on the same
squares as his bishop.

25...Qh5 26.Be5 f6 27.Bg3 Qd5 28.b3 a4 29.b4 a3 30.Re3 Re8, Tiviakov

– Nijboer, Dieren 2006, 31.Bc7 Kg8 32.h3² Black’s defence is very
difficult. For example, after the routine move 32...Kf7? he would lose
immediately 33.Re5! fxe5 (33...Nxe5 34.dxe5 Qb5 35.Rd7+–) 34.dxe5
Qb5 35.Rxd7+ Kg8 36.Qg4 g6 37.Qh4+–
 Index of Variations

Chapter 1 1.e4 c5 2.c3

A) 2...Qc7 3.d4 14
B) 2...Qa5 3.g3 various 16
3...Nc6 4.Bg2 various 18
B1) 4...g6 5.Ne2 19
B2) 4...Nf6 5.Ne2 20
C) 2...Nc6 3.d4 23

Chapter 2 1.e4 c5 2.c3 b6 3.d4

various 28
3...Bb7 4.Bd3 various 29
A) 4...e6 5.Nf3 31
B) 4...Nf6 5.Nd2 various 36
B1) 5...e6 6.Ngf3 37
B2) 5...cd 6.cd various 42
B2a) 6...Nc6 7.Ngf3 43
B2b) 6...e6 7.Ngf3 45

Chapter 3 1.e4 c5 2.c3 g6 3.d4

various 50
3...cd 4.cd various 53
4...d5 5.e5 Bg7 6.Nc3 various 54
A) 6...Nc6 7.Bb5 Nh6 8.h3 58
B) 7...f6 8.Nf3. 61

Chapter 4 1.e4 c5 2.c3 a6 3.Nf3

various 65
A) 3...d5 4.ed 68
B) 3...e6 4.d4 various 72
B1) 4...b5 5.Bd3 72
B2) 4...cd 5.cd 78

Chapter 5 1.e4 c5 2.c3 e5 3.Nf3

various 84
3...Nc6 4.Bc4 various 86
A) 4...Qc7 5.0-0 88
B) 4...Nf6 5.Ng5 91

Chapter 6 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d6 3.d4

various 95
A) 3...Nd7 4.Nf3 95
B) 3...Nc6 4.Nf3 97
C) 3...cd 4.cd various 99
C1) 4...Nc6 5.Nf3 99
C2) 4...e6 5.Nf3 102
C3) 4...Nf6 5.Nf3 104
D) 3...Nf6 4.Bd3 various 111
 D1) 4...Nbd7 5.Nf3 112
D2) 4...Nc6 5.Nf3 114
D3) 4...cd 5.cd 117
D4) 4...g6 5.Nf3 119

Chapter 7 1.e4 c5 2.c3 e6 3.d4

various 128
A) 3...cd 4.cd 129
B) 3...d5 4.ed ed 5.Nf3 various 139
B1) 5...c4 6.b3 140
B2) 5...a6 6.Bd3 143
B3) 5...Nf6 6.Bb5+ 146
B4) 5...Nc6 6.Bb5 various 148
B4a) 6...Nf6 7.0-0 150
B4b) 6...Bd6 7.dc 153

Chapter 8 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.ed

3...Nf6 4.Qa4 175
3...Qxd5 4.d4 Bf5 5.Nf3 177
4...e5 5.de 178

Chapter 9 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.ed Qxd5 4.d4 g6 5.Nf3

various 182
5...Bg7 6.Na3 various 185
A) 6...Nf6 7.Bc4 186
B) 6...cd 7.Nb5 188
Chapter 10 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.ed Qxd5 4.d4 cd 5.cd
5...g6 191
A) 5...e5 6.Nf3 191
B) 5...Nc6 6.Nf3 various 194
B1) 6...Bg4 7.Nc3 195
B2) 6...e5 7.Nc3 198

Chapter 11 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.ed Qxd5 4.d4 cd 5.cd

A1) 5...e6 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Nf3 204
A2) 6...Qd8 7.Nf3 205
B1) 5...Nc6 6.Nf3 e6 7.Nc3 Bb4 8.Bd3 207
B2) 7...Qa5 8.Bd3 210
B3) 7...Qd8 8.Bd3 213
B4) 7...Qd6 8.Bd3 223

Chapter 12 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.ed Qxd5 4.d4 e6 5.Nf3

various 234
5...Nc6 6.Bd3 235

Chapter 13 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.ed Qxd5 4.d4 Nc6 5.Nf3

A) 5...e5 6.Nxe5 242
B) 5...a6 6.dc 245
C) 5...Bf5 6.Be3 various 248
C1) 6...cd 7.Nxd4 249
C2) 6...Nf6 7.Na3 251
D) 5...Bg4 6.dc 256

Chapter 14 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.ed Qxd5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nf3

various 268
A) 5...Bg4 6.Nbd2 269
B) 5...a6 6.Be3 272
C1) 5...Nc6 6.dc Qxc5 7.Na3 279
C2) 6...Qxd1 7.Kxd1 281
D) 5...e6 6.Na3 various 287
D1) 6...cd 7.Nb5 287
D2) 6...Be7 7.Nb5 290
D3) 6...a6 7.Nc4 292
D4) 6...Qd8 7.Nc4 294
D5) 6...Nc6 7.Be3 295

Chapter 15 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5

3...Ng8 4.d4 307
3...Nd5 4.Nf3 b6 5.Bd3 308
A) 4...a6 5.d4 308
B) 4...g6 5.d4 312
C) 4...d6 5.d4 315

Chapter 16 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 e6 5.Bc4

various 318
5...Nb6 6.Bb3 various 321
A) 6...Nc6 7.d4 323
B) 6...d6 7.ed various 328
B1) 7...Qxd6 8.d4 330
B2) 7...Bxd6 8.d4 333

Chapter 17 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 e6 5.Bc4 d6 6.d4

various 348
A) 6...Be7 7.0-0 349
B) 6...de 7.de 350
C) 6...cd 7.cd various 352
C1) 7...Nb6 8.Bd3 356
C2) 7...Be7 8.0-0 369

Chapter 18 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 e6 5.Bc4 d6 6.d4 cd 7.cd
Nc6 8.0-0 Be7 9.Qe2
various 374
9...0-0 10.Nc3 Nb6 378
10...Nxc3 11.bc various 79
11...de 12.de Bd7 13.Bd3 381
A) 12...b6 13.Bd3 381
B) 12...Qc7 13.Bd3 382
C1) 12...Qa5 13.Bd2 392
C2) 13.Rb1 396

Chapter 19 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.d4

various 404
5...cd 6.cd various 405
 6...d6 7.Bc4 de 8.Bxd5 406
A) 8.Nxe5 406
B) 8.de 409

Chapter 20 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.d4 cd 6.cd d6 7.Bc4
Nb6
8.Bb3 415
A) 8.Bb5 Bd7 9.ed 418
B) 8.Bb5 de 9.Nxe5 Bd7 10.Nxd7 Qxd7 11.Nc3 various 426
B1) 11...e6 12.0-0 a6 13.Bxc6 429
B2) 12...Rd8 13.Be3 437
B3) 12...Be7 13.Qg4 42