Benoni - ia600907.us.archive.org...17 Fianchetto System 221 18 Knight's Tour Variation 248 19 Lines with an early ibg5 261 20 4.g3 269 21 Rare 4th moves 290 Index of Variations 298

The Modern Benoni

by Marian Petrov

The Modern Benoni arises after 1.d4 <2:i f6 2.c4 cs 3.dS e6. It leads

to unbalanced structures and exciting play, so it has naturally

been a favourite of ambitious attacking players such as Tai, Fischer

and, more recently, Topalov, lvanchuk and Gashimov.

The Modern Benoni is a bold answer to 1.d4 and GM Marian Petrov

shows it is possible to play this line confidently without

memorizing extreme levels of theory. Black must certainly be well

prepared, but the workload is less than for most aggressive

defences - this book supplies all Black needs to know.

•Expert guidance on an exciting counterattacking line •Fight against 1.d4 with a concise effective repertoire •Hundreds of novelties

Marian Petrov is a grandmaster and former Bulgarian Champion.

He has great experience in the Modern Benoni and has used it

successfully in many international events.

€29.99

ISBN 9 78-1-907982-60-6

�I QUALITY CHESS

www.qualitychess.co.uk 9 7 819 0 7 9 82 6 06

Grandmaster Repertoire 12

The Modern Benoni By

Marian Petrov

•

I Quality Chess

www.qualitychess.co. uk

First edition 2013 by Quality Chess UK Ltd

Copyright© 2013 Marian Petrov

GRANDMASTER REPERTOIRE 12-THE MODERN BENONI All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored

in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior

permission of the publisher.

Paperback ISBN 978-1-907982-59-0 Hardcover ISBN 978-1-907982-60-6

All sales or enquiries should be directed to Quality Chess UK Ltd, 20 Balvie Road, Milngavie, Glasgow G62 7TA, United Kingdom

Phone +44 141 333 9588 e-mail: [email protected]. uk website: www.qualitychess.co. uk

Distributed in North America by Globe Pequot Press, P.O. Box 480, 246 Goose Lane, Guilford, CT 06437-0480, US

www.globepequot.com

Distributed in Rest of the World by Quality Chess UK Ltd through Sunrise Handicrafts, ul. Skromna 3, 20-704 Lublin, Poland

Typeset by Jacob Aagaard Proofreading by Colin McNab & John Shaw Edited by Andrew Greet & Nikolaos Ntirlis Cover design by www.adamsondesign.com

Cover photograph by www.capture365.com Printed in Estonia by Tallinna Raamatutriikikoja LLC

Contents Key to symbols used & Bibliography 4 Introduction 5

f4 Systems 1 Mikenas Attack 9 2 The Four Pawns Attack 18 3 Flick-Knife Attack - 8 ... ctJ bd 7 32 4 Flick-Knife Attack- 8 ... ct:Jfd7 without 9.a4 42 5 Flick-Knife Attack- 9.a4 '1Wh4t 49 6 Flick-Knife Attack- 9.a4 0-0 62

e4 Systems 7 Classical Variation with 9 .. .!�e8 79 8 Classical Variation with ... ibg4 101 9 Modern Main Line 117 10 Modern Main Line - without 9 ... b5 127 11 Kapengut 144 12 7.ct:'ige2 160 13 7 .ibd3 and 8. ctJ ge2 165 14 Sidelines 184

Lines without e4 15 7.ibf4 ibg7 192 16 7.ibf4 a6 205 17 Fianchetto System 221 18 Knight's Tour Variation 248 19 Lines with an early ibg5 261 20 4.g3 269 21 Rare 4th moves 290

Index of Variations 298

Key to symbols used White is slightly better Black is slightly better

± White is better + Black is better +- White has a decisive advantage -+ Black has a decisive advantage

equality iii with compensation ft with counterplay = unclear

? a weak move ?? a blunder

a good move !! an excellent move !? a move worth considering ?! a move of doubtful value # mate

Bibliography Avrukh: Grandmaster Repertoire 2- J.d4 Volume Two, Quality Chess 2010 Cox: Starting Out: I d4!, Everyman Chess 2006 Kaufman: The Kaufman Repertoire for Black and White, New In Chess 2012 Nunn, Burgess, Emms & Gallagher: Nunn's Chess Openings, Everyman Chess 1999 Palliser: Chess Developments: the Modern Benoni, Everyman Chess 2011 Palliser, Emms, Ward & Jones: Dangerous "Weapons: The Benoni and Benko, Everyman Chess 2008 Schandorff: Playing J.d4 - The Indian Defences, Quality Chess 2012 Semkov: Kill KID I, Chess Stars 2009 Watson: A Strategic Chess Opening Repertoire for White, Gambit 2012 Watson: The Gambit Guide to the Modern Benoni, Gambit 2001

Periodicals

Chess Evolution by Arkadij Naiditsch Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings New In Chess Yearbooks

Internet/Other Media

Chesspublishing.com Ziegler: Modern Benoni for Advanced Players (DVD), ChessBase 2012

Introduction By the Author

Welcome to the Modern Benoni, one of the most dynamic openings in all of chess. Make no mistake: this book is for players who enjoy the wild and adventurous side of the game. Modern Benoni devotees are forced to play on the edge, and will often have to live with positional weaknesses and/or sacrifice material to avoid being driven into passivity. On the plus side Black gets active piece play with rich counterattacking possibilities, perhaps more so than in any other opening against 1.d4.

The Benoni got its name from a German manuscript published in 1825 entitled Ben-Oni. For the rest of the 19th century it was rarely seen and had a poor reputation. Then in the early 1900s it was adopted by a few maestros of the day, most notably Frank Marshall. Even the great Alekhine played it a few times, despite having stated it was not a good opening. It was not until the late 1950s that the Modern Benoni really became popular, thanks to the great Mikhail Tal. The Benoni, with all its dynamism and counterattacking potential, suited Tal's aggressive tactical style perfectly. His games say more than my words ever could, so let's whet our appetites by seeing a couple of them.

Bukhuti Gurgenidze - Mikhail Tai Moscow 1957

1 .d4 lllf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.lllc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.lllf3 g6 7.e4 .ig7 s . .ie2 0-0 9.0-0 Gurgenidze employs the Classical System, which can be found in Chapters 7 and 8.

9 ... E:e8 10.llld2 llla6 1 1 .E:el lllc7 12.a4 b6 At this stage it is hard to predict where Black's counterplay will come from, but just watch how

quickly the situation changes.

6 Grandmaster Repertoire 12 - The Modern Benoni

13.�c2 Nowadays the main move is 13.f4.

13 ... lllg4! 14.h3? White must have been asking himself where

the knight could be going. Playing against Tai, perhaps he should have been more cautious.

a b c d e f g h 14 ... Cllxf2!!

A brilliant combination! Suddenly White's king is in grave danger.

15.iixf2 �h4t 16.iifl J.d4 17.Clldl

18.J.f3 18.gxh3? J.xh3 is mate of course.

18 ... �h2 19.Clle3 f5! The quote from The Lord of the Rings, "Even

the smallest person can change the course of the future", applies just as much to pawns as it does to hobbits.

20.Clldc4 fxe4 21 .J.xe4 J.a6! The bishop finds a perfect home. There are

too many pins, open files and diagonals for White to deal with.

22.J.f3 �e5 23.�a3 �ae8 24.J.d2 Cllxd5! An excellent demonstration of team play.

After the earlier sacrifice Tai has simply brought his pieces to good squares and the white position soon crumbles to dust.

� � �·� s � -a-� � 1 � m m _, 6 t-�-��·� • '•il�� s m� -:--- "�-%-----Y-� %� 4 �- ��/,'"//, �� 3 � - mJl-_____ y,w-'l,; ��-d'l,,,,,;� �;W'''' 2 W/jif� - 8 a 1 �,,,,,/,.,,,,,%��;.,,,,,,/,

a b c d e f g h 25.J.xdSt �xd5 26.<itie2 he3 27.�xe3 J.xc4t 0-1

Any player would be proud to win such a game, and Tal's play from 1957 showed he was way ahead of his time. No wonder his opponents became scared to sit down opposite him before a game! Here is one more game from the following year.

Introduction 7

Yuri Averbakh -Mikhail Tal Riga 1958

1 .d4 ttJf6 2.c4 e6 3.tlJc3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.ie2 ig7 8.ttJf3 0-0 9.0-0 l:!e8 10. � c2 ttJ a6 1 I .if4 ttJ b4

Another knight attack, this time from the other side.

12.�bl

s .1.m.!.B.1.m•� , ,� �� ,,,,,,%� ��r� 7 /,-� I. �&'/.'/ � �J� I. 6 B w� �·� 5 � �.lr� /,,,,,,� �,,,{ '� �f,'1;1;�� 4 �It,//,�� 3 � � �lt:J-��,�,,,,,;%% ��,��,� 2 8 �� -JL�� 8 �l�L 1 �� -!=,,,,

a b c d e f g h 12 ... tlJxe4!?

This move must have come as a huge psychological shock to Averbakh. In fact it is not fully correct, but over the board it caused problems that were too much for White to handle. The fact that Black can even contemplate giving up a piece in this way says something about the wealth of possibilities offered by the Benoni.

13.tlJxe4 if5 14.ttJfd2 tlJxd5 15.ixd6? l 5.�g3 would have made it harder for Black

to prove his compensation.

15 ... ttJf6 16.if3 tlJxe4 17.tlJxe4 ixe4 18.ixe4 �xd6

Black has emerged a pawn up with a more active position.

s J.B B.1.m•� ,� � � �,�� 7 1%1.a a1.m1. /,,,,,/,� "r "'; "� ,,,,,"� 6 �JI'�� 5 ��"'�� 4 ��,�� :r��-��:r� 1 ,,ii� �-�m,,,,

a b c d e f g h 19.�c2 l:!e7 20.if3 l:!ae8 21 .l:!adl

The opposite-coloured bishops give White realistic drawing possibilities, so it is interesting to observe how Tai breaks the defence.

21...id4 22.a4 b6 23.h3 l:!e5 24.l:!d2 h5 25.l:!e2 l:!xe2 26.he2 h4 27. �hl �f4 28.g3 �f6 29.�dl l:!d8 30.ig4?

Under heavy pressure, White commits a fatal oversight.

30 ... ixfl! 31 .�e2

8 Grandmaster Repertoire 12 - The Modern Benoni

32.°IWeSt 32.'Wxd2 'Wc6t leads to mate.

32 ... �g7 33.gxh4 °1Wd4 34.ih3 °1Wd3 35.ig2 �dl 0-1

About this book I have been playing the Modern Benoni for about a decade. Before then I played the King's Indian, so it was a natural transition as I was already used to having my bishop on g7. For my own reasons I have usually preferred the move order 1.d4 g6, intending to transpose to a Benoni after a subsequent c2-c4. Of course I understand most readers will prefer a more conventional move order, so I have taken the position after the standard moves 1.d4 lt'if6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 as my starting point for the book.

A friend of mine once told me "Every time when I see your pawn on d6 it makes me sick!" However, he also admitted he wished he could get such interesting positions from the black side of the Queen's Gambit Declined, which is his favoured defence. The thing I like about the Modern Benoni is that it almost always gives rise to a tense position where both players must make concrete decisions. I have also observed that there are many players who do not enjoy facing the Benoni, as White finds it hard to control the game the way he often does in most l .d4 openings.

In this book I have departed slightly from the strict repertoire approach' of giving one recommendation against each of the opponent's options. Against most major options I have provided coverage of two or more lines; the Benoni is a versatile beast and I hope the reader will find it useful to have multiple weapons in his arsenal. In some cases I have even spent time covering a less promising alternative, in order to provide some theoretical background and highlight the reasons that led me not to recommend something different. No doubt some readers would argue in favour of a more detailed 'one recommendation' approach, bur I am happy with the final balance of detail versus choices. I also made the decision to focus my attention on the most popular and critical attempts for White to handle each major variation. In almost every early position there are probably ten or more uncommon moves that have been played at some point, but does anyone really need a recommendation against every possible move that they're unlikely ever to face?

I hope you will enjoy reading this book and putting its recommendations into practice. Remember one thing: the Modern Benoni is not an opening that can be played by book alone. Preparation has its place of course, but more important are the resolve, wit and ingenuity of the brave warrior who puts his pawns on c5 and d6. Thus I invite you to summon your inner Tai, turn the page and get started.

Marian Petrov Burgas, Bulgaria February 2013

f4 Systems a b c d e f g h

Mikenas Attack

Variation Index 1.d4 �f6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.�c3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4

7 ... fl.g7 8.e5 A) 8 ... dxe5 10 B) 8 ... �fd7 9.�b5 dxe5 10.�d6t rtle7 1 1 .�xcSt Wfxc8 12.�f3 �e8 12

Bl) 13.fS 14 Bll ) 13 ... �b6N 14 B12) 13 ... e4! 15

B2) 13.fxeS 17

A) note to 1 1 . . .'llf6 B) note to 1 2 . . . Ei:eS BI2) after 18 .'lle6

a b c d e f g h 1 8 . . . tllbc6!!N

10 f4 Systems

1 .d4 ltJf6 2.c4 c5 3.dS e6 4.ltJc3 exdS 5.cxdS d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4

a b c d e f g h The first six chapters of the book will

focus on this aggressive continuation, which continues to be a source of headaches for a lot of Benoni players.

7 ... i.g7 8.eS

a b c d e f g h This is known as the Mikenas Attack. It is

rarely played, but Black should be prepared. The two main replies are A) 8 .•• dxe5 and B) 8 .•• ltJfd7.

A) 8 •.• dxeS

This is an acceptable choice for players who don't wish to study long variations.

9.fxe5 ltJfd7 10.e6 fxe6 l 1 .dxe6

a b c d e f g h 1 I . . . ltJf6

Now White must go into an endgame. I believe this is the best move, although I will mention three other options:

The tempting 11.. .Wi'h4t?! does not work: 12.g3 ixc3t 13.bxc3 Wi'e4t (13 ... Wi'e7 14.llif3 Wi'xe6t 15.ie2 0-0 16.0-0 Wg?;!;) 14.Wi'e2 Wi'xe2t 15.llixe2 llif8 16.e?;!; White has good compensation.

11...ctJf8 occurred in Alfonso Nogue -Almeida Quintana, Badalona 2009. Here White has a natural improvement:

Chapter 1 - Mikenas Attack 11

Finally there is: l l . . . Wie7

This has been the most popular move, but I don't like it much.

12.llid5 Now you must enter a long forced line:

12 . . . Wixe6t 13.Wie2 Wffxe2t 14.i.xe2 0-0 14 . . . i.e5? 15.llif3 i.d6 16.i.h6±

15.lt'ic7 lt'ic6 16.lt'ixa8 lt'ib4 17.i.dl 17.lt'if3 lt'ic2t 18.iiidl llixal 19.i.c4t iiih8 20.:gel a6= 21.i.e6 lt'ie5 22.:gxe5?? i.xe5-+ Shereshevski - Semeniuk, Vilnius 1974. After the text move Black needs to fight hard just to stay in the game, while White has many ways to stay a piece up for one or two pawns.

l 7 . . . llid3t 17 . . . llie5 18.lt'if3 llied3t 19.iiifl llid5 20.i.b3 i.e6 2 l.i.g5 :gxa8 22.:gd 1 c4 23.i.xc4 lt'ie3t 24.i.xe3 i.xc4 25. digl i.xb2 26.h4t

18.iiie2 lt'if2 19.i.e3 lt'ixhl 20.lt'if3 c4 21.i.c2 lt'if6 22.:gxhl lt'id5 23.i.xa7

8 ��.i.� ��· 7 �·� -------Y.�· 6 • � .-�r� 5 � � �� a�� : ��,��

��-,, �� 0, '% 2 ij��@Dij� '""'� -� �� -� a b c d e f g h

23 . . . i.g4!N I prefer this over 23 . . . llif4tt as played in Marcotulli - Fredriksen, e-mail 2002.

24.llib6 llif4t 25.iiid2 25.iiif2? lt'ixg2 26.i.e4 i.xf3 27.i.xf3 lt'ih4 28.lt'ixc4+

25 . . . llixg2 26.lliel :gd8t 27.iiicl i.h6t 28.iiibl llie3 29.b3

29.h3? i.f5-+

a b c d e f g h 29 . . . lt'ixc2

29 . . . i.f5 30.i.xf5 :gdlt 31.iiib2 i.g7t 32.iiia3 gxf5 33.lt'ixc4 :gxel 34.:gxel lt'ic2t 35.dia4 lt'ixelt

30. lt'ixc2 cxb3 3 l.axb3 :gd3 Black keeps a playable position, but overall

I don't find this line particularly appealing.

12.Wffxd8t l 2.i.b5t?! lt'ic6 favours Black.

12 .•. �xd8

a b c d e f g h 13 . .ie3N

13.i.g5?! i.xe6 14.0-0-0t lt'ibd7 15.lt'if3 h6 left White struggling to demonstrate compensation in Moehring- Hesse, AnnabergBuchholz 1965.

13 ... Le6 I 4.hc5= The queenless middlegame is balanced.

12 f4 Systems

B) 8 .. . ltJfd7

a b c d e f g h This is the main line, and leads to more

complex play.

9.ctJbS 9.llie4 dxe5 lO.llid6t is the same.

9.e6?! is worse: 9 . . . fxe6 10.dxe6 llib6 l l.ctJe4 d5 12.ib5t (12.llixc5 Wfe?+) 12 ... llic6 13.ctJxc5 This position occurred in Kratochvil - Hradecky, Frydek Mistek 2005, and now 13 ... Wfe?!N would have left Black dearly better.

Finally, 9.exd6 0-0 10.llif3 llif6 l l.ie2 Wfxd6 12.0-0 llibd7= is not dangerous.

9 ... dxeS IO.ltJd6t In return for the sacrificed pawn White has

managed to give an early check, forcing our king to stay in the centre for a while.

I 0 ... rtle7 l l .ctJxc8t l 1.llib5? is deservedly rare: l l..J''1e8 12.d6t

iiif8 13.ctJc7 For some reason the natural 13 ... Wfh4t!N has not been played so far, but it brings Black a dear advantage as shown after: 14.g3 (14.iiie2 llif6 15.ctJf3 ig4 16.llixeS llixe8+) 14 ... exf4t 15.iiif2 fxg3t 16.dig2 Wfe4t l 7.ctJf3 gxh2+

I I . . . �xc8

a b c d e f g h 12.ctJf3

White needs to catch up on development. 12.d6t?! is premature: 12 . . . iiifS 13.ctJf3 ctJc6

14.ie2 (14.ic4 llib6 15.id3 Wfd7 16.ie4 E!:e8 17. 0-0 exf 4+ N ogues - Berto rello, Villa Martelli 2008.) l 4 ... e4 l 5.llig5 llid4+ 16.ic4 The counterattack is not working.

a b c d e f g h 16 .. . llib6! 17.ixf7 h6 18.ixg6 hxg5 19.fxg5 ie5-+ Maiorov - Marcotulli, e-mail 2002.

12 ... :Se8 This is the main move, but there are a couple

of promising alternatives.

12 . . . e4!? Keeping the e- and f-files dosed is a rare but nice idea which seems to work well.


1 3.llig5

a b c d e f g h Few games have reached this position, so

there is room to explore. Black must certainly avoid l 3 . . . :ge8?? l 4.d6t <iif8 1 5 .Wf d5+-. However, it is worth checking both a) 1 3 . . . lt'ib6 and b) 1 3 . . . i.d4N.

a) 1 3 . . . lli b6 This has been the most common choice, although I only found six games in which it was played.

14.d6t The untested 1 4.Wfb3!?N may be White's best bet: 14 . . . <iif8 1 5 .i.e3 h6 The safest move. 1 6 .lt'ixe4 Wfe8 1 7.Wfc2 <iig8 1 8.<iif2 llixd5 l 9.i.xc5 lt'ixf4�

1 4 . . . <iif8 1 5 .a4 h6 16.a5 hxg5 1 7.axb6 a6 1 8.Wfd5 Wfd7 1 9.fxg5 llic6 20.i.b5 i.d4+

22.Wfxd4 cxd4 23.i.xd7 lt'id3t 24.<iifl llixf4+

b) 1 3 . . . i.d4!?N An ambitious but risky move which I found.

14 .Wfb3 14 .i.c4?! looks dangerous, but after 14 . . . llib6 I think Black has enough resources to repel the attack: 1 5 .d6t ( 1 5 .i.b3 :gd8 16.llixe4 lt'ixd5+) 1 5 . . . <iif8 16.i.xf7 h6 17 .i.e6 Wfe8 1 8 .f5 hxg5 1 9.Wfg4 <iig7 20.i.xg5 gxf5 2 1 .i.xf5 Wfh5 22.Wf g3 :ggs 23.i.e3t <iih8 24.i.xd4t cxd4 25.Wf e5t :gg7+

14 . . . f6 1 5 .d6t? l 5 .llie6 lt'ib6(± 1 5 .llixe4 :ge8 16.i.e2 llib6(±

1 5 . . . <iixd6 16.lt'if7t <iic7 17 .lt'ixh8 Wfxh8 1 8.i.e3 f5

Black has excellent compensation. 19 .0-0-0 llic6+

Black has a second promising alternative in the form of: 1 2 . . . :gd8!?N

The rook is going directly after the d5-pawn.

a b c d e f g h 1 3.fxe5

1 3.i.c4 lt'ib6 1 4.Wfe2 e4+ 13.d6t <iif8 14 .i.e2 lt'ic6 1 5 .0-0 e4 16 .lt'ig5 i.d4t 17 .<iih l h6 1 8.lt'ixe4 f5 19 .ctJc3 lt'if6+

1 3 . . . lt'ixe5 1 4.i.e2 Black's 1 2th move was also suggested by Ziegler, who offers the following line: l 4.i.g5t f6 l 5 .i.e3 llig4 16 .i.d2 Wf f5+

1 4 . . . lt'ixf3t 1 5 .i.xf3 <iif8 1 6.0-0 lt'id7+

14 f4 Systems

To summarize, it seems Black really is spoiled for choice at move 1 2. Let us now return to the main line of 1 2 . . . E!:eS which, as we will soon see, is also promising for him.

From this position it is worth considering both Bl) 13.fS and B2) 13.fxe5.

BI) 13.fS

si,�if�i.� � ,�_,,,,; � � ?f/% 1 � · -'Ji)-iMi 6

,,,,,/,� @� ,,,,,%� ,,,,,�� 5 lllm "'llllil "'lllj 4 llllll �Jt'�i llllll 3 llllll llllll �Ill 2 '·lll·lll·'· ,,,,)',,,,%% ';; ��'0,-; ef/%-,,,, 1 /,� �v�;sij,,��

a b c d e f g h This move has only been seen in a few

games, but it is my engine's first choice. For instructive purposes it is worth analysing Bl I) 13 ... 'Llb6!?N, but the strongest move for Black is Bl2) 13 •.. e4!.

The following alternatives are less appealing:

1 3 . . . lllf6? 14.fxg6 hxg6 1 5 .lllg5 'ttif8 1 6.ic4± Inkiov - Hamdouchi, Cap d'Agde 20 1 0.

l 3 . . . gxf5 looks playable but risky: 14 . lllh4 lllf6 1 5 .Wi'c2 f4 16 .lllf5t 'ttif8 1 7.llld6 Wi'c7 18 . lll xe8 'ttixe8�

Bll) 13 ..• 'Llb6N

Although this is not the move I recommend, I decided to include it mainly for its entertainment value.

14.d6t @f8 15.ib5

a b c d e f g h 15 • . . 'Llc6

1 5 . . . e4 l 6 .lllg5 E!:e5 l 7.f6 ih8 l 8 .if4 E!:d5 1 9.Wi'e2 lllc6+±

I6.fxg6 hxg6 17.0-0 e4 18.'Llg5 id4t 19.@hI f6

Now White has to find some accurate moves:

2I . .. 'Llxd4 22.ixe8 Wi'xe8 23.b4! Wfe5 24.bxc5 fxg5

24 . . . E!:hS 25.lllh3 llld7�


30.<;t>xh2? lllxfl t 3 1 .<;t>g2 1.Wb2t-+

30 • • • <j;>xf7 3 I .'!Nf3t <j;>g7 32. <j;>xh2 ltJe2t 33,<j;>g2 ltJf4t 34,<j;>g3=

Such a sequence would surely win any Best Game Prize if it ever occurred over the board!

Bl2) 13 ... e4!

Let's return from fantasy land to concentrate on the stronger move.

a b c d e f g h 15.ltJxh7t?!

This is excessively greedy. White loses too much time for the sake of an insignificant pawn, while most of his pieces remain undeveloped.

1 5 .fxg6 hxg6 1 6.ie2 should be about equal, for instance: 1 6 . . . id4 1 7.l:!fl lll f6 1 8 .:!'1xf6 ixf6 1 9.lllh?t <;t>g7 20.lt:lxf6 <;t>xf6 2 1 .ih6 This was Feller - Marzolo, Marseille 2009, and here Black should have played:

a b c d e f g h 2 1 . . .gS!N 22.1.Wb3 <;t>g6 23 .ixg5 <;t>xg5 24.1.Wg3t=

15 ... <j;>gs 16.fxg6 fxg6 17.ltJg5 ltJe5 18.ltJe6

16 f4 Systems

18 ... �bc6!!N This beautiful move emphasizes development

above all else! It is worth comparing this move with the

following practical example: 1 8 . . . c4 1 9 . .ie2?

19 .tllxg7N Wxg7f± was correct. Now in Szczesniak - Radecki, corr. 1 992, Black could have used the same idea as in our main line, in an even more favourable setting:

19.�xg7 @xg7 Now we reach a comical situation where all

of White's pieces are on their starting positions!

20.dxc6 �d3t

21 . •• �f2 22.'?Nb3 e3t 23.@c2 e2 24.'?Nc3t @h7 25.'?Nf6!

Only this move can save White.

25 • . . '?NfSt 25 . . . lllxhl =


a b c d e f g h 26.\W:xfS gxf5 27.if4 bxc6 28.:ggl exfl=Wf 29.:gaxfl :ge2t 30.�b3 :gdsi

White is still not altogether out of trouble.

B2) 13.fxe5

This is the more popular move.

13 ... ltJxe5 14.ib5 ltJbd7 15.0-0 1 5 .lllxeS <iif8 leads to the same thing.

15 ... �fS 16.ltJxe5 :gxe5 17.if4 c4 This is the main move, although 17 . . . l"le4

is also possible: 1 8 .1.Wf3 f5 19.l"lae l l"lxel ( 1 9 . . . id4t 20.<iih l lllf6f±) 20.l"lxel a6 2 1 .ifl id4t 22.ie3� Saint Amour - Hase, Internet 2004.

18.\Wd4 1 8.ixd7?! 1.Wc5t 19 .<iih l l"lxd5 20.1.Wg4

f5 2 1 .1.Wh3 l"lxd7 22.1.Wxh7 <iif7 23.l"ladl (23 .ih6+) 23 ... l"lad8 24.l"lxd7t l"lxd7+ Yuferov - Kapengut, Soviet Union 1 976.

The text move leads to an endgame.

19.\Wxc4 \Wxc4 20.ixc4 ixb2 21 .:gadl ie5! It is important to challenge the strong

bishop, even though Black's kingside structure now gets destroyed.

22.ih6t �e7 23.:g:xfS gxf5 24.g3 :ggs 25.:gfl :gg6=

Kirsanov - Smirnov, corr. 2002.

Conclusion The Mikenas Attack is not too dangerous, and Black has the luxury of more than one good reply. Players wishing to avoid heavy theory can play 8 . . . dxe5 which leads to a balanced endgame. Those who desire a full-blooded fight will get their wish after 8 . . . lllfd7, and I would encourage the reader to investigate the alternatives analysed at move 12 , as they may well be as strong or stronger than the main line.


Tue Four Pawns Attack

Variation Index 1.d4 llif6 2.c4 cS 3.dS e6 4.llic3 exdS S.cxdS d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 i.g7 8.llif3

8 ... 0-0 9.i.e2 A) 9 ... �e8 B) 9 ... llibd7 C) 9 ... i.g4 10.0-0 llibd7 l l.h3 i.xf3 12.ha �e8 13.�el

Cl) 13 ... �aS C2) 13 ... c4 14.i.e3 �aS

C21) 15.i.d4 C22) 15.@hl

A) note to 12 .ig5 A) note to 14.tllxe5 Cl I) after 19 .ixc5

a b c d e f g h 19 . . . tllxe4!

19 22 23 27 29 29 30

Chapter 2 - The Four Pawns Attack 1 9

I .d4 tllf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.tllc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 i.g7 8.tllo

The main theoretical line is 8.�b5t, which can be found in Chapters 3-6. The knight move is an important alternative, and we will deal with it thoroughly over the coming pages.

8 .i �i.�-� �� 1 lfi• "•f•1 6 _____ ,,_ "m "*-,�� 5 ' --�-� /,,,,,,� 4 ��,� :r��

3 ��m�� "Wtf � �� !W� ��.1.fM a b c d e f g h

8 ... 0-0 9.i.e2 A harmless alternative is:

9.�d3 The bishop is more vulnerable on this square, and Black has many good options.

9 . . . :!"i:e8 A decent alternative is: 9 . . . b5!? 10 .�xb5 lllxe4 1 1 .lllxe4 'Wa5t 12.<iif2 'Wxb5 1 3.lllxd6 'Wb6 14 .tllc4 'Wa6 1 5 .'We2 �b7 16.:!"i:d l llld7� 1 7.tllce5 'Wxe2t 1 8.<iixe2= Parr - Prods, Melbourne 1 972.

10 .0-0 c4 1 1 .�c2

a b c d e f g h

1 1 . . .b5 l 1 . . . tlla6!?+± 1s a suggestion from Nikos Ntirlis.

1 2.a3 'Wb6t 12 . . . tt:Jbd7 1 3.�e3 a6 1 4.�d4 �b7 15 .:!"i:el 'W c7 = Felmery - Sallai, Hungary 20 1 0.

1 3.<iih l lllbd7 1 4.h3 �b7 1 5 .:!"i:e l lllc5 16 .�e3 :!"i:ad8

With equal chances in Kolba - Ivanenko, Lugansk 20 1 0.

This is the main tabiya of the Four Pawns Attack. The position often arises from the King's Indian Defence, and there are many players who are happy to use one line to meet two openings.

Here Black has several playable choices, and I decided to cover three of them: A) 9 ... :B:e8, B) 9 ... ttJ hd7 and C) 9 ... i.g4. The last of them is my personal preference, although the choice is at least partially a matter of taste, and when preparing for an important game it may be useful to have more than one option available.

A) 9 ... :B:e8

Although it is not my favourite, this move has actually been the most popular choice, and to cover it extensively would almost require a separate book. Instead I will provide a concise summary of the most important lines.

20 f4 Systems

IO.es 1 0.tlld2 lllbd7 1 1 .0-0 leads to variation

B2 1 of Chapter 7 - see page 87.

10 ... d:xeS 1 1 .fxe5 l!Jg4

a b c d e f g h 12 . .igS

Worse is: 12 .0-0?! lllxe5 1 3.i.f4 lllbd7 1 4.d6 tllxf3t 1 5 .i.xf3 llle5 16 .lllb5

a b c d e f g h 1 6 . . . i.d7!?

16 . . . :!"i:fB is simple and good: 1 7.tllc7 :!"i:b8 1 8.:!"i:el lllxf3t 19 . Wf xf3+ Gerard - Pepino, Turin 2002.

1 7.tllc7 lllxf3t 18 .Wfxf3 i.c6 l 9.Wfg3 :!"i:e2 20.:!"i:ae l i.d4t 2 1 .i>hl :!"i:xg2 22.Wfxg2 i.xg2t 23.i>xg2 :!"i:c8 24.:!"i:e7 i.f6 25 .:!"i:fel

In De Lagontrie - Bert, corr. 1 998, Black could have kept the advantage as follows:

a b c d e f g h 25 . . . i.xe7!N 26.dxe7 Wfd7 27.e8=Wft :!"i:xe8 28.lllxe8 Wfg4t 29.i.g3 Wfb4 30.:!"i:e2 Wfc4+

8 ��,.i.�.i-· -7 Ji:iB n • •i 6 B, ./ 'B . . %B·i· 5- -ci� � 4 B, ..... %B ..... %B'i� 3 - � �ltJ� 2 �o a!a!� 1 �d �.v= �-�

a b c d e f g h 12 ... �b6

If you want to avoid long forced variations, you can try: 1 2 . . . f6!? 1 3.exf6 i.xf6 1 4.Wfd2 i.f5

1 4 . . . i.xg5!? l 5.Wfxg5 Wfb6+:! 1 5.0-0 i.xg5 16.Wfxg5 tlld7=

Chapter 2 - The Four Pawns Attack 21

1 7.h3 Clle3 1 8.1.Wh6?! 1 8.:9:f2 '.Wxg5 19 .Cllxg5=

1 8 . . . lllxfl 1 9.lllg5 '.We7 20.d6 '.We3t 2 1 .iixfl lll f8 22.l"!d l l"!e5 23.d7

This occurred in Szabo - Timman, Amsterdam 1 975, and now Black could have played:

a b c d e f g h 13.0-0 Cllxe5 14.Cllxe5

The alternative is: 14.d6

And here everything is almost forced: 1 4 . . . 1.Wxb2 1 5 .Clld5 lllxf3t 16.ixf3 1.Wd4t 1 7.iihl 1.Wxal 1 8.1.Wxal ixal 19.l"!xal Clld7 20.ie7 l"!b8 2 1 .Cllc7 l"!f8 22.l"!e l c4 23.ixf8

iixf8 24.l"!e8t iig7 25.Cllb5 lll f6 26.l"!d8 a6 27.llla7 c3 28.idl

Now in Murin - Pertlova, Tatranske Zruby 2009, Black could have improved with:

8 ��.i.�� 1 ��Zfiv,� ... Y,� flit 6 ,,.;� ��¥'•?,� 5 �� , ,,%� /,,,,� 4 ��

�z·s�� 3 � • •• 2 ��"..,,%� �� tJwtj ��,��-� a b c d e f g h

28 . . . <ile4!N 28 . . . ig4N leads only to an equal position.

29.ic2? This allows a neat refutation. 29.Cllxc8 lllxd6 30.l"!xd6 l"!xc8 3 l .ic2 l"!e8 32.l"!d l l"!e2 33.l"!cl b5+

29 ... Cllxd6! 30.l"!xd6 if5-+ The c-pawn will decide the game.

14 ... ixe5

22 f4 Systems

at least level, and perhaps already a little better.

15 ... °Wxh2 16.d6 E:ffi 17.hf'lt @g7 18.J.d5

a b c d e f g h 18 ... �d7!

1 8 . . . 'Wxc3 was good enough for equality in Kahn - Zimmerman, Budapest 1 996, but Black can play for more.

19.!l:xfS �xf8 20.°Wcl °Wxc3 21.J.h6t @hs 22.°Wxc3 J.xc3 23.!l:fl J.d4t 24.@hl J.e6

Black is dearly better, for example:

B) 9 ... �bd7

10.0-0 1 0.e5?! is risky for White, for instance:

1 0 . . . dxe5 (lO . . . tLle8!? is also playable) l 1 .fxe5 tLlg4 1 2.e6 lLlde5 1 3.tLlg5?!

10 ... !l:eS 1 1 .°Wc2 This is the independent line. Instead 1 1 .tLld2

takes us to variation B2 1 of Chapter 7 on page 87.

a b c d e f g h 1 1 ... °We7!? 12.E:el

25.hh7 E:b8 26.E:xfSt !J:xf8 27.J.xfS @gs 1 2.tLld2 is well met by 12 . . . l2Jb6! threatening 28.J.e7 @f7-+ . . . tt:Jfxd5.

Verdier - Niessen, e-mail 1 999. 12 ... �b6!


Intending to put the bishop on g4 and take on f3 when the time is right. Later Black can develop his queenside counterplay, perhaps rerouting the b6-knight to another post if necessary.

13.h3 Preventing the aforementioned plan, but

allowing a second idea:

13 ... Cllxe4!

14 ... �fS! 15.Cllxe4 c4! Black emerges with the better chances. My

thanks to Nikos Ntirlis for showing me this variation.

C) 9 ... �g4

Overall this is my preferred choice. Black intends to exchange the bishop and complete development while restraining the e4-eS break.

10.0-0 1 0.eS

This move is not dangerous, but of course we should still check it.

a b c d e f g h 1 0 . . . �xf3

A reasonable alternative is 1 O . . . dxeS 1 1 .fxeS ll'ifd7 1 2.e6 fxe6 1 3.0-0 and now instead of 1 3 . . . �xf3 transposing to the main continuation, Black can consider 1 3 . . . ll'i a6!? with interesting play.

1 l .�xf3 dxeS 1 2.fxeS ll'ifd7 1 3.e6 ll'ieS 1 4.0-0 fxe6 l S .�e3 ll'ixf3t

The safest move. The knight concludes its dance.

1 6.�xf3 �xf3 1 7.'Wxf3 exdS 1 8 .ll'ixdS

a b c d e f g h 1 8 . . . ll'id7

Or 1 8 . . . ll'ic6 1 9.�xcS mhs 20.�d l 'WaS 2 1 .�a3?! �e8+ Matisson - Thimognier, e-mail 2003.

1 9.�dl 'Lies 20.'We4 'Wd6 2 1 .ll'ic3 'Wc6 22.'Wxc6 ll'ixc6 23.�xcS b6=

Monin - M. Nepomniashchy, St Petersburg 1 997.

10 ... Clibd7

24 f4 Systems

1 1 .h3 1 1 .Ei:el should be met by 1 l . . .Ei:e8 when it is

doubtful that White has anything better than 1 2.h3 i.xf3 1 3.i.xf3 transposing to the main line.

1 I.. .ixf3 12.ixf3 From here Black has a wide choice of

possible plans. He can prepare . . . bS either with or without . . . a6; alternatively he might look to improve his position on the queenside with . . . c4 and . . . lllcS . The queen's rook may go to either b8 or c8, depending on Black's other queenside plans. Finally the king's knight on f6 might drop back to d7, or switch to the queenside via e8 and c7. As for White, it will be hard to get in the e4-e5 break, so he often resorts to advancing his g-pawn in a bid to gain space on the kingside.

12 .. Jl:eS I will take this as the main line. Another

interpretation of the position is: 1 2 . . . a6

After this move White can either ignore the queenside counterplay with a) 1 3.g4 or restrain it with b) 1 3.a4.

a) l 3.g4 bS 14 .tlle2

14 . . . tllb6 Another possibility is 1 4 . . . Ei:e8 1 5 .tllg3 lllb6 1 6.gS tllfd7 1 7.Ei:bl c4� and Black has a good position.

1 5 .gS llle8 1 5 . . . lllfd7=

1 6.h4 This occurred in Jobava - Kotronias, Rijeka 20 10 . Here I suggest:

a b c d e f g h 1 6 .. .f6N 1 7.tllg3 fxgS 1 8 .hxgS lllc4 1 9.We2= tllxb2!? 20.i.xb2 El:xf4 2 l .i.g4 Wxg5 22.i.e6t 'it>h8�


b) 1 3.a4

s .i. S ��·H 7 l��·Y,·· �� ///.'0 �%,,

,,,}L�� 6 ·� �� -·�

5 �-;0;%� ,, ,,;� 4 !��,,,%� ,��

�%'"//,��"'.',,, ,%/, 3� � ��-� 2 ��,,,,,;. �. ��

,,,�,,,,1,�;� �� %' l� �w� :� a b c d e f g h

1 3 . . . tlieS With this move Black restrains the e4-e5 break while preparing to deploy the knight on c7. From there it will support the . . . b5 plan, and if White prevents it with a4-a5 then the knight might go to b5 and later d4. 1 3 . . . Ei:eS transposes to 1 3.a4 in the notes to the main line - see 1 2 . . . Ei:eS 1 3 .a4 a6. 13 . . . Ei:bS!? is also interesting, as shown by the following example: 1 4.a5 tlie8 1 5 .�d3 tlic7 l 6 . .id2 b5 l 7.axb6 tlixb6 (l 7 . . . Ei:xb6N 1 8.tlia4 Ei:b5+± may be a little more precise.) 1 8 . .ie3 tlid7 1 9.Ei:f2 Ei:e8 20.e5 dxe5 2 1 .f5 c4 22.�xc4 gxf5 23.d6 tlie6 24.tlid5 @hs

8 �� .i� k� 7 ,,,,Y,� i)� ,_,, 6 !��1-;,,,�� 5 ��-qi�f· �� ,,,,/,��% 4 �1·�,0�� 3� � �� 2 /,� �.,,,,,��l� , ,,�,,, ,/,� %�c ,,Y,w� ;; � . �{

a b c d e f g h 25.tlie7?! e4 26 . .ih5 f4 27 . .ixf4?? tlixf4 28.Ei:xf4 �b6t 29.@hl �xd6-+ Adly -Grischuk, Ningbo 20 1 1 .

14 .�d3

14.Ei:el tlic7 1 5 . .ie3 (1 5.a5 tlib5=) 1 5 . . . b5N Strangely this has not been played yet. 1 6.axb5 tlixb5= The text move is fighting against . . . b5, but invites Black's counterplay with . . . c4.

14 . . . Ei:cS! 1 5 .a5 c4 16.�e2 tlic7 1 7 . .ie3 tlib5 Black succeeds in exchanging another piece, which gives him more breathing space.

s ��- B�-·�� ,,,,,/,, � 7 � .t. 8A))8 .t. -.t. �,,,�� ,� �f"/<f"3� 6 - �� :.t.� 5 � �-2r� /,,,,,,� 4 ��"'��0�10 ��;"//,<�� ,,,,,/,� �

3 � �� -Jl-[j 2 8H,,,,,;B��8� ,,,, / ,,,, %�,� �� w� 1�� °if� M �

a b c d e f g h 13.E:el

Supporting a future e4-e5 is certainly logical. White has tried several other moves, and I have summarized a few of the key examples below.

13 . .ie3 b5 14.e5?! dxe5 1 5 .tlixb5 �b8 1 6.�b3 exf4 was a clear failure for White in Lahiri - Dochev, Paracin 20 1 0.

26 f4 Systems

1 3.a4 a6 1 4.2"1e l c4 1 5 .ie3 °Wa5 16 .'ttih l llic5=

The most popular alternative has been immediate kingside expansion, but Black is well placed to meet that plan: 1 3.g4 h6 14.h4 h5!

1 5 .g5 The justification for Black's last move is seen after: l 5 .gxh5?! ctJxh5 16 .ixh5 °Wxh4! 1 7.'ttig2N ( 17.°Wg4 °Wxh5 1 8.°Wxd7 2"1ad8-+ Otano - Otero, Cuba 1 997 .) 1 7 . . . gxh5 1 8.!"i:h l 'Wg4t 19 .°Wxg4 hxg4+

1 5 . . . tlig4! 1 6.ixg4 16 .'ttig2 occurred in Jobava - A. Tate, Porto Carras 20 1 1 , and here 1 6 . . . c4!N would have given Black equal play. In the game he preferred 1 6 . . . b5?! , after which White could have claimed some advantage with 1 7.llixb5N ixb2 1 8.!"i:b l ixc l 1 9 .°WxcLt

16 . . . hxg4 1 7.!"i:el

a b c d e f g h 1 7 . . . °Wa5 !

l 7 . . . c4 1 8.ie3 ixc3 1 9.bxc3 2"1xe4 20.°Wxg4 'We7 2 1 .if2 llic5= Kouatly - Kindermann, Trnava 1987.

1 8 .id2 c4 1 9.'ttig2N 1 9.!"i:bl b5 was also pleasant for Black in Merilo - Alvarez Rouchaud, corr. 1 996.

l 9 ... llic5 20.f5 ie5 2 l .°Wxg4 b5 22.fxg6 fxg6+

After the text move Black should aim to advance his queenside play by preparing . . . b5 and/or ... c4. We will investigate two main continuations: Cl) 13 ... °Wa5 and C2) 13 ... c4.

I will also mention a playable sideline in 13 ... 2"1c8!? 1 4.ie3 b5 which might lead to an equal endgame as in the following example: 1 5 .llixb5 tllxe4 1 6 .ixe4 2"1xe4 1 7.llixd6 2"1xe3


1 8 .!'l:xe3 i.d4 1 9.�f3 !'l:b8 20.i>h2 tlif6 2 1 .tlic4 i.xe3 22.�xe3 �xd5= Nogueiras Santiago - Kasparov, Barcelona 1 989.

Cl) 13 . . . �aS

This has been the most popular choice.

14 . .ie3 1 4.a4 a6 1 5.i.e3 can be met by 1 5 . . . c4

which resembles line C2, or even 1 5 . . . tt:Jb6!? 1 6.i.f2 tt:Jfd7 with good play as in ]. Brown -Nenciulescu, e-mail 2002.

14 ... bS 14 ... c4 cakes us to variation C2 on page 29.

1 5.a3 l!Jb6

a b c d e f g h

16.e5 If White does not cake the chance to play

chis move then he may not get another, for instance: 1 6.i.f2?! tlic4 17 .�c2 tlid7 1 8 .a4 b4 1 9.tlib5?! a6 20.�xc4 axb5 2 1 .�xb5 �xb5 22.axb5 i.xb2+ Cebalo - Bojkov, Cetinje 2009.

16 ... l!Jc4 1 6 . . . tt:Jfd7 is also good, although it gives

White a wider choice of deviations. We will follow one relevant example. l 7.e6 tlic4 1 8 .exd7 !'l:xe3 1 9.!'l:xe3 tlixe3 20.�e2 �d8 2 1 .�xb5= It is worth quoting the remaining moves of a well-played game from chis position.

8 �- � --� 7 'JA•"��. t�r 6 .. . %� %• "� -�r� 5 '·�?,�� 4 � . .... ?..��

'% �"'"//, �,,-.. ,,,('----\� 3 � � -J,,�[j 2 ,,,,,?,�d,,,,.:�%,,,, ,,:� �� ----%��

a b c d e f g h 2 1 . . .!'l:b8 22.�c6 !'l:xb2 23.!'l:cl !'l:b6 24.tlib5 (24.�c8 !'l:b8 25.�c6=) 24 . . . !'l:xc6 25.dxc6 a6 26.tlixd6 �b6 27.tlie8 �b2 28.!'l:dl tlixdl 29.d8=� i.d4t 30.i>h2 tlie3 3 1 .tlid6t 'ktig7 32.tlie8t <±>g8 33.h4 �f2 34.i>h3 �gl 35.tlid6t Y2-Y2 Banikas - Kocronias, Korinthos 1 998 .

17.exf6 l!Jxe3 The following sacrificial alternative is tricky,

but ultimately unsound: l 7 . . . i.xf6?! l 8.i.d2!N

1 8.i.c l ? i.xc3 1 9.bxc3 �xc3 20.!'l:xe8t !'l:xe8 2 1 .'ktih2 �xal-+ Komljenovic - Delchev, Creon 200 1 .

1 8 . . . tlixb2 1 9.tlie4! 1 9.�c2? tlic4+

28 f4 Systems

a b c d e f g h 19 . . . .id4t 20.@h2 'Wb6 2 1 .'Wc2 c4 22.:il:ab l tlld3 23.:il:e2±

a b c d e f g h 18.E1xe3 E1xe3 19.fxg7 E1ae8

Black should be fine from here; his rooks are excellent and White's two minor pieces are unable to cause much harm.

20.f5! If White plays too slowly then he could

become worse, so he needs to open the kingside.

20 ... b4 20 . . . gxfS!? 2 1 .Wi'd2 b4 22.tlle2 c4 23.lllg3 c3

24.bxc3 bxc3= Mercadal Benejam - Hervet, e-mail 200 1 .

21.axb4 Wi'xb4 22.Wi'cl2

8 m m1.m•� 7 �- -·�· 6

" '• !ff&. !ff&. 0,i. 5 W,a �¥81a!a 4 �w,,,J� �� ;,,,,J �%'"" � 3 � � ��iL-8 2 �.,,,,,;�,,,,,Y,m �m 1 :d,,,,%.,,,,,/,� %'

a b c d e f g h 22 ... Wi'f4!

22 . . . 'Wh4 has been more popular, but I don't like it. 23.fxg6 hxg6 24.lllbS± :il:xf3 25.gxf3 :il:e5 26.f4 'Wg3t 27.'Wg2 'Wxf4 28.:il:fl 'We3t 29.@hl :il:g5 30.'Wf3 'Wxf3t 3 l .:il:xf3 :il:xd5 32.:il:f6± Mercadal Benejam - Khlusevich, corr. 2000.

23.E1fl gxf5 23 . . . 'WxfS?? is refuted by 24 . .ie4 'WgS

25.:il:f3.


24 ... '?Nh6 24 . . . W'g3 25 .ii.xf5 :ge l =

25.�xfS gxh3 26.�xh?t 'it>xg7 27.'?Nxh6t gxh6=

This sharp line seems perfectly playable, although players who are not keen on memorizing so many forced moves may prefer the following alternative.

C2) 13 ... c4

With this thematic move Black sets his queenside counterplay in motion. This should provide roughly even chances without as many long forced lines as we saw in the previous variation.

14.�e3 '?Na5 The two main options now are C21) 15.�d4

and C22) 15.'it>hl .

C21) 15.�d4 l1Jc5 16.b4

Such a move could be easy to overlook! Fortunately for us, Black is adequately placed to meet it.

16 ... '?Nxb4 Less convincing is:

l 6 . . . cxb3?! l 7.axb3 W'b4 l 8 .ctJa2 W'b5 1 8 . . . W'a3 1 9.e5 dxe5 20.fxe5 llifd7 2 1 .b4

llixe5 22.ii.xc5 b6 23.ii.f2 llixf3t 24.W'xf3 W'xf3 25.gxf3 ii.xal 26.:gxal :gac8 27.b5 :gc4 28.:gb1 Egds 29.llib4 'it>fs 30.:gb2± Netolitzky - Knostenbergs, e-mail 2006.

a b c d e f g h 1 9.ii.e2! W'xb3 20.ii.xc5 W'xdl 2 1 .Egaxdl dxc5 22.e5 llid7?

22 ... a6!? 23.exf6 ii.xf6� 23.ii.b5 Eged8 24.e6 llif6? 25.e7 Egd6 26.llic3 a6 27.llie4 llixe4 28.:gxe4 ii.d4t 29.Egdxd4+

Bergonzoni - B. Benko, Internet 2004.

17.gbl '?Na5 18.gb5 '?Na6 19.hc5

20.l1Jxe4 '?Nxb5 21.�fl c3 22.l1Jxd6? 22.W'c2=

30 f4 Systems

a b c d e f g h 22 ... �xel t 23.'?Nxel '?Nb2 24.tll c4 '?Nxa2 25.tlleS c2-+

Cruz Lopez Claret - Vachier Lagrave, San Sebastian 20 1 1 .

C22) 1 5.@hl

15 ... tll cS 16.i.xcS '?NxcS This exchange of bishop for knight represents

a definite achievement for Black, but the knight was headed for d3 so White hardly had a choice. Now to avoid becoming worse he must play:

17.eS dxeS 18.fxeS tlld7 19.e6 1 9.'lle4 Wb6 20.e6 'lle5 2 1 .'llg5 fxe6

22.dxe6? 'lld3+ Zantorik - Timoscenko, Martin 2003.

19 ... tll es Equally playable is:

1 9 . . . fxe6 20.l:'i:xe6 20.dxe6 'lle5 2 1 .Wd5 l:'i:ac8 22.Wxc5 ? (22 .Wxb7 l:'i:e7 23 .Wd5 'lld3 24.l:'i:e2 'llxb2 25.l:'i:xb2 �xc3 26.l:'i:b8 <±ig7 27.l:'i:xc8 Wxc8 28.l:'i:cl �f6 29.l:'i:xc4 Wxe6 30.Wxe6 l:'i:xe6 3 1 .l:'i:c7t l:'i:e7 32.l:'i:xe7t �xe7=) 22 . . . l:'i:xc5 23.'lle4 l:'i:c6+ Aschenbrenner - Post!, Graz 2002.

20 . . . 'lle5 2 l .We2 l:'i:ad8= Lautier - Temirbaev, Elista 1 998.

20 ... tllxf7 21.tll e4 '?Nb4 22.d6 �ad8 23.�e2 �eS 24.a3 '?Nb6 25.�d2 i.h6 26.�e2

Chapter 2 - The Four Pawns Attack 3 1

26 ... �g7 Settling for a repetition of moves. If Black

was determined to play on then he could consider 26 . . . ii.fS!?N when his position is not worse, but neither is White's.

27.:!:!d2 �h6 lfl-1/2 Cebalo - Timoscenko, Lido Estensi 2003.

Conclusion

Although the Four Pawns Attack looks and sounds dangerous, White is unable to generate much of an attack. Black can develop his pieces and castle in relative ease, and has a wide choice of playable plans in the middlegame. My personal preference is the 9 . . . J'.ig4 line followed later by l 3 . . . c4 as we saw in variation C2, but the reader is invited to examine the different options and make his own choice.

f4Systems Flick-Knife Attack - 8 ... � bd7

a b c d e f g h

Variation Index 1 .d4 lLlf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.lLlc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 .ig7 8 . .ib5t

8 ... lLlbd7 9.e5 dxe5 10.fxe5 lLlh5 11 .e6 VNh4t A) 12.i>d2 B) 12.g3!

B) note to I4.�e3 B) note to 1 8.1Wg4t! B) note to 22 ... Ei:cS

a b c d e f g h a b c d e f g h 16 . . . Ei:eS! 24 . . . 1Wxg3!?N 26 . . . Ei:d2tN

33 35

Chapter 3 - Flick-Knife Attack - 8 . . . tllbd7 33

1 .d4 llif6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.lli c3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 ig7 s.ib5t llibd7

s .iB.i.�*B �.I" . 7 ��·� i)� •�.rfi

6 " "� �-�•.r•

5 �'-�"•" � 4 �- ,-��

3 � �� -,,j� �iiJr�,,,,, ;� �� -0 2 � f� - -� f� %,,,,z,,,,%�:f0 ·w-. ·0 ·% '"//Z"'" 1 �� if� � M a b c d e f g h

This move is generally thought to be suspicious, and rightly I think. Since I am not recommending it, I will just show you what I consider the most important and critical lines.

9.e5 dxe5 10.fxe5 llih5 l 1 .e6 l l .ctJf3 0-0 12 .ig5 '!Wb6 1 3 .'!We2 a6 is

about equal.

1 1 . .. YNh4t Now the two options are A) 12. d2 and B)

12.g3!.

8

3

2

1

A) 12.d2

a b c d e f g h

This move allows White to claim an extra piece, but Black gets plenty of attacking chances.

12 ... fxe6 13.dxe6 1 3.ctJf3? ixc3t 1 4.bxc3 '!Wf2H is poor for

White.

13 ... 0-0 14.exd7 hd7 15.hd7 l 5 .llif3? '!Wg4 l 6.ixd7 is refuted by

16 . . . '!Wxg2t! 1 7.�d3 8:xf3t 1 8.�c4 llif4 1 9.8'.gl Ei:xc3t 20.bxc3 '!We4t 2 1 .�b3 c4t 22.�b2 llid3t 23.�bl ctJxcl t 24.�xcl '!We3t and Black wins.

The last few moves have been virtually forced on both sides, but now Black has a choice.

a b c d e f g h 15 ... �flt

An interesting alternative is: 1 5 . . . ixc3t!? 1 6.�xc3

1 6.bxc3? Ei:f2t 1 7.ctJe2 8:d8+ 16 . . . 1Wb4t 1 7.�c2 Ei:f2t 1 8 .id2?!

This is a risky attempt to preserve White's material advantage. l 8.ctJe2 is safer, and should lead to equality as demonstrated in the following example: 1 8 . . . '!We4t 1 9.'!Wd3 8:xe2t 20.id2 ctJf6 2 l .'!Wxe4 ctJxe4 22.Ei:ad l Ei:d8 23.Ei:hel (23.ie6t? �g7 24.Ei:hel 8:dxd2t 25.8:xd2 8:xd2t 26.�cl 8:d4+) 23 . . . 8:xd2t 24.8:xd2

34 f4 Systems

tt'lxd2 25.E':e7 <j;>f8= Van Vugt - B. Benko, e-mail 2006. (25 . . . tt'le4N also leads to equality after: 26.!g4 ctJd6 27.!f3 tt'lf5=)

s ,i� � �· 7 �·�i�� , 6 %�� "�� : �-��a %,,,,�� 3 �?3!-0 �m 0 �% ----�?J!-0 2 8 r�@� �i.% 8 rt§ 1 S(,,,,%� 'iB''""Y,��

a b c d e f g h 1 8 . . . �c4t 1 9.<;t>b l �d3t 20.�c2 El:fl t!?

Black can repeat the position with 20 .. . �fl t= but it is tempting to play for more.

2 1 .!c l �xd7 22.�c4t �f7 23.�xf7t <;t>xf7 Black remains a piece down, but White's forces are badly restricted.

24.a4 E':e8 25.E':a3 E':eel 26.El:f3t ctJf4 27.E':xfl El:xfl 2s.<;t>c2 E':xc l t!?

28 . . . tt'lxg2 is possible of course. 29.<;t>xcl ctJd3t 30.<;t>d2 ctJf2 3 1 .<;t>el tt'lxh l 32.<;t>fl <;t>e6+

The knight is trapped, but Black's king can support his extra pawn. Black has some winning chances.

Once again Black has a choice of playable lines. The alternative is: 1 7 . . . <;t>hs 1 8.�e6 El:xg2!?N

This was my attempt to improve on 18 .. . tt'lf4 19.g3 tt'lxe6 20.gxh4 as occurred in Iotov -Simeonov, Bankia 2003. Here Black's best way of maintaining compensation would have been 20 . . . El:xd7tN 2 1 .<;t>el E':f3, although it seems to me that White's chances should be higher.

1 9.<;t>c2 !xc3 20.bxc3 tt'lg7 2 1 .�e5

8 � � � � 7 � {� 1:� �--· 6

,,,,,%� �� '-/,,,,,;� ��-�� : ��·��;;,,,�� 3 ��----2 '��r� ---��;�� ---� � � m M

a b c d e f g h 2 1 . . .�c4!

2 1 . . .E':xd7 22.<;t>b3! (22.!h6 �c4 23.!xg7t E':xg7 24.E':hel h@) 22 . . . c4t 23.<;t>b4 �d8 24.tt'ld4±

22.E':el El:xd7 23.�bSt �g8 24.�xgSt <;t>xg8 Black has reasonable chances in the endgame, for instance:

a b c d e f g h 25 .<;t>b3 E':e7 26.tt'lf4 E':xel 27.tt'lxg2 E':e2 28.ctJf4 El:xh2 29.<;t>c4 g5 30.ctJd3 E':h l 3 1 .E':b l b6 32.EJ:b2 g4 33.!f4 ctJf5oo

Chapter 3 - Flick-Knife Attack - 8 . . . tll bd7 35

20.g3 hc3t 21 .'1t>xc3 l£ixe2t 22.'lt>b4

a b c d e f g h 22 ... 'Wf6

22 . . . Wi'e7t!? looks to be enough for a draw: 23.iiia4 c3 24.�g5 Wi'g7 25 .�g4 llld4 26.�f4 Ei:xb2 27.Wi'c5 b6 28 .Wi'xc3 Wi'f6 29.Wi'xb2 Wi'c6t 30.Wa3 Wi'c5t 3 1 .Wi'b4 tllc2t 32.Wb3 Wi'xb4t (32 . . . tllxal t 33.Wa4 Wi'c6t 34.Wa3 tllc2t 35 .Wb3 tllxb4 36.Ei:xdSt Wg7=) 33.Wxc2 Wi'c4t=

23.i.gS? White should prefer 23.Wxc4 tllxc l

24.Ei:axcl Ei:xb2 25 .Wi'd5 Wi'a6t 26.Wc3 Wi'a3t

27.Wd4 Ei:e2, when Black retains reasonable compensation for the material but any result is possible.

23 ... 'Wxb2t+ 24.'lt>cs 'West 25.'lt>b4

� %"'"/. � �-�,,; 8 � �� -1 %liB�B Bi 6 -�-�n�-�� s �if- �m� � 4

%= ·%� ,,,,,%� ,,,,,��

Ll��IJ!�

3 �-�

� �

- , , , ,J��-� 2 8B -�� W! 1 m

�� l_,,,,_Y,W,,,,%

,,, Y,

� � � a b c d e f g h

25 ... aSt!-+ 26.'lt>xaS �a8t 27.'lt>b6 °Wb8 28.°Wb2t c3 29.°Wb3 l£id4 30.°WdS °Wa7t 31 .'1t>c7 bSt 32.'1t>d6 °Wb6t 33.i.c6 lLif5t 34.'lt>e6 lLig?t 35.'1t>d6 liJeSt 36.'1t>e7 °Wc7t 37.i.d? 'Wdst 38.'lt>e6 �e2t 39.'1t>f7 l£id6t 40.'Wxd6 'Wg8t 4I.'lt>f6 °Wg7#

J. Ivanov - Cheparinov, Seville 2004.

B) 12.g3!

a b c d e f g h Unfortunately this move takes most of the

fun out of Black's position.

36 f4 Systems

12 ... lllxg3 13.hxg3 '?Nxhl 14.ie3 A simple move, but a strong one.

1 4.exd?t? ixd7 is poor: 1 5 .W'e2t ( 1 5 .ixd7t �xd7 16 .W'g4t f5 l 7 .W'a4t �c8 1 8 .ie3 ixc3t 1 9.bxc3 W'xd5 20.l'l:d l W'c6 2 1 .W'xc6t bxc6 22.ixc5 l'l:b8+ Thorsteins - Ashley, New York 1 989.) 1 5 . . . �f8 1 6.ie3

a b c d e f g h 16 . . . l'l:e8! l 7.ixd7 l'l:xe3 l 8.W'xe3 id4 l 9.W'f3 W'xgl t 20.W'fl W'xg3t 2 1 .�d2 �g7 22.W'h3 ixc3t 23.bxc3 W'g5t 24.�c2 W'xd5+ Kantsler - Battaglini, Herzliya 2009.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 a b c d e f g h

14 ... h:c3t! 1 4 . . . W'g2 is worse: 1 5 .exd?t ixd7 1 6.ixd?t

�xd7 1 7.W'a4t �d8 ( 1 7 . . . �c8 1 8.0-0-0 W'xg3 1 9.if4 W'g4 20.d6 W'd7 2 1 .W'c4±) 1 8.0-0-0 ixc3 1 9. bxc3 W'xg3

a b c d e f g h 20.l'l:d3! The position may appear close to equal, but after a few moves the white knight comes into play with great effect. 20 . . . W'd6 2 1 .'ll f3 f6 22.'lld2 b6 23.'lle4 W'd7 (23 . . . W'e5 24.ih6+-) 24.W'a6 W'e7 25.'llxf6! W'xf6 26.W'b7 +- Soucha - Hlavac, corr. 2005 .

15.bxc3 a6 16.exd?t ixd7 17.ixd7t @xd7 18.'?Ng4t!

It is important to provoke Black's next move in order to weaken the dark squares. Other moves are less challenging:

1 8.W'a4t b5 1 9.W'g4t ( 1 9.W'f4 l'l:he8 20.0-0-0 W'e4+) 1 9 . . .f5 20.W'f3 W'xf3 2 1 .'llxf3 l'l:he8 22.�f2

7 6 5 4

2 a b c d e f g h

Ziegler seems to believe that White is better here but after 22 . . . l'l:e4 23.ixc5 l'l:c8! I think Black is okay. Compared with the position reached after move 22 in the main line, here Black has the extra move . . . b5 which should help him.

Chapter 3 - Flick-Knife Attack - 8 . . . tlibd7 37

1 8.�f3 �xf3 1 9.tLlxf3 1"lhe8 20.ciif2 ciid6 2 1 . c4

8 .i� �.i- �

�r,·��'� s �

�-,�"B�

� 4 ��«�;,� �� ,0��r� 3 � � �tiJ�� 2 fIB 0B'�,,,%�,,%�

��-,,,/,� a b c d e f g h

2 l . . .f6! This is the difference when the f-pawn has not been lured to fS . 22.1"\b l bS 23.tLld2 gS 24.<iif3 1"lad8 2S .1"ldl hS 26.tLle4t 1"lxe4 27.<iixe4 1"le8t 28 .<;t>f3 bxc4 29.�d2 1"leS 30.�c3 mst 3 1 .<;t>e4 m2 32.<;t>e3 ms 33.<iie4 1"lf2 34. <iie3 ms Y2-Y2 Illescas Cordoba -Topalov, Alcobendas 1 994.

White's final option is: 1 8 .�b3

But attempting to play for an attack gives Black good counter-chances.

1 8 . . . bS 1 9.0-0-0 1"lhe8

20.�xcS 20.�f4 �e4 2 1 .tLlh3 �fS 22.g4? �xg4 23.�a3 occurred in Kuljasevic - Cebalo, Zagreb 20 1 2, and now 23 . . . 1"le4N would have been winning for Black.

20 . . . �g2 2 1 .d6 1"le6 22.tLlh3 �xh3 23.�dS 1"lb8 24.�a7

a b c d e f g h 24 . . . �xg3!?N

24 . . . �h6t 2S .ciib l �f8 26.g4 �e8 27.�xb8 �xb8 28 .1"\fl �xd6 29.1"lxf7t <iie8 was agreed drawn in Lautier - Degraeve, Clichy 200 1 .

2S .�xb8 �xc3t 26.ciib l �b4t 27.<;t>al=

8

7

6

5

d e f g h 18 ... £5 19.Wi'f3 Wi'xf3 20.tllxf3

White's chances are clearly higher in this endgame. I believe Black should be able to hold it, but unfortunately he has virtually no winning chances. From a practical perspective, the only good thing is that White has had no real chance to deviate since move 12 , so if you are happy to take your chances in the endgame, you can reach it without having to do much preparation.

38 f4 Systems

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h 20 ... ghe8!

Black was facing a difficult case of the "which rook?" problem, but after analysing both of them I am pretty sure the king's rook should be preferred. 20 . . . Elae8 2 1 . <;t>d2!

2 l .<;t>f2 l'l:e4 22.ii.xc5 l'l:c8 23 .ii.b4 (23.ii.d4 <;t>d6) 23 . . . l'l:ce8 24.tt:Jd4 El8e5 25 .l'l:h l h5 26.tt:Je6 <;t>c8=

2 1 . . .l'l:e4 2 1 . . . c4?! 22 .ii.f4!±

22.ii.f4! It is too early for White to attempt to steal a pawn: 22.ii.xc5 Elc8 23.ii.d4 <;t>d6 24.ctJg5 l'l:e7 25 .l'l:h l <;t>xd5 26.g4 is equal. 22.ctJg5 also fails to achieve any advantage: 22 . . . l'l:a4 23.<;t>d3 h5 (23 . . . b5 24.l'l:el h6 25.ctJe6 <;t>d6 26.ctJxc5 l'l:g4=) 24.tt:Jf7 l'l:e8 25 .ii.xc5 l'l:a5 26.ii.d4 l'l:xd5 27.c4 l'l:a5 28.a4

b5 (28 . . . l'l:e6 29.c5 Ele7 30.ctJe5t l'l:xe5 3 1 .ii.xe5 Elxc5 32.ii.d4±) 29.ctJe5t <;t>e6 30.Elel <;t>d6=

22 . . . Ei:dS This fails to equalize, but 22 . . . l'l:he8?! is even worse: 23.ctJg5 l'l:e2t 24.<;t>d3 h5 25.a4 l'l:el 26.l'l:xel Elxel 27.ctJe6 <;t>cs 28 .a5+-

23.ctJg5 Ele7 24.ctJe6 Elxe6 25.dxe6t <;t>xe6t

axb5± White has good winning chances.

21 .<±>n White can consider a different king move:

2 1 . <;t>d2!? c4! 2 1 . . .Ele4?! 22.ctJg5 Ela4 (22 . . . l'l:e5 23.c4 l'l:ae8 24.ii.xc5± Ele2t 25 .<;t>c3 l'l:g2 26.ctJxh7±) 23.ctJxh7 Elh8 24.tt:Jf6t <;t>e7 25 .ii.g5±

22.ii.f4

Chapter 3 - Flick-Knife Attack - 8 . . . lll bd7 39

Attempting to exploit the absence of a black rook on the h-file leads nowhere: 22.§h 1 ciid6 23.1"1xh7 'it?xd5 24.1"1d7t 'it?e6 25 .1"1g7 1"1g8!? 26.llld4t ciif6 27.1"1xb7 1"1ab8= Compare this position to the analogous one occurring in the 20 . . . 1"1ae8 line analysed above. In that variation I dismissed the position as clearly better for White, but having a rook on a8 instead of h8 changes the assessment.

8 .i ��-1·� � ,,�-��,, �� di8i8� 3 � �� -lt), 2 !!;��,, ,;!�� ,, ,,%� ��-,,, ,%.��

a b c d e f g h 22 . . . 1"1ad8!

Of course! Having another rook in play makes all the difference.

23.§h l ciic8 24.d6 h5 25 .1"1bl h4! 26.gxh4 26.lllxh4? is refuted by 26 . . . g5!.

26 ... 1"1e4 27 . .ie5 1"1e8 28.d?t ciixd7 29.1"1xb7t 'it?c6 30.1"1a7=

An equal rook endgame will ensue.

a b c d e f g h

21. .. B:e4 22 . .ixc5 White is not helped by 22.lllg5?! 1"1c4+ or

22.llld2 1"1a4=.

After the text move Black has good drawing chances, but little hope of winning.

22 ... B:cS The other tempting rook move is worse:

22 . . . 1"1ae8?! 23.lllg5 ! 1"1e2t 24.ciif3 1"1c2 24 . . . 1"1d2!? may be a better chance, although Black is still struggling to hold: 25.lllxh7 1"1d3t 26.'it?f2! (After 26.'it?f4 1"1e4t 27.ciig5 1"1xg3t 28.ciih6 1"1h4t 29.ciig? 1"1xh7t 30.'it?xh7 1"1xc3 3 1 ..ib4 1"1d3 32.ciixg6 1"1xd5 33.ciig5 f4t 34.ciig4 1"1d3 35 .§fl f3 Black has good chances to draw.)

40 f4 Systems

25.ib4 25 .id4 is also promising: 25 . . . 1"1e7 26.tt:'le6 (26.1"\b l Wd6 27.tt:'lh3 b5 28.a4±) 26 . . . wd6 Rej - Smerdon, Canberra 2007.

8 � � � 7 � ·- �� .•• 6 •m Stt:J� i� 5 "� --- - - /,�� 4 � � � 3 �w-�-----%� �w-� � �� @� 2 �--i� �� ---- -"� 1 � -��

a b c d e f g h 27.1"\b l !N (27.1"\el !?N Wxd5 28.tt:'lf4t Wd6 29.ic5t Wxc5 30.1"1xe7 1"1xc3t 3 1 .Wf2 1"1c2t 32.We3 1"1xa2±) 27 . . . b5 28.a4 Wxd5 29.tt:'lf4t Wc6 30.axb5t axb5 3 1 .ctJd3 1"1d2 32.ctJe5t Wc7 33.1"1xb5±

25 . . . 1"1ee2!?N I tried to improve Black's play, but the idea falls short. I doubt that the alternatives are any better. 25 . . . h6 occurred in Summerscale - Snape, Coulsdon 20 1 0, and now 26.tt:'le6± would have been the easiest solution. 25 . . . 1"1h2!?N is also unsatisfactory: 26.tt:'le6 b6 27.1"\b l ! 1"1xa2 28 .1"\h l h5 29.ctJfSt Wd8 30.tt:'lxg6±

26 . . . 1"1xa2 27.ctJf6t Wd8 28 .1"1xa2 1"1xa2 29.ifS 1"1al 30.We2 1"1a2t 3 1 .Wd3 1"\al 32.d6 §el 33.Wc4 1"1e5 34.Wd4 1"\el 35.Wc5+-

27.We3 f4t 28.gxf4 1"1ce2t

7 6

4 3 2

a b c d e f g h 29.Wd3!

The most accurate, although 29.Wd4 1"1xf4t 30.Wd3 1"1e5 3 1 .ctJfSt We8 32.tt:'lxg6 1"1xd5t 33.We3 1"1f6 34.tt:'lf4± also gives White good winning chances.

29 . . . 1"1d2t 30.Wc4 1"1xf4t 3 1 .Wb3 1"1xd5 32.tt:'lf8t We8 33.1"\e l t Wf7 34.1"1e7t Wg8 35.tt:'lxg6+-

The conclusion is that 22 . . . 1"1ae8?! fails to equalize. If Black is determined to explore this path then the 24 . . . 1"1d2!? line looks like the way to go, although I am not convinced that it represents an improvement over the main line.

Chapter 3 - Flick-Knife Attack - 8 . . . tt:J bd7 4 1

23 . .td4 �d6 24Jl:dl White was eventually successful with 24.tllg5

l'l:e7 25.l'l:hl c;t>xd5 26.tllxh7 in Barkhagen -Ziegler, Sweden 2008, but at this stage Black could have equalized with either 26 . . . b5!N or 26 . . . c;t>c4!N.

24 ... �xd5 I checked a couple of other ideas, but in this

case the obvious move is the best:

24 . . . h6?!N 25.tllh4 l'l:g4 26.tllg2 b5 27.tlle3 l'l:e4 28 .c;t>e2±

24 . . . b5?!N 25.tllg5 l'l:e7 26.l'l:d3 l'l:c4 27.tll f3 l'l:a4 28 . .te5t±

a b c d e f g h 25.llJgS E:ee8 26.lDxh7 �c4 27.lDgS!

27.a4 l'l:e7 28.tt::lf6 l'l:c6 29.l'l:b l l'l:f7 30.l'l:b4t c;t>d3 3 l .ctJd5 g5=

27 ... E:c6

a b c d e f g h 28.E:bl!?N

28.a4 led to an eventual victory for White in Schoen - Blokh, corr. 1 995, but I like the more forcing approach.

28 ... bS 28 . . . l'l:e7 29.ctJh3 c;t>d3 30.l'l:b2;t

29.a4 bxa4 30.E:b4t �d3 31.E:xa4;!; Black will have to defend for a good while

longer.

Conclusion

This was a chapter of two contrasting sections. In variation A White grabbed a material advantage, but in return Black obtained a long-lasting initiative and excellent practical compensation. Unfortunately variation B was a different story, and led to a one-sided endgame in which I see little chance of Black winning. For this reason, I would not recommend using 8 . . . tt::lbd7 as your primary response against the Flick-Knife Attack. However, it might have some value as a surprise weapon, especially at rapid time controls where there is more chance of the opponent making a mistake somewhere.


Flick-Knife Attack - 8 .. . � fd7 without 9 .a4

Variation Index 1.d4 llJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.llJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 i.g7 8.i.hSt

8 ... llJfd7 A) 9.tiJf.3 B) 9.i.d3 C) 9.i.e2

Cl) 9 ... 0-0 C2) 9 ... 11Nh4t

A) note co 12 . . . i"le8 B) after l 4 .i.e3 C2) note co 10 . . . Wd8!?

17 . . . a5N

43 44 46 46 47

Chapter 4 - Flick-Knife Attack - 8 . . . lll fd7 without 9 .a4 43

1 .d4 lllf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.tlJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 i.g7 8.i.b5t tlJfd7

a b c d e f g h This is the most reliable method of blocking

the bishop check. Black now has a positional threat of . . . a6, when White must either relinquish the bishop pair or allow . . . b5. For this reason he normally continues 9.a4, which can be found in the next two chapters. In the coming pages we will look at the following alternatives: A) 9.tlJf3, B) 9.i.d3 and C) 9.i.e2.

A) 9.tlJf3

This line is not dangerous, and Black will be happy to expand on the queenside with .. . b5. Meanwhile the knight on d7 helps to restrain any early e4-e5 ideas, thus allowing Black to finish his development in peace.

9 ... a6 10.i.d3 1 0.�xd7t tl'ixd7 l l .a4 prevents . . . b5, but

giving up the bishop is arguably an even greater concession from White. Play continues 1 1 . . . 0-0 1 2.0-0 Elb8 and Black should be fine.

10 ... b5 1 1 .0-0 Another game continued: 1 1 .a3 0-0 1 2.0-0

Ele8 1 3.c;t>hl ( 1 3.'\Wel can also be met by 1 3 . . . Ela7!?N 14 .'1Wg3 tlif6 with reasonable play for Black.)

8 .itlY..t.�.i� •• 7 ,,,,,,� i)� ,., 6 ,.

�.�-�.��

5 �·-8· %. 4

�� - -%��

�� ''h �% ""- ��- -�� 3 � �l�BCZJB - - %�·ef'" ';� �� -,,, 2 , ,J��}fJ ,� �ii� �-@

a b c d e f g h l 3 . . . Ela7!? It is worth remembering this method of activating the rook in positions where . . . b5 (or . . . b6) has been played. 1 4.�d2 tl'if6 1 5 .b4 tl'i bd7 1 6.Elcl Elc7 Black obtained sufficient counterplay along the c-file in Gonzalez Garcia - Lie, Turin (ol) 2006.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 a b c d e f g h

1 1 ...0-0 12.iihl 1 2.a3 leads to the previous note. After the

text move there are several decent possibilities for Black.

12 ... l:!e8 Another option to consider is:

1 2 . . . tl'ib6 1 3.f5 b4!? This leads to highly complex play. 1 3 . . . tl'i8d7 1 4.�g5 �f6 1 5 .�f4 '1We7 1 6.'\Wd2 �b7 was about equal in Glek - Anikaev, Minsk 1 983.

1 4.tl'ie2 tl'i8d7 1 5 .�g5 �f6 1 6.�f4 '1We7

44 f4 Systems

1 6 . . . ixb2!?N 17.ixd6 ixal 1 8 .ixf8 '1Wxf8 19.'\Wxal c4 20.ic2 c3f±

17.'1Wd2

1 7 . . . a5N I think Black should improve his position before jumping with the knight in the centre. 1 7 . . . lt'ie5 allowed White to make some progress on the kingside in the following game: 1 8.lt'ixe5 ixe5 19.ixe5 '\Wxe5 20.f6 'it>h8 2 1 .lt'igl Ei:a7 22.Ei:ael a5t Fiala -Claridge, e-mail 2002.

1 8 .Ei:acl Ei:e8 The position is unclear but roughly balanced

in my view.

2

1 ��--""'=--=��..:=�"'----"� a b c d e f g h

13.f5 lllf6 1 3 . . . b4 14.lt'ie2 gxf5 1 5 .lt'ig3! ( 1 5 .exf5 lt'if6f±)

1 5 . . . lt'if6 16.ig5 gave White a strong attack in M. Kaufmann - Campagnone, e-mail 1999.

14.igS lllbd7 15.fxg6 hxg6 16.'Wel c4 17.ic2 b4 18.llle2 'Wb6 19.'Wh4

8 �-.i.�� -� �� -� 7 �m11,a,��iff�� 6 i �m� �� gf • � 5

, , , , ,/,� '[�/,� /,, , , , ,� , � � �� 'f .. . �ii:XKfi 4 m .t._8_ �§� W'L . . . . "� �� %� ... . . .

� !�f-�i!� " "ef"""� �� ·� 1 S: � � M•w a b c d e f g h

19 ... lllh7!? A draw was agreed here in Travnik - Vrkoc,

corr. 2003, and indeed it seems to me that Black's chances are not worse. By the way, the tempting 19 . . . lt'ixd5? should be avoided on account of 20.lt'ifd4! when 20 . . . lt'ic7 runs into 2 1 .Ei:xf7! 'it>xf7 22.'\Wh7 lt'if8 23.Ei:fl t if5 24.'\Wh4 with a decisive attack.

B) 9.J.d3

a b c d e f g h This often transposes to one of the 9.a4

variations, as there is a good chance that White will want to restrain . . . b5 at some point.


9 ... 0-0 Black can also play by analogy with

Chapter 5 : 9 . . . '\Wh4t 1 0.g3 '1We7

1 0 . . . '\Wd8 l l .Cllf3 0-0 1 2.0-0 a6 1 3.a4 transposes to variation A22 in Chapter 5 -see page 54.

l l .Cllf3 0-0 1 2.0-0 liJ b6

a b c d e f g h 1 3.Wg2

1 3.f5 lll 8d7 1 4.�g5 �f6 l 5 .�h6 Ei:e8 1 6.Whl Clle5 1 7.Cllxe5 �xe5 1 8.iWd2 occurred in Ravikumar - Thorsteins, Copenhagen 1 982, and here l 8 .. . Clld7N seems logical, when the position remains about equal.

l 3 . . . �g4 l 4.h3 �xf3t l 5 .'\Wxf3 Cll8d7 l 5 ... c4 is perhaps a bit too ambitious: 1 6.�c2 Cll a6 1 7.a3 Cllc5 1 8.�e3 Cllbd7 1 9.Ei:adl Ei:ab8 20.Ei:fel b5 2 1 .e5 b4 22.axb4 Ei:xb4 23.�cU:: Lau - Dolmatov, Graz 1 98 1 .

l 6 . . . c4?! loosened Black's position and gave White an edge in Van Wely - Topalov, Monte Carlo (blind) 2004.

1 7.Ei:ae l Ei:ac8 1 8.g4 c4 Now is a better time to get active, as all of Black's pieces are in play.

1 9 .�c2 liJ c5 +± Ackley - Hanison, England 2000.

10.llJf3 'I.We?!? This is an independent line. Alternatively,

1 0 . . . llla6 1 1 .0-0 Cllc7 ( l 1 . . .Ei:b8 1 2.Whl Cll c7 1 3.a4 a6 also transposes to Chapter 6) 1 2.a4 a6 1 3.Ei:e 1 l':i:e8 l 4 .�e3 Ei:b8 reaches variation A3 of Chapter 6 - see page 65.

1 1 .0-0 c4 Black should always think carefully about

the timing of this move, but here it seems to work okay.

12.ic2 llJa6 13.a3 llJacS 14.ie3 Here the most logical continuation seems to

be:

15.id4 bS 16.ixg7 �xg7 17.'\Wd4t f6 18.llJgS '!Wb6 19.f5 llJeS 20.llJe6t llJxe6

46 f4 Systems

21 .Wl'xb6 E:xb6 22.dxe6 ib7? I think Black is okay here. The e6-pawn

is mighty indeed, but Black has a beautiful knight on e5 and a useful queenside majority.

C) 9.ie2

a b c d e f g h With this move White steers the game

towards a version of the Four Pawns, where the black knight is on d7 instead of f6. Let's see who will derive the greater benefit from this difference. It is worth analysing both Cl) 9 ... 0-0 and C2) 9 ... Wl'h4t.

Cl) 9 ... 0-0 IO.tlJf3 E:e8 This was the choice of one of the greatest

Benoni players of all, in a game that we will follow shortly. Black can also consider doing without the rook move: 10 . . . tlla6

With the d7-square blocked, the knight has no real choice but to head for c7, so it is reasonable to consider doing so immediately.

1 1 .0-0 tt:lc7 1 2.a4 a6 1 2 . . . �e8 might transpose to the Furman -Tal game in the main line ifWhite responds with 1 3.tlld2.

1 3.tlld2 Now Black has the option to play for complications.

8 .i�� ·� 7 �·-'Al�·�· 6 r�/- - '� ��-,"� 5 � �-�/,� �� 4 ra---3� r� �� 3 m � � ��R£----· ;�'� '�IW 2 �t'.Y �-d;£,� o �b

---�----\�7{t" " � W,f'"' /,{:- ' §, DV� :� % a b c d e f g h

1 3 . . . f5! ? 14.tt:lc4!? This dynamic move only leads to equality. Perhaps White should prefer 14.exf5 gxf5 1 5 .tllc4 as played in Hua Lefong - Dias, Yerevan 1997. Here 1 5 . . . tt:lf6N 1 6.if3 �e8 looks best, reaching a complex position where White's chances are slightly higher.

14 . . . fxe4 1 5 .tllxd6 15 .tllxe4 tt:lf6 16.tt:lexd6 tt:lfxd5 17.tt:lxc8 '1Wxc8= Gilimshin - Grigoryev, e-mail 2003.

15 ... id4t 16.c;t>hl tllf6 17 .tt:lxc8 �xc8= Arnelind - Nikolov, Rethymnon 20 1 1 .

8 i.�.t�i.� -� 7 if••�·f•f 6 /,,,,,/,� �- %� -,�� ¥' '�� : ��•Jif��

% �%'"//, �� , , , , , %% � 3 � � btZJ-2 ��-----;-:� ��

, , , ,/- - - -�- -� �%'-� ��,J----1 �m �°iVk� -� a b c d e f g h

1 1 .0-0 tlJa6 1 l . . .ixc3?! is too risky. 1 2.bxc3 �xe4 1 3.id3

�e8 14.c4 tt:lf6 Now in Shafei - Sabitov, Kuala Lumpur 1993, White could have obtained good attacking chances with 1 5 .f5 !Nt.

12.tlJd2 tlJc7 13.a4 tlJf6


Black accepts the loss of a tempo, but it does not harm his chances too much.

14.if3 b6 This method of developing the bishop is

quite typical, and works well here.

15.Cllc4 ia6 Exchanging the bishop will ease the

congestion in Black's camp.

16.iWd.3 �b8 17.�bl?! White should prefer l 7.id2 ixc4 l 8.'\Wxc4

a6 with a balanced position, as in Putzbach -Kolthoff, Pinneberg 200 1 .

1 7 ... bS! 18.axbS tlJxbS 19.tlJxbS i.xbS 20.i.d2?

20.b3N was necessary although Black would have remained at least equal.

C2) 9 ... iWh4t

With this move Black takes the opportunity to provoke a kingside weakness before the knight comes to f3.

10.g3 '1Wd8!?

The queen goes all the way back to d8 in order to keep the e-file clear for the rook. Also possible is: 1 O . . . '\We7 l 1 .lllf3 0-0

1 1 . . . lll b6!? is a rare move, which has the idea of immediately opening the diagonal for the bishop: 1 2.e5 0-0 1 3.0-0 ig4 1 4.lllb5 lllc8

8 �}'l!�z,,J:l�-7 � · - � · � · 6 ,,, j. �."' '�.�.�� ,J,,j�f0 �� 5 �CZJ;f� 8 if� • 4 ��'!,, ,%�'! , ,%�'-· �� '!:,,,%w,r 3 �W'0 �� i��W'� 2 �,y{jr/)'0 �� w,J� � �'ii� ��

a b c d e f g h 1 5 .:gel !?N ( l 5.lllg5 ixe2 l 6.'\Wxe2 a6 17 .lllc3 dxe5 1 8 .f5 gxf5 1 9.:gxf5 llld6� Baron Rodriguez - Glavina Rossi, Spain 2004.) l 5 . . . a6 16 .lllc3 ixf3 l 7.ixf3 dxe5 1 8.fxe5 ixe5 1 9.if4 llld7 20.d6 lllxd6 2 1 .llld5 '1We6f!

1 2.0-0 llla6 1 3 .:ge l lllb6 1 4.'tt>g2 ig4 1 5 .h3 ixf3t 1 6.ixf3

8 � ·� ��\trJ:ii• 7 � · - �mJ · · · 6 i)� (;,-'"""� -·%� � ,,, ,,, ;�'%"" '"� �� : �J�i!o�• 3 �� %��ft� 2 ,�,, , ;.�-�� , ,, ,/"""rf)'0 %%%""' %%

� 1 � �'ii�� a b c d e f g h

1 6 . . . c4!?N This move is slightly provocative, but it seems playable and interesting. 1 6 . . . :gae8 was also roughly level in Gutov -Miroshnichenko, Dubai 201 1 .

1 7 .e5 dxe5 l 8 .fxe5 :gae8f!

48 f4 Systems

1 1 .tlJB 0-0 12.0-0 B:e8 13.tLld2 1 3 .@g2?! is inadvisable: 1 3 . . . lt'ia6 14.1"1el

{jjc? 1 5 .{jjd2 {jjf6 1 6.a4 h5 1 7.if3

8 � �-�� i. �·� �� ... ;� �� ... w� 7 A':' A ,� � A W 6 , , . ,/,.,,. , � ��fi"� 5 �•zr� -·· · · · ·� • 4 , . . . . . �� ,�� ,,.,,, �� ?,:_ , � 3 � m •i.� 2 ��,,,,,;��-��

. . . r· ·%11v�� · · a b c d e f g h

1 7 . . . Wd7 1 8.lt'ifl This position was reached in Oms Pallisse - Berbatov, Balaguer 20 10 , and here 1 8 . . . Wh3tN 1 9.Wgl ig4 would have put White under pressure.

13 .. . t2Jf6 14 . .if3

s I�.i.�I�·-1 ., . . -,,, , ,/,-: •• 6 , , , , ,/,� ��fl"� 5 •w2r•,, � 4 ·.� '•'··· 3 � �ID �-£, �Wfft . . . . . �?.�� . . JWfW 2 o ;;-u% ·�J � ;;-u >�t,,, ,/,��\ilii� ��,,,, 1 /� � i§t � M �f;

a b c d e f g h 14 ... .ih3!N

Black needs to improve on: l 4 . . . h5 l 5 .lt'ic4 b5?!

Once again l 5 . . . ih3N is a better option: 1 6.1"1e l lt'ig4+±

16 .{jjxd6 Wxd6 1 7.e5 Wb6 1 8 .d6 ig4 1 9.exf6 ixf6 20.f5 id4t 2 1 .Wg2 t:jjd7?

The lesser evil was: 2 l . . .gxf5N 22.h3 ixf3t 23.Wxf3 {jjd7 24.Wxf5;l;

a b c d e f g h 22.fxg6 fxg6

V. Georgiev - Quillan, Sunny Beach 201 1 . 23.id5tN ie6 24.Wf3+-

15.B:el '?Nd7 16.tLlc4 tLlg4? Black is making good use of the weakened

light squares on White's kingside.

Conclusion

In the first of the three main lines examined in the chapter, was saw Black easily obtaining a good position after mobilizing his queenside pawns. The two bishop retreats are a bit more challenging, but both of them give Black a choice of playable lines. Against 9 .id3 he can either transpose to Chapter 5 or try the independent line analysed in section B. The other retreat 9 .ie2 allows Black to choose between castling and checking on h4; once again, his chances are decent in both cases.

f4 Systems Flick-Knife Attack - 9 .a4 lh4 t

a b c d e f g h

Variation Index 1.d4 lllf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.lllc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.£4 J.g7 8.J.b5t

8 ... lllfd7 9.a4 �h4t 10.g3

A) 10 ... �d8 1 1 .lllS 0-0 12.0-0 Al) 12 ... llla6 A2) 12 ... a6

A21) 13.J.e2 A22) 13.J.d3 lllf6

A221) 14.�b3 A222) 14.©g2

B) 10 ... �e7 1 1.lllS 0-0 12.0-0 llla6 Bl) 13.e5 B2) 13.:B:el

All) note to 14.<±ig2

a b c d e f g h 1 8 . . . ixc3N

B l ) after 16.llleg5

a b c d e f g h 16 . . . We8!N

B2) note to 16.if2

a b c d e f g h 24 . . . h5!N

50 50 52 52 54 54 57 58 58 59

50 f4 Systems

I .d4 .!llf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4 • .!llc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 ig7 s.ibst .!l\fd7 9.a4

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 a b c d e f g h

For a time this line was believed to be almost winning for White, but we will find out that the rumours of Black's demise are premature. From this position the main line is the natural 9 . . . 0-0, which we will deal with in the next chapter beginning on page 62. Over the coming pages we will analyse an interesting alternative for Black.

9 • • • 'Wh4t This strange-looking move has gained in

popularity in recent years. Although checks are usually thought of as aggressive, this move is actually played with more defensive ideas in mind. An important point is that, after the forced 1 0.g3, White's dark-squared bishop will be unable to reach the g3- and h4-squares, which it might otherwise occupy for attacking purposes in the middlegame. Black may also look to post his bishop on g4 or h3, and perhaps exchange it for White's light-squared bishop. Such simplifications will tend to favour the side with less space, and may pave the way for a subsequent counterattack with . . .f5.

10.g3 Now there are two possibilities: A) 10 . • • 'WdS

and B) 10 • . . 'We?.

A) 10 ... 'WdS

a b c d e f g h On the face of it this may look like a

shocking waste of time, but White also will have to spend a few moves retreating the bishop to cover the weakened light squares on the kingside.

1 1 • .!llf3 0-0 12.0-0 Now we will consider two ways for Black to

develop his queenside: Al) 12 ... .!lla6 and A2) 12 . • • a6.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 a

13.�el

Al) 12 • • • .!lla6

e f g h

White can also continue aggressively: 1 3.f5 ! ? .!llf6 14 .�f4 gxf5 1 5 .e5 .!lle4 1 6.l'!el .!llb4

Chapter 5 - Flick-Knife Attack - 9.a4 \Wh4t 5 1

1 7 .�c4 This was Sasikiran - Berg, Warsaw 2008. White certainly has compensation for the sacrificed pawn, but Black is not without his chances. The right continuation is:

a b c d e f g h 1 7 . . . dxe5N 1 8.ctJxe5 '2ld6 1 9.�b3 1"le8 With an unclear position, as noted by Sasikiran.

13 ... .!lic7 14.ifl 14 .�c4!?N is untested but looks interesting.

The idea is to lure the enemy knight to the slightly unfavourable b6-square, for instance: 1 4 . . . 1"le8 ( 1 4 . . . '2lb6 1 5.�fl �g4 1 6.h3 �xf3 1 7.\Wxf3±) 1 5.h3 '2lb6 1 6.�fl±

14 ... :aes

15.h3 I also considered 1 5.e5!?N when a funny line

is possible: 1 5 . . . dxe5 1 6.d6 '2le6 1 7.'2ld5 exf4

1 8.ctJc7 fxg3

s .!�.!.BE••� 7 �r�i)� r� . 6 - - - "�''---- - '�f··�r� ��-l --�� : ��r�� • 3

LS ��!' ��r�� ;; _ _ _ %�-" 2 , , ,J&� '0 �X'" ' ��J� 1 � �� a b c d e f g h

1 9.ctJxa8 gxh2t 20.'it>hl '2lf6 2 1 .ctJc7 '2lxc7 22.dxc7 \Wxc7 23.1"lxe8t '2lxe8� Black has given up a rook for four pawns (after the one on h2 drops) plus the initiative.

1s ... :abs 16.ie3 b6 Black can also consider 1 6 . . . a6!?N

immediately, as after 1 7.a5 b5 1 8 .axb6 1"lxb6 the position is balanced.

1 6 . . . �xc3!?N is also playable, although White will get enough compensation: 1 7.bxc3 '2lf6 ( 1 7 . . . 1"lxe4 1 8.c4 '2lf6�) 1 8 .e5 '2le4 ( 1 8 . . . '2lcxd5 1 9.�d2 '2lh5 20.g4 '2lg7 2 1 .c4 '2lb4=) 1 9.�f2 '2lxc3 20.exd6 ctJ7xd5 2 1 .\Wb3�

a b c d e f g h 17.if2 a6 18.\Wd2 b5 19.axbS '2lxb5 20 . .!lixbS axb5=

Fraczek - Brzeski, Krakow 20 1 1 .

52 f4 Systems

A2) 12 ... a6

This is the main line. Now the two most important moves are A21) 13.ie2 and A22) 13.id3.

Less common is: 1 3 .ic4 lt'i b6

Now the bishop might go anywhere. Here are a few examples.

1 4.ie2 1 4.ia2 ig4 1 5 .l'!e l 2"1e8 1 6.Wg2 lt'i8d7 17.aS lt'ic8 1 8 .ic4 bS 1 9.axb6 lt'icxb6 20.ifl c4 2 1 .h3 ixf3t 22.\Wxf3 lt'ic5= Jelen - Sax, Bled 2005.

a b c d e f g h 1 4 . . . ig4 1 5 .ie3

This was played in a high-level game. Perhaps White could consider 1 5 .aS lt'ic8 as in Nygard - Welti, e-mail 2006, and

now 1 6.\Wb3!?N bS l 7.axb6 lt'ixb6 1 8.Wg2 intending h2-h3 looks interesting.

1 5 . . . 2"1e8 1 6.\Wc2?!

1 6 . . . \We7 This solid move is good, although Black can also grab a pawn with: 1 6 . . . ixc3!?N l 7.bxc3 2"1xe4! 1 8 .lt'igS (l 8.\Wxe4 ifS+) l 8 . . . 2"1xe3 l 9.ixg4 ctJ8d7+

17.eS dxeS 1 8.fxeS ixf3 1 9.2"1xf3 lt'i8d7+ Bareev - Gelfand, Khanry-Mansiysk 2005 .

A21) 13.ie2

a b c d e f g h 13 ... �eS 14.@g2

Another sensible move is: 1 4.\Wc2 lt'if6

1 4 . . . aS!?N appears strange, but White is not in a position to attack the d6-pawn, so giving away the bS-square is not as big

Chapter 5 - Flick-Knife Attack - 9.a4 �h4t 53

a concession as it would be in some other Benoni variations. A possible continuation is: 1 5 .f5 tlia6 1 6.fxg6 hxg6 1 7.ib5 tlib4 1 s.Wff2 ms 1 9.if4 tlib6 20.�g2 Wfe?t

1 5 .�g2 ig4 1 6.h3 ixf3t 1 7.ixf3 tlibd7 1 8.l'!el

1 8 . . . c4N Improving over 1 8 . . . 2"1b8 1 9 .a5 b5? 20.axb6± Pappier - Claridge, e-mail 2005.

1 9.ie3 2"1c8 20.l'!ad l Wfa5 2 1 .id4 tlib6 2 1 . . .tlixd5? is not working: 22.tlixd5 ixd4 23.2"1xd4 Wfxe l 24.l'!dl Wf a5 25 .ig4+-2 1 . . .tlic5?! is also unsatisfactory: 22.e5 tlid3 23.exf6 l'!xe l 24.fxg7±

22.e5 dxe5 23.ixe5 tlibd7 24.2"1e2 2"1cd8t White keeps a slight edge here, although

Black is not without chances.

14 ... ixc3!? This looks risky of course, but it seems to be

playable.

A sharp alternative is: 1 4 . . . tlif6

This provokes a forcing line leading to an endgame.

1 5.e5 dxe5 1 6.fxe5 tlig4 1 7.e6 fxe6 1 8.tlig5 White can also consider 1 8.ic4!? �h8 as in Filippas Ntekouan - Sperdokli, Kallithea 2008, and now l 9.dxe6N Wf xdl 20.l'!xdl tlic6 2 1 .tlig5t.

a b c d e f g h 1 8 . . . ixc3N

Black needs an improvement over 1 8 . . . tlif6? 1 9.llixe6 ixe6 20.dxe6 tlic6 2 1 .Wfxd8 2"1axd8 22.ig5± Muir - Peicheva Hansen, Copenhagen 1 990.

1 9.bxc3 1 9.ixg4 id4 20.dxe6 tlic6 2 1 .Wfb3 tlib4 22.tlie4 Wfd5 23.Wfxd5 llixd5 24.tlid6 ixe6 25.l'!e l ixg4 26.2"1xe8t 2"1xe8 27.tlixe8 leaves Black with fair compensation for the exchange, thanks to his extra pawn and excellent pieces.

1 9 . . . Wfxd5t 20.�gl Wfxdl 2 1 .ixdl llie5 22.tlie4 tlibd7�

White has good compensation for two pawns, although it is hard to say if it is enough for him to claim an objective advantage.

15.hxc3 �xe4

54 f4 Systems

A possible improvement is: 1 5 . . . tt:lf6!?N 1 6.e5 dxe5 17.fxe5 tt:lxd5 1 8.ctJg5 .ie6 1 9.c4 tt:lb4 ( 1 9 . . . tt:lc3? 20.'<.Wxd8 l::\xd8 2 1 .ctJxe6 fxe6 22 . .ig4+-) 20.tt:lxe6 fxe6=

16.i.d3 l::le8 17.c4 CLJf6 18.h3 CLJbd7

19 ... �b8 20.fS b5 21 .axb5 axb5 22.fxg6 hxg6 23.i.xg6! Vfie7 24.�el Vfif8 25.i.b2 �xel 26.�xel fxg6

26 . . . bxc4 27 . .if5±

a b c d e f g h 27.Vfixg6t Vfig7 28.�e8t CLJffi 29.Vfixg?t

<;tixg7 30.�e?t <;tig6 31.CLJh4t <;tih6 32.i.cl t <;tih5 33.�g7 bxc4 34.�g5t <;tih6 35.�g6t c;tih? 36.�xf6;!;

Black's king survived the middlegame, but the draw is not yet secure. Therefore he should consider the proposed improvement at move 1 5.

A22) 13.i.d3

a b c d e f g h This has been the most popular choice

among high-rated players.

13 ... CLJf6 White has tried several moves here, but I will

concentrate on the two most popular ones: A221) 14.Vfib3 and A222) 14.<;tig2.

A221) 14.Vlib3

This enables Black to develop strong counterplay.

14 ... i.h3! 15.�el CLJg4 Black can ignore the hanging b-pawn and

focus on the weaknesses created by the g2-g3 move.

16.Vfixb7 This move is consistent at least. Refusing the

pawn does not promise much for White:

Chapter 5 - Flick-Knife Attack - 9 .a4 Wf h4 t 55

16.ifl ixfl 1 7.l:l:xfl 'Lld7 1 8.h3 1 8.Wfxb7 l:l:e8 1 9.l:l:e l c4+

s i: � E �:i; 1 � .t.U,'AIU,i�i 6 .... . ·· � 5 �-8%� �� 4 !��----%�!�1-�% "//, �� , , , ,%�-�f% 3 �� •tt:Jw� 8 2 �dL,,;� �� " .%. - - - -� - - - -%�/'/�� :z-� 1 � � � .:J�

a b c d e f g h 1 8 . . . id4t

This leads to complications and eventual equality. Black can also consider the thematic tactical resource: 1 8 . . . c4!? 1 9.Wfxc4 Wfb6t 20.c;t>hl (20.c;t>g2 Wfxb2t-+) 20 . . . l:l:ac8 2 1 .Wfe2

8 �i: � ��· 7 �r.r.-,�� ... �SJ ��-� ��---�� 6 j. L-�� /,·�� : !��i!wd� ��:"//,/, �� - , %�,':; � �02D.1r�1 i � D � :�@

a b c d e f g h 2 l . . .ixc3! This exchange is necessary for Black to obtain his counterplay. 22. bxc3 'Llgf6 23.c4 Wfb3 24.e5 'Llh5 25. c;t>g2 l:l:xc4+±

19 .c;t>g2 1 9.'Llxd4 cxd4 20.hxg4 dxc3 2 1 .Wfxc3 l:l:e8 22.l:l:el 'Llf6 23.Wf d4 'Llxg4 24.b3 Wf f6 25.ib2 Wfxd4t 26.ixd4 l:l:ac8 is equal, for example: 27.e5 dxe5 28.d6 l:l:ed8 29.fxe5 f6 30.l:l:ad 1 fxe5 3 l .ixe5 'Llxe5 32.l:l:xe5 l:l:d7 =

1 9 . . . 'Llgf6 Now the e4-pawn is under fire.

20.e5 dxe5 2 1 .fxe5 'Llxe5

Within a few more moves the table will be almost cleared of pieces.

22.'Llxd4 cxd4 23 .ig5 dxc3 24.ixf6 Wfd6 25 .l:l:ael 'Lld3 26.ie7 'Llxel t 27.l:l:xe l Wf d7 28.ixf8 l:l:xf8 29.bxc3 b5 30.axb5

Y2-Y2 Utesch - Claridge, e-mail 2005.

a b c d e f g h 16 ... llid7 17.aS

Immediate central action promises White nothing: 1 7.e5 dxe5 1 8 .'Llg5 e4 l 9.'Llcxe4 id4t 20.c;t>h l This was Teboul - Marques, e-mail 2004. Here Black has more than one playable move, but the most convincing is: 20 . . . c4N 2 1 .ixc4 l:l:b8 22.Wfxa6 Now at the minimum Black can force a draw with:

17 • • • Wfe7 18.Wfh3

56 f4 Systems

1 8 .ixa6? is too greedy, and after 1 8 . . . 1"lab8 the white queen is in trouble: 19 .�cGN (After 1 9.�c7? lllde5! White had to resign in Garcia Martinez - Pigusov, Moscow 1 987.)

a b c d e f g h 18 ... c4! 19.hc4

1 9.�xc4? 1"lfc8 20.�a2 lllde5-+

19 ... .!lic5 20.�c2 �a7 An interesting alternative is:

20 . . . 1"lfc8!?N 2 1 .ifl �a7 2 1 . . .ixfl ? 22. <iixfl 1"lab8±

22.ixh3 lllb3t 23.<iih l lllxal 24.�a4 24.�bl lllf2t 25.<iig2 lllxh3 26.ie3 �d7 27.�xal �g4+±

24 . . . ixc3 24 . . . lllf2t? 25.<iig2 lllxh3 26.ie3±

.1•.1� � .� 8 ta�� r� ... : ,,5,.�.�.r� 5 � � 8 � � 4 if•!'I·'�:"' 3 � 0,� 0,-�� ref,,,;;� �� ,, .:.�JP' 2 ' '/Jtl�, � ,, ' ��Jc0i 1 � � � •@

a b c d e f g h 25.bxc3 lllf2t 26.<iig2 llld3 27.1"\fl 1"lxc3 28 .id2 1"lc2 29.�xal �e3!?

29 ... 1"lb8 30.�dl 1"lxd2t 3 1 .lllxd2 �e3 32.lllf3 1"lb2t 33.<iih l �xe4 34.ig2 lllf2t 35 .1"lxf2 1"lxf2=

30.�dl �xe4 3 1 .<iigl 1"la2 32.ig2 1"lb8 Black has some initiative; the pair of

rooks on the second rank will make a fine sight indeed, after the second one arrives on b2.

21.@hl .!lid3 On this occasion it is best not to give away

the g7-bishop: 2 1 . . .ixc3 22.�xc3 llld3! (22 . . . lllxe4 23.�d4±) A beautiful idea, but White has an equally clever defence:

Chapter 5 - Flick-Knife Attack - 9.a4 \Wh4t 57

26.�a2 �xc3 27.\Wxc3 �fc8 28.\Wd4 �cl t 29.@1'2 �flt 30.@e2 \Wd7--+

Dufour - Weegenaar, e-mail 2003.

A222) 14.@g2

Less logical is: 1 4 . . . l"1e8 1 5 .h3! c4 1 6.ic2 'Llbd7

s .im.t�.i·9� 7 �i·'ll·i�i 6 •• • 1r• ·�

� � � � !·i'Z�:. 3 �� ;:J �� 8 2 ��- •@• 1 ,� �iV•i• .

a b c d e f g h 1 7.ie3!N ( 17.fS allows Black to obtain good counterplay: 1 7 . . . 'LlcS 1 8 .'LlgS?! h6 19 .'Llxf7 Wxf7 20.fxg6t Wg8 2 1 .ie3 Grigorian - Kononenko, Internet 2009, and now 2 1 . . .'Llfxe4!N 22.'Llxe4 'Llxe4 23.\Wf3 'Llf6 gives Black a big advantage.) 1 7 . . . \Wc7 1 8 .\We2 l"1b8 1 9 .g4 b6t Black lacks counterplay and his position is generally unimpressive.

1 5.h3 hat 16.\Wx£3 liJbd7 This is the type of position Black aims for

when playing 9 . . . \Wh4t. It's close to equal, as the chances of White executing a successful e4-e5 break or kingside attack are quite low.

17.�d2 Another game continued 1 7.aS 'Lle8 1 8 .id2

'Llc7 19 .l::lab l l"1e8 20.b4 l"1c8 2 1 .'Lla4 cxb4 22.l::\fcl 'Llb5 23.l"1xc8 \Wxc8 24.l"1xb4 \Wc7 25 .l"1c4 \Wd8 and White kept just a modest edge in Braziulis - Betker, e-mail 2008.

17 ... \Wc? After 1 7 . . . l::\c8?! 1 8 .b3 'Lle8 1 9.ic4 l::\b8

20.\Wd3 'Llc7 2 1 .l::lae lt White was in control in Akesson - Solomon, Budapest 2008.

18.b3 �fe8N I think the rook should stay in the centre, as

opposed to 1 8 . . . l::\fb8 as played in T. Paehtz -Goldberg, Glauchau 1 987.

Another game saw: 1 8 ... l::\ae8 19 .l::lae l ( 1 9.ic4N l"1e7 20.\Wd3 l::\fe8 2 1 .l::\ae l 'Llb6t)

58 f4 Systems

19 . . . E:e 7 20 .E:e2 E:fe8 2 1 .E'.fe l i;ti h8 22.E'.c l �b8 23.E'.ce l �c?;!; Tate - Gantar, Pardubice 20 1 2.

8 �- ·/��--� 7 � ... itill //,� ��Jf% fm%��!��if�£ 6 - � J• �-, · � 5 � -� -�%� /,,, , ,,� 4 t<,R "a'.f-�� 3 ��miavn� 2 //,� /, , , , , ,�;� �

� ,,, , , %� 1 ��-·.ra a b c d e f g h

19JUel :ae7 20.aS :aae8 21 .g4 h6t Black has arranged his pieces in as good

a way as he can hope for in this line. He is well placed to meet any immediate attacking try from White, but on the other hand it is hard to see how Black can improve his position further. Perhaps his best winning strategy will be to offer a draw and hope the opponent overreaches.

B) 10 ... '?9e7

1 1 .liJO 0-0 12.0-0 llJa6 This time I have a clear preference for the

knight move.

I am less keen on 1 2 . . . a6, and will say no more abou� it other than mentioning one game showmg a good path for White: 1 3 . .id3 lllf6 l 4.e5 llle8 l 5 .�b3 llld7 ( l 5 . . . .ig4 1 6.llle4 dxe5 l 7.lllxe5 .if5 l 8 . .ie3 .ixe4 l 9 . .ixe4±) 1 6.e6 fxe6 l 7.dxe6 llldf6 1 8.f5

a b c d e f g h l 8 . . . gxf5 ( l 8 . . . d5 l 9.lllxd5 lllxd5 20.�xd5 lllc7 2 1 .�c4 gxf5 22 . .ig5±) 19 . .ixf5 lllc7 20.E'.el ± Flude - Shutov, e-mail 2002.

a b c d e f g h Here White can choose between the sharp

Bl) 13.eS and the more measured B2) 13.:ael .

Bl ) 13.eS liJb4!

Chapter 5 - Flick-Knife Attack - 9.a4 1Wh4t 59

13 .. . dxe5?! is inadvisable: 1 4.d6 1Wd8 1 5 .'lld5 e4 1 6.'llg5 'll f6N ( 1 6 . . . id4t 17.ie3 ixe3t l 8 .Cllxe3 'll f6 l 9.ic4-+ Van Dijk - Guido, e-mail 2002) l 7.'ll e7t \t>h8 l 8 .f5 ixf5 1 9.'llxf5 gxf5 20.l:l:xf5±

14.tt:le4 dxe5 Now is the time to take the pawn.

Avoiding it may lead to trouble: 1 4 . . . 'llb6?! 1 5 .'llxd6 'll6xd5 ( 1 5 ... ih3 1 6.l:l:f2 a6 1 7.ifl ixfl 1 8 .'®xfl 'll6xd5 1 9.id2± Bielik - Gazi, e-mail 2008.) 1 6.id2 ig4 17 .1Wb3 l:l:ad8 1 8 .ic4 ( 1 8 .l:l:ad l !N±) 1 8 . . . 'll b6 ( 1 8 . . . l:l:xd6 l 9.exd6 1Wxd6±) l 9.ixb4 cxb4 20.ixf7t l:l:xf7 2 l .'llg5 l:l:xd6 22.exd6± Bagirov - Malaniuk, Baku 1 983.

15.d6 1We6 16.tt:leg5 This position was reached in Yuneev -

Goldberg, Dresden 1 98 1 . Here I found a useful improvement for Black:

17.fxe5 After 1 7.'llxe5!? a6 1 8.ic4 ixe5 1 9.fxe5

Cllxe5 20.l:l:e 1 'll bc6 2 l .if4 1W d8 22.id5 if5

White has fair compensation for a pawn, but no obvious advantage that I can see.

17 ... a6 18.i.c4 tt:lb6! 1 8 . . . Cllxe5? does not work: 1 9 .'llxe5 1Wxe5

20.'llxf7 1Wd4t 2 1 .1Wxd4 ixd4t 22.lt>g2 if5 23.'llh6t lt>g7 24.'llxf5t gxf5 25.if4±

19.i.xf7t gxf7 20.tllxf7 1Wxf7 The game is finely balanced, and it is by no

means clear whether White's mighty central pawns or Black's slight material advantage (two strong minor pieces versus rook and pawn) will ultimately prove more significant. Here is an illustrative line:

21.i.e3 i.h3 22.gf2 1Wd5 23.1Wxd5t tll6xd5 24.hc5 tt:ld3 25.gd2 tt:lxc5 26.gxd5 tlld7f!

The endgame is not worse for Black.

B2) 13.gel

14.i.fl White uses his bishop to shore up the

weakened light squares on the kingside. Now Black must decide what to do with his own light-squared bishop.

14 ... b6

60 f4 Systems

White has cried several differenr moves here, bur rhere is no clear from-runner. Since Black's general scheme of development is unlikely co vary a great deal, I will jusr menrion a few examples co illustrate the most imporrant ideas.

15.i.e3 1 5 .1Wb3 a6 1 6.id2 ib7 17.ctJdl a5 1 8.Ei:cl

a b c d e f g h 1 8 . . . lt'if6!N Preparing to move the lightsquared bishop to a better place. ( 1 8 . . . Elfe8 1 9.lt'if2 ia6 20.ixa6 Elxa6 2 I .ic3± Cutillas Ripoll - Kovernikov, e-mail 2004.) l 9.ctJf2 Elad8 20.ib5 ic8=

15 ... i.b7 The bishop will not want to spend the rest

of its days on this square, but for the time being it fulfils an important defensive role in discouraging e4-e5.

16.i.fl Another game conrinued: 1 6.Elcl a6 1 7.if2

Elac8 1 8 .b3 lt'if6 1 9.h3 Elfe8 20.g4 White should always consider chis move carefully. Ir does nor cause any immediate problems, bur there may come a rime when . . . h5 becomes troublesome.

a b c d e f g h 20 . . . h6 2 1 .ic4 1Wd7 22.ig3 Ele7 23.Ele2 Elce8 24.'®el

a b c d e f g h This position occurred in D. Gurevich -

Nun, Eksjo 1 982, and now was just the right time for 24 . . . h5!N+, based on the fact that 25 .g5? is met by the crushing 25 . . . lt'ifxd5!.

16 . . J'ffeB 17.h3 a6 18.°Wd2 We have been following the game Tanggaard

- May, corr. 1 996. So far Black has developed most of his pieces to normal places, and here I believe the most precise conrinuation would have been:

Chapter 5 - Flick-Knife Attack - 9.a4 '\Wh4t 6 1

19.�adl '1Wd7 After this move we have transposed to a

game that reached this position via the 9 . . . 0-0 move order; the transposition is also noted in the 1 5 . . . lll f6 line in the notes to variation B2 1 of the next chapter, which can be found on page 70. But please stay on this page for the continuation from the present position.

20.'itih2 �ads Black is doing everything possible to

prevent the e4-e5 break. White is not really in a position to attack on the kingside, so it remains to be seen how the first player may try to make progress. The one game to have reached this position soon ended in a draw.

a b c d e f g h

21 .ic4 Trying to overprotect the d5-pawn in

preparation for e4-e5, but Black can easily counter this plan.

21...icS! 22.ifl ih7 23.ic4 Of course White could try searching for

another idea, but I do not see any real problems for Black.

23 ... ics Black might also keep the game going

with 23 . . . h5!?N 24.'\We2 '\Wc8 25 .Ei:d2 ih6= although he is unlikely to get anywhere unless White makes a mistake.

24.ifl ih7 1/2-1/2

H. Muller - Chetvertakoff, e-mail 2002.

Conclusion

9 . . . '\Wh4t is a respectable alternative to the main 9 . . . 0-0 line (which we will encounter in the next chapter) , especially for players who prefer a more cautious approach against the Flick-Knife Attack. I devoted quite a lot of space to the provocative 1 0 . . . '\Wd8 move, but found that White was slightly better in quite a lot of the ensuing lines. On the other hand, variation B with 1 0 . . . '\We7 seems more solid, and I failed to find any major problems for Black in the ensuing positions.


Flick-Knife Attack - 9 .a4 0-0

Variation Index 1.d4 �f6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.�c3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 .ig7 8 . .ib5t

8 ... �fd7 9.a4 0-0 10.�f3 �a6 1 1.0-0 A) l l ... �c7

Al) 12 . .ic4 A2) 12.hd7 A3) 12 . .id3

B) 1 1 ... �b4 Bl) 12.h3?! B2) 12.:B:el a6 13 • .ifl :B:e8 l 4.h3

B21) 14 ... b6 B22) 14 ... fS!?

Al) afrer l 8.lt'id6

a b c d e f g h 1 8 . . . Ei:FS!N

B221) 15.exfS B222) 15 . .id2 B223) 15.e5 B224) 15.W/b3

A3) afrer l 7.e5!

a b c d e f g h 17 . . . c4!N

B224) afrer 20.lt'ig5

a b c d e f g h 20 . . . bS!N

63 63 64 65 67 68 69 70 71 72 72 73 76

Chapter 6 - Flick-Knife Attack - 9.a4 0-0 63

l .d4 tllf6 2.c4 cS 3.dS e6 4.tllc3 exdS S.cxdS d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 ig7 8.ibSt lllfd7 9.a4 0-0

This will be our starting position for the present chapter. Black gets on with his development and prepares for a sharp fight.

10.tllf3 tlla6 1 1 .0-0 Now there are two main lines that Black can

consider: A) 1 1 . .. tllc7 and B) l l ... tllb4.

A) 1 1 ...tllc7

s i.� ..t.E ��·-''./, �/,'"/;(,,, ,,/,� , , , ,,Y,�,V,W� 7 ef� i �'Al� • m • , , , , , /,� /, , , , , ,�;!'�� ,,,,,Y,� 6 ��,J��-i� s ��w� 8 � � 4 8B,,,,,,,B8�� /,'"//, �� ,,, ,%� 3 - � �lZJ� 2 ��,,,, , ,- �-�Wtf , , , ,�, , , , %�/�' �� ';?'"' 1 /� �iV-M�

a b c d e f g h Black nudges the bishop and hopes to use

the knight to support a future . . . b5 break. White has tried virtually every legal move from this position, but I will focus on the three most important ones: Al) 12.ic4, A2) 12.ixd7 and A3) 12.id3.

Al) 12.ic4 a6

1 2 . . . tll b6! ? This move looks a bit strange but it seems playable.

1 3.j,a2 j,g4 1 4.h3 j,xf3 1 5 .1Wxf3 tlla6!? l 5 . . . tlld7 fails to equalize: l 6.j,e3 tlle8 ( 1 6 . . . a6?! l 7.e5! dxe5 1 8 .f5± Lupini - Purdy, e-mail 1 997.) 1 7.:8adl tll ef6 ( 17 . . . Wb6 1 8.1Wf2 1Wb4±) 1 8.tllb5 tlle8 1 9.tllc3± Vernay - Spraggett, Metz 2009.

l 6.e5 tLl b4 17 .a5 This was L. Muller - Vazquez Reyes,

Khanty-Mansiysk (ol) 20 1 0. Here Black should have played:

l 7 . . . tllc8N The position remains unclear and roughly

equal.

13.:8el :8e8 14.eS This is the most popular move.

l 4.h3 seems pretty harmless, and after 1 4 . . . :8b8 1 5.1Wd3 tllb6 1 6.j,b3 tlld7 it is not clear if White can do any more than repeat the position. l 7.a5N is one way of continuing the fight, although after l 7 . . . b5 l 8.axb6 tllxb6+± Black is not worse.

14 ... tllb6 1S.ia2 ig4 16.aS llld7 Black is okay here, and in the following

game White overplayed his hand.

17 ... dxeS 18.tlld6 Now in Mitra - Murshed, Kolkata 1 988,

Black could have kept some advantage with:

18 ... :8f8!N:j: White will struggle to justify his pawn

sacrifice.

64 f4 Systems

A2) 12 . .ixd7 bd7

13.fS Obviously White did not give up the bishop

pair while helping Black's development just for fun - he did it to start an attack. Fortunately Black has plenty of resources, and can decide whether to grab the f-pawn or start a counteroffensive on the other flank.

13 ... gxfS 13 . . . b5 is playable, although after 14 .ig5 f6

1 5 .if4 b4 1 6.llle2 it seems Black should take the f-pawn after all: 1 6 . . . gxf5!?N ( 1 6 . . . '®e7 l 7.lllg3 g5 l 8.ie3 a5 Building the great wall, but the g7-bishop may not be so happy to see it. 1 9.llld2 ic8 20.lllc4 ia6 2 1 .Elcl ixc4 22.Elxc4± Nikolov - Pantsulaia, Chalkidiki 2003 .)

s E� � ��-1 &r•:r� , , , ,Y,� i 6

. . . %�'----·-�------�� 5

�szr� ··%� ��-�----%� ��7�� 4 � /i% -� � � , , .%� �� 3 ��-%�� -" 2 if!} �CZJ� � i� 1 �----%�ii� iJtli'"'

a b c d e f g h

l 7.ixd6 ( l 7.lllg3 fxe4 1 8 .lllxe4 llle8 1 9.lllxd6 lllxd6 20.ixd6 ixa4 2 1 .1Wxa4 1Wxd6'x>) l 7 . . . fxe4 1 8.ixf8 exf3 1 9.ixc5 fxe2 20 .1Wxe200 In this murky position both sides have their chances.

a b c d e f g h 14 . .ig5

Now we must decide whether or not to block the Benoni bishop.

14 ... f6 I prefer this move, although the alternative

also seems okay: 1 4 . . . if6 1 5.if4

1 5 .1Wd2 ixg5 1 6.lllxg5 f6 1 7.llle6 ( 1 7.lll f3 fxe4 1 8.lllxe4 if5 1 9.lllg3 ig6 20.lllh4 1Wd7 2 1 .Ela3 Elae8� Xiu - Liu, Jinan 2005.) l 7 . . . lllxe6 l 8.dxe6 ixe6 1 9.Elad l fxe4 20.lllxe4= Blair - Kramer, corr. 1 999.

a b c d e f g h


1 5 . . . :8e8 1 6.'®el Wh8 1 7.1Wd2 b5 1 8 .ctJg5 Now in Ataman - Erdogan, Ankara 2008, Black should have played:

1 8 . . . Wg8N 1 9.exf5 ixf5 20.axb5 ig6+± With mutual chances.

15.if4 llJe8 16.exfS ixf5 I don't see any major problems for Black here.

17.Wfd2 ig6 R. Fernandez - H. Fernandez, Santos 1 998.

White has obtained a reasonable level of compensation for the pawn, but not enough to claim the advantage.

A3) 12.id3

Finally we come to the most popular move.

12 ... a6 13.�el 1 3.ie3 :8b8 can be compared with the main

line. Apart from that White has tried a whole host of alternatives at one time or another, but I want to focus on the most challenging line.

13 ... �e8 14.ie3 �b8 Now Black is ready for . . . b5 .

15.if2 The main move. White wants to exploit the

fact that the black queen is surrounded and cannot move.

Less challenging is: l 5 .a5 b5 1 6.axb6

a b c d e f g h 1 6 . . . llib5!?N A typical move, which allows Black to clear space on the queenside more quickly. ( 1 6 . . . :8xb6 17 .1Wd2 :8b4 1 8 .:8ab l llif6 1 9.if2 ig4= was also fine in Lalic -Kotsur, Lucerne 1 997.) 1 7.'®d2 llixc3 1 8.bxc3 Wfxb6=

15 ... bS 16.axbS axb5

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

17.eS!

a b c d e f g h

This move is the most dangerous for Black.

1 7.ih4 if6 1 8.ig3 This is the other idea, hoping to break through with e4-e5.

1 8 . . . c4 This would be my choice. 1 8 . . . b4 1 9.llia4 ig7 is also playable,

66 f4 Systems

although Black must be willing to accept a repetition of moves. 20.1:'la2 (20.ih4 if6=) 20 . . . llif6 2 1 .ih4 '1Wd7 22.'1Wd2 llih5= Molo - Noronha, e-mail 2005.

1 9.ifl ib7 20.e5 ie7 2 1 .ilf2 if8 22.'1Wd2 1:'la8 23. lli g5

Dannehr - Pommrich, e-mail 2008. Now I think Black's best continuation would have been:

a b c d e f g h 23 . . . i:l:xal !N 24.i:l:xal dxe5 25 .d6 llie6 26.llixe6 i:l:xe6 27.llixb5 exf4

Black has decent chances here, for example:

8 � � �· "'� _,,, ,/,� ,,,,,%� � �,�Ar'!� �� _,,,,%� �� : ��,� �-�� ----%� 3 ��'0 ��"' "' · ��'0 ��'0 2 r� � � � rt§ 1 �· ,7,� ,,,,,/,� i.rtf ""

a b c d e f g h 28 .ilxc4?! '1Wg5 29.id4 1:'le5!

Now White must find some good moves just to hold on.

30.h4! The only move.

30 . . . '\Wxh4 3 l .ixf7t i>xf7 32.ixe5 llixe5 33.1:'la7 llif3t 34.gxf3 '1Wg5t 35 .i>fl '1Wxb5t 36.'1We2 '\Wd7 37.'IWdl =

a b c d e f g h 17 ... c4!N

I was not satisfied with Black's chances after other moves, so I propose this improvement.

The other main line I analysed is: l 7 . . . dxe5 1 8.ih4 if6 1 9.d6

a b c d e f g h 1 9 . . . ixh4!?N The machine thinks this is the best chance. ( l 9 . . . llie6 20.ixf6 llixf6 2 1 .fxe5 b4 22.llib5± Teboul - Stancu, e-mail 2003.) 20.dxc7 '1Wxc7 2 1 .llixh4 c4 22.ifU Black has two pawns and a slight initiative for a piece, but it seems to me that White has good chances to consolidate his extra material.

18.ih4 I also analysed: 1 8 .ilc2 ib7 1 9.ih4 '1Wc8

20.llie4 if8! This may look a little scary, but don't worry.


a b c d e f g h 2 1 .lllxd6 �xd6 22.exd6 Elxel t 23.�xel lllxd5 24.1Wd4 f5 ! The position is about equal.

18 ... if6! This resource is the key to our survival.

19.exf6 This seems like the most ambitious move.

l 9.�xf6 lllxf6 20.exf6 cxd3 2 1 .1Wxd3 Elxel t 22.Elxel 1Wxf6 gives White a modest edge, but I do not believe Black should be in much danger.

20.�xel cxd3 2 1 .llld4 �b7 22.lllc6 �xc6 23.dxc6 lllc5 24.b4 lll 5e6f!

20.lllxe l ! looks like the right route to an edge for White: 20 . . . cxd3 2 1 .lllxd3 b4 22.lll e4 lllxd5 23.1Wd2±

20 ... cxd3 21.tlid4 21 .'®e7 �b7 22.Ela7 1Wxe7 23.fxe7 lllb6

24.lllxb5 llle8f±

21 ...ib7 22.tlic6 ixc6 23.dxc6 tlic5 24.b4 24.f5 b4f±

24 ... tli5e6 25.Wf e4 d5 26.Wfxd3 tlixf4 27.Wfd2 Clife6

The position is about equal. Although my new l 7 . . . c4!N idea seems to improve over existing theory, Black still falls slightly short of equality in a few of the variations noted above.

B) 1 1 ...tlib4

8 .i �.i.� ��·� 7 art�i)�{•y,•r 6 %,, , ,%� �� ,,%�

5 � !98"•·· �% "/,J,3� �W.';( �� 4 � � � � r� � 3 .,,,,,;� ��

.!»«' -·-·!»� 2 , , , ,/tl�;�� ft!J; 1 ,� ��M�

a b c d e f g h I think this is the best line for Black. From

this position White has tried a wide array of moves, but for instructive purposes I would like to focus on the inaccurate Bl) 12.h3?! followed by the main line of B2) 12.gel.

I would like to mention one brief example where Black made excellent use of his knights:

6 8 f4 Systems

12 .ie3 a6 1 3 .ic4 llib6 14 .ie2 1:'le8 1 5 .if2 ig4 1 6.�d2

Bl) 12.h3?!

12 .. . a6 13.ic4 Thanks to the slowness of White's previous

move, Black can now take the opportunity to sharpen the fight.

13 . .. f5!

s A'�.i.� ��·-1

�·-�- . . . . . Y,Er

6 · � m �� ·•%� 5 ��(1rafa %,, .,,/J . . , ,/,� %o:0"/ �� 4 b �� b �� 3 .. . . . . . m�� ttS� b 2 �B"····· ·� �� !-•

. . . . . }' . . .. /,�·0 �� %.if� 1 � �wv� n�i a b c d e f g h

14.llJg5 Of course we should also consider the central

breakthrough: 1 4.e5 dxe5 1 5 .d6t

Another idea is 1 5 .ie3!? h6!? ( 1 5 . . . exf4N and 1 5 . . . e4N both deserve serious consideration.) 1 6.fxe5 ctJxe5 17.ctJxe5 ixe5 1 8.ixh6 1:'le8 19 .�d2 �d6 20.i:'lael id7 with balanced play, Gretencord -Lahdenmaeki, e-mail 2008.

i s . . . 'iiihs 1 6.lligs White is poised to win an exchange, but Black should be able to claim excellent compensation.

1 6 . . . e4 1 6 . . . llib6!? 1 7.llif7t 1:'lxf7 1 8 .ixf7 �f8 1 9.�b3�

l 7.ctJe6 17.llif7t? is premature due to 17 . . . 1:'lxf7


1 8 .i.xf7 i.d4t followed by . . . ll'lf8, with a big advantage to Black.

17 . . . 1ltff6 1 8 .ll'lxf8 1ltfd4t 1 9.1ltfxd4 .ixd4t 20.iiih2 ll'lxf8+

14 ... ttJb6 15.i.b3 a5! It is worth weakening the b5-square in order

to maintain the knight's position on b6.

16.i.e3 fxe4 17.'it>hl tlJd3 18.1ltfd2 Now Black has a few tempting options.

1 8 . . . l:l:e8 ?! led to an eventual victory for Black in Bareev - Topalov, Dortmund 2002, but at this point 19 .ll'lcxe4!N ll'lxb2 20.l:l:acl would have turned the tables and given White a promising initiative.

1 8 . . . c4!?N is tempting when you see that 19 . .ic2 .if5 20.ll'lgxe4 ll'lxd5 2 1 .tl'ixd5 i.xe4 22.ll'lb6 d5 23.ll'lxa8 1ltfxa8 is an excellent exchange sacrifice. Unfortunately White can improve on move 19 by capturing on e4 with either one of his knights, each leading to approximate equality.

Finally l 8 . . . .if5!?N deserves attention, based on the fact that 19 .g4 h6! favours Black.

19.bxc3 19.1ltfxc3 1ltfe7 is better for Black.

19 ... '?Ne7 20.g4 Most other moves will be met by . . . h6.

20 ... i.d? Black is at least equal, for instance:

21 .tlJe6 '?Nh4t

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

B2) 12.l:l:el a6

a b c d e f g h 13.i.fl

This is the best retreat square for the bishop.

l 3.i.c4?! gives Black time to exchange his problem bishop: 1 3 . . . tl'ib6! 1 4 . .ifl ( 1 4 . .ie2 i.g4 1 5 .h3 i.xf3 16.i.xf3 I. Watson - Nunn, Brighton 1 980. 1 6 . . . ll'lc4Nt) 14 . . . i.g4 1 5 . .ie3 i.xf3 1 6.gxf3 ll'ld7 Black is at least equal, Cori Tello - Padilla, Callao 2007.

13 ... l:l:eS 14.h3 The most popular alternative has been:

14.i.e3 ll'lf6 1 5 . .if2 .ig4 One top-level game continued: l 5 . . . ll'lh5!? l 6.1ltf d2 .ig4 17 . .ie2 .ih6 18 . .ie3 ctJ f6 19 .h3

70 f4 Systems

ixf3 20.ixf3 llld7 2 1 .a5 :B:b8 22.ie2 lllf6 23.if3 llld7 24.ie2 lll f6 25.if3 llld7 and a draw was agreed in Jakovenko - Gashimov, Astrakhan 20 1 0.

s .i� ;s,1�9� %%� �,, , ,;,� %%�f�� 7 �A �W.'0 ��i!�A 6 • • �� · � 5 �-ti��>,,,, , :� �/ ,,,f .. ,":,w; �W.'0 �;,w; 4 fj . • fj ef�.!.� 3 ,,, , ,m �� ,�_, ,;� ��'0 ��'0 2 , , ,J[J� �/""'��J0 � �v��JJ�

a b c d e f g h 1 6.:B:cl llld7

1 6 . . . lllh5!? 1 7.h3 ixf3 1 8 .1ltfxf3 id4! 1 9.g4 lllf6 was also balanced in Bosschem -Mirzoev, Livigno 20 1 1 .

17.h3 ixf3 1 8 .1ltfxf3 :B:c8= Guevara Castillo - G. Mueller, e-mail 2006.

Black was fine in all these games, so we may conclude that White's only chance for an advantage is to prevent the enemy bishop from exchanging itself via the g4-square.

8 .i-.ttif .i�-� 7 �f•if-.ftrr 6 ·� �- �� ,,�� 0r*" '� �� 5 �% "/J�� , , �, 4 8 � � 8 D � 3 /,, , , , ,� %� qs� 8 2

��··· · · ·� �� '· , , , ,)1, , ,,/,%) '0 �%"'" �w,-� 1 � �v��

a b c d e f g h After the text move Black has to make an

important decision. Although bringing the knight to b4 was a good achievement, we must make sure it does not end up out of play. I have

analysed two contrasting approaches, the first being solid and the other more aggressive and risky: B21) 14 ... b6 and B22) 14 ... f5!?.

B21) 14 ... b6 15.i.e3 i.h7

1 5 . . . lllf6 is another decent option, which is directed against the manoeuvre of the enemy bishop ro h4. Here is a good example: l 6,if2 lllh5 1 7.g3 (or 17.ih4 if6 1 8 .ig5 Sundararajan - Satyapragyan, Negombo 2003, 18 . , .:B'.a7!f±) 17 . . . ib7 1 8 .1ltfd2 lllf6 1 9.:B:adl 1ltfd7 This was the game H, Muller - Chetvertakoff, e-mail 2002, and we encountered the same position at the end of the previous chapter. Turn back to page 6 1 for the continuation from here.

I6.i.c4 l 6,if2 lllf6 17.1ltfd2 lllh5 1 8 .ih4 if6 was

equal in Galvn - Pages, Internet 2009.

a b c d e f g h 16 ... tllf6

I think Black should improve his position on the kingside and in the centre, rather than the queenside.

In the following game he went for a different plan but failed to equalize: 1 6 . . . :B:b8 1 7.if2 ia8 1 8 .ih4 if6 1 9.ig3 id4t ( 1 9, . . b5 20.axb5 axb5 2 1 .lllxb5 lllb6 22.ifl ixb2

Chapter 6 - Flick-Knife Attack - 9 .a4 0-0 7 1

23.l"i:b l tg7 24.f5 li:'ic8 25 .fxg6 hxg6±) 20.li:'ixd4 cxd4 2 1 .li:'ia2± Moskalenko - Janev, Alicante 2000.

17 .i.fl tD h5 1 7 . . . thG!?N is an interesting alternative:

1 8 .tg3 li:'ih5 1 9.th4 i'Nc8 20.tg5 tg7 2 1 .g4

a b c d e f g h 2 1 . . .li:'if6+± Black has decent counter-chances. (But note that 2 l . . .f6? does not work due to 22.gxh5 i'Nxh3 23.th4 g5 24.�f2! gxh4 25 .l"i:gl �h8 26.f5 ! followed by tfl trapping the black queen.)

18.i'Nd2 i.h6 19.g3 'Wd7 20.@h2 i.c8 We have reached a similar situation to that

at the end of the previous chapter. White has more space, but Black has no weaknesses and is well placed to meet any show of aggression. In the one practical example from this position, White lost his way and fell into difficulties.

21.'Dgl?! White should have preferred 2 1 .tflN tb7

when the position resembles the end of the previous chapter.

21. ..�bS 22.'We2 i'Nd8 23.�adl fS!? Black finds an interesting way to exploit

the unfortunate position of the knight on g l . Quieter moves are also fine of course.

24.e5

a b c d e f g h 24 ... 'Dxf4!

The point behind the previous move.

25.gxf4 i.xf4 t 26.i.g3 hg3t 27 .@xg3 dxe5 2s.d6t <.!?g7 29.'Df3?

29.li:'id5N would have kept the game unclear.

29 ... e4+ Lautier - Nun, Dortmund 1 989.

B22) 14 ... fS!?

This is the more aggressive line. Black opens the game and trusts in his dynamic potential. I examined four main moves from this position: B221) 15.exfS, B222) 15.i.d2!?, B223) 1 5.e5, and B224) 15.i'Nb3.

1 5 .li:'ig5 is not dangerous, as after 1 5 . . . li:'if8 the e6-square is well protected.

72 f4 Systems

B221) 15.exf5 �xel 16.lllxel gxf5

a b c d e f g h Almost all White's pieces are on the first

rank, and Black should be at least equal from here.

17.lllc2 After l 7.llif3 llif6 Black already controls all

the important squares in the centre. 1 8.Wh2 td7!?N ( 1 8 . . . llie4 was equal in Starke -Nowak, e-mail 2004, but maybe it is better to develop the pieces before coming forwards.)

17 .. . lllf6 1 7 . . . We7 is also reasonable, preventing

the bishop from coming to e3 . 1 8 .a5 Now

in Backe - Riccio, e-mail 2002, Black could have virtually forced a draw with: 1 8 . . . llixc2N 19 .Wxc2 td4t 20.Wh2 llif6 2 1 .td2 llig4t 22.iiih 1 llif2t=

20.lllxe4 'Wxe4 21 .lllxb4 'Wxb4= Berkvens - Allemann, Zug 2003 .

B222) 15.i.d2!?

a b c d e f g h This move should not really amount to

anything more than a quirky move order, but I want to draw your attention to a nasty trap into which a few players have fallen.


15 ... llJf6? The correct response has still not occurred in

practice: 15 . . . fxe4!N 16 .'llxe4 'llf6 17.'llxf6t txf6 1 8.Wb3 :9'.xel 1 9.:9'.xel and we have transposed to variation B224 below, which can be found on page 76.

16.e5! ctJfxd5 17.ctJxd5 ctJxd5 18.i.c4 i.e6 19.ctJg5 ctJ:xf4 20.ctJxe6 ctJxe6 21 .exd6

The pin will cause Black to lose material.

21 ...@hs 2 1 . . .Wxd6? 22.tc3 is even worse for Black.

22.i.xe6 Wxd6 23.i.f7 �f8 24.i.a2 Wd4t

25 ... '1Wxb2 26.i.d5 'IWxal 27.'IWxal i.xal 28.�xal±

Gokerman - Kusmierek, e-mail 2009.

B223) 15.e5

This move is ambitious, but White is risking just as much as Black, and in many lines he will have to sacrifice his knight in order to maintain the initiative.

15 ... dxe5 16.d6 e4 If you don't want to have to remember a

series of forcing lines, you could consider 16 . . . h6!? which seems quite playable and prevents White from developing an attack. 1 7.'lld5 e4 18 .'llc7 :9'.b8 1 9.'llxe8 Wxe8� Black had about enough compensation for the exchange in Grahl - Heinz, corr. 1 989.

a b c d e f g h 17.ctJg5

White can also give a check first: 1 7.Wb3t <iihs 1 8.'llg5 td4 t 1 9.te3

a b c d e f g h Now there is a split between a) 1 9 . . . Wf6

and b) 1 9 . . . txe3t!N. I included some interesting analysis of the first move, but the second is more accurate and the one I would recommend.

a) 19 . . . Wf6

74 f4 Systems

This is objectively playable but practically dangerous.

20.j,xd4 20.l"i:adl j,xe3t 2 1 .l"i:xe3 b6 22.tlid5 tlixd5 23.Wxd5 l"i:a7 24.j,c4 j,b7 25 .Wf7 Wxf7 26.j,xf7 l"i:b8

a b c d e f g h Now 27.l"i:g3? j,c6+ occurred in Battaglini -Janev, Sautron 2002. Instead 27.g4N= was correct.

20 . . . Wxd4t 2 1 .Whl tlifs 2 1 . . .Wf6? 22.tlicxe4! fxe4 23.tlixe4 Wxf4 24.tlixc5 l"i:xel 25 .l"i:xe l tlif6 26.Wf7 j,xh3 27.gxh3 Wxd6 28 .Wxb7 l"i:b8 29.l"i:e6 Wd5t 30.Wxd5 tlifxd5 3 1 .a5± Kordts - Stefanov, e-mail 2002. 2 1 . . .Wg7!? seems to be the safest move, for instance: 22.l"i:ad l (22.tlif7t Wg8=) 22 . . . h6 23.tlie6 Wg8 24.tlixc5 Wxb3 25.tlixb3=

22.l"i:ad l Wf6 Wild complications can occur from here.

23.l"i:xe4! fxe4 24.tlicxe4 Wg7 24 . . . l"i:xe4 25.tlixe4 Wg7 26.tlixc5 a5 27.l"i:el j,f5 28 .l"i:e7 Wf6t

25.tlif7t iiigs 26.tlih6t iiihs 27.tlig5 j,e6 28.tligf7t j,xf7 29.tlixf7t Wg8 30.tlig5t Wh8 3 l .d7 l"i:e7 32.d8=W l"i:xd8 33.l"i:xd8 tlic6 34.l"i:c8 Wf6

Black has survived and should hold the endgame, but the whole line comes with a health warning!

b) 1 9 . . . j,xe3t!N This is much safer.

20.l"i:xe3 Wf6

8 i: �_._�, � ill 7 ��-��!\ill�, 6 ·��%�i,%�� 5 � �� -·� 4 �---j.:�-----'� 3 v� ��nf"'z� t!J 2 ��i(""''� ,,,,,Y,� '� , , ,efLlzW# �W# �(�� 1 � � � ��

a b c d e f g h Now White does not have the same resources involving sacrificing on e4, and he will struggle to justify his material investment. A possible continuation is:

2 1 .j,c4 h6 22.tlie6 tlib6 23.tlic7?! Wd4+

Let's return to the main line. Black has a choice of possible continuations, but needs to be careful.

17 ... lllfS Black wants to regroup, but does he have

time? We will find out shortly.

Another playable option is: 1 7 . . . j,d4t 1 8 .j,e3 Wf6

1 8 . . . j,xe3t!?N 19 .l"i:xe3 Wf6 also looks interesting, for instance: 20.Wb3t Wh8


2 1 .�ael h6 22.lt:Jgxe4 fxe4 23.lllxe4 �d4 24.�dl �g7 25.lllxc5 �xe3 26.�xe3 lllxc5 27.�xc5 lllc6+

a b c d e f g h 1 9.�b3t Wg7 20.ixd4 �xd4t 21 .Whl �f6 22.�ad lN

I t i s necessary for White to improve on 22.ic4? as played in Klim - Bebe!, Barlinek 2008, after which the simple 22 . . . �xd6!N 23.lt:Je6t �xe6 24.ixe6 lll f6 would have brought Black a decisive advantage.

22 . . . b6 22 . . . h6? 23.lllcxe4 fxe4 24.lllxe4 �f8 25.lllxc5±

23.ic4 ib7 23 . . . lllf8? 24.if7 �d8 25 .id5! is unpleasant.

24.llle6t �xe6 25 .ixe6 �d8� Black has enough compensation to maintain

the balance.

18 . .ic4t .ie6 19.tllxe6 Here too Black has a choice of playable

continuations.

19 ... tllxe6 This is the safer choice, and the one I would

recommend.

More complicated is: 1 9 . . . �xe6 20.lllxe4!N

20.ie3?! llld3 2 1 .ixd3 exd3 22.�xd3 id4 23.ixd4 �xd6+ Rain - Eiben, e-mail 2004.

20 . . . fxe4 2 1 .�xe4

s ,i. � •• 7 �in,,, ,/,� '----- -�• 6 •n �r� ,•�� 5 /,.,_,, /,�� 4 !-�nl��

,,,, ,,,� �� ,,, /,� 3 ��P'��

-�

-� 2 .,/flrf).'��/,� 1 � �w� �

a b c d e f g h 2 1 . . .id4t

This is the forcing move, although 2 1 . . .�d7 is possible: 22.�g4 �ae8 23.f5 gxf5 24.�xf5 lllc2 (24 . . . Wh8? 25 .ixe6 �xe6 26.�xe6 lllxe6 27.ih6 ixh6 28.�el± ; 24 . . . lt:Jc6 25 .ie3 b6 26.�el �xd6 27.ixc5 �xc5t 28.�xc5 bxc5 29.ixe6t lllxe6 30.�xe6=) 25.�xe6 lllxe6 26.�xc2 Wh8=

22.ie3 �xd6 23.ixd4 cxd4 24.�b3 �ae8 25 .�ael f7 26.g4 f6 27.g5t f7 28.�f3 Wg7 29.ixe6 �xe6 30.�xe6 lllxe6 3 l .�xe6 �xe6 32.�xb7t Wg8=

20.tllxe4 fxe4 20 . . . Wh8 is not so good: 2 1 .ixe6 �xe6

22.lllg5 �xe l t 23.�xel �d7 24.�e6! �xe6 25.lllxe6t

21 .�xe4 Wf d7 22.Wfb3 22.�e2 �xd6=

76 f4 Systems

22 ... @hs 23Jhe6 Now in Kordts - Markus, e-mail 1 998,

Black's simplest continuation would have been:

B224) 15.'Wb3

15 ... fxe4 16.ctJxe4 ctJf6 Black has tried a few other options here, but

I see no reason to deviate from the main line.

17.ctJxf6t ixf6

a b c d e f g h 18.id2

Exchanging rooks is slightly inaccurate, for reasons that will soon become obvious: 1 8.l:l:xe8t 'Wxe8 19 .�d2

s E�,�,,�, 7 �� r�R�,,,�� 6 • • !i% � · � //,�f�' ""� ""'"� : !J�1�� / , , , , � , ,,,%

� �r�i!' S{,,,%� ,;,,,i� tJttr� a b c d e f g h

1 9 . . . 'We4! The queen wastes no time taking centre stage. 20.2::\c l (20.l:l:el 'Wc2) 20 . . . �d7 2 1 .l:l:c4 'We8 22.'llg5?! (22.�xb4N �xa4 23 .'Wd3 cxb4 24.l:l:xb4 �b5 25 .'Wd2 �xfl 26.Wxfl b5=) 22 . . . �xa4+ 23.'Wg3 'Wd7 24.�c3? 'llxd5+ Luukkonen - Herraiz Hidalgo, Madrid 20 1 1 .

18 .. J'�xel 19J'hel if5 Another game continued 19 . . . �d7 20.'llg5

'Wa5 2 1 .'Wg3 'Wd8, and here the critical continuation seems to be:

Chapter 6 - Flick-Knife Attack - 9 .a4 0-0 77

a b c d e f g h 22.llie6!N (22.'1Wb3=; 22.txb4 was agreed drawn in Mascarenhas - Schoen, e-mail 2003.) 22 . . . txe6 23.dxe6 d5 24.txb4 cxb4 25.\Wf2 1Wd6 Black faces a long defence with little chance of achieving more than a draw.

20.lligS Another obvious move to consider is:

20.g4 td7 20 . . . tc2? allows White to obtain some advantage with precise play: 2 1 .'1Wa3 a5 (2 1 . . .'1Wd7 22.a5 :9'.e8 23 .txb4 cxb4 24.1Wxb4 :9'.xel 25.llixe l tba) 22.1We3 txa4 (22 . . . c±>h8 23 .'1We6 '1Wf8 24.'1Wd7 :9'.d8 25.'1Wc7 txa4 26.llig5 txg5 27.fxg5 :9'.e8 28.:9'.e6±) 23.'1We6t c±>h8 24.tc3 txc3 25.bxc3 '1Wf8 26.llig5 (26.cxb4?? :9'.e8-+) 26 . . . :9'.e8 27.'1Wf7 '1Wxf7 28.llixf7t c±>g8 29.:9'.xe8t txe8 30.llixd6 llixd5 3 1 .llixe8± After the text move the position can be compared with the previous note. Here I like Black's chances a little more, as the 'free' g2-g4 move has weakened White's kingside.

a b c d e f g h

2 1 .tc3 a5 22.g5 th8 23.llid2 td4t 23 . . . tf5!?N 24.txh8 c±>xh8 25.llie4 txe4 26.:9'.xe4 '1Wf8=

24.txd4 cxd4 25.llie4 :9'.c8 26.llif6t c±>f7 27.h4 tf5 28 .th3

a b c d e f g h 28 . . . d3!

Forcing a draw. 29.txf5 '1Wb6t 30.c±>hl 1Wf2 3 I .txc8 'IWxe it

Y2-Y2 Trembecki - Rogos, e-mail 2008.

a b c d e f g h 20 ... hS!N

I was happy to find this improvement, which has the important aim of clearing some space for the black rook on the queenside.

20 . . . tc2? 2 1 .'1Wc4 txa4 22.txb4 cxb4 23 .1Wxb4 tb5 24.txb5 '1Wb6t 25.c±>h2 axb5 occurred in Stefansson - Lie, Aarhus 2003, and here 26.llie6N± would have been unpleasant.

78 f4 Systems

20 . . . li:'ic2!? should be enough to hang on although Black will need to play accurately to prove it: 2 1 .Elcl b5 22.Elxc2

8 .i. �� .,� 7 � • '"·�,"·� 6 •• • �·� 5 is;�r�� !� , ,,, , %� ��, , , ;� 4 ��r,, , %� � �n��,1 1 , , , , ,%-,,,,,Y,� !=

a b c d e f g h 22 . . . c4!N (22 . . . id4 t? 23. <iih2 c4 24.ixc4 ixc2 25.1lffxc2 bxc4 26.1lffxc4 ixb2 27.1lff c6± Bennewitz - Boos, e-mail 2008.) 23.1lff e3 ixg5 24.fxg5 (24.Elxc4 bxc4 25.fxg5 1lffe8 26.1lff d4 id3 27.ixd3 cxd3 28.ic3 1lff e5 29.1lffxd3 1lffxg5=) 24 . . . ixc2 25.1lffe6t <iifS 26.if4 1lffb6t 27.<iih l Eld8 28.1lfff6t <iie8=

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h 21 .i.xb4 bxa4 22.'Wxa4 cxb4 23.'Wxb4

Mission accomplished. At the price of a pawn Black has opened two queenside files and obtained the advantage of the bishop pair.

a b c d e f g h 23 ... a5

23 . . . ElbS 24.1lff a4 a5 25.1lff c6 Elc8 also looks fine.

24.'Wb7 i.d7 25.llle6 'Wc8 26.'WxcSt �xc8 27.b3 �c3 28.�bl h6;i

The endgame holds no danger for Black.

Conclusion

Although 1 l . . .li:'ic7 seems playable, the 1 l . . .li:'ib4 line is the one I would recommend. In variation B21 we saw Black playing solidly with . . . b6 and . . . ib7, which seems perfectly okay. Nevertheless it was in line B22 that the real highlights occurred, and according to my analysis Black has good chances in the resulting complications.

Overall I would say the Flick-Knife Attack is one of the most difficult variations for either side to play, as there are lots of playable deviations and it is hard to be prepared everywhere. Still, I don't think Black should be afraid to dive headfirst into the flames.

e4 Systems a b c d e f g h

Classical Variation with 9 . . . �e8

Variation Index 1 .d4 �f6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.�c3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.�f3

7 .. . .ig7 8 . .ie2 0-0 9.0-0 :Se8 A) 10.�c2 B) 10.�d2

Bl) 10 ... �a6 1 1 .f3 �c7 12.a4 �d7 B l l ) 13.�c4 B12) 13.@hl

B2) 10 ... �bd7 B21 ) 1 1 .f4 B22) 1 1 .�c2 B23) 1 1.a4

B23 1 ) 1 1 . .. �e5 8232) 1 1 . .. a6

82321 ) 12.f4 s2321 1 ) 12 ... :Sh8 823212) 12 ... c4

82322) 12.�c2 s23221 ) 12 ... :Sb8 823222) 12 ... �e5

80 82 82 84 85 87 87 89 90 91 93 93 94 95 96 96 98

80 e4 Systems

I .d4 tllf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.tllc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.tllf3 ig7 8.ie2

This classical set-up has been a main line for many years, although nowadays it is not the most popular, as many players prefer one of the more aggressive modern lines.

8 ... 0-0 9.0-0 :ges This is by far the most popular move,

although we will also discuss 9 . . . ig4 in the next chapter.

From this, the starting position for the present chapter, White has two logical ways to deal with the threat to the e4-pawn: A) 10.vgc2 and B) IO.tlld2.

A) 10.vgc2

This is a relatively rare choice, and Black gets a good game without too much difficulty.

10 ... tlla6! Immediately Black hints at the possibility of

harassing the queen.

1 1 .:gel 1 1 .a3 has been played in quite a few games,

but apart from guarding the b4-square, this move is of little use to White. Therefore I will not pay much attention to it here, other than noting that 1 l . . .ctJc7 1 2.Ei:el El:b8 1 3.if4 b5 was quite satisfactory for Black in Vexler -Shestoperov, Omsk 1 973.

a b c d e f g h l l ...ig4

1 1 . . . lt:l b4?! sets a small positional trap, as after 12 .iWbl ig4 1 3.a3? ! Black can play 1 3 . . . ixf3! 1 4.gxf3 ( 14.ixf3? lt:lbxd5!) 1 4 . . . lt:la6 and point to White's fractured kingside. But of course White can easily avoid this with something like 1 3.ie3N llld7 1 4.a3 lt:la6±.

1 l . . .ctJc7 seems quite playable though, for instance: 1 2.if4 ( 12.ctJd2 b5 1 3.lt:lxb5 lt:lfxd5 was good for Black in Materne - Krauhausen, corr. 1 969.) 1 2 . . . El:b8 1 3.a4 a6 1 4.a5 This occurred in Vichnar - Pribyl, Mlada

Chapter 7 - Classical Variation with 9 . . . l:'\e8 8 1

Boleslav 2008, and here the most consistent continuation would have been:

a b c d e f g h l 4 . . . b5N l 5 .axb6 l:'\xb6 Black has good counterplay, for example: 1 6.lt'id2 lt'ib5 1 7.lt'ic4 lt'id4 1 8.°Wdl lt'ixe2t 1 9.i::lxe2 lt'ih5 20.lt'ixb6 llixf4 2 1 .ctJxc8 lt'ixe2t 22.°Wxe2 'Wxc8=

12 . .if4 tllb4! On the previous move this idea was dubious,

but here it works well.

13.°Whl

8

7

6

5

4

3

2 1

a b c d e f g h 13 .. . tllh5!

1 3 . . . °We7 This move was played in Kolus - Bulgarini Torres, e-mail 2008. Black is determined to dine on the e4-pawn, but the plan is a little too risky.

1 4.a3!N

a b c d e f g h 1 4 . . . lt'ixe4!?

There is no way back for the brave. Of course 1 4 . . . lt'ia6 could be played as a last resort, but after 1 5 .e5t White is just better.

l 5 .i,b5! l 5.axb4 gives Black a choice of acceptable lines: 1 5 . . . i,xc3 ( 1 5 . . . lt'ixc3 1 6.bxc3 i,xc3 l 7.i,b5! [ l 7.i,e3? cxb4+] 1 7 . . . i,xel 1 8.'Wxel 'Wxel t 1 9.lt'ixel i::le4 20.i,xd6 i::lxb4 2 1 .i,fl i::\d4 22.i,xc5 i::lxd5=) 1 6.bxc3 lt'ixc3 1 7.i,fl lt'ixb l 1 8.i::lxe7 i::lxe7 19 .1::\xb l i::le4 20.i,xd6 i::lxb4 2 1 .i::lxb4 cxb4 22.i,xb4 i,xf3 23.gxf3 i::\d8 24.d6 a6 25.f4 b5=

l 5 . . . i,xc3 l 6.bxc3 llixd5 l 7.i,xe8

7 6

4 3

Over the past few turns Black's pieces have all 2 been moving forwards! Obviously we should have a concrete idea in mind, otherwise we will just be pushed back.

82 e4 Systems

1 7 . . . .ixf3 1 7 . . . llidxc3? 1 8.'Wd3 Elxe8 1 9 . .id2! c4 20.'Wxc4 d5 2 1 .'Wxc3 llixc3 22.Elxe7 Elxe7 23 . .ixc3+-17 . . . .if5? ! 1 8 . .ixd6! llixd6 1 9.'Wa2±

l 8.'Wd3! 1 8.gx:f3 llixf4 19 .Elxe4 'Wg5t 20.Wfl 'Wg2t 2 1 .Wel 'Wgl t 22.Wd2 'Wxf2t 23.<;t>cl llie2t 24.Elxe2 'Wxe2 25 .ixf7t Wxf7 26.'Wxb7t Wf6 27.'WxaS '@fl t 28.Wb2 'We2t=

1 8 . . . llixf4 1 9.'Wxf3 Elxe8 20.'Wxf4 'We5 2 1 .'Wxe5 Elxe5 22.Ele3 <;t>f8 23.f3 lli f6 24.Elxe5 dxe5 25.Elbl b6t

After all the fireworks Black will have to fight for a draw in the endgame.

14.igS l 4.ie3 c4! can be compared with the main

line; here too Black has promising counterplay.

14 ... if6 15.ih6 c4! Black needs to make use of the knight on b4

before it is driven away.

16.a3 ixf3 17.axb4 ixe2 18.:gxe2

8

7

6 5

4

3

2 1

a b c d e f g h 18 ... igSN

This would be my first choice, although l 8 . . . g5!? also led to interesting play and eventual success for Black in Nemet -Antunac, Yugoslavia 1 975.

19.hgS 'WxgS 20.g3 tt:lf4; The initiative is with Black.

B) 10.tt:ld2

8 •Jt1£�!---� 7 � · - - · � · 6 , , , , , /,� %� %16)fi�� 5

�-��//,,,,,;�

4 •• 'B!a•• 3

��

�- ,�,,,,,;% "//, ��r �- ,�

2 � � �il,�� 1 �---- %•vmtm----

a b c d e f g h Even if you favour the 9 . . . .ig4 line, It 1s

important to know something about this position as it can also arise through the Knight's Tour Variation, while some of the ensuing lines with f2-f4 can occur via the Four Pawns. From here I will consider two approaches for Black: Bl) 10 ... tt:la6 and B2) 10 ... tt:lbd?.

Bl) 10 ... tt:la6

The knight is heading for c7. The variation is solid but lacking in active prospects for Black, so it would not be my first choice.

l l .f3 White overprotects the e4-pawn in order to

prepare llic4.

1 1 ...tt:lc? From here the knight will support the . . . b5

break. If White tries to prevent it with a4-a5 , then the knight may come forwards to b5 and later to d4.

12.a4 tt:ld7 This modern line has been used by a few top

Chapter 7 - Classical Variation with 9 . . . E1e8 83

players. I will discuss a couple of other ideas as well:

1 2 . . . lt:lh5? With most of the pieces on the back rank it is a lost cause to start an attack so early. 1 3.lt:lc4 i.d4t 1 4.Whl f5 ( 14 . . . �h4 1 5 .�e l �f6 16 .i.d3± Furman - Kirchberg, e-mail 2005.) 1 5 .g4 fxg4 1 G.fxg4 lllfG 1 7.i.g5! ms 1 8.i.f3 �d7 Now in Delchev - A. Kovacevic, Zadar 2007, White could have obtained a serious advantage with 1 9.llle2!N.

Historically, Black's most popular option has been: 1 2 . . . bG 1 3 .lt:lc4 i.aG

Black wants to exchange the worse of his two bishops for the annoying knight on c4.

a b c d e f g h 1 4.i.g5

14.lt:le3 i.xe2 1 5 .�xe2 a6 16.g4 Ei:b8+± Karasev - Stein, Leningrad 1 97 1 .

1 4 . . . �d7 14 . . . hG?! 1 5 .i.e3 i.xc4 1 6.i.xc4 a6 1 7.�d2 Wh7 1 8.Ei:abl �d7 1 9.b4 b5 20.i.e2 c4 2 1 .a5± This position occurred in several games in the later decades of the last century, but most Benoni players avoid it nowadays. Black has no serious weaknesses, but his position is passive and generally unappealing.

l 5 .�d2 i.xc4 16 .i.xc4 a6 l 7.�d3 White has two bishops and more space. Black's only real option is to aim for kingside counterplay.

s E �%---/�£

�� 1 � IE-W�i-i ��at{""'�� {7.�---&r,�

6 . %'.% %'.% ,� - � 5 . . . . . %-�%� /.,., .� 4 '·�·'··�---%�

3 �'ii� [3J� 2 ��-----'� �� !� �----%��r=----a b c d e f g h

1 7 . . . lllh5 1 8.Whl The direct l 8.g4!? is also prom1smg: 1 8 . . . i.d4t 1 9.Whl lt:lg7 (Or 1 9 . . . lt:lfG 20.Ei:ab l intending b2-b4 with an edge to White, Banet - Chiru, e-mail 2005.) 20.i.d2 f5?! Evdokimov - Berg, Helsingor 2008. 2 1 .gxf5N gxf5 22.b4±

1 8 ... hG 1 9.i.d2 g5 20.Ei:fb l lt:lf4 Zilka - Fauland, Austria 20 1 1 . Now the right way would have been:

2 1 .i.xf4N gxf4 22.�d2 i.e5 23.lt:le2 b5 24.i.d3 �e7 25.lllxf4±

Black has no real compensation.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

a b c d e f g h Returning to the main line, White has two

main options: coming forward immediately with Bl 1) 13.lllc4 and waiting with B12) 13. @hl .

84 e4 Systems

B 1 1) 13.li)c4 li)e5

Black's previous move prepared this method of challenging the strong knight.

14.li)e3 f'5 1 5.exf5 1 5 .f4?! is an inaccurate move order which

needlessly gives Black an additional option: 1 5 . . . li)f7 1 6.exf5

15 ... gxfS 16.f4 li)f7 Both sides have strengths and weaknesses

here, but overall White's chances seem to be slightly higher.

17.@hl b6 18.i.d3 li)h6 The knight does not sit prettily here, but

there was not much choice as the f5-pawn needed to be defended. 1 8 . . . 'Wf6 can be met by 1 9.'Wc2 forcing 1 9 . . . li)h6 when we reach the main line.

19.�c2 �f6 20.i.d2 i.d7

21 . .. @hs Black can also consider 2 1 . . .1'l:e7 22.1'l:g3

1'l:ae8 as played in Koneru - Siebrecht, Differdange 2007, after which 23.:!'l:fl N± looks like a logical way to build up White's position.

22.gafl ge7 23.gh3 �f7 Another idea is 23 . . . 1'l:ae8N 24.li)cd l 'Wf8

25.j,c3 j,xc3 26.'Wxc3t ©g8, when White remains a bit better but Black is certainly in the game.

24.li)c4 �g6 25.gg3 li)g4 26.h3 h5?! An understandable attempt to complicate

the position, but objectively it is insufficient. 26 . . . 'Wf6!N± should have been preferred.

Chapter 7 - Classical Variation with 9 . . . l"i:e8 85

8 .1 m � � -�-�%'"//, �%""-�'d"" ' 7 �� ..t�� 6

/.,, , ,%.,,,, ,,-,_, , ,Y,�ii� 5 • ,•K� T� i 4 !n�a�nl•"� , �%'"//, �� , , , , ,%%'"" 3 � �il,- �� t!J 2 ��ii� ��ftr� • "• '•'•�

a b c d e f g h 27.hxg4!N

27.tlie3?! maintained a slight plus but Black was eventually able to draw in Kramnik -Topalov, Monte Carlo (rapid) 200 1 .

27 ... hxg4 28.tll e3 White faces some temporary coordination

problems, but eventually his extra piece should tell. A possible continuation is:

28 ... i.d4 29.tll e2 he3 30.:gxe3 :gxe3 31 .he3 tllxd5 32.i.d2 tllf6 33.h4 g3 34.@gl+-

B12) 13.@hl

previous variation with 1 3 .tlic4. However, I should not hide that fact that the knight move leads to some advantage for White in this position too: 1 4 .tlic4 tlie5 1 5 .tlie3 l"i:b8

1 5 .. .f5 1 6.f4 tlif7 1 7.exf5 gxf5 leads back to variation Bl l, which favours White as we have already seen.

1 6 . .id2 a6 1 7.f4 tlid7 1 8 .tlic4 tlif6 l 9 . .if3 b5

s ��.t.BE•*� ,, ,, "" "/;("' , /,� ��-kPfi' 7 ��:0'0 �%4!�� 6 •• r� •• � 5 r-�/,� /,,,, -� 4 '-�-:r�� 3 m ��

�r�- ,, , ,�r0 ��

�r"(< 2 � � �t!:i rtJ S{,,,, /,-�� r� �

a b c d e f g h 20.tlixdG!

This simple and thematic tactic leads to a fine position for White.

20 . . . °IWxdG 2 1 .e5 °1Wd8 2 1 . . .°1Wd7 22.dG tlie6 23.exfG .ixf6± Mulder van Leens Dijkstra - C. Alexander, corr. 1 972.

22.dG tlie6 23.exfG .ixf6 24.axb5 axb5 This position occurred in Kauko - Knebel, corr. 1 984, and a few subsequent games. So far everyone played 25.f5 which is not a bad move in itself, but there is something even stronger.

86 e4 Systems

25.llld5!N �xb2 26.i::\a7 i::\b7 27.i::la8 l 7 . . . lllbxd5!? White has a serious initiative - the main

threat is f4-f5.

15.aS! 1 5 .lllb5 is slightly less accurate: 1 5 . . . lllxb5

1 6.�xb5 i::\d8 17.a5 a6 1 8 .�c6 i::\b8= Kramnik - Topalov, Dortmund 200 1 .

1 5 . .. �b7 l 5 . . . a6! ?N

I was hoping to find something encouraging here, but if White finds a few good moves the situation will be anything but rosy.

1 6.axb6 lllxb6 1 7.i::\b3

This was my big idea, but it does not quite work. Objectively 17 . . . lllb5 is the best chance, followed by attempting to hold the ensuing pawn-down endgame: l 8.lllxb5 axb5 1 9.�xb5 �d7 20.�xd7 lllxd7 2 1 .lllc4 llle5 22.llle3 i::\eb8 23.i::\xb8t i::lxb8±

1 8.exd5 �xc3 1 9.i::\xc3 'Wxe2 20.llle4

20 . . . i::\xe4 20 . . . 'Wxdl 2 1 .1::\xdl i::\e7 22.�g5! (22.lllxd6 lllxd5 23.i::\xc5 �e6±) 22 .. .f6 23.lllxf6t Wh8 24.llle4 i::ld7 25.i::\b3 lllb5 26.i::\e3±

2 1 .fxe4 'Wxe4 22.i::\e3 'Wh4 23.b4! cxb4 24.'Wc2 'Wd8 25 .�b2 lllxd5

25 . . . �d7 26.'Wc4+-

a b c d e f g h 26.'We4! lllxe3 27.'Wd4 f6 28.i::\xf6

Despite having an extra piece and three extra pawns, Black is powerless against the mating threats.

Chapter 7 - Classical Variation with 9 . . . l"i:e8 87

17.i.xbS l:!ed8;!; Black has reasonable defensive chances, but I

don't see any active ideas for him.

B2) 10 ... lllbd7

8 i.� ..t.�i.� -� 7 .T� i)� T� ... 6 " '•�.�.t� 5 � �-�%�//,,, , , ;� �� ,� �� : ��-�,�� ®'i""'"'�:'//,/, �®'% �®'� 2 � r� ��'.JLr� � r� 1 ��,,,,%dv•jm""

a b c d e f g h This normally leads to a more complicated

position than 1 o . . . llla6, and is my primary recommendation. As with most major opening tabiyas, a whole host of different moves have been tried at one time or another, but I will

focus on the three most important ones: B21) l l .f4, B22) I I .Wfc2 and B23) 1 1 .a4.

Before diving into the analysis, let me explain a bit about the different move orders. Things can get rather confusing as the moves a2-a4 and . . . a6 can be played at any moment. (For example, in many games Black has favoured the move order 1 0 . . . a6 l l .a4 'llbd7, leading immediately to variation B232 on page 93.) The other two lines will cover some specific situations in which Black may steer the game in a different direction, hoping to exploit the absence of the . . . a6 move in some way.

B21) 1 1 .f4

l l .. . c4! The same move can be played with or without

the inclusion of the moves a2-a4 and . . . a6, but we will see that leaving the a-pawns at home should benefit Black slightly. The position after l l . . .a6 12.a4 c4 will be examined later in variation B232 12, beginning on page 95 .

12.�hl

88 e4 Systems

After 12.j,xc4 ctJc5 Black immediately regains the pawn: 1 3 .e5 ( 1 3 .j,b5 does not help: 1 3 .. .!'le7 14.Ele l ? ct'ig4 1 5 .e5 ct'id3+ Nemec - Sikora Lerch, Stary Smokovec 1 977.) l 3 . . . dxe5 l 4.fxe5 Elxe5 l 5 .f3 Ele8+ B. Toth -Velimirovic, Budva 1 98 1 .

1 2 ... ctJcS 13.eS There is no point in crying to protect the

pawn: 1 3 .j,f3 b5 ! With pawns on a4 and a6, this would not be possible. l 4.ct'ixb5 ct'ifxe4 1 5 .ctJxc4 Elb8 16.ct'id4? ( 1 6.ct'iba3 j,a6+) Now in Weber - Hartmann, Berlin 1 972, Black could already have got a winning position with 1 6 . . . j,a6N-+.

13 ... dxeS 14.fxeS :gxeS 15.ctJxc4

8 .i� .i.� � ··�·- "• •wi·� : "*'-, •••• ,, 5 • �,. fti"' .� �� /:,, , , �� ,J� �� : -�·-·· ?ii! 2 '.fg ·'·'�

""rf""?;Wf/":J; �� .,,,, , 1 /� �V�M�@ a b c d e f g h

15 ... :ges l 5 . . . Elf5 is slightly less accurate. The stem

game continued: l 6.j,f3 (The rare l 6.j,f4! seems more promising, and has made a heavy score for White.) 1 6 . . . ct'ig4 ( 1 6 . . . b6 l 7.d6 l:'i:b8 1 8.ctJe3 Ele5=) l 7.ctJe3 ctJxe3 1 8.j,xe3 b6= Rycov - Tai, Tallinn 1 979.

16.J.gS h6 17.Lf6 l 7.j,h4 is well met by l 7 . . . ct'ice4 l 8.ct'ixe4

l:'i:xe4. Here we see another advantage ofleaving the a-pawns on their original squares, as after 1 9.j,g3 Wi'xd5 the b6-square is protected and

White must fight for a draw as follows:

a b c d e f g h 20. '!Wxd5 ct'ixd5 2 l .j,f3 Eld4 22.Elad 1 ctJ b6 23.l:'i:xd4 j,xd4 24.Ei:dl j,f6 25.b3 ctJxc4 26.bxc4 <;t>g?+ Hage - De Smet, corr. 1 995 .

17 ... J.xf6 18.ctJb5 a6 White has active knights and a passed

cl-pawn, but Black has good prospects for counterplay on the dark squares. We will follow a top-flight game for a few more moves.

8 .i� .i.�.i�·� ill! •• ,._ •• • 7 -� •. •m4,x•IJJ" : ��,.��-

4 •·5····· � �� 3 �� , � �� 2 lS � -j,,� lS �

1 0n("""Bi-iB� a b c d e f g h

19.ctJbd6 ElfS 20.b4 ct'ia4 21.Elcl ctJc3 22.Wf d2 bS 23.Elxc3 bxc4 24.ct'ie4 J.xc3 25.Wfxc3 f5 26.ct'icS

This position was reached in Jobava -Radjabov, Novi Sad 2009. White has made an interesting exchange sacrifice, but I believe Black could have maintained at least equal chances with:

Chapter 7 - Classical Variation with 9 . . . Ei'.e8 89

B22) 1 1 .°Wc2

White overprotects the e4-pawn and prepares tt:lc4.

1 1 . . . lbes Black can postpone moving his a-pawn for

a moment. Instead l l . . . a6 12.a4 reaches line B2322 on page 96.

When discussing the present variation one cannot avoid mentioning the following move: l 1 . . .lllh5!?

This was famously played by Fisher in his match against Spassky.

l 2.ixh5 gxh5

a b c d e f g h The idea of allowing doubled h-pawns was revolutionary at the time. Despite Fischer's eventual success, the plan is considered strategically risky and most Benoni players do not trust it nowadays. I will give a few more moves of the game for historical interest.

1 3.tt:lc4 l 3 .a4 tt:le5 transposes to a slightly more popular version of the . . . tt:lh5 idea. From here 1 4.tt:ldl has scored heavily for White, and 1 4.b3!? may also be a good move.

1 3 . . . tt:le5 1 4.tt:le3 'W'h4 1 5.id2?! Too timid. White could have obtained some advantage with: l 5 .f3! id7 l 6.a4 a6?! (l 6 . . . 'W'f6N l 7.'W'e2±) Pojedziniec - Widera, Polanica Zdroj 20 1 0, and now 1 7.tt:le2!N 'W'f6 1 8.tt:lg3± with a firm grip on the f5-square.

90 e4 Systems

1 5 . . . lllg4 1 6.lllxg4 hxg4= Spassky - Fischer, Reykjavik (3) 1 972.

Having straightened out his kingside pawns, Black had a comfortable position and went on to outplay his opponent.

12.f4?! Stopping . . . g5, but this is too risky without

preparation. The superior l 2.a4 transposes to the later variation B23 l on page 9 1 . As you will see, from that position Black can opt for the main lines with 1 2 . . . a6 or venture the quirkier 1 2 . . . ig4!?.

12 .. . c!Deg4 13.c!Df3

a b c d e f g h 13 ... c4!

This seems to be the most energetic. 1 3 . . . 1We7!?N is also interesting, for instance:

1 4.ib5 lllxe4 1 5.ixe8 lllxc3 1 6.bxc3 if5 17.ixf7t 1Wxf7 1 8.1Wb3 id3 1 9.Ele l c4t with good play for the sacrificed exchange.

14.!xc4 b5 This more or less forces a draw.

If Black is determined to play for more he could also consider: l 4 . . . lllxe4! ?N l 5 .lllxe4 if5 1 6.id3 ixe4 1 7.ixe4 1Wb6t 1 8.<;t>hl :8ac8 1 9.1Wd3 lllf2t 20.Elxf2 1Wxf2 2 1 .id2 (2 1 .ie3? \Wxb2) 2 l . . .f5 22 .ixf5 gxf5 23.\Wxf500

15.ixbS 'Wb6t 16.i?hl

20.Elxfl c!Dxflt 21.i?gl lDh3t 22.i?hl c!Df2t 23.i?gl c!Dh3t

Y2-Y2 Kaposztas - Meleghegyi, Salgotarjan 1 977.

B23) 1 1 .a4

This typical pawn move is not only useful in preventing ... b5, but also enables the queen's rook to enter the game via the a3-square. Here I considered the independent possibility of

Chapter 7 - Classical Variation with 9 . . . l':1e8 9 1

B231) 1 1 .. .tlleS, but focused mainly on B232) 1 1 ...a6, which reaches a popular position that can arise via many different move orders.

B231) 1 1 ...tlleS

With this move Black activates his pieces in the centre while potentially trying to save a tempo by doing without the . . . a6 move.

12.'?Nc2 The immediate attempt to chase the knight

meets with a stern punishment: 1 2.f4? tlleg4 1 3 .tllc4?! This is the move White would like to play, but it fails for tactical reasons:

8 .i �jJ�.i �·,�� ,,, ,/,� ��,�� : '1�,�.�Mf� ��ref , '"�',,, ,, , ,� 5 �� '� �W/i 4 t!J -�- t!J �'))� 3 � � "� ��'ef'""'� �� '� 2 ",/fJrf{:�� Jt!J a, �v� ��

a b c d e f g h 1 3 . . . tllxe4! 14.ixg4 ixg4 1 5 .1Mfxg4 id4t 1 6.tlle3 tllxc3 l 7.bxc3 ixe3t Black emerges a clear pawn ahead, Luzardo Alvarez - Verducci Silvelo, corr. 1 999.

l 2.l':1a3 g5 l 3.1Mf c2 resembles variation B23222 on page 98, and may transpose immediately if Black plays 1 3 . . . a6.

1 2 . . . a6 leads to variation B23222, while 1 2 . . . g5 l 3.l':1a3 is the same as the l 2.l':1a3 note above.

13.f3 This seems like the most ambitious attempt.

1 3 .ixg4 tllfxg4 1 4.h3 tllf6 Black should have no problems here, as he has managed ro exchange a pair of minor pieces while White's remaining bishop is still undeveloped.

1 5 .f4 tlled7 1 6.tllf3

92 e4 Systems

1 6 . . . c4!N I found one game which continued: 1 6 . . . Ek8 1 7.Elel c4 1 8.e5 dxe5 1 9.fxe5 'Llxd5?! 20.'Llxd5 Cllxe5 2 l .Cllxe5 �xd5 22.'Llf3 Elxe l t 23.'Llxel c3 24.b3 Kozul -Chatalbashev, Zagreb 20 10 . The machine rates this position as close to equal, but I don't see a great deal of compensation for Black and in the game he lost quickly. Black can improve on that line with 1 9 . . . 'Llh5!?N but after best play it gets him no more than equality: 20.�g5 f6 2 1 .exf6 �b6t 22.�f2 �xf2t 23.Wxf2 'Llhxf6= I like the text move more, as it gives the knight faster access to the c5-square while avoiding the drama and complications of the aforementioned game.

l 7.�e3 1 7.Ele 1 ? 'Llc5+

17 ... a6 1 8.Elfel �a5 Black has a good position.

a b c d e f g h 13 ... �d7

The bishop retreats, having provoked a slight weakening of White's kingside. The f6-knight is already eyeing the h5- and f4-squares, while the bishop dreams of delivering a deadly check from d4.

14.Clic4 Usually White would prefer not to exchange

these knights, but he needs to develop his queenside pieces somehow.

1 4.'Lldl 'Llh5 l 5 .g3 occurred in Galliamova - Cmilyte, Nalchik 20 1 1 , and here l 5 . . . f5!?N looks promising for Black.

l 4.f4 Clleg4 l 5 .'Llc4? is worse, and led to crushing defeats for White in two games:

s �� E�-� 7 �·•..t.•••• 6

, , ,%� �� .-.%� 5

�-�%�/,,, ,,� 4 ,.�.,�1� 3 �m ��- - - %� �% -ef:"" % �� -� 2 ,,,,,D!f•�·�1� /� � � ��

a b c d e f g h 1 5 . . . Cllxe4! 1 6.'Llxe4 �d4t 17 .Cllf2 ( 1 7.Whl 'Llxh2 1 8.Cllg5 'Llxfl 1 9.�xfl Ei:el-+ Evdokimov - Volokitin, Moscow 2008.) 17 .. . 'Llxf2 1 8 .Elxf2 �h4 19 .�fl Elel 20.�e3 (20.'Llxd6 �g4-+) 20 . . . Elxal-+ Simunek -Splichal, e-mail 2004.

a b c d e f g h 14 ... Cllxc4 15.�xc4 Cllh5 16.g4 �d4t 17.@hl

Now the knight must decide where to go.

Chapter 7 - Classical Variation with 9 . . . ge8 93

17 ... tllf6!N I prefer this over the more obvious l 7 . . . CiJg7,

after which 1 8.�f4 h5 1 9.h3 �h4 20.�h2! 1!1aintained an edge for White in Markus -Dvirnyy, Nova Gorica 20 1 1 .

The text move keeps the knight in a better position. In the aforementioned game Black may have been reluctant to leave his darksquared bishop short of squares, but I have not found a convincing way for White to exploit this.

19 . . . .td4!? The tempting 1 9 . . . h5?! is not quite correct.

I spent some time checking variations such as 20.gxh5 �xf4 2 1 .�xf4 CiJxh5 22.�e3 a6 23.a5 �h4, but eventually judged that the tremendous potential of White's dark-squared bishop was more significant the slight damage to his kingside.

If Black does not wish to allow the weakening of his own kingside structure, then 1 9 . . . �c8!? could be considered, in order to free the d7-square for the knight.

20.gS 20.CiJe2= repeats the position.

20 ... tllhS 21 .tllxhS gxh5= Black's position seems okay, as it will be hard

for White to get to the weak h5-pawn without leaving himself exposed in some other area.

B232) 1 1 . . . a6

This posmon can be considered the most significant branching point of the present chapter. It has occurred in over a thousand games, via numerous move orders whereby Black plays . . . a6 and White answers with a2-a4 at some stage in the opening. We will consider two main plans for White: B2321) 12.f4 and B2322) 12.'?Nc2.

B2321) 12.f4

s i.� .i.Bi.� 9m � ��,, ,j� ��,� 7 - .t. a'!A)a .t. � '

6 .t. � �- �-,,�� 5 !Iii �.8"� ,, � 4 !�� '�,�� 3 !Iii �:m��" '� ��:�rd",,, ,,;%_"//, �� ,� 2 w� 0�a lS wl3 /, ""ef""%�;�,,,,,;� ��'!{"" 1 � �V�Mm

a b c d e f g h If White wishes to play a set-up with f2-f4,

it would be advisable for him to aim for this version with the pawns already on a6 and a4. Compared with the earlier variation B21 , the inclusion of those two pawn moves should help White slightly should Black play . . . c4.

Here I have analysed two replies for Black: B2321 1) 12 . . . �bS and B23212) 12 . . . c4. (Even though the latter move compares a little unfavourably with variation B21 , it is still quite playable.)

94 e4 Systems

B2321 1) 12 ... i:!bS

One noteworthy game continued 1 3.a5 b5 14.axb6 lllxb6 1 5 .Whl c4 1 6.:8a3 Wdc7= l 7.b4?! cxb3 1 8 .:8xb3 lllfd7 with good play for Black in Navara - Gashimov, Reggio Emilia 2007.

It is also worth pointing out that 13 .Wic2 transposes to variation B2322 l , which can be found on page 96.

13 ... °Wc7 14.e5!? This is by no means forced, but it certainly

seems to be the critical move.

14 ... dxe5 15.tlJc4 b5 This forcing move has been Black's most

popular reply.

l 5 . . . e4!? leads to an interesting struggle, although after 1 6.f5 Ela8 17.�f4 Wid8 White's chances were slightly higher in Ponomariov -Gashimov, Nice 20 10 .

15 . . . b6!? This rare move deserves consideration.

l 6.fxe5 lllxe5 l 7.d6 l 7.lllxe5 Elxe5 l 8 .�f4 llle8�

17 . . . Wdd7 l 8 .�g5 lllfg4 l 9 .llld5 lllxc4 20 .�xc4 llle5

2 1 .Elxf7!? A beautiful combination, even if it not entirely correct.

2 1 . . .lllxf7 22.llle7t Wh8 23.�xf7 Elf8 The simple 23 . . . �b7!?N 24.�xe8 :8xe8 leaves Black with an excellent position where his bishops dominate the board. 25 .Wid2 :8f8+

24.�xg6 Wdg4 25.Wid2 �d7 26.�c2 Wid4 27.Wie2 �g4 28.Wie l

Now in Jobava - Vocaturo, Reggio Emilia 2009, Black could have taken control with:

Chapter 7 - Classical Variation with 9 . . . Ei:e8 95

16.axb5 axb5 17.tllxe5 c4 l 7 . . . li:lxe5? has never been played for good

reason: 1 8 .fxe5 :i"i:xe5 1 9.i.f4 c4 20.�d4 li:ld7 2 1 .d6 �c5 22.i.xe5 i.xe5 23 .�xc5 li:lxc5 24.li:lxb5 i.d7 25.lllc7 li:le4 26.i.xc4 li:lxd6 27.i.d5±

18.tll c6 In this sharp position I found an important

improvement over the existing games.

18 . . . b4!N Black can give up the exchange to fight for

the initiative.

19.tllxbS 1 9.li:la4 li:lxd5 20.�xd5? (20.li:lxb8 li:lxb8

2 1 .i.8 li:le7�) 20 ... i.b7 2 1 .i.8 :i"i:e6 22.�xc4

:i"i:xc6 23 .i.xc6 i.xc6 24.�b3 �b7+

19 .. . bxc3 20.tllxd7 ixd7 21 .bxc3 tll e4

8

7

6

4

3

2

1 a b c d e f g h

22.:ga3 '?Nc5!? 22 . . . li:lxc3 23.:i"i:xc3 i.xc3 24.�c2=

23.'?Nel ig4 24.d6 h5t Despite being (temporarily at least) the

exchange and a pawn down, Black has more than enough compensation.

B23212) 12 ... c4

a b c d e f g h This line closely resembles the earlier

variation B2 l, and the reader may wish to turn back to page 87 to compare the two paths. Once again I will point out the key places

96 e4 Systems

where the inclusion of the moves a2-a4 and . . . a6 makes a difference.

13.�hl This has been the most popular reply, and

I think it is the strongest one available. In the event of l 3.if3 Black does not have the same . . . b5 idea that was noted in line B2 l , but l 3 . . . li:lc5 still offers him a fine position.

13 . . . li:lcS 14.eS Once again l 4.if3 is not too impressive

after l 4 . . . id7, for instance: 1 5 .e5 dxe5 l 6.6ce5 !'l:xe5 l 7.li:lxc4 !'l:e8 1 8 .if4 li:lfe4+ Ehlvest -Szekely, Tallinn 1 983.

14 ... dxeS 15.fxe5 !'l:xe5 16.li:Jxc4 !'l:e8 l 6 . . . !'l:f5?! is risky as the rook is short of

squares: 17.if4 li:lfe4 1 8.li:lxe4 li:lxe4 1 9.°Wc2 li:lf6 20.li:le3 °Wa5 2 1 .li:lxf5 ixf5 22.°Wb3 °Wxd5 23.ic4+- Schmidt - Olszewski, Warsaw 2009.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

a b c d e f g h 17.igS h6 18.ih4 li:lce4 19.li:lxe4 !'l:xe4 20.ig3 li:lh5

Compared with line B2 l , let us note that 20 . . . °Wxd5? is a blunder here as 2 1 .li:lb6 wins material.

20 . . . ig4!? is a playable alternative though: 2 1 .ixg4 li:lxg4 22.li:ld6 !'l:d4 23.°Wf3 °Wd7 24.!'l:ad l !'l:xdl 25 .!'l:xd l 'Wxa4= Glorstad -Achilles, e-mail 2008.

21.ixhS !'l:xc4= Hage - Ziegert, corr. 1 999.

B2322) 12.'Wc2

a b c d e f g h This move is more solid. White overprotects

the e4-pawn in preparation for f2-f4 and/ or li:lc4. We will investigate two responses for Black: B23221) 12 . . . !'l:b8 and B23222) 12 . . . li:les.

B23221) 12 ... !'l:b8

This move leads to a sharp struggle with White preparing e4-e5 and Black preparing . . . b5.

13.f4 This has not been the most popular choice,

but it immediately transposes to a position that has occurred more frequently than that after any other move. Therefore I will treat it as the main line.

It is also worth mennonmg: l 3 .li:lc4 liJ b6 l 4.li:le3 (l 4.li:la3 °We7 l 5.a5 li:lbd7 1 6.!'l:e l b5 17.axb6 li:lxb6+±) 1 4 . . . °We7 1 5 .f3 li:lh5! A typical method to obtain counterplay on the dark squares. l 6.a5 li:ld7 l 7.g3 id4 1 8.li:lcdl li:le5 1 9.'iihl ih3 20.!'l:el

Chapter 7 - Classical Variation with 9 . . . Ei:e8 97

8 �- � i. �� , , ,1, � -'m' 1 �·· iiiBi

6 •• __ , __ _ ,,�r� 5 � ·�-��-')) 4 --- *--- --�-�:·% �-3 � � m��r 2 �;� 1·� - - - - -"� , , , ,,J-. .. %-r//0 �%'" ' �w-£---m �·�llJ�� R@

a b c d e f g h Now in Levar - Sutkovic, Rijeka 201 l , Black

should have played 20 . . . tllf6N maintaining sufficient counterplay. 2 1 .1Wd2 tlleg4! ? 22.1Wc2 tlle5= is one amusing line, although it would be a shame if such a rich position were to end in a premature draw.

a b c d e f g h 13 • • • °Wc7 14.iihl

Tucking the king away has been White's usual choice.

14 ... b6!? Black is waiting for the right moment to

spring forwards.

The main alternative is: 1 4 . . . c4

This move is certainly spirited, although Black may fall a little short of equality.

1 5 .e5!

White should strive for the initiative instead of material gains. l 5.ixc4 leads to an endgame where Black is doing fine: l 5 . . . b5 16 .axb5 axb5 l 7.id3 b4 1 8.tlld l 1Wxc2 1 9.ixc2 tll c5 20.tll f2 b3 Black has good compensation, for instance: 2 1 .ib l tllg4!?N (2 1 . . .ia6 22.i:'i:d l i:'i:b4 Yi-Yi Gauri - Homatidis, Chalkidiki 2007.) 22.tllxg4 ixg4 23.Ei:e l Ei:b4 24.h3 id7 25 .i:'i:a7?! f5+

a b c d e f g h 1 5 . . . dxe5 16 .tllxc4 b6

1 6 . . . b5?! does not quite work: 17 .axb5 axb5 1 8.d6 1Wc6 Now in Gershon - Manor, Israel 2002, the strongest continuation would have been: 19 .tlla5!N 1Wa6 20.b4±

17 .fxe5 tllxe5 l 8.d6 We have been following the game Schorra - Hirmer, e-mail 2007. Here Black's best chance would have been:

98 e4 Systems

But even here White maintains some initiative.

1 9.lllxe5 �xe5 20.�f4 �e8 2 1 .�f3 �b7 22.�xb7 �xb7 23.'Wd3±

15.lllc4 Most players have chosen this move, which

meets the challenge head-on. If White does not want to follow this path then he could try just about any sensible non-committal move. In most cases Black can reply with either a delayed . . . c4 or the waiting move . . . h5 to improve his prospects on the kingside.

15 ... b5 16.axb5 axb5 17.lllxd6 This has been the most popular move but it

is not dangerous.

l 7.llla5!? is more challenging, but Black is surviving and thriving here too. l 7 . . . b4 1 8.lll b5 'Wb6N ( 1 8 . . . �xb5!? was also interesting in Lauber - Syperek, Halle 1 993, but I prefer the text move slightly.) 19 .lllc4 'Wxb5 20.lllxd6

a b c d e f g h 20 . . . b3!? (20 . . . 'Wb6 2 1 .lllxe8 lllxe8 22.e5 lll c7 23.�dl �b7 24.�c4±) 2 1 .'Wdl 'Wb4 22.lllxe8 (22.e5 �d8 23.�d2 'Wd4f±) 22 . . . lllxe8 23.e5 lllxe5!? 24.fxe5 �xe5 25.'Wd3 ll:ld6� Black has a pawn and excellent piece play for the exchange.

17 .. . 'Wxd6 18.e5

8 ��.i.� i.� .� '� �" �!fi.lt?'f' : �� r�� 5 f.3;'� � 4 �lJJJ{ '�� '�� 3 �� ,�

��/�,,, , , ;� �� r� 2 , , , ,J�J�£-�1£ 1 � � � l:t�w

a b c d e f g h 18 . . . lllxeS!?N

I like this new idea, although there is nothing wrong with following the existing examples: l 8 . . . 'Wb6 l 9.exf6 lllxf6 (l 9 . . . �xf6 20.�xb5 �xc3 2 1 .�xd7 �xd7= B. Toth - Cosulich, La Spezia 1 973.) 20.�xb5 �d8 2 1 .�c4 �f5= Pulvett - Diamant, Montevideo 2009.

19.fxe5 :gxe5 20.Af4 c4 21 .AO Af5 22.Axe5 'Wxe5 23.'Wfl b4i

Not for the first time, Black has a pawn and a promising initiative for the exchange.

B23222) 12 . . . �e5

a b c d e f g h I find this to be the more natural move, and

it does not lead to excessive complications. Overall I would prefer this method of playing

Chapter 7 - Classical Variation with 9 . . . E1e8 99

- not only is Black theoretically okay, he also avoids having to learn too many long forcing lines .

. 13.E:a3 This move is by no means uncommon

in several Benoni lines. The rook waits on standby, ready to swing into action if needed on the other side of the board.

1 3 .h3 is the second most common move in the position. Black can reply with the thematic 1 3 . . . g5 1 4.tlic4 llixc4 1 5.ixc4 g4 16.hxg4 llixg4 1 7.if4 Wf6 (or 1 7 . . . id4!?N+±) with a good position, Napalkov - Grigoryev, corr. 2004.

1 3.f4?! tlieg4 is risky for White, for instance: l 4.llic4 llixe4 1 5 .llixe4 id4t 1 6.hl llixh2-+ Oxborough - Curnow, London 1973.

13 ... g5 This may look strange to the uninitiated,

but it has a clear positional justification. Black is trying to conquer the dark squares in the centre, keeping control of e5 and preparing a possible knight manoeuvre to f4 later.

A playable alternative is: 1 3 . . . We7 14.h3 ( 14.a5 ig4 1 5.ixg4 llifxg4 1 6.tlia4 llid7= Beliavsky - Jobava, Wijk aan Zee 2006) 14 . . . g5 1 5.ctJf3 ctJxf3t 1 6.ixf3 g4 1 7.hxg4 ixg4= Kopecky - Fuka, corr. 1 987.

14.tlJdI The knight is heading for e3 and perhaps

later f5 - in White's dreams at least.

Here is an example showing what may happen if White ignores his opponent's kingside play: 14.a5 g4 ( 14 . . . id7 is another idea, with the possible continuation 1 5 .tlidl g4 1 6.ctJe3 We7+± intending . . . h5 next.) 1 5.b3 llih5 1 6.llic4 Wf6 1 7.llidl ? ( 1 7.hlN+±)

a b c d e f g h 1 7 . . . llif3t! 1 8 .gxf3 gxf3 1 9.ixf3 Wxf3 20.b4 Wxe4 2 1 .Wxe4 Elxe4 22.llixd6 Elxb4+ Vefling - Charushin, corr. 1 986.

14 ... id7 I prefer to finish development rather than

manoeuvring the already powerful knight to a different outpost. Nevertheless the more common 14 . . . tlig6 is playable too, for instance: 1 5.ctJe3 llif4 1 6.idl b6 1 7.f3 Elb8 1 8 .g3 llig6 1 9.tlidc4 This was Spraggett - Barlov, New York 1 987, and now 1 9 . . . Wc7N 20 .ie2 b5 would have kept the position dynamically equal.

15.a5 g4 16.CDe3 We7 17.f4 1 7.ElelN Elac8 1 8 .b3 h5+±

100 e4 Systems

Black reasonable chances in D. Berczes -Bluvshtein, Budapest 2007.

19.:Sdl tlih5t Overall I like the scheme with . . . tlie5 and

. . . g5, as Black gets to follow a simple and active plan without having to remember any complex variations.

Conclusion

Black seems to be alive and well in the main lines of the Classical Variation, whether they involve wild complications or relatively calm manoeuvring. As in other chapters I covered a variety of playable options, so you can choose the one that best matches your own style and tournament tactics.

e4 Systems Classical Variation with . . . ig4

a b c d e f g h

Variation Index 1.d4 lLif6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.lLi c3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.lLif'3

7 ... i.g7 8.i.e2 0-0 9.0-0 A) 9 ... a6 B) 9 ... i.g4

Bl) 10.h3?! B2) lO.lLid2 B3) 10.i.f4

A) note ro 1 5 .a5

a b c d e f g h 24 ... c4!N

B 1 ) note to l 3 . . . 1Mfc7!? B3) after 17.�fl

a b c d e f g h a b c d e f g h l 7 . . . lll c5!N 17 . . . g5!?N

102 109 109 1 10 1 1 1

102 e4 Systems

l .d4 lllf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.lllc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.lllf'3 J.g7 s.J.e2 0-0 9.0-0

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

a b c d e f g h The plan with . . . ii.g4 is quite popular

because it solves two of the problems that Black traditionally faces in the Benoni. First and foremost, he guarantees himself the chance to exchange his light-squared bishop, which might otherwise struggle to find a meaningful role in the game. Secondly, in the likely event of the bishop taking the knight on f3, Black will gain improved control over the e5-square, making it hard for White to execute one of his most important ideas.

If Black wants to put his bishop on g4, the first decision he must make is whether to insert the preliminary moves . . . a6 and a2-a4. I don't know of a truly compelling reason to favour one approach over the other, so I decided to analyse both A) 9 ... a6 and B) 9 ... J.g4.

A) 9 ... a6 10.a4 J.g4

1 0 . . . l::\e8 1 1 .llld2 takes us back to the previous chapter.

l l .J.f4

In a recent game I encountered another idea: 1 1 .2::\e 1

This move does little to improve White's position, and could prove to be a loss of time.

1 1 . . .l::le8 12 .llld2 ii.xe2 1 3.l::lxe2 Attempting to justify the rook's position.

1 3 . . . lllbd7

14.f4?! This only succeeds in creating weaknesses in White's camp. 14 .lllc4 lllb6 1 5 .llla3 Vflc7 1 6.a5 lllbd7 1 7.lllc4 lllg4 1 8 .ii.f4 lllge5= Smirnov -Zhao, North Geelong 20 1 1 .

1 4 . . . l::\c8 14 . . . lllh5!?N 1 5 .lllf3 c4+

1 5.a5 c4 Black often plays this move against a white pawn on f4.

1 1 .llld2 can be compared with variation B2 a b c d e f g h on page 1 1 0. 1 6.l::\a4?

This terrible move quickly backfires.

Chapter 8 - Classical Variation with . . . ii.g4 103

1 6 . . . tllc5 Almost everything is wmnmg here, for instance: 1 6 . . . tllg4! ?N 17 .tllxc4 b5+

1 7.:8'.xc4 tlld3 1 8.:8'.xc8 iWxcs+ 19.ctJb3 iWc4 20.e5 dxe5 2 1 .fxe5 tllxd5 22.tllxd5 iWxd5-+

Jepson - Petrov, Malmo 20 1 2.

s i.� B ��·___ , , , ,� ,, , , ,/,� , , , , ,/,�,�� 7 �£ ��,��!!�£ 6 · � �� t • • � �-�/,� /, , , , , ,� 5 ��" '� �llF��

: /� �m�li�i �Wff�---- , :� 'WM·W� 2 ra, ��ra-o ru 1 /,""ef""%� �-----%�,�--- ,� �Vm M �� a b c d e f g h

1 1 ...�e8!? "Let him live" said he, and gave the knight

a chance to escape! This move leads to a more complicated position.

The alternative is, or course: 1 I . . .ii.xf3 Got you! 1 2.ii.xf3 iWe7 For more on this position, refer to the variation B3 on page 1 1 1 . Personally I would choose to aim for this position, no matter in what move order.

12.ttJd2 White defends the e4-pawn and prepares

the usual knight dance here to c4. Usefully, his dark-squared bishop has already developed as opposed to being blocked on c l .

12 .h3? does not work: 1 2 . . . tllxe4! A nice combination! 1 3.hxg4N ( 1 3.ctJxe4 :8'.xe4 14 .ii.g5 iWe8 1 5.ii.d3 ii.xf3 1 6.iWxf3 :B:b4 1 7.:8'.ael ii.e5+ Uhlmann - Fischer, Palma de Mallorca 1 970.) 1 3 . . . ii.xd 14 .iWb3 ii.b4+

IfWhite is determined to avoid exchanging his light-squared bishop then he may try:

1 2.iWc2 Here the game is more positional and slow.

1 2 . . . iWc7 1 3.:8'.fe l Here i s an example involving the great master of the Benoni: 13 .b3 tllbd7 14 .:B:fe l :B:ab8 1 5.a5 :8'.bc8 16.ii.d2

a b c d e f g h 1 6 . . . c4!? A nice trick, and of course a thematic one for this opening. 1 7.bxc4 tllc5 18 .h3 ii.d7 19 .ii.e3 ctJ fxe4 20 .ii.d4 ii.xd4 2 1 .ctJxd4= Tukmakov - Tai, Leningrad 1 97 1 .

1 3 . . . tllbd7 14.a5 White has done quite well from this position, but I do not believe Black should be in much danger.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

a b c d e f g h 1 4 . . . c4!?N

It's strange nobody has tested this thematic move. Unlike several of the other examples we have seen, here it is not even a pawn sacrifice!

1 04 e4 Systems

14 . . . :gac8 was played in Kristiansen -Ornstein, Polanica Zdroj 1 975, and here White could have claimed a slight edge with: 1 5 .:ga4N 'llh5 1 6 . .id2;:!; 14 . . . :gab8 looks reasonable though, and l 5.'lld2 .ixe2 l 6.:gxe2 'lle5 was equal in Eperjesi - Perenyi, Hungary 1 980.

l 5 .:ga4 Trying to prevent . . . 'llc5 , but Black can modify the plan slightly.

l 5 . . . b5 l 6.axb6 'llxb6 1 7.:ga5

a b c d e f g h l 7 . . . 'llfd7!

The first knight was diverted away from c5, but the second is ready to step up.

1 8 . .ie3 'llc5 19 . .ixc5 dxc5 20.:geal .ixc3 2 1 .bxc3 Wl'f4=

variation B2, which begins on page 1 1 0. It remains to be seen which side will benefit from the inclusion of the moves .if4 and .. ,:ge8.

13 ... lllh5 This is necessary if Black is to develop the

other knight smoothly.

14 . .ie3 llld7

15.a5 I also checked a few examples where White

advanced on the kingside.

1 5 .g4 'llhf6 16.f3 h6 1 7.�hl 'lle5 1 8.:gg l b5 (l 8 . . . Wl'a5!?Nf±) l 9.g5 hxg5 20 . .ixg5

Chapter 8 - Classical Variation with . . . ig4 105

1 5 .<iih l I faced this move a couple of years ago.

1 5 . . . llle5 1 6.g4 lllf6 1 7.!:'1gl !:'1b8 1 8 .g5 lllh5 1 9.f4 llld7=

White has gained some space but his attacking chances remain low, while there is always a chance he will be left with weaknesses later in the game.

20.e5? Too optimistic. The saner 20.a5N id4 2 1 .'Wf2 f6 22.gxf6 'Wxf6 would have kept the position balanced.

20 . . . dxe5 2 1 .f5 lllf4 22.'Wg4 lllb6 23.ixf4 exf4 24.f6 lllxd5 25.lllce4 if8-+

Dobrev - Petrov, Albena 20 1 1 .

its counterpart, it is not uncommon for Black to exchange them with a view to exploiting the opponent's dark-square weaknesses.

1 5 . . . Wt c7?! has been played, but is too passive in my opinion.

However, there is a more interesting alternative which could be considered: 1 5 . . . 'Wh4

The queen supports the knight, which may jump to f4 at any time.

16 .lllc4 The most natural move. 1 6.lllf3 'We7= Malich - Suba, East Berlin 1 979. 1 6.g3 'Wh3 was balanced in Andres Gonzalez - Reinaldo Castineira, Aviles 2000. It is worth pointing out the possible continuation 1 7.lllc4N llle5= 1 8 .lllxd6?? lllg4 19.f3 lllxe3 and Black wins.

1 6 . . . lllf4 1 6 . . . ixc3? 1 7.bxc3 !:'1xe4 1 8 .lllxd6 !:'1e5± Van der Vliet - Grooten, Amsterdam 1 983.

1 7.ixf4 1 7.'Wf3 llle5 1 8.lllxe5 ixe5 1 9.g3 leads to a roughly equal endgame after: 1 9 . . . 'Wh5 20.'Wxh5 lllxh5 2 1 .llla4 ig7 22.f3 f5 23.lllb6 !:'1ad8 24.ig5 ixb2 25 .ixd8 ixal 26.ic7?! (26.!:'1xa1 N !:'1xd8�) 26 . . . id4t 27.<iig2 fxe4 28.fxe4 lllf6+ Toro Solis de Ovando - Marcussi, corr. 1 980.

1 06 e4 Systems

I 7.�d2? has never been played and can be refuted by means of a simple combination:

8 .i� �.i··� 7 �l�ll�•�· �� -�� -·"� : ��-��-�-4 , , , , ,/,� ::,, %� �- -� ��?!�_, , ;�,, ,, 3 ,�_J � �

2 �-("" ·�r ... Y,� [j -� �ll ..... . %.i=,, ,

a b c d e f g h 1 7 . . . llixg2! 1 8 .�g5 ( 1 8 .'tt>xg2 �g4t 1 9.'tt>h l �xc3 20.�xc3 �f3t 2 1 .'tt>gl 2:xe4 22.2:fcl 2:ae8-+) 18 . . . �xc3 1 9. bxc3 � xe4 20 . ctJ xd6 �f3 2 1 .ctJxe8 2:xe8 The knight is oddly placed on g2, but at the same time highly influential. 22.2:a2 2:e5 23.h4 h6 24.�dl �xc3 25.'tt>xg2 hxg5+

17 . . . �xf4

a b c d e f g h 1 8 .g3 �f6 1 9.f4 �e7 20.l::l:ae l 2:ab8

White has the centre, but Black has an excellent bishop. 20 . . . 2:ad8 2 1 .�f3i Tirabassi - Oakley, corr. 1 982.

2 1 .e5?! Premature. 2 1 .'tt>g2N would have given White a slight plus.

2 1 . . .dxe5 22.f5 b5 23.axb6 llixb6 24.tlia5

24 . . . c4!N Improving over 24 . . . �d6 25 .�xa6 Auger -Morczeau, corr. 1 993, after which 25 . . . 2:a8N 26.tlic4 llixc4 27.�xc4 marginally favours White.

25.�f2 25.tlic6 �c5t 26.�e3 �xe3t 27.2:xe3 2:bc8 28.f6 �f8 29.2:xe5 2:xe5 30.llixe5 �d6 3 1 .tlig4 h5 32.tlif2 �e5 33.ctJfe4 llid7+

25 . . . �c7! Black is targeting the vulnerable knight.

a b c d e f g h 26.tlic6 2:bc8 27.tlib4 �d6 28.llixa6

28.ctJc2 e4+ 28 . . . llid7

28 . . . llixd5 29.fxg6 fxg6 30.�f7t 'tt>h8 3 l .ctJxd5 �xa6 32.l::l:a l �b5 33 .2:a7 2:g8 34.tlif6 �c5t 35 .'tt>g2 2:cf8 36.llixg8 2:xf7 37.2:fxf7 �c6t 38.'tt>gl =

29.fxg6 fxg6 30.�f7t 'tt>h8 3 1 .ctJe4 �b6t 32.'tt>g2 2:cd8 33.tlig5 �xa6 34.tlie6 �f8 35.llixd8 2:xd8+

Chapter 8 - Classical Variation with . . . �g4 107

To summarize, 1 5 . . . Wh4 leads to rich and dynamic play. In general Black's chances are pretty good, although White may be able to claim an edge with precise play, as mentioned in the no te to move 2 1 above.

16.g4 Here are two other ideas:

16 .'llc4 Wf6 ( 1 6 . . . Wc7 17 .Wd3 Clle5 1 8.Cllxe5 �xe5 is another idea) 1 7.Wd2 �xe3 1 8.Wxe3 Clle5 1 9.Cllxe5 Wxe5= Pelletier - Mantovani, Pula 1 997.

1 6.l::\a4 can be met by 16 ... Wf6!? insisting on a battle for the dark squares. ( 1 6 . . . �xe3 17.Wxe3 f5 1 8.lllc4;!; Olsen - Ruben, corr. 200 1 .) 1 7.Wd3 Clle5 1 8.�xd4 'llxd3 1 9.�xf6 'llxf6 20.l::\a3 l::lad8= Blatsky - Hladik, corr. 1 999.

16 ... tlihf6 17.0 Now Black must decide on which flank to

take action.

8 �� i��·� �� ,,, ,/,� 0,� � ,��a�,,� ''/, �

�-�- , /,� 1iliti & 5 '[!j �� 8 - � -4 , , ,;,� 7;, ;,·�-;,,,, ;�

�Z'";,/""'"0,rn �� 3 � m � 8 • ��,�,, , �:,,lfu£� %�M 2 �� >�§?- �b �,,, /, •. ,,,,� :s�@ a b c d e f g h

20.'llc4 �xe3 20 . . . �e5? does not work: 2 1 .'lla4 We7 22.f4 �xb2 23.Cllaxb2 Wxe4t 24.Wg2 Wxg2t 25 .�xg2 'lle4 26.'lla4±

2 1 .Wxe3 Clle5 22.Cllxe5 dxe5 White has some positional compensation for the pawn, but no definitive advantage that I can see. A possible continuation is:

23.f4 exf4 24.Wxf4 We7 25.2::\ael We5 26.h4 Wxf4 27.l::lxf4 'llh7 28.e5�

18.axb6 tlixb6 19.tlidl

a b c d e f g h 19 ... tlibxd5!?

A nice idea, although Black has a second aggressive line available: 1 9 . . . h5!?

This move also happens to set a nasty trap. 20.�xd4!N

1 08 e4 Systems

20.h3? is the only move to have been played, but it allows Black to obtain an improved version of the main line: 20 . . . 'Llbxd5! 2 1 .exd5 'Llxd5 22.'Llc4 :gbs 23.:ga3 :gb4+ Rajkovic - De Firmian, Vrsac 1 983. By comparison with the main line, the move h2-h3 has seriously weakened White's kingside.

20 . . . cxd4 2 1 .Wl'f2

s � � s� �-� �� ,_ ,,/,� ,/,� 7 �/,'"//, �Y//.'0 �/,'"//, ��Y//, 6 · �� ?� & %'% A /�l 2A% /!'al: A 5 / - - -� ';0;

"� /,,,,,,� i �� -0 �� 4 � W� [j · [j � �� - --"�� 3 ��-0 �/,'"//, �'!itXKI ��-0 2 ef[!ft � �Y§J ef� d . . , 7,.lt)'��:=--

a b c d e f g h 2 1 . . .hxg4!?

This sharp move looks slightly risky but it seems to hold up. 2 1 . . .'Llbd7 is safer: 22.g5 'Llh7 (22 . . . 'Llxd5? 23.exd5 Wl'xg5t 24.�hl ctJc5 25 .:ga3 Wl'xd5 26.b4 'Lle6 27.'Lle4 �g7 28 .:ga5 Wl'b3 29.ctJxd6 :ged8 30.Wl'e l ±) 23.f4 f6 24.h4 fxg5 25 .hxg5 (25.fxg5 'Lle5 26.'Llf3 :gf8 27.Wl'g3 ctJxf3t 28.:gxf3 :gxf3 29.Wl'xf3 'Llf8 30.ctJf2 'Lld7=) 25 . . . 'Llc5 26.Wl'f3 :gb8=

22.fxg4 'Llbd7 23.g5 'Llxe4 24.Wl'xf7t �h8 25 .:ga3 'Llxg5 26.Wl'xg6

a b c d e f g h

Both kings are in danger, and the position balances out to equality in a few moves.

26 . . . :gg8 27.Wl'h6t 'Llh7t 28.:gg3 Wl'e7 29.'Llf3 :gxg3t 30.hxg3 :gg8 3 1 .Wl'f4 d3=

20.exdS tlixd5;; 21 .tlic4 I left my engine running on this position for

a while, but the only enlightenment I received was a list oflines with zeroes in evaluation.

21...f5 Here are a couple of playable alternatives:

2 1 . . .Wl'f6N 22.Wl'd2 'Llxe3 23.ctJcxe3 :ge5 (23 . . . :gab8 24.:ga3 �xb2 25 .'Llxb2 :gxb2 26.Wl'c3 Wl'xc3 27.:gxc3 :ge2 28.ctJd5 �g7 29.:gf2;:!;) 24.�hl :gae8 25 .:ga3 Wl'e7 26.'Llg2 :ge2 27.Wl'd3 Wl'g5 28 .:gxa6 Wl'd2 Black has no problems in this endgame, despite being a piece down. 29.Wl'xd2 :gxd2 30.'Llf4 �e5 3 1 .ctJg2 �d4=

2 1 . . .:gb8N 22.:ga3 :gb4 23.�hl :gxc4 (23 . . . Wl'b8 24.:ge l 'Llxe3 25 .ctJcxe3 �xb2 26.:gxa6 :gb3 27.Wl'd2 �d4 28.ctJc2 :gxel t 29.ctJxel�) 24.Wl'xc4 'Llxe3 25.ctJxe3 �xe3=

22.f4 fxg4 23.:i:3a3 tlixe3 24.tlicxe3 '!Wd7 25.'!Wg2 h5 26.�hl �g7N=

26 . . . Wl'e6? 27.f5 was winning for White in Korchnoi - Nunn, London 1 980, but the text move keeps the position double-edged.

Chapter 8 - Classical Variation with . . . i.g4 1 09

B) 9 .. . i.g4

Bl) 10.h3?!

This has been played in well over a hundred games, but it is practically a waste of a tempo as Black is usually willing to take on f3 voluntarily. This does not mean White is immediately worse, but at the same time it can hardly be good for his chances of achieving an opening advantage.

10 .. . i.x£3 I I .i.x£3 a6 l 1 . . .l/Jbd7 1 2.i.f4 Vfie7 13 .Ei:el a6 1 4.a4

E:I:fe8 is another route to the 1 3 . . . Vfie7 line noted below.

12.a4 llibd7 13.i.f4 VNc7!? In the analogous position from line B3,

this move would be slightly risky, for reasons noted on page 1 1 1 . Here on the other hand, the wasted h2-h3 move noticeably improves Black's chances.

Of course there is nothing at all wrong with the more traditional queen move: l 3 . . . Vfie7

From here the queen supports the . . . l/Je5 move if and when it is needed.

1 4.Ei:e l E:I:fe8 15 .Vfic2 l 5 .i.h2 seems odd, and after l 5 . . . . Ei:ac8 l 6.a5 c4 Black was fine in Van Hoolandt � Chatalbashev, Val Thorens 2008.

15 . . . c4 1 6.i.g3 E:I:ac8 17.Ei:ad l Now in Petkov - Berelowitsch, Eupen 2007, Black could have played:

a b c d e f g h 1 7 . . . l/Jc5!N 1 8 .e5 l/Jfd7 1 9.e6 l/Je5

With equal chances.

a b c d e f g h 14.VNc2 �Ue8 15.�fel c4 16.i.e2 �ac8 17.aS

1 7.Ei:acl El:e7 1 8.i.fl El:ce8 1 9.Vfib l l/Jh5 20.i.g5 occurred in Tsatsalashvili - Kushka, Rijeka 20 1 0, and now 20 . . . i.f6N 2 l .i.e3 i.xc3 22.Ei:xc3 E:I:xe4 would have been equal.

17 .. . llicS

1 1 0 e4 Systems

This leads to mass exchanges culminating in an amusing draw.

a b c d e f g h 18.hc4 llicxe4 19.llixe4 �xe4 20.�xe4 llixe4 21 .°Wxe4 'Wxc4 22.�cl

22.°Wxc4 �xc4 23.�xdG �xb2 24.�b l �cl t 25 .�xcl �xcl = Forintos - Anka, Hungary 2005 .

22 .. . 'Wxe4 23.�xcSt iJ8 24.i.h6

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 a b c d e f g h

24 .. . °Welt 24 ... We7N= could also be followed by a

swift handshake.

25.�h2 °We5t 26.�gl Yi-Yi Rezsek - Leviczki, Balatonlelle 2009.

B2) 10.llid2

a b c d e f g h Compared with the 1 2.ctJd2 move seen in

the main line of variation A, here the knight retreat has the disadvantage of blocking the dark-squared bishop on its original square. This means that when the knight arrives on c4, it can be chased away before the bishop arrives on f4 to attack the d6-pawn.

10 . . . he2 1 1 .°Wxe2 a6 12.a4 llibd7 13.llic4 llib6 14.llie3 °We?

1 4 . . . �e8 is slightly less accurate: 1 5 .a5 ctJbd7 ( 1 5 . . . ctJc8 1 6.f3 ctJd?±) 16.ctJc4 ctJe5 1 7.ctJbG �b8 1 8.�g5± Black's pieces are slightly lacking in coordination and he still has to work for equality.

a b c d e f g h

Chapter 8 - Classical Variation with . . . ig4 1 1 1

1 5.aS tllbd7 16.tll c4 tlle5 17.tllb6 l:!ae8! Compared with the previous note, it is

obvious that Black's pieces are working more harmoniously here.

IS.ig5 h6 19.ih4

20.ig3 tllfd7= Jaracz - Vaulin, Polanica Zdroj 1 999.

B3) IO.if4

This is the main line and 1s the most challenging move.

10 ... ixf3 If Black wants to exchange this knight then

he should do so immediately, as it might run away at any moment. That being said, he could consider 10 . . . Ele8 when 1 1 .'lld2 ixe2 1 2 .'<Wxe2 resembles the earlier variation A, and is likely to transpose directly as soon as the moves . . . a6 and a2-a4 are played. By the way, I don't see a good reason for Black not to insert these moves, as without them he will have be to mindful of a knight or even queen coming to b5.

I I .ixf3 a6 12.a4 '<We7 1 2 . . . Wc7 has been played, but I like it less

here than I did in variation B 1 , when we effectively had an extra tempo. One potential problem is the sharp approach with 1 3 .e5!?, but even if White proceeds more quietly with 13 .'<Wd2 'llbd7, there is still an interesting plan available in 1 4.a5!? followed by Elfc l and a timely b2-b4 to cast doubt on the queen's position.

Another idea is: 12 . . . 'lle8

This move has been tested by some top players, bur it is too passive for my liking.

1 3 .Wd2 'lld7 14.ig5! This is the most unpleasant move, although 14.Elfe l Elb8 15 .ie2 We? 16.ig5 also gives White an edge.

14 . . . if6 15 .ie3 Elb8 16.ie2 ctJc7 1 7.f4± Black is poorly placed to meet the following sacrificial breakthrough.

1 1 2 e4 Systems

l 7 . . . Ele8 17 . . . �g7 1 8.eS dxe5 1 9.fS ctJe8 20.d6 'WaS 2 1 .fxg6 hxg6 reaches a sharp position, but if White manages to find a couple of good moves he will get a big advantage: 22.'Wc2! ctJef6 23 .�c4!± Wojtyra - Rupsys, e-mail 2004.

1 8.eS dxeS Now in Kuzmin - Simacek, Pardubice 2009, White should have continued in thematic style with:

1 9.fS !N A typical pawn sacrifice.

1 9 . . . e4 1 9 . . . ElfB 20.ctJe4 ctJe8 2 1 .d6±

20.d6 ctJa8

2 1 .aS! Paralysing the knight and effectively forcing the following move.

2 1 . . .bS 22.axb6 ctJaxb6 23.Elxa6 Ela8 24.Elxa8 'Wxa8±

Material is equal and White has a strong initiative, with a powerful passed pawn and two great bishops.

13.�el It is important to note that 1 3 .eS leads

nowhere: 1 3 . . . dxeS 14.d6 'We6 1 5 .Elel '2Jbd7 1 6.�xb7 Ela7= Browne - D. Gurevich, New York 1 984.

1 3 .'Wb3 has also been tried, but Black can happily sacrifice a pawn with: 1 3 . . . '2Jbd7!

14.'Wxb7 Elfb8 l 5 .'Wc6 ctJe8 ( 1 5 . . . ctJeS 1 6.�xeS 'WxeS�) 16.aS ctJeS 17 .�xe5 �xe5� Svetushkin - Foisor, Eforie Nord 2009.

13 . . . lllbd7 Both sides have more or less completed

development. Black's position is pretty fluid, and he may look to develop play in the centre and/or on either flank. Compared with some other Modern Benoni lines the position is relatively stable here, and White will have to try and improve his position gradually, perhaps with a view to exploiting his bishop pair later.

a b c d e f g h 14.a5

Lots of other moves have been played, and the position is generally of a non-forcing character. Therefore I will limit the coverage to a few of the more interesting and instructive examples I found.

14 .'Wd2 c4 The following game shows an interesting plan involving kingside play: l 4 . . . Elfe8 1 5 .aS hS!? 1 6.h3 ctJh7 17 .�e2 Elac8 1 8.�fl 'Wf6 1 9.Elacl g5 20.�e3 g4+± Tukmakov -Spraggett, 1 993. Here is another example where Black combined kingside and queenside play: 14 . . . hS 1 5 .h3 ( 1 5 .aS can be compared with the main line.) l 5 . . . c4 16.�e2 Elac8 17 .�fl

Chapter 8 - Classical Variation with . . . ig4 1 1 3

Elfe8 l 8.ih2 Gual Pascual - Cramling, Barcelona 1 989.

a b c d e f g h 1 8 . . . ctJe5 !?N With the typical idea of sacrificing the c-pawn. 1 9 .f4 ctJd3 20.ixd3 cxd3 2 1 .�xd3 ctJd7 Black has fair compensation, for example: 22.e5 dxe5 23.d6 �d8 24.fXe5 ctJxe5=

1 5 .ie2 Ei:ac8 1 6.f3N I decided to examine this untested move. 1 6.ifl tt:Jg4 l 7.h3 ctJge5 was pleasant enough for Black in Boensch - Perenyi, Leipzig 1 988.

a b c d e f g h 1 6 . . . Ei:fe8

Here is another version of the aforementioned pawn sacrifice: l 6 . . . ctJe5 l 7.ig3 tt:Jfd7 l 8.f4 ctJd3 1 9.ixd3 cxd3 20.�xd3 Elfe8 2 I .if2 ctJc5 22.ixc5 Ei:xc5�

l 7.a5 ctJh5 Black chases the enemy bishop with a view to developing play on the dark squares. A possible continuation is:

a b c d e f g h 1 8.ig5 id4t!? 1 9.c;t>hl if6 20.ih6 ie5 2 1 .f4 ig7 22.ig5 f6 23 .ih4 ctJxf4 24.�xf4 g5 25.�f2 gxh4f±

After the text move we must decide where to put the rooks. Another key question is what to do with the knight on f6, as we may wish to move it to open the long diagonal.

l 4 . . . Ei:fe8 Of course playing in the centre is also not bad.

1 5 .�c2 h5 Initiating one of the typical plans in this position. The knight will retreat to h7 to

1 14 e4 Systems

allow Black's other pieces to fight for the dark squares.

1 6.h3 'llh7 17 .°1Wd2 .id4 1 8 . .ie3

Fighting for the dark squares. I am less keen on the following three alternatives: 1 8 . . . .ieS ?! 1 9 . .idl b5 20.axb6 'llxb6 2 1 ..ib3:t Kononenko - Delchev, Solsones 2004. 1 8 ... \Wf6 1 9.l:fad l .ixe3 20.l::\xe3 'llg5? 2 1 ..ixhS! Wf4 (2 1 . . .gxhS 22.l:l:g3+-) 22 . .ig4± Gupta - Girinath, Visakhapatnam 2006. l 8 ... .ixe3N l 9.°1Wxe3 'llhf6:t

1 9.l:l:adl 19 . .idl 'llhf6 20 . .ic2 .ixe3 2 1 .°1Wxe3 h4 is also about equal.

1 9 . . . .ixe3 20.°1Wxe3 °1Wg5= I see no major problems for Black.

a b c d e f g h

1 5.lDa4 If Black gets to play . . . b5 and recapture with

the rook, then he can expect a good deal of activity on the b-file. Here are three examples demonstrating how Black can obtain easy play if White fails to prevent this.

1 5 .°1Wd2 b5 16.axb6 8:xb6 1 7.l:l:a2 8:fb8= Roeder - Galje, Graz 1 997.

l 5.°1Wc2 'lle8 Before implementing the plan, Black carries out a typical manoeuvre. 16 . .ie2 'llc7 17.ifl b5 1 8.axb6 8:xb6= Black had a good position in Vukic - Tringov, Borovo 1 980.

1 5 .ie2 'lle8 16.°1Wd2 'llc7 1 7.igS .if6 1 8 . .ixf6 \Wxf6 1 9.l:l:adl b5= Hudak - Harvey, corr. 2009.

15 ... lDeS A firmly-established knight on e5 is normally

a sign of good health for the Benoni player.

16.ie2!? This is the most ambitious move, avoiding

simplifications and daring Black to capture the e4-pawn.

Several game have continued with 16 . .ixeS '.Wxe5 but Black obviously has nothing to fear here. One example continued 17.l:l:bl 'lld7 1 8.b4 °1Wd4 1 9.°1We2 cxb4 20.l:l:ed l \Wf6 21 ..ig4 b5 22.axb6 'llxb6 23.8:xb4 'llxa4 24.8:xa4 and a draw was agreed in Browne -D. Gurevich, Estes Park 1 985. Curiously, a year later Gurevich reached the same position with Black against a less formidable opponent, but that time he played on and won.

16 ... lDxe4!? With this move Black drags his opponent

into deep water, though it remains to be seen who is more likely to drown.

Chapter 8 - Classical Variation with . . . �g4 1 1 5

The more solid 1 6 . . . �fe8 is also quite playable, for instance: 1 7.f3 ctJh5 1 8 .�e3 f5 1 9.ctJc3 f4 20.�f2 �f6 2 1 .'®d2 �h4=

17.�fl

8 �� u ��·-•,,,, ,Y,� �-,_, , ,Y,�f�� 7 � ' �� ,,j,,, ,�£��' 6 ' m - - ' � 5 � -8 " � 4 �-� '·il···· %%% %%� ,,,,,'/, 3 •m0!1Jai1Jm�m" 2 , , , ,/�� f"''��flJ 1 � �if��

a b c d e f g h 17 . . . gS!?N

1 7 .. .f5? White is more prepared for the open centre here. 1 8.f3 ctJf6 ( 1 8 . . . ctJg5 does not help either: 1 9.�xe5 �xe5 20.f4 �d4t 2 1 .'®xd4 '®xe l 22.�xe l ±) 1 9.�xe5 dxe5 20.d6 '®e8 2 1 .ctJxc5±

The one game on the database took an interesting course: 1 7 . . . ctJxf2!? 1 8.'®d2?

For better or worse, White should have taken the knight. After 1 8 .'it>xf2N '®f6 1 9.'it>g3 '®f5� Black has nothing forced, but White's pieces lack coordination and his king is a little vulnerable. Play may continue:

7 6 5 4 3 2

a b c d e f g h

20.'2Jb6 mes 2 1 .h4 �f6 22.�d2 h5-t 1 8 . . . '2Jfg4

After 1 8 . . . ctJh3t 1 9.gxh3 ctJf3t 20.'it>g2 '®xel 2 1 .�xel ctJxd2 22.�xd2 �be8 23.�b l �e4 24.l2Jb6+! the endgame is unclear.

a b c d e f g h 1 9.h3 '2Jf6 20.�xe5 dxe5 2 1 .d6 md8!N

2 1 . . .'®e8 22.ctJxc5 was level in Geffroy -

S. Kovacevic, Issy !es Moulineaux 1 999. 22.dxe7 �xd2 23.ctJxc5 �e8

24.l2Jxb7 24.�xe5? ctJh5-+

24 . . . �xe7 25 .�xa6 e4 The b2-pawn will not escape.

26.ctJc5 �c2 27.ctJb3 �a7+

18.�cl f5 Another idea is: 1 8 . . . ctJg6!? 1 9.'®c2 f5 20 .f3

ctJe5 2 l .fxe4 (2 1 .�e2 '2Jf6 22.�xg5 '@f7f!) 2 1 . . .ctJg4 22.e5 �xe5 23.'it>hl ctJxh2f!

19.f.3

1 1 6 e4 Systems

20.fx:e4 lllg4 21 .g3 �d4t 22.i>g2 lllf2 For the moment Black is down a bishop for

a pawn, but just look at the difference between the two sets of pieces.

24.E:a3 lllxe4 25.lllb6 fxg3 26.hxg3 E:f2t 27.i>h3 i>hs 28.�e3 Lb2 29.�g2

� � �-� � 8 � �� ;"""'� �� ,, , , 7 � ·� � -·

6 I. � ____ ,/,� . � 5 � -8-.�., 4 , , , , ,%��-- - -%� ��--- -%-

'"" �� ! ��r�� 3 �� r�@ 2 /, , , , ,Y,� �� ,,,,,r,�-ll� I � "•�If "�

a b c d e f g h 29 .. . g4t!?

29 . . . �xa3 should not change the final result: 30.�xe4 �b4 (30 . . . �f7 3 1 .�g6 g4t 32.�xg4 hxg6 33 .�xf2 Ei:xel 34.�xel �fl t 35.<;t>h2 �xe l =) 3 1 .�xf2 �xe l 32.�xel �xe4 33.�c3t <;t>gs 34.�xgSt �g6 35 .�xg6t hxg6 36.'Lic4 Ele2 37.'Lixd6 Ei:e3 38.�b2 Ei:d3 39.'Lie4 c4=

30.�xg4 E:xg2 31 .i>xg2 �xa3 32.�h6 �b4 33.tll cS �f6 34.E:xe4 E:xe4 35.�xe4 �xh6 36.�eSt i>g7 37.�e7t i>g8 38.lllxd6 �d2t 39.i>h3 �h6t=

As often occurs, the wild complications eventually led to a draw after accurate play from both sides.

Conclusion

The . . . �g4 variation remains in good health. Compared with some other Benoni lines it is pretty solid, and you do not need to learn much theory in order to play it. At the same time there is scope to interpret the position in different ways, whether by manoeuvring for solid equality or conjuring up a tactical storm as we saw in the final part of the chapter.

e4 Systems Modern Main Line

Variation Index 1 .d4 ttJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.tlJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.�d3 �g7 8.h3

8 ... 0-0 9.tiJf3 h5 A) 10.tlJxbS �e8 1 18

Al) 1 1.tlJd2 1 19 A2) 1 1.0-0 121

B) 10.hhS tlJxe4 1 1 .tlJxe4 �a5t 12.tiJfd2 �xb5 13.tlJxd6 �a6 14.tlJ2c4 tlJd7 15.0-0 tlJ e5 16.tlJxc8 �axc8 17.tlJxeS he5 18.�el 123

Bl) 18 ... �d6 125 B2) 18 ... �fe8 125

Al) after 17.ig5 B2) note to 20.:i"lbl B2) after 22.g4!?

a b c d e f g h 1 7 . . . '1!9b8N 24 . . . ixf2t!N

1 1 8 e4 Systems

I .d4 tllf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.lllc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7 . .id3 .ig7 8.h3 0-0 9.lllf.3

a b c d e f g h This is the main tabiya for what has become

known as the Modern Main Line. As the name suggests, this variation has become one of White's most popular and highly-regarded weapons against the Benoni, so it is essential to be prepared for it. Before discussing the possible continuations from this position, I would first like to replay the opening moves in order to discuss a few move-order subtleties.

I.d4 tllf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.lllc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4

This is the usual move order; the nuances of 6.lllf3 g6 can be found on page 1 28 in the next chapter.

6 .. . g6 7 . .id3 There does not seem to be anything wrong

with 7.h3 as an alternative move order, although if I was playing White, I think I would prefer to develop the bishop and overprotect the e4-pawn before spending a tempo on a pawn move.

7.lllf3 a6!? can be found on page 1 29 in the next chapter.

7 ... .ig7 8.h3

8.lllf3 can be met safely by 8 . . . ig4! - see variation C of Chapter 14, which can be found on page 1 89.

8 .. . 0-0 9.lllf.3 Finally we reach the main starting position

of the Modern Main Line. Compared with the Classical Variation from the previous two chapters, White has developed his bishop to a more active square where it reinforces the e4-pawn. True, he has had to invest a tempo on h2-h3, but now the f3-knight will be secure for a long time. Black has several ways of responding, bur in this chapter we will focus on the main theoretical line.

9 • • • b5 This remains the most popular move,

although it has some practical drawbacks, as Black needs to know a lot of theory just to reach a slightly inferior endgame offering few winning chances. Readers looking for a different approach may skip ahead to the next chapter beginning on page 1 27, where I discuss a number of other plans.

After the text move White's main options are A) IO.lllxb5 and B) IO . .ixb5.

1 0.0-0 b4 is not dangerous for Black, for instance: l l .Clle2 ( 1 1 .lllb l c4 1 2.ixc4 lllxe4= Karpov - Andres Mendez, Buenos Aires 200 1 ; l 1 .llla4 ia6 1 2.Ei:el ixd3 1 3.W/xd3 lllbd7 14.if4 lLl b6= Z. Polgar - Gdanski, Adelaide 1988.) l l . . .Ei:e8 12.Cllg3 ia6= Malaniuk -Feygin, Nikolaev 1 995.

A) 10.tllxb5

This leads to a complicated game. Black should be able to win back his pawn, but he must take care and do it in the correct way.

10 ... :aes

Chapter 9 - Modern Main Line 1 1 9

The following alternative may appear tempting, but it is inferior: 1 0 . . . t'Llxe4?! 1 1 .i.xe4 :§e8

1 l . . .Wi'a5t 1 2.t'Llc3 i.xc3t 1 3.bxc3 :§e8 · 1 4.t'Llg5 Wi'xc3t 1 5 .i.d2 Wi'c4 1 6.f3 f5 1 7.<;t>f2 fxe4 1 8.t'Llxe4 t'Lld7 1 9.:§el i.a6± Erdogan -Pantsulaia, Kocaeli 2002.

1 2.t'Llg5 Wi'a5t 1 2 . . . h6 13 .t'Lle6 Wi'a5t 14.t'Llc3 i.xc3t 1 5 .bxc3 Wi'xc3t 1 6.i.d2 Wi'c4 1 7.Wi'e2 Wi'xe2t 1 8.<;t>xe2 t'Lla6 1 9.i.xh6 fxe6 20.i.xg6 :§e?± Baier - Lamy, email 2002.

1 3 .t'Llc3 i.a6 14 .i.d2 t'Lld7 1 5 .Wfc2 :§ab8 1 6.0-0-0 t'Lle5±

Bern - Ha. Olafsson, corr. Sweden 1 994.

From here White's most important options are Al) I I .lDc12 and A2) 1 1 .0-0.

1 1 .t'Llc3?! t'Llxe4 1 2.t'Llxe4 f5 1 3.t'Llfg5? fxe4 14.i.xe4 i.xb2! 1 5 .t'Lle6 Wi'h4 1 6.Wi'e2 i.c3t+ Del Prado Montoro - lzeta Txabarri, Ponferrada 1 99 1 .

1 1 .i.g5 c4 1 2.i.xc4 :§xe4t 1 3 .i.e2 Wi'a5t 14.<;t>fl i.a6 1 5 .a4 t'Llbd7 gave Black nice compensation for a pawn in Lipinsky -Palkovi, Balatonbereny 1 997.

Al) I I .lDc12

This tricky move can lead to heavy complications.

1 1 ...lDxdS Sometimes the simplest moves are the best.

1 1 . . . t'Llxe4!? This leads to interesting play although I do not completely trust it.

1 2.i.xe4 i.a6 l 3.a4 Wf a5 1 3 . . .f5 ? 1 4.0-0 fxe4 1 5 .t'Llc4 i.e5 1 6.:§el i.xb5 1 7.axb5 t'Lld7 1 8.t'Llxe5 :§xe5 1 9.i.f4 :§e8 20.i.xd6± Nikolov - Rabrenovic, Obrenovac 2010.

a b c d e f g h 14.t'Llxd6 t'Lld7 1 5 .Wi'c2 f5 1 6.t'Llxe8 :§xe8 1 7.<;t>dl fxe4 1 8.t'Llxe4 c4! ?

Vescovi - Jobava, Wijk aan Zee 2006.

1 9.f3!?N This looks like the only chance for White to fight for the advantage.

120 e4 Systems

The game continued 1 9.ctJc3 j,xc3 20.Wi'xc3 Wi'xd5t 2 1 .j,d2 ctJc5 22.i::le l , and now 22 . . . tt:Je4N would have forced 23.i::lxe4 leading to equal chances.

1 9 . . . Wi'xd5t 20.Wi'd2 Wi'b7 2 1 .i::la3 c3 22.ctJxc3 ctJe5 23.i::le l Wi'a8 24.i::le4 j,d3 25 .Wi'e3 j,xe4 26.Wi'xe4 Wi'c8�

So maybe this line is playable for Black too, but I find the main move more convincing and less risky.

12.lllc4 lllb4 1 2 . . . i::le6!? seems playable too, for instance:

1 3.j,e2 ( 1 3 .0-0 is not dangerous: 1 3 . . . tt:Jb4 1 4.j,e2 j,a6 1 5 .ctJc3 ctJd7 1 6.j,e3 tt:Jb6 1 7.ctJxb6 Wi'xb6 1 8.i::le l i::lae8 1 9.Wi'd2 j,xe2 20.i::lxe2= Shishkin - 0. Kononenko, Kharkov 2007.) 1 3 . . . tt:Jb6 1 4.tt:Jcxd6 j,a6 1 5 .j,g4 f5 16 .j,e2 ctJc6 1 7.j,e3 tt:Jd4 1 8.j,xd4 j,xd4 1 9.Wi'b3 c4 20.ctJxc4 j,xb5 2 1 .Wi'xb5 i::lxe4= Carpenito - Novak, e-mail 2008.

s i,-.t�.i�.m 7 lf • "•ff•r 6 %, , , ,%� %� %� ,,��

�mef '�� : �n�!�� 3 . �,.�� [<, · �% ,� �% ��r� �� 2 �1fj�7��-JrJ�-1 -� �ii� -�

a b c d e f g h 13.lllcxd6 l 3.j,e2 j,a6

A pawn sacrifice, which could be temporary. Another intriguing possibility is: 1 3 . . . i::lxe4 1 4.tt:Jcxd6 i::lxe2t!? ( l 4 . . . i::le5 is also quite playable.) 1 5 .Wi'xe2 Lazarev- Cebalo, Cannes 1 995, and now 1 5 . . . j,e6N 1 6.a3 tt:J4c6 1 7.j,f4 a6 1 8.ctJc3 tt:Jd4 1 9.Wi'd3 c4 would have given Black ongoing compensation.

1 4.tt:Jbxd6 i::le6 1 5 .j,f4 tt:Jd7 Black has good compensation, and in the following game he soon regained his pawn to equalize:

16 .0-0 ctJe5 17.j,xe5 j,xe5 1 8.a3

Yi-Yi Hillarp Persson Gdanski, Gothenburg 1 997.

s i,�.t�.i-· -7 .,,,,,,-,,, , ,%m r�r 6 %,,, , %� %�� ,,�� 5 �

�- -�-4 �.,,,,%� �� 3 . �,�� ['<, 2 !n�•�n!� %""ef , , , ,%�;� %w�1,,,,%� 1 �� iil� ��

a b c d e f g h 13 ... i.a6 14.0-0 lllxd3 15.Wfxd3

Compared with the previous note White has avoided losing time with his bishop, but he obviously has less stability on the light squares.

15 ... B:e6 16.Wfd5 lllc6 17.i.g5 This position occurred in Konca - Blokh,

corr. 1 992, and here I suggest the improvement:

Chapter 9 - Modern Main Line 12 1

17 ... §'bSN Simplifying to an endgame which should

not be difficult to hold.

18.§'xc6 1 8 .Wxc5 �xb5 19.etJxb5 �f8 20.Wc4 etJa5

2 1 .Wa4 :§e5 22.etJc7 :§xg5 23.etJxa8 Wf4 24.Wc2 llic4 25 .Wxc4 Wf3 26.g3 :§xg3t 27.fxg3 Wxg3t=

18 ... ixb5 19.§'xb5 §'xd6 20.ie3 E:b8! 20 . . . :§xe4 is playable, if slightly less accurate:

2 1 .�xc5 :§b8 22.Wa5 Wc6±

A2) 1 1 .0-0

a b c d e f g h Although the previous line is by no means

bad, the text move has been a lot more popular.

1 I ...llJxe4 12.i:'!:el This is the main line although l 2.�xe4,

1 2.Wa4 and 1 2.Wb3 have all been tested by strong grandmasters.

12 ... a6 13.llJa3 l 3 .:§xe4 does not test Black at all: l 3 . . . :§xe4

( 1 3 . . . axb5=) 14.Clixd6 :§b4 1 5 .a3 Wxd6 1 6.axb4 cxb4 l 7.We2 �b7= Guo - Zhang, China 20 10 .

More interesting is: 1 3.Wa4

a b c d e f g h 1 3 . . . llid?!

1 22 e4 Systems

An important move! Black is developing his pieces with the help of tactical resources.

I 4.l:!xe4 l:!xe4 I 5 .Wxe4 1 5 .�xe4? lLl b6 I 6.Wb3 axb5 I 7.Wxb5 �a6 1 8 .Wb3 �c4 1 9.Wc2 �xa2+ Schmidt -Myakutin, e-mail 200 I .

1 5 . . . lllf6 16 .Wh4 axb5 I 7.�xb5 Wb6 1 8 .a4 �b7 1 9.�h6 �xd5 20.llld2 Wb7 2 1 .�xg7 ©xg7=

Lobron - Topalov, Dortmund 1 996.

16 ... ttJf6 White is ahead in development, but Black

has no weaknesses and should be able to catch up within a few moves.

17.c!lJbs Black is fine against other moves as well.

Here are two brief examples:

1 7.�xf6 �xf6 1 8.Wf4 llld7 1 9.lllc4 �b7� Romanov - Hardicsay, e-mail 2002.

17.l:!e1 �b 7 18 .�xf6 �xf6 19 .l:!e8 t ©g7 20.Wb3= McArthur - ]urea, e-mail 1 999.

17 • . . 1,Wb6 Black has a second good option: 1 7 . . . Wd7

1 8 .l:!e l �b7 1 9.�xf6 �xf6 20.Wf4 �e5 2 1 .l:!xe5 axb5 22.l:!e l �xd5 23.lllg5= Polak Simacek, Decio 2009.

18.J.xf6 J.xf6 19.1,Wf4

8

7

6

5

a b c d e f g h 19 ... axbS! 20.1,Wxf6 c!lJd7

The knight will save his king now.

2I.1,We7 '.t>g7 Now we are heading for a practically forced

draw.

22.c!lJgS c!lJeS 23.c!lJe4 c!lJxd3 24.c!lJxd6 B:a7

Chapter 9 - Modern Main Line 1 23

25.lllest 25.lllxc8?! �xe7 26.lllxb6 �b7 27.tllc8

lllxb2+

25 ... 'it>g8 26.lllf6t 'it>g7 27.llleSt= Palliser - D. Kononenko, Plovdiv 20 10 .

B) 10.J.xbS

10 ... lllxe4 1 I .lllxe4 °Wa5t 12.lllfd2 °Wxb5 13.lllxd6 °Wa6

1 3 . . . Wd3?! is worse: 14 .lll2c4 Wxdl t 1 5. <;t>xd 1 J.a6 1 6. <;t>c2 tLl d7 1 7 .J.f4± Epishin -San Segundo Carrillo, New York 1 990.

a b c d e f g h

14.lll2c4 llld7 I prefer this over 1 4 . . . �d8 1 5 .J.f4 tlld7

1 6.0-0 lllb6 17 .lllxb6 Wxb6 1 8.lllxc8 �axc8, when the position can be compared with 1 5 . . . lllb6 as mentioned in the notes to the main line below.

15.0-0 To draw or not to draw - that is the question!

15 ... lll eS I think this is the most precise move.

Many games have continued: l 5 . . . lllb6 l 6.lllxb6 Wxb6 l 7.lllxc8 �axc8 1 8 .�b 1 md8 19.J.f4 Wb7 20.d6 J.f8 2 i .Wd3 J.xd6 22.J.xd6 �c6 23.mdl

Black should be able to hold this, but i t is not my idea of a dream Benoni position, especially if I happen to be facing a lowerrated opponent.

7 6 5 4 3 2

a b c d e f g h 23 . . . �cxd6

23 . . . Wd7 24.Wa3 �xd6 25 .�xd6 Wxd6 26.Wxa7 �e8 27.Wa5 �e2 28.Wc3 Wb6 29.a4 c4 30.mU reaches a different type of endgame, but here too Black will have to defend without having the slightest chance to play for a win.

24.Wxd6 �xd6 25.�xd6 c4 26.�d2 c3 27.�c2 We4 28.�bcl cxb2 29.�xb2±

With two rooks against a queen, White can press for a long time, although the majority of games have been drawn from this position.

124 e4 Systems

a b c d e f g h 16.lllxc8 1 6.tt:lxe5 Wxd6

This leads to a position where White has many choices, none of which lead to an advantage. l 6 . . . �xe5 is also playable, for instance: 1 7.tt:le4 �f5 1 8 .tt:lxc5 Wc4 1 9.�e3 �xb2 20.g4 �xal 2 1 .Wxal �xg4 22.:gcl We2 23.�h6 f6 24.�xf8 :gxf8 25.hxg4 Wxg4t 26.lt>fl Wh3t 27.lt>gl = Seres - Ovsejevitsch, Budapest 2003.

l 7.tt:lc4 1 7.ctJc6 �b7 1 8.�e3 �xc6 19 .dxc6 Wxc6 was equal in Grabarczyk- Simacek, Wroclaw 20 1 0.

1 7 . . . Wa6 White must not be allowed to develop his queenside easily.

1 8 .ctJe3

1 8 .Wb3 �b7 19 .:gd l �d4 20.tt:le3 Yi-Yi Wang Yue - Gashimov, Kallithea 2008. 1 8.We2 �b7 19.:gd l �d4 20.Wc2?! �xd5+ Lenderman - Fernandez, Mesa 2009.

18 . . . �b7 1 9.Wc2 �d4 20.�d2 md8= Guramishvili - Gaponenko, St Petersburg

2009.

16 ... :gaxc8 17.lllxe5 J.xe5 We have reached a typical scenario for the

present variation. For the moment White has an extra pawn, but the weakness of the d5- and b2-pawns gives Black sufficient compensation.

18.:gel There are many deviations, but the final

result is almost always a draw. Here are a few examples:

l 8.�h6 md8= Batkovskyte - Anu, Kerner 2009.

1 8.Wf3 mes 19 .:gd l ( 1 9.:gb l ? �h2t 20.lt>xh2 Wxfl+ Andonovski - Jianu, Tivat 20 1 1 ) 19 . . . c4 20.a4 Wb7 2 1 .:ga3 �xb2 22.d6 Wxf3 23.:gxf3 �xcl 24.:gxcl :ged8 25.m4= Shengelia - Gashimov, Novi Sad 2009.

a b c d e f g h From this position Black has at least two

good moves: Bl) 18 ... §'d6 and B2) 18, .. :gfe8.

Chapter 9 - Modern Main Line 125

1 8 . . . '\W f6 also seems decent, for instance: 1 9.�h6 ( 1 9.2::\b l l::lfd8 20.'1Wg4 h5 2 1 .'1Wc4 '1Wf5 22.'1We4 '1Wxe4 23.l::lxe4 l::lxd5 24.�e3 c4 25 .f4 �g7 26.2::\c I �xb2 Y2-Y2 Polak - Chatalbashev, Beraklio 2007.) 1 9 . . . �d4 20.�xf8 �xf2t 2 1 .'itihl �xel 22.'\Wxel l::lxf8 23.2::\d l '1Wd6 24 .b3 h5 25 .'1We3 a6 26.2::\cl '1Wxd5 27.'1Wxc5 '1Wd2 28 .'1Wc2 l::\d8 29.'1Wxd2 l::lxd2 30 .a4 l::\b2 3 I .l::lc6 Y2-Y2 Ki. Georgiev - Delchev, Sunny Beach 2009.

BI) 18 ... �d6 19.�h6

19 .l::\e2 �d4 20.�e3 '1Wxd5=

19 ... 2::\fdS 20.�e2 i.d4 Now Black regains his pawn by force, and

the chances of White claiming a notable positional advantage are minimal.

21.�f3 i.xb2

a b c d e f g h 22.l::labl i.g7 23.i.f4 �f6

23 . . . '\Wxd5?? 24.l::\e8t! would be embarrassing.

24.�e4 �d4 25.�f3 �f6 26.�e4 �d4 27.�f3 �f6 28.�e4 �d4 29.�f3

This was the game Blagojevic - Nikolov, Valjevo 20 1 1 . So overall 1 8 . . . '1Wd6 looks like a fully viable route to equality.

B2) 18 ... l::lfeS

a b c d e f g h This move is slightly more complicated, but

is still good enough to equalize.

19.i.g5 i.d4 20.2::\hl White has several other options.

20.'1Wf3 �xb2 2 1 .2::\ad l '1Wd6 led to yet another quick draw in the following game: 22.�f4 �e5 23.l::lxe5 l::lxe5 24.�xe5 '1Wxe5 25 .d6 l::\d8 26.'1Wc6 '1We2 27.2::\c l '1Wd2 28 .'1Wxc5 Y2-Y2 Polak - Simacek, Czech Republic 20 1 1 .

20.2::\c l '1Wd6 2 1 .'1Wa4 l::le5 22.l::lxe5 '1Wxe5 23.'1Wd7 l::\b8 24.�h6 occurred in Meier -Gashimov, Novi Sad 2009. Here Black's most convincing route to equality would have been:

a b c d e f g h 24 . . . �xf2t!N 25.'itixf2 g5=

126 e4 Systems

Finally 20 . .ie7 forces Black to find (or know in 22 ... :Bxel t!N advance) a nice idea: It is important for Black to get this right.

20 ... Wf d6 21 .WfB

�f6t :1'\d8=

2 1 .�a4 :1'\xe l t 22.:1'\xe l �xd5 23 . .ih6 �d8 24.b3 c4 25.bxc4 .ixf2t 26.ciixf2 �h4t 27.ciifl �xh6= Mahnke - G. Mueller, e-mail 2007.

21 . . . .ixb2 22.g4!? This seems like White's best chance to create

problems. Instead 22 . .if4 .ie5 23.:1'\xe5 :1'i:xe5 24.:1'\d l :1'\ce8 25 . .ixe5 :1'\xe5 26.�d3 h5 Y2-Yi was another thrilling outcome in Blagojevic -Colovic, Porto Carras 20 1 1 .

I also considered 22 . . . .id4N, but after 23 . .if4 .ie5 24.:1'\xe5 :1'i:xe5 25 . .ixe5 �xe5 26.:1'\b7 ms 27.:1'\xa7 Black still has a way to go before he can claim equality.

The one game on the database continued in a more exciting manner than is typical for this line: 22 . . . .ie5 23.:1'i:b7 f6 24.:1'i:xe5! A promising exchange sacrifice. 24 . . . :1'\xe5 25 . .ixf6 �xd5 26.:1'\g7t ciif8 27.�c3� Acevedo Villalba -Soltau, e-mail 2008. Black managed to defend for a draw, but would you want to risk this position over the board?

23.:Bxel .ie5 This is much safer now that there is no white

rook landing on b7.

24.Wfe4 f6 25 . .ie3 :Bd8= Black will soon eliminate the d-pawn.

Conclusion

The 9 . . . b5 line seems to be in good theoretical shape, but it has some practical disadvantages. One important point is that White has the freedom to choose between a complex game with 1 o .'llxb5 and a more simplified, technical battle with 1 o . .ixb5 . The latter case is a particular problem when one is facing a weaker opponent, or simply wishing to keep winning chances alive with the black pieces. Nevertheless, the bottom line is that Black's position is viable, so the readers can decide for themselves. Those who are not attracted to 9 . . . b5 are invited to turn the page and check some of the ideas presented in the next chapter.

e4 Systems

Variation Index 1 .d4 �f6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.�c3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4

A) 7.�£3 a6!? Al ) 8.a4 A2) 8.�e2!?

B) 7 . .id3 .ig7 8.h3 0-0 9.�£3 Bl) 9 ... a6 B2) 9 ... �e8 10.0-0 c4

B21) 1 1 ..ic2 B22) l 1 ..ixc4

6 ... g6

B3) 9 ... �h5!? 10.0-0 � d7 l l ..ig5 .if6 12 . .ie3 �e8 B31) 13.�d2 B32) 13.�d2

Al) after 13.�h3 A2) after 18 .d6 B22) note to 1 3 . . . 'Wb6?!

129 129 131 134 134 135 135 136 138 140 142

a b c d e f g h a b c d e f g h a b c d e f g h 1 3 . . . c4!N 1 8 . . . li'leS!N 21 ... �a3!N

128 e4 Systems

I .d4 llJf6 2.c4 c5 3.dS e6 4.llJc3 exd5 5.cxdS d6

a b c d e f g h Although the main 9 . . . b5 line is fully

playable, it will definitely not be to everyone's taste. Black has several ways of avoiding it, and in this chapter we will discuss a few of them. Our main topic will be Black's alternatives on move 9, although before then I will also mention some ways to bypass the Modern Main Line altogether in the event that White's move order allows it. That's why we are beginning the discussion at move 6: to pay attention to the different move orders and the possibilities to which each of them may lead.

6.e4 Sometimes White develops the knight first:

6.tl'if3 g6 But already Black can choose to prevent the Modern Main Line if he wishes to.

7.h3 7.e4 transposes to line A on the following page. Other tt'if3-based systems which do not involve an early e2-e4 will be examined in Part 3 of the book.

7 . . . a6!? Note that 7 . . . We7?! does not prevent 8.e4 due to the standard trick: 8 . . . tt'ixe4?? 9.Wia4t+-

8.a4 We?!? Now there is no check on a4, so Black really is restraining the e-pawn.

a b c d e f g h 9.i.g5

9.i.f4 i.g7 1 0.e3 0-0 l 1 .i.e2 tt'ibd7 1 2.0-0 ttJ e8 transposes to line C 1 of Chapter 1 6 on page 2 1 5 .

9 . . . i.g7 1 O.e3 h6 l 1 .i.h4 t2J bd7 l 2.tt'id2 0-0 13 .i.e2 g5 1 4.i.g3 tl'ie5 1 5 .0-0

1 5 .Wic2 i.d7 1 6.0-0 occurred in Chemin -Milov, Biel 1 994, and here I would suggest: 1 6 . . . 2::\feSN 1 7.:§fel g4 1 8.hxg4 tt'ifxg4 1 9.a5 h5�

l 5 . . . i.f5! Black should usually play this move if he gets the opportunity in such positions. The bishop exerts a strong influence on the h7-b 1 diagonal.

1 6.a5 tt'ifd7 1 7.e4 i.h7 1 8.f4 gxf4 1 9.i.xf4 f5 20.exf5 i.xf5=

F. Andersson - Ornstein, Sweden 20 1 0.

Chapter 1 0 - Modern Main Line - without 9 . . . b5 1 29

6 ... g6 From here the chapter will be divided

according to move order, beginning with A) 7.llJf3 and ending with B) 7.�d3. If White is l?oking to employ the Modern Main line, the second option is the more accurate in terms of limiting Black's options.

By the way, to repeat a point that was made in the previous chapter, 7.h3!? seems to be a valid way to initiate the Modern Main line, despite the fact that it appears slightly strange to move the h-pawn before either of the minor pieces on the kingside.

A) 7.llJf3

This gives Black the option of avoiding the Modern Main Line.

7 ... a6!? 7 . . . �g7 8 .h3 0-0 9.�d3 leads to the main

tabiya, which will be discussed later under variation B.

It should be noted that 7 . . . �g4? is a mistake due to 8.iWa4t! (8.iWb3!? is also promising) 8 . . . �d7 (8 . . . lllbd7?! runs into 9.llld2!± or 9.lllg l !±) 9.iWb3 and Black has problems. (Compare with Chapter 1 5 - here Black has lost a tempo by playing . . . �d7 in two moves.)

After the text move White may react with Al) 8.a4 and A2) 8.�e2!?.

In several games White has ignored the coming advance of the b-pawn, but I do not believe this should be dangerous:

8 .�f4 b5 reaches variation B of Chapter 1 6.

8.h3 b5 (8 . . . �g7 could be met by 9 .a4) 9.�d3 �g7 1 0.0-0 0-0 l l .�f4 (l l .a3 E!e8 1 2.E!el ll:lbd7 1 3.�f4 iWb6 gave Black satisfactory play in Ibragimov - Batsanin, Novgorod 1 997.)

l l . . .E!e8 1 2.E!el E!a7 Developing the rook along the second rank is a useful option that the early . . . b5 has made possible. 1 3.a3 E!ae7 14.E!cl iWb6 1 5 .b4 lllbd7 1 6.iWd2 �b7 1 7.�e3 iWd8! Aleksandrov - Sherbakov, Kolkata 2002. Black's last move prevents a3-a4 and leaves him with roughly equal chances.

Al) 8.a4 �g4!?

Black avoids the Modern Main Line and aims for a transposition to Chapter 8 .

9.�b3!? This is an attempt to punish Black's move

order, but it turns out that White is risking just as much, if not more than his opponent.

The other move is 9.�e2, when it is worth considering two paths for Black.

s z• � �•� �.1 ,,,,� ,,, ,/� ,,Y,� ,, 7 �% �ij'/,'/ �%'""-�� 6 • • �� - · � ��-ef"""� ,, , ,,,� : ,.��,,.!� 3 �F,,� �� -��

��-�l[j,� �� -/,;, 2 w� •�w� t!J r� , , ,� - - - - "�;� �?'0'i("""� ,,,,, � �� a b c d e f g h

a) 9 . . . �g7 1 o.llld2!? ( 1 0.0-0 leads to Chapter 8.) 1 0 . . . �xe2 l 1 .iWxe2 0-0 l 2.ll:lc4 ll:lbd7!? 1 3.lllxd6 lllb6 Black has just about enough compensation for the missing pawn. I did some more analysis on this position, but it does not really belong in the book as there is no reason even to allow White this option in the first place.

b) 9 . . . �xf3! 1 0.�xf3 lllbd7 is the best move order. After the coming . . . �g7 Black achieves the desired transposition to Chapter 8, without allowing the line noted above.

1 30 e4 Systems

10.'1Wxb7 tl\bd7!? This ambitious move is slightly risky, but it

seems to work.

A safe alternative is 1 0 . . . ixg2 l l .ii.xg2 tt:lbd7 12.0-0 ie7 l 3.f4 0-0 with equality, for instance: 1 4.e5!? dxe5 1 5.d6 ii.xd6 16.'WxaS 'Wxa8 1 7.ixaS l"lxa8= Crouch - Emms, Millfield 2000.

1 1 .gxf3 i.g7 12.f4 Grabbing a second pawn with 1 2.'Wc6 0-0

1 3.'Wxd6 seems excessively risky: 1 3 . . . tt:lh5 14.f4 l"le8 1 5.ii.g2 l"la7! 1 6.a5 'Wh4

a b c d e f g h l 7.tt:le2? ( l 7.'Wc6N was the only move,

although even here after l 7 . . . tt:lxf4 l 8 .ii.xf4 'Wxf4 Black has a great initiative on the dark squares.) 1 7 . . . l"lcS! l 8.e5 if8-+ Cordova -Smerdon, Turin (ol) 2006.

12 ... 0-0 13.i.h3

1 3 . . . l"\eS? 14.0-0 l"le7 1 5 .'Wc6± left Black struggling for compensation in Khmelniker -Nikolov, Ziirich 20 1 0.

1 3 . . . 'Wa5!?N is quite playable, and after 14.e5 l"lab8 l 5.'Wa7 Black can immediately force a draw by attacking the queen. This would be a perfectly adequate improvement were it not for the fact that the text move gives Black chances to claim the advantage.

14.0-0 tl\c5 1 5.'1Wb4 tl\h5! Having brought one knight to a fine square,

Black improves the second one while also making room for the queen to join the action.

16.tl\e2 tl\b3 17J�bl '1Wh4t Black intends to exchange on c l and take

on f4, with a strong initiative on the dark squares.

Chapter 1 0 - Modern Main Line - without 9 . . . b 5 1 3 1

A2) 8.°We2!?

This aggressive move was introduced by Vladimir Epishin in 2004, and has since been tested by many strong players. It was also the subject of a Dangerous Weapons chapter by Chris Ward in 2008.

8 ... i.g4 According to the database this move has

achieved a dismal score of less than 20%, but all of Black's losses have resulted from subsequent errors.

9.e5 i.xf3 10.gxf3 dxe5 1 1 .°Wxe5t °We? 12.i.f4

This has almost always been played. Ward analyses the following alternative: l 2.'Wxe7t ixe7 l 3.if4 lllh5!

It is important to challenge the strong bishop.

a b c d e f g h

14 .ic7 l 4.ie3 should be met by: l 4 .. .f5! Black wants to put his bishop on d6 without fearing harassment from a knight on e4. 1 5 .d6!? This seems to be the only way to cause problems. 1 5 . . . ixd6 1 6.0-0-0 ie5 l 7.ic4 tlld7 l 8.if7t!? Wxf7 l 9.l"i:xd7t We6 20.l"i:xb7 l"i:ab8 Ward evaluates the position is roughly equal.

1 4 . . . <iid7 14 . . . tlld7 1 5.d6 favours White according to Ward.

1 5 .ib6 1 5.ig3 can be met by 1 5 .. .f5 ! when Ward points out the following line: 1 6.tlla4? f4! l 7.tllb6t Wd6 1 8.tllxa8 tlld7+

s !.IE -� • ,,I" _____ :��-A��----1 �,;,,�i�£�£ 6 ·� • -·� s �-----%·�-�R'il 4 -� "" %� �� {@,� 3 ��!�

��pj<""''� ��-��-00, 2 � �(.!j • � � if� -�----%� ��t-�

a b c d e f g h 1 5 . . . <iid6!

Black can get away with this bold method of development.

1 6.0-0-0 1 6.tlle4t Wxd5 1 7.0-0-0t Wc6 gives White nothing - Ward.

1 6 . . .f5 Black is ready to complete development with . . . tlld7, and the following attempt to invade on the e6-square backfires:

1 7.l"i:e l ? ig5t 1 8.Wc2 tllf4+ Ward mentions that Black has nice

coordination, but I would go further and claim a clear positional advantage.

12 ... 'Wxe5t 13.i.xe5 tl\hd7

1 32 e4 Systems

8

7 6

5

4

3

2 1

a b c d e f g h 14.�c7

Keeping the bishop is more important than improving White's pawn structure, as shown by the following line: 1 4.f4 �g7!

1 4 . . . �h6 1 5 .�h3 0-0 1 6.0-0 b5!? 1 7.Elad l Ela7 1 8.i:'!:fe l tt:lh5! 1 9 .�d6 tt:lxf4! 20.�xd7 Elxd7 2 l .�xf8 <iixf8 gave Black some compensation for the exchange in Rowson - Ward, Douglas 2005, but I find the text move more convincing.

1 5 .�g2

8 .i � �·

� �.i

7 �

•• ,. ·�lfl 6 :. �� -r�

� . . , �. ·;:/'······� 5 � - b � . 4 �� ··· ·"� .,.,."�� 3 �� ·····"� ��r�!;...··� ��M ��M 2 b �� • �� .. �Jrb � . ... %��

=· ··%·�

a b c d e f g h l 5 . . . ctJxe5!

1 5 . . . 0-0? 16.0-0 ctJh5 1 7.�d6! was better for White in Epishin - S. Kovacevic, Seville 2005.

1 6.£Xe5 tt:lh5 1 7.0-0 tt:lf4! It is crucial to prevent f2-f4.

1 8.i:'!:ael 0-0-0

The strength of White's central pawns is largely just optical, and he had to play well to draw in Epishin - Degraeve, Bad Wiessee 2006.

14 ... �h6 Compared with the previous note, here it is

useful to prevent long castling.

15.�h3 0-0 Ward points out that the attempt to block

the light-squared bishop with l 5 . . . tt:lh5 1 6.0-0 f5 can be met by 1 7.i:'!:fe l t <iif7 1 8.d6! when the bishop is poised to cause trouble via fl and c4.

16.0-0

8 .i " � �·� % ��'�%% ..... :!,%% 0 7 ��,�?l�� 6 .t. • - ,lit .t. �

%%0 ,� �� ,., .... � .,,,, : ��.�� 3 . �� .ll ��'�d/,.,.,;%% ��,'0��,� 2 b W� � w� w�,,

1 � . . . . %_%%•!=···· " a b c d e f g h

16 ... �eS! This move was played in 20 1 0 in a game

contested between two 2 1 00-rated players. Despite the relative anonymity of the players, the idea seems to have rescued what previously appeared to be quite a bleak position for Black.

Previously 16 . . . b5 and 16 . . . Elfe8 have been tried, but neither of those moves fights against White's main trump cards: the passed d-pawn and the powerful bishops.

17.�xd7


1 7.d6N f5 ensures Black of a decent position by shutting the enemy bishop out of play.

17 ... c!lixc7 18.d6 Here I offer an improvement.

a b c d e f g h 18 ... c!lieS!N

The game continued l 8 . . . :B:fd8 and now in Pettersson - Janse, Lund 20 1 0, White could have won an exchange with 1 9.dxc7N :B:xd7 20.:B:fd l :B:xc7 21 .ctJd5±, although Black retains some drawing chances.

However, 1 8 . . . ctJb5 !?N 1 9.ii.xb5 axb5 20.ctJxb5 ii.g7+± is a valid alternative which the reader may wish to investigate.

19.c!lie4 The alternative is:

l 9.ixe8 :B:fxe8 20.d7 20.:B:fe l :B:xe l t 2 1 .:B:xe l :B:d8+

20 . . . :B:e6 Of course Black must avoid the trick 20 . . . :B:e7? 2 l .ctJd5! .

2 1 .:B:fe l :B:d8 22.:B:xe6 fxe6 23.ctJe4 ii.f8 24.:B:d l <;t>f7 25.f4

25 .b3 e5! 26.ctJg5t <;t>e7+ 25 . . . <;t>e7!?

Black forces the play with a temporary pawn sacrifice. If he wishes to keep more tension in the position, both 25 . . . c400 and 25 . . . b500 may be considered.

8 � � � ·� -�'"�·'1';,,,Y,� I. : !��!�!� ��f%�� : ��!�� 3 �� .. . %� ��-%�� -� ��-� 2 � �� %-Jlj 1 � ��

a b c d e f g h 26.ctJxc5 b6 27.ctJxa6

27.ctJe4 :B:xd7 28.:B:xd7t <;t>xd7 29.ctJf6t <;t>e7 30.ctJxh7 ii.h6 3 l .ctJg5 <;t>f6=

27 . . . :B:xd7 28 .:B:c l :B:d2= White's extra pawn is meaningless and the

game is virtually certain to end in a draw.

19 ... �g? 20.�xe8 20.ii.h3 c4 intending . . .f5 is at least equal for

Black.

20.:B:ac l ctJxd6! 2 1 .ctJxd6 :B:ad8 22.ctJxb7 :B:xd7 23.ctJxc5 :B:d2+ also turns out well for the second player.

20 ... �fxe8 21.c!lixcS b6 Black is temporarily a pawn down, but the

d-pawn will fall soon enough.

22.c!lia4

1 34 e4 Systems

22.'lle4 :B:ad8 23.:B:fdl f5 gives us no problems.

22 ... hs 23.lbcs if8 24.E:fdl 24.'lld7 :B:e6 wins back the pawn by force.

a b c d e f g h 24 ... E:edS 25.a4!

If Black is allowed to capture on d6 with impunity, he will have chances to claim an advantage thanks to his superior minor piece and White's weak kingside pawns. Therefore White should attack the queenside to ensure his own safety.

25 ... bxa4 26.E:xa4 ixd6 27.E:ad4 ie7 28.E:xdSt i.xd8 29.lbxa6 if6=

Black will restore material equality shortly, but with only kingside pawns remaining, there is little chance of making his better pawn structure count for anything.

B) 7.id3

This is a more accurate way for White to initiate his set-up. Pins on g4 will not be permitted.

7 ... ig7 This time 7 . . . a6 8.a4 does not give Black any

special options, and the likely outcome is a transposition to line B 1 .

8.h3 0-0 9.lbf3

Standard Benoni development is playable, but I think it is too passive. More than a thousand games have been played from here, so I will just mention a few key examples to illustrate the character of the play.

10.a4 lbbd7 1 1.0-0 E:e8 12.if4 V!fc7 13.E:el h6

1 3 . . . 'llh5?! 14.i.h2 'lle5 1 5 .i.e2 'llxf3t 16.i.xf3 'll f6 17.e5 dxe5 1 8 .d6 'Wb6 1 9.i.xe5 i.e6 20.a5± Dreev - Malakhov, Villarrobledo 2007.

14.Vfid2 ih7 1 5.ic4 lbh5 16.ih2 h6 Black's position is solid but passive.

Chapter 1 0 - Modern Main Line - without 9 . . . bS 135

17.�adl l 7.g4 gives Black some chances to obtain

counterplay on the kingside: l 7 . . . '2lhf6 1 8.:B:ad l hS 1 9.gS '2lh7 20.i.g3 :B:e7 2 1 .:B:e2 :B:ae8 22.:B:de l i.c8 23.<iih2 bS+! 24.eS?! h4 25 .i.f4 lllxeS 26.i.xeS 'Wd7! White was in trouble in Onischuk - Nakamura, San Diego 2006.

17 ... 'it>h7 18.'Wc2 �e7 19.i.e2 'it>g8 20.llJd2 llJ hf6 21. llJ c4

White had a considerable advantage in Jakovenko - Gashimov, Sochi 2008.

B2) 9 . . . �e8

This leads more interesting play than the previous line.

10.0-0 1 O.i.gS has not been played in many

games, but it immediately transposes to a position that has been reached many more times via other move orders, most notably the King's Indian where White plays h2-h3 and i.gS, and Black responds with . . . cS . For more details, see line D on page 1 9 1 , where the position is reached by the move order 9.i.gS :B:e8 1 o .'2lf3.

10 ... c4

Other moves are likely to lead to similar play as in variation B 1 , but the text move is more interesting. White can react with B21) 1 1 .i.c2 or B22) 1 1 .i.xc4.

B21) 1 1 .i.c2

This does not cause many problems for Black.

1 1 ...b5 12.a3 Already we can see a considerable difference

from the previous variation B 1 . Black's queenside play is well underway and White has had to spend a tempo on a purely defensive move.

12 ... llJbd7 1 2 . . . a6 is playable too, but why spend time

defending a pawn when it is not yet necessary?

13.�el llJc5 The pressure against the e4-pawn enables

Black to maintain the indirect defence of bS .

a b c d e f g h 14.i.f4

Another example continued: 1 4.i.gS 'Wb6 1 5 .eS Perhaps White should play more patiently, in which case the game will resemble the main line below. 1 5 . . . dxeS 1 6.lllxeS i.b7 1 7.'Wf3 h6 1 8.i.h4 tllcd7= 19 .i.g3? tllxeS 20.i.xeS :B:ad8+ Rusev - Cvitan, Zadar 2008.

1 36 e4 Systems

14 ... �b? 15.llid4 Black has a good position and can arrange

his pieces in a few different ways.

15 ... a6!? 1 5 . . . 'Wb6 looks natural but gives White the

option of 1 6.'llc6!?, when 1 6 . . . i!.xc6 1 7.dxc6 ge6 1 8.b4 cxb3 1 9.i!.xb3 'llxb3 20.'Wxb3 'Wxc6 2 1 .gacl 'We8 22.'Wxb5 'Wxb5 23.'llxb5 gxe4 simplified to an equal endgame in Ki. Georgiev - Chatalbashev, Blagoevgrad 20 1 0.

a b c d e f g h 16.'Wd2

Now 1 6.'llc6?! 'Wc7 achieves nothing for White.

16 ... �b6 17.gadl llifd7 18.�e3 gac8 19.f4 �d8 20.�f2 llib6 21.llif3

a b c d e f g h

21 . .. llid3!t A typical sacrifice for the Benoni. Black will

get the c4-square for his knight which, along with the combined power of the bishop on g7 and rook on c8, will ensure a powerful initiative.

22.�d3 cxd3 23.�cl a5 24.�al b4 25.axb4 axb4 26.llia4 llic4 27.�bl? �a5+

Rusev - Quillan, Sunny Beach 201 1 .

B22) 1 1.�xc4

This move is more challenging.

1 1 ... llixe4 12.llixe4 gxe4 Black should be careful here, as the position

is more open and White has the better development.

13.�g5 The other option for White is: 1 3.i!.d3 ge8

1 4.i!.g5 'Wa5 1 5.ge l i!.d7 1 6.gxeSt i!.xe8 1 7.'Wel 'Wxel t 1 8.gxel 'lld7= Norkin -Torsky, Moscow 1 995.

8 ��.i.� � -� % ,�, , , , , ;� ,,, , , %� ��,� �

7 tiHt. � � · � · 6 % , , , , %� ��-,,¥,� 5 ��-8'• '%. � � � � �-- ,�, 4 -�-�- u 3 U m -t:ZJU [j %�,%%%� ��'% %�%� 2 [j :f� � :f� [j � 1 �-----%�1•!=

a b c d e f g h 13 ... �b6?!

This is the move I would ideally like to play, but I was unable to make it work. Still, I have made i t the main line as it is the most principled attempt to obtain an active position.

Chapter 1 0 - Modern Main Line - without 9 . . . b5 137

l 3 . . . 'l;Wf8!? seems objectively better, and in the following game I found a nice improvement to neutralize the pressure: 14 .'l;Wc2 l"le8 1 5 .l"lael �f5 1 6.'l;Wb3 Now Black has to make a temporary pawn sacrifice. 1 6 . . . llid7 l 7.l"lxe8 'l;Wxe8. 1 8.'l;Wxb7 'l;Wc8 1 9.'l;Wc6 �xb2 20.�f4 ctJ b6 2 l .�b3 Stoever - Van Seben, e-mail 2004.

� �1-�!a . 6 , , ,?,.1.��!� : �;'•j·>� 3 ,�� lS ��F�� .%�-%� 2 lS� � �lS� �

-----�� ,;,-i� a b c d e f g h

21 . . .�a3!N This move saves the day for Black. 22.l"lel �d7 23.'l;Wxc8t l"lxc8= Despite the satisfactory outcome of this particular line, putting the queen on f8 does not seem like a pleasant way to conduct the game. If this is the best Black can do, then I would rather play a different line entirely. Besides, we have not even mentioned potential improvements for White in the above game.

White must be precise if he is to turn his dynamic advantage into something tangible. This move forces the rook back while defending the bishop and preparing to deploy the knight on a more favourable square.

After 1 4.�d3 l"le8 1 5 .l"lel �d7 Black has few problems, and the position can be compared with the following line.

14 .'l;Wc2 l"le8 1 5 .l"lael �d7 1 6.l"lxe8t �xe8 1 7.l"lel llid7 Black has managed to develop his pieces and is close to equalizing the game. 1 8 .�b3 llie5 1 9.llixe5 �xe5 20.�e3 Gavrilovic - Palosevic, Serbia 2005. 20 . . . 'l;Wa5N=

14 ... :ges 14 . . . l"le8 1 5.l"lel �d7 1 6.llie4± Annakov -

Totsky, Russia 1 995.

15.i.f4 :g5 16.i.h2 We have been following the game Nava Baro

- Migliorini, e-mail 2002. Black is under some pressure here; his rook is oddly placed and g2-g4 could be awkward at some point. I tried, unsuccessfully, to rescue the position with the following idea:

17 ... :gxeS 18.i.b3!

138 e4 Systems

Another precise move, vacating the c4-square for the knight and forcing Black to waste additional time.

18 ... 'Wds 19.llJc4 E:e8 20.'Wd2± This would be absolutely no fun to play

for Black. The story so far has been less than inspiring, so let's see if things will improve in the final section of the chapter.

B3) 9 ... llJhS!?

8 ��.i.� ��-� 1 ifl"R""'"-·iy,•t 6 "� �-�� .,� ��-�,,, ,%�� 5 � f� b - -'i) 4 � ,,,,

, %�

��

�� % "//,��

3 � �ltt�� b 2 ltd""':� �� :� , , , ,�, , , , %�:� �%:-�,,, ,%� 1 -� �if� �.:

a b c d e f g h This move was recommended by John

Watson in his 200 1 book, and has since become a common guest in tournaments. The point of the knight move is to prevent �f4 and prepare . . . 'lld7-e5 to exchange a pair of knights. Later Black may aim to take control of the dark squares with moves like . . . \Wf6 or . . . \Wh4.

By the way, in discussing the . . . 'llh5 plan I should also mention a system recommended by Chris Ward in a Dangerous Weapons book, whereby Black puts the knight on h5 before castling. This idea definitely warrants consideration but I decided not to cover it here, partly to avoid duplicating another author, and also because I believe White has a route to a slight plus. So instead I will cover the . . . 'llh5 system in conjunction with castling, and leave

it to the reader to carry out his own research on the delayed-castling approach if he wishes.

10.0-0 llJd7 1 1 .i.gS This natural move is the main line.

Alternatives are unlikely to trouble Black:

1 1 .Elel 'lle5 1 2.�e2 'llxf3t 1 3 .�xf3 '1Wh4! l 4.�xh5 gxh5

a b c d e f g h 1 5 .iWd2 ( 1 5 .'llb5 �e5 1 6.�h6 �xh3! works out well for Black, as Watson demonstrates.) 1 5 ... �e5 1 6.\Wg5t '1Wxg5 17.�xg5 �d7= Merbis - Langedijk, Haarlem 2005.

l l .g4 gains time but weakens the kingside: l 1 . . .'llhf6 1 2.�f4 '1We7 13 .Elel 'lle8 ( 13 . . . h5!?) 14.�fl a6 1 5.a4 'lle5 1 6.'lld2 g5 1 7.�g3

This was Kanko - Kosmo, Helsinki 2002, and now after l 7 ... 'llc7!N Black intends ... �d7 and . . . b5 with counterplay. If White blocks the


queenside with a4-a5, the knight on c7 can go to b5 and later d4.

1 1 .i.e3 allows Black to carry out the intended knight exchange, which is the main idea behind putting the knight on h5. 1 1 . . . a6 1 2.a4 :9'.e8 13 .Wd2 llle5 14 .i.e2 lllxf3t l 5 .i.xf3 lllf6= The knight carried out his duty so now he can go back. The position is balanced and it is worth seeing the rest of the game.

a b c d e f g h And now, almost out of nowhere, Black is

winning. 23 . . . tllf3t! The knight is untouchable and the white king cannot be saved. 24.<;tihl We5 25 .g3 (25.gxf3 Wh5+) 25 . . . Wh5 26.h4 Wg4 Vasilev - Chatalbashev, Calvi 2004.

a b c d e f g h 1 1 . . . i.f6

It is not only the knights that Black will be happy to exchange. If the bishops come off then he will have chances to exploit the dark squares, especially with the queen coming to f6.

12.i.e3 I 2.i.xf6 does not seem to have been tested,

and after 1 2 . . . Wxf6 Black has a comfortable position, thanks to his active queen and ideas of . . . tllf4 and/or . . . tlle5 coming at some point in the future.

White's other important option is: 12 .i.h6 i.g7

1 2 . . . :9'.eS is also playable. One game continued: 1 3.Wd2 a6 14.a4 tlle5 1 5 .i.e2 lllxf3t 1 6.i.xf3 tllg7 1 7.a5 b5 1 8 .axb6 Wxb6 and White had a small advantage at best, Makovsky - Donnelly, corr. 2004.

1 3.Wd2 13 .i.g5 i.f6= repeats the position. 1 3.i.xg7 occurred in Fries Nielsen - Maus, Germany 1 989, and here Black evidently should have recaptured with the king: 1 3 . . . <;tixg?N 14.Wd2 Wf6 1 5 .tlle2 :9'.e8 According to Watson Black has a reasonable game, with ideas such as . . . b5 and . . . tlle5 on the agenda.

1 3 . . . a6

140 e4 Systems

1 3 . . . ixh6 1 4.\Wxh6 \Wf6 1 5 .ib5!? gave White good chances in Heigl - Beyer, corr. 1 995.

14.ixg7 14.a4 ixh6 1 5 .\Wxh6 \Wf6= is pleasant for Black without any lllb5 ideas to worry about.

1 4 . . . lllxg7 14 . . . c;t>xg7!?N 1 5 .a4 \Wf6 looks sensible.

l 5 .\Wf4 \We? I 6.1:'!:fe I Jenneborg - Pott, e-mail 2003. Here I would suggest:

a b c d e f g h 16 . . . 1:'!:e8N

Preventing the e4-e5 break. 1 6 . . . b5 17.e5t

l 7.a4 lllh5 1 8.1Wd2 1 8.\Wh6 \Wf6 keeps the kingside under control.

1 8 . . . 1:'!:b8 19.a5 b5 20.axb6 1:'!:xb6+±

12 .. J�e8 1 2 . . . llle5 is possible, but it is always useful

to activate the rook. After the text move I considered two main options for White: B31) 13.tL\d2 and B32) 13.%Vd2.

Once again Black does not have to be concerned about the advancing g-pawn: l 3.g4 lllg7 1 4.c;t>g2 ( 1 4.g5 ixc3 1 5 .bxc3 c4! gives Black interesting play on the light squares.) l 4 . . . a6 l 5.a4 Bern - Gallinnis, corr. 2002. l 5 ... h5!N 16 .g5 id4!+±

B31) 13.tL\d2

14 . .ixd4?! A mistake, but it is worth highlighting the

refutation.

A better, if still harmless continuation is: 1 4.1:'!:el llle5 1 5 .lllf3 lllxf3t

Or 1 5 . . . ixe3N 16.1:'!:xe3 \Wf6 with comfortable equality.

1 6.\Wxf3 ie5 l 7.g4?! l 7.ib5N id7=

a b c d e f g h 1 7 . . . lllf4! 1 8.ib5

1 8.ixf4 \Wf6 19 .llle2 g5 is also good for Black.

Chapter 1 0 - Modern Main Line - without 9 . . . bS 141

18 . . . ms l 9 .ixf4 �f6+ 20.ixeS? �xf3 1 8.ltih2 �h4 1 9.�d2 ixh3 20.1:'!:h l �xf2t 2 1 .ltixh3 �xf3t 22.ltih2 leads to a draw -Emms.) 1 8 .f4 ll'lxf4 19 .ll'lbxd4 fS! Emms stops analysing here. Black's attack gives him the upper hand, but White had to try this and hope for the best.

a b c d e f g h 2 1 .ixd6

2 1 .1:'!:e3 �xe3 22.fxe3 dxeS+ 2 1 . . .�xh3 22.1:'!:e3 �xg4t 23.1:'!:g3 �h4-+

Pier - Brunello, Khanry-Mansiysk (ol) 20 10 .

14 ... cxd4 15.llle2

1 5 ... lll e5! Improving over 1 5 . . . ll'lcS as had been played

before.

16.lllb3 lllf3t!

2

The key idea, which justifies Black's previous a b c d e f g h play. 20.�g4

20.ltixgl ? ll'lf4 is the end. 17.'it>hl? 20 . . . �xh3t 2 1 .�xh3 ll'lxh3 22.ll'lxd4 ll'l5f4-+

Taking the knight would have given better With both material and position advantages, survival chances: l 7.gxf3 ixh3 ( 1 7 . . . �gSt Black should win without much trouble.

142 e4 Systems

The main move occurred in Biliskov - Zufic, Zadar 2008. Now Black's easiest route to victory is:

21.'!Wg3 2 I .c;t>g2 lllf4t 22.c;t>gl l"i:e5 is crushing.

21 ...ctJ:xflt!-+ As pointed out by Emms.

B32) 13.'!Wd.2

13 ... ClJe5 Although Black is unlikely to win with a

mating attack here, he keeps an active game and is not forced to return from the baseline, as they say in tennis.

14.i.e2 Exchanging on e5 is not dangerous: l 4.lllxe5

�xe5 1 5 .llle2 ( 1 5 .f4?! �xc3 16.'\Wxc3 lllg3 saw Black win material in Shulman - Langer, Las Vegas 2002.) 1 5 . . . �d7 16.l"i:fel Arreaga Orozco - Knebel, e-mail 2003. 1 6 . . . b5N l 7.f4 �g7 Black has promising counterplay.

8 .i� .i.�.i--� 1 .T� ,� :� 1 %, , , ,/, �� - �� 6 - - �·� 5 � -�- �'11 4 �. ,,.,Ii.�� %'"// ��-� �� 3 � 0

��

2 8�,_,, , ;��8� 1 �--,J-,,,,��'

,, , Y, � � ' /, , ,/;

a b c d e f g h 14 ... ClixBt 15.i.xa ClJg7

The knight is not as badly placed as it might appear, and may support the .. .f5 break if it is needed.

16.E:abl !? Preparing b2-b4 is perhaps the most

challenging plan for White. Here are a few other examples:

16.l"i:fel �e5 l 7.�f4 was played in Matthiesen - E. Pedersen, Denmark 2006, and now after 17 . . . a6N l 8.a4 b6 the black rook is ready to swing to the centre via a7.

16 .�f4 �e5 1 7.�xe5 l"i:xe5 1 8.�e2 f5 1 9 .f4 l"i:e8 20.�f3 occurred in Cmilyte - Langer,

Chapter 1 0 - Modern Main Line - without 9 . . . b S 143

Gibraltar 2008. Here the logical continuation would have been:

16 ... i.e5 17.b4 b6 18.i.f4 This position was reached in Schandorff -

E. Pedersen, Denmark 2007. Since the queenside has now become a key battleground, I think Black should have taken the opportunity to take the enemy queen in the opposite direction:

Conclusion

Against the 7.ctJf3 move order 7 . . . a6!? seems perfectly valid, although Black had better be prepared for the tricky 8.We2!? line as examined in line A2. If White wishes to play the Modern Main Line then the 7 .id3 move order is the best way to do it, and after 7 . . . ig7 8 .h3 0-0 9.ctJf3 we reach the main tabiya for the system. According to my analysis neither 9 . . . a6 nor 9 . . . :9'.e8 1 0.0-0 c4 is particularly appealing for Black, so if the reader is looking for an alternative to the theory-laden 9 . . . b5 variation of the previous chapter, 9 . . . ctJhS!? looks like the best bet.


Kapengut

Variation Index 1 .d4 tLlf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.tLlc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f3

7 ... �g7 A) 8.tLlge2 0-0 9.tLlg3

Al) 9 ... a6 A2) 9 ... h5 A3) 9 ... tLlh5!?

B) 8.�e3 0-0 Bl) 9.tLlge2 B2) 9.�d2

C) 8.�g5 0-0 9.�d2 Cl) 9 ... a6 C2) 9 ... h6 10.�e3 h5 1 1 .tLlge2

C21) 1 1 . .. :ges C22) 1 1 ...tLlbd7

Al) after 1 8.f6? A3) after 2 l ..ltd2

a b c d e f g h 1 8 . . . tllxf6!N

C22) after 20 . .ltd3

145 145 146 148 149 149 150 152 152 155 156 157

a b c d e f g h 20 . . . Ei:b4!N

Chapter 1 1 - Kapengut 145

1 .d4 t!llf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.t!llc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f3

This set-up is named after the Belarusian master Albert Kapengut, although the main lines of the present chapter arise more frequently via the Samisch Variation of the King's Indian Defence.

White's last move prepares to develop the bishop on e3 without fearing harassment from a knight on g4. On the negative side, White not only spends a tempo on a pawn move, but will often spend considerable time on manoeuvres such as l/Jgl -e2-g3 followed by l/Jh l -f2 or l/Jfl -d2. But as we say in my country: for every train there are passengers!

7 ... .ig7 From here White usually proceeds with

one of the following developing moves: A) 8.t!llge2, B) 8 . .ie3 or C) 8 . .ig5. Obviously transpositions are possible, but each move can give rise to independent possibilities as well.

A) 8.t!llge2 0-0 9.t!llg3

s ��.i.� ��•m 7 .,,,�

,

,, , ,,,

�

,•y,•r 6 /,, , , , /,� �� f·�� 5 � �-8"� " � 4

�.

� ,.,.�� 3 � w � � w ��,d",,,, , ;� �� ;/,,, , , ;�,� � r.1.!�

a b c d e f g h 9.ie3 leads straight to line B l on page 149 .

After the text move i t i s worth considering three main options for Black: Al) 9 ••• a6, A2) 9 ... h5 and the remarkable A3) 9 ... t!llh5!?.

Al) 9 ... a6 10.a4 t!llbd7

This is the most natural scheme of development for Black.

l l . .ie2 Once again l l .ie3 will lead to variation B 1 .

8 �� .i.� ��·� �� "� "m Bf' 7 �%

·

�� %lJ�£ 6 ·� � �·�

5 �-�r� /, , ,, , ,� % 4 �� ,�� -ll �% "//, �� % "/� 3 � m � � m 2 ��,,,, , ;�'·/8,;� 1 �,,,,/,�'� �.�

, , , , , , ,,,,,,,,; /,, , , ,/, � ' a b c d e f g h 1 1 ...t!lle8!

I like this move a lot. Instead of chasing the knight away from g3, where it is not brilliantly placed anyhow, Black manoeuvres his knight to support the . . . b5 plan.

1 1 . . . h5 This is the main line. It seems okay too, even if it is not my favourite plan in the position.

1 2.ig5 The black queen has a couple of options.

1 2 . . .'�c7 1 2 . . .'�b6 1 3.'�d2 l/Jh7 1 4.ih4?! ( 14 .a5 is better) 14 . . . :9'.eS 1 5. 0-0 c4t 16.<;tihl l/Jc5 1 7.:9'.ab l ll:lb3 1 8.We l We3+ Dambacher -Bojkov, Belgium 201 1 .

146 e4 Systems

1 3 .1Wd2 �b8 14 .0-0 c4 1 5 .ie3 h4 1 6.lllh l h3 1 6 . . . lllc5 is also decent.

l 7.lllf2 hxg2 1 8 .c;t>xg2 The position was roughly balanced in Anand

- Nakamura, Moscow 20 1 1 .

12.0--0 �b8 1 3 . .ie3 ClJc7 Black is ready to commence his counterplay,

and White must decide what to do about it.

14.f4 White goes for swift action in the centre.

1 4.a5 is nothing special: 1 4 . . . b5 1 5 .axb6 �xb6 ( 1 5 . . . lll b5!?N=) 1 6.\Wd2 �b4= Gupta -Vishnu, Chalkis 20 1 0.

14 ... b5 15.e5 Definitely the most ambitious move. Instead

1 5 .axb5 lllxb5 1 6.lllxb5 axb5 17.1Wd2 �e8 was comfortable for Black in Antonsen -Mortensen, Farum 1 993.

15 ... bxa4 16.ClJce4 clxe5 17.f5 .ib7 1 7 . . . �xb2!N looks like an improvement,

as 1 8.d6 lllb5 favours Black. Still, it is worth mentioning a tactical point that occurred in the game after the text move.

18.f6? This occurred in Bargan - Dochev, Paracin

20 1 0, and here Black could have obtained a big advantage as follows:

18 ... Clixf6!N 19 . .ig5 Clice8 20.ctJxf6t .ixf6 21 .�xf6 ctJxf6 22.Clie4 Clixe4 23.hd8 �fxd8+

Black has a rook, knight and several pawns for the queen.

A2) 9 ... h5

IO • .ig5 It seems logical to hold up the h-pawn.

Ignoring it allows Black to develop rapid counterplay: 1 0.ie2 h4 1 1 .lllfl lllh7 1 2.ie3 f5 1 3.exf5 ixf5 14.if2


more sense in Dreev - Tkachiev, Shanghai 200 1 .) 1 6.Clle3 Now in Kopasov - Oortwijn, Internet 2003, I think Black should have played:

10 ... °Wh6 1 1 .°Wd2 lllh7 12.Ah4 It seems a bit odd to combine a knight on g3

with a bishop on h4, but several strong players have followed this path.

1 2.j,e3 llld7 1 3 .0-0-0?! is hardly an improvement: 1 3 . . . h4 14 .lllge2 1¥fa5 1 5.Wbl b5 1 6.lllc l b4 17 .Cll3e2 llle5 1 8 .lllf4

12 ... llld7 l3.Ae2

Now Black has a couple of contrasting options.

8 .1m.i.�_ �-·-7 &rrmlj)m, Ei 6 _ _ _ _ _ ,,B %m %m·1�� s , __ _ _ ,,sl"� ,,� ' 4 ��!!' '�!� �� % "//, �� % ,,/}L . 3 � m m 8 m 2 ��----- ;�fm,,l_ ;� 1 ... , , /,., , , , ,/,= %-�

a b c d e f g h 13 ... a6 1 3 . . . g5!?

After this sharp move both kings could become unsettled.

1 4.j,xg5 Cllxg5 1 5 .lllxh5 ! ? An interesting long-term piece sacrifice. Another game continued: 1 5 .1¥fxg5 1¥fxb2 1 6.E!:cl lllf6 1 7.llldl 1¥fb4t 1 s.<iif2 h4+± 19.E!:c4?? hxg3t 20.hxg3 '1¥fbl-+ Dubessay Martinovic, Sibenik 20 1 2.

1 5 . . . lllh7 1 6.lllxg7 Wxg7 17.g4� White had reasonable compensation m

Sandipan - Caspi, Zurich 2009.

14.o-o c4t 1s.iih1 This position was reached in Svetushkin -

Denny, Turin (ol) 2006, and here Black should have gone forwards!

15 ... °Wd4!N 16.°Wxd4 Axd4 17.Ae7!? An interesting solution, which looks

preferable to 17.j,xc4 lllb6 1 8 .j,b3 g5+.

17 ... E:eS 18.Axd6 h4 19.Axc4 hxg3 20.Axg3 White's three pawns should give him enough

for the piece, but no advantage in my view.

148 e4 Systems

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

A3) 9 ... c!llh5!? 10.c!llxhs gxh5

a b c d e f g h This looks like an even more extreme version

of the famous . . . lllh5 idea as used by Fischer against Spassky. Here Black incurs a similar shattering of his kingside pawns, without gaining the advantage of the bishop pair as a consolation. Fortunately the news is not all bad; the .. .f5 break will come quickly and the f2-f3 move has weakened White's dark squares, in addition to shielding the h5-pawn from attack.

1 1 .�d3 f5 12.0-0 c!lld7 If the knight has the chance to settle on the

splendid e5-square, all other options should be skipped. For instance: 1 2 . . . tt:la6 1 3.a3 �d7 14.\Wc2 \Wf6 1 5 .c;t>hl !'l:ac8 1 6.1We2 tt:lc7 1 7.�f4 !'l:ce8 1 8.1Wd2;!; Taborov - Pavlov, Kiev 2003.

13.�c2 13 .exf5 llle5 1 4.f6 \Wxf6 1 5 .tt:le4 1Wg6 1 6.�c2

�f5 1 7.c;t>hl b5 gave Black fully satisfactory play in Novikov - Langer, Lindsborg 2002.

13 ... c!lle5 Black can also establish a dark-squared

blockade with: 1 3 . . .f4!?N 14.tt:le2 �e5 1 5 .c;t>hl h4=

14.c!lle2 c!llg6

It is worth pomtmg out the erroneous 14 . . . \Wh4? as played in Oreev - Peng Xiaomin, Beijing 2000. Here White could have obtained a pleasant advantage by simple means:

a b c d e f g h l 5.exf5N �xf5 1 6.�xf5 !'l:xf5 17.tt:lg3 !'l:ff8 1 8.tt:le4 \We7 1 9.�g5;!;

15.exf5 � 16.�xf5 �xf5 17.c!llg3 �f'7

a b c d e f g h 1s.c!llxhs

Taking the pawn must be critical. 1 8.tt:le4 was played in Kraft - Kuhn, e-mail 2008, and here I suggest 1 8 .. . 1.Wd?N 1 9.lllg5 �d4t 20.c;t>hl !'l:f5 2 1 .1Wb3 !'l:c8 when Black has sufficient counterplay.

18 • • . �d4t 19.i>hl Wfh4 20.f4 �af8 21 .�d2 We have been following the game Ilj in -

Sjugirov, St Petersburg 2005. So far Black's


play has been excellent, and here he could have obtained the upper hand with:

8 . m � ��·� 7 .r��'i� " 6 , ,��-��1� 13! ��¥ '� �� 5 �� -� �� 4 � � f� �m �

��

,,,,,%�

,, , , ,/,�

,,, , , , 3 ��-� �%-� �� -� 2 � f� � - � ffj ��--,,/,-if� rw� /, . V, m . m1

a b c d e f g h 21. ..'lJe5!N 22 . .iel V9g4 23.V9xg4t 'lJxg4i

Black is temporarily a pawn down, but his pieces are much more active and several of White's pawns are weak.

B) 8 . .ie3

a b c d e f g h 8 ... 0-0

Now it is worth checking both Bl) 9.'lJge2 and B2) 9.V9d2.

Bl) 9.ltJge2 ltJbd7 10.ltJg3

Deciding the knight's position so early gives Black an attractive option.

10 ... h5! This is an easy and straightforward route to

a good game.

It is worth comparing the alternative: 1 O . . . lll e5 1 l .�e2

8 il�i��;� 7 � · · � · � · 6

. .. . %. liZ� liZlif ·%� 5 �-��-----'� 4 �� , .. %�//�,;� �� / "//, ��-/, �% "/� 3 � � � b � 2 ��- - - '� ��,,/E'� . .. . {---"� �f0·0,� •. · � �Ji'� • .:

a b c d e f g h This position is more commonly reached

via the King's Indian move order: 1 .d4 lllf6 2.c4 g6 3.lllc3 �g7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.�e3 c5 7.lllge2 lllc6 8.d5 llle5 9.lllg3 e6 10.�e2 exd5 l l .cxd5.

Notice that in the above move order Black is forced to put his knight on e5 before playing . . . e6. In our Benoni move order this is not the case, and we can obtain a good game by leaving the knight back on d7 for a few more moves. So although transposing to the King's Indian is a valid option which leads to interesting play, I see little point in doing so when an easier and less theoretically dense alternative exists.

l 1 ..ie2 h4 12.'lJfl 'lJh7 13.'lJd2 The knight must be feeling tired already.

13 ... a6 Black can also do without this move, for

instance: 1 3 .. .f5 14.0-0 ( 14.exf5 gxf5 1 5 .0-0 f4 1 6.�f2 h3+±) 14 .. .f4 1 5 .�f2 llle5 1 6.a4= Lapiccirella - Chatalbashev, Bratto 20 1 0.

14.a4 f5 15.exf5 gxf5 16.0-0 ltJe5 17.�hl Korchnoi - Saric, Porto Carras 20 1 1 .

1 50 e4 Systems

18.i.fl h3? Black has a full share of the chances.

B2) 9.'1Wd2

s .i �.i.S ��--�---- - -� ,,, , ,/,� ""'"�-�� : .,,��,,� �.ii'• , • JffiJ : �� -!� ��

�/,'"//, ��-0 �� 3 � � � ci -�®-�,,,, , ;.;,,,�� ®-� 2 t)flJ%�,,j)/�'0 �,,�Jc0$, � - ��m: a b c d e f g h

Although White's set-up resembles the Yugoslav Attack against the Sicilian Dragon, don't expect any craziness involving long castling and marching the h-pawn.

9 ... �e8 It is worth pointing out that 9 . . . tt'lbd7 is

inaccurate due to 1 O.tt'lh3! when the knight finds an ideal home on f2.

On the other hand 9 . . . h5 is perfectly playable and immediately transposes to line C2 on page 1 56.

10.CLJge2 CLJbd7 1 1.CLJcl l 1 .ctJg3 h5 is hardly an improvement for

White over the previous variation, as the white queen is blocking the knight's route via fl-d2.

1 1 ... a6 12.a4 After some standard opening moves it is

time for Black to decide on a plan.

I also like the following option: 12 . . . h5

Even without a knight on g3 this move makes some sense. The knight can drop back to h7 to make way for .. .f5 , while in some positions the further advance of the h-pawn could be considered.

1 3.�e2 tt'lh7 14.0-0 tt'le5 1 5 .ctJ la2 1 5 .!'l:b l f5 16.b4 c4= 1 7.f4?! Hobaica -Barbosa, Brasilia 20 1 0. l 7 . . . tt'lg4N l 8.�xg4 hxg4+

l 5 . . . �d7 16.!'l:ab 1 f5 l 7.b4 c4= l 8.f4?! Once again this aggressive move does more harm than good to White.

l 8 . . . tt'ld3 l 8 . . . tt'lg4+

Chapter 1 1 - Kapengut 1 5 1

l 9.�xd3 cxd3 20.'1Wxd3 tt:'if6+ Moutousis - Kotronias, Aghia Pelagia 2004.

13.g4? A clear mistake, but it is worth seeing the

refutation.

White should prefer l 3.�e2 although here too Black is in good shape: 1 3 . . . f5 14.exf5 gxf5 1 5 .�g5 \Wa5 1 6.0-0 '1Wb4 1 7.'1Wc2 tt:'if4 The imaginative plan of utilizing the queen to support a kingside outpost along the fourth rank makes a nice impression.

a b c d e f g h 1 8.\Wxf5?! ( 1 8.'itihl N h6 1 9.�xf4 \Wxf4=) 1 8 .. . \Wxb2 1 9.Ei:a2 '1Wxc3 20.\Wxf4 tt:'ie5 (20 .. . �e5!N 2 1 .'1Wh4 \Wd4H) 2 1 .'1Wd2? (2 1 .'1We4+) 2 1 . . .tt:'if7+ Shumilina - Loeffler Vienna 2009.

'

13 ... Clle5! 14.�g2 �h4t 15.�f2 It is possible that White calculated this far

but missed the crushing follow-up.

a b c d e f g h 15 ... lllxBt! 16.�xB �xg4 17.�d3?

The only chance was: 1 7.\Wxf7t 'itixf7 1 8.�xh4 �xc3t 1 9.bxc3 Ei:xe4t 20.'itif2 Ei:f8 2 1 .�g2 'itig7t 22.'itigl Ei:e3+

17 ... �xdt 18.hxd �f6 White can do nothing to prevent a decisive

breakthrough along the e-file.

a b c d e f g h 19.Clle2 �O 20.�gl �xe4 21 .�d2 �ae8 22.Cllg3 Cllxg3 23.�xg3 c4 0-1

Enchev - Berbatov, Bankia 20 1 1 . A perfect demonstration of Black's chances!

1 52 e4 Systems

C) 8.ii.g5

% '"/0 B•- �I/, � �.!.%,,, ,�/, ��"i 8 S?:?--- - - -� - ' � . �� & � ��Mief"&�� 7 A% A �� - �

- - - - · "- w� �/- - ,.,k�r%

6 �%?'.f'd"'f;"� �

� �w o � ,., .,Y,�

5 �% �--j� �%� � 4 ., .�. �-� fil' �,,o �� 3 -� - •,�� 2 $Jb,� �w �i?D � 1 � � '§' � , .J :/,,, , , . .

h , ,v.

d e f g a b c

h6 bur Black can rovoke · · · ' · e we Whi<e wan� '° p

A< <he "m' nm h5

do without that mhove.

Black often plays . . . d en t at I hievement

have alrea y se h a specia ac regardless, so it not sue

for White either way.

0 he bishop then he

8 .. . 0-h '° nudg"

1 ilii> If Black wis es

h6'' immediate y, as h Id consider 8 . . . . . . en in the note to

s ou the option g1v

e page 1 5 5. takes away

. n line C2 - se . ' 1 0th move I White s

he queens1 h6 followe

6 or he can ·de with Cl) 9 ... a ' d by his on t

k . t with C2) 9... he lines that we

attac 1 . "de play, along t thematic kmgs1

h already seen. ave

0 4 ge8 Cl) 9 ... a6 l .a

% '"/0 ttni � �--� � .i.%� a �� 8 a ,,, , , . ,,�m,,,, . ,%- i � a � & � ��Mief"&:�� 7 !i?,Zt, • %%Wl% � • � 6 •"•_.�, . D ¥ o D ""• 5 ... � J. ,11,"•0 4 ,I\, ·� "• A • Yi, t.J �%0 �%!'� 3 .. , ·#'· .... imll • ,II, � �A"� �� %'"/,;/Fr 2 , , , �Q�%.""""m � m

M ,�t • ')§'<' dib 0,,,. , , 1 �� %,, % h

/, , . . d e f g a b c

ttJ 2 ttJbd7 12.tlJg3 V9a5 blishes a pin of

1 1 . ge ks the pin and esta Black brea

fil I the a- e. his own a ong

13.ga3 s against . . . b5 . He has also White takes step

. . ored it in several games. � . s��

1 3.ii.e2 b5 been played bur It 1 3 . . . h5 has

· ent inron"" . 4

h ·J 14 0-0 b4 1 5 .ctJdl c

. II underway, w I e B. I k's counterplay is we

hieving anything ac

from ac White is a long way the kingside. on . " :i •• !llil 8 1.•1-�� 1�, 7 � -� �*&<1"&:xB �� ,�,��

• · �- ii "D D, 5 � �%0 �� • ''A"�� & • 8 �1� 4 o •% A �� A 'k_t � .. . %. a o ,�,., ;�� 3 �,, .,,, ��n� 1.-, ·8 �b � �§i�d!b �� 2 · l �-qs'-� k'§i 1 � - (

f g h .

d e a b c

Chapter 1 1 - Kapengut 1 53

16.�hl 1 6.�xc4 Wf c5t 1 7.Clle3 h6 1 8.�xf6 �xf6 19.Ei:fe l Ei:b8 20.Ei:ab l b3 2 1 .Cllgfl Wfb4� White remained a pawn up but paid a substantial price in the shape of his darksquared bishop in Stolz - Boos, e-mail 2006.

16 ... llle5 1 7.Clle3 c3 1 8.bxc3 bxc3 1 9.Wf c2 Ei:b8 20.Clldl

20 . . . h6! Black's little 'Hobbit' starts its journey!

2 1 .�e3 h5! 22.Ei:e l h4 23.lllfl h3! The humble pawn has single-handedly pushed back White's pieces and facilitated the destruction of his entire position, as demonstrated by the game continuation:

24.g3? lllxd5! 25 .exd5 �f5 26.Wfxc3 Wfxd5 27.Wf d2 Wfa8-+

Gross - Kende, Budapest 1 998. White faces imminent disaster on the 8-square.

13 ... Wfb4 Another game continued 1 3 . . . h5 14 .�e2

lllh7 1 5.�f4 llle5 16.0-0 �d7 1 7.�h6 h4 1 8.�xg7 with equality, Martin - ArakhamiaGrant, Sunningdale 2007.

14.�e2 lDe5

a b c d e f g h 15.0-0 llJfd7!

A queen exchange only helps White: 1 5 . . . Wfd4t?! 1 6.�hl Wfxd2 1 7.�xd2 c4 1 8 .a5 �d7 19 .llla4 �xa4 20.Ei:xa4 Ei:ac8± Mortensen - Hoi, Ringsted 1 995 .

A somewhat better alternative is 1 5 . . . lllc4 1 6.�xc4 Wfxc4 1 7.�J4 �f8 1 8.�h6 �e7 ( 1 8 . . . �xh6 1 9.Wfxh6 llld7=) 1 9.Clla2 a5 20.Ei:cl Wfa6 2 1 .Ei:e3 �d7 with a reasonable position for Black in Papaioannou - Gagunashvili, Budva 2009.

Nevertheless I find the text move the most logical. The knight is going to support Black's queenside play, while all the white pieces seem to be sitting on strange places.

16.@hl c4!?N I find this move the most interesting,

although 1 6 . . . lllb6 gave Black an acceptable position in Puschendorf - Heyn, e-mail 2000. The main move is technically a novelty, although it immediately transposes to another game which we will follow for a few moves.

1 54 e4 Systems

17.�dl?! After the superior I 7.a5N b5 I 8.axb6 llixb6

the position is roughly equal.

17 ... �xd.2 18 . .L:d.2 Peralta - Ferreira, Asuncion 1 999. Here I

found a nice idea for Black:

18 ... h5!N Black must disrupt his opponent's position

before ctJe3 puts him in defensive mode.

19.�e3!? Attempting to provoke a conflict. 19 .Ei:e I

llic5 20.ctJe3 �d7 2 l .�xc4 ctJxa4 favours Black slightly.

19 ... h4 20.f4

20 ... hxg3! Black must avoid the seemingly tempting

alternative: 20 . . . llid3?

The complications are not in our favour. 2 l .ctJxc4 llixb2 22.llixd6 l"i:d8 23.e5 hxg3 24.Ei:a2 ctJc5

24 . . . llixe5 25 .fxe5 �xe5 26.llixf7 l"i:xd5 27.�cl �g7 28.l"i:xb2 �xb2 29.�xb2 �e6 30.�c4±

25 .llixc8 25 .Ei:xb2? l"i:xd6!+

25 . . . l"i:axc8 26.Ei:xb2 llixa4 27.l"i:a2 ctJc3 28.�xc3 l"i:xc3 29.�f3 f6;!;

8 �->-��-�� 7 -·-'i)-·-6 · � %- � .�� 5 %iZ �� "8• �I! 4 '1!'•"8 D�I! �,, , ,� �� :,/ef,, , ,%�rP-3 �� ,0� r� 2 ,,, , ,,y,D �Iii'� ii%� l � "• "•'•�

a b c d e f g h 21.fxe5 �xe5 22.hxg3

White is poised to win a pawn, but Black's active pieces and dynamic energy will prove far more significant:

Chapter 1 1 - Kapengur 1 5 5

22 ... i.d7 23.i.xc4 b5! 24.axb5 tlixc4 25.tlixc4 i.xb5 26.b3 1:he4 27.tlixd6 �d4 28.tlixb5 1hd2 29.tlic7 1:k8

29.tlixa6 i.d4! With the terrible threat of . . . 'itig7 and mate.

C2) 9 ... h6

a b c d e f g h 10.i.e3

White can also consider taking the pawn: 1 0 . .ixh6!?

This is a valid option, albeit not an especially promising one.

1 0 . . . Cllxe4 This thematic mini-combination should be familiar to Benoni and King's Indian players alike.

l l .Cllxe4 \Wh4t 12.g3 \Wxh6 1 3 .\Wxh6 .ixh6 14 .Cllxd6 Clld7

Black has sufficient compensation, but it will be hard to play for a win.

a b c d e f g h 1 5 .f4 Cllf6

1 5 . . . Cll b6?! is slightly inaccurate: 1 6.0-0-0 l::ld8 17.Cllxc8 l::laxc8 1 8.Jih3 f5 19 .Cllf3± Radusinovic - Zakic, Belgrade 20 1 0.

1 6.0-0-0 l::ld8 l 7.Cllxc8 l::laxc8 1 8 .Jlg2 1 8.d6 Clle4 19.d7 l::lc7 20.2::\e l l::lcxd7= Vidarte Morales - Minguez Rodriguez, Barcelona 20 1 1 .

7 6 5 4

2 a b c d e f g h

1 8 . . . Cllg4 19.Jih3 Cllf2 20.Jlxc8 Cllxdl 2 1 .'itixdl l::lxc8 22.Clle2 l::ld8 23.Cllc3 Jlg7 24.'itic2 Jlxc3 25.bxc3 l::lxd5=

Piker - Van Wely, Amsterdam 1 996.

1 56 e4 Systems

Let me repeat a point that was made earlier on page 1 52. If you intend to chase the bishop with . . . h6, I would suggest doing it on move 8 in order to avoid giving White the option of playing the above line. 1 o . .ixh6 may not be theoretically dangerous for Black, but why allow it at all when we don't have to?

� �� A ;\tit� ��0, 8 g :�l i �5� �� 7 ••. ;� ,, , ,,/,� .• Y,� •

- - - - ·��-�

;;'/.'' �

- .,,,,JL�. . � �� & �� 6 � �� -�- - �-5 0,.8%� //,, , , , ;� ;:, , , ,

4 B9 'BfBBB 3 ��

� /,

2 !• �rH'•!� , , , .J;, ,J.,, , ,�W0 iW/, .,,/j,, , , . 1 ,.� • m��M

a b c d e f g h 10 . .. h5

If Black wants to put his rook on e8 (as in variation C2 l below) there is nothing to stop him from doing so immediately. However, the . . . h5 move will normally be played at some point so I will assume Black plays it now before discussing the options for his other pieces.

By the way, it is worth mentioning that 1 0 . . . llibd7 needlessly gives White the useful option of l l .llih3! when he has good chances for an advantage.

Here is one interesting example where Black managed to do without the . . . h5 move: 1 o . . . Ei:e8 l 1 .a4

1 1 . lli ge2 h5 reaches line C2 l below. l l . . . a6

l 1 . . .llibd7 1 2.llih3! is worth mentioning again.

1 2.llige2 llibd7 13.llicl llih7!? An interesting way of utilizing the . . . h6 move. Black prepares not only to play . . JS , but also to station his knight on g5.

14 . .ie2 f5 1 5 .0-0 lligS 16.llid3 This position was reached in Sasikiran -Radjabov, Kallithea 2008, and here Radjabov points out rwo ways to improve on his play:

a b c d e f g h 1 1 .lDge2

Now it is worth discussing both C21) l 1.. .Ei:e8 and C22) 1 1 ...llJ hd7 with the idea of rushing the knight to e5 and leaving the rook on f8 .

C21) 1 1 ...Ei:e8 12.llJcl

White could hardly deploy the knight on g3, for obvious reasons. Therefore it must go


to c l and later perhaps d3 or even b3. This strangeness is all due to the earlier f2-f3 move.

12 ... tlibd7 13.�e2 tlie5 Meanwhile the black knight takes up its

typic·al post in the centre.

14.0-0 tlih7 Preparing to launch the f-pawn.

16.tlid3 l 6.a4 a6 1 7. Whl Jid7 1 8.li:J 1 a2 f5 l 9.Jle3

li:Jf6 20.Jig5 fxe4 2 l .li:Jxe4 llixe4 22.fxe4 was agreed drawn in Illescas Cordoba - Marin, Barcelona 2000, and indeed after 22 . . . Vfic7 Black is certainly not worse.

16 ... a6 17.tlif2 b5+! The position was double-edged but roughly

equal in De Sa - Noronha, e-mail 2005.

C22) 1 1 ...tlibd7 12.tlicl tlie5

This time Black postpones putting the rook on e8, reasoning that it might prove just as effective on f8 where it supports a future .. .f5 .

The potential danger of rushing with the knight to e5 is that White may try to arrange f3-f4, so it is important to be familiar with the various tactical resources needed to justify Black's last move.

13.h3 Preparing f3-f4 is the critical test.

The alternative is: l 3 .Jie2

And here I have a suggestion for you. 1 3 . . . h4!?N

With the simple idea of . . . h3, so that after White responds with g2-g3, a subsequent f3-f4 will be met by . . . li:Jg4 when the knight's future is secure. I will just briefly mention that the most common move has been 1 3 . . . li:Jh7 intending . . . f5 .

1 4.Jig5 14.h3 li:Jh5! could be annoying for White. 1 4.0-0 allows Black to carry out his plan: 14 . . . h3 1 5 .g3 a6 1 6.a4 Jid7= Black no longer has any reason to fear f3-f4.

14 . . . h3 1 5 .gxh3!? 15 .g3 falls in with Black's plan, so the text move is critical.

1 5 . . . a6!? 1 5 . . . Jixh3 is also playable, and may lead to approximate equality after the following line: 1 6.f4 Jig2 1 7.fxe5 Jixhl 1 8 .exf6 Jlxf6

1 58 e4 Systems

19.�xf6 �xf6 20.ctJd3 �h4t 2 1 .ctJf2 �g2 (2 1 . . .f5 ? 22.0-0-0 �xf2 23.Ei'.xh l f4 24.Ei:fl �xh2 25 .e5±) 22.�d3 �xh2 23.0-0-0 �f3 24.Ei:e l i±>g7= The text move could lead to some wild complications. The following line is nowhere near forced, but it illustrates some important tactical resources while also providing considerable entertainment.

1 6.h4!? l 6.a4 gives Black a choice between l 6 . . . �xh3 by analogy with the note to the previous move, and 1 6 . . . �a5 renewing the possibility of . . . b5 .

1 6 . . . b5 17.h5 b4 1 8.ctJdl �e8 1 9 .Ei'.gl 1 9 .hxg6?? llixf3t! 20.�xf3 llixe4 21 .gxf7t Ei:xf7 22.�e2 Ei:xf3-+

l 9 . . . llixh5 20.f4

a b c d e f g h 20 . . . llic4!! 2 1 .�xc4 �xe4t 22.�e2

22.�e2 �d4 23.Ei:fl �g4 24.�xg4 �xc4+ 22 . . . Ei:e8 23.ctJf2 �f3 24.llicd3 �d4 25 .iidl

25 . . . Ei:xe2! 26.�xe2 �xd5+ Black is a rook for two pawns down, but his

pieces dominate the board and the white king faces a turbulent future.

14 . .. lllh7

15.f4? This tempting move only leads to trouble

for White. Correct is: 1 5 .0-0 f5 1 6.llib3 fxe4 l 7.ctJxe4 Shishkin - Ionescu, Bucharest 2004, and now l 7 ... llif6N would have kept the position roughly equal.


1 S ... llid7 16.llid3 Now Black has more than one way to exploit

the vulnerability of White's centre.

16 ... bS 1 6 . . . ixc3!?N Yes, I know it's difficult to

exchange this bishop for a knight, but here it is okay! 1 7.bxc3 Ei:xe4 ( 1 7 . . . tllhf6 1 8.tllf2 lllxe4 1 9.tllxe4 Ei:xe4 20.0-0 tllb6+) 1 8 .0-0 tllb6+

17 ... lli df6 18.llifl llixe4 19.llixe4 �xe4 20.id3

Now in Nikolov-Chatalbashev, Blagoevgrad 20 10 , Black's strongest continuation would have been:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 a b c d e f g h

20 ... �b4!N In the game Black quickly got a winning

position with 20 . . . Wfh4t 2 1 .<iifl Ei:b4 22.Ei:b l ? ia6-+, but White could have offered more resistance with 22.tllxd6N Ei:xb2 23.Wfe l .

2I.llic3 �ab8 22.b3 Wfe7 23.'itifl 23.Ei:cl Ei:xf4 wins a pawn while preventing

castling.

23 ... hc3! 24.W/xc3 ll!f6 Followed by . . . lllxd5 with both a material

and positional advantage.

Conclusion

We covered three main move orders for White, none of them especially dangerous but all with their own nuances. The early 8 .tllge2-g3 plan gives Black several decent plans, with 9 . . . tllh5!? being the boldest of all. 8.ie3 and 8 .ig5 lead to similar types of positions and can sometimes transpose if Black plays . . . h6 and later . . . h5. Both moves allow Black to choose between a few different set-ups, all of which give him reasonable play as far as I can see.

e4 Systems 7.�ge2

a b c d e f g h

Variation Index 1 .d4 lDf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.lDc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.lDge2

7 ... �g7 8.lDg3 A) 8 ... h5 B) 8 ... a6 C) 8 ... 0-0

A) after 12.lllfl B) after l 4.g3 C) note co 16.lllh l

12 . . . h3!?N

161 162 163

Chapter 1 2 - 7.tt:lge2 1 6 1

1 .d4 llJ f6 2.c4 cS 3.dS e6 4.llJc3 exdS S.cxdS d6 6.e4 g6 7.llJge2

This rare but quite sophisticated system was recommended by Lars Schandorff in his recent book covering the Indian Defences from White's side.

The idea is to put the knight on g3 and develop in a similar manner as in the previous chapter, but without spending time on f2-f3 until there is a good reason for it. So in a nutshell, White is aiming for an improved version of the Kapengut System.

7 ... ig7 8.llJg3 From this position I will cover two interesting

plans in A) 8 ... hS and B) 8 ... a6, both of which involve delaying castling, followed by the main line of C) 8 ... 0-0.

A) 8 ... hS

Certainly the most direct challenge to the knight sortie.

9.ie2 a6 10.a4 Wfe7!? Persisting with the plan of early disruption.

The following game led to a complicated struggle: 1 0 . . . 0-0 l l .ig5 tt:lbd7 1 2.0-0 !l:e8 1 3.f4!? 'Wb6

8 :1•1•1�;� 7 � .. �, �� %lJ�� 6 .t. �5'� w� � .t. � " ,z�;r'i""%� /,, , - �J/fi : !�l";,i!J�, 3 � %,� %,----- %� 2 ��----- 'al•z�-'W8f gC,,,,%�-1� 1;1""

a b c d e f g h 1 4.e5!? dxe5 1 5 .f5 A typical pawn sacrifice. 1 5 . . . 'Wxb2 1 6.fxg6 fxg6 1 7.!l:cl 'Wb4 1 8.1Mi'c2 e4 1 9.<iih l <iih8 20.d6 This was Shishkin -Leon Hoyos, Navamoral de la Mata 20 1 0, and now 20 . . . 'Wd4N 2 1 .!l:cdl 1Mi'e5 would have left the position highly unclear.

a b c d e f g h 1 1 .Wfc2

l l .ig5 allows Black to display one of the points behind his previous move: l l . . .'We5 ! 12 .'Wd2 h4 1 3.if4?! 'We?+ 14.tt:lfl h3 1 5.if3 hxg2 1 6.ixg2 ih3 1 7.ixh3 tt:lxe4 1 8.tt:lxe4 'Wxe4t 1 9.1Mi'e3 1Mfxe3t 20.tt:lxe3 !l:xh3 and Black maintained slightly better chances in Dreev - Art. Minasian, Moscow 2009.

1 1 . .. h4 I also considered l l . . .a5 !?N but after 1 2.ig5

tt:la6 1 3.ib5t id7 1 4.0-0 tt:lb4 1 5.'Wd2 0-0;t White's chances are higher.

1 62 e4 Systems

12.llifl This position was reached in Perdomo -

Rodi, Sao Paulo 2008, and here I propose:

14.ig5 llie5 15.llie3 Wffc7 16.f4 llieg4 17.llixg4 llixg4 18.f5 llie5

The computer favours White slightly, but both sides have certain weaknesses and I would call the position unclear.

B) 8 • • • a6

This time Black makes a few moves on the queenside before commencing his kingside play.

9.a4 ll:ibd7 10.ie2 h5 1 0 . . . 0-0 reaches line C below, but for now

we will concentrate on delaying castling.

1 1 .ig5 Wffa5 12.0-0 h4 13.llihl h3 14.g3

a b c d e f g h 14 ... c4!?N

l 4 . . . 'llh7 was the expert's choice in P.H. Nielsen - Gashimov, Khanty-Mansiysk (4) 20 1 1 , but it did not work out well for Black. The text move leads to interesting complications.

15.ixc4 l 5 .'Wc2 Cllc5 1 6.ixc4 'Wb4 l 7.'We2

'llfd7 1 8 .if4 gives Black a choice between 1 8 . . . 'llb6 1 9.ia2 'llbxa4 with complex play, and 1 8 . . . Clle5 1 9.ixe5 ixe5 with ongoing compensation for the pawn.

15 ... Wffb4 16.ib3 16 .'We2?? and 16.'Wb3 ?? are both met by

1 6 . . . 'lle5 winning outright.

16 ... llic5 17.ic2 0-0? Black will capture one of the pawns on e4 or

bl, maintaining a satisfactory position.

Chapter 1 2 - 7.Clige2 163

C) 8 ... 0-0

9.ie2 9.f3 and 9.il.d3 lead to Chapters 1 1 and 1 3

respectively.

9 ... a6 10.a4 llibd7 1 1 .0-0 l 1 .h4 has been played, but a kingside attack

is unlikely to succeed here. The simplest reply is 1 l . . . h5N when the chances ofWhite arranging a successful sacrifice on h5 are minimal, and if White changes plans and castles short then the h4-pawn will be weak.

1 1 . . . E:e8 12.igS Many other moves have been tried, but the

text is the most common and natural, and is given by Schandorff.

12 ... h6 13.ie3 E:b8 14.'Wd2 hS Black plays all the standard moves.

15.f3 llih7 Now that White has played f2-f3 the position

strongly resembles the previous chapter, although there are some subtle differences such as the knight's placement on g3 instead of c l .

16.CLJhl In another game White made room for

the knight on fl instead: 1 6.!l:fd l h4 1 7.tt:lfl ( 17.tt:lhl h3+±) 1 7 . . . h3 1 8.g3

8 �.i.� .i�-� 7 � i �'))� i �')) 6 r� ��,� ��t� ��-- %�� : �.�-:-=� 3 � � � 8 r� • 2 §' "'S1£�, --,%� -�- --%-��,�;�f "

a b c d e f g h This position was reached in Ivanchuk

- Andreikin, Havana 20 1 1 , although in that game the move count was one higher. Whatever the move number, at this point Black can obtain a satisfactory, if still rather unclear position with 1 8 . . . tt:le5!N, as noted by Stohl.

8 ��.i.��--�,,,,,v�';,,, ,%� ��f� 7 m • m4i)a • l#J4i) 6 · � � � · � .lilrf '• •• � 5 '��,�� 4 oa%'"//,-�� 3 � m � � -2 r�"""Slf-�%rt! 1 'd,,, ,/,-,,, , ,/,� l=� /, , , ,Y, � � /, , /, a b c d e f g h

16 ... llieS 17.CLJf2 id7 18.aS f5 19.b4?! The critical continuation is 1 9.!l:fe lN,

which Stohl rates as slightly better for White. This may be true although I do not believe it is anything serious, and Black is very much in the game after something like 1 9 . . . tt:lf6 20.h3 fxe4 2 1 .tt:lfxe4 tt:lxe4 22.tt:lxe4 tt:lf7 intending . . . il.f5 .

19 ... cxb4 20.llia4 ihS 20 . . . fxe4!? leads to heavy complications

and eventual equality: 2 1 .tt:lxe4 tt:lg4 22.il.d4

1 64 e4 Systems

'Llhf6 23.iWxb4 (23.'Llxd6? iWc7 24.j,c5 j,xa4 25 .j,xb4 j,h6 26.iWa2 j,b3 27.iWxb3 El:xe2 28.fxg4 'Llxg4+) 23 . . . Cllxe4 24.j,xg7

a b c d e f g h 24 . . . 'Llxh2! 25 .<;t>xh2 'Llg3 26.<;t>xg3 iWg5t 27.<;t>f2 iWe3t 28.<;t>g3 iWg5t=

21 .c!lib6 .L.:e2 Another mtngumg possibility is:

2 1 . . .'Llxf3t!?N 22.j,xf3 (22.gxf3? f4 23.j,xf4 j,xe2 24.iWxe2 j,xal 25 .Ei:xal iWf6 26.Ei:b l iWxf4+)

22.'?Nxe2 c!lid7N 22 . . . fxe4 23.Cllxe4 was decent for White in

Bratanov - Petrov, Blagoevgrad 20 1 0, although I eventually managed to get the better of the struggle.

Conclusion

The 7.'Llge2 line should be taken seriously, and Black must take care not to fall into an inferior version of the previous chapter. Of the three approaches examined here, the first two are tricky if slightly risky, while the third is more reliable yet still dynamic enough to lead to an interesting middlegame where both sides will have their chances.

e4 Systems 7.id3 and 8.�ge2

Variation Index 1.d4 tlJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.tlJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7 . .id3 .ig7 8.tlJge2

8 ... 0-0 9.0-0 a6 10.a4 tlJbd7 A) 1 1..ig5 167 B) 1 1 .h3 169 C) 1 1.tlJg3 �e8 172

Cl) 12.h3 172 C2) 12.f4 �c7 173

C21) 13.�f3 174 C22) 13.h3 �b8 175

Cl) after 15 .1l*'d3?!

a b c d e f g h 1 5 ... li:Jxb2!N

C221) 14 . .ie3 175 C222) 14.�f3 c4 15 . .ic2 b5 16.axb5 axb5 17 . .ie3 tlJc5 18.e5 dxe5 19.fxe5 �xe5 20 . .id4 b4!? 178

C2221) 21..ixe5 179 C2222) 21.�f4 181

C2221 ) after 22.l"i:ael

a b c d e f g h 22 . . . 1l*'c7!N

C2222) after 23.ixeS

a b c d e f g h 23 . . . li:Jd3!N

1 66 e4 Systems

1.d4 lllf6 2.c4 c5 3.dS e6 4.lllc3 exdS 5.cxdS d6 6.e4 g6 7.id3 ig7 8.lllge2

This is an aggressive system based on the following attacking scheme. After castling White intends to place the knight on g3 and advance with f2-f4, threatening e4-e5 . If Black overprotects the e5-square, then White will push with e4-e5 anyway, meeting . . . dxe5 with f4-f5 (although we will see some cases, including the main line, where a sacrifice with fXe5 is played instead) . If timed correctly, this pawn sacrifice combined with a bishop on g5, rook on the f-file and knight on e4, not to mention the dynamic potential of the passed d-pawn, could lead to a devastating attack.

Fortunately there is no need to sink into despair just yet. White's entire set-up is geared towards the e4-e5 break, usually connected with a pawn sacrifice (involving either f4-f5 or fXe5), so the first good thing is that we know exactly what is coming. The attack will take a good deal of time to prepare, and the presence of the knight on g3 (compared with d2 in the Classical Variation) makes it easier for Black to obtain counterplay with moves like . . . c4, . . . b5 and . . . lllc5.

Summing up, both sides have concrete plans and in the sharpest lines a single tempo could prove decisive.

8 ... 0-0 9.0-0 a6 This is the most common move order.

9 . . . Ei:e8 and 9 . . . lt:lbd7 are both quite playable, although in most cases . . . a6 and a2-a4 will be played anyway within the next few moves. 9 . . . lt:la6 is another option, but I don't like it very much.

10.a4 ll\ bd7 Sometimes Black plays 1 O . . . Ei:e8 first, but the

knight has nowhere to go apart from d7, so we may as well play that move first.

From this position we will examine three main options: A) 1 1 .igS, B) 1 1 .h3 and C) 1 1 .lllg3.

1 1 .f3 reaches a strange form of Kapengut System, and after l 1 . . .ctJe5 1 2.ic2 Ei:b8 Black had good prospects in Marinelli - Martorelli, Chianciano 1 990.

l l .if4 does not make a great deal of sense, as after 1 l . . .'Wc7 White's bishop is left blocking his main attacking plan involving f2-f4.

l l .f4 Ei:e8 (l 1 . . .'Wc7!? can also be considered) 1 2.ctJg3 transposes to line C2 on page 1 73.

Chapter 1 3 - 7 .id3 and 8 .Cllge2 167

A) 1 1 .igS

8 .i �.i.� ��·� 1 U .t. U'!i1U .,Y,� .t. 6 .t. U. - ___ .t.y,m 5 u • �%-/,,,, ,,, 4 � --�·,:,/,·-�-,,,,,%� 3 U ., r�S\�U U 2 . . . . . tt UttJ·o � -� � -�-�iit�----

/, , , ,,Y, � �§�� a b c d e f g h 1 1 ... �eS

I think it is worth playing this move, and I have recommended it in most of the lines featured in this chapter. Nevertheless Black can also consider the immediate 1 l . . .ctJe5 with similar ideas as in the main line below.

12.'Wd2 White has tried several other moves, but in

most cases Black's basic plan will remain the same: the knight will come to e5, and later c4 and a5 if and when it becomes appropriate. C�mbined with his rypical queenside play with . . . id7 and . . . b5, this should ensure good chances. Here are a few alternatives:

1 2.ctJg3 is covered on page 1 72 - see the l 2.ig5 line in the notes to variation C.

1 2.f4? is premature due to 1 2 . . . c4! 1 3.ixc4 iWb6t 14 .<iih l lllg4+ Parr - Pritchard, York 1 959.

1 2.h3 llle5 1 3.ic2 h6 14 .ie3 tt::lc4 1 5 .icl Now in Sagalchik - Epstein, San Diego 2004, Black could have obtained good prospects with 1 5 . . . id7N 1 6.b3 llla5 . The knight has arrived at his destination and . . . b5 is on the way.

14.\Wcl id7 15.h3 lllaS The knight is well placed here in this line.

Now . . . b5 is inevitable.

2 a b c d e f g h

16.\Wf4 1 6.!l:bl occurred in Sadler - Kempinski,

Germany 2003, and here I would suggest: 1 6 . . . b5 17 .axb5 axb5 1 8.b4 cxb4 1 9 .!l:xb4 lllc4 20.id3 iWa5 2 1 .iWbl !l:ec8=

16 ... �eS Another interesting line is 1 6 . . . b5 !?N

1 7.axb5 axb5 with the possible continuation:

1 68 e4 Systems

1 8 .'1Wxd6 b4 1 9.l'l:xa5 l'l:xa5 20.e5 i.f8 2 1 .'1Wxf6 i.e7

8

7 6 5 4 3 2

a b c d e f g h 22.'1Wxe7 (22.'Lle4? i.xf6 23.CLlxf6t Wh8-+) 22 . . . l'l:xe7 23.d6 bxc3 24.'Llxc3 c4 25.dxe7 \Wes+. White's enterprising sacrifice has not quite provided enough compensation for the queen.

8 H� e �-� �� ,,, , ,;/,� ��,�� 7

��Y/� �.i. � �,-�i

i �-/, �-,� �-'/'% ·�� 6 � � � ; ; � � ,,/ ?, � , '"//, ,�,'.%% , , , , , '%""/,y,,, , , ,�,?,;

s � w� � �� /�,,�

, , , , , ;/,� ,�Y,-,,,,,%�

: a!�l�n' '• 2 �RI•�n!n 1 � %,-�-,=,,,,%

a b c d e f g h 17.'Wd.2?!

This feeble retreat hands Black the initiative. Of course the point of Black's move was ro meet 1 7.'1Wh4?! with 1 7 . . . h6!.

Instead White could have kept the game unclear with a move like 1 7.l'l:ab l , bearing in mind that .. . 'Llxd5 tricks will not work due ro the hanging knight on a5 .

17 ... h5 18.axh5 axh5 19.i.f4?! 19 .f4N l'l:e8 20.e5 dxe5 2 1 .fxe5 l'l:xe5

22.\Wf4 l'l:xg5 23.'1Wxg5 '1Wb6 leaves Black with more than enough play for the exchange, but the position remains complicated. After the text move the play becomes one-sided.

23.i.g5? 23.h4N 'Llg4+

23 ... h4! 24.hl4 lllxe4

Chapter 1 3 - 7.!d3 and 8 .tllge2 1 69

B) 1 1 .h3

1 1 . .. E:hs Black can also adopt the same strategy that

we saw in the previous line: l 1 . . .tlle5!? This has only rarely been played, but it looks good to me. The knight is going to the end of the world, at least on the chess board. 12 .j,c2 l:'i:e8

a b c d e f g h 1 3.f4!? ( 1 3.tllg3 transposes to variation C l , which can be found later i n the chapter on page 1 72.) The text move was played in Manzone - Bittelmajer, Argentina 200 1 , and here I am not sure why Black refrained from the consistent 1 3 . . . tllc4N 14.tllg3 !d7 when he would have been doing fine.

8 ��j_- ��-� ._,,,, ,Y,;«'L;�� ,,,,,Y,�,�� : f�-�� . �¥',ii'� ' '� : '·1J·'·�-3 � �m � w� �m, A � ��J �OO ��-J o 2 'ft"""

� ,,,,,�n�--� , �- ,�--i.� a b c d e f g h

13 ... h5!? This leads to a sharp and double-edged fight.

The fact that it has only occurred in a couple of practical encounters makes it all the more intriguing.

I should mention that 1 3 . . . l:'i:e8 is a vaild option, and after 1 4.f4 we have the same transposition to line C221 as was noted at move 12 .

14.f4 h4

170 e4 Systems

l 4 . . . c4!?N l 5 .ic2 b5 l 6.axb5 axb5+± is also possible, for example: l 7.:1l:a7 �dS l 8.�f3 Now Black's pawns gather momentum.

s ��..ts ��• , , , ,/'""v,� ,,,,,/,� ,,, ,,v,:?f0 7 -�� /,lJ�� 6 � f� · · �

: �6'��-3 � � �'ii'� � 2 ��I��,,-��,,�·'• � . . %� �.,, a b c d e f g h

1 8 . . . b4 1 9.lllce2 b3 20.ib l h4 2 1 .lllh l :1l:b7 Having driven White's minor pieces backwards, Black now removes the strong enemy rook. In my opinion Black is not worse.

l 6.if2N c4 l 7.ic2 lllc5 l 8.e5 dxe5 l 9.fxe5 :1l:xe5+±

1 6.f5!?N is aggressive, but Black seems to be holding his own: 1 6 . . . lllh5 l 7.fxg6 fxg6 1 8.�d2 tlle5 1 9.ig5

8 ��..t�i. �--7 �··(,�-�, %� ,, ,/,?Jj'�� ,,,, ,r,� 6 i �?Jl.J�/, "//, �� s � r�� - �I.Al 4 �� . . /,� /�-� ,,,,,/,� 3 �mf� �-7;� 2 ��- ,,·�� ,, •{' ' "P'" ""� lWf0'01 � • �lIW�

a b c d e f g h 1 9 . . . b5!? Who counts pawns in such a position? ( 1 9 . . . :1%f8 is also possible, based on the following point: 20.ixh4?! [20.:1l:xf8t= J 20 . . . ixh3! 2 1 .gxh3? :1l:f3! 22 .ic2 �d7-+) 20.axb5 lllxd3 2 l .�xd3 axb5 22.ixh4 b4 23.llld l id7� Black's bishops are excellent.

The text move is also quite challenging. White wants to capture the h4-pawn, so Black must take immediate action. Fortunately he has more than one satisfactory solution.

a b c d e f g h 16 .. . c4

1 6 . . . lllxe4!?N is another obvious candidate, which may appeal to aggressive players. 1 7.lllxe4 ( 17 .ixe4? tll f6+) 1 7 . . . f5 1 8.�xh4 fxe4 1 9.ic2 lllb600 Black has a good position.

17 . .ic2 lllc5 18.e5 llld3 19.'IW:xh4 dxe5

Chapter 1 3 - 7.!d3 and 8 .ctJge2 17 1

20.!xd3?! Better is 20.fxeSN Ei:xe5 2 l .!d4 Ei:hS,

although I believe Black is at least equal here too.

20 ... cxd3 21.Cllg3 '1Wc4 22.:gacl

8 ��.i.-�--� • � %<� �-� : T-A��

iM ��mt!" � 5 �� 1·®" ��,,, 4 � �!' ��-J�/,'"/)-3 � fil i � fil� 2 %<�,,,,,;� ,;,,,��,/�,;�

�j! . . . . xr . . �� w� i � P� �- M� a b c d e f g h

22 ... CllxdS!N This should eventually secure an advantage,

although both sides will have to navigate some amazing complications along the way.

It's worth seeing the end of the game as well: 22 . . . d2 23 .Ei:cdl ? !

23.!xd2N= 23 . . . bS 24.axbS axbS 25 .Ei:xd2 b4 26.tllce2 tllxdS 27.Ei'.cl Wifb3 28.!f2

Dumitrache - Chatalbashev, Agneaux 2004. Here Black could have tried:

The game ended 28 . . . !f6 Y2-Y2 in view of 29.Wifh6 !g7= with a repetition of moves.

29.tllxf4 tllxf4 30.Wefxf4 �b7+ Black's bishops should offer him somewhat

better chances.

23.Cllce4 '1Wb3 24.!a7 Cll:xf4!? 24 . . . Ei:a8 25 .fxeS Elxa7 26.tllgS is bizarrely

equal. The elegant finish might be: 26 . . . bS 27.Wefh7t 'it>f8 28.Wefxg6!

a b c d e f g h 28 . . . tllf6! 29.Ei:xf6 d2! 30.Ei:ffl ! dxcl =Wif 3 I .tllh7t 'it>g8 32.tllf6t 'it>f8=

26 •.. 'IWxcl t 27.:gfl d2 White is under serious pressure and must

play precisely just to reach an inferior endgame.

1 72 e4 Systems

2s.'llf6t .ixf6 29.Wxf6 .if5 30.�h2! Wxfl 31 .ixe5

� � �--� 8 .% -. �Ill : -� •111 •,.,i 111111 5 ,,• Ill.-�, 4 , ••• �].�. 3

� %� %� %f!I!'ft �

� '// �� '' " "';w 2 u - - � �

1 " �-- '·'� / a b c d e f g h

31 .. J'he5 The spectacular 3 1 . . .Wgl t!? is reasonable,

if not a real improvement: 32.Wxgl d l =iWt 33.Wh2 :1l:xe5 34.WxeS Wxa4 35 .WbSt Wh7 36.'llxfS gxf5 37.Wxb?+

32.Wd8t ge8! 33.Wxe8t �g7 34.We5t �h7 35.'llxfl dl=W

Black keeps an extra pawn and some winning chances.

C) l l.Cllg3

1 1 . . .ClleS is playable although White may be tempted to consider 1 2.ie2!?, losing a tempo with the bishop bur hoping to regain it with interest after a subsequent f2-f4.

After the text move White has two main options: Cl) 12.h3 and C2) 12.f4.

1 2 .igS Wc7 1 3 .i¥1'd2 c4 1 4.ie2 occurred in Chatalbashev - Melnikova, Samron 2006, and now after 14 . . . 'llcSN l 5 .ixc4 Cllcxe4 1 6.'llgxe4 Cllxe4 1 7.Cllxe4 :1l:xe4= Black is fine.

CI) 12.h3

s �� .ts�� •� � �,,,,% �

�h'// � ? � · -'))- · � · 6 :��w�.-t� 5 •• 8111'" 111111 4 !n" 'n!n•n 3 �� 2 ·� -·�8-1 ;l,,,,%Dl��i� �

a b c d e f g h 12 ... Clle5!?

It is important to mention that 1 2 . . . Wc7 is perfectly fine, and is likely to transpose to variation C22 below after White plays f2-f4.

13 . .ic2 1 3 .ie2!? has been played in a few games, and

here 1 3 . . . Wc7N looks like a sensible response. Compared with the 1 1 . . .'lleS 12 .ie2 line mentioned on the previous move, here White has invested a tempo on h2-h3, so I do not see much for Black to fear.

The position after the text move can also arise via variation B with l l .h3 - see the note on page 1 69 with 1 1 . . .ClleS!? 1 2.ic2 :1l:e8, after which 13 .'llg3 reaches the present position.

Chapter 1 3 - 7.!d3 and 8 .llige2 173

a b c d e f g h 13 ... Cllfd7 14.f4 Cllc4 15.'1Wd3?!

White should try something else here, although I think Black is okay in any case. His plans include . . . !d7 (or . . . Elb8) preparing . . . b5 , and/or . . . llia5 with ideas of . . . c4 and . . . llic5, with enough queenside counterplay to keep White from executing his kingside attack unhindered.

Before seeing the problem with the main move, it is worth mentioning the only other practical encounter on the database: l 5 .Elf3 A. Roberts - Flores Gutierrez, corr. 1 995. l 5 . . . E\b8N 1 6.b3 Most other moves can be met by ... llia5 followed by . . . b5 .

a b c d e f g h 1 6 . . . !d4t!? ( 1 6 . . . llia5=) 1 7.hl llice5!? l 8.fx:e5 llixe5�

The text move occurred in Aleshin - Lubbe,

Pardubice 2006. At this point Black missed a tactical opportunity:

16.!xb2 '1Wb6 Now White must find some good moves just

to stay in the game.

17.a5 '1Wxb2 18.Cllge2 c4 19.'1Wxc4 b5 20.axb6 '1Wxb6t 21 .hl '1Wc5i

Black's powerful dark-squared bishop ensures his advantage.

C2) 12.f4

174 e4 Systems

With this direct move White refuses to give the knight another chance to come to e5. On the negative side, White loses the option of developing the bishop to g5, for the moment at least.

12 ... '!Wc7 Now the two main moves are C21) 13.'!Wf3

and C22) 13.h3.

1 3 .ic4!? With this rare move White blocks the . . . c4 advance.

1 3 . . . tt:lb6 Chasing the bishop away seems logical.

1 4.ie2

8 .i �;�,�1�� 7 �/,�J,'iit,s �%�/,��· 6 & �� ff� � & � ... ;.!JI): �-% �ml: ... 5 /,,,,,-�/,� /,,,,,,�

4 !��,,,%� !��-�/,"//,��"--,,A ,,,/� 3 � m m m ��,d',,,, , ;� ��',,,,,, ;�'S

2 , ,,/!]�7�� {/BJtJ � �'ii'� �� a b c d e f g h

1 4 . . . tt:lbd7! ?N Insisting on . . . c4 and . . . tt:lc5, even if the first move no longer gains a tempo. 1 4 . . . id7?! 1 5 .a5 tt:lc8 1 6.f5 gave White some initiative in Chatalbashev - Moradiabadi, Peristeri 20 1 0.

1 5 .Whl 1 5 .ic4= repeats the position. 1 5 .ie3 allows the typical trick 1 5 . . . tt:lxe4! 1 6.tt:lcxe4 f5 when Black is at least equal.

1 5 . . . c4+! Intending . . . tt:lc5, with typical Benoni

counterplay.

C21) 13.'!Wf3

a b c d e f g h This move has scored quite highly and seems

like a logical attempt to do without h2-h3.

13 ... c4 I 4 . .ic2 E:b8 ECO evaluates this as unclear, but obviously

we should investigate the position in more depth .

15.a5!?N This untested move is possibly the most

challenging. 1 5 .ie3 lllc5 1 6.h3 b5 l 7.axb5 axb5

transposes to line C222 below. In one game White tried the immediate

sacrifice: 1 5 .e5 dxe5 1 6.f5 :gfg 1 7.ie3 Wehnert - Espig, Weimar 1 968, and now l 7 . . . tt:lc5N would have been okay for Black, whose ideas include . . . tt:ld3 (or . . . tt:lb3-d4), not to mention ... b5 at some point.

a b c d e f g h

Chapter 1 3 - 7.id3 and 8 .tLlge2 175

15 ... Cllc5! Taking control of a4 before advancing the

b-pawn. l 5 . . . b5 16 .axb6 Elxb6 17.lt:'ia4 is less clear.

16.h3 It is natural to cover the g4-square. White

can also try taking immediate action:

1 6.e5 dxe5 1 7.f5 b5 1 8.axb6 E!:xb6 is not bad for Black at all.

l G.f5 b5 1 7.axb6 �xb6 1 8.mhl ( 1 8.fx:g6 fx:g6) 1 8 . . . �c7 Black intends . . . lt:'icd7-e5 with a good game.

16 ... �e7! It is useful to cover f7.

17.f5 l 7.e5 dxe5 1 8.f5 E!:d7 is unclear but not

worse for Black in my view.

8 �..t� -·� _____ _ Y,",., -,.,J�A" _ _ _ __ �� 7 � · � ��· �· 6 ' --,,,,, ____ , , ,y,f"/�,_,,,,%� ;//,':; �- ,, f;,, , ,% ,�Ji '

� 5 ��/, �-�-�---4 % B,,lU- �U -� 3 n/, '/ 0_ nvefrt 2 _ _ __ J,d�n n �---1 � � � F?-� / / � § �

a b c d e f g h 17 ... Cllfd7 18.ie3 b5 19.axb6 �xb6 20.�abl �b4 21 .�fl Clld3 22.ixd3 cxd3+!

Like ma�y other variations in the present ch.apter, this whole line is complicated but I thmk Black is holding his own.

C22) 13.h3

a b c d e f g h 13 ... �b8

We have arrived at a popular position which can be reached via several different move orders. At this point we reach an important division between C221) 14.ie3 and C222) 14.Wff3.

C221) 14.ie3 c4 15.ic2 Cllc5

a b c d e f g h 16.id4

1 6.�f3 b5 l 7.axb5 axb5 transposes to variation C222 on page 1 78.

Another option is: 1 6.a5 b5 17.axb6 E!:xb6 1 8.lt:'ia4 lt:'ixa4 19.ixa4

Now Black must decide which rook should sacrifice its life for an enemy bishop.

176 e4 Systems

8 /�.t�i.�-� ��/.' J�� /;, 7 �%, ,Jti�,,,•,,AJ..14 6 • �� r� • • � 5 , , ,Y,� zr� /,,,� 4 !.r.,�� 3 � �� -,,zm t!:i 2 ��-,3·/�,;�

• '{'''"� %� fd'� � � �� :�� a b c d e f g h

1 9 . . . Ele7!N The dark-squared bishop is the one we want to eliminate. 1 9 . . . lllxe4? is too optimistic: 20.j,xe8 lllxg3 2 1 .Elf3! It is important to drive the knight away from the king. (2 1 .Ele l ? Elxb2+ Spassov - Petrov, Sofia 2009.) 2 1 . . . lll fS 22.j,xb6 �xb6t 23.'it>h2 j,xb2 (23 . . . lllh4 24.Elcl lllxf3t 25 .�xf3 �cS 26.�e2 c3±) 24.Elb l ± Leitao - Bachmann Schiavo, Sao Paulo 2006.

20.j,xb6 �xb6t� 2 1 .'it>h2 2 1 .'it>hl lllxe4 22.lllxe4 Elxe4 23.�c2 f5=

16 ... b5 17.axb5 axb5 18.f5 1 8.eS lll fd7!? ( 1 8 ... dxeS 1 9 .fxeS ElxeS

20.�f3 transposes to line C222; see page 179

for the continuation after 20 . . . b4!?) 1 9.exd6 �xd6 20.j,xg7 'it>xg7 2 1 .lllce4 lllxe4 22.lllxe4 �b6t 23.'it>h2 lllf6 24.lllxf6 �xf6+ Paradella - Letelier Manner, Mar de! Plata 1 973.

The untested 18 ... �e7!?N looks quite playable, for instance: 1 9.�f3 lllcd7 20.Ela7 b4 2 1 .lllce2 llleS 22.�f4 Elb7=

19.�cl The other queen move is unconvincing:

1 9.�f3?! b4 20.lllce2 Here Black has a few good moves.

20 . . . �e7 20 . . . j,h8!?N 2 1 .lllhS?! lllcxe4+ 20 . . . c3!?N 2 1 .bxc3 b3 22.j,d3 b2 23 .Elab l h6�

Chapter 1 3 - 7.id3 and 8 .tLlge2 177

2 1 .'llh5 'llxh5 22.1Mf xh5 f6oo Black was okay in V. Georgiev - Nedev,

Plovdiv 201 1 , and he could have done even better with one of the alternatives noted above at move 20.

19 ... h6 20.h4 Here Black needs to choose carefully.

8 .�-�-1�-� 1 � �mJ m i m 6 �R,,, ,,,,m��,,,,,,)<� s

� iSl"�'zl,;¥,,, , 4 �r�{1a!��3� 3 "' ��3� ��··· 2 �0Ia�n,2'i� , ,, , ,z-,, , ,\txki �� w� 1 (,� &�J m�m

a b c d e f g h 20 ... tLld3!?

20 . . . b4? 2 1 .hxg5 bxc3 22.gxf6 gave White a decisive attack in Dicker - Marcotulli, e-mail 2002. (White went wrong with 22.bxc3? in Knaak- Bangiev, Bremen 1 998, and eventually lost a wild back-and-forth game.)

20 . . . gxh4!?N This untested move is a viable alternative to the main line.

2 l .ixf6D Axf6 22.1Mfxh6 Ag7 22 . . . Ad4t? 23.'\t>hl hxg3 24.f6+-

23.1Mfxh4 Ad4t 24.'\t>h2 f6 Cementing the dark squares.

25 .'llh5 25 .:§:f4 :§:e7 26.:§:g4t :§:g7 27.'llh5 :§:xg4 28 .1Mfxg4t '\t>f8f±

s •.i.nE n•, ,, , ,V,r,,,, �� .�.�� T•l?,•l%��

: �-/·,,��-�� z��f""�� z� ,,, , � ��:f��,� �, ,,�� ,.,,, ,,

a b c d e f g h 25 . . . 1Mfh7 26.:§:f3 Ae5t

The bishop is the best-placed piece on the board.

27.'\t>gl '\t>f7 Black has some initiative in this complex

position.

21 .ixd3N This is the obvious answer, and presumably

the reason why the knight jump to d3 was rejected in the games mentioned in the note to the previous move.

2 1 .1Mfd2 has been played in one game, and here I suggest: 2 l . . .gxh4! ?N (2 l . . .b4 22.hxg5 bxc3 23 .1Mfxc3 'llxe4 24.'llxe4 :§:xe4 25.f6 [25 .Axg7? 1Mfc5t 26.'\t>h2 1Mfe3-+] 25 . . . Af800 Hegoburu -Salanin, e-mail 2005.)

1 78 e4 Systems

22.i.xd3D hxg3 23.i.c2 b4 24.tlle2 tllxe4 25 .ixe4 l:'i:xe4 26.f6 i.fS 27.tllxg3 c3 28.bxc3 bxc3+

21 ... cxcl3 22.hxgS At first Black's position looks desperate, but

he has a clever rejoinder.

a b c d e f g h 22 ... tLlxe4!

Launching a counterattack.

23.f6! 23.i.xg7? d2 24.Wifc2 tllxg3 25.gxh6 Wif cSt

26.'it>h2 tllxfl t 27.l:'i:xfl Wef e3+

23 .. . tLlxg3 24.fxg7 Wef c4 24 . . . Wifxc3?! is not a great idea, as after

25 .ixc3 tlle2t 26.'it>h2 tllxcl 27.l:'i:axcl hxgS 28.l:'i:f3 l:'i:e4 29.l:'i:xd3 the g7-pawn means Black will have to be slightly careful in this endgame.

a b c d e f g h

25.Wiff4 tLif5 26.if6 Wifxf4 27J�xf4 hxg5 28.ixgS Wxg7 29.gg4 lLih6 30.gg3 tLlg400

Black is at least not worse in this complex endgame. We have witnessed some wild complications in this line, but ultimately I think the positions are just as risky for White as they are for Black.

C222) 14.Wiff3

17 ... lLicS 1 7 . . . b4!?

This move has been less popular, but I think it is okay for Black, and could be considered as a valid alternative to the main line. Here is a sample continuation:

1 8.l:'i:a7 WefdS 1 9.tllce2 ib7 20.tlld4 tllxdS 20 . . . lllcS ! ? 2 1 .fSN Wefb6f!

a b c d e f g h

Chapter 1 3 - 7.id3 and 8 .tllge2 1 79

2 U'hb7 2 l .exd5? El:xe3! 22.Wxe3 Wb6 23.tlldf5 Wxe3t 24.tllxe3 .id4+ Louis - Moeldner, Deidesheim 2000.

2 1 . . .Ei:xb 7 22.exd5 Lutz - Norwood, Arnhem 1 987.

22 . . . b3N 23 . .ib l tllc5+±

After the text move both sides have mobilized their pieces just the way they wanted, so the stage is set for a bloodthirsty battle!

18.eS With . . . b4 coming, Black is poised to take

over the initiative so White cannot afford to hesitate.

18 ... dxeS 19.fxeS The thematic 1 9.f5? is just a mistake here:

a b c d e f g h

1 9 . . . e4! 20.tllgxe4 tllcxe4 2 1 .tllxe4 tllxd5 22.fxg6 hxg6 23 .Ei:a7 El:b7+ Gayer - Schmidt, Germany 1 995.

19 ... �xeS We have reached one of the critical positions

of this line, which has been tested in over thirty games.

20.!d4 The most popular move, and the best.

20 . .if4?! blocks the f-file, allowing the following strong reply: 20 . . . tllfd7! 2 1 .�hl b4 22. tllce4 b3+ Chatalbashev - Pantsulaia, Izmir 2002.

20 ... b4!? According to the database the more popular

20 . . . Ei:g5 has appeared in thirty games, while the text move has occurred in just three. Nevertheless I have found it to be just as promising as the main line. In this highly complex position it is worth analysing both C2221) 21 .!xeS and C2222) 21 .'Wf4.

C2221) 21 .heS 'Wxe5

With a pawn plus some initiative for the exchange, Black should be at least equal here.

1 80 e4 Systems

22.E:ael The alternative is:

22.li:lce4 li:lcxe4 23.li:lxe4 Now Black has a choice between keeping the game complicated and going for simplifications.

23 . . . li:lxdS A relatively simple drawing line is: 23 . . . b3N 24.li:lxf6t 'Wxf6 25.'Wxf6 ixf6 26J:!:xf6 bxc2 27J''k6 if5 28.1'hc4 E:xb2 29.E:e l !=

8 ��.!.� �

· ,, , Y,�� /� : ��,� 5 ��1�� 4 ��r-�.�� , ,,, %�� ,��1!'

- - - -� ' ,�� %'�� 1 � � � n � a b c d e f g h

24.'Wxf7t mh8 25.li:lgS id7N 25 . . . li:le3?? occurred in Vinot - Haik, France 1 9S7, and now the clever 26.E:aS!N would have won on the spot.

26.'WfSt ixfS 27.li:lf7t mgS 2S.li:lxe5 ib5 29.ia4 ixa4 30.E:xa4 E:cS�

Black's strong queenside pawns give him adequate compensation for the exchange.

a b c d e f g h

22 ... 'Wc7!N This retreat is far from obvious, which

explains why it was not played in any of the three games to have reached the previous position. According to my analysis however, it sets White the most problems.

22 . . . 'Wd4t Although this is not my first choice, it is not a bad move and should eventually lead to equality as follows:

23.mh1 ixh3 23 . . . ib7 24.li:lce4� 23 . . . bxc3 24.E:eSt ifs 25.li:lhS gxh5 26.'Wg3t ig400

24.li:lce4 24.li:lce2? 'Wxb2-+ Kasparov - Rachels, New York (simul) 1 9SS. 24.gxh3!?N bxc3 25.bxc3 'Wxd5 26.li:le4 li:lcxe4 27.ixe4 li:lxe4 2S.'Wxe4= The text move was played in Cording -Lobron, Germany 1 9S2. Here I analysed the following line:

23.tlice4 After 23.d6 'Wa7! 24.E:e7 li:lcd7t 25 .mh2

bxc3 26.bxc3 'Was 27.E:eSt li:lfS+ Black has

Chapter 1 3 - 7.id3 and 8 .tt:'lge2 1 8 1

reasonable chances to make his two minor pieces count against White's rook.

23 ... c!lJfxe4 24.c!lJxe4 c!lJxe4 25.ixe4 f5! This enables Black to keep some winning

chances alive.

The following alternative leads to equality after accurate play: 25 . . . ixb2 26.d6 'Wc5t 27.c;t>hl ie6

s �� B �� , , , , ,Y, � �'§' 7 �� ·�r". I. . I. 6 .'"' "J�,.i.- .t. � s � � • D ��rJ--J� �- � 4 ��%·-�· �

� ��l!i 1 - � -��l�@

a b c d e f g h 28.ixg6! hxg6 29.Elxe6 fxe6 30.'Wf7t c;t>h8 3 l .'Wxg6 ig7 (3 l . . .'Wxd6 32.'Wh6t c;t>g8 33.'Wg6t ig7 34.'\Wf7t c;t>h7 35.'Wh5t=) 32.d7 'We5 33 .'We8t c;t>h7 34.d8='1W Elxd8 35 .'Wxd8 'We4 36.'Wa5 'We2 37.Elcl b3 38.E\e l 'Wd3 39.'Wh5t=

a b c d e f g h 26.d6D

26.ib l ? ib7+

26 ... '1Wxd6 27.idSt <it>f8 28.'1We4 id? 29. <it>hl ixb2 30.ixc4

C2222) 21 .'1Wf4

22 ... c!lJxd6 23.ixeS c!lJd3!N Black needs to improve on 23 . . . ltJe6? as

played in Zsinka - Danner, Budapest 1 985, after which 24.ixd6!N 'Wb6t 25 .'\Wf2 id4 26 .ltJce4 would have given White a clear advantage.

1 82 e4 Systems

25 ... VNxeS!i This is not the only move, but it is the most

interesting and problematic for White. 25 . . . j,xeS is also possible: 26.ctJce4 'Wd4

(26 . . . j,xf4 27.ctJxcS j,eS 28.1''\ac l h5 29.h4 cxd3 30.ltJxd3±) 27.ctJf6t ©g7

26.'llce4! This is virtually the only move.

26 ... VNxf4 27,);xf4 cxd3 27 . . . j,xb2 is good enough for equality:

28 .ctJxd6 (28 .l:l:e l ctJxe4 29.j,xe4 j,c3 30.l:l:e2 j,eS 3 Lm3 j,e6 32.j,b l l:l:b5-+) 28 . . . j,xal 29.j,xc4 j,e6 30.j,xe6 fxe6 3 l .ctJc4 b3 32.l:l:fl j,d4 33.l:l:bl b2 34.ltJe4 l:l:a8=

Despite being a rook down, Black has a full share of the chances. In the following analysis we can admire the amazing power of the bishops.

Chapter 1 3 - 7.id3 and 8 .ctJge2 183

29.Ei:a5 d2 29 . . . b3 30.tllxcS icl 3 1 .tlle7t f8 32.Ei:fl b2 33.tllc6 b 1 ='W 34.tt:lxbS 'Wxb8 35 .Ei:xcl 'Wd6 36.Ei:dl h5 37.h4 d2=

30.Ei:fl 30 .. Ei:d5? ie6 3 1 .Ei:xd2 ic l 32.Ei:df2 b3+

30 . . . ie6 3 1 .tllge4 icl 32.Ei:a7 ib2 33.Ei:d l ie5t 34.hl ixd6 35.tllxd6 b3 36.tlle4 if5 37.tllxd2 Ei:d8 38.h2 ic2 39.Ei:fl El:xd2 40.Ei:fxf7 ie4=

30 ... d2 The queenside pawns are extremely

dangerous, but White can narrowly force a draw.

31.ctJh6t @g7 32.ctJg4 b3 33.:Se4 :Sb6 34.ctJe2 g5 35.:Sdl ixg4 36.hxg4 if6 37.:Sxd2 b2 38.:Sxb2 :Sxb2 39.ctJg3=

Conclusion

This chapter has featured some of the sharpest variations in the book. We have seen many wild positions, the evaluations of which depend almost exclusively on tactics. In such situations it is impossible to memorize or calculate every possibility, so you will also have to rely on intuition to some degree. Overall Black has a lot of exciting possibilities and in theoretical terms he seems to be at least okay everywhere.


Sidelines

Variation Index 1.d4 ltlf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.ltl c3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4

A) 7 . .ib5t B) 7 . .ie2 C) 7.lllf3 D) 7 . .id3

A) after 12.�f4

6 ... g6

B) after 1 3.'llh3

a b c d e f g h 13 . . . c4!?N

C) after 20.l"i:xa6

a b c d e f g h 20 . . . li:lg4N

185 187 189 191

Chapter 1 4 - Sidelines 1 85

1 .d4 ctJf6 2.c4 c5 3.dS e6 4.ctJc3 exd5 5.cxdS d6 6.e4 g6

a b c d e f g h In this chapter we will round up a few

of White's rare possibilities with the pawn already on e4. I will divide them according to four options on the next move: A) 7.ibSt, B) 7.ie2, C) 7.ctJf3 and D) 7.id3.

7.'Wa4t is not dangerous. 7 . . . 'llbd7 (7 . . . �d7?! 8.'Wb3 would justify White's last move.) 8.'llb5?! This attempt to use the queen's position aggressively soon backfires. 8 . . . a6 9.�f4 'Wb6 1 0.2"1b 1 2"1b8 l 1 .'llc3

8 •.!.··� �B" ,�r� r� ,•%� ,. 7 �itt?J �/, '0 �% "//, ��

6 i �m� � •.t.� , , , , , /,�f'f ""� /,, , , , ,� : ,.��,,�� 3 ��-_,,,, ,. 2 �ft,,, , ;� ��Wtf �,,, ,r,

� fL,% ,,,,30, , , , : � �l�J�j.:t a b c d e f g h

Now in Vidalina - Bernal Varela, e-mail 2002, Black could have obtained the better chances with l l . . .'Wc7N with . . . b5 to follow.

7.�g5 �g7 8.�d3 (8.f4 0-0 9.'llf3 2"1e8 is good

for Black; 8.�e2 transposes to line B of the present chapter - see page 1 87.)

a b c d e f g h 8 . . . 0-0 9.'llf3 (9.h3 is likely to lead to the Modern Main Line after a subsequent 'llf3; 9.'llge2 takes us to Chapter 1 3 with White having committed the bishop to g5 rather early.) 9 . . . a6 1 0.a4 �g4 This is similar to variation C on page 1 89, but again with the bishop committed too early to g5.

A) 7.ibSt ctJbd7

7 . . . �d7 8.a4 �g7 9.'llf3 0-0 1 0.0-0 �g4 ( 1 O . . . a6 l l .�e2 �g4 transposes to Chapter 8.) l 1 .h3 �xf3 1 2.'Wxf3 a6 1 3.�d3 'llbd7 leads to variation C. The text move is more ambitious and keeps us in independent territory.

a b c d e f g h 8.a4

8 .�f4 a6 9.�d3 'lle5=

1 86 e4 Systems

8 ... ig7 9.tlJO 13.ixd6 9.if4 'We7 1 O.id3 ltJe5 l 1 .ie2 0-0= Other moves are not dangerous.

Stefanova - Muzychuk, Dresden (ol) 2008.

9 ... 0-0 10.0-0 a6 1 1 .id3 E:e8 The immediate l l . . .ltJg4!? also seems okay.

12.if4 1 2.h3 ltJh5! leaves Black a tempo up on

line B3 of Chapter 1 0.

The present position occurred in D. Andersen - Rustemov, Pinsk 1 99 3, and several other games. White has lost a tempo with his lightsquared bishop, but if he is allowed to play h2-h3 next, he can argue that he has been able to reach a version of the Modern Main Line where Black has been denied some of the critical options that we examined in Chapters 9 and 10 . For this reason I would like to recommend a new idea.

I was not satisfied by 1 2 . . . c4 1 3 .ic2 ltJc5 l 4.ltJd2t.

13 .ltJd2 ltJde5 1 4.ie2 f5 1 5 .'Wc2 ( 1 5 .h3 ltJf6 1 6.exf5 ixf5=) 1 5 . . . g5 1 6.ixe5 ixe5 1 7.ixg4 fxg4 1 8 .ltJc4 'We7 1 9.a5 id7=

13 .h3 ltJge5 1 4.a5 'Wf6 1 5 .ltJxe5 'Wxf4 ( 1 5 . . . ltJxe5 1 6.ih2 ltJxd3 1 7.'Wxd3 E:b8=) 1 6.ltJc4 ltJe5 might lead to an early draw: l 7.ltJxd6

13 ... 'Wb6


14 ... tlJxfl! 15.tlJc4! In this complex position Black has two

promising moves.

15 ... tlJxdl 1 5 . . . 1Mfxd6 1 6.tt'lxd6 ( 1 6.Elxf2 �f8 1 7.�hl

tt'le5+) 16 . . . tt'lxdl 17.Elaxd l ( 17.tt'lxe8?? id4t 1 8 .�hl tt'lxb2-+) 17 . . . id4t 1 8.�hl Elf8= is a simple way to reach an equal endgame.

16.tlJxb6 id4t 17.@hl

17 ... tt'lxb6 1 8.Elaxd l tt'ld7 l 9.a5 tt'le5= is a nononsense alternative.

18.tlJxa8 tlJxd3 19.tlJc7 :Se5!f! Now there are many possibilities, and it is

not clear who should be playing for win.

20.:Sadl tlJ b2!? 20 . . . c4 2 1 .ixeS tt'l7xe5 22.tt'le2 tt'lf2t

23.�gl tt'lh3t= could lead to a quick draw.

21.:Sxd4 cxd4 22.ixeS tlJxe5 23.tlJbl d3i Any result is possible although, for what it's

worth, at this stage the computer favours Black just slightly.

B) 7.ie2 ig7

a b c d e f g h 8.igs

8.tt'lf3 takes us back to the Classical System of course. The variation with bishops on e2 and g5 is not so common against the Benoni, but is often occurs via the Averbakh Variation of the King's Indian.

8 ... 0-0 9.°1Wd2 The King's Indian move order is 1 .d4 tt'lf6

2 .c4 g6 3.tt'lc3 ig7 4.e4 d6 5 .ie2 0-0 6.ig5 c5 7.d5 e6 8 .�d2 exd5 9.cxd5 - although it should be mentioned that 9.exd5 is a much more popular option in that position.

9 ... :Se8 10.8 a6 l l .a4 This position could be viewed as a version

of the Kapengut System in which White has played ie2 instead of tt'lge2. One advantage of doing this is that if the b8-knight moves to d7, White will move his own knight to h3 and f2, which is more efficient than the Kapengut route of e2-g3-h 1 -f2. For this reason it makes sense for us to delay . . . tt'lbd7 for at least one more move.

1 1 .. .'1Wc7 1 1 . . . �aS is more common, but I noticed

that in some games the queen ends up going via b4, b6 and finally back to c7, so I decided I

1 88 e4 Systems

would prefer to put it there immediately. Now the . . . c4 advance becomes an important source of counterplay.

12.aS I only found six games with Black's last

moves, and White has tried several different replies. Here are a few examples.

1 2.Ei'.cl was played in Rej - Eriksson, Canberra 2004, and now 1 2 . . . c4!?N 1 3.a5 '.Wxa5 1 4.ixc4 would have been about equal.

l 2.h4?! occurred in Kopylov - Sharafutdinov, Khanty-Mansiysk 2007, and here Black missed a good opportunity: 1 2 . . . tlih5!N

a b c d e f g h 1 3 .g4 tlig3 14 .Ei:h2 llixe2 1 5 .tligxe2 tlid7 l 6.h5 tlie5+

1 2.id l This typical move makes room for the knight to come to e2.

l 2 . . . llibd7 l 3.llih3 1 3.tlige2 Ei'.b8 1 4.0-0 b5 1 5 .axb5 axb5 l 6.ic2 tlie5 l 7.'.Wf4 tlifd7+ Abbasov -Wickstrom, Sautron 2008.

13 . . . c4! 1 4.tlif2 tlic5 1 5 .'.We2 id7 1 6.'.Wxc4? 16.a5N=

l 6 ... b5 l 7.'.Wa2 Ilinsky - Djurhuus, Gausdal 1 99 1 . Here Black missed a strong tactical blow.

14.llln lllcs Now White can steer the game in a couple

of directions.

15.i.xc4 1 5 .id l tlifd7 1 6.0-0 b5 l 7.axb6 llixb6=

15 ... lllfxe4 16.lllcxe4 lllxe4 17.lllxe4 '!Wxc4 From here the game might end in an

amusing perpetual.


18J'kl E:xe4t! 19.fxe4 Wxe4t 20 . .ie3 Wh4t 21 ..if2 We4t 22 . .ie3=

C) 7.ll:)f3 .ig7

8 . .id3 Now we will see what happens if White tries

playing a Modern Main Line without the h2-h3 move.

By the way, 8.iM!a4t does not achieve much here due to 8 . . . ltJbd7 9.tf4 0-0!, based on the simple trap 1 0.txd6?? ltJb6 and White loses a piece.

8 ... .ig4! There is a reason why h2-h3 is normally

played. Black could play 8 . . . 0-0 first, intending 9.0-0 tg4, but this would needlessly give White a chance to transpose to the more challenging system with 9.h3!.

9.0-0 9.iMi'a4t?! carries no sting whatsoever here:

9 . . . ltJbd7 1 0.ctJd2 0-0 1 l .f3 ctJe5 1 2.iMi'c2 td7+ Karpov - Timman, Moscow 1 993.

9 ... 0-0 10.h3 .ixf3 1 1 .Wxf3 a6 12.a4 ll:)bd7 Let's evaluate the opening. White has the

bishop pair, but Black can feel happy to have swapped off his troublesome light-squared

bishop. The loss of the f3-knight also means that White has little chance of breaking in the centre with e4-e5.

a b c d e f g h 13 . .if4

1 3 .iMi'dl can transpose within a few moves. 1 3 . . . �e8 14.�el iMi'c7 1 5 .te3!? ( 1 5 .tf4 transposes to the main line.) 1 5 . . . c4 16.tc2 Saidy - Sherwin, New York 1 966. 1 6 . . . ctJc5N 17.a5 lLifd7 (17 . . . ctJfXe4? 1 8.ctJxe4 ctJxe4 19.tb6+-) 1 8.iM!e2 ctJe5 19.�fl =

13 ... Wc7 The queen goes to a typical square where she

monitors the queenside and supports a future . . . c5-c4 push.

14.E:fel A glance at the database reveals that a huge

number of alternatives have been tried here. I don't consider White's set-up to be especially important so I will mention just a couple of other possibilities.

1 4.�ac l should, just like most other nonforcing moves, be met by l 4 . . . �fe8.

14 .iMi'e2 �fe8 1 5 .th2 sees White preparing for the e4-e5 break. 1 5 . . . �ac8 16 .tc4 ctJe5 17.f4 ctJxc4 1 8.iMi'xc4 ctJd7! The first knight has gone from d7 but the second immediately takes its

1 90 e4 Systems

place, while also opening the diagonal for the bishop. Watch how the great master of the Modern Benoni skilfully develops a decisive initiative on the queenside.

% � � �� 8 �'.'�;�, �,fY£1. 1 � i �'i1D i � i 6 ·� ,, ,,7,�%%� ,,,,,� 5

�-�%� �� 4 !uvn!�

�� 3 � m � � � 2 �WI§'"".�.,� 1 gt--- %� %� '=,;,,,

a b c d e f g h 1 9.:§:fe l ?! 'Wb6 20.8'.ab l 'Wb4 2 1 .'Wfl c4 22.8'.e2 b5 23 .axb5 axb5 24.mhl i.xc3 25 .bxc3 'Wxc3 26.E:xb5 'Wd3 27.'We l c3 28.8'.b l lLic5 0-1 Donner - Tal, Zurich 1 959.

8 �- ·- ��·-7 a 'IDll' ._ � ,,Y,�fuw� ��%4J�A 6 · � �� aY i � 5 �-��r� // . . . . . ;

� ?'/,

4 !n" 'n!��-3 � ��-V� 8 2 �� - ��!-,,,,}-- - -�� ,,,, , ,}-- - -��-� 1 /� � �m �

a b c d e f g h 14 ... :Sfes 1s.'\Wd1

White must retreat his queen in order to avoid unnecessary exchanges. 1 5 .8'.acl lLie5 16 .i.xe5 E:xe5+ was worse than harmless in Santos Folch - Barriga, Asturias 1 995 .

15 ... c4 16.�c2 16.i.fl was seen in Fleur - Irwin, Leiden

2002. Here I suggest the logical 1 6 . . . ltJc5N with the possible continuation: 1 7.e5 ( 1 7.'Wc2 lLi b3 1 8 .E:adl ltJd7=) 17 . . . dxe5 1 8.d6 'Wb6

( 1 8 . . . 'Wc6 19.i.xe5=) 19 .i.xe5 lLice4! 20.ltJxe4 E:xe5 2 1 .lLixf6t i.xf6 22.E:xe5 i.xe5 23 .i.xc4 'Wxd6 The tactics have petered out to dry equality.

16 .. . :SabS 1 6 . . . ltJc5 l 7.a5 lLifd7=

17.aS b5 18.axb6 :Sxb6= 19.�e3!? White forces a pawn trade, hoping the

activity of his rook on the queenside will count for more than Black's passed c-pawn. Overall the chances remain about level.

19 ... :Sxb2 20.:Sxa6 This position was agreed drawn in Kliewe

- Pajeken, Germany 1995 , while in another encounter Black went astray - see the next note for details. Instead a logical continuation would have been:

21 .hxg4 hc3 22.:Sfl ll:)cs 23.:Sc6 '1We7� White has two bishops and the structural

advantage of a single pawn island, but Black's active pieces and powerful c-pawn give him sufficient counter-chances.

Chapter 1 4 - Sidelines 1 9 1

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

D) 7.�d3

a b c d e f g h 7 ... �g7 8.h3 0-0 9.�gS

This set-up was recommended by John Watson in his recent "Strategic Repertoire" book.

9 .. J'!:e8 IO.lllf3 1 0.ctJge2 a6 ( 1 0 . . . c4? now is met by l l .ixc4)

l l .a4 ltJbd7 12 .0-0 transposes to 1 2.h3 in the notes to line A of the previous chapter - see page 1 67.

10 •.• c4 1 1 .�c2 l l .ixc4? is met by l l . . .ctJxe4! with the idea

1 2.ixd8? ctJxc3t and Black wins.

1 1 . .. bS 12.0-0!? According to Watson this slightly unusual

move deserves serious attention.

1 2.a3 has been more common, but I do not believe it is dangerous. Here is one top-level example to show the way for Black: 1 2 . . . ltJbd7 1 3.0-0 a6 1 4.'Wd2 ib7 1 5 .mel �c8 1 6.�adl 'Wc7 17.ltJd4 ctJc5 1 8.ctJc6?! ( 1 8.ih6N is better. Now 1 8 . . . ih800 is playable, but I prefer the strategic 1 8 . . . ltJfd7!? 1 9.ixg7 'it>xg7 with ideas of . . . 'Wd8-f6 and . . . ctJe5 and later invading on d3.) 1 8 . . . ixc6 1 9.dxc6 �e6!+ Kramnik - Grischuk, Monaco (rapid) 201 1 .

a b c d e f g h 12 ... h6!N

This untested move was mentioned by Watson, who must have correctly identified it as the critical continuation.

13.hf<l �xf6 14.'\Wd2 a6! This is my improvement. Watson mentions

l 4 . . . ia6 l 5.e5! , giving White some initiative.

15.'\Wxh6 If Black is given time to play . . . ig7 then he

will simply be better. Note also that l 5 .e5 dxe5 16 .d6 can be met by 1 6 . . . �a7!, safeguarding the rook and preparing . . . �d7.

15 ... llld7i I believe Black is better, as his fantastic

control over the dark squares and long-term prospects on the queenside give him more than enough for a pawn.

Conclusion

The lines examined in this chapter may not be the most theoretically critical, but they each require Black to think carefully about the position and select an appropriate plan against his opponent's chosen set-up. This is hardly a surprise, and merely confirms the view of the Benoni as a sharp battleground that should not be navigated 'on autopilot'.

Lines without e4 7.if4 ig7

Variation Index 1 .d4 liJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.lLic3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.lLif3 g6 7 . .if4

7 ... .ig7 8.�a4t .id7 9.�b3 A) 9 ... bS

Al) 10.lLixbS A2) 10.hd6!

B) 9 ... �c7! 10.e4 0-0 l 1.lLid2 lLihS 12 . .ie3 Bl) 12 ... lLia6 B2) 12 ... fS

Al) note to 1 2 . . . c4 Al) after l 7.e2 B2) note to l 5.h3

193 193 194 199 200 202

a b c d e f g h 28 . . . ixg2!N

Chapter 1 5 - 7.i.f4 i.g7 1 93

1 .d4 ll:lf6 2.c4 cS 3.dS e6 4.lllc3 exdS 5.cxdS d6 6.lllf3 g6 7.i.f4

With this move White can try to disrupt our natural scheme of development.

7 .•. i.g7 This could be the choice of adventurous

types who wish to venture into the jungle, or at least the variation-heavy chess version of it.

7 . . . a6 leads to calmer play and can be found in the next chapter.

s.Wa4t This is White's most important idea. Moves

like 8.e4 and 8.tlld2 will usually transpose to variations considered elsewhere in the book.

8 .h3 0-0 9.e3 a6 1 0.a4 transposes to the next chapter, while Black also has the option of deviating with 9 . . . E1e8.

s . • . i.d7 9.Wh3 At this point Black has to make an important

choice between A) 9 ..• bS and B) 9 • . • Wc7!. As you can tell from the choice of punctuation, I believe the second option to be the more promising.

A) 9 • . . bS

Even though this is not my recommendation, it is an interesting line to analyse. It used to be quite popular, but unfortunately the trend in terms of both analysis and practical analysis results has not been going Black's way. White can consider both Al) 10.lllxbS and A2) 10.hd6!.

Al) 10.lllxbS

This line is not the critical theoretical challenge, but it still poses some practical problems for Black, who must play accurately for many moves just to reach an equal position.

10 • . • i.xhS 1 1 .WxbSt ll:lbd7 12.i.xd6 llle4 13.i.eS 0-0 14.hg7 @xg7 15.Wa4

s .i�

� �� m 7 Y/� �� i)� ,,Y,., 6 " }·····,·· 5 ��l'� �� 4 18'•�···

� �� 3 �

�,� �% ��

,

� �

�

,

� 2 8 �� 8 �� 8 �l�L 1 /�,,, , /,� �=}£·� a b c d e f g h

1 5 • . . :B:b8! An important move which forces the play

and does not gives White time to complete development.

16.Wxe4 Wast 17.llld2 :B:xb2 18.:B:dl lllf6 1 8 . . . l:!fb8? 1 9.�f4 2:!8b4 20.e4 l:!d4 2 1 .i.c4

l:!xc4 22.0-0 l:!cc2 23.tllf3± Bus - Skrobek, Poland 1 988.

19.Wc4 :B:fb8 20.e3 :B:xa2 21 .i.d3 :B:bb2

1 94 Lines without e4

The correct continuation is 22.0-0 %\xd2 23.d6 iMi'b4 with equality, Moormann - Matic, e-mail 1 998.

22 ... lllxdS 23.�bl i'!:xbl ! 24.Wl'xbl lllc3 25.Wl'd3 lllxdl 26.i>xdl c4

White is in trouble. Here is an illustrative line:

29.i>el Wl'b4t 30.llld2 Wl'aS 31 .i>e2 c3 32.!'!:dl il:xd2t 33.il:xd2 cxd2 34.Wl'xd2 Wl'xd2t 3S.i>xd2 i>f8-+

The pawn ending looks to be a lost cause for White.

A2) 10.hd6!

This is the critical theoretical path.

10 ... Wl'b6 1 0 . . . c4

Funnily enough this move, which looks like an obvious candidate, has only occurred in a handful of games. At this point White needs to play precisely:

l 1 .iMi'a3! 1 1 .iMi'dl i.f5 12 .i.e5 ( 1 2.i.a3 lLie4 1 3.lLixe4 i.xe4 1 4.iMi'd2 a5 1 5 .lLig5 b4�) 1 2 . . . ltJbd7 1 3 .i.d4 b4 1 4.ltJa4 iMi'a5= Ki. Georgiev -Glavina Rossi, Zaragoza 20 1 1 .

l I . . .iM!b6 12.e4 12 .i.c5 iMi'b7 1 3.lLig5 ltJa6 14.ltJge4 lLixe4 1 5 .lLixe4 iMi'xd5 16.lLid6t 'it>f8 17 .i.e3 b4 1 8. iMfxa6 c300

8 1.• �·y� �· 'f""''� %,� %,�-�"' ' 1 l\nn�A��U�%' 6 �eri � m i � .,%� -zr� /,,,, _� 5 �� : ��,�� "f(riffJ·,,,, � �r!M 'r!c'¥ 2 o 'fd • 'fd o 'fb

1 ,�- ,, %� �m:rm: a b c d e f g h

l 2 . . . lLia6 1 2 . . . a5 1 3.iMi'c5 iMi'xc5 14.i.xc5 b4 1 5 .lLid l lLixe4 16 .i.d4± The text move forces White to sacrifice a piece.

l 3.i.xc4! bxc4 14.0-0 Unfortunately for Black he now faces a powerful attack, for instance:

Chapter 1 5 - 7.if4 ig7 195

8 .i� �-� �ii ' -�_, , ,, ;� %� ��-�""' 7 �i��mi

�

�

�

�if.lir£ 6 �e� � ,.; i %% s U'i/, •. 8/,U/.,, ,,.U 4 - - - � � � � 3 % if� �l;LJ� 2 !n a!a!a ��,_,,/,- �=�-�

a b c d e f g h 1 1 .ieS 0-0 12.e3

So White has an extra pawn, and if he is allowed to complete development without making any concessions, then life will obviously get cough for Black. Therefore we must search for immediate counterplay on the queenside.

12 . .. c4 The alternative is:

1 2 . . . b4 The good news here is that we are pushing the knight back.

1 3 .tllb l The bad news is that it is now heading for a perfect outpost on c4.

7 6 5 4 3 2

1 3 . . . a5 a b c d e f g h

1 3 . . . if5 14.tt:lbd2 tt:lbd7 was played in Grigore - Erdogan, Mangalia 1 992, and here my recommendation for White would be: 1 5.tllc4!?N iWd8 1 6.d6 ie6 17.ig3 tll b6 1 8.'1Wc2±

14.a4 if5 Black cried 14 . . . ig4 at super-GM level but failed to solve his problems: 1 5 .tll bd2 tt:lbd7 1 6.ib5 :gfd8 17.i.g3 ixf3 1 8 .gxf3 '1Wa7 This was Gelfand - Gashimov, Linares 20 10 , and now White has several good moves, one example being 19.d6N±.

8 � - � ��·� 7 w-----;� �� --.v,wr �� .;&�� 6 �'el� • -m! A � 5 �-----/,� [J%�1;� 4 2r8"'"� -----%�� ,, ,%��-0�� 3 �i��-�-/, 2 '1� • '1� [J '1[J 1 mtb� �=�•:

a b c d e f g h 1 5 .tll bd2 tt:lbd7 1 6.tllc4

As GM Emms has pointed out, the position of the bishop on f5 instead of g4 means that Black can exchange on e5 without losing a

196 Lines without e4

tempo afterwards. For instance, if White tries 1 6 . .ilb5N then 1 6 . . . ctJxe5 17.ctJxe5 ctJe4 1 8.ctJxe4 .ilxe5 l 9.ctJg3 iMi'f6 gives Black reasonable compensation.

s i, � � �· 7 ��.i.-.y,�· 6 �B�� -f� ·'{{"' ·"-�·0 ��-d"---- · � 5 � t� ts �.i.� 4 ;0;"•ttS• ..... %. �� 3 ii� ��tb� ��-0 �� ... . . %�·0 ��-c;;. 2 i[j; • i[j; b t!J 1 �--- '-� �=:r•�

a b c d e f g h 1 6 . . . iM!dS 17.2"1d l ctJxe5!?N

17 . . . .ile4 18 .d6 was unconvincing for Black in Khismatullin - Venevtsev, Olginka 201 1 .

1 8.ctJcxe5 ctJe4 1 9.ctJc4 ltJd6 Black has a degree of compensation, but I

would take White if given the choice.

13.iMi'dl ltJa6 The alternative is:

1 3 . . . b4 14 .ctJ b l Black also has to b e ready for: 1 4.ctJe2 .ilb5 1 5.ctJed4 (or 1 5 .ctJf4 ltJbd7 1 6 . .ild4 iMi'b7 17 . .ile2 Kaluga - Badmatsyrenov, Barnaul 20 1 1 , 1 7 . . . 2"1fd8N=) 1 5 . . . ltJbd7 1 6.ltJxb5 iMi'xb5 17 . .ild4 iMi'xd5 18 . .ile2 ctJb6 1 9.0-0 2"1ac8 20.2"1c l Aronian - Gashimov, Wijk aan Zee 20 12 . After 20 . . . iMi'e6!?N Black is close to equal.

1 4 . . . 2"1c8 I think this is Black's best chance. The more popular 14 . . . .ilb5 does not equalize: 1 5 .a4 .ila6 16 .ltJbd2 c3 1 7.bxc3 ctJxd5 1 8 . .ilxg7 <±ixg7 1 9.cxb4 ctJxb4!?N (Even worse is: l 9 . . . 2"1e8 20.b5 ctJc3 2 1 .ctJc4 ctJxdl 22.ctJxb6 axb6 23.2"1xdl .ilb7± Llanes Hurtado - Del Rio Angelis, Ayamonte 2007.) 20.iMi'b3 .ilxfl 2 1 . <iixfl ctJd7 22.g3 ctJc5 23.iMi'c3t f6 24.<iig2 Black does not have much to show for the sacrificed pawn.

1 5 .ltJbd2 White could also consider: 1 5 . .ile2 .ilf5 ( 1 5 . . . iMi'c5N 1 6.0-0 iMi'xd5 17 .iMi'xd5 ctJxd5 1 8 .2"1c l c3 1 9.bxc3:t) 1 6.0-0 ltJbd7 17 . .ild4± Szymczak - Morchat, Polanica Zdroj 1 995.

1 5 . . . .ilb5 1 6.2"1c l c3 17.bxc3 .ilxfl 1 8 .<iixfl

8 i.a'Yi. � �-� 7 ,, ..... ;. �. ttrr 6 ____ j� �- �.,� 5 .. . ,/,� ��-�- - -� 4 �.�,�� ..... %�-0� '0� 3 � �FJ: �tt:J-2 la----"'w:;J----"'� l� 1 �-if-�-�

a b c d e f g h 1 8 . . . ctJxd5!?

I also checked 18 . . . bxc3 19 . .ilxc3 Yrjola -Winants, Dubai 1 986, and now the best line seems to be: 1 9 . . . iMi'a6tN 20.<iig l ltJbd7

Chapter 1 5 - 7.if4 ig7 1 97

2 1 .g3 ctJxd5 22.ixg7 Wxg7 23.Wg2 Wxa2 24.�al Wc2± Here too Black must fight for a draw.

19 .cxb4 Wa6t 20.Wgl ctJd7 2 1 .ixg7 Wxg7 22.�xc8 �xc8

A long time ago, the text move was believed to be fully adequate for Black. Unfortunately modern analysis paints a different picture.

14.a4! Breaking up the queenside pawns forces

Black to embark on a wild attack, for which he is not yet fully prepared.

White has a second good option: 14.ie2

Even after this simple move Black will struggle to find enough counterplay.

14 . . . ltJc5 14 . . . b4 1 5 .ctJbl �ac8 16.0-0 �fd8 17.ctJbd2 ib5 1 8.id4 Wb7 ( 1 8 . . . ctJc5!? may be the best chance, for instance: l 9.ctJxc4 Wa6 20.Wc2 ctJxd5 2 1 .ixg7 Wxg7 22.ctJd4 ltJf4 23.ctJxb5 ctJxe2t 24.Wxe2 Wxb5 25 .b3 ctJe4 26.Wb2t ctJc3±) 19.a4! bxa3 20.�xa3 ctJxd5

8 .i � � ��· 7 � r0•t.n·•Y,•• 6 · · ·"a�� .-,"� s �-i"•'lf"" 'B 4 ��,,,,;� ,,,,,r,.�� %"'''-��-" �� 3 � ,,� �� -� 2 LS � -��LS � S("""� '="""•tt

a b c d e f g h 1 5 .o-o mds

1 5 . . . b4!?N may be a slight improvement. 1 6. ltJ b 1 ia4 Now a possible continuation is: 17.Wd4 ctJd3 18 .a3 ctJxe5 19.ctJxe5 ctJ d7 20. ctJxd7 Wxd4 2 l .exd4 ixd7 22.axb4 �fb8 23.ixc4 �xb4 24.b3 ixd4 25 .�a2 a5


26.'Lia3 E:b6 Black has some compensation, but it only gives him good chances for a draw.

16.Wd4 l 6.a3 'Li b3�

1 6 . . . b4 Black has managed to develop some initiative, but as usual he falls a little short of full equality.

l 7.'Lid2!? The unassuming 1 7.'Lib IN is also not bad.

1 7 . . . bxc3 1 8.ctJxc4 Wa6 1 9 .'\Wxc5 cxb2N 19 . . . E:ac8?! was played in Scott - Marcotulli, e-mail 2002, and here 20.Wd6! would have brought White a clear advantage.

20.ixb2 'Lie4 2 1 .'\Wb4 E:ab8 22.iWe l

a b c d e f g h 22 . . . ixb2

22 . . . E:xb2 23.'Lixb2 ib5 24.ixb5 '\Wxb5 25.f3 'Lid6 26.8'.b l ixb2 27.a4 Wb3 28.We2 E:b8 29.8'.f2 'Lic4 30.'\Wc2 iWa2 3 l .8'.e2 also does not bring much joy for Black.

23.ctJxb2 ib5 24.ixb5 '\Wxb5 25.f3 'Lif6 26.8:f2 'Lixd5 27.8'.d l±

The general pattern here is clear: Black is struggling to justify his pawn sacrifice and the most he can hope to achieve against an accurate opponent is to fight for a draw. But let us now return to the main line where White is playing more ambitiously.

s i:U - �-•U ,�� , , , �,�� : :\¥)

�, �.,� , , , , , % � ,?,, , , , ; � s � iUl U U 4 8 � ,%� � %� 3

��

�n�� If!! ��/�,,,,, ;� , , , , ,%�,��,� 2 w� � W� l W� 1 /-,, , ,%ml=1L&It

a b c d e f g h 14 ... lllb4

This is more or less forced. Instead after 14 . . . b4? 1 5 .ctJb5 ixb5 1 6.axb5 ctJc7 17.ixc4 'Lixb5 1 8.0-0 White's advantage had already reached decisive proportions in Volzhin -Kekelidze, Graz 1 999.

15.axb5 White is just too solid and I have not found

any way for Black to justify his ambitious play.

15 .. . i.fS 16.i.xc4 lllc2t Another notable game continued: 1 6 . . . E:fc8

1 7.b3 'Lig4? 1 8.ixg7 ctJc2t 1 9.iWxc2!? A beautiful sacrifice, although it was not strictly necessary. 1 9 . . . ixc2 20.id4 iWd8 2 1 .0-0 White's pieces dominate the board. 2 1 . . .'\We7 22.8'.fc l if5 23.e4 id7 24.h3 'Lif6 25.d6 Wds 26.e5 'Lih5 27.'Lid5 <iif8 28.ie3 'Lig7 29.ig5 1-0 Gelfand - J obava, Rogaska Slatina 20 1 1 .

17. 'it>e2

Chapter 1 5 - 7.if4 ig7 1 99

8 1.m m ��-� 7 � m m·•y,•r 6

?!,, , ,%� �� -,� s Rt�!�I� 4 %� l� ""'�� % "/Y, ��-0 �� 3 � m �� W�.��f%�W� 2 1U%....i�W1U% U 1U 1 ��--- -%� ;w----%� -- - - -/,, ,,� � � �M

a b c d e f g h 17 ... tlixalN

Black can easily improve on this game: l 7 . . . lllg4 l 8.ixg7 lllgxe3 l 9 .fxe3 Wxe3t 20.@fl +- Wiacek - Daciuk, Poland 1 992.

18.Wxal �Ue8 19.J.d4 Wb7 20.b3± This brings us to the end of a rather sad story

from Black's perspective. Maybe we could pick out some line that gives reasonable counterplay and/ or sets some traps for the opponent, but my overall feeling is that 9 . . . b5 is not to be recommended. Nevertheless I wanted to give a full picture to enable the reader to see where the problems lie.

With that job done, let's move on to the more promising alternative.

8 7 6

5

4 3 2 1

B) 9 ... Wc7!

a b c d e f g h

This has been the most popular choice. It is theoretically sounder than 9 . . . b5 , and has the added benefit of not requiring such heavy memorization of forced lines.

10.e4 1 o.ixd6? is a well-known blunder, and

after 1 O . . . Wxd6 l l .Wxb7 Wb6 12.Wxa8 Wxb2 White's position is hopeless.

1 O.e3 allows Black to hunt down the darksquared bishop, and after 1 0 . . . lllh5 l l .ig5 h6 l 2.ih4 g5 l 3.ig3 lllxg3 l 4.hxg3 0-0+± Black has no cause for concern.

10 ... 0-0 1 1 .tlid2 Other moves are less dangerous:

l l .id3 :8e8 12.llld2 ( 1 2.0-0 c4) 1 2 . . . lllh5+± l 3.ie3 f5!N Miton analyses this position extensively but I am happy to leave it here and say Black has good counterplay.

l l .ie2 b5! 1 2.e5 1 2.ixb5 lllxe4 13 .lllxe4 Wa5t and Black is doing fine. 1 2.lllxb5 ixb5 1 3.Wxb5N lllxe4 1 4.0-0 llld7 1 5 .Wc6 Wd8 1 6.id3 :8c8 17 .Wa6 f500 is mentioned by Miton.


1 5 .exd6 Wb7 and White's queen is a target. 1 5 . . . llla6 16.Wxd6 Wxd6 l 7.exd6 lllc5 1 8 .0-0 b4 19 .Clldl Clld300

(Analysis by Miron.) Black has pretty good chances in all these lines.

1 1 ...ctJh5 Black needs to do something about the

threat of lllc4.

12.i.e3 Now I have chosen to analyse the interesting

sideline Bl) 12 ... ctJa6!? in addition to the main line ofB2) 12 ... 5.

Bl) 12 ... ctJa6 13.i.e2 gab8

14.a4 This is the most popular move, although it

is important to stress that . . . b5 is not strictly a threat at this point.

14.0-0 b5? Black should prefer 14 . . . Ei:fe8 1 5 .h3 as in Colovic - Aranovitch, Milan 20 1 0, and now 1 5 . . . lllf6N looks best, for example: 1 6.Elfe l b5 l 7.lllxb5 Wd8 1 8 .a4 Cllxe4 19 .Cllxe4 :8xe4=

1 5 .lllxb5 i.xb5 1 6.i.xb5 We7 l 7.Wa4 Cllc7 l 8.i.c6 :8b4

1 8 . . . :8xb2?! 1 9.Elab l ± Ki. Georgiev - Fier, Benasque 20 10 .

Moberg - Eklund, Sweden 2008. Now the most accurate continuation looks to be:

a b c d e f g h 1 9.Wa5!?N i.xb2 20.Elab l i.c3 2 1 .!"lbcl i.xd2 22.i.xd2 :8xe4 23.Elce l

Black i s under pressure.

8 �� - ��-� 7 ifi"�f.,v., 6 lj)•,,,J� �-�rm � J,,,, /�� 5 � �l� -� �� , , , , ,/,� �� 4 �-�� 3 -§ ;�; 00 -2 �,,, , , ,�£� lW{f;, 1 �d,,,,/.,,,,,,m,,,,/•�

a b c d e f g h 14 ... l2Jb4 15.0-0

1 5 .lllc4 f5 16.0-0 transposes to the note to White's next move. If Black wants a safer alternative he can consider l 5 ... lllf6 l 6.i.f4 Clle8 17.0-0 <iih8 as mentioned by Watson. Black has lost some time with his knight, but is ready to strike back with . . . f5 .

15 ... 5!? This risky move may not be as bad as

was previously thought. 1 5 . . . lllf6 is a safer alternative which may be compared with the previous note.

Chapter 1 5 - 7.!f4 !g7 20 1

16.exf5 1 6. lll c4 f4 1 7 .!d2 was played in Flear -

D. Lund, Birmingham 2006, and here my suggestion would be l 7 . . . a6!?N, with the possible continuation l 8.e5 !f5 l 9.exd6 Wf f7 with interesting play. I'm not sure if I would completely trust Black's position against a computer, but it looks messy enough to be considered unclear over the board.

We still have the main line with 12 .. .f5 to consider shortly, so I will not take up too much space with the present variation. I do, however, want to present one sacrificial line which I found especially interesting to analyse.

16 ... i.xf5

17 .lll b5 Wfd7 1 8.l:'i:ac l b6 1 9.lllc4N ( 19.l:'i:fd l a6 was more pleasant for Black in Hardicsay - Fronczek, Prievidza 1 978.) 19 . . . lllxd5 20.lllcxd6 !e6 2 1 .!c4 lllhf6 looks roughly equal.

17 ... i.c2 18.'tfNc4 lllf6 19.llla2 �:U7 20J;fcl

a b c d e f g h 20 ... i.d3!

This is not the only playable move, but it is sound and deserves the exclamation mark for its shock value alone.

20 . . . b5!? is the 'calm' alternative which might lead to an early draw: 2 1 .axb5 !a4 22.lllc3 (22.lllxb4? !xb5+) 22 . . . !c2 23.llla2 !a4=

21..L:d3 lllxd3 22.11Nxd3 lllxg4 Black's attack is more potent than its initial

appearance may suggest. Of course there are many possible deviations, but I will give you some illustrative lines to show the correctness of the sacrifice.

a b c d e f g h 23.lllc4


Or 23.ctJc3 :8e8 24.lt::lde4 �d8 25 .�d2 �d4 with a dangerous attack.

23 ... E:eS 24.E:el 24.�e2? To the untrained eye White may

look solid, but in fact he is already almost lost! 24 . . . �d7+ 25.Elfl :8f4! The importance of this move will soon become clear. 26.h3 '2lxe3 27.fxe3

a b c d e f g h 27 . . . :8xc4! 28.�xc4 �xh3 29.Elae l �h6-+

m �� m 8 ,��iltf�,-,?� 1 � i &e� � .i� i 6 ,, , , , , ,,� ,,, , ,,,w%%� ,,�� 'ef""%%% �%% s %% r� 8 � � %%� ::, , , /,� ;;,::� ;;,::� 4 8 -'2J- -4i)%%/, w.

�%%�;� � 3 �m0 �1�0° �0w. 2 �J�Y$� �c,ff�wJ�� 1 >RI� � �RI� �, /� f,� ��

a b c d e f g h 24 ... 'WdS 25.h3 ltJxe3 26Jhe3 E:xe3

26 . . . :8ef8 may also lead to equality: 27.'2lc3 �d4 28.Ei:fl �h4 29.�e4 :8f4 30.�e6t mh8 3 1 .�xd6 �g5t 32.mhl �xe3 33.'2lxe3 :8f3 34.lt::lg2 :8xh3t 35.mgl �h6 36.�e5t=

27.'Wxe3 id4 White looks to be in trouble, but he can force

a draw with the help of a simple counterattack.

B2) 12 ... fS

a b c d e f g h The main move.

13.exfS ixf5!? This looks like the better recapture to me,

leaving the f-file open for the rook and also the seventh rank for the queen.

1 3 . . . gxf5 This has been much more popular, but I do not trust it.

14.�e2 f4 14 . . . �e8 is more solid, but still less than inspiring. 1 5 .'2lf3 h6 16 .0-0 a6 17.a4 '2ld7

Chapter 1 5 - 7 .if4 ig 7 203

1 8.!'l:fe l ± Almost all the games from here were won by White, and I do not recommend volunteering to be the next victim.

s EtlY � ��·� 7 �1· 'Bfn · ,,� • 6

, , ,%� , , ,,/.� /.� ,,,,,%� 5 ��-�%-�.I.Al 4

m,•"'" %. m,� m,� �% "//, ��-d'· ,,%� 3 �vm � • ��/�,,,,.:,, ,,/,,,,,,,,,%�,/ ��-'(}, 2 [1:i �f!j, � i. �f!j, [1:i �� td''''% •.. , , ,w:· · · ·%·�

a b c d e f g h l 5 .ixc5! f3?

1 5 . . . li:la6?! 1 6.i.a3 :8ae8 17.li:lce4 was also winning for White in Malaniuk - Norwood, Lvov 1 986. l 5 . . . 'Wxc5 is perhaps the best chance, but after l 6.ixh5 I am not convinced by Black's compensation.

l 6 .i.xf3 :8xf3 l 7.gxf3 'Wxc5 l 8 .'Wxb7 +

Korchnoi - Nunn, London 1 984.

I4 ... c!tJf6 I S.h3 l 5 .li:lc4

This move has scored a hundred percent on

the database so is worth checking. l 5 . . . li:le4!?

Not the only option, but it seems a logical way to 'exploit' White's last move.

1 6.li:lb5 16 .0-0N may be a slight improvement, although after 16 . . . li:lxc3 l 7.bxc3 li:ld7 I think Black's position is okay.

1 6 . . . 'Wd8 l 7.a4 a6 1 8.li:lc3 li:lxc3 1 9. bxc3 li:ld7

initiative. 20.0-0

20.li:lxd6? 'Wf6 is bad for White. 20 . . . li:le5 2 1 .li:lb6 :8b8 22.a5 'Wf6 23.'Wb2 g5 24.!'l:fel g4 25.'Wd2 i.e4 26.:8a4 'Wg6 27.ig5 :8be8 28.ifl

Erbe - Berger, Internet 2004. At this point the game score ends mysteriously with 1-0, just as Black was poised to seize the advantage.

28 . . . ixg2!N 29.ixg2 li:lf3t 30.ixf3 gxf3 3 1 .:8e6

3 l .:8g4 h6 also gives White some problems. 3 l . . . :8xe6 32.dxe6 :8e8

Followed by . . . h6, with better chances for Black. IS ... c!tJa6 I6.a3

This has been the usual choice. A couple of other examples:

1 6.0-0 li:l b4= Mons - Kaphle, Oberhof 201 1 .


16.g4 j,d7 17.0-0 :8ae8 1 8 .a3 :8e7 1 9.j,f3?! 1 9.Elfe 1 �b8 20.Eladl :8fe8+±

1 9 . . . �b8= 20.a4 h5 2 1 .g5 ctJe8 2.h4? j,h3 23.Elfe l �c8 24.�c4 'Lib4+ 25.ctJe2

Povah - Lund, West Bromwich 2004. Now the most convincing would have been:

25 . . . j,fS!N-+ Black has numerous threats and will soon

win material.

a b c d e f g h 16 .. Jl:abS!?

1 6 . . . :8ae8 was the only move mentioned by Kaufman in his repertoire book, but then after 17.0-0 Black has no good way to counter a later 'Lic4. In contrast, after l 6 . . . :8ab8 a later 'Lic4 will generally be met by . . . b5 .

1 6 . . . �f7N 17.'Lic4 :8ad8 1 8.!"i:dl;I;; IS

mentioned by Miton.

17.c!tJbSN This would appear to be the critical test of

Black's last move.

After 17.0-0 �d8 Black is not troubled by 1 8.'Lib5 'Lic7= Del Rey - Forcen Esteban, Utebo 20 12, nor by 1 8.j,g5 b5+±.

And as previously suggested, 1 8.'Lic4 would be answered by 1 8 . . . b5. For example: 1 9.'Lixb5 'Lic7 20.'Licxd6 'Lixb5 2 1 .'Lixb5 a6, when

White's extra pawns just barely compensate for the piece he is about to lose.

17 ... Wfe7 18.c!lJxa7 c!lJc7

a b c d e f g h 19.c!tJbS c!tJxbS 20.ixhS i.d7;;

So ultimately it seems Black can get through the opening and obtain a reasonable position by playing l 2 . . . f5 and recapturing with the bishop.

Conclusion

The 7.j,f4 j,g7 line is quite demanding and will not be to everyone's taste. It would have been nice to recommend the sharp 9 . . . b5 line, but I don't really believe in it, especially in the critical 1 o.j,xd6! as analysed in variation A2. Instead variation B with 9 . . . �c7 is more reliable, although even here the play can be quite double-edged. My advice is to compare these positions with the ones in the next chapter and make your own choice.

Lines without e4 7.JJ4 a6

Variation Index I .d4 ll:Jf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.ll:Jc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.ll:Jf3 g6 7.i.f4

7 ... a6 A) 8.ll:Jd2 B) 8.e4 b5 9.Wf e2 i.e7

Bl) 10.e5 B2) 10.Wfc2

C) 8.a4 i.g7 9.h3 0-0 10.e3 Cl) 10 ... ll:Je8 C2) 10 ... �e8

C2 l) 1 1 .i.e2 C22) 1 1 .ll:Jd2!

A) note to 10 . . . 'i:lh5 B2) note to 14 . . . 'llf6 Cl) note to 1 3.a5

206 208 210 211 214 215 217 217 218

a b c d e f g h a b c d e f g h 22 . . . l"i:xel t!N 1 8 . . . �b5!N


1 .d4 lllf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.lllc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6. lll f3 g6 7 .if4 a6

This is the most popular move nowadays. Black wants to provoke a2-a4 to take away the option of the troublesome queen check. We will analyse A) 8.llld2, B) 8.e4 and C) 8.a4.

A) 8.llld2

This rare move has some logic to it, but I don't think it is too dangerous.

8 ... b5 9.a4 White's idea is to exert pressure against

d6, bur as we know, playing several moves with one piece in the opening rarely leads to anything good.

9 ... b4 10.lllce4

10 ... lllh5 Black has a couple of playable alternatives.

1 o . . . lllxe4 l 1 .tllxe4 12.e7 is perhaps the safest way to deal with this line. l 2.i2.h6 ttJ d7 13 .'Wd2?! ( 1 3 .e3N=)

� r1,e.�f 6 r. �.,,,,�. r� 5

�-�%� �� ,,,,, 4 !•,_,,;,��

,,, , ;,�� 3 �??.''" �%�'' �??.''" �?/,''� 2 �W� � � A �� A �� iOz ;, / Q iQ,-; Q iQ �,,, %-,, ,,/,�£-:

a b c d e f g h Johansen - Lie, Asker 2000 . Now after

1 3 . . . tllf6!N 14.tllxf6t 12.xf6 Black has exchanged both nasty knights without making any unnecessary pawn moves, and is left with a strong bishop and pawn majority on the queenside. 1 5 .e4 'We7 16.i2.d3 ( 1 6.f3 g5 17 .0-0-0 i2.d7+) l 6 . . . c4+

I also found an interesting new idea: 1 O . . . tllxd5 1 1 .12.xd6 tlle3!?N

1 1 . . .12.xd6 12 .tllxd6t 'Wxd6 13 .tlle4 'We5 14.'Wxd5 'Wxd5 l 5 .tllf6t Wf8 1 6.tllxd5= Martinez Martin - Martin Gonzalez, Ciudad Real 2004.

1 2.'Wb3

Chapter 1 6 - 7 .!f4 a6 207

l 2.fxe3 !xd6 13 .liJc4 fie? 14.liJcd6t ( 14 .Wfxd8t @xd8 l 5 .liJb6 El:a7 1 6.0-0-0t @c7 l 7.liJd5t c6 l 8.g3 fie6+) 14 . . . fixd6 1 5 .liJxd6t @e7 1 6.liJxc8t ( 1 6.Wfd5? Wfxd6 1 7.Wfxa8 E!:d8 18 .Wfe4t fie6 1 9 .Wfc2 Wfe5 20'.E!:cl c4+) 16 . . . Wfxc8 1 7.Wfd5 liJd7 1 8.g3 Wfc7=

1 2 . . . fixd6 1 3.liJxd6t Wfxd6 14 .Wfxe3t Wfe7 1 5 .Wfxe7t @xe7 16.E!:c l fie6=

a b c d e f g h 1 1 .!gS f6 12.!e3 f5 13.g4

This is the tactical resource which keeps White in the game.

13 ... ctJf6 Black wants to remove the strong enemy

knight.

l 3 . . . fxg4?! leaves the white knight in the centre, where it is highly influential: 1 4.h3 g3? l 5 .fxg3 fig? l 6.fig5 liJf6 17.fig2 0-0 Aronian - Gashimov, Nice (blind) 20 1 0. 1 8.liJc4N+-

16.ctJg3 W!f6 Now White does not have any threats and

must chink about where to put his king - not an easy decision with both flanks having been weakened.

a b c d e f g h 17.Wfd2 !g7 18.ctJxfS

The machine suggests 1 8.0-0-0N as a slight improvement, but after 1 8 . . . 0-0 I still prefer Black due to his safer king.


18 ... 'WxfS; 19.h4 c!tJd7 Attempting to force the play with l 9 . . . '\We5

leads to no more than equality: 20.0-0-0 '1We4 2 1 .f3 Wc4t 22.Wc2 Wa2 23.'\Wbl and now Black can either take a perpetual or play on with 23 . . . Wxa4, although in the latter case 24.h5 gives White enough counterplay.

20.i.h3 'We4 21 .f3 'Wxh4t 22.c;t>fl 'Wf6 23.E:cl?

23.Elb l was essential. In that case White's bishops would have provided some compensation for the missing pawn, although I still prefer Black's chances.

23 ... 'Wxb2-+ Salvador - Drei, Cesenatico 20 1 0.

B) 8.e4

This time White aims for direct action in the centre, hoping to expose Black's queenside expansion as a loss of valuable time.

8 ... b5 8 . . . Jtg7 could transpose to Chapter 8 after

9.a4 0-0 1 O.Jte2 Jtg4 1 1 .0-0, but White can keep the game in the realm of the present system by playing 9.'\Wa4t Jtd7 10.Wb3.

9.'We2 The main line. It is an unusual place for

the queen, but the idea is to prevent Black's natural development.

The natural 9.Jtd3 is not too dangerous. 9 . . . Jtg7 1 0.0-0 0-0 l 1 .h3 :8e8 12.Ele l :8a7! Using the fact that the seventh rank is free, Black improves the position of the rook.

a b c d e f g h 1 3 .a3 :8ae7 14.Elc l Wb6 1 5.b4 tllbd7 16.Wd2 Jtb7 17.Jtg5 ( 17.Jte3 '1Wd8 1 8 .Jtg5 Wb6= has occurred in a few games.) l 7 . . . :8c8 l 8.Jte3 '1Wd8 l 9.Jtf4 tllb6 20.bxc5 :8xc5 2 l .Jtxd6? '\Wxd6 22.e5 '\Wd8 23 .exf6 Elxe l t 24.Elxe l Jtxf6+ Onischuk - Bacrot, Biel 2008.

9 ... i.e7 The main move. Don't be afraid, the bishop

will go to the long diagonal eventually!

The need to take the long route to g7 is highlighted by the following short line:

Chapter 1 6 - 7.if4 a6 209

9 . . . ig7? 1 0.ixd6 °1Wxd6 1 1 .e5 °1We7 1 2.d6 '\We6 1 3.tlig5+- A few players have fallen for this; make sure you are not one of them!

9 . . . tlih5!? This is not a bad move if you don't mind a draw and there are no Sofia rules.

l O.ig5 ie7 l 1 .ih6 ifs 12.°1We3 1 2.ig5=

1 2 . . . ixh6 13 .°1Wxh6 b4 14 .tlidl '\Wf6 14 . . . iWe? 1 5 .id3 ig4 16.tlid2 ixdl 17.Elxd l '\Wf6 18 .0-0 '\Wf4 19 .°1Wxf4 tt'lxf4 20.tlic4± Agdestein - Bjornsson, Reykjavik 1998.

1 5.tlid2 Yusupov - Dolmatov, Minsk 1 987. Here I suggest:

1 5 . . . tlid?N 1 6.tlic4 tlie5 l 7.tlide3= And now there are many good moves, for example:

17 . . . a5 1 7 . . . id? 18 .f3 ib5=

1 8.Elb 1 tt'lxc4 19 .ixc4 a4= White's grip over the c4-square is balanced

by Black's extra queenside space and control over the dark squares.

Returning to the main line, White's main options are Bl) 10.eS and B2) 10.'1Wc2.

1 o.ih6?! tlig4 1 1 .ig?? Elgs+

1 0.0-0-0?! I think this is too optimistic for White. He has nothing on the kingside while on the queenside the black pawns are ready to hurl themselves forward.

1 0 . . . 0-0 l l .e5 l l .h3 b4 12 .tlibl °1Wa5 13.b3 A. Ponomarev - Wilke, corr. 200 1 . 1 3 . . . tlibd?N 14.°1Wc2 '\We? l 5 .tlibd2 tlib6 l 6.tlic4 tlifd7+

8 .i�..t� � �·� ,... . . .. ,, . ,,%�fef"'""� 7 ��·w.·J-*l� �� 6 , . f� - · � 5 �r•2r� ..... ;. 4

� .. . . % .. .. . %� �� 3 �m�� % ,,,? . . · · '� ��·� ��·; 2 [j � -'iV� [j ft! ,,, , ,%�l•.r� ·�

a b c d e f g h l l . . .tt'lg4! 1 2.tlie4 dxe5 13 .tt'lxe5

13 .ig3!?N looks like a good attempt to complicate the game, although Black still remains on top with precise play: l 3 . . . f5 14.d6 fx:e4 1 5 .dxe? '\Wxe7 16.'\Wxe4 Ela? 17.h3 if5 1 8 .°1We2 tlif6 19.'\Wxe5 '\Wf7+

1 3 . . . tlixe5 14.ixe5 tlid7 1 5 .if4 Ele8 16.'\Wc2 tlif6 l 7.d6 tt'lxe4 18 .'\Wxe4

Alburt - D. Gurevich, Estes Park 1 986. Here Black's most convincing path to a huge advantage would have been:


1 8 . . . i.f6!N 1 9.°1Wf3 19 .iWxaS? i.xb2t! 20.Wxb2 '\Wf6t 2 1 .Wc2 i.f5t picks up the queen.

19 . . . c4 20.i.e3 i.d7 With . . . c3 coming next, Black's attack

should decide the game.

Bl) IO.es

This direct attempt does not promise much.

10 ... dxeS 1 1 . .ixeS CLJbd7 12.0-0-0 Not working here is 1 2.d6? 'llxe5

13 .dxe7 'llxf3t 14.'\Wxf3 '\Wxe7t+ Marsak -Novgorodskij , Nizhnij Novgorod 2008 .

1 2.i.g3?! Now d5-d6 is inevitable, but . . .

1 2 . . . 0-0!

Black will win back the piece at least. l 3 .d6 2"i:e8 l 4.dxe7 :9:xe7 1 5 .'lleS 'llxe5 16 .i.xeS i.b7!N

Black is doing okay after other moves, but I like this tricky option the most. Now White has to find a few good moves to stay in the game.

17.f4 17.2"1d l ? '\We8 1 8 .i.xf6 :9:xe2t 19 .'llxe2 '\We6 20.i.gS '\Wxa2+

17 . . . lllhS 1 8.°1Wf2 18 .:§:d 1 ? '\We8 l 9.'lle4 i.xe4 20.'\Wxe4 'llxf4-+

18 . . . f6 1 9 .i.e2 fx:e5 20.:§:dl °1Wc7 2 1 ..ixhS gxh5+

Chapter 1 6 - 7 .�f4 a6 2 1 1

15.f3 �d7= 16.a4?! b4 17.CDxe7

a b c d e f g h 17 ... Wfxe7N

The remarkable 17 . . . 'tt>f8! ? is playable and led to an eventual victory for Black in Gonzalez Garcia - Pantsulaia, Khancy-Mansiysk (ol) 20 10 , but sometimes the simple moves are objectively the strongest.

18.gel l 8.�xe7t 'tt>xe7 l 9.d6t 'tt>d8 20.llld5 tt:lxd5

2 1 .l'l:xd5 �xa4 also favours Black, who intends . . . 'tt>d7 next.

18 ... Wfxe2 Now Black wins a pawn.

19.E:xe2t �d8 20.CDe4 CDxe4 21 .fxe4 La4i

B2) IO.Wic2

The queen did her job by luring the enemy bishop to an unnatural square, so now she switches to a more comfortable spot.

10 ... 0-0 l l .a4 White hopes to win the c4-square for his

pieces, but in the meantime Black can generate a good deal of activity.

l l .�e2 This move gives Black a lot of freedom.

l l . . .l'l:e8 l 2.llld2 �f8 13.0-0

13 . . . b4!? I think Black should take this chance . 13 . . . tt:lbd7 is the safest line: 14.E!:fe l ( 14.a4? b4 1 5 .llld l lllxd5 1 6.exd5 E!:xe2 17.llle3 �f6 1 8 .�g3 �d4-+ Wemmers -Degraeve, Belgium 2006.) Flear - Schulte, Oakham 1988. Now an amusing finish might be: 1 4 . . . �e7N 1 5 .�g5 �g7 1 6.f4 h6 17 .�h4

a b c d e f g h


17 ... 'llg4! 1 8 .�xe7 �d4t 19 .�hl 'llf2t= 14.'lld l 'llxd5 1 5 .exd5 :gxe2 1 6.�e3

Now in S. Schneider - De Firmian, Copenhagen 1999, the best continuation would have been:

s E•..t� �-� /,,, ,� - - -"� ""'"� : !��!� 5 �-c0;%�� -- ,,�� : �:_,,,%� �� %'0 �% ,,/),,J%'0 �%'0 2 [j w�if� :i w� [j w� 1 /�f' %-�·•:=,, ,

a b c d e f g h 1 6 . . . �g7!N

More precise than 1 6 . . . a5, which still brought Black a decent position in the game.

1 7.°1Wd3 :gxe3 18 .'\Wxe3 'lld7 The pair of bishops and extra pawn give Black more than enough for the exchange.

19 .'llc4 'lle5 20.:gcl 'llxc4 2 1 .:gxc4 �d7 22.:gel '\Wa5+

12.liJbI

12 .'lld l A strange place for the knight, but eventually it can go to c4 via e3 .

1 2 . . . b3 I like this move most, although of course it is not the only playable one.

1 3 .°1Wxb3 Perhaps White should consider an alternative, such as: 13 .'\Wc4 'll bd7 14 .:ga3 :gb8 1 5 .:gxb3 :gxb3 l 6.'\Wxb3 lllxe4 1 7.�d3 °1Wa5t 1 8 .'llc3 'llxc3 19 .bxc3= Samraoui -Christiansen, e-mail 2003.

18 . . . lllg5! It is better to exchange the knight on the kingside.

Chapter 16 - 7.iif4 a6 213

19 .iixg5 iixg5 20.t2Jxg5 �xg5i Black has the initiative.

The solid 12 . . . t2Jh5 should be enough for equality, for example: l 3 .iih6 Ei:e8 l 4.iid3 t2Jd7 1 5 .0-0 ii.f6 1 6.t2Jbd2 l2Je5 17.l2Jxe5 iixe5 1 8.t2Jc4 iif4 19 .iixf4 t2Jxf4= Yakovich -Martin Gonzalez, Terrassa 1999.

13.Wfxb3 lllxe4 Black has succeeded in exchanging a flank

pawn for a more central one, which is especially useful when you consider that he will soon be able to attack with his rooks along at least one of the newly-opened files.

14.iid3 ll:lf6 This has been the most popular choice, but I

am not sure if it is best.

l 4 . . .f5!? Black's position is good enough to justify this ambitious move, which aims to keep the knight on its active outpost.

1 5 .0-0 t2Jd7 1 6.t2Jc3 Ei:b8 Black can consider getting aggressive with: l 6 . . . g5!?N 17.iic l g4 (If you don't feel

the urge to give up a pawn, you can play 17 . . . Ei:bS l 8.�c2 t2Jxc3 l 9.bxc3 g4 20.t2Jd2 l2Je5 2 1 .ii.e2 f4 with a promising position.) 1 8.ii.xe4 fxe4 19 .t2Jd2 e3 20.fxe3 Ei:b8 2 1 .Ei:xfSt �xf8 22.� c2 tDe5�

s ��.i.S ��.� 7 ,,,, Y,�i)· y,� 6 !.� .. ,,�.!� 5 �

�-�/,-:.

4 ra -�.:�� 3 w�l�tJS� 2 ��,_ ,,;��!�

g(,, ,;,� �-,=- -a b c d e f g h

l 7.�c2 t2Jdf6 The opening phase has more or less concluded, and Black is not worse.

1 8.ii.h6 Ei'.e8 19 .t2Jd2? t2Jg4 20.ii.f4 t2Jxd2 I am not sure if White has enough compensation after: 20 . . . t2Jexf2N 2 1 .Ei:xf2 t2Jxf2 22.Wxf2 g5 23.iig3 f4 24.iixh7t Wh8 25.iixf4 gxf4+

2 1 .�xd2 ii.f6 22.Ei:fel

a b c d e f g h 22 . . . Ei:xe l t!N

22 ... t2Je5 23 .iifl was less convmcmg, though still pleasant for Black in Lalic -D. Kononenko, Pardubice 201 1 .

23.Ei:xe 1 g5 24.h3 t2Jxf2 25.iixg5 25.�xf2? gxf4 26.�xf4 Ei'.xb2-+

25 . . . t2Jxh3t 26.gxh3 iixg5 27.�g2 Wh8+


8 7

6

5

4

3

2 a b c d e f g h

1s.o-o ttJbd7 I6.ltJc3 gbs I7.'?Na2 gb4 Black is making full use of the open b-file.

18.i.d.2 ltJg4 19.ltJe4 f5 20.ltJg3 20.'Lieg5? is too ambitious: 20 . . . 'Lide5

2 l .i.e2 ( 2 l .i.xb4 i.xg5 22. 'Li xe 5 'Li xe5 23 .i.c2 i.f4 24.i.c3 i.xh2t-+) 2 1 . . .i.xg5 22.'Lixg5 l::\d4 23.b4 i.b7 Now Black is winning a pawn. 24.bxc5 i.xd5 25 .�c2 dxc5+

�.t� �-� 8 ��4)1r '�T : .t. .�.%]·'· ��r�,,, , %� �� 5

!J-11��1. : 'nf�f� �®'0 ��,0 �®'ef,,, , , :®,� 2 vw� � w� � w�

/�,,, ,,,.,,,,,�.im,,,,,, a b c d e f g h

20 ... gbs 21.gfe1 i.f6 22.i.c3 ltJde5 Black's position was more comfortable in

Vaassen - Daurelle, Internet 2003. Overall I found no major problems, and in some places Black has the luxury of choosing between a couple of promising lines.

C) 8.a4

Preventing . . . b5 is the main line.

8 ... .tg7 9.h3 This is the most important independent line.

Instead 9.e4 i.g4 1 0.i.e2 leads to Chapter 8,

9 ... 0-0 10.e3 1 0.'Lid2 l::\e8 l l .e3 transposes to variation

C22 on page 2 1 8 .

This line has become quite popular for White, who hopes to slow the game down and limit Black's counterplay by putting his pawn on e3 instead of e4. From here I analysed both CI) 10 ... ltJeS and C2) 10 ... ge8. The first leads to a relatively slow positional struggle, whereas the second is more sharp and active.

1 0 . . . �e7 has actually been the most popular move, and sometimes transposes to line C 1 after a subsequent . . . 'Lie8, but I don't see any special advantage in developing the queen first.

The aggressive 1 0 . . . 'Lih5 1 1 .i.h2 f5 12 .i.e2 f4 was proposed by Watson, but both Kostas Oreopoulos and Kaufman have pointed out that after 1 3.0-0;!; White is better.

Chapter 1 6 - 7 .i.f4 a6 2 1 5

CI) 10 ... lbes

I I .i.e2 CDd7 12.0-0 �e7 As mentioned previously, this position might

also be reached after 1 0 . . . �e7. After checking various plans I finally formed a clear picture of what Black should be doing. The first step is to redeploy the knights on e5 and c7. If it looks like White is threatening to play e3-e4, Black should take countermeasures with . . . f5 . Depending on what White is doing, we may also look to develop counterplay on the queenside with . . . E:b8 and . . . b5 , and/or on the kingside with . . . g5 .

13.aS White has tried several different moves here,

but since the general character of the position will remain similar, I will focus on a few illustrative examples.

White's most popular move has been: 1 3 .E:e 1 ctJe5

This looks to me like the most natural response. 13 . . . h6 can be played in the 'slow-motion' style. 1 4.a5 ctJc7 1 5 .E:cl f5 16 .�b3 g5 1 7.ig3 E:b8 1 8.ctJa4 b5 19.axb6 ctJa8 20.E:al ctJaxb6 2 1 .ctJc3 ctJa8 22.�c2 ctJc7 White was just a little better in Aronian -Gashimov, Linares 20 1 0.

a b c d e f g h 1 4.lZJd2 f5 1 5 .ih2 ctJf6 16.a5 id7 17.f4 lZJf7 1 8 .id3

Now in Sargissian - Fier, Bursa 20 1 0, I think Black should have played:

a b c d e f g h


1 8 . . . �bS!N If Black can prevent e3-e4 the bishop on h2 will not feel well.

l 9.tlixb5 19 .�xb5 axb5 20.lllxb5 lllxd5 2 1 .tlic4 lll b4=

l 9 . . . axb5 20.�xb5 lllxd5 2 l .e4 fxe4 22.tlixe4 llle3 23.�d3 �xb2+±

14.Clld2 Clle5 l 4 . . . tlic7?! is less accurate due to l 5 .e4,

but 14 . . .f5 ! ? could be considered and may transpose to the main line within a few moves.

15.Clla4 l 5 .e4N is not a real threat here as after

l 5 . . . b5 l 6.axb6 Elxb6 l 7.Ela2 lllc7+± Black has adequate play.

1 5 .�c2 occurred in Maletin - Kopylov, Samara 20 1 2, and here too 1 5 . . . bSN l 6.axb6 Elxb6 looks okay for Black.

15 ... id7 White may have prevented the pawn from

going to b5, bur now the bishop is heading for the same square.

16.Cllb6 ibS 17.gel fS l 7 . . . tlic7N also looks playable, for instance:

1 8.�b3 Elbd8 19 .tlie4 �xe2 20.Elxe2 lll b5=

18.°W'b3 Cllc7 Also after 1 8 . . . �xe2N 19 .Elxe2 lllc7

20.tlidc4 lllxc4 2 1 .tlixc4 tlib5 the position is dose to equal.

20.gadl 'W'f6 21.ig3 gbd8 22.Clla4 Clla8 23.Cllc3 ixc4 24.ixc4 gb8 25.Clla4 Clle5 26.ifl 'W'd8

Although minor improvements could surely be found on both sides, the general standard of

Chapter 1 6 - 7.�f4 a6 217

play has been quite high, and pretty thematic for the whole variation. Over the next few moves White goes astray.

C21) 1 1 .�e2

This allows Black to get a good position with a typical simplifying procedure.

1 l. . .tlJe4! 12.tlJxe4 gxe4 13.tlJd2 gb4

The rook is both safe and active here.

14.tlJc4 14.0-0 t2Jd7 ( 14 . . . �xb2!? 1 5 .E:bl �e5

16.�xe5 dxe5 17.l2Jc4�) 1 5 .t2Jc4 leads to the main line.

14 ... tlJd7 15.0-0 The d6-pawn is safe for now: 1 5 .�xd6??

E:xc4! 16.�xc4 'Wb6 wins material, while l 5.t2Jxd6?! �xb2 16.E:b 1 �c3t also favours Black.

15 ... tlJb6 This is the no-nonsense approach, forcing an

equal endgame.

1 5 . . . t2Je5 can also be tried: 16 .�xe5 dxe5 ( 16 . . . �xe5N is also okay: 17.t2Jxe5 dxe5 18 .b3 �f5=) 17.a5 �d7 ( 17 ... 'Wg5!?N 18 .<;t>h l �f5f±) 1 8 .t2Jb6 E:b8 19.'Wc2 �f8 20.b3= Wojtaszek Gashimov, Warsaw 20 10.


18.CDxb6 'W'xb6 19.a5 °W'd6 20.l:!a2 i.xb2 21 .°W'c2 i.g7=

Onischuk - Gashimov, Ningbo 20 1 1 .

C22) 1 1 .CDd2!

s .irlli.B.i�*� /, ,,, , ,� ,,,,,/,� ��,�f< : !��-�.,� 5 �-,/\;"� " � ��" '� �¥//�� 4 ' � �/,'"//, ��,J�� 3 � m ??f!1 � � 2 ��r(,,, , , :��,,JW:N��-i0% ;;.�: iO/, 0 � 1 /�"""·if=�� Ii

a b c d e f g h With this move White prevents the knight

exchange and plans to put the knight on c4, where it has the potential to exert troublesome pressure against the d6-pawn. To stop this, we must plant a knight on e5.

1 1 ...tbbd7!

Black can afford to leave the d6-pawn hanging.

12.i.e2 l 2.ii.xd6 is almost never played, and after

1 2 . . . tllbG 1 3 .ii.xc5 tllfxd5 1 4.ii.xbG tllxb6 Black had good compensation in Biriukov -Tselkovskiy, St Petersburg 20 1 2.

1 2.tllc4 tlle4 ( 1 2 . . . tlle5 1 3 .ii.xe5 dxe5±) 13 .tllxe4 l::lxe4 14.ii.d3

a b c d e f g h l 4 . . . l::lxc4! l 5.ii.xc4 Now in Kacheishvili - Chirila, Richardson 20 1 2, the simplest continuation would have been l 5 . . . ii.xb2N 1 6.l::la2 ii.c3t 17.'kt>fl V!ie7 with obvious compensation for Black.

Chapter 1 6 - 7.if4 a6 2 19

13 ... lDfd7 14.Wfc2 It is worth mentioning a couple of other

plans here.

14.e4 occurred in Dubov - Gabuzyan, Jermuk 201 1 , and in this position I found a nice plan for Black: 1 4 . . . b6!?N

14.aS!? This move has only been played once, but it presents an interesting challenge.

14 . . .fS !?N 14 ... Ei:bS?!N 1 5.'1Mfc2 f5 16.Ei:a3± Kostas Oreopoulos. 14 . . . b5!? 1 5 .axb6 '1Mfxb6 gave Black some counterplay in Kosteniuk - Cmilyte, Tbilisi (rapid) 20 12 , but the machines love White's position and Kosteniuk went on to win the game.

1 5 .'1Mf c2 b5 I 6.axb6 lllxb6f± The machine thinks White is a bit better,

but I think Black has enough counter-chances thanks to the strong knights and the slight weakness of the d5-pawn.

a b c d e f g h 14 ... f5

As is typical for this line, Black takes control over the e4-square and prepares a possible pawn march on the kingside.

15.ih2

15 ... b6 16.b3 ib7


This may not be the typical square for the bishop in the Benoni, but here the d5-pawn is slightly weaker than normal.

17.fllc4 V9e7 18.�acl Kaufman claimed a slight edge for White

after 1 8.�ab 1 , but it makes no difference, and after 1 8 . . . �f8! Black is ready to follow exactly the same plan as in the main line below. It is worth adding that 19.b4?! tllxc4 20.ibxc4 cxb4 2 l .�xb4 �ac8+ does not help White's cause.

a b c d e f g h 18 ... �fS!

The rook moves to support a future . . . f4 break, while making room for its twin to slide over to e8.

19.�fel �ae8 20.ig3 White does not have an active plan.

20 ... h5! Black continues to improve his position, so

in the game White felt compelled to simplify.

a b c d e f g h 21.ixe5 ixe5 22.fllxe5 V9xe5 23.ic4

Khairullin - Grigoryan, Rogaska Slatina 20 1 1 . Now the most accurate continuation would have been:

23 ... V9f6N= Making room for the knight to come to e5.

Black has a fine position.

Conclusion

7 . . . a6 leads to positions that are, on the whole, easier to handle than those from the previous chapter with 7 . . . ibg7. We saw that Black has no real problems in those lines in which he is allowed to play 8 . . . b5. The system with 8.a4, 9.h3 and 1 O.e3 is more interesting, but here too Black has a choice of playable lines, variation C2 with 1 O . . . �e8 being my personal preference.

Lines without e4 a b c d e f g h

Fianchetto System

Variation Index 1 .d4 ttJf6 2.c4 c5 3.dS e6 4.ttJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.ttJf3 g6 7.g3

7 ... fi.g7 8.fi.g2 0-0 9.0-0 A) 9 ... :B:e8 223 B) 9 ... a6 10.a4 ttJbd7 224

Bl) 1 1.fi.f4 224 B2) l l.e4 225 B3) I 1.ttJd2 :Bes 227

B31) 12.aS 228 B32) 12.ttJc4 229 B33) 12.h3 :B:bs 13.ttJc4 ttJeS 14.ttJa3 ttJhs 232

B331) 15.'itih2 234 B332) 15.e4 fi.d7 236

B332 1) 16.g4 236 B3322) 16.£4 237 B3323) 16.aS 238

B33231) 16 ... WfxaS 239 B33232) 16 ... bS 17.axh6 fi.h5 18.ttJaxbS axh5 19.ttJxbS Wfxb6 241

B332321) 20.ttJc3 242 B332322) 20.ttJa3 244


I .d4 fllf6 2.c4 c5 3.dS e6 4.lllc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.lllf3 g6 7.g3 ig7 8.ig2 0-0

After White castles we will reach the basic position for the Fianchetto System. White has a solid position on the kingside and his strategy is mainly preventative. Black has the freedom to choose different plans, depending on the style of the player. The main goal is to mobilize the queenside majority, but we will see in the main line that ifWhite prevents that, we can switch to kingside counterplay, often involving material sacrifices.

9.0-0 The Fianchetto System was recommended in

Boris Avrukh's popular Grandmaster Repertoire 2 - 1 .d4 Volume Two, which has led to it becoming particularly topical over the past few years.

The rare move order with 9.ctJd2 promises nothing good to White. 9 . . . ltJ bd7 1 0.ctJc4 ( 1 0.0-0 l:'i:e8 could soon lead to the main line) 1 0 . . . ctJ b6 l 1 .ctJe3 l:'i:e8 12 .0-0 ctJg4!

a b c d e f g h 1 3.ctJxg4 ( l 3.ctJc2 �d7 l 4.h3 ctJe5 l 5 .liih2 f5+±) 1 3 . . . �xg4 White invested a total of five tempos in the knight, only to see it exchanged. 14.h3 �d7 With . . . ttJc4 and . . . b5 on the agenda, Black was comfortably equal in Nigalidze - Pantsulaia, Tbilisi 2007.

s X�..tB ��·� 7 �·,,� ,, , ,/,� ,,y,., /,, , , , /,� ��-"0 �c/1----,�� 6 - v� �•, .t. � @/,�-�,, , , /,� /,, , , ,,� : llll•i JIB�B �%'"// �� ?3J-� 3 � � -tt:Jv� �?3J-w----- :� �?3J-0?"" %?3J,� 2 - �/tJW2;��tJJ;ffJ 1 ,_9 �v-��

a b c d e f g h Over the next few moves Black will usually

play . . . a6, . . . l:'i:e8 and . . . ctJbd7, and in most cases the same position will be reached. However, if White avoids the main line there are some independent possibilities. I do not have a strong preference between the different move orders, so I will present both A) 9 ••• l:'i:e8 and B) 9 ••• a6 and allow the reader to decide which he prefers.

Here is one example of a quirky treatment: 9 . . . ltJbd7 1 0.a4 h6!? ( 1 0 . . . a6 leads to line B, but in a recent game Nigel Short showed there is room for creativity even at this early stage of the game.) l l .'<.Wc2 '<.We7 12.l:'i:a3 A strange move. 12 . . . a6 1 3.ctJd2 l:'i:b8 14.a5 b5 1 5.axb6 ctJxb6 1 6.b3 ctJg4 1 7.�b2 f5=

8 ��.i.- ��·· 7 �-----Y-B�B _ _ _ _ Y,, 6 r.�.-----/�-�r� ,, ____ -�%� r� - --� ��7;, ,,f,��1. ,,,, �/ "//,/�� -� 3 m 8 � • t�

- ,Y,%' kfiliii\�� "'wMJ:/,�-� 2 �i§W 8 fc1�W� -----�- - - - -·f=''''

a b c d e f g h 1 8.e3 g5 19.l:'i:aa l �b7 20.l:'i:ael l:'i:be8 2 1 .h3 ctJe5 22.f4 ctJg6 23.liih2 gxf4 24.gxf4 liih7

Chapter 1 7 - Fianchetto System 223

25 .lllc4 lllxc4 26.bxc4 i.c8 27.!'l:f3 !'l:g8 28.2"!'.gl i.f6 29.i.h 1 ? Allowing a nice tactic.

A) 9 . .. �e8

a b c d e f g h This has been the choice of many of the

world's top players, and is directed against the following move:

IO.i.f4

A good alternative is 1 0 . . . llla6 1 1 .2"!'.el i.g4 when Black manages to develop all his pieces comfortably. 1 2.iWb3 b5!? 1 3.lllxb5 !'l:b8 1 4.iWa4 iWd7 1 5.iWxa6 !'l:xb5 1 6.iWxd6 iWxd6 l 7.i.xd6 llle4+± Black has a lot of activity.

a b c d e f g h 1 8.i.c7?! ( 1 8.i.e5!N i.xe5 1 9.ctJxe5 !'l:xe5 20.f3 would have maintained the balance.) l 8 . . . E!:xb2+ Grischuk - Gashimov, Nice 20 1 0.

The more common 1 0.llld2 a6 l l .a4 lllbd7 13.a3 transposes to the main line B3. Another idea is:

1 3.b3 10 . • . lt:Je4!? Instead of playing to win the exchange,

This implies an exchange sacrifice. White offers a sacrifice of his own!


1 3 . . . i.xal 14 .�xal

� ?,� ,, � � 8 ��:.t.� �·� 7 ,(i•, '/ ···· 6 • '/ . -·� 5 � ,,,Jll?i• • 4 �� • � � 3 �zl?i. ., ,,, ,� 2 {2,. � l?i '�:f� 1 � - ' -jf� ,,,

a b c d e f g h 1 4 . . . :r::lxf4!

The bishop is too strong and our rook was in trouble anyway.

1 5 .gxf4 llld7 1 6.tt:le4 1 6.�c3 Leitao - Rocha, Sao Paulo 20 1 1 . 1 6 . . . b5!N=

1 6 . . . �e7 17 .:r::lel 17 ·:r::lc l !? b6 1 8.:r::\c3 tt:lf6 1 9 .:r::le3 tt:lxe4 20.i.xe4 �d8 2 1 .:r::lg3 f5 ! 22.i.d3 i.d7 followed by . . . �e7 and . . . b5 seems okay.

1 7 . . . b6 1 8.�c3 i.b7 1 9.�d2 :r::le8 20.f5 tt:lf6 Black was fine in Akesson - Brynell, Swedish

League 2005.

a b c d e f g h 13 ... �xf4!

This is the right way to give up an exchange. Instead 1 3 . . . :r::lxb2 1 4.tt:lc4 :r::lb6 1 5 .tt:lxb6 axb6 16 .:r::\a2 b5 ( 1 6 . . . i.d7!?) 1 7.�d2 tt:la6 1 8.:r::lb l

tt:lc7 l 9.e4 was somewhat better for White in Moiseenko - Miroshnichenko, Kharkov 2009.

I4.gxf4 ixb2 I5.�a2 1 5 .:r::\b l i.xa3 allows Black to claim a second

extra pawn.

I5 ... ig7iii With a pawn for the exchange and a mighty

dark-squared bishop, Black was not worse in Alburt - Peters, South Bend 198 1 .

B) 9 ... a6 IO.a4 'libd7

From here we will analyse the sidelines BI) I I .if4 and B2) I I .e4, followed by the main line B3) I l.CLJd2.

BI) l l .if4

s %�B%.tE, �-·� 1 �,iU'Ja)Ui�i 6 iU � '�fi%� 5 m, •2ru/,, ,,, ,u 4 8 • . • "• � 3 B% '/ � UCZJ'8 2 ,,,,, ,U U8 ,dJt'� 1 �� -��'�l�/,,,,,

a b c d e f g h �i�h this move White avoids the sharpest vanauons and just plays normal and solid moves in the centre. Black does not have the same antidote as in the previous line, but even so he has nothing to fear.

I l . .. �e7 This line is the most popular nowadays

although I think l l . . .�c7 is also fine. One example continued: 1 2.:r::lc l :r::le8 1 3 .b4 lllh5 1 4.i.d2 b6 1 5 .:r::le l lt:Jhf6 1 6.h3 i.b7= Glejzerov - Oleksienko, Romania 2008.


12.h3 �b8 13.e4 Here is another line where White gets

nowhere: 1 3.�bl lllh5 14 .�g5 f6 1 5 .�d2 f5 1 6.�g5 �e8 17.�cl llle5= Grigorov -Miroshnichenko, Greece 2009.

a b c d e f g h 13 ... bS

The solid 1 3 . . . llleS 1 4.�el f6 is also playable, but generally I don't like to block the g7-bishop. 1 5 .llld2 llle5 1 6.�e2 lllc7 17 .�e3 b5 1 8.f4 Ganguly - Naiditsch, Melilla 20 1 1 . Now the most logical continuation is:

a b c d e f g h 1 8 . . . lllf7N 1 9.axb5 axb5 20.lllb3 b4 2 1 .llla4 The position is double-edged, but Black cannot be entirely happy with the pawn on f6.

14.axbS axb5 15.�el tlie8 16.Wfe2 b4 17.tlibs �b6

a b c d e f g h The knight on b5 can avoid immediate

capture, but it remains in an odd position.

18.tlia7 i.b7f! With mutual chances, De Morais - Coelho,

corr. 1 993.

B2) 1 1 .e4

a b c d e f g h A rare move. Now White will not have time

to transfer his knight to c4.

1 1 ... �e8 12.�el 12 .llld2 llle5 13 .�c2 lllh5 1 4.h3 f5 can

be compared with the main line B33. Here the presence of the knight on d2 is a big disappointment for the bishop on c l .


a b c d e f g h l 5 .f4? ( l 5 .exf5 i.xf5 16.ltJde4 ltJf6=) l 5 . . . ctJxg3 l 6.fXe5 ctJxfl 17.ctJxfl i.xe5+ Milicevic - Gerzhoy, Toronto 2006.

12 ... c4!? This dynamic move implies a pawn sacrifice.

Black can of course choose a more solid move, but I believe in his chances. White must try to capture the brave pawn, otherwise Black will get an easy game after . . . ctJc5.

13.ifl 1 3.�e2 ctJc5 14.�xc4?

White can try a counter-sacrifice with 1 4.ltJd2!? ltJd3 1 5 .ctJxc4 ctJxe l 1 6.�xe l�.

a b c d e f g h 14 . . . b5!

This simple but pleasing move releases the dynamic energy in Black's position.

1 5 .axb5!?N The best chance to trick the opponent. 1 5 .�a2 b4+

1 5 .�fl b4 1 6.e5 dxe5 17.ctJe2 ctJb3-+ Doi - Faber, corr. 1995 .

1 5 . . . axb5 1 6.�xc5

8 .i�.i.�.i �·-7 �fmi)mlBt %%� %%�.r'l,; %%%'"/,;("'"%� 6 · � w� aY i � �� ,,, , ,%� /,,,,,;� %

: f ll Ti!ll ll• �%'"//, �� ref'� 3 � � �tZJw� ��-ef"""� ��-:¥'"'\� -� 2 , , , ,J�%''l,; �%""!��-!�' 1 � �w�mil,� a b c d e f g h

13 ... '1Wc7 14.\Wd4 The more patient 1 4.h3 b6 1 5 .�d4 was

played in Steckner - Kopp, corr. 1987, and here Black should have continued developing with l 5 . . . i.b7N. From here play may continue: 1 6.�xc4 �xc4 l 7.i.xc4 ctJc5 l 8.ctJd2 ltJfd7 1 9. 'iiig2 :B:ac8t Black has full compensation and White has a problem with the bishop on c l .

14 ... lllc5 15.'1Wxc4 ig4


16 ... llJfd7 17.Wa2N I think White should aim to improve on

1 7.:1:'i:e3 �h5 1 8.Wb4 llle5 1 9.h3 as played in Alvarez Villar - Esses, e-mail 1 997, after which 1 9 . . . g5N� would have maintained a good position for Black. The positioning of the white pieces seems distinctly odd to me.

17 ... f5 17 . . . llle5 is also fine, for instance: 1 8.:1:'i:e3

�d7 1 9.h3 f5�

18.h3 J.hS;J; Almost all the white pieces are sitting less

than prettily, so I think Black is fine.

B3) I I.llJd2

This is the main line. White wants to put the knight on c4 and then push his pawns in the centre.

1 1 .. J!:es Now there is B31) 12.aS, B32) 12.llJc4,

and the main line B33) 12.h3.

Instead 12.:1:'i:bl aims for a rapid b2-b4, but 12 . . . lllh5! puts paid to that idea. Here is a nice example of Black's chances: 1 3.:§:el llle5 1 4.Wc2 f5 1 5 .e3 c4 1 6.�fl

a b c d e f g h 1 6 . . . llld3! 17.�xd3 cxd3 1 8.Wxd3 f4! Black


had a strong initiative for the pawn in Leong -Palliser, York 2009.

B31) 12.a5

13.axb6 llJxb6 14.llJb3 Another option is:

1 4.e4 Black is fine here, since his knight controls the c4-square and he is free to develop the remaining pieces.

1 4 . . . Ei:b8 The less common 14 ... aS also leads to a good position. 1 5 .�c2 a4 1 6.h3 ia6 17.Ei:d l ltJfd7 Black has made all the normal moves here. 1 8 .ifl ixfl 1 9.Ei:xfl This was Ilincic - I. Rajlich, Budapest 2006, and now after l 9 . . . c4N 20.lLidb 1 (20.ctJxa4 ctJcS 2 l .ctJxb6 Ei:xal 22.lLibxc4 �e7+) 20 . . . lLicS 2 1 .ie3 lLib3 22.Ei:a3 id4= Black has a comfortable position.

1 5 .�c2 Now we have to decide where to put the knight.

1 5 . . . lLig4!?

There is also 15 . . . ltJfd7 with the same ideas as in the previous line. 1 6.ctJdl aS 17.ctJe3 ia6 1 8.Ei:d 1 a4= Soppe - Hoffman, Buenos Aires 1 998.

1 6.h3 ctJe5

a b c d e f g h 17.f4

White preferred the more patient 17.ctJdl in Baburin - J. Cobb, Birmingham 200 1 . Here I would suggest 1 7 . . . aS!?N l 8.f4 ltJed7 1 9.'iiih2 ia6= with good chances for Black.

17 . . . ctJec4 1 8.ctJf3 fSt Black obtained good play in Willsch -

Heller, Schleswig Holstein 1 99 1 , and several subsequent games.

8

7

6

5

4

3 2

a b c d e f g h 14 ... if5

This is the most interesting continuation and it leads to a complex game.


It is important to mention that Black has a solid equalizing option: 14 . . . tt:lc4 1 5 .Ela4 tt:lb6 l 6.Ela2 tt:lc4= Black offers a move repetition. White does not have to accept it, but he gains no advantage from declining, for instance: l 7.�d3 Elb8 18 .�xc4 Elb4 1 9.�d3 Elxb3= Redolfi -Mulder van Leens Dijkstra, corr. 1987.

15.f3 1 5 .ctJa5 tt:le4 1 6.Ela3 occurred in Stempin

- Nowak, Poznan 1 997, and now after 1 6 . . . �d7N+± Black's pieces are well placed and he has no problems.

15 ... l2Jc4 16.e4 id7 Note the usefulness of the knight on c4 in

preventing the white knight from going to a5 . The young Italian GM Sabino Brunello has reached this position three times with White but has failed to achieve anything special.

17 ... aS 18.ifl l2Je5 19.t2Jd2 ttJh5 20.ie2 f5 21.f4 l2Jg4

This natural move forces White to exchange a valuable bishop.

The more adventurous 2 1 . . .fxe4!?N is also possible, for instance: 22.tt:ldxe4 tt:lf7 23.�xh5 gxh5 24.�xh5 ii.d400

23 .. . id4t 24.<iig2 ttJf6i White had to work hard for the draw in

Brunello - Rotstein, Brescia 2009.

B32) 12.ttJc4

With this move White tries to save a tempo by omitting h2-h3, but this policy may easily backfire.


12 ... ttJes Black proceeds analogously to the main line.

13.tiJa3 This ambitious move is riskier for White

than for Black.

Objectively White should probably exchange knights: l 3.'2ixe5 Elxe5

Black is practically assured of equality here, but he is unlikely to achieve much more. The knight exchange should generally favour the side with less space, especially when it means eliminating the powerful knight on c4.

1 4.e4 1 4.�f4 .Ele8 1 5 .'1Wc2 also leaves Black with a few good options. One noteworthy game continued: 1 5 . . . '2ig4 1 6.Elab l '1Wc7 17.h3 '2ie5 1 8 .'2ie4 �f5

8 .i ,��mi�rJ �It 1 �· �er� �·�· 6 .%.,, ,/.� /-.-�r• 5 ��-��1-4 tr.-----"-2:ZS'm 0,•

�� rfl'�{f-3 �rfi-0 •� arfl_Jfl:i 2 �'ii- [j ��it,� 1 -,��a:m

a b c d e f g h Black was comfortable and after 1 9 .g4 �xe4 20.�xe4 b5 2 1 .b4? c4+ he had a big advantage in Arkell - Vallejo Pons, Rijeka 20 1 0.

1 4 . . . Ele8 1 5 .h3 l 5 ,�f4 Elb8 16.a5 is well met by 1 6 . . . bS! 1 7.axb6 Elxb6 1 8 .'1Wc2 '2ig4 1 9 .h3 '2ie5. The b2-pawn was weak and White was left without a truly promising plan in D. Fernandez - Kacheishvili, Orlando 20 1 1 .

1 5 . . . Elb8 1 6.'1Wd3

1 6.Elb 1 was played in Palliser - Richardson, Birmingham 200 1 , and now after 1 6 . . . bSN 17 .axb5 axb5 1 8.b4 '2id7! Black has nothing to worry about.

1 6 . . . '2id7 17.�e3 f5 1 8 .'IWc2 ctJf6 19 .exf5 �xf5 20.iWd2

Kempinski - Istratescu, Plovdiv 2008. Here I found a modest improvement:

a b c d e f g h 20 . . . '1Wd7!N

Based on the following point: 2 1 .g4 '2ie4+

8 .i� .i.�.i�·� /, �� ,,,, ,/,� ��-� 7 � ·- - · � · 6 · � - -· � 5 "

�•«�r• � 1m

4 !-.� 'B" '•�• 3 -��-�� -� .. , .. 1�rJ----,1� ��,/-- ,��,� � Jldi/f;f

a b c d e f g h 13 ... tiJhS 14.h3

In most games White has felt the need to cover the g4-square anyway, but now the problem becomes apparent: Black is by no means forced to transpose to the main line by putting his rook on b8.

Chapter 1 7 - Fianchetto System 23 1

Here is another nice line illustrating Black's resources: 1 4.e4 f5 l 5 .h3 b5! Black has managed to open the whole board, while conveniently taking advantage of the rook's position on a8 instead of b8. l 6.axb5 axb5 l 7 .CLlcxb5 �a6 l 8.�d2

. , � i)� 8 :i ��tji�;r� � ��.��,� �w.-ef' ,,,;:;,, "//, �/, s �tLJr� !'!J � 1. �� . . .. /,�,,E,� �� : f!j��d ,,, . . ,�./ �m/ ��-<:d'· "-/,� 2 w� � W�il� 1 � . .. /,.,v•:=

a b c d e f g h l 8 . . . fXe4!N ( l 8 . . . '®b6 is also excellent and led to an eventual victory in Ogloblin -Obukhov, Alushta 2004, but the text move is even stronger.) 1 9.:ge l '®b8! 20.CLlc3 CLld3 2 l .:gxe4 :gf8! White's position is on the verge of collapse.

14 ... f5! 14 .. . :gbs 1 5 .e4 �d7 leads to the main line,

but from this position Black can do better.

15.f4?! This is not the best move, but I want to

highlight an important improvement over the existing games. Here are a few other examples:

l 5 .e4 b5! gives Black excellent play, while once again highlighting the usefulness of the rook on a8.

1 5. ii>h2 This has been White's most popular choice. He wants to play f2-f4, but Black has a convincing answer.

l 5 . . .f4! 1 5 . . . g5!? intending l 6.e4 g4 is also promising,

but the text move is even more convincing. Soon White may regret the decision not to exchange the powerful knight on e5 .

1 6.�xf4? This loses practically by force, but the situation is already bleak for White: 1 6.�f3 occurred in Cocconcelli - Sipos, Lugano 20 1 2, and now 1 6 . . . fXg3t l 7.fXg3 b5! gives Black a huge advantage across the board. 1 6.gxf4N '®h4! l 7.e3 �g4-+ 1 6.e3N fXg3t 17.fXg3 b5!+ 1 8.axb5? axb5 19.CLlcxb5 '®g5-+

1 6 . . . lllxf4 17.gxf4 '®h4! 1 8.e3 �g4 19 .f3

� :i,��1�e 6 !��.��1'.t�

///, �///,'ef"""/,'"//, �� 5 . ��!'!J� • 4 :� . . -�., . .. . �rst 3 r:J�o/f!J�Wfiti"8ti /,,, , , ;

�,,.,,;�7,,.,.%.

l� � �- -%�1�t-"' '

a b c d e f g h 1 9 . . . lt:lxf3t! 20.:gxf3 :gxe3 2 1 .:gxe3 �xdl 22.CLlxdl '®xf4t 23.ii>hl

Gonzalez Perez - Aroshidze, Barbera de! Valles 201 1 . Here the easiest way to secure victory would have been:

23 . . . �e5N-+


8 1.�.t.iif 1.m•m {@� ;;,, ,,�� {@�-�� : T��.�.T� 5 �-�r� •� '11 4 !� ,� , -� • . ,,//, �,,,.,,/;! �� ;;,,,,/,�::;:rjW� 3 � � � �£9 8 2 ,, , _ _ _ ,� __ _ _ _ ;m8mi:� , , , ,,z ,, , , ;-;� ·0 �� -� 1 � �°iV� M�

a b c d e f g h 15 ... ltJxg3!N

It is strange that nobody has played this thematic sacrifice.

l 5 . . . tllf7 is, to be fair, also not bad. One example continued: 1 6.'tt>h2?! ( 1 6.'We l il.d?+) 16 . . . bS!+ 1 7.axb5? axb5 1 8.CLlcxbS il.a6 19.Ei:b l 'Wd7 20.CLlc3 il.xc3 2 1 .bxc3 il.xe2-+ Tuhrim - Can, Rethymnon 201 1 .

16.fxeS tiJxfl 17.'Wxfl bS! Yet again we see this move. It is important to

open more files and diagonals.

a b c d e f g h 18.axbS

1 8.e6 b4 19 .tllc4 bxc3 20.bxc3 a5! The strong knight must be destroyed! (20 . . . il.xc3?! 2 1 .il.f4 il.xal 22.'Wxal�) 2 1 .il.f4 il.f8 22.e4 il.a6+

18 ... axbS 19.ltJcxbS i.xe5 20.i.f4

21 .i.xeS �xe5 22.tiJc3 �b8+ Material is approximately even, but Black's

superior coordination makes him the dear favourite.

B33) 12.h3

a b c d e f g h Finally we arrive at the main line. With the

black knight heading for e5 at some point, it is useful for White to take the g4-square under control in advance.


12 ... �b8 It is too early to put the knight on e5, so

Black needs a waiting move of sorts, and this is the most purposeful one available.

13.tiJc4 Black was threatening . . . b5, so White's

choices are limited.

1 3 .aS This is not dangerous for Black.

1 3 . . . bS 14 .axb6 li:lxb6 1 5 .e4 1 5 .'1Wc2 a5 1 6.l:l:d l a4 1 7.e4 �a6=

l 5 . . . li:lfd7

a b c d e f g h 1 6.f4?!

This has been the most popular move but it is not a good one. 16 .Wc2 Wc7 1 7.li:ldl c4 1 8.li:le3 li:le5 19 .l:l:a3 Wc5= V. Alterman - Yudasin, Haifa 1 993.

16 . . . c4+ 17.li:la4 li:lxa4 1 8 .l:l:xa4 li:lc5 There are too many weaknesses in the white camp.

a b c d e f g h

19 .l:l:a3 19 .l:l:xc4 a5 20.eS �a6 (20 . . . Wb6 2 1 .l:l:c2! li:le4t 22.'tt>h2 li:lxd2 23.�xd2 dxe5=) 21 .l:l:xcS �xfl 22.�xfl dxc5+

1 9 . . . l:l:b4 20.Wc2 �d7+ With the following point:

2 1 .li:lxc4? �b5 22.b3 li:lxb3! 23.l:l:xb3 Now in A. Mohamed - Forster, Duisburg 1992, Black overlooked a simple win.

23 . . . �a4N-+

a b c d e f g h 13 ... ltJeS

The other main line is 1 3 . . . li:lb6 1 4.li:la3 �d7 1 5 .aS li:lc8, with a solid but somewhat passive position for Black. I prefer the text move as it is much more active.

14.ltJa3 As usual, 1 4.li:lxeS l:l:xe5 does nothing to

challenge the black position, so I will not discuss it other than by giving a few more moves from a recent game: 1 5 .�f4 l:l:e8 1 6.aS b5 17.axb6 l:l:xb6= Michalik - Antoniewski, Slovakia 20 1 1 .

14 ... ltJhS The second member of the black cavalry

enters the battlefield! Without this the previous move would make no sense, as the knight would have been driven back by f2-f4.


After the text move Black's main plan is to play .. .f5 and attack on the kingside. Here White sometimes plays B331) 15.@h2 but the main line is B332) 15.e4.

l 5 .f4? can be refuted as follows: l 5 .. . '2ixg3 1 6.fxe5 i.xe5 1 7.'2ic4 ( 17.l"i:f2N \Wh4�) l 7 . . . i.xc3 l 8.bxc3

B331) 15.@h2

15 .. . fS This is the main move, but there is an

intriguing alternative: l 5 . . . g5! ?

Black's idea i s to discourage f2-f4, thus

enabling his knight to remain on e5, which will in turn keep the white one tied back on a3.

l 6.f4? The obvious question is: what happens if White stubbornly tries to remove the knight anyway? 1 6. ctJ c2 occurred in L. Szabo - Christiansen, Hastings 1 98 1 , and here I like the look of: l 6 . . . \Wf6!N l 7.'2ie3 (l 7.f4? gxf4 l 8.gxf4? [ 1 8.i.xf4 '.Wg6+] 18 .. . \Wg6-+) l 7 .. . \Wg6 1 8.'.Wc2 f5 1 9.i.d2 ms+ Maybe White's best is 16.e4N g4 l 7.f4 (or l 7.hxg4!?N i.xg4 1 8.f3 i.d7 1 9.i.h3f!) l 7 . . . '2ig6 1 8.\Wd3 with unclear play, Skjoldager - Rydell, Helsingor 20 1 2.

l 6 . . . gxf4 l 7.gxf4?? The lesser evil is l 6.i.xf4 as played in Sisak -Marusak, Bratislava 1 99 1 , but in that game Black obtained a clear positional advantage after eliminating the bishop on f4.

16.f4 The following line shows the importance of

blocking the f-pawn: 1 6.e4?! f4!

Boris Gelfand once exchanged on e4, but


the text move is much stronger. l 7.gxf4

I also considered l 7.�xf4 lllxf4 1 8.gxf4 '®h4! and now 19.fxe5 'Wf4t 20.'tt>g l �xe5 2 1 .l"i:e l Ei:f8 or 1 9.llle2 lllf3t! and Black wins in both cases.

1 7 . . . '®h4!

l 8.llle2 There is also no joy for White after: 1 8.fxe5 �xe5t 1 9.f4 ( 1 9.'tt>g l ? �xh3 20.'®d3 �xg2 2 1 .'tt>xg2 '®g4t 22.'tt>h l l"i:f8! sees the black rook joining the attack with decisive effect.) 1 9 . . . '®g3t 20.'tt>h l �xh3 2 1 .'Wf3 �xg2t 22.'®xg2 '®h4t 23.'tt>g l �d4t 24.l"i:f2 l/Jxf4 Black will emerge with a clearly better endgame.

8 �� .i �· , , , v,� ,,,,,/,� 0�% 7 ��A�� 6 • � �� m i � �-��',,.:� i s �� -- -r.��w�� 4 �- • /��

3 � %mi¥� j_�� 2 '------u----- -�!� ---%w 1 -

---- %-_,,,,%

��-,, ,,

a b c d e f g h 20 . . . b5 ! 2 l .axb5 axb5 22.l/Jcxb5 llle4 Black's strong pawn sacrifice enabled him to coordinate his pieces to good effect in Evdokimov - Ponkratov, Belgorod 2008.


17 ... ttJf6 Another idea is 17 . . . b6 1 8 . e4 ctJ f6 as in

Cuevas Rodriguez - Marin, Andorra 1 997.

18.'!Wc2 �d7 19.a5 �bS 20.ltJb6 '!Wc7 21.E:el E:e7 22.�d2 E:be8=

Barmbold - Philippe, Germany 2007.

B332) 1 5.e4

This is the main line and by far the most popular move. White wants to stop . . . f5 .

1 5 ... �d7 Leaving both knights in danger, but

completing development and preparing to launch the b-pawn. 1 5 . . . i"i:f8 16.�h2 f5 17 .f4 b5 is another possibility, but I consider it much more risky for Black.

Now we have another division between B3321) 16.g4, B3322) 16.f4 and B3323) 16.aS.

1 6.'2ie2?! is feeble: 16 . . . b5 17.f4?! ( 1 7.g4 '2if6 1 8.'1Wc2 c4 19.axb5 axb5+ 20.'2id4? '2id3 2 l .�e3 '2ixe4-+ Zatonskih - Kacheishvili, Gibraltar 20 1 1 .) 17 . . . b4 1 8 .ctJb l '2lc4+

a b c d e f g h 1 9.'1Wb3?! '2ia5 20.'1Wf3 f5 with a monstrous initiative for Black in Hossain - Narayanan, Delhi 2010.

B3321) 16.g4

8 �� i.�·� 7 ••"•:f•!mA 6 · - m -� · � � �/, '0/, , , ,/,/, '"//, �� 5 - � b � �'11 4 :a,,,,�•7s;m :� 3 � � � � b 2 "' � .�.!�

/, , , , ,�" " "�/';( �-"""�::-;�� 1 � �V�.a'.� a b c d e f g h

16 ... bS!? I prefer this counterattacking move,

although 1 6 . . . '2if6 is also playable: 1 7.g5 '2ih5 1 8 .f4 Okay the knight is trapped, but don't worry! 1 8 . . . b5 1 9.fxe5 b4

s � a.1�•� - -- -"�

,,, ,/,�

��,v� 7 ��,�� 6 ,. J.1 ., 5 � � [j � �I.Al 4 �------%·-�/,-, ,,,/,�

"'/,?""%z·"'Z �� 3 � � • • [j 2 /,, , , , ;�- - - - -. �-:� " ,,7,,,,z�p-0 �� 0 1 -� �ii� :� a b c d e f g h

20.'2lc4N (20.'1Wf3? bxa3! It is important to eliminate the knight that could otherwise have gone to c4. 2 1 .i"i:xa3 �xe5 22.'1Wxf7t �h8+ Porat - Dobrowolski, Pardubice 2008.) 20 ... bxc3 2 1 .bxc3 dxe500

17.axbS Prudent, unlike 17.gxh5?! b4 1 8 .'1We2 bxa3

19.i"i:xa3 c4 which gave Black excellent play for his pawn in M. Kraemer - Maslik, Austria 2010.


l 7 ... axb5 18.tllcxb5 hb5 19.tllxb5 E:xb5 20.gxh5 '!Wb6ii5

8 - ��-·-7 - · · · ·� _,., 6 %� �-�-,,�� 5 -�-8%�� 8 4 !&iii� "� CA� �� 3 .�.�.�- 8

�/'l,; � %i''l,; ��%� 2 �£9 - if[g JL � ,�[_,,/,��-��o/i/� 1 /� � '§ � § � a b c d e f g h

21.E:a2 E:b3 22.h6 Alternatively after 22.h4 li:ld3 23.�e3! l:l:xb2

24.Ei:xb2 li:lxb2 25 .'1Mie2 li:la4 26.'!Wg4 White drummed up just enough counterplay to maintain the balance in Mikheev - I. Brooks, corr. 2007.

22 ... �f6 23.�d2 E:xb2= Murden - Lambert, e-mail 2003.

B3322) 16.f4

16 ... tllxg3 17.fxeS �xeS 18.E:fl There are two noteworthy alternatives:

1 8 .li:lc4 �d4t

1 9.l:l:f2 1 9.ii>h2 li:lxfl t 20.'IMixfl b5+ 2 1 .li:lxd6? �e5t 22.�f4 '\Mif6-+ Kuligowski - Levitt, Germany 1 987. I could not find games with 19 .�e3N. My computer thinks it is the best chance for White, but Black should still be more than happy. 1 9 . . . b5 20.axb5 axb5 (Another good line is: 20 . . . li:lxfl 2 1 .'\Mixfl �xe3t 22.li:lxe3 axb5+) 2 1 .�xd4 cxd4 22.li:lxd6 dxc3 23.li:lxeS li:lxfl 24.'\Mixfl '1Mib6t 25.ii>hl Ei:xe8 26.bxc3 Ei:c8+ Black has the more comfortable position.

a b c d e f g h 1 9 . . . �xf2t 20.ii>xf2 '1Mih4 2 1 .ii>gl li:lxe4 22.li:lxe4 Ei:xe4 23.�xe4 '1Mixe4 24.'\Mifl

This was Medvegy - Sax, Hungary 2006,


and here Black could have capitalized on his advantage with:

a b c d e f g h 24 .. .'1Wxd5N 25 .�f4 �xh3 26.'Wxh3 'Wxc4+

Black has too many pawns in this endgame.

l 8.Elf3 This was played in a game that I had the opportunity to witness from a short distance.

1 8 . . . b5 1 9.axb5 axb5 20.�e3 ? 20.li:laxb5N is better although 20 . . . 'Wh4!� still favours Black. (But note that 20 . . . �xb5? should be avoided due to 2 1 .li:lxb5 Elxb5 22.Elxg3 �xg3 23.'Wd3±.)

a b c d e f g h 20 . . . f5 ! 2 1 .Elxg3?!

This does not help, but White's position is bad after other moves too.

2 1 . . . �xg3-+ Berg - Hoyos, Tromso 2010 .

18 ... bS

Once again Black's initiative extends across the entire board. I believe he has, as a bare minimum, enough compensation for the knight.

1 8 . . . �xc3!?N 19.bxc3 li:lxe4 20.Elf3 b5 2 1 . axb5 axb5 22.li:lc2 f5= is a playable alternative, but the text move is more thematic.

19.'ll*ff3 f5 20.exfS Here it was necessary to improve on Black's

play in the game Maletin - Vocaturo, Balaguer 20 1 0.

21.axbS axb5 22.llJc2 'll*f e7 23.�f4 b4 Black's counterplay across the board gives

him sufficient compensation for the material investment. A possible continuation is:

24.llJe4 ix.b2 25.E:el 'll*lg7 26.llJxd6 E:xel t 27.llJxel ms 28.llJxfS E:xf5t

B3323) 16.aS


a b c d e f g h This is the most popular move, and Avrukh's

recommendation. Here I would like to present two contrasting approaches for Black: B33231) 16 ... �xaS and B33232) 16 ... bS.

B33231) 16 ... �xaS

This may lead to heavy complications.

17.g4 llJf6 18.f4 1 8.g5 does not seem to be an improvement:

1 8 . . . lllh5 l 9.f4 'Llc4 20.'Llxc4 Wxal 2 l .CLlxd6 �xc3 22.bxc3 °1Wxc3 Black had at least equal chances in Avrukh - Kamsky, KhantyMansiysk 2007, and several subsequent games.

a b c d e f g h 18 ... lDexg4! 19.hxg4 llJxg4

Black has three pawns for a piece, and the more reliable pawn structure. White has tried a few moves, but his only really dangerous approach is to start an attack.

20.fS! llJeS! I like this move the most.

20 . . . �d4t?! 2 1 .<;tihl tt'lf2t 22.:E'i:xf2 �xf2 23 .�g5 is dangerous for Black.

It is worth mentioning a high-level game: 20 . . . h5!? I prefer the main-line move, but this alternative is certainly playable. 2 1 .�g5 Wb4 22.f6 �h8 23.°1Wd2 (Perhaps White could try to improve here; 23 .CLla2!? is one possibility.) 23 . . . Wd4t 24.Wxd4 cxd4 25.'Lle2 :E'i:e5

a b c d e f g h 26.�h4? (26.�f4N �xf6�) 26 . . . 'Lle3 27.'Llxd4 'Llxg2 28.<;tixg2 :E'i:xe4+ Sasikiran - Anand, Bastia 20 1 1 .


21.f6 Avrukh proposed this move, and it was later

tested in a few games.

21 ...ihs 22.igS �d8 23.lDc2 h5! Avrukh gave the line 23 ... h6 24.�h4 g5

25.�g3 �xf6 26.tlle3± which indeed looks promising for White. Black has freed his darksquared bishop, but in the process he has permanently weakened his kingside.

The text move is more ambitious, and just a better move all round. Black leaves his bishop buried on h8 for the time being, having confidence that a suitable opportunity will arise to free this piece later in the game. Meanwhile he sets his queenside pawns in motion and challenges White to find a good plan.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 a b c d e f g h

24.h4!?N White needs to do something about

the queenside pawn roller. The following two examples highlight the need for an improvement.

24.tlle3?! b4 25.tlle2 h6 26.�h4 (26.�xh6 �xf6 also favours Black.) 26 . . . a5 27.tllc l c4 28.Wd2 a4 Black was in full control and White already felt compelled to resign in Claridge -Catt, corr. 20 1 0.

24.:E'i:xa6 b4 25.tlle2 �b5 26.:E'i:al :E'i:a8 was also promising for Black in Mareco - Flores, Moron 20 1 2.

25.llJxb4 a5 26.llJc6 llJxc6 27.dxc6 ixc6 28.llJdS ixd5 29.exdS

Black has four pawns for a piece, but for the time being the bishop on h8 is incarcerated. Still, Black will always have ways to free it, for instance by playing . . . h6 or . . . :E'i:e5 at the right moment. The continuation might be:


29 ... 1Wb6t 30.�h2 b4 31 .icl b3 It is hard to give a definitive evaluation,

but I would say Black is, at the very least, not worse. It is not easy for White to restrain the queeµside pawns while also keeping the f6-pawn secure.

B33232) 16 ... b5

17.axb6 ib5 Black offers a pawn in the spirit of the Benko

Gambit. In return he will obtain pressure along the b-file plus the use of the d7-square for his knights .

l 7 . . . !'l:xb6!? This is a playable alternative, especially if Black is happy with a draw.

1 8 .g4 1 8.f4 'llxg3 1 9.!'l:f2 !'l:b4 20.fXe5 ixe5 2 1 .'llc2 occurred in Dziuba - Iordachescu, Bratto 20 1 0, and here I suggest 2 1 . . .1Wh4!N 22.'llxb4 cxb4 23.'lle2 ixh3 when Black's attack fully compensates for the material deficit.

8 • -.i �· : !��·�� , , ,;:, /,.,,,;, � ·� s � m 8 11Y � /& � ' "" ,,_ , , �.....i 4 • · 8 · 8-� 3 � m � � 8 , , , ._ ,,?""

��

�- �'

2 � � ��ii.� ,� - -"�la:� a b c d e f g h

1 8 . . . 1Wh4! 1 9.gxh5 1 9.!'l:el ? ixg4 20.hxg4 'llxg4 2 1 .1Wf3 'llh2 Payen - Sanglan, Avoine 2004. 2 1 . . . id4N-+

1 9 . . . ixh3 20.hxg6 If White wishes to keep the game going then the critical continuation is: 20 .1We2 'llg4 (Black cannot proceed as in the main line below, as there will be no queen check on h6. 20 .. .f5 ! ? could be considered though.) 2 1 .1Wf3 ixg2 22.1Wxg2 ie5 23.!'l:el (23.!'l:d l ? ixc3 24.bxc3 'llxf2!-+) 23 . . . 'llxf2! 24.\Wxf2 ig3 25 .Wg2 ixe l 26.ig5 !'l:xb2! 27.ixh4 !'l:xg2t 28.©xg2 ixc3 My machine thinks Black should be okay in this endgame, but plenty of play remains.

20 . . . hxg6 2 1 .1We2

a b c d e f g h 2 1 . . .!'l:xb2!! 22.ixb2 ixg2 23.©xg2 1Wg5t 24.©h3 \Wh6t=

Let's return to the main line.


18 ... axh5 19.Cllxb5 '?Nxb6 From here White has tried both possible

knight retreats: B332321) 20.Clld and B332322) 20.Clla3.

B332321) 20.Clld

a b c d e f g h 20 ... Cllc4

This move is active, although Black should rake care as the knight could be a little bit unstable here. The alternatives are worth checking:

Compared with line B332322 below, White's knight on c3 supports e4 and blocks the long diagonal, therefore 20 . . . '®b3 no longer seems quite so purposeful . Nevertheless I suspect it's still fully playable, with, for example, 2 l .g4!? lllf6 22.f4 tt::lc4 23.Wxb3 Ei:xb3 24.Ei:f2 llld7 giving Black continued queenside pressure.

20 . . . c4!? seems like a valid alternative, with the idea of planting the knight on d3 where it dominates the centre. 2 1 .g4 tt::lf6 22.Ei:a2 tt::ld3 23.'®e2

a b c d e f g h 23 . . . llld?!t Skrbin - Saric, Pula 20 1 1 .

8 �� -�-·� : • ... .-�,� • 'mJ '� �� i!1l!J : �.:-1if.�a 3 � ID B ft� 2 "U" • i!11}j�!(f� 1 ,�--- - %ml•1'

a b c d e f g h 21.'?Ne2

Against 2 l .Ei:a2 Black has a nice improvement in 2 1 . . .j,d4! ensuring that the bishop stays active. (Instead after 2 1 . . .Wb3 22.g4 tt::lf6 23 .j,f3! Wxdl 24.Ei:xdl Ei:b4 25.j,e2 White


was able to swap off his bad bishop and had chances to be better in Lemos - Mayorga, Asuncion 20 1 1 .)

·8 �� .i �.� . . Y,�� : ��--,,� 5 �"· ·"•zra �.')) 4 �-��:-�� 3 � ��""·"a �wti'E 2 i6'" '• �wr1�� iiW.l" . %?!'(7� � .... "�·� 1 - �°ii'-�?�

a b c d e f g h The value of Black's last move can be seen

after 22.g4 li:lf6� when the bishop is strong on d4. Black has pressure against the e4-pawn and keeps the . . . Wb3 idea in reserve. Another possible plan is exchanging off the useful defensive rook with . . . 2"1a8.

I also decided to analyse the untested but fairly logical move: 2 1 .g4!?N li:lf6! (2 1 . . .li:lxb2 22.11*'f3 11*'b3 23.2"1a7 2"1f8 24.li:la4 li:lxa4 25 .11*'xb3 2"1xb3 26.2"1xa4 li:lf6 27.2"1a6±) 22.2"1a2 2"1a8 23.Wc2 li:ld7 24.2"1xa8 2"1xa8 25 .i.f3 2"1b8 Finally Black is poised to capture the b-pawn.

a b c d e f g h 26.i.e2 li:lxb2 27.li:lb5 c4 28.i.xb2 Wxb5 29 .i.xg? 'it>xg7 30.i.xc4 Wb4= Black's active pieces provide ongoing compensation for the pawn.

22.�a6 i.d4 23.'itihl lllf6 24.'Wd3 h5! A nice touch, preparing to soften up the

white kingside.

Black might have hurried, but after 24 . . . li:lxb2 25 .i.xb2 Wxb2 26.li:ldl Wb3 27.Wxb3 2"1xb3 28.2"1xd6 li:lxe4 29.i.xe4 2"1xe4 White would have had good chances to draw the resulting rook endgame with 30.2"1d8t 'it>g7 3 l .d6 2"1e6 32.li:le3 i.xe3 33.fxe3 2"1bxe3 34.!"i:d l !.


an obvious move. Unfortunately for White, would have left Black with an overwhelming his chosen move loses a more important pawn initiative. than the weakling on b2.

A better attempt was 25.f4!? h4 26.g4 tllxb2 27.j,xb2 Wxb2 28.tlld l when White's kingside looks rather overextended, but at least this way he would have been able to complicate the struggle. Overall I would evaluate Black's chances as only slightly better here.

25 ... \Wxdl 26.tllxdl tllxe4 27.ixe4 �xe4 28.�a4

Indirectly defending b2, but with the e4-pawn already having fallen, Black has a more attractive target.

8 �� m m•� .

,,, , ,Y,� ��

��

� : ��-��,� 5 .�.,��.r �

�� Jml"a��

�. : 1�a·1�rttt ��n�� ,J,,, ,%� 2 �� .,,,,%��-'-:

a b c d e f g h 28 ... tllb6! 29.tllc3 �e5

White's position has become distinctly unappetizing. Such a scenario is far from unknown in Benko-type positions, in which Black restores the material balance while maintaining pressure against other weaknesses.

30.�a7 lllxd5 31.�d7 bc3 32.bxc3 �e6 33.c4

The c-pawn will fall after this. I dare say that the dark-squared bishop would have liked to have moved at some point, but here 33 .j,d2 :1:\b2 34,:1:\d l tllf6 35 .:1:\d8t <;tig7 followed by some combination of . . . :1:\c2, . . . :1:\e2 and . . . tlle4

33 ... tllb6 White resigned in Stun - Berg, Helsingor

20 1 1 .

B332322) 20.tlla3

8 �� m:e:m•R • � �

�,�� 7 �r,,.,;��,��4�4 6 s /j% � · -5 .,,, ,,%-�%-�-, �� ,,, , ,%� /,, , ,, ,� ,� 4 �:'//��-i-�,� 3 ��,��-�,J

�i 2 , , , , ,J��,�-J�Jv�

�� v • .:m a b c d e f g h

20 ... '1Wb3! This move was not mentioned by Avrukh,

and to be fair it had not been played at the time his book was published! In the last few years it has been played several times at GM level and is currently considered the critical path of the 16 . . . b5 line.

It's important to realize that, just as in the previous line, the present position is essentially a Benko Gambit. As is ofren the case in that opening, Black should not fear the exchange of queens as his compensation will persist and quite possibly grow in an endgame. The text move also has the benefit of controlling the third rank.

By the way, it is worth pomtmg out that 20 . . . c4?! is premature: 2 i .<;tih2! Wc5 22.j,e3 Wb4 23.ctJc2 11*'xb2 24.:1:\a6 :1:\ed8 25.tlld4 c3 26.tllc6 c2 27.'IWc l tllxc6 28.:1:\xc6± Anastasian - Gopal, Abu Dhabi 2007.


21.'it>h2 White has several other candidates here.

a) 2 1 .11*'e2?!N tlld3 is good for Black.

b) 2 i .f4? 11*'xg3! 22.fxe5 �xe5 shows that the position might quickly return to Benoni waters, with White in huge trouble here:

c) 2 1 .g4 tllf6 22.:E'i:b l Wxdl 23 .:E'i:xdl :E'i:b3! 24. <;t>n Sasikiran - Battaglini, Bastia 20 1 1 . (24.�d2 tll fd7 25 .�c3 g5! )

cl) 2 1 .:E'i:b l 'IWxdl 22.:E'i:xd l :E'i:b3 Not only blocking the b-pawn, but also exerting pressure on the third rank.

a b c d e f g h 23.�d2

The last point can be highlighted by 23 .�e3? tllxg3!+.

23 . . . :E'i:a8 24.g4 tllf6 25 .�c3 :E'i:xc3 26.bxc3 :E'i:xa3 27.f4 tllc4

27 . . . tlled7 28.:E'i:b7 :E'i:xc3 also leads to a draw: 29.g5 tllh5 30.:E'i:xd7 �d4t 3 1 .<;t>hl �e3 32.:E'i:xd6 tllg3t 33.<;t>h2 �xf4 34.:E'i:d8t <;t>g7=

28.e5! This saves the day for White.

28 . . . dxe5 29.d6 exf4!?N 29 . . . :E'i:a7 led to a draw in Le Quang - Giri, Beijing 20 1 1 .

30.:E'i:b8t �f8 3 l .d7 tllxd7 32.:E'i:xd7 :E'i:al t 33.<;t>f2 :E'i:a2t 34.<;t>gl f3

Unfortunately this is not quite winning.

a b c d e f g h 35.�xf3 tlle5 36.:E'i:dd8 tllxf3t 37.<;t>fl <;t>g7 38.:E'i:xf8 :E'i:d2=

Black is poised to deliver perpetual check with the knight.


e) 2 1 .'®xb3 l:l:xb3 22.l:l:dl We have reached the same position as the main line, but the king is on gl .

22 . . . tllf6! The knight embarks on a long journey. This is better than 22 . . . l:l:eb8 23. <j;>f1 f5 24.exfS gxf5 25.l:l:a2 l:l:f8 26.<;t>gl l:l:a8 27.�fl c4 28 .<;t>g2 tlld3 29.tllxc4 l:l:xa2 30.l:l:xd3 l:l:b4 3 1 .tllxd6 �xb2 32.l:l:d2 f4 33 .�e2 tllf6 34.gxf4 lllxd5 35 .�c4 �xcl 36.�xdSt 1-0 Sasikiran -Arnold, Bastia 20 1 1 .

23.�d2 tllfd7 24.�c3 tllb6 25 .l:l:acl tll ed7 26.�xg7 <;t>xg7 27.l:l:d2 l:l:a8 28.�fl tlle5

Black's moves are natural and easy to find. 29.<;t>g2 l:l:a4 30.f4 tllf3=

Malikentzos - Grigorov, Plovdiv 20 1 2.

23.g4 Preventing . . .f5 .

23 ... tt:lf6 24.@gl tllfd7 I found an amusing draw in the following

line: 24 . . . l:l:eb8!?N 25.f4 tll f3t 26.�xf3 l:l:xf3 27.eS dxe5 28 .fxeS tlld7 29 .e6 fxe6 30.dxe6 tlle5 3 1 .e7

a b c d e f g h 3 l . . .�f6 32. <;t>g2 �h4! The bishop has found a way towards the white king. 33.l:l:d8t <;t>g7 34.e8=lll t!? <;t>h8 35 .l:l:xb8 l:l:f2t 36.<;t>hl l:l:fl t 37.<;t>g2 l:l:f2t=

a b c d e f g h 2S.f4 ll'lf3t 26.@f2

26.�xf3 looks risky, as after 26 . . . l:l:xf3 27.tllc4 l:l:xe4 28 .l:l:a8t �f8 29.tllxd6 l:l:e200 the black rooks are extremely active.

26 ... tllh4 27.tllc4 id4t 28.<;t>fl �g3 29.ll'lxd6


29 . . . Ei:xg2?? 30.Ei:xd4+- Grischuk - Vocaturo, Khanty-Mansiysk (ol) 20 1 0.

30.Ei:d2 ltJxg2 31.Ei:xg2 Ei:xh3 32.<i!?el Now we will make way for the knight.

a b c d e f g h 32 ... c4!t

Black is doing fine, as shown by the following illustrative lines.

33.ltJxc4 ltJc5 34.Ei:c2 34.Ei:a3?! Ei:hl t 35 .'it>d2 Ei:b4 36.tt:le3

(36.tt:ld6? �xb2-+) 36 . . . tt:lb3t 37.Ei:xb3 Ei:xb3 38.tt:ldl Ei:b4+

34 ... ttJxe4 34 . . . Ei:h lt 35 .'it>e2 Ei:h2t=

Conclusion

The Fianchetto System presents a good challenge but it seems to me that Black can obtain an active and promising game in all the major variations. Avrukh's recommendation deserves especially dose attention, but we have seen that Black has the relative luxury of being able to choose between two quite satisfactory options on move 1 6.

Lines without e4 Knight's Tour Variation

Variation Index 1 .d4 ctJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.ctJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.ctJf3

6 ... g6 7.ctJd2 A) 7 ... ctJbd7!? B) 7 ... �g7 8.ctJc4 0-0

Bl) 9.g3 B2) 9.�g5 B3) 9.�f4

B3 1 ) 9 ... b6 B32) 9 ... ctJe8

B2) after 1 9.icl B3 l) note to I S.ixbS B32) note to 13.ie2

a b c d e f g h

16 . . . c4!?N

249 250 25 1 252 253 253 257

Chapter 1 8 - Knight's Tour Variation 249

1 .d4 lt:lf6 2.c4 cS 3.dS e6 4.lllc3 exdS S.cxdS d6 6.lllf3 g6 7.llld2

In this variation we see the white knight making an early journey from gl -f3-d2-c4, hen�e the name "Knight's Tour". The main reason for executing this manoeuvre so early in the game is to attack the d6-pawn, with the help of �f4 and perhaps even lllb5 . This all takes time of course, and we will see some lines where Black just abandons the d6-pawn in search of the initiative.

We will consider A) 7 ... lt:lbd7!? followed by the main line ofB) 7 ... �g7.

A) 7 ... lt:lbd7!?

Black has the simple idea of countering White's manoeuvre with a knight tour of his own.

8.e4 8 .lllc4 allows Black to implement his plan

and achieve almost instant equality: 8 . . . 'llb6 9.e4 Cllxc4 1 0.�xc4 �g7 1 1 .0-0 0-0

a b c d e f g h 1 2.�gS a6 l 3.a4 h6 l 4.�h4 :!"\e8= Ramakrishna - Rathnakaran, Mumbai 2008.

8 ... �g7 9.lllc4 White's play makes more sense than in the

previous note, as now the knight can drop back and avoid being exchanged without blocking the e-pawn. Obviously he could also head for the Classical Variation with 9.�e2.

9 ... lll b6 10.llle3 0-0 1 1 .�d3

Black can also develop normally with: l 1 . . .:!"\e8

This has been the most popular move. Here are some illustrative lines:

1 2.0-0 a6 1 2 . . . c4 1 3.�c2 �d7 14 .a4 a5 1 5 .f4 Vf1c7 1 6.Vfif3 Vf1c5= Bastos - C. Jones, e-mail 2003.

1 3.a4

1 3 . . . 'llbd? The knight is ready to take another route. Another option is: 1 3 . . . �d? l 4.�d2 ( 1 4.aS Cllc8 1 5 .'llc4 �b5 1 6.:!"\el Tarjan - Rohde,


Lone Pine 1 978. 16 . . . b6N=) 14 ... c4 1 5 .�c2 Vf1c7 16.We2 a5 17.f4 Wc5 1 8.Whl :1'le7 1 9.Vf1f3 E!ae8f± Jankovic - Gashimov, Kusadasi 2006.

1 4.f4 Preventing . . . tt:le5, but Black is ready with a typical pseudo-sacrifice.

1 4 . . . c4!? l 5 .tt:lxc4 tt:lc5 16 .�e3 tt:lfxe4 1 7.ctJxe4 tt:lxe4

a b c d e f g h 12.0-0 tt:lf4

Here is an old example to illustrate the Modern Benoni's long history: 1 2 . . . �e5 1 3 .a4 tt:lf4 1 4.a5 tt:ld7 1 5 .tt:lc4 tt:lxd3 16 .Wxd3t Nimzowitsch - Marshall, New York 1 927.

13.�c2 �e5 1 3 . . . E!e8 14.Vf1f3 �e5 1 5 .a4 a5 1 6.tt:lb5t

14.g3 tt:lh5 15.f4 �d4 16.ctJbS �h3 17J�f2 1 7.tt:lxd4!?N �xfl 1 8 .Wxfl cxd4 1 9.Vf1xd4

Vf1f6 20.Wb4�

B) 7 ... �g7

Chapter 1 8 - Knight's Tour Variation 25 1

8.lt:lc4 8.e4 0-0 9.i.e2 leads to Chapter 7.

8 .. . 0-0

Now it is worth considering three main options: Bl) 9.g3, B2) 9.i.gS and B3) 9.�f4.

Bl) 9.g3 b6

Black immediately goes after White's prized knight.

10.a4 �a6 1 1 .lllbS llleS 12.�g2

some knights. We will see that there may be chances to fight back on the queenside later with a timely . . . a6.

13.axbS llld7 14.�f4 'We7 1 4 . . . llle5!?N has not been tested but seems

playable, for instance: l 5 .i.xe5 i.xe5 l 6.lllxe5 ( 1 6.0-0 i.g7=) 16 . . . dxe5 l 7.d6 lllxd6 1 8.i.xa8 '1Wxa8

a b c d e f g h 1 9.0-0 lllxb5 20.e3 '1Wc6=

15 ... gS 1 5 . . . tll e5?! 16 .i.xe5 i.xe5 17 .tllxb6 Ei:b8


1 8 .'llc4 �xb5 l 9.'1Wc2;!; Rodshtein - Romanov, Yerevan 2006.

16.�d2 lllc7 17.�b3 f5

18 ... f4 19.gxf4 gxf4 With the knight coming to e5 next Black

had the initiative in lvanchuk - Topalov, Novgorod 1 995 .

B2) 9.�gS

Why is the bishop going to g5 instead of f4, where it would attack the d6-pawn? The answer is that White wants to bring his queen to f4, where it will hit d6 while also establishing a bind over the kingside.

9 ... �e7! 9 . . . h6?! has been the most popular move,

but I don't like it. 1 O.ibf4 llleS 1 1 .�c l g5 1 2.ibd2;!; Black's position is slightly unpleasant due to the constant presence of h2-h4 ideas, for example: 1 2 . . . Cllc7 13 .a4 Cll ba6 14.h4 f6 1 5 .e4± Portisch - Spassky, Turin 1 982.

10.�d2 b6 1 1.�f4 �d8 The rook looks a little peculiar here, but

White's pieces are also rather oddly placed.

12.0-0-0 12 .Cll e4?! is too risky for White. There can

follow: 1 2 . . . 'llbd7 1 3.'llexd6 h6 14.ibh4

12 ... �a6 13.e4 �xc4 14.�xc4 a6 Black has solved his opening problems

and can complete his development in a straightforward fashion.

15.�h4 lllbd7 16.�hel �f8 The white bishops will soon be pushed back.


17.'i:tibl bS 18 . .ifl h6 19 . .icl Portisch - Horvath, Hungary 1 984.

B3) 9 . .if4

Attacking the d6-pawn is White's main plan. Now Black has an adventurous option in B31) 9 ... b6 and a more solid alternative in B32) 9 ... lt:le8.

B31) 9 ... b6

10 . .ixd6 1 0.e3!?

This modest move is actually rather challenging, as it invites a transposition to the 9 . . . 'lle8 variation that Black has just tried to avoid.

1 O . . . 'llh5!?N If you are determined to obtain a complicated position you could try this aggressive move. I do not trust it completely, but in a practical game it could prove quite tricky. For 1 0 . . . 'lle8 1 l .'1Wd2, see 9 . . . Clle8 1 0.'1Wd2 b6 1 l .e3 on page 259. 10 . . . �a6?! does not work: 1 l .�xd6 l"i:e8 1 2.�g3 'lle4 1 3.'llxe4 l"i:xe4 14.'1Wc2 '1Wxd5 1 5 .Ei:dl '1Wc6 Dmitrenko - Arutyunova, Simferopol 2003. 1 6.�e2N±


14 . . . bxc4 14 . . . gxh5?! is interesting, but does not quite work against accurate play: l 5 .Wf3 bxc4 16 .Wg3t c;:t>hs 17.ixb8 Wxd5 1 8 .2::1d l

a b c d e f g h 1 5.i.xb8 2::1xb8 1 6.i.e2 2::1e5

Another idea is 16 . . . Wg5!? 1 7.0-0 ih3 1 8.i.f3 if5 19 .2::1e l i.d3 20.Wa4 We7, when the strong bishop on d3 gives Black some compensation, although objectively White must still be better.

1 7.0-0 After 17.ixc4 l::1xe3t! 1 8.fxe3 Wh4t 1 9.g3 Wxc4 20.Wd2 ih3� Black has good play for the exchange.

l 7 . . . 2::1xd5 l 7 . . . ib7 l 8.i.xc4 i.xd5 l 9.We2 leaves Black a pawn down for not much.

l 8.Wa4 if5 l 9.i.xc4 Wd7! 20.Wxd7 2::1xd7 Black is still a pawn down, but is poised to

invade with his rook on b2, and thus has good chances to hold the endgame.

Let's return to the main line.

a b c d e f g h 10 ... :B!e8 1 1 .e3!

An important nuance in the move order.

The more common l l .i.g3 appears to be a slight inaccuracy due to the following untested idea: l 1 . . .llih5!N Exchanging the important bishop. (All games have continued l 1 . . .llie4 1 2.llixe4 2::1xe4 13 .e3 reaching the main line below.) 1 2.e3 llixg3 1 3 .hxg3 i.xc3t 14 .bxc3 ib7 1 5.d6 b5 1 6.llib2 2::1e6t

7 6 5 4 2 1

a b c d e f g h


Black has a promising position, for example: 1 7.Wb3 a6 1 8.a4 llid7+

12.llixe4 gxe4 13.i.g3 b5 14.l2Jd6 The alternative is 1 4.llid2 gb4 1 5 .b3 when

the critical continuation seems to be:

s ,i·.!.� B•• �-- --;� __ _ _ ,,,� r•r � , , , , ,%� �� ,,%�

5 �!.!.�. 4 ��----%� �� ----'"� ��,,, ��r" 3 � b� rt'j �·� 2 �- ��---- %0,�r� � W/<� 'iWm.r� :

a b c d e f g h 1 5 . . . �xa l !? This has only been played in one game so far. ( 1 5 . . . c4 has been the usual choice. It leads to interesting play but I do not fully trust it.) 1 6.Wxa l Now I would like to improve on the game Reeh - Wallinger, Germany 199 1 , by recommending 1 6 . . . WxdSN. The rook on b4 is in danger and the dark squares in our camp are exposed, but on the other hand we

do have an extra exchange, and it will take some time for White to create an attack. A possible continuation is: 1 7.�e2 �b7 1 8.�f3 Wd7 19 .a3 �g4 20.Wf6 llic6�

s i,�.i.� �-� 7 i£'• "•!•r 6 , , , , ,�� t� ��'ef,_, , , ;� �� 5 � i f� 8 � � 4 %� , , , , ,%� ,� "m 3 ��-�,�� 2 8wtJ�.,,,,%�li�Wff 1 fm,,,,%�,=�•:

a b c d e f g h 14 ... gb4 15.i.xbS

Grabbing the b-pawn seems like the most ambitious choice, and leads to interesting complications.

1 5 .�e2!? has only been played once, but could be a serious alternative: 1 5 . . . �xb2 1 6.0-0

s E , �.t.s �·· 7 �,,,,,; •. ,,,;,···· 6 , , , ,%� �� 'i"� '·�,;�� : ��- %��-�� ,1;�%0,r 3 �%' "·��&�,}��-,, 2 b � ��rt'j b 1£5

�-----Y-�i� ��--, a b c d e f g h

1 6 . . . c4!?N ( 1 6 . . . �a6 occurred in Garcia Ilundain - Spraggett, Ampuriabrava 1997, and now after 17.�b l N c4 1 8.�xb2 �xb2 19 .a4 b4 20.llixc4 Black's compensation is questionable.) 1 7.a4 llid7 1 8.axbS c3 The machine still favours White, but I would expect the strong c-pawn to be a source of at least some discomfort to most players.


s i.�.i.B � -m;r iii "iii !li!'f.i•t-< : JI. iii. !Iii T� 5 /, r.8-;� �� Y/, �%""�----%� �� : .-.. �� 2 �� %_/. _ _ ,,%d'8�� 1 �-----/,�;=----"�'f

a b c d e f g h 15 ... �fS 16.�c6 Cllxc6N

It is necessary to improve on: 1 6 .. ,�a6?

This led to success for Black in two games, but White's play can easily be improved,

1 7.�xaS :9'.xb2 It may look as though Black has dangerous counterplay ( . . . '\Wa5t being the obvious threat) but White can obtain a serious advantage with the help of some accurate moves.

8 �� · 7 �-------- , /,� ,,Y,. ' 6 :t� �m�� r� � d"""'' � 5 � � � - . 4 . ,, • • 0,. �� 0 �m.-� 3 �Y,' "' � �� 2 � �� • f�� tl �,,,,,Y,� ;=- -%� ::

a b c d e f g h 1 8.llie4!N

1 8.'1Wa4?? '\Wf6-+ 1 9.:9'.c l �xd6 20.f4 '\Wf5 2 1 .e4 :9'.e2t 22.mdl '1Wh5 0-1 Donner -Planinec, Wijk aan Zee 1 973.

1 8 . . . '1Wa5t 1 9.llid2 �g7 20.:9'.c l �c3 2 1 .:9'.c2± �xd2t 22.:9'.xd2 :9'.xa2

17.dxc6 �a6 Black has good compensation here, as the

white king is stuck in the centre.

18.WfdS I also analysed: 1 8.'1Wd2 �g7 19.:9'.b l '1Wb6

20.f3 '1Wxc6 2 1 .mf2 :9'.d8 22.:9'.hdl �f8 23 .'1Wd5 '1Wxd5 24.:9'.xd5 :9'.b6 25.:9'.bdl :9'.xb2t+

18 ... �xd6 19.Wfxd6 Wf aS 20.0-0-0 Wfxa2!? Black can force a draw immediately:

20 . . . :9'.xb2 2 1 .mxb2 '1Wb4t 22.mc2 '1Wc4t=


21..Jk4t 22.�c3 �xc3t 23.bxc3 �c4 24.�d2 °Walt 25.'it>c2 °Wa2t 26.'it>cl=

So the main line ended peacefully, but we saw there were many possible deviations along the way. The next option is much calmer.

B32) 9 ... l2Je8

The first point worth mentioning is that going after the d6-pawn is a road to misery for White: 10 .tlle4 b5 l 1 .tllcxd6 tt::lxd6 12.tt::lxd6 g5 13 .�g3 �xb2+ Sadauskas - Bianchi, corr. 1 989.

It is a similar story after 1 0.tllb5 . Now in Van Rensburg - Solomon, Cape Town 2007, Black should have played 1 0 . . . tlld7!, for instance:

l 1 .tllbxd6? White should avoid this move, but then what was the point of putting the knight on b5? 1 1 . . .tt::lxd6 12 .�xd6 l:l:e8 1 3 .'Wb3 tt::lb6 14 .�xc5 tt::lxc4 1 5 .'Wxc4 �xb2 1 6.l:l:bl 'Wf6+

What about moving the e-pawn? 1 0.e4 allows immediate counterplay with: 1 0 . . . f5 ! l l .exf5 �xf5 12.�g3 a6 13 .a4 tlld7 14 .�e2

8 .i� �'Si��-� 7 !�i)� - Y,�r 6 ,��-,�� 5 ��•zr�r� 4 �� 3 %% 0,m 0,� ' %%�t"_;,,,, ,� %%�/%'"""?;ii'� 2 J��,,�,�

a b c d e f g h This position was reached in Kopsa -

Moettonen, Finland 1 987, and here recommend 14 . . . �d4!N 1 5 .0-0 tlle5 with equal chances.

The last of White's noteworthy alternatives is: 1 0.e3

Compared with the main line this gives Black a few extra options.

1 0 . . . g5!? It is hard to say if this aggressive move is really the best, but it is certainly tempting.


I O . . . b6 can be compared with the main line, and may transpose after a subsequent Wd2. Another good option is I O . . . llla6 which leads to a solid position: I I .�e2 'llac7 1 2.a4 b6 1 3 .0-0 �a6 1 4.Wd2 f5 1 5 .�g3 ( 1 5 .�ab I Burkart - Auer, Germany 2008. I 5 .. . We7N=) I 5 .. . We7= Petrosian - Ehlvest, lvano Frankovsk 1982.

1 l .�g3 f5 1 2.Wd2 We7 1 3 .f4 This was played in the only game, but White may look to improve with I 3.�e2!?N 'lld7 14 .f3 ctJe5 1 5 .0-0 'llxc4 1 6.�xc4 �d7 with mutual chances.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

1 3 . . . gxf4 a b c d e f g h

Another possible plan is: 1 3 . . . �d7N 14.a4 'lla6 1 5.�e2 ( 1 5 .fxg5 f4+t) 1 5 . . . g4ft

I 4.�xf4 'lld7 I 5.�d3 'lle5 1 6.0-0 �d7+t Black is close to completing development and he can feel happy with the outcome of the opening.

I 7.e4?! I 7.a4N 'llxc4 I 8.�xc4 'llf6 would have kept the position roughly equal.

I 7 . . . 'llxd3 I 8 .Wxd3 b5 I 9.'lld2 b4 20.ctJe2 Now in Renaze - Bouaziz, Cannes 1 997, Black could have obtained the better chances using a nice idea:

20 . . . a6!+ Preparing . . . �b5.

10 ... b6 This is the main line. Black has tried several

other moves, but I would like to focus on one particularly interesting option: I O . . . �xc3!?

Normally it would be crazy to make this exchange, but Black wants to rush through with . . . b5.

I l .bxc3 I 1 .Wxc3 b5 12 .'lld2 'llf6N ( 1 2 .. .f5 1 3 .h4± Dzagnidze - Krush, Khanry-Mansiysk [ol] 20 1 0.) 1 3 .�g5 'llbd7 14.e4 �e8 1 5 .�e2 'llxd5!? ( 1 5 . . . a6=) 1 6.Wg3 'll 5f6 1 7.Wxd6 �b7=

I l . . .b5 12 .'llb2 The knight is more or less forced to settle for this suboptimal square, as 1 2.ctJe3? g5 I 3.�g3 f5 I 4.f4 'llf6 would be awkward.

s .i•.ts��•• 7

�-------" ·"- •"•• 6 --- �� f� 5 �!-�?,.�. 4 �� ,,,,,%� ��/'�� 3 �� " .. ,.J·- - \nKi ��-" ��-::: 2 c0i m �� c0i t� c0i ttJ �-- - -� " "";·1.f•�

a b c d e f g h 1 2 . . . llla6!?N

This new idea makes sense to me. 1 2 . . . �b7 was enough for a playable position in two old games: 1 3.g3 'lld7 14.�g2 f5 1 5 .0-0 c4 ( 1 5 . . . llldf6 1 6.a4 a6 1 7.axb5 axb5 1 8 .c4± Antoshin - Ta!, Leningrad 1 956.) 1 6.�ael Van den Berg - Korchnoi, Wijk aan Zee 1 97 1 . 1 6 . . . lllc5N=

1 3.e4 1 3.a4 b4 14.lllc4 'llf6 1 5 .�g5 �e8 1 6.Wf4 ( 16.f3 �b7ft) 1 6 . . . lllh5+

1 3 . . . c4 Making way for the knight to come to c5.

14 .�h6 'llg7 1 5.Wd4 f6 Both sides have weaknesses, and the

middlegame should be roughly balanced.


12.a4 f5 There is no need to hurry with the exchange

on c4. Instead Black should wait for the enemy bishop to develop so that he can win a tempo. Exchanging immediately with l 2 . . . �xc4 l 3.�xc4 a6 1 4.0-0 tlid7 l S.We2 W c8± left Black a little short of equality in Sakurai -C. Sanchez, Haifa 1 976.

13.i.e2 White has tried a few different ideas here.

13 .tlibS �xbS 14 .axbS Elf7!? An interesting idea. In other parts of the book we have seen the other rook swing via a7 to the kingside, but here Black uses the same idea in reverse! (There is also nothing wrong with natural development: 1 4 . . . tlid7N 1 5 .�e2 tt'leS=)

1 5 .�e2 a6 1 6.0-0 Ei'.fa7 1 7.bxa6 tlixa6 1 8.Ela3 Wc7 1 9.e4 fxe4 20.Ei'.e3 bS 2 1 .tt'la3 Wf7 22.g3 tliac7f± Lie - Arakhamia-Grant, Reykjavik 2008.

1 3 .h3 occurred in Viner - Schutt, corr. 1 965, and here a logical reply would have been: 1 3 . . . tlid7! Offering a pawn for compensation. The continuation might be 1 4.tlixd6 �xfl 1 5 .'itixfl tlixd6 1 6.�xd6 E\f7 17 .�g3 c4� with good chances for Black.

1 3.h4!? This is a logical idea, even though it has not been played in the last thirty years.

s E• S'!IJ��-� 7

:j'' .,, ,,/,., ,, Y,�· 6 :r� Y},� Y},� ··"� 5 , , , ,%-�%� ·� 4 '·�-��

3 �m ��-;,,,,<��-- - -

�;3,'�- ,,- '�,,,,�;3,'M'� 2 r� �§'� ro o � ,� , , .%-,, , ,,,�£� :S

a b c d e f g h 1 3 . . . �xc4

Commencing queenside counterplay. Compared with the 1 3.h3 line mentioned above, the pawn sacrifice 1 3 . . . tlid7N is less convincing here. After 14.tlixd6 �xfl 1 5 .'itixfl tt'lxd6 1 6.�xd6 Ei:f7 the presence of the pawn on h4 restrains the . . . gS advance, allowing the white bishop to settle on the f4-square. Furthermore White may even have ideas of Ei:h3 and/or h4-h5 at some point.

1 4.�xc4 a6 1 5 .�e2 1 5.We2 tlif6 16 .�d3 occurred in Borisenko - Boleslavsky, Moscow 1 96 1 , and now 1 6 . . . tlihSN would have been equal.

l S . . . tlid7 l 6.e4?! This sacrifice isn't a complete disaster, but it hardly seems necessary.


1 6 . . . fxe4 1 7.h5 Black has many good moves here, but I like the following idea the most:

8 E• S'S)��·� 7 �y, %.i) • .

v,

• • 6 • • . • ··· ·� s B -t::,B Bt::, 4 l .

.... %.r��

3 � � %� ,,,,,¥,� '%;'.%/�'ef' "'�<- �W-0 �% 2 �r � ; : � �/'f� A � � % % ��%'0::'. Q � 1 � .... -... . %�r . %� :

a b c d e f g h 1 7 . . . �xc3!?N

l 7 . . . tt:ldf6 was playable but less convincing in Farago - Velimirovic, Amsterdam 1976.

l 8.bxc3 \Wf6 l 9.�e3 tllg7 20.hxg6 hxg6f! Black remains a pawn up and his knights are

poised to take up excellent positions on e5 and f5 , enabling them to fight against the enemy bishop pair.

13 .. JWf6 14.tllb5 I also analysed: l 4.�g3 �xc4 1 5 .�xc4

a6 1 6.0-0 tlld7 l 7.f4 tllc7 Black has a comfortable and solid position. l 8.�f2?! b5 1 9.axb5 tt:lb6 20.�e2 axb5+ Osnos - Forintos, Leningrad 1 962.

14 .. . tlld7!?N 14 . . . �xb5 l 5.axb5 tlld7 1 6.h4 '1We7 l 7.'1Wc2;!;

Harrison - Giobbi, e-mail 2002.

15.tllbxd6 1 5 .h3 g5 1 6.�h2 f4f!

16 ... '1Wxb2 17.'1Wxb2 ixb2 18.ixc4 ixal 19.d6t iihs 20.tllc7 gab8i

The position is balanced, as White has sufficient compensation for the exchange but not more.

Conclusion

We have seen that Black has more than one acceptable way of meeting the Knight's Tour Variation. 7 . . . tt:lbd7 seems quite playable and can be recommended to players who are happy to avoid the main theoretical paths. In the main line with 7 ... �g7 8.tt:lc4 0-0 9.�f4, we looked at two contrasting approaches for Black. B3 l) 9 . . . b6 requires a lot of preparation and willingness to take risks, so it should only be used by players with an especially strong desire to reach a complicated position. The more reliable B32) 9 . . . tt:le8 will be a more appropriate choice for most readers. I believe in Black's chances here, and like a wise man said a long time ago, it is not good to move the same piece several times in the opening!

Lines without e4 Lines with an early ig5

Variation Index 1 .d4 lllf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5

3 ... e6 A) 4 . .ig5 h6 5 . .ih4

Al) 5 ... d6 A2) 5 ... g5!?

B) 4.lllc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.lllf3 g6 7 . .ig5 Bl) 7 ... h6 B2) 7 ... .ig7

B21) 8.e4 B22) 8.llld2

A 1 ) after 1 3 .hxg3

1 3 . . . if6N+

821 ) after 20.lllf5

a b c d e f g h

822) note to 9 . . . g5

262 263 263 265 265 266 266 267


I .d4 liJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6

a b c d e f g h In this chapter we will deal with some lines

where the white bishop comes to g5 in the early stages. We will begin by analysing the extremely rare A) 4.i.g5 before considering the more common B) 4.liJc3 (followed by �g5 in the near future) .

A) 4.ig5

This Benoni-Trompowsky hybrid is nothing special, but we should check it all the same.

4 ... h6 As a general rule, if White plays �g5 early

then it is usually good to nudge the bishop. There is also nothing wrong with 4 . . . exd5 5 .cxd5 d6, when 6.tllc3 g6 (6 . . . �e7 is also playable) 7.tllf3 leads to variation B.

s.ih4 White can also exchange:

5 .�xf6 \Wxf6 6.tllc3 d6 7.tll f3 e5!? The solid 7 . . . �e7N is fine, for instance: 8.g3 0-0 9 .�g2 tlld7 1 0 .dxe6 fxe6=

8.e3N 8.e4 �e7 9.�e2 0-0 was equal in Trohimchuk - Mirzoian, Orel 1 998. After the text move I considered a somewhat amusing continuation.

8 . . . g6 9.�d3 '1We7 10.h4 f5 l l .e4 f4 1 2.h5 g5 Black is playing provocatively, moving virtually nothing but pawns so far.

Chapter 1 9 - Lines with an early �g5 263

Now Black can choose between the solid Al) 5 ... d6 and the sharp A2) 5 ... g5!?.

Al) 5 ... d6

8.�g3 8.e4? has been seen in a couple of games, but

on both occasions Black failed to carry out his threat: 8 . . . llixd5!N 9.�xe7 llixe7 10 .'\Wd2 '\Wb6 1 1 .0-0-0 l::\d8+

8 ... exd5 9.cxd5 tiJhS Also after 9 . . . �f5!?N I prefer Black slightly.

10.e3 tiJd7 l l.�e2 ge8 12.tiJd2 ltJxg3 13.hxg3

This position occurred in Golod -Anastasian, Ubeda 200 1 . Black has a few good options here but my choice would be:

A2) 5 ... g5!?

This ambitious move aims to immediate problems for the opponent.

create


6 . .ig3 9 ... f6! Dollah - Oberholzer, Istanbul 2000. Here An important resource.

I found a promising way for Black to exert immediate pressure on the queenside. 10.ctJO

6 .. . W/b6!N 7.ctJc3 7.ie5 ig7 8.tt'lc3 d6 9 .!xf6 !xf6+

7 ... '1Wxb2 Having threatened the b-pawn Black must

call his opponent's bluff. Now there are some complications, but it all seems to turn out well for Black.

8 . .ie5 8.tt'lb5? tt'le4!+

I also considered 8 .l"i:cl d6 9.e4 exd5 1 0.cxd5 'llbd7 when White has a bit of compensation but Black's chances are higher.

8 ... ctJe4! The brave pirates attempt a daring raid!

9J'kl 9.l"i:b l ? lets Black take everything: 9 . . . tt'lxc3

1 O.l"i:xb2 tt'lxd 1 The final step of the knight's short but glorious career. 1 1 . 'tt>xd 1 l"i:g8+

The alternative is: 9.ixh8 Cllxc3 10.°IWcl (1 0.l"i:b l ? °IWxb l-+) 1 0 . . . °IWxcl t 1 1 .l"i:xcl tt'lxa2 1 2.l"i:b 1 exd5 l 3.cxd5 tt'lb4+

1 O.tt'lxe4 1Wxe5+

1 1 .iixfl fxe5 12.ctJb5 12.l"i:c2 1Wb6 13.°1Wd3 exd5 14.tt'lxd5 1Wd6+

Long live the queen! She managed to escape and defend everything.

12 ... e4! The only move, but good enough.

Chapter 1 9 - Lines with an early �g5 265

13.�c2 '!Wf6 14.liJc?t �d8 15.lDxaS �g7+ Black's ambitious opening play has clearly

been justified.

B) 4.liJc3

a b c d e f g h In this section we will look at some systems

involving an early �g5 after a couple more conventional Benoni moves by both sides.

4 ... exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.liJf3 g6 7.�g5

Now there are two distinct approaches for Black: Bl) 7 ... h6 and B2) 7 ... �g7. The former implies an immediate hunt for the dark-squared bishop, while the second involves more straightforward development.

Bl) 7 ... h6 8.�h4 g5 9.�g3 liJhS

10.e3 lDxg3 l 1 .hxg3 �g7 12.�d3 lDd7 1 2 . . . 0-0 1 3.'1Wc2 f5 1 4.0-0 tLla6 1 5 .a3 ttJc7

was also satisfactory for Black in Razuvaev - Holm, Polanica Zdroj 1 972, and a few subsequent games.


exchange the light-squared bishops and plant a knight on fS then things would be different, but that is not going to happen anytime soon.

14.a4 It seems logical to keep the rook on the h-file

for a few more moves at least. The following game saw a different approach: 1 4.0-0 hS!? (14 . . . 0-0 1 5 .l::\ael a6 1 6.a4 l::\b8= was also comfortable for Black in Antoshin - Honfi, Luhacovice 1 97 1 .) 1 5 .i.fS llleS l 6.i.xc8 lllxf3t l 7.gxf3 l::\xc8 1 8.�fS l::\d8 l 9.i>g2 �eS 20.�xeSt i.xe5= Hanston - Sowray, London 1 980.

14 ... a6 15.i.fS tll e5 Black can also keep more pieces on the

board: l 5 . . . l::\b8 1 6.aS 0-0 1 7.0-0 bS l 8.axb6 l::\xb6= Shumilov - Hedman, Pardubice 20 1 0.

18 ... lllxd?N With equal chances.

B2) 7 ... i.g7

This time Black develops his own bishop before chasing his opponent's. We will consider both B21) 8.e4 and B22) 8.tlld2.

B21) 8.e4

s i.�J.�9� �I/. m%' � "� �wi1f : "*''�_.,,, 5 � ��ref,,,, /.� ,,, , , , ,w� 4 �---�-�� 3 � %� %�� -�,_,, , ;� ��-��-� 2 � if[!§ � if[!§ � if� 1 �g/"3� °iifdil•� /, , , , ,Y, % ,,,, , , , /. m ,

a b c d e f g h Even if you prefer line B l with the early

7 . . . h6, it is worth studying the present variation, as it might occur via a different move order with 8 .i.gS being White's last move.

8 ... h6 9.i.h4 a6! 9 . . . gS 1 0.i.g3 lllhS 1 1 .i.bSt is slightly

annoying.

IO.tlld2!? After 1 0.a4 gS l 1 .i.g3 lllhS Black has

a comfortable position as there are no troublesome checks on bS or a4. The game may continue 1 2.llld2 lllxg3 1 3.hxg3 tlld7= with comfortable play for Black, Weber - Tan Lian Ann, Skopje (ol) 1 972.

IO ... b5 Black has won some space on the queenside

and it is not clear if White will be able to achieve anything in the centre.

1 I .i.e2 0-0 12.�c2 lllbd7 13.0-0 :ge8 Black continues developing fluidly.

14.a4 b4 15.llldl g5 Another approach is: 1 5 . . . b3 1 6.�bl gS

1 7.i.g3 lllxdS 1 8.lllc4 lllf4 1 9.i.xf4 gxf4 20.tllxd6 l::\e6 2 1 .lllfS= Atakisi - Grigoryev, e-mail 2005.

Chapter 1 9 - Lines with an early i.g5 267

16.i.g3

17.ctJc4 1 7.i.f3?! l2Jf4 1 8 .e5? d5 ( 1 8 . . . Ei:b8N+ is also

strong) was excellent for Black in Groffen -Berg, Liverpool 2008.

17 ... ttJf4 18.i.xf4 gxf4 19.ctJxd6 �e6 20.ctJfS

Lubas - Emelyanov, e-mail 2008. Here it is worth considering:

Black has an active, dynamic position. Meanwhile the knight on dl will need some time to find a good place.

B22) 8.ctJd2

a b c d e f g h This time White has the idea of pushing his

e- and f-pawns, but once again we can employ the typical plan of hunting the bishop.

8 ... h6 9.i.h4 g5 This works fine, but it is also worth

mentioning a second decent line: 9 . . . 0-0 1 0.e4 a6 1 1 .a4 Ele8 12 .i.e2 tLl bd7 1 3.0-0 g5 1 4.i.g3 lLle5 l 5 .f4

Opening the kingside is White's most challenging plan, but the strong knight on e5 holds everything together.


It is hard for White to develop an attack, so he switches his attention to the other flank.

1 8 .l"i:b 1 l"i:ab8 l 9 .b4 Now I would like to offer an improvement on the game Cherniaev - Kuznetsov, Moscow 2008.

a b c d e f g h 10.i.g3 tllh5 1 1 .'!Wa4t!?

An interesting way to cause problems, but we will survive it.

1 1 ...@1'8 Black must forfeit the right to castle, as

l l . . .il.d7? 12.'We4t is unplayable.

12.'!Wc2 tllxg3 13.hxg3 tlld7 As usual in such positions, Black's bishop

pair gives him good chances. The king is slightly misplaced on f8 but it is of no great consequence.

14.e3 '!We7 I prefer this move over l 4 . . . llle5, after which

l 5 .il.e2 a6 16.a4 'We7 l 7.a5 gave White a slight edge in Voronov - Zherebukh, Alushta 2008.

15.i.d3 In the event of l 5 .il.e2 Black may be tempted

to try l 5 . . . lllf6!?+:! with ideas of . . . h5. The text move provokes simplifications

which are not dangerous for Black.

a b c d e f g h 15 ... tll e5 16.i.f5 i.xf5 17.'!Wxf5 '!Wf6 18.'!Wxf6 i.xf6 19.tll ce4 @e7 20.tllxf6 @xf6 21.@e2 @g6=

Kempinski - Kanovsky, Czech Republic 20 12.

Conclusion In general we have seen that the earlier White plays il.g5, the brighter Black's prospects for early counterplay. Even when White leaves the bishop development until slightly later, the second player keeps a sound position and will usually have more than one good way to navigate the opening.

A) 6.J.g2 d6 Al) 7.e4 A2) 7.b4!?

Lines without e4 4.g3

Variation Index 1.d4 �f6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.g3

4 ... exd5 5.cxd5 b5!?

B) 6.�f3 J.b7 7.e4 �xe4 8.J.g2 Bl) 8 ... J.d6!?N B2) 8 ... J.e7

C) 6.e4!? �xe4 Cl) 7.J.g2 C2) 7.f!e2 fie7 8.J.g2

C2 1) 8 ... � d6 C22) 8 ... fS 9.�h3 b4

C221) 10.0-0 C222) lO.J.e3 C223) 10.d6

Al) after l 7.li'ie4 A2) after 12.0-0

a b c d e f g h 17 . . .f5!N

a b c d e f g h

C222) after l 5.�xe4

270 270 272 273 274 275 277 277 280 281 283 285 286 288


l .d4 ltlf6 2.c4 cS 3.dS e6 4.g3 White's last move is exceedingly rare in this

particular move order sequence. However, the above position often occurs via the move order l .d4 cof6 2.c4 e6 , which has the idea of answering 3.COc3 with 3 . . . j,b4, and 3 .COf3 or 3.g3 with 3 . . . c5 inviting a Benoni. Thus after 3.g3 c5 4.d5 we reach the main position.

Why should Black use the 2 ... e6 move order?

There are many players who are only willing to enter a Modern Benoni after White has committed himself to cof3 or g2-g3, usually due to fear of the Flick-Knife Attack. In the early part of the book I analysed this sharp system and concluded that Black had fully adequate resources, but I am well aware that many readers will continue to prefer the 2 . . . e6 move order for their own reasons. So let's see a couple more moves.

4 ... exdS 5.cxdS

a b c d e f g h S ... bS!?

Now we reach a second topic of discussion in the early phase of the game. In the present position many players will prefer the simple 5 . . . d6, which almost always transposes to a Fianchetto System (see Chapter 1 7) . If you wish to minimize your workload then feel

free to skip this entire chapter and play 5 . . . d6 followed by 6 . . . g6, as White can hardly hope to do anything better than putting his bishop on g2 and knights on c3 and f3 .

Nevertheless there are many players who like to challenge White's move order by opting for the immediate queenside expansion, and ultimately I felt as though I would have been leaving the book incomplete if I had failed to cover this ambitious plan.

a b c d e f g h White now has the following options:

A) 6.ig2, B) 6.lllf3 and C) 6.e4!?.

A) 6.ig2 d6

Here White has tried virtually every legal move, but we will focus on the two primary options of Al) 7.e4 and A2) 7.b4!?.

Al) 7.e4 lllbd7 8.f4

This is the only really challenging move, but such ambitious schemes can easily backfire as we will soon see.

The quieter 8.COe2 g6 9.0-0 j,g7 leaves White equal at best. Black's queenside expansion gives him a more comfortable version of a normal Benoni, and I see no reason to analyse further.

20 - 4.g3 Ch,ptoc

·d b he has pa1 Piece ut · White has won a . ,

behind m So . d d H"' "'Y

ht

271

a g6 9.°We2

force through 8...

. king h"d to bdng'

White is wor . his development but neglectmg e4-e5 , es quenc · certain conse

9 ... .ltg7 10.eS ' 0-0 wh;ro·, fade �: Afi 1 0.°1Wxb5. comical

ter almost

d h. ment was

1 980, an is dewelop . - Movce. cw.

hwb to Milovanov1c

certainly not t ntual victory was eve the opening.

dxeS! ood chances to

10... 1 gives Black g

· even 1 0 0-0 a so

h text move is . . .

. but t e . he initiative, seize t

h. h price m ee . . . ks being caug

a ig d his kmg ns development an

in the centre.

l'.!b81 13

...

· uchable. The rook is unto


17 ... fS!N Amongst others we could mention

17 . . . j,xb2N 1 8.j,xb2 l'l:xb2-+.

18.VNxdSt VNxdS 19.lllf6t ixf6 20.ixdSt c;t>g7 21 .ic4 ixe2 22.ixe2 ixb2-+

White is two pawns down with an exposed king and poor pieces, so it is safe to say that the opposite-coloured bishops offer him scant hope of saving the game.

A2) 7.b4!?

a b c d e f g h This would make a promising gambit, if

only Black was forced to accept it.

7 ... ib7!? Inviting White to exchange on cS, which

will lead to a sharp and unbalanced position in which both sides have significant pawn majorities in their respective areas of dominance. It is worth mentioning a couple of other possibilities.

Taking the pawn is risky: 7 . . . cxb4?! 8.a3 bxa3 (I also considered 8 . . . aS !?N 9.axb4 l'l:a6!? 1 0.l'l:xaS l'l:xaS 1 1 .bxaS �xaSt when Black has managed to clear the flank, although after 12.j,d2 White still has the initiative.) 9.ctJxa3 Black has many options here, but White has good compensation everywhere, for instance:

9 . . . j,d7 1 0.lllf3 j,e7 l 1 .ctJd4 b4 1 2.lllc4t

Another option is: 7 . . . lll bd7 8 .ctJc3

8 .bxcS dxcS!? can be compared with the main line below.

8 . . . cxb4 9.ctJxbS j,b7

a b c d e f g h 1 0.lllf3

1 0.e4 lllc5 1 l .f3 j,e7 l 2.llle2 �b6 13 .ctJ bd4 0-0 14.0-0 lllfd7 1 S .j,e3 llle5= 16.h3?! j,f6 17.l'l:bl lllc4 1 8.j,f2 l'l:ac8+ Vertes - Zebre, e-mail 2006.

1 0 . . . �b6 1 1 .�a4 lllxd5!?N 1 1 . . .a6 12.lllbd4 llle4 1 3 .j,b2 j,xdS 1 4.0-0 l'l:c8� Murden - Kauppinen, e-mail 2008.

a b c d e f g h l 2.j,b2 0-0-0

This may look risky, but I think it is okay for Black.

1 3.lll bd4 lllcS 14.�c2 ciib8 White has yet to prove his compensation for

the pawn.

Chapter 20 - 4.g3 273

8.bxc5 Quiet moves achieve nothing, for instance:

8.a3 llibd7 9.ctJc3 a6 1 0.ctJf3 !'l:c8 l 1 .ilb2 ctJ b6� Mascaro March - Carlsson, Soller 2006.

8 ... dxc5 9.e4 id6 10.ctJd2 0-0 1 1 .ctJe2 l:!e8 12.0-0

Now in the game Chemin - Timman, Saint Vincent 2000, Black made the slightly odd decision to put his bishop on a6. Instead I would like to propose a more natural alternative:

8

7

6

5

4 3

2 1

a b c d e f g h 12 ... lllbd?!N

This brings Black a good game, especially if White gets too aggressive.

13.a4 This natural move backfires. White should

try playing more patiently although I don't believe Black has anything to fear, especially after the following unfortunate try: l 3 .f4? c4+ 1 4.eS '<Mi'b6t 1 5 .Whl llixd5 1 6.ctJxc4 bxc4 17 .ilxd5 !'l:ad8-+

13 ... b4 l 3 . . . a6 l 4.ilb2 ile5 is equal, but Black

should be happy to advance his pawn majority, as the loss of the c4-square does not hurt him.

14.lllc4

15.lllxd6 '<Mi'xd6 16.f4 llled7 17.e5 lllxe5 18.fxe5 '<Mi'xe5 19.l:!a2 ixd5 20.ixd5 lllxd5-+

Black's pawns are too much for White to handle, even with an extra piece.

B) 6.lllf3

This tricky move was recommended by Boris Avrukh in the popular Grandmaster Repertoire 2 - J .d4 Volume Two, so we had better be ready for it. By delaying the e2-e4 advance for a move, White maintains the option of deploying his bishop on the fl -a6 diagonal.


6 ... ib7 This seems critical. The main alternative is

6 . . . d6, but then 7.e4 gives White quite good chances.

7.e4 ClJxe4 8.ig2 White has given up a pawn for the initiative,

and Black must play carefully to avoid being pressed.

S .ixb5 is not dangerous, as shown by the following example. S . . . �a5t 9.tt:lfd2 ixd5 1 0.0-0 �xb5 1 1 .tt:lxe4 �c6 12.ctJbc3 ie6 1 3 .f4 f5 1 4.tt:lg5 ie7 1 5 .�h5t g6 16.�h6 ifs 1 7.�h3 ig7 1 S .ie3

8 �� -·� �-7 �,,, ,;··· �.-, 6 , , , , ,%� f� .t� ,,%. �;:0'/ �� % "/�� s � w� U .t. � 4

�� ,, ,,%� ��_,,, ,;�

�% "//, ��'ef"""'�'/, 3 � m � ��v 2 �Wd _ _ _ _ _ ,.,,,,,r,�,, ,,%�,/, ""{"'"'� �� (Z-'/1'"" 1 � � � ��;'. a b c d e f g h

1 S . . . ic4 (another idea is l S . . . tt:la6!?N l 9.ctJxe6 dxe6 20.Ei:adl 0-0+) 1 9.Ei:fe l Now in Nyback - Andreikin, Khanty-Mansiysk 2009, Black could have maintained the better chances with 1 9 . . . WdS!N 20.g4 tt:la6+.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

a b c d e f g h

In this pos1t1on Black has two playable continuations: Bl) 8 ... id6!?N and B2) 8 ... ie7.

Bl) 8 ... id6!?N

Avrukh does not like this move much, but I think it is okay. The idea is not only to develop, but also to prevent if4.

9.0-0 The immediate 9.tt:lh4!? tt:lf6 1 O.tt:lf5 can

be met by 1 0 . . . 0-0, relying on a basic tactical defence: l 1 .ctJxd6 ( 1 1 .0-0 transposes to the main line below.) 1 1 . . .�e7t 1 2.tt:le4 lllxe4 1 3 .0-0 tt:ld6 1 4.Ei:el �f6 1 5.if4 tt:la6 16.ctJc3 Ei:aeS=

9 ... 0-0 IO.tlJh4! Avrukh's recommendation, and definitely

the critical test. Less dangerous is: 1 0.Ei:e l f5

1 O . . . Ei:eS is also good: l 1 .tt:lh4 tt:lf6 12.Ei:xeSt tt:lxeS 1 3 .ctJc3 b4 1 4.tt:le4 ifs�

1 1 .ctJc3 ctJxc3 12.bxc3 tt:la6 Black has kept his extra pawn and does not face any major threats.

a b c d e f g h 1 3 .l"i:b l tt:lc7

13 . . . �a5 1 4.a4 b4 also looks okay. 1 4.ig5 �cS

White has some compensation but I would take Black if given the choice.

Chapter 20 - 4.g3 275

8 .!� s ��--7 �I-� ,,/,� 'iy,St / 'lil lilml + lillil' 'lil 6 . !ff§ jlm;W�jl jljl : lil� ��Ill lil� 3 lillil lillil lil

� lilw ' lillil lilr1n< 'w � 2 �j[jfj'0 �JlJ!JfJ

l �CLJ�°ii�l:,� a b c d e f g h

10 ... llif6 I I .llif5 ie5! Avrukh only mentions 1 1 . . .'<Mi'bG 1 2.a4!

with some initiative for White. Instead I think Black should return his extra pawn after first provoking the following pawn move, which slightly exposes White's king and restricts his dark-squared bishop.

12.f4 id4t 13.llixd4 cxd4 14.�xd4 llia6 White has the bishop pair, but Black is dose

to finishing development and the f4-pawn looks a little out of place.

s .!� B �-� 7 ':1fa;ra.1"m.1. 6 i)� -� -- � � � //, , , , , ; s � · ��Uj - -/,� �nt� �-� �� 4 - �I§� /�% � 3 � /,� ,,, , ,/,� ,, , , , /,� 2 �olilalla'to %,�fr;;?!� �� '�----1 -�� §��

a b c d e f g h 15.llic3 b4 16.llie4 llixe4 17.ixe4 �b6 18.ie3 1:Ue8

After a likely exchange of queens Black will obtain counterplay against the d5-pawn, although there is a potential risk of ending up

with a tricky endgame against the rwo bishops. If this is not to your taste, then see the next line below.

B2) 8 ... ie7

a b c d e f g h 1 I.. .llia6!?N

Returning the pawn to catch up on development.

12.llixe4 12.llie5 idG 1 3.llixe4 fXe4 transposes to the

main line.


Avrukh briefly mentions 1 2.tllxb5 '<Mi'b6 13 .tllc3 as favouring White, but I think Black can improve with 12 . . . tllb4!?. A possible continuation is 1 3 .Cllc3 j,f6 1 4.tllxe4 fxe4 l 5.!'l:xe4 !'l:c8! with equal chances.

12 ... fxe4 13.llleS 1 3.!'l:xe4 d6 14.!'l:g4 tllc7 1 5 .Cllg5 ms leads

to equality after the following forcing line:

a b c d e f g h 16 .tllxh7! Wxh7 17 ,j,e4 j,c8 1 8 .m4 g6 19.j,xf5 j,xf5 20.!'l:xf5 gxf5 2 1 .'<Mi'h5t Wg8 22.'<Mi'g6t whs 23.'<Mi'h5t=

13 ... id6

a b c d e f g h 14.ixe4!?

I checked two other moves, both leading to approximate equality.

14.j,f4 c4 1 5 .j,xe4 tllc5 1 6.j,c2 !'l:xf4 l 7.'<Mi'h5 ( 17.gxf4 '<Mi'h4�) 1 7 . . . g6

a b c d e f g h 1 8.j,xg6! '<Mi'e7! 19 .Cllxc4 hxg6 20.'<Mi'xg6t '<Mi'g7 2 1 .'<Mi'xg7t Wxg7 22.Cllxd6 !'l:b4 23.Cllxb7 tllxb7 24.!'l:e7t Wf6 25.!'l:xd7 tllc5 26.!'l:c7 tlle4 27.b3 !'l:d4=

1 4.!'l:xe4 Cll c7 14 . . . ms 1 5 .f4 j,xe5 1 6.!'l:xe5 is not what Black wants. 14 . . . c4 1 5.!'l:h4 j,xe5 1 6.'<Mi'h5 h6 l 7.'<Mi'xe5 !'l:e8 1 8.'<Mi'c3 b4 1 9.'<Mi'd2 !'l:c8 is more interesting but still favours White.

1 5 .!'l:e l 1 5 .j,f4 tllxd5 16 .'<Mi'b3 c4 17 .'<Mi'xb5 '<Mi'b6 1 8.'<Mi'xb6 tllxb6 1 9.Cllxd7 j,xe4 20,j,xe4 j,xf4 2 1 .Cllxf8 !'l:xf8 22.gxf4 !'l:xf4 23.f3 !'l:f7 24.!'l:d l g6=

7 6 5 4 3 2

a b c d e f g h 1 5 . . . j,xe5 1 6.!'l:xe5 '<Mi'f6 1 7.j,f4 d6 1 8.!'l:e l h6 19.'<Mi'd2 a5 20.h4 b4 2 1 .a3 !'l:ab8 22.h5

Chapter 20 - 4.g3 277

22.axb4 axb4 is similar. 22 . . . �cS 23.axb4 axb4=

White has the bishop pair but the d5-pawn requires constant protection, so I think Black is okay.

14 ... VNf6 15.f4 ixeS 16.fxeS VNf2t 17.@hl It is important for Black to do something

with his temporary initiative before White catches up on development.

17 ... �aeS It is not so easy for White to develop the

dark-squared bishop, as the b2-pawn would be left hanging.

18.a4 This appears critical, but Black can maintain

the balance by tactical means.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

a b c d e f g h 18 ... �xeS! 19.if4

1 9.�xh7t? backfires: 1 9 . . . Wxh7 20.E!:xe5 cob4 2 I .�e3 (2 I .axb5 Clixd5-+) 2 I . . .Wxb2 22.8'.h5t Wg8 23.Wgl Wc3 24.Wel Wxel t 25 .8'.xe I 8'.e8 26.�f2 8'.xe I t 27.�xe I cod3+

19 ... �xe4 20.�xe4 tllb4 21 .VNe2 VNxe2 22.�xe2 tllxdS

The complications have resulted in an approximately equal endgame.

a b c d e f g h 23.@gl tllxf4 24.gxf4 a6=

C) 6.e4!?

This is White's most aggressive attempt to fight for the advantage. The total number of games on the database is still relatively small (less than a hundred at the time of writing), so this line could be recommended to adventureseeking players on either side.

6 ... tllxe4 Now White has two significant options:

he can develop his bishop immediately with Cl) 7.ig2 or play C2) 7.VNe2 first.

Cl) 7.ig2 tlld6


I also considered an untested but quite interesting alternative: 7 . . . Wa5t!?N 8 .l2Jd2

Alternatives are worse: S.j,d2 l2Jxd2 9.ctJxd2 d6 1 0.l2Jgf3 j,e7 1 1 .0-0 0-0 12.:B:e l 'i&dS+ 8.ctJc3 ctJxc3 9.bxc3 Wxc3t I O.j,d2 Wf6 l l .ctJf3 j,d6+ White clearly has compensation, but the two-pawn sacrifice is perhaps pushing his luck too far.

a b c d e f g h 8 . . . l2Jd6 9.ctJgf3 j,e7 10.0-0 0-0

Compared with the main line the white knight has been driven to d2 instead of the more natural c3-square, but the black queen is also slightly exposed.

l l .a4! ctJa6 l I . . .j,f6 12.ctJb3 Wb6 ( 12 . . . 'l&c7?! 1 3.axb5 ctJxb5 14.j,gS! is excellent for White) l 3 .j,e3 ctJa6 l 4.l2Jxc5! ctJxc5 l 5 .b4 puts Black under some pressure.

1 2.ctJ b3 Wd8 l 3 .axb5 ctJxb5 l 4.l2Je5 j,f6 1 5 .d6 !'l:b8 16.!'l:e l

l 6.j,f4 ctJxd6� 16 . . . ctJxd6 l 7.Wxd6 !'l:xb3 1 8.E!:xa6 j,xa6 19.Wxa6 !'l:b6 20.Wxa7 !'l:e6 2 1 .ctJf3 !'l:xe l t 22.ctJxe U

White has good chances with two pieces against a rook.

8.ctJf3 The overoptimistic 8 .b4? was played in

Cativelli - Rodriguez Vila, Buenos Aires 2008, and here Black should have played 8 . . . l2Ja6!N 9.ctJf3 'l&e7t I O.j,e3 ctJf5 with a clear advantage.

8 ... J.e7 9.0-0 0-0 IO.J.f4 1 O.E!:e1 is likely to come to the same thing

after a subsequent j,f4. Another game continued: 1 0.a4 j,b7 l I .j,f4

b4 l 2.ctJbd2 ctJe8 13.ctJe5 Alvarado - B. Socko, Warsaw (rapid) 20 1 0, and now after 1 3 . . . d6N 14.l2Jc6 ctJxc6 1 5.dxc6 j,a6 1 6.!'l:e l ctJc7 the situation is dynamically balanced; White has about enough compensation for a pawn.

Chapter 20 - 4.g3 279

l 3 .llle4 White's chances are excellent.

I U '&el J.b7 Another game continued: l I . . .:§:e8 1 2.lllc3

lllc7 1 3 .Wc2 ( 1 3.lllg5!?N looks like an improvement.) 1 3 . . . .ib? 1 4.h4 g6 1 5 .lllg5 :§:c8 1 6.:§:ad 1 b4=

a b c d e f g h 1 7.lllce4?! lllxe4 1 8 . .ixe4 d6 1 9.g2?! Csapo - Forintos, Budapest 1 968. 1 9 . . . .if6N+

8 �- B ��--,�� :-;,,,,;;�/.F�/,,, , ,��,�� 1 �.i.� • m • w� • �� ---,,,¥,� , , , , , /,� 6 �m%"N �� 5 �- · �� ,� �� 4 - � � � �� ,:--,%�,'l0 3 �" " �� 0'-" 2 �n� ��,,,,JllJ:;J!j 1 �tt:J�V��

a b c d e f g h 12.CLJc3 CLJc7

I also analysed: l 2 . . . b4 l 3 . .ixd6

1 3.llla4 :§:e8 1 4.b3 .if8 1 5 .Wd3 g6 1 6.h4 :§:xel t 1 7.:§:xel Karner - Palac, Oberwart 20 1 0. 1 7 . . . Wf6�

1 3 . . . .ixd6 1 4.llle4 1Mfc7 1 4 . . . .ie? l 5 .d6 .if6 l 6.lllxf6t 1Mf xf6 l 7.llle5 .ixg2 1 8.xg2 :§:ad8 1 9.Wd5± Tomashevsky

- Bocharov, Taganrog 20 1 1 . 1 4 . . . Wb8 1 5 .lllh4 .ie5 1 6.d6 g6 1 7.lllxc5 lllxc5 l 8.:§:xe5 .ixg2 l 9.lllxg2 llle6 20.llle3 g7 21 .Wd3 Wb6 22.:§:b5 Wa6 23.llld5 :§:ab8 24.lllc7 Wc6 25.lllxe6t fXe6 26.Wd4t g8 27.:§:xb4 :§:xb4 28 .Wxb4 a6 Oren -Hicdoenmez, e-mail 201 1 . Black eventually drew the game but White is a pawn up in a one-sided endgame, so I cannot recommend this for Black.

a b c d e f g h 1 5 .lllh4!N

Improving on the game Gleizerov - Medvegy, Banska Stiavnica 20 1 1 . With the knight on its way to f5 (which can even be played after 1 5 . . . g6), White has the initiative.

a b c d e f g h 13.CLJd2!?

This seems like the best way to create problems.

280 Lines with out e4

l3 ... ttJce8 l 3 . . .f5 led

14 "" b to a draw ·

."LI 3 c4 1 5 liJ m anoth

liJcxb5 1 8.\Wa4. • c5 .icS 1 6.a4 1"\b8

erl

game:

s"n'h" - E igs 1 9.ieS ifb 20 irf ;�bs

goshm, e-mail 20 1 . Vi-Y2

1 .

14.a4 a6 1 4 . . . b4 enables Wh "

on the ite to clai

1 7.liJc4 qu;enside: 1 5 .liJb5 liJx

�5some squares

G ' 1 8.\!Yd3 ,4 I

I 6.�b5 d6

rammatica - Se 9 .\Wc2 b3 20 \W =

mmler, e-mail 20 1 . d3oo

1 .

8 � � fit . '/,a � � � ;:o . . . ia �-

7 •.i� " "'P*• 6 .t-.�"u�u. � &

• • � � . . , , . %0•

5 • •• ;;;.•,. •. 4 r:, • ,pa a 3 ��%0""//,U. � ��0�

� (;' � �00 , , , , ,l':, � 00 , ; 00 0 ''/ .

2 01�''/»,, , , , ; � �fl-0 ;?'( � % "//, � ic'....Y ;?,; ?,;; '/. ' /, 0 ''/ , , , , , /,

1 �--- ·1[ . . . . %. •• 00�0 ;,[)j_ .. n (.\ WM '/; 00 °if%�'"/, .. , . . % & /U

/ / � �

-��- •ef"" /.I � ; �

a / % �

b c d "' .. ';

I

e f 5.axb5 axb

g h

18 i 5 16.E:xa8 i

Wi,".ll5 Wxg5 19.�de4 xa8 17.\!Ye2 �5

Jte has main . for the

tamed a reason bl .

did pawn, but in the c 11

a.

e mitiative

not take lo ro owm

P"""" ng f m Bhok '"

g g.me "

3 2 1

. neutralize the

a b

l9 ... ltJxe4 20 r:.. ."Z..lxe4 WI 7 2 1 .liJxc5 \W 5

e 21 .Wlxb5 xc 22.\WxeS=

2I.. .ixd5 22 WI 24.@xg2

ltjf6� xc5 Wlxc5 23.ltJxc5 ixg2

Chapter 20 - 4.g3 281

C21) 8 . .. tiJd6 9.ie3 ltJa6

There is another option here: 9 . . . i,b7

This may lead to an endgame where Black has to fight for a draw.

l O.i,xc5 '1Wxe2t l 1 .l1.Jxe2 l1.Ja6

8 �� -� JI 7 .�.t•••·�· 6 '))� � � · ·"� ��;�'-- ·� �� : ��,Ji�� 3 ��.�-�� -,,; �� -ef- ·"�-� 2 �'�� ,��1� 1 ,�lt:J� � -�

a b c d e f g h 1 2.i,xd6

1 2.i,d4 l1.Jb4 1 3.l1.Ja3 i,xd5 14 .i,xd5 l1.Jxd5 1 5 .0-0-0=

1 2. .. i,xd6 1 3.l1.Jbc3 l1.Jc7 14.l1.Jd4 0-0 The tables have turned and it is now Black who goes a pawn down in return for compensation. 14 ... b4 1 5 .l1.Je4 i,e5 1 6.0-0-0t

1 5 .l1.Jdxb5 l1.Jxb5 1 6.l1.Jxb5 i,e5 1 7.0-0-0

1 8.l1.Jc3 18 .l1.Jd4 g6 1 9.1"1hel 1"1fe8�

1 8 . . . 1"\fc8 1 9 .'iic2 1"1ab8 Black has compensation, bur only enough for a draw, for example:

20.1"\hel 1"\xb2t 2 1 .'iixb2 i,xc3t 22.'iia3 i,xel 23.1"\xel 'iif8=

8 .1m.tm•� �ir ,�� '-"''"'""'"'�Jr'<!'"" 7 � - · � · &� • 6 ·� �.,,,,.,/,� ,,, , ,/,� �!JJs"u � �� . : ��i�� • �� -, �% ,� 3 . "·� · Jl " 2 �!�%%B!J8l!J81 1 ��l:ZJ- � � M

a b c d e f g h 10.tiJc3 b4!

It is worth comsidering the alternative: 1 o . . . 1"1b8?!

A closer look will reveal this move to be inferior.

l 1 .a4! bxa4 There are no other moves, for instance: 1 1 . . .b4 1 2.l1.Jb5 l1.Jf5 ( 1 2 . . . l1.Jxb5? 1 3.axb5 l1.Jc7 14.d6+- Ksieski - Werner, Jena 2008.) 1 3.d6 iWe6 Michalicka - Macak, Slovakia 20 1 2. 1 4.1"\dlN±

a b c d e f g h


1 2.1"lxa4 lllb4 13 .lllf3 1"lb6 1 3 . . . lllf5?! 1 4.d6! lllxd6 1 5 .0-0 lllf5 1 6.1"lxb4 1"lxb4 17 .llld5+-13 . . . a5 14.0-0 �a6 1 5.1"lxb4! axb4 1 6.ifilfxa6 bxc3 17. bxc3±

1 4.0-0!N A powerful exchange sacrifice. The game continued 1 4.1"lxa7? 1"la6+ Wagner - Postny, Aix !es Bains 20 1 1 .

1 4 . . . �a6 1 5 .ifilfdl �xfl 1 6.�xfl lllc8 17 .llld2t d6 1 8 .lllc4 1"lb8 1 9.�h3

White has a huge initiative.

l l . . . �b7 1 1 . . . g6

Only tested once, this also seems playable. 1 2.lllxc5

Perhaps White could consider delaying this move, which would at least prevent the new idea mentioned below.

1 2 . . . lllxc5 1 3.�xc5

a b c d e f g h 1 3 . . . �a6!N

There is no need to protect the pawn. 1 3 . . . a5 14.�d4 1"lg8 1 5 .0-0-0 ifilfxe2 16 .lllxe2 occurred in Moiseenko -Carlsson, Plovdiv 2008, and here the right continuation would have been: 1 6 . . . lllf5N 17.Elhel lllxd4 1 8.lllxd4t Wd8f!

1 4.ifilfxe7t �xe7 Now let's see what happens ifWhi te becomes greedy.

Chapter 20 - 4 .g3 283

l 5 .�xb4?! 0-0 l 6.ll'if3 Ei:ab8 White is in trouble.

1 7.�xd6 l 7.a3? �f6+ 1 8.�xd6 Ei:fe8t 1 9.<iid l �e2t 20.<±icl Ei:ec8t 2 1 .<iid2 Ei:xb2t 22.<iie3 Elc3t 23.<iif4 �xf3 24.Ei:he l h6-+

1 7 . . . �xd6 1 8.0-0-0 Ei:fc8t 1 9.<iib l �a3 20.b3 Ei:c3---+

1 2.ll'ixc5 ll'ixc5 1 3.�xc5 �a6 ( 1 3 . . . a5N=) l 4.1Wxe7t �xe7 1 5 .Ei:cl 0-0 l 6.ll'ih3 Ei:ae8= Mikhalevski - Laznicka, Aix-les-Bains 20 1 1 .

1 2.ll'if3 g6 1 3 .0-0 occurred i n Bluebaum - Bures, Merlimont 20 1 1 , and now after

1 3 . . . �h6N 1 4.Ei:ae l �xe3 1 5 .1Wdl 0-0 1 6.Ei:xe3 1Wd8 White must prove his compensation.

12 . . . g6 1 2 .. .f6? 1 3 .0-0 gave White too much play in

Sasikiran - Bocharov, Sochi 20 12 .

13.Cllxc5N 1 3 .0-0?! occurred in Rombaldoni -

Aguettaz, Sibenik 20 1 2, and here Black could have obtained an edge with 1 3 . . . �h6!N, much as in the note to White's previous move.

The text move is better, but White has no more than equality in the endgame.

13 ... Cllxc5 14.!xc5 Wfxe2t 15.<iixe2 Cllb5 16.ixf'S <iixf'8=

C22) 8 . . . f5

a b c d e f g h Although the previous line is playable, the

idea of keeping the strong knight in the centre is rather appealing. Of course advancing one's f-pawn before completing development does not come without risk, but I think Black's position is strong enough to justify this ambitious decision.

9.Cllh3 This is the usual move although not many


games have been played, so there is still a lot to explore.

The most popular alternative has been: 9.d6 We6 1 o.llic3 j,xd6 l Lllih3

l l .g4 g6 1 2.gxf5 gxf5 1 3 .liJh3 leads almost by force to the following endgame: 1 3 . . . llic6 14 .'llxe4 fxe4 1 5 .llig5 liJd4 1 6.llixe6 llixe2 17.llig7t @f7 1 8.liJf5 llixcl 1 9.llixd6t @e6 20.llixe4 liJd3t 2 1 .@d2 Carron -Mekhitarian, Zurich 20 1 0.

a b c d e f g h l l . . .j,b7!?

There is no time for prophylaxis here: l 1 . . .h6?! 1 2.g4!Nt ( 12.llixe4 fxe4 1 3.j,xe4 'llc6 1 4.Viih5t d8 1 5 .llig5 hxg5 1 6.Wxh8t c7 17 .Vfih7 j,b700 1 8.j,e3? :§:h8! 19 .Viixh8 Wxe4-+ Mahjoob - Jumabayev, Dresden 2008.) l l . . .Viic4 seems playable though. 1 2.llixe4 Wxe2t 1 3 .@xe2 fxe4 14.llig5 This was

Hauser - Bergmann, email 2009, and now after 1 4 . . . j,b?N 1 5 .llixe4 j,xe4 1 6.j,xe4 llic6 17.:t'l:dl� the position is about equal.

a b c d e f g h 9 . . . b4 9 . . . j,b7! ?N

I didn't find any games with this move, but I think it deserves consideration. White has to sacrifice a pawn, but he develops quickly while the black king remains in the centre.

1 0.0-0 j,xd5 1 1 .:t'l:e l llic6 1 2.llic3 1 2.liJd2 c4 1 3.liJf4 j,£7 14 .liJxe4 fxe4 1 5 .j,xe4 0-0-000 The text is more natural. Now Black has a few options and he needs to choose carefully.

Chapter 20 - 4.g3 285

8 �� ·� �· 1 i(�� ls-,,,,�--. 6

- - - %� r� - - -%� - - - -%� �% '/�� 5 �·�.i.-i•

4 �." . . . %•l• �� *� • Wc%)i"';\ 3 ,�_J � ?.'u'�"'LJ �ref' · · � "';�ref · · %�-;;;,

2 �,}/lW/.'"/ �'jf fll�J!J � � ��

a b c d e f g h 1 2 . . . ctJxc3!

The tempting l 2 . . . j,c4? does not work out so well : 1 3 .ifilfdl d5 14.b3 0-0-0 1 5 .j,d2!+-

1 3.ifil!d2 Here is a funny example showing how a sharp position might lead to an early draw: l 3.bxc3 j,xg2 14.ifilfh5t g6 1 5.1'l:xe7t j,xe7 1 6.\Wh6 j,e4 l 7.ctJg5 j,f8 l 8.ifilfh4 j,e7 l 9.ifilfh6=

1 3 . . . ct:le4 The safest choice and my recommendation. l 3 .. . j,xg2!? is worth mentioning though: 1 4.1'l:xe7t j,xe7 1 5 .'it>xg2 ctJe4 1 6.\Wd5 g6 l 7.j,h6 lt:lf6 1 8 .ifilfdl 0-0-0±

8 �·�� · -�� - "�-�� - - -: -·��1��-f6 s �f-�B'i--------4

� .... ..%. �. �-3 �

�- �. �� -% �� -�----%�-;;;, 2 8 �& • �&@�� L.%� i8,,.:.,,

a b c d e f g h This looks to me like the kind of position that would have appealed to Emanuel Lasker, the second world champion. Lasker often chose to give up his queen for an assortment of enemy pieces, even knowing he was objectively worse, in order to reach an unbalanced position in which he could subsequently outplay his opponent.

8 P��-�-J• 1 -� �·� r� • 6 .'fl)." --%.,,,, %� 5 �··.!.�·� 4

��- --��=� �� 3 �� (0'/ ��"' ,, �w.-ef""\y.·/ 2 A W"� i� �/'f� !.-, f,_flf,_ 0 �z �i§� %'0z � r,Q ,,, ,7., , ,%W/.'d"'' '%;,, , ,7- -- -%?0'ef''' ' 1 ,� � ��

a b c d e f g h 14 .ifilfxd5 \Wf7 1 5.j,xe4 fxe4 1 6.1'l:xe4t

1 6.ifilfxe4t ifilfe7= 1 6 . . . j,e7 l 7.ifilfxc5 0-0 18 .ifilfxb5 1'l:ab8 l 9.ifilf d3 j,f6=

Black has good compensation and most probably will take on b2 with at least an equal position.

Let's now return to the main line. At this point there are three moves worth analysing: C221) 10.0-0, C222) 10.J.e3 and C223) 10.d6.

C221) 10.0-0

Having already sacrificed a pawn, White now gives up an exchange to ramp up his initiative.

10 .. . J.a6 1 1 .l!;Vc2 Lfl 12.@xfl

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a b c d e f g h


12 . . . h6 If Black does not take care then he may

lose quickly, for instance: l 2 . . . \Wf6 1 3.ctJd2 ctJxd2t? ( 1 3 . . . ct:ld6 1 4.ct:l b3 h6 1 5 .ctJxc5 fie7 leads to the main line) 1 4.fixd2 fid6 1 5.Ei:e l t <iif8 1 6.fixb4 ct:la6 1 7.fic3 1Mff7?

8 �- � :. �.i 7 r.r•wJ�•• 6 �� -� -- ·� ��-,,�� s � r .. �••• 4 � •. ,z. �. ��

�m.·0 �� r�� !nla�J!f�

• --Z� ��m�---a b c d e f g h

This was Arnaudov - Videnova, Cappelle la Grande 20 1 1 , and now 1 8.'1Wa4!N ct:lb4 19 .ctJg5 would have enabled the white queen to penetrate to d7 with lethal effect.

13.tiJd2 tiJd6 14.tlJb3 1Mff6 15.tlJxc5 fie? 16.tlJe6

We have been following the game Rojicek - Bures, Czech Republic 20 1 2. From this position many crazy deviations are possible. I think the best move may be:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 a b c d e f g h

16 ... tlJa6!N

I also analysed l 6 . . . dxe6!?N 1 7.dxe6 ctJe4 when Black just survives thanks to some tactical resources: 1 8 .'1Wc8t ( 1 8 .fixe4 fxe4 1 9 .1Mfxe4 0-0 20.'1Wxa8 1Mf xe6 2 l .'1Wg2�) 1 8 . . . !id8 19.1Mfb7 0-0 20.'1Wxa8 1Mfxe6 2 1 .1Mfxb8 1Mfc4t 22.<iigl fig5 23.fifl iMfxfl t 24.<iixfl !"i:xb8 25.ctJxg5 ct:lxg5±

17.1Mfa4 l:k8 18.Jif4 '1Wxb2 19.l:fol '1Wa3 Also playable is: 1 9 . . . g5 20.fixd6 !"i:c l

2 1 .ctJg7t <iif7 22.1Mfxd7 !"i:xel t 23.<iixel 1Mfc3t 24.<iie2 '1Wc2t=

20.tiJc?t <iid8 21 .'1Wxa3 hxa3 22.tDxa6 1'k2?

Black is holding his own in this somewhat messy position.

C222) I o.iie3

Here we see a more solid approach from White.

10 . . . g6 I l .'1Wc2 d6 12.tiJd2 This was the latest attempt from the Russian

GM Iljushin, who has played this variation twice for White.

A year beforehand he tried: 1 2.0-0 fig7 13.ctJd2 0-0 14.ct:lxe4 fxe4 1 5 .ctJg5

Chapter 20 - 4 .g3 287

Iljushin - Khismatullin, Dagomys 20 10 . Now the critical continuation would have been:

s ,E�.i. � �-� 1 �- -- '� %Sf __ y,� i 6 , , , , %� �------"� 'i"� �.�� : � •. J.r.;�- - . 3 �---- ".��wr 2 c�;�-; ___ £�� -----"� %•:� - - -

a b c d e f g h 1 5 . . . j,a6N

I think Black can take the exchange and there is nothing too scary.

1 6.j,xe4 j,xfl 1 7.Ei:xfl C/Jd7 l 8.C/Je6 cuf6 1 9 .j,g2 Ei'.fe8oo

12 .. . i.g7 13.ltJxe4 fxe4 14.ltJgS 0-0 15.i.xe4

s ��.i.� �-m 7 i{AJ;n �------Y-�r 6 , , , , ,/,� �------"� 'i"� ��n?--- -�� :--/� 5 � �� 8 - �� 4 �----- %� �� /, , , , , ,�

� �-- - -%� ��-0 ��r� 3 � - � �� 2 �W�� ,,,,,"w�--- - "w� 0 /,Q% \§ � /,Q% � 1 -----"��=----"-�

a b c d e f g h 15 . . . tiJd7!?N

1 5 . . . j,f5 leads to an endgame: 1 6. 0-0 j,xe4 1 7.W'xe4 W'xe4 1 8.CUxe4 j,xb2 1 9.Ei:ab l j,g7 20.CUxd6 Ei:d8= Iljushin - Sharafiev, Moscow 20 1 1 . The text move is a good alternative which keeps more pieces on the board, and could lead to some exciting possibilities as shown in the following illustrative line.

16.0-0 ltjf6 17.i.g2 ltJg4 18.i.f4 1 8.CUe6 CUxe3 1 9 .fxe3 Ei:f6=

19.gxf4 Wff6 20.Wf c4 White has to be careful, for instance 20.h3?

W'xf4 2 1 .hxg4 W'xg5 and Black wins.

20 .. . aS 21 .WfbS? 2 1 .h3! is essential: 2 1 . . .j,a6 22.W'e4 j,xfl

23.Ei:xfl cuh6 24.b3=

21. . .Wfxf4 22.Wf est i.ffi 23.tiJf3

8 7 6

5

3 2

1 a b c d e f g h

23 .. . i.fS!! This beautiful move seals White's fate.


24.'Wxa8 ie4 25.'Wds ixf3 26.'Wh4 hg2-+ Black is winning, since taking the bishop

would cost White his queen after a knight check.

C223) 10.d6

a b c d e f g h 10 . . . 'Wxd6 1 1 .f3 ia6 12.'We3

This time White wins material, but his king is stuck in the centre and the black pieces may become extremely active.

12 ... 'l)c6 13.fxe4 This position has only been reached in one

game, Sosonko - Barle, Ljubljana 1 977. At this point I found a useful improvement:

13 .. . ie7!N

a b c d e f g h

In the aforementioned game Black opted for long castling, but to me it looks more logical to park the king on the kingside, as it will be safer there while the rook will be happy on f8 .

14.e5 After the greedy l 4.exf5 0-0 Black has a

formidable initiative, for example: l 5 .iWe4 Ei:ae8 1 6.iWd5t �h8 17.�dl Ei:xf5 1 8.iWxd6 ixd6+

Another possibility is: 14 .lllf4 0-0 1 5 .llld2

White's king remains stuck in the centre and it will take a long time to develop his queenside. Black should be able to win in a few different ways.

l 5 . . . Ei:ae8 1 5 . . . llld4 should also work, but the rook move is stronger and also brings a certain sense of harmony associated with developing the last piece.

l 6.llle2 if6 Black has a decisive initiative, for example:

1 7.0-0 llld4-+

a b c d e f g h 14 ... 'l)xe5!!

Welcome back in time to the 1 9th century, where we will play in the style of the old maestros!

15.ha8 0-0 16.if3

Chapter 20 - 4 .g3 289

a b c d e f g h 16 ... f4!

Despite being a rook and a knight down, Black has a crushing attack.

We should not allow ourselves to become distracted by material: 1 6 . . . ll'id3t? 17.lt>fl ll'ixcl t 1 8 .lt>g2 ll'id3 1 9 .:!"i:dl �.f6 20.a3±

17.tLlxf4

Against l 8.ll'id2 'iffie6 l 9 . .ie4 almost everything is winning, for example: 1 9 . . . ll'id3t 20.lt>dl ll'if2t 2 1 .lt>c2 .id3t (2 1 . . .:!"i:xe4 22.ll'ixe4 'iffic4t

23.lt>d2 ll'ixe4t 24.<±>el 'iffie6-+) 22.'iffixd3 2"1xe4 23.'iffif3 2"1e2 24.g4 '1Wg6t 25 .'iffif5 'iffixf5t 26.gxf5 ll'ixhl-+

18 ... gf6! 1 8 . . . :8:£7 also wins, but the lines are more

complicated.

a b c d e f g h 19.ixa6 °?NdS!?

1 9 . . . 'iffixa6 is also good enough, for instance: 20.lt>dl ll'ig4 2 1 .'iffixe7 'iffid3t 22 . .id2 ll'if2t 23.<±>cl ll'ixh l-+

20.gfl gxa6 21.id2 ge6 22. 'itidl tLlc4-+

Conclusion

Readers who employ the 'pure Benoni' move order may never encounter the variation with an early g2-g3 from White. However, for those who favour the 2 . . . e6 move order, followed by 3.g3 c5 as an anti-Catalan weapon, the 5 . . . b5!? variation is a real possibility. Whether or not you choose it over the standard 5 . . . d6 lines is a matter of personal preference. If you do decide to venture the more ambitious system then you should be well prepared but still expect surprises, as there are many unexplored possibilities.

A) 4.dxe6?! fxe6 Al) 5.�f3 A2) 5.�c3 A3) 5.�g5

B) 4.�f3

A2) note to 12 . . . c4

Lines without e4 Rare 4th Moves

Variation Index 1 .d4 �f6 2.c4 c5 3.d5

3 ... e6

A2) after 1 7.'it>e2

a b c d e f g h

B2) note to 1 5 .h3

291 291 292 294 295

a b c d e f g h 28 . . . .i,xg2!N

Chapter 2 1 - Rare 4th Moves 291

l .d4 lllf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6

In this chapter we will round up a few rare and mostly insignificant lines, beginning with A) 4.dxe6?! and finishing with B) 4.lllf3.

4.'Lic3 This move has been the focus of most of the book. We have already covered a few rare lines from this position, and there is not much more to add here.

4 . . . exd5 5.'Lixd5?! 5 .cxd5 d6 6 . .if4 (Sidelines after 6.e4 can be found in Chapter 1 4, and various 6.'Lif3 lines in subsequent chapters.) 6 . . . g6 Now it is hard to suggest anything other than 7.e4 or 7.'Lif3 transposing to normal positions.

5 . . . 'Lixd5 6.Wxd5

but I see no reason to devote much space to such a timid line. Here is a good example of how Black should proceed.

6 . . . 'Lic6 7.'Lif3 d6 8.e4 .ie6 9 .Wdl .ie7 1 0 . .ie2 0-0 1 1 . 0-0 .if6+

Seidemann - Wolf, Germany 1 995.

A) 4.dxe6?! fxe6

4 . . . dxe6? needlessly hands White a slight edge after 5 .Wxd8t �xd8 6.'Lic3 'Lic6 7 . .if4.

a b c d e f g h The text move is much better, and with

a central pawn majority and open f-file it is Black who can fight for the advantage. We will analyse Al) 5.lllf3, A2) 5.lllc3 and A3) 5.i.gS.

Black has a comfortable game after 5.g3 .ie7 6 . .ig2 0-0 7.'Lif3 d5 8.0-0 'Lic6+ as seen in Krausser - Sailer, Ingolstadt 1 989.

Al) 5.lllf3 d5

Black can get a good position playing almost anything, but taking over the centre is the most logical idea. By the way, 5 . . . b5?! 6.cxb5 leads to the Blumenfeld Gambit Accepted, but there is absolutely no need for it here.

6.e3 lllc6 7.i.e2


The careless 7.ctJc3? allows 7 . . . d4+ when the following continuation amused me: 8 .ctJe2 d3! 9.llif4 e5! 1 0.llid5 e4-+

9 ... d4! 10.exd4 cxd4 11 .tllbS eS Black was already winning in Burger -

Grab, Wattens 1 994.

A2) s.tllc3

6.�g5 d4 7.llie4 �e7 8.�xf6 gxf6 9.e3 0-0+ Foguelman - R. Garcia, Quilmes 1 959. Black dominates the centre and has the bishop pair too.

6.e3 d4 7.ctJce2 e5 8.llig3 llic6 9.�d3 \We7+ Black has a comfortable position with more space.

6.e4 d4 7.e5 This is a bit more spirited, but Black has more than one good reply.

8 .iatt.�•� �� 7 :iii'� ,,, ,%� ,,,,,�--, 6 . . . %� �� f�r -%� ��f%��-�- - - '� 5 ��-,J�� 4 •�w� • � 3 ��- - %� �� ,zt-- --� ��-%��-� 2 �J��/0 �y�P.,,41�

-� �'ii'�.i�M a b c d e f g h

7 . . . llifd7!? Intending to grab the e-pawn. Black can also force a slightly better endgame without any risk: 7 . . . dxc3N 8.\Wxd8t c±>xd8 9.exf6 gxf6 1 0 .bxc3 lli c6 1 1 .llif3 e5+

8.llie4 llixe5 9.\Wh5t 9.llif3 ctJ bd7 1 o.llixe5 llixe5 1 1 .\Wh5t llif7 1 2.�g5 \Wa5t 1 3.�d2 \Wb6 14.0-0-0 �e7+


9 . . . ll'if7 1 0.ig5N 1 0.tl'ig5 g6+ Korban - Tsiganova, Tallinn 2008.

10 . . . 'Wa5t 1 1 .id2 'Wb6 Black is clearly better here, for example:

1 2.0-0-0 ie7 1 3.id3 ll'ic6 1 4.f4 1 4.ll'if3 g6 1 5 .'Wg4 e5 1 6.'Wg3 if5 17 .h4 0-0-0+

a b c d e f g h 1 4 . . . e5! 1 5.Ei:e l

1 5 .ll'if3?? g6-+ l 5 . . . g6 1 6.'We2 0-0+

6 ... exd5

a b c d e f g h 7.i.g5

This seems like the logical and principled try, but it just doesn't work. Objectively 7 .e3 should be tried, but it is obvious that Black has the initiative.

7 ... d4 7 . . . ie7 transposes to line A3, but via this move

order advancing the cl-pawn is more energetic.

s.llJe4 i.f5!? 8 . . . ie7 is also good: 9.ll'ixf6t (9 .ixf6 R. Silva

- R. Fernandez, Guarapuava 1 992. 9 . . . gxf6!?N 1 0.e3 'Wa5t 1 l .'Wd2 'Wxd2t 1 2.ll'ixd2 ll'ic6+) 9 . . . ixf6 1 0.ixf6 'Wxf6+ 1 1 .ll'if3 Obando - Guimoye, Lima 2002. Here I suggest the following slight improvement:

8 .i fll.t�• � �.i" 1 �··'� �� W-i 6

,,,,,�� ..... f,� �-��;;,,, ,;,� : �-j-�� 3 � ,, � � - .,,� 'O'/ 2 �n ��n��/, �,,,,%�,��-�

a b c d e f g h 1 1 . . .ll'ic6!N The benefit of delaying castling is seen in the following line: 1 2.Ei:c l b6 1 3.e3 ib7 1 4.exd4? 0-0-0!-+


9 ... gxf6 White is already in trouble.

a b c d e f g h 10.e4!?

Attempting to complicate the game, rather than play something like 1 0.i.d2 Wb6 l l .iWb3 Wxb3 12.axb3 i.e6 when Black is clearly better.

10 ... ixe4 I I .'1We2 fxg5 12.'!Wxe4t '!We7+ White does not have much to show for his

missing pawn.

A3) 5.ig5

5 . . . d5 is not bad at all, but it could be useful to get rid of the pin first.

6.ctJc3 d5 Just as in many of the earlier lines, White

already has to be careful.

6 . . . 0-0 is also not bad, but it allows White to develop: 7.lt'if3 lt'ic6 8.e3=

7.cxd5 7.lt'if3 d4 8.i.xf6 gxf6+ Hillmann -

R. Mueller, Jena 2005 .

7 ... exd5 8.e3 Let's see what happens if White dines on the

cl-pawn: 8.i.xf6 i.xf6 9.llixd5N

9.Wxd5?? i.xc3t actually occurred in one game which I'm sure White would rather forget. After 9.'Wb3?N White will pay the price for not developing his kingside: 9 . . . llic6 There are other good moves, but one is enough. 1 0.0-0-0 ( 1 0.lt'ixd5? Wa5t 1 1 .lt>dl i.f5-+) 1 0 . . . i.xc3 l 1 .Wxc3 We?+ 1 2.:!"i:xd5? lt'ib4-+

8 1.•..t�•� �I' 7 &ri'� ,,,,,/,� �-,· 6

, , , , ,%� �� ,�----%� 5 �

��!.�. 4

�---�� 3 ��,,, �� ,,, ��,� 2 �,�� 0:4J!l/;:J!J

1 � �v�.tm : a b c d e f g h

9 . . . i.xb2 1 O.:!"i:b 1 i.d4 l l .e4 This can hardly be good for White, but what else is there?

1 1 . . .0-0 1 2.llif3 :!"i:e8 Black is also better after: 1 2 . . . i.g4 1 3.i.c4 c±>h8 14.0-0 llic6 1 5 .i.e2 i.xf3 16.i.xf3 b6+

13 .llid2 1 3.i.c4 :!"i:xe4t 14.lt'ie3t c±>h8 1 5 .0-0 lt'ic6+


1 3 . . . ie6 Black must avoid 1 3 . . . \;Wxd5? 14.ic4 1':lxe4t 1 5 .\t>fl \;Wxc4t 16.ll'ixc4±.

14.ie2 l 4.ll'if4 \;Wf6+

14 . . . ll'ic6+ The queenside pawn majority and bishop

pair offer Black a slight edge.

8 .i �.i.�·- �� 1 76i-;B,, _ _ _ ,,�m-i 6 %, , , ,%- ;/,-""'".----%-

� ��-� �� /-- - - - -W(:r 5 � /j;; i � � 4 �� ,,, , , /,� �� , , , , ,/,�

, �% "//, �w.-� �� 3 � � '4[S � 2 �d"'":-,,J� �ff 1 ;,�t"""� !��,,?.�� z� � §i �d)b�; §

a b c d e f g h 8 ... Cllc6N

I prefer this over 8 . . . d4, which has the disadvantage of giving the white knight a good square in the centre. 9.exd4 cxd4 10.ixf6 ixf6 l 1 .ll'ie4N= (Rather than l l .\;We2t?! lt>f8+ Busch - Niessen, e-mail 200 1 .)

9.ixf6 ixf6 10.Cllxd5 ixb2 1 1 .�bl ie6! We must destroy the opponent's only active

piece.

12.ic4 After l 2.1':lxb2 ixd5 White must find some

only moves just to survive the opening: 1 3.e4! ( 1 3.ll'if3 is well met by 1 3 . . . \;Wa5t 14 .\;Wd2 ll'ib4+ 1 5.ie2? ixf3-+) 13 . . . ixe4 14.\;Wxd8t lt>xd8! l 5 .f3 id5 l 6.1':lxb7 ll'id4 l 7.1':lb2 (l 7.1':lxg7 1':lb8+) l 7 . . . lt>c7+ Black has a lead in development and can press for a win with virtually no risk.

s .iB �-�% �� 7 �·� "� �-i '� �� 0 3� 6 � �!�� : ��,i�� 3 - %

�%� %� �l!!P �� 'm0 �!W" 2 .�� // ��--��8

1 M -V� �M � � /,, , , , �,, , , , ; a b c d e f g h 12 ... 0-0!

Development is the name of the game, and Black can even afford to go a piece down temporarily.

13.�xb2 Clle5 This wins back the piece immediately.

14.ie2 This leads to a tough endgame for White,

but it is hard to suggest anything better, for example: 14.ib3 c4 1 5 .1':ld2 \;Wa5 16.ll'ie7t lt>f7-+

l 4 ... ixd5 15.Cllf3 Cllxf3t 16.gxf3 'Wa5t 17.'Wd2 'Wxd2t 18.�xd2 ixf3+

Black's extra pawn gives him good winning chances.

B) 4.Cllf3


a b c d e f g h 4 ... exd5

If you want to save yourself the effort of looking at the remaining pages, you can just play 4 . . . d6! followed by . . . exd5, when White is denied the option of a quick e2-e4. Nevertheless I will cover the text move for the sake of completeness, as well as for the benefit of those who may reach the position via a different move order such as l .d4 e6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 exd5 4.cxd5 lllf6 5 .lllf3 .

5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 This is about the only way for White to

give independent value to the set-up with lll8 instead of lllc3 . He uses the fact that the e-pawn is presently untouchable (6 . . . lllxe4?? 7.'Wa4t) to do without the knight on c3 for the moment. Still, one has to ask if the knight can realistically hope to find a better square than c3.

6 ... a6!? We can borrow an idea from Chapter 1 6,

namely that if White puts his pawn on a4, his queen will not be able to give check on that square.

6 . . . g6 is possible, but after 7.i.d3 i.g7 8.h3 0-0 9.0-0 White's idea of delaying lllc3 starts to make a bit more sense. For instance, after 9 . . . b5 White can try 1 0 .Ei:e l ! ? to create an

escape square for the bishop on fl (rather than 1 0. lll c3 which transposes to the sideline 10 . 0-0 in the Modern Main Line with 9 . . . b5 - see page 1 1 8) . This may not be so bad for Black, but it has been tested by some strong players and I see no reason to follow this path when a much simpler alternative exists.

7.id3 ig4 8.ctJbd2 ctJbd7 9.h3 Black is also fine after: 9.Vf1c2 g6 1 0.h3 i.xf3

1 1 .lllxB i.g7 1 2.a4 Ei:c8

s �KB•� �i' 7 ·�i)�·-·

�� ;;;, ,, �. " ,('"""� 6 , • • -· � 5 �-�%�',, -� 4 !a--- �.!.�� 3 � -�-et:J-�

2 ��,�� "':f'" ' "�7� �fu<X{' , "� � � � � M a b c d e f g h

Compared with the Modern Main Line, the exchange of Black's problem bishop eases his position considerably. One game continued: 1 3 .i.c4 0-0 14.0-0 'We7 1 5 .Ei:el EI:fe8= Garcia Palermo - Granda Zuniga, Benasque 20 10 .


Black took on f3 in Yermolinsky - Shaked, Denver 1 998, but I find it more logical to exchange another pair of minor pieces.

10�i.e2 i.xf3 1 0 . . . lllxf3t 1 1 .lllxf3 �h5 1 2.0-0 �e7 its

close to equal, but not much of a Benoni.

1 1 .llJxf3 llJxf3t 12.i.xf3 i.e7 1 2 . . . g6 is playable, but the bishop will soon

reach the long diagonal anyway, and this time without any weakening of the kingside.

Conclusion

You hardly need to do much preparation for any of these lines, but now you can be ready in the event that someone tries to surprise you with one of them.

I hope you enjoyed the book and wish you every success with the Modern Benoni.

Variation Index

Chapter 1

1 .d4 c!lJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.c!lJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 i.g7 8.e5

A) 8 . . . dxe5 J O B) 8 . . . tlifd7 9 .tlib5 dxe5 1 0.tlid6t We7 l 1 .llixc8t Wxc8 12.tlif3 �e8 12

B l ) 1 3.f5 14 B l 1 ) 1 3 . . . tlib6N 14 B l 2) 1 3 . . . e4! 15

B2) l 3.fxe5 17

Chapter 2

1.d4 c!lJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.c!lJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 i.g7 8.c!lJf3 0-0 9.i.e2

A) 9 . . . �e8 19 B) 9 . . . tlibd7 22 C) 9 . . . .ig4 1 0.0-0 tlibd7 l 1 .h3 .ixf3 1 2 . .ixf3 �e8 1 3.�e l 23

Cl ) 1 3 . . . Wa5 27 C2) 1 3 . . . c4 14 . .ie3 Wa5 29

C21 ) 1 5 . .id4 29 C22) 1 5 .Whl 30

Chapter 3

1.d4 c!lJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.c!lJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 i.g7 8.i.bSt c!lJbd7 9.e5 dxe5 10.fxeS c!lJhS 1 1 .e6 °?Nh4t

A) 1 2.Wd2 33 B) 1 2.g3! 35

Chapter 4

l .d4 c!lJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.c!lJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 i.g7 8.i.bSt c!lJfd7

A) 9.tlif3 43 B) 9 . .id3 44 C) 9 . .ie2 46

Cl ) 9 . . . 0-0 46 C2) 9 . . . Wh4t 47

Variations Index 299

Chapter 5

1 .d4 llif6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.llic3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 J.g7 8.J.b5t llifd7 9.a4 �h4t 10.g3

A) 1 0 . . . '\WdS l 1 .llif3 0-0 1 2.0-0 50 Al) 1 2 . . . llla6 50 A2) 1 2 . . . a6 52

A2 1) 1 3 .J.e2 52 A22) l 3.J.d3 lllf6 54

A22 1 ) 14 .'\Wb3 54 A222) 14.�g2 57

B) 1 0 . . . '\We7 l 1 .lllf3 0-0 1 2.0-0 llla6 58 B l ) 1 3.e5 58 B2) 13 .Ei:e l 59

Chapter 6

I .d4 llif6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.llic3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 J.g7 s.J.b5t llifd7 9.a4 0-0 10.llif3 llia6 1 1 .0-0

A) l l . . . lllc7 63 Al) 1 2.J.c4 63 A2) 1 2.J.xd7 64 A3) 1 2 .J.d3 65

B) l 1 . . .lllb4 67 B l ) 1 2.h3?! 68 B2) 1 2.Ei:el a6 13 .J.fl Ei:e8 14 .h3 69

B2 1 ) 1 4 . . . b6 70 B22) l 4 . . .f5 ! ? 71

B22 1 ) 1 5 .exf5 72 B222) l 5 .J.d2 72 B223) l 5 .e5 73 B224) l 5 .'\Wb3 76

300 Grandmaster Repertoire 1 2 - The Modern Benoni

Chapter ?

1.d4 llJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.llJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.llJf3 .ig7 8 . .ie2 0-0 9.0-0 l:!e8

A) l 0.'\Wc2 80 B) 1 O.llld2 82

B l ) 1 0 . . . llla6 l l .f3 lllc7 1 2.a4 llld7 82 B l 1 ) l 3 .lllc4 84 B l 2) 1 3 .'kt>hl 85

B2) 1 0 . . . lllbd7 87 B2 1 ) l l .f4 87 B22) l l .'\Wc2 89 B23) l l .a4 90

B23 1 ) l 1 . . .llle5 91 B232) l l . . . a6 93

B232 1 ) 1 2.f4 93 B2321 l ) 1 2 . . . Elb8 94 B232 1 2) 1 2 . . . c4 95

B2322) 1 2.'1Wc2 96 B2322 1 ) 1 2 . . . Elb8 96 B23222) 1 2 . . . llle5 98

Chapter 8

1.d4 llJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.llJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.llJf3 .ig7 8 . .ie2 0-0 9.0-0

A) 9 . . . a6 102 B) 9 . . . ig4 109

B l ) 1 0.h3?! 1 09 B2) 1 0.llld2 1 10 B3) 1 0.if4 1 1 1

Chapter 9

1.d4 llJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.llJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7 . .id3 .ig7 8.h3 0-0 9.llJf3 b5

A) 1 0.lllxb5 Ele8 1 18 Al ) 1 1 .llld2 1 19 Al) 1 1 .0-0 121

B) 1 0.ixb5 lllxe4 l 1 .lllxe4 '\Wa5t 1 2.lllfd2 '1Wxb5 13 .lllxd6 '\Wa6 1 4.lll2c4 llld7 1 5 .0-0 llle5 16 .lllxc8 Elaxc8 7.lllxe5 ixe5 1 8.Elel 123

B l ) 1 8 . . . '\Wd6 125 B2) 1 8 . . . Elfe8 125

Variations Index

Chapter 10

1 .d4 c!lif6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.c!lic3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6

A) 7.Ci:Jf3 a6!? 129 Al) 8.a4 129 A2) 8.iWe2!? 131

B) 7.J.d3 J.g7 8.h3 0-0 9.Ci:Jf3 134 B l ) 9 . . . a6 134 B2) 9 . . . E!:e8 1 0.0-0 c4 135

B21 ) l l .J.c2 135 B22) l l .J.xc4 136

B3) 9 . . . Ci:Jh5!? 1 0.0-0 Ci:Jd7 1 1 .J.gS J.f6 1 2.J.e3 E!:e8 138 B3 1 ) 1 3.Ci:Jd2 140 B32) 13 .iWd2 142

Chapter 1 1

1.d4 c!li f6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.c!lic3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f3 J.g7

A) 8.Ci:Jge2 0-0 9.Ci:Jg3 145 Al) 9 . . . a6 145 A2) 9 . . . h5 146 A3) 9 . . . Ci:Jh5!? 148

B) 8.J.e3 0-0 149 B l ) 9.Ci:Jge2 149 B2) 9.iWd2 150

C) 8.J.g5 0-0 9 .iWd2 152 Cl) 9 . . . a6 152 C2) 9 . . . h6 10 .J.e3 h5 l l .Ci:Jge2 155

C2 1 ) l l . . .Ei:e8 156 C22) l l . . .Ci:Jbd7 157

Chapter 12

1 .d4 c!lif6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.c!lic3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.c!lige2 J.g7 8.c!lig3

A) 8 . . . h5 161 B) 8 . . . a6 162 C) 8 . . . 0-0 163

301


Chapter 13

1 .d4 llJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.llJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7 . .id3 .ig7 8.llJge2 0-0 9.0-0 a6 10.a4 llJ bd7

A) 1 1 .igS 167 B) l 1 .h3 169 C) 1 1 . Cli g3 Ei:e8 172

Cl ) 1 2.h3 172 C2) 1 2.f4 V!ffc7 173

C2 1 ) 1 3.Vfif3 174 C22) l 3.h3 Ei:b8 175

Chapter 14

C221 ) 1 4.ie3 175 C222) l 4.Vfif3 c4 l 5 .ic2 b5 1 6.axbS axb5 l 7.ie3 lllc5 1 8 .eS dxe5

1 9 .fxeS Ei:xe5 20.id4 b4!? 178 C222 l ) 2 1 .ixeS 179 C2222) 2 1 .Vfif4 181

1 .d4 llJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.llJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6

A) 7.ibSt 185 B) 7.ie2 187 C) 7.llif3 189 D) 7.�d3 191

Chapter 15

1 .d4 llJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.llJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.llJf3 g6 7 . .if4 ig7 8.�a4t .id7 9.�b3

A) 9 . . . b5 193 Al) 1 0.llixbS 193 A2) 1 0.ixd6! 194

B) 9 . . . V!ffc7! 1 0.e4 0-0 l l .llld2 llih5 1 2.ie3 199 B l ) 1 2 . . . llia6 200 B2) 1 2 .. .fS 202

Chapter 16

1 .d4 llJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.llJc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.llJf3 g6 7 . .if4 a6

A) 8 .llid2 206 B) 8 . e4 b5 9.Vfie2 ie7 208

B l ) 1 0.eS 210

B2) I O.iWc2 211 C) 8 .a4 �g7 9.h3 0-0 1 0.e3 214

C I ) 10 . . . llie8 215 Cl) 10 . . . Ele8 217

Chapter 17

C2 1 ) l l .�e2 217 C22) I I .llid2! 218

Variations Index

1 .d4 lllf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.lllc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.lllf3 g6 7.g3 �g7 8.�g2 0-0 9.0-0

A) 9 . . . E\e8 223 B) 9 . . . a6 1 0.a4 llibd7 224

B l ) l 1 .�f4 224 B2) l I .e4 225 B3) l I .llid2 Ele8 227

B3 1 ) 1 2.a5 228 B32) 1 2.llic4 229 B33) l 2.h3 E\b8 l 3 .llic4 llie5 l 4.llia3 llih5 232

B33 1 ) I 5.<;i{h2 234 B332) l 5 .e4 �d7 236

Chapter 18

B332 1 ) I 6.g4 236 B3322) 16.f4 237 B3323) 1 6.a5 238

B3323 1 ) I 6 . . . '\Wxa5 239 B33232) 16 . . . b5 17.axb6 �b5 1 8 .lliaxb5 axb5

1 9.llixb5 iWxb6 241 B332321 ) 20.llic3 242 B332322) 20.llia3 244

1 .d4 lllf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.lllc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.lllf3 g6 7.llld2

A) 7 . . . llibd7!? 249 B) 7 . . . �g7 8 .llic4 0-0 250

B l ) 9.g3 251 B2) 9.�g5 252 B3) 9.�f4 253

B3 1 ) 9 . . . b6 253 B32) 9 . . . llie8 257

303


Chapter 19

l.d4 CLJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6

A) 4.ig5 h6 5 .ih4 262 Al) 5 . . . d6 263 A2) 5 . . . g5!? 263

B) 4.lllc3 exd5 5 .cxd5 d6 6.lllf3 g6 7.ig5 265 B l ) 7 . . . h6 265 B2) 7 . . . ig7 266

Chapter 20

B21 ) 8 .e4 266 B22) 8 .llld2 267

l.d4 CLJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.g3 exd5 5.cxd5 b5!?

A) 6.ig2 d6 270 Al) 7.e4 270 A2) 7.b4!? 272

B) 6.lllf3 ib7 7.e4 lllxe4 8 .ig2 273 B l ) 8 . . . id6!?N 274 B2) 8 . . . ie7 275

C) 6.e4!? lllxe4 277 Cl ) 7.ig2 277 C2) 7.V:fle2 V:fle7 8 .ig2 280

C2 1 ) 8 . . . llld6 281

Chapter 21

C22) 8 . . .f5 9.lllh3 b4 283 C22 1 ) 1 0.0-0 285 C222) 1 0.ie3 286 C223) 1 0.d6 288

l .d4 CLJf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6

A) 4.dxe6?! fxe6 291 Al) 5 .lll f3 291 A2) 5.lllc3 292 A3) 5 .ig5 294

B) 4.lllf3 295

Documents

Benoni - ia600907.us.archive.org...17 Fianchetto System 221 18 Knight's Tour Variation 248 19 Lines with an early ibg5 261 20 4.g3 269 21 Rare 4th moves 290 Index of Variations 298