Clless ys

cp p i1 1 +
Technical Editor: IM Sergei Soloviov

Translation by: GM Evgeny Ermenkov

Cover design by: Rustam Taichinov

Copyright© Alexei Kornev 2 017

Printed in Bulgaria by "Chess Stars" Ltd. - Sofia

ISBN13 : 978 619 7188 14-1
A PRACTICAL BIACK REPERTOIRE with d5, c6

Volumel

Alexei Kornev

The Slav
and Other Defences

Chess Stars
 Bibliography

Books

A Practical White Repertoire with 1.d4 and 2.c4, Vol. 1 by Kornev, Chess
Stars 2 0 13
Beating 1.d4 Sidelines by Avrukh, Quality Chess 2012
Complete Slav: Enter a Grandmaster's Laboratory by Sakaev, Chess
Evolution 2012
The Classical Slav, by Avrukh, Quality Chess 2 0 14
The Kaufman Repertoire for Black and White, New in Chess 2012
The Semi-Slav, by Schandorff, Quality Chess 2 0 15

Electronic/Periodicals

Chess Informant
New in chess Yearbook

Bestlogic Database
Chessbase online database
ChessOK Correspondence Database
Correspondence Database
FICGS DataBase
GameKnot Database
ICCF Database
LSS Database
Mega Database

4
Contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Part 1. 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6

1 Rare; 3.e3 lll f6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

2 3.lll c3 lll f6 Rare; A) 4.i.g5 dxc4; B) 4.e3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3 3.cxd5 cxdS A) 4.i.f4 lll c 6 ; B) 4.lll c3 lll f6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.lll f3 lll f6 Rare; 5.lll c3 lll c 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Part 2. 1.d4 d5 2 .c4 c6 3.lll £J c!Lif6

5 4.lll b d2 i.f5 Rare; A) 5.e3 e6; B) 5.g3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

6 4.g3 i.g4 A) 5.lll e 5 i.f5; B) 5.ig2 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
7 4.VNc2 dxc4 Rare; A) 5.e4 b5 ; B) 5.VNxc4 i.f5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
8 4.e3 ig4 Rare; A) 5.lll b d2 e6; B) 5.cxdS i.xf 3 ;
C ) 5.VNb3 W/b6; D) 5.lll c3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
9 4.e3 ig4 5.h3 i.h5 A) 6.lll b d2 e6; B) 6.g4 i.g6 7.lll e5 e6 ;
C) 6.cxd5 cxd5 ; D) 6.lll c3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 0

Part 3. 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.c!Li£J c!Lif6 4.c!Lic3 e6

10 Rare; 5.W/b3 dxc4 6.VNxc4 b5 A) 7.VNb3 lll b d7; B) 7.VNd3 i.b7 . . . 1 3 1

11 5.g3 dxc4 Rare; 6.i.g2 lll b d7 A) 7.a4 i.b4; B ) 7.0-0 b 5 . . . . . . . 1 3 8
12 5.cxd5 exd5 Rare; A) 6.i.g5 h 6 ; B ) 6.W/c2 g 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Part 4. 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.c!Li£J c!Lif6 4.c!Lic3 e6 5.e3 a6

13 Rare; A) 6.h3 lll b d7; B) 6.id2 c5 ; C) 6.a3 lll b d7 . . . . . . . . . . 1 6 7

14 6.ie2 dxc4 7.a4 c5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
15 6.id3 dxc4 7.ixc4 b5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
16 6 .c5 lll b d7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
17 6 .b3 ib4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
18 6.VNc2 c5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

5
 Part 5. 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.c!LJ:f3 tll f6 4.c!ll c3 e6 5 .ig5 dxc4 •

19 Rare; 6.a4 ib4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230

20 6.e4 b 5 7.e5 h6 8 . .ih4 g 5 A) 9.exf6 gxh4; B) 9 . .ig3 c!ll d5 . . . . . 237
21 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8 .ih4 g5 9.c!ll xg5 hxg5 10.ixg5 lll b d7
ll.exf6 .ib7 Rare; 12 .g3 \Wb6 13.ig2 0-0-0 14.0-0 c5
15.dS b4 16.l3bl \Wa6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
22 6.e4 b 5 7.e5 h6 8 . .ih4 g 5 9.lll xg5 hxg5 10 . .b:g5 lll bd7
11.exf6 i.b7 12 .g3 \Wb6 13 . .ig2 0-0-0 14. 0-0 c5 15.dS b4
16.lll a4 WfbS 17.a3 c!ll b 8 18.axb4 axb4 A) 19 . .ie3 .ixdS;
B) 19.\Wd4 c!ll c 6; C) 19.\Wg4 ixdS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254

Part 6. 1.d4 d5 without c4

23 A) 2.c3 c5; B) 2.lll c3 c6; C) 2.e3 c!ll f6; D) 2. e4 de; E) 2 .igS h6 . . . 2 6 7

24 A) 2 .if4 c5 ; B) 2 .lll f3 lll f6 3.i.f4 c 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
25 2.lll f3 lll f6 Rare; 3 ..igS lll e4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
26 2 .lll f3 lll f6 3.g3 c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297

Index of Variations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304

PREFACE

About an year ago I wrote the two-volume work "A Practical Black Rep­
ertoire with llif6, g6, d6" in which the readers had the option to build
their opening repertoire on the base of the King's Indian Defence and
the Pirc Defence. Both these openings are very good when you have to
play for a win irrelevant of the colour of your pieces. Still, sometimes,
depending on the situation in the tournament, you have to play some
not so aggressive, but more reliable systems. Therefore, I decided to
write another two-volume work in which as main openings for Black,
I analysed the Slav Defence and the Caro-Kann Defence. Both these
openings are very solid. This does not necessarily mean that the maxi­
mum that Black dreams about is a draw. The moment that White plays
imprecisely, Black can try to seize the initiative.

So, now I am happy to present to my readers the two-volume work

"A Practical Black Repertoire with dS, c6". In the first volume, we will
concentrate mostly on the Slav Defence (Chapters 1-2 2). In fact, now­
adays the Slav Defence (1.d4 dS 2 .c4 c6) is one of the most popular
closed opening in the contemporary tournament practice. In it, contrary
to the Queen's Gambit Declined (2 . . . e6), Black fortifies his centre, but
does not restrict his bishop on c8. Later, it can be developed to fS, or g4.

Besides all that, in the first part of the book, we will analyse all the
opening set-ups for White in which he refrains from the pawn-advance
c2-c4, after d4-d5 (Chapters 23-26). Among these lines, we have to pay
special attention to the London System (1.d4 dS 2 .i.f4, or 1.d4 dS 2 .llif3
llif6 3.i.f4) , which has become tremendously popular lately. It is also
worth mentioning that the combination of the Slav Defence and the
Caro-Kann Defence enables Black to facilitate his defence in the open­
ing and to avoid numerous unpleasant schemes for him. For example,
after 1.c4, he can simply play 1 . . .c6, without being afraid of 2 .e4. In
the above mentioned London System, after the moves 1.d4 dS 2 .i.f4 cS
3.e3,1Jlack has the resource 3 . . . cxd4 4.exd4, after which there arises by
transposition a variation from the Caro-Kann Defence which is practi­
cally harmless for Black.

The author would like to express his enormous gratitude to Ekate­

rina Smirnova for her invaluable assistance in the work over this book.

Alexei Kornev,
city of Vyazniki, July 2 0 17

7
 Part l
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6
In the first part of our book we
will analyse White's not so popu-
lar alternatives on move three,
when he refrains from 3. 'llf3, or
8
when he plays 3. 'llc 3, he does not
develop his king's knight on his
moves four and five.
The exchange variation has
turned into the main danger for
Black (Chapters 3, 4) . Numerous
fans of the Slav Defence do not
spend too much time in studying
it. Meanwhile, in the last several
years there has been amassed
plenty of theory in it and there
arise rather complicated varia­
tions, so without precise knowl­
edge in the opening Black may
come quickly into a bad position.
Chapter! 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6
We will analyse as a main
opening weapon for Black the
Slav Defence against White's first
moves d4 and c4. This opening
has become very popular in the
contemporary tournament prac­
tice. It is encountered in regular
open tournaments, as well as in
the super-tournaments and even
in the matches for the World
Championship. This is quite de­
servedly so, because the Slav De­
fence has a deep positional basis.
Indeed, with his first move (d7-
dS) Black begins a fight for the
centre and with his second move
(c7-c6) he continues with his
central strategy, fortifying his
central pawn. Still, contrary to the
Queen's Gambit (e7-e6), Black
does not close the h3-c8 diagonal
and his bishop can be developed
later to an active position on fS or
g4. In addition, the move c7-c6
creates prerequisites for him to
begin active actions on the queen­
side (dxc4, b7-bS) . In some varia­
tions Black can even try success­
fully to hold on to his c4-pawn.
This opening has been named the
Slav Defence, because many Pol­
ish, Russian, Czech and Yugosla­
vian chess masters have contrib­
uted greatly to the development
of its theory.
3.e3
White protects immediately
his c4-pawn, but now his bishop
on cl is deprived of the possibility
to be developed to f4 or gS.
About 3.'!Wc2 dxc4 4.�xc4 t.llf6
- see 3.'!Wb3.
3.'!Wb3 dxc4 4.'!Wxc4 t.llf6 S.t.llf3
.ifs, or S.t.llc3 .ifs 6.t.llf3 e6 - see
Chapter 7, variation B.
3.t.lld 2 t.llf6 4.t.llgf3 ifs, or 4.e3
ifs S.t.llgf3 e6 - see Chapter S.
9
Chapter 1
It is not good for White to play
3.igS, because after 3 . . . h6 4.ih4,
Black can simply capture the
pawn 4 . . . dxc4 and White fails to
obtain sufficient compensation
for it. 5.a4 (5.e4 bS 6.a4, Chepu­
kaitis - Sebag, playchess.com
2003, 6 . . . llJf6 ! ?+) 5 . . . Wfb6. Black
removes with tempo his queen
away from the h4-d8 diagonal
and prepares e7-e5 and ib4, in
order to exploit the absence of
White's dark-squared bishop
from the queenside. 6.'\1;Vd2 eS ! 7.
dxeS ib4 8.llJc3, Chepukaitis -
Karjakin, Dubai 2 0 0 2 , 8 . . . gS ! ?
9.ig3 llJa6 10 .e3 ie6+ Black has
given back advantageously the ex­
tra pawn, but has seized firmly
the initiative.
3.g3. As a rule, this move leads
by transposition to lines from the
other Chapters. 3 . . . llJf6.
About 4.llJc3 dxc4 5.llJf3 e6, or
5.ig2 e6 6.liJf3 llJbd7 - see Chap­
ter 11.
4.cxdS cxdS - see Chapter 3,
4.g3 llJf6.
4.llJf3 ig4 - see Chapter 6,
3.llJf3 llJf6 4.g3 ig4.
4.ig2 ig4 5.llJc3 (5.h3 ihS 6.
10
'\1;Vb3, Berkes - K.Szabo, Paks
2 0 0 2 . Here, the simplest for Black
would be to choose 6 . . . '\1;Vb6 ! ? = , in
an attempt to trade the. queens
and to obtain a quite acceptable
position; 5.llJf3 - see 3.llJf3 llJf6
4.g3 ig4 5.ig2) 5 . . . e6 6.f3. After
this move there arise very original
positions (6.llJf3 llJbd7 - see
Chapter 6, variation B). 6 . . . ihS
7.llJh3, Tischbierek - Hug, Zuer­
ich 199. After llJf4, White plans to
exchange his knight for the enemy
bishop and to obtain the two­
bishop advantage, but leaves his
c4-pawn without protection and
Black can exploit this immediate­
ly. 7 . . . dxc4 ! ? 8.llJf4 ig6 9.h4 id6
10 .e4 .hf4 ll.hf4 llJhS= There
has arisen a position with dynam­
ic balance. Black has an extra
pawn at the moment, but White
has occupied the centre with his
pawns and has restricted consid­
erably the mobility of the enemy
bishop on g6.
3.if4 dxc4 ! This is the only
correct move for Black; otherwise,
White will play e2-e3 and Black
will have great difficulties to or­
ganise counterplay on the queen­
side.

4.e4 b5 5.lbc3 lbf6 6.f3 ? ! White
protects reliably his pawn on e4,
but deprives his own knight of the
f3-square. (6.lbf3 e6 - see Chap­
ter 10, 5. i.f4 dxc4 6.e4 bS) 6 . . . e6
7.a4, Gonzalez Diaz - Bravo Bar­
ranco, Barbera del Valles 1997,
7 . . . 'i;Yb6 ! ?+ White has no compen­
sation for the pawn.
4.e3. This move looks more re­
liable than 4.e4, but is also insuf­
ficient for equality. 4 . . . b5 5.a4
lbf6 6.lbc3 (Unfortunately for
White it would not work for him
to play here 6.axbS cxb5 7.b3?, in
view of 7 . . . eS ! 8 .ixeS i.b4+ 9.
@e2 , Mancini - Pert, France
2 0 04, 9 . . . lbd5-+) 6 . . . 'i;Yb6. This is
Black's simplest move. He should
better refrain from b5-b4, be­
cause this would weaken his c4-
pawn. 7.lbf3 e6 8.i.e2 i.b4 9.0-0
0-0 10 .'\!;l/c2 i.b7 11.gfdl lbbd7.
Black has managed to complete
his development and to deploy
harmoniously his pieces. 12.lbeS
(12.lbgS, Sulskis - Antal, Plovdiv
2 01 2 , 12 . . . a6 ! ?+) 12 . . . lbxeS 13.
he5 lbd7+
3 ... �f6
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e3 lbf6
4.i.d3
White wishes to impede the
development of Black's bishop on
c8. Still, he presents his opponent
with the possibility to accomplish
an advantageous break in the cen­
tre with the help of a tactical op­
eration.
About 4.lbc3 e6 - see Chapter
2, variation B.
4.lbf3 ig4 - see Chapters 8-9.
4.lbd2 ifs 5.lbgf3 e6 - see
Chapter 5, variation A.
The move 4.'\!;l/c2 cannot create
problems for Black. 4 . . . ig4 5.lbc3
(5.id3 e6 6.lbc3 dxc4 - see 5.lbc3 ;
5.lbf3 i.xf3 - see Chapter 8, 5.Wc2
ixf3) 5 . . . e6 6.id3 dxc4 7.ixc4,
Gnidenko - Domnin, St Peters­
burg 2005, 7 . . . c5 ! ? 8.lbge2 cxd4
9.lbxd4 a6 10 .h3 ihS 11.0-0
lbbd7 12 .ie2 ig6 13.id3 ixd3
14.'i;Yxd3 �c8=
4 ... e5 !
This is the point.
11
Chapter 1
5.c!LJc3
White should better refrain
from opening the game in the
centre.
Following 5.cxd5 ? ! e4 !+ and
then cxd5, Black obtains the c6-
square for his knight, Potapov -
Komliakov, Salekhard 2 0 07.
5.�b3 e4+ Hoelzl - Madl, Aus­
tria 2 0 01.
After 5.c!LJe2 , Black's simplest
move would be 5 . . . id6, for exam­
ple 6.dxe5 he5. Here, it is essen­
tial that White has played too
early the move c!LJe2 and cannot
attack the enemy bishop with the
move c!LJf3. 7.cxd5 �xd5+ Paw­
lowski - Strumberg, ICCF 2 014.
Following 5.dxe5 dxc4, it is
only White who may have prob­
lems.
It is obviously bad for White to
play here 6.exf6?! cxd3 7.fxg7
hg7 8 .c!LJf3 c!LJa6 9.0-0, Zhao -
Girya, Khanty-Mansiysk 2 014,
9 . . .!�g8 ! ? Black begins an attack
against the enemy king. 10.c!LJbd2
i.e6+, followed by �d7, 0-0-0.
12
White can hardly parry his oppo­
nent's threats on the g-file, be­
cause the powerful black pawn on
the d-file squeezes his forces.
The endgame is preferable for
Black after 6.hc4 �xdl+ 7.<iix dl
c!LJg4. This is the point. White can­
not protect simultaneously his
pawns on e5 and f2 . 8 .<iie l c!LJxe5
9.ie2 a5 ! ? 10 .id2 i.e6+
About 6.i.c2 §'xdl+ 7.i.xdl
llig4 - see 6 . .ie2 .
6 . .ie2 �xdl+ 7.hdl llig4 8.f4.
This ambitious move leads to the
weakening of the e3-square.
(White should possibly try to play
for equality already: 8.llif3 llid7
9.e6 llide5 10.exf7+ @xf7 11.0-0
llixf3 + 12 . .ixf3 i.d6= Schulle -
Puleston, IECG 2 003.) 8 . . . ic5
9. <iie 2 (It is more reliable for
White to opt here for 9.llia3 ! ? llia6
10.llixc4 llib4t, although even
then he would hardly manage to
neutralise the activity of Black's
pieces.) 9 . . . i.f5 10.llic3 (10.h3
i.d3+ 11.<iif3 h5 ! 12.llie2, Hamble­
ton - Constantinou, Ascot 2 014,
12 . . . llid7! ?+) 10 . . . i.d3+ u.<iif3 . It
is an endgame indeed, but White's
king cannot be safe in the centre,
because there are still too many
pieces on the board. 11 . . . h5 1 2 .
llige2, Aleksandrov - Novitzkij ,
Minsk 2 0 07, 12 . . . llid7 ! ? 13.h3 g5+
Now, White must consider per­
manently the possible sacrifice of
the enemy knight on e5.
5 . . . e4
Black acquires additional
space with tempo.

6.J.c2 J.d6
7.ttlge2
7.cxd5. This move seems im­
precise, because after 7 . . . cxd5,
Black will be able to develop his
knight on c6. 8.f3 0-0 9.fxe4
tlJxe4 10.tlJf3 (10.J.xe4 dxe4 11.
tlJxe4 .ib4+ 12 . .id2 ges�) 10 . . .
tlJxc3 ll.bxc3, Chemin - Kram­
nik, Moscow 1996. Here, Black
can maintain a slight but stable
edge with the line: ll . . . tlJc6 ! ? 12.
0-0 f5+, preventing e3-e4. Later,
he can continue with tlJa5 and
in the middle game White is
unlikely to have compensation
for his weak pawns on c3 and
e3.
7.f3. The pawn on e4 restricts
considerttbly White's pieces, so
his desire to exchange it as quick­
ly as possible is easily under­
standable. 7 . . . J.e6 ! This is Black's
most precise move. Now, if White
captures on c4, without the pre­
liminary exchange on d5, Black
will manage to regain the pawn
on c4.
1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.e3 tlJf6
8.fxe4 tlJxe4 9.i.xe4 (Natural­
ly, White cannot play here 9.tlJxe4
dxe4 10 ..ixe4?, due to 10 ...l,1;¥h4-+)
9 . . . dxe4 10.tlJxe4 i.xc4 11.'1;¥c2
.ids 12.tlJxd6+ '1;¥xd6+, followed
by tlJd7-f6, 0-0, gae8 with power­
ful initiative on the light squares.
8.cxd5 cxd5 9.fxe4 tlJxe4 10.
i.xe4 dxe4 ll.tlJxe4. White has
managed to win a pawn, but Black
has seized firmly the initiative.
ll . . . W/h4+ 12.tlJf2 l,1;¥g5 13 .g3 J.b4+.
He exploits the fact that his oppo­
nent cannot interpose against the
check with his bishop because of
the loss of his e3-pawn, so White
loses his castling rights. 14.©fl
0-0 15.tlJe2 f5 16.©g2 '1;¥d8 17.tlJf4
J.f7 18.gf1 J.d6� Firsching - Rada,
ICCF 2 011.
7 . . . 0-0
13
Chapter 1

8 .id2
•

The move 8.0-0? allows Black

to sacrifice his bishop in a typical
fashion 8 . . . hh2 + 9.©xh2 lll g 4+
10.©g3 h5 11.gh1 W/g5 1 2 .f4 Wfg6
13.fS W/g5 14.W/fl h4+ 15.gxh4
lll h 6+ 16. ©f2 W/xh4-+

Th move 8 .h3 seems a bit slow.

8 . . . lll a 6. Black prepares the trans­
fer of his knight to the c7-square,
from where it will protect the im­
portant d5-square and can go even­
tually to g5 in order to join into
the attack against White's mon­
arch. 9.cxd5 cxd5 10.a3 lll c7+ Por­
tisch - Beliavsky, Hungary 2 003.
8 . . �a6 9.a3 �c7 10.c5 .ie7
. exerts powerful pressure against
11.0-0 b6
Black prepares the develop­
ment of his bishop to the fl-a6 di­
agonal.
12.b4 .ia6 13.f3 exf'3 14.
gxf'3 W/d7oo Marquardt - Pu­
zanov, ICCF 2 015. White has
managed to exchange the enemy
e4-pawn, but Black's bishop on a6
his position.

14
Chapter 2 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 .tLJc3 tLJf6
We are going to analyse
White's main lines in the follow­
ing chapters of our book, while
now we will deal with A) 4 . .ig5
and B) 4.e3, when after 4 . . . e6, he
refrains from the most natural
move S.tl:)f3.
About 4.g3 dxc4 S.tl:)f3 e6, or
S.ig2 e6 6.tl:)f3 tl:)bd7 - see Chap­
ter 11.
4.\!Nb3 dxc4 S.'1Nxc4 ifs 6.tl:)f3
e6 - see Chapter 7, variation B2.
4.cxdS cxdS - see Chapter 3,
variation B.
4.tl:)f3 e6 - see Chapters 10-2 2 .
4.if4 dxc4
S.tl:)f3 e6 - see Chapter 10,
S.if4 dxc4.
S.e4 bS, or S.e3 bS 6.a4 \!Nb6 -
see Chapter 1, 3.if4.
S.a4 Was 6.tl:)f3 (6.id2 eS. -
see 4.igS) 6 . . . tl:)bd7 7.id2 es 8.e3
exd4 9.exd4 ib4 10.i.xc4 0-0
11.0-0 tl:)b6 12 .ib3, Schef­
fknecht - S.Nikolic, Tuebingen
2 0 01,12 . . . ifS ! ? =
A) 4 .ig5
.
This is a very risky move for
White, since Black can simply
capture the c4-pawn and White
will need plenty of efforts in order
to regain it.
4 . . . dxc4
lS
Chapter 2
5.a4
This move is prophylactic
against b7-bS.
S ..bf6 exf6 6.e3 (6.a4 �as -
see S.a4) 6 . . . bS 7.a4 b4 8.lDbl i.a6
- see S.e3.
S.lDf3 bS 6.e3 e6 - see Chapter
19.
S.e4 bS 6.eS llJdS 7.a4 h6 8.
i.d2 (8.i.h4 �d7! ?+) 8 . . . aS ! ? This
is Black's most precise response.
Here, after 9.axbS llJxc3 10.bxc3
cxbS+, White's queen-sortie to f3
would not win material for him,
because Black's rook has numer­
ous squares on the a-file. As a re­
sult he remains with a solid extra
pawn.
S.e3 bS 6.a4. White must try to
undermine the enemy bS-pawn as
quickly as possible in order to
force the pawn-advance bS-b4
and thus to weaken the protection
of the pawn on c4. 6 . . . b4 7.lDbl
(7.llJa2 ? ! llJe4 8 .i.h4 '!Was 9.lDf3,
Penson - Van Routte, Gent 1989,
9 ... b3+ ! ? 10.llJc3 i.a6 11.i.e2 lDxc3
16
12 .'!Wd2 e6 13 .bxc3 llJd7+) 7 ... i.a6
8.i.xf6 exf6 9.'!Wcl (9.lDf3 i.e7=)
9 ... c3 10.bxc3 i.xfl 11.<i>xfl cS 12.
lDf3, Tartakower - Bogoljubow,
Karlsbad 1929, 12 . . . llJd7 ! ? 13 .g3
l:k8=
5 . . . '!Wa5
Black creates the threat llJe4,
but White should better ignore it.
6.�t'3
6.i.xf6?! This move not only
presents Black with the two-bish­
op advantage, but also enhances
the development of his kingside.
6 . . . exf6 7.e3 i.b4 8 .'!Wcl i.e6 9.�f3
�d7 10 .i.e2 0-0 11.0-0 lDb6
12 .e4, Rosa Valenzuela - Salazar
Jacob, Vina del Mar 1997, 12 . . .
l'fad8 ! ?+
Following 6.i.d2?! eS ! , Black
obtains a better position. 7.dxeS
(7.llJe4? Vladimirov - Sasikiran,
Kolkata 2000, 7 . . . '!WdS ! ? 8.�xf6+
gxf6+; 7.�f3? exd4 8.�xd4 �bd7
9.e3 lDeS+ Snehal - Perez Garcia,
Barbera del Valles 2 016) 7 . . . �xeS
8.�f3 '!Wes+ Black has an extra
 l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.4Jc3 4Jf6 4.igS de
pawn. White is incapable of ex-
ploiting his lead in development,
because after the natural move
9.e4? ! , he will suddenly have
problems with the protection of
the f2-square : 9 ... 4Jg4 10 .Wie2,
Ornstein - Kirov, Eksjo 1980,
10 ... 4Ja6 ! ?+, followed by 4Jb4 and
the threats 4Jd3(c2) will be very
unpleasant for White.
6 • • • tle4 7 .i.d2 tlxd2
•
Black has succeeded in obtain­
ing the two-bishop advantage, but
lags in development.
8.tlxd2 e5 9.tlxc4 Wlb4
10.tlxe5
10.e4? ! exd4 11.Wfxd4 ie6 12.
0-0-0 4Jd7 13.4Jd6+ hd6 14.
'!Wxd6 aS+ Mende - Borst, IECG
2003. The vulnerability of the b4-
square provides Black with a sta­
ble edge both in the endgame as
well as in the middle game.
It is also possible for White to
play here 10 .e3 ie6 11.ltJxeS '!Wxb2
12Jkl ib4 13.'!Wd2 '!Wxd2+ 14.
©xd2, Giannetto - Hessenius,
ICCF 2009, 14 . . . cS ! ? = , with ap­
proximately equal chances in the
endgame.
10 Wfxb2 11.lkl .i.b4 12.
• • •
Wfd2 Wfxd2+ 13.©xd2 0-0
It would be very difficult for
both sides to fight for an advan­
tage in this endgame.
14.e3
14.e4 4Jd7 1s.gb1 liJxeS 16.
gxb4, draw, Sorensen - Leiner,
ICCF 2 011. Indeed, after 16 . . . gds
17.dS (17.©e3? ! 4Jg4+ 18.©f3 aS+)
17 . . . aS 18.gb2 cxdS 19.ltJxdS ie6
20.gbs id7 2i.gxb7 ic6 = , Black
restores the material balance, but
there would be just a few material
left on the board.
14 • • • tid7
Black should better either ex­
change the powerful enemy
knight, or just oust it immediately
away from that square.
15.tld3
It seems less reliable for White
to opt here for 1s.gb1 cs 16.4Jxd7
17
Chapter 2
ix:d7. Black has completed his de­
velopment and his bishop-pair
may turn into an important trump
for him in the future. 17.dS a6
18.aS gfe8 19.!c4 gads 20.ghel
ix:aS 21.gxb7 ic6 22.ga7 ix:dS
23.ix:dS gxdS+ 24.@c2 gfs 25.
ge2 ghs 26.h3 gh6+ Varonen -
Laukola, ICCF 2 0 14.
15 . .iaS 16.@c2 tll f6= Hop­
..
man - Girl, Hilversum 2009.
Black has two powerful bishops,
but White's central pawns should
not be underestimated at all.
B) 4.e3 e6
s.ec2
18
About 5.tll f3 a6 - see Chapters
13-18.
5.a3 a6 6.tll f3 tll b d7 - see
Chapter 13.
5.f4. This move has been
played numerous times by A.Ru­
binstein. It is not however among
the best achievements of this
great theoretician . . . 5 . . . cS ! ? Black
wishes to develop his knight on c6
in order to exert pressure against
the d4-square. The loss of a tem­
po is not so important here, be­
cause the move f2-f4 may turn out
to be not so useful for White later
due to the weakening of the e4-
square. 6.tll f3 tll c 6 7 . .ie2 (7.a3 a6
8.tll e S !e7 9.cxdS, Seirawan -
Chemin, Wijk aan Zee 1986, 9 . . .
exdS ! ?oo) 7 . . . .ie7 8 . 0 - 0 0-0 9.b3
(9.tll e S cxd4 10.exd4 dxc4 11.
tll xc6 bxc6 12 .ix:c4, Lilov - Droz­
dovskij , playchess.com 2006, 12 . . .
ec7 ! ? 13.ie3 gds+ White's d4-
pawn would need permanent
protection.) 9 . . . cxd4 10.exd4 dxc4
11.bxc4, Villeneuve - Feller,
Cannes 2 0 07, 11 . . . b 6 ! ? 12 .!b2
!b7+, followed by lL!aS, gcs, ex­
erting pressure against the enemy
hanging pawns.
5.!d2 a6 6.cs (6.'!Wc2 cs - see
5.'!Wc2 ; 6.lL!f3 c5 - see Chapter 13,
6 . .id2) 6 ... eS. Black exploits the
fact that White has not developed
his knight on f3 yet and accom­
plishes this advance without the
preliminary move tll b d7. 7.dxeS
(7.tll f3 e4oo Mirzoev - Handke,

Barcelona 2 011) 7 . . . lll fd7 8.f4
lll xcS 9.b4 lll e 6 lO J�bl aS+± Jus­
supow - Movsesian, Germany
1999.
· S.cxdS exdS. There has arisen
the Carlsbad pawn-structure,
which often happens in the ex­
change variation of the Queens
Gambit, but here, White's bishop
on cl has remained restricted in­
side his own camp and is deprived
of the possibility to go to f4 or gS.
6.id3 (6.1.Mlc2 id6 7.id3 0-0 8.
lll g e2 l3e8 - see 6.id3) 6 . . . id6 7.
lll g e2 0-0
8.h3 l3e8 9.0-0 lll b d7 10.f3.
White plans to advance e3-e4, but
after 10 . . . cSoo, this becomes im­
possible due to the horrible weak­
ening of the d4-square, Nouisseri
- Andujar, Siegen 1970.
8 .1.Mlc2 l3e8 9.i.d2 (9.0-0 lll b d7
- see 8 . 0-0) 9 . . . b6 ! ?+, preparing
c6-cS and lll c 6, Stanojevic -
Shabtai, Budapest 1994.
8.0-0 l3e8 9.�c2 lll b d7 10.f3
cS 11.b3, Novoa - Saint Amour,
IECG 2001, 11 . . . b6 ! ?+
S.id3 a6 6.b3 (6.a4 c5 7.lll f3
dxc4 8 .ixc4 lll c 6 - see Chapter
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. lll c3 lllf6 4.e3 e6
14, 7.a4 c5 8.i.xc4 lll c 6; 6.cS lll bd7
7.lll f3 es - see Chapter 16, 7.id3
eS ; 6.lll f3 dxc4 - see Chapter lS)
6 . . . cS 7.lll f3 lll c6 8.0-0 (8.cxdS
exdS 9.0-0 cxd4 10.lll xd4 lll xd4
11.exd4. White has some lead in
development, but this is irrele­
vant, since Black does not have
any pawn-weaknesses in his posi­
tion and he only needs several
moves in order to evacuate his
king away from the centre. 11...
ib4 12.lll a4 0-0 13.if4 ig4 14.f3
id7= Saric - Jakovljevic, Zadar
2012) 8 . . . dxc4. Black exploits the
misplacement of the enemy bish­
op on d3 and wishes simply to
capture the pawn on d4. 9.bxc4
cxd4 10.exd4 (10.lll e 4? ! dxe3.
White does not have full compen­
sation for the sacrificed pawn. 11.
ixe3 lll b 4 12 .id4, Levin - Vy­
sochin, St Petersburg 2 0 09, 12 . . .
ie7! ?+) 10 . . . lll xd4 11.lll xd4 1.Mlxd4
12 .ib2, Ivanisevic - Acs, Hunga­
ry 2 0 14 12 . . . id7! ?oo. Here, White
has some compensation for the
pawn, but not more than that.
S.b3. Now, after an exchange
on c4, White will be able to recap­
ture with his pawn. S . . . ib4. Black
exploits immediately the basic de­
fect of White's previous move -
the weakening of the el-aS diago­
nal. 6.ib2 (6.id2 . White's bishop
is not so actively placed here as on
the b2-square. 6 . . . 0-0 7.lll f3 b6 ! ?
This i s the simplest fo r Black. He
plans to advance c6-cS. 8.id3
dxc4 9.bxc4 cS 10.0-0 lll c 6 11.lll e4
ixd2 12 .�xd2 cxd4 13.exd4 ib7=
19
Chapter 2
Rost - Tseng, ICCF 2 0 1S. White's
hanging pawns have become an
excellent target for an attack by
Black's pieces.) 6 . . . llie4
Now, White has a choice how
to protect his knight on c3 .
Following 7.llige2, Black has
an interesting pawn-sacrifice : 7 . . .
dxc4 ! ? 8.bxc4 eS ! 9.f3 (9.dxeS
0-0iii) 9 . . ..ixc3+ 10 ..ixc3 llixc3 ll.
llixc3 0-0 12 .dS, Cabello Rodri­
guez - Van Bommel, LSS 2008,
12 . . . llia6!?oo. White has much
more space, but his dark squares
have been seriously weakened.
7.�c2 eS. Black prepares the
development of his bishop on the
fS-square in an attempt to exploit
the misplacement of the enemy
queen on c2.
It is not good for White to play
here 8 . .id3, because of 8 . . . exd4
20
9.exd4 llixc310 ..ixc3 dxc4! 11 . .ixc4
�xd4 12 .llie2 .ixc3+ 13.�xc3
�xc3+ 14.llixc3 0-0+ and he has
no compensation for the pawn at
all, Daenen - Booth, ICCF 2012.
Following 8.cxdS, l.Sokolov -
Palac, Neum 2 0 0S, 8 . . . cxdS ! ? ,
Black has n o problems whatsoev­
er. 9 . .id3 exd4 10.exd4 .ifS 11.
llige2 0-0 12.0-0 ge8 13.a3 .ixc3
14.llixc3 llic6 1S.llixe4 .ixe4 16.
gfel .ixd3 17.�xd3 �d7= Later,
White needs to play accurately,
because in numerous variations
Black's knight may turn out to be
more powerful than White's "bad"
bishop on b2.
8 . 0-0-0 .ifS 9 . .id3. He wish­
es to neutralise the pressure of
Black's bishop on fS, but his bish­
op on d3 will come under an at­
tack with tempo. 9 . . . llixc3 10.
.ixc3, Anuszkiewicz - Splosnov,
Suwalki 2000, 10 . . . e4 ! ? 11 . .ie2
.ixc3 12 .�xc3 0-0+
8.a3 .ixc3+ 9 . .ixc3 llixc3 10.
�xc3. Two couples of minor piec­
es have gone off the board and it
looks like the game is nearing
quickly a drawish outcome. Still,
just after a few moves the situa­
tion is sharpened. 10 . . . dxc4 11.
dxeS cxb3 12 . .ic4 b2. Black wish­
es to deflect the enemy queen
away from the el-aS diagonal.
13.�xb2 (13.gbl �gs 14.llie2 llid7
1S.f4 �xg2 16.ggl �xh2 17.gxg7
�hl+ 18.lligl gf8 = Diaz - Osorio,
ICCF 2016. There has arisen a po­
sition with dynamic balance.
Black has temporarily two extra
pawns, but they are both weak,

while his king has remained
stranded at the centre of the
board.) 13 . . . �aS+ 14.©e2 llid7 1S.
f4 llib6 16.i.b3 'iNbS+ 17.@f2 i.e6
18.l:!bl i.fS 19 . .ic2 �xb2 20.l:!xb2
hc2 21.l:!xc2 0-0-0 2 2 .llif3
l:!d3 = Rost - Pecka, ICCF 2 01S.
Black's prospects are not worse in
this endgame thanks to the active
position of his rook.
5 ••• a6
6 .id2
• lags horribly in development. His
About 6.a3 llibd7 7.llif3 .id6 -
see Chapter 13, variation C.
6.llif3 cS, or 6.b3 cs 7.llif3 llic6,
or 7.dxcS hcS 8.llif3 dxc4 - see
Chapter 18.
6.cS llibd7 7.b4 (7.llif3 b6 - see
Chapter 16, 7.�c2) 7 . . . eS 8.llif3 e4
9.llid2 g6 10 ..ie2 .ig7 ll ..ib2 0-0oo
Levin - Riazantsev, Sochi 2 016.
6 . . . c5
After the opening of the c-file,
the placement of White's queen
on c2 may tum out to be bad,
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.lliC3 llif6 4.e3 e6
since Black can win a tempo by at­
tacking it with his rook.
7.dxc5 hc5 8.cxd5 exd5
9.lkl
The move 9.llibS leads to great
complications. 9 ... llibd7 10.b4 .ib6
11.llid6+ ©e7 12.llifS+ @f8 13.i.c3
g6 14.llid4 llie4 ! ? 1S.llie6+ fxe6
16.hh8 'iNe7oo Timman - Mo­
rozevich, Wijk aan Zee 2 0 0 2 .
White has won the exchange, but
pawn on b4 is hanging while
Black is threatening to advance
e6-eS, cutting off the possible re­
treats of the enemy bishop on h8.
9 .ie6 10.�xdS. White wins
•••
a pawn but is considerably behind
in development. 10 Vxd5 11.
••.
�xc5 Vxd2+ 12.©xd2 �e4+
13.©dl llixc5 14.lhcS llid7 15.
l::l a5 l::ld 8 16. ©cl l::lc 8+ 17.©bl
llic5 18.f3 0-0 19.llie2 l::lfd8�
Bareev - Gong, Beersheba 2 00S.
It is an endgame indeed, but
White's lag in development hurts
him seriously. In addition, his
rook on aS is misplaced.
21
Chapter 3 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3.cxd5 cxd5
This is the basic position of the
exchange variation of the Slav De­
fence. It was considered for a long
time to be a prerequisite of a quick
draw. White used to choose it
when he did not mind a drawish
outcome, or when he played
against an opponent who was
stronger than him. Still, there
were new possibilities found for
White some years ago and despite
the fact that they did not promise
him an advantage, Black needed
to play very precisely in numer­
ous variations. In the line A)
4 ..if4 we will deal with variations
in which White postpones the de­
velopment of his knight on bl to
the c3-square, while in variation
B) 4.�c3 we will pay attention to
22
the lines in which he is not in a
hurry to develop his knight to f3.
The next chapter will be devoted
to the variations in which he de­
velops his king's knight immedi­
ately to f3 ( 4.llJf3).
About 4.g3 llJf6 5.i.g2 (5.lll f3
llJc6 - see Chapter 4; 5.llJc3 llJc6
- see variation B) 5 . . . llJc6 6.llJc3
(6.llJf3 .US - see Chapter 4) 6 . . .
i.fS - see variation B.
The move 4.i.gS does not cre­
ate any serious problems for
Black. 4 . . . h6 5.i.h4 llJc6 6.llJc3
i.fS 7.e3, Puuska - Mintenko,
Krakow 2 012, 7 . . . �b6 ! ? He is pre­
paring e6, .id6, lll g e7. If White
captures the pawn on dS - 8 .
lll xdS, then i t all ends i n a n imme­
diate draw by a perpetual check -
8 . . . �xb2 9.lll c 7+ @dB 10.lll xa8
.ic2 11.�cl �c3+ 12 .@e2 �d3+
13.@el �c3=
A) 4 . .if4 �c6 5.e3
5.llJf3 llJf6 - see Chapter 4.
5.llJc3 llJf6 - see variation B.
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4.ilf4 lll c6 5.e3 ilf5
5 ... .if5 ! ?
This i s the simplest move for
Black.
He also obtains a very good
position after 5 . . . lll f6, but then af­
ter 6. ild3, White can prevent the
development of Black's bishop on
c8 to the fS-square.
6.�b3
6.lll c3 lll f6 - see 4.lll c3.
6 .•. �d7 7.tlic3 e6 8.tli:f3
Following 8.Ei:cl Ei:c8 9.tlif3 f6
10 .h3 lll a5 11.�b5 �xbS 12 .ilxbS+
iif7= , there arises an approxi­
mately equal endgame on the
board, Johnston - Kracht, ICCF
2 016.
8 . . . f6!
White's plans include ilbS,
lll e S, so Black should better take
an immediate control over the eS­
square. Besides that, he can man­
age after g7-g5, h7-h5, or h7-h5,
to begin an immediate chase after
the enemy bishop on f4 and this
would force White to weaken his
kingside in numerous variations.
9 . .ib5
9.ile2 g5 10 .ilg3, Nguyen Tran
Quang - Switzer, Vung Tau 1999,
10 . . . hS ! ?oo
The move 9.a3, Lenderman -
Wesley So, Las Vegas 2 014, seems
a bit slow 9 . . . gS ! ? 10.ilg3 hS 11.h3
iif7 12.Ei:cl ilg6 13 .ile2 lll h 6 14.
ilh2 lll fSoo
Following 9.Ei:cl, Galje - Kui­
pers, Haarlem 2 006, Black should
better begin with the move 9 . . .
hS ! ?oo, because the straightfor­
ward line: 9 . . . gS 10.ilg3 hS 11.h4
g4 12.lll d 2 .ig6 13 ..ibSt, would
enable White to seize the initia­
tive, Melkumyan - Lampert, Bad
Wiessee 2 0 14.
9 ••. h5! ? 10.h4
(diagram)
The inclusion of the moves h7-
h5 and h2-h4 is in favour of Black,
because a weak g4-square has ap­
peared in White's camp. The gS-
23
Chapter 3
square in Black's position is relia­
bly covered by his pawn on f6,
while his weakness on g6 can be
defended by his bishop on fS, his
knight on e7 and his king on t7.
10 • • • �k8 11.0-0 a6 12 .ie2
• 3.tll c3 tll f6 4.cxdS cxdS.
c!Oa5
Black has got rid of the pin and
transfers his knight to the c4-
square with tempo.
13.Yedl c!Oc4 14.c!Od2
White cannot put up with the
enemy knight on c4 for long, so he
sacrifices temporarily a pawn.
Now, the position is quickly sim­
plified. 14 . . . c!Oxb2 15.'flYb3 c!Od3
16.hd3 hd3 17.c!Oxd5 .ic2
18.c!Ob6 hb3 19.c!Oxd7 @xd7
20.c!Oxb3 b6 2U�fcl c!Oe7 22.e4
24
c!Oc6 23.i;dt .ia3 24.d5 c!Oe7
25.dxe6+ @xe6= Rau - Ilonen,
ICCF 2 016. This endgame seems
approximately equal. In addition,
if White plays imprecisely later,
Black can even play for a win, uti­
lising his pawn-majority on the
queenside.
B) 4.c!Oc3 c!Of6
There is no need to analyse
here the move 4 . . . c!Oc6, because
White can easily reach a position
with a black knight on f6 chang­
ing a bit the order of the moves -
5 .if4
•
White develops his knight to
an active position.
About S.tll f3 tll c 6, or S.e3 tll c 6
6.tll f3 .ig4, or S.g3 tll c 6 6.c!Of3 �JS,
or 6 . .ig2 .ifs 7.tll f3 e6 - see Chap­
ter 4.
It does not look good for White
to play here S.f3. He prepares e2-
e4 indeed, but deprives his knight
of the f3-square. S . . . Yeb6 6.e4
 l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. CiJ c3 CiJf6 5. if4 CiJ c6 6.e3 if5
dxe4 7.fxe4 eS. Black begins a
fight for the dark squares. 8.i.bS+
CiJc6 9.ds i.b4 10 .W/d3 a6 11.ia4
W/aS 12 .i.dl CiJd4oo Ruiz-Jarabo -
Botev, ICCF 2 01S.
S.i.gS. White's bishop is not so
well placed on this square as on
f4. s . . . CiJe4 6.CiJxe4 (6.i.f4 CiJc6 7.
CiJf3 f6 - see Chapter 4) 6 ... dxe4
7.a3 (The drawback of the place­
ment of the bishop on gS is em­
phasized by the fact that White
cannot play 7.e3?, because of 7 . . .
'1;l/aS-+ and Black wins a piece.)
7 ... W/b6 8Jkl ifs 9.W/a4 + ?! (It is
more reliable for White to choose
here 9.e3 CiJc6 10 .i.c4 h6 11.i.h4
eS 12 .CiJe2 id6= and at least he
would not end up in an inferior
position.) 9 . . . CiJd7 10.W/c2 h6 11.
i.d2 es. Black seizes the initiative
with an energetic play. 12.dxeS
ie7 13.ie3 W/e6 14.g4 ih7 1S.CiJh3
gS !+, emphasizing the misplace­
ment of White's knight at the
edge of the board, Ermakov - Ko­
zlov, ICCF 2 014.
5 . . . CiJc6 6.e3
About 6.CiJf3 ifs, or 6Jkl ifs
7.CiJf3 e6 - see Chapter 4.
6 . . . if5
(diagram)
7.W/b3
This move has become popu­
lar just recently. White exerts
pressure against the b7-pawn and
forces the move CiJaS and then the
return of Black's bishop to d7.
Still, he loses plenty of time on
maneuvers with his queen and
Black obtains a good position.
7.CiJf3 e6 - see Chapter 4.
7.ie2 e6 8.g4. White begins
active actions on the kingside, but
weakens the position of his own
king. (8.CiJf3 id6 - see Chapter 4;
8 .W/b3 ib4 9.CiJf3 0-0 - see Chap­
ter 4, variation C) 8 . . . ig6 9.h4
(9.f3 i.e7oo Nalbandian - Marce­
lin, Paris 1994) 9 . . . hS 10 .gS CiJe4=,
followed by i.e7, 0-0, Del Rey -
Garcia Ruido, Villagarcia de Aro­
sa 199S. Black's king will be much
safer than its counterpart in this
middle game.
7.f3. White is trying to provoke
complications. Before even com­
pleting the development of his
pieces, he plans to begin a pawn­
offensive on the kingside (g2-g4,
h2-h4). The shelter of his own
king is weakened in the process,
however . . . 7 . . . e6 8.g4 ig6 9.h4
(9 .W/b3, Bunzmann - Kapic, Ger­
many 2 003, 9 . . . i.b4 ! ? = ) 9 . . . hS
10.gS CiJd7 ll.ih2, Miladinovic -
2S
Chapter 3
Ronchetti, Frascati 2 005 (11.lll h 3,
Vaisser - Fressinet, Chartres 2005,
ll ... lll b6! ?=) ll ... 1.Wb6! ? Black must
organise active actions on the
queenside in order to impede his
opponent's play on the other side
of the board. 12 .'l!;Yd2 gc8 13. 'iti f2
.ib4 14.lll g e2 0-0=
The move 7.gcl does not
promise much to White. 7 . . . gc8
8.'l!;Yb3 (8.lll f3 e6 - see Chapter 4)
8 . . . lll a5 9 . .ib5+ (9.1.Wa4+ .id7 10.
1.Wdl e6 11 . .id3, Drozdova - Girya,
Khanty-Mansiysk 2014, 11...lll c4+)
9 . . . .id7 10 .'l!;Ya4 a6. This is the
simplest move for Black. He forc­
es immediately the trade of his
"bad" bishop. 11.hd7+ lll xd7 12.
lll g e2 b5 13.'l!;Ydl e6 14.0-0 !i..e7
15.1.Wd3 0-0=, followed by lll c4
and doubling of his major pieces
on the c-file, Muzychuk - Girya,
Khanty-Mansiysk 2 014.
The move 7 ..id3 is absolutely
harmless for Black. 7 . . . hd3 8 .
'l!;Yxd3 e 6 9.lll ge2 . This develop­
ment of the knight is not good for
White (9.lll f3 .ie7 - see Chapter 4,
variation A). 9 ...ie7 10.0-0 0-0
ll.h3 (11.gacl gc8 12 .h3 - see 11.
h3) ll . . . gc8 12 .gacl 'l!;Yd7 13.gfdl
b6. It is useful for Black to deprive
his opponent of the active possi­
bility lll a4-c5. 14 . .ih2 (14 . .ig5 h6
15.!i..xf 6 !i..xf 6 16.a3 lll a S= Arnold -
Le, Belfort 2 0 05) 14 . . . gfd8 15.
1.Wbl 1.Wb7 16.lll f4 h6 17.lll d3 lll a5=
Eperjesi - Le, Budapest 2 0 05.
7 . .ib5 e6 8.1.Wa4. White in-
26
creases his pressure on the a4-e8
diagonal, but this activity is pre­
mature and Black seizes the initi­
ative thanks to a nice tactical
trick. (It would be better for White
to have played here 8.lll f3 lll d 7, or
8.gcl !i..e 7 9.lll f3 lll d7 - see Chap­
ter 4, variation D.) 8 . . . 'l!;Yb6 9.lll f3
.ie7 10.lll e5 0-0 11 . .ixc6 gfc8 !
This is the point! It turns out
Black is not forced to capture the
bishop.
12 .e4 dxe4 13.!i..b 5 a6 14 . .ic4
1.Wxb2+ Illingworth - Bjelobrk,
Nadi 2013.
12 .hb7 'l!;Yxb7 13 .0-0 1.Wxb2
14.lll c 6 .if8+ Nebolsina - Zhuko­
va, Dagomys 2008. Black's two
powerful bishops provide him
with a stable advantage.
12 . .ib5 a6 13 .0-0 axb5 14.
'l!;Yxb5 'l!;Yxb5 15.lll xb5 gc2 . He has
powerful initiative for the sacri­
ficed pawn. 16.mbl, Vera Gonza­
lez Quevedo - Hector, Istanbul
2000, 16 . . . h6 ! ? Black can improve
patiently his position, since White
has no active counterplay. 17.lll c3
lll e4 18.f3 lll d 6. Black prepares
the transfer of his knight to the
c4-square. 19.a4 f6 2 0 .lll g4 lll c4
21.lll f2 lll a 5. Now, his knight will
 3.cd cd 4. liJ c3 liJf6 5.if4 liJ c6 6.e3 ij5 7. 'i!! b3 liJ a5 8. 'i!! a4+ id7
go to b3. 22.l:!dl gS 23.ig3 liJb3
24.l:!abl ig6+
12.0-0 bxc6 13.l:!fcl, Moro­
zevich - Grischuk, Moscow 2007
(13.'i!!b 3 cS+). Here, Black can
simply capture the pawn : 13 . . .
�xb2 ! ? 14.liJxc6 ia3 15.�a6 id3 !
The position is simplified now
and Black maintains a stable ad­
vantage. 16.�xd3 l:!xc6 17.l:!abl
'i!!x cl+ 18.l:!xcl ixcl 19.h3 h6+.
White's queen can hardly defend
successfully against Black's two
rooks.
7••• �a5
8.Yfa4+
8.ibS+ id7
9.'i!!a4 e6 - see variation Bl.
9.�c2 e6 10.id3 l:!c8 - see
variation B2.
9.�dl e6 10.id3 liJc4 - see 8.
�a4+ id7 9.'i!!d l e6 10 .id3 liJc4.
9.ixd7+ �xd7 10.'i!!b5 liJc4 11.
liJf3 e6 12.liJeS liJxeS 13.ixeS (fol­
lowing 13.dxeS liJhS+t, it would be
only White who might have prob­
lems, Seirawan - Khalifman,
Moscow 1990) 13 . . . ie7 14.ixf6
ixf6 15.@d2 l:!c8 16.�xd7+ @xd7=,
the draw is imminent, Margve­
lashvili - Dreev, Philadelphia
2 015.
8 ••• id7
We will analyse now Bl)
9.ib5 and B2) 9.Yfc2.
9.�dl e6 10.liJf3 (10 . .id3 liJc4
11.'i!!e 2 l:!c8 12.liJf3 ib4 - see 10.
liJf3) 10 . . .l:!c8 11.id3 liJc4. Black's
active knight guarantees a good
play for him in all the variations.
(diagram)
12 .ixc4, Bai - Van Foreest,
Basel 2 0 17, 12 . . . dxc4 ! ?oo
12.l:!bl bS 13.0-0 ie7 14.liJeS
0-0 15.liJxd7 �xd7 16.igS a6= S.
Belov - Zhak, ICCF 2013.
27
Chapter 3
12.1!Ne2 J.b4 13.l:k l tlie4. Black's
piece-activity is sufficient for him
to maintain the balance. 14.he4
dxe4 15.tlig5 e5 ! He sacrifices a
pawn and seizes the initiative.
16.dxe5 i.g4 ! 17.f3 exf3 18.tlixf3
0-0 19.0-0 1!Na5 2 0 .a3. Black's
pieces are so active that White
should better give back the extra
pawn. 20 . . . 1xf3 21.gxf3 hc3 2 2 .
l3xc3 tlixe5= Ellis - Hartl, ICCF
2 016.
Bl) 9.J.b5
This move seems less logical
than 9.�c2 . Indeed, at first White
forces the enemy bishop to retreat
to d7, where it is not so active
than on f5, but now he exchanges
it deliberately.
9 . . . e6
28
10.tlit'3
About 10.l3cl a6 11.hd7+
llixd7 12 .tlif3 tlic6 - see 10 .tlif3.
10.hd7+ tlixd7 11.e4 (11.tlif3
a6 - see 10.tlif3). This pawn­
break in the centre is not danger­
ous for Black, since he can simply
reply with 11 . . . tlic6 and White
cannot win the d5-pawn. 12.exd5
tlib6 13.�b3 exd5 14.tlige2 i.e7
15.0-0 0-0= Grishchenko -
T. Petrosian, Yerevan 2 014.
After the active move 10 .J.g5,
Black can centralise effortlessly
his knight 10 . . . tlic6.
ll.i.xf6. This deliberate ex­
change of the bishop for the
knight is very bad for White. 11 . . .
1!Nxf6 12 .tlif3 i.d6 13.0-0 0-0+
Kiselev - V.Ivanov, Moscow 1995.
Black's two-bishop advantage
may prove to be an important
trump for him in the future.
White would not obtain much
with 11.�dl, Agdestein - Razni­
kov, Warsaw 2 0 14, in view of 11 . . .
i.b4 ! ? 12 .l3cl 1!Na5. Black's threat
1!Nxb5 forces White to trade his
bishop. 13.hc6 hc6 14.i.xf6
gxf6 15.a3 i.d6oo
 3.cd cd 4. t:/Jc3 t:/Jf6 5.iJ..f4 t:/Jc6 6.e3 ii.JS 7. Wfb3 CiJaS 8. W!a4+ i.d.7
11.C/Jf3 a6 12 .hc6 (12 .il.e2 h6
13.il.xf6 W/xf6= Novkovic - Sko­
berne, Austria 2 012) 12 . . . hc6
13.W/b3 .id6 14.0-0 W/c7 15.ht"6
gxf6oo Zilberberg - Sasikiran,
ICCF 2 014. Black's two powerful
bishops compensate the minimal
weakening of his kingside pawn­
structure. In addition, he can ex­
ploit in the middle game the semi­
open g-file in order to organise an
attack against White's monarch.
10 . . . a6 11.hd7+ C/Jxd7
12.0-0
12 .�cl C/Jc6 13.h3 (13.W/b3 W/b6
14.W/xb6 C/Jxb6= Filguth - Gomez
Baillo, Corrientes 1985) 13 . . . .ie7
14.0-0 o-o 15.C/Jel b5 16.W/dl �cs
17.C/Jd3 W/a5 18.a4 W/b6 19.axb5
axb5 2 0 .�al C/Ja5 21.�el C/Jc4=
Magallanes - Pappier, ICCF
2008.
12 ... b5
Black ousts the enemy queen
from its active position.
13.W/dl i.e7
14.�kl
14.a4 b4 15.C/Je2 0-0 16.b3
W/b6 17.l"!cl l"!fc8= Shishkin -
Sieciechowicz, Poznan 2009.
14 ••• �kS 15.a4
White wishes to exploit the
pawn-advance b7-b5 as a target
to organise counterplay on the
queenside. Still, Black's position
remains solid enough.
15.W/e2 0-0 16.�c2 C/Jc6 17.h3
C/Jb6 18.b3 W/d7= Garcia Martinez
- Dominguez Perez, Las Tunas
2 0 01.
15 . . .b4 16.C/Je2 0-0 17.W/d3
W/b6 18.b3 W/b7 19.h3
19.C/Jd2, Dunn - Taylor, Read­
ing 2 0 17, 19 . . . h6 ! ? =
1 9 . . . gxcl 20.gxcl gcs 21.
gxc8+ W/xc8= Andeer - Dolgov,
ICCF 2 012.
B2) 9.W/c2
This is the main line for White
which leads to a very sharp play.
9 . . . e6
29
Chapter 3
Now, Black's bishop on d7,
closed inside his own camp, may
turn out to be "bad". On the other
hand, he can use it to organise ac­
tive counterplay on the queenside
with the help of the pawn-advance
b7-b5, or to exchange it after a7-
a6, i.d7-b5.
We will analyse now: B2a)
10.lLlt'3 and B2b) 10 .id3.•
10.h3 1!c8 11.i.d3 .ib4 - see
10 . .id3.
B2a) 10.lLlt'3 lLlh5! ?
Black begins a n immediate
chase after the enemy bishop.
11 . .ig5
11.i.eS f6 12 . .ig3 1!c8 13.i.d3
i.b4 14.0-0 (14 . .ixh7. It is rather
risky for White to lose time to
capture the enemy pawn. 14 . . . lLlc4
15 . .ig6+ cJ?f8 16.hbS lLlxb2 17.
0-0 .ixc3+ Barbot - Basso, Ziller­
tal 2 015.) 14 . . . lLlxg3. This is an im­
portant moment. Black usually
captures on g3 only after White
has castled kingside, so that his
30
rook cannot join in the actions on
the h-file. 15.hxg3 fS. Black weak­
ens the es-square, but prevents
the pawn-break in the centre e3-
e4. 16.i!fcl a6 17.Wfdl i.d6 18.lLla4
.ixa4 19.\&xa4+ ll:lc6 2 0 .b4 1!a8
21.bS axbS 2 2 .'l&xbS 0-0 23.Wfxb7
ll:lb4 24.i.e2 1!b8 25.Wfa7 1!a8 =
White is incapable of preventing
the permanent chase after his
queen. 26.Wfb7, draw, Terreaux -
Grigoryev, ICCF 2 016.
n . f6
. .
t2.Ah4
Besides this move White has
some other sharp alternatives at
his disposal.
12 .h4 i.d6 13.g4 fxgS 14.hxgS
ll:lg3 ! This is Black's most precise
move. He loses his knight any­
way, so he gives it up at the dear­
est possible price. 15.fxg3 .ixg3+
16.cJ?d2 \&e7 17.i!h3 i.c7 ! ? This
move may seem rather risky, be­
cause the bishop is not protected
on this square, but after 18.ll:lxdS
exd5 19.'l&xc7, Black can make a
 3.cd cd 4. tfJc3 tfJf6 5.1i.f4 tfJc6 6.e3 Ii.JS 7. Vfib3 tfJa5 8. Vf!a4+ .id7

draw almost by force. 19 . . . tfJc6

2 0 .id3 �b4+ 21.©dl l:!f8 22 . .if5
i.xf5 23.gxf5 l:!xf5 24.vt/xg7 �b5
25.l:!xh7 Vf/d3+

12 .g4. This move was recom­

mended by A.Dreev in his book
".if4 in the Queen's Gambit and
the Exchange Slav". Still, White
does not achieve much with it.
12 . . . fxg5 13.gxh5 i.d6 14.l:!gl Vf/f6
15.i.e2 l:!c8 16.tfJxg5. He has won
a pawn, but at a very dear price.
His doubled extra pawn on the h­
file is practically useless, while
Black's pieces are very active.
16 . . . h6 17.tfJf3 0-0 18.l:!g2 ie8 19.
tfJd2 ©h8 2 0 . .ig4 l:!c7+ White can
hardly find a safe haven for his
king. It is misplaced at the middle
of the board, while if he castles
queenside, Black can begin imme­
diately active actions there with
b7-b5.
and he should better prepare im­
mediately castling queenside.
This move was recommended
by A. Dreev in his book published
in June 2 016.
Black did not react so well in a
game played three months later:
14 ... .ib4, Aronian - Girl, Moscow
2 016, 15.l:!gl ! ?;!; It is obvious that
even grandmasters with a rating
over 2700 should read books . . .
15 .id3 h3 16.hh7 0-0-0
•

17 .ig6 ©b8 18.Ve2 tbc6 19.0-

•

12 gS
••• 0-0 .ib4�, followed by ix:c3,
He continues the chase after tfJa5 (tfJe7). Black has very good
the enemy bishop. counterplay for his minimal ma­
13.g4 terial deficit.

The move 13 . .ig3 leads to a B2b) 10 .id3 �k8

•

very complicated game. 13 . . . l:!cS

14.i.e2 g4 15.tfJh4 f5 16.i.e5 l:!g8
17.g3 tfJf6 18.h3 h5 19.tfJg2 tfJe4
2 0 .©fl .ib4? Perez Fernandez -
Dutra, ICCF 2 015.

13 ••• gxh4 14.gxhS

(diagram)
14 ••• Vf/c7!?
Black's king is not reliably
placed at the middle of the board

31
Chapter 3
n.ttit'3
White would not achieve much
with the line: ll.h3 i.b4 (ll ...ltle4!?
12.llige2 bSoo) 12 .a3 hc3+ 13.
bxc3 ltlc4 14.llie2 0-0 15.0-0 i.bSoo
Boruchovsky - Dreev, Balm 2 013.
ll.ltlge2. White's knight is not
better placed here than on the f3-
square. 11 . . . bS 12.a3 ltlc4 13.0-0
(It would be rather slow for White
to opt here for 13.h3 aS+ Fang -
Yu, China 2 014.) 13 . . . aSoo Fuentes
Parra - Di Giannantonio, Santa
Cruz 2 015.
11 .ib4 12.0-0
•••
12.ltleS, Kashlinskaya - V.Sve­
shnikov, Moscow 2007, 12 ... llihS!?=
12 ••• 0-0
13.�ffcl
After 13 . .igS h6 14 . .ih4, Wil­
liams - Cox, England 2 015, Black
should better get rid immediately
of the unpleasant pin of his
knight: 14 . . . gS ! ? 15 ..ig3 ltlh5oo
32
13.l:!acl ltlc4 14.Wi'e2 ltlhS 15.
i.gS f6 16 ..ih4 .ie8 ! It would be
useful for him to protect his
knight on hS. 17.ltleS (17.a3 hc3
18.l:!xc3 gS 19.i.g3 ltlxg3 20.hxg3
llid6= Rogemont - Ruiz-Vidal,
ICCF 2010) 17...ltlxeS 18.dxeS hc3
19.l:!xc3 gS 2 0 .Wi'g4 l:!xc3 21.bxc3
@h8 22 . .ig3 fS 23.Wb4 .ic6 24.
i.e2 llixg3 25.hxg3 @g7 26.l:!dl
Wi'c7 27.c4 g4 ! = Schon - Elent,
ICCF 2 015. This is Black's most
precise move. Now, White cannot
play f2-f4, protecting his eS­
pawn. The vulnerability of Black's
king is not important here, be­
cause there is just a few material
left on the board. In addition, he
has a better pawn-structure.
13.llieS a6 14.i.gS (14.l:!fcl
hc3 - see 13.l:!fcl) 14 . . . h6 15.i.h4
(15.llixd7 Wxd7 16.hf6 gxf6= ).
Here, Black can play 15 . . .gS, with­
out worrying about the safety of
his king, because White can hard­
ly transfer effectively his pieces to
the kingside. 16 . .ig3 .ibS 17.hbS
axbS 18 .We2 hc3 19.bxc3 llic4
2 0 .f3 llihSoo with a complicated
double-edged position.
13 a6 !? This is the simplest
•••
road to equality for Black. He
plans to continue with .ibS, ex­
changing his "bad" bishop. 14.
ltle5 .b:c3 15.bxc3 .ib5 16.
.b:b5 axb5 17 .igS Wc7 18
• •
.ixf6 gxf6 19.ltld3 ltlc4= Weber
- Zhak, ICCF 2 015. Black's king­
side pawn-structure has been
weakened, but White's pawns on
c3 and a2 are also weak.
Chapter 4 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.�f'3
In this chapter we will contin-
ue the analysis of the exchange
variation of the Slav Defence, but
now we will deal only with varia­
tions in which White develops im­
mediately his knight on f3.
4 .•. llif6
This same position can also
arise after the move-order 3.llif3
llif6 4.cxdS cxdS.
5.llic3
S.e3 llic6 6.llic3 ig4, or S.igS
llie4 6.if4 llic6 7.llic3 f6 - see
S.llic3.
S .g3 llic6 6.ig2 (6.llic3 ifs -
see S.llic3) 6 . . .ifS 7.�b3 (7.llic3
e6, or 7. 0-0 e6 8.llic3 ie7 - see
S.llic3) 7 . . . �b6 8.�xb6 axb6 9.
llic3 e6 10.0-0 ib4 11.id2 llie4=
Hormiga Amador - Balcerak, Las
Palmas 2 0 0S.
S.if4 llic6 6.e3. White can
postpone the development of his
knight on c3, but this cannot
bring him anything positive ( 6.
llic3 ifs - see S.llic3). Following
6 . . . �b6, he will already have
problems with the protection of
his b2-pawn.
7.llic3 ? ! This pawn-sacrifice is
not good. 7 . . . �xb2 8.�cl (8 .llibS?
eS ! 9.a3 llib4 ! - + Lyrberg - Ne­
vanlinna, Jyvaskyla 1994) 8 . . . ifS
9.ibS e6 10.0-0 ia3 ll.�a4 0-0+
J ovicic - Pavlovic, Belgrade 2006.
7.�cl llihS ! ? Black attacks im­
mediately his opponent's power-
33
Chapter 4
ful bishop. 8.ig3 ig4 9 . .!lic3 e6
10 .Wd2 ie7 ll.id3 ixf3 12.gxf3
0-0 13 . .!lia4 Wd8=
7.YUb3 . Now, there arises a
transfer into an endgame at once.
7 . . . Wxb3 8.axb3 i.d7 9 . .!lic3 e6
10 .h3. White should better save
his powerful bishop from an ex­
change. (10.i.e2 .!lihS+; 10 . .!lieS
.!lihS= Gheorghiu - Bronstein,
Moscow 1971) 10 . . . ib4 ll . .!lid2
(11.i.d3 .!Lias 12 . .!lid2 gcs 13.gcl
0-0= Kunzel - Price, ICCF 2 014)
11 . . . 0-0 12 .i.d3 gfc8= Stefanova
- I.Sokolov, Wijk aan Zee 2 0 0 2 .
White's weak isolated pawns on
the b-file provide Black with at
least equal prospects.
5 ••• .!lic6
6.Af4
This is White's most logical
and consequent move. Before
playing e2-e3, he develops his
bishop to an active position.
6.Wb3. This queen-sortie seems
a bit premature. 6 . . . e6 7.i.f4 .!lie4
8.e3 gS ! After this energetic move
Black obtains the two-bishop ad-
34
vantage and a better position. 9.
.!lixe4 gxf4 10 . .!lied2 i.d6 11.id3
fxe3 12 .fxe3 fS+, fixing the weak
enemy pawn on e3, McClain -
Bucsa, ICCF 2 01S.
6 . .!lieS. White plans after .!lixc6
to create a weakness for Black on
c6. Still, this plan takes too much
time. 6 . . . e6
7.g3 .!lixeS 8.dxeS .!lid7 9.i.f4,
Adorjan - Huebner, Frankfurt
1998, 9 . . . gS ! ? Black prepares the
development of his bishop on g7
with tempo. 10.ie3 i.g7+
Following 7.i.f4 Wb6 8 . .!lixc6
bxc6 9.gbl, Black can advance
immediately c6-cS, getting rid of
his weak pawn : 9 . . . cS 10.dxcS
i.xc5 11.e3 0-0oo Lagno - Gapo­
nenko, Moscow 2010.
7.e3 .!lixeS 8.dxeS .!lid7 9.f4 Ae7
10.id3 .!lies 11.ic2 as 12.0-0 0-0
13.gf3 g6 ! oo After this precise
move (Black has defended against
the threats ixh7, gh3, YUhS.),
Black's chances are not inferior
thanks to his better pawn-struc­
ture, Lanin - Roubaud, ICCF 2010.
7.YUa4 id7 8 . .!lixd7. Here,
White obtains the two-bishop ad­
vantage, but loses too much time
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. liJ.f3 liJf6 5. liJ c3 liJc6
on manoeuvres with his pieces.
8 . . . Wfxd7 9 .e3 .id6= Popov - Hop­
man, Wijk aan Zee 2001.
7.liJxc6 bxc6 8 .g3 i.d6 9 .i.g2
0-0 10.0-0 c5 11.dxc5 h:c5.
Black has got rid of his weak
pawn. 12.liJa4 i.d6 13.i.e3 Wfe7
14.l''k l i.d7 15.liJcS, Coret Fras­
quet - Asensio Soto, Mislata 1997,
15 . . . .te8 ! ? 16.Wfd2 h6. He is pre­
paring liJg4. 17.liJd3 .ib5oo Black's
light-squared bishop is better
placed than its counterpart on the
a6-fl diagonal, since White's
bishop is restricted by the pawn
on d5.
6.g3. White prepares the fian­
chetto of his light-squared bishop.
Still, it would not be placed so
well on the long diagonal, as on
the fl-a6 diagonal, because the
d5-pawn would restrict consider­
ably its sphere of actions. 6 . . . .if5
7 . .ig2 e6
8 . .tf4 1l;l/b6 9.liJa4 i.b4+ Ohnes­
org - Klundt, Frankfurt 2009.
After 8.liJh4, Black should play
8 . . . .ig4, after which the chase af­
ter the enemy bishop would lead
to a weakening of White's king­
side. 9.h3 .th5 10 .g4 i.g6 11.liJxg6
hxg6 1 2 . 0-0, Kotov - Tokarev,
Kazan 2 0 07, 12 . . . .id6 ! ? =
8 . 0 - 0 .ie7 9 . .if4 (9.liJh4 .ig4
10 .h3 i.h5 11.g4 i.g6 12.liJxg6
hxg6 13.e3 gc8 14.f4 liJa5 15.1l;l/d3
liJc4 16.b3 liJd6+t Braga - Ham­
douchi, Malaga 2000. The weak­
ness of the e4-square may hurt
White in the future.) 9 . . . 0-0 10.
h3 (10.gcl h6= ; 10.liJh4 i.g4 11.h3
i.h5 12 .g4 .ig6 13.liJxg6 hxg6 14.
e3 gc8= Gutierrez - Krylov, Mos­
cow 1994) 10 . . . liJe4 (10 . . . 1l;l/b6 ! ?+)
11.gc1 gc8 12 .g4 .tg6 13.liJxe4
h:e4 14.liJe5. The exchanges of
pieces do not facilitate White's
defence, because Black will soon
seize the initiative on the queen­
side. 14 . . . liJxe5 15.he5 h:g2 16.
Wxg2 1l;l/a5 17.Wfb3 b5 ! + This is a
typical resource for similar posi­
tions. Black is preparing gc4. 18.
gxc8 gxc8 19.a3 gc4 2 0 .gd1 Wfb6
21.gd2 Wfc6+ The c-file is com­
pletely in Black's hands. 2 2 .e3 a5
23 . .tg3 gel 24.f3 f6 25.i.f2 1l;l/c4
26.1l;l/d3 a4-+ , fixing the pawn on
b2. 27.e4 Wfxd3 28.gxd3 b4 29.
axb4 hb4 30.exd5 exd5 31.ge3
gc2 0-1 Tarnowski - Botvinnik,
Leipzig 1960.
6.i.g5 liJe4
35
Chapter 4
It is not good for White to play
here 7.ih4?! in view of 7 . . . 1/;!faS ! .
After the removal o f White's dark­
squared bishop from the queen­
side the vulnerability of the el-aS
diagonal hurts him severely.
8.1/;!fb3 eS 9.e3 (9.1/;!fxdS ib4
10.\WxaS i.xaS 11.0-0-0 hc3
12 .bxc3 llixc3+) 9 . . . i.b4+ Fink -
Schwicker, Germany 199S.
Following 7.if4, Black can
play 7 .. .f6 ! ? , preparing not only
e7-eS, but much rather g7-gS. 8 .
a 3 (8.e3? ! g S 9 .ig3 hS 10.h3 llixg3
11.fxg3 1/;!fc7+ Puzanov - Nemec,
LSS 2012. He has the two-bishop
advantage, while White's kingside
pawn-structure has been compro­
mised.) 8 . . . e6 9 .h3 \Was 10.id2
llixd2 ll.1l;!/xd2 bS 12 .gcl b4=
Kirkov - Davidov, ICCF 2016.
6.e3. This move is somewhat
passive. White complies deliber­
ately with the fact that his bishop
on cl will remain restricted inside
his own camp. 6 . . .ig4
7.ibS gc8 8.h3 ixf3 9.1/;!fxf3
a6= Rodriguez - Zirians, IECC
2000.
After 7.h3 ixf3 8.\Wxf3 a 6 9 .
.id3, Black can try 9 . . . eS, obtain-
36
ing following 10.dxeS llixeS, a very
good version of a standard posi­
tion with an isolated queen's
pawn. ll.1/;!fe2 ib4 12 .id2 0-0=
Pepe - Cucchi, ICCF 1998.
In the variation 7.\Wb3 gb8 8.
llieS i.d7, there arise simplifica­
tions after 9 .llixdS \Was+ 10.llic3
llixeS 11.dxeS \WxeS 12 .id2 e6=
Dragun - Czarnota, Poland 2 0 13 .
7.ie2 e6 8 . 0 - 0 (8.\Wb3. White
does not achieve much by attack­
ing the b7-pawn, since Black can
easily protect it. 8 . . . gb8 9.0-0
i.d6 10.h3 .ihS 11.i.d2 0-0=
Rother - Stoeger, Germany 1997.)
8 ... .id6 9 .h3 .ihS 10.a3 0-0 11.b4
gc8 12 .ib2 ib8 13.llid2 ig6= Fa­
qiry - Karjakin, Mainz 2010.
6 if5
•••
7.e3
7.llieS e6 8 .e3 llixeS - see vari­
ation B.
7.1/;!fb3 lliaS 8 .\Wa4+ id7 9 .1/;!fdl
e6 10.e3 gc8, or 9 .\Wc2 e6 10.e3
llihS - see Chapter 3 , variation
B.
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. liJ.f3 liJf6 5. liJ c3 liJ c6 6. if4 if5 7.e3 e6
After 7.l'kl e6 8.'l!:!fb3 (8.e3 gcs
- see 7.e3), Black does not need to
lose time to protect his b7-pawn.
8 . . . id6 9.W/xb7 (White should
better refrain here from accepting
the gift: 9.i.xd6 '\!:!/xd6=) 9 . . . 0 - 0 !
10.W/xc6 i.xf4 11.e3 i.d6 12.a3 ( 1 2 .
ibS gbs 13.W/a6, Barcenilla -
Dao, Tagaytay City 2 013, 13 . . .
liJe4 ! ? 14.liJa4 i.b4+ lS.iifl ig4+
Black maintains powerful initia­
tive for the sacrificed pawn.) 12 . . .
gbs 13.liJdl (13.b4 ? ! aS+ Voiska -
Ortega, Campobasso 2 006) 13 . . .
gb6 14.W/a4 Wfb8�. White i s faced
with a difficult defence, because
he lags in development, while
Black's pieces are very active.
7 . . . e6
We will analyse now: A)
8 . .ld3, B) 8.l0e5, C) 8.M>3 and
D) 8 . .lb5 .
8.'\!:!/a4 liJd7 9 . .lbS gcs - see
variation D2.
8 .a3. This is not White's most
active move, because a2-a3 may
turn out to be a loss of a tempo in
some variations. 8 . . . .ld6 9.hd6
W/xd6 10.id3 hd3 11.W/xd3 0-0
12.0-0 gfcs 13.gacl (Following
13.b4 aS 14.liJa4 liJd7 lS.bS liJe7
16.gfcl, Aleksandrov - Maletin,
Bhubaneswar 2010, 16 ... gc7! ?+,
Black seizes the initiative.) 13 . . .
liJ a S 14.liJd2 (l4.gc2 W/d8 lS.gfcl,
Maiorov - Stambulian, Anapa
2012, lS . . . liJb3 ! ?=) 14 . . . liJc4 lS.
liJxc4 gxc4 16.liJe2 gac8= Vasiu­
kov - Furman, Tbilisi 1973 .
a.gel gcs 9.W/b3 (9.liJeS liJxeS
10.heS a6= Chirila - Ostrovskiy,
Montreal 2013; 9.id3 hd3 10.
'\!:!/xd3 !ie7 11.0-0 0-0 12 .h3 'l!:!fb6
13.W/e2 liJe4= Kazmierczuk - Ma­
lyshev, ICCF 2 0 14) 9 . . . ib4 10.
ibS (10.ie2 0-0 11.0-0, Zhang
- Volokitin, Kallithea 2008, 11 . . .
liJhS! ?=) 10 . . .hc3+
ll.bxc3. White must comply
with the weakening of his pawn­
structure (After 11.Wfxc3 a6 12.
i.e2 liJe4+ Black can begin an ad­
vantageous chase after the enemy
bishop on f4 with the moves g7-
gS, h7-hS, Delchev - Andersen,
Spain 2 0 14.) 11 . . . 0-0 12 .hc6
(12.0-0 liJe4t Tregubov - Sebag,
Montpellier 2 01S) 12 . . . gxc6 13.
37
Chapter 4
\Wxb7 \Wc8 14.\Wxc8 gfxc8 15.llieS
gxc3 16.gxc3 gxc3+ Carlsen -
Anand, Dubai 2 0 14. Black has re­
stored the material balance and
his prospects seem preferable
thanks to his active rook.
White cannot achieve much
with the rather careful line: 8.ie2
id6 9.ixd6 (9.llieS, V.Georgiev -
Dominguez Perez, Merida 2 0 0 2 ,
9 . . . \Wb6 ! ? = ) 9 . . . §'xd6 1 0 . 0 - 0 0 - 0
11.gc1 (11.llih4 .ie4 12 .f3 .ig6 13.
llixg6 hxg6 14.Wid2 gac8= Khus­
nutdinov - Sajedi, Rasht 1998)
ll . . . h6 12 .a3 gfc8 13.b4, Mihali­
chenko - Kovalev, Mukachevo
2 0 13, 13 . . . aS ! ? =
A) 8.id3
White usually chooses this
move when he would not mind a
draw.
8 . . . .h:d3 9.ti'xd3
9 . . . J.e7! ?
Black equalises with 9 . . . .id6,
but the move 9 . . . .ie7 leaves him
with more possibilities against
38
opponents who are playing
straightforwardly for a draw.
10.0-0
10 .h3 0-0 11.0-0 gc8 - see
10.0-0.
10 .WibS. Black parries easily
the threat of capturing on b7. 10 . . .
§'d7 11.0-0 0 - 0 12 .llieS (12.gfcl
a6= Azmaiparashvili - Topalov,
Benidorm 2 0 03) 12 . . . llixeS 13.
hes WixbS 14.llixbS a6 15.hf6
gxf6 16.llic3 gac8= Sumets - Sta­
rostits, Calvi 2009. The position
has been simplified considerably.
10 . . . 0-0
11.h3
This is a useful move. It is a
leeway for the king, as well as a
square for the retreat of the bish­
op if Black plays llihS.
11.\WbS §'d7 - see 10.WibS.
After 11.igS gc8 12.gfcl,
Ghaem Maghami - Bu, Macau
2 0 07, Black can reply 12 . . . llie8 ! ? ,
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. 0.j3 0.f6 5. 0. c3 0. c6 6. i.f4 i.j5 7.e3 e6
preparing the transfer of his
knight to c4 via the d6-square.
13 . .be7 W!xe7 14.a3 0.d6=
Following ll.a3, Black can try
to seize the initiative with the line :
11 ... 0.hS 12.i.eS f6 13.i.g3 0.xg3 14.
hxg3 (14.fxg3 ? ! Vasile - Ferreira,
ICCF 2 0 03, 14 . . .fS ! ?+) 14 . . .fS=
The position is simplified con­
siderably after 11.0.eS 0.xeS 12.
hes 0.d7 13.i.g3 0.b6 14.W!bs
i!c8= , followed by i!c4, i!b4, oust­
ing White's queen from its active
position, Breier - Andersen, Ger­
many 2 016.
11.i!fcl 0.hS ! ? 12 .i.eS (12.0.e2
i!c8 13.a3 a6= Doye - Rhodes,
ICCF 2 011) 12 .. .f6 13 .i.g3, Medu­
na - Gdanski, Novy Smokovec
1992, 13 . . . W!d7 ! ? =
After 11.i!acl, i t seems very
good for Black to continue with
11 . . . Wlb6 ! ? . He wishes to place his
king's rook on the c-file and not
his queen's rook. 12.0.a4 (12 .Wi'bS,
Khenkin - Ivanchuk, Antalya
2 0 13, 12 . . . W/xbS ! ? 13.0.xbS 0.e4 = ;
12 .Wie2 :gfc8 13.i.gS h 6 1 4 . .bf6
hf6 15.a3 0.aS 16.0.a4 W/d6=
Veremechik - Tiulin, USSR 1988)
12 ... Wlb4 13.Wi'c2 0.e4 14.a3 W!bS=
Dragun - Artemiev, Moscow 2014.
11 ••• :!k8 12.l:!fcl
Following 12.i!acl, Black, just
like in the main variation, pre­
pares the transfer of his knight to
c4. 12 ... 0.d7!? 13.a3 (13.i!fdl? ! 0.b6
14.0.eS 0.xeS 15.heS 0.c4+ Segal
- Gomez Baillo, Mar del Plata
1989. Black's prospects are already
preferable thanks to the powerful
placement of his knight on c4.)
13 ... 0.b6 14.l:!c2 0.c4 15.l:!fcl a6=
Markelova - Girya, Sochi 2016.
12 •.• 0.d7
He is trying to seize the initia­
tive. Now, White must play pre­
cisely in order not to end up in an
inferior position.
13.0.d2
White is covering in advance
the c4-square against the pene­
tration of the enemy knight.
13.W!bS Wlb6 14.0.el a6= Pla­
chetka - Malakhatko, Cappelle la
Grande 2005.
13.a3 0.b6 14.b3 a6 15.Wlbl (15.
i.g3 i!e8 =) 15 ... i.d6= Piesina -
Dorfman, Vilnius 1978.
13 ••• 0.b6 14.a3 0.aS
Black is threatening again to
follow with 0.c4.
39
Chapter 4
15.b3
This is White's most reliable
move.
15.WfbS? lll bc4 16.lll xc4 !!xc4
17.lll a4 a6-+ Mirzoev - Domin­
guez Perez, Saint Vincent 2 0 0 2 .
15 a6 16.Wbl Wd7= Ando­
•••
nov - Tukmakov, Sochi 1987. Lat­
er Black can even try to maintain
an edge, because White's a3-pawn
is under an attack by Black's bish­
op and it impedes White's major
pieces to fight effectively for the
c-file. The pawn-advance b3-b4
would lead to the weakening of
the c-file, while the move a3-a4
would weaken the b4-square.
B) 8.�e5
40
White wishes to trade the
knights. It is understandable that
he cannot fight for an advantage
in the opening in this way.
8 . . . �xe5 9 . .be5
After 9.dxeS �d7, White forces
his opponent to lose a tempo for
the retreat of his knight indeed,
but he ends up with doubled
pawns on the e-file. 10.e4. He is
trying to get rid of his doubled
pawns, but he will have difficul­
ties to regain the sacrificed pawns.
10 . . . dxe4 11 . .Ab5, Mozny - Cerny,
Tatranske Zruby 2006, 11 . . . .AcS ! ?
12.0-0 a6. Black wishes to elimi­
nate the pin of his knight and to
castle. 13 .i.a4 bS 14.i.c2 e3. Black
will lose his e4-pawn anyway, so
he gives it up deliberately in order
to double again his opponent's
pawns. White must play very ac­
curately in the middle game, be­
cause his pawn-structure has
been compromised.
9 ••• �d7
10 .Ag3
•
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. 0ij3 0if6 5. 0i c3 0i c6 6. i.f4 if5 7.e3 e6
It is bad for White to play here
10 . .ib5, because after 10 . . . a6 11.
i.xd7+ §'xd7, Black obtains two
powerful bishops. 12.0-0 f6 13.
i.g3 l:k8 14.l:kl i.e7 15.1l«b3 (15.
§'a4 ik4 16.§'b3 0-0 17.a3 gfc8+
Anastasian - Ivanchuk, Yerevan
1989) 15 . . . b5 16.f3 o-o 17.a3
gc4+, followed by gfc8. Black
maintains a considerable advan­
tage, Shimanov - Svidler, Olginka
2011.
10 .§'b3. White is trying to
sharpen the game, but this at­
tempt backfires. 10 . . . 0ixe5 11.
dxe5 i.e7! Black is afraid neither
of the loss of his b7-pawn, nor of
the check on b5. 12 .ib5+ (It
would be too risky for White to
play here 12 .§'xb7? ! 0-0 13 . .ib5
a6 14.i.e2 gb8 15.§'xa6, Lumley ­
Harding, England 1986. He has
two extra pawns at the moment,
but after 15 . . . d4 ! his position is
beginning to crumble. 16.exd4
§'xd4 17. 0-0 gxb2 18.0ia4 gxe2
19.§'xe2 §'xa4-+) 12 . . . ©f8. Black
would not mind the loss of his
castling rights, because later, he
can castle artificially after g7-g5,
©g7, or with h7-h5, ©g8-h7.
13.0-0 (13 .i.e2 §'c7 14.f4, De
Mauro - Harding, ICCF 1997,
14 . . . g5 ! ?+) 13 . . . V«b8. Black wishes
to force the move f2-f4, which
would weaken the gl-a7 diagonal.
(Following 13 . . . g5, White still
maintains the balance with the
line: 14.gadl! V«b6 15 . .id3 V«xb3
16.axb3 i.xd3 17.gxd3 =) 14.ie2,
Berthelot - Froilan Sulit, ICCF
2016 (14.f4 a6 15.ie2 §'a7! 16.llJdl
.ic5+ Westerman - De Groot,
Netherlands 1990) 14 . . . h5 ! ?+.
Black has two powerful bishops,
while White has problems with
the protection of his e5-pawn,
since the pawn-advance f2-f4
would weaken the gl-a7 diagonal.
10 .i.d3. White continues to
simplify the position. 10 . . . .ixd3
11.§'xd3 0ixe5 12.dxe5 ie7 13.
§'b5+ V«d7 14.gcl gc8 15.§'xd7+
©xd7 16. ©e2 gc4= Andersson -
Beliavsky, Brussels 1988. White
must play precisely, because in
actions on both sides of the board
Black's bishop may turn out to be
more powerful than White's
knight.
10 . . . a6
11 .ie2
.
After ll.§'b3 §'b6 12 .ie2, Ri­
cardi - Chemin, Buenos Aires
1992 , Black can simply exploit the
defects of his opponent's queen­
side pawn-structure 12 . . . V«xb3 ! ?
13.axb3 ib4+
41
Chapter 4
White cannot harm his oppo­
nent with 11.i.d3 i.xd3 12 .W/xd3
i.e7 13.0-0 0-0
14.gacl gcs 1s.gc2 (1S.llie2
\Was 16.a3 bS. With this move
Black prepares an outpost for his
rook on the c4-square. 17.h3 gc4=
Benidze - Ni Hua, Shenzhen
2 011.) lS . . . Wi'aS 16.gfcl gc6 17.f3.
White intends to play e3-e4, as
well as to transfer his bishop to el
(17.©fl gfc8+ Seel - Vovk, Berlin
2 0 1S). 17 . . .gfc8 18.i.el (White
should better refrain from the
pawn-advance 18.e4, Leitao -
Dominguez Perez, Havana 2003,
18 ... i.b4 ! ?+) 18 ... .id6 19.e4, Rem­
linger - Akobian, Orange 2011,
19 . . . W/c7 ! ? 2 0 .eS .ib4= White has
occupied space, but his bishop is
restricted by the pawns on d4 and
eS, has no mobility and may turn
out to be "bad".
14.gfcl WfaS 1s.gc2 gfc8. Both
sides plan to double their rooks
on the c-file. 16.gacl gc6 17.llidl
gac8 18.gxc6 gxc6 19.gxc6 bxc6.
Black is not afraid of the appear­
ance of a weak pawn on c6, be­
cause White will be incapable of
preventing the pawn-advance c6-
cS. 20.llic3 cS= Ki.Georgiev -
42
Bruzon Batista, Moscow 2001.
11. . • .ie7 12.0-0 0-0
13.lkl
13 . .id3. White's straightfor­
ward desire to exchange pieces
may lead him to an inferior posi­
tion. 13 . . . .ixd3 14. W/xd3 W/aS lS.a3
gfcs 16.b4 Wfd8 17.llia4 gc4+ Ma­
tamoros Franco - Svetushkin, Is­
tanbul 2000.
13.W/b3 W/b6 14.W/xb6 (14.gfcl
gac8= Andersson - Babula, Ger­
many 2002) 14 . . . llixb6 1S . .ic7
llid7 16,gfcl, Epishin - Chemin,
Reggio Emilia 1994 (16.g4 .ig6= )
1 6 . . . gfc8=
13 . •• lkS 14.a3
After White's alternatives he
may even fail to equalise. For ex­
ample: 14.W/b3 W/b6 1S . .if3, M.
Makarov - Aleshin, Pardubice
200S, 1S . . . W/xb3 ! ? 16.axb3 llib6+
1S.h3, or 1S . . .W/xb3 16.axb3 gc6+
Bacrot - Fressinet, Ajaccio 2 0 07.
In both variations Black's superi-
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. t:/Jj3 t:/Jf6 5. t:/J c3 t:/Jc6 6. if4 ij5 7.e3 e6
or pawn-structure provides him
with a slight but stable advantage.
14.id3 .b:d3 15.\Wxd3 \Was 16.
l'l:c2 (White ends up with a weak
isolated pawn after 16.e4 dxe4
17.\Wxe4 \Wb4+ Verduga Zavala -
Vilela de Acuna, Camaguey 1987.)
16 . . . l'l:c6 17.l'l:fcl l'l:fc8 18.f3 ib4+
Vallejo Pons - Andreikin, Tallinn
2 0 16. Black's pressure on the c­
file provides him with a stable ad­
vantage.
14 . . .b5. Now, White cannot
play t:/Ja4, b2-b4, t:/Jc5. 15.�a2,
Carlsen - Aronian, Moscow 2 009,
15 . . . �b6! ?oo, followed by t:/Jc4.
C) 8. \Wb3 .ib4
9 . .ib5
This is White's most active
move.
It is obviously more modest
for him to choose the develop­
ment of his bishop to e2 : 9.ie2
0-0 10.0-0 \We7 11.l'l:fcl, Wang -
Ding, Huaian 2016, 11 . . . CiJhS ! ?oo
9.t:/Je5 .b:c3+ 10.bxc3 (White
would not achieve much if he opts
for the other capture 10.\Wxc3, be­
cause later Black will win a tempo
by attacking the enemy queen ei­
ther with his knight on c4, or with
his rook on c8. 10 . . . t:/JxeS 11 . .b:eS
0-0 12.'?t/b4 l'l:c8 13.ie2 l'l:c2 14.
idl l'l:c4 15.'?t/a3, Martinovic - Er­
dos, Sibenik 2011, 15 . . . a6 ! ? = ) 10 . . .
t:/Jxe5 11 . .b:eS 0-0
Following 12.\Wxb7 l'l:c8=, White
leads considerably in develop­
ment and therefore cannot cap­
ture the pawn 13.\Wxa7? ! , since
after 13 . . . t:/Je4 14.a4, Milchev -
Lindgren, Vaxjo 2015, 14 . . . \Wh4 ! ?
15.g3 \Wh6+, h e must consider
t:/Jxc3, or l'l:xc3, as well the trap­
ping of his bishop with f7-f6, g7-
g5, while after ie5-c7, Black has
the resource l'l:f8-f7.
43
Chapter 4

1 2 .f3 tt:ld7 13.i.g3 l:k8= El­ 20.:gxcl V!Jb6 21.:gcs+ ©t7 2 2 .

linger - Hacker, ICCF 2 0 15. V!Jxb7+ V!Jxb7 23.gc7+ Y!!xc7 24.
12 .:gc1 :gcs 13.ie2 V!Je7 14.hf6 hc7 id3 = Akobian - Bu Xiang­
V!Jxf6 15.0-0 Y!!e 7. White must get zhi, Istanbul 2 0 1 2 .
rid of his backward pawn on c3 as
quickly as possible; otherwise, he 9 ••• 0-0
might end up in an inferior posi­
tion. 16.c4 dxc4 17.:gxc4 i.e4= Bar
- Homont, ICCF 2 016.
12 .i.e2 :gcs. Black is eyeing the
enemy weakness on c3. 13.0-0
tt:le4 14.Y!!xb7 (If White begins de­
fending with 14.:gfcl, things are
not going to end up well for him.
14 . . . Y!!h4 15.i.g3 Y!!e 7 16.c4 tll d 2
17.V!Ja4, Polak - Ragger, Austria
2 013, 17 . . . dxc4 ! ? 18.hc4 h5t)
14 .. .f6
We will analyse now: Cl)
10 . .ixc6 and C2) 10.0-0.

Cl) 10 .ixc6 .ixc3+ 11.'f!Yxc3

•

11.bxc3 ? ! bxc6 12.0-0 tt:le4 13.

15.i.g3 (15.i.f4 g5 16.ig3,
Richter - Hermann, Germany
2 015, 16 . . . Y!!b 6 ! ? The transfer into
an endgame is Black's simplest
road to equality. 17.V!Jxb6 axb6
18.:gfcl :gxc3 19.gxc3 tt:lxc3. His
knight on c3 is very powerful.
This compensates White's two­
bishop advantage. 2 0 .i.fl gc8= )
15 . . .g f7 16.V!Ja6 tt:lxc3 17.:gfcl
tt:lxe2+ 18.Y!!xe2 . This position
with bishops of opposite colours
and major pieces seems rather
drawish. 18 . . . gb7 19.V!Ja6 gxcl+
h3, Pakleza - Erdos, Sitges 2008.
White defends against g5, h5. 13 ...
h5 ! ? 14.Y/!b2 c5+ Black has man­
aged to advance his weak pawn,
while White must work hard in
order to protect his weakness on
c3.
u . . . �k8 12.�e5 bxc6! ?
This i s a n interesting possibil­
ity after which Black preserves
chances of seizing the initiative if
White reacts inaccurately.
Black can equalise easily with
the line: 12 . . . �g4 13.�xg4 hg4
14.Y!!b 4 gxc6 15.Y!!xb7 Y!!c 8 16.

44
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. l:LJ.f3 lLJf6 5. lLJ c3 lLJ c6 6. i.f4 i.j5 7.e3 e6
ti'xc8 gfxc8 17.0-0 aS 18.f3 i.fS=
Kramnik - Anand, Bonn 2008.
White has no chances of realising
his extra pawn in this position
with rooks and bishops of oppo­
site colours.
13.ti'a3
After 13.gcl cs, White must
play precisely in order to avoid
ending up worse. 14.dxc5 lLJe4 1S.
ti'a3 f6. Black wishes to restrict
his opponent's minor pieces. 16.
lLJf3 eS 17.i.g3 ti'e7= Here, White
should better give up his cS-pawn,
since his attempt to protect it with
18.b4? ! and 18 . . . aS ! 19.ti'xaS gas
2 0 .ti'bS gfbs 2 1.ti'e2 gxb4+,
would lead to a difficult position
for him. The straightforward
move 2 2 .c6? even loses for White
2 2 . . . lLJc3 ! 23.ti'd2 gxa2 24.ti'xc3,
Andersson - Blomqvist, Borlange
2 0 14, 24 . . . d4-+
13 . . . lLJhS
Now, White's bishop on f4
cannot avoid being exchanged.
14.Jkl lLJxf4 15.exf4 f6
16.�xc6
White has won a pawn, but his
knight has been unpleasantly
pinned.
16 ...ti'd7 17.Vc5 gfe8
18.0-0
The move 18. <i>d2 has its draw­
backs too. There are still too many
pieces on the board and White's
king may come under an attack in
the centre. 18 . . . <i>hS. Black de­
fends against the threat lLJe7. 19.
b4 a6 20.ghel h6 21.a4 i.bl !
White i s preparing the transfer of
his bishop to the c4-square. 2 2 .
<i>e3 i.a2 23 .bS i.c4 24.f3 axbS
2S.axbS gc7 26.<i>f2 i.xbS 27.'\1;lfxbS
gec8= Soltau - Bokar, ICCF 2 0 13.
White cannot save his knight, so
the position is balanced.
18 . . . e5. Black plays in the
centre in an attempt to deflect
White's pieces from the defence of
his knight on c6. 19.b4. White
wishes to protect his knight with
his pawn on bS as quickly as pos­
sible in order to free his queen
from its protection. In the mean­
time, Black manages to advance
4S
Chapter 4
further his pawn. 19 exd4 20.
•••
b5 d3 2Ukdl (It is just bad for
White to play here 2 1.Wfd4, be­
cause of 21 . . . ge2 22.gcS gees 23.
:i!xdS Wfe6 24.h3 d2+; 24.gd6 'i;Vxa2
2s.gds i.g6 26.lllb4 'i;VaS 27.:i!xeS+
gxe8 28.lll xd3 'i;VxbS 29.lll cS aS+
Ponomarev - Leupold, ICCF
2008. The tactical complications
have ended. The outside passed a­
pawn and the dominance of his
bishop over the enemy knight in
actions on both sides of the board
provide Black with a great advan­
tage.) 21 a6 22.a4 h5oo
•••
C2) 10.0-0
White hopes that the extra
tempo (Wfb3) in this symmetrical
position would enable him to fight
for the opening advantage. Still,
Black's position remains quite
solid.
10 .txc3 11.'i;Vxc3
•••
There arise great simplifica­
tions after 11.i.xc6 i.xb2 12 .i.xb7
(12 .'i;Vxb2 bxc6 13.lll e S 'i;Vb6 14.
'i;Vxb6 axb6 1S.lll xc6 i.d3 16.gfcl
ga4 17.i.d6 gfas 18.a3 lll e 8= Graf
46
- Miles, Chania 1997) 12 . . . i.xal
13.gxal (13.i.xaS Wfxa8 14.gxal
lll e4= ) 13 . . . lll e4 14.gcl Wfb6 lS.
i.xa8 gxa8 16.h3 f6 17.g4 .ig6 18.
gc7 'i;Vxb3 19.axb3 as 2 0.©g2 .ie8
2 1.gS a4 2 2 .bxa4 gxa4= Voetter -
Leupold, ICCF 2008.
11••• lll e4
Black attacks his opponent's
queen and wins a tempo for the
pawn-advance g7-gS.
12.'i;Va3 g5! ? 13.i.g3 f6
It is useful for him to take the
es-square under control, so that
White's knight cannot go there
later.
14.!Ucl
About 14.i.xc6 bxc6 1s.gac1
'i;Vb6 - see 14.gacl.
14.gacl Wfb6 1S.i.xc6 bxc6
16.gfdl as 17.lll d 2 lll xg3 18.hxg3
a4 19.lll b l gfbs . Black squeezes
his opponent's pieces with the
protection of the b2-pawn. 2 0 .
Wfe 7 'i;Vd8 2 1.'i;VxdS+ gxd8 2 2 . gxc6
gab8= White is incapable of hold­
ing on to his material advantage.
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. l:iJfJ t:fJf6 5. t:fJ c3 t:fJc6 6. il..f4 il..f5 7.e3 e6
14 • • • �k8 15.J.xc6 bxc6
16.ti'xa7
He wins a pawn, but presents
the initiative to Black.
It is obviously bad for White to
play here 16.t:fJel? ! , because after
16 . . . hS 17.f3 t:fJxg3 1S.hxg3 ti'c7
19.©f2 h4 2 0.g4 i.g6+, the mate­
rial on the board is equal indeed,
but his king is seriously endan­
gered, Bakre - Thakur, San Se­
bastian 2 0 1 2 .
There arises a complicated
position following 16.gdl gf7 17.
t:fJd2 t:fJxg3 1S.hxg3 hS? Sykora -
Hybl, ICCF 2010. Black has weak
pawns on a7 and c6, but if he
manages to open the h-file after
gh7, h5-h4, his attack against the
enemy king may become very
powerful.
16 • • • h5 17.h4 g4 18.l:iJh2
Or lS.t:fJel t:fJxg3 19 .fxg3 Wfd6
2 0 .gc3 ! ? White defends precisely.
(After 2 0 . ©h2? ! gas 2 1.ti'cS ti'xcS
2 2 . gxcS gfbs 23.gxc6, Taboas
Rodriguez - Ramirez Garcia, Tres
Cantos 2010, 23 . . . ga4 ! ?+, it is es­
sential for Black not to allow a2-
a4, while the b2-pawn is not run­
ning away. Meanwhile, White's
knight is misplaced on el and is
severely restricted by the pawn on
e4 and the bishop on fS. White
has two extra pawns indeed, but
Black has a great advantage.) 20 . . .
.ie4 21.©h2 gas 2 2 .Wfb7 gfbs 23.
ti'xc6 ti'xc6 24.gxc6. Now, con­
trary to the previous variation,
Black's bishop is on e4 and does
not protect the pawn on e6. This
circumstance enables White to
equalise. 24 . . . gxb2 25.a4 @f7 26.
a5 ©e7=
18 . • • �xg3 19.fxg3 ti'd6
20.ti'a6! ?
Now again, White must defend
very accurately.
The natural move 2 0 .t:fJfl? los­
es. 20 . . . gas 21.ti'cS WfxcS 22.gxcS
gfbs 23.e4 (23.gxc6 gxb2-+, fol­
lowed by .ie4 and White cannot
hold on to the g2-square, Rusev
- Ni Hua, Villarrobledo 2009)
47
Chapter 4
23 . . . he4 24.ti)d2 .ifs 25.b3 i!b4
26. i!xc6 i!xd4-+ Lechtynsky -
Haba, Czech Republic 2 005.
20 '9xg3 21.�fl ti'xh4 22.
••.
fucc6 �ke8 23.a4 ti'g5oo There
arises a very sharp play in this
middle game. White will advance
his queenside pawns, while Black
will push forward his g and h­
pawns with the idea to attack the
enemy king.
D) 8 .ib5 �d7
• time the enemy pawn on b2.
Black parries the threat ti)eS.
We will analyse now: Dl)
9.0-0 and D2) 9.'9a4.
9.i!cl !i.e7 10.0-0 (10.'frb3 a6
- see 9.'9b3). 10 . . . i!c8 - see varia­
tion Dl.
9.ti)eS ti)cxeS 10 .heS a6 11 .
.b:d7+ Wxd7 - see variation B.
White can create a weakness
on c6 - 9 .hc6 bxc6, but this is
not much of an achievement,
since he cannot prevent later
48
Black's pawn-advance c6-c5. 10.
ti)eS (10.0-0 .ie7 - see 9. 0-0)
10 ... ti)xeS 11.heS f6 12 . .ig3 cS=
Weiss - Orsolic, Germany 2009.
9 .ti'b3 .ie7 10.i!cl (It is better
for White to play here 10.0-0 gS
- see variation Dl.) 10 . . . a6 11.
hc6 bxc6 12.ti)eS? ! Espig - Ba­
reev, Novi Sad 1990, 12 . . . i!bS ! ?
13.Wa4 li)xe5 14.heS i!b6+ Black
has the two-bishop advantage and
his rook on b6 protects the pawns
on c6 and a6 attacking at the same
Dl) 9.0-0
White is not in a hurry to in­
crease the pressure against the
enemy knight on c6 with the move
Wa4 and simply removes his king
away from the centre. Strangely
enough, after castling in numer­
ous variations his king may come
under attack after .ie7, g7-g5, h7-
h5. White must be constantly on
the alert about this possibility.
9 .ie7
•••
10.�kl
 J.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. l?Jj3 l?Jf6 5. l?Jc3 l?J c6 6. i.f4 i.j5 7.e3 e6
10.l?JeS l?JcxeS 11.i.xeS 0-0 12.
i.g3 :Sc8 13.�d3. White's plan is
not impressive at all . Now, just like
in variation A, he exchanges the
light-squared bishops, but loses a
tempo for the move 8 .i.bS. 13 . . .
.bd3 14.�xd3 �b6 15.:Sabl, An­
dersson - Hansen, Thessaloniki
1988, 15 . . . :Sc4+, followed by :Sfc8.
10.�e2 0-0 11.:Sfcl :Sc8 1 2 .
l?J e l , Jobava - Rapport, Austria
2012, 12 . . . l?Jf6 ! ? =
10.id3 i.xd3 ll.�xd3 0 - 0 1 2 .
:Sfcl :Sc8 13.�b5 l?Jb6= Urkedal -
Rapport, Athens 2012.
10.h3 l'k8 11.:Scl a6= Anders­
son - Dominguez Perez, Havana
2 0 03.
The line: 10 .hc6 bxc6 does
not promise much to White.
Black's bishops are very powerful.
He is also threatening g7-g5, h7-
h5, so White cannot concentrate
on his attack against the c6-pawn.
ll.l?Ja4, Henley - Torre, Indo­
nesia 1983, 11 . . . hS ! ? t
11.:Scl :Sc8 12.l?Ja4 gS ! Black
begins an attack with this move.
13.ig3 hS. He is threatening to
trap the enemy bishop and forces
White to play 14.h3. After 14 . . . g4
1 5 . hxg4 hxg4, Black opens the
h-file. 16.l?JeS l?JxeS 17.heS f6
18.ig3 'itif7-+ His attack is im­
possible to parry now. 19.:Sel :Sh5
2 0 .�d2 ie4 21. 'itifl �f3 ! 0-1 Sei­
rawan - Beliavsky, Brussels 1988.
11.l?JeS. This is a reliable move
for White and he is at least not
worse after it. 11 . . . l?JxeS 12 .heS
0-0 13.l?Ja4 (13.:Scl �as 14.�b3
:Sfc8 15.l?Ja4, Barbero - Meduna,
Biel 1986, 15 . . . �bS ! ?) 13 . . . �aS 14.
�b3 (14.:Scl :Sfc8 15.a3 �bS 16.
:Sc3 f6 17.ig3 c5= Guerra Costa -
Schinis, Ciro 1998) 14 . . . �bS 15.
:Sfcl :Sfc8 16.�dl f6 17 ..ig3 c5.
Black gets rid of his backward
pawn and equalises completely.
18.dxcS .bcS 19.l?JxcS :Sxc5 20.
:Sxc5 �xc5 2 1.:Scl �b5= Barlov -
Mednis, Graz 1987.
After 10 .�a4 �b6, White's
queenside initiative reaches its
dead end.
11.:Sfcl a6 12 .hc6 bxc6= An­
derton - Akstinat, Germany 2011.
White cannot break in the cen­
tre with ll.e4, because after 11...
49
Chapter 4
dxe4 12 .dS .!Des 13.dxc6 0-0!
14.Wdl exf3+, Black manages to
complete his development, Cos­
ma - Gilbert, Bucharest 1993.
11.'{gb3 a6 12 .hc6 bxc6 13 .
.!Des (13.:gfcl Wxb3 14.axb3 f6=
Hansen - Salov, Wijk aan Zee
1991) 13 . . ,'{gxb3 14.axb3, Illescas
Cordoba - Teske, Germany 1997,
14 . . . gS ! ? 1S.i.g3 c!DxeS 16.heS f6
17.i.g3 h5t Both sides have pawn­
weaknesses, but Black's prospects
seem slightly preferable thanks to
his bishop-pair.
10.Wb3 gS ! ? This plan is very
unpleasant for White.
11.i.g3. This natural move is
not precise. 11 . . . hS 12 .h3 g4 13.
hxg4 hxg4 14.c!Dd2 @f8 ! Black is
preparing @g7, in order to con­
nect his major pieces. It would be
difficult for White to parry his en­
emy threats on the h-file. lS.:gfcl
@g7 16.c!De2 :gc8 17.hc6 bxc6 18.
'{gb7 :gh7 19 . .if4, Rakhmanov -
Jakovenko, Plovdiv 2012 (19.
:gxc6? :gxc6 2 0 ,'{gxc6 Wh8-+) 19 . . .
i.d3 ! ? 2 0 .c!Dg3 c 5 2i.:gc3 c4+
White must continue here
with 11 . .ieS ! ? and only after
11 . . . 0-0 (11 . . .f6 12 .i.g3 hS 13.h4 ! )
so
to retreat 12 . .ig3. After Black has
castled, White does not need to be
afraid of the opening of files on
the kingside. 12 . . . a6 13.hc6 (13.
i.e2 Wb6 14.'{gxb6 c!Dxb6+ Jordan
- Canizares Cuadra, IECG 2 006)
13 . . . bxc6oo
10 . . . !k8
11.c!Da4
11.h3 a6 12 . .ie2 0-0= Sasiki­
ran - Fedorov, playchess.com
2006.
11.c!DeS c!DdxeS 12 .heS 0-0
13 . .ig3 c!DaS= Bleul - Mueller,
Germany 199 2 .
After 11.'{gb3, Black can also
advance his kingside pawns. 1 1 . . .
g S 12 .i.eS, Zeller - Rausis, Ger­
many 1999, 12 . . . 0-0 ! ? 13 . .ig3 hSt
11 . . . gS 12 . .ig3
12 . .ieS :gg8oo Nisman - Lalic,
Belgrade 1989.
12 . . . hS 13.c!Llc5
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4. &iJj3 &iJf6 5. &iJ c3 &iJ c6 6. i.f4 i.j5 7.e3 e6
With his active actions on the
queenside Black wishes to deflect
his opponent of his attack on the
kingside.
It would be worse for White to
play here 13.h3 g4 14.&iJeS &iJdxeS
15.heS f6=i= Kropff - Cubas, Asun­
cion 2006.
13 c!LJxcS 14.dxcS h4 15.
•••
.id6 .ixd6 16.cxd6 Yfxd6 17.
c!LJxgS, I.Sokolov - Danin, Koge
2 013, 17 eb4! ?
••• 18 .ixc6+
• kingside. 14.a3, Simanowski -
gxc6 19.h3 ggs 20.YfhS .ig6
21.Yfe2 .if5= Now, White has
nothing better than to repeat the
position.
D2) 9.Yfa4
White begins immediate ac­
tive actions on the queenside.
9 ••• gcs
Black is not afraid of the pos­
sible loss of his a7-pawn.
10.0-0
White should better refrain
from obtaining material gains at
the moment, because after 10.
hc6 i!xc6 ll.�xa7 .id3 ! , Black
seizes firmly the initiative. 12.
9a4. White wishes to return his
queen into his own camp as
quickly as possible (12 .�xb7 i!b6+
13.9c7? ! i!xb2 14.'\l!!!x dB+ @xd8
15.a3 i!c2+ Petrovic - Zivkovic,
Belgrade 2 0 07). 12 . . . .ie7 13.�dl
.ia6. Black has two powerful bish­
ops for the sacrificed pawn and
what is most important his bishop
on a6 impedes White's castling
Stewart, ICCF 2007 (White must,
irrelevant of the time lost, trans­
fer his knight to e2 and castle
kingside. 14.c!ll g l ! ? �as 15.c!ll g e2
.b:e2 16.l!?xe2 .ib4 17.i!el 0-0+)
14 . . . �aS ! ?+ Black has very power­
ful initiative for his minimal ma­
terial deficit.
10 a6 11 .ixc6 gxc6 12.
••• •
gfcl .ie7
13.c!ll e 2
White used to follow the plan
with the move 13.&iJdl at the end
of the 80ies of the past century,
51
Chapter 4
but its popularity diminished
quickly. 13 . . .bS 14.eb3 ec8 15.e4.
White sacrifices a pawn and
brings his bishop to control the
cl-square. Still, his dominance
over the c-file does not compen­
sate fully his material deficit. (15.
13xc6 exc6 16.ec3 Wfxc3 17.tLixc3
f6+ Hernando Garcia - Lopez
Gracia, Aragon 2 0 14) 15 . . . he4
16.13xc6 exc6 17.i!cl ea8 18.a4
hf3 . It is useful for Black to com­
promise his opponent's pawn­
structure. 19.gxf3, Shabalov -
Khalifman, Tashkent 1987, 19 . . .
gS ! ? 20 . .ic7 Wfb7 2 1..ig3 .id8+
13 Wfb6 14.�c6 bxc6
•••
White has managed to weaken
Black's pawn-structure, but his
two powerful bishops provide
him with counterplay sufficient to
maintain the balance.
15.�kl
15.Wfb3? ! f6 16.tLic3 @m Vais­
ser - Fressinet, Val d'Isere 2 0 04.
1s ••• .t.d3 16. ed1
16.13xc6. The exchange of the
pawns on b2 and c6 does not
52
promise much to White. 16 ...
exb2 17.13c8+ .id8 18.tLicl .ibS 19.
eb3 Wfxb3 2 0 .tLixb3 0-0 2 1 ..id6
!i.e7. Black has succeeded in get­
ting rid of the pin of his bishop
and after the exchanges, there
arises an equal endgame with mi­
nor pieces on the board. 22.13xf8+
©xf8 23.!i.xe7+ ©xe7 24.tLifd2
©d6= Plaskett - Jussupow, Graz
1981. Black's king is more active.
White must play precisely in or­
der to maintain the equality.
16 .ig6
•••
11.,;1c3
The position is repeated after
17.Wfa4 !i.d3=
17.tLieS tLixeS 18 .heS 0-0.
Black has the two-bishop advan­
tage and can always get rid of his
weak pawn by advancing c6-c5.
19.Wfd2 , Pakhomov - Tuma, Par­
dubice 2006, 19 . . . 13c8 20.tLic3
eb4 2 i.ee2 WfaS 2 2 .edl f6 23 . .if4
cs+
11 . . . 0-0 1s.Bb3 �1cs 19.
ti'xb6 tLixb6 20.tLleS c5 21.
tLixg6 hxg6 22.dxcS �c5=
Dzenis - Garnier, ICCF 2 0 14.
 Part 2
1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . �fJ �f6
In the second part of our book
we will analyse lines in which af-
ter 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.�:f3 �f6,
White refrains from the most
popular move 4.�c3. The fifth
chapter of the book will be devot­
ed to the move 4.�bd2 , while in
Chapters 6-7 we will deal with
4.g3 and 4.\Wc2 , while in the two
final chapters of the second part
(8 and 9), we will analyse 4.e3. It
is also worth mentioning that the
rather popular move 4.\Wb3, after
4 . . . dxc4 5.\Wxc4, transposes to po­
sitions from chapter seven.
53
Chapter s 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . tll f3 tll f6
4.t£ibd2
Indeed, White's knight is not
so active here than on the c3-
square, but one of the pluses of
this move is that now, he does not
need to worry about the protec­
tion of his pawn on c4.
About 4.'\Wa4 dxc4 5.'\Wxc4 .ifs,
or 4.'1Wb3 dxc4 5.'.Wxc4 .ifS - see
Chapter 7.
It is obviously bad for White to
choose here 4 . .igS, because Black
can simply capture the pawn 4 . . .
dxc4 and White's compensation
for it is insufficient. 5.'\Wc2 (5.
lll b d2 bS 6.a4, Kiriakov - S.Vol­
kov, playchess.com 2 0 04, 6 . . . h6 ! ?
7 . .ixf6 exf6+) 5 . . . bs 6.e4 h6 7 . .ie3
54
(7 . .ixf6? ! exf6 8 .lll b d2 .ib4+
Cherniaev - Hochstrasser, Saas
Almagell 2005. Black has an extra
pawn and the two-bishop advan­
tage.) 7 . . . e6+ Bratanov - Yorda­
nov, Plovdiv 2 0 1 2 .
4 ... .if5
White does not exert sufficient
pressure against the dS-pawn, so
before playing e7-e6, Black can
exploit this developing his light­
squared bishop outside of his
pawn-chain without being afraid
of the queen-sortie '\Wb3 .
Now, White must make a
choice on which diagonal to de­
velop his light-squared bishop:
A) 5.e3, or B) 5.g3.
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. lllj3 lllf6 4. lll bd2 Ii.JS
5.§'b3. This move is not dan­
gerous for Black with a white
knight on d2. 5 . . . \!;llb 6
6.\!;llc3 e6 7.c5 §'c7 8.b4 a5=
McMurray/Allies - Capablanca,
New York 1936.
The exchange of the queens is
not promising for White, because
after 6.\!;llxb6 axb6, Black's rook
will operate on the semi-open a­
file. 7.cxd5 cxd5 8.e3 lll c 6 9.i.b5
e6 10.lll e5 !!c8= Melkumjanz -
Jugelt, Essen 2 0 0 0 .
6.lll h 4 §'xb3. This i s a n inter­
esting idea. 7.axb3 ic2 . It is
amazing, but Black's bishop is
perfectly placed inside his oppo­
nent's camp. It attacks the b3-
pawn and White's pieces can
hardly counter it. 8.e3, Rogo­
zenco - Pacher, Czech Republic
2 0 13 , 8 . . . lll a6 ! ?oo Black is pre­
paring the transfer of his knight
to the b4-square. White should
better not accept the pawn-sac­
rifice, since following 9 .cxd5
cxd5 10 .i.xa6 bxa6 11.!!xa6 i.d3
12 .!!al e6 13.lll hf3 ib4 14.lll e5
ib5+, Black's bishops would be­
come very active, while White's
doubled extra pawn would be im­
material.
There arises a complicated po­
sitional battle after 5.lll h4 fi.e6. In
general, it is not good to place
bishops in front of the central
pawns, since this may lead to the
delay of the development of the
pieces. Still, this is an exceptional
case, because Black can easily de­
velop his bishop on f8 to g7. 6.e3
(It seems less consistent for White
to play here 6.\!;llb3 §'b6 7.e3 \!;llxb3
8.axb3 lll a 6 9.ie2 g6 10.0-0 fi.g7.
Black develops his pieces in the
spirit of the Gruenfeld Defence.
11.lll b l 0-0 12.lll c3 c5= Rivas Ma­
ceda - Walter, ICCF 2 0 15. White
must lose time here in order to
centralise his knight.) 6 . . . g5 ! ?
This interesting move leads to po­
sitions which are not so well ana­
lysed. Black exploits the misplace­
ment of the enemy knight on h4
and advances with tempo his
kingside pawns. 7.lll hf3 g4 8.lll e5
h5 ! ?
Now, if White castles kingside,
his king may come under a pawn­
offensive.
After 9.b3, Black must try to
exchange his opponent's central­
ised knight as quickly as possible.
9 . . . lll bd7 10.§'c2 lll xe5 11.dxe5
55
Chapter s
ll:ld7 12 .i.b2 i.g7 13.cxdS cxdS 14.
f4. This move weakens White's
pawn-structure, but he has no
other way of protecting his eS-
pawn. It is good for Black to have
a pawn on g4, since it deprives
White's knight of the f3-square.
14 . . . gxf3 1S.lLlxf3 Was+ 16.'!Wd2
Wxd2+ 17.©xd2 lLlcS= White must
play accurately in this endgame;
otherwise, the vulnerability of his
pawn-structure might hurt him.
9.cxdS WxdS 10.ll:ld3 i.h6 11.
lLlcS ll:lbd7 1 2 . ll:lxe6 '!Wxe6
White has obtained the two­
bishop advantage, but has lost too
much time on the manoeuvre of
his knight and lags considerably
in development. 13.'!Wb3 lLldS ! ?
Black sacrifices a pawn and avoids
the trade of the queens. 14.Wxb7
gbs 1S.'!Wa6 ll:lb4 16.Wa4 Wg6 17.
©dl. White defends against lLlc2 ,
but now, his king remains strand­
ed at the centre of the board for a
long time. 17 ... eS 18.a3 lLldS 19.dxe5
lLlxeS� followed by 0-0, Enricci -
Glatthaar, ICCF 201S. Black has
more than sufficient compensa­
tion for his minimal material defi­
cit. His pieces are very active,
while White will need a lot of time
S6
to develop his pieces and to evac­
uate his king away from the centre.
A) 5.e3 e6
6.!;..e 2
6.a3. The immediate occupa­
tion of space on the queenside
would not bring anything to
White. 6 . . . ll:lbd7 7.b4 ie7 8 .i.b2
0-0 9.i.e2, Lehr - Boettcher, Bad
Segeberg 199S, 9 . . . aS ! ? 10.cS b6=
6.'!Wb3 Wb6 7.cs (Or 7 . .ie2
'!Wxb3 8 .ll:lxb3, Keese - Pedrosa,
ICCF 2009, 8 . . . aS ! ? = , preparing
aS-a4 and preventing White's
knight-sortie lLlaS.) 7 . . .'!Wc7 8.Wc3
ll:lbd7 9.b4 !;.,e7 10 .i.b2 0-0 11.
.ie2 , Piazzini - Grau, Buenos
Aires 193S. Here, Black can pre­
pare his standard pawn-break in
the centre e6-eS, or can apply
some prophylactic on the queen­
side : 11 . . . aS ! ? 12 .a3 b6=, after
which White will hardly manage
to advance b4-bS, because then,
his pawn on cS would not be suf­
ficiently protected.
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. llij3 llif6 4. lli bd2 i.j5

After 6.llih4, Black should bet­ 6 ••• h6 ! ?

ter play 6 . . . .ie4. This i s the simplest fo r Black.
Now, he should not be afraid of
llih4.

7.§'b3 1l;!/b6 8 .i.e2 (8.c5 §'c7 9 .

f3 i.g6oo M.Gurevich - Hauchard,
Gibraltar 2 009) 8 . . . h6. Black pre­
pares the retreat of his bishop to
h7. 9 .llixe4 dxe4oo. This is the es­ 7.0-0
sence of the idea behind Black's
move six. Now, his pawn on e4 White would not achieve much
will deprive White's knight on h4 if he postpones castling. 7.b3
of the f3-square, Carlsen - Fressi­ llibd7 8 .i.b2 i.d6 9.llie5 (9.0-0
net, Dubai 2 0 14. 0-0 - see 7.0-0) 9 ... llie4 10.llixe4
7 ..ie2 llibd7 8.0-0 i.d6 9 .c5. i.xe4= Kholmov - Shcherbakov,
White occupies space on the Perm 1997.
queenside, but now, Black can be­
gin active actions on the kingside 7 ••• llibd7 8 .b3
(g7-g5), without worrying about White prepares the develop­
his position in the centre. (9. ment of his bishop to b2.
llihf3. White admits that the ma­ 8 ••• i.d6 9.i.b2 0-0
noeuvre llih4 was a failure. 9 . . .
i.g6 1 0.b3, Zubov - Ravi, Mumbai
2 0 15, 10 . . . llie4 ! ? = ; 9.g3, Girl -
Fressinet, Beijing 2012, 9 . . . h5 ! ?oo)
9 . . . i.c7 10.b4 g5 11.f3 gxh4 12 .fxe4
llixe4 13.llixe4 dxe4 14.§'c2 llif6
15 . .ib2 13g8 = Ilyushchenko - Ya­
maliev, ICCF 2 0 15. Black has an
extra pawn and good attacking
prospects on the g-file, but his
pawn-structure has been com­
promised. White has a bishop­
pair, however. 10.llie5

57
Chapter s
10.a3 aS 11.llJeS 'fie7= Zallio -
Macedo, Natal 2013.
10 • • • ti'e7 11.f4
White fortifies reliably his
knight on eS, but weakens the e4-
square.
White would not obtain much
after his alternatives. For exam­
ple: 11.a3 �fd8= Mastrovasilis -
Darmarakis, Kallithea 2008, or
11.llJdf3 �fd8= Sabaev - Skatch­
kov, Bor 2000, or 11.'!Wcl llJe4.
Black wishes to trade the knights.
The simplification is his most di­
rect road to equality. 1 2 .llJxe4
ixe4 13.llJxd7 '\Wxd7 14.ia3, Gran­
da Zuniga - De la Riva, Linares
2008, 14 . . . ixa3 ! ? 1S.'f!xa3 aS=
11 llJe4 12.llJxd7 W!xd7 13.
• • •
�xe4 he4 14.c5 J.c7= Yere­
menko - Lucchini, ICCF 1999.
White has slightly more space,
but the vulnerability of the e4-
square does not enable him to
fight for the advantage.
B) 5.g3 e6
S8
We will analyse similar posi­
tions in the next chapter, but
there, Black's bishop would be on
the g4-square.
6.J.g2
It seems premature for White
to choose 6.�h4, since following
6 ...dxc4 7.�xf5 exf5 8.�xc4, Black
has the move 8 . . . '!WdS with a dou­
ble attack against the enemy rook
and knight. White does not lose
material, because he can defend
with 9 .'!Wb3, Martinovsky - Feld­
man, New York 1992, attacking
the pawn on b7 at the same time,
but after 9 ... �a6 ! ? 10.�gl ib4+ 11.
id2 bS 12.ixb4 bxc4 13.Wi'e3+ lbe4
14.id2 0-0+, the tactical compli­
cations end in Black's favour,
since he leads in development
and his knight is very powerful at
the centre of the board. White's
king is unsafe both in the centre
and on the queenside as well.
6 • • • h6
This is a practical decision.
Black takes care immediately
against the move llJh4.
 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. tLif3 tLij6 4. t0 bd2 .ij5
7.0-0
About 7.a3 as 8.0-0 tLibd7, or
7.b3 .ie7 8 .!i.b2 tLibd7 9.0-0 - see
7. 0-0.
7.tLieS tLibd7 8 .tLixd7 �xd7=
Krasenkow - Cramling, Stock­
holm 2 0 14.
7 ••• t0bd7
8.b3
White prepares the fianchetto
of his second bishop.
8 .a3 as 9.b3 !i.e7 10 .!i.b2 0-0
- see 8.b3.
Following 8.gel !i.e7 9.Wi'b3
(9.b3 0-0 - see 8 .b3) 9 . . . �b6 10.
cs Wfc7 11.Wi'c3, Black can prevent
his opponent's pawn-advance b2-
b4 with the move 11...aS+ Mat­
nadze - Korneev, Linares 2013.
8 . . . !i.e7
This placement of the bishop
has the advantage, in comparison
to 8 . . . .id6, that after !i.b2 and
tLieS, Black can capture White's
knight (lLixeS), without being
afraid of the pawn-fork dxeS.
9.J.b2
9,ge1 0-0 10 .ib2 aS - see 9.
ib2 .
9 ••• 0-0
10.t0e5
This is a logical continuation
of White's opening strategy. After
the development of the bishop to
b2, he deploys his knight at the
middle of the board.
About 10 .gcl aS ll.a3 !i.h7, or
10 .ge1 aS 11.a3 t0e4 - see 10.a3.
10 .�cl gcs 11.!i.c3 aS= Borroni
- Balabaev, ICCF 2 0 0 2 .
10.h3. This i s not the most
useful move for White. 10 . . . aS 11.
a3 Wfc7 12 .gcl t0e4 13.e3 t0xd2 14.
t0xd2 t0f6= Alfaro de Hombre -
Tassone, ICCF 201S.
10.e3. He is preparing �e2 .
10 . . . aS. This typical advance of
the rook pawn in similar positions
S9
Chapter s
provides Black with a good game.
ll.§'e2 a4 12 .i.c3, Arkell - Berry,
London 2012 (12 . Rfcl, Hort - Il­
lescas Cordoba, Tilburg 1992 , 12 . . .
§'c7! ?oo; 12 .lLieS i.b4oo Bashkirov
- Khusainov, Kazan 2008) 12 . . .
§'b6 ! ? = , increasing the pressure
against the pawn on b3. Black
does not need to be in a hurry to
exchange on b3, since he can open
the a-file later at the most appro­
priate moment for him.
10.a3 as
11.lLieS lLixeS - see 10.lLieS.
11.lLiel. This transfer of the
knight to the d3-square seems too
slow. 11 . . . §'b6 12.lLid3 lLie4+
lUkl i.h7 12.lLiel, Kirana -
Haslinger, Leiden 2011, 12 . . .
lLie4 ! ?oo
11.�el lLie4 1 2 .lLixe4 (12 .e3 bS
13.cxdS cxd5 14.lLixe4 he4 15.i.fl
§'b6= , followed by the doubling of
the rooks on the c-file, Sulskis -
Hasangatin, Koszalin 1996. In the
middle game, the bishop on b2
may tum out to be "bad", since it
is severely restricted by his own
pawns on d4, e3 and a3.) 12 . . .
i.xe4 13.lLid2 (13 .i.h3 i.h7= ; 13.
i.fl i.h7=) 13 ... hg2 14.@xg2 bS
60
15.e4. After this pawn-break in
the centre, White suddenly ends
up in an inferior position. 15 . . .
dxe4 16.lLixe4, Cedriano - Braca­
li, Bratto 2 0 05, 16 . . . lLib6 ! ? . Black
exerts pressure against the c4-
pawn and is also threatening a5-
a4, so he forces the move 17.cS
lLidS+. The powerful placement of
the knight at the middle of the
board and White's "bad" bishop
on b2 make Black's prospects
preferable.
10 . . . as
This pawn-advance is very
useful. Black wishes to continue
with a5-a4, seizing the initiative
on the queenside.
11.a3
White plans to counter a5-a4
with b3-b4.
After his alternatives, he might
even fail to equalise. For example:
11.�cl a4 12.lLixd7 §'xd7+ Do -
Barbosa, Ho Chi Minh City 2012,
or 11.ge1 a4 12.lLixd7 §'xd7 13.i.c3
bS 14.cS lLie4 15.lLixe4 dxe4 16.b4
§'dS+ Jorgensen - Tseitlin, Bad
 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. llij3 llif6 4. lli bd2 i.j5
Zwischenahn 2008. Black's queen
is very powerful at the middle of
the board.
11.llixd7 Bxd7 12.f3. White is
preparing e2-e4, but after 12 . . .
gfd8 13.e4, Lewtak - Carlsson,
Prague 2 016, 13 . . . dxe4 ! ? 14.fxe4
i.g4 1S.Bc2 , Black has the power­
ful resource 1S . . . .ia3 ! ? , for exam­
ple: 16.i.c3 eS 17.dS (17.dxeS? !
Bd3 18.Bxd3 gxd3 19.exf6 gxc3+
His bishops are very powerful
in this endgame. White's minor
pieces are restricted at the mo­
ment by his own pawn on e4.) 17 . . .
ges+. Black has provoked the
pawn-advance d4-dS and has
managed to weaken the dark
squares in his opponent's camp.
ll.a4. White solves radically
the problem with the pawn-ad­
vance aS-a4, but weakens the
b4-square in the process. 11 . . .
Bc7 1 2 .llixd7 Bxd7 13.gcl i.b4=
Romm - Dolgov, ICCF 2 0 13.
11 • • • IOxeS 12.dxeS /Od7
13.e4
White gets rid of his doubled
pawn.
After 13. Bel Bb6+, Black is
eyeing the weak b3-pawn, Efimov
- Kadimova, Formia 199S.
Following 13.gcl, Roos - Is­
tratescu, Vaujany 2011, Black can
simply retreat his bishop 13 . . .
.ig6 ! ?+, s o that later White cannot
advance with tempo e2-e4.
13.cxdS exdS 14.e4 dxe4 1S.llixe4
llicS+ Nilssen - Bang, Koge 1997.
Black's pieces are more active, while
White's fianchettoed bishops are
severely restricted by his own pawn
on es and the enemy pawn on c6.
13 • • • dxe4 14.llixe4 llic5
Here, you can see the advan­
tage for Black of the inclusion of
the moves a7-aS and a2-a3. White
has a weak pawn on b3. 15.Be2.
He sacrifices a pawn with the
idea to follow with gadl and llid6.
Still, even the powerful placement
of his knight on d6 cannot com­
pensate fully his material deficit.
15 c!Oxb3 16.1:iadl Bb6 17.c!Lid6
• • •
.ih7 18.i.e4 he4 19.Wixe4 a4
20.1:id3 Bc7+ Zarnescu - Solo­
vyev, ICCF 2 0 1S.
61
Chapter 6 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . tD:f3 tLlf6 4.g3

A) 5.tlie5 .if5
This is Black's most precise
move. He must increase his con­
trol over the e4-square.

After the routine move 5 . . .

.ih5, White can seize the initiative
with the line: 6.cxd5 ! ? cxd5 7.tlic3
e6 8.�a4+ lll b d7 9.e4t Ris - An­
dersen, Germany 2 0 15.

This move is becoming very

popular lately. White avoids the
theoretical disputes in the main
variations of the Slav Defence and
wishes to focus on the middle
game for the basic fight. He devel­
ops his pieces in the spirit of the
Catalan Opening.
4 . . . .ig4! ?
Black should better refrain
from capturing the pawn on c4,
because he can hardly hold on to 6 . .ig2
it later.
His opening strategy is very 6.�b3 �b6 7.cxd5 4Jxd5 8.i.g2
simple - to develop his pieces and �xb3 9.axb3. Black has not only
to preserve his pawn on d5 in or­ doubled his opponent's pawns on
der to restrict considerably the the b-file, but has also obtained
enemy bishop on g2. the excellent b4-square for his
We will analyse now A) 5.tlie5 minor pieces. 9 . . . 4Jb4 10.lll a3 f6
and B) 5 . .ig2 . 11.lll ec4 lll 8 a6 12.0-0 0-0-0oo

62
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 0ij3 0if6 4.g3 .tg4 5. 0ie5 ij5

Pashikian - Hovhannisyan, Yere­ bishop. Now, White cannot play

van 2 0 16. 11.0ixdS?, because after ll . . . e6,
the weakening of the el-h4 diago­
White would not obtain much nal becomes horrible for him. 12.
with the move 6.0ic3, because af­ 0ic3 '!Wh4+ 13. ©d2 0ixd4-+ White
ter 6 . . . e6 7.'!Wb3 (7.i.g2 0ibd7 - cannot survive for long with his
see 6 .ig2) 7 . . . '!Wb6 8.cS '!Wxb3 9 . king stranded in the centre of the
axb3 0ibd7 10.0ixd7 0ixd7, Black board.) 10 . . . e6 11.e3 0ixeS 12.
succeeds in advancing e6-eS be­ hes, Markoja - Vogel, Celje
fore White pushes b3-b4-bS. 11. 2016, 12 . . . ib4 ! ? = , followed by
b4 eS 12.dxeS 0ixeS= Wirig - '!Was. Black's task here is to play
Favarel, Pau 2012. Now, it would actively on the queenside and
be difficult for White to advance thus to squeeze his opponent's
b4-bS, because his pawn on cS pieces, preventing them from or­
would be hanging after that. ganising an attack on the opposite
side of the board.
There arises a very sharp posi­
tion after 6.cxdS cxdS 7.0ic3 0ic6 6 . . . e6
8.f3, preparing g3-g4. (It seems
less consistent for White to opt
here for 8.ig2 e6 9.0-0 ie7 10.
i.f4 0-0 11.0ixc6 bxc6. He has
created a weak pawn on c6 for his
opponent, but this does not pro­
vide him with an edge. In the mid­
dle game his bishop with be re­
stricted considerably by the ene­
my pawn on dS and he can hardly
prevent Black's pawn-advance
c6-cS. 12 .!kl gc8 13.0ia4 0id7 14 .
.te3, Ledger - Medvegy, Catalan 7.0-0
Bay 2 003, 14 . . . '!WaS ! ? 1S.i.d2
'!WbSoo) 8 . . . gc8 9.g4 (White can 7.0ic3 0ibd7
push this pawn a move later: 9 .
i.g2 '!Wb6 10 .g4 id7 ll.e3 e6oo
Rodshtein - Rublevsky, Sochi
2 016.) 9 . . . .td7 10 . .tf4 (It would
not be logical for White to con­
tinue here with 1 0 .0ixd7 0ixd7+
Hracek - Banusz, Jerusalem
2 0 1S, because he trades his pow­
erful knight for the "bad" enemy

63
Chapter 6
8.0-0 .ie7 - see 7. 0-0.
8 .\Wb3 \Wb6 9.i!Lixd7 i!Lixd7 10.
0-0 (10.cS \Wxb3 11.axb3 eS+ Bo­
zic - Markovic, Valjevo 2 0 16)
10 ... \Wxb3. Black creates a weak
pawn on b3 in his opponent's
camp. 11.axb3 .ic2 12.cxdS exdS
13.e4 dxe4 14.he4 he4 1S.i!Lixe4,
Rrhioua - Maleki, Bois Colombes
2 0 0S, 1S . . . i!Lib6 ! ?+ White has man­
aged to maintain the material bal­
ance, but his pawn-structure has
been seriously compromised.
It seems premature for him to
opt for 8 .i!Lixd7. As a rule, White
exchanges there only after the in­
clusion of the moves 'i;Ydl-b3 -
\Wd8-b6, in order to deprive his
opponent of the possibility to cap­
ture with his queen. Here, after 8 ...
'i;Yxd7 9.'i;Yb3 �d8, Black is threat­
ening to win a pawn with dxc4
and \Wxd4. 10.cxdS, Schulze -
Wiedenkeller, Badenweiler 1988,
1 0 . . . exdS l l . .if4 .ie7 1 2 . 0 - 0
0-0=
7
••• i!Libd7
Black takes an immediate con­
trol over the powerful enemy
knight on es.
64
8.i!Lic3
Or 8.b3 i!LixeS 9.dxeS, Eade -
Nakamura, Hawaii 1994, 9 . . .
i!Lie4 ! ?oo
8 .'i;Yb3. This queen-sortie will
not bring anything to White. 8 . . .
'i;Yb6 9.i!Lixd7 (9.i!Lic3 ? ! Atalik -
Nechaeva, Izmir 2 016, 9 . . . i!LixeS ! ?
10.dxeS i!Lid?+ Black's pawn-struc­
ture is more elastic.) 9 . . . i!Lixd7 10.
i!Lid2 (10.i!Lic3 .ie7 - see 7.i!Lic3)
10 ... 'i;Yxb3 ll.i!Lixb3, Siebrecht -
Roeder, Bad Woerishofen 1997,
11 . . . 0-0-0 ! ?oo Black protects reli­
ably his b7-pawn against the
threat i!LiaS and obtains a very
good position.
8 .i!Lixd7 'i;Yxd7 9.i!Lid2. White is
preparing the transfer of his
knight to f3 and protects at the
same time his c4-pawn. (9.i!Lic3
ie7 10.\Wb3 0-0 11..if4 �ac8=
Lomer - Homuth, Gluecksburg
1988) 9 . . . .id6
10.'i;Yb3 0-0 ll.i!Lif3 (It seems
premature for White to play here
11.cS ie7 12 .i!Lif3, Gutman - Sie­
brecht, Werther 2006, because
Black can play 12 . . . b6! ?+, under-
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJj3 liJf6 4.g3 i.g4 5. f1Je5 if5
mining the pawn on cS, while
White's queen on b3 makes the
move b2-b4 impossible.) 11 . . . h6=
Tappyrov - Derbenev, Kostroma
2011.
10.'1Jf3 0-0 11.b3 h6. There
has arisen a position in which nei­
ther side can begin any active ac­
tions. 12 .ib2 i:!fd8 13.i:!cl W/e7 14.
'1JeS '1Jd7. Black ousts the enemy
knight away from the centre of
the board. 1S.'1Jd3 ia3 16.ha3
Wfxa3= Novak - Andersson, ICCF
2 01S. Black's queen will exert
powerful pressure from here
against the enemy a2-pawn.
8 . •. .ie7
9.Wib3
9.if4 0-0
10 .h3. White is preparing g3-
g4. 10 . . . h6. Black saves his bishop
from an exchange. ll.g4 ih7oo Ha­
ves - Forchert, Germany 2009.
White's king is a bit weakened
and this may hurt him in this
middle game, since pawns cannot
go back, as it is well known ...
10 .Wfb3 . This queen-sortie is
typical for similar positions, but it
is not appropriate here. 10 . . . '1JxeS
11.heS (11.dxeS '1Jd7+ Kuznetsov
- Nemchenko, ICCF 2011 and
White cannot play 12 .Wfxb7? liJcS
13.Wfb4 as 14.Wfa3 a4-+) 11 . . . Wfb6
12.Wfxb6 axb6 13.cxdS exdS+ Na­
sybullin - Spitz, ICCF 2 0 07. This
endgame seems to be in favour of
Black, because he has a clear cut
plan for the improvement of his
position on the queenside : b6-bS,
'1Jd7-b6-c4.
There arises a complicated
double-edged position after 10.
cxdS 10 . . . exdS ll.h3 h6 12 .g4 ih7
13.a3 i:!e8 14.ig3 Wfb6 1S.b4 aSoo
Aleshnia - Bubir, ICCF 2009.
9 Wfb6 10.c!Oxd7
•••
White wishes to deflect the en-
6S
Chapter 6

emy knight from the control over tive. 15.'\1;l/xd4 .ixcS 16.ti'c3
the centre and to advance e2-e4. llJg4t He has a pawn for the ex­
10 �xd7 11.e4 dxe4 12.
••• change and what is most impor­
�xe4 tant his pieces exert powerful
pressure against the f2-square.
12 .�e3 '\1;l/xb3 13.axb3 �f6+
Adly - Yildiz, Chania 2 0 14.
B) 5 . .ig2 e6
12 ••• �f6 13.�c5

It is possible that here White

should try to advance d4-d5. He
will not be worse after that to say
the least. 13.llJc3 0-0 14.dS '\1;l/xb3
15.axb3 cxd5 16.cxdS llJxdS 17.
llJxdS exd5 18.hdS �e6 19.he6
fxe6= Gutman - Fiebig, Dort­
mund 2008. Both sides have
pawn-weaknesses in their camps
and they balance each other
somehow. There is just a few ma­ 6.0-0
terial left on the board as well. . .
6.llJeS .tfS - see variation A.

6.llJbd2 llJbd7 7.h3 (7.0-0 .te7 -

see 6.0-0) 7 . . .ifS 8.llJh4 ie4 9.
llJxe4 dxe4oo Wang Hao - Ni Hua,
China 2 016. White has a bishop­
pair, but his knight is horribly mis­
placed at the edge of the board.

After 6.llJc3 llJbd7 7.h3 (7. 0-0

This position was reached in
the game Gutman - Porper, Kor­
bach 2007. Black had an interest­
ing plan here : 13 0-0-0 ! ? He
•••
dxc4 - see 0-0; 7.ti'b3 ti'b6 - see
6.ti'b3), Black does not need to
waste time for the retreat of his
bishop: 7 . . . hf3 ! ? 8.hf3 dxc4oo
Trumic - Rogic, Neum 2008.

protects the b7-pawn and attacks 6,'!Wb3 '\1;l/b6

the d4-square at the same time. (diagram)
14.'\1;l/c3 gxd4! Black sacrifices About 7. 0-0 llJbd7 - see varia­
the exchange and seizes the initia- tion Bl.

66
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 11Jf3 l1Jf6 4.g3 :ig4 5. :ig2 e6 6. 0 - 0 11J bd7
7.l?Jc3 l?Jbd7 8.cS (8.0-0 ie7
- see variation Bl) 8 . . . �a6 - see7.
cs.
7.cS �a6 8.h3 (8.l?Jc3 l?Jbd7
9.0-0 ie7 - see 6.0-0) 8 . . . i.xf3
9.exf3, Ovsiannikov - Tropin,
Saratov 2 0 07, 9 . . . b6 ! ?oo
6 . . . t0bd7
White has two basic plans in
this position: Bl) 7.Wb3 and B2)
7.b3.
7.l?JeS .ifs - see variation A.
7.1fc2 . Now, just like after 7.
�b3, White protects his pawn, but
does not force Black to lose a tem­
po fpr the protection of his b7-pawn.
7 . . . ie7 8 .if4 0-0 9.!!dl, Kurajica
- Schneider, Rethymno 2 0 03 (9.
!!cl, Ljubojevic - L'Ami, Amster­
dam 2008, 9 . . . !!c8 ! ?oo) 9 . . . h6! ?oo
After 7.h3, Black can transfer
his bishop to the bl-h7 diagonal
in order to increase his control
over the e4-square. 7 . . . 11..fS 8 .l?Jc3
h6 9.�b3 (The position is simpli­
fied after 9.l?Jd2 :ie7 10.e4 dxe4
11.l?Jdxe4 l?Jxe4 12.l?Jxe4 l?Jf6=
Theodorou - Moshkov, Herak­
lion 2016.) 9 . . . �b6 10 .cS �a6
11.l?Jd2 b6= Shimanov - Motylev,
Moscow 2 0 1S.
It is not good for White to play
here 7.l?Jc3, because then Black
can simply grab a pawn and it
would be very difficult for White
to regain it. 7 . . . dxc4 ! ? 8.h3 (8.e4
eS+; 8.a4. He prevents b7-bS, but
weakens seriously the b4-square.
8 . . . aS 9.e4, Matnadze - Dzag­
nidze, Istanbul 2012, 9 . . . eS ! ?+)
8 . . . i.xf3 9.ixf3, Derjabin - Itkis,
Alushta 2 0 04, 9 . . . ib4 ! ?oo
The exchange of pawns 7.cxdS
exdS only presents to Black the
semi-open e-file.
8.\Wb3 �b6 9.\We3+ :ie7. The
transfer of the queen to the e3-
67
Chapter 6
square seems rather awkward.
10.lll c3 (It is preferable for White
to choose here 10 .b3, although
even then after 10 . . . lll e4 ll.lll bd2 ,
Gutman - Neuer, Senden 2 014,
ll ... lll x d2 ! ? 12 .hd2 !e6 13 .i.c3
Wfd8 14.lll eS 0-0=, Black has no
problems whatsoever.) 10 . . . h6 11.
gd1 !e6 12 .'!Wd3 o-o I3.lll h4 gfes.
Black prepares a square for the
retreat of his bishop. 14.lll fS i.f8+
Zelovic - Ingersol, ICCF 2011. His
pieces have been more harmoni­
ously deployed.
8.lll c3 i.d6 9.h3 (9.lll e l 0-0
10.f3, Leblanc - Sullivan, Langley
2006, 10 . . . !hS ! ? = ) 9 . . . hf3 . Black
presents his opponent with the
two-bishop advantage, but White
can hardly exploit this effectively,
because the position remains
rather closed. 10 .hf3 0-0 ll.!J.g2
(11.'it>g2 '\We7 12 .Wfc2 gae8= Zhid­
kov - Butnorius, Daugavpils
1978 ; 11.ge1 ges 12 .'!Wd3 h6 13.
'it>g2 i.b4= Fritz - Green, Germa­
ny 2013) 11 . . . ges 12 .e3 (12 .'!Wd3
Wfe7= Stefanova - Krush, Huaian
2016) 12 . . . lll b 6 13 .b3 '\We7 14.lll e 2,
Kasimdzhanov - Prie, France
2010, 14 . . . aS ! ?oo, preparing a5-a4.
7.lll b d2 !J.e7
68
8.b3 0-0 - see variation B2.
8.Wfb3 Wfb6 9.cxdS exdS 10.
'!We3 !e6 11.h3, Kasparov - Comp
Fritz 5.32, Hannover 1999, 11...
h6 ! ?+
a.gel. White intends to con­
tinue with e2-e4. Still, this pawn­
advance leads only to the simplifi­
cation of the position. 8 . . . 0-0 9.
e4 dxe4 10.lll xe4 lll xe4 u.gxe4.
White has a bit freer game, but
Black's position remains quite
solid. In addition, he can create
counterplay by exerting pressure
against the d4-pawn, or can sim­
plify the position, preparing the
pawn-advance c6-c5. ll . . . lll f6 12.
gel (12.ge2 h6=) 12 . . . Wfb6. The
queen frees a square for the rook.
13.!e3 gad8 14.'!Wc2, Shyam -
Swapnil, Chennai 2013, 14 . . . !J.fS ! ?
15.'\We2 c5=
8.'!Wc2 0-0 9.e4 (After 9.Wfc3,
Bu Xiangzhi - Lu Shanglei, Shen­
zhen 2 0 16, the simplest move for
Black would be 9 . . . !hS ! ? = , re­
moving in advance the bishop
against the possible attack lll e S.)
9 ... aS ! ? Black does not need to
be in a hurry to exchange on e4,
because White's knight on d2 im­
pedes the development of his
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJfJ li:Jf6 4.g3 ig4 5. ig2 e6 6. 0 - 0 li:J bd7
queenside. 10.liJeS, S.Braun - Lo­
bron, Gran Canaria 1996. Here,
Black can sacrifice advantageous­
ly a pawn : 10 . . . liJxeS ! ? 11.dxeS
liJd7 12.cxdS cxdS 13.exdS exdS
14.ixd5 liJxe5 15.ixb7 �fa7 16.ig2
�k7 17.'\1;Ve4 if6 18.Wi'e3 liJd3;; He
has sufficient compensation for
his minimal material deficit.
Black's pieces are very active,
while White's queenside has not
been developed yet.
Bl) 7.'\1;Vb3 ti'b6
Black would not mind the
trade of the queens, because he
would obtain a very good endgame.
He is also ready to counter White's
pawn-advance c4-c5, after which
he would prepare the undermin­
ing moves e6-e5, or b7-b6.
8.c!Oc3
8.cS Wi'a6. This is a very good
square for the queen, because
White fails to transfer his bishop
to fl. 9.h3 (9.liJc3 ie7 - see 8.
liJc3. After 9.if4, Black can un­
dermine immediately the enemy
pawn on cS. 9 . . . b6 10.cxb6 axb6
11.liJc3, Teterev - S.Zhigalko,
Minsk 2 0 14, 11 . . . bS ! ? = ) 9 . . . ifS 10.
if4 b6 ll.cxb6 axb6 12 .l:!cl l:!c8
13.liJc3 h6. Black not only pre­
pares a square for the retreat of
his bishop, but also intends to con­
tinue with g7-g5, in order to pre­
pare with tempo the development
of his dark-squared bishop to the
g7-square. 14.liJeS gS ! ? 15.liJxd7
liJxd7 16.id.2 liJf6 17.f3. White wishes
to advance e2-e4 as quickly as
possible, but the pawn-advance
f2-f3 compromises the position of
his king. In addition, his pawn­
centre does not seem to be so reli­
able. 17 . . . ig6 18 .e4 ig7oo Trubet­
skoi - Ponomarjov, ICCF 2 0 14.
8 . . . ie7
9.if4
White completes the develop­
ment of his pieces without deter­
mining yet the pawn-structure in
the centre. Besides that, he has
also tried in practice :
9.l:!dl ihS 10.if4 h6 11.l:!acl
0-0= Ribli - Larsen, Tilburg 1980.
69
Chapter 6
After 9.h3, Black can transfer
his bishop to the bl-h7 diagonal
in order to increase his control
over the important e4-square. 9 . . .
ifs 10.c5 (If White continues to
chase the enemy bishop with the
move 10 .g4, his pawn-structure
might be seriously weakened.
10 . . . ig6 11.lLieS? ! lLixe5 12.dxe5
lLid7 13.cxd5 \1;!/xb3 14.axb3 exd5+
Andreikin - Morozevich, Astana
2012.) 10 . . . \1;!/xb3. This is the sim­
plest for Black. He does not lose
time for the retreat of his queen,
but enters an approximately equal
endgame. 11.axb3 lLie4 12 .b4 a6
13.l':�el 0-0. Black has prevented
reliably White's pawn-advance
b4-b5. He will be incapable of
breaking Black's defence in the
centre and on the kingside. 14.g4
!g6 15.!f4 h6 16.e3 f5= Olofs son
- Raijmaekers, ICCF 2 0 14.
9 .gel. White frees in advance
the fl-square for his bishop, which
might be very useful after c4-c5
and \1;!/b6-a6. 9 . . . 0-0
About 10.if4 !xf3 - see 9.if4.
It does not seem logical for
White to choose here 10.\1;!/xb6 axb6
11.cxd5 exd5+ Speelman - Short,
70
Torquay 1998. It is not easy to un­
derstand why he has played gel at
the first place. Black has a clear cut
plan for the improvement of his po­
sition on the queenside: b6-b5, lLib6.
10.e4 dxe4 11.lLixe4 lLixe4 12.
gxe4 .if5 13.ge3, Marangunic -
Mikac, Austria 1994, 13 . . . gfd8 ! ? =
10.c5 \1;!/xb3. Now, the retreat
of the queen to the a6-square
seems less reliable, because White
can attack it with ifl and e2-e4.
In addition, the transfer into an
endgame provides Black with an
excellent game, because he can
undermine his opponent's pawns
on the queenside with b7-b6 and
a7-a5. ll.axb3 b6 ! ? 12 .b4 .ixf3
13.!xf3 a5 14.b5. White cannot
even equalise with this pawn-sac­
rifice. 14 . . .cxb5 15.cxb6. His b­
pawn is too far away from the rest
of his forces and will soon perish.
15 . . .b4 16.lLia4 id8 17.b7 gb8 18.
lLic5 lLixc5 19.dxc5 gxb7 2 0 .if4
ga7+ Slyusar - Onoprichuk, ICCF
2016. White has the two-bishop
advantage and a passed c-pawn,
but this does not compensate ful­
ly his material deficit.
White has also tried in practice
here the immediate line: 9.c5 '!Wa6 !?
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l'iJ.f3 l'iJf6 4.g3 !i.g4 5. !i.g2 e6 6. 0 - 0 l'iJ bd7
10.if4 b6. The undermining of
the c5-pawn, cramping Black's
position, is his simplest road to
equality. 11.cxb6 axb6 12 .h3 (12.
e4 0 - 0 ! ? = Teterev - S.Zhigalko,
Minsk 2 014; 12 J''ffe l 0-0 13.e4
gfc8= Persson - Rublevsky, Novi
Sad 2 0 16) 12 . . . .ih5 13.g4 .ig6 14.
l'iJh4, Rakhmanov - Debashis,
Doha 2 0 14, 14 . . . b5 ! ?oo, followed
by the transfer of the knight to the
c4-square (l'iJb6, l'iJc4) .
10.ge1, preparing e2-e4. 10 . . .
b 6 ll.cxb6 axb6.
After 12 .h3, Black does not
need to waste time for the retreat
of his bishop and can exchange it
for the enemy knight. 12 . . . hf.3
13.hf.3. White's two-bishop ad­
vantage is not important here, be­
cause the position remains closed.
It would be very difficult for him
to activate his light-squared bish­
op, since it is severely restricted
by the enemy pawn on d5. 13 . . .
0-0 14.e4. White i s trying t o open
the position, but his d4-pawn will
remain isolated. 14 . . . dxe4 15.
l'iJxe4 l'iJd5 16.l'iJc3 l'iJ7f6. Black in­
creases his control over the d5-
square. 17.a4 §'d3 18.\Wdl l'iJb4 19.
\Wxd3 l'iJxd3 20 .gd1 l'iJxcl. White is
deprived of his two-bishop advan­
tage. 21.gaxcl l'iJd5= Emrich -
Evstigneev, ICCF 2012.
12 .e4 0-0 ! ? Black should not
be in a hurry to capture on e4, be­
cause he should not be afraid of
the pawn-advance e4-e5. 13.exd5
(13 . .if4 dxe4 14.l'iJxe4 l'iJd5= Te­
terev - Kochetkova, Minsk 2 015;
13.h3 hf3 14.hf.3 dxe4 15.l'iJxe4
l'iJd5 - see 12 .h3) 13 . . . l'iJxd5 14.ifl
§'a7 15.l'iJxd5 cxd5 16 . .ib5. White's
bishop will be very active on this
square, but this is still insufficient
for him to maintain an edge. (16.
@g2 gfc8= Theodorou - Miton,
Achaea 2 0 16) 16 ... .if6 ! ? = , eyeing
the enemy weakness on d4.
9 . . . 0-0
10.c5
It is not good for White to play
here 10 .gfel? ! , because his f2-
pawn is not sufficiently protected
and this enables Black to obtain
an advantage in a tactical fashion.
10 . . .hf3 11.hf.3 \Wxd4 12 .\Wxb7
(12 .cxd5. If White's rook had been
on fl, his position would have
71
Chapter 6
been in order. Now, after 12 . . .
tll c5+ Zlotnikov - Becerra Rivero,
Philadelphia 2008, he cannot
play 13 .\!Na3?, because Black can
counter that with 13 . . . tll d3 ! 14.
\!Nxe7 \!Nxf2 + 15.@hl tll xel-+) 12 . . .
\!Nxc4 13.l'facl \!Nb4 14.\!Nxc6
\!Nxb2+, with a solid extra pawn
for Black, Skatchkov - Al Sayed,
Khanty-Mansiysk 2 013.
10 .h3 .�.f5!? 11.c5 1M/xb3 12.
axb3 h6= Morovic Fernandez -
Solomon, Istanbul 2012.
Following 10.tll d 2, Cvitan -
Jakovljevic, Pula 2 0 03, Black can
simply capture a pawn 10 . . .
\!Nxd4 ! ? ll.h3 i.h5 12 .i.e3 \!Ne5
13.1Mi'xb7 \!Nd6 = The exchange of a
central pawn for a flank pawn
may turn out to be in favour of
Black in this middle game.
After 10.i!fdl i.f5 11.c5 1Mi'xb3
12.axb3 , Black must continue
with the solid move 12 . . . h6= Con­
die - Orr, London 1986, because
if he tries to capture the enemy
pawn on b3, he may face serious
problems : 12 . . . i.c2 13.i!dcl hb3
14.tll d 2 i.c4 15.tll xc4 dxc4, Kam­
sky - Kramnik, Nice 2009, 16.
tll d l ! ?;l;
10 . . . 1Mi'a6 11.h3
ll.1Mi'c2 . This move enables
Black to increase his control over
the e4-square with tempo. 11 . . . i.f5
12 .\!Nd2 b6? Kovalev - A.Zhi­
galko, Minsk 2012.
72
White would not achieve much
if he enters an endgame : 11.\!Na4
1M/xa4 12.tll x a4, Stupak - Maiorov,
Minsk 2009, 12 . . . h6 ! ? =
11.i!fcl b 6 12.cxb6 axb6=
Yegiazarian - Lputian, Yerevan
1994.
11 . . . .thS
12.lUcl
There arises a complicated po­
sitional battle after 12.g4 .ig6 13.
tll h4 b6 14.tll xg6 hxg6 15.cxb6
axb6. White has obtained the
two-bishop advantage indeed, but
Black's pawn-structure is more
elastic. 16.a4 i!fd8 17.i!fdl \!Na7
18 .e4. White's desire to open the
position is understandable, but he
weakens his d4-pawn and pre­
sents Black's knight with the won­
derful d5-square. 18 . . . dxe4 19.
tll xe4 tll d5 2 0 .i.g3 g5. Black pre­
vents his opponent's pawn-ad­
vance h3-h4. Later, he plans the
transfer of his knight tll f8-g6, in
order to exploit the vulnerability
of the f4-square. 2 1.1Mi'c2 i!ac8 2 2 .
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4.g3 !ig4 5. !ig2 e6 6. 0 - 0 liJ bd7
W/d2 W/aS 23.liJd6 �xd2 24J"�xd2
hd6 2S.hd6 liJf8 ! 2 6.fi.g3 liJg6oo
12 •••b6 13.g4 .tg6 14 .td6,
• follow with 9 . . . h6 ! ? , not only pre­
Burmakin - Rublevsky, Tomsk
2001, 14 .ixd6 ! ?
••• 15.cxd6
gfd8oo White's d6-pawn is too far
away from the rest of his forces
and would be a cause of worries
for him in the future.
B2) 7.b3
White prepares the fianchetto
of his second bishop. Still, later he
will have problems activating his
bishops, because one of them will
be restricted by the enemy pawn
on dS, while his other bishop's
mobility will be diminished by his
own pawn on d4.
7 .te7 8 .tb2
••• •
About 8.liJbd2 0-0 9.i.b2 aS,
or 8.liJc3 0-0 9.i.b2 h6 - see 8.
i.b2 .
8.i.a3 0 - 0 9.W/cl :i!e8 10.W/b2
h6= Koneru - Cao, Budapest 2001.
Black's position is very solid.
8 ••• 0-0 9.liJbd2
After 9.liJc3, Black can simply
paring a leeway for his king in ad­
vance, but also ensuring a square
for his bishop to retreat against a
chase after it. 10 .:!'!el. White can
hardly find an active plan for ac­
tions, because after his standard
plan for similar positions, con­
nected with the preparation of
the pawn-advance e2-e4, there
would only arise simplifications.
(10.h3 i.fS 11.liJd2 �b6 12.e4 dxe4
13.liJdxe4 liJxe4 14.liJxe4 :i!fd8 lS.
W/e2 as. Black wishes to play a4, in
order to exert pressure against
the b3-square. 16.�e3 a4= An­
tonenko - Versili, ICCF 2012.)
10 . . . i.fS 11.liJd2 .th7 12 .e4 (12 .a3
aS= Ribli - Nogueiras Santiago,
Clermont Ferrand 1989) 12 . . . dxe4
13.liJdxe4 liJxe4 14.i.xe4 i.xe4
1S.liJxe4 liJf6= Vukic - Saric, Sa­
rajevo 2 007.
9 ••• a5
Black plans to advance aS-a4.
10.a3
73
Chapter 6
Now, the positional threat aS-
a4 is not dangerous for White,
since he can counter it simply
with b3-b4. The move 10.a3 how-
ever, weakens a bit the b3-square.
With the move 10 .a4, Badea -
lordachescu, Bucharest 1998,
White solves radically the prob­
lem with Black's threat a5-a4, but
weakens the b4-square in the pro­
cess. 10 . . . h6 ! ? =
10.tll eS tll xeS 11.dxeS tll d7 1 2 .
h3. White wishes t o oust the ene­
my bishop away from the dl-hS
diagonal and to advance e2-e4,
but this seemingly logical plan
suddenly leads to difficulties for
him. 12 . . . !hS 13.g4 !g6 14.e4
dxe4 15.tll xe4. White is perfectly
prepared to penetrate with his
knight to the d6-square, but after
15 . . . tll cS it turns out that Black
will penetrate with his knight to
the d3-square. From there it can
go eventually to the weakened f4-
square and will be very effective.
16.tll d 6, Andersson - Smyslov,
Hastings 1972 (There arises a dif­
ficult endgame for White after
16.1/Nxd8 i:!fxd8 17.!a3 he4 18.
he4, Lago - Geller, Palma de
Mallorca 1989, 18 . . . a4 ! ?+) 16 . . .
f6 ! ? Black undermines the pawn­
base of the knight on d6. 17.ia3
tll d3 18.tll xb7 1/Nd7 19 .he7 1/Nxe7
2 0 .tll d 6 fxeS+ White's opening
strategy has failed completely. He
must remove his knight from d6
and the vulnerability of his king
will be the decisive factor in this
74
middle game. Black's attack will
develop effortlessly: i:!ad8, tll f4,
1/Nh4 and eventually i:!d3. White
cannot defend the h3-square.
10 .h3 !hS ll.g4. White weak­
ens his king's shelter, but wishes
to obtain the two-bishop advan­
tage. (ll.a3 tll e4 12.tll xe4 dxe4
13.tll eS fS= Stojanovic - Medic,
Zadar 2 0 04) 11 . . . !g6 12.tll h4 a4
13.tll xg6 hxg6 14.!c3 (14.1/Nc2 ib4
15.i:!fdl 1/Ne7= Donchenko - Zheli­
andinov, USSR 1977) 14 . . . �c7.
Black's position is very solid and
White is unlikely to break it. His
attempt to occupy space on the
queenside with the move 15.cS
enables Black to accomplish the
standard pawn-break in the cen­
tre : 15 . . . eS 16.dxeS tll xeS= Stad­
chenko - Waerstad, ICCF 2 0 14.
10 . . . h6
It is now difficult for both sides
to develop any active actions, so
they should be happy with the
possibility to play moves which
improve a bit their positions.
lU�el
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. &i:Jj3 &i:Jf6 4.g3 fi.g4 5. fi.g2 e6 6. 0 - 0 &i:J bd7
About lUkl fi.f5 12 .E:el l!;VbS -
see 11.E:el.
11.fi.c3 fi.f5 12 .c5, Ruck - Por-
tisch, Hungary 2 005, 12 . . . b6 ! ?oo
11.&i:Jh4 fi.h5= Bu Xiangzhi -
Matlakov, Helsingor 2 0 14.
11 .tfS
•••
This move impedes White's
pawn-advance e2-e4. You can see
now the idea behind Black's
previous move. After &i:Jh4 he
can simply retreat his bishop to
h7.
12.c!beS
The position is quickly simpli­
fied after this move.
White has another plan, con­
nected with the preparation of the
transfer of his queen to e2, but it
does not promise much to him ei­
ther: 12 .e3 l!;Vb6, Black is eyeing
the weak enemy pawn on b3.
13 .W/e2 E:feS 14.E:ecl &i:Je4= Jianu
- Bonte, Arad 2 0 15, or 12.E:cl
W/bS 13.e3 E:dS 14.l!;Ve2 b5. Black
begins active actions on the
queenside. 15.&i:Je5 &i:Jxe5 16.dxe5
&i:Je4 17.&i:Jxe4 he4=
12 c!bxeS 13.dxeS c!be4 14.
•••
c!bxe4 dxe4 15.e3, Vijayalak­
shmi - Zubarev, Borup 2012 (15.
fi.d4, Wilder - Novikov, Mendoza
1985, 15 . . . b5 ! ? 16.cxb5 cxb5 17.e3
l!;Vd5= Black's centralised queen is
very powerful and his prospects
are not worse thanks to that.)
15 l!;Vxdl! ? 16,gexdl gfd8 = ,
•••
followed by the further exchange
of the major pieces on the d-file.
The draw seems imminent.
75
Chapter 7 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . tll t'3 tll f6 4.tfc2
White protects his c4-pawn
with the queen and plans to fol­
low with .if4 and then e2-e3 .
4 . . . dxc4
This is Black's simplest deci­
sion. He provokes the enemy
queen to occupy an unstable posi­
tion.
No doubt, White's most natu­
ral move here is B) 5.Wxc4.
There are some players however
who would like to sacrifice a pawn
here - A) 5.e4.
Besides the move 5.e4, White
has sacrificed a pawn in some
other ways too. As a rule, they are
worse than 5.e4.
For example :
5.lll b d2 . This pawn-sacrifice
76
seems rather artificial. 5 . . . b5 6.b3
cxb3 7.lll xb3, Davies - Khenkin,
Porto San Giorgio 1998, 7 . . . a5 ! ?+
His piece-control over the c5-
square does not compensate fully
the sacrificed pawn.
5 . .ig5 b5 6.e4 h6 7 . .ie3 (7 .
.ixf6?! exf6+ Cherniaev - Hoch­
strasser, Saas Almagell 2005.
White not only presents his oppo­
nent with the two-bishop advan­
tage, but also opens the diagonal
for the enemy bishop on f8.) 7 . . . e6
8 . .ie2 , Bratanov - Yordanov,
Plovdiv 2012, 8 . . . .ib7! ?+ White's
compensation for the pawn is in­
sufficient.
5.e3 b5 6.b3 (6.a4 a6 7.lll b d2 ,
Andres Gonzalez - Vishnu, San
Sebastian 2012, 7 . . . Wa5 ! ?oo) 6 . . .
cxb3 7.axb3. White has n o direct
threats and Black has an extra
pawn. Still, the position remains
approximately equal, because it
would be necessary for Black to
advance c6-c5 in order to obtain
any real chances of an advantage.
It would be however very difficult
for him to accomplish that. 7 . . . e6
 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. tl:ij3 l:i:if6 4. Wlc2 dc 5.e4 b5
8.ie2 ib7 9.0-0 l?ibd7 10.l?ieS a6
ll.l:i:id3. White increases his con­
trol over the cS-square. ll . . . W!c7
12 .l?id2 id6oo
A) 5.e4 b5
6.b3
Black's pawn on c4 cramps
considerably White's actions on
the queenside, so he should better
exchange it.
6.igS h6 - see S. igS.
6.a4. Black should not be
afraid of the attack against the bS­
square. 6 . . . e6 7.i.e2 (7.l?ibd2? !
Yegiazarian - Asrian, Yerevan
2008, 7 . . . l?ia6! ?+) 7 . . . ib7 8.0-0,
Canelli - Bianco, Asti 199S, 8 ...
i.e7 ! ?+
6.ie2 ! ? This move has not
been analysed extensively, but it
is not bad at all. 6 . . . e6 7.0-0 ib7
8 .b3 cxb3 9.axb3 l?ibd7 10.l:!dl
(10 .l:i:ic3 a6 11.l:!dl ie7 - see 10.
l:!dl). White has a pawn-centre
and a freer game for the sacrificed
material. 10 . . . a6 ll.l?ic3 !i.e7 12.
id3 h6 13 .i.d2 0-0 14.eS l:i:idS
lS.l:i:ixdS cxdS 16.iaS W!b8 17.l:!dcl
l:!c8 18.ic7 Vf/a7 19.Vf/d2 . White's
pieces are very active, while
Black's bishop on b7 is severely
restricted. In fact, he should bet­
ter try to exchange it even at the
price of a pawn. 19 . . . ic6 ! 20.l:!xc6
l:!xc7 21.l:!axa6, draw, Yurov -
Zhak, ICCF 2 0 1S. Indeed, after
2 1 . . . l:!xc6 2 2 . l:!xc6 Vf/a3 = , the posi­
tion becomes completely equal.
6 . . . cxb3 7.axb3 e6 8 .id2 •
About 8.!i.d3 .ib79 . .id2 aS, or
9.0-0 .ie7 10 . .id2 aS - see 8 . .id2 .
8 ••• a5
Black does not allow his
queenside pawns to be blocked af­
ter .iaS, followed by b3-b4.
9 .id3 J.b7 10.0-0 .ie7
•
lU'kl
This is White's most precise
move.
After his alternatives he may
even fail to equalise. For example
77
Chapter 7
it is bad for him to play 11.lll c3,
because after 11 . . . lll a 6 12.lll e 2
lll b 4, in addition to his extra
pawn, Black obtains also the two­
bishop advantage. 13.i.xb4 i.xb4
14.lll f4 h6 15.h4, Gausel - Astrup,
Norway 2 011, 15 . . . 0-0 ! ?+
11.i!el h6 ! ? 12 .W/cl, Stocek -
Zakhartsov, Pardubice 2 004.
White is preparing to sacrifice his
bishop on h6. Black does not need
to castle immediately and can
play 12 . . . b4+, restricting consider­
ably the enemy knight on bl.
It is also bad for White to
choose here 11.i.c3. He prepares
in this fashion the development of
his knight to d2, but weakens his
control over the cS-square and
thus facilitates Black's thematic
pawn-advance c6-c5. 11 . . . h6. He
cannot continue the game with­
out this move; otherwise, after
e4-e5 and hh7, White will regain
his pawn. 12.lll b d2 lll b d7 13.1!a2
0-0 14.i!fal b4 15.i.b2 c5 ! 16.lll c4
a4. Black gives back his extra
pawn and seizes completely the
initiative. 17.1!xa4 1!xa4 18.1!xa4
cxd4 19.ixd4 ic5+ Nakamura -
C.Hansen, Malmo/Copenhagen
2 005. Black's pieces are obviously
much better coordinated.
11.i!dl '1;l/b6= Semcesen - Hec­
tor, Uppsala 2 016.
11 • . • b4 12.if4
78
There arises a much calmer
position after the line: 12 .i.e3
lll bd7 13.h3 cS. Black has succeed­
ed in advancing c6-c5 indeed, but
after 14.lll b d2 1!c8 15.W/a2 , he will
be forced to part with his a5-
pawn. 15 . . . 0-0 16.W/xa5 '1;l/xa5 17.
1!xa5 cxd4 18.1!xc8 1!xc8 19.hd4
lll c5 20.1!a7 lll xd3 21.i!xb7 @f8 =
Neto - Stalmach, ICCF 2 0 14. The
position has been considerably
simplified and there has arisen an
approximately equal endgame on
the board.
12 lll bd7 13.lll b d2 c5 14.
• • •
�c4 0-0 15 .td6•
White's piece-activity com­
pensates the sacrificed pawn, but
not more than that.
15 a4 16.gxa4 gxa4 17.
• • •
bxa4 cxd4 18.Wlbl �c5 19.
he7 '1;l/xe7 20.ti'xb4 ges 21.
.tfl lll fxe4 22.lll aS .tds 23.
lll xd4 ti'f6 24.gc2 h6co Refalo -
Kozlowski, ICCF 2016. Black's
centralised pieces compensate the
presence of an outside passed
pawn for his opponent.
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:i:ij3 l:i:if6 4. �c2 de 5. �xc4 i.j5
B) 5.�xc4
5 . . J.f5
. axb6+) 7 . . . &i:ibd7 ! ? Black wishes to
This is a reliable move for
Black. He develops his bishop to
an active position and it will con­
trol the important central e4-
square from there.
Black's other popular theoreti­
cal move 5 . . . i.g4 leads to more
complicated positions. For exam­
ple : 6.&i:ic3 &i:ibd7 7.e4 J.xf3 8 .gxf3
e5 9.dxe5 &i:ixe5 10 .�e2 icS 11.
id2 &i:ihS 12.f4. Now, Black is
forced to sacrifice his queen. 12 ...
�xd2 + ! ? 13.@xd2 l:i:ixf4 14.�dl
0-0-0+ 15.&i:idS cxd5� He has
sufficient compensation for the
sacrificed queen, but this way of
playing might not be to every­
body's liking.
After 5 . . . ifS, White has a
choice between numerous possi­
bilities and they often lead to
transposition of moves. In order
to systematise all this in Bl) 6.g3,
we will analyse the variations in
which White is not in a hurry to
develop his queen's knight to the
c3-square. The other variations
with be dealt with in the line B2.
6.&i:ibd2 e6 7.g3 (7.e3 h6 - see
6.e3) 7... l:i:ibd7 8.ig2 J.e7 - see 6.g3.
6.i.gS. This move seems a bit
premature, because after 6 . . . �b6,
White has problems with the pro­
tection of his b2-pawn. 7.b3, Plas­
kett - Cooper, Port Erin 2000
(7.�b3, Doettling - Kindermann,
Germany 2003, 7 . . . &i:ia6 ! ? 8.�xb6
advance e7-e5 as quickly as pos­
sible. 8.&i:ibd2 e5 ! 9.dxe5 ie6 10.
Wfcl &i:ig4 ll.e3 &i:igxe5 12.&i:ixeS
&i:ixe5+ Black has restored the ma­
terial balance and his position
seems preferable thanks to his
more actively deployed pieces.
After 6.if4, just like following
6.igS, Black can attack bravely
his opponent's b2-pawn. 6 . . . �b6
7.Wfcl e6 8.&i:ibd2, Schulte - Jaco­
by, Hamburg 1986, 8 . . . &i:ibd7!?.
This is Black's simplest road to
equality. He simply completes his
development and accomplishes
the freeing pawn-break c6-c5. 9.
a3 i.e7 10 .e3 0-0 ll.l:i:ic4 Wfd8 12.
i.e2 c5=
6.e3. This is a solid move for
White. He does not plan to fian­
chetto his light-squared bishop.
6 . . . e6.
(diagram)
7.l:i:ih4, Korchnoi - Fressinet,
Villandry 2 0 07. White's attempt
to obtain the two-bishop advan-
79
Chapter 7

c6. It will be much more active on

this square than on d7. 9.0-0 (9.
llJc3 llJc6= Epishin - Krivoboro­
dov, Schwaebisch Gmuend 2 0 13)
9 . . . llJc6 10.lDc3 !e7= Oinonen -
Pettersson, ICCF 2012.

Bl) 6.g3
tage will cost him several tempi. White plans at first to com­
7 . . . llJbd7 ! ? 8.llJxf5 exf5oo plete the development of his piec­
7.!e2 lDbd7 8.0-0 !d6 (It also es on the kingside and to castle
seems good for Black to opt here there.
for 8 . . . h6 9.llJbd2 !e7 - see 7. 6 ••. e6 7 .tg2
.

llJbd2 .) 9.llJbd2 0-0= Van de 7.llJc3 llJbd7 - see 6.llJc3.

Griendt - Lalic, West Bromwich 7••• llJbd7 8.0-0
2 005. Black is perfectly prepared
for the freeing pawn-breaks c6-c5 8.lDc3 !e7 - see variation B2.
and e6-e5.
7.llJbd2 h6. This is the sim­ 8.llJbd2 !e7 9.0-0 0-0 - see
plest. Black saves his bishop in 8.0-0.
advance from the possible chase
after it with the move llJh4. 8.!e2 8.e3 !e7 9.llJc3 (9.0-0 0-0 -
llJbd7 9.0-0 !e7 10.�b3 (The see variation Bla) 9 . . . 0-0 - see
move 10.a4 leads to the weaken­ variation B2.
ing of the b4-square. 10 . . . a5 11.
�dl 0-0= Epishin - Hilverda, 8 ••• .te7
Werther 2 013.) 10 . . . Wfb6 11.�dl.
White avoids the exchange of the
queens, but this is still insufficient
for him to maintain an advantage.
(There arises an equal endgame
after ll.llJc4 �xb3 12.axb3 0-0
13.!d2 c5= Epishin - Gonzalez
Perez, Oeiras 2015.) 11 . . . 0-0 12.
b3 �ac8 = , followed by c6-c5, ei­
ther immediately, or after the pre­
liminary move �fd8, Voloshin -
Sodoma, Mlada Boleslav 2 0 07.
Following 7.!d3 hd3 8.�xd3, 9.e3
Black can play 8 . . . c5, preparing White prepares the retreat of
the development of his knight to his queen to e2 where it would be

80
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. tiJj3 tiJf6 4. Wlc2 de 5. Wlxc4 .ij5
much safer and would support the
pawn-advance e3-e4.
About 9.tiJc3 0-0, or 9.a4 0-0
10.tiJc3 a5 - see variation B2.
9 . .id2 . White is preparing b2-
b4, but this plan seems to be rath­
er slow. Black manages to occupy
the central d5 and e4-squares and
to seize the initiative. 9 . . . 0-0 10.
b4 (10.!�dl h6 - see 9. gdl) 10 ...
tiJe4 11 . .iel, Cramling - Liu, Chi­
na 2008, ll . . . tiJb6 ! ? 12 .Wb3 Wd5+
9 . .ig5. This plan is also not so
good for White, since after h7-h6
he will have to exchange on f6, af­
ter which Black will have the two­
bishop advantage. 9 . . . 0-0 10.e3
(10.tiJc3 h6 - see variation B2;
10 .tiJbd2 h6 ll.hf6 hf6 12 .Wb3,
Sjodahl - Hultin, Sweden 2009,
12 ... cS ! ?i) 10 ... h6 11.hf6 .ixf6oo,
followed by e6-e5, or gc8, c6-c5,
Schussler - Dominguez Perez,
Havana 1999. White will hardly
manage to prevent the opening of
the position and so Black's two­
bishop advantage will enable him
to seize the initiative.
9.tiJbd2 0-0 10 .Wb3 (10 .e3
gc8 - see 9.e3) 10 . . . tiJb6 and here
11.e3 a5 12 .a4, Urban - Dziuba,
Katowice 2010, 12 . . . tiJfd7 ! ? = , or
ll.a4 a5 12 .gd1 tiJfd7 13.e4 i.g6=
Eljanov - Motylev, Shamkir 2 0 14.
In both variations Black's posi­
tion remains very solid, while the
vulnerability of the b4-square in
White's camp may hurt him later.
9.Wb3. He wishes to force the
move Wb6, with the idea to play
later tiJd2-c4, attacking the enemy
queen. 9 . . . Wb6 10.tiJbd2 W/xb3 ! ?
This i s Black's simplest decision.
(Following, 10 . . . 0-0 11.tiJc4 Wa6
12 .i.f4 = , there arises again an ap­
proximately equal position, but
the penetration of White's minor
pieces to the d6-square would be
very unpleasant for Black, so he
must defend very precisely. After
the trade of the queens, the end­
game will be approximately equal.)
ll.axb3 . White opens a file for
his rook, but later the weakness
of his doubled b-pawns may hurt
him. ll . . . .ic2 . This is an energetic
move. Black exerts pressure against
the pawn on b3 and wishes to im­
pede the harmonious develop­
ment of his opponent's pieces.
12.tiJel i.dl ! ? 13.i.f3. This move
not only protects the pawn, but
also prepares tiJg2 . 13 . . . 0-0 14.
tiJg2 (14.!iJc4?! i.xb3 15.tiJd2 i.dl
16.b3 i.b4 17.tiJd3 i.xd2 18.i.xd2
i.c2+ White's compensation for
the sacrificed pawn is insuffi­
cient.) 14 . . . i.c2 15.tiJe3 i.g6= V.
Georgiev - Gasthofer, Germany
2008.
81
Chapter ?
11.llixb3. Capturing with the
knight seems to be more reliable,
but cannot provide White with an
advantage either. 11 . . . ie4 12.gdl
h6 13.lliel hg2 14.©xg2 0-0-0.
This is Black's most precise reac-
tion. He not only connects his
rooks, but also parries the possi-
ble threat llia5. 15.id2 id6 16.f3
ic7= Babic - Johnson, ICCF 2016.
9 .gdl 0-0
10.llic3? ic2 - see variation
B2.
10.e3 V!!c7 - see 9.e3.
It seems premature for White
to play 10 .llih4. He begins a chase
after the enemy bishop, but the
absence of a control over the e4-
square makes this plan ineffec­
tive. 10 . . . ie4 ll . .be4 llixe4= Lju­
bojevic - Anand, Belgrade 1997.
Following 10 .if4, Black can
win a tempo for the preparation
of the move c6-c5, by attacking
the pawn on b2 . 10 . . . Wi'b6 11.V!!c l
c5= Vladimirov - Magem Badals,
Istanbul 2000.
10.id2 h6. Black prepares a
square for the retreat of his bish­
op. 11.Vf!cl (11.iel Wi'b6=) ll . . . Wi'b6
12 .iel, Epishin - Dreev, St Pe-
82
tersburg 2009 (After 12.llic3 gac8
13.a4, the b4-square is weakened
13 . . . aS+ Epishin - Skembris,
Neustadt an der Weinstrasse
2009.) 12 ... gac8 ! ? 13.a4 V!!c 7=
Black's position is solid. He can
organise counterplay, connected
with the preparation of the pawn­
advance c6-c5 either immediate­
ly, or after the preliminary move
gfd8 and White should not un-
derestimate that.
9 ... 0-0
10.gd1
10.llic3 b5 - see variation
B2a.
10 .b3 a5= Wojtkiewicz - Mi­
nasian, Yerevan 1996.
10.llibd2 gcs 11.llih4. White
begins a chase after the enemy
bishop. He weakens however the
shelter of his king in the process.
11 . . .ig4 12 .h3 ihS 13.g4 Milchev
- Manea, Condom 2 0 13 (The
move 13.V!!b 3 looks less conse­
quent here. 13 . . . ie2 . Black trans-
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l'iJ.fJ l'iJf6 4. WI c2 de 5. W!xc4 ii.JS
fers his bishop to the queenside
and does not allow his opponent
to obtain the two-bishop advan­
tage. 14.l:�el ia6+ and later c6-cS,
Fedoseev - Bajarani, Kocaeli
2011.) 13 . . . l'iJdS ! ? 14.gxhS i.xh4oo
10 .Wle2 Wlc7. Black's pieces are
harmoniously deployed. He is
perfectly prepared to undermine
the enemy d4-pawn with the
moves e6-eS, or c6-cS. 11.l'iJc3 (11.
l3dl es - see 10 .l3dl; ll.h3 cS=
Chuchelov - Sandipan, Germany
2010; 11.l'iJbd2 h6= Bu Xiangzhi
- Eljanov, Tsaghkadzor 2 0 1S)
11 . . . es
12 .l3dl e4 - see 10.l3dl.
12.dxeS l'iJxeS 13.l'iJxeS WlxeS -
see 12.l'iJxeS.
1 2 .l'iJxeS. White clarifies im­
mediately the situation in the cen­
tre. His later plan is connected
with the pawn-advances e3-e4,
f2-f4. Still, Black's pieces are ac­
tive and this enables him to main­
tain the balance. 12 . . . l'iJxeS 13.
dxeS W!xeS 14.e4 il.e6 1S.h3. Be­
fore advancing f2-f4, it would be
useful for White to take the g4-
square under control, as well as
the gl-a7 diagonal. (1S.l3dl l3ad8=
Papaioannou - Esen, Aix les Bains
2011; 1S.f4 Wc5+ 16.i.e3 W!b4
17.a3 Wb3= Sargissian - Salgado
Lopez, Villafranca 2010) lS . . .
l3ad8 16 . .ie3 WlaS 17.f4 icS. Black
must try to exchange pieces, in or­
der to neutralise White's piece­
activity. 18.l3adl (18.l3fdl, Ju
Wenjun - Girya, Teheran 2017,
18 . . . l'iJd7 ! ? = ) 18 . . . l'iJd7. Black's
knight is severely restricted by the
pawns on h3 and e4 and should
leave the kingside in order to find
a better sphere of actions. 19.eS
Wlb6 2 0.if2 .bf2 + 2 1.Wfxf2 l'iJcS
2 2 . ©h2 l3fe8 23.l3d6 l3xd6 24.
exd6. White's passed d6-pawn
may turn out to be a liability later.
24 . . . l'iJd7. There is no pawn on the
e4-square anymore, so Black's
knight can come back. 2S.Wfd2
l'iJf6. From this square Black's
knight can go to dS, cutting the
enemy major pieces from the pro­
tection of the pawn on d6 and can
also take part in an attack after
l3d8, l'iJe8. 26.g4 l3d8 27.fS ids
28.gS l'iJe8 29.l'iJxdS cxdS 30.WlxdS
l'iJxd6 31.b3 g6 32 .fxg6 hxg6=
Cruzado Duecas - Roubaud, ICCF
2 0 14. The position has been con­
siderably simplified. There is just
a few material left on the board.
Black's knight protects reliably
the pawns on f7 and d7, moreover
that the position of White's king
seems seriously weakened.
12 .h3 l3fe8. Black does not de­
termine yet the position in the
centre. Later, depending on
White's actions, he can exchange
on d4, or can occupy additional
83
Chapter ?
space with the move e5-e4. 13.e4.
White prevents e5-e4. (13.l'!dl
e4 ! ? 14.tll d 2 i.f8+ Taras - Robert,
ICCF 2012) 13 . . . exd4 14.tll xd4
.tg6
15 . .tf4 (15.g4 .tcS 16.l'!dl, Grig­
oryan - Svetushkin, Roquetas de
Mar 2016, 16 . . . l'!ad8 ! ?+) 15 . . . 1M/b6
16.l'!fdl (It would be worse for
White to play here 16 . .te3? ! , be­
cause after 16 . . . .tcS 17.tll a4 1M/c7
18.tll xcS tll xc5, he can protect his
e4-pawn only at the price of his
g3-pawn : 19.f3 Wfxg3+ Ivanchuk -
Karjakin, Beijing 2011.) 16 . . . .tb4.
Black's pieces exert rather un­
pleasant pressure against the en­
emy centre. 17.eS. White crosses
the demarcation line, but com­
plies with having a weakness on
c3. (There arises a quieter ma­
noeuvring game after the line:
17.tll a4 1M/d8 18.Wfc4 .tf8 19.tll c3
Wfc8 2 0 .f3 tll h5 21.tll c e2 tll xf4 2 2 .
tll xf4 Wfc7= Hollands - Peschke,
ICCF 2012.) 17 . . . hc3 18.bxc3 h6
19.c4 tll c5 20.1M/e3 tll fd7 21.tll b 3.
White continues to seek simplifi­
cations. 2 1 . . .tll xb3 2 2 .Wfxb6 axb6
23.axb3 l'!xal 24.l'!xal .tc2 . He has
the two-bishop advantage, but
Black's counterplay against the
84
pawns on b3 and e5 is sufficient
for equality. 25.e6 l'!xe6 26.l'!a7 g5
27 . .te3 hb3 28. l'!xb7 tll e 5 29.
l'!xb6 hc4. Black has managed to
capture all his opponent's pawns
on the queenside. 30 . .td4 f5 31.
hes l'!xe5 32 .l'!xc6 l'!el+ 33.Wh2
i.e6= Stephan - Persson, ICCF
2012.
10 Wfc7
•••
This is a very flexible move.
Black is waiting for the moves
tll c3 and 1M/e2 , in order to prevent
the pawn-advance e3-e4 with the
move tll e 4.
11.tll c3
11.h3 l'!ad8= Pogonina - Go­
ryachkina, Nizhnij Novgorod
2 013.
Following 11.Wfe2 e5, White
must consider the possibility e5-
e4. This would be particularly ef­
fective with a rook on dl, because
after the removal of the knight
from the f3-square and Black's
move .tg4, White will have to
weaken the position of his king
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. li:JfJ li:Jf6 4. W!c2 de 5. W!xc4 fi.f5
with the move f2-f3 in order not
to lose the exchange. 12.li:Jc3 (12 .
h3. White defends against i.g4,
but his play seems to be too slow.
12 . . . e4 13.li:Jfd2 l:!fe8 14.li:Jc3 fi.f8oo
15.b3 ? ! li:Jb6 16.li:Jc4 li:Jbd5 17.i.b2
b5 18.li:Jxd5 li:Jxd5 19.li:Jd2 Wid'l+
Taras - Robert, ICCF 2012.) 12 . . .
e 4 13.li:Jh4 i.g4 14.f3 exf3 15.i.xf3
i.xf3 16.�xf3 c5 17.li:JfS. White's
knight will be very powerful on
this square, but he cannot sup­
port its activity with anything,
since his queenside pieces are
not developed yet. 17 . . . l:!fe8 18.g4
cxd4 19.exd4 �c6. The trade of
the queens is Black's simplest way
of neutralising White's imitative.
2 0 .Wixc6 bxc6 2 1.g5 li:Jd5 2 2 .li:Jxd5
cxd5= Matlakov - Jakovenko, 01-
ginka 2011.
11 . . J�ad8
12.We2
Black can counter 12 .h3 with
12 . . . li:Je4, without waiting for the
move Wie2 . 13.li:Jd2 li:Jxc3 14.bxc3
i.c2 15.l:!el li:Jb6. He prepares the
transfer of his knight to a4 in or-
der to attack the enemy weakness
on c3. 16.Wie2 li:Ja4 17.li:Jc4 fi.g6
18.id2 f6 19.e4 b5 2 0.li:Je3 e5oo
Jenkinson - Jones, ICCF 2016.
12 . . . li:Je4 13.�el
This is White's most princi­
pled move. He wishes to force the
exchange on c3 in order to fortify
his centre.
White's plan, connected with
the advance of the a-pawn, leads
to quick simplifications. 13.a4
i.g6 14.a5 i.b4 15.li:Jxe4 ixe4 16.
i.d2 ixd2 17.li:Jxd2 i.xg2= Neb -
Vinchev, ICCF 2016.
13 ... �xc3 14.bxc3 es
Black not only attacks the en­
emy centre, but also prepares the
e6-square for his bishop.
15.e4 .ie6
This bishop will be much more
active on the a2-g8 diagonal than
on the g6-square.
16.�f3 f6 17.�h4
17.fi.e3, Miron - S.Volkov,
Plovdiv 2012, 17 . . . li:Jb6 ! ? =
85
Chapter 7
17.Wfc2 tlib6 18 . .ifl .if7 19.tlih4
�fe8. Black prepares a square for
the retreat of his bishop on e7.
2 0 .tlifS .�.f8= Mikheev - Poli,
ICCF 2012.
17
••• tlib6
Black prepares the transfer of
his knight to c4, from where
White will hardly manage to out it
easily. 18.a4 gfe8 19.a5 tlic4
20.d5 cxd5 21.exd5 .if7 22.
c!lif5 .if8. Black's pieces are much
more harmoniously deployed.23.
ga4 b5 24.axb6. After this move
the position is simplified, but
White has nothing better anyway.
Black's knight on c4 is so power­
ful that White may even end up in
an inferior position. 24 c!lixb6
•••
25.gas Wfxc3 26.�a7 Wfc4 27.
Wfxc4 c!lixc4= Andersen - Weber,
ICCF 2 0 13. Black is completely
safe in this endgame. On the con­
trary, White must play precisely.
He must watch carefully about
the possibility that Black may en­
circle and capture the isolated dS­
pawn.
86
B2) 6.c!lic3
This is a logical move, but is a
bit too straightforward. White in­
creases immediately his control
over the central e4-square, but
later his knight may come under
attack after b7-b5-b4.
6 ••• e6
7.g3
White prepares the fianchetto
of his light-squared bishop.
7.h3. He wishes to play g2-g4.
After this however, his kingside
would be slightly weakened. 7 . . .
tlibd7 8.g4 .ig6 9.ig2 ie7oo Kor­
chnoi - Raznikov, Caleta 2012.
Following 7.Wfb3 1Mfb6, White
must consider Black's threats
Wfxb3 and ic2 . If White exchang­
es the queens 8.Wfxb6 axb6, then
he will not have the possibility
9.tlih4, because of 9 . . . .ic2 !+ and
after 10.�d2 .ib3+ Walseth -
Pavlidis, Porto Carras 2008.
Black exploits the pin of the a2-
pawn, saves his bishop and ob­
tains an advantage.
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4. Wfc2 de 5. Wfxc4 i.j5
7 . .igS Wfb6 8.0-0-0. White's
plan, connected with castling
queenside, seems rather risky, be-
cause his king will be unsafe on
the queenside. 8 ... liJbd7 9.liJh4 i.b4
10.liJxfS exf5 11.f3 0-0oo M.Hor-
vath - Videki, Balatonbereny 1993.
7 ••• c!LJbd7 8 .tg2 .te7
• and Black exploits this immedi­
9.0-0
White's delay with castling
cannot be good for him at all.
9.e3 0-0 10 .liJh4 (10.0-0 bS
- see variation B2a) 10 . . . liJb6 11.
Wifl. White's play seems a bit awk­
ward. 11 . . . .ig4 12 .h3 .ihS 13 .g4
liJfdS 14.gxhS (14.liJf3 .ig6 15.liJe5,
Andersen - Gysi, Argentina 2001,
15 . . . liJxc3 ! ? 16.bxc3 .ic2 . Black
has managed to avoid the trade of
his light-squared bishop. Now,
his plan includes its transfer to
the b5-square from where it
would exert powerful pressure
against White's position. 17.Wie2
.ia4 18.0-0 .ibS 19.liJd3 Wfc7!=.)
14 ... .ixh4+ Bareev - Anand, Til­
burg 1991. White has succeeded
in obtaining the two-bishop ad-
vantage, but at a very dear price.
His kingside has been weakened
and his king is still stranded in the
centre.
9.Wib3 �b6 10.liJd2. White is
preparing liJc4, but weakens his
control over the central e5-square
ately. 10 . . . eS 11.dS (11.dxeS liJxeS
12.�a4 �b4= Korchnoi - Sandi­
pan, Caleta 2 011) 11 . . . cxdS. The
simplifications are unavoidable.
12.liJxdS liJxdS 13.hdS Wfxb3 14.
liJxb3 .ib4+ 15 . .id2 hd2 + 16.
liJxd2 ©e7 17 . .ixb7 gab8 18 . .if3
gxb2= Mirzoev - Firat, Cappelle­
la-Grande 2012.
9 ••. 0-0
Now, White has two main
lines: B2a) 10.e3 and B2b)
to.gel.
It would be a blunder for him
to choose the routine move 10 .
gdl?, since following 10 . . . .ic2 ! - + ,
Black's threat t o trap the enemy
queen liJ b6 would force White to
part with an exchange.
87
Chapter 7
White cannot harm his oppo­
nent with 10 . .ie3, T.Petrosian -
Bagirov, Moscow 1983, 10 . . . h6 ! ? =
10 .h3 h 6 lU�el lll e 4= Janko­
vic - Antal, Hungary 2016.
10.a3. White is preparing a
square for the retreat of his queen,
but the move a3 seems rather
slow. 10 . . . lll e4 11.l�dl lll b 6 12 .'1Ba2
lll d 5= Itkis - Matulovic, Cetinje
1993. Black's knights have joined
very effectively in the fight for the
central squares.
It seems premature for White
to opt here for 10.lll h 4? ! , because
Black can simply capture the cen­
tral pawn. 10 . . . lll b 6 ll.'1Bb3 '\!;Vxd4
12.lll xf5 exf5 13 . .if4, Rogers -
Bacrot, Batumi 2001, 13 . . J''ffe 8 ! ?+
White's two-bishop advantage
does not compensate fully his ma­
terial deficit.
After 10 . .if4 .ig6 lUffel, Black
obtains a very good game with the
plan, connected with a pawn-of­
fensive on the queenside. ll .. J'k8
12 .'\!;Vb3 b5= , followed by a7-a5-
a4, Hauchard - Brunner, Evry
2008.
10.a4. White solves radically
the problem with Black's pawn­
advance b7-b5, but weakens the
b4-square in the process. 10 . . . a5
ll.e3 '1Bb6 12.lll h 4 (12 .We2 '\!;Va6=
Kharlov - Ki.Georgiev, Istanbul
2 0 03) 12 . . . .ic2 = Now, White
should better refrain from the
88
pawn-advance 13.e4? ! , because
after 13 . . . .ib3 14.'\!;Vd3 l:3fd8+,
Black's threat lll e5 would be very
unpleasant, Jeremie - Blagojevic,
Budva 2003.
After 10 .i.g5 h6 ll . .ixf6 .ixf6,
Black has the two-bishop advan­
tage and a solid position. 12.l:3fdl
(12 .h3, Ibarra Jerez - Salgado
Lopez, Madrid 2 0 15, 12 . . . .ig6 ! ? = ;
12 .e3 '1Bb6= Dragomarezkij - Ga­
garin, Moscow 1998; 12 .e4 .ig6
13.l:3adl '\1Ba5oo Knol - Sivic, ICCF
2009) 12 . . . i.c2 ! ? Before playing
lll b 6, Black deprives his oppo­
nent of the b3-square. 13.l:3d2 (13.
l:3dcl lll b 6 14.'1Bc5 i.f5 = Roman­
ishin - Kalinitschew, Germany
1992.) 13 . . . lll b 6 14.'!1Bc5 i.g6=
Brunner - Hochstrasser, Switzer­
land 2005.
10.'\!;Vb3 '\!;Vb6
There arises an approximately
equal endgame after 11 . .if4 '1Bxb3
12.axb3 lll d 5= Sahu - Rajesh,
Bhubaneswar 2016.
The move ll.l:3el is not timely
here for White, since following
ll . . . '1Bxb3 1 2.axb3, Black can be­
gin an attack against the pawn on
 J.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. &Dj3 &Df6 4. Vff c2 dc 5. Wlxc4 !i.j5
b3. 12 . . . .ic2 13 . .igS h6 14 . .ixf6
0ixf6 15.gecl .ih'l+ Bates - Lalic,
Hastings 2 016. Black's threats
against the pawn on b3 have
forced White to exchange his
powerful bishop for the enemy
knight on f6. His compensation
for the vulnerability of his dou­
bled b-pawns and his opponent's
two-bishop advantage is insuffi­
cient.
After 11.Vffxb6 axb6 12.0ih4,
Black can avoid the exchange of
his powerful bishop for the enemy
knight with 12 . . . .ic2 ! 13 .i.d2 h6+.
There might follow 14.gacl .ih7.
It is much easier to play this posi­
tion with Black, since he has a
clear cut plan : b6-b5, 0ib6-c4.
1s.gfe1 b5 16.a3 0ib6 17.e4 0ic4+
Ovetchkin - Skorchenko, No­
vokuznetsk 2008.
11.0id2. White is preparing
0ic4, but weakens his control over
the central d4 and es-squares.
11 . . . eS. This timely counter strike
in the centre is Black's simplest
way of equalising. 12.dS (12 .e4,
Dzagnidze - Zhu, Doha 2011, 12 . . .
.ig6 ! ?oo) 12 . . . cxdS 13.&iJxdS 0ixd5
14.W/xdS Vffa 6. He exchanges his
b7-pawn for the enemy e2-pawn.
15.W/xb7 Vffx e2 16.b3 !a.cS. Black's
pieces are very active, so White is
forced to trade the light-squared
bishops. 17 . .if3 W/d3 18 . .ie4 .ixe4
19.W/xe4 Vfic3 2 0 .gb1 .id4 = , fol­
lowed by &iJcS , Opitz - Lundberg,
ICCF 2010. White's pawn-majori­
ty on the queenside is not impor­
tant at all.
B2a) 10.e3
White prepares Vffe 2, but Black
can obtain a very good position in
a tactical fashion.
10 ••• b5 ! ?
This i s the point. I t turns out
that Black is not afraid of the cap­
turing on c6 and so he seizes the
initiative on the queenside. Now,
White must play very precisely;
otherwise, he might end up in an
inferior position.
11.Vfie2
It seems less adequate for
White to choose the other retreat
of his queen ll.W/b3 b4 1 2 .0ia4
.ie4 13 . .id2 , Portisch - Galliamo­
va, Marbella 1999, 13 . . . aS ! ?+.
11.Vffxc6 b4 12 .&Dbl .id3 13.gel
W/a5 14.0ifd2 gac8 15.Vfff3 b3t I.
Balog - To Nhat Minh, Balaton­
lelle 2009. Black's pieces are very
active. He has more than suffi­
cient compensation for his mini­
mal material deficit.
11 b4
•••
89
Chapter 7
12.tll a4
12 .tlibl. This move is too pas-
sive 12 . . . c5 13.tlibd2 gcs
14.a3 b3 ! ? 15.e4 i.g6 16.tlixb3
i.xe4 17.dxc5 i.d5 18.c6 hb3 19.
cxd7 §'xd7+, followed by gc2 , De­
fore} - Bartsch, ICCF 2 0 15. White
can hardly complete the develop­
ment of his queenside without
material losses.
Following 14.b3, there appears
a weak c3-square in White's camp
and Black's knight is immediately
headed there. 14 ... tlid5 15.i.b2
tlic3 16.i.xc3 bxc3 17.tlic4 tlib6 18.
gacl tlixc4 19.bxc4, Bancevich -
Jones, LSS 2 007, 19 . . . §'a5 ! ?t
Black's bishops are very powerful
and his pawn o n c3 can hardly be
captured easily by White.
90
14.e4 i.g6 15.gdl h6 16.d5
exd5 17.exd5 i.c2 18.gel ges 19.
tlic4 i.f5 2 0.§'dl i.f8 2 1.a3 tlib6.
Black trades the strong enemy
knight. 22.gxeB §'xe8 23.tlixb6
axb6 24.axb4 gds 25.bxcS i.xc5
26.i.d2 tlixd5+ Defore} - Yakov­
lev, ICCF 2 015. Black has man­
aged to restore the material bal­
ance. His pieces are tremendously
active and his bishop on c5 is par-
ticularly powerful, exerting rather
unpleasant pressure against the
f2-square, as well as his central-
ised knight. White must work
very hard to neutralise the pres­
sure.
12 . . . §'aS
Black improves the placement
of his queen with tempo.
13.b3 §'b5
14.gel
14.Wfdl gac8 15.i.b2 gfd8 16.
gel, D .Gurevich - Bruzon Batis­
ta, Buenos Aires 2 003, 16 . . .
i.g6 ! ? =
14 . . . gac8 15.i.b2
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4. "ff c2 dc 5. "ffxc4 if5
15.a3, Istratescu - Itkis, Bu­
charest 2000, 15 . . . aS=
15 .id3
•••
Black plans to continue with
'i;Ya6 and .ibS in order to empha­
size the misplacement of the ene­
my knight on a4.
16.'i;Ydl gfd8 17.gcl Yfa6
18.liJd2 ib5 19.ifl hf1 20.
gxfl
This position was reached in
the game Deepan Chakkravarthy
- Alarcon Casellas, Barcelona
2012. White managed to neutral­
ise the threat ha4, but he had no
advantage. 20 liJd5 ! ? This is
•••
Black's simplest road to equality.
21. Yfg4 g6. Before advancing c6-
c5, Black must take care about his
opponent's threats against the g7-
square. 22.gc2 c5 23.gfcl cxd4.
There begin forced actions which
lead to almost complete simpli­
fications. 24.gxc8 gxc8 25.
gxc8+ 'i;Yxc8 26.Yfxd4 if6 27.
Yfxa7 Yfc2 28.Yfxd7 ixb2 29.
liJxb2 Yfxd2 30. Yfe8+ ©g7 31.
liJc4 Yfxa2. The draw has become
imminent, for example: 32.liJd6
Yfa7 33."f!dS liJxe3 !? Black sac­
rifices a piece and forces a perpet­
ual check. 34.fxe3 "ffxe3+ 35.
©g2 "ffe 2=
B2b) 10.gel
This is an energetic move.
White is threatening e2-e4 and
wishes at first to force the move
liJe4 and to follow this with liJh4.
Still, the complications beginning
after this are not dangerous for
Black if he plays correctly.
10 ••• liJe4
11.Yfb3
White must play this prepara­
tory move, because after the im-
91
Chapter ?
mediate try ll.llJh4? ! , Black can
exploit the exposed placement of
the enemy queen with ll . . . llJd6
12.Wfb3 .bh4 13.gxh4 Wfxh4+ Ca­
ceres Vasquez - Marin Munoz,
Santiago de Chile 2009. White
has the two-bishop advantage in­
deed, but this does not compen­
sate fully the sacrificed pawn.
It is bad for White to play here
11.e3, since then it becomes un­
clear why he had played gel at
the first place. 11 . . . cS ! ? Black un­
dermines his opponent's centre
and this is his simplest way of
equalising. 12 .llJd2 llJxc3 13.bxc3
cxd4 14.exd4 gc8 1S.'\!;Yb3 llJf6 16.
ib2 '\!;Yc7 17.c4 b6 18.gacl gfd8=
Rost - Romanov, ICCF 2 013.
Black's pieces exert powerful
pressure against his opponent's
hanging pawns.
There arises a calm position
after 11.if4 llJxc3 12.bxc3 ie4.
This is a standard resource in
similar positions. Black prevents
mechanically the enemy pawn­
advance e2-e4. After the removal
of the knight from f3, Black would
like to trade the light-squared
bishops.
92
It seems rather slow for White
to opt here for 13.ifl . Before
playing llJd2, he avoids the ex­
change of his bishop. Still, this
plan takes too much time. 13 . . . cS
14.llJd2 llJb6 1s.'l!;Yb3 ids 16.Wfd1,
Portisch - Lengyel, Budapest
196S, 16 . . . cxd4 ! ? 17.cxd4 i.b4+
Black's minor pieces have become
very active.
13.Wfb3 c5. He has a very com­
fortable position.
The position is simplified after
14.llJeS i.xg2 1S.©xg2 llJxeS 16.
hes Wfd7 17.e4 bS= Brunello -
Kobalia, Plovdiv 2 0 1 2 , or 14.llJd2
hg2 1S.©xg2 , Horvath - Sav­
chenko, Pula 1994, 1S . . . '\!;Yb6 ! ? =
14.gadl, Barber - Kleiser, ICCF
2009, 14 . . . cxd4 ! ? 1S.cxd4 '\!;Yb6=
14.gedl Wfc8. Black prepares
the transfer of his queen to the
long diagonal. lS.llJel (There aris­
es a more complicated battle after
lS.gacl c4oo Efimov - Knezevic,
Prague 198S. Naturally, it is not
good for Black to open the c-file
with a white rook on cl.) 1S . . . .bg2
16.llJxg2 gd8 17.e4 b6 18.WfbS llJf6
19.f3. White has managed to ob­
tain a pawn-centre. Still, he had
to weaken his king in order to do
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l?Jf.3 l?Jf6 4. 'flc2 de 5. 'flxc4 i.j5
that. In addition, his knight on g2
seems a bit misplaced. 19 . . . �b7.
Black's plans include the advance
of his queenside pawns a7-a6, b6-
b5, but he must protect at first his
pawn on b6. 2 0 . a4 a6 2 1.�b2 bS
2 2 .i.e3 �c6 23.axbS axb5= Tucci
- Borroni, ICCF 2012.
ll . . . Vb6
12.l?Jh4
White weakens his pawn­
structure, but wishes to obtain the
two-bishop advantage and what is
even more important - to bring
his bishop on g2 into the fight for
the e4-square.
The transfer into an endgame
12 .�xb6 axb6 does not promise
White more than equality. 13.
l?Jxe4 (It would be worse for him
to choose here 13.l?Jh4, because
after 13 . . ..ib4 14 . .ixe4, Moehring
- Golz, Zinnowitz 1964, Black can
create at first a weakness for his
opponent on c3 14 . . . .ixc3 ! ? 15.
bxc3 .ixe4 and then fix it with the
moves b6-b5 and l?Jb6. 16.f3 ids
17.a3 f6 18.e4 ic4 19.l?Jg2 b5 2 0 .
l?Je3 l?Jb6+ White's chase after the
enemy bishop with his pawns and
a knight has failed completely.
His weak pawns on c3 and a3 pro­
vide Black with a stable advan­
tage.) 13 . . . i.xe4 14.l?JeS l?Jxe5 15.
i.xe4 l?Jc4 16 ..id3 b5= Portisch -
Unzicker, Santa Monica 1966.
White's two-bishop advantage is
practically immaterial. He has no
pawn-weaknesses in his position
and his pieces are active.
12 . . . hb4
13.gxh4
This is a logical continuation
of White's plan.
The exchange of the queens
13.�xb6 axb6 is in favour of
Black, because his rook on a8 is
activated. 14.l?Jxe4 (14.gxh4 l?Jxc3
15.bxc3 b5 16.e4, Shinkevich -
Odnorozhenko, Perm 2 0 09, 16 . . .
.ig6+ Black has a superior pawn­
structure, so he can try to play for
a win without any risk at all.) 14 . . .
ie7 15.if4, Serov - Butuc, St Pe­
tersburg 2 0 07, 15 . . . i.xe4 ! ? 16.
i.xe4 b5= , followed by l?Jb6-c4.
93
Chapter 7
13.tt:lxe4 iJ.e7 14.iJ.f4 (It is worse
for White to try here 14.tt:lc3? ! ,
since following 14 . . .V9xb3 15.axb3
iJ.c2+, he will fail to save his b3-
pawn, Roy - Yagupov, Olomouc
2016.) 14 . . . he4 15.he4, Leutwy­
ler - Kharitonov, Paleochora
2 011, 15 . . . V9xb3 ! ? 16.axb3 tt:lf6 17.
iJ.f3 iJ.b4 18.E!:edl tt:ld5= White has
the two-bishop advantage, but
his queenside pawn-structure has
been compromised.
13 . . . �df6
Black is reluctant to give up
the e4-square without a fight.
14.:f3
White wins the fight for the
e4-square, but t}\!s is still insuffi­
cient for him to rrra intain an ad­
vantage.
He can also play f2-f3 after
the preliminary exchange of the
queens. 14.V9xb6 axb6 15.f3 (15.
tt:lxe4 he4 - see 14.�e4) . Still, af­
ter 15 . . . �xc3 16.bxc3 iJ.c2 17.iJ.b2,
Tiggelman - Roorda, Vlissingen
2012, 17 . . . E!:a5 ! ?oo, followed by
E!:fa8, Black's prospects are not
worse.
94
White would not achieve much
with 14.�xe4 he4 15.V9xb6 axb6
16.f3, because Black's bishop can
easily avoid the pawn-chase after
it. 16 . . . iJ.dS 17.a3 iJ.c4 18.e4 (The
trade of the b-pawns is evidently
in favour of Black: 18.b3 hb3
19.E!:bl iJ.c4 20.E!:xb6 Ela?+ Landa
- Gasanov, Dagomys 2010. He
has got rid of his doubled pawns,
while White must worry about his
weakness on a3.) 18 . . . �h5
19.iJ.h3 b5 2 0.iJ.g4 �f6, draw,
Eger - Bleker, ICCF 2012. Indeed,
after 2 1.iJ.h3 �h5 = , White has
nothing better than to repeat the
moves.
19.b3. Now, just like on the
previous move, the exchange of
the b-pawns is not dangerous for
Black. 19 . . . hb3 2 0.E!:bl iJ.c4 21.
E!:xb6 E!:tb8 22.E!:e3 �f6= Dimitrov
- Robert, ICCF 2 01 1 . His supe­
rior pawn-structure compensates
White's two-bishop advantage.
19.f4 f5. Black must try to keep
the centre closed, because of
White's bishop-pair. 2 0 .e5 g6 21.
iJ.f3 E!:fd8 2 2 .iJ.e3 �g7 23.@f2 .id5
24.iJ.e2 @f7= Fortune - Krzyza­
nowski, ICCF 2011. Black's bishop
is very powerful at the centre of
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:i:ij3 l:i:if6 4. Vflc2 de 5. Vflxc4 .ij5
the board. White can break nei­
ther on the kingside, nor on the
queenside.
14 . . . l:i:ixc3 15.bxc3 e5 ! ?
This i s not the most popular
move for Black, but is possibly his
simplest way of equalising. He
frees the e6-square for his bishop.
16.Wxb6
White would not achieve much
with 16.e4 .te6. Here, Black's
bishop would be much more ac­
tive than on the g6-square.
17. �a4 l:i:ih5 18 . .ie3 (The
pawn-sacrifice 18.f4?! would lead
to difficulties for White. 18 . . . l:i:ixf4
19.hf4 exf4+ Hernandez Carme-
nates - Borges Matos, Madrid
2 0 07.) 18 . . . �d8 19 . .ig5 Vflc7+ Sta­
bolewski - Zherebukh, Dresden
2010. The vulnerability of White's
king will be a cause of worries for
him in this middle game.
17.Vfib2 gfd8 1s .gd1 Vfixb2 19.
hb2 l:i:id7= Rodolfo Masera -
Burg, ICCF 2 0 15. There has arisen
a position with dynamic balance.
Black has a superior pawn-struc­
ture, while White has a bishop-pair.
16 . . . axb6 17.dxe5 �d7
18.f4
He protects reliably his pawn.
Following 18 .e4 .ie6, White's
pawns on e5 and a2 are hanging.
Therefore, Black restores the ma­
terial balance. 19.f4, Wojtaszek -
Zherebukh, Warsaw 2009, 19 . . .
ha2 ! ? =
18 . . . �c5
White has an extra pawn, but
Black's pieces are very active,
while White's pawns on a2, c3
and h4 are weak.
19.e4
After 19 . .ie3 ga3 2 0 . .id4, Vo­
robiov - Poetsch, Pardubice 2 0 14,
2 0 ... gfaS= , White cannot avoid
the loss of his a2-pawn.
19 . . . .te6 20 . .ie3 .ixa2= The
material balance has been re-
stored. Naturally, White has the
two-bishop advantage, but his
pawn-structure is inferior, so he
cannot play for a win.
95
Chapter s 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . tll f'3 tll f6 4.e3

Now, White has a choice be­

tween numerous possibilities. In
this chapter we will analyse only
these in which he refrains in his
first moves from the pawn-ad­
vance h2-h3. The possible attacks
against the enemy bishop will be
dealt with in the next chapter.

This move may seem rather

modest, but it gains popularity in
the last several years. White wish­
es to avoid the long forced lines,
typical for the Botvinnik varia­
tion, or the Meran system and
wishes to focus on the fight in the
middle game. He would not mind
his opponent to develop his bish­
op on g4, or f5. His later plans in­ We will analyse now A)
clude the development of the 5.c!LJbd2, B) 5.cxdS, C) 5.Yfb3
queen to b3 in order to attack the and D) 5.c!LJc3 .
b7-pawn, or the chase after the
enemy bishop with ll:ih4, or h3, 5.Yfc2 . White removes his
g4, ll:ie5, with the idea to obtain queen from the pin, but allows his
the two-bishop advantage. pawns to be doubled. 5 . . . hf3 6.
4 . . . .tg4 gxf3 e6 7.ll:ic3 ll:ibd7= Just -
Black exploits the possibility Minte, Binz 2012.
to develop his bishop to an active
position before playing e7-e6. 5.b3 e6 6.i.e2 (6.ll:ibd2 ll:ibd7

96
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. lt.Jj3 lt.Jf6 4.e3 .tg4
- see 5.lt.Jbd2) 6 . . . .tb4 - see 5.
.te2 .
5 . .td3 e 6 6.W/b3 (6.lt.Jc3 lt.Jbd7
- see 5.lt.Jc3 ; 6.lt.Jbd2 lt.Jbd7, or
6.0-0 lt.Jbd7 7.lt.Jbd2 .td6 - see
5.lt.Jbd2) 6 . . . dxc4 ! ? This is Black's
most precise road to equality. 7.
hc4 (The chase after the enemy
rook on a8 leads to a loss for
White: 7.W/xb7? cxd3 8.1Mfxa8 hf3
9.gxf3 W/c7-+ , with the threat
lt.Jd7-b6.) 7 . . . .txf3 8.gxf3 1Mfc7 9.
lt.Jc3 .te7. Black is not in a hurry
to play lt.Jbd7, preserving the
possibility to develop his knight
to c6 after c6-c5. 10 .i.d2 0-0 11.
h4 a6oo Rakhmanov - Grachev,
Moscow 2011.
5.i.e2 . This is not White's most
active move. 5 . . . e6 6.0-0 (Follow­
ing 6.b3, Black can prevent the
development of the enemy bishop
on b2 with 6 . . . .ib4+ ! ? 7 . .id2 .id6
8.lt.Jc3 lt.Jbd7= Kock - Zichichi,
Saint Vincent 2002; 6.lt.Jbd2 lt.Jbd7
- see 5.lt.Jbd2 ; 6.lt.Jc3 lt.Jbd7 - see
5.lt.Jc3) 6 . . . lt.Jbd7 7.b3 (7.lt.Jbd2
.id6 - see 5. lt.Jbd2 ; 7.lt.Jc3 .id6 -
see 5.lt.Jc3) 7 . . . .id6 8 .i.b2 (8.lt.Jbd2
0-0 - see 5.lt.Jbd2) 8 . . . 0-0 9.lt.Je5
(9.h3, Stein - Vaganian, Lenin­
grad 1971, 9 . . . i.f5 ! ? = ; 9.lt.Jbd2 a5
- see 5.lt.Jbd2 ; 9.lt.Jc3 1Mfe7 - see
5.lt.Jc3) 9 . . . he2 10.1Mfxe2 W/c7
11.f4. White preserves his knight
at the centre of the board, but
weakens the e4-square. (ll.lt.Jxd7
W/xd7= Maze - Balcerak, Germa­
ny 2 0 11) 11 . . . lt.Je4 12 .lt.Jd2 lt.Jxd2
13.W/xd2 lt.Jf6 14.W/e2 lt.Je4 15.lt.Jd3,
Durst - Enneper, Germany 1997,
15 . . . aS ! ? = Black's prospects are
not worse, because White's bish­
op is severely restricted by his
own pawn on d4.
A) 5.tll b d2
This is not White's most prin­
cipled move. He does not attack
the b7-pawn and does not oust
the enemy bishop from the g4-
square. Therefore, Black com­
pletes effortlessly his develop­
ment and obtains a wonderful
position.
5 . . . e6
6 . .id3
About 6.h3 .th5, or 6.W/b3 W/c7
7.h3 .th5 - see Chapter 9, varia­
tion A.
After 6.b3 tll b d7 7 . .ib2 , Black
can deploy immediately his knight
at the centre of the board, exploit­
ing the delay of White's move
.td3. (7.W/c2 '<Mias - see 6.'<Mfc2 ;
7.i.d3 .td6 - see 6.i.d3 ; 7 . .te2
.tb4 - see 6 . .ie2) 7 . . . tll e4 8 . .te2
97
Chapter B
.ib4 9.0-0, Budnikov - Tregubov,
St Petersburg 1993. 9 . . . 0-0 ! ? 10.
lll xe4. White can hardly continue
the game without the exchange of
the centralised enemy knight, but
now, after 10 . . . dxe4 he will have
to lose a tempo for the retreat of
his knight. 11.lll e l he2 12.'1Nxe2
fSoo
Following 6.IM'c2 lll b d7 7.b3
(7 . .id3 .id6 - see 6 . .id3), Black
has a very active plan: 7 . . . V:VaS ! ?
8 . .id3 .hf3 9.gxf3 cS. White has a
pair of bishops, but his pawn­
structure has been compromised.
10.b4 ! ? This pawn-sacrifice is in­
teresting, but still insufficient for
White to maintain an advantage.
10 . . . ""1'xb4 11.l'!bl Was 12.l'!xb7
cxd4 13.exd4 dxc4 14.V:Vxc4. He
has managed to activate his piec­
es, but his pawn-structure has
been weakened even more. 14 . . .
.ie7 1S.""1'bS ""1'd8 16.lll e4 0-0oo
6 . .ie2 . White's bishop is not so
active on this square as on d3 . 6 . . .
lll b d7 7. 0-0 (7.h3 .ihS - see
Chapter 9, variation A; 7.b3 .ib4
8.a3 .ic3 9.l'!a2 lll e4 10.0-0, Tre­
gubov - Sebag, France 2010,
10 . . . 0-0 ! ? = ) 7 . . . .id6
98
8.h3 .ihS - see Chapter 9, var­
iation A.
8 .cS. White occupies space
on the queenside, but reduces
the tension in the centre and
sets Black's hands free to pre­
p a re the pawn-break e 6 - e S .
8 . . . .ic7 9.b4 0 - 0 10 .bS eSoo
Kishkin - Mannanov, ICCF
2 0 1S .
8.b3 0-0 9 . .ib2 aS. Black is
ready to seize the initiative on the
queenside at an opportune mo­
ment with the move aS-a4.
10.lll eS he2 ll.""1'xe2 a4= Pa­
ranichev - Shabanov, Krasnodar
1983.
The position is simplified
considerably after 1 0 . a3 lll e 4
1 1 . lll xe4 dxe4 12.lll d 2 .ixe2 13.
""1'xe2 fS= Rice - Houska, Sutton
1999. Black's bishop seems more
active than its white counter­
part.
10 .h3 .ifs 11.lll h 4 lll e4 12.lll xfs
exfS 13.cxdS cxdS 14.l'!cl V:Ve7oo
Karpov - Carlsen, Moscow 2008.
White has obtained the two­
bishop advantage indeed, but
his bishop on b2 is very passive.
6 . . . �bd7
 l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. ttJj3 ttJf6 4.e3 i.g4
7.0-0
About 7.h3 .ihS - see Chapter
9, variation A.
7.'!Wb3 dxc4 ! ? 8 .hc4, Lammi
- Eklof, Helsinki 1993, 8 . . . '!Wc7 ! ? =
7.b3 i.d6 8.i.b2 ( 8 . 0 - 0 0-0 -
see 7. 0 - 0 ; 8.Wc2 0-0 - see 7.
Wc2) 8 . . . 0-0 9.'!Wc2 (9.0-0 eS -
see 7.0-0) 9 . . . .hf.3 - see 7.Wc2 .
7.'!Wc2 .id6 8 .b3 (After 8.c5
i.c7 9.b4 0-0 10 . .ib2 , Dumpor -
Cabarkapa, Subotica 2010, there
arises a very complicated posi­
tion. In the middle game White
will prepare active actions on the
queenside with a2-a4 and b4-bS,
while Black will try to accomplish
the freeing pawn-break in the
centre e6-eS. 10 . . . We7 ! ? 11.0-0
hf3 . This is the simplest deci­
sion. Before playing e6-eS, Black
exchanges his bishop, since it may
become "bad" later. 12.ttJxf3 eS 13.
dxeS ttJxeS 14.ttJxeS heS= White
cannot avoid the trade of his dark­
squared bishop, so he loses his
two-bishop advantage.) 8 . . . 0-0
9.i.b2 .ixf3 ! ? Without this move,
after White plays ttJeS, this bishop
may turn out to be out of the ac­
tions. 10.ttJxf3 '!Was + . Black ex­
ploits the fact that White has not
castled yet and succeeds in ex­
changing the dark-squared bish­
ops. 11.i.c3 (11.ltJd2 .ia3 12 ..ic3
i.b4=) ll ...ib4= Pheby - Benejam,
ICCF 200S. After the exchange,
the chances would be approxi­
mately balanced, since neither
side has any pawn-weaknesses.
7 .id6
•••
8.b3
8.h3 i.hS see Chapter 9, varia­
tion A.
Following 8 .Wc2 0-0 9.b3,
Black manages to advance e6-eS
before White has played i.b2 . 9 . . .
e S 10.dxeS ttJxeS 11.ttJxeS hes
12 .�bl, Matjushin - Rudak,
Alushta 2 0 0S, 12 . . . '!We7 ! ? =
8.'!Wb3. This queen-sortie seems
premature, because Black can
simply protect his b7-pawn with
99
Chapter B

his rook. 8 . . . l'!b8 9.cxdS (9.h3 .ihS B) 5.cxd5

10.l'!el 0-0 11.e4 dxe4 12.llJxe4
llJxe4 13.he4 llJf6= Reinstadler
- Kleiser, ICCF 2012) 9 . . . cxdS 10.
\!;l/a4. White is threatening llJeS,
but Black can simply sacrifice his
a7-pawn. 10 ... 0-0 ! ? ll.\!;l/xa7 bS�
Pecot - Polaczek, Email 1999.
White has lost too much time
winning a pawn. Black has seized
completely the initiative. In addi­
tion, White will have problems to
bring back his queen on a7 into
his own camp. This move seems anti-posi­
tional, because after the exchange
8 ••• 0-0 9 .ib2 e5 10.cxd5,
• of the pawns, Black's knight ob­
Dahl Pedersen - Christiansen, tains access to the c6-square. It
Denmark 2 0 0 2 , has however a tactical justifica­
tion.
5 . . . .txrJ
Black is forced to exchange his
bishop.

Following 5 . . . cxdS 6.llJc3 e6

10 .txfJ ! ? Black forces the
•••
enemy queen to occupy an unfa­
vourable position. 11. 'f!Yxt'3. White
must capture with his queen, be­
cause taking with the pawn would
weaken the shelter of his king,
while capturing with the knight
would lose a piece after e5-e4.
11 cxd5 12.dxe5 .ixe5 13.
•••
.ixe5 llJxe5. White fails to block
his opponent's isolated pawn.
14.'f!Ye2 d4=
7.'f!Ya4+ llJbd7 8.llJeS a6 9.llJxg4,
White will obtain the two-bishop
advantage anyway. This does not
mean however that his position is
better. 9 . . . llJxg4 10.f3 llJ gf6 11.
'f!Yb3 bS 12 .i.d3 i.d6 13.0-0oo Vo­
robiov - Shirov, Czech Republic
2 016.
6.'f!Yxt'3
6.gxf3. Capturing with the
pawn seems less reliable for
White. 6 . . .cxdS 7.'f!Yb3 (7.llJc3 llJc6
8 .'f!Yb3 'f!Yd7 - see 7.'f!Yb3) 7 . . . 'f!Yd7
8.llJc3 (8.i.d2 llJc6 9.llJc3 e6 - see
8.llJc3) 8 . . . llJc6 9 . .id2 (White
would not achieve much with the

100
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4.e3 i.g4
move 9.i.bS. The knight on f2 has
been exchanged, so White cannot
increase the pressure against the
c6-square. 9 . . . e6 10.i:!gl i:!c8+ Is-
tratescu - Graf, Deizisau 2012.)
9 . . . e6 10.i:!cl (10.liJa4 .id6 11.i:!cl
0-0, or 11.ibS 0-0 12 .i:!cl i:!ac8 -
see 10.i:!cl) 10 . . . .id6
White's two-bishop advantage
is practically irrelevant here, since
his kingside pawn-structure has
been weakened and his king has
remained for too long stranded at
the centre of the board. If Black
manages later to advance e6-eS,
he will seize firmly the initiative.
11.liJa4. The transfer of White's
knight to c5 would take too much
time. (He should possibly choose
here 11.i.bS, although even then
after 11 . . . 0-0 12.liJe2 i:!fe8 13.�a4
i:!ac8 14.i.xc6 bxc6 1S.i.b4, Ein­
gorn - Dolmatov, Tashkent
1 9 8 0 , lS . . . eS ! ?+, the vulnerability
of White's king compensates
with an interest the defects of
Black's queenside pawn-struc-
ture.) 11 . . . 0-0 12 .i.bS (12.liJcS
hcS 13.i:!xcS eS+ Nikolic - Sako-
lov, Reykjavik 2 0 03) 12 . . . i:!ac8
13.@e2 �e7 14.i.xc6 bxc6 1S.i:!c2 ,
Nogueiras Santiago - Ehlvest,
New Delhi/Teheran 2000, lS ...
liJhS ! ? 16.Wfd3 eS 17.dxeS WfxeS+,
creating the threat liJf4.
6 ... cxd5
7,ljj c3
7 . .ibS+ liJc6 8.liJc3 e6 - see
7.liJc3.
7 ..id3 liJc6 8.0-0 (8.ljj c3 e6 -
see 7.ljj c 3) 8 . . . e6 9.a3. White does
not lose a tempo for the move
liJc3. This attempt is interesting,
but still insufficient to obtain an
advantage. (9.liJc3 .ie7 - see 7.
liJc3) 9 . . . .id6 10 .b4 eS 11.dxeS
i.xeS 12 .i:!a2 0-0 13.�h3 i:!e8 14.
liJd2 d4. This pawn-advance is
Black's simplest way of equalising
1S.e4 .if4 = , followed by liJeS, Bog­
danovich - Wirthensohn, Liech­
tenstein 1994.
7. . ,ljj c6
Black has nothing to com-
plain about, despite White's two­
bishop advantage. He has neither
bad pieces, nor pawn-weakness­
es.
101
Chapter s
8.J.d3
8 .g4 e6 9.gS (9 . .id3 a6 - see
8.i.d3) 9 . . . llid7 10 .h4 !k8 11.i.d2
a6= Bauer - Dautov, France
2003.
It seems less convincing for
White to play here 8 . .ibS . In
fact, he cannot increase his pres­
sure against the c6-square. The
exchange J.xc6 would only lose
for him the two-bishop advan­
tage. 8 . . . e6 9 . 0 - 0 i:!c8 10 . .id2
.id6 11.i:!fcl (11.e4 dxe4 12.llixe4
llixe4 13.W/xe4 0-0= Knotek -
Roubalik, Stare Mesto 2010. The
vulnerability of the isolated
d4-pawn precludes White from
exploiting the power of his bish­
ops.) 11... 0-0 12 . .id3 i:!e8= Bur­
makin - Krivoshey, Oberwart
2001.
8 . .id2 . This is a flexible move.
White conceals for the moment
his further plans. 8 . . . e6.
(diagram)
9 . .id3 ie7 - see 8 . .id3 .
9.g4 i:!c8 10.gS llid7 11.h4 a6 -
see 8.g4.
102
9.W/g3 . White impedes his op­
ponent's castling kingside. Still,
Black can simply reply with 9 . . . g6
10 . .id3 J.e7 11.0-0 0-0 12 .i:!acl
i:!c8= Polak - Videki, Paks 2 004.
9.i:!cl .ie7 10.g4. White begins
active actions on the kingside, but
can hardly create any meaningful
threats against the enemy king. It
is well known that pawns cannot
come back, so the weakening of
his kingside may hurt him later.
(10 .i.d3 0-0 11.0-0 i:!c8 - see 8.
.id3) 10 . . . i:!c8 11.W/g2 llid7 12 . .ie2,
L.Hansen - Heller, Germany
2 0 0 2 , 12 . . . lliaS ! ? Black prepares
the transfer of his knight to the
c4-square and this promises him
an excellent position. 13.0-0
llic4=
8 . . . e6
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. ttJj3 ttJf6 4.e3 i.g4
9.0-0
About 9.1l;!/e2 !i..e 7 10.0-0 0-0,
or 9.!i..d 2 !i..e7 10.0-0 0-0, or 10.
gel 0-0 11.0-0 - see 9.0-0.
The move 9.g4 leads to a dou­
ble-edged fight. 9 . . . a6 10.gS ttJd7
11.'!Wg2 ttJb6oo Miron - Dobre,
Targu Mures 2 0 14.
9.'!Wg3, Burmakin - Fominyh,
Ekaterinburg 2002, 9 ...i.d6! ? Black
would not mind the exchange of
the g-pawns. 10.'!Wxg7 ggs ll.'!Wh6
gxg2 12 .i.d2 ttJb4 13.i.bS+ ©e7
14.1l;!/h3 1l;!/g8 15.a3 ltJc2 + 16.©fl
ttJxal 17.'!Wxg2 1l;!/xg2+ 18.©xg2
ggs+ 19.©f3 ttJb3= The tactical
complications are over and there
has arisen an approximately equal
endgame on the board.
9 . . . i.e7
This move looks more precise
than the development of the bish­
op to d6. In this variation White
can simply remove his queen from
f3 and play later f2-f4, preventing
Black's pawn-break e6-e5.
The development of Black's
bishop on e7 has the advantage
that after 0-0, he can transfer his
knight to the queenside at an op­
portune moment: ttJf6-e8-d6-c4.
10.i.d2
White connects his rooks.
About 10.1l;!/e2 0-0 11.!i..d 2 gcs
or 10.'!Wh3 0-0 ll.!i..d 2 g6 - see
10.i.d2.
Following 10.gd1 0-0 11.i.fl,
the simplest for Black would be to
prepare the transfer of his knight
to the c4-square from where it
would exert rather unpleasant
pressure against the b2-square.
(11.!i..d 2 gcs - see 10.!i..d 2) 11.. .gcs
12 . .id2 ttJaS 13.!i..e l ttJc4 14.'!We2,
Jussupow - Rogozenco, Germany
2011 (14.gabl 1l;!id7 15.'!We2 gc7=,
followed by the doubling of the
rooks on the c-file, Vorobiov - Nik­
cevic, Cappelle-la-Grande 2012)
14 . . . gc6 ! ?oo Black will play later
'!Wc7, gcs, tripling his major pieces
on the only open file. White's bish­
ops are very passive at the moment
and it is rather difficult to see how
they can be activated later.
10 . . . 0-0
103
Chapter s
lU�acl
11.gfdl gc8 12 . .iel, Polugaev­
sky - Hort, Petropolis 1973 (12.
gacl Wfd7 - see 11.gacl) 12 . . . a6 ! ? =
11.Wfg3 . White i s preparing the
advance of his f-pawn. 11 . . . gc8
12.f4, Koneru - Karavade, Calicut
2 003. Here, Black can simply play
12 . . . lDe8 ! ? with the idea to trans­
fer the knight to d6, without being
afraid of the move 13 .fS, since he
can counter that with the line :
13 . . . eS! 14.dxeS ih4 15.Wff4 .igS,
with a permanent chase after the
enemy queen. 16.Wfg3 .ih4=
ll.Wfe2 gc8 12 .f4 (12 .gacl a6 -
see 11.gacl; 12 .gfc1 a6= Medvegy -
Hajnal, Hungary 2016) 12 . . . g6.
Black impedes his enemy pawn­
advance f4-f5. 13.gacl tlJd7 14 . .iel
fS. Now, White will hardly man­
age to open the position. 15.g4
tlJf6 16.gxfS gxfS 17.<!ihl <!ih8 18.
ggl gg8 = Tkachiev - Fressinet,
Ajaccio 2 0 07.
11.'!Wh3. With this move, just
like after 11 .Wfg3, or 11.Wfe2 , White
prepares f2-f4, but now he creates
a threat against the h7-square.
11 . . . g6 12 .f4 (12.:Bacl :Bc8 - see
11.:Bacl) 12 . . . :Bc8 13 .g4, Berkes -
Salgado Lopez, Paks 2011 (White's
attempt to bring his rook into the
attack with 13.:Bf3, Dragun - Mi­
ton, Wroclaw 2014, would not
achieve anything for him: 13 . . .
tlJb4 ! ? 1 4 . .ibl Wfb6 15.tlJa4 Wfc6
16.tlJc3 tlJe4oo) 13 . . . tlJb4 ! ? Black
must try to organise active coun-
104
terplay; otherwise, he may end up
in a bad position. 14 . .ie2 tlJe8
15.fS tlJd6 16.fxe6 fxe6 17.gxfs+
.ixf8 18.:Bfl ig7= Black's bishop
on g7 cements reliably his posi­
tion on the kingside.
11 . . Jfo8 12.'!Wh3
The alternatives for White do
not provide him with any advan­
tage. For example: 12 .Wfe2 a6 13.
tlJa4, Ghaem Maghami - Gatter­
er, Oberwart 2 0 07, 13 . . . tlJe4 ! ? = ,
o r 12.:Bfdl '!Wd7 13.tlJe2 :Bc7 14.a3
E:fc8= Curtis - Smallbone, Sun­
ningdale 2008.
12 ... g6 13.f4
13.:Bfdl, Danner - Meduna,
Passau 2000, 13 . . . a6 ! ? =
13 . . . tlJaS 14.lk2 tlJc4 15 . .iel
h5. Black has deployed almost all
his pawns according to the rules
- on squares opposite of the col­
our of his bishop. 16.'!Wf'3, Jus­
supow - Fridman, Arnhem 2006,
preparing h2-h3 and g2-g4. Still,
Black can take care about this
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:iJfJ f1Jf6 4.e3 i.g4
threat by transferring prudently
his rook to the h-file. 16 . . . @g7!?
17.h3 gh8=
C) 5.1fb3
White attacks immediately the
enemy b7-pawn.
5 . . . 'eb6
6.t:fJeS
About 6.f1Jc3 e6, or 6 ..id3 f1Jbd7
7.f1Jc3 e6 8 . .id2 .ie7 - see 5.f1Jc3.
6.c5 Wic7 7.f1Je5 .if5, or 6.Wixb6
axb6 7.f1Je5 .if5, or 6.cxd5 'exb3 7.
axb3 f1Jxd5 8.f1Je5 .if5 - see 6.f1Je5.
6 . f1Jbd2 . White's knight will
be less active here than on the
c3-square. 6 . . . Wixb3 ! ? 7.f1Jxb3 e6
8 . .id2 , Fassmann - Lichtblau,
Magdeburg 2 0 15, 8 . . . f1Jbd7 ! ? =
6 . . . i.t'5 7 .cxd5
White complies with having
doubled pawns on the b-file.
About 7.f1Jc3 e6, or 7.c5 Wic7
8.f1Jc3 e6, or 7 . .ie2 e6 8.f1Jc3
f1Jbd7, or 7 . .id3 hd3 8.f1Jxd3 e6
9.f1Jc3 f1Jbd7 - see 5.f1Jc3.
7.1l;l/xb6. White avoids the
weakening of his pawn-structure,
but activates his opponent's rook.
7 . . . axb6 8.cxd5 f1Jxd5. This move
seems more reliable for Black,
than capturing with the pawn,
since it would lead for him to
the appearance of two doubled
pawns on the b-file. 9 . .id3 hd3
10.f1Jxd3 e6. Black has a solid po­
sition. 11 . .id2 (11.i>e2 f1Ja6 12 .i.d2
f1Jab4 - see ll.i.d2) ll . . . f1Ja6.
Black prepares the penetration
of his knight to the b4-square,
which would lead to further sim­
plifications. 12.©e2 f1Jab4 13.f1Jxb4
f1Jxb4 14. f1Jc3 .ie7 15.a3 f1Jd5=
Zagorskis - Nyback, Warsaw
2 013.
7. . . Wffxb3 8.axb3 �xd5
White will hardly manage to
advance his centre in this end­
game (f2-f3, e3-e4). In addition,
he must consider his enemy's
possibility f1Jb4-c2 .
9.�a3
105
Chapter s
White parries immediately the
threat tlJb4-c2 . Still, the edge of
the board is not the best place for
his knight.
9.�c4 e6=
9.i.e2 tlJd7 10.tlJxd7 ©xd7=
Girl - Smeets, Amstelveen 2 015.
9.tlJc3. This move seems pre­
mature, because after 9 . . . ttJb4,
White cannot protect the c2-
square with the move tlJa3. 10.
!la4. He removes his rook away
from the fork. Its placement on
the a4-square seems rather awk­
ward, though . . . 10 . . . e6 11.e4 .!g6
12 . .!e3 ttJd7 13.ttJxd7 ©xd7 14.
©d2 �e7+ Shalimov - Borisiuk,
Kiev 2 009.
9.tlJd2. This move has the
same defect as 9.tlJc3. 9 . . . ttJb4 10.
!la4 e6 ll.e4 i.g6 12. ©dl tlJd7+ Sko­
morokhin - Ponkratov, Izhevsk
2013.
9.i.d3 . This is a reliable move
with which White would not mind
simplifications. He will not be
worse by playing in this way, but
cannot fight for the advantage ei­
ther. 9 . . . hd3 10.tlJxd3 e6 ll . .!d2
tlJa6 12 .©e2 ttJab4 13.ttJxb4 hb4
14.hb4 ttJxb4= Narciso Dublan
- C.Balogh, Barcelona 2 013.
9 . . . f6
Black ousts immediately his
opponent's knight away from the
centre.
10.tll d3
106
White would not obtain much
with 10.tll ec4 b5 11.tll a5 e5= Vaga­
nian - Jussupow, Germany 2 0 07,
or 10 .�d3 e6 11.hfS exf5 12.tlJd3
ttJa6= Bars - Walther, Germany
2 013. In most of the cases the ac­
tivity of Black's pieces compen­
sates the slight defects of his
pawn-structure, moreover that
White should not forget about
the weakness of his doubled b­
pawns.
10 ••• tll d 7 11.f':J
n . . . .ixd3 12 .ixd3 e5 13.
•
dxe5 tll xe5
Black presents his opponent
with the two-bishop advantage,
but has advanced e7-e5 quite
comfortably. His knights are very
active at the centre of the board.
14.J.e4 J.c5 15.©e2 0-0-0
16.J.d2 ©b8= I.Sokolov - Dreev,
Shanghai 2001.
D) 5.tll c3
This is the natural develop­
ment of White's knight.
5 ••• e6
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. tl\j3 tl\f6 4.e3 ig4
6.ti'b3
As a rule, after his alternatives
there arise positions from the
next chapter by transposition of
moves.
6.cxdS exdS 7.i.e2 tll bd7 8.0-0
i.d6 9.h3 �5 10 .b3 0-0 ll.i.b2
ge8 12 .gcl V!!e 7 13.tll e l ig6+ Capi­
telli - Ernst, Dublin 2012.
6.h3 i.hS, or 6.i.e2 tll b d7 7.h3
i.hS, or 7. 0-0 id6 8.b3 0-0 9.
i.b2 Wffe 7 10.h3 i.hS - see Chapter
9, variation D.
6.id2 tll bd7 7.cxdS (7.h3 i.hS
8.cxdS exdS - see 7.cxdS) 7 . . . exdS
8 .h3 ihS 9.g4 i.g6 10.tll h4 ib4
11.tll xg6 hxg6 - see Chapter 9,
variation D2.
6.id3 tll b d7 7. 0-0 (7.h3 i.hS
- see Chapter 9, variation D;
7.i.d2 i.d6 8 .h3 ihS 9.Wffb3 dxc4
10 .hc4 bS 11.i.e2 0-0= Adly -
Smeets, Hoogeveen 2 008) 7 . . .
id6 8.e4. This pawn-break i n the
centre seems rather premature.
(It would be better 8.h3 i.hS - see
Chapter 9, variation D; 8.cxdS
exdS 9.e4 dxe4 10.tll xe4 tll xe4
11.he4 0-0 12.Wffc 2, Tarrasch -
Chigorin, Ostend 1907, 12 . . .
h6 ! ? = ) 8 . . . dxe4 9.tll xe4 tll xe4 1 0 .
ixe4 tll f6 ll.ic2 ic7. H e i s pre­
paring V!!d 6. 12 .ie3 Wffd 6. Black is
threatening the h2-square and
thus provokes a weakening of
the light squares in the enemy
camp. 13.g3, Chiang - Goryach­
kina, Caldas Novas 2011, 13 . . .
0-0- 0 ! ?+
6 . . . V!!b 6 7.�e5
About 7.cs Wffc7 8.tll eS ifs -
see 7.tll e S.
7.h3 i.hS, or 7.tll h4 ihS 8.h3
i.e7 - see Chapter 9, variation Dl.
There arises a calm position
after 7.i.d2 tll bd7 8.i.d3 (8.cxdS
Wffxb3 9.axb3 exd5= Ehlvest -
Wojtkiewicz, New York 2 0 04) 8 . . .
i.e7 9.V!!c 2 dxc4 10.hc4 0-0
11.ie2 gac8oo, followed by c6-c5,
Romanishin - Peralta, Athens
2006.
7. . . if5
107
Chapter B
8.c5
White occupies space on the
queenside. Now however, Black
has a clear cut plan for his further
actions - he must prepare e6-e5,
or the undermining of the c5-
pawn with the move b7-b6.
8.�dl. This retreat of White's
queen to its initial position cannot
be good for him. 8 . . . tlJbd7 9.tlJxd7
tlJxd7 10 .�d3 hd3 11.�xd3 '\Wa6 !
Black increases his pressure
against the c4-pawn. 12 .b3 tlJb6.
White cannot hold on to the pawn
and after 13.�e2 dxc4+, his com­
pensation for the material loss
would be insufficient, Villamayor
- Sorokin, Kolkata 2001.
About 8.�d2 tlJbd7 9.tlJxd7
tlJxd7 10.�e2 �e7 - see 8. �e2 .
8.�e2 tlJbd7 9.tlJxd7 tlJxd7 1 0 .
�d2 i.e7 11.0-0 (lUkl 0 - 0 1 2 .
0-0 l:!fe8 - see 11.0-0) 11 . . . 0 - 0
12 .l:!acl l:!fe8 = Milov - Predojevic,
Philadelphia 2 0 07. There has
arisen an approximately equal
position in which neither side can
organise active actions.
8.i.d3. The exchange of the
bishops cannot create any prob­
lems for Black. 8 . . . i.xd3 9.tlJxd3
tlJbd7 10.cxd5, Ye - Antonio, Bei­
jing 1992 (10.0-0 '\Wa6 ! ?oo) 10 . . .
'\Wxb3 ! ? 11.axb3 tlJxdSoo White
must play very carefully in this
endgame, because the vulnerabil­
ity of his doubled d-pawns may
hurt him in the future.
108
8 ••• 1Yc7 9 .te2
•
After 9.f3, Black's simplest re­
action would be 9 . . . h6= , avoiding
in advance White's pawn-attacks
against his bishop (g2-g4, h2-h4),
Chiburdanidze - Paehtz, Ekater­
inburg 2 0 07.
9.f4 ? ! White fortifies the stra­
tegically important es-square, but
Black can inflict a strike on the
other side of the board: 9 . . . b6 ! ?+
Yordanova - Nikolova, Kozloduy
2 0 14.
9 . •• h5! ?
This prophylactic i s necessary.
Black prevents immediately his
opponent's idea, connected with
the pawn-advance g2-g4. In addi­
tion, the move will be very useful
for the organisation of his coun­
terplay on the kingside with h5-
h4.
10.0-0
10.i.d2 tlJbd7 11.f4 h4oo Mahl­
ing - Efendiyev, ICCF 2011.
10 ••• c!Llbd7 ll.c!Llxd7 c!Llxd7
 J.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:i:ij3 l:i:if6 4.e3 i.g4

12.'fra4 J.e7 13.b4 h4 14.'frdl

b6
This is the simplest for Black.
Now, White will hardly manage to
create active counterplay on the
queenside, because the move b4-
b5 would be impossible.
(diagram)
15.a4. This advance of the
rook pawn seems a bit slow, but
White has nothing better anyway.
15 0-0 16.a5 bxc5 17.bxc5
••• ed promising counterplay in the
e5oo Ilyushchenko - Tleptsok, centre and on the kingside, while
ICCF 2 013. There has arisen a it would be very difficult for White
very complicated position with to exploit the weakness of the c6-
mutual chances. Black has creat- pawn.

109
Chapter 9 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . �f3 �f6 4.e3 i.g4
5.h3 .ih5
White's most natural move in
this position is D) 6.� c3, but
before that we will analyse A)
6.�bd2, B) 6.g4 and C) 6.cxd5.
About 6 . .id3 e6 7.0-0 (7.�c3
�bd7 - see 6.�c3; 7.�bd2 �bd7
- see 6.�bd2) 7 . . . �bd7 8.�c3
.id6 - see 6.�c3 (8.�bd2 .id6 -
see 6.�bd2).
6.�b3. As a rule, this leads to
transposition of moves. 6 . . . �b6
110
About 7.�c3 e6, or 7.�h4 e6
8 .g4 .ig6 9.llJxg6 hxg6, or 7.llJeS
e6 8.�c3 .ie7, or 8.g4 .ig6 9.�xg6
hxg6 10 . .ig2 .ie7 ll.lbc3 gS - see
variation Dl.
7.cxdS �xb3 8.axb3, Belous -
Raznikov, Kenner 2 016, 8 . . .
llJxdS ! ? =
Following 7.g4 .ig6 8.gS, Kem­
pinski - Krejci, Czech Republic
2 0 15, Black can simply enter an
approximately equal endgame 8 . . .
�xb3 ! ? 9.axb3 llJe4=
A) 6.�bd2
This is a passive move after
which White has no chances of
obtaining an advantage in the
opening. His knight is not so ac­
tive on this square as on c3.
6 . . . e6
Black's plan is quite simple:
llJbd7, .id6, 0-0. In general, if in
the variation with 4.e3 White re­
frains at the beginning from an
attack against the enemy b7-pawn
(�b3), or from a chase after the
bishop on hS, Black obtains ef­
fortlessly a very comfortable
game.
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. tfJj3 tfJf6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 ih5
7. .id3
7.'!Wb3 Wic7 8 .g4 ig6 9.tfJe5
tfJbd7 10.tfJxg6 hxg6 11.g5, Bolo­
gan - Vitiugov, Dubai 2 0 14 (11.
ig2 0-0-0oo Michalik - Navara,
Czech Republic 2 017) ll . . . dxc4 ! ?
12 .hc4 tfJd5=
7.g4 ig6 8.tfJe5 tfJbd7 - see
6.g4.
7.ie2. White would not obtain
much with this development of
the bishop. 7 . . . tfJbd7
8 .b3 id6 9 . .ib2 0-0 10.0-0
'\We7 - see 8.0-0.
There arises a sharp position if
White chooses a plan, connected
with an immediate pawn-offen­
sive on the queenside. 8 .a3 id6
9.b4 0-0 10 .ib2 tfJe4 11.tfJxe4
dxe4 12 .tfJd2 he2 13.'!Wxe2 f5oo
Bischoff - l.Sokolov, Germany
2002.
8.0-0 id6 9.b3 0-0 10 .ib2
Wie7. Black's queen is very well
placed here, supporting at an op­
portune moment the pawn-break
e6-e5. 11.tfJe5 he2 12 .Wxe2 :gfd8
13.c5. White occupies space on
the queenside. (13.:gfdl, Goh -
Torre, Hangzhou 1981, 13 . . . a5 ! ?=)
13 ... ic7 14.b4 tfJxe5 15.dxe5 tfJd7
16.tfJf3, Eldridge - Ponomarjov,
ICCF 2012, 16 . . . a5= White has oc­
cupied slightly more space, but
his central pawns have been de­
ployed on squares with the same
colour as his bishop and the vul­
nerability of the light squares in
his camp may hurt him in the fu-
ture.
7 ••• tjj bd7
8.0-0
White should better postpone
the move b2-b3 until his oppo­
nent plays id6, because after the
immediate move 8.b3, Black has
111
Chapter 9
the resource 8 . . . .ib4= and White
cannot play 9.i.b2 ? ! , because of
9 . . . lll e4+
Following 8 .'/Nc2 , Black has a
very interesting idea - 8 . . . dxc4 ! ? .
H e exchanges his central pawn
and will try later to advance his
queenside pawns. 9.'/Nxc4 cS 10.
0-0 a6. White's defence is not
easy at all, because he must lose
time for the retreat of his queen.
11.dxcS (11.lll eS bS 12.'/Nc2 :i!c8
13.lll xd7 Y;lrxd7+ Xu Jun - Zhang
Pengxiang, Yongchuan 2 0 03) 11...
lll xcS 12 .i.bl fJ.e7 13 .b3 :i!c8+ Sek­
retaryov - Romm, ICCF 2009.
8 ... fJ.d6
9.b3
White's plan, connected with
the pawn-advance e3-e4, would
lead to simplifications. 9.e4 dxe4
10.lll xe4 lll xe4 11 . .b:e4 0-0 12 .:i!el
lll f6 - see 9.:i!el.
Or 9.:i!el 0-0 10.e4 dxe4 11.
lll xe4 lll xe4 12 ..b:e4 lll f6 13 . .ic2
cS. The undermining of the pawn
on d4 is Black's simplest road to
112
equality. 14.g4 fJ.g6 lS.fJ.xg6 hxg6
16.dxcS .ixcS 17.Y;lrxd8 :i!fxd8 18.
i.gS. White will hardly manage to
advance his queenside pawns in
this endgame, because Black can
play 18 . . . aS 19.'it>g2 a4 2 0 .:i!acl
@f8 = Fremmegaard - Stojanovic,
ICCF 2 016. He should not forget
to centralise his king in the end­
game.
9 . . . 0-0 10.fJ.b2
After 10.'/Nc2 , Black can exploit
the delay of the development of
White's bishop on cl and advance
10 . . . eS immediately, for example:
11.dxeS lll xeS 1 2 .lll xeS .ixeS 13.
:!:!bl, Puranen - Lako, Finland
1993, 13 . . . Y;lre7 ! ? 14.b4 :i!ad8=
10 .. ,ges
Black is preparing e6-eS.
11.Y;lfc2 e5 12.cxd5
12.dxeS lll xeS 13.lll xeS .ixeS
14.fJ.xeS :i!xeS lS.:i!ael i.g6 16 .
.b:g6 hxg6= Dizdarevic - Movse­
sian, Sarajevo 2 0 04.
12 . . . .ixf3
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 t:fJf6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 i.h5
This is Black's most precise
move. He exploits the fact that
White cannot capture with his
knight due to the loss of a piece,
while capturing with the pawn
would weaken the position of
White's king. So, Black thus forc­
es the intermediate exchange on
e5 after which the position is
quickly simplified. 13.dxe5 he5
14.c!Oxf'3 hb2 15.§'xb2 c!Oxd5
16.gfdl (16.gadl 'fffe 7 17.i.c4
c!LJ7f6 18 .a3 a5= Stushkin - Selin,
ICCF 2 0 15) 16 §'f6 17.'f!c2 g6
•••
18 .tc4 c!LJ5b6 19.gacl gad8
•
20 .te2 §'e7= Ponomarenko -
•
Naumenko, ICCF 2 013.
B) 6.g4 .tg6
7.c!Oe5
This is an interesting plan
which is used in the last several
years by numerous grandmasters.
White begins a chase after the en­
emy bishop on h5 before he has
developed his knight on c3. Later,
he plans to develop this knight on
d2, where it would defend his c4-
pawn, contrary to its placement
on c3. So, White will be able to de­
velop his bishop on g2 without
being afraid of the safety of his c4-
pawn.
7.cxd5 cxd5 - see variation C.
7.liJc3 e6 - see variation D2.
7.c!Oh4 e6 8.liJxg6 hxg6 - see
7.c!Oe5.
7 •.• e6
8.c!Od2
8 .c!Oc3 liJbd7 - see variation
D2.
8.i.g2 liJbd7 9.c!Oxg6 hxg6 -
see 8.liJxg6.
8.t:fJxg6 hxg6 9.i.g2 (9.c!Od2
c!Obd7 - see 8.liJd2 ; 9.c!Oc3 c!Obd7 -
see variation D2) 9 . . . t:fJbd7
(diagram)
10.liJd2 g5 - see 8.liJd2.
10.liJc3 dxc4 - see variation
D2.
It would be imprecise here for
White to play 10.0-0, Grischuk -
113
Chapter 9
Mamedyarov, Sochi 2 0 14, be­
cause Black can exploit the de­
fencelessness of the e4-square
and play 10 . . . tll e 4! ?+, followed
by f7-f5. Then, in the middle
game, the weakening of the
shelter of White's king, because
of the moves h3 and g4, may hurt
him.
10.Wd3, Lysyj - Korchmar,
Moscow 2 0 15. This is another in­
teresting idea for White. He pro­
tects his c4-pawn with his queen
and not with his knight. 10 . . .
i.d6 ! ? 11.tlJc3 dxc4. Without this
exchange, Black cannot advance
e6-e5. 12 .'!Wxc4 e5 13.'!Wb3 exd4
14.exd4. The position is opened,
but White's pawn-weaknesses
prevent him from exploiting the
power of his bishops. 14 . . . tll b 6
15.igS Wc7 16.0-0 0-0 17.a4
l:!ab8=, followed by i.f4 either im­
mediately, or after the prelimi­
nary move ih2 .
8 ••• �bd7 9.ttJxg6
After 9.h4, Black cannot ad­
vance his rook pawn, since this
would weaken horribly his king­
side after the exchange on g6. He
can play however: 9 . . .dxc4 10.
114
.!Llxg6 hxg6 11.gS tlJd5 12.tlJxc4
i.b4+ . This is an important check.
Black wishes to deprive his oppo­
nent of his two-bishop advantage.
13 .id2 '!We7 14.a3 i.xd2+ 15.'!Wxd2
ttJ7b6 16.tlJeS tll d 7= Anton Gui­
jarro - Dvirnyy, Reykjavik 2 015.
He has obtained a very solid posi­
tion and White will hardly man­
age to break it.
9 hxg6 10.J.g2
•••
About 10 .gS tll e4 11.tlJxe4 dxe4
- see variation D2.
10 ••• gS
This is an important move.
Black not only fixes the enemy
pawn on h3, but also frees the g6-
square for his knight.
11.0-0
11.l:!bl. White is preparing b2-
b4, but Black has very good
chances of organising counter­
play on the kingside. 11 . . . i.d6
12 .b4 a6 13.a4, Vitiugov - Geske,
Bilbao 2 0 14, 13 . . . tll fS ! ?oo, fol­
lowed by tlJg6, tll h 4.
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJj3 liJf6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 ih5
ll.e4. This pawn-break in the
centre seems premature, since
following ll . . . dxe4 12.liJxe4 0.xe4
13.he4 �as+ 14.id2 ib4, White
cannot save his dark-squared
bishop from an exchange. After
he loses his two-bishop advan­
tage, he would have no compen­
sation for the vulnerability of his
h3-pawn. In addition, after Black
doubles his rooks on the d-file,
White's d4-pawn would need per­
manent protection. 15.a3 hd2 +
16. �xd2 �xd2+ 17.©xd2 0-0-0+
Shengelia - Kojima, Tromsoe 2014.
11 id6 12.ge1 tLif8 ! ?
•••
Black transfers his knight to
the g6-square.
13.Y«b3
There arises a complicated po­
sitional battle after the line : 13.
cxdS tLixdS 14.liJc4 0.g6 15.�b3
gbs 16.tLlxd6+ �xd6= Javakhish­
vili - M.Muzychuk, Batumi 2016.
White can hardly advance his e­
pawn, since this would weaken
the f4-square and Black's knight
would occupy it immediately.
13 Y«b6! ?
•••
I t seems less precise fo r Black
to choose here 13 . . . gb8 14.e4 dxe4
15.tLlxe4 tLixe4 16.ixe4;!; Topalov
- Caruana, Saint Louis 2016.
White's bishops are very power­
ful.
14.�c2
With a black queen on b6
White cannot follow the plan, we
have mentioned in our previous
comments, connected with the
move 14.e4, because at the end of
this variation, after �xb3, he will
simply lose his h3-pawn.
14 .ie7
•••
Black defends against c4-c5.
15.tLit'"J tLle4 16.gdl tLlg6
It is rather difficult for White
to obtain here even a minimal ad­
vantage. In addition, even a single
mistake may lead to an inferior
position for him, because his
kingside has been seriously com­
promised. 17.tLle5 tLixe5 18.
dxe5 tLlc5 19.b3 dxc4. Black is
opening the d-file. 20.�xc4 tLld7
21 .ib2 '9c7. He protects his
•
115
Chapter 9
knight and squeezes his oppo­
nent's pieces with the protection
of the e5-pawn at the same time.
Black is perfectly prepared to cas­
tle kingside, since his king would
not be so safe on the queenside.
22.tfc3 a5 23.a3 0-0 24 .ie4 •
gfd8 25Jfacl �cs 26 . .ic2 gds.
He begins a fight for the d-file.
27.c,!lg2 gad8 = Fraczek - Pere­
verzev, ICCF 2 0 14.
C) 6.cxd5 cxd5! ?
Now, contrary t o the variation
5.cxd5 from the previous chapter,
Black does not need to play 6 . . .
hf3 7.tfxf3 cxd5= , although even
then his position would look quite
reliable.
7.�c3
About 7.�b3 tfc7 8.�c3 e6, or
7.g4 .ig6 8.llic3 e6, or 8.llie5 e6
9.llic3 llifd7 - see 7.llic3.
Following 7.�a4+ llibd7 8.
llie5, it becomes obvious that the
inclusion of the moves h3 and
.ih5 is in favour of Black, because
116
White cannot obtain the two­
bishop advantage with the move
llixg4. 8 . . . a6 ! This is necessary
prophylactic against the move
.ib5. 9.llic3 b5 10.�b3 llixe5 ! ? Af­
ter this interesting pawn-sacrifice
Black obtains a lead in develop­
ment. ll.dxe5 llid7 12.�xd5 e6 13.
�d4 .icS. He develops his bishop
with tempo. 14.tff4 l'k8 15.g4 g5
16.�g3 .ig6 17 . .ig2 .id3. Black
prevents his opponent's castling
kingside. 18.e4 llib6iii Pawlowski
- Klochan, ICCF 2 016.
7 e6
• • •
8.g4
White cannot achieve much
with 8.tfa4+ llibd7 9.llie5, be­
cause Black can simply reply with
9 . . . .id6= and after 10 . .ib5 ? ! a6,
obtaining the two-bishop advan­
tage. ll . .ixd7+ llixd7 12 .tfxd7+
tfxd7 13.llixd7 c,!lxd7+ Koneru -
Muzychuk, Monaco 2 0 15.
8.�b3. Black parries easily the
attack against his b7-pawn. 8 . . .
tfc7 9.llie5 llic6 (It seems less reli-
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJj3 liJf6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 .ih5
able for him to opt here for 9 . . .
liJfd7 10.liJxd7 Wfxd7, Yang - Dre­
ev, Las Vegas 2 0 15, ll.e41' and
White opens advantageously the
game in the centre.) 10.i.d2 i.e7
lU'kl 0-0 12 .g4 i.g6 13.liJxg6
(There arises a much more com­
plicated game after the move
13.f4. White fortifies his knight on
es, but weakens the e4-square.
13 . . J'3ac8oo Altrichter - Terekhov,
ICCF 2010.) 13 . . . hxg6oo Pert -
Anand, London 2 014. White has
the two-bishop advantage indeed,
but Black has good counterplay
on the c-file. Later, he will man­
age to exploit the misplacement of
the enemy queen on b3 winning a
tempo ( liJaS) for the transfer of
his knight to the c4-square.
8 ••• J.g6 9.tll e 5
9 .Wi'b3 Wfc7 10.tll eS tll c 6= Pert
- Anand, London 2 0 14.
9 .•• tll fd7
Black should better exchange
immediately the powerful enemy
knight.
10.tll xg6 hxg6 11 .ig2 • promise his opponent's pawn­
After 11.Wi'b3, Khismatullin -
Ponkratov, Dagomys 2008, it
seems good for Black to continue
with 11 . . . �b6 ! ? = , while the pawn­
sacrifice 11.e4 dxe4 12 .dS, Ma­
karov - Kotanjian, Samara 2 0 0 2 ,
leads only t o equality after 12 . . .
tll c5 ! ? =
n . . tll c 6
. .bc3 18.�xc3 liJdS 19.�cl f6 20.
12.e4
White has the two-bishop ad­
vantage and he must strive to
open the game. After that he
would remain with an isolated
pawn in d4, though . . .
Following 1 2 . 0-0 f5, White
cannot advance e3-e4. 13.tll e 2,
Tregubov - Anand, Bastia 2 0 14,
preparing the transfer of the
knight to the f4-square. 13 . . .
fxg4 ! ? This i s Black's simplest
road to equality. 14.liJf4 gxh3 15.
�g4 Wff6 16.h:h3 i.d6 17.Wfxe6+
�xe6 18.h:e6. Naturally, White
cannot capture with his knight
due to the loss of a piece. Now
however, Black manages to com­
structure and equalises complete­
ly. 18 . . . i.xf4 19.exf4 liJf6 20.�el
©d8 =
12 ••• dxe4 13.tll xe4
After 13.he4, Black's main
task is to fight against the pawn­
break d4-d5. 13 . . . liJb6 14 . .ie3 .ib4
15.�cl �d7 16.!g2 �cs 17. 0-0
117
Chapter 9

W/d3 @fl 21.i.d2 lll ce7+ He has a
slight edge thanks to his control
over the d5-square.
Wd3 28. Wxd3 �d3 29.gedl
gxdl + 30. gxdl @:f8 3U�d6
t0a5 32.ga6 gxc5 33.gxa7 t0b3
34.a4 g5 35 .ifl gci, draw.
•

White's outside passed pawn can

be stopped easily with the move
l:fal, while the pawn on e6 pre­
vents reliably Black of any prob­
lems connected with the attack
against the fl-square.

D) 6.t0c3 e6

13 ••• t0b6!?
This i s Black's most reliable
move.

Following 13 . . . i.b4+ 14.lll c3

lll b 6 15.0-0 0-0 16.dS exd5 17.
lll xd5 i.c5 18.lll c 3;!;, the position is
opened and White preserves good
winning chances thanks to his
bishop-pair, Carlsen - Nakamu­
ra, London 2 0 15. We will analyse as main lines
for White here Dl) 7.Wb3 and
14.0-0 .id6 15 .i.e3 �k8 16.
• D2) 7.g4.
lll c5. White's knight on c5 is very
powerful, but he has no concrete 7.cxd5 cxd5 - see variation C.
threats.16 W/e7 17.!kl 0-0
•••

18.a3. He is preparing b2-b4. White would not achieve much

18 !Ud8 19.b4 .b:c5. Black ex­
•••
changes the powerful enemy
knight. 20.bxc5 t0d5 21.Wfd2 b6
22. ti'b2 Wid7 23.!Uel gb8 = The
position seems approximately
equal and after 24.Wc2 in the
game Perez Lopez - Gonzalez
Sanchez, ICCF 2016, Black began
to simplify. 24 bxc5 25.dxc5
•••
t0xe3 26.gxe3 gbc8 27.geel
with 7.i.d3 lll b d7 8.0-0 (8.Wi'b3
gb8 ! ? = ) 8 . . . i.d6. We have already
analysed a similar position earlier
(Chapter 8, variation D), but
without the inclusion of the moves
h3 - i.h5. This circumstance can­
not change the evaluation of the
position as approximately equal.
9.b3 (9.e4 dxe4 10.lll xe4 lll xe4
11.he4 0-0 - see variation A)

118
 l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. liJf3 liJf6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 i.h5 6. liJc3 e6
9 . . . 0-0 10 .i.b2 ge8 = Zilberman
- Huzman, Tel Aviv 1994.
7.i.e2 liJbd7 8.0-0 (8.\Wb3
gb8= ) 8 . . . i.d6 9.b3 0-0. Black
has completed effortlessly his de­
velopment and castled. 10 .i.b2
\We7
He connects his rooks and pre­
pares the pawn-advance e6-e5 at
an opportune moment.
After 11.ge1, Black does not
need to be in a hurry to play e6-e5
and can follow instead with 11 . . .
gad8= Ftacnik - Barbero, Debre­
cen 1989.
ll.liJd2 i.g6. It would be suffi­
cient for Black to exchange here
on e2 in order to equalise, but he
can also try to obtain an advan­
tage. 12.cS. This occupation of
space on the queenside seems to
be premature for White. 12 . . . i.c7
13.f4. He defends against e6-e5,
but weakens the e4-square. 13 . . .
b6 14.b4, Frare - Dianda, Sao
Paulo 2 0 0 2 , 14 . . . gab8 ! ?+ Later,
Black can exchange on c5 at the
right moment and begin active ac­
tions on the queenside.
There arises a calmer position
after 11.gc1 gac8 12 .liJd2 i.g6=
Alekseev - Lintchevski, St Peters­
burg 2 016.
11.liJeS he2 12.liJxe2 gac8 13.
gel. White has a slightly freer
game, but his bishop on b2 is
more passive than its counter­
part. 13 . . . i.c7. Black is preparing
liJxeS. 14.liJf4 gfd8 15.�c2 liJe4
16.gfdl \Wg5 17.liJfd3 h5=
Dl) 7.�b3 \Wb6
8.liJh4
White has removed his queen
from the pin and begins a chase
after the enemy light-squared
bishop. His purpose is to obtain
the two-bishop advantage.
About 8 .g4 i.g6, or 8.�xb6
axb6 9.g4 i.g6 - see variation D2.
As a rule 8.liJeS leads to trans­
position of moves. 8 . . . i.e7 9.g4
i.g6 10.liJxg6 (10 .�dl, Lupulescu
- Ragger, Istanbul 2012, 10 . . .
i.b4 ! ?oo) 10 . . . hxg6 - see 8.liJh4.
8 . . .i.e7
Black should not be in a hurry
119
Chapter 9
to play ltJbd7, because in some
variations his knight on b8 can go
to a6 and from there either to c7,
or to b4.
9.g4
After 9.i.d2 ltJfd7, in order to
obtain the two-bishop advantage
White must comply with the
weakening of his pawn-structure.
10 .g4 .b:h4 11.gxhS, Perez Ponsa
- Peralta, Argentina 2 0 13, 11...
ltJf6 ! ? =
9 . . . .lg6 10.ltJxg6 hxg6
11 . .ig2
White defends against ltJg4.
He could have protected his
pawn with the move 11.ggl, but
this seems less active than i.g2 ,
since i t does not contribute t o the
development of his pieces. 11 . . . gS
12 .i.d2 ltJbd7 13.0-0-0, Topalov
- Steingrimsson, Warsaw 2 013,
13 ... clxc4 ! ? 14.1l«xc4 ltJdS 15.'it>bl
ltJxc3+ 16 ..b:c3 ltJf6= White has
the two-bishop advantage, but his
pawn on b3 is backward and his
king is protected on the kingside
120
by only two pawns, so this might
hurt him in the middle game.
After 11.gS ltJe4 12.ltJxe4 clxe4,
White will have problems with the
protection of his gS-pawn. 13. 'cl«c2
(13.i.g2 , Ki.Georgiev - Michalik,
Dubai 2 0 14, 13 . . . gh4 ! ?+) 13 . . . gh4
14.cS Wfd8oo Vareille - Boudre,
France 2009.
11 . . . gs
Black fixes the enemy weak­
ness on h3 and prepares the ma­
noeuvre ltJb8-d7-f8-g6.
12 . .id2
White prepares castling
queenside.
About 12 .e4 ltJxe4 13.Wfxb6
axb6 14.ltJxe4 clxe4 15.he4 ltJa6
- see 12.1l«xb6.
There arises an approximately
equal endgame after 12 .Wfxb6
axb6 13.e4 ltJxe4 14.ltJxe4 clxe4
15 . .b:e4. White has the two-bish­
op advantage, but Black's position
looks very solid. He must be only
on the alert about the possible
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 i.h5 6. liJc3 e6
pawn-break in the centre d4-d5.
15 . . . liJa6. This is the simplest for
him - to transfer the knight to the
c7-square. 16 . .ie3 liJc7= B.Socko
- Michalik, Germany 2 0 14.
12 .c5. White occupies space on
the queenside. Now, the position
becomes closed and he will hardly
manage to prove the power of his
bishops. 12 . . . �xb3 13.axb3 liJa6 ! ?
This i s why Black was not i n a
hurry to play liJd7. 14.i.d2 (The
move 14.f4 cannot even equalise
for White. 14 . . . gxf4 15.exf4, Miro­
shnichenko - Predojevic, Kragu­
jevac 2009, 15 . . . liJb4 ! ? 16.<it>d2
<it>d7+ Black's knight on b4 causes
disharmony in White's position.)
14 ... liJc7. Black plans to play a7-a6
and 0-0-0, after which White
will be incapable of breaking on
the queenside. 15.f4 (15.b4 liJd7
16.e4. Without this move Black
will advance e6-e5. 16 . . . dxe4 17.
liJxe4 f6 18.liJc3 a6 19.0-0-0
0-0-0 2 0.f4 gxf4 2 1 . .bf4 e5
22. dxe5 liJxe5 = , followed by liJe6.
White's bishops cannot be acti­
vated at all.) 15 . . . gxf4 16.exf4,
Wang - Aronian, Linares 2009,
16 . . . liJe4 ! ? This temporary pawn­
sacrifice is Black's simplest way of
equalising. 17.liJxe4 dxe4 18.i.xe4
i.f6. He simply increases the pres­
sure against the enemy d4-pawn
and White's defensive moves are
exhausted quickly. 19.i.e3 liJb5
2 0 . 0-0-0 0-0-0=
1 2 . 0-0 liJbd7 13.i:!dl (The ex­
change 13. �xb6 only helps Black
to activate his rook on a8. 13 . . .
axb6 14.cxd5 liJxd5= Wang -
Inarkiev, Elista 2008; 13.i:!el,
Dreev - Inarkiev, Sochi 2012, 13 . . .
�xb3 14.axb3 a6=) 1 3 . . . �xb3 14.
axb3 a6
Black deploys his pawns ac­
cording to the rules - on squares
opposite of the colour of his bish­
op. The only exception is the move
g6-g5, but that was necessary for
him to ensure the g6-square for
his knight.
After 15.cxd5, Galliamova -
Girya, Sochi 2 016, Black can sim­
ply capture with his knight and to
follow this with liJb4. 15 . . . liJxd5 ! ? =
After 1 5 . .id2 0-0-0 16.f3,
Black can begin the standard
transfer for similar positions of
his knight to the g6-square. 16 . . .
liJf8 17.liJe2 liJg6oo Batsiashvili -
Girya, Germany 2 016.
15.f3 i:!d8 16.i.d2 liJf8 17.@f2
(17.liJe2 liJg6 18.<it>f2 liJh4= Gallia­
mova - Girya, Novosibirsk 2016)
17 . . . liJg6 18.liJa4 liJd7. Black pre­
vents his opponent's knight to go
to b6, or c5. 19.cxd5 exd5 20 .b4.
White is preparing liJc5. 20 . . . i:!bB.
Black has in mind in advance to
counter the penetration of the en-
121
Chapter 9
emy knight. 21.llicS llib6. Natu­
rally, he refrains from llixc5, since
this would improve White's queen­
side pawn-structure. 2 2 .ifl id6=
Joppich - Szczepanski, ICCF
2016. White can hardly find a way
of improving his position, be­
cause after the pawn-advance e3-
e4, Black's pieces will gain access
to the f4-square.
12 . . . �bd7
13.0-0-0
After 13.W/c2, Kuraszkiewicz -
Boehnisch, Germany 2012, Black
can simply capture the pawn and
White will have to waste too much
time in order to regain it. 13 . . .
dxc4 ! ? =
Following 13.0-0, Wang Hao
- Movsesian, Huai'an 2016, Black
can accomplish his standard ma­
noeuvre 13 . . . llifS ! ? =
After 13.�cl W/xb3 14.axb3,
Kobo - Tate, Caleta 2017, 14 . . .
a6 ! ? = , Black's position remains
very solid.
122
If 13.W/a4, Black has the pow­
erful resource 13 . . . W/c7, threaten­
ing to win a pawn with the move
llib6. 14.cxdS exd5 15.W/c2 0-0-0
16.�cl llib6. Black defends against
llixd5. 17.WffS+ W/d7 18 .W/xd7+
©xd7. There has arisen a transfer
into an approximately equal end­
game. 19.b3. White prevents the
manoeuvre of the enemy knight
to the c4-square. 19 . . . llieS. Black
intends to deploy his knight on
e6, so that his pressure against
the d4-square would impede
White's break in the centre after
f2-f3 and e3-e4. 2 0 . 0-0 ©cs 21.
llie2 llic7= Novak - Szczepanski,
ICCF 2016.
13 . . . ti'xb3 14.axb3 0-0-0
15.©c2
White will hardly manage to
prove the power of his bishops in
this endgame.
After the immediate opening
of the centre with 15.e4, the posi­
tion will be simplified even more.
15 . . . llixe4 16.llixe4 dxe4 17.he4
f6= Kogler - Emelyanov, ICCF 2014.
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:iJ.f.3 11Jf6 4.e3 i.g4 5.h3 i.h5 6. 11Jc3 e6
After his alternatives Black
also obtains a good game by
transferring his knight to the g6-
square: 15J'�hfl, Bachmann -
Negi, Graz 2 0 14, 15 . . . 11Jf8 ! ? = , or
15.cS 11Jf8 16.b4 a6 17.f3 11Jg6oo
Movsesian - Najer, Khanty-Man­
siysk 2 0 13, or 15.f3 11Jf8 16.i.fl
11Jg6= Sargissian - Jakovenko,
Yerevan 2 0 14.
15 ••• lll f'B 16.:f3
There arises a sharper position
after 16.l%al Wb8 17.e4 11Jxe4 18.
11Jxe4 dxe4 19 .l%a5, but even then,
Black holds his defence success­
fully. 19 .. .f6 20 . .ic3 11Jg6 2 1.he4
11Jf4= Jorgensen - Andersen,
ICCF 2009. His pressure against
the h3-pawn provides him with
counterplay sufficient to maintain
the equality.
16 11Jg6 17 .iel lll h4 18.
••• . 8.11Jh4. This chase after the en­
.ixh4 gxb4= Dreev - Najer,
Moscow 2013. Black has forced
the exchange of the enemy bishop
for his knight and has a quite ac­
ceptable position.
D2) 7.g4
This is White's most princi­
pled move.
7 .ig6
•••
8.lll e 5
White wishes to realise the
main idea of the variation with
4.e3 - the exchange of the knight
on f3 for the enemy light-squared
bishop.
8.cxd5 cxd5 - see variation C.
8.'r9b3 'r9b6 9.'r9xb6 (9.11Je5
11Jbd7 10.11Jxg6 hxg6 - see 8. 11Je5)
9 . . . axb6. The transfer into an end­
game leads to a complicated fight.
10.t:fJeS 11Jbd7 ll.11Jxg6 hxg6 12.
cxd5 exd5 13.gS 11Jg8oo, followed
by b6-b5, 11Jb6, or 11Je7-f5, Milos
- Vitiugov, Khanty-Mansiysk
2009.
emy bishop seems less precise for
White here, because after 8 . . . !e4,
the placement of his knight at the
edge of the board does not beau­
tify his position. 9.f3 11Jfd7 10.
123
Chapter 9
lll g 2. This is his most reasonable
decision. (After 10 .fxe4 �xh4+
11.@d2 , there are still too many
pieces left on the board and
White's king might be endan-
gered in the middle game. 11...
dxc4 12 .hc4, Lysyj - Najer,
Zvenigorod 2008, 12 . . . �d8 ! ?+)
10 . . . i.g6. Black has managed to
save his light-squared bishop
from an exchange. 11.W/b3 ll'la6
12.cxdS (After 12 .a3 �b6= , the
juxtaposition of the queens will be
in favour of Black, because after
the removal of White's pawn from
the a2-square, his queen will re­
main defenceless.) 12 . . . exdS 13.f4
fS 14. i.d2 i.e7. Black is threaten­
ing to deprive his opponent of his
castling rights after i.h4. 15.gS.
After this move, the position is
closed. 15 . . . 0-0 16.ll'lh4 i.hS 17.
i.e2 he2 18.lll xe2 . White has
more space, but his bishop may
turn out to be "bad". 18 . . . �b6 19.
�xb6 lll xb6 2 0 .lll g3 g6. Almost all
Black's pawns are deployed ac­
cording to the rules, i.e. on
squares opposite of the colour of
his bishop, which cannot be said
about their white counterparts.
2 1.ll'lf3 gfes 2 2 .b3 c5= Vecek -
124
Valli, ICCF 2 015. Black should not
be afraid of the capturing on cS
and the appearance of an isolated
pawn in his position, because in
that case White's pawn on e3 will
also become a target for an attack.
8 ••• tllb d7
9.tll xg6
Capturing with the queen 9.
W/b3? will be a mistake, because
after 9 . . . lll xeS 10.dxe5 lll d 7, Black
can sacrifice advantageously his
pawns on b7 and c6, obtaining
very powerful initiative for them.
ll.�xb7 (11.cxdS, D.Gurevich -
Dautov, Moscow 2001, 11...
exdS ! ?+) 11 . . . gbs 12 .�xc6 i.b4 13.
i.d2 0-0 14.0-0-0 lll xeS 15.�a4,
Stefansson - Dreev, Berlin 2 0 15,
15 . . . �b6 ! ?- + , Black's attack is
impossible to parry . .
O r 9.cxdS lll xeS 10.dxe6 fxe6
11.dxeS, B.Socko - Dreev, War­
saw 2 013, 11 . . . lll d 7! ?oo White can
hardly hold on to his extra pawn,
because he lags horribly in devel­
opment.
 l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. 11:,fJ 0,f6 4.e3 !g4 5.h3 i.h5 6. 0, c3 e6
After 9.h4, Black must play
very precisely. 9 . . . dxc4 !
This is his only move ! The
pawn-advance h7-h6, after the
exchange 0,xg6, would lead to a
horrible weakening of his king­
side pawn-structure. Therefore,
he must save his bishop on g6 in a
tactical fashion.
Following 10.hS 0,xeS ll.hxg6
0,xg6 12 .hc4 i.b4+, White does
not have sufficient compensation
for the pawn, Pira - Postny, Le
Port Marly 2009.
10.0,xc4. Now, White's knight
is not threatening to capture on g6,
so Black can play simply 10 . . . h6,
for example: ll.!g2 , Fominyh -
Abdulla, Dhaka 2 0 0 2 , ll . . Jk8 ! ? =
10.0,xg6 hxg6
11.gS 0,dS 12 .hc4 0,7b6 13.
!e2 (13 .!fl !b4 14.i.d2 V!ie7=
Schenk - Bieluszewski, Koge
2010) 13 . . . i.b4 14.i.d2 Y!!e 7 15.a3
0,xc3 16.bxc3. White has the two
bishop advantage, but he can
hardly find a safe haven for his
king. 16 . . . !a5 17.f4 0-0-0 18 .V!ic2
©b8 19.i!bl 0,c8 2 0.i.f3 ©as 21.
©f2 0,d6oo, followed by 0,fS with
powerful pressure against the
pawn on h4, Fischer - Saidashev,
ICCF 2 0 14.
11.hc4 0,dS 12 .hS (12.gS
0,7b6 - see 11.gS) 12 . . . gxhS 13.
gxhS 0,7f6= Benson - Maatman,
Groningen 2 0 14. White has a
bishop-pair, but his kingside
pawn-structure has been compro­
mised.
9 . . . hxg6
There has arisen a position
whose evaluation is critical for the
fate of the variation 4.e3 i.g4.
White has the two-bishop advan­
tage, but Black's position is rather
difficult to break.
10.J.d2
10.i.d3 i.b4 11.!d2 dxc4 - see
10 .i.d2.
125
Chapter 9
After 10.'\1;Vf3, Black can play in
the spirit of the Nimzo-Indian :
10 . . . i.b4 ll.i.d3, Golod - Petro­
syan, Yerevan 2 0 14 (ll.i.d2 !xc3
- see 10 . .id2) 11 . . . cS ! ?oo
There arises a very complicat­
ed position after 10 .'\1;Vb3 tll xg4 11.
.ig2 tll h 6oo and here, it would be
bad for White to choose 12 .e4?! in
view of 12 . . . dxe4 13.'\1;Vxb7, Heb­
den - Jaunooby, Wakefield 2016,
13 . . . lll fS ! ?+
10 . .ig2 . This pawn-sacrifice
seems rather dubious. 10 . . . dxc4
11.'\1;Ve2 tll b 6 12.0-0 V/!c7 13.e4 es+
Hebden - Melkumyan, London
2012.
10.cxdS. White clarifies the
pawn-structure in the centre with
this move. 10 . . . exdS
ll.a3 i.d6= Arutinian - Hov­
hannisyan, Gyumri 2009.
11 . .id2 .ib4 or 11 . .id3 .ib4 1 2 .
.id2 '\1;Ve7 - see 10 . .id2 .
11.gS tll h 7 12.f4 .id6 13 . .id3
V!!e 7. Black wishes to evacuate his
king to the queenside, since if he
castles kingside, White will devel­
op a crushing attack with the
126
move h4-h5. 14.V/!f3 0-0-0 15.
i.d2 @b8 16.0-0-0 tll hf8 17.h4,
Batsiashvili - Asan, Kocaeli 2 0 14,
17 . . . tll b 6 ! ? =
10.a3. White prevents .ib4,
but the move a2-a3 may turn out
to be not so useful for him. 10 . . . gS
ll.i.g2 , Kozul - Haba, Austria
2 0 14, ll . . . dxc4 ! ?+
11.cxdS, Kozul - Ribli, Slove­
nia 2013, 11 . . . exdS ! ? =
After 11.cS, Black can accom­
plish the standard plan for similar
positions with the transfer of his
knight to the g6-square. ll . . . i.e7
12 .b4, Spoelman - Girl, Am­
stelveen 2 0 15, 12 . . . lll fS ! ?oo
ll.V!!f3 .id6 12 .i.d2 V/!e7 - see
11 . .id2 .
11 . .id2 i.d6 12 .'\1;Vf3 V/!e7 13.0-
0-0 0-0-0. Black's king will be
much safer on the queenside than
on the kingside. 14.@bl (14 . .id3
@b8 15.@bl, Levin - Zhurikhin,
St Petersburg 2 013, 15 . . . .ic7 ! ? = )
14 . . . @b8 15.:gcl (15 . .id3 i.c7 - see
14 . .id3 ; 15.V!!g 2 .ic7= Cheparinov
- Potkin, Khanty-Mansiysk 2 0 13 ;
15.e4. This pawn-advance i n the
centre leads to the simplification
of the position. 15 . . . dxe4 16.tll xe4
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3 . li::ij3 li::if6 4.e3 1i.. g 4 5.h3 1i.. h5 6. li::i c3 e6
li::i xe4 17.'\Wxe4, Inarkiev - Mame­
dyarov, Sochi 2014, 17 . . . eS ! ? = )
1 S . . . i.c7 l6.gc2, Ivanchuk - Pot­
kin, Havana 2012, 16 . . . li::i fS ! ??,
followed by li::i g 6.
After 10 .gS, Black can deploy
his knight at the centre of the
board without being afraid of the
doubling of his pawns. 10 . . . li::i e4
ll.li::i xe4 dxe4
There arises an approximate­
ly equal endgame after 12 .'1Ng4
'\Was+ 13.<i>e2 i.e7 14.i.g2 '\WxgS
lS.VNxgS hgS= Lysyj - Potkin,
Taganrog 2011. White has the
two-bishop advantage, but his
kingside pawn-structure has been
compromised.
12.'1Nb3 VNb6 13.h4 (13.Wfxb6
axb6= Le Quang Liem - Khairul­
lin, Khanty-Mansiysk 2013; 13.
i.g2 gh4oo Bologan - Rogozenco,
Kishinev 2 0 14) 13 . . .fS. Black pro­
tects reliably his e4-pawn. 14.i.d2
eS 1S.i.e2 i.e7 16.0-0-0 VNxb3
17.axb3 exd4 18.exd4 cS. Black
wishes to block the position. 19 .dS
li::i e S. His centralised knight is not
weaker than any of White's bish­
ops. 2 0 . <i>c2 <i>d7 21.i.c3 i.d6=
Rubinas - Jacot, ICCF 2 013.
12 .h4 i.b4+ . Black exploits
White's lag in development and
deprives him of his two-bishop
advantage. 13 .i.d2 Was 14.a3
hd2+ 1S.'1Nxd2 '\Wxd2+ 16.<i>xd2 f5
17.i.g2, Blomqvist - Smith,
Uppsala 2016, 17 . . . 0-0-0=
17.gxf6 gxf6 18.i.e2 <i>e7 19.
gagl gag8 20 .b4 fS 21.a4 eS 22 .cS
exd4 23.exd4 li::i f6= , taking the
dS-square under a reliable con­
trol, Efremov - Emelyanov, ICCF
2 01S. Black is not worse at all
thanks to his superior pawn­
structure.
17.cS. White prepares the de­
velopment of his bishop to the c4-
square. 17 . . . eS 18.i.c4 <i>e7 19.b4
gad8= Ljubicic - Cornejo, ICCF
2 0 1S. It is inconceivable how
White can break his opponent's
position.
10 . . . .ib4
Black develops his bishop to
an active position.
(diagram)
11.cxdS
White clarifies the pawn­
structure in the centre.
11.gc1, Bareev - Najer, Phila­
delphia 2 009, 11 . . . gS ! ? =
127
Chapter 9
Following 11.Wf3 , Black can
simplify considerably the position
with ll ... .ixc3 12 . .ixc3 lll e4 13,:gcl
lll xc3 14,:gxc3 lll b 6= Walther -
Hinz, Germany 2 0 13.
11.f3. White takes the impor­
tant e4-square under control, but
weakens the el-h4 diagonal. 11. . .
dxc4 12 . .ixc4 tll d 5 13.'\1;l/b3 a5 =
Ivanchuk - Topalov, Tromsoe
2 0 14.
It seems too straightforward
for White to choose here 11 . .id3,
because he loses a tempo after
11 . . . dxc4 12 .hc4 hc3 13 .hc3
lll e4 14.Wic2 lll xc3 15.Wxc3 lll b 6
16.i.fl '\1;l/d5 17.:ggl, Miton - Prie,
Elgoibar 2 0 07, 17 . . . g5 ! ?oo
There arises a very complicat­
ed position after 11.'\1;l/b3. White
wishes to trade his g4-pawn for
the enemy b7-pawn after which
his kingside and Black's queen­
side will be considerably weak­
ened. ll . . . .ixc3 12 . .ixc3 lll xg4 13.
.ig2 (It would be premature for
White to opt here for 13.Wixb7? ! ,
because after 13 . . .:gb8 14.'\1;l/xc6
128
'\1;lff6, Black's threat to capture on
f2 would force White to part with
an exchange. 15.hxg4 :gxhH Ste­
fansson - Solak, Baku 2 016.) 13 . . .
lll h 6 14.'\1;l/xb7 lll f5 15.c5. White
fixes the enemy weakness on c6.
(15.'\1;l/xc6 :gc8 16.'\1;l/a4 :gxc4 17.
'\1;l/xa7 0-0 18 . .ifl :gc7 19.'\1;l/a5 lll f6
2 0 . .id3 Wlb8 2 1.Wa4 tll h4� Zalcik
- Hauser, ICCF 2 0 1 2 . The activity
of Black's pieces compensates
with an interest his minimal ma­
terial deficit.) 15 .. ,:gc8 16.0-0-0,
Levin - Yevseev, St Petersburg
2012, 16 . . . lll f6 ! ? 17.'\1;l/xa7 lll h4�
u . . . exd5
�.
�
12.Wb3
12 . .ig2 '\1;l/e7 13.'\1;l/c2 (It seems
premature for White to play here
13.0-0, Kozul - Perisic, Bizovac
2 005, 13 . . . ix:c3 ! ? 14.hc3 lll e 4+;
13.a3 hc3 14.ix:c3 lll e4 15.'\1;l/c2
lll xc3 = Bareev - Nepomniachtchi,
Moscow 2010.) 13 ... lll b 6 14.b3 a5+:t
Werner - Mannanov, ICCF 2 0 13 .
12 . .id3 '\1;l/e7 13.'\1;l/e2 (13.'\1;l/b3
0-0-0 - see 12 .Wib3) . Here, Black
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. !iJ.f3 !iJf6 4.e3 fi.g4 5.h3 fi.h5 6. !iJ c3 e6
can simplify advantageously the
position with the line: 13 . . . !iJe4
14.!iJxe4 dxe4= Svetushkin - Prie,
Gap 2008.
12 • • • �e7 13.f3
13.fi.d3 0-0-0 14.0-0-0 hc3
(or 14 . . . ©b8= Kovalyov - Adams,
Tromsoe 2014) 15.hc3 �h7. Black
is preparing the doubling of his
rooks on the h-file in order to or­
ganise an attack against the pawn
on h3. 16 . .tb4 �e6 17.gS !iJe4 18.
he4. His pieces are very active
and White is forced to part with
his two-bishop advantage. 18 . . .
�xe4 19 . .id6 b 6 2 0 .h4 ©b7 2 1 .
.ig3 !iJf8 = Bars - Stromberg,
ICCF 2 0 14.
13 • • • 0-0
Now, contrary to the varia­
tions, we have already analysed,
Black can castle kingside, since
White fails to organise an attack
against the enemy king.
14.h4 c5
Black follows the classical
principles. He inflicts a counter
strike in the centre against his op­
ponent's flank attack.
15.©f2 gfe8 16.h5 g5
Black prevents the opening of
files on the kingside.
17.gel �e6 18 .td3 !iJb6
•
He is preparing the transfer of
his knight to the c4-square.
19.�c2 �c4 20.hc4
Black's knight is very active and
White is forced to exchange it.
20 dxc4 21.a3 hc3 22.
• • •
hc3 gad8
Black's pieces have been very
harmoniously deployed, while the
position of White's king is not re­
liable at all. Therefore, he has no
chances of maintaining an advan­
tage in the middle game, but the
transfer into an endgame cannot
provide him with much either.
23.�fS �xfS 24.gxfS �d5=
Neto - Vassia, ICCF 2015.
129
 Part 3
1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . lLJ:f3 lLJf6 4.lLJc3 e6
In this part of the book we will
analyse all the possibilities for
White after 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.
130
�:f3 �f6 4.�c3 e6, besides 5.e3
(Part 4) and 5.�g5 (part 5). The
tenth chapter of the book will be
devoted to White's early queen­
sortie (5.�b3). In Chapter 11 we
will deal with the interesting hy­
brid between the Slav Defence
and the Catalan Opening - 5.g3,
while in Chapter 12 we will ana­
lyse 5.cxd5 exd5, after which there
arises by transposition a line from
the exchange variation of the
Queen's Gambit, but not in the
best version for White.
Chapter 10 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . �f3 �f6 4.�c3 e6
5.%!fb3
White protects his c4-pawn,
but his queen enters the actions
too early. Later, Black will man­
age to win a tempo for the devel­
opment of his queenside by play­
ing b7-b5 after the preliminary
exchange on c4.
About 5.YHd3 dxc4 6.�xc4 bS
- see 5.YHb3.
White has tried in more than a
hundred games the move 5.a3? ! ,
but after dxc4+, he has no com­
pensation for the pawn at all.
White obtainsa difficult posi­
tion after 5.if4 dxc4 6.e3 (6.e4?!
bS 7.�c2 ib7 - see 5.YHc2) 6 . . . bS
7.a4 ib4+ Golombek - Wade,
Nottingham 1946.
It seems rather dubious for
White to opt here for 5.YHc2 , since
following 5 . . . dxc4, he will have
problems to prove that his pawn­
centre and lead in development
are sufficient to compensate
the sacrificed pawn. 6.e4 (White
should possibly prefer here the
more modest move 6.a4, prevent­
ing b7-b5. 6 . . . c5 7.e3 lll c 6. Black
exploits the drawbacks of the
move 5.YHc2 . White will have dif­
ficulties to protect his pawn on
d4. 8.i.xc4 cxd4 9.exd4 lll xd4 10.
lll xd4 W/xd4 11.ibS+ id7 12 .ie3
Wies 13.0-0 icSoo Ooms - Vul,
Cappelle-la-Grande 1995. If Black
succeeds in completing his devel­
opment, White will not have com­
pensation for his material deficit.)
6 . . . bS
131
Chapter 1 0
7.i.gS h 6 - see Chapter 2 0 .
7.i.f4 i.b7 8 ..ie2 llJbd7 9.0-0
!e7 10.l:fadl 0-0 lU:ffe l , Fornal
- Bashkov, Katowice 1993, 11. . .
h6+
7.g3 i.b7 8.i.g2 llJbd7 9.0-0
i.e7 10 .h3 a6+ Spassky - Bagirov,
Leningrad 1960.
After 7.a4, White cannot ob­
tain compensation for the pawn.
7 . . . a6 8.axbS (8 . .ie2 .ib7 9.i.gS
h6 ! + Lukasova - Kuhl, ICCF
2 0 14) 8 . . .cxbS 9.eS llJdS 10.llJxbS
axbS ! Black sacrifices the ex­
change and seizes completely the
initiative. 11.�xa8 .ib7 12 .�a7
llJb4 13.lYdl !e4+ Gelfand -
Bacrot, Albert 2 0 0 2 .
7 . .ie2 .ib7 8.0-0 .ie7 9.es.
White's pawn frees a square for
the knight, but now Black's knight
also gains access to a very good
square at the centre of the board.
(9 . .igS h6 10 . .ih4 llJbd7 11.b3,
Rausis - Goloshchapov, Cairo
2000, 11 . . . gS ! ? 12 . .ig3 b4 13.llJa4
c3+) 9 . . . llJdS 10.llJe4
10 . . . h6. This is important pro-
phylactic; otherwise, White will
play i.gS and will penetrate to the
132
d6-square after the trade of the
dark-squared bishops. 11.b3 cxb3
12.axb3 llJa6. Black prepares the
transfer of his knight to b4. 13 .i.b2
llJab4 14.Wd2 0-0 lS.�fcl aS 16.
llJcS Wc7 17.lYdl �fd8+ Babychuk
- Tkachenko, ICCF 2 0 16. He has
managed to complete the devel­
opment of his pieces. White is
dominant over the cS-square, but
this does not compensate fully his
sacrificed pawn.
5 ••• dxc4 6.lYxc4 b5
Now, White must make up his
mind where to retreat with his
queen: A) 7.Wb3, or B) 7.Wd3.
A) 7.Wb3
White's queen is not so active
here as on the d3-square, since it
does not control the important
central e4-square and does not
protect the d4-pawn.
7 ••• llJbd7
This is a very elastic move for
Black. Later, depending on cir-
cumstances, he can advance c6-c5
after bS-b4, c6-cS, as well as fol­
lowing a7-a6, c6-cS.
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. CiJj3 CiJf6 4. CiJ c3 e6 5. Wb3 de 6. Wxc4 b5
8 .lg5
• 9.e3. This move is too passive.
The pawn-sacrifice 8 .e4 seems
too risky for White. 8 . . . b4 9.CiJa4
CiJxe4 10 . .id3 CiJef6 11 . .lgS, Vaga­
nian - Chekhov, Vilnius 1980,
11 ... i.d6 ! ?+, followed by 0-0.
Black's queenside is a bit weak,
but this does not compensate ful­
ly White's material deficit.
8.g3. White's plan to fian­
chetto his light-squared bishop
takes too much time. 8 . . . b4 9.CiJa4
cS 10 . .ig2 .ib7 11.CiJxcS (11.0-0
.ids 12 .ygd1 gc8 13.dxcS CiJxcS=
Mihajlovskij - Matlakov, St Pe­
tersburg 2 008) 11 . . . CiJxcS 12.dxcS
.ixcS. He must play very precise­
ly in order to neutralise the ac­
tivity of Black's pieces. 13 .i.e3
i.xe3 14.ygxe3, Marsalek - Dufek,
Czech Republic 199S, 14 . . . ygb6 ! ?
1S.Wf4 0 - 0 16.0-0 h 6 17.gfcl
gac8=
8 . . . a6
Black is perfectly prepared for
the pawn-advance c6-cS.
9.e4
9 . . . cS 10 . .ie2 .ib7 11.0-0, Piaset­
ski - Grandelius, Gibraltar 2016,
ll ... .ld6 ! ? 12.gfdl c4 13.Wc2 h6
14 . .ih4 Wc7+
9.l:!dl Wc7 10.g3 c5 11.i.xf6 CiJxf6
12 .i.g2 .lb7 13.0-0, Timoscenko -
Rogozenco, Berlin 1994, 13 ... l:!c8! ?+
The move 9 . a4 leads to a
complicated position. 9 . . . WaS 10.
.ixf6, Bachmann - Santiago, Neu­
quen 201S, 10 ...CiJxf6oo Black's two­
bishop advantage may be a seri­
ous trump for him in the future.
9 c5 10.d5 c4 11.ygc2, Kor­
•••
chnoi - Novikov, Pamplona 1990,
ll .le7!?oo Black has succeeded
•••
in occupying space on the queen­
side. He is not afraid of the ex­
change on c6, because he would
easily protect this pawn.
B) 7.ygd3
White's queen is more actively
placed here than on the b3-
square.
7 .lb7
..•
133
Chapter 1 0

8.e4
This is his most active move.
He occupies immediately the cen­
tre with his pawns.

The move 8.a3 looks too pas­

sive. 8 . . . a6. Black is quite ready to
advance c6-cS. 9.e4 (9.e3 cs
10.dxcS hcS 11.Wfxd8+ ©xd8 12.
id2 ©e7= Karpov - Kasparov,
Las Palmas 1996) 9 . . . cS 10.eS.
This move seems too ambitious,
because now Black can occupy
with tempo additional space on
the queenside. (White had better
think already about equality: 10.
dxcS �xd3 11.ixd3 ixcS= Stoja­
novic - Dgebuadze, Basel 2010.)
10 . . . c4 11.Wfc2 llidS 12 .ie2 i.e7
13.0-0 0-0+ Dimov - Petkov,
ICCF 2009. The dominance over
the dS-square provides Black with
better prospects.
White cannot achieve much
with 8.g3, because Black can
counter that with the energetic re­
sponse 8 . . . cS ! = and it would be
bad for White to play 9.WfxbS+? ! ,
because of 9 . . .i.c6 10 .�c4 cxd4
11.llibl, Tunik - Lintchevski, Ka­
zan 2014, 11 . . . llibd7! ?+. Black ex­
ploits the defencelessness of the
enemy bishop on cl and com­
pletes quickly the development of
his queenside pieces. 12 .Wfxc6?
gc8-+
9.g3. This move does not com­
bine well with 8.igS. Here, after
h7-h6, White's bishop cannot re­
treat to the h4-square. 9 . . . a6 10.
ig2 (10.gd1, Bartel - Werle, Novi
Sad 2 009, 10 . . . cS ! ? 11.dxcS ixcS
12 .i.g2 �b6 13.0-0 0-0+ Black's
pieces are more actively de­
ployed.) 10 . . . cs 11.0-0 h6 12.i.xf6
llixf6 13.gfdl �b6 14.a4 c4 1S.�c2
i.b4+ Norowitz - Naroditsky,
Reykjavik 2 0 1S. Black has two
powerful bishops.
9.a3 h6 10.i.f4, Portisch - No­
gueiras Santiago, Brussels 1988,
10 ... a6 ! ? ll.e3 i.e7 12 .i.e2 cS 13.
0-0 0-0=
9.e3 a6. If Black manages to
advance c6-cS, he will not be
worse at all.

8.i.gS. This pin is harmless for

Black. 8 . . . llibd7 10.i.e2 (10.a4 i.e7 11.i.e2 0-0
(diagram) 12.0-0 h6 13.i.xf6 llixf6= Mat­
9.e4 b4 10.llia4 �as - see 8.e4. senko - Potkin, St Petersburg

134
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 11Jf3 11Jf6 4. 11J c3 e6 5. Vf!b3 de 6. Vf!xc4 b5
2 0 14. White has succeeded in im­
peding the pawn-advance c6-cS,
but Black has the two-bishop ad­
vantage and a solid position.) 10 . . .
cS 11.0-0 fi.e7 12 .l�ffd l (12.dxcS
11JxcS 13.Vfixd8+ i:!xd8 14.l:!acl 0-0
1S.11Jd4 l:!c8+ Andersson - Belia­
vsky, Parnu 1997) 12 . . . 0-0 13.
dxcS l:iJxcS 14.Vf!d4 Vf!xd4 1S.i:!xd4,
Karpov - Timman, Netherlands
1993. The queens have been ex­
changed early in the game, but
Black can still seize the initiative:
1S . . . h6 ! ? 16.fi.h4 l:!fd8+ White
must play very accurately; other­
wise, Black's edge will increase.
8 . . . b4
Black ousts immediately the
enemy knight to the edge of the
board.
9.11Ja4 c!i.)bd7
10.e5
The move 10 .fi.e2 leads to a
complicated fight. 10 . . . Vf!aS 11.b3
cS 12 .eS l:iJdS 13.0-0 i.e7 14 . .id2
0-0 lS.l:!fcl cxd4 16.Vf!xd4 l:!fc8
17.a3 l:!xcl+ 18.l:!xcl l:!d8oo Knoll
- Mignon, ICCF 2011. Black can
hope to equalise thanks to his
powerful knight at the centre of
the board.
10 . .ie3. White wishes to im­
pede Black's freeing pawn-break
c6-cS. 10 . . . fi.e7 11.11Jd2 0-0
Following 12 .11Jb3 , Black can
continue with 12 . . . aS, preparing
the transfer of his bishop to the
bS-square. 13.f3 fi.a6 14.Wfc2 fi.bS
lS.l:iJbcS l:iJxcS 16.l:iJxcS 11Jd7 17.
11Jxd7 Vf!xd7= Dreev - Van Wely,
Khanty-Mansiysk 2 0 0S. The posi­
tion has been simplified after the
exchange of the knights. The
slight weakness of the c6-pawn is
compensated by Black's lead in
development.
12 .f3. White protects reliably
his e4-pawn. 12 . . . WfaS 13.Vfic2
l:!ac8 14.l:iJcS. Without this move
Black will advance c6-cS. Now
however, after 14 . . . l:iJxcS lS.dxcS
11Jd7, White's pawn on cS would
need protection. 16.11Jb3 Vf!a4 17.
0-0-0 l:!fd8 18.©bl .ia6 19.l:!d4
.ixfl 2 0 .l:!xfl Vf!bS 21.l:!fdl. White's
pieces are more actively deployed,
but his initiative gradually reach­
es its dead end. 21...11Jf8. Black
continues to simplify the position.
13S
Chapter I O
22. :!:!xdS :!:!xdS 23.:!:!xdS hdS 24.
tlJcl fi.e7 2S.Wd3 Wb7 26.f4 as 27.
Wc4 eS 2S.fS ttJd7. Black's posi­
tion is impossible to break. 29.
tlJd3 Was 30.@c2 h6 31.g3 .tgS
32 .fi.f2 Wa7 33.h3 fi.e7 34.b3 %\las
3S.tlJb2 @fs 36.tlJa4 Wb7 37.@d3
Was, draw, Vinchev - Busenberg,
ICCF 2 0 1S.
After 10.fi.gS, it seems good for
Black to play 10 ... WaS, running
away with his queen from the pin
with tempo. 11.b3 cS
There arises a very complicat­
ed position after 12 .dS exdS 13.
exdS fi.d6oo Bu Xiangzhi - Gasa­
nov, Moscow 2010.
12 .hf6. White weakens his
opponent's pawn-structure on the
kingside, but presents Black with
the two-bishop advantage. 12 . . .
gxf6 13.fi.e2 (13.dxcS ? ! fi.c6+ Dzag­
nidze - Cramling, Monaco 201S;
13.dS ? ! l:!gS 14.We3 0-0-0 lS.
0-0-0 tlJb6 16.ttJxb6+ axb6+ Ki­
rienko - Bogatov, ICCF 2011.
White's king is not so safe as its
counterpart.) 13 . . . cxd4 14. 0-0
(14.%\'xd4 fi.e7+ Black's two-bish­
op advantage provides him with a
stable advantage in this open po-
136
sition.) 14 . . . tlJcS lS.WbS+. White
must continue to simplify the po­
sition; otherwise, he might even
fail to equalise. lS ...%\fxbS 16.hbS+
@dS 17.tlJxd4 ttJxa4 1S.bxa4 a6
19.fi.c6. White deprives his oppo­
nent of his bishop-pair and the
position becomes balanced. 19 . . .
hc6 2 0 .ttJxc6+ @d7= Bennett -
Rivas Maceda, ICCF 2 01S.
10 . . . tlJdS
11 .id2
.
11.i.e2 %\fas 12 .b3 ttJ7b6 13.
ttJxb6, Blagojevic - Marjanovic,
Kragujevac 2 0 13 , 13 . . . axb6 ! ?+
White is unlikely to manage to
equalise due to the vulnerability
of his backward a2-pawn.
It would be too active for him
to choose 11.tlJgS, because the
passive placement of his other
knight at the edge of the board
would preclude him form seizing
the initiative. 11 . . . i.e7 12 .tlJe4 (12.
Wg3 ? ! %\fas 13.b3 cS+ Gonzalez
Zamora - Quesada Perez, Merida
2 0 1s) 12 . . . Was 13 .b3 tlJSb6+ Stu-
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. li:Jj3 li:Jf6 4. li:Jc3 e6 5. V!! b3 de 6. V!!xc4 b5
pak - Duda, Lublin 2 0 13. The
edge of the board is not the best
place for a knight indeed, but the
knight on a4 prevents Black's
pawn-break c6-c5. Therefore, his
desire to exchange it is easily un­
derstandable.
11.li:Jd2. White is preparing the
transfer of his knight on b3 to the
e4-square. 11 . . . .ie7 12.li:Jb3 0.Sb6
13.li:Jxb6 axb6 14.V!!g 3. White can­
not prevent Black's pawn-advance
c6-c5, but can deprive his oppo­
nent of his castling rights with ac­
tive actions on the kingside. 14 . . .
ciif8 15.!e3 V!!c7 16.!c4 cS= Ste­
phan - Noble, ICCF 2 0 13.
u . . . �5b6! ? 12.V!!c 2
12.li:Jxb6, Tregubov - Yako­
vich, Paris 2 0 05, 12 . . . axb6 ! ? =
12 ••• �xa4 13.'efxa4 a5
(diagram)
Black's plan is quite simple:
!e7, 0-0, c6-c5 and White can
hardly manage to counter it effec­
tively.
14.lkl
After White's alternatives,
Black seizes the initiative. For ex­
ample: 14.!e2 !e7 15.13cl 0-0 16.
0-0 cS+ Banshchikov - Sutkalen­
ko, ICCF 2 013, or 14.!gS .ie7 15.
he7 V!!xe7 16 ..id3 cS+ Williams -
Wells, Edinburgh 2003.
14 .te7oo Black's prospects
•••
are not worse at all. Later, in the
game Tregubov - Yakovich, Ka­
zan 2 0 05, White played carelessly
15 . .id3? and after 15 . . . liJcS 16.
13xc5 hc5-+, he suffered materi­
al losses.
137
Chapter ll 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . �f3 �f6 4.�c3 e6
5.g3
This is something like a hybrid
between the Slav Defence and the
Catalan Opening. White wishes to
develop his king's bishop to the
g2-square ignoring the fate of his
pawn on c4.
5 . . . dxc4!
This is Black's most principled
move. He captures his opponent's
defenceless pawn. Later however,
he must play very precisely, since
he lags in development and his
light-squared bishop is severely
restricted by his own pawns.
6.Ag2
6.igS bS - see Chapter 19.
6.a4. With this move White
impedes b7-b5 indeed, but weak-
138
ens the b4-square. In addition,
the move a2-a4 does not contrib­
ute to the development of his
pieces. 6 . . . cS ! ? Black inflicts an
energetic strike against the enemy
centre and is trying to seize the
initiative.
7.igS, Akobian - Shen, Gi­
braltar 2008, 7 . . . ttJc6 ! ?+
7.ie3 . White's bishop is unsta­
ble on this square. 7 . . . ttJg4oo Kha­
der - Mohammad, Dubai 2011.
7.dxcS. After this straightfor­
ward transfer into an endgame
White cannot even equalise. 7 . . .
Wfxdl + 8.ttJxdl ttJa6. This i s Black's
most precise move. He wishes to
capture on c5 with his knight and
not with his bishop. 9.ig2 ttJxcS+
Stupak - Reshetnikov, Moscow
2011. White's queenside has been
 l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. l?Jj3 l?Jf6 4. l?J c3 e6 5.g3 de 6 . !g2 l?J bd7
weakened by the pawn-advance
a2-a4 and regaining the pawn on
c4 would take too much time for
him.
7.!g2 l?Jc6 8.dxc5 (8.e3 cxd4
9.l?Jxd4, Tukmakov - Drozdovs­
kij , Odessa 2006, 9 . . . l?JaS+) 8 . . .
\Wxdl+ 9.l?Jxdl, Lalith - Kohlwey­
er, Gibraltar 2 016, 9 . . . l?Ja5 ! ?+ In
both these variations Black's
knight will be perfectly placed at
the edge of the board, because
from the a5-square it not only
protects reliably the pawn on c4,
but can also go to the b3-square.
After 6.l?Je5, Black's simplest
response would be 6 . . . l?Jbd7 ! ? ,
giving back the extra pawn, but
planning to develop his bishop on
c8 . 7.l?Jxc4 b5
8.l?Je3 !e7 9.!g2 Wfb6 10.0-0
!b7 11.b3 0-0. Black has com­
pleted his development and has
no problems at all. 12 .!b2 l:!fd8
13 .\Wd3 (13.Wfc2 l:!ac8 14.l:!acl
l?Jd5= Petkov - Andersen, Can
Picafort 2 0 13) 13 . . . aS 14.l:!fdl
l:!ac8 15.l:!acl h6= Tsygankov -
Serazeev, ICCF 2 0 14.
8.l?Jd2. White plans to follow
with l?Jde4, but his king's knight
has made too many moves at the
beginning of this game. 8 . . . !b7 9.
!g2 \Wb6 10.l?Jde4 (The position is
simplified after 10. 0-0 c5 11.dxc5
l?Jxc5 12 .hb7 \Wxb7 13.l?Jb3 l:!d8
14.Wfc2 l:!c8 15.l?JxcS hc5=, fol­
lowed by 0-0, Romanishin - Ki.
Georgiev, Belgrade 2000.) 10 . . .
!e7 1 1 . 0 - 0 0-0 12 .!gS (After 1 2 .
!e3, Black can play 12 . . . l?JdSoo, at­
tacking the enemy bishop, Troff
- Le, Saint Louis 2 0 15.) 12 . . . l:!fdB.
Black's pieces have been harmo­
niously deployed and White will
be incapable of preventing the
pawn-advance c6-c5. 13.e3. He is
trying to fortify his position in the
centre. 13 . . . cS 14.!xf6 l?Jxf6 15.
dxc5. Now, White must simplify
the position; otherwise, he may
end up in an inferior position.
15 . . . l:!xdl 16.l?Jxf6+ !xf6 17.cxb6
l:!xfl+ 18.@xfl hg2+ 19.@xg2 axb6
2 0 .l?JxbS, Hernandez - Rabler,
ICCF 2 0 15, 20 . . . hb2 =
6 . . . �bd7! ?
Black impedes his opponent's
knight-sortie in the centre (l?JeS).
Here, White can play either A)
139
Chapter 11
7.a4, preventing b7-b5, or B)
7.0-0.
About 7 . .igS bS 8.llieS (8.0-0
W/b6 - see 7.0-0) 8 . . . llixeS 9 . .hf6
gxf6 10.dxeS .ib7= Tregubov -
Sakaev, St Petersburg 1993.
Following 7.e4 bS 8.es (8.0-0
!b7- see variation B) 8 . . . llidS,
White would not achieve much
with the knight-sortie 9.llig5 !e7
10.W/hS g6 11.�h6 .if8 12 .�h3,
Olszewski - Dreev, Warsaw 2009.
Here, Black could have played
12 . . . h6! ?oo, without being afraid of
the piece-sacrifice 13.llixe6? ! , be­
cause he would have the powerful
tactical counter strike 13 . . . llixeS ! +
A) 7.a4
This is a reliable move for
White. He is reluctant to play with
material sacrifices and deprives
the enemy c4-pawn of the possi­
ble support of his b-pawn. Later,
he hopes to restore the material
balance, but the drawback of the
move 7.a4 (the vulnerability of
140
the b4-square) would not allow
him to fight for the advantage.
7 . . . .ib4
Black occupies immediately
the weak square.
8.0-0
8.W/c2 0-0 9.0-0 - see 8.0-0.
8 . . . 0-0 9.�c2
It seems less precise for White
to play 9.llid2, because this move
weakens his control over the cen­
tre. Black can exploit this imme­
diately: 9 . . . eS ! 10.llixc4 exd4 11.
W/xd4. After the disappearance of
White's d4-pawn off the board,
Black's knight gains access to the
wonderful c5-square from where
it can go to b3. 11.. .llicS+ Loginov
- Beshukov, St Petersburg 1997.
9 . . . a5
Black increases his control
over the b4-square.
10.�Ml
The move 10 .llieS, Dziuba -
Olafsson, Reykjavik 2 0 15, leads to
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l'iJ.f3 l'fJf6 4. l'iJ c3 e6 5.g3 de 6. ig2 l'fJ bd7
the appearance of doubled e­
pawns in White's camp. 10 . . .
l'fJxeS ! ? 11.dxeS l'fJdS+
10.l'fJa2 id6. Black is reluctant
to trade his powerful bishop for
the enemy knight placed at the
edge of the board. ll.'t!/xc4 es 12.
't!/c2 , Gleizerov - Thomassen, San
Sebastian 2010. This is White's
most precise move. (Following 12.
l'fJc3 exd4 13.�xd4, his queen will
be misplaced at the centre of the
board, since it can be attacked by
the enemy pieces. 13 ... l'fJcS+ Miton
- Dreev, Moscow 2002) 12 ... exd4! ?
13.l'fJxd4 ge8oo There can b e expect­
ed a complicated battle with mu­
tual chances in this middle game.
The move 10.e4 leads to an in­
teresting position. 10 . . . eS ! ? Black
prevents e4-eS. 11.dxeS l'iJg4 12.
e6. White does not hold on to his
eS-pawn and gives it back weak­
ening his opponent's pawn-struc­
ture. 12 . . . fxe6 13 .�e2 l'fJdeS 14.
l'fJxeS l'fJxeS. Black's pawn-struc­
ture has been compromised but
still, one of his pawns is extra af­
ter all . . . 1S.f4 l'fJd3 16.eS gb8. He
is preparing b7-bS. 17.ie3 bS
18.l'iJe4 ie7 19.'t!/c2 't!/c7oo Martin
Sanchez - Romm, ICCF 2 0 1S.
White's positional pluses com­
pensate the sacrificed pawn, but
not more than that.
10 ti'e7
•••
Black removes his queen from
the X-ray juxtaposition with the
enemy rook.
11.c!LJa2
It seems bad for White to play
here 11.igS, because after ll . . . h6
12.ixf6 �xf6, Black obtains the
two-bishop advantage. 13.l'fJe4 WfS
14.gacl, Zhou - Wen, Xinghua
2 016, 14 . . . eS ! ?+
11.l'fJeS. White is not afraid of
the appearance of doubled d­
pawns in his position. He is fight­
ing for the d6-square. 11 . . . l'fJxeS
12.dxeS l'fJd7 13.if4 fS ! ? Black is
forced to weaken his pawn-struc­
ture; otherwise, White will play
l'iJe4, followed by l'fJd6, or l'fJgS,
seizing completely the initiative.
14.exf6 l'fJxf6 1S.l'iJe4 es 16.i.e3
.te6. Black has solved the prob­
lem with his bishop on c8 and
preserved his extra pawn, but
White still has the initiative. 17.
l'fJgS idS 18.gxdS. This exchange­
sacrifice is interesting, but still
insufficient for White to maintain
an advantage. 18 . . . cxdS 19 . .txdS+
'ktih8 2 0 . .txc4. White has a pawn
for the exchange and his pieces
are active. 20 . . . gac8. Black pins
the enemy bishop. 2i.gd1 h6. He
141
Chapter 11
ousts White's knight, but weakens
the g6-square. 2 2 .lilf3 e4 23.lilh4
@h7 24 . .id4 lilg4. Black begins
counterplay against the f2-square.
25.h3 lilxf2 . Now, there arises an
equal endgame by force. 26.hf2
gxf2 27.@xf2 Wies+ 28 .@fl Wi'xc4
29.Wi'xc4 gxc4= Pheby - Burger,
ICCF 2 015.
11 . • • .id6 12.Wi'xc4 e5
Black's plans include the ex­
change of the e-pawn for the en­
emy d-pawn after which his
knight will gain access to the cS­
square.
13.Wi'c2 exd4 14.c!LJxd4 c!LJc5
15 .ie3
• 17.e3 .icS 18.gel lilgS 19.gadl .ib6
142
15.b4 axb4 16.lilxb4. White
has activated his knight, but now,
his a4-pawn has become isolated
and this might hurt him later.
16 . . . lilce4 17.lild3 gds 18 . .ib2 .ic7
19 . .ia3 Wies 2 0 .e3 hSoo, followed
by h5-h4, Borstnik - Serban,
ICCF 2015. White must watch
carefully for Black's kingside ini­
tiative not to become threatening.
Following 15.lilc3 ges 16.f3,
Black should play 16 . . . lildS ! ? ,
without waiting fo r the move e2-
e4, since after that his knight on
f6 would be restricted by the ene­
my pawns on f3 and e4. 17.lilxdS
cxdS. White cannot exploit the
weakness of the dS-pawn, because
his kingside has been weakened
by the move f2-f3. 18.lilbS lila6.
Black sends his knight to the b4-
square. 19.lilxd6 Wfxd6 2 0 .e4
Wi'b6+ 21.Wi'f2 Wi'xf2 + 2 2 .@xf2 dxe4
23 . .ie3 exf3 24 . .ixf3 lilb4= Di­
mitrov - Hitzegrad, ICCF 2 014.
White's two-bishop advantage
compensates the sacrificed pawn,
but not more than that.
15.b3. White prepares the fian­
chetto of his queen's bishop. 15 . . .
gds 16.ib2 ( H e should better
not enter the complications aris­
ing after 16.hc6 bxc6 17.lilxc6
Wfd7 18.lilxdS '.Wh3+ and White
loses after 19.gxd6?? lilg4-+) 16 . . .
lilce4. Black's knight i s very pow­
erful at the middle of the board.
From there it can go to gS creating
threats against the enemy king.
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. lt:Jj3 lt:Jf6 4. lt:J c3 e6 5.g3 de 6. ig2 lt:J bd7
2 0 .lt:JfS ixfS 2 1.Y;YxfS lt:Jge4 2 2 .
id4 ixd4 23.exd4 Y;Ya3 24.ixe4
W/xa2 = Schneider - Amann, ICCF
2 0 15. The position has been con­
siderably simplified. Later, it
would be White who must play
accurately in order not to remain
without compensation for his
weak pawns on d4 and b3.
15 ••• lt:Jg4
Black ousts the enemy bishop
from its active position.
16 .id2
•
16.lt:Jxc6 bxc6 17. E:xd6 lt:Jxe3
18.WfxcS lt:Jxg2 19.©xg2 Y;Yxe2 =
16 J'.!le8 17 .iel h5
.• •
The majority of White's pieces
are on the queenside, so Black's
plan, connected with the pawn­
advance h5-h4, would be rather
unpleasant for his opponent. 18.
lt:Jc3 �f6 19.e4 h4 20.:f3 hxg3
21.hxg3 .id7 22 .if2 gad8 23. •
gd2 �a6oo Sommerbauer - Pan­
itevsky, ICCF 2016. Black's play is
much simple in this middle game,
because White's position has been
weakened on both sides of the
board.
B) 7.0-0
White complies with playing
without a pawn.
7 b5
•.•
8.e4
He wishes to play e4-e5, oust­
ing the enemy knight from the f6-
square and to follow this with
lt:JgS.
8 .b3 ? ! b4 9.lt:Ja4 c3 10.a3 as+
- Hofer - Nowakowski, ICCF
2010. White's knight has been
ousted to the edge of the board
and Black has obtained a protect­
ed passed pawn.
White only loses time for the
move 8.a4? ! , because after 8 . . . b4,
his knight will be forced to retreat
to the edge of the board. 9.lt:Jbl.
Black has a very active position
and an extra pawn. His further
plan is quite simple - to advance
c6-c5 and after the exchange on
d4 to liquidate his doubled c-
143
Chapter 11
pawns. 9 . . . .ia6 10 .!i.gS gc8 11.
llJbd2 (ll.'1Wc2 cS+) 11 . . . cS 12 .gc1
cxd4 13.llJxd4 �b6 14.llJbS hbS
15.axbS �xbS 16 ..hf6 gxf6+ Tre­
gubov - Grischuk, Mainz 2010.
Black lags in development indeed,
but still has two extra pawns.
8.llJd2 '\Wb6 9.a4 .ib7oo Vakhi­
dov - Khoroshev, Tashkent 2 016.
Following 8.llJeS, there arises
a transfer to a very complicated
endgame. 8 . . . llJxeS 9.dxeS '\Wxdl
10.gxdl llJdS ll.a4 b4 12 .llJe4 aS
13 . .ie3, Zhao - Brunello, Wijk
aan Zee 2 014, 13 . . . !i.a6 ! oo
8 .'\Wc2 !i.b7 9.gdl ( 9 . .igS '\Wb6oo
Lenderman - Stopa, Mesa 2010;
9.e4 .ie7 - see 8.e4) 9 . . . !i.e7 10.
llJeS llJdS. Black wishes to dimin­
ish the pressure of the enemy
bishop on g2 on the long diago­
nal. 11.llJxd7 '\Wxd7 12.llJe4. White
impedes the enemy pawn-ad­
vance c6-c5. 12 . . . llJb4 13.�d2
gd8oo Ladva - Fridman, Tallinn
2 016.
8.!i.gS �b6 9.b3 .ib4 10.hf6
llJxf6 11.gcl llJdS 12.llJxdS exdS.
There has arisen an interesting
position. Black has an extra pawn
and the two-bishop advantage.
Still, after 13.bxc4 dxc4 14.llJeS
0-0 15.a4, White's pieces are very
active. He is threatening axbS,
after which Black's queenside
pawn-structure will be compro­
mised. Therefore, he must play
15 . . . !i.b7 ! ? , sacrificing the ex-
144
change. 16.llJd7 '\Wa6 17.llJxf8
.hf8oo Mende - Babushkin, ICCF
2 0 14. Black's passed pawns, sup­
ported by his bishop-pair, can
create great problems for White.
8.llJgS. White is threatening to
capture on c6 and bS, but Black
can parry easily both these threat.
8 . . . '\Wb6
There arises a complicated po­
sition after 9.a4 b4 10.aS '\Wa6
11.llJce4, Gupta - Robson, Wijk
aan Zee 2010, 11 . . . !i.e7! ?oo
9.e4 h6 10.llJxe6. This piece­
sacrifice is rather dubious (after
10.es hxg5 ll.exf6 gxf6 12 .!i.e3
.ib7+, White does not have suffi­
cient compensation for the two
missing pawns, Harikrishna -
Amanov, Philadelphia 2 0 11) 10 . . .
fxe6 11.eS llJdS 12 .'\Wg4, Dubov -
Ter Sahakyan, Moscow 2 0 15, 12 . . .
llJb8 ! ?+ White's compensation for
the sacrificed piece is not good
enough.
It is possible he must choose
9.b3 h6 10.llJge4 cxb3 11.llJxf6+
(ll.'\Wxb3, Shinkevich - Kozionov,
Togliatti 2011, 11 . . . llJdS ! ? = ) 11. . .
llJxf6 1 2 .'\Wxb3 !i.b7 13.a4 a 6 = Tay­
lor - Visigalli, ICCF 2 0 16. White
 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. l:i:if3 l:i:if6 4. l:i:i c3 e6 5.g3 de 6. i.g2 l:i:i bd7
leads in development and exerts
pressure on the queenside and
this compensates his minimal
material deficit, but not more
than that.
8 . . ..lb7
9.e5
White must play energetically
not to end up in an inferior posi­
tion.
It is bad for him to play here
9.i.g5? ! , because after 9 . . . h6 10.
i.xf6 l:i:ixf6, Black exchanges his
opponent's powerful bishop. 11.
'\Wc2 i.e7-F Baburin - Bhat, San
Francisco 1997.
It would be too slow for White
to opt here for 9 .'\Wc2 .le7 10.�Ml
0-0+ He does not have full com­
pensation for the pawn.
9 ••• c!LJd5 10.c!LJgS h6 11.c!LJxe6
The idea of this piece-sacrifice
was behind White's previous play.
He cannot even equalise if he
retreats his knight: 11.l:i:ige4 i.e7
12 .Wh5, Vinchev - Goncharenko,
ICCF 2 0 14, 12 . . . ©fS ! ?+; or 11.Wh5
g6 12 .Wi'h3 i.e7 13.l:i:ige4 ©fS+ Al­
varez Pedraza - Ibarra Jerez, La
Roda 2 016.
11 fxe6 12.�h5+ ©e7
•••
13.c!LJe4
White obtains a bad position
after 13.i.g5 + ? ! hxg5 14.'\WxhS
l:i:i7b6. Black's two minor pieces
are stronger than his opponent's
rook in this middle game. 15.l:i:ie4
©d7 16.Wg8 (16.Wh5 ©c7 17.l:i:ixg5
'\Wd7 18 .i.h3 ges . He has fortified
reliably the e6-square. Black only
needs to advance c6-c5, in order
to activate his bishop on b7. 19.a3
cS+ Petukhov - Odrov, ICCF
2 0 15.) 16 . . . WeS 17.Wh7 gds 18.
c!LJxg5 ©c7 19.gael ©bS+ Shinke­
vich - Korobov, St Petersburg
2010. Black has managed to evac­
uate his king to the queenside
where it will be quite safe.
13 WeS 14 .lgS+ hxg5 15.
••• •
�xh8
White has obtained a rook for
145
Chapter 11
two minor pieces under much
better circumstances than in our
previous notes.
15 . . . ©d8
It is necessary for Black to
evacuate his king away from the
danger zone as quickly as possi­
ble.
16.tll xgS
16.Wg8 ? ! \!;Vg6+ Lalith - Ding
Liren, Hyderabad 2 0 15.
16 . . . ©c8 !? 17.a4
17.\!;Vh3? ! lLlc7. Black parries
easily the threat against his e6-
pawn. 18.l'Uel ©b8 19.tll e4 tll b 6+
Ciciotti - Romanov, ICCF 2 0 1 2 .
There arises a complicated sit­
uation following 17.gfel tll c7 18.
lLle4 c5 19.tfh4 he4 20.\!;Vxe4 gb8
21.gadl cxd4 2 2 .\!;Vxd4 lLlcSoo Lu­
kasova - Fonteneau, ICCF 2016.
The position is beginning to open
and White's rook can fight success­
fully against Black's minor pieces.
17. . . cs
146
Black activates his bishop on
b7.
18.ffh3
White attacks the e6-pawn
and wishes thus to oust Black's
knight from the centre of the
board.
18.axbS cxd4 19J'ffc l tll 5 b6
20.lLle4 \!;Vd8oo Ipatov - Fedoseev,
Saint Louis 2 017.
18.gfdl bxa4 19.gxa4 lLl5b6
2 0 .gas hg2 21.©xg2 cxd4 2 2 .
gxd4 ©b7. Now, Black must play
very precisely, since the position
has been opened and his king
might be endangered. 23.lLle4
'!Wg6 24.ffh4 gc8 25.tll d 6+ hd6
26.exd6 eS. Black has managed to
coordinate his pieces. White is
forced to trade the queens on or­
der to prevent his opponent from
seizing the initiative to the end of
the game. 27.\!;Ve4+ ffxe4+ 28.
gxe4 gf8 29.f4 exf4 30.gxf4 gxf4
31.gxf4 ©c6 32 .gxa7 ©xd6= Ru­
binas - Mendl, ICCF 2 014. In or­
der to make a draw in this end­
game, White must exchange his
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4. liJ c3 e6 5.g3 de 6. ig2 liJ bd7

rook and three pawns for the en- 19 hdS••• 20.hdS exd5
emy two pawns and then Black 21.e6
would be left with two useless
knights.

18.dxc5 liJxc5 19.axb5 liJb6 2 0 .

liJ f3 ©c7 2 1.W/h3 1M/xb5 2 2 .liJd4
W/d7 23.l':ffd l a5 24.hb7 ©xb7.
Black has managed to consolidate
his position and White must play
energetically; otherwise, Black's
two minor pieces might prove to
be stronger than White's rook and
pawns. 25.b3 c3 26.l3acl liJd5 27.
1M/g2 ©b6. Black removes his king 21 ie7!
•••

away from the pin. 28.liJe2 liJxb3 The activity of his pieces be­
29.l3bl a4. His passed a-pawn comes greater with every move,
seem very powerful, but his king so Black is trying to simplify the
is vulnerable and he cannot main­ position sacrificing a piece.
tain an advantage. 30.liJxc3 l3c8 22.exd7+ W/xd7
31.lLJxdS+ exd5 32 .Wff3 ©c6 33.
1M/e2 l3a8. Black defends against
the penetration of the enemy
queen to the a6-square. 34.e6 1M/d8
35.l3d3 ic5 36.l3bdl d4oo Camp­
bell - Sherwood, ICCF 2 0 14.

18 ••• �c7 19.d5

23.WfhS
White's attempt to play for a
win seems to be too risky for him,
because Black has too many
pawns on the queenside.
White should have possibly
agreed to a draw by repetition of
moves. 23.1M/h8+ W/d8=
White continues to increase
his pressure. 23 ••• bxa4 24.�ffe l

147
Chapter 11
After 24J:Udl, there might fol­
low a variation ending up with a
perpetual check: 24 . . .Wff5 25.h4
13b8 26.13d2 i.f6 27.W/fl W/d7 28.
W/f8+ ©b7 29.W/xc5 .bg5 30.hxg5
13h8 31.13d4 W/h3 32.13h4 13xh4
33.W/b4+ ©c8 34.gxh4 W/g4+ 35.
©fl Wfh3+ 36. ©e2 W/d3 =
24 ••. .tf6oo
Black's bishop on f6 exerts
powerful pressure against White's
queenside.
25J1e2 l1b8 26.�h7
White decides to sacrifice his
b2-pawn, but now, Black has too
many passed pawns on the queen­
side.
26 .lxb2 27.�:f8 g6! ?
•••
H e sacrifices a pawn and pro­
vokes White's queen to occupy a
square on the sixth rank in order
to attack it later with his rook with
tempo.
28.W/xg6 l1b6 29.WhS Wd6
30.l1ael .tc3 31.l1e6
(diagram)
31 ••• .lxel! ! This is the point!
Now, Black can sacrifice his
148
queen. 32.l1xd6 �d6. Here,
White's queen will hardly manage
to stop the enemy passed pawns,
despite the fact that after 33.WeS,
he can capture the enemy bishop
on el thanks to the double attack.
33 l1b6 34.'ffx el a3 35.Wfal
•••
c3 !+ 36.�d7. White sacrifices a
piece and forces the enemy king
to an unfavourable position. This
does not help him, though . . 36
. •••
©xd7 37.Wxa3 d4 38.WxcS
�e6. Black has finally managed
to coordinate his pieces and
White's lone queen is helpless
against the enemy rook, knight
and passed pawns. 39.W:f5 l1c6
40.Wh7+ ©d6 41.'flrc2 a5 42.h4
©c7. Black cannot play immedi­
ately d4-d3, because White will
capture the pawn with a check.
43.Wh7+ ©b6 44.Wbl+ ©a7
45.We4 l1c7 46.Wc2 d3. Black
sacrifices a pawn, but advances
his passed c-pawn another square
forward. The outcome of the game
has become quite evident. 47.
Wxd3 c2 48.We3+ l1c5 49.'flrcl
l1c3 50.©g2 �cs-+ Visloguzov
- Buhme, ICCF 2 0 15.
Chapter 12 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . lLJ:f3 lLJf6 4.lLJc3 e6
5.cxd5
This quiet move is usually cho­
sen by White when he wishes to
avoid the long theoretical varia­
tions arising after S.e3, or S . .igS.
Still, he cannot fight for the open­
ing advantage when he plays in
this fashion.
5 . . . exd5
Black opens the diagonal for
his light-squared bishop.
There has arisen on the board
the exchange variation of the
Queen's Gambit, but in a favour­
able version for Black, because
White has developed too early his
knight on f3. Later, he cannot ac­
complish the standard set-up of
his pieces in similar positions -
.igS, e3, .id3, because Black man­
ages to develop his bishop on fS.
We will analyse now: A)
6.J.g5 and B) 6.1!ic2.
6.h3. This can be hardly
White's most useful move. 6 . . .
.id6. Black develops his bishop to
an active position and prevents
.if4. 7.W/c2 0-0 8 . .igS h6 9 . .ih4
gS. This move emphasizes the de­
fects of White's move six. 10 . .ig3
.ixg3 ll.fxg3 lDhS+ Ivanisevic -
Kramnik, Tromsoe 2 0 14. White's
pawn-structure has been serious­
ly compromised.
6.g3. The development of this
bishop to the g2-square is too
slow. 6 . . . .id6 7 . .ig2 0-0 8.0-0
l:!e8. Black has already a slightly
freer game. 9.W/c2 (9.lDel .ifS 10.
lDd3, Luzuriaga - Urrutia, Bue­
nos Aires 1998, 10 . . . 1!lb6 ! ?+) 9 . . .
lDbd7 10.l:!el (10.lDh4 lD b 6 11.lDfS
.ib4+ Kuznetsova - Katzkova,
Zvenigorod 2 00S. The transfer of
the knight to the fS-square has
not improved White's position,
because Black has managed to
avoid the exchange of his bishop.)
10 ... h6 11.lDh4 lDb6 12 .b3 as+
Huzita - Saitou, ICCF 2011.
149
Chapter 12
6.e3. Before the development
of White's bishop to f4, or gS, this
move seems bad for him. 6 . . . i.d6
7.i.d3 o-o 8.0-0 ges 9.h3. He
prevents the development of the
enemy bishop to g4. (9.\!;l/c2 i.g4+)
9 . . . lll e4 10 .'Wc2 i.fS+ Krawiec -
Gaponenko, Fond du Lac 1990.
Black's pieces have been more ac­
tively deployed.
6.J.f4. This bishop is not better
placed here than on gS. 6 . . . .ifS.
Black has managed to develop his
bishop to an active position and
this means that he has solved
the problems in the opening. 7.e3
(7.'Wb3 'Wb6=) 7 . . . lll b d7 8 .i.d3
hd3 9.'Wxd3 i.e7
10 .h3. White saves his bishop
from an exchange after lll h S. (Fol­
lowing 10.0-0, Black can sharpen
the game with 10 . . . lll h S ! ? 11.J.eS
0-0 12 .h3 lll xeS 13.dxeS, Volkov
- Kotanjian, Dubai 2011 and here
he had to attack immediately the
cramping enemy pawn on eS with
the move 13 .. .f6 ! ?oo) 10 . . . 0-0 11.
0-0 ges 12.gabl (12 .'Wc2 lll b 6=
Fressinet - Fridman, Trzcianka
2 015) 12 . . . aS. Black thwarts his
150
opponent's pawn-minority attack
(b2-b4-b5).
13.\!;l/c2 . White prevents a5-a4.
13 . . . lll b 6 14.b3, Fressinet - Gus­
tafsson, Oberhof 2011, 14 . . .
i.b4 ! ?oo
The move 13.a3 allows 13 . . . a4.
Black is deploying his pawns ac­
cording to the rules - on squares
opposite of the colour of his
bishop. 14.'Wc2 (14.i.h 2 , Pert -
Hawkins, London 2 0 15, 14 . . . bS ! ? ,
followed by lll b 6, lll c 4) 1 4 . . . 'WaS
15.gfdl MB 16.lll eS, Larsen - Spas­
sky, Montreal 1979, 16 . . . \!;l/a6 ! ? =
White can hardly find a n active
plan for his further actions.
13.gfcl .if8 14.lll a4 lll e4 15.
lll eS lll xeS 16.i.xeS ge6= Black's
prospects are not worse and after
White's careless reaction 17.i.f4?!
\!;l/h4 18.\!;l/e2 gae8+, Black seizes
the initiative. His attack develops
effortlessly. 19.lll b 6? ! gg6 2 0 .©fl
\!;l/d8 2 1 .lll a4 gf6 2 2 .©gl bS 23.
lll cS gxf4 24.exf4 lll xcS-+ Knaak
- Geller, Novi Sad 1979.
A) 6.J.g5 h6! ?
The inclusion of this move is
very useful for Black.
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. li:Jj3 li:Jf6 4. li:Jc3 e6 5.cd ed 6. ig5 h6
7.ih4
It is not good for White to
play here 7.i.xf6 W/xf6 . Black has
a bishop-pair and a solid posi­
tion.
White must play very accu­
rately not to end up in an inferior
position.
8.l3cl. Black can parry easily
the threat li:Jxd5. 8 . . . li:Jd7 9.W/c2 ,
Shrentzel - Greenfeld, Tel Aviv
1988, 9 . . . li:Jb6 ! ?+
8.W/b3. This is hardly White's
most useful move. 8 . . . id6 9.e3
li:Jd7 10 . .id3 We7 11.0-0-0 li:Jf6+
Lilienthal - Botvinnik, Moscow
1945. He has no compensation for
Black's bishop-pair, moreover
that his king is not so reliably
placed on the queenside.
8.e3 id6 9.id3 0-0 10.0-0
i.g4 ll.h3 .bf3 12 .Wxf3 li:Jd7 13.
Wxf6 li:Jxf6= Shengelia - Ragger,
Vienna 2010.
7 if5
•••
8.e3
8.W/b3. The attack against the
b7-pawn leads to difficulties for
White. 8 . . . g5. Before playing Wb6,
Black must oust his opponent's
bishop in order to avoid the com­
promising of his kingside pawn­
structure. 9.i.g3 (It is bad for
White to play here 9.W/xb7?, be­
cause after 9 . . . gxh4 10.W/xa8 W/b6,
his queen will have great prob­
lems to get away from the a8-
square. 11.0-0-0 id6 12 .li:Ja4
W/c7 13.li:JcS hes 14.dxcS 0-0 15.
li:Jd4 i.d7 16.e3 l3c8. Black is per­
fectly prepared to trap the enemy
queen, 0-1 Spasov - Dimitrov,
ICCF 2013. 17.ie2 li:Ja6 18.Wxc8+
hc8-+ You can see now why
Black has played l3c8 - his knight
on a6 is protected. White does not
obtain sufficient material for his
queen.) 9 . . . W/b6.
151
Chapter 12
White has numerous alterna­
tives here, but neither of them
equalises.
10.�xb6? ! The opening of the
a-file is in favour of Black. 10 . . .
axb6 11.e3 b5+, followed by
llibd7-b6-c4, Banovic - Cabarka­
pa, Novi Sad 2 015.
10 .h4 �xb3 ll.axb3 g4+ Lysyj
Lintchevski, Novokuznetsk
2008. The pawns on b2 and b3
are weak in White's position.
10 .llid2 . He avoids the dou­
bling of his pawns on the b-file.
10 . . . llibd7 ll.f3 (ll.e3 llih5 - see
10 .e3) ll.. .ig7 12 .h4 0-0 13.hxg5
hxg5 14.i.f2 �fe8 15. 0-0-0 i.g6+
Tosi - Krakovsky, ICCF 2011.
Black's pieces are more harmo­
niously deployed and White
will hardly manage to advance
e2-e4.
10 .e3 llibd7. Black takes the
e5-square under control. He plans
to continue with llih5. (11.llid2
llih5, or 11.i.e2 llih5 12 .llid2 llixg3
- see 8 .e3, 9.Wfb3) 11 ..te2 llih5
12 .i.e5 llig7 13 .i.g3 Wfxb3 14.axb3,
Janachkov - Rusev, Plovdiv
2 0 07, 14 . . . i.e7 ! ?+ Black has a su­
perior pawn-structure.
8 • • • llibd7
152
9.i.d3
9.Wfb3 Wfb6 10.llid2 g5 11.i.g3
llih5 12.llia4 (12 .i.e2 llixg3 13.hxg3
0-0-0 14.�cl @b8 15.llia4 Wfxb3
16.llixb3, Margvelashvili - Par­
ligras, Kavala 2 0 07, 16 . . . llif6 ! ? 17.
lliac5 i.d6+, with the two-bishop
advantage for Black.) 12 . . .Wfxb3
13.llixb3 llixg3 14.hxg3 i.b4+ 15.
@dl llif6 16.f3, Gyimesi - Pinter,
Germany 1998, 16 . . . b6 ! ?+, depriv­
ing White's knights of the c5-
square and maintaining an ad­
vantage for Black.
9 . . . .ixd3 10.Wfxd3 Ad6
Black's bishop is more actively
placed here than on e7.
11.0-0
11.0-0-0. White's king will
not be so reliably deployed on the
queenside. 11 . . . 0-0 12 .g4 i.b4 13.
llie2 i.e7 14.i.g3 llie4 15.h4 c5.
This is a double-edged position.
16.llid2 llixg3 17.llixg3 �c8 18.@bl
c4 19.Wfc2 ib4 20.llie2 �c6 2 1.g5
�a5--+ followed by �a6, Rogos -
Kloster, ICCF 2 0 15. Black's rook
is doing a lot of work. It attacks
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. li:Jj3 li:Jf6 4. li:Jc3 e6 5.cd ed 6. ig5 h6

the enemy king and protects the 12 dxe4 13.c!bxe4 ie7 14.
•••

own monarch. '3fel

11.a3 as 12 .li:Je2 0-0 13 .0-0 14.li:Jc3 1'!e8 15.i'!fel V9b6 - see

1'!e8= Landa - Bareev, Vienna 1996. 14.i'!fel.

11 ••• 0-0 14 ••• '3e8

12.e4
White wishes to activate his
pieces, but ends up with an iso­
lated pawn in his camp.
12 .i'!fel 1'!e8 13.e4 dxe4 14.
li:Jxe4 ie7 - see 12.e4.
White's decision not to play
e3-e4 leads to an approximately
equal manoeuvring game. 12.i'!abl
1'!e8 13 .b4 a6 14.a4, Ueti - Cal­
deira, Sao Bernardo do Campo
2 0 14, 14 . . . bS= This is a typical re­
source for Black in positions with
the Carlsbad pawn-structure. He
solves radically the problem with
White's pawn-break b4-b5 and
wishes eventually to transfer his
knight to the c4-square (li:Jb6-c4) .
From there it will cover reliably
his c6-pawn against the attack of
White's major pieces on the c-file.
15.c!bg3
15.c!bc3 Wi'b6 16.i'!adl id6 17.
Wi'c2 Wi'a5= Nowak - Kolanek,
ICCF 2011.
15.ixf6. The vulnerability of
the isolated d4-pawn becomes
more and more obvious with eve­
ry exchange of pieces. 15 . . . c!bxf6
16.li:Jxf6+ .bf6 17.1'!xe8+ Wi'xe8 18.
W/b3 V9d7+ Arkell - Gordon,
Torquay 2013.
15 ••• g6
Naturally, Black should not al­
low the enemy knight to occupy
the fS-square.
But not 15 . . . gS?, because of
16.li:JfS gxh4? 17.c!bxh6+-
16.hf6 c!bxf6 17.c!be5 mg7
18.Yfb3

153
Chapter 12
It may look like White has tri­
umphed with the double attack
against the fl and b7-squares, but
Black has calculated precisely
everything.
18 Yfd5 19.ti'xb7 .td6 20.
• • •
gacl gac8 21. Yfb3
White would not achieve much
with 2 1.Yfxa7 cS 2 2 .Yfa6 gas 23.
\Wc4 cxd4 24.YfxdS tLixdS 2S.tlJc4
fuel+ 26.fuel hg3 27.hxg3 fua2 .
There is just a few material left
on the board. 28JM1 ga4 29.b3
gb4 30.gxd4. White has an extra
pawn, but will be incapable of
holding on to it. 30 . . . tLib6 31.g4
gxb3 32.tLixb6 gxb6=
21 ti'xb3 22.axb3 c5 23.
•••
tLit"3 gxel + 24.gxel cxd4 25.
tLixd4
White's doubled extra pawn
is practically useless. In addi­
tion, Black's bishop will be
stronger than any of White's
knights in a fight on both sides of
the board.
25 gds 26.gdl .tc7= Black
. • •
prepares the transfer of his bish­
op to the a7-gl diagonal.
1S4
B) 6.ti'c2
White impedes the develop­
ment of the enemy bishop to the
fS-square.
6 • • • g6
Black resumes his positional
threat.
7 .tg5
•
White would not achieve any­
thing with 7.!f4 !fS 8.ti'b3 (8.ti'cl
tLibd7 9.h3, Radjabov - Al Sayed,
Doha 2016, 9 . . . tLie4 ! ?=) 8 . . . ti'b6
9.tlJd2, Kharitonov - Tukmakov,
Riga 1988, 9 ... tlJhS ! ? 10.!e3 tlJd7oo
It is obviously bad for White to
opt here for 7.e3, because his
dark-squared bishop would re­
main restricted in his own camp.
7 . . ..tfS 8.!d3 hd3 9.Yfxd3 i.d6
10.0-0 0-0 ll.e4. Now, White's
bishop will have the possibility to
go to gS, or h6, but he ends up
with an isolated pawn. 11 . . . dxe4
12.tLixe4 tLixe4 13 .Wxe4 ges 14.
Wd3 tLid7 ts ..tgs Was 16.a3 ti'ds+
Bohm - Chekhov, Polanica Zdroj
1981. Black's pieces are very ac­
tive and the vulnerability of the
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 11Jj3 11Jf6 4. 11J c3 e6 5.cd ed 6. 'i!! c2 g6 7. ig5 ie7
isolated d4-pawn may hurt White
in the future.
7 ie7
• • •
Black has also tried in practice
to fianchetto his bishop: 7 . . . i.g7
8.e3 MS 9.i.d3 hd3 10.'i!!xd3 0-0
11.0-0 11Jbd7 12.b4 i!e8 13.i!fc1 i!c8=
Bayer - Knaak, Germany 1991.
Here, White can choose the
calm move Bl) 8.e3 and the
more active B2) 8.e4.
8 .i.h6 i.fS 9.'\Wcl 11Jbd7 10 .h3
'\Wb6 11.e3, Studnicka - Konopka,
Decin 2 0 09, 11 . . . 11Je4 ! ? 12 .i.e2
�f8 13.�f4 id6=
He would not achieve much
with the move 8 .h3, with the idea
to follow with g2-g4, because
Black can simply remove his bish­
op from fS to e6. 8 . . . �fS 9.'\Wb3
'\Wb6 10 .g4 '\Wxb3 ll.axb3 i.e6 12 .
.ih6 11Ja6= Van der Wiel - Jadoul,
Brussels 1986. It is White who
must play carefully in this end­
game, because he has isolated
pawns on the b-file.
8 . .bf6. White exchanges his
bishop with the idea to provoke
Black's bishop to occupy the f6-
square from where it cannot im­
pede the pawn-advance b2-b4.
8 . . . .bf6
The move 9.e4 is not in the spir­
it of the position, because Black
has the two-bishop advantage and
the opening of the position would
be in his favour. 9 . . . 0-0! 10.exdS
cxdS 11.i.e2 11Jc6 12.'\Wd2 MS+ Khe­
gay - Shomoev, Nizhny Tagil 2014.
9.e3 �.fS 10.i.d3 hd3 11.'i!!xd3
11Jd7 12.0-0 (12 .b4 a6 13 .0-0
0-0, or 13.a4 0-0 14.0-0 11Jb6 -
see 12.0-0) 12 . . . 0-0 13.b4 a6 14.
a4 11Jb6. Black's knight can go to
c4 from this square. 15.i!abl (Af­
ter the straightforward move 15.
bS, Black can create an outside
passed pawn on the a-file with the
line: 15 . . . cxbS ! 16.axbS aS+ Nei -
Van Scheltinga, Beverwijk 1966.)
15 ... i.e7. Black's bishop on f6 was
restricted by the pawn on d4, so
he transfered it to a more active
position - the d6-square. 16.11Jd2
i!e8 17.i!fcl i.d6= Javakhishvili -
Korneev, Linares 2005.
155
Chapter 12
Bl) 8.e3
If White manages to develop
his bishop on d3 he would have
the edge, but it is Black's move
now . . .
8 . . . U5 .
9 .id3
• 0-0, or 11.h3 0-0 1 2 . 0 - 0 ges, or
Black's bishop is very active on
f5, so White should better ex­
change it.
Or 9 .VHcl, Radjabov - Wang,
Beijing 2 0 13, 9 . . . lll bd7 ! ? =
Following 9.VHb3 VHb6 10.lll d 2
lll bd7 11.i.e2 h6 12.i.f4, Black can
enter a favourable endgame. 12 . . .
VHxb3 13.axb3 g 5 1 4 . .ig3 0 - 0 15.
0-0 ©g7 16.gfcl a6+ Graf - Lan­
da, Cappelle-la-Grande 1995. His
superior pawn-structure provides
him with a slight but stable edge.
9 • • • .ix:d3 10.VHxd3 lll bd7!?
This is Black's most precise
move. Now, after an exchange on
f6, he will be able to capture with
his knight and his bishop will not
lose the control over the b4-
square.
156
White has a choice now. He
can play Bla) 11 .ih6, impeding
•
his opponent's castling kingside,
or castle immediately Blb) 11.
0-0.
About 11.hf6 lll xf6 12.0-0
12.i.f4 ge8 13 .0-0 lll b 6 - see var­
iation Blb.
11.gbl. White would not
achieve much if he delays his cas­
tling. 11 . . . a5 12 . .ih6 (12.0-0 0-0
- see 11.0-0) 12 ... i.f8 13.i.xf8
©xf8 . Black is not afraid of the
loss of his castling rights. 14.0-0
©g7 15.VHc2 , Andersson - Farago,
Dortmund 1978. Here, it seems
very good for him to transfer his
knight to the d6-square : 15 . . .
lll e 8 ! ? 16.gfel lll d 6=
The move 11.h4 seems a bit too
active. 11 . . . 0-0
(diagram)
Following 12 . 0-0-0 ges 13.
hf6 lll xf6 14.h5 lll xh5, White
does not obtain sufficient com­
pensation for the pawn. 15.gh3
lll f6 16,gdhl, Williams - Stanke-
 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. liJj3 liJf6 4. liJ c3 e6 5.cd ed 6. Vf!c2 g6 7. i.gS i.e7
vicms, ICCF 2003, 16 . . . i.f8 ! ?
Black prepares the transfer of his
bishop to g7 where it would pro­
tect reliably his king. 17.liJeS i.g7
18.g4 gxeS ! It is now time for
Black to sacrifice ! 19.dxeS liJxg4.
He sacrifices the exchange and
seizes the initiative. 2 0.'We2 liJxeS
21.gxh7 Wf6 2 2 .f4 liJc4+
12 .liJeS liJxeS. Black wishes to
reduce his opponent's attacking
potential by exchanging pieces.
13.dxeS, Oral - Konopka, Czech
Republic 2 0 0S, 13 . . . liJg4 ! ? Black
forces the enemy queen to protect
the pawn on eS. 14.Wd4 hS 1S.!f4
f6 16.e6 'Wc8 17.f3 liJeS 18 .heS
fxeS 19 .'WxeS gfs 2 0 .'Wd4 'Wxe6+
He has succeeded in trading his f­
pawn for White's e-pawn. Later,
in a fight on both sides of the
board, Black's long-range bishop
with be obviously stronger than
White's knight.
Bla) 11 . .th6 liJg4
Black wishes to oust the ene­
my bishop and to castle.
12 . .tf4
With the move 12 .!g7, White
can deprive his opponent of his
castling rights, but later Black
may castle queenside, while
White will miss badly his power­
ful dark-squared bishop. 12 . . . gg8
13.i.eS liJgxeS 14.liJxeS liJxeS lS.
dxeS 'Wc7 16.Wd4, Arkell - Demp­
sey, Hastings 199S, 16 . . . 0-0-0 ! ?
Black would not mind the ex­
change of his rook pawn for
White's central pawn. 17.Wxa7
WxeS 18.0-0 d4 19.exd4 Wxd4
20 .'Wa8+ ©c7 21.'WaS+ ©b8 22.
gadl Wb4 23.'WeS+ i.d6 24.Wf6
'Wf4 2S.Wxf4 i.xf4+ Black's bishop
will be more powerful than the
enemy knight in this endgame.
12 . . . 0-0
13.h3
Or 13.0-0 ge8 14.a3 (14.h3
liJgf6, or 14.gabl as 1S.a3 liJgf6
16.h3 a4 - see 13.h3) 14 . . . as lS.
'Wc2 liJb6 16.b3 i.d6 17.hd6 'Wxd6
18.h3 liJf6 19.liJeS liJc8 20.Wb2
liJd7 2 1.liJd3, Seirawan - Khalif­
man, Bali 2000, 21.. .'Wf6 ! ? = , fol­
lowed by liJd6.
13 . . . tll gf6 14.0-0
1S7
Chapter 12

14.g4 ge8 1s.@fl .if8 16.@g2

llie4= Antoshin - Spassky, Sochi
1967.

White's king will not be so reli­

ably placed on the queenside.
14.0-0-0 ? ! bS lS.llieS llixeS 16.
ixeS llid� Braun - Halkias, Peri­
steri 2010.
14 . . . ges
15.llie5
1S.�c2 aS 16.a3 �b6= Seira­
wan - Norowitz, Vancouver 2012.
16.a3 a4= Houska - Koneru,
Antakya 2 0 1 0 ;
16.gfcl .if8 17.llid2 lli b 6 1 8 .
�c2 ge6= Gyimesi - Dreev, Vi­
enna 1996.
16.�c2 llib6 17.llieS (17.llid2
llihS 18 ..ih2 .id6 19 ..b:d6 �xd6=
Ivkov - Hemasian, Siegen 1970)
17...llihS 18 ..ih2 .id6 19.gbel, Vol­
kov - Pashikian, Abu Dhabi 2 0 14.
Here, Black had to remove imme­
diately his knight from the edge of
the board, obtaining a quite ac­
ceptable position 19 . . . llig7! ? =
15 • • • �b6

lS.gfcl llib6 16.�c2 .id6 17.

ixd6 �xd6 18.llieS �e7 19.llid3
llie4 20 .llieS, Gareev - Bruzon
Batista, Las Vegas 2 0 14, 20 . . .
llid6 ! ? =

1 S . .ih2 , Nepomniashchy - Ya­

kovich, St Petersburg 1994, lS . . .
llib6 ! ? =
1s.gabl as
(diagram)
16.�e2 llif8 17.a3 .id6= Polu­
gaevsky - Tal, Leningrad 1962 .
Black's plan is very simple in
similar positions. He must place
immediately one of his knights on
b6 and to transfer his other knight
to d6, via e8, or e4. After that

1S8
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:i:ij3 l:i:if6 4. l:i:i c3 e6 5.cd ed 6. Wic2 g6 7. igS ie7
White can hardly find any active
plan, because the pawn-minority
attack (b2-b4) would weaken hor­
ribly the c4-square.
16 .igS l:i:ie4 17 .ixe7 Wffxe7
• •
18.Wic2 l:i:id6! 19.l:i:ia4 l:i:ibc4 20.
l:i:ixc4 l:i:ixc4 21.�cS �d6+
This position was reached in
the famous game Bobotsov -
T.Petrosian, Lugano 1968. White
has no active plan at all. Black
can improve patiently his posi­
tion on the kingside preparing an
attack against the enemy king
there. 22.gacl Wigs 23.ti'dl hS
24.@hl ge7 2S.�d3 �e4 26.
�cs �d6 27.�d3 ti'f5 28.�es
f6 29.�t'3 gg7. Black is perfectly
ready to begin a pawn-offensive
with g6-g5-g4. 30.�h2 ges 31.
@gl �e4 32.ti't'3 ti'e6. Naturally,
he should be reluctant to ex­
change the queens. 33.gfdl gS!+
Black sacrifices a pawn and be­
gins a decisive attack. 34. ti'xhS
f5 3S.ge1 g4 36.hxg4 fxg4
37.t'3? This was not White's best
defence, but his position was al-
ready tremendously difficult any-
way. 37 gxt'3 38.�xt'3 gb7
• • •
39.ti'eS ti'c8 40.ti'f4 gf8 41.
Vies gf5 0-1
Blb) 11.0-0 0-0
12.gabl
White is preparing the pawn­
minority attack.
He can prepare the pawn-ad­
vance b2-b4 also with the move
12 .a3, but even then after 12 . . .
ge8 ! ? , Black equalises easily.
13.b4 a6 14.Wic2 �b6 15 . .ixf6
.ixf6= Polugaevsky - Karpov,
Mar del Plata 1982.
12 . .ih6 ge8 13.h3 a5= Gheor­
ghiu - Ivkov, Petropolis 1973.
12 .gfel. The central strategy
would not promise much to White
here. 12 . . . l:i:ie4 13 . .if4, Iniyan -
Golikov, Khanty-Mansiysk 2016
and here, Black could have tried
to seize the initiative with the line:
13 . . . gS ! ? 14 . .ig3 fSt
12.gadl ge8 13.gfel l:i:ie4 14.
.ixe7 Wffxe7 15.l:i:id2 fS 16.f3, Gonda
159
Chapter 12
- Erdos, Hungary 2008, 16 . . .
llJgS ! ? = White's e3-pawn i s weak
and the pawn-advance e3-e4
would lead to further exchanges.
12 .'%!fc2 ge8 13.gabl llJe4. Black
would not mind furth er s i m ­
plifications ( 1 3 . . . a S - s e e 1 2 .
gabl). 14.llJxe4 (White should
possibly choose here the modest
line: 14.he7 '%!fxe7= Kuzmin -
Vladimirov, Dubai 2002.) 14 . . .
dxe4 1S.he7 '%!fxe7 16.llJd2 cS ! ?
17.gbcl. After a n exchange o n cS,
Black's knight will occupy quickly
the d3-square. 17 . . . cxd4 18.exd4
llJf6 19.gfel gad8+ Gyimesi -
Khalifman, Ulcinj 1998. Black
has a superior pawn-structure
and more harmoniously deployed
pieces.
12.ixf6. This exchange is rea­
sonable only when Black is forced
to capture on f6 with his bishop,
so that White can play b2-b4 im­
mediately. 12 . . . llJxf6 13 .gabl as
14.gfcl ge8 = Kurajica - Ribli,
Surakarta 1982.
12 .h3. White is preparing a
square for his bishop. 12 . . . ge8
13 . .if4. There has arisen a posi­
tion like in variation Bla, but
without a tempo for White. This
circumstance does not influence
the evaluation of the position as
approximately equal. 13 . . . llJb6 14.
gacl (14.gabl, Harikrishna - Bar­
sov, Hastings 2 003, 14 . . . llJc4 ! ? = )
1 4 . . . llJc4. Black prepares the
transfer of his bishop to the d6-
160
square. 1S.b3 llJd6 16.llJeS aS=
Ciucurel - Begliy, ICCF 2 0 14.
12.llJd2. White takes the e4
and c4-squares under control.
12 . . . ge8 13.gael (13 .gabl as - see
12.gabl ; 13.gfel llJe4 14 ..ixe7
Wxe7 1S.f3 ttJxd2 16.Wxd2, Bu
Xiangzhi - Bhat, Seattle 2001,
16 . . .fS = , preventing e3-e4.) 13 . . .
llJf8 . Black prepares the transfer
of his knight to e6. l4.ge2 llJe6
1S.hf6 .ixf6. His minor pieces
exert powerful pressure against
White's d4-pawn and thus de­
prive him of an active play con­
nected with the pawn-advance
e3-e4. 16.b4. This move looks
rather inconsistent. White had at
first centralised his rook on al
and then began active actions
on the queenside. 16 ... aS 17.bxaS
gxaS 18.llJb3 ga3+ Hulak - Be­
liavsky, Murska Sobota 2 0 07.
White's weak a2-pawn needs per­
manent protection.
12 . . . as
Black impedes the pawn-ad­
vance b2-b4.
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 11Jj3 11Jf6 4. 11J c3 e6 5.cd ed 6. �c2 g6 7. ig5 i.e7
13.a3
13.11Jd2 ge8 14.f3 (14.gfcl i.d6
- see 13.gfcl) 14 . . . 11Jf8oo Jakab -
Todorovic, Budapest 2003.
13.h3 ge8 14.i.f4 (14.Wfc2 11Je4
- see 13.Wfc2) 14 . . . i.f8 15.Wfc2
�b6= Burmakin - Dreev, St Pe­
tersburg 1999.
13.gfcl ge8 14.11Jd2 (14.a3 11Je4
- see 13.a3 ; 14.�c2 11Jb6 - see
13.Wfc2) 14 . . . id6. Black is prepar­
ing �b8 and 11Jh5. 15.11Jfl Wfb8
16.f3 11Jh5oo His prospects are not
worse and White's too active
move l 7.g4? ! led only to the weak­
ening of his kingside. 17 . . . 11Jg7+
Tangborn - Bhat, ICC 2 0 07.
13.Wfc2 ge8
About 14.a3 11Je4, or 14 . .ixf6
11Jxf6 15.a3 i.d6 - see 13.a3.
The line: 14.h3 11Je4 15.if4
i.d6 16.11Jxe4 leads to complica­
tions which turn out to be in fa­
vour of Black. 16 . . .dxe4 17.hd6
exf3 18 .gxf3 Wff6 19.if4 g5. He re­
gains his pawn. 2 0.i.g3 Wfxf3 2 1 .
gfe1 11Jf6 2 2 .Wfe2 �f5+ Meenakshi
- Makka, Athens 2006. White's
king does not seem to be so safe in
this middle game. In addition, the
attacking potential of Black's tan­
dem queen + knight is well
known . . .
14.11Jd2 11Jf8 ! ? = Bunzmann -
Klovans, Schwerin 1996.
14.gfcl 11Jb6 15.11Je5 11Jfd7.
Simplifying of the position is
Black's simplest road to equality.
16.i.xe7 �xe7 17.11Jd3 (Following
17.11Jxd7 �xd7 18.11Ja4, Black can
refrain from exchanging the last
couple of minor pieces and trans­
fer his knight to the d6-square.
18 . . . 11Jc4 19.�dl �e7 2 0 .b3 11Jd6
21.l1Jc5 hS+ Koneru - Nielsen, Es­
bjerg 2 0 03. The arising position
resembles very much a game, we
have already analysed in variation
Bla - Bobotsov - T.Petrosian.)
17 ... 11Jc4= Spassky - Hort, Co­
logne 1989.
13 . . . ges
14.�c2
14.gfcl 11Je4 15.if4 id6 16.
i.xd6 11Jxd6= Tomaszewski -
Flear, Buende 1985.
161
Chapter 12
14 ..txf6 llJxf6 15.'\Wc2 i.d6 16.
h3 (16.b4, Chuprov - Shomoev,
Khanty-Mansiysk 2010, 16 . . .
bS ! ?+; 16.llJe2 '\We7= Vescovi -
Mekhitarian, Americana 2 010)
16 ... '\We7= Jakovenko - Gelfand,
Odessa 2 0 09. Black has no prob­
lems at all, which is by the way
typical for the Carlsbad pawn­
structure when he has managed
to exchange his passive light­
squared bishop.
14 . . . lll e4 15 .ixe7
•
About 15.llJxe4 dxe4 16.he7
'\Wxe7 - see 15.i.xe7.
15 • • • Wxe7
16.b4
There arises a complicated ma­
noeuvring battle after 16.l:Ucl llJd6
17.llJe2. White prepares the trans­
fer of his knight to the d3-square.
17 . . . ©g7 18.llJf4 llJf8 19.llJd3 llJe6=
Ivanchuk - Girl, Leon 2 013.
16.llJxe4 dxe4 17.llJd2 cS ! ? Af­
ter this move, White must comply
162
with the weakening of his pawn­
structure in order to prevent the
appearance of Black's knight to
the d3-outpost. 18.l:!bcl (18.l:!fel,
Vera Gonzalez Quevedo - Maro­
vic Fernandez, Havana 1999, 18 . . .
bS ! ? 19.l:!bcl l:!ac8= ) 18 . . . cxd4 1 9 .
exd4, Nikolic - Lagumina, Lu­
gano 1989, 19 ... llJf6!?= Now White
must play very precisely not to
end up in an inferior position. The
vulnerability of his isolated d4-
pawn may hurt him in the future.
16 . . • lll d6
This is the ideal square for
Black's knight in this variation.
17.bxa5
17.Wb3? axb4 18.Wxb4, Sta­
menkovic - Korneev, Forni di So­
pra 2011, 18 . . . bS ! ?+
17.b5 llJc4 18.bxc6 bxc6. White
has succeeded in creating a weak­
ness on c6 for his opponent, but
thanks to the powerful placement
of his knight on d6, Black manag­
es to get rid of it by advancing
c6-c5. 19.l:!al llJdb6 20.llJa4 llJxa4
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4. liJ c3 e6 5.cd ed 6. Wic2 g6 7. .igS ie7
2 1.Wxa4 i'fac8 2 2 .i''i:fc l cS= Gar­
darsson - Ruimy, ICCF 2008.
17 gxa5 18.a4 ga6 19.liJel
• • •
White prepares the transfer of
his knight to d3. Black does not
need to waste time and can send
his own knight to the c4-square.
19.�fel liJb6= Galliamova -
A.Petrosian, Lvov 199S.
19 ttib6 20.ttid3 liJbc4 21.
• • •
gb4, Inkiov - Abramovic, Bor
1983, 21 ©g7!?oo The powerful
•••
placement of Black's knight on c4
provides him with at least equal
prospects.
B2) 8.e4
White wishes to exploit his
lead in development, but his
pawn-break in the centre would
lead to the appearance of an iso­
lated pawn in his position.
8 • • . dxe4 9 .ixf6
•
Or 9.liJxe4 liJxe4 10.Wxe4 .ie6
11.ih6, Toth - Nagy, Budapest
2 0 04, 11 . . . liJd7 ! ?+
9 • • • .ixf6 10.Wxe4+
It would not be so energetic for
White to play here 10.liJxe4 .ifs+
Baron Rodriguez - Rodriguez
Guerrero, Mataro 2004.
10 • • • ti'e7
11 .ic4
•
White's pieces have been de­
ployed very actively, but his queen
is pinned. After its exchange, if
Black manages to complete the
development of his pieces, he will
succeed in exploiting the vulner­
ability of the d4-pawn.
About ll.ti'xe7+ liixe7 12 . .ic4
.ifs - see 11.ic4.
163
Chapter 12
11 • • • .lfS
Black develops his bishop with
tempo.
12.'f«xe7+
12 .\We3 llid7 13.0-0 0-0+
Orzech - Parramon Guillaumet,
Balaguer 2009.
12 • • • ©xe7
13.0-0-0
Besides this move, White has
tried in practice:
13.h3 hS. Black should better
not allow g2-g4. 14.0-0 gd8. He
has taken measures against the
possible check on el. 1S.gfe1 + ©f8
16.gadl (After 16.llie4, Black can
simply exchange the enemy knight.
16 . . . .ixe4 17.gxe4 llid7 18.gf4
©g7oo Johansen - Sandler, Mel­
bourne 1998. White must play ac­
curately in this endgame. ) 16 . . .
llid7 17.llie4 .ixe4. This move is
necessary; otherwise, Black can­
not neutralise his opponent's ini­
tiative. 18.gxe4 llib6 19 ..ib3 llidS.
This black knight, placed in the
164
centre, will impede the enemy
bishop on b3 to exert pressure
against the f7-square. 2 0 .llieS
©g7 21.g3, Grigore - Dumitrache,
Bucharest 1992, 2 1 . . .aS ! ?oo
13.0-0. Now, just like after
0-0-0, White plans to give a
check from the el-square. Still,
his queen's rook will occupy a less
active position. 13 . . . gd8 14.gfel+
©f8 1S.llie4, Beim - Portisch,
Frankfurt 1998 (1S.h3 hS, or lS.
gadl llid7 16.h3 hS - see 13.h3)
1S ... .ixd4 ! ? Black exploits the in­
sufficient protection of the pawn
on d4 and can simply capture it.
Naturally, White still maintains
the initiative, but his compensa­
tion for the sacrificed pawn is
insufficient. 16.llifgS f6 17.llif7
gd7 18.llied6 llia6 19.gadl .ixb2.
White's pieces seem very active,
but Black has already two extra
pawns. White's attempt to restore
the material balance would lead
to numerous exchanges. 2 0 .llixfS
gxdl 21.gxdl gxfS 2 2 .llid8 llicS
23 .llie6+ llixe6 24.he6 bS 2S.
.ixfS cs 26 . .ixh7 i.d4 27.©fl as+
Now, thanks to the powerful posi­
tion of his bishop and the far-ad­
vanced queenside pawns, Black's
prospects seem preferable.
13 • . • �d7 14.h3
It is obviously worse for White
to play here 14.dS ? ! Sanikidze -
M.Gurevich, Metz 2012, since fol­
lowing 14 . . . ghc8 ! ? 1S.d6+ ©f8+,
Black manages to avoid the dis-
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. CiJj3 CiJf6 4. CiJ c3 e6 5.cd ed 6. V!ic2 g6 7. .ig5 .ie7
coordination of his rooks and
White's pawn, having penetrated
to the d6-square, is much rather a
liability than a real danger.
14 . . . c!bb6
15.gdel+
While Black's rook remains on
hS, it is important for White to
give a check on the e-file, so that
Black's king, after its retreat to
the f8-square, would impede the
coordination of his major pieces.
15 ..ib3 h5 16.l'!hel + The check
with this rook looks less precise.
(16.l'!hgl h4+ Sulava - Brkic,
Marija Bistrica 2011; it is better
for White to play here 16.l'!del +
©fS - see 15.l'!del.) 16 . . . ©fS. With
a rook on dl White cannot play
CiJe5, because of the enemy bish­
op-check on g5. 17 . .ic2 . White de­
prives his opponent of the two­
bishop advantage, but with the
exchange of every piece the vul­
nerability of his isolated d4 pawn
becomes more and more obvious.
17 . . ..ixc2 18.©xc2 ©g7 19.CiJe4
CiJd5+ Capuano - Zawadka, ICCF
2 0 14.
15 ©f8 16 .lb3 h5 17.c!be5
. • • •
.lgs+ 1s.©d1 gds 19.c!bxf7
gxd4+. Here, Black could have
even tried to obtain an advantage
if his rook on hS had not been
so horribly misplaced. 20.©e2
.ld3+ 21.©:f3 gf4+ 22.©e3
gxf7+ 23.©xd3 gd7+ 24.©c2
©g7= Deforel - Bericat, ICCF
2016. The tactical complications
are over and the position is just
dead simple and equal.
165
 Part 4
1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . lti:f3 ltif6 4.ltic3 e6 5.e3
The fourth part of our book
will be devoted to the analysis of
one of the two main lines for
White on move five - 5.e3. As an
opening weapon for Black we will
not choose the Meran variation
(5 . . . lll bd7), but 5 . . . a6 ! ?
The point is that after 5 . . .
lll b d7, there has been played an
enormous amount of games and
there has been amassed so much
theory both in the Meran varia­
tion (6.i.d3), as well as in the An­
ti-Meran set-ups (6.�c2), so that
not every reader will manage to
find his way in these intricacies.
The move 5 . . . a6 has not been
so well studied, but has been test-
166
ed by such strong players as
V.Anand, L.Aronian, M .Carlsen,
P.Elianov, G. Kasparov, A.Mo­
rozevich, A.Tomashevsky, V.To­
palov . . .
I n Chapter 1 3 we will analyse
the moves 6.h3, 6.i.d2 and 6.a3 as
well as some other possibilities
for White. The Chapters 14-15 will
be devoted to the moves with
White's bishop: 6.i.e2 (Chapter
14) and 6.i.d3 (Chapter 15) . The
occupation of space (6.c5) will be
dealt with in Chapter 16. Finally,
in Chapters 17-18, we will analyse
White's popular moves 6.b3 and
6.�c2.
Chapter 13 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . lLJf.J lLJf6 4.lLJc3 e6
5.e3 a6
Black prepares dxc4, followed
by b7-bS and contrary to the
Meran variation, does not deter­
mine yet the placement of his
knight on b8. It can often go to a
more active position (the c6-
square), even after a loss of a tem­
po, following c6-cS.
In this chapter we will analyse
White's relatively seldom played
moves: A) 6.h3, B) 6 . .id2 and
C) 6.a3.
6.�b3. This move does not
seem logical. Why should White
protect once again his c4-pawn, if
it is defended by his bishop on fl?
6 . . . dxc4 7.hc4 bS 8 . .ie2 c5 9.dxcS
hes 10.0-0 0-0= Dimakiling -
Alavkin, Moscow 2011.
6.lL!eS cS 7.cxdS (7.a4 id6 -
see 6.a4) 7 . . . exdS 8 . .ie2 (8 .id3
.id6 9.0-0 0-0 10 .h3, Gagunash­
vili - Kobalia, Istanbul 2003, 10 . . .
bS ! ?oo Black begins immediate ac­
tive actions on the queenside.) 8 . . .
.id6 9.0-0 0 - 0
10.b3, Moiseenko - Bojkov,
Plovdiv 2008, 10 . . . �e8 ! ? =
10.f4. The basic defect o f the
plan with lL!eS and f2-f4 is that
White weakens the e4-square.
10 . . . lL!c6 11.@hl cxd4 12.exd4
\Wb6= Moiseenko - Svane, Hel­
singor 2 0 14.
10 . .if3 .ie6. Black parries eas­
ily the threats against his dS-pawn.
ll.b3 cxd4 12.exd4 \Wc7. White's
knight is very active at the centre
of the board and Black must exert
pressure against it. 13 ..ib2 lL!bd7!?=
167
Chapter 13
6.a4. White impedes his oppo­
nent's counterplay, connected
with b7-b5, but weakens the b4-
square. 6 . . . c5. Black prepares
lDc6. The loss of a tempo is not so
important here, because White's
"extra" move a2-a4 does not seem
so useful either. 7.cxd5 (7.ie2 dxc4,
or 7.id3 dxc4 8.hc4 lDc6 - see
Chapter 14; 7.lDe5, Lugovoi -
Grigoriants, Krasnoyarsk 2 0 03,
7 . . . .id6 ! ? 8.cxd5 exd5 9.g3 ie6=)
7 ... exd5
8.lDe5 lDc6 9 . .ie2 id6 10.lDxc6
bxc6 11.0-0 0-0= Purnama -
Nguyen, Jakarta 2 015. Black's
pawns look a bit weak, but the po­
sition is approximately equal, be­
cause his pieces are very active
and White's queenside has been
weakened by the pawn-advance
a2-a4.
8.ie2 lDc6 9.0-0 .id6 10.dxc5
(10.b3 cxd4 11.lDxd4 Wffc7 12.lDf3
ie6 13.ia3 ha3 14.gxa3 0-0=
Grivas - Giorgadze, Ankara 1995.
Here, just like in our previous
notes, White's queenside has been
compromised after a2-a4.) 10 . . .
.ixc5 11.lDd4 (11.b3 0 - 0 12 .i.a3
ha3 13.gxa3 ie6 14.Wffa l Wffe 7=
Neverov - Gormally, Cappelle-la-
168
Grande 2002) 11 . . . 0-0 12.lDxc6
bxc6 13.Wic2 id6oo Siebrecht -
Drozdovskij , Dresden 2 0 07. You
can see once again the negative
consequences of the move a2-a4.
White does not have the standard
manoeuvre for similar positions
lDa4-c5, because of that.
A) 6.h3
White is waiting. He wishes to
capture with his bishop without
the loss of a tempo after Black
takes on c4. Still, the move h2-h3
does not seem to be so useful.
6 • • . lll b d7! ?
This is an interesting decision.
Black transfers into Meran set­
ups in which his move a7-a6 will
be more useful than his oppo­
nent's move h2-h3.
7.Wffc 2
White plays in the spirit of the
Anti-Meran.
The move 7.a4 weakens the
b4-square and Black can exploit
this immediately. 7 . . . ib4 8.id2
0-0 9.ie2, Ehlvest - Malakhov,
Jurmala 2 0 15, 9 . . . a5 ! ? =
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. Ci:ij3 Ci:if6 4. Ci:ic3 e6 5.e3 a6
7.b3 ib4 8 .i.d2 0-0 9.i.e2
i.d6. We will analyse similar posi­
tions in Chapter 17, but there
White does not lose time for the
unnecessary move h2-h3. 10.0-0
eS 11.dxeS Ci:ixeS 12.cxdS cxdS=
Giffard - Kurmann, France 2 0 07.
White's attempt to occupy
space on the queenside with 7.cS
frees Black's hands for counter­
play in the centre. 7 . . . g6 8.i.d3
i.g7 9.0-0 o-o 10 .b4 ge8 ll.i.b2
eS 12.Ci:ixeS Ci:ixeS 13.dxeS gxeS.
He does not need to be afraid of
White's possible knight-sorties.
14.Ci:ia4 ge8 1S.i.d4 Ci:ie4 16.he4
gxe4= Stocek - Cerveny, Pardu­
bice 2 0 07.
7.a3. White makes too many
moves with his rook-pawns. 7 . . .
.id6. Now, h e has n o more wait­
ing moves and must clarify the
position. 8.cS. This is an impor­
tant decision. White occupies
space on the queenside, but with
his bishop on the h2-b8 diagonal
Black will accomplish easily the
thematic pawn-advance e6-eS.
(White would not achieve much
with 8 . .id3 dxc4 9.hc4 cS 10.
dxcS hcS 11.0-0 bS. Black pre­
pares the development of his
bishop on b7 with tempo. He has
no problems whatsoever. 12 . .ie2
ib7 13 .b4 .ie7 14.i.b2 0-0= Sto­
cek - Laznicka, Czechia 2012.)
8 . . . ic7 9.b4 eSoo Naumkin - Ko­
balia, Moscow 2008.
7 . . .id6
. ICCF 2014. White has managed to
8.g4
White is fighting for the initia­
tive on the kingside.
8.cS .ic7 9.i.d3, Kozul - Gla­
vas, Bihac 1999, 9 . . . eS=
8.b3. This fianchetto of
White's bishop seems to be too
slow. 8 . . . eS 9 . .ib2 e4. Black occu­
pies space. 10.Ci:id2 0-0 ll.g4 h6
12 . .ie2 ge8 13.0-0-0 bS 14.cS .
Now, Black cannot open the b­
file, but on the other hand, he
does not need to worry about the
protection of the dS-square. (Fol­
lowing 14.gdgl, Black must take
care about the possibility g4-gS.
14 . . . Ci:ih7 lS.©bl bxc4. He opens
the b-file for his rook. 16.bxc4
gb8 17.©al i.b4 18.cxdS .ixc3 19.
§'xc3 cxdS 20 ..ia3 Ci:ib6 21.gbl
.id7= Petersons - Schoch, ICCF
2 0 1S . Black's king is safer than
its counterpart.) 14 . . . .ic7 lS.gdgl
Ci:ih7 16.h4 Ci:idf8. He is preparing
f7-fS. 17.Ci:idl fS 18.gS. White sac­
rifices a pawn for the initiative.
18 . . . hxgS 19.hxgS Ci:ixgS 20 .f4
Ci:igh7oo Grabliauskas - Pezzica,
169
Chapter 13
open the h and g-files, but Black
has an extra pawn. In addition, he
has more space too.
8 . . . h6
Black prevents g4-gS.
9.c5
If White wishes to occupy
space on the queenside, he should
better do this before Black has
played b7-bS.
About 9.b3 es 10 . .ib2 e4 11.
lll d 2 0-0 - see 8.b3 .
9 . .id2 bS 10 .cS .ic7 11 . .id3 aSoo
Richardt - Eldridge, ICCF 2 013.
9.:!!g l Wie7. Black's plans in­
clude the exchange on c4, fol­
lowed by b7-bS, c6-cS, .ib7. He
does not need to be in a hurry to
castle kingside, because after g4-
gS, his king may come under an
attack. 10 . .id2 (10 .h4 dxc4 11.
hc4 bS 12 ..ie2 cS 13 .gS hxgS 14.
hxgS lll d S= Valli - Cecchelli, ICCF
2009) 10 ... dxc4 ll ..ixc4 (11.e4
Black parries easily his opponent's
threat to win a piece. 11 . . . eS 12.
170
hc4 bS 13 . .ie2 c5 14.dxeS lll xeS
lS.0-0-0, Berczes - Baramidze,
Budapest 2010, 1S . . . b4! ?oo) 11 . . . bS
12 . .ie2 cS 13.h4 (13.dxcS lll xcS+
Sakhabeev - Alderisio, ICCF
2012) 13 . . . b4. Black ousts the en­
emy knight to the edge of the
board. 14.lll a 4, Rodshtein - Droz­
dovskij, Cappelle-la-Grande 2007,
14 . . . cxd4 ! ?oo
9 . . . J.e7!?
The bishop usually retreats to
c7, or b8 in similar positions. Still,
Black's further plans include not
e6-eS, but b7-b6. In these lines,
the bishop will be better placed on
the a3-f8 diagonal, controlling
the important cS and b4-squares.
10.J.d2
Or 10.:!! g l b6 11.cxb6, Ding -
Vitiugov, Sochi 2009 and here,
Black does not need to lose time
to capture the pawn, but can play
immediately 11 . . . cS ! ?oo
10 . . . b6 11.cxb6, Adhiban -
Ragger, Moscow 2012, 11 . . .
ti'xb6 ! ? 12.gS (Following 12.lll a4
 l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. l:iJ.f3 l:iJf6 4. l:iJc3 e6 5.e3 a6
ffc7 13Jkl i.b7=, Black can de­
fend easily his weakness on c6,
while White can hardly find a safe
haven for his king.) 12 . . . l:iJe4.
Black sacrifices a pawn for the
initiative. 13.c!Oxe4 dxe4 14.
ffxe4 .ib7 15 . .ig2 (15.gxh6? ! cS
16.hxg7 gg8t) 15 . . . cs 16.ffg4
hxg5= , restoring the material
balance.
B) 6 . .id2
White wishes to develop
quickly his queenside pieces, but
with a bishop on d2, his queen
would not control the important
d4-square.
6 . . . c5
Black is not bothered by the
loss of the tempo and is preparing
t:fJc6. His plan is to create pressure
against the enemy centre as
quickly as possible.
7.cxd5
7.gcl t:fJc6 8.cxdS exdS - see
7.cxdS.
7.ffc2 t:fJc6 8.dxcS i.xcS 9.gdl
V!!e7 10.a3 0-0= Nakamura - Fer­
nandez, Orlando 2011.
7 . . . exd5
8 . .ie2
White's bishop will be less ac­
tive on this square than on d3, but
on the other hand Black would
not be able to win a tempo with
the move c5-c4.
8.dxcS. White prefers to play
against an isolated pawn. 8 . . . i.xcS
9 .ffa4+. He wishes to exploit
Black's delay with castling. (After
White's calmer line: 9 .gcl t:fJc6
10.l:iJa4 i.d6 11.i.c3 0-0 12 .i.e2
t:fJe4=, Black's centralised knight
is obviously more powerful than
White's knight on a4, Nikolic -
Girl, Hilversum 2009. 9.g3 t:fJc6
- see 8.g3.) 9 . . . t:fJc6 10 .i.bS i.d7
ll.i.xc6 i.xc6 12.V!!f4 0-0 13 .0-0,
Vovk - Rutkowski, Mrzezyno
2011, 13 ... t:fJe4 ! ? 14.gfdl f5oo Black's
bishop-pair and his powerful
knight in the centre compensate
the weakness of his dS-pawn.
8.g3 . White prepares the fian-
171
Chapter 13
chetto of his bishop. 8 . . . ll:lc6 9.
dxcS (9.i.g2 i.g4 10.0-0 cxd4 11.
exd4 i.e7= Hebden - Haslinger,
Great Yarmouth 2 007) 9 . . . ixcS
10.i.g2 0-0 11.0-0 i.g4. There
has arisen a typical position with
an isolated queen's pawn in which
Black's active pieces compensate
the slight weakness of his dS­
pawn. 12 .h3, S.Atalik - M.Gure­
vich, Istanbul 2 0 03, 12 . . . ifS ! ?
13.ll:le2 ll:le4 14Jkl 'i;1fd7 1S.g4
i.e6oo
8.i.d3 ll:lc6 9 .ll:leS (After the
rather slow move 9 .h3, Gajewski
- Barnaure, Jerusalem 2 0 1S,
Black can try to occupy additional
space on the queenside, instead of
exerting pressure against the d4-
pawn: 9 . . . c4 ! ? 10 .i.c2 bSoo) 9 . . .
cxd4 10.ll:lxc6 bxc6 ll.exd4 i.d6
12.0-0 0-0 13.i.gS, Markus - M.
Gurevich, Khanty-Mansiysk 200S,
13 .. .!�bB ! ? 14.ll:la4 h6 lS. i.h4 i.f4.
He is preventing the move �cl.
16.a3 as 17.�el 'i;1fd6 18.i.g3 i.g4
19.'i;1fc2 ll:lhS= We have already
seen in this variation that Black's
active pieces compensate the vul­
nerability of his c6-pawn.
8.�cl ll:lc6
172
After 9.i.d3, Morozevich -
Malakhov, Moscow 2 013, Black
can occupy advantageously addi­
tional space on the queenside
with the move 9 . . . c4 ! ?oo
Following 9.ll:leS cxd4 1 0 .ll:lxc6
bxc6 11.exd4 i.d6= , the slight
weakness of Black's c6-pawn is
practically irrelevant, Vitiugov -
Ni Hua, Ningbo 2010.
9 .i.e2 , Shalimov - M.Gure­
vich, Istanbul 2006, 9 . . . cxd4 ! ? 10.
ll:lxd4 i.d6 ll.ll:lxc6 bxc6 12.ll:la4.
White wishes to exploit the weak­
ness of the enemy c6-pawn, but
Black can deploy his knight at the
middle of the board. 12 . . . ll:le4 13.
i.f3 (It would be too dangerous
for White to accept the pawn­
sacrifice : 13.�xc6? ! 'i;1fh4t) 13 . . .
ll:lxd2 . Black exchanges his active
knight, but obtains the two-bishop
advantage. 14.'i;1lxd2 as 1S.a3 i.d7
16.ll:lcS i.c8 17.ll:ld3 i.d7 18.0-0
0-0= His powerful bishop-pair
compensates the slight vulnera­
bility of Black's pawn-structure.
8 • • • c!Oc6
9.0-0
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. &iJ.f3 &iJf6 4. &iJc3 e6 5.e3 a6
9 .&iJeS cxd4 10.exd4 id6 11.
&iJxc6 bxc6 12 .i.g5 �b8 13 .�d2 h6
14.i.h4 0-0 15.�cl �e8= Bareev ­
Malakhov, Sochi 2006.
9 ... .te6
Black is not in a hurry to de­
velop his bishop to d6 in order not
to lose a tempo after White cap­
tures dxc5.
lOJkl
10.&iJeS cxd4 ll.exd4 .ld6 12.
&iJxc6 bxc6 13 . .lgS �b8 . Black re­
moves his queen from the pin.
13 . . . 14.h3 &iJe4 15.&iJxe4 dxe4
16.V:Va4 i.d5. His bishop cements
perlectly his position on this
square. 17 . .lc4 0-0= Jussupow -
M .Gurevich, Bastia 2 004.
10 • • . �k8
White has no more waiting
moves, so he must exchange on
c5. 11.dxc5 hc5 12. l0a4 .ta7
13.V:Vb3 ti'e7. Black complies with
the penetration of the enemy
knight to the b6-square, but that
is practically useless for White.
14.l0b6 gbs 15. l0g5 0-0oo
Bischoff - M.Gurevich, Germany
2 0 0 2 . Black has completed the
development of his pieces. It is in­
conceivable how White can de­
velop his initiative later. The ex­
change on e6, after fxe6, would
lead to the opening of the f-file
and the fortification of the pawn
on d5.
C) 6.a3 l0bd7
This transfer to the Meran set­
ups seems logical, because the
move a6 seems more useful than
White's move a3.
7 .td3
•
7.c5 g6 - see Chapter 16.
7.i.e2 dxc4 8.i.xc4 - see 7.
i.d3.
7.h3 i.d6 - see 6.h3.
7.b3 i.d6 8.ib2 0-0 9.ie2
b6 ! ? With this move Black not
only prepares the development of
his bishop on b7, but also c6-c5.
10.0-0 i.b7 11.V:Vc2 c5 12.dxcS
173
Chapter 13
bxcS= Bilobrk - Kovacevic, Sibe­
nik 2009.
The move 7.cxdS is not good
for White, because after 7 . . . exdS,
Black's rook will have the semi­
open e-file in the middle game
and his bishop will gain access to
the h3-c8 diagonal. 8 . .id3 .id6 9 .
0-0 0-0= Karaklajic - Minev,
Sambor 1966.
7.W/c2 .id6 8.e4. This move
leads to simplifications. (8 .b4 es
- see 7.b4) 8 . . . dxe4 9 .tlJxe4 tlJxe4
10.Wfxe4 cS 11 . .igS, Grigoryan -
Wells, Aix les Bains 2011 (The po­
sition might seem absolutely
equal, but White must play care­
fully, because after 11 . .id3 cxd4
12 .b4 tlJf6 13.Wfxd4, Black can ex­
ploit his opponent's delay of cas­
tling and accomplish a dangerous
break in the centre with 13 . . . eS ! ,
seizing completely the initiative.
14.W/e3 e4+ Kotsur - Kvon, Al Ain
2012.) 11 . . . W/aS+ ! ? 12 . .id2 Wc7=
7.b4. White occupies space on
the queenside, but after 7 . . . .id6,
Black's counterplay, connected
with e6-eS, would be sufficient for
him at least to maintain the equal­
ity. 8 . .ib2 (8 . .id3 eS = ; after 8.Wfc2
eS 9 . .ib2 , Malaniuk - Lau, Monte­
catini Terme 1994, Black can oc­
cupy space advantageously with
9 . . . e4 ! ? 10.tlJd2 0-0oo) 8 . . . 0-0
(diagram)
9.h3 Wfe7 ! ? =
9.Wfb3. White exerts pressure
against the dS-square with the
174
idea to prevent the enemy pawn­
break e6-eS. Still, Black can un­
dermine White's centre with his
other pawn after the preliminary
move b7-b6. 9 . . . We7 10.h3, Vol­
kov - Svetushkin, Moscow 2008,
10 . . . b6 ! ? ll ..ie2 dxc4 12 .hc4 cS=
9.cS. White occupies even
more space on the queenside, but
reduces his pressure against the
pawn on dS. Now, the pawn-break
e6-eS will be even more effective
for Black. 9 . . . .ic7 10.tlJa4 Wfe7 11.
.ie2 �b8 ! ? He removes his rook
in advance against the possible
attack tlJb6. 12.0-0 es 13.tlJxeS
tlJxeS 14.dxeS hes lS.heS WxeS
16.W/d4, Lantier - M .Gurevich,
Moscow 2002 and here, Black's
simplest road to equality would
be the prosaic trade of the queens :
16 . . . Wxd4 ! ? 17.exd4 .ifS=
9 .Wc2 We7 10 . .ie2 (10 . .id3
dxc4 11.hc4 es - see 10 . .ie2 ; 10.
�dl dxc4 11.hc4. After the re­
moval of the rook from al, the
move b4-bS becomes impossible.
Black can exploit immediately
this circumstance with the move
11 . . . aS+ Krasenkow - Kobalia,
Port Erin 2006.) 10 . . .dxc4 11.
hc4 es 12 . .ib3 (12 ..ia2 .ic7=
Bauer - Gelfand, Biel 2 0 0S) 12 . . .
 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. liJj3 liJf6 4. liJc3 e6 5.e3 a6
aS 13.bS, K.Georgiev - Dorfman,
Moscow 1990, 13 ... exd4! ? 14.l/Jxd4
liJeSt Black's pieces have been
much more harmoniously de­
ployed.
7 dxc4 8 .ixc4 b5
. . . . sufficient compensation for the
Now, White must make up his
mind where to retreat his bishop to.
9 .le2
. 12.dxcS liJxcS 13.b4 l/Jcd7 14 . .ib2
9 . .la2 cs 10.0-0 .ib7
White would not achieve much
with the move ll.e4, because of
Black's simple response ll . . . cxd4.
He does not need to calculate
the variations, connected with the
capturing on e4. 1 2 .l/Jxd4 .icS 13.
.le3 0-0 14.f3 liJeS= Hoi - Pe­
tursson, Reykjavik 1981.
11.l3el. White is preparing e3-
e4, but reduces the protection of
his pawn on f2 . ll . . . .id6 12 .e4 (12.
dS exdS 13.e4 d4 14.eS liJxeS lS.
liJxeS 0-0+ Kruck - Beyer, Ger­
many 2001. Black has more than
sacrificed piece.) 12 . . . cxd4 13.
�xd4 .lcS 14.�dl l/Jg4. He attacks
the f2-pawn and wins an impor­
tant tempo, managing to transfer
his knight to the es-square. 1S.l3fl
liJdeS 16.liJxeS liJxeS= Santos Etx­
epare - Llorach Garcia, ICCF
2012.
11.�e2 .id6. Black's bishop
will be very active on the h2-b8
diagonal. Later, he can follow
with �c7, or �b8, increasing the
pressure against the h2-square.
12 .l3dl (12.e4 cxd4 13.liJxd4 l3c8!?=;
0-0 1S.l3fdl �e7= Khalilbeili -
Ustinov, Batumi 1961. White's
knight is better placed on d2 than
on c3 in similar positions.) 12 . . .
�c7 13.dxcS (After 13.dS, Black
has the powerful resource 13 . . .
c4 ! ?+, restricting the enemy bish­
op on a2, Bauer - Lautier, Eng­
hien les Bains 2001. Following
13.h3 0-0=, White should better
refrain from 14.e4?! cxd4 1S.liJxd4
liJcS+, with rather unpleasant
pressure against the pawn on e4,
Kozul - Varga, Medulin 1997.)
13 . . . liJxcS 14.b4 l/Jcd7 1S ..ib2 l3c8
16.l3acl �b8 17.h3. Now, White
must play very precisely not to
end up in an inferior position .
(For example: he cannot equalise
with 17.e4, because of 17 . . . 0-0
17S
Chapter 13
18.g3, Piskov - Rublevsky, Hel-
sinki 1992, 18 . . . gfd8 ! ?+, followed
by lll b6-c4.) 17... 0-0 18 . .ibl gfd8=
Velilla Velasco - Van der Hoeven,
ICCF 2010.
9 . .id3 cS 10.0-0 .ib7. Black
deploys his pieces analogously to
the line with 9.h2, which we have
just analysed. 11.'1Mfe2 (11 . .ic2 Y!!!c7= ;
the move 11.dxcS only enhances
the development of Black's piec­
es. 11 . . . lll xcS 12 . .ic2 '!Mfc7! ? Black
avoids the trade of the queens and
shows his aggressive intentions.
He will not be happy anymore
with just equalising. 13.Y!!le 2 .id6
14.e4 0-0 1s.ge1 lll cd7 16.h3
lll eS+ Moutousis - Halkias, As­
propyrgos 2 003.) ll.. . .id6
12 ,gdl 0-0 13.dxcS lll xcS 14.
e4 (14 ..ic2 Y!!!c7 1S.e4 lll cd7 - see
14.e4) 14 ... '!Mfc7 1S . .ic2 lll cd7!? Black
parries the threat e4-eS and frees
the cS-square for his bishop in the
process. 16.'!Mfd2 .icS+ Boreika -
Gudkov, ICCF 2012.
12 . .ic2 Y!!!c7 13,gdl (It is possi­
ble that White should better think
about equalising here and try to
simplify the position, exchanging
pieces. 13.dxcS lll xcS - see 11.
176
dxcS) 13 . . . 0-0 14.h3, Korchnoi -
Acs, Paks 2 0 07, 14 . . . cxd4 ! ? lS.
exd4 gfes+ The vulnerability of
White's isolated pawn may hurt
him in this middle game.
9 . . . c5 10.dxc5
10.0-0 .tb7 ll.dxcS hc5 - see
10.dxcS.
10 . . . .hc5 11.0-0
11.b4 .ie7 1 2 . 0-0 .ib7, or 12.
.ib2 .ib7 13.0-0 0-0 - see 11.0-0.
11 . . . .tb7 12.b4 .te7
13.'!Mfb3
After White's alternatives,
Black has no problems at all.
13 ..id2 0-0 14.a4. After this
move, the queenside pawns are
exchanged and there arises com­
plete equality. 14 . . .hb4 lS.axbS
axbS 16,gxa8 ha8 17.lll xbS hd2
18.lll x d2 lll e S= Vidit - Lu, Pune
2 0 14.
13.lll d4 0-0 14 . .ib2 gcs - see
13 . .ib2 .
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:Dj3 l:Df6 4. l:Dc3 e6 5.e3 a6
13 . .ib2 0-0
14.�b3 .id6 - see 13.Ylllb 3.
14.0id4 l:k8 15.0ib3 0id5 16.
0ixd5 i.xd5= Andersson - So­
sonko, Wijk aan Zee 1988.
14.�d4, Capablanca - Euwe,
Amsterdam 1931, 14 . . Jk8 ! ? =
14.l:'kl gc8 15.Yllib 3, Glienke -
Blauert, Germany 1997, 15 ...i.d6 !?=
13 ... 0-0 14,gdl
14 . .ib2 i.d6 ! ? Black is prepar­
ing We7. 15,gfdl Yll!e 7 16,gacl gac8
17.&Dbl i.d5 18.Yllid3 i.b8 = Alexan­
drova - Delchev, Cappelle-la­
Grande 2 005.
14 .. .'�c7
Before White has played gacl,
Black must succeed in playing
gac8, in order to remove his
queen away from the c-file, to a
safer place.
15 . .ib2 gac8 16.gacl '%Yb8
17.h3
17.a4 bxa4 18.Yll!xa4 0ib6 19.
�b3 0ig4+ Karpov - Illescas Cor­
doba, Wijk aan Zee 1993 .
17 . . . 0ib6 18 . .ial gfd8
It is only Black who can play
for a win in this position, because
he can seize the initiative at an
opportune moment with the move
0ic4. 19,gxd8 + gxd8 20.YlYbl
h6 21,gd1 gc8 = Karpov - Ka­
simdzhanov, San Sebastian 2009.
177
Chapter 14 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . llJf'3 llJf6 4.llJc3 e6
5.e3 a6 6.i.e2 dxc4

more often after the move-order:

l.d4 d5 2 .c4 dxc4 3.llif3 llif6 4. e3
e6 5.hc4 c5 6.llic3 a6 7.a4.
9.0-0

Following 9 .d5 exd5 10.llixd5

7.a4!?
This is an interesting possi-
bility after which there arises by
transposition a line from the
Queen's Gambit Accepted, but
not in the best possible version
for White, since he has played too
early llic3.
ie6 ll.lll xf6+ �xf6 12.ixe6 Wfxe6,
only White may have problems,
because Black can easily advance
his pawn-majority on the queen-
side. 13.0-0 ie7 14.id2 0-0 15.
Wfc2 b5 ! ?+ Aliekhin - Lebedev,
Moscow 2011.
9 • • • .ie7!?

7.ixc4 b5 - see Chapter 15.

7.0- 0 ? ! b5+

7. . . c5 8 . .ixc4

8.0-0 llic6 9 . .b:c4 ie7 - see

8.ixc4. Black should not exchange on
d4 in order not to allow his oppo-
8 • • • llic6 nent to develop his bishop on f4,
This position arises much or g5. Here, you can see the con-

178
 3. l:jjf3 l:jjf6 4. l:jj c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. i.e2 de 7.a4 c5 8. i.xc4 l:jj c6 9. 0 - 0 .ie7
sequences of White's loss of a
tempo for the move (jj c3 . His d4-
pawn is not sufficiently protected,
so he is incapable of accomplish­
ing the standard set-up for simi­
lar positions �e2 , l:Ml.
Now, we will analyse in de­
tails: A) 10.dxcS and B) 10.ee2.
10 .h3. This move does not
seem so active. 10 . . . 0-0 11.dxcS
.ixcS 12 .�e2 es 13.l�dl �e7 14.e4
(jj d4 1S.(jj xd4 exd4 16.(jj dS (jj xdS=
Costa - Boikov, IECG 2001.
10.�d3 0-0 11.l:3dl �c7. Black
continues to refrain from ex­
changing on d4. 12 .\We2 l:3d8 13.h3
h6 14.dS. White's waiting moves
have ended and he is forced to
clarify his further plans. This
pawn-break in the centre howev­
er, leads only to the simplification
of the position. 14 . . . exdS 15 . .ixdS
(jj b 4. Black's knight will be well­
placed and stable on this square.
16.i.c4 l:3xdl+ 17.(jj x dl, Can - Sa­
kaev, St Petersburg 2015, 17 . . .
i.d7 ! ? =
10.dS. Black i s well prepared
to counter this pawn-break. 10 . . .
exdS. Now, his bishop o n c 8 will
be developed to an active posi­
tion, which cannot be said about
its white counterpart on cl. 11.
(jj xdS 0-0 1 2 .(jj x e7+ (12 .h3 (jj xdS
13 . .ixdS, Uhlmann - Gustafsson,
Dresden 2 003, 13 . . . \Wd6 ! ?oo, pre­
paring i.e6) 12 . . . �xe7 13.h3 (jj e4
14.\We2 l:3d8 = Milanovic - Erdos,
Nova Garica 2008. White has the
two-bishop advantage indeed, but
Black's pieces are very active. In
addition, White needs to com­
plete the development of his
queenside.
10.(jj eS cxd4 11.(jj xc6 bxc6 12.
exd4. The pawns on d4 and c6 are
about equally weak. 12 . . . aS. Black
emphasizes the vulnerability of
the b4-square and prepares the
exchange of his "bad" bishop
(.ia6). 13.�f3 0-0 ! ? 14.l:3dl (Fol­
lowing 14.�xc6 l:3b8= , due to the
threat i.b7, White fails to protect
his d4-pawn, Polajzer - Zhelian­
dinov, Ptuj 1993 ; 14 . .ie3 (jj dS 15.
l:3acl i.a6 16.b3 �b6= Piket - Ni­
kolic, Wijk aan Zee 1993.) 14 . . .
(jj dS 15.(jj e4 .ia6 16.b3 �b6 17.
eg3. White wishes to begin an at­
tack with the move .ih6, but 17 . . .
\Wb8 parries this threat. 18.eh3
l:3d8= Pinter - Hoelzl, Austria 1998.
10 .b3 0-0. Black is not in a
hurry to exchange on d4, before
White has played .ib2, in order to
obtain a position with an isolated
pawn in which White's bishop will
be restricted by his own pawn on
d4.
179
Chapter 14
11.i.b2 cxd4 12.exd4. It is only
Black who can fight for an advan­
tage in this position (Therefore,
White should possibly consider
here 12.llixd4 i.d7= Deich - Na­
sybullin, Khabarovsk 1990). 12 . . .
llib4. Black increases his control
over the strategically important
dS-square. 13.llieS (13.i!el b6= ;
13.Wfe2 b 6 14.llieS .ib7 - see 13.
llieS) 13 ... b6 14.Wff3. White pre­
pares the transfer of his queen to
the g3-square with tempo. (14.
\We2 i.b7 15.i!acl llifdSoo Kempin­
ski - Van Wely, Gothenburg
2 0 05) 14 . . . i!b8 15.Wfg3 (The char­
acter of the position remains
more or less the same after 15.
i!adl i.b7 16.Wfg3 llibdS 17.llixdS
llixdS 18.f4, Lima - Quinn, Yere­
van 1996, 18 . . . g6 ! ?+) 15 . . . i.b7 16.
i!acl i!c8 17.i!fdl i.d6 18.i.a3
llibdS 19.hd6 \Wxd6+ Molzahn -
Grabner, ICCF 2013. White has
got rid of his passive bishop on
b2, but the vulnerability of his
isolated d4-pawn provides Black
with a slight but stable advantage.
11.dxcS. Now, White is at least
not worse. 11 . . . hcS 12 .i.b2 (12.
\We2 eS 13.i!dl \We7 14.llidS llixdS
15.hdS, Paredes - Mazziotti Iri­
goyen, Buenos Aires 2 0 03, 15 . . .
llib4 ! ? = ) 12 . . . i.d7 13.Wfbl lliaS=
Vieito Ribelles - Tinjaca Ramirez,
ICCF 2011.
A) 10.dxc5
After this move, there arises
an endgame in which White can
hardly exploit his slight lead in
180
development due to the vulnera­
bility of the b4-square.
10 . . • 'Bxdl ll.gxdl hc5
12.i.d2
Besides this, White has nu­
merous alternatives, but neither
of them provides him with any
chance of obtaining an advantage,
About 12.lligS ©e7 13.llige4
llixe4, or 13.llice4 llixe4 14.llixe4
i.b4, or 13 . .id2 i.b4 14.llice4 llixe4
15.llixe4 i.d7 - see 12.llid2.
12.llid2. White prepares the
transfer of his knight to the e4-
square. 12 . . . ©e7. It is well known
that the king is better placed at
the centre of the board and not at
the edge in an endgame. In addi­
tion, here it covers the d6-square
against the penetration of the en­
emy knight. 13.llide4 llixe4 14.
llixe4 i.b4 15.i.d2 .id7
(diagram)
16. ©fl, Thomas - Rubinstein,
Scarborough 1930, 16 . . . i!hd8 ! ? = ,
followed by l::1 ac8.
16.i.c3 hc3 17.llixc3, Uhlmann
- Wells, Austria 2002, 17 ... llib4!?=
 3. liJ.f3 liJf6 4. liJ c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. j,e2 de 7.a4 c5 8. hc4 liJ c6 9. 0 - 0 i.e7
16.i.e2, Can - Gordievsky, Sit­
ges 2 0 15, 16 . . . .ixd2 17.gxd2 liJb4=
16 . .ixb4+ liJxb4 17.liJcS. White
must play energetically; other­
wise, Black may obtain an edge.
(17.liJd6? ! This strike is useless
17 . . . i.c6+ 18.e4? ! Shinkevich -
Vorobiov, St Petersburg 2011.
Here, Black can obtain an advan­
tage exploiting the drawbacks of
the placement of White's seem-
ingly active knight on d6 : 18 .. .
gad8 ! ? 19.eS f6 2 0 .f4 gS+) . 17 . . .
ic6 18.liJd3. White trades the ac­
tive enemy knight and maintains
the balance. 18 . . . liJxd3 19 ..ixd3
ghd8= Lilienthal - Bronstein,
Moscow 1962.
12 .b3 0-0 13.ib2 b6 14.liJgS.
The transfer of the knight to the
e4-square leads to further simpli­
fications. 14 . . . ie7 15.liJge4 liJaS
16.h3 liJxe4 17.liJxe4 ha3 18.
gxa3 ib7 19.liJd6 gfd8 2 0.gaal
ic6 2 1.f3 @f8 2 2 .e4 ©e7= Farago
- Trent, Porto San Giorgio 2004.
12 .h3. White defends against
the knight-sortie liJg4 and pre­
pares the advance of his e-pawn.
12 . . . b6 13.e4 (13.liJd4 liJb4 14.liJb3
i.e7 15.e4 j,b7 16.f3 liJd7 17.i.f4
gc8= Kose - Acs, Yerevan 2000)
13 . . . liJaS
14.ia2 ib7 15.eS (ls.gel?!
This removal of the rook from the
open file seems bad for White.
15 . . . 0-0+ Bourgoin - Luers, IECC
2001.) 15 . . . liJd7 16.liJgS liJxeSoo
Littlewood - Wells, West Brom­
wich 2 0 0 2 . White has compensa­
tion for the sacrificed pawn, but
not more than that.
14.id3. This move allows the
penetration of Black's knight to
the b3-square after which he ob­
tains the two-bishop advantage.
14 . . . liJb3 1s.gb1 liJxcl 16.gbxcl
j,b7 (16 . . . id7? ! 17.eSt Bareev -
Kasparov, Novgorod 1997) 17.eS
liJdS 18.liJxdS hdS 19.liJgS ie7
2 0 .liJe4 0-0. Black has completed
the development of his pieces and
his bishops may become very
powerful in the endgame. There­
fore, White's most reasonable de­
cision is to force a draw by a rep­
etition of moves. 2i.gc7 id8 2 2 .
gccl i.e7= Shinkevich - Filipen­
ko, Kazan 2012.
12 . . . b6
Black only needs to solve the
problem with his bishop on c8
181
Chapter 14
in order to equalise completely.
With his last move he prepares its
development on b7.
13 .id3
•
13.tlia2, Postny - Baron, Beer­
sheba 2 014. White prepares the
pawn-advance b2-b4. Meanwhile,
it is not dangerous for Black. 13 . . .
ie7 ! ? 14.b4 ib7=
13.tligS tlieS 14.ie2 (14.ib3
ib7= Meins - Svane, Bad Zwisch­
enahn 2 0 13) 14 . . . ib7 15.tlia2 h6
16.ic3 tlied7 17.if3 ixf3 18.tlixf3
0-0 19.gacl gfc8= Lahaye - Ok­
kes, Hilversum 2008.
13.gacl ib7 14.tlia2 (14.id3
gd8 15.iel <Jle7= Hera - Macieja,
Kallithea 2008) 14 ... 0-0 15.iel
as. Now, White is deprived of the
possibility b2-b4, while the weak­
ening of the bS-square is immate­
rial in this position. 16.tlic3 gfd8=
Karpov - Hjartarson, Seattle
1989.
13 .ib7 14.tlie4 .ie7 15.
•••
c!lixf6+
182
Following 15.ic3 0-0 16.tlixf6+
ixf6 17.ie4 gfd8 18.ixf6 gxf6,
White will be incapable of exploit­
ing the slight vulnerability of
Black's kingside pawn-structure,
since there is just a few material
left on the board. 19.tlid2 fS 2 0 .
if3 tliaS. Black exchanges the ac­
tive enemy bishop. 21.ixb7 tlixb7
2 2 .tlic4 bS= Kulaots - Sulskis,
Borup 2009.
15 .ixf6
• • .
16Jfacl
16.ie4 gc8 17.gacl 0-0 18 .b4
gfd8 19.bS. There arise further
exchanges after this move. 19 . . .
axbS 20.axbS tliaS 2 1.ixb7 (Fol­
lowing 21.ixaS gxdl+ 2 2 .gxdl
ixe4 23.ixb6, Black regains the
pawn after 23 . . . gb8 24.gd6 ile7
2s.gd7 @f8=) 2 1 . . . tlixb7 2 2 . gxc8
gxc8 23.e4 ile7= Cantelli - Kor­
chut, ICCF 2 0 07.
16 • . . 0-0 17. .ie4 gfc8 18.b3,
Ivanchuk - Naiditsch, Dortmund
2008, 18 gabS ! ? = White's
. • •
pieces are slightly more active,
 3. &iJj3 &iJf6 4. &iJ c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. i.e2 de 7.a4 c5 B. i.xc4 &iJ c6 9. 0 - 0 ie7
but Black has no pawn-weakness­
es in his camp.
B) 10.%Ye2
White's attempt to play �e2
and �dl leads to considerable
simplifications.
10 . . . cxd4 11.gd1
The pawn-sacrifice ll.exd4?!
seems rather dubious, because af­
ter ll . . . 11Jxd4 1 2 .&iJxd4 %Yxd4 13.
13dl �g4+, White does not obtain
full compensation for it. 14.f3
�hS+ Van Foreest - Loiseau, Lille
2 0 15.
11 ... eS! 12.exd4 exd4 13.
�xd4
White restores the material
balance with this temporary
piece-sacrifice.
13.&iJeS? ! 0-0 14.if4 id7 15.
&iJdS &iJxdS 16.ixdS if6+ Jianu -
V. Popov, Dresden 2 0 07.
13 . . . �xd4
14.�es
14.%Ye3 0-0 15.�xd4 (After
15.�xd4, there arises a transposi­
tion to the main variation, but
with an extra tempo for Black.
This would not influence the eval­
uation of the position as approxi­
mately equal. 15 . . . %Yxd4 16.�xd4
i.cS 17.gdl ig4 18.13el �ac8 =
Kahlert - Korpa, Germany 2 0 15.)
15 ... %Yc7. Black is threatening i.cS.
16.%Yf3 %Yes 17.%Yf4 �xf4 18.
ixf4 - see 16.%Yf4.
16.%Ye2 , Sasikiran - Wells,
Hastings 2 0 0 2 , 16 . . . icS ! ? =
16.�f4 �xf4 17.ixf4 ie6 ! ?
This i s the simplest fo r Black. He
exchanges the active enemy bish­
op and the arising weakness on e6
after that will be protected easily.
183
Chapter 14
18.he6 fxe6 19 . .id6 (19.gadl .ic5
20 .g4d2 gac8 2 1..ieS ib4= Alves
- Frey Beckman, ICCF 2002) 19 . . .
gfd8 20.gadl @ f7 21.@fl, Miladi­
novic - Guliyev, Frascati 2 0 0S,
2 1 . . .hd6 2 2 .gxd6 lll d S 23.gxd8
gxd8=
14 . • . �d6
There arises an approximately
equal endgame after this move.
15.�xd4
1S.�xd6 ixd6 16.gxd4 .ieS
17.gh4 0-0 18 ..if4 hc3 19.
bxc3 ifs. White has the two-bish­
op advantage, but his queenside
pawn-structure has been weak­
ened. 2 0.f3 (20 . .ieS, Psakhis -
Tai, Tel Aviv 1990, 2 0 . . . gac8 ! ? = )
184
2 0 . . . gac8 2 1..ieS gfe8 2 2 .hf6
gxf6= Ftacnik - Z.Polgar, New
York 1987. Both sides have pawn­
weaknesses and they balance each
other.
17.gdl 0-0
18.ge1 ge8 19.id2 .id7= Cvi­
tan - Horvath, Pula 1997.
18.h3, Tregubov - Agrest,
Ohrid 2001, 18 . . . .ifS ! ? 19 . .ie3
gac8=
The move 18.lll dS leads to the
simplification of the position. 18 . . .
ie6 19.lll xf6+ hf6 2 0.he6 fxe6.
The bishop on f6 exerts powerful
pressure against White's queen­
side. 2 1..ie3 hb2 2 2 . gabl gad8
23.gfl .id4= Speelman - Movse­
sian, Caleta 2 0 1 0 .
18 . .ie3 .ifs 19 . .id4 gfe8. Black
has completed the development
of his pieces and has equalised
completely. 2 0.heS gxeS 21.f3
.ie6= Mueller - Bindrich, Germa­
ny 2010.
15 . . . �xd4 16.l'�xd4 .ic5
Black wins a tempo by attack­
ing the enemy rook.
17.gdl
17.gh4 0-0 18 ..igS (18.h3 h6=
 3. &i:if3 &i:if6 4. &i:i c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. i.e2 de 7.a4 c5 8. i.xc4 &i:ic6 9. 0 - 0 .ie7
Hebden - Harikrishna, Hastings
2002) 18 ... &i:ig4 19.&i:ie4, Neverov -
Meister, Togliatti 1985, 19 ...i.b6 !?=
17.i:!d3 . White prepares the
transfer of his rook to the f3-
square. 17 . . . .ifS 18.l:!f3 .ie6 19.
.ixe6 (19 ..ie3 l:!c8 2 0 . .ixe6 fxe6=
Le Quang Liem - So Wesley, Saint
Louis 2012) 19 . . . fxe6 2 0 .i.gS 0-0
2 1.l:!dl i:!ad8 22.i:!xd8 i:!xd8 23.
©fl ©t7= Koneru - Ju Wenjun,
Chengdu 2 016. Black gradually
neutralises his opponent's initia­
tive by exchanging pieces.
17 . . . 0-0
18 .if4
. 23 .l:!dl i.eS 24.g4 hS 25.gS l:!ad8
18.h3 i.e6 19.i.xe6 fxe6 20.©fl
(20 . .ie3 .ixe3 21.fxe3 l:!ad8 2 2 .aS
©t7= Todorovic - Madeja, Budva
2 009) 20 . . . &iJdS 2 1.f3 &i:ixc3 2 2 .
bxc3 l:!ac8 23.l:!bl b 6 = Eljanov -
Caruana, Douglas 201.
18.l:!el .ifs 19 . .igS l:!ac8. Black
is not afraid of the exchange on f6,
since he would obtain the two­
bishop advantage after that. 2 0 .
i.e2 . White wishes to play a4-a5
and i.f3, squeezing the enemy
pieces with the protection of the
pawn on b7. Still, Black can pre­
vent the fixing of his queenside.
2 0 . . . aS 21.i.f3 b6 22 .h3 l:!fe8 23.
l:!xe8+ l:!xe8 24.l:!dl h6 25 . .ixf6
gxf6 26.©fl ©g7= Epishin -
Khenkin, Bolzano 2000.
18.i.gS i.g4 19.l:!d3 (19.l:!d2
i:!ad8 2 0.i.dS, Hertneck - Aroni­
an, Bad Wiessee 2 0 0 2 , 20 . . .
b6 ! ? = ) 1 9 . . . i.fS 2 0.l:!f3 .ig6 21.
i.xf6 (21.h4, Gabuzyan - Chi­
bukhchian, Jermuk 2 0 13, 2 1 . . .
&i:ig4 ! ? = ) 2 1 . . .gxf6
22 .h4. White plans to chase
the enemy bishop on g6. 22 . . . i.d4
26.l:!xd8 l:!xd8 27.&iJdS, Khenkin -
Aronian, Germany 2 0 04, 27 . . .
©g7 ! ? 28.gxf6+ ©h6+ White has
played too actively for a win and
has serious problems now. His
extra doubled pawn is useless,
while Black's two powerful bish­
ops control almost the entire
board in this open position.
22 ..idS l:!fd8 23 . .ixb7 l:!ab8
24.ha6 i:!xb2 25.h4 l:!dd2iii Tis­
dall - Elsness, Norway 2016.
185
Chapter 14

22.l'!xf6 1!ad8 23.:!!e l, Keymer -

Wichmann, Schwaebisch Gmu­
end 2 0 17, 23 . . . ©g7 ! ? 24.1!f3 1!d2ii5
In the last two variations Black's
pieces have become very active,
compensating the minimal mate­
rial deficit.

18 . . . .ig4
He develops his bishop with
tempo.
19.gel gac8 20.ctld5 gfd8
21.ltlxf6+ gxf6 22.b3
(diagram)
White has managed to realise
the maximum in this position. He
has weakened his opponent's
pawn-structure without present­
ing him with the two-bishop ad­
vantage. Still, this is insufficient
for an advantage, because Black's
pieces are very active and his
pawn-weaknesses are easily de­
fensible.
22 . . . ©g7 23.h3 .if5 24.gadl
.ib4 25.gxd8 �d8 26.gcl
.ia3= 27.gel .ib4 2s.gc1 .ia3
29.gel, draw, Ivanchuk - Wang
Hao, Beijing 2 013.

186
Chapter 15 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . lL!f3 lL!f6 4.lL!c3 e6
5.e3 a6 6.J.d3 dxc4 7.J.xc4 b5

e4 cxd4 10.�xd4 �xd4 11.tll xd4,

Werle - l.Sokolov, London 2007,
11 . . . eS ! ? = , while following 9.dxcS
�xdl+ 10 . .b:dl .bes ll.a3 .ib7
12 .b4 .id6 13 . .ib2 tll b d7= Rakh­
manov - Shimanov, Minsk 2 014,
there arises an approximately
similar endgame as in the main
variation.

9 . . .ib7
.

Black plays in the spirit of the

Meran variation, but his knight is
still on b8. Later, he can develop
it not only on d7, but also on c6,
after the preliminary move c6-c5.
Now, White's most popular re­
treat of the bishop in this position
is - C) 8 . .id3. Before that how­
ever, we will analyse the less pop­
ular alternatives A) 8 . .ie2 and
B) 8 . .ib3.

A) 8 . .ie2 c5
Black attacks immediately the
enemy centre.
9.0-0
White would not obtain much
with the straightforward line : 9.
10.dxc5
After this move, the endgame
is with about equal prospects.
About 10.a3 tllbd7 11.dxcS .ixcS
- see Chapter 13, variation C.
10.tll e S. White is preparing

187
Chapter 15
if3, but this plan seems to be too
slow. Later, Black can not only
equalise, but can think about
something more in this position.
10 . . . id6 11.if3 Wfc7 12.a4 cxd4
13.exd4 b4 14 . .b:b7 Wfxb7 15.lll e 2
0-0+ Uhlmann - Jonkman, Dres­
den 1993. After the exchange of
the light-squared bishops, White
can hardly develop any initiative,
while the vulnerability of his iso­
lated pawn will hurt him.
10.b3 lll c6 11.dxcS hes 12.
ib2 0-0 13.gcl Vfie7 14.Vfic2
gac8= Cvek - Haba, Czech Re­
public 2012.
10 • • • Y«xdl lU:�xdl .bc5
12.�d2
The transfer of the knight to
the b3-square seems rather time­
consuming, but after his alterna­
tives White has no hopes of obtain­
ing an advantage in the opening.
12.lll d4 lll b d7 13.lll b3 ib4 -
see 12.lll d 2 .
12 .b3 lll b d7 13 .ib2 0-0 14.
188
gacl gac8 15.@fl h6= Salov -
Karpov, Moscow 199 2 .
12.lll e 5 lll b d7 13.lll xd7 (13.lll d3
id6 14.f3, Hedman - Lind, Hall­
stahammar 2001, 14 . . . b4 ! ? Black
occupies space on the queenside.
15.lll b l a5= ) 13 . . . lll xd7 14.id2
@e7= Smederevac - Gaprindash­
vili, Hoogovens 1966.
12 ..id2 lll b d7 13.b4. Before
playing a2-a4, White wishes to fix
the enemy pawn on bS. Still, this
plan only leads to the exchange of
the queenside pawns. (13.iel
0-0=) 13 . . . .ie7 14.a4, Adly - M.
Gurevich, Port Erin 2 007, 14 . . .
.ixb4 ! ? 15.axbS axbS 16.gxa8+
.ixa8 17.lll xbS .ixd2 18.lll xd2 @e7=
12.a3. White is preparing b2-
b4, after which the pawn-struc­
ture would become quite symmet­
rical. 12 . . . lll b d7 13.b4 ie7 14.ib2
0-0 15.gacl (15.lll d 2 gfd8=) 15 . . .
gac8 16.@fl gfd8 17.h3 @f8 =
Pomar Salamanca - Spassky, Go­
thenburg 1971.
12 . . . �bd7 13.�b3 .ib4
 2.c4 c6 3. li:Jj3 li:Jf6 4. li:Jc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. id3 de 7.hc4 b5 8. i.b3 c5
14.i.d2
Following 14.a4 bxa4 15J:!xa4
as, White will hardly manage to
increase his pressure against the
enemy a5-pawn and he has no
other objects to attack. 16.i.d2
0-0 17J%aal, Vidit - Sengupta,
Dharamshala 2 014, 17 . . . l:!tb8 ! ? =
14 • . • 0-0 1S.a4
15.f3, Vitiugov - Vidit, Tsagh­
kadzor 2 0 15, 15 . . . l:!fc8 ! ? =
15.a3 li:Jc5 16.li:Jcl i.xc3 17.ixc3
l:!fc8. White has the two-bishop
advantage, but Black's pieces are
very active. 18 . .!d4 i.d5 19.f3 i.c4.
He wishes to deprive White of his
only advantage. 2 0 . 'it>f2 i.xe2 21.
'it>xe2 lt.JdS 2 2 .l:!d2 f6 23.i.xcS
l:!xcS 24.li:Jd3 l:!c7= Kramnik - To­
mashevsky, Moscow 2012.
1S bxa4 16.li:Jxa4 as 17.
• • •
i.xb4 axb4 18.li:JacS
White's pieces are a bit more
active, but he has no concrete
threats in sight. Black should
gradually equalise completely with
an accurate play. 18 i.dS 19.fJ.
• • •
White restricts the enemy minor
pieces and prepares the move
@f2 . 19 gxal 20.gxal gc8 21.
• • •
gel i.xb3 22.�xb3 gxcl+ . The
draw outcome becomes more and
more probable with every ex­
change. 23.�xcl �cs 24.'it>t'2
�dS 2S.e4 �b6 26.'it>e3 es.
Black fixes the enemy pawn on
the same colour of the square as
his bishop. 27.b3 'it>f8 = Topalov
- Wang Hao, Stavanger 2 013.
B) 8.i.b3
8 • • • cs 9.0-0
It would be premature for
White to play here 9.a4, because
after 9 . . . b4, his knight would need
to retreat to a passive position.
10.li:Je2 i.b7 11.0-0 li:Jbd7 12.li:Jf4,
Epishin - Meister, Togliatti 1985.
This transfer of the knight has
taken too many tempi for White . . .
12 . . J''k8 ! ?+
9 • • • i.b7
189
Chapter 15
10.'fl!fe2
He is preparing 13dl.
After 10.13el, Black can play
10 . . . llJc6, increasing his pressure
against the d4-square and imped­
ing White's pawn-advance e3-e4.
11.d5 exd5 12 .e4. This is an inter­
esting pawn-sacrifice, but insuffi­
cient for White to maintain an
advantage. 12 . . . dxe4 13.i.g5 Wfxdl
14.13axdl llJd4. Black exchanges
pieces and neutralises his oppo­
nent's initiative. 15.llJxd4 cxd4
16.1xf6 gxf6 17.13xd4, Graf - Sar­
gissian, Batumi 2 0 0 2 , 17 . . . i.cS ! ? =
After 10.dxc5 Wfxdl 11.13xdl,
Mirzoev - Yanev, Spain 2013,
Black should better not capture
on c5 with his bishop. It seems
much better for him to choose in­
stead 11 . . . llJbd7 ! ? = , followed by
llJxc5.
10.e4. White exploits his lead
in development and begins im­
mediate active actions in the cen­
tre. 10 . . . cxd4. This is Black's most
reasonable reaction. He does not
need to enter the complications
190
after the capturing on e4. 11.llJxd4
llJc6
12 .i.e3 llJxd4 13.hd4 i.e7 14.
f3 (14.e5 llJd5= Cornette - David,
Cap d'Agde 2 010) 14 . . . 0-0 15.a4,
Wojtaszek - Kulaots, Warsaw
2 0 13 , 15 . . . b4 ! ? 16.llJe2 llJd7oo
Black's knight is very passive on
the f6-square, because it is se­
verely restricted by the enemy
pawns on e4 and f3. Therefore, he
should better transfer it to a more
active position.
The move 12.llJxc6 would lead
to simplifications. 12 . . . Wfxdl 13.
13xdl hc6 14.f3 i.c5 + . Black de­
velops his bishop with tempo. 15.
©fl ©e7. He connects his rooks.
16 . .ig5 (After 16.e5 llJd7 17.i.g5+ ,
Korobov - Lesiege, Baku 2016,
Black can simply retreat his king:
17 . . . ©e8 ! ? , for example: 18.13acl
h6 19.i.d2 13c8 2 0.f4 ©e7=) 16 . . .
h6. Black should better get rid im­
mediately of the rather unpleas­
ant pin. 17.i.h4 g5 18.i.f2 i.xf2 19.
©xf2 13hc8 20.13acl llJd7= Pono­
mariov - Anand, Moscow 2009.
10 • • • llJc6 lU::! d l
ll.d5 llJxd5 12 .13dl i.e7 13.
 2.c4 c6 3. l:i:ij3 l:i:if6 4. l:i:i c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6 . .id3 de 7.hc4 b5 8 . .ib3 c5

l:i:ixdS exdS 14 . .ixdS Wfb6 - see jovcic, Warsaw 1959 (15.l:i:ixeS

lU�dl. WfxeS=) 15 . . . 0-0 ! ?oo

11.dxcS hcS 12 .e4 (After 12. 12 • • • exdS 13.l:i:ixdS

l'!dl the fifth World Champion has
shown how to play with Black: 13 . .ixdS Wfc7 14.e4 l'!d8= Lan­
12 . . . 1.Wc7 13 .i.d2 0-0 14.l'!acl l:i:ieS dau - Rubinstein, Netherlands 1930.
15.l:i:ixeS 1.WxeS+ Winter - Euwe,
London 1946. His pieces have 13 . • • lll xdS 14.hdS Wfb6
been much more actively de­
ployed.) 12 . . . l:i:id4 13.l:i:ixd4 hd4
14.eS l:i:idS 15.l:i:ixdS hdS 16.l'!dl
hb3 17.axb3 1.Wb6 18 .i.d2 0-0
19 . bs 1.Wa7= Kramnik - Pono­
.

mariov, Dortmund 2012. The po­

sition has been simplified consid­
erably. Black has completed his
development and has no prob­
lems at all.

11 • • • .ie7
Black removes his queen away
from the dangerous juxtaposition
with the enemy rook. It would be
sufficient for White to castle in or­
der to complete his development.
After that, the activity of his
pieces would compensate Black's
pawn-majority on the queenside.
15.e4
The development of the bish­
op to the al-hS diagonal does not
promise anything to White either.
He does not exchange on d4 in
order not to help in the activation 15.i.d2 0-0 16.i.c3 l'!ad8 17.b3
of White's bishop on cl. l'!feS 18.l'!acl h6= Bubir - Semrl,
12.dS ICCF 2 0 14.

After 12.dxcS Wfc7, Black re­ 15.b3 0-0 16 . .ib2 l:i:ib4 17 . .ixb7
gains his pawn and obtains an ex­ Wfxb7 18.e4 l'!feS 19 . .ic3 .ifS 2 0.eS
cellent position. 13.e4 hes 14.h3 l:i:idS 2 1.Wfe4 l'!ad8= Defore} - Sad­
l:i:ieS 15 . .igS, Litmanowicz - Bul- ler, ICCF 2015.

191
Chapter 15

15 . . • 0-0 16 .ie3 tbb4

•

Black exchanges the powerful

enemy bishop.
17.hb7 Wxb7 18.a3 tbc6
19.l"!d5 c4 20.i;adl i;ad8 21.h4
gfe8= Vescovi - Fuentes Vasallo,
Villa Martelli 1997.

11.tt:lxf6+ tt:lxf6 12.dxcS hc5

C) 8 ..id3 c5
Here, White can either begin
immediate active actions on the
queenside by attacking the enemy
b5-pawn - Cl) 9.a4, or at first
castle - C2) 9.0-0, concealing
for the moment his further plans.
9.a3 tbbd7 - see Chapter 13,
variation C.
13 .'!We2 0-0 14.Ei:dl \We7= Toth -
Tornyai, Hungary 2010.
After 11.tt:lxcS, Black can reply
with 11 . . . hcS ! ? 12.dxcS tt:lxc5. He
has presented his opponent with
the two-bishop advantage, but his
pieces are very actively placed.
13 . .ie2 0-0 14.b3. White prepares
the development of his bishop to
an active position, but weakens
the c3-square. Later, Black will
play tt:ld5, tt:le4, b4 and will ac­
complish penetration to the c3-
square. 14 . . . Ei:c8 15 . .ib2 tt:lce4 16.
Wxd8 Ei:fxd8 17.Ei:acl tt:ld5 18.Ei:fdl
Ei:e8 19.@fl tt:Jec3 2 0.hc3 tt:lxc3
21.Ei:d2 b4= Michiels - Ghyssens,
ICCF 2009. Black has gradually
managed to realise his plan. His
prospects are not worse in this
endgame.

9.'!We2 tbbd7 10.a4 (10.0-0 9.dxc5 hc5

.ib7 - see variation C2b) 10 . . .b4
11.tt:le4 .ib7 - see variation Cl.

9 .tt:le4. This seems to be better

when the moves a2-a4 and b5-b4
are included, because then White
can exploit the weakening of the
c4-square in the middle game. 9 . . .
tt:Jbd7 10.0-0 .ib7.

192
 2.c4 c6 3. li3j3 li3f6 4. li3 c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. id3 de 7.hc4 bS 8 . i d3 c5
10.0-0 ib7 or 10 .'!We2 liJbd7
11.0-0 ib7 - see variation C2a.
The move 10.a4 only leads to
simplifications, because after 10 . . .
b 4 ll.liJe4 liJxe4 12.!xe4, Black
can exchange not only the knights,
but the queens as well. 12 . . . \Wxdl+
13 .@xdl 1'fa7 14.b3 ib7= Soysal -
Kanmazalp, Kocaeli 2 015.
Cl) 9.a4 b4 10.liJe4 liJbd7
He is fortifying his c5-pawn.
11.0-0
About ll.'!We2 ib7 12.liJxf6+
liJxf6 13.0-0 cxd4, or 13.dxc5
hc5 14. 0-0 0-0, or 14.e4 0-0
15.0-0 id6 - see variation Cla.
11.a5 i.b7 12.liJed2 ie7 or 11.
liJed2 i.b7 12 .a5 ie7 - see 11.
liJed2 .
After 11.dxc5, Black can seize
the initiative by sacrificing a
pawn. 11 . . . i.b7 ! ? 12.liJd6+ hd6
13.cxd6 liJc5 14.i.c2, Gavrilov -
Bezgodov, Moscow 1995, 14 . . .
a5 ! ?+, followed b y �a6, regaining
the pawn and preserving all the
advantages of his position.
11.liJed2 ib7 12.0-0 ie7, or
12.a5 ie7 13 . 0-0 0-0, or 12.liJc4
ie7 13 .0-0 0-0, or 12 .'!We2 ie7
13.0-0 0-0, or 13.a5 0-0 14.0-0
\Wc7 - see 11.0-0.
11.b3 cxd4 12.exd4. White has
an isolated pawn, but not in the
most favourable version. 12 . . . ib7
13.\We2 ie7 14.0-0 liJxe4. As it is
well known, the exchanges are in
favour of the side, which plays
against the isolated pawn. It is be­
coming weaker, when the posi­
tion nears an endgame. 15.!xe4
!xe4 16.\Wxe4 0-0 17.id2 liJf6 18.
\Wd3 \Wd5= M.Gurevich - Krivo­
shey, Bastia 2 0 05.
11.liJxf6+ liJxf6
12.0-0 ib7 - see 11.0-0.
12 .b3 cxd4 13.liJxd4 ib7 14.
0-0 \Wd5. Black's queen frees the
square for his rook with tempo.
15.liJf3 �dB+ Vidal Zamora -
Aroshidze, Sitges 2016. His pieces
have been obviously more actively
deployed.
12.dxc5 hc5 13.b3 (13.0-0
193
Chapter 15
.ib7, or 13 .We2 0-0 14.0-0 .ib7,
or 13.e4 .ib7 14.We2 0-0 15.0-0
.id6 - see 11.0-0) 13 ....ib7 14. .ib2,
M.Gurevich - Pavasovic, Plovdiv
2008. Here, Black could have ex­
ploited immediately the weakness
of the c3-square : 14 . . . llid5 ! ? 15.
0-0 llic3 16.'!Wc2 .id6 17 . .ixc3
bxc3 18.Wxc3 .ixf3 19.gxf3 .ixh2+ .
H e sacrifices a piece and forces a
draw by a perpetual check. 2 0 .
'i!?xh2 Wh4+ 2 1.'i!?gl Wg5=
11 . . . ib7
Now, we will analyse in de­
tails: Cla) 12.�xf6 and Clb)
12.�ed2.
Alexander Alekhine showed
how to play with Black after 12.
llixc5? ! : 12 . . . .ixc5 ! 13.dxc5 �xc5
14 . .ic4 0-0 15.We2 a5+ Reinfeld
- Alekhine, Pasadena 193 2 .
12 .'!Wc2 gc8. This move em­
phasizes the unfavourable place­
ment of White's queen on c2 . 13.
�xf6+ '!Wxf6 14.'!We2 . The threat of
capturing on f3, or d4 forces
White to lose another tempo for a
194
move with his queen. Still, fortu­
nately for him, the position is
within equality. 14 . . . .ixf3 15.gxf3
(15.Wxf3 ? ! Wxf3 16.gxf3 c4 17.ie2
a5+ Dothan - Napalkov, ICCF
2008. In this endgame, Black's
prospects seem preferable thanks
to his far-advanced queenside
pawns.) 15 . . . .id6 16 . .ixa6 .ixh2 +
17.'i!?g2 '!Wg5= Nierobisz - Bala­
banov, ICCF 2008.
12 .llig3. White's knight is not
so well placed here, as on d2, be­
cause in some variations Black
can develop powerful initiative on
the kingside by advancing h7-h5-
h4. 12 . . . id6 13.We2 (After the pa­
tient line: 13.b3 cxd4 14.�xd4
llJc5 15 . .ic4, Black can begin im­
mediate active actions on the
kingside : 15 . . . h5 ! The threat of the
advance of Black's h-pawn forces
White to weaken seriously his
pawn-structure. 16.h3 .bg3 17.
fxg3 .id5+ Kameneckas - Rezzuti,
ICCF 2008.) 13 . . . 0-0 14.gdl,
Kummer - Koutsin, Oberwart
1998, 14 . . . Wc7! ?oo
Cla) 12.�xf6+
White is reluctant to waste a
tempo for the retreat of his knight.
12 . . . �xf6
(diagram)
13.dxc5
13.b3 cxd4 14.exd4 (14.�xd4
Wd5 15.f3, Sobek - Jirovsky,
Prague 2 0 15, 15 . . . ic5 ! ?+) 14 . . . ie7
15 . .ic4 0-0+ Akobian - Shulman,
 2.c4 c6 3. tfJj3 tfJf6 4. tfJ c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. i.d3 de 7. i.xc4 b5 8. id3 c5
Stillwater 2 0 07. White has no
compensation for the vulnerabili­
ty of his isolated pawn.
After 13.aS, Black can retreat
his knight 13 . . . tfJd7 ! ? , so that after
an exchange on cS to play tfJxcS.
14.W/e2 ie7 1S.id2 0-0= Probst
- Thier, Germany 2008.
13.Wi'e2 cxd4
14.exd4. This straightforward
transfer into a position with an
isolated pawn cannot be ap­
proved, because after 14 . . . i.e7 lS.
i.e3 0-0 16.tfJeS Wi'dS, Black's
pieces become very active. White
has no compensation for his weak
d4-pawn. 17.f3 as 18.l'!fcl l'!fc8 19.
i.bS W/d6 2 0 .i.f2 tfJdS+ Semenov
- Lovakovic, ICCF 2011.
14.tfJxd4 i.d6. Black's bishops
exert powerful pressure against
White's castling position. 1S.tfJf3
(1S.b3. This move leads to the
weakening of the c3-square. lS . . .
tfJdS 16 . .ib2 tfJc3 1 7. .b:c3 bxc3+
Opryatkin - Matei, ICCF 2007.
Black's bishop-pair provides him
with a stable advantage.) lS . . .
tfJe4+ Ftacnik - Kramnik, Dort­
mund 1992. White is forced to be­
gin defending.
14.l'!dl i.d6 1S.exd4 0-0 16.
i.gS, Farid - Malakhatko, Biel
2 0 13, 16 . . . h6 17.i.h4 aS ! ? =
14.e4. This interesting pawn­
sacrifice is still insufficient for
White to maintain an advantage.
14 ...i.e7 1S.i.f4 0-0 16.l'!fcl l'!c8 17.
eS l'!xcl+ 18.l'!xcl .b£3. Black wish­
es to neutralise his opponent's in­
itiative by exchanging pieces. 19.
%!/xf3 tfJdS 2 0 .i.d2 as 21.%!/g4 W/b8
2 2 .W/xd4 l'!d8 23.%!/e4 g6= Krasen­
kow - Dreev, Esbjerg 2003. White
has managed to restore the mate­
rial balance, but Black's prospects
are not worse thanks to his pow­
erful centralised knight on dS.
13 . . . .ixc5 14.'Be2 0-0
I. �
19S
Chapter 15
15.e4
There arises an approximately
equal position after 1s.gd1 Vf!e7
16.aS (16.e4 eS= ) 16 . . . gfdS 17.i.d2
eS 1S.e4 h6= Gagunashvili - Ka­
zhgaleyev, Bastia 2006.
15 • • • J.d6 ! ?
This i s not Black's most popu­
lar move, but it is very good. He
exploits the circumstance that
White cannot play e4-eS and es­
tablishes control over the h2-bS
diagonal. Later, Black's plans in­
clude Vf!bS and gas.
16.gdl
16.eS?! i.xf3 17.gxf3 (17.Wxf3
hes+) 17 . . . heS+
16.gel llid7=
16 • • • Vf!b8
17.J.d2
White would not achieve much
by attacking the enemy knight on
f6. 17.i.gS llid7 1s.gacl :gcs 19.
.ie3 h6. Black only needs to bring
196
his rook on as in order to equalise
completely. 20.:gxcS+ WxcS 21.
.ibl .ie7 2 2 .h3 Wes 23.llid2 :gas
24.llib3 llif6=
17 h6 18.gacl a5 19.gc2
• • •
gds 20.h3 J.f4 21.hf4 %'ixf4=
Bokar - Zhak, ICCF 2 013.
Clb) 12.llied2 J.e7
13.Vf!e2
This is the best square for
White's queen. It squeezes the en­
emy rook to protect the pawn on
a6.
13.llic4 0-0 14.:gel, Golod -
Ribli, Germany 2007 (14.aS Wc7
- see 13.aS; 14.Vf!e2 Vf!c7 - see 13.
We2) 14 ... gcs lS.llifeS Vf!c7! ?oo
13.aS 0-0 14.llic4 (14.Vf!e2 %'ic7
- see 13.Vf!e2) 14 . . . %'ic7 1S.h3 (lS.
We2 llig4 - see 13.We2 ; following
lS.llifeS gads 16.Vf!e2 cxd4 17.
exd4 llixeS lS.dxeS, Black obtains
a very good position by transfer­
ring his knight to the cs-square .
1S . . . llid7 19.i.f4 llicSoo Bennborn
 2.c4 c6 3. 11Jj3 11Jf6 4. 11J c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6 . .id3 de 7.hc4 b5 8. id3 c5
- Gysi, ICCF 2 0 07.) 15 . . JUd8
16.�e2 11Je4. Black begins active
actions in the centre and on the
kingside. 17 . .id2 �c6. White is
practically helpless against Black's
pressure on the hl-a8 diagonal.
18.:gfdl l:iJgS+ Troia - Domancich,
ICCF 2012.
13.:gel 0-0 14.e4. This is a
double-edged pawn-sacrifice with
which White risks more than Black.
(14.11Jc4 :gc8 - see 13.11Jc4) 14 . . .
cxd4 15.eS 11Jg4 ! ? 16.�e4. White
wishes to trade the powerful ene­
my bishop. (After 16.h3, he can­
not oust Black's knight. 16 . . . l:iJcS
17.11Je4 11Je3 ! 18.fxe3 11Jxe4 19. exd4,
Korchnoi - Ponomariov, Karlovy
Vary 2 007, 19 . . . l:iJgS ! ?+ White's
weak d4-pawn will cause plenty of
problems for him.) 16 . . . d3 !
With this powerful move,
Black opens the a7-gl diagonal for
his queen.
White ends up in an inferior
position after 17..hb7 fil6+, while
capturing the rook 18 . .ha8? just
leads to a smothered checkmate,
or the loss of the queen 18 . . .
/1Jxf2-+ 19.�b3 11Jh3 + 2 0.©hl
'\Wgl+ 21.:gxgl 11Jf2 #
17.h3 .he4 18.:gxe4 fS 19.exf6
11Jgxf6. Black has managed to
solve the problem with his knight
on g4. 20.:gxe6 (White's attempt
to eliminate the powerful enemy
passed d3-pawn would not solve
his problems either. 20.:gd4 '\Wc7!?
21.:gxd3 11Jc5. White's unfortunate
rook comes constantly under an
attack by Black's pieces. 22 .:gd4
es 23.:gxb4 e4 24.l:iJel e3 25.fxe3
l:iJdS+) 2 0 . . . l:iJcSt
13 . . 0-0
.
14.gdl
14.11Jc4 '\Wc7 15 . .id2 (15.:gdl
!!fd8 - see 14.!!dl; 15.l:iJfeS, Vesco­
vi - Leitao, Rio de Janeiro 2 0 07
15 ... aS!?+) 15 ... 11Jg4. Black is threat­
ening to capture on f3 and this
forces White to weaken the long
light-squared diagonal. 16.g3 fS+
Koskela - Pfiffner, ICCF 2 009.
14.e4 cxd4 15.eS. This pawn­
sacrifice for initiative cannot pro­
vide White with more than equal­
ity. 15 . . . l:iJdS. The basic defect of
the plan, connected with the
197
Chapter 15
pawn-advance e3-e4-e5, is that
Black's knight gains access to a
wonderful square at the centre of
the board. 16.tlJb3 (16.%Ye4 g6 17.
tlJb3, Ibragimov - Volzhin, Voro­
nezh 1991, 17 . . . V;Yc7! ? Black pro­
tects his bishop and is threatening
the rather unpleasant knight-sor­
tie from the dS-square. 18 .i.h6
gfd8+ Black's pieces have been
deployed much more harmoni­
ously.) 16 . . . aS 17.%Ye4 g6 18.i.h6
ge8 19.i.bS. White wishes to ex­
ploit the vulnerability of the bS­
square. 19 . . . %Yb6 2 0 .%Yxd4 (20.
i.xd7 tlJf6 21.V;Yf4 tlJxd7oo) 20 ... tlJcS.
Black avoids material losses with
a precise play. 21.tlJfd2 i.c6 22..ixc6
%Yxc6 23.gfcl gec8. White cannot
achieve anything out of the pin on
the c-file. 24.tlJxcS i.xcS 25.%Yh4
V;Yb6 26.gc4. The rooks will be
soon traded on the c-file after
which the position will be consid­
erably simplified. 26 . . . gc7 27.gacl
gac8 28 .b3 i.e7 29.gxc7 gxc7 30.
gxc7 %Yxc7 31.V;Yc4 %Yd8= Degtya­
ryov - Iordanyan, ICCF 2 0 14.
14.aS. White fixes immediately
the enemy pawn on a6, so that
Black would not be able to play
later a6-a5. 14 . . . %Yc7
198
1s.gd1 gfd8 - see 14.gdl.
1s.ge1 gfd8 16.tlJc4 (After 16.
e4, it seems good for Black to
choose 16 . . . g6 ! ? 17.tlJb3 cxd4 18.
eS hf3 19 .gxf3 tlJdS+ Ramik -
Fessler, ICCF 2011. His superior
pawn-structure provides him with
a stable edge.) 16 . . . i.e4. Black ex­
changes the powerful enemy bish­
op and leaves him with the pas­
sive bishop on cl. 17.b3 (17.i.xe4
ttJxe4+ Lenic - Berczes, Rogaska
Slatina 2 0 09) 17 . . . gac8 18.i.xe4
ttJxe4 19.i.b2 cxd4 2 0.exd4 tlJc3
2 1.%Ye3 tlJf6. Black's pieces are
completely dominant over the
dS-square. 2 2 .gacl ttJfdS 23.V;Yd3
V;Yb8 24.tlJceS V;Ybs+ Atakisi - Jop­
pich, ICCF 2011.
The move 15.tlJc4 leads to in-
teresting complications 15 . . . tlJg4 ! ?
16.e4 (16.tlJcd2 tlJgf6=) 16 . . . cxd4
17.h3 , Alekhine - Bogoljubow,
Germany 1934, 17 . . . ttJgf6 ! ? 18 .eS.
White sacrifices another pawn for
the initiative. 18 . . . i.xf3 19.%Yxf3
tlJxeS 2 0 .V;Yg3 i.d6 21.tlJxeS i.xeS
2 2 .%Yh4. Black has a huge materi­
al advantage, but his defence is
not easy at all. He cannot play h7-
h6, because White will immedi­
ately counter that with a bishop­
sacrifice. 22 . . . hS ! ? 23 .i.gS tlJdS
24.gfcl V;Yd6 25.V;YxhS g6 26.%Yf3
b3. Black is preparing tlJb4. 27.g3
tlJb4 28 .i.e4 gac8 29.V;Yxb3. He
gives back his extra material and
neutralises his opponent's initia­
tive. White must play very pre­
cisely in order not to end up in an
inferior position. 29 . . . d3 30.gc4
gxc4 3 1 .%Yxc4 i.xg3 . Black will
 2.c4 c6 3. 0.j3 0.f6 4. 0. c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. i.d3 de 7. hc4 b5 8 . i d3 c5
obtain two pawns for the piece
and his passed d-pawn will be-
come very dangerous. 32 .fxg3
'1Wxg3+ 33.ig2 \Wxg5 34.'1Wxb4 gc8
35,gfl gel 36.'1Wd4 d2 37.h4 \Wxa5.
Black collects already a third pawn
for the piece. 38 .b4 dlWI' 39.gxdl
gxdl+ 40.Wfxdl Wfxb4= The posi-
tion is objectively drawish, but it is
only Black who can play for a win.
14 . . . Wfc7
15.�c4
There arises a complicated po­
sition with mutual chances after
15.aS gfd8 16.h3 (16.0.c4 .ie4 -
see 15.0.c4) 16 . . . g6 17.0.c4 0.e4
18 . .id2 cxd4 19.exd4 0.xd2 2 0 .
0.fxd2 0.f6 2 1.0.b6 ga7 2 2 .gacl
Wff4oo Kameneckas - Zhak, ICCF
2008. The a7-square is not the
best for Black's rook, but he has
two powerful bishops, while
White's isolated d4-pawn would
need permanent protection.
15 . . . �ffd8 16.aS
White cannot delay this pawn-
advance anymore, because after
16.id2 , Black will play himself
16 . . . aS, for example: 17.gacl ic6
18.b3 '1Wb7 19.gc2 ids 20.iel cxd4
21.exd4 0.f8. His knight is headed
for the g6-square from where it
might go to f4. 2 2 .0.cd2 0.g6+ De
Oliveira - Ruemmele, ICCF 2008.
Black's pieces have been much
more actively deployed.
16 . . . .ie4 17.he4
Following 17.b3 cxd4 18.exd4
ixd3 19.gxd3, White must play
very accurately; otherwise, he
might end up in a worse position
due to his weak d4-pawn. 19 ...
'1Wb7 2 0 .igS h6 2 1.ih4 0.d5 22.
ixe7 0.xe7 23.0.fe5 0.f6= Kaupert
- Molina, ICCF 2013.
17. . . �xe4 18 . .id2 �fac8
19. gacl
19 . .iel Wfb7 20.0.feS 0.ef6.
Now, White should already think
about equality. 21.0.b6 0.xb6 22.
axb6 Wfxb6 23.Wfxa6 \Wxa6= Cat­
tani - Bergmann, ICCF 2010.
199
Chapter 15
19 Wi'b7 20.i.el g6. Black
• . .
wishes to exchange on d4 and to
follow this with e5. Therefore, he
covers immediately the f5-square
against the penetration of the en-
emy knight. 21.h3 cxd4 22.
lll xd4 e5 23. ttJb3 Wi'b5 = Petkov
- Freeman, ICCF 2 013.
C2) 9.0-0 i.b7
We will deal now with : C2a)
10.dxc5 and C2b) 10.Wfe2.
About 10.a3 lll b d7 - see Chap­
ter 13, variation C, 9.�d3.
It would be too slow for White
to opt here for 10 .b3 cxd4 ! ? 11.
lll xd4 �e7 12 .�b2 lll b d7 13.:E&cl
:E&c8 14.�bl 0-0 15.Wi'e2 Wi'a5+
Lippmann - Schulz, Kiel 2 015.
Black's pieces are more active.
10.a4 b4 11.lll e 2 (11.lll b l lll bd7
12.lll b d2 �e7, or 12 .�e2 �e7 13.
lll b d2 0-0, or 13.:E&dl �c7 14.
lll b d2 0-0 - see variation Clb)
11 . . . lll b d7 12 .b3 (12 .lll g3 �d6 13.
b3 cxd4 14.lll xd4, Burmakin - Le-
200
vin, Benidorm 2008, 14 . . . h5 ! ?+)
12 . . . cxd4+ White is already facing
serious problems. 13.lll fxd4 e5.
Black ousts the enemy knight
from its active position. 14.lll f5 g6
15.lll fg3 h5+ Jussupow - Ivan­
chuk, Linares 199 2 . The threat
h5-h4 is very unpleasant for White.
C2a) 10.dxc5 hc5
11.a3
White is preparing b2-b4,
�b2 .
After 11.a4 b4, h e must worsen
the placement of his knight. 12.
lll e 2 lll bd7+ After 13.lll g 3? ! , Black
has a resource that we have al­
ready encountered in this varia­
tion - 13 . . . h5 ! + Hjartarson - Ehl­
vest, Reykjavik 1991.
11.b3 0-0 12 .�b2 �e7 ! ? = Ko­
tenko - Volodarsky, Russia 1996.
ll.e4 lll b d7 12 .�f4 (12 .�e2
�b8 - see 11.�e2) 12 . . . lll h 5 13.
�g5 �e7 14.�e3 lll hf6= Bondars -
Sorcinelli, LSS 2011.
 2.c4 c6 3. lllj3 lllf6 4. lll c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. id3 de 7. ixc4 b5 8. id3 c5
ll.�e2 lll b d7
12 .a3 0-0 - see 11.a3.
12 .b3 0-0 13 ..ib2 !k8 14.l''ffd l
.ib4 - see 12 .l:!dl.
12 .l:!dl 0-0 13.b3 l:!c8 14 . .ib2
.ib4 lS.lll b l, Grachev - Filippov,
Sochi 2 0 04, 1S . . . ixf3 ! ? This is a
non-standard decision. 16.�xf3
�c7. White has the two-bishop
advantage, but has problems to
complete the development of his
queenside pieces without posi­
tional concessions. 17.a3 ie7 18.
l:!a2 . He wishes to develop his
rook via the c2-square. 18 . . . l:!fd8
19.ixf6 lll xf6 2 0 .l:!c2 �b8 21.l:!xc8
�xc8 2 2 .�e2 g6+ Now, White
would need to make many more
accurate moves in order to equal­
ise completely. He will hardly
manage to improve the placement
of his knight on bl, since it must
protect the pawn on a3. In addi­
tion, the penetration of Black's
queen to the c3-square might be a
serious threat.
12 .e4 �b8 . Black does not
need to be in a hurry to castle;
otherwise, he will have to consid­
er the move e4-eS and after the
retreat of his knight - the stand­
ard bishop-sacrifice on h7. 13 ..igS
(13 .a3 id6 14.h3 0-0= Straeter -
Schandorff, Germany 2007)
13 . . . 0-0
14.l:!adl, Uhlmann - Lukacs,
Debrecen 1988, 14 . . . l:!c8 ! ?+
14.a3 h6 1S.ixf6 lll xf6 16.eS
ixf3 . Now, White must comply
with the weakening of his king's
shelter in order not to lose his eS­
pawn. 17.gxf3 lll h S+ Mannermaa
- Olofsson, ICCF 2009.
14.l:!acl .id6. Black has suc­
ceeded in establishing control
over the es-square. lS.l:!fdl h6 16 .
.ih4 .if4 17.l:!c2 l:!c8+ Lagowski -
Kempinski, Warsaw 2 0 07. His
pieces have been much more har­
moniously deployed.
11 . . . 0-0 12.b4
White should better clarify im­
mediately the position of the ene­
my bishop on cS, because after
12 .�e2, Black can deploy it even
more actively. 12 . . . lll b d7 13.b4 (or
13.e4 .id6 14 . .igS �b8= Johann -
Nesterov, Germany 2009) 13 . . .
.id6 1 4 . .ib2 , Najdorf - Becker,
Munich 1936, 14 . . . l:!c8=
12 . . . J.e7 13.J.b2 �bd7
201
Chapter 15
14.YlYe2
14J�kl l"k8 15.�e2 .txf3 - see
14.YlYe2 .
The careless move 14.YlYb3? !
would leave the bishop o n b 2 de­
fenceless and would enable Black
to inflict a simple tactical strike
and to obtain an advantage - 14 . . .
llJcS ! 15.hh7+ llJxh7 16.bxc5, Heis­
senbuettel - Kahn, Schwaebisch
Gmuend 1993, 16 . . . hc5 ! ?+
14.llJe2 l:k8 15.llJf4, Kryakvin
- P.Smirnov, Olginka 2 011, 15 . . .
�c7 ! ?oo
14 . . . gcs 1s.gfdl
It would be less precise for
White to play here 15.gacl hf3 ! ?
16.gxf3. Naturally, h e cannot cap­
ture here with his queen because
of llJe5. 16 . . . llJe5 17.gfdl llJxd3 18.
Wxd3 �xd3 19.gxd3 gc4 2 0 .llJe2
gxcl + 21.llJxcl llJd5 22 .llJb3 gc8+
Lanzani - Godena, Padova 2 0 14.
The position has been simplified
and there has arisen an endgame
in which Black has a stable advan-
202
tage, because White's pawns on
a3 and b4 have been fixed on
squares with the same colour as
his bishop.
15 . . . �c7
Black must remove his queen
away from the c and d-files in or­
der to avoid the attack of White's
rooks.
16.gacl �b8
17.h3
17.llJbl gxcl 18.gxcl .txf3 19.
�xf3 gd8 2 0 .'119e 2 llJe5 2 1..ic2
llJc4= There has arisen a position
with dynamic balance. White has
the two-bishop advantage, but
Black has a powerful knight on
the c4-square.
17 . . . gfdS = Spirin - Malakhat­
ko, Esbjerg 2008.
C2b) 10.Yl\'e2
White's queen frees a square
for his rook.
10 . . . llJbd7
 2.c4 c6 3. l:i:ij3 l:i:if6 4. l:i:i c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. i.d3 de 7. hc4 b5 8. i.d3 c5
lU�dl
About 11.dxc5 i.xc5 - see vari-
ation C2a.
11.a4 b4 12.l:i:ibl i.e7 13.l:i:ibd2
0-0 - see variation Clb.
11.a3 i.d6 - see Chapter 13,
variation C, 9 .i.d3 .
The straightforward attempt
to advance e3-e4-e5 would lead to
problems for White, due to the
weakening of the d4-square. 11.
!!el i.e7 12 .e4 ? ! cxd4 13.l:i:ixd4
l:i:ic5 14.!!dl b4 15.e5, Horvath -
Veress, Hungary 2010, 15 . . . bxc3 ! ?
16.exf6 i.xf6 17.bxc3 �d5 18.f3
l:i:ixd3 19.�xd3 0-0+ Black has
not only the two-bishop advan­
tage, but also a superior pawn­
structure.
11.i.d2 . White's bishop will
impede from this square his own
rook to fight for the d-file. 1 1 . . .
i.d6 12.!!acl 0-0 13.!!fdl c4oo, oc­
cupying space on the queenside,
Nawrocki - Snihur, Borowice
2012.
11.b3. The development of the
bishop on b2 seems rather slow.
11 . . . i.d6 12 .i.b2 0-0 13.!!acl (13.
!!adl cxd4! ? 14.l:i:ixd4 !!c8+; 13. !!fdl
!!c8 14.!!acl cxd4 - see 13.!!acl)
13 . . . !!c8 14.!!fdl cxd4 15.l:i:ixd4, Pi­
casso Gallego - Korneev, Malaga
2010, 15 . . . l:i:ie5 ! ?+ Black's pieces
have been more actively deployed.
11 . . . YHb6
He removes immediately his
queen from the X-ray juxtaposi­
tion with White's rook.
12.a4
Or 12 .a3 !!d8 13.i.c2 i.d6 14.
i.d2 cxd4 15.exd4 0-0+ Martins
Barriga - Saglione, ICCF 2015.
White has obtained a position
with an isolated pawn in not the
best possible version.
12 .b3 cxd4 ! ? 13.exd4, Gouy -
Solakian, France 1996 (13.l:i:ixd4? !
e5+) 13 . . . i.b4 ! ? 14.i.b2 0-0+
White's dark-squared bishop is
not well placed, because his own
pawn on d4 restricts considerably
the sphere of its actions.
203
Chapter 15
12 .ic2 l'k8
The seemingly active move
13.e4 only leads to the weakening
of the gl-a7 diagonal. 13 . . . cxd4 14.
lll xd4 i.c5 15.i.e3 0-0+, followed
by lll e 5, lll g4 (lll c4), Milinaroli -
Rabiega, Berliner 1995.
13.a3 ie7 14.dxc5 (After 14.e4,
Black can transfer quickly his
knight to the c4-square, from
where it will exert powerful pres­
sure against White's queenside.
14 . . . cxd4 15.lll xd4 lll e 5 16.ig5,
Em. Lasker - Duras, St Petersburg
1909, 16 ... lll c4! ?+) 14 ... '!WxcS. Black
is preparing the transfer of his
queen to the kingside. 15.e4 '!Wh5
16.if4 0-0= Reshevsky - Naj­
dorf, New York 1952.
12 • • • c4!?
Black reduces his pressure
against the enemy centre and re­
lies on utilising of his pawn-ma­
jority on the queenside.
13 .tc2 b4 14.a5 lrc7 15.lll a4
• Black has managed to impede
The other retreats of White's
knight lose a piece for him.
15 . . . lrxaS
(diagram)
16.Vxc4
2 04
White restores the material
balance, but allows the transfer
of the enemy queen to the h5-
square. From there, it can partici­
pate in an attack against White's
king.
There arises a complicated
strategical battle after the line :
16.e4 !k8 17.ig5 b3 18.ibl ib4oo
Istratescu - Sturua, Istanbul 2003.
White has a pawn-centre, but his
pieces are dis-coordinated. In ad­
dition, it should not be forgotten
that Black has an extra pawn.
16 . . . Vhs 17.Ve2
The move 17.'!Wc7 would lead
to a perpetual check after 17 . . .
ixf3 18.gxf3 lrxf3 19.lll b 6 b3
2 0 .hb3 '!Wg4=
17. . . .td6 18.h3
After the careless move 18.e4?,
White loses a pawn: 18 ... ixh2+
Berczes - Galyas, Budapest 2 0 0 2 .
18 . . . t0e4
the enemy pawn-advance e3-e4.
19.b3 o-o 20 .tda as 21.
•
.tb2 h6= Black has an excellent
position thanks to his powerful
centralised knight.
Chapter 16 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 .tll t'3 tll f6 4.tll c3 e6
5.e3 a6 6.c5
White occupies space on the
queenside, but now, he must be
constantly on the alert about the
undermining moves b7-b6, or e6-
e5.
6 ... �bd7! ?
This is a flexible move. Black
does not clarify his plans for the
time being. Later, depending on
the circumstances, he may either
inflict a counter strike in the cen­
tre e6-e5 (immediately, or after
the preliminary moves g6, i.g7,
0-0), or can begin active actions
on the queenside with b7-b6.
(diagram)
7.b4
White fortifies his c5-pawn
and prepares the development of
his bishop on b2.
Besides this move, he has
many other possibilities :
The move 7.a3 does not look
so active. 7 . . . g6 ! ? 8.b4 !i.g7 9.!i.b2
0-0 10 . .ie2 fie7 11.�a4 �e8 ! ?
( 1 1. . . �e4?! Speelman - M.Gure­
vich, Port Erin 2 0 07, 12 .�eS ! ?;t,
followed by f2-f3) 12.0-0 e5. This
thematic pawn-advance equalis­
es. 13.dxeS �xe5=
7.�a4. This does not look like
the right time for White to de­
centralise his knight. 7 . . . e5 ! 8.
�xeS (8 .i.d2 �e4= Botvinnik -
Rabinovich, Moscow 1937) 8 . . .
�xe5 9.dxe5 �e4= White has
temporarily an extra pawn, but
can hardly hold on to it, because
205
Chapter 16
after 10 .b4? ! , Black has the pow-
erful resource 10 . . . bS ! 11.llib6
'\Wxb6! This is the point! Black sac-
rifices temporarily his queen and
obtains a serious advantage after
that. 12.cxb6 hb4+ 13.i.d2 hd2+
14.'\Wxd2 llixd2 1S.c;!;ixd2 gb8+
The move 7.i.d2 does not pre­
vent Black's pawn-break in the
centre. 7 . . . eS 8.dxeS (8.llixeS
llixeS 9.dxeS llid7= White is inca­
pable of protecting simultaneous­
ly his pawns on eS and cS.) 8 . . .
llie4 9 .e6, Lymar - Ettinger, Tel
Aviv 2003. White has an interest­
ing resource here, which is still
insufficient to maintain an advan­
tage. 9 . . . fxe6 ! ? This is the sim­
plest. Black is not afraid of having
a weak pawn on e6. 10.llixe4 dxe4
11.llid4 llixcS 12.llib3 llixb3 13.
'\Wxb3 id6 14.gdl Wle7 1S.Wlc4 es.
Black opens the diagonal for his
bishop. 16.Wixe4 0-0 17.i.d3 ifs
18 .%!/c4+ i.e6=
After 7 .ie2, Black can begin
active actions on the queenside.
7 . . . b6 ! ? 8.cxb6 i.d6 9.0-0 0-0
10.'\Wc2 , Javakhishvili - Krush, Is­
tanbul 2008, 10 . . . %!/xb6 ! ? The
weakness on e6 is easy to defend
for Black and he will exchange his
"bad" bishop after a6-aS, ia6. 11.
llia4 '\Wc7 12 .b3 as 13 . .!b2 ia6
14.gfcl llie4 1S.ha6 gxa6=
7.Wic2 . With the help of this
move Boris Gelfand won his game
in the World Championship
match in the year 2012 against
206
Vishy Anand. Still, later Black
found quickly reliable ways of
equalising. 7 . . . b6 8.cxb6
8 ... %!/xb6 ! ? 9.i.d2 id6 10.gc1
i.b7 ll.i.d3 aS. Black wishes to ex­
change the light-squared bishops
at an opportune moment and
White's activity in the centre 12.
e4 would lead to quick simplifica­
tions. 12 . . . dxe4 13.llixe4 llixe4 14.
.he4 cS 1S.hb7 %!/xb7 16.0-0
cxd4 17.llixd4 0-0 18 .%!/c6 '\Wxc6
19.llixc6 a4 20.gfdl llif6 = , fol­
lowed by llidS, Ugrinovsky - We­
ber, ICCF 2012.
8 . . . llixb6 9.i.d2 cS. Black gets
rid of his weak pawn. 10.gc1 cxd4
11.exd4 i.d6 12 .i.gS (12 .i.d3 0-0
13.0-0 i.b7 14.llia4 llixa4 1S.V9xa4
aS l6.gc2 llie4= Gelfand - Aro­
nian, Paris 2 0 13) 12 . . . 0-0 13.id3
h6 14.ih4 if4 ! ? Black ousts the
enemy rook from the c-file (In the
above mentioned game Anand
played against Gelfand the move
14 . . . i.b7.). 1s.gd1 llibd7 16.0-0
aS ! ? 17.%!/e2 %!/b6= Frolyanov -
Iskusnyh, Kazan 2012.
7.i.d3 es
(diagram)
About 8.dxeS llig4 9.llia4
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. l:i:ij3 l:i:if6 4. l:i:ic3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.c5 l:i:i bd7

l:i:igxe5 10.l:i:ixeS l:i:ixe5 - see 8.

l:i:ixe5.
Following 8.ic2 e4 9.l:i:id2 b6=
Khruschiov - Vysochin, St Peters­
burg 2009, or 8.ie2 e4 9.l:i:id2 b6
10.cxb6 id6 11.0-0 0-0+, Black
obtains a space advantage, Ver­
meulen - Niewold, ICCF 2 0 15.
8 .l:i:ixe5 l:i:ixe5 9.dxe5 l:i:ig4 10.
l:i:ia4 (White's protection with the
other pawn 10.f4 does not prom­
ise him anything either: 10 . . . hcS
ll.'!Wf3 '\1;¥b6= Bromberger - V.
Georgiev, Neuhausen 2008. Black's
pieces exert rather unpleasant
pressure against the e3-pawn.)
10 ... l:i:ixeS 11.0-0 g6 ! ? The fian­
chetto of the bishop is Black's
simplest road to equality. The
move 12 .e4 leads to simplifica­
tions. 12 . . . dxe4 13.he4 °\1;¥xdl 14.
gxdl ie6 15.if4 ig7 16.l:i:ib6 gd8
17.l'�xd8+ ©xd8 18 .gdl+ ©e7=
Pintonello - Konstantinov, LSS
2011.
however, White's bishop is on f4
and not on cl.
With his last move, Black not
only undermines the enemy c5-
pawn, but also prepares the exchange
of his bad bishop (a6-a5, i.a6).
8.ib2
Following 8.id2 a5 9.b5, Black
fortifies the c6-square with the
move 9 . . . i.b7 and after 10.cxb6,
he does not need to lose time to
regain his pawn, but can play
more actively: 10 .. . cS ll.dxc5 l:i:ixc5
12.l:i:ia4 l:i:ife4 13.gcl, Shirov -
Fridman, Riga 2 0 14, 13 . . . gc8 ! ?oo
8 . . . a5 9.a3 ie7

7 . . . b6
(diagram)
The pawn-structure resem­
bles the famous variation of the
Queen's Gambit l.d4 d5 2 .c4 e6
3.l:i:ic3 l:i:if6 4.l:i:if3 i.e7 5.i.f4 0-0
6.e3 l:i:ibd7 7.c5 c6 8 .i.d3 b6. There 10.id3

207
Chapter 16
About 10 .i.e2 0-0 11.0-0 i.a6
12 . .ixa6 l:!xa6 - see 10.i.d3.
10 • • • 0-0 11.0-0
ll.Wfc2 V9c7 12.0-0 i.a6 13.
.ixa6 l:!xa6= Onischuk - Motylev,
Poikovsky 2010.
n . . . J.a6
Black has realised his plan and
has equalised completely.
12 .ixa6
• his knight from e8 will go later
If White refrains from this
capture, the character of the fight
remains more or less the same :
12.l:!el .ixd3 13.Wfxd3, Dyach­
kov - Rublevsky, Dagomys 2010,
13 . . . W/c7=, or 12.lliel, Ding - Aro­
nian, Paris 2013, 12 . . . W/c8 ! ? = , 12.
Wfe2 .ixd3 13.V9xd3 V9c7 14.h3 l:!tb8
15.l:!tbl l:!b7 16.Wfc2 h6= Matlakov
- Jakovenko, Dagomys 2010.
12 • • • gxa6 13.b5
White is reluctant to comply
with the rather calm develop­
ments and wishes by all means to
complicate the matters.
208
13 .Wie2 WfcB 14.l:!abl axb4 15.
axb4, Vachier Lagrave - Melku­
myan, Biel 2012, 15 . . . W/b7 ! ? = , fol­
lowed by l:!fa8. Black has less space
indeed, but his bishop is more ac­
tive than its white counterpart .
13 cxb5 14.c6 tLib8 15.
• • •
tLle5, Korchnoi - Golod, Beershe­
ba 2004, 15 tLieS!? •••
This is Black's most reliable
move. He is preparing f7-f6, while
to c7, taking part in the blockade
of the enemy pawn on c6. 16.
tLixb5 f6 17.Wlg4. White contin­
ues to increase the pressure, but
Black's position remains quite
solid. 17 fxe5 18.V9xe6+ m'7 19.
•••
e4! ? gas. Black frees a square for
his knight. 20.dxe5 (Following
20.exd5? llia6 21.dxe5 llic5- + ,
White's centre crumbles.) 20 . • •
tLl a 6 21.gadl tLiac7 22.tLixc7
tLixc7 23.Wfh3 d4! 24 .ixd4 Wic8
•
25 .ixb6 Wixh3 26.gxh3 .ixa3
•
27.f4 tLie6= Black can defend
successfully in this endgame and
can even seize the initiative at an
opportune moment.
Chapter 17 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . tl'if'3 tl'if6 4.tl'ic3 e6
5.e3 a6 6 .b3
White defends his c4-pawn.
Now, he does not need to worry
about the possibility dxc4, fol­
lowed by b7-b5.
Still, the move 6.b3 has a
drawback - the weakening of the
el-a5 diagonal and Black can ex­
ploit this immediately.
6 . . . Ab4 7.Ad2
White's bishop will be less ac­
tive on this square than on b2, but
he cannot play 7.i.b2? ! , since he
would lose a pawn after 7 . . . Wfa5
8.Wfc2 tlJe4 9.l'kl 1l;l/xa2 10 .i.d3
ixc3+ 11.i.xc3 Wfxc2 12.!!x:c2 tlJxc3
13 .l':�xc3, Shipov - Dreev, play­
chess.com 2 006, 13 . . . aS ! ?+ This is
Black's most precise move. He
impedes the pawn-advance b3-b4
and can transfer his knight to a
more active position at an oppor­
tune moment: tlJa6-b4.
7. . . tlJbd7
8.Ad3
White develops his bishop to
an active placement and prepares
castling kingside.
8.Wfc2 0-0 9 . .ie2 (9.i.d3 i.d6
- see 8.i.d3) 9 . . . i.d6 10.0-0 e5 -
see 8 . .ie2 .
The move 8.g3 does not com­
bine well with e2-e3. 8 . . . 0-0 9.
i.g2 1l;l/e7 10.0-0 b6. Black wishes
to exploit the removal of White's
bishop from the fl-a6 diagonal.
209
Chapter 17
11.tlJel aS=, followed by i.a6, Khis­
matullin - Reshetnikov, Tagan­
rog 2011.
It is not good for White to play
here 8.cS, because this clarifies
the pawn-structure too early. Now,
Black's pawn-advance e6-eS be­
comes much more effective. 8 . . .
0 - 0 9 .tlJa4 ( 9 . .id3 es. This tem­
porary pawn-sacrifice is Black's
simplest road to equality. 10.tlJxeS
ttJxeS 11.dxeS tlJd7 12.tlJa4 i.xd2+
13 .�xd2 ttJxeS=) 9 ... i.xd2+ 10.
�xd2, Akesson - Cramling, Goth­
enburg 2 00S (10.tlJxd2 eS= Be­
rezovsky - Krivoshey, Germany
2 0 04) 10 . . . eS ! ? t
8.ie2. White's bishop will be
less active here than on the d3-
square. 8 . . . 0-0 9.0-0 .id6. Black
should not overlook the possi­
bility tlJxdS. 10.Wl'c2 (lOJ'kl �e7
11.�c2 es 12.cxdS cxdS 13.dxeS
tlJxeS= Tkachiev Godena,
Cannes 1999) 10 . . . eS
11.dxeS ttJxeS 1 2 .l:Ud l , Portisch
- Khalifman, Bazna 2007 (12.
cxdS cxdS - see 11.cxdS) 12 . . .
ttJxf3 + ! ? 1 3 . .ixf3 tlJg4t
11.cxdS cxdS 12.dxeS tlJxeS
210
There has arisen a position
with an isolated pawn. It is not
easy for White to increase his
control over the strategically im­
portant d4-square, because he
cannot transfer his knight on c3
there. In addition, his queen
might turn out to be misplaced on
c2 if Black manages to develop his
rook on c8.
13.�fdl. White's rook is re­
moved from the protection of his
king. 13 . . . .ie6 14.tlJd4 �c8 1S.Wl'b2
Wfe7 16.a4. He defends against the
threat ia3, but weakens the b4-
square. 16 . . . tlJc6 17.if3, Granda
Zuniga - Agrest, Turin 2006, 17 . . .
tlJg4 ! ?+ White's king i s seriously
endangered.
13.h3 ie6= Kovalenko - Re­
shetnikov, Moscow 2 013.
13.�adl .ie6 14.�bl �c8 = Mir­
zoev - Wirthensohn, Basel 2010.
8 ... 0-0 9.0-0
After White has removed his
king from el, he is threatening to
capture on dS with his knight, so
Black must take some measures
against that.
It is not good for White to de­
lay his castling. 9.Wfc2 id6 10.tlJe2
 4. li:i c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.b3 i.b4 7. i.d2 li:i bd7 8. i.d3 0 - 0 9. 0 - 0 i.d6
(10.0-0 - see 9.0-0) 10 . . . cS! ? This
move looks more reliable than the
advance of the other pawn. (10 . . .
e 5 11.cxdS cxdS 12.dxeS li:ixeS 13.
li:ixeS heS 14 . .ic3 .ixc3+ 1S.Wfxc3;!;
Jussupow - Kempinski, Germany
2009. White's bishop is more ac­
tive than its counterpart. There
has appeared an isolated pawn in
Black's position.) 11.0-0 b6. He is
preparing to develop his bishop
on b7. 12.cxdS exdS 13.li:ig3 i.b7
14.li:ifS /i.c7 lS.dxcS bxcSoo Huz­
man - Kasparov, Rethymno 2003.
There has arisen a standard posi­
tion with hanging pawns in which
Black's prospects are not inferior.
9 . . . .i.d6
9 .. J3e8? 10.li:ixdS ! li:ixdS 11.
cxdS hd2 12.dxc6 i.b4 13.cxd7
hd7 14.li:ieS± Goryachkina -
Bulmaga, Moscow 2012.
We will analyse in details now:
A) 10.lkl, B) 10.e4 and C)
10.'8c2.
10.h3 h6 11.�c2 (lUkl l'!e8 -
see variation A) 11 . . . eS - see vari­
ation C.
10 .�e2 l'!e8 11.h3 eS 12.dxeS
li:ixeS 13.li:ixeS heS 14.l'!adl, Ras­
mussen - Hansen, Aalborg 2006,
14 ... bS ! ? lS.cxdS cxdS+, followed
by dS-d4. You can see the conse­
quences of the misplacement of
White's queen on e2 impeding the
move li:ie2.
After 10.cS i.c7 ll.e4, Black
can play 11 . . . eS ! , after which the
game is sharpened. 12.exdS, Ip­
polito - Erenburg, New Jersey
2008 (12 .dxeS? ! Le Quang Llem -
Nguyen Huynh Minh, Singapore
2 006, 12 . . . li:ixeS ! ? Black wins by
force the pawn on h2. 13.li:ixeS
dxe4 14.li:ixe4 li:ixe4 1S.he4 !i.xeS
16.l'!cl hh2 + 17.©xh2 �h4+ 18.
©gl Wfxe4+) 12 . . . exd4 ! ? Black un­
dermines the base under the ene­
my pawn on cS. 13.d6 li:ixc5 14.dxc7
Wfxc7. He regains his piece and
ends up with an extra pawn. Still,
White has two powerful bishops
and this compensation is suffi­
cient for him to maintain the bal­
ance. 1S.i.c2 dxc3 16.i.xc3 l'!d8 17.
Wfcl li:idS 18.i.eS �e7 19.l'!el li:ie6oo
10.l'!el h6
11.l'!cl es - see variation A.
211
Chapter 17
11.\Wc2 eS see variation C
ll.h3 eS 12.cxdS cxdS= Potkin
- Jakovenko, Moscow 2012.
After 11.\Wcl, Bu Xiangzhi -
Rublevsky, Sochi 2016, it is good
for Black to choose 11 .. J!e8 ! ? = ,
followed by e6-eS.
11.e4 dxc4. This is a typical re­
source for Black in similar posi­
tions. Before playing eS-e6, he
exchanges on c4. 1 2 .bxc4 eS 13.cS
!i..c7 14.lll a 4. The edge of the board
is not the best place for White's
knight. (He should have possibly
chosen the more reliable move
14.\Wc2 , although even then after
14 . . . exd4 1S.lll e 2 lll g4 16.lll exd4
lll deS 17.h3 lll xd3 18.\Wxd3 lll eS
19.lll xeS .ixeS= , Black would not
have any problems thanks to his
two powerful bishops, Bacrot -
Rublevsky, Poikovsky 2011.) 14 . . .
exd4 1S.h3. White takes the g4-
square under control. 1S .. J:�e8 16.
�kl (16.l"�bl, Rodshtein - Delor­
me, Biel 2011, 16 . . . lll h 7! ?oo) 16 . . .
lll h 7+± White must play very pre­
cisely in this position; otherwise,
Black's kingside counterplay might
turn into a decisive attack. For
example after: 17.i.bl? ! lll gS 18.
lll xd4, Matlakov - Iskusnyh, Khan­
ty-Mansiysk 2011, 18 . . . lll eS ! ?+,
White would be beyond salvation,
since after 19 . .ie3? ! , Black would
have the resource 19 . . . lll xh3+ !
20.gxh3 \Wh4 2 Uk3 i.xh3-+
A) 10.!!kl h6
Black does not clarify his fur­
therplans yet.
212
11.h3
About ll.\Wc2 l'!e8 12 .h3 cS -
see variation C.
11.lll e 2, Aronian - Jakovenko,
Moscow 2009, White increases his
control over the d4-square. This
may be very useful for him if Black
advances e6-eS and there arises a
position with an isolated queen's
pawn. Still, Black can undermine
the enemy centre with his c-pawn
as well: 11 . . . dxc4 ! ? 12 .bxc4 cs 13.
lll g 3 b6 14.i.c3 cxd4 1S.exd4 \Wc7
16.lll e4 lll xe4 17.he4 i.b7=
11.l'!el. White increases the ef­
fect of the threat e3-e4, but Black
takes actions first. 11 . . . eS 12.cxdS
cxdS 13.dxeS (The move 13.e4
leads to exchanges. 13 . . . dxe4 14.
lll xe4 lll xe4 1S.he4 exd4 16.lll xd4
lll f6= Chadaev - Rublevsky, Ta­
ganrog 2 011.) 13 . . . lll xeS 14.lll xeS
heS lS.lll e 2, Sargissian - Illescas
Cordoba, Istanbul 2 0 1 2 , lS . . .
lll e4 ! ? = Black has obtained a good
position with an isolated pawn.
11 . . . ges 12.e4
 4. l:iJ c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.b3 !ib4 7. !id2 l:iJ bd7 8 . .id3 0 - 0 9. 0 - 0 .id6
12 .W/c2 c5 - see variation C.
White should better not post­
pone this move, because after 12.
gel, Scekic - Erenburg, New Jer­
sey 2008, Black can play 12 . . . eS ! ?
13.dxeS l:iJxeS 14.l:iJxeS hes lS.
cxdS l:iJxdS 16.l:iJxdS �xdS=
12 • • • dxc4 13.bxc4
13.hc4 eS= Volkov - Motylev,
Moscow 2008.
13 • • • es
Black wishes to exchange on
d4 and to gain access to the eS
and cs-squares for his minor
pieces.
14.cS
White is fighting for the cS­
square. Still, his pawn on cS will
need protection later.
14 .ic7 15 .ie3 exd4 16.
• • • • 29 .ig8 30 .ib3 ctlg6 31.ge4
hd4 Be7 17.ctla4 ctlh7 18.e5
Following 18.W/b3, Guedon -
P.Martynov, Cappelle-la-Grande
2 013, it seems very good for Black
to play 18 . . . l:iJdf8, in order to play
later .ie6 with tempo. 19.l:iJb6 !i.e6
20 . .ic4 hb6 2 1.�xb6 hc4 2 2 .
gxc4 l:iJgS 23.l:iJxgS hxgS 24.f3
gad8 2S.�b2 f6= The position
has been simplified considera­
bly.
18 ctlh:f8 19.ctlb6 gbs 20 .
• • •
.ic4 ctlxe5
Black wins a pawn, but ena­
bles the opponent to pin him on
the e-file. This pin is harmless for
him, though . . . 21 .b:eS hes 22.
•
gel Bc7 23.Bb3 .if5 24.ctlxeS
gxe5 25 .lxf7+ ©h8 26.Bg3
•
�el+ 27.gxel Bxg3 28.fxg3.
Black must play accurately in this
endgame, because White's pieces
are much more active. 28 .ih7. • • •
Black prepares .ig8, in order to
exchange the active enemy bish­
op. 29.ge7. This penetration of
the rook is harmless for Black.
• • • •
hb3 32.axb3 ©g8. Centralis­
ing the king is the simplest road
to equality. 33.ctlc4 @f7 34.©f2
@f6= White's pieces are more ac­
tive, but Black has a better pawn­
structure.
213
Chapter 17
B) 10.e4
This is a straightforward move.
White does not lose time to im­
prove his position and advances
immediately e3-e4. Black is per­
fectly prepared to counter it.
10 • • • dxc4 11.bxc4
Capturing with the bishop
cannot create problems for Black.
In addition, it does not seem logi­
cal, since then the move b2-b3 be­
comes senseless for White. 11.
i.xc4 e5 12 .i.g5 b5 13.i.e2 (13 .i.d3
i.b7 14.lDe2, Aleksandrov - Dziu­
ba, Dresden 2 0 07, 14 .. J'!e8 ! ?oo)
13 . . . h6 14 ..ih4 13e8 15.13cl i.b7
16.dxeS lDxeS 17.lDd4 lDg6+, Black
gets rid of the pin and is threaten­
ing later to play c6-c5, winning
the pawn on e4, Wiedenkeller -
Karjakin, Ohrid 2009.
11 . • . e5 12.c5
The move 12 .dS weakens the
c5-square. 12 . . . lDcS 13.i.gS (13.
i.c2 cxd5 14.cxdS b5 15.Wie2 i.g4+
Gasanov - Malakhatko, Moscow
2007. Black's pieces have been
2 14
harmoniously deployed, while
White's passed pawn has been re­
liably blocked.) 13 . . . h6 14.i.h4
g5 ! ? 15.i.g3, Uhlmann - Ushe­
nina, Marianske Lazne 2008.
White's bishop is misplaced here
and he will need plenty of efforts
to bring it back into the actions.
15 . . . cxdS ! ? 16.cxdS i.g4+
12 . • • i.c7
13.lDa4
About 13 .i.gS exd4 14.lDa4
13e8, or 13.h3 exd4 14.lDa4 13e8 -
see 13.lDa4.
13.i.e3 fie7= A.Moiseenko -
Huzman, Montreal 2 0 04.
13 . . . exd4 14.h3
14.i.gS. This pin of the knight
does not bring White anything.
14 . . . 13e8 15.13el (15.fffc 2? ! lDf8+,
with the rather unpleasant threat
i.g4, Dzagnidze - Stefanova, Lo­
pata 2 0 14.) 15 . . . 13b8 16.i.c2 h6
17 ..ih4 lDf8 18.Wxd4 .ig4oo Van
Wely - Rublevsky, Foros 2 0 07.
 4. l?i c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.b3 !ib4 7. i.d2 l?i bd7 8. !id3 0 - 0 9. 0 - 0 !id6

Now, Black's queen may go to

the kingside. 18.gbdl, Riazant­
sev - Sakaev, Moscow 2008 (18.
E!b3 ? ! �f6 19. !i.c4 l?ig6+ Braun -
16.E!cl l?if8 17.eS l?id5oo Sasiki­ M.Gurevich, Dresden 2008) 18 • . •

ran - Kempinski, Warsaw 2008. � e 6 19.eS. White prevents �f6.

19 gb8oo Black's position is a
• • •

After 16.'!Wcl, Malakhatko - bit cramped, but he has no pawn­

Kharlov, Zvenigorod 2008, Black weaknesses. It should not be for­
has the interesting possibility 16 . . . gotten that he has an extra pawn
l?ih7!?+ His knight frees the square as well.
for his queen and later it can go to
e6 or g6 from the h7-square.
C) 10.'Bc2
16 • • • l?if8 17.'!Wc2 This is a useful move. White
connects his rooks and increases
17.'!Wcl, Palliser - Malakhatko, his control over the e4-square.
Port Erin 2 0 05, 17 . . . l?i6d7 ! ? 18. 10 • • • h6
l?ixd4 l?ie5 19.�c3 l?ixd3 20.�xd3
l?ie6 2 1.i.e3 E!b8+ Black's two
powerful bishops provide him
with a slight but stable advantage.

17.E!b4, Van Wely - Bacrot,

Germany 2 0 06, Black can neu­
tralise the threat against the d4-
pawn with the move l?ie6. 17 . . .
l?ie6 ! ? 18.E!c4 E!b8 19.eS /?ids 2 0 .
�c2 i.d7oo

17 • • • �6d7!

215
Chapter 17
He has numerous alternatives
here, but neither of them provides
him with an advantage.
11.cS .ic7 12 Jfael es - see 11.
gael.
11.gacl ges 12 .h3, Gajewski -
Potkin, Pardubice 2 0 0S, 12 . . . cS ! ?
13.cxdS exdS 14.dxcS lll xcS=
11.gael eS 12.cS !i.c7 13.lll xeS
heS ! ? This is Black's simplest
road to equality. 14.dxeS lll xeS.
He is threatening dS-d4, as well
as lll xd3, depriving his opponent
of his two-bishop advantage. 1S.f3
(Following lS.!cl, Riazantsev -
Tomashevsky, Dubai 2 0 14, lS . . .
lll xd3 ! ? 16.Wxd3 lll e4 17.lll xe4 .ifs
18.Wc3 he4 19.!i.b2, Black neu­
tralises the activity of White's
pieces on the long diagonal with
the move 19 .. .f6 and obtains a
quite acceptable position 2 0.f3
ig6=) 1S . . . d4 16.lll e4 lll xd3 17.
Wxd3 lll xe4 18 .fxe4 dxe3 19 .Wxe3.
White's pieces are better devel­
oped, but his e4-pawn is weak.
19 . . .f6 (19 . . . .ie6 ! ? = ) 20 .eS. He
gets rid of the isolated pawn, but
now, Black succeeds in complet­
ing his development. 20 . . . fxeS
21.gxf8+ Wxf8 2 2 .\1;!/xeS .id7 23.
gfl \1;!/e8 = Lysyj - Rublevsky, So­
chi 2 01S.
11.gfe1 eS 12.cxdS cxdS 13.e4
dxe4 14.llJxe4 lll xe4 1S,gxe4 lll f6
16.gh4 (After 16.dxeS, White does
not obtain sufficient compensa­
tion for the exchange. 16 . . . lll xe4
216
17.he4, Kashlinskaya - Bulma­
ga, Athens 2012, 17 . . . !i.bS ! ?+) 16 . . .
e4. Black sacrifices a pawn and
neutralises White's activity on the
kingside. 17.!i.xe4 lll xe4 18.\1;!/xe4
ges 19.\1;!/d3 Wf6 20 .ge4 !i.fS 21.
gxe8+ gxe8 2 2 .Wc3 gcs 23 .\1;!/e3
gc2 = Learte Pastor - Camacho
Dominguez, ICCF 2012. Black's
two powerful bishops in this open
position compensate fully his
minimal material deficit.
ll.e4 dxc4 12 .bxc4 eS 13.cS
(The move 13.dxeS leads to the
weakening of the dark-squared
complex at the centre of the
board. 13 . . . lll xeS 14.lll xeS heS lS.
gadl lll g4 16.g3 .id4t Shirov -
Gelfand, Odessa 2 007.) 13 . . . .ic7
14.lll a4 exd4 1S.h3 ges 16.1%adl
(16.gfel lll h Soo Nguyen Ngoc Tru­
ong Son - Zhang Ziyang, Manila
2008; 16.gabl, Kuzubov - Koba­
lia, Port Erin 2 00S, 16 . . . lll f8 ! ?+)
16 . . . lll f8 = Chatalbashev - Mala­
khatko, Athens 2 0 07.
After 11.h3, the move 11 . . . eS is
even more effective for Black. He
wishes to obtain a position with
an isolated pawn, because White's
king shelter has been weakened
by the pawn-advance h2-h3. 12.
cxdS (12.dxeS lll xeS 13.lll xeS hes
14.gadl, Kasimdzhanov - Bacrot,
Bastia 2006, 14 . . . ges ! ? = ) 12 . . . cxdS
(diagram)
13.dxeS lll xeS 14.lll xeS hes
lS.gadl (The move lS.gacl ena­
bles Black to play 1S . . . d4 16.exd4,
Huzman - Najer, Moscow 2006,
 4. CfJ c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.b3 .ib4 7. .id2 CfJ bd7 8 . .id3 0 - 0 9. 0 - 0 i.d6
16 . . . hd4 ! ? = He has got rid of his
only weakness and the position is
equal.) 1S . . . .id7 16.CfJe2 :gc8 17.
Wfbl ge8= , preventing .ic3, Ku­
laots - Godena, Saint Vincent
2 00S. The placement of White's
bishop on b2 is not so good.
If he is reluctant to play the
position against the isolated pawn,
White can choose 13.e4, which
would lead to a calmer game. 13 . . .
clxe4 14.CfJxe4 CfJxe4 1S.ixe4 exd4
16.CfJxd4 CfJf6. The central pawns
have been exchanged. Neither
side has pawn-weaknesses. Later,
both sides will have difficulties to
improve their positions and to
break the balance. 17 . .if3 i.eS 18.
.ic3 Wfb6 19.gadl i.d7 2 0 .Wfd2
gac8 2 1.i.aS Wfa7 2 2 .Wfb4 bS 23.
gfel gfe8= Tomashevsky - Jako­
venko, Moscow 2010.
11.CfJe2. The transfer of the
knight to the g3-square seems a
bit slow. ll . . . Wfe7 ! ?
(diagram)
12.cS .ic7 13.CfJg3 eS. Black is
not afraid of the loss of a tempo
after CfJg3-fS. 14.CfJfS Wfe8 lS.CfJxeS
CfJxeS 16.clxeS hfS. He exchanges
the active enemy knight. 17.exf6
hd3 18.Wfxd3 Wies. This is the
point! White must lose a tempo to
defend against the checkmate and
Black manages to preserve the
harmony in his kingside pawn­
structure. 19.g3 Wfxf6= Prati -
Cvak, ICCF 2 0 14.
12.CfJg3 b6 13.e4. Black is well
prepared to counter this move.
(13.gadl .ib7 14.gfel gfd8= Vol­
kov - Rodshtein, Dresden 2 007)
13 . . . clxe4 14.CfJxe4 CfJxe4 1S . .ixe4
.ib7 16.gfel gfd8 17.gadl CfJf6 18.
.id3 . Black cannot play yet c6-cS,
because of d4-dS, but he can ac­
complish that pawn-advance lat­
er. (18 . .ic3, Ftacnik - Erenburg,
Germany 2006, 18 . . . aS ! ? = ) 18 . . .
aS= Noeth - Pavlicek, ICCF 2012 .
11 . . . e5 12.cxd5 cxd5
13.e4
217
Chapter 17

The transfer into a position

with an isolated pawn 13.dxeS does
not promise much to White. 13 . . .
lll xeS 14.lll xeS hes 15.lll e 2. His
knight is headed for the blocking
d4-square. Black can impede this
manoeuvre, however... 15 ....ig4 16.
h3 (The move 16.f3 weakens the
e3-pawn. 16 .. .l:kS 17.V!ibl .id7 18.
l:kl V!ib6 19.�cS �c8 20.gc1, Sar­
gissian - Hansen, Turin 2006, 20 ...
.ic7 ! ? This is Black's most precise Following 17.lll f3? ! lll xe4 18.
move. He prepares V!id6, in order V!ixe4 ges+ Radjabov - Erenburg,
to weaken White's king shelter even Rishon Le Ziyyon 2006, it is only
more. 21.lll d4 V!id6 22 .g3 ge8 =) Black who can play for a win
16 ... gcs 17.V!ibl .be2 ! ? (17 . . . .id7? ! thanks to his two bishops.
18 . .icl ! V!ie7 19 . .ib2 gfe8 2 0.V!ial
hb2 21.V!ixb2;t Nyback - Frid­ 17.h3 lll xe4 18.V!ixe4 ges 19.
man, Germany 2 006) 18 . .ixe2 V!if3, Carlsen - Erenburg, Reykja­
V!id6= , followed by the doubling of vik 2006, 19 . . . .ieS ! ? =
the rooks on the c-file, gc6, gfc8.
1 7. .if3 .ixh2 + 18.©xh2 V!ixd4
13 dxe4 14.�xe4
••• �xe4 19.©gl .ig4. Black continues to
15.he4 exd4 16.lll xd4 strive for simplifications. Natu­
rally, White will regain the sacri­
White would not achieve much ficed pawn, but he would have no
if he postpones the regaining of chances of playing for a win. 2 0 .
his pawn: 16 . .ih7+ ©h8 17 . .ifS, .bh6 V!ieS 2 1.gfel V!ihS 2 2 . .ixg4
Aleksandrov - Fridman, Turin lll xg4 23 ..if4 gads 24 . .ig3 gxdl
2006, 17 . . . lll cS ! ? = , or 16 . .icl lll f6 25.V!ixdl lll f6= Navalon - Pericot,
17 . .ib2 ges 18 . .ifS V!ia5= Ftacnik ICCF 2012.
- M.Gurevich, Warsaw 2005.
17 �xe4 18.V!ixe4 :!ie8 19.
• . •

16 ••• �f6 V!i:f3 hf5 20.V!ixf5 V!ic8 21.%Yxc8

White's pieces are more active, :!iaxc8 22 .ixh6 hh2 + 23.
•

but he cannot realise anything ©xh2 gxh6= Maksimenko -

meaningful out of this. Kempinski, Gorzow Wielkopolski
(diagram) 2 0 14. In this endgame Black's
17.�f5 kingside pawn-structure is a bit
This seemingly active knight­ weak, but this is not important,
move leads only to further ex­ since there is just a few material
changes. left on the board.

218
Chapter 18 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3.�t'3 �f6 4.�c3 e6
5.e3 a6 6. �c2
White is fighting for a tempo.
After . . . dxc4, he wishes to recap­
ture .ixc4, therefore he is reluc­
tant to play with his bishop. Still,
the placement of his queen on c2
may turn out to be bad if the c-file
is opened, moreover that his con­
trol over the d4-square has been
weakened as well.
6 . . . c5
Black wishes to exploit the de­
fects of the move 6.�c2 . He would
not mind losing a tempo in order
to do that.
7.cxd5
Before developing his bishop
on e2, White deprives Black of the
possibility to capture on c4.
7.i.d2. This move does not
contribute to the development of
White's kingside. 7 . . . l2Jc6 8.dxcS
i.xcS= Nakamura - Fernandez,
Orlando 2011.
7.b3. The development of the
bishop on b2 seems rather slow.
Black manages to create pressure
against the d4-pawn. 7 . . . l2Jc6
8.cxd5 l2Jb4 ! ? =
8.dxcS i.xcS 9.i.b2 0 - 0 10.a3
(10.l::M l �e7 11 . .ie2 gd8 = Scherer
- Spreemann, Email 2013) 10 . . .
d4= Sasikiran - Sarakauskas,
Beijing 2008.
8 . .ib2 cxd4 9.exd4 dxc4 ! ? This
is a principled move. Black wishes
to capture on d4. 10.bxc4 (This
move is forced, because after 10.
!xc4 bS ll ..ie2 .ib'l+, there arises
an unfavourable version for White
219
Chapter 18
of a position with an isolated
pawn, because his bishop on b2 is
very passive.) 10 . . . lll xd4 11.lll xd4
\!;!fxd4 12.lll dS \!;!fcS 13.lll xf6+ gxf6
14.h-£6, Sultana - Coimbra,
Khanty-Mansiysk 2010. White
has regained the sacrificed mate­
rial, but after 14 . . . l:!g8 ! ? 15.g3
i.d7oo, Black's prospects are not
worse at all.
7.a3. White is preparing dxcS
and b2-b4, but it is Black to move
now and he accomplishes a similar
plan before his opponent. 7 . . . dxc4
8.hc4 (8.dxcS hes - see 7.dxcS)
8 . . . bs 9.i.a2 lll b d7 10.0-0 (After
10 .dS, White would not achieve
much, because following 10 ... exdS
11.lll xdS i.b7 12.e4, Black can play
12 ...c4oo, occupying additional space
on the queenside and restricting
the enemy bishop on a2, Mame­
dyarov - Andreikin, Baku 2 0 14.)
10 . . . i.b7 11.'l&e2 (11.13dl '\Wc7 ! ? 12.
\!;!fe2 i.d6 - see 11. '1We2) 11 ... i.d6
Black's bishop will be more ac­
tive on this square than on e7. He
should not be in a hurry to ex­
change on d4, because White's
bishop on cl will be activated af­
ter exd4.
220
Following 12 .e4 cxd4 13.lll xd4
0-0 14.l:!dl, Dizdar - Lalic, Se­
ville 2011, it seems very good for
Black to play 14 . . . \!;!fc7! ? = , winning
a tempo by attacking the pawn on
h2.
12.dxcS lll xcS 13.b4 lll cd7 14.
i.b2 0-0 15.l:!fdl \!;!fe7= Inkiov -
Danailov, Sofia 1985. In positions
of this type White's knight is bet­
ter placed on d2 than on c3, be­
cause it does not stand in the way
of the bishop on b2.
12 .l:!dl \!;!fc7
13.dS c4 ! ?+ Bauer - Lautier,
Enghien les Bains 2001.
Black has no problems at all
after 13.h3 0-0 = , while after
White's careless reaction 14.e4 ? !
cxd4 15.lll xd4 lll cS+ Kozul - Var­
ga, Medulin 1997, Black's pieces
will exert powerful pressure
against the enemy e4-pawn. The
move f2-f3 will weaken consider­
ably the dark squares around
White's king.
13.dxcS lll xcS 14.b4 lll cd7 15.
i.b2 l:!c8 16.l:!acl '1Wb8. Black re­
moves his queen away from the
juxtaposition with the enemy
rook. 17.h3 0-0 18 .i.bl l:!fd8= Ve­
lilla Velasco - Van der Hoeven,
 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. 11Jj3 11Jf6 4. 11J c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. Vf!c2 c5
ICCF 2010. His pieces have been
very harmoniously deployed.
7.dxc5 .ixc5 8.a3 (8.b3 dxc4
9 . .b:c4 b5 10 .i.e2 i.e7= Ghosh -
Movsesian, Pardubice 2 015; 8.
ie2 dxc4 9.0-0 0-0= Hambleton
- Erenburg, USA 2 0 17; 8.cxd5
exd5 - see 7.cxd5) 8 . . . dxc4. White
wanted to play b2-b4, therefore,
Black had no time to wait for the
development of the enemy bishop
on fl. 9 . .b:c4 b5
10.ia2 . This is not going to be
the best square for White's bishop
in this middle game, because it
will be restricted by the pawn on
e6. 10 . . . 11Jbd7 11.b4 i.e7 12 .i.b2
ib7 13.0-0 (13.e4, Agrest - Go­
dena, Batumi 1999. After this un­
timely activity Black obtains an
edge: 13 . . . gcB ! ?+) 13 . . . gcs= Smys­
lov - Pelletier, Zuerich 1998.
10 .ie2 11Jbd7. Black defends
against 11Jxb5. 11.0-0 ib7 12 .b4
(12 .id2 0-0+ Lastin - S.Atalik,
Istanbul 2 003) 12 . . . ie7 13.ib2
0-0 14.gfdl (14.a4 a5= Beliavsky
- Cheparinov, Amsterdam 2 0 07) .
Black's queen on dB is misplaced
under the X-ray juxtaposition
with the rook on dl. Still, he can
transfer it to a8 after gc8-c7. 14 . . .
gcs 15.gacl gc7 ! ?oo Flohr/Reilly
- Alekhine/Monosson, Nice (con­
sultation) 1931.
10 .id3. This is the most active
retreat of the bishop, but it is still
insufficient to provide White with
an advantage. 10 . . . 11Jbd7
11.0-0 i.b7 12.a4 (The move
12 .e4 weakens the gl-a7 diagonal.
12 . . . Vf/c7 13.ig5, Rustemov - Vera
Gonzalez Quevedo, Mondariz
2 0 0 2 , 13 . . . 11Jg4 ! ?+) 12 . . . 0-0 13.
11Je4. The exchange of the knights
leads to simplifications, but White
had nothing better anyway. 13 . . .
gcs 14.11Jxf6+ 11Jxf6= Grachev -
Bareev, St Petersburg 2009.
11.b4. White prepares the de­
velopment of his bishop on b2.
ll ... ie7 12 .ib2 .ib7 13 .0-0 (13.
gdl Vf/c7= Kornienko - Iskusnyh,
Novokuznetsk 2 0 03) 13 . . . gcs 14.
gfdl W!c7 15.gacl W!b8. Black's
queen is going to the a8-square in
order to increase the pressure on
the long light-squared diagonal.
16.Wibl, Chemin - Malakhatko,
Bastia 2 0 05, 16 . . . W!aB ! ? =
11.11Je4 ie7 12.11Jxf6+ (It i s less
consistent for White to play here
12 .id2 ib7+, followed by gcs,
221
Chapter 18
S.Atalik - Gurevich, Saint Vin­
cent 2 0 03.) 12 . . . i.xf6 13 . .ie4, Tu­
rov - Kobalia, playchess.com
2006. White exploits the fact that
Black has failed to play .ib7 and
wishes to cause disharmony in
the deployment of his pieces. Still,
Black has the powerful transfer of
his rook to the c7-square. 13 . . .
�fa7 ! ? 1 4 . .id2 l'k 7 15.\Wbl .ib7 16.
.ixb7 (The attempt to win the ex­
change with the move 16 . .iaS
might create problems for White.
16 . . . \WaB ! 17.!xc7? ! !xe4 18.\Wa2
lDcS. Black wishes to attack the
weak b3-square. 19.0-0 .idS ! 2 0 .
\Wbl lDb3+) 16 . . J'�xb7=
7 . . . exd5
8 .ie2
. 11 . .ib2 , Radjenovic - Huebscher,
White wishes at first to com­
plete the development of his king­
side pieces and to castle.
About 8.lDeS .id6 9 . .ie2 0-0
10.0-0 .ie6 - see 8 . .ie2 .
The strike i n the centre 8.e4
would only lead to simplifications
8 . . .cxd4 9.lDxdS lDxdS 10.exdS
222
.ib4+ 11 . .id2 .ixd2+ 12.\Wxd2
\WxdS 13.\Wxd4 \We6= Ivanisevic -
Oms Pallisse, Andorra 2003.
8 .g3. White's light-squared
bishop is better placed on the fl­
a6 diagonal, because it does not
control the d3-square from g2.
Black can make use of this cir­
cumstance. 8 . . . lDc6 9 . .ig2 lDb4 10.
\Wd2 .tfS 11.0-0 .id3 = Now, White
has nothing better than to comply
with the repetition of the position.
12 .l'�dl .ic2 13.�fl .id3 14.�dl
.ic2 = Blagojevic - Voiska, Plovdiv
2010.
8.dxcS !xcS
9 . .ie2 lDc6 10.0-0 .ie6 - see
8 . .ie2 .
Following 9.a3 lDc6 10.b4 .ia7
Berlin 1999, Black has an inter­
esting possibility to sacrifice a
pawn for the initiative. ll . . . d4 ! ?
12.exd4 .ig4iii
9.lDe2, Nikolic - Handke, Ger­
many 2012, 9 . . . \We7 ! ? 10.lDed4
0-0 ll . .id3 .ig4= The activity of
Black's pieces compensates the
vulnerability of his isolated
pawn .
 J.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 0.j3 0.f6 4. 0. c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. Wic2 c5 7.cd ed
8 • • • .ie6! ?
This is considered to be his
most precise move.
After 8 . . . 0.c6, White has the
additional possibility 9.0.e5, threat-
ening to double the enemy pawns
on the c-file.
9.0-0
9 .0.e5 id6 10.0-0 0-0 11.b3
(The move 11.f4 weakens the e4-
square. 11 . . . 0.c6 12.0.xc6 bxc6+
Ushenina - Girya, Khanty-Man­
siysk 2 0 14.) 11 . . .cxd4 12.exd4 Wic7
13.ib2 0.c6 14.0.xc6 \Wxc6+ Kra­
senkow - Ni Hua, Helsingor 2011.
Black's pieces are more actively
placed.
9.dxc5 hc5 10.0.d4 (10. 0-0
0.c6 - see 9 . 0-0) 10 ... 0-0 11.0-0
\Wd6 12.l3dl (After 12.0.xe6, White
obtains the two-bishop advan­
tage, but fortifies the enemy d5-
pawn and opens the f-file for
Black's rook. 12 . . . fxe6 13.b3 0.bd7
14.ib2 l3ac8 = Medvegy - Banusz,
Heviz 2 012.) 12 . . . 0.c6 13.0.xc6 bxc6
14.b3 0.g4 15.hg4 hg4 16.0.e2
ib6oo, followed by !i..c7, with the
idea to create weaknesses in
White's king shelter, Rodshtein -
Rublevsky, Khanty-Mansiysk 2010.
Black's piece-activity compensates
with an interest the slight weak­
ness of his pawns on c6 and d5.
9 • • • 0.c6
10.gd1
10 .id2 gc8 = Bischoff - E.Ata­
lik, Wijk aan Zee 2006.
10.a3. This move may tum out
to be not so useful for White in
the forthcoming battle. 10 . . . cxd4
ll.exd4, Ki.Georgiev - Svetush­
kin, Subotica 2008, 11 . . .h6! ? Black
prevents the development of the
enemy bishop on g5. 12.if4 id6
13.hd6 \Wxd6 14.h3 0-0=
10.0.es gcs
(diagram)
11.'1Wa4, Sadler - M.Gurevich,
Germany 2 003, ll . . . cxd4 ! ? 12.
exd4 Wib6 13.0.xc6 l3xc6=
After 11.if3 id6, White can­
not hold on to the eS-square. 12.
223
Chapter 18
llixc6 gxc6 13.dxcS gxcS 14,gdl
0-0 1S.�d3 llig4 16 . .ixg4 i.xg4t
Black's pieces are very active. For
example, after 17.llie2? ! W/gS 18.
gel, Coleman - Ramirez, Free­
mont 2012, he has the line: 18 . . .
he2 19.�xe2 �es 2 0 .g3 �e4 2 1 .
id2 gc2+ and White i s beyond
salvation.
11.gdl cxd4 12.exd4 id6 13.
llixc6 gxc6 14.igS 0-0 1S.if3 h6
16.ih4 i.xh2 + ! ? This bishop-sac­
rifice is Black's simplest road to
the draw. 17.<i>xh2 llig4+ 18 . .ixg4
W/xh4+ 19.i.h.3 i.xh3 20.gxh3 W/f4+
21.<i>hl W/f3= Komev - Ni Hua,
Moscow 2012. White's king can­
not go to the g-file, so he is forced
to comply with the perpetual
check.
10.dxcS. This move only en­
hances the development of Black's
pieces. 10 . . . .ixcS
2 24
11.llia4. This transfer of the
knight to cS is not dangerous for
Black. 11 . . . id6 12.llicS W/e7 13.
llixe6. Black's dS-pawn is fortified
after this exchange. 13 . . . fxe6 14.
llid4 gc8= Loiseau - Salles, Saint
Paul Trois Chateaux 2 013.
11.b3 gc8 12 .ib2 0-0 13.gacl
ia7 14.gfdl �e7 lS.�bl gfd8=
There has arisen a typical position
with an isolated pawn with ap­
proximately equal chances. Later,
in the game M.Gurevich - Mo­
rozevich, Moscow 2001, White
played rather carelessly 16.lligS?
and Black seized the initiative
with the move 16 . . . d4+
11.llibS. This is a good posi­
tional move. White increases his
control over the important d4-
square. ll ...ib6 12.llibd4 llixd4 13.
llixd4 0-0 14.W/d3 id7= Lalic -
Damljanovic, Lorca 2 0 0S.
11.a3. White is preparing b4
and ib2 . ll . . ,gc8 12 .b4 id6 13.
ib2 0-0 14.gacl (14.�bl, Ruste­
mov - Erenburg, Germany 2006,
14 . . ,ge8 ! ? = ) 14 ... llieS lS.llixeS
.ixeS= Binder - Bachner, St Poel­
ten 2009. The pressure on the c­
file is very unpleasant for White.
11.gdl. White is threatening
llixdS. 11 . . . �e7
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. &i'Jj3 &i'Jf6 4. &i'Jc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. W!c2 c5 7.cd ed
Following 12 .b3, Black com­
pletes effortlessly his develop­
ment and advances d5-d4. 12 . . .
0 - 0 1 3 . .ib2 1'fac8 14.l'facl .ia7 15.
W!bl :afd8 16.h3 d4 17.exd4 &i'Jxd4
18.&i'Jxd4, Fressinet - Gagunash­
vili, Warsaw 2 005, 18 . . . hd4 ! ? =
12.a3 0 - 0 13.b4 .id6 1 4 . .ib2
:aac8 15.:aacl (15.W!d2 :afd8= Na­
kamura - Shankland, Baku 2015)
15 . . . a5 16.bxa5 (16.&i'Jg5, Moise -
Pedersen, ICCF 2009, 16 . . . g6 ! ? =
White i s incapable o f exploiting
the vulnerability of the al-h8 di­
agonal.) 16 . . . &i'Jxa5 17.a4 :afd8=
12.&i'Jd4 &i'Jxd4 13.exd4, Bischoff
- Schandorff, Germany 2 004,
13 . . . .ia7 ! ? 14.W!a4+. White ex­
ploits the fact that his opponent
has not castled yet and forces the
transfer of Black's bishop from e6
to c6. This is still insufficient for
White to maintain an edge. 14 . . .
.id7 1 5 . W!b3 .ic6 16 . .ig5 0 - 0 17.
.if3. White increases his pressure
against the d5-square. 17 . . . :aadB
18.&i'Jxd5 hd5 19.hd5 :axd5 2 0 .
hf6 W!d7. He has a n extra pawn
at the moment, but is incapable of
protecting the d4-pawn. 2 1.Wfg3
g6 2 2 .h3 :ae8 . Black does not need
to capture on d4 immediately.
23.W!h4 :ae6 24.:ael hd4=
10 • • • cxd4 11.&i'Jxd4
White wishes to exploit the weak­
ness of the isolated pawn on d5.
He would not obtain much af­
ter ll.exd4 id6 12 . .ig5, Gordi­
evsky - Belous, Moscow 2 0 14,
12 . . . h6 ! ? 13 . .ih4 0-0=
n . . . &i'Jxd4
12.gxd4
White's rook will come under
an attack with tempo on this
square.
Even after 12.exd4 .id6, White
would not achieve anything. 13 .
.ig5 0-0 14.W!b3 h6 15.hf6 (After
15.ih.4, Black should play 15 ... b5 ! = ,
defending against the manoeuvre
&i'Ja4-c5, Schepetkova - Girya,
Khanty-Mansiysk 2013.) 15 ... W!xf6
16.W!xb7, Girl - Tomashevsky, Al
Ain 2012. White has an extra pawn,
but Black's bishops are very pow­
erful. 16 . . J':UdB ! ? 17.g3 (After 17.
W!b3 g6 18.g3 ©g7 19.&i'Ja4 :aab8
2 0 .Wff3 W!xf3 21.hf3 id7 22.&i'JcS
:axb2 23.&i'Jxa6, Black's pieces are
very active. For example: 23 . . . :aaB
24.llJc5 .ic6 25.llJd3 :abxa2 26.
:aacl .ia4 27.hd5 hdl 28.ha2
.ig4 29 . .id5 :aa4 30 ..ic4 .if5 31.
&i'Jb2 :ab4 32 .llJdl .ie4 33.&i'Je3 .ib8
34.d5 :ab2 = and White is incapa­
ble of realising his extra pawn.)
17 ... :aabB 18.W!xa6 :axb2 19.:aabl.
He exchanges the active enemy
rook. 19 . . . :axbl 20.&i'Jxbl W!e7 21.
225
Chapter 18
l'kl \Wf6. Now, White's queen is
squeezed to protect the d4-pawn.
22 .'1Wd3 gas 23.gc6 i.f8 24.lll c3
ifs 2s.gxf6 .ixd3 26.gb6 .ixe2
27.lll x e2 gxa2 = Black has restored
the material balance.
12 . . . i.c5 13.lii d l
13.i%d 2 . White's rook is not
better placed here than on dl. 13 . . .
\We7 14.\Wa4+ id7 lS.'IWdl 0-0 16.
lll xdS lll xdS 17.gxdS ic6�. Black
has sufficient compensation for
the pawn. Later, in the game Yuf­
fa - Rublevsky, Cheliabinsk 2016,
White played rather carelessly
18.ghs?! and after 18 . . . g6 19.gh3
gfd8 2 0.\Wel i.b4 21.\Wfl gac8 2 2 .
a 3 i.d6+, ended u p i n a very diffi­
cult position, because his queen­
side pieces were not developed
and his rook on h3 was misplaced.
13 . . '1We7
. of the position; otherwise, his sit­
14.i.t'3
White increases the pressure
against the pawn on dS.
14.b3 . White prepares the fi-
226
anchetto of his bishop, but with a
calm play he would be incapable
of preventing Black's pawn-break
dS-d4. 14 . . . 0-0 1S . .ib2 gac8 16.
gacl gfd8 17.\Wbl d4 18.lll a4 i.a7
19.hd4 hd4 20.gxd4 gxd4 21.
exd4 gxcl+ 2 2 .\Wxcl .ixb3. Black
restores the material balance. 23.
\Wc8+ lll e 8 24.axb3 \Wxe2 25.h3
©f8= Aleksandrov - Rublevsky,
St Petersburg 2 0 15.
14.lll a4 .id6 15.lll b 6. This is an
interesting pawn-sacrifice. It is
not sufficient to provide White
with an edge, however ... lS ... i.xb.2+
16.©xh2 \Wd6+ 17.©gl \Wxb6 18.
\Wa4+ i.d7 19.\Wf4 (After 19.\Wa3,
Guseva - Schepetkova, Khanty­
Mansiysk 2 013, the simplest way
for Black to equalise would be
19 . . . gc8 ! ? 2 0 . .id2 gc2 21.i.f3
\Wxb2 2 2 .\Wd6 gc6. Now, White
must comply with the repetition
uation would be worse. 23.'1Wb8+
gcs 24.\Wd6 gc6=) 19 . . . o-o 2 0 .b3
gac8 2 1.i.b2 \We6 2 2 .i.xf6 \Wxf6
23.'1Wxf6 gxf6 24.�ds. White has
regained the sacrificed pawn, but
there is just a few material left on
the board. Black's kingside pawn­
structure has been compromised
indeed, but he can maintain the
balance with a precise play. 24 . . .
i.e6 2s.gd4 gc2 26.ig4 (26.if3
gb8= Schepetkova - Girya, Mos­
cow 2014) 26 .. .fs 27.i.f3 b6 2s .
.ids gfc8 29 .he6 fxe6 3o.gd7
gsc7. Black exchanges the active
enemy rook. 31.gxc7 gxc7= Alek­
sandrov - Rublevsky, Loo 2 013.
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 0.}3 Ci:Jf6 4. Ci:J c3 e6 5.e3 a6 6. W!c2 c5 7.cd ed
14.W/a4+ i.d7 1S.�b3. White is
attacking the pawns on b7 and dS.
(1S.�h4 ? ! h6 16.�g3 i.d6 17.f4
i.c6 18.i.f3 0-0+ Gordievsky -
Rublevsky, St Petersburg 2 0 14.
Black has completed his develop­
ment, while White has to worry
about the weak e3-pawn in his
camp.) lS . . . 0-0
16.i.f3. White can capture on
dS on his next move. 16 ... i.e6
17.0.xdS Ci:JxdS 18.hdS hdS 19.
i:!xdS l3ad8. White has an extra
pawn, but has difficulties to com­
plete the development of his
queenside pieces. 2 0.g3 i.b6 21.
i:!xd8 i:!xd8 2 2 .i.d2 (He loses after
2 2 .�xb6, because of 2 2 . . . l3dl+ 23.
'it>g2 �e4+ 24.f3 �c4-+) 2 2 . . .
i:!xd2 23.�xb6 W/e4 24.i:!cl h6 2S.
W/b3 �fS 26.i:!fl bS= Bluebaum -
Heimann, Athens 2012. White
has an extra pawn in the arising
endgame with major pieces, but
his rook is squeezed with the pro­
tection of his f2-pawn.
16.Ci:JxdS Ci:JxdS 17.�xdS, Zon­
takh - Korchmar, Voronezh 2 0 14,
17....!a.4! ? This is Black's most pre­
cise move. He removes his bishop
from the d-file with tempo. 18.b3
l3ad8 19.WfhS i:!xdl+ 2 0.hdl g6
2 1.�g4 i.c6 22 .i.b2 (It is bad for
White to play here 22 .i.d2 ? ! , be­
cause of 2 2 . . . hS 23.W/e2 �es 24.
i:!cl l3d8. Black's pieces are obvi­
ously more active. 2S.i.c3 Wigs.
This move provokes a weakening
in White's position. 26.g3 l3e8 27.
i.b2 l3xe3 ! After this simple com­
bination, Black not only regains
the material, but also remains
with an extra pawn. 28.fxe3
he3+ 29.'it>fl hcH) 22 . . . he3 ! =
14 . . . 0-0
15.�xd5
About lS.hdS Ci:JxdS 16.Ci:JxdS
i.xdS 17J�xdS l3ac8 - see lS.Ci:JxdS.
White would not achieve much
if he refrains from capturing the
pawn. 1S.b3 l3ac8 16.i.b2 l3fd8 17.
�e2 , Iljiushenok - Lintchevski,
Moscow 2 016, 17 . . . bS ! ? After this
move, White's knight cannot go to
a4 if Black plays dS-d4. 18.i:!acl
d4=
15 . . . hd5 16.hd5 �xd5
17.gxd5 gac8
227
Chapter 18
White cannot realise his extra
pawn due to the lack of develop­
ment of his pieces.
18.J.d2
18.\Wdl gfd8 19.g3, Yuffa - An­
dreikin, Sochi 2016, 19 . . . !b6 ! ?
2 0 .gxd8+ gxd8 2 1.Wfc2 \Wc7 2 2 .
1l;\le2 1l;\le5 23.1l;\lc2 1l;\lc7=
18.1l;\ld3 gfd8 19.g3 gxdS 2 0 .
1l;\lxd5 gd8 2 1.Wff3, Kovalenko -
Shimanov, Wroclaw 2014, 2 1 . . .
!d6 ! ? The transfer o f Black's
bishop to the es-square is his sim­
plest road to equality. 2 2 .gb1 (22.
i.d2 hg3 23.hxg3 gxd2 = ) 22 ...
i.eS 23.e4 1l;\lc5 24.i.gS Wfc2 . White
cannot avoid the loss of his b2-
pawn. 2s.ge1 f6 26.1l;\lf5 1l;\lxb2=
18 • • • ixe3
Black restores the material
balance. White's pieces are active,
but he cannot obtain anything
meaningful out of this.
19 .lc3 .lb6 20.'ef5
• The exchange of the bishops is
Or 2 0 .Wfb3, Schandorff - Er­
enburg, Helsingor 2 0 13, 20 . . .
gfe8 ! ? =
228
20 • • • Wfe6
This is Black's simplest reac­
tion. He would not mind the ap­
pearance of a weak pawn on e6 in
his position, because he can easily
hold this endgame.
21.Wf:f3
2 1.gadl WfxfS 2 2 . gxfS gcd8 .
Black only needs to centralise his
king in order to equalise com­
pletely. 23.gfdS f6 24.@fl gxdS
2s.gxdS gd8 26.gxd8+ hd8 27.
@e2 @f7= Froewis - Svane, Ru­
zomberok 2 0 14.
21 ••• f6
This move prevents White's
plan to attack the g7-square.
22.h4 ti'c6 23.h5 gfd8 24.
fu(d8+ gxd8 25.ti'xc6 bxc6
Black's queenside pawn-struc­
ture is a bit weak, but this is prac­
tically irrelevant.
26.gel @f7 27.g4 .ld4
Black's simplest way of equalis­
ing.
28.�kl ixc3 29.gxc3 gd4=
Gelfand - Anand, Moscow 2012.
 Part s
1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . �t'3 �f6 4.�c3 e6 5 . .tg5 dxc4
In this part of our book we will
analyse 5.ig5 and then 5 . . . dxc4,
after which Black is trying to hold
on to his c4-pawn, complying
with the destruction of his pawn­
chain on the kingside.
The variations in this scheme
are usually very complicated and
are full of plenty of tactical possi­
bilities. Black's last move is
named in the theory of the open­
ings as "The Botvinnik System".
Mikhail Moiseevich was not
the first who played this system,
but this opening scheme was
named after him quite deservedly,
since he contributed greatly to the
development of its theory. He
played for the first time the move
5 . . . dxc4 in his game against Zhiv­
.
tsov (Moscow 1943) and this sys­
tem was universally acknowl-
edged after the famous game
Denker - Botvinnik (radio match
USA - USSR 1945), in which
Black scored a crushing victory.
The idea of the Botvinnik System
is that Black wishes to hold on to
his c4-pawn and is ready to com­
ply with almost complete destruc­
tion of his kingside pawn-struc­
ture. Instead he manages to cre­
ate counterplay in the centre and
to obtain pawn-majority on the
queenside. He can use this in the
endgame and his king usually
finds its shelter on the queenside
in the middle game. In addition,
in some variations Black can use
the open h and g-files on the king­
side in order to organise an attack
against the enemy king.
We devote to the Botvinnik
System chapters 19-2 2 . In Chap­
ter 19 we will analyse the varia­
tions in which White refrains
from the most popular move 6.e4.
In Chapter 2 0 , White plays 6.e4,
but after 6 . . . b5 7.e5 h6 8 . .ih4 g5,
he does not play 9. tlJxg5 and tries
instead 9 . .ig3, or 9.exf6. Finally,
Chapters 21-22 will deal with the
main lines of the Botvinnik Sys­
tem, arising after 9.tlJxg5.
229
Chapter 19 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c6 3 . ll:if3 ll:if6 4.ll:ic3 e6
5.i.g5 dxc4
6.a4
This move looks too timid in
comparison to 6.e4. Instead of
playing actively in the centre and
on the kingside, White applies
prophylactic on the queenside.
He can hardly fight for the open­
ing advantage playing in this
fashion.
6.e3 bS 7.i.e2 (7.a4 i.b4 - see
6.a4) 7 . . ..ib7 8.0-0 lll bd7+ Me­
duna - Ostenstad, Gausdal 1988.
6.g3. The combination of the
moves .igS and g3 does not seem
harmonious at all. 6 . . . bS 7 . .ig2
i.b7
(diagram)
It would be rather difficult for
White to prove here that his lead
230
in development and more active
pieces are sufficient to compen­
sate the sacrificed pawn.
8.0-0 !ie7 9.a4 (Following 9.
e4 h6 10.!ixf6 i.xf6 11.eS .ie7+,
Black has not only an extra pawn,
but also the two-bishop advan­
tage, Guijarro - Moreno Trujillo,
Madrid 2013.) 9 ... a6 10.lll e5 (White
ends up in a bad position after
10.e4 h6 11 ..bf6 .bf6 12.axbS axbS
13.!�xaS ha8 14.\l;!lal lll d7 15.\l;!la7
0-0 16.eS .ie7+ Andreikin - Shi­
rov, Loo 2 013.) 10 . . . lll d S. Black
wishes to neutralise his oppo­
nent's pressure by exchanging
pieces. 11.he7 \l;!fxe7
(diagram)
12 .e3. The transfer of the
queen to hS seem rather slow.
12 . . . 0-0 13.�hS f6 14.lll f3 lll d7+
Kozul - Sulava, Bol 2 0 15.
Following 12.lll e 4, Black can
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. t:fJj3 t:fJf6 4. t:fJc3 e6 5. .lg5 de 6.a4 .lb4
oust at first one of the enemy
knights away from the centre of
the board: 12 .. .f6 13.t:fJf3 t:fJd7 14.
W/c2 0-0 15.b3 and then the other
one: 15 . . .f5 16.t:fJed2 c3 17.e4, A.
Smirnov - Volkov, Izhevsk 2011,
17 ... fxe4 18.t:fJxe4 b4+ Black's pro­
tected passed extra pawn pro­
vides him with a stable advantage.
12.e4. White occupies the cen­
tre with his pawns, but reduces
the scope of action of his bishop
on g2. 12 . . . t:fJxc3. Black continues
to play for simplifications. 13.bxc3
0-0 14.f4 f6 15.t:fJg4 t:fJd7+ Karthi­
keyan - Sardana, New Delhi 2010.
White's pawn-centre is powerful,
but is insufficient to compensate
fully his sacrificed pawn.
8.a4 a6 9.t:fJe5. White wishes to
provoke immediate tactical com­
plications, before Black has com­
pleted his development and cas­
tled. 9 . . . W/cS 10.0-0 t:fJbd7
Black must exchange the ac­
tive enemy knight as quickly as
possible.
11.f4?! Flores - Santiago, Mon­
tevideo 2 0 15. It seems too risky
for White to cut off the possible
retreats of his bishop on g5. 11. . .
b4 ! ? 12.t:fJe4 t:fJxe4 13.he4 t:fJxe5
14.dxe5 c5+
11.W/c2 h6 12.t:fJxd7, lzoria -
Timofeev, Oropesa del Mar 2001,
12 . . . t:fJxd7! ? 13 . .if4 .ie'l+
11.e3 t:fJxe5 12.dxe5 t:fJd5 13.
t:fJe4 h6 14.Wh5 W/c7oo Kamsky -
Pridorozhni, Kazan 2016. Now,
White must play very precisely;
otherwise, he may lose his dark­
squared bishop, which is deprived
of squares to retreat to.
11.t:fJxd7 t:fJxd7 12 .e4 h6 13 . .ie3
.ie7 14.e5 0-0 15.W/g4 ©hS, Ro­
manishin - Movsesian, Solin
2006, 16.W/h5 c5 17.d5 b4= Here,
White has nothing better than to
force a perpetual check after 18.
hh6 .
11.ixf6. White preserves his
centralised knight from being ex­
changed, but presents his oppo­
nent with the two-bishop advan­
tage. 11 ... t:fJxf6 12.e3 .id6 13.b3 cxb3
14.Wxb3 0-0oo Ashwin - S.Atalik,
Golden Sands 2012. White's
piece-pressure compensates the
sacrificed pawn, but not more
than that.
6 . . . .lb4
Black exerts pressure on the
el-a5 diagonal with the idea to
force the enemy bishop to come
back to the d2-square.
231
Chapter 19
7.e4
This is White's most popular
move in this position. He occu­
pies the centre with his pawns, a
move later, though . . .
7 .hf6 \Wxf6+
7.g3 ttlbd7 8 .i.g2 aS. Black in­
creases his control over the weak
b4-square. 9.0-0 h6 10 .id2 0-0+
Stupak - Braun, Gaziantep 2008.
7.e3. White's pawn is not so
active here as on e4. He cannot
obtain sufficient compensation
for the sacrificed pawn with such
humble moves. 7 . . . bS
8.i.e2 ttlbd7 9.0-0 \Wb6 10.
\Wc2 0-0 11.e4. White has to play
e4 anyway. 11 . . . i.b7 12 .i.e3 a6 13.
232
eS ttldS 14.ttlgS g6. He will hardly
manage to exploit this slight
weakening of Black's king shelter.
1S.\We4 h6 16.ttlxf7. White sacri­
fices a piece in the hope to con­
tinue with his ebbing off initia­
tive. 16 . . . @xf7 17.ttlxdS cxdS 18.
\Wf4+ ©g8 19.\Wxh6 l:!f7 2 0 .\Wxg6+
l:!g7 21.\WhS i!h7 2 2 .\Wg6+ ©h8+
Simeonov - Spasov, ICCF 2 0 14.
In this middle game Black's piec­
es will be obviously stronger than
White's two pawns.
8.ttld2 a6 9.axbS cxbS 10.ttlxbS
axbS! Black sacrifices the exchange
and seizes the initiative. ll.l:!xa8
!b7 12 .l:!al (12 .!xf6?! gxf6 13.l:!al
eS+ Van der Werf - Piket, Am­
sterdam 2000) 12 . . . eS !+ 13.i.e2 ? !
Nordahl - Korneev, Gausdal 200S,
13 ... \WdS ! ? 14.i.f3 e4+
After 7.\Wc2, Black can play 7 . . .
bS ! , without being afraid o f any
tactical complications.
8.g3 i.b7 9.i.g2 ttlbd7 10.0-0
\Wb6 ll.e4 a6 12.l:!fdl h6 13.ie3
0-0+ Mamedyarov - Carlsen,
Shamkir 2 0 14. Black has an extra
pawn and a good position.
8.e4 h6. He gets rid immedi­
ately of the unpleasant pin. 9.
 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. &iJj3 &iJf6 4. &iJ c3 e6 5. i.g5 de 6.a4 i.b4
i.xf6 %!/xf6 10 .i.e2 a6 11.0-0 i.b7
12 .b3, Savon - Neverov, St Pe­
tersburg 1996, 12 . . . cS ! ?+
8.i.xf6 gxf6 9 .g3 a6+ Capa­
blanca - Nimzowitsch, Bad Kiss­
ingen 1928. Black's prospects
seem preferable thanks to his ex­
tra pawn and the two powerful
bishops.
After 8.axbS cxbS 9.i.xf6, Black
can play 9 . . . Wxf6 ! ? , without being
afraid of 10.%!/e4, because of 10 . . .
'll;lffS ! This i s the point! Black sacri­
fices the rook on a8 in order to
capture the enemy b2-pawn with
his queen. ll.'\1;lfxa8 '\1;lfc2 12 .&iJd2
%!/xb2 13.gdl .bc3 14.f3 ? ! White
opens a leeway for his king on f2 .
(It seems more resilient for White
to choose here 14.'\1;lfxb8, but even
then after 14 ... i.xd2+ 15.�d2 %!/bl+
16.gdl %!/b4+ 17.gd2 0-0 18.e3
c3+, his extra rook would not save
him.) 14 . . . 0-0 15.'\1;lfxb8. White
has already an extra rook, but his
lag in development and his king,
stranded in the centre, doom him
to a quick demise. 15 . . . hd4.
Black not only captures the ene­
my central pawn, but frees the
way forward of his c-pawn, which
should settle the issue. 16.gbl
%!/a2 17.'ll;lfxbS c3 18.&iJe4, Lain -
Lettieri, Bratto 2 005 and here,
Black's simplest winning line is:
18 ... c2 19.gcl '\1;lfa3 2 0 . gxc2 '\1;lfal+
2 1.@d2 gas 2 2 .%!/d3 i.a6-+ Now,
White must either give up his
queen, or allow a deadly discov­
ered check.
7 Wa5
• • •
8.i.d2
White is forced to retreat with
his bishop, because the following
line is very bad for him: 8.eS &iJe4
9.i.d2 &iJxd2 10.'\1;lfxd2, Ernst - Pot­
kin, Wijk aan Zee 2012, 10 . . . bS ! ?+
8.'\1;lfc2? &iJxe4+
8 . . . c5
Black undermines the enemy
centre and prepares the develop­
ment of his bishop to the c6-
square.
9.A.xc4
9.eS, Timoscenko - Berezjuk,
Czech Republic 2006, 9 . . . &iJfd7! ?oo
9.dxcS %!/xc5 10.es .bc3 11.
.bc3 &iJdS. White has the two­
bishop advantage, but regaining
the c4-pawn will take too much
time for him. 12 .'\1;lfd4 (12 .i.d2 i.d7
13.gcl c3 14.bxc3 &iJb6oo) 12 ...%!/xd4
13 .hd4, Rychagov - Goumas,
Malevizi 2 016, 13 . . . c3 ! ? Black will
lose his c-pawn anyway, but with
this move he compromises his
opponent's pawn-structure on
233
Chapter 19
the queenside. 14.bxc3 llJc6 lS.aS
llJxd4. Black deprives his oppo­
nent of his two-bishop advantage.
16.llJxd4 id7 17.@d2 f6=
9 • • • cxd4 10 .!Lixd4 0-0
• bishop advantage after the ex­
11 .!Lic2
• some edge thanks to his superior
White's pieces are very unsta­
ble on the fourth rank, so he re­
moves immediately his knight
from the centre, attacking the en­
emy bishop.
11.0-0 �cs. Now, White must
enter tactical complications in or­
der to save his hanging pieces.
12.tLicbS, Cramling - Grandelius,
Tallinn 2016, 12 . . . hd2 ! ? 13.�xd2
a6 14.:Bfcl .!Lixe4 1S.�e3 axbS 16.
he6 .be6 17.:BxcS llJxcS 18.:Bcl
llJbd7 19.b4 llJxa4 2 0 .llJxe6 fxe6
2 1.�xe6+ :Bfl+ The tactical com­
plications are over and it is only
Black who can play for a win in
this endgame with a rather non­
standard material ratio.
ll.llJb3. Now, contrary to 11.
llJc2, Black's bishop on b4 is not
threatened after this retreat o f
234
White's knight. 11 . . . �c7 12 .�e2
llJc6 13.0-0 llJeS 14.llJbS �e7 lS.
:Bfcl. White's pieces are seemingly
more active, but Black can oust
them quickly and obtain the two­
change of his knight on eS for the
enemy bishop. 1S . . . a6 16.llJSd4,
Reyes la Rosa - Figlio, ICCF 2009,
16 ... id6 ! ? 17.id3 llJxd3 18.�xd3
:Be8 19.lDf3 eS 2 0 .llJaS ie6 21.
llJxb7. White is already forced to
fight for equality. 2 1 . . .�xb7 2 2 .
�xd6 llJxe4 23.�c6 �xc6 24.:Bxc6
llJxd2 2S.llJxd2 l3eb8 26.llJf3 i.dS
27.:BcS .ixf3 28.gxf3 :Bxb2 29.:BxeS
:Bc8+ In the arising endgame with
four rooks on the board, Black has
pawn-structure.
After ll.�e2, Black should
continue with ll . . . llJc6 ! ? , without
being afraid of the appearance of
a weak pawn in his position.
12.llJxc6 (12.llJc2 :Bd8 - see 11.
llJc2) 12 ... bxc6 13.0-0, Sriram -
Sundararajan, Mumbai 2 0 09,
13 ... llJd7! Black's knight on f6 is
severely restricted by White's
pawn on e4, so Black is transfer­
ring it to the b6-square. 14.f4 llJb6
1S.i.d3 l3d8 ! ? 16.:Bfdl cS 17.i.el
ib7= The activity of Black's piec­
es compensates the defects of his
pawn-structure.
11 • • • .!Lic6 12 . .!Lixb4
About 12.0-0 :Bd8 13.llJxb4
(13 .�e2 llJxe4 - see ll.�e2) 13 . . .
�xb4 14.b3 �e7 - see 12.llJxb4.
 J.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. ll:Jj3 ll:Jf6 4. ll:Jc3 e6 5. il.g5 de 6.a4 i.b4
Following 12 .Wi'e2 l:!d8 13.0-0,
Black has a powerful tactical ar­
gument - 13 ... ll:Jxe4! 14.li:Jxb4 li:Jxd2
1S.li:Jxc6 bxc6 16.l:!fdl ll:Jxc4 17.b4 !
(17.%Vxc4, Farago - Kozak, Buda­
pest 2 016, 17 . . . il.d7! ?+) 17 . . . %Vc7
18.l:!xd8+ %Vxd8 19.%Vxc4 i.d7 2 0 .
l:!dl W/e7 2 1.li:Je4 .ie8 = His extra
pawn compensates all White's po­
sitional pluses.
12 . . . %Vxb4
He has the two-bishop advan­
tage, but Black has a better de­
velopment. In addition, White's
queenside has been weakened by
the pawn-advance a2-a4.
13.b3 �MS 14.0-0 %Ve7
Black obtains a very good posi­
tion too after 14 . . . ll:Jd7 ! ? . He is not
afraid of the enemy knight-sorties
and wishes to transfer his own
knight to eS, or cS as quickly as
possible. lS.li:JbS %Ve7 16.Wi'cl li:JdeS
17.i.gS f6 18.il.e3 b6 19.i.e2 i.b7
2 0 .f3 l:!ac8 2 1.%Va3 W/xa3 22.li:Jxa3
ll:Jd4. The activity of Black's pieces
forces White to part with his two­
bishop advantage. 23 . .ixd4 l:!xd4=
1s.ge1
lS.YlVel b6 16.il.cl i.b7= Lege­
maat - Smith, ICCF 2 013.
lS.YlVcl b6 16.f3 li:JaS. White's
light-squared bishop cannot avoid
the exchange, because of the vul­
nerability of the b3-square. 17.
li:JbS ll:Jxc4 18.bxc4. Now, White
must play accurately, because
his queenside pawn-structure
has been weakened. 18 . . . a6 19.
li:Jc3 il.b7 2 0 .i.e3 ll:Jd7 2 UM 1
h 6 = Holroyd - Reinhart, ICCF
2 01S.
Following 1S.Wi'c2 b6 16.l:!fdl
il.b7 17.f3 YlVcS + , Black's queen
becomes very active. 18.©hl Wi'f2
19 .Wi'a2 li:JeS 2 0 .i.fl li:Jd3 21.il.gS
YlVcS. White has managed to neu­
tralise the activity of Black's piec­
es, but this leads to numerous ex­
changes and a very likely draw.
2 2 .hf6 gxf6 23.hd3 %Vxc3 24.
i.c4 ©g7 2S.Wi'f2 Wies 26.©gl fS
27.exfS YlVxfS 28 .E:d4 E:xd4 29.
W/xd4+ %Vf6 30 .E:dl W/xd4+ 31.
E:xd4 i.c6= Weber - Mendl, ICCF
2 0 1S.
23S
Chapter 19

1S.f3. White protects reliably

his e4-pawn. 1S ... lt:\d7 16.ie3 lt:\de5
17.1/Nc2 lt:\xc4 18.bxc4 id7 19.lll bS
(19.cS a6 2 0 .i:!abl ie8 = Benzoni
- Noble, ICCF 2 0 09) 19 . . . a6.
Black ousts the enemy knight to
the edge of the board. 2 0 .lll a3 eS
21.ib6 i:!dc8 2 2 . i:!fdl lt:\d4. This
pawn-sacrifice is Black's simplest
road to equality. If he plays pas­
sively, he may encounter difficul­
ties after c4-c5, lll a 3-c4-d6. 23. This position w as reached in the
ixd4 exd4 24.i:!xd4 i:!d8 2S.i:!adl game Nakamura - Girl, Saint Louis
ie8 26.i:!xd8 i:!xd8 27.i:!xd8 �xd8 2016. Here, Black had to continue
28 .�b3 1/Nd4+ 29.'it>fl ic6. White's with 15 b6!?, without being afraid
...

attempt to activate his knight of the move e4-eS. 16.Yfcl (The

leads to a perpetual check. 30. pawn-advance 16.eS? ! only helps
lll c 2 �dl+ 31.'it>f2 1/Nd2 + 32 .'it>gl Black to transfer his knight to cS.
1/Ndl= 16 . . . lt:\d7 17.f4 lll c S+) 16 lll eS=
. . .

236
Chapter 2 0 1.d4 d 5 2 . c4 c 6 3.�t'3 �f6 4.�c3 e6
5.J.g5 dxc4 6.e4

Pushkov - Yagupov, Orel 1999,

10 . . . '!Wxe7! ?+, or 7.'!Wc2 h6 (The in­
clusion of this move is very useful
for Black.) 8 . .ih4 llJbd7 9 . .ie2 .ib7
10.0-0 '!Wb6 lUfadl .ib4+ Dziuba
- Dimakiling, Calvia 2006. White
does not have compensation for
the pawn in both lines.

7.a4. Black can easily parry the

attack against his bS-pawn with
This is the best for White ! He the move 7 . . . '!Wb6.
occupies the centre, attacks the
c4-pawn and creates the threat
e4-e5 in the process.
6 . . .b5
This is the essence of Black's
idea in the Botvinnik System. He
protects the c4-pawn and plans to
get rid of the pin of his knight
with h7-h6, g7-g5, complying with
the considerable weakening of his
kingside. 8.1!;!/c2 llJbd7 9 . .ie2 as 10. 0-0
7.e5 b4 11.lDdl b3 12 .'!Wbl .ia6+ W.
Refraining from this move Schmidt - Henley, Indonesia
would not end up well for White. 1983.
8 . .ixf6. White weakens his op­
For example: 7 . .ie2 h6 8 . .ih4 ponent's kingside pawn-struc­
(8 ..ixf6 '!Wxf6 9.0-0, Zherebukh ture, but presents him with the
- Sevian, Saint Louis 2 0 17, 9 . . . two-bishop advantage. 8 . . . gxf6
a6 ! ?+) 8 . . . .ie7 9.eS llJdS 10.ix:e7, 9 . .ie2 (9.g3. It seems too slow for

237
Chapter 2 0
White to fianchetto his bishop in
this position. In addition, it weak­
ens the fl-a6 diagonal and Black's
bishop will be placed there very
soon. 9 . . . lll d7 10 .i.g2 b4 11.lll e 2
i.a6+ Groenhout - Gray, ICCF
2 016.) 9 . . . i.b7 10.0-0 a6 11.dS
(Following ll.b3 '11;!/aS 12.'11;!/c l b4
13.lll d l c3+, Black obtains a pro­
tected passed pawn, Halkias -
Bruno, Bad Wiessee 2 0 07). White
leads in development and wishes
to open the position. On the other
hand, Black has the two-bishop
advantage and the opening of the
game may turn out to be in his fa­
vour. 11 . . . lll d 7. He is not afraid of
the weakening of the hS-e8 diago­
nal. 12.dxe6 (12 .b3 cxdS 13.exdS
b4 14.aS '11;!/d 6 1S.dxe6 fxe6 16.lll a4
c3+ Gyimesi - C.Horvath, Buda­
pest 2 0 04; 12.lll d 4, Cramling -
Piket, Spijkenisse 1978, 12 . . . lll eS+)
12 . . . fxe6 13.lll d4 cS 14.i.hS+ .
Black i s not afraid o f the loss of
his castling rights, because
White's pieces are incapable of
organising an effective attack
against Black's king. 14 . . . @d8 lS.
lll xe6+. White's attacking pros­
pects are just minimal, so he can­
not afford to sacrifice a piece. (lS.
lll c 2 b4 16.lll e 2 @c7+) 1S . . . \Wxe6
16.axbS gg8+ Naumkin - Kor­
neev, Assisi 2003.
8.i.e3 ! ? This is the only way
for White to obtain a good posi­
tion after 7.a4. 8 . . . b4. Black wish­
es to oust the enemy knight, but
weakens the pawn on c4. 9.aS.
White frees a square for his
knight. 9 . . . \Wd8 10.lll a4 i.a6 11.
238
i.gS b3 12.lll c3 h6 13.i.xf6 \Wxf6
14.lll eS cS 1S.i.xc4 i.xc4 16.lll xc4
cxd4 17.lll bS i.b4+ 18.@fl '11;!/e 7
19.lll xd4 o-o 2 0 .\We2 gd8 21.
lll xb3. White has already an extra
pawn, but has lost his castling
rights. 2 1 . . .'11;!/b 7 2 2 .g3. He pre­
pares an artificial castling. 22 . . .
i.e7 23.lll c d2 lll c 6 24.@g2 lll d4
2S.lll xd4 gxd4 2 6.ghel a6 27.b3
gad8 28.lll f3 gb4. Black's pieces
exert powerful pressure and
White cannot hold on to his extra
material. 29.gabl gc8 3 0 .lll d 2
i.gS 31.gedl gd4 3 2 .lll c4 gxdl
33.gxdl '11;!/xb3= Dhanish - Cruza­
do Duenas, ICCF 2012.
7 ... h6 8 . .th4 g5
We will analyse the move
9 .lll xgS in the following chapters,
while now we will deal with A)
9.exf6 and B) 9 . .tg3.
A) 9.exf6
The exchange of White's pow­
erful bishop for the enemy knight
is just horrible for him.
9 . . . gxh4 10.ltieS
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. 0ij3 0if6 4. 0i c3 e6 5. i.g5 de 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8. j.h4 g5
White wishes to play g3 and
i.g2 , in order to exert pressure
against Black's queenside.
About 10.a4 a6 11.lDeS Wfxf6 -
see 10.lCieS.
10 ti'xf6
•••
Black has already two extra
pawns.
11.g3
Following ll . .ie2 ? ! , Black can
give up one of his extra pawns
in order to develop quickly his
queenside. ll . . . 0id7! 12.0ixc6 .ib7
13.i.f3 a6 14.0-0 !k8 15.lCieS j_xf3
16.0ixf3, Csiszar - K.Szabo, Zala­
karos 2009, 16 . . . h3 ! ? 17.g3 .ie'l+
11.a4 a6 12 . .ie2 (Unfortunate­
ly for White, he cannot regain his
pawn by exploiting the pin on the
a-file. 12.axbS cxbS 13.lCixbS?!
axbS ! 14.gxa8 .ib4+ 15.©e2 .id6
16.0ig4 §'g7-+ Muradli - San­
zhaev, Moscow 2 016.) 12 . . . 0id7!
13.axbS (13.0ixc6? b4 14.0ie4 ti'fS
15 . .if3 .ib7 16.0id2 gcs-+ Clark­
son - Manarin, ICCF 2 0 13) 13 . . .
cxbS 14.lCixbS. White has man­
aged to regain one of his pawns,
but after 14 . . . i.b4+, Black brings
his bishop into the actions with
tempo. 15.0ic3 ! This is the right
move ! (After 15.©fl 0-0 16.0ic7
ga7, White's knight is obviously
lost inside the enemy camp. 17.
0ixa6, Marzolo - Ribli, Germany
2011, 17 . . . i.e7! ?-+) 15 . . . .ixc3+ 16.
bxc3 0ixe5 17.dxeS WfxeS+ Baum­
gartner - Kloster, ICCF 2010.
Now, even if White manages to
regain his c4-pawn, Black will re­
main with an extra pawn anyway.
11 ••. �d7
12.ti'e2
White preserves his control
over the es-square.
12.0ixc6? ! .ib7 13 . .ig2 gcs 14.
dS, Mozharov - Fluvia Poyatos,
Platja d'Aro 2 016, 14 . . . exdS ! ? 15.
§'e2 + Wfe6+
12 .f4?! White fortifies his
knight, but weakens his g3-pawn.
12 . . . .ib7 13 . .ig2 , Portisch - Ribli,
Warsaw 1979, 13 . . . gg8 ! ?+
239
Chapter 2 0
12 . • • J.b7 13.J.g2
13.l.lJxd7 ©xd7 14.!g2 ©c7+
Cheng - Izzat, Adelaide 2 016.
13 •.• c!LJxe5 14.dxe5 Y:!lg5
15.gdl
After 15.a4 a6 16.f4, White
sends the enemy queen to the
queenside, but it will be very well
placed there, defending the bish­
op on b7 and exerting pressure on
the gl-a7 diagonal. 16 . . . Y:!ldS 17.
l'!dl (17.Y:!le3 ib4+) 17 . . . �b6+ Ar-
regui - Razzeto, ICCF 2 0 14.
15.f4 �d8 16.1.lJxbS, Braun -
O'Donnell, Crawley 2 0 16, 16 . . .
�b6 ! ? This i s Black's simplest
move. After 17.l.lJd6+ .ixd6 18.
exd6 �b4+ 19.�d2 Y:!lxd2+ 20.
©xd2 0-0-0+, the position is
simplified and Black has excellent
chances of realising his extra ma­
terial in this endgame.
1s hxg3
• • •16.hxga gds
17.0-0. White's bishop exerts
powerful pressure on the hl-a8
240
diagonal. Black has however a
very strong positional exchange­
sacrifice: 17 gds!+ 18.gfel J.e7
• • •
19.c!LJxd5 cxd5+ He has two
pawns for the exchange and what
is even more important - his c6-
pawn is already on the d5-square.
B) 9.J.g3
This is an interesting move.
White avoids the competition
with his opponent - who knows
the theoretical variations better,
since some of them end up deep
into the endgame. He wishes to
focus on the complicated middle
game in which he has some com­
pensation for the sacrificed pawn.
9 • • • c!LJd5 10.c!LJd2
White is preparing l.lJde4.
10 .i.e2 i.b4 11.l'!cl �as. The
pressure of Black's pieces on the
el-aS diagonal is very powerful.
12 .\!;Yd2 l.lJd7 13.0-0 l.lJ7b6 14.!dl.
White defends against l.lJa4, Kier­
zek - Meyer, Hessen 2000. Still,
after 14 . . . g4 15.l.lJh4, Black can ex­
ploit the defencelessness of the
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3. CfJj3 CfJf6 4. CfJ c3 e6 5. igS de 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8. !h4 g5
enemy queen and simply capture
on a2. 15 . . . 'i;1lxa2-+
10.h4. White attacks immedi­
ately his opponent's weakened
kingside. Still, after 10 . . . �aS 11.
l'kl !b4, Black's queenside coun­
terplay seems much more danger­
ous. 12.hxgS CfJxc3 13.bxc3 hc3+
14.CfJd2 , Dubov - Shirov, Moscow
2013, 14 . . . CfJa6 ! ? 15.Elxh6 Elg8+
10 . . . J.b7
11.J.e2
11.CfJde4 CfJd7 12 .h4 (12 .ie2
'i;1!b6 - see 11.ie2) 12 . . . CfJxc3 - see
11.h4.
ll.a4, Lobron - Slingerland,
Amsterdam 1996, 11 . . . !e7! ?+
The move 11.h4 ! ? leads to a
very interesting game. 11 . . . CfJd7
(diagram)
12.CfJde4 CfJxc3 13.CfJxc3 'i;1la5.
Black is perfectly prepared to
castle queenside and to follow
this with c6-c5. The juxtaposition
of his rook with the enemy queen
will be then obviously in his fa­
vour. 14.ie2, Thorhallsson -
Thompson, Reykjavik 2010, 14 . . .
0-0-0 ! ? 15.hxgS CfJcS+
12.hxgS 'i;1lxg5 13.CfJde4 �g6
14.Elh4 0-0-0 15.!e2 CfJcS. Black's
position is a bit cramped, so the
exchange of pieces would be in his
favour. 16.ihS (It is less precise
for White to play here 16.CfJxcS
.b:cS 17.CfJxdS Elxd5 18.!f3 Eld7 19.
Elg4 ib4+ 20.©fl 'i;1!d3+ 21.'i;1lxd3
cxd3 2 2 .Eldl hS 23.Elh4 as 24.ElxhS
ElxhS 25.hhS fS. Black is prepar­
ing Elh7. 26.Elxd3 Elh7 27.a3 ha3
28.bxa3 ElxhS+ Konstantinov -
Lykke, ICCF 2 015. In the arising
endgame, despite the presence of
bishops of opposite colours on the
board, White must still find nu­
merous accurate moves in order
to make a draw.) 16 . . . �h7 17.dxc5.
This is an interesting queen-sacri­
fice. 17 . . . CfJxc3 18.�xd8+ ©xd8 19.
bxc3 !e7 20.0-0-0+ ©cB 21.CfJd6+
©c7 22.Elhd4. White has sufficient
compensation for the sacrificed
material. There might follow:
22 . . . EldB 23.©b2 !c8 24. Elf4 Elf8
25.Elf6 ! This is an exchange-sacri­
fice, which should not be accepted
241
Chapter 2 0
by Black, because then White's
bishop on g3 will join into the at-
tack with a decisive effect. 2 5 . . .
Wfg8 26 ..if3 a5 27. l3xh6. White
has regained the pawn on h6, but
it is inconceivable how he can im-
prove his position later. 27 . . . .ia6
28 .l3d4 .ig5 29.l3hl \:Wg6 30 . .ie4
Wfg7 31..if3 Wfg6= Turgut - Cru-
zado Duecas, ICCF 2 0 15.
11 'l!Wb6
•••
12.�de4
It is worse for White to play
here 12 .h4, because of 12 . . . llid7 ! ? .
Black is reluctant to lose time for
the protection of his pawns on g5
and h6. 13.hxgS 0-0-0 14.gxh6
c5. White's centre is about to
crumble. 15.llixdS i.xd5 16.h7
cxd4. White has a far-advanced
passed h-pawn indeed, but his
position is difficult, because Black
obviously dominates in the cen-
tre. 17 . .if3 llic5 18 . .bdS exd5 19.
Wg4+ (19.Wfh5 l3d7 20.©fl d3+
Boldysh - Secchi, ICCF 2 0 15) 19 . . .
\:We6 2 0 .Wfxd4. Winning the d4-
pawn is small consolation for
242
White, because after 20 . . . Wfg6 21.
\:Wh4, Black can free the seventh
rank fo r his rook: 21. . . fS 2 2 .llif3
llid3+ 23.©fl l3d7. White is inca­
pable of holding on to his h7-
pawn. 24.\:Wf6 'l!Wxf6 25.exf6 l3dxh7
26.l3xh7 l3xh7+ Coyne - Rawlings,
ICCF 2 015.
12 . . . llid7
13.0-0
It seems less logical for White
to opt here for 13.a4, because
Black has pawn-majority on the
queenside and h e i s supposed to
play there. 13 . . . aS 14. 0-0 (14.
axb5 cxb5 15.0-0 llixc3 16.llixc3,
Swayams - Potkin, Moscow 2 0 16,
16 ... .ib4+) 14 ... b4 15.llibl (15.llia2 .
White's knight will be misplaced
on this square and he will have
problems to bring it into the ac­
tions from there. 15 . . . 0-0-0 16.
llid2 (16.i.xc4 llif4+ Nakamura -
Gustafsson, Austria 2 0 09) 16 . . .
\:Wxd4 17.llixc4 llif4 ! 18 .l3el Wfxdl
19.i.xdl c 5 2 0 . .ixf4 gxf4 21.llixaS
.id5+ Johansson - Efremov, ICCF
2012) 15 . . . .ia6 (Black can obtain
l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3. tiJj3 tiJf6 4. tiJc3 e6 5. 1J.g5 de 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 B. 1J.h4 g5

an edge too with the move 15 . . . 14 • • • .b:d5 15.tlJc3

0-0-0 ! ? , but after 16.tiJbd2 \!;lfxd4
17.\!;l/c2 c3 18.tiJb3 §'b6 19.bxc3
tiJxc3 2 0 .tlJxc3 bxc3 21.§'xc3 .ib4
2 2 .§'e3 §'xe3 23.fxe3 ghf8 24.
gacl ©b8+, White managed to
draw, despite being a pawn down
in the endgame, Rawlings - Bol­
dysh, ICCF 2 016.) 16.gel (16.\!;l/d2,
Lemos - Fabian, Buenos Aires
2011, 16 . . . c5 ! ?+) 16 . . . .ie7 17.tlJd6+
.ixd6 18.exd6. Naturally, White's
d6-pawn is powerful, but still in­
sufficient to compensate his ma­
terial deficit. 18 . . . 0-0 19 . .if3 (19 .
.ih5 ©g7 2 0 .h4 gg8+ Martynov -
Roze, ICCF 2 0 13) 19 . . . ©g7 20 .h4
gh8 2 1.§'d2 gag8 2 2 .hxg5 ©f8 23.
hd5 cxd5. White's hopes are
based on the passive position of
the enemy bishop on a6. 24.gxh6
gg6 25 . .if4 .ic8 26.g3 tlJf6+, pre­
paring tlJg4, regaining the pawn
on h6, Schafer - Jensen, ICCF
2 0 15. White's queenside pieces
are still not developed.
13 • • • c5
Black wishes to activate his
bishop on b7 as quickly as possi­
ble. It was restricted until now by
his own pawn on c6.
14.tlJxd5
White sacrifices his d4-pawn
and wishes to exchange the pow­
erful enemy bishop on d5 and to
remove the blockade against his
pawn on e5.
15 cxd4
••• 16.tlJxd5 exd5
17 . .ih5 .ie7
18.a4
White opens a second front
and wishes to complicate his op­
ponent's defence. At first, he
wishes to deflect the enemy queen
from the protection of his king­
side.
18.e6. This pawn-sacrifice is
premature at the moment: 18 . . .
\!;lfxe6 19.gel §'f6+ Babula - Rag­
ger, Austria 2 0 14.
18 0-0 19.axb5 a5. Black
•••

The move 14.dxcS only en­
hances the development of Black's
pieces. 14 . . . hc5 15.a4 tlJxc3 16.
tlJxc3 a6+ Lajthajm - Aleksan­
defends against ga6. 20.f4 d3+
21.©hl f5 22.e6 'exe6 23.gel
'ed6 24.fxg5 f4 25.gxh6 c!Llf6
26 .if2 ©h7oo Lins - Stockert,
•

drov, Budva 2003. ICCF 2016.

243
Chapter 2 1 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c 6 3 . �t'3 �f6 4.�c3 e6
5 . .ig5 dxc4 6.e4 b5 7 .e5 h6 8 . .ih4 g5
9 . �xg5 hxg5 10 .hg5 �bd7

ment of the theory of the Botvin­

11.exf6
ll.'!Wf3 ib7 12.exf6 '!Wb6, or 11.
g3 .tb7 12.exf6 \Wb6, or 12 .i.g2
\Wb6 13.exf6 0-0-0 - see ll.exf6.
11 . ib7 12.g3
. .
nik System. 12 . . . '!Wb6. Black pre­
pares castling queenside and at­
tacks the d4-pawn. 13.'!We3 0-0-0
14.o-o-o '!Was lS.©bl lLib6 16.h4
b4 17.lLie4 cS= Zhivtsov - Botvin­
nik, Moscow 1943 . The position is
approximately equal indeed, but
Black's play is much simpler, be­
cause White's king shelter is not
reliable. There followed 18.f3? !
c3 ! 19.i.e2 ids 2 0.a3. Here, the
easiest win for Black would be the
move - 20 . . . ib3-+
12 .ie2. White's bishop is not
so active here as on g2. 12 . . . '!Wb6

With the fianchetto of his

light-squared bishop White solves
several problems. At first, his
bishop will be very active on g2,
impeding Black's pawn-advance
c6-c5. Secondly, the move g2-g3
fortifies White's kingside and
neutralises Black's possible at­
tacks on the g-file as well as on the
h2-b8 diagonal. 13.if3. This move seems
stronger than 13.0-0. White wish­
12.\Wf3. White used to play this es to play \We2 and 0-0-0, evacu­
move at the dawn of the develop- ating his king to the queenside.

244
4. l:i:Jc3 e6 5. !gS de 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8. ih4 g5 9. &i:Jxg5 hg 1 0 . hgS &i:J bd7
13 . . . 0-0-0 14.'!We2 ! ? White gives
back his extra pawn in the fight
for the initiative. (14.0-0 i.h.6 - see
13 . 0-0) 14 . . . '!Wxd4 lS.!!dl �es 16.
h4 i.d6 17.&i:Je4 ic7 18.g3 cS 19.
!f4 '!WfS 2 0.&i:Jd6+, draw, Batrakov
- Efremov, ICCF 2 0 1S, because
after 20 . . . .ixd6 2 1..ixb7+ ©xb7
2 2 .�f3+ Wa6 23.'!Wa3 = , Black's
king cannot run away from the
perpetual check.
13.0-0 0-0-0 14.a4 (The move
14.h4 only weakens the shelter of
White's king. 14 . . . ih6+ Ragozin ­
Botvinnik, Moscow 1941; after 14.
b3, Spassky - Heyken, Germany
1987, Black can reply with the
energetic strike in the centre -
14 . . . cS ! ?+; but White has the pos­
sibility 14.if3 il6 1S.ie3 &i:Jxf6
16.'!We2 he3 17.fxe3 �c7 18.g3
!!h6oo Cebalo - Fercec, Rijeka
2 007) 14 . . . b4 1S.&i:Je4 cs+ White's
position crumbles. 16.'!Wbl �c7
17.&i:Jg3 cxd4-+
This position was reached in
the famous game Denker - Bot­
vinnik, radio match 194S. Black
has a powerful pawn-centre and
an attack. 18.hc4 �c6 19 .f3 .
White frees the gl-a7 diagonal.
19 . . . d3 2 0 .'!Wcl icS+ 21. Whl �d6
2 2 .'!Wf4. Now, Black forces a win
with a beautiful rook-sacrifice.
22 . . . l"!xh2 + ! 23.Wxh2 l"!h8+ 24.
�h4 l"!xh4+ 2S . .ixh4 �f4 0-1
12 .h4. This move seems il­
logical, because White advances
his rook-pawn when his king has
not castled yet. Still, the move
has venom... 12 ... &i:Jx:f6 ! ? This is
Black's only move. (After the
straightforward response 12 . . .
'!Wb6, White has a very interesting
pawn-sacrifice: 13.�c2 ! ? �xd4
14.l"!dl \Wes+ 1S.'!We2 '!Wc7 16.g3t
Walters - Rodriguez, ICCF 2016.)
13.'!Wf3. White increases his pres­
sure against the enemy knight on
f6. 13 . . . ie7
Capturing the pawn 14.&i:JxbS
leads to the simplification of the
position. 14 . . . '!Wb6 1S.&i:Jc7+ �xc7
16.ixf6 cS= Nikolic - Ivanchuk,
Monte Carlo 1997.
Following 14.ie2 &i:JdS lS.he7
�xe7 16.&i:JxdS, the simplest for
Black would be to capture the en­
emy e-pawn, so that he can acti­
vate later his bishop via the c8-
square. 16 ...exdS 17.�f4 ©f8. Black
is preparing l"!e8. 18.Wfl l"!e8 19.
!f3 Wg7= Voll - Serban, ICCF
24S
Chapter 21
2012. He wishes to continue ei­
ther with Wf6, or with gh6.
14.0-0-0 lDdS 1S . .txe7 Wxe7
16.lDe4 (After 16.g3, Black ad­
vances 16 . . . cS and equalises ef­
fortlessly. 17.dxcS �xcS 1S . .ig2 b4
19.lDe4 �c7 20.lDf6+ @fS= Black's
king is placed unreliably, but its
white counterpart might come
under an attack after c4-c3.)
16 ... 0-0-0
17.lDcS ©bS 1S.We4 f6. Black
sacrifices the pawn on e6 and ac­
tivates his pieces. 19.�xe6 Wh7
20 .�el gheS 21.�d2 .icS 2 2 .a4
�hS 23.axbS cxbS 24.WaS, Hanel
- Schmidt, Germany 2014. Here,
the simplest solution for Black
would be 24 . . . lDc7 ! ? 2S.g3 Wf3
26 . .ih3 .ixh3 27.gxh3 Wxf2 and
White would have nothing better
than to force a perpetual check
with 2S.lDa6+ lDxa6 29.�xbS+
©as 30.Wc6+ ©bs 31.WbS=
17.g3 lDb4 lS.lDcS. White sac­
rifices his a2-pawn for the initia­
tive. lS . . . lDxa2+ 19.Wbl lDb4. Black
has an extra pawn, but his bishop
on b7 is "bad". 20 . .ig2 �c7 2 1.hS.
The advance of White's h-pawn
seems very dangerous for Black,
246
but he manages to cope with the
brave enemy pawn. (21.g4 lDdS
2 2 .�a3 ©bS 23.hS �f4 24 . .txds
gxdS 2S.f3 @as 2 6.h6 .icS 27.lDe4
eS= , Black succeeded in activat­
ing his light-squared bishop.) 2 1 . . .
@bS 22 .h6 .icS 23.Wa3 lDdS 24.
gdel lDe7. He prepares the trans­
fer of his knight to the fS-square
in order to increase the pressure
against the enemy d4-pawn. 2S.
�f3 lDfS 26.h7 f6. Black is threat­
ening to capture on h7 and after
27.�xc6, there arises a transfer to
an approximately equal endgame.
27 . . . �xc6 2S . .ixc6 lDxd4 29 . .ig2
©c7 30.gh6 fS= Taner - Noble,
ICCF 2012. White's powerful
passed pawn compensates his
material deficit, but not more
than that.
17.hS eS. This pawn-sacrifice
is Black's simplest way of equalis­
ing. 18.WfS+ (White cannot ob­
tain an advantage even if refrains
from capturing material. 1S . .ie2
©c7 19.dxeS WxeS 2 0 .gd2 .icS.
Black is preparing �JS. 21.gh4
.ifS. He finally solves the problem
with his "bad" bishop. 2 2 .lDc3
.id3 23.lDxdS+ gxdS=) 1S . . . ©c7
19.�xeS+ WxeS 2 0 .dxeS gdeS 21.
lDd6 gxeS 2 2 .lDxb7 ©xb7. Black
has managed to restore the mate­
rial balance and his powerful
knight in the centre cements his
position. 23.h6 ©c7 24.a4 a6 2S.
gd4 gfs 26.axbS axbS= Sanchez
Ortega - Filho, ICCF 2 0 14.
12 . . . �b6 13 . .ig2 0-0-0
4. liJ c3 e6 5. i.g5 de 6.e4 bS 7.eS h6 8. i.h4 gS 9. liJxgS hg 1 0 . i.xg5 liJ bd7
14.0-0
White plays sometimes here
14.Wg4 c5 15.hb7+ ci>xb7 16.gdl
(Following 16.We4+ Wc6 17.0-0-0
cxd4 18.gxd4 !c5 19.gddl hf2
2 0 .liJxb5 llic5 2 1.Wxc6+ ci>xc6,
there arises a complicated end-
game on the board. After 22.gxd8
gxd8 23.liJa3 liJd3+ 24.ci>bl ci>d5iii ,
the activity of Black's pieces com-
pensates his minimal material
deficit, Trani - De Sa Nobrega,
!ECG 2002.) 16 . . . Wc6 17.0-0 cxd4
18.Wxd4 �b4 19.h4 liJc5. Black
prepares a transfer of his knight
to the outpost on d3, which is
quite typical for the Botvinnik
system. 2 0 .We5 .ixc3 2 1.bxc3 liJd3
22 .We2 a5= Paredes - Sadowski,
ICCF 2 0 14.
14 . . . c5 15.d5
15.dxc5. White would not
achieve much exchanging pawns
in the centre. 15 . . . liJxc5 16.We2
(16.hb7+ Wxb7= Nyzhnyk - Se­
vian, Rockville 2 0 14) 16 . . . hg2
17.ci>xg2 i.h6. Black wishes to ex­
change the bishop and to capture
the pawn on f6. 18.h4 (18.i.xh6
gxh6 19.gadl gxdl 20 .liJxdl gxf6
2 1.b3 Wc6+ 2 2 .f3 liJd3 23.bxc4
bxc4 24.liJf2 liJxf2 25.ci>xf2 gf5
26.gcl gc5= Acevedo Villalba -
Bokar, ICCF 2013. Black's power­
ful passed c4-pawn compensates
the unreliable shelter of his king.)
18 ... hg5 19.hxg5, Timman - Tai,
Hilversum 1988. White has pro­
tected reliably his f6-pawn, but
has weakened his king, moreover
that the pawn on g5 would also
need protection. 19 . . . ghg8 20.
We3 (The move 2 0 .f4? ! weakens
seriously White's king 2 0 . . . gd3+)
2 0 . . . gd3 21.Wf4 Wc6+ 2 2 .f3 e5
23.Wf5+ Wd7 24.Wxd7+ ci>xd7 25.
gadl gxg5. After the fall of the
pawn on g5, White will fail to hold
on to his f6-pawn as well. 26.
liJxb5 ci>e6 27.gxd3 liJxd3 =
15 ... b4
16.gbl
Black has attacked the enemy
knight with his last move, but
White does not plan to retreat it.
White's main line 16.liJa4 will
be analysed in the next chapter.
247
Chapter 21
16.lll e 2 exd5 17.lll f4 d4 18.lll d5
hd5 19.hd5, L'Ami - Seps,
Budva 2003, 19 . . . ih6 ! ? =
16.dxe6 ixg2 17.e7 hfl 18.
lll d5 \We6 19.lll f4, De Wolf - Van
der Veen, Dieren 1982, 19 . . . \We4 ! ?
2 0.%Vd6 .b:e7 2 1.fxe7 gdg8 2 2 .ge1
\Wxel. Black has a huge material
advantage, but his king cannot
run away from the perpetual check.
23.\Wc6+ ©b8 24.\Wd6+ ©c8=
16 . . . %Va6
Black should better not accept
this gift, because after 16 . . . bxc3?
17.bxc3, the opening of the b-file
would be deadly for his king 17 . . .
Wa6 18.gxb7! Wxb7 19.dxe6 %Vb6
20 .e7+- Gajdos - Svizensky, Se­
nica 2 0 15.
17.dxe6
17.We2? ! bxc3 18.dxe6 %Vxe6 19.
Wxe6 fxe6 2 0.bxc3 hg2 21.©xg2
id6+ Iriarte Gomez - Figlio, ICCF
2006. White's two pawns do not
compensate fully his missing
piece.
248
17. . . .ixg2 18.e7
White's alternatives are obvi­
ously worse.
18.©xg2? ! Wxe6+
18.gel ? ! bxc3 19.e7 ia8 2 0 .
exd8§'+ ©xd8 2 1.bxc3 i.d6 2 2 .
ge3 ©c7+, followed b y %Vc6 and
lll e 5, Volek - Sykora, ICCF 2009.
In this middle game Black's two
minor pieces will be stronger than
White's rook and two pawns.
18 . . . .ixfl
19.©xfl
It is premature for White to
choose here 19 .exd8§' +? ©xd8
2 0 .Wxfl bxc3 2 1.bxc3 id6 2 2 .%Vg2
©c7 23.Wd5 Wc6 24.Wxf7 %Ve4-+
Galanov - Tinture, ICCF 2 0 15.
After 19.Wd5, the simplest for
Black would be to choose 19 . . .
.b:e7 ! ? 2 0 .fxe7 and here 20 . . . i.d3 !
21.lll e4 (21.exd8\W+ gxd8 2 2 .lll e4
hbl - see 2 1 .lll e 4) 2 1 . . . .b:bl.
White's attacking prospects seem
quite real, but Black's material
4. &i::J c3 e6 5. j,g5 de 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8. ih4 g5 9. &i::J xg5 hg 1 0 . hgS &i::J bd7
advantage is too big . . . 2 2 .&i::J d 6+
(22 .exd8\W+ gxd8 23.&i::J d 6+ ©c7
- see 2 2 .&i::J d 6) 22 . . . ©c7
23.exd8\W+ gxd8 24.if4 ©b6
- see 23.if4.
White's attempt to avoid the
draw would lead to a lost position
for him: 23.&i::J xf7? gc8 24.if4+
©b6 2S.\Wxd7 Wtb7 26.\We6+ \Wc6-+
Vovk - Kulaots, Fagernes 2 0 1S,
or 23.&i::J xc4? f6-+ 24.if4+ &i::J e S
2S.\WxcS+ ©b8 0-1 Mchedlishvili
- Dvirnyy, Porto San Giorgio
2013.
23.if4 ©b6 24.&i::J xc4+ (24.
exd8\W+ gxd8 2S.&i::J x c4+ ©bS 26.
&i::J d 6+ ©b6=) 24 . . . ©bs 2s.&i::J d 6+
©b6
2 6 .a4. White continues to re­
kindle his ebbing off attack. (26.
&i::J c4+ ©bS=; 26.exd8\W+ �d8 27.
&i::J c 4+ ©bS= ) 26 . . . bxa3 27.\Wb3+
(Following 27.&i::J c4+ \Wxc4 28.\Wxc4
a2, Black's far-advanced passed
pawn guarantees him against any
difficulties. 29.exd8\W+ gxd8 30.
\Wb3+ ©c6 31.Wi'f3+ ©b6 32 .\Wa3
&i::J eS 33.Wi'b3+ ©a6 34.\Wa4+ ©b6=
Here, White must comply with
the draw, because after 3S.heS?
al\W 36.\Wxal gd1+ 37.©g2 �e4+
38.f3 hf3+ 39.©xf3 gxal-+, the
endgame would be hopeless for
him, Mikhalevski - Karim, Gibral­
tar 2008.) 27 . . . ©c6 28.&i::J xf7 (28.
W!f3+ ©b6 2 9.\Wb3+ ©c6=) 28 . . .
gb8 2 9.hb8 gxb8 30 .\We6+ ©bs
31.\Wxd7+ ©c4 32.&i::J e S+ ©b3
Black has evacuated his king to
a relatively safe place. 33.bxa3
\We2 . He begins a counter attack.
The idea is to give a perpetual
check. 34.e8\W gxe8 3S.Wi'xe8 ie4
36.\Wf7+ c4 37.\Wxc4+. The trans­
fer to an endgame with four
pawns against a bishop and a
pawn is White's last attempt to
play for a win. It is still insuffi­
cient, though . . . 37 . . .\Wxc4 38.
&i::J xc4 ©xc4 39.f4 as 40. g4 a4 41.
fS ©d4 42.©f2 ©es 43.©g3 ic2
44.©h4 ©f6 4S.©g3 ©es 46.h3
id3 4 7 .h4. Now, Black can enter a
king and pawn ending thanks to
249
Chapter 21
his far-advanced a-pawn. 47 . . . i.xfS
48.gxfS @xfS= 49.@f3 @g6 SO.
'>t>e4 @hs Sl.'kt>d4 @xh4 S2.'>t>c4
@gs S3.@bs @f6 S4.@xa4 @e7
SS.@bS @d7 S6.@b6 @c8 . Black's
king has succeeded just in time,
draw, Andreikin - l.Popov, Dago­
mys 2010.
Let us go back to 19.@xfl.
19 ... .ixe7 20.fxe7 gdg8 21.
�e4 c3+ 22.@gl gxg5 23.�xgS
Wg6
This is the essence of Black's
defensive idea. Now, he is threat­
ening not only to capture on gS,
but also c3-c2 .
24.bxc3
2SO
After 24.Wfcl c2 2s.ga1 ges,
Black manages to annihilate his op­
ponent's dangerous passed pawn.
26.Wfe3 §'f6 27,gcl gxe7 28.Wfd2
Wxb2 29.gxc2 Wes 30 .gcl @b7 31.
�f3 WffS 32.@g2 �b6oo Gilimshin
- Ohtake, Czech Republic 2003.
There has arisen a complicated po­
sition in which Black's prospects
are not worse thanks to the plan,
connected with the advance of his
queenside pawns (a7-aS, cS-c4).
24.Wfl. White sacrifices a piece
and begins an attack against the
enemy king. 24 . . . WfxgS 2S.Wa6+
@c7 26.Wxa7+ @c8 27.Wfa6+ @c7
28.bxc3 Wxe7 29.Wa7+ @c8 30.
Wfa8+ �b8 31.cxb4 Wb7. Black's
idea is to exchange the queens af­
ter which the vulnerability of his
king would be irrelevant. 32 .Wfa4
�c6 33.Wc2 cxb4 34.a3 gh6 3S.
axb4 WbS 36.Wfd2 gf6oo
24 . . . WfxgS 25.Wfe2 ti'e5 26.
ti'a6+ '>t>b8
27.ti'bS+
White does not obtain an ad-
4. li:Jc3 e6 5. i.g5 de 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8. !i.h4 g5 9. li:Jxg5 hg 1 0 . hg5 li:J bd7
vantage after 27.cxb4 cxb4 28.
\Wa3 \Wd6 29.\Wxb4+ \Wxb4 30.
l'!xb4+ @c7 31.l'!f4 f6 32 .l'!e4 l'!e8.
Black can defend successfully this
endgame. 33 .l'!e6 fS 34.@fl (34.
@g2 f4 35.g4 li:JcS 36.l'!f6 li:Jd3. It
is essential for Black to preserve
his f4-pawn. 37.l'!a6 li:Jel+ 38.@fl
li:Jf3 39 .h3 l'!xe7 40.l'!xa7+ @d6
41.l'!xe7 @xe7. White has an out­
side passed pawn indeed, but he
cannot win this position. For ex­
ample: 42.a4 @d6 43.gS l?JxgS 44.
@g2 @cS 45.h4 li:Je6= Hefka - Ser­
ban, ICCF 2 0 1 2 ; or 34.h4 f4 35.g4
li:JcS 36.l'!f6 li:Jd3 = Milanollo -
Kleiser, ICCF 2 0 14.) 34 . . .f4 35.g4
li:JcS 36.l'!f6 l'!xe7 37.l'!xf4 l'!e4 38.
l'!xe4 l?Jxe4= Once again, Black's
knight copes successfully with
White's three pawns. 39.h4 (Fol­
lowing 39.a3 , Magat - Woodard,
ICCF 2 016, 39 . . . li:Jd2+ 40.@e2
li:Jbl= , White cannot save his a­
pawn.) 39 . . . @d6 40.f4 li:Jf6 41.gS
li:JhS 42.fS li:Jg3+ 43.@g2 li:JxfS
44.h5 @e7=
27 • • • @c7
28.cxb4
After 28.\WaS+ @b7 29.cxb4
(29.\Wd8 l?Jb6 30.cxb4 c4 - see
29.cxb4) 29 . . . c4, Black's powerful
passed c-pawn provides him with
good prospects. 30 .\Wd8 li:Jb6.
31.\Wf8 li:Jc8 32.\Wxf7 \Wxe7=
31.h4 fS 32.l'!dl c3 33.bS (33.
\Wf8 f4 34.e8W/ \Wxe8 35.\Wg7+ @b8
36.\Wxc3 fxg3 37.fxg3 \Wh5 38 .\Wd4
l'!g8 = Chubukin - Efremov, ICCF
2 008) 33 . . . c2 34.l'!cl f4 35.g4
li:Jc8. Now, White has nothing bet­
ter than to comply with the repe­
tition of the position. 36.\Wd7+
@b8 37.\Wd8 @b7 38.\Wd7+ @b8 =
Bychkov - Wegman, ICCF 2007.
31.a4 li:Jc8 32 .\Wd7+ @b8 33.l'!cl
l?Jxe7 34.l'!xc4 \Wel+ 35.@g2 fuh2 ! =
Black sacrifices a rook and forces
a draw. 36.@xh2 Wfxf2 + 37.@h3
\Wfl+ 38.@h2 \Wf2 + 39.@h3, draw,
Merrell - Naumenko, ICCF 2016.
28 Wfxe7 29.Wa5+ @b7 30.
• • •
bxc5+ @a8
(diagram)
31.c6
31.\Wc3 \Wf6 32.Wxf6 li:Jxf6. The
vulnerability of Black's king is ir­
relevant in this endgame, while
White's kingside passed pawns
251
Chapter 21

The forced play has ended in

this endgame in which it may
seem that White has a clear ad­
vantage thanks to his three con­
nected passed pawns on the king­
side. The computer however,
evaluates this position as com­
pletely equal...
39.h4 ©b7 40.hS a5
Black wishes to deflect with
his a-pawn White's rook from the
are still too far from promotion. support of his passed pawns.
33.©g2 lLid7 34.c6 lLib6 35.gel 41.h6 gc2 42.h7 gcs
lLic8. Black prevents the penetra­
tion of the enemy rook to the e7-
square. 36,gbl lLib6 37.gb4 ©b8.
Black should not forget to central­
ise his king in this endgame. 38.
a4 ghs 39.gb5 gd5 40.h4 ©c7
41.h5 ©xc6 42 .h6 gd6 43.gh5
gd8 44,gf5 gh8 45.gxf7 gxh6 46.
gxa7 gh8 47.g4 lLidS 48.a5 ©bs
49.©g3 gf8= Sienkiewicz - Com­
pagnone, ICCF 2 015. Black pre­
vents f2-f4 and holds successfully
his defence in this endgame. Black's rook has managed to
come back to his own camp in or­
31 lLieS 32.Wds We6 33.
• • • der to hold the enemy passed h­
Wxe6 fxe6 34.c7 gcs 35.©g2 pawn just a step before its promo­
gxc7 36.gel lLid3 37.gxe6 gc2 tion.
38.gf6 gxa2 43.g4

43.gh6 �h8 44.g4 lLie5 45.©g3

lLid7 46.g5 lLif8 = Ruiz Romero -
Perez Ferris, ICCF 2010.

43 a4 44.gd6 lLie5
• • •

(diagram)
45.ge6

White's alternatives would not

provide him with much, for exam-

252
4. � c3 e6 5. i.g5 dc 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8. i.h4 g5 9. �xg5 hg 1 0 . bgS � bd7

a draw. 46 .. J'�hS 47.ge7+ ©c6 48.

fxg4 ©d6. White fails to capture
the enemy passed pawn and to
prevent his own h7-pawn at the
same time. 49.ga7 ©es 50.©g3
@f6 51.©f4 ©g6 s2 .ga6+ ©xh7=
Limbert - Henri, ICCF 2 014.

46 . . . c!Lie3+

ple : 45.g5 a3 46.f4 ghs 47.gh6

�g6 48.©g3 a2 49.ghl ©b6 50.
gal gxh7 51.gxa2 ghl= Mielke -
Noble, ICCF 2 0 1 2 . Now, in order
to make a draw, it would be suffi­
cient for Black to give up a knight,
or in some variations even a rook,
for the enemy two pawns.

45 •.. c!Lixg4
White's three connected passed 47.©t"3
pawns have disappeared off the
board. 47.fxe3 ghs 48.gh6 a3 49.©f3
46.gg6 a2 50.ghl ©c6 51.gal gxh7= Rob­
Now, due to the threat ggs, ert - Pinho, ICCF 2 0 14.
White wins a knight. This would
not change anything, though . . . 47 ghs 48.©xe3 lllh 7=
•••

The move 46.f3 also leads to Jacot - Mendl, ICCF 2 0 16.

I can understand that some of my readers may be disappointed

having seen such long variations, ending up with almost complete an­
nihilation of all the pieces, but this is contemporary chess. The com­
puter analyses can turn some opening variations into a lifeless de­
sert. . .

253
Chapter 2 2 1.d4 d5 2 . c4 c 6 3 .lll :f3 lll f6 4. lll c3 e6
5 . .ig5 dxc4 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8.i.h4 g5
9 . lll xg5 hxg5 10 ..bg5 lll b d7 11.exf6
J.b7 12.g3 �b6 13 . .ig2 0-0-0 14.0-0
c5 15.d5 b4

21.exd7+ ©xd7 2 2 . �adl+ i.d6 0-1

16.�a4
White's knight runs away from
the attack with tempo, but its
placement at the edge of the board
may turn out to be unfavourable
for him.
16 . . . �b5 17.a3
White wishes to open the a-file
in order to bring his rook into the
attack against the enemy king.
He would not achieve much
with 17.dxe6 hg2 18.©xg2 (It is
bad for him to opt for 18.e7? ! ,
because of 18 ... �c6 19.exd8W/+
©xd8 20 .�el. White has won the
exchange, but the light squares
around his king are hopelessly
weak. 2 0 . . . i.hl 21.f3 hf3 2 2 .W/c2,
Braeutigam - Strobel, Bayern
2002, 2 2 . . . i.d6+) 18 . . . W/c6+ 19.f3
(19 .�f3?? �xh2+ ! 20.©xh2 W/xf3
Aseev - Bagirov, Helsinki 1992)
19 ... �xe6 2 0 .�c2 (20.h4 i.h6 21.
Wfcl i.xgS 2 2 .W/xgS, Haba - Sha­
balov, Oberwart 1992 , 22 . . . W/c6 ! ?+
Now, White must fight for equali­
ty due to the misplacement of his
knight at the edge of the board.)
20 ...�eS 21.�ael b3 ! ? 22.axb3 cxb3
23 .Wfe2 W/h3 + 24.©gl �d3 25.�c3
c4. It is essential for Black to pre­
serve his active knight on the d3-
outpost. 26.�e4 W/e6 27.h4 i.h6
28.i.xh6 �@ Glembek - Weber,
ICCF 2010. His powerful knight is
sufficient to compensate Black's
missing pawn.
17 . . . �b8
Black will increase his pres­
sure against the dS-square.
18.axb4 cxb4

254
 13 . .ig2 0 - 0 - 0 14. 0 - 0 cS 15.dS b4 16. liJa4 W!b5 17.a3 liJ b8 18.ab cb
We will analyse now: A) 19.
.ie3, B) 19.ti'd4 and C) 19.Yfg4.
19.ti'e2 .ixdS 2 0.E:fcl (20 . .ixdS
E:xdS 2 1..ie3 liJc6 - see 19 . .ie3)
20 . . . liJc6 21..ixdS exdS 2 2 .b3.
Black cannot hold on to his c4-
pawn, but White has no advan­
tage anyway. 22 . . . ©b7. Black re­
treats immediately his king away
from the dangerous file. 23.bxc4
dxc4 24 . .ie3 E:hS 2S.E:xc4 liJd4 26.
.ixd4 E:xd4 27.liJb2 E:hdS 28.E:acl
E:xc4= Aguiar Garcia - Perez Fer­
nandez, ICCF 2 016. Black's king
is vulnerable, but his pawns are
very dangerous.
A) 19 .ie3 hd5 20.hd5
•
gxd5 21.ti'e2 liJc6 22.gfcl liJe5
Naturally, Black should not al­
low his opponent to regain the
pawn on c4.
23.f4
White ousts the enemy knight
from eS, but weakens the position
of his own king.
23 . .ixa7? ! Capturing of this
pawn is obviously bad. 23 . . . ©b7
24 ..ie3 (24.liJb6 c3 ! 2S.WxbS �bs+
Loos - Paszewski, Zalakaros
2 016) 24 . . . E:d3. White is already
beyond salvation. 2S.E:fl (After
2S.f4, Black has the powerful re­
source 2S .. J�xh2 ! , deflecting the
enemy king under a double attack
by the knight. 26.©xh2 E:xe3 27.
Wdl, Koopmans - Van der Muy­
senberg, Netherlands 1991, 27 . . .
E:el ! -+) 2S . . . W!c6 26.f3 .id6 27.
©g2 l:fa8 ! ? 28.liJb6 E:xal 29J�xal
E:xe3 30.W!xe3 ti'xb6-+
23 . .if4 .ih6 24.b3 i.xf4
After the intermediate move
2S.bxc4?, Black has the beautiful
resource 2S . . . E:dl + ! 26.E:xdl Wc6.
His king has found a safe haven be­
hind the pawn on c4, while Black's
threats on the hl-a8 diagonal
seem very powerful. 27.E:d3. Now,
White must part with an exchange
in order to defend against the
threat liJt'3. 27 ... liJxd3 28.ti'xd3 .ieS
29Jfa2 E:d8 30.ti'b3, Kacheishvili -
Yang, Saint Louis 2011, 30 ....ixf6 !?
31.f3 aS-+ It would be sufficient
to compare the power of the bish­
op on f6 and the knight on a4 in
order to evaluate this position
correctly.
2SS
Chapter 22
2S.gxf4 lll d 3 26.13xc4+ ©b8
27.lll b 2. White is in a huny to ac­
tivate his knight. 27 . . . lll xf4 28.
1l;!/e3 13d4. This is a beautiful rook­
sacrifice. 29.13xd4 lll e 2+ 30 .©hl
lll xd4 31.1l;!/xd4 '!Wc6+ 32 .©gl 13g8+
33.@fl 1l;!/hl+ 34.©e2 1l;!/xal = Black
has already an extra exchange, so
White is forced to give a perpetual
check. 3S.'!Wd6+ , draw, Balabanov
- Fetisov, ICCF 2010.
23.b3 c3 24.lll xc3. This was
the idea behind White's previous
move. He sacrifices a knight for
two pawns in order to open files
for his rooks. 24 . . . bxc3 2S.13xc3+
©b8
26 . .ba7+ ©b7 27. '!WxbS+ 13xbS
28.ie3 id6 29.13a7+ ©b8+ Peder­
sen - Schandorff, Denmark 2016.
Black has managed to coordinate
his pieces and White must already
fight for a draw.
26.'!Wc2 i.d6 27 ..ba7+ ©b7 28.
b4 l3d3. This move leads to equal­
ity. (Black could have tried here to
fight for the advantage with the
line: 28 .. Jfa8 ! ? 29.l3aS 1l;!id7 3 0 .
!b6 l'fa 6 31.l3xa6 ©xa6 32 .icS
©b7+ Rattay - Krakovsky, LSS
2S6
2010. White can hardly find a way
to improve his attack against his
opponent's king, deprived of any
pawn-shelter.) 29.13xd3 1l;!/xd3 3 0 .
'!Wxd3 lll xd3 31.l3dl ©xa7 32.l3xd3
13d8 33.h4 i.c7= Giese - Herold,
Germany 1996.
23 ... lll d3 24.gxc4+ '!Wxc4
2s.gc1 1l;!/xcl + 26.hcl lll xcl
27.'!Wc4+ ©b8 28.'!Wxcl
White has a queen and a pawn
for two rooks. His knight on a4
however is still misplaced, so
Black manages to coordinate his
rooks.
28 . . . J.d6
29.'!Wc4
29. ©g2 . This is an interesting
move, but still insufficient for
White to obtain an advantage.
29 . . J�k8 30.1l;!/hl ! ? l3c2 + 31.©f3
13cd2 32.©g4 eS 33 .fxeS .beS 34.
'!Wf3 ©c7 3S.©h3 ©d8. Black's
king is trying to run away from
the queenside. His idea is to pro-
 13 . .ig2 0 - 0 - 0 14. 0 - 0 c5 15.d5 b4 16. ltJ a4 W!b5 17.a3 ltJ bB 18.ab cb

tect the important t7-pawn. 36.b3 B) 19.ti'd4

hl 37.'!We3 !xf6 38.'!Wxa7 ©e8 39.
ltJb6. Finally, White's knight is
back in action. 39 . . .!'�h5+ 40.Wg4
gg5+ 41.©f3 gf5 + . White's king
must go to the centre of the board
in order to avoid the perpetual
check. 42.We3 .ic3 43.'!Wb8+ gds
44.W!b7 .id4+ 45.©e4 ge5+ 46.©f4
ge7 47.'!Wc6+ ©f8 48.ltJd5, draw,
Tsygankov - Tinture, ICCF 2 0 14.
Following 48 ... ged7 49.ltJxb4 gd6=
50.W!b7 .ic3 51.ltJc6 gf6+ 52.©e4
ge6+ 53.©f3 gf6+ 54.©g4 gg6= , This is an ambitious move.
White must give u p his h2-pawn if White prepares a queen-sacrifice.
he wishes to avoid the perpetual The tournament practice shows
check. 55.©f3 gf6+ 56.Wg2 gd2 + however that he risks more than
57.©h3 gh6+ 58.©g4 gg6+ 59. his opponent in this line.
©f5 gxh 2 = 19 . . . ltJc6 20.dxc6

29 • • • !1!c8 30.'i'e2 !1!d8 Black should not be afraid of

20 .ltJb6+. Before sacrificing the
queen, White brings his knight on
the altar of the attack in order to
open the a-file for his rook. 20 . . .
axb6 21.dxc6 .ixc6. White's pawn
on b7 will be very dangerous with
the a-file opened. 2 2 . .ixc6 W!xc6
23 .W!g4

31.'i'a6 (31.W!c4 gcs 32 .'!We2

gd8= Dzenis - Eshuis, ICCF
2 0 16) 31 !1!c8 32.Wg2 !1!c2 +
• • •

33.©h3 e5. Black opens files for

his rooks. 34.fxe5 .ixe5 35.b3
.id4 36.'i'fl .i:f2 37.'i'al !1!h5+
38.©g4 gds 39.'i'bt !1!d4+
40.Wh3 gdd2 = Black's rooks are
very well coordinated.
23 . . . ©b7 (Black should not
allow White's rook to the a7-
square : 23 ....icS 24.ga7--+ Carlsen

257
Chapter 22
- Smeets, Wijk aan Zee 2010).
The tactical complications are
over. Black's prospects are not
worse in the arising position
thanks to his possibility to create
quickly a passed pawn on the
queenside. 24.b3 (24.l:Ud l ? ! ic5+
The move 24.l:'ffc l ? ! only helps
Black to advance his pawns. 24 . . .
b5+ Maze - Brunner, Guingamp
2010.) 24 . . . c3 25.Wi'e2 .ic5 (25 . . .
.ih6 26.hh6 gxh6, Hebden -
Arun Prasad, Edinburgh 2009.
Now, White must try to organise
counterplay with the move 27.
ga4 ! ?� ; otherwise, he may end
up in an inferior position.) 26 . .if4
b5 27.ga5 @b6
Black follows the advice of
Steinitz who considered the king
to be a powerful piece. 28.gfal
gas 29.�a8 �a8 30.�a8 Wi'xa8.
The arising endgame might seem
dangerous for White, but he man­
ages to draw it after an accurate
play. 31.Wi'd3 Wi'e8 32 .h4. White's
counterplay is connected with the
advance of his h-pawn. 32 . . . e5 33.
Wi'e4 id4 34.ig5 '1;!.lc8 35.@g2 c2
36.icl Wi'c3 37.h5 Wi'xb3 38.h6.
White succeeds in deflecting the
enemy queen from his passed
258
pawns by advancing his h-pawn.
38 . . . Wi'e6 39.h7 Wi'xf6 40.Wi'xc2 b3
41.'1;!.le2 e4 42 .ie3 @c6 43 .hd4,
draw, Murden - Adelseck, ICCF
2 0 15. Later, there may follow this
variation: 43 . . .Wi'xd4 44.Wi'h5 b2
45.hBWI' Y;!fxh8 46.Wi'xh8 blWI' 47.
Wi'f6+ @c5 48.Wi'e7+ @c4 49. Wfxfl+
@c3 50.'1;!.lf6+ @c4= White man­
aged to save the draw somehow,
but this was not an easy task at all .
20 . . . gxd4 21.cxb7+ @b8
22.Ae3 e5
Naturally, Black should not al­
low the enemy bishop to occupy
the gl-a7 diagonal.
23.b3
White must play very precisely
now, because a single mistake
may lead to a hopeless position
for him. For example: 23.gfcl?
ih6- + Ernst - Burg, Amsterdam
2 0 14.
23.lll c3 This sacrifice of anoth­
er piece seems to be too risky for
White. 23 . . . bxc3 24.bxc3 ic5 25.
gfbl gdl + ! This is the point! After
 13 . .ig2 0 - 0 - 0 14 . 0 - 0 c5 15.d5 b4 16. lt:ia4 Vflb5 17.a3 lt:i bB 18.ab cb
this not so obvious rook-sacrifice,
Black seizes completely the initia­
tive. 26.gxdl .ixe3 27.fxe3 Wi'b2
28.gacl. Now, White's rook must
occupy this passive position in or­
der to protect his c3-pawn. 28 . . .
Wb6 29.gel Wi'xf6 30.gc2 Wg6 3 1 .
gd2 fS. Black prepares the move
eS-e4 in order to cut off White's
bishop from the protection of the
pawn on b7. White prevents this
with 32 . .idS, but after 32 . . . gd8
33.gee2 as-+ , the game is practi­
cally over. 34.©fl a4 3S.e4 a3 36.
ga2 Wh6 37.gal fxe4 38 . .ixe4 gd3
0-1 Claus - Rada, ICCF 2011.
23.gfel .ih6. Black wishes to
trade the active enemy bishop.
24.f4. White is preventing the ex­
change. Still, after 24 . . . .ixf4 2S.
gxf4 gg8, his king becomes too
vulnerable and Black's counter­
play becomes sufficient for a per­
petual check. 26 . .ixd4 exd4 27.
ges Wi'a6 28.©f2 Wxf6 29.lt:icS ,
draw, Yeremenko - Noble, ICCF
2011, 29 . . . Wi'xf4+ 30.©gl gxg2+
31.©xg2 Wi'g4+ 32 .©fl Wi'f4=
23 • • • c3
24.!Udl
24.gadl gd6 2s.gfe1 as 26.h4
gd3 27 . .ie4 gxdl 28.gxdl .ih6 29.
.icS .id2 30 ..id6+ ©a7 31.gal c2.
Now, White has nothing better
than to give a perpetual check.
32 .icS+ ©b8 33 . .id6+ ©a7= Bor­
stnik - Efremov, ICCF 2011.
24 J.h6
• . •
25 .ixd4
•
The exchange-sacrifice 2S.
gxd4? ! leads to difficulties for
White after 2S ... exd4 2 6 . .ixd4 c2
27.lt:icS ge8 ! Black defends against
ieS. 28 . .ifl Wc6 29.lt:ia6+ ©xb7
30 .J.g2. White regains the queen,
but this is still insufficient for
equality. 30 . . . clW+ 31.gxcl .ixcl
32 . .ixc6+ ©xc6 33.lt:ixb4+ ©bS+
Altanoch - Henri, ICCF 2011.
Black's rook will be obviously
more mobile than White's minor
pieces in actions on both sides of
the board.
25 • • • exd4 26.gxd4 c2 27.
gc4
2S9
Chapter 22
27.f4? '1We2-+ Krush - Wang,
Philadelphia 2011.
27... Yfxc4! ?
This is the simplest for Black.
He gives back the queen and en­
ters an endgame in which White
needs to play very precisely.
28.bxc4 gds
29 ..l:f3
White loses after 29.i.dS?, be-
cause of 29 . . . b3 30.<i>fl cl'IW+ 31.
gxcl hcl 32 . .ixfl b2. Black's
pawn has advanced too far and
White will have to give one of his
minor pieces for it later. 33 .i.g6
�d6 34.i.e4 gxf6 3S.lll cS gd6 36.
h4 i.d2 37.@g2 .lb4-+ Serradimi-
260
gni - Duliba, ICCF 2010.
29 . . . cre+ 30.�ct .bet 31.
l0c5 gd6
Black's rook protects simulta­
neously the a6 and d7-squares.
32 . .ldS !
32.<i>g2 ? ! i.b2 33.h4 (33.lll b 3
hf6 34.lll aS gd2 3S.h4 gb2 36.cS
i.c3 37.i.dS ci>c7 38.<i>fl l:!d2 39.
i.g2 b3 ! Black sacrifices a pawn
and forces White's knight to oc­
cupy an unfavourable position.
40.lll xb3 �d8 41.c6 i.b4. White's
knight has been severely restrict­
ed. Black's a-pawn will settle the
issue. 42.i.e4 aS+ Drenthen - Pan­
nekoek, ICCF 2 0 1S.) 33 . . .hf6 34.
hS as 3S.h6 i.h8 36.h7 fS+ 37.i.dS
b3 ! We are already familiar with
this resource. Here however, it is
not used with the idea to restrict
the enemy knight, but to help the
advance of Black's a-pawn. 38.
lll xb3 a4 39.lll c l a3. It is well
known that knights are very inad­
equate in the fight against the
passed rook-pawns ... 40.lll a 2 �b6
41.©f3 �b2 42.cS gd2 , followed
 13. il..g 2 0 - 0 - 0 14. 0 - 0 cS 15.dS b4 16. EiJ a4 Wib5 17.a3 EiJ bB 18.ab cb
by il..d 4, 0-1 Hiltunen - Noble,
ICCF 2008.
32 as 33.@fl .ib2 34.ttle4
•••
ga6 35.ttlcS gd6= Domer -
Feco, ICCF 2012.
C) 19.'9g4
White pins the pawn on e6 and
impedes capturing on dS with the
pawn.
19 . . . .ixdS 20.gfcl
Or 2 0 .hdS ? ! l:!xdS 2 1 .il..e 3 (21.
if4 EiJc6 22.l:!fcl l3d4 23.Wie2 W!dS+
Bacrot - Fier, Le Port Marly 2012)
2 1 . . . ttlc6 2 2 . l:!fcl EiJeS 23.W!e4 W!c6
24.©g2 .ih6 ! 25.l:!el EiJd3 26.l:!e2
he3 27.13xe3 13hh5 28. ©gl 13he5-+
Buj - Pappier, Argentina 1992.
White fails to r egain the pawn on
c4 in both the variations.
20 . . . ttlc6 21.hdS gxd5
22.�c4
2 2 .il..e 3 EiJeS - see 2 0.hdS.
2 2 .Wixc4? l:!dl+ 23.©g2 '9xc4
24.l3xc4 l:!xal-+ Van Wely - Sha-
balov, New York 1993.
22 . . . gxgS
23.'9d4
White prevents ii.cs. Black has
temporarily an extra piece, but
cannot avoid the loss of his knight
on c6.
Following 23.Wie4, Black suc­
ceeds in creating counterplay
against the f2-square. 23 . . . .icS
24.b3 l3f5 25.l:!acl .ixf2 + 26.©g2
©b8 27.Wixc6 '9xc6+ 28.l3xc6. Af­
ter the trade of the queens the
vulnerability of Black's king
would be irrelevant. 28 . . . .id4=
Harikrishna - Mulyar, Toronto
2010.
23 . . . ©b8 24.�c6 gxg3+
This intermediate move is nec­
essary.
24 . . . '9xc6? 25.Wif4+-
25.fxg3 '9xc6 26,gdl
Black's king seems quite vul-
nerable, but there is just a few
261
Chapter 22
material left on. the board, so
White cannot bring into the at­
tack his knight, which has re­
mained at the edge of the board.
26.b3 .td6 27.gd1 gas= Robert
Perez - Sevian, Saint Louis 2013.
26 ••• ti'c7
27.b3
White protects his knight, just
in case . . .
The evaluation o f the position
remains the same after 27.@fl -
White removes his king away
from the dangerous gl-cS diago­
nal. 27 . . . ghs 28.\WdB+ '\Wc8
Here, White has several active
possibilities, but Black holds sue-
262
cessfully the defence in all the
lines.
29.lll b 6 gfs+ 30 .Wel. White's
king is forced to go to the e-file,
because his other possibilities
lose. (30.Wg2? axb6 31.\Wxb6+?
Y!\'b7- + ; 30 .Wgl?? .icS-+) 30 . . .
ges= Kozak - Mihok, Budapest
2 0 1S.
29 .h4 gas. It is essential for
Black to exchange the enemy
rook, since it might join into the
attack later. 30.gxdS exdS 31.
\WxdS ti'a6+ 32.Wf2 Y!\'xa4 33.
\Wd8+ Wb7 34.Y!\'xfB. There has
arisen a king and queen ending in
which Black exploits the mis­
placement of the enemy queen on
the f8-square and ends the game
with a perpetual check. 34 . . . \Wc2 +
3S.We3 \Wcl+ 36.Wd3 \Wfl+ 37.
@d4 \Wxf6+ 38.@c4 Y!\'e6+ 39.Wxb4
ti'b6+ 40.Wc4 Y!\'e6= Shkuro -
Ghane Gardeh, Azov 2010.
29.gd7. This move may seem
very dangerous for Black, but he
can capture cold-bloodedly the
pawn on f6. 29 ... gfS+ 30.Wg2 gn6
31.ti'xcB+ @xc8 32.gxa7. Black's
king is cut off on the penultimate
rank, but his bishop is more pow­
erful than the enemy knight in a
fight on both sides of the board.
32 ... lt>dB 33.gas+ lt>e7 34.gbs .th6
3S.lll cs gfs 36.lll e4 gas 37.�b4.
White has managed to win a
pawn, but Black's pieces have
been activated considerably. 37 . . .
fS 38 .gb7+ @dB 39.lll c3 l'! d 2 + 4 0 .
@fl. Now already, White's king
has become passive. 40 . . . .ie3 41.
lll e 2 @cs 42.gb3 ga1+ 43.lt>g2
 13. ig2 0 - 0 - 0 14. 0 - 0 cS 15.dS b4 16. tfJ a4 W!b5 17.a3 tfJ bB 18.ab cb
ia7 44.l:!c3+ ©d7 4S.l:!c2 ib8 46.
h4 ©e7 47.b4 ieS 48.hS l:!bl = Van
Seben - Starke, LSS 2012. The ac­
tivity of Black's pieces is sufficient
to maintain the equality.
29.b3 l:!dS 30.l:!xdS exdS 31.
W!xdS W!a6+ 32 .©g2 W!xf6. In the
arising endgame White's only
chance of obtaining an edge is
connected with the advance of his
h-pawn. 33.h4 ©c7 34.hS W/c6.
The trade of the queens is Black's
most accurate way of reaching the
draw. 3S.W/xc6+ ©xc6 36.@f3 ©d6
37.tfJb2 ©es 38.tfJc4+ ©fs 39.
g4+ ©gs 40 .tfJe3 ( 40 .tfJeS fS=)
40 . . . ig7= Ham - Cruzado Due­
cas, ICCF 2 0 1S.
37.©f4 ©e6 38.g4 id6+ . Now,
irrelevant of where White will re­
treat with his king, he will be inca­
pable of obtaining an advantage.
3 9 . © g S . H i s king is trying
to go to the h7-square. (39.
©e4 ©f6 40. tfJb2 ©gs 41.tfJc4
.if8 42 .tfJe3 aS= ; 42.tfJeS f6
43 .tfJd7 ih6 44.@f3 fS 45.gxfS
@xfS= Duliba - Noble, ICCF
2 0 09) 39 . . . ie7+ 40.©h6 if8+
41.©h7 fS
This is a quite concrete deci­
sion. Black allows his opponent to
obtain two connected passed
pawns, but relies on his powerful
f-pawn. 42.gS (42. gxfS+, Nilsson
- Efremov, ICCF 2012, 42 . . . @xfs
43.©gS ih6= ) 42 . . .f4 43.g6 f3
44.h6 f2 4S.g7 flWI 46.gSW/+ W!f7+
47.W/xf7+ @xf7. The pawn races
cannot change the evaluation of
the position as approximately
equal. White's king stands in the
way forward of his h-pawn and
h i s knight cannot help the
king, because it must prevent
Black's pawn-break a7-aS-a4.
48.tfJb2 ©f6 49.tfJd3 as so.
tfJf4 ©fs Sl.tfJd3 ©gs s2.tfJes
ixh6= S3.tfJf7+?? ©f4 S4.©xh6
a4-+
27 . . . ©c8
Black defends against W/d8.
263
Chapter 22
28.ti'e3
White has some other moves
with his queen as well.
2S.ti'd2 . After this move Black
can win a tempo for the develop­
ment of his bishop. This does not
influence the evaluation of the po­
sition at all. 2S . . . i.h6 29.\We2 gas
30 .\Wa6+ ©bS 31.gxdS+ \WxdS 32.
\WbS+ . Now, White has nothing
better than to give a perpetual
check. 32 . . . ©aS 33.\Wc6+ ©bS =
Craig - Dijon, ICCF 2012.
2s .'1We4 ©bs 29,ga4 (29.VNd4
©cS = ; 29.\Wd3 i.cS+ 30.lLixcS
\Wxc5+ 31.VNd4 \Wc3 - see 2S. \We3)
29 . . . i.d6 30 .gc4 (Following 30.
©g2 , Black can activate his rook.
30 . . . ghs 31.h4 ges 32.ti'd3 \Wc6+
33.©h3 gas= Tazelaar - Schwarte,
ICCF 2011; 30 .h4, Shimanov - I.
Popov, Loo 2014, 30 ... aS! ? He frees
the a7-square for his queen. 31.
gc4 \Wa7+ 32.©g2 ghs 33.VNc6 VNb7
34.VNxb7+ ©xb7= After the trade
of the queens Black has nothing to
worry about.) 30 . . . \WaS 31.ti'd3
gas 32.©g2 i.c7 33,ga4 gxd4 34.
\Wxd4, draw, Bokar - Duecas,
264
ICCF 2010. The position has been
simplified considerably and after
34 . . . i.eS, White must be ready to
exchange the queens in order to
prevent the activation of Black's
pieces. 3S. \Wes VNxcS 36.lLixcS ©c7
37.lLia6+ ©d6 3S.lLixb4 i.xf6=
2S.Wd3 ghs 29.Wt'3 gbs. Black's
rook has come just in time to help
his king. 30 .WaS+ gbs 31.ti'e4
gbs 32 .lLib2 . Finally, White has
decided to improve the placement
of his knight. (32.ga4 ©bS 33.
Wd3 \Wcl+ 34.©g2 VNc6+ 3S.We4
Wxe4= Dothan - Perez Fernan­
dez, ICCF 2 0 16.) 32 . . . ©bS 33.lLic4
as. Black makes use of the remov­
al of White's knight from the a4-
square in order to create counter­
play with aS-a4. 34.©g2 (34.gal
i.d6 3S.©g2 ggs 36.Wh4, Alexa -
Davis, ICCF 2012, 36 . . . gcS=) 34 . . .
a 4 3S.bxa4 gc5 36.lLie3 gc3. Black
has activated his pieces at the
price of a pawn. 37.©h3 i.d6 3S.
ga2 \Wes 39.lLidl gc4 40.\Wh7
i.c7= Bubir - Ohtake, ICCF 2 0 07.
2s . . . ©bs
White was threatening gel.
 13. �g2 0 - 0 - 0 14 . 0 - 0 c5 15.d5 b4 16. CiJ a4 �b5 17.a3 CiJ bB 18.ab cb
29.�d2
About 29.�d3 Ac5+ 30.CiJxcS
�xc5+ 31.�d4 �c3 - see 29.�d2 .
29 Ac5+ 30.CiJxc5 ti'xc5+
• . •
31.ti'd4
Now, White must exchange
the queens if he wishes to contin­
ue to fight for a win.
31.@g2 �c6+ 32 .@gl �CS=
31 • • • ti'c3
32.ti'xc3
32.�f4, Ding Ding Liren - Yu
Yangyi, Danzhou 2 0 16, 32 . . . eS ! ?
33.�e4 gc8=
32 • • • bxc3 33.�kl �k8
Black must play very accurate­
ly in this rook and pawn ending in
order not to lose his c3-pawn and
not to allow the promotion of the
enemy h2-pawn.
34.©f2
White is activating his king.
He cannot obtain an edge after
34.g4 ©b7 3S.h4 gc5 36.©f2 (36.
hS ©c6=) 36 . . . ©c6 37.b4 gc4 38.
gS ©d6 39 .hS gh4= Babushkin -
Butov, ICCF 2011.
34 • • • gc5
Black is preparing ©c7, fol­
lowed by ©d6-eS.
35.g4
White's alternatives would not
change the character of the posi­
tion.
3S. ©e2 ©c7 36.g4 (36. ©d3
©d6 - see 3S.©e3) 36 . . . ©d6 37.
©d3 ©es - see 3S.g4.
3S. ©e3 ©c7 36. ©d3 (36.g4
©d6 - see 3S.g4 ; 36.©d4 ©d6 37.
i:!xc3 gxc3 38. ©xc3 @es - see
36.©d3.) 36 . . . ©d6 37.i:!xc3 (37.g4
@es - see 3S.g4) 37 . . . i:!xc3+ 38.
©xc3 ©es. Black will restore the
material balance on his next
move. 39.©d3 (39 .©d2 ©xf6 = ;
39.g4 ©xf6 40.h4 ©es 41.hS ©f6
42.©d4 ©gs 43.©es fs 44.gxfs
exfS= Nilsson - Krzyzanowski,
ICCF 2 016.) 39 . . . @xf6. The king
and pawn ending is a draw. 40.
26S
Chapter 22

©e4 @gs 41.h3 as 42.@f3 f6 43 . 40.gxc3

h4+ ©hs 44.©f4 ©g6 4S.g4 ©h6
46.gS+ fxgS, draw, Nouveau -
Verhaeren, ICCF 2 016, because
after 47.hxgS+ ©g6 48.@es ©xgS
49.©xe6, Black's king manages to
gobble the enemy b3-pawn just in
time. 49 . . . @f4 SO.@ds ©e3 Sl.
©c4 ©d2 S2.@bs ©c3 S3.©xaS
©xb3.
35 ••• ©c7 36.©e3 ©d6
The inclusion of the move
40 .b4 does not promise anything
to White. 40 .. Jk8 41.13xc3 13d8+
42.©e4 ©xh4 43.g6 @gs 44.gxf7
@xf6 4S.13c7 ©g7, Vecek - Taras,
ICCF 2013, 46.13xa7 13b8 =
40 • • • gds+ 41.©e3
41.©e4 13f5 42 .13c7 ©xh4 43.
13xa7 ©xgS 44.13xf7, draw, Lege­
maat - Boskovic, ICCF 2011. Fol­
lowing 44 . . .13xf6 4S.13xf6 @xf6
46.b4 ©e7= , Black's king holds
the enemy b4-pawn.
41 • • • ©xh4 42.g6

37.h4

37.©d3 ©es 38 .gS @fs 39.h4

©g4 - see 37.h4.

37 . • • ©es 38.gS ©f5 39.©d3 Black can simply ignore this

©g4 pawn-break. 42 @gS 43.gxf7
• • •

gds 44.gc7 ©xf6 45.�a7 gf'8

46.©e4 (46.b4 13xf7 47.13al
©eS=) 46 gxf7 47.gal gd7.
•••

This is the most precise way for

Black to draw. He cuts off the en­
emy king from the b-pawn and
will place his rook on dS on his
next move. Later his king will go
to the c8-square. 48.b4 gds
49.gbl ©e7 50.bS ©d7 51.b6
©c8=

266
 Part 6
1.d4 d5
In the final part of our book we
will analyse the opening varia­
tions in which White plays l.d4,
but after l.. .d5 refrains from ad­
vancing c2-c4 on his second and
following moves. As a rule, in
these variations he plays 2 .lll f3,
but not always. For example in
Chapter 23 we will analyse the
set-ups in which White plays nei­
ther c2-c4, nor lll f3 .
The London system, in which
White develops his bishop on f4
will be dealt with in Chapter 24.
Chapter 25 will be devoted to the
Torre system - 2 .lll f3 lll f6 3 . .ig5.
Finally, the last chapter of the
book will be devoted to the varia­
tions beginning with 2 .lll f3 lll f6
3.g3.
We have to mention that the
connection of the openings "The
Slav Defence + the Caro-Kann
Defence" enables Black to avoid
many problematic opening varia­
tions. For example, after l.d4 d5
2 .lll c 3, he can play simply 2 . . . c6,
avoiding the main lines of the Ve­
resov Attack, arising after 2 . . . lll f6
3 . .ig5. In the London system, which
has become very popular lately,
after 1.d4 d5 2 ..if4 c5 3.e3, Black
can simply exchange on d4 - 3 . . .
cxd4 4.exd4, after which there aris­
es on the board a harmless varia­
tion of the Caro-Kann Defence (1.
e4 c6 2 .d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4 . .if4).
267
Chapter 23 1.d4 d5
2 . c3
2 . lLJ c3 Chigorin Variation
2 .e3 Stonewall Attack
2.e4 Blackmar - Diemer Gambit
2 .i.g5 Bishop Attack

A) 2.c3 c5
The simplest response for Black,
preparing an exchange on d4 af­
ter which there arises a position
from the Caro-Kann Defence, or
the exchange variation of the Slav
Defence.

About 2 .lild2 tt:lf6 3.c4 (3.lilgf3

c6 - see Chapter 24) 3 ... c6 - see
Chapter 1.

2 .f4 tt:lf6 - see volume 2, the

Bird Opening.

2 .i.f4 cS - see Chapter 25, var­

iation A.
2.g3 tt:lf6 3.i.g2 (3.c4 c6 - see
Chapter 1; 3.lilf3 c6 - see Chapter
26) 3 . . . c6 4.lild2 (4.tt:lf3 i.g4 - see
Chapter 26; 4.c4 i.g4 - see Chap­
ter 1) 4 . . . ig4 5.lilgf3 e6 - see
Chapter 26.
3.dxc5
This is a principled move for
White. He wins a pawn and will
try to preserve it later.
About 3.i.f4 cxd4 4.cxd4 lilc6,
or 3.i.gS h6 4.i.h4 cxd4 5.cxd4
tt:lc6 - see Chapter 3.

2.a3 lilf6 3.tt:lf3 c6 - see Chap­ 3.lilf3 cxd4 4.cxd4 tt:lf6 - see
ter 24. Chapter 4.

268

3.e3 cxd4 4.exd4 �c6 - see the
Caro-Kann Defence (volume 2).
3 • • • e6
4.b4
It is just bad for White to play
here 4.e4, because after 4 . . . i.xcS,
Black restores immediately the
material balance. 5.exd5 exd5 6.
�f3 �c6 7 ..le2 �f6 8.0-0 0-0
9.�bd2
Similar positions arise very of­
ten in the Tarrasch system in the
French Defence (l.e4 e6 2 .d4 d5
3.�d2). Here however, it is in a
very good version for Black, be­
cause at first he has not lost a
tempo for the move id6 and sec-
1.d4 d5 2.c3 c5 3.dc e6
ondly his king's knight is devel­
oped to an active position to f6
and not on e7. 9 . . . ib6 10 .�b3
�e4 ll.�bd4 ig4 12 .ie3 ge8
13.gel \1;Vf6 14.\1;Vd3 gad8= Zindel
- Lputian, Geneve 1986. Black's
pieces are very active and the vul­
nerability of his d5-pawn is irrel­
evant.
4 • • . a5 5.a3 b6 6.cxb6
6 • • • \1;Vxb6
Black is forced to sacrifice a
pawn.
It would not work for him to
play 6 . . . axb4 7.cxb4 ixb4+? ! , in
view of 8.axb4 gxal 9.ib2± Hort
- Velimirovic, Novi Sad 1976 and
thanks to the double attack White
regains the material and pre­
serves all the pluses of his posi­
tion.
7 .le3 'flc7 8.�d2 �f6 9.
•
�g£J .ld6 10.�kl 0-0;; Green -
Cvetnic, ICCF 2 0 15. Black has
very good compensation for his
minimal material deficit.
269
Chapter 23
B) 2.lLJc3
White is preparing e2-e4, but
the placement of his knight in
front of the c2-pawn may turn out
to be unfavourable for him in this
middle game.
2 • • • c6 !?
This is the simplest. Black is
offering his opponent to trans­
pose to the Caro-Kann Defence.
3.ig5
Black has not played yet lLJf6,
so this bishop-sortie is not so ef­
fective.
About 3.e4 dxe4 - see the Ca­
ro-Kann Defence (volume 2).
3.lLJf3 i.fS 4 . .if4 (After 4.igS,
Black can solve the problem with
the development of his bishop on
f8 with Wb6, e6. 4 . . . h6 S.ih4 �b6
6.l'!bl e6 7.e3 i.e7 8.i.xe7 lLJxe7
9.i.d3 lLJd7= Mueller - Simon,
Germany 1992.) 4 . . . e6 S.e3 i.d6
6 ..ig3 lLJf6 7 . .id3 .ixd3 8.�xd3,
Lindinger - Pedersen, Germany
2 0 04, 8 . . . 0-0 ! ? =
The move 3 . .if4 i s not with-
270
out venom. 3 . . . Wb6 ! ? (After the
straightforward reaction 3 . . . .ifS,
Black must consider f2-f3, fol­
lowed by g2-g4, h2-h4, or e2-e4.)
4.l'!bl (After 4.lLJa4, Black's sim­
plest response would be 4 . . . �aS+
S.lLJc3, Sychev - Vitiugov, Sochi
2 016, S . . . Wb6 ! ? = ; there arises a
double-edged position after the
pawn-sacrifice 4.�d2 Wxb2 S.l'!bl
�a3oo Cornette - Genov, Morzine
2 0 14.) 4 lLJf6 s.e3 .ifs 6.lLJf3 (Af­
• . .
ter 6.f3, Black should better de­
fend in advance against g2-g4-gS.
6 . . . h6 7.g4, Darini - Melkumyan,
Doha 2 0 16, 7 . . . .id7. Black's bish­
op is more reliably placed here
than on g6, or h7. 8 .h4 cS+± Black
follows the classical principle and
counters the enemy flank attack
with a counter strike in the centre.
White has managed to advance
his kingside pawns, but will have
serious problems to find a safe
haven for his king in the forth­
coming middle game.) 6 . . . e6 7.
id3 i.xd3 8.cxd3 . White opens
the c-file for his rooks, but com­
promises his pawn-structure.
(8 .�xd3 lLJbd7 9 .h3 i.e7= Hill­
mann - Lombardy, Nice 1974) 8 . . .
aS. Black impedes the pawn-mi­
nority attack of his opponent (b2-
b4) . 9.0-0 ie7 10.lLJa4 �bs 11.
Wc2 lLJbd7= Ibarra Jerez - Perez
Candelario, Navalmoral 2 0 1 2 .
3 . • • h6
This is a useful move for Black
if he plans to castle kingside. He
provides his king with a leeway in
advance.

4 .ih4 Yfb6
• The move 6. e3 leads to a qui­
This is an important move.
White's plan includes the moves
°l&d2 , 0-0-0, f2-f3, e2-e4. Now,
he must either sacrifice his b2-
pawn, or lose the possibility to
castle queenside.
5.l:'!:bl
It would be too risky for White
to choose here 5.'19d2 'l&xb2 6.!!bl
'l&a3 7.e4 dxe4+ Black lags in de­
velopment indeed, but he has no
pawn-weaknesses in his position
and White can hardly find targets
for attack. For example, White
may have serious problems, after
the straightforward move 8 .dS? ! .
8 . . . llJf6 9 . .ig3 lDbd7 10 .lDge2, Mi­
ladinovic - Starostits, Cutro 2005,
10 ... e5 11.dxe6 lDb6 12.exf7+ @xt'7-+
5 . . . i.f5
Before playing e7-e6, Black
develops his bishop to an active
position.
6.£J
1.d4 d5 2. lDc3 c6 3. igS h6
eter game. 6 . . . e6 7 . .id3 llid7.
Black prepares the development
of his knight to the f6-square. 8.
llJge2 lDgf6 9 . 0-0 .ie7 10.f3 .ixd3
11.cxd3 0-0 12 .e4 as 13.f4, Kava­
lenia - Shalimov, Dimitrov 2007,
13 . . . 'l&d8 ! ? = It is not easy for
White to develop his initiative on
the kingside.
6 . • . e6 7.e4 .ih7 8.i.-rl
8 • • • dxe4
Black begins an attack against
the e4-square
9.fxe4
After 9.lDxe4, the position be­
gins to resemble the classical sys­
tem of the Caro-Kann Defence.
9 . . . llJd7 10 . .id3 llJgf6 ll.c3 l3d8 =
9 • . • �f6 lO.i.d3 i.h4 n.es.
White must present to his oppo­
nent the dS-square. ll ... .ixd3
12.cxd3 �d5 13.llJge2 0-0=
White has more space, but Black's
pawn-structure is much more
elastic.
271
Chapter 23
C) 2.e3 �f6
3 . .id3
White preserves the possibility
to advance f2-f4.
About 3.f4 .ifS - see volume 2 .
3.�f3 .ig4 - see Chapter 24.
3.c4 c6 - see Chapter 1.
3.�c3. White's knight will be
misplaced on this square imped­
ing the pawn-advance c2-c4. 3 . . .
c S 4.�f3 �c6.
After S.dxcS eS 6 ..ibS .ig4 7.h3
i.xf3 8.'fixf3 .ixcS, Black restores
the material balance. 9.0-0 0-0
10 .l:!dl e4 ll.'fie2 , Lugovskoy -
Kupreichik, Tula 2 0 17, ll . . . �e7 ! ?
272
Black protects reliably his dS­
pawn. 12 ..ic4 .id6 13 ..ib3 .ib8
14.g3 'fid7. He would not mind
the exchange of the dS-pawn for
the enemy h3-pawn, since the po­
sition would be considerably sim­
plified after that. lS ..ixdS �exdS
16.�xdS �xdS 17.c4 �c3. This is
an important intermediate move
leading to the weakening of
White's queenside pawn-struc­
ture. 18.bxc3 'fixh3=
S . .ibS. White exerts pressure
on the a4-e8 diagonal with the
idea to provoke .id7, so that after
e7-e6, Black's light-squared bish­
op would be restricted. Still, this
would not be sufficient for White
to maintain an advantage in the
opening. S . . . e6 6.0-0 .id7 7.b3
(7.a3, Kovacevic - Sermek, Ma­
karska 199S, 7 . . . a6=) 7 . . . cxd4.
Black opens the c-file for his ma­
jor pieces. 8.exd4 a6 9 . .id3 .id6
10.�e2. White is preparing the
exchange of the dark-squared
bishops. 10 . . . 0-0 ll . .if4 .ixf4 1 2 .
�xf4 'fic7 13 .'f!d2 l:!fe8. Black
wishes to accomplish the freeing
pawn-break in the centre e6-eS.
14.l:!fel h6 1S.c3 l:!ac8 16.l:!adl es
17.�xeS �xeS 18.l:!xeS l:!xeS 19.
dxeS 'fixeS= Hering - Rosa Solor­
zano, ICCF 2 016. The weaknesses
of the pawns on c3 and dS balance
each other,
3 . . . �c6!?
Black places his knight i n front
of his c-pawn, but the threat e7-eS
compensates this defect of his po­
sition.

4.f4
It might seem that Black's
strategy is in doubt after this
move.
After 4.lll f3 .ig4, White cannot
prevent the pawn-advance e7-eS.
S.lll b d2 (S.0-0 es 6.dxeS lll xeS=)
S . . . eS 6.dxeS lll xeS 7 ..ie2 lll xf3+
8.lll xf3 .id6 9.0-0, Orban - Bese­
nyi, Szekszard 1989, 9 . . . Wfe7! ?+
There arise similar positions, but
with colours reversed, in the Ru­
binstein system in the French De­
fence. Black has a freer game.
4.c3 eS S . .ibS e4. Black occu­
pies space. 6.c4 .id7oo, preparing
lll b 4, Galego - Narciso Dublan,
Mondariz 2000.
4 . • • li)b4!?
This i s the point! Black wishes
either to exchange on d3, obtain­
ing the two-bishop advantage, or
to follow with .ifs, attacking the
c2-square.
5.li)f'3
S ..ie2 .ifs. Now, White's
knight is forced to occupy an un-
1.d4 d5 2.e3 lllf6 3. i.d3 lll c6
favourable position at the edge of
the board. 6.lll a3 cS 7.c3. After
Black has advanced c7-cS, his
knight might retreat. 7 . . . lll c6 8.
lll f3 e6 9.lll c 2 .id6 10.lll eS �c8+
Meijers - Fedorovsky, Germany
2012.
5 . . . li)xd3+ 6.cxd3 e6 7.li)c3
c5
8.dxc5
8 . .id2 cxd4 9.lll xd4 .icS 10.
lll c e2 Wfe7 11.�cl 0-0. Black has
evacuated his knight away from
the centre and has a slight but
stable edge thanks to his two­
bishop advantage. 12.0-0 .id7 13.
h3 �fc8+ Llagaria Vidal - Castro
Cruz, ICCF 2 0 14.
8 • . • hc5 9.d4
White increases his control
over the es-square, but weakens
the light squares in his camp.
9 ... .ie7 10.li)eS
The move 10 .Wfd3, Showalter
- Pillsbury, New York 1898, has
the defect that after 10 . . . 0-0!?,
273
Chapter 23

followed by b7-b6 and a7-a5,

Black will win a tempo by attack­
ing the enemy queen with the
move .ia6.

At first Blackmar used to play

10 0-0 11.0-0 �e4 12.
•••
�xe4 dxe4 13.id2, Marshall -
Leonhardt, Vienna 1908, 13. . .
Wid5! ? Black is centralising his
queen. 14.Yfb3 Yfxb3 15.axb3 f6
16.�c4 J.d7 17.gfcl gfc8+ He
has the two-bishop advantage,
while White's queenside pawns
have been weakened.
3.f3? ! , but it became obvious
quickly that after the energetic
strike in the centre 3 . . . eS ! Black
would seize the initiative. 4.dxeS.
This seems to be the most resil­
ient move for White (Following
4.dS �f6 5.�c3 .ib4 6 ..igS, Rossi ­
Have, Corsica 2004, 6 ... h6 ! ? 7.ixf6
hc3+ 8.bxc3 Yfxf6+, Black pre-
serves the extra pawn, because cap­
turing on e4 is impossible due to the
check on h4.) 4 ...Yfxdl+ 5.tiixdl ttJc6

D) 2.e4
This is the so-called Blackmar
- Diemer Gambit. White sacrific­
es a pawn, but can hardly obtain
sufficient compensation for it.
2 • • • dxe4
Naturally, Black can simply
transfer to the Caro-Kann De­ 6.fxe4 ! ? (6.J.f4 exf3 ! ? 7.tDxf3
fence with the move 2 . . . c6. Still, .ie6 8 .J.bS ttJger+, followed by
why not capture a central pawn? 0-0-0. Black has a better pawn­
(diagram) structure, while White will have
3.�c3 problems with his king, despite
This is the improvement by the fact that it is an endgame.
Diemer, after which the gambit There are still too many pieces left
was named after the two of them. on the board.) 6 . . . ttJxeS+

274

3 . . . �f6
Naturally, Black is reluctant to
give back so easily his extra pawn
and later he intends to preserve it,
for example, with the help of the
move .ifs.
4.f'3
4 ..ic4 .ifs S.f3. The e4-pawn is
doubled, but it hampers the de­
velopment of the knight on gl.
Therefore, White wishes to ex­
change it, opening in the process
the f-file for his rook. (S . .igS e6
6 .llige2 llic6+; S.llige2 llic6 6.0-0
e6+) S . . . e6
Black does not wish to ex­
change on f3, not to enhance the
development of his opponent's
pieces.
1.d4 dS 2.e4 de 3. llic3 llif6
6 . .igS .ib4. The pin of this
knight is very unpleasant for
White. 7.�d2 llibd7 8.0-0-0,
Reh - Mueller, Bad Zwesten 1999,
8 . . . c6 ! ?+
After the advance of his g­
pawn - 6.g4, White can restore
the material balance, but at the
price of the considerable weaken­
ing of his kingside. 6 . . . .ig6 7.gS
llidS 8.llixe4 h6. Black exploits
immediately the defect of his op­
ponent's position. 9.h4 hxgS
10.llixgS, Portisch - Jankovics,
Zalaegerszeg 19S9, 10 . . . cS ! ?+
6.fxe4 llixe4 7.llif3 .ib4 8 . 0-0.
White must continue with his sac­
rifices in order to maintain his
ebbing off initiative. 8 . . . llixc3 9.
bxc3 hc3 10 . .ia3 . He adds the
exchange on the altar of the at­
tack, Markwardt - Mueller, Ger­
many 19S7. Black may refrain
here from capturing the rook.
10 . . . llic6 ! ? 11.E:bl llixd4 12.@hl
llixc2 13 ..icS �xdl 14.E:fxdl .ib4 ! ?
Black sacrifices two pieces fo r a
rook here and simplifies consid­
erably the position. 1S.i.xb4 llie3
16 . .icS llixdl 17.E:xdl c6 18 .E:el b6
19 . .if2 c5 20 . .ibS+ @e7- +
4 . .igS c6 ! ? This is the right
move for Black! He does not need
to be in a hurry to play .ifS, be­
cause White can counter this with
�e2 , followed by �bS. S . .ixf6.
White restores the material bal­
ance, but Black's bishops will be
very powerful on this open posi­
tion. (S.�e2? ! �xd4; White can­
not equalise with the gambit ap-
27S
Chapter 23
proach 5.f3 exf3 6.llixf3 i.g4 7.
%Yd2 llibd7 8.0-0-0 e6+ Eschert
- Turowski, ICCF 2 016. Black has
an extra pawn and a solid posi­
tion.) 5 . . . exf6 6.llixe4 Vb6
This is his most precise move.
Now, White will have problems
with the protection of his pawn on
b2. 7.b3. This move weakens the
el-aS diagonal (White would not
solve his defensive problems with
the line: 7J�bl i.e6 8.llic3 llia6+,
followed by 0-0-0, Lipski - Du­
kaczewski, Jarnoltowek 2 0 07.).
7 . . .fS 8.llic3 i.b4 9.llige2 %Ya5 10.
Vd3 0-0 11.0-0-0, Klinger -
Wetscherek, Oberwart 1991. Here,
Black can obtain an advantage in
numerous ways, but the simplest
would be to transfer the knight
to the f6-square in order to in­
crease his control over the central
squares. ll . . . llid7 ! ? 12.<ttib 2 llif6+
4 . . . ext'3 5.Vxt'3
White sacrifices his second
central pawn for the sake of main­
taining his initiative.
After 5.llixf3 c6, there arises a
position from the Caro-Kann De­
fence, which will be analysed in
276
our volume two after the move­
order l.e4 c6 2 .d4 dS 3. llic3 dxe4
4.f3 exf3 5.llixf3 llif6.
s ... tfxd4 6.i.e3 Yfg4
Black lags in development and
naturally, he would not mind a
transfer into an endgame.
7.tft'2
7.llibS. The attempt to capture
Black's a7-pawn may end up trag­
ically for White's knight. 7 . . . llia6
8.0-0-0 c6 9.llixa7, Maciulewicz
- Sakai, Email 2001, 9 . . . i.d7 ! ?
10.%Yxg4 llixg4 ll.i.b6 llib4 12.a3
llidS-+
7 %Yf5! ?
• • •
Black continues the chase af­
ter the enemy queen.
8.�f'J
White allows llig4.
After 8.Vd2 e6 9.0-0-0 !i.e7
10. llif3 o-o ll.fi.d3 Vas 12.�hel
llic6+, White has no compensa­
tion for the pawn at all.
8 • • • �g4

Black trades the powerful ene­
my bishop. 9.'ffd.2 �xe3 10.ti'xe3
e6 11. 0-0-0 J..e 7 12.J..d3 ti'a5
13.ghfl., Helman - Jan, ICCF
2 0 07, 13 �c6 ! ? Black is not in a
•••
hurry to castle kingside. After id7,
he might castle queenside at an
opportune moment. 14.J..e4 ti'b6+
E) 2.J..g5
White is waiting for the ap­
pearance of the enemy knight on
f6 in order after ixf6 to compro­
mise the enemy pawn-structure.
2 h6
•••
It is useful for Black to play
this move, because he might have
the possibility to play g7-g5 and
1.d4 d5 2. ig5 h6 3. J.. h4 c5
J..g 7 in the future, or just to use
the h7-square as a place for his
bishop on f5 to retreat to, or as a
leeway for his king.
3.J..h4
3.if4 ifS ! ? 4.c4 ( 4.e3 e6 5.
id3 .ixd3 6.cxd3 id6=) 4 . . . e6
5.llJc3 c6 6.e3 id6 7 . .ixd6 '1Nxd6=
Rafa - Balda, Poland 2 0 07.
3 .. c5
.
Black begins an immediate
fight for the centre.
4.dxc5
White wins a pawn, but weak­
ens the al-h8 diagonal and Black
exploits this immediately.
About 4.c3 cxd4 5.cxd4 llJc6 -
see Chapter 3.
It is obviously not correct for
White to sacrifice a pawn here
4.e4?! dxe4 5.d5 g5 6.ig3 ig7 7.
llJc3, Mehmeti - Postny, Baku
2016, 7 . . . fS ! ?+
Following 4.llJc3 , Black can
continue to exert pressure against
277
Chapter 23
the enemy central pawn. 4 . . . lLic6
5.lLif3 (5.e4 dxe4 6.dS lLid4+ Che­
pukaitis - Grachev, St Petersburg
2 0 0 2 ; 5.e3 cxd4 6.exd4 lLif6 7.lLif3
ig4 - see 5.lLif3) 5 . . . lLif6 6 .e3 cxd4
7.!i.xf6. This move presents
Black with the two-bishop advan­
tage. 7 . . . gxf6 8.exd4 eS 9 .ibS e4
10.lLid2 a6 11.hc6+ bxc6+ Gazi -
Delizia, ICCF 2012.
7.exd4 i.g4. Here, before play­
ing e7-e6, Black develops his bish­
op to an active position. 8.ie2 e6
9.lLieS ixe2 10.lLixe2 lLixe5 11.dxe5,
Neronov - Fiodorov, Yuzhny 2008.
The pin of the knight is harmless
for Black, because he can play
simply 11 . . . gS ! ? 12 .ig3 lLid7 13.
0-0 �b6 14.lLid4 hS 15.h3 i.e7+
Later, he can continue with his
pawn-offensive against the enemy
king. His king can always find a
safe haven on the queenside.
4.e3 lLic6
(diagram)
5.lLic3 cxd4 - see 4.lLic3 .
After 5.dxcS lLif6, White can
preserve his extra pawn with the
line : 6.ibS WfaS+ 7.lLic3 a6 8.ia4
e6 9.!i.xf6 gxf6 10.�d4 �xcS 11.
�xf6 �gs:;.;, but the two-bishop
278
advantage, as well as the better
development more than compen­
sate Black's minimal material def­
icit, Demian - Ressler, ICCF 2011.
Following 5.lLif3 �b6 6.lLic3,
Black obtains a good position af­
ter transferring his knight to the
fS-square. 6 . . . e6 7.ie2 cxd4 8 .
exd4 lLige7oo Eliseev - Korbut, St
Petersburg 2001. It would not be
easy for White to preserve his
dark-squared bishop after lLifS.
5.c3 �b6 6.Wfb3 c4. Black oc­
cupies space on the queenside. 7.
Wfxb6 (After 7.�c2 , Black can play
7 . . . i.fS ! ?+, and the defenceless­
ness of the b2-pawn does not pro­
vide White with the possibility to
capture the bishop, Kindermann
- Landa, Germany 2016.) 7 . . . axb6
8.lLid2 bS+, followed by b5-b4.
White cannot counter Black's
queenside offensive with the
counterstrike in the centre 9 .e4? ! ,
because after 9 . . . dxe4+, Black's
threat to win the bishop with g7-
g5, f7-f5-f4, would not allow White
to regain his pawn, Polaczek -
Sretenskij , Dos Hermanas 2003.
4 . . . g5 5 . .ig3 li..g7
Black develops his bishop to
an active position with tempo.
 1.d4 d5 2. i.g5 h6 3. i.h4 c5 4.dc g5 5. i.g3 .lg7

6.c3 tLJa6 10.t'3!

This is the only move after
which White can obtain an ac­
ceptable game.
His position is inferior after 10.
h4 fS 11.hxgS hxgS 12.gxh8 i.xh8+
Konenkin - Landa, Minsk 201S,
as well as following 10.lLJa3 fS 11.
0-0-0+ @e8 12.i.c7, Paragua - Ara­
dhya, chess.com 2017, 12 . . . �b7! ?+
10 ... e3 ll.lLJa3 f5 12.0-0-0+
@es t3.f4 e5 !

7.e4
White sacrifices a pawn in an
attempt to deprive his opponent
of his castling rights.
7.lLJf3 tLJxcS+ Artemiev - Jojua,
Minsk 2 0 17.
After 7.1.Wa4+ i.d7 8.�a3,
White can try to preserve his ma­
terial advantage, but following
8 . . . 1.Wc8 9.b4 (9.c6, Kamsky - Shi­
rov, Moscow 2 0 07, 9 . . . �xc6 ! ?+)
9 . . . tLJc7 10 .�b2, Afanasiev - Devi­ It is essential for Black to de­
atkin, Moscow 2 016, 10 . . . aS ! ? fend his pawn on e3 ; otherwise,
11.a3, Black can advance his this pawn, cut off away from the
pawns in the centre and on the rest of his forces, might perish.
kingside. 11 .. .fS 12 .e3 eS� 14.fxeS lLJe7 (After the straight­
7 . . . dxe4 8.�xd8+ @xd8 forward line: 14 .. .f4 lS . .lel hes,
9.i.xa6 bxa6 Tamosaitis - Kazakovskiy, Lithu­
ania 2 016, 16.lll c4 .lc7, White can
exploit his superior development
and begin an attack against his op­
ponent's far-advanced pawns. 17.
h4 g4 18.lLJe2 gh7oo) 15.lLJc4 f4 16 •

.let tLJc6 17.tLJt'3 .le6 18.lLJd6+

@e7 19.lLJd4 tLJxe5f Velasco -
Miras Garcia, ICCF 2 0 1S. Black's
position seems preferable thanks
to his two powerful bishops and
his far-advanced f and e-pawns.

279
Chapter 24 1.d4 d5
2 .i.f4
2 . tll t'3 tll f6 3.i.f4 London System
In this chapter we will analyse
the rather popular lately London
system, which can be character­
ised by the early development
of White's bishop to the f4-
square. At first we will see this de­
velopment of the bishop on move
two - A) 2 . .if4, and then on the
third move - B) 2.c!LJ:f3 c!Of6
3 . .if4.
A) 2 . .if4 c5
This is Black's most practical
response. In some variations Black
can exchange on d4 after which
there will arise by transposition
lines either from the exchange
variation of the Slav Defence, or
from the Caro-Kann Defence.
280
3.e4
This pawn-sacrifice is double­
edged.
About 3 .c3 cxd4 4.cxd4 t.tJc6 -
see Chapter 3, variation A.
3.e3 cxd4 ! ? 4.exd4 t.tJc6 - see
the Caro-Kann Defence (volume 2).
3 . .ixb8. This voluntary ex­
change of the bishop for the ene­
my knight is obviously bad for
White. 3 . . . i!xb8 4.c3 ( 4.dxc5 e6 5.
'!Wd4 t.tJe7 6.e3, Stefanova - Skrip­
chenko, Shenyang 2000, 6 . . . t.tJc6
7 ..ibS '!Was+ 8.l.lJc3 a6 ! ? 9 . .ia4
'!WxcS 10 .'!WxcS .ixc5+ Black has a
stable advantage thanks to his
bishop-pair.) 4 . . . cxd4 5.cxd4 '!Wb6+

Chernyshov - Solodovnichenko,
Voronezh 2006.
3.llif3. Now, Black can occupy
the centre with his pawns. 3 . . .
cxd4 4 . .ixb8 (It i s worse fo r White
to play here 4.llixd4, because of
4 .. .f6 S.i.g3 es 6.llib3 llic6 7.e3
.ie6 8 . .ie2 llih6 9.llild2 llifS+ Bo­
zic - Zelcic, Ljubljana 1999. Later
Black can exchange on g3, obtain­
ing the two-bishop advantage.)
4 ... �aS+ Black protects in ad­
vance his pawn on a7 with this in­
termediate check. S.c3 l3xb8 6.
�xd4. Black lags in development
and has no time for f6 and eS.
Still, after 6 . . . llif6 7.llibd2 e6 8.
llib3 (8.e3, Skatchkov - Bezgo­
dov, St Petersburg 1998, 8 . . .
.id7! ?+) 8 . . . �b6 9.�xb6 axb6oo
A.Sokolov - Westerinen, Gausdal
1996, White must play very accu­
rately in order not to end up in an
inferior position, because despite
the vulnerability of his doubled
pawns on the b-file, Black's posi­
tion seems preferable thanks to
his two-bishop advantage.
3.llic3 llic6 4.llif3 ( 4.e3 cxd4 S.
exd4 i.fS - see the Caro-Kann De­
fence, volume 2) 4 . . . llif6 S.e3 cxd4
1.d4 d5 2 . .if4 c5
About 6.exd4 .ig4 - see the
Caro-Kann Defence, volume 2 .
6.llibS. White's desire t o create
a double attack on the c7-square
may lead to difficulties for him.
6 . . . �aS+ 7.�d2 �xd2+ 8.lt>xd2
dxe3+ 9.fxe3 @d7! ?+, Black re­
moves his king in advance against
the double attack, Rakic - Cvet­
kovic, Kladovo 1991. Later, he can
defend the c7-square against the
penetration of White's knight
with the moves e7-e6, .ic5-b6.
6.llixd4 e6 7 ..ibS .id7 8.0-0
i.e7= Ryska - Ingersol, ICCF 2009.
3.dxcS llic6. Black is threaten­
ing e7-eS.
4.e4 llif6 S.exdS llixdS 6 . .ig3
.ifs. Black is preparing e7-e6. 7.c3
e6 8.llid2 (White cannot defend
his pawn with 8.b4? �f6 ! 9 . .ibS
llidxb4-+) 8 . . . .ixcS+ Bu Xiangzhi
- Ding Liren, Shenzhen 2 0 16.
Black's prospects are already
preferable thanks to his superior
development.
4.llif3 e6 S.e3 (S.e4 .ixcS 6.llic3
llige7=) S . . . hcS 6.c3 llif6 7.llibd2
0-0. Black has evacuated his king
away from the centre. His posi­
tion is already preferable. 8 . .id3
281
Chapter 24
l3e8 9.llieS. White prevents e6-e5.
9 . . . .id6. Black insists on the con­
tinuation of his plan. 10.llixc6
bxc6 ll.ixd6 1/Nxd6 12.0-0 es+
Rozhko - Elistratov, Moscow
2 015. Black's powerful pawn-cen­
tre provides him with an edge.
3 dxe4 4.d5 �f6 5.�c3
• . •
g6! ?
Black plays much more often
here 5 . . . a6, defending against the
knight-sortie. Still, the threat llibS
is not so dangerous for him.
6.'1Nd2
White not only prepares cas­
tling queenside, but also wishes to
trade his opponent's dark­
squared bishop.
6.'1Ne2?! .ig7 7. 0-0-0 0-0
8.d6 l3e8 9.llibS, Valero - La­
crosse, Benidorm 2 011, 9 ... llic6-+
Black should not be afraid of
6.llibS llia6 7.d6, Toupalik - Spiel­
mann, Prague 1912, 7 . . . ie6 ! ?+
6 .tg7 7.0-0-0 0-0 8 .th6
• • • • This fact does not prove that the
.ixh6 9.tfxh6 a6
282
10.h4, Winants - Okkes,
Netherlands 2006 (10.f3 exf3 11.
gxf3 11Nd6=) 10 �g4!? This is a
•.•
very practical decision. Black
ousts immediately the enemy
queen further away from his king.
11.'lfd2 e3. Black cannot hold his
e4-pawn anyway. 12.fxe3. After
the removal of the pawn from the
f-file, it would not be easy to oust
the knight from the g4-square.
12 �d7 13.hS �df6 14.hxg6
• • •
fxg6 15.e4 b5 16.%!fel. White is
preparing e4-e5, but this threat is
not so dangerous for Black. 16 • • •
tfa5 17.eS �h5 18.d6 exd6 19.
exd6 �f2 Here, White has noth­
ing better than after 20.gxhs
�xdl 21. tfe7 gxh5 to force a
draw by repetition of the position :
22.1/NgS+ ©h8 23.'lfeS+ ©g8 =
B) 2.�f'3 �f6 3 .tf4
•
This system for White is be­
coming very popular lately. M.
Carlsen, V.Kramnik and many
other strong grandmasters have
played like this once in a while.
move 3 .if4 is particularly strong .

The opening theory is developing
so fast every year that it has be­
come very difficult for White not
only to obtain an advantage after
the main lines arising after 3.c4,
but also to enter a fighting posi­
tion. So, he is looking for sidelines
in which he can obtain a fighting
position, even if it is about equal,
if his opponent has not subjected
it to a thorough computer analysis.
3 . . c5
. bad for White. 4 . . . cxd4 5.ttJxd4
Now, just like after 2.M4, Black
would not mind transposing to
the exchange variation of the Slav
Defence, or to a rather harmless
variation of the Caro-Kann De­
fence.
4.dxc5
4.ttJc3 ttJc6 - see variation A.
4.c3 cxd4 5.cxd4 ttJc6 - see
Chapter 4.
4.e3 cxd4 5.exd4 ttJc6 - see the
Caro-Kann Defence, volume 2 .
After 4.i.xb8 gxb8, Black's
prospects seem already prefera-
J.d4 dS 2. ttJ.f3 ttJf6 3. i.f4 c5
ble thanks to his bishop-pair. 5.c3
e6 6.e3 (The chase after the ene­
my a7-pawn would end tragically
for White's queen: 6.'\Wa4+ ? ! id7
7.Wixa7? Wic8-+ 8.'\Wb6 gas 9.Wb3
ia4 10.Wb6 ttJd7 0-1 Knechtel -
Letourneau, corr. 1982.) 6 . . . bS+
Fritsch - Drexel, Wattens 1999.
4.c4. The combination of the
moves 3 .if4 and 4.c4 is obviously
ttJbd7. The threat e7-e5 is very un­
pleasant for him. 6.'\Wa4, Hoenig
- Van den Doel, Germany 2 016. It
might seem that White has pre­
vented his opponent's threat, but
Black can play 6 . . . eS ! ? anyway,
sacrificing a pawn for the initia­
tive. 7.i.xeS icS 8.e3 0-0 9.ixf6
ttJxf6 10.ttJc3 i.xd4. Black ex­
changes his powerful bishop, but
opens the e-file. ll.exd4 ges+ 12.
i.e2 i.g4. It is useful for Black to
weaken his opponent's position.
13.f3 i.d7 14.'\Wc2 dxc4+ Black's
advantage is doubtless here
thanks to his superior pawn­
structure.
4 . e6
. .
283
Chapter 24
5.e3
About S.lll c3 hc5 6.e3 0-0, or
S.c3 hc5 6.e3 0-0, or S.lll b d2
hc5 6.e3 lll c 6 - see S.e3.
S.id6 hd6 6.cxd6 W/xd6 7.c3
lll c 6 8.e3 eS 9 .ie2 0-0+ Kolbus -
Yagupov, Biel 2006.
White should better not try to
hold on to his extra pawn, since
following S.b4? ! as 6.c3 axb4
7.cxb4 (7.hb8 l:!xb8 8.cxb4 b6
9 .Wfa4+ lll d7! + Now, Black re­
gains his pawn anyway, because
White cannot play 10 .c6?, due to
10 . . . W/f6-+ Schroll - Palac, Abe les
Bains 2011.) 7 . . . lll c 6 8 .id2 (8.Wfb3
lll e 4. Black prepares the develop­
ment of his queen on f6, or g7-gS
and ig7. 9.lll c3 W/f6 10.id2. White
has managed to cover the al-h8
diagonal, but there comes trouble
surprisingly from another side . . .
10 . . . lll xb4 ! 11.Wfxb4 hes 12 .Wfb2
hf2 + 13.©dl icS+ Williams -
Perkiomaki, ICCF 2010.) 8 . . . lll e4
9.a4, Polyaninov - P.Smirnov, St
Petersburg 2 014, 9 . . .Wff6 10.l:!a3
gS ! 11.ic3 lll xc3 12.l:!xc3 lll xb4+
The pawns are equal indeed, but
White's queenside pawn-struc­
ture has been horribly weakened
and his pieces are not developed.
5 . . . .bc5
(diagram)
6.c4
6.c3 0-0 7.lll b d2 lll c 6 - see 6.
lll b d2 .
284
6.a3 0-0 7.c4 dxc4 - see 6.c4.
6.lll c3 lll c 6 7.id3 h6 8 .lll bS
0-0 9.0-0 Wfe7. Black's prospects
look preferable thanks to his pawn­
dominance in the centre. 10.lll b d4
lll g4 11.lll xc6 bxc6 1 2 .lll eS lll xeS
13.heS f6 14.ic3 eS+ Jefferson -
Sherwood, ICCF 2 01S.
After 6.id3, Black can begin a
chase after the enemy bishop on
f4. 6 . . . lll h S 7.hb8 l:!xb8 8.ibS+
@f8 ! ? This is an interesting deci­
sion after which Black preserves
his two-bishop advantage. The
loss of his castling rights would
not be so important. 9.0-0 lll f6
10.lll b d2 g6+ Mouron - Moskvi­
chev, ICCF 2011.
6.ie2 lll c 6 7.0-0 0-0 8 .c4
(8.lll b d2 W/e7 - see 6.lll b d2) 8 . . .
dxc4. This i s the simplest way for
Black to obtain a good position.
9.hc4 W/e7 10.lll c3 l:!d8 11.W/e2 h6
12.lll eS lll xeS 13.heS id7=, fol­
lowed by ic6. Wang Chen - Wang
Hao, Xinghua 2 01S. Black solves
the problem with his bishop on c8
and equalises completely.
 1.d4 d5 2. lllf3 lllf6 3. i.f4 c5 4.dc e6 5.e3 hc5
6.lll b d2 lll c 6
7.a3 0-0 8.b4 ie7= Anto­
niewski - Smolen, Slovakia 2016.
7.id3 Wfe7 8.lll e 5 (Following
8.ig5, Black advances e6-e5 and
obtains a stable advantage. 8 . . . h6
9.ih4, I.Sokolov - Matlakov, Du­
bai 2 0 14, 9 . . . e5+) 8 . . . lll d 7 9.lll xc6
bxc6 10.ig3 0-0=i= Andersson -
Hector, Malmo 1995.
7.c3 0-0 8 .id3 (8 . .te2 h6 -
see 7.ie2) 8 . . . ge8 - see variation
A, 3.dxc5 lll c 6 4.lll f3 e6.
7.ie2 0-0 8.c3 (8.0-0 Wfe7 9.
lll b 3 ib6 10.lll e5 gd8+; 10.lll b d4,
Kurajica - Lautier, Belgrade 1999,
10 ... lll e4+) 8 ... h6 9.0-0 lll h5 10.
lll b 3 ib6oo, followed by the ex­
change of the knight for the ene­
my bishop, Demircioglu - Yilmaz,
Izmir 2016. Now, Black can even
try to fight for the advantage thanks
to his two powerful bishops.
6 ••• 0-0 7.c!Llc3
There has arisen a position
from the Queen's Gambit (1.d4 d5
2 .c4 e6 3.lll c3 lll f6 4.lll f3 ie7 5.
.if4 0-0 6.e3 c5 7.dxc5 hc5), but
with an extra tempo for Black, be­
cause he has saved it for the move
.ie7.
Or 7.a3 dxc4 8.Wffxd8 gxd8
9.hc4, Wen Yang - Asgarizadeh,
Baku 2 0 14, 9 . . . b6=
7 c!Llc6
•••
8.a3
White lags in development
and must play very carefully not
to allow the opening of the centre
after d5-d4, because Black is very
well prepared for that.
8.cxd5 c!Llxd5 9.c!Llxd5 exd5 10.
a3 d4+ Stajcic - Yakovich, Kec­
skemet 1991.
After 8 . .ie2 dxc4, there arises
an approximately equal endgame.
9.hc4 Wffxdl+ 10.gxdl .ib4 11.
0-0 hc3 12 .bxc3 b6 13.c!Lld4 ib7
14.lll xc6 hc6= Comtesse - Ru­
dykh, ICCF 2013. White's two-bish­
op advantage is compensated by
Black's superior pawn-structure.
8 •••d4
White's king is still stranded in
the centre, so Black wishes to
open the position. His idea is to
advance e6-e5.
285
Chapter 24
9.exd4 l!Jxd4 10.i.e2
After 10 .�d3 l!Jxf3+ 11.Y*fxf3,
Black can play immediately 11 ... eS
12 .�gS h6 13.�6 Wxf6 14.Y*fxf6
gxf6oo Broekmeulen - Greenfeld,
Rosmalen 2 0 14. His two powerful
bishops compensate the weaken­
ing of his kingside pawn-struc­
ture.
10 . . . l!Jxf3+ 11.i.xf3 e5! ?
Black sacrifices a pawn and
seizes the initiative. In addition,
he will soon obtain a bishop-pair,
which will be very active in this
open position.
286
12.he5 Y*fxdl+ 13.@xdl
l!Jg4 14.hg4 hg4+ 15.f3 i.f'5
16.b4 gfd8+ 17.l!Jd5 i.f8 18.
@cl f6 19.i.g3 i.d3
Black wishes to undermine the
base under the powerful enemy
knight on dS. 20.l!Jc7 gac8 21.
c5 b6 22.cxb6 i.d6 23.@b2
axb6 24.l!Je6 hg3 25.hxg3.
White has managed to preserve
his extra pawn, but Black's pieces
are very active and this compen­
sates his minimal material deficit.
2s . . . gc2+ 26.@b3 gdc8 27.
gbdl g2c3+ 28.@b2 gc2+ 29.
@b3 gsc3+ 30.@a4 g5oo Sesko
- Woznica, ICCF 2016.
Chapter 25 1.d4 d5 2 . �f'3 �f6
In this chapter we will analyse
all the possibilities for White be­
sides 3.if4 and 3.g3.
3.ig5
This bishop-sortie is much
more justified when Black has
played e6, instead of dS (The
Torre Attack), because then his
knight is pinned and he cannot
reply with tlJe4.
About 3.c4 c6 - see Chapters
5-2 2 .
3.tlJbd2 c 6 4.e3 ( 4.g3 ig4
5.ig2 e6 - see Chapter 26; 4.c4
ifs - see Chapter 5) 4 . . .ifS 5.ie2
(5.c4 e6 - see Chapter 5, variation
A) 5 . . . h6. Black prepares in ad­
vance a square for the retreat of
his bishop. 6.tlJeS tlJbd7 7.f4.
White fortifies his knight at the
centre of the board, but weakens
the e4-square. 7 . . . e6 8.0-0 ie7
9.g4. This is a risky decision for
White, since it is well known that
pawns cannot come back. .. 9 . . .
ih7+ 10.gS hxgS ! Black i s not
afraid of the opening of the f-file,
because after 11.fxgS, he has pre­
pared the piece-sacrifice 11 . . . tlJxeS
12.gxf6, Naiditsch - Vitiugov,
Jurmala 2 0 16, 12 . . . gxf6 ! ? 13.dxeS
fxeS+ He has obtained two pawns
for the knight, a powerful pawn­
centre and excellent attacking
prospects against the enemy king.
3.a3. This move is often played
by the French GM Eric Prie. White
is ready to counter the move c7-c5
after which he will simply capture
the pawn and will protect it with
b2-b4. Still, after 3 . . . c6, the move
3.a3 will hardly be so useful.
(diagram)
After 4.e3 ig4 5.h3 ixf3 6.
\Wxf3 tlJbd7 7.c4, Black can exploit
his lead in development and play
7 . . . eS, beginning active actions at
the centre of the board. 8.cxdS,
287
Chapter 25
Kivimaki - Olsson, Norrkoeping
2010, 8 . . . exd4 ! ? 9.dxc6 lll eS 10.
\1;Vf5 lll xc6 11.ibS dxe3 12 .he3
\1;Vd5 13.\1;Vxd5 lll xdS. White will
hardly manage to make use of his
two-bishop advantage in this end­
game, because Black's pieces are
very active. 14.id2 0-0-0 15.0-0
id6 16.:Bcl lll d e7 17 . .ic4 f6 18.:Bdl
ieS 19.lll c3 :Bd4 2 0.ie6+ ©b8 21.
:Bahl :Bhd8 22 .iel :Bxdl 23.lll x dl
lll d5 24.@fl lll f4 25.ic4 lll d3.
White is forced to trade his bishop
for the enemy knight after which
the position becomes completely
equal. 2 6.hd3 :Bxd3=
4.if4. Before playing e3,
White develops his bishop to an
active position. 4 ... ifS 5.e3 e6 6.
c4 (6.lll b d2 .id6 7.ig3 0-0 8.c4
W!lc7 9.ie2 as 10 .hd6 Wlxd6 11.
lll h4 ig6 12.0-0 lll b d7= Fuller -
Serradimigni, ICCF 2 015. Black
has no pawn-weaknesses in his
camp, while White has no active
plan in sight, since the pawn-ad­
vance c4-c5 will free Black's hands
for actions in the centre with e6-
e5.) 6 . . . .id6 7.hd6 Wlxd6 8 .\1;Vb3
W!lc7 9.lll b d2 (9 .id3 hd3 10.
Wlxd3 lll bd7 11.lll c3 0-0 12.0-0
:Bfe8 13.cxdS exdS. After this cap­
ture, there arises a Carlsbad
288
pawn-structure on the board. As a
rule, in it White can rely on ob­
taining an advantage only if Black's
passive light-squared bishop re­
mains on the board. Here, the
bishops are exchanged so Black
has no problems at all. 14.:Bfcl
Wld6= Prie - Bonnaud, Avoine
2008.) 9 . . . lll b d7 10.:Bcl 0-0 11 .
.id3 hd3 12 .Wlxd3 :Bfe8 13.cxdS
exd5 14.WlfS, Prie - Kononenko,
Elgoibar 2 0 06, 14 . . . g6 ! ? 15.\1;Vc2 .
Now, Black obtains a very good
game after the standard transfer
of the knight for similar positions
- 15 . . . lll b 6=, followed by lll c 8-d6.
3.lll c3. In the closed openings
this knight is developed only very
seldom in front of the pawn on c2,
because later White cannot attack
the enemy centre with the move
c2-c4. 3 . . . c5
About 4.e3 cxd4 5.exd4 ig4 -
see the Caro-Kann Defence (vol­
ume 2).
4 . .if4 lll c6 - see Chapter 25,
variation A.
Following 4.igS lll e4 5 . .if4,
Black can play 5 .. .f6, increasing
his control over the central e5-
square and preparing cxd4, fol-

lowed by e7-eS. 6.e3. After the
move id2 has become impossi­
ble, Black caqn pin the knight on
c3. 6 . . . W/aS 7.tlJd2 tlJxc3 8.bxc3
1M'xc3 9 .l'�bl e6 10.ibS+ tlJc6oo
Peled - Tudor, ICCF 2 01S. Later,
White must play very energetical­
ly in order to prove that the activ­
ity of his pieces compensates the
sacrificed pawn.
4.dxcS tlJc6 S.a3. White con­
tinues with his risky flank strate­
gy ignoring the fight for the im­
portant central squares. (It would
be more reliable for him to opt
here for S.e4 d4 6.tlJe2 es 7.tlJg3
hes 8.id3 ib4+ 9.id2 hd2 +
10.W/xd2 1g4= Pandavos - Adler,
France 1982.) S . . . d4 6.tlJa2 eS 7.
tlJb4 hes 8.tlJxc6 bxc6
9.e4. Now, White must admit
that his previous strategy has
failed and should try to play for
equality; otherwise, he would end
up in an inferior position. (Win­
ning a pawn with the move 9.tlJxeS
would be very risky after 9 . . . 0-0
10.tlJd3 ib6. Now, while Black's
pawn is on d4, White cannot play
e2-e3 and his attempt to fian­
chetto the bishop with the move
11.g3 would be countered by Black
l.d4 dS 2. tlJj3 tlJf6
with 11 . . . W/ds 12 .l'�gl ge8 13.ig2
tlJe4+ Kokorin - Stanishevski,
ICCF 2 0 1S.) 9 . . . tlJxe4 l0.1d3 1M'dS
11.1M'e2 fS 12. 0-0 1e6 13.gel 0-0
14.ixe4 fxe4 1S.1M'xe4 1M'xe4 16.
gxe4 idS, Vandermeulen - Nefe­
dov, ICCF 2 0 1 2 , 17.gxeS id6
18.ge2 c5 19 .igS .txf3 2 0 .gxf3
gxf3 = White's kingside pawn­
structure has been weakened, but
there is just a few material left on
the board so the most likely out­
come of the game would be a
draw.
3.c3. White is planning to play
the Slav Defence himself, but still
you should try to obtain an ad­
vantage and not to equalise when
you are playing with White. 3 . . .
ifs
The move 4.igS is not danger­
ous for Black at all, because he
can simply play 4 . . . tlJbd7, defend­
ing against ixf6. S.tlJbd2 h6 6.
i.h4 e6 7.e3 1e7 8.ie2 cs 9.0-0
0-0. Black has already a some­
what freer game. 10 .1g3, Torre -
Huebner, Brussels 1987, 10 ...W/b6 ! ?
11.'Mlcl tlJhS+, followed by tlJxg3.
Black has a slight but stable
edge.
289
Chapter 25
4.�b3. The attack against the
b7-pawn is parried easily. 4 . . . �c8
S.i.gS (S.i.f4 e6 - see 4.i.f4) S . . .
tlibd7
Black can counter 6.tlibd2 with
the interesting possibility 6 . . . aS ! ? .
With this advance o f his rook
pawn Black wishes at first to oust
the enemy queen from the b3-
square and then to weaken his
queenside. 7.tlih4 a4 8.�dl .ie6
9.e3 c6 10.tll hf3 h6 ll.hf6 exf6
12 . .id3 a3 13.b3 fS. Now, White
cannot play e3-e4. 14. 0-0 tll f6
1S.�c2 i.d6 16.c4 ib4 17.gacl
0-0 18.tll eS l3e8= Winter - Baby­
chuk, ICCF 2 0 14. Black's position
is easier to play from the practical
point of view. He has two power­
ful bishops and if in this middle
game, or in the endgame, his
knight manages to reach the c3-
square, the vulnerability of
White's a2-pawn will hurt him
horribly.
6.e3 e6 7.c4. White has lost a
tempo, but has accomplished this
standard pawn-advance for the
Closed openings (7.tll b d2 h6 8.
i.h4 ie7 9.gcl cS= Hulak - Ste­
vie, Pula 2001.). 7 . . . h6 8 . .ih4 c6
9.tll c3 .id6 10 . .ie2 0-0 11.0-0
290
tlie4 12.gacl �b8 = , Black removes
his queen from the X-ray juxtapo­
sition with the enemy rook, Mar­
kowski - Navara, Poland 2 0 1S.
4.if4 e6
S.tll b d2 .id6. Now, White must
either exchange his bishop, or
lose a tempo for its retreat. 6 . .ig3,
Zurek - Malisauskas, Pardubice
1996, 6 . . . h6 ! ? =
S.�b3 �c8 6.e3 id6 7.ig3 (7.
i.bS+ tlibd7 8 . .ixd6. This move
doubles Black's pawns, but also
opens the c-file for his major piec­
es. 8 . . . cxd6 9.0-0 0-0= Hulak -
Gulko, Moscow 1990.) 7 . . . 0-0 8.
c4 ixg3 9.hxg3 c6 10.tll c 3, Ruste­
mov - Drozdovskij , Internet
2003, 10 . . . h6 ! ? =
S.e3 .id6. Black does not play
c7-c6, because later he wishes to
advance c7-cS at once. 6 . .ig3 (6.
.ixd6 �xd6=) 6 ... 0-0 7.tlibd2
h6 ! ? Black should not allow his
opponent to trade his bishop after
tlih4. 8.tll e S cS 9.dxcS. After this
exchange, it is only Black who can
fight for the advantage. 9 . . ..ixcS
10.i.d3. White should forget about
his dreams of obtaining an edge
and by exchanging pieces should
be careful not to become worse.

10 . . . .b:d3 11.lLixd3 i.d6 12 .Wff3
lLic6 13.i.h4 i.e7= Susedenko -
Grabner, ICCF 2012.
3.e3. White usually plays this
move when he wishes to develop
his pieces according to the follow­
ing plan: i.d3, 0-0, b3, i.b2 ,
lLibd2 . Still, this i s good when the
opponent is playing the Queen's
Gambit after the move 3 . . . e7-e6.
Here, the adherents to the Slav
Defence can simply reply 3 . . . ig4
Later, depending on the cir­
cumstances, Black can play either
lLibd7, advancing later e7-eS, or
e7-e6 and c7-cS, obtaining an ex­
cellent position.
About 4.c4 c6 - see Chapters
8-9.
4.i.d3 lLibd7 s.h3 (S.lLibd2 es
- see 4.lLibd2) S . . . hf3 6.Wfxf3 eS=
4.lLibd2 lLibd7 s.h3 (S.i.d3 es
6.dxeS lLixeS - see Chapter 23, 2 .
e 3 lLif6 3.id3 lLic6 4.lLif3 i.g4; S.c4
e6 6.i.e2 c6 or S.ie2 e6 6.0-0
i.d6 7.c4 c6 - see Chapter 8 , vari­
ation A) S . . . i.hS 6.c4 e6 7.Wfb3.
This queen-sortie is usually not
dangerous for Black when he can
protect his b7-pawn with his rook.
7 .. J'�b8 8.cxdS exdS 9.i.d3 c6 10.
1.d4 d5 2. lLij3 lLif6
Wfc2 ig6. Black exchanges the
powerful enemy bishop. 11.hg6
hxg6= Kovacevic - Timman, Bu­
gojno 1984.
4.h3 hf3 He cannot save his
.
bishop from an exchange anyway
(After 4 . . . ihS, White has g2-g4
and lLieS.). S.Wfxf3 e6 6.c4 cS (6 . . .
i.b4+ ! ? 7.i.d2 hd2 + 8.lLixd2
0-0= Bayer - Nisipeanu, Austria
2017) 7.cxdS WfxdS 8.ibS+ lLibd7!?
This move is stronger than the de­
velopment of this knight to c6, be­
cause it does not allow the dou­
bling of his pawns. 9. WfxdS lLixdS
10.lLic3 lLJSb6 11.0-0 �c8 12.dxcS
hc5 13.�dl <tle7= White has the
two-bishop advantage indeed,
nevertheless the endgame seems
approximately equal.
4.i.e2. Now, White does not
need to be afraid of lLibd7 and e7-
eS, but here his bishop would not
be so active as on the d3-square.
4 . . . e6 S.0-0 cS 6.b3 lLic6 7.ib2
(7.lLibd2 cxd4 8.exd4 ie7 9.ib2
0-0 - see 7.ib2) 7 . . . cxd4
8.exd4. Now, White's bishop
would be restricted by his own
pawn on d4. (The move 8.lLixd4
leads to simplifications 8 . . . he2
9.Wfxe2 lLixd4 10 .hd4 ie7 11.lLid2
291
Chapter 25
0-0= Arencibia Rodriguez - Ro­
driguez Cespedes, Matanzas 1997.)
8 . . . i.e7 9.ttJbd2 0-0 10.ttJeS (10.
c4 l�k8 11. h3 i.hS 12.a3 ttJe4oo, fol­
lowed by f7-f5, i.f6, Gelashvili -
Skembris, Kavala 2 0 04.) 10 . . .
i.xe2 11.Wfxe2 gcs 12 .c4 dxc4 13.
ttJxc6 gxc6 14.bxc4, Smyslov -
Sveshnikov, Tilburg 199 2 . Here,
Black could have played 14 . . .
'\WaS ! ? , without being afraid o f the
enemy pawn-break in the centre.
15.dS exdS 16.'\Wxe7 '\Wxd2 17.i.xf6
gxf6 18.gadl '\Wc2 = Black equalis­
es with this precise move. The
point is that White cannot create
a passed pawn 19.cxdS?, because
Black has the powerful argument
against that - 19 . . . gxf2 ! +
3 • . • ttJe4
Now, White must choose a
square for the retreat of his bish­
op: A) 4 ..th4 or B) 4.i.f4.
4.h4?! cs 5.e3 '\Wb6 6.'\Wcl ttJc6
7.c3, Tiumentsev - Fominyh,
Tomsk 2003, 7 . . . eS ! ?+
A) 4.i.h4 c5
292
Here, White suddenly has dif­
ficulties to hold his centre.
5.dxc5
This move is practically forced.
White's attempt to hold the
centre leads to problems for him.
For example: 5.c3 cxd4 6.ttJxd4
(6.cxd4 W/b6 7.'\Wb3 W/xb3 8.axb3
e6 9.ttJfd2 i.b4+ Jaunooby - Sum­
merscale, Sheffield 2011. Black
maintains a stable advantage
thanks to his superior pawn­
structure.) 6 . . . W/b6+. It is bad for
White to play here 7.'\Wb3? ! , be­
cause of 7 . . . '\Wh6 ! His bishop on
h4 is hanging and Black is threat­
ening the rather unpleasant pen­
etration to the cl-square. White
loses material. 8.ttJf3 Wfcl+ 9.Wi'dl
'\Wxb2 10.ttJbd2 ttJc6-+ Kaiser -
Friedrich, Germany 2008.
5.e3 Wfb6 6.'\Wcl ? ! (Here, White
should probably choose the least
of evils : 6.ttJc3 ttJxc3 7.bxc3 Wfb2 ,
M.Hansen - LB.Hansen, Den­
mark 1995, 8 .@d2 ! ttJc6 9.Wi'bl
'\Wxbl 10.gxbl c4+ White's queen­
side pawn-structure has been

weakened, but he still preserves
chances of a successful defence.)
6 . . . cxd4 7.exd4 g5 !
This is the point! After this
surprising strike with Black's g­
pawn, White's seemingly reliable
defence is broken.
Following 8.ixg5 llJxg5 9.llJxg5
i.h6 10.f4 �xd4, Black restores
the material balance and pre­
serves all the advantages of his
position. 11.i.e2 llJc6+ Legall -
Prats Rodriguez, Cannes 2000.
8 .llJxg5 �h6 9.�f4 f6 10.llJh3
hh3 ll.�xh6 hh6 12 .gxh3 i.cl.
This penetration of Black's bishop
inside the enemy camp is another
proof of his advantage. 13.a3 hb2
14.l:!a2 hd4+ Luther - Liepold,
Grossenseebach 2012.
8.i.g3 �6 9.c3 g4 10.llJfd2
i.f5 11.a4, Gouloutis - Iskos, Nea
Moudania 2016, 11 . . . 0-0+ Black
has a superior development, while
White's knight has come under a
rather unpleasant pin.
5 • • • c!Dc6
(diagram)
6.e3
Following 6.c3 llJxc5 7.e3, Pos­
cente - Oesterle, Forli 1990, it
l.d4 d5 2. llJ.f3 llJf6 3. i.g5 llJe4
seems very good for Black to
choose here 7 . . . f6 ! ?+, preparing
the occupation of the centre with
e7-e5 and restricting the bishop
on f4 and the knight on f3.
6.llJbd2 llJxc5 7.c3 (7.e3 g6 -
see 5.e3; 7.llJb3 llJxb3 8.axb3,
Gulko - Timoscenko, Volgodonsk
1981, 8 .. .f6 ! ?+) 7 .. .f6 8.b4 llJe4 9.
llJxe4 dxe4. After this move there
arises a complicated endgame.
10 .�xd8+ llJxd8 11.llJd2 , Tang­
born - Kallai, Wiesbaden 1991,
11 ... gS ! ? Black frees the g7-square
for his bishop with tempo. 12 .i.g3
i.g7 13.e3 f5oo ·
6 • • • g6 7.c!Dbd2
About 7.i.e2 i.g7 8.c3 llJxc5 9.
llJbd2 0-0 - see 7.llJbd2 .
7 • • • c!Dxc5
After White has traded a flank
pawn for a central pawn, it is only
he who might have problems.
8.c!Db3
8.c3 i.g7 9.llJb3 (9 .i.e2 0-0 -
see 8.i.e2) 9 . . . llJe4 - see 8.llJb3.
293
Chapter 25
8.i.e2 i.g7 9.c3 0-0 10.0-0 as
11.lll d 4, Nikolac - Pinter, Rome
1984, 11 . . . h6 ! ?oo
8 • . • i.g7
9.c3
9.lll xcS. The exchange of the
knights would not solve White's
problems. 9 ... ti'aS+ 10.c3 �xcS 11.
i.e2 (11.�b3 0-0 12.l:!dl e6 13.
!e2 , Kharitonov - Yakovich,
Leeuwarden 1997, 13 ... lll aS ! ? Black
is preparing the transfer of his
knight to the c4-square. 14.�bS.
After the trade of the queens,
Black will manage to win a tempo
for his pawn-offensive on the
queenside. 14 . . . �xbS lS.hbS a6
16.i.e2 bS+) 11 . . . 0-0 12.0-0 i.g4
13.h3 hf3 14.hf3 e6. White's
two-bishop advantage is irrele­
vant here. Black has a clear-cut
plan for queenside actions : b7-bS,
a7-aS, lll e S-c4. 1S.i.e2 bS 16.l:!cl
lll eS 17.i.g3 l:!fc8 18.l:!el lll c4 19.
�c2 aS+ Lambrecht - Boehnke,
ICCF 2012.
9 • • • lll e4 10.i.d3
294
10.lll fd2 lll d 6+ Sergeev - Boro­
vikov, Ordzhonikidze 2001.
10.i.e2 0-0 11.0-0 h6 1 2 .lll fd2
lll d 6+ K.Mueller - Lukacs, Aus­
tria 2001. Black has more space,
so he should better avoid the ex­
change of pieces.
10 . . . 0-0
11.J.xe4
White doubles the enemy
pawns, but presents his opponent
with the two-bishop advantage.
After 11.0-0, Black obtains an
excellent position by advancing
his pawns in the centre and on the
kingside. 11 . . . h6 12 .l:!el gS 13.i.g3
es 14.lll fd2 lll xg3 1S.hxg3 e4 16.
i.e2 fS 17.lll fl i.e6+ Feldis - Duch­
ardt, ICCF 2016.
11 . . . dxe4 12. ti'xd8 Ihd8
13.tLlfd4 f6 !?
Black's position i s very good
anyway, so he does not need to
sacrifice a pawn at all: 13 . . . lll eS
14.he7 l:!e8 1S.i.a3 lll d3+ 16.©e2

b6� Timman - Shirov, Wijk aan
Zee 2001.
14.0-0-0 tlie5+ Gavrijski -
Brewer, ICCF 2009.
B) 4 .if4 c5
• op on g3 has been isolated from
5.e3
S.c3 cxd4 6.cxd4 tlic6 7.tlic3 f6
- see Chapter 4, 6 . .igS tlie4 7 . .if4
f6.
White only worsens his pawn­
structure with the line: S.tlic3
tlixc3 6.bxc3 tlic6 7.e3, Ntoutsou­
lis - Tepelenis, Porto Rio 2 0 14,
7 ... WiaS ! ? 8.Wd2 c4+
After S.tlibd2 , it seems very
good for Black to continue with
S ... cxd4! ? 6.tlixd4 tlid7 7.tlixe4 dxe4
8.tlib3 eS+ Kiratzopoulos - Niko­
laidis, Leros 2009.
S.dxcS. White gives up the
centre with this move and ends up
in an inferior position. S . . . tlic6
6.tlibd2 (6.e3 f6 ! ?+ Hulak - So-
1.d4 d5 2. tlif3 tlif6 3 . .ig5 tlie4
sonko, Hoogovens 1987) 6 . . . tlixcS
7.e3 (7.c3 g6 8 . .ie3, Miladinovic,
- Boudriga, Monastir 2012, 8 . . .
eS ! ?+) 7 . . .f6 8 . .ig3 e S . White's
main problem is not so much that
Black has occupied the centre
with his pawns, but that his bish­
the actions for long. In order to
activate it White must at first re­
move his knight from f3 and then
the pawn from f2 , but all this
would take too much time. 9.c3
ifs 10 .tlih4 .ie6 11.tlib3 Wb6 12.
ie2 tlie4+ Weggen - Lipecki,
ICCF 2 0 14.
5 ••• Wb6
6.Vcl
After 6.tlibd2 , White does not
obtain sufficient compensation
for the pawn. 6 . . . tlixd2 7.Wxd2
(7.tlixd2 cxd4 8.exd4 Vxb2+ Son­
ntag - Lazarev, Uebach 1996) 7 . . .
'%\'xb2 8 .l'k l c4. Black lags i n de­
velopment, so he should better
prevent the opening of the posi­
tion. 9.ie2 e6 10.0-0, Berend -
Kappler, Dijon 1994, 10 . . . .ie7 ! ?+
29S
Chapter 25
Following 6.lll c3 Was 7 . .hb8
lll xc3 8.Wfd2 :Sxb8, no matter how
White would recapture on c3, his
queenside pawn-structure would
be compromised. 9.Wixc3 (9.bxc3
c4+) 9 . . . Wlxc3+ 10.bxc3 c4. Black
occupies space on the queenside.
11.:Sbl e6 12 .e4 bS 13 . .ie2 :Sb6 14.
exdS exdS lS.0-0 .ie7 16.lll eS hS
17 ..if3 .ie6 18.:Sfel gS+ Kmiecik -
Lubas, ICCF 2010. Black has the
two-bishop advantage and more
space.
6 • • • lll c6 7.c3 f6
He is preparing g7-gS, fol­
lowed by h7-hS.
8.�fd2
White reduces his control over
the centre.
8.lll b d2 gS 9 . .ig3 (Giving up
the centre with 9.dxcS does not
facilitate White's task. 9 . . . llJxcS
10 . .ig3 .ifS+ Jacquin - Schuster,
ICCF 2009.) 9 . . . hS. The threat hS­
h4 is very unpleasant for White.
10.lll xe4 (After 10.dxcS WxcS 11.
Wc2 h4 12 . .ic7, Jacquin - Joao,
296
ICCF 2008, 12 . . . eS ! ?+, White's
bishop might get lost inside the
enemy camp.) 10 . . . dxe4 11.dxcS
WxcS 12.lll d 2 h4 13 . .ic7 WfS 14.h3
eS. Now, White must compromise
irrevocably his queenside pawn­
structure in order not to lose a
piece. 1S.b4 Wd7 16.bS Wlxc7 17.
bxc6 Wxc6+ Lagergren - Langer,
ICCF 2 01S.
8 • • • e5
Now, Black would not need to
play g7-gS.
9.�xe4
9 • • • cxd4
He can afford this intermedi­
ate exchange, because White is
incapable of removing simultane­
ously both his pieces away from
the attack.
10.cxd4 exf4 11.�ec3 .ie6
12.�a4 (12.lll d 2 .id6+) 12 • • .
Yfa5+ 13.�ac3 .id6 1 4 .ie2 •
0-0+ Baciak - Pecka, ICCF 2 0 1S.
This is an open position and
Black's advantage is doubtless
thanks to his powerful bishop­
pair.
Chapter 2 6 1.d4 d 5 2 .lll f'J lll f6 3.g3

5.h3 .ih5 6.tlJe5 (6. 0-0 e6 -

see 5.0-0) 6 . . . tlJbd7 7.f4 e6oo Kar­
g! - Kilgus, Austria 1999.

5.tlJbd2 e6 6.0-0 (6.c4 tlJbd7

- see Chapter 6, variation B) 6 . . .
.ie7 - see 5.0-0.

5.tlJe5 .ifS 6.c4 e6, or 6.0-0 e6

7.c4 tlJbd7 - see Chapter 6, varia­
tion A.
White wishes at first to fian­
chetto his bishop and to evacuate 5 . • . e6
his king away from the centre.
The defect of this plan is that
White's bishop on g2 will be se­
verely restricted by the pawn on
d5.
3 . . . c6 4 . .ig2

About 4.tlJbd2 .ig4 5 . .ig2 e6 -

see 4 . .ig2 .

4.c4 .ig4 - see Chapter 6.

4 . . . .ig4 5.0-0 6.�bd2

White wishes to play l"iel and
5.c3 e6 6.0-0 .ie7 - see 5.0-0. to follow that with e4.

5.c4 e6 - see Chapter 6, varia- 6.c3 .ie7 7.tlJbd2 tlJbd7 - see

tion B. 6.tlJbd2.

297
Chapter 26
6.c4 llibd7 - see Chapter 6,
variation B.
The inclusion of the moves
6.h3 i.hS does not promise much
to White. 7.c4 i.e7. Black is not in
a hurry to develop his queen's
knight, because after the exchange
on dS he will manage to develop it
to a more active position - the c6-
square. 8.llic3 (8.llieS llibd7 9 .
llic3 0-0 10.g4 i.g6 - see 8.llic3 ;
8.cxdS i.xf3 9.i.xf3 cxdS 10.�b3
llic6 11.e3 0-0 12 .i.d2 �d7 13.l'!cl
l'!fc8 = Vachier Lagrave - Dreev,
Doha 2 016. White has the two­
bishop advantage indeed, but the
position is rather closed, so
Black's prospects are not worse.)
8 . . . 0-0
9 .�b3 �b6 10.i.f4 (10.llieS,
Lorparizangeneh - Sargissian,
Rasht 2017, 10 . . . llifd7= , Black is
preparing the exchange of the
powerful enemy knight.) 10 ... llibd7
11.cS �xb3 12.axb3, Margvelash­
vili - Mulyar, Rockville 2 0 14, 12 . . .
a6 ! ? = White can obtain a n advan­
tage in similar endgames only if
he manages to advance b3-b4-b5.
Here, this pawn-break is impos­
sible, so the prospects of both
298
sides can be evaluated as approxi­
mately equal.
9 .g4. White wishes to obtain
the two-bishop advantage. Still,
after 9 . . . i.g6 10.llieS llibd7 11.
llixg6 hxg6, it will not be easy to
break Black's defence, because he
has no weaknesses in his camp.
12.�d3 (12 .b3 i.b4 13.�c2 �e7oo
Vitiugov - Tomashevsky, Sochi
2 0 16) 12 . . . dxc4 13.�xc4, Hari­
krishna - Adams, Shenzhen 2 0 17.
Here, Black's simplest road to
equality would be 13 . . . llib6 ! ? 14.
�d3 �c7 15.e4 cS. He attacks im­
mediately the enemy pawn-cen­
tre. 16.dxcS i.xcS=
Following 6.b3 llibd7, there
arises most often a transfer to a
variation which we will analyse in
volume two after the move-order
l.c4 c6 2 .llif3 dS 3.b3 llif6 4.g3
i.g4 5.i.g2 e6 6.0-0 llibd7.
About 7.c4 i.e7 - see Chapter
6, variation B2.
7.i.b2 i.d6 8.c4 0-0, or 8.
llibd2 0-0 9 .c4 �e7 - see volume
2.
7.llibd2 i.d6 8.c4 0 - 0 9 .i.b2
�e7, or 8 .i.b2 0-0 9 .c4 �e7, or 9.
llieS i.t5 10.c4 �e7 - see volume 2 .
 l.d4 d5 2. t:fJj3 t:fJf6 3.g3 c6 4. !ig2 fig4 5. 0 - 0 e6
6.t:fJeS ihS 7.c4 (7.t:fJc3 t:fJbd7=
Vajda - Pacheco, Istanbul 2012).
White has changed a bit the move­
order (at first t:fJeS and then c4)
and has managed to avoid the
variation with 6 . . . .ifS, which has
been analysed in the part about
the Slav Defence. This does not
change the evaluation of the posi­
tion as approximately equal. 7 . . .
fie7 8.t:fJc3 t:fJbd7
9.h3 0-0 10.g4 .ig6 - see 6.h3.
9 . .if4 t:fJxeS 10.dxeS t:fJd7oo
9.cxdS t:fJxeS ! This is a power-
ful intermediate move. Before
capturing on dS, Black doubles
the enemy pawns on the e-file.
10.dxeS t:fJxdS 11.�c2 0-0 12 .h3
VNaS 13.t:fJxdS cxdS. Black is al­
ready a little better thanks to his
superior pawn-structure. 14.g4
.ig6 1S.V9b3, Romanishin - Kar­
pov, Moscow 1983, 1S . . . �c7 ! ?+
After 9.�b3, Black can simply
capture 9 . . . t:fJxeS ! ? , ignoring the
threat against his pawn on b7.
10.dxeS t:fJd7 11.V9xb7 0-0 12.
�xc6, Thompson - Purtell, ICCF
2009, 12 .. J�c8 ! ? 13.�a4 gxc4 14.
�xa7 t:fJxeSiii Black's pieces are
very active and White's extra
pawn is practically irrelevant.
6 • • • .ie7
7,ge1
7.c3 t:fJbd7 8.ge1 0-0 - see
7.gel.
7.c4 t:fJbd7 - see Chapter 6,
variation B.
Following 7.t:fJes fibs 8.h3 t:fJbd7
9.g4 fig6, White obtains the two­
bishop advantage indeed, but his
kingside pawn-structure is com­
promised. 10.t:fJxg6 hxg6 11.c4 �c7
12 .e3 t:fJe4= This move has be­
come possible, because the pawn
on h3 is not sufficiently protected,
Tocchioni - Godena, Arvier 2008.
7.b3 t:fJbd7 8 . .ib2 (8.c4 0-0 -
see Chapter 6, variation B2)
8 ... 0-0 9.gel (9.c4 as - see Chap­
ter 6, variation B2) 9 . . . .ihS 10 .e4
dxe4 11.t:fJxe4 t:fJxe4 12.gxe4, K.
Larsen - Zhao, Copenhagen
2 007, 12 . . . V9c7 ! ? =
7 ... 0-0 8.e4
8 .c3 t:fJbd7 9.V9b3 (9.e4 fihS -
299
Chapter 26
see 8.e4) 9 ... gbs 10 .e4 ihS - see
8.e4.
8 • • • c!Libd7
This is an important moment.
Black should not exchange on e4,
because this would activate the
bishop on g2. After that Black
would hardly manage to organise
counterplay. He should better
wait for e4-eS, after which he can
begin active actions on the queen­
side (c6-cS). As a rule, the ex­
change on e4 in this variation is
done by Black only after White
plays c2-c4, because then Black
can create pressure against the
enemy d4-pawn on the semi-open
d-file.
9.c3
This is a useful move. White
also follows a waiting tactic and
postpones the move e4-eS.
9.c4 i.b4 ! ? 10.cxdS cxdS 11.eS
c!Lie4 12 .ge3, Lagunow - Velicka,
Berlin 1999, 12 .. .f6 ! ? 13.li)xe4 dxe4
14.gxe4 li)xeS=
300
9.h3 i.hS 10.eS (10 .c3 i.g6 -
see 9.c3) 10 . . . li)eS - see 9.es.
9.eS. This move has the draw­
back that White shows immedi­
ately his intentions and thus frees
Black's hands for active actions
on the queenside. 9 . . . li)eS 10 .h3
(10.c3 i.hS - see 9.c3 ; 10.li)b3
li)c7 11.h3 i.hS - see 10.h3) 10 . . .
i.hS
About ll.c3 li)c7 - see 9.c3.
After 11.li)b3, White's knight
may come under attack when
Black advances aS-a4. ll . . . li)c7 12.
i.e3 h6 13.li)cl. White is not wait­
ing for Black's pawn to come to a4
and transfers his knight immedi­
ately to f4. This manoeuvre takes
too much time, though . . . 13 . . . i.g6
14.li)d3 as 1S.a4 li)a6 16.li)f4 i.h7
17.c3 cSoo Rudykh - Adamko,
ICCF 2009.
11.li)fl cs 12 .g4 ig6 13.li)g3
gcs 14.c3, Wojtkiewicz - Waitz­
kin, Philadelphia 1997, 14 . . . h6 ! ?oo,
Black prepares in advance a
square for his bishop to retreat to
and also prevents g4-gS, followed
by h4. White can hardly organise
an effective attack on the king-
 1.d4 d5 2. liJ.f3 liJf6 3.g3 c6 4. i.g2 i.g4 5. 0 - 0 e6
side. On the other hand, Black's
counterplay on the opposite side
of the board may turn out to be
very dangerous.
9 . . . .ih5
Black's last move may be use­
ful, because he can play later i.g6
and after e4-e5 centralise his
knight to the e4-square, instead
of retreating to the edge of the
board.
10.e5
Or 10.Wfe2, Heberla - Jarmu­
la, Warsaw 2 0 17, 10 . . . a5 ! ?+:t
In similar positions, after 10.
exd5, Black usually captures
10 . . . cxd5= Mirzoev - Krivoshey,
Salon 2008. Later, he organises
the pawn-minority attack: b7-b5-
b4.
10.h4 cS 11.e5 liJe8 12 .liJfl cxd4
13.cxd4 l:k8oo Predojevic - Diz­
dar, Dresden 2 007.
10.h3 i.g6. Black exploits his
opponent's rather timid play and
increases his pressure against the
e4-pawn.
11.exd5 cxd5 12.liJe5 (12.liJfl
h6=) 12 . . . liJxe5 13.dxe5 liJd7 14.
liJb3. Without this move, Black
would play liJc5-d3. 14 . . . Wfc7 15.f4
gfd8 16.i.e3, Sajtar - Szilagyi,
Warsaw 1956, 16 . . . a5 ! ? 17.a4 liJcS=
ll.e5 liJe4 1 2 .liJxe4 .ixe4 13.
liJh2 i.g6. Black's light-squared
bishop seems more active than its
white counterpart, so Black is re­
luctant to exchange it. 14.h4 h6
15.i.fl cS. Black prepares the
opening of the c-file after which
his bishop on g6 will help his piec­
es to penetrate to the c2-square.
16.i.d3. White trades the power­
ful enemy bishop. On the other
hand he has a space advantage, so
the exchanges of pieces are in fa­
vour of Black. 16 . . ..ixd3 17.Wfxd3
cxd4 18.cxd4 Wfa5 19.ie3 gfc8oo
Anand - Mcshane, London 2013.
10.a4. White prevents in ad­
vance Black's pawn-minority at­
tack. 10 . . . i.g6 ll.exd5 (ll.e5 liJe4
12.liJfl cSoo Garcia Palermo -
Godena, Martina Franca 2 008)
11 ... cxd5 12.a5 (Following 12.Wfb3
Wfc7 13.liJfl, Black should better
301
Chapter 26
continue here with 13 ... .id6, pre­
venting .if4. 14.h4 h6 15.lll e 3
llie4+ Drabke - Sax, Dresden
2002.) 12 . . . a6 13.lll eS llixe5 14.
dxe5 llid7 15.lll b 3 l:k8= Berkovich
- Girl, Groningen 2009.
10 .'\Wb3. This queen-sortie
does not promise anything to
White. 10 . . J'�b8
There arise simplifications af­
ter 11.c4 llixe4 1 2 .lll xe4 dxe4 13.
�xe4 '\Wb6 14.'\Wxb6 llixb6 15.b3
�bd8= Pigusov - V.Georgiev, Me­
rida 2002.
After ll.a4 .ig6 12.exdS cxd5
13.aS '\Wc7 14.llih4, Black can play
14 . . . i.d3 ! ? , preventing the ex­
change of his bishop for the ene­
my knight. 15 . .ifl i.xfl. Now, he
does not object to the trade of the
bishops, because then White is
left with a "bad" bishop. 16.lll xfl
.id6= Hausrath - Avrukh, Biel
2008. All White's pawns are
placed "against the rules" - that is
on squares with the same colour
as his bishop. The position still re­
mains approximately equal, but
White must play very accurately;
otherwise, he might end up in an
inferior position.
302
11.exdS cxdS 12.lll fl (12.c4 �e8=
Lenic - Pavasovic, Rijeka 2 0 05)
12 ... bS. Black's play is much easi­
er in similar positions. He has an
easy plan - to organise the pawn­
minority attack, while White can
hardly find an object to attack.
13 . .if4 �b6 14.a3 llie4 15.llieS
llixe5 16.heS lll d 6. Now, White
must either allow the move llic4,
or present his opponent with the
two-bishop advantage. 17.hd6
hd6 18.lll d 2 a5+ Wigger -
Sasikiran, Dresden 2005.
10 . . . llie8
11.lll b3
White must remove his knight
from d2 in order to develop his
bishop on cl. He can do that ei­
ther to b3, or to fl. Both these re­
treats of the knight have defects.
In the first case, the knight will be
attacked after a7-a5-a4, while in
the second case the knight on fl
will not prevent c6-c5.
About 11.h3 llic7 12.lll fl (12.
lll b 3 a5 - see 11.lll b 3) 12 . . .cS - see
11.lll fl..
 l.d4 dS 2. &iJj3 &iJf6 3.g3 c6 4. j,g2 j,g4 5. 0 - 0 e6
11.&iJfl &iJc7 12 .h3 cS 13.g4 j,g6
14.&iJg3 &iJa6 ! ? Black's knight is
misplaced on c7, so he wishes to
transfer it to c6, via the b8-square,
and it will be much more active
there. 15.a3 l:k8 16.j,fl &iJab8oo
Petkov - Mascaro March, Can
Picafort 2 013.
11 ••• c!LJc7
12 .le3
• 14 . . . .lg4!? Black has no time
12.h3, Palecek - Arslanov, Par­
dubice 2010, 12 . . . aS ! ? 13.a4 &iJa6oo
After 12.j,f4, Black can ad­
vance his rook-pawn just like in
the main line. 12 . . . aS 13.&iJcl, Ga­
buzyan - K.Georgiev, Padova
2 014, he removes immediately his
knight against the possible attack
a5-a4. (13 .�d2 a4 14.&iJcl cS= Za­
tonskih - Mikhalevski, Schaum­
burg 2 0 06) 13 . . . bS ! ? Black is not
in a hurry to play c6-c5 and wish­
es at first to advance b5-b4, at­
tacking the c3-square. Black's
task in similar positions is to or­
ganise active actions on the
queenside with the idea to deflect
the enemy forces from the attack
against his own king. 14.&iJd3 b4oo
12 •.• as 13.c!LJcl
Or 13.a4, Rombaldoni - Sedi­
na, Acqui Terme 2011, 13 . . .
&iJa6 ! ? = , followed by c6-c5.
13 ••• a4 14.c!LJd3
to play j,g6, h6, j,h7, because af­
ter &iJf4, White will exchange his
bishop. Therefore, Black is trying
to play trickier . . . 15.h3 .if5 16.
c!LJf4 h6 17 .ifl c!LJb6. Black pre­
•
pares the transfer of his knight to
c4 and it will exert from there
powerful pressure against White's
queenside. 18 .id3 c!LJc4. Black is
•
not afraid of the exchange on fS,
because after 19 .ixf'S exfS his
•
knight will gain access to the e6-
square. 20. �c2 �c8 21.h4 c!LJe6
22.c!LJg2 c!LJxe3. Without this move,
Black cannot play g7-g6. 23.gxe3
g6 24.h5 .lg5 2s.ge2 @g7oo
Klewe - Salzmann, ICCF 2016.
White can hardly break his oppo­
nent's defence on the kingside.
303
Index of Variations

Chapter 1 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
3.e3 lll f6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Chapter 2 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.�c3 �f6

various . . . . . . . . . . . .15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A) 4.i.gS de . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
B) 4.e3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Chapter 3 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2
A) 4.i.f4 lll c 6 . . .
. . . . . . . . 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B) 4.lll c3 lll f6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4

Chapter 4 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cd cd 4.ltlt'3 ltlf6

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.lll c3 lll c 6 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
6.i.f4 ifs 7.e3 e6 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
A) 8.i.d3 .ixd3 9.�xd3 i.e7 . . . . . . . . 38
B) 8.lll eS lll xeS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
C) 8.Wb3 i.b4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
D) 8.i.b5 lll d 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Chapter 5 1.d4 d5 2 .c4 c6 3.lll t'3 ltlf6

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ . . ........ . . ........ . . . . . . 54
4.lll b d2 i.fS various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
A) 5.e3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
B) 5.g3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Chapter 6 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.�t'3 ltlf6 4.g3 i.g4

A) 5.lll e5 i.f5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
B) 5.i.g2 e6 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
6.0-0 lll b d7 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Bl) 7.Wb3 Wb6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
B2) 7.b3 i.e7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

Chapter 7 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.ltlt'3 ltlf6 4.�c2 dxc4

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
A) 5.e4 b5 . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 77
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B) 5.�xc4 i.f5 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

304
 Index of Variations

Bl) 6.g3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
B2) 6.tll c3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

Chapter 8 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tll :f3 tll f6 4.e3 .tg4

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
A) S.tll b d2 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
B) S.cxdS i.xf3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 0 0
C) S.�b3 �b6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lOS
D) S.tll c3 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

Chapter 9 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tll :f3 c!LJf6 4.e3 .tg4 5.h3 .th5
various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 0
A 6.tll b d2 e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 0
B) 6.g4 i.g6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 3
C) 6.cxdS cxdS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 6
D) 6.tll c3 e6 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 8
Dl) 7.�b3 �b6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 9
D2) 7.g4 i.g6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3

Chapter 1 0 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c 6 3.tll :f3 c!LJf6 4.c!LJc3 e6

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A) S.�b3 dxc4 6.�xc4 bS 7.�b3 tll b d7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

B) 7.�d3 i.b7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

Chapter 11 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.c!LJ:f3 c!LJf6 4.tll c3 e6 5.g3 dxc4

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
A) 6.i.g2 tll b d7 7.a4 i.b4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
B) 7.0-0 bS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

Chapter 12 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.c!LJ:f3 c!LJf6 4.c!LJc3 e6 5.cxd5 exd5

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
A) 6.i.gS h6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lSO
B) 6.�c2 g6 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1S4
7.igS ie7 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lSS
Bl) 8.e3 ifs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1S6
B2) 8.e4 dxe4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163

Chapter 13 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tll :f3 c!LJf6 4.c!LJc3 e6 5.e3 a6

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
A) 6.h3 tll b d7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
B) 6.i.d2 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 7 1
C) 6.a3 tll b d7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

30S
Index of Variations

Chapter 14 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tb:f3 tbf6 4.tbc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6 .ie2 •

dxc4 7.a4 c5 8.bxc4 tbc6 9.0-0 .ie7

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
A) 10.dxcS �xdl 11.gxdl hes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
B) 10 .�e2 cxd4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183

Chapter 15 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tb:f3 tbf6 4.tbc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6 . .id3

dxc4 7 .ixc4 b5
•

A) 8 . .ie2 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
B) 8 . .ib3 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
C) 8 . .id3 c5 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
Cl) 9.a4 b4 10.tLle4 ttJbd7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
C2) 9.0-0 .ib7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200

Chapter 16 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tb:f3 tbf6 4.tbc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.c5

tbbd7
various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20S
7.b4 b6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207

Chapter 17 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tb:f3 tbf6 4.tbc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.b3

.ib4 7 .id2 tbbd7
•

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
8 . .id3 0-0 9.0-0 .id6 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
A) 10 .gcl h6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
B) 10 .e4 dxc4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
C) 10 .�c2 h6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1S

Chapter 18 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tb:f3 tbf6 4.tbc3 e6 5.e3 a6 6.�c2

c5
various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 19
7.cxdS exdS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222

Chapter 19 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tb:f3 tbf6 4.tbc3 e6 5 . .ig5 dxc4

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
6.a4 .ib4 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
7.e4 �as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233

Chapter 20 1.d4 d5 2 .c4 c6 3.tb:f3 tbf6 4.tbc3 e6 5 . .ig5 dxc4 6.

e4 b5
various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
A) 7.eS h6 8 . .ih4 gS 9.exf6 gxh4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
B) 9 . .ig3 tLldS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240

306
 Index of Variations

Chapter 21 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.�fJ �f6 4.�c3 e6 5 ..igS dxc4 6.

e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8 .ih4 g5 9.�xg5 hxg5 10.hgS �bd7 11.exf6 .ib7
•

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12 .g3 \Wb6 13 .ig2 0-0-0 14.Wfg4 cs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247

14.0-0 cS lS.dxcS tll xcS . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
lS.dS b4 16.gbl \Wa6 . . . . . 248

Chapter 22 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.�fJ �f6 4.�c3 e6 5 .igS dxc4 •

6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8 .ih4 g5 9.�xg5 hxg5 10.hgS �bd7 11.exf6

•

.ib7 12 .g3 Wfb6 13 .ig2 0-0-0 14.0-0 c5 15.dS b4 16.�a4 \Wb5

•

17.dxe6 .ixg2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2S4

17.a3 lll b 8 18.axb4 cxb4 19 .\We2 i.xdS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2SS
A) 19.i.e3 i.xdS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2SS
B) 19.Wfd4 lll c 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2S7

Chapter 23 1.d4 d5
various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
A) 2 .c3 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
B) 2 .lll c3 c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
C) 2 .e3 lll f6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272
D) 2 .e4 dxe4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274
E) 2 .i.gS h6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277

Chapter 24 1.d4 dS
A) 2 .if4 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
B) 2 .lll f3 lll f6 3.if4 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283

Chapter 25 1.d4 dS 2 . �fJ �f6

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
A) 3.igS tll e4 4.i.h4 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
B) 4.if4 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29S

Chapter 26 1.d4 dS 2.�fJ �f6 3.g3 c6 4 . .ig2 .ig4

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
S . 0-0 e6 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
6.lll b d2 ie7 . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

307
 Other CHESS STARS Books

Repertoire books :
Opening for White Acc. to Kramnik 1 . lll £J by A. Khalifman
Volume 3: English, 2 0 1 1
Volume 4 : Maroczy, Modern, Trifunovic, 2 0 1 1
Opening fo r White According t o Anand 1 . e 4 b y A . Khalifman
Volume 13: The Sicilian, English Attack, 2 0 1 0
Volume 14: The Sicilian, Najdorf, 2 0 1 2
Opening fo r Black According t o Karpov b y A. Khalifman

Current theory and practice series:

The French Defence Reloaded by Nikita Vitiugov, 2 0 1 2
The Open Games F o r Black b y Igor Lysyj a n d Roman Ovetchkin, 2 0 1 2
The Berlin Defence b y Igor Lysyj a n d Roman Ovetchkin, 2 0 1 2
Dreev v s . the Benoni b y Alexey Dreev, 2 0 13
The lfltimate Anti-Griinfeld. A Siimisch Repertoire by Dmitry Svetushkin, 2 0 13
The Modern Anti-Sicilian by Sergei Soloviov, 2 0 14
Leningrad Dutch. An Active Repertoire Against 1.d4, 1.c4, 1.lll f3 by Malaniuk, 2014
Anti-Spanish. The Cozio Defence by Alexey Dreev, 2 0 14
A Practical White Repertoire with l.d4 and 2 . c4 by Alexei Kornev
Volume 1: The Queen's Gambit, 2 013
Volume 2: The King's Fianchetto Defences, 2 0 13
Volume 3: The Nimzo-Indian and Other Defences, 2 0 14
The Modern Vienna Game by Roman Ovetchkin and Sergei Soloviov, 2015
Rossolimo and Friends. A Complete Repertoire vs. the Sicilian by Alexei
Komev, 2 0 15
The Queen's Gambit Accepted by A. Delchev and S. Semkov, 2 0 15
The Safest Scandinavian by Vassilios Kotronias, 2 0 16
The Spanish Main Road. A Black Repertoire by Evgeniy Solozhenkin, 2 0 16
�f4 in the Queen's Gambit and the Exchange Slav by Alexey Dreev, 2016
Attacking the English/Reti by A. Delchev and S . Semkov, 2016
A Practical Black Repertoire with li:lf6, g6, d6 by Alexei Kornev
Volume 1: English, Pirc, Reti and Other Defences, 2 0 16
Volume 2: The King's Indian Defence, 2 0 16
Attacking the Flexible Sicilian by V. Kotronias and Semko Semkov, 2 017
The Hedgehog vs the English/Reti by Igor Lysyj and Roman Ovetchkin, 2 0 17
More details at www . chess-stars.com

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