Scheveningen [B80−B90]

Written by GM John Fedorowicz, GM Tony Kosten & IM Richard Palliser

Last updated Monday, 6 June 2011

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9zpp+-+pzpp0 9-+-zppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9+-sN-+-+-0 9PzPP+-zPPzP0 9tR-vLQmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

he Scheveningen system has fallen out of favor in recent times. It has a solid look

to it but I think people got tired of dealing with the Keres Attack beginning with 6

g4! This appears to be the main threat to this variation.

Against other 6th moves Black's setup is very sound as his 'small center' e6 and d6

offers good chances for counterplay.

T

All the game references highlighted in blue have been annotated and can be downloaded in PGN form using the PGN Games Archive on www.chesspublishing.com.

Contents

1 e4 c5 2 ¤f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ¤xd4 ¤f6 5 ¤c3 e6

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9zpp+-+pzpp0 9-+-zppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9+-sN-+-+-0 9PzPP+-zPPzP0 9tR-vLQmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

6 ¥e3

6 g4 Keres Attack [B81] 6 f4 ¤c6 7 ¥e3 ¥e7 8 £f3 £c7 9 ¥d3 a6 10 ¤b3 B82 same as Benko System−vs the Sozin

[B82] 6 ¥e2 Scheveningen Be2 mainline [B85] 6 ¥c4 a6 (6... ¤c6 7 ¥e3 ¥e7 8 £e2 0-0 9 0-0-0 Sozin − Velimirovic Attack [B89]) ¥b3 b5 Sozin vs Najdorf [B87](7...¤bd7 Najdorf Sozin 7...Nbd7 [B86])

6 g3 6 g3 [B80]

6...a6

6...¤c6 English Attack− Intro [B80]

7 g4

2

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9+p+-+pzpp0 9p+-zppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+P+0 9+-sN-vL-+-0 9PzPP+-zP-zP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

7 f3 b5 8 £d2 (8 g4 English Attack− ...e6, White plays 8 g4 [B80 & B90]) 8...¤bd7

English Attack− ...e6, White plays 8 Qd2 [B80 & B90] 7 ¥e2 £c7 8 a3 b5 Najdorf/Scheveningen Mix [B84]

7...e5 8 ¤f5 g6 9 g5 gxf5 10 exf5

The Perenyi piece sac [B81]

Press F4 or click on 'Bookmarks' (F5 in older versions) to toggle the Navigation Pane,

then click on the appropriate bookmark to go straight to that section.

Ctrl + 2 resizes the page to fit the window.

All rights reserved Chess Publishing Ltd

3

6 g3 [B80]

Last updated: 14/03/09 by Richard Palliser

1 e4 c5 2 ¤f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ¤xd4 ¤f6 5 ¤c3 e6 6 g3

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9zpp+-+pzpp0 9-+-zppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9+-sN-+-zP-0 9PzPP+-zP-zP0 9tR-vLQmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

6...¤c6

6...a6 7 ¥g2 £c7?! 8 0-0 ¤c6 9 ¦e1 (9 h3 ¥e7 Kallio,H−Cramling,P/Stockholm SWE 1999,

9 ¥e3 ¥e7 10 ¤xc6! Ivanov,A−Fedorowicz,J/Chicago 1991) 9...¦b8 (9...¥e7 10 ¤xc6

bxc6 11 e5 dxe5 12 ¦xe5 0-0 13 ¥f4) 10 ¤xc6 bxc6 11 e5! dxe5 12 ¦xe5 Black's structure gives White good long term prospects. 12...¥d6 (12...£xe5 13 ¥f4 £a5 14 ¥xb8) 13 ¦e2 (13 ¦e1 0-0 14 b3 Leko,P−Movsesian,S/Las Vegas USA 1999.) 13...0-0 14 b3 ¦d8 (14...c5 15 ¥g5 ¥b7 16 ¥xb7 ¦xb7 17 £d3! Black has serious difficulties, Ivanov,A−DeFirmian,N/Salt Lake City USA 1999.) 15 £e1 e5 16 ¥g5!? Kovalevskaya,E−Vasilevich,T/New Delhi IND 2000.

7 ¥g2 ¥d7

Black should be ready for ...¥xc6.

8 0-0

4

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-wqkvl-tr0 9zpp+l+pzpp0 9-+nzppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9+-sN-+-zP-0 9PzPP+-zPLzP0 9tR-vLQ+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

8...a6

8...¥e7 9 ¤db5 Rowson,J−Arakhamia,K/Edinburgh SCO 1999.

9 a4

A popular choice, but White has plenty of alternatives: 9 ¤xc6 ¥xc6 Qin Kanying−Ioseliani,N/Shanghai CHN 2001. 9 ¥e3 ¥e7 Nielsen,M−De Firmian,N/Copenhagen DEN 2004 10 a4!?

9...¥e7

9...¤xd4 is worse, Lobron,E−Balster,S/Gelsenkirchen GER 2001.

10 ¤b3 0-0 11 a5

White is binding the b6−square, but this shouldn't promise him any advantage against a well−prepared opponent, Baklan,V−Movsesian,S/European Ch., Plovdiv (rapid play−off) 2008.

5

English Attack − Intro [B80]

Last updated: 14/06/10 by Richard Palliser

1 e4 c5 2 ¤f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ¤xd4 ¤f6 5 ¤c3 e6 6 ¥e3 ¤c6

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwqkvl-tr0 9zpp+-+pzpp0 9-+nzppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9+-sN-vL-+-0 9PzPP+-zPPzP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

From what I've seen in the English attack the lines where Black plays ...¤c6 look inferior.

In many cases it blocks the play on the c−file. 6...a6 7 £f3!? The English GM is very good at getting off the beaten track. Here he mixes

¥e3 and £f3. I've seen 6 ¥g5 e6 7 £f3, but I'm not sure about Adams' choice. (7 f3 is the mainline, and transposes to other chapters) 7...¤bd7 8 ¥e2 h5!? Black puts an end to g4 ideas, but at what cost? (I prefer 8...¤e5 9 £h3 £c7 10 g4 ¤c4 looks ok for Black) 9 ¥g5 It's logical to take advantage of Black's ...h5. 9...£a5 10 ¥d2 (10 h4!?

¤e5 11 £e3 b5 looks reasonable) 10...£b6 11 ¤b3 £c7 12 a4!? I like White's game now. The position resembles a Scheveningen where Black has played...h5 for no apparent reason. 12...b6 13 ¥g5 ¥b7 14 ¦d1 ¥e7 15 £e3 ¤c5 16 ¤d2 ¦d8 17 0-0 ¤g4?! (17...d5!? Looks normal. Black can free his position.) 18 ¥xg4 hxg4 19 ¥xe7 d5 20 £g3 £xg3 21 fxg3 ¢xe7 22 exd5 exd5 23 ¦de1+ ¢f8 24 b4² Adams,M−Kasparov,G/Linares ESP 2002.

7 f3

7 f4 a6 8 £f3 £a5!? this active idea may well turn out to be a fairly easy approach for Black against White's aggressive line, Ivanchuk,V−Movsesian,S/Nanjing 2008.

7...¥e7

6

7...a6 8 g4 h6?! This mixture of ideas leaves Black in big difficulties, see Paehtz,E−Sarbok,T/Gausdal Classics GM 2003.

7...£c7 8 £d2 a6 9 0-0-0 ¤e5 10 g4 h6 11 h4 looks like an ...h6 Richter Rauzer where White is up some tempi. 11...b5 12 ¦g1 g6 13 ¥d3 b4 14 ¤ce2 d5 15 exd5 ¤xd5 16 f4 ¤xd3+ 17 £xd3 ¤xe3 18 £xe3± Movsesian,S−Kozul,Z/Batumi GEO 1999, just look at the development.

7...d5!? Not a bad idea by any means. The resulting position resembles a ...£b6 line in the Rauser. 8 ¥b5 (8 exd5!? ¤xd5 9 ¤xd5 exd5 10 ¥d3 Saves white a tempo, but black is ok.) 8...¥d7 9 exd5 ¤xd5 It's better to capture with the knight as it takes the steam out of g4, g5. (9...exd5 lost quickly in Stellwagen,D−Ljubojevic,L/Youth v Veterans, Amsterdam 2007) 10 ¤xd5 exd5 11 £e2 ¥e7 12 0-0 0-0 13 ¥d3 ¦e8 14 £f2 ¥h4 15 g3 ¥f6 16 c3 ¤e5 17 ¦ad1 ¤xd3 18 ¦xd3 £c7 19 ¦fd1 ¦e7 20 ¤b3 Mkrtchian,L−Milliet,S, Istanbul TUR 2003 White's loose king position offsets the isolated d5 pawn.

8 £d2 a6

8...0-0 9 g4! More accurate than (9 0-0-0 d5!? After this Black gets a decent position, 10 exd5 (10 £e1!? Keeping the tension puts some pressure on Black to find the proper plan, Lastin,A−Kiik,K/St Petersburg RUS 1999, 10 ¥e2!? is rapidly becoming fashionable, see Navara,D−Rasik,V/Czech Championship, Ostrava 2010) 10...¤xd5 11 ¤xd5 £xd5 12 c4 (12 ¤b3 This gives White no edge. 12...£xd2+ (12...£e5!?

Kaufman,L−Kacheishvili,G/Connecticut USA 2002) 13 ¦xd2 ¦d8 14 ¦xd8+ ¤xd8 15 ¥d3 ¥d7 16 ¦d1 ¥e8 17 ¥e4 ¤c6 18 ¥xc6 bxc6 19 ¦d4 Grafl,F−Boros,D/Budapest HUN 2003 ) 12...£d6 13 ¤xc6 (13 ¢b1 ¤xd4 14 £xd4 £xd4 15 ¥xd4

¦d8 16 ¥e2 b6 17 ¢c2 ¥b7 18 a3 ¥c6 19 ¥e3 e5 20 ¦xd8+ ¦xd8= Vorobiov,E−Aseev,K/St Petersburg RUS 1999, more or less.) 13...£xc6 14 ¥d3 e5 15 £c2 ¢h8 16 ¥e4 £a6 17 ¢b1 ¥e6 18 ¥d5 ¦ac8 19 b3 ¥c5= Ye Jiangchuan−Zvjaginsev,V/Belfort FRA 1999.) 9...d5!? (9...¤xd4 10 ¥xd4 d5 11 e5 ¤d7 12 0-0-0 f6 13 exf6 ¥xf6 14 £e1 ¤b8 15 ¥c5

¦f7 16 ¤xd5! exd5 17 ¥c4 ¥d7 18 ¥xd5± Lastin,A−Sokolov,A/Ohrid MKD 2001.) 10 g5 ¤h5 11 exd5 (11 ¦g1 dxe4 12 ¤xe4 e5 13 ¤xc6 bxc6 14 ¥c4 Fontaine,R−Sokolov,A/Val d'Isere FRA 2004) 11...¤xd4 12 £xd4 ¥xg5 13 0-0-0 exd5 14 ¦g1 ¥xe3+ 15 £xe3 ¥e6 16 £h6+− Gaponenko,I−Socko,B/Polanica Zdroj POL 2000 − it is mate or h5 drops.

9 0-0-0

9 g4 £c7 10 0-0-0 Smeets,J−Werle,J/Groningen NED 2002.

9...0-0 10 g4

Anything that takes the starch out of the ...d5 breaks should be played.

10...¤xd4

7

10...¤d7 11 h4 the main approach (11 £g2 Phillips,R−Spraggett,K/Port Erin 2007)

11...¤de5 12 £g2 (12 £f2 Kovacevic,A−Stevic,H/Jahorina BIH 2003) 12...b5 13 ¤xc6 ¤xc6 14 g5 £a5 15 ¢b1 b4 16 ¤e2 e5 This is Black's only chance for counterplay. 17 f4 f5 18 gxf6 ¥xf6 19 f5 £c7 20 ¤g3 ¤d4 21 ¤h5 ¥b7 22 ¤xf6+ ¦xf6 23 ¥xd4 exd4 24 ¦xd4± Morozevich,A−Short,N/Sarajevo 1999.

11 ¥xd4

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwq-trk+0 9+p+-vlpzpp0 9p+-zppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-vLP+P+0 9+-sN-+P+-0 9PzPPwQ-+-zP0 9+-mKR+L+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

11 £xd4 b5 12 h4 (12 g5 ¤d7 Socko,B−Stevic,H/Plovdiv BUL 2003) 12...¦b8 13 ¢b1 b4 14

¤e2 a5 15 ¤g3 a4 16 g5 ¤d7 17 f4 b3 18 cxb3 axb3 19 a3 Black's queenside play hasn't led to anything, Kritz,L−Sasikiran,K/Tripoli LBA 2004.

11...b5

11...¤d7 12 ¢b1 b5 13 h4 b4 14 ¤e2 a5 Bojic,Z−Cebalo,M/Zurich SUI 1999.

12 g5 ¤d7 13 h4

13 ¦g1!? worked well in Apicella,M−Sokolov,A/Aix les Bains FRA 2003.

13...¥b7

The most popular, but there are others: 13...¦b8 14 ¢b1 ¤e5 15 £g2 ¥d7 16 f4 ¤c6 17 ¥e3 b4 18 ¤e2 a5 19 h5 White is much

faster. 19...a4 20 g6 b3 21 cxb3 axb3 22 a3 £c7 23 gxh7+ ¢xh7 24 ¤c3± Anand,V−Ljubojevic,L/Monaco MNC 2000.

13...£a5 14 ¢b1 b4 15 ¤e2 e5 16 ¥e3 ¤c5 17 c4?! violating the rule that says "never weaken the side you're being attacked on", Jenni,F−Babula,V/Plovdiv BUL 2003

13...b4 14 ¤e2 a5 15 f4?! giving Black a target and loosening the pawn structure. I realize White wants to play h5, but Be3 is indicated, Aaberg,A−Nielsen,P/Malmo SWE 2003.

13...£c7 14 ¢b1 b4 Cheparinov,I−Ivanov,J/Elgoibar ESP 2004.

8

14 g6!?

In many cases this speeds up White's attack. Here I'm not so sure. 14 ¦g1 ¦c8 15 a3 d5 16 exd5 e5 17 d6 exd4 18 £xd4 ¥xf3 19 ¦d3 ¤c5 20 dxe7 ¤xd3+ 21

£xd3 £xe7 22 £xf3 £e1+ 23 ¤d1 ¦fd8 24 ¦g2 £xh4 25 ¥d3± Krush,I−Lesiege,A/Montreal CAN 2001.

14 ¢b1 ¦c8 15 g6!? (15 ¥h3! is better, preparing this, or 15 a3! ) 15...fxg6! 16 ¥h3 e5 17 h5!? (17 ¥xd7 £xd7 18 ¥xe5 ¦xf3 Crosa,M−Milos,G/Sao Paulo BRA 2004) 17...gxh5!? 18 ¥e6+ with a dangerous attack in Lavrik,D−Vorobiov,E/Zvenigorod 2008.

14...b4?!

Black had to call White's bluff. 14...fxg6! 15 h5 g5 16 h6 g6 17 £g2 (17 ¥h3 e5 18 ¥e3 ¦xf3∓ White's attack has stalled.)

17...b4 18 ¤e2 £a5 19 ¢b1 ¤e5∓

15 gxh7+ ¢h8 16 ¤d5??

Any human−type chess move gives White the better game. 16 ¤e2 £a5 17 ¢b1 e5 18 ¥e3 ¤f6 19 ¤g3± White is much faster.

16...exd5 17 ¥xg7+?

Why not I guess.

17...¢xg7 18 ¦g1+ ¢xh7 19 ¥h3 f5-+

Vazquez,R−Abreu,A/Holguin City CUB 2002.

9

English Attack − ...e6, White plays 8 g4

[B80]

Last updated: 14/06/10 by Richard Palliser

1 e4 c5 2 ¤f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ¤xd4 ¤f6 5 ¤c3 e6 6 ¥e3

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9zpp+-+pzpp0 9-+-zppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9+-sN-vL-+-0 9PzPP+-zPPzP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

6...a6

The 'Najdorf move' is the most popular.

7 f3

Standard, bolstering the e−pawn.

7...b5

7...¤bd7 8 g4 h6 9 h4 b5 10 ¦g1 ¤b6 11 g5 ¤fd7 Black is already in trouble, Wedberg,T−Akesson,R/Orebro SWE 2000.

7...h5!? Hracek,Z−Georgiev,K/Herceg Novi YUG 2001.

8 g4

White immediately gains space on the kingside, and threatens to displace the black knight.

10

8...h6!?

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9+-+-+pzp-0 9p+-zppsn-zp0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+P+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzPP+-+-zP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

As of May 2003 this move has seen a resurgence. Black can sacrifice a pawn for king

safety and attacking chances. 8...¤fd7 This regrouping plan has been doing well. 9 £d2 ¤b6 10 0-0-0 (10 a4!? Black

shouldn't have too many problems after this idea, 10...bxa4 11 ¤xa4 ¤xa4 12 ¦xa4 ¥e7 13 ¥e2 (13 g5 0-0 14 h4 ¥d7?! this appears to be where Black went astray, Topalov,V−Anand,V/Wijk aan Zee NED 2004) 13...0-0 14 0-0 ¥b7 15 ¦fa1 ¤d7 16 ¤b3 ¦b8 17 ¥a7 ¦c8 18 ¤a5 ¥a8 19 ¥xa6 ¤e5 20 ¥e2 f5! Anand,V−Kasparov,G/Kopavogur ISL 2000.) 10...¤8d7 (10...¥b7 11 ¤b3!? This idea is very strong. White's ¤b3 to a5 maneuver keeps Black from organizing decent counterplay. If White wants to play this ¤b3 idea this is the only moment.

a) 11 ¥g5 £c8 12 ¥d3 ¤8d7 13 ¢b1 b4 14 ¤ce2 d5 15 exd5 ¤xd5 16 ¦he1 ¥c5 17 ¥f5 ¥xd4 18 ¤xd4 ¤c5 19 ¥e4 0-0 20 ¥xd5 ¥xd5 21 £xb4 A perfectly safe pawn−snatch, Nedev,T−Psakhis,L/Pula CRO 2000.

b) 11 ¥d3 ¤8d7 12 ¢b1 ¦c8 13 g5 ¤e5 (13...b4?! Gunnarsson,J−Vazquez,R/Havana CUB 2002) 14 f4 ¤bc4 (14...¤ec4 Stellwagen,D−Doggers,P/Amsterdam NED 2004.) 15 £e2 ¤xd3 16 cxd3 b4 17 ¤a4 £a5 18 dxc4 ¥xe4+ 19 ¤c2 £xa4-+ De la Riva Aguado,O−Simutowe,A/Istanbul TUR 2000.

c) 11 £f2 ¤8d7 transposes to the '8 Qd2' chapter 11...¤8d7 12 ¤a5 Black's Q−side gets discombobulated. 12...£c7 (12...¦b8 13 ¥f4 ¤c8 14

¤xb7 ¦xb7 15 ¢b1 ¥e7 16 h4 0-0 17 ¤e2 ¤cb6 18 ¤d4² Blehm,P−Kalod,R/Paget Parish BER 2001.) 13 ¢b1!? (13 ¥f4 ¤c8 14 ¤e2 ¦b8 15 ¤xb7 ¦xb7 16 h4 Fedorov,A−Ermenkov,E/Ohrid MKD 2001.) 13...¥e7 14 h4 0-0 15 ¥g5! Forcing a crucial weakness, Anand,V−Ponomariov,R/Mainz GER 2002. ) 11 ¤cxb5!? Shirov's idea, (11 £f2 ¥b7 transposes to the '8 Qd2' chapter) 11...axb5 12 ¤xb5 ¥a6

a) 12...¦xa2!? Very sharp and a tad optimistic, but we must consider it 13 ¢b1 ¦xb2+ Forced, but White should be able to defend, (13...¦a8? 14 £c3!+− ¤c7 is an unstoppable threat.) 14 ¢xb2 White's king is wide open, but Black doesn't have the development to take advantage. 14...d5 15 ¥f4 ¥c5 16 ¤d6+ ¢f8 17 ¤xc8 £xc8 18 ¦a1÷ Fantin,L−Fedorchuk,S/Sautron FRA 2002 (18 £a5!? White's king is open, but Black is underdeveloped.)

11

b) 12...¥b7?! This isn't very challenging. 13 ¤xd6+ ¥xd6 14 £xd6 ¤c8 15 £b4 ¥c6 16 ¢b1 £f6 17 ¥e2 ¦b8 18 £d4 0-0 19 £xf6 ¤xf6 20 b3± White's pawns are solid and black's pieces are uncoordinated, Potkin−Deepan 41st World Junior Goa 2002.

c) 12...¤e5!? I (Fed) showed this to GM Larry Christiansen and we agreed that this could be a direct refutation of this piece sacrifice. 13 £c3 This is the move that usually causes Black problems. 13...¤a4 14 £c7 (14 ¤c7+?! ¢e7 15 £xe5 £xc7 This is a very forcing continuation and it looks just about winning for Black. As the books like to say: "practical tests are needed", Yakovich,J−Komiagina,M/Serpukhov RUS 2003.) 14...¥d7 15 b3 £f6! which looks like good home preparation − Becerra Rivero,J−Novikov,I/San Diego USA 2004.

d) 12...d5?! 13 £c3! Many times this move is a killer in this line, Vasquez,R−Jaime Montalvan,L/Malaga ESP 2003

13 ¤xd6+ ¥xd6 14 £xd6 ¤c4 15 ¥xc4 ¥xc4 16 £d4 (16 a3!? e5 (16...¥e2?! 17 ¦d2 ¥xf3 18

¦f1 ¥xe4 19 £d4 ¤f6 20 ¦xf6 £xf6 21 £xe4± Farakhov,R−Panarin,M, Essentuki RUS 2003 White's 3 queenside passers are gonna spell big trouble.) 17 ¦d2 ¥e6 18 ¦hd1 g5 19 £c6 ¦c8 20 £b5 ¦g8 21 ¦d3 ¦g6 22 a4 £c7 23 ¦c3 ¥c4 24 ¦xc4+− Atalik,S−Wojtkiewicz,A/San Francisco USA 2002) 16...¦xa2!? critical, (16...¥e2 17

£xg7 £f6 18 £xf6 ¤xf6 19 ¦de1 ¥xf3 20 ¦hf1 ¥xg4 21 ¥d4! ¦xa2 22 ¢b1 ¦a8 23 ¥xf6+− was Shirov−Kir Georgiev Dubai 2002) 17 ¢b1 ¦a8 (17...£c8!?

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+q+k+-tr0 9+-+n+pzpp0 9-+-+p+-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+lwQP+P+0 9+-+-vLP+-0 9rzPP+-+-zP0 9+K+R+-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

Who's attacking who here?) 18 £xg7 (18 £xc4!? £a5 19 c3 ¤e5 20 £b4² This has been a Fritz

production!) 18...¦f8 19 ¥c5 £c7 20 ¥d6 £b6 21 £c3 Almasi,Z−Berkes,F/Heviz HUN 2003, After this Fritz is happier than a clam!

8...b4?! 9 ¤ce2 h6 10 c4! I really like this move here. Black is faced with an important decision. If he captures on the c3 the position is open with development lagging. If he doesn't capture he runs the risk of a locked queenside.

a) 10 ¤g3 e5!? Probably Black's sharpest attempt. Playing to breakout with a fast ...d5. White should try to take advantage of his lead in development. 11 ¤df5 ¥e6 12 g5 hxg5 13 ¥xg5 ¤c6 14 f4?! White should hurry 0-0-0 before he gets stuck in the middle, Gonzalez,Y−Vera,R/Las Tunas CUB 2001.

b) 10 ¥g2 e5 11 ¤f5 g6 12 ¤fg3 ¥e6 13 h3 h5 (13...d5 14 g5 hxg5 15 ¥xg5²) 14 g5 h4 15 gxf6 hxg3 16 £d2 ¤c6 17 f4 Arizmendi Martinez,J−Cvitan,O/Biel SUI 2001.

12

10...bxc3 If Black doesn't capture on c3 white's queenside looks untouchable. (10...¤bd7!? Since 10...bc3 didn't work, Black needed an alternative. 11 h4 £c7 12 ¥h3 I don't like the looks of this. White wants to play g5 etc., but this looks strange. The e6 point is easily defended. (12 ¦g1!? Keeps options open, but White should deal with the king safety issue.) 12...e5 13 ¤f5 g6 14 ¤fg3 ¤c5 15 £d2 ¥e6 16 b3 a5 17 ¥g2 ¦b8 18 0-0 ¤fd7 Naiditsch,A−Kulaots,K, Istanbul TUR 2003) 11 ¤xc3 The position is open and White has more development. Black's 8...b4?! was the cause of Black's misery. 11...e5 12 ¤b3 ¥e6 13 £d2 ¤bd7 14 h4 ¤b6 15 0-0-0 White kings heads to safety while Black's king is about to suffer. 15...¤fd7 16 ¢b1 a5 17 ¤d5 a4 18 ¤xb6 axb3 (18...¤xb6 19 ¥b5+ ¤d7 20 ¤c1± White has a plethora of good ideas.) 19 ¤xa8 bxa2+ 20 ¢a1 £xa8 21 ¦c1+− As long as ...¤b3+ doesn't happen White wins, Lutz,C−Berkes,F/Budapest HUN 2003

9 £d2

9 h4 ¥b7 10 £d2 ¤bd7 11 ¦g1 Gombac,J−Sax,G/Ljubljana SLO 2001.

9...¤bd7

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwqkvl-tr0 9+-+n+pzp-0 9p+-zppsn-zp0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+P+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzPPwQ-+-zP0 9tR-+-mKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

9...b4!? is Black's latest try, 10 ¤a4 (10 ¤ce2 e5 11 ¤f5 d5 12 g5 hxg5 13 ¥xg5 ¥xf5 14 exf5 £a5

15 ¥xf6 gxf6 16 0-0-0 ¥h6 17 f4 ¤c6 18 £xd5 £xd5 19 ¦xd5 exf4³ Goloshchapov,A−Sakaev,K, Dubai UAE 2003 Black activity and possession of the e5 point give him a good game.) 10...¤bd7 11 0-0-0 ¤e5! Topalov's strong innovation,

a) 11...£a5?! Black is mixing systems, a sure recipe for disaster. 12 b3 d5 13 e5! ¤g8 Black is already busted. 14 f4 £c7 15 ¢b1 g5 16 f5 ¤xe5 17 fxe6 fxe6 18 h4+− Leko,P−Movsesian,S/Budapest HUN 2003 White has an unbelievable lead in development and a massive initiative.

b) 11...d5!? 12 exd5 (12 ¥f4? after this the position is probably already lost for White! 12...£a5 13 b3 dxe4! and White was crushed, Leko,P−Gelfand,B/Monte Carlo MNC 2006) 12...¤xd5 13 ¥c4!? White has a huge lead in development and with black's king in the middle this is not recommended, 13...¥b7 14 ¦he1 ¤e5 15 ¥b3 £c7 16 ¥f2 ¥e7 17 ¢b1 ¤g6 18 ¥g3 £a5 19 ¤xe6! very often in this system White explodes Black's position with a sacrifice on e6. 19...fxe6 20 ¦xe6± Almasi,Z−

13

Movsesian,S, Budapest HUN 2003 We see this often in this variation... Black's development lags while his king comes under siege.

12 b3 (12 £xb4!? ¥d7 13 ¤b3? and White was already lost, Kramnik,V−Topalov,V/Wijk aan Zee NED 2005.) 12...¥d7 (12...d5!? 13 ¥f4 ¥d6 Anand,V−Topalov,V/Linares ESP 2005.) 13 ¤b2 (13 f4!? is a bold new try, 13...¤exg4 14 ¥g2 e5 15 ¤f5 ¥xa4 16 bxa4 ¤xe3

17 ¤xe3 Vallejo Pons,F−Sandipan,C/Gibraltar 2010) 13...d5 14 ¥f4 ¤xf3!? 15 ¤xf3 ¤xe4 with sharp play, Anand,V−Topalov,V/Sofia BUL 2005.

10 0-0-0 ¥b7

10...b4!? is a decent alternative, 11 ¤ce2 £c7!? 12 h4 (12 ¥g2!? Svetushkin,D−Wang Hao/Bosna Open, Sarajevo 2010) 12...d5 13 ¤f4!? (13 ¥h3 Karjakin,S−Ivanchuk,V/European Club Cup, Kallithea 2008.) 13...e5 14 ¤fe6! with wild play, Morozevich,A−Vachier Lagrave,M/Biel 2009.

10...¤e5!? is a fairly rare move, 11 £e1!? Carlsen,M−Ponomariov,R/Tal Memorial, Moscow 2009.

11 h4

Continuing the kingside demonstration. 11 ¥d3 is solid, 11...¤e5 (11...£a5 12 ¢b1 ¤e5 13 a3 £c7 14 ¦he1 ¥e7 15 h4 ¤fd7 16 g5 hxg5 17

hxg5 g6 Black's king has problems finding a home, Morozevich,A−Lutz,C/Frankfurt GER 1999.) 12 ¦he1 ¦c8 (12...£a5 13 ¤b3 £c7 14 £f2 ¤xd3+ 15 ¦xd3 Black keeps White occupied by piling on c2. 15...¤d7 16 ¦d2 ¥e7 17 a3 ¦c8= Fedorov,A−Gelfand,B/Polanica Zdroj POL 2000., 12...b4 13 ¤ce2 d5 is unclear, De la Riva Aguado,O−Caruana,F/Dresden Olympiad 2008) 13 ¢b1 ¤fd7 14 f4 ¤c4 15 £e2 (15

¥xc4 ¦xc4 16 f5 e5 17 ¤f3 £a8! 18 b3 ¦xe4 19 ¤xe4 ¥xe4 20 ¤g1 ¥e7 Black has very good play for the exchange. He can roll the center or hit c2. 21 ¥f2 0-0³ Korneev,O−Topalov,V/Cala Galdana ESP 1999.) 15...¤xe3 16 £xe3 £b6 (16...g5 17 e5! This prevents Black from controlling the dark squares, Morozevich,A−Van Wely,L/Wijk aan Zee NED 2000.) 17 ¤d5 (17 f5 e5 18 ¤b3 £xe3 If Black forces a queen trade it takes care of White's attacking chances, Anand,V−Van Wely,L/Wijk aan Zee NED 2000., 17 e5 dxe5 18 fxe5 ¥c5 19 ¤ce2 £c7 20 £f4 ¥d5³ Kreiman,B−Fedorowicz,J/Linares ESP 2000.) 17...£c5 (17...exd5 18 exd5+ ¢d8 19 ¥xb5! A temporary double piece sac. Black's position is uncoordinated and white will have a mass of pawns, Timman,J−Van Wely,L/Wijk aan Zee NED 2000.) 18 b4 £a7 19 h4 e5 20 fxe5 dxe5 21 ¤f5 £xe3 22 ¤fxe3 g6 Black's bishop pair compensates for d5 control, Fedorov,A−Van Wely,L/Polanica Zdroj POL 2000.

11 ¢b1 ¤e5 12 h4 ¤fd7 13 ¦g1 ¦c8 14 g5 Feigin,M−Van Wely,L/Hengelo NED 2000.

11...b4

14

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-wqkvl-tr0 9+l+n+pzp-0 9p+-zppsn-zp0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-zp-sNP+PzP0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzPPwQ-+-+0 9+-mKR+L+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

12 ¤a4

12 ¤b1 d5 13 ¥h3 g5!? Kasparov's solution to the g5 push, Anand−Kasparov/Linares 1999.

12...£a5!?

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+kvl-tr0 9+l+n+pzp-0 9p+-zppsn-zp0 9wq-+-+-+-0 9Nzp-sNP+PzP0 9+-+-vLP+-0 9PzPPwQ-+-+0 9+-mKR+L+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

This leads to razor sharp situations. 12...d5 13 ¥h3 g5 14 ¥g2 (14 hxg5 hxg5 15 e5!? ¤xe5 16 ¥xg5 ¦g8 17 ¤b6 ¤c4? Kasparov,G−

Wojtkiewicz,A/Kopavogur ISL 2000.) 14...gxh4 15 ¦xh4 dxe4 16 g5 Kasparov,G−Van Wely,L/Wijk aan Zee NED 2000.

13 b3 ¤c5!

This is a very important positional pawn sacrifice in order to weaken White's pawns defending the king on the queenside.

13...¥e7 14 ¢b1 ¤c5 15 ¤xc5 dxc5 16 ¤e2 ¦d8 (16...£c7 17 ¥g2 ¤d7 18 g5 Nijboer,F−Janssen,R/Rotterdam NED 2000.) 17 £c1 ¤d7 18 ¤g3 ¤e5 19 ¥e2 Kasparov,G−Van Wely,L/Internet 2000.

15

14 a3 ¤xa4

14...¦c8 15 £xb4 £c7 16 ¢b1 (16 ¤xc5 dxc5 17 £a4+ ¤d7 Ernst,T−Agrest,E/Orebro SWE 2000.) 16...¤cd7 17 £d2 d5 18 ¥h3 dxe4 19 g5 Anand,V−Khalifman,A/Shenyang CHN 2000.

15 axb4 £c7 16 bxa4

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+kvl-tr0 9+lwq-+pzp-0 9p+-zppsn-zp0 9+-+-+-+-0 9PzP-sNP+PzP0 9+-+-vLP+-0 9-+PwQ-+-+0 9+-mKR+L+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

16...d5!

Opening the a3−f8 diagonal to highlight the weakness of b4. 16...¤d7!? With black's king relatively safe for the moment and white's looking airy black

has good comp. 17 ¥h3?! This piece was useful defending the queenside. (17 ¢b1!?

Safety first should be the order of the day.) 17...d5 18 g5 £c4 19 £d3 £xb4 20 £b3 hxg5 21 hxg5 ¤e5³ Kosteniuk,A−Ehlvest,J/Connecticut USA 2003 − Black has better piece coordination and structure.

17 e5 ¤d7 18 f4 ¤b6 19 f5

19 a5 ¤c4 20 £c3 £e7! Topalov,V−Kasparov,G/Linares 1999.

19...¤c4

19...¤xa4 20 fxe6 0-0-0 Topalov,V−Gelfand,B/Monaco MNC 2000.

20 ¥xc4 £xc4

20...dxc4 21 fxe6 (21 c3!?) 21...c3 22 exf7+ ¢xf7 23 ¦hf1+ (23 £f2+!?) 23...¢g8 24 £d3 ¥xb4 Mrdja,M−Vera,R/Saint Vincent ITA 2000.

21 fxe6 ¥xb4 22 exf7+ ¢xf7 23 £d3

Tiviakov,S−Danailov,S/Wijk aan Zee NED 2000.

16

English Attack − ...e6, White plays 8 Qd2

[B80]

Last updated: 10/05/10 by Richard Palliser

1 e4 c5 2 ¤f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ¤xd4 ¤f6 5 ¤c3 e6 6 ¥e3 a6

This position can also arise from a Najdorf move−order, and some of the games will be found classified under [B90].

7 f3 b5 8 £d2

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9+-+-+pzpp0 9p+-zppsn-+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzPPwQ-+PzP0 9tR-+-mKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

White defers the kingside pawn advances, preferring to bring his king to safety.

8...¤bd7

Otherwise: 8...¥b7 9 g4 ¤fd7 (9...£c7?! The queen is misplaced at this time. 10 0-0-0 ¥e7 11 h4 ¤fd7 12

¥d3 ¤b6 13 £f2 ¤8d7 14 ¢b1 ¤c5 15 ¥xb5+ axb5 16 ¤dxb5 £c6 17 ¤xd6+ ¥xd6 18 ¦xd6!

£xd6 19 ¥xc5± Nakamura,H−Patterson,R/Philadelphia USA 2001.) 10 h4 (10 g5 ¤b6

11 ¥d3 ¤8d7 12 f4?! This gives Black a target on e4. 12...¦c8 13 0-0-0 ¤c5 14 a3 ¥e7 15

¢b1 ¤xd3 16 cxd3 d5 17 ¦c1 dxe4 18 ¤xe4 ¤c4³ Pegoraro,N−Aleksic,N/Lido Estensi ITA 2000., 10 a4!? is interesting, Lupulescu,C−Ionica,I/Bucharest ROM 2004)

10...¤b6 11 ¤b3 b4 12 ¤d1 ¤c6 13 £f2 ¤d7 14 g5 ¥e7 15 f4 h6?! Black's play is on the other side. 16 ¦g1 hxg5 17 hxg5 ¤c5 18 ¥xc5 dxc5 19 ¥d3 e5 20 ¤e3 exf4

17

21 £xf4 £d6 22 £f1 ¦h5 23 ¤c4 £e6 24 0-0-0 ¤e5 25 ¥e2 ¦xg5 26 ¤d6+± Solak,D−Bruzon,L/Yerevan ARM 2000.

8...¥e7 Black's mix of ...¥e7 and ...b5 makes White's life easy, 9 0-0-0 (9 g4 ¥b7 10 g5

Kernazhitsky,L−Magony,T/Szombathely HUN 2003) 9...0-0 (9...¥b7 10 g4 ¤fd7 11 g5

Georgiev,V−Georgiev,K/Tsarevo BUL 2001) 10 ¢b1 £c7 11 g4 ¤c6 Black has no choice but to do this, but he is worse, Mahia,G−Rodriguez,S/Buenos Aires ARG 2003.

8...b4!? is Topalov's idea, 9 ¤a4 (9 ¤ce2 is nothing much, Anand,V−Gelfand,B/Turin ITA 2006) 9...¤bd7 10 c4!

a) 10 0-0-0 £a5! (10...d5 11 exd5! ¤xd5 12 ¥c4 ¥b7! (12...¤7f6 was risky for Black in Leko,P−Topalov,V/San Luis ARG 2005) 13 ¥g5!? (13 ¦he1 ¥e7) 13...£c7 14 £e2 ¤e5 15 ¥b3 was unclear in Motylev,A−Bologan,V/Moscow RUS 2006.) 11 b3 ¥b7 12 a3!? £c7! 13 axb4 d5! regains the pawn, with good play, 14 c4 (14 b5?!

Brodsky,M−Cheparinov,I/Hoogeveen NED 2006) 14...dxe4 Ponomariov,R−Grischuk,A/Sochi RUS 2006.

b) 10 ¥c4!? is Leko,P−Gelfand,B/Dortmund GER 2006 10...bxc3 11 ¤xc3 ¥b7 12 ¥e2 d5 13 exd5 ¤xd5 14 ¤xd5 ¥xd5 15 0-0 (15 ¦c1!? the latest

try, see Smirnov,P−Hillarp Persson,T/European Championship, Dresden 2007)

15...£b8 16 ¤f5 £e5 17 ¤g3 ¥b4 18 £xb4 £xe3+ 19 ¢h1 ¦b8 20 £a4! when practice and the Kasparov DVD show that Black still has some problems to solve, (whereas 20 £d6 didn't lead anywhere for White in Anand,V−Topalov,V/Sofia BUL 2006.)

8...h5?! 9 a4! critical, (9 0-0-0 ¥b7 10 ¥d3 ¤bd7 Van Haastert,E−Nakamura,H/Gibtelecom Masters, Gibraltar 2008.) 9...bxa4 10 ¤xa4 ¤bd7 11 £c3! Sutovsky,E−Kamsky,G/Baku (rapid) 2010.

9 0-0-0

White can also molest the f6−knight: 9 g4 ¤b6 making room for the f6−knight, 10 a4 White attacks on both sides! (10 g5 ¤fd7 11

0-0-0 ¥b7 12 ¥d3 ¤e5 13 ¢b1 ¤bc4 14 £e2 ¤xe3 15 £xe3 White loses the bishop pair for nothing. 15...b4 16 ¤ce2 £b6 17 f4 ¤d7 18 £h3 g6 19 ¦hf1 ¥g7 20 ¤xe6 fxe6 21 £xe6+ ¢d8

22 £f7 ¥f8∓ Matthews,S−Arencibia,W/Istanbul TUR 2000) 10...¤c4 (10...bxa4 11 ¤xa4

¤xa4 12 ¦xa4 ¤d7 13 £a5 £xa5+ 14 ¦xa5 d5 15 ¢f2 dxe4 16 fxe4 ¥b7 17 ¥d3 ¥b4 18 ¦a4 ¥d6

19 ¤b3 ¤e5 20 h3 ¥c6 21 ¦a2 ¤xd3+ 22 cxd3 0-0∓ Guid,M−Podkriznik,G/Bled SLO 2000) 11 ¥xc4 bxc4 12 0-0 (12 a5 ¤d7 13 £e2 ¥e7 14 £xc4 ¥h4+ 15 ¢e2 ¥b7 16 ¦ad1

¥e7 17 £a4 £c7 18 ¤b1 d5 19 exd5 ¥xd5 20 ¤c3 ¥b7 21 ¤e4 ¦d8 22 ¦d3 0-0 23 ¦c3 £e5 24

¤c6 ¥xc6 25 ¦xc6 f5³ Firman,N−Genov,P/Lausanne SUI 2001.) 12...¥b7 13 g5 ¤d7 14 f4? This is too loosening. White had to stand pat. 14...¤c5 15 £g2 g6 16 ¦ad1 £c7 17 £g4 h6 18 f5 gxf5 19 exf5 e5 20 ¤e6 fxe6 21 £h5+ ¢d8 22 f6 £c6 23 ¦d2 ¢c7 24 g6 ¦g8 25 g7 ¥xg7-+ Anand,V−Kasparov,G/Kopavogur ISL 2000.

9...¥b7

9...¤b6 10 £f2 (10 g4 ¤fd7 transposes to the '8 g4' chapter) 10...¤fd7 11 ¥d3 (11 f4 ¥b7 gets Black into a jam, Korneev,O−Garcia Cuenca,V/Madrid ESP 2001) 11...¥b7 12 f4

18

¦c8 13 f5!? e5 (13...¦xc3 14 fxe6 fxe6 15 bxc3²) 14 ¤e6! fxe6 15 fxe6 ¤f6 16 ¥xb6 £e7 17 £f5 ¦c6 18 ¥a5 ¥c8 19 ¤d5 £xe6 20 ¤c7+ ¦xc7 21 £xe6+ ¥xe6 22 ¥xc7 ¥e7 23 ¢b1 ¢d7 24 ¥b6 ¦c8 25 ¦he1± Korneev,O−Teran Alvarez,I/Dos Hermanas ESP 2001.

10 g4

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-wqkvl-tr0 9+l+n+pzpp0 9p+-zppsn-+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+P+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzPPwQ-+-zP0 9+-mKR+L+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

10 ¤b3?! is passive, Socko,B−Shipov,S/playchess.com INT 2004.

10...¤b6 11 £f2

Taking aim at b6. 11 ¥d3 ¦c8 (11...¤fd7 12 ¥g5 £c8!? Bosnjak,D−Kutuzovic,B/Pula CRO 2000) 12 ¢b1 (12

¦he1 White intends the f4 advance so first overprotects e4, 12...¥e7 13 g5 ¤fd7 14 f4

¤c5 Black's attack comes quickly, Kraemer,S−Bromberger,S/Bad Wiessee GER 2004) 12...¤fd7

a) 12...¥e7 13 h4 ¤fd7 14 g5 ¤e5 15 £e1 Shahade,G−Wojtkiewicz,A/San Francisco USA 2001.

b) 12...d5 13 g5 b4 14 ¤ce2 ¤fd7 (14...dxe4 15 gxf6 exd3 16 fxg7 ¥xg7 17 £xd3 ¤c4

Zubarev,A−Shneider,A/Ordzhonikidze UKR 2000.) 15 exd5 ¤xd5 16 g6 hxg6 17 ¤xe6 fxe6 18 ¥xg6+ McShane,L−Olafsson,H/Reykjavik ISL 2000.

13 f4 ¤c4 14 ¥xc4 ¦xc4 15 f5 e5 16 ¤f3 £a8 17 ¤d5 ¥xd5 18 exd5 ¦xg4 19 h3 ¦c4 20 ¦hg1 ¤f6 21 ¥g5 McShane,L−Van Wely,L/Internet ICC 2000.

11 ¢b1 ¤fd7 12 ¥g5 £c8 13 £f2 b4 14 ¤ce2 d5 15 ¤g3 £c7 16 ¥d3 ¤e5 17 ¦he1 ¤xd3 18 ¦xd3 ¥c5 19 ¤h5 0-0 20 ¥f6 gxf6 21 £d2 Mulyar,M−Ashley,M/Framingham USA 2001.

11...¤fd7

19

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-wqkvl-tr0 9+l+n+pzpp0 9psn-zpp+-+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+P+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzPP+-wQ-zP0 9+-mKR+L+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

The knights maneuver to the queenside.

12 ¥d3

12 ¢b1 ¦c8 13 ¥d3 (13 g5 ¦xc3! White should never allow this. Now Black gets a long−lasting initiative. 14 bxc3 £c7 15 ¥d3 £xc3 16 ¤e2 £c7 17 ¥d4 e5 18 ¥a1 ¤c5 19 h4 ¥e7 20

¤g3 g6 21 f4 ¤ca4 22 £d2 £c5 23 h5 b4 24 ¤e2 ¦g8 25 hxg6 hxg6 26 ¦h7 exf4 27 £xf4 ¦f8 28

¤d4 ¥xg5∓ Movsesian,S−Van Wely,L/Dordrecht NED 2000.) 13...¦xc3! 14 bxc3 £c7 15 ¤e2 ¥e7 (15...¤a4 16 h4 d5 17 exd5 ¥xd5 18 ¥e4 ¥c4 19 ¥f4 e5 20 ¦xd7 £xd7 21

¥xe5 ¥c5 22 £e1 0-0 23 ¤f4 f6 24 ¥f5 £f7 25 ¥d4 ¥a3 26 ¥e6 ¥xe6 27 £xe6 £xe6 28 ¤xe6

¦c8 29 ¦d1 ¢f7 30 ¤f4 ¥b2-+ Quesada,R−Leyva,R/Las Tunas CUB 2001.) 16 g5 0-0 17 h4 ¤a4 18 ¥c1 ¤e5 19 h5 d5 20 £h2 ¥d6 21 £h3 ¤xd3 22 cxd3 b4 23 cxb4 ¦c8 24 ¢a1 dxe4 25 fxe4 ¥xe4∓ Movsesian,S−Kasparov,G/Sarajevo BIH 2000.

12...¦c8 13 ¤ce2

White must play this otherwise the strong and typical ...¦xc3 happens. 13 g5 ¦xc3 14 bxc3 £c7 15 ¦hf1 d5 16 ¤e2 ¤a4 17 exd5 ¥xd5 18 f4 ¥a3+ 19 ¢d2 0-0∓

Gonzalez Diaz,D−Vera,R/Vila Real ESP 2001.

13...¥e7

20

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+rwqk+-tr0 9+l+nvlpzpp0 9psn-zpp+-+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+P+0 9+-+LvLP+-0 9PzPP+NwQ-zP0 9+-mKR+-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

13...¤c5 14 ¢b1 ¤ba4 15 b3 (15 h4 £c7 16 b3 ¤b6 17 h5 h6 18 g5 hxg5 19 ¥xg5 e5 20 ¤f5 ¤xd3

21 cxd3 ¦xh5 22 ¥h4 ¤d7 23 ¦c1 £b8 24 ¦cg1 g6∓ Nedev,T−Vera,R/Yerevan ARM 2001.) 15...¤xd3 16 cxd3 ¤c5 17 ¤g3 b4 18 ¤c2 a5„ 19 d4 ¤d7 20 d5 e5 21 ¦c1 ¥a6 22 h4 g6 23 h5 ¤c5 24 hxg6 Movsesian,S−Nielsen,P/Tegel GER 2001.

13...£c7 14 ¢b1 ¤a4 (14...d5!? 15 ¤g3 ¤c4 16 ¥xc4 bxc4!? with pressure on e4 and on the b−file, Bacrot,E−Berkes,F/Moscow RUS 2004) 15 ¦he1?! Massing in the center doesn't make sense. (15 g5!?) 15...¥e7 16 ¥c1 0-0 17 f4 ¤ac5 18 ¤g3 ¦fe8 19 g5 ¥f8 20 ¤h5 ¢h8 21 e5 ¤xd3 22 ¦xd3 dxe5 23 fxe5 ¦ed8 24 ¦e2 ¤c5 25 ¦h3 ¥e4∓ Ashley,M−Ehlvest,J/Philadelphia USA 2001.

13...¤c4 14 ¢b1 ¤xe3 15 £xe3 ¤e5= Kapnisis,S−Tsivelekidis,G/Ano Liosia GRE 2000.

14 h4 0-0

14...¤c5 15 ¢b1 £c7 16 ¥g5 ¤ba4 17 ¥xe7 £xe7 18 g5 0-0 19 ¤g3 f6 20 ¤h5 £f7 21 ¤g3 d5 22 £e1 ¤xd3 23 cxd3 ¤c5 24 ¦g1 fxg5 25 hxg5 dxe4 26 dxe4 ¦c7 27 g6 hxg6 28 ¦h1 e5÷ Polgar,J−Svidler,P/Cannes FRA 2001.

15 ¢b1

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+rwq-trk+0 9+l+nvlpzpp0 9psn-zpp+-+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+PzP0 9+-+LvLP+-0 9PzPP+NwQ-+0 9+K+R+-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

21

15...¤a4

15...d5 16 ¤g3 ¤c4 17 ¥xc4 ¦xc4 18 exd5= Teran Alvarez,I−Santa Torres,J/Varadero CUB 2000.

16 g5 ¤dc5 17 ¤g3 £c7 18 ¤b3 d5

Polgar,J−Kasparov,G/Linares ESP 2001.

22

The Perenyi piece sac [B81]

Last updated: 14/06/09 by Richard Palliser

1 e4 c5 2 ¤f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ¤xd4 ¤f6 5 ¤c3 a6 6 ¥e3 e6 7 g4

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9+p+-+pzpp0 9p+-zppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+P+0 9+-sN-vL-+-0 9PzPP+-zP-zP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

7...e5

7...h6!? This could transpose into a Keres Attack, but is a sane alternative to the Perenyi piece sac. 8 ¥g2 (8 h3 b5 9 ¥g2 ¥b7 10 a3 ¤bd7 11 0-0 ¦c8 12 ¤de2 ¤e5 13 b3 g5 14 £d2

h5! 15 ¥xg5 hxg4 16 hxg4 ¤exg4 17 f3 £b6+ 18 ¤d4 ¥h6 19 ¥xh6 ¤xh6 20 ¦f2 e5 21 ¤de2

¢e7³ Zufic,M−Kozul,Z/Bled SLO 2001., 8 ¦g1 Medancic,R−Arlandi,E/Arco ITA 1999.) 8...¤c6 (8...e5 9 ¤f5 g6 aims for a slightly different version of the Perenyi, 10

£e2 gxf5 11 exf5 Anand,V−Vallejo Pons,F/Monte Carlo MNC 2005.) 9 h3 ¤e5 10 £e2 £c7!? With ...¤c4 ideas. (For 10...g5!? see the Keres Roadmap.) 11 0-0-0 ¥d7 12 f4 ¤c4 13 ¢b1 e5 14 ¤b3 ¦c8 With ...¤xb2 threats. 15 ¦d3 b5 16 g5 hxg5 17 fxg5 ¤h5 18 ¤d5 The ¤d5 invasion doesn't disrupt Black's forces. 18...£b7 19 ¥c1 ¥e6 20 £e1 ¥e7 21 ¥f3 ¥d8 22 ¥g4 a5² Shirov,A−Gelfand,B/Monaco rapid 1999.

8 ¤f5 g6

8...h5!? is rarer, but avoids the problems of the mainline, 9 ¥g5!? (9 g5 ¤xe4 10 ¤xg7+ ¥xg7

11 ¤xe4 d5 12 ¤g3 is more common, White has chances to gain an edge here after 12...d4 13 ¥d2 £d5 with 14 c4!, while 9 £d2?! is seen in Diermair,A−Doric,D/Szeged 2007) 9...hxg4 10 ¤d5!? but Black now found an excellent manoeuvre in Naiditsch,A−Cvitan,O/Kusadasi TUR 2006.

23

8...¤c6!? 9 ¥g2!? g6 10 g5 gxf5 11 exf5 ¦g8!? worked well for Black in Bacrot,E−Vachier Lagrave,M/French League 2009.

9 g5

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9+p+-+p+p0 9p+-zp-snp+0 9+-+-zpNzP-0 9-+-+P+-+0 9+-sN-vL-+-0 9PzPP+-zP-zP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

This leads to the so called Perenyi piece sac. Named after the late Hungarian IM, it is

unbelievably complicated, and Black better have nerves of steel and good defensive instincts.

9...gxf5 10 exf5 d5 11 £f3!?

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9+p+-+p+p0 9p+-+-sn-+0 9+-+pzpPzP-0 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-sN-vLQ+-0 9PzPP+-zP-zP0 9tR-+-mKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

11 gxf6 was briefly favoured after Shirov played it, 11...d4 12 ¥c4 £c7 13 £d3 dxe3 14 0-

0-0 exf2 15 ¥xf7+!? ¢xf7 16 £d5+ ¢xf6 (16...¢e8 17 f7+ ¢e7 is unclear) 17 £f3 (17

¤e4+ ¢e7) 17...¥h6+ 18 ¢b1 ¦d8 19 ¦xd8 £xd8-+ Fontaine,R−Svidler,P/Brussels BEL 2000.

11...d4

24

11...¥b4!? Very unusual, but possibly not so bad. Black develops and is ready to eliminate the c3−knight. 12 gxf6 ¤c6 13 0-0-0 see Pikula,D−Krivokapic,M/Pancevo SCG 2006.

When Perenyi introduced his variation, 11...¤e4 was a fairly common response and as pointed out by Kasparov in his 'Revolution in the 70s', it remains far from refuted. A key concept is 12 ¤xe4 dxe4 13 £xe4 ¤c6 14 ¥c4 £d7! which was introduced in the game Chiburdanidze − Nutu−Gajic, Belgrade 1983. For some reason theory has rather ignored this line, and I'm far from certain as to why.

12 0-0-0 ¤bd7 13 ¥d2

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwqkvl-tr0 9+p+n+p+p0 9p+-+-sn-+0 9+-+-zpPzP-0 9-+-zp-+-+0 9+-sN-+Q+-0 9PzPPvL-zP-zP0 9+-mKR+L+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

The current favourite. 13 ¥xd4!? exd4 14 ¦xd4 ¥g7!? (14...¥c5) 15 ¦g1 ¢f8! 16 £e3 with a dangerous attack,

Polgar,J−Kasimdzhanov,R/San Luis ARG 2005. 13 ¦xd4?! exd4 14 ¥xd4 is doubtful after 14...¥g7 15 ¥d3 0-0 13 gxf6 was once the main move, 13...dxc3 14 ¥c4 £xf6 15 ¦hg1 h6 but Black went on to

win in Khalifman,A−Gelfand,B, Shenyang 2000. 13 ¥c4! is a logical move, developing a piece and attacking f7, 13...£c7 14 ¥xd4! exd4 15

¦he1+ when Black should play 15...¢d8 (15...¤e5? Timman,J−Smeets,J/Hilversum NED 2006) 16 ¦xd4 ¥c5 17 ¦dd1!? Leko,P−Anand,V/Melody Amber Rapid, Nice 2008.

13...£c7

13...dxc3 14 ¥xc3 ¥g7 (14...£b6!? This game was one of the most exciting of 1999 featuring this novelty. Black wants to solve his problems with ...¥b4. 15 gxf6 ¥b4! Reducing the number of potential attackers. 16 ¥c4 ¥xc3 17 ¥xf7+!? The only way to keep the attack alive. 17...¢xf7 18 £h5+ ¢xf6 (18...¢f8?? 19 £h6+ ¢g8 20 f7+ wins the Q) 19 £h6+ ¢xf5 Nijboer,F−Van Wely,L/NLD−ch, Rotterdam 1999 (19...¢f7??

20 ¦xd7+!) ) 15 ¦g1 0-0 16 gxf6 £xf6 17 £e3 ¢h8 18 f4 £b6?! (18...£h6 was the best try) 19 £g3 £h6 20 ¦d6 f6 21 ¥d2 e4 22 ¥c4 b5 23 ¥e6 ¦a7 24 ¦c6!± Polgar,J−Anand,V/Dos Hermanas 1999.

25

14 gxf6 dxc3 15 ¥xc3

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+l+kvl-tr0 9+pwqn+p+p0 9p+-+-zP-+0 9+-+-zpP+-0 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-vL-+Q+-0 9PzPP+-zP-zP0 9+-mKR+L+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

15...£c6 16 £g3 ¥h6+

16...£xh1 17 ¥g2 ¥h6+ 18 ¥d2 ¥xd2+ 19 ¢xd2 £xg2 20 £xg2 a5 21 f4 exf4 22 £g7 ¦f8 23 ¦e1+ ¢d8 24 ¦e7 ¢c7 25 £xf8 Shirov,A−Van Wely,L/ Istanbul TUR 2000. It's amazing that Shirov could win almost the same way twice. When he faced Kasparov though he opted for something else.

17 ¢b1 ¥f4 18 £d3 ¦g8 19 ¥h3 ¢d8 20 ¥b4 £xf6 21 £c4 ¦g5 22 ¦d6

Mate is inevitable! I find all this very hard to believe. Shirov,A−Topalov,V/Wijk aan Zee NED 2001.

26

Keres Attack [B81]

Last updated: 13/02/10 by Richard Palliser

1 e4 c5 2 ¤f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ¤xd4 ¤f6 5 ¤c3 e6 6 g4!?

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9zpp+-+pzpp0 9-+-zppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+P+0 9+-sN-+-+-0 9PzPP+-zP-zP0 9tR-vLQmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

The starting position for the Keres attack. White aims to take space as a prelude to an

attack.

6...h6

There are two major alternatives: 6...¤c6 is natural, 7 g5 ¤d7 8 ¥e3 (8 ¦g1 ¥e7 9 ¥e3 0-0 (9...¤b6 10 a4? A perfectly good

Keres attack ruined. (10 £e2!?) 10...0-0 11 ¥e2 ¤a5 12 b3 d5 13 exd5 ¤xd5 14 ¤xd5 exd5 15 £d2 ¤c6 16 h4 ¦e8 17 h5 ¤xd4 18 ¥xd4 ¥f5 19 0-0-0 ¦c8 20 ¥d3 ¥xd3 21 £xd3 ¥xg5+ 22 ¢b1= Perelshteyn,E−Krejci,J/Yerevan ARM 1999) 10 £d2 a6 11 0-0-0 ¤xd4 12 ¥xd4 b5 13 f4 b4 14 ¤e2 £a5 15 ¢b1 e5 Ljubojevic,L−Kasparov,G/Belfort 1988) 8...¥e7 9 h4 0-0 (9...a6 10 £e2 (10 £h5!? g6 11 £e2 White can attack on the H file.) 10...¤xd4 11 ¥xd4 0-0 12 0-0-0 b5 13 f4 b4 14 ¤b1?! The king belongs here not a knight. (14 ¤a4!? Should give white good attacking chances.) 14...e5 15 fxe5 dxe5 16 ¥e3 £c7 17 £c4 ¤c5 18 ¦d5 ¥e6 19 ¥h3 ¥xd5 20 exd5 a5 21 d6 ¥xd6 22 ¦d1 ¦ad8-+ Boudre,J−Lepelletier,B/Bescanon FRA 1999) 10 £d2 (10 £h5 a6 11 0-0-0 ¤xd4 12 ¥xd4 b5 13 f4 b4 14 ¤e2 £a5?! This move creates serious problems. (14...e5! A thematic shot! 15 fxe5 (15 ¥e3!?) 15...dxe5 16 ¥xe5 £a5 Hitting a2 and e5.) 15 ¢b1 e5 16 ¥e3 ¤c5 17 ¥xc5 £xc5 18 f5!+− ¥b7 19 ¤g3 ¦fc8 20 ¥d3 Kobalia,M−Vitiugov,N/Togliatti RUS 2003 Black has no chances to distract white from conducting his attack.) 10...¤b6?! (10...¤de5!? This cheap

27

fork threat is the start of a correct plan. 11 0-0-0!? White can try this attempting to save a tempo. (11 ¥e2 ¤xd4 12 ¥xd4 ¤c6 13 ¥e3 a6 14 0-0-0 b5„) 11...¤xd4 (11...¤g4!?

Chasing down the dark squared bishop looks good.) 12 £xd4 ¤c6 13 £d2 £a5 14 ¢b1 ¥d7 15 f4² White has an attack which looks easier to play.) 11 0-0-0 d5 12 ¢b1 ¥b4 (12...dxe4 13 ¤xc6 bxc6 14 £xd8 ¦xd8 15 ¦xd8+ ¥xd8 16 ¤xe4² This structure usually gives white the better chances.) 13 a3 ¥xc3 14 £xc3 dxe4 15 £e1 £e8 16 ¤b3 e5 17 ¥c5 ¤e7 18 £xe4 ¥e6 19 ¥d3 g6 20 £xe5+− Van Riemsdijk,H−Watson,B/Auckland NZL 2000.

6...a6 7 g5 (7 ¥g2!? is not as ambitious, but White can play quietly by using the advantage in space. It also slows Black's counterplay down since ...b5 walks into e5. 7...¤c6!? see Rodriguez,A−Julia,E/Buenos Aires ARG 2003) 7...¤fd7 8 h4 (8 ¥e3 b5 9 a3 Fed had a game with this variation many moons ago. The prepared novelty was Jon Tisdall's and Fed was lucky enough to try it vs Tigran Petrosian (Hastings 77/78) 9...¥b7 (9...¤b6 10 ¦g1 ¤8d7 11 f4 ¥b7 12 £f3 ¦c8 13 ¥f2 Protecting against ...¦xc3 13...£c7 (13...e5!?) 14 0-0-0 e5 15 ¤f5 ¤a4 16 ¥e1 Enders,P−Espig,L/Plauen GER 1999) 10 h4 (10 £g4! was Fedorowicz−Petrosian) 10...¤c6 11 ¤xc6 ¥xc6 12 £d4! Black's counterplay is non−existent, Parligras,M−Florescu,C/Techirghiol ROM 2000.) 8...b5

a) 8...¤c6 9 ¥e3 £c7?! wasting time (9...¤xd4 10 ¥xd4 b5!?) 10 £h5?! If this move doesn't provoke ...g6 then it's nonsense. (10 £d2!?, 10 £e2 ¥e7 Fedorchuk,S−Tymrakiewicz,R/Polanica Zdroj POL 1999) 10...¤c5?! (10...¤xd4 11 ¥xd4 ¤e5 12 0-0-0

¤c6 13 ¥e3 b5„) 11 0-0-0 b5 12 ¥g2 ¦b8 13 ¤xc6 £xc6 14 ¦he1 b4 15 ¤d5! Slingerland,C−Muhren,B/Rotterdam NED 1999

b) 8...¥e7 9 ¥h3?! This has nothing to do with the game. 9...0-0 10 ¥e3 ¤c6 11 £e2 ¤xd4 12 ¥xd4 b5 13 a3 £a5 14 0-0-0 b4 15 axb4 £xb4 16 ¦hg1 ¦b8 17 ¤b1 ¤c5 18 £e1 £b5 19 ¦g3 e5∓ Medvegy,N−Antal,G/Budapest HUN 2000.

9 a3 ¥b7 10 h5 ¤c6 11 ¦h3!? White is determined to force through the g6−advance as quickly as possible, Nataf,I−Graf,A/Ourense 2007.

6...e5!? is an ambitious sideline, 7 ¥b5+ ¥d7 8 ¥xd7+ £xd7 9 ¤f5 h5 10 gxh5 ¤xh5 11 ¤d5!? (continuing positionally. In 'Experts vs.' Gavrikov prefers 11 ¥h6 ) 11...g6 12 ¤g3 ¥g7 13 c3 Sokolov,A−Nisipeanu,L/Tegernsee 2007.

7 h4

28

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9zpp+-+pzp-0 9-+-zppsn-zp0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+PzP0 9+-sN-+-+-0 9PzPP+-zP-+0 9tR-vLQmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

7 h3 This is the quiet line in the Keres. White maintains the spatial advantage and delays e5

indefinitely. 7...a6 8 ¥g2 g5!? to control e5, a) 8...¤c6 9 f4 (9 ¥e3 allows 9...¤e5! 10 £e2 (10 f4 ¤c4 Svidler,P−

Movsesian,S/Odessa (rapid) 2009) 10...£c7 11 f4 ¤c4 Leko,P−Sasikiran,K/Istanbul TUR 2000) 9...£b6 more active than (9...¥d7 10 ¥e3 £c7 11 £e2 ¥e7 12 0-0-0 and Black lost quickly in Kosten,A−Tratar,M/Sautron 2005) 10 ¤b3 ¥e7 11 £f3!? Naiditsch,A−Movsesian,S/Sant Lluis ESP 2005

b) 8...¥e7 9 ¤de2 ¤c6 10 ¤g3 Buckley,D−Hunt,A/Scarborough HUN 2001 9 ¥e3 (9 b3 ¤c6 10 ¥b2 ¥g7 11 ¤xc6 bxc6 12 £d2 Lanka,Z−Antal,G/Paris FRA 2000) 9...¤bd7

10 £e2 ¤e5 11 0-0-0 ¥d7 (11...£c7 12 f4 gxf4 13 ¥xf4 ¥e7 14 ¦hf1 ¥d7 15 ¤f3! and White soon played a decisive ¤d5 sac, Jens,J−Hillarp Persson,T/Stockholm SWE 2005) 12 ¤f3!? White trades Black's excellent e5−knight off. 12...£a5 13 ¢b1 ¥e7 14 ¤xe5 dxe5 15 h4 ¦g8 16 hxg5 hxg5 17 ¦h6 ¥c6 18 £f3 ¤d7 19 ¦h7 ¤f6 20 ¦h6 ¤d7 21 ¥f1! Activating the misplaced B. 21...¦d8 22 ¥c4 ¤f8 23 ¤d5 exd5 24 exd5 e4!? (24...£b4? 25 dxc6+− Adams−I.Sokolov/Sarajevo 1999) 25 £xe4 ¦d7 26 ¦hh1 £d8 27 ¦d3 ¥b5 28 ¥xb5 axb5 29 ¥c5±

7 ¥g2 ¤c6 8 ¤b3 I feel Black should be ok after this. (8 h3 a6 transposes to 7 h3, above)

8...¥e7 (8...a6 9 £e2 £c7 (9...g5!? 10 h4 ¦g8„) 10 f4 b5 11 e5 ¤d7 12 exd6 ¥xd6 13 ¤e4 ¥xf4?! (13...¥e7!?) 14 ¥xf4 £xf4 15 ¦f1 £xh2 16 0-0-0 0-0 17 ¢b1 ¦a7 18 g5 f5 19 gxf6 ¤xf6 20 ¤xf6+ ¦xf6 21 ¦xf6 gxf6 22 £f1± Babula,V−Jansa,V/CZE 2000) 9 0-0 0-0 10 f4 ¤h7?! (10...¤d7!? can it be so bad?) 11 ¥e3 ¥d7 12 £e1 a6 13 ¦d1 b5 14 e5 d5 15 ¤c5 ¦c8 16 ¤3e4± Babula,V−Mirumian,V/CZE 2000

7 g5!? hxg5 8 ¥xg5 £b6!? Lawson,E−Korchnoi,V/Quebec 2004.

7...¥e7

29

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqk+-tr0 9zpp+-vlpzp-0 9-+-zppsn-zp0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+PzP0 9+-sN-+-+-0 9PzPP+-zP-+0 9tR-vLQmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

7...¤c6 is the main alternative: 8 ¦g1 h5!? fighting back on the kingside when White must

acquiesce to the splitting of his kingside structure, (8...d5!? is arguably the most combative response, 9 exd5 (9 ¥b5!? ¥d7 10 exd5 ¤xd5 11 ¤xd5 exd5 12 £e2+ ¥e7 13

¥e3!? see Goh Wei Ming−Arlandi,E/Beijing (rapid) 2008) 9...¤xd5 10 ¤xd5 £xd5 the safe and sensible recapture, 11 ¥e3 ¥d7 with no problems, Smeets,J−Anand,V/Wijk aan Zee 2010.) 9 gxh5 ¤xh5 10 ¥g5 ¤f6 (10...£c7!? 11 £d2 a6 12 0-0-0

Macieja,B−Kasimdzhanov,R/Lugo 2007) 11 ¦g3!? quite a critical try, (11 ¥e2 £b6 (11...a6 12 £d2 £b6 13 ¤b3 ¥d7 Lautier,J−Akesson,R/Batumi GEO 1999) 12 ¤b3 a6 13 £d2 ¥d7 14 ¦g2 £c7 15 0-0-0 0-0-0 Black's position is passive after this. (15...b5!?) 16 ¢b1 ¥e7 17 f4 ¢b8 18 h5² White has a nice spatial advantage, but Black is solid. Collins−Timofeev 41st World Junior Goa 2002) 11...a6 (11...¥e7 12

£d2 is Gavrikov's main suggestion) 12 ¤xc6 bxc6 13 £f3 £a5! Fier,A−Ponomariov,R/Spanish Team Championship 2009.

7...a6?! After this White is very fast. 8 ¦g1 ¤c6 9 g5 hxg5 10 hxg5 ¤d7 11 ¥e3 g6 12 f4 £c7 13 £f3 b5 14 0-0-0 ¥b7 15 f5 Calota,A−Voicu,C/Lasi ROM 1999.

8 ¦g1

8 £f3 ¤c6 9 ¥b5 ¥d7 10 ¥xc6 bxc6 11 g5 hxg5 12 hxg5 ¦xh1+ 13 £xh1 ¤g4! Brave but strong 14 g6 ¥f6 15 gxf7+ ¢f8 16 ¤de2 ¥h4 17 ¤f4 ¢xf7 18 ¤d3 £f6 19 e5? (19

£g2!? e5 20 ¤d1 ¦f8 21 ¥d2 ¢g8‰) 19...¤xf2!-+ Belotti,B−Sokolov,A/Swiss−chT 1999.

8 ¥g2 ¤c6 9 g5 hxg5 10 hxg5 ¦xh1+ 11 ¥xh1 ¤h7 this looks very ugly, but the limited practice shows that it's underrated, Vogt,L−Atlas,V/Velden AUT 2004.

8...d5

A logical reaction in the centre to White's kingside advance, 8...¤h7 is Aseev,K−Arlandi,E/Ohrid MKD 2001.

9 ¥b5+ ¢f8 10 exd5 ¤xd5 11 ¤xd5 £xd5

30

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnl+-mk-tr0 9zpp+-vlpzp-0 9-+-+p+-zp0 9+L+q+-+-0 9-+-sN-+PzP0 9+-+-+-+-0 9PzPP+-zP-+0 9tR-vLQmK-tR-0 xiiiiiiiiy

12 £d3!?

and White went on to win brilliantly, Ziska,H−Timman,J/Reykjavik ISL 2006.

31

B82 same as Benko System − vs the

Sozin [B82]

Last updated: 16/07/09 by Richard Palliser

1 e4 c5 2 ¤f3 d6

The 'standard' move−order, but the exact same position can also arise with a move more, from the Sozin, say, one or even both sides 'wasting' a tempo:

2...¤c6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ¤xd4 £b6 5 ¤b3 e6 6 ¥d3 ¤f6 7 ¤c3 d6 8 ¥e3 £c7 This is basically the starting position. It can be reached by a number of move orders. So check B57 as well. 9 f4 a6 10 a4 (10 £f3 ¥e7 is the same position as at move 10 of the mainline, except that here it is White to move!) 10...b6 11 0-0 ¥b7?! This premature developing move weakens the e6 point. 12 £f3 ¥e7 13 ¦ae1 ¤d7? (13...0-0 14 £h3

¤b4 is the best try) 14 f5! ¤ce5 15 £g3 ¥f6 16 fxe6 fxe6 17 £h3 ¤f8 18 ¤d4 ¥c8 19 ¥e2 £e7 20 ¢h1² Chapman,M−Rogers,I/Canbarra AUS 2000.

3 d4 cxd4 4 ¤xd4 ¤f6 5 ¤c3 e6

5...a6 6 ¥e3 e6 7 f4 b5 8 £f3 ¥b7 9 ¥d3 ¤bd7 10 g4 h6!? Usually I hate this move, but here it gives Black time for ...¦xc3. (10...¤b6 11 g5 ¤fd7 Followed by ...¦c8 and play on the c−file.) 11 0-0-0 ¦c8 12 ¦he1 ¦xc3 13 bxc3 Berg,E−Hillarp Persson,T/Linkoping SWE 2001, when 13...¤c5 14 ¥f2 £a5 offers compensation.

6 f4 ¤c6

6...a6 7 ¥d3 b5 8 0-0 ¥b7 9 £e2 ¤bd7 10 ¤f3 b4 11 ¤d1 ¤c5 12 ¤f2 ¥e7 13 ¢h1 Shabalov,A−Breyther,R/Hamburg GER 1999, when 13...0-0 With ideas like ...d5 look fine.

6...¥e7 7 ¥e3 0-0 8 £f3 e5 9 ¤f5! Ivanchuk,V−Nisipeanu,L/Bazna 2009.

7 ¥e3 ¥e7

7...¥d7!? 8 ¥e2 ¥e7 transposes to the next note.

8 £f3

32

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwqk+-tr0 9zpp+-vlpzpp0 9-+nzppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNPzP-+0 9+-sN-vLQ+-0 9PzPP+-+PzP0 9tR-+-mKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

The most aggressive,. 8 ¥e2 ¥d7 9 0-0 (9 ¤db5!? £b8 10 a4 0-0 11 0-0 ¦d8 with ideas of ...d5, Ivanchuk,V−

Movsesian,S/Wijk aan Zee NED 2009) 9...¤xd4 10 ¥xd4 ¥c6 11 ¥d3 0-0 12 £e2 is Areshchenko,A−Bischoff,K/Bremen GER 2006.

8...£c7

8...¥d7 9 0-0-0 ¤xd4?! 10 ¥xd4 ¥c6 11 g4! led to a swift rout in Almasi,Z−Ftacnik,L/Bremen GER 2005.

9 ¥d3 a6 10 ¤b3 b5 11 0-0

11 0-0-0 ¥b7 12 ¢b1 ¤b4 13 ¤d4 0-0 14 g4 ¦fc8 15 g5 ¤d7 16 h4 Abreu,A−Stefansson,H/Havana CUB 2001, and now 16...¤c5 17 h5 ¤bxd3 18 cxd3 b4 19 ¤ce2 ¥f8 is the best try.

11...¥b7

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+k+-tr0 9+lwq-vlpzpp0 9p+nzppsn-+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+-+PzP-+0 9+NsNLvLQ+-0 9PzPP+-+PzP0 9tR-+-+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

11...0-0 12 ¦ae1 b4 (12...¥b7 13 £h3) 13 ¤d1 e5 14 f5 ¥b7 15 ¥g5 ¦fe8 16 ¤e3 ¤d4

Gershon,A−Vescovi,G/Paget Parish BER 2001.

33

12 g4

12 ¦ae1 ¤b4 12 a4 b4 13 ¤d1 ¤d7 14 ¤f2 ¥f6 Chabanon,J−Fressinet,L/Marsailles FRA 2001.

12...h6 13 £h3

13 g5? White gift wraps the e5 point for Black. 13...hxg5 14 fxg5 ¤e5 15 £g2 ¤fg4 16 ¥f4 £b6+ 17 ¢h1 ¤e3 (17...¥xg5! 18 ¥xg5 ¦xh2+ 19 £xh2 ¤xh2 20 ¢xh2 ¤xd3 21 cxd3

b4-+ was stronger) 18 £g1 ¦h3 19 ¦ae1 ¤3c4 20 £xb6 ¤xb6 21 ¤a5 ¥c8 22 ¦e3 ¦xe3 23 ¥xe3 ¤bd7³ Busquets,L−Fedorowicz,J/San Francisco USA 2000.

13...h5!

Forced as g5 to g6 is major.

14 g5 ¤g4 15 ¥d2 d5 16 £f3 £b6+

Chasing the king to the a8−b7 diagonal.

17 ¢g2 dxe4 18 ¤xe4 f5 19 h3 fxe4 20 ¥xe4 ¤d4!-+

Doss,J−Fedorowicz,J/Philadelphia USA 2000.

34

Najdorf/Scheveningen Mix [B84]

Last updated: 31/05/11 by Richard Palliser

1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.¤xd4 ¤f6 5.¤c3 a6 6.¥e3

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9+p+-zppzpp0 9p+-zp-sn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9+-sN-vL-+-0 9PzPP+-zPPzP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

White threatens to play an English Attack. 6.¥e2 is more solid, but may transpose, 6...e6 7.f4 (7.0-0 ¤bd7!? 8.f4 (8.¥e3 b5 9.a4 would

lead to the Anand−Topalov game) 8...b5! 9.¥f3 ¥b7 Aagaard,J−Vallejo Pons,F/Torrelavega 2007) 7...¥e7 (7...£c7 8.0-0 ¥e7 9.¥e3 0-0 10.g4 d5 11.e5!? White plays for attack, Bologan,V−Schlosser,P/Evry FRA 2004) 8.¥e3 0-0 9.g4 d5 10.e5 ¤e4 11.¤xe4 dxe4 12.g5 £b6 13.¤f5 £a5+ 14.¥d2 £c5 15.¤xe7+ £xe7 16.c3 b5 17.¥e3 ¦d8 18.£c2 ¥b7 19.¢f2 ¤d7 20.b4 ¤f8 21.h4 £c7 22.h5 ¤d7 23.h6 g6 24.a4 ¤b6 25.axb5 axb5 26.¢g3 ¤c4 27.¦xa8 ¦xa8 28.¥xc4 £xc4 29.¦d1 ¥d5³ Shirov,A−Kasparov,G/Linares ESP 2001, Black has control of the only open file, but it's difficult to make progress.

6...e6 7.¥e2 £c7

7...¤bd7 8.0-0 b5 9.a4! wasting no time in undermining the black queenside, 9...b4! 10.¤c6 £c7 11.¤xb4 d5 12.¤xa6 ¥xa6 13.exd5 sacrificing a piece for three pawns, Anand,V−Topalov,V/Ciudad de Leon (rapid) 2007.

7...¥e7 8.g4!? (Instead 8.0-0 would, of course, take play into the main lines of the Classical Scheveningen.) 8...b5 9.g5 ¤fd7 10.a3! a bold pawn sacrifice, Ivanchuk,V−Negi,P/Greek Team Championship 2010.

7...¤c6 8.f4 ¥d7!? 9.£d2 b5 10.a3 ¦c8 11.¤b3! Azarov,S−Navara,D/Czech Team Championship 2011.

35

8.a3

8.0-0 ¤c6 9.f4 ¥d7!? A curious line where Black develops his queenside first, presumably to dissuade White from overt kingside aggression, 10.g4!? White plays this anyway, and it is positionally justified as the black light−squared bishop sits on the f6−knight's best retreat square, see the brilliant game Shirov,A−Illescas Cordoba,M/Pamplona ESP 2006.

8...b5 9.£d2

9.g4 ¥b7 10.f3!? White transposes into an English Attack setup with Black's queen misplaced. 10...¤fd7 11.£d2 ¤e5 12.0-0-0 ¤bd7 13.f4 ¤c4 14.¥xc4 £xc4 15.¦he1 ¤f6 16.£g2 d5 17.e5 ¤e4 18.¤xe4 dxe4 19.¢b1 ¥d5 20.b3 £c7 21.¥c1 ¥c5 22.¥b2 0-0-0 23.f5± Adams,M−Svidler,P/New Delhi IND 2000.

9...¥b7

9...¤bd7 10.f3 h5!? soon led to unfathomable complications in Bologan,V−Shirov,A/Edmonton CAN 2005.

10.f3 ¤bd7

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+kvl-tr0 9+lwqn+pzpp0 9p+-zppsn-+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9zP-sN-vLP+-0 9-zPPwQL+PzP0 9tR-+-mK-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

10...¥e7 11.0-0-0 0-0 12.g4 ¤c6 13.g5 ¤d7 14.h4 Of the opposite flank attacks White's is

further along, Leko,P−Van Wely,L/Wijk aan Zee NED 2002.

11.0-0-0 d5

11...¥e7 12.¤dxb5 axb5 13.¤xb5 £c8 14.¤xd6+ ¥xd6 15.£xd6 ¥a6 16.¦he1 £b7 17.g4 ¥xe2 18.¦xe2 ¦a6 19.£d4 h6 20.h4 £b5 21.¦ed2 g5 22.hxg5 hxg5 23.c4 ¦c6 24.¦c2 £e5 25.£d2 0-0 26.¥xg5 ¤c5÷ Shirov,A−Palac,M/Villarrobledo ESP 2001 White has a lot of pawns, but they're not moving yet.

36

12.exd5 ¤xd5 13.¤xd5 ¥xd5 14.¢b1 ¤f6 15.g4 ¥c4 16.¥f4 £b6 17.¥e5 Adams,M−Topalov,V/New Delhi IND 2000.

37

Scheveningen Be2 mainline [B85]

Last updated: 03/02/11 by Richard Palliser A lot of times this Scheveningen comes from a ¥e2 Taimanov move order.

1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.¤xd4 ¤f6 5.¤c3 e6 6.¥e2

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9zpp+-+pzpp0 9-+-zppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9+-sN-+-+-0 9PzPP+LzPPzP0 9tR-vLQmK-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

6...¥e7

Alternative move−orders are common, e.g.: 6...a6 7.0-0 ¥e7

7.0-0 ¤c6 8.¥e3 0-0

8...¥d7 9.¤b3 a6 10.a4 ¤a5 Shahade,G−Ehlvest,J/San Francisco USA 2000.

9.f4

38

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwq-trk+0 9zpp+-vlpzpp0 9-+nzppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNPzP-+0 9+-sN-vL-+-0 9PzPP+L+PzP0 9tR-+Q+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

9...a6

This can often arise from Najdorf move orders. Alternatives: 9...e5! is an old favourite of both Spassky and Kasparov and has long had the reputation of

offering Black excellent chances to fully equalize. 10.¤b3 exf4 11.¥xf4 ¥e6 12.£d2 (12.¢h1 Movsesian,S−Morozevich,A/Sarajevo 2007, when 12...d5 is the drawish mainline.) 12...d5 13.exd5 ¤xd5 14.¤xd5 £xd5 15.£xd5 ¥xd5 with a quick draw, Alekseev,E−Svidler,P/FIDE Grand−Prix, Astrakhan 2010.

9...£c7 10.¢h1 ¤xd4 11.£xd4 b6 prepares to fianchetto the light−squared bishop before contesting the centre, 12.¥f3 (12.e5!? is the sharp approach: 12...dxe5 13.fxe5) 12...¥b7 13.¤b5 £b8 14.c4 a6 15.¤c3 b5! a strong pawn sacrifice that appears to fully equalize, see Jakovenko,D−Rublevsky,S/Foros 2007.

9...¤xd4 10.¥xd4 ¥d7 11.¢h1 ¥c6 12.¥d3 Areshchenko,A−Movsesian,S/German Bundesliga 2009.

10.a4

Aims to restrain on the queenside, alternatives: 10.£e1 aggressive, the queen aims for g3, menacing the black king. 10...£c7 (10...¤xd4 is a

time−honoured equalizer, 11.¥xd4 b5 12.a3 ¥b7 13.£g3 g6 14.¥f3 a5!? Kamsky,G−Mamedyarov,S/Tal Memorial, Moscow 2008) 11.£g3 (11.¥f3 ¤xd4 12.¥xd4 e5 13.¥e3

b5 14.a3 ¥b7 15.¦d1 ¦fe8 16.f5 ¦ad8 17.£f2 £c4 18.¥b6 ¦d7 19.¦fe1 b4 20.axb4 £xb4 21.g4

h6= Black gets good play on the Q−side, while White's king side storm hasn't gotten off the ground. Voigt,R−Bruch,J/Altenkirchen GER 1999, 11.¢h1 ¤xd4 12.¥xd4 b5

13.a3 ¤d7!? Vuckovic,B−Dimitrov,V/Lazarevac YUG 1999) 11...¤xd4 12.¥xd4 b5 13.a3 (13.e5 dxe5 14.fxe5 ¥c5! This trade takes the starch out of White's attack. 15.¥xc5

£xc5+ 16.¢h1 ¤d7 17.¥f3 ¦b8 18.¦ae1 b4 19.¤d1 ¥b7 20.¥xb7 ¦xb7= Koch,J−Lautier,J/Bescanon FRA 1999) 13...¥b7 14.¢h1 (14.¦ae1 ¥c6 15.¥d3 ¦ae8 16.¦f3 (16.£h3 e5 17.¥e3 £d7!? Polgar,J−Portisch,L/Monaco 1994) 16...e5!? Shirov,A−Lutz,C/Bonn GER 2001) 14...¥c6 Black will keep an eye on the a8−h1 diagonal. (14...¦ae8?! This looks mighty passive. 15.¦ae1 ¥d8 16.e5 dxe5 17.¥xe5 £b6 18.¦d1 ¢h8

39

19.¦d6 £a7 20.¥d3 £a8 21.¦e1 ¥e7 22.¤e4!± Calzetta,M−Arakhamia,K/Batumi GEO 1999) 15.¦ae1 £b7 16.¥d3 b4 17.¤d1 bxa3 18.bxa3 ¦ad8 19.¤f2 d5 20.¥xf6 ¥xf6 21.¤g4 Shabalov,A−Lesiege,A/Paget Parish BER 2001.

10.¢h1 may transpose, 10...¥d7 11.a4 ¦c8 12.¥d3 e5!? Anand,V−Mamedyarov,S/Baku (rapid) 2009.

10...£c7

10...¥d7 11.¤b3 b6 12.¥f3 £c7 was played by Judit Polgar, against Kasimjanov, San Luis ARG 2005, but after 13.g4! White had a strong attack.

11.¢h1

11.¤b3 b6 12.¥f3 (12.£e1 ¥b7 13.g4 d5 14.e5 ¤d7 15.£f2 f6 16.exf6 ¥xf6 17.¤d4 ¤xd4 18.¥xd4 e5

19.fxe5 ¥xe5 20.¥xe5 £xe5³ Cooke,E−Dembo,Y/Budapest 2000. ) 12...¥b7 (12...¦b8

13.g4 ¦e8 14.g5 ¤d7 15.¥g2 Neiksans,A−Cvitan,O/Batumi GEO 1999) 13.£e1 (13.¦f2

¤d7 14.g4 ¦fe8 15.g5 ¥f8 16.¥g2 ¤b4 17.¦d2 ¦ad8 18.£e2 d5 19.e5 ¤c5∓ Hunt,A−Ftacnik,L/Surfers Paradise AUS 2000) 13...¤b4 14.£f2 ¥d8 15.g4 d5 16.e5 ¤e4 17.¥xe4 dxe4 18.¤d4 ¦c8 19.£g3 ¤c6 20.¤xc6 £xc6 21.f5± Xu,S−O'Donnell,R/North Bay CAN 1999

11...¦e8

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+l+r+k+0 9+pwq-vlpzpp0 9p+nzppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9P+-sNPzP-+0 9+-sN-vL-+-0 9-zPP+L+PzP0 9tR-+Q+R+K0 xiiiiiiiiy

Black prepares to play ...¥f8, and hopes for play on the e−file. 11...¤xd4 12.£xd4 ¥d7 13.e5 ¤e8 14.¥f3 ¥c6 15.¤e4 ¦d8 16.£c3 ¦c8 17.¥d4 f6 18.exf6

White gets good play vs Black's e6 and d6 points. 18...¥xf6² De Firmian,N−Hansen,C/Esbjerg DEN 2000.

11...¥d7 12.¤b3 The correct moment for this. Usually Black regroups with ...¥c8 later when White gains time. Even after all that Black finds good resources. (12.£e1 ¤xd4

13.¥xd4 ¥c6 14.£g3 Efimenko,Z−Navara,D/Wijk aan Zee 2011) 12...¤a5 (12...¦fe8

13.¥f3 b6 transposes to the mainline) 13.¤xa5 £xa5 14.£d3 ¦ac8 15.¥f3 £c7 16.a5 ¥c6 17.¥b6 £b8 18.¦fd1 ¤d7 19.¥f2 ¦fd8² De Firmian,N−Mueller,W/Las Palmas ESP 1999.

40

12.¥f3

The main move. 12.¥d3!? the most aggressive square for the bishop and now Black must be careful,

12...¤b4 (12...¤xd4 13.¥xd4 e5 14.¥e3 exf4 15.¦xf4 ¥e6 16.¤d5! ¥xd5 17.exd5 ¥d8 18.¥d4!

The pointed B's look tough to deal with. 18...h6± Jansa,V−Lerner,K/Hamburg GER 1999.) 13.a5 ¥d7 14.£e1 ¦ac8 15.£g3 ¤h5 16.£f3 ¤f6 17.g4!? Jakovenko,D−Volokitin,A/European Championship, Dresden 2007.

12.¤b3?! is premature, usually White waits for ...¥d7 then plays this, 12...b6 13.¥f3 ¥b7 Satyapragyan,S−Prathamesh/41st World Junior Goa 2002.

12.¥g1!? it looks like White intends to be solid, but this strange looking move later leads to a strong attack, 12...¥d7 13.¤b3 b6 14.¥f3 ¦ab8 15.£e2 ¤b4 16.e5!? Tseshkovsky,V−Kasparov,G/Moscow RUS 2004.

12.£d2 ¦b8 (12...¥d7 Nijboer,F−Le Quang Liem/Wijk aan Zee 2011) 13.a5!? is a striking new pawn sac, see Radjabov,T−Schlosser,P/Mulhouse FRA 2005.

12...¦b8

XIIIIIIIIY 9-trl+r+k+0 9+pwq-vlpzpp0 9p+nzppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9P+-sNPzP-+0 9+-sN-vLL+-0 9-zPP+-+PzP0 9tR-+Q+R+K0 xiiiiiiiiy

The traditional main line 12...¥f8 was once quite popular, but has now fallen out of favour, 13.£d2 (13.¤b3 b6 14.e5!

gave White interesting kingside possibilities in Adams,M−Topalov,V/San Luis ARG 2005.) 13...¤a5 (13...¦b8!? 14.£f2!? (14.¦fd1 ¤a5 15.£f2 ¤c4 16.¥c1 e5! Ivanchuk,V−Van Wely,L/Dortmund 2008) 14...e5 15.¤de2 (15.fxe5!? Carlsen,M−Grischuk,A/Linares 2009) 15...b5!? might be better, 16.axb5 axb5 17.f5 ¤b4 18.¤g3 (agreed drawn, Grischuk,A−Rublevsky,S, 5th matchgame, Elista Candidates 2007.) 18...¤xc2!? Jakovenko,D−Rublevsky,S/Poikovsky 2008.) 14.b3 (14.£f2?! ¤c4

15.¥c1 e5! 16.¤de2 d5 17.fxe5 ¤xe5 18.¥f4 dxe4 19.¤xe4 £xc2 20.¤xf6+ gxf6 21.£g3+ £g6

Black has no trouble with king safety and is up a pawn. Lutz,C−Galkin,A/ Batumi GEO 1999.) 14...¦b8 15.¦ad1 ¤c6!? 16.¥f2 This led to a crushing White win in Adams,M−Topalov,V/Wijk aan Zee NED 2006.

12...¥d7 13.¤b3 b6 14.g4 ¥c8 15.g5 ¤d7 16.¥g2 ¥b7 17.¦f3 (17.£h5 ¤b4 18.¦f2 An extremely sharp position where both sides must tread lightly. Dolmatov,S−Jakovenko,D/Elista RUS 2001) 17...¤b4 18.¦h3 g6 19.£d2 ¥f8 20.£f2 ¥g7 21.¦f1

41

¦e7! borrowing one of Kasparov's most famous concepts, Grischuk,A−Rublevsky,S/3rd matchgame, Elista Candidates 2007.

13.£d2

13.g4!? is a more energetic possibility, 13...¤d7 14.g5 ¥f8 15.¥g2 ¤xd4 16.¥xd4 b6 17.f5 ¤e5 18.f6 g6 19.h4 ¥b7 20.¥xe5 dxe5 21.h5 Almasi,Z−Portisch,L/HUN−ch Teams 1999.

13...¥d7

13...¥f8 transposes to 12...¥f8.

14.¤b3 b6 15.g4

Anand,V−Ivanchuk,V/Morelia 2008.

42

Najdorf Sozin 7...Nbd7 & Intro [B86]

Last updated: 06/06/11 by Richard Palliser

1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.¤xd4 ¤f6 5.¤c3 a6 6.¥c4 e6 7.¥b3

7.0-0 is well met by 7...¥e7! see Bauer,C−Navara,D/French League 2011.

7...¤bd7!?

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwqkvl-tr0 9+p+n+pzpp0 9p+-zppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9+LsN-+-+-0 9PzPP+-zPPzP0 9tR-vLQmK-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

This variation is becoming Black's best choice vs the Sozin. Black puts immediate pressure

on e4 and keeps an eye on the b3−bishop. Very often Black picks up the bishop pair and gets an easy game.

8.f4

8.£e2 ¤c5 9.¥g5 ¥e7 10.f4?! this hands over the bishop pair, 10...h6 11.¥xf6 ¥xf6 12.0-0-0 £c7 (12...¥d7 13.¢b1 £c7= Berndt,S−Bischoff,K/Magdeburg GER 2000) 13.¢b1 ¥d7 14.¦he1 0-0-0 with good chances because of the bishop pair, black castles on the same side, Habu,Y−Sadvakasov,D/Philadelphia USA 2003.

8.g4 ¤c5 9.f3 ¥e7 10.g5 ¤fd7 11.¦g1 £c7 12.¥e3 b5 13.£d2 ¤b6 14.0-0-0 ¥d7 15.¢b1 b4 Black's attack is very fast. 16.¤ce2 a5∓ Anderson,R−Lapshun,Y/Framingham USA 2001

8.0-0 ¤c5 9.f4 (9.£e2!? ¥e7 10.¢h1 0-0 11.f4 ¤xb3 12.axb3 e5 13.¤f5 ¥xf5 14.exf5 £c7 15.g4 £c6+ 16.¢g1 e4? (16...¤d5!? Doesn't look too bad.) 17.g5 £c5+ 18.¥e3 £xf5 19.gxf6+− Schneider,I−Brueckner,R/Framingham USA 2001) 9...¤fxe4! Capturing with the other knight amounts to the same.

43

a) 9...b5!? is possible, 10.f5 e5 11.¤f3 ¤xb3 12.axb3 ¥b7 13.£d3 £b6+ 14.¢h1 £c6 White is on the defensive already 15.¦e1 ¦c8 16.¦e2 h6³ was Vink−Lautier Lost Boys 1998

b) 9...¥e7?! Once this is played ...b5 becomes difficult due to ¤c6xe7. So if Black can play ...b5, then ...¥b7, he should. 10.e5 dxe5 11.fxe5 ¤fd7 Black has f7 under control, but he has serious development issues, 12.£h5 g6?! (12...0-0!? This must be best. The sacs on e6 are under control. White can try the not very subtle ¦f3) 13.£e2 £c7 14.¥h6 ¥f8 15.¤d5!? Interesting, but no big deal. (15.¥xf8 ¦xf8 16.¦ae1² I prefer White) 15...exd5 16.e6 ¥xh6 17.exd7+ ¢d8 18.dxc8£+ ¦xc8 19.¦ad1 ¤xb3 20.¤xb3 £b6+ 21.¢h1 ¦c7= Belov,V−Dvoirys,S/Moscow RUS 2002.

c) 9...£c7?! In many cases Black can omit this move. 10.£e2 ¥e7 11.g4 b5 12.g5 ¤fd7 13.f5 ¤e5 14.fxe6 fxe6 15.£h5+ g6 16.£h3 £b6 17.¥e3 ¤xb3 18.axb3 b4 19.¤f5+− Bintafrit,S−Campos,E/Istanbul TUR 2000.

10.¤xe4 ¤xe4 11.f5 e5 12.£h5 d5! (12...£e7? 13.£f3 ¤c5 14.¤c6 White enjoyed a dangerous initiative and went on to triumph in Topalov−Kasparov Amsterdam USB 1996)

13.¦e1 ¥c5 14.¦xe4 ¥xd4+ with sharp play, Naiditsch,A−Mamedyarov,S/Dortmund 2010.

8.¥e3 ¤c5 9.f3?! This isn't very threatening. 9...b5 10.g4 ¥b7 11.g5 ¤fd7 It resembles an English attack with White's bishop on b3. The knight on c5 gets in the way of the ...Rxc3 type stuff, 12.£e2 ¥e7 Not so much to develop, but to take the sting out of Nf5 or Nd5 sacs. 13.£g2 Looks very slow, but so does h5. Meanwhile Black's position is compact and solid. King safety isn't an issue. 13...b4! The direct approach is best. 14.¤a4?! After this White's position comes apart. (14.¤ce2 a5 15.¤g3 a4 16.¥c4

0-0³ Was White's best chance.) 14...£a5! 15.¤xc5 dxc5 16.g6 This doesn't come close to working. (16.¤e2 ¤e5 17.f4 c4 18.fxe5 cxb3 19.cxb3 £xe5-+ is a horror story)

16...cxd4 17.gxf7+ ¢xf7 18.£g4 £e5 19.¦g1 ¤c5 20.¥f4 £f6-+ Rogers,N−Fedorowicz,J/Foxwoods 2002, White has no comp for the piece minus.

8.¥g5!? This could turn out to be White's best vs the 7...¤bd7 line. 8...¤c5 a) 8...£a5 Anand's choice, 9.£d2 transposes into a not very good line of the ¥g5

Najdorf, (9.¥xf6!? ¤xf6 10.0-0 ¤d7 11.f4 won quickly in Nisipeanu,L−Paragua,M/Turin ITA 2006) 9...¥e7 (9...h6 10.¥e3 ¤c5 see Lahno,K−Paehtz,E/Biel SUI 2004) 10.0-0-0 (10.f3?! is way too slow, 10...¤c5 11.0-0-0 £c7 see Naiditsch,A−Anand,V/Dortmund GER 2003.) 10...¤c5 11.¦he1 h6?! 12.¥xf6 ¥xf6 13.¤f5! Black is in trouble, Rublevsky,S−Efimenko,Z/Russian Team Championship, Dagomys 2008.

b) 8...h6 9.¥h4 (9.¥xf6 can this be dangerous? 9...£xf6!? (9...¤xf6 10.0-0 ¥e7 11.f4 b5 (11...0-0?! 12.f5 e5 13.¤de2 b5 14.¤g3 ¥b7 15.¤h5² Gaining control of d5) 12.f5 e5 13.¤de2 ¥b7 14.¤g3 h5 is good counterplay) 10.0-0 g5 11.f4! ¥g7?! 12.e5! with a strong attack, Nisipeanu,L−Grischuk,A/Foros UKR 2006) 9...¤c5 10.£e2 (10.f4

g5!? looks possible, Kudrin,S−Sarkar,J/Philadelphia USA 2003) 10...¥e7 11.0-0-0 0-0 12.¥g3!? Naiditsch,A−Van Wely,L/Dortmund 2008.

9.f4 ¥e7 10.£f3 £c7!? (10...¥d7?! This move looks too passive 11.0-0-0 0-0 12.¢b1 ¦c8 13.h4 b5 14.e5 ¤e8 15.¤e4 ¤xb3?! This bishop wasn't bothering anyone. (15...¤xe4

16.£xe4 d5 17.£f3 a5!? Doesn't look all that bad) 16.axb3 d5 17.¥xe7 £xe7 18.¤g5 h6 19.£d3! f5 20.g4 hxg5 21.hxg5+− Morozevich,A−Ljubojevic,L/Monaco MNC 2002.) 11.0-0-0 b5 hoping to develop with ...¥b7, pressuring e4. If my memory serves me correctly a Velimirovic attack vs the Najdorf isn't the best, and that's what

44

this is: (11...0-0 12.¦he1 b5 13.¥d5!? if this is dangerous then Black should capture on b3 earlier, see Volokitin,A−Grachev,B/Dagomys RUS 2004) 12.¥xf6 ¤xb3+?! Black can delay this capture, (after 12...¥xf6 the c5−knight can hit at e4 and possibly gain time by threatening ...b4.) 13.axb3 ¥xf6 14.¤f5! Sokolov,A−Lautier,J/Aix les Bains FRA 2003.

8...¤c5

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwqkvl-tr0 9+p+-+pzpp0 9p+-zppsn-+0 9+-sn-+-+-0 9-+-sNPzP-+0 9+LsN-+-+-0 9PzPP+-+PzP0 9tR-vLQmK-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

9.f5

9.£f3 b5! Is the point in this variation. Black puts the pressure on white to prove something. (9...¥e7 10.0-0 (10.f5 £c7 11.¥g5 b5 12.fxe6 fxe6 13.e5 ¥b7 14.£h3 dxe5

15.¤xe6 ¤xe6 16.£xe6± Koo,O−Francisco,R/Virginia Beach USA 2001, 10.¥e3 £c7

11.0-0 ¥d7 12.g4! with a powerful attack, Fernando,D−Mateo,R/Havana CUB 2003)

10...0-0 11.¥e3 ¤fd7 12.g4 ¦e8 13.g5 ¥f8 14.£h5 g6 15.£h3 ¥g7 16.¦ad1 b5 17.f5 ¤xb3 18.axb3 exf5 19.exf5 ¥b7 20.f6 ¥f8 21.¤de2 £c8 22.¤f4 ¤xf6∓ Frolov,D−Dvoirys,S/Samara RUS 2000) 10.f5 £d7?! This leaves me with an uncomfortable feeling. (10...¥d7!? is safest 11.fxe6 (11.a3?! This idea is too slow. 11...¤xb3 Hard to question this, but can Black let White waste more time with Ba2? 12.cxb3 ¥e7 13.¥e3 0-0 14.0-0 £b8 15.b4 £b7 16.¢h1 a5 To me this looks like a waste of time. (16...e5?! 17.¤b3 ¥c6 18.¤a5², 16...¦ac8!? This looks best. Eventually black can pressure e4. Exchange sacrifices on c3 are possible as well.) 17.bxa5 ¦xa5= Sachdev−Tsai 41st World Junior Goa 2002) 11...fxe6 12.0-0 ¤xb3?! I've had nightmares about the bishop on b3, but taking here opens the c−file causing Black problems. (12...¥e7!? 13.£h3 £c8 The main difference is White doesn't have Na4 ideas and the c file isn't open. 14.¥e3 b4 15.¤ce2 ¤xb3 16.cxb3 e5 17.¤f5 ¥xf5³) 13.cxb3 ¥e7 14.£h3 £c8?! (14...b4!? 15.¤a4 0-0 (15...e5 16.¤e6 ¥xe6 17.£xe6 £c8 Black is fine)

16.¤xe6 £c8 17.¤b6 ¥xe6 18.¤xc8±) 15.¥e3 0-0 16.¦ac1 e5 17.¤f5 ¥xf5 18.¦xf5 £b7 19.¤d5?! (19.¥g5!± Taking control of g5 is unpleasant) 19...¤xd5 20.¦xf8+ ¥xf8 21.£e6+ £f7 22.£xd5 £xd5 23.exd5² Paschall−Fedorowicz,J/US championship 2002, White has control of the open file, but Black has everything protected.) 11.¥g5 b4 (11...¥e7 12.fxe6 fxe6 13.0-0 ¤xb3 14.axb3 0-0 15.£h3 b4 16.¤ce2 ¦f7

45

17.¥e3 e5 18.¤f5 ¤xe4 19.£g4 ¦xf5 20.£xe4 d5 21.£d3 ¦xf1+ 22.¦xf1 £b5 Andersen,P−Psakhis,L/Copenhagen DEN 2000) 12.fxe6 fxe6 13.¤a4 ¤xb3 14.axb3 £b7 15.¥xf6 gxf6 16.£h5+ ¢e7 17.0-0-0 ¥d7 18.¦hf1 £c7? (18...¥g7 keeps Black alive)

19.¦xf6+− Nijboer,F−Simutowe,A/Zwolle NED 2001 9.e5 This idea doesn't workout very often. Black gets the bishop pair, the better pawn

structure, and where is White's attack? 9...¤fd7 (9...dxe5 10.fxe5 ¤xb3 11.axb3 ¤d5

12.¤f3 ¥b4 13.¥d2 ¤xc3 14.bxc3 ¥c5 15.£e2 ¥d7 16.c4 ¥c6 17.0-0-0 £b6 18.¥c3 a5 19.¢b2 0-

0∓ Zaitsev,V−Kurochkin,V/Tomsk RUS 2001) 10.exd6 ¤f6 11.¥e3 ¥xd6 12.£f3 (12.£e2 0-0 13.0-0-0 £c7 14.¦hf1 ¥d7 15.g4 ¤xb3+ 16.axb3 ¦fe8 17.g5 ¤d5 18.¤xd5 exd5

19.£f3 ¦e4³ Zapolskis,A−Ftacnik,L/Batumi GEO 1999) 12...0-0 13.0-0 (13.0-0-0 after this I like Black's game. Black can take the bishop pair at any point and get play on the c−file. White's kingside pawn storm isn't very threatening, 13...£c7 14.¢b1 ¥d7 15.g4 (15.¦he1 ¤xb3 16.axb3 ¦ac8 17.g4 ¦fd8 18.g5 ¤e8 19.¤e4 ¥f8 20.h4

¥c6³ Shtyrenkov,V−Kaiumov,D/Alushta UKR 2002 White should try to liquidate and play defense.) 15...¤xb3 16.cxb3 e5 17.fxe5 ¥xe5 18.¦hg1 ¥xd4 19.¥xd4 ¥c6 20.£f5 ¤d7 21.¥xg7= Faybish,N−Mrdja,M/Porto San Giorgio ITA 2000) 13...£c7 14.¦ad1 ¥d7 15.g4?! I don't believe this one bit. White has no attack so it opens the king up for no reason. 15...¤xb3 16.axb3 ¦fe8 (16...¦fd8!? 17.g5 ¤e8∓) 17.g5 ¤d5 18.¤e4 ¤xe3 19.£xe3 ¥c5 20.¤xc5 £xc5 21.¦fe1 ¦ad8³ Lapshun,Y−Baginskaite,C/Seattle USA 2002, if the pawn were back on g2 it would be equal.

9.0-0!? transposes to 8.0-0.

9...¥e7 10.fxe6

10.0-0 ¥d7 (10...0-0 11.£f3 e5 12.¤de2 ¤xb3 13.axb3 b5 14.¥g5 ¥b7 15.£d3 ¦c8 16.¦ad1 b4 17.¥xf6 ¥xf6 18.¤a4 (18.¤d5 ¥xd5 19.exd5 e4!³) 18...£c7 19.c3 ¥c6 20.£xa6 ¥xe4 2 bishops vs 2 knights in an open position tells the story. 21.¦xd6 ¥e7 22.¦dd1 ¥c2∓ Chuah Jin,H−Mas,H/Penang MAS 2000.) 11.£f3 e5 12.¤de2 ¥c6 13.¤g3 h5! Black forces White's hand regarding the e4 and d5 points. 14.¥d5 h4 15.¤ge2 ¥xd5 16.exd5 b5³ Hendriks,W−Dvoirys,S/Dieren NED 2000

10...fxe6 11.0-0

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwqk+-tr0 9+p+-vl-zpp0 9p+-zppsn-+0 9+-sn-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9+LsN-+-+-0 9PzPP+-+PzP0 9tR-vLQ+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

46

11...¤xb3

Black's bishop pair gives him good long term chances.

12.axb3 0-0 13.¥e3 ¥d7 14.¢h1 £e8 15.£e2

15.¦f3 b5 16.b4 £h5= Garcia,O−Garcia Martinez,S/Las Tunas CUB 2001.

15...£g6 16.¥g1 ¤h5 17.¥e3 ¦ae8∓

Bauer,C−Kasparov,G/Cannes FRA 2001.

47

Sozin vs Najdorf [B87]

Last updated: 13/09/10 by Richard Palliser

1 e4 c5 2 ¤f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ¤xd4 ¤f6 5 ¤c3 a6 6 ¥c4

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9+p+-zppzpp0 9p+-zp-sn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+LsNP+-+0 9+-sN-+-+-0 9PzPP+-zPPzP0 9tR-vLQmK-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

6...e6 7 ¥b3 b5

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9+-+-+pzpp0 9p+-zppsn-+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9+LsN-+-+-0 9PzPP+-zPPzP0 9tR-vLQmK-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

This is the sharp alternative to 7...¤bd7!? 7...¥e7 8 0-0 0-0 9 f4 b5 10 f5 b4 11 ¤a4 e5 12 ¤e2 ¥b7 13 ¤g3 ¤xe4 (13...¤bd7!? The

offer of e4 is very kind, but Black should refuse.) 14 ¤xe4 ¥xe4 15 £g4 d5 16 ¥h6 ¥f6 17 ¥xg7 ¥xg7 18 f6 ¥g6 19 fxg7 ¢xg7² Castany Pampalona−Rodriguez Lopez,R/Palencia ESP 1999.

48

8 0-0

The mainline, but there are others: 8 £f3 £b6 (8...£c7 9 0-0 transposes to the mainline, and (9 ¥g5 transposes below) ) 9 ¥e3

£b7 10 0-0-0 ¤bd7 11 ¦he1 ¥e7 (11...¤c5!?) 12 £g3 b4 13 ¤f5 bxc3 14 ¤xe7 cxb2+ 15 ¢b1 ¤xe4 16 £xg7 ¦f8 17 ¤d5 a5 18 ¥h6+− Doghri,N−Ilincic,Z/Istanbul Olympiad, Turkey 2000.

8 ¥g5!? is becoming trendy: 8...¥e7 (8...b4!? 9 ¤a4! ¤bd7! might be a simpler solution for Black, see Bacrot,E−Sasikiran,K/Antwerp 2009) 9 £f3 White brings his pieces out to aggressive squares as quickly as possible and tries to blow Black away, 9...£c7 10 e5!? very sharp, but Black has a lot of resources,

a) 10 0-0-0 is also very dangerous for Black, 10...¤bd7 11 ¥xf6!? (11 e5 see Nisipeanu,L−Karjakin,S/Foros UKR 2006.) 11...¤xf6 12 g4 Black must find a way to cope with the rapid advance of the g−pawn, Williams,S−Palliser,R/Liverpool Open 2007.

b) 10 ¥xf6!? ¥xf6 11 0-0-0 likewise, see Volokitin,A−Harikrishna,P/Cap d'Agde FRA 2006

10...¥b7 11 exd6 ¥xd6 12 £e3 threatening a sacrifice on e6, 12...¥c5 13 0-0-0 ¤c6 14 ¥xf6 (14 £xe6+!? fxe6 15 ¤xe6 is a stunning queen sacrifice, Ivanchuk,V−Karjakin,S/Melody Amber (rapid), Nice 2008.) 14...gxf6 15 ¤e4 sacrificing an exchange (15 ¤d5!? Houska,J−Palliser,R/Swansea WLS 2006) 15...¥xd4 16 ¦xd4 ¤xd4 17 ¤xf6+ with an attack that seems enough to draw, Kogan,A−Sutovsky,E/Ashdod ISR 2006.

8 f4 is the old mainline, which greatly suffered at Bobby Fischer's hands.

8...¥e7

8...b4 9 ¤a4 ¥d7 (9...¥e7 Since 9...¥d7 more often then not gets into difficulties, this deserves a look. 10 ¦e1 ¥b7 11 c3 (11 ¥xe6?! fxe6 12 ¤xe6 £d7 13 ¤xg7+ ¢f7-+) 11...0-0 12 f3 d5 13 e5 ¤fd7 14 f4 ¤c6 15 ¥e3 bxc3 16 bxc3 g6 17 ¦b1 £c7 18 ¥f2 ¤a5 Bitoon,R−Toh,T/Shenyang CHN 1999) 10 c3 ¤xe4 (10...¤c6 11 ¦e1 ¦b8 12 cxb4 ¦xb4

13 ¤xc6 ¥xc6 14 f3 Once thing I try to avoid is f3 (unless it's an English or Yugoslav attack) it's so passive that any hope for advantage disappears. 14...¥e7 15 ¤c3 0-0 16

¥e3 £b8 17 ¦e2 ¦d8 18 ¦d2 ¤d7 19 £e2 ¤c5 20 ¥c4= Wagman,S−Fercec,N/Arco ITA 1999) 11 £f3 d5 12 c4! This makes Black's life very difficult. 12...¤c6 (12...£f6 13

cxd5 £xd4 14 ¥e3 £e5 15 ¥f4 £f5 16 ¦fe1 g5 17 ¦xe4 gxf4 18 ¦xf4+− Lautier,J−Sadler,M/Enghien−les−Bains 1999) 13 ¤xe6 ¥xe6 14 cxd5 ¤d4 15 £xe4 ¤xb3 16 dxe6+− Kudrin,S−Fedorowicz,J/Salt Lake City USA 1999

8...¥b7 9 ¦e1 ¤bd7 10 ¥g5 £b6 11 a4 b4 12 ¤d5! Fischer used to win games like this in the old days. 12...exd5 13 exd5+ ¤e5 14 a5 £c5 15 ¥e3 £c8 16 ¥a4+ ¢d8 17 f4 ¤c4 18 ¤c6+ ¥xc6 19 ¥xc6 ¤xe3 20 ¦xe3 ¦a7 21 £d4! Nicely played! 21...¦c7 22 £xf6+ Pruess,D−Baginskaite,C/San Francisco USA 2000.

9 £f3 £c7

49

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnl+k+-tr0 9+-wq-vlpzpp0 9p+-zppsn-+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9+LsN-+Q+-0 9PzPP+-zPPzP0 9tR-vL-+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

As the natural 9...¥b7 is impossible (because of the bishop sac on e6), Black must guard the

b7−square, ready to answer e5 with ...¥b7. 9...£b6 is the other possibility, 10 ¥g5 (10 ¥e3 £b7 11 £g3 b4!? Georgiev's choice in 'The

Sharpest Sicilian', (11...¤bd7 12 f3 0-0!? Navara,D−Svidler,P/FIDE Grand Prix, Sochi 2008, 13 ¤d5) 12 ¤a4 ¤bd7 13 f3 0-0 14 ¦fd1 ¢h8 15 ¦ac1 ¤e5 16 ¤e2 ¦b8 17 c4 bxc3 18 ¤exc3 ¥d7 19 ¤b6 ¥c6= FRITZ6−Van Wely,L/Eindhoven NED 2000, Black is solid.) 10...0-0 11 ¦ad1 b4 12 ¤a4 £b7 13 ¦fe1 ¦e8 14 c3 a5 15 ¥c2 ¤bd7 16 £g3 ¥f8 17 f4 e5?! The Nf5 looks really annoying. (17...d5 18 e5 ¤e4 19 ¥xe4 dxe4

20 f5 exf5 21 ¤xf5 ¤xe5 looks like a better chance) 18 fxe5 dxe5 19 ¤f5 ¢h8 20 ¢h1 h6 21 ¥c1 £c7 22 ¥b3!± Reinderman,D−Bosboom,M/Hoogeveen NED 1999.

10 £g3

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnl+k+-tr0 9+-wq-vlpzpp0 9p+-zppsn-+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+-sNP+-+0 9+LsN-+-wQ-0 9PzPP+-zPPzP0 9tR-vL-+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

10 ¦e1 ¥b7?! Black must always keep an eye on e6. 11 ¥xe6! fxe6 12 ¤xe6 £d7 13

¤xg7+ ¢f7 14 ¤f5 ¤c6 15 ¥f4 ¤d8 16 ¥xd6 ¥xd6 17 ¦ad1+− Bosch,J−L'Ami,E/Hoogeveen NED 1999.

10...¤c6

In my opinion this is Black's best.

50

10...0-0!? 11 ¥h6 ¤e8 12 ¦ad1 ¥d7 (12...b4!?) 13 f4! (13 ¤ce2 ¢h8 14 ¥g5 ¥xg5 15 £xg5 ¤f6

16 ¤g3 ¤c6 17 c3 ¤a5 18 ¦fe1 £b6 19 ¤f3² Lautier,J−Gelfand,B/Las Vegas USA 1999.) 13...¤c6 14 ¤xc6 ¥xc6 15 f5 ¢h8 16 f6!? Rublevsky,S−Bu Xiangzhi/Ningbo (rapid) 2010.

11 ¤xc6 £xc6 12 a3 ¥b7 13 ¦e1 ¦d8!

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-trk+-tr0 9+l+-vlpzpp0 9p+qzppsn-+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+-+P+-+0 9zPLsN-+-wQ-0 9-zPP+-zPPzP0 9tR-vL-tR-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

My recommendation in 'Easy Guide to the Najdorf', Black further strengthens his position

before committing his king. 13...0-0 14 ¥h6 ¤e8 15 ¦ad1 ¢h8 16 ¥g5 ¥xg5 17 £xg5 ¤f6= Collins,S−Maki

Uuro,M/Port Erin HUN 1999.

14 a4 0-0 15 axb5 axb5 16 ¥h6 ¤e8

For the theoretical details see the brilliant game Gormally,D−Sutovsky,E/Caleta ENG 2005.

51

Sozin − Velimirovic Attack [B89]

Last updated: 19/04/11 by Richard Palliser

1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.¤xd4 ¤f6 5.¤c3 e6 6.¥c4 ¤c6 7.¥e3

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwqkvl-tr0 9zpp+-+pzpp0 9-+nzppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+LsNP+-+0 9+-sN-vL-+-0 9PzPP+-zPPzP0 9tR-+QmK-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

7...a6

Black delays his kingside development. 7...¥e7 8.£e2 (8.f3?! is slow, 8...a6 9.£d2 0-0 10.0-0-0 £c7 11.g4 ¤xd4 12.£xd4 ¤d7 White's play

didn't make much sense, Krivanek,V−Tejkal,J, Prague CZE 2004.) 8...0-0 9.0-0-0 XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwq-trk+0 9zpp+-vlpzpp0 9-+nzppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+LsNP+-+0 9+-sN-vL-+-0 9PzPP+QzPPzP0 9+-mKR+-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

White will play g4−5 and launch a dangerous kingside attack. 9...a6 10.¥b3 £c7 (10...¤xd4

11.¦xd4 b5 12.¦g1 ¤d7 13.g4 ¤c5 14.g5 Svidler,P−Dreev,A/French League 2009)

11.¦hg1 (11.g4 ¤xd4 12.¦xd4 b5 (12...e5 13.¦c4) 13.g5 ¤d7) 11...¤d7 12.g4 ¤c5

52

13.g5 With sharp play. Nowadays Black players often prefer to avoid this by playing the Benko System with ...£b6.

8.£e2

Preparing for castling queenside, this is the "Velimirovic Attack". 8.0-0 is quieter, 8...¥e7 9.a4 £c7 10.£e2 ¥d7 11.¢h1 0-0 Emms,J−Hynes,A/British

League (4NCL) 2011.

8...£c7 9.0-0-0

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+l+kvl-tr0 9+pwq-+pzpp0 9p+nzppsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+LsNP+-+0 9+-sN-vL-+-0 9PzPP+QzPPzP0 9+-mKR+-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

9.¥b3 ¤a5 10.0-0-0 b5 11.f3?! this has no place here. In this line where time is so

important White can't afford to waste it, Dervishi,E−Williams,L, Calvia ESP 2004.

9...¥e7

The mainline, 9...¤a5 10.¥d3 b5 11.¥g5?! Williams,L−Ermenkov,E/Calvia ESP 2004, but (11.g4 is more

to the point.)

10.¥b3 ¤a5 11.g4 b5 12.g5 ¤xb3+ 13.axb3 ¤d7 14.¤f5!?

One of the key lines of the Velimirovic. 14.h4 see Efimenko,Z−Areshchenko,A/Rivne UKR 2005.

14...exf5 15.¤d5 £d8 16.exf5 ¥b7 17.f6!

The critical test, Lane,G−Wells,P/British Championship, Torquay 2009.

53