the-eye.eu · 2016. 3. 20. · preface the position which occurs after the opening moves l.d4...

Grandmaster Repertoire 9

The Griinfeld Defence

VolumeT"Wo

By

Boris Avrukh

Quality Chess www.qualitychess.co. uk

First edition 20 I I by Quality Chess UK Ltd

Copyright© 20I I Boris Avrukh

Grandmaster Repertoire 9 -The Grfinfeld Defence Volume Two

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,

electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher.

Paperback ISBN 978-I-907982-00-2 Hardcover ISBN 978-I-907982-0 I-9

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

e-mail: [email protected] website: www.qualitychess.co.uk

Distributed in US and Canada by SCB Distributors, Gardena, California, US www.scbdistributors.com

Distributed in Rest of the World by Quality Chess UK Ltd through Sunrise Handicrafts, Smyczkowa 4/98, 20-844 Lublin, Poland

Typeset by Jacob Aagaard Edited by Colin McNab and Andrew Greet

Proofread by John Shaw Cover design by Adamson Design

Printed in Estonia by Tallinna Raamaturriikikoja LLC

Preface The position which occurs after the opening moves l .d4 lt:lf6 2.c4 g6 3.ltlc3 d5 4.cxd5 lt:lxd5 will provide the starting point for this, the second volume in my two-part work on the Griinfeld. (I am not sure if" Griinfeld Defence" is really an accurate term.) In case the reader is not yet familiar with Volume One, I will once again share the story of how I became a devotee of this wonderful opening. As I wrote in the Preface to the first volume:

"After I moved to Israel in 1 995 my opening repertoire was rather shaky, so during my first few months there I made a serious effort to improve it. Fortunately the Beer-Sheva Club and its manager Ilyahu Levant provided the best possible conditions for such work. My first coach in Israel was Mark Tseitlin, whom I continue to regard as something of a 'Griinfeld guru'. I also received high quality support from Alex Huzman, a strong player who is best known for being the long-term coach of Boris Gelfand.

Ever since my first few lessons with Mark, I immediately understood that the Griinfeld was the opening for me. I was attracted by the combative and dynamic positions to which it leads, and relished the prospect of fighting for the initiative with the black pieces. It was especially helpful that all the strong players in my new club knew this opening well. Indeed, in the present work the reader will find plenty of references to the games of Mark Tseitlin, Alex Huzman, Alon Greenfeld, Victor Mikhalevski and Alex Finkel. At that time the influence of the computer was not so strong, and by analysing together we managed to discover a lot of interesting ideas. The Griinfeld has remained my first choice against 1 .d4 for sixteen years (and counting!), whereas against l .e4 I have changed quite a lot."

In the first volume I mentioned the problem of fighting against the Fianchetto Variation, which I had recommended in Grandmaster Repertoire 2 -I.d4 Volume Two. But this was not the only time I had to offer an antidote 'against myself'. I have used the main lines involving 3.ltlc3 d5 4.cxd5 lt:lxd5 5.e4 in numerous games with the white pieces, and I continue to relish the challenges presented by the Griinfeld from either side of the board. One of my favourite weapons with the white pieces has been the famous 8J!b 1 system, but as you can see in Chapters 13- 16, Black is currently doing fine there, so I have been forced to explore other avenues when playing against my pet opening. Another critical battleground is the 7.i.c4 system, against which I decided to offer a choice between two different approaches for Black, details of which can be found in Chapters 1 7-2 1 .

This second volume completes my Grandmaster Repertoire i n the Griinfeld. I have gained a lot of enjoyment as well as excellent results over the board with this great opening, and I hope that my two books will help the reader to do the same.

Boris Avrukh Beer-Sheva, June 201 1

Contents

Key to Symbols used & Bibliography 6

Various 5th Moves l.d4 lLJf6 2.c4 g6 3 .lLJc3 d5 4.cxd5 lLJxd5

4.cxd5 ctJxd5 5.ctJf3 7 2 5.ctJa4 19 3 5.id2 26 4 5.g3 41

Various 7th Moves l.d4 lLJf6 2.c4 g6 3.lLJc3 d5 4.cxd5 lLJxd5 5.e4 lLJxc3 6.bxc3 �g7

5 7.ig5 57 6 7.ia3 62 7 7.\Wa4t 69 8 7.ib5t 78

l .d4 lLJf6 2.c4 g6 3.lLJc3 d5 4.cxd5 lLJxd5 5.e4 lLJxc3 6.bxc3 �g7 7.�e3

9 Two Rook Moves 89 10 8.ctJf3 108 11 8.\Wd2 134

l .d4 lLJf6 2.c4 g6 3.lLJc3 d5 4.cxd5 lLJxd5 5.e4 lLJxc3 6.bxc3 �g7 7.lLJf3

12 Various 8th Moves 144

l .d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3 .�c3 d5 4.cxd5 �xd5 5.e4 �xc3 6 .bxc3 J.g7 7 .�f3 c5 SJ�bl

13 Various 9th Moves 14 ll.YMd2 15 ll..id2 YMxa2 - Introduction and other 13th Moves 16 13.ig5

l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 d5 4.cxd5 �xd5 5 .e4 �xc3 6.bxc3 J.g7 7 .J.c4

17 Various 9th and 1Oth Moves 18 10 ... ig4 19 12.E:b 1 20 10 ... YMc7 21 ll...b6!?

Variation Index

162 169 181 194

203 212 222 229 241

255

Key to symbols used t White is slightly better i Black is slightly better ± White is better + Black is better +- White has a decisive advantage -+ Black has a decisive advantage

equality iii with compensation � with counterplay m unclear --+ with attack t with initiative

a weak move ?? a blunder

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

Bibliography Aagaard: Starting Out: The Grunfeld Defence, Everyman 2004 Avrukh: Grandmaster Repertoire 2 -J.d4 Volume Two, Quality Chess 20 10 Cox: Starting Out: 1 d4!, Everyman 2006 Davies: The Grunfeld Defence, Everyman 2002 Dearing: Challenging the Grnnfeld, Quality Chess 2005 Delchev & Agrest: The Safest Grnnfeld, Chess Stars 20 1 1 Dembo: Play the Grunfeld, Everyman 2007 Rowson: Understanding the Grunfeld, Gambit 1999 Sakaev: An Expert's Guide to the 7.Bc4 Gruenfeld, Chess Stars 2006

Periodicals New in Chess Yearbooks Secrets of Opening Surprises (SOS)

Electronic/Internet resources ChessBase Magazine ChessPublishing.com

Various 5th Moves 4.cxd5 �xd5 5.�£3

Variation Index I.d4 tDf6 2.c4 g6 3.tDc3 d5 4.cxd5 tDxd5 s.tDf3

A) 6.g3 B) 6 . .id2 0-0 ?.:acl tDb6

B1) 8.e3 B2) 8 • .ig5

C) 6.�b3 D) 6.�a4t

s ... .ig7

E) 6 • .ig5 c5 ?.:acl tDxc3 8.hxc3 0-0 E1) 9.�d2 E2) 9.e3

B2) note to l l .d5!?

a b c d e f g h

1 2 . . . g4!N

B2) after l l .d5!?

a b c d e f g h

l l . . . �xc3t!N

E2) afrer ll.�e2

a b c d e f g h

l !. . .Wid5!N

8 9 9

10 13 14 16 16 17

8 Various 5th Moves

l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 d5 4.c:xd5 �xd5 5.�f3 .ig7

a b c d e f g h

This position is frequently reached via the move order of 4.tt'lf3 .!g7 5.cxd5 tt:lxd5. The main line is of course 6.e4, but in the present chapter we will pay attention to the significant sidelines of A) 6.g3, B) 6 . .id2, C) 6J�Yb3, D) 6.WI'a4t and E) 6 . .ig5.

6.tt:la4 0-0 7.e4 tt:lb6 leads to a position from Chapter 2, beginning with the 4.cxd5 tt:lxd5 5.tt:la4 move order.

A) 6.g3

a b c d e f g h

6 ..• �xc3 7.bxc3 b6!? The normal continuation would be 7 .. . c5

8 . .!g2 tt:lc6, transposing to the line 5 .g3 .!g7 6 . .!g2 tt:lxc3 7.bxc3 c5 8.tt:lf3 tt:lc6, as analysed in line B of Chapter 4. The immediate fianchetto of Black's light-squared bishop is an interesting and quite promising alternative, which enables the second player to neutralize any pressure along the h 1 -a8 diagonal.

s . .ig2 .ib7 9.� � Black's position should be perfectly safe, as

shown by the following illustrative lines.

a b c d e f g h

IO • .ie3 1 0 . .!a3 was played in the older game Cotta

- Mori, Belo Horiwnte 1966. At this point Black could have questioned the positioning of the bishop with the energetic 10 . . . c5!N, with the point that after l l .dxc5 tt:ld7 1 2.!!bl 'Wic7 13.cxb6 tt:lxb6 Black has promising compensation.

10 •.. �d7 l l.WI'cl c5 12 • .ih6 !!cS 13 . .ixg7 �xg7

White has managed to trade the dark-squared bishops, but the idea has cost him quite a lot of time, and in the following game Black was able to obtain the upper hand.

This particular move order allows Black an extra option, which I have chosen to explore here. 14.WI'a3 Wl'c7 15.!!fdl e6 16.!!acl !!fd8 17.e3

Chapter 1 - 4.cxd5 tLlxd5 5 .tLlf3 9

�e4 18.c4 Y;Yb7 19.c!Llel hg2 20.c!Llxg2 c!Llf6i Black was more comfortable in Meier -

Vachier Lagrave, Khanty-Mansiysk 2009.

B) 6.�d2

This can sometimes transpose to the betterknown 5.�d2 line, but there are also some independent possibilities.

6 ... 0-0 7Jkl 7.e4 tLlxc3 8.�xc3 �g4 reaches a position

examined via the 5 . .id2 move order in line E of Chapter 3.

7 ... �b6 Now White's main possibilities are Bl) 8.e3

and B2) 8.�g5.

8.�f4 This is not dangerous at all.

8 . . . c5 9.dxc5

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

9 . . . .ixc3t! This is an important idea which solves Black's problems easily.

1 0.bxc3 1 0J'!xc3 also leads nowhere for White: 10 .. .'Wxdlt 1 1 .'it>xd1 tLla4! 1 2.l'!a3 (1 2.l'!cl l'!d8t 13.'it>e1 tLlxb2 also gives Black no problems.) 12 ... ttJxb2t 13.'it>cl tLlc4 14.l'!c3 ltla5 1 5.e4 .ig4 16.ltle5 .ie6 Black was absolutely fine in Partanen - Halmeenmaki, Finland 200 1 .

10 . . . Wxdlt 1 1 .l'!xd1 ltJa4 1 2.c4 ttJc6 13 . .ih6?! l'!e8 1 4.�e3 �e6 15 .l'!b1 .ixc4 16.g3 .ia6

Black's position was already preferable in R. Nilsson - Koranyi, corr. 1 988.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

Bl) 8.e3

a b c d e f g h

8 ... �c6! Black prepares the ... e5 advance, which

should ensure an active game for him.

It is worth mentioning that 8 ... ttJ8d7 is too passive, and following 9.a4! a5 10.e4 e5 1 1 .d5 c6 1 2.�g5! .if6 13.�e3 White obtained some advantage and won a very nice game, Topalov - Cheparinov, Sofia 2008.

9.�b5 It is natural for White to try and discourage

his opponent's idea. In the event of 9.�e2 e5

10 Various 5th Moves

10.dxe5 lt:\xe5 1 1 .lLlxe5 .ixe5 12.0-0 .ie6 15 ... �e7N 16.�c3 gdsi Black has absolutely no problems. Black has the more promising game, as

his bishop pair and active pieces are more 9 ... e5! significant than his damaged pawn structure.

This thematic move still works in spite of White's last move! B2) 8 . .ig5

a b c d e f g h

IO . .ixc6 exd4 l l.�xd4 bxc6 12.ttlce2 Accepting the pawn sacrifice with 1 2.lt:\xc6

leads after 12 . . . Wd7 13.lZle2 .ib7 14.Wc2 E:fe8! to a position in which Black has excellent compensation.

12 ... �d5 13.0--0 c5 14.�£4 �d6 15.ttlb5 This position occurred in Marcelin -

Sasikiran, France 2008. At this point the most accurate continuation would have been:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

a b c d e f g h

8 ..• h6 9 . .ih4 An interesting alternative is:

9 . .if4!? This move is tricky and relatively unexplored.

9 . . . lt:\a6!? One of the points of White's idea is that Black is unable to equalize in the same way as after 8 . .if4, as after 9 . . . c5?! 1 0.dxc5 .ixc3t? 1 l .bxc3 Wxdlt 12.E:xd1 lt:\ a4 White gets a winning position with the simple 1 3 . .ixh6. Some players have responded with 9 . . . lt:\c6 1 O.e3 g5 1 1 . .ig3 g4 but I find Black's play quite risky, and after 12.lt:\h4 I prefer White's position. The text move is rare but logical, as Black wants to carry out the usual ... c5 advance. In the following encounter White was unable to pose his opponent any problems.

10.e3 Maybe White should search in the direction of 1 0.e4!?N. In this case I am pretty sure Black should go for the sharp 1 O . . . c5 1 1 .d5 f5! with double-edged play.

10 . . . c5

Chapter 1 - 4.cxd5 l2Jxd5 5.tLlf3 1 1

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 1 . .ie2

a b c d e f g h

1 l ..ixa6 can be met by 1 1 . . .cxd4! 1 2.exd4 bxa6 1 3 . .ie5 .ib? when Black has no problems.

1 l . ..cxd4 1 2.exd4 tLlb4! 13.0-0 .ie6 14.a3 lt'l c6 1 5 .E:e 1 E:c8

Black easily solved his opening problems in Epishin - Lalic, Seville 2006.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

9 ... g5!

a b c d e f g h

By safeguarding the e? -pawn Black prepares to counterattack using his c-pawn.

lO . .ig3 c5 From here White can choose between

aggression and solidiry.

l l .d5!? According to the database this ambitious

move has scored 3Y214 for White, including a

win by Morozevich over Shirov. Naturally we will consider the alternatives as well.

In the event of l l .dxc5, Black should play in exactly the same way as he does against 8 . .if4, as given on page 9: 1 1 . . . .ixc3t! 1 2.E:xc3 'Wxdl t 13.t>xdl tLla4 14.E:c l E:d8t 1 5 .t>el Ulibin Ris, Hoogeveen 20 10.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

1 5 . . . tLlxb2N This natural improvement gives Black a good game with at least equal chances.

l l .lt'lb5?!

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

This kind of material-hunting rarely works well against the Griinfeld, especially when White is behind in development.

l l . . .cxd4 1 2.lt'lbxd4 In the event of 12.tLlc7 tLlc6 13.tLlxa8 lLlxa8 Black has more than enough compensation for the exchange.


· The same player later 'improved' with 1 2.tlJfxd4?! but soon came unstuck: 1 2 . . . a6! 13 . .ic7 Wfd5 14 . .ixb6 axb5 1 5 .e3 l=!xa2 Black was already winning in Priehoda - Sutovsky, Kaskady 2002.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 2 . . . g4!N a b c d e f g h

After 1 2 . . . tlJc6 1 3.tlJxc6 Wfxd1 t 14.l:!xd1 bxc6 1 5 . .ie5 .ie6 1 6 . .ixg7 'itlxg7 17.b3 a5! Black equalized comfortably in Priehoda -Rotstein, Wattens 2000, but thanks to his lead in development can play for more.

13.tlJe5 Wfd6! 1 4.f4 14.tlJb5 Wfb4t 1 5.tlJc3 Wfxb2+ is even worse for White.

14 . . . tlJ8d7 White is obviously in trouble.

Finally, White has also tried the quiet move: 1 1 .e3

Needless to say, this is unlikely to cause Black any serious problems.

l l . . .tlJc6

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

1 2.d5 1 2.dxc5 is harmless: 1 2 ... .ixc3t! 1 3.bxc3 Wfxd1 t 14.l:!xdl tlJa4 Black regains his pawn with a comfortable game, for example: 1 5 .l:!cl tlJxc5 16.tlJd4 tlJe4 (Another idea is 16 . . . .id7!?N intending ... l:!ac8.) 17.tlJxc6 bxc6 18 . .ic4 tlJxg3 19.hxg3 'itlg7= Schmidt - Ribli, Wijk aan Zee 1 972.

1 2 . . . .ixc3t This is the simplest solution, although Black can also consider 12 . . . tlJb4!? 13.d6 with complex play, as in Safin - Greenfeld, Calicut 2007.

13.l:!xc3 Wfxd5 14.Wfxd5 tlJxd5 1 5.l:!xc5 We have been following the game Bukic -Ribli, Bucharest 197 1 . At this point Black's most accurate continuation would have been:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

1 5 . . . tlJf6N With the following possible continuation:

16 . .ib5 After 16 . .id3 .ie6 17 . .ib 1 1'!fd8 White's bishop pair is not particularly significant, and in the event of 1 8.0-0 Black can even think about the sharp 18 . . . g4!? followed by . . . l:!d2.

16 . . . .id7 1 7.0-0 tlJe4 18.l:!d5 .ie8 I prefer this over 1 8 . . . .ie6 19 . .ixc6 bxc6 20.l:!a5! when White has a nagging edge.

19 .l:!cl f6! Black is absolutely fine.

Chapter 1 - 4.cxd5 ltJxdS S.ltJf3 13

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h

l l ..• .txc3t!N This new move enables Black to solve his

problems with ease. So far the only move to have been tested is 1 l . . .e6, after which 12.d6 lLldS 13.h4 led to an extremely complex game in Morozevich - Shirov, Pamplona 2006.

12Jhc3 �xd5 13J!:xc5 Obviously 13J:!d3? can be met by

13 . . . %lfa5t.

13 . • Jt:Jf6! 14.'!Wxd8 14.lt::ld4 lt::le4 looks risky for White.

15 . .ic7 Otherwise . . . lt::le4 might prove annoying.

15 .•• :!::!:e8 16.e3 .ie6 Black has the initiative.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

I was surprised to discover that this oddlooking move has been played in over 500 games, and has been tested by several strong players from Capablanca to Kasimdzhanov.

6 • . . lthc3 7.bxc3 c5 14 ... :!::!:xd8 This thematic reaction should enable Black

Black is at least equal in this queenless to count on a good game. position, for instance:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

8.e3 0-0 9 • .ia3 The only significant alternative is 9 . .ie2,

which transposes to line A2 of Chapter 12 in Volume One, in which the position is reached via the move order 4.e3 .ig7 5.lt::l8 0-0 6 . .ie2 c5 7.cxd5 lt::lxd5 8.%lfb3 lt::lxc3 9.bxc3.

9 • . . cx:d4! A well-timed decision.

10.�xd4 10.cxd4

This natural recapture has been less popular, for reasons that will soon become clear.


lO . . . lLlc6 The point is that Black now threatens an annoying check on a5.

l l .E:cl Preparing to block with the queen on c3.

1 l .. . .ie6 1 2.'\Wb2 Wfa5t 13.lLld2 Now in the game Sandoval - Corsi Ferrari, Mar del Plata 2008, Black should have played:

8 7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

13 . . . E:fc8N 14 . .ie2 Wfb6 Attacking the a2-pawn.

1 5.lLlb3 .id5 16.0-0 e5 Black has obtained comfortable equality

without any difficulties.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h

IO ••• �c6 It is hard to imagine that White can aspire to

an opening advantage in a position with this pawn structure.

l l .Ae2 c!Lla5 12.Wfb4 c!Llc6

a b c d e f g h 13.�b2?!

This strange-looking move was an attempt to continue the fight. The intention is admirable, but objectively White should have admitted that he achieved nothing from the opening and settled for 13 .lLlxc6 (or 13.Wfb3 repeating the position) 13 ... bxc6 1 4.0-0 .if6 when the position is equal.

13 ... �b6! 14.0-0 �xb2 15.hb2 Ad7 In this position the players agreed a draw in

Bruzon Bautista - Sutovsky, Pamplona 2004. However, it seems to me that Black's superior pawn structure offers him the better long-term chances.

D) 6.�a4t

a b c d e f g h

Chapter 1 - 4.cxd5 ttJxd5 5 .ttJf3 1 5

This early queen sortie has not attracted many followers, but it is occasionally used as a surprise weapon.

6 •.• .id7 7.'flYc2 7.�b3

This move is also harmless. 7 ... tLlxc3

Black has more frequently defended or retreated his knight, but exchanging it is the simplest way to solve his opening problems.

8.bxc3 c5 9.e3 0-0 I O.i.e2 �c7 1 1 .0-0 ttJc6 We have already seen several examples featuring the same pawn structure. It is virtually always good for Black, and the present case is no exception.

1 2.E!:dl E!:ac8 13.i.a3 This was Turner - Seidman, New York 1957, and here I would recommend the naturallooking continuation:

8

7

6

5

4

3 w�\Uii�rN£'=/-�� 2

a b c d e f g h

13 . . . tLla5N 14.�b2 b6 Black has a comfortable game.

7 .. .tthc3 8.bxc3 c5 9.e3 9.e4?! looks too loosening, and after 9 . . . cxd4

1 0.cxd4 ttJc6 1 l .i.e3 i.g4 12.E!:d1 0-0 Black was already more than happy in Berezovics -Pribyl, Decin 1 996.

9 ... ttJc6 IO • .ie2 0-0 1 1.0-0 Once again, the same pawn structure results

in a pleasant game for Black, especially with the white queen misplaced on c2.

l l ... cxd4!? Normally Black would be in no hurry to

release the tension, but in the present position it makes some sense to harass the white queen.

12.cxd4 gc8 13.'flYb3

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h 13 ... b5! 14 • .id2

The b5-pawn is untouchable, as demonstrated by 14.i.xb5? E!:b8 1 5.�a4 E!:xb5! 16.�xb5 ttJxd4 when Black wins.

14 ... e5! 15.dxe5 1 5.d5 runs into 1 5 .. . e4 16.dxc6 i.e6! when

Black is doing well.

15 ... ltlxe5 16.tthe5 This position occurred in Mohr - Krasenkow,

Palma de Mallorca 1989. At this point I would suggest:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h


I6 ... i.e6N Based on the following line:

17.�xb5 �xd2 18.ttlf3 �d5 19.�xd5 .ixd5 20.�d4 i.xd4 2I.exd4 gfd8

Black will regain his pawn to reach an absolutely equal endgame.

E) 6 . .ig5

a b c d e f g h

This is quite a serious sideline which should be considered carefully.

6 ... c5 7.gcl This is the consistent follow-up to the

previous move.

7 ... ttlxc3

a b c d e f g h

Here I believe we should follow the example of Emil Sutovsky, a leading Griinfeld expert.

9 ... .ig4 IO.e3 L£3 l l.gxf3 �c6 12 . .ig2 Another idea is:

12.d5 lUeS 13 . .ie2 Gavrilov - Bagirov, Vladimir 2008. Now an obvious improvement would be:

This has been employed by some strong players, and overall it seems like the best a b c d e f g h

solution for Black. 13 . . . c4!N

8.bxc3 0-0 In this position White's main moves are

El) 9.�d2 and E2) 9.e3.

9 .e4 transposes to variation B of Chapter 15 .

EI) 9.�d2

Preventing White from supporting his centre by means of c3-c4, and even more importantly, creating tactical opportunities associated with a knight jump to d3. Here are some lines I analysed:

14.h4 14.f4? runs into 14 . . . tt'ld3t! 15 . .ixd3 'Wxd5 with a serious advantage for Black. 14.e4 f5 1 5 .f4 tt'lf7! is also poor for White.

14 . . . l::k8 1 5.E!:g1

Chapter 1 - 4.cxd5 tbxd5 5 .lbf3 17

In the event of 1 5.h5 Black once again has 1 5 . . . tbd3t! as after 1 6.i.xd3 Wfxd5 both of White's bishops are under attack.

1 5 . . . Wfd6 1 6.h5 e6 Black has the better game.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

12 ••. YMd5! Black must play energetically, otherwise

White will have time to consolidate his twobishop advantage with f4.

13 . .ih4 e5

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h

14.dxe5? This is a serious mistake which allows Black

to obtain a powerful initiative. The correct continuation was: 1 4.c4 Wfd6

1 5 .dxe5 Attempting to open the position for

the bishops must be the critical idea. ( 1 5 .d5 tbe7 looks comfortable for Black.) 15 ... Wfxe5 1 6.Wfd5 The most challenging move. (After 1 6.0-0 Wfh5 17.i.g3 !!adS Black has a good game.) 1 6 . . . Wfb2 1 7.0-0 Wfxa2 1 8.Wfxc5 a5! The a-pawn offers Black good counterplay.

14 ..• YMc4! 15.f4

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h 15 •.. ltlxe5!

This strong idea was missed by White.

16.fxe5 Wfxh4 17.0-0 !'!:adS 18.YMe2 Le5 19.f4 .ic7

Despite the opposite-coloured bishops Black maintained a strong initiative in Hochstrasser - Sutovsky, Zurich 2009.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

E2) 9.e3

a b c d e f g h


9.: . .ie6!? Black ignores the traditional rule of"knights

before bishops" in order to attack the a2-pawn, highlighting a drawback of White's early rook development. In my view it is Black's most promising idea in the position.

IO.'%Ya4 In one subsequent game White tried

1 0.Wfd2 but without much success: 10 . . . lt:lc6 1 l ..ie2 E!:c8 12.0-0 h6 13 . .if4 cxd4 14.cxd4 Wfa5! 1 5 . .ic4 .ixc4 16.l'l:xc4 '%Yxd2 17.lt:lxd2 e5 18.dxe5 lt:lxe5+ Babu - Gupta, Hyderabad 2005.

IO ••• t£lc6 II.J.e2 Now in the game Banikas - Eljanov, Plovdiv

2003, Black missed a very strong idea:

a b c d e f g h

l l...'%Yd5!N This queen activation is surprisingly

problematic for White. First he must worry about the a2-pawn.

12.c4 In the event of 1 2.E!:b 1 Black can simply play

1 2 ... cxd4 1 3.cxd4 a6! followed by . . . b5.

12 ••• '%Ye4! The queen does a great job on this unusual

square.

13.dxc5 White cannot play 1 3.d5? in view of

1 3 ... .ixd5!, exploiting the pin along the fourth rank.

13 ... h6 14.J.f4

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

14 ••• g5! Black continues to play energetically.

15.J.g3 g4 16.c!Llh4 !:!:adS 17.0-0 E!:d2t Black has great compensation for the pawn.

Conclusion

Over the course of this chapter we have examined a wide variety of set-ups, each giving rise to disparate sets of problems for each player. There are not really any common themes that can be applied across all the variations examined here, although certain ideas, most notably the inclusion of a timely . . . .ixc3t, occurred in a few different lines. Instead of trying to formulate general principles, in the present chapter we would do better to keep in mind that all of the lines examined are distinct from one another. Only by focusing on the specific features of the position in front of us can we optimize our chances of success. I hope that the material presented here will help to facilitate that goal.

Various 5th Moves a b c d e f g h

Variation Index Ld4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.ll:k3 d5 4.cxd5 �xd5 5.�a4

A) 8.�xb6?! B) 8.�f3 i.g4

81) 9.i.e2 82) 9.�c5

B I) after 13.f4

a b c d e f g h

13 . . .f6!N

s ... i.g7 6.e4 �b6 7.i.e3 0-0

B2) note to l l .ia6

1 2. . .l='i:d8!?N

B2) after 15.fxe3

20 21 21 22


I.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 d5 4.cxd5 �xd5 5.�a4

This remarkable move was introduced into practice by the Armenian IM Nadanian in 1996. It quickly gained considerable popularity, but Black has gradually found some effective weapons against it. White is aiming to get control over the centre, while avoiding the knight swap on c3.

5 ... .ig7 The most natural move and a good one.

There are several alternatives for Black and I would just like to mention 5 . . . e5!? 6.dxe5 tt:lc6, which I think leads to an interesting battle where Black is by no means worse.

6.e4 �b6 7 . .ie3 7.tt:lf3 does not have any independent value,

since 7 . . . 0-0 8.ie2 ig4 9.ie3 leads into line B l .

7 ... 0-0 We shall examine A) 8.�xb6?! and B)

8.�f3, although White also has:

12.ie2 '1Wb6 White is behind in development and his next move doesn't help. 13.l::k2?! ixf3 14.gxf3 E:d8 1 5 .E:d2 'WaS Black had an edge in Legky - Mrdja, Cannes 1999.

8.ie2 tt:lc6 9.tt:lf3 ig4 transposes to B l .

A) 8.�xb6?!

The knight exchange on b6 cannot promise White any advantage, but it has nevertheless occurred several times in tournament practice.

8 ... axb6

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

9 . .ic4

a b c d e f g h

In one game my opponent chose the prophylactic 9.h3?! but that appears too slow when White is lagging in development. Black managed to seize the initiative with energetic play: 9 . . . c5 10.tt:lf3 tt:lc6 1 l .d5 tt:lb4! 12.'1Wd2 (the tactic 12.a3? ixb2 shows how useful the semi-open a-file is to Black) 12 . . . f5! Black was clearly better in Legky - Avrukh, Paris 1998.

9 ... c5 10.t£le2 t£lc6 l l.dxc5 bxc5 8.tt:lc5 doesn't make much sense when the 1 1 . . .tt:le5!? looks promising as well. b7-pawn is def

Chapter 2 - 5.tlJa4 21

a b c d e f g h

Unexpectedly White finds himself in trouble, due to Black's pressure on the queenside.

13 . .L:c5 �eS! 14J�cl Ae6 15 . .ib5 Ad7! Black is making all the best moves.

16.f4 .ixbS 17.fxe5 .ih6! 18J;al gd2-+ Black had a decisive advantage in Suvrajit -

Konguvel, Raipur 2002.

B) s.�f3 Ag4

Black shouldn't rush to strike in the centre with 8 . . . tt:\xa4 9.Wfxa4 c5 since White can obtain the better chances by: 1 0.l'!d1 Wfb6 1 l .l'!d2!

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

White now chooses either Bl) 9.Ae2 or B2) 9.�c5.

Bl) 9 . .ie2 �c6

Once again I would not recommend: 9 . . . tt:\xa4 10.Wfxa4 c5 1l .dxc5 .ixb2 12.l'!b1 .ic3t 13.'it>fl .ic8 14.g3 tt:\c6 15 .'it>g2 White's queenside pressure gave him a pleasant edge in Oms Pallisse - Lopez Martinez, Lleida 2009.

lO.dS 1 0.tt:\xb6 axb6 l l .d5 tt:\e5 transposes to the

note to White's eleventh move below.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

lO ... lLleS Black can temporarily win a pawn by

10 . . . tlJxa4 1 l .Wfxa4 .ixb2, but after 12.l'!b1 .ic3t 13 .'it>fa White will regain the b7-pawn with dividends, Juszczak - Zielinska, Wisla 1998.

l l .�xe5 I don't believe in the knight exchange:

1 1 .tt:\xb6?! axb6 White's score from this position is horrible, and surely the most White can hope for is equality.

12.tt:\xe5 Clearly inferior is: 12.tt:\d4 .ixe2 13.Wfxe2 c5! Black takes over the initiative. 14.dxc6 bxc6 1 5.l'!d1 Wfc8 16.a3 c5 17.tt:\b5 c4! 18.0-0 Wfc6 19.tt:\c3 e6 Black had a clear positional edge in Schnider - Feher, Zalakaros 2004.


a b c d e f g h

12 . . . .!xe2 13 .'\M!xe2 .!xe5 14.0-0 Black has comfortable play in this roughly equal position.

14 . . . '\M!d? 1 5 .a3 e6 1 5 . . .f5!? also comes into consideration.

I 6Jl:adl Elfe8 17.Eid2 exd5 18.Eixd5 '\M!e6 19.Eifd1 .!g7

The position was balanced in Legky -Mikhalevski, Montreal 2003.

1 I. . • he2 12.YMxe2 lL!xa4 13.f4

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

13 ... f6!N In my opinion this is a significant

improvement over 1 3 . . . c6 Kaufman - Aagaard, Hampstead 1 998; I am then slightly concerned by: 14.b3N lt::lb6 1 5 .dxc6 .!xe5 1 6.fxe5 bxc6 17.0-0 White has good attacking chances.

14.l£lc4

Another possibility is 1 4.lt::lf3 f5 and now it's important that the tactical idea 15 .d6 is not dangerous for Black: 1 5 . . . fxe4 16.'\M!c4t e6! 17.dxc7 '\M!d3! 1 8.'\M!xd3 exd3 1 9.lt::le5 Elac8 Only Black can be better here.

14 ... 5 The point of Black's novelty; White is unable

to maintain his centre.

15.0-0 Or 1 5 .'\M!c2 '\M!d7 1 6.0-0 ( 1 6.0-0-0 fxe4

17.'\M!xe4 Elad8 is also fine for Black) 16 . . . fxe4 17.Eiad1 lt::lb6 18.'\M!xe4 '\Mff5 with roughly equal play.

15 ... fxe4 16,gad1 lL!b6! 17.hb6 axb6 18.'iNxe4 'iNd7 19.a3 b5 20.l£le5 'iNd6

Black is by no means worse.

B2) 9.l£lc5

a b c d e f g h

This makes some sense here, as White is attacking the b7-pawn.

9 ... lL!c6 I like this approach, which is clearly in the

spirit of the Griinfeld; Black sacrifices the b7-pawn for the initiative.

IO.t£!xb7

Chapter 2 - 5.lLla4 23

White has to accept the challenge, as otherwise he is not really fighting for an advantage. For instance: I O.d5 lLle5 I I . .ie2 .ixf3 12.gxf3 lt:\ec4 1 3.1.Mfc2 ( 13 . .id4?! lt:\xb2 I4.Wfd2 lt:\2c4 I 5 .Wfc3 e5! left White a pawn down for no compensation in Kantorik -Llaneza Vega, Pardubice 2008) I 3 . . . lt:\xe3 ( 13 ... .ixb2 I4J!bi lt:\xe3 I 5.fxe3 ig7 I6.a4! is far from clear) I4.fxe3 e6! I 5 .dxe6 Wfh4t Black has an initiative.

10 .•. '\WbS! Weaker is: IO .. . \Mfc8 I I .lt:\c5 .ixf3 I2.\Mfxf3!

lt:\xd4 13.\Mfdi Wfd8 (13 . . . :B:d8 I4 . .ia6 \Mfb8 I 5 .0-0 is good for White) I4.:B:cl White was slightly better. Luehrig - Svartbo, e-mail 200 I .

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h

l l .�a6 This is clearly the critical continuation. Black

has no problems after: 1 I .lt:\c5 .ixf3 1 2.gxf3

Recapturing with the queen is no good: 1 2.\Mfxf3 lt:\xd4 I 3.Wfdi lt:\c4! This tactic strikingly demonstrates why the black queen should go to b8 rather than c8. I4 . .ixc4 (after 14 . .ixd4 \Mfb4t 1 5.'tt>e2 lt:\xb2! White has nothing better than 1 6.a3 Wfxd4 1 7.Wfxd4 .ixd4 and Black is a healthy pawn up) I4 . . . Wfb4t I 5 . .id2 Wfxc4 I6.:B:cl Wfxa2 Black was just a pawn up in Cody - Barnsley, e-mail I998.

a b c d e f g h

I 2 . . . :B:d8!?N I think this is the simplest solution. After 1 2 . . . .ixd4 Pridorozhni - Kalod, Pardubice I999, I found 13.\Mfc2!N and White keeps some pressure, thanks to his strong knight on c5. For example: I 3 ... :B:d8 14.0-0-0 a5 I 5 .'tt>bU

I 3.d5 e6 1 4.lt:\a6 \Mfb7 But not: I4 ... \Mfc8? I 5 .:B:cl±

I 5 .lt:\c5 \Mfb8= White doesn't have anything better than

taking the repetition.

l l ... e5

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

12.d5

a b c d e f g h

I also examined 1 2.dxe5 lt:\xe5 I 3.0-0 and from several attractive ideas my preference is for: 13 ... \Mfc8! 14 . .if4 .ixf3 1 5 .gxf3 :B:b8! Chasing the knight from b7 so that the dB-square will


become available for a black rook. 1 6.ltk5 '%Yh3 1 7.i.e2 ( 1 7.i.g3 leads to a difficult position for White after 17 .. .!!fd8 1 8.'%Ye2 E:d2! 19 .'%Ye3 ll:\bc4+) 1 7 . . . ll:\bc4 18.i.xc4 E:fd8! Black has a serious initiative. (Less strong is 1 8 . . . ll:\xc4 1 9.'%Yd3! ll:\e5 20.i.xe5 i.xe5 2 I .f4! and White forces simplification to an equal endgame.)

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

13 ... �6xd5! A nice tactical idea that gives Black good

play.

14.�b7 I also looked at: 14.exd5 e4

a b c d e f g h

1 5 .ll:\xe4 (or 1 5 .0-0 ll:\xa6 [ 1 5 . . . exf3 16.gxf3 i.h3 1 7.i.b7! i.xfl 1 8.'it>xfl;!;] 16.ll:\xa6 '%Yc8 17.ll:\xc7 '%Yxc7 �8.h3 i.xf3 1 9.gxf3 E:ae8!

and the exposed white king offers Black good attacking chances) 1 5 . . . ll:\xa6 16.0-0 E:e8 17.ll:\g3 i.xf3 1 8.'%Yxf3 '%Yxb2 Black is at least equal.

14 ... �xe3 15.fxe3

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h 15 ... Lf3N

I found this relatively clear-cut route to equality. Instead in Kiss - Gara, Hungary 2008, Black understandably couldn't resist playing the fantastic 1 5 . . . ll:\a6 16.i.xa8 ll:\xc5 17.i.d5. The situation is rather unclear, although Black should have enough compensation for the exchange.

I6.gxf3 E:ds I7.'1Wb3 After 17.'%Ya4 ll:\d3t 18.ll:\xd3 '%Yxb7 White

is worse.

17 ... �£8! The key move.

18 . .lxa8 Another important line is: 1 8.'%Yxb4 a5!

1 9.'%Yb5 (After 19.'%Yb3 E:a7 20.i.d5 i.xc5 White can win a pawn but he finds himself in trouble: 2 I .i.xf7t 'it>g7 22.i.d5 c6! 23 .i.xc6 .ib4t Black will continue 24 . . . E:d2 with a powerful initiative.) 1 9 . . . i.xc5 20.'%Yxc5 '%Yxb7 2 1 .'%Yxe5 E:ab8 Despite being a pawn up, it is White who is fighting for equality.

Chapter 2 - 5.lt:la4 25

18 ... .ixc5 19.i.d5 �xd5 20.exd5 'ilYxb3 2l.axb3 he3

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

I believe that only Black can try to win this endgame.

22. 'i!?e2 i.d4 23J:�hdl :axd5 24.:axa7 gb5 25.ga3 'i!?g7

Black is marginally better, although White should be able to hold.

Conclusion

Nadanian's 5.lt:la4 can be answered in many ways, but I consider the natural 5 . . . .ig7 6.e4 t!Jb6 7.ie3 0-0 to be entirely satisfactory for Black. The most critical line is then 8.t!Jf3 ig4 9.l0c5, but I believe that the combative 9 ... ltk6 lO.t!Jxb7 Wfb8! offers Black full compensation for the sacrificed pawn.

Various 5th Moves a b c d e f g h

s.id2

Variation Index I.d4 lLlf6 2.c4 g6 3.lLlc3 d5 4.cxd5 lLlxd5 5.�d2

5 ... �g7 6.e4 tDxc3 7.hc3 0-0 A) 8.�e2 B) 8J�d c5!? 9.d5 �xc3t 10.�xc3 e6

Bl) l l .�c4 B2) l l .d6

C) 8.'1Wd2 c5! Cl) 9.dxc5 C2) 9.d5

D) 8.�c4 c5 9.d5 �xc3t 10.bxc3 '!Wd6! Dl ) l l .'!We2 D2) l l .tDB D3) l l .tDe2

E) s.lLJB �g4 El) 9.'!Wd2 E2) 9.�e2

C2) after 1 2.lt:lf3

a b c d e f g h

1 2 . . . lt:lb6!N

E l ) after 1 8Jid l

a b c d e f g h

1 8 . . . \Wg4!N

E2) after 1 3.\Wb3

a b c d e f g h

13 ... lt:ld7!?N

27 29 30 31 32 32 33 35 35 36 36 37 37 38

Chapter 3 - 5 . .id2 27

l.d4 c!L!f6 2.c4 g6 3.ttlc3 d5 4.cxd5 c!Llxd5 5 . .id2

White's last move sets up a clear idea: he would like to play e4 next, and in the event of a knight capture on c3, to recapture with bishop. For some reason this rather fashionable line . has rarely occurred in my own games. Of course I was always aware of it, and for many years my intended response was the system starting with the retreat 5 ... tt:lb6. However, I have more recently been inspired by the ease with which Emil Sutovsky, one of the world's leading Griinfeld theoreticians - not to mention my team-mate from both the ''Ashdod" Club and the Israeli national team - has solved his problems in this line.

s ... .ig7 6.e4 6.tt:lf3 reaches line B of Chapter I.

6 ... c!Llxc3 In terms of both popularity and statistical

success, this move ranks as a clear second choice behind the main line of 6 . . . tt:lb6. However, as long as it is followed up correctly, I believe it is the preferable solution for Black.

7.hc3

a b c d e f g h

7 .•• 0-0 Another interesting idea which has recently

become popular is 7 . . . c5 8.d5 .ixc3t 9.bxc3 0-0. Black has achieved decent results from this position, nevertheless castling immediately is my preferred choice.

We have reached the main tabiya for this variation. At this point White has a wide choice, the main options being A) S • .ie2, B) SJ�kl , C) 8.�d2, D) S . .ic4 and E) s.ttlf3.

A) S • .ie2

a b c d e f g h

At first glance this move looks strange, but it is actually quite logical as White wants to play tt:lf3 without running into the pinning ... i.g4. The drawback is that this move does not exert


any direct influence on the centre and Black easily carries out his planned counterplay.

8 ... c5 9.d5 e6 This undermining move is typical for the

present variation, and for the Griinfeld in general.

10.�f3 exd5 l l .exd5

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

l l ... �d7 1 l ...'.Mfd6!? This natural blockading move

is a good alternative. 12 . .ixg7 This seems slightly inaccurate. (Preferable was 1 2.0-0, although after 12 . . . lt:\d7 13.'Wb3 tt:lb6 14J!fd1 .ig4oo Black has a decent position.) 12 ... �xg7 13.'Wd2

a b c d e f g h

This position occurred in Fedorowicz -Kadhi, Novi Sad (ol) 1990, and now after the

natural 13 . . . lt:\d7N 14.0-0 tt:lf6 1 5J!fd1 E!:e8+ Black's position is more comfortable.

12.0-0 In the event of 12.'Wd2?! as played in B.

Schmidt - Schlick, Germany 2009, Black can reply with the extremely strong 12 . . . lt:\f6!N with the point that 1 3.E!:d1 lt:\e4! 14.'Wc2 lt:\xc3 15.bxc3 'Wa5+ is highly unpleasant for White.

12 •.. tt:lb6 13.i.xg7 c;.t>xg7 14.'Wc2 White must work for equality, and this move

looks like the right way to do it.

14.d6 is riskier as the d-pawn lacks support: 14 ... 'Wf6 1 5 .'Wd2 E!:d8 16.E!:fd1 This was Teodorescu - Ocnarescu, Buzias 2002, and now after the strong 16 . . . .ie6!+N (intending . . . .id5) it will be hard for White to hold onto the d6-pawn.

14 ... 'i'xd5 15JUdl 'i'f5 16.'Wc3t 'i'f6 16 . . . 'kt>g8 is not an improvement, as after

1 7 . .id3 the c-pawn will soon fall.

17.'i'xc5

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

17 • . • J.e6! Black wisely avoids 1 7 . . . 'Wxb2, after which

1 8.lt:\d4!� gives White a nice initiative for the pawn, while Black's pieces remain very passive.

Chapter 3 - 5 .id2 29

18.%Yd4 l:Ud8 19.%Yxf6t �xf6 The position was equal in Zueger - Schlick,

Germany 2006.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

B) SJ�cl

a b c d e f g h

This can be considered a thematic move for the present line, as White once again wants to recapture on c3 with a piece rather than a pawn.

8 •.• c5!? Amazingly this natural move has only been

seen in two games, but a more telling fact is that both of them were high-level grandmaster affairs.

9.d5 This was White's choice in both games.

Presumably the reason why Black's previous move has been so rare is that players have been worried about: 9.dxc5N

This is playable enough, but Black's resources are quite sufficient.

9 . . . Wfxdl t lO.'i!?xdl The exposed position ofWhite's king clearly gives Black some compensation, although it is not completely clear how he should proceed on the next move.

a b c d e f g h

1 0 . . . ih6!? This is my first choice, although Black is probably also fine after 1 o .. J'!:d8t or 10 . . . ie6.

l l .id2!? This looks like White's best move. Instead after l l .:B:c2 ie6 1 2.b3 :B:c8 13.id2 ixd2 14.xd2 ttlc6 Black has powerful compensation and it seems to me that it is White who will be fighting for equality.

l l . . .:B:d8 12.ttlf3 ig4 Black can also consider 1 2 ... ie6!?.

1 3.el ixf3 14.ixh6 ixe4 1 5 .f3 id5 The position is roughly equal, as White's

bishop pair is balanced by Black's healthy development and coordination.

9 •.• i.xc3t IO.:B:xc3 Of course White recaptures this way in order

to make sense of his previous rook move.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h


IO ••• e6 Black follows his usual plan. I would also like

to point out an interesting alternative, which is in the spirit of line D below: 1 0 . . . Wfd6!?N The following line looks logical: l l .lt:lf3 ig4 12 .ie2 ixf3 It is important to play this before White can retreat his knight to d2. 13.ixf3 lt:ld7 14.0-0 bS Black has reasonable chances in this complex position.

After the text move Black has a positional threat of ... exdS, leading to a pawn structure which is almost always pleasant for him in the present variation, as the previous exchange of two sets of minor pieces reduces the dynamic potential of White's position with the passed d-pawn.

With this in mind, it is logical for White to try and prevent this structure from occurring, and so far he has tried both Bl) I I ..ic4 and B2) l l.d6.

It is hardly worth mentioning that l l .E:xc5?! is too greedy, and after l l . . .lt:ld7 or simply l l ... exd5 Black will obtain more than enough activity for the pawn.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

Bl) l l . .ic4

a b c d e f g h

l l ... exd5 12.obd5 �d7 13.�e2 13.lt:lf3 can be met by: 13 . . . lt:lf6 14.E:xc5

( 14.0-0 lt:lxd5 1 5 .exd5 Wfd6 gives Black a

comfortable position.) 14 ... Wfe7! Black easily solves his problems.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

14 ... lt:\xd5 Perhaps an even simpler route to equality

would have been 14 . . . E:e8N 1 5 .E:xc5 Wfe7 16.Wfc2 lt:lxdS 17.E:xd5 Wfxe4 18.Wfxe4 E:xe4 19 .E:d8t �g7 when White is unable to exploit the pin along the back rank.

15.exd5 b6 This move not only defends the c5-pawn,

but also prepares to activate the bishop via b7 or a6.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

Chapter 3 - 5.�d2 31

17 ... J.xe2! This secures an equal major piece

middlegame.

18.g lxe2 '%Yd6 19.h4 gadS 20J�d2 gres Black has no problems and the players soon

agreed a draw in Shirov - Sutovsky, Kallithea 2008.

B2) l l .d6

a b c d e f g h

This is a more challenging move, although the resulting positions are just as dangerous for White as for Black.

l l . .. e5! With this strong reaction Black not only

isolates the d6-pawn, but also creates a nice outpost for his knight in the future.

12.tLlf3 If White takes the pawn immediately with

12.E:xc5 then 12 . . . tLld7 13.E:d5 Wi'b6 gives Black enough counterplay, for instance: 14.tLlf3 Wfb4t 1 5.Wi'd2 Wfxe4t 16.�e2 Wi'bl t 17.�dl Wfe4t The game ends in perpetual check.

12 ... .ig4 13.gxc5 hf3 14.gxf3 c!Llc6 Black's strategy is clear: he will strive to

maintain control over the dark squares and install his knight on the ideal outpost d4 (and perhaps later f4).

15 . .ih3 I also examined 15 .d7 Wi'e7 16.E:d5

tLld4 17.�h3 f5 ! when Black has great compensation.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

15 ... '%Yf6 This is not a bad move, but the following

alternative may be even stronger: 1 5 . . . tLld4! ?N

This energetic move is very much in the spirit of Black's previous play.

16.E:d5 16.E:xe5?! Wfxd6 17.E:d5 Wfb4t is unpleasant for White.

1 6 . . . Wfh4 17.�g2 17.E:xe5? tLlc6!-+

17 . . . E:fd8 Black is doing well, for instance:

18.0-0 E:ac8 19.Wfa4

a b c d e f g h


1 9 .. .'1Wf4! Not only attacking the f3-pawn, but also

threatening an invasion on c l . White's position already looks precarious.

16.0-0

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h

16 .• .ll:�d4 17.d7 E!:ad8 18.El:d5 We have been following the game Moiseenko

- Rodshtein, Rijeka 20 1 0. At this point the most consistent continuation would have been:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

18 •.• tlhf3tN 19.g2 �g5 This irregular position seems to be balanced.

I analysed the following continuation:

20.f3 V!fe7 2I .V!fa4 f5 22.exf5 �xh3 23.xh3

E!:xf5 24. g2 g7 To me the position seems dynamically equal,

as White's strong passed pawn is balanced by the exposed position of his king.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

8 ••• c5!

C) s.V!fd2

a b c d e f g h

This temporary pawn sacrifice is more challenging than the more frequently played 8 . . . tt::ld7. White can choose between Cl) 9.dxc5 and C2) 9.d5.

Cl) 9.dxc5 V!fxd2t IO.xd2 E!:dSt

The misplaced position ofWhite's king should offer Black full compensation.

l l .c2

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

Chapter 3 - 5 . .id2 33

l l .•• .id7!?N I decided to analyse this interesting new idea,

although it is certainly not the only playable continuation.

The following is perhaps the simplest route to equality: l l . . . .ixc3 1 2.';!{xc3 .ie6 White can hardly hope to retain his extra pawn with his king in such an exposed position. 13 .lLlf3 lLld7 ( 13 ... !!c8N 14.b4 aS was also good enough.) 14.b4 aS 1 5 .ib5 lLlf6 16.!!hel axb4t 17.


Another idea is 1 1 .0-0-0 exd5 12.exd5 as played in Lampen - Holmsten, Tampere 1994. The position is complicated, but I find it hard to believe in the concept of long castling for White. After spending some time on this position I finally found a strong idea for Black:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

12 .. .'1Ml'f6!N This move is directed against the development of the white knight to e2, which would now drop the f2-pawn. 13.f3 seems like a logical reply, but after 1 3 ... E:d8 14.lt:le2 lt:lc6! Black has an excellent game.

a b c d e f g h

ll. .. �d7! 12.�f3 The justification for Black's last move is

revealed after 1 2.dxe6? lt:le5 13.'1Mfc3 'IM!d4! when Black is already better.

12.lt:le2 lt:lf6 ( 12 . . . lt:lb6N 13.b3 'IM!h4!? also comes into consideration.) 13.lt:lc3 exd5

14.J.xd5 So far we have followed Mamedyarov - Sutovsky, Baku 20 10. At this point Black should have played:

a b c d e f g h

14 . . . J.e6N 15.J.xe6 ( 1 5.0-0? lt:lxe4!) 1 5 ... '1Mfxd2t 16.'it>xd2 fxe6 17.f3 E:ad8t 1 8.'it>e2 lt:ld7 1he endgame is roughly balanced.

"'

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

12 ... �b6!N Even better than 12 . . . exd5 13.J.xd5 lt:lf6

14.'1Mlc3 'it>g8 which was also decent for Black in D. Rombaldoni - Cmilyte, Novi Sad 2009.

13.0-0 �xc4 I4.'1Wc3t '%Yf6 15.'%Yxc4 exd5 16.'%Yxd5

After 1 6.exd5 b6+ the d-pawn is more of a weakness than a strength.

16 ... .ig4! Black has the more pleasant position.

Chapter 3 - 5 .�d2 35

a b c d e f g h

This time White arranges his bishops into an attractive formation.

8 •.. c5 9.d5 Harmless is:

9.lLle2 cxd4 10.lLlxd4 1 0.�xd4 #Jc6 1 l .�xg7 xg7 1 2.0-0 occurred in Roussel Roozmon - Prahov, Montreal 2000. At this point Black should have played 1 2 . . . �g4N 13.�d5 '?Nb6+ when he is slightly better.

1 O ... '?Nb6! l l .lLle2 White felt compelled to play this in view of the impending . . . gds.

l l . . .�xc3t 1 2.bxc3 lLlc6 Black was already better due to White's

damaged queens ide structure, Fries - Mendege, Budapest 2006.

9 •.. hc3t IO.bxc3 'Wfd6! This is a thematic idea in positions with this

central structure. Black takes control over the important e5- and f4-squares before deciding how to deploy his pieces. White has tried three moves: Dl) l l ."?Ne2, D2) II.tl:lf3 and D3) II.c!i)e2.

Dl) l l ."?Ne2

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h

This logical move has so far only been tried once. White threatens to push his e-pawn, but the plan can be thwarted by the following remarkable idea:

l l . .. "?Ne5! The natural 1 1 ... lD d 7 is met by 12 .lLl f3 when

Black's position does not look very promising.

12."?Ne3 f5! The following continuation looks sensible

enough.

13.c!i)f3 'Wfxe4 14.'Wfxe4 fxe4 15.c!i)g5 .if5 16.0-0-0

16.gbl can be met by 1 6 . . . g?! 17.gxb7 lLld7 intending ... gfbg when Black is by no means worse.

a b c d e f g h


16 ... �d7 17.d6t �g7 18.c!l:!xe4 �e5 19.dxe7 �Ue8 20.�d6 �xc4 21.�xc4 gxe7=

The complications have subsided and the position remains balanced, Zhou Weiqi -Sutovsky, Khanty-Mansiysk 2009.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

D2) 1 1 .c!l:!a

a b c d e f g h

l l ... i.g4 Obviously Black should take the opportunity

to pin the knight.

12.e5 This must be the critical continuation.

Instead after 12 .h3 ixf3 1 3.'1Mfxf3 f5!? ( 13 ... lt:ld7N is also fine.) 14.0-0 lt:\d7 15.exf5 �xf5 Black had a healthy and active position in Gazarek - Bastijanic, Pula 1993.

12 ... Yic7 13.0-0 i.xf3 14.VIxf3 Ylxe5 15.gab1

White seems to have promising compensation, but with a few accurate moves Black can easily return his extra pawn and neutralize his opponent's initiative.

15 ... c!i:ld7 16,gfel Yld6 17.gxb7 gfbg 18,gb3 �e5 19.VIe4 c!l:!xc4 20.Yixc4 gxb3 21.axb3 gds

In this equal position the players agreed a draw in Grachev - Vachier Lagrave, Moscow 20 10.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

03) l l .c!i:le2

a b c d e f g h

1 1 ... £5! Thanks to Black's control over the e5-square,

this move is possible.

12.exf5 A recent game saw 12.id3, Vidit -Vakhidov,

Burdur 20 1 0, and now instead of rushing with 1 2 . . . fxe4, Black should have preferred 1 2 . . . lt:\d7N 13.0-0 lt:\e5 with a great position.

12 .. . i.xf5 13.0-0 c!i:ld7 14.c!l:!g3 �b6 15.Yib3 Ylf4 16.i.e2 c4 17.Yib5

This position was reached in Dreev -Kozakov, France 2009, and one subsequent game. At this point I found a clear-cut path to equality:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

Chapter 3 - 5 . .id2 37

17 ••. .id3!N 18.L.d3 cxd3 19.:aadl 19 . W xd3 is met by 1 9 ... E:ad8 regaining the

d5-pawn.

19 ... d2 20.'We2 ttlxd5= Both sides have a weak pawn, and overall the

position is balanced.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

E) s.tt! a

a b c d e f g h ..

This has been White's most popular choice in the position.

8 • . . .ig4 From here White has occasionally tried El)

9.'%Yd2, but the main line is E2) 9..ie2.

El) 9.'%Yd2

a b c d e f g h

This rare move has so far scored three wins and two draws without a defeat for White, so it should not be underestimated. I like the following idea of Sutovsky:

9 •.• c5! IO.d5 .ixf3 l l.gxf3 .ixc3 12.bxc3 e6 The position is rather irregular and double

edged, but it seems to me that Black has adequate play.

13.d6 This must be critical. I also examined 13 .j.c4,

which can be met convincingly by means of: 13 . . . Wf6! 1 4.f4 ltJd7 White's centre is starting to look vulnerable, for instance: 1 5 .e5 'Wh4 16.j.e2 (or 16.dxe6 ltJxe5!) 16 . . . ttJb6 17.d6 ltJd5+

13 .•• '%Yf6 14.£4

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h

14 • . . e5! Black must of course prevent his opponent

from setting up a pawn chain from f4 to d6.

15.fxe5 White should probably have preferred

1 5 .f5N ltJd7 although Black is not worse here either.

15 . • . '%Yf3! White must have underestimated this move.


16.E:gl tl:lc6 17 . .ig2 �xe5! This simple tactic justifies Black's previous

play.

lS.E:dl We have been following the game I. Sokolov

- Sutovsky, Kragujevac 2009. At this point Black could have obtained better chances by means of:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

18 .. . �g4!N 19.�e2 �h4 1 9 . . . 'Wf4 is also good.

20.�e3 E:ad8! Bringing another piece into play. Black

has the initiative in a position with equal material.

E2) 9 . .ie2

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

This natural move is the clear main line.

9 ... c5 Black responds in the usual way.

10.d5 e6 Black has an interesting alternative:

1 o . . . .ixc3t l l .bxc3 e6 This undermining move almost always figures in Black's plans at some point.

a b c d e f g h

12.dxe6 I checked two alternatives as well: 1 2.c4 is risky due to 12 . . . exd5 13 .cxd5 E:e8, for instance 14.tLld2 .ixe2 1 5 .'Wxe2 lLla6 and White still cannot castle as his d5-pawn would hang. 1 2.0-0 is safer, but after 1 2 . . . exd5 13.exd5 'Wd6 14.'Wb3 b6 Black has a pleasant position.

12 . . . 'Wxd 1 t 13.'it>xdl 13.E:xd1 .ixe6 does not change much.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

Chapter 3 - 5.i.d2 39

13 . . . i.xe6 14.�c2 lt:lc6 15 .:1!hd1 In this balanced position the players agreed a

draw in Dreev - Smirin, Plovdiv 20 1 0.

1 1 .0-0

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

ll ••• exd5 12.exd5 W!'d6!

13 .•• lt:ld7!?N This is my improvement over the following

game: 13 . . . i.xc3 14.bxc3 b6 1 5.l'!fe1 ixf3 16.i.xf3 lt:ld7 17.a4 lt:le5 18.i.e2 Black's position was solid but slightly passive in Nikolov - Sutovsky, Rijeka 20 10.

14.Wfxb7 This is the most principled reply. Instead

after 1 4.h3 .ixf3 1 5 .i.xf3 b6 16.l'!fel l'!fe8 Black is fine.

14 ... .L:c3 15.bxc3 t£Je5! Perhaps unexpectedly, it turns out that Black

has full compensation for the pawn.

16.W!'b3 I also analysed 16.'1Wa6 lt:lxf3t 17.gxf3

'1Wxa6 1 8.ixa6 ixf3 19.c4 l'!fb8 20.l'!fb 1 l'!b6! 21 .l'!xb6 axb6 22.i.b5 l'!a3 when White may

Before developing the knight on d7, the even end up worse.

queen occupies her best possible square.

l3.Wfb3 In the event of 13.1MI'd2 Black soon gets

a comfortable position by playing natural moves: 13 . . . lt:\d7 1 4.h3 ixf3 1 5 .i.xf3 This was Mambrini - Beggi, Monrecatini Terme 1994, and now after 1 5 ... l'!fe8N 16.l'!fe 1 i.xc3 17.bxc3 b5 it is White who should be thinking about equalizing.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

16 ... L£3 l? . .L:£3 c4 18.W!'dl gadS= Black easily regains his pawn and the

resulting position will be equal.


Conclusion

The 5.id2 system has become quite fashionable in recent years, and its popularity shows no sign of abating. Many players have favoured a knight retreat to b6, either immediately or on the following move, but I believe that my recommendation of5 . . . ig7 6.e4 lt:lxc3 7.ixc3 0-0 is a preferable solution. White has tried a number of different set-ups, but in virtually all cases Black will respond in the same way, by playing the thematic counterattacking move . . . c5 at the earliest convenience. Normally White responds with d5, after which the further undermining . . . e6 will form the basis of Black's counterplay. Throughout the chapter we have seen plenty of evidence for Black's dynamic potential and tactical resources, and overall I believe that the second player has a full share of the chances.

Various 5th Moves

5.g3

Variation Index l.d4 lL!f6 2.c4 g6 3.lLlc3 d5 4.cxd5 lL!xd5 5.g3

A) 8.e3 V;V a5 A1) 9.lLle2 A2) 9 . .td2

B) 8.lL!f3 lL!c6! B1) 9.d5!? B2) 9.0-0

5 ... .tg7 6.e4 lLlxc3 7.bxc3 c5

B3) 9.e3 0-0 10.0-0 .te6 B31 ) 1 l .V;Va4 B32) 1 1 .lLld2 B33) l l . .ta3

B4) 9 . .te3 0-0 10.0-0 cxd4 B41 ) 1 l .cxd4 B42) 1 1 .lLlxd4 lL!a5!

B421 ) 12.V;Vc1 B422) 12.lLlb5 B423) 12.V;Va4 B424) 12.V;Vd3 B425) 12J�b1

a b c d e f g h

42 42 43 44

44 45 48 48 49 50 51 51 52 52 53 53 54 55


. l .d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 d5 4.cxd5 l£lxd5 5.g3

a b c d e f g h

This is a different version of the Fianchetto System, which was analysed in Chapters 3-7 of the first volume. This way White bypasses the ... c6 and . . . dS system which I recommended, but allows Black the option of creating a traditional Griinfeld structure by exchanging on c3.

5 ... J.g7 6.J.g2 �xc3! As I explained in the aforementioned

chapter, I have no intention of entering the 6 . . . l£lb6 7.tLlf3 line, unless I am sitting on the opposite side of the board.

7.bxc3 c5 From this position White can choose between

A) 8.e3 and B) 8.�£3. When I checked the database I was surprised to learn that the former has been played more frequently, as I believe the latter to be clearly the more challenging option.

A) 8.e3

This move ensures White of a solid foothold in the centre, but it is too slow to offer realistic prospects of an advantage.

8 ... '1'a5

In the end I decided to recommend this slightly unusual move, although the more orthodox alternatives of 8 . . . 0-0 and 8 . . . tLlc6 also promise Black a good game.

From here we will analyse A1) 9.�e2 and A2) 9.J.d2.

A1) 9.�e2

a b c d e f g h

This is not a bad move, but it allows Black to force a desirable pawn structure.

9 ... cxd4 10.exd4 This structure is virtually always harmless for

Black, as demonstrated in several lines in the first volume.

10 ... 0-0 1 1 .0-0 l£lc6 12.'1'b3 This has been the usual choice, although two

other moves have been tried.

1 2.a4 .ifS 1 3 . .ia3 1'!fd8!? (Black opts for an interesting pawn sacrifice, although there was nothing wrong with 13 . . . 1'!fe8.) 14 . .ixc6 bxc6 1 5 . .ixe7 1'!e8 16 . .ib4 WfdS 17.tLlf4 Wfc4� Black's bishop pair and light-squared control gave him sufficient compensation for the missing pawn in Korchnoi - Huzman, Beersheba 2004.

Chapter 4 - 5 .g3 43

1 2.:B:e I :B:d8 With this useful move Black prepares . . . e5. Here is a nice illustrative game, which once again involved a sacrifice of the e7-pawn: 13 . .id2 .ig4 14.h3 .ie6 1 5.lt:lf4 .ic4 16 . .ixc6 bxc6 17.:B:xe7

a b c d e f g h

17 ... c5! 1 8.d5 .if8 19.:B:e l 'Wa6 20.'Wf3 :B:d7 2 I .'Wg4 :B:ad8 Black regained his pawn with a comfortable game in Louro - Krueger, e-mail 2006.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

12 ... l::!.d8 13.d5 �e5 14 . .ig5 14.lt:ld4 .id7 1 5 . .ig5 occurred in

Mamedyarov - Grischuk, Almaty 2008, and now 1 5 . . . :B:e8N would have transposed to the main line below.

14 ... ge8 15.�d4 .td7 16.l::!.abl b6 17 . .tf4 l::!.ac8

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

Black has absolutely no problems and positionally he stands better, so in the following game White took the opportunity to simplifY.

18 . .ixe5 After other moves White would simply be

worse.

18 ... .ixe5 19.�c6 �xc3 20.�xc3 .ixc3 2l.�xa7 !:!.aS 22.�c6 l::!.xa2 23.gxb6 gb2

At this point a draw was agreed in Ki. Georgiev - Kramnik, Belgrade 1997.

A2) 9 . .td2

a b c e g

With this move White prevents an unfavourable change in the pawn structure.


9 ... 0-0 10.ttle2 t£lc6 11 .0-0 Black has tried several moves here, but my

favourite is:

l l ... YMa6!? 1 1 .. .:B:d8 has been the most popular choice,

while 1 1 . . .id7 looks like another reasonable option.

12.t£lf4 White tries to improve his passive knight.

He attempted a similar idea with 1 2.ttlcl in Avontuur - Schenning, Veldhoven 1992, and here I would suggest: 1 2 . . . id7N 13.ltlb3 b6 14.a4 (Black should almost never be afraid of 14.dxc5?!, and indeed after 14 ... :B:ac8 he has wonderful compensation for the pawn, thanks to White's dreadful queenside structure.) 14 . . . :B:ab8 The position is unclear and approximately equal.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h

12 ... .id7 1 2 ... :B:d8 looks like a good alternative.

13.�e1 �ac8 14.-ifl White tries to harass his opponent's queen,

but the idea does not lead to any special benefit for him.

I4 ... YMa3 15.�b1 b6 Black has a comfortable position, and in the

fo llowing game White now went astray:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h

16.'iMb3?! YMxb3 17.axb3 e5 18.dxe5 ttlxe5i This queenless position is more pleasant for

Black thanks to his superior piece coordination, Annakov - Svidler, Internet (rapid) 1999.

B) s.ttlf3

a b c d e f g h

8 ... ttlc6! Black must be precise with the move order.

Instead after 8 ... 0-0 9.0-0 ltlc6 White has the promising option of 10.d5! which has recently yielded good results for him.

After the text move it is worth considering B1) 9.d5!?, B2) 9.0-0, B3) 9.e3 and B4) 9.ie3.

B1) 9.d5!?

Chapter 4 - 5.g3 45

a b c d e f g h

This surprising new move was played for the first time in 20 1 1 .

9 ••• tL!b4!?N This seems like a promising reply. White

obtained interesting compensation after 9 . . . .ixc3 t 1 0 . .id2 .ixa 1 1 l .'Mf xa 1 ttl d4 12.tt:lxd4 cxd4 13.'Mfxd4 f6 14.0-0 0-0 1 5 . .ib4� in Khismatullin - Kozul, Aix-lesBains 20 1 1 .

IO.cxb4 Otherwise White just loses material without

getting much in return.

IO . . • hal l l .bxc5 I find it hard to believe that 1 1 .0-0 cxb4

1 2 . .ih6 ic3 can be a serious option for White.

a b c d e f g h

l l ..• 'Mfa5t! Black should take the opportunity to pick

up a pawn, while also activating his queen.

12.J.d2 In the event of 1 2.ttld2 'Mfxc5 1 3.0-0 (or

13.tt:le4 'Mfd4+) 13 . . . .ig7 14.tt:le4 'Mfd4 Black is doing great.

12 ... 'Mfxa2 13.0-0 J.g7 Since move 9 both sides have played logically,

and the present position seems critical for the assessment of the whole line. I was unable to find any truly dangerous ideas for White, for instance:

14.J.f4 Or 14.e4 a5! 1 5 . .ie3 a4 16.e5 0-0 and Black

is better.

14 . . • 0-0 15.d6 Another line is 1 5 . .ie5 .ixe5 16.tt:lxe5 'Mfb2

17.tt:ld3 'Mfd4 when Black seems to be safe enough .

15 ... exd6 16.hd6 .ie6 Black is certainly not worse.

B2) 9.0-0

a b c d e f g h

9 ... cxd4!


·Black should accept the pawn sacrifice. Besides, 9 . . . 0-0 would transpose to the undesirable line mentioned in the note to Black's eighth move after 1 0.d5!.

10.cxd4 tllxd4 ll .tllxd4 �xd4 12J:i:bl White clearly has compensation for the

pawn, thanks to his superior development and powerful light-squared bishop. Nevertheless it is doubtful that he can aspire to anything more than equality.

1 2.Wxd4?! Black should be happy to see this inaccurate move.

12 . . . .ixd4 13 .E:b 1 Now Black has a strong defensive idea.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

13 . . . .ib6!

a b c d e f g h

Blocking the b-file makes Black's life a lot easier.

14.a4 Black should not be concerned by 14 . .ih6 preventing castling, as he can solve his problems easily by means of 14 . . . f6 intending . . . �f7.

14 . . . 0-0 1 5 . .ia3 E:e8 Black has managed to protect all his pawns and will soon be ready to develop his queen's bishop.

16.a5 .ixa5 17 . .ixb7 .ixb7 18 .E:xb7 e6+ It was clearly White who was fighting for the

draw in Schroeder - Hebels, corr. 1 990.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h

12 ... 0-0 13.i.e3 �c4 This is the move I like best. 13 ... Wxd1

14.E:fxd1 a5 gave Black a tenable, though somewhat passive position in Gritsak -Schmidt, Warsaw 2009. Please note that 14 ... E:b8?! would not be an improvement, as after 15 . .ixa7 E:a8 16 . .ic5 E:xa2 17 . .ixe7 E:e8 1 8 . .if3!t White retains unpleasant pressure.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

14.i.d5 I consider this the most important move,

not least as it was the choice of Aronian. Nevertheless White has a few playable alternatives.

According to theory, 14.Wd2 leads to a drawish position after the following sequence: 14 ... .ie6 1 5.E:xb7 E:ad8 16.Wa5 Wxe2

Chapter 4 - 5 .g3 47

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

17.:1ha7 ( 17."/J.xe7 �xa2 leads to dry equality.) 17 . . . "/J.d1 1 8.h3 "'J.xfl t 1 9 . .ixfl �d 1 20.�d2 �xd2 2 l ..ixd2 .id4 22."/J.xe7 .ixa2= Krivonosovs - Sykora, Spain 2004.

16."/J.fe1 �h5 1 7."/J.bcl occurred in Vidarte Morales - Cuadras Avellana, Spain 2003, and here Black should have played: 17 ... e6!N (The game continued 17 . . . .ig4 18."/J.c5 e5?! 19."/J.c?t when Black had some problems.) 18 . .ig2 a5+

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

14.a4 �a6 1 5 . .ie4?! Being a pawn down, 1 White should play more incisively. ( 1 5 ."/J.b5N looks better, after which 1 5 ... "/J.bS 16 . .if4 e5 a b C d e f g h

17 . .ixe5 .ixe5 18 ."/J.xe5 .ie6 reaches a balanced 16 ..• .if5!N position.)

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

1 5 . . . "/J.bS! White's compensation is in question and after the further mistake 16."/J.b4? .ih3 Black was clearly better in Grynszpan - S. Alonso, Argentina 2000.

14 •.. �a6 15.'!�Yb3 Wfxe2 Black should take the opportunity to bag

another pawn. Instead after 1 5 . . . "'J.b8 16 . .if4! e5 17 . .ie3 White retains some pressure.

16 . .ic5

This is a necessary improvement over 16 . . . .ie6 17.ixe6 �xe6 18.�xe6 fxe6 19 ."/J.xb7 "'J.f5 20."/J.c?;l; when, despite his extra pawn, Black was doomed to a passive defence in Aronian -Radjabov, Nice (blindfold) 2009.

17J�bel I also analysed:

17."/J.fe1 �d2 1 8."/J.bd 1 Another interesting line is 18 .ib4 �d4 ( 18 . . . �d3!? is not bad either.) 19 ."/J.bd1 .ic2! 20.�xc2 �xb4 21 ."/J.e4 �a3 22."/J.d3 "'J.ac8 23.ixf7t 'it>h8 with equality.

1 8 . . . �c2 1 9.�xc2 .ixc2 20."/J.cl if5

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h


2 1 ..ixb7 After 2 Uhe7 Elad8 22.ixb7 Elfe8 the evaluation is the same.

2 1 . ..Eiab8 22.Eixe7 Elfe8 The position is equal.

17 .•• %Yd3

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

18.�xe7 In the event of 1 8.'1Wxb7 Black can simply

play 1 8 . . . if6.

18 ... %Yxb3 19.axb3 19 .ixb3 b6 20.ia3 ie6! is also equal.

19 ... �ad8 20 . .ixb7 .if6 White has nothing here, for instance:

21.�c7 .ie5=

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

B3) 9.e3

a b . c d e f g h

This time White plays more patiently and secures his centre before castling.

9 ... 0-0 10.0-0 J.e6 This is my preferred choice although there

are numerous alternatives. Now it is White who must make a choice, the main options being B31) I I .%Ya4, B32) l l .�d2 and B33) Il.J.a3.

l l .�e2 This has been played in a few games, but it should be harmless.

l l . . .Eic8 1 2.�dl Jedlicka - Akesson, Pardubice 2008. Now I developed the following idea:

12 . . . cxd4N 13.cxd4 Alternatively after 13.tt:lxd4 tt:lxd4 1 4.cxd4 ic4 15 .�d2 �d7= Black has a good game.

13 . . . tt:la5 14.tt:le5 b6 1 5.ia3 tt:lc4 16.tt:lxc4 ixc4 17.�d2 �d7=

The position is balanced.

B31) 1 1 .%Ya4

a b c d e f g h

l l ... cxd4 The untested l l .. .!k8!?N also looks

interesting.

12.cxd4 1 2.tt:lxd4 was played in Ngo - Vu Dinh

Hung, Kuala Lumpur 200 1 . Here I would

Chapter 4 - 5.g3 49

suggest 12 ... .id7N when 13.lt:Jxc6 .ixc6 14 . .ixc6 bxc6 1 5 .ia3 Vf!c7= is just equal.

12 ... '1Wd7! Setting up an important tactical moti£

13J:�dl Defending, at least for the moment.

In the following game both players were oblivious to the opportunity: 13 . .ia3? This was Stajcic - Szekely, Kecskemet 1 990, and here Black missed: 13 . . . lt:Jxd4!N 14.Vfixd7 lt:Je2t 1 5.i>h1 .ixd7 16.E!.ab 1 b6 17 . .ixe7 El.fe8 18.ib4 :i:'!ac8 Material is equal, but Black's superior pieces give him the advantage.

13 .. JUd8 I4 . .ib2? White should have guarded against the

following tactical strike, although Black has clearly solved his opening problems in any case. At this point, in the game Aaron - Geller, Stockholm 1962, Black should have played:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

14 ... �xd4! Once again the complications work out well

for him:

15.\Wxd7lDxf3t 16.Lf3 �hd7 17J�xd7 hd7 18.hg7 i>xg7 19.hb7 El.bS 20.id5 El.b2i

White will have to fight for a draw.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

B32) l l .�d2

a b c d e f g h

l l .. J:'ic8 12 . .ia3 12.Vfia4 was played in Rodjko - Shadrin,

Novosibirsk 1 998, and one subsequent game.

a b c d e f g h

discovered an interesting response in 12 . . . Vfia5!N when 13.ixc6 leads to the following forced line: 13 . . . Vf!xc3 14.ixb7 Vf!xa1 1 5 .ixc8 El.xc8 16.lt:Jb3 Vfib 1 17.lt:Jxc5 Vf!xa2 1 8.Vf!xa2 ixa2 Black is at least equal, and can try to make something of his two bishops and passed a-pawn in the endgame.

12 ... cxd4 13.cxd4 \WaS Immediately exploiting the vulnerable

position ofWhite's dark-squared bishop.

14 . .ib2 lDb4 15.a4


We have been following the game Barlov - Akesson, Valjevo 1984. At this point Black should have continued:

a b c d e f g h

15 ... b6N I6.�b3 YNa6i The position remains complex, but Black's

active pieces give him the better chances.

B33) II..ia3

a b c d e f g h

Forcing Black to release the tension.

l l ... cxd4 12.�xd4

a b c d e f g h

14 . . . b6N It is useful to safeguard this pawn from a future attack along the b-file, not to mention the X-ray vision of the bishop on g2. 1 5.tt:ld2 tt:lb4 ( I S . . . tt:le5!? 16.dxe5 :B:cd8 is also worth considering.) 16 . .ixb4 Wfxb4+ Black's bishop pair gives him the better chances.

12 ... .id5 This move equalizes easily, as shown by the

following illustrative example.

13 . .ixd5 YNxd5 14.'iNb3 YNxb3 15.axb3 i:Ue8 1 5 .. . :B:fc8 1 6.:B:fd 1 .if6= is fine for Black.

I6J:Ucl Akopian - Kuzmin, Dubai 2000.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 Recapturing with the knight is quite thematic

for this variation. The alternative is 1 2.cxd4 a b c d e f g h

Wfa5 13.Wfd3 :B:ac8 14.:B:fcl Edouard - Vachier 16 ... :B:ac8N Lagrave, Chalons 2008, and here Black should have played:

This natural move would have maintained easy equality.

Chapter 4 - 5 .g3 5 1

B4) 9 . .ie3

a b c d e f g h

White supports his centre while developing a piece. In my view this is the most challenging continuation at his disposal.

9 ... 0-0 10.0-0 cxd4 From this position White can play both

B41) l l.cxd4 and B42) l l .ttlxd4.

B41) ll .cxd4

By recapturing with the pawn White keeps his structure intact, but in doing so he restricts his dark-squared bishop.

l l ... .ie6 12.'ilYd2 White has also tried a different queen move:

12 .Wfa4 Here I recommend:

12 . . . Wfd7!? 13-l:l:fdl E!:fd8 14.Wfa3 I also examined: 14.E!:ac1N E!:ac8 1 5.lt:lg5

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

1 5 . . . b5! 16.Wfxb5 lt:lxd4 17.Wfxd7 .ixd7 1 8.E!:xc8 .ixc8 1 9.'it>fl With equality.

14 . . . .id5 1 5 .E!:ab l This position was reached in A. Rodriguez - Valverde Lopez, Peru 2000. Here Black could have safely played:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 5 . . . b6N

a b c d e f g h

In the game he was most probably worried about:

1 6.lt:le5 But there is a clever retort available.

16 . . . .ixe5 17.dxe5 Wff5! Black takes over the initiative.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h

12 ... .id5 13.:Sabl Another game continued 1 3.E!:fdl E!:c8

14 . .ih6 Wfd6 1 5 . .ixg7 'it>xg7 16.E!:ab l b6 when Black had no problems in Faraci - Torrarolo, Imperia 1996.


13 .. J�c8 I4JUdl This position was reached in Beliavsky -

Balogh, Austria 2005, and here Black should have played actively by means of:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h

14 .. .lt�a5N The following continuation looks normal:

15.i.h6 �c4 16.�£4 �d6 17.\Wh4 !xh6 }8.�xh6 f6CD

Black is by no means worse in this complicated position.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

B42) II.tllxd4

a b c d e f g h

This is considered to be the main direction. White 'sacrifices' his pawn structure in order to maximize the activity of his pieces.

II. .. ttl aS! With this multi-purpose move Black

safeguards his knight, defends the b7-pawn and eyes the c4-square, which could become a juicy outpost for his knight later in the game.

In this complex position White has a wide choice between B421) 12.�cl, B422) 12.ttlb5, B423) 12.�a4, B424) 12.�d3 and B425) 12J�bl .

B421) 12.�cl

The plan of trading the dark-squared bishops is slow and absolutely harmless for Black.

12 ... �c4 13J�dl The consistent 13.i.h6 actually leads to

trouble for White: 13 . . . e5! 14.i.xg7 'tt>xg7 1 5.lLlc2 Wlc7 16.lLlb4 i.e6+ Black is in control.

13 ... tllxe3 14.�xe3 �c7

a b c d e f g h

15.h3?! Too slow. Instead the energetic 15 .lLlbS!?N

WleS 16.Wlxe5 Axe5 17.f4 would have given White just enough activity to maintain the balance.

15 ... a6 I6J�acl gbs 17.c4 gdsi White does not have enough activity to

compensate for his opponent's bishop pair and

Chapter 4 - 5.g3 53

better pawn structure, Lew - Rawlings, e-mail 2008.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

B422) 12.c�b5

a b c d e f g h

This move is a bit premature and not dangerous for Black.

12 • . . .id7! l3J;bl The main point behind Black's last move

is that 13.lDxa7?? is refuted by 1 3 . . . lDc4 14 . .id4 e5 1 5 . .ic5 '1Mfc7! 16 . .ixf8 .ixf8 when Black picks up the stranded knight to reach a winning position.

The text move was played in Rustemov -Yuferov, Minsk 1 994. Here Black could have solved all his problems by means of:

13 ... a6N 14.tLlc7 Senseless is 14.ltJd4?! '1Mfc7 when Black is just

better.

14 ... '1Wxc7 15 . .ib6 '!WcS 16 • .ixa5 .ic6= Black is doing fine.

B423) 12.'1Wa4

This is playable but slightly risky for White, as his queen can become a target for Black's pieces, starting from the very next move.

a b c d e f g h

12 ••. .id7 l3.'1Wb4 E:cS White must react precisely in order to avoid

falling into an inferior position.

14.E:fdl In a few games White has chosen the other

rook: 14J!ad1 E:c4 1 5.'1Mfb 1

1 5.'1Mfa3?! allows Black to consolidate his position: 1 5 . . . E:a4 16.'1Mfb2 '1Mfc8 17 . .ig5 e6+ White has no compensation for his positional defects, Kampenuss - Suetin, Riga 1962.

1 5 ... '\MfeS 16 . .ixb7 e5 17.lDf3 .if5 18.'1Mfb2 lDxb7 1 9.'1Mfxb7

Ftacnik - Bacrot, Hamburg 20 1 0. It is clear that Black has good compensation for the pawn and he is not worse at all. Still, from this position his most precise continuation would have been:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h


1 9 . . . Wfa4N 20.\Wxa7 \Wxa7 2l .i.xa7 E!:a8 22.i.e3 E!:xc3 23.E!:d2 E!:ca3

With a level endgame.

14 .. J�c4 15.Wfb2 In another game White tried a different

queen move: 1 5.\Wa3 b6 16 .i.g5?!

Every move has a high price for White, and with this inaccuracy he slips into a worse position. Instead 16.ltJb3N would have maintained the balance.

16 . . . E!:c5! 17.h4 h6 1 8.lLlb3? A blunder in a bad position.

1 8 . . . lLlxb3 19.axb3 hxg5 20.\Wxa7 E!:c7-+ Gibbons - Akhayan, Kallithea 2008.

15 ... Wfc8 It is useful for Black to remove the queen

from d-file in anticipation of lLlb5.

16.Wfa3 16.ltJb5N \We8!? (Alternatively 16 . . . i.xb5

17.\Wxb5 b6 looks extremely solid.) 17.E!:ab l a6 1 8.ltJa3 E!:a4oo In this complex position Black's chances are by no means worse.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

16 ... b6N This is my improvement over 1 6 . . . E!:a4 as

at which point White should have played 17.Wfxe7N E!:e8 18 .\Wh4 I!Nxc3 19.E!:acl I!Nb2 20.i.d5 when Black is under some pressure.

17.Wfxe7 ges 18.Wfh4 gxc3 Black has nothing to worry about.

B424) 12.Wfd3

a b c d e f g h

12 ... a6 The need for this prophylactic move is

demonstrated by the line 1 2 ... i.d7?! 13 .lLlb3! lLlxb3 14.axb3t when White obtained some pressure in Benko - Chandler, Lone Pine 1979.

13.gacl 13.c4 \Wc7 14.E!:acl is an equally valid move

order.

13 ... Wfc7 14.c4 gdsN I found a convincing route to equality,

beginning with this move.

14 . . . i.d7 was Black's choice in Bolbochan - Najdorf, Buenos Aires 1 949, but after the natural 1 5 .E!:fdlN White has promising play. (The game continued with the inferior 1 5 .ltJb3?! i.f5! when Black was already better.)

played in Banus'Z - Wittmann, Budapest 2005, 15,gfdl

Chapter 4 - 5.g3 55

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h

15 ... .L:d4! This exchanging operation solves all Black's

problems.

16 . .ixd4 c!Llc6 17.�e3 1 7.Wic3 can be met in exactly the same way.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

B425) 12.gbl

a b c d e f g h

12 ... a6 It is essential to take control over the b5-

square. By doing so Black not only stops a knight invasion, but also secures a comfortable square for his queen on c7.

Black has comfortable equality, as 13.ltlb3 demonstrated by the following lines: 13 .'W'cl ?! Wic7 I4J:'!:dl E:b8 1 5 .lt:lb3 �f5+

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

20.�b2 20.c5 E:d8 2 I .Wib4 �d5 is also equal.

20 .. Jk8 2l.c5 �a5! 22 . .ixb7 E:xc5 23J:!xc5 �xc5 24 . .L:a6 �a5

Black regains his pawn to reach a dead equal endgame.

White's play over the last few moves lacked vitality and he quickly found himself in an unpleasant situation, Bewersdorff - Gutman, Hessen 1990.

I also analysed a natural alternative: 13.Wia4N Wic7 I4.�g5 e5 1 5 .lt:lb3 lt:lc4 16.lt:ld2

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

I6 . . . b5! This temporary sacrifice solves all Black's problems. 1 7.E:xb5 axb5 1 8.Wixa8


ke6 19 .'Wc6 'Wxc6 20.kxc6 f6 2 1 .ltJxc4 kxc4 22.ke3 Ei:c8 Black regains the pawn to reach an equal position.

13 ... �c4 14 . .id4 This position occurred in Banusz -

Wittmann, Balatonlelle 2005, and here I suggest the natural improvement:

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

14 . • . 'Wc7N In the game Black opted for the passive

14 . . . ltJd6?! and soon found himself in a difficult position.

15.�d2 White needs to exchange the strong knight at

some point. My analysis continues as follows:

15 .. J:id8 16.�xc4 'Wxc4 17.'Wb3 'Wxb3 18J��xb3 Ld4 19.cxd4 :!3xd4 20.Lb7 gbs 21.Lc8 gxc8=

With full equality.

Conclusion

The idea of fighting against the Griinfeld bishop by employing a symmetrical set-up with a bishop on g2 is not without logic. Nevertheless we have seen that this does not stop Black from obtaining his typical pressure against the enemy pawn centre.

In variation A with 8.e3, White supports his centre solidly but is slow in developing his pieces, which enables Black to develop smoothly and actively, and so B) 8.tt::lf3 is rightly considered more challenging. Then after the correct 8 . . . tt::lc6! White has a surprisingly wide choice. The aggressive B l ) 9.d5!? is a nice idea, but I believe I have shown a good way to defuse it. The pawn sacrifice B2) 9.0-0 leads to a simplified position in which White has full compensation, but no advantage. B3) 9.e3 can be compared with 8.e3 on the previous move; again, Black obtains easy development with good chances in the middlegame. Finally, the more active B4) 9 . .ie3 aims for more fluid development, but we have seen that Black can claim a full share of the chances here too.

Various 7th Moves 7.ig5

Variation Index l .d4 tl::J£6 2.c4 g6 3.tLlc3 d5 4.cxd5 tl::lxd5 5.e4 tl::lxc3 6.bxc3 .ig7 7 . .ig5

7 ... c5 8J:!:cl 0-0 A) 9.d5 B) 9.tl::lf3 .ig4 10.d5 �d6 l l • .ie2 tl::ld7

81) 12.0-0 82) 12.h3

A) after 9 .d5 B) note to l i . . .ti::ld7

a b c d e f g h a b c d e f g h

9 .. .f5! - the spirit of the Griinfeld 1 3 . . . e6N

82) after 14 .c4

a b c d e f g h

1 4 . . . bxc4!N

58 59 59 61


l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3Jl:k3 d5 4.cxd5 �xd5 5.e4 �xc3 6.bxc3 .ig7 7 . .ig5

White's main idea in this line is to provoke the move . . . h6, and then to continue with .ie3 and Wfd2; compared with Chapter 1 1 , White would gain a tempo by attacking the black h-pawn. However Black can easily manage without moving his h-pawn.

7 ... c5 8.�cl 0-0

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a b c d e f g h

Here play may take two directions: A) 9.d5 or B) 9.�f3.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

A) 9.d5 f5!

a b c d e f g h

This is very much in the spirit of the

Griinfeld; Black attacks the white centre, aiming to use his lead in development.

10 . .ic4 �h8 l l.�e2 Probably the most challenging move. The

alternatives are:

1 1 .exf5 E!:xf5 1 2.ltlf3 tt:ld7 13.Wfe2 tt:le5 14.tt:lxe5 :!'!xeS 15 . .ie3 e6 Black has comfortably equalized.

In Troff- Haessel, Las Vegas 20 1 0, White tried to hold the centre with 1 1 .f3. It is now very tempting to play: 1 l . . .Wfd6N 1 2 . .id3 tt:ld7 13.ltle2 c4 14 . .ib 1 fxe4 1 5 . .ixe4 tt'lc5 16.0-0 .if5 Black has the better chances.

l l ...fxe4 12.�g3 if5 If Black would prefer to avoid the repetition

in the main line, I can offer a reasonable alternative in 1 2 . . . tt:ld7N 13.tt:lxe4 tt:lb6 14.Wfe2 h6 15 . .ie3 tt:lxc4 16.Wfxc4 b6 with double-edged play.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

13.0-0 Inferior for White is 13.Wfe2 ltld7 14.tt:lxe4

h6 1 5 . .ih4 g5 16 . .ig3 tt:lb6 17.:!'!d1 Lysyj -Sutovsky, Dagomys 2008. Now I recommend the straightforward: 17 . . . tt:lxc4N 1 8.Wfxc4 b5 19.'11Me2 .ixe4 20.Wfxe4 .ixc3t 21 .\t>fl Wfd7 Black is clearly better.

Chapter 5 - 7.i.g5 59

13 ... �d7 14.d6 White cannot afford to play slowly, for

example: 14.'We2 tt:le5 1 5 .tt:lxe4 tt:lxc4 1 6.'Wxc4 b5 16.Wfd3 c4 White is losing his d-pawn.

14 ... J.f6 15.i.h6 i.g7 16.i.g5 J.f6 17.i.h6 It seems that neither side can avoid the

repetition, Polak - Ftacnik, Czech Republic 2009.

B) 9.tLlf3 i.g4 10.d5 vtfd6

much prefer this positional concept to the sharp 1 O . . . f5 which leads to crazy complications: 1 l .'Wb3 �h8 12.tt:ld2 fxe4 13.'Wxb7 tt:ld? 14.h3 I don't have much faith in Black's position here.

8

7

6

5

4

3

the-eye.eu · 2016. 3. 20. · preface the position which occurs after the opening moves l.d4...

Documents