% BOOKTITLE = Declining the Queen's Gambit
[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "About this Publication"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "D30"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "5"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 {. This book provides a repertoire for Black with the
ever-popular Queen's Gambit Declined. Opening expert John Cox covers not one
but two key options for Black. The Tartakower Variation is a sophisticated
defence used successfully by world champions such as Kasparov, Karpov and
Kramnik. The Lasker Variation is an easy-to-learn and reliable option devised
by one of the legends of the game. Cox also demonstrates how to play against
White's other tries, including the Exchange Variation, Catalan and Bf4 lines.
He explains in detail the typical plans and tactics adopted by both sides,
whilst also tackling the tricky subject of move-order possibilities.} 3. -- {
A repertoire for Black against the Queen's Gambit. -- Provides answers to all
of White's main options. -- Ideal for improvers, club players and tournament
players.} (3. -- {John Cox is an International Master and a former British
Junior Champion. His books for Everyman Chess have established him as a writer
with impressive credentials.}) *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Introduction"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "15"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

{This is a repertoire book for Black against} 1. d4 {, based on the Queen's
Gambit Declined (QGD). It deliberately concentrates more on theory than on
strategical explanations; there is no shortage of the latter in the QGD, but
the literature has been missing detailed theoretical coverage of the
Tartakower, for instance, for an extraordinarily long time. Although these
systems are some of the oldest in chess, nothing stands still, and the
variations at the cutting edge today are not those which concerned the
classical masters of the 1930's, nor even those which were in fashion in the
1980's. --- I don't cover lines without c2-c4 such as the pseudo-Tromp,
Veresov, Colle and Torre for various reasons. First, they aren't so common or
significant after} d5 {. Second, I did that before, in Dealing with d4
Deviations. Third, they're dealt with well in other books on the market. And,
lastly, there's only so much space in a book and I wanted to be sure the main
repertoire was presented in sufficient detail. One of the appeals of the QGD
is that against flank openings Black can pretty much set up in the same way as
he does against 1 d4; the only thing he needs to know something about is the
neo-Catalan or Réti line which arises after 1 c4 e6 2 Nf3 d5 3 g3 Nf6 4 b3 Be7
5 Bg2 0-0 6 0-0 c5 7 e3 Nc6 8 Bb2, or some such sequence. I'm afraid I haven't
covered that either, so let me just recommend either 4...dxc4 5 bxc4 e5 or 4...d4 as irritants for White if you don't want to play the main line, and move on.
The Catalan, however, I have counted as part of White-main-lines-with c2-c4,
and given a repertoire for Black against it.} 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 ({
Chapter Six covers the Catalan,} 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. g3 {
, and the system I have chosen is the fashionable} dxc4 5. Bg2 ({or} 5. Qa4+ c6
) 5... Bb4+ 6. Bd2 a5 {, which was reinvented by Topalov and since then has
produced three of the epic contests of modern chess (Kramnik-Topalov, Game 1
of the 2006 Elista match; Anand-Topalov, Game 4 of the 2010 Sofia match; and
Carlsen-Kramnik, Wijk aan Zee 2010).}) 3... Nf6 4. Nf3 ({Chapter Five covers
the Exchange Variation, which I have preferred to deal with by the sidestep} 4.
cxd5 exd5 5. Bg5 c6 {, and now either} 6. Qc2 ({or} 6. e3 Bf5 {
- Nigel Short's recipe}) 6... Be7 7. e3 Nbd7 8. Bd3 Nh5 {(a very solid system
favoured in his time by Ulf Andersson, and also by Lars Bo Hansen and the
English GM Jonathan Parker).}) 4... Be7 5. Bg5 ({
Chapter Four is devoted to the fashionable} 5. Bf4 O-O 6. e3 Nbd7 {
, popularized by Kramnik among others.}) 5... h6 6. Bh4 ({Chapter Three deals
with White systems which avoid the Tartakower and Lasker proper, but without
falling into any of the subsequent three parts. The most significant of these
is 'Bxf6' systems, including} 6. Bxf6 {
, but also a couple of early Rc1 lines, and 5 Qc2 or 5 e3 are covered.}) 6...
O-O 7. e3 b6 {
. The repertoire is based around the Tartakower, which forms Chapter One.} ({
I give an alternative system in the form of the ancient and modern Lasker
Defence,} 7... Ne4 {, in Chapter Two.}) 8. -- {It's handy to have a hero when
studying an opening; someone whose games you look out for in the database and
make an effort to grasp. Of course with the QGD there's no shortage of world
champions to play this role, but sometimes it's better to aim slightly lower,
and I have no hesitation in naming Rafael Vaganian as the man to follow. I
don't know how he's played so many brilliant combinational attacks from the
opening, but he has. Nigel Short, of course, is the modern-day knight of the
Tartakower and has contributed hugely to its theory, and I would also mention
the solid German GMs Uwe Boensch and Fabien Doettling as people to keep an eye
on.} (8. -- {As usual I would like to thank John Emms, Richard Palliser and
Byron Jacobs for their courtesy and patience as contractual deadlines,
polite-request deadlines, drop-dead deadlines, final deadlines and the rest
flew by. I had the misfortune to be paired with John in the 4NCL somewhere
around the point where any possible excuse for my tardiness expired, and his
accusing stare at my back as I fled the scene after a draw was agreed remains
with me still...}) (8. -- {John Cox, Ruislip, June 2011.}) *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "1. Tartakower Variation"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "14"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 b6 {
. The Tartakower is the most modern and combative of Black's ways of handling
the QGD (modern at least in the sense of the time when it was developed; the
Lasker is actually more fashionable just now). Black wants to solve the
perennial problem of his queen's bishop in the easiest and most natural way
possible, by fianchettoing. A good many of White's options against the opening
revolve around preventing this, or at least fixing a pawn on d5 to restrict
the bishop's horizon and prevent an equalizing liquidation in the centre.} *

[Event "FIDE World Ch., Tripoli (rapid playoff)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2004.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Mamedyarov, S."]
[Black "Lputian, S."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D59"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "82"]
[EventDate "2004.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Nf3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 b6 8. cxd5 {
This move was White's first reaction to the Tartakower. The move ...b6 has
weakened the c-file, and White immediately fixes the centre and opens the file.
The result is that Black is obliged to play ...c5 and accept pawn weaknesses
after dxc5; either an isolated pawn after a piece recapture, or more usually
hanging pawns after ...bxc5, giving the pawn structure which is typical of
this opening.} Nxd5 (8... exd5 {is one of those moves which the Queen's Gambit
abounds in; it seems to suit Black to exchange a couple of pieces, and most of
all to obtain a convenient square for his queen on e7, but it's hard to say
that the pawn recapture is bad. Everyone quotes one of the Kasparov-Beliavsky
1983 candidates games, which went} 9. Bd3 Bb7 (9... Be6 {is possible by
analogy with the main line, but is never played for no very visible reason -
Black can always meet Ne5 with ...Nfd7}) 10. O-O ({White isn't ready for} 10.
Ne5 {, since after} Nbd7 11. Bf5 (11. O-O Nxe5 12. dxe5 Ne4 13. Bxe7 Qxe7 {
also doesn't achieve much; White hasn't had time to get the d3-bishop out of
the way so thatd5hangs}) 11... Nxe5 12. dxe5 Ne4 13. Bxe7 Qxe7 14. Nxd5 $2 {
loses to} Bxd5 15. Qxd5 Qb4+) 10... -- {and now:} (10... c5 $6 11. Ne5 Nbd7 12.
Bf5 Nxe5 13. dxe5 Ne8 14. Bg3 Nc7 15. Qg4 {
with a very unpleasant position for Black.}) ({
. Personally I don't believe this is the end of the story, and} 10... Nbd7 {
is much better, preventing Ne5, as in A.Yusupov-G.Kamsky, Linares 1991, which
went} 11. Rc1 (11. Qc2 c5 12. Rad1 {
is the way to make White's advantage clear according to Ivan Sokolov}) 11... a6
(11... c5 12. dxc5 bxc5 13. Bf5 {
is good for White according to Yusupov, whose point is} g6 ({
in any case Black could forestall this idea with the prophylactic} 13... Re8 {
if he wished}) 14. Bxd7 Qxd7 15. Bxf6 Bxf6 16. Ne4 Bxb2 17. Nxc5 Qe7 18. Rb1
Qxc5 19. Rxb2 {
, although it's far from clear that even this is so fabulous for White}) 12.
Qb3 Re8 13. a3 {, and now instead of Kamsky's strange} Rb8 {,} ({
perfectly satisfactory was} 13... c5 14. Bxf6 Nxf6 15. dxc5 Bxc5 {
, when Black can fortunately meet} 16. Na4 {with} Qd6 {, since if} 17. Nxc5
bxc5 18. Qxb7 $4 {loses the queen; Yusupov gives White a slight advantage here,
but if that's true at all it's certainly not much - it's rather reminiscent of
the French Tarrasch with 3...c5 and ...exd5}) 14. -- {. Note too that Dorfman
has an ominous warning somewhere to the effect that he was Gazza's second in
1983, and that "I can definitely assure you that this variation is bad for
Black". On the other hand, the advantage of this line is that it can also be
played against the Exchange Variation, and it might well suit a tough-minded
player who prefers to avoid theory. It was, after all, good enough for
Petrosian on several occasions.})) 9. Bxe7 (9. Nxd5 {
may simply transpose and I think that's Black's best bet; the line} Bxh4 ({
after} 9... exd5 10. Bg3 {
Black can play many moves, for example Van der Sterren's} Bg4 {,} ({
but personally I feel he should avoid the tempting} 10... Bb4+) ({
and just develop with} 10... c5 11. Be2 Nc6 12. O-O Be6)) 10. Nxc7 Bxf2+ 11.
Kxf2 Qxc7 12. Rc1 Qe7 13. Qa4 {
looks better for White to me, although Karpov laconically calls it equal.}) ({
Instead} 9. Bg3 c5 10. Bd3 cxd4 11. exd4 Ba6 12. O-O Bxd3 13. Qxd3 Nc6 {
was easy for Black in G.Levenfish-J.Capablanca, Moscow 1936.}) 9... Qxe7 10.
Nxd5 {This was another point of the immediate exchange in the centre; White
can ensure that the bishop's diagonal is blocked and that Black remains with a
centre pawn which will be weak after Black's intended freeing move ...c5.} ({
After seeing Black's 11th move in the game, the thought naturally occurs that
White might do better with} 10. Rc1 Bb7 11. Nxd5 {, committing Black to putting
the bishop on b7 before exchanging, but this allows Black to take back with
the bishop and keep its diagonal open, when his task is somewhat easier. This
line is actually played in the next game, but here's another example:} Bxd5 12.
Be2 Rc8 {(this is a rather less convenient position for the rook than in the
main game, but Black needs to prepare ...Nd7)} 13. O-O c5 ({
there is no time to prepare ...Nd7 with} 13... a5 {, because} 14. Ne5 Bxa2 15.
Bh5 {is extremely annoying, as shown by} g6 16. Bf3 Bd5 17. Bxd5 exd5 18. Qg4
Rd8 19. Qg3) 14. dxc5 Rxc5 15. Rxc5 Qxc5 16. Qa4 Bc6 (16... a6 $5 {
is also a good move}) 17. Qd4 Nd7 18. Qxc5 bxc5 $1 {, after which Black can
proceed with ...Rb8 and ...a5-a4xb3, along with ...Kf8-e7, and stands at least
equal, the game E.Gausel-K.Georgiev, European Team Championship, Debrecen 1992,
being a good demonstration of his chances.} ({This is a brilliant move
pioneered by Kiril Georgiev; as Rizzitano says, after the optically better} 
18... Nxc5 19. b4 Ne4 20. Rc1 Bd5 21. Ba6 {
White's control over the c-file leaves Black struggling for a draw.})) 10...
exd5 11. Rc1 {It looks natural to play this move first of all, and also White
has a particular plan in mind to try and disarrange Black's pieces. Other
moves don't achieve very much:} (11. Be2 Be6 12. O-O c5 {and then:} 13. -- (13.
b3 {doesn't prevent Black from arranging his pieces conveniently (not that the
alternatives are much use either):} Rc8 14. Qd2 a5 15. Rfc1 Nd7 16. Bb5 Nf6 17.
Qb2 Bd7 18. Bf1 Ne4 19. Ne5 a4 {
with equality in L.Portisch-K.Georgiev, Linares 1988.}) (13. Ne5 Nd7 14. Nxd7
Qxd7 15. dxc5 bxc5 16. Qd2 Qb7 17. Rfc1 Qb6 18. Rc3 Rfd8 19. h3 a5 {
was very comfortable for Black in B.Larsen-K.Thorsteins, Reykjavik 1985.}) (13.
Qa4 {is similar to the main game except that Black doesn't have to spend time
on ...Rfc8: for example,} Nd7 14. Qa3 Rfe8 {with equality (if} 15. Bb5 c4 {).})
(13. dxc5 bxc5 14. Ne5 (14. Qa4 Qb7 15. Qa3 Nd7 16. Ne1 a5 17. Nd3 c4 18. Nf4
Rfb8 {, with advantage to Black, was the start of the classic M.Bertok-R.Fischer, Stockholm Interzonal 1962}) 14... Nd7 15. Nd3 {
could be met in cavalier fashion with} g5 $5 {,} ({
or more safely with Short's efficient} 15... Rfb8 16. b3 a5 17. Nf4 Nf6 18. Qc2
a4 {(S.Agdestein-N.Short, Reykjavik 1985).}))) (11. Bd3 {is simply the wrong
square for this piece unless White intends to proceed as in W.Uhlmann-C.Kottnauer, Tel Aviv Olympiad 1964, with} Be6 12. O-O c5 13. dxc5 bxc5 14. e4 d4
15. Nd2 {(not the best move but Black is comfortable anyway), which
unfortunately for him leaves Black a fair bit better after} Nc6 {.}) (11. Qd2 {
, a favourite of Petrosian, intends b4 and can probably be most efficiently
met with} a5 12. Rc1 Be6 13. Bb5 Rc8 14. O-O c6 15. Be2 c5 {
, as in various games involving Geller, Petrosian and Vaganian.}) (11. Qb3 {
doesn't have much significance since the queen will surely not want to stay on
b3 and is only choosing a different route to a3.}) 11... Be6 {The establishment
of this move as Black's best was largely due to the Soviet Vladimir Makogonov,
who played some very modern-looking games with it in the 1930's and after whom
the Russians call this opening the Tartakower-Makogonov-Bondarevsky Defence,
or TMB. Black's idea is that he is going to play ...c5. Thereafter White may
play dxc5 bxc5, in which case the bishop will not obstruct a rook on b8,
pressing on the b2-pawn (thematic in these hanging pawn positions), and may
usefully attack an a2-pawn or a b3 one after ...a5-a4xb3. Alternatively, one
day Black is going to play ...c4, in which case the bishop is generally better
on e6, where it doesn't get in the way of the heavy pieces backing a pawn
advance on the queenside and may usefully defend c4, for example in the event
of e4 at some moment.} ({
Having said that, there is obviously a case to be made for the older} 11... Bb7
{. Readers who are interested in this alternative can look at Sokolov's
excellent comments, for example to the game S.Flohr-M.Vidmar, Groningen 1946,
which he quotes and went} 12. Qa4 c5 13. Qa3 Rc8 14. Be2 Nd7 15. O-O Nf8 $1 {
(a very typical manoeuvre in the ...Bb7 line)} 16. Rfd1 Rc7 17. dxc5 bxc5 18.
Ba6 Bxa6 19. Qxa6 Rd8 20. Qd3 Ne6 21. Qf5 d4 {
with equality; this underscores the general harmlessness of White's set-up.})
12. Qa4 {White has tried a variety of alternatives:} (12. Qc2 Rc8 13. Bd3 c5
14. dxc5 bxc5 15. Nd4 {is an interesting plan:} ({instead} 15. b3 Nd7 {
is fine for Black}) 15... -- (15... Nc6 $5 {(in my opinion this is best)} 16.
Nxe6 ({otherwise,} 16. Nxc6 {is equal,}) ({while} 16. Qxc5 Nxd4 17. Qxe7 Rxc1+
18. Kd2 Rxh1 19. exd4 Rxh2 20. Bf1 {
is difficult to judge, but I doubt that Black is worse}) 16... Nb4 {
(this is the point; recapturing on e6 would leave White better)} 17. Bh7+ {
(the only real try; allowing an exchange on d3 would leave Black at least equal)
} Kh8 18. Qd2 Kxh7 19. Nf4 Nxa2 20. Nxd5 Qg5 {is equal.}) ({. After} 15... Bd7
{, according to Atalik,} 16. O-O {shouldn't have got White anywhere after} Qf6
({rather than the} 16... g6 $6 17. Ne2 c4 18. Bxg6 {
of P.Soln-S.Atalik, Bled 2001}) 17. Bf5 (17. Qb3 $5 {
is the problem; I don't see how Black can equalize after this:} Qd6 ({
neither is} 17... cxd4 $6 18. Qb7 {ideal, especially in view of} Nc6 19. Qxd7
dxe3 $2 20. Ba6) 18. Nf5 Bxf5 19. Bxf5 Rd8 {is decidedly better for White})
17... Rd8 18. Bxd7 Nxd7 {. I will dare to state a general 'rule' in this line:
if White wants to obtain anything, he generally has either to exchange his
knight for the bishop and then have his bishop dominate as in Spassky-Fischer,
or exchange his bishop for the knight, force ...c4 and install his knight on
d4. Exchanging similar minor pieces never seems to work.})) (12. Bd3 c5 13.
dxc5 bxc5 14. O-O Nd7 15. e4 d4 {has been played in a few games with rather
poor results for White. For example, the very thematic V.Babula-R.Vaganian,
German League 1998, which went} 16. h3 a5 17. a4 f6 18. Nd2 Ne5 19. Bb5 g5 {
with a nice game for Black.}) (12. Be2 {
is probably just a transposition, unless White wants to play the simple} c5 13.
b3 ({after} 13. Qa4 {Black can just play} Rc8 ({or try} 13... c4 {
, when Kharitonov offers} 14. Ne5 a6 15. Bf3 b5 16. Qa5 Ra7 {
as an edge for Black})) 13... Nd7 14. O-O a5 15. Bb5 Nf6 16. Ne5 Rfc8 17. Qe2 {
, as in W.Uhlmann-S.Atalik, Dresden 2005, when Black should have kept the
tension with} Rc7 18. Rfd1 Bf5 {(Atalik).}) 12... c5 (12... a5 {is an alternative, played by Short and applauded by Sokolov. It's supposed to threaten ...Qb4+ (after, for example,} 13. Ne5 {), but I'm not sure about this
continuation, and prefer the classical text move.}) 13. Qa3 {This was the
point of White's last move, threatening c5 and pinning the c-pawn. Other moves
can be met by developing as in the examples above.} Rc8 {This looks a bit
awkward to the uninformed, but in fact this is the ideal square for this rook.
The d5-pawn doesn't need any more protection for the moment, and Black does
best to defend c5 with his king's rook and use the other one for activity on
the queenside, either by coming to b8 to hit b2 (very often in hanging pawn
positions Black plays ...c4, and the weaknesses on b2 and d5 balance each
other out), or by staying on a8 and assisting ...a5-a4xb3.} (13... Nd7 {
is very seldom played, but I haven't seen any convincing reason why it would
be bad. One would think from Fischer-Spassky that it would allow} 14. Bb5 Rfc8
15. O-O {followed by some combination of dxc5, Nd4xe6 and Bxd7, establishing
either a dynamic advantage with bishop against knight as in Fischer-Spassky,
or a static one with a knight on d4 against the bishop on d7 after forcing ...c4. In fact, however, I can't see how White can achieve either of those things,
so perhaps this move is a viable alternative.}) 14. Be2 ({White used to play} 
14. Bb5 {, as in a legendary Fischer-Spassky game from 1972, but he stopped
after Geller revealed} Qb7 $1 {when the c-pawn is poisoned. After} 15. dxc5
bxc5 16. Rxc5 Rxc5 17. Qxc5 Na6 18. Bxa6 (18. Qc6 Qxc6 19. Bxc6 Rb8 $1 {
is really the point: after} 20. b3 $4 {,} ({while} 20. O-O Rxb2 21. a4 Nb4 22.
Nd4 Ra2 {is slightly better for Black, as indicated by Sokolov}) 20... Rc8 {
now does win}) 18... Qxa6 19. Qa3 Qc4 {, practice has seen:} 20. -- ({
. White was slaughtered after both} 20. Kd2 Qg4 21. Rg1 d4 22. exd4 ({and} 22.
Nxd4 Qh4 {, J.Timman-E.Geller, Hilversum 1973}) 22... Bd5 {, Y.Kuzubov-E.Schroll, Plovdiv 2008 - detention for the Ukrainian youngster after this one,
no doubt,} ({although in fact the position is not at all so clear after 22...
Bd5 and it is quite possible that Black should actually prefer} 22... Rc8 {
: for example,} 23. h3 Qf4+ 24. Qe3 Qc7 25. Qc3 Qf4+ {with a draw.})) (20. Qc3
{is 'safer' although not necessarily better. After} Qxa2 21. O-O Rb8 22. b4 Qa4
23. Ra1 Qxb4 24. Qxb4 Rxb4 {'the opponents agreed to a draw in L.Szabo-L.Kavalek, Amsterdam 1973, not waiting for White to win back the missing pawn'
according to Khalifman. A pity since it would have been interesting to see how
White proposed to do that: for example,} 25. h3 Rb7 26. Nd4 Kf8 27. Nc6 Bd7 28.
Nxa7 Ke7 29. g4 Kd6 30. Kg2 Rb2 $1 {(threatening ...Kc7)} 31. Rc1 Rb8 32. Kf3
Ra8 33. Ra1 Kc5 34. Ra6 Re8 $1 35. Kg2 Re6 {, and Black wins. I'm sure White
can do better than that, but if I'd been Black I think I'd have let him show
me how.})) ({Ironically, it was later revealed that} 14. Bb5 Qb7 {had been part
of Spassky's preparation for the 1972 match, but he had forgotten it. The idea
of Bb5 was to keep this piece on the a4-e8 diagonal, impeding Black's
development by threatening Bxd7 after ...Nxd7, but after 14...Qb7 Black is
threatening ...c4 and if White doesn't want to play sharply then the bishop
more or less has to retreat at once, after which Black has gained time to
develop comfortably.}) 14... a5 {An interesting juncture. Black's main problem
is the pin along the a3-f8 diagonal, which has two annoying effects. First, it
gives White the chance of playing dxc5 bxc5; Nd4. Second, Black would like to
force dxc5, since that gives him more scope for pressing on the b-file and
even perhaps making the ...d4 break. In order to do that he needs to force
White's hand by some positional threat of his own to release the tension, and
the most obvious is ...c4, which obviously he can't do as long as his c-pawn
is pinned. Most of Black's moves here therefore address the issue of unpinning
the c-pawn without losing it. The text move has been approved by theory, but
Black has a lot of other very playable choices:} (14... Nc6 {is the most
interesting. It has never been played at a high level, but Kharitonov (an
old-school Soviet who knows a lot about the TMB) gives} 15. dxc5 (15. O-O c4)
15... d4 {in some annotations somewhere as though it were the most natural
thing in the world:} (15... Na5 $5 {is also interesting, in fact possibly best}
) 16. exd4 Bd5 17. Qe3 (17. cxb6 Qxa3 18. bxa3 axb6 {is equal}) 17... Qf6 {
White might try:} 18. -- (18. Ne5 $5 Re8 19. f4 (19. O-O Nxe5 20. dxe5 Rxe5 {
is equal, as shown by, for example,} 21. Qd2 Rd8 22. Rfd1 Ree8 $1 23. Bb5 Bf3
$1 24. Qc3 Qxc3 25. bxc3 Bxd1 26. Bxe8 bxc5) 19... Bxg2 20. Rg1 Bd5 {
reaches a very complicated position in which I suspect White is better after}
21. Bb5 {, although his position is certainly a bit scary to play.}) (18. O-O {
is of course safer, but Black seems to have enough play to win his pawns back
with equality: for example,} Re8 19. Qd3 ({or} 19. Qd2 Rad8 20. cxb6 (20. Rfe1
bxc5 21. Rxc5 $4 {loses to} Bxf3 22. Bxf3 Qxd4) 20... Bxf3 21. Bxf3 Nxd4 22.
Qc3 Qxb6 23. Rfe1 ({here} 23. b3 Re2 $1 24. a3 Rd2 25. b4 Nxf3+ 26. Qxf3 R2d3 {
is no better,}) ({while} 23. Bd1 $6 Re2 24. Bb3 Rxf2 $1 {is a good deal worse})
23... Nxf3+ 24. gxf3 Rxe1+ 25. Rxe1 Rd6 {
, and Black should draw without difficulty}) 19... Rad8 20. cxb6 axb6 21. b3 ({
otherwise,} 21. Rfd1 Bxf3 22. Qxf3 Nxd4 23. Qxf6 Nxe2+ 24. Kf1 Rxd1+ 25. Rxd1
gxf6 26. Re1 Ra8 27. Rxe2 Rxa2 {
is a little better for White but should be a draw,}) ({while} 21. Rfe1 {
doesn't prevent} Bxa2 {followed by winning back the d-pawn, in view of} 22. b3
Nxd4 23. Nxd4 Qxd4 24. Qc2 Qd2) 21... Qe7 $1 ({a fine quiet move;} 21... Bxf3
22. Bxf3 Nxd4 23. Rfe1 {is much less effective}) 22. Bd1 Qa3 23. Bc2 g6 {
, and White can't prevent Black from restoring the material balance and at
least equalizing.})) (14... Kf8 {was adorned with a dubious sign by Kasparov,
but without any terribly convincing reason. Moreover, it has always done
fairly well: for example,} 15. dxc5 bxc5 16. O-O a5 17. Rc3 Nd7 18. Rfc1 Rcb8
19. Rb3 (19. b3 a4 $1 20. bxa4 c4 {is equal according to Kasparov}) 19... c4
20. Rxb8+ Rxb8 21. Qxa5 Rxb2 {favoured Black according to Sokolov in L.Winants-G.Kasparov, Brussels 1987, which continued} 22. Nd4 Kg8 23. Ra1 Nc5 24.
Qa8+ Kh7 25. Qa3 Rb6 26. Bd1 g6 27. Bc2 Bd7 {, and now} 28. h4 h5 29. Qa5 {
would have given White the edge according to Kasparov, although this is far
from obviously true.}) (14... Qb7 15. dxc5 (15. b3 {is a more principled move,
refusing to activate Black's queen; the question is what happens after} c4 {
, but Black seems to be okay, such as after} 16. bxc4 dxc4 17. Ne5 Nd7) 15...
bxc5 16. O-O (16. Rxc5 Rxc5 17. Qxc5 Qxb2 18. Nd4 Nd7 19. Qa5 Qc1+ 20. Bd1 Qc4
21. Be2 {is a draw}) 16... Qb6 {is also a very sound plan.}) ({
Finally, the obvious and natural} 14... Nd7 {is generally reputed to be bad
without explanation, although it isn't terribly obvious to me why; White's
objection to it ought to be} 15. O-O Rc7 16. dxc5 bxc5 17. Nd4 Nf6 18. Nxe6
fxe6 {, but Black is better placed here than in Fischer-Spassky and I'm not
convinced White has anything real.}) 15. dxc5 (15. O-O Qa7 {is Black's point,
getting out of the pin without losing c5 and finally preparing ...Nd7:} 16. b3
{(White avoids dxc5 for the time being to avoid giving Black's queen a good
square on b6)} Nd7 17. Bb5 Rc7 18. Rfd1 Rac8 19. h3 {saw Black obtain a
comfortable set-up and equalize in A.Karpov-L.Kavalek, Linares 1981, and later
games; his next step might be ...Nf6-e4-d6.}) 15... bxc5 (15... Rxc5 {
isn't very often played at all, but it's not clear that Black is significantly
worse after, say,} 16. O-O Nc6 17. Qa4 Rc8 {.}) 16. Nd4 Na6 $5 {
By no means the only move.} (16... Nd7 17. Nxe6 fxe6 18. O-O Nf6 {
has been played in a few games and looks about equal to me.}) 17. Bxa6 {
A committal try;} ({but after} 17. Nxe6 fxe6 18. O-O {
presumably Black's idea is something like} Nb4 19. b3 Qd7 {
, which seems satisfactory enough for him.}) 17... Rxa6 18. O-O Bd7 19. Nb3 $6
{Underestimating Black's play on the kingside.} ({Better was} 19. Rfd1 Qd6 {
'with a balanced game' - Rizzitano.}) 19... Rg6 20. Kh1 (20. Rxc5 $2 Qe4 {
leads to mate, for example after} 21. f3 Qxe3+ 22. Kh1 Qe2 23. Rg1 Bh3 $1 24.
Rxc8+ Kh7 $1 {.}) 20... Qe4 21. f3 Qxe3 22. Nxc5 Qd2 (22... Qxa3 {
looks good until you see} 23. Nxd7 {.}) 23. g4 Be6 (23... Qg5 {
was better, with the idea of ...h5.}) 24. Qc3 $2 {A bit panicky;} (24. Rfd1 {
was equal.}) 24... Qxc3 25. Rxc3 d4 26. Rcc1 Bxa2 27. Nd3 Rgc6 28. Rxc6 Rxc6
29. Ra1 Bd5 30. Kg2 Rf6 31. Ne1 Rb6 32. Rxa5 Rxb2+ 33. Kg3 Bc4 34. Rc5 d3 35.
Ng2 d2 36. Ne3 Rb3 $2 {Too clever by half.} (36... Be6 {
was simply winning; this was a rapid game and presumably there was no time.})
37. Rxc4 Rxe3 38. Rd4 Re2 39. f4 Re3+ 40. Kg2 Re4 41. Rxd2 Rxf4 {. --- Conclusion: This old line will always be important and attempts are made to revive it
from time to time, but generally speaking theory has moved on.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Greek Championship, Aspropyrgos"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2003.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Mastrovasilis, A."]
[Black "Halkias, S."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D59"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "86"]
[EventDate "2003.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. c4 e6 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. d4 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 b6 8. Rc1
Bb7 9. cxd5 {If White wants to do this he normally inserts Bxf6, which we will
see in action, in one form or another, in the next few games. The reason for
this is that at this exact moment he cannot force Black to capture on d5 with
a pawn, and this makes Black's task of equalizing a little too easy, since his
freeing break with ...c5 no longer leaves any pawn weaknesses in its wake.}
Nxd5 10. Bxe7 Qxe7 11. Nxd5 Bxd5 {This is the point.} ({
There's nothing wrong with} 11... exd5 {, which would transpose to the notes
to Black's 11th move in the previous game, but the text is very much simpler.})
12. a3 {Essentially whatever move White plays Black has the choice between the
more aggressive continuation ...c5; dxc5 bxc5, as seen in the present game,
and a more conservative plan with a ...Rc8; ...c5; dxc5 Rxc5 procedure. For
example:} (12. Bd3 Rc8 (12... c5 13. dxc5 bxc5 {
is perhaps more ambitious and equally good: for example,} 14. e4 Bb7 15. O-O
Rd8 16. Qe2 Nc6 {is fine for Black}) 13. O-O c5 14. dxc5 Rxc5 15. Rxc5 Qxc5 16.
Qa4 Nc6 $1 {(it's sometimes thought to be terribly important for Black that
this move is available if White has developed his bishop to d3, because of the
trick which Black demonstrates at his next turn, although I don't think this
is true, particularly)} 17. e4 Nb4 18. exd5 Nxd3 19. dxe6 fxe6 {
, with at least equality for Black, as was first shown by Spassky.}) (12. Be2 {
is supposed to have the point that after} Rc8 (12... c5 {
is also possible and approved by, for example, Atalik and Sadler;} 13. dxc5 Rd8
14. Qc2 ({here} 14. Qa4 {runs into} Nd7 {, when} 15. e4 Nxc5 16. Rxc5 Qxc5 17.
exd5 Qc1+ 18. Bd1 Rxd5 19. O-O Qxb2 {
was about equal in V.Korchnoi-N.Short, Wijk aan Zee 1990}) 14... Rc8 15. O-O
Rxc5 16. Qd2 Rxc1 17. Rxc1 Nc6 {is equal}) 13. O-O c5 14. dxc5 Rxc5 15. Rxc5
Qxc5 16. Qa4 {...} -- ({...Black can't play} 16... Nc6 $2 {in view of} 17. e4 {
(which is correct)}) ({, and therefore has to acquiesce in either} 16... Qc6
17. Bb5) ({, or} 16... Bc6 17. Qf4 Nd7 18. b4 Qf8 {(G.Kasparov-J.Timman,
London 1984), which are both supposedly a bit better for White (in the latter
case, the patient} 19. Rd1 ({is perhaps better than Kasparov's} 19. Qc7 {.})) (
{. I'm not sure} 16... Qc6 17. Bb5 Qc5 {is anything for White}) ({, but anyway
Black doesn't need to put any of his pieces on c6; 17 Qe8+ Qf8 is no threat
and his best is} 16... a6 {, equalizing easily: for instance,} 17. Rd1 (17.
Qe8+ Qf8 18. Qxf8+ Kxf8 19. Rc1 Nc6 {is nothing}) 17... b5 18. Qf4 Nc6 {.})) (
12. Bc4 {is also harmless even if Black lets it gain a tempo:} Bb7 ({
the much more interesting} 12... Bxf3 13. Qxf3 Qb4+ 14. Kd1 Nd7 15. Qc6 Rfd8 {
was the choice of the great Lajos Portisch in S.Gligoric-L.Portisch, Havana
Olympiad 1966}) 13. O-O Rc8 14. Qe2 c5 15. Rfd1 cxd4 16. Nxd4 Nc6 {with a rapid
draw in sight, M.Illescas-R.Kasimdzhanov, Spanish Team Championship 2008.})
12... c5 (12... Rc8 {is fine too, since if White's idea is} 13. b4 $2 {
it is bad after} a5 {.}) 13. Bc4 Bb7 {An ambitious move;} ({
if Black were satisfied to make a draw he would have played} 13... Bxc4 14.
Rxc4 Nd7 {.}) 14. dxc5 bxc5 15. O-O Nd7 16. Be2 Rab8 17. Qc2 Rfc8 {These positions are also equal, but perhaps a shade more demanding for either side.} 18.
Qc3 Nb6 19. Qe5 Nd7 20. Qc3 Nb6 21. Qe5 Bd5 22. Ba6 Rd8 23. e4 Nd7 24. Qf4 Bb7
25. Be2 Nf6 26. e5 {A committal move. I suspect Halkias was happy to have
provoked it, although the computer doesn't seem to think anything of it either
way.} Nd7 27. Rc2 Bd5 28. Rd2 Nf8 29. Rc1 Rb3 30. Bd1 ({By now Black
definitely has the better of it, and the computer wants White to try and
exchange queens with} 30. Qh4 {, although Black is still better then.}) 30...
Ng6 31. Qa4 $2 {Missing Black's next.} (31. Qg3 {was forced, although if White
has to exile the queen to this sorry square you can see why the machine wanted
to exchange it.}) 31... Rxf3 $1 {A little trick based on the hanging rooks on
d2 and c1 after ...Qg5+. The rest is silence.} 32. Rxd5 exd5 33. Bxf3 Nxe5 34.
Be2 d4 35. Bf1 d3 36. Rd1 c4 37. Qa5 Re8 38. Qc3 Qd6 39. h3 Qd5 40. b3 cxb3 41.
Bxd3 b2 42. Bh7+ Kxh7 43. Qc2+ Ng6 {. --- Conclusion: It's obvious that this
variation doesn't do the business for White. He has to prevent Black somehow
from liquidating the centre. In the next game we shall see White attempting to
keep the tension.} 0-1

[Event "Taiyuan"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2006.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Bu Xiangzhi"]
[Black "Asrian, K."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "73"]
[EventDate "2006.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 b6 8. Rc1
Bb7 9. Bd3 {
This time White doesn't fix the centre before developing this bishop.} dxc4 $1
({Black is a little stuck for a developing move, as after} 9... Nbd7 10. cxd5 {
he is forced to recapture with the pawn, since} Nxd5 ({after} 10... exd5 {
White is usually considered a little better, although Kasparov played this way
on a few occasions}) 11. Nxd5 {wins material.}) 10. Bxc4 Nbd7 11. O-O c5 ({
Black shouldn't play} 11... a6 {until Qe2 is played; after} 12. a4 c5 13. Bg3
Nh5 14. d5 Nxg3 15. hxg3 exd5 16. Bxd5 Bxd5 17. Qxd5 Nf6 18. Qc4 {
followed by e4-e5 White's chances are preferable (Kasparov).}) 12. Qe2 ({
For the 34th game of the first Karpov-Kasparov match Kasparov had prepared} 12.
dxc5 Nxc5 13. Qe2 a6 14. Rfd1 Qe8 15. Ne5 b5 16. Nxb5 $5 {
, but unfortunately Black can refute this with} Qb8 $1 17. Bg3 axb5 18. Ng6
fxg6 19. Bxb8 bxc4 20. Bd6 Bxd6 21. Rxd6 Nfe4 {
, although he didn't in the game.}) ({Instead after} 12. Bg3 Nh5 13. d5 {
Black is glad he hasn't yet played ...a6; he should be able to equalize with
care after} Nxg3 14. hxg3 exd5 15. Bxd5 Qc7 16. Bxb7 Qxb7 17. Qd5 Rab8 {.})
12... a6 13. a4 ({
Black has an easy game if he is allowed to play ...b5: for example,} 13. Rfd1
b5 14. Bd3 cxd4 15. Nxd4 Rc8 16. Bc2 Qb6 17. f3 Rfd8 {.}) 13... cxd4 14. Nxd4 (
{The alternative} 14. exd4 Nh5 ({if Black is more aggressively inclined then} 
14... Re8 {is possible, as in L.Ljubojevic-V.Topalov, Monte Carlo (rapid) 2001,
which went on} 15. Rfe1 Nf8 16. Rcd1 Ng6 17. Bg3 Bb4 {, with full equality})
15. Bxe7 Qxe7 16. d5 Nf4 17. Qe3 Qf6 18. Ne4 Qf5 19. Ng3 Qf6 20. Ne4 (20. dxe6
fxe6 21. Nd4 Ne5 22. f3 Rad8 {is nothing either}) 20... Qf5 {
and so forth has produced a number of high-level draws.}) 14... Nc5 15. Rfd1 ({
Black can meet} 15. f3 {similarly with} Qe8 (15... Nfe4 16. Bxe7 Nxc3 17. Bxd8
Nxe2+ 18. Bxe2 Rfxd8 19. a5 {is best avoided,}) ({but} 15... Nd5 16. Bxe7 Qxe7
17. Bxd5 exd5 {
, when the weaknesses on e3 and d5 balance each other out, is reasonable}) 16.
b3 Rc8 17. Rfd1 Nd5 18. Nxd5 exd5 19. Bxe7 Qxe7 {.}) 15... Qe8 16. Bg3 ({
Alternatively,} 16. b3 Nfe4 {is also equal, with Vaganian giving} 17. Nxe4 Bxh4
18. Nd6 Qe7 19. Nxb7 Qxb7) ({but} 16. f3 Nxa4 17. Nxa4 Qxa4 18. Bb3 Qe8 19. Rc7
Bd5 {doesn't give White quite enough compensation.}) 16... Nfe4 17. Nxe4 Nxe4
18. Bc7 (18. Be5 Bf6 19. Bxf6 Nxf6 20. Qc2 Qe7 21. Qb3 Nd5 22. Be2 Rfc8 23. Bf3
{had achieved nothing in R.Vaganian-M.Gurevich, Leningrad 1987, but the text
doesn't do much either.}) 18... Bc5 19. a5 ({
The computer proposes the interesting switchback} 19. Be5 {, when undoubtedly
Black has to be a little careful, although he seems to be able gradually to
equalize in all variations: for instance,} Qe7 ({not} 19... Qxa4 $2 20. Qg4)
20. f3 Nf6 21. Nb3 Bb4 22. Bd3 Rfc8 23. Rxc8+ Bxc8 24. Bxf6 gxf6 {.}) (19. f3
Nf6 ({or} 19... Qe7 $5) 20. Nb3 Bb4 21. Bxb6 Qxa4 22. Bd4 Rfc8 {
is also okay - again Black doesn't need to fear} 23. Bxf6 gxf6 {.}) 19... b5
20. Bd3 Qe7 21. Qc2 Bxd4 22. Bxe4 (22. exd4 Rac8 23. f3 Nf6 24. Qc5 {
is also equal:} Qxc5 25. Rxc5 Nd5 26. Rdc1 Nxc7 27. Rxc7 f5 {.}) 22... Bxe4 23.
Qxe4 Rac8 24. Rxd4 Rxc7 25. Rcd1 Rfc8 26. h4 Rc1 27. h5 Qc5 28. g4 Qc2 29. Qxc2
R8xc2 30. Rxc1 Rxc1+ 31. Kg2 Rb1 32. Rd6 Rxb2 33. Rxa6 b4 34. Ra8+ Kh7 35. Ra7
f6 36. Re7 e5 37. Rb7 {. --- Conclusion: This line is a little too simple also.
White does retain some pressure in the symmetrical positions which arise, but
if he lets Black liquidate the centre like this then such initiative as White
has is rather likely to slip away. This is why White generally feels that he
either has to refrain from Rc1 in favour of developing the kingside more
quickly, assuming a more aggressive IQP posture if Black does exchange in the
centre (as in Tomashevsky-Rychagov and Borovikov-David), or else fix the
centre by throwing in Bxf6 Bxf6 before exchanging on d5. The next few games
will deal with that latter plan.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Sarajevo"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1999.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Sokolov, I."]
[Black "Short, N."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "86"]
[EventDate "1999.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 b6 8. Rc1
Bb7 9. Bxf6 {If White wants to fix the centre then giving up this bishop is
the price he has to pay. It looks a little strange after going Bh4 a moment
ago, but White argues that forcing Black to block his newly fianchettoed
bishop and sustain weaknesses on the c-file which will translate themselves
into pawn weaknesses of one kind or another is worth giving up the bishop for.}
Bxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11. Bd3 {So White has succeeded in fixing the centre and
ensuring that Black's ...c5 break will at least incur weaknesses, but even so
I give you Grandmaster Daniel King: 'I really find it hard to grasp why White
plays this system at all. Black has achieved what he wants from the Tartakower:
the two bishops and some pressure on White's centre.' Unfortunately I don't
think history records the views of Anatoly Karpov or Ivan Sokolov, who between
them popularized this set-up for White, on Danny's observation. Still, you can
see what he means; in the main fixed centre lines in the next few games White
takes care to get in b4 so that Black can't so easily play ...c5. --- This
line was Richard Palliser's choice in his 2004 repertoire book 'Play 1 d4!'.
According to Ivan Sokolov White's idea with this line is to force an exchange
on d4 and obtain a position with the d-pawns fixed, and then rely upon the
superiority of his d3-bishop to the one on b7. Sokolov says that 'if White's
idea is well executed, he will have a small but lasting advantage'.} c5 {
Naturally, since White hasn't prevented it, Black takes advantage of the
opportunity to fight for his dark-squared bishop.} 12. O-O Na6 {A rare move,
but from the point of view of fighting against White's idea as outlined by
Sokolov above, perhaps the most logical. Black hurries with his knight to the
magnificent e6-square, where the knight aims for both d4 and c5, and hopes,
far from permitting White to force ...cxd4, rather to force White into freeing
Black's bishops with dxc5. There is a considerable range of alternatives:} (
12... cxd4 13. exd4 Nc6 14. Bb1 Re8 {has been played in a large number of
games and allows White to obtain exactly the sort of small advantage he wanted,
although Black of course retains a very solid position and can expect to draw
if he plays well.}) (12... Nd7 {
is also popular but allows White to obtain his blockade with} 13. Bf5 g6 (13...
Re8 14. Bxd7 Qxd7 15. dxc5 bxc5 16. Na4 c4 17. Nd4 {is a slightly different
type of blockade and dynamically equal according to Sokolov, although players
of different style will favour either side}) 14. Bxd7 cxd4 ({better than} 14...
Qxd7 15. dxc5 bxc5 16. Ne4 $1 {when White obtains the same sort of position
after exchanging the dark-squared bishop for a knight and can torture Black
for a long time after} Bxb2 17. Nxc5 Qe7 18. Rb1 Qxc5 19. Rxb2) 15. Bc6 Bxc6
16. Nxd4 {.}) ({Even} 12... Nc6 {is possible, despite appearing to lose a pawn:
} 13. dxc5 d4 ({not} 13... bxc5 14. Nxd5 $1) 14. exd4 Nxd4 15. Be4 (15. Nxd4
Bxd4 16. cxb6 {was proposed by Palliser, but it seems pretty clear that Black
has enough for his pawn: for example,} axb6 17. Qb3 ({instead} 17. Qc2 Bxc3 18.
Qxc3 Qg5 19. f3 Rac8 20. Qe1 Bxf3 {is undesirable for White}) ({, while} 17.
Re1 Qg5 18. g3 Bxf2+ {is an immediate draw}) 17... Rc8 18. Be4 Bxe4 19. Nxe4
Rxc1 20. Rxc1 Re8 {, and Black's next move is either ...Bxb2 or Bxf2+!}) 15...
Bxe4 16. Nxe4 Nxf3+ 17. Qxf3 Bxb2 18. Rc2 Be5 19. c6 {was immediately agreed
drawn in Z. Ribli-A.Beliavsky, Reggio Emilia 1989; obviously White could
continue with his passed pawn, but he is not playing entirely without risk
himself.}) (12... c4 {is never played by strong players, although computers
like it. As usual it's not obvious that the machine is wrong after, for
example,} 13. Be2 a6 14. Ne5 b5 15. f4 ({or} 15. Bf3 Re8) 15... b4 {, and this
could certainly be tried; any move that enables Black to develop his queen's
knight to its most natural square on c6 without losing material has to be
seriously considered.}) (12... Re8 {was another of Nigel's contributions:} 13.
Bb5 Re6 (13... Re7 {is less good, since after} 14. dxc5 bxc5 15. Na4 {,} Na6 (
15... c4 $2 {loses to} 16. Bxc4) 16. Nxc5 Nxc5 17. Rxc5 {
follows, with a slight advantage for White}) 14. b3 (14. dxc5 {
now is only equal, in view of the line} bxc5 15. Na4 c4 16. Nd4 Bxd4 17. Qxd4
Bc6 18. Bxc4 Bxa4 19. Bxd5 Rd6 $1 20. Bxf7+ Kxf7 21. Qxa4 Nd7) 14... a6 15. Bd3
cxd4 16. Nxd4 Bxd4 17. exd4 Nc6 {was equal in I.Morovic Fernandez-N.Short,
Parnu 1998. Black's bishop might be worse, but his central pawn is less weak.})
13. Bb1 {Alternatively:} (13. Qa4 Nc7 14. Rfd1 Qe7 15. Bb1 g6 16. a3 Bg7 17.
Re1 f5 {was about equal in A.Maric-A.Skripchenko, Belgrade 2000. I don't see
that the queen can be right on a4.}) (13. Bxa6 Bxa6 14. Re1 Bb7 15. dxc5 bxc5
16. Na4 c4 {would produce something similar to the position after 12...Nd7 13
Bf5 Re8 assessed as dynamically equal by Sokolov above.}) ({Black can meet} 13.
Ne5 {in various ways: for example,} Bxe5 ({I'm not so keen on Lalic's} 13...
cxd4 14. exd4 Bxe5 15. dxe5 Nc5 {because of} 16. Nb5) 14. dxe5 d4 15. Ne4 Qd5 (
{only not} 15... dxe3 16. Nd6 exf2+ 17. Rxf2 {
when White is much better, as Lalic pointed out}) 16. exd4 cxd4 17. Qg4 Qxe5 {
, with rough equality; White can just about show enough compensation for his
pawn, but definitely not more.}) 13... Re8 14. a3 (14. Qd2 {
was played in V.Zvjaginsev-P.Zarubin, Kazan 1995, and provoked Black into} cxd4
{for no particular reason;} (14... Nc7 {would have been more thematic.})) 14...
g6 {I have to admit I don't understand this move.} ({
It looks more natural to me to play} 14... Nc7 {
. If White then continues exactly as in the game with} 15. Re1 (15. dxc5 bxc5
16. Na4 {is the most natural objection to Black's last, but} Ba6 17. Re1 c4 18.
Nd4 Ne6 {looks absolutely fine}) 15... g6 16. dxc5 bxc5 {then} 17. e4 $2 {
fails to} Bxc3 18. Rxc3 dxe4 {, so he would need either a different plan or a
good waiting move in this position, and I'm not sure what that would be.}) 15.
Re1 (15. Ba2 {was suggested by Lalic, but} Nc7 ({is better than the} 15... c4)
({or} 15... Rc8 {he considered}) {; after} 16. dxc5 bxc5 17. Na4 c4 18. b3 {
Black can choose between the pawn sacrifice} Ne6 ({and the simple} 18... cxb3
19. Bxb3 Ne6) 19. bxc4 d4 {, with equality at least in either case.}) 15... Qd7
{This makes White's play in the game possible;} ({
to my mind there was still a case for} 15... Nc7 {.}) 16. dxc5 bxc5 17. e4 {
One of the classical plans against the hanging pawn couple, but not especially
effective in this position.} d4 {An ambitious move.} ({As Sokolov pointed out,
} 17... Rad8 {equalizes cleanly:} 18. exd5 Rxe1+ 19. Qxe1 Bxd5 20. Nxd5 ({or} 
20. Rd1 Qe6 21. Qxe6 Bxe6 22. Rxd8+ Bxd8 23. Ne5 Nb8) 20... Qxd5 21. Qe2 Nc7 ({
Sokolov considered} 21... Rd6 {
, but the text is easier thanks to the following intermezzo}) 22. b4 Ne6 23.
Ba2 Nf4 {. Interestingly, Sokolov described 17...Rad8 as 'more thematic',
something which over-structurally minded players such as myself might benefit
from contemplating. We've seen this structure with the isolated pawn on c5
before; generally Black has enough active play against b2 and down the d-file
to prevent White from consolidating with some piece on c4 and obtaining a bind;
a famous recent example of course being the twelfth and final game of the
Anand-Topalov match.}) 18. Ba2 ({
Sokolov proposed a direct siege of the c-pawn with} 18. Na4 Rac8 19. Bd3 Qd6
20. Qd2 Bg7 21. Qa5 {, giving many variations, and it does seem that this
simple plan would have been difficult for Black to meet.}) 18... Rab8 19. Bc4 {
Sokolov said that this was simply a mistake in view of Black's reply,} ({
and that either} 19. Qd2 Bg7 20. Nd5 Bc6 21. h4) ({or} 19. Re2 Bc6 20. Nd5 Bg7
{led to unclear positions, although he evidently favours White.}) 19... Bc6 $1
20. Nd5 ({
Probably it was better to bale out and start fighting for a draw after} 20.
Bxa6 dxc3 21. Qxd7 Bxd7 22. bxc3 Rb3 23. e5 Rxa3 {
; Sokolov felt Black was better here, but I don't think it's so much.}) 20...
Bxd5 21. exd5 Nc7 22. Qd2 Kg7 23. Rxe8 Nxe8 24. Ne1 Nd6 25. Nd3 Qf5 26. Qc2 Re8
27. h3 Bg5 28. Rd1 h5 29. b3 h4 30. Qb2 Bf6 31. Qc2 g5 32. f3 {Black was a bit
better perhaps, but this is not good. 'Thank God the grandmaster title is for
life' (Seirawan, quoted by Sokolov as a comment on his own play).} (32. Rf1 {
was correct, planning Qd1.}) 32... Re3 33. Qd2 Be5 34. Ba6 Qf6 35. Re1 ({
Painful variations follow after} 35. Qa5 Nf5 36. Nxc5 d3 $1 37. Nxd3 Bd4 {.})
35... Bf4 36. Qd1 Rxe1+ 37. Qxe1 Be3+ 38. Nf2 Nf5 39. Bd3 Ng3 40. Qd1 Qe5 41.
Qc2 Qxd5 42. b4 cxb4 43. axb4 Qe5 {. --- Conclusion: I'm going to side with
Danny K against the big battalions here; I think Black should be happy to see
this line. In the next few games we see White going for plans which both fix
Black's d5-pawn and restrain ...c5.} 0-1

[Event "Skanderborg"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2003.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Hansen, C."]
[Black "Short, N."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "142"]
[EventDate "2003.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 b6 8. Rc1
Bb7 9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11. b4 {We saw 11 Bd3 in the previous game.
With the text White aims to prevent ...c5. The idea was introduced at a high
level by Korchnoi in another Candidates match, this one against Spassky in
1977, and produced two famous games (30 h3!! and 'how Spassky tricked
Korchnoi', for students of Kasparov's 'My Great Predecessors').} c6 ({
If Black has no great ambition, then he can perfectly well play} 11... c5 12.
bxc5 bxc5 {. White has very little here: for example,} 13. dxc5 ({after} 13.
Bb5 {Efim Geller's excellent} Na6 {is good, coming to e6}) 13... Nd7 14. Be2
Nxc5 15. O-O Rc8 16. Nb5 (16. Nd4 Qa5 17. Qd2 Na4 18. Ne4 Qxd2 19. Nxd2 Rxc1
20. Rxc1 Rc8 21. Rxc8+ Bxc8 {became favourable for Black with alarming speed
in Aung Aung-Liang Jinrong, Yangon 1999}) 16... a6 17. Nbd4 {
(V.Akopian-N.Short, Linares 1995), and now either the widely recommended} Qa5 (
{or Rybka's set-up with} 17... Qd7 {
and then doubling rooks on the c-file is equal.})) 12. Bd3 Be7 {
With this move Black announces his intention to play a little irregularly.} ({
Commoner is} 12... Qd6 13. Qb3 Nd7 14. O-O a5 15. b5 c5 16. Rfd1 ({
allowing 16...c4, a controversial view; most players play} 16. dxc5 {
reaching a similar position}) 16... Rfd8 17. dxc5 Nxc5 18. Qa3 Rac8 {, as in V.Iotov-S.Halkias, European Championship, Dresden 2007, with an equal position.})
13. Qb3 Qd6 14. Rb1 ({If} 14. b5 {is played voluntarily, rather than as a
reply to ...a5, then Black is presumably going to meet it with} c5 15. dxc5
bxc5 {with a good position.}) 14... Nd7 15. O-O f5 {
I quoted this game because I admired Nigel's style with this move.} (15... a5 {
was of course possible, but if Black is going to play that way he might as
well have left the bishop on f6.}) 16. Rfd1 Rad8 17. a4 Kh8 18. Bf1 g5 {
Both players have made natural strengthening moves, and now Hansen decides he
can't just sit and watch Black build up further, although how exactly Black
was going to do that is not so clear.} 19. b5 c5 20. dxc5 Nxc5 21. Qa2 Bf6 22.
Ne2 Ne4 23. Nfd4 Be5 24. Nf3 Bg7 25. Nfd4 f4 26. exf4 gxf4 27. Rbc1 Rd7 28. Nf3
Ng5 29. Ned4 Nxf3+ 30. Nxf3 d4 31. Qb3 Re8 32. Re1 Rxe1 33. Rxe1 Re7 34. Rxe7
Qxe7 {The position has burned out to a fairly equal late middlegame, but Black
wants to try and win.} 35. h3 Bf6 36. Bc4 Qc5 37. Kh2 Be4 38. Kg1 Kg7 39. Nd2
Bg6 40. Qf3 h5 41. Qb7+ Qe7 42. Qxe7+ $2 {A dreadful move. Exchanging the
queens leaves Black's king free to take an active part in the game.} ({After} 
42. Qb8 {the game was still about equal.}) 42... Bxe7 43. Nf3 d3 44. Kf1 Bf6
45. Ke1 Bc3+ 46. Kd1 Kf6 47. g4 ({After} 47. Ne1 Bxe1 48. Kxe1 Ke5 49. Kd2 Kd4
50. Bg8 h4 {
Black wins with a well-timed ...d2 deflection to get into the queenside.})
47... fxg3 48. fxg3 Bf5 49. Kc1 $2 ({
I don't actually see how Black was going to win after the better} 49. Ne1 {
: for example,} Bxh3 50. Nxd3 Bg4+ 51. Kc2 Ba5 52. Nf2 Bf3 53. Kd3 {, and White
hangs on at least for the moment, although Black of course retains the
advantage.}) 49... Ke7 {Now Black wins.} 50. g4 hxg4 51. Nh4 d2+ 52. Kd1 Bd7
53. hxg4 Bxg4+ 54. Be2 Bxe2+ 55. Kxe2 Ke6 56. Kd1 Bb4 57. Nf3 Kd5 58. Kc2 Bc3
59. Ng5 Kc4 60. Ne4 Bb4 61. Ng5 Ba5 62. Ne6 Kb4 63. Nd4 Kxa4 64. Nc6 Kxb5 65.
Nxa7+ Kc5 66. Nc8 b5 67. Ne7 Bc3 68. Nf5 b4 69. Ne3 Kd4 70. Nf1 b3+ 71. Kd1 b2
{. --- Conclusion: This line leads to positions which are very typical of the
Tartakower. However, Black could equalize a little too easily with 11...c5. In
the next few games we see White adopting a move order which is designed truly
to prevent ...c5. This has at times been considered the absolute main line of
the Tartakower, and is presently enjoying a bit of a renaissance due to a
clever tactical idea (L'Ami-Savanovic).} 0-1

[Event "Hastings"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1995.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Arkell, K."]
[Black "Parker, J."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "80"]
[EventDate "1995.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. c4 e6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 O-O 6. e3 h6 7. Bh4 b6 8. Be2
Bb7 9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11. b4 $1 {White insists on inflicting
weaknesses if Black is going to play ...c5. This line was considered by Lalic
in 2000 as the main line of the Tartakower, although since then its popularity
has declined a little.} c6 ({The choice is between the text and} 11... c5 {
nevertheless. The latter was good enough for both the two great K's in their
interminable mid-80s matches, but} 12. bxc5 bxc5 13. Rb1 {(this move is the
whole point; in these IQP set-ups White wants rooks on b1 and c1, and he wants
to gain this half-tempo, which is why the 8 Rc1 approach from the previous
game wasn't quite as accurate)} Bc6 14. O-O Nd7 15. Bb5 Qc7 16. Qd3 {is really 
pretty tedious, although it seems clear that if Black knows what he is doing
and takes a lot of care he will be able to achieve the worse side of a draw.})
12. O-O a5 {Black has many other moves, but this is the one I'm recommending.
The reason for playing it now rather than a developing move is seen in the
next game.} 13. a3 (13. bxa5) ({and} 13. b5 {are the alternative ways of
dealing with Black's queenside challenge, as we'll see in the next two games.})
13... Nd7 14. Qb3 Re8 15. b5 {Obviously a critical move, since Black's reply
is forced. Fortunately the tactics work for him. White has also tried:} (15.
Rad1 {is directed against ...Nf8,} -- ({, intending to meet} 15... Nf8 {with}
16. b5 {.}) ({. Black can meet this well with} 15... b5 16. Bd3 ({
usually Black has played 15...axb4 16 axb4 first, but I don't really see why:} 
16. a4 axb4 17. Qxb4 Be7 {is much better for Black}) ({; instead} 16. Ne1 {
aims logically for c5, but it turns out that} axb4 17. axb4 Nb6 18. Nd3 Bc8 19.
Nc5 Bf5 20. Ra1 Be7 21. Ra2 Rxa2 22. Qxa2 Bd6 {
, as played in J.Speelman-S.Lputian, Kropotkin 1995, is fine for Black}) 16...
Nb6 17. e4 {(if White plays slowly, Black can regroup like Lputian with ...Bc8-f5 and ...Be7-d6)} axb4 18. axb4 Nc4 19. e5 Ra3 {
(Sadler), which is fine for him.})) ({After} 15. Bd3 {
, aiming for e4, Black can play Short's} axb4 ({but I like} 15... b5 {
still, based on the wicked trick} 16. e4 c5 $1 {when the best White can do is}
17. e5 c4 18. Qb1 axb4 19. axb4 Rxa1 20. Qxa1 cxd3 21. exf6 Qxf6 {
followed by trying to maintain equality}) 16. axb4 Nf8 {.}) 15... c5 16. Nxd5
Bxd4 17. Rad1 (17. exd4 Rxe2 18. Rfe1 {was apparently suggested as interesting
by Short, which is straining the language a bit, but anyway Black has no
difficulties after, for example,} Rxe1+ 19. Rxe1 Bxd5 20. Qxd5 Rc8 {.}) 17...
Ne5 18. Nxe5 (18. Nxb6 Bxf3 19. gxf3 ({or} 19. Bxf3 Nxf3+ 20. gxf3 Qxb6 21.
exd4 cxd4) 19... Qxb6 20. exd4 cxd4 {is also equal.}) 18... Bxd5 19. Nc4 Qg5
20. g3 Qf5 21. Rfe1 Qe4 22. f3 Qxe3+ 23. Qxe3 Rxe3 24. Nxe3 Bxe3+ 25. Kg2 $6 ({
This sequence, which was virtually forced after 17...Ne5, had previously
occurred in A.Karpov-N.Short, Amsterdam 1991, but Karpov wisely baled out with} 
25. Kf1 Bd4 26. Rxd4 cxd4 27. Rd1 Rc8 28. Rxd4 Rc5 29. f4 Kf8 30. Bd3 Ke7 {
, reaching a position of which Salov sternly observed that 'Black is better
and the draw was agreed prematurely'.}) 25... Bd4 26. Bd3 ({It's too late for} 
26. Rxd4 cxd4 27. Rd1 {in view of} Rd8 $1 {, but in spite of the missing
exchange it is Black who has the chances in this ending.}) 26... Bb3 27. Rc1
Kf8 28. Bc4 a4 29. Re2 Rd8 30. f4 Bf6 31. Re3 Bb2 32. Rxb3 Rd2+ 33. Kf3 axb3
34. Rb1 f5 35. Ke3 Rc2 36. Kd3 Ke7 37. a4 Rc3+ 38. Kd2 Rxc4 39. Rxb2 Rxa4 40.
Rxb3 Rb4 {. --- Conclusion: The tactics of this line were solved long ago in
Black's favour, and the quieter lines seem unlikely to yield White anything
either.} 0-1

[Event "Gibraltar"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2009.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Akobian, V."]
[Black "Gordon, S."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "94"]
[EventDate "2009.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 b6 8. Be2
Bb7 9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11. b4 c6 12. O-O a5 13. bxa5 Rxa5 14. a4 {
White can't let Black cramp his queenside with ...Ra3, so the choice is pretty
much between this and:} (14. Qb3 {
. After that Black should continue in the same way as in this game, with} Bc8 {
. The viability of this move was established in some games by Lutz.} 15. -- ({
. The most important point is that after} 15. Rab1 Bf5 $1 {Black has the tempo
to defend b6 smoothly with ...Nd7 and so obtain the set-up he wants.}) ({
. If Black is allowed to play ...Be6 in peace then he will have good play
along the lines of the present game, so the critical line is} 15. Na4 {
, but then Black has the excellent} Ba6 $1 16. Bxa6 Nxa6 $1 {.} 17. -- ({
. The point of this is that after} 17. Nc3 b5 {Black is in time to meet} 18. a4
$2 {with} b4 {, so White doesn't get to gain space on the queenside and Black
obtains a nice set-up with pressure on the a-pawn.}) ({. Otherwise,} 17. Rab1
b5 18. Nb2 c5 {was even worse in K.Hulak-C.Lutz, Wijk aan Zee 1995}) ({
, and clearly White must avoid} 17. Nxb6 $4 Rb5) ({, while after} 17. Rac1 {
Black is in time for} c5 {, since} 18. Nc3 {is well met with} Nb4 19. a3 ({
White has to settle for} 19. Rfd1 Qa8 {
, when Black's knight is stable on b4, so he is safe}) 19... Nd3 {and ...c4.}))
) 14... Bc8 $1 {This manoeuvre was extremely highly spoken of by Sadler, and I
think he was right. The structure is a bit deceptive. What White has done with
bxa5 looks a little horrid, but his idea usually is to prepare e4. After that
Black's pawns on c6 and b6 are just as bad as White's on a4 and d4, and also
more restrictive of Black's pieces, especially the b7-bishop. Black often
solves this problem by exchanging it on a6, but then White has chances with an
attack based on a knight of e5 and the sore points at f7 and c6, as often
demonstrated by Karpov (most notably in A.Karpov-K.Georgiev, Tilburg 1994).
--- With the text Black has a different idea, somewhat reminiscent of
Makogonov's 11...Be6 from Mamedyarov-Lputian. He is going to take the bishop
to e6, and after any e4 break the bishop can then go to d5, where it will
protect both c6 and f7, and instantly become the best player on the pitch.
It's worth pointing out that this was why Black played ...a5 already on move
12. By doing so he allows the dangerous line in the next game, but if he had
played, say, 12...Re8 then 13 a4 a5 14 bxa5 Rax5 15 Rab1 would have prevented
his regrouping, since 15...Bc8 16 Qb3 attacks b6 and obliges 16...Nd7. Many
GMs who play this line for Black don't think that's so tragic and are happier
to play that way than allow the line in the next game, but I think Black can
cope with that and prefer to optimize Black's set-up in the structure in this
game.} 15. Qc2 ({Placing the queen opposite the bishop with} 15. Qb3 {
is asking for ...c5: for example,} Be6 16. Rfd1 (16. Bd3 c5 17. Bb5 Na6 {
was fine for Black in another Lutz game}) 16... c5 17. Rab1 Nd7 18. Nxd5 cxd4
19. Nxf6+ Qxf6 20. Qd3 dxe3 21. Qxe3 {with equality.}) ({Instead} 15. Rb1 Be6
16. Qc2 Nd7 17. Bd3 Re8 18. Rfe1 g6 19. e4 dxe4 20. Nxe4 Bd5 {is another
which demonstrates Black's idea; imagine the same position with the bishop on
b7 to see this.}) 15... Be6 16. Rfd1 ({White needs to restrain ...c5;} 16. Rfc1
{fails to achieve this and after} Qe7 17. Nd2 $6 c5 {
Black was already better in P.Nikolic-A.Beliavsky, Tilburg 1993.}) ({Meanwhile
} 16. Rab1 Nd7 (16... c5 {is still possible: for example,} 17. Ne5 Bxe5 18.
dxe5 Nc6 19. f4 d4 {is unclear}) 17. Rfe1 Qc7 18. Bd3 Raa8 19. e4 dxe4 20. Nxe4
Bd5 {illustrated Black's point in A.Maksimenko-A.Beliavsky, Tivat 1995.}) 16...
Nd7 ({Even here it isn't clear that Black can't play} 16... c5 {: for example,}
17. Ne5 (17. e4 Nc6 18. exd5 Nb4 19. Qd2 Nxd5 20. Ne4 Bf5 {is fine as well,}) (
{while} 17. Bb5 Na6 18. Rac1 Qa8 19. e4 Nb4 20. Qb1 Rc8 {
was equal in V.Tukmakov-A.Shabalov, Koszalin 1999}) 17... Na6 18. Nc6 Nb4 $1 {.
}) 17. Rab1 Qa8 18. Bd3 Rc8 {This is Black's paradigm set-up in this line if
he isn't going to break with ...c5.} 19. h3 (19. e4 {is ineffective in view of}
dxe4 20. Bxe4 Be7 {, with easy equality.}) 19... Be7 (19... c5 {
was tempting now too, and fine for Black, but Gordon prefers to manoeuvre.})
20. Bf5 b5 {
This was Black's idea with 19...Be7 (and indeed to an extent 18...Rc8 also).}
21. Bxe6 fxe6 22. Ne5 Nxe5 23. dxe5 b4 24. Ne2 c5 {The game now becomes
extremely sharp, and both players handle the complications very well.} 25. Qg6
Ra6 26. Nf4 Rcc6 27. e4 d4 28. Rd3 Qf8 29. Rg3 Bg5 30. Rxg5 ({
An extremely difficult choice between this and the alternative} 30. Nh5 Qf7 31.
Qxf7+ Kxf7 32. h4 {
, which also seems in fact to be equal but is scary for White.}) 30... hxg5 31.
Qxg5 Rxa4 32. Ng6 Qe8 33. f4 Rca6 34. Kh2 d3 ({Most of Black's reasonable
moves actually seem to lead to a draw, including the spectacular line} 34...
Ra1 35. Rxa1 Rxa1 36. f5 exf5 37. exf5 Ra6 38. Qh5 d3 ({not} 38... Rxg6 39.
fxg6 Qe6 40. Qg5 $1) 39. f6 gxf6 40. Qh8+ Kf7 41. e6+ Qxe6 42. Qh7+ Ke8 43.
Qh8+ {, with perpetual.}) 35. Qh5 Ra1 36. Rxa1 Rxa1 37. f5 exf5 38. exf5 d2 39.
Qh8+ Kf7 40. e6+ Kf6 41. Qxe8 d1=Q 42. Qe7+ Kxf5 43. Nh4+ Ke4 44. Qxc5 Qh1+ 45.
Kg3 Qe1+ 46. Kh2 Qh1+ 47. Kg3 Qe1+ {. Conclusion: --- This variation leads to
interesting positions, but Black has his full share of the play.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "European Championship, Budva"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2009.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "L'Ami, E."]
[Black "Savanovic, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "145"]
[EventDate "2009.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 O-O 6. e3 h6 7. Bh4 b6 8. Be2
Bb7 9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11. b4 c6 12. O-O a5 {
We saw all this in the last game. Now White tries the most direct reply.} 13.
b5 c5 14. Ne5 {White seldom plays anything else nowadays. Before this move was
discovered by Alexander Onischuk in 2002 White had been doing fairly badly
with quieter tries, for example:} (14. Rc1 Nd7 15. dxc5 (15. Qd2 {is also played, when the build-up against d5 is going to force Black into ...c4, but these
position-types too are basically fine for Black}) 15... Nxc5 16. Nd4 Rc8 {
(important to play this before White can get in Bg4)} 17. Bg4 Rc7 {was H.Gretarsson-A.Yusupov, Groningen 1997, when Black is generally thought to be doing
pretty well. The game continued} 18. Na4 (18. Nce2 {
is an alternative, also with equal play}) 18... Ne4 19. Qd3 Rc4 {, and at this
point, as Lalic pointed out even in the pre-computer age, White had to play}
20. Nc6 Bxc6 21. bxc6 b5 22. f3 {, when presumably play is going to continue}
Ng5 23. Nc5 ({if} 23. Nc3 Bxc3 24. Rxc3 f5 $1) 23... Qd6 24. Nb7 Qxc6 25. Nxa5
Rc3 {, with rough equality.}) ({White tried a more flexible approach in the
famous game V.Topalov-V.Kramnik, Linares 1998, with} 14. Re1 Re8 (14... Nd7 {
is equal, says Kramnik laconically}) 15. Rc1 Nd7 16. g3 Nf8 ({
evidently Kramnik didn't mind being forced to play ...c4; he proposed} 16...
Rc8 17. Bf1 cxd4 18. Nxd4 Nc5 19. Bg2 Ne4 {
as another valid method, along the lines of Gretarsson-Yusupov}) 17. Na4 c4 18.
Bf1 {, and now Kramnik won a manoeuvring classic after} Qd6 {,} ({
but later he felt that it was better to defend b7 with} 18... Qc7 19. Bg2 Rad8
20. Nc3 g6 {, which he felt was equal. In the game something similar happened
and Topalov had a chance for Nd2 (threatening Nxc4; this was why Kramnik
wanted to defend b7), and then f4 followed by Nf3, which Kramnik felt would
have been better for him.})) 14... cxd4 ({Black's main alternative is} 14...
Qc7 15. Ng4 Nd7 16. Bf3 Rad8 17. Nxd5 Bxd5 18. Bxd5 cxd4 {, but I have been
reluctantly forced to agree with Rizzitano that White is better after} 19. Rc1
Qd6 20. e4 Nc5 21. f4 d3 22. Rc4 {.}) ({Instead} 14... Bxe5 15. dxe5 d4 16.
exd4 cxd4 {is the same as the game.}) 15. exd4 Bxe5 (15... Qc7 16. Na4 Bxe5 17.
dxe5 Nd7 18. f4 {
is less effective; Black does better to make sure he can win the e5-pawn.}) 16.
dxe5 d4 17. Na4 Qg5 18. Bg4 {An excellent move. The bishop on g4 dominates the
knight on d7 most effectively.} ({White has nothing after} 18. Bf3 Bxf3 19.
Qxf3 Nd7 {.}) 18... Qxe5 19. Nxb6 Ra7 {This position can be considered the
main one after 14 Ne5 (and indeed 13 b5). Machines tend to like White, but
Black has held up well here.} 20. Rb1 {
It's natural to defend b5, though White has tried a couple of others:} (20. Re1
{can be comfortably met by} Qc5 (20... Qd6 21. Na4 Qd5 22. Bf3 Qxb5 23. Qxd4
Nc6 {worked fine too in D.Bocharov-A.Nikitin, Tomsk 2003, but if the knight is
going to come to c6 then Black might as well leave the bishop floating on g4,
since its function of controlling d7 is over}) 21. Na4 Qxb5 22. Qxd4 Nc6 {.}) (
20. Rc1 {
is White's best alternative and quite possibly his best full stop. Here} Qxb5
21. Qxd4 {was drawn at once in M.Makarov-V.Kosyrev, Sochi 2007, but Black
still needs to show a bit of care to equalize from here, especially if White
is one of those horrid machines: for example,} Nc6 22. Qe3 Qe5 23. Rc5 Qxe3 24.
fxe3 {, when Black's most accurate line, I think, is} Ra6 25. Nd5 Nd8 {
, but he still has some defending to do.}) 20... Qd6 {A good move. Black has
tried a few alternatives, but to my eye it simply has to be best to drive the
knight away to a4 first of all.} 21. Na4 (21. Nc4 {loses a piece to} Qd5 {
, of course.}) 21... Be4 {This too seems to be best. Before going ...d3 Black
gains a tempo to defend the pawn, and also gives his a7 rook some perspectives.
} 22. Rc1 (22. Rb2 d3 23. Rd2 {, as in P.Bobras-A.David, Port Erin 2005, isn't
very scary. Black could play a number of good moves, including} Qb4 {
as in the game,} ({or} 23... Nd7 {
. In either case White will do well to avoid being worse.})) 22... d3 {
This position has arisen in a few games and seems to be equal.} 23. Nc5 {
The critical move.} ({
If White doesn't go for this then Black is simply fine: for example,} 23. Qd2
Qd4 24. Bd1 Nd7 25. Bb3 Ne5 26. Qc3 Rd7 27. Qxd4 Rxd4 {, when Black's hefty
centralization enabled him to hold the balance easily in S.Ivanov-C.Jepson,
Swedish League 2008.}) 23... d2 24. Rc3 (24. b6 Re7 {
doesn't get White anywhere.}) ({The computer gets excited for a moment about} 
24. Nxe4 dxc1=Q 25. Nxd6 Qxd1 26. Rxd1 {, but} Rc7 {
is comfortable enough for Black, who can even gain the advantage.}) 24... Bg6
25. Bf3 Re7 26. Nb3 Rd8 (26... Rd7 {also looks very sound in view of} 27. Bg4
Qb4 {.}) 27. Qxd2 Qxd2 28. Nxd2 Rxd2 29. Rc8+ Kh7 30. Rxb8 Rxa2 {Black should
hold this ending fairly comfortably, but L'Ami keeps trying and, as so often
happens, his extra couple of hundred points prevail in the end.} 31. h4 (31. b6
{is met by} Bd3 32. Rc1 Rc2 {followed by chasing the rook along the first rank.
}) 31... Be4 32. Re1 f5 33. Rb6 g6 {Bh5 was White's threat.} 34. h5 gxh5 35.
Rf6 Rb2 (35... Rb7 {might have been simpler, since it insists upon the
exchange of bishops, but you can see why it wasn't easy to be sure about} 36.
Bxe4 fxe4 37. Rxe4 Rxb5 38. Re7+ Kg8 {, although in fact White can't do
anything much; the moment the rook comes off the f-file, ...Rf5 attacks and
defends simultaneously.}) 36. Rxf5 Bxf5 37. Rxe7+ Kg6 38. Bc6 Bd3 39. Kh2 Rb4
40. Be8+ Kf6 41. Rb7 h4 42. Bc6 a4 43. Ra7 Bxb5 {Savanovic probably wanted to
reduce the task to a technical one, but this is a concession;} ({
keeping the tension with} 43... Ke5 {was much better.}) 44. Bxb5 Rxb5 45. Rxa4
Kg5 46. Kh3 {This is the problem; White wins the h-pawn, and produces an
ending which can please only technical aficionados as Black, although Black's
correct defensive methods and the trick White wins with in the game are well
known and set out in many endgame books.} Rb3+ 47. f3 Rb2 48. Rxh4 Ra2 49. Rg4+
Kf6 50. Kh4 Ra5 51. Rb4 Ra2 52. Rb6+ Kg7 53. g4 Rh2+ 54. Kg3 Ra2 55. Re6 Ra3
56. Kf4 Rb3 57. Ke4 Ra3 58. f4 Ra4+ 59. Kf5 Ra5+ 60. Re5 Ra7 61. Rd5 Rf7+ 62.
Ke4 Re7+ 63. Kf3 Ra7 64. Rd6 Ra5 65. Ke4 Rb5 66. f5 Ra5 $2 (66... Rb1 {
was the way, with the idea of} 67. Rd7+ Kf6 68. Rh7 Rh1 {. Keeping ...Rh1
available is pretty much Black's main defensive idea in this endgame.}) 67.
Rd7+ Kg8 {Fatal;} ({but so is} 67... Kf6 68. Rh7 {.}) 68. Re7 Rb5 69. Kf4 Ra5 (
69... Rb6 70. Re6 Rb4+ 71. Kg3 Kg7 72. Re7+ Kg8 73. Kh4 {is also winning.}) 70.
f6 Rb5 71. Rg7+ Kh8 72. g5 hxg5+ 73. Kg4 ({Black might at least have tried} 73.
Kg4 Rb8 {, since while} 74. Kf5 {and various rook moves win for White,} ({
the plausible} 74. Kh5 {doesn't after} Rf8 75. Kg6 Rg8 76. Kf7 Ra8 77. Rxg5
Ra7+ 78. Kg6 Kg8 79. Rb5 Rg7+ {. --- Conclusion: I don't think Black has much
to fear after 20 Rb1. The less popular 20 Rc1 would trouble me more, though
it's notable that the very well-prepared L'Ami didn't go for it.})) 1-0

[Event "European Championship, Ohrid"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2001.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Piket, J."]
[Black "Yegiazarian, A."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "84"]
[EventDate "2001.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 b6 8. Be2
Bb7 9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11. O-O {This time White doesn't bother to
prevent ...c5. This, by the way, was Khalifman's choice in volume 5 of
'Opening Repertoire According to Kramnik', based on his own game against
Kramnik given below.} c5 $1 {
Black's most logical possibility, since White hasn't arranged to prevent it.} (
{He has a wide range of alternatives, of which the dual-purpose} 11... Qe7 {
, holding back b4 and preparing ...Rd8 and ...c5 anyway, is the most popular.})
12. dxc5 {This isn't forced, of course, but it's generally played.} ({
Other moves tend to be met with ...Na6, after which Black can recapture on c5
with a knight if he wants: for example,} 12. Rc1 Na6 13. dxc5 Nxc5 (13... bxc5
{is also very playable, since} 14. Nxd5 Qxd5 15. Qxd5 Bxd5 16. Bxa6 Bxa2 17.
Rxc5 Bxb2 {is nothing}) 14. Nd4 Qe7 {
, when it's hard to come up with any constructive plan for White.}) 12... bxc5
({Instead} 12... Bxc3 13. bxc3 bxc5 14. Rb1 Qc7 15. Ne5 Nd7 (15... Re8 {
had been played in J.Timman-R.Vaganian, Riga 1995, when apparently Kramnik's
idea was the dashing} 16. Nxf7 ({although the more modest} 16. Qb3 {
also has a certain appeal}) 16... Qxf7 17. Bh5 g6 18. Bxg6 Qxg6 19. Rxb7) 16.
Nxd7 Qxd7 17. Qb3 Bc6 18. Qa3 Qe7 19. Bf3 {was the game I mentioned, V.Kramnik-A.Khalifman, Linares 2000, in which the then FIDE Champion needed to
show some very well-tutored technique to keep out his unauthorized opposite
number in a rook ending. I find this rather an unattractive proposition for
Black.}) 13. Qb3 {A logical way to develop with gain of tempo; the queen is
quite often well placed on a3 against the hanging pawns.} Bc6 {Also something
Black quite commonly has to do when he has obtained hanging pawns in a
position where he isn't yet quite developed. The knight isn't going to c6
anyway, so the optically clumsy nature of the move is not so important, and
clearing the b-file for a rook can even be useful.} ({
Ways of defending the bishop tie Black down somewhat: for example,} 13... Qe7 {
prevents ...Nd7}) ({and} 13... Qb6 $2 14. Nxd5 {obviously won't do.}) 14. Rfd1
(14. Rad1 {was met the same way in K.Sasikiran-F.Doettling, French League 2008:
} Nd7 $1 15. Nxd5 Rb8 16. Qa3 {
(this was the idea of using the queen's rook on move 14, of course)} Bxb2 $1 (
16... Rxb2 17. Bc4 {might give White a little something: for example,} Bxd5 18.
Bxd5 Qc7 19. Nd4 Bxd4 20. exd4 Rb5 21. Rc1 Ra5 22. Qd3 Nb6 23. Rxc5 Rxc5 24.
dxc5 Qxc5 25. Bb3 {, and Black still hasn't quite equalized}) 17. Qa6 (17. Qxa7
Ra8 {wins the pawn back, of course}) 17... Bxd5 18. Rxd5 Qc7 19. Rfd1 Nb6 20.
R5d2 Bf6 {with equality.}) 14... Nd7 $1 {Best.} (14... c4 $2 15. Qc2 Qa5 16.
Nd4 {gives White what he wants}) ({while} 14... Bxc3 15. Qxc3 Nd7 16. b4 c4 17.
b5 Bb7 18. Qb4 {is also a little better for White.}) 15. Bb5 $5 ({Instead} 15.
Rab1 {(an incomprehensible move in my view)} Nb6 {occurred in K.Hulak-K.Galic,
Pula 1993, and here Khalifman equally incomprehensibly offers the improvement}
16. Bb5 Bb7 {(of course Black doesn't allow an exchange: it would weaken d5,
deprive him of his bishop-pair, and also rob a possible ...d4 of a lot of its
dynamism connected with the uncovering of the b7-bishop against the kingside;
by contrast White's king's bishop is puzzled to find a role or a stable
position)} 17. Ne4 {'and White maintains his slight edge'. I understand
nothing and suggest that Black just carries on with} Be7 {, which looks to me
like a pretty standard hanging-pawns position where White's last two moves
will shortly require retraction.}) ({Otherwise,} 15. Nxd5 Rb8 16. Qc4 Rxb2 {
is completely equal}) ({
and standard development doesn't offer White much: for example, after} 15. Rac1
Rb8 16. Qc2 Re8 17. b3 {Black could already contemplate his ideal break} d4 18.
exd4 Bxf3 19. Bxf3 cxd4 20. Nd5 Bg5 {
, with equality, although keeping the tension is also fine.}) 15... Rb8 (15...
Bb7 {is impossible because of} 16. Nxd5 {, but the queen sacrifice White is
implying by his last move doesn't lead anywhere.}) 16. Bxc6 Rxb3 17. axb3 Bxc3
({There's not a lot wrong with the text, but various sources point to} 17... d4
$1 18. exd4 cxd4 19. Nxd4 Nb8 {
as a more reliable equalizer, based on the trick...} ({
there's not much wrong with} 19... Nb6 {either; Black is simply in no danger})
20. Ne6 $2 (20. Nf5 Qc8 {is equal}) 20... Qc8 21. Nxf8 Qxc6 {
, collecting the knight at leisure.}) 18. bxc3 Nf6 19. c4 (19. e4 $6 Qb6 {
is worse.}) 19... d4 {A prudent move;} ({
White's hope was to play the position after something like} 19... Qb6 20. cxd5
Qxb3 21. Nd2 Qb2 22. Rab1 Qe5 23. Nc4 Qe4 24. Rbc1 {(Dautov), where all three
results are possible. After the text a draw becomes an odds-on chance, and the
remaining moves are of much less relevance to our theme.}) 20. exd4 cxd4 21.
Rxd4 Qb6 22. Bb5 Qc5 23. h3 Rc8 24. b4 Qxb4 25. Rxa7 Qb1+ 26. Kh2 Qf1 27. Ra2
g5 28. Ne5 Rc7 29. Bc6 Kg7 30. Bf3 Qe1 31. Re2 Qa1 32. Red2 h5 33. Bd5 Re7 34.
f4 g4 35. g3 gxh3 36. Bf3 Ra7 37. Kxh3 Ra3 38. Kg2 Rc3 39. R4d3 Rc1 40. Rd1
Rc2+ 41. R1d2 Rc1 42. Rd1 Rc2+ {. --- Conclusion: White needs a pretty serious
improvement to keep playing this line, and there's no sign of one appearing.}
1/2-1/2

[Event "Russian Team Championship"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2006.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Tomashevsky, E."]
[Black "Rychagov, A."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "73"]
[EventDate "2006.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. Nf3 d5 2. c4 e6 3. d4 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. Nc3 O-O 6. e3 h6 7. Bh4 b6 8. Bd3
Bb7 9. O-O Nbd7 10. Qe2 ({After} 10. Rc1 {
Black could either transpose to Bu-Asrian with} dxc4 ({or play} 10... c5 {
, when direct attempts in the centre give White nothing and} 11. Qe2 Ne4 {
is also equal.})) 10... c5 11. Bg3 {This system, which subtly combines
development and prophylaxis, is often said to have been popularized by Kramnik
(mainly on the basis of the splendid game V.Kramnik-A.Yusupov, Dortmund 1998),
but to judge from the databases seems to be the intellectual property of the
tragic Russian GM Alexei Vyzmanavin.} ({Sadler explains the point of the move
wonderfully lucidly in his classic book; White wants to threaten cxd5 in such
a way that Black is compelled to recapture with the pawn rather than the
typically equalizing ...Nxd5, and in order to do this he withdraws the bishop
so that Black should not gain a tempo when recapturing on d5 with the knight.
To see this consider what would happen if White instead played} 11. cxd5 Nxd5 {
.} 12. -- ({. Now} 12. Bg3 {is met by} cxd4 {
and unless White is willing to accept an IQP in a rather poor version, or else}
13. Nxd4 ({he has to play} 13. Nxd5 Bxd5 14. Nxd4 {, and offer a draw}) 13...
Nxc3 {damaging his structure.}) ({. Here too after} 12. Bxe7 Qxe7 13. Nxd5 Bxd5
14. e4 Bb7 {White has absolutely nothing.})) ({
After other developing moves, for example,} 11. Rac1 {
(11 Rad1 is met the same way), Black has} Ne4 {, when White has either to allow
} 12. Bg3 ({or else play} 12. Bxe7 Qxe7 13. cxd5 exd5 {
, but now the exchange of bishops frees Black's position: for example,} 14.
Rfd1 Rac8 15. dxc5 Rxc5 {
, and the threat of ...Nxc3 forces a further concession with equality}) 12...
Nxg3 13. hxg3 cxd4 14. exd4 ({or} 14. Nxd4 {, which is equal}) 14... dxc4 15.
Bxc4 Nf6 {, and Black is fine.}) 11... cxd4 {This is Black's solidest way to
equalize, and has been known at least since it was shown by Tigran Petrosian,
that prince of equalizers, in S.Gligoric-T.Petrosian, Zurich 1961.} 12. exd4
dxc4 13. Bxc4 Nh5 (13... Bb4 {
is an alternative which doesn't allow the dull lines shown in the next note:}
14. -- ({. 'Official' theory (at least in the form of some annotations by
Ftacnik quoted by implication by Sadler) says that White now has a good move
in} 14. Nb5 Ne4 15. Bc7 Qe7 ({this move is supposed to be impossible for the
reason given in the note to White's next, and thus Black plays} 15... Qe8 {
and suffers}) 16. a3 {. Now Black has a good move in} a6 $1 (16... Bd6 {
loses material after} 17. d5 Bxc7 18. Nxc7 exd5 19. Nxd5 Bxd5 20. Bxd5 Rae8 21.
Rfe1 Ndf6 22. Bc6) {. The point of this is that after} 17. axb4 axb5 18. Bxb5
Ndf6 19. Bxb6 Qxb4 {Black is threatening ...Nd6, and after} 20. Bc7 {
he has the uncommonly refined tactical trick} Rxa1 21. Rxa1 Nc3 $1 {
. Without giving too many variations, Black is comfortably equal here.}) ({
. A less pretentious and more sensible way for White to play is} 14. Rac1 {
. Now if} Bxc3 (14... Qe7 {is interesting, so that if} 15. a3 ({
or, for instance,} 15. Rfe1 Rfc8) 15... Bxc3) 15. bxc3 Ne4 {Sadler suggested}
16. Bh4 ({instead} 16. Bf4 Rc8 17. Nd2 Ndf6 18. Nxe4 Nxe4 19. Be3 Nd6 20. Bb3 {
saw Black in time to put the hanging pawns under a bit of pressure in W.Arencibia-A.Beliavsky, Elista Olympiad 1998;} Qf6 {was a good move now}) 16...
Qc7 17. Bd3 Qc6 ({the point is that Black can't get away with} 17... Nxc3 18.
Qb2 Rfc8 19. Bg3 Qc6 20. Rc2 b5 {, if only because} 21. d5 exd5 22. Nd4 {
wins material}) 18. c4 {with advantage to White, and I agree with him.})) ({
Another interesting, and untried, idea is} 13... a6 14. a4 Bb4 15. Rac1 {
, and now} Qe7 $5 {. This placement of the queen is unusual in IQP positions,
basically because White would normally put a rook on e1 and threaten d5, but
with the bishop stable on b4 Black seems well able to cope with this (his next
move will probably be ...Rfc8). This could well be Black's best way of all to
play the position, combining security and combativeness.} ({Instead} 15... Bxc3
{gives similar variations to the above,}) ({while if Black wants to play} 15...
Nh5 {he should have done it before now; after} 16. d5 Nxg3 17. hxg3 exd5 18.
Nxd5 {the weakness of b6 and a6, as well as the gain of tempo on the b4-bishop,
makes it quite hard to equalize.})) 14. Rad1 ({Many games have been played with
} 14. d5 Nxg3 15. hxg3 exd5 16. Bxd5 ({
Ivan Sokolov said that White had 'an initiative' after} 16. Nxd5 Bd6 ({but} 
16... Re8 {is better; the idea is to delay the choice of square for the bishop,
and thus enable Black to meet a set-up with Ne3 and without Qe2 by ...Bc5;
play might continue} 17. Rfd1 Bc5 18. Qd3 Nf6 19. b4 Bf8 {
, and Black has no problems}) 17. Rfd1 Nf6 18. Ne3) 16... Bxd5 17. Nxd5 Re8 {
, but this really doesn't give White anything: for example, the original
Gligoric-Petrosian game, which went} 18. Rad1 Bc5 19. Qc4 Rc8 20. Qf4 a5 21. a3
Re6 $1 {(a classy move)} 22. b4 axb4 23. axb4 Bd6 24. Qd4 Qe8 25. Rfe1 Ne5 {.})
(14. Rfd1 Nxg3 15. hxg3 Nf6 16. Ne5 {has also been tried and evidently doesn't
do White much good after, among others,} Rc8 {.}) 14... Nxg3 15. fxg3 {
Bravo! This was the idea of using the queen's rook, of course.} (15. hxg3 Nf6 {
is nothing for White.}) 15... Nf6 16. Ne5 Bb4 {A slightly curious move to my
eye. It isn't at all clear to me that the c3-knight is the piece Black needs
to eliminate. Black has a large number of alternatives:} ({
He could certainly try} 16... a6 {- either getting in ...b5 or forcing a4
would be an achievement for Black. The trouble is that once the b-pawn is
undefended, White probably has} 17. Nxf7 Rxf7 18. Qxe6 Qf8 19. Qxb6 Rb8 20.
Bxf7+ Qxf7 {, when I think White is at least not worse, although his position
is nowhere near as good as the material balance suggests.}) ({
A sensible alternative is} 16... Qd6 17. Rf4 (17. Nb5 Qd8 18. Nc3 {
would be considered a drawback by some, of course}) 17... a6 {, when the
on is extremely sharp. A sample variation to illustrate the point:} 18. Rdf1 b5
19. Bd3 Rac8 20. a3 Rfd8 21. g4 Qb6 22. Qe3 Rc7 23. h4 Bd6 24. g5 Bxe5 25. Qxe5
Nh5 26. gxh6 f5 27. R4f2 Rxd4 {, when Black survives and is even better.}) ({
Another set-up which comes into consideration is} 16... Rc8 17. Rf4 Bd6 {
(the immediate 16...Bd6 was met by 17 Nb5)} 18. Rdf1 Qe7 {. I think this would
probably be my choice - the option to eliminate the e5-knight at a convenient
moment is very important.}) 17. Rf4 Bxc3 18. bxc3 Rc8 19. Rdf1 Rc7 20. g4 $1 {
Black is likely slowly to become better if White plays quietly, so this is
more or less compulsory.} Nd5 {It's natural to try to force exchanges, but
still it seems to me that White is better.} (20... Bd5 21. Bd3 Rxc3 22. Qe3 Qc7
23. h4 {is also very dangerous.}) 21. Bxd5 Qxd5 22. c4 {
An extremely difficult choice.} ({The position after} 22. h4 Rxc3 23. Nxf7 Rfc8
24. R1f2 Rc2 25. Qxc2 Rxc2 26. Rxc2 {is hard to judge over the board. It seems
that White was better both there and in the game.}) 22... Qd8 23. Qf2 $6 ({
Black's last didn't actually prevent} 23. h4 {and I think that's what White
should have played. It's hard to believe he was afraid of the computer's} g5 ({
not} 23... Qxh4 $2 24. Ng6) 24. R4f2 Qxd4 {, especially since White wins after}
25. Rd1 Qc3 26. Rd3 Qb4 27. hxg5 hxg5 28. Nd7 {
. Black would have been in grave difficulty in this line.}) 23... f6 24. Ng6
Re8 25. h4 Rxc4 26. g5 e5 {
The position is very tricky, but I doubt Black can do better than this.} 27.
dxe5 Rxf4 28. Qxf4 Qd5 29. Qg3 Qd4+ 30. Kh2 fxg5 31. hxg5 Ba6 32. Rf3 h5 33.
Qh3 Qg4 34. Qxg4 hxg4 35. Ra3 Kh7 36. Nf4 Bc4 37. Rxa7 {. --- Conclusion:
Anyone who wants to incorporate 13...Nh5 into their repertoire needs to study
Tomashevsky's idea carefully, and the same goes for anyone who plays this
system as White, since White's alternatives are uninspiring in the extreme. I
actually prefer either 13...a6 or 13...Bb4 for Black if he wants to play these
IQP positions, rather than the line in the next game, which is more oriented
towards central control.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Metz"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2009.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Borovikov, V."]
[Black "David, A."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "49"]
[EventDate "2009.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 b6 8. Bd3
Bb7 9. O-O Nbd7 10. Bg3 {Again this prophylactic retreat, here played a move
earlier than in Tomashevsky-Rychagov, although play soon transposes.} ({Instead
} 10. cxd5 {is met, of course, by} Nxd5 {when Jakovenko has tried} 11. Bg3 {
of late, although what he had in mind after} c5 {I couldn't say;} 12. Rc1 N7f6
({even better than the hardly shabby} 12... cxd4) 13. Qe2 cxd4 14. Nxd4 Rc8 {
was nothing for White in S.Arun Prasad-K.Georgiev, Szirak 1985.}) 10... c5 11.
Qe2 (11. cxd5 {is also played, although it does seem a little strange at this
moment when Black can easily recapture with a piece. After} Nxd5 12. Rc1 (12.
Nxd5 Bxd5 13. e4 Bb7 14. Rc1 {
is perhaps a less accurate order which gives Black the chance for the usual}
Nf6 ({or perhaps Topalov's} 14... a6 {, in either case with full equality}))
12... cxd4 13. Nxd5 Bxd5 14. e4 Bb7 15. Bc7 Qe8 16. Nxd4 {gives a position
where Black still has to be a little careful; maybe he should play} Bc5 {, when
} 17. Nb5 ({after} 17. Nb3 {,} Qe7 {is certainly possible,} ({
but perhaps the best is the surprising} 17... Rc8 {, since after} 18. Nxc5 Nxc5
19. Bd6 Nxd3 20. Rxc8 Qxc8 21. Bxf8 Qc4 {Black wins two pawns back for his
exchange and remains with the more active pieces})) 17... Qe7 18. Bb1 Ba6 19.
Qa4 Bxb5 20. Qxb5 e5 {didn't give White anything in D.Arutinian-J.Arizmendi
Martinez, Palma de Mallorca 2008.}) 11... Ne4 {This is Black's main
alternative to the IQP positions of the last game, fighting for central space.}
12. cxd5 {As I said before, it was the object of White's Bg3 to have this move
available in reply to ...Ne4. Black has to accept pawn weaknesses in return
for his greater influence in the centre - the typical trade-off of the
Tartakower.} ({Instead} 12. Rfd1 cxd4 13. exd4 Nxg3 14. hxg3 Nf6 {was the Gavrikov-Yusupov game mentioned in the Bibliography, when Black was fine.}) 12...
exd5 13. Rad1 ({White uses this rook partly because after} 13. Rfd1 {
Black has the simplifying alternative} cxd4 14. Bxe4 dxc3 15. Bxd5 cxb2 {
, which doesn't work unless there is a rook en prise on a1, but anyway in some
lines the rook on f1 may still come in useful, as we shall see.}) ({Instead} 
13. Rac1 {doesn't prevent} Ndf6 {: for example,} 14. dxc5 Nxg3 15. hxg3 bxc5
16. Rfd1 Qb6 17. b3 Qe6 {
, and Black was fine in A.Yermolinsky-K.Georgiev, Moscow Olympiad 1994.}) 13...
Qc8 {This move, one of Nigel Short's many contributions to the Tartakower, is
often considered Black's best, but he has a number of possibilities:} (13...
cxd4 14. Bxe4 dxe4 15. Nxd4 {is now not so effective.}) (13... Ndf6 14. dxc5
Nxc3 (14... bxc5 $4 15. Bxe4 {was the point of White putting a rook on d1}) 15.
bxc3 Bxc5 16. Nd4 Qe7 17. Bh4 {was the main line before Nigel's invention, but
Black never did very well from this position.}) (13... Bf6 $2 {
is not good, either, in view of} 14. Bxe4 dxe4 15. Ne5 {.}) (13... Nxg3 14.
hxg3 {is perhaps the main alternative; and now:} -- (14... a6 15. dxc5 {
, as in V.Kramnik-A.Yusupov, Dortmund 1998, renders Black's last a bit of a
waste of time.}) (14... c4 15. Bb1 a6 16. e4 {
, as in V.Babula-U.Boensch, German League 1999, gives Black a choice between}
Re8 ({and the game's simpler} 16... dxe4 17. Nxe4 (17. Bxe4 {
might be more prudent}) 17... b5 {.})) (14... Bf6 {
is well spoken of by Sokolov.} 15. -- ({
. It has the effect of blunting White's pressure down the d-file, since if} 15.
dxc5 Bxc3 {gives both sides weaknesses}) ({, and preparing for dxc5 with} 15.
Qc2 g6 16. dxc5 bxc5 {leaves White's queen poorly placed.}) ({. Instead in A.Vyzmanavin-E.Pigusov, Moscow 1987, the system's creator's reorganization with} 
15. Bb1 Re8 16. Rd2 a6 17. Rc1 Rc8 18. Qd1 (18. dxc5 Rxc5 {
renews the threat to create a weakness on c3}) 18... c4 {left him worse.})))
14. Rc1 {Black's last move had various ideas. First of all, he wants to enable
himself to move the d7-knight and still recapture with the b-pawn after dxc5.
He also facilitates ...Ba6 after a Bxe4 dxe4; Ne5 sequence, and lastly
prepares to bring the queen to the fine e6-square.} ({White's first try, in
the game J.Lautier-N.Short, Pamplona 1999, was a disaster:} 14. Bb1 Ndf6 15.
Qc2 {(this battery proves useless)} Re8 16. Be5 Qe6 17. dxc5 bxc5 18. Qa4 Ng5
19. Nxg5 Qxe5 {, and Black was better.}) ({Likewise,} 14. Bxe4 dxe4 15. Ne5
Nxe5 16. Bxe5 Ba6 17. Nb5 Qe6 18. a4 Qb3 {is no good}) ({while} 14. a4 {
has the idea of enabling Nb5 after the sequence Bxe4 dxe4; Ne5 Ba6, but apart
from that really isn't a very useful move. Black has tried three replies:} -- (
14... Ndf6 {has the drawback of allowing} 15. Ne5 Qe6 16. f4 {
, although it isn't clear that has to be so tragic:} -- (16... cxd4 {
(seldom a good move)} 17. exd4 Nxg3 18. hxg3 Bb4 (18... h5 19. Nb5 {
is again annoying, especially should Black continue with} Rfc8 $4 20. f5) 19.
g4 {(Black always has to watch out for this in this line after doubling the
g-pawns)} Rae8 (19... Bxc3 {
seems like a more logical follow-up to Black's last;} 20. bxc3 Ne4 21. Bxe4
dxe4 22. g5 Rad8 23. Qh5 Rd6 {
emphasizes the point I make below about the rook on d8}) 20. g5 hxg5 21. fxg5
Ne4 22. Bxe4 dxe4 23. Qh5 {was very nasty for Black in K.Sasikiran-R.Kasimdzhanov, Skanderborg 2003, but the suggested improvements are not too bad
for Black at all.}) ({. Indeed,} 16... Nxg3 17. hxg3 Rad8 (17... h5 $5 {
is worth consideration too}) 18. g4 Ne4 19. Qf3 Nxc3 20. bxc3 Bd6 {, with equality was better according to Dautov. Although the rook doesn't have obvious
prospects on d8, it is well placed there; it may come usefully to d6 in some
lines, it presses usefully on d4 if a knight on e4 is captured, and its
support for the d-pawn itself, the foundation stone of Black's game, is never
out of place.})) (14... Nxg3 {is fairly dangerous in my view:} 15. fxg3 $5 {
(Black always has to look out for this idea)} Bf6 16. Qf2 {(preparing Nh4-f5)}
cxd4 $6 (16... Re8 {with an unclear position was best in Babula's opinion,
although he doesn't say how Black then meets} 17. Nh4 {:} g6 ({
I don't really care for} 17... c4 18. Bb1 g6 {either}) 18. Bb5 Re6 19. e4 {
is not good; I think Black does well to avoid this line}) 17. exd4 g6 {
was V.Babula-M.Konopka, Czech Championship, Havlickuv Brod 2008, and now
Babula's} 18. Nb5 Qd8 19. Rc1 {would have given White a definite advantage and
highlighted the drawbacks of 16...cxd4.}) ({
. Babula points to the quiet and untried} 14... Re8 {as Black's best move,
asking White what he intends to do next, and I think he is right.})) 14... Re8
{A new, and eminently sensible, move, keeping back Ne5 for the moment. Others:}
(14... Ndf6 {was played in the classic game for this line, G.Sargissian-S.Halkias, Antalya 2004, which went on} 15. dxc5 ({instead Sokolov suggests} 15.
Ne5 {along the lines of Sasikiran-Kasimdzhanov, above; it seems to me that
nothing much changes from that game and that Black should look to the same
ideas to defend:} Nxg3 16. hxg3 Qe6 17. f4 Rad8 (17... c4 18. Bb1 h5 $5 {
is possible too; after} 19. e4 dxe4 20. Nxe4 {
Black can choose between the simple} Nxe4 ({and a pawn sacrifice with} 20...
Qd5 21. Nxf6+ Bxf6 22. Rxc4 Rfc8 23. Rfc1 Rxc4 24. Rxc4 Re8) 21. Bxe4 Bxe4 22.
Qxe4 b5) 18. g4 Ne4 {, and I don't think he has too much to fear; indeed White
might find himself wishing the c1-rook was still defending d4}) 15... bxc5 16.
Rfd1 Qe6 17. Bh4 g5 18. Bg3 Rfd8 19. Nd2 Nxg3 20. hxg3 g4 21. b3 Kg7 $1 {
, and White found himself mated in another ten moves when he couldn't find an
antidote to the admirably route one plan ...h5-h4 and ...Rh8.}) (14... Nxg3 15.
hxg3 Re8 16. Rfd1 c4 (16... Nf6 17. Ne5 Bd6 {was an option}) 17. Bb1 Nf6 18.
Ne5 Bd6 19. f4 a6 20. g4 b5 {led to a sharp and approximately equal game in A.Riazantsev-A.Onischuk, Russian Team Championship 2008.}) (14... Rd8 {is a very 
solid and flexible move somehow typical of Ivanchuk's style; the game E.Bacrot-V.Ivanchuk, Odessa (rapid) 2007, continued} 15. Rfd1 Ndf6 16. Ne5 Qe6
17. Bh4 Rac8 18. f3 cxd4 19. exd4 Nxc3 20. Rxc3 Rxc3 21. bxc3 Nd7 22. Bxe7 Qxe7
23. Nxd7 ({Sokolov proposed} 23. f4 {
, but I think Black can achieve much the same result quite simply with} f6 24.
Ng6 Qxe2 25. Bxe2 Nf8 26. Bh5 Nxg6 27. Bxg6 Bc6 28. Re1 Kf8 {followed by ...Be8
}) 23... Rxd7 24. Re1 Qxe2 25. Rxe2 Kf8 {with equality.}) 15. b3 ({Instead} 15.
Rfd1 Nxg3 16. hxg3 c4 {would be Riazantsev-Onischuk; evidently White intends
to rule out any ...c4 ideas.}) 15... Bf8 {
A cautious move; David doesn't intend to allow any Ne5/f4 stuff.} ({
It was perfectly possible to play} 15... Nxg3 16. hxg3 Nf6 17. Ne5 Qe6 18. f4 {
with similar play to lines we've already seen, for example} h5 $5 {now.}) 16.
Rfd1 Ndf6 {Only now that it is clear that White is not going for an f4 plan
does David play this move.} 17. Bb5 Nxc3 18. Rxc3 Ne4 19. Rcc1 Rd8 20. Bh4 g5 {
If Black has kept his central bastions intact he normally need not be afraid
to play this move, as in Sargissian-Halkias.} 21. Bg3 Qe6 22. dxc5 bxc5 23. Bc7
a6 $5 {An interesting moment.} ({There wasn't anything wrong with} 23... Rdc8 {
, but instead David offers an exchange sacrifice whose acceptance would be
very difficult for White.}) 24. Bd3 ({
There were interesting complications after} 24. Bxd8 {: for instance,} axb5 25.
Qxb5 (25. Bc7 b4 {is downright terrible}) 25... Bc6 26. Qb6 Rxa2 27. Rf1 Qe8
28. Ra1 Rb2 29. Ne5 Qxe5 ({but not} 29... Bb5 $2 30. Nxf7 $1 Kxf7 31. Ra7+ Kg8
32. Qb7) 30. Qxc6 Rxf2 {
with rough equality in a sharp position. Borovikov wants none of this.}) 24...
Re8 25. Ba5 ({
Black has a perfectly good position and could certainly continue, with} 25. Ba5
Bd6 {for example. Neither side has any particularly active plan at its
disposal, though. --- Conclusion: While I prefer the IQP positions of the
previous game, there's little doubt that the central approach with 11...Ne4
offers Black a very solid game.}) 1/2-1/2

[Event "Monte Carlo (blindfold)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2001.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Piket, J."]
[Black "Topalov, V."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "77"]
[EventDate "2001.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 b6 8. Qb3 {
Not that common a move, but one with both purpose and pedigree, against which
Black has been losing a lot of games recently, so worth taking seriously.
Fortunately Kasparov played some model games against the line, and as long as
his example is followed Black will be fine. White's idea is to press quickly
on d5 and thus prevent freeing lines with ...c5. In that sense this is by far
the most principled of these less regular ideas.} Bb7 9. Bxf6 (9. cxd5 Nxd5 {
, as usual, enables Black to equalize easily.}) 9... Bxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11. Rd1
{This is White's main idea, preventing 11...c5 by attacking d5 three times.} (
11. Bd3 c5 ({an interesting idea would be to play with} 11... a5 {followed by ...Na6 and ...c5 after all; this would be worth a try in the main line also
(see below)}) 12. dxc5 Nd7 {
would probably transpose to the notes to White's 12th, below.}) 11... Re8 {
A developing move which waits to see what White's next will be before committing
the c-pawn.} ({White would ideally like to play his bishop to d3, but for the
moment this obstruction of the d-file would allow ...c5, as we'll see. For
this reason} 11... c6 12. Bd3 {would be just a shade less accurate.}) ({
As I said,} 11... a5 {would be an interesting idea, intending ...Na6. The
knight is often well placed on this square; it can either recapture on c5 or
go to c7 and e6, as in Sokolov-Short. I don't see how White can hold back an
effective ...c5: for example,} 12. a3 Na6 13. Qa2 {(otherwise ...c5; dxc5 Nxc5
comes with tempo and Black simply obtains a decent version of
Beliavsky-Kramnik below)} Re8 14. Be2 c5 {, and since} 15. Bxa6 $6 (15. dxc5
Bxc3+ 16. bxc3 Nxc5 {, of course, when Black is comfortable}) 15... Rxa6 16.
dxc5 $2 {fails to} d4 {, it's difficult to see what White can do to pursue the
advantage. In fact I find it quite difficult to see what White should do
against this idea in general.}) ({
Another very simple idea if Black doesn't like the positions in the text is} 
11... Qd6 {, just to play ...c5 anyway, as in R.Hübner-L.Ljubojevic, Tilburg
1983, which went} 12. Bd3 c5 13. dxc5 Bxc3+ 14. Qxc3 bxc5 {, and was equal.})
12. a3 {A subtle counter-waiting move introduced by Korchnoi in his candidates
match with Kasparov in 1983. Since 12...Nd7 and 12...c5 are both impossible
for the moment, White plays a move which will almost certainly be useful and
waits for 12...c6 before putting the bishop on its preferred d3-square. 
Alternatively:} (12. Bd3 {allows} c5 {after all} ({Geller's} 12... Nc6 {
is also possible, with the idea of ...Na5 and ...c5}) {
, in view of the typical turn} 13. dxc5 Nd7 $1 {. Now:} 14. -- (14. cxb6 {
is too dangerous because of} Nc5 15. Qc2 Nxd3+ 16. Qxd3 Qxb6 {
, when White needs to brave the attack with} 17. Nxd5 {
, when he can just about keep equality,} ({in view of the trick} 17. O-O $4 Ba6
18. Nxd5 Bxd3 19. Nxb6 Bxf1 20. Nxa8 Be2 {.})) (14. Na4 {
can be met by the computer's subtle} Re7 {
(overprotecting b7 in order to threaten ...Nxc5),} ({or more humanly with} 
14... d4 {, when} 15. Bc4 Qe7 16. Nxd4 Bxd4 17. Rxd4 Ne5 18. O-O (18. cxb6 Bxg2
{is a little better for Black}) 18... bxc5 19. Rf4 Rab8 {
resolves itself to equality.})) (14. c6 Bxc6 15. O-O Nc5 {has been proved
equal in many games, including, for example, the excellent A.Beliavsky-V.Kramnik, Belgrade 1997, which continued} 16. Qc2 Rc8 ({much less good was} 
16... Bb7 $6 17. Bb5 Re7 18. Nxd5 Bxd5 19. Qf5 Bxb2 20. Rxd5 Qc8 21. Qc2 {
, when White had good chances in J.Lautier-A.Beliavsky, Dortmund 1995}) 17.
Bh7+ Kh8 18. Bf5 Ne6 {.})) (12. Be2 {does continue to stop ...c5, but on the
other hand puts this piece on the wrong square. Black continues as in the game
with} c6 13. O-O Nd7 14. Rfe1 Nf8 15. e4 Ne6 (15... g6 {is also possible}) {
, as in the excellent positional game V.Malisauskas-P.Van der Sterren, Yerevan
Olympiad 1996, which went on} 16. exd5 (16. e5 Be7 {
is nothing special; Black can prepare ...c5}) 16... cxd5 17. Bf1 Re7 18. Re2
Rc8 19. g3 Rc4 20. Red2 a6 21. Qc2 Rc8 {.}) (12. g3 {
can be met in a variety of ways: for example,} c5 $1 ({or} 12... c6 13. Bg2 Ba6
) 13. Bg2 ({if} 13. dxc5 d4 $1) 13... Nc6 14. dxc5 Na5 {.}) 12... c6 ({
Black could try} 12... a5 {
again now; as before I can't see how White prevents ...c5.}) 13. Bd3 Nd7 ({
Black could certainly contemplate} 13... c5 14. dxc5 Nd7 {very seriously,
although this has never been played. I can't see any difference myself between
the variations with or without a3 in.}) 14. O-O g6 {Kasparov always preferred
this move, presumably so as to retreat with the bishop to g7 in the event of
e5.} (14... Nf8 15. e4 Ne6 16. e5 Be7 {
is also possible and has proved fine for Black in many games.}) 15. Rfe1 {
The conventional wisdom seems to be that to achieve anything White has to play
e4, although most of White's recent successes have been achieved in manoeuvring
struggles in which he has refrained from this move:} ({
White didn't do any better in V.Kramnik-G.Kasparov, Moscow 2001, with} 15. Bb1
Bg7 16. e4 Ba6 (16... Nf8 {is also very possible: for example,} 17. Rfe1 Ne6
18. e5 Qe7 19. Bd3 Red8 $1 ({a typical and useful plan to note;} 19... Rad8 {
wouldn't be wrong, but a rook has more and better options from a8 than from e8}
) 20. Qa4 c5) 17. Rfe1 Bc4 18. Qc2 dxe4 19. Rxe4 Rxe4 20. Qxe4 Bb3 21. Bc2 Nf6
{½-½.}) ({Another set-up is} 15. Rd2 Nf8 16. Rc1 {
, which the great man dealt with some ease by} Ne6 17. Qd1 Qe7 18. Bb1 ({if} 
18. b4 a5 {,}) ({but Kasparov proposed} 18. Bf1 {when play might continue} Rad8
19. b4 Ng5 {; I suspect} 20. Nxg5 hxg5 {is a good transaction for Black}) 18...
Rad8 19. h3 c5 {, and had equalized in J.Piket-G.Kasparov, Wijk aan Zee 2001.})
(15. Qc2 Nf8 16. b4 a5 17. b5 cxb5 18. Bxb5 Re7 {
isn't doing much for White either.}) 15... Nf8 16. Bb1 Bg7 17. Ba2 Ne6 18. h3
Qd6 {In the stem game Kasparov had organized his pieces with ...Qc7 and ...
Rad8, but it doesn't make a great deal of difference.} 19. e4 Rad8 20. exd5
cxd5 {Black has equalized at least.} 21. Re3 a6 $1 {Another typical plan for
Black in such positions; gaining space and introducing the option of ...b4.}
22. Rde1 b5 23. Bb1 Re7 24. Qd1 Rde8 25. Ba2 h5 26. g3 h4 27. gxh4 Nf4 28. Rxe7
Rxe7 29. Rxe7 Qxe7 30. Qd2 Bh6 31. Kf1 Bc8 $6 {Of course, this is what Black
is going to play in a rapid game, let alone blindfold as well;} ({
but the computer has a clever finesse:} 31... Qd7 $1 32. Ng1 Qd8 $1 33. Nf3 Kg7
$1 34. Qe3 Bc8 35. Ng1 Be6 $1 36. Qe5+ Kg8 {, and only now will Black win the
h-pawn. A very good example of the machines' legendary expertise in
non-forcing play.}) 32. Nxd5 $2 ({It was much better to play} 32. Qe3 {
, when White escapes the worst in view of} Qd8 33. Nxd5 {. Ensuring that Qe3
should not gain a tempo on the black queen was the point of the computer's
finesse.}) 32... Bxh3+ 33. Kg1 Qe6 $4 ({It was a blindfold game; in 'real
life' Topalov would have rounded off a well-played game with} 33... Nxd5 34.
Qxh6 Qe2 35. Qg5 Qf1+ 36. Kh2 Qxf2+ 37. Kxh3 Qxf3+ 38. Kh2 Nf4 {
, with a winning position for Black.}) 34. Ne5 Bf5 35. Kh2 Kg7 36. Nxf4 Qxa2
37. Nf3 f6 38. Kg3 Qf7 39. d5 1/2-1/2

[Event "Nancy"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2009.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Krasenkow, M."]
[Black "Meier, G."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "65"]
[EventDate "2009.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 e6 2. c4 Nf6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 b6 8. Rb1 {
A strange move, originally popularized by Eingorn in the mid-1990's, and
played only occasionally since then.} Nbd7 {Black avoids committing his
light-squared bishop, which is sensible when one considers:} ({
White's first idea is to meet} 8... Bb7 {with} 9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11.
b4 {, when he claims that the rook will be perfectly placed on b1. That is
certainly possible for Black, but it's natural to avoid it.}) (8... Ne4 9. Bxe7
Qxe7 10. cxd5 Nxc3 11. bxc3 exd5 {is another of White's points; this is a
Lasker Variation with Rb1 and ...b6 added, and he claims that is going to
favour him. Certainly it looked that way in M.Krasenkow-V.Topalov, Elista
Olympiad 1998, after} 12. Bd3 c5 13. O-O Nc6 14. Re1 Qf6 15. dxc5 bxc5 16. e4 {
, and again I think it's natural not to give White the satisfaction.}) (8... c6
9. b4 $1 Bb7 10. c5 {(Krasenkow's move), also gives White the satisfaction of
making his point and is perhaps best avoided for that reason.}) (8... a5 {
is another natural move which will probably force White sooner or later to
enter normal paths with Rc1 and Black having the extra move ...a5, which as a
general rule will help him at least a little bit: for example,} 9. Bxf6 ({
it looks more normal to delay this with} 9. Bd3 {when} Bb7 10. Bxf6 Bxf6 11.
cxd5 exd5 12. Rc1 c5 13. O-O Na6 {is Sokolov-Short with ...a5 thrown in}) 9...
Bxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11. Rc1 Be6 12. g3 c5 13. Bg2 Nc6 14. O-O Rc8 15. Qd2 cxd4
16. exd4 Qd6 {, when Black was fine in V.Anand-A.Karpov, Moscow (blitz) 2007.})
9. cxd5 (9. b4 {would be premature - a blunder in fact - since after} a5 {
White cannot keep the a-file closed on account of the embarrassing} 10. b5 g5
11. Bg3 Bb4 {.}) ({Likewise,} 9. Bxf6 {
is no good with the knight on d7 for a similar reason:} Nxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11.
b4 a5 $1 {, when} 12. b5 {loses to} Bb4 {
, while any developing move would simply mean that Rb1 was pointless.}) 9...
Nxd5 10. Nxd5 ({A slightly different approach; Eingorn used to play} 10. Bxe7
Qxe7 11. Nxd5 exd5 12. -- (12. Be2 {, and} Nf6 ({
Black could certainly contemplate either} 12... c5 13. dxc5 Nxc5 14. O-O Bb7
15. Rc1 Rfc8 16. Qd4 Rc7 {,}) ({or} 12... Bb7 13. b4 c6 14. Qd2 Qd8 15. O-O a5
16. b5 c5 17. dxc5 Nxc5 {, with a very solid position in either case}) 13. b4
Bf5 14. Rb2 c5 15. bxc5 bxc5 16. dxc5 Qxc5 17. O-O Rab8 18. Qa1 Rxb2 19. Qxb2
Rc8 20. Nd4 {was V.Eingorn-E.Geller, Berlin 1991. Lalic gives White a 'slight
but nagging advantage' here, which I suppose is true, but generally these IQP
position are much easier without a pair of b-pawns, as long as Black is
reasonably active on the queenside, and Geller held with very little trouble
in the game.}) ({. After} 12. b4 {Black could either play} c5 ({or} 12... c6
13. Qc2 Bb7 14. Bd3 a5 15. bxa5 Rxa5 16. O-O Rfa8 {with a type of position
which arises very frequently in the Tartakower and where Black is probably
better off for the absence of the usual ...Be7 and Nc3; see, for example, the
classic A.Karpov-K.Georgiev, Tilburg 1994}) {when} 13. dxc5 bxc5 14. Qxd5 Rb8
15. b5 Bb7 16. Qb3 Bxf3 17. gxf3 Ne5 {is very dangerous for White, so the
likelihood is that an IQP position will arise where Black can equalize with ...Nxc5, ...Bf5-e4 and ...Ne6})) ({Instead} 10. Bxe7 Nxe7 {
is eminently possible; after say} 11. Be2 Bb7 12. O-O c5 13. Rc1 Nd5 {
(to give the queen a square on e7) Black seems to have very little trouble
equalizing.}) 10... Bxh4 11. Nxh4 (11. Nxc7 {is not good; as a general rule
this transaction favours White only if he can keep the king on f2 and trade
queens quickly with Qc2-c7; and here he can't do that in view of} Bxf2+ 12.
Kxf2 Qxc7 13. Rc1 Qd6 14. Qc2 Nf6 $1 15. h3 Bb7 16. Qc7 Rac8 $1 {.}) 11... exd5
12. Nf3 Nf6 13. Bd3 (13. Be2 Qe7 {would be Eingorn-Geller,} ({
but Black does better with the immediate} 13... c5 {: for example,} 14. dxc5
bxc5 15. O-O Rb8 16. Qc2 Ne4 17. Rfd1 Re8 18. Nd2 Bf5 {with equality.})) (13.
b4 c5 14. bxc5 bxc5 15. dxc5 Qa5+ 16. Qd2 Qxc5 17. Be2 Ne4 {is another version
of the IQP, but this time even easier for Black, who is active very quickly.})
13... Bg4 {An interesting choice.} ({Perhaps Meier was concerned about} 13...
c5 14. Ne5 Nd7 15. f4 {
. The computer is not, largely on account of the continuation} c4 16. Bc2 ({or
} 16. Be2 Nxe5 17. dxe5 Bf5 18. Rc1 f6) 16... Qh4+ 17. g3 Qh3 {.}) 14. h3 (14.
Qc2 Bxf3 15. gxf3 c5 16. dxc5 Rc8 17. c6 d4 {
would have been interesting. I believe it is about equal.}) 14... Bxf3 15. Qxf3
c5 16. dxc5 bxc5 17. O-O Qa5 18. a3 Rab8 {Black is fine here, indeed if
anything it is White who has to think about equalizing. The knight's stability
on f6 and the target on b2 make it hard for White to free himself.} 19. Bc2 c4
20. Qf5 Rb5 21. a4 Rb6 22. b3 cxb3 {A solid choice.} ({
Black wouldn't have risked much with} 22... c3 {, but equally it seems that
White has sufficient initiative to prevent him from consolidating: for
instance,} 23. Rbd1 Qb4 24. Rd4 Qd6 25. Rfd1 g6 26. Qd3 Qc5 27. a5 $1 {.}) 23.
Rxb3 Rxb3 24. Bxb3 Rb8 25. Rc1 Qb4 26. Bxd5 Nxd5 27. Qxd5 Qxa4 28. Rc7 Qa1+ 29.
Kh2 Qf6 30. f4 Re8 31. Qc5 a5 32. Ra7 Qe6 33. Rxa5 {. --- Conclusion: This
line doesn't give Black too much trouble equalizing, but the lines in the text
are a little simple. If Black wants to retain more tension in the position
then probably 8...a5 is his best idea.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Paleochora"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2008.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kapnisis, S."]
[Black "David, A."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "66"]
[EventDate "2008.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 b6 8. Qc2 {
Given that Black's plan generally includes ...c5, and that there is no
question of the Orthodox 'battle for the tempo', this is quite a peculiar move.
White's usual aim with it, though, is to castle queenside and launch a sharp
attack based on the weakness Black has created with his ...h6.} Bb7 9. Bxf6 {
An essential link in White's plan; he needs to fix the centre.} ({After, say,} 
9. O-O-O Nbd7 10. Kb1 c5 {he's already far too late, and the centre is far too
fluid, for any sort of kingside g4-g5 effort, and he's just spent the last few
moves putting his queen on a vulnerable square and his king in a poorly
protected part of the board.}) ({Instead} 9. Rd1 {
does enable certain tricks down the d-file, but is fairly tame; after} Nbd7 {
White has a choice:} 10. -- ({. Granda's pet} 10. Be2 {
leads to a pretty equal position after} Ne4 11. Bxe7 Qxe7 12. Nxe4 dxe4 13. Nd2
Nf6 14. O-O c5 {.}) ({. Romanishin's invention} 10. cxd5 Nxd5 11. Bg3 {
is commoner, but Black has easy play, such as with Beliavsky's solid queen
sacrifice} c5 (11... Nxc3 12. bxc3 {followed by any of} Qc8 {,} (12... Bd6) ({
, or} 12... c5 {is also good})) 12. dxc5 Rc8 (12... Bxc5 {is also fine}) 13. e4
(13. cxb6 Qxb6 {is at least equal for Black, who will win his pawn back on c3})
13... Nxc3 14. bxc3 Rxc5 15. Ne5 Nxe5 16. Rxd8 Rxd8 17. Bxe5 Rxe5 {, when Black
has a very solid position and certainly shouldn't lose, although probably one
of the other lines gives more winning prospects.})) 9... Bxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11.
O-O-O (11. g4) ({or} 11. h4 {are also played, but all converge on the same
position after Black's fourteenth.}) 11... c5 12. g4 ({Sometimes White plays} 
12. h4 {first but if Black proposes to play how I suggest it doesn't make any
difference.}) ({Instead} 12. dxc5 {was popular about thirty years ago under
the influence of a very young Garry Kasparov; Black has a solid move in} Bxc3 {
,} (12... bxc5 $2 13. Nxd5 Bxd5 14. Bc4 {is just bad,}) ({
and his most dynamic is the gambit} 12... Nd7 {, when White has two lines:} 13.
-- (13. c6 Bxc6 14. Nd4 Bb7 {
with an IQP position where Black is very comfortable: for example,} 15. g4 Ne5
({this is official theory, based on a game E.Ubilava-A.Kharitonov, USSR
Championship, Tallinn 1983, but is not obviously best; Black might well, for
example, consider} 15... Nc5 {, to meet} 16. h4 $6 {with} Bxd4 17. Rxd4 Ne6 {
and ...d4}) 16. Be2 ({the acid test is} 16. h4 Nxg4 {
with very difficult complications}) 16... Nc6 $1 {
, and leaving Black about equal after} ({improving on an earlier game in which
} 16... Rc8 17. h4 {had led to trouble}) 17. Nf5 {.}) (13. Nxd5 Nxc5 14. Bc4 ({
it may well be preferable to bale out with} 14. Qf5 Bxd5 15. Rxd5 ({or here} 
15. Qxd5 Qxd5 16. Rxd5 Ne4) 15... Qe7 16. Kb1 Na4) 14... b5 15. Nxf6+ (15. Bxb5
$2 Bxd5 16. Bc4 Rc8 {is unthinkable}) 15... Qxf6 16. Bd5 Rac8 17. Kb1 Bxd5 18.
Rxd5 Na4 19. Qe2 Rc4 {
(this far a famous game G.Kasparov-I.Zaitsev, Baku 1980), and now} 20. Rd4 Rfc8
21. Rhd1 Rc2 {
was shown to be good for Black in T.Ghitescu-S.Lputian, Berlin 1982, since} 22.
Qxc2 Rxc2 23. Kxc2 Qg6+ {wins both the b-pawn and the g-pawn.}))) ({
Whatever he does White has to be resolute; it's too late for slow play such as
} 12. Kb1 {, when another of the Tartakower's all-time classics was P.Benko-S.Reshevsky, 5th matchgame, New York 1960, which went} Nc6 13. dxc5 Nb4 14. Qb3
bxc5 15. a3 Bxc3 16. Qxc3 d4 17. exd4 Be4+ 18. Ka1 Nc2+ 19. Ka2 cxd4 20. Nxd4
Rc8 21. Qd2 Qb6 22. f3 Bd5+ 23. Kb1 Nxa3+ 24. Ka1 Rfd8 25. bxa3 Bb3 26. Rb1
Rxd4 {, and didn't last much longer.}) 12... cxd4 13. exd4 ({
It's too late to go back; after} 13. Nxd4 Nc6 {
Black is very comfortable - his dark-squared bishop is monstrous.}) 13... Nc6
14. h4 {The critical position of this line. Black has a lot of moves here, for
example 14...Qd6, 14...Bc8 and 14...Nb4, but keeping lines closed as far as
possible with the text is the more natural way.} g6 15. g5 {
With this move White opens a line; instead:} ({He could conquer a square with} 
15. h5 g5 16. Qf5 {, as in S.Agdestein-H.Olafsson, Gjovik 1985, when I suspect
Black was better advised to play} Kg7 ({rather than the game's} 16... Nb4 17.
Ne5 Bc8 18. Qf3 Bxe5 19. dxe5 Qc7 20. Kb1 Qxe5 {
, since White would have been rather better after} 21. a3 d4 22. Nb5 Nd5 23.
Bg2 Bb7 24. Nxd4) 17. Nxd5 {, relying on the trick} Nb4 $1 18. Nxb4 Qc8+ $1 {.}
) (15. Bb5 {was advertised by Richard Palliser in his article on this line in
'New in Chess Yearbook 87'. White's dream is to go Bxc6, Ne5 and f4 (perhaps
in conjunction with g5 and hxg5). This idea is quite common in this variation,
but Black has a good answer in} Qc7 (15... Bg7 {is also fine, when} 16. Rhe1
Qd6 17. Kb1 {was played in a correspondence game Richard gives, but} Rae8 {
is simply a little better for Black; this is better than 17...Rfe8 for the
reason that after} 18. Qd2 a6 19. Bxc6 Bxc6 20. Ne5 Bxe5 21. dxe5 Rxe5 22. Qxh6
Rxe1 23. Rxe1 d4 24. Qd2 Qf6 25. Ne4 Qxh4 26. Qxd4 Bxe4+ 27. Qxe4 Qxf2 {
there is no rook hanging on a8 - award yourself five bonus points if you saw
this at move17}) 16. Qd2 ({otherwise:} 16. Kb1 {burns out to a draw:} Qf4 17.
Nxd5 Qxf3 18. Bxc6 Rac8 19. Ne7+ Bxe7 20. Bxf3 Rxc2 21. Bxb7 Rxf2 {;}) (16.
Nxd5 {is just bad:} Qd6 17. Nxf6+ Qxf6 18. Qe4 Rae8 19. Ne5 Nxd4 20. Qxb7 Rxe5
{and ...Qxf2;}) ({and} 16. g5 {is cleverly met by} hxg5 17. hxg5 Nb4 18. Qb3
Qf4+ 19. Nd2 Be7 20. a3 Na6) 16... Bg7 17. g5 (17. h5 g5 {is similar}) 17... h5
18. Kb1 a6 19. Bxc6 Bxc6 20. Rhe1 Rae8 {, and Black is better.}) (15. Be2 {
with the idea of Rdg1 was apparently suggested by Van der Tak, but I don't
understand it; Black just keeps lines closed with} Bg7 {and stands better.})
15... hxg5 16. hxg5 ({Black beat off the attack with the calm efficiency of a
world champion to be in W.Uhlmann-B.Spassky, Moscow 1967, after} 16. h5 $6 Kg7
17. hxg6 (17. Bb5 {
was suggested at the time, but I don't see that it makes much difference after}
g4 {; White is hardly going to be able to refrain from hxg6 for ever}) 17...
fxg6 18. Bb5 ({Black also survives after} 18. Qd2 Rh8 19. Rg1 Rh5 {
: for instance,} 20. Be2 Rc8 {followed by ...Rc7-e7}) 18... g4 19. Qd2 gxf3 20.
Qh6+ Kf7 21. Qh7+ Bg7 22. Rh3 {, and now the cold shower} Rh8 $1 {0-1. Modern
computers show a few other winning moves, but this is the human way to
terminate the game:} 23. Rxf3+ Qf6 24. Rxf6+ Kxf6 25. Nxd5+ Kf7 {is the end.})
16... Bg7 (16... Bxg5+ {is possible, for example} 17. Kb1 Bf6 18. Bd3 Nb4 19.
Bxg6 {(a queen sacrifice which probably should lead to a draw, but is
unpleasant to defend), but the text is more sensible.}) 17. Qd2 (17. Rh4 Re8
18. Bh3 $6 b5 $1 {saw one of the great heroes of the QGD showing the way in P.Cramling-R.Vaganian, Biel 1994, since taking the pawn is far too risky: for
example,} 19. Nxb5 Nb4 20. Qb3 a5 21. a3 Ba6 {.}) 17... Qd6 {
The only move. Black must prevent Qf4.} 18. Bb5 (18. Rh4 Rac8 19. Bh3 Rc7 20.
Kb1 a6 21. Rh1 {was played in O.Cvitan-B.Abramovic, Novi Sad 1985, and is
usually said to be a little better for White, but this in my opinion is not
true at all and is a case of annotation by result. Black has lots of useful
moves he can play while keeping the knights where they are, and he ought to
start with one of those, for example} Re8 {. After that he has plenty of ideas,
such as ...b5, ...Rce7 and ...Bc8, while it's not easy to come up with an plan
for White at all. This same position was reached in J.Bellon Lopez-F.Hellers,
Swedish League 2000 (the Bellon-Lopez/Cramling ménage and White in the present
game are the most ardent devotees of this line), but with the bishop on d3,
and proved satisfactory for Black. Indeed if Black wanted to prepare ...Na5-c4
he was probably better advised to do it with ...Rad8 rather than ...Rc8-c7,
since White will surely have to take the knight on c4, and after ...dxc4 the
rook has much better views on d8 than on c7. There was a strong case for this
reason for the more flexible 18...Rfe8.} ({However, in the game Black played} 
21... Na5 $2 {, and after} 22. Bf1 Bc8 {
the white knight stepped in to e5, with predictable results.})) 18... Rac8 19.
Rde1 {Obviously White has decided that doubling on the h-file, as in previous
games in this line, doesn't do any good.} (19. Bxc6 {was in a sense the
logical follow-up, but Black establishes counterplay too quickly, with} Bxc6
20. Ne5 b5 21. Kb1 b4 22. Ne2 Ba4 23. b3 ({after} 23. Rc1 {comes} Bxe5 24. dxe5
Qxe5 {
; with the exchange of a pair of rooks White doesn't get enough compensation})
23... Bb5 {.}) 19... Na5 20. Ne5 a6 21. f4 {It turns out that this loses;} ({
but} 21. Bd3 Nc4 {was already a bit uncomfortable: for instance,} 22. Bxc4 dxc4
23. Ne4 Bxe4 24. Rxe4 c3 {.}) 21... axb5 22. f5 gxf5 23. Qh2 Rxc3+ {The machine
can keep out my attacking efforts for White even without this move, but
David's play is very convincing.} 24. bxc3 Rc8 25. Qh7+ Kf8 26. Qxf5 Rxc3+ 27.
Kd1 Rc7 28. Rh7 Nc4 29. Qh3 Nxe5 30. Rh8+ Ke7 31. g6 Qxg6 32. Qh4+ f6 33. Rxe5+
Kf7 {. --- Conclusion: One can see the temptation of White's straightforward
and aggressive set-up, but if Black heads straight for the main line the onus
already appears to be on White to keep the game within the bounds of equality.}
0-1

[Event "Dresden Olympiad"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2008.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nielsen, P."]
[Black "Georgiev, V."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D58"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "59"]
[EventDate "2008.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 O-O 6. e3 h6 7. Bh4 b6 8. g4 {
A ridiculous move, obviously, so why am I giving it a whole game? Well, first
of all Peter Heine Nielsen, Anand's second, doesn't fool around in team
competitions and if he thinks the move's worth playing then it's worth
preparing for. Secondly, after a game like this one it's bound to become
popular following inclusion in some future 'Dangerous Weapons' series. And,
finally, it's actually quite sensible, a sort of accelerated version of the
system we saw in the last game. If White knows he wants to play a kingside
pawn storm, there is certainly logic in playing g4 at once and waiting until
later to see where the king and queen should best go.} dxc4 {
A natural enough move, taking action in the centre;} ({
but the first move to consider should be} 8... Nbd7 {(it was this move that 8
Qc2 prevented by pressing on the c7-pawn after 9 cxd5 Nxd5 10 Bxe7 Qxe7 11
Nxd5 exd5). Presumably White carries on with} 9. Bxf6 Nxf6 10. g5 hxg5 11. Nxg5
c5 ({
the idea of this move is to prevent White recapturing on d4 with a rook after} 
11... dxc4 12. Bxc4 c5 13. Qc2 cxd4 14. O-O-O) {
, but White needs a good move here and I must say I don't see it: for example,}
12. Rg1 dxc4 13. Bxc4 cxd4 14. exd4 Qc7 15. Qe2 Qf4 {
, when I really don't see what White can do other than play} 16. Qe3 {
and admit he's worse.}) 9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. h4 Bb7 11. g5 hxg5 ({
Black must have felt a bit queasy about this, but} 11... Be7 12. gxh6 g6 13.
Bxc4 {is also terrible.}) 12. hxg5 Bxg5 13. Bxc4 {A logical sequence leads to
a position which is really quite dangerous for Black.} c5 $2 {A terrible move,
contributing nothing to Black's game and inviting White's next move, which was
in his plans anyway.} (13... Bh6 {
is going to be necessary anyway and might as well have been played at once:}
14. -- ({. Black can meet} 14. d5 {with at least} b5 15. Bxb5 {(without the
wasted ...c5 tempo White doesn't have the time to ignore the attack on the
bishop)} c6 {; when White has to play} 16. dxc6 {
and allow an exchange of queens,} ({in view of} 16. Bd3 cxd5 17. Ke2 Qf6 {
(now the queen is stable on this square and Black is doing okay).})) ({
. I suppose that White continues as in the game with} 14. Ke2 {
when I think Black's best is} Qf6 ({
to see how quickly Black can go wrong, consider} 14... Nc6 15. Qg1 Qf6 16. Qg4
Ne7 17. Rag1 Nf5 $2 ({here} 17... c5 18. Ne4 Bxe4 19. Qxe4 cxd4 {
is necessary, but White is better here too after} 20. Qxd4 $1 Qxd4 21. Nxd4 Kh8
22. Ba6) 18. Ne4 Bxe4 19. Qxe4 c5 20. Ne5 $1 Qe7 21. Nxf7 {, when White wins})
15. -- {and now:} ({. After} 15. Ne5 {Black seems to defend with} Rd8 {when}
16. f4 (16. Qg1 Nd7 {is Black's point}) 16... Bxf4 $1 17. Rf1 $1 (17. exf4 $2
Nc6 {allows Black to give the white king a taste of his own medicine}) 17...
Bxe5 18. Rxf6 Bxf6 {
produces a very complex position, objectively probably better for Black.}) (15.
d5 Rd8 16. Qb3 Nd7 {seems to be okay for Black.}) (15. Rh3 c5 16. d5 (16. Ne5 {
is met by} Qf5) 16... exd5 17. Bxd5 Nc6 {gives Black much better counterplay
against the centralized king than he obtains in the game: for instance,} 18.
Qa4 Rad8 19. Rg1 ({trying to avoid Black's next with} 19. Ke1 {allows} Rxd5 20.
Nxd5 Qe6) 19... Nd4+ 20. Nxd4 ({if} 20. exd4 Bxd5 21. Nxd5 Qe6+) 20... Rxd5 21.
Nxd5 Bxd5 22. Rxh6 ({or} 22. Nf3 Qxb2+ 23. Ke1 Bxa2) 22... Qxh6 23. Nf5 Qf6 24.
Rxg7+ Kh8 {, when Black survives and is better. There's a lot still to be
uncovered here, though.}))) 14. d5 Bh6 15. Ke2 b5 {
I think Black is already lost;} ({consider too the line} 15... Nd7 16. Qc2 ({
but not} 16. dxe6 $4 Bxf3+ 17. Kxf3 Ne5+) 16... Kh8 17. Rag1 Nf6 18. dxe6 Bxf3+
19. Kxf3 fxe6 20. Qg6 {.}) 16. Rxh6 gxh6 17. Qh1 Kh7 18. Ne4 ({
The computer rattles off the forced line} 18. Rg1 Rg8 19. Bd3+ f5 20. dxe6 Rxg1
21. Bxf5+ Rg6 22. Bxg6+ Kg7 23. Qg2 Qg5 24. Qxg5 hxg5 25. e7 {, and no doubt
Nielsen could calculate that too if he wanted, but the Olympiad is played at
one of FIDE's silly semi-rapid time limits, and one can't criticize simply
moving pieces towards the king, especially since White is still winning.})
18... Rg8 19. Qh5 Rg6 20. Nfg5+ Rxg5 21. Qxf7+ Rg7 22. Qf4 bxc4 23. Rh1 Bxd5
24. Qxh6+ Kg8 25. Qh8+ Kf7 26. Qxd8 Bxe4 27. Rh8 Nc6 28. Rf8+ Kg6 29. Qf6+ Kh7
30. Qh4+ {. --- Conclusion: It remains to be seen whether 8 g4 will take off;
beyond question it is a very dangerous surprise weapon. Black has to be ready
for a hand-to-hand struggle very different from the normal positional channels
of the QGD.} 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "2. Lasker Defence"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "D56"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "14"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 Ne4 {
. This, our alternative repertoire system, is named after the second World
Champion ("of course Lasker was the greatest of the World Champions" - Tal),
and is Black's main alternative to the Tartakower. As one can guess from the
name, it is a very old line, but in very recent times it has seen a revival,
so much so that the fifteenth World Champion retained his title with a Black
win with it in the final game of the last title match. Its idea is simply to
break the pin and free Black's game.} *

[Event "European Championship, Batumi"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2002.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Jobava, B."]
[Black "Shengelia, D."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D57"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "68"]
[EventDate "2002.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. e3 O-O 6. Nf3 h6 7. Bh4 Ne4 8. Bxe7
Qxe7 9. cxd5 {Unfashionable, but equally dangerous, leading to less technical
positions than the very much more popular 9 Rc1, which is covered in the next
game. By forcing Black's next White gains a considerable central majority.}
Nxc3 10. bxc3 exd5 11. Qb3 {This move has been played by numerous World
Champions and just about everyone who has reached this position. White's idea
is that by putting sufficient pressure on d5 (and b7), he will force Black
into playing ...dxc4 before White has to move his king's bishop, a version of
the perennial 'fight for the tempo'.} ({Since Black's main defence to it (see
the note to Black's 12th, below) is based on the fork ...Na5, though, one does
get the idea that the immediate} 11. c4 {might be worth a thought. After} Be6 (
11... dxc4 12. Bxc4 c5 {is an alternative, more nihilistic, try}) 12. Rc1 {
might be tried;} (12. Qb3 Rd8 {leads to the same position as the game}) 12...
Nd7 {(I suspect this sharp move is Black's best answer)} 13. cxd5 (13. Qb3 {
can be met with} c6 {, since} 14. Qxb7 Qa3 15. Qb1 Rab8 {
gives Black excellent compensation for his pawn}) 13... Bxd5 14. Rxc7 Rac8 15.
Rxc8 Rxc8 16. Bd3 Qb4+ 17. Ke2 Bc4 {
, when Black will win back the a-pawn with an unbalanced but equal position}) (
{White's other moves have the defect of not preventing ...c5: for example,} 11.
Bd3 c5 12. O-O Nc6 ({if Black wanted to be more combative then} 12... c4 {
is perfectly possible}) 13. Rb1 ({
Black also held without any real difficulty after} 13. Re1 Rd8 14. e4 dxe4 15.
Bxe4 Qf6 16. d5 Ne7 17. Ne5 Bf5 18. Bf3 Ng6 {
in the latest Topalov-Anand Lasker clash, Monte Carlo (rapid) 2011}) 13... Be6
14. dxc5 Rab8 15. Qa4 Qxc5 {with perhaps a tiny advantage for White in V.Eingorn-Li Wenliang, World Team Championship, Lucerne 1993. Black held the
draw easily against his much higher-rated opponent; in these positions the
mutual weaknesses on c3 and d5 and the strong posts on d4 and c5 tend to
balance each other out.}) 11... Rd8 {This move is usually chosen today rather
than the older 11...Qd6. The rook looks a bit prospectless, but Black
anticipates White's next and calculates that sooner or later he will be able
to achieve ...c5, and that when he does his rooks will belong on d8 and c8.}
12. c4 Be6 $5 {This long-forgotten move was thought to have been refuted forty
years before this game and is still little known.} ({So far it has achieved
excellent results, but much of what follows is original analysis and for that
reason I have included a lengthy note about the older} 12... dxc4 {
, whose idea is to gain time after the obvious} 13. Bxc4 {by} Nc6 {with the threat of ...Na5. White has dealt with this threat in three ways in practice:} 14.
-- (14. Be2 b6 15. O-O Bb7 {, with a further divide:} 16. -- (16. Rac1 {
has been proven equal in several games since the stem game V.Kramnik-C.Lutz,
German League 1994,whichwent} Na5 17. Qb2 Rac8 18. h3 (18. Rc3 c5 19. Qa3 Kf8 {
was given by Kramnik as equal and has also been proved so in various games})
18... c5 19. dxc5 Rxc5 20. Rxc5 Qxc5 21. Rc1 Qe7 22. Nd4 Qg5 23. Bg4 Qd5 24.
Bf3 Qd7 25. Bxb7 Nxb7 26. Nc6 Ra8 27. Qd4 {
reaching a position which puzzles me.} -- ({. Kramnik won a splendid ending,
which Lutz analyses wonderfully in 'Endgame Secrets' and agrees with Kramnik's
suggestion that} 27... Qe6 28. Qc4 Qe8 {was the way to defend, 'followed by ...Nc5, when the knight on c6 has to retreat and White isn't better at all'. I
don't understand this; it seems to me that White can defend the knight by Qd5
and follow with Rd1 with a nasty bind.} ({It looks to me as though either} 
28... Qxc4)) ({, or} 27... Qxd4 28. exd4 Nd8 29. Nb4 Kf8 {
is preferable, particularly the latter.})) (16. Rfc1 Rac8 17. Qa4 Na5 18. Rc3
c5 19. Rac1 cxd4 20. Nxd4 Rxc3 21. Rxc3 Rc8 22. Rxc8+ Bxc8 23. h3 g6 24. Bf3
Bd7 25. Qc2 Qc5 26. Qe4 {was all but equal in 'Deep Fritz'-V.Kramnik, 5th
matchgame, Bahrain 2002, but computers play this sort of position very, very
well and Kramnik went down in the game; maybe the best at this moment was the
uncompromising} Kg7 {.})) (14. Qb2 {was the favourite move of that cunning old
fox and QGD perennial Gideon Stahlberg.} -- ({
. Black can choose between the Lutz plan of} 14... Na5 15. Be2 b6 16. O-O Bb7
17. Rac1 Rac8 {(Atalik)}) ({, and the Yusupov plan of} 14... Bg4 15. Be2 ({if} 
15. Qxb7 $2 Bxf3 16. gxf3 Nxd4) 15... Bxf3 16. gxf3 Rab8 {
, with approximate equality in either case.})) (14. Qc3 Bg4 15. O-O ({
White can hardly avoid the doubled f-pawns since} 15. Be2 Bxf3 16. Bxf3 {allows
} Nxd4) 15... Bxf3 16. gxf3 Qf6 $1 {
(it's important to hit f3 and cover c6 at the same time)} 17. Be2 Rac8 $1 {
is ' a world-class move' (Sadler), and was part of Yusupov's preparation for
his 1989 Candidates' match against Karpov. Now:} 18. -- (18. Rab1 b6 19. Rfc1 (
{alternatively,} 19. f4 Ne7 20. Ba6 {was well met by} Qg6+ 21. Kh1 Nd5 22. Qd3
Qxd3 23. Bxd3 c5 {in M.Kobalija-O.Korneev, Krasnodar 1998,}) ({and} 19. Ba6
Qxf3 20. Bxc8 Rxc8 21. Rfc1 Ne7 {gives Black good compensation}) 19... Ne7 20.
Kh1 Rd5 21. Qc2 ({according to Yusupov White is already worse and his best is} 
21. Qe1 c5 {;}) ({White's trouble is that he is not in time for} 21. f4 c5 22.
Bf3 {in view of} cxd4 23. Qxc8+ Nxc8) 21... Qh4 {
, and now only the much-praised} 22. f4 {enabled White to hang on in the stem
game A.Karpov-A.Yusupov, 5th matchgame, London 1989, and I'm not sure even
that would have done the trick if Black had continued more calmly with} c5 {,}
({rather than the game's} 22... Qxf2 {
, which led to an instructive rook ending which Karpov managed to hold.})) (18.
Rac1 {, recommended by various people in 1989 and subsequently, can be met by}
Ne7 19. Kh1 ({Babula's} 19. Qa5 {could perfectly well be met with} a6 {, since}
({but as Dautov points out Black can also make an immediate draw with} 19...
Rd5 20. Qxa7 Rh5 21. Rc5 Nd5 22. Qxb7 Qg5+ 23. Kh1 Rxh2+ {, and perpetual}) 20.
Rxc7 $4 {loses to} Nc6 21. Qb6 Nxd4) 19... b6 20. Qb4 ({or} 20. Qa3 c5 21. dxc5
Rd2) 20... c5 {, since} 21. dxc5 bxc5 22. Rxc5 $4 {loses to} Nd5 {
followed by ...Rxc5 and ...Nc3.})) ({. Finally,} 14. Bd5 {has never been
played, although the fact disappoints my computer; a clean response seems to
be} Na5 (14... Nxd4 15. Nxd4 c6 16. Nxc6 bxc6 17. Bxc6 Qf6 18. Rc1 Be6 19. Qa4
Rd2 20. O-O {is spectacular but doesn't quite give enough compensation}) 15.
Qb5 c5 16. Bxf7+ Qxf7 17. Qxa5 b6 18. Qb5 Bb7 19. dxc5 bxc5 20. Qxc5 Bxf3 21.
gxf3 Rac8 22. Qe5 Qxf3 23. Rg1 Qb7 {with good compensation for the pawn.})) 13.
Qxb7 {If this move isn't good for White then probably Black's last move was
simply good. Moreover, White's other tries have so far looked like bringing
him more grief than Black:} (13. Be2 c5 14. O-O Nc6 {
was obviously fine for Black in V.Malakhatko-T.Sanikidze, Baku 2007.}) (13. Rc1
c5 14. Qa3 Nd7 15. cxd5 Bxd5 16. Be2 b6 {
gave White nothing in S.Skembris-A.Mastrovasilis, Salonica 2006.}) (13. c5 b6
14. Rc1 bxc5 15. Qa3 (15. Rxc5 Nd7 16. Rxc7 Rab8 17. Qc2 Qa3 18. Bd3 Rb2 {
saw Black regaining his pawn with equality in P.Nikolic-D.Jojua, European
Championship, Plovdiv 2008}) 15... Nd7 16. Bb5 Bg4 ({
'the point of Black's play', according to Anand, but} 16... Rab8 17. Bxd7 Qxd7
18. Qxc5 Qb5 {looked fine for Black too in V.Malakhatko-D.Jojua, Arcapita 2009}
) 17. Bxd7 Rxd7 {(this 'works tactically', as Anand says)} 18. Qxc5 ({both} 18.
Rxc5 Qe4 19. Ke2 Rd6 20. h3 Bc8 $1) ({and the cute} 18. Ne5 cxd4 $1 19. Qxe7
Rxe7 20. Nxg4 h5 $1 {demonstrate Black's point}) 18... Qe4 19. Rg1 Re8 $1 {
was at least equal for Black in the recent high-profile game V.Topalov-V.Anand,
Nanjing 2010; Black's idea is} 20. Ne5 Rxe5 21. dxe5 d4 22. h3 dxe3 23. hxg4
exf2+ 24. Kxf2 Qf4+ 25. Ke1 Rd4 {, and wins.}) (13. cxd5 Bxd5 14. Bc4 Bxf3 15.
gxf3 {(½-½ K.Sasikiran-O.Korneev, Corsica (rapid) 2005), is a clear
improvement for Black on Karpov-Yusupov, since not only is he a tempo or so up,
but also he can get in} c5 {right away.}) 13... Qa3 (13... dxc4 14. Qxa8 Qa3
15. Rb1 Bd5 {was played quite a lot before White discovered} 16. Qxd5 $1 {
, which looked as though it had closed this line down, but Shengelia's idea of
inverting the moves has breathed new life into it.}) ({
Having said that, the untried} 13... dxc4 14. Qxa8 Qb4+ {
looks quite plausible; after} 15. Nd2 c3 {
White has the choice between a very unclear position with} 16. Bd3 ({
or a draw with} 16. Rd1 cxd2+ 17. Rxd2 Qb1+ 18. Rd1 Qb4+ {, and so on}) 16...
cxd2+ 17. Ke2 Qc3 {. For example:} 18. -- (18. Rab1 Nc6 19. Qxd8+ ({or} 19. Qb7
Bc4 20. Bxc4 Nxd4+ 21. exd4 Re8+) 19... Nxd8 20. Rb8 g6 21. Rxd8+ Kg7 22. Rd1
Qa5 $1 {is better for Black; ...Qg5 is on the cards.}) (18. Qxa7 Nc6 19. Qa4 {
leaves Black with a great many interesting tries which are fun to analyse:} ({
not} 19. Qc5 Nxd4+ $1 20. exd4 Bg4+) 19... Rxd4 20. exd4 Nxd4+ 21. Ke3 Nf5+ 22.
Ke2 Nd4+ {is an immediate draw.}) (18. Qe4 g6 19. Qf4 ({if} 19. Rab1 Bf5 20.
Rb3 Qc1 $1) 19... Nc6 20. f3 Nb4 21. Be4 f5 22. a3 fxe4 23. axb4 exf3+ 24. gxf3
d1=Q+ 25. Raxd1 Qb2+ 26. Ke1 Bc4 27. Rd2 Qc1+ 28. Rd1 Qb2 {with a draw.})) 14.
Rb1 ({Instead} 14. Nd2 dxc4 15. Bxc4 ({White settled for} 15. Be2 Bd5 16. Qb1
c5 {with equality at least for Black in A.Lugovoi-A.Alavkin, Russian Team
Championship 2003}) 15... Bxc4 16. Qxc7 Nc6 $1 17. Qxc6 Rac8 18. Qb7 Qc3 $1 {
ties White in knots}) ({and} 14. Qb3 Qa5+ 15. Kd1 ({if} 15. Nd2 c5 $1) 15... c5
{is also at least equal for Black,} ({but} 15... Bd7 16. a4 {
is not quite so effective.})) 14... Qxa2 (14... Nd7 {
is also an interesting move, since} 15. Qb2 ({not} 15. cxd5 Rab8 16. dxe6 Rxb7
17. exf7+ Kf8 18. Rxb7 Nc5 $1 {, when Black wins}) 15... Qxb2 16. Rxb2 dxc4 {
looks a little better for Black and it's hard to see what else White can play.
This might be important if White can indeed do better than Jobava does in the
text line. It is important that after} 17. Rc2 Rab8 18. Nd2 {
Black has the excellent pawn sacrifice} c5 {: for example,} 19. Bxc4 Bf5 20.
Rc3 Rb2 21. Bb3 cxd4 22. exd4 Nf6 {, maintaining a definite pull.}) 15. cxd5
Bf5 16. Rc1 (16. Rd1 {was perhaps a sterner test:} Nd7 17. Qa6 Qb3 $5 (17...
Qxd5 18. Bc4 Qd6 19. Qa2 Qb4+ 20. Nd2 {
enables White to castle and perhaps claim a slight advantage}) 18. Qc4 {
seems to enable White to consolidate and claim a slight edge : for instance,}
({by contrast} 18. Bd3 Bxd3 19. Rxd3 Qxd5 20. Rc3 c5 21. Qa5 Ne5 $5 {
produces some wonderful complications, probably about equal}) 18... Qa3 19. Rc1
Rab8 20. Be2 Nb6 21. Qc5 Qb2 22. Ne5 Nd7 23. Nxd7 Rxd7 24. Bf3 {.}) 16... Qa3
17. Qxc7 $2 {
It's easy to say once you've seen Black's reply, but this move is a mistake.} (
{It's no surprise that White didn't fancy} 17. Rxc7 {
, but this was the critical move: for example,} Qa1+ 18. Ke2 (18. Kd2 Qa2+ 19.
Kd1 Qa4+ 20. Ke1 Qa1+ {repeats}) 18... Nd7 19. Nd2 Nb6 20. h3 (20. Rxf7 Bd7 21.
Re7 Rab8 22. Rxd7 Nxd7 23. Qc6 Rb2 {is terrible for White}) 20... Bc8 21. Qc6
Nxd5 22. Qc1 {, although here too Black has much the easier play.}) 17... Nc6
$3 18. Rd1 {White is busted.} (18. Qxc6 Rac8 19. Rc5 Rxc6 20. dxc6 Rb8 21. Nd2
Bg4 {is hopeless}) ({and} 18. Rxc6 Rac8 19. Qb7 Rb8 20. Qa6 Rb1+ 21. Ke2 Rb2+
22. Nd2 Qb4 23. Kf3 Qxd2 24. Qe2 Qb4 $1 {is also extremely unpleasant.}) 18...
Rac8 19. Qf4 Bc2 20. dxc6 Bxd1 21. Kxd1 Rxc6 22. Nd2 Qc1+ 23. Ke2 Rc2 24. Kf3
Qxd2 25. Kg3 Rc3 26. Kg4 Qd1+ 27. f3 Qd2 28. e4 Rxd4 29. Qe5 Rd6 30. Qe8+ Kh7
31. Qxf7 Qg5+ 32. Kh3 Rf6 33. Qd5 Rfxf3+ 34. g3 Rxg3+ {. --- Conclusion: 12...
Be6 is a powerful idea which for the moment has driven White away from this
line. Black needs to be confident in the critical 13 Qxb7 lines, but otherwise
White has had little that's challenging to offer so far. I was rather hoping
to be recommending a promising and slightly unknown line, but Topalov's
miserable failure in Topalov-Anand has rather brought it into the spotlight.}
0-1

[Event "Hockenheim"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2006.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Ikonnikov, V."]
[Black "Gasthofer, A."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D56"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "60"]
[EventDate "2006.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 Ne4 8. Bxe7
Qxe7 9. Rc1 {
In modern play this is very much White's main try against the Lasker Defence.}
Nxc3 10. Rxc3 c6 11. Bd3 {A natural developing move.} ({Of course White would
like to find some more waiting moves to play before ...dxc4 happens, but after,
say,} 11. Qc2 Nd7 {he doesn't really have another one.}) ({
White can also play the restrained} 11. Be2 {, whose idea is to avoid the
intermezzo 11 Bd3 Nd7 12 0-0 e5 13 cxd5 e4, discussed in the next note.} -- ({
. Black can try} 11... Nd7 12. O-O Re8 {, as in V.Ivanchuk-A.Onischuk, World
Team Championship, Beersheba 2005, which went} 13. Qc2 dxc4 14. Bxc4 e5 15. d5
Nb6 16. dxc6 bxc6 17. Rc1 Nd5 18. Rb3 a5 19. Qe4 a4 20. Ra3 {, when} Qb7 {
is said to give Black good chances to equalize, although I think Black would
do better to stick with the line in the main game.}) ({. Indeed,} 11... Nd7 12.
O-O dxc4 13. Rxc4 (13. Bxc4 {would be the main line, of course}) 13... e5 14.
Qc2 exd4 15. Nxd4 Nb6 16. Rc5 Rd8 17. Bf3 Be6 18. Rc1 Bd5 {
was nothing for White in T.Radjabov-V.Kramnik, 1st matchgame, Kazan 2011.}))
11... dxc4 ({Obviously before he can play ...e5 Black needs to play this move
in order to prevent himself from being left after ...e5; cxd5 with a weak and
isolated d-pawn, but he does have a clever alternative in} 11... Nd7 {
. The idea of this move is well seen after} 12. O-O e5 $1 ({
by contrast to Ivanchuk-Onischuk,} 12... Re8 {now has less point, since} 13.
Qc2 e5 14. dxe5 dxc4 $2 {loses material to} 15. Rxc4 Nxe5 16. Nxe5 Qxe5 17. Re4
) 13. dxe5 ({one of Black's points is that} 13. cxd5 $6 {loses a piece to} e4 {
, although White is not actually lost after} 14. dxc6 bxc6 15. Be2 exf3 16.
Bxf3 Bb7 17. Bxc6 Bxc6 18. Rxc6) 13... dxc4 $1 {
(this intermezzo is the other main point)} 14. Bxc4 (14. Rxc4 Nxe5 15. Re4
Nxf3+ 16. Qxf3 Be6 17. Bc4 Rad8 18. Bxe6 fxe6 {gives White nothing despite the
visually weak e-pawn, and was quickly drawn in M.Sadler-V.Kramnik, Tilburg
1998, among other games}) 14... Nxe5 15. Nxe5 Qxe5 {. --- This position is the
same as that reached in the old main line of the Orthodox QGD (after 6...Nbd7
7 Rc1 c6 8 Bd3 dxc4 9 Bxc4 Nd5 - Capablanca's legendary 'freeing manoeuvre',
extensively tested in the 1927 Alekhine-Capablanca match - 10 Bxe7 Qxe7 11 0-0
Nxc3 12 Rxc3 e5 13 dxe5 Nxe5 14 Nxe5 Qxe5), save that Black's h-pawn is on h6,
which is a small improvement for him:} 16. -- (16. Qb3 b6 ({
I like this move of Oleg Korneev's - a great Lasker expert - better than} 16...
b5 {, though the latter has Kramnik's authority behind it;} 17. Be2 ({
but I don't see how Black was going to meet} 17. Bd3 {, since obviously} Be6
18. Qc2 Bd5 $2 19. e4 {won't do, and otherwise Black gets a bit penned in})
17... Be6 18. Qc2 Bd5 {
was all very well in J.Lautier-V.Kramnik, Monte Carlo (rapid) 1999}) 17. Rd1
Bf5 {reveals the point of 16...b6; White has to waste time with his rook on c3
and this should enable Black to equalize: for example,} 18. h3 (18. f3 b5 {
is now fine}) 18... Qe7 {(a good move, stopping Bxf7+ tricks)} 19. Bd3 Be6 20.
Qa4 c5 21. Rc2 Rad8 22. Rcd2 g6 {.}) (16. f4 {is Rubinstein's idea in the
analogous Orthodox line; there was a great deal of theory on this line 60
years ago, none of which gave White anything much, but according to Sadler the
'standard line' is} Qe4 17. Qe2 {when, rather than Sadler's} Bf5 {,} ({
far commoner and more efficient is in fact} 17... Rd8 {, meeting} 18. Bd3 {
with the ruthless equalizer} Bg4 {.})) ({. Recently} 16. Qc2 Bf5 17. Bd3 Bxd3
18. Rxd3 Rad8 19. Rfd1 Rxd3 20. Rxd3 Qa5 21. h3 Qxa2 22. Ra3 Qd5 23. Rxa7 c5 {
, reaching a pretty level endgame, was seen twice in the Lublin GM event,
where both E.Alekseev-B.Grachev and, a round later, R.Wojtaszek-E.Alekseev
were shortly drawn.})) ({The problem with} 11... Nd7 {is sometimes said to be}
12. cxd5 exd5 13. O-O {when the tragic position of Black's h-pawn on h6 is
meant to mean that he can't sensibly evict a knight from e5 with f6 because of
the weakness of g6, and thus has a bad version of the typical Carlsbad
structure. This is, however, pretty much nonsense, as Khalifman points out,
and White hasn't been able to make much of his position in high-level games.
The main reference is still P.Nikolic-A.Yusupov, Horgen 1994:} Nf6 ({
Yusupov actually played} 13... Re8 {first in the belief that after 13...Nf6 14
Ne5 was good for White but in fact this is not true; see the next note}) 14.
Qb1 ({the reason for Yusupov's belief was the line} 14. Ne5 Nd7 15. f4 f6 ({
but after the simple} 15... Nxe5 {followed after either recapture by ...f6
Black is fine, as Khalifman pointed out}) 16. Ng6 Qxe3+ 17. Kh1 {
, when Black loses the exchange in view of} Re8 18. Ne5 $1 {, winning the queen
}) 14... Re8 ({Black can also play} 14... a5 {
, which may be more reliable, when} 15. Rfc1 ({instead} 15. Ra3 b6 {seems fine
for Black to me, although this is Khalifman's recommended line: for example,}
16. Rb3 Qc7 17. Rc3 c5 18. Ne5 Qd6 19. f3 c4 20. Bc2 b5) 15... Re8 {would transpose to L.Ftacnik-R.Vaganian, German League 2004, which soon levelled out
after} 16. Ne5 Ng4) 15. b4 (15. Ne5 Ne4 $1 {is similar}) 15... Ne4 16. Bxe4
dxe4 17. Nd2 Be6 18. Rfc1 ({if} 18. b5 Bd5 {,}) ({or} 18. Nxe4 Bf5 19. f3 Bxe4
20. fxe4 Qxe4 21. Qxe4 Rxe4) 18... Bd5 19. b5 Rad8 {.} 20. -- ({Now} 20. a4 h5
{was unclear in the game,}) ({and} 20. Rc5 Rd6 21. bxc6 Bxc6 22. Nc4 Rg6 {
is okay for Black,}) ({but Yusupov, followed by Khalifman, gave} 20. bxc6 bxc6
21. Rc5 {with the idea of Nc4-e5 (playing Nc4 before Rc5 allows ...c5) as a
little better for White, but I don't really see it after} Rb8 22. Qc2 Rb7 {
: for example,} 23. Nc4 Reb8 24. Ne5 Rb2 25. Qd1 Rxa2 26. Nxc6 Bxc6 27. Rxc6
Rbb2 {, when Black can hardly lose. It seems to me that 20 Rc5 would be more
to the point; I don't see why White needed to open the b-file.})) 12. Bxc4 (12.
Rxc4 {can be met as in the game with} Nd7 13. O-O e5 {, when the rook on c4 is
simply stupid and the bishop on d3 also less than ideal for an IQP position
(it is better on b3 as in the game).}) 12... Nd7 13. O-O ({Radjabov preferred} 
13. Qc2 {second time around in T.Radjabov-V.Kramnik, 3rd matchgame, Kazan 2011,
} -- ({, when there was nothing wrong with} 13... e5 {
with a likely transposition after} 14. O-O {
to the notes to White's 14th, below.} ({. Instead} 14. d5 cxd5 ({
although the bolder} 14... Nb6 $5 15. dxc6 Nxc4 16. Rxc4 bxc6 17. Rxc6 Bb7 {
was preferred in M.Hoffman-O.Korneev, Vila Nova de Gaia 2010}) 15. Bxd5 Nf6 {
looks like an easy equalizer}) ({, while} 14. Qe4 Re8 (14... Qb4 15. O-O exd4
16. Nxd4 Nf6 {deserved definite attention too,} ({but not} 16... Qxb2 $2 17.
Rb3 Qd2 18. Nf5 {with a virulent attack})) 15. O-O exd4 16. Qxe7 Rxe7 17. Nxd4
{wasn't all that impressive for White in M.Carlsen-A.Volokitin, Foros 2008; I
couldn't tell you why Black now avoided} Ne5 {.})) ({
. However, Kramnik preferred} 13... b6 14. Bd3 ({not forced, but} 14. O-O Bb7 {
followed by ...c5 has long been known to be completely equal}) 14... Nf6 $1 {
(an idea of Kasimdzhanov's)} (14... Bb7 15. Be4 {
would have fallen in with White's plans}) 15. Rxc6 Nd5 16. Qb3 Nb4 {
(this manoeuvre is Black's main point)} 17. Rc1 Nxd3+ 18. Qxd3 Bb7 19. O-O Bxf3
20. gxf3 Qg5+ 21. Kh1 Qd5 {
, regaining his pawn and simplifying towards the resulting draw.})) 13... e5 ({
Of course} 13... b6 {is the main alternative, which Anand unkindly gave his
seal of approval to in his World Championship match with Topalov just after I
had finished this chapter, but I am recommending the less common text.}) 14.
Bb3 {Karpov's widely praised move;} ({
although White has a reasonable alternative in} 14. Qc2 {, which was warmly
recommended by Efstratios Grivas in 'New in Chess Yearbook 90', after which}
exd4 (14... Re8 15. d5 {would be Ivanchuk-Onischuk above, and is perhaps
slightly better for White; since Qc2 isn't massively useful in an IQP position,
it makes sense to make the exchange at once,}) ({but} 14... Rd8 {
is also a sensible move, when Grivas gave} 15. Bb3 exd4 16. exd4 {
, but missed the point of Black's set-up, which is to play} Nf8 {
and transpose to the note to Black's 14th, below}) 15. -- {
gives White a choice:} ({. The feeble} 15. Nxd4 Nf6 16. Rd1 (16. f3 Rd8 17. Qf2
Nd5 18. Bxd5 Rxd5 19. e4 {got nowhere in V.Kunin-M.Prusikin, Griesheim 2004})
16... Rd8 17. Rcd3 {is '+=' according to Grivas, but after} Bd7 {
I think Black has only to play a few accurate moves to equalize: for example,}
18. a4 ({or} 18. Qd2 Re8 {(to prevent Nf5)}) 18... Rac8 {
with the idea of ...c5.}) (15. exd4 {
leads to similar positions as those in the notes to Black's 14th, below:} Qd6
16. Re1 Nb6 {(one point of not having the bishop on b3 is that Black can't
manage a ...Rd8 and ...Ne6 regrouping, because if he moves the rook Qb3
follows)} 17. Bb3 Nd5 18. Ne5 Be6 19. Rg3 Nc7 {is the same critical regrouping;
Black's key idea in these lines is to get the knight somewhere where it
supports ...Be6. After} 20. Re4 ({the less logical} 20. Qe4 {
was played in E.Zude-M.Becker, German League 2006, which went on} Bxb3 21. Rxb3
Rab8 22. h3 Rfe8 23. Ree3 Nb5 24. Qf5 Re7 25. Nf3 Rd7 26. Re4 {, and now} g6 {
would have kicked the white queen away from the kingside and left Black at
least equal}) 20... Rad8 ({an excellent move; Black should keep the bishop
preventing Rg4 for the moment, and the rook on d8 is more valuable than after
Grivas'} 20... Rae8) 21. h3 (21. Rh4 {
would be more in line with Grivas' ideas; after} Bxb3 22. axb3 ({or} 22. Qxb3
Ne6) 22... Rfe8 {Black will need to play a few accurate moves, but equally
White can easily get his rooks stuck offside: for example,} 23. h3 Qf6 24. Rh5
Qe6 25. Ng4 Kh8 {, and the position is still tense}) 21... Bxb3 22. Qxb3 Ne6
23. Qxb7 Nxd4 {was equal in A.Grischuk-D.Jakovenko, Khanty-Mansiysk 2009.})) ({
Instead} 14. dxe5 Nxe5 15. Nxe5 Qxe5 {would be Lautier-Kramnik above; the
point of Black's move order finesse in that game, with 12...e5 before the
exchange on c4, is to force White into this position by the threat of ...e4.})
({Finally, the enigmatic} 14. Qb1 {is also played, and best met by} exd4 15.
exd4 Nb6 16. Bb3 Qd6 17. Re1 Nd5 {.}) 14... Re8 {
I am recommending this move, another clever idea of Yusupov's;} ({
although Black has an excellent alternative too, namely} 14... exd4 {(this was 
how Yusupov was slaughtered in the famous eighth and decisive game of his
Candidates' final with Karpov in London 1989, but he too went for a ...Nf6
plan, and Black can do much better)} 15. exd4 {(others are feeble really, but
if Black is bothered about them he can play first 14...Rd8 and only after
seeing White's 15th, 15...exd4)} Rd8 16. Re1 Qd6 {. Now:} 17. -- (17. Qe2 Nf8
18. Qe7 Ne6 19. Qh4 Nf8 ({this is equal according to Dautov;} 19... Nc7 {
deserves consideration too,}) ({though not} 19... Qf4 20. Qxd8+ Nxd8 21. Re8+
Kh7 22. Rxd8) 20. Rce3 (20. Ne5 Be6 {is fine for Black}) 20... Be6 {is Khalifman's repertoire suggestion. He gives White the better of it 'according to I.Donev', but I think Black can be happy enough; computers tend to overrate
these positions for White, and Black can play to win them as well.}) (17. d5
cxd5 18. Qxd5 Qxd5 19. Bxd5 Nf8 20. Be4 Be6 {
doesn't give Black too much trouble, as Khalifman says.}) (17. Rce3 Nf8 18. Ne5
Be6 {, with a further split:} 19. -- ({. After a semi-waiting move, such as} 
19. Re4 {, Black's best next move is usually} Re8 {,} ({and certainly not} 
19... Bxb3 $2 20. Qxb3 Qc7 21. Rf4 {.})) ({. Instead Sadler claimed that} 19.
Bxe6 {'was powerful' with the idea of} Nxe6 $2 ({
in any event missing Black's point, which is} 19... Qxe6 {
followed by taking the queen to d5, when Black is fine}) 20. Qh5 {,} ({
presumably overlooking} 20. Nxf7 $1 {.})) (19. Qh5 Bxb3 20. Rxb3 Qc7 21. Qg4 {
, and now} Rd6 ({while} 21... Ne6 22. Nxf7 Qxf7 23. Rxe6 Rxd4 {was also good
enough for equality in R.Leitao-I.Morovic Fernandez, Mario Covas 2003}) 22. Rf3
Re8 {is even a little better for Black according to Dautov. --- This is a very
interesting alternative and might even be my choice next time if I can't
persuade myself that Hebden and Grischuk's 15 Re1 in the next note is really
as equal as it looks when Anand is Black. Computers tend to overrate White's
position in this line - in the fullness of time Black tends to equalize and if
White is inaccurate Black can even gradually obtain chances against the IQP.}))
) 15. Nxe5 {This was recommended strongly by both Sadler and Palliser as the
refutation of Black's system, but as we shall see it isn't as strong as they
believed. Others:} (15. d5 {is less effective than in the same position with
Qc2 instead of Bb3 (see Ivanchuk-Onischuk, above), and} cxd5 {
gives Black no particular trouble in equalizing: for example,} 16. Qxd5 Nf6 17.
Qc5 Ne4 18. Qxe7 Rxe7 19. Rc4 Ng5 20. Nxg5 hxg5 {has led to a number of draws,
starting with the stem game P.Nikolic-A.Yusupov, Belgrade 1989.}) (15. Qc2 exd4
{and then:} 16. -- ({. Vyzmanavin claimed that White was better after} 16. Nxd4
Nf6 17. f3 {, but I don't believe it: Black should just develop quietly, put
his rooks on the c- and d-files, and wait for a good moment for ....c5: for
example,} Bd7 18. e4 Rac8 19. Rc1 Red8 20. Ne2 b6 21. Nf4 Qd6 {
, and Black is fine thanks to the tactical turn} 22. Nd3 c5 23. e5 Qd4+ 24. Qf2
Bf5 $1 {.}) (16. exd4 Nf8 17. Re3 (17. d5 {
is not particularly alarming but has to be met calmly:} Bd7 $1 {
, and now a sample continuation might be} 18. Qd2 Rad8 $1 {, not fearing} 19.
d6 Qf6 {: for example,} 20. Re3 Rxe3 21. fxe3 Ne6 22. Nd4 Qe5 23. Nf5 Kh8 {
; playing such a position against computers reminds me of Karpov's bon mot,
'Black is worse now, but soon he will be better'}) 17... Be6 18. Rfe1 Qd6 {
is much the same as Magerramov-Korneev, below.})) (15. Qb1 exd4 16. exd4 (16.
Nxd4 Nf6 17. f3 c5 18. Nf5 Bxf5 19. Qxf5 {is equal, as Khalifman points out})
16... Nf8 17. Re1 Be6 18. Rce3 {(E.Magerramov-O.Korneev, Podolsk 1992) shows
Black's basic idea well: to enter IQP positions with his ...Re8 waiting move
being more useful than whatever White plays on move 15. Black's best now is
the ultra-methodical} Qd6 19. Qd3 Re7 {, followed by doubling on the e-file or
...Rd8 as appropriate, with a very solid position where White can easily find
himself running out of ideas.}) (15. Re1 {
is a clever try, played twice by Grischuk,} -- ({, which prevents} 15... exd4 {
because after} 16. exd4 Qf8 17. Rxe8 Qxe8 18. Re3 Qf8 {
White prevents the ...Nf8/...Be6 manoeuvre and is much better.}) ({. Instead} 
15... e4 16. Nd2 Nf6 17. Rc5 (17. Qb1 {
was Grischuk's try in a later game, preventing ...Be6, and could be well met by
} Qc7 {, renewing the threat and meeting} 18. Bc2 {with} Nd5 {followed by ...f5
}) 17... Be6 18. Re5 Bxb3 19. Qxb3 (19. Rxe7 Bxd1 20. Rxe8+ Rxe8 21. Rxd1 {
looks equal to me, but after beating me with consummate ease from this
position Mark Hebden assured me that White is slightly better}) 19... Qc7 {
was A.Grischuk-V.Anand, Moscow (blitz) 2009, which was pretty equal.})) 15...
Nxe5 16. dxe5 Qxe5 17. f4 Qf6 (17... Qe4 {is also entirely possible;} 18. -- ({
; both Sadler and Palliser believed that White had} 18. f5 {, because} Bxf5 {
loses 'material' (Sadler) or 'a piece' (Palliser) to} 19. Bc2 {
, but software instantly points out that this is not true:} Bg4 {
(actually this turn has been known since Rubinstein's time)} 20. Bxe4 Bxd1 21.
Bxc6 bxc6 22. Rxd1 Rad8 {is a very drawish rook ending.}) (18. Bc2 {
is more sensible, but White doesn't have much after} Qb4 {:} 19. f5 ({or} 19.
Rb3 Qc5 20. Qd2 f5) 19... Qxb2 20. Qd3 Qb6 21. f6 g6 {
is scary, but I don't think White objectively has enough})) 18. f5 {
This is the point, cramping Black's bishop.} b6 {An obvious reply, but Black
has alternatives; either 18...Re5 to develop the bishop on f5 after all, or
(my favourite) 18...a5!? looks entirely possible. For example:} (18... Rd8 $2 {
(inexplicably exchanging one of Black's two developed pieces instead of
developing the other two)} 19. Rd3 {(Sadler) isn't one of them.}) (18... Re5 {
is possible but fairly tenuous:} 19. Rd3 Bxf5 20. Rd7 Rf8 ({
a difficult decision; Black might have better chances to hold after} 20... Qg5
{, for instance} 21. Rxf7 Be6 22. Bxe6 Rxe6 23. Qd7 Rae8 24. Qxb7 Qxe3+ 25. Kh1
Qd3 {, but it isn't much fun}) 21. Rxb7 Rxe3 22. Qd2 {favours White,} ({whereas
} 22. g4 Rxb3 23. Rxb3 Rd8 {followed by ...Qd4+ was Black's point.})) (18... a5
{maintains that the bishop is developed just fine where it is so long as the
queen's rook can get out round the side, and also has some nice tactical
points:} 19. -- ({. Black's point is that} 19. Rf4 {is well met by} a4 {when}
20. Bxa4 (20. Bc2 a3 $1) 20... Bxf5 {is possible, since} 21. g4 $2 ({and} 21.
Qf3 {is coolly met by} Qe7) {runs into} 21... Qg6 $1 22. Rxf5 Red8 $1 {.}) (19.
a3 a4 20. Bc2 Ra5 {also gives Black's push with the a-pawn point.}) (19. Qd4
Qxd4 20. exd4 Bd7 21. f6 a4 22. Bc4 Be6 {can't trouble Black.}) (19. a4 {
is probably best; Black's idea is that now} Re5 {is an improved version:} 20.
Bc2 {(White meekly defends the pawn)} (20. Rd3 {
is now less effective since there is no a-pawn en prise at the end:} Bxf5 21.
Rd7 Rf8 (21... Qg5 {is also equal}) 22. Rxb7 Rxe3 23. Qd2 Re5 24. Qd4 Re1)
20... c5 21. Rd3 Re8 22. b3 b6 23. Rd6 Qc3 24. e4 Bb7 25. Re1 c4 $1 {
, and Black holds thanks to some tactics, basically the fact that} 26. Rxb6
Rad8 {is very good for him.})) 19. Rf4 $6 {
This is natural somehow, but I don't think it's the best move.} ({White's most
surgical solution is to exchange the piece which is preventing him from
realizing his idea of f6:} 19. Qd4 Qxd4 ({if} 19... Re5 20. Rxc6 {, of course,}
) ({but} 19... c5 $5 20. Qxf6 gxf6 {might well be the best try}) 20. exd4 Bb7 (
20... Ba6 {is no better:} 21. Rff3 Rac8 22. f6 gxf6 23. h3 {; this idea of
doubling on the third to enable White to challenge the e-file in some lines
and continue his attack on the kingside in others -} Kg7 24. Rf5 $1 {
- is very hard for humans to see}) 21. f6 g6 22. Rff3 Rad8 23. Rce3 c5 24.
Rxe8+ Rxe8 25. Rg3 Kf8 26. dxc5 Re2 27. cxb6 axb6 28. Bc4 Rxb2 29. Rd3 {
, and White is much better.}) 19... Ba6 20. Qh5 Rad8 21. Ra4 {White had been
relying on this move, presumably, but the sight of the black rooks and the
empty spaces around his king and back rank must have given him a somewhat
queasy feeling.} Re5 $1 {An excellent move which wins the game;} ({
presumably White was expecting only} 21... Bb7 22. Rxa7 Re7 {
with reasonable compensation for the pawn.}) 22. g4 $2 {Ikonnikov must have
lost his balance completely to play such a move; you suspect he hadn't seen
Black's last at all.} ({Obviously} 22. Rxa6 $4 Rxf5 23. Qe2 $4 Rd2 24. Qe1 Rff2
{wasn't on}) ({
but against a fellow GM you suspect Ikonnikov would have gone for} 22. Qxf7+
Qxf7 23. Bxf7+ Kxf7 24. Rxa6 Rd1+ 25. Kf2 Rxf5+ 26. Ke2 Rg1 {
with an equal rook endgame.}) 22... Bb7 23. Rxa7 Re7 {Black has more than
sufficient compensation now, and White doesn't manage to find any sort of
defence at all; probably there isn't one. It's difficult to imagine what White
was thinking in going in for this.} 24. Qh3 c5 25. Qg3 Qc6 26. Rxb7 Rxb7 27.
Rc1 Rd2 28. Rf1 Re7 29. Rf2 Rxf2 30. Kxf2 Rd7 {. --- Conclusion: Black is as
solid in this system as ever, if not more than ever.} 0-1

[Event "Odessa (rapid)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2010.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Gurevich, M."]
[Black "Jakovenko, D."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D56"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "89"]
[EventDate "2010.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 Ne4 8. Bxe7
(8. Bg3 {is best met with the unnatural} Bb4 {, which reaches a kind of
position Black would rather like to get from the Manhattan Variation, but
can't manage without throwing in the rather undesirable ...g5. Black has good,
free play with ...c5: for example,} 9. Rc1 c5 10. cxd5 exd5 11. Bd3 Nc6 12. O-O
Bxc3 13. bxc3 Bg4 14. dxc5 Qa5 15. c4 Nxg3 16. hxg3 d4 {
, G.Kamsky-Wang Yue, Monte Carlo (rapid) 2009.}) 8... Qxe7 9. Qc2 (9. Nxe4 dxe4
10. Nd2 {is a rare bird at high level.} f5 {is a perfectly good reply,} ({
but also good is Boensch's} 10... e5 {when White's only reasonable move is} 11.
d5 {, with an unexplored position,} (11. Nxe4 $6 exd4 12. Qxd4 $4 Rd8 {
loses a piece}) ({, while Black was quickly better after} 11. dxe5 Qxe5 12. Qc2
Bf5 13. c5 $6 Nd7 {in L.Ftacnik-U.Boensch, German League 1996}) 11... -- ({
, where Black can choose between} 11... f5) ({, and} 11... Bf5 {
. After the latter a couple of possibilities are} 12. Be2 ({and} 12. g4 Bh7 13.
Bg2 Nd7 14. Bxe4 Bxe4 15. Nxe4 Qb4+) 12... Nd7 13. O-O c6 {
, both with interesting play.}))) 9... Nxc3 10. Qxc3 ({After} 10. bxc3 {
the only high-level example is K.Sasikiran-Z.Azmaiparashvili, Pune 2004, which
went} Nc6 11. cxd5 exd5 12. Bd3 b6 13. O-O Bg4 14. Nd2 Na5 15. e4 dxe4 16. Nxe4
Bf5 17. Rfe1 Rae8 18. Re3 Qd8 {
with rough equality; I feel a little more comfortable with White, though.}) ({
It might be me, but I would prefer the play of a player rated 400 points lower
in P.Ostermeyer-R.Marian, German League 1985, which went} 10. bxc3 c5 11. Bd3 Nc6
12. O-O dxc4 13. Bxc4 Na5 14. Bd3 b6 15. Bh7+ Kh8 16. Be4 Bb7 {
with a very comfortable Semi-Tarrasch-like position for Black.}) 10... dxc4 {
Black might as well do this at once, since he doesn't have a convenient
waiting move.} (10... c6 {
isn't useful if he's going to play the way he does in the game}) ({and after} 
10... b6 {White wouldn't play} 11. Bd3 $6 {
, allowing Black to gain a tempo on the text,} ({but} 11. cxd5 {.})) 11. Qxc4 (
11. Bxc4 {doesn't change the play much; Black is too comfortable with ...b6, ...Bb7, ...Nd7, ...Rfc8, and thereafter either ...a5 or ...c5: for example, D.Navara-V.Korchnoi, Karlsbad 2007, saw} b6 12. O-O Bb7 13. Be2 Rc8 14. b4 Nd7
15. Rfc1 c6 ({not an obvious choice; presumably Korchnoi didn't want to allow} 
15... a5 16. b5 {, but after} c5 {I don't really understand why not}) 16. Nd2
a5 17. bxa5 Rxa5 18. Nc4 Ra7 19. Qb2 {, and at this point} b5 20. Nd2 e5 {
would have been a convenient equalizer. This example could be multiplied by
many other master games stretching back a century or so, almost all of them
drawn.}) 11... b6 12. Rc1 {This is the only significant try; otherwise Black
equalizes easily along the lines of Navara-Korchnoi.} c5 $1 {
Without this move Black would find himself a little annoyed,} ({
needing to start with} 12... c6 {, although that might well be fine. At the
moment, however, this seems to be an extremely clean equalizer.}) 13. dxc5 Bb7
14. Be2 {
It seems that, as Anand would put it, Black's last move works tactically;} ({
certainly White demonstrated nothing at all with either} 14. Qh4 Qxh4 15. Nxh4
Rc8 16. Bb5 Na6 17. c6 Nb4 18. Ke2 {in E.Alekseev-D.Jakovenko, Moscow 2007}) ({
or} 14. Qa4 Rc8 15. Be2 Rxc5 16. Rxc5 Qxc5 17. O-O Nc6 18. Rd1 Ne5 {
in L.Aronian-D.Jakovenko, Sochi 2008.}) 14... Rc8 15. O-O (15. b4 bxc5 16. b5 {
is asking to end up worse; for example, after} a6 17. a4 axb5 18. axb5 Bd5 {.})
15... Rxc5 16. Qa4 Nc6 17. a3 Ne5 18. Nxe5 Rxe5 19. Rfd1 Rd5 20. Rxd5 Bxd5 21.
Qf4 e5 22. Qf5 Qg5 23. Bg4 Qxf5 24. Bxf5 g6 25. Bg4 f5 26. Be2 Be6 27. Rc6 Kf7
28. Rc7+ Kf6 29. f4 Rd8 30. Kf1 exf4 31. exf4 Rd7 32. Rxd7 Bxd7 {White can point at the f-pawn and claim some sort of moral victory, but that's all.} 33. Bc4
g5 34. g3 gxf4 35. gxf4 a5 36. Kf2 Ke7 37. Ke3 Kd6 38. Kd4 Bc8 39. Bf7 Bd7 40.
Kc4 Bc8 41. Kd4 Bd7 42. Bh5 Be6 43. Bg6 Bd7 44. Bf7 Bc8 45. Bg6 {. --- Conclusion: These irregular variations really don't have anything to offer White,
though Jakovenko's 12...c5 is handy to remember.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "3. Avoiding the Main Line"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "D37"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "8"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 Be7 {. We now turn to consider variations
in which White refuses to allow the starting position of the Tartakower or
Lasker to arise, other than the Exchange, the Bf4 line or the Catalan. I'm
going to work roughly backwards, starting from move seven. The first two lines
we're going to consider both start at move seven, after 5 Bg5 h6 6 Bh4 0-0.
They both involve White playing the always-useful move Rc1 a move earlier than
normal, in order to retain the option of developing one or other of his minor
pieces (the king's knight in Piket-Van der Sterren, the king's bishop in Van
Wely-Timman), on squares other than their usual f3 and e2/d3.} *

[Event "Antwerp"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1997.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Piket, J."]
[Black "Van der Sterren, P."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D53"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "110"]
[EventDate "1997.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. Rc1 {This, Wolfgang Uhlmann's idea, has a fine pedigree, having featured in the World
Championship matches of 1969, 1978 (56 Qh4?? Re4!), 1981 and 1984, Candidates
matches in 1974 (Petrosian-Portisch; ...Qf4; gxf4!) and 1984 (Smyslov-Kasparov)
, and some dramatic theoretical battles between Team USA (Yasser Seirawan and
Larry Christiansen) and Team Karpov (Karpov and Efim Geller) in the early
1980s ('Oh no! Now this is going to be in his next book of selected games.').
It is widely considered to have been defused by Karpov in 1981, and is now
seen much less frequently, but it is still worth a glance, partly for its
contribution to the Tartakower's history and partly because if you ever play
in the World Seniors Championship Uhlmann is still there wheeling it out with
success.} dxc4 {This, effectively an innovation when first played in
Korchnoi-Karpov in 1981, is considered the theoretical antidote and is what
most leading Tartakower practitioners play these days.} ({
Of course Lasker players can simply go} 7... Ne4 {
, when White hardly has better than} 8. Bxe7 Qxe7 9. e3 (9. g3 Nxc3 10. Rxc3 c6
11. Bg2 Nd7 12. O-O dxc4 13. Rxc4 e5 {saw the players swapping sides, and
Black equalizing comfortably along thematic Lasker lines in V.Kramnik-T.Radjabov, 7th matchgame (rapid), Kazan 2011})) ({but we should have a look at} 
7... b6 {, partly because the text is rather dry, and partly as a nod to
history and to see what White's idea is. Uhlmann's idea was always} 8. cxd5 (8.
Bxf6 {was Korchnoi's choice in 1978, after which} Bxf6 9. cxd5 exd5 10. g3 c6
11. Bg2 Bf5 12. O-O Qd6 13. e3 Nd7 14. Ne1 Rfe8 15. Nd3 {produced a very
typical Tartakower position in which both players can be happy and Black has a
large variety of alternatives to the game's} g6 {,} ({for example} 15... Nf8) (
{, or Tal's cheeky} 15... h5 $5)) 8... Nxd5 9. Bxe7 Qxe7 10. Nxd5 exd5 {
and now aiming for an improved version of Mamedyarov-Lputian with the bishop
on the long diagonal after} 11. g3 {. Eventually Black hit upon} Re8 (11... Be6 {
was never exactly refuted}) ({, but} 11... Ba6 12. e3 $1 {
proved a bit better for White}) 12. -- {, when White has:} (12. Rc3 c5 $5 (
12... Na6 13. Qa4 b5 14. Qa5 $2 Qe4 15. Kd2 Re6 16. b3 b4 17. Re3 Qb1 18. Rxe6
Qb2+ 19. Kd1 Bxe6 20. Qxa6 Qa1+ 21. Kd2 Qc3+ 22. Kd1 Bf5 23. Ne1 Rb8 24. e3 Rb6
25. Qxa7 Rc6 26. Bc4 Qa1+ 27. Kd2 Qb2+ 28. Kd1 dxc4 29. Qa8+ Kh7 30. Qxc6 c3 {
0-1 Y.Seirawan-A.Karpov, Hamburg 1982, was what went into Karpov's book of
selected games, but given that Seirawan was willing to repeat this and Geller
varies, the story probably doesn't end there}) 13. dxc5 bxc5 14. Qxd5 Bb7 15. Qd2
Nc6 16. Re3 Qf8 17. Bg2 Rad8 18. Rxe8 Qxe8 19. Qe3 Nd4 20. Qxe8+ Rxe8 21. Kd1
$6 {was Y.Seirawan-E.Geller, Linares 1983, and now best of all is the
computer's magisterial quiet move} (21. Nxd4 {is safer}) 21... Rb8 {
, with the idea only after} 22. b3 {of playing} Rd8 {
, when Black is better; this did seem to kill off Rc3.}) (12. Bg2 Ba6 13. e3 {
(Smyslov's idea)} (13. Ne5 Nd7 $1 {was crucial to the establishment of Black's
defence, in the brilliant game W.Uhlmann-G.Veresov, Schwedt 1969, Uhlmann was
rocked back by this and the continuation} 14. Rxc7 (14. f4 Nxe5 15. dxe5 Bb7
16. O-O Red8 {
was better but still only equal in W.Uhlmann-B.Kurajica, Sarajevo 1981}) 14...
Rac8 $3 {, based on the long forced variation} 15. Rxd7 (15. Rxc8 Rxc8 16. O-O
{is wiser, but Black is at least equal}) 15... Qb4+ 16. Kf1 Qxd4 $1 17. Nd3
Rxe2 18. Kxe2 Re8+ 19. Kf1 Qxd3+ 20. Qxd3 Bxd3+ 21. Kg1 Re1+ 22. Bf1 Bxf1 23.
Rd8+ Kh7 24. h4 Bd3+ 25. Kh2 Re2 {, when Black finishes slightly better}) 13...
c5 14. Qa4 Rc8 15. Ne5 Qe6 16. Rc3 cxd4 17. Qxd4 Nd7 18. Bxd5 Qxe5 19. Bxa8
Rxa8 20. Qxd7 Qe4 21. Rg1 Qb1+ 22. Qd1 Qxb2 23. Qd2 Qa1+ 24. Rc1 Qe5 {
, when White has no better than repetition with} 25. Qd4 Qf5 26. Qd1 Qf6 27.
Qd4 {and so on, was A.Yusupov-N.Short, Madrid 1995 - another brilliant piece
of preparation.})) 8. e3 (8. e4 {
is well met by Lev Polugaevsky's idea (found in Merano)} Nc6 $1 {, which forces
} (8... Nxe4 $2 {at once didn't work because of} 9. Bxe7 Nxc3 10. Bxd8 Nxd1 11.
Be7 Re8 12. Ba3) 9. e5 {, as first demonstrated in V.Tukmakov-A.Beliavsky,
Tilburg 1984, when Black was fine after} ({since} 9. Bxc4 Nxe4 {now wins a pawn
}) 9... Nd5 10. Bxe7 Ncxe7 11. Bxc4 Nxc3 12. bxc3 b6 {.}) 8... c5 9. Bxc4 (9.
dxc5 Qxd1+ {is always given as equal} ({I think he would do better to go} 9...
Qa5 {: for example,} 10. Bxc4 Qxc5 11. Qe2 Rd8 12. O-O Nc6 13. Rfd1 Bd7) 10.
Rxd1 Bxc5 {, but after} 11. Bxc4 {it's a bit awkward for Black to develop.})
9... cxd4 10. Nxd4 (10. exd4 {never recovered from the instructive anti-IQP
battering Korchnoi took in the 9th game in Merano (21...Rb6!), but a more
significant reference is L.Christiansen-A.Karpov, London 1982:} Nc6 11. O-O Nh5
({Beliavsky's later} 11... Qb6 {and ...Rd8 is also eminently possible}) 12.
Bxe7 Nxe7 13. Re1 Nf6 14. Ne5 Bd7 15. Qb3 Rb8 16. Rcd1 b5 $1 {
(a trademark anti-IQP move of Karpov's), with equality.}) 10... Bd7 11. Bg3 {
Trying to get in on d6,} ({and at the same time seeking to avoid Black's
typical simplifying method, which was demonstrated in the first outing from
this position:} 11. Be2 Nc6 12. Nb3 Nd5 13. Bxe7 Ncxe7 14. Nxd5 Nxd5 15. Qd4
Bc6 16. Bf3 Ne7 {, which fully equalized in V.Korchnoi-A.Karpov, World
Championship (Game 17), Merano 1981.}) ({At one time White placed some hopes in
} 11. O-O Nc6 12. Nf3 (12. Nb3 Rc8 13. Be2 Nd5 14. Bxe7 Ncxe7 15. Nxd5 Nxd5 {
is nothing, although Black should be careful to meet} 16. Qd4 {with} Bc6 {,} ({
and not} 16... b6 $6 17. Ba6)) 12... Rc8 13. a3 Nh5 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 15. Ne4 (15.
e4 Rfd8 16. Qe2 Qc5 {is worse}) 15... Rfd8 16. Qd6 Be8 17. Qxe7 Nxe7 {
, but a number of games never saw him get anywhere in spite of White's
optically greater comfort.}) 11... Nc6 ({Black can also play} 11... a6 {
, but it isn't necessary, as Van der Sterren shows.}) 12. Ndb5 (12. Nb3 Na5 13.
Be2 Rc8 {even gives Black a slight initiative, as he showed in A.Ornstein-H.Schussler, Swedish Ch., Malmo 1986, with} 14. O-O Nc4 15. Qc2 b5 16. Rfd1 b4
17. Nb5 {, and now there wasn't any reason to refrain from} Nxe3 {
: for instance,} 18. Qxc8 Qxc8 19. Rxc8 Nxd1 20. Rc7 Bxb5 21. Bxb5 Nd5 22. Rxa7
Nxb2 {.}) 12... a6 13. Nd6 b5 14. Be2 ({Somewhere I saw the rather unnatural} 
14. Bd3 {
recommended; I mention it only to show the wonderful computer variation} Qb6
15. O-O Rad8 16. Nce4 Nd5 17. Be2 f5 18. Nc5 f4 19. Bg4 fxg3 20. Nxd7 Rxd7 21.
Bxe6+ Kh8 22. Bxd7 gxf2+ 23. Rxf2 Rxf2 24. Kxf2 Qxe3+ 25. Kf1 Qf4+ 26. Kg1 Bxd6
27. Rxc6 Qxh2+ 28. Kf2 Bc5+ $1 29. Rxc5 Qf4+ 30. Kg1 Qe3+ 31. Kh1 Qxc5 {
with an extra pawn for Black, which is hardly forced but has a lovely logical
flow to it.}) 14... Qb6 ({I don't like Tsesarsky's} 14... e5 $5 {; after his}
15. Bf3 Qc7 {White does best with} 16. Nde4 Nxe4 17. Bxe4 {, aiming at d5.})
15. a4 b4 16. Nb1 (16. Nc4 {
was tried in S.Lputian-D.Komarov, Dubai 2000, and would have been best met with
} Qb7 $1 {(the queen has more possibilities here than after the game's 16...
Qa7). I can't resist quoting another variation worked out with the computer
and showing its characteristic 'flair' for quiet moves in the midst of
tactical firestorms:} 17. Nb1 Ne4 18. Bf4 (18. O-O Nxg3 19. hxg3 Rfd8 {
is easy for Black}) 18... Rad8 19. Qc2 Nf6 20. O-O b3 21. Qd1 e5 $1 22. Nxe5
Nxe5 23. Bxe5 Bc6 24. Bd4 (24. Qe1 Bxg2 25. Rc7 Qe4 26. Rxe7 Bxf1 27. Qxf1 Nd5
{wins}) 24... Bxg2 25. Bxa6 Qa8 {, and probably Black is doing well in view of}
26. Qxb3 $2 (26. Bb5 {is more critical}) 26... Qf3 {, when he is winning.})
16... Na5 $1 {Provocative, but good.} 17. Nxf7 $6 {Praised at the time,} ({
but actually White was better advised to settle for slight inferiority with
something like} 17. O-O Bc6 {.}) 17... Bc6 $6 ({
In fact White's combination was just unsound:} 17... Kxf7 18. Bc7 Qb7 19. Bxa5
Rac8 $1 20. O-O (20. Rxc8 Rxc8 21. O-O Rc5 {wins}) 20... Rxc1 21. Qxc1 Rc8 22.
Qd2 Bxa4 {
, and Black is much better; again the computer's 'calmness' is evident.}) 18.
Ne5 Bxg2 {The complications are about equal and rather irrelevant for our
purpose, so I comment only very lightly.} 19. Rg1 (19. Ng6 Ra7 20. Nxe7+ Rxe7
21. Qd6 {was an option of about equal value.}) 19... Rad8 20. Nd2 Ne4 21. Bd3
Nxd2 (21... Nxg3 {was probably better.}) 22. Rxg2 Qb7 $2 ({And here} 22... Ndb3
{was essential, although probably White is still better.}) 23. Rg1 $4 (23. Qg4
{was basically winning, since} Qxg2 24. Qxe6+ Kh8 25. Ng6+ {is terminal.})
23... Nab3 $1 24. Qg4 Rxd3 $1 (24... Nf3+ 25. Nxf3 Nxc1 {
was an alternative, also keeping equality after huge complications.}) 25. Qxe6+
Kh7 26. Qg6+ Kh8 27. Rc6 $4 {Going too far and missing Black's reply;} (27.
Qxd3 {was the only move.}) 27... Rd5 $1 28. Qe6 ({
The point is the cruel defence} 28. Qxh6+ gxh6 29. Rxh6+ Kg7 30. Bf4+ Bg5 {.})
28... Rxe5 {The human move;} ({although} 28... Rc5 {
also extinguishes White's initiative efficiently.}) 29. Bxe5 Nf3+ 30. Kd1 Bg5
$1 {Excellent;} ({not} 30... Bf6 $2 31. Rxg7 $3 {(Novikov)} Bxg7 32. Qxh6+ Kg8
33. Bxg7 Qxg7 34. Rg6 {and wins.}) 31. Rxg5 {
Black is now winning, but no doubt time trouble was rearing its head.} Nxg5 32.
Qxh6+ Nh7 33. f4 Na5 34. Qxg7+ Qxg7 35. Bxg7+ Kxg7 36. Rxa6 Nc4 37. Ra7+ Rf7 $6
({The text may not throw away the win, but as Novikov pointed out} 37... Kg6 {
was far easier; basically the point is that rook, knight and knight win easily
against rook and pawn, whereas knight and knight do not win nearly so easily
against pawn, as is well known.}) 38. Rxf7+ Kxf7 39. Kc2 Na5 ({
Black could still keep things under control with} 39... Nxe3+ 40. Kb3 Nd5 41.
a5 Nf8 42. a6 Nd7 43. a7 N7b6 44. h4 Kg6 45. Kc2 Nxf4 {(Tsesarsky).}) 40. Kd3
Ke6 41. Kd4 Kd7 42. Kc5 Nc6 43. a5 Nf6 44. a6 Ne4+ 45. Kd5 Nc3+ 46. Kc4 Nd1 47.
a7 Nxa7 48. Kxb4 Nxb2 ({One could analyse this endgame for a week, and it
seems that Igor Novikov did, although I don't know where his analysis was
published (some of it is quoted in Megabase). According to him Black could
still win by taking the other pawn:} 48... Nxe3 $1 49. h4 Nf5 50. h5 Nh6 51. f5
Nc8 $1 52. f6 Ke6 53. Kc5 Kxf6 54. b4 Ke7 55. Kc6 Kd8 56. b5 Ne7+ 57. Kb7 Kd7
58. b6 Nc8 59. Ka6 Nd6 60. Ka7 Kc6 61. Ka6 Nb7 62. Ka7 Nc5 {
, and the remaining white pawn fails to cross Troitsky's famous line.}) 49. h4
Ke6 50. h5 Nc6+ 51. Kb5 Nd8 52. h6 Kf5 53. e4+ Kxf4 54. h7 Nf7 55. e5 Kxe5 {
. A splendid struggle in all its stages. --- Conclusion: 7 Rc1 has contributed
some magnificent games to the Tartakower's treasury, but unless White can find
some way to retain some edge in the simplified position after 7...dxc4, it
doesn't seem likely to return to the position on the stage it once occupied.}
1/2-1/2

[Event "Almelo (rapid)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2004.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Van Wely, L."]
[Black "Timman, J."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D54"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "137"]
[EventDate "2004.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Bg5 Be7 5. e3 O-O 6. Rc1 h6 7. Bh4 {This system
is the trademark of Viktor Korchnoi, who has a huge score with it. White's
idea essentially is to keep the option of developing the king's knight to e2
in the typical hanging pawn positions of the Tartakower.} b6 ({
Lasker players will of course be happy to play} 7... Ne4 8. Bxe7 Qxe7 {
, when White has two alternatives to 9 Nf3, transposing to a main line Lasker.
The first is} 9. Nxe4 (9. cxd5 Nxc3 10. Rxc3 exd5 11. Bd3 c6 12. Ne2 Nd7 13.
Bb1 Re8 14. O-O Nf8 {was just equal in V.Korchnoi-R.Vaganian, Lucerne 1993})
9... dxe4 10. Qc2 ({Timman criticized this and gave} 10. Ne2 {, although after}
Nd7 11. Nc3 Nf6 12. Be2 b6 {White has nothing to boast about anyway}) 10... e5
11. d5 ({if} 11. Qxe4 Qb4+ {of course}) 11... Bf5 12. Ne2 Nd7 13. Nc3 a5 14.
Be2 Nc5 15. O-O Ra6 16. Na4 Nd3 17. Bxd3 exd3 18. Qd2 e4 19. Nc3 {
, and now Black would have been fine after} Re8 {
in J.Timman-U.Andersson, Tilburg 1990.}) ({Black can also (and many Tartakower
aficionados usually do, for example Van der Sterren and Boensch) play} 7...
dxc4 8. Bxc4 c5 {when} 9. Nf3 {would be Piket-Van der Sterren,} ({and} 9. dxc5
Qa5 10. Nf3 {the note to White's ninth therein.})) 8. cxd5 Nxd5 9. Nxd5 exd5
10. Bxe7 Qxe7 11. Bd3 ({
White could of course still revert to the line of Mamedyarov-Lputian by} 11.
Nf3) ({while his other tries are} 11. Ne2) ({and} 11. Be2 {.}) 11... c5 12. Ne2
Nd7 13. O-O Nf6 {The best move. The best spot for the c8-bishop is not yet
clear; if Black were to play ...c4, for example, it might well be good on d7,
e6 or even f5.} 14. b3 ({The threat of ...c4 is annoying: for example,} 14. Qa4
c4) ({or} 14. dxc5 bxc5 15. Qc2 c4 16. Bf5 Bxf5 17. Qxf5 {, which has been
played a few times and is fine for Black; his pressure against b2 holds the
balance as in a classic game shown in Nimzowitsch's 'Chess Praxis' (or indeed
the ultra-classic Tartakower game Bertok-Fischer).}) 14... Bb7 {Now that ...c4
is ruled out the bishop develops here. Part of the point of White's system is
that if the bishop develops to e6, as in Makogonov's original idea, White can
threaten to exchange it with Nf4. White then has the dangerous idea of Nxe6
fxe6; e4, as in the über-classic Fischer-Spassky and the less-sung but equally
impressive J.Hjartarson-R.Vaganian, German League 1999.} 15. Rc2 Rfc8 16. Qc1
a5 17. a4 g6 18. h3 Rc7 {This is usually Black's correct plan in such
positions; he defends c5 and d5 both stoutly, and the constant threat of
invasion on the c-file constrains White's actions.} 19. Qa3 Rac8 20. Rfc1 Ne4 {
This can be a bad idea in such positions; see Korchnoi-Bruzon, Essent 2001,
but it is okay here because the white knight can't get to d4 and White has
pawn weaknesses of his own on the queenside.} ({
Black could also have simply waited with, for example} 20... Qd8 {(} 21. dxc5
bxc5 22. Rxc5 $2 Qd6 {
wins material). White doesn't have much in the way of a constructive plan.})
21. Bxe4 dxe4 22. Nc3 Bc6 (22... Rd7 23. Nb5 Rd5 {was another uncompromising
option. The position is equal and the rest of the game is not of much interest;
the older man presumably ran short of time and loses a completely drawn rook
ending in a fashion which John Nunn might well have seized upon for his recent
book on how not to lose drawn endings like this.}) 23. d5 Be8 24. d6 Qxd6 25.
Nxe4 Qe6 26. Nd2 Rd8 27. Nc4 Rcd7 28. Qb2 Rd3 29. Rc3 R3d5 30. Qe2 Bc6 31. e4
Rd4 32. f3 Bb7 33. Qe3 Kg7 34. Qf4 Ba6 35. Ne3 h5 36. h4 Bb7 37. R1c2 R8d7 38.
Kh2 Ba6 39. g4 hxg4 40. Nxg4 Qd6 41. Qxd6 R7xd6 42. Ne3 f5 43. exf5 Rxh4+ 44.
Kg3 Rh5 45. fxg6 Kxg6 46. Ng4 Bc8 47. Re2 Bxg4 48. fxg4 Rhd5 49. Rce3 Rd3 50.
Kh4 Rxe3 51. Rxe3 Kf7 52. g5 Rd1 53. Kg4 Rg1+ 54. Kf5 Rf1+ 55. Ke5 Rd1 56. Rf3+
Kg6 $4 {Basically just a one-move blunder;} ({
Black probably hasn't played optimally, but} 56... Kg7 {
was still completely equal since Black can meet} 57. Rf6 {with} Rb1 58. Rxb6 c4
{.}) 57. Rf6+ Kxg5 58. Rxb6 Rd3 59. Rb5 Kg6 60. Ke6 Rc3 61. Rxa5 Rxb3 62. Rxc5
Kg7 63. a5 Ra3 64. Ke7 Ra1 65. Kd7 Kf6 66. Rb5 Kf7 67. Kc7 Ke7 68. Kb7 Kd7 69.
a6 {. --- Conclusion: Delaying the development of the king's knight does not
appear to trouble Black, whether he heads for Lasker or Tartakower waters.} 1-0

[Event "Reno"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2005.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Serper, G."]
[Black "Mezentsev, V."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D53"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "60"]
[EventDate "2005.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Bg5 Be7 5. Nf3 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. Qc2 {A strange 
move - strange, because it seems quite likely the c-file will be opened and
the queen will have to move again - but one which is a little fashionable at
the moment.} b6 ({As with the 7 Rc1 ideas, Lasker players are scarcely
inconvenienced, and can simply continue with} 7... Ne4 {. White can try} 8.
Nxe4 ({if he doesn't want to play} 8. Bxe7 Qxe7 9. e3 {with a Lasker}) 8...
Bxh4 9. Nc3 {, but Black has no difficulties here: for example,} dxc4 10. e3
Be7 11. Bxc4 Nd7 12. Rd1 c6 13. O-O b5 14. Be2 Bb7 {
, Zhou Weiqi-Liang Chong, Chengdu 2009.}) ({Another very solid equalizer is} 
7... dxc4 8. e3 (8. e4 c5 9. e5 (9. dxc5 Nfd7 {
is still the right move, as in a couple of Vaganian games}) 9... Nfd7 {
also gives White nothing}) 8... c5 9. dxc5 Qa5 10. Bxc4 Qxc5 11. Qe2 {
, which Atalik claims is 'a little better for the home team', but looks
completely equal to me after} Rd8 12. O-O Nc6 {. Still, these symmetrical
variations are a little dry, and there's no reason for Black not to play the
pure Tartakower move.}) 8. O-O-O $5 (8. e3 {would be Kapnisis-David, of course}
) ({and} 8. Bxf6 Bxf6 9. e4 {is well met by} Nc6 {(Atalik)}) ({
so White's main alternative is} 8. cxd5 Nxd5 9. Bxe7 Qxe7 10. Nxd5 exd5 11. Rc1
{, which is a position that doesn't see much action in the databases, but
which according to Atalik was investigated in a few games in the Soviet Union.
It seems to me that Black's best would be to develop uncompromisingly with} Nd7
12. e3 (12. Qxc7 Ba6 {is too risky: for example,} 13. Qc2 Rac8 14. Qd2 Rxc1+
15. Qxc1 Rc8 16. Qd2 Bd3 $1) 12... Bb7 13. Be2 c5 {, with equality.}) 8... dxc4
{A unique position, but Black seems to me to play very well.} 9. e4 Ba6 10. d5
Qe8 $1 {This looks a bit alarming, but actually the rook isn't even en prise
on a8, so Black has nothing to worry about.} 11. Bxf6 Bxf6 12. e5 Bd8 13. Qe4
exd5 14. Nxd5 {This looks a bit alarming, but actually the rook isn't even en
prise on a8, so Black has nothing to worry about.} Nd7 15. Ne3 Bg5 16. Nxg5
hxg5 17. h4 ({Black has emerged well from the opening, and perhaps White
should have started trying to get his material back with} 17. Bxc4 {.}) 17...
Qxe5 18. Qd5 Rad8 19. hxg5 c6 20. Qf3 Qxg5 21. Rh5 (21. Qh3 Qh6 {defends and
enables Black to retain the better chances, but perhaps this was the lesser
evil. As played White goes downhill fast.}) 21... Qf6 22. Rf5 Qe6 23. Ng4 Rfe8
24. Qg3 Qg6 25. f4 Nf8 26. Rxd8 Rxd8 27. Rg5 Qd6 28. Ne3 Ne6 29. Rg4 Qd2+ 30.
Kb1 c3 {. --- Conclusion: 7 Qc2 is another line unlikely to trouble the Lasker
player; Tartakower aficionados should be ready for 7...b6 8 0-0-0, when
pawn-grabbing à la Mezentsev looks like an attractive option.} 0-1

[Event "1st matchgame, Albert"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1999.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Bacrot, E."]
[Black "Beliavsky, A."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D55"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "50"]
[EventDate "1999.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 {In this and the next few
games we are going to look at deviations on move six. There's only really one
of those, since White's bishop is attacked and it makes little sense to go
back to f4 and play a Bf4 system with Black having the extra move ...h6, so
White's only real variation is Bxf6. I can't rid myself of the notion that
this is simply a horrible move, giving up the bishop-pair for no reason, but
it has been played by many grandmasters up to and including decisive games for
the championship of the world, so obviously I'm wrong. --- We saw in the
Tartakower chapter that White often plays Bxf6 there in order to force a
recapture on d5 with a pawn, but here he has no such structural motive. It's
sometimes said that White gains more control of the e4-square and can hope to
play e4 in one go; that's true up to a point, but in fact e4 ideas rarely seem
to work out well for White in this line. Still, White does of course speed up
his development and thus gives himself time to prevent Black's freeing breaks,
and he can reasonably hope that if he achieves that, knights will be the
equals of bishops in the fixed structure which arises.} 6. Bxf6 Bxf6 {
Incidentally, some people play 5...h6, and others 6...h6. After investigation
I've decided that really it doesn't matter which you play. I've assumed 5...h6
(and thus that after 6 Bxf6 Bxf6 White can play for e4 in one go if he wants
to, although this approach isn't really very threatening).} 7. e3 {White's different treatments of this variation basically revolve around where he moves his
queen to. In this game we look at Qd2 systems, the next two deal with Qc2,
Mamedyarov-Kramnik with Qb3, and Sokolov-Short and Kasimdzhanov-Ponomariov
with the main line of 7 e3 0-0 8 Rc1.} ({If White wants to play a set-up with
Qd2 he can also start with that move immediately, as Karpov did in the 21st
game of the 1984-5 Moscow Marathon.} 7. Qd2 {
does give Black the opportunity to play} dxc4 {
at once. The drawback with that move is that it allows} 8. e4 {. There was a
bit of theory around this position after the K-K match, in which Kasparov
continued} (8. e3 O-O {would be the game, of course}) 8... c5 9. d5 exd5 10. e5
-- (10... Bg5 11. Qxd5 Nc6 12. Bxc4 O-O 13. O-O Qxd5 14. Bxd5 Nb4 {. Later in
'rematch' between Ubilava and Dorfman (respectively Karpov's and Kasparov's
seconds)} 15. Be4 f5 {was played, which led to a draw and which Kasparov
implies is equal, but it seems that} 16. Nxg5 hxg5 17. a3 fxe4 18. axb4 cxb4
19. Nd5 {would set Black some problems.}) ({. Later} 10... Be7 {came to be the
official antidote following the game P.Nikolic-D.King, German League 1998 -
Predrag Nikolic is the main recent advocate of this line for White;} 11. Nxd5 (
{but in his recent series on the K-K matches Kasparov reveals that his team
were afraid of} 11. Qxd5 Qxd5 12. Nxd5 Bd8 13. Bxc4 Nc6 14. O-O-O {
, and it does seem that this is quite unpleasant for Black}) 11... b5 12. b3
Nc6 13. bxc4 Bg4 $1 {was Nikolic-King})) ({
At all events it seems simpler to me for Black to meet} 7. Qd2 {with} O-O {
. True, he has to reckon with} 8. e4 {
, but this doesn't seem to be any problem after} dxe4 9. Nxe4 Nd7 (9... b6 {
is another sensible move}) 10. O-O-O c5 {
as in P.Nikolic-M.Narciso Dublan, European Championship, Ohrid 2001.} 11. -- ({
. Black was at least equal in the game after} 11. Qe3 Be7 12. Bd3 cxd4 13. Nxd4
Ne5 14. Bc2 Qb6 15. Qc3 Qb4 {.}) (11. d5 exd5 12. cxd5 {
is one alternative pointed out by Tsesarsky; here} Nb6 {
would be best in my opinion.}) (11. dxc5 Be7 12. g4 Qc7 13. g5 {
is another, when Black has a choice between the dangerous-looking} hxg5 ({
and Tsesarsky's original} 13... h5 14. Rg1 Rd8 {
'with counterplay', when Black is going to have to offer a pawn sacrifice after
} 15. Qe3 b6) 14. Nfxg5 Nxc5 {.})) 7... O-O 8. Qd2 dxc4 {This is a very
logical move, to work for the f6-bishop by striking at the white centre with ...c5. It also equalizes very comfortably. Black does have a variety of more
combative alternatives:} (8... Nc6 {has been the most popular, after which the
main reference is Su.Polgar-M.Chiburdanidze, 3rd matchgame, St Petersburg 1995,
which went} 9. Rc1 a6 10. Be2 ({either} 10. b3) ({or} 10. cxd5 {
cross Black's plans and may well be better}) 10... dxc4 11. Bxc4 e5 12. d5 Na7
{(a popular sequence)} 13. Qc2 Nb5 14. Nxb5 axb5 15. Bb3 Bg4 16. Nd2 {
, and now Black should have taken the opportunity for} c5 {
with equality (Ftacnik).}) (8... a6 9. Rc1 (9. O-O-O {should be met with} dxc4
10. Bxc4 b5 11. Bd3 c5 ({or} 11... Bb7)) 9... c6 10. e4 b5 11. e5 Be7 12. c5 f6
{is an interesting way to play, as in C.Gabriel-S.Lputian, Baden-Baden 1996.})
9. Bxc4 Nd7 ({Black can also play} 9... c5 {
immediately, and in fact this might even be more accurate. If} 10. dxc5 ({
while if White intends to play as Karpov did by allowing ...cxd4 then the
knight can develop to c6: for example,} 10. O-O cxd4 11. exd4 Nc6) 10... Nd7
11. Ne4 Be7 12. Rd1 {then the position in the game arises} (12. c6 {
can be met either by taking it or by the surgical} Nf6 $1 {, as in M.Pein-A.Barsov, Hampstead 1998. I don't see any disadvantage in this way of doing
things, and it also I suspect makes White's 0-0-0 or h4 plans harder to
implement.})) 10. Ne4 ({The main alternative is} 10. O-O c5 11. Rfd1 cxd4 12.
Nxd4 (12. exd4 Nb6 {and ...Bd7 is too easy for Black}) 12... Nb6 13. Be2 $1 ({
Karpov's innovation from the 1985 match; in previous games} 13. Bb3 Bd7 14. Ne4
Bxd4 15. Qxd4 Bc6 {was even easier for Black}) 13... Bd7 14. Bf3 Rb8 15. Ne4 (
15. Rac1 Qe7 {doesn't achieve anything either}) 15... Bxd4 16. Qxd4 {
, and now Kasparov found the fine solution of} Ba4 (16... Bc6 17. Qc5 Bd5 18.
Nc3 Qc8 {also leads to a draw - Kasparov}) 17. Qxd8 Rbxd8 18. Rxd8 Rxd8 19. Nc5
Rd2 $1 20. b3 Bc6 21. Nxb7 Bxf3 22. gxf3 Nd7 $1 {
, when White has no realistic prospects of converting his extra pawn.}) (10.
O-O-O {and 10 h4 can both be met in the same way; by} g6 11. h4 {(0-0-0)} Bg7
12. Kb1 a6 13. Bb3 Qe7 $1 {, as in M.Sadler-P.Van der Sterren, Linares Zonal
1995. Black won this game in good style and Sadler thinks Black's play is fine,
but this is quite dangerous and unexplored territory, and if Black is choosing
these peaceful ...dxc4 and ...c5 ideas I think this is another reason to avoid
9...Nd7 in favour of 9...c5.} (13... c5 14. d5 {is less good.})) 10... Be7 ({
Black could also play} 10... e5 {(Kasparov), although so far no-one has felt
inclined to speculate with this move.}) 11. Rd1 c5 12. dxc5 Qc7 13. b4 a5 ({
An alternative of equal merit is} 13... b6 {
, when White could find no better than} 14. Nd6 Rd8 15. Nb5 Qb7 16. Nd6 Qc7 {
in Z.Azmaiparashvili-A.Khalifman, Chalkidiki 2002. White continued with} 17.
O-O bxc5 18. Nxc8 Raxc8 19. b5 {
in the later V.Ivanchuk-D.Jakovenko, Russian Team Championship 2011, but after}
Ne5 20. Qe2 Nxf3+ 21. Qxf3 {and mass liquidation down the d-file, the presence
of opposite-coloured bishops still gave Black a pretty easy draw.}) 14. Nd6 Nf6
15. O-O (15. a3 axb4 16. axb4 b6 {is completely equal.}) ({At one time} 15. e4
{was thought to be dangerous, as indicated by Beliavsky in 'Informator', but
Black showed the antidote in E.Bacrot-D.Marciano, French Championship, Vichy
2000, with} axb4 16. e5 Bxd6 17. Qxd6 Ne8 {.}) 15... axb4 16. Qxb4 Nd7 17. Rc1
Nxc5 18. Nxc8 Rfxc8 19. Qb1 Bf6 20. Nd4 Qe7 21. Nb5 Na4 22. Be2 Rc6 23. Qb3 Nc5
24. Qb1 Na4 25. Qb3 Nc5 {. --- Conclusion: This set-up is frankly rather
prospectless for White. Black can equalize easily by liquidating the centre.
Alternatively, he can try either of the options given in the notes to his 8th.}
1/2-1/2

[Event "Taxco Interzonal"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1985.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Agdestein, S."]
[Black "Spraggett, K."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D55"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "78"]
[EventDate "1985.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bxf6 Bxf6 7. e3 O-O 8. Qc2
{The most popular and natural move; White brings the queen to its usual
position in this opening.} c5 9. dxc5 dxc4 {This move was also introduced (by
Kasparov) in the 27th game of the Moscow Marathon. In part two of his 'Garry
Kasparov on Modern Chess' series Kasparov says that this was why he gave up
the variation for White (previously he had won some high-profile games with it,
including one against Timman in the USSR-Rest of the World match).} 10. Bxc4
Qa5 (10... Nd7 {is another of Kasparov's ideas, intending} 11. c6 Ne5 $1 {
. White does best to decline the offer with} 12. Nxe5 Bxe5 13. Be2 {, when Black will have to recapture on c6 with the c-pawn and incur a tiny theoretical
disadvantage in the form of his queenside weaknesses, albeit that the two
bishops almost compensate.} (13. f4 {is also possible}) ({, or} 13. Bd3 {
, although then Black can choose between} bxc6 {
, with a small but very manageable disadvantage,} ({or} 13... Qb6 $5 14. cxb7
Bxb7 {, which probably offers him enough compensation.}))) 11. O-O ({
White would like to avoid the breaking of his queenside pawns, but after} 11.
Rc1 Qxc5 {he has to spend a tempo moving the bishop and Black equalizes easily:
for example,} 12. Bb3 (12. Ne4 {would be met by the relieving} Qb4+) 12... Nc6
13. O-O Rd8 {.}) 11... Bxc3 12. Qxc3 (12. bxc3 Qxc5 {
is easier for Black. This way White can break Black's pawns as well.}) 12...
Qxc3 13. bxc3 Nd7 14. c6 bxc6 {This endgame has been played several times, and
the only time Black has lost is the stem game, the 27th of the 1984-5 K-K
match, in which Kasparov played unrecognizably.} 15. Rab1 {Interestingly,
Kasparov says in his recent series on the K-K matches that this move is
premature because White cannot do anything on the b-file,} ({and that he did
not want to play this line in their second match because of Timoschenko's move
} 15. Rfd1 {, which he says is stronger than Karpov's move, as was shown by
their analysis before the second match. No-one else has played or considered
this move as far as I know, and it remains to be seen whether it will produce
a revival of this line for White (which has been virtually closed by
Kasparov's idea). I have to say that I understand nothing and that it seems to
me that Black should continue as in the game with} Nb6 16. Be2 c5 {
, when so far as I can see Black can reasonably meet either} 17. a4 ({or} 17.
Ne5 {with} Bb7 {and expect to equalize shortly thereafter, but evidently
Kasparov and his team must have seen some ideas for White they were unhappy
about.})) 15... Nb6 16. Be2 c5 17. Rfc1 {A much-praised move, except by
Kasparov, who says that the idea of Kf1 and Rb5 is obvious.} Bd7 ({
Kasparov had played} 17... Bb7 {and lost after a series of further mistakes,
essentially by refusing to bring his queen's rook to c7.}) 18. Ne5 ({Later White made various other attempts: for example, trying to slide the rook to a5 by
way of a3 (the point of 17...Bd7 is basically that White cannot get the rook
to a5 without exchanging the bishops, which simplifies Black's task), but
after} 18. Rb3 Rfd8 19. Ra3 {Black can prevent this with} Ba4 {
, and is by no means worse.}) 18... Ba4 19. Nd3 ({Kasparov had been afraid of} 
19. Bb5 {, but after} Bxb5 20. Rxb5 Rac8 21. Ra5 Rc7 {
'White has not even the trace of an advantage' (Kasparov).}) 19... Rfc8 20. c4
Rc7 {Commentators on the match had stressed the importance of this manoeuvre,
and in the remainder of the game Spraggett plays very solidly, and White never
has anything at all.} 21. Rc3 Rd8 22. Rbc1 Kf8 23. Ra3 Ke7 24. f3 ({Seeing the
game it's natural to wonder what would happen if White tried to line up the
rooks on the a-file more quickly, but Black can cope with this easily: for
example,} 24. Rcc3 f6 25. Kf1 (25. Nb2 {at once is met by} Rd2) 25... e5 26.
Nb2 Bd7 27. Ra5 Be6 28. Rca3 Rdd7 {
, and if White isn't careful he's going to find himself worse.}) 24... f6 25.
Kf2 e5 26. Rcc3 Rd6 {A typical move in this endgame; the rook is invulnerable
here and allows the king to pass easily behind its back to c8, after which
White has no prospects at all of putting any pressure on the queenside
'weaknesses'.} 27. Ke1 Kd8 28. Nb2 Be8 29. Ra5 Kc8 30. Bd3 Bf7 31. Rca3 Kb8 {
A similar set-up to the earlier note. Black is fine.} 32. Rb3 Kc8 33. Ke2 Be6
34. Rbb5 Nd7 35. Kd2 a6 36. Rb3 e4 37. fxe4 Ne5 38. Kc3 Bg4 39. Bf1 Bh5 {
. --- Conclusion: This variation is pretty easy for Black, unless Kasparov's
15 Rfd1 proves more annoying than I can see, but it is very drawish. In the
next game Vaganian shows a more sprightly, albeit riskier, way to play.}
1/2-1/2

[Event "Paris"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1998.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Fayard, A."]
[Black "Vaganian, R."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D55"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "58"]
[EventDate "1998.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 e6 2. c4 d5 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bxf6 Bxf6 7. e3 O-O 8. Qc2
c5 9. dxc5 Nc6 {The line given in the previous game, while undoubtedly an
efficient equalizer, is very dry, and the more exciting text move may be
preferred by some.} 10. O-O-O {
White's sharpest move; he has also tried a number of vanilla alternatives:} (
10. Be2 Qa5 11. O-O Qxc5 12. Rfd1 b6 ({
obviously not the only move; Black could, for example, play} 12... Rd8) ({or} 
12... Qb6 13. Rac1 Rd8) 13. Rac1 Bxc3 14. Qxc3 Ba6 {
was J.Timman-A.Beliavsky, Tilburg 1984, when Black defended easily enough.}) (
10. a3 Qa5 11. Rd1 Rd8 12. Be2 {
similarly didn't offer Black much challenge in E.Relange-O.Renet, Belfort 1995,
} -- ({, although possibly} 12... d4 13. exd4 Nxd4 14. Nxd4 Bxd4 15. O-O Qxc5 {
would have been a cleaner equalizer}) ({, than the game's} 12... dxc4 13. O-O
Bxc3 (13... Qxc5 14. Ne4 Qe7 15. Rxd8+ Nxd8 16. Bxc4 b6 {is also pretty equal})
14. Qxc3 Qxc3 15. Rxd8+ Nxd8 16. bxc3 Bd7 {
, although Black is only slightly worse in this endgame.})) (10. cxd5 exd5 11.
Be2 {looks like the best of these quieter tries to me:} Qa5 12. O-O Qxc5 13.
Rac1 Qa5 14. Qb3 {poses Black some problems in unravelling without losing the
d- or b-pawns. I think Black's best is} Ne7 {followed by developing with ...Rd8, ...Rb8 as necessary and ...Bd7. Black is very solid and has the bishops,
but I think most players would feel more comfortable with White with the
blockade against the isolani.}) (10. cxd5 exd5 11. Bb5 {looks a bit strange to
me but has been quite popular. Black has a choice of methods:} -- (11... Qa5
12. O-O d4 13. exd4 Nxd4 14. Nxd4 Bxd4 15. Qa4 Bxc3 16. bxc3 Qxa4 17. Bxa4 {
was A.Chernin-E.Geller, Riga 1985, when Black has to play a bit carefully but
this is basically just a draw;}) (11... Bg4 12. Bxc6 (12. O-O Bxf3 13. gxf3 Qa5
14. Qb3 Rfd8 15. Rfd1 a6 {is okay for Black, although he might end up
defending 4 vs. 3 on the kingside with the broken white pawns}) 12... bxc6 13.
Nd4 Bxd4 14. exd4 Re8+ 15. Kf1 {
gave Black enough compensation in R.Douven-E.Geller, Eindhoven 1986.})) ({
Finally,} 10. cxd5 exd5 11. O-O-O {can be met with} Nb4 {as in the game.})
10... Nb4 11. Qb3 ({White's main alternative is} 11. Qa4 {, preventing the
convenient deployment of the black queen on a5. Black has a handy alternative,
however, in} a5 {, after which an earlier Vaganian game (L.Van Wely-R.Vaganian,
Yerevan Olympiad 1996) went} 12. cxd5 ({
White can't get by without this move anyway, for example} 12. a3 Bd7 13. Qb3
Bxc3 14. bxc3 Na6) 12... exd5 13. Nd4 Bg4 14. Be2 {
, and now, as pointed out by several commentators, Vaganian should have played}
Bxd4 15. Rxd4 Bxe2 16. Nxe2 {when perhaps} Rc8 ({
is even more effective than Van Wely's} 16... Qe7 17. a3 Qxc5+ 18. Nc3) 17. a3
Rxc5+ {, intending} 18. Kb1 b5 19. Qd1 Nc6 {.}) 11... Qa5 12. cxd5 (12. Kb1 {
(J.Dorfman-A.Petrosian, Lvov 1981) is well met by} Na6 {: for instance,} 13.
cxd5 Nxc5 14. Qc4 Bxc3 15. bxc3 Qa3 {.}) 12... Bxc3 (12... exd5 {is a possible
alternative (evidently after the 10 cxd5 move order this position would have
been reached without the alternative Vaganian plays in the game). After} 13. a3
Bxc3 14. bxc3 Na6 15. Bxa6 {Black has adequate counterplay with either} Qxa6 ({
or} 15... bxa6 $5 {.})) 13. bxc3 Nxd5 14. Kb2 Qxc5 {White is already worse,
and in the rest of the game he isn't able to offer much resistance to the
grandmaster's attack.} 15. Qc4 Qa5 16. Nd4 Bd7 17. Nb3 Qb6 18. Qd4 Qc7 19. Be2
Nb6 20. c4 Rfd8 21. c5 Na4+ 22. Ka3 Bc6 23. Qc4 $2 {
Not the optimal square and losing at once, but it was grim anyway, of course.}
b5 24. cxb6 axb6 25. Rxd8+ Qxd8 26. Qxc6 Qf8+ 27. Nc5 Nxc5+ 28. Kb2 Ne4 29. Ra1
Qb4+ {. --- Conclusion: This line leaves a bit more in the game than
Kasparov's 'drawing variation' of the previous game, but in truth White's
system has had its day.} 0-1

[Event "Baku (rapid)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2009.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Mamedyarov, S."]
[Black "Kramnik, V."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D55"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "116"]
[EventDate "2009.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bxf6 Bxf6 7. Qb3 {
A very natural move, seeking to prevent a freeing ...c5 by the pressure on d5,
and perhaps bring a rook quickly to d1 to protect d4.} c6 ({Black can also play
} 7... dxc4) ({or} 7... c5 {. Indeed Kasparov writes that his team in 1985
considered the latter critical and best, but practice hasn't really borne this
out, and the solid text has always been the most popular.}) 8. e3 ({
White has various ways to play for an early e4. The immediate} 8. e4 dxe4 9.
Nxe4 {can be well met by} Qa5+ 10. Qc3 Qxc3+ 11. bxc3 Be7 {
(Kasparov), but White can pose more problems by preparing his break:}) (8. Rd1
O-O 9. e4 dxe4 10. Nxe4 Qa5+ 11. Rd2 {succeeds in forcing the bishop back to
e7 without any great concessions, but after} Be7 12. Bd3 Bb4 {(Black can also
just develop with ...Nd7, ...b6, ...Bb7 and so on, and this might even be more
reliable)} 13. Nc3 c5 14. a3 Bxc3 15. bxc3 (15. Qxc3 Qxc3 16. bxc3 Nd7 17. O-O
b6 18. Be4 Rb8 {is similar; White has a slight short-term initiative, but a
perfectly manageable one}) 15... Nd7 16. O-O cxd4 17. cxd4 b6 18. Be4 Rb8 {
Black equalized with ...Rd8, ...Bb7 and so forth in P.Nikolic-E.Pigusov,
Bugojno 1999.}) (8. O-O-O {is of course much sharper:} dxc4 {(Yusupov sagely
observes that in this line Black should not hurry to castle, since this gives
White a chance to prepare a pawn storm with h4, g4 and so on in the certainty
he will find the black king at home, and in such a situation his attack might
turn out to be first)} 9. Qxc4 b5 {. Now:} 10. -- (10. Qd3 Nd7 11. Kb1 (11. e4
Qa5 {also gives Black counterplay - Kasparov}) 11... Qa5 12. g4 $6 Bb7 13. Bg2
c5 14. Qxb5 Qxb5 15. Nxb5 Ke7 {worked out very well for Black in D.Arutinian-T.Sanikidze, Georgian Championship, Tbilisi 2009, after} 16. e3 Rab8 17. Nc3 Rhc8
18. Ka1 cxd4 19. exd4 Rc4 {.}) (10. Qb3 a5 {('Of course this is an impudent
plan, but I didn't choose it casually. I think it is also quite good
objectively.' - Yusupov, who writes very interestingly about this game in
'Training for the Tournament Player')} 11. e4 a4 12. Qc2 Nd7 ({
Yusupov says that he considered mainly} 12... Na6 {,}) ({but the immediate} 
12... a3 {also has a great deal to be said for it, for example} 13. b3 Na6) 13.
d5 (13. e5 Be7 14. Ne4 Bb7 15. Kb1 {
was more solid, but after, for example, Yusupov's} b4 {
Black retains counter-chances}) 13... cxd5 14. exd5 {was J.Timman-A.Yusupov,
6th matchgame, Tilburg 1989 (a brilliant game), and now Yusupov says that he
should have played} O-O $1 ({in the game} 14... a3 15. dxe6 axb2+ 16. Kb1 fxe6
17. Qe4 Bxc3 18. Qxa8 O-O {led to complications which are probably about equal:
it's worth trying to work out what Black should have played after} 19. Qc6 b4
20. Qxe6+ Kh8 21. Bb5 {; modern software reveals immediately a trick which
eluded even Yusupov and Dvoretsky's analysis}) 15. dxe6 fxe6 {
. Yusupov was afraid of} 16. Nxb5 {
, but later discovered the powerful sacrifice} (16. Bxb5 {
is probably best and gives a thoroughly unclear position after} a3 17. Bc4
axb2+ 18. Kb1 Qb6) 16... a3 17. Nxa3 Rxa3 18. bxa3 Qa5 {.})) (8. g3 {
is another idea altogether which was played by a young Vallejo. After} O-O 9.
Bg2 Nd7 10. O-O {probably the best is} Nb6 {
; the g2-bishop is not well placed for the structure after} 11. cxd5 exd5 {.})
8... O-O 9. Rd1 {This move is the most popular, so it grieves me to say that
it doesn't make much sense to me in conjunction with e3.} ({Recently Bu
Xiangzhi has agreed with me and played a couple of games with the simple} 9.
Be2 Nd7 10. O-O {: for example,} dxc4 ({a simpler way to equalize is} 10... Qb6
11. Qc2 dxc4 12. Bxc4 c5 13. Ne4 cxd4 14. Nxd4 Be7 {
, an idea played in a Kasparov-Timman game in a slightly different position})
11. Bxc4 b5 12. Be2 a6 13. Ne4 Be7 14. Rac1 Bb7 15. Rfd1 Qb6 16. Qc3 Rfd8 17.
Ne1 b4 18. Qc2 a5 19. b3 ({
I don't know why Bu played this; it makes more sense to me to play} 19. Nd3 {
at once}) 19... Nf6 (19... a4 20. Nd3 axb3 21. axb3 Ra5 {looks more sensible})
20. Nxf6+ Bxf6 21. Nd3 {and White was beginning to get a bit of a grip in Bu
Xianghi-Ji Dan, Xinghua 2009.}) ({Instead} 9. h4 {was played in H.Koneru-A.Karpov, Cap d'Agde (rapid) 2008, and should surely have been met now with} c5 {
, when Black's activity seems to keep him just about afloat:} 10. -- (10. dxc5
Nd7 11. cxd5 Nxc5 {gives Black active play, such as with} 12. Qa3 ({or} 12. Qc4
Qb6) 12... Qb6 13. Bc4 Rd8 14. O-O-O ({if} 14. dxe6 Bxe6 {, intending} 15. Bxe6
$2 ({or} 15. Be2 a5 $1 {with the idea of ...Qb4}) 15... Nd3+) 14... Be7 15. b4
Na6) ({, and} 10. cxd5 cxd4 11. Nxd4 (11. exd4 exd5 12. O-O-O Nc6 13. Nxd5 Bg4
{gives Black plenty of play}) 11... exd5 12. Qxd5 Qb6 13. O-O-O Nc6 14. Nxc6
bxc6 15. Qb3 Qc5 {, when Black's bishops and activity against the exposed
white king (not to mention the foolishly exposed h-pawn!) give him just about
enough compensation, although if he wants White can more or less force a
repetition with} 16. Qc4 Qb6 17. Qb3 {.})) 9... Nd7 10. Bd3 b6 {
First played by Karpov in the 2nd K-K match in 1985.} (10... Qb6 {
had been played previously and is also very solid}) ({
while 22 years later the ex-champion demonstrated another method:} 10... Nb6
11. e4 dxc4 12. Bxc4 Nxc4 13. Qxc4 b5 14. Qb3 (14. Qxc6 Bd7 {
gives Black plenty of compensation}) 14... Ba6 {
, and Black was already better in R.Ponomariov-A.Karpov, Moscow (blitz) 2007.})
11. O-O ({In 1985 Kasparov had played the weaker} 11. cxd5 cxd5 12. e4 ({
better was} 12. O-O Bb7 13. e4 dxe4 14. Bxe4 {when the threat of the d5
breakthrough would still have obliged Black to exercise a certain caution
according to Kasparov, although it doesn't seem too difficult to be cautious,
starting with} Qb8 {and later ...Rd8; the fact that d5 is always met by ...Nc5
harshes White's buzz quite a bit}) 12... dxe4 13. Bxe4 Rb8 14. O-O {
when after the brilliant (and very Karpovian) move} b5 $1 {
'I realized that I urgently had to seek a way to equalize' (Kasparov).}) 11...
Bb7 12. Bb1 {A new move, and not particularly more or less successful than
White's earlier attempts:} (12. e4 c5 ({Kasparov's recommendation; both} 12...
dxc4) ({and} 12... dxe4 {are also fine}) 13. e5 cxd4 14. exf6 Nc5 15. Qc2 dxc3
16. fxg7 Kxg7 17. Qxc3+ Qf6 18. Ne5 dxc4 19. Bxc4 (19. Bc2 Rad8 20. f4 {
is interesting; it produces a queer kind of stasis where neither side can
really find a way forward}) 19... Ne4 20. Qd4 Rfd8 21. Nd7 {with equality was
Kasparov's pre-computer analysis, which modern machines more or less confirm.})
(12. Rfe1 dxc4 {is another lively 1985 Kasparov recommendation:} ({
quieter souls will prefer} 12... Be7 13. e4 dxc4 14. Bxc4 b5 15. Bd3 Qb6 {
as in A.Yusupov-K.Spraggett, 1st matchgame, Quebec 1989}) 13. Qxc4 ({and} 13.
Bxc4 c5 14. dxc5 Bxf3 15. gxf3 Bxc3 16. Qxc3 Rc8 17. Kh1 Rxc5) 13... b5 14. Qb3
a6 15. Ne4 Be7 16. Rc1 c5 17. dxc5 Bd5 18. Qc3 f5 {
with counterplay were two lines given by Kasparov.}) 12... g6 13. e4 dxc4 14.
Qxc4 b5 (14... c5 15. dxc5 Qc7 {
was another and possibly preferable approach; White runs out of gas after} 16.
b4 bxc5 17. Nb5 Qc6 18. Rd6 Qc8 {.}) 15. Qb3 Bg7 16. h4 $1 Qe7 17. h5 a6 18. e5
({For the moment} 18. hxg6 fxg6 19. e5 {would run into} Rxf3 {
, but nonetheless White is better here.}) 18... c5 19. d5 $6 {A crazy move;} (
19. Be4 {was normal and I suspect objectively essential.}) 19... Nxe5 20. Nxe5
Bxe5 21. Rfe1 Qg5 22. hxg6 fxg6 23. Ne4 Qh4 24. g3 Qg4 $2 {It's hard to
imagine what Kramnik was thinking with this move - surely he didn't just think
that White's next was impossible?} ({After} 24... Qe7 {the position is
extremely complicated and Black certainly has his trumps, but now he is more
or less lost.}) 25. Nxc5 Bd4 ({Is it possible Kramnik intended} 25... Rf3 {
and only saw} 26. Re4 {too late?}) 26. Re4 Bxf2+ 27. Kg2 {
Black now loses a piece and the game, but it's not over...} Qh5 28. Nxb7 Ba7
29. Rd2 Rf1 $5 {This doesn't alter the evaluation, but in practical terms it's
an excellent try.} 30. Kxf1 $2 (30. Rh4 Qg5 31. Rd1 Rf2+ 32. Kh3 {was the winning sequence, but it's not easy to see in the closing stages of a rapid game.})
30... Qh1+ 31. Ke2 Rf8 32. Rf4 Qg2+ 33. Kd1 Qg1+ 34. Ke2 Qg2+ 35. Kd1 Qg1+ 36.
Kc2 {Brave but unwise in my view; a queen against an exposed king is a
formidable object in rapidplay.} Rc8+ 37. Qc3 Rxc3+ 38. bxc3 Be3 39. dxe6 $5 (
39. Rd1 Qg2+ 40. Kb3 Bxf4 41. gxf4 exd5 42. Nd6 {
keeps more men on the field, but the h-pawn is an issue.}) 39... Bxd2 40. Kxd2
Qg2+ 41. Kc1 Qxb7 42. Bxg6 Qe7 43. Bc2 (43. Bf7+ Kg7 {actually only puts the
bishop offside. One has to sympathize with Mamedyarov; it does look as though
White must be able to give the bishop check that is all he needs, but it
doesn't work out like that.}) 43... Qa3+ 44. Kb1 Qxc3 45. Re4 Kf8 46. e7+ Ke8
47. Re6 Qb4+ 48. Kc1 $2 {Going too far;} ({after} 48. Ka1 {
Black can only give perpetual.}) 48... Qc4 {Black is now winning since he can
keep the bishop from giving check while at the same time winning tempi to
advance his pawns.} 49. Re3 a5 50. Kd2 Qxa2 51. Kd1 Qa1+ 52. Kd2 Qd4+ 53. Ke2
Qg4+ 54. Kf2 a4 55. Be4 Qe6 56. Bd3 Qc6 57. Be2 Qf6+ 58. Kg2 Qg5 {. --- Conclusion: This line tends to lead to a set-up which is a cross between the Meran
and Moscow systems; Black shouldn't have too many problems.} 0-1

[Event "Groningen"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1996.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Sokolov, I."]
[Black "Short, N."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D55"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "64"]
[EventDate "1996.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 e6 2. c4 Nf6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bxf6 Bxf6 7. Rc1 ({
The text or} 7. e3 O-O 8. Rc1 {is the main line.} ({Instead} 8. Bd3 {
allows Black to equalize a bit too easily with} dxc4 9. Bxc4 b6 {: for example,
} 10. O-O Bb7 11. Rc1 Nd7 12. Bd3 c5 {
. White must continue the 'fight for the tempo' even in this context.})) 7...
O-O 8. e3 a6 {A cunning move, introducing ideas of either a Meran-style
extended fianchetto with ...dxc4 and ...b5, or perhaps ...c6 and ...b5.} 9. Qc2
{It seems to me that this is the only move which really fights against Black's
idea of ...dxc4.} ({As usual after 8...a6 (Capablanca used to be very dogmatic
about this, and the game A.Rubinstein-S.Takacs, Budapest 1926, certainly gave
material for his view) some players have tried to show that ...a6 isn't such a
good move in the Carlsbad structure by exchanging on d5 here. Black has never
experienced much trouble, though, basically because experience has shown that ...a6 isn't such a drawback in the Carlsbad structure (Rc1 isn't actually such
a great move either: b1 is the square), and also because he hasn't had to
waste time with his queen's knight the way he does in a true Exchange
Variation. A model game for Black's attack on the kingside is G.Rajna-U.Boensch, Polanica Zdroj 1987 (although both Boensch and Vaganian have played
several interesting games from this position; including at least one
demonstration of 'how Spassky tricked Korchnoi' by Boensch):} 9. cxd5 exd5 10.
Bd3 c6 11. O-O Re8 ({it's possible that an immediate} 11... Nd7 {
is more accurate, since if White's next move is} 12. Qb3 {
Black might prefer Vaganian's} Qb6 ({to Short's} 12... Re8 13. e4 dxe4 14. Nxe4
Nf8 {, which in the recent game I.Saric-N.Short, European Club Cup, Kemer 2007,
left Black equalizing with a little care, but in a very prospectless position})
) 12. Na4 Nd7 13. b4 Be7 14. Qb3 Bd6 15. Nc5 Nf6 16. Rfe1 Qe7 17. a3 Ne4 {
(Black's plan is absolutely typical of these structures)} 18. Bxe4 dxe4 19. Nd2
Bf5 20. Nc4 Rad8 21. a4 (21. Nxd6 {
looks natural, but the rooks come to the kingside and are very dangerous after}
Rxd6 22. Red1 Rg6 23. g3 Bg4 24. Rd2 Bf3 25. Qc4 Rd8) 21... Bg4 22. Nd2 Qh4 23.
Nf1 Bc8 24. b5 Bxh2+ 25. Nxh2 Rd5 26. f4 (26. Nf1 Rh5 27. Ng3 Qh2+ 28. Kf1 Bg4
{is crushing}) 26... Rh5 27. Nf1 Qh1+ 28. Kf2 Bh3 29. Re2 (29. gxh3 Qf3+ 30.
Kg1 Rxh3 {and mate}) 29... Qxg2+ 30. Ke1 Qxf1+ 31. Kd2 Qf3 32. Nxb7 Bg4 33.
Rce1 axb5 34. Nd6 Rf8 35. axb5 Rd5 36. Nc4 Rxb5 37. Qa2 Rfb8 38. Kc3 Be6 39.
Qa3 Qh5 40. Nd2 Qd5 {0-1.}) ({Practice has also seen:} 9. Bd3 {
also enables Black to demonstrate the point of his play in classical style with
} dxc4 10. Bxc4 Nd7 11. Ne4 ({an attempt to prevent ...b5 and ...c5;} 11. O-O
b5 12. Bd3 c5 {is easy for Black}) 11... c5 ({11...b6 and} 11... Be7 {
are also good moves, although in the latter case it is necessary to brave some
complications after} 12. Qc2 b5 13. Bd3 {, and now} f5 $1 14. Qb3 Rf7 $1 {
is necessary in order to avoid being tied down,} ({and not} 14... fxe4 15.
Qxe6+ Rf7 16. Qxe4)) 12. Nxf6+ Qxf6 13. O-O {, and now in J.Speelman-Xu Jun,
Subotica Interzonal 1987, Black should have played...} (13. Be2 $5 b6 14. b4 $5
{was a characteristic Speelman suggestion, but I don't believe it: Black ought
to be able to consolidate at least adequately after} cxb4 15. O-O Ra7) 13... b6
({whereas in the game} 13... cxd4 $6 14. Qxd4 Qxd4 15. Nxd4 {
gave White a little pressure}) 14. Qa4 ({or} 14. dxc5 Nxc5 15. b4 Ne4 16. Bd3
Bb7 17. Rc7 Nd6) 14... Qe7 {with equality (Speelman).}) ({Also often played is
} 9. a3 {when Black has a choice:} -- (9... dxc4 10. Bxc4 Nd7 {isn't any different from 9 Bd3 dxc4 as far as I can see - having a3 in doesn't help White much.
}) ({. More often, however, Black has continued} 9... c6 10. Bd3 (10. e4 dxe4
11. Nxe4 c5 $1 12. Nxc5 Nc6 {was fine for Black in A.Mikhalchishin-H.Sobura,
Karmina 1987; as usual White wants to watch out for d4 if he goes e4 without
first moving the queen, so as to have Rd1, but rarely is this so starkly
illustrated as here}) 10... Nd7 11. O-O b5 {, when White's most dangerous plan
was supposedly shown in A.Karpov-N.Short, Brussels 1986:} (11... dxc4 {
is still fine}) 12. cxd5 cxd5 13. Ne2 {('!' according to Podgaets)} Bb7 14. Bb1
Re8 15. Qd3 g6 16. Rfe1 Rc8 17. Rxc8 Qxc8 18. h4 e5 19. dxe5 Nxe5 20. Nxe5 {
, although it seems to me that Black would have been fine after the natural
recapture} Bxe5 {, in view of the line} 21. h5 Qc4 22. Qd2 ({or} 22. hxg6 Qxd3
23. Bxd3 Bxb2) 22... Qh4 23. f4 Bxb2 24. hxg6 fxg6 25. Bxg6 Rxe3 26. Qxe3 Qxe1+
{, with at least perpetual.})) (9. c5 {
is always a move to think about after ...a6, but here} b6 {
is fine since White can't really maintain c5:} 10. b4 Nc6 11. a3 bxc5 {
is easy for Black after either} 12. bxc5 ({or} 12. dxc5 Bxc3+ {and ...e5})
12... Rb8 {.}) (9. Qb3 {can be met either with} c6 ({or} 9... dxc4 10. Bxc4 b6)
10. Bd3 b5 11. cxd5 cxd5 12. O-O Bb7 {.}) 9... c6 10. Bd3 (10. e4 $5 {
is suggested but untried. It seems to me that probably Black's best reply is}
c5 (10... dxe4 11. Qxe4 c5) ({and} 10... dxc4 {are clearly both very possible})
11. e5 Be7 12. cxd5 {, and now either} cxd4 ({or} 12... exd5 {.})) 10... b5 11.
c5 ({At this point Short makes a remark I find very difficult to understand in
'ChessBase Magazine'. 'This caught me by surprise. Somehow I had been
expecting} 11. cxd5 {. I suddenly woke up from my deep coma and realized why I
normally have my knight on d7 in positions like this.' It seems to me that the
point of playing ...b5 before ...Nd7 was precisely that in the structure after
cxd5 cxd5 the knight would rather be on c6, where it has more active
possibilities on the queenside than on d7.}) ({Later} 11. b3 $5 {was proposed,
and Piket's notes to a later encounter with Short (where Short avoided 10...b5)
suggested that this might have been what he would have played. I don't really
understand White's idea, though; it seems to me that Black has more useful
moves to play while keeping the tension than White. Black has useful moves in ...Nd7 and ...Bb7, and if White's going to play c5 or cxd5 then b3 is just a
wasted tempo, while otherwise I'm not sure what he's doing after} Nd7 12. O-O
Bb7 {.}) 11... Nd7 12. e4 (12. O-O e5 13. dxe5 Nxe5 14. Nd4 Nxd3 15. Qxd3 Qc7 {
with equality was given by Short; possibly the point of his remark about ...
Nd7 was that if Black had that move in before ...b5 then he would be there
first with ...e5, rather than needing to react to White's e4.}) 12... e5 (12...
dxe4 {has been universally despised, although it's not so clear to me that the
sort of position which arises after, for example,} 13. Bxe4 Bb7 14. Rd1 b4 15.
Na4 Qc7 16. O-O a5 17. Rfe1 Rad8 18. h3 Rfe8 {is truly so terrible for Black.})
13. exd5 (13. dxe5 {leaves White with some difficulty in maintaining equality:}
Nxe5 14. Nxe5 Bxe5 15. O-O (15. exd5 Bxc3+ 16. Qxc3 Re8+ {is worse}) 15... dxe4
16. Bxe4 Qc7 17. g3 Bh3 18. Rfe1 Rfe8 {isn't much, but you'd rather be Black.})
13... exd4 14. Ne2 (14. Ne4 $6 {
is the alternative, after which Short gives the impressive line} cxd5 (14...
Ne5 {is also possible and about equal}) 15. Nxf6+ Qxf6 16. O-O Nb8 $1 17. -- ({
, when the point is that} 17. c6 $6 {doesn't achieve anything good after} Bg4
18. c7 Nd7) ({, or} 17. a4 {
, although now I rather prefer the ambitious and unclear} Bg4 $5 ({to Short's} 
17... bxa4 {, since I don't understand what Black intends to play after} 18. c6
{here, because after} Bg4 19. c7 Nd7 {White has the annoying} 20. Qxa4 {.})))
14... Qa5+ $1 {The only good move;} ({
otherwise White would get what he wanted, for example after} 14... cxd5 15. O-O
Ne5 16. Nfxd4 {.}) 15. Qd2 b4 $5 {Aiming for the c5-pawn;} ({
and much better than the alternative} 15... Qxd2+ {which Nigel damned with the
faint praise of 'perhaps not as stupid as it looked'! Still,} 16. Kxd2 cxd5 17.
Nfxd4 Ne5 18. b3 {looks a little better for White to me, whereas in the game
White has problems to solve.}) 16. Nfxd4 {
White is already in more trouble than appears at first sight.} ({In his notes
at the time (made of course before computers were strong) Short gave many
variations after} 16. a3 Nxc5 17. Bb1 {('!' - Short), but with the aid of a
machine it is not hard to determine that Black is all but winning after} Nb3
18. Qd3 bxa3+ 19. Kf1 Rd8 20. Qxb3 (20. Re1 a2 21. Qh7+ Kf8 22. Bxa2 Bf5 23.
Qxf5 Qxa2 {is another computer variation; Black is winning here also}) 20...
axb2 21. Rxc6 {, which Short understandably gave as 'unclear'.}) ({
In fact I think White is taking the wrong pawn; his best chance was} 16. dxc6
Nxc5 17. O-O Bg4 18. Nexd4 Bxf3 19. Nxf3 Nxd3 20. Qxd3 Bxb2 {with a very sharp
position, where I suspect Black is better, but certainly this would take a bit
of demonstrating.}) 16... Nxc5 17. Bb1 ({White's problem is that he doesn't
have time simply to castle since 17...cxd5 will just leave Black a pawn up,
and both pawn captures on c6 are very dangerous:} 17. Nxc6 Nxd3+ 18. Qxd3 Qxa2
{is just better for Black}) ({while} 17. dxc6 {
leads to a very sharp position after} Bxd4 18. Nxd4 Nxd3+ 19. Qxd3 b3+ 20. Qd2
Re8+ 21. Kd1 (21. Ne2 $2 Rxe2+ 22. Kxe2 Bg4+ 23. f3 Re8+ 24. Kd1 Rd8 {
wins the queen}) 21... Qh5+ 22. f3 bxa2 {.}) 17... cxd5 18. O-O Qb6 {Intending 
to meet 19 Qc2 with 19...Ne4. Black is essentially simply a pawn up here, and
the rest of the game is not much of a fight.} 19. Rfd1 Bb7 20. Qc2 Ne4 21. f3
Rfc8 22. Qd3 Rxc1 23. Rxc1 Nd6 24. Kh1 (24. Qh7+ Kf8 {
achieves nothing; Next is ...Nb5 and the pin kills White.}) 24... g6 25. b3 Re8
26. h3 a5 27. Rd1 Ba6 28. Qd2 Bxe2 29. Nxe2 Qf2 30. Bd3 Nf5 31. Nf4 Qxd2 32.
Rxd2 Bg5 {. --- Conclusion: 8...a6 seems like a very good way for Black to
unbalance the game in preference to the main move 8...c6, which we turn to
consider in the next game.} 0-1

[Event "Vitoria Gasteiz"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2007.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kasimdzhanov, R."]
[Black "Ponomariov, R."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D55"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "71"]
[EventDate "2007.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bxf6 Bxf6 7. e3 O-O 8. Rc1
c6 {A more solid continuation. Black simply defends the d5-pawn in order to
play ...Nd7; thereafter he will aim at ...dxc4 and ...e5.} 9. Bd3 {The 'fight
or the tempo' is now over, since Black has indicated he won't be playing for ...c5 anyway, so White might as well get on with development.} Nd7 10. O-O dxc4
11. Bxc4 e5 {The basic position of the variation.} 12. h3 {This little move
brought the variation to prominence after Kasparov's use of it in the 23rd
game of his 1985 match with Karpov, and subsequently in the 1986 match too.
Kasparov remarks astutely that the line looks harmless in the computer era,
but that in the pre-silicon age it was nowhere near so easy for Black to shake
off White's nagging pressure.} ({Previously White had been playing} 12. Bb3 {
, but after} exd4 13. exd4 Re8 14. h3 Nf8 {Black equalizes easily, for example}
15. d5 Bd7 {.}) ({The object of White's changed move order, with} 12. h3 {
, is to keep b3 free to meet} exd4 13. exd4 Re8 {with} 14. Qb3 {.}) (12. Ne4 {
is a particularly tame option: Black can play many moves, but the method of
choice seems to be} exd4 13. Nxf6+ Nxf6 14. Qxd4 (14. Ne5 {could be tried;} d3 (
{or} 14... Be6 15. Bxe6 fxe6 16. exd4 Qd5) 15. Qxd3 Qxd3 16. Nxd3 Re8 {
is probably about equal, but White has something to play for at least}) 14...
Bg4 {, when White has no prospect of eking out even the tiniest advantage.}) ({
Finally, as we were going to press,} 12. d5 {
was tried in V.Kramnik-T.Radjabov, 5th matchgame (rapid), Kazan 2011, where}
Nb6 13. b3 Bf5 ({certainly} 13... Nxc4 14. bxc4 Bg4 {is a more uncompromising
choice and perhaps a better one; White can entomb the bishop with} 15. h3 Bh5
16. g4 Bg6 17. e4 {, but this carries undoubted risk and commitment: ...Be7
and ...Qa5 will leave Black active on the queenside and the dark squares, and
there's always a timely ...h5 to consider}) 14. dxc6 bxc6 15. e4 Bg4 16. Be2 {
gave White a definite pull on account of the c6-weakling, although Black was
never in too much danger during his long defence due to the presence of
opposite bishops (brought about by an exchange on f3).}) 12... exd4 13. exd4 ({
White is committed to the isolated d-pawn in view of} 13. Nxd4 Nb6 {
, so he might as well keep pieces on the board.}) 13... Nb6 14. Bb3 Re8 15. Re1
Bf5 16. Rxe8+ ({Later it became apparent, according to Stohl, that White's
only way to fight for the advantage is} 16. g4 {
(admittedly in an analogous position with ...a5 and a3 included):} -- ({
. I suggest the calm reply} 16... Bg6 17. Qd2 Qd7 18. Qf4 Rad8 19. Rxe8+ Rxe8
20. Rd1 {, as in S.Halkias-T.Michos, Greece 2003. Black is solid here, but
still needs to be accurate; in the game his} Qd8 ({
he had a number of better alternatives, of which} 20... Nd5 {
is perhaps the most clear-cut; neither} 21. Bxd5 ({nor} 21. Nxd5 cxd5 22. Ne5
Qe6) 21... cxd5 22. Ne5 Qe6 {offers White a great deal}) 21. Kg2 Qb8 {
proved rather misguided after} 22. Qxb8 Rxb8 23. Ne5 {.}) ({
. Black can also play Kramnik's solid} 16... Be6 17. Bxe6 Rxe6 18. Rxe6 fxe6
19. Qe2 Qe7 20. Re1 Re8 {(B.Gelfand-V.Kramnik, Dortmund 1997), although I feel
he has to be a little more careful than White here.}) ({
. Possible too is Kasimdzhanov's} 16... Rxe1+ 17. Qxe1 Bd3 {
, when the critical move is very much} 18. Ne5 (18. Ne4 Bxe4 19. Qxe4 Nd5 20.
Bxd5 cxd5 21. Qf5 Qb6 {was equal in J.Piket-R.Kasimdzhanov, Vlissingen 2001})
18... -- ({. Kasimdzhanov gave} 18... Qxd4 19. Nxf7 {
, but in the variation he gives,} Kf8 ({here} 19... Nc4 20. Ne2 Qe4 21. Rxc4
Qxe2 22. Qxe2 Bxe2 23. Re4 Ba6 24. Nxh6+ Kh7 25. Nf7 Bxb2 {
is also a little shaky for Black}) 20. Rd1 Re8 21. Qd2 c5 22. Nxh6 c4 23. Nf5
Bxf5 24. Qxd4 Bxd4 25. Rxd4 cxb3 {, White has} 26. Rf4 {, almost winning.}) ({
. In my opinion Black should play} 18... Bxe5 19. dxe5 c5 (19... Qg5 20. e6
fxe6 21. Qxe6+ Kh7 22. Rd1 Bg6 {is equal according to Kasimdzhanov, but after}
23. Qd6 {I don't think Black has quite reached full equality}) {. After this I
think Black has little difficulty in demonstrating full equality: for example,}
20. Rd1 c4 21. Bc2 Qd4 22. e6 Re8 {.})) ({. Even the computer's} 16... Bh7 17.
Ne5 Re7 {is not to be despised.})) 16... Qxe8 17. Qd2 Qd7 18. Re1 {White doesn't have to play this, which is simply going to lead to an exchange of rooks;} (
18. Qf4 {is possible too.}) 18... Nd5 {The text move was introduced by Karpov
after the 1986 match, in which he suffered in this variation with 18...Nd7
(with an earlier ...a5 and a3 in), among other moves, and so deserves
considerable respect, but probably the 18...a5 line is more reliable. I chose
this game because it is the most recent high-level clash in the line, rather
than any conviction that 18...Nd5 is better than alternatives.} ({Black has an
approved continuation here, which was first played by Paul Van der Sterren (a
considerable QGD expert), and has led to quick draws in many grandmaster games.
This begins with} 18... a5 {, when White has tried:} 19. -- (19. Qf4 g5 20. Ne4
gxf4 21. Nxf6+ Kf8 22. Nxd7+ Nxd7 23. Ne5 Nxe5 24. Rxe5 Bg6 25. d5 a4 {
has proven to be equal in lots of games.}) (19. Ne4 Bxe4 20. Rxe4 a4 21. Bc2 a3
22. bxa3 {as in E.Bacrot-D.Marciano, French League 1999, should have been met
with Donev's} Rxa3 23. Bb3 Nd5 24. Ne5 Qf5 {.}) (19. a4 Nd5 {
leads to similar variations to the game.}) ({. Black's main point is} 19. a3
Re8 {(it is important to throw in ...a5 but not ...a4, for a reason we shall
see in a moment)} 20. Rxe8+ Qxe8 21. Qf4 Be6 22. Bxe6 Qxe6 23. Qc7 ({after} 23.
Qb8+ Qc8 {if the a-pawn were on either a7 or a4 Black would now just lose a
pawn, in the latter case after an exchange of queens, but as it is this simply
equalizes}) 23... Nc4 $1 24. Qxb7 Bxd4 $1 25. Nxd4 (25. Qb8+ Kh7 26. Nxd4 {
looks better, but actually after} Qe1+ 27. Kh2 Qxf2 {Black's threat of ...Ne3
is so strong that if White doesn't want to be worse he needs to find} 28. Qc8
Qxd4 29. Qf5+ {with perpetual}) 25... Qe1+ 26. Kh2 Qe5+ 27. g3 Qxd4 {
with complete equality.})) 19. Nxd5 ({After the immediate} 19. Ne5 {
I think Black does best with} Bxe5 (19... Qd6 20. g4 Be6 21. Ne4 Qe7 22. Nc5 {
is annoying}) {, and following} 20. Rxe5 (20. dxe5 Nxc3 21. Qxd7 Bxd7 22. bxc3
Be6 23. Bxe6 fxe6 24. Rd1 Rf8 {is equal}) {, with} 20... Be6 ({
rather than Hjartarson's} 20... Nf6) 21. Ne4 b6 {.}) 19... cxd5 20. Ne5 Qd6 ({
Karpov had played} 20... Qe6) ({and} 20... Qb5 {is possible too, but basically
the position is equal whichever move Black plays.}) 21. g4 Be6 22. f4 Bxe5 ({
The machine regards the text as foolish panic and prefers the cold-blooded} 
22... b6 {and if} 23. f5 Bc8 {
, which is no doubt also possible, but Ponomariov's human move is easier.}) 23.
dxe5 (23. fxe5 Qe7 {is fine for Black, for example} 24. Rc1 h5 {.}) 23... Qb6+
24. Kg2 d4 {Making the draw clear.} 25. Qd3 Bxb3 26. axb3 Rd8 27. f5 Qc6+ 28.
Kf2 Qd5 29. Re4 Re8 30. Qxd4 Qxd4+ 31. Rxd4 Rxe5 32. Rb4 b6 33. Ra4 a5 34. b4
f6 35. bxa5 bxa5 36. b4 {. --- Conclusion: At the top level this variation has
had its day, which was the mid-to-late eighties, but it's as well to remember
Kasparov's words: Black needs to have a clear idea of what he's going to do.}
1/2-1/2

[Event "Dubai (rapid)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2002.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Khalifman, A."]
[Black "Topalov, V."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D37"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "64"]
[EventDate "2002.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Qc2 {A strange move.} ({
White's goal is to achieve an Exchange Variation after} 5. Qc2 O-O 6. cxd5 (6.
Bg5 h6 {produces either Agdestein-Spraggett after} 7. Bxf6 ({
or Serper-Mezentsev after} 7. Bh4 b6) 7... Bxf6) 6... exd5 {and so on, and he
offers Black a plethora of options, including 5...Na6, 5...dxc4, and 6...Nxd5,
simply for the pleasure of introducing slightly different play if Black
chooses. Since he has already played Nf3, White can't even get the most
dangerous form of Exchange Variation, and to cap it off, even after 6...exd5
Black can avoid a true Exchange Variation if he wants with} 7. Bg5 c6 8. e3 Ne4
$5 {. Why White would do this I'm not really quite sure, but 5 Qc2 remains
quite a popular move, and I suggest we meet it in forthright style.}) 5... c5 {
This is always a move to consider after an offbeat Qc2 in the QGD; White's
queen no longer presses on d5 and tends to get in the way on the open c-file.}
({The pawn sacrifice this move entails will not be to everyone's taste, and
apart from the alternatives mentioned above, another very simple way to play
is} 5... O-O 6. cxd5 exd5 7. Bg5 g6 8. e3 Bf5 9. Bd3 Bxd3 10. Qxd3 c6 11. O-O
Nbd7 {, reaching what one might call the Arkell Exchange Variation, dealt with
in the notes to Gymesi-Dreev}) 6. dxc5 ({Since the present game this move has
not seen a top-level outing; the modern preference is for} 6. cxd5 {, but I think Jakovenko effectively defused this in V.Akopian-D.Jakovenko, Elista 2008,
with} cxd4 7. Nxd4 O-O 8. Bg5 h6 9. Bh4 ({Black gets good play after} 9. Bxf6
Bxf6 10. Qe4 $5 ({or} 10. O-O-O exd5) 10... Na6 {, for example} 11. O-O-O Nc5
12. Qf3 Qb6 13. e3 Bd7 14. Kb1 Rac8) 9... Nxd5 10. Bxe7 Qxe7 $1 (10... Nxe7 {
had been much more common}) 11. Nxd5 exd5 12. e3 Nc6 13. Rd1 (13. Nxc6 bxc6 14.
Qxc6 $2 d4 $1 {is too dangerous}) 13... Bg4 14. Nxc6 bxc6 15. Be2 Bxe2 16. Qxe2
f5 17. O-O f4 18. Qf3 fxe3 19. Qxe3 Qxe3 20. fxe3 {with equality; I can't see
White coming up with much of an improvement on this sequence.}) 6... d4 {
Characteristically resolute;} (6... Na6) ({and} 6... Nc6 {
are calmer alternatives.}) 7. Nb5 (7. Na4 {is most simply met by} b6 {
. Black wins his pawn back with a good position, as, for example, in M.Krasenkow-P.H.Nielsen, Copenhagen 2003, which went} 8. e4 ({since} 8. cxb6 axb6
{gives Black too much play to contemplate}) ({and} 8. b4 Na6 {
effectively forks two pawns}) 8... bxc5 9. Bd3 Nc6 10. a3 e5 11. O-O O-O 12.
Bd2 Bg4 {, when Black was a little better already.}) 7... e5 8. Nxe5 a6 9. Na3
(9. Nd6+ $2 {loses in fine Reinfeld style to} Bxd6 10. cxd6 Qa5+ {.}) 9... O-O
{A new move in this game;} (9... Bxc5 10. Nd3 Bxa3 11. bxa3 O-O {
had worked out less well in previous games.}) 10. g3 (10. Nd3 $5 Bf5 {
is no doubt the critical line and doesn't seem to have been played. After
something like} 11. g3 Nbd7 12. Bg2 Nxc5 13. O-O Re8 {there is no doubting
Black's compensation (probably his next move will be ...Nfd7 with the idea of ...Ne5 and perhaps ...Qb6), but one would be more comfortable with a few tests,
of course.}) 10... Qa5+ 11. Bd2 Qxc5 12. Nd3 ({After} 12. Nf3 Bf5 13. Qb3 Nc6
14. Bg2 Ne4 15. O-O Rac8 {
too, as given by Dautov, Black has strong play for his pawn. If now} 16. Rac1 {
then} Qa7 {is a good move, defending b7 and introducing the possibility of ...Nc5. Black doesn't have to prove his compensation quickly - White's major
problem is the fact that he cannot get his a3-knight into the game.}) 12... Qc6
13. Rg1 ({Dautov gave} 13. f3 {as dubious, and said that after} Bxa3 14. bxa3
Re8 {Black had the initiative, yet it seems to me that this is the critical
line. After the plausible continuation} 15. Bg2 Bf5 16. O-O Rxe2 17. Rfe1 Rxe1+
18. Rxe1 Qb6 19. g4 Bxd3 20. Qxd3 Nc6 {White has a number of ideas, and it
seems likely to me that he can claim some advantage, although the position is
complex. I find it rather surprising that White hasn't sought to revisit this
variation.}) 13... Bf5 14. Bg2 Qc8 15. c5 $6 {This probably isn't a very
sensible idea, but White's position is extremely difficult to play, especially
in a rapid game.} ({The trouble, of course, is evacuating his king, which is
not safe even on the queenside: for example,} 15. Qb3 Nc6 16. O-O-O $6 b5 $1 {
(Dautov again),}) ({or} 15. O-O-O Nc6 16. Kb1 Qe6 17. Rge1 Bxa3 18. bxa3 Ne5 {.
}) 15... Nbd7 16. c6 {This was White's idea, of course.} (16. b4 {is met by} a5
{.}) 16... Bxa3 {Not the only move;} ({and certainly} 16... bxc6 17. Qxc6 Qxc6
18. Bxc6 Rab8 {was possible, but Topalov prefers to tempt White into a forcing
sequence which leaves him with difficulties in co-ordinating his pieces.}) 17.
bxa3 Ne5 18. Nxe5 Bxc2 19. cxb7 Qe6 20. bxa8=Q Rxa8 21. Bxa8 Qxe5 22. Bf4 {
This doesn't help, but it's extremely difficult for White to play this
position in practice, unless he's a computer.} ({Dautov suggested} 22. f4 {
, to play Kf2 and connect the rooks, but I'm not sure how much this helps
either after} Qe6 23. Bf3 ({if} 23. Kf2 $2 Be4) 23... Ne4 24. Bb4 d3 {.}) ({
Even the machine's proposal of} 22. Bf3 d3 23. Rc1 Ne4 24. Bxe4 Qxe4 25. Be3 {
looks better for Black to me after} h5 {.}) 22... Qa5+ 23. Kf1 $2 (23. Bd2 Qxa3
{was also good for Black, but this just loses a piece.}) 23... g5 $1 24. Bc1 ({
Since} 24. Bb8) ({or} 24. Bd6 {loses a bishop to} Qd8 {, White is lost.}) 24...
Qc3 25. Kg2 Qc8 $1 {Cruelly trapping the other bishop,} ({
rather than allowing White the modicum of counterplay he would obtain after} 
25... Qxa1 26. Bxg5 {.}) 26. Bxg5 Qxa8+ 27. f3 Qe8 28. Rge1 Nd5 29. Rac1 Qa4
30. Kg1 f6 31. Bd2 Kf7 32. Kg2 Nb6 {. --- Conclusion: This game seems to have
buried 6 dxc5, although I feel it might objectively be ripe for reappraisal.
Black's position is fun to play, but he does have some more solid alternatives
which I've indicated in the notes. Perhaps the solidest of all is 5...0-0;
White doesn't really have any independent options then, and seems to have cut
down his own choices rather than Black's.} 0-1

[Event "Tilburg (rapid)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1994.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Skembris, S."]
[Black "Portisch, L."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D37"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "114"]
[EventDate "1994.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. c4 e6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. e3 {A slippery, transpositional
move, not to be underestimated. It can lead to structures typical of many
openings, including the Queen's Indian, Semi-Tarrasch, Rubinstein Colle and
Queen's Gambit Accepted.} (5. g4 {is an entertaining alternative proposed by
Richard Palliser in the 'Dangerous Weapons' series. It seems rather unsporting
to analyse such a move, so I shall just propose the reply} O-O {.} 6. -- ({
. Richard goes with} 6. Qc2 {
; as so often in the QGD Black's instinctive reply is} dxc4 {, when} 7. e4 Nc6
{is a natural continuation, and now} 8. g5 Nd7 9. Bxc4 Nb6 10. Be2 (10. Ne2 {
was played in the only GM game with 5 g4, L.Bergez-A.Skechachev, Creon 2000,
but after} e5 {White would have been in dire trouble, in view of the line} 11.
dxe5 $2 ({here} 11. Nxe5 Nxe5 12. dxe5 Bb4+ {also loses a piece}) ({, while} 
11. d5 Bg4 {is better but still dreadful}) 11... Nb4 12. Qc3 Nxc4 13. Qxc4 Nd3+
14. Kf1 Bh3+ 15. Kg1 Nxe5) 10... Nxd4 11. Nxd4 Qxd4 12. Nb5 Qd8 13. Qxc7 Bd7
14. Qxd8 Rfxd8 {. Here Richard rather touchingly observes that the game is
'roughly equal'; well, I think most players would rather try Black's side: for
example,} 15. Be3 Bb4+ 16. Kf1 Na4 {, and if} 17. Nxa7 Bc5 18. Bxc5 Nxc5 19.
Nb5 Bxb5 20. Bxb5 Nb3 $1 {.}) ({. The move with the best pedigree is} 6. Rg1 {
, whereupon} c5 7. dxc5 (7. cxd5 Nxd5 8. Bd2 Nc6 9. dxc5 Bxc5 {
is the same thing}) 7... Bxc5 8. e3 {was played in L.Eklund-C.Cranbourne,
correspondence 2003 (a reasonably high-level game), and now it seems to me
that the simplest way was} Nc6 {, and if} 9. cxd5 ({otherwise,} 9. Bd3 dxc4 10.
Bxc4 Qe7) ({or} 9. g5 Ne4 10. cxd5 Nxc3 11. bxc3 exd5) 9... Nxd5 10. Bd2 Qe7 {
. I may be getting all classical and dinosaury here, but it seems to me that
White simply doesn't have a very good position. One can carry out an interesting
thought experiment; if the game had begun 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 c5 5
e3 Nc6, and White had now chosen 6 Rg1 Be7 7 dxc5 Bxc5 8 g4 0-0 I think most
people would feel White had treated the opening a little flippantly, but the
same position is reached after 8...Nc6 in our line. Anyway, I don't think
Black has too much to fear here.})) 5... O-O 6. Be2 ({With this move (or} 6.
Bd3 {) White allows Black to lead play into a sort of Queen's Gambit Accepted
in which White has taken on c4 in two stages, and consequently Black has
almost gained a tempo over that opening.}) ({A more principled alternative is} 
6. b3 {, which generally transposes to the 4 e3 Queen's Indian. The line which
is hallowed by time is} c5 7. Bd3 Nc6 8. Bb2 cxd4 9. exd4 b6 10. O-O Bb7 {
, and here we have:} 11. -- (11. Qe2 {is usually spat upon by commentators
(including, I fear, ones as distinguished as Cox, in 'Dealing with d4
Deviations') because of} dxc4 12. bxc4 Nb4 13. Bb1 Bxf3 ({
in my (present) view it would be a great deal more sensible to play} 13... Rc8
14. Rd1 Ba6 15. Ne5 Qc7 {
, when White has to concern himself with how to maintain equality}) 14. gxf3 ({
first of all} 14. Qxf3 {is distinctly better so long as White avoids} Qxd4 15.
a3 Na6 16. Qb7 $2 ({and instead selects} 16. Rd1 {
with reasonable compensation for the pawn}) 16... Bd6 {
when he can almost resign}) 14... Qxd4 15. Ne4 Qd8 16. Rd1 Qc7 17. Nxf6+ Bxf6
18. Bxf6 ({and secondly reversing the move order with} 18. Bxh7+ Kxh7 $2 ({
Black has to play} 18... Kh8 {after which he is worse}) 19. Bxf6 gxf6 20. Qe4+
{is winning for White}) 18... gxf6 19. Bxh7+ Kg7 {with an edge for Black, as
in K.Grigorian-A. Karpov, USSR Championship, Moscow 1976.}) (11. Rc1 Rc8 12.
Re1 (12. Qe2 Re8 {followed by ...Bf8, ...g6 and ...Bg7 is also normal}) 12...
Nb4 13. Bf1 Ne4 14. a3 Nxc3 15. Rxc3 Nc6 {, which first happened in the
historic game P.Keres-V.Smyslov, Zurich 1953, and where White is really best
advised to head for harbour with} 16. cxd5 (16. Ne5 Nxe5 17. Rxe5 Bf6 18. Rh5
g6 19. Rhh3 dxc4 $1 {, as you know, of course}) 16... Qxd5 17. Bc4 Qh5 18. d5 {
.})) 6... dxc4 {The text transposes to easy positions for Black akin to the
Queen's Gambit Accepted.} (6... b6 {would be a Queen's Indian, of course}) ({
and the Semi-Tarrasch-like} 6... c5 {is perfectly viable as well.}) 7. Bxc4 c5
8. O-O (8. dxc5 Qxd1+ 9. Kxd1 Bxc5 {is uninspiring and rather equal.}) 8... a6
({Also possible, and avoiding White's rather tedious dxc5 possibilities, is} 
8... cxd4 9. exd4 a6 {with a rather good QGA IQP; Black was already for choice,
for example, in E.Dizdarevic-Z.Kozul, Sarajevo 2001, after} 10. Ne5 b5 11. Qf3
Ra7 12. Bb3 Bb7 13. Qh3 b4 {.}) 9. Qe2 (9. dxc5 Qxd1 10. Rxd1 Bxc5 11. Ne5 Nbd7
12. Nd3 Be7 13. f3 b5 {
didn't get White anywhere in A.Karpov-G.Flear, Aix-en-Provence (rapid) 2004,})
({so White's main alternative is} 9. a4 {(as in the QGA), although after} Nc6 {
he is rather pressed for a move; in practice the most common has been} 10. h3
b6 {, but this cannot trouble Black. White's problem is that in the QGA he has
had time for Qe2 and Rd1; with this denied him he really doesn't have a plan
at all.}) 9... b5 10. Bd3 Bb7 11. dxc5 {White can't really get by without this
move, since otherwise he is going to be hampered by the fact he has to develop
unambitiously while still leaving Black the chance to isolate his pawn on d4
at a time of Black's choosing.} Bxc5 12. e4 Nbd7 13. Bg5 ({
White might have tried} 13. e5 Nd5 14. Ne4 {
, but he still doesn't have much after, for example,} Qb6 15. Rd1 h6 16. Bd2
Rac8 {. Still, Black might have played 12...b4 to prevent this line.}) 13... h6
14. Bh4 Be7 {Black is now fine; the forthcoming exchange of dark-squared
bishops removes his last worries.} 15. Rad1 Nh5 16. Bg3 $6 {A dubious choice;
sometimes this move is right in such positions, but here it was better to
exchange on e7 and start trying to equalize.} Nxg3 17. hxg3 Qc7 18. Rc1 Qb8 19.
Rfd1 Rd8 20. a3 Bf6 21. Bb1 Ne5 22. Nd2 {A misguided move;} ({you can see why} 
22. Nxe5 Qxe5 {was a bit unappealing, but this was better than leaving Black
with both the active knight and an active queen.}) 22... Qa7 23. Kh2 h5 $1 {
An excellent plan. White is soon in dire straits on the kingside dark squares.}
24. f3 Bg5 25. Rc2 g6 26. Nb3 Kg7 27. Rxd8 Rxd8 28. Nd1 Qb6 {
A slightly strange choice of diagonal.} ({
White would have been sorely pressed to find any moves at all after} 28... Qb8
{, for example} 29. Kg1 Nc4 30. Qe1 Bf6 {.}) 29. Nc5 Ba8 30. b4 Nc4 31. Ra2 Be7
32. Nb3 h4 33. Nf2 (33. gxh4 {drops a piece to} Qd6+ {
, so White has to allow his king to be further opened up.}) 33... hxg3+ 34.
Kxg3 Bd6+ 35. f4 g5 36. e5 gxf4+ 37. Kh2 Nxe5 38. Nc5 f3 39. Qb2 Rh8+ 40. Kg1
Bd5 41. Ra1 Kg8 42. Be4 fxg2 43. Bxd5 exd5 44. Kxg2 Rh6 45. Rg1 Rg6+ 46. Kf1
Bxc5 47. Rxg6+ Nxg6 48. bxc5 Qxc5 49. Qf6 Qc4+ 50. Kg1 a5 51. Qd8+ Kg7 52. Qxa5
Qb3 53. Qd2 Qg3+ 54. Kf1 Nf4 55. Qd4+ Kg8 56. Qc5 Qg2+ 57. Ke1 Qxf2+ {
. Not difficult of course, but a classy touch at the end of a rapid game. ---
Conclusion: Not a classic game - I chose it for the brisk dark-square attack
in the middlegame. There isn't any theory to this line, but it's surprisingly
common at lower levels and it's wise to have an approach in mind against it.}
0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "4. The 5 Bf4 Variation"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "D37"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "9"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 Be7 5. Bf4 {. We now move on to White's
main alternatives to the classical Bg5 set-ups. This move, often attributed to
Blackburne, is of course a perfectly natural developing move. It languished in
obscurity for a long time before Korchnoi rehabilitated it in the 1978 title
match with Karpov, where he won a very impressive game with it, and today is
almost as popular as the classic Bg5 lines. The drawback is that White isn't
paying quite as much attention to preventing ...c5 as he is with Bg5, and
indeed 5...0-0 6 e3 c5 is historically by far the main line. I'm choosing to
avoid that though, because it gives White a choice between some quite
technical lines and some lines with 0-0-0 and either g4 or h4, many of which
have been analysed as far as perpetual check, and I don't think it's a very
practical choice for an amateur repertoire.} *

[Event "Paks"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2008.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Acs, P."]
[Black "Berkes, F."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D37"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "116"]
[EventDate "2008.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Be7 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. Bf4 O-O 6. e3 Nbd7 {This is the
main alternative to 6...c5, and today at least as popular at grandmaster level.
It was favoured in his time by Spassky, and perhaps came most to prominence as
a result of Kramnik's use of it in his 2001 multi-discipline match against
Kasparov. Most likely Black just wants to play ...c5 and take back with the
knight, rather than moving his king's bishop again. In that event he has to be
willing to accept an isolated queen's pawn, since the d7-knight prevents a
recapture with the queen, but as we shall see, he does have some ideas if that
doesn't appeal.} 7. Rc1 {
Probably this isn't the best move, though it's very natural.} ({We'll see} 7.
a3 {in the next game}) ({while} 7. Qc2 {is Lahno-Vaganian, and some less
theoretical but still interesting and thematic moves are seen in the three
games which follow that.}) ({White can also radically cross Black's plan with} 
7. c5 {, which is Van Wely-Yusupov and Kramnik-Ivanchuk.}) 7... c5 8. cxd5 ({
If White doesn't isolate Black's queen's pawn then he can't hope for much: for
example,} 8. a3 cxd4 9. exd4 dxc4 10. Bxc4 Nb6 11. Bd3 Nbd5 12. Nxd5 Nxd5 {
was L.Van Wely-A.Onischuk, Foros 2007; Black should be happy in this IQP
position to have traded a couple of pieces and for White's queen's bishop to
be floating rather ineffectually on f4, to say nothing of the prospect of
trading another rook or two down the c-file.}) ({Likewise,} 8. dxc5 Nxc5 9. a3
(9. Qc2 Nfe4 {is annoying since Black is threatening with ...Nxc3 either to
inflict a horrid weakness or give an embarrassing check on the a5-e1 diagonal
after Qxc3 Ne4; here} 10. cxd5 exd5 11. Bd3 Bf5 {
leaves Black very actively placed}) 9... dxc4 10. Bxc4 Qxd1+ 11. Kxd1 Bd7 12.
Ne5 Rfd8 13. Nxd7 Rxd7+ 14. Ke2 Nh5 {when Black had equalized very easily in R.Ruck-L.Portisch, Hungarian Championship, Heviz 2003.}) 8... Nxd5 {Black generally recaptures with the knight in this line for several reasons: partly because
the f6-knight is simply more passive than the one on c3, but also because it
frees a good square for his bishop on f6, and in this particular version it
also compels White to waste time guarding the a5-e1 line.} 9. Nxd5 exd5 10.
dxc5 ({After} 10. Be2 Qa5+ 11. Qd2 Qxa2 12. O-O Qb3 {
White probably has enough for his pawn, but hardly any more.}) 10... Nxc5 11.
a3 ({This is the problem. Moves like} 11. Be2 {just lose the a-pawn to} Qa5+ {
, so White has to take time out for a non-developing move.}) 11... Bg4 12. Be2
Ne6 13. Be5 Bf6 14. Bxf6 Qxf6 15. Qd2 ({
This is the only point at which White might perhaps deviate: after} 15. Qb3 {
the very natural sequence} Rac8 16. O-O Nc5 17. Qxd5 Rfd8 18. Qa2 Be6 19. Qb1
Bf5 {would lead to a draw by repetition.}) 15... Rad8 16. Nd4 ({This, also
natural, sequence has led to a position which arose in the first major game
with 7 Rc1 c5, A.Miles-R.Sanguinetti, Sao Paulo 1977, where White chose the
characteristically combative (and probably superior) move} 16. Qc3 {, on the one hand braving desperate complications and on the other offering an unbalanced
and probably equalish ending after} Qxc3+ ({
Black preferred to play boldly, and after} 16... d4 17. Nxd4 Rxd4 18. f3 {
he should probably have preferred} Bh3 ({to the game's} 18... Re8) {; after}
19. exd4 Bxg2 20. Rg1 Qh4+ 21. Kd2 Qxh2 {
the overused expression 'chances for both sides' seems fair}) 17. Rxc3 Bxf3 18.
Bxf3 d4 19. Rc1 {
. Acs instead settles for a nasty defensive task in a simplified position.})
16... Bxe2 17. Nxe6 ({It's possible that the alternative} 17. Kxe2 {was better;
computers seem able to ward off Black's tries and reach a more or less equal
ending, but it's terribly hard to be sure in a game that Black doesn't have a
way of disrupting White while he rescues his king with g3 and Kf1-g2 or some
such.}) 17... Qxe6 18. Qxe2 Rfe8 19. O-O d4 20. Rfd1 Qb6 21. Rd3 {
A curious move.} ({The naked eye and machines alike agree that} 21. e4 {
was a better try; after the text the young Hungarian wins the sort of technical 
grind QGD players had better do well at.}) 21... dxe3 22. Rxe3 Rxe3 23. fxe3 g6
24. h3 h5 25. Rc4 a5 26. Kh1 Re8 27. Rc3 Kg7 28. Rd3 Re5 29. Qd2 Qc5 30. Qc3
Qxc3 31. Rxc3 Rb5 32. b3 Kf6 33. Kg1 Ke6 34. Kf2 Kd6 35. g4 h4 36. e4 Rc5 37.
Rd3+ Ke6 38. Ke3 f6 39. Kd2 Rc6 40. Ke3 Rc2 41. a4 g5 42. Kd4 Rg2 43. Rf3 Rg3
44. Rf5 ({It's worth having a look at the pawn ending; after} 44. Rxg3 hxg3 45.
Ke3 Ke5 46. Kf3 g2 47. Kxg2 Kxe4 48. Kg3 {
Black doesn't ineptly go for the race with} Kd4 ({but wins smoothly with} 48...
Ke3 49. h4 gxh4+ 50. Kxh4 Kf4 51. Kh5 Kg3 52. Kg6 Kxg4 53. Kxf6 Kf4 {
, when White looks to be in front but the queenside pawns favour Black:} 54.
Ke6 Ke4 55. Kd6 Kd4 56. Kc7 Kc3 57. Kxb7 Kxb3 {, and wins}) 49. h4 gxh4+ 50.
Kxh4 Kc3 51. Kh5 Kxb3 52. Kg6 {
, which leads only to a tablebase draw with queen and pawn against queen.})
44... Rxb3 45. e5 Rb4+ 46. Kc5 Rf4 47. Rxf6+ Kxe5 48. Rg6 Rxa4 49. Rxg5+ Kf4
50. Rg7 Kg3 51. Rxb7 Kxh3 52. g5 Rg4 53. Rb3+ Rg3 54. Kc4 a4 55. Rd3 a3 56. g6
a2 57. g7 a1=Q 58. Rxg3+ hxg3 {. --- Conclusion: 7 Rc1 isn't the best move and
hopefully now we've seen why. In the next game we'll look at what by common
consensus is White's main try against 6...Nbd7.} 0-1

[Event "World Championship (Game 4), Bonn"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2008.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Anand, V."]
[Black "Kramnik, V."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D37"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "58"]
[EventDate "2008.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bf4 O-O 6. e3 Nbd7 7. a3 {This little move has become White's main line; hopefully the last game demonstrated why
White would choose it.} c5 {The main move, effecting the usual idea behind
Black's last. It does lead to very technical positions, though, and if he
particularly wants a tense game Black can consider various alternatives:} (7...
dxc4 8. Bxc4 Nb6 {is Vaganian's patent manoeuvre; its ideas were well shown in
L.Schandorff-R.Vaganian, German League 2002, after} 9. Bd3 Nbd5 {,} 10. -- ({
, and then} 10. Bg3 Nxc3 11. bxc3 b6 12. e4 Bb7 13. Qc2 Nh5 14. O-O c5 15. d5
Nxg3 16. hxg3 exd5 17. exd5 g6 {, with pleasant equality for Black. Returning
to move 10, we find that White can try to do better:}) ({
. Perhaps better, and certainly endorsed by Schandorff, is the simple} 10. Nxd5
exd5 ({after} 10... Nxd5 $2 11. Bg3 {
Black is hard-pressed to meet the threat of Qc2, hitting h7 and c7}) 11. Qc2
Bd6 12. Bxd6 Qxd6 13. b4 Re8 14. O-O c6 {, when} 15. b5 ({
Schandorff thinks that 'White has a very pleasant position' after} 15. Ne5 {
, but I don't really see that it helps a great deal; Black's most normal
reaction would be} g6 {followed by either ...Ng4 or ...Be6 and ...Nd7; if White
allows a knight exchange he seldom achieves much}) 15... cxb5 $1 16. Bxb5 Bd7 {
equalized quickly in T.Radjabov-V.Bologan, Dortmund 2003.}) ({. Vaganian
t seem that bothered and has carried on being willing to play this position.
In D.Jakovenko-R.Vaganian, Sochi 2005,} 10. Nxd5 exd5 11. Qc2 Bd6 12. Be5 ({
possibly} 12. Bxd6 cxd6 {is Vaganian's idea; after that Black can develop very
easily and play a knight to e4 at some moment, and is fully equal as far as
computers are concerned, though I wouldn't be so sure if an Andersson were
playing White}) {produced a typical Vaganian attacking gem with this opening:}
12... h6 13. h3 Re8 14. O-O-O $5 ({something like} 14. O-O Ne4 15. Rac1 {
would presumably meet more with Schandorff's approval; Black can scarcely avoid
} c6 16. Bxd6 Qxd6) 14... Bd7 15. g4 Ne4 16. Kb1 Rc8 17. Rhf1 Re6 18. Qb3 Bxe5
19. Bxe4 Rb6 20. Qxd5 Bd6 21. Ne5 Be6 22. Qa5 c5 $1 {
, when Black had a considerable initiative and went on to win.}) (10. Be5 {
is also possible. E.Vorobiov-J.Zeberski, Olomouc 2007 went} Nxc3 11. bxc3 b6
12. Qc2 (12. Ng5 {is a computer suggestion; Black has to choose between the
rather unattractive 12...g6 and giving up a pawn with} h6 13. Bxf6 ({
alternatively,} 13. h4 Bb7 14. Qc2 Re8 {
is extremely scary, but maybe no more than that}) 13... Bxf6 14. Nh7 Re8 15.
Be4 Rb8 16. Nxf6+ Qxf6 17. Qa4 Qd8 18. Qxa7 Bd7 {with tenuous compensation,
and so it looks to me as though Black would be well advised to avoid this with
11...h6!?}) 12... h6 13. h4 {and now Black should probably have played} Bb7 {,}
({rather than the nervous} 13... Nd7) {: for example,} 14. Rh3 Bd6 {, and since
} 15. Rg3 $2 Nh5 16. Rg4 $4 f5 {
loses material, it isn't clear how White continues his attack.})) (7... c6 {
is generally not supposed to be so good against Bf4 lines, but a3 is not a
terribly useful move against it, and Black did fine in one recent high-level
encounter:} 8. h3 ({alternatively,} 8. Qc2 b6 ({here} 8... a6 9. Rd1 dxc4 10.
Bxc4 b5 11. Bd3 Bb7 12. b4 a5 13. Rb1 {is the sometimes-quoted L.Psakhis-D.King, London 1994, when Danny embarked on a curious ...Re8 and ...Nf8 effort -
I am tempted to say that this is never good in the QGD, and certainly here
much better was} axb4 14. axb4 Nb6 15. O-O Nc4 {
with reasonable counterplay for Black}) 9. cxd5 cxd5 {
shouldn't be too much of a strain for Black}) 8... b6 ({
Black could also consider either} 8... a6 {, when} 9. c5 b6 10. b4 bxc5 11.
bxc5 Ne4 {was fine for him in I.Simeonidis-A.Schneider, Corfu 2007,}) ({or} 
8... dxc4 9. Bxc4 b5) 9. cxd5 Nxd5 10. Nxd5 exd5 11. Be2 Bb7 12. Qa4 c5 13. O-O
a6 14. dxc5 Nxc5 15. Qc2 Bf6 16. Rac1 Rc8 17. Qb1 Qe7 18. Rfd1 g6 {
, and Black was fine in V.Ivanchuk-A.Volokitin, Foros 2008.}) 8. cxd5 Nxd5 9.
Nxd5 exd5 10. dxc5 Nxc5 11. Be5 {White's bishop is not very effective on f4
and he hurries to bring it to e5 in order to trade Black's bishop once it
comes to f6.} ({The main alternative is} 11. Be2 Bf6 12. Be5 {, when} Bf5 {
would be the game.} ({Black has tried many other ways of defending, most of
them more popular: for example,} 12... Bxe5 13. Nxe5 Ne6 {
, which has been successful, but in my view is not so good because of} 14. O-O
d4 ({this was Black's idea:} 14... Qd6 15. Nf3 Bd7 {
is obviously possible, but White has a slight pull here}) 15. Qd2 dxe3 16. Qxe3
Nd4 (16... Qd4 17. Rad1 $1 Qxe3 18. fxe3 $1 {was also good for White in A.Moiseenko-A.Rychagov, Moscow 2008; the knight is very strong on d6}) 17. Bc4
Nc2 {, and now White should have played} 18. Bxf7+ {in V.Malakhov-A.Riazantsev,
Novokuznetsk 2008; the complications all lead to endings with White a pawn up,
such as after} Kh8 19. Qe2 Nxa1 20. Qh5 g5 21. Ng6+ Kg7 22. Nxf8 Qxf8 23. Bc4
Qf6 24. Rxa1 {.})) 11... Bf5 {A rare move and a significant one,} ({
since it bypasses White's main alternative to} 11... Bf6 12. Be2 {,} ({
which is the immediate exchange,} 12. Bxf6 Qxf6 13. Qd4 {
, when Black's most interesting way to play is} Qd6 (13... Qxd4 14. Nxd4 Bd7
15. f3 Rfc8 (15... Rac8 {
is less accurate since Black needs the f8-square for his king after} 16. Kd2
Ne6 17. Nf5) 16. Kd2 Ne6 {is an endgame where White has a slight edge,
although Black drew fairly easily in G.Kasparov-V.Kramnik, Moscow (blitz) 2001}
) 14. Rd1 Rd8 15. b4 ({or} 15. Be2 Bf5) 15... Ne6 16. Qh4 a5 {, which was
pretty equal in S.Mamedyarov-R.Vaganian, Pamplona 2004; it would be
interesting to know how Anand intended to improve on this.})) ({Black demonstrated another, albeit fairly nihilistic, method in V.Kramnik-M.Adams, London
2009, with} 11... Bg4 12. Be2 Ne6 13. h3 Bxf3 14. Bxf3 d4 15. Bxd4 ({
White has no real prospects either after} 15. exd4 Bf6 {, and now any of} 16.
O-O (16. Bxf6 Qxf6 17. d5 Nd4) ({or} 16. Bxb7 Bxe5 17. Bxa8 Qxa8 18. dxe5 Qxg2
19. Rf1 Rd8) 16... Nxd4 17. Qxd4 Qxd4 18. Bxd4 Bxd4 19. Bxb7 Rab8) 15... Nxd4
16. Qxd4 Qxd4 17. exd4 {, with a position where White's chances to convert his
extra pawn are negligible.}) 12. Be2 Bf6 ({Black also sometimes plays} 12... a5
{followed by ...a4, in which case his stable knight on c5 compensates to some
extent for the d5-weakness and the d4-knight, although White is always a
little better.}) 13. Bxf6 ({White gained a slight advantage after} 13. O-O Be4
({maybe better was} 13... Bxe5 14. Nxe5 Rc8 ({Marin gave} 14... Qd6 {, but I think Black should wait with this; the queen may be better on f6 or even b6, for
example}) 15. Nf3 Be4 16. Rc1 Qf6 {; the point is that} 17. Qd4 Nb3 18. Qxf6
gxf6 {is surprisingly acceptable for Black}) 14. Bxf6 Qxf6 15. Qd4 Qd6 ({or} 
15... Nb3 16. Qxf6 gxf6 17. Rad1 Rac8 18. Bd3 Rfd8 {
, V.Potkin-K.Landa, Ulan Ude 2009}) 16. Nd2 Rfd8 17. Nxe4 dxe4 18. Qxd6 Rxd6
19. Rfd1 Rad8 20. Rxd6 Rxd6 21. Rc1 {
in P.Tregubov-A.Goloshchapov, German League 2008.}) 13... Qxf6 14. Nd4 Ne6 $5 {
This was evidently Kramnik's preparation, and has to be respected as such. I
don't think many players would have made the same move: it's a known idea in
such IQP positions to allow the exchange of the d4-knight for the queen's
bishop; in the Tarrasch, for example, Black frequently doesn't fear Nxe6, but
then he can recapture with the f-pawn. It is certainly true that with his
king's bishop against the knight White has little chance to control d4 (the
IQP's 'stop square', as Kmoch called it), but on the other hand, in the open
position that will result after ...d4 he will always have the bishop against
the knight.} ({The only previous game from this position had seen} 14... Be4
15. Rc1 Ne6 16. f3 Bg6 17. O-O Rac8 18. Qd2 Nxd4 19. Qxd4 Qxd4 20. exd4 Bc2 21.
Kf2 Rc7 {, A.Flumbort-A.Goloshchapov, German League 2007. As Marin says,
Kramnik must have had some reason to deviate from this, but it's fairly
difficult to imagine what it was. It's true that Black still has to display a
bit of care over the next few moves in order to equalize completely, but it's
hard to suppose that Kramnik felt he would be in any danger.}) 15. Nxf5 Qxf5
16. O-O Rfd8 17. Bg4 {An important move; it's useful that White has the option
of Bxe6, and also that he controls c8.} Qe5 18. Qb3 Nc5 19. Qb5 b6 20. Rfd1 ({
Marin points out that if both White and Black intend the plans they follow in
the game, there was something to be said for} 20. Rad1 {
. The reason appears at move 22.}) 20... Rd6 21. Rd4 ({
While if White did want his king's rook on d1 then} 21. Rac1 {
(Marin again) appears more logical: for example,} Rad8 22. b4 Ne4 ({and not} 
22... Ne6 $2 {because after} 23. Bxe6 {Black is forced into the undesirable}
Qxe6 {,} ({in view of} 23... fxe6 24. Rc7 {; such a major-piece-only position
with an IQP is very dangerous for the defender})) 23. Rd4 {.}) 21... a6 22. Qb4
{This is the trouble; the queen has to adopt this rather daft position to
defend b3.} h5 $1 {A fine resolution of the problems.} 23. Bh3 {
If the bishop leaves the diagonal then ...Rad8, ...Ne6 and ...d4 follows.} Rad8
24. g3 g5 $1 {Consequent. Black has to shift the bishop to allow his plan.
With the forthcoming exchanges and Black's central control, the weaknesses on
the kingside don't signify.} 25. Rad1 ({As Marin points out, White could
prevent Black's forthcoming plan only by immuring his rook with} 25. Re1 g4 26.
Bg2 Ne6 27. Rdd1 {, but what does he do after that?}) 25... g4 26. Bg2 Ne6 27.
R4d3 d4 28. exd4 Rxd4 29. Rxd4 Rxd4 {. --- Conclusion: At the moment this
seems quite a good way for Black to play: to me Goloshchapov's method actually
looks better than Kramnik's, but when one World Champion has prepared
specifically for a position and another can't show anything for White, one has
to suppose Black's pretty solid.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Antwerp"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2008.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Lahno, K."]
[Black "Vaganian, R."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D37"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "142"]
[EventDate "2008.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Be7 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. Bf4 O-O 6. e3 Nbd7 7. Qc2 {
Another natural move, which doesn't pose great difficulties for Black according
to theory, although White may find this a good area to look for new ideas.} c5
{Always the first move to think of in reply to an early Qc2 in the QGD,
although here the normal justification - that the reduced pressure down the
d-file permits it - is absent, since with the bishop on f4 rather than g5
Black has enough cover for d5 anyway.} 8. dxc5 {Alternatively:} ({After} 8.
cxd5 {Black has the intermezzo} cxd4 ({nor is there anything wrong with} 8...
Nxd5 9. Nxd5 exd5 10. Bd3 g6 11. dxc5 Qa5+ {
with equality, as in A.Galliamova-B.Spassky, Marbella 1999}) 9. exd4 ({
White has no trick:} 9. Nxd4 e5) ({and} 9. dxe6 dxc3 10. exd7 cxb2 {
are both unwise;}) ({while} 9. d6 dxc3 10. bxc3 e5 11. dxe7 Qxe7 12. Bg3 {
is nothing special either}) 9... Nxd5 10. Nxd5 exd5 {
was equal in G.Kaidanov-D.Campora, Tilburg (rapid) 1993, and many later games.}
) (8. O-O-O {
is a very critical and rarely played move. Black has three alternatives:} -- (
8... b6 {was the choice of a QGD lifer and produced a very interesting game in
S.Williams-J.Parker, British League 2006:} 9. cxd5 (9. Nb5 {
achieves nothing after} Bb7 10. Nd6 Bxd6 11. Bxd6 Re8 {, when Black's lead in
development and ideas of ...Rc8 or ...Ne4 more than make up for the bishops})
9... exd5 10. Ng5 (10. dxc5 Nxc5 11. Kb1 Bb7 {would be a more conventional try,
but Williams lives up to his pre-game war cry: 1 d4 'Do you want a draw?', 1...
d5 'Let's play a few moves.', 2 c4 'It's your last chance.'}) 10... Bb7 11.
dxc5 (11. Bd3 $5) 11... Rc8 $5 (11... Nxc5 12. Bc4 {
gives Black the choice between the tenuous positional queen sacrifice} dxc4 ({
and} 12... g6 13. h4 {with alarming attacking prospects}) 13. Rxd8 Raxd8) 12.
h4 ({something like} 12. cxb6 Qxb6 13. Bd3 h6 14. Nh7 ({
White can't continue like the game with} 14. h4 {in view of} hxg5 15. hxg5 Rxc3
$1 16. bxc3 Ne4) 14... Rfe8 15. Bf5 Rc4 16. Nxf6+ Nxf6 {is dangerous for White}
) 12... Rxc5 13. Bd3 h6 14. Bh7+ Kh8 15. Bf5 Bc6 ({White was threatening} 15...
-- 16. Bxd7 Qxd7 17. Be5 g6 18. Nge4) ({, but perhaps the humble} 15... Kg8 {
was the best way to defend against this threat}) 16. g4 b5 17. Bxd7 Bxd7 18.
Be5 Ne4 19. f3 $6 ({
probably it was objectively time to switch to more materialistic lines with} 
19. Rxd5 Rxd5 20. Qxe4 Bxg5 21. Qxd5 Be6 22. Qxd8 Bxd8 23. Nxb5 Bxa2) 19... --
({, when Jonathan preferred to head for a difficult ending with} 19... Bxg5 20.
hxg5 Qxg5 21. Bf4 Nxc3 22. Bxg5 Nxa2+ 23. Kb1 Rxc2 24. Kxc2) ({, although both
} 19... f6 {, for example} 20. Rxd5 Nxg5 21. hxg5 fxe5 22. gxh6 g5) ({
. and the less scary} 19... Nxg5 20. hxg5 Bxg5 21. f4 Bf6 22. Bxf6 (22. Bd6 Rc8
23. Bxf8 Qxf8 {gives Black decent compensation}) 22... Qxf6 23. g5 Qc6 24. gxh6
g6 {were enticing alternatives.})) ({. The untried} 8... Qa5 {
would transpose to Pelletier-Kramnik below after} 9. dxc5 ({
but also it's not entirely easy to see what Black's next move is after} 9. Kb1
{: I don't fancy} Nb6 ({while after} 9... a6 {even} 10. Qd2 {is annoying}) 10.
Ne5 cxd4 11. Rxd4 {much}) 9... Nxc5 {(a significant point in itself, since in
that move order perhaps Black should prefer 8 dxc5 Nxc5 9 0-0-0 Bd7).}) (8...
cxd4 9. Rxd4 {is dangerous.} -- ({. A nasty cautionary tale was P.Drenchev-G.Ginsburg, German League 2005, which I think we have space to give in full:} 
9... Nc5 10. Ng5 g6 11. h4 b5 12. h5 b4 13. hxg6 hxg6 14. Be5 Bd6 15. Rh6 Nce4
16. Qxe4 $1 {1-0.}) ({. Instead} 9... Nb6 10. e4 {is also troublesome}) ({, but
} 9... Qa5 10. cxd5 ({the problem with 9...Nc5 was that it relinquished
control over e5, whereas after Sakaev's move Black can meet} 10. Ng5 {with} h6
11. h4 Bc5 {, followed by ...e5, so White has to switch to less caveman methods
}) 10... exd5 11. Bd3 Nc5 {enabled Black to equalize in the game T.Radjabov-K.Sakaev, Khanty-Mansiysk 2009.}))) (8. Rd1 {doesn't have so much point:} cxd4 9.
exd4 (9. Rxd4 Qa5 {is much less effective with the king on e1}) 9... dxc4 10.
Bxc4 Nb6 11. Bd3 Nbd5 (11... Bd7 {
is fine also; White's set-up isn't so effective for an IQP position}) 12. Nxd5
{was seen in S.Bromberger-O.Heinzel, Augsburg 2007, and now it seems to me}
Qxd5 ({was more effective than the game's} 12... exd5 {.})) 8... Nxc5 9. Be2 {
Again there are alternatives:} ({The} 9. a3 {
of S.Ivanov-M.Grabarczyk, Lubniewice 1994, should have been met with} Nfe4 {
, which is thematic when White wastes time developing his kingside like this;
White finds it hard to prevent either an annoying check or else contracting a
horrid weak c3-pawn after the coming ...Nxc3.}) (9. O-O-O {
is more popular than on move eight for some reason:} -- (9... Qa5 10. Kb1 (10.
Ng5 $5 {as in M.Notkin-M.Shur, Moscow 1997, is best met with} h6 11. h4 Rd8 {
, when sooner or later White has to go backwards}) 10... Bd7 11. Ne5 Ba4 12.
Nxa4 Nxa4 13. cxd5 Nxd5 14. Nc4 Qb4 15. Be5 b5 16. a3 Nac3+ 17. Ka1 Qc5 18.
Bxc3 Nxc3 19. Qxc3 bxc4 20. Qxc4 Qf5 {
was equal in Y.Pelletier-V.Kramnik, Zurich (simul) 1999.}) ({. Vaganian prefers
} 9... Bd7 {, when} 10. Ne5 (10. cxd5 Nxd5 11. Nxd5 exd5 12. Rxd5 Rc8 13. Kb1
Ba4 {is too dangerous for White}) 10... Rc8 11. Kb1 (11. Nxd7 $2 Ncxd7 {
followed by ...Nb6}) 11... Qe8 $1 12. f3 (12. Nxd7 {still gives nothing:} Ncxd7
13. Qa4 Nb6 14. Qxe8 Rfxe8 15. cxd5 Nfxd5 16. Nxd5 Nxd5 {
, I.Stohl-S.Lputian, Istanbul Olympiad 2000}) 12... Ba4 (12... Na4 13. Nxd7
Nxc3+ 14. Qxc3 Nxd7 $1 {is fine}) 13. Nxa4 Nxa4 14. Qd2 Nb6 15. Rc1 Nh5 {
equalized in V.Epishin-R.Vaganian, German League 2001.})) (9. cxd5 Nxd5 10.
O-O-O Bd7 $1 {takes play back into a line considered in 'b', above.}) 9... dxc4
10. Bxc4 a6 11. Rd1 (11. Ne5 {is well met by} Nh5) ({but I don't quite know
why Lahno wanted to commit the a1-rook to this square. After} 11. a4 {
Black can develop with ...Bd7 and ...Qa5, although I'm not sure about this: in
M.Illescas Cordoba-F.Vallejo Pons, Dos Hermanas 2003, after} Bd7 12. O-O Qa5 13.
Ne5 Rac8 {it seems to me that White could have done better with} 14. Rfb1 {
at once , meeting} ({rather than first} 14. Qe2 Rfd8 15. Rfb1 Nce4) ({
, although here} 14. Rfd1 {is also very dangerous: for example,} Rfd8 15. b4
Qxb4 16. a5 b5 17. Rdb1 Nd3 18. Rxb4 Nxb4 19. Qb3) 14... Qb4 {with} 15. Rd1 {.}
) ({Thus I think Black would do better after} 11. a4 {
to follow Vaganian in the main game with} b6 {followed by ...Qe8 and ...Bb7.})
11... Qe8 12. a4 ({
If White allows ...b5 he isn't going to get much: for example,} 12. Be2 b5 13.
b4 Ncd7 14. a3 Bb7 15. O-O Rc8 16. Qb3 Nb6 {.}) 12... b6 13. O-O Bb7 14. Ne5 {
Otherwise Black will unravel with ...Rd8, a rook exchange and ...Qa8, but in
any case White has nothing.} Nfe4 15. Nxe4 Bxe4 16. Qe2 Kh8 ({
I must say I don't quite understand the objection to} 16... Qxa4 {
, but it's clear that Black has equalized.}) 17. b3 f6 18. Nd3 Bxd3 19. Bxd3 e5
20. Bg3 Nxd3 21. Qxd3 b5 22. Ra1 Qc6 23. Rfc1 Qb7 24. Qf5 Rad8 25. axb5 axb5
26. h4 Rd2 27. h5 h6 28. Rd1 Qc8 29. Qf3 Rxd1+ 30. Rxd1 b4 31. Qe4 Qe6 32. Rd3
Rc8 33. Kh2 Rc3 34. Qg6 Bd6 35. f4 e4 36. Rxd6 $2 {I don't know the
circumstances of this game, but this move loses a position which would have
been equal;} ({i.e. after} 36. Rd4 {, whether because of time-trouble, because
Lahno needed to win, or because she simply misjudged the positions now arising.
}) 36... Qxd6 37. Qe8+ Kh7 38. Qxe4+ Kg8 39. Be1 Rc8 40. Bxb4 Qd7 41. Kg3 Kh8
42. Kh4 Re8 43. Qd4 Qf5 44. Bc3 Qc2 45. Qd2 Qxb3 46. Bd4 Qd5 47. Qf2 Rb8 48.
Qc2 Qe6 49. Qg6 Kg8 50. Kg3 Rb5 51. Kh4 Kf8 52. Qc2 Ra5 53. Bc5+ Kg8 54. Bd4
Ra8 55. Qg6 Rc8 56. Qb1 Qf7 57. Qf5 Rd8 58. Qg4 Rd7 59. Qf5 Rc7 60. Qb1 Qe8 61.
Qb3+ Kh8 62. Qb1 Rc8 63. Kg4 Rc4 64. Kh4 Qc6 65. Qg6 Rc1 66. Kh3 Rh1+ 67. Kg3
Kg8 68. Bb6 Qb5 69. Qc2 Qxb6 70. Qc8+ Kf7 71. Qd7+ Kf8 {. --- Conclusion:
White's 0-0-0 ideas are dangerous for the unprepared, but otherwise 7 Qc2
isn't the most pertinent move for White to play.} 0-1

[Event "German League"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2002.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Gabriel, C."]
[Black "Vaganian, R."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D37"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "74"]
[EventDate "2002.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bf4 O-O 6. e3 Nbd7 7. h3 {This move 
is directed against a plan with ...c6 and so forth as part of a 'battle for
the tempo', but if Black plays as he does against 7 a3 it turns out that h3 is
less useful in a couple of ways; first it doesn't control b4, and secondly it
actually makes a weakness itself.} c5 8. dxc5 {White must isolate the d-pawn;}
({after} 8. cxd5 Nxd5 9. Nxd5 exd5 10. Be2 c4 $1 11. O-O b5 12. Qc2 Bb7 13.
Rad1 Rc8 14. Ne5 f6 15. Nf3 Nb6 {
he was crushed in J.Piket-V.Kramnik, Monte Carlo (rapid) 2000.}) 8... Nxc5 9.
cxd5 Nxd5 10. Nxd5 exd5 11. Be5 ({
The lack of back-up on the a5-e1 diagonal makes itself known after} 11. Be2
Qa5+ ({or} 11... Ne6 12. Be5 Bb4+ 13. Bc3 Bxc3+ 14. bxc3 b6 {
, as given by Dautov}) 12. Kf1 Ne4 {.}) 11... Ne4 12. a3 {
A necessary precaution after all;} (12. Bd3 $6 Qa5+ 13. Ke2 Bd7 $1 {, eyeing a4
or b5, gave Black the initiative in E.Postny-V.Golod, Tel Aviv 1999,} ({
but here less good is} 13... Be6 14. a3 Rfc8 15. Re1 Qd8 16. Kf1 {
, as in G.Kallai-A.Rustemov, German League 2001.})) 12... Bh4 13. g3 ({Instead
} 13. Nxh4 Qxh4 14. g3 Qg5 15. Bd4 (15. Qxd5 Bd7 $1 16. Rc1 Rae8 {
gives Black at least adequate compensation}) 15... Qf5 16. Qe2 (16. f3 Nxg3 17.
Rg1 Nh5 {defends}) 16... Bd7 17. h4 Bb5 18. g4 Bxe2 19. gxf5 Bxf1 20. Rxf1 f6 {
was comfortable for Black in V.Korchnoi-R.Vaganian, Istanbul Olympiad 2000.})
13... Bf6 14. Bd4 $6 {Misguided;} ({although after} 14. Bg2 Bxe5 15. Nxe5 Qf6
16. Nd3 {Black has decent play either with Dautov's} b6 {,} ({or perhaps} 16...
Bf5 17. O-O d4 18. exd4 Qxd4 19. Nf4 Nd2 20. Re1 Rae8 {.})) 14... Bd7 15. Be2 (
15. Bg2 {allows} Bb5 {, but now White has to waste still more time to castle.})
15... Rc8 16. h4 Re8 17. O-O Bh3 18. Re1 Rc6 19. Bb5 $2 {Obviously a mistake
as it turns out, although evidently Black had pleasant play in any case.} Bg4
20. Be2 {A sad admission;} ({but} 20. Bxc6 $6 {
gives Black a very strong attack after something like} bxc6 21. b4 Re6 22. Kg2
Bxh4 {(Dautov); White would have to try something like} 23. Ra2 ({since} 23.
gxh4 {loses to} Rg6) {, but} 23... Rg6 24. Nxh4 Bxd1 25. Nxg6 Bb3 26. Rb2 hxg6
27. Rxb3 Qc8 {is very nice for Black.}) 20... Bxf3 21. Bxf3 Bxh4 22. Bxe4 ({
The knight has to go: for instance,} 22. gxh4 Qxh4 23. Qe2 $2 Rg6+ 24. Bg2
Rxg2+ 25. Kxg2 Re6 {, and Black wins.}) 22... dxe4 23. gxh4 Qxh4 24. Rc1 Rd6
25. Kf1 Red8 (25... Qh3+ 26. Ke2 Qf3+ {was a draw in view of} 27. Kd2 Rxd4+ {
, but Vaganian plays for more.}) 26. Rc4 Rd5 27. a4 Rf5 28. Qc2 h5 ({Missing} 
28... Qh3+ $1 {(Dautov), when White has to cough up the f-pawn, since} 29. Ke2
Qg4+ 30. Kf1 $2 Rh5 {wins.}) 29. Rd1 Qg4 30. Qe2 Rf3 31. Ke1 h4 32. Kd2 Qg2 33.
Rf1 h3 34. Rc5 g6 35. Qe1 h2 36. Ke2 $4 ({It was still unclear after the reply
} 36. Rc3 {.}) 36... Rxd4 $1 37. exd4 Rd3 {. --- Conclusion: To be honest 7 h3
is not a theoretically significant move and this game could have been omitted,
but one can't see too many attacks by Rafael Vaganian on the black side of the
QGD.} 0-1

[Event "German League"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2003.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Hübner, R."]
[Black "Vaganian, R."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D37"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "116"]
[EventDate "2003.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Be7 4. Bf4 Nf6 5. e3 O-O 6. Nf3 Nbd7 7. Be2 {
A move with some point.} dxc4 ({If Black now continues} 7... c5 8. dxc5 Nxc5 9.
cxd5 Nxd5 10. Nxd5 exd5 {
then White has time to castle and can hope to save on a3 for the moment.}) 8.
Bxc4 Nb6 {Vaganian's pet method;} ({obviously Black could equally well play} 
8... a6 9. a4 c5 10. O-O cxd4 11. exd4 ({or} 11. Qxd4 {when Black didn't have
too many difficulties defending the IQP situation which arose after} Nb6 12.
Bb3 Qxd4 13. Nxd4 Bd7 14. Bc7 Nbd5 15. Nxd5 Nxd5 16. Bxd5 exd5 {
in N.Short-D.Fridman, Gibraltar 2011}) 11... Nb6 {.}) 9. Bd3 Nbd5 10. Be5 ({
In this version} 10. Nxd5 {, as Schandorff suggests with a3 in (see note 'a'
to Black's 7th in Anand-Kramnik) can be met with} Nxd5 {, since after} 11. Bg3
{Black has some resources based on the a5-e1 diagonal: for example,} Bb4+ ({
or perhaps the immediate} 11... c5) 12. Nd2 c5 {.}) ({Meanwhile after} 10. Bg3
Nxc3 11. bxc3 b6 12. e4 Bb7 13. Qe2 c5 14. O-O Nh5 15. Be5 cxd4 16. cxd4 Rc8
17. Rfd1 f6 18. Bg3 Nxg3 19. hxg3 Qc7 {
Black was doing fine in K.Sasikiran-R.Vaganian, Calvia Olympiad 2004.}) 10...
b6 {An interesting point.} ({We looked at} 10... Nxc3 11. bxc3 b6 12. Ng5 $5 {
(with the pawn on a3) in Anand-Kramnik, and maybe Vaganian wants to avoid that.
}) 11. O-O (11. Nxd5 Nxd5 {is still no problem}) ({and} 11. Ng5 $2 h6 {
is nonsense, so White has to continue quietly.}) 11... Nxc3 12. bxc3 Bb7 13. a4
Bd6 14. Bxd6 cxd6 {Evidently Black has equalized comfortably.} 15. a5 bxa5 16.
Qa4 Rc8 17. Rfc1 e5 18. Be2 Nd5 19. c4 Nb6 20. Qxa5 Bxf3 21. Bxf3 exd4 22. exd4
Nxc4 23. Qxd8 $2 (23. Qxa7 {was better; Hübner must have missed something.})
23... Rfxd8 24. Rxa7 Nd2 25. Rca1 (25. Rxc8 Nxf3+ ({if} 25... Rxc8 26. Bc6 $1)
26. gxf3 Rxc8 27. Rd7 {was simpler.}) 25... Nxf3+ 26. gxf3 g6 27. Rb7 Ra8 28.
Rc1 ({White would hardly have lost after} 28. Rxa8 Rxa8 29. Rb6 {
, but nothing tragic has occurred yet.}) 28... Ra5 29. Rcc7 Rf5 30. Rd7 $4 ({
The simple} 30. Kg2 Ra8 31. Rd7 Ra3 32. Rxd6 Raxf3 33. Rb2 {was still okay,
but now White is condemned to an ugly defensive task. It's rare to see a
player of Hübner's standard make such a hash of such a simple drawn endgame.})
30... Rxd7 31. Rxd7 Rd5 {One can only assume that Hübner must have just missed
this move altogether. It's possible White can still draw, but not surprisingly
he didn't make it in the game.} 32. f4 Kg7 33. Kg2 Kf6 34. Kf3 Rxd4 35. h4 Ke6
36. Ra7 Rd3+ 37. Kg2 Rd5 38. Kg3 h5 39. f3 Rc5 40. Ra6 Rb5 41. Kf2 Rb2+ 42. Kg3
Rd2 43. Rb6 Ra2 44. Rb1 Ra4 45. Rb6 Rc4 46. Ra6 Kd7 47. Ra7+ Rc7 48. Ra5 Ke6
49. Rb5 Ra7 50. Rb1 Ra6 51. Re1+ Kf6 52. Rd1 Rc6 53. Rd2 Kg7 54. Rd1 f6 55. f5
g5 56. Re1 Rc3 57. Re7+ Kf8 58. Rh7 g4 {. --- Conclusion: Vaganian's method
seems very good against 7 Be2 or 7 Bd3, and presumably could also be applied
against 7 h3. After 7 a3, though, it is more of a risk.} 0-1

[Event "German League"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2005.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kalinitschew, S."]
[Black "Vaganian, R."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D37"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "103"]
[EventDate "2005.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Be7 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. Bf4 O-O 6. e3 Nbd7 7. cxd5 {
In the style of the Exchange Variation. It makes sense for a few reasons for
Black to exchange the knights in reply; the c3-knight is an important piece in
the Exchange, in which it can often be very effective from c5.} Nxd5 $1 8. Nxd5
exd5 9. Bd3 ({White's main alternative is} 9. Be2 {
, when Black has two good replies:} Bb4+ $1 ({the bishop is on its way to d6
to challenge the f4-bishop anyway, but on its way it lures the white knight to
the inferior d2-square; the alternative is to hunt down White's dark-squared
bishop with} 9... Nf6 10. O-O Nh5 11. Be5 f6 12. Bg3 Nxg3 13. hxg3 {
: for example,} c6 14. Ne1 Bd6 15. Nd3 Qe7 16. Rc1 g6 17. Qd2 a5 18. a3 Kg7 19.
Rfe1 h5 20. Nf4 f5 {, and Black was at least equal in V.Koziak-A.Kveinys,
Polish Championship, Lubniewice 2005}) 10. Nd2 Nf6 11. O-O Bd6 {. Now:} 12. --
({. If the Mozart of chess himself, to say nothing of his 2600 colleague
Tregubov, tells us that this bishop should be traded not for the bishop but
for the knight then perhaps we should listen, but I think most readers would
be more likely to encounter} 12. Bxd6 Qxd6 ({here} 12... cxd6 {is also very
possible: although this recapture in these positions is not played much and
always leaves one with a queasy feeling that one will have to defend until
move 97, it is very difficult for White to show much against the doubled pawns}
) 13. Qc2 {, when Black has a very solid and normal type of Exchange position,
although perhaps White can claim a tiny advantage: for example,} Re8 14. Rac1
c6 15. h3 g6 16. Bd3 a5 17. Nb3 Be6 18. Nc5 Re7 {with rough equality.}) ({
. However, M.Carlsen-E.Alekseev, Moscow 2007, went} 12. Bg5 h6 13. Bh4 c6 14.
Qc2 Re8 ({P.Tregubov-J.Gonzalez Garcia, Merida 2007, had gone} 14... g6 15. f3
Bf5 16. e4 g5 17. Bf2 (17. Bxg5 hxg5 18. exf5 Qc7 {
gives Black dangerous compensation}) 17... Bg6 18. Bd3 dxe4 19. fxe4 Ng4 20.
Nf3 Nxf2 21. Rxf2 Bf4 {with at least equality for Black, in view of} 22. e5 Be3
23. Bxg6 Bxf2+ 24. Kxf2 g4 {: White's play here was not convincing, but
Alekseev prefers to rule out even the possibility of f3}) 15. Rab1 g6 {
, with a further divide:} 16. -- ({
. White has a problem with his queenside advance: for example,} 16. b4 Kg7 17.
b5 ({if} 17. Bd3 Bxh2+) 17... cxb5 $1 {(a rare but noteworthy decision;
sometimes if Black's pieces can flood in down the c-file this is a very
effective response to a minority attack)} 18. Bxb5 Bf5 19. Bd3 Rc8 20. Qb3 Bxd3
21. Qxd3 g5 22. Bg3 Bxg3 23. hxg3 Re7 {, when Black is a little better.}) (16.
Bd3 {can be met either with the immediate} Bxh2+ ({or the calm} 16... Kg7 {
preparing this trick}) 17. Kh1 g5 {.}) ({. Thus} 16. Bxf6 {
was not such a curious decision, but after} Qxf6 17. b4 a6 18. a4 h5 19. b5 ({
it looks as though Carlsen radically underestimated Black's next few moves,
but already he had difficulty in proceeding logically with his queenside
attack, while Black had possibilities on the kingside: for example,} 19. Bd3
Kg7 20. Qc3 h4 21. h3 Bc7 {and Black is slightly better, as indicated by Dautov
}) 19... Bf5 20. Bd3 Bxd3 21. Qxd3 cxb5 $1 ({a hugely instructive moment:
Black wouldn't be too badly off after the more conventional} 21... axb5 22.
axb5 Ra3 {- his activity should enable him to hold without much trouble - but
Alekseev demonstrates that actually Black is better}) 22. axb5 a5 23. Qb3 Qf5 {
Black had the edge; in fairness I should mention that Mozart defended wonderfully from here on to hold the game.}))) 9... c6 ({
Black can play the same way here too: for example,} 9... Bb4+ 10. Nd2 Nf6 11.
O-O Bd6 12. Bxd6 (12. Bg5 $5 {is not necessarily an improved version of
Carlsen-Alekseev, since it's hard for White to move his queen without allowing
...Bxh2+}) 12... Qxd6 13. Qb3 Re8 14. Rfc1 c6 15. Rc3 a5 16. Rb1 g6 17. Qc2 Kg7
18. a3 a4 {with equality in C.Hansen-B.Spassky, Malmo 1998 - notice Black's
last move; one of the advantages of Black taking the knights off with 7...Nxd5
is the possibility of crippling White's pawns on the queenside in this way.
Nonetheless one feels that White must be better off with the bishop on d3 than
e2 in such lines, and if this is Black's best then 9 Bd3 is simply correct,
rather than 9 Be2.}) ({
Another possibility which is stimulated by the bishop on d3 is} 9... c5 10. O-O
({if} 10. dxc5 {then Black is fine after the usual} Nxc5 {,} ({
but he can also consider} 10... Qa5+ 11. Qd2 ({worse is} 11. Nd2 Nxc5 12. Be2
d4 13. exd4 Ne6 14. Be3 Rd8) 11... Qxd2+ 12. Kxd2 Nxc5 {
, when Black's activity compensates for his isolated pawn, for example after}
13. Bc2 b6)) 10... c4 11. Bc2 b5 12. e4 (12. b3 {
might be more challenging; Black shouldn't play} cxb3 {
, that much is clear, but his best move is more difficult to suggest:} ({
the computer is devoted to} 12... Ba6 {
with the idea of forcing an early exchange on c4,}) ({and} 12... Qb6 {
is another possibility})) 12... Nf6 (12... Nb6 {
is also possible, but this move of Vaganian's seems to equalize handily}) 13.
e5 Ne4 {, when R.Kempinski-R.Vaganian, Khanty-Mansiysk 2005, continued} 14. Qe2
Bb7 15. Rad1 a5 16. Nd2 Nxd2 17. Bxd2 Qb6 18. Rfe1 {before ending prematurely
in a draw, just when we were about to find out whether Vaganian was going to
go in for the positional queen sacrifice} Qxd4 ({or something else, possibly} 
18... Bc8) 19. Bb4 Qxd1 20. Rxd1 axb4 {.}) 10. O-O (10. Qc2 {is tempting to
try and force ...g6 before Black's next move can allow ...Nf8. I'm not really
sure why White wouldn't play this;} Qa5+ 11. Nd2 Nf6 {
looks like it misplaces Black's pieces more than White's to me.}) 10... Re8 11.
Qc2 ({This position is more about understanding than specific moves, but I
don't see why White shouldn't just get on with his queenside play with} 11. b4
a6 ({one would think} 11... Bxb4 12. Bxh7+ Kxh7 13. Qb1+ Kg8 14. Qxb4 Nf6 {
would favour White, but maybe it's not so clear}) 12. a4 {. It seems to me
that White would have good chances to achieve a nagging advantage by this
means.}) 11... Nf8 12. Rab1 a5 $1 {Vaganian's accurate and thematic play was
why I chose to show this game. By holding up b4 in this way he forces White to
spend a lot of time if he wants to get his minority attack off the ground.} 13.
a3 a4 $1 {À la Hansen-Spassky, Black prevents b4 altogether.} 14. h3 Ng6 15.
Bg3 Bd6 {Another very thematic manoeuvre. Often in the Exchange Black wants to
exchange these bishops despite his bishop being ostensibly his better one. His
'bad' queen's bishop can be very useful either in attack on the kingside or in
defence, for example on d7 defending a pawn on c6 and holding White's entire
major-piece army at bay while Black's major pieces play on the kingside.} 16.
Bxd6 Qxd6 17. Bf5 $6 {Trading these bishops is often useful for White in the
context of a minority attack; as I said the black bishop is a stout defender
and the white bishop doesn't have much to contribute to a siege of a weak
c6-pawn. But here where White's minority attack is stillborn, he is just
trading an active unit for a less active one at the cost of time.} ({
Dautov suggests instead} 17. Rfe1 {
to aim for e4, but in any case it's clear that Black is fine.}) 17... Bxf5 18.
Qxf5 Re4 $1 {There is also a more specific drawback! The queen is in danger
and Black seizes the initiative.} 19. Nd2 Re6 20. Qd3 Rae8 21. b4 $6 {
This is a typical Exchange QGD position gone wrong for White, and it's worth
experimenting a bit with Black's attacking options.} ({The text doesn't really
help much, but without his normal b4-b5 ideas White is stuck for an active
continuation. Going over to defence with} 21. Nf3 $5 {
might well have been preferable.}) 21... Nh4 $1 22. Kh1 Rh6 23. Rg1 $2 {
White presumably envisaged a set-up with his rooks on g1 and f1, but there's a
problem.} ({It was better to give himself a chance to open the game to offset
the kingside pressure with} 23. Rbe1 {, when Dautov gives the variation} Qf6 ({
perhaps Black does better with the sophisticated} 23... Qd7 24. e4 Rd8 $1 {
, when} 25. e5 {is well met by} Qg4 {followed by 26...Nf5}) 24. e4 Qg5 25. Rg1
Rhe6 {. I'm not sure this is actually so effective after} 26. e5 {, when it see
ms to me that White's newly acquired space on the kingside helps him to defend.
}) 23... Qe6 $1 {
A decisive move; the threat of ...Nxg2 cannot be properly parried.} 24. Nf1 (
24. g4 f5 25. g5 f4 $1 {is the problem, and} 26. Rg4 Rh5 27. exf4 Qe2 {
is the reason why the queen went to e6 and not d7 on move 23.}) 24... Nf3 $1 {
Winning the exchange and concluding the theoretical interest in the game, but
it is surprisingly often the case in the Exchange that a minor piece is as
effective in the short term as a rook, not surprisingly in the absence of any
open lines, and in the remaining play Vaganian slips up in the exploitation of
his material.} 25. Nh2 Nxg1 26. Kxg1 Rg6 27. Nf3 Qc8 28. Rc1 Re4 29. Kf1 h6 30.
b5 Rf6 31. Qc2 Qa8 32. Ne5 Rxe3 $1 {
Giving back the exchange to achieve what should have been a technical task.}
33. Ng4 Ree6 34. Nxf6+ Rxf6 35. Re1 Re6 $6 36. Rxe6 fxe6 37. Qg6 Qc8 $2 {
Vaganian must have been in time trouble.} ({
In the normal course of events he would hardly miss} 37... cxb5 38. Qxe6+ Kh8
39. Qxd5 b4 40. axb4 a3 41. Qa2 Qa4 {(Dautov), when Black is winning.}) 38. b6
$1 {Black can't win anymore; this pawn is too strong.} Qd8 39. Qxe6+ Kh8 40. g4
Qxb6 41. Qc8+ Kh7 42. Qf5+ Kg8 43. Qc8+ Kf7 44. Qf5+ Ke7 45. Qe5+ Kd8 46. Qxg7
Qb1+ 47. Kg2 Qe4+ 48. f3 Qe2+ 49. Kg3 Qe1+ 50. Kg2 Qe2+ 51. Kg3 Qe1+ 52. Kg2 {
. --- Conclusion: This variation is perhaps too simple to give White much
theoretically, but some of Black's ideas in the note to move 9 might be more
convenient to some than the main line in the game.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Wolvega"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2006.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Van Wely, L."]
[Black "Yusupov, A."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D37"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "57"]
[EventDate "2006.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Be7 4. Bf4 d5 5. e3 O-O 6. Nc3 Nbd7 7. c5 {This and 7
a3 are traditionally regarded as White's most challenging moves, and White's
statistics have been excellent in this line over the last few years, although
(pre-Kazan, at any rate!) it hasn't seen as much action at the very highest
levels as 7 a3.} c6 ({Black is going to need to play this at some point,
although he could perfectly well start with} 7... b6 {, since} 8. c6 Nb8 {
is very unclear.}) 8. h3 {A contentious moment. White has a respite before he
needs to start playing moves like b4 and a3, and with the text he cheekily
seeks to gain a semi-useful move.} ({It would be more natural to play} 8. Bd3 {
, but White calculates that Black is anyway going to play ...Ba6, and he
reckons therefore that any tempi spent on moving his f1-bishop will be wasted.}
) ({We will see in the next game that h3 is a move White normally finds useful
at some stage. It also cuts out Black's ...Nh5 option, which we'll see in the
note to Black's 7th move in the next game. However, in the present game we
look at another plan in which White draws Black's rook to the a6-square for a
concrete reason. Normally h3 is a clue that White intends this variation,
since usually Black will be able to win any battle for the tempo over who has
the more waiting moves before the f1-bishop has to move.} 8. b4 b6 {
is only a transposition,} ({and in fact the move order in Van Wely-Yusupov was
} 8... a5 9. a3 b6 10. h3 {.})) 8... b6 9. b4 a5 10. a3 Ba6 ({
Black might well seek to take advantage of the omission of Bd3 by playing} 
10... Ne4 {here ('!' according to Dautov). He hasn't very often done this so
far, but maybe he ought to. After} 11. Nxe4 dxe4 {
we have the following possibilities:} 12. -- ({. The game D.Palo-V.Iordachescu,
Malmo 2005, followed a very natural course with} 12. Ne5 Nxe5 13. Bxe5 f6 14.
Bg3 Qd5 15. Be2 Ba6 16. O-O axb4 17. axb4 Bxe2 18. Qxe2 b5 19. Rfb1 Rfc8 ({
White's idea is Qd1 followed by Rxa8 and Ra1, hoping to seize the a-file;
Dautov suggests that Black should fight against that with} 19... h5 20. Qd1 Kf7
21. Rxa8 Rxa8 22. Ra1 Rxa1 23. Qxa1 g5 24. Qa7 (24. h4 $5 {
might cause more problems}) 24... e5 $1 25. dxe5 h4 26. e6+ Kxe6 {
which may well be splendid, but Black doesn't even need to do that}) 20. Qd1
Kf7 21. Rxa8 Rxa8 22. Ra1 Rxa1 (22... Qd8 23. Qh5+ Kg8 24. Rxa8 Qxa8 25. Qh4 {
is the reason White's plan enables him to win the a-file, but the simplification
means that it doesn't matter}) 23. Qxa1 {
, and now Iordachescu made an inconceivable error with} h6 {, allowing White
to seize the key b7-square for his queen, from where it attacks b7 and also
threatens Bd6, and leaves Black in grave trouble,} ({but after} 23... Qd7 {
White can hardly do anything at all -} 24. Qa8 {can either be met with} Bd8 {
or just ignored;} (24... h6 25. Qh8 {doesn't do White any good.}))) (12. Nd2 {
is something to be avoided in view of} bxc5 13. bxc5 ({after} 13. dxc5 f5 14.
Bc4 {both} Nf6 ({and} 14... Bf6 $5 {
are interesting: for example, after the latter,} 15. Bxe6+ Kh8 16. Rc1 Ne5 17.
Bxe5 Bxe6 18. Bd6 ({here} 18. Bxf6 Qxf6 19. O-O axb4 20. axb4 Rfd8 {
also gives Black a lot of compensation}) 18... Rf7 19. O-O axb4 20. axb4 Rb7 {
, winning the pawn back with an ongoing initiative})) 13... e5 14. Bxe5 (14.
dxe5 Nxc5 15. Nc4 Be6 16. Nd6 a4 $1 {
also gives White trouble in restraining Black's initiative}) 14... Nxe5 15.
dxe5 Qd5 16. Nc4 Qxc5 17. Qc2 Be6 18. Qxe4 Rfd8 {
, and Black's activity gives him at least equality.})) ({
Another move Black might consider is the calm} 10... h6 {, intending after} 11.
Bd3 Ba6 {to have the useful extra move ...h6 in the event White wants to go
for the sharp variations.}) ({
In recent times Black has also taken to sometimes playing} 10... Bb7 {
to avoid the line in this game, intending to proceed with ...Qc8 and ...Ba6,
and prevent any silliness with b5. I haven't covered that move because I can't
really see how Black's supposed to meet} 11. Bd3 Qc8 12. Na4 {, although no-one
seems to agree with me except the young Frenchman Romain Edouard, whose move
this is: R.Edouard-D.Lemos, Cappelle la Grande 2010, went} axb4 13. axb4 Ba6
14. O-O Qb7 15. cxb6 Bxb4 16. Bxa6 Rxa6 17. Qb3 Be7 18. Ne5 Rfa8 19. Nxd7 Nxd7
20. Bc7 {, after which Black naturally lost, and frankly this seems about par
for the course to me. Of course Black can play with ...b5 but without ...Ba6,
but if he has to do that then White must be able to claim a bit of an edge.})
11. Bxa6 ({White could of course continue with} 11. Bd3 {, but this move, in
conjunction with his next, is his most dangerous idea by far.}) 11... Rxa6 12.
b5 {Invariably played;} ({but} 12. Qd3 Qa8 13. b5 {would be an interesting
notion. The computer has great faith in the exchange sacrifice} cxb5 (13... Ra7
14. cxb6 Nxb6 15. Ne5 cxb5 16. Nxb5 Rb7 {
is safer, and probably perfectly reliable}) 14. Nxb5 bxc5 15. Nc7 c4 16. Qc2
Qc6 17. Nxa6 Qxa6 {for Black, and indeed it is more awkward for White to make
his material count in this position than one would imagine. The problem is
that the bishop is stuck in the wrong theatre of war, and that either a3 is en
prise for the whole game, or else White goes a4 and allows ...Bb4, cementing
the passed pawn on c3.}) ({In the pivotal game A.Grischuk-L.Aronian, 8th
matchgame (rapid), Kazan 2011, White settled for the quiet} 12. O-O Qa8 13. Rb1
{, which should be closely compared with the lines considered in our next
illustrative game. After} axb4 14. axb4 Qb7 15. Qc2 Rfa8 16. Ne1 Bd8 17. Nd3
Ra3 {White broke through with the highly thematic} 18. b5 $1 {, but Black
should of course have taken his chance to close lines with ...b5 at some point
over the preceding moves.}) 12... cxb5 13. c6 Qc8 {White's 13th was the point,
of course, and this is the only reply; otherwise the d7-knight has nowhere to
go.} 14. c7 $1 {This move was introduced by Karpov in 2002, and was the
beginning of this variation;} ({previously on the few occasions White had
stumbled into this position he had tried} 14. Nxb5 {
, which gave him an uneasy sort of equality after} Qxc6 15. Nc7 Ra7 16. Rc1 Qb7
17. Nb5 Raa8 18. Rc7 Qa6 19. a4 Rfc8 20. O-O Bd8 {
in A.Rustemov-L.Schandorff, Esbjerg 2001.}) 14... b4 {Alternatives here and at
Black's next turn have been proven inferior; essentially Black cannot allow
the knight on b5 to be cemented in place and thus he needs to get in ...a4 to
cut off its light-squared support.} 15. Nb5 a4 16. Rc1 {A natural move,
overprotecting the c-pawn in order to threaten Bd6. White has also tried two
other moves:} (16. O-O $5 {bravely ignores Black's threat to establish a
protected passed pawn and it would be rude not to oblige:} b3 17. Rc1 Ne4 18.
Nd2 Ndf6 (18... Ra5 19. Nxe4 dxe4 20. Nd6 Bxd6 21. Bxd6 Re8 {was an extremely
plausible alternative; Black can move the queen and take the rook to c8, after
which he has a solid blockade with all his pieces playing and I suspect is
even better}) 19. Nxb3 $6 (19. Nxe4 {
was called for; the play is then complex but approximately equal}) 19... axb3
20. f3 Ra5 21. a4 Rxb5 ({the right idea, but the more accurate} 21... b2 $1 22.
Rc2 Rxb5 23. axb5 Nd6 {would have left White really struggling}) 22. axb5 Nd6
23. Qxb3 Nc4 24. e4 Ne8 25. Rxc4 dxc4 26. Qxc4 Bd6 27. Bxd6 Nxd6 28. Qc6 Nxb5
29. Qxb5 Qxc7 {led to a draw after a short but spectacular struggle in R.Vera
Gonzalez-J.Diaz, Havana 2007.}) (16. axb4 {is a less common but dangerous and
underrated try, whose theory is entirely built about the game I.Sokolov-V.Bologan, Pamplona 2002, and Bologan's detailed notes in 'Informator'. That saw}
Bxb4+ 17. Ke2 (17. Kf1 Ra5 18. Rxa4 Rxb5 19. Qd3 Ra5 20. Rxb4 Ne4 {
(Bologan) is about equal after} 21. Kg1 Ra2 22. Kh2 g5) 17... Ra5 {
, and now we have:} 18. -- (18. Rb1 $6 Ne4 19. Rxb4 $2 (19. Qd3 {
is better, but it's academic}) 19... Rxb5 {
eliminates White's best piece for Black's worst.}) (18. Rxa4 Rxb5 19. Qd3 Ne4 {
had been seen previously, but after} 20. Rc1 Rc5 $3 {
(Bologan) White is left struggling for a draw after} 21. dxc5 Ndxc5 22. Qb5
Nxa4 23. Qxa4 (23. Qxb4 Qa6+ 24. Ke1 Nac5 {is much worse}) 23... Nc3+ 24. Rxc3
Bxc3 25. Bd6 Re8 {.}) (18. Qd3 {
('!' - Bologan; this move was Sokolov's improvement)} Ne4 (18... Qa6 {
is less good:} {Akobian's clever} 19. Bd6 ({but} 19. Rhb1 Qxb5 20. Qxb5 Rxb5
21. Rxa4 Ne4 22. Rbxb4 Rxb4 23. Rxb4 Rc8 {
may not be the clear advantage to White Bologan claims}) {, based on} 19... Rc8
20. Bxb4 Rxb5 21. Ra2 Rxc7 22. Rha1 Rc4 23. Rxa4 Qc8 24. Ra8 Nb8 25. Bd6 Rb2+
26. Kf1 Nfd7 27. Ne1 $1 {with strong pressure, gave White a stable edge in V.Akobian-A.Onischuk, Foxwoods 2008}) 19. Rhc1 {gives Black a number of options:}
-- (19... Qa6 {was Bologan's suggested 'improvement' on the game, which is
strange since he gives a long and impressive line after it, which leaves Black
all but lost!} 20. Nd6 Qxd3+ 21. Kxd3 Bxd6 22. c8=Q Rxc8 23. Rxc8+ Bf8 24. Rc7
Ndf6 25. Ke2 a3 26. Ne5 Rb5 27. Nd3 Rb3 (27... g5 {looks better: for example,}
28. Bh2 Rb3 29. f3 Nd6 30. Be5 Nfe8 31. Ra7 Nc4 32. Ra8 f6 {
, when Black seems to be getting the upper hand if anything}) 28. f3 Nc3+ 29.
Kd2 Nb5 30. Rc8 Na7 31. Ra8 Nb5 {is his analysis, and now} 32. Rc1 {
looks virtually winning,} ({and certainly better than Bologan's} 32. Bg5 {.}))
(19... Qb7 20. Rab1 Be7 21. Nd2 Rc8 22. Nxe4 dxe4 23. Qc4 a3 24. Rb3 {
was the game, which went on} Qd5 25. Qxd5 exd5 {, and now Bologan gives} 26.
Bd6 Kf8 27. Rxa3 Rxa3 28. Bxa3 Bxa3 29. Nxa3 Nf6 30. Nb5 Ne8 31. Rc6 Ke7 32.
Rxb6 Nxc7 33. Rb7 Kd7 {, with equality, which seems fair.}) ({
. I like the computer suggestion} 19... h6 $5 {best - such a typical computer
move; improving the position slightly on the brink of head-spinning
complications, and asking White how he proposes to do the same. After} 20. Rab1
(20. g4 Qb7 21. Rab1 Be7 22. Nd2 a3 23. Nxe4 dxe4 24. Qc4 Rc8 25. Rb3 a2 26.
Ra1 Nf6 27. Bd6 Rxb5 28. Bxe7 Ra5 29. Bxf6 Rxc7 30. Qb4 Qa6+ {
is another instructive line where Black winds up winning}) 20... Be7 21. Nd2 e5
$1 {(in the game this was not possible because Bologan's queen was on b7 and
White could simply have replied 22 Nxe4 dxe4 23 Qc4, since the bishop is
immune because of the threat of c8Q, but here 22 Nxe4? would simply drop a
piece, so Black wins c5 for a knight)} 22. Bxe5 (22. dxe5 g5 23. Bh2 Ndc5 24.
Qxd5 Nxd2 25. Qxd2 Qa6 {looks about equal}) 22... Nxe5 23. dxe5 Nc5 24. Qxd5 a3
25. Rb4 a2 26. Ra1 Ne6 27. Rc4 Qa6 28. c8=Q Rxc8 29. Rxc8+ Qxc8 30. Rxa2 Rxa2
31. Qxa2 Qc6 32. Nd4 Nxd4+ 33. exd4 Qxg2 {
the complications burn out to an unbalanced but level endgame.}))) 16... Ne4 (
16... b3 17. Bd6 {wins the exchange (} Ra5 18. Bxe7 Rxb5 19. Bxf8 {and so on).}
) 17. Nd2 Nc3 {The knight on b5 is public enemy number one, and Black has to
remove it even at the cost of a pawn.} ({After} 17... Ndf6 18. Nxe4 Nxe4 19. f3
{he has no good move: for example,} Ra5 20. fxe4 Rxb5 21. Qxa4 Ra5 22. Qc6 bxa3
23. exd5 Rxd5 ({or} 23... exd5 24. O-O) 24. Qxb6 Qd7 25. O-O Rc8 26. Rc6 $1 {
, as in E.Tomashevsky-A.Riazantsev, Russian Championship, Moscow 2008.
Basically he has traded off the wrong knight: White's d2-knight is not the
enemy; the b5-knight is.}) 18. Nxc3 bxc3 19. Rxc3 b5 20. Qe2 (20. Qc2 Qb7 21.
O-O Rc8 22. Rb1 {, as in L.Fressinet-M.Laznicka, European Club Cup, Ohrid 2009
(and a number of other games), can be met in the same way with} b4 23. axb4
Bxb4 {.}) 20... Qb7 21. O-O Rc8 22. Rb1 Rb6 23. Nf3 b4 24. axb4 Bxb4 25. Rc2
Bd6 26. Rxb6 Qxb6 27. Bxd6 Qxd6 28. Qb5 Rxc7 29. Qxa4 {. --- Conclusion: This
line is really dangerous, but if Black knows what he's doing he can hold his
own, although in practice his score hasn't been so good. In the next game we
see an alternative if Black is unhappy with this line, while the game also
deals with White's quieter plans.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Nice (rapid)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2010.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kramnik, V."]
[Black "Ivanchuk, V."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D37"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "92"]
[EventDate "2010.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bf4 O-O 6. e3 ({In recent times
White has taken to trying to avoid Black's system entirely with either} 6. a3 {
(when} Nbd7 {allows} 7. Nb5 Ne8 8. e3 {without an annoying ...Bb4+)}) ({and} 6.
Rc1 {(when} Nbd7 7. cxd5 Nxd5 $2 {loses c7 and thus forces Black to keep the
knights if he wants to play this way). In both cases Black should switch
course:}) (6. a3 b6 {is the most common top-level reply, leading to a Queen's
Indian position in which White's a3 is not very useful, e.g. S.Mamedyarov-D.Jakovenko, Khanty-Mansiysk Olympiad 2010, went} 7. e3 Bb7 8. Qc2 c5 9. Rd1 Nbd7
10. cxd5 Nxd5 11. Nxd5 exd5 12. Bd3 Nf6 13. dxc5 bxc5 14. Be5 Qa5+ 15. Bc3 Qb6
{with no problems for Black.}) (6. Rc1 {really forces} c5 {
by the pressure on the c-pawn, and now} 7. dxc5 Bxc5 8. e3 Nc6 {is the 6 e3 c5
main line with the rather feeble 8 Rc1. If White now exchanges on d5 then he
can't stop ...d4 with equality, so his most challenging is} 9. a3 {. This was how Grischuk played against Gelfand in Kazan; the approved remedy is Kasparov's}
a6 {and now either} 10. cxd5 ({or} 10. b4 Bd6 11. Bg5 a5 12. b5 Ne7 $1 13. Bxf6
gxf6 14. a4 Bb4 {, P.H.Nielsen-G.Kasparov, Reykjavik rapid 2004}) 10... exd5
11. Bd3 (11. Nxd5 Nxd5 12. Rxc5 Nxf4 13. Qxd8 Nxd8 14. exf4 Ne6 15. Rc4 b5 16.
Rb4 Re8 {'=+' is Kasparov's characteristically sharp point}) 11... Ba7 12. Ne2
Bg4 13. Qb3 Qa5+ $1 14. Kf1 Bb8 $1 {
(A.Beliavsky-A.Barsov, Tripoli 2004) is fine.}) 6... Nbd7 7. c5 c6 ({It is also
possible, and has lately become more fashionable, to set about capturing the
bishop immediately with} 7... Nh5 {. The usual line is something like} 8. Bd3 (
8. Be5 f6 9. Bg3 c6 {doesn't pose too many problems, although Black needs to
be a little wary of capturing on g3 before White castles}) 8... Nxf4 9. exf4 b6
10. b4 a5 11. a3 c6 12. O-O Ba6 (12... Qc7 {
is often played first, but I don't see the need}) 13. Ne5 (13. Bxa6 Rxa6 14. b5
cxb5 15. c6 Nb8 16. Ne5 Bd6 {seems fine for Black}) 13... Nxe5 14. fxe5 Bxd3
15. Qxd3 axb4 16. axb4 bxc5 17. bxc5 f6 {
, and Black was fully equal in R.Edouard-A.Mirzoev, Pamplona 2009.}) ({Notably
} 7... Nh5 {
was Kramnik's invariable choice in the recent Candidates event in Kazan. After}
8. b4 Nxf4 9. exf4 c6 10. Bd3 b6 11. O-O a5 12. a3 {he went with} Qc7 {
before ...Ba6 in A.Grischuk-V.Kramnik, 6th matchgame (rapid), Kazan 2011,
which was quickly agreed drawn. Two games later Grischuk took his match
strategy to a new high by offering a draw immediately with 8 Bd3. It's easy to
dismiss such games because of the format and lack of moves, but to my mind
they still help to show just how solid Black is after 7...Nh5. Moreover, in
the preceding round Radjabov had twice manoeuvred for a bit after} 13. g3 Ba6 {
, but without ever really demonstrating anything for White:} 14. Bxa6 (14. Kg2
{was his second try, in the 8th matchgame, but after} Bf6 15. Bxa6 Rxa6 16. Qc2
Rfa8 17. Rab1 axb4 18. axb4 Ra3 {again White had nothing whatsoever}) 14...
Rxa6 15. Qe2 Rfa8 16. Rab1 axb4 17. axb4 Bf6 18. Rfc1 Ra3 {(Black's model
set-up in this line; notice too how he is much less cramped than in
Grischuk-Aronian in the notes to the previous game, and so b5 breakthrough
ideas are much harder for White to arrange)} 19. Qe1 bxc5 20. bxc5 Qa5 21. Ne5
Nxe5 22. fxe5 Bg5 23. Rc2 Bd8 {, and Black was too active for White to have
any real chance of demonstrating that his was the superior minor piece in T.Radjabov-V.Kramnik, 6th matchgame (rapid), Kazan 2011.}) 8. Bd3 b6 9. b4 a5 10.
a3 ({Having played Bd3 instead of h3 White has another quiet way to play in
Gelfand's favoured} 10. b5 Bb7 {
, but Black doesn't have much difficulty: for example,} 11. cxb6 (11. bxc6 Bxc6
12. cxb6 Qxb6 13. Rb1 Bb4 14. O-O Qa7 15. Nb5 Bxb5 16. Bxb5 Ne4 17. Qd3 Rfc8
18. Rfc1 Bd6 {also led to rapid equality in B.Gelfand-V.Ivanchuk,
Khanty-Mansiysk Olympiad 2010}) 11... Qxb6 12. O-O Rfc8 13. bxc6 Bxc6 14. Rb1
Qd8 15. Qe2 Ne4 16. Rfc1 Ndf6 17. Ba6 Ba3 18. Rc2 Rxa6 19. Qxa6 Ba4 20. Nxa4
Rxc2 {led to equality in B.Gelfand-M.Carlsen, Bazna 2010.}) 10... Ba6 ({
Black could try} 10... Bb7 {as in the note to his 10th move in the last game,
but again White can now prevent ...Ba6 from happening at all, as he did in E.Romain-A.Karpov, Cap d'Agde rapid 2010, with} 11. O-O Qc8 12. Na4 b5 ({
it's easy to feel queasy about this move, but the variations after} 12... Ba6
13. Nxb6 {favour White}) 13. Nc3 Nh5 {. This looks as though it's gone wrong
for Black, but in the game the ex-champion soon obtained the advantage after}
14. Bg5 Bd8 {(a Karpovian move shrieking class)} 15. Bxd8 Qxd8 16. Ne5 g6 17.
Be2 Ng7 18. e4 Nxe5 19. dxe5 d4 20. Na2 {, when White would have found himself
exposed, strangely, on the black squares after} f6 {. Still, I find it hard to
believe that White doesn't have some better way of going about the position
after 13...Nh5 and laughing at Black's bishop on b7.}) 11. O-O {This is White's
quieter way of playing; he allows Black to exchange the light-squared bishops
and stabilize the queenside, and relies on the advantage in space given to him
by his seventh move. If he's going to do that then he gains a tempo by waiting
for an exchange on d3 rather than taking on a6, so consequently he doesn't
gain any time by playing h3 in the opening rather than Bd3, and Kramnik finds
that the most useful move to play at his next turn after all.} Qc8 {Black's usual move; he brings the queen to b7 to connect the rooks and facilitate the
task of fighting for the soon-to-be-opened a-file.} 12. h3 Qb7 {Often the position with 12 h3 arises with White to move after a ...Bb7-a6 two-step, but White
doesn't really have an alternative to moving the queen at some point, after
which ...Bxd3; Qxd3 tends to transpose.} ({
Later Kramnik tried this variation again, and again got nowhere after} 12...
Bxd3 13. Qxd3 Qb7 14. Nd2 ({White has also tried allowing the exchange of all
the rooks and trying to make something of his extra space in an endgame, as,
for example, in A.Riazantsev-D.Jakovenko, Moscow 2009, which went} 14. Rfb1 Ra7
15. Nd2 Rfa8 16. Qf1 h6 17. Qc1 Bd8 18. Nb3 axb4 19. axb4 Rxa1 20. Nxa1 Ne8 21.
Nc2 Bc7 22. Bxc7 Nxc7 23. Ra1 Rxa1 24. Qxa1 bxc5 25. bxc5 e5 {, and was shortly
drawn; Black's play in this game was a model - less accurate performances have
often seen black players getting squeezed in similar endings}) 14... Rfc8 15.
Rab1 axb4 16. axb4 Bd8 17. Nb3 Ra3 18. Qc2 bxc5 19. bxc5 Rca8 {
in V.Kramnik-Wang Hao, Shanghai 2010.}) 13. Rb1 {
Unlike Riazantsev, Kramnik chooses to leave Black in charge of the a-file.}
axb4 14. axb4 Rfc8 $5 {A notable decision. In general Black has a choice in
this structure between playing ...b5 and ...bxc5.} ({With White's bishop and
queen's rook where they are Black is obviously not going to want to open the
b-file, and his most thematic continuation would be} 14... Bxd3 15. Qxd3 Ra3
16. Qc2 (16. b5 cxb5 17. Rxb5 $2 Ne4) 16... Rfa8 {, when} 17. b5 {is still impossible since c5 is hanging. Presumably Ivanchuk thinks that the battle for the
a-file is over (since White is not in practice likely to go back to Ra1 plans),
and instead he mobilizes all his forces and prepares the thematic...Bd8-c7,
fighting against White's active bishop without disconnecting the rooks.}) ({
Meanwhile he must have thought that his move was directed specifically against
White's next, and he grudges the loss of a tempo inherent in} 14... Bxd3 15.
Qxd3 Rfc8 {, although that (without ...axb4) was Mickey Adams' choice in F.Vallejo Pons-M.Adams, Spanish Team Championship 2009, which went on} 16. Qc2
Bd8 17. Rfc1 Bc7 {; this is perhaps Black's paradigm plan, reserving his
choices on the queenside, and led to equality.}) 15. b5 ({
Previously White had tried} 15. Bxa6 Qxa6 16. Qc2 {in I.Cheparinov-E.L'Ami, 
Budva 2009, in which Black again demonstrated the approved plan with} Bd8 17.
Rb2 Qb7 18. Ne1 Bc7 19. Nd3 {
. At this point (and later) L'Ami studiously avoided the obvious} Bxf4 {
, but I don't really understand why: after} 20. exf4 {
(presumably this was what L'Ami feared)} bxc5 21. bxc5 Qc7 {it seems to me
that Black can contest the queenside squares quite easily; if White gets
carried away with a knight and queen invasion on that flank, there is usually
counterplay against d4 and/or the white king.}) 15... cxb5 ({
White's surviving light-squared bishop would be a better piece after} 15...
Bxb5 16. Nxb5 cxb5 17. Rxb5 {than his c3-knight would have been (it is more
stable on d3 and covers c4), so Black has to block his own bishop for the
moment, and because there is a bishop en prise on a6 there is no time to take
first on c5.}) 16. Nxb5 Ne4 17. Ne5 Nxe5 18. Bxe5 bxc5 ({There was a case for} 
18... f6 19. Bf4 bxc5 {, which would have prevented White's next idea. Black
has to give up the queen after either} 20. Nd6 ({or} 20. Nc7 {
, but he's in no great danger in the resulting positions.})) ({However,} 18...
Bxb5 19. Rxb5 Nc3 20. Rxb6 Qxb6 21. cxb6 Nxd1 22. Rxd1 {was losing, of course.}
) 19. Qg4 Nf6 (19... g6 20. Nd6 Qd7 21. Bxa6 Bxd6 22. Bxc8 Rxc8 23. Bxd6 Qxd6 {
was similar, but Ivanchuk feels it will be easier to defend with the bishop.})
20. Bxf6 Bxf6 21. Nd6 Qc7 22. Bxa6 Qxd6 23. Bxc8 Rxc8 24. dxc5 {It seems to me
that with this move White essentially acquiesces to a draw, since now the
bishop acquires greater mobility.} ({
If it had been me I would have thought that greater chances were offered by} 
24. Rfc1 c4 25. Rb7 {; the protected passed pawn is a worry, but White can try
to exchange rooks and perhaps queens, and control the pawn by means of
ensuring that he will always be able to cut off and win it if it advances.
Still, one doesn't know the time situation, and anyway there's a high chance
that Kramnik knows better than me, of course.}) 24... Qxc5 25. Rb7 g6 26. Rfb1
h5 27. Qf4 Qc3 28. Qa4 Be5 {This is the trouble. This bishop is very active
here, with ideas of either mating on the back rank or a sudden ...Bxg3 if
White makes luft with g3. Hence Kramnik's next move. It is safe, by the way,
to ignore various computer suggestions round here, which are predicated on the
belief that White wins the endgame without queens, which is most unlikely.} 29.
g4 hxg4 30. hxg4 Qc4 31. R7b4 Qe2 32. Qd1 Qxd1+ 33. Rxd1 g5 34. Kg2 Kg7 35. Rb5
Rc4 36. Kf3 Kg6 37. Rd2 f5 38. gxf5+ Kxf5 39. Ra2 Rh4 40. Ra8 g4+ 41. Ke2 Rh2
42. Rf8+ Ke4 43. Rb6 g3 44. Rxe6 Rxf2+ 45. Rxf2 gxf2 46. Kxf2 d4 {. --- Conclusion: These quiet variations are fairly risk-free for White, but equally Black
emerges from the opening with a very solid position and can look forward to
equalizing with a little care.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "5. Exchange Variation"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "D35"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "20"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. cxd5 exd5 {. In this chapter we are going to
meet for the first time the Exchange (or Carlsbad as it is sometimes known)
Variation. In most openings the Exchange Variation is a nuisance primarily
because it's tedious. In the Queen's Gambit Declined the problem is more with
its actual strength: the Exchange is perennially popular at all levels of the
game, powerful, easy for White to play, and the subject of many
recommendations in repertoire books. --- Black has a host of methods to meet
the Exchange Variation. The main two lines arise after} 5. Bg5 c6 6. e3 Be7 7.
Bd3 O-O 8. Qc2 Nbd7 {, and now either} 9. Nf3 ({or} 9. Nge2 Re8 10. O-O Nf8 11.
f3) 9... Re8 10. O-O Nf8 {, both of which have masses of theory from these
starting points. Instead I have chosen to recommend two alternative approaches.
The first one has been frequently adopted by Nigel Short, always a model for
QGD players. It is an endgame line somewhat similar to the Berlin variation of
the Ruy Lopez.} *

[Event "Linares"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1992.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Ivanchuk, V."]
[Black "Short, N."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D35"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "69"]
[EventDate "1992.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Bg5 {All but invariably played.} (
{The alternative} 5. Bf4 Bd6 {doesn't help White at all.}) 5... Bf5 {
An exceptionally cheeky move order.} ({Much more typical would be} 5... c6 {
and if} 6. e3 Bf5 {, which we'll hear more about later.}) 6. e3 ({
The question is what happens after} 6. Qb3 {. I imagine that Black plays} Nc6 {
and now a number of quite unexplored things might happen, among them} 7. e3 (7.
Qxb7 Nb4 8. Rc1 Rb8 9. Qxa7 Ra8 {and so forth is a draw}) 7... Na5 8. Qa4+ (8.
Qd1 {is probably more prudent}) 8... c6 9. Bxf6 gxf6 10. Nf3 Qb6 {. It would be interesting to investigate this, but for an all-purpose repertoire the forced
draw is a nuisance, so I have chosen to leave it to the reader. The
significance, however, is that if Black is happy with this and also happy with
the draw, then by playing this move order he can almost force White to play
the endgame line which arises in the game.}) 6... c6 7. Qf3 {This move is
normally considered the only objection to Black's early development of the
bishop. If White simply develops then either he has to allow the bishop
exchange on d3 or let Black keep his bishop where it is and develop freely,
and in neither case can he expect any advantage.} ({Occasionally} 7. Qb3 {
is tried, when} Qb6 ({unfortunately the bold} 7... Nbd7 8. Qxb7 Rb8 9. Qxc6
Rxb2 {, with the idea of} 10. Bb5 Bb4 11. Nge2 O-O 12. O-O Qa5 13. Rfc1 Nb8 $1
{, fails to convince if White begins by inserting the exchange on f6}) 8. Qxb6
axb6 9. Bxf6 gxf6 {is similar to the game, but the doubled b-pawns and
half-open a-file are useful for Black; ...b5 and ...Nd7-b6 will usually follow.
}) 7... Bg6 8. Bxf6 Qxf6 9. Qxf6 gxf6 {Black's structure now looks absolutely
unspeakable, and until the present game White was widely considered simply to
be better. Interestingly the only top-class player who had shown much interest
prior to Short's involvement was Boris Spassky, who came very close to beating
Tal in this line. Spassky and Short famously had training sessions devoted to
the QGD at about this time prior to Short's match with Karpov, so maybe Nigel
got the idea from the old champion. The present game illustrates better than I
could say the compensation Black has for his mangled pawns, so let's see the
game before we speak about that.} 10. Kd2 {This isn't White's most compelling
try, and we'll see other moves in the next two games.} Nd7 11. Bd3 a5 {
The idea of this move is to render White's traditional minority attack more
difficult to conduct by ensuring that if White is to get in b4-b5 he will need
to put a rook on the b-file and cede the open a-file to a black rook, but also
perhaps by advancing to a4 to prevent White's Na4 and/or cement an outpost for
the black knight on c4.} ({The text isn't by any means Black's only choice; in
a later game (B.Gulko-N.Short, 12th matchgame (rapid), New York 1994),} 11...
Nb6 12. b3 Ba3 13. Nge2 Kd7 14. Ng3 Nc8 15. h4 Nd6 16. h5 Bxd3 17. Kxd3 Bb2 18.
Rab1 Bxc3 19. Kxc3 {led to a very similar position to this game, and Black was
also very comfortable. Notice Black's exchange of the king's bishop for a
knight. This is usually to Black's advantage in this line; it ensures that
White will not be able to dominate the weakened 'stop-square' f5. See the game
V.Babula-M.Jirovsky, Czech League 1995, for an example of a black player
failing to make this exchange when necessary and suffering accordingly.}) 12.
Nf3 {Mikhalchishin strongly criticized this move,} ({
and said that White was much better after} 12. f4 f5 13. Nge2 Nf6 14. Ng3 Ne4+
15. Bxe4 dxe4 16. Rac1 {. Black might well have thrown in 14...Rg8 earlier on,
but anyway I think Mikhalchishin was suffering from the optical impression
which affects many players on seeing this line; Black should continue with ...0-0-0 and ...h5, and he isn't worse at all. It's true that the kingside looks
a bit sad, but it is costing White too much energy to maintain it like that,
and sooner or later the bishop will have its say. Allowing f4 and ...f5 to
occur is seldom the way forward for White in this line; see, for example, the
game R.Scherbakov-J.Parker, Hastings 1995.}) 12... Nb6 13. b3 Kd7 14. Ne1 Bb4
15. Nc2 Bxc3+ 16. Kxc3 Nc8 {Notice too the timing of this move. One of Black's
key ideas in this variation is to get the knight to d6 (and not only in this
line but the whole Exchange Variation; see the classic games
Bobotsov-Petrosian and Portisch-Kasparov, expounded amongst other places in
Lars Bo Hansen's book), but often the knight doesn't leave its post on b6
until Na4 has become impossible for White.} 17. Rae1 Nd6 18. f3 Rhe8 {
Reaching a very typical position for this line. It looks as if White ought to
be better, but the trouble is that he doesn't have any pawn breaks that don't
dissolve Black's weaknesses. Many other games in the early 90's demonstrated
that Black has no problems at all in such positions.} 19. Re2 Re7 20. Rhe1 Rae8
21. Na3 b6 22. Kd2 Bxd3 23. Kxd3 f5 {It's apparent that White's wandering
knight on a3 is part of his problem, but even if it were on c3 or f4 there
wouldn't be anything he could do. Going e4 would simply lead to exchanges, and
the mighty knight on d6 is also preventing much by the way of play on the
queenside. It's worth playing around a bit with this kind of position to
convince yourself that this is so if you intend to play this line.} 24. Nb1 c5
25. Nc3 Kc6 26. a4 Re6 27. Rc1 h5 28. Rcc2 h4 29. Rc1 Rg6 30. Rcc2 Reg8 31. Nb1
Ne8 ({Black could have dissolved his doubled pawns at this point with} 31... f4
32. exf4 (32. e4 dxe4+ 33. fxe4 h3 {is the point}) 32... Rf6 {; it looks to me
as though he might even have had pretensions to being better then.}) 32. Nc3
Nc7 33. e4 fxe4+ 34. fxe4 Rg5 35. exd5+ {. --- Conclusion: Model play from the
modern master of this variation. This game repays careful study, but White can
pose greater problems than Ivanchuk did.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Sarajevo"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Sokolov, I."]
[Black "Short, N."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D35"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "38"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 e6 2. c4 Nf6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Bg5 c6 6. e3 Bf5 7. Qf3 Bg6 8.
Bxf6 Qxf6 9. Qxf6 gxf6 10. h4 {A natural reaction, but the problem is that it
weakens White on the g-file. This game leads to another important
position-type for this variation.} Nd7 {
Nigel always ignores the h-pawn in this way.} (10... h5 {is undoubtedly
possible, but this pawn is a long-term structural weakness which is a bit
scary while the position is still quite fluid.}) 11. Nge2 ({In the later E.Bacrot-N.Short, 1st matchgame, Albert 2000, the young Frenchman tried at once} 
11. h5 Bf5 {, but he didn't achieve anything either; following} 12. f3 (12. Nf3
Nb6 13. Nh4 Be6 14. Bd3 O-O-O {is similar to the same plan without h4-h5, and
also doesn't achieve a great deal for White}) 12... Be6 13. Bd3 f5 14. Nge2 Bd6
15. h6 Ke7 16. Kf2 Rag8 {
it was already apparent that Black was not at all worse.}) 11... Bd6 {
Once the h-pawn has moved it is quite natural simply to develop like this and
postpone the knight's trip to b6. Since White can't really contemplate Ng3, he
isn't in any position for the time being to mount a challenge for the f5-square.
} 12. h5 Bf5 13. Nc1 Rg8 14. g3 a5 15. Bd3 Bxd3 16. Nxd3 f5 17. Ke2 Ke7 18.
Rac1 a4 19. Nb1 h6 {. This is the position-type I had in mind. White has
managed to force the exchange of light-squared bishops, but the h-pawn is a
serious annoyance for him, both because it is weak in itself and because its
advance means that should he play f3 (which he really needs to do in order to
achieve anything), his g-pawn will be horribly weak on the open file. White
has no advantage here. --- Conclusion: Black need not fear the early advance
of the h-pawn. True, this forces the exchange of light-squared bishops, but
the weakening of White's kingside enables Black to maintain the balance quite
comfortably.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "2nd matchgame (rapid), Prague"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2007.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Navara, D."]
[Black "Short, N."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D35"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "118"]
[EventDate "2007.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Bg5 c6 6. e3 Bf5 7. Qf3 Bg6 8.
Bxf6 Qxf6 9. Qxf6 gxf6 10. Nf3 {This is the third of White's plans. He aims
first of all to try and dominate the f5-square with his pieces.} Nd7 11. Nh4 ({
White sometimes plays} 11. g3 {first, after which some people think that} a5 {
is terribly accurate, with the point that after} 12. Nh4 a4 13. a3 (13. f4 {
can be met by either} a3 ({or} 13... Bb4)) 13... Be7 14. Bh3 Nb6 15. f4 {
Black has time for} Bc2 {with a safe haven on b3 for the bishop, as in Bu
Xiangzhi-S.Atalik, Mallorca Olympiad 2004. Personally I don't believe in these
plans which involve taking the bishop to the queenside (another example is M.Carlsen-Z.Azmaiparashvili, Khanty-Mansiysk 2005), although it must be admitted
that Black was okay in the Bu-Atalik game. I would prefer the older 11...Nb6
with the same plan as in this game.}) 11... Be7 {White is threatening f4, and
with this move Black readies himself to meet that move with ...f5; it is
almost always better in this set-up to meet f4 with ...f5, rather than playing
...h6 and hiding the bishop on h7, or indeed allowing f5 Bh5 and hoping to
ward off the long-term threat of g4 by tactical means, much though computers
like both of these approaches.} 12. g3 Nb6 {
Thematically preventing ideas of Na4, while preparing a timely ...Nc8-d6.} 13.
Bh3 {This has the drawback of allowing Black's next move, but it isn't quite
apparent how White should continue his plan without allowing that.} ({
An important reference is} 13. f3 a5 ({Nigel always likes to gain space like
this in this line, although a more mundane} 13... O-O) ({or} 13... Nc8 {
was also possible; I don't find ...a5 to be a particularly necessary move,
although obviously Nigel thinks it at least improves Black's position, and it
is possible I'm wrong about this, of course}) 14. Kf2 a4 15. Rc1 Nc8 16. Be2 ({
before Nigel could demonstrate his improvement White deviated with} 16. Ne2 {
in V.Bologan-N.Short, Gibraltar 2011, but after the precise} Ra6 {
could find nothing better than returning with} 17. Nc3 {, whereupon} Ra5 18.
Be2 Nd6 19. Rhd1 Kd7 20. Ng2 b5 {
saw Black maintaining the balance, with a timely ...Nc4 on the agenda}) 16...
Nd6 17. Rhd1 O-O 18. Bd3 {, which was L.Van Wely-N.Short, Wijk aan Zee 2005,
in which Nigel suffered his only defeat in this variation after} Rfe8 ({
the widely recommended} 18... Bxd3 19. Rxd3 f5 {was the normal course, with an
equal position; of course g4 earlier, before White has sufficient control of
f5, is met by ...f5}) 19. g4 {, followed by f4 forcing the exchange anyway,
and Ne2-g3-f5. If Nigel hadn't been a 2700-player playing his pet variation, I
would say 18...Rfe8 was simply a fundamental positional error which permitted
White to squeeze his position with g4 and prevent the programmed ...f5. There
must have been more to it than that, but I'm hanged if I can see what.}) 13...
Nc4 14. O-O-O a5 15. Bf5 {This really doesn't achieve much for White, since he
isn't threatening anything on the kingside and after ...Nd6 is simply going to
have to retreat the bishop and reach the same sort of position as in the Van
Wely-Short game;} ({but} 15. f4 {would be well met by} f5 {, since the pawn
can't be taken and Black's next move will be ...Nd6 (or indeed ...Bxh4, though
before doing this Black needs to check carefully that nothing horrid can
happen along the g-file).}) 15... a4 {The opening is really over now and for
the next few moves the players strengthen their positions in the prescribed
ways.} 16. g4 Rg8 17. h3 b5 18. Ne2 Kd8 19. Bc2 Bd6 20. Nf5 Kc7 21. Nxd6 (21.
Neg3 {would complete White's domination of f5, but could be met with many
moves, including} b4 {, along the lines of Navara's suggestion below} ({or even
} 21... Bxg3) {, setting up some annoying tactical tricks connected with ...b3,
which restrict White's possibilities (} 22. h4 Bxg3 23. Nxg3 b3 {
, for instance).}) 21... Nxd6 {We saw in the Ivanchuk-Short game that Black
doesn't have to be afraid even of this exchange; in fact rooks and a pair of
knights is more or less his ideal material balance.} 22. Nf4 Rae8 ({
Navara proposed} 22... b4 {, with the intention of meeting} 23. Nd3 ({
but exposing the b-pawn like this is very committal and I'm not sure what
Black should play next after the prophylactic} 23. Bd3) {with the sly} 23... b3
{. Nigel prefers to continue positionally.}) 23. Rhg1 Kb6 24. h4 h6 25. Rde1
Rg7 26. Rg2 Bxc2 ({There was a definite case for} 26... a3 {; after} 27. b3 b4
{the possibility of the knight coming to c3 is distinctly annoying.}) 27. Kxc2
f5 {It's not at all clear this was a good idea, although obviously Black's
last few moves prepared it. In general Black seldom wants to exchange both
rooks in this line; one advantage he received in return for his pawn
weaknesses was open files and hence active rooks, and the exchange accentuates
his static targets.} 28. Reg1 Reg8 29. g5 hxg5 30. Rxg5 Rxg5 31. Rxg5 Rxg5 32.
hxg5 Ne4 33. Nh3 {This is an interesting knight endgame. According to Navara
in 'Informator' White is significantly better now, and both players hand the
half-point back and forward in what follows, although the Czech prodigy's
notes are elliptical and a little impenetrable to the non-super GM armed with
a computer.} Kc7 34. f3 Nd6 35. b3 axb3+ 36. axb3 Nc8 37. Nf4 Kd6 38. Kc3 Nb6
39. Nh5 Nc8 40. Kb4 Ne7 41. Ng3 Kd7 42. Kc5 Kc7 43. Ne2 Ng6 44. Nc1 $4 {
Clearly a blunder which allows 44...f4 with advantage to Black, although one
can't criticize players in the last few seconds of a rapid game.} ({
Navara says that White (who has already missed some wins) should win after} 44.
f4 Nh4 ({though he doesn't say how White should tackle the more obvious} 44...
Ne7 {, and in view of the flaw in the line} 45. Nc1 (45. Ng3 Kd7 46. Kb6 Nc8+ {
doesn't obviously achieve anything either}) 45... Nc8 46. Nd3 Nd6 47. Nb4 {
'winning the c-pawn', I don't quite see how White would do that}) 45. Ng3 {.})
44... Nh4 45. f4 Ng2 46. Nd3 Nxe3 47. Ne5 Ng2 48. Nxc6 Nxf4 49. Ne5 Ne6+ 50.
Kxb5 Nxd4+ 51. Kc5 Ne6+ 52. Kxd5 Nxg5 53. Nd3 Ne6 54. Ke5 f4 55. Nxf4 Nxf4 56.
Kxf4 Kb6 57. Ke5 Kc5 58. Kf6 Kb4 59. Kxf7 Kxb3 {. --- Conclusion: This
unexpected endgame variation forces White to solve unusual problems, and is
particularly useful if Black can actually semi-force it with 5...Bf5. Its
interest perhaps lies as much as anything in contemplating the depth of
understanding that led Nigel Short to see that Black is not suffering in a
miserable ending, but in fact has almost equal play. In the pre-computer era
this was a remarkable find. In the next game we turn to White's method of
avoiding this line after the commoner 5...c6 move order with 6 Qc2, which was
Lars Schandorff's choice in his recent repertoire book for White, 'Playing the
Queen's Gambit'.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "German League"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Bareev, E."]
[Black "Boensch, U."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D36"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "78"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Bg5 c6 6. Qc2 ({Given that the
object is to avoid the fearsome set-up described in the introduction to this
chapter, one may wonder whether Black couldn't make this system his sole
weapon against the Exchange. Sadly, the set-up seen here is not really
effective after} 6. e3 Be7 7. Bd3 Nbd7 8. Nge2 Nh5 $6 {
, because White has time for} 9. Bxe7 Qxe7 10. g4 $1 Nhf6 11. Ng3 {(in the normal version White cannot achieve this set-up, both because he has spent a tempo
with Qc2 and because his g-pawn would now hang, and consequently when he does
chase the knight with g4, as we'll see in the next few games, he can't also
manage to send it to f6 and establish his own knight comfortably on g3).}) 6...
Be7 (6... Na6 {is an interesting move, but the variation I am going to
recommend is a great favourite of the black player in this game (a QGD
virtuoso), and also of Lars Bo Hansen, who wrote about it in his 'How Chess
Games are Won and Lost'.}) 7. e3 Nbd7 8. Bd3 Nh5 {This is the distinctive move
of the system. Black radically releases the pressure exerted by the g5-bishop
at the cost of some time.} 9. Bxe7 (9. Bf4 {is possible, but almost never
played; Black should be able to achieve equality with something like} Nxf4 10.
exf4 Nf6 (10... Nb6 11. Nf3 Qd6 12. Ne2 Qb4+ 13. Nc3 Qd6 {is my computer's
idea of how the game should conclude; this is also a possible way for Black to
play}) 11. Nf3 O-O 12. O-O Bd6 13. g3 Re8 {.}) 9... Qxe7 10. Nge2 {In this game
we are going to look at White's (less popular) methods involving kingside
castling.} ({Since} 10. Nf3 {allows} Nf4 {
, White will almost always start such plans with this move.}) 10... Nb6 {
Black also has the plan of ...g6, ...Ng7 and ...Bf5. If White meanwhile
achieves b4-b5 and bxc6, he tends to find in the resulting structure that his
knight would have been better on f3. Still, this is a bit of a nihilistic way
to play for Black, and the text move is extremely sound against a minority
attack plan.} 11. Rb1 ({White does have another plan; which is to play in the
spirit of the main line with Nge2 and f3; thus:} 11. O-O g6 12. Rae1 O-O 13.
Nc1 {(in order to get in f3 White is forced into this regrouping; this is one
of the advantages of Black's set-up)} Be6 14. Nb3 {
. Boensch once played 14...Nd7 here, but I think it makes more sense to go}
Rad8 (14... Rae8 {with similar ideas is also logical}) {. The object of this
is to prepare optimally against White's f3 and e4 idea: for example,} 15. Nc5 {
(if White doesn't do this then the constant threat of ...dxe4 and ...Bxb3
after an e4 break is annoying)} Bc8 16. f3 ({
Black is also well placed to meet a switch of plans with} 16. f4 Ng7 17. Qf2
Bf5 18. e4 dxe4 19. Bxe4 Qc7) 16... Ng7 17. Qf2 Ne6 {
, and White is still nowhere near achieving a successful e4 push.}) 11... g6 ({
Black could also very well play} 11... a5 {. The advantage of meeting Rb1 with
this move instead of waiting for b4 and then playing ...a6 is that Black can
exchange pawns straightaway after b4 and get any counterplay he can manage
going on the a-file, so that it is less easy for White to wait and pick the
optimum moment for b5. It also of course prevents the a5 plan played in this
game, although arguably Black shouldn't worry too much about that.}) 12. b4 a6
13. a4 O-O 14. a5 {A controversial decision - blocking the queenside like this,
especially when e4 is not in the air, can simply free Black's hands and leave
his play on the kingside the dominant feature of the position. Still, if White
is going to play a5 then presumably he ought to do so before ...Be6 is played,
so there is point in doing it now.} (14. O-O Be6 {would reach the commonest
position in this line, which can be achieved by various move orders. White
then achieves nothing with} 15. b5 ({
White was cannier in K.Georgiev-U.Andersson, French League 2000, with} 15. Rfc1
Rfc8 16. a5 Nd7 17. Na4 Re8 {, but even so after} 18. Nc5 Nxc5 19. bxc5 Rad8
20. Rb3 Bc8 {Black had reached another typical minority attack position, where
the bishop on c8 keeps out White's entire army on the queenside, and Black
stands constantly ready for action on the kingside; Black is not worse here at
all either}) 15... axb5 ({Marin's} 15... cxb5 16. axb5 a5 17. Na4 Rfc8 18. Qa2
Nxa4 19. Qxa4 b6 {is another typical method of meeting the minority attack
with a knight on b6, and is also well possible}) 16. axb5 c5 17. dxc5 Qxc5 18.
Rbc1 Rfc8 19. Rfd1 Qb4 20. Rb1 Qa3 {, as in R.Wojtaszek-L.B.Hansen, European
Team Championship, Gothenburg 2005. In such a position White even has to be
careful about too many exchanges; in an endgame with knights and bishops and
Black's king on d6, for example, the b5-pawn would be in constant danger. It's
noticeable how the exchange of dark-squared bishops has given Black's knight
absolute stability on b6, and in an endgame the same is true of a king on d6.})
14... Nd7 15. Na4 f5 {Not obligatory;} ({
Black could also play just with pieces starting with} 15... Ndf6 {
- but natural enough when White's knights are miles from e5.}) 16. O-O Ndf6 17.
Qc1 ({It's not easy to discern the plan behind Bareev's next few moves, but
after the more natural approach to my eye of aiming for f3 and perhaps e4
Black also doesn't have much to fear: for example,} 17. Rfe1 Be6 18. Nc5 Rae8
19. f3 Bc8 20. Nc3 Qg7 21. Qd2 Re7 {
; Black's decision to play ...f5 works well against such a plan.}) 17... Be6
18. Bc2 Ne4 19. Rb3 g5 $5 {Boensch plays ambitiously.} ({
He could have postponed this decision with} 19... Nd6 {
when probably something like the note to White's 17th would have resulted.})
20. f3 Nd6 {A Petrosian knight! (see the game Bobotsov-Petrosian, Lugano
Olympiad 1968, and Hansen's excellent explanation).} 21. Nc5 Rae8 22. Re1 Bc8 {
Black has regrouped perfectly and his play on the kingside gives him at least
equal chances in a practical struggle, although I'm not convinced objectively
that he deserves Baburin's '=+'.} 23. Ng3 Nxg3 24. hxg3 f4 {
Again not the only move, but Black continues to go forwards.} 25. g4 ({
The game is extremely complicated. Baburin marks the text with '?!' and prefers
} 25. gxf4 {; Black might then try either} gxf4 ({or} 25... Rxf4 26. e4 Qg7 27.
g3 dxe4 28. Bxe4 Nxe4 29. Nxe4) 26. e4 Nf5 27. Qxf4 Nxd4 28. Qg3+ {, but it doe
s seem to me that either of these gives White slightly the better prospects.})
25... Qg7 (25... Qf6 {was another idea, with the nasty trick} 26. Qd1 fxe3 27.
Rbxe3 Rxe3 28. Rxe3 Bxg4 $1 {in mind.}) 26. Qd1 Nb5 ({After Baburin's} 26...
Nc4 $5 27. e4 {White is going to be forced to make an exchange sacrifice on e3,
but in the resulting position his solidity leaves him at least equal. In
general if White can stabilize the position he is likely to retain a static
advantage.}) 27. Bd3 h5 28. Bxb5 axb5 29. gxh5 g4 $1 30. exf4 g3 31. Rbe3 {
The struggle reaches its climax.} ({Another option was} 31. Re5 {, when it seems that Black's attack has the power to achieve perpetual check, but no more.
An extremely approximate variation might be} Qf6 32. Qe1 Qh4 33. Qe3 Rxe5 34.
fxe5 Qxh5 35. Rc3 Qh2+ 36. Kf1 Qh1+ 37. Qg1 Qh2 38. e6 Bxe6 39. Nxe6 Re8 40.
Qe3 Qh1+ 41. Ke2 Qxg2+ {, when neither side can avoid perpetual; of course
White in particular has many other tries, but they all seem to lead to the
same result.}) 31... Rxe3 32. Rxe3 Qf6 33. Kf1 Qh4 34. Ke2 Qh2 35. Qf1 Bh3 {
An alarming shot, but not in fact fatal.} 36. Kd2 (36. Kd1 Bxg2 37. Qe1 Bh3 38.
Re5 Bf5 39. Rxf5 Rxf5 {
was another way to make a draw, but no doubt a time scramble was occurring.})
36... Bxg2 37. Qe1 $4 ({White could still hold on with the improbable} 37. Qb1
Bxf3+ 38. Kc3 Bxh5 39. Qe1 Bg6 40. Nd3 {
, when he somehow manages both to rescue his king and control the g-pawn.})
37... Bh3+ 38. Re2 g2 39. Qf2 Qxf4+ {. --- Conclusion: This variation
shouldn't give Black too much trouble. Boensch played va banque in the main
game and won the game of his life, but a more solid approach around move 18
would have produced an entirely different manoeuvring struggle. Bareev too
played ambitiously, and if Black finds the approach in this game uncomfortable
then perhaps he does better to play an early ...a5 (as Lars Bo Hansen, a very
different kind of QGD player, did against Wojtaszek).} 0-1

[Event "Reykjavik"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1988.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Andersson, U."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D36"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "87"]
[EventDate "1988.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

{This is an old game now, but such is Kasparov's authority that it is the one
quoted by most sources and white repertoire books as White's main reply to
Black's system, so it is still the main reference point for the line.} 1. d4
Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 {Always a great favourite of Kasparov's, who
had a colossal score from this position (as from so many others, of course).}
exd5 5. Bg5 c6 6. Qc2 Be7 7. e3 Nbd7 8. Bd3 Nh5 9. Bxe7 Qxe7 10. Nge2 {
In this game and the next we consider the approach which most people consider
White's best in this variation; castling queenside in conjunction with Nge2.}
g6 11. O-O-O Nb6 12. Ng3 {This is one of White's two main approaches; plans
with h3 and g4 are considered in the next game. The reason these two are
White's only popular approaches is that both of them prevent the manoeuvre ...Ng7 and ...Bf5, which would otherwise equalize for Black in short order.} (12.
Kb1 {
is also often played, when Black can 'force' the line played in the game with}
Ng7 {, since ...Bf5 is threatened, and} 13. e4 dxe4 14. Bxe4 O-O 15. Rhe1 Qc7 {
doesn't achieve anything for White.}) 12... Ng7 ({
With this move order a rare but extremely plausible alternative is} 12... Nxg3
13. hxg3 h5 {:} 14. -- ({. If White continues along normal lines then Black
benefits both from the exchange of knights and the opportunity to open lines
with ...h4: for example,} 14. Kb1 Be6 ({or} 14... Bd7 15. Rc1 O-O-O 16. Na4
Nxa4 17. Qxa4 Kb8 18. Rc3 {, and now} h4 $5 ({or Marin's} 18... b6) 19. Ra3 a6)
15. Rc1 {(A.Goldin-G.Vescovi, Buenos Aires 2003), and now not the game's} Kf8
$6 {,} ({but} 15... O-O-O 16. Na4 Nxa4 17. Qxa4 Kb8 18. Rc3 Rc8 {(Black is in
time for this important move before White can force ...b6 and then prevent it
with Ba6 - see Kasparov's 18th, below)} 19. Ra3 b6 20. Rc1 h4 $1 {
, and Black has amply sufficient counterplay.})) (14. e4 dxe4 15. Bxe4 Be6 16.
Rhe1 Qg5+ $1 {is Marin's improvement on a game G-Fish-G.Kern, German League
2005. White is well advised to settle for equality with} 17. Qd2 ({, or} 17.
Kb1 O-O-O 18. Bxg6 Qxg6 19. Qxg6 Bxa2+) ({, since the critical} 17. f4 Qxg3 18.
d5 ({if} 18. Bxg6 O-O-O $1) 18... cxd5 19. Nxd5 Nxd5 20. Bxd5 O-O 21. Bxe6 fxe6
22. Kb1 {leaves him with uneasy compensation for his pawn at best.}))) ({
Instead} 12... Nf6 {is natural, but is not supposed to be good in view of a
plan with f3 and e4: for instance,} 13. Rhe1 Be6 14. f3 O-O-O 15. Kb1 Kb8 16.
Qf2 {, D.Barlov-D.Campora, Bor 1985, although it's not clear this is quite so
tragic as Marin's '+='. Black could also consider castling kingside, although
in either case he does miss the handy h4-square for his queen, and there is a
lot to be said for a knight with access to e6, attacking White's Achilles heel
on d4.}) 13. Kb1 ({White could certainly consider the usual f3 and e4 plan
here as well, although such has been the impact of this game that he seldom
does. Black is in fact better placed to meet it than in the 'normal' Exchange
Variation, for example} 13. Rhe1 O-O 14. f3 Qh4 $5 {.}) 13... Bd7 ({In general
this bishop is best placed here to guard against White's proposed queenside
attack, but if Black dislikes the course of the present game he can also play} 
13... Be6 {and castle kingside}) ({or} 13... h5 {
, keeping his options open. Schandorff's} 14. Rhe1 {then should be met by} Qh4
15. e4 O-O {.}) 14. Rc1 {White has played other moves, but this one,
anticipating queenside castling, is regarded as the best plan by all
authorities.} (14. h4 {is a blow in the air after} O-O-O {
, since not only is White not threatening} 15. h5 {in view of} Bg4 {, but even
h4 and ...h5 hardly improves his position, since he needs to keep his king's
rook and knight where they are after that to keep down both ...Bf5 and ...Qxh4,
so the other plans basically involve e4 either at once or after preparation:})
(14. Rhe1 {is worth meeting carefully,} -- ({
, since in V.Dobrov-M.Kosyrev, Moscow 2002, the obvious} 14... O-O-O 15. e4 ({
superior to} 15. f3 Ne6 16. Qf2 f5) 15... dxe4 16. Bxe4 Qf6 17. d5 Kb8 {
would have given White decided pressure, if he had found the cunning} 18. Qb3 {
, aiming at f7.}) (14... Ne6 {was a better option, to deter White's next; it
is usually worth Black preparing himself in the early stages mainly to
discourage e4 in this variation if he can, either after f3 or directly.}) ({
. Here} 14... O-O {
is also a good move, when White may well feel he wants to play} 15. Rh1 ({if} 
15. e4 Qh4) {, although then} 15... Qh4 {prevents h4 for the time being, and
at worst will leave Black a tempo ahead of the 13...Be6 line after a later ...Be6.})) (14. e4 {is also best met with} O-O 15. e5 ({
Black's next moves are the same in almost any case, for instance} 15. f3 Ne6
16. Qf2 Qh4) 15... Qh4 16. Nce2 Ne6 17. Qc3 f6 {, and Black is doing well.}) (
14. Na4 {would prevent queenside castling, but} Nxa4 15. Qxa4 O-O {
is fine for Black;} 16. h4 {can be well met by} c5 {among many other moves.})
14... O-O-O 15. Na4 Nxa4 16. Qxa4 Kb8 17. Rc3 b6 {White was threatening Ra3,
but this is an important concession. It was the aim of White's last few moves
to force it.} 18. Ba6 ({The bishop is exposed here, but White wants to prevent
...Rc8-c7 (this would be the answer to a move like} 18. Rhc1 {, for instance).}
) ({In J.Timman-N.Short, 11th matchgame, El Escorial 1993, White preferred} 18.
Ra3 Be8 19. Qc2 Rc8 20. Rc1 Bd7 21. Qd2 h5 22. Rb3 ({in his book of selected
games Timman says that the point of his last few moves was} 22. b4 {and that this was the moment for that advance, but it seems to me that after the calm} Ne8
{, coming to d6, White's b4 does not achieve very much}) ({
; in 'Informator' Timman recommended the more prudent} 22. Rac3 {, which is an
improvement on the game, but Black can continue as in the game and has little
to fear}) 22... Ne6 23. Rbc3 h4 24. Ne2 Qd6 25. h3 {
, and at this point Nigel really should have gone for} Qh2 {
. Timman maintained that White retains the advantage after} 26. Rg1 (26. e4
Qxg2 27. Qe3 {
was his other suggestion, but I don't understand what White's idea is after}
Rhe8 {; any e5 advance is met with ...c5}) 26... c5 27. dxc5 Nxc5 28. Ka1 {
, but in this modern age computers make fools of us all - Black has the strong
shot} d4 {, based on} 29. exd4 Nxd3 30. Qxd3 Rxc3 31. Qxc3 Re8 {.}) 18... Ne6
19. Rhc1 Rhe8 {Preparing ...c5;} ({according to Kasparov} 19... c5 20. Qa3 {
was already clearly better for White, although this isn't obvious to lesser
mortals after} Rhe8 21. dxc5 Nxc5 {(} 22. Rxc5 bxc5 23. Qb3+ Kc7 {is extremely
scary, but persuading a computer that White is winning is a different matter).}
) 20. Qb3 {White needs to pay attention to ...c5 ideas.} ({
In D.Kumaran-J.Blauert, Lyngby 1990, White blundered with} 20. Ne2 $2 {, when}
Nc7 {would have been virtually winning: for example,} 21. Nf4 (21. Bd3 c5 {
wins material with the ideas of ...c4 and ...Nb5}) 21... c5 22. Qa3 Bb5 $1 {.})
20... Qd6 {Prudently shoring up c6;} ({but there was a definite case for} 20...
Qf6 {, which Kasparov intended to meet with} 21. Rxc6 (21. Qc2 c5 22. dxc5 Nxc5
{is nice for Black after either} 23. Be2 ({or} 23. Bd3 Rc8) 23... d4 $1) 21...
Bxc6 22. Rxc6 Rd7 ({Black could also play to win with} 22... Qe7) 23. Rxb6+
axb6 24. Qxb6+ Ka8 25. Qc6+ Kb8 {, which is winning according to the great man,
but in fact is a draw (see the comment above about computers), since} 26. Qxd7
$2 Nc7 {defends and leaves Black better.}) 21. Nf1 Ka8 $1 {An excellent move
according to Kasparov, preparing the idea of ...b5 aiming at the bishop.} 22.
Nd2 $6 {Kasparov decides prompt action is needed and characteristically
gambits the h-pawn.} ({A lesser man would have played} 22. Bd3 {
, after which Black should return to his manoeuvre of ...Rc8-c7;} Rc8 23. h3
Rc7 24. Nd2 Qh2 25. Bf1 Qg1 {would be a logical continuation with Black's
marauding queen in the spirit of the game (and of Timman-Short).}) 22... Nc7 ({
Even here it's not at all obvious to me how White was defending against} 22...
b5 {; Kasparov gave} 23. a4 {, but he didn't say how he was going to meet} b4
24. R3c2 c5 {. The short answer is that he was going to give up material
somehow, but it's far from simple to see how he was going to do that
convincingly. The best I can do is} 25. Bd3 (25. dxc5 Qxa6 26. c6 Bc8 27. Qxb4
Qb6 {is nothing,}) ({and} 25. Be2 {allows} Nxd4 $1 26. exd4 Rxe2 27. Nc4 Qe6)
25... c4 26. Nxc4 dxc4 27. Rxc4 a5 28. d5 {
, but even this runs into the cunning} Kb8 {
, and I'm not at all sure what White's next trick is.}) ({
It's understandable that Black wouldn't consider it, but even total greed with
} 22... Qxh2 23. Nf3 Qxg2 {doesn't obviously lose} (23... Qd6 24. Ne5 {
really is bad; this was the main idea behind White's 22nd}) {: for example,}
24. Ne5 Nc7 25. Bd3 Qxf2 26. Nxc6 Bxc6 27. Rxc6 Ne6 28. Rxb6 (28. Qb5 Qxe3 29.
Rc7 Kb8 $1 30. Rxa7 Kxa7 31. Qa6+ Kb8 32. Qxb6+ {is similar}) 28... axb6 29.
Qxb6 Qxe3 30. Ba6 ({if} 30. Bb5 Nxd4) 30... Re7 31. Bb5 Qe4+ 32. Ka1 (32. Rc2
Nxd4) 32... Rc7 33. Bc6+ Rxc6 34. Qxc6+ Ka7 {, and White has no better than a
draw. It's fair to say though that to be sure of this over the board would
have been a superhuman feat.}) 23. Bf1 Ne6 ({
It's at this point that Black really had to nerve himself to play} 23... Qxh2 {
; after} 24. Nf3 Qd6 25. Ne5 {he can now give up the exchange with} Rxe5 26.
dxe5 Qxe5 {and stands fine. It's surprising that Andersson didn't go for this;
one would have thought it was very much in his style.}) 24. g3 Rc8 25. Bg2 Rc7
26. h4 Rd8 27. Nf3 Bc8 $6 {A logical regrouping;} ({
but it was better preceded by} 27... f6 {, a useful move in this structure to
keep White's knight from e5 or g5, and perhaps prepare counterplay with ...g5
one day. Kasparov says that White is slightly better after} 28. Ne1 {, when the
knight is coming to d3, and no doubt that's true, but Black's position is well
defensible still, for example} Bc8 29. Qa4 Bb7 30. Nd3 c5 $5 {.}) 28. Qa4 c5 $6
{Losing faith in his position;} ({it's annoying that after} 28... Bb7 29. Ne5
Rdc8 30. Ra3 {White manages to force} a6 {
, but it's hardly fatal and this was preferable to the text.}) 29. Ng5 $1 Nxg5
30. hxg5 Bb7 31. dxc5 bxc5 32. Qf4 $1 Qxf4 ({Kasparov gives} 32... d4 33. Bxb7+
Kxb7 34. Qxd6 Rxd6 35. exd4 Rxd4 36. Rxc5 Rxc5 37. Rxc5 {as the last chance,
and doesn't attempt to solve this endgame, so I won't either.}) 33. gxf4 d4 34.
Rxc5 Rxc5 35. Bxb7+ Kxb7 36. Rxc5 dxe3 37. fxe3 Re8 38. Re5 $1 Rxe5 39. fxe5
Kc6 40. Kc2 Kd5 41. b4 Kxe5 42. a4 f6 43. gxf6 Kxf6 44. b5 {. The white pawns
can queen on their own. --- Conclusion: A characteristic performance by
Kasparov, with the tactics bubbling under in the transition from opening to
middlegame, and a period of manoeuvring followed by a ruthless strike when
given the chance. I'm still far from convinced by White's plan, though; it
seems to me that he can hardly achieve anything directly on the queenside, and
that Black's well-centralized and co-ordinated position is objectively at
least equal.} 1-0

[Event "Buenos Aires"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1991.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Granda Zuniga, J."]
[Black "Nogueiras Santiago, J."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D36"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "125"]
[EventDate "1991.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Bg5 c6 6. Qc2 Be7 7. e3 Nbd7 8.
Bd3 Nh5 9. Bxe7 Qxe7 10. Nge2 Nb6 11. O-O-O g6 12. h3 {This is White's main
alternative to Ng3 plans; he has to prevent the idea of ...Ng7 and ...Bf5
somehow. The downside, obviously, is the kingside weaknesses he creates. The
upside is the increased space and freedom for his e2-knight, and finding a way
to make good use of that piece is his main task over the next few moves.} Ng7
13. g4 Bd7 (13... h5 {
is an alternative leading to an easier type of game: for example,} 14. e4 (14.
Kb1 Be6 15. Nf4 {is fine; Nxe6 is nothing to be afraid of}) 14... dxe4 ({
I doubt if even} 14... Be6 15. f3 O-O-O 16. e5 Kb8 17. Kb1 {is half as bad as
Lalic says it is; Black could, for example, cut off the e-pawn with} g5 {
before aiming for ...c5 when appropriate; these e5 structures often look
better than they are}) 15. Bxe4 Be6 16. Kb1 hxg4 17. hxg4 Rxh1 18. Rxh1 O-O-O {
with equality in J.Lautier-P.Van der Sterren, Dutch League 1998, and other
games.}) 14. Kb1 {A useful move which also has a specific point which will
become apparent shortly.} ({On g3 the knight would be totally ineffective; it
doesn't restrain ...h5 anyway and has no prospects. Thus a natural alternative
is} 14. Nf4 {, but then Black develops immediate counterplay with} g5 $1 {
(before the bishop can clear d3 for the knight's retreat)} 15. Nfe2 (15. Ng2 h5
16. e4 {is an idea, bringing the knight to e3; probably Black does best to
meet that with} Ne6 {, hitting d4}) 15... h5 16. e4 $5 ({the tame} 16. Ng3
O-O-O 17. Nf5 {is very comfortable for Black, as in a number of games}) 16...
Be6 $1 ({after} 16... dxe4 17. Nxe4 Be6 {
it seems to me that Black would be puzzled for a reply to} 18. Qc5 {,} ({
although White won anyway with} 18. a3 {
in A.Aleksandrov-O.Krivonosov, Stockholm 1995})) 17. exd5 ({
Vaganian recommended keeping the tension with either} 17. Kb1) ({or} 17. f3 {
, although neither of these is obviously better than the text; the game is
approximately equal in any case}) 17... Nxd5 18. Be4 {
, when V.Malaniuk-R.Vaganian, USSR Championship, Moscow 1988, proceeded with}
Nb4 $5 ({if} 18... O-O-O 19. Nxd5 Bxd5 20. Bxd5 Rxd5 21. Nc3 {
, and d5 is rather uncomfortable}) 19. Qa4 a5 20. Ng3 Kf8 {with a complicated
and probably about equal position which is certainly not as good for Black as
the clearly better assessment which contemporary commentators gave it; White
should start with} 21. Rde1 {to give the queen a square,} ({
rather than the game's} 21. d5 $6 {.})) ({Instead} 14. e4 $5 {is a logical
strike which has been played only in one game so far, N.Vitiugov-V.Popov,
Kazan 2005. That continued} dxe4 (14... O-O $5 {is an interesting idea; meeting
} 15. e5 {with the surprising} f5) 15. Nxe4 (15. Bxe4 {
is met the same way: for example,} f5 16. gxf5 Nxf5 17. d5 O-O $1) 15... f5 $1
{(an astonishing move)} ({the point is to avoid the vexing} 15... O-O-O 16. Qc5
) 16. Nc5 fxg4 17. hxg4 O-O-O {(this position should be fine for Black with
his plan against the white pawn weaknesses)} 18. Rhg1 Ne6 19. Be4 Rhf8 20. f3
Ng5 21. Qc3 {
and now, as Marin points out, Black would have been doing well after} Kb8 {,} (
{as opposed to falling for the game's} 21... Be6 $2 22. Qa3 {.})) 14... O-O-O (
14... h5 {is also played, when it seems to me that Black's main task is to
find an answer to} 15. e4 {. Probably he is fine after something like} dxe4 16.
Bxe4 O-O {.}) 15. Nf4 ({The plan which we saw in the last game is senseless
now because the weaknesses on the kingside mean that Black's counterplay is
far too quick: for example,} 15. Na4 Nxa4 16. Qxa4 Kb8 {
and now the miserable retreat} 17. Qc2 ({here} 17. Rc1 h5 {
is also strong, albeit an opportunity Black has passed by in several games})
17... h5 {
, and White was already struggling in J.Dueball-J.Federau, German League 1985.}
) 15... Kb8 16. Be2 {This is the point of White's 14th; by timing Nf4 for a
moment when d5 was en prise he is able to regroup the knight to d3, and as an
added bonus he takes a lot of the sting out of ...h5. It may be for this
reason that some good players, not least Boensch, have preferred to meet 14
Kb1 with the immediate 14...h5.} Ne6 ({Black has also played} 16... Rc8 {
which might be no more than a different order of moves or might, as Marin
suggests, be aiming at} 17. Nd3 h5 {. I'm not sure that's a particularly
effective move, though; it often isn't when a knight is in reach of e5, since
it weakens g6 and makes it harder to kick the knight out. Moreover, I'm happy
enough with the text.}) 17. Nd3 Rc8 18. b4 {Marin gives this an exclamation
mark, and we saw in the last game Timman regretting not having played a
similar move. I'm not so sure; certainly White restrains Black in the short
term, gains space and increases his own active possibilities, but there's a
long-term price to be paid in terms of king safety.} Nc4 19. Ka1 {Marin gives
White the better of it here. Rybka, on the other hand, likes Black. I'm going
to be frank and say that I don't know, but it's an interesting position to
play.} b6 {
I'm not entirely sure that this move was either necessary or desirable.} ({
If it was directed against Nc5 then an alternative method of discouraging that
move was} 19... Qh4 {, since if} 20. Nc5 Nxc5 21. Bxc4 {(else f2 hangs)} Ne6 {
, when Black's next move is ...h5, and he stands very well. It seems to me
that the queen is very well placed on h4, although in the game Nogueiras
steadfastly refuses to place it there.}) 20. Qb3 Rhd8 21. Rc1 Be8 22. Rhd1 (22.
h4 {was worth thinking about, and for the same reason Black might have played
21...Qh4 at his last turn. The bishop is probably better at d7 than e8 if
Black is going to play with ...Qh4 anyway.}) 22... f6 {I don't like this move;
presumably it was part of Black's plan with his last move, aimed at playing ...Bf7 in some position and maintaining the knight on c4 even in the face of a
Bxc4 threat. My experience has been that such an idea is seldom successful,
and in this position it has the drawback, illustrated in the game, of losing
control of h4 and allowing White to move his pawn to that square.} ({
I would still like Black to play} 22... Qh4 {. Indeed, I don't really
understand what White's idea is after that move; he has various ideas on the
queenside, but so far as I can see none of them works, while after a passive
continuation like} 23. Bf1 {Black can play} Bd7 {
and go on with ...h5. The rest of the game is less interesting for our theme.})
23. Bf3 Nc7 24. Nb2 Bf7 25. Be2 Nd6 26. Rc2 Ncb5 27. Nb1 Ne8 28. Rdc1 Qb7 29.
Qd3 Nbd6 30. Qd1 Qd7 31. h4 Rc7 32. Qg1 Ka8 33. Qg2 Rb8 34. Nd2 b5 {
A very committal move, and not obviously a good idea at all.} 35. Nd3 Nc4 36.
Nb3 Ned6 37. g5 fxg5 38. hxg5 Be6 $2 {A disastrous move, effectively
blundering the exchange. White was getting slightly the better of things, but
it wasn't so terrible yet.} 39. Nbc5 Qc8 40. Nxe6 Qxe6 41. Nc5 Qc8 42. Bg4 Qe8
(42... Nf5 43. Bxf5 gxf5 {was obviously also unpleasant, although Black does
have resources, sometimes involving ...f4!?, and the game would hardly have
been over. Nogueiras never looks like proving this exchange 'sacrifice'
sufficient.}) 43. Na6 Rf7 44. Nxb8 Kxb8 45. Be2 Qd8 46. Bd3 a5 47. bxa5 Qxa5
48. Qh2 Ka8 49. Qh1 Ra7 50. Qe1 Qd8 51. Qb4 Qc8 52. Rh1 Qe8 53. Bxc4 Nxc4 54.
Rh4 Rf7 55. Qc5 Qd7 56. e4 Qe6 57. a4 dxe4 58. axb5 Ra7+ 59. Ra2 Rxa2+ 60. Kxa2
Qf7 61. bxc6 Qxf2+ 62. Kb3 Nd2+ 63. Kb4 {. --- Conclusion: It's fairly logical
for White to advance his kingside pawns, but even this doesn't appear to
promise him any advantage; Black should seriously consider an early ...h5,
although playing as per Nogueiras is hardly terrible. His main mistake was not
remembering one of the key lessons from Kasparov-Andersson - Black should
always be looking to make nuisance value of his queen on the kingside.} 1-0

[Event "Tilburg"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1988.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nikolic, P."]
[Black "Timman, J."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D36"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "98"]
[EventDate "1988.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. cxd5 exd5 6. Bg5 c6 7. Qc2 Nbd7 8.
e3 Nh5 9. Bxe7 Qxe7 10. h3 {Although the move order has been different in this
game, it doesn't really make any difference, and we shortly arrive at the
critical position for Nf3 lines. These are very highly spoken of by both
Sadler and Schandorff, so they need study, although Hansen, a great expert on
this line, declares firmly when annotating his game given below that the
knight belongs on e2. The first point to note is that White still needs to
play h3 and g4 to prevent ...Bf5, so if he is going to adopt Kasparov's plan
he comes a tempo slower on the queenside. We shall see the significance of
that in a moment.} g6 11. O-O-O Nb6 12. Bd3 Be6 {With the knight on f3 Black
doesn't need this bishop on d7 in order to avoid being forced into weaknesses
on the queenside, as we shall see.} 13. Kb1 Ng7 14. g4 O-O-O 15. Na4 {
The Kasparov plan again.} ({In C.Ward-J.Parker, British League 1997, the game
which so impressed Sadler, White played} 15. Qb3 {, with the follow-up a4. The
bishop was on d7 in that game; here Black could have met that move efficiently
with} Qf6 16. Be2 Kb8 {, and if} 17. a4 Nc4 {.}) ({Instead} 15. Rhg1 {
was played in V.Lazarev-M.Llanes Hurtado, Zafra 2004, in which Black played
sensibly with} Kb8 16. Rc1 Ne8 17. Ne2 {, but now instead of the game's} h5 {,}
({superior was} 17... g5 {(better to give the f5-square than allow Nf4xe6,
although 17...Nd6 is also possible): for example,} 18. Ng3 Nd6 19. Nf5 Bxf5 {.}
)) ({Finally,} 15. Rc1 Kb8 {
is almost always just a transposition; if White isn't going to play} 16. Na4 {
then his last move had little point.}) 15... Nxa4 ({Here Schandorff gives I.Khairullin-I.Nepomniachtchi, European Championship, Plovdiv 2009, in which
Black chose the extraordinary sequence} 15... h5 16. Ne5 hxg4 17. hxg4 Qc7 18.
Nc5 Kb8 19. a4 {, and naturally lost quickly.}) 16. Qxa4 Kb8 17. Rc1 Bd7 $1 {
A good move exploiting a difference between the knight being on e2 and on f3;}
({but Black has another good move, exploiting the fact that White has had to
make three moves on the kingside as opposed to two in Kasparov-Andersson, in} 
17... Ne8 18. Rc3 Nd6 19. Ra3 (19. Rb3 Nc4 {
also got White nowhere in V.Ivanchuk-P.Van der Sterren, Munich 1994}) 19... Nc8
{(this is the point; Black is in time for this move and can't be forced to
weaken his structure with ...b6)} 20. Rc1 {, and now either} f6 ({
or the provocative} 20... Rd7 21. Ne5 Rc7 {
of Nilsson-L.B.Hansen, Laholm 2008, when since} 22. Rb3 {is well met by} Nb6
23. Qa5 f6 {White has made all the progress he's going to make on the
queenside - i.e. none - and needs to start going backwards.})) 18. Rc5 (18. Rc3
c5 19. Qa3 {was very good for White in Kasparov-Andersson, but here it is
easily dealt with by} Qf6 {followed by ...c4.}) 18... Be8 19. Rhc1 Ne6 20. R5c3
f6 {A good move intending ...Ng5, according to Nikolic.} 21. h4 Rc8 22. Ra3 b6
23. Rac3 Rc7 24. Qc2 Rf8 25. Qd2 {A waste of time according to Nikolic, who
wants White to play a3 and b4. I don't think there's anything so terrifying
about that; Black has plenty of useful moves, such as ...Rg8, ...h6 and ...Qd6,
while White needs to remain alert for various moves on the kingside, for
example ...g5.} Qd6 26. a3 Bd7 27. Rg1 Bc8 28. Rg3 c5 $1 29. dxc5 bxc5 30. h5
gxh5 31. gxh5 f5 {
According to Nikolic White now has to be careful to maintain the balance.} 32.
Rg1 Bb7 33. Bc2 Rd7 ({Nikolic says that in order to keep his winning chances
alive Black had to go for the splendid variation} 33... f4 $1 34. Ng5 Rg8 ({
alternatively, Black could play less committally with} 34... fxe3 {
, although objectively he doesn't seem to have any advantage.}) 35. exf4 h6 36.
Rcg3 hxg5 37. fxg5 {with unfathomable complications.}) 34. Ba4 Rdd8 35. Rcc1 f4
{The position remains about equal; although Black's pieces are more active and
he has good central control, his weak king means he can't establish enough of
a grip to make decisive progress.} ({Nikolic gives} 35... d4 36. Ne1 $5 (36.
Ng5 {is safer}) {, although it seems that Black is better after} 36... f4 {.})
36. Ng5 fxe3 37. fxe3 Nxg5 38. Rxg5 Qe7 39. Qh2+ Ka8 40. Qe5 Qxe5 41. Rxe5 d4
42. Rexc5 Be4+ 43. Ka2 d3 44. Bc6+ Bxc6 45. Rxc6 Rfe8 46. Rd1 Rd7 47. Rd2 Rxe3
48. Rc5 Kb7 49. b4 Re2 {. --- Conclusion: A combination of 0-0-0 and Nf3 has
received high-profile support from Sadler, Schandorff and Ward, but just gives
White an inferior version of Kasparov's plan on the queenside.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Vienna"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1996.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Gyimesi, Z."]
[Black "Dreev, A."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D36"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "128"]
[EventDate "1996.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Bg5 c6 6. Nf3 {Finally, let's see
what happens when White ignores Black's 'threat' of ...Bf5 and simply develops.
} Be7 {Black has a multitude of ways of dealing with this position. His main
concern is to find a way of playing ...Bf5 'safely', without allowing Qb3 or
some other strong answer.} ({First, he could play the very safe} 6... h6 7. Bh4
Bf5 {with the idea} 8. Qb3 ({White will most likely play} 8. e3 {
and Bd3, with play very similar to the game}) 8... g5 9. Bg3 ({after} 9. Qxb7
gxh4 10. Qxa8 Qc7 {the queen is slowly lost}) 9... Qb6 {, which is fine.}) ({
Second, he could play the cheeky immediate} 6... Bf5 {, meeting} 7. Qb3 {
with the obscure gambit} Nbd7 (7... Qb6 8. Bxf6 gxf6 {is not half so bad as it
looks and is quite playable, just as it is with e3 in instead of Nf3 - see the
notes to White's 7th in Ivanchuk-Short}) 8. Qxb7 Rb8 9. Qxc6 Rxb2 {. This is at
the very least extremely dangerous and quite possibly objectively adequate;
Kasparov himself has been willing to adopt it in blitz and simultaneous play.
The critical line probably is} 10. a3 ({
Karpov lost horribly in one of the recent dinosaur fundraisers after} 10. g4
Rb6 {and so on,}) ({while} 10. Rc1 Bb4 {is fine for Black}) 10... Be7 11. Bxf6
Bxf6 ({better than} 11... gxf6 {
as in V.Akobian-Y.Shulman, Upper Lake (blitz) 2009}) 12. Nxd5 O-O {; I believe
Black has entirely adequate compensation and that actually this line is very
dangerous for White. However, probably in practice White will play 7 e3 here
as well, so the only real difference between these lines and that in the game
may be whether Black has ...h6 or ...g6 in, or neither, and whether Black
prefers to offer this gambit or face the rather drawish 8 e4 in the game.}) 7.
Qc2 g6 {This is the point; Black can still get his ...Bf5 anyway.} 8. e3 (8. e4
{, Jan Timman's move, is White's main alternative. Black's safest line is} dxe4
(8... O-O {is a feistier alternative}) 9. Bxf6 ({this is White's point;} 9.
Nxe4 O-O {is nothing}) 9... Bxf6 10. Qxe4+ Qe7 (10... Kf8 11. Bc4 Kg7 12. O-O
Re8 13. Qf4 Be6 14. Bxe6 Rxe6 15. Rfe1 Qd6 {
also has a long-standing reputation as an equalizer}) 11. Bc4 Bf5 12. Qxe7+
Kxe7 {.} 13. -- ({
. Black has to be a little careful here; the line he needs to avoid is} 13.
O-O-O Rd8 14. h3 h5 $2 (14... Nd7 15. g4 Nb6 16. Rhe1+ Be6 17. Bxe6 fxe6 18.
Ne4 Rd5 {is reasonable for Black}) 15. g4 $1 hxg4 $6 16. hxg4 Bxg4 17. Rh7 {
, when Black is in real trouble.}) ({. Instead} 13. O-O Rd8 14. Rfe1+ Kf8 15.
Rad1 Nd7 {is easy for Black}) ({, but White can also start with} 13. h3 {
, hoping for} Rd8 14. O-O-O {.}) ({. To avoid this I propose meeting} 13. h3 {
with} h5) ({, and} 13. O-O-O {with} Nd7 {
, which reserves the possibility of meeting h3 if necessary with ...h5.})) 8...
Bf5 9. Bd3 (9. Qb3 Qb6 {means White simply wants to achieve a slightly worse
position and play, but there is no need to prepare for such moves.}) 9... Bxd3
10. Qxd3 {This position has been thought to be equal for a very long time, but
that doesn't stop Grandmaster Keith Arkell, for example, from playing it all
the time and making a huge score with it. It isn't really very theoretical: in
fact the whole variation is a good field for thematic study, and if you
haven't seen them the classics Bobotsov-Petrosian, Lugano 1968, and
Nikolic-Kramnik, Nice (rapid) 1998, are a good place to start.} Nbd7 11. Bh6 {
With this move White effectively transfers his bishop to f4 for free, not that
that improves his position greatly.} ({After the alternative} 11. O-O {
there are many classic black performances in the databases to admire (notably
the puzzling Andersson-Kasparov, Belgrade 1985), but I liked Gelfand's
handling in the following:} O-O 12. Rab1 a5 13. Qc2 Re8 14. Bxf6 Nxf6 15. a3
Bd6 16. h3 ({if} 16. b4 Qe7 $1) 16... Qe7 17. Nd2 Qe6 18. Na4 Qf5 $1 19. Rfc1
Qxc2 20. Rxc2 {
, when he was fine in D.Jakovenko-B.Gelfand, Odessa (rapid) 2009.}) (11. O-O-O
{is also possible; it isn't usually the way White wants to approach the game
if he's playing this variation, but the correspondence GM Adrian Hollis used
to link it to a plan with h4, claiming that by cunningly forcing ...g6 he had
weakened Black's king. Black could certainly just bravely castle, but it's
probably more cunning to delay the decision with} Nb6 {, for example} 12. Ne5
Nfd7 {.}) 11... Ng4 12. Bf4 O-O 13. h3 Ngf6 14. O-O Re8 15. Rab1 a5 {The position is equal and both players have had many alternatives which keep it that way
for some moves now; the important things in such positions are experience,
patience and class, and the player who has those normally prevails. So it
proves here.} 16. Rfc1 Bf8 17. Nd2 Nb6 18. Qc2 Re6 19. Na4 Nbd7 20. Nc3 h6 21.
Bh2 Nb6 22. Ne2 Re8 23. Nf4 Bd6 24. Nd3 Bxh2+ 25. Kxh2 {A small success for
Black. As a general rule, positions with two knights each are easier for Black
in the Exchange than those with bishops as well.} Nfd7 26. Nf3 Nc4 27. Ra1 Kg7
28. Kg1 Re7 29. b3 Nd6 30. Re1 Nf8 31. Nc5 Qe8 32. Re2 Nd7 33. Nxd7 Qxd7 {
It is unhelpful now that Black has played ...a5. If the pawn were on a6, Black
would have the sort of small edge to be found in the aforementioned Bobotsov-Petrosian game, and also in Portisch-Kasparov, Skelleftea 1989, since White could
never open lines on the queenside as long as the knight stayed on d6 (unless
he could take his own knight to c3, that is, but meanwhile Black would gain
full control of the c4 outpost), while Black has chances on the kingside.} 34.
Ne5 Qc7 35. Rc1 Rae8 36. a3 Re6 37. Nd3 Qd8 38. Nc5 R6e7 39. Rce1 h5 40. Qb2 h4
41. Nd3 g5 42. Ne5 Ne4 43. Rc2 Re6 44. Rf1 Qe7 45. b4 axb4 46. axb4 Nd6 47. f4
$2 {Tempting, but White is falling into a trap.} ({After something like} 47.
Ra1 Qf6 48. Ra7 R6e7 49. Qb3 Qf5 50. Nf3 f6 51. Rc1 g4 {
the storm clouds are gathering, but White can very much still fight.}) 47... f6
$1 {Forced and not too hard by now, but Dreev had to see this a while ago.} 48.
f5 Rxe5 49. dxe5 Qxe5 50. Rf3 Qxb2 51. Rxb2 Ra8 52. Kh2 Kf7 53. g3 hxg3+ 54.
Kxg3 Rh8 55. Rf1 Ke7 56. Ra2 Rh4 57. Ra8 Rxb4 58. Rh8 Ne4+ 59. Kg2 Rb2+ 60. Kg1
Kd6 61. Rd8+ Kc7 62. Re8 Rb3 63. Re7+ Kd6 64. Rf7 b5 {. --- Conclusion: Black
should be ready for this variation, which may also arise via a 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3
Be7 5 cxd5 exd5 6 Bg5 move order. It's toothless theoretically, but you have
to have some grasp of the classic minority attack themes which arise.} 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "6. The Catalan"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "E04"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "12"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. g3 dxc4 5. Bg2 Bb4+ 6. Bd2 a5 {. Kramnik-Topalov was the game which brought Black's system into the spotlight, where it has
more or less remained ever since. It's difficult at first sight to understand
the purpose of Black's last move. One of the most important points is that it
enables him to play ...b5 in many positions, and the queen's rook has a square
to advance to in the face of a move such as Ne5. It also makes ...Ba6 more of
a possibility; in general we can say that it presages a scorched earth policy
on the long diagonal as opposed to any attempt to compete for it (as in the
main lines of the Catalan with 4...Be7 5 Bg2 0-0 6 0-0 dxc4 7 Qc2 a6).
Alternatively, to say it more concretely, Black's point is that after 7 Qc2
the extra ...a5 is useful, although obviously 7 Qc2 is not forced.} ({
By contrast,} 6... Bxd2+ $6 7. Qxd2 c6 8. Ne5 b5 $2 9. Nxc6 Qc7 10. Qa5 {
simply loses material.}) *

[Event "World Championship (Game 1), Elista"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2006.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kramnik, V."]
[Black "Topalov, V."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E04"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "149"]
[EventDate "2006.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. g3 dxc4 5. Bg2 Bb4+ 6. Bd2 (6. Nbd2 {
is a racier alternative, which is covered in Caruana-Gelfand.}) ({
White could also (but very seldom does) play} 6. Nc3 {, which leads to a
variation of the Nimzo-Indian, and we'll see that one in Agdestein-Onischuk.})
6... a5 7. Qc2 {White concerns himself immediately with regaining the pawn.
This is the most popular move, although of course White has many moves:} (7.
O-O {(Markus-Beliavsky)}) (7. Nc3 {(Carlsen-Kramnik)}) ({and} 7. Na3 {
(Iskusnyh-Maletin) are the most respectable}) ({while} 7. a3 Bxd2+ 8. Qxd2 {
will probably transpose to the line in this game.}) 7... Bxd2+ {
Facing White with the task of taking an early decision.} 8. Qxd2 $5 {This looks
strange, of course, but in fact it enables White to win the pawn back.} ({
The more natural} 8. Nbxd2 {is considered in the next game.}) 8... c6 {
Black prepares to defend the pawn with ...b5;} (8... O-O 9. Ne5 {
would not allow him to do that.}) 9. a4 ({
In contrast to the position with the pawn on a7,} 9. Ne5 b5 10. Nxc6 Qc7 {
now leads nowhere for White, especially since} 11. Qg5 Nxc6 12. Qxg7 Ke7 13.
Qxh8 Bb7 14. Qg7 Nxd4 {is terrible for White. This can almost be thought of as
the point of Black's system.}) 9... b5 {Black has to keep playing the moves
he's going to need to play to defend the pawn and extract concessions from
White while he regains it.} ({Instead} 9... O-O 10. Na3 {
is comfortable for White.}) 10. axb5 ({Black is ready to meet} 10. Na3 {with}
Bd7 ({or} 10... Ba6) 11. Ne5 (11. axb5 cxb5 12. Qg5 {
, as in the text, is ineffective when Qxb5+ is not threatened: for example,} h6
13. Qe5 (13. Qxg7 Rh7 {wins the queen, of course}) 13... O-O 14. Nxb5 Qb6 {
with good play for Black}) 11... Nd5 12. O-O O-O 13. e4 Nb4 {
, as in V.Anand-V.Topalov, World Championship (Game 4) Sofia 2010:} 14. Rfd1
Qb6 ({Topalov had played} 14... Be8 {
and been slaughtered, but Kramnik changes sides here to show the way}) 15. d5
Ra7 16. dxc6 N4xc6 17. Qd6 (17. Nf3 bxa4 18. Nxc4 Qb4 19. Qe2 Na6 {
is similar; Black has to defend well but he should be able to equalize}) 17...
bxa4 18. Nexc4 Qb4 19. Rac1 Be8 (19... e5 {
looks easier; it seems unlikely that Kramnik objected to the forced draw with}
20. Qxb4 axb4 21. Nb5 Rb7 22. Nbd6 Ra7 {in a team event}) 20. Qxb4 axb4 21. Nb5
Rd7 22. Nbd6 e5 23. Bf1 (23. Rd5 Ra7 24. Nb5 Ra6 {
is also not dangerous; Black can meet} 25. Bf1 {calmly with} Bd7) 23... Rd8 24.
Nb6 a3 25. bxa3 bxa3 26. Bb5 g6 27. Ra1 a2 {, and Black held easily enough in
Wang Yue-V.Kramnik, Khanty-Mansiysk Olympiad 2010.}) ({Instead} 10. Ne5 Nd5 {
is also reasonable for Black;} 11. axb5 cxb5 12. Nc3 {is well met by} f6 13.
Ng4 Bb7 $1 {, in view of the powerful trick} 14. Nxb5 Qd7 15. Na3 h5 $1 {.})
10... cxb5 11. Qg5 {This unexpected shot was the point of 8 Qxd2; White
assures himself of regaining the pawn at some considerable cost in time.} O-O (
11... b4 {is far from unthinkable, as Marin points out, but you can see why it
hasn't caught the eye of black players so far.} 12. Qxg7 Rg8 13. Qh6 Bb7 {
looks like the critical position to me; according to Marin it 'leaves Black
with viable play in a rather unbalanced position', but I rather suspect
White's trumps will turn out to be more important in the end. White should
proceed methodically with Nbd2, 0-0, Rfc1 and Ne5, and I don't quite see how
Black is going to maintain enough dynamic possibilities to make up for his
unfortunate king.}) 12. Qxb5 Ba6 {This was a novelty at the time, and played a
large part in the establishment of Black's system. Other moves allow White
simply to castle and develop his knight to c3, with superior chances.} 13. Qa4
(13. Qxa5 {is of course the critical line, when Black's idea is} Bb7 $1 14.
Qxd8 Rxa1 $1 15. Qxf8+ ({anything else is unthinkable, as Black takes on b1
and b2, and a well-timed ...c3 will open lines against White's king; an
important point is} 15. Qb6 $2 Rxb1+ 16. Kd2 c3+ $1 {winning the queen,}) ({and
} 15. Qc7 $2 Rxb1+ 16. Kd2 Rxb2+ 17. Kc1 c3 18. Qxc3 Rxe2 {is also crushing})
15... Kxf8 {with a critical position which Cheparinov and Topalov had studied
before the match. Their analysis hasn't been published as far as I know, but
Marin gave some interesting lines in ChessBase Magazine. After} 16. O-O ({
Marin also proposed} 16. Kd2 Ra2 17. Rc1 {
, which looks to me as though it is going to burn out to equality after} Rxb2+
18. Ke1 Nc6 19. Nfd2 Nxd4 20. Bxb7 Rxb7 21. Rxc4) 16... Ra2 {Black will most
likely win his pawn back, but White can count on a small achievement, too: he
has almost completed his development and maintained control of the c3-square
at the same time. Now:} 17. -- ({. After} 17. Nbd2 {
Black has the typical sequence} Bxf3 $1 18. Bxf3 (18. Nxf3 Rxb2 {
is worse in view of} 19. Re1 $2 c3 $1) 18... c3 $1 19. Nc4 cxb2 {
followed by ...Ra4 and a draw.}) (17. Rc1 Rxb2 18. Na3 (18. e3 Nbd7 19. Nbd2
Ng4 $1 {(Marin)}) 18... Nbd7 ({not} 18... Rxe2 $4 19. Rb1) 19. Bf1 Bxf3 20.
exf3 {looks like about the best White can do to me, but Black can impose the
exchange of knights as a condition of losing the c-pawn with} Nb6 {, in view of
} 21. Bxc4 Rb4 22. Rc3 Ra4 23. Bd3 Rxd4 {
, and after that he shouldn't have much trouble to hold the endgame.}) (17. Ne5
Ba6 ({not} 17... Bd5 18. Nc3 Rxb2 19. e4) 18. Nc3 (18. Rc1 Rxb2 {
is not so good; as Marin points out, White has to exchange the rook}) 18...
Rxb2 19. Rb1 Rxb1+ ({Marin also gives White a shade the better of it after} 
19... Rb3 20. Rc1 Nfd7 21. f4 {'followed by the centralization of the king';
perhaps White's position is a little easier to play but it seems to me that
Black has sufficient active possibilities to hold the balance after} Nxe5 22.
fxe5 Nd7 23. Kf2 Ke7 24. Ke1 Bb7 {followed by ...f6}) 20. Nxb1 Nd5 21. Bxd5 (
21. e4 $2 {loses to} c3 $1 {, but anyway it's desirable for White to stabilize
the structure in this way; knights are more effective than bishops in these
endings with the pawns essentially restricted to one side}) 21... exd5 22. Nc3
{with an endgame where Marin prefers White, and certainly his position is a
little easier to play, but Black really should hold comfortably enough. He
should set up with ...Bb7, ...f6, ...Ke7 and ...Na6-c7 in some order and, as
is usual in positions with a slightly restricted bishop, avoid the exchange of
a pair of knights if possible. I don't see a useful plan for White to try and
win against this set-up.})) 13... Qb6 14. O-O ({White can also play} 14. Nbd2 {
, but, as Marin observes, the weakness of this continuation is that it
abandons control of c3:} Bb5 15. Qa2 ({or} 15. Qa3 Nc6 {, when after} 16. Rc1 (
{while} 16. O-O Rab8 17. Rfc1 Nxd4 {
was instantly equal in P.Leko-V.Kramnik, Dortmund 2009}) 16... Rad8 17. e3 {
I prefer} Rc8 ({to Marin's} 17... Qa6 {,}) {based on the trick} 18. Nxc4 ({
and here} 18. Bf1 $2 Nb4 19. Bxc4 $2 Rxc4 $1 {is even worse}) 18... Nxd4 $1)
15... Nc6 16. Nxc4 Qd8 $1 {
(Marin), and now White has no time to defend d4 in view of} 17. Rd1 $2 ({
White should let the position burn out with} 17. O-O Rc8 18. b3 Bxc4 19. bxc4
Nxd4 20. Rfd1 Nxf3+ 21. Bxf3 Qe7) 17... Nb4 18. Qb3 Nfd5 $1 {(threatening a4)}
19. Rc1 Rc8 20. Nfd2 Nb6 {, when Black is virtually winning.}) 14... Qxb2 15.
Nbd2 Bb5 16. Nxc4 Bxa4 17. Nxb2 Bb5 18. Ne5 Ra7 {This sequence is almost
forced after 14 0-0, and the ending which arises gives Black equal chances.}
19. Bf3 ({As Topalov points out, White could pretty much make a draw with} 19.
Nbc4 Nbd7 20. Nxa5 Bxe2 21. Rfe1 Bh5 {.}) ({Later White 'improved' with} 19.
Nbd3 Nfd7 (19... Nbd7 20. Rfb1 Nxe5 21. dxe5 Bxd3 22. exd3 Nd7 23. d4 Rb8 {
also looks pretty efficient for Black to me}) 20. Rfb1 Nxe5 21. Rxb5 Nxd3 22.
exd3 a4 23. Ra3 Nd7 24. Bc6 Nf6 25. Rb4 Rd8 26. Rbxa4 Rxa4 27. Rxa4 Kf8 {
in E.Gleizerov-T.Luther, Predeal 2007, and managed to win, but this ending
looks like a complete draw to me.}) 19... Nbd7 20. Nec4 ({White could probably
obtain rook and four pawns against rook and three by means of} 20. Nxd7 Nxd7
21. Rfb1 $5 Rc8 22. Nd1 Bc6 23. Rc1 Rac7 {, and now} 24. d5 Bxd5 25. Rxc7 Rxc7
26. Bxd5 exd5 27. Rxa5 Nb6 {followed by the trick} 28. Ne3 Rd7 29. Rb5 Rd6 30.
Nxd5 {. As Topalov says, round about here Kramnik perhaps wasn't quite sure
about whether he was playing to win or draw.}) 20... Rb8 (20... Rc7 {
'practically forces a draw' (Topalov), in view of} 21. Nxa5 Bxe2 22. Bxe2 Rc2 {
, but Topalov too was not yet choosing continuations which sought a draw.}) 21.
Rfb1 g5 $5 {'A typical move in this kind of position' (Topalov), which perhaps
wouldn't have seemed so to many of us. Kramnik-Carlsen, Wijk aan Zee 2008, and
Topalov-Anand, Leon 2006, are useful comparisons.} 22. e3 g4 23. Bd1 Bc6 24.
Rc1 Be4 25. Na4 Rb4 26. Nd6 Bf3 $5 {A very typical decision by Topalov. Many
other moves were possible, but with his usual dynamism and optimism, he wants
to clear the way for the a-pawn, and relies on this play on the queenside to
provide enough initiative if White should go after the f-pawn.} 27. Bxf3 gxf3
28. Nc8 {As Topalov says, leaving e4 to a black knight while chasing the
a-pawn is a very risky decision, but White had no safe way to play:} ({
for example,} 28. Nc3 $5 Ra6 29. Nde4 Nxe4 30. Nxe4 a4 31. Ng5 a3 32. Nxf3 Nb6
{would offer Black at least adequate compensation for the pawn.}) 28... Ra8 29.
Ne7+ Kg7 30. Nc6 Rb3 31. Nc5 Rb5 ({Again Black could force a draw with} 31...
Nxc5 32. dxc5 Rb2 33. Ne5 Ne4 34. Nxf3 Nxf2 35. c6 Nh3+ {(Topalov).}) 32. h3 $6
{Topalov approves of this;} ({but it seems to me that Marin's} 32. Ra4 $5 Nxc5
33. dxc5 Nd7 34. Rac4 {is preferable.}) 32... Nxc5 33. Rxc5 {
A very difficult choice.} ({After} 33. dxc5 Nd7 34. Ra4 Nxc5 35. Rg4+ Kf8 36.
Nd4 {Black can try either} Nd3 ({or} 36... Nb3 {; in both cases he is better
although possibly not actually winning, whereas after the text it seems that
White might actually be lost.})) 33... Rb2 34. Rg5+ Kh6 $6 ({As many commentators on this dramatic game, including Topalov himself, have pointed out,} 34...
Kf8 {was better. Black's idea is well illustrated by Marin's variation:} 35.
Rgxa5 Rxa5 36. Nxa5 Ne4 37. Rf1 f6 38. Nc4 Ra2 39. Nb6 Ke7 40. Nc4 Kd7 41. Nb6+
Kc7 42. Nc4 Kc6 43. Rc1 Kb5 $1 44. Rc2 Ra1+ 45. Kh2 Rf1 46. g4 Kb4 {
, and White is lost.}) 35. Rgxa5 Rxa5 36. Nxa5 $2 {A strange moment.} ({After} 
36. Rxa5 Ne4 {White can defend with} 37. Ne5 Rxf2 $4 38. Ng4+ {
, another thing he couldn't have done with the king on f8.}) 36... Ne4 37. Rf1
Nd2 38. Rc1 Ne4 39. Rf1 f6 40. Nc6 Nd2 41. Rd1 Ne4 42. Rf1 Kg6 43. Nd8 {
This is the difference. If the king had been on f8 Black could have met this
easily by defending e6 with the king while at the same time making progress
with the king on to the queen's wing.} Rb6 44. Rc1 h5 45. Ra1 h4 ({
Black is very close to winning here, perhaps with} 45... e5 $5 {
(Marin), but I pass over the closing stages of this much-annotated game}) 46.
gxh4 Kh5 47. Ra2 Kxh4 48. Kh2 Kh5 49. Rc2 Kh6 50. Ra2 Kg6 51. Rc2 Kf5 52. Ra2
Rb5 53. Nc6 Rb7 54. Ra5+ Kg6 55. Ra2 Kh5 $6 ({
Black can no longer win and would do better to play} 55... Kh6 {, when Sergei
Shipov's online commentary team produced the following piquant variation:} 56.
d5 $1 Rg7 $1 57. dxe6 Rg2+ 58. Kh1 Kg7 $1 59. Ra7+ Kg6 60. Ne7+ Kh6 61. Ra2
Nxf2+ 62. Rxf2 Rxf2 63. Nf5+ Kg6 64. Nd6 $1 Rf1+ 65. Kh2 f2 66. e7 Rh1+ $1 67.
Kg3 f1=Q 68. e8=Q+ Kh7 {with a draw.}) 56. d5 $1 e5 57. Ra4 f5 $2 ({
It was necessary to switch to looking for a draw:} 57... Nxf2 58. Kg3 e4 59.
Kxf2 Rb2+ {with perpetual was the way to achieve this (} 60. Kg3 $2 {loses to}
Rg2+ 61. Kf4 f2 62. Ra1 Rg1 {).}) 58. Nxe5 Rb2 59. Nd3 Rb7 ({
Topalov had overlooked the elementary} 59... Rd2 60. Rd4 {
. The rest is silence.}) 60. Rd4 Rb6 61. d6 Nxd6 62. Kg3 Ne4+ 63. Kxf3 Kg5 64.
h4+ $5 Kf6 65. Rd5 Nc3 66. Rd8 Rb1 67. Rf8+ Ke6 68. Nf4+ Ke5 69. Re8+ Kf6 70.
Nh5+ Kg6 71. Ng3 Rb2 72. h5+ Kf7 73. Re5 Nd1 74. Ne2 Kf6 75. Rd5 {. --- Conclusion: Black doesn't seem to have too much to fear here and on the whole the
search for an advantage against Black's set-up has moved on.} 1-0

[Event "Jiangsu Wuxi"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2008.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Inarkiev, E."]
[Black "Zhou Weiqi"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "E04"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "71"]
[EventDate "2008.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. g3 d5 4. Nf3 dxc4 5. Bg2 Bb4+ 6. Bd2 a5 7. Qc2 Bxd2+ 8.
Nbxd2 b5 {Of course. Otherwise Black's play to date would make no sense.} 9. a4
({White's only real alternative is Romanishin's} 9. Ne4 {
, which was handled rather roughly in O.Romanishin-A.Brkic, Solin 2007, with}
Bb7 10. Nc5 Bxf3 11. Bxf3 Nd5 12. O-O Nc6 13. Rfd1 O-O 14. b3 Ncb4 15. Qd2 cxb3
16. Nxb3 a4 17. Nc5 Na6 18. Nd3 c6 19. Rac1 Qd6 20. Qb2 Rac8 21. Rd2 Rfd8 {
, and White's compensation for the pawn slowly proved inadequate. This is
rather typical for this line; computers are quite keen on White's compensation
to start with, but as Black gradually develops his pieces it tends to ebb away.
}) 9... c6 10. b3 (10. Ne5 Nd5 {would achieve nothing (the same was true last
move), so White is committed to making a real gambit of it.}) 10... cxb3 11.
Nxb3 O-O 12. O-O b4 13. e4 (13. Ne5 Nd5 {still doesn't achieve anything, so
White has nothing better to do than occupy the centre in this way. He has
about enough compensation for three-quarters of a pawn.}) 13... Nbd7 {
In the long run Black can't both develop and hold on to his pawn, so this move,
activating all Black's forces at the cost of the c6 weakness, makes a lot of
sense.} 14. Qxc6 Ra6 15. Qc2 Bb7 16. Ne5 Qa8 {
A good move, fighting for the initiative.} ({After} 16... Nxe5 17. dxe5 Ng4 18.
Qc5 Qb8 {the game would have tended to peter out to equality.}) 17. Nxd7 Nxd7
18. Qc7 Nf6 19. f3 Rc8 20. Qf4 Bc6 {A critical moment.} ({It's easy to see why
Black underestimated the defence White produces in the game, and it seems as
though better chances might have been offered by} 20... Rac6 {, for example}
21. Rfc1 Rxc1+ 22. Rxc1 Rxc1+ 23. Qxc1 Bc6 {.}) 21. Rfc1 Be8 22. Bf1 {
Well played. White's idea is one of those which is obvious only once it is
actually on the board.} Rxc1 23. Rxc1 Rc6 24. Bb5 Rxc1+ 25. Qxc1 Bxb5 26. axb5
a4 27. Nc5 a3 {Well played again.} ({Perhaps the ending after} 27... Qa5 28.
Nxa4 Qxb5 29. Qc8+ Qe8 30. Qxe8+ Nxe8 31. Kf2 Kf8 32. Ke3 Nd6 33. Kd3 {
poses no genuine danger, but only White can win.}) 28. b6 {Obvious now, but
this counterplay had to be seen a long way in advance. The game now proceeds
to a draw by forced stages.} a2 29. Qa1 h5 30. b7 Qa7 31. Qxa2 Qxa2 32. b8=Q+
Kh7 33. Qxb4 Qa1+ 34. Kg2 Qa2+ 35. Kg1 (35. Kh3 $2 g5 {
would be suicide, so White must settle for the draw.}) 35... Qa1+ 36. Kg2 {
. --- Conclusion: A good game, and a model display by Black. This line isn't
really anything to fear and has been almost entirely replaced by 8 Qxd2.}
1/2-1/2

[Event "Wijk aan Zee"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2010.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Carlsen, M."]
[Black "Kramnik, V."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E04"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "75"]
[EventDate "2010.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. g3 dxc4 5. Bg2 Bb4+ 6. Bd2 a5 7. Nc3 {
A fairly rare move, and this game probably isn't going to start a trend, but
still.} O-O 8. a3 {Sooner or later White has to do this to win his pawn back,
but at this precise moment this move had not been played before, and it must
have been Carlsen's preparation. Others:} ({The year before Gelfand had tried} 
8. Bg5 {against Kramnik:} b5 9. Ne5 Ra6 10. -- (10. a4 bxa4 (10... c6 11. O-O {
was possibly what Gelfand was expecting, not that that is obviously tragic for
Black}) 11. Nxc4 h6 12. Bxf6 Qxf6 13. O-O Rd8 14. Qxa4 Bd7 15. Qd1 Be8 16. e3
c5 {, when White was under pressure and felt obliged to sacrifice a pawn with}
17. d5 Bxc3 18. bxc3 Qxc3 {, when he had no more than tenuously adequate
compensation at best and almost lost in B.Gelfand-V.Kramnik, Moscow 2009. It
seems as though both players learned from this game (Kramnik's 13...gxf6 in
the present game, and Gelfand's 11...bxa4 against Caruana).}) ({. Marin criticized 10 a4, astutely remarking that White has not yet extracted any concession
from the pawn's placement on b5, and recommended instead the line} 10. O-O h6
11. Bxf6 gxf6 12. Nf3 Rb6 13. Qc1 Kg7 14. a4 c6 15. Qf4 {'with ample
compensation for the pawn'; certainly White has compensation for the pawn, but
Black has his trumps too, and I doubt that Kramnik was afraid of this; after
the natural} Nd7 16. Rfd1 {
it seems to me that Black's most recommendable line is} Bxc3 (16... Rg8 {
allows White to regain the pawn with} 17. Qg4+ Kh7 18. Qh5 Qe7 19. axb5 cxb5
20. Nxb5) 17. bxc3 b4 18. Nd2 Ba6 19. Rdc1 ({if} 19. cxb4 axb4 20. a5 Rb8 21.
Bxc6 c3) 19... bxc3 20. Rxc3 c5 {with equality.})) ({After the natural} 8. O-O
{Black can change course with} Nc6 9. a3 (9. Bg5 h6 10. Bxf6 Qxf6 11. e3 {
as in S.Feller-A.Kosteniuk, Paris (blitz) 2010, should have been met with} e5 {
, with at least equality for Black}) 9... Bxc3 10. bxc3 a4 {(a typical move in
this line, which protects Black's queenside pawn constellation in various ways;
it prevents a4, allows ...Na5 or ...Ra5, and fixes the a-pawn where it is
often vulnerable to a queen from e7)} 11. Bg5 ({if} 11. Qb1 Ra5 {
followed by ...b5}) {
, as in S.Iskusnykh-Y.Yakovich, Tomsk 2006, when Black should have played}
11... h6 12. Bxf6 Qxf6 13. Nd2 e5 14. d5 Na5 {. This position is no good if
both sides haven't castled, because a4 is en prise with check, but here} 15.
Qxa4 {is better for Black after the excellent sequence} Bg4 16. Qd1 Qe7 $1 17.
Re1 c6 18. dxc6 bxc6 $1 {.}) 8... Be7 9. Qa4 c6 10. Qxc4 b5 11. Qb3 ({
Later White tried} 11. Qd3 Ba6 12. Ne4 b4 (12... Nbd7 {
also makes a lot of sense, for example} 13. Nxf6+ Bxf6 14. O-O c5 15. Be3 Rc8
16. Rfd1 Qb6) 13. Nxf6+ Bxf6 14. Qc2 (14. Qe4 {was Marin's proposal, but after}
bxa3 15. Rxa3 Bb5 16. O-O Nd7 17. Rfa1 a4 {Black is okay, thanks to the trick}
18. b3 Be7 19. R3a2 axb3 20. Rxa8 b2) 14... bxa3 15. Rxa3 Bb5 {, when White
was perhaps a tiny bit better, although Black held comfortably in A.Grischuk-L.Aronian, Nice (rapid) 2010.}) 11... Ba6 12. Bg5 ({Otherwise,} 12. O-O {allows}
b4 {and ...Bxe2}) ({while after} 12. Qc2 Nbd7 13. Ne4 Nxe4 14. Qxe4 Bb7 {
White is not in time to prevent ...c5.}) 12... Nbd7 13. Bxf6 gxf6 {
An extremely combative choice.} ({I don't see that Black has anything
particular to fear after the more conventional} 13... Bxf6 {: for example,} 14.
Ne4 Be7 15. Rc1 ({or} 15. O-O) 15... b4 16. Qe3 bxa3 17. bxa3 Qb6 18. O-O Rab8
{.}) 14. Qc2 b4 15. Na4 Rc8 ({Playing the queen to b8 and the other rook to c8
was an attractive alternative: for example,} 15... Qb8 16. Nd2 (16. O-O Qb5)
16... Rc8 17. Bf3 bxa3 18. bxa3 Qa7 {, when White really doesn't have the
horses to hold down c5 and establish a grip.}) 16. O-O c5 {This was the idea
of the last move; obviously Kramnik isn't afraid of White's next, but it gets
quite dangerous for him. The remainder of this game has been much annotated by
the great and good with varying conclusions, and we might have to wait for
Kramnik's own collection of games to get somewhere near the truth.} 17. d5 exd5
18. Bh3 {Kasparov objected strenuously to this one already,} ({
claiming that White is almost winning after} 18. Rfd1 d4 19. Qf5 Re8 ({or} 
19... Bd6 20. axb4 Bxe2 (20... axb4 21. Nc3 {
is the idea, but perhaps this is what Black should do}) 21. bxc5 Bxd1 22. Rxd1)
20. Nxd4 cxd4 21. Rxd4 Qc7 ({not} 21... Rc7 $2 22. Be4) 22. Rxd7 Qe5 23. Qxe5
fxe5 24. Nb6 Rc2 25. Nd5 {.}) 18... Bb5 19. axb4 axb4 20. Rfd1 d4 21. Bf5 Ne5
22. Bxh7+ (22. Bxc8 d3 {is at least equal for Black}) ({but Kasparov preferred
} 22. Nxe5 fxe5 23. b3 {'with an easy game', and it does seem natural to stop
the pawns advancing before starting to take any material.}) 22... Kg7 23. Nxe5
({Kramnik said that he was more afraid of} 23. Be4 {
, and certainly the computer reaction of} b3 ({
Black has to trade the knights anyway with} 23... Nxf3+ {, but it seems likely
that the position with the doubled f-pawns is better for White than the game})
{is not good after} 24. Qxb3 Bxe2 25. Nh4 Rb8 26. Nf5+ Kg8 27. Qc2 {.}) 23...
fxe5 24. Bf5 Rc6 25. Qe4 Rh8 {A striking move, giving up e5 to activate the
dark-squared bishop. Carlsen now thought for a long time and began to fall
into time trouble.} 26. Qxe5+ Bf6 27. Qe4 Re8 28. Qg4+ Kf8 29. Be4 ({
Kasparov wanted to play} 29. Bd7 Bxe2 ({if} 29... c4 30. e3) 30. Qh3 Bxd1 31.
Rxd1 Ree6 32. Bxe6 fxe6 33. b3 Qd5 {and his comment shows his feelings at this
stage: 'Black cannot win with such a king'.}) 29... c4 $5 {Computers of course
prefer various moves which don't lose material, but a convincing refutation of
this sacrifice has yet to be shown, and against a human opponent already in
considerable time trouble I doubt whether Kramnik had too many qualms about it.
} 30. Bxc6 Bxc6 31. Qh5 (31. Nc5 Qd5 32. Qf3 Qxf3 33. exf3 Kg7 {
was one internet refutation, but it seems to me that Black is not worse here.})
31... Re5 32. Qh6+ Ke7 33. e4 $6 (33. Qd2 {was probably the best move;
computers as you would expect show many and various lines, while Kasparov gave}
Qd5 34. Qxb4+ Ke8 35. Qb8+ Bd8 36. f3 Rxe2 37. Qf4 d3 38. Rf1 {'and maybe
can hold', but the verdict everywhere is that Black has adequate compensation
and by far the easier practical play.}) 33... d3 34. Qe3 Bxe4 35. Nb6 $2 {
Losing a piece, but by now if White has a route to salvation I don't see it:} (
35. Re1 Bc6 36. Qc5+ Qd6 37. Rxe5+ Bxe5 38. Qxc4 d2 39. Qb3 Qd4 40. Qc2 Bf3 41.
Rd1 Bxd1 42. Qxd1 b3 43. Nc3 Qd3 44. Nb1 Qc2 {, for example.}) 35... Bb7 36.
Qf4 Qxb6 37. Qxc4 Re2 38. Rf1 {. A great game. I can't resist quoting the two
gladiators' contrasting opinions: 'Frankly the thought of losing today didn't
even cross my mind' (Carlsen), 'one of the best games I have ever played'
(Kramnik), and of course 'Today I'm going to crush Vladimir Kramnik like a
bug' (Carlsen on Facebook, allegedly). --- Conclusion: This line is dangerous
and we can expect more developments, but Black seems to have his own chances
as well.} 0-1

[Event "Krasnoyarsk"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2007.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Iskusnyh, S."]
[Black "Maletin, P."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E04"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "70"]
[EventDate "2007.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 Bb4+ 4. Bd2 a5 5. g3 d5 6. Bg2 dxc4 7. Na3 {
Another rare move, albeit leading to very entertaining play.} Bxa3 8. Qa4+ ({
The alternative is} 8. bxa3 {, when there followed a very natural sequence in
E.Miroshnichenko-S.Estremera Panos, Leros 2009:} b5 9. Rb1 c6 10. Qc2 Ba6 11.
O-O O-O 12. e4 h6 13. Rfe1 Nbd7 {, and now the rather splendid} 14. g4 {
; White has some compensation for his pawn here, of course, but objectively I
doubt it's enough, and I'd suggest Black simply carry on taking pawns:} Qe7 15.
g5 ({or} 15. Bxa5 Nxg4 16. e5 Bb7 17. Qc3 h5 18. h3 Nh6) 15... hxg5 16. Bxg5
Qxa3 (16... e5 {
would be the game, quite possibly also better for Black but more complicated})
17. Re3 Qa4 {and White really has to settle for} 18. Qxa4 bxa4 {
, when Black's extra pawns aren't much to shout about, but still he is better.}
) 8... b5 9. Qxa3 Qd6 $1 {
A strong move, which I suspect more or less closes this line.} 10. O-O (10.
Qxd6 cxd6 {is the critical line, but Black obtains far more than enough for
the exchange after} 11. a4 b4 12. Ne5 dxe5 13. Bxa8 exd4 14. Bf4 Nbd7 {
, thanks to the trick} 15. Bc7 ({or} 15. Bc6 Kd8 $1) 15... Nc5 $1 {.}) 10...
Bb7 11. Rfc1 Bd5 12. Bf4 Qb6 13. Bg5 Nc6 {White is struggling here, although
he doesn't have to lose his queen the way he does.} 14. b3 $6 c3 15. Bxf6 b4
16. Bxg7 bxa3 17. Bxh8 Ke7 18. Be5 f6 19. Bf4 Nxd4 20. Nxd4 Qxd4 21. e4 Bb7 22.
Rc2 a4 23. b4 Qxb4 24. Rac1 Rd8 25. Rxc3 Rd1+ 26. Rxd1 Qxc3 27. Rc1 Qb2 28. e5
Bxg2 29. Rxc7+ Kd8 30. exf6 Qxf6 31. Kxg2 e5 32. Rc3 exf4 33. Rxa3 Qc6+ 34. Rf3
a3 35. gxf4 Qd5 {
. --- Conclusion: This line is more dangerous to White than to Black.} 0-1

[Event "Turin Olympiad"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2006.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Markus, R."]
[Black "Beliavsky, A."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "E04"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "53"]
[EventDate "2006.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. g3 dxc4 5. Bg2 Bb4+ 6. Bd2 a5 7. O-O {
Boris Avrukh predicted in his 2008 repertoire book that this move would become
White's main try against Black's system, and he has been proved correct,
certainly in terms of popularity.} O-O 8. Bg5 {Avrukh's main move, and also
played in the 2008 games Kramnik-Navara and Ivanchuk-Alekseev which brought
White's set-up to prominence. Obviously Vladimir Kramnik's choice against the
system he encountered in a World Championship match and then adopted himself
as Black deserves the highest respect. Previously White tried various other
moves:} (8. Qc2 {should be met by} Bxd2 9. Nbxd2 b5 10. a4 c6 11. b3 cxb3 12.
Nxb3 b4 {, leading to Inarkiev-Zhou Weiqi.}) (8. Nc3 Nc6 ({I wonder about} 8...
c6 9. a3 Be7 {which hasn't been played, but it does stop the Qa4 idea Carlsen
employed in Carlsen-Kramnik; I'm not sure how exactly White would go about
showing compensation for his pawn then}) 9. a3 Bxc3 10. Bxc3 (10. bxc3 {
would lead to the note with 8 0-0 in Carlsen-Kramnik}) 10... Nd5 11. Bd2 {
is another way to make it a real gambit:} -- ({
. In E.Bareev-V.Kramnik, Monte Carlo (rapid) 2005, Black defended with} 11...
b5 12. e4 Nb6 13. Be3 Bb7 14. Qc2 Ne7 ({not obviously the best move; Black
could consider a number of alternatives including} 14... a4 $5) ({and} 14... h6
15. Rad1 Qf6) 15. Rad1 Qe8 16. d5 Ra6 17. Rfe1 h6 {
, but obviously this is fairly uncomfortable for Black after} 18. dxe6 fxe6 19.
Bf4 {.}) ({. It's not obvious to me why Kramnik wanted to put his knight on b6;
since 2005 a number of games have shown the merit of} 11... a4 {
in this kind of position: for example,} 12. Qc2 b5 13. e4 Nf6 14. Rad1 Ra6 $1 {
(this covers the knight on f6 in the event of d5 exd5)} 15. Rfe1 h6 16. Bc3 Re8
{. Black is pretty well placed now to meet d5, but what I'm less sure about is
how he could proceed if White were to do nothing.})) (8. Na3 Bxa3 9. bxa3 b5 {
will most likely lead to the note to White's 8th move in Iskusnyh-Maletin after
} 10. Rb1 c6 11. Qc2 Ra6 {.}) 8... Nc6 9. e3 h6 10. Bxf6 Qxf6 11. a3 ({
Avrukh says that he was at one time intending to recommend} 11. Nbd2 {
, but discovered that Black was fine after} e5 12. d5 Ne7 13. Nxc4 ({
even worse is} 13. a3 Bxd2 14. Nxd2 Rd8 15. Nxc4 Nxd5 16. Bxd5 Be6 17. e4 c6)
13... e4 14. Nd4 ({or} 14. Nfd2 Rd8 15. Nxe4 Qa6) 14... Nxd5 15. Bxe4 Rd8 {.})
11... Bd6 12. Nc3 (12. Nfd2 {is another line Avrukh says that he had to
abandon with regret; he gives the lines} e5 13. d5 Ne7 14. Nc3 ({or} 14. Nxc4
b5 15. Nxd6 cxd6 {with equality}) 14... Bd7 15. Nxc4 b5 16. Nxd6 (16. Ne4 Qg6
17. Nexd6 cxd6 18. Nb6 Bg4 {is equal too}) 16... cxd6 17. Qd3 Rab8 18. b4 a4 {
, and Black is fine. It's a shame simply to copy these lines; the only excuse
I can offer is that as with so much of Avrukh's work I haven't been able to
find any significant improvement.}) 12... e5 13. d5 Na7 {
I think this is the best move.} ({
I'm not totally convinced by Avrukh's observation that after Korchnoi's} 13...
Ne7 {White continues} 14. Qa4 {, captures on c4 with the queen, and maintains
a significant advantage, but the text gives Black the opportunity to force
simplification with ...b5, and is a reasonably clear equalizer in my view.})
14. Nd2 (14. Qa4 b5 15. Qxa5 Bf5 {
(Avrukh) is fine for Black, who has stabilized himself.}) 14... b5 15. a4 Bd7
16. Qc2 Bb4 {A good square for the bishop, observes Avrukh. True enough, but
d6 isn't bad either.} ({
It seems to me that Black could equalize fairly clearly with} 16... Rfb8 {:}
17. -- (17. axb5 Nxb5 18. Nxc4 Nxc3 19. Qxc3 ({if} 19. bxc3 a4) 19... Bb5 {
is fine for Black.}) (17. Rfd1 {presumably is what Avrukh would like, but after
} Qe7 {White is hard-pressed for a constructive waiting move, and has nothing
better than} 18. axb5 Nxb5 19. Nxc4 Nxc3 20. Qxc3 a4 {
, when Black follows with ...Bb5, and has easy equality.}) ({
. White's other reasonable try is} 17. Nce4 {
, but it comes to much the same: for example,} Qe7 18. Nxd6 ({or} 18. axb5 Nxb5
19. Nxc4 Bb4) 18... cxd6 19. axb5 Bxb5 20. Rfc1 ({if} 20. Nxc4 Rc8 21. b3 a4)
20... Nc8 21. Nxc4 Bxc4 22. Qxc4 Rxb2 {
, and White can win the pawn back, but no more.})) 17. axb5 (17. Rfd1 bxa4 18.
Nxa4 Nb5 19. Nxc4 Ra7 20. Nd2 {is Avrukh's offering, when he justifiably
prefers White. I'm not sure Black's bishop is so well placed on b4 in this
line; it doesn't do much there for his c7-pawn or his king's rook.}) 17... Nxb5
18. Nxb5 Bxb5 19. Nxc4 a4 20. Rfc1 Bd6 21. Nd2 Rfb8 {Achieving the set-up I
wanted to establish on move 16. Black is comfortable now.} 22. Ne4 Qd8 23. Nc5
Be8 24. Nxa4 Rxa4 25. Rxa4 Bxa4 26. Qxa4 Rxb2 27. Be4 {. --- Conclusion: 7 0-0
might have Avrukh's support, but Black appears to equalize without too much
difficulty; he should, however, if facing a booked-up Avrukhian deploy his
bishop to d6, rather than Beliavsky's choice of b4. We now move on to consider
White's alternatives to 5 Bg2 Bb4+ 6 Bd2.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Amsterdam"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2010.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Caruana, F."]
[Black "Gelfand, B."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E04"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "172"]
[EventDate "2010.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. g3 dxc4 5. Bg2 Bb4+ 6. Nbd2 O-O {Since the bishop is not en prise, of course, there is no reason for Black not to continue
with normal development.} 7. O-O {White almost always plays this.} ({
Other moves can be met in much the same way, for example} 7. Qc2 {.}) 7... b5
8. a4 {White needs to loosen Black's pawn chain at some point, and it's better
to play this move before Black can go ...Bb7 and ...a6, so this again is
virtually the only move White ever plays.} c6 9. b3 {This, however, was a
novelty by Caruana (albeit rather an unsuccessful one). At this point White
has tried a considerable variety of moves:} (9. Qc2 {is the most natural and
the commonest, preventing Black from establishing a clear extra pawn with ...
c3, and simply developing. Black continues with} Bb7 {, when we have:} 10. -- (
10. Rd1 Nbd7 11. -- (11. e4 {is a real gambit and probably White's most
dangerous method, although Black was successful in L.Koerholz-Z.Hracek,
European Club Cup, Rethymnon 2003, with the rather curious} Re8 ({not a natural
move to my eye, although you can see why it was played; the machine prefers
the plan} 11... h6 12. e5 Nd5 13. Ne4 Be7 {, followed by ...a5 and...N7b6,
trying to force axb5, and inserting ...Qc7 or not as appropriate - this would
be a very plausible alternative}) 12. e5 Nd5 13. Ne4 Bf8 14. h4 Nb4 15. Qe2 Nd3
16. Bg5 f6 17. exf6 gxf6 18. Be3 Nb6 19. b3 ({
a critical point; Black beats this off, and probably} 19. Ne1 {was better})
19... Nd5 20. bxc4 bxc4 21. Nfd2 Ba6 22. Bf1 f5 23. Ng5 h6 24. Qh5 hxg5 25.
Qg6+ Bg7 26. Bxg5 Qd7 27. g4 Qf7 {0-1.}) ({. Instead} 11. b3 c3 12. Nb1 {
would most probably transpose into the note to White's 14th in the game if
Black were to play} bxa4 {now;} ({instead in I.Ivanisevic-M.Prusikin, Swiss
League 2007, he was less accurate with} 12... c5 13. Nxc3 bxa4 14. Nxa4 {
, which revealed the difference, and after} Be4 15. Qb2 Qe7 {,} 16. Nc3 {
would have left White considerably better off than in the main game.}))) (10.
Ne5 Nd5 11. Ne4 f6 12. Nf3 Qe7 13. Nc3 Nxc3 14. bxc3 Bd6 15. Nd2 a6 16. Ne4 Re8
{was solid, and fine for Black in A.Naumann-A.Beliavsky, German League 2005.})
(10. e4 Nbd7 11. e5 Nd5 12. Ne4 h6 13. Bd2 {, and now} Be7 {
would have embarked on the machine's plan,} ({while after} 13... a5 14. b3 cxb3
15. Qxb3 bxa4 16. Rxa4 Ba6 17. Rc1 Bb5 18. Raa1 Be7 19. g4 Bb4 {Black was also
doing well in M.Carlsen-I.Ivanovic, European Team Championship, Heraklion 2007.
}))) (9. e4 $5 {has the drawback of not preventing} c3 {, which produced a
wild encounter in Z.Kozul-V.Topalov, FIDE World Championship, Tripoli 2004,
with} 10. Nb3 (10. bxc3 Bxc3 {doesn't trouble Black much, for example} 11. Ra2
b4 12. Bb2 Bxb2 13. Rxb2 a5 14. Qc2 Ba6 15. Rc1 Nbd7 {
, so White is more or less obliged to give up another pawn}) 10... Ba6 11. a5
Nxe4 12. Qc2 cxb2 13. Bxb2 Nf6 14. Ne5 Nd5 15. Rfc1 Bb7 16. Nc5 Bxc5 17. dxc5
f6 18. Nd3 Na6 19. Re1 Bc8 {; the former Avignon pope had to undergo some
difficult moments but won in the end, and there's no reason to think that
White has enough compensation for two pawns here.}) (9. Ne5 {
, as always, is met with} Nd5 {, when} 10. e4 Nf6 ({Black has also played} 
10... Ne7 {, and indeed even going to the queenside isn't out of the question;
White's two free moves of Ne5 and e4 look quite pretty, but they weaken d4,
block the g2-bishop, and allow exchanges after ...Nbd7, so they're far from
unmitigated benefits}) 11. Ndf3 Bb7 12. Qe2 Nbd7 13. Rd1 a6 14. Bg5 Be7 {
produced a pretty normal sort of position for these pawn sacrifices in R.Buhmann-R.Jedynak, French League 2007; Black isn't under much pressure here
and White doesn't have full value for his pawn.}) 9... c3 {Gelfand reacts
cautiously, yet strongly. Black can't hope to hold this pawn, but the time he
gains while White rounds it up enables him to complete his development and do
a little more than equalize.} 10. Nb1 Bb7 11. Qc2 bxa4 {An excellent move.
Black can't be happy without playing ...c5, and to do that he has to tackle
the pressure on the b5-pawn somehow. With a knight about to appear on c3, he
doesn't want to play ...a6 since even then the b-pawn will be en prise after ...c5, and anyway it's convenient to keep the a-pawn to defend the bishop on b4,
hence the text.} 12. Rxa4 c5 13. Nxc3 a5 14. Na2 {Another good move. White's
problems are his hanging knight on c3, and the fact that he's going to need to
spend a tempo moving his rook back from a4. With the text he attempts to solve
both issues economically.} ({White could easily get himself into trouble with
routine development: for example, the co-operative variation} 14. Rd1 Nbd7 15.
Be3 Qe7 16. Raa1 Rac8 {, and here White is already in grave difficulties.})
14... Be4 15. Qd1 Nbd7 16. Nxb4 cxb4 {Combative.} ({
If Gelfand had wanted a draw, then he could have played} 16... axb4 17. Rxa8
Qxa8 {.}) 17. Bb2 {A difficult choice. White is slightly worse and needs to
find a way to minimize his disadvantage.} ({The alternative was} 17. Ra1 Nb6
18. Bg5 {(better than the immediate 17 Bg5 because Black would now have to
recapture on f6 with the queen, taking it away from the ideal d5-square).
Still, in either case it is clear that Black has won the opening.}) 17... Nb6
18. Ra1 Qd5 19. Ne1 Bxg2 20. Nxg2 Qb5 21. Nf4 a4 {Another good move; with the
knight on f4 the b-pawn is not vulnerable, but after this exchange White's
bishop is merely a target and his problems continue.} 22. bxa4 Nxa4 23. Qb3 Nd5
24. Nd3 Nac3 {Another delicate choice.} ({With} 24... Ndc3 {Black could more
or less have forced the ending of rook, knight and four against rook, knight
and three: for example,} 25. Rfe1 Nxb2 26. Qxb2 Rxa1 27. Rxa1 Qc4 28. Kf1 Qxd4
29. Qxb4 Nxe2 {; I wouldn't care to say whether his winning chances here are
better or worse than in the game.}) 25. Rfe1 Rxa1 26. Bxa1 Rc8 27. Bxc3 Rxc3
28. Rc1 {It's possible this wasn't the best defence.} ({Black's rook isn't his
most effective attacker and the 4 vs. 3 ending with rooks and knights might be
better to defend than just knights (which is very often lost); thus} 28. Qa2 {
might have been more resilient.}) 28... h6 29. Rxc3 Nxc3 30. Nc1 Qg5 {
This probably isn't the most accurate choice.} ({With the refined} 30... Qa6 $1
{Black could more or less have forced his target ending of knight and four
against knight and three at once: for example,} 31. Kg2 (31. Qxb4 Qa1 32. Qb8+
Kh7 33. Qf4 Nxe2+ {is the point, of course}) 31... Qa8+ 32. f3 Qa1 33. Nd3 Nxe2
34. Kf2 Nxd4 35. Qxb4 Qa2+ 36. Qb2 Qxb2+ 37. Nxb2 {.}) 31. e3 Qb5 32. Kg2 {
This runs into trouble;} ({computers hang rather tougher with} 32. h4 {
, but White still faces a most unpleasant task.}) 32... Qc6+ 33. Kg1 Ne4 34.
Nd3 Nd2 35. Qb2 (35. Qxb4 {loses at once to} Qc2 {
, threatening the knight and mate via ...Qd1+ and ...Qf1.}) 35... Nf3+ 36. Kf1
Qb5 37. Ke2 Ng1+ 38. Kd2 Nf3+ 39. Ke2 b3 40. Qc3 Qh5 41. Nf4 Nxd4+ 42. Kd2 Nf3+
43. Kc1 Qxh2 44. Nd3 Qh1+ 45. Kb2 Qd1 46. Qxb3 Qxb3+ 47. Kxb3 {I remember Jon
Speelman looking at me in horror once when I made some comment that betrayed
the fact that I didn't know this ending was generally winning, but of course
Gelfand has had a proper education.} Kh7 48. Kc2 Kg6 49. Kd1 Kf5 50. Ke2 Kg4
51. Nc5 h5 52. Nd7 f6 53. Nf8 Ng5 54. Ng6 e5 55. Kf1 Kh3 56. Nh4 Ne4 57. Ng6
Kh2 58. Nh4 g5 59. Nf5 Kh3 60. Ng7 h4 61. gxh4 gxh4 62. f3 Ng5 63. Kf2 e4 {
A surprising solution, but the knight dominates on e4 to such an extent that
Black wins easily after this.} 64. fxe4 Kg4 65. Ne8 Nxe4+ 66. Kg2 f5 67. Kh2 h3
68. Ng7 Nd2 69. Kg1 Nc4 70. Ne8 Nxe3 71. Nf6+ Kg3 72. Nh5+ Kh4 73. Nf4 Kg3 74.
Nh5+ Kg4 75. Ng7 f4 76. Ne8 f3 77. Nf6+ Kf5 78. Nh5 Ng4 79. Ng3+ Kf4 80. Nf1
Ke4 81. Ng3+ Ke3 82. Nf1+ Kf4 83. Kh1 f2 84. Nd2 Ne3 85. Nf1 Kf3 86. Ng3 f1=Q+
{. --- Conclusion: A really classy game by Gelfand, who made Caruana look like,
well, a 17-year-old taking his first steps in top-class chess. 6 Nbd2 isn't
too much of a threat to 5...Bb4+.} 0-1

[Event "Turin Olympiad"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2006.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Agdestein, S."]
[Black "Onischuk, A."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E20"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "80"]
[EventDate "2006.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. g3 dxc4 5. Bg2 Bb4+ 6. Nc3 {This position
actually usually arises from the 4 g3 Nimzo-Indian (and has a lot to do with
why it's now really become the 5 g3 Nimzo-Indian, with 4 Nf3 c5 preceding the
move g3). It would be rare for it to occur from a Catalan move order, but not
impossible.} Nc6 {This is much the most popular method, although by no means
the only one. Black prepares ...Rb8 and ...b5, evacuating the Catalan diagonal
and holding on to the c4-pawn. White is hampered in his attempts to win that
back by the premature deployment of his c3-knight.} 7. O-O ({Instead} 7. a3 Bd6
8. Qa4 {(this attack on the pawn was the reason for a3 at the exact moment it
was played) would transpose to a variation of the Catalan with the addition of
the move a3 and the early Nc3, neither of which is a great boon to White's
position since the most dangerous replies to Black's ...dxc4 and ...Bd6 idea
(aiming for ...e5) are normally thought to involve trying to take the c4-pawn
with a knight.}) ({Still, I don't like this variation much (it went poorly in
two recent top-class games), and to me it seems more logical after} 7. a3 {
to continue as in the old game A.Pomar-A.Bisguier, Stockholm Interzonal 1962,
with} Bxc3+ 8. bxc3 Bd7 {(preventing Qa4)} 9. a4 O-O 10. Nd2 Na5 11. Ba3 Re8
12. Bb4 Bc6 $1 13. f3 Nd5 $1 14. Bxa5 Ne3 15. Qc1 Nxg2+ 16. Kf2 Ne3 $1 {
(the point)} 17. Kxe3 Qg5+ 18. Kf2 Qxa5 19. Nxc4 Qa6 20. Ne5 f6 {
½-½; Black could perfectly well have played on.}) 7... Rb8 8. a3 {
This position is something of a tabiya for the pure 4 g3 Nimzo, and the text
is not the most common move. White has tried the following three alternatives:}
(8. e3 {
comes at the c-pawn from a different direction; the normal continuation is} O-O
9. Qe2 b5 10. Rd1 {, and now I like} Nd5 {, and if Mikhalevski's} 11. Bd2 {
, then} (11. Qc2 Be7 12. a3 Na5 13. Nd2 Nxc3 14. bxc3 Bd7 {looked quite wrong
in E.Gleizerov-A.Raetsky, Katowice 1990; weakening b3 with an unforced a3 is
seldom a good idea in this variation}) 11... Nxc3 12. bxc3 Ba3 {. The bishop
is surprisingly good on this square, preventing a4, leaving e7 free for the
queen or knight if needed, and even having the idea of a cheeky ...Bb2 at some
later moment.}) (8. Re1 O-O 9. e4 ({White's problem is that} 9. a3 Be7 10. Qa4
{can now be well met by} b5 11. Nxb5 Bd7 $1 {, when} 12. Nxa7 Nxd4 13. Qxc4 Nb3
14. Rb1 c5 {is good for Black, as in a mysterious game G.Dizdar-M.Cebalo,
Yugoslavia 1980, thanks partly to the clever counterstroke} 15. Ne5 Qa5 16. Rd1
Qxa7 17. Rxd7 Nxd7 18. Nc6 Ne5 $1 19. Nxe5 Nxc1 20. Nc6 Qd7) 9... b5 10. e5 Nd5
{was apparently BCO's recommendation, when something like} 11. Ng5 Be7 12. h4
Ncb4 (12... h6 $5 {also looks fairly effective}) 13. Be4 f5 {
is quite tenuous for White, although obviously he has some compensation.}) (8.
Bg5 {has a point that it wouldn't have when played in the rather commoner
position after 7...0-0. After} O-O ({here} 8... h6 9. Bxf6 Qxf6 10. Ne5 {
is slightly annoying}) 9. Rc1 ({
this is usually White's idea after an early Bg5; certainly not} 9. e4 h6 10.
Bxf6 Qxf6 {, when Black is already better since d4 is in trouble,}) ({and} 9.
a3 Bxc3 10. bxc3 h6 11. Bxf6 Qxf6 12. Nd2 e5 {doesn't trouble Black much either
}) ({, but} 9. e3 {is a sensible alternative: for example,} b5 10. Nd2 Bd7 11.
Nce4 Be7 12. Nxf6+ Bxf6 13. Bxf6 Qxf6 14. b3 e5 {
with equality, F.Levin-M.Wahls, German League 2004}) 9... h6 10. Bxf6 Qxf6 11.
Ne4 Qf5 12. Ned2 b5 13. Nh4 Qg5 14. Nxc4 bxc4 15. Bxc6 Ba6 {
Black is at least not worse, M.Prusikin-L.Kritz, Griesheim 2003.}) 8... Ba5 {
By no means the most popular move, but I rather like it. We are wandering some
way off the beaten track into an unexplored, interesting and roughly equal
position, so I won't add too much theory in the rest of the game.} 9. Qc2 (9.
e3 e5 ({obviously Black could consider a number of other moves: for example,} 
9... b5 {, when White is more or less bound to have to give up a pawn for
indeterminate compensation}) 10. Nxe5 Nxe5 11. dxe5 Qxd1 12. Rxd1 Nd7 13. f4
Nc5 14. Bf3 Bxc3 15. bxc3 Bf5 {
was N.Pedersen-M.Carlsen, Aalborg (blindfold) 2006.}) 9... O-O 10. Rd1 h6 $1 {
A good move, directed against the possibility that White's next will be d5:} ({
for example,} 10... b5 $6 11. d5 exd5 12. Nxd5 h6 ({if} 12... Nxd5 13. Ng5) 13.
Ng5 $5 {.}) 11. e4 Bxc3 {An inconsistent-looking move, but this knight would
have been quite dangerous on e4 with Black having no bishop on e7 to defend
the kingside:} ({for instance, after} 11... b5 12. e5 Nd5 13. Ne4 Bb7 {even}
14. Neg5 {is already possible, although perhaps} hxg5 15. Nxg5 g6 16. Nxe6 Qd7
{is only a draw.}) 12. bxc3 b6 13. a4 Bb7 14. Ba3 Re8 15. Nd2 Na5 16. Ra2 Ba6
17. Bf1 Qc8 {White certainly has at least some compensation here, but he can't
really stop Black playing either ...c5 or ...e5, so his pawn centre isn't as
solid as it looks.} 18. Bb4 e5 19. Bxa5 bxa5 20. f3 (20. Bxc4 exd4 21. Bxa6
Qxa6 22. cxd4 Rb4 23. e5 Nd5 {gave Black good play as well; the exchange of
bishop for knight on a5 wasn't critical for him and suggested that White was
already seeking equality.}) 20... Qe6 21. Kh1 Nd7 22. Bg2 {Black is better now
with the extra pawn and the b-file. His pawns aren't gorgeous but White's
problem is that any way of releasing the tension is likely to undouble them:} (
{for example, after} 22. d5 {Black could sooner or later play ...c6}) ({
or after} 22. dxe5 Nxe5 {
a knight on d3 would have to be captured at some point.}) 22... exd4 23. cxd4
c3 24. d5 {Otherwise ...Bc4 wins the exchange.} Qf6 25. Nb3 Bc4 26. Ra3 Qd6 27.
Rda1 Bxb3 28. Rxb3 Rxb3 29. Qxb3 Qb4 30. Qd1 Rb8 31. Bf1 Nc5 32. d6 cxd6 33.
Bb5 Qb2 34. Rc1 Qd2 35. Qxd2 cxd2 36. Rd1 a6 37. Bc6 Rb6 38. Bd5 Rb2 39. Bc6
Rc2 40. Kg2 Nd3 {. --- Conclusion: 4 g3 is no longer considered too highly in
the Nimzo, and Black should welcome this transposition. Moreover, Onischuk's 7...Rb8, and if 8 a3 then 8...Ba5, looks like a good alternative to the more
theoretical lines. We now turn our attention to White's decision to regain his
pawn at once with 5 Qa4+.} 0-1

[Event "European Club Cup, Rethymnon"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2003.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Fahrner, K."]
[Black "Tregubov, P."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D30"]
[Annotator "John Cox"]
[PlyCount "84"]
[EventDate "2003.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.07.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 c6 ({The game position can also arise from the Slav,
as in this game; our move order would be} 3... Nf6 4. g3 dxc4 5. Qa4+ c6 6.
Qxc4 {.}) 4. Qc2 dxc4 5. Qxc4 Nf6 6. g3 b5 7. Qb3 ({
With this move White is trying to hold back ...c5, but more common is} 7. Qc2
Bb7 8. Bg2 Nbd7 {, and then:} 9. -- (9. O-O c5 10. a4 b4 (10... cxd4 11. Nxd4
Bxg2 12. Kxg2 Rc8 13. Qb3 Qb6 $1 14. Nf3 b4 15. a5 Qa6 {
was also fine for Black in P.Nikolic-V.Ivanchuk, Antalya (rapid) 2004}) 11.
Nbd2 Rc8 12. Qd3 Be7 {is already fine for Black; White needs to find some way
to develop the c1-bishop. Things soon went wrong in D.Fridman-A.Grischuk,
Mainz (rapid) 2003, with} 13. b3 (13. Rd1 O-O 14. Nc4 Be4 {
already sees White under pressure}) 13... cxd4 14. Nxd4 Rc3 15. Qb5 Bxg2 16.
Kxg2 Qa8+ 17. Kg1 a6 18. Qg5 h6 {, and since} 19. Qxg7 Rh7 {
loses the queen, White was already struggling.}) (9. Ne5 {is also played:} Qb6
10. Nxd7 Nxd7 11. Be3 c5 12. Bxb7 Qxb7 13. O-O Rc8 14. Rc1 Be7 15. dxc5 Nxc5 {
is fine for Black, thanks to the point} 16. b4 Bf6 {.}) (9. a4 {doesn't stop}
c5 {, in view of the continuation} 10. axb5 cxd4 11. O-O Bc5 {.}) (9. Nc3 c5
10. O-O (10. Nxb5 $2 Qa5+ {loses a piece}) 10... b4 11. Na4 Rc8 12. Nxc5 Nxc5
13. dxc5 Bxc5 14. Qa4+ Bc6 15. Qa6 O-O 16. Bg5 Bd5 17. Rac1 Qb6 {
is fine for Black as well.})) ({Instead} 7. Qd3 {
has a similar idea to the text to restrain ...c5, but also doesn't really work:
} Bb7 8. Bg2 Nbd7 9. O-O a6 10. Be3 (10. a4 c5 11. axb5 Be4 {
transposes to 11 axb5 Bd5 12 Qd3 in the notes to the main game.}) 10... c5 11.
dxc5 Bxc5 12. Bxc5 Nxc5 13. Qxd8+ Kxd8 {
left Black comfortable in J.Nogueiras-V.Ivanchuk, Havana 2005.}) 7... Bb7 {
The appeal of Black's system to my mind is that he immediately solves his
greatest problem in the Catalan, the light-squared bishop. White can hardly
hold down ...c5, so Black's bishop will be able to oppose White's and be fully
its equal. Of course nothing is for free, and Black can sometimes find his
queenside pawns a little exposed, but there are compensations for that in the
form of his activity, and overall I think this is an excellent method to meet
the early queen excursion.} 8. Bg2 Nbd7 9. O-O a6 10. a4 c5 $1 {Black is able
to play this move thanks to the resource 11...Bd5 after 11 axb5, and so
equalizes comfortably.} 11. Bf4 {Quite a pointed idea;} ({
even so much commoner is} 11. axb5 Bd5 {, and then:} 12. -- (12. Qd1 axb5 13.
Rxa8 Qxa8 14. Nc3 Bc6 15. Ne1 {
(A.Lunev-A.Grischuk, Moscow 1999), and now Adams'} Bxg2 ({
better than Grischuk's} 15... b4 16. Nb5 Qb7 17. Bxc6 Qxc6 18. Qa4 {
; the ending after something like} Be7 19. dxc5 O-O 20. Nc3 Qxa4 21. Nxa4 Nxc5
22. Nxc5 Bxc5 23. Nd3 Bd6 24. Bd2 {
is pretty much what White is hoping for in this system}) 16. Nxg2 b4 17. Nb5
Qc6 {
with equality in I.Papaioannou-M.Adams, European Team Championship, Leon 2001.}
) (12. Qd3 Be4 13. Qb3 Bd5 14. Qd3 {
offers a draw, but if Black wants to then he can play on with} c4 15. Qc2 axb5
16. Rxa8 Qxa8 17. Nc3 Bc6 {, as in E.Bacrot-Dao Thien Hai, Wijk aan Zee 1997.
White now has the breakthrough} 18. d5 exd5 (18... Nxd5 19. Nd4 Nb4 20. Bxc6 {
is worse}) 19. Nd4 Bc5 {, and then the alarming} 20. Nxc6 Qxc6 21. Nxd5 {
, although the ending after} Nxd5 22. Qe4+ Kf8 23. Qxd5 Qxd5 24. Bxd5 Ke7 {
is about equal.}) (12. Qc2 axb5 (12... Be4 13. Qb3 Bd5 14. Qc2 {is a not-infrequent draw and a good argument against White's set-up, but Black isn't obliged
to do this and there's no particular reason to move the queen from c2, where
it isn't wonderfully placed anyway}) 13. Rxa8 Qxa8 14. Nc3 Bc6 15. dxc5 ({
alternatively:} 15. e4 $6 Nxe4 16. Ne5 Nxe5 17. Nxe4 Nd7 18. Re1 c4 {
is basically unsound, D.Poldauf-M.Roiz, Chalkidiki 2002}) (15. b3 {
, to enable Na4 after ...b4, is met well enough by} Be7 16. dxc5 Bxc5) (15. Ne1
Bxg2 16. Nxg2 b4 17. Nb5 Qc6 18. Qa4 {is Papaioannou-Adams again}) ({and} 15.
Bg5 $6 b4 16. Nb1 Be4 17. Qd1 cxd4 18. Qxd4 Bc5 {is at least equal for Black})
15... b4 16. Nd1 Bxc5 17. Be3 Be7 {
was V.Malaniuk-A.Kharlov, Alushta 1992; again Black is fine.})) 11... c4 $5 ({
White's idea is that after a neutral move like} 11... Be7 12. axb5 Bd5 13. Qc2
axb5 14. Nc3 Bc6 {he doesn't need to exchange rooks and bring the black queen
to a8, which frees his hands to meet ...cxd4 at some moment with Nxd4, so
Black is tempted into releasing the pressure on the centre. Of course there
are compensations - Black has a decent grip on e4 and his pawns are quite
dangerous - but even so this is a double-edged decision.}) 12. Qc2 Be7 13. Na3
$6 ({White should have followed through with the point of 11 Bf4;} 13. axb5
axb5 14. Nc3 {was much better. After a sequence like} Qb6 15. b3 O-O 16. bxc4
Rxa1 17. Rxa1 bxc4 18. Rb1 Qa6 {the c-pawn may turn out weak or it may turn
out strong, but certainly Black has to display more care than in the game.})
13... Be4 14. Qd2 Qb6 15. Rfc1 O-O 16. Bf1 $2 {
To be perfectly frank, this is just a terrible move.} ({I don't know what
White was thinking, but his best course was to reroute the knight on a3 to
somewhere sensible, quite possibly starting with the mildly embarrassing} 16.
Nb1 {.}) 16... Rfc8 ({Even the co-operative} 16... Bxf3 17. exf3 Nd5 {
, which was surely what White was expecting, was better for Black.}) 17. Ne5
Nxe5 18. Bxe5 Bd5 19. Nc2 ({
At least White should have fought for his idea with 16 Bf1 by playing} 19. f3 {
; Finkel dismisses this with} Nd7 {, but I don't know that} 20. Bf4 e5 21. Be3
{was any worse than the game.}) 19... Ne4 20. Qe1 b4 21. f3 Nf6 ({
Black has a trick here which was much better:} 21... c3 22. fxe4 cxb2 23. exd5
f6 $3 {, and Black comes out material ahead:} 24. Bf4 Rxc2 {
is the main point, while a5 Qa7 at any point changes nothing.}) 22. e4 Bb7 23.
a5 Qa7 24. Nxb4 Nd7 25. Bf4 Qxd4+ 26. Be3 Qxb2 27. Rab1 Qf6 28. Qf2 Ne5 29. Be2
g5 30. Bd4 Qg7 31. Kf1 Bf6 32. f4 $2 gxf4 33. gxf4 Ng4 34. Bxg4 Bxd4 35. Qg2
Kh8 36. Nd5 Rab8 37. Nb6 Rg8 38. Nd7 Bxe4 39. Qxe4 Rxb1 40. Rxb1 f5 41. Qxe6
Qxg4 42. Rb8 Qf3+ {. --- Conclusion: This line really doesn't cause too many
problems for Black; White can't prevent ...c5 followed by the development of
Black's kingside pieces.} 0-1

