% BOOKTITLE = Meeting 1 e4
[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "About this Publication"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B20"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "2"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

{Fed up having to defend with Black? Annoyed by all those irritating white
systems? Then this is the book for you! Russian international master Alexander
Raetsky draws upon his wealth of experience gained playing on the tough
international tournament circuit to supply you with an all-in-one solution to
your problems. The reader is provided with a complete repertoire for Black
against} 1. e4 {, based on the ever-reliable Sicilian Defence:} c5 {. Lines suggested are fun to play and promise Black dynamic counterplay. The variations
are also easy to learn: this book is especially useful for players who have
neither the time nor inclination to learn reams and reams of the latest
opening theory.} (1... -- {Alexander Raetsky is a Russian Grandmaster and an
experienced competitor on the chess tournament circuit. He's also a skilled
writer and has been a frequent contributor to the famous Russian magazine '64'
and the internationally renowned publication 'New In Chess'.}) *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Introduction"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "11"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

{This book was written together with my close friend and co-author Maxim
Chetverik (with whom I have written on the Petroff Defence, the Albin
Counter-Gambit, and the Catalan Opening; his help here was priceless). The
idea is to give club and tournament players a chance to build a serious
opening repertoire with as little memorization as possible. We have built up
an opening repertoire which is solid and yet active. Every line starts with a
brief introduction to highlight the main important strategic themes dealt with
in the chapter. Still, this is a theoretical work where there is a possibility
to be well prepared for serious games. When we found it prudent and felt we
had the space for it, we have dealt in depth with the theoretical branches in
a position, but mainly we have tried to focus on the most important lines,
seen from a practical point of view.} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 ({
The only place we abandon fashion is against the closed systems with} 2. Nc3 {
, where we have chosen to recommend} e6 {followed by ...d7-d5, instead of the
more traditional 2...Nc6 and ...g7-g6. This line is, in my opinion, no worse
than the traditional system, and will probably become fashionable in the not
too distant future. Still, you might be blessed by the advantage of surprise
and find your opponent on foreign territory in his own favourite system.}) 2...
Nc6 3. d4 ({Against the Rossolimo (} 3. Bb5 {
), we have decided on one of the main lines with} e6 {
and 4...Nge7, which is in the repertoire of many top class grandmasters.}) 3...
cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 {. The choice of The Four Knights Variation was
made after conversation with our editor Byron Jacobs. The reason why we chose
this lesser known variation is simple. Though it is perfectly playable and
will not face serious threats on its right to existence in the coming century,
it has not been covered seriously in any book for a very long time. Still, it
has been used by two modern world champions (Kramnik and Zsuzsa Polgar)!} 6. --
({We have also given some different possibilities in the main line. In the
position after} 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. a3 Bxc3+ 8. Nxc3 d5 9. exd5 exd5 10. Bd3 {
, we have decided to give both} O-O {(the main line)} ({and} 10... d4 {
as options. Not because we believe they are of precisely equal value, but
because chess is a game and is to be played to win. Therefore a surprise
weapon can come in handy if you expect your opponent to be familiar with your
main line. Remember, however, that even though your opponent might have
prepared for the game, this does not mean that he will be just as capable as
you in playing the positions which arise once the theory ends.})) (6. -- {
One of the great strengths of this book is that it is not only a repertoire
book for the main lines. It is, of course, possible to substitute the Sicilian
Four Knights with a variety of other main lines. There is the Sveshnikov (5...
e5), the Classical (5...d6), the Accelerated Dragon (4...g6), the Kalashnikov
(4...e5) and the Paulsen (4...e6). There are good books available on all of
these openings, but they only cover about half the games you will play in the
Sicilian. This book also covers the other half.}) (6. -- {I would very much
like to thank Nikolay Kizimenko and Sergey Sergienko for their practical
assistance towards this book. I would also like to express my admiration I
have for my wife Elena, who managed to remain calm in the months I was working
on the book. Finally, I would also like to express my gratitude to Jacob,
although I don't have enough words to express it fully. --- Positive criticism
is very welcome. Please send your comments to the address
alex_raetseky@hotmail.com. And if you would like to see the author in the
flesh, you should maybe consider participating in the Voronezh Chess Festival,
starting every year on June 12th. Voronezh is located about nine hours south
from Moscow by train and has fantastic weather in the summer. For more
information use the e-mail address given above.}) (6. -- {
Alexander Raetsky, Voronezh, January 2002.}) *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "1: Main Line with 7 Nd6+"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "16"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. Nd6+ {
was frequently played in the formative years of the Four Knights Variation,
but nowadays is a regular visitor only to amateur competitions. However,
let's look closer at the position after the sequence} ({
The check is seductive: after} 7. Nd6+ Bxd6 8. Qxd6 {Black feels uncomfortable
without the bishop, while if 7...Ke7 Black loses the right of castling.}) 7...
Ke7 8. Nxc8+ ({White has tried supporting the centralized knight by} 8. Bf4 {
(Anderssen-Paulsen and Cipolli-Limp). However, after} e5 9. Nf5+ Kf8 {
Black will shortly make the advance ...d7-d5 with the better prospects as the
bishop on c8 now takes aim on the white knight. It is possible to conclude
that the move 7 Nd6+ is a harmless one, after which White is struggling for
equality.}) 8... Rxc8 {. The white knight has made five moves to exchange an
undeveloped and inactive bishop, while bringing the black rook to the
half-open c-file. Black's advantage in development is obvious and the awkward
placement of the black king is an inexpensive price for this, especially as
the king can easily be evacuated to his native kingside if necessary. All in
all, the situation is preferable for Black - as we shall see in Sanz-Jordan
and Buchenthal-Rosen.} *

[Event "Cataluña"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1999.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Sanz, B."]
[Black "Jordan, J."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "67"]
[EventDate "1999.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. Nd6+ {
Here 7 e5 and 7 Bg5 are also possible. Let us consider them one at a time.} ({
With the pawn sacrifice} 7. e5 {White hastens the development of the queen's
bishop, but that alone is not enough for an advantage. Nevertheless, Black
should proceed circumspectly. After 7 e5 the moves} Nxe5 8. Bf4 d6 9. a3 Bxc3+
10. Nxc3 {look almost forced. White intends Qd1-d2 and 0-0-0.} -- ({. After} 
10... a6 11. Qd2 b5 12. O-O-O Bb7 {
Black has developed the wrong side of the army and now punishment comes!:} 13.
Nxb5 $1 axb5 14. Bxe5 O-O $1 (14... dxe5 $2 15. Bxb5+ Ke7 16. Qb4+ {
and White wins}) 15. Qxd6 {
and White had an extra pawn and a won position in Polzin-Poppner, Berlin 1994.}
) ({. After} 10... O-O 11. Qd2 -- (11... Qe7 12. O-O-O Ne8 13. Nb5 Ng6 14. Bxd6
Nxd6 15. Qxd6 Qxd6 16. Nxd6 {White has won back the pawn and is positionally
preferable, Schaefer-Stein, Dortmund 1991.}) ({. Apparently, it is more
expedient to give back the extra pawn at once, in order to complete
mobilization of the remaining forces. For example,} 11... Nd5 $5 12. Nxd5 exd5
13. Qxd5 Qf6 14. Be3 Bf5 {with an active game for Black.} (14... --)))) ({
Against the straightforward pin,} 7. Bg5 {
, it is simplest to ask the intentions of the bishop at once with} h6 ({if} 
7... Qa5 $6 8. Bxf6 gxf6 9. a3 Bxc3+ 10. Nxc3 {, Black's kingside pawn
structure is spoiled and this is felt much more with the dark-squared bishop
missing}) 8. Bxf6 Qxf6 9. a3 (9. Nd6+ Ke7) ({and} 9. Nc7+ Kd8 {
are both bad for White since c3 is under attack; e.g.} 10. Nxa8 Bxc3+ 11. bxc3
{loses to} Qxc3+ 12. Ke2 Nd4+) 9... Bc5 {
when Black can develop smoothly and has the advantage of the two bishops.})
7... Ke7 8. Nxc8+ ({The attempt to maintain the knight on d6 with} 8. Bf4 {
is considered in Anderssen-Paulsen and Cipolli-Limp.}) 8... Rxc8 9. Bd2 ({
White does not want Black to spoil his queenside pawn chain with} 9. Bd2 Bxc3 {
and is therefore ready to sacrifice the pawn on e4.}) (9. Bd3 {
is considered in Buchenthal-Rosen.}) 9... d5 {
This is the thematic move, pushing forward in the centre.} ({
However, Black is perfectly developed and can also continue} 9... Bxc3 10. Bxc3
Nxe4 11. Bxg7 Qa5+ 12. c3 Rhg8 {as in Mason-Mieses, Paris 1900. Due to his
strong development, Black has a good game. After} 13. Bh6 Nxc3 $5 14. bxc3
Qxc3+ 15. Bd2 Qe5+ 16. Be3 {
, Black can, if he so desires, finish the game by repetition of moves:} ({not} 
16. Be2 $2 Nd4 $1 {with a lot of threats}) 16... Qc3+ {etc.}) 10. exd5 Nxd5 11.
Nxd5+ ({The attacking move} 11. Qg4 {
does not threaten 12 Qxg7 so much as 12 Nxd5+ and 13 Bxb4+. This is best met by
} Bxc3 12. bxc3 Qd6 {
and Black's lead in development guarantees him a strong position.}) 11... Qxd5
12. Bxb4+ $2 {This loses a pawn;} ({but after} 12. c3 Bc5 {
White has problems with his development.}) 12... Nxb4 13. Qxd5 ({
Now it is too late for} 13. c3 {in view of} Qe4+ {, winning.}) 13... Nxc2+ 14.
Kd2 exd5 15. Rc1 Nb4 {. Black has an extra pawn in the endgame. The rest is a
matter of technique and here, too, Black was clearly superior.} 16. Be2 Nc6 17.
Rc3 Kd6 18. Rhc1 Ne7 19. Bg4 Rxc3 20. Rxc3 Nc6 21. f4 Re8 22. b4 $6 Re4 $1 23.
b5 Ne7 24. Ra3 Rxf4 25. Be2 Nc8 26. Rc3 Nb6 27. Rc1 Ra4 28. Ra1 Nc4+ 29. Kc3
Kc5 30. Kd3 Ra3+ 31. Kc2 Kxb5 32. Rb1+ Kc6 33. Bxc4 dxc4 34. Kb2 0-1

[Event "Germany"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1979.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Buchenthal, D."]
[Black "Rosen, W."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "54"]
[EventDate "1978.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 e6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. Nd6+ Ke7 8.
Nxc8+ Rxc8 9. Bd3 d5 10. exd5 Qxd5 $1 {Black wisely elects to finish his
development and so clears the d8 square for the king's rook.} ({After} 10...
Nxd5 $6 11. O-O Nxc3 12. bxc3 Bxc3 13. Rb1 Qc7 14. Ba3+ Ke8 15. Qh5 {(Fink-Grünberg, Dortmund 1988) the black king is stuck in the centre and the rook on h8
is left out of the game, all in all leaving White with a dangerous initiative.}
) 11. O-O Bxc3 $1 {This move deforms White's queenside pawn structure. It
seems dangerous to give up the two bishops, but because of his perfect
development and the centralization of his forces, Black is not worse.} (11...
Qh5 {leads to a slightly inferior endgame; for example,} 12. Qxh5 Nxh5 13. Ne4
Ne5 14. Be2 Nf6 15. Nxf6 gxf6 16. c3 Bc5 17. Bf4 Rhd8 18. Rfd1 {
as in Fischer-Pavey, New York 1956.}) 12. bxc3 Rhd8 13. Rb1 ({
Baron-Krivokapic, Paris 1993, saw} 13. Ba3+ Ke8 14. Qb1 Rc7 15. Bb5 {
(threatening 16 Qb4) when Black successfully defended with} Ng8 (15... Ne4 $1 {
is probably even stronger, e.g.} 16. Qb4 Nd6 {and everything should be okay})
16. Qb4 Nge7 17. Bxc6+ Qxc6 18. Qg4 Qxc3 19. Bxe7 Rxe7 20. Qa4+ Red7 {
and now the attempt to win back the pawn resulted in immediate disaster:} 21.
Qxa7 $4 Qxa1 $1 {0-1.}) 13... Rd7 14. Ba3+ Ke8 15. Qc1 a6 {To prevent 16 Rb5.}
16. c4 Qh5 17. f4 Na5 {Finally Black can begin to take advantage of the pawn
weaknesses in his opponent's camp.} 18. c5 Qd5 $1 {Because of White's
defective pawn structure, the power of his bishops is not felt at all. White's
only chance lies in an attack against the king.} 19. f5 Nc4 20. fxe6 fxe6 21.
Rd1 Rxc5 $5 {This interesting combinational continuation is not the strongest.}
({Centralization was preferable:} 21... Qd4+ 22. Kh1 Ne4 $1 23. Bxe4 Qxe4 24.
Rxd7 Kxd7 {when Black has the better arrangement of pieces.}) 22. Be2 $6 ({
White should have chosen one of two basic continuations: either} 22. Bg6+ hxg6
23. Rxd5 Rcxd5 {when Black has sufficient compensation for queen}) ({or} 22.
Bxc5 Qxc5+ 23. Kh1 Ne3 {
when Black has the initiative to compensate for the exchange.}) 22... Nd2 $1
23. Rb4 $2 ({It was necessary to accept an inferior endgame after} 23. Rxd2
Qxd2 24. Qxd2 Rxd2 25. Bxc5 Rxe2 26. Rxb7 {.}) 23... Rc3 {. The invasion of
unfriendly black pieces into the enemy camp makes a strong impression. White
is lost.} 24. Rf4 Qe5 25. Rf2 Nde4 26. Rxd7 Nxd7 27. Bb2 Nxf2 0-1

[Event "Leipzig"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1876.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Anderssen, A."]
[Black "Paulsen, L."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "79"]
[EventDate "1876.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. Nc3 Nc6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. Nd6+ Ke7 8.
Bf4 {It is characteristic that in this, one of the first games with the
variation, the great Adolf Anderssen prefers not to exchange the knight for
the bishop, but to keep it in the centre.} e5 9. Nf5+ Kf8 10. Bg5 {
The most natural continuation.} ({The pawn sacrifice} 10. Bd2 {
is considered in Cipolli-Limp.}) 10... d5 $1 {
Black is well prepared to play this.} 11. exd5 ({After} 11. Bxf6 Qxf6 12. Qxd5
Bxf5 13. exf5 Rd8 14. Qe4 ({absolutely bad is} 14. Qc4 $6 Rd4 15. Qb5 Qg5 $1
16. Rd1 Re4+ 17. Be2 Qxg2 18. Rf1 Qf3 {with advantage to Black}) 14... Rd4 15.
Qe3 Qxf5 {Black has an easy game.}) 11... Qxd5 $1 ({
This is more enterprising than} 11... Bxf5 12. dxc6 bxc6 13. Bd3 {
with approximately equal chances.}) 12. Ne3 Qa5 $6 {Black goes astray here.
Even though he wins a pawn, he gets into trouble as he lacks development.} ({
The exchange of queens promised the best prospects:} 12... Qxd1+ $1 13. Nexd1
Ne4 14. Be3 Nd4 15. Bd3 Bf5 {when Black's initiative develops almost by itself.
Seminara-Alpern, Buenos Aires 1992, continued} 16. a3 Nxc3 17. bxc3 ({or} 17.
Bxf5 Nxd1+ 18. Kxd1 Nxf5 19. axb4 Nxe3+ 20. fxe3 Ke7 {
with a favourable rook endgame for Black}) 17... Bxd3 18. Bxd4 (18. cxd3 $6 Ba5
{achieves nothing}) 18... exd4 19. axb4 Bxc2 {. Here the players agreed a draw,
but in fact that Black has a more pleasant position.}) 13. Nc4 Bxc3+ 14. bxc3
Qxc3+ 15. Bd2 Qd4 16. c3 Qe4+ ({
Probably the queen should remain on the d-file, i.e.} 16... Qd5 {.}) 17. Be3
Nd5 18. f3 Qh4+ (18... Nxe3 {is unfortunately impossible because of} 19. Qd6+
$1 {.}) 19. Bf2 Qd8 20. Qb3 {After a long journey the black queen comes home
again. Meanwhile White has improved the position of his pieces. Perhaps it was
now necessary to prepare the introduction of the c8-bishop into the game by 20.
..Qe7.} Nf4 21. Rd1 Qe7 22. g3 Ne6 23. Bg2 g6 24. O-O Kg7 25. Rfe1 Qc7 26. Rd5
{The alternative plan is to move the knight to d5 via e3 in preparation for
f3-f4.} f6 27. Nd6 Ng5 {Black is trying to develop his bishop.} 28. Nxc8 {
But White does not allow it.} Rhxc8 29. Rb5 b6 30. f4 $5 {
This is the style of Anderssen! Opening lines, he does not care about pawns.}
Nf7 ({After} 30... exf4 31. gxf4 Qxf4 32. Bg3 {
White's initiative is rather dangerous.}) 31. fxe5 fxe5 (31... Nfxe5 {
deserved attention.}) 32. Rf1 Nd6 $2 {
Now White wins back the pawn with advantage.} ({Black should play} 32... Rf8 {
with the amusing simplification} 33. Qe6 Ng5 34. Qxc6 $6 ({correct is} 34. Qg4
{with the initiative}) 34... Nh3+ $1 35. Kh1 Qxc6 36. Bxc6 Rxf2 {
when Black has good chances to draw.}) 33. Bxc6 Qxc6 34. Rxe5 Nf5 $6 35. g4 Qf3
36. Re7+ Kh8 37. gxf5 Qg4+ 38. Bg3 Rc4 39. fxg6 Rd8 40. Qxc4 $1 {
Deflecting the queen. The king is defenceless.} ({Black resigned due to} 40.
Qxc4 Qxc4 41. Be5+ Kg8 42. gxh7# {.}) 1-0

[Event "Brazil"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Cipolli, A."]
[Black "Limp, E."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "90"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. Nd6+ Ke7 8.
Bf4 e5 9. Nf5+ Kf8 10. Bd2 Bxc3 11. Bxc3 d5 $1 ({The greedy} 11... Nxe4 $6 {
was tried in Cantoni-Zon, Venice 1883. After} 12. Qg4 Ng5 13. f4 $1 Ne6 $6 ({
Black should have made a temporary piece sacrifice with} 13... d5 $1 14. fxg5
d4 {, even though after} 15. Bd2 g6 16. Bd3 {White is more active}) 14. fxe5
Qg5 15. Be2 Qxg4 16. Bxg4 h5 17. Bf3 g6 18. Nd6 Ke7 19. O-O-O b6 20. Rhf1 {
Black was under strong pressure.}) 12. exd5 Nxd5 13. Ne3 Nxc3 (13... Be6 14.
Nxd5 Qxd5 15. Qxd5 Bxd5 {promises Black less, as White has the two bishops and
a flawless pawn structure.}) 14. Qxd8+ Nxd8 15. bxc3 Be6 {The game has passed
through the middlegame without stopping and has gone directly from the opening
into the endgame. White's queenside pawn chain is spoiled, as frequently
happens in the Four Knights Variation. In the middlegame this weakness is
usually compensated by better development and threats against the black king
(especially due to the dominance of the dark-squared bishop). Here these
factors are absent and so White's position is strategically difficult.} 16. a4
{This move loses time;} ({White should have preferred the developing move} 16.
Bc4 {.}) 16... Rc8 17. O-O-O Ke7 18. Kb2 ({
The knight against bishop endgame after} 18. Nd5+ Bxd5 19. Rxd5 Ke6 {
is also favourable to Black.}) 18... Rc5 19. c4 Nc6 20. Nd5+ Bxd5 21. cxd5 Nd4
{White has created a passed pawn, but the pawn is not dangerous as it is
easily blockaded. So instead of advancing the passed pawn to its own death,
White should have played more precisely with 22 c4.} 22. d6+ $6 Ke6 23. c3 Nf5
24. d7 Rd8 25. g4 Nd6 26. Bd3 g6 27. Rhe1 f5 {This stops White's planned
counterplay with f2-f4 and after the d7-pawn falls the struggle practically
comes to an end.} 28. gxf5+ gxf5 29. Re3 Rxd7 30. Rh3 e4 31. Bb5 Rg7 32. Rh6+
Rg6 33. Rxh7 Nxb5 34. axb5 Rxb5+ 35. Kc2 Rg2 36. Rd2 Ke5 37. c4 Rb6 38. Kc3 Kf4
39. c5 Rc6 40. Kd4 b6 41. cxb6 axb6 42. Rh4+ Rg4 43. Rh8 Rd6+ 44. Kc3 Rxd2 45.
Kxd2 Kf3 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "2. Main Line with 7 Bf4"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "29"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. Bf4 {
An early (though rather unsuccessful) employment of this move was in Reggio-Tarrasch, Monte Carlo 1902. This aggressive attack on the sensitive c7-square (and
the slightly less sensitive d6-square) is strategically more reasonable than 7
Nd6+, since 7 Bf4 is also a developing move. Some rather strong chess players
(in particular Judit Polgar) have done their part in championing the move. The
main line involves the capture of the central pawn on e4with} ({In reply to} 7.
Bf4 -- ({, it is unprofitable to play} 7... e5 {, as} 8. Bg5 {
leads to an inferior (for Black) version of the Cheliabinsk Variation.}) ({
. Instead, a rather quiet game arises after} 7... O-O 8. Bc7 Qe7 9. Bd6 Bxd6
10. Qxd6 {(the same position can arise from the modern 6...Bc5!? 7 Bf4 0-0 8
Bc7 Qe7 9 Bd6 Bxd6). White has a strong grip on d6 and stands better (see
Pinski-Gdanski).} (10. --))) 7... Nxe4 {which gives rise to some very
confusing positions. Play usually gravitates towards the following theoretical
position:} 8. Qf3 d5 9. Nc7+ Kf8 10. O-O-O Bxc3 11. bxc3 {It is also possible
to reach this position by transposition of moves, as frequently occurs in
practice. The black king is not as naturally placed as his white colleague.
However, his pawn structure is much better and this factor favours Black after
the most natural continuation} Rb8 {
, when Oll-Shabanov deals with the subsequent transition into an endgame:} ({
The tactical move} 11... g5 {
, with rather unclear consequences, is considered in Rasik-Rogozenko.}) ({
Martinez-Khenkin sees the central advance} 11... e5 {
- a good move which can be recommended for Black.}) 12. Nxd5 exd5 13. Qxe4 dxe4
14. Rxd8+ Nxd8 15. Bxb8 {.} *

[Event "Polanica Zdroj"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1999.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Pinski, J."]
[Black "Gdanski, J."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "52"]
[EventDate "1999.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Bf4 Bb4 7. Ndb5 O-O ({
Compared with the 7...Nxe4 variation, the positions after} 7... O-O {are relatively quiet. The bishop is not ideally placed on f4, so White begins a struggle
for the d6 square. Black is safe from the immediate} 8. Nc7 {as after} ({after} 
8. a3 Bxc3+ 9. Nxc3 d5 $1 {a position arises which is considered in Chapter 3})
8... e5 9. Nxa8 exf4 {
the knight is trapped in the corner and will subsequently be lost.}) 8. Bc7 ({
8 Bc7 is more exact than} 8. Bd6 Bxd6 9. Nxd6 ({or} 9. Qxd6 a6 {
and White cannot play his knight to d6 as he would wish}) 9... a6 10. Qd2 b5
11. O-O-O Qb6 12. f3 Ne8 13. Kb1 Nxd6 14. Qxd6 Bb7 15. Bd3 f6 16. f4 Rf7 17.
Rhf1 Rc8 18. Rf3 Qc7 {(Haag-Myagmarsuren, Polanica Zdroj 1972). Black has
conveniently arranged his pieces and will be no worse in any potential endgame,
while it is hard to see how White can co-ordinate fully.}) 8... Qe7 9. Bd6 Bxd6
10. Qxd6 a6 {This move forces the exchange of queens.} ({The alternative} 10...
Ne8 {leaves White with a choice. After} 11. Qxe7 ({in the case of} 11. Qd2 a6
12. Nd4 Nxd4 13. Qxd4 b5 14. O-O-O d6 15. h4 Rb8 16. a3 Bb7 {(Wedberg-Hall,
Swedish Team Ch., 2000) we have a standard Sicilian position, and one quite
acceptable for Black}) 11... Nxe7 12. O-O-O f5 13. Nd6 Nxd6 14. Rxd6 fxe4 15.
Nxe4 Nf5 16. Rd2 d5 17. Ng5 {(Wahls-Hall, German League 1999) White has a
certain pressure on the central pawns.}) 11. Qxe7 Nxe7 12. Nd6 Ne8 13. Rd1 {
The struggle for control over d6 continues. After the bishop, the queen and
knight have occupied this square, it is the rook's turn to join in.} ({
Perhaps it was more precise to play} 13. O-O-O {.}) 13... Nxd6 14. Rxd6 b5 15.
a4 b4 16. Nd1 Rd8 17. f3 {White prophylactically protects the pawn on e4 in
advance of the possible ...Bc8-b7.} ({Now} 17. f3 Bb7 {
can be answered by the move} 18. Rb6 $1 {.}) 17... Kf8 18. Ne3 Nc6 19. Be2 Ke7
20. Rd2 {Black has achieved his goal and broken the blockade of the d-pawn.} ({
White can fight to keep the rook on d6 by} 20. Nc4 {
but refuses, probably because of} a5 {and 21...Ba6.}) 20... Na5 $1 {
Controlling the c4-square - the only serious square for the white knight.} 21.
Kf2 d6 22. Rhd1 Bb7 23. Rd4 Nc6 24. R4d2 Na5 25. Rd4 Nc6 26. R4d2 Na5 1/2-1/2

[Event "Kostroma"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1985.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Oll, L."]
[Black "Shabanov, Y."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "81"]
[EventDate "1985.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. Bf4 Nxe4 8.
Qf3 {There are some alternatives here:} ({
It is clearly unprofitable for White to play} 8. Bd3 Nxc3 9. bxc3 Ba5 {
when Black protects c7 and keeps the extra pawn.}) ({
Nor is it good to for White to take the rook at once with} 8. Nc7+ Kf8 9. Nxa8
$6 {. In an ancient game Reggio-Tarrasch, Monte Carlo 1902, White was severely
defeated:} Qf6 $1 10. Qf3 Nxc3 11. -- (11. Bd2 $2 Nd4 $1 12. Qd3 (12. Qxf6
Nxc2#) 12... Qe5+ 13. Be3 (13. Be2 Nxc2+ 14. Kf1 Nxa1 {
secures an advantage for Black}) 13... Na4+ $1 14. c3 Nxb2 15. Qb1 (15. Qxd4
Bxc3+ {and Black wins}) 15... Bxc3# {mate!}) ({. The co-operation of the black
pieces makes a strong impression, but White's hasty defeat was not
predetermined. After the correct} 11. a3 -- ({, the attack} 11... Nd4 {
is met by} 12. Bd6+ $1 Bxd6 13. Qxc3 Qe5+ 14. Kd1 {with unclear play}) ({
, while if} 11... Ne5 12. Qh3 ({not} 12. Bxe5 $2 Qxe5+ 13. Be2 Nxe2+ 14. axb4
Nd4+ 15. Qe3 Nxc2+ {and Black wins the queen}) {
, Black has a choice between a draw by perpetual check:} 12... Ba5 ({
or dangerous centralization} 12... Qxf4 13. axb4 Nd5) 13. Bd2 Ne4 14. Bxa5
Qxf2+ 15. Kd1 Qd4+ 16. Ke1 Qf2+ {. In these variations the disorder of the
white pieces is obvious. Therefore, instead of 9 Nxa8 it is preferable to play
9 Qf3 transposing back to the main continuation.}))) 8... d5 ({
Black prefers to improve his development rather than play} 8... Nxc3 9. bxc3
Ba5 10. Nd6+ Kf8 11. O-O-O {
when White has a strong initiative in return for the missing pawn. For example,
} f6 12. Bc4 Bc7 13. Rhe1 Bxd6 14. Bxd6+ Kg8 15. Qh5 g6 16. Qh6 Kf7 17. f4 b5
18. Bb3 a6 19. a3 Qg8 20. g4 {and in Klovsky-Antoshin, USSR 1969, White
successfully organized a decisive attack.}) 9. Nc7+ (9. O-O-O Bxc3 10. Nc7+ {
is just a transposition.}) 9... Kf8 {The king quickly and correctly leaves the
centre, where he risked coming under attack.} ({
The king is worse placed on e7: after} 9... Ke7 10. O-O-O Bxc3 11. bxc3 -- (
11... Rb8 {, the move} 12. c4 $1 {undermines the d5-square with the passing
threat 13 Qa3+. With the king on f8 Black could reply with the unpleasant 12...
Qf6, but here after} f5 13. cxd5 e5 {(an attempt to close the position)} 14.
Qxe4 $1 (14. dxc6 $6 Qxc7) 14... fxe4 ({or} 14... Qxc7 15. Qe1 $1 {
and Black is lost}) 15. Bg5+ {White has the advantage.}) ({
. Black's wide choice (which he gets after 9...Kf8) is narrowed down to just} 
11... g5 12. Bg3 f5 13. Bc4 Kf7 14. Nxd5 Qa5 ({A.Kuzmin recommended} 14... Qf8
$5 15. Nb4 Kg6 16. Rhe1 a5) 15. Rhe1 exd5 16. Bxd5+ Kg6 17. Rxe4 $1 Rf8 18.
Bxc6 Qa3+ 19. Kb1 fxe4 20. Bxe4+ Kh6 21. Qe3 {
(A.Kuzmin-Timoshenko, USSR 1984) and Black still has problems with the king.}))
10. O-O-O Bxc3 11. bxc3 ({Not good is} 11. Nxa8 $2 Qa5 12. a3 (12. bxc3 Qa3+ {
just wins}) 12... e5 $1 {(bringing everyone to the party!)} 13. Be3 Be6 14. Kb1
Ke7 15. Bd3 Rxa8 {
and Black has a decisive advantage (Prins-Gonzales, Havana 1952).}) 11... Rb8 {
The rook saves itself for now. This is the most natural continuation. Other
more complex possibilities are considered in the games below.} 12. Nxd5 {
White forces a transition into the endgame.} ({After} 12. Qxe4 $6 dxe4 13.
Rxd8+ Nxd8 14. Nxe6+ Bxe6 15. Bxb8 {
a similar endgame occurs, only now Black has played the extra move ...Bc8-e6!})
12... exd5 13. Qxe4 dxe4 14. Rxd8+ Nxd8 15. Bxb8 {This endgame is important
for the evaluation of 11...Rb8. White has the two bishops and the better
development. But he also has a defective pawn structure, which will depreciate
these advantages. In practice Black keeps the balance.} a6 16. Bc4 Be6 17. Rd1
(17. Bb3 {should not create any difficulties for Black. After an exchange on
b3 White will restore his pawn chain but also lose the advantage of the two
bishops. After} Ke7 18. Re1 f5 19. f3 Bxb3 (19... exf3 20. gxf3 Kf7 {
is safer but also less dynamic}) 20. cxb3 ({with hindsight} 20. axb3 {
appears to be more normal as the d3-square is no longer weakened}) 20... Ne6
21. fxe4 $6 ({this loses the exchange;} 21. Be5 $1 {was better}) 21... Nc5 22.
exf5+ Kf7 23. Re5 Nd3+ (23... Nd7 $1 {
was more precise, gaining a tempo on the game}) 24. Kd2 Nxe5 25. Bxe5 Re8 {
a draw was agreed in Khasin-Bannik, Moscow 1961.}) 17... Ke7 18. Bd6+ Kf6 19.
Rd4 {White tries vigorously to exploit his lead in development. However, Black
has sufficient defensive resources.} Bxc4 20. Rxc4 Ke6 21. Ba3 f5 22. Rc7 Rg8
23. c4 h6 24. Kd2 g5 {Black removes his pawns from the seventh rank to lessen
White's advantage of having a rook there. The better organization of White's
pieces is insufficient for victory because of his defective pawn structure.}
25. Ke3 Re8 26. Bc5 Kf6 27. Bd4+ Kg6 28. Rc8 f4+ 29. Ke2 Kf7 30. Rb8 g4 {
Reminding White of the opposing kingside pawn majority.} 31. g3 Nc6 {
Black sacrifices a pawn in order to exchange rooks.} 32. Rxb7+ Re7 33. Rxe7+
Nxe7 34. Be5 ({After} 34. gxf4 Nf5 35. Be5 {the two extra pawns will not bring
White the victory, as all his pawns are isolated and weak.}) 34... fxg3 35.
Bxg3 Nf5 36. c5 Ke6 37. c6 h5 38. c3 h4 39. Bf4 h3 40. c7 Kd7 41. Be5 1/2-1/2

[Event "Sas van Gent"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1992.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Rasik, V."]
[Black "Rogozenko, D."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "66"]
[EventDate "1992.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Bf4 Bb4 7. Ndb5 Nxe4 8.
Qf3 d5 9. Nc7+ Kf8 10. O-O-O Bxc3 11. bxc3 g5 $5 ({
The previous game showed that after the immediate} 11... Rb8 {
the rook comes under fire from the bishop on f4.}) ({Therefore Black makes a
natural attack on the bishop, intending to exchange it after} 11... g5 12. Bg3
Nxg3 13. Qxg3 {and only then continue} Rb8 {.}) 12. Qxe4 (12. Bg3 Nxg3 13. Qxg3
Rb8 {a very sharp position arises which is difficult to assess. One possible
continuation is} 14. Bb5 f5 $1 ({after} 14... Qe7 $2 15. Bxc6 bxc6 16. Nxe6+
Bxe6 17. Qxb8+ Kg7 18. Qg3 Rd8 19. Rhe1 {Black had no compensation for the
exchange in J.Polgar-Hajkova Maskova, Novi Sad Women's Olympiad 1990}) 15. h4
$5 ({now} 15. Bxc6 f4 $1 {closes the ill-starred diagonal;}) ({another line is
} 15. c4 f4 16. Qc3 d4 17. Bxc6 bxc6 18. Rxd4 Qxc7 19. Rd8+ Qxd8 20. Qxh8+ {
, also with a draw; certainly both players have other possibilities in this
complex line, so nothing should be taken for granted}) 15... f4 16. Qxg5 Qxc7
17. Bxc6 bxc6 18. Qf6+ Kg8 19. Rd4 e5 20. Re1 Qg7 21. Qd8+ Qf8 22. Qg5+ {
with a draw according to Judit Polgar.}) ({Bad is} 12. Nxa8 $2 Qa5 $1 13. Kb2
gxf4 {.}) 12... Qxc7 {This move forces a complex endgame.} ({
Black has little choice here as the alternative continuations} 12... gxf4 13.
Qxf4) ({and} 12... dxe4 13. Rxd8+ Nxd8 14. Be5 {are no good at all.}) 13. Bxc7
dxe4 {This position is important for the evaluation of 11...g5. White has a
pair of strong bishops and a lead in development. Black, however, has an extra
pawn and while White spends time to win back the pawn, Black will be able to
develop his forces fully. After that the bad pawn structure (a2, c2, c3) will
depreciate White's initiative.} 14. h4 ({
The game Gaponenko-Foisor, Romanian Team Ch. 1997, continued} 14. Bb5 Kg7 ({
more precise is} 14... f6 {and 15...Kf7 as in the main game}) 15. h4 g4 16.
Bxc6 bxc6 17. Rhe1 f6 18. Rxe4 e5 19. Rxe5 $1 fxe5 20. Bxe5+ Kf7 21. Bxh8 {
and White is two pawns up. Yet one of these is immediately lost and the other
not very important, as it is part of an weak structure. After} Be6 22. Be5 Bxa2
23. Rd6 Bd5 24. f3 Re8 25. Bd4 gxf3 26. gxf3 Re6 27. Rxe6 {
the players agreed a draw.}) 14... g4 15. Bb5 f6 $1 {This move prepares to
bring the bishop into play at e6 while also restricting White's dark-squared
bishop.} 16. Rhe1 e5 17. Rxe4 Be6 18. f4 gxf3 19. gxf3 Kf7 {
Black's pieces are well co-ordinated and already he has nothing to fear.} 20.
Ra4 ({It was probably better to go at once into an opposite coloured bishop
endgame with} 20. Bxc6 bxc6 21. f4 {.}) 20... Rhc8 21. Bd6 a6 (21... Ne7 {
was possible, trying to avoid the opposite-coloured bishop endgame.}) 22. Bd3
b5 23. Ra3 {White's rook manoeuvre has landed it in an inferior position and
Black's chances are already preferable.} f5 24. Rg1 Kf6 25. Rg5 h6 26. Rg1 Bd5
27. h5 Bf7 $1 ({Not} 27... Bxf3 $2 28. Rg6+ Kf7 29. Bxf5 {
and the bishops rage in full power!}) 28. f4 Bxh5 $2 {
Now the game quickly comes to an end with numerous simplifications.} (28... e4
{was necessary, after which the protected passed pawn would give Black some
advantage.}) 29. fxe5+ Nxe5 30. Bxe5+ Kxe5 31. Rh1 Bf7 32. Rxh6 Be6 33. Ra5 Bc4
1/2-1/2

[Event "Alcobendas"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1994.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Martinez, F."]
[Black "Khenkin, I."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "48"]
[EventDate "1994.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. Bf4 Nxe4 8.
Qf3 d5 9. Nc7+ Kf8 10. O-O-O Bxc3 11. bxc3 e5 ({Another way to play against 7
Bf4. As well as limiting the white bishop's strength on the crucial h2-b8
diagonal,} 11... e5 {also opens up a diagonal for the bishop on c8. Now after}
12. Nxa8 $6 exf4 {
White loses some co-ordination and experiences difficulties. For example,} 13.
c4 ({if} 13. Qxf4 Qa5 {followed by ...Qa3+ is very dangerous for White}) 13...
Qf6 14. Qa3+ Ne7 15. c3 Nxf2 16. Rxd5 g6 17. Rd8+ Kg7 18. Rxh8 Kxh8 19. Rg1 Qe5
{with an overwhelming black advantage in Paraminski-Macek, Pula 1998.}) 12.
Nxd5 {The black pawn centre falls and routine play does not help anymore.} ({
In Turner-Thiel, Krumbach 1991, the centralization of White's pieces after} 12.
Nxd5 exf4 13. Qxe4 Qa5 14. Bc4 {allowed him to win a beautiful game:} g5 15. h4
$1 Bg4 16. hxg5 $1 Qa3+ 17. Kb1 Bxd1 18. Rxh7 $1 Rxh7 19. Qxh7 Ke8 20. Nf6+ Kd8
21. Qg8+ Kc7 22. Nd5+ Kd6 23. Qxa8 Bxc2+ 24. Kxc2 Qa4+ 25. Bb3 Qe4+ 26. Kd2 {
and Black resigned.}) {However, Black has a useful intermediate move in} 12...
Ng5 $1 13. Bxg5 ({The alternative is to sacrifice a piece by} 13. Qe3 {
, for which White achieves quick centralization and co-ordination of his
pieces. But with good defence Black has good chances to consolidate. Ernst-Hector, Uppsala 1985 continued} exf4 14. Qc5+ Ke8 (14... Kg8 $4 {
loses immediately to} 15. Ne7+ $1) {, now:} 15. -- (15. Bc4 Ne6 16. Rhe1 Bd7
17. Nxf4 Qe7 18. Qh5 Kf8 $2 ({correct was} 18... Ncd8 19. Nd5 Qa3+ 20. Kb1 Rc8
{and Black should eventually convert his superior position to a win}) 19. Bxe6
$1 Bxe6 20. Rxe6 $1 Qa3+ (20... fxe6 21. Ng6+ $1 {and wins}) 21. Kb1 Qxc3 (
21... fxe6 22. Rd7 Ne7 23. Nxe6+ Kg8 24. Qe5 Kf7 25. Rd4 $1 {
with a winning attack}) 22. Nd5 Qa5 23. Re3 {and White has a great advantage.
This game proves convincingly that Black needs to pay very close attention to
the dangers in this line!}) ({. Instead of 15 Bc4, more often seen is} 15. Bb5
Ne6 16. Rhe1 ({unprofitable is} 16. Bxc6+ bxc6 17. Qxc6+ Bd7) 16... Bd7 17. Qd6
(17. Nxf4 {lets Black escape with useful simplifications, e.g.} Qe7 18. Nxe6
fxe6 19. Rd6 Rf8 20. Bxc6 bxc6 21. g4 Rd8 {, Gonzales-Li Zunian, Dubai 1986})
17... Rc8 18. Kb2 h5 ({if} 18... Nb8 19. Rd4 $1 {
forces the knight to return to c6;} Bxb5 {is impossible because of} 20. Rxe6+
$1) 19. Ka1 Rh6 20. h3 a6 $1 ({
Gobel-Sepp, Netherlands 1987 finished in a draw after} 20... Nb8 21. Qe5 Kf8
22. Qd6+ Ke8 23. Qe5) 21. Ba4 b5 22. Bb3 {
and now it is possible to remove the unfriendly knight from d5 by} Ne7 {.}))
13... Qxg5+ 14. Kb1 ({If queens are exchanged by} 14. Qe3 Qxe3+ 15. Nxe3 {
, White has no compensation for his spoiled pawn structure and should struggle
for equality; e.g.} Be6 16. Bc4 Ke7 17. Rhe1 Rhd8 {and Black is better.}) 14...
h5 (14... Bg4 {is pointless because of} 15. Qg3 {
. Therefore Black makes a way out for the king's rook.}) 15. h4 ({
Emms-Byway, British Ch., Eastbourne 1991, saw} 15. Be2 Bf5 16. h4 Qg6 17. Rd2
Rc8 18. Qe3 Rh6 19. Rhd1 {. Here Black could have taken the pawn on g2, and it
is not clear whether White has any compensation for the sacrificed pawn.})
15... Qg4 16. Qd3 $6 {
White does not sense the danger. It was necessary to exchange queens.} Bf5 17.
Qd2 Rd8 18. f3 Qa4 $1 ({The threat is} 18... Qa4 19. -- Rxd5 20. Qxd5 Qxc2+ 21.
Ka1 Qxc3# {.}) 19. Qf2 Nd4 $1 20. cxd4 Rxd5 21. Bd3 Qb4+ 22. Ka1 Qc3+ 23. Kb1
Rh6 $1 {The last piece enters the battle and the white king finds himself in a
mating net.} 24. Bxf5 Rb6+ {. This game is an instructive example of a
successful attack on the weakened white king position, which often arises
after ...Bxc3.} 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "3. Main Line with 7 a3"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "23"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. a3 {
Currently most people play just so! Moreover, 7 a3 is often seen in games by
the best chessplayers in the world. White gains a minute advantage; Black, on
the other hand, trusts in the solidity of his position. Play is rather calm
and there is a tendency for many games to end in draws. To play the resulting
positions correctly it is necessary to have some precise strategic reference
points; concrete knowledge of lines and variations are of secondary importance.
After} Bxc3+ 8. Nxc3 {White gains the so-called advantage of the bishop pair,
but he also allows the opponent to make the freeing break ...d7-d5.} d5 {
White sometimes declines to isolate the black d-pawn (9 Bd3 - Shirov-Grischuk),
but nevertheless it is usual for White to play} 9. exd5 exd5 {Isolated d-pawn
positions are key in the 7 a3 variation. But rather than a standard isolated
queen's pawn (IQP) situation (i.e. pawns on a2, b2, c2, f2, g2, h2 versus a7,
b7, d5, f7, g7, h7), here we are dealing with a rarer pawn structure of a7, b7,
d4, f7, g7, h7 as the black d-pawn almost always thrusts forward one more step.
Moving the pawn to d4 has some advantages: -- 1) With the black pawn on d5, a
white piece (often a knight) normally occupies the d4-square and the power of
such a blockader can be enormous. White can also use the c5- and e5-squares to
attack the opponent. With the pawn on d4, the power of the blockading piece is
lessened as it is harder to attack the enemy camp from d3, and the c4- and
e4-squares are less important. -- 2) When playing against an isolated d5-pawn,
White can answer Black's pressure on the c-file with the strong move c2-c3. In
the present case this move would merely exchange the isolated pawn. -- 3) The
pawn advance ...d5-d4 grabs space and the important d5-square falls into
Black's hands. He can then more easily manoeuvre his forces from one side of
the board to the other. For example, ...Qd5 attacks the pawns on a2 and g2; on
d6 the queen would be less dangerous. --- However, pushing the pawn forward to
d4 also has some important disadvantages: -- 1) With the pawn on d5 Black has
strong control over the c4- and e4-squares. This is obviously not the case
with the pawn on d4. -- 2) In the endgame the d4-pawn can easily be lost. With
his space advantage Black is less worried about playing with a knight versus
light-squared bishop, which in other isolated pawn positions can be very
unpleasant. Less desirable for Black are single rook endgames, especially if
White is able to organize a blockade with Kd3. Then it would be possible for
White to threaten the pawn on d4 via the open e-file and penetrate into the
black camp. But with the presence of both queens and rooks, the white pawn on
c2 is just as weak as the d4-pawn. --- Black can choose between several
different strategies: -- 1) Apply pressure down the half-open c-file. -- 2)
Advance ...d4-d3, in order to either exchange the isolated pawn or gain an
outpost on d4 for the knight. -- 3) Exchange whichever white piece is on d3.
After the recapture c2xd3 Black may stand better due to his space advantage.
-- 4) Transpose into an endgame with knight against dark-squared bishop.
Practice has shown that this endgame is not at all dangerous for Black. ---
White, on the other hand, can choose to: -- 1) Free his position with the pawn
move c2-c3 or c2-c4. Either advance can be effective if White retains the
advantage of the two bishops. -- 2) Simplify into a profitable endgame of some
sort - this will often be a rook endgame. --- After 9 exd5 exd5 White
sometimes pins the knight on f6 at once by 10 Bg5 (Jones-Denker), but usually
he plays} 10. Bd3 O-O {Castling is not automatic, even though it is our main
choice. The basic position arises after} ({
Black can also test the possible advantages of an early} 10... d4 {
(Fernandez Garcia-Illescas).}) ({The move} 10... Qe7+ {has also been tried,
but we have decided to limit ourselves to the two strongest opportunities here.
}) 11. O-O {. In most cases Black immediately grabs space with the advance} d4
({The Moldovian Grandmaster Dorian Rogozenko has tried delaying ...d5-d4,
taking time first to prevent 12 Bg5 by the prophylactic} 11... h6 {
(Krogius-Tal and Kravchenko-Rogozenko).}) 12. -- ({Then} 12. Ne4 {
is considered in Ki.Georgiev-Chandler}) ({and} 12. Ne2 {
in Ernst-Van Riemsdijk and Kudrin-Rogers.}) *

[Event "Linares"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2001.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Shirov, A."]
[Black "Grischuk, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "63"]
[EventDate "2001.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. a3 Bxc3+ 8.
Nxc3 d5 {This move enables the development of the queen's bishop.} (8... O-O {
can transpose to the usual positions (9 Bd3 d5), but can also have independent
significance after} 9. Qd6 $5 Qe7 ({or} 9... Ne8 {
. After both moves White is slightly better.})) 9. Bd3 {White aims to complete
the development of his kingside and chooses not to clarify the situation in
the centre just yet.} d4 ({White offers to go into an endgame by allowing} 9...
dxe4 10. Nxe4 Nxe4 11. Bxe4 Qxd1+ 12. Kxd1 {. However, this endgame is
unpleasant for Black, as White has the bishop pair and a queenside pawn
majority.} -- ({
. Despite the appearance of opposite-coloured bishops, following} 12... f5 13.
Bxc6+ bxc6 14. Bf4 Ba6 15. Re1 Rd8+ 16. Kc1 Kf7 17. b3 Rd4 18. Be3 Rd7 19. c4
e5 20. Kc2 Bc8 21. Rad1 a6 {, Black does not have an equal game because of the
weakness of his a- and c-pawns and his dark squares. After} 22. Rxd7+ Bxd7 23.
Rd1 Be6 24. Bb6 Rc8 25. Rd6 f4 26. Kc3 {White went on to convert his advantage
to a full point in Garcia-Khenkin, Reykjavik 1994.}) ({. Nor do same-coloured
bishops provide Black with equality. Fischer-Bolbochan, Mar del Plata 1959, saw
} 12... Bd7 13. Be3 f5 14. Bf3 e5 15. b4 O-O-O 16. Kc1 Nd4 17. Bxd4 exd4 18.
Re1 Rhe8 19. Kd2 Bb5 20. Rxe8 Rxe8 21. a4 Bc4 22. Rc1 Kb8 23. c3 dxc3+ 24. Rxc3
Bf7 25. a5 Re7 26. Re3 Rd7+ 27. Rd3 Re7 28. Rd8+ Kc7 29. Rh8 h6 30. Kc3 a6 31.
Kd4 {. Gradually the white pieces and pawns have all become better placed than
their black counterparts. In the end Fischer was able to gain a full point
from the accumulation of these small positional advantages.} (31. --))) ({
More interesting is} 9... Ne5 {
, trying to equalize by exchanging the bishop on d3.} 10. -- ({. After} 10.
exd5 Nxd3+ 11. Qxd3 Nxd5 12. Nxd5 Qxd5 13. Qxd5 exd5 14. Be3 {(Moldovan-Chernov, Bucharest 1992) the opposite-coloured bishops rendered White's advantage
insignificant.}) ({. In Christiansen-Alburt, Parsippany 1996 White tried} 10.
Bb5+ Bd7 11. -- (11. Qd4 Nc6 12. Bxc6 Bxc6 13. exd5 Bxd5 (13... exd5 $2 14. Bg5
{makes the bishop on c6 look very bad; and} Qe7+ {does nothing after} 15. Kd2
$1 {intending 16 Rae1}) 14. Nxd5 Qxd5 15. Qxd5 Nxd5 {and the knight versus
bishop endgame is satisfactory for Black as he has no weaknesses.}) ({. Instead
} 11. Bxd7+ Qxd7 12. exd5 Nxd5 13. Nxd5 exd5 ({or} 13... Qxd5 14. Qxd5) {
, creates a typical position for the 7 a3 variation with no minor pieces other
than knight versus dark-squared bishop. These positions are generally without
particular danger for Black. For example:} 14. Bf4 Qf5 15. Qd4 Nc6 16. Qe3+ Qe6
17. O-O-O O-O 18. Rhe1 Qf5 19. Bg3 d4 20. Qe4 Qxe4 21. Rxe4 f5 22. Re6 f4 23.
Bh4 Rf5 24. f3 Rh5 25. Bf2 Rxh2 26. Rg1 Rd8 27. Re4 g5 28. Kd2 Rh6 29. Kd3 Kf7
30. b4 a6 31. Bxd4 Nxd4 {
with a draw in De Firmian-Khmelnitsky, Parsippany 1996.}))) 10. Ne2 e5 {
This gain of space is logical. Black has a good arrangement of pieces so his
position is not worse. White's only plan is to prepare f2-f4.} 11. O-O O-O 12.
h3 {A useful preventive move.} ({After} 12. Ng3 Bg4 13. f3 Be6 14. f4 exf4 15.
Bxf4 Nd7 {(Lutz-Rabiega, German League 2001) Black controls the important
e5-square and keeps the balance.}) 12... Re8 {Preventing White from playing
f2-f4 immediately by preparing counterplay against the white pawn on e4.} 13.
Ng3 Be6 $6 ({
Black should expect 14 f4 and prepare to bring the knight to e5 with} 13... Nd7
14. f4 exf4 15. Bxf4 Nde5 16. Qh5 f6 {
, as in Ponomariov-Korchnoi, Donetsk (5th matchgame) 2001. Strongest is} 17.
Rf2 Be6 18. Raf1 {with a complex struggle ahead.}) 14. f4 exf4 15. Bxf4 Nd7 $6
{Again with the idea of gaining control over e5, but such strategic play is no
longer prudent. It is simply too slow.} ({
Shirov thinks that the best move here is the prophylactic} 15... h6 {.}) 16.
Qh5 $1 ({Now} 16. Qh5 f6 {(intending 17...Nde5) meets a strong objection in}
17. e5 $1 {.}) 16... g6 {The dark squares are permanently weakened - this is
especially dangerous for Black with the dark-squared bishop missing.} ({But} 
16... Nf8 {is no picnic either due to} 17. e5 $1 {with many threats.}) 17. Qh6
Qf6 {Other moves are also unsatisfactory.} ({Against} 17... f6 {
Shirov had prepared the following beautiful variation:} 18. e5 $1 {
(opening the diagonal for the light-squared bishop)} Ncxe5 19. Nh5 $1 Qe7 20.
Bxe5 fxe5 21. Bxg6 $1 hxg6 22. Qxg6+ Kh8 23. Nf6 Nxf6 24. Rxf6 Qh7 25. Qg5 $1
Rg8 26. Qxe5 {and White wins.}) 18. Bg5 Qg7 19. Qh4 Nce5 20. Bh6 Qh8 {
The black queen has occupied an original but not very good position.} 21. Nf5
$1 Bxf5 (21... gxf5 22. exf5 {is no improvement.}) 22. exf5 {The strength of
the light-squared bishop is growing and Black feels compelled to exchange it.}
Nxd3 23. cxd3 Qe5 {The advance f5-f6 was threatened.} 24. Rf4 $1 {
Preparing to activate the dormant queen's rook.} Nc5 25. Raf1 Nxd3 26. fxg6
fxg6 ({The rook is inviolable:} 26... Nxf4 27. gxf7+ Kxf7 28. Rxf4+ Kg8 29.
Qg3+ Kh8 30. Rf8+ {and mate follows shortly.}) 27. Rf7 Nc5 28. Rg7+ Kh8 29.
Rff7 {A triumphant invasion of the rooks to the seventh rank.} Ne6 30. Rxg6 d3
31. Rg4 Rg8 32. Rxh7+ $1 1-0

[Event "US Ch., Ventura"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1971.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Jones, C."]
[Black "Denker, A."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "82"]
[EventDate "1971.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. a3 Bxc3+ 8.
Nxc3 d5 9. exd5 {White aims for the isolated d-pawn positions.} exd5 ({
We know that Black should not be afraid of simplifications after} 9... Nxd5 10.
-- (10. Nxd5 Qxd5 11. Qxd5 exd5 {as it is normally very hard for White to win
this endgame. But on the other hand Black would have to defend and think only
about making a draw. The active player prefers 9...exd5.}) ({
. After 9...Nxd5 many players choose} 10. Bd2 {
rather than open things up for the bishop on c8.} -- ({. Then if} 10... Nxc3
11. Bxc3 Qxd1+ 12. Rxd1 {
the two bishops and asymmetric pawn structure provide White with an advantage:}
f6 13. f4 Bd7 14. Bc4 O-O-O 15. O-O Kc7 16. Rde1 Rhe8 17. Rf3 Bc8 18. Rg3 Re7
19. Rge3 Rd6 20. b4 Nd8 21. b5 Red7 22. Bd3 h6 23. Rg3 b6 24. Bb4 {
and White went on to win in Fischer-Addison, US Ch., New York 1962.}) ({
. A similar endgame also arises after} 10... O-O 11. Qh5 Nf6 ({otherwise White'
s dangerous bishops will attack the king, as in Tal-Liberzon, Kislovodsk 1964:
} 11... Nxc3 12. Bxc3 e5 13. Bd3 g6 14. Qh6 Qf6 15. O-O Qg7 16. Qe3 g5 17. h4
h6 18. hxg5 hxg5 19. f3 Be6 20. Kf2) 12. Qh4 Qd4 {.}) ({. The move} 10... Qh4 {
interferes with Qd1-h5, but is still not sufficient for equality. For example:}
11. Qf3 Nd4 12. Qd3 O-O 13. O-O-O Rd8 14. g3 Qg4 15. h3 Qf3 16. Qxf3 Nxf3 17.
Bg2 Nxd2 18. Rxd2 Kf8 19. Rhd1 Rb8 20. Nxd5 exd5 21. Rxd5 Rxd5 22. Rxd5 {
and White won a pawn in Mecking-Van Riemsdijk, Sao Paulo 1972.}))) 10. Bg5 {
White ingenuously pins the knight and threatens to win the pawn on d5. But
White cannot win this pawn without cost.} O-O ({
The game Radulov-Rossolimo, Novi Sad 1972, has shown that} 10... d4 {
is premature:} 11. Qe2+ Be6 (11... Qe7 $6 12. Bxf6 $1 {
destroys Black's pawn chain}) 12. O-O-O h6 13. Bh4 Qc7 (13... g5 14. Bg3 Qe7
15. Nb5 {is good for White}) 14. Bxf6 Qf4+ 15. Kb1 Qxf6 16. Nd5 Qd8 17. Nf4 Qf6
18. Nxe6 fxe6 19. Qh5+ g6 20. Qg4 O-O-O 21. Bc4 Rd6 22. Rhe1 {
and White had pressure in the centre.}) 11. Be2 ({White can take the pawn, but
Black gets good compensation thanks to his superior development:} 11. Bxf6 Qxf6
12. Qxd5 (12. Nxd5 Qe5+ $5 13. Ne3 Qxb2 {is better for Black}) 12... Re8+ 13.
Be2 Bg4 14. f3 Rad8 15. Qc5 Nd4 {with a strong initiative for Black.}) 11...
Bf5 {Black has developed the bishop conveniently, taking advantage of the
absence of its white counterpart from the b1-h7 diagonal.} (11... Re8 {
is equivalent. For example,} 12. O-O d4 13. Bxf6 {
(without this exchange the white knight has no place in the centre)} Qxf6 14.
Nd5 Qd6 15. c4 Be6 ({the alternative is} 15... dxc3 16. Nxc3 {
with simplifications}) 16. Bf3 Rad8 (16... Ne5 $5) 17. Re1 h6 18. Rc1 Ne5 19.
Qxd4 Nxf3+ 20. gxf3 Bxd5 21. cxd5 Rxe1+ 22. Rxe1 Qg6+ 23. Kh1 Qf5 {
and Black got his material back in Blalock-Fernando, Aveiro 2000.}) 12. O-O d4
13. Na2 $6 {White seems to have regretted playing the bishop to g5. But why
should the knight suffer for it?} ({Necessary was} 13. Bxf6 Qxf6 14. Nd5 Qd6
15. c4 dxc3 16. Nxc3 Qf6 17. Bf3 Rad8 {as in Kindermann-Chandler, German
League 1988. Black has the better of this symmetrical position thanks to his
superior development.}) 13... Rc8 14. Nc1 h6 15. Bh4 Ne5 16. Nd3 Ng6 {
Black has a space advantage, so he should not exchange pieces. As explained
earlier, the knight on d3 only carries out defensive functions.} 17. Bg3 Qb6
18. Rb1 Rfd8 19. Re1 Ne4 {The black pieces are placed actively and
harmoniously. Now White should attack the centralized knight on e4 by means of
20 Bf3.} 20. Bf1 $6 Qf6 21. Re2 $6 {The pressure on the c2-pawn was
appreciable, but White defends the pawn too clumsily.} ({Preferable was} 21.
Rc1 {.}) 21... h5 $1 22. f3 Nxg3 23. hxg3 h4 24. g4 Bxd3 25. cxd3 Nf4 {
Black has an obvious positional advantage due to greater space and the
superiority of his knight over the white bishop.} 26. Re4 Ne6 ({
Instead of this obscure manoeuvre, there was a better and simpler move in} 
26... g5 $1 {.}) 27. Qd2 Nc5 28. Ree1 g5 29. b4 $2 {
White defends poorly, needlessly weakening the c3-square.} Na4 30. Rbc1 Nc3 31.
Be2 Re8 32. Bd1 Re5 33. Bb3 $2 {The bishop at last comes to a good diagonal,
but too late. Black has a tactical shot.} Re2 $3 34. Rxe2 Nxe2+ 35. Qxe2 Rxc1+
36. Kf2 Qf4 37. Bd1 Ra1 38. a4 Kf8 39. Qc2 Qe3+ 40. Kf1 Rc1 41. Qb3 Qd2 0-1

[Event "Pamplona"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1991.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Fernandez Garcia, J."]
[Black "Illescas Cordoba, M."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "80"]
[EventDate "1991.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6 5. Nb5 Nf6 6. N1c3 Bb4 7. a3 Bxc3+ 8.
Nxc3 d5 9. exd5 exd5 10. Bd3 d4 {This move simplifies the position.} 11. Qe2+ {
White tries to exploit Black's delay in developing.} ({In the case of} 11. Ne4
Nxe4 12. Bxe4 {, the tactical possibility} Bf5 {
is sufficient for equality; for example,} 13. Bxf5 ({
a similar endgame arises after} 13. Qf3 Bxe4 14. Qxe4+ Qe7 15. Qxe7+ Kxe7)
13... Qa5+ 14. Bd2 ({after} 14. c3 Qxf5 15. O-O O-O 16. cxd4 Rad8 17. Be3 Rd5
18. Rc1 Rfd8 19. Qb3 Qd7 {
Black can win the pawn back at a suitable moment and balance the chances})
14... Qxf5 15. Qe2+ Qe5 ({also acceptable is} 15... Qe6 16. Qxe6+ fxe6 {
with an alteration of the pawn structure, but no extra weaknesses}) 16. Bf4
Qxe2+ 17. Kxe2 O-O-O 18. Kd3 Rd5 19. Rhe1 Rf5 20. Bg3 h5 21. h4 a5 22. b4 Rd8
23. Rab1 axb4 24. axb4 b5 {
and a draw was agreed in Sakharov-Zaitsev, Alma Ata 1968.}) ({In the case of} 
11. Ne2 Bf5 ({
on 11 Ne2 it is probably preferable for Black to transpose to the main line by
} 11... O-O 12. O-O Bg4 {- see Ernst-Van Riemsdijk and Kudrin-Rogers}) 12. O-O
Bxd3 13. Qxd3 {, White effortlessly organizes strong pressure against the
d4-pawn. A classic example is the game Karpov-Kuzmin, Leningrad 1977, which
continued} O-O 14. Bg5 h6 15. Bh4 Re8 16. Rad1 Rc8 17. Rfe1 Re6 18. Kf1 Qc7 19.
Bg3 Qb6 20. b4 {with advantage to White.}) 11... Be6 12. Ne4 Nxe4 13. Qxe4 Qd5
{This is virtually forced as the line-up of the d3-bishop and the e4-queen is
very unpleasant.} 14. Qxd5 $6 {Despite the amusing opposition of queens and
bishops White should have kept his cool.} ({
It was obviously better to continue development with} 14. Bf4 {
, keeping all the advantages of his position.}) 14... Bxd5 15. Bf4 ({In the game Chiburdanidze-Barlov, Biel 1990, White played c2-c4 and opened the position
when her two bishops gave her the advantage after} 15. O-O O-O 16. Re1 Rac8 ({
Black should have played} 16... Rfe8 17. Bd2 Ne5 {to counteract the 16 Re1 plan
}) 17. Bd2 Be6 18. c4 dxc3 19. Bxc3 Rfd8 20. Be4 b6 21. Rad1 {.}) 15... O-O (
15... Bxg2 $6 16. Rg1 Bd5 17. Rxg7 {only benefits White.}) 16. O-O Rfe8 17.
Rfe1 f6 {This limits the scope of White's dark-squared bishop and opens a road
to the centre for the black king. Probably White should play similarly with 18
f3.} 18. Rxe8+ Rxe8 19. Rd1 g5 20. Bg3 Bf7 21. f4 gxf4 22. Bxf4 Bg6 {Aiming to 
exchange off light-squared bishops. The weak pawns are a problem for Black,
but the pawn on f6 limits White's dark-squared bishop and provides a healthy
square on e5 for the black knight.} 23. Kf2 ({
Here and on the next move, White could play} 23. Bb5 {going into an
opposite-coloured bishop endgame, in which it is practically impossible for
Black to realize his minimal edge.}) 23... Kg7 24. Rd2 Bxd3 25. Rxd3 Re4 26.
Rg3+ Kf7 27. Bd2 Ne5 28. h3 h5 29. Bh6 {White has managed to get his rook to
the seventh rank, but it does not do him any good. In fact, this rook gets
stuck in the opponent's camp and becomes the cause of White's defeat.} Ke6 30.
Rg7 Nf7 31. Bd2 Re5 32. Bb4 $6 {
Probably the white bishop is also on a wrong path.} ({
It was better to bring the rook back into play with} 32. Rg8) ({or} 32. Rg3 {.}
) 32... a5 33. Bf8 Rb5 34. b4 b6 35. Ke2 a4 {First he limits the bishop's
scope with ...b7-b6, and now Black fixes the weak white pawn on a3. The
position is becoming dangerous for White. Again 36 Rg3 was the best chance.}
36. Kd3 Rd5 {Compared with White's poor co-ordination, Black has absolutely
nothing to complain about.} 37. b5 ({The endgame after} 37. Rh7 Ne5+ 38. Ke2
Rd8 39. Bh6 Rg8 40. Rg7 Rxg7 41. Bxg7 Nc4 {is hopeless for White.}) 37... Ne5+
38. Ke4 $2 ({After} 38. Ke2 Rxb5 {
White only loses a pawn. Now he loses the bishop.}) 38... f5+ 39. Kf4 Kf6 40.
Kg3 Nd7 $1 0-1

[Event "Leningrad"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1987.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Georgiev, Kir"]
[Black "Chandler, M."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "81"]
[EventDate "1987.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. a3 Bxc3+ 8.
Nxc3 d5 9. exd5 exd5 10. Bd3 O-O 11. O-O d4 {Black grabs space.} ({
The prophylactic} 11... h6 {
is investigated in Krogius-Tal and Kravchenko-Rogozenko.}) 12. Ne4 {
This natural move leads only to simplifications.} Bf5 13. Bg5 ({If} 13. Ng3 {
, then Black exchanges the light bishops in the following way:} Bg4 14. Be2
Bxe2 15. Nxe2 Qd5 {and, in contrast to 13...Bxd3 14 Qxd3, we now see a
centralized black queen, instead of a white queen. After} 16. c3 dxc3 17. Nxc3
Qf5 {Black had easy play in Serper-Kuzmin, Tashkent 1987.}) 13... Bxe4 14. Bxe4
h6 {This deprives White of the advantage of the two bishops.} ({
Another good possibility is} 14... Qd6 {, when} 15. Bxf6 Qxf6 {leads to the
same position, the only difference being the position of the h-pawn (h7 or h6),
which is less than important.}) 15. Bh4 ({Here White has an alternative in} 15.
Bxf6 Qxf6 {.} 16. -- ({. If the position is then simplified so that only the
heavy artillery remains, Black has no problems:} 16. Bxc6 bxc6 17. b4 a5 18.
Qd3 Rfb8 19. Rab1 axb4 20. axb4 Ra4 21. Rfe1 g6 {
with obvious drawing tendencies in Weitzer-Priehoda, Germany 1996.}) ({
. In Xie Jun-Polgar, Jaen (6th matchgame) 1996, Black skilfully neutralized
her opponent's minimal initiative after} 16. Qf3 Qxf3 17. Bxf3 Rac8 {
(aiming at the c2-pawn)} 18. Rfe1 Rfd8 19. Rad1 Kf8 20. Kf1 Na5 21. Re2 Nc4 {
and now:} 22. -- (22. Re4 d3 $5 23. cxd3 (23. Rxd3 $2 Rxd3 24. cxd3 Nd2+ {
does not work}) 23... Nxb2 24. Rb1 Nxd3 25. Ra4 ({not} 25. Rxb7 $4 Rc1+ 26. Ke2
Re1+ 27. Kd2 Rxe4 28. Bxe4 Nc5+ {and Black wins}) 25... Nc5 26. Rxa7 Ra8 27.
Rxa8 Rxa8 28. Bxb7 {with a draw on the way.}) ({. After} 22. Bxb7 Rb8 23. b3 ({
after} 23. Ba6 $6 Nxb2 {White has some problems in the inevitable rook endgame}
) 23... Rxb7 24. bxc4 Rc7 25. c3 Rxc4 {
again a draw is looking like the only result.})) ({
. Kudrin-Chandler, London 1987, saw instead} 16. Re1 Rad8 17. Qd3 Ne5 18. Qb3
b6 19. Re2 g6 20. Rae1 Kg7 21. Qb5 Rfe8 22. Bd3 Nxd3 23. Qxd3 {and in this
major piece endgame Black kept the balance by means of pressure against the
c2-pawn:} Rxe2 24. Rxe2 Rd5 25. Re1 Rc5 26. h3 Rf5 27. Qd2 h5 28. Rd1 Rc5 29.
Re1 Re5 30. Rd1 {½-½.})) 15... g5 16. Bxc6 bxc6 17. Bg3 Qd5 {This is a more
interesting position than the ones arising after 15 Bxf6. Black has weakened
his kingside but has also gained control over the centre.} 18. f4 {
A vigorous attempt to exploit Black's kingside weakening.} ({The quieter move} 
18. Qd3 {was played in the game Kaminski-Sorokin, Slupsk 1992, which continued}
Rfe8 19. c4 Qe4 ({keeping the passed pawn; if} 19... dxc3 $2 20. Qxc3 {
and Black has problems}) 20. Rad1 Rad8 21. f3 Qxd3 22. Rxd3 Nh5 23. Rfd1 Nxg3
24. hxg3 Re2 {and the rook endgame should end in peace.}) 18... Ne4 19. fxg5 ({
In Kveinys-Sorokin, Poland 1992, the following aggressive move was tested:} 19.
Qh5 Kg7 20. Rad1 Rad8 21. Rd3 c5 22. fxg5 hxg5 23. c3 f5 24. cxd4 cxd4 25. Rfd1
f4 26. Be1 {
when Black has a passed pawn and centralized pieces, but a vulnerable king.})
19... hxg5 20. Qd3 f5 21. Rad1 Rad8 22. Bf2 c5 {
White needs to undermine the strong pawn duo on c5 and d4.} 23. c3 $1 (23. b4
$6 {weakens c3 and creates risks for White:} Nc3 24. Rde1 c4 25. Qh3 Ne4 {
and Black is in control.}) 23... Qb3 $1 {Black sacrifices a pawn and maintains
the initiative after the exchange of queens thanks to his more active pieces.}
24. cxd4 Qxd3 25. Rxd3 c4 26. Rdd1 Rb8 27. Be1 ({Then} 27. Rc1 Rxb2 28. Rxc4 $2
{, then White loses the exchange to} Nd2 {.}) 27... Rxb2 28. Rc1 Rfb8 $1 29.
Bb4 ({Not} 29. Rxf5 $2 Rb1 30. Rxb1 Rxb1 {
as the passed c-pawn is very dangerous.}) ({Or} 29. Rxc4 $6 Re2 $1 30. Bc3 f4
31. Rc1 Nxc3 32. R4xc3 Rbb2 {with a probable draw in the rook endgame, even
though it looks more dangerous for White.}) 29... Rb5 30. Rxc4 a5 31. Rc8+ Kf7
32. Rc7+ Kg6 33. Rc6+ Kf7 34. Bc5 f4 ({
If Black wanted to win, he could have tried} 34... Rb1 $5 {.}) 35. h4 {
White disrupts the harmony on the black kingside and gains a draw.} Ng3 36. Re1
Re2 37. Rc7+ Kg6 38. Re7 Rbb2 39. R1xe2 Nxe2+ 40. Kh2 gxh4 41. d5 1/2-1/2

[Event "Thessaloniki Olympiad"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1984.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Ernst, T."]
[Black "Van Riemsdijk, H."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "86"]
[EventDate "1984.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. a3 Bxc3+ 8.
Nxc3 d5 9. exd5 exd5 10. Bd3 O-O 11. O-O d4 12. Ne2 {
White avoids simplifications and attacks the pawn on d4.} Bg4 (12... Ne5 $2 13.
Nxd4 $1 Bg4 14. Be2 Bxe2 15. Nxe2 {does not work out for Black.}) ({
Recently grandmasters have more often played} 12... Qd5 {
, which is another very popular continuation. White has two active plans:} 13.
Nf4 ({or} 13. c4 dxc3 14. Nxc3 Qa5 15. Bf4 Bg4 16. Qb1 Nd4 17. b4 Qh5 18. f3
Be6 19. Qb2 Rfd8 20. Rae1 {with pressure in Kamsky-Lobron, Dortmund 1993})
13... Qd6 14. Nh5 Nxh5 15. Qxh5 h6 16. Bd2 $1 Bd7 17. Rae1 Rfe8 18. f4 $1 {
with the initiative on the kingside in Xie-Polgar, Jaen (8th matchgame) 1996.})
13. f3 ({
The other way to attack the d-pawn is by placing the bishop on b2 after} 13. b4
{. The drawback is the weakening of c3. Wahls-Chandler, London 1987 continued}
Re8 14. Bb2 Nd5 15. Qd2 Bxe2 16. Bxe2 Qf6 17. Bf3 Nc3 18. Rae1 Red8 {
with sufficient counterchances for Black.}) ({The third candidate move,} 13.
Bg5 {, is to be found in Kudrin-Rogers.}) 13... Bh5 14. Nf4 ({
Another example is} 14. Bg5 Qd6 15. Qd2 Rad8 16. Rad1 Rfe8 17. Bh4 Bg6 18. Bxg6
hxg6 19. Bf2 {(White attacks the pawn on d4 with four pieces!)} Nd5 20. Rfe1 (
20. Bxd4 $2 Rxe2 21. Qxe2 Nf4 {wins for Black,}) ({while after} 20. Nxd4 Nf4
21. Kh1 Nxd4 22. Bxd4 Re2 {Black has the initiative for sacrificed pawn}) 20...
Ne3 21. Bxe3 Rxe3 22. c3 Rde8 23. cxd4 Nxd4 24. Qxd4 Qxd4 25. Rxd4 Rxe2 26.
Rxe2 Rxe2 {with mass simplification in Zapata-Chandler, Amsterdam 1987.}) 14...
Bg6 15. Nxg6 hxg6 {White has gained the two bishops, but at the expense of
weakening the e3 square. Black will use this to his benefit.} 16. f4 {
White wants to gain space for his pieces by means of f4-f5 so Black interferes
with this plan.} Ne7 ({In the game Forgacs-Schwarz, Wiesbaden 1988, Black
carelessly ignored his opponent's threats and tried to occupy e3 at once by} 
16... Nd5 {. The game continued} 17. f5 $1 gxf5 18. Rxf5 Ne3 19. Bxe3 dxe3 20.
Qh5 $1 g6 21. Qh6 Qd4 22. Rh5 $1 Qg7 23. Qxg7+ Kxg7 24. Rh3 e2 25. Re1 {
and Black loses the e2-pawn.}) 17. Qf3 Qd5 18. Bd2 Rfe8 19. Rae1 Nf5 20. Qxd5
Nxd5 {Black has prepared the intrusion of his knight to e3, whereas the power
of the white bishops is yet to be felt.} 21. g3 Nfe3 22. Rf2 Re6 23. Rfe2 Rc8 {
The attack on the c2-pawn, typical of this variation, is assisted by the
dominating pawn on d4.} 24. c3 dxc3 25. bxc3 (25. Bxe3 Nxe3 26. Rxe3 Rxe3 27.
Rxe3 c2 28. Bxc2 Rxc2 {is no worse for Black.}) 25... Nc4 26. Rxe6 fxe6 27.
Bxc4 Rxc4 28. Rxe6 Kh7 ({After} 28... Kf7 29. Rd6 Nf6 $1 (29... Nxc3 $2 30.
Rd7+ {is no good}) 30. Rd4 Rxd4 31. cxd4 Ke6 {everything is all right. The
white bishop and king are so inactive that Black's pawn minus is without
importance.}) 29. Rd6 Nxc3 30. Rd7 Ne2+ 31. Kf2 Rd4 32. Rxd4 Nxd4 33. Bc3 Nb5
34. Bb2 Nd6 35. Ke2 Nc4 36. Bc1 b5 37. Kd3 Kg8 38. Kd4 Kf7 39. Kc5 a6 40. a4
Ke6 41. axb5 axb5 42. Kxb5 Nd6+ 43. Kb6 Ne4 {. The Brazilian International
Master Herman van Riemsdijk is a great connoisseur of this variation. Here he
has provided a good model of how to play this kind of position.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Bayswater"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1988.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kudrin, S."]
[Black "Rogers, I."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "65"]
[EventDate "1988.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. a3 Bxc3+ 8.
Nxc3 d5 9. exd5 exd5 10. Bd3 O-O 11. O-O d4 12. Ne2 Bg4 13. Bg5 ({
As we have already seen in the previous game,} 13. f3 {weakens the e3 square.})
13... Qd6 {
The black queen gets out of the pin and simultaneously the rooks are connected.
} 14. Re1 Rfe8 15. Qd2 Bxe2 {Black removes the white knight, which wanted to
go to g3 or f4. This exchange is characteristic for this variation.} 16. Rxe2 (
16. Bf4 {is not dangerous for Black either, e.g.} Qd7 17. Rxe2 Rxe2 18. Qxe2
Re8 19. Qf1 Qe6 {
and Black's pieces were actively placed in Kasparov-Grischuk, Cannes 2001.})
16... Rxe2 17. Qxe2 Re8 18. Qf3 Ne5 19. Qf4 ({Accepting the pawn is risky:} 19.
Qxb7 $6 Nxd3 20. cxd3 Qe5 21. Bd2 Ng4 22. f4 Qe2 23. Qb5 Rf8 {
with a dangerous initiative.}) 19... Qb6 20. Bxf6 Nxd3 21. Qg3 ({
A drawn rook endgame arises on the board after both} 21. cxd3 Qxf6 22. Qxf6
gxf6 23. Kf1 Rc8 24. Re1) ({and} 21. Qxd4 Qxf6 22. Qxf6 gxf6 23. cxd3 Re2 24.
Rb1 Rd2 {.}) 21... Qxf6 22. Qxd3 Qb6 {. This position is fairly standard.
White pressures the pawn on d4; Black pressures the pawn on c2. After the
exchange of these pawns the symmetrical structure has obvious drawing
tendencies.} 23. b3 g6 24. g3 Qc5 25. a4 a6 26. Rd1 h5 27. h4 b5 28. axb5 axb5
29. Kg2 Qc6+ 30. Qf3 Qxc2 31. Rxd4 Qc7 32. Qd5 Qe5 33. Qxe5 1/2-1/2

[Event "Riga"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1958.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Krogius, N."]
[Black "Tal, M."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "101"]
[EventDate "1958.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. a3 Bxc3+ 8.
Nxc3 d5 9. Bd3 O-O 10. O-O h6 11. exd5 exd5 12. Bf4 {
The most natural development. The bishop occupies an active square.} d4 13. Nb5
(13. Ne4 {is considered in Kravchenko-Rogozenko.}) ({After} 13. Ne2 {
Black should continue as in the game Morozevich-Rogozenko, Moscow 1990, with}
Qd5 14. c4 ({after} 14. Ng3 $1 Re8 15. Re1 Bd7 16. Re2 a5 17. Qf1 Rxe2 18. Qxe2
Re8 19. Qf1 Ne5 20. Bxe5 Qxe5 {play has become easier and Black has no
problems, Golod-Rogozenko, Alba Julia 1990}) 14... dxc3 15. Nxc3 Qd4 {
. Opening the position is usually favourable for the player with two bishops,
but here Black is better co-ordinated and can compensate for the slight
disadvantage:} 16. Bg3 (16. Qd2 Rd8 17. Rad1 Bg4 $1 {
is advantageous for Black only}) 16... Rd8 17. Be2 Be6 18. Bf3 $6 {
(the exchange of queens was preferable)} Qb6 19. Qc1 Nd4 20. Bd1 Rac8 {
(Black controls all of the board)} 21. Bh4 Bb3 $1 22. Qe3 Re8 23. Qd2 Rcd8 24.
Kh1 Nc2 25. Qc1 Nxa1 26. Qxa1 Bxd1 27. Nxd1 Qd4 28. Bxf6 Qxf6 29. Ne3 Rd2 {0-1.
}) 13... Nd5 {Black utilizes d5 as an ideal square for the knight.} 14. Bg3 Be6
15. Re1 Qd7 16. h3 Rad8 ({
In Tal-Olafsson, Zurich 1959, Black played illogically:} 16... a6 $6 17. Nd6
Nf6 18. Qf3 Kh8 19. Rad1 Nh7 20. Bxh7 Kxh7 21. c3 dxc3 22. Ne4 Qc8 23. Qxc3 Ne7
24. Nc5 Nf5 25. Bc7 $1 {and White ended up with a clear advantage.}) 17. Qf3
Nde7 {The knight concedes d5 to the bishop. By strengthening the centre, Black
prepares an advance of his pawns on the kingside.} 18. Nd6 Bd5 19. Qh5 ({If} 
19. Be4 {, then} Bxe4 20. Nxe4 ({not} 20. Rxe4 $2 f5 {followed ...f5-f4!})
20... Qd5 {with a strong position for Black.}) 19... f5 20. Nc4 f4 21. Bh4 {
Black has won space on the kingside, but has also weakened the b1-h7 diagonal.}
({The move} 21. Bh4 g5 {is now impossible because of} 22. Qxh6 $1 {
. Therefore Black drives the white queen from her active position.}) 21... Bf7
$1 22. Qb5 Bd5 $1 ({Not} 22... g5 $2 23. Bxg5 $1 a6 24. Qc5 {
and White keeps his attack on the black king.}) 23. Bxe7 Nxe7 24. Qc5 ({
The exchange of queens is not dangerous for Black:} 24. Qxd7 Rxd7 25. Ne5 Rc7 {
and Black is fine.}) 24... Nf5 25. Re5 b6 26. Bxf5 ({
White is forced to exchange queens as} 26. Qb4 f3 $1 {
is very dangerous for him.}) 26... bxc5 27. Bxd7 Rxd7 28. b3 Rc8 {Chances are
about equal in this endgame. The bishop is stronger than the knight, but the
pawns on c5 and a7 are weak, and White controls the only open file.} 29. Rae1
Bf7 30. Re7 Rxe7 31. Rxe7 Bg6 {. The c2-pawn is weak too! Black forces the
exchange of rooks and the game ends in a tie.} 32. Re2 Re8 33. Rxe8+ Bxe8 34.
Ne5 g5 35. Kf1 Kg7 36. Ke1 Bb5 37. a4 Be8 38. Kd2 Kf6 39. Ng4+ Kg6 40. f3 h5
41. Ne5+ Kf5 42. Nd3 c4 43. bxc4 Bxa4 44. Nc5 Be8 45. Nb3 Ke5 46. Kd3 Bg6+ 47.
Kd2 Bf5 48. Na5 Bd7 49. Nb3 g4 50. hxg4 hxg4 51. Nc5 1/2-1/2

[Event "Chisinau"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1986.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kravchenko, V."]
[Black "Rogozenko, D."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "77"]
[EventDate "1986.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Ndb5 Bb4 7. a3 Bxc3+ 8.
Nxc3 d5 9. exd5 exd5 10. Bd3 O-O 11. O-O h6 12. Bf4 d4 13. Ne4 {This move is
seen more often. Compared with 11...d4 12 Ne4, Black can more easily keep the
balance due to the exposed position of the white bishop on f4. Black will
exchange the light-squared bishops and constantly threaten the pawn on c2.
White must also watch out for the break ...d4-d3 after the blockading bishop
on d3 has been traded off.} Nxe4 14. Bxe4 Qf6 15. Bg3 (15. Qd2 {
was played in Savin-Rogozenko, Eforie 1989, which continued} Bf5 16. Rfe1 Rfe8
17. Bxf5 Qxf5 18. h3 a5 19. Bg3 a4 {
(this thrust on the queenside is rather typical)} 20. Qd3 Qxd3 21. cxd3 {
(the exchange of queens has altered the pawn structure and Black now stands
better with his unshakeable knight at c6)} Rxe1+ 22. Rxe1 Ra5 $1 {
(the rook conveniently enters play on the fifth rank)} 23. Kf1 Rb5 24. Re2 f6
25. Ke1 Rb3 26. Rd2 Kf7 {and Black was better, though White managed to draw.})
15... Bf5 16. Re1 ({As usual,} 16. Bxc6 {is not dangerous.}) 16... Bxe4 17.
Rxe4 Qf5 18. Qd3 (18. Qe2 $6 {unexpectedly caused difficulties for White in
Bakhmatov-Rogozenko, Sauleai 1988:} Qd5 $1 {(opening a path for the f-pawn)}
19. Bf4 $2 f5 20. Re6 d3 $1 {(with the idea of ...Nc6-d4!)} 21. Qe3 dxc2 22.
Rd6 Qc4 23. b3 Qe4 24. b4 Rfd8 25. Qb3+ Kh8 26. Rxd8+ Rxd8 27. Be3 Rd3 28. Qa4
Rxe3 {0-1. The thematic break ...d4-d3 has given Rogozenko more than one
victory in this variation.}) 18... Qd7 (18... Qd5 {
does not satisfy Black due to the possibility of c2-c4.}) 19. Rae1 f5 20. Re6
f4 21. Bh4 Rae8 22. Qg6 {
With this move White keeps control over the open e-file.} Rxe6 ({Black tries
to exploit the poor position of the white bishop and declines the slightly
favourable endgame following} 22... Qf7 23. Qxf7+ Kxf7 24. Rxe8 Rxe8 25. Rxe8
Kxe8 {.}) 23. Rxe6 Qf7 24. Qe4 Qh5 25. g3 {White had no choice, but now his
king is in danger. The subsequent moves are forced.} Qd1+ 26. Kg2 f3+ 27. Kh3
h5 28. Be7 Qf1+ 29. Kh4 Qxf2 30. Bxf8 Qxh2+ 31. Kg5 Qxg3+ 32. Kxh5 Qh3+ 33. Kg5
f2 34. Bd6 $1 {White threatens to play 35 Re8+ and it seems as if he has
deceived his opponent. However, Black had foreseen this and found a
combination.} Ne7 $3 35. Rxe7 ({If} 35. Bxe7 f1=Q {
and the weakness of the white king will tell.}) 35... Qh6+ 36. Kg4 Qxd6 37. Qe2
Qf6 $4 {An annoying mistake in an otherwise superbly played game!} ({After} 
37... Qxe7 38. Qxe7 f1=Q {Black has the better endgame.}) 38. Re8+ Kf7 39. Rh8
$1 {. Threatening either Qe8+ or Rh1 and wins.} 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "4. Four Knights: 6 Nxc6"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "16"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Nxc6 {This exchange is
not usually to be recommended in the Sicilian as it helps Black create a
strong centre. However, in this position White can use it to seize the
initiative and fix the weak square d6.} bxc6 7. e5 Nd5 8. Ne4 $1 ({
The primitive exchange} 8. Nxd5 cxd5 {(Chernyshov-Chekhov) is also sometimes
seen, although it does not cause Black any difficulties. After ...d7-d6 Black
has a central pawn majority and a convenient way to develop.}) ({With} 8. Ne4 {
, on the other hand, White creates the positional threat c2-c4, attacking the
centralized knight. After this White will play Ne4-d6+, forcing Black to
relinquish the valuable dark-squared bishop. Therefore Black is obliged to
fight vigorously against the vanguard of the white army: the e5-pawn and the
knight on e4. To do this Black usually plays ...f7-f5 or, less often, ...f7-f6,
...d7-d6 or ...d7-d5, while the black queen frequently attacks the e5-pawn
from c7 or a5, or even from d4. Another serious problem for Black is the
light-squared bishop, which is restricted by the central pawn complex.
Therefore, from rare ancient games and throughout the history of the Four
Knights Variation, Black has mostly aspired to develop the bishop to a6.}) 8...
-- ({At first Black's preferred system was} 8... f5 9. exf6 Nxf6 {
but numerous examples have confirmed that White has a small advantage after}
10. Nd6+ Bxd6 11. Qxd6 {.}) ({So players started to look at other intricate
lines, such as those arising after} 8... Qc7 9. f4 Qb6 ({or} 9... Qa5+ {.})) ({
After} 8... Qa5+ 9. c3 ({the alternative} 9. Bd2 {(Adams-Khenkin) has its own
drawbacks in that b2 is weakened and the bishop blocks the white queen on the
d-file - the struggle here is primarily of a tactical nature}) 9... f5 10. exf6
Nxf6 {(Sutovsky-Nijboer), in comparison with 8...f5 9 exf6 Nxf6, the inclusion
of ...Qd8-a5 and c2-c3 is favourable for Black, as the developing move ...Qa5
supports the desired ...Bc8-a6.}) ({In 1999, in a game between Kasparov and
Leko, a new plan of development for the light bishop was investigated:} 8...
Bb7 {followed by ...c6-c5 (or in reverse order). This idea at once became
popular among the top grandmasters. Apart from Leko, Grischuk also defends
this way, and Shabalov-Vescovi and Kasparov-Grischuk show that, with 8...Bb7,
Black successfully solves his opening problems.}) *

[Event "Podolsk"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1992.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Chernyshov, K."]
[Black "Chekhov, V."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "53"]
[EventDate "1992.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. Nc3 Nc6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. Nxc6 ({
The continuations} 6. Be2) (6. Be3) (6. g3) ({and} 6. a3 {
are considered in Chapters 5-7}) ({while} 6. Bf4 Bb4 7. Ndb5) ({
and 6 Bg5 Bb4 7 Nb5 reach positions covered via the move order} 6. Ndb5 Bb4 {
etc.}) (6. Bg5 {has some independent significance, for example,} Bb4 7. Nxc6
bxc6 8. Bd3 (8. e5 $6 Qa5 9. exf6 Qxg5 {
leaves Black in control of the dark squares}) 8... h6 9. Bd2 d5 10. e5 Nd7 11.
f4 a5 12. O-O O-O 13. Qe2 Re8 14. Rfe1 Ba6 15. Bxa6 Qb6+ 16. Kh1 Qxa6 {
and Black safely completes his development without further problems (Tomes-Priehola, Litomysl 1997).}) 6... bxc6 7. e5 Nd5 8. Nxd5 cxd5 {The strongest move.
The pawn which grew up on the outskirts of the board (b7) has made full use of
his talents and become a central pawn!} ({Sometimes} 8... exd5 {is seen, with
the idea that after ...d7-d6 it is possible to develop the bishop on the c8-h3
diagonal. However, the pawn structure is not as solid as after 8...cxd5, and
White has a small but clear advantage.}) 9. Bd3 {In this position White's
chances are based on an attack on the king. Black plans to put pressure on the
half-open b- and c-files.} Qc7 {Perhaps the most ambitious continuation.} ({
The logical} 9... d6 {(to exchange the e5-pawn and take control of the centre)
was seen in Larsen-Fries Nielsen, Aalborg 1989:} 10. Bf4 dxe5 11. Bxe5 Bd6 12.
Bxg7 Rg8 13. Bc3 Rxg2 14. Qf3 Qg5 15. Bf6 Qg4 16. Qxg4 Rxg4 17. Bxh7 Be7 18.
Bxe7 Kxe7 19. Bd3 Rh4 {. White has won a pawn, but Black has some compensation
due to his powerful pawn centre and the strong position of his rook on h4.}) ({
The exchange of light-squared bishops with} 9... Ba6 {, simplifying the
position, is also typical of the variation. Black is okay after this, but it
is not easy for him to create winning chances. After} 10. O-O Bxd3 11. -- (11.
cxd3 d6 12. f4 g6 13. Be3 Bg7 14. Qa4+ Qd7 15. Qxd7+ Kxd7 16. Rac1 a6 17. Rc3
Rhc8 18. Bd4 Rxc3 19. Bxc3 a5 20. Kf2 {
(Hearst-Pavey, New York 1954) the endgame is certainly not worse for Black.}) (
{. Therefore White usually plays} 11. Qxd3 {and after} Qc7 {
we have several possibilities.} 12. -- ({. For example,} 12. Re1 Rc8 13. c3 g6
{(normal in this line; from g7 the bishop protects the king and attacks the
e5-pawn)} 14. Be3 Bg7 15. Bd4 O-O 16. Qa6 Ra8 17. Rac1 Rfc8 18. g3 Qc4 19. Qxc4
Rxc4 20. Kf1 Rc6 21. Ke2 Bf8 22. Kd3 Bc5 23. Rc2 Rac8 24. Rec1 d6 {
and Black has a good endgame, Campora-Illescas, Buenos Aires 1993.}) ({
. White can also play} 12. Bf4 Rc8 13. c3 (13. Qg3 {is an elastic move which
does not commit the queenside pawns too soon. Nevertheless, after} g6 14. h4 h5
15. Rac1 Bg7 16. Rfd1 O-O 17. Rd3 Qc4 18. b3 Qa6 19. a4 Rc6 {
Black still succeeded in creating a queenside weakening and won a pawn after}
20. Bg5 Qc8 21. c3 Qb8 22. Bf6 Qxb3 {in Rytshagov-Kharlov, Helsinki 1992})
13... f5 14. Qg3 Kf7 15. Rfd1 Be7 16. h4 Qd8 17. h5 Rc4 18. b3 Re4 19. Rd4 g5
$1 {and Black captured the initiative with his creative play, Renet-Van der
Wiel, Cannes 1990.}))) 10. f4 {This move weakens the dark squares, but other
attempts to protect the e5-pawn also have drawbacks:} (10. Bf4 Rb8 $1 {
immediately attacks the unprotected b2-pawn. Now} 11. Rb1 $6 ({
and after the clumsy} 11. Qc1 d6 12. exd6 Bxd6 13. Bxd6 Qxd6 14. O-O O-O 15. c4
Ba6 16. Rd1 Rfc8 {Black is perfectly developed and has the initiative,
Schandorff-Sulava, Copenhagen 1982}) 11... Rxb2 12. Rxb2 Qc3+ 13. Ke2 Qxb2 14.
Qb1 Qb6 {loses a pawn (Marshall-Mieses, Monte Carlo 1903).}) ({
After the natural} 10. Qe2 {the correct answer is} Bb4+ $1 {
and White loses the right to castle, having to play} 11. Kf1 (11. c3 $2 Bxc3+ {
is obvious}) {, and now} 11... Rb8 $1 {is the most exact move!} 12. -- ({
. In the case of} 12. h4 {, intending to bring the king's rook into play,
Black has the stunning double attack} Bc3 $3 13. bxc3 Qxc3 14. Qg4 O-O 15. Bb2
(15. Ke2 Qxa1 16. Bh6 Qxe5+ {does not work}) 15... Rxb2 16. Rh3 Qxe5 17. Re1 f5
18. Qa4 Qb8 19. Rg3 Rb4 20. Qa3 d6 {
and it was time for White to resign, Rigo-Horvath, Budapest 1980.}) ({
. Better is} 12. Bf4 {when we should not be afraid to imitate Black's play in
Shabanov-Filippov, Elista 1996:} Bc5 $5 13. b3 O-O 14. h4 f6 $5 15. Qh5 f5 16.
Qe2 Rb4 $1 17. c4 ({if} 17. Bd2 Re4 $1 18. Bxe4 fxe4 {
with compensation for the exchange}) 17... dxc4 18. Bxc4 Ba6 19. Rc1 ({if} 19.
Bxa6 Rxf4 {and White is very weak on the dark squares}) 19... Qb6 20. g3 Bxc4
21. Rxc4 Rxc4 22. bxc4 Qc6 23. Kg1 Rb8 24. Kh2 Qe4 25. Qd2 Qxc4 26. Qxd7 Qxa2
27. Kh3 Qd5 {and Black has an extra pawn.})) 10... d6 ({Possible is} 10... Bc5
{, preventing castling.}) 11. O-O {
White hopes to utilize his slight lead in development.} ({After} 11. Qe2 dxe5
12. Qxe5 Qxe5+ 13. fxe5 Rb8 14. Rb1 Bc5 {we have an approximately equal ending.
}) 11... Be7 ({Apparently Black could accept the sacrifice and continue} 11...
dxe5 {, although after} 12. fxe5 Qxe5 13. Bb5+ Bd7 14. Bxd7+ Kxd7 15. Rxf7+ Ke8
16. Rf1 Bc5+ 17. Kh1 Rf8 18. Re1 {White's chances are a little bit better
because of the unreliable position of the black king.}) 12. Qe2 O-O 13. b3 {
White wants to use the bishop on the long diagonal.} ({If instead} 13. exd6
Bxd6 14. Be3 {then} e5 $5 {is interesting.}) 13... dxe5 14. fxe5 Bc5+ {
Black chooses the wrong path.} (14... a5 {, intending ...a5-a4 and the
exchange of the light-squared bishops with ...Bc8-a6, deserves attention.}) 15.
Kh1 Bd4 $2 (15... a5 {
was still better. Now White gains a clear advantage by the following exchanges.
}) 16. Bxh7+ $1 Kxh7 17. Qd3+ Kg8 18. Qxd4 Qxc2 {White has a lead in
development, and in the middlegame the opposite-coloured bishops normally
favour the attacking player.} 19. Ba3 Rd8 20. Be7 Rd7 $6 (20... Re8 {
was more cautious.}) 21. Rxf7 $1 Ba6 $1 ({If} 21... Kxf7 22. Rf1+ Qf5 (22...
Kxe7 $2 23. Qh4+ Ke8 24. Qh8+ Ke7 25. Qf8# {mate!}) 23. Rxf5+ exf5 24. Bd6 {
and the queen is stronger than the two rooks.}) {
Moreover, White has a extra pawn to play with...} 22. Qa4 ({Possible was} 22.
Rf2 Qe4 23. Qxe4 dxe4 24. Bc5 {
and, despite the opposite-coloured bishops, White retains his winning chances.}
) 22... Kxf7 23. Qxd7 Qc8 24. Qd6 Qb7 25. Rc1 Rc8 26. Rxc8 Qxc8 27. Bg5 {
White should still have made Black struggle to save the game.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Yerevan Olympiad"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1996.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Sutovsky, E."]
[Black "Nijboer, F."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "77"]
[EventDate "1996.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. e5 Nd5 8.
Ne4 Qa5+ 9. c3 ({For} 9. Bd2 {see Adams-Khenkin.}) ({
In the case of the precipitate} 9. Qd2 $2 {
, Black unexpectedly wins material with} Nb4 $1 {
as both c2 and e5 are hanging. Therefore in Mazi-Mohr, Bled 1996, White tried}
10. Nd6+ Bxd6 11. Qxd6 Nxc2+ 12. Ke2 Nxa1 13. Bg5 Qb5+ 14. Ke3 {
, but Black found} Qb4 $3 15. Bd3 Qxd6 16. exd6 f6 {
with an easily winning endgame.}) 9... f5 {Black aims to clarify the situation
in the centre. Now the white knight has to choose.} 10. exf6 {
White's reply is practically forced.} ({
Moving the knight is simply a loss of time. For example,} 10. Nd6+ Bxd6 11.
exd6 Ba6 12. Be2 O-O {with comfortable development for Black.}) 10... Nxf6 ({
Now White can either exchange knights, as in this game, or exchange knight for
bishop with} 10... Nxf6 11. Nd6+ {.} ({
An atypical and insufficiently investigated line is} 11. Bd3 Nxe4 12. Bxe4 Ba6
13. Bf4 Be7 14. Bd6 Bf6 15. Qc2 Kf7 16. O-O-O (16. Bxh7 $2 {loses to} Rxh7 $1
17. Qxh7 Bxc3+ $1) 16... g6 17. h4 Qxa2 18. h5 {
with counterchances in Brodsky-Beshukov, Krasnodar 1999.})) 11. Nxf6+ ({
Let's consider the second and quieter continuation:} 11. Nd6+ Bxd6 12. Qxd6 {
. In comparison with 8...f5 9 exf6 Nxf6 10 Nd6+ Bxd6 11 Qxd6, the inclusion of
...Qd8-a5 and c2-c3 narrows White's possibilities sharply and allows Black
favourably to exchange the light-squared bishops with} Ba6 {
. Landa-Filipenko, Katowice 1992, continued} 13. Bxa6 Qxa6 {and now:} 14. -- (
14. Be3 Kf7 {(a typical move which connects the black rooks)} 15. a3 Rhb8 16.
O-O-O Qc4 17. Qd3 Qa2 18. Qb1 Qxb1+ 19. Kxb1 d5 20. Bf4 Rb7 21. Kc2 a5 {
with a safe endgame for Black.}) ({. A more complicated struggle is seen if
the queens remain on the board. For example,} 14. b3 Qa5 15. O-O Qxc3 16. Ba3
Kf7 17. Bb4 Qb2 18. Rad1 Qe2 19. Rfe1 Qh5 20. Re5 Qg6 21. h4 Rhe8 22. h5 Nxh5
23. Qxd7+ Kg8 24. Qxc6 Nf4 {and by returning material Black completed his
development, Vujakovic-Mohr, Pula 2000.} (24... --))) 11... gxf6 {In the 8...
f5 9 exf6 Nxf6 variation, 10 Nxf6+ is harmless as Black would simply recapture
with the queen. The insertion of 8...Qa5+ 9 c3 means that here Black has to
weaken his king position with ...g7xf6, but in return he gains a powerful
central pawn mass and a half-open g-file.} 12. Be2 Ba6 13. O-O Bxe2 14. Qxe2
Rg8 {If queens were removed from the diagram position, Black would have no
worries about the safety of his king and his chances would be preferable.} ({
Black can try to prepare the exchange of queens by} 14... Bd6 {
as, for example, in Valegra-Sorokin, Argentina 1994:} 15. Bh6 Rg8 16. Rad1 Qe5
17. Qxe5 Bxe5 18. Rfe1 Rg4 19. Bc1 Ke7 20. f4 Bc7 21. Re2 Rag8 22. Rf1 a5 23.
Rf3 d5 24. Kf1 Bb6 {and Black had a small advantage.}) 15. Bf4 Qf5 16. Bg3 h5
17. Rad1 {White plans 18 Rd4.} Bc5 $6 {Premature.} ({
It was necessary first to make c5 safe for the bishop by} 17... a5 {
with good chances for equality (} 18. Rd4 {is met by} Rg4 {).}) ({Worse is} 
17... Qg4 18. Qd3 Rg7 ({if} 18... d5 19. Qa6 $1 {
and Black's interior ranks are very weak}) 19. Rfe1 h4 $2 20. Re4 {
as given by Huzman.}) 18. b4 Bb6 19. c4 Qg4 20. Qd3 Qg7 $2 {Another mistake!} (
20... Rg7 {is better.}) 21. Qf3 $1 Qg4 22. Qxf6 Rg6 23. Qe5 h4 24. Rd3 $1 {
Black missed this move. Now after the exchange of queens Black loses the
h-pawn and the game.} Qg5 25. Qxg5 Rxg5 26. Bxh4 Rg4 27. Rg3 Rxh4 28. Rg8+ Ke7
29. Rxa8 Rxc4 30. a3 d5 31. g3 e5 32. h4 e4 33. Kg2 Rc2 34. h5 Kf6 35. h6 Kg6
36. Rg8+ Kh7 37. Rg7+ Kh8 ({If} 37... Kxh6 38. Rg8 Kh7 39. Rg4 {
and mate follows.}) 38. Rf7 e3 39. g4 1-0

[Event "Chalkidiki"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1992.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Adams, M."]
[Black "Khenkin, I."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "83"]
[EventDate "1992.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Nge2 e6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. e5 Nd5 8.
Ne4 Qa5+ ({This position after 10...Qb6 can also arise after} 8... Qc7 9. f4
Qa5+ 10. Bd2 Qb6 {.}) 9. Bd2 {As already said, 9 Bd2 weakens the b2-pawn and
blocks the d-file. The black queen can now go to b6 at once or after 9...Qc7
10 f4.} ({The eccentric} 9. Bd2 Nb4 $5 {is risky, though Black quickly got a
winning position in Schmid-Butenschoen, correspondence 1956:} 10. f4 Qd5 11.
Nc3 ({after} 11. Nf2 Rb8 12. a3 Na6 13. b4 d6 14. exd6 Bxd6 15. Bd3 Nc7 16. O-O
{White had much better development in the game Emms-Vaisser, Cappelle la
Grande 1993}) 11... Qd4 12. a3 $2 (12. Rc1 Rb8 $5 {was the critical line here})
12... Bc5 $1 13. Qc1 Nd5 14. Nxd5 exd5 15. c3 Qf2+ 16. Kd1 d6 {.}) 9... Qc7 $1
{Black intentionally loses a tempo, forcing White to play f2-f4 (as known from
the variation 8...Qc7 9 f4 Qb6). Black hopes to exploit the weakening of the
g1-a7 diagonal. Such loss of a tempo is extremely unusual in sharp Sicilian
lines, as it rarely brings any advantages. This position is, of course, an
exception.} (9... Qb6 {is an alternative to the text. White has the answer} 10.
c4 {, which is both obvious and normal} ({
, though in Sanchez Almeyra-Mellado, Barcelona 1992, the following happened:} 
10. Bd3 Qxb2 11. O-O $6 ({it is better not to give up the second pawn; instead
} 11. c3 Qb8 12. Qh5 {gives some compensation}) 11... Qxe5 12. Re1 Be7 13. c4
Nf4 14. Bc2 O-O 15. Rb1 d5 16. Ng3 Qf6 {
and White's initiative does not compensate for the material deficiency.}) ({
. But let us consider the critical position after} 10. c4 {.} -- ({. After} 
10... Nb4 11. Bc3 {Black's lack of space is a real problem. Therefore Black
should make use of the tactical possibilities in the position.}) ({
. In particular,} 10... Qxb2 $5 {deserves serious attention:} 11. cxd5 ({if} 
11. f4 Qd4 $1 12. Qb1 f5 $1 13. exf6 Nxf6 14. Nxf6+ gxf6 {
with obvious advantage to Black}) 11... Qxe5 12. Bd3 exd5 13. O-O dxe4 14. Bxe4
d5 {and it is doubtful whether White now has sufficient compensation for the
two pawn investment.}) ({
. But Grandmasters do not take the pawn on b2, playing the solid} 10... Qd4 {
with a subsequent exchange of queens. In Fedorov-Kovalev, Minsk 1995, Black
managed to hold the slightly inferior endgame arising after} 11. Nd6+ Bxd6 12.
exd6 Qe5+ (12... Nf6 {
is slightly worse, as White has the advantage of the two bishops in the ending:
} 13. Bc3 Qxd1+ 14. Rxd1 c5 15. h4 O-O 16. f3 a5 17. Rh3 Bb7 18. Rg3 Kh8 19.
Bd3 Rfc8 20. Kf2 Ra6 21. Bc2 a4 22. a3 $1 Ne8 23. h5 h6 24. Rh1 {
, Svidler-Lautier, Cannes 2001}) 13. Be2 Nf4 14. Bxf4 Qxf4 15. Qd2 Qxd2+ 16.
Kxd2 Rb8 17. Kc3 c5 18. a3 Bb7 19. f3 a5 20. Rhb1 Bc6 21. b4 cxb4+ 22. axb4
axb4+ 23. Rxb4 Rxb4 24. Kxb4 f6 {and Black had a respectable position.}))) 10.
f4 Qb6 11. c4 ({After} 11. Bd3 {it is risky for Black to take the pawn on b2,
as White generates a dangerous attack with his lead in development.} -- ({
. For example,} 11... Qxb2 12. O-O Ba6 13. Bxa6 Qb6+ 14. Kh1 Qxa6 15. f5 exf5
16. Rxf5 Be7 17. Bg5 O-O 18. Qg4 Bxg5 19. Rxg5 g6 20. c4 f5 21. exf6 Qxc4 22.
Rxg6+ $1 {and White wins (Emms-Gayson, Port Erin 1994). In comparison with 9...
Qb6 10 Bd3 Qxb2, the extra tempo f2-f4 is of prime importance and changes the
assessment of the position after the poisoned pawn is taken.}) (11... Be7 {
is the strongest reply, leaving the black queen in control of the diagonal
a7-g1, weakened by f2-f4. It is not at all obvious here that the extra tempo
is favourable for White.} 12. -- ({. In particular,} 12. c4 {
does not give White the advantage:} Qd4 13. Ke2 $5 Ba6 {(as usual Black uses
all the tactical twists and turns possible in the position)} 14. b3 f5 15. exf6
gxf6 16. Qg1 Qxg1 17. Raxg1 Nb6 {
with good play for Black, Fedorov-Khalifman, Samara 1998.}) ({. Therefore} 12.
Qe2 {is seen more often.} -- ({. Here Black should not hurry to castle, as he
can come under a dangerous attack. For example,} 12... O-O 13. c4 Nb4 14. Bb1
f5 15. exf6 Bxf6 16. Nxf6+ Rxf6 17. Be3 Qa5 18. O-O Ba6 19. Bd4 Rf7 20. a3 Nd5
21. Qh5 Bxc4 22. Bxh7+ Kf8 23. Bg6 Bxf1 24. Rxf1 c5 25. Be5 Nf6 26. Bd6+ Re7
27. Qh8+ Ng8 28. f5 $1 {1-0 Adams-Lautier, Bordeaux 2000.}) ({
. Apparently the best move is} 12... a5 {, as played by the Four Knights
expert GM Filippov. Black seizes control of b4 and prepares ...Bc8-a6.
Stanishesky-Filippov, Polanica Zdroj 1999 saw} 13. a3 ({also possible is} 13.
c4 f5 14. exf6 ({or} 14. Nd6+ Bxd6 15. exd6 Nf6 16. Bc3 O-O 17. O-O-O c5 18.
Be5 Ng4 {with counter-chances in Varga-Filippov, Neum 2000}) 14... Nxf6 15. Bc3
Nxe4 16. Bxe4 Bb4 17. Qh5+ Kf8 18. Qf3 d5 19. Bd3 Ra7 20. a3 Bxc3+ 21. bxc3 Rf7
22. Rb1 Qc5 23. cxd5 exd5 24. Kd2 g6 25. Qe3 {
and a draw was agreed in Peng Xiaomin-Ye Jiangchuan, Shanghai 2000}) 13... Rb8
14. c4 f5 ({in a later game Filippov tried} 14... Qxb2 15. O-O Qd4+ 16. Kh1 Ba6
17. Rad1 Rb3 18. Rf3 a4 19. Ba5 Rxd3 20. Qxd3 Qxd3 21. Rdxd3 Bxc4 {when Black
ad two strong bishops to compensate for the exchange - Gashimov-Filippov,
Dubai 2000}) 15. Nf2 Qxb2 $5 16. Rb1 Qxb1+ 17. Bxb1 Rxb1+ 18. Nd1 Ba6 19. Qd3
Rb7 20. Qg3 Bxc4 21. Qxg7 Rf8 22. Qxh7 Bxa3 {and Black's chances are
preferable in this complicated position as his pieces co-operate better. 13 a3
appears to be slightly passive. So the move 10 Bd3 leads to very interesting
struggle where Black has good counterplay.})))) 11... Qd4 ({In contrast to 9...
Qb6 10 c4, here the b2-pawn cannot be taken. But a new opportunity has
appeared:} 11... Ne3 $5 12. Qc1 Nxf1 13. Rxf1 Qd4 14. Qc2 Ba6 15. b3 $1 d5 $5 (
{after} 15... Qxa1+ 16. Kf2 Qxf1+ 17. Kxf1 {
the white queen is stronger than the two rooks}) 16. exd6 f5 17. d7+ $1 Qxd7
18. Ng5 Be7 19. Nf3 Bf6 20. Bc3 {when White's better pawn structure and
control of e5 gave White a useful advantage in the game Huang-Abdullaev,
played in the appealingly-named Gurzuf 2000.}) 12. Qb1 $6 {
Not the strongest move.} ({Nataf-Filippov, Koszalin 1999, saw the novelty} 12.
Qf3 $5 {, sacrificing the b2-pawn, and White won in a very nice way after} Qxb2
13. Rd1 f5 (13... Nb4 $5) 14. Nd6+ Bxd6 15. cxd5 Bb4 16. dxe6 dxe6 $2 {
(this loses)} ({. The line} 16... O-O 17. exd7 Bxd7 18. Bc4+ Kh8 19. O-O Bxd2
20. Qf2 $1 {is also good for White.}) ({. So} 16... Bxd2+ 17. Rxd2 Qb1+ {
is necessary and if} 18. Kf2 (18. Rd1 Qb4+ 19. Rd2 Qb1+ {with perpetual}) {
, then} 18... Qb6+ {followed by 19...dxe6 with a perfectly good position.}) 17.
Qxc6+ Ke7 (17... Kf7 18. Bb5 $1 {is similar, though even worse}) 18. Bb5 $1 ({
not} 18. Qxa8 $2 Rd8 $1) 18... Rd8 19. O-O Bxd2 20. Qc7+ $1 Bd7 21. Qd6+ Kf7
22. Bxd7 Be3+ 23. Kh1 Qxa2 24. Qc7 $1 Bb6 25. Bxe6+ Kxe6 26. Qxg7 {
and White had emerged with a winning attack.}) 12... Rb8 $1 {
Again Black keeps his game together with tactics.} 13. b3 (13. cxd5 $2 Rxb2 14.
Qd3 Rxd2 $1 15. Kxd2 Bb4+ 16. Ke2 Qxa1 {and Black wins.}) 13... f5 {
This advance is typical for this variation.} ({
In Shalimov-Budnikov, Kharkov 2000, Black tested} 13... Ne3 $5 14. Bd3 Bb4 ({
forcing the strategically unprofitable exchange of dark-squared bishops
because of the benefit given to his centralized pieces; also interesting is} 
14... Nxg2+ 15. Kf1 Ne3+ 16. Ke2 Nf5 {with unclear play}) 15. Bxb4 Rxb4 16. g3
f6 17. exf6 gxf6 {with mutual chances.}) 14. exf6 Nxf6 15. Bd3 {The excellent
position of the queen in the centre gives Black a small advantage.} ({
Another white attempt is} 15. Nxf6+ gxf6 16. Be2 Ba3 {
(threatening ...Bb2 and preventing Qb1-c1-c3)} 17. Qd1 d5 18. Rf1 Rg8 {
and Black is better placed.}) 15... Nxe4 16. Bxe4 Ba3 $6 {
Black wants to win the exchange, but this is not a good idea.} ({Preferable is
} 16... d5 $1 17. Bf3 (17. cxd5 $2 exd5 $1) ({and} 17. Bd3 Ba6 {
are both good for Black}) 17... Bc5 18. Rf1 O-O {
and Black has completed development with a better position.}) 17. Ke2 Bb2 18.
Be3 Qf6 19. Bxa7 Ra8 20. Be3 d5 21. Bd3 Bxa1 22. Qxa1 O-O 23. a4 Ba6 24. Qxf6
gxf6 {In this complex endgame the bishop pair and passed a-pawn promise White
real counterplay.} 25. Bb6 e5 {
Now the struggle becomes very sharp, as both players have passed pawns.} ({
Quieter was} 25... dxc4 26. bxc4 Kf7 27. a5 h5 28. Ke3 {
when it is difficult for Black to realize his exchange.}) 26. cxd5 cxd5 27.
Bxa6 Rxa6 28. a5 Rc8 29. fxe5 fxe5 30. Rf1 $1 {This move prevents the black
king coming to the centre and prepares to attack the black pawns from f5.} ({
Weaker was} 30. b4 Kf7 31. b5 Rxb6 32. axb6 Rb8 {
and Black will probably win the endgame with his strong central pawns.}) 30...
Rc2+ 31. Kd3 Rxg2 32. Rf5 e4+ 33. Kc3 Rxh2 34. Rxd5 Rh3+ 35. Kc4 Ra8 36. Re5
Rh4 37. b4 Kf7 38. b5 e3+ 39. Kd5 Rb4 40. Kc6 Rc8+ 41. Kd7 {
Black has improved his position, but not enough for victory.} Rb8 42. Kc7
1/2-1/2

[Event "Bermuda"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2001.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Shabalov, A."]
[Black "Vescovi, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "66"]
[EventDate "2001.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6 5. Nc3 Nf6 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. e5 Nd5 8.
Ne4 Bb7 {This encourages the attack c2-c4-c5.} ({
If Black so desires, he can avoid this by playing first} 8... c5 9. -- ({, when
} 9. Be2 Bb7 {transposes to 8...Bb7 9 Be2 c5.}) ({
. In Ungure-Kuzmin, Cappelle 1993, White still tried} 9. c4 Nb4 10. g3 (10.
Nd6+ Bxd6 11. exd6 Bb7 {is favourable for Black}) 10... Qa5 11. Bd2 Qa6 12.
Bxb4 $6 ({better was} 12. a3 $5 Nc6 13. Bc3 Bb7 14. Bd3 {
with a playable position for both sides}) 12... cxb4 13. b3 Bb7 14. Bg2 Qa5 15.
Qd4 Rd8 16. O-O Bxe4 17. Qxe4 Bc5 18. Rfd1 O-O {
and now that Black has developed fully, he cannot be worse.})) 9. c4 ({
In Kovalev-Yagupov, Alushta 1999,} 9. Bd3 {
was played but this move has not found any followers:} Nb4 10. O-O c5 11. Re1
Nxd3 12. Qxd3 Qc7 13. Bf4 f5 14. exf6 Qxf4 15. fxg7 Bxg7 16. Nd6+ Ke7 17. Nxb7
{and now, instead of 17...Qc7 overlooking the strong answer 18 Qd5!, Black
should have played} Bd4 {and if} 18. Rad1 Rag8 $1 ({weaker is} 18... Bxf2+ 19.
Kh1 Bxe1 20. Qxd7+ Kf8 21. Rxe1 {and White has a strong attack}) 19. Re2 Rg7 {
with counterplay. The bad position of the white knight on b7 certainly
delights Black.}) 9... Nb4 10. c5 {White's blockade has reached its maximum.
The black pawns and bishops are motionless, and at first sight it is unclear
how Black can generate counterplay. However, counterplay is possible since
White has neglected his development and the black knight can occupy d5 forever.
} ({If instead} 10. a3 {, then} c5 $1 {
opens the diagonal for the bishop and frees the c6-square for the knight. After
} 11. Ng5 ({or} 11. Bg5 Qb6 12. axb4 Bxe4 13. b5 Qc7 14. f4 d6 {
and Black is no worse}) 11... Nc6 12. Qf3 f6 {Black is doing fine.}) ({
The inactive bishop move} 10. Bd2 {
also gives Black many opportunities for counterplay: for example,} c5 (10...
Qh4 $5 11. Ng3 c5 {is also interesting}) 11. Bxb4 Bxe4 ({or} 11... cxb4 $5 12.
Nd6+ Bxd6 13. Qxd6 Qh4 {with counterplay}) 12. Bc3 Qc7 13. Qg4 Qc6 14. f3 Bf5
15. Qf4 d6 16. Rd1 dxe5 17. Qxe5 f6 18. Qe3 Be7 {
with approximate equality in Khachian-Halkias, Yerevan 2000.}) 10... Ba6 $1 ({
In Topalov-Illescas, Spain 1999, Black played} 10... Qb8 11. f4 Ba6 {, though it is not clear which side the additional moves ...Qb8 and f2-f4 favour. In the
game, after} 12. a3 Bxf1 13. Rxf1 Nd5 14. Qd4 Be7 15. f5 exf5 16. Rxf5 {
White's chances were preferable.}) ({The new attempt} 10... Qh4 $6 {
was unsuccessful in Macieja-Czebe, European Ch., Ohrid 2001:} 11. Qf3 ({
the spicy move} 11. g4 $5 {intending 12 Bg5, as suggested by Istvan Almasi,
probably casts doubt upon 10...Qh4}) 11... h6 $2 ({better is} 11... Nc2+ 12.
Kd1 Nd4 13. Qf4 Qxf4 14. Bxf4 a5 {and Black is alright}) 12. g3 Qd8 13. Qb3 $1
Qa5 14. Bd2 Bxc5 15. Nxc5 Qxc5 16. Bxb4 Qxe5+ 17. Be2 Ba6 18. Qc2 h5 19. Rd1 $1
Bxe2 20. Qxe2 Qxe2+ 21. Kxe2 {and White won with his extra piece.}) 11. Bxa6
Nxa6 12. O-O $5 {This pawn sacrifice is not obligatory;} ({but if} 12. Qd4 Be7
13. O-O Rb8 14. a3 Nc7 15. Nd6+ Bxd6 16. exd6 Nd5 17. Qxg7 Qf6 18. Qxf6 Nxf6 {
, then the knight returns to d5, making it difficult for White to exploit his
extra pawn. Also, if he so desires, Black can avoid sacrificing a pawn with 15.
..Kf8!?, after which White's huge space advantage and Black's untouchable
knight on d5 probably balance each other out.}) 12... Nxc5 13. Ng3 $1 {
White avoids the exchange on c5 because the black knight is not so well placed
there. The knight is best placed on d5 of course!} h5 14. Be3 h4 15. Nh5 Nd3 $5
{An interesting manoeuvre!} ({Now the exchange} 15... Nd3 16. Qxd3 Rxh5 {
causes problems only for White.}) 16. f4 Nb4 17. Qg4 $6 {
This move is refuted by a temporary exchange sacrifice.} ({
Correct was the direct} 17. f5 $1 exf5 18. Rxf5 Nd5 19. Bd4 g6 20. Nf6+ Nxf6
21. exf6 Bd6 22. Rf3 {(Vescovi) with full compensation, as the pawn on f6
limits the black king's safety.}) 17... Rxh5 $1 18. Qxh5 Nc2 19. f5 ({After} 
19. Bf2 Nxa1 20. Rxa1 Rb8 $1 21. b3 Rb4 {the rook comes into play.}) 19... Qc7
$1 ({White probably expected} 19... Nxe3 $4 20. fxe6 {and f7 is very weak!})
20. fxe6 dxe6 21. Rac1 $6 {White overestimates his initiative.} ({
It was necessary to keep the bishop with} 21. Bf2 Nxa1 22. Rxa1 {
when the position remains unclear.}) 21... Nxe3 22. Rxc6 Qe7 $1 ({Not} 22...
Qxc6 $2 23. Qxf7+ Kd8 24. Qxf8+ Kc7 ({if} 24... Qe8 25. Qd6+ {followed by Rf8})
25. Rf7+ Kb6 26. Qb4+ Ka6 27. Qa3+ {and 28 Qxe3 with a winning advantage.}) 23.
Rfc1 Nd5 {So the heroic knight comes at last to d5, capturing a pawn and a
bishop along the way. Now it protects the c7-square just in time.} 24. a3 ({If
} 24. Qg4 {, then} Qb4 {. So White protects the b4-square in advance.}) 24...
g6 25. Qg4 Rd8 ({It was not too late to lose the game:} 25... Bh6 $4 26. Rc8+
Rxc8 27. Rxc8+ Kd7 28. Qc4 {and the black king is in deep trouble.}) 26. Qa4
Qd7 27. Qxh4 {White moves his queen like a metronome and wins a pawn, but
meanwhile Black has prepared the development of his bishop.} Qb7 28. h3 Bg7 29.
Rd6 Rc8 30. Qa4+ ({Slightly more stubborn is} 30. Re1 Qxb2 31. Qg4 Ne7 $1 {
though it would not help White in the long run.}) 30... Kf8 31. Rf1 Ne3 32. Rf3
Rc1+ 33. Kf2 Qxb2+ 0-1

[Event "Linares"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2001.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kasparov, G."]
[Black "Grischuk, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "89"]
[EventDate "2001.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. e5 Nd5 8.
Ne4 Bb7 9. Be2 c5 10. O-O ({Grünfeld-Shariyazdanov, Biel 1999, saw instead} 10.
c4 Nb4 11. Bf3 Qc7 ({Istvan Almasi's suggestion,} 11... Qb8 {, is probably
more accurate as then the queen will not be attacked by a later e5xd6. One
example is} 12. Bf4 Nc6 13. O-O Nd4 {and Black stands well}) 12. Bf4 Nc6 13.
Nd6+ Bxd6 14. exd6 Qb6 15. O-O O-O 16. Be3 Rab8 {
with approximately equal chances.}) 10... Qc7 11. Nd6+ ({In Shirov-Kramnik,
Frankfurt 2000, White decided first to attack the knight with} 11. c4 $5 {
and after} Ne3 $5 ({here Black must be careful; if} 11... Qxe5 $2 12. cxd5 Qxe4
13. Bf3 Qb4 14. Bd2 $1 Qb6 15. Bc3 {
, then Black is seriously behind in development}) 12. Nd6+ Bxd6 13. exd6 Qc6
14. Bf3 Nxd1 15. Bxc6 Bxc6 16. Rxd1 O-O 17. Be3 Rfc8 18. Rac1 Rab8 19. Rd2 Be4
{the position was approximately equal. The endgame is very complex with
opposite-coloured bishops and a slightly weird pawn structure. In general,
opposite-coloured bishop endings are a characteristic of the 8...Bb7 variation.
}) 11... Bxd6 12. exd6 Qc6 13. f3 {This is currently the critical position in
the 8...Bb7 variation. White has the bishop pair, but power of these bishops
is not fully felt. The d6-pawn is a splinter in Black's eye, but is also a
potential weakness.} c4 {
Black strengthens the knight, but gives White the control over the d4-square.}
({In turn the black pawn on c5 can also be attacked as, for example, after} 
13... O-O 14. c4 Nb6 15. Qd3 {followed by Be3, Rad1 and Qa3.}) ({
In contrast Black can try} 13... Nb6 $5 {, to attack the d6-pawn immediately by
} 14. c4 ({while after} 14. Qd2) ({and especially} 14. Qd3 {
intending Rd1, Black replies} c4 {gaining space on the queenside}) 14... Nc8
15. Bf4 f6 {and ...e6-e5.}) 14. Qd4 O-O {The attempt to keep the pawn by
exchanging queens has not yet been seen in practice.} ({After} 14... Qb6 15.
Qxb6 Nxb6 16. Be3 Bd5 17. b3 {Black is at a disadvantage in the queenside
battle as his king's rook has yet to enter the game.}) 15. Bxc4 Rfc8 $5 {
A new idea. Black is ready to play an endgame with opposite-coloured bishops,
even with a pawn less.} ({In a preceding game, Kasparov-Leko, Linares 1999,
Black won back his material in the most natural way:} 15... Qxd6 {, but after}
16. Bb3 ({in Anand-Leko, Dortmund 1999, Black defended accurately after} 16.
Rd1 Rfc8 17. Bd3 Qb6 18. Qxb6 Nxb6 19. b3 d5 20. Bb2 a5 21. Bd4 Nd7 22. c4 f6
23. f4 Kf7 24. Rac1 dxc4 25. Bxc4 Ba6 26. Bb2 Nb8 27. Bf1 Rxc1 28. Rxc1 Bxf1
29. Kxf1 {½-½; the advantage of the two bishops was neutralized by the
active position of the black pieces}) 16... Qb6 17. Rd1 Rfc8 18. Qxb6 Nxb6 19.
a4 d5 ({if} 19... Bd5 $2 20. a5 $1 Bxb3 21. axb6 Bxc2 22. Rd2 {and White wins})
20. a5 Nc4 21. a6 Bc6 22. Bxc4 dxc4 23. Be3 {
Black had difficulties in the endgame, due to the weakness of the a7-pawn.})
16. Bxd5 $5 ({A month later the players met again and Kasparov chose} 16. b3
Qxd6 17. Bb2 Qb6 ({
Kasparov also advises future black players to keep the queens on with} 17... e5
$5 18. Qe4 (18. Qf2 Nf4 {is unclear}) 18... Nb6 {with equality as after} 19.
Qxb7 Nxc4 20. bxc4 Rab8 {Black will regain his material}) 18. Rf2 Qxd4 19. Bxd4
Nb4 20. c3 Nc6 21. Be3 d5 22. Bf1 a5 23. a4 Ne7 {
when Black is only a little bit worse (Kasparov-Grischuk, Cannes {rapid} 2001).
}) 16... Qxd5 ({The attempt to pin the bishop by} 16... Qxd6 $6 {fails to} 17.
Bh6 $1 gxh6 18. Qg4+ Kh8 19. Bxb7 Qb6+ 20. Rf2 Qxb7 21. c3 {
and Black has a bad pawn structure and his king's position is weakened.}) 17.
Qxd5 Bxd5 18. Rf2 {This opposite coloured-bishop endgame with an extra white
pawn is typical for the variation. White plans to activate his queenside pawns
with b2-b3 and c2-c4 so Black should quickly create pressure on these pawns.}
Rc6 19. Bf4 ({Kasparov recommends that White let the d6-pawn go and continue
with his main plan:} 19. b3 $5 Rxd6 20. Rd2 Rb6 21. c4 Bc6 22. Rd6 a5 23. Bd2 {
with slightly better chances, although this is mainly because Kasparov is
playing White!}) 19... Rac8 20. Rc1 $1 {White avoids playing c2-c3 as it will
be easier to fight for the advantage later with all the pawns on the light
squares.} Ra6 21. a3 f6 {Black plans to win back the d6-pawn after ...e6-e5.} (
{It was also possible to wait with} 21... Rac6 {
as it is difficult for White to improve his position.}) 22. Be3 Ra4 23. Ra1 $1
{By defending the a-pawn White prepares the advance b2-b3 and c2-c4. However,
Black's defensive resources are not exhausted yet.} e5 24. b3 Ra6 25. c4 Be6 {
The bishop belongs on the a2-g8 diagonal to prevent the advance of the
queenside pawns.} 26. Rd2 Rb8 27. Rd3 Rb7 $2 {A very slow and passive move.} ({
Black should continue his logical plan of putting pressure on the white pawns:
} 27... Bf5 $1 28. Rc3 Rxd6 29. Bxa7 Rb7 30. Bc5 Rd3 31. Rxd3 Bxd3 32. b4 ({or
} 32. Bb4 Bc2 33. Bd6 Rxb3 34. a4 Rb1+) 32... Bxc4 33. a4 d5 34. b5 Kf7 {
and the position is drawn according to Kasparov.}) 28. g4 $1 {
Preventing ...Be6-f5.} h5 29. h3 hxg4 30. hxg4 f5 $2 {Inappropriate activity!
Black is opening up his kingside while his rooks are stuck on queenside. His
play is not very coherent.} 31. Bc5 $1 Rc6 32. b4 fxg4 33. fxg4 Rc8 ({
A colourful position arises after} 33... Bxc4 34. Re3 Be6 35. Rxe5 Bxg4 36.
Re8+ Kh7 37. Kf2 {and White will win. The bishop and two pawns have succeeded
in imprisoning the two black rooks!}) 34. Re1 Bxc4 35. Rc3 Bb5 36. Rxe5 Rf8 37.
Bxa7 Bc6 ({White wins convincingly in the rook endgame after} 37... Rxa7 38.
Rxb5 Rf4 39. g5 Rd4 40. g6 Rg4+ 41. Kf2 Rxg6 42. Rd5 {
. White is more active and still has an extra pawn.}) 38. Be3 Rbb8 39. Bg5 Rb5
40. Rcc5 Rb6 41. b5 Bf3 42. Be7 Ra8 43. Rg5 Rxa3 44. Bf6 Kf7 45. Bb2 ({If} 45.
Bb2 Rb3 {, then Black would have been mated by} 46. Rxg7+ Ke6 47. Rg6+ Kf7 48.
Rf6+ Kg7 49. Rg5+ Kh7 50. Rf7+ Kh6 51. Rh5+ Kg6 52. Rg7# {.}) 1-0

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "5. Four Knights: 6 Be2 & 6 a3"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "13"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 e6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. Be2 {is an unpretentious move; White prepares simply to complete his kingside development. However,
it also gives his opponent the freedom to develop as he wishes:} ({
In Shabalov-Khmelnitsky we take a brief look at} 6. a3 {. This prophylactic
move is directed solely against Black's intended ...Bf8-b4, but uses a tempo
that White might better spend on development. So White should try to place his
pieces in such a way that a2-a3 becomes useful, while Black will try to show
it to have been a waste of time. 6 a3 is not a bad move and it is not possible
to refute it. Still, Black will do well if he chooses to play in the centre.})
6... Bb4 {
and Black can carry out the thematic advance ...d7-d5 without difficulty.} 7.
-- ({The only way for White to challenge this plan is to sacrifice the e4-pawn
for a lead in development, and the critical continuation} 7. O-O {
is given full attention in Gutierrez-Yusupov and Kupreichik-Taimanov.}) ({
The exchange} 7. Nxc6 bxc6 {, which creates a strong black pawn centre, is
investigated in K.Arp-Cifuentes, while White's unusual 7th move possibilities
are analysed in Barua-Mohr.}) *

[Event "Istanbul Olympiad"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Barua, D."]
[Black "Mohr, G."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "87"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 e6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. Be2 Bb4 7. Qd3 {
Protecting the e-pawn, but the queen is in an uncomfortable position on d3.} ({
Trying to defend the pawn with} 7. Bg5 $2 Qa5 $1 {, e.g.} 8. Bxf6 ({not} 8.
Nxc6 $2 Bxc3+ 9. bxc3 Qxg5) 8... Bxc3+ 9. bxc3 Qxc3+ 10. Kf1 gxf6 11. Nb5 Qe5 {
with an extra pawn and a clear advantage to Black.}) ({
Against the simple defence} 7. f3 {, the move} d5 $1 {is the most logical reply
} ({, but} 7... Qa5 $5 {
is also interesting, as in the following amusing miniature:} 8. Qd2 $6 (8. Qd3
{is better,}) ({but not} 8. O-O $4 Nxd4 {winning a piece}) 8... d5 $1 9. a3
dxe4 $4 ({the right move is of course} 9... Nxd4 $1 10. Qxd4 Bxc3+ {
with good play}) 10. axb4 Qxa1 11. Nb3 {
1-0 Powell-Nagel, London 1985 - the black queen is trapped.}) ({. Returning to
} 7... d5 {, the line} 8. Nxc6 bxc6 9. O-O O-O ({not} 9... Bxc3 10. bxc3 dxe4
$2 11. Qxd8+ Kxd8 12. fxe4 Nxe4 13. Rxf7 {and White is better; but after 9...
0-0 Black is threatening both ...Bxc3 and ...dxe4}) 10. Bg5 Be7 11. Qd2 h6 12.
Bf4 Bb7 13. Bd3 Nh5 14. exd5 Nxf4 15. Qxf4 cxd5 16. Ne2 Bf6 17. c3 Qb6+ 18. Kh1
e5 19. Qa4 Bc6 20. Qc2 Rab8 {was seen in Armas-Illescas Cordoba, France 1991.
Black's central pawns, supported by the two bishops, have begun to move and
White has a hard defence in front of him. 7 f3 is not seen at grandmaster
level as it does nothing for White's development and weakens the dark squares
on the g1-a7 diagonal too much.})) 7... d5 {The most logical move.} 8. exd5 (8.
Nxc6 $6 bxc6 {
only strengthens Black's centre, when he already has the better prospects.})
8... Nxd5 9. Nxc6 {Now Nxc6 wrecks the black pawn structure and this may have
some importance later, especially in an endgame.} ({In the case of} 9. O-O Nxd4
10. Qxd4 Nxc3 11. Qxd8+ (11. bxc3 Qxd4 12. cxd4 Bc3 {is similar}) 11... Kxd8
12. bxc3 Bxc3 {
, it is difficult for White to demonstrate any compensation for the pawn.})
9... bxc6 10. Qc4 {This second queen move in the opening is hardly justified;}
({but after} 10. Bd2 Nxc3 11. bxc3 Bd6 {
This second queen move in the opening is hardly justified but after} 12. Bg5
Be7 13. Qxd8+ Bxd8 14. Bf4 ({it is probably preferable to play} 14. Bxd8 Kxd8
15. O-O-O+ Kc7 16. Bf3 Bd7 17. Rd3 {with equality}) 14... Bf6 15. O-O-O e5 16.
Be3 Be6 17. Rd6 O-O 18. Rhd1 Bd5 {, Chistiakov-Kan, Moscow 1947. The endgame
is good for Black due to his superior pawn structure.}) 10... O-O 11. O-O ({
Pawn grabbing is for patzers:} 11. Qxc6 $4 {is met by} Bd7 12. Qc4 Rc8 {
with a winning attack.}) 11... a5 {Black tries to exploit the poor position of
the white queen with ...Bc8-a6, but this allows White to keep his pawn
structure intact.} ({Instead, the pawn sacrifice} 11... Nxc3 12. bxc3 Bd6 13.
Qxc6 Rb8 {deserved attention, when Black has good development and a lot of
weak white pawns to attack.}) 12. Nd1 Ba6 13. Qe4 Bxe2 14. Qxe2 Qh4 15. Ne3 Bd6
16. h3 Nxe3 {This move helps White develop his pieces.} ({Preferable was} 16...
Qf4 17. Ng4 Qf5 {with an active position.}) 17. Bxe3 Qe4 18. Rad1 Rfd8 19. b3
a4 20. g3 axb3 21. cxb3 Bc5 22. Rxd8+ Rxd8 23. Rd1 {White wants to exchange
all the pieces without altering the pawn structure. Then the passed a-pawn can
easily become very dangerous.} Re8 $6 {A passive move.} (23... Rd5 $5 {
was better.}) 24. Rd3 Bxe3 25. Rxe3 Qb1+ 26. Kg2 Rd8 $6 {
Black chooses the wrong plan.} (26... h6 {
was necessary to give himself freedom to attack the a- and b-pawns.}) 27. Rc3
Rd1 28. Qc2 Rg1+ {
Black tries to attack as the rook endgame is completely hopeless for him.} 29.
Kf3 Qf1 30. Rxc6 f5 {This just gives away another pawn.} ({Better was} 30... g6
) ({or} 30... Qg2+ 31. Kf4 f6 {.}) 31. Rxe6 Qg2+ 32. Kf4 h6 33. Re8+ Kf7 34.
Re2 g5+ 35. Ke5 Kg7 36. Qc7+ Kg6 37. Qd6+ Kh5 38. Qd5 Qxd5+ 39. Kxd5 Rh1 40.
Ke5 Kg6 41. a4 Rxh3 42. a5 f4 43. a6 fxg3 44. fxg3 1-0

[Event "Netherlands"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1992.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Arp, K."]
[Black "Cifuentes, R."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "92"]
[EventDate "1992.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Be2 Bb4 7. Nxc6 bxc6 {
In this position, as in the majority of positions in the Four Knights Variation,
the exchange on c6 is not favourable for White.} 8. O-O ({After} 8. e5 {
, the inclusion of Bf1-e2 and ...Bf8-b4 (compared with the line 6 Nxc6 bxc6 7
e5) is obviously favourable for Black. Perhaps the most accurate response is}
Ne4 {, when Polovkin-Kharitonov, Briansk 1995, continued} 9. Bd2 ({
the best reply to the double attack} 9. Qd4 {is} Qa5 {, since if} 10. Qxe4 $2 (
{while after} 10. Bd2 Nxd2 $1 11. Kxd2 Rb8 12. f4 O-O 13. Bd3 Ba6 14. a3 Bxc3+
15. Qxc3 Qd5 $1 16. Rhg1 f6 {Black had the initiative in Gold-Wozney, USA 1972}
) 10... Bxc3+ 11. Kf1 Qxe5 {and Black is winning}) 9... Nxd2 10. Qxd2 Qa5 11.
f4 Ba6 12. Bxa6 Qxa6 13. a3 Ba5 14. Qd3 Qxd3 15. cxd3 f5 16. exf6 gxf6 {
and a draw was agreed although Black, having kept his valuable dark-squared
bishop, had the better position.}) 8... d5 ({Black can win a pawn by} 8... Bxc3
9. bxc3 Nxe4 {
, but White's lead in development gives him good compensation; e.g.} 10. Qd4 (
10. Bd3 d5 {transposes to Gutierrez-Yusupov}) 10... d5 11. Qxg7 Qf6 12. Qxf6
Nxf6 13. Bf4 Ne4 14. Bd3 Ke7 15. Rfe1 {
with the initiative to White, Silva-Elguezabal, Lisbon 1985.}) 9. e5 (9. exd5 {
is favourable for Black as the mobile pawn centre gives him an easy game; e.g.}
cxd5 10. Qd4 Be7 11. Bf4 O-O 12. Rfe1 Bb7 13. Be5 Bd6 14. Bd3 Bxe5 15. Qxe5 Qb8
16. Qd4 Re8 17. Bb5 e5 18. Qd2 Rd8 19. Ne2 a6 20. Ba4 Ne4 21. Qe3 d4 22. Qh3
Qc8 {with a clear advantage for Black in Shaposhnikov-Drogun, Yalta 1996.})
9... Nd7 10. f4 O-O {The position resembles the French Defence, but there
White never gains anything from exchanging on c6 either - when Black can
recapture with the b-pawn.} 11. Bd3 $6 {
Here the bishop can be attacked by the black knight.} ({Better was} 11. Be3 {
with complex play and with approximately equal chances.}) 11... Nc5 12. Ne2
Nxd3 13. Qxd3 a5 14. c3 Ba6 15. Qf3 Bc5+ 16. Be3 Qb6 17. Bxc5 Qxc5+ 18. Qf2
Qxf2+ 19. Rxf2 c5 {In similar positions arising from the French Defence, the
black pawn on c5 would instead be on the b-file, and White would stand better
with an irremovable knight on d4. But in the current position the knight has
nowhere to go and the bishop is obviously the stronger piece.} 20. Rd1 f6 {
Black wants to play on kingside as well. However, it would have been better
first to strengthen his position on the queenside, using the half-open b-file.}
21. exf6 ({White misses the opportunity to confuse matters with} 21. f5 $5 {.})
21... Rxf6 22. Ng3 {The knight dreams of coming to e5 but he is not nearly
fast enough. Better was Ne2-c1-b3 in order to attack the black pawns on the
queenside.} g6 23. Nf1 Raf8 24. g3 g5 $1 {
Making use of the greater co-ordination of his forces.} 25. Ne3 $6 {
Now White loses a pawn and the game.} ({More chances were offered by} 25. Nd2
a4 26. Re1 {when White's pieces are at least active.}) 25... gxf4 26. Ng4 Rg6
27. Ne5 Rg7 28. Re1 fxg3 29. Rxf8+ Kxf8 30. hxg3 a4 $1 31. Kf2 Rb7 32. b3 axb3
33. axb3 Rxb3 34. Nd7+ Ke7 35. Nxc5 Rb2+ 36. Kf3 Bc8 37. Rh1 Kd6 38. Rxh7 Rc2
39. Na4 Bd7 40. Nb6 Rxc3+ 41. Kf2 Bb5 42. g4 Rc6 43. Na8 Rc8 44. Ra7 Bc6 45.
Nb6 Rb8 46. Na4 Rb4 0-1

[Event "Cienfuegos"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1979.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Gutierrez Castillo, J."]
[Black "Yusupov, A."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "69"]
[EventDate "1979.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Be2 Bb4 7. O-O {
White completes his development and ignores the attack on his central pawn. In
compensation he will get a lead in development and the bishop pair, and the
dark-squared bishop will have a great time on the weakened squares in the
black camp.} Bxc3 8. bxc3 Nxe4 9. Bd3 ({On} 9. Nxc6 {,} dxc6 {is possible as
the exchange of queens (10 Qxd8+ Kxd8) is not dangerous for Black. Instead
Mujic-Karpov, Tuzla 1991, saw} 10. Bd3 Nc5 11. Ba3 b6 12. Qf3 Qd5 13. Qg3 O-O
14. Rfd1 Qh5 15. Re1 f6 {and Black had a good position.}) ({After} 9. Bf3 {
it is dangerous to take the second pawn:} -- (9... Nxc3 $6 10. Qd3 Nxd4 11.
Qxd4 Qf6 12. Qxf6 gxf6 13. Bb2 Na4 14. Bxf6 Rg8 15. Be4 {and the two menacing
bishops give White an advantage (Zelcic-Bennett, Geneva 1996).}) ({
. Therefore Black should play} 9... d5 {when} 10. Nxc6 ({or first} 10. Bxe4
dxe4) 10... bxc6 11. Bxe4 ({Morovic-Ricardi, Rio de Janeiro 1985, deviated with
} 11. Ba3 c5 12. Bxe4 dxe4 {but after} 13. Qh5 Qd5 14. Qxd5 exd5 15. Bxc5 Ba6
16. Rfd1 Bc4 17. Rab1 Kd7 18. Rb4 {the players agreed a draw as they had no
urge to play on in the opposite-coloured bishop endgame}) 11... dxe4 {
transposes to the game.})) ({After} 9. Qd3 d5 10. Ba3 {White occupies the
weakened a3-f8 diagonal and prevents Black from castling. However, the black
king can find refuge on f7, e.g.} Qa5 ({or Black can block the diagonal by} 
10... Nd6 {as in Del Rio Angelis-Moreno, Varadero 2000:} 11. Qg3 Nxd4 12. cxd4
Nf5 13. Qd3 f6 14. c4 Kf7 {
and in this unclear position the players agreed a draw}) 11. Nb5 a6 12. Nd6+
Nxd6 13. Bxd6 f6 $5 14. Qg3 Kf7 15. Bc7 Qa3 16. Bd6 Qa4 17. Rfb1 b5 18. Rb3 e5
19. f4 {with mutual chances, Greis-Stein, Essen 1948.}) 9... d5 ({
The adventurous} 9... Nxc3 {wins a second pawn, but Black lags even further
behind in development. Black was broken and beaten in Kupreichik-Barenboim,
Riga 1968:} 10. Qg4 -- (10... Qf6 11. Nxc6 dxc6 12. Bg5 Qe5 13. Bf4 Qd4 14. Qg3
Rg8 15. Be5 Qc5 16. Rfe1 g6 17. Bf1 Nd5 18. c4 Nb6 19. Rad1 Qe7 20. Bd6 {
(the dark squares are weak!)} Qf6 21. Rd3 Qg7 22. c5 Nd5 23. Rxd5 cxd5 24. Qg5
f6 25. Qxd5 g5 26. c6 Kd8 27. c7+ Ke8 28. Rxe6+ $1 {1-0 - an instructive
example! The black position was probably not hopeless but from a psychological
point of view, it is very unpleasant to defend such a position.}) ({. It would
have been strategically correct to return the extra material in time. For
instance:} 10... O-O 11. Nxc6 dxc6 ({
in Becker-Bangiev, Budapest 1989, Black played the alternative} 11... bxc6 {
; after} 12. Bb2 Qf6 13. Qb4 Nd5 14. Qxf8+ Kxf8 15. Bxf6 Nxf6 {Black has two
pawns for the exchange and sufficient counter-chances in the complex endgame})
12. Bb2 e5 $1 13. Bxh7+ Kxh7 14. Qh5+ Kg8 15. Qxe5 Qf6 $1 {
and the opposite-coloured bishops promise a draw.})) 10. Nxc6 (10. Ba3 {
is seen in Kupreichik-Taimanov}) ({while} 10. Bxe4 dxe4 11. Nxc6 ({
instead, White can prevent Black from castling by} 11. Ba3 {
, when Kristensen-Schandorff, Copenhagen 1994, continued} Nxd4 12. cxd4 Qa5 13.
Qc1 (13. Bd6 Qd5 14. Ba3 Qa5 {is equal}) 13... f6 14. Re1 Qf5 15. Rb1 Kf7 16.
c4 Rd8 17. Rb5 Qg6 18. Qc3 Kg8 {
and White's initiative compensates for the pawn deficiency}) 11... bxc6 {
transposes to the game.}) 10... bxc6 11. Bxe4 dxe4 12. Qxd8+ ({
White has to exchange queens, as after} 12. Qg4 O-O 13. Qxe4 Qd5 {Black has completed development and has the superior pawn structure and hence also the
advantage.}) 12... Kxd8 {The opposite-coloured bishops ensure that the endgame
will tend towards a draw, but Black still has to play precisely as his dark
squares are weak.} 13. Re1 f6 {Black gives up the extra pawn as he wants his
pawns on the dark squares to support his bishop.} ({
This is far better than the greedy} 13... f5 $6 {
which gives White a long lasting initiative, e.g.} 14. Bg5+ Ke8 15. Rad1 Bd7
16. Bf4 Rf8 17. c4 Rf7 18. c5 h6 19. h4 Kf8 20. f3 $1 exf3 21. gxf3 Re8 22. Kf2
Kg8 23. Be5 Kh7 24. Rg1 Rg8 25. f4 Re7 26. Rd6 {
and Black had a constricted position in Morovic Fernandez-Franzoni, Graz 1978.}
) 14. Rxe4 Kc7 15. Be3 e5 16. Ra4 Bf5 17. Rxa7+ Rxa7 18. Bxa7 Bxc2 {The passed
a-pawn is not dangerous here and, with his well-placed pawns on kingside,
Black's chances are not worse.} 19. Bc5 Rb8 20. h3 Ba4 21. Re1 Kd7 22. f4 $1 {
Breaking down the black centre after which the draw becomes obvious.} Rb5 23.
Bf8 g6 24. c4 Rb8 25. Bg7 exf4 26. Bxf6 Re8 27. Rxe8 Kxe8 28. Bg5 Kd7 29. Bxf4
h5 30. Kf2 Bc2 31. g4 hxg4 32. hxg4 Bd3 33. c5 Kc8 34. Ke3 Bb1 35. a4 1/2-1/2

[Event "Tbilisi"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1976.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kupreichik, V."]
[Black "Taimanov, M."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "58"]
[EventDate "1976.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e6 5. Be2 Nf6 6. Nc3 Bb4 7. O-O Bxc3 8.
bxc3 Nxe4 9. Bd3 d5 10. Ba3 {Instead of exchanging all the pieces, White
prevents the black king from castling. This is a clearly more double-edged
strategy.} Qa5 (10... Nxd4 11. cxd4 Qa5 {
most likely leads to a transposition of moves.}) (10... Qa5 {
is more flexible and gives Black some additional opportunities.}) 11. Qc1 Nxd4
({Here, and in other variations, White should be emotionally prepared for} 
11... Nxc3 {. White gets another tempo to develop his initiative, but cannot
count on it leading to a definite advantage; e.g.} 12. Nb3 Qc7 13. Re1 e5 14.
Qd2 d4 15. f4 Be6 16. fxe5 O-O-O 17. Bd6 Rxd6 18. exd6 Qxd6 19. Qg5 g6 20. Nc5
Bd5 21. Ne4 Nxe4 22. Bxe4 Bxe4 23. Rxe4 f5 {with an unclear position in
Balashov-Filippov, Maikop 1998. Both players probably have improvements, but
that just highlights the complexity of the line!}) 12. cxd4 Bd7 13. c4 $5 ({
Besides this energetic move, practice has also seen} 13. Rb1 Bc6 14. Bb4 Qc7
15. Qa3 a5 16. Bxe4 dxe4 17. c4 f6 18. Bd6 Qd7 {and the king is evacuated via
f7 with a fully defensible position, as in Geller-Khasin, Moscow 1961, and
Sutovsky-Ankerst, Ljubljana 1994. The latter game continued} 19. Rfe1 Kf7 20.
f3 $1 e3 $1 (20... exf3 $2 21. d5 $1 {and White wins}) 21. Rxe3 Rhe8 {
with a complicated position.}) 13... Nd2 14. Rd1 Nxc4 15. Bxc4 dxc4 (15... Rc8
{only helps White after} 16. Bc5 $1 -- {followed by} 17. Qg5 {.}) 16. d5 $1
exd5 17. Rb1 $1 {By sacrificing three pawns White has opened all the lines for
his pieces to attack. Black must now be very careful or he will face ruin.}
O-O-O {Forced;} ({since} 17... Bc6 18. Re1+ {
and 19 Re7 is not a viable option for Black.}) 18. Bb4 Qa6 (18... Qb5 $5 {
is interesting, as after} 19. Be7 Qc6 20. Bxd8 {
Black still has three pawns for the exchange.}) 19. Rxd5 Qg6 $1 ({After} 19...
Bc6 {White can exploit the poor position of the black queen:} 20. Ra5 $1 Qb6
21. Bc3 Qc7 22. Rxa7 {with numerous threats.}) 20. Be7 $5 Rde8 (20... Bc6 $5
21. Rg5 Qe4 22. Bxd8 Rxd8 {was probably fine for Black as well.}) 21. Rxd7 $1
Kxd7 22. Rxb7+ Kc8 {Black must be careful.} ({Not} 22... Kc6 $2 23. Qb2 Rxe7
24. Qb5+ Kd6 25. Qb4+ {and Black will not survive.}) 23. Rxa7 {White has sufficient compensation for the exchange, as the black king is very exposed and the
rook on h8 is still out of play.} Qb6 24. Qxc4+ Kb8 25. Rd7 Qb1+ 26. Qf1 Qxf1+
27. Kxf1 Kc8 28. Ra7 Kb8 29. Rd7 Kc8 {. A magnificent duel, in which the
attacker and defender were worthy adversaries.} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Parsippany"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1996.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Shabalov, A."]
[Black "Khmelnitsky, I."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "74"]
[EventDate "1996.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. a3 d5 {This is the
most logical continuation, which usually leads to isolated queen's pawn
positions.} ({Black could also play} 6... Be7 7. -- ({, with the idea} 7. Be2
O-O 8. O-O d5 {, to avoid 7 Bb5.}) ({. However,} 7. f4 $1 {
threatens the annoying e4-e5, and in the case of} d5 ({
therefore, after 7 f4 Black usually plays} 7... d6 {
transposing to the Scheveningen, but that is not our theme in this book}) 8. e5
{the inclusion of a2-a3 and ...Bf8-e7 most likely favours White in comparison
with similar positions from the French Defence.})) 7. Bb5 {
By pinning the knight, White can create an isolated d-pawn by force.} ({
If immediately} 7. exd5 {
, then Black has a choice. He can either accept an isolated pawn with} exd5 ({
or recapture} 7... Nxd5 {when it is best for White to continue} 8. Nxc6 bxc6 9.
Ne4 {and then Bd3, 0-0, c2-c4 with a small advantage due to a superior pawn
structure}) 8. Be2 (8. Bb5 {leads to the main game}) 8... Be7 {
, when Lutikov-Dvoretsky, Kutaisi 1978, continued} 9. O-O O-O 10. Be3 Ne5 11. h3
h6 12. Nf3 Nc6 {with equality.}) 7... Bd7 {It is necessary to unpin the knight.
} ({No good is} 7... Qc7 $6 8. exd5 exd5 9. O-O Be7 10. Bf4 ({also possible is
} 10. Nxc6 bxc6 11. Nxd5 Nxd5 12. Qxd5 Bd7 13. Qe4 {with a winning advantage})
10... Qd7 (10... Qxf4 11. Nxc6 Be6 12. Re1 {gives Black a truly hard time}) 11.
Qf3 O-O 12. Rad1 a6 13. Ba4 Bc5 14. Nb3 Ba7 15. Nxd5 Nxd5 16. Rxd5 {
and White has won a pawn, Vasiukov-Sermek, Bled 1989.}) 8. exd5 Nxd5 ({
In the case of} 8... exd5 9. O-O Be7 {we have a standard IQP position. Here
a2-a3 does not seem very useful and chances are approximately equal; e.g.} 10.
Nb3 Bg4 11. f3 Be6 12. Be3 O-O 13. Bxc6 bxc6 14. Na4 Nd7 {(Suetin-Manor,
Berlin 1995) and now White insisted on controlling c5 and thus went astray:}
15. Nac5 $6 Qb6 16. Qd4 Nxc5 17. Nxc5 Bf6 18. Qa4 Qxb2 19. Rab1 Qc3 {
and Black had an extra pawn.}) 9. Nxd5 exd5 ({The mass exchanges after} 9...
Nxd4 10. Bxd7+ Qxd7 11. Qxd4 Qxd5 12. Qxd5 exd5 {are unprofitable for Black.
In the endgame the isolated pawn is a weakness for which Black does not have
compensation.}) 10. O-O Be7 11. Nb3 ({After} 11. Re1 O-O 12. Nb3 Be6 13. Bf4
Qb6 14. Bd3 Bf6 15. c3 {, as in Ermenkov-Theofilopoulos, Hania 1993, Black
could equalize immediately with} d4 {.}) 11... a6 12. Bxc6 {
Played with the intention of blockading the black centre on the dark squares.}
({A standard IQP position would arise after} 12. Bd3 Be6 {.}) 12... bxc6 13.
Be3 O-O 14. Bc5 Re8 15. Bxe7 $6 {White hopes that his knight is better than
Black's bishop and plays to establish a blockade on c5 and d4, as Nimzowitsch
once advised. It is a strategically correct decision, but White has
underestimated Black's tactical threats on the kingside.} ({Stronger was} 15.
Re1 {.}) 15... Qxe7 16. Qd4 Qg5 $1 {Threatening 17...Bh3.} 17. Qc3 Re4 $1 18.
Nd2 ({If} 18. Nd4 c5 $5 19. Nf3 Qe7 {
and the black centre no longer looks at all weak.}) 18... Bh3 $1 19. g3 $6 ({
White should have gone for the rook ending:} 19. Qxh3 Qxd2 20. Qd3 Re2 21. Qxd2
Rxd2 22. Rac1 {and Black's advantage is tiny.}) 19... Re2 20. Nf3 Qg6 21. Rfe1
({White does not try to protect the pawn, as after} 21. Rfc1 Rae8 {
all the black pieces would be excellently placed.}) 21... Rxc2 22. Qb3 Qf6 $1 {
A beautiful tactical twist that attacks b2.} 23. Qe3 ({Not} 23. Qxc2 $4 Qxf3 {
with mate to follow.}) 23... h6 24. Ne5 d4 $5 {An interesting pawn sacrifice,
the purpose of which is to get the inactive rook to the seventh rank.} ({
Also good was} 24... Re8 25. Ng4 Qe6 {with a solid extra pawn.}) 25. Qxd4 Rd8
26. Qf4 Rdd2 27. Qxf6 gxf6 28. Nf3 Rxf2 {All Black's pawns are isolated and
weak but his pieces are extremely active, and that is what matters most here.}
29. Nh4 Rxb2 30. Rac1 Bg2 $1 {
The bishop finds a clever route to the ideal square d5.} 31. Rb1 Bd5 32. Rxb2
Rxb2 33. Re8+ Kh7 34. Ra8 Rb6 35. a4 c5 36. Rd8 Be6 37. Kg2 Rb4 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "6. Four Knights: 6 Be3"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "14"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 ({In the Sicilian,} 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 {
, Scheveningen (} e6 {),} ({Najdorf (} 5... a6 {)}) ({, and Classical (} 5...
Nc6 {), English chess players have invented a standard plan of development
involving Be3, f2-f3, Qd2, 0-0-0 and a pawn storm on the kingside with the g-
and h-pawns. Although this scheme might seem somewhat crude, it is difficult
for Black to defend and every top player has at some time investigated this
plan. Once grandmasters play something, it is adopted by amateurs as well,
especially those with an active style.})) 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6.
Be3 {Admirers of the so-called English Attack sometimes play this strange move.
The Four Knights Variation is a cold shower for these players. The standard
move ...d7-d5 kills this attack. After} Bb4 {the game can develop in a similar
fashion to the 6 Be2 Bb4 line investigated in the previous chapter. The main
line} 7. Bd3 d5 {is seen in Handoko-Yusupov and Saltaev-Beshukov, while
White's alternatives are investigated in Spassky-Hübner.} *

[Event "Tilburg"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Spassky, B."]
[Black "Huebner, R."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "46"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Be3 ({Compared with} 6.
Be2 Bb4 7. Nxc6 bxc6 8. e5 {the line with 6 Be3 is even less dangerous, as the
bishop is immediately exposed.}) 6... Bb4 7. Nxc6 ({
Amateurs will sometimes continue with} 7. f3 {anyway, sticking stubbornly to
their English Attack. We should only be pleased to play against someone so in
love with their pet system. Black, of course, replies} d5 $1 {
and White is badly placed to meet this.} 8. -- ({. After} 8. Qd2 e5 9. Nxc6
bxc6 10. exd5 Nxd5 {
White had serious problems in Lyubimtsev-Yagupov, St. Petersburg 2000.}) ({
. If instead} 8. Bb5 Bd7 {sets a trap:} 9. O-O $2 ({or} 9. Bxc6 Bxc6 10. e5 Nd7
11. f4 Qh4+ 12. g3 Qh3 13. Qe2 Nb6 {
with a good position for Black in Jongsma-Kujif, Haarlem 1993}) 9... e5 10. Nb3
$2 ({the best defence was} 10. Nde2 d4 11. Nd5 Nxd5 12. exd5 {
and White only loses a pawn}) 10... d4 11. Nd5 dxe3 12. Bxc6 bxc6 13. Nxb4 e2
14. Qxe2 Qb6+ 15. Qf2 Qxb4 {
with an extra piece, Dhar-Strutinskaya, Moscow Olympiad 1994.})) 7... bxc6 8.
e5 ({Better is} 8. Bd3 {which transposes to Handoko-Yusupov after} d5 {.}) 8...
Nd5 ({Also possible is} 8... Ne4 {, as in the similar position with 6 Be2 (see
the notes to K.Arp-Cifuentes). The ancient game Yanovsky-Schiffers, Leipzig
1894, proceeded as follows:} 9. Qd4 Qa5 10. Qxe4 $2 ({better is} 10. a3 $1 Bxc3+
11. bxc3 Qxc3+ 12. Qxc3 Nxc3 13. Bd4 {and White has some compensation for the
pawn as his bishop is very strong, though Black has no obvious weaknesses})
10... Bxc3+ 11. bxc3 Qxc3+ 12. Ke2 Qxa1 13. Kf3 f5 14. Qf4 O-O {
and Black easily used his material advantage to gain a full point.}) 9. Bd2 {
In comparison with 6 Be2 Bb4 7 Nxc6 bxc6 8 e5 Nd5 9 Bd2, White has simply lost
a tempo and of course Black has no problems.} Qc7 10. f4 ({If} 10. Nxd5 Bxd2+
11. Qxd2 cxd5 {
Black simplifies the position and exchanges the d7-pawn for the e5-pawn; e.g.}
12. f4 Rb8 13. b3 d6 14. exd6 Qxd6 15. Bd3 Qc5 {and it is White who should be
thinking about equality, Sharp-Ippolito, Philadelphia 1999.}) 10... Qb6 {
Black takes control of the weakened a7-g1 diagonal and threatens 11...Ne3.} 11.
Qf3 O-O 12. a3 Bxc3 13. bxc3 {Spassky challenges Black to play 13...Qb2, which
in fact deserved serious attention. Instead Hübner chooses to increase the
value of his knight.} Ba6 14. Bxa6 Qxa6 15. Qd3 ({White wants improve his pawn
structure, even though Black can seize the b-file after} 15. Qd3 Qxd3 16. cxd3
Rfb8 {.}) 15... Qa4 $5 {Still playing for the knight.} 16. O-O f5 {The alternative advance ...c6-c5-c4 would give the knight the d5-square for eternity. But
in this case White would play 17 f5 and have good attacking chances on the
kingside.} 17. c4 Nb6 18. c5 Nc4 {The knight has found a new square.} 19. Bc3 (
19. Qxd7 Rfe8 20. Bb4 Ne3 {
is dangerous for White as the queen is in trouble after} 21. -- Nd5 {.}) 19...
Rfb8 20. Qxd7 Re8 {White has won a tempo (Bb2-c3) on the previous note. Now
the game ends in a draw.} 21. Rab1 Rad8 22. Qc7 Rc8 23. Qd7 Rcd8 1/2-1/2

[Event "Skien"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1979.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Handoko, E."]
[Black "Yusupov, A."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "88"]
[EventDate "1979.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. Nc3 Nc6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. Be3 Bb4 7. Bd3 {
White protects the e4-pawn and simultaneously completes his development.
Obviously the correct move!} d5 {
Black still tries to seize the initiative at once.} 8. Nxc6 ({The naive} 8. f3
$2 {is bad because of} e5 9. Nxc6 bxc6 {and Black has a strong pawn centre.}) (
{After} 8. O-O {this plan does not have the same force:} e5 ({better is simply
} 8... Bxc3 9. bxc3 dxe4 10. Bb5 Bd7 11. Bxc6 Bxc6 12. Qe2 Qc7 13. Bg5 Nd5 14.
c4 Nb6 {and White has yet to prove that his initiative counterbalances the
lost pawn, Meyer-Rogozenko, Dresden 1996}) 9. Nxc6 bxc6 10. exd5 cxd5 11. Bg5 {
with pressure on the pawns.}) 8... bxc6 {Here White has two essentially
different plans: advance with e4-e5 or exchange on d5.} ({
In the latter case, after} 8... bxc6 9. exd5 exd5 {the position is similar to
the Scotch Four Knights variation: 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 exd4 4 Nxd4 Bb4+ 5
Nc3 Nf6 6 Nxc6 bxc6 7 Bd3 0-0 8 0-0 d5 9 exd5 cxd5 10 Bg5 c6, which is
considered harmless for Black. And in our Sicilian line the white bishop is on
e3 where it is less active, so clearly Black has no problems.} ({After} 9...
cxd5 {, the evaluation of the position is dependent upon whether or not White
succeeds in blockading the black pawn centre. In Bergstrom-Zapolskis,
Stockholm 1990, White achieved the blockade but at the cost of weakening his
control over e4 and Black had sufficient counterchances:} 10. Bd4 O-O 11. O-O
Bd6 12. f4 Nd7 13. Qh5 f5 14. Kh1 Bc5 15. Ne2 Nf6 16. Qh4 Bxd4 17. Nxd4 Qb6 18.
Nb3 Ba6 {.}) ({The other recapture,} 9... Nxd5 {
, would transpose to Saltaev-Beshukov but, besides that, it makes little sense!
})) 9. e5 {The important feature of this position is the open d1-h5 diagonal.}
({After the standard} 9. e5 Nd7 {White has the aggressive reply} 10. Qg4 {
. But Black also has another possibility, as played by the former World
Champion Alekhine.}) 9... d4 $5 10. exf6 (10. Bd2 dxc3 11. bxc3 Ba5 12. exf6
Qxf6 {is not dangerous for Black.}) 10... dxe3 ({
The stem game Gonzalez-Alekhine, Gijon 1944, saw} 10... dxc3 11. O-O (11. fxg7
$4 cxb2+ 12. Kf1 bxa1=Q 13. Qxa1 Rg8 {is no good as} 14. Bxh7 Ba6+ 15. Kg1 Rxg7
$1 {exploits the weakness of White's back rank and wins the game}) 11... cxb2
$6 ({better is} 11... Qxf6 12. b3 O-O 13. Qh5 g6) 12. fxg7 Rg8 13. Rb1 Rxg7 14.
Rxb2 Qd5 15. g3 a5 16. c4 Qe5 17. Rb1 {
and White had a lead in development and a better pawn structure.}) (10... Qxf6
$5 {has been little investigated.}) 11. fxg7 ({If} 11. Qf3 exf2+ 12. Kf1 gxf6
13. Qxc6+ Bd7 14. Qc4 Qb6 {
and Black's chances are better, Rujevic-Rogers, Surfers Paradise 2000.}) 11...
exf2+ 12. Kf1 ({After} 12. Kxf2 Qd4+ 13. Kf1 Qxg7 {
Black stands better with the bishop pair.}) 12... Rg8 13. Bxh7 {
This does not appear to be the strongest move.} ({More interesting is} 13. Qg4
{, keeping the pawn and threatening 14 Bxh7; e.g.} Bxc3 14. bxc3 Qf6 15. Qc4 ({
if} 15. Qd4 e5 $1 16. Qxf2 Qxf2+ 17. Kxf2 Rxg7 {with a good endgame for Black})
15... Bd7 16. Be4 e5 17. Bf3 Rxg7 {
with approximately equal chances in Hector-Sax, Denmark 1994.}) 13... Rxg7 ({
In Soos-Karpov, Kecskemet 1991, Black consistently avoided the exchange of
queens with} 13... Qh4 14. Bd3 ({if} 14. Bxg8 $2 Ba6+ $1 15. Ne2 Rd8 16. Qc1
Rd2 {is killing}) 14... Rxg7 15. Qf3 Bb7 16. Qxf2 Qe7 17. Re1 O-O-O {
and Black had full compensation for the pawn.}) 14. Qxd8+ Kxd8 15. Bd3 f5 $1 {
Limiting the mobility of White's pieces on the light squares.} 16. Na4 {
The knight goes to the edge of the board and remains there for almost the
entire game.} ({Instead Schlosser-Fauland, Semriach 1987, saw} 16. Kxf2 e5 17.
Rhe1 Bd6 18. Bc4 Ke7 19. Re2 (19. g3 {is more accurate}) 19... Rg4 20. b3 $2 ({
this weakens the dark squares and, as is well known, pawns cannot go backwards!
Also poor is} 20. Bb3 Ba6 21. Rd2 Bc5+ 22. Ke1 Be3 {and Black wins,}) ({
but after} 20. Bd3 Be6 {White can put up resistance despite the perfect
co-ordination of Black's pieces and pawns}) 20... Bc5+ 21. Ke1 ({not} 21. Kf1
Bd4 $1) 21... Bb4 22. Kd2 {, and now} ({no better is} 22. Rxe5+ Kf6 23. Re3 Re4
$1 24. Kd2 Rxe3 25. Kxe3 Bxc3) 22... Be6 $1 {would have won a piece after} 23.
Bxe6 ({or} 23. Bd3 e4) 23... Rd8+ {, followed by ...Bxc3.}) 16... e5 17. Kxf2
e4 18. Bc4 f4 19. Rhd1+ Kc7 20. Rd4 ({
It seems that this curtails Black's initiative after, for example,} 20. Rd4 e3+
21. Kf1 Bd6 22. Rad1 {. But with a second pawn sacrifice Black co-ordinates
his forces and continues the attack.}) 20... e3+ 21. Kf1 f3 $1 22. gxf3 Bh3+
23. Ke2 Re8 ({Better is} 23... Rg2+ {, when} 24. Kxe3 {loses to...} ({
in the case of} 24. Kd3 {Black can continue either} e2 ({or} 24... c5 25. Rd5
Re8 26. Rxc5+ Bxc5 27. Nxc5 {and White has only dim chances of saving the game}
)) 24... Re8+ 25. Re4 (25. Kf4 $2 Bf8 $1 {threatening ...Bh6 mate}) 25... Bd2+
26. Kd4 (26. Kd3 $2 Rd8+ 27. Rd4 Bf5# {mate!}) 26... Rd8+ 27. Ke5 ({or} 27. Kc5
Rg5+ 28. Bd5 Rgxd5+ 29. Kc4 Bf5 {and wins}) 27... Rg5+ 28. Kf6 Rf8+ 29. Bf7 ({
or} 29. Ke7 Bb4+ {and Black mates}) 29... Rf5+ {winning a piece.}) 24. Bf7 {
Giving the white king a flight square at c4.} Rg2+ 25. Kd3 Bf5+ 26. Kc4 Rb8 27.
c3 Bd6 28. Re1 e2 29. Bh5 {Planning to attack the e-pawn with f3-f4.} ({
The direct} 29. Rd2 {is unsuccessful after} Rf8 30. Bh5 Rh8 31. Bg4 Bxg4 32.
fxg4 Rhxh2 {and Black maintains the initiative.}) 29... Be5 30. Re4 {White sacrifices the exchange to eliminate the black e-pawn and thus obtain chances of a
draw.} Bxe4 31. fxe4 Rxh2 32. Bxe2 Bg3 33. Rg1 Rxe2 34. Kd3 $1 (34. Rxg3 $2 {
drops a piece to} Rxe4+ {.}) 34... Re1 35. Rxg3 Rd8+ 36. Kc2 Re2+ ({If} 36...
Rxe4 37. Rg7+ Kb8 {and the black king cannot pass the second rank to help the
other pieces. However, the draw is inevitable in any case.}) 37. Kb3 Rd7 38.
Nc5 Rf7 39. Rg6 Kb6 40. Kc4 Rh7 41. Rg8 Kc7 42. Ra8 Kd6 43. Rd8+ Kc7 44. Ra8
Kd6 1/2-1/2

[Event "Agios Nikolaos"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1995.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Saltaev, M."]
[Black "Beshukov, S."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "50"]
[EventDate "1995.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Be3 Bb4 7. Bd3 d5 8.
exd5 Nxd5 (8... exd5 {is seldom seen, as Black does not want to risk sitting
back with an isolated pawn blockaded by a white knight on d4.}) 9. Nxc6 bxc6 {
Black is planning exchanges on c3 and e3. However, White has a slight lead in
development and some quite good continuations.} ({If} 9... Nxe3 {
immediately, then} 10. fxe3 ({White can win a pawn by exchanging queens:} 10.
Nxd8 Nxd1 11. Rxd1 Kxd8 12. Bxh7+ {, but Black has good compensation after} Kc7
({also interesting is} 12... Ke7 13. Be4 Bd7 $5 {, taking over the initiative})
13. Be4 Rh4 $5) 10... bxc6 11. O-O {transposes to the main game.}) (9... Nxc3
$6 {does not oblige White to go into a slightly favourable endgame by} 10. Nxd8
({instead he can continue} 10. Qg4 $1 bxc6 11. Qxb4 Nd5 12. Qc5 {
with a clear advantage}) 10... Nxd1+ 11. Kxd1 {.}) 10. O-O ({
Another active move is} 10. Qg4 {, but after} O-O 11. O-O -- ({
, Black can simplify the position by} 11... Bxc3 12. bxc3 Nxe3 13. fxe3 {
, destroying White's pawn structure. The endgame is still far away and White's
lead in development gives him some initiative, but Black should be better with
only a single pair of minor pieces left on the board.}) ({. In Zigzidsuren-Schmidt, Polanica Zdroj 1973, Black chose to keep the tension with} 11... f5 $5 {
. After} 12. Qc4 Qd6 13. a3 Nxe3 14. fxe3 Bc5 15. Bxf5 Qe5 16. Be4 Rxf1+ 17.
Rxf1 a5 18. Bxc6 Qxe3+ 19. Kh1 Ba6 20. Qe4 Bxf1 21. Qxe3 Bxe3 22. Bxa8 Bc1 23.
Kg1 Ba6 24. b4 Bxa3 25. b5 Bb4 26. bxa6 Bxc3 {
the result of the sharp struggle was an drawn endgame.} (26... --))) ({
Another idea is} 10. Bd2 {. Black often plays} Nxc3 ({Black can also play} 
10... Bxc3 11. bxc3 Qf6 {, keeping the strong knight on d5. After} 12. O-O O-O
13. Qh5 g6 14. Qh6 e5 15. Bg5 Qe6 16. Rae1 f5 17. c4 Nf6 18. c5 a5 19. Re2 Ba6
{White's initiative died away in Frolov-Beshukov, St. Petersburg 1994}) 11.
bxc3 Bd6 12. O-O (12. Qh5 $5) 12... O-O {.} 13. -- ({. Now in an historical
game Andersen-Paulsen, Leipzig 1877, the anti-positional move} 13. f4 $6 {
caused White difficulties after} Bc5+ 14. Kh1 g6 15. Rf3 Qf6 16. Qe2 Bb7 17.
Raf1 Rfe8 18. Rg3 Bf8 {
as Black has a solid position with long-lasting strategic advantages.}) ({
. It was more prudent to organize active piece play with} 13. Qh5 f5 ({
more cautious was} 13... g6 {, when after} 14. Qh6 Qc7 15. Rae1 c5 16. Re4 Bb7
17. Rh4 f5 18. Re1 Rfe8 {
Black successfully defended his position as in Basas-Delgado, Spain 1999}) 14.
Rfd1 Kh8 15. Bc4 Bc5 16. Be3 Qa5 17. Rd3 Bxe3 18. Rxe3 Qc5 19. Bb3 Qe7 20. Rae1
Rf6 21. Re5 Bd7 22. Qe2 {with strong pressure in Frolov-Filippov, Smolensk
2000. However, this time the advance of the f-pawn, 13...f5?!, weakened
Black's position.})) (10. Bd4 $6 {is even less successful, as after} Nxc3 11.
Bxc3 ({White cannot play} 11. bxc3 {, as with 10 Bd2, because of} Qxd4 $1 {
and Black wins}) 11... Bxc3+ 12. bxc3 {White has too few pieces to develop an
initiative, and so stands worse because of the defects in his pawn structure.})
10... Nxe3 ({Black can win a pawn by} 10... Nxc3 11. bxc3 Bxc3 {
but risks losing the game; e.g.} 12. Rb1 Qd5 13. Rb3 Bf6 14. c4 Qd7 15. Qf3 O-O
16. Be4 Bb7 17. Rd1 Qc8 18. Bc5 Rd8 19. Rxd8+ Bxd8 20. Bxh7+ Kxh7 21. Qh5+ Kg8
22. Rh3 Bh4 23. Qxh4 {1-0 Paoli-Foltys, Vienna 1949.}) 11. fxe3 Bxc3 ({
Paoli-Kozma, Reggio Emilia 1964, saw} 11... O-O 12. -- (12. Rf4 Be7 13. Qf3 Rb8
14. Rf1 f5 {and the pressure on the f-file seems to be worthless.}) ({
. Stronger, however, is} 12. Rxf7 $5 Kxf7 ({not} 12... Rxf7 $2 13. Bxh7+ {
and White wins the queen}) 13. Qh5+ Ke7 14. Qh4+ Kd7 15. Qxb4 {
with a dangerous attack in Melnikov-Lucin, USSR 1967.})) 12. bxc3 O-O 13. Qf3
Qc7 ({Saltaev-Iskusnyh, Moscow 1996, ended in a quick draw:} 13... Qd5 14. Qf4
Qc5 15. Qd4 {½-½. After} Qxd4 16. cxd4 e5 $5 17. dxe5 Re8 18. Bc4 Be6 {
White's advantage is negligible.}) 14. Rab1 a5 15. Qe4 g6 (15... f5 16. Qc4 Rf7
17. Qc5 {would create difficulties.}) 16. Rf6 {
Using the newly created hole in the black king's position.} Ba6 17. c4 c5 18.
h4 {White begins a promising attack with the aid of the h-pawn, but Black
successfully defends by exploiting White's own weaknesses.} Rab8 19. Rbf1 Bb7
20. Qg4 Qe5 21. h5 Qxe3+ ({Weaker is} 21... Qxh5 22. Qxh5 gxh5 23. Rh6 {
with pressure.}) 22. R1f2 Qe1+ ({
Black is satisfied with the repetition of moves, but he could play on with} 
22... Bc6 $5 23. hxg6 fxg6 (23... hxg6 $2 24. Rxg6+ $1 {and mate will come!})
24. Qxe6+ (24. Rxg6+ $2 Kh8 {leaves White with two rooks en prise}) 24... Qxe6
25. Rxe6 Rb1+ {and Black has a favourable endgame.}) 23. Rf1 Qe3+ 24. R1f2 Qe1+
25. Rf1 Qe3+ 1/2-1/2

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "7. Four Knights: 6 g3"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "12"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. g3 {. The continuation
6 g3 is not the most popular but it can be used against many schemes, in
particular against the Scheveningen, Dragon, Najdorf and Paulsen systems. Many
chessplayers consider this set-up as a universal remedy against all branches
of the Sicilian Defence. White plays g2-g3, Bf1-g2, 0-0 and then chooses a
concrete plan according to arrangement of the black pieces. White does not
strive for the maximum advantage from the opening, but creates a strategically
solid basis for the middlegame. --- Against the Four Knights Variation the
move 6 g3 also is quite satisfactory. The light-squared bishop on g2 protects
the e4-pawn and gains in strength after the centre is opened up. In turn,
Black has no serious problems in developing, and can spoil the white pawn
structure with an exchange on c3, thus as a rule obtaining sufficient
counterplay.} -- ({The continuation} 6... Bb4 7. Bg2 d5 {is similar to lines
with 6 Be2 (Chapter 5) and 6 Be3 (Chapter 6), and is considered in
Glek-Maksimenko and Brajovic-Nikcevic.}) ({More flexible is} 6... d5 {
(Peng Xiaomin-Filippov and Campora-San Segundo), when Black can not only
continue with ...Bf8-b4, transposing to 6...Bb4 lines, but has additional
possibilities; for example,} 7. Bg2 Qb6 {(Campora-San Segundo).}) *

[Event "Varna"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1989.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Glek, I."]
[Black "Maksimenko"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "39"]
[EventDate "1989.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. g3 Bb4 7. Bg2 d5 8.
exd5 (8. Nxc6 bxc6 {creates a compact black pawn centre and after the further}
9. exd5 {Black has a pleasant choice of recaptures.}) ({The pawn sacrifice} 8.
O-O Bxc3 9. bxc3 Nxe4 10. Bxe4 dxe4 {is also possible, and this position can
arise (without g2-g3) from the 6 Be2 variation (see Gutierrez-Yusupov).
However, the weakening of the kingside light squares by g2-g3 makes the
position favourable Black; e.g.} 11. Nb5 O-O 12. Ba3 Qa5 ({also possible is} 
12... Qxd1 13. Raxd1 Rd8 14. Rxd8+ Nxd8 15. Nc7 Rb8 16. Bd6 Bd7 17. Nxe6 Rc8 {
and Black is doing well}) 13. Bxf8 Qxb5 14. Bd6 b6 15. Re1 Bb7 {with full compensation for the pawn in view of the numerous weakness in the white camp, Van
Kooten-Janssen, Arnhem 1996.}) 8... Nxd5 9. O-O ({Here} 9. Nxc6 {
makes more sense as it separates the black pawns, and after} bxc6 10. O-O -- (
10... Bxc3 11. bxc3 {transposes to Brajovic-Nikcevic.}) ({
. The tempting alternative} 10... Ba6 {is justified after} 11. Re1 ({
10...Ba6 gives White an additional tactical shot:} 11. Nxd5 $5 Bxf1 (11... cxd5
12. Qd4 Bxf1 13. Qxg7 {seems dangerous for Black}) 12. Qg4 $5 Bxg2 13. Nxb4 Bd5
14. Qxg7 {with unclear consequences}) 11... O-O 12. Bd2 Nxc3 13. bxc3 Ba5))
9... Nxc3 $6 {This leaves White's light-squared bishop unopposed on the long
diagonal, making life unpleasant for the black king, which is still
vacationing in the centre.} ({Better is} 9... Bxc3 {as in Brajovic-Nikcevic.})
10. Nxc6 $1 ({An historical example saw} 10. bxc3 Bxc3 11. Nxc6 Qxd1 12. Rxd1
Bd7 13. Rb1 Bxc6 14. Bxc6+ bxc6 15. Ba3 -- (15... Be5 16. Rb7 Rd8 17. Re7+ {
1-0 Denker-Mieses, Hastings 1945.}) ({. This does not mean that 10 bxc3 is a
good alternative to 10 Nxc6. Black played well up till the careless 15...Be5?.
The correct move is} 15... a5 $1 {intending to block the important a3-f8
diagonal and reach an equal rook endgame. Schubert-Dolmatov, Groningen 1977,
continued} 16. Rb7 Bb4 17. Bxb4 axb4 18. Rdd7 O-O 19. Rxb4 Rxa2 20. Rc4 Ra6 21.
Rc7 g6 22. R4xc6 Rxc6 23. Rxc6 Kg7 {
with a drawish position. So 10 Nxc6 is certainly the strongest.} (23... --)))
10... bxc6 ({Not} 10... Qxd1 $2 11. Rxd1 Nxd1 12. Nxb4 {and White wins}) ({
while if} 10... Nxd1 11. Nxd8 Kxd8 12. Rxd1+ Ke8 13. Bf4 {
and White has a clear lead in development.}) 11. bxc3 Bxc3 12. Bxc6+ $1 Bd7 13.
Qf3 $1 {The correct move, allowing White to develop a strong initiative.} Rc8
$2 ({After} 13... O-O 14. Qxc3 Rc8 15. Bb2 f6 16. Bxd7 $1 Rxc3 17. Bxe6+ Kh8
18. Bxc3 {White wins material.}) ({The only move was} 13... Bxa1 {
, though after} 14. Bxd7+ $1 Qxd7 ({if} 14... Kxd7 {
White has a pleasant choice between the natural} 15. Rd1+ ({and Glek's stunning
} 15. Ba3 $5 {, e.g.} Bd4 16. Rb1 Qc8 17. Qxf7+ Kc6 18. Qf3+ Kc7 19. Rb4 {
with many threats}) 15... Ke8 16. Qc6+ Kf8 17. Ba3+ Kg8 18. Rxd8+ Rxd8 19. c3 {
when the queen is stronger than the two rooks}) 15. Qxa8+ Qd8 16. Qxa7 O-O 17.
Be3 Be5 18. c4 {and with an extra pawn, White can play for a win.}) 14. Qxc3
Bxc6 15. Qxg7 Qd5 16. f3 $1 {White protects the weakened light squares and has
good winning chances due to his extra pawn and control over the dark squares.}
({Not} 16. Qxh8+ $4 Kd7 {and White has to give up material to prevent mate.})
16... Qc5+ 17. Rf2 Qf8 18. Qd4 $1 {
White has all the threats, so of course he does not want to exchange queens.}
Rd8 19. Qc3 $1 Rd1+ 20. Kg2 {
. Threatening both 21 Qxc6 and 21 Ba3. Black decided he had had enough.} 1-0

[Event "Cetinje"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1996.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Brajovic, R."]
[Black "Nikcevic, N."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "66"]
[EventDate "1996.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. g3 Bb4 7. Bg2 d5 8.
exd5 Nxd5 9. O-O Bxc3 10. Nxc6 (10. bxc3 {was played in Mestel-Sveshnikov,
Hastings 1977, but has not been tried again. After} Nxc3 11. Bxc6+ bxc6 12. Qf3
Qxd4 ({better is} 12... Nd5 13. c4 Nb6 {with sharp play}) 13. Qxc6+ Qd7 {
White could take a rook with} 14. Qxa8 ({instead of Mestel's} 14. Qxc3) {
, and Black has to prove that after} 14... O-O ({or} 14... Ne2+ 15. Kg2 O-O 16.
Rb1 $1) 15. Qf3 $1 {he has sufficient compensation for the exchange.}) 10...
bxc6 11. bxc3 Ba6 {Probably the only move.} (11... O-O $6 {allows White to play
} 12. c4 {when his two bishops give him an advantage.}) 12. Re1 (12. c4 Bxc4
13. Qd4 Bxf1 14. Qxg7 {
has also been tested. Black needs to be careful, for example not} Rf8 $2 ({
also unsatisfactory is} 14... Qf6 15. Qxf6 Nxf6 16. Bxc6+ Nd7 17. Bxa8 O-O 18.
Bf3 {with good winning chances in Rodriguez-San Segundo, Odessa 1990}) ({
; but the endgame after} 14... Bxg2 15. Qxh8+ Kd7 16. Qxd8+ Rxd8 17. Kxg2 c5
18. Ba3 Kc6 19. Re1 a5 {is favourable for Black as his pieces are better
co-ordinated, Szmetan-Vasiukov, Quito 1976}) 15. Ba3 Ne7 16. Bxc6+ Nxc6 17.
Qxf8+ Kd7 18. Qd6+ Kc8 19. Qxc6+ {1-0 Meyling-Holmsgaard, Copenhagen 1993.})
12... O-O {Black has finished his development. He has control over the light
squares and a better pawn structure, which to a certain extent seems to
counterbalance White's bishop pair.} ({
It is risky to delay castling, as shown by Kveinys-Schebler, Goch 1992:} 12...
Qa5 13. c4 $1 Ne7 ({or} 13... Bxc4 14. Bb2 O-O $2 15. Qd4 {
and White wins a piece}) 14. Bd2 Qc5 15. Rb1 $1 Rd8 16. Qc1 Qxc4 17. Ba5 $1 Rd5
18. Qa3 {and Black loses material.}) 13. Ba3 (13. c4 Bxc4 14. Ba3 Re8 {
is considered in the next note.}) 13... Re8 14. Qd4 ({White can also consider} 
14. c4 $5 {to open the long diagonal immediately, while after} Bxc4 15. Qg4 {
White gains a tempo to create threats on the kingside. Glek-Wiedenkeller,
Prague 1985, continued} Bb5 ({preferable was} 15... Ba6 {
, although White's initiative after} 16. Bb2 g6 {
certainly compensates for the pawn deficiency}) 16. Bb2 e5 17. a4 Ba6 18. Bxe5
f6 19. Bd4 Qd6 20. Qh5 g6 21. Qf3 Bc4 22. h4 {
with an obvious advantage to White due to his strong bishops.}) 14... Qa5 ({
Exchanging queens by} 14... Qf6 {
is another way to combat the dangerous threat c3-c4, but after} 15. Qxf6 gxf6
16. c4 $1 Bxc4 ({while after} 16... Ne7 17. Re4 Ng6 18. Bd6 {White was slightly
better in the endgame, Valiente-Piscicelli, Mar del Plata 1991}) 17. Re4 Ba6
18. c4 ({or} 18. Rg4+ Kh8 19. c4 {, White still has a strong initiative.})) 15.
Bb2 (15. Qc5 {leads to equality:} Qxc5 16. Bxc5 Rec8 17. c4 Nb6 18. Bxb6 axb6
19. c5 bxc5 20. Re5 Bc4 21. Rxc5 Bd5 22. a4 Bxg2 23. Kxg2 Kf8 {
Ostojic-Rossolimo, Monaco 1969.}) ({
In Marinkovic-Bakic, Kladovo 1992, White tried} 15. Bb4 {so that after} Nxb4 {
his pawn structure might be repaired,} ({but Black did not oblige:} 15... Qa4
16. Bc5 Qxc2 17. Rec1 Qg6 18. c4 e5 19. Qb2 Nc7 ({
it was probably better to return a pawn by} 19... Nb6 20. Bxb6 axb6 21. Qxb6 e4
{with equality}) 20. Qa3 Red8 21. Qa4 e4 22. Qa5 Rd7 23. Be3 {
and White had the initiative for a pawn.})) 15... Qb6 $5 {
Preventing White from using the long diagonal.} 16. Rab1 Rab8 17. a3 $6 ({
If immediately} 17. c4 Qxd4 18. Bxd4 Bxc4 {, then the a2-pawn is under attack.
So White tries to prepare c3-c4 by moving the a-pawn, but it does not make a
good impression.}) 17... c5 18. Qh4 Nxc3 $5 {The rooks are usually stronger
than the queen in the endgame, but here the black king is unsafe so White has
some counter-chances.} 19. Bxc3 Qxb1 20. Be4 f5 21. Rxb1 $2 ({Better is} 21.
Qg5 Qxe1+ 22. Bxe1 fxe4 23. Qe5 {with chances to save the game.}) 21... Rxb1+
22. Kg2 fxe4 23. Kh3 Bf1+ 24. Kg4 e5 (24... h6 $5 {
deserves attention, limiting the freedom of the white queen.}) 25. Bxe5 ({
Instead of a sacrificing a piece, White should activate the queen with} 25. Qg5
Rb6 26. Qd2 {with more chances to save the game.}) 25... Rxe5 26. Qd8+ Kf7 27.
Qd7+ Kf6 $4 {Missing an easy win.} ({After} 27... Kf8 $1 {
the king escapes the checks. Now it is a perpetual.}) 28. Qd6+ Re6 29. Qf8+ Ke5
30. Qxc5+ Kf6 31. Qf8+ Ke5 32. Qc5+ Kf6 33. Qf8+ Ke5 1/2-1/2

[Event "Shanghai"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Peng Xiaomin"]
[Black "Filippov, V."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "85"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 ({The position after 7...exd5 8 Bg2 arises more often in the
Closed Variation of the Sicilian Defence, by the move order} 2. Nc3 e6 3. Nge2
Nc6 4. g3 d5 5. exd5 exd5 6. Bg2 {, and now} Nf6 ({
but in this case, it is better for Black to gain space with} 6... d4 {
, as we examine in Chapter 10}) 7. d4 cxd4 8. Nxd4 {.}) 2... e6 3. Nc3 Nc6 4.
d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. g3 d5 7. exd5 Nxd5 8. Bg2 (8. Nde2 {did not prevent the
damage of White's pawn structure in Kaplan-Quinteros, San Paulo 1977:} Bb4 9.
Bg2 Nxc3 10. Qxd8+ Nxd8 11. Nxc3 Bxc3+ 12. bxc3 Bd7 13. Rb1 Rc8 14. O-O Bc6 15.
Bxc6+ Rxc6 16. Rd1 f6 17. Be3 b6 {
and the weak pawns are more important than White's lead in development.}) ({
After} 8. Nxc6 bxc6 9. -- ({, the line} 9. Bg2 Bb4 ({but} 9... Ba6 $5 {
may be a way to exploit the different move order}) 10. O-O {
leads back to Brajovic-Nikcevic}) ({. Also of independent importance is} 9. Ne4
{, by which White avoids structural damage and prepares the advance c2-c4.
Ostojic-Van Riemsdijk, Amsterdam 1989, continued} Qb6 10. c4 Bb4+ 11. Nd2 ({if
} 11. Bd2 {, then} Qd4 $5 {is interesting}) 11... Bc5 ({or} 11... Qd4 $5) 12.
Qe2 ({perhaps it was necessary to repeat with} 12. Ne4) 12... Ba6 13. a3 O-O
14. Bg2 Rad8 15. O-O Bd4 16. Nf3 Bf6 17. Bg5 Qb3 18. Rfc1 {and now the black
knight, after sitting en prise for eight moves, finally acknowledged the
c4-pawn, but only to win it by} Nb6 {.}) (9. Ne4 {breaks a basic opening rule
- by moving the one developed piece for the second time, White disregards his
development. Therefore Black can afford to play the sharp} f5 {
as, for example, in Sattarov-Rogozenko, correspondence 1994:} 10. Ng5 Qf6 11.
Bg2 Ba6 12. c3 Rd8 {with a clear advantage to Black.})) 8... Nxc3 {This move deforms White's pawn structure, at the price of strengthening the bishop on g2.}
({Instead} 8... Bb4 {
returns to the 6...Bb4 lines in Glek-Maksimenko and Brajovic-Nikcevic.}) (8...
Ndb4 {
also saves Black from getting an isolated pawn and is quite acceptable; e.g.}
9. Nxc6 Qxd1+ 10. Kxd1 bxc6 11. a3 Nd5 12. Nxd5 exd5 13. Re1+ Be7 14. Bg5 Be6
15. Bxe7 Kxe7 16. Kd2 Rhb8 17. b3 Kd6 18. Rad1 a5 {
and Black is only slightly worse in the endgame, Glek-Krasenkow, Geneva 1994.})
9. bxc3 Nxd4 10. Qxd4 (10. cxd4 $6 Bb4+ {is obviously not in White's favour.})
10... Be7 ({Not} 10... Qxd4 $6 11. cxd4 Bb4+ 12. Bd2 Bxd2+ 13. Kxd2 {, when White has the advantage as his pieces are much better placed, whereas the
inability to castle is irrelevant in the endgame.}) 11. Qxd8+ Kxd8 (11... Bxd8
{is somewhat similar, e.g. Movsesian-Chekhov, Germany 1996:} 12. O-O f6 13. c4
Rb8 14. c5 Be7 15. Be3 Kd8 16. Rfe1 Bd7 17. Rab1 Kc8 $1 ({not} 17... Kc7 $2 18.
Bf4+ $1 e5 19. Rxe5 fxe5 20. Bxe5+ Kc8 21. Bxb8 Kxb8 22. Rxb7+ Kc8 23. c6 {
and White wins}) 18. f4 Kc7 19. Bf2 Rhe8 20. a4 Bf8 {
and Black has defended accurately and eliminated White's pressure.}) 12. Bf4 ({
After} 12. Rb1 Bd6 13. Be3 Ke7 ({logical is} 13... Kc7 {
to reinforce the queenside}) 14. c4 Rb8 15. c5 Bc7 16. O-O b6 17. c4 Bb7 18. c6
Ba8 19. Rb3 Rhd8 20. Ra3 a5 21. Rb3 Rdc8 22. Rd1 {
White had the initiative in the endgame, Dolmatov-Sveshnikov, Minsk 1979.})
12... f6 {Black intends to block the diagonal with ...e6-e5 and then plant the
king on c7 to defend the queenside. But White stops this.} 13. Rd1+ Ke8 14. Bc7
a5 {Trying to activate the a8-rook.} 15. O-O a4 16. Rb1 Kf7 17. Rfd1 ({Not} 17.
Bxb7 $6 Ra7 18. Bxc8 Rxc7 {and it is now White who has problems.}) 17... a3 18.
Rb3 ({Probably stronger is} 18. f4 {, which interferes with Black's plans.})
18... e5 19. Bxb7 Ra7 20. Bd5+ Be6 21. Bxe6+ Kxe6 22. Rb6+ Kf5 23. Bb8 Ra8 24.
Bd6 Rhd8 25. Rd3 Bxd6 26. Rdxd6 Rxd6 27. Rxd6 {White has an extra pawn in the
rook endgame, but Black is very active and the a3-pawn is potentially very
dangerous. So White chooses to be careful.} Rc8 28. Rd3 e4 29. Re3 Ke5 30. c4
Rxc4 31. Rxa3 Rxc2 32. h4 g6 33. Ra5+ Kd4 34. Ra7 Kd3 35. Rxh7 Rxa2 36. Rh6 Ke2
37. Rxg6 Ra1+ 38. Kg2 Rf1 39. Rxf6 e3 40. Re6 Rxf2+ 41. Kh3 Rf3 42. Kg2 Rf2+
43. Kh3 1/2-1/2

[Event "Spain Team Championship"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1993.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Campora, D."]
[Black "San Segundo Carrillo, P."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B45"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "70"]
[EventDate "1993.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. g3 d5 7. Bg2 Qb6 ({
Besides the text move, Black can choose between} 7... Bb4 {
(returning to Glek-Maksimenko and Brajovic-Nikcevic)}) ({and} 7... dxe4 {
. The latter allows White to simplify the position by} 8. Nxc6 Qxd1+ 9. Kxd1
bxc6 10. Nxe4 Nxe4 11. Bxe4 {, after which his superior pawn structure gives
him a small but clear advantage in the endgame. An ancient example continued}
Bb7 12. Be3 f5 13. Bd3 O-O-O 14. Ke2 c5 15. Rhd1 g6 16. Bc4 Bd5 17. Ba6+ Kc7
18. c4 Bc6 19. Bd2 Kb6 20. Bc3 Rxd1 21. Rxd1 Rg8 22. Bb5 Bxb5 23. cxb5 Bg7 24.
a4 Bxc3 25. Rd6+ Kc7 26. Rc6+ Kd7 27. bxc3 {
and White won, Wolf-Mieses, Hanover 1902.}) 8. Nb3 {
The active 7...Qb6 causes White some inconvenience.} ({Of course} 8. Nxc6 bxc6
{only strengthens Black's centre.}) ({
But apart from retreating the knight to b3, White can sacrifice the b2-pawn by
} 8. Be3 {with ensuing complications.} -- ({
. Mestel-Van der Wiel, Marbella 1982, continued} 8... Qxb2 9. Ndb5 Bb4 $1 10.
O-O Bxc3 11. Rb1 Qxa2 12. Nxc3 Qa5 13. exd5 Nxd5 14. Nxd5 exd5 15. c4 $5 d4 (
15... dxc4 $6 16. Qd6 Qd8 17. Bxc6+ bxc6 18. Qe5+ Qe7 19. Qxg7 Rf8 20. Qxh7 {
with a strong attack on the exposed king}) 16. Rb5 $5 Qa2 17. Bxd4 O-O 18. Rg5
f6 19. Bd5+ Kh8 20. Rh5 {and White has many threats, although after} g6 21. c5
Qa5 22. Rh4 Bf5 23. g4 g5 24. Rh3 Bg6 {Black was able to defend.}) ({. If he so
desires, Black can play more cautiously as in Romanishin-Tseshkovsky, Lvov
1979:} 8... Bc5 9. Na4 Qa5+ 10. c3 Bxd4 11. Bxd4 dxe4 12. Bxf6 gxf6 13. Bxe4
Bd7 14. O-O Ne5 15. b3 O-O-O 16. Qe2 h5 17. Qe3 h4 18. Qc5+ Qxc5 19. Nxc5 Bc6
20. Bxc6 bxc6 {with a satisfactory position for Black.})) 8... d4 {
Black wants to gain space.} 9. e5 $5 {Rather than continue to retreat, White
conducts an interesting counterattack, which also opens the diagonal for his
light-squared bishop.} ({Instead, after} 9. Ne2 e5 10. O-O Bg4 11. h3 Bxe2 12.
Qxe2 Be7 13. Bd2 O-O 14. a4 Bb4 15. a5 Qc7 16. Bg5 Nd7 17. Qc4 h6 18. Bc1 Rac8
{the chances are approximately equal in this difficult position,
Svidler-Kharlov, Elista 1995.}) 9... Nd7 (9... Nxe5 10. Qxd4 Qxd4 11. Nxd4 {
leads to a quiet game in which White is slightly better}) ({but} 9... dxc3 10.
exf6 gxf6 11. bxc3 Bd7 {deserves attention.}) 10. Ne2 Bb4+ 11. c3 ({Weaker was
} 11. Bd2 Ndxe5 12. O-O d3 13. cxd3 Nxd3 14. Bxb4 Ndxb4 {
and Black is well placed. Since} 15. a3 Nd5 $1 16. Bxd5 exd5 17. Qxd5 $2 {
loses a piece to} Be6 {
, Black gets to keep his pawn and therefore the advantage.}) 11... dxc3 12.
bxc3 Bc5 ({After} 12... Be7 13. Be3 Qc7 14. f4 b6 15. Ned4 Bb7 16. Nb5 Qc8 17.
O-O O-O 18. Qe2 a6 19. Nd6 Bxd6 20. exd6 Na7 21. Rac1 Nb5 22. Rfd1 {
Black had problems in Kagan-Arnason, Denmark 1982.}) 13. Nxc5 Qxc5 14. f4 O-O
15. a4 {White has a spatial advantage and a pair of strong bishops. However,
his pawns are weak and his king is stuck in the centre.} Rd8 16. Ba3 Qc4 ({If} 
16... Qe3 17. Qc1 {and the black queen has nowhere sensible to go.}) 17. Bd6
Nc5 18. O-O Ne4 19. Bxe4 Qxe4 {White has finally managed to castle, but it has
cost him his strong light-squared bishop.} 20. Nd4 Nxd4 ({
Black can win a pawn by} 20... Qe3+ 21. Rf2 Qxc3 22. Nb5 {
but White would obtain sufficient compensation with his active pieces.}) 21.
Qxd4 Qc6 {Black plays to win. Nevertheless, all hopes come to an end with the
exchange of queens.} 22. Qc5 Qe8 23. Qb5 Bd7 24. Qxb7 Bxa4 25. Rf2 Bc6 26. Qe7
Qxe7 27. Bxe7 Rd3 28. Rb2 h5 29. c4 a5 30. Ra3 Rd4 31. c5 Rc4 32. Kf2 Rb4 33.
Rxb4 axb4 34. Rxa8+ Bxa8 35. c6 Bxc6 1/2-1/2

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "8. Rossolimo Variation"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B30"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "9"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 ({The scenario after the lines with 4 0-0 Nge7 5 c3 and 4 Bxc6
bxc6 also arises via the Closed Variation:} 2. Nc3 e6 {, and now White plays} (
{incidentally, the majority of games in the line 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 e6 4 0-0 Nge7
5 Nc3 Nd4 (Speelman-Larsen) arise via the Closed} 2... Nc6 3. Bb5 Nd4 4. Nf3 e6
5. O-O Ne7 {- these transpositional possibilities are highly characteristic of
the Sicilian Defence}) 3. Nf3 {.}) 2... Nc6 ({
Sometimes Black tries to avoid Rossolimo Variation by playing} 2... e6 {
. However, after} 3. Nc3 Nc6 ({other moves such as} 3... d6) ({or} 3... a6 {
do not fit into our repertoire}) 4. Bb5 {transposes back to the Rossolimo. On
the plus side, Black has avoided the lines with 4 0-0 Nge7 5 c3 and 4 Bxc6
bxc6, which may be useful if he wants to limit his opening repertoire.}) 3. Bb5
{Theoreticians associate this variation with GM Rossolimo, who was the
champion first of France and then the USA in the middle of the twentieth
century. However, 3 Bb5 dates from long before Rossolimo, even as far back as
the first international chess tournament (London 1851) where the move was seen
in the games Bird-Horwitz and Williams-Mucklow. The variation appeared
periodically in the games of the top players of that epoch; for example
Winawer-Chigorin, London 1883: 1 e4 c5 3 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 e6. In his comments on
his own game Nimzowitsch-Gilg, Kecskemet 1927, Nimzowitsch wrote that the move
3 Bb5 'is much better than its reputation and gives at least convenient play.'
--- For a long time 3 Bb5 was regarded as a way to avoid theoretical
discussions, with White aiming to transfer the weight of the struggle from the
opening to the middlegame. Now the situation has greatly changed. The elite of
the world's players, including Kasparov, Kramnik, and Anand, have made use of
3 Bb5, and the Rossolimo Variation is now at the sharp end of theory in the
Sicilian Defence. However, it is not a tapestry of forced lines, but rather a
network of strategic variations and is based not so much on concrete moves,
but instead on more general plans.} e6 {After 3 Bb5 Black has a rich choice of
replies, of which 3...e6, 3...g6 and 3...d6 are the most preferred. The
continuation 3...e6 best fits into the concept of our book - the central
strategy based on the advance ...d7-d5. Therefore this chapter will be devoted
solely to 3...e6. White then has two basic strategies. He can spoil the pawn
structure immediately with 4 Bxc6 or allow Black to keep it intact after 4 0-0
Nge7. The positions after} 4. Bxc6 ({In Speelman-Larsen and the three
subsequent games White declines to exchange with 4 Bxc6. In the case of} 4. Nc3
) ({or more often} 4. O-O Nge7 5. Nc3 {, the reply ...Nc6-d4 is effective for
Black as it is impossible to banish this knight with c2-c3, while after an
exchange on d4 the white knight on c3 is attacked with tempo. The resulting
positions, reminiscent of Bird's Defence to the Ruy Lopez (1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3
Bb5 Nd4), are considered in Speelman-Larsen.} ({. The converging lines} 5. Nc3
a6 6. Bxc6 Nxc6 7. d4 cxd4 8. Nxd4 Qc7 9. Re1) ({, and} 5. Re1 a6 6. Bxc6 Nxc6
7. d4 cxd4 8. Nxd4 Qc7 9. Nc3 {
are considered in Plaskett-Bischoff and Glek-Nijboer} (9. --)) ({
, while deviations after} 5. Nc3) ({, and} 5. Re1 {
are covered in the notes to Plaskett-Bischoff and Glek-Nijboer respectively.})
({. Finally, the popular continuation} 5. c3 {
, planning to create a pawn centre, is the subject of Gdanski-Cifuentes.}))
4... bxc6 {are difficult to classify. The hostile armies do not rush to clash
with each other, and there are many transpositional possibilities. White has
three main continuations:} 5. -- (5. O-O Ne7 6. b3 {
to develop the queen's bishop on the flank (Bisguier-Gulko)}) (5. d3 {
with castling postponed (Sutovsky-Nataf)}) ({and} 5. O-O Ne7 6. d3 {(Rozentalis
-Shariyazdanov). All these lines are strategically complex. After the exchange
of his light-squared bishop White sets up his pawns on light squares so they
do not hinder his pieces, while trying to restrain Black's central pawns.
White's key breaks are a2-a3 and b2-b4 (intending to attack the isolated
a7-pawn after ...c5xb4, a3xb4) and f2-f4. In turn Black hopes to make
advantageous use of the two bishops in the middlegame, while with prudent play
the avalanche of his central pawns can literally crush the opponent.}) *

[Event "Los Angeles"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1991.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Bisguier, A."]
[Black "Gulko, B."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B30"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "86"]
[EventDate "1991.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 e6 4. Bxc6 bxc6 5. O-O {Before considering the
development of the queen bishop to b2, we shall examine some rarer
continuations:} ({The blocking} 5. c4 {leads to a manoeuvring game, and after}
Ne7 6. O-O Ng6 {
White has essentially two different plans, though neither offers any advantage.
} 7. -- ({
. He can either allow ...e6-e5, e.g. Wahls-Fedorowicz, Groningen 1990:} 7. b3
e5 8. Nc3 Be7 9. Ne2 d6 10. Ng3 O-O 11. Nf5 Bf6 12. Ne3 Nf4 13. d3 g6 14. g3
Nh5 15. Kg2 Bg7 16. Nh4 Nf4+ 17. Kh1 Ne6 {and the knight goes on d4.}) ({
. Or he can advance in the centre with d2-d4, e.g. Bronstein-Byrne, Moscow 1971:
} 7. d4 cxd4 8. Qxd4 c5 9. Qc3 Bb7 10. Nbd2 f6 11. b3 Be7 12. Bb2 O-O 13. Rfe1
a5 14. a4 Bc6 15. Nb1 Qb6 16. Na3 Qb7 17. Nd2 e5 18. Nb5 d6 19. f3 Nf4 20. Rad1
Ne6 21. Nf1 Nd4 22. Ne3 Qd7 23. Qd3 g6 24. Nd5 Bd8 25. f4 {½-½.} (25. --)))
(5. e5 {seeks to gain space, but is not supported by appropriate development.
Black can remove the e5-pawn by the standard} f6 {.} 6. -- ({. Then} 6. b3 $6 {
is a mistake: Klepikov-Bocharov, Novosibirsk 1999, continued} fxe5 7. Nxe5 Qg5
$1 8. Ng4 Nf6 9. Nxf6+ gxf6 (9... Qxf6 $5) 10. O-O Rg8 11. Qf3 d5 12. Qg3 Qxg3
(12... Bd6 $5) 13. fxg3 f5 14. Nc3 Kf7 {and Black is better.}) ({
. In the case of} 6. O-O {
, Karlsson-Aagaard, Iceland 1999, saw an interesting attempt to target e5:} Nh6
({also possible is} 6... fxe5 7. Nxe5 Nf6 8. d3 Be7 9. f4 O-O 10. c4 Qc7 11.
Nc3 d6 12. Nf3 Nh5 13. g3 e5 $5 14. Ng5 Bxg5 15. Qxh5 Be7 16. fxe5 Rxf1+ 17.
Kxf1 Bf5 18. Qe2 dxe5 {and in this sharp position Black has the better
prospects, Sanduleac-Tomescu, Bucharest 1998}) 7. Re1 Nf7 8. d4 cxd4 9. Qxd4
Be7 10. Bd2 $6 ({better is} 10. Bf4 $5 fxe5 11. Nxe5 O-O 12. Nd2 Nxe5 13. Bxe5
d6 14. Bxg7 e5 {with an unclear game}) 10... O-O 11. Bc3 fxe5 12. Nxe5 Bf6 13.
Qe3 Nxe5 14. Bxe5 Bxe5 15. Qxe5 Qb6 16. Re2 Rf5 17. Qc3 Ba6 18. Re3 Raf8 {
and Black is winning.})) ({Sometimes White plays} 5. b3 {
at once without hurrying to castle. After} Ne7 {
there are several interesting possibilities:} 6. -- (6. Ba3 $5 {prepares d2-d4
to challenge the opposing bishop on the a3-f8 diagonal. However, in
Alavkin-Nachev, Ufa 1999, Black found a convincing riposte:} d6 $1 {
(intending ...e6-e5 to sideline the Ba3)} 7. e5 dxe5 8. Bxc5 e4 9. Ng5 $2 ({
better is} 9. Ng1 Qd5) 9... Nf5 10. Bxf8 Qxg5 11. Bb4 Qxg2 12. Rf1 Nd4 {
with a winning position.}) ({. On} 6. h4 {, the move} d6 {
, intending ...e6-e5, is again good. For example,} 7. Bb2 ({or} 7. h5 e5 8. d3
f6 9. Nbd2 Be6 10. Nc4 d5 11. Ne3 c4 $1 {
(a standard sacrifice to destroy the pawn chain)} 12. bxc4 dxe4 13. dxe4 Qxd1+
14. Kxd1 Nc8 15. Rb1 Bc5 16. Ke2 Nd6 17. Nd2 O-O 18. f3 f5 19. Nxf5 Nxf5 20.
exf5 Rxf5 {with counterplay in the endgame, Fernando-Plaskett, Mondariz 2000})
7... e5 8. c3 $6 (8. h5 $5) 8... Ng6 9. d3 (9. d4 $6 Bg4 $1 10. dxc5 Nxh4) 9...
Bg4 10. g3 Qf6 11. Nbd2 h5 12. Kf1 d5 13. Kg2 Be7 14. Nf1 Rd8 15. Qe2 Qe6 {
with active play, Kovalevskaya-Manakova, Belgrade 2000.}) ({. If} 6. e5 {
, then Black can target the interfering pawn in typical fashion by} Ng6 7. h4
f6 {, when Brodsky-Shariyazdanov, Novgorod 1998, continued} 8. Bb2 Be7 9. d3
O-O 10. Nbd2 Nxe5 11. Nxe5 fxe5 12. Bxe5 d6 13. Bc3 e5 ({not} 13... Bxh4 $2 14.
Qh5 Bxf2+ 15. Ke2 h6 16. Bxg7 $1) 14. h5 h6 15. Qe2 Be6 16. O-O-O Bg5 {
with advantage to Black due to the strong bishop pair.}) ({. After} 6. Bb2 {
, the idea of 6...d6 and ...e6-e5 is now incorrect because of 7 e5! and White
has a small positional advantage. Preferable is} Ng6 {
, as in German-Milos, Buenos Aires 1997:} 7. h4 h5 8. e5 c4 $5 ({or} 8... Be7 {
intending ...f7-f6}) 9. bxc4 Rb8 10. Bc3 c5 11. d3 Be7 12. Nbd2 f5 13. exf6
gxf6 14. Qe2 Kf7 15. O-O Bb7 16. Rfe1 Qc7 17. Qe3 Rbg8 18. Ne4 e5 19. Bb2 d6 {
with compensation for the pawn.})) 5... Ne7 6. b3 Ng6 7. Bb2 ({
Sometimes White tries} 7. Ba3 {, intending to exchange dark-squared bishops
after d2-d4. So Black concentrates on solving the problem of his bad
light-squared bishop and obtains good play. In Antunes-Franco, Seville 1992,
Black opened the c8-h3 diagonal for the bishop:} Be7 8. d4 ({if White tries 8
c3 to create a small pawn centre, then the bishop is well placed on the a6-f1
diagonal:} 8. c3 O-O 9. d4 cxd4 10. cxd4 Ba6 11. Re1 f5 12. e5 Nf4 13. Qd2 g5
14. Bxe7 Qxe7 {with full play for Black, Antunes-Hernandez, Matanzas 1992})
8... cxd4 9. Qxd4 O-O 10. Bxe7 Qxe7 11. c4 e5 12. Qe3 d6 13. Nc3 f5 14. exf5
Bxf5 15. Rfe1 Rae8 16. h3 Nf4 {with active play on kingside.}) ({Finally, in
Damaso-Franco, Cienfuegos 1991, White played Bc1-a3 and d2-d4 with a pawn on
e5, so Black activated the bishop on the long diagonal:} 7. e5 Be7 8. Ba3 O-O
9. d4 cxd4 10. Qxd4 f6 11. Bxe7 Qxe7 12. Nbd2 fxe5 13. Nxe5 Nf4 14. Rae1 c5 15.
Qe3 Bb7 16. Ne4 Rac8 17. Nd3 Nxd3 {½-½.}) 7... f6 8. e5 (8. d3 Be7 9. e5 {
transposes to the game.}) ({An alternative plan is} 8. d4 {
, altering the pawn structure. After} cxd4 9. -- (9. Qxd4 d5 10. exd5 cxd5 11.
c4 Bb7 12. cxd5 Qxd5 13. Qg4 Qe4 14. Qxe4 Bxe4 15. Nd4 Kf7 {
a draw was agreed in Rozentalis-Kogan, Montreal 2000}) ({
, but puzzling complications can arise after} 9. Nxd4 e5 ({quieter is} 9... Be7
10. c4 O-O 11. Nc3 Qc7 12. Qd2 a6 13. Rad1 Bb7 14. f4 Rad8 15. Nde2 f5 16. exf5
{½-½ Savon-Gulko, Vilnius 1975}) 10. Nf5 d5 11. Qh5 Be6 12. Nc3 Qc8 13.
Rad1 dxe4 14. g4 (14. Nd6+ $4 Bxd6 15. Rxd6 Bg4) 14... Qc7 15. Nxe4 Bd5 16.
Nfg3 ({better is} 16. Rfe1) 16... O-O-O 17. Qf5+ Kb8 18. Qf3 Nh4 19. Qe2 h5 $1
20. f3 Qb6+ 21. Kh1 hxg4 22. fxg4 Ng6 23. c4 Nf4 24. Qf3 Bxe4 25. Nxe4 Rh3 26.
Ng3 Bd6 {and Black is better, Gdanski-Z.Polgar, Polanica Zdroj 1991.})) 8...
Be7 9. d3 (9. exf6 {eases the tension for Black:} Bxf6 10. Bxf6 Qxf6 11. Nc3
O-O 12. Ne4 Qe7 13. d3 d5 14. Ng3 e5 15. h3 Qf6 16. Nh2 Ba6 17. Ng4 Qg5 18. Re1
Rae8 19. Re3 Bc8 20. Nh2 Nf4 {with active play, Tatai-Cherniaev, Cannes 1997.})
({With} 9. Na3 {White completes his queenside development, with the knight
heading for c4. But Black may then exchange it, getting rid of the bad bishop
on c8 as, for example, in Matsuura-Milos, Brasilia 1995:} O-O 10. Nc4 Qc7 ({or
} 10... Ba6 11. d3 Bxc4 12. dxc4 fxe5 13. Nxe5 Nxe5 14. Bxe5 d6 15. Bc3 Bf6 {
, Makarichev-Sveshnikov, Sochi 1983}) 11. d3 Ba6 12. Re1 Rf7 13. Qd2 Raf8 14.
-- (14. Qa5 $2 {and now Black forced a favourable rook endgame by} Qxa5 15.
Nxa5 Bd8 16. Nc4 Bxc4 17. dxc4 fxe5 18. Bxe5 (18. Rad1 $5) 18... Ba5 19. Re2
Rxf3 $1 20. gxf3 Nxe5 21. Rxe5 Bc3 22. Rae1 Bxe1 23. Rxe1 Rxf3) ({. Better is} 
14. Nd6 $5 {with the idea} Bxd6 ({however, Black can answer} 14... Nxe5 $5 15.
Nxf7 Nxf3+ 16. gxf3 Rxf7 {with compensation for the exchange}) 15. exd6 Qxd6
16. Qa5 {.})) 9... Qc7 {In this game Black refuses the mass exchange on e5,
although this plan occurs more often.} ({Let's consider the position after} 
9... O-O 10. Nbd2 fxe5 11. Nxe5 Nxe5 12. Bxe5 d6 {.} 13. -- (13. Bb2 {
does not really try for an advantage, as after} e5 {it is difficult to carry
out the undermining f2-f4, so the bishop is blocked off on b2, leaving Black
with a space advantage:} 14. Qe2 Rf4 15. Nc4 Bg4 16. f3 Bh5 17. Rae1 Rf7 {
with good play in David-Kramnik, France 1993.}) ({
. So the bishop usually retreats to g3. Spassky-Gulko, Linares 1990, saw} 13.
Bg3 -- (13... e5 14. Qe2 ({
but it is better to attack the pawn centre at once with} 14. f4 $5 {; after}
exf4 15. Bxf4 Bf6 16. Rb1 Bf5 17. Kh1 Qd7 18. Qf3 {
White is slightly better, Matulovic-Vojinovic, Herced Novi 1999}) 14... Bg5 15.
Ne4 Bh6 16. f3 a5 17. a4 Ra7 18. Bf2 Raf7 19. Be3 Bxe3+ 20. Qxe3 h6 21. Rae1
Be6 22. Qd2 Bd5 {and Black has the freer game.}) ({. For Black,} 13... g5 $5 {
is interesting, trying to restrain the Bg3 with the help of 14...e5. Consequently,} 14. f4 {again seems best. After} gxf4 15. Bxf4 e5 16. Bh6 Rxf1+ 17. Qxf1
Be6 18. Qf3 Qe8 19. Rf1 Kh8 {
both sides have mutual chances, Gubanov-Cherniaev, St Petersburg 1997.}))) 10.
Re1 {
This natural move is the main reason for some of White's future difficulties.}
({More interesting is} 10. Qe1 $5 {
, the point of which will be seen in the next note.}) ({
The plan with 12...Nh8 makes less sense against} 10. Qe1 O-O 11. Nbd2 fxe5 12.
Nxe5 -- ({, as after} 12... Nh8 {, White can now play} 13. f4 {
, preventing ...e6-e5.}) ({
. So in Seifert-Ksieski, Jachranka 1987, there followed} 12... Nf4 13. g3 Nd5
14. f4 d6 15. Nef3 Bd7 16. Ne4 Rae8 17. c4 Nf6 {with very complex play.} (17...
--))) 10... O-O 11. Nbd2 fxe5 12. Nxe5 Nh8 $1 {A noteworthy manoeuvre, by
which Black evades the exchange of knights and threatens to gain space by ...
d7-d6 and ...e6-e5. In this plan to clamp and cramp it is important to keep
pieces from being exchanged.} 13. g3 {
Hoping to play f2-f4, but only weakening the kingside.} ({
In Wach-Glek, Linz 1997, White tried} 13. Qh5 $6 {, but after} d6 14. Nec4 Ng6
15. Re3 Rf5 16. Qd1 d5 17. Na3 Bd6 18. Nf1 e5 19. c4 Qf7 20. Qe1 Bd7 21. Ng3
Rf4 22. Rc1 Rf8 {the white pieces have been rolled back and the black pieces
control the board. Perhaps it is just difficult for White to find an
acceptable continuation.}) 13... d6 14. Ng4 {
The knight tries to protect the weakened squares on the kingside.} e5 15. Ne4
Qd7 {Black transfers his queen to the kingside where it joins the attack.
White has no counterplay and is compelled to defend.} 16. f3 Qf5 17. Kg2 Ng6
18. Qe2 Bd7 19. Bc1 {The bishop has no future on b2 and therefore goes to a
more pertinent diagonal. However, it is now easier for Black to advance ...
d6-d5.} Qh5 (19... Qh5 {threatening} 20. -- Rxf3 21. Qxf3 Bxg4 {with a dangerous attack on the light squares. In protecting himself against this threat,
White again weakens his position.}) 20. h3 Qf5 {
Making room for the h-pawn to advance.} 21. Rh1 d5 22. Nef2 h5 23. Nh2 h4 24.
g4 Qf6 {A colourful position! As White chokes, Black slowly prepares a
decisive breakthrough.} 25. Bd2 Rf7 26. Rhg1 Nf4+ 27. Bxf4 Qxf4 28. Kh1 Bg5 29.
Rae1 Re8 30. Nd1 Qd4 {Provoking White to weaken his queenside.} 31. c3 Qf4 32.
Ne3 Ree7 33. Qg2 Rf8 34. Nf5 {
White must keep a constant watch against an opportunistic ...e5-e4.} Re6 ({
After} 34... Bxf5 35. gxf5 Rxf5 36. Qf2 {White would be slightly liberated,
but Black is not obliged to take the pawn straightaway.}) 35. Qf2 Qd2 36. Qxd2
({If} 36. Qxc5 Bf4 $1 {wins, so White is forced to exchange of queens, when he
loses a pawn and with it the game.}) 36... Bxd2 37. Re2 Bxc3 38. Rc1 Bd4 39. f4
$1 e4 $1 ({Not} 39... exf4 $2 40. Nxd4 cxd4 41. Rxe6 Bxe6 42. Rxc6 {
when it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to win.}) 40. dxe4
Rxe4 41. Ne7+ $2 Kf7 42. Rce1 Rxe2 43. Rxe2 Re8 0-1

[Event "FIDE World Ch., New Delhi"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Sutovsky, E."]
[Black "Nataf, I."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B30"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "92"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 e6 4. Bxc6 bxc6 5. d3 {An easily understandable
move: White's light-squared bishop has left the board, so the white pawns
occupy the light squares.} Ne7 {Since the two armies will not face battle just
yet, White has the chance to do his own thing.} 6. h4 {With the natural idea
of driving the knight from g6 when it arrives there. White has several other
possibilities:} ({The provocative} 6. Ng5 {was first played by David Bronstein.
Subsequently the Moldovian chess aficionados (Bologan, Iordachescu and others)
have taken up its cause. White opens the road for the f-pawn and leaves the
question of the king's castling open. It is best for Black to persuade the
white knight to retreat to h3 where it is less well placed.} -- ({
. For example,} 6... h6 7. Nh3 g6 8. Bd2 Bg7 9. Bc3 e5 10. f4 d5 11. Nf2 d4 12.
Bd2 exf4 13. Bxf4 O-O 14. g4 Kh7 {, Svetushkin-Motylev, Bucharest 1998.}) ({
. Or} 6... f6 7. Nh3 d5 ({or} 7... g6 8. f4 Bg7 9. Nf2 d6 10. c4 f5 11. Nd2 e5
12. fxe5 Bxe5 13. Nf3 Bg7 14. Bd2 Bxb2 15. Rb1 Bg7 16. Qc1 O-O {
, Bronstein-Panchenko, Moscow 1979}) 8. Nc3 Ng6 9. Qh5 Bd6 10. Nf4 ({
also possible is} 10. f4 O-O 11. O-O) 10... Bxf4 11. Bxf4 O-O 12. Bd2 f5 {
, Adams-Vaisser, French League 2001. In all cases Black has equal chances in a
complex struggle.})) ({With the eccentric} 6. Nh4 {, White intends to exchange
the black knight when it appears at g6. 6 Nh4 breaks two opening principles -
the knight moves for the second time and moreover to the edge of the board -
but this is not so important in such a slow position. After} Ng6 7. Nxg6 hxg6
8. -- ({, if White grabs space with} 8. e5 {
, then Black has a tactical resource:} c4 $1 9. Bf4 ({if} 9. dxc4 Qa5+ {
and 10...Qxe5}) 9... Qb6 10. Nd2 cxd3 11. O-O Qxb2 {and it is not easy for
White to prove that he has full compensation, McShane-Tomescu, Arco 2000. 8 e5
is probably too ambitious.}) ({
. Instead, original play was seen in Bologan-Krasenkow, New York 1997:} 8. Be3
d5 9. Nd2 Bd6 10. c3 Ba6 11. Qc2 f5 12. e5 Be7 13. O-O-O Kf7 14. Nf3 g5 15. h3
c4 16. dxc4 Bxc4 17. Nd2 Be2 18. Rde1 Bb5 {
and in this sharp position Black's attacking chances are better.}) ({
. Quiet manoeuvring occurred in Bologan-Sveshnikov, Moscow 1995:} 8. Qe2 e5 9.
c4 d6 10. Nc3 Be7 11. Be3 Bg5 12. O-O-O Bxe3+ 13. Qxe3 g5 14. f3 Qf6 15. h3 Qf4
16. Rhe1 Be6 17. Kc2 Qxe3 18. Rxe3 Ke7 {with equality.})) (6. Bd2 {is a slightly mysterious move, favoured by the Russian IM Hasangatin. The bishop is ready
to play not only on the c1-h6 diagonal, but also on the long diagonal after
Bd2-c3. Generally White chooses his plan according to Black's response.} -- ({
. After} 6... f6 {, the move} 7. Nh4 {
has a little more force, though White has no apparent advantage after} d6 8. f4
Qc7 9. O-O Ng6 10. Qh5 Qf7 11. Nxg6 Qxg6 {and now} 12. Qf3 ({
while the exchange of queens is doubtful for White:} 12. Qxg6+ $6 hxg6 13. e5
c4 $1 14. dxc4 d5 15. Re1 Kf7 16. Nc3 Bc5+ {
with strong play, Hasangatin-Somkin, Bor 2000}) 12... Be7 13. f5 Qf7 14. e5 d5
{for example.}) ({
. An important position for the assessment of 6 Bd2 arises after} 6... Ng6 7.
h4 h5 8. e5 f6 9. Qe2 Nxe5 ({interesting is} 9... Kf7 $5 {
to cover the important g6 square}) 10. Nxe5 fxe5 11. Qxe5 Qf6 {.} 12. -- ({
. The endgame is equal after} 12. Bc3 Qxe5+ 13. Bxe5 d6 14. Bg3 Be7 15. Nd2 e5
16. f4 exf4 17. Bxf4 Be6 18. Ne4 Kd7 {, Nevednichy-Moskalenko, Nikolaev 1993.})
({. More interesting is} 12. Qg3 $5 {, sacrificing the b2-pawn in order to
seize the initiative. In the recent game Hasangatin-Zambor, Presov 2000, Black
could not solve his problems:} Qxb2 13. Qg6+ Kd8 14. O-O Qxa1 ({
an earlier game Hasangatin-Sherbakov, Pardubice 1996, ended in a draw after} 
14... Qd4 15. Nc3 Qg4 16. Bg5+ Kc7 17. Rab1 Ba6 18. Qf7 Qf5 19. Bf4+ Kd8 20.
Bg5+ Kc7 21. Bf4+ Kd8) 15. Ba5+ Ke7 16. Bc3 Qxa2 17. Bxg7 Bxg7 18. Qxg7+ Kd6
19. Qxh8 Qxc2 20. Qxh5 {and the passed h-pawn is potentially dangerous.})))
6... h5 7. Qe2 f6 $1 {Black intends next move to prevent the active advance
e4-e5. Therefore White does not hesitate.} 8. e5 fxe5 9. Qxe5 ({After} 9. Nxe5
{Black can successfully unravel the kingside and achieve good play:} d6 10. Nc4
Nf5 11. Bg5 Be7 12. Bxe7 Qxe7 13. Nc3 e5 14. O-O-O Be6 15. Kb1 Rb8 16. Rde1 Nd4
17. Qd2 O-O {, Shabanov-Arkhipov, Smolensk 2000.}) 9... Nf5 10. Qe4 {
White withdraws the queen in anticipation of ...d7-d6.} ({
Instead Markovic-Perunovic, Subotica 2000, continued} 10. Bg5 Be7 11. Nc3 d6 12.
Qe2 Rb8 13. b3 ({if} 13. O-O-O $2 {
the manoeuvre ...Qd8-a5-b4 is very unpleasant}) 13... e5 14. Ne4 O-O 15. c3 {
(to prevent ...Nf5-d4 after castling kingside)} (15. O-O-O a5 {
would have been too risky}) 15... a5 16. Rd1 a4 17. bxa4 g6 18. O-O Ra8 19. Qc2
Be6 {and the attempt to change the position with} 20. d4 $6 {
was unsuccessful after} exd4 21. cxd4 c4 $1 {.}) 10... Rb8 11. Ne5 $2 {
White underestimates the strength of Black's reply.} ({The preventative move} 
11. a3 {was necessary, when Black should reply} Qa5+ 12. Bd2 Qb6 {.}) 11... Rb4
12. c4 d5 $1 13. Qf3 Qf6 $1 {
After this pawn sacrifice Black's pieces become very active.} 14. Nxc6 Rb6 $1
15. Nxa7 ({The opening of the e-file gives White nothing:} 15. cxd5 exd5 16.
Qe2+ Be7 17. Nxa7 ({or} 17. Nxe7 Re6 $1) 17... Nd4 $1 18. Qd1 Qe5+ 19. Kf1 Bd7
20. a4 ({or} 20. Nc3 Rb7) 20... Ra6 {.}) 15... Bb7 16. Qd1 dxc4 17. Bg5 Qe5+ $1
(17... Qe5+ {with a disguised attack on the stray knight at a7, i.e.} 18. Qe2
Qb8 $1 19. Nb5 cxd3 20. Qxd3 c4 21. Qxc4 Qe5+ {etc.}) 18. Kf1 Qd5 19. Rh2 Bd6
20. Nc3 Qxd3+ 21. Qxd3 cxd3 22. Rh3 Rxb2 {It is possible to summarize: Black
has exchanged queens, is a pawn up, has two passed pawns and more active
pieces. In short, the game should soon be over.} 23. Nab5 c4 $6 ({
Immediately winning was} 23... Bg3 $1 24. Rxg3 ({or} 24. fxg3 $2 Bxg2+) 24...
Nxg3+ 25. fxg3 O-O+ 26. Bf4 e5 {.}) 24. Nxd6+ Nxd6 25. Re3 Kd7 26. Na4 Rb5 27.
Rae1 Re8 28. Bf4 Bc6 $1 {
Gradually Black destroys White's last standing defence.} 29. Nc3 Rb2 30. Re5
Rc2 31. Rc1 Rxc1+ 32. Bxc1 g6 33. f3 Nf5 34. Rc5 Bd5 35. Bf4 ({Clearly White
does not want to win the pawn if it costs the blockading knight, i.e.} 35. Nxd5
exd5 36. Rxd5+ Kc6 {.}) 35... Rc8 36. Ra5 Nxh4 37. Ra7+ Kc6 38. a4 Kc5 39. Bg5
Nf5 40. g4 hxg4 41. fxg4 Ng3+ $1 42. Ke1 Kb4 43. Bd2 Kb3 44. Kd1 Rh8 45. a5
Rh1+ 46. Be1 Rxe1+ 0-1

[Event "Neum"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Rozentalis, E."]
[Black "Shariyazdanov, A."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B30"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "121"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 e6 4. Bxc6 bxc6 5. O-O Ne7 6. d3 ({
Sometimes White tries to create a pawn centre with c2-c3. For example,} 6. Re1
Ng6 7. c3 Be7 8. d4 O-O 9. -- ({
, and now Timman-Rogers, Netherlands 1998, continued} 9. Nbd2 cxd4 10. cxd4 f5
$5 {(this unusual way of attacking the pawn centre deserves attention)} 11. Nb3
Ba6 12. Qc2 fxe4 13. Rxe4 Rxf3 $5 14. gxf3 Qf8 15. Nc5 Bxc5 16. dxc5 Qxf3 17.
Re3 Qh5 18. Rg3 Nh4 {and Black has a pawn for the exchange, as well as better
piece co-ordination to attack White's vulnerable king.}) ({
. Olenin-Belikov, Moscow 1996, saw instead} 9. Be3 cxd4 10. cxd4 f5 11. e5 Rb8
12. Qc2 Bb7 ({probably better is} 12... f4) 13. d5 $5 c5 (13... cxd5 $5 14.
Bxa7 Ra8 15. Bd4 {is very unclear}) 14. d6 Bh4 15. Nbd2 Rc8 {
and in this complex position a draw was agreed.})) 6... Ng6 7. Ng5 {
The most vigorous continuation, clearing the way for the f-pawn to advance.} ({
In Galego-Golod, Neum 2000, after} 7. Nbd2 Be7 8. Nc4 O-O 9. Bd2 Ba6 10. Re1 f6
11. a3 Rb8 12. -- ({, the typical advance} 12. b4 {was best for White:} Bxc4
13. dxc4 cxb4 14. axb4 Bxb4 15. Bxb4 Rxb4 16. Rxa7 Rf7 {with equality.}) ({
. Instead Galego played} 12. Rb1 Qc7 13. Ba5 Qc8 14. Qd2 Re8 15. h4 Nh8 $1 {
(the same idea as in Bisguier-Gulko)} 16. e5 ({probably stronger is} 16. Ne3)
16... fxe5 17. Ncxe5 (17. Rxe5 $2 d5 18. Ne3 Nf7 19. Rh5 g6) 17... d6 18. Nc4
e5 {with an advantage to Black.})) ({After} 7. e5 {Black has the standard plan
of challenging the e5-pawn with ...f7-f6. Thus he should not hurry to exchange
on e5 as the pressure on the e-pawn ties the white forces down. White must be
careful, for example:} f6 8. Re1 Be7 9. Nc3 Qc7 10. Qe2 O-O 11. Qe4 $6 fxe5 12.
Nxe5 d5 13. Qe2 Nxe5 14. Qxe5 Bd6 15. Qh5 Bd7 16. Rf1 Rf5 17. Qh4 Raf8 {
with a clear advantage to Black, Cvorovic-Kurajica, Solin 1998.}) 7... Be7 8.
Qh5 e5 9. f4 ({Less ambitious is} 9. Nc3 d6 10. Ne2 Bxg5 11. Bxg5 f6 12. Be3
O-O 13. f4 exf4 14. Nxf4 Ne5 {
and Black has no problems, Gass-Mainka, German League 1996.}) 9... Bxg5 10.
fxg5 d6 {Black has exchanged his dark-squared bishop and set up his pawns on
dark squares. White's chances, however, are preferable due to the half-open
f-file.} 11. Be3 O-O 12. Nd2 Be6 13. Rf2 {The point of this is not to double
rooks - f7 is too well protected - but to transfer the knight to f5 via f1 and
g3 (or, if 13...Qd7, only after the preliminary 14 h3).} ({In Illescas
Cordoba-Franco Ocampos, Dos Hermanas 1998, White pursued the usual plan of
advancing the b-pawn:} 13. b3 f5 14. gxf6 Rxf6 15. Rxf6 Qxf6 16. Rf1 Qe7 17. a3
Rf8 18. Rxf8+ Nxf8 19. b4 cxb4 20. axb4 Qb7 21. c3 Qa6 {
with approximately equal play.}) 13... f5 14. gxf6 Rxf6 15. Rxf6 Qxf6 16. Rf1
Qe7 17. b3 Rf8 18. Rxf8+ Nxf8 19. Nf3 {After the exchange of rooks Black's
doubled c-pawns ensure that White has a slight advantage, but no more than
that.} Qd7 20. h3 Bf7 21. Qh4 Ne6 22. Qg4 Be8 23. c3 {
The knight on e6 is now unpinned and White does not want to allow it into d4.}
Nf8 24. Qg3 Bf7 25. Kh2 Bg6 26. Nh4 Qf7 27. Qf3 Qe7 {Black declines to
exchange queens, as after 28 gxf3 White would then advance f3-f4.} 28. Qg4 Qd7
29. Qxd7 Nxd7 30. Kg3 Kf7 31. Kf3 a6 32. g4 h6 33. c4 {The central black pawn
group c5, c6, d6, e5 is blocked. White tries to play for a win, despite the
opposite-coloured bishops.} Kf6 34. Bd2 Bh7 35. Ba5 d5 36. Bc7 ({
It was better first to chase the black king from the centre with} 36. Bd8+ Kf7
({if} 36... Ke6 37. Nf5) 37. Bc7 {.}) 36... Nf8 37. Bd8+ Kf7 38. Bb6 dxe4+ 39.
dxe4 Ne6 40. Nf5 Ng5+ $2 {
This pursuit of the h3-pawn is the cause of Black's defeat.} ({
It was necessary to exchange the active white knight immediately by} 40... Nd4+
$1 41. Ke3 Nxf5+ 42. exf5 g6 43. fxg6+ Bxg6 44. Bxc5 Bb1 45. Kd2 Be4 {
with an inevitable draw.}) 41. Ke3 Nxh3 42. Bxc5 Ng5 43. b4 h5 (43... h5 {
hoping for} 44. gxh5 $2 Nxe4 45. Kxe4 Ke6 {.}) 44. Nd6+ Ke6 45. gxh5 Kd7 46. a4
Ne6 47. Nf7 a5 48. Nxe5+ Kc7 49. Be7 axb4 50. Bxb4 c5 51. Bc3 Bg8 52. a5 Kb7
53. Kf3 Ka6 54. Kg4 Nd4 55. Nd3 Nb3 56. Nb2 Bh7 57. Kf4 g5+ 58. Ke3 g4 59. e5
g3 60. Kf3 Nc1 61. Be1 1-0

[Event "New York"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1990.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Speelman, J."]
[Black "Larsen, B."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B30"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "80"]
[EventDate "1990.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 e6 4. O-O ({
Instead of castling immediately, White sometimes plays} 4. Nc3 {
, which also arises via the move order 2...e6 3 Nc3 Nc6 4 Bb5.} -- ({. After} 
4... Nge7 {, however, it is best to return to the game with} 5. O-O {.} ({
If instead} 5. d4 $6 Nxd4 6. Nxd4 {, then a version of the Taimanov system has
appeared on the board (2...Nc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 e6 with ...Nge7), where the
move Bb5 is a waste of time. Black has a nice game after} cxd4 7. Qxd4 a6 8.
Ba4 ({or} 8. Be2 Nc6 9. Qd3 Bc5 10. O-O O-O 11. a3 b5 12. Be3 d6 13. Kh1 Bb7
14. f4 Qb6 {, Djuric-Strikovic, Belgrade 1998}) 8... b5 9. Bb3 Nc6 10. Qd3 Qc7
11. Bg5 h6 12. Bh4 Ne5 13. Qe2 Bb4 14. O-O Nc4 {
Gurgenidze-Georgadze, Tbilisi 1977.})) ({. Another common response is} 4... Nd4
{when the exchange} 5. Nxd4 cxd4 {is closely related to the Ruy Lopez, Bird's
Defence (1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 Nd4 4 Nxd4 exd4). The pawn on d4 constrains
White, but is also a potential weakness. More importantly, as White has not
yet castled, Black can play ...Qg5 with a double attack on g2 and b5. White
has two choices:} 6. -- (6. Nb1 {, intending} Qg5 7. Bf1 {
, is rare and does not create any problems for Black. For example:} Ne7 8. d3
Qg6 9. g3 b6 10. Na3 Ba6 {and Black is fine.}) (6. Ne2 {dates back to the
ancient game Winawer-Andersen, Leipzig 1877, in which Black played} Nf6 {.} ({
Instead} 6... Qg5 {is the most obvious continuation} 7. -- ({, after which} 7.
Nxd4 $2 {loses a piece to} Qc5 8. c3 e5 9. b4 Qb6 10. Qe2 exd4 11. cxd4 Qxd4
12. Rb1 Nf6 13. O-O Be7 14. Rb3 a6 {
and Black won, Velimirovic-Matulovic, Vrsac 1981.}) ({. White must therefore
allow the capture on g2 and try to exploit the awkward situation of the black
queen. Black should be careful. After} 7. Bd3 Qxg2 8. Ng3 {(threatening 9 Bf1),
the resulting positions are complex, and White has a lead in development for
the pawn. For example:} Qh3 9. b3 ({or} 9. c3 Bc5 10. b4 Bb6 11. Bb2 Ne7 12.
Qh5 Qxh5 13. Nxh5 {(Vatnikov-Efimov, Prague 1985) and White has compensation})
9... Ne7 10. Bb2 Nc6 11. Qe2 Qh4 12. O-O-O Qd8 13. Kb1 d6 14. f4 Bd7 15. f5 {
(Mason-Maróczy, Monte Carlo 1903).}) ({. In the case of} 7. a4 Qxg2 8. Ng3 Qh3
9. c3 Bd6 $1 10. Qe2 (10. cxd4 Bxg3 11. fxg3 Qg2) 10... Be5 11. cxd4 Bxd4 12.
Ra3 Qh4 13. a5 Nf6 14. Ra4 Be5 15. d3 a6 16. Bc4 O-O {White had insufficient
compensation for the pawn in Tornai-Z.Horvath, Hungarian League 1995.}) ({
. Black is also better after} 7. Bc4 Qxg2 8. Ng3 Qh3 9. c3 Bc5 ({possible is} 
9... Bd6 {, not provoking b2-b4}) 10. b4 Bd6 11. cxd4 Bxg3 12. Qf3 Bxf2+ 13.
Qxf2 Nf6 {and now instead of 14 Bf1?! Qg4 (Rossolimo-Tartakover, Southsea 1949)
, it would have been better to play} 14. Rg1 Nxe4 15. Qf4 O-O 16. Qxe4 d5 17.
Qf4 dxc4 18. Rxg7+ $1 Kxg7 19. Qg5+ Kh8 20. Qf6+ {with a draw.})))) ({
. Instead of taking on d4 White can either move or defend the bishop. The main
line after} 4... Nd4 5. -- (5. Bc4 Ne7 6. Nxd4 cxd4 7. Ne2 Nc6 {most often arises
by transposition from 2 Nc3 Nc6 3 Bb5 Nd4 4 Bc4 e6 5 Nf3 Ne7 6 Nxd4 cxd4 7 Ne2
Nc6. Here White's chances are to be found on the kingside, while Black will
play on the queenside - mainly on the half-open c-file. Thus it is favourable
for Black to exchange White's light-squared bishop and to activate his own
light-squared bishop on the long diagonal, for example:} 8. O-O ({or} 8. d3 Bc5
9. Bb3 O-O 10. O-O b5 11. f4 Na5 12. f5 Nxb3 13. axb3 f6 14. Nf4 e5 15. Nd5 Bb7
16. Kh1 Bxd5 17. exd5 Qe7 18. Qe2 a5 19. g4 Bb4 20. Qg2 Rac8 21. g5 Rc5 {
with a very complex struggle, Kotsur-Kozul, Istanbul Olympiad 2000}) 8... Be7
9. d3 O-O 10. Bb3 b6 11. f4 Bb7 12. f5 Na5 13. Bf4 Nxb3 14. axb3 f6 $1 {
(this typical move puts a brake on White's attack and prepares ...e6-e5)} 15.
Bd2 e5 16. Rf3 d5 $1 17. Rh3 dxe4 18. dxe4 Bxe4 19. Ng3 Bc6 20. Qh5 h6 21. Re1
Qd5 22. Ne4 Rf7 23. Qg4 Kf8 {
and Black has sufficient defensive resources, Najer-Yuferov, Moscow 1999.}) (5.
a4 {intends} Nxb5 6. axb5 {
, when a later d2-d4 will give White a clear advantage.}) ({
. Instead Black can reach a position similar to the 5 Bc4 line with} 5. a4 Ne7
6. Nxd4 cxd4 7. Ne2 a6 {, and if} 8. Bc4 {
, Black can use the knight on e7 to support the advance ...d7-d5:} ({instead} 
8. Bd3 {leads to very complex play. For example:} Nc6 9. c3 Bc5 10. O-O Qf6 {
(continuing the fight for d4)} 11. Bc2 O-O 12. b4 Be7 13. f4 e5 14. fxe5 Qxe5
15. Bb2 d5 16. cxd4 Qg5 17. Rf3 Bg4 {and Black has solved the problem of his
light-squared bishop, Thesing-Lanka, Nettetal 1992}) 8... d5 $5 {. For example:
} 9. exd5 Nxd5 10. O-O Bc5 11. d3 O-O 12. Ng3 b6 {
with a space advantage. Psakhis-Dolmatov, Sochi 1978, continued} 13. Nh5 {
(threatening 14 Qg4)} Nf6 ({also good is} 13... Ra7 14. Qf3 Ne7 15. Bg5 f6 16.
Bd2 Ng6 17. Qe2 Kh8 18. Ng3 e5 {, Soukup-Michalek, Czech Republic 1995}) 14.
Qf3 Ra7 15. Bg5 Be7 16. Bxf6 Bxf6 17. Qg3 Kh8 18. Nxf6 gxf6 19. Rfe1 Rg8 20.
Qh4 Rd7 21. Re4 f5 22. Qxd8 Rdxd8 {with the better endgame for Black.}) ({
. The immediate retreat} 5. Bd3 {leads to similar positions:} Ne7 6. Nxd4 cxd4
7. Ne2 Nc6 8. O-O d5 {and after} 9. Nf4 $6 ({or} 9. c3 Bd6 10. Nxd4 Nxd4 11.
cxd4 dxe4 12. Bc2 O-O 13. d3 exd3 14. Qxd3 Qh4 {
and Black is more active, Vasiukov-Kozlov, Yaroslavl 1990}) 9... dxe4 10. Bxe4
g6 $1 11. c4 Bg7 12. g3 e5 13. Nd5 f5 14. Bg2 d3 15. b4 e4 {the picturesque
pawn chain determines Black's advantage, Gipslis-Kurajica, Moscow 1992. In
general the bishop is not well placed on d3.}))) 4... Nge7 5. Nc3 Nd4 (5... a6
{is considered in Plaskett-Bischoff.}) 6. Nxd4 (6. Re1 {allows the bishop to
retreat to f1 but this is fairly harmless and Black has some reasonable
replies, for example:} Nec6 ({or} 6... Ng6 7. Bf1 Nxf3+ 8. Qxf3 b6 9. Qe3 f6 {
(aimed against e4-e5)} 10. d4 cxd4 11. Qxd4 Bc5 12. Qd2 O-O 13. Nb5 Qe7 14. a3
a6 15. Nd4 Bb7 16. b4 Bd6 17. Bb2 Bf4 18. Qd3 Rac8 19. Rad1 Bb8 20. Nf3 d5 21.
exd5 Bxd5 22. Nd4 b5 {
and Black has an ideal Sicilian, Shabanov-Kramnik, Kuibishev 1990}) 7. Bxc6
bxc6 {
(in comparison with 4 Bxc6 bxc6 the centralized knight on d4 favours Black)} 8.
e5 Be7 9. Ne4 O-O 10. d3 f6 11. Nxd4 cxd4 12. exf6 Bxf6 13. Qh5 Rb8 14. a4 d6
15. f4 c5 16. b3 Rb7 17. Bd2 Rbf7 18. Rf1 Bb7 {, Zagema-Nunn, Leeuwarden 1995.}
) 6... cxd4 7. Ne2 {The basic starting position of the line under
consideration. As we saw in the analysis of 4 Nc3 Nd4, the struggle centres
around the pawn on d4. The plans of each player are normally that White's
queen's knight transfers to the kingside, while the black king's knight heads
for the queenside. Accordingly, White has more forces and attacking chances on
the kingside while, on the other hand, Black develops an initiative on the
queenside and down the half-open c-file.} a6 {A more common continuation than
7...Qb6 or 7...Nc6. It is useful for Black to find out where the bishop is
going before he decides upon his plans.} 8. Bd3 ({On} 8. Ba4 {
, Black as a rule plays ...Ne7-c6, either immediately or after ...b7-b5.} -- ({
. After} 8... Nc6 9. d3 {, expedient is} Bc5 {
, supporting the important d4-pawn:} 10. -- ({
. Kuczynski-Krasenkow, Sopot 1997, continued} 10. c3 b5 11. Bb3 Bb7 12. Bf4 Qb6
13. cxd4 Nxd4 14. Nxd4 Bxd4 15. Qd2 O-O 16. Rac1 Rac8 17. Be3 Rc6 18. Rfd1 f5
19. Rxc6 Bxc6 20. Re1 a5 {
and Black has a small advantage due his control of d4.}) ({. On the aggressive
} 10. f4 {, Black should not to rush ahead with ...0-0 or he will find himself
under attack. Instead Black can exploit the position of the white bishop on a4
to play} d5 11. Kh1 $6 ({if} 11. exd5 Qxd5 {;}) ({better is} 11. Ng3 {
intending to centralize the knight after} dxe4 12. Nxe4) 11... b5 12. Bb3 dxe4
13. dxe4 Na5 14. f5 Nxb3 15. axb3 e5 16. Ng1 f6 {
with better prospects in the middlegame, King-Larsen, London 1989.}) ({
. White can prevent ...b7-b5 by playing} 10. c4 {, but then the pressure on
the d4-pawn is lessened. King-Nielsen, Bad Lauterberg 1991, continued} O-O 11.
a3 Be7 12. b4 e5 13. f4 d6 14. Ng3 Bh4 15. Qf3 exf4 16. Bxf4 Ne5 17. Qe2 Bg4
18. Qd2 Ng6 19. Kh1 h6 20. Ne2 Bxe2 21. Qxe2 Nxf4 22. Rxf4 Bf6 {
with approximately equal chances.})) ({. Following the insertion of} 8... b5 9.
Bb3 {, the game Kurtenkov-Kouatly, Trnava 1986, is a typical example of play
on opposite wings:} Nc6 ({
Black can play without ...Ne7-c6 as in Kuczynski-Benjamin, Saint John 1988:} 
9... Qb6 10. d3 ({or} 10. c3 d3 $1 11. Nf4 Bb7 12. Re1 Qd6 13. Qf3 Ng6 14. Nxd3
f5 15. e5 Bxf3 16. exd6 Bc6 17. Nc5 Bxd6 18. d4 Ne7 {
with approximately equal chances, King-Chandler, German League 1996}) 10... Bb7
11. Ng3 g6 12. Bg5 Bg7 13. Qd2 f6 14. Bh4 O-O 15. f4 Rae8 16. a4 b4 17. Ne2 f5
{with very complex play}) 10. d3 Bc5 11. f4 Na5 12. f5 Nxb3 13. axb3 f6 ({
apart from the standard pawn break,} 13... Bb7 {is also fine}) 14. Nf4 O-O 15.
Qh5 Qe8 16. Ng6 d5 17. g4 dxe4 18. Nxf8 Qxf8 ({or} 18... Qxh5 $5 19. gxh5 exf5
$1 {with strong pawns in an endgame}) 19. fxe6 Bxe6 20. Bf4 Qc8 21. g5 g6 {
and a draw was agreed in this complex position, where Black has compensation
for the sacrificed material.})) 8... d5 {The relocation of the bishop on d3
allows Black to carry out the freeing advance ...d7-d5 and he does so
immediately.} (8... Nc6 9. f4 d5 10. e5 {transposes,} ({or if} 10. exd5 Qxd5 {.
})) 9. e5 (9. exd5 {occurs more often, when the continuations 9...Qxd5 and 9...
Nxd5 lead to completely different positions, but are of roughly equal worth.}
-- (9... Qxd5 {keeps control over d4, e.g.} 10. c3 ({
an interesting idea to gain space by} 10. c4 Qd6 11. b4 $5 {
was tried in Grabarczyk-Sherbakov, Polanica Zdroj 1996:} Qxb4 12. Rb1 Qd6 13.
Be4 Nc6 14. Qa4 Qd7 {and the players agreed a draw in a complex position})
10... Nc6 11. Qc2 Bd6 12. b3 Qh5 13. Ng3 Qh4 14. Re1 O-O 15. Bb2 Bd7 16. Bf1
Rac8 17. Qe4 Qh6 18. Rad1 f5 19. Qf3 f4 20. Nh1 Ne5 {
with a clear advantage to Black, Brodsky-Markowski, Katowice 1993.}) ({. After
} 9... Nxd5 {it is unprofitable for White to take the d-pawn because of 10...
Nf4 and 11...Nxd3. But he can exchange the pawn with} 10. c3 dxc3 11. dxc3 {
. Similar positions occur in the French and the Sicilian Defence with 2 c3.
Here both sides have easy development and the chances are approximately equal.
For example, after the most active} Bd6 {we have} 12. Qc2 ({or} 12. Nd4 Qc7 13.
h3 Bd7 14. Qf3 Nf4 15. Be4 Ng6 16. Be3 (16. Bxb7 $2 Ne5 17. Qe4 f5 {
and White is worse}) 16... Ne5 17. Qe2 O-O-O 18. Rfd1 Kb8 19. a4 Nc4 {
with a sharp middlegame, Svidler-Krasenkow, Belgrade 1999}) 12... Qc7 13. h3
Bd7 14. Bd2 h6 15. Rac1 O-O 16. a3 e5 17. c4 Nf6 18. c5 Be7 19. Ng3 Rfe8 20.
Rfe1 Bf8 21. b4 Bc6 {with good play, Shabanov-Cherniaev, Arkhangelsk 1996.}))
9... Nc6 10. f4 Bd7 ({A year later the future World Champion played} 10... g5
$5 {immediately. Fette-Kramnik, Groningen 1991, continued} 11. c3 Bg7 12. cxd4
Nxd4 $1 13. b3 (13. Nxd4 Qb6 14. Qf3 Qxd4+ 15. Qe3 Qxe3+ 16. dxe3 {
leads to an equal endgame}) 13... gxf4 14. Bb2 ({if} 14. Nxd4 Qb6 15. Bb2 Bxe5)
14... Nxe2+ 15. Qxe2 Qg5 16. Rac1 Bd7 17. Qf2 Bh6 (17... Bxe5 $5) 18. Ba3 Bc6
19. Qd4 Rc8 20. Rf2 Kd7 21. Bd6 f5 22. Rd1 Ke8 23. Qa7 Qd8 24. Be2 Ra8 25. Qd4
{½-½.}) 11. a3 {This sluggish move puts White in a difficult situation.} ({
White should remove the king from the a7-g1 diagonal with} 11. Kh1 {
(Speelman), preparing to answer} g5 {with} 12. c3 {.}) 11... g5 $1 12. f5 Qc7
13. b4 Qxe5 14. Bb2 O-O-O 15. Ng3 h5 $1 16. c3 ({
It is dangerous to take the h-pawn because of} 16. Nxh5 Bd6 17. g3 Rh6 {.})
16... h4 17. cxd4 Nxd4 18. Qc1+ Bc6 19. Qc3 hxg3 20. Qxd4 Qxd4+ 21. Bxd4 Rxh2
$6 ({Better is} 21... gxh2+ 22. Kh1 Rh6 {.}) 22. fxe6 fxe6 23. Rae1 Bd6 ({
The e6-pawn cannot be held; if} 23... Kd7 24. Rf7+ Be7 25. Bf5 $1) ({or} 23...
Re8 24. Bg6 {.}) 24. Rxe6 Rh4 25. Bf6 Bb8 $1 26. Bf5 $4 {
In time trouble White misses a good defensive opportunity.} ({
It was better to play} 26. Bxg5 $1 {immediately, when after} Ba7+ 27. Re3 Bxe3+
28. dxe3 {Black's victory is not that close.}) 26... Ba7+ 27. Re3+ Bd7 28. Bxg5
Rc4 {This would not have been possible after 26 Bxg5.} 29. Bxd8 Kxd8 30. Bxd7
Kxd7 31. Rf7+ Kc6 32. Kf1 ({If} 32. b5+ Kxb5 $1 ({not} 32... axb5 $2 33. Rf6+ {
with a draw}) 33. Rxb7+ Kc6 {leads to a straightforward win.}) 32... Bxe3 33.
dxe3 Rc3 34. a4 {Black is a pawn up with a better position;} ({
similarly after the alternative} 34. Rf3 Rxa3 35. Rxg3 Rb3 {.}) 34... Rxe3 35.
Rf6+ Kd7 36. Rf7+ Ke6 37. Rxb7 d4 38. Rb8 Kd5 39. b5 axb5 40. axb5 d3 0-1

[Event "Hastings"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2001.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Plaskett, J."]
[Black "Bischoff, K."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B30"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "59"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 e6 4. O-O Nge7 5. Nc3 ({On the modest move} 5. b3 {
, the usual suspect} a6 {is the strongest answer. After} 6. Bxc6 Nxc6 7. Bb2 b5
{Black has captured space on the queenside and should not have any problems.}
8. -- ({. After} 8. Na3 {, possible is the reply} Nd4 $5 ({not bad either is} 
8... Bb7 9. c4 b4 10. Nc2 Qb6 11. Re1 f6 12. a3 bxa3 13. Bxa3 e5 $1 {
with unclear play, Perez-Merino Garcia, Albacete 2000}) {, making use of the
weak position of the a3-knight. The game Azmaiparashvili-Almasi, Dos Hermanas
2001, continued} 9. c4 Qa5 10. d3 Nxf3+ 11. Qxf3 Bb7 12. Nc2 Qd2 13. Rac1 Bd6
14. Bxg7 Rg8 15. Bb2 Qh6 16. g3 f5 {
when Black has obvious compensation for a pawn.}) ({. In the case of} 8. d4
cxd4 9. Nxd4 Qf6 $1 {, the pin on the long diagonal ties White down. After} 10.
a4 b4 11. Ra2 Nxd4 12. Bxd4 Qg6 13. Nd2 Bb7 14. Qe2 ({or} 14. Re1 Be7 15. Re3
f6 16. Rg3 Qf7 17. Be3 d5 18. exd5 Bxd5 {
, as in the game Maljutin-Belikov, Jurmala 1991}) 14... Be7 15. f4 f5 16. Rf3
Qh5 17. Bxg7 Rg8 18. Be5 d6 19. Ba1 Rc8 {, Zapolskis-Belikov, Pinsk 1993,
Black's chances are to be preferred here because of the unhappy placement of
the white rook on the a2-square.}) ({. It is generally better for White to
refrain from d2-d4. Frolov-Kramnik, Moscow 1991, saw} 8. a4 b4 9. d3 d6 10.
Nbd2 e5 {(shutting out the Bb2)} 11. Nc4 Be7 12. Ne1 O-O 13. f4 {
(opening the long diagonal once more)} exf4 14. Rxf4 f5 15. exf5 d5 16. Ne5
Nxe5 17. Bxe5 Bg5 18. Rf1 Bxf5 {with equality.})) 5... a6 6. Bxc6 Nxc6 7. d4
cxd4 8. Nxd4 {It is necessary to consider this position. By playing d2-d4,
White has made room for his pieces to develop swiftly. Black has the two
bishops, but for the time being the bishop on c8 and the rook on a8 cannot
come into the game. Therefore Black must proceed with caution.} Qc7 {The beginning of an unusual plan for the Sicilian Defence. Black wants to exchange on d4
and play ...f7-f6, preparing the development of the king's bishop.} 9. Re1 ({
The moves} 9. Be3) ({and} 9. Kh1 {are too sluggish. For example,
Conquest-Skripchenko Lautier, Pamplona 2000, continued} b5 10. Be3 Bb7 11. Qe2
Ne5 12. Rad1 Be7 13. f4 Nc4 14. Bc1 b4 15. Nb1 O-O 16. Rd3 Nd6 17. Nd2 f5 {
and normally it is only possible to dream of such a Sicilian Defence position
for Black!}) ({After} 9. Nxc6 {both pawn captures are satisfactory:} -- (9...
dxc6 {is most reliable, for example:} 10. Qg4 ({or} 10. Be3 e5 11. Na4 b5 12.
Nb6 Rb8 13. Nxc8 Qxc8 14. Qf3 Be7 15. Qg3 O-O 16. Qxe5 Bf6 17. Qg3 Qe6 18. Bf4
Rbe8 19. Qa3 Qxe4 20. Bd6 Be7 21. Bxe7 Rxe7 22. Rad1 Re6 23. Qd3 {
½-½ Kuzmin-Tregubov, Krasnodar 1998}) 10... e5 11. Qg3 f6 12. Be3 b5 13. a4
b4 14. Nb1 Be6 15. Nd2 Bd6 16. Rfd1 Kf7 17. f3 Rhd8 18. Qf2 c5 19. b3 Rac8 20.
Nc4 {with equality in Grosar-Shariyazdanov, Croatia 1995.}) ({
. A more complex struggle results from} 9... bxc6 {
. Zagrebelny-Kamsky, Barnaul 1988, continued} 10. Qg4 ({
while in Grosar-Onischuk, Yerevan Olympiad 1996, after} 10. Re1 d6 11. Na4 Be7
12. c4 c5 13. Bf4 Bb7 14. Qg4 g5 ({possible also is} 14... O-O) 15. Bd2 h5 16.
Qg3 h4 17. Qa3 $6 ({better is} 17. Qc3 Rg8) 17... h3 18. g3 g4 19. Rad1 f5 $1 {
Black had taken over the initiative on the kingside}) 10... d6 11. Kh1 h5 12.
Qh4 Be7 13. Qg3 g5 14. f4 g4 15. Be3 Rg8 16. f5 e5 17. f6 Bf8 18. Qh4 Rh8 19.
Ne2 Be6 {and the players have mutual chances.})) 9... Nxd4 10. Qxd4 f6 $5 11.
e5 $1 f5 ({The e5-pawn is poisoned because of a nasty tactical trick:} 11...
fxe5 $6 12. Nd5 $1 {and it is difficult to find a good defence for Black here.}
) 12. Bg5 ({It was also possible to play} 12. a4 {, when after} Bc5 13. Qh4 O-O
14. Bd2 d5 15. Be3 Bd7 16. Rad1 Rac8 17. Bxc5 Qxc5 18. Qd4 Qxd4 19. Rxd4 Rc5
20. f4 Rfc8 21. Kf2 {
White is slightly better, Yegiazarian-Garcia Martinez, Ubeda 1999.}) 12... b5
13. Rad1 {A logical centralization of the rook.} ({
Christiansen-Bischoff, Essen 1999, ended more tamely with} 13. Qh4 Bb7 14. Ne2
Bc5 15. Rad1 O-O 16. Nf4 Be4 17. c3 Rf7 18. Nd3 Bf8 19. f3 {½-½.}) 13...
Bb7 14. Rd3 $6 {The rook is a little awkwardly placed here.} ({Transferring
the queen to h4 and centralizing the c3-knight (Nc3-e2-d4) remained the best
plan. For example:} 14. Qh4 b4 15. Ne2 Qxc2 16. Nd4 Qxb2 17. Re2 Qa3 18. Nxf5
$1 exf5 19. e6 {with an attack on the king.}) 14... b4 ({The preliminary move} 
14... Qc6 {to distract the rook is interesting. Then after} 15. Rg3 b4 {
there are no threats against d7 and it is possible for Black now to think of
capturing on c2.}) 15. Ne2 Be4 $6 {
This forces the rook back to d1 where is better situated.} ({After the correct
} 15... Bc5 {White has potential problems defending the e5-pawn, although it
is safe for the time being after} 16. Qf4 h6 17. Qh4 {.}) 16. Rdd1 Bc5 17. Qd2
Qb7 18. Nf4 Rc8 {Black's battery on the long diagonal is the wrong way round
and hence not too dangerous.} ({After} 18... h6 {White could continue} 19. Ng6
$1 Bxg2 20. Be3 $1 {.}) 19. Nh5 {It becomes clear that Black's plan has
backfired and merely created problems for his king, which is now stuck badly
in the centre.} Rg8 20. Rxe4 $1 fxe4 21. Qf4 {With the help of an exchange
sacrifice, White has created new threats against the king. But the danger has
not yet reached decisive proportions.} Ba7 $2 {This careless move loses the
game as the bishop leaves the king in trouble on the dark squares.} 22. Bh4 $1
{Threatening 23 Qg5 while in passing protecting f2.} h6 ({Now the continuation
} 22... e3 23. Qg5 exf2+ 24. Kf1 {is clearly unprofitable for Black.}) 23. Qg4
Kf7 24. Ng3 Rc4 25. Nf5 $1 Bc5 {An acknowledgement that 21...Ba7 was a mistake.
} (25... exf5 26. Qxf5+ Ke8 27. e6 {also loses.}) 26. Qh5+ Kf8 27. Rd6 $1 exf5
28. Qxf5+ Ke8 29. e6 Bxf2+ 30. Bxf2 1-0

[Event "Netherlands"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Glek, I."]
[Black "Nijboer, F."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B30"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "49"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 e6 4. O-O Nge7 5. Re1 a6 6. Bxc6 ({
As the white rook has moved aside, the bishop can also retreat with} 6. Bf1 {
, to which the most natural and strong reply is} d5 {. And now:} 7. -- ({
. Against the modest} 7. d3 {, Black can claim a territorial advantage by} d4
8. a4 e5 9. Nbd2 f6 10. Nc4 Be6 11. c3 Ng6 12. cxd4 cxd4 13. Bd2 a5 14. Qb3 Bb4
15. Rec1 O-O {, as in Tatai-Lazarev, Arco 1999.}) ({
. A similar gain of lebensraum occurs after} 7. e5 Nf5 $1 {(to prevent d2-d4)}
8. d3 Be7 9. c3 O-O 10. Na3 (10. d4 $2 cxd4 11. cxd4 Qb6 {
and White loses something}) 10... d4 11. c4 b6 12. g3 Bb7 13. Bg2 Rb8 14. h4 h6
15. Bf4 Qd7 {
with a complex struggle lying ahead in Kholmov-Ionov, Volgodonsk 1983.}) ({
. In the case of} 7. exd5 -- (7... Nxd5 8. d4 cxd4 ({while after} 8... Be7 9.
dxc5 O-O 10. c4 Nf6 11. Nc3 Bxc5 12. Bg5 Qb6 13. Qc2 Nd4 14. Nxd4 Bxd4 15. Be3
Bxe3 16. Rxe3 {White is slightly better, although a draw was agreed in
Hort-Timman, Wijk aan Zee 1979}) 9. Nxd4 {
, White threatens to spoil the black pawn structure by exchanging on c6.}) ({
. Strangely enough, Black's best answer to 7 exd5 is} 7... Qxd5 {, preventing
d2-d4 and continuing the struggle for space with ...Ne7-f5-d4. Now Black is
slightly better, for example:} 8. Nc3 Qd8 9. b3 ({or} 9. Ne4 Nf5 10. c3 b6 11.
Ng3 Nxg3 12. hxg3 Be7 13. d3 O-O 14. Be3 Bf6 15. Qa4 Bd7 16. Qc2 e5 {
, Robovic-Palac, Fomia 1994}) 9... Nf5 10. Bb2 Be7 11. Ne4 O-O 12. Ne5 Nxe5 13.
Bxe5 Nd4 14. Ng3 Bf6 15. c3 Nc6 16. Bxf6 Qxf6 17. Ne4 Qe7 {
, Rotta-Kramnik, Sao Paulo 1991.}))) 6... Nxc6 7. d4 cxd4 8. Nxd4 Qc7 9. Nc3 {
Reaching the same position as in Plaskett-Bischoff (Plaskett-Bischoff). Now we
consider the alternative to 9...Nxd4 10 Qxd4 f6.} Bd6 {A logical development
of the bishop. By attacking h2, Black prepares to castle and take some central
control with ...Bd6-e5.} 10. Nxc6 ({After} 10. g3 {(threatening 11 Ndb5!)} Nxd4
11. Qxd4 {, the move} Be5 {is a good reply, and now} 12. Bf4 Bxd4 13. Bxc7 Bxc3
14. bxc3 b5 {
leads to an opposite-coloured bishop endgame which is more pleasant for Black.}
) ({The typical Sicilian sacrifice} 10. Nd5 $5 {is more interesting. After}
exd5 11. exd5+ Ne7 12. Nf5 Kf8 13. Qe2 Bxh2+ 14. Kh1 d6 15. Nxe7 {
White has won back a piece and is to be preferred.}) ({Therefore} 10. Nd5 exd5
11. exd5+ Ne5 {is better and now the adventurous} 12. Nf5 $2 ({instead} 12. f4
O-O 13. fxe5 Bxe5 14. Nf3 Bf6 (14... d6 $6 15. Nxe5 dxe5 16. d6 {
gives White a dangerous passed pawn}) 15. c3 d6 16. Bg5 Bxg5 17. Nxg5 h6 18.
Ne4 Bf5 19. Ng3 Bg6 20. Qd4 Rfe8 {
offers approximately equal chances, Zhenetl-Poluljahov, Krasnodar 2000}) {
, crashed in Timman-Lautier, Horgen 1995:} 12... O-O 13. Bh6 gxh6 14. Qh5 Ng6
15. Qxh6 Be5 16. d6 Qc5 17. g4 Re8 18. Re4 Re6 19. Qg5 Bxd6 20. Nh6+ Kh8 21.
Nxf7+ Kg7 22. Qh6+ Kxf7 {0-1.}) 10... dxc6 11. f4 $5 ({After} 11. Qh5 {
(with the idea of e4-e5) Black showed good play in Sadvakasov-Sorokin, Perm
1997:} e5 12. f4 g6 13. Qf3 b5 14. f5 Qe7 15. Qg3 Bb7 16. fxg6 hxg6 17. Bg5 f6
18. Be3 Kf7 19. Rf1 Kg7 20. Rad1 Rad8 21. Rd2 Bc8 {
and Black had a solid position.}) 11... e5 $1 {
It is necessary to prevent clamping 12 e5.} ({Taking the pawn by} 11... Bxf4 {
is risky. For example:} 12. Bxf4 Qxf4 13. e5 O-O 14. Qd6 b6 15. Rad1 Ra7 16.
Qxc6 Qb4 17. Rd2 b5 18. Ne4 Qa5 19. Qc5 Rc7 20. Qe3 Bb7 21. Nf6+ Kh8 22. Red1
Bd5 23. Qf2 gxf6 24. Qxf6+ Kg8 25. Qg5+ {½-½ Lastin-Kotsur, Elista 2000.
The result might seem alright, but during the game White had a dangerous
initiative.}) 12. f5 b5 {White has closed the centre to limit the unfriendly
pair of bishops. Therefore Black develops play on the queenside, hoping to
give his bishops some scope.} 13. Qg4 f6 14. Rd1 Bc5+ 15. Kh1 Bb7 16. Rd3 ({
Against} 16. Qh5+ Ke7 17. Rd3 {best is} g6 $1 {
, since if White accepts the pawn sacrifice his king cannot escape the checks:}
18. fxg6 hxg6 19. Qxg6 Rag8 20. Qf5 Bc8 21. Qf3 Rxh2+ $5 22. Kxh2 Rh8+ 23. Kg3
Rg8+ {etc. As we see, with the centre closed Black can open the kingside
without any undue fear.}) 16... Qf7 17. Ne2 Rd8 18. Rxd8+ Kxd8 19. Bd2 Bb6 20.
Nc1 Kc8 21. Nb3 Rd8 22. Ba5 Bxa5 23. Nxa5 c5 {At last the white knight finds a
good square, but in the meantime the diagonal has opened for the bishop and an
exchange is necessary.} 24. Nxb7 Kxb7 25. Rd1 1/2-1/2

[Event "Polanica Zdroj"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1992.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Gdanski, J."]
[Black "Cifuentes Parada, R."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B30"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "41"]
[EventDate "1992.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 e6 4. O-O Nge7 5. c3 {An essentially different plan
from the one seen so far in Speelman-Larsen and the two subsequent games.
White is going to create a pawn centre, behind which his pieces will find
shelter.} a6 6. Ba4 ({This time exchanging the bishop by} 6. Bxc6 $6 Nxc6 {
is not too clever for White. After} 7. d4 d5 {
we have the following possibilities:} 8. -- (8. exd5 Qxd5 {gives rises to a
position similar to that after 2 c3 d5 3 exd5 Qxd5 4 d4 e6 5 Nf3 Nc6, but
without White's light-squared bishop, which is certainly to Black's advantage.
Kostikov-Moiseenko, Alushta 1998, continued} 9. dxc5 Qxd1 10. Rxd1 Bxc5 11.
Nbd2 e5 12. Nc4 f6 13. Be3 Bxe3 14. fxe3 Be6 15. Nb6 Rd8 16. e4 Kf7 {
with a safe endgame.}) ({. In the case of} 8. e5 {the position is similar to
the French Defence Advance (1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 e5 c5 4 c3 Nc6), but again the
absence of White's light-squared bishop is favourable for Black. It is
difficult for White to develop an initiative on the kingside without the
bishop, whereas Black still has prospects on the queenside. For example:} Bd7
9. Re1 Rc8 10. dxc5 Bxc5 11. Nbd2 O-O 12. Nb3 Be7 13. Nbd4 Qb6 14. Qe2 Nxd4 15.
Nxd4 f5 $1 16. f4 (16. exf6 Bxf6 17. Nxe6 $2 Rfe8 $1 {does not work out}) 16...
Rc4 17. Be3 Qc7 18. Qf2 b5 19. a3 a5 20. Nb3 Rb8 {
and Black is more active, Mortensen-Larsen, Graested 1990.})) ({
Sometimes White plays} 6. Be2 {, keeping the bishop on the f1-a6 diagonal. Then
} d5 7. exd5 {is again reminiscent of the French Defence.} -- ({. For example:
} 7... exd5 8. d4 c4 9. Re1 g6 10. b3 cxb3 11. axb3 Bg7 12. Nbd2 O-O 13. b4 Bf5
14. Nb3 Qc7 15. Nc5 Rad8 16. Bg5 h6 17. Bh4 {
with slight pressure for White, Magomedov-Sherbakov, Koszalin 1999.}) ({
. In the case of} 7... Nxd5 8. d4 {, exchanging on d4 does not equalize:} cxd4
({White's queenside pawn majority also gives him an advantage after} 8... Be7
9. c4 Nf6 10. dxc5 {, as in Kasparov-Kramnik, Paris (rapid) 1995:} Bxc5 ({
it is more interesting for Black to keep queens on the board with a more
complex middlegame:} 10... Qc7 11. a3 a5 12. Nc3 Bxc5 13. Bg5 O-O 14. Qc1 Nd7
15. Ne4 f6 16. Be3 b6 17. Rd1 Bb7 18. Nxc5 Nxc5 19. Qc3 a4 {
with good play, Fressinet-Krasenkow, Saint Vincent 2000}) 11. Qxd8+ Kxd8 12.
Nc3 Ke7 13. Rd1 Rd8 14. Rxd8 Nxd8 15. a3 Bd7 16. b4 Bd6 17. Be3 h6 18. Rd1 {
and it is obvious that Black has some problems}) 9. Nxd4 Nxd4 (9... Bd7 10. Be3
Nxd4 11. Qxd4 {transposes}) ({, while if} 9... Bd6 10. Nxc6 bxc6 {
spoils Black's pawn structure}) 10. Qxd4 Bd7 11. Bf3 Bc6 12. Nd2 Qc7 13. Nc4
Rd8 14. Rd1 f6 15. Qg4 Kf7 16. Re1 Re8 17. a4 g6 18. Bd2 h5 19. Qg3 Qxg3 20.
hxg3 Rd8 21. Na5 Nb4 22. Nxc6 Nxc6 23. Be3 {
with a slightly better ending for White, Kramnik-Miladinovic, Belgrade 1995.}))
6... b5 {The standard continuation.} ({If Black first plays} 6... d5 {
and then ...b7-b5 he can run into great trouble:} 7. exd5 Qxd5 8. d4 b5 $2 {
. Now the stunning blow} 9. c4 $3 {puts Black in a catastrophic situation:} --
({. After} 9... Qxc4 10. Bb3 Qb4 11. Bd2 {the queen is lost.}) (9... Qd6 10.
cxb5 Nxd4 11. bxa6+ Nec6 $2 ({more stubborn is} 11... Bd7) 12. Bf4 $1 Qd5 13.
Nxd4 cxd4 14. Nc3 $1 {1-0 Wahls-Rajkovic, German League 1992.}) (9... bxc4 10.
Nc3 Qd8 11. d5 exd5 12. Nxd5 Bd7 13. Re1 Ra7 14. Bf4 f6 15. Nd2 Kf7 16. Nxc4
Ng6 17. Bb3 Nd4 18. Nc7 Be7 19. Qh5 Kf8 20. Rxe7 Ne2+ 21. Rxe2 Nxf4 22. Qxc5+ {
1-0 Degraeve-Van Doeland, Paris 1992.})) ({The advance} 6... c4 {fixes White's
queenside pawns, but at the price of delaying mobilization. White can try to
remove the cramping c4-pawn by} 7. Bc2 Ng6 {(the usual response)} 8. b3 {
. If Black exchanges on b3, then White gets a strong pawn chain, as in
Baklan-Loebler, Graz 1997:} d5 ({
the attempt to keep the pawn on c4 allows White to besiege it:} 8... b5 9. Qe2
Qc7 10. bxc4 Nf4 11. Qe3 bxc4 12. Ba3 Be7 13. Bxe7 Nxe7 14. Na3 O-O 15. Rfe1
Nfg6 16. h4 f5 17. h5 Nf4 18. h6 gxh6 19. Nxc4 {
and White is better, Vaulin-Moroz, Pardubice 1992}) 9. exd5 Qxd5 10. Re1 cxb3
11. axb3 Bd6 12. d4 O-O 13. Nbd2 Qh5 14. Ne4 Bf4 15. Ng3 Qh6 16. Be4 {
with an overwhelming advantage.}) 7. Bc2 Bb7 {The most flexible continuation.
The planned ...d7-d5 (now or later) limits the b7-bishop and the further
advance ...d5-d4 would only make the pawn weak.} 8. a4 {
Attacking the extended pawns on the queenside. Alternatively:} ({The immediate
} 8. d4 {allows the exchange of White's light-squared bishop with complete
equality after} cxd4 9. -- (9. cxd4 Nb4 10. d5 Nxc2 11. Qxc2 Ng6 12. Rd1 Rc8
13. Qe2 Bc5 14. Be3 Qb6 15. Bxc5 Qxc5 16. Nc3 O-O {
, Morozevich-Sherbakov, Elista 1995.}) ({. Even weaker is} 9. Nxd4 {
as Black has more central pawns and is therefore slightly better:} Ng6 10. Be3
({more evidence is provided by Gazizov-Chernyshov, Bor 2000:} 10. Nxc6 Bxc6 11.
a4 b4 12. Qd4 Qb8 13. Nd2 Bd6 14. h3 O-O 15. Nc4 Bc7 16. cxb4 Qxb4 17. Bd2 Qb7
18. Bc3 e5 19. Qc5 Rfe8 20. Rfe1 d5 21. exd5 Bxd5 22. Ne3 Bc6 23. Bxg6 hxg6 24.
a5 Re6 {with a strong pair of bishops giving Black some pressure}) 10... Qc7
11. f4 Rc8 12. Bd3 Bc5 13. Nd2 O-O 14. Kh1 Nce7 15. Qe2 f5 16. exf5 Nh4 17.
N2f3 Nexf5 18. Nxf5 Nxf5 19. Bxc5 Qxc5 20. Be4 Bxe4 21. Qxe4 Rf6 {
with a good position for Black in Svidler-Greenfeld, Tilburg (blitz) 1994.})) (
8. Qe2 {
prepares 9 d4. White was unsuccessful in Totsky-Kogan, Budapest 1996, following
} Ng6 9. d4 cxd4 10. cxd4 Nh4 $1 11. Nbd2 Rc8 12. Bb1 ({
it was necessary for White to advance the d-pawn with} 12. d5 $5 Ne5 13. Nd4 g5
14. a4 b4 15. N2b3 g4 16. Rd1 Qc7 17. Kh1 Bg7 18. Bg5 {
with better chances for White in Tkachiev-San Segundo, Ampuriabrava 1997})
12... Bd6 ({for Black,} 12... Nb4 $5 13. b3 Nc2 {deserved serious attention})
13. e5 Bb8 14. Qe4 Nf5 15. Nb3 d6 16. Qg4 Nce7 17. Re1 Qb6 18. Bg5 dxe5 19.
dxe5 h6 20. Bxe7 Nxe7 21. Nbd2 Ba7 22. Qg3 Rd8 23. Re2 O-O {
with an advantage for Black.}) (8. Re1 {also prepares d2-d4, but after} Rc8 {
the advance} 9. d4 ({if White tries} 9. a3 {
, preparing d2-d4 again by preventing ...Nb4, Black replies} c4 $1 10. d4 cxd3
11. Bxd3 Ng6 12. Nbd2 Qc7 13. Bf1 Be7 14. a4 b4 15. Nc4 bxc3 16. bxc3 Na5 17.
Nxa5 Qxa5 18. Qd4 O-O 19. Qxd7 Rc7 20. Qd1 {
and the players agreed a draw in Zaitsev-Moiseenko, Orel 1999}) ({
; White should probably play} 9. a4 {when} Ng6 {transposes to the next note}) {
, meets with a tactical rebuff:} 9... cxd4 10. cxd4 Nb4 11. Bb3 Rxc1 $1 12.
Qxc1 Nd3 13. Qe3 Nxe1 14. Qxe1 Ng6 {and after} 15. Qe3 Bd6 16. Nc3 O-O 17. Rd1
Bc7 18. Ne2 Bb6 19. Bc2 d6 20. Qd2 Nh4 21. Nxh4 Qxh4 22. Qd3 g6 23. Qg3 Qxg3
24. hxg3 Rc8 {and the endgame is better for Black due to the two bishops,
Malakhov-Komarov, Porto San Giorgio 1996.}) 8... Ng6 9. axb5 {After the exchange of rooks Black must play precisely in order to achieve equality.} (9. Re1 Rc8
{does not create problems. For example:} 10. axb5 ({or} 10. Qe2 b4 11. d3 Be7
12. Be3 O-O 13. Nbd2 d6 14. d4 bxc3 15. bxc3 cxd4 16. cxd4 Nb4 17. Bb3 d5 {
(in general Black plays this only when his bishop can emerge at a6)} 18. e5 a5
19. Rec1 Ba6 20. Qd1 f6 {
with a clear advantage for Black, Batsanin-Smirnov, Tomsk 1999}) 10... axb5 11.
d4 cxd4 12. Nxd4 Nxd4 13. cxd4 Be7 14. Bd3 b4 15. Be3 O-O 16. Nd2 f5 {
(a typical thrust)} 17. d5 Ne5 18. Ba6 Bxa6 19. Rxa6 Nd3 20. Rf1 Bc5 21. Qe2
Bxe3 22. Qxe3 Nc5 {with the initiative, Spasov-Gulko, Biel 1993.}) 9... axb5
10. Rxa8 Bxa8 11. d4 cxd4 12. cxd4 ({If} 12. Nxd4 {then} b4 {
equalizes immediately:} 13. Nb5 Qb8 14. c4 Bc5 15. Nd2 Na5 16. b3 d6 17. Bb2 e5
18. g3 O-O 19. Qe2 Nc6 {Odeev-Makarov, Elista Olympiad 1998.}) 12... Nb4 {
We have already seen a similar position after 8 d4 cxd4 9 cxd4 Nb4. White is
forced to part with his light-squared bishop or he loses his e-pawn. Then with
two strong bishops Black can feel confident.} 13. Nc3 Nxc2 14. Qxc2 b4 ({
It is impossible to protect the pawn (} 14... Qb8 $2 15. Nxb5 $1 {
) so it must be advanced.}) 15. Nb5 Bc6 16. Na7 Bb7 17. Bg5 {
There is no way home for the knight.} ({If} 17. Nb5 $2 Qb6 $1 18. Qc4 Bc6 {
and the knight is trapped.}) 17... f6 ({
It is a bad idea to weaken the dark squares: if} 17... Be7 $2 18. Bxe7 Nxe7 19.
Nb5 O-O 20. Nd6 Qb6 21. Qc5 Qxc5 22. dxc5 Bc6 23. Ra1 {
and White has the advantage.}) 18. Be3 Be7 19. Rd1 d5 $1 {Just in time!} ({
After} 19... O-O $6 20. d5 Qa5 21. Qc4 $1 Qa6 22. Qxa6 Bxa6 23. d6 Bd8 24. Bc5
{Black has serious problems.}) 20. Nc6 Bxc6 21. Qxc6+ ({
Here a draw was agreed in view of} 21. Qxc6+ Qd7 ({nor does} 21... Kf7 {
break the balance}) 22. exd5 exd5 23. Qb6 O-O 24. Ra1 Rc8 {
and it is difficult for either players to improve his position.}) 1/2-1/2

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "9. c3 Sicilian"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "31"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 {is White's main alternative to 2 Nf3, both as regards the
number of games played and its actual worth. Still, Black should not be scared
and the current chapter clearly illustrates that Black has a lot of resources
at hand.} ({Some players choose to go for the c3-line after} 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. c3 {
. Our recommended repertoire is, of course, adapted to meet this as well.})
2... Nf6 3. e5 {Nothing else makes sense if White is after an advantage.} (3.
d3 {, for example, is not a move you need to prepare for.}) 3... Nd5 4. d4 {
This is the most ambitious move, but it most likely leads to very little.} ({
About five to ten years ago some players experimented with} 4. Nf3 Nc6 5. Bc4 {
, but the current conclusion is that after} Nb6 6. Bb3 c4 {
(Zakharov-Ovsejevitsch and Pavasovic-Tratar) Black will eventually equalize.})
(4. g3 {has been pioneered by Rozentalis and is not as stupid as it might look
at first glance. The conclusion again, though, is that Black should be fine,
as can be seen in Short-Kasparov and the two subsequent games.}) 4... cxd4 5.
Nf3 ({The sideline} 5. Bc4 Qc7 $1 {
is examined in Okhotnik-Ikonnikov and Miles-Sax}) ({while} 5. Qxd4 e6 6. Nf3
Nc6 7. Qe4 {is the subject of Frois-Yakovich and the two subsequent games.}) ({
The line} 5. cxd4 d6 6. Bc4 Nb6 7. Bb5+ Nc6 {can also have some independent
significance (see Colding-Grischuk), but normally transposes to the main lines
after} 8. Nf3 {, specifically to the next note.}) 5... Nc6 6. Bc4 ({
The main alternative,} 6. cxd4 d6 7. Bc4 ({while} 7. Nc3 {
is seen in Afek-Van Wely}) 7... Nb6 8. Bb5 {
, is covered in Antonio-Ki.Georgiev and Sadler-Shirov.}) 6... Nb6 7. Bb3 d5 $1
{This is a very important move for Black. The great danger is that Black will
never get fully developed, and the threats against f7, among others, will
become too much.} 8. exd6 (8. cxd4 $6 Bg4 {
is not something we will waste any time on since Black already stands better.})
8... Qxd6 9. O-O (9. Na3 {(Rabiega-Van Wely and Vajda-Rogozenko) is a tricky
alternative. We have chosen a line that guarantees Black at least equality,
but still requires some awareness.}) 9... Be6 $1 {Another move that is
absolutely essential for Black's development. The white bishop on b3 is
enormous, while the c8-bishop no good squares available.} ({Notice that} 9...
Bg4 {fails to} 10. Bxf7+ $1 {with advantage to White.}) 10. Bxe6 (10. Na3 {
(Sepp-Gelfand) is now at least as common and probably more dangerous.}) 10...
Qxe6 11. Nxd4 Nxd4 12. Qxd4 Rd8 {This is seen in Janovsky-Kiselev and
Kotliar-Brook. Black should be okay, though this assessment is still under
discussion. Play usually continues with} 13. Qh4 Qe2 14. Be3 Qxb2 15. Nd2 Rxd2
16. Rab1 {and White has developed everything but also sacrificed some material.
The evaluation in this book is that Black has good chances of gaining a full
point here, and should therefore take the risk and the material (see
Kotliar-Brook).} *

[Event "London (rapid)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1993.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Short, N."]
[Black "Kasparov, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "74"]
[EventDate "1993.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. g3 {After it became more and more apparent
that the 2 c3 main lines did not promise White any advantage, GM Rozentalis -
a man who has always had his own understanding of chess - began to try this
kingside fianchetto.} d6 5. exd6 e6 {This is the usual antidote. As 4 g3 is a
perfectly natural move, Black will just develop normally and not try to refute
it. Incidentally, this is the right way to play against almost all weird
opening ideas!} 6. Bg2 Bxd6 7. Nf3 O-O 8. O-O Nc6 9. d3 {
As we shall see, this is not so dangerous for Black.} (9. d4) ({and} 9. Na3 {
will be investigated in the next two games.}) 9... b6 {Logical! The bishop on
b7 will counteract the bishop on g2. And if the bishops are exchanged it will
be White who has the greatest weaknesses on the light squares.} 10. Nbd2 Bb7
11. Qe2 ({Also possible is} 11. Nc4 Bc7 12. a4 a6 13. Re1 b5 14. Ncd2 h6 {
and White has achieved absolutely nothing, Jakubiec-Zhigalko, Polanica Zdroj
2001.}) 11... Bc7 {White has to play his knight to c4 or e4 to make any sense
out of his position, so Kasparov moves his bishop now, waiting to see which
way the knight goes before deciding what to do.} 12. Nc4 Re8 $1 {
Preparing an advance in the centre.} 13. a4 ({Instead} 13. Nce5 $5 {
has been suggested to prevent ...e6-e5. But after} Nxe5 14. Nxe5 Bxe5 15. Qxe5
Qd7 {Makarichev believes that Black is slightly better. The logic is simple:
White's dark-squared bishop has no good squares, and after the exchange of
light-squared bishops White's d3-pawn and kingside will be weak.}) 13... h6 14.
Bd2 Qd7 15. Rad1 ({If} 15. Nce5 Nxe5 16. Nxe5 Bxe5 17. Qxe5 Ne7 $1 {with the same reasoning as in the last note. The knight prepares to go to c6 from where
it prevents both d3-d4 and a4-a5.}) 15... Rad8 16. Bc1 e5 17. Rfe1 {Black is already slightly better as White has no real counterplay. But now he allows
White to invade the kingside on the light squares.} f5 18. Nh4 Qf7 19. Bf3 Rf8
20. Bh5 Qd7 21. Ng6 Rfe8 22. Qf1 $2 {
One just has to look at it to know that this move is no good.} ({Better was} 
22. Nh4 Rf8 23. Ng6 Rfe8 {with a repetition of moves.}) 22... Nf6 23. Bf3 Kh7
24. Nh4 g5 25. Ng2 {White is clearly paying the price for his sins.} f4 26. Qe2
Kg7 27. Qc2 Qh3 28. Nd2 e4 {
Making room for the black knight to come to e5 and decide the game.} 29. Rxe4
Nxe4 30. Bxe4 Rxe4 31. dxe4 Ne5 32. Ne1 Ba6 33. c4 Rxd2 $1 {
Removing an important defender of the light squares.} 34. Rxd2 Bxc4 35. Rd3
Bxd3 36. Nxd3 Nf3+ 37. Kh1 Qf1# 0-1

[Event "Leeuwarden"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1997.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kroeze, F."]
[Black "Van Wely, L."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "46"]
[EventDate "1997.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. c3 Nf6 4. e5 Nd5 5. g3 d6 6. exd6 Bxd6 7. Bg2 O-O 8. O-O
Nc6 9. d4 $5 {White tries to gain space in the centre but, as we shall see, he
loses some control over the light squares.} cxd4 10. Nxd4 Nxd4 11. Qxd4 Qc7 {
Simple development once again. Black is preparing to develop his bishop to b7.}
12. Nd2 (12. Bxd5 $2 exd5 13. Qxd5 {wins a pawn, and there is no immediate way
to refute it, but one look at the light squares should be enough for anyone to
realize that Black's chances are preferable.}) 12... Rd8 {
A natural move, indicating that the white queen could be better placed.} ({
Also fine is} 12... b5 $5 13. a4 bxa4 14. Qxa4 Bb7 15. c4 Nb6 16. Qc2 Bxg2 17.
Kxg2 Rfc8 {with a good position, Kos-Horvath, Charleville 2000.}) 13. Ne4 ({
Ofstad-Penko, Bled 2000, saw} 13. Nf3 b5 14. Re1 Rb8 15. a3 a5 16. Be3 Bb7 17.
Qd3 h6 18. Bd4 Ne7 19. Qe2 Nf5 {and, due to his space advantage, Black has
more logical squares for his pieces and is therefore is slightly better.}) (13.
Qc4 {has also been tried. White does not really want to exchange queens - he
is more concerned with preventing ...b7-b5, but this comes at a price:} Rb8 14.
a4 Bd7 15. Qe2 Rbc8 16. Re1 h6 17. Nf1 Bc6 {and Black is well developed
without ...b7-b5, Proehl-Andersson, German League 2000.}) 13... Be7 14. Qa4 {
What White is trying to do over the next few moves is not really apparent.
Probably Van Wely was not sure either!} a5 15. Ng5 h6 16. Nf3 b5 17. Qe4 ({Not} 
17. Qxb5 $2 Ba6 {winning the exchange.}) 17... Bf6 18. Nd4 Rb8 19. Qg4 b4 {
White's queenside is collapsing; that he wins the h6-pawn is no real comfort.}
20. Bxh6 bxc3 21. bxc3 Qxc3 22. Rad1 Rb4 $1 {Winning a piece.} 23. Bxg7 Bxg7
0-1

[Event "Corsica (rapid)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1997.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Villard, P."]
[Black "Salov, V."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "77"]
[EventDate "1997.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. g3 d6 5. exd6 e6 6. Bg2 Bxd6 7. Nf3 Nc6 8. Na3
O-O 9. O-O ({With 9 Na3 (the swapping of Nb1-a3 and 0-0 makes no difference)
White tries to get the best of both worlds: the good knight from the} 9. d3 {
line}) ({and the exchange of the potentially weak d-pawn as after} 9. d4 {.})
9... b6 10. Re1 {A natural move.} ({Instead} 10. d3 Bb7 11. Nc4 Bc7 {
transposes to 9 d3.}) ({However,} 10. Nc4 -- (10... Bc7 11. d4 $5 {shows that
he bishop should retreat to e7 where it will have more control over the c3-f6
diagonal}) ({, as in Sokolov-Banas, Viernheim 1992:} 10... Be7 11. d3 Bb7 12.
a4 a6 13. Qb3 Rb8 14. Rd1 Qc7 {½-½.} (14... --))) (10. Nc2 {
seems slow but makes good sense. Probat-Pilaj, Austria 1996, continued} Bb7 11.
d4 cxd4 12. Ncxd4 Nxd4 13. Nxd4 Rc8 {(preventing c3-c4)} 14. Qe2 Qe7 15. Re1
Rfe8 {with equality.}) 10... Bb7 11. Nc4 Be7 12. d4 cxd4 13. Nxd4 Nxd4 14. Qxd4
Bf6 15. Qd1 Qc7 {It is again clear that White does not have enough good
squares for his pieces, whereas Black certainly does.} 16. Qb3 Rfd8 17. Ne3 Ne7
18. Ng4 Bxg2 19. Kxg2 Qc6+ 20. Kg1 Ng6 21. Be3 ({At first glance} 21. Nxf6+
gxf6 {appears to weaken the black king's position, but one does not have to
see further than} 22. -- Ne5 {
to realize that the knights are the important pieces here.}) 21... Qf3 22. h3
h5 23. Nh2 Qf5 24. Kg2 Ne5 25. Rad1 Nd3 {Black has the advantage with better
placed pieces and good chances to attack his opponent's weaknesses.} 26. Rf1
Rd5 27. Rd2 Rad8 28. Rfd1 Qe4+ 29. Kg1 Nxf2 30. Kxf2 Rf5+ 31. Bf4 Rxf4+ 32.
gxf4 Bh4+ 33. Kg1 Qe3+ 34. Kh1 Rxd2 35. Rxd2 Qe1+ 36. Kg2 Qxd2+ 37. Kh1 Qe1+
38. Kg2 Qf2+ 39. Kh1 0-1

[Event "Krasnodar"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1996.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Zakharov, A."]
[Black "Ovsejevitsch, S."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "94"]
[EventDate "1996.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. c3 Nf6 4. e5 Nd5 5. Bc4 $5 {This line was popular some
years ago but is now seen less and less in international tournaments since
there are many good ways for Black to equalize. Here we will look at one that
has some similarity to our weapon against the main line.} Nb6 6. Bb3 c4 $5 {
Black takes some risks to ensure him control in the centre.} 7. Bc2 d6 ({
It probably makes no difference to the evaluation, but here it might be
possible to investigate the alternative} 7... d5 $5 {
, which avoids 7...d6 8 Qe2!?.} 8. -- ({. Then} 8. exd6 {transposes to the game
}) ({, while} 8. d4 cxd3 9. Qxd3 Bg4 {
gives White some problems with the e5-pawn.}) ({. If instead} 8. h3 Qc7 9. Qe2
Nd7 {the heavy pressure against e5 forces White to go in for unfavourable
complications:} 10. e6 fxe6 11. Ng5 (11. Qxe6 Nf6 12. Qe2 e5 {
looks very promising for Black}) 11... Nf6 12. Nxe6 ({
more or less forced as White encounters nothing but trouble after} 12. O-O Qe5)
({or} 12. Bxh7 $2 Nxh7 13. Qh5+ Kd7 14. Nxh7 Qe5+ 15. Qxe5 Nxe5 16. Nxf8+ Rxf8)
12... Qd6 $1 13. Nxf8 Rxf8 {followed by ...e7-e5 and Black has no problems.}))
8. exd6 ({White can also try} 8. Qe2 $5 {
as in Rytshagov-Niemela, Helsinki 1995, which continued} Bg4 ({
it might be interesting to look at} 8... dxe5 $5 9. Nxe5 Nxe5 10. Qxe5 Be6 11.
O-O Qd5 {and Black seems to be doing well}) 9. exd6 Qxd6 10. Na3 Bxf3 11. Qxf3
Qe5+ 12. Be4 e6 13. O-O Bd6 14. Bxc6+ Ke7 $1 {(nice tactics)} 15. g3 bxc6 16.
b3 cxb3 17. axb3 Qd5 {and Black was more or less equal.}) 8... Qxd6 9. Na3 {
This allows ...Qe6+.} ({Instead,} 9. O-O {
is investigated in the next game, but there are several other possibilities:})
(9. d4 cxd3 10. Qxd3 ({or} 10. Bxd3 Bg4 11. O-O Rd8 {
and Black had equalized, Samuel-Camilleri, Istanbul Olympiad 2000}) 10... e5 $1
{(there is no sense in Black exchanging queens since White has more problems
in developing fluently)} 11. h3 h6 12. O-O Be6 13. a4 Rd8 14. Qxd6 Bxd6 15. a5
Nd5 16. Nbd2 O-O {with a good game for Black due to his preponderance in the
centre, Schuerch-Yewdokimov, Bern 1991.}) (9. b3 Qe6+ 10. Qe2 Qxe2+ 11. Kxe2 e5
12. Re1 f6 13. Kf1 Kf7 14. bxc4 Nxc4 15. d3 Nb6 16. Bb3+ Be6 {
was about equal in Kernazhitsky-Lemmers, Olomouc 1999.}) (9. h3 g6 ({better is
} 9... e5 $1 {with a good game for Black}) 10. d4 cxd3 11. Qxd3 Qc7 (11... Qxd3
{makes more sense}) 12. Qe2 Bg7 {and White has chance for an advantage as the
black knight looks misplaced on b6 in the middlegame, Kalygin-Dubinsky, Moscow
1996.}) (9. Qe2 Qe6 $5 (9... Bg4 {transposes to 8 Qe2!? above}) 10. Be4 -- ({
, when Bouhlel-Pitlagano, Istanbul Olympiad 2000, saw} 10... h6 $2 11. Na3 a6
12. O-O Bd7 13. Re1 {and White was better.}) ({
. The only chance to fight for equality is by} 10... Bd7 11. Ng5 ({if} 11. O-O
f5 12. Ng5 Qd6 13. Bxc6 Bxc6 {and the position is very double edged}) 11... Qh6
{and now} 12. Nf3 ({while} 12. f4 f5 13. Bf3 Qd6 {
, intending ...0-0-0 and ...e7-e5, seems much better for Black}) 12... Qe6 {
repeats moves.})) 9... Bg4 ({More forcing is} 9... Qe6+ $1 10. Qe2 (10. Kf1 Qd5
{only helps Black}) 10... Qxe2+ 11. Kxe2 Bg4 {and then} 12. b3 $1 {
transposes to the game.}) 10. Qe2 Qe6 11. b3 {
Fighting back on the light squares.} Qxe2+ 12. Kxe2 Ne5 13. Nxc4 Nbxc4 14. bxc4
Nxc4 15. Ba4+ Bd7 16. Bxd7+ Kxd7 17. d3 Nd6 {The black knight is well placed
at d6 and the endgame should be more or less equal.} 18. Be3 g6 19. Ne5+ Ke6
20. f4 {White is trying very hard to prove an advantage that is not there.} Bg7
21. Rab1 Rhc8 22. c4 Rab8 23. Nf3 b5 $1 {Black has successfully punished White
for his overambitious play. Now the black king takes control over the very
important d5-square and secures the advantage for Black.} 24. c5 Nf5 25. Bf2
Kd5 26. d4 e6 27. Rhd1 Ne7 28. Rd3 Kc6 29. Ra3 Nd5 30. Kd2 b4 31. Rxa7 Ra8 32.
Rxf7 Rxa2+ 33. Ke1 Rc7 34. Rxc7+ Kxc7 35. Ng5 Kd7 36. g3 h6 37. Nf7 h5 38. Nd6
Kc6 39. Ne4 Kb5 40. Nd6+ Kc6 41. Kf1 Bf8 42. Nf7 Kb5 43. Ng5 Ra6 44. Ne4 Kc4
45. Ke2 Ra2+ 46. Kf3 b3 47. Be1 b2 0-1

[Event "Radenci"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1998.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Pavasovic, D."]
[Black "Tratar, M."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "120"]
[EventDate "1998.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. Nf3 Nc6 5. Bc4 Nb6 6. Bb3 c4 7. Bc2 d6 8. exd6
Qxd6 9. O-O {This is by far the most logical move in the position.} ({Now} 9.
O-O e5 {is risky due to} 10. Re1 {with immediate pressure on the e-pawn.}) 9...
g6 10. b3 Bg7 11. Na3 cxb3 12. axb3 O-O 13. d4 {White has succeeded in
removing the opposing pawns from the centre and now expands in that sector.
But meanwhile Black has prepared his counterplay and the new white centre does
not last for long.} Bg4 $1 14. h3 Bxf3 15. Qxf3 e5 $1 16. Nb5 ({
Also possible is} 16. dxe5 Qxe5 17. Bb2 Rfe8 18. Rad1 Rad8 19. b4 Qf6 20. Qxf6
Bxf6 21. Ba1 a6 22. b5 Na5 23. c4 Rxd1 24. Rxd1 Bxa1 25. Rxa1 Naxc4 {
and a draw was agreed in Vajda-Cosma, Sovata 1999.}) 16... Qd7 $1 {The right post for the queen. From here it controls all the weak squares in her own camp
(b7, f7 and c6) and keeps an eye on the d4-pawn and White's knight on b5.} 17.
Ba3 Rfd8 18. dxe5 Nxe5 19. Qe2 a6 20. Nd6 {The knight might look impressive
here, but in just a few moves it becomes apparent that it is merely on its way
into trouble.} Nd5 21. Qd2 Nc7 $1 22. c4 {
Preventing Black's intended ...Nb5 but allowing a little combination.} Qxh3 23.
f4 Qh6 24. Qe2 Nc6 25. Rad1 Ne6 26. Be4 Nxf4 27. Qe3 Nd4 $1 {
Another blow and White is now lost.} 28. Rfe1 Nfe6 29. Qxh6 Bxh6 30. Kf1 Bf8
31. c5 Nxb3 32. Bxb7 Nbxc5 33. Bxa8 Rxa8 34. Nc4 Nb3 35. Bxf8 Rxf8 36. Rd6 {
White has managed to escape into an endgame with an extra exchange. But he
remains in trouble even after winning the a-pawn, as his kingside is very
exposed to Black's pawn majority and the magic of his knights.} Nbc5 37. Ne5 a5
38. Nd7 Nxd7 39. Rxd7 Ra8 40. Ra1 a4 41. Rd5 Kf8 42. Re5 Kg7 43. Re4 Nc5 44.
Rc4 Ra5 45. Ke2 h5 46. Ra3 f5 47. Ke3 Kf6 48. Kd4 Ne6+ 49. Kc3 Re5 50. Rcxa4
Kg5 51. Kd2 h4 52. Re3 Rd5+ 53. Ke2 Nf4+ 54. Kf3 Rd1 $1 {
Threatening ...Rf1 mate!} 55. Ra2 Nd5 56. Rb3 Nf6 $1 {The knight slowly
entraps the opposing king. White attempts to counterattack but merely shortens
the game.} 57. Ra6 $2 Ng4 58. Rbb6 Rd2 $1 {The final blow.} 59. Rxg6+ Kh5 60.
Rxg4 fxg4+ 0-1

[Event "Le Touquet"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1993.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Okhotnik, V."]
[Black "Ikonnikov, V."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "72"]
[EventDate "1993.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4 cxd4 5. Bc4 {This sideline is very popular
at club level, and has therefore been given more space here than it really
deserves.} Qc7 $1 {A nice trick that immediately gives Black a good game.} 6.
Qe2 Nb6 7. Bb3 ({The more dangerous} 7. Bd3 {is considered in the next game.})
7... d3 $1 ({Not} 7... dxc3 8. Nxc3 {when the black queen is exposed on c7 and
White quickly develops both pieces and threats. Instead the pawn is used to
hinder White's development.}) 8. Qe4 Na6 $1 {Coming to c5.} 9. Nf3 $2 {
After this move White is in great difficulties.} ({
Instead Jo.Piket-Adorjan, Amsterdam 1970, saw} 9. Bf4 Qc6 $1 10. Nd2 Nc5 11.
Qf3 Qxf3 12. Ngxf3 f6 $1 13. O-O (13. exf6 gxf6 {
followed by ...e7-e5 is great for Black}) 13... d6 $1 14. exd6 e5 {
and White is already somewhat worse.}) (9. Be3 {
is probably the best move here, but still after} e6 10. Nf3 Nc5 11. Bxc5 Bxc5
12. Qxd3 d6 {Black has an easy game with the two bishops, Milner Barry-Van den
Berg, Cheltenham 1959.}) 9... Nc5 10. Qf4 {
It is already difficult for White to find good squares for his pieces.} ({After
} 10. Qh4 e6 11. O-O d5 12. exd6 Bxd6 {Black is just a pawn up with a better
position. Matulovic-Janosevic, Skopje 1956, continued} 13. Nbd2 Be7 14. Qh5 O-O
15. Ng5 h6 16. Nge4 Nxb3 17. Nxb3 e5 18. Rd1 f5 {
and Black is on his way to victory.}) 10... Nxb3 {By simple means, Black keeps
his opponent from getting at the pawn on d3. White is already in great
difficulties.} 11. axb3 d6 $1 12. Na3 a6 13. exd6 Qxd6 14. Qxd6 exd6 15. O-O
Bf5 16. Nd4 Bg6 17. f4 Be4 18. Be3 Nd5 19. Bd2 f5 {
Black has a winning position.} 20. Nc4 Be7 21. Ra5 O-O 22. Re1 b5 23. Nc6 Bh4
24. g3 bxc4 25. gxh4 Nc7 26. Nd4 cxb3 27. Kf2 Rf6 28. c4 Ne6 29. Nb5 axb5 30.
Rxa8+ Bxa8 31. cxb5 Be4 32. b6 Rf8 33. Rc1 Rb8 34. Ba5 Kf7 35. Ke3 Ke7 36. h5
Kd7 0-1

[Event "Bath"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1973.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Miles, A."]
[Black "Sax, G."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "52"]
[EventDate "1973.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4 cxd4 5. Bc4 Qc7 $1 6. Qe2 Nb6 7. Bd3 {
The bishop is better placed here for one reason only: it prevents 7...d3! as
seen in the previous game. This illustrates that White's strategy has already
gone wrong.} Nc6 8. Nf3 g6 9. O-O {
This is the only serious move. Others have a bad reputation.} ({For instance,} 
9. cxd4 $2 Nxd4 {is just plain stupid}) ({while after} 9. Bf4 Nd5 10. Bg3 Bh6
11. Qe4 dxc3 12. bxc3 Qa5 13. O-O f5 14. Qh4 Bg7 {
Black was already much better in Pasman-Gutman, Israeli Ch., 1984.}) 9... dxc3
{Black has to accept the pawn sacrifice now as White would otherwise get a
powerful centre. But acceptance is not as dangerous for Black as in the
previous game, since on d3 the white bishop has no direct threats against the
black king. Still, White does have some compensation for the pawn. Nothing
comes for free.} 10. Nxc3 Bg7 11. Re1 {Two other moves have also been tested:}
(11. Nb5 {(the beginning of a dubious plan)} Qd8 12. Nd6+ {
(this seems far from dangerous for Black)} exd6 13. Bg5 Nd4 $1 {
is the magic that saves Black:} 14. -- (14. Nxd4 {
loses as can be seen in the following game:} Qxg5 15. exd6+ Kf8 16. Nb5 Nd5 (
16... Bf6 17. f4 Qc5+ 18. Kh1 Nd5 {also won in Short-Cummings, Brighton 1977})
17. Rfe1 Bf6 18. Bc4 Nf4 19. Qe8+ Kg7 20. Qxf7+ Kh6 21. g3 b6 22. Re4 Nh3+ 23.
Kf1 Qf5 24. f4 Bb7 25. Be6 dxe6 26. Qxb7 Qxb5+ 27. Kg2 Qxb2+ 28. Kxh3 Qxa1 29.
g4 Qc3+ 30. Kg2 Qd2+ 31. Kg3 Qc3+ 32. Kg2 Rac8 33. g5+ Kh5 34. Re1 Qd2+ 35. Kf1
Qxf4+ {0-1 Eschenbrenner-Muth, Hessen 1990.}) (14. Qd2 Nxf3+ 15. gxf3 f6 16.
exf6 Bxf6 17. Rfe1+ Kf7 18. Qf4 Rf8 19. Qh4 Rh8 20. Qf4 Rf8 21. Qh4 Kg8 22.
Bxg6 hxg6 23. Qh6 Bxg5 24. Qxg6+ Kh8 25. Re4 Qf6 26. Qh5+ Qh6 27. Qg4 d5 28.
Re2 d6 {(White has no bullets left!) 0-1 Freeman-Watts, Brighton 1984.})) (11.
Bf4 $5 O-O 12. Rac1 Qd8 13. Rfd1 ({probably stronger is} 13. Ne4 Nd5 14. Bg3 b6
15. Bc4 Nc7 16. Rfd1 Qe8 17. a3 Bb7 18. b4 Ne6 19. Qe3 Rc8 {, when White's
spatial advantage and Black's extra pawn balance each other out, Hedke-Kern,
Germany 1988}) 13... d5 $1 14. exd6 exd6 15. h3 Be6 {(the following
complications seem favourable for Black, but in this life there are few
guarantees)} 16. Nb5 Bxa2 17. Nxd6 Qf6 18. Bg3 Bd5 19. Be4 Bxe4 20. Qxe4 Qxb2
21. Nxb7 Nd8 22. Bd6 f5 23. Qe7 Nf7 24. Ba3 Qb3 25. Qb4 Qxb4 26. Bxb4 Rfc8 27.
Na5 Rxc1 28. Rxc1 Rc8 {and Black has successfully defended his extra pawn,
Ulmer-Weindl, Dornbirn 1988.}) 11... O-O 12. Bg5 d5 13. exd6 Qxd6 14. Rad1 Qb4
15. Qd2 $2 {With this move White begins the misplacement of all his pieces.} ({
It was necessary to play} 15. Bxe7 Nxe7 16. Qxe7 Bxc3 17. bxc3 Qxc3 18. Bb5 $1
{when White retains good compensation for his pawn, but no more than that.})
15... Rd8 16. Qc1 Be6 17. Bh6 Bh8 $1 {Black is now fully developed and White
has no threats to compensate for his missing pawn.} 18. Re4 Qa5 19. Rh4 $2 {
Of course this attack is completely stupid.} Nb4 20. Bb1 Rxd1+ 21. Nxd1 Rc8 22.
Qd2 Nc4 23. Qe1 Bf6 $1 24. Re4 Bf5 25. a3 Bxe4 26. axb4 Qh5 0-1

[Event "Santo Antonio"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Frois, A."]
[Black "Yakovich, Y."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "52"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4 cxd4 5. Qxd4 $5 {This move does not have
many supporters and is not really dangerous for Black. But the queen capture
is better than its reputation, so it should not be underestimated!} e6 6. Nf3 (
6. Bc4 Nc6 7. Qe4 d6 $1 8. Nf3 dxe5 9. Nxe5 Bd6 10. Nxc6 bxc6 11. O-O O-O 12.
Nd2 e5 {was fine for Black in Handoko-Martin Gonzales, Lucerne 1982.}) 6... Nc6
7. Qe4 f5 {This is Black's most aggressive way to play.} ({Also okay is} 7...
d6 8. exd6 Nf6 {
followed by ...Bxd6 with a good game, but that is another story.}) 8. exf6 (8.
Qe2 $1 {is to be found in Rusanov-Brodsky.}) 8... Nxf6 9. Qh4 d5 10. Bd3 Bd6 {
Black is completely indifferent to the possibility of losing castling rights.
As we shall see, he is correct - the big centre is more important by far.} 11.
Bg6+ (11. Bg5 {is seen in Vorotnikov-Sveshnikov.}) 11... Ke7 12. Bc2 h6 {
Threatening ...g7-g5.} 13. Bg6 Bd7 14. O-O (14. Bf4 e5 15. Bg3 Be8 16. Bxe8
Rxe8 17. Qa4 Kf7 18. O-O e4 {
also gave Black a better game in Novopashin-Sveshnikov, Volgodonsk 1981.})
14... Be8 15. Bxe8 Qxe8 16. Nd4 {
White still has no peace in which to concentrate on his own development.} ({
After} 16. c4 g5 $1 17. Qh3 g4 {
White lost in Kartmann-Schneider, Bruchkoebel 1993.}) 16... Kf7 17. Be3 Ne5 18.
f3 Nc4 19. Bc1 e5 {Black has an overwhelming advantage due to his powerful
centre and lead in development.} 20. Nb3 Qb5 21. Re1 Bc7 22. Kh1 a5 23. N3d2
Nxb2 24. Na3 Qa4 25. c4 Nd3 26. Re3 Qd1+ 0-1

[Event "Lvov"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1983.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Vorotnikov, V."]
[Black "Sveshnikov, E."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "84"]
[EventDate "1983.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4 cxd4 5. Qxd4 e6 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. Qe4 f5 ({
There is a minor issue here. It seems that Sveshnikov actually played} 7... f6
$5 {. Of course this might be a misprint as it made no difference to the game
after White's} 8. exf6 {, but it might also be a very clever idea.} ({
It seems there is one game of independent importance with 7...f6: Gabriel-Walek,
Czech League 1995, saw} 8. Bc4 Nb6 9. Bb3 Be7 10. O-O fxe5 11. Nxe5 d5 12. Qf4
Nxe5 13. Qxe5 O-O 14. Nd2 Bd6 15. Qh5 g6 16. Qe2 Qh4 17. g3 Qf6 18. f4 Bd7 19.
Nf3 a6 {and Black had a good position.})) ({
If, for some reason, you do not want to play the line with} 7... f5 8. Qe2 {
, then 7...f6 is an less tested but apparently promising alternative.}) 8. exf6
Nxf6 9. Qh4 d5 10. Bd3 Bd6 11. Bg5 $5 Kf7 $1 {This way of protecting f6 and
preparing ...h7-h6 is very strong. White is soon fighting for his survival.}
12. Nd4 $6 {This brings no joy. Other possibilities are:} (12. Nbd2 h6 13. Bxf6
Qxf6 14. Qxf6+ gxf6 ({but} 14... Kxf6 $1 {followed by simply ...Bc8-d7 would
give Black a better game with the two bishops}) 15. Nd4 Rg8 16. g3 Nxd4 17.
cxd4 {with an unclear position in Lazar-Gropp, Szolnok 1997.}) (12. Na3 h6 13.
Nb5 Bb8 14. Be3 e5 15. Be2 e4 16. Nd2 g5 {
and Black is already winning a piece, Briggs-Wilson, London 1994.}) (12. O-O e5
13. Bxf6 Qxf6 14. Qxf6+ gxf6 15. Nh4 e4 16. Bc2 f5 17. f3 Bc5+ 18. Kh1 Kg7 {
was also better for Black, Szymanowska-Maszota, Zakopane 2001.}) 12... h6 13.
Be3 Ne5 14. Bc2 g5 15. Qh3 Ng6 16. g3 $6 {
This leaves the queen in an awkward spot and weakens the kingside.} ({
Still, after} 16. O-O e5 17. Nf5 Ne7 {Black is much better.}) 16... e5 17. Nf5
Ne7 18. f3 (18. Nxd6+ Qxd6 19. Qf1 Bf5 {would give Black a clear advantage.
The white bishop on e3 is by no means superior to either of the black knights.}
) 18... d4 $1 {
Opening up the position and thereby exploiting his lead in development.} 19.
Bf2 ({After} 19. cxd4 exd4 20. Bxd4 Nxf5 21. Bxf5 Qa5+ {
Black picks up the bishop on f5.}) 19... Nxf5 20. Bxf5 Qb6 $1 ({As} 20... Qb6
21. b3 {fails to} Qc6 $1 {
attacking both f3 and c3, White must now give up all of his queenside.}) 21.
Nd2 Qxb2 22. Rd1 Qxc3 23. O-O Bxf5 24. Qxf5 Qc8 25. Qb1 Qc6 26. Rc1 Qd5 27. Ne4
Rad8 28. g4 Nxe4 29. fxe4 Qe6 30. Qxb7+ Kg6 31. Bg3 Rh7 32. Qa6 Qxg4 33. Rc6
Rhd7 34. Qc4 Re7 35. Qa6 Qd7 36. Rc2 d3 37. Rd2 Qe6 38. Kg2 Bb4 39. Qxe6+ Rxe6
40. Rdd1 d2 41. Rf5 Rc8 42. Kf3 Rc1 0-1

[Event "St Petersburg"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Rusanov, M."]
[Black "Brodsky, M."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "102"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4 cxd4 5. Qxd4 e6 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. Qe4 f5 8. Qe2
(8. Qc2 $6 {is inappropriate, as after} Qc7 $1 {
White could not come up with anything better than} 9. Qe2 {
in Baran-Swic, Lodz 1996.}) 8... Qc7 9. g3 (9. Nbd2 {
is slightly tricky. It allows an immediate draw with} Nf4 10. Qe3 Nd5 11. Qe2
Nf4 12. Qe3 {but if Black gets too greedy he might drift into a worse position:
} Ng6 13. Nc4 b5 14. Nd6+ Bxd6 15. exd6 Qxd6 16. Bxb5 {
and White is a little better off, Castillo-Cacho Reigadas, Lleida 1991.}) ({
Instead,} 9. h4 {seems like a joke, and is indeed just a waste of time after}
b6 10. g3 Bb7 11. Bg2 Ncb4 $1 {(threatening ...Ba6)} 12. c4 b5 13. Na3 bxc4 14.
Nxc4 Nb6 {and White is under pressure, Doncevic-Volke, Baden-Baden 1999.}) 9...
b5 {As this is just one of several good plans here, the line can never be
considered dangerous for Black.} (9... d6 {
is more standard but with a greater likelihood of a draw.}) 10. Bg2 a5 11. O-O
Ba6 {Black prepares the break ...b5-b4. He should be okay if he times this
correctly, but he can also get into trouble.} 12. Bf4 $6 {As we shall soon see,
allowing the exchange ...Nxf4 is not good for White. Other possibilities are:}
(12. Rd1 Bc5 13. Nbd2 b4 ({probably too soon; better is} 13... O-O) 14. c4 O-O
15. Qe1 {
and here White might have a small advantage, Canal-Kramer, Beverwijk 1963.}) ({
After} 12. Re1 Bc5 {White has numerous tries:} 13. -- (13. Nbd2 O-O 14. Nf1 (
14. Nb3 Bb6 15. Nbd4 b4 {is a very good version of the ...b5-b4 break for
Black, Kranzl-Stanec, Aschach 1997}) 14... b4 15. Qc2 (15. c4 Nd4 16. Nxd4 Bxd4
{was also good for Black in C.Graf-Lisko, Bad Wiessee 1999}) 15... bxc3 16.
bxc3 Rab8 {
and Black seems to be better placed, Zaitsev-Schneider, Germany 1995.}) (13.
Ng5 b4 14. c4 Nd4 15. Qd3 h6 16. Nh3 {and now} b3 {
was unclear in Rogers-Van der Sterren, Eerbeek 1978,} ({
but Black could have played the following explosive combination:} 16... Bxc4 $3
17. Qxc4 Nf3+ 18. Kf1 ({if} 18. Bxf3 Bxf2+ 19. Nxf2 Qxc4 {
and the pawns would ensure Black the advantage}) 18... Nxe1 19. Bxd5 exd5 20.
Qxd5 Rc8 21. Kxe1 {(otherwise ...Nc2 is coming)} Bxf2+ 22. Nxf2 Qxc1+ 23. Nd1
Qc5 $1 24. Qxc5 Rxc5 25. Nd2 Rxe5+ {and Black has the advantage in the endgame.
})) (13. Nh4 {(the knight seems to be going astray out here!)} O-O 14. Qd1 (14.
Bxd5 exd5 15. Nd2 f4 {was terrible for White in H.Appel-Meissner, Germany 1996}
) 14... f4 15. g4 f3 16. Nxf3 Nf4 17. Bxf4 Rxf4 {and the pressure on the
f-file more than counterbalances the loss of a pawn, Garbett-Hamilton,
Melbourne 1993.}) (13. b3 O-O 14. Bb2 (14. a3 Nce7 15. Bb2 Ba7 16. Nbd2 f4 17.
g4 Ng6 {gives Black a good position, Deviatkin-Turov, St Petersburg 1999})
14... a4 $5 {(this is very interesting; now both queen's bishops become weak)}
15. b4 Ba7 16. Na3 Rab8 17. Rad1 Nce7 18. Qd3 h6 19. Nd4 f4 {
with an unclear game ahead, Benko-Soria, Mar del Plata 1972.})) 12... Be7 13.
Nbd2 O-O 14. Rfe1 b4 $1 {The break is correctly timed. First Black had to
develop; now he takes control of the central dark squares.} 15. c4 Nxf4 16.
gxf4 a4 17. Red1 Rad8 18. b3 Rfe8 19. bxa4 d5 $1 {Perfectly timed again. First
the rooks are put on good squares, then comes the break.} 20. Rdc1 dxc4 21.
Nxc4 Na5 {and Black wins material.} 22. Nxa5 Qxc1+ 23. Rxc1 Bxe2 24. Nc6 Rd1+
25. Rxd1 Bxd1 26. a5 Be2 27. Nfd4 Bc4 28. Nc2 Bc5 29. N2xb4 Bxb4 30. Nxb4 Rb8
31. a3 Rb5 32. a6 Ra5 33. Bb7 Rxa3 34. f3 Kf7 35. Kf2 Ke8 36. Ke1 Kd7 37. Nc2
Ra5 38. Nb4 Kc7 39. Kd2 Ra3 40. Nc2 Rd3+ 41. Ke1 Kb6 42. h3 Rd8 43. Na3 Bxa6
44. Bxa6 Kxa6 45. Ke2 Kb6 46. Nc4+ Kc5 47. Nd6 Rb8 48. Kf2 Kd4 49. Kg3 Ke3 50.
Nf7 Rb1 51. Nd8 Rg1+ 0-1

[Event "New York"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Colding, E."]
[Black "Grischuk, A."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "56"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4 cxd4 5. cxd4 {White's idea in this game is
very offbeat and for a good reason: only Black has the chance of an advantage.}
({After 7...Nc6 White normally plays 8 Nf3, transposing to the main line} 5.
Nf3 Nc6 6. cxd4 d6 7. Bc4 Nb6 8. Bb5 {, in Antonio-Ki.Georgiev and
Sadler-Shirov, but other moves have been attempted.}) 5... d6 6. Bc4 (6. exd6
e6 {is standard stuff, without danger for Black.}) 6... Nb6 7. Bb5+ ({Or} 7.
Bb3 dxe5 8. Qh5 ({after} 8. dxe5 Qxd1+ 9. Bxd1 Nc6 10. f4 Bf5 {
Black is well placed for the endgame}) 8... e6 9. dxe5 Nc6 10. Nf3 Qd3 11. Nc3
Bb4 12. Bd2 Na5 $1 13. O-O-O $6 ({safer is} 13. Bd1 Nac4 14. Be2 Qg6) 13...
Nxb3+ 14. axb3 Bd7 15. Qh4 Bxc3 16. Bxc3 Qg6 {
with a clear advantage to Black, Tong Yuanming-Alterman, Beijing 1995.}) 7...
Nc6 8. d5 ({Rozentalis-Sadler, Hastings 1997/98, saw} 8. Nc3 $2 dxe5 9. d5 a6
10. Ba4 Nxa4 11. Qxa4 b5 12. Nxb5 Bd7 13. Nc3 Nd4 14. Qd1 Bf5 $1 {and there is
no doubt that Black is better. That Rozentalis could find nothing better than}
15. Kf1 {
illustrates how much White's strategy has failed. He also lost horribly.}) (8.
exd6 {is probably the only serious move besides 8 Nf3. After} Qxd6 9. Nc3 {
it has been suggested that Black simply plays} e6 10. Nf3 Be7 11. O-O O-O {
and he should be fine.}) 8... a6 9. e6 {This is the idea behind White's moves
but as we shall see, it is not at all dangerous.} axb5 10. exf7+ Kxf7 11. dxc6
bxc6 12. Nf3 Qd7 13. O-O e5 {
Black already has a clear advantage due to his grand centre and two bishops.}
14. Nc3 Be7 15. Re1 Qd8 16. Ne4 h6 17. Qc2 Qc7 18. b3 Rf8 19. Bb2 Kg8 20. a4
bxa4 21. bxa4 Bg4 22. Nfd2 Kh8 23. Rac1 Rac8 24. a5 Nd5 25. Ng3 Rxf2 26. Ngf1
Qa7 27. Kh1 Nf4 28. Qb3 Rb8 0-1

[Event "Amsterdam"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2001.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Afek, Y."]
[Black "Van Wely, L."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "112"]
[EventDate "2001.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. Nf3 Nc6 5. d4 cxd4 6. cxd4 {This is quite
popular these days, but is generally considered less important than 6 Bc4 in
theoretical works.} d6 7. Nc3 (7. Bc4 {is examined in the next two games.})
7... dxe5 8. dxe5 Nxc3 $1 {The endgame is in no way dangerous for Black.} 9.
Qxd8+ Nxd8 10. bxc3 Bd7 11. Rb1 {White has tried numerous alternatives:} (11.
Be3 g6 {and now:} 12. -- (12. Rb1 Bg7 13. Bb5 Bxb5 14. Rxb5 a6 15. Rb6 Rc8 {
was fine in Sveshnikov-Gutman, Hastings 1984/85}) ({, while} 12. Bd4 Ne6 13.
Rb1 b6 14. Bb5 Bxb5 15. Rxb5 Rc8 {was better for Black in Boe-Pedersen, Nyborg
2001. White got some chances after Black mysteriously exchanged his powerful
knight for the awkward white bishop, without in any way being forced to do so.
Probably Black's next move should be 16...Rc4.}) ({. Finally, after} 12. O-O-O
Bg7 13. Bc4 Bc6 (13... Rc8 {also looks good}) {, White tried a pawn sacrifice
in Nehlert-Lagunow, Porz 1991, but it did not bring him enough compensation:}
14. Ng5 e6 15. f4 Bxg2 16. Rhg1 Bc6 17. Bc5 h6 18. Nh3 {
and Black's chances are better.})) (11. Bd3 Rc8 12. Bd2 g6 13. O-O Bg7 14. Rfe1
O-O 15. Nd4 Ne6 16. f4 Rfd8 {gave Black a slight advantage in O'Donnell-Kozul,
Toronto 1990. From this game it is easy to conclude that if White does not
develop an immediate initiative, then Black will have time to put pressure on
the weak c-pawn and thereby claim a small edge.}) (11. Nd4 Rc8 {
is another major line with many possibilities.} 12. -- ({. For example,} 12.
Be3 a6 13. Kd2 e6 14. f4 Bc5 15. Bd3 O-O {
was roughly equal in Sveshnikov-Lanka, Bratislava 1996.}) ({
. Similarly, in Keitlinghaus-Gallagher, German League 1999:} 12. f4 g6 13. h4
h5 14. Be3 a6 15. Kd2 Ne6 16. Be2 Nc5 17. Bf3 e6 18. Nb3 Nxb3+ 19. axb3 Bc6 {
and a draw is inevitable after the bishops are exchanged.}) ({. However,} 12.
Bb2 $6 {is obviously not a good move. Black was better after} Nc6 13. f4 Nxd4
14. cxd4 Rc2 15. Bc1 e6 16. Bd2 Bc6 {in Christensen-Rytshagov, Stockholm 1990.}
) ({. And exchanging on d4 is not the only promising strategy. Ruchieva-Baklan,
Alushta 1999, saw} 12. Rb1 a6 13. e6 $5 fxe6 14. Be2 g6 15. O-O Bg7 16. Bb2 e5
17. Nf3 e4 18. Nd4 e5 19. Nb3 Be6 {and Black is well placed.} (19... --)))
11... Rc8 12. Be3 a6 13. Kd2 e6 14. Bd3 Bc5 {
Black neutralizes White's pressure bit by bit.} ({Best now is} 14... Bc5 15.
Nd4 $1 {with an unclear position - White has some weaknesses, but Black needs
to develop completely before he can exploit them, and that might not be so
easy.}) 15. Rhe1 $6 Bxe3+ 16. Rxe3 h6 17. Nd4 Rc7 18. Rb6 Bc6 $1 {Black is close to freeing himself, and it seems that White cannot prevent it anymore.} 19.
Be4 Bxe4 20. Rxe4 Kd7 21. f4 g6 22. Re3 Rc5 23. Rd3 Kc7 24. Rd6 Ra5 25. Nc2
Rxa2 26. Rd7+ Kc8 27. Re7 g5 28. g3 Rg8 29. Rf3 gxf4 30. Rxf4 Nc6 31. Rexf7
Rd8+ 32. Kc1 Nxe5 33. Rf8 Nd3+ 34. Kb1 Rb2+ 35. Ka1 Rxc2 36. Rc4+ Nc5 $1 {
. Black had calculated everything and now has a won rook endgame.} 37. Rxc5+
Kd7 38. Rxd8+ Kxd8 39. h3 Kd7 40. Kb1 Kd6 41. Rh5 Rxc3 42. g4 b5 43. Rxh6 a5
44. g5 a4 45. Rh8 Rg3 46. h4 Rg4 47. Kc2 Kc5 48. Kd3 a3 49. Kc3 b4+ 50. Kb3
Rg3+ 51. Ka2 Rg2+ 52. Kb1 b3 53. Rc8+ Kb4 54. Rb8+ Kc3 55. Rc8+ Kd3 56. Rd8+
Ke2 0-1

[Event "Yerevan Olympiad"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1996.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Antonio, R."]
[Black "Georgiev, Kir"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "194"]
[EventDate "1996.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4 cxd4 5. cxd4 ({
Of course the natural route is} 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. cxd4 d6 {and only then} 7. Bc4
Nb6 8. Bb5 {.}) 5... d6 6. Bc4 Nb6 7. Bb5+ Nc6 8. Nf3 {
Reaching the standard position via the move order noted in Colding-Grischuk.}
dxe5 9. Nxe5 Bd7 10. Bxc6 (10. Nxd7 {is considered in the next game.}) 10...
Bxc6 ({After} 10... bxc6 {the black bishop looks stupid on d7.}) 11. Nxc6 (11.
O-O Rc8 12. Nc3 g6 13. Qb3 Nd5 14. Nxd5 Qxd5 15. Nxc6 bxc6 16. Qb7 Qd7 {
was completely equal in Dinic-Brajovic, Nis 1996 - which is the case with of a
lot of positions after 6 cxd4.}) 11... bxc6 12. Nc3 {
The most natural square for the knight.} ({In Remizov-Baikov, Moscow 1998,
White tested the plan of controlling the c-file by} 12. Be3 g6 13. Nd2 Bg7 14.
Nb3 O-O 15. Rc1 Qd5 {, but Black's pressure on d4 and (potentially) down the
b-file is more important than White's control over c5.}) ({
An important alternative for White is} 12. O-O g6 13. Re1 Bg7 14. Bg5 {and now:
} -- (14... O-O 15. Bxe7 Qxd4 16. Qxd4 Bxd4 17. Nd2 {
(Dolmatov-Alterman, Pardubice 1993) and now Alterman recommends} Rfb8 {
with equality.}) ({. 'ECO' gives} 14... Nc8 15. Qf3 O-O 16. Nc3 Rb8 {
with an equal position.} (16... --))) 12... g6 13. Qf3 {
The queen does not appear to be especially well placed here.} ({Also dubious is
} 13. Bf4 $6 Bg7 14. Qf3 O-O 15. Be5 f6 16. Bg3 Qxd4 17. Qxc6 f5 18. O-O Qc4
19. Qxc4+ Nxc4 {and Black is much better, Buljovcic-Deze, Novi Sad 1979.}) ({
White should probably try} 13. O-O Bg7 14. -- ({, and then} 14. Qf3 Qd7 15. Bg5
O-O 16. Rfe1 Rfe8 17. Rad1 Rad8 {is equal. In Mufic-Lisenko, Medulin 1997,
White tried getting a little funky with} 18. Re4 $5 {, but after} h6 19. Bf4
Nd5 20. Be5 f6 21. Bg3 Nxc3 22. bxc3 {a draw was agreed.}) ({
. Vokac-Smejkal, Marianske Lazne 1978, was also equal after} 14. Be3 O-O 15. Rc1
({Zimmermann-Ye Jiangchuan, Bern 1995, saw instead} 15. Qd3 a5 $1 16. Rfd1 a4
17. Rac1 Qd7 18. h3 Rfd8 {and Black could be happy with his position - the
a-pawn dominates the two white pawns on the queenside and assists in Black's
plan of putting pressure on b2}) 15... Nc4 16. Qf3 Nxb2 17. Qe2 Rb8 18. Rc2 Qa5
19. Rfc1 Na4 20. Nxa4 Qxa4) ({. Finally} 14. Bg5 $2 {
is ill advised. Huenerkopf-Yakovich, Munich 1992, continued} Bxd4 15. Qf3 f6
16. Qxc6+ Kf7 17. Qf3 Bxc3 18. bxc3 Qd5 19. Qxd5+ Nxd5 20. c4 Nb6 {
and White, with the clearly inferior minor piece, had a very difficult endgame.
})) 13... Rc8 14. Be3 Bg7 15. O-O O-O 16. Rfd1 Nc4 $1 {As all White's
weaknesses are on dark squares, it makes perfect sense to exchange his
otherwise silly bishop. An old saying claims that the worst bishop is still
better than the best knight. Although this is not entirely true, there is some
wisdom in it.} 17. Qe2 Nxe3 18. fxe3 e6 19. Rac1 Qa5 20. a3 Rfd8 21. Ne4 e5 $1
{Creating White's dark square weaknesses by destroying his pawn centre.} 22.
Nc5 Qb6 23. dxe5 Rxd1+ 24. Qxd1 Qxb2 25. e6 fxe6 26. Nxe6 Qxa3 27. Qd2 ({If} 
27. Nxg7 Qxe3+ {wins another pawn.}) 27... Bh6 28. Nf4 Re8 29. Rxc6 Qxe3+ 30.
Qxe3 Rxe3 {
Black has a virtually winning endgame with an extra pawn and a powerful bishop.
} 31. Nd5 Re1+ 32. Kf2 Re5 33. Nf6+ Kg7 34. Ng4 Rf5+ 35. Ke2 Bg5 36. Ra6 Rf7
37. Kd3 Bf4 38. g3 Bb8 39. Ra2 Bd6 40. Kc4 Rc7+ 41. Kd5 Bc5 42. Ne5 Bg1 43. Ke6
Rc8 44. h4 Re8+ 45. Kd6 Bd4 46. Nc6 Bb6 47. g4 Re4 48. Ne5 Rf4 49. Kd5 Rd4+ 50.
Ke6 Bc5 51. Ra6 Bb6 52. Ra2 Rf4 53. Kd5 Rf1 54. Ke6 Rf2 55. Ra4 Re2 56. Rc4 Kh6
57. Kd5 Rh2 58. Nf3 Rh1 59. Ke4 Rd1 60. h5 gxh5 61. Rc6+ Kg7 62. g5 h4 63. Kf4
h3 64. Kg4 Rh1 65. Rc2 Kf7 66. Kg3 Ke6 67. Rc6+ Kd5 68. Rh6 Bc7+ 69. Kf2 h2 70.
Rxh7 Rc1 $6 {Tricky.} ({The pawn endgame after} 70... Rc1 71. Nxh2 ({
but White might try} 71. g6 $5) 71... Bxh2 72. Rxh2 Rc2+ {etc is easily won.})
({More accurate was} 70... Rb1 $1 {, when Black has ...Rb8 if necessary.}) 71.
Nxh2 $2 Bxh2 72. Kf3 Bc7 73. Ke2 Bb6 74. Kd3 Rg1 75. Rg7 Ke5 76. Kc4 Kf5 77.
Rf7+ Kxg5 78. Kb5 Kg6 79. Rf8 Rg5+ 80. Ka4 Rf5 81. Rg8+ Kf7 82. Rh8 Ke6 83. Rh4
Kd7 84. Rh6 Kc7 85. Rg6 Kb7 86. Rg4 Kc6 87. Rg6+ Kc5 88. Kb3 Rf3+ 89. Ka4 Rf4+
90. Kb3 Kb5 91. Rg8 a5 92. Ka2 Rf2+ 93. Kb1 Bc5 94. Rb8+ Kc4 95. Rc8 a4 96. Rc7
a3 97. Rd7 Bb4 0-1

[Event "Monte Carlo (blindfold)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1998.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Sadler, M."]
[Black "Shirov, A."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "37"]
[EventDate "1998.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. Nf3 Nc6 5. d4 cxd4 6. cxd4 d6 7. Bc4 Nb6 8. Bb5
({Also possible is} 8. Bb3 {, but this is not dangerous against precise play:}
dxe5 9. d5 Na5 10. Nc3 Nxb3 11. Qxb3 e6 12. Nxe5 exd5 13. Be3 Bd6 14. Qb5+ Kf8
15. O-O-O Be6 16. Nf3 Rc8 {and White has yet to prove that he has enough for
the pawn. The game Rechel-Kragel, Kecskemet 1999, continued} 17. Kb1 Nc4 $1 18.
Nxd5 a6 19. Qb3 Qa5 $1 {and Black took over the initiative.}) 8... dxe5 9. Nxe5
Bd7 10. Nxd7 ({This ought to be more promising than} 10. Bxc6 {, but apparently
not. Black's immediate counterplay against d4 is too important to give White
any chance of an advantage.}) 10... Qxd7 11. Nc3 e6 (11... Rd8 12. O-O $1 Qxd4
13. Qb3 e6 14. Bg5 $1 {Godena-Rechlis, Eupen 1994) is a good example of why
Black should concentrate on development and not on making threats while his
king is still stuck in the centre. White, of course, has a powerful initiative
for the sacrificed pawn.}) 12. O-O {
White, too, should develop before he thinks of anything else.} ({After} 12. Qg4
h5 ({equally interesting is} 12... a6 13. Bxc6 Qxc6 14. O-O h5 15. Qe2 Be7 16.
Be3 h4 17. Rac1 h3 18. gxh3 Rxh3 19. Qg4 {
with an unclear game, Sveshnikov-Kovalev, Budapest 1989}) 13. Qf3 a6 14. Bxc6
Qxc6 15. Qxc6+ bxc6 16. Ke2 Kd7 17. Ne4 Nd5 18. Bd2 Be7 19. Rhc1 {
the players agreed a draw in Sveshnikov-Shirov, Val Maubuee 1994.}) 12... Be7
13. Qg4 O-O 14. Rd1 {White has no advantage.} ({
Another way to an equal position was} 14. Bxc6 bxc6 15. Bh6 Bf6 16. Rfd1 Kh8
17. Ne4 Qe7 18. Bg5 Bxg5 19. Qxg5 Qb4 20. b3 Rfd8 21. Qh5 f6 22. Nc5 Rxd4 23.
Nxe6 Rxd1+ 24. Rxd1 Qe7 25. Nf4 Qe4 26. g3 g5 27. Qe2 Qxe2 28. Nxe2 c5 {
½-½ Godena-Ki.Georgiev, Bastia 1999.}) 14... Rfd8 15. Bh6 Bf8 ({There is no
thing wrong with the text move, but Black can also keep the game alive with} 
15... g6 $5 {. For example:} 16. Rac1 $6 Rac8 17. h4 a6 18. Bxc6 Rxc6 19. Bg5
Rc4 20. Ne2 Rdc8 21. Rxc4 Rxc4 {
and Black had an edge in Emms-Macieja, European Team Ch., Batumi 1999.}) 16.
Bg5 {White is in danger of sitting with a weak pawn on d4 without anything to
show for it. Therefore he decides to force a draw.} Be7 17. Bh6 Bf8 18. Bg5 Be7
19. Bh6 1/2-1/2

[Event "Frankfurt"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Rabiega, R."]
[Black "Van Wely, L."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "124"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. Nf3 Nc6 5. d4 cxd4 6. Bc4 {
This is the main line for 2 c3 Nf6.} Nb6 7. Bb3 d5 $1 {The best move by far.} (
{After} 7... dxc3 $6 8. Nxc3 {it will be difficult for Black ever to develop
his pieces, while White has very easy play. Clear advantage to White is a
reasonable assessment.}) 8. exd6 (8. cxd4 $6 Bg4 $1 {gives Black a good game.})
8... Qxd6 (8... dxc3 $2 9. Nxc3 exd6 10. Ng5 d5 {
was once popular, but White soon developed his initiative with} 11. O-O Be7 12.
Qh5 {and Black lost some horrible games in a very few moves, after which the
variation was never seen again.}) 9. Na3 $5 {This line is quite tricky, but
Black need not fear entering battle with open claws.} dxc3 $1 ({
Taking the pawn is obviously critical, though} 9... a6 {followed by} 10. -- e6
{should lead to equality without too many problems.}) 10. Nb5 $5 ({
The only move to cause Black any trouble is} 10. Qe2 {
, as seen in the next game.}) ({Another line is} 10. Qxd6 exd6 11. Nb5 Rb8 ({
this seems very solid, but also possible is} 11... cxb2 $5 12. Bxb2 Rb8 13. Ng5
Nd8 14. O-O Be6 15. Rfe1 Kd7 16. Nxe6 fxe6 17. Nxa7 d5 18. Bd4 Nc8 19. Ba4+ Nc6
20. Nxc6 $2 bxc6 21. Rec1 Ne7 22. Bc5 Ra8 23. Bd1 Nf5 {
and Black succeeded in beating off the enemy forces in Jahn-Gallati, Baden 1997
}) 12. Ng5 ({or} 12. bxc3 a6 13. Nc7+ Kd8 14. Nd5 Nxd5 15. Bxd5 Be6 16. Bg5+
Kc7 17. O-O-O Bxd5 18. Rxd5 Be7 {
and White's initiative faded in S.Lalic-Sakhatova, Port Erin 1994}) 12... Ne5
13. O-O Be7 14. bxc3 O-O 15. Rd1 Nbc4 16. Bf4 Bf5 17. Nxd6 $5 {
(White has to do something - anything!)} Bxd6 18. Rxd6 Nxd6 19. Bxe5 Rbd8 20.
Rd1 Nc4 $1 {and Black gradually converted his material to a full point,
Jonkman-Van den Doel, Alphen aan den Rijn 1995.}) 10... Qxd1+ 11. Kxd1 ({
The alternative is no more promising:} 11. Bxd1 cxb2 12. Bxb2 Nc4 13. Bc3 Rb8
14. Bb3 Nd6 15. Nxd6+ exd6 16. Ng5 Nd8 17. O-O-O Be6 18. Rhe1 Kd7 19. Ne4 Bxb3
20. axb3 Rc8 21. Kb2 Rc6 {and though White's initiative has ended, Black's
superiority in material has not, Sylvan-Sammalvuo, Roskilde 1998.}) 11... Rb8
$1 (11... cxb2 12. Bxb2 Rb8 {
is also possible, but watch what happens after the text move!}) 12. Bf4 cxb2
13. Rb1 Bf5 $1 {And Black is able to untangle himself from the threats posed
by White's minor pieces. Now White will have to spend some time to regain his
sacrificed material, which Black can use to complete his development.} 14. Nc7+
Kd7 15. Rxb2 Rd8 16. Rd2+ Kc8 17. Rxd8+ Kxd8 18. Bxf7 e5 $1 {A powerful shot
that exploits the positioning of the white knights. After the subsequent
exchanges Black is able to take over the initiative.} 19. Nxe5 Bd6 20. Nxc6+
Kxc7 21. Bxd6+ Kxd6 22. Nd4 Bd7 23. Ke2 $2 {This more or less loses the game.}
({The only move was} 23. Bb3 $1 {
to retain the bishop. Black would have a small edge after} Kc5 {
due to his activity, but there would still be a big fight going on.}) 23... Nd5
$1 ({Now after} 23... Rf8 $1 {White will have to go into an endgame with
knight against bishop. With Black's activity and extra pawn on the queenside,
this endgame will be very hard to save, especially against a player with an
extra 200 Elo points!}) 24. Rc1 Rf8 25. Bxd5 Kxd5 26. Nb3 (26. Rc7 {
would lose something after} Rf7 {.}) 26... Bb5+ 27. Ke3 Re8+ 28. Kf3 Kd6 29.
Nd4 Bd7 30. Rd1 Re5 31. Nf5+ Kc7 32. Ne3 Ra5 33. Rd2 Be6 {White is now
definitely lost. The pawn on a2 cannot be saved, even though Black waits a
while before he cashes in.} 34. Rc2+ Kd6 35. g4 g6 36. Rd2+ Ke7 37. Re2 Kf6 38.
Rc2 h5 39. gxh5 gxh5 40. Rc7 b6 41. Rh7 Bf7 42. Rh6+ Bg6 43. Rh8 Rxa2 44. Rb8
Bf7 45. h4 Rb2 46. Rb7 a5 47. Ke4 Rb4+ 48. Kd3 a4 49. Nc2 Bg6+ 50. Kc3 Rb3+ 51.
Kd2 Rb2 52. Ra7 Rxc2+ 53. Ke3 Rc4 54. f4 Rb4 55. Rc7 a3 56. Rc6+ Kf5 57. Rc3
Ra4 58. Rc1 a2 59. Ra1 Bf7 60. Kd3 Rb4 61. Rg1 Rb1 62. Rg5+ Kf6 0-1

[Event "Bucharest"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Vajda, L."]
[Black "Rogozenko, D."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "111"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. Bc4 Nb6 7. Bb3 d5 8. exd6
Qxd6 9. Na3 dxc3 10. Qe2 Bf5 $1 ({The text appears to be safer than} 10... cxb2
{, which is also quite popular and not clear at all!}) 11. Nb5 {
The only serious move since Black threatened 11...Bd3.} ({For example,} 11.
bxc3 $6 Bd3 $1 {(here the bishop is boss!)} 12. Qe3 e6 13. Bb2 Ba6 14. c4 ({if
} 14. Rd1 Qc5 {and it is hard to see White's compensation}) 14... Qb4+ {
with advantage to Black in Vajda-Cosma, Bucharest 1997.}) 11... Qd7 12. Ne5 {
The idea ...Bf5-d3 is still an issue.} Nxe5 13. Qxe5 Rc8 $1 {This has not been
examined before in chess literature, even though it is probably the best move
and has been around for some time.} 14. O-O Nc4 ({Not now} 14... Bd3 $2 15.
Nxa7 Bxf1 ({or} 15... Ra8 16. Rd1) 16. Nxc8 Nxc8 17. Kxf1 {
with a dangerous initiative.}) 15. Bxc4 Rxc4 16. Nxc3 {Probably forced.} ({
In Palkovi-Wells, Budapest 1997, White decided to walk the plank and test the
solidity of Black's idea:} 16. Bf4 f6 17. Qb8+ Rc8 18. Nc7+ Kf7 19. Qxb7 e5 20.
Qb3+ Kg6 21. Nd5 exf4 22. Nxf4+ Kh6 23. Rad1 Qc7 24. Rd4 g5 {
and it was obvious that White's attack would never be successful.}) 16... e6
17. Re1 Rc5 18. Qg3 f6 ({A slight improvement over} 18... Bg6 {, as Rogozenko
played against Vajda three months earlier. Rogozenko writes that he chose 18...
f6 because he felt it gave him a better chance to play for an advantage.}) 19.
Bf4 {White cannot allow 19...Bd6.} Kf7 {The king is quite safe here.} 20. Rad1
Qc6 21. Bd6 {White needs to prove compensation for the pawn and in this game
he was successful. Still, the feeling is that Black has more chances of
gaining an advantage.} ({Instead} 21. Rd8 Rg8 22. Red1 Be7 23. Rxg8 Kxg8 24.
Bh6 Bg6 {is given by Rogozenko as clearly better for Black.}) 21... Rc4 22. h3
(22. Bxf8 {does not work due to} Rg4 $1 23. Rd6 ({or} 23. Qh3 Rg6 {
and White will have to pay!}) 23... Rxg3 24. Rxc6 bxc6 25. hxg3 Rxf8 {
and Black will win the endgame.}) 22... e5 23. Bxf8 ({Not} 23. Bxe5 $2 fxe5 24.
Qxe5 Rc5 $1 {and Black wins.}) 23... Rxf8 24. Qe3 a6 25. Rd2 Rc8 26. Red1 Rc7
27. Rd5 ({Rogozenko recommends} 27. Rd6 Qc5 28. Qf3 Rf4 29. Qh5+ Bg6 30. Qe2 {
with compensation for the pawn. After 27 Rd5 Black gets a slightly better
endgame, although he does not manage to win.}) 27... Rd7 28. Rxd7+ Bxd7 29. Qd3
Rd4 30. Qxh7 Rxd1+ 31. Nxd1 f5 32. Qh5+ Kg8 33. Qg5 Be6 34. Nc3 Qd6 35. a3 b5
36. Qg6 Qc6 37. g4 Bd7 38. gxf5 Qxg6+ 39. fxg6 Bxh3 40. Nd5 Kf8 41. Nb4 Ke7 42.
Nxa6 Kd6 43. f3 Bf5 44. Kf2 Bxg6 45. Ke3 Bf5 46. Nb4 Be6 47. Nd3 Bb3 48. Nc1
Bd1 49. Na2 Bc2 50. Kd2 Bg6 51. b3 Bf7 52. Nc1 Bd5 53. Ke3 g5 54. a4 b4 55. Nd3
Bxb3 56. a5 1/2-1/2

[Event "Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1988.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Janovsky, S."]
[Black "Kiselev, S."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "72"]
[EventDate "1988.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. Bc4 Nb6 7. Bb3 d5 8. exd6
Qxd6 9. O-O {The most natural move. Black's reply is without doubt the best.}
Be6 $1 10. Bxe6 {This mass exchange is not the most dangerous for Black, but
it is still one of the most played lines in the 2...Nf6 variation.} Qxe6 11.
Nxd4 {White has no way of generating an attack now the light-squared bishops
have been traded off, so he regains his material. But now it is suddenly
apparent that Black is better developed.} Nxd4 12. Qxd4 Rd8 13. Qf4 {
The white queen also has other squares:} ({The main line with} 13. Qh4 {
is considered in the next game.}) (13. Qb4 Qc6 (13... Qe2 $2 {
is misplaced here, as after} 14. Qb3 $1 {everything is protected}) {, when} 14.
a4 (14. Nd2 e6 15. Qe4 Qd5 {was fine for Black in Anka-Yakovich, Stockholm 1999
}) 14... a6 15. Qb3 e6 16. Nd2 Be7 17. Nf3 O-O {was fine for Black in
Blatny-Stohl, Pardubice 1993. Only basic chess understanding is needed to play
these kinds of positions.}) (13. Qc5 Qd5 14. Be3 Qxc5 15. Bxc5 Na4 16. Bxa7
Nxb2 17. Na3 e6 18. Nb5 Na4 19. Rfd1 Bc5 20. Bxc5 Nxc5 {
and Black is no worse, Baron Isanta-Gual Pascual, Spain 1995.}) (13. Qe3 Qc6 $5
{(the white queen is not well placed on e3, so why exchange it?)} 14. Qe2 e6
15. Be3 Be7 16. Nd2 O-O {
and again Black is not worse, Nurkic-Tratar, Kastav 1999.}) 13... g6 14. Na3 $6
{This is considered refuted by the current game, but it is the only ambitious
move in the position. The other possibilities are:} (14. Nd2 Bg7 15. Nf3 Qc4
16. Re1 Qxf4 17. Bxf4 Nd5 18. Bd2 e6 {
with equality in Braga-Sorokin, La Plata 1997.}) (14. Qf3 Qd5 15. Qxd5 $6 ({
better is} 15. Nd2 Bg7 16. Re1 {with equality}) 15... Nxd5 16. Nd2 ({or} 16.
Na3 Bg7) 16... Nf4 $1 {
and Black stands slightly better, Gamback-Seeman, Helsinki 2001.}) (14. Be3 Bg7
15. Nd2 ({instead White can remove Black's right to castle by} 15. Bxb6 Qxb6
16. Qa4+ Kf8 {, but not his ability to develop:} 17. Na3 ({or} 17. Rd1 Rxd1+
18. Qxd1 Bf6 19. Qe2 Kg7 {and Black was slightly preferable because of the
potential pressure against the white queenside, in Jacek-Folk, Czech Republic
1994}) 17... Bf6 18. Nc4 Qc5 19. Qb3 Kg7 {
was good for Black in Sveshnikov-Vyzmanavin, Moscow 1987}) 15... O-O 16. Qe4
Qd7 17. Bxb6 axb6 18. Nb3 e5 19. Qb4 Qe6 {
and Black was fine, Goergens-Rodewis, Germany 1994.}) (14. a4 Bg7 15. a5 Nd5
16. Qa4+ Qd7 17. Rd1 O-O 18. Qxd7 Rxd7 19. Be3 a6 20. c4 Nb6 21. Na3 $1 Bxb2
22. axb6 Rfd8 23. Rxd7 Rxd7 24. Rb1 Bxa3 {and in Sariego-Martin del Campo,
Cienfuegos 1989, the plan of c4-c5-c6 gave White sufficient compensation for
the pawn, but no more than that.}) 14... Bg7 15. Nb5 (15. Be3 {is probably
better, but in that case 14 Na3 was without point. Sowray-Dam, Dieren 1989,
continued} O-O 16. Rfe1 Nd5 17. Qa4 Nxe3 18. Qxa7 Rd2 19. Rxe3 Qd5 {with powerful compensation for the pawn due to the many weaknesses in the white camp.
This soon led to disaster for White after} 20. Qb6 $2 Qxa2 $1 21. Ree1 Qxb2 22.
Qxb2 Rxb2 23. Nc4 Rc2 24. Rxe7 Rxc3 25. Ne5 Bf6 {0-1.}) ({
Sariego-Remon, Havana 1990, saw instead} 15. Qc7 $5 Qd7 $5 16. Qxd7+ Rxd7 17.
Be3 Na4 $1 18. Rab1 O-O 19. Bxa7 {
(otherwise the white pieces are again foolishly placed)} b6 20. Nb5 Ra8 21. b3
(21. Rfd1 Raxa7 22. Nxa7 Rxa7 23. Rd8+ Bf8 {also looks good for Black}) 21...
Nxc3 22. Nxc3 Raxa7 {and the bishop is clearly superior to the knight.}) 15...
O-O $1 16. Nxa7 $2 {This was the point, but it does not float.} ({
Better was the unambitious} 16. Nd4 {.}) 16... Qe2 $1 17. Be3 {Forced.} (17.
Qe3 $2 Qa6 18. Qc5 Qxa7 19. Be3 Rd6 {Black keeps his material.}) 17... Nd5 18.
Qf3 Qxb2 19. Rab1 Qxa2 20. Rxb7 Qa6 21. Rbb1 Nxc3 {
Black has won a pawn and goes on to win the game.} 22. Qb7 Qd3 23. Rbe1 Rd7 24.
Qf3 e5 25. Bc5 e4 26. Qe3 Ra8 27. Nc6 Qc4 28. Ne7+ Kh8 29. Qh3 Rd3 30. Be3 Qc7
31. Qh4 Rd7 32. Bg5 Ra5 33. Bf6 Rh5 34. Bxg7+ Kxg7 35. Qg4 Rxe7 36. Rc1 Qxh2#
0-1

[Event "Israel"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1986.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kotliar, M."]
[Black "Brook, O."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "102"]
[EventDate "1986.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. Bc4 Nb6 7. Bb3 d6 8. exd6
Qxd6 9. O-O Be6 10. Bxe6 Qxe6 11. Nxd4 Nxd4 12. Qxd4 Rd8 13. Qh4 Qe2 {
This was for a long time considered to be the main line in the 2 c3 Nf6
Sicilian. But practice proved that Black is in no danger, so White started to
look at earlier deviations. Nevertheless, Black needs to be careful in order
to complete his development safely.} 14. Be3 {
This is considered critical. The alternatives are:} (14. Qg3 e6 15. Nd2 Bd6 $5
{(speculative since White has no obvious weaknesses, but Black's lead in
development offers fair compensation)} 16. Qxg7 Be5 17. Qg5 Rd3 18. Nf3 ({
less good is} 18. Nb3 h6 19. Qh4 Rd1 20. Nd2 Rxd2 21. Bxd2 Qxd2 22. Rad1 Qg5
23. Qe4 Qf4 {and Black has an advantage, Afek-Ikonnikov, Paris 1995}) 18... Rd1
19. Nd2 Nc4 20. Rxd1 Qxd1+ 21. Nf1 h6 22. Qh4 Nd2 23. Bxd2 Qxa1 24. Qh5 Bf6 25.
Qf3 Bg7 26. Qg3 Bf6 27. Qf4 Ke7 28. Qb4+ Ke8 29. Qxb7 Qxa2 30. Be3 Kf8 {
and although White has some counterplay and a pawn for the exchange, he is
still struggling to keep the game level, Acs-Volzhin, Budapest 1996.}) (14. Bd2
{intends Re1} -- ({, and tempts Black with the specious} 14... Rxd2 $6 15. Nxd2
Qxd2 16. Rfd1 {, but otherwise the bishop is stupid on d2.}) ({. After} 14...
h5 $1 {(preparing ...Qg4) Sariego-Pigusov, Bayamo 1985, continued} 15. Re1 ({
after} 15. Qg5 h4 16. Re1 Qh5 17. Na3 Qxg5 18. Bxg5 Rh5 19. Be3 e6 20. Bxb6
axb6 21. Nc4 b5 22. Ne3 h3 {Black stood well in Sveshnikov-Tukmakov, USSR 1984}
) ({; White can prevent ...Qg4 by} 15. h3 {but after} e6 16. Re1 Qb5 17. b3 Qf5
{and Black was fine in De Waal-Greenfeld, Montecatini Terme 1998}) 15... Qg4
16. Qxg4 hxg4 17. Be3 e6 18. Nd2 Bd6 {and Black is probably already slightly
better. Note that the doubled b-pawns after Be3xb6 would not be a weakness as
they are impossible to attack - on the contrary, they are in the best
formation to block the three white queenside pawns.})) (14. Nd2 h5 ({again} 
14... Rxd2 $6 {is poor}) ({, while} 14... e6 15. Qg3 {
transposes to 14 Qg3 above}) 15. -- ({, and the Hungarian expert on this line,
Peter Acs, has failed even to achieve equality after} 15. h3 $2 g5 $1 16. Qg3
g4 17. Nb3 ({or} 17. h4 Bg7 18. Nb3 O-O 19. Nd4 Bxd4 20. cxd4 Qe4 {
and Black is obviously better, Acs-Schneider, Budapest 1995}) 17... gxh3 18.
Nd4 Qg4 19. Qxh3 e6 20. Qxg4 hxg4 21. Bf4 Rd5 22. Rfe1 Bg7 {
and Black had a better game which he eventually won, Acs-Votava, Budapest 1995.
}) ({. The only move that makes sense here is} 15. a4 $5 {
, when Degraeve-Ikonnikov, Saint Affrique 1997, continued} e6 (15... Qg4 $5 {
is more consistent with ...h7-h5}) 16. a5 Be7 17. Qg3 Nd5 18. a6 Bd6 19. Qf3
Qxf3 20. Nxf3 {with a good position for White, but Black was very careless})) (
14. a4 $5 {has only been played on one occasion, but might occur in the future
as a surprise! Degraeve-Sarthou, Montpellier 1998, continued} Rd1 $2 ({
better was} 14... Nc4 $5 {- threatening 15...Rd1! -} 15. Qh3 e6 {with an unclear game; thanks to Jacob Aagaard and Finn Nøhr for sharing their analysis on
this line}) 15. Nd2 Nc4 {
(Black is pursuing fame and fortune, but will end with neither)} 16. Rxd1 Qxd1+
17. Nf1 Nd6 (17... Nd2 {does not work as after} 18. Bxd2 Qxa1 19. Qc4 $1 f6 20.
b3 {Black has no way to defend the queenside and will lose the endgame -
Aagaard, Nøhr}) 18. c4 f6 19. Qh3 Qe1 20. b3 Kf7 21. Bb2 Qe2 22. Bd4 a6 23. c5
{and Black was on the way to defeat.}) 14... Qxb2 $1 {The critical test;} ({
though} 14... e6 {is also possible.}) 15. Nd2 Rxd2 {
Having already said 'a', then 'b' follows naturally!} 16. Bxd2 (16. Rab1 $2 {
was once the main gambit line, but should be considered incorrect because of
the following game, Brynell-Degerman, Haninge 1997:} Qxa2 $1 {
(suggested by Murray Chandler in his excellent book on the c3 Sicilian)} (16...
Qxc3 {was the old move}) 17. Bxd2 Qxd2 18. Rfd1 Qc2 19. Qh5 g5 20. Qf3 Bg7 21.
Qxb7 O-O 22. Rbc1 Qf5 23. Qxe7 a5 24. c4 Bb2 25. Rd8 Rxd8 26. Qxd8+ Kg7 27. Rd1
Nxc4 {and Black won. The ball is in White's court now!}) 16... Qxd2 17. Rfd1 {
White must act immediately or he will lose momentum.} ({There is no time for} 
17. a4 Qh6 18. Qg3 Qc6 19. Rfd1 g6 20. Rab1 Nd7 21. Rd3 f6 22. Rbd1 Ne5 23.
Rd8+ Kf7 24. f4 Nc4 25. Qh3 Qb6+ 26. R8d4 f5 27. a5 Qc5 28. Kh1 Bg7 {
and Black is winning, Van der Werf-Har Zvi, Wijk aan Zee 1993.}) 17... Qh6 18.
Qg3 Qc6 19. Rab1 $1 {This is the best move by far. Funnily enough, Gallagher
does not deal with this in his 1997 book on the c3 Sicilian.} ({Instead} 19.
Rd4 $2 f6 20. Qb8+ Nc8 21. Rad1 Kf7 22. Rd7 g5 23. Rc7 Qa4 24. Rd8 Qa3 $1 {
gave Black a clear advantage in Maric-Chernaiev, Hastings 1991/92.}) 19... Qc8
$1 {Black has to do something about 20 Qb8+!. Now White plays passively and
Black gets a better endgame. The feeling is that White can do more to develop
his initiative. Still, Black should never be afraid to enter this highly
combative arena.} 20. Qe5 (20. a4 $5) ({and} 20. c4 $5 {
both seem more dangerous for Black.}) 20... e6 21. Qb5+ Qc6 22. Qxc6+ {
White has no compensation left.} ({If} 22. Qa5 Bc5 {.}) 22... bxc6 23. a4 Bc5
24. a5 Nc8 25. Rb8 Ke7 26. Rb7+ Kf6 27. Rb8 Ke7 28. Rb7+ Kf6 29. Rb8 Re8 30.
Rd7 Re7 31. Rbb7 Rxd7 32. Rxd7 Ne7 33. Kf1 e5 34. c4 Ke6 35. Rd8 Bb4 36. Ra8
Bxa5 37. Rxa7 Bb6 38. Ra8 Bd4 39. Rd8 c5 40. g4 e4 41. h4 g6 42. Re8 f5 43. g5
f4 44. Rf8 e3 45. fxe3 fxe3 46. Rf4 Nf5 47. Re4+ Kd6 48. Kg2 Be5 49. Kf3 e2 50.
Kf2 Bd4+ 51. Kg2 Be3 0-1

[Event "Berlin"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1996.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Sepp, O."]
[Black "Gelfand, B."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "80"]
[EventDate "1996.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. Bc4 Nb6 7. Bb3 d5 8. exd6
Qxd6 9. O-O Be6 10. Na3 $5 {This move is by far the most dangerous for Black
and is considered the main line in the latest 'ECO'.} dxc3 $1 {
The most testing reply and, as far as is known these days, also the best.} 11.
Qe2 ({The only important alternative is} 11. Nb5 Qxd1 12. Rxd1 Rc8 13. Bxe6
fxe6 {and now:} 14. -- (14. bxc3 Nc4 15. Ng5 e5 16. Ne6 Kf7 17. Nbc7 $5 (17.
Ng5+ Ke8 18. Ne6 Kf7 19. Ng5+ Ke8 {
½-½ Smagin-Gavrikov, Kiev 1986, is perhaps the best White has got!}) 17...
g6 18. f4 Bg7 19. fxe5 N4xe5 $1 20. Rf1+ Bf6 21. Bh6 ({if instead} 21. Ng5+ Kg8
22. Nd5 h6 $1 23. Ne4 Bg7 {
and White does not have an enormous amount for the pawn}) 21... g5 $3 {
. A powerful blow - now White is worse. Bräuning-Yakovich, Munich 1991,
continued} 22. Bxg5 Nd8 $1 23. Nxd8+ ({if} 23. Bxf6 exf6 24. Ng5+ Kg6 25. Nge6
Nxe6 26. Nxe6 Rxc3 {White would be lucky to avoid losing the endgame}) 23...
Rhxd8 24. Rae1 $5 Rxc7 {and White does not have enough play for the pawn.}) ({
. If instead} 14. Nxc3 g6 $5 15. Re1 Bg7 16. Rxe6 O-O {and Black is fine. As
so often White regains his material, but has taken longer to do so than Black
took to take the pawn in the first place. Nadyrhanov-Kruppa, Sochi 1994,
continued} 17. Re4 ({White needs to be careful here:} 17. Bg5 $6 Rxf3 $1 18.
gxf3 Nd4 {is good for Black}) 17... Rf5 $1 18. Bg5 Nd5 19. Nxd5 Rxd5 {
and Black is very well placed, making the weakness at e7 less important.}))
11... Bxb3 {Not really a lot to discuss here!} 12. Nb5 Qb8 13. axb3 e5 14. bxc3
{This is the main line and leads to wild complications. Other tries are:} (14.
Bf4 Bd6 15. Rad1 O-O 16. Nxd6 exf4 17. bxc3 Rd8 $1 {
with equality, Motwani-Ernst, Gausdal 1992.}) (14. Nbd4 {
leads to a lot of exchanges and a probable draw:} Nxd4 15. Nxd4 f6 16. bxc3 Kf7
17. Nb5 a6 18. Be3 axb5 19. Bxb6 Rxa1 20. Rxa1 Qe8 21. Ra5 b4 $1 22. c4 ({or} 
22. cxb4 Qe6 23. Qc4 Qxc4 24. bxc4 Bxb4 25. Ra7 Rc8 26. Rxb7+ Ke6 {
with an equal position in Luther-Sadler, Gausdal 1994}) 22... Qc6 23. Rb5 Be7
24. Ba5 Ra8 {
and the game Lautier-Gelfand, Linares 1994, eventually ended in a draw.}) (14.
Nfd4 {is less strong after} Be7 15. Nf5 O-O 16. Nxc3 g6 17. Nxe7+ Nxe7 18. f4
f6 $1 {and Black was better in Ferguson-Sutovsky, Guarapuava 1995.}) (14. Re1 {
is natural, but White's attack does not seem that dangerous. Torre-Illescas
Cordoba, Moscow 1994,saw} Nd7 15. Bf4 ({if} 15. bxc3 Be7 {
and Black will develop, keeping the extra pawn}) 15... Be7 {
(Black needs to develop fast)} 16. Rad1 ({White's only chance is to mobilize
quickly; all other lines fail according to Illescas Cordoba, e.g.} 16. Nxe5
Ndxe5 17. Bxe5 Nxe5 18. Qxe5 Qxe5 19. Rxe5 cxb2 20. Rae1 Kf8 {
and Black is much better,}) ({or if} 16. bxc3 exf4 17. Nbd4 O-O 18. Nxc6 bxc6
19. Qxe7 Nf6) 16... exf4 $1 {(Black takes up the challenge)} 17. Nd6+ Kf8 18.
Nxf7 {(again White needs to keep his action going)} Nb6 $1 (18... Kxf7 19. Rxd7
{is clearly too dangerous}) 19. Nxh8 Kg8 20. Nd4 ({or} 20. Ng6 hxg6 21. Qe6+
Kf8 22. bxc3 Qe8 {with advantage}) 20... Bf6 21. Nxc6 bxc6 22. Ng6 $1 hxg6 23.
Qe6+ Kf8 24. bxc3 {and White is slightly worse.}) 14... Be7 15. Bg5 $1 {
This is clearly the most dangerous move. White tries to exchange the black
king's most reliable defender.} ({Instead,} 15. Be3 Nc8 16. c4 O-O 17. c5 b6 {
was even in Sveshnikov-Yudasin, USSR 1986}) ({while after} 15. Re1 Nd7 16. Ng5
Bxg5 17. Bxg5 O-O 18. Rad1 Nc5 19. Qg4 Qc8 20. Qh4 Qf5 {
White had no significant compensation in Hoffman-Gavrikov, Biel 1994.}) 15...
f6 {Black also shows ambition.} ({Otherwise he could play} 15... a6 16. Bxe7
Nxe7 17. Nxe5 O-O 18. Nd4 Ng6 19. Nxg6 hxg6 20. Rfe1 Re8 21. Qf3 Qc7 {
with an equal game in Onischuk-Nijboer, Wijk aan Zee 1996.}) 16. Be3 Nc8 $1 {
The only move.} ({After} 16... O-O $2 17. Nxa7 $1 {, as seen in Smagin-Dvoirys,
Novgorod 1995, Black has problems with his development and no material to show
for it.}) 17. Nh4 O-O 18. Qc4+ (18. Qg4 a6 19. Nf5 g6 {now:} 20. -- (20. Na3 $6
{was Degraeve-Stohl, European Team Ch., Pula 1997, and now} Kh8 $1 {
would have given Black a good position.}) ({. Alternatively,} 20. Qc4+ Kh8 21.
Bh6 gxf5 22. Bxf8 Nb6 $1 {and the white attack is not going to happen}) ({, or
} 20. Nxe7+ N6xe7 $1 {(keeping an eye with the important d6-square)} 21. Qc4+
Kg7 $1 (21... Rf7 22. Nc7 Nd6 23. Qc5 Ne4 24. Qc4 Nd6 {is a repetition of moves
}) 22. Nc7 Nd6 23. Qc5 Rc8 24. Nxa8 Rxc5 25. Bxc5 Ne4 26. Bxe7 Qxa8 {
and Black was better in Benjamin-Ilincic, Yerevan Olympiad 1996.})) ({
Instead, Tzermiadianos-Ilincic, Cacak 1995, saw} 18. Nf5 a6 19. Qa2 {
(not the most obvious move one must say!)} g6 20. b4+ Kh8 21. Nh6 Kg7 22. Ng4
g5 {and Black must be better.}) 18... Kh8 19. f4 e4 $1 {To keep the lines
closed and exchange his worst piece, Black wisely returns his extra pawn.} 20.
Qxe4 Nd6 21. Nxd6 Bxd6 22. Nf5 Re8 23. Qf3 Bf8 24. b4 {There are many opinions
about this position. Some think Black is a little better, some that it is
equal. Whoever you choose to trust, Black should at least not be worse!} Qc7
25. Nd4 Nxd4 26. Bxd4 a6 27. Rae1 Red8 28. Qe4 b6 29. Re3 a5 {This is reason
enough to believe in Black's position. The distant passed pawn gives good
practical chances.} 30. bxa5 bxa5 31. Rb1 Rab8 32. Rxb8 Rxb8 33. g4 Qd7 34. Qe6
Qxe6 35. Rxe6 Ra8 36. c4 a4 37. c5 a3 38. c6 a2 39. Re1 Bc5 40. Bxc5 a1=Q 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "10. Closed Sicilian"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B23"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "7"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 {signifies the Closed Sicilian. in which White refrains from
an early d2-d4 in favour of a slow development with g2-g3, Bg2 and d2-d3.
Depending on how Black develops, White then chooses a suitable course of
action.} e6 3. g3 ({
We should also take a look at tricky move orders; specifically} 3. Nge2 {
. Most often this move has no independent significance. After} Nc6 4. d4 ({
while} 4. g3 d5 {leads to positions considered in this chapter}) 4... cxd4 5.
Nxd4 Nf6 {we transpose to our main line Four Knights Variation. However, the
game can sometimes develop in an original way, as occurs in
Shamkovich-Kharitonov.}) 3... d5 {. The moves 2...e6 and 3...d5 define this
variation as Black begins his struggle for the centre immediately. The
position after 2...e6 3 g3 d5 can already be found in games from the end of
the nineteenth century - Paulsen, Schlechter, Tarrasch and Rubinstein all
played this way. However, the variation was practically forgotten until
Grandmaster Korchnoi revived it in his match with Spassky in 1968 (see
Spassky-Korchnoi).} ({Enriched with new ideas, 2...e6 has since then occurred
regularly and is quite promising for Black, who can also switch to other lines
of the Closed system, e.g.} 3... Nc6 4. Bg2 g6 5. d3 Bg7 6. Be3 d6 7. f4 Nge7 {
.}) 4. exd5 ({The continuation} 4. exd5 exd5 5. Bg2 ({
White also sometimes plays} 5. d4 {
which leads to positions with an isolated pawn (Kupreichik-Morawietz)}) 5...
Nf6 6. Nge2 ({Krapivin-Shariyazdanov reaches the same position at move nine
via a slightly different move order, in that White plays} 6. d3) 6... d4 7. Ne4
Nxe4 8. Bxe4 {
(Spassky-Korchnoi) is standard. Here Black has a spatial advantage.}) ({
White can on the fourth move switch to other opening schemes, such as a
reversed King's Indian with} 4. Bg2 {, for example:} d4 5. Nce2 e5 6. Nf3 Nc6 7.
d3 f6 8. Nh4 g5 9. Nf5 Nge7 10. f4 Nxf5 11. exf5 Bxf5 12. fxg5 fxg5 13. O-O Bg6
14. g4 {with play for the pawn, Janosevic-Kozomara, Ljubljana 1960.}) ({
Another idea is} 4. d3 Nf6 5. Bg2 Be7 6. e5 Nfd7 7. f4 Nc6 8. Nf3 a6 9. O-O b5
10. Ne2 Qb6 {with difficult play, Abramovic-Abshalumov, Poland 1987. With
these possibilities, Black should carry out sensible development.}) *

[Event "Kiev (5th matchgame)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1968.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Spassky, B."]
[Black "Korchnoi, V."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B23"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "101"]
[EventDate "1968.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. g3 (3. Nge2 {will be considered in Shamkovich-Kharitonov.
}) 3... d5 4. exd5 ({White can avoid the main line by} 4. d3 Nf6 5. Bg2 {
, but it does not give any advantage, for example:} dxe4 6. Nxe4 Nxe4 7. Bxe4
Qc7 8. Bg2 Nc6 9. Nf3 e5 10. Nd2 Be6 11. O-O Be7 12. b3 O-O 13. Bb2 Rad8 {
with a slight advantage for Black, Allgaier-Nisipeanu, Berlin 1997.}) 4... exd5
5. Bg2 Nf6 ({Risky is} 5... d4 6. Qe2+ $1 {.}) 6. Nge2 d4 7. Ne4 Nxe4 8. Bxe4
Nd7 {A typical position in this variation. If Black completes his development
and places his pieces harmoniously, then the spatial advantage will ensure
that his chances are at least not worse. White's hopes are connected to the
bishop on the long diagonal and to his slightly more active pieces.} 9. d3 {
After this White has little hope of any advantage. In fact, from here on White
is compelled to defend.} ({
The famous game Spassky-Kasparov, Bugojno 1982, saw instead} 9. O-O Nf6 10. Bg2
Bd6 11. c3 $5 {(a logical attempt to exploit his small lead in development)} d3
12. Nf4 O-O (12... Bxf4 $2 13. Qa4+ Bd7 14. Re1+ Kf8 15. Qxf4) 13. Nxd3 Bxg3
14. fxg3 Qxd3 15. Qf3 Qxf3 16. Bxf3 Bh3 17. Bxb7 Rae8 18. Bg2 Bxg2 {
and in the subsequent brisk struggle Black kept the balance:} 19. Kxg2 Re2+ 20.
Rf2 Rfe8 21. b3 Rxf2+ 22. Kxf2 Ng4+ 23. Kg2 f5 24. h3 Ne5 25. d4 cxd4 26. cxd4
Nd3 27. Bg5 h6 28. Rd1 hxg5 29. Rxd3 Re2+ 30. Kf3 Rxa2 31. d5 Kf7 32. d6 Ke8 {
½-½. The game J.Claesen-Chuchelov, Antwerp 1998, continued for another
eight moves, but was also drawn:} 33. g4 g6 34. gxf5 gxf5 35. Rd5 g4+ 36. hxg4
fxg4+ 37. Kxg4 Kd7 38. Kf5 Re2 39. Ra5 Kxd6 40. Rxa7 {.}) 9... Nf6 10. Bg2 Bd6
11. O-O O-O 12. Bf4 ({Korchnoi criticized this move, recommending either} 12.
h3) ({or} 12. c3 {. The former is seen in Krapivin-Shariyazdanov. The latter
occurred in Radovici-Ionescu, Romania 1994, concluding} Re8 ({also possible is
} 12... dxc3 13. Nxc3 {as in Minasian-Kupreichik, Elista 1998, though here
Black has some difficulties in developing his queenside}) 13. cxd4 cxd4 14. h3
Qb6 15. b3 Be6 16. Bb2 Bc5 17. Nf4 Bd7 18. Rc1 Re5 19. Re1 Rae8 20. Rxe5 Rxe5
21. Qc2 Bd6 {½-½.}) 12... Bg4 $1 {
Forcing White to exchange on d6 after which Black quickly develops.} 13. Bxd6
Qxd6 14. h3 Bd7 15. Nf4 Rfe8 16. Qd2 ({Not} 16. Bxb7 $2 Rab8 {
followed by ...Rxb2.}) 16... Bc6 17. Rae1 Nd7 $1 {This knight manoeuvre shows
that Black is slightly better. On f6 the knight had no prospects, now it is on
its way to f3.} 18. Bxc6 Qxc6 19. Ng2 h6 ({The immediate} 19... Ne5 {
is impossible because of} 20. Nh4 {and} -- 21. f4 {.}) 20. f4 ({
Grandmaster Bondarevsky, who was Spassky's trainer, recommended} 20. Rxe8+ Rxe8
21. Re1 Ne5 22. Kf1 {with chances to equalize, as after} Qe6 23. Qe2 Qxh3 24.
f4 f6 25. Kg1 Qxg3 26. fxe5 Rxe5 27. Qf2 {the position is unclear.}) 20... Nf6
21. a3 b6 22. Qf2 a5 23. g4 $1 {White does not want to defend passively and
tries to create counterplay on the kingside. Black now decides to simplify the
position.} Rxe1 24. Rxe1 Re8 25. Rxe8+ Qxe8 26. Qf3 Qe6 ({If} 26... a4 {, then}
27. Qb7 {with counterplay.}) 27. b3 Nd5 28. a4 Nb4 29. Qd1 h5 $6 {The culmination of the game. The weakness on c2 is not enough to win. So it is necessary to
weaken the white pawns on the kingside as well.} ({
Black could do so by means of} 29... f5 $1 {, when after the exchange ...f5xg4,
h3xg4 Black could create a passed h-pawn, increasing his advantage.}) 30. Kh2
hxg4 31. hxg4 g6 32. g5 {Now White is out of danger.} Kf8 33. Kg3 Ke7 34. Qd2
Nd5 35. Qe1 {The exchange of queens hastens the draw.} Qxe1+ 36. Nxe1 Kd6 37.
Kf3 Ke6 38. Ng2 Nb4 39. Ne1 Kf5 40. Kg3 Nd5 41. Ng2 Ne3 42. Ne1 Nd5 43. Ng2 Ne3
44. Ne1 Ke6 45. Kf2 Kd6 46. c4 $1 Ke6 47. Ng2 Nd1+ ({
Black cannot play to win the b3-pawn by ...Nc2-a1, because of} 47... Nc2 48.
Ke2 Na1 49. Nh4 Nxb3 $2 50. Kd1 {and the knight is trapped.}) 48. Kf3 Nc3 49.
Nh4 Na2 50. Ke2 Nb4 51. Kd2 1/2-1/2

[Event "Pskov"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1998.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Krapivin, V."]
[Black "Shariyazdanov, A."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B23"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "76"]
[EventDate "1998.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. g3 d5 4. exd5 exd5 5. Bg2 Nf6 6. d3 (6. Nge2 d4 7. Ne4
Nxe4 8. Bxe4 Nd7 9. O-O Nf6 10. Bg2 Bd6 11. c3 {(as in the notes to
Spassky-Korchnoi) causes more problems for Black. But in practice White seldom
chooses this line, preferring quieter play, albeit with little chance of an
advantage.}) 6... d4 7. Ne4 Nxe4 8. Bxe4 (8. dxe4 {
does not offer White anything either, for example:} Be7 9. Ne2 O-O 10. O-O Nc6
11. Nf4 Bd6 12. Re1 Re8 13. Nd5 Be6 14. c4 Rb8 15. h3 b5 {
with perfectly good play for Black, S.Bücker-Nun, Dortmund 1989.}) 8... Nd7 9.
Ne2 Nf6 10. Bg2 Bd6 11. O-O O-O 12. h3 Be6 $1 ({
12...Be6 is a more principled and vigorous move than either} 12... Re8) ({or} 
12... Rb8 {. Now on} 13. Bxb7 {, there is} Bxh3 {.}) 13. Nf4 Bxf4 14. Bxf4 Qd7
{The advantage of the bishop pair is imperceptible. Besides which, White can
hardly prevent the exchange of one of them by ...Bd5 as h3 is under fire.} 15.
Kh2 ({In Robovic-Volke, Munich 1993, White played thoughtlessly and was broken:
} 15. Be5 Nd5 16. g4 f5 17. g5 f4 18. h4 Ne7 $1 {
(Black already has a large advantage)} 19. Re1 Ng6 20. Qf3 Rf7 21. h5 Nh4 22.
Qe4 Nxg2 23. Qxg2 Bh3 24. Qf3 Bg4 25. Qe4 Re8 26. g6 hxg6 27. Qxg6 Rfe7 28. h6
Rxe5 {0-1.}) 15... Bd5 16. Re1 Rfe8 17. a3 {A sluggish move;} ({but after} 17.
Qd2 Bxg2 18. Kxg2 Qd5+ 19. Kg1 Rxe1+ {the a2-pawn could be in danger.}) 17...
Rxe1 18. Qxe1 Bxg2 19. Kxg2 Re8 20. Qd1 Nd5 21. Bd2 (21. Qf3 {
deserves attention.}) 21... Qc6 22. Kg1 ({Not} 22. Qf3 $2 Re2 $1 {.}) 22... c4
{Black has achieved an advantage by simple and natural moves. However, White
has no weaknesses and after Qf3, Re1 and b2-b3 everything would be alright.
Therefore Black plays on the queenside to make something of his advantage
before it vanishes.} 23. Qf3 c3 24. bxc3 dxc3 25. Be3 a5 ({If} 25... Nxe3 26.
Qxc6 bxc6 27. Re1 $1 {and White has good counterchances.}) 26. a4 b5 27. axb5
Qxb5 {The important moment in the game!} ({Although Black has a dangerous
passed pawn, White's position is still solid and after} 27... Qxb5 28. Bd4 $1
a4 29. Kg2 {
White is not worse. However, he cracks under the pressure and makes a mistake.}
) 28. Qg4 $2 Nxe3 29. fxe3 Rxe3 $6 {Now Black is inaccurate.} ({Better is} 
29... Qb2 $1 {.}) 30. Qc8+ Re8 31. Qxc3 a4 {White has problems. His king's
position is open and he has to contend with a dangerous passed a-pawn. White
should defend attentively.} 32. Rd1 $6 Ra8 33. Ra1 h5 $1 34. d4 Qf5 35. Qc6 Rc8
36. Qxa4 Qxh3 37. Ra3 Qg4 $1 38. Rd3 $2 {
But it is impossible to protect all the weaknesses.} Qe2 0-1

[Event "Germany"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1996.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kupreichik, V."]
[Black "Morawietz, D."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B23"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "96"]
[EventDate "1995.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. g3 d5 4. exd5 exd5 5. d4 {A standard continuation.} ({
After} 5. d4 cxd4 6. Qxd4 {the isolated d-pawn will be rather vulnerable, but
the white queen is immediately attacked and Black wins some time. The position
is difficult for both sides.}) 5... cxd4 (5... Nf6 {is seen occasionally.}) ({
Also interesting is} 5... Nc6 $5 6. dxc5 d4 7. Ne4 Bxc5 {
with good play for Black.}) 6. Qxd4 Nf6 7. Bg5 Be7 8. O-O-O (8. Bg2 Nc6 9. Qd2
O-O 10. Nge2 d4 11. Bxf6 Bxf6 12. Nd5 {is equal.}) ({The position after 6...
Nf6 is in fact a reversed Göring Gambit Declined (1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 exd4
4 c3 d5) with the extra move g2-g3 for White. Consequently the most reliable
variation is} 8. Bb5+ Nc6 9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. Qc5 $1 Bxc3+ 11. bxc3 Qe7+ 12. Qxe7+
Kxe7 {with a probable draw.}) 8... Nc6 9. Qa4 Be6 10. Bg2 O-O 11. Nge2 Qb6 ({
The following line deserves attention:} 11... Ng4 $5 12. Bxe7 Qxe7 13. Rhe1
Nxf2 14. Rd2 Qc5 15. Bxd5 Rad8 16. Nf4 Bf5 17. Qb5 Qxb5 18. Nxb5 Ng4 {
with equality, Efler-Popov, Pardubice 1998.}) 12. Be3 Bc5 13. Bxc5 Qxc5 14. Nf4
Rad8 ({Probably safest is} 14... Qxf2 15. Ncxd5 Bxd5 16. Bxd5 Nxd5 17. Rxd5
Rfe8 {, but Black wants more complex play.}) 15. Rd2 d4 16. Nxe6 fxe6 17. Qb5
$2 {A mistake!} ({After} 17. Ne4 Nxe4 18. Bxe4 {White is better: the weak
pawns on d4 and e6 can become a serious factor and Black has no real
counterplay.}) 17... dxc3 $1 18. Qxc5 cxd2+ 19. Kd1 Ng4 20. f3 b6 $1 {
White probably did not expect this move.} 21. Qg1 ({
White would have had more chances to save the game following} 21. Qxf8+ Rxf8
22. fxg4 Ne5 23. Bf1 Nxg4 24. Kxd2 Nxh2 {.}) 21... Nce5 {
Now Black has many threats: 22...Nxf3, 22...Rxf3 and 22...Nc4.} 22. Ke2 (22.
fxg4 Nxg4 23. Ke2 d1=Q+) ({and} 22. h3 Nc4 23. hxg4 Nxb2+ 24. Ke2 d1=Q+ {
do not help either.}) 22... d1=Q+ 23. Qxd1 Rxd1 24. Rxd1 Nf6 {
White's continued resistance is futile.} 25. f4 Nf7 26. Rd3 Rc8 27. Kd2 Rd8 28.
Rxd8+ Nxd8 29. Kc3 Kf7 30. Kc4 Ne8 31. a4 Ke7 32. b4 Kd6 33. c3 Nc6 34. Be4 h6
35. Bf3 Nc7 36. Bh1 Nd5 37. Bf3 g5 38. a5 gxf4 39. gxf4 bxa5 40. b5 Nce7 41.
Kb3 Kc5 42. Ka4 Nxc3+ 43. Kxa5 Nxb5 44. Bg4 Nc7 45. Bh3 h5 46. Ka4 h4 47. Ka5
Kd4 48. Kb4 Ned5+ 0-1

[Event "Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1989.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Shamkovich, L."]
[Black "Kharitonov, A."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B23"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "84"]
[EventDate "1989.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Ne2 e6 3. Nbc3 Nc6 4. g3 d5 5. exd5 exd5 6. Bg2 (6. d4 {
is premature because of} Bg4 $1 {, with the twin threats of ...Bf3 and ...Nxd4.
}) 6... d4 ({Now if} 6... Nf6 7. d4 $1 {
is very strong, with play against the soon-to-be isolated d-pawn.}) 7. Nd5 ({
In the variations considered in the previous chapter the knight went to e4
rather than d5, as at this point Black had developed ...Nf6 rather than ...Nc6
(here} 7. Ne4 {would of course lose a piece to} f5 {
). However, the typical positions that now arise are still familiar to us.})
7... Nf6 ({Iskov-Romanishin, Tallinn 1986, saw} 7... Bd6 8. O-O Nf6 9. Nef4
Bxf4 $5 10. Nxf4 O-O {
. In this roughly equal position White played carelessly with} 11. Nh5 $2 ({
instead of the natural} 11. d3 $1) {, and conceded the initiative to Black:}
11... d3 12. c3 Re8 13. b3 Re2 14. Nf4 Re5 15. Bb2 Bg4 16. f3 Bf5 17. g4 Bg6
18. Re1 Qd6 19. Rxe5 Nxe5 20. Qf1 Re8 21. c4 Nxc4 22. Bxf6 gxf6 23. Nxg6 Nxd2 {
0-1.}) 8. Nef4 Bd6 9. Qe2+ {Now Black cannot castle, but this is not a great
disadvantage, as the white pieces are not very active.} Kf8 10. O-O Nxd5 11.
Nxd5 h5 $1 {A move achieving many goals. Now the bishop has an excellent
outpost on g4 and the rook can enter the game via h6.} 12. d3 Bg4 13. Qe4 Qd7 {
Black has no problems. White is forced to simplify because of the threat 14...
Re8.} 14. Re1 Re8 15. Qxe8+ Qxe8 16. Rxe8+ Kxe8 17. h3 Bf5 18. Bd2 Kd7 19. Re1
Re8 20. Rxe8 Kxe8 {An approximately equal ending seems to have arisen. But
Black's chances are actually slightly better. Black has a spatial advantage,
his king is already in the centre, and the white queenside pawns are easy to
attack. Although White has the beautiful knight on d5 and bishop on the long
diagonal, it is hard to see that they have any practical strength.} 21. Nf4 $6
({It was necessary to bring the king into action with} 21. Kf1 {.}) 21... g6
22. Bd5 $2 Ke7 $1 {Unexpectedly White runs into difficulties.} ({After} 22...
Ke7 23. -- Bxf4 {the h3-pawn will be attacked, while if} 24. Bxf4 {, then} Nb4
{is dangerous as ...Ke7 has prevented White's counterplay with Bf4-d6.}) 23.
Kg2 Bxf4 24. gxf4 ({Not} 24. Bxf4 $2 Nb4 25. Bxb7 ({or} 25. Bb3 Be6 26. a3 Nxd3
$1 {and Black wins}) 25... Nxc2 {and both ...Bxd3 and ...Nb4 are threatened.})
24... Nd8 25. a3 Kd6 26. Bf3 Nc6 27. b4 $6 {
This weakens the queenside even more!} ({It was necessary to seek salvation in
the opposite-coloured bishop endgame after} 27. Bxc6 Kxc6 28. b3 b5 29. h4 {
, even though White does look very fragile on the light squares.}) 27... b6 28.
Kg3 Ne7 29. bxc5+ bxc5 30. Ba5 Bd7 31. Be4 Nd5 32. h4 ({
Now the exchange on d5 is no good:} 32. Bxd5 Kxd5 33. h4 Ba4 34. c4+ Kd6 35.
Kf3 Bd1+ 36. Kg3 (36. Ke4 $4 f5# {is mate!}) 36... Bc2 {and Black wins.}) 32...
Nc3 33. Bxc3 {Black threatened 33...Nb1 34 a4 Na3!. But now the weak pawns are
becoming terminally ill!} dxc3 34. Bf3 {Otherwise 34...Ba4.} Be6 $1 {The most accurate move! White is now in zugzwang. Since he can not transfer his king to
e3 he must make more concessions.} ({Worse was} 34... Ba4 35. Bd1 Kd5 36. f5 {
with counterplay.}) 35. Bd1 (35. Be4 f5 36. Bf3 Ba2 37. Bd1 Kd5 {
is also hopeless.}) 35... Kd5 36. Kg2 Kd4 37. Kf1 c4 38. dxc4 Bxc4+ 39. Kg2 Be6
40. Kg3 Bf5 41. Kg2 a5 42. Kg3 Kc5 {
. After ...Kb5-a4 the black invasion is complete.} 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "11. Morra Gambit"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B21"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "18"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3 {This is the so-called Morra Gambit. First seen in
the nineteenth century (Fleissig-Bauer, Vienna 1889), it became widely
practised in the middle of the last century. The French correspondence chess
player, Pierre Morra, published a detailed analysis of this opening in 1945
and thereby gave it its name. Subsequently the Yugoslavian Grandmaster
Matulovic introduced the gambit into tournament practice, which is why it is
also sometimes connected with his name. Black can reject the pawn sacrifice
with 3...d5, 3...Nf6 (transposing to 2 c3 variations) or 3...d3. However,
acceptance of the sacrifice is critical. After 3...dxc3 4 Nxc3 White has good
opportunities to take the initiative due to easy development and the constant
positional threat of e4-e5. He usually places his pieces based on the schema:
Nf3, Bc4, Qe2, 0-0, Bf4 (or Be3 or Bg5), Rfd1, Rac1 - in that or any other
move order. Black has many different set-ups which promise good play.
Therefore, at grandmaster level, the Morra Gambit is not considered correct.
But at amateur level many people play it willingly and with good results. The
majority of defensive schemes against this gambit do not hinder the standard
set-up of white pieces. However, we shall here consider a system providing
active counterplay. The Russian player Schipkov developed the following
variation:} dxc3 4. Nxc3 Nc6 5. Nf3 e6 6. Bc4 Qc7 7. O-O Nf6 {
with the idea of ...Ng4. The basic trick of} 8. Qe2 ({
Recently White has chosen a more aggressive line:} 8. Nb5 $5 Qb8 9. e5 $5 {
(Quadrio-Cacho).}) 8... Ng4 9. h3 $4 Nd4 $1 {and wins, is primitive but
effective. Many an unwary traveller has fallen into this Venus fly trap.
However, the strengthened control of the e5-square is the main strategic
concept of the system. Practice has shown that routine play (e.g. 8 Qe2 in
Shibaev-Zakhartsov) creates few problems for Black.} *

[Event "Krasnodar"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1999.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Shibaev, F."]
[Black "Zakhartsov, V."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B21"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "96"]
[EventDate "1999.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Nxc3 ({
The attempt to play the Danish Gambit against the Sicilian Defence with} 4. Bc4
$5 {has no independent importance after} e6 ({or} 4... Nc6 {
. White will have to play Nxc3 eventually.}) ({. All the same} 4... cxb2 $5 {
, though rarely seen in practice, seems the most principled move and also the
strongest.})) 4... Nc6 5. Nf3 (5. Bc4 {almost always leads to transposition.})
5... e6 6. Bc4 ({Occasionally White plays} 6. Bf4 {, to which the best reply is
} a6 {, preventing Nc3-b5. Examples from tournament practice explain the
rarity of the bishop's swift jump to f4.} 7. -- ({
. Ivkov-Fuderer, Zagreb 1955, saw} 7. e5 Nge7 8. Bd3 Ng6 9. Bg3 Qc7 10. O-O {
and now Kostic gave} Ngxe5 11. Nxe5 Nxe5 12. Re1 d6 {
and White has no compensation for the two pawns.}) (7. Bc4 {
also leads to a black advantage after} b5 8. Bb3 Nge7 9. e5 Ng6 10. Bg3 Bb4 11.
O-O Bxc3 12. bxc3 Bb7 13. Re1 Nce7 14. Qd3 Nf5 15. Rad1 Rc8 16. Nd4 Nxg3 17.
hxg3 O-O {, Santos-Milos, Sao Bernardo 1998.} (17... --))) 6... Qc7 7. O-O (7.
Qe2 Nf6 {has no independent significance if White continues with} 8. O-O {
. But of course this is not the only tested move here.} (8. Bg5 {
does not promise a lot, as Black conveniently rejigs his pieces:} Ng4 $1 9. Bb3
Bc5 10. Bh4 a6 11. Bg3 d6 12. O-O O-O 13. Rac1 Qe7 14. Rfd1 Nge5 15. Kh1 Bd7
16. Na4 Ba7 {
and Black has a healthy extra pawn, Matychenkov-Rublevsky, Smolensk 1991.}) (8.
h3 {is directed against the trap (8 0-0 Ng4 9 h3?? Nd4!), but does nothing to
assist development. After standard Sicilian play it is difficult for White to
prove any compensation for the pawn:} d6 9. O-O Be7 10. Rd1 a6 11. Bf4 Ne5 $5 {
(a typical method of thwarting e4-e5)} 12. Bb3 O-O 13. Rac1 Qb8 14. Be3 Nxf3+
15. Qxf3 b5 16. Qe2 Bb7 {, Hyll-Vaulin, Mlada Boleslau 1995.}) ({. After} 8. e5
Ng4 9. Bf4 -- ({, Black should not try for a second pawn with} 9... f6 {
because of} 10. Nd5 $5 {.}) ({. It is safer to continue development with} 9...
d5 {. Then absolutely harmless is} 10. Bb3 ({nor does} 10. exd6 Bxd6 11. Nb5 {
achieve its purpose due to} Bb4+ 12. Bd2 Qe7 {with favourable simplifications:}
13. Bxb4 Nxb4 14. O-O a6 15. Nc3 O-O 16. Rad1 Nf6 17. Ne5 b5 18. Bb3 Bb7 {
and White has no compensation for the pawn, Picardi-Nicevsky, Rome 1995}) 10...
h5 11. O-O Be7 12. Rae1 $6 Qd8 $1 13. h3 g5 {(who attacks whom?!)} 14. Bd2 Nh6
15. h4 g4 16. Ng5 Nf5 {
with serious difficulties for White, Prelati-Timoshenko, Arco 1998.}))) 7...
Nf6 8. Qe2 ({Here} 8. h3 {seems more reasonable than after 7 Qe2 Nf6. The
position is typical for the Morra Gambit as a whole. Black should counteract
the advance e4-e5, to which end he often puts a knight on e5.}) ({A non-standard set-up of pieces does not create problems for Black. For example:} 8. Bg5 Be7
9. Qd2 ({if} 9. Qe2 Ng4 $1 {with threats}) 9... O-O 10. Rac1 a6 11. Rfd1 Rd8
12. h3 b5 13. Bd3 Bb7 14. Bb1 Rac8 {, Comas-Spassov, Sitges 1993.}) 8... Ng4 {
In my database there are about twenty games in which White missed the threat
of ...Nc6-d4 and played the suicidal move 9 h3??. Alas, here White chooses a
less kamikaze-like continuation.} 9. Nb5 {Alternatively:} (9. Kh1 Nd4 10. Nb5 {
answers the immediate threat, but after} Nxb5 11. Bxb5 a6 12. Bd3 Bc5 {
Black stands well.}) (9. Nd5 {
fires a blank as Black is not obliged to take the knight} -- ({, although after
} 9... exd5 10. exd5+ Nce5 11. Nxe5 Nxe5 12. Re1 f6 13. f4 Bc5+ 14. Kh1 d6 {
everything is quite alright, Fabre-Vallejo Pons, Ibercaja 1994.}) ({
. Easier, however, is} 9... Qb8 {and now if} 10. g3 ({or} 10. Bf4 Bd6 $1 11.
Ne3 Bxf4 12. Nxg4 h5 $1 13. Ne3 Ne5 14. Bb3 Nxf3+ 15. Qxf3 Bxh2+ 16. Kh1 Be5
17. Rac1 O-O 18. Qxh5 g6 19. Qg5 Kg7 20. g3 d5 $1 21. Kg2 (21. exd5 f6 $1)
21... Bf6 22. Qg4 Qe5 {
and Black has a clear advantage, Zavalishin-Duchov, Kstovo 1994}) {, then}
10... d6 11. h3 Nge5 12. Bb5 Bd7 13. Bxc6 Nxf3+ 14. Qxf3 bxc6 {
with advantage, Horvath-Schipkov, Zalakaros 1989.})) ({
It is hardly possible to recommend} 9. Rd1 $6 {, which parries the threat of}
Nd4 {but weakens the f2-square.} ({This is obvious after} 9... Bc5 {
, as in Briem-Khenkin, Reykjavik 1994:} 10. Nb5 Qb8 11. Be3 Nxe3 12. fxe3 O-O
13. Rac1 a6 14. Nbd4 Be7 15. Nxc6 dxc6 16. e5 b5 17. Bd3 c5 18. Bb1 Qc7 19. Rd4
g6 20. Rg4 Bb7 {and Black has an extra pawn and a good position.})) ({
Similarly,} 9. g3 {both defends but weakens the kingside.} -- ({
. Black can find excellent play in several ways. For example:} 9... Bc5 10. Bf4
d6 11. a3 Nge5 12. b4 Bb6 13. Nb5 Qe7 14. Rfd1 O-O 15. Nxd6 Nxf3+ 16. Qxf3 Nd4
17. Qd3 e5 18. Nxc8 Raxc8 19. Be3 Rfd8 {, when Black has given back the pawn
but stands more active, Wach-Grosar, Graz 1993.}) ({. Or} 9... d6 10. Bf4 Be7
11. Nb5 Qb8 12. Rfd1 Nge5 13. Rac1 O-O 14. Bb3 a6 15. Bxe5 $6 (15. Nbd4 $5 {
is better}) 15... dxe5 16. Nc3 Qa7 17. Qc4 $6 Bc5 18. Rd2 Nd4 19. Kg2 Nxf3 20.
Kxf3 Bd4 {and White is a pawn down with his king in danger, Satonen-Seeman,
Jyvaskyla 1994.})) 9... Qb8 10. h3 {This move is now possible since the knight
on b5 controls the d4-square. However, Black can keep the knight on g4 with
the aid of tactics.} h5 ({Also possible is} 10... Nge5 {with normal play after
11 Bf4 d6, or else more original play as in Schmidt-Raeberg, Germany 1996:} 11.
Nxe5 Nxe5 12. Bb3 a6 13. Nd4 Bc5 14. Be3 Qa7 15. Rfd1 Nc6 16. Nxc6 bxc6 17.
Bxc5 Qxc5 18. e5 O-O 19. Rac1 Qe7 20. f4 f6 21. f5 $1 {
with the initiative for the pawn.}) 11. g3 ({Opening the h-file by} 11. hxg4
hxg4 12. g3 gxf3 13. Qxf3 a6 14. Bf4 Ne5 15. Bxe5 Qxe5 {
is clearly favourable for Black.}) ({But} 11. e5 $5 {deserves attention:} Ngxe5
12. Nxe5 Nxe5 $6 ({probably better is} 12... Qxe5 $1 13. Qxe5 Nxe5 {
as, with two extra pawns, Black can afford to give up the exchange:} 14. Nc7+
Kd8 15. Nxa8 Nxc4 16. b3 Na5 17. Bf4 Nc6 18. Bc7+ Ke7 19. Bh2 d5 20. Nc7 Kd7 {
and Black has the initiative, a strong central pawn mass and the two bishops
to boot}) 13. Bf4 f6 (13... d6 14. Bxe5 dxe5 15. Rac1 Bd7 16. Bxe6 $1 Bxe6 17.
Nc7+ $1 Ke7 18. Qxe5 {both benefit White}) {, and the inclusion of the moves
h2-h3 and ...h7-h5 is favourable for White due to the weakening of the
g6-square (} 14. Bxe5 fxe5 15. Bd3 $1 {).}) 11... a6 ({It is worthwhile to
push back the active knight at once. Otherwise it is capable of causing
trouble:} 11... Bc5 12. Bf4 Nge5 13. Nxe5 Nxe5 14. Rac1 a6 15. Bxe6 $1 Bb6 16.
Rxc8+ $1 {winning, Hoeffner-Ritter, Germany 1975.}) 12. Nc3 ({Still not} 12.
hxg4 $2 axb5 13. Bxb5 hxg4 {with sudden activity for the black rooks. After
the knight moves from f3, then comes} 14. -- Nd4 {.}) 12... Nge5 13. Nxe5 Nxe5
14. Bb3 ({Schmidt-A.Müller, Germany 1993, saw} 14. Bf4 Bd6 15. Bb3 h4 $1 16.
Kg2 hxg3 17. fxg3 Ng6 18. Bxd6 Qxd6 19. Qg4 b5 20. Rad1 Qe5 {and Black is
better. Here, as in the main game, the move 10...h5 was very useful.}) 14... b5
15. Bf4 Bd6 16. Rad1 h4 $1 17. Kg2 hxg3 18. Bxg3 ({
It was probably better to play} 18. fxg3 {
to open the f-file and thereby generate some counterplay.}) 18... Bc7 19. Qd2
Ng6 20. f4 O-O 21. Kh2 Bb7 22. Bc2 Bc6 23. e5 f5 $5 {
Limiting the scope of the bishop on c2.} 24. Ne2 ({After} 24. exf6 Rxf6 {
the black pieces co-operate excellently.}) 24... Bb6 25. Nd4 Bxd4 26. Qxd4 Kf7
$1 {An attack down the h-file is now threatened. Therefore White decides to
exchange queens.} 27. Qd6 Qxd6 28. Rxd6 Rh8 29. Bb3 $2 (29. Bd1 {protected the
g4-square and would have prevented the following beautiful sacrifice.}) 29...
Rxh3+ $1 30. Kxh3 Rh8+ 31. Bh4 Rxh4+ 32. Kg3 Rg4+ 33. Kh2 Nxf4 {The co-ordination of the black pieces is ideal. White must give back the exchange but then he
is just three pawns down.} 34. Rxc6 ({If} 34. Rf2 Rh4+ 35. Kg3 g5 {
threatens ...Nh5 mate and Black wins.}) 34... dxc6 35. Rc1 Rg2+ 36. Kh1 Rxb2
37. Rxc6 a5 38. Rb6 g5 $2 39. Rxb5 g4 $4 {A grave mistake in time-trouble!} ({
After} 39... Kg6 {Black would have won easily.}) 40. Bxe6+ Kxe6 41. Rxb2 Nd3
42. Rb6+ Kxe5 43. Rb5+ Ke4 44. Rxa5 f4 {In this suddenly sharp endgame White
probably can save the game with accurate play. However, White manages to lose
in four moves!} 45. Kg2 $6 (45. Rg5 $1 Kf3 46. Kg1 $1 {
prevents the pawns from advancing for the time being.}) 45... f3+ 46. Kg3 f2
47. Kg2 g3 48. Rb5 $2 ({Necessary was} 48. Ra8 {
to give the rook room to deliver checks.}) 48... Ke3 ({After} 48... Ke3 49. Kf1
Kf3 50. Rf5+ Nf4 {Black threatens 51...g2 mate.}) 0-1

[Event "Linares"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1995.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Quadrio, A."]
[Black "Cacho Reigadas, S."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B21"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "54"]
[EventDate "1995.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Nxc3 Nc6 5. Nf3 Qc7 6. Bc4 e6 7. O-O Nf6 8.
Nb5 Qb8 9. e5 $5 {This move is the most unpleasant for Black and is White's
main hope against this defence to the Morra-Gambit.} a6 $1 ({As usual the pawn
on e5 gains space. Therefore it is necessary first of all to check whether} 
9... Nxe5 {is possible, especially as the capture of the second pawn occurs
more often than other lines. However, White's lead in development is so great
that it is impossible to recommend the capture here.} 10. -- ({. After} 10.
Nxe5 Qxe5 11. Re1 -- (11... Qb8 12. Qd4 d6 13. Bf4 Bd7 (13... e5 {loses to} 14.
Rxe5+) 14. Nxd6+ Bxd6 15. Bxd6 Qd8 16. f4 {Black's position is unenviable.}) ({
. Instead, Klimes-Vild, Plzen 1995, saw} 11... Qc5 12. Bf1 Nd5 $2 ({
returning some material is the only correct strategy for Black:} 12... a6 13.
Be3 Qc6 14. Rc1 ({however,} 14. Na7 $5 {poses serious problems for Black})
14... axb5 15. Rxc6 dxc6 ({or} 15... bxc6 {
, when Black has enough material for the queen and no longer risks being mated}
)) 13. Be3 Nxe3 14. Rxe3 Qb6 15. Rc3 Bc5 16. Qc2 {and White won a piece.})) ({
. It is also difficult for Black to defend after} 10. Bf4 {
. The miniature Maulton-Manik, San Mateo 1992, is characteristic:} d6 11. Re1
$1 Nxc4 12. Qa4 Bd7 13. Qxc4 Bxb5 14. Qxb5+ Nd7 15. Ng5 $1 Be7 16. Nxe6 $1 fxe6
17. Rxe6 Kd8 18. Rae1 Re8 19. Qe2 {and Black resigned.})) (9... Ng4 {
is also not very good. After} 10. Bf4 a6 11. Nd6+ Bxd6 12. exd6 {
the knight is doing nothing on g4.}) 10. exf6 {
This does not give White any hope of an advantage.} ({Interesting is} 10. Nd6+
Bxd6 11. exd6 b5 12. Bb3 Bb7 {with mutual chances. Play might continue} 13. Bg5
Ne4 14. Re1 Na5 15. Bc2 Nxg5 16. Nxg5 Nc4 17. Qh5 g6 18. Qh4 Qxd6 19. Nxh7 f5
20. Qh6 O-O-O {and Black is better.}) 10... axb5 11. fxg7 ({If} 11. Bxb5 {then}
gxf6 12. Re1 Be7 13. Bh6 d5 {and Black is not worse in this complex position.})
11... Bxg7 12. Bxb5 O-O {White has won back his pawn but Black has completed
the development of his kingside and has simultaneously obtained a potentially
strong pawn centre.} 13. Re1 ({Probably better was} 13. Qc2 {
with the idea of attacking the weakened kingside by Nf3-g5.}) 13... d5 14. a4
Qd6 15. Ra3 {White wants to transfer the rook to the kingside, but Black has
sufficient time to defend and his central strategy triumphs.} e5 16. Ng5 Bf5
17. Rg3 Rad8 18. Qh5 $2 {
Here queen is out of play. All the action is in the centre.} Bg6 19. Qh3 Nd4
20. Be2 ({A tougher defence was} 20. Bd2 Nxb5 21. axb5 {
, though Black is still better.}) 20... Qb4 $1 21. Kf1 Nxe2 22. Rxe2 Qxa4 23.
b3 Qa6 24. Bb2 Rc8 25. Ke1 Qa2 26. Rc3 Qb1+ 27. Bc1 Bf5 {White resigns.} ({If} 
27... Bf5 28. Qg3 {, then} Rxc3 29. Qxc3 Rc8 {wins.}) 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "12. Grand Prix Attack"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B21"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "7"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. f4 {, known as the Grand Prix Attack, creates a reversed English/Dutch structure with an extra tempo for White. It is interesting that this
system has been favoured by English players, all the way back to McDonnell (in
an historical 1834 match against de la Bourdonnais, 2 f4 was played more than
ten times). Nowadays the Englishmen Hodgson, Hebden, Plaskett and Watson,
among others, have often played this way. The Danish GM Bent Larsen also
warrants special mention for the development of this line since the 1960s. ---
Players who love to attack but hate opening theory have a tendency to play 2
f4. At once White declares that he is going to attack on the kingside. In the
future he will, if allowed, advance e4-e5 or f4-f5, sometimes sacrificing a
pawn to open lines. It is well known that the best defence against this bold
attack is to counter in the centre.} ({
Also in this chapter we will take a look at the popular move order} 2. Nc3 -- (
2... e6 3. f4 {. This is a hybrid between the Closed Sicilian and the Grand
Prix Attack. Instead of fianchettoing the light-squared bishop, White keeps it
on the f1-a6 diagonal and plays the more direct f2-f4, but first prepares it
with 2 Nc3 to prevent the immediate ...d7-d5.}) ({. White's plans vary in
accordance with his opponent's choice of development. If Black plays} 2... Nc6
3. f4 g6 ({if Black opts instead for} 3... e6 {
, White develops the bishop to b5 and prepares for a more positional struggle})
4. Nf3 Bg7 {, then White's light-squared bishop can occupy the c4-square,} 5.
Bc4 {, and after} e6 6. f5 $5 {a position arises with rich attacking
opportunities. By our move order, 1 e4 c5 2 Nc3 e6 3 f4, the development of
the bishop to b5 is generally predetermined.})) 2... d5 {is therefore quite
logical. We now have an unusual version of the Scandinavian Defence (1 e4 d5),
where the moves f2-f4 and ...c7-c5 have been included. This can hardly be
considered in White's favour. As in the Scandinavian, Black has a choice after}
3. exd5 {between 3...Qxd5 or the gambit move} Nf6 {.} 4. -- ({In this chapter
we will examine the most vigorous reply: 3...Nf6, with the possible
continuations} 4. c4 {(Hodgson-Salov)}) ({and} 4. Bb5+ {
(Zhuravliov-Yermolinsky and the subsequent game).}) *

[Event "Leningrad"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1983.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Hodgson, J."]
[Black "Salov, V."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B21"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "72"]
[EventDate "1983.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 ({After 6...Nc6 we have an analogy with the Scandinavian:} 1... d5 2.
exd5 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. dxe6 Bxe6 5. Nf3 Nc6 {.}) 2. f4 d5 3. exd5 (3. e5 {
leads to positions reminiscent of the French Defence or, perhaps more accurately
, the Caro-Kann Defence, as Black is able to develop his light-squared bishop
so that it is not shut in behind the pawn chain. He has easy development and
convenient play, for example:} Nc6 4. Nf3 Bg4 5. Be2 e6 6. O-O Nge7 7. d3 Nf5
8. c3 Be7 9. Na3 Qb6 10. Nc2 O-O-O 11. Rb1 f6 12. exf6 gxf6 13. Ne3 h5 {
and Black has good chances of concluding the game with a crushing mating
attack on the kingside, Jabbusch-Dobos, Cattolica 1993.}) (3. Nc3 {is named the
'Toilet Variation', as it is said to have been invented by a guy who was
taking care of this side of his daily business at the time. We recommend 3...
d4 with gain of space, when the position develops in the spirit of The King's
Indian Defence with reversed colours:} d4 4. Nce2 Nc6 5. d3 e5 6. Nf3 Bd6 7. g3
Nge7 8. Bg2 f6 {reaching a reversed Sämisch (5 f3) Variation of the King's
Indian, in which the manoeuvre ...Nb8-c6-e7 (or here Nb1-c3-e2) is not well
regarded. Kuzuev-Loginov, St. Petersburg 1998, continued} 9. O-O Be6 10. c4 Qd7
11. a3 {with a complex struggle, where Black is not worse.}) 3... Nf6 {
The continuations 3...Nf6 and 3...Qxd5 are equally popular.} ({
If we compare the position after} 3... Qxd5 4. Nc3 {to the similar line in the
Scandinavian 1 e4 d5 2 exd5 Qxd5 3 Nc3, we see that in our Sicilian version
the queen is deprived of the important a5-square because the c5-pawn is in the
way. There are advantages to having the pawn on c5 - for instance, it is now
very difficult for White to advance in the centre with d2-d4. Nevertheless, 3...Nf6 is more aggressive and therefore more important. As yet no refutation of
this gambit has been found, and it is hard to believe that one will.}) 4. c4 ({
Occasionally the harmless move} 4. Nc3 {is seen, when White wants to avoid the
sharp lines with 4 c4 and 4 Bb5, instead offering the exchange of queens.
Hort-Cramling, Roquebrune 1998, continued} Nxd5 5. Nxd5 Qxd5 6. Qf3 Qe6+ 7. Qe3
Nc6 8. Nf3 g6 9. Bb5 Qxe3+ 10. dxe3 Bd7 11. Bd2 Bg7 12. O-O-O a6 13. Be2 h6 14.
e4 Be6 15. a3 O-O-O {with a roughly equal position.}) 4... e6 5. dxe6 Bxe6 6.
Nf3 Nc6 {Here Black's c5-pawn is usefully controlling d4, but it is not clear
what exactly the white pawn does on f4.} 7. d4 {Returning the pawn is not
justified as it is insufficient to extinguish Black's initiative. However, it
can be psychologically difficult for White to play with the backward d-pawn.
The weaknesses in the white camp guarantee Black counterplay.} ({
For instance, after} 7. Be2 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. Nc3 {Black has a pleasant choice:
} -- (9... Qd7 10. d3 Rad8 11. Be3 $6 Ng4 12. Bd2 Nd4 13. Ne1 Rfe8 {with a pleasant arrangement of the black pieces on the central files in Sale-Lutz, Pula
1997. The game continued} 14. Kh1 Nxe2 15. Qxe2 Bf8 16. h3 Nf6 17. Qf3 Bxc4 {
and here White foolishly tried to keep the extra material, playing} 18. dxc4
Qxd2 19. Qxb7 Rb8 20. Nf3 Qxf4 ({immediately winning was} 20... Qc2 $1) 21.
Qxa7 Rxb2 22. Nd5 Nxd5 23. cxd5 Qg3 24. Nd2 Re7 25. Qa5 Re2 {0-1.}) (9... Re8 {
was seen in Sveshnikov-Grosar, Nova Gorica 1997:} 10. d3 Qd7 11. Kh1 Rad8 12.
Ne5 Nxe5 13. fxe5 Ng4 14. Bf4 g5 $5 15. h3 gxf4 16. Bxg4 Bxg4 17. Qxg4+ Qxg4
18. hxg4 Bg5 19. Rf3 Rxe5 {when having restored material equality, Black is
certainly not worse with his active pieces.})) 7... Nxd4 8. Nxd4 Qxd4 9. Qxd4
cxd4 10. Bd3 Nd7 $1 {The knight is heading for the perfect square c5 to fight
against the blockade of his d-pawn. White now enters a tactical swamp from
which he will not emerge alive.} 11. f5 Nc5 $1 12. fxe6 Nxd3+ 13. Ke2 Ne5 $1 {
It is very important to keep the knight in an active position.} ({After} 13...
Nxc1+ $2 14. Rxc1 fxe6 15. Kd3 {White blockades the central pawns, controls
the light squares and probably has the advantage.}) 14. exf7+ Kxf7 15. b3 Re8
16. Kd1 Kg6 {
Here the king is both safe and active in readiness for the endgame.} 17. Bf4
Ng4 18. Rf1 Bc5 19. h3 ({It was better to play} 19. Rf3 {
at once as the knight was going to e3 anyway.}) 19... Ne3+ 20. Bxe3 dxe3 21.
Nc3 (21. Nc3 {the only move to defend against both} e2+ ({and} 21... Bd4 {
. Nevertheless, White cannot avoid material losses.})) 21... Bb4 $1 22. Kc2 e2
23. Rfe1 Re3 24. Nxe2 {
White loses the exchange and, in addition, cannot escape the pin on the e-file.
} ({After} 24. Nd5 Bxe1 25. Nxe3 Ba5 {the e2-pawn would cost White his rook.})
24... Kh6 25. Rad1 Bxe1 26. Rxe1 g5 27. Kd2 Rhe8 28. Kd1 Rd8+ 29. Kc2 Kg7 30.
Kc1 Rde8 31. Kd2 a5 32. Kd1 h5 33. g3 Kh6 34. Kd2 R8e4 35. Kd1 Rd3+ 36. Kc2
Rxg3 0-1

[Event "Blagoveshchensk"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1988.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Zhuravliov, V."]
[Black "Yermolinsky, A."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B21"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "68"]
[EventDate "1988.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. f4 d5 3. exd5 Nf6 4. Bb5+ {This is a better way than 4 c4 to hold
on to the pawn, as exchanges usually favour the player ahead on material. But
more than that, it is important for White to exchange the light-squared bishop,
which in Hodgson-Salov was rendered completely useless by the pawns on c4 and
d3.} Nbd7 ({The alternative is} 4... Bd7 5. Bxd7+ Qxd7 6. c4 e6 {
when White has two main lines:} 7. -- (7. dxe6 Qxe6+ 8. Qe2 Nc6 {(Black's initiative compensates for the pawn deficit even after the exchange of queens)} 9.
Na3 O-O-O 10. Qxe6+ fxe6 11. Nf3 Bd6 12. d3 e5 $1 13. O-O Rhe8 (13... exf4 14.
Ng5 Rhe8 15. Nf7 Rd7 16. Nxd6+ Rxd6 17. Bxf4 Rxd3 {would equalize}) 14. Nb5 Bb8
15. fxe5 Nxe5 16. Nxe5 Rxe5 17. Bf4 Re2 {
and Black has a good game, Sulskis-Bucher, Geneva 1999.}) (7. Qe2 Bd6 8. f5 $5
O-O 9. fxe6 fxe6 10. dxe6 ({if} 10. Qxe6+ {, then} Qxe6+ 11. dxe6 Re8 {
gives Black an active game, with possible targets at d3 and c4}) {, when it is
unclear which is most important: the two extra white pawns or Black's
initiative. Black's opportunities are illustrated by the game Chernov-Bouaziz,
Bucharest 1992:} 10... Qc7 11. Nf3 Nc6 12. Nc3 Rae8 13. d3 Nd4 14. Nxd4 cxd4
15. Nb5 Bb4+ 16. Bd2 Bxd2+ 17. Kxd2 Qb6 18. Qe5 Rxe6 19. Qxd4 Ne4+ 20. Kc1 Nf2
21. Qxb6 axb6 22. Kd2 ({if} 22. Rg1 Re2 {and White is lost}) 22... Nxh1 23.
Rxh1 Rf2+ {and Black is the exchange up in a winning endgame.})) 5. c4 a6 {
White now has a choice between 6 Ba4 (Hodgson-Yrjola) and the text move.} 6.
Bxd7+ Bxd7 (6... Qxd7 {
seems more clumsy, though in Tkachiev-Milov, Biel 1995, after} 7. Nf3 e6 8. Ne5
Qc7 9. dxe6 (9. Qa4+ Nd7 10. dxe6 fxe6 11. O-O Bd6 {
also gives Black good counterplay due to his lead in development}) 9... Bxe6
10. b3 Nd7 11. Bb2 Bd6 12. Nxd7 Qxd7 13. O-O O-O-O 14. Qf3 f6 {
both players thought a draw was a fair result.}) 7. Nf3 ({Harmless is} 7. Nc3
e6 8. Nge2 exd5 9. Nxd5 Bc6 10. Nec3 Nxd5 11. cxd5 Bxd5 12. Qe2+ Be7 13. Nxd5
Qxd5 14. O-O Rd8 {and Black is better, Petrauskas-Malisauskas, Vilnius 2000.})
({Opening the position by} 7. d4 {is easily criticized given White's lack of
development. Black has good chances after} cxd4 ({and} 7... Bg4 8. Nf3 cxd4 9.
O-O e6 10. dxe6 Bxe6 11. Re1 Be7 12. b3 O-O {
with good compensation, Westerinen-Burger, Brighton 1981}) 8. Qxd4 e6 9. Nc3
Rc8 10. Be3 Bc5 11. Qd3 Bxe3 12. Qxe3 O-O 13. Nge2 Re8 {
with a great variety of ongoing threats in Khalikian-Vitolins, Yerevan 1981.})
7... e6 {The key move in this line, challenging the d5-pawn.} 8. Qe2 ({
In Kravtsov-Fominyh, Vladivostok 1995, White played} 8. dxe6 {
at once, not committing the queen just yet. But after} Bxe6 9. d3 Be7 10. O-O
O-O 11. Nc3 Bf5 12. Ne5 Bd6 13. Be3 Qe7 14. d4 cxd4 15. Bxd4 Rad8 16. Qe1 Bb4
17. Bb6 Rd6 18. c5 Re6 19. a3 Bxc5+ 20. Bxc5 Qxc5+ 21. Qf2 Qe7 {
Black had won back the pawn and achieved full equality.}) 8... Be7 9. dxe6 Bxe6
10. O-O O-O {This is the standard position of the variation. White is a pawn
up, but it is a backward pawn, while Black has better development and the two
bishops. In practice Black has achieved good results.} 11. Nc3 ({White's best
course of action is probably to give back the pawn, as in Sveshnikov-Kiik,
Gausdal 1992:} 11. d3 Bf5 12. Ne5 Bd6 13. Qf3 Re8 14. Nc3 Bxe5 15. fxe5 Qd4+
16. Be3 Qxe5 17. Qxf5 Qxe3+ 18. Kh1 Re5 {½-½.}) 11... Re8 12. Ne5 Nd7 {
So as to exchange White's strongest piece.} 13. Kh1 ({White should show more
respect to his queenside pieces and finish his development following} 13. d3 {
, though Black is still slightly better after} Nxe5 14. fxe5 Qd4+ 15. Qe3 Rad8
{.}) 13... Nxe5 14. fxe5 Qd4 15. b3 Rad8 {This prevents White from completing
his development. Again we should notice the perfect organization of the black
pieces.} 16. Qe4 Rd7 17. Qxd4 Rxd4 18. Re1 f6 $5 {Black now opens up the
position for his bishops, and in this way exploits his lead in development.}
19. Ne4 (19. exf6 Bxf6 20. Nd5 {deserved attention.}) 19... f5 20. Nf2 f4 21.
Re2 ({It was necessary try to exchange a pair of rooks - probably with} 21. Re4
{. Instead White tries to hang on to the pawn on d2 at all costs. This gives
Black the freedom and time to execute his main plan: an advance on the
kingside.}) 21... Red8 22. a4 Bf5 23. Ra2 g5 24. h3 Kf7 25. Kg1 Ke6 26. Kf1 h5
27. Ke1 g4 28. Bb2 {At last the bishop makes it to b2, but now White is in for
a severe disappointment.} g3 $1 29. Bxd4 ({Against} 29. Nd1 {
Black had prepared a beautiful win:} f3 $1 30. gxf3 Rxd2 $1 31. Rxd2 Rxd2 {
and White is forced to give up his knight to stop the g-pawn from promoting.})
29... cxd4 30. Kf1 {If the knight moves, then Black plays 30...d3 and the
white rook is trapped in its own house.} gxf2 31. Rxf2 Kxe5 32. Ra1 Bd3+ 33.
Kg1 Bh4 34. Rf3 Be2 {White had finally had enough and resigned.} 0-1

[Event "Tallinn"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1987.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Hodgson, J."]
[Black "Yrjola, J."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B21"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "38"]
[EventDate "1987.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. f4 d5 3. exd5 Nf6 4. Bb5+ Nbd7 5. c4 a6 6. Ba4 {The bishop on a4
holds the black army in check but, fortunately, it is possible to take
immediate action to break the unpleasant pin.} b5 7. cxb5 Nxd5 {
Black takes control over the centre.} ({
Also possible is the immediate attack on the white bishop with} 7... Nb6 {
. After} 8. bxa6+ Nxa4 9. Qxa4+ Bd7 10. Qc4 e6 11. Nc3 $6 {
, (W.Watson-Razuvaev, London 1983) Black could launch a beautiful attack:} ({
in the case of} 11. dxe6 Bxe6 12. Qe2 {
Black still has to prove compensation for the pawns, but after the natural} Be7
{he has a big lead in development and the two bishops to support him in his
quest}) 11... exd5 $1 12. Nxd5 Nxd5 13. Qxd5 Rxa6 {
and the rook enters quickly into the fray. For example:} 14. Nf3 Re6+ 15. Kf2
Re2+ $1 16. Kf1 ({not} 16. Kg3 $2 Rxg2+ {
and the king cannot hide from the decisive bishop check}) 16... Bb5 17. Qxd8+
Kxd8 18. d3 Bxd3 19. Kg1 c4 {and Black has a very dangerous initiative.}) 8.
Nf3 {There are a few alternatives here:} (8. d4 $2 axb5 9. Bc2 ({if White tries
} 9. Bxb5 {, to keep some material compensation for his fractured centre,
Black has the forced continuation} Qa5+ 10. Nc3 Nxc3 11. Bxd7+ Bxd7 12. bxc3
Qxc3+ 13. Bd2 Qxd4 {and now Black is a pawn up and completely winning}) 9... e6
{leaves Black with a structural advantage.}) (8. bxa6 Rxa6 9. Ne2 e6 10. O-O c4
$5 {leads to unclear play in which the scope of the black pieces fully
compensates for the pawn.}) ({Kallio-Pyhala, Helsinki 1997, saw} 8. Nc3 Nb4 $5
(8... N7b6) ({and} 8... axb5 9. Bxb5 Bb7 {also deserved attention}) 9. Nf3 Nd3+
10. Kf1 c4 11. bxa6 Rxa6 $5 12. Bb5 Qc7 $1 13. Bxa6 Bxa6 14. Qa4 $2 ({
this is a mistake, but after} 14. g3 Bb7 {
it is not easy for White to defend his weaknesses}) 14... Qb6 15. Ke2 (15. Nd1
c3 $3 16. Qd4 c2 {wins}) 15... Qf2+ 16. Kd1 Qxg2 {and Black won.}) 8... g6 {
Black has other good options:} (8... Qa5 {
was played in Valkesalmi-Rajkovic, Gausdal 1984, which continued} 9. b6 N5xb6
10. Bc6 Ra7 11. O-O Rc7 12. Ne5 c4 13. d4 cxd3 14. Qxd3 e6 15. a3 Nd5 16. Kh1
Be7 17. f5 O-O {and Black has finished his development with a good position.})
({Matthias-Arkhipov, Lippstadt 1994, saw} 8... N7b6 9. bxa6+ Nxa4 10. Qxa4+ Qd7
$1 11. Qxd7+ Bxd7 {when Black has good compensation despite the exchange of
queens, due to his lead in development and the many weak spots in the white
camp. After} 12. O-O Nxf4 13. Nc3 Nd3 14. Nd5 ({better is} 14. Ne1 {
to exchange the unpleasant knight}) 14... Ra7 15. b3 Bb5 16. Nb6 g6 17. a4 Bxa6
18. Ba3 Bg7 19. Rab1 O-O {Black has obviously increased his advantage.}) 9. Nc3
N5b6 ({It is useful to exchange the bishop as Black then gets full control
over the light squares. In return White sees no prospects for the bishop on
either the a2-g8 diagonal (} 9... N5b6 10. Bb3 $6 {is met by} c4 {), or the b1-h7 diagonal. Therefore he prefers the vigorous advance in the centre.}) 10. d4
Nxa4 11. Qxa4 ({In the case of} 11. Nxa4 Qa5+ 12. Bd2 Qxb5 13. Nc3 Qd3 {
, White is forced to exchange queens with} 14. Qe2 {
and go into a slightly inferior ending.}) 11... Bg7 12. Be3 $2 {
White wants to keep the tension in the centre, but this is a mistake.} ({
Better was} 12. dxc5 Nxc5 13. Qc4 Nd3+ 14. Ke2 Nxc1+ 15. Raxc1 {when the position is unclear. It is not easy to see how Black can exploit the exposed state
of the white king in the centre.}) 12... Nb6 13. Qa5 O-O ({
Black cannot win a pawn by} 13... cxd4 $2 {. Following} 14. Nxd4 Bxd4 15. Rd1
axb5 16. Qb4 {White regains the piece with advantage, since after} Bxc3+ 17.
Qxc3 {the black rook on h8 is hanging.}) 14. O-O-O {
The alternatives are not pleasant either:} (14. Rd1 Nc4 $1 {
and the centre collapses}) ({or if} 14. dxc5 Qd3 $1 {
and the white king is in trouble.}) 14... axb5 15. Qxb5 Ba6 16. Qxc5 ({
The simplifications after} 16. dxc5 Bxb5 17. Rxd8 Rfxd8 18. cxb6 Bxc3 19. bxc3
Rxa2 {are clearly unacceptable for White.}) 16... Nc4 17. Rhe1 Qb8 $1 18. b3 $2
{A decisive weakening of the position around his king.} ({But after} 18. Rd2
Rc8 19. Qg5 Bf6 20. Qg3 Na3 21. Rc2 Nxc2 22. Kxc2 Bc4 {
White is still under the weather.}) 18... Rc8 19. Qxc8+ Bxc8 0-1

[Event "Skopje Olympiad"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1972.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Hug, W."]
[Black "Gligoric, S."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B23"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "80"]
[EventDate "1972.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. f4 Nc6 ({Of course} 3... d5 {
is good too. This often leads to the same positions as after 3...Nc6.}) 4. Nf3
{The most natural move.} (4. Bc4 $6 {
does not impress as the bishop becomes an easy target for the black pawns:} a6
5. a4 Nge7 6. d3 (6. Nf3 d5 7. Ba2 b5 $1 8. axb5 $6 axb5 9. Nxb5 $6 Nb4 10. Na3
dxe4 11. Ng5 Nf5 {
gave Black a big advantage in the ancient game Lowe-Kennedy, London 1849}) 6...
d5 7. Bb3 Nd4 8. Nf3 Nxb3 9. cxb3 Nc6 10. O-O Be7 11. Bd2 O-O {
and Black is already better, Esquivias-Ionov, Benasque 1997.}) 4... d5 5. Bb5 {
This is the main line. The alternatives 5 e5, 5 exd5 and 5 d3 only offer White
a struggle for equality:} ({On} 5. e5 {Black will transfer his knight to f5
via e7 or h6, gaining control over the centre and good attacking possibilities:
} Nge7 ({or} 5... Nh6 6. Bb5 Bd7 7. Qe2 Nf5 8. Bxc6 Bxc6 9. b3 Qb6 10. Bb2 c4
$5 11. g4 Nd4 12. Nxd4 Qxd4 13. Rf1 Qb6 14. f5 O-O-O {
and Black had good prospects in Bujakevich-Sveshnikov, Moscow 1994}) 6. g3 Nf5
{(this position could of course also arise via 5...Nh6 6 g3 Nf5)} 7. Bg2 h5 $5
{(very ambitious) and now:} 8. -- ({. Aronin-Kan, Moscow 1952, continued} 8.
O-O $6 c4 $1 9. Ne2 Bc5+ 10. Kh1 h4 $1 11. g4 h3 $1 12. gxf5 hxg2+ 13. Kxg2
exf5 14. d4 cxd3 15. Qxd3 Qb6 16. c3 a5 17. Ned4 Bxd4 18. cxd4 Bd7 19. Bd2 Ne7
{with a better game for Black, who might even find he could improve his game
and claim an even larger advantage.}) ({
. Skripchenko Lautier-Galliamova Ivanchuk, New Delhi 2000, saw} 8. d3 b6 9. Ne2
Bb7 10. c3 d4 $5 11. h3 dxc3 12. bxc3 Qd7 13. O-O Rd8 14. Ne1 Nce7 15. Bxb7
Qxb7 16. Qa4+ Rd7 17. Qe4 Nd5 18. a3 c4 $1 19. d4 h4 20. g4 Ng3 21. Nxg3 hxg3 {
with an obvious advantage to Black.} (21... --))) ({
If White opens the e-file by} 5. exd5 exd5 {, then it is unclear why he played
f2-f4, which now seems merely to have weakened the e4- and g4-squares, and
limit the scope of the dark-squared bishop. After} 6. Bb5 Nf6 7. Qe2+ $6 ({
this check achieves very little; better was} 7. O-O Be7 8. Ne5 Qd6 9. Bxc6+
bxc6 10. d3 O-O 11. b3 Nd7 {with a roughly equal position}) 7... Be7 8. Bxc6+
bxc6 9. Ne5 Qc7 10. d3 O-O 11. O-O Bd6 12. Na4 Re8 13. Qf2 Ng4 $1 {
(exchanging White's best placed piece)} 14. Nxg4 Bxg4 15. b3 Re2 {
(this could no longer be prevented)} 16. Qg3 Bd7 17. Bb2 d4 18. c3 Rae8 $1 {
White's position looked very bad in Shtyrenkov-Hagarova, Pardubice 2000.}) ({
As always,} 5. d3 {
is rather harmless. Black now has to choose between the simple} dxe4 {
and the more aggressive 5...Nf6.} ({. Only} 5... d4 {
is no good, as White is well placed for a reversed King's Indian.}) ({. After} 
5... Nf6 $5 6. e5 Nd7 {White must fianchetto the light-squared bishop as} 7. d4
{produces a standard position from the French Defence, but with Black to move.}
({So Reiter-Varga, Budapest 1994, continued} 7. g3 b5 $5 8. Bg2 ({not} 8. Nxb5
$4 Qa5+ 9. Nc3 d4 {and Black wins a piece}) 8... b4 9. Ne2 Be7 10. O-O O-O 11.
g4 (11. a3 $5 {, to not burn all the bridges, was an option}) 11... f6 $5 {
(White does not have enough control in the centre to keep fighting for control
over it)} 12. exf6 Nxf6 13. h3 ({or} 13. g5 Nh5 {and Black is slightly better})
13... Qc7 14. c3 Bd6 15. d4 bxc3 16. bxc3 Ba6 {and Black has the initiative.}))
) 5... Nf6 {One of two equally good moves. In this game Black develops the
knight to the most natural square, but allows White to double his pawns.} ({
The alternative} 5... Nge7 {is considered in Minasian-Dreev.}) 6. d3 ({
The direct attempt to exploit the pin by} 6. Ne5 {
only brings White problems after} Qc7 {as, for example} 7. -- ({
, in Sofman-Polugaevsky, Leningrad 1962:} 7. d3 Be7 8. Qf3 O-O 9. Bxc6 bxc6 10.
g4 $5 {(the centre seems secure so White launches his attack immediately)} Ba6
11. g5 Ne8 12. Rg1 c4 $1 {(a typical resource with this structure: Black tries
to eliminate his doubled pawns and open a diagonal for his light-squared
bishop)} 13. Rg3 f6 $5 14. gxf6 Nxf6 15. Be3 Bd6 16. d4 dxe4 17. Nxe4 Nxe4 18.
Qxe4 Qa5+ 19. Bd2 Qd5 20. Qe3 c5 $1 {
and Black clearly had taken over the initiative.}) ({
. Similarly in Tseshkovsky-Sveshnikov, Sochi 1980:} 7. Qf3 a6 8. Bxc6+ bxc6 9.
O-O Bd6 $5 10. Nd3 ({the knight has to go back; after} 10. Nxf7 Qxf7 11. e5 Be7
12. exf6 Bxf6 {and Black has the edge}) 10... c4 $1 {(again!)} 11. Ne1 O-O 12.
d3 cxd3 13. cxd3 Be7 14. Qg3 a5 15. e5 Nh5 16. Qh3 g6 17. g4 Ng7 18. Be3 h5 $5
19. gxh5 Nxh5 20. Rf2 c5 {and Black is already better.})) (6. Bxc6+ bxc6 {
leads to positions similar to the main game, including the same ideas. For
example:} 7. e5 Nd7 8. O-O c4 $5 {(of course!)} 9. b3 Ba6 10. bxc4 Bxc4 11. d3
Ba6 12. Kh1 Qa5 13. Ne2 g6 14. Bd2 Qc7 15. Qe1 Bg7 {
with a pleasant game for Black in Gentilleau-Vaisser, Escaldes 1998.}) 6... Be7
7. O-O O-O 8. Bxc6 bxc6 {White's basic plan consists of fixing Black's
queenside pawns, closing the position to favour the knights and limiting the
scope of the black bishops, and then attacking the weak pawns.} 9. Bd2 {
This seems to be inaccurate. The following alternatives should be studied:} (9.
e5 Nd7 10. Qe1 Rb8 ({Black should play} 10... Ba6 {and ...c5-c4, to open up
the position on the queenside for the bishops, as below in the main game}) 11.
b3 f5 12. Ba3 Rf7 13. Na4 h6 14. c4 g5 15. Rc1 Ba6 16. g3 Rg7 17. Kh1 Rc8 {
and White is a slightly better, Keitlinghaus-Pekarek, Prague 1992.}) (9. b3 {
(against ...c5-c4 and more normal than 9 Bd2)} Ba6 10. e5 Nd7 11. Ne2 c4 $5 {
(anyway!)} 12. d4 c5 13. Be3 Qc7 14. Rf2 cxb3 15. axb3 Bxe2 16. Qxe2 {
and a draw was agreed in Hickl-Hodgson, Jakarta 1996.}) ({
In Szell-Biriescu, Budapest 1981, White began aggression on the kingside:} 9.
Qe1 Ba6 10. Ne5 Qc7 11. b3 c4 $5 12. dxc4 dxc4 13. Rf3 Rfd8 14. Bb2 c5 15. Rh3
Rd4 16. Qh4 h6 17. Qg3 {with a complex fight.}) 9... Ba6 10. e5 Nd7 11. Qe1 d4
$5 12. Ne4 c4 {Without doubt this must be played! If White is given time for
13 b3 then Black would be strategically lost.} 13. Ba5 Nb6 14. dxc4 Bxc4 15.
Rf2 c5 16. b3 Bd5 17. c4 dxc3 ({After} 17... Bb7 {it would be difficult for
Black to activate his knight and dark-squared bishop, and furthermore the
passed d-pawn on d4 could be easily blockaded.}) 18. Bxc3 $6 ({More natural was
} 18. Nxc3 {with approximate equality.}) 18... c4 $1 {
Now the dark-squared bishop also becomes active.} 19. Rd2 Qc7 20. Rc1 Rfd8 21.
Bd4 Rac8 {Black is better due to the two bishops. His pieces are placed
harmoniously and after ...Qc7-b7 the pressure on the long diagonal will be
unpleasant. White therefore decides to change the character of the struggle.}
22. Nf6+ $5 Bxf6 $1 {A pragmatic decision.} ({
If Black accepts the sacrifice with} 22... gxf6 23. exf6 Bd6 ({or} 23... Bf8
24. Qg3+ Kh8) 24. Qg3+ Kf8 25. Ne5 {then White has a dangerous initiative.
Although it seems that Black should be able to ride out the storm, he is
content to have an extra pawn and keep the initiative, rather than take risks,
which is not difficult to understand. After all, the position was very quiet
just a move ago!}) 23. exf6 Qxf4 24. Be5 Qh6 25. bxc4 ({If} 25. fxg7 {, then}
f6 {with a good position for Black.}) 25... Nxc4 26. Rdc2 gxf6 27. Qg3+ Kh8 28.
Ng5 Rf8 {White cannot really do anything to hurt Black.} 29. Ba1 e5 30. Qd3
Qxg5 31. Qxd5 Ne3 $1 {
The combinative possibilities of queen and knight are well known.} 32. Rxc8
Nxd5 33. Rxf8+ Kg7 34. Rfc8 Nf4 35. R1c2 Nh3+ 36. Kf1 Qf5+ 37. Ke1 Qe4+ 38. Kd1
Nf2+ $1 {A small tactical trick, which leads to immediate victory.} 39. Kd2 ({
If} 39. Rxf2 Qg4+ {wins the rook on c8.}) 39... Qd3+ 40. Ke1 Ne4 {
. Black intends ...Qe3+ etc.} 0-1

[Event "Sochi"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1982.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Minasian, A."]
[Black "Dreev, A."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B23"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "81"]
[EventDate "1982.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. f4 Nc6 4. Nf3 d5 5. Bb5 Nge7 {Black avoids doubled
c-pawns at the cost of obstructing his dark-squared bishop.} 6. d3 {
Alternatively:} ({Strangely, on} 6. exd5 -- ({, it is probably best to play} 
6... Nxd5 {, allowing the doubled pawns after all. Hebden-Miles, Manchester
1982, continued} 7. Ne5 Bd7 8. Bxc6 Bxc6 9. Nxc6 bxc6 10. O-O Be7 11. Qe2 O-O
12. Ne4 f5 $5 13. Nc3 Qd6 14. d3 Bf6 15. Bd2 Rab8 16. Rab1 Rfe8 17. Qf3 Nb4 18.
Qd1 c4 $5 19. a3 Nd5 {and all Black's pieces were very active.}) ({. After} 
6... exd5 $6 7. Qe2 {
, however, it is difficult for Black to complete his development. For instance,
} Qd6 8. Ne5 Bd7 ({or} 8... a6 9. Bxc6+ bxc6 10. b3 f6 11. Nf3 Kf7 12. Ba3 Nf5
13. g3 a5 14. O-O Ba6 15. d3 Bb5 16. Rae1 {
with good attacking prospects in King-Podzielny, German League 1985}) 9. Bxc6
Bxc6 10. Nb5 Qd8 11. O-O f6 12. Nxc6 bxc6 13. Nc3 Kf7 14. f5 Qd7 15. Qf3 c4 16.
d3 {and Black had big problems in Rogoff-Tukmakov, Graz 1972.})) ({
Instead of the inert 6 d3, strongest seems to be} 6. Qe2 -- ({, when} 6... a6
7. Bxc6+ Nxc6 {is impossible due to} 8. exd5 {winning a pawn. This is
regrettable from a positional point of view. Black must first clear up the
situation in the centre before completing his development. Nevertheless, Black
cannot develop without some difficulties.}) ({. After} 6... dxe4 7. Nxe4 a6 8.
Bxc6+ Nxc6 9. b3 Be7 10. Bb2 O-O 11. O-O {the white bishop on b2 presses
unpleasantly on the black position, Rossolimo-Zuckerman, New York 1966.}) ({
. In Bangiev-Novikov, Kiev 1978, Black closed the centre with} 6... d4 {
, which was justified after} 7. Na4 ({a shorter way is} 7. Nd1 $1 {
and then after} a6 8. Bxc6+ Nxc6 9. d3 {followed by Nd1-f2, 0-0 White's
chances are slightly better, as he can attack the enemy king}) 7... a6 8. Bxc6+
Nxc6 9. b3 Be7 10. d3 O-O 11. O-O f5 12. Bd2 b5 13. Nb2 Qd7 14. Rae1 Bb7 15.
Nd1 Rae8 16. Nf2 {
with unclear play. Clearly the white knight chose a very long route to f2.}))
6... a6 7. Bxc6+ Nxc6 8. O-O Be7 9. Kh1 O-O 10. Qe1 {The standard queen
transfer to the kingside is not as logical here as in many games with a
similar structure. With the black pawn still on d5 (compare the variation 6
Qe2 d4 7 Nd1 given above), it is more difficult for White to organize an
attack on the king in peace, as the constant threat of ...d5xe4 ties him down.}
({More pertinent was} 10. Bd2 {.}) 10... b5 {Black outpaces his opponent.
White withdraws the knight from the possible threat of ...b5-b4, but instead
Black focuses on the c2-pawn.} 11. Ne2 Nb4 12. Qc3 {White is forced to forget
about attacking and the advantage in order just to defend his weak spots.} ({If
} 12. Qd1 $2 dxe4 {and the c-pawn is history.}) 12... Bb7 13. a3 Nc6 14. Ng3
Qa5 {After the exchange of queens Black is clearly better since White has no
relevant counterplay.} 15. Qxa5 Nxa5 16. Bd2 Nc6 17. exd5 exd5 18. Rae1 Rfe8
19. d4 $2 ({In a constrained position the weaker side should usually try to
trade some pieces so as to relieve the tension. Therefore it was preferable to
play} 19. Re2 {and} -- 20. Rfe1 {, planning to exchange rooks on the e-file.
Instead White tries to struggle against Black's territorial advantage. This is
a mistake.}) 19... Nxd4 $1 ({Weaker is} 19... cxd4 $6 20. Nf5 Bc5 21. b4 Bb6
22. Nd6 Reb8 23. Ne5 {and the white knights are rather active. After a pair of
knights are exchanged White has no compensation for the pawn.}) 20. Nxd4 cxd4
21. Nf5 Bf6 22. Nd6 Rxe1 23. Rxe1 Bc6 24. Nf5 Kh8 25. Nd6 Ra7 26. Ba5 h5 27.
Nf5 d3 28. cxd3 Bxb2 29. Bb4 d4 30. Rb1 Bc3 31. Rc1 Rd7 $1 32. Nxd4 {
The subsequent skirmish lands White in a rook endgame two pawns down.} ({But} 
32. Bxc3 dxc3 33. Rxc3 Be4 $1 {is more evidence against White's position.})
32... Bxg2+ 33. Kxg2 Bxb4 34. Nxb5 Bd2 35. Rc8+ Kh7 36. Nc7 Rxd3 37. Rf8 Bxf4
38. Rxf7 Rd2+ 39. Kf3 Bxc7 40. Rxc7 Rxh2 41. Kf4 0-1

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "13. 2 g3"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B20"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "4"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. g3 {This version of the Closed Sicilian has never enjoyed great
popularity, but at the same time has never completely disappeared from
tournament practice. White aspires to support the e4-pawn with Bf1-g2 and then
create a powerful pawn centre by c2-c3 and d2-d4. This is obviously not
possible in the standard Closed (with 2 Nc3) since White's knight occupies the
c3-square. The drawback is that 2 g3 fails to control the very important
d5-square and Black can thus play} d5 {at once. This immediate counterplay in
the centre is beyond doubt the strongest reply to this offbeat line.} *

[Event "Planernaya"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1981.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Kuznetsov, A."]
[Black "Chekhov, V."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B20"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "74"]
[EventDate "1981.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. g3 d5 3. exd5 {Other possibilities:} ({After} 3. Bg2 dxe4 4. -- (4.
Bxe4 Nf6 5. Bg2 Bg4 (5... g6 {is good too}) 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. O-O e6 8. h3 Bh5 9.
d3 Be7 10. Nc3 O-O {Black has easy play.}) ({
. More interesting is the pawn sacrifice} 4. Nc3 $5 {, first seen at high
level in the 1930s. Spielmann-Bogoljubow, Semmering 1932, continued} f5 5. f3
$5 ({in Grishanovich-Yemelin, St Petersburg 1997, White tried} 5. d3 $5 exd3 6.
Bf4 Nc6 ({or} 6... dxc2 7. Qxd8+ Kxd8 8. Nf3 {
with an initiative for the sacrificed material}) 7. Qxd3 Qxd3 8. cxd3 Bd7 9.
Nf3 Nh6 $5 10. O-O-O Ng4 (10... Nf7 $5) 11. Rd2 e5 $1 12. Nxe5 Ngxe5 13. Bxe5
Nxe5 14. Re1 O-O-O 15. Rxe5 Bd6 16. Re1 Rde8 {and, after having returned the
pawn, Black is now clearly better due to the bishop pair and better pawn
structure}) 5... exf3 ({obviously Black is okay after} 5... e3 6. dxe3 Qxd1+ {
and 7...e5}) 6. Nxf3 Nc6 7. O-O e5 8. d3 Be7 9. Qe2 Bf6 10. Be3 Qd6 11. Nb5 Qe7
12. Qf2 Nd4 13. Nbxd4 cxd4 14. Bxd4 $1 exd4 15. Rae1 Be6 16. Rxe6 $1 Qxe6 17.
Re1 Qxe1+ 18. Qxe1+ Ne7 19. Qe6 {and here White's queen is stronger than the
two rooks because of Black's poor co-ordination.})) (3. d3 {is sometimes seen,
even in the games of strong grandmasters. The idea is to avoid theory and play
a complex middlegame without queens:} dxe4 4. dxe4 Qxd1+ 5. Kxd1 Nc6 6. Be3 b6
7. Nd2 g6 8. c3 Bg7 9. f3 Nf6 ({or} 9... Bb7 10. Nh3 h5 $5 11. Bb5 h4 12. Ke2
Nf6 13. g4 Nd7 14. f4 O-O-O {was unclear in Chelushkina-Z.Polgar, Moscow 1994})
10. Nh3 O-O 11. Kc2 Bb7 12. Rd1 Rfd8 {
with an equal position and a draw in Karpov-Ligterink, Groningen 1967.}) 3...
Qxd5 {The queen comes early into play as Black hopes to exploit the weakened
long diagonal and the light squares in White's kingside. Consequently, a
tussle immediately starts.} 4. Nf3 ({The exchange of queens after} 4. Qf3 {
is harmless:} Qxf3 5. Nxf3 Nc6 6. Bg2 {and Black develops freely with ...
Bc8-f5, ...e7-e6, ...Ng8-f6, ...Bf8-e7 and chooses which side to castle
according to the situation on the board.}) 4... Bg4 5. Bg2 Qe6+ $5 ({
Notice that} 5... Qe6+ 6. Qe2 Qxe2+ 7. Kxe2 Nc6 {
is already pleasant for Black, so White must give up his right to castle.}) 6.
Kf1 Nc6 ({Black has often played} 6... Bh3 {here, in order to exchange the
light-squared bishops and hence weaken White's kingside.} 7. -- ({. After} 7.
d4 cxd4 8. Nxd4 Qd5 ({or} 8... Qd7 9. Nc3 Nc6) 9. Qf3 Qxf3 10. Nxf3 Bxg2+ 11.
Kxg2 Nc6 {it is difficult for White to get the initiative without the
light-squared bishop.}) ({. However, as the black c5-pawn is a hindrance,
White therefore eliminates it by means of a pawn sacrifice:} 7. b4 $5 {
, as played successfully by ICCF Grandmaster Korolev. Then White either clears
the way for his pieces after} cxb4 8. a3 b3 ({or for his d- and c-pawns after} 
8... bxa3 9. Nxa3 Nc6 10. d4 Qd7 11. c4 {when it is not so easy for Black to
defend. Korolev-Semin, correspondence 1980, continued} O-O-O 12. Nb5 a6 13. Bf4
f6 14. d5 e5 15. Qe2 $5 exf4 16. dxc6 bxc6 17. Rxa6 Qd1+ 18. Qxd1 Rxd1+ 19. Ke2
Rxh1 20. Rxc6+ Kd8 21. Bxh3 $1 Nh6 $6 22. Rc8+ Ke7 23. Rc7+ Kd8 24. Rd7+ Kc8
25. Na7+ Kb8 26. Nc6+ Kc8 27. Be6 $1 {1-0}) 9. Nc3 Nf6 (9... bxc2 10. Qxc2 Nc6
{looks alright for Black, though there are some dangers}) 10. Rb1)) ({
All in all,} 6... Nc6 {is to be recommended. The knight on c6 controls the b4-
and d4-squares so that Black now threatens ...Bg4-h3. For example, after} 7.
Nc3 Bh3 8. d3 O-O-O 9. Be3 Qf5 $1 10. Nh4 Bxg2+ 11. Kxg2 Qe5 12. Bf4 Qe6 {
the weakness of the white kingside is felt. Therefore White responds with the
text move.}) 7. h3 Bh5 8. d3 {
White doesn't decide where to place the queen's knight just yet.} ({If first} 
8. Nc3 {, the routine} Qd7 {, clearing the way for the e-pawn to move forwards,
gives White an interesting possibility to exchange queens:} ({correct is} 8...
Nf6 {to protect the bishop, and transposing to the main line after 9 d3 Qd7
and 10...e6. For White, the knight transfer from c3 to the kingside, intending
to exchange the light-squared bishop, is too slow:} 9. Ne2 $6 Qd7 10. Nf4 Bg6
11. Nxg6 hxg6 12. d3 e6 13. Nd2 $6 Rd8 14. a4 Nd5 15. Nc4 Be7 16. Kg1 g5 $1 17.
a5 f5 18. c3 Bf6 19. Qa4 O-O 20. Qb5 f4 $1 {
and Black has the initiative, Iuldachev-Zagrebelny, Tashkent 1992}) 9. Ne5 $5
Bxd1 10. Nxd7 Bxc2 11. Nxc5 O-O-O 12. b4 $5 {
with an attack on the king. Vesselovsky-Pyda, Lublin 1993, continued} e5 13.
Nxb7 Kxb7 14. b5 Nge7 15. Bb2 f5 16. g4 g6 17. Rc1 {with many threats.}) 8...
Qd7 9. Nc3 (9. Na3 {is seen in Sepp-Yakovich.}) ({
If White tries to exchange the h5-bishop at once by} 9. g4 Bg6 10. Nh4 {
, then Black can make use of the pin on the d-file with} c4 $1 11. Nxg6 hxg6
12. Nc3 O-O-O 13. Be3 cxd3 14. Qxd3 Qxd3+ 15. cxd3 Rxd3 16. Bxc6 bxc6 17. Bxa7
{with approximate equality (Suetin).}) 9... e6 10. Bf4 ({
Clamping down on the queenside with a2-a4-a5 is harmless for Black:} 10. a4 Nf6
11. a5 Rd8 $1 {(the rook puts his x-ray eyes on the white queen on d1)} 12. g4
Bg6 13. Nh4 Be7 14. Nxg6 hxg6 {with the break ...c5-c4 to follow and Black has
no problems. In Short-Sveshnikov, Solingen 1992, White continued
unsuccessfully with} 15. h4 $6 a6 16. Be3 Qc7 17. g5 Nh5 18. Bxc6+ Qxc6 19. Rh3
c4 {when Black has very good chances indeed due to the misplacement of the
white pieces.}) ({The position after} 10. Be3 {has not been investigated
thoroughly. Here the games normally lead (often by transposition) to the
following position:} Nf6 11. g4 Bg6 12. Nh4 Be7 13. Nxg6 hxg6 {, and now} 14.
Ne4 ({instead} 14. g5 {
prepares Nc3-e4, but still does not promise an advantage:} Nh5 15. Ne4 b6 16.
Qe2 Rd8 17. c3 f5 {with unclear play, Tiulin-Ivanov, correspondence 1992})
14... Nxe4 15. dxe4 Qc7 16. c3 O-O {is unclear.}) 10... Nf6 11. g4 {
White prepares to take control of e5.} ({In Guseinov-Vasiukov, Doha 1992, after
} 11. a4 Bd6 12. Bg5 h6 13. Bxf6 gxf6 14. Ne4 Be7 15. Qd2 Bxf3 16. Bxf3 Nd4 17.
Bg2 f5 18. Nc3 Bg5 19. Qd1 Bf6 20. a5 Rb8 {
Black stood well due to the strong knight on d4.}) 11... Bg6 12. Ne5 Nxe5 13.
Bxe5 Bd6 $1 {This pawn sacrifice is the strongest continuation. If White
accepts the b7-pawn, Black can make good use of the weaknesses in his
opponent's camp (such as the f4 square, for example).} 14. Bxd6 {
It is better for White to decline the offered pawn.} ({
Complex play with mutual chances results from} 14. Bxf6 gxf6 15. Qf3 Be5 16.
Ne4 ({or} 16. Qxb7 Qxb7 17. Bxb7 Rb8 18. Bc6+ Ke7 {and Black regains his pawn})
16... Qe7 17. Nd2 Rb8 18. Nc4 Bc7 19. a4 h5 20. Qe3 Kf8 {
, Veinger-Har Zvi, Rishon le Zion 1991.}) ({The other continuation is} 14. Qe2
{when Black has two main lines to choose from:} -- (14... Bxe5 15. Qxe5 Rc8 16.
Bf3 O-O 17. Rg1 ({more natural was} 17. Kg2 {to centralize the rook}) 17... Qd4
18. Re1 Qxe5 19. Rxe5 c4 {with equality in Chandler-Hübner, Wijk aan Zee 1982.}
) ({. Alternatively, because of his central control, Black can afford to
castle queenside despite White's pressure on b7. Short-Chandler, Dortmund 1983,
continued} 14... O-O-O 15. a4 Bxe5 16. Qxe5 Qd4 17. Qg3 c4 18. Nb5 Qc5 19. dxc4
Ne4 20. Bxe4 Bxe4 21. Rh2 a6 22. Na3 Rd2 {
and Black has the initiative in return for a single pawn.})) 14... Qxd6 15.
Bxb7 Rb8 16. Qf3 O-O 17. Rb1 c4 $1 {
The key move, which very often lends Black a helping hand in this line.} 18.
Be4 ({White wants to simplify the position, since on} 18. dxc4 {Black replies}
Bxc2 {and} 19. -- Bd3+) ({while after} 18. g5 Nh5 19. Be4 f5 $1 {
White will feel the strength of the black attack down the f-file.}) 18... Nxe4
19. dxe4 f5 $1 20. exf5 exf5 21. Qd5+ Qxd5 22. Nxd5 Rb7 23. Nf4 Be8 {Black has 
entered the endgame still a pawn down, but his pieces are much better located
so he obviously has full compensation.} 24. Ne6 $6 ({Better was} 24. g5 {
closing the f-file.}) 24... Rf6 25. Nd4 fxg4 26. hxg4 Rf4 27. Nf5 c3 $1 28. b3
Bb5+ 29. Ke1 Rxg4 30. Rd1 Rb6 31. a4 $2 {Ignoring the danger.} ({Better was} 
31. Rd8+ Kf7 32. Kd1 {when White retains some chances of saving the game.})
31... Re6+ 32. Ne3 Rh6 $1 {This game has been filled with interesting tactical
twists, and it is not about to stop just yet.} 33. Rf1 Bxf1 34. Nxg4 Rh1 35.
Rd8+ Kf7 36. f3 Ke7 37. Rc8 $2 {a blunder in a difficult position;} ({
but on any other rook move, such as} 37. Ra8 {
, Black has good winning chances after} Bd3+ 38. Kf2 Bxc2 {.}) 37... Ba6+ 0-1

[Event "Leeuwarden"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1993.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Sepp, O."]
[Black "Yakovich, Y."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B20"]
[Annotator "Alexander Raetsky"]
[PlyCount "109"]
[EventDate "1993.??.??"]
[Source "Everyman Chess"]
[SourceDate "2011.08.15"]

1. e4 c5 2. g3 d5 3. exd5 Qxd5 4. Nf3 Bg4 5. Bg2 Qe6+ 6. Kf1 Nc6 7. h3 Bh5 8.
d3 Qd7 9. Na3 {The main continuation in this variation. The knight heads for
c4 where it is very well placed, overlooking the e5-square. Often White will
play a2-a4 to reinforce the outpost, and g3-g4 followed by Nf3-e5 to gain the
bishop pair.} e6 ({Black must be careful in choosing which pawn structure he
wants in the centre. For instance,} 9... e5 10. Be3 Nf6 11. Nc4 Qc7 12. Qe1 Be7
13. Nfxe5 $1 {
gave White a clear advantage in Tischbierek-S.Polgar, Vienna 1991.}) ({
And after} 9... f6 10. Be3 Nd4 (10... e5 $2 {loses a pawn to} 11. Nxe5 $1 Bxd1
12. Nxd7 Bxc2 13. Nxc5 $5 Bxc5 14. Nxc2) 11. c3 Bxf3 12. Bxf3 Nxf3 13. Qxf3 e5
14. Kg2 O-O-O 15. d4 $1 {
White possesses a dangerous initiative, Ibragimov-Tolnai, Budapest 1992.}) 10.
Nc4 ({In Balashov-Filipenko, Katowice 1992, White achieved nothing with} 10. g4
Bg6 11. Nc4 f6 $5 12. a4 Nge7 13. h4 e5 14. Nfd2 Bf7 15. Ne3 O-O-O 16. a5 a6
17. Ndc4 Kb8 18. h5 Qc7 19. Be4 Nc8 20. c3 Nd6 21. Nxd6 Bxd6 {
and the position is equal.}) 10... f6 $5 {The modest pawn set-up with ...e7-e6
and ...f7-f6 is the most reliable, as it limits White's tactical opportunities.
Again Black needs to be careful.} ({If} 10... Nf6 $6 11. g4 Bg6 12. Bf4 Nd5 13.
Nfe5 Nxe5 14. Nxe5 Qd8 15. Bg3 Bd6 16. Qe2 {(with the idea of h3-h4)} Bxe5 17.
Qxe5 O-O 18. h4 {, then White has a clear advantage with two strong bishops
and a promising attack on the kingside, Lima-Makarichev, Seville 1990.}) 11.
Be3 Rd8 12. a4 Nd4 13. Bxd4 cxd4 14. Qe1 Ne7 {Black does not try to keep the
two bishops, as this would lead to delays in his development.} ({If} 14... Bf7
15. Qa5 $1 b6 16. Qb5 {
and White has good chances of creating queenside pressure. Note that} Ne7 $4
17. Nd6# {is very unfortunate!}) ({Also,} 14... Bc5 15. Nfe5 $1 Qc7 16. g4 {
gives White unpleasant pressure on the long diagonal.}) 15. Qa5 Bxf3 16. Bxf3
b6 17. Qb5 Kf7 $1 {After this precise move Black quickly finishes his
development and completely equalizes.} 18. Kg2 Nd5 19. Rhe1 Bc5 20. Re2 Rhe8
21. Nd2 Bf8 $1 {
A well timed manoeuvre! Black now prepares counterplay against the c2-pawn.}
22. Nb3 Nb4 23. Qc4 Rc8 24. Qxd4 Qxd4 25. Nxd4 e5 26. Nf5 Nxc2 27. Bd5+ Kg6 28.
Rc1 Ne3+ 29. Rxe3 Kxf5 ({A colourful finale could have arisen after} 29... Rxc1
30. Nh4+ Kh6 31. Bf7 Rd8 32. Nf5+ Kg5 33. h4+ Kxf5 34. g4+ $1 {
and the rook will deliver perpetual check, though White would probably prefer}
Kf4 $4 35. Re4# {mate!}) 30. Rc4 Rxc4 31. dxc4 Kg6 32. Rd3 Bc5 33. Bc6 Rc8 34.
Bd7 Rc7 ({Not} 34... Rd8 $4 {when the reply} 35. Bf5+ {is a shock.}) 35. Be8+
Kf5 36. Bd7+ Kg6 37. f4 e4 38. Rd5 Kf7 39. Bf5 ({Slightly better was} 39. f5 {.
}) 39... Re7 40. Rd7 {
Otherwise Black's passed e-pawn would have become dangerous.} Rxd7 41. Bxd7 {
The position is completely equal, but still the struggle continues.} g6 42. g4
Ke7 43. Bc8 Be3 44. Kg3 Bd2 45. b3 a5 46. h4 Be1+ 47. Kh3 Kd6 48. Bb7 e3 49. h5
gxh5 50. gxh5 Kc5 51. Kg2 Kd4 52. Kf3 f5 53. Bc8 Kd3 54. c5 $1 {This is very
accurate. Now White can put his bishop on c4, protecting the important b3-pawn
and taking control of the a6-f1 diagonal.} bxc5 55. Bxf5+ 1/2-1/2

