1.d4 b5 2.e4 Bb7?
Here Black plays a reversed Polish Opening. We feel that the simplest solution is to play the same line that we used as Black versus the Polish, but a tempo up. Even Magnus Carlsen couldn’t hold Black’s position together when he essayed 1…b5.
Wojtkiewicz – Bronstein
Reykjavik 1994
1.d4 b5 2.e4 Bb7?
After this Black is already defending in a cramped position. 2…a6 is the St George, which we looked at under the move order 1.e4 a6 2.d4 b5.
3.Bxb5!
The simplest move, and also the best.
3…Bxe4 4.Nf3
White is playing a Polish Orangutan position a full tempo up. That is, 1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 Bxb4 3.Bxe5 Nf6 reversed with the extra move d2-d4. We think this is the best line for Black against the Polish, so all the better to play it here.
4…e6
4…Nf6 comes into consideration.
5.0-0 Nf6 6.c4!
It’s useful to advance the c-pawn before playing Nc3, in order to support d5. Another good move is 6.Re1, when 6…c5? runs into 7.Nc3 Bb7 8.d5!.
6…Bb7 7.Nc3 Be7
8.Ba4
White wants to play Bc2 in many lines, and he also wants to play d4-d5 without having to deal with …c7-c6. Kramnik-Carlsen, Moscow (rapid) 2011, saw White play the other strong move 8.d5! and the game shows that even the all-time highest-rated player can’t get away with this nonsense: 8…0-0 9.Bf4 Na6 (Black loses after 9…c6? 10.d6! cxb5 11.dxe7 Qxe7 12.Bd6 Bxf3 13.gxf3) 10.Re1 Qc8 11.Nd4 Bb4 12.Bg5 Ne8? 13.Re3!? (13.Qa4!) 13…c6 14.Bxa6 Bxa6 15.Qh5 f6 16.Rh3 fxg5 17.Qxh7+ Kf7 18.Qh5+ (or 18.dxe6+ dxe6 19.Ne4) 18…Kg8 19.Qh7+ Kf7 20.Ne4
Bxc4 21.Qh5+ Ke7 22.Qxg5+ Kf7 23.Qh5+ Ke7 24.Qg5+ Kf7 25.dxe6+ dxe6 26.Nf3! Kg8 27.Qh4 Rxf3 28.Qh7+ 1-0.
8…0-0 9.d5!?
9.Bc2 and 9.Re1 are also good.
9…Na6 10.a3 Nc5 11.Bc2 a5 12.Be3 exd5 13.cxd5 g6 14.Re1 Nh5
Black has no space and is simply flailing about.
15.Ne5 Ng7 16.Bd4 a4?
But 16…d6 17.Nc6 Bxc6 18.dxc6 isn’t much better!
17.Nxa4!?
Fine, but 17.Ng4! with the idea Rxe7 wins more easily. After 17…f6, 18.Nb5! Na6 (18…f5 19.Nh6+ Kh8 20.Nxc7!, 19.Bxa4 gives White a pawn and huge position.
17…d6 18.Ng4 f5?
18…Nd7 holds on for a while.
19.Bxg7 Kxg7 20.Qd4+ Bf6 21.Nxf6 Rxf6
21…Qxf6 22.Nxc5! has the idea 22…Qxd4? (but 22…dxc5 23.Qxc5 Rf7 24.Re6 is hopeless) 23.Ne6+ Kf7 24.Nxd4.
22.Nc3 Kg8 23.f4 Rf7 24.b4 Nd7 25.Ba4 Nf6 26.Bc6 Rb8 27.b5 Bxc6 28.dxc6 d5 29.Rad1 Qd6 30.a4
This is a total slaughter. The game ended a little sloppily, but the outcome wasn’t in doubt:
30…Ra8 31.Re5 Qa3 32.Nxd5 Rxa4 33.Nxf6+ Rxf6 34.Qd8+ Rf8 35.Re8 Qc5+ 36.Kh1 Rb4 37.Rxf8+ Qxf8 38.Qxc7 Rxb5 39.h3 Rb8 40.Qd7 Qc5 41.c7 Rf8 42.Qd5+ Qxd5 43.Rxd5 Kf7 44.Rd8 1-0
Slav: Winawer Countergambit (D10)
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 e5
This advance, directly challenging White’s center, is known as the Winawer Countergambit. It looks aggressive, but White can win a pawn and then, while Black works to recover it, White gains a lead in development.
Arlandi – Ortega
Imperia 1996
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 e5
Here Black normally prefers 3…Nf6 with a Slav Defence, or 3…dxc4, or a Triangle formation with 3…e6.
4.dxe5
A) 4.e3 is cautious but still leaves plenty to play for: 4…e4 (4…exd4 5.Qxd4 Nf6 6.Nf3 is a reversed Sicilian Alapin Variation where White will play cxd5 at some point and work against the isolated pawn), with a reversed French Advance Variation. For example, 5.Bd2 Nf6 6.Nh3!?, or 5.Nge2;
B) The main book alternative is 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.dxe5 d4 6.Ne4 Qa5+ 7.Nd2
with a slight advantage. For example, 7…Nc6 8.Ngf3 Bg4 9.g3 Bxf3 10.exf3 Qxe5+ (10…Nxe5 11.f4 Nc6 12.Bd3 Be7 13.0-0, Strunsky-Stotyn, playchess.com 2009. White has the bishop pair, and can continue with a2-a3 and b2-b4) 11.Qe2 Qxe2+ 12.Bxe2, an ending that has scored well for White with his bishop pair, one example continuing 12…0-0-0 13.Bc4 Bb4 (13…Rd7 14.0-0 Nf6 15.Rd1 a6 16.Ne4 Nxe4 17.fxe4 Bc5 18.a3 Ne5 19.Bd5, with a definite advantage) 14.a3 (14.Bxf7) 14…Bxd2+ 15.Bxd2 Ne5 16.Be2 d3!? 17.Rc1+ (17.Bc3!) 17…Kd7? (17…Nc6) 18.f4! dxe2 19.fxe5 Ne7 20.Kxe2, with a winning endgame, Fridman-Hector, Germany Bundesliga 2009/10.
4…d4 5.Ne4 Qa5+ 6.Bd2 Qxe5 7.Ng3
White’s plan is to extend his lead in development (Nf3 is coming) and then challenge the pawn on d4.
7…Nf6
A) 7…c5 8.Nf3 Qc7 9.e3
favors White’s development. For example, 9…Nc6 (9…dxe3 10.Qe2! has the idea of 0-0-0, Qxe3 and/or Bc3, in one order or another depending on what Black does) 10.exd4 cxd4 11.Bd3 Bd6 12.0-0 Nge7 Agrest-Hector, Malmö 1993 and here 13.c5! is good, with the idea 13…Bxc5?! (13…Bf4 14.Bxf4 Qxf4 15.Ne2 Qf6 16.Nexd4! Nxd4 17.Nxd4) 14.Rc1 Bb6 15.Re1 (or 15.b4 a6 16.a4+-) 15…Be6 (15…Bg4 16.Bb4) 16.Ng5 Qd7 17.Nh5 0-0-0 18.Nxe6 fxe6 19.b4 and White will win a piece;
B) 7…Bc5 8.b4 Be7 9.Nf3 Qd6 10.c5 Qd8 11.Bf4, Mozetic-Pajkovic, Igalo tt 1994. The pawn on d4 hangs, so 11…a5 12.Ne4! axb4 13.Nd6+ Bxd6 14.Bxd6 might follow, with a fine position;
C) 7…Be6 8.Nf3 Qc5 9.a3 Nf6 (no better are 9…Bxc4 10.Rc1 Qd5 11.Nxd4! Qxd4 12.e3 and 9…Qxc4 10.e3 Qd5 11.Nxd4) 10.e3 dxe3 11.Bxe3 Qd6 12.Qe2 (or 12.Be2 Qxd1+ 13.Rxd1, or 12.Ng5) 12…Nbd7 13.Rd1 Qc7 14.Qd2 0-0-0 15.Bf4 Qb6 16.b4 with a nice attack.
8.Nf3 Qd6 9.Qc2
White is simply going to play 0-0-0, e2-e3, and Bc3, breaking up the center and opening lines.
9…Be7
9…c5 is again met by 10.e3 Nc6 11.exd4 Nxd4 12.Nxd4 cxd4 13.Bd3, with the better game.
10.0-0-0 0-0 11.Bc3 c5
11…Qf4+ 12.e3! dxe3 13.fxe3 Qxe3+ 14.Kb1.
This is, at best, very dangerous for Black. After Bd3 and Rhe1, all of White’s pieces will have great scope, and most will be aimed at the kingside. One example is 14…Na6 15.Nd4 (or 15.a3! Qf4 16.Bd3) 15…Bb4 16.Ndf5 Bxf5 17.Nxf5 Qe6 18.Bd3 Bxc3 19.Qxc3 c5 20.Rhe1 Qb6, Azmaiparashvili-Eslon, Seville 1994, and here White played 21Re3 with a strong attack, but 21.g4! is even stronger.
12.e3 Nc6 13.exd4
Or 13.Kb1 Bg4 14.Be2 and it’s still hard for Black to hang onto d4.
13…cxd4 14.Nxd4 Nb4
White is a pawn up, and now…
15.Qb3
… would have kept a nice advantage. For example:
15…Qf4+ 16.Kb1 a5 17.Bd2 Qg4 18.Qf3! Rd8 19.Bc3
And Black is running out of ideas.
1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5
The Albin Countergambit is a positionally well-based opening that always has some dedicated followers. Alexander Morozevich is the highest-level grandmaster to advocate for the Albin. In addition, entire books have been written in its support. Sacrificing the e-pawn gains space and can give Black a serious initiative. Nevertheless, it’s always a little dicey for Black to gambit a pawn, since he’s a tempo behind to begin with. In our solution, White plays cautiously and avoids excessive greed. He can sometimes return the pawn for a long-term initiative. As usual, we are avoiding the main lines that extend into 20 moves of theory and are impractical for anyone except the professional. On the other hand, we are going to show lines in considerably more depth than usual so that you can get a feel for how both sides should play.
1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3
The move that we prefer. Incidentally, be sure to avoid the trap 4.e3? Bb4+ 5.Bd2 dxe3!.
Black stands well regardless of how White responds:
A) 6.Qa4+? Nc6 7.Bxb4 doesn’t help at all: 7…exf2+ 8.Kxf2 Qh4+ 9.g3 Qd4+;
B) 
6.Bxb4?? exf2+ 7.Ke2 fxg1N+! 8.Ke1 (8.Rxg1 Bg4+) 8…Qh4+ and wins. Play might proceed 9.Kd2 Nc6 and White is getting killed. For example, 10.Bc3 Bg4 11.Qe1 0-0-0+;
C) 6.fxe3! is best, but then White’s e-pawns are both weak and isolated. Apart from 6…Nc6 intending …Nge7-g6, Black can recover his pawn by 6…Qh4+ 7.g3 Qe4 8.Nf3 (8.Qf3 Bxd2+ 9.Nxd2 Qxe5.) 8…Bxd2+ 9.Nbxd2 Qxe3+ 10.Qe2 Qxe2+ 11.Bxe2 Nc6, with an edge (White’s e-pawn is weak).
4…Nc6
The most direct method to get play for the pawn, developing with tempo. Other options are:
A) 4…Bc5?! 5.Nbd2 Nc6 6.Nb3 Bb4+ 7.Bd2 Be7 8.e3! with the idea 8…d3? 9.Nbd4! Nxd4 10.exd4;
B) 4…c5?! 5.e3 Nc6 6.exd4 cxd4 7.Bd3! is active: 7…Bg4 (7…Nxe5? 8.Qe2 f6 9.Bf4 Bd6 10.c5! Qa5+ 11.Nbd2 Qxc5 12.0-0) 8.0-0 Qc7 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3 Nxe5 11.Re1 Bd6 12.Bf4 Ne7 13.Bxe5 (or 13.Qg3 Nf3+ 14.Qxf3 Bxf4 15.Na3 a6 16.Re4! Bd6 17.Rae1, with the idea 17…0-0? 18.Rxe7 Bxe7 19.Qe4) 13…Bxe5 14.Na3 a6 15.c5! Bf6 16.Nc4 Qxc5 17.Qxb7 0-0 18.Nb6 Rab8 19.Qe4 Ng6 20.Nd7, and White is winning, Grünfeld-Tartakower, Karlsbad 1923.
5.Nbd2
Eric and John have been recommending this move for decades, in several books, most recently Strategic Opening Repertoire for White. Developing the knight is not so common as the main line 5.g3, but it creates its own set of problems, and is generally less risky because Black can’t simply proceed mechanically with …Bf5, …Qd7, …Bh3, and …h5-h4 without losing his d-pawn. With 5.Nbd2, White would like to win the d-pawn with Nb3, expand on the queenside with a2-a3 and b2-b4, or play g2-g3, depending on what Black is doing. So far Black hasn’t found a truly satisfactory response. There is nothing new about this plan, which was recommended by Dr. Tarrasch in his 1924 book on the Queen’s Gambit. Black has a remarkable number of approaches, and we’ll try to cover as many as possible.
5…Bg4
This move is probably the most natural one, yet Black has no less than seven legitimate tries here! The good thing is that White’s ideas are the same against most of them. We may not refute the Albin Countergambit here, but White should come out with some advantage in every line, so the burden of proof is on Black. While the moves of Black’s queen’s bishop (5…Be6, 5…Bf5, and 5…Bg4) are the most obvious, to play for…0-0-0, each alternative is instructive:
A) 5…Bb4 6.a3 Bxd2+ 7.Bxd2 (or 7.Qxd2! Bg4 8.b4) 7…Bg4 8.Qb3!? (8.h3 Bxf3 9.gxf3 Nxe5 10.f4 Nc6 11.Bg2 and White stands better) 8…Rb8 (8…Nge7 9.e3) 9.Bg5 Nge7 10.0-0-0 0-0 11.e3 Re8, Marshall-Showalter, 8th match game, US Championship 1909. Now 12.exd4 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 Nxd4 14.Qg4 c5 15.Bf6 g6 16.Qg5! wins;
B) 5…Qe7
and:
B1) 6.a3!? Bf5 (6…Nxe5 7.Nxe5 Qxe5 8.Nf3 and White has the advantage) 7.b4 0-0-0 8.Bb2 f6! 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.g3!? Ng4 11.Bg2 Ne3 12.fxe3 dxe3 13.Qc1 exd2+ 14.Nxd2 Nd4. This is theory. White has a pawn and can still play for a win following 15.Bxd4 Rxd4 16.Nb3 Rd8 17.0-0. For example, 17…Be4 18.Bh3+!? (18.Bf3 with an edge) 18…Kb8 19.Nc5 Bc6! 20.Ne6 Rd6 21.Nxf8 (or 21.Rd1) 21…Qe4 22.Rf3 Qxe2 23.Rf2 Qe4 24.Bg2 Qd4 25.Nxh7! Bxg2 (25…Rxh7 26.Qc3!!) 26.Kxg2 Qe4+ 27.Kg1 Qxh7 28.Qe3 Rd3 29.Qe5 with an edge;
B2) 6.g3! is safer. For example, 6…Bg4 (6…Nxe5 7.Nxe5 Qxe5 8.Bg2 d3 9.Ne4) 7.Bg2 0-0-0 8.0-0 d3?! (8…f6 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.a3) 9.exd3 Rxd3 10.Qe2 (10.Qa4!) 10…Qd8 11.Nb3 Szigeti-Balogh, Tatatovaros 1935.
C) 5…f6 6.exf6
can lead to:
C1) 6…Qxf6 7.Nb3 (7.a3 is also considered good by theory. Or 7.g3; for example, 7…Bg4 8.Bg2 0-0-0 9.h3 Bf5 10.0-0) 7…Bg4 (7…Bb4+ 8.Bd2 Bxd2+ 9.Qxd2 Bg4 10.Qg5!) 8.a3 (threatening 9.Bg5) 8…h6 (8…Bxf3 9.exf3 0-0-0 10.Bd3 Qe5+ 11.Qe2 Re8 12.Qxe5 Nxe5 13.Kd2! c5 14.Re1 Nf6 15.f4) 9.Nbxd4 0-0-0 10.e3 and White can return one of his two pawns to reach safety. For example, 10…Bc5 11.Qc2!? Bxd4 12.Nxd4 Nxd4 13.exd4 Qxd4 14.Be3;
C2) 6…Nxf6 7.a3 a5 (7…Be6 8.b4 Qd7 9.Bb2 a6 10.g3! 0-0-0 11.Bg2) 8.Nb3 Be6 9.Qd3 (or 9.e3) 9…Bf7 10.Nbxd4 Nxd4 11.Nxd4 Bc5 12.Nb3 (12.Qe3+! Be7 13.Nf5 is even better) 12…Bb6 13.Be3 0-0 14.Qxd8 Raxd8 15.Bxb6 cxb6 16.e3 Bernstein-Janowsky, Barmen 1905. This game was repeated move-for-move 92 years later in Burmakin-Halser, Graz 1997!
D) 5…Nge7 is one of the most popular lines and was picked up by Morozevich in 2005. White can’t overwhelm Black, but he can retain some advantage: 6.Nb3 (6.a3 is also good, but more complicated. One line goes 6…Ng6 7.Nb3 Ngxe5 8.Nxe5 Nxe5 9.Qxd4! Qxd4 10.Nxd4 Nxc4 11.e4 Ne5 12.Nb5! Kd8 13.Be3, with an edge for White) 6…Nf5 7.e4!? (this is a well-established and risk-free way to get the better game; 7.a3 is also good, but can get messy) 7…dxe3 8.Qxd8+ Nxd8 (Black’s king position is a drawback following 8…Kxd8 9.fxe3. For example, 9…Bb4+ 10.Kf2 Be7 11.Nbd4 Bd7 12.Bd3 Nh4 13.Be4 Ng6 14.Nxc6+ Bxc6 15.Bd5 Jojua-Adnani, Manama 2009) 9.fxe3. White has weak isolated pawns, but they are hard to attack and actually support a White knight on d4, while his other pieces develop rapidly and actively. For example, 9…Nc6 (9…Ne7 10.Bd2 Nec6 11.Nbd4 Bd7 12.Bd3 Bb4 13.0-0-0 Maksimenko-Antoniewski, Wysowa 2007; 9…Bb4+ 10.Kf2 Be7 11.Nbd4 0-0 12.Bd3 Nh4 De Jong-Docx, Gent 2006, and here 13.Bd2 is simple enough. For example, 13…Re8 14.Nxh4 Bxh4+ 15.g3 Be7 16.Bc3) 10.Nbd4 Bb4+ 11.Kf2 (White also stands better after 11.Bd2 Bxd2+ 12.Kxd2 Bd7 13.Bd3) 11…Nfxd4 12.exd4 Bg4 13.Be3 0-0-0 14.Rc1, with the idea 14…Bxf3 15.gxf3 Nxd4 16.Bh3+ Kb8 17.Rhd1 Nc6 18.a3 Be7 19.f4 g5! 20.Rd5!;
E) 5…Bf5 6.Nb3.
This used to be considered the main line of the Albin with 5 Nbd2. However, Black doesn’t have a clear way to prevent White from developing and staying a pawn ahead. Here are the most important continuations:
E1) 6…Qd7 7.Nbxd4! 0-0-0 (7…Bb4+ 8.Bd2 Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Qxd4 10.Qa4+ c6 11.Qxb4) 8.e3 Bc5 9.Be2 Bxd4 (Astrup-Eriksson, Oslo 2003), and now 10.Nxd4 isn’t bad, but 10.exd4! gives a clear advantage: 10…Nb4 (10…Nxd4? 11.Nxd4 Qxd4 12.Qxd4 Rxd4 13.Bd2 Ne7 14.Bc3, with the bishop pair and a clear extra pawn) 11.0-0 Nc2 12.Rb1 (12.Be3 Nxa1 13.Qxa1, with two pawns for the exchange, is also good) 12…Nxd4 (12…Nb4 13.Nh4! with the idea 13…Bxb1 14.Bg4) 13.Nxd4 Qxd4 14.Qxd4 Rxd4 15.Be3 Re4 16.Rbe1 Be6 (16…Rxe5? 17.Bd4) 17.b3 Ne7 18.Bd2 Nf5 19.Bf3;
E2) 6…g6? 7.Nbxd4 Nxd4 8.Nxd4 Bg7 9.Nxf5 Qxd1+ 10.Kxd1 gxf5 11.f4 0-0-0+ 12.Kc2 Gaier-Heckmann, Ladenburg 1992;
E3) 6…a5? 7.a3 d3 8.Be3! dxe2 9.Qxd8+ (or 9.Qxe2) 9…Rxd8 10.Bxe2+–;
E4) 6…Bb4+ (the most common move in practice) 7.Bd2 Qe7 (7…Be7 8.Na5! Nxa5 9.Bxa5 b6 10.Bd2 c5 11.e3; 7…Nge7 8.Nbxd4 0-0 9.Bxb4 Nxb4 10.a3 Nbc6 11.Nxf5 Nxf5 12.e4 Hickl-Musielak, corr. 1987; 7…d3?! 8.exd3! Bxd3 9.Bxb4! Nxb4 10.Nbd4 Bxf1 11.Qa4+! with an extra pawn and better position; 7…Nge7? 8.Bxb4 Nxb4 9.Nbxd4) 8.Nbxd4 Nxe5 9.Nxe5 Bxd2+ 10.Qxd2 Qxe5 11.Nxf5 Qxf5 12.Rd1 Nf6 13.Qe3+ Kf8 14.Qa3+ (or 14.g3 Qa5+ 15.Qd2) 14…Kg8 15.e3, or even 15.Qxa7! Re8 16.Qd4;
E5) 6…f6?! 7.Nbxd4! Bb4+ 8.Bd2 Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Qxd4 10.Qa4+! (10.Bxb4? Qxb2) 10…c6 11.Qxb4 0-0-0 12.e3 (or 12.Be3 Qxe5 13.Bxa7!? with two extra pawns) 12…Qxe5 13.Bc3 Qe6 14.Be2.
F) 5…Be6 gives White a good choice:
F1) 6.Nb3!? Bxc4 (6…Bb4+ 7.Bd2 Qe7 8.a3 Bxd2+ 9.Qxd2 favors White) 7.Nbxd4 Bc5 (7…Qd7 8.Nxc6 Qxc6 9.Bd2! 7…Nxd4?! 8.Qxd4 Qxd4 9.Nxd4 Rd8, and 10.Nc2 has been played, but 10.Nf3 seems clearer. For example, 10…Ne7?! 11.e4 Bxf1 12.Rxf1 Nc6 13.Be3 Be7 14.Ke2, etc.) 8.Be3! (8.e3 Bxf1 9.Rxf1! Dzevlan-Furhoff, Stockholm 1992) 8…Bb4+ 9.Bd2 Bxd2+ 10.Qxd2;
F2) 6.a3 Qd7 (6…Nge7 transposes to 5…Nge7 6.a3 Be6) 7.b4 Nge7 8.b5 Na5 9.Qa4 b6 10.Bb2 c5 (10…Nf5 11.Rd1 h5 12.g3 Be7 13.Bh3!) 11.bxc6 Nexc6 12.Nxd4 Nxd4 13.Qxd7+ Kxd7 14.Bxd4 Nxc4 15.Nxc4 Bxc4 16.e3 Bxf1 17.Rxf1 (analysis by Raetsky).
6.Qb3!?
Here we are following our philosophy of using somewhat rare but safe moves. Instead, 6.a3 is the theoretical move, which yields some advantage as well.
6…Bb4
A) 6…Nge7 7.a3 (not 7.Qxb7? Rb8 8.Qa6 Nb4 9.Qa4+ Bd7 10.Qd1 Bf5 7.e3!?) 7…a5 (7…Qd7 8.Qxb7) 8.h3 a4 9.Qd3 Bf5 10.e4 dxe3 11.Qxe3 with an edge;
B) 6…Rb8 defends b7 but forfeits the possibility of …0-0-0: 7.h3 (7.a3, with some advantage for White) 7…Bf5 (no better is 7…Be6 8.a3 Nge7 9.Qd3 Ng6 10.e3! Ngxe5 11.Nxe5 Nxe5 12.Qxd4) 8.g4 (8.a3) 8…Be6 9.Bg2 Nge7 10.Ng5! Ng6 (10…Qd7 11.f4 10…Bd7 11.c5 Nxe5 12.Ndf3 N7g6 13.Nxe5 Nxe5 14.Bd5 Qe7 15.Bf4 and White is in charge) 11.Nxe6 fxe6 12.0-0 Ngxe5 13.Ne4 with the bishop pair, a wonderful knight outpost, and mobile pawns;
C) 6…Qd7 7.h3 Bf5 8.a3 0-0-0 9.e3 dxe3 (9…d3 10.Qc3 with the idea b2-b4, and White has the option of e4 if he needs it) 10.Qxe3 Re8 (10…g6 11.Be2 Bh6 12.Qc3 Bg7 13.Nb3 Qe7 14.0-0!Nxe5 15.Nfd4 Bd7 16.Re1 and Black can’t coordinate his pieces) 11.b4 f6 12.Bb2 fxe5 13.0-0-0 Qe7 14.Re1 e4 15.Qf4! with a clear advantage.
7.a3
7.h3 looks effective at this point: 7…Bxf3!? (7…Bh5 8.g4 Bg6 9.a3) 8.gxf3 Qe7 9.a3 Bxd2+ 10.Bxd2 0-0-0 11.f4 remains a pawn to the good. Black needs to activate immediately, but the sequence 11…f6 12.Bg2 fxe5 13.Bxc6 bxc6 14.Qa4 leads to further problems for Black. For example, 14…Kb7 15.Bb4 Qf6 16.Bc5 a6 17.Qb4+ Ka8 (17…Kc8 18.fxe5 Qxe5 19.0-0-0 Nf6 20.Qa5) 18.fxe5 Qxe5 19.0-0-0 Nf6 20.Qa5 Kb7 21.Rd3 and White is winning.
7…Bxd2+ 8.Nxd2!?
The most common move, leading to wild and fun complications. It is probably enough to establish a very small edge, but we think that 8.Bxd2!
is definitely better for White: 8…Nge7 (8…Rb8 9.Bg5!? Nge7 10.0-0-0 0-0 11.e3 Marshall-Showalter, 8th match game, US Championship 1909. In this line 9.e3! looks solidly better for White) 9.0-0-0!?. Now Bc3 will follow, with pressure on the d-pawn. Black is struggling to regain his pawn. Play can continue 9…0-0 10.Bc3 Bxf3 11.gxf3 Ng6 12.e3 Ngxe5 13.exd4 Nxf3 14.d5 Nce5 15.h4! with the idea Rh3. The bishops ensure White the advantage.
8…Nge7 9.Qg3!?
A little greedy. Safer is 9.h3!. For example, 9…Be6 (9…Bf5 10.g4 Bg6? 11.f4) 10.Nf3 0-0 11.e3 Rb8 12.Qd3 dxe3 13.Bxe3 with an edge.
9…Qd7 10.h3 Be6
Or 10…Bf5 11.Qxg7 Rg8 12.Qf6 Rg6 13.Qh4 Nxe5, and now the forcing sequence 14.g4 Be6 15.f4!? (15.b3 is the safe alternative) 15…Nxc4 16.f5 seems good. For example, 16…Ne3 17.fxg6 Nxg6 18.Qf6 Nc2+ 19.Kf2 Bd5 20.Bg2 Bxg2 21.Kxg2 Nxa1 22.Rf1 Qc6+ 23.Qxc6+ bxc6 24.Ne4 and White has the chances.
11.Qxg7
Or 11.b3 0-0 12.Bb2.
11…0-0-0 12.Qf6!?
12.Ne4 Bxc4 13.Nf6 Qe6 14.Qg4 Nxe5 15.Qxe6+ is a good option.
12…Nf5!?
(Grekov-Nenarokov, Moscow 1922) And here instead of 13.g4? Ne3!!, favoring Black, White could have played 13.Ne4 Rhg8! 14.g4! Rg6 15.gxf5 Rxf6 16.Nxf6 Qe7 17.fxe6, when 17…Nxe5 18.Ne4 Qxe6 19.Bg2 Rg8 20.Ng3 Nxc4 21.Bf3 is totally unclear! This is a rather unstable line, but White would have had a real advantage had he played 8.Bxd2, and even in the 8.Nxd2 main line, 9.h3 was preferable from a practical standpoint. In general, White manages to maintain the advantage after 5.Nbd2, and faces few risks in the process.
Zukertort Opening 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Bg4 (D02)
1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Bg4
With this move Black is hoping to develop with the idea of …Bxf3, and then perhaps …e7-e6, when he hasn’t blocked in his bishop. But White can ruin his plans with an aggressive response.
1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Bg4 3.Ne5!
White doesn’t allow Black to settle in. The bishop must retreat.
3…Bh5
3…Bf5 4.c4
has the idea of playing Qb3 and pressuring the queenside light squares that Black has left unprotected. For example:
A) 4…Nd7 5.cxd5! and Black can’t recover his pawn: 5…Ngf6 6.Nc3 Nb6 7.e4! Nxe4? 8.Bb5+, when Black can already resign;
B) 4…Nf6 5.cxd5 (or 5.Qb3) 5…Nxd5 6.Qb3 with the idea 6…Nc6 7.e4! Bxe4 8.Qxb7 and wins;
C) 4…dxc4 5.Nc3 Nf6 (versus e2-e4) 6.Bg5 (6.f3! is better, with e2-e4 next) 6…Nbd7 7.Nxc4 h6 8.Bh4 e6 9.e4 with a large central advantage, Feller-Kurkijarvi, Budva jr 2003;
D) 4…f6 5.Nf3 dxc4 (5…e6 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Nh4 Ne7 8.Nxf5 Nxf5 9.e3 favors White’s bishops and structure) 6.Nc3 with e2-e4 to follow. White will quickly pick up the pawn on c4 and Black has only weakened his own position with the …f7-f6 move.
4.Qd3!?
This has the double idea of Qb5+ and Qh3. Actually White has several good moves:
A) 4.c4 f6 5.g4!
5…fxe5 (5…Bf7 6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.Bg2 threatens the d5-pawn as well as Qb3) 6.gxh5 and Black has some problems with his light squares while trying to neutralize White’s bishop pair. For example, 6…exd4 (6…Nc6 7.Bg2!) 7.Qb3! (or 7.Bg2 Nf6 8.cxd5 as in Andersson-Van Riemsdijk, Rio de Janeiro 1985) 7…b6 8.cxd5 Nf6 9.Bg2 etc.;
B) 4.g4 Bg6 (4…f6 5.gxh5 fxe5 6.dxe5 e6 7.Bh3!) 5.h4!? (or 5.Bg2 e6 6.c4) 5…e6 (5…f6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 7.Qd3) 6.h5 Be4 7.f3 f6 8.fxe4 fxe5 9.Bg2. For example, 9…dxe4 10.Bxe4 c6 11.c3 Nf6 12.Bg2 Nxg4 13.e4 Nf6 14.Qb3 with pressure.
4…c6
4…Nd7 5.Qb5 wins the d- or b-pawn. 4…Qc8 of Steinitz-Chigorin, Havana 1992, can be met by 5.Nc3, intending 5…f6 6.g4! fxe5 7.gxh5 e4 8.Bh3!.
5.Qh3 Nf6
5…Bg6 6.Nxg6 fxg6 7.e4!. Black’s pawns are shattered and White owns the light squares.
6.g4 Bg6 7.Nxg6 fxg6 8.g5 Ne4
So far Naaktgeboren-P.de Jager, Dutch League 1995/96. Again Black’s kingside is a mess.
9.Nc3!
White can even allow the exchange of queens by 9.Qe6 Qd7 (9…Na6!?) 10.Bh3 Qxe6 (10…Nd6!? intending 11…Nf5) 11.Bxe6.
9…Nxc3 10.bxc3 Qd7 11.Rb1 b6 12.Bf4
With two bishops and a bind, White stands much better.
Two Knights Tango with 3.Nc3 (A50)
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3
It used to be thought that Black’s wild horses in The Two Knights’ Tango (also called ‘The Mexican Defense’) were easily tamed. But when it was discovered that 3.d5 Ne5 was satisfactory for Black, 2…Nc6 became respectable. Still, with careful commonsense play, White should achieve a modest advantage.
Tomescu – Iordachescu
Bucharest 1993
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3
Our other solution, 3.Nf3, is laid out in the next game. One reason to examine 3.Nc3 is that it can arise via the order 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.d4.
3…e5
The consistent move.
A) 3…e6 4.a3 intends e4, and 4…d5 5.Nf3 is examined in the following game, via the order 3.Nf3 e6 4.a3 d5 5.Nc3;
B) 3…d5 is a variation of the Chigorin Defense to the Queen’s Gambit (1.d4 d5 2.d4 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6). A safe solution is 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.Nf3, although White’s advantage is limited. Then 5…Bg4? (5…e5 6.dxe5 Be6, but White still stands better) 6.e4 Nxc3 7.bxc3 e5 8.d5 is good for White. For example, 8…Nb8 9.Qa4+ Nd7 (9…Bd7 10.Qb3 hits b7 and e5) 10.Nxe5 Qf6 11.Be2!!
is very strong. For example, 11…Bd6? (but Black is also in terrible shape after 11..c6 12.dxc6 Qxe5 13.Bg4 Qxc3+ 14.Ke2! Qxc6 15.Qxc6 bxc6 16.Rd1) 12.Bxg4 Qxe5 13.Bxd7+ Kd8 14.Bd2 1-0, P. Cramling-Landenbergue, Biel 1987.
4.d5 Ne7 5.e4
5…Ng6
Preparing to bring Black’s bishop to c5 or b4. The alternative, 5…d6, aims for a King’s Indian Defense following …g7-g6. White can anticipate this by playing 6.Bd3 (6.f3 g6 7.Be3 is a good option; this is a type of Sämisch Variation where Black’s knight isn’t well-placed on e7) 6…g6 (6…Ng6 7.Nge2 Be7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Ng3 Nf4 10.Bc2 or 10.Nf5, in both cases with White standing better) 7.f4 (or 7.Nf3 Bg7 8.h3) 7…exf4!? (7…Bg7 8.fxe5 dxe5 9.c5!) 8.Bxf4 Bg7 9.Nf3 0-0 10.0-0 Ng4 (10…Bg4 11.Qd2 doesn’t improve) 11.h3 Ne5 12.Nxe5 dxe5 13.Bg5 h6 14.Be3 f5 15.c5 with a standard advantage.
6.h4
White wastes no time in threatening the kingside.
6…h5
The best move, preventing h4-h5. Allowing it is risky:
A) 6…Bc5 7.h5 Nf8 8.h6!.
This aggressive move rips open the kingside: 8…gxh6 (8…g6 9.Be2 Be7 10.f4! d6 11.Be3 N8d7 12.g3 and Black is cramped) 9.Bxh6 Rg8 (9…d6 10.Bg5 Rg8 11.Nf3! Bxf2+?! 12.Kxf2 Ng4+ 13.Kg1 Rxg5 14.Nxg5 Qxg5 15.Qc1) 10.Nh3!? (10.f3! gives White an easy edge) 10…Ng4?! (10…d6 intending …Bd7) 11.Bd2 d6 12.Qe2! c6 13.0-0-0 cxd5 14.exd5! f5 15.f3 Nf6 16.Bg5! Bd7 17.f4 (White is in control of the game now) 17…Qe7!? (17…e4 18.g4!) 18.fxe5! dxe5 19.d6 Qe6 (19…Bxd6 loses to 20.Nd5!) 20.Nf4!! exf4 21.Qxe6+ Nxe6 22.Bxf6 Rg6 23.Nd5! Kf7 24.Rxh7+ 0-1 Bloch-Vlasov, Russian Championship 1992;
B) 6…Bb4 7.h5 Bxc3+ (7…Ne7 8.Qf3 h6 9.Qg3 Nxe4 10.Qxg7 Rg8 11.Qxe5 f5 12.Nh3 gave White a promising game in Prokopchuk-Bologan, Krasnodar 1997) 8.bxc3 Nf8 9.h6 gxh6 10.Qf3 Ng8!? 11.Ne2 d6 12.Ng3 Qf6 13.Qd3 b6 14.Nh5 Qe7, Yuferov-Rudnev, Minsk 1993. Now White is better in any case, but 15.Ng7+ Kd8 16.Qf3 ensures that Black’s king will come under pressure.
7.Bg5
7…Bc5
Again, Black’s alternatives fall short:
A) 7…Bb4 can be answered by 8.Rc1, for example, but 8.Ne2 is the simplest, with the idea 9.a3. Then 8…a5 9.Ng3 threatens Nxh5 and Nf5;
B) 7…Be7 8.Be2 d6 loses a pawn after 9.Bxf6 Bxf6 10.g3. For example, 10…c6 11.Bxh5 Qb6 12.Bxg6! Qxb2 13.Bxf7+ Kxf7 14.Nge2.
8.g3!?
Covering f4 and preparing Bh3. White has other and perhaps better ways to claim a small advantage. For example, 8.Be2 c6 (8…d6 9.Bf3 c6 10.Nge2) 9.Nf3 d6 10.a3 a5 11.Na4 Ba7 12.dxc6! bxc6 13.c5! dxc5 (13…Bxc5 14.Nxc5 dxc5 15.Qc2!? Qb6 16.Be3 Rb8 17.0-0-0 Be6 18.Bxc5 Bb3 19.Bxb6 Bxc2 20.Kxc2 Rxb6 21.Bc4! 0-0 22.Rd6! with the idea Ng5, and if 22…Nxe4?? 23.Rxg6) 14.Qxd8+ Kxd8 15.g3! (against …Nf4; the c-pawns aren’t going anywhere) 15…Kc7 16.Nd2 Be6 (16…Nd7 17.Be3) 17.Rc1 c4 18.Bxc4 Bxc4 19.Bxf6 gxf6 20.Rxc4 and Black has serious weaknesses. For example, Ke2 and Rhc1 might follow.
8…d6 9.Bh3 Ne7
9…a6 10.Bxc8 Rxc8 11.b4!? Ba7 12.Nf3 with an edge due to White’s territorial advantage.
10.Bxf6 gxf6 11.Qd3!?
11.Qf3 Rh6 12.0-0-0 is probably more accurate.
11…c6! 12.Bxc8 Qxc8 13.Nge2 f5 14.f3!?
Both 14.0-0-0 with the idea 14…Bxf2?! 15.exf5 Qxf5? 16.Ne4 and 14.a3 a5 15.f4! should be considered.
14…Bb4?!
14…fxe4! 15.Nxe4 (15.fxe4 Qg4) 15…Bb4+ 16.Kf1 Rh6 does a better job of complicating matters.
15.0-0-0 fxe4 16.fxe4 cxd5 17.cxd5 a6 18.Rdf1 Qg4 19.Rf6
White has a large advantage, which only grew after…
19…Ng8 20.Rf5 f6 21.Kb1 Qg6 22.Rhf1 Ba5 23.Qc4 Kd8 24.Qa4
… and White went on to win.
Two Knights Tango with 3.Nf3 (A54)
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nf3
Here’s another attempt to tame the unruly steeds. With 3.Nf3, White develops, covers e5 and is ready to play 4.d5.
Leontiev – Gutov
City Championship, Moscow 1996
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nf3
Now White is ready to play d4-d5, since e5 is covered. In the previous game we saw 3.Nc3.
3…d6
Black prepares to play …e7-e5, and is happy with 4.d5 Ne5 (or maybe even 4…Nb8 with the idea …c7-c6). The main alternative is 3…e6, when a good answer is 4.a3
(to stop …Bb4 in preparation for Nc3), and White intends to gain space after Nc3 and e2-e4 or d4-d5. Then Black’s two most popular moves are:
A) 4…d5 5.Nc3 (for White this is a good version of the Queen’s Gambit Declined because Black’s knight is slightly misplaced on c6, and a2-a3 fits in reasonably well) 5…a6 (5…dxc4 6.e4 Na5 7.Bxc4 Nxc4 8.Qa4+ Nd7 9.Qxc4 c5 10.Be3! with advantage, Yakovich-Vlassov, Moscow city championship 1996; 5…Be7 can be met by 6.Bf4 0-0 7.e3, or even 6.e3 0-0 7.Bd3 with a small edge) 6.cxd5 exd5 7.Bg5 Be7 8.e3 h6 9.Bh4 0-0 10.Bd3 Be6 11.0-0 Nd7 12.Bg3 Bd6, Kasparov-Yermolinsky, Yerevan Olympiad 1996, and here Kasparov recommends 13.Qc2, giving 13…Bxg3 14.hxg3 Ne7 15.Na4 c6 16.b4, with White clearly in charge;
B) 4…g6 5.Nc3 Bg7 has in mind that White’s d4-d5 will lengthen the influence of Black’s fianchettoed bishop. But White can simply grab more of the center: 6.e4 d6 7.Be2 0-0 8.0-0 Re8 (8…e5 9.d5 Ne7 gives White an extra move in the main line of the King’s Indian Defense. That move is a2-a3, so one obvious way to continue is with 10.b4! giving a standard Bayonet Attack variation, but one in which Black achieves nothing by 10…a5 11.Bd2 or 11.Rb1) 9.Be3 (or 9.h3! e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.Be3) 9…e5 10.d5!? (10.dxe5 is simpler: 10…Nxe5 11.Nxe5 Rxe5 12.f3 with some advantage) 10…Nd4! 11.Re1!? Nxe2+ 12.Rxe2 Nh5, L.Portisch-Wilhelmi, Frankfurt 1997; and White’s most effective move may be 13.h3 to prevent …Bg4, since 13…Nf4?! 14.Bxf4 exf4 15.Qd2 g5 16.Rae1! will be followed by e4-e5, even after 16…h5 17.e5 g4 18.exd6 Rxe2 19.Qxe2 Qxd6 20.hxg4 hxg4 21.Ne5.
4.Nc3 e5
A recent favorite of Richard Rapport. Black should grab some of the center.
5.d5 Ne7 6.e4 g6
Trying to get into a conventional King’s Indian after 7.Be2 Bg7, for example. However, White has a dynamic response. 6…Ng6 is not a bad move…
… but it blocks Black from fianchettoing. For example, 7.g3 (this preparation to fianchetto also stops …Nf4. In the stem game Heinicke-Wagner, 2nd match game Hamburg 1930, White played 7.h3) 7…Be7 8.Bg2 0-0, and here 9.0-0 is normal, but we like the alternative 9.Nd2 with the idea Nf1-e3: 9…Nd7 (9…c6 10.Nf1 Bd7 11.Ne3 and White has the advantage) 10.Nf1 (or 10.h4! h6 11.h5 Nh8 12.Nf3 a5 13.Be3 with space and better development) 10…Bg5 11.Bxg5 (or 11.Ne3) 11…Qxg5 12.h4 Qd8 13.Ne3 with a comfortable space advantage, Chernin-Blatny, New York 1996.
7.c5!
This is a move White has to work hard to achieve in the normal King’s Indian Defense.
7…Bg7
It’s surprising how bad the alternatives are:
A) 7…dxc5 8.Nxe5 Bg7 9.Bb5+ Nd7 10.f4 with two unimpeded center pawns versus none (10.Bf4 is also very strong);
B) 7…Nd7? is basically losing because of 8.cxd6 cxd6 9.Nb5!
threatening mate in one: 9…Nc5 (9…Nb8?? 10.Qa4) 10.b4 (or 10.Be3 a6 11.Bxc5! with the idea 11…dxc5?? 12.Qa4!) 10…Nxe4 11.Qc2 threatening Qxe4 and Nc7+;
C) 7…a6 (versus 8.Bb5+) 8.Qa4+ Bd7 (8…Qd7 9.Bb5! c6 10.dxc6 bxc6 11.Bc4 d5 12.exd5 cxd5 13.Bb3! Qxa4 14.Bxa4+ Bd7 15.Nxe5) 9.Qb3. For example, 9…Rb8 10.Be3 Bg7 11.cxd6 cxd6 12.Bb6 Qc8 13.Qb4!, winning the d-pawn.
8.cxd6
Or 8.Bb5+ Bd7 9.Qb3.
8…cxd6
8…Qxd6 9.Nb5 Qb4+ 10.Nd2 is much better for White, because 10…Qa5? can’t protect c7 following 11.b4! intending 11…Qb6?? 12.Nc4.
9.Qa4+
9.Bb5+ is also good, if more complicated, with the idea 9…Nd7 (9…Bd7 10.Bd3 0-0 11.Qb3) 10.0-0 0-0 11.Be3 f5 12.Ng5!? Nf6 Cooper-Trois, Buenos Aires Olympiad 1978, and now a good way to maintain the advantage was 13.Qb3! fxe4 14.Bc4! Kh8 15.Ncxe4 Nf5?! (15…Nxe4 16.Nxe4 Nf5 17.Bg5 Qd7 limits White’s advantage) 16.Nxf6 Bxf6 17.Ne6 Bxe6 18.dxe6 Nxe3 19.fxe3! Qe7 20.Bd5, with a powerful bind and e6-pawn.
9…Bd7
Probably the best way to block the check. White gets a significant positional advantage after other moves:
A) 9…Nd7 10.Qa3 Nc5 11.Be3 b6 12.Bb5+ Bd7 13.b4! a6 14.Be2 Nb7 15.0-0 Zakharevich-Sysolyatin, Gatchina 2001;
B) 9…Kf8 10.Nd2!? Bh6 11.Qb4 Bxd2+ (11…Kg7 12.Nc4) 12.Bxd2 Kg7 13.Be2 a6 14.f4! Ne8 15.fxe5 dxe5 16.Be3, with a decisive advantage, Bareev-Alvarez Fernandez, Leon 2008.
10.Qb4 Qb8 11.Bb5
Or 11.a4.
11…0-0 12.Bg5!?
12.0-0 is stronger. For example, 12…a6 (12…Nc6? 13.Qa4! a6 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.dxc6) 13.Bxd7 Nxd7 14.Bg5 f6 15.Be3, Gostisa-Barle, Vrhnika ch-SLO 1995.
12…Rd8
12…Nc6! is a clever trick. Then 13.Qa4 a6 favors Black, because b2 hangs when the b-file opens.
13.Bxd7 Rxd7 14.0-0 b5 15.Nd2 a5?
But White was threatening 16.a4, and f2-f4 was also in the air.
16.Qxb5 Rb7 17.Qd3 Rxb2 18.Nb3
Now the rook is trapped.
18…a4 19.Bc1 axb3 20.Bxb2 bxa2 21.Qc2 Qb4 22.f3 Qc4 23.Rfc1 Qd4+ 24.Kh1 Rc8 25.Rxa2 Bh6 26.Rd1 Qc4 27.Qa4 Qc7 28.Qa7 Qd8 29.Bc1 Bxc1 30.Rxc1 Nexd5 31.exd5 Nxd5 32.Ne2
1-0
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Ne4
This isn’t such a bad move, since it interferes with the move Nc3, as well as preparing …Bb4+. Nevertheless, Black moves a piece twice in the opening and will probably make a third move with it soon. That’s going a little far, and White should expect some advantage.
Ibragimov – Brooks
US Championship, Saint Louis 2009
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Ne4 4.e3
A simple solution, going for a modest plus. White can also get the better of it by 4.g3. For example, 4…d5 5.Bg2 Be7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Qc2 Nd6 8.Nbd2 with an edge, Shankland-Lenderman, ICC 2010.
4…Bb4+ 5.Nbd2 b6 6.Bd3 Bxd2+ 7.Nxd2 Nxd2
8.Bxd2
8.Qxd2 0-0 9.b4 and Bb2 also favors White, who has space and the bishop pair.
8…Bb7 9.e4!?
9.0-0 is a simpler way to get the advantage. If Black tries 9…f5, then 10.d5! is strong.
9…0-0 10.Qh5!?
Going for a direct kill. 10.0-0 d6 11.f4 is an option.
10…f6!
To meet e4-e5 with …f6-f5.
11.0-0-0
White is also well off after 11.0-0 Qe8 12.Qh3 Nc6 13.Bc3 with bishop pair and center.
11…Qe8 12.Qh3 e5 13.d5 d6 14.f4! Nd7
14…exf4? 15.e5! threatens Qxh7+, and Black will lose quickly after 15…g6 16.exd6 cxd6 17.Bxf4 Qd8 18.Qg3.
15.f5!?
This sets up an attack with g4-g5. Since Black’s …exf4 will be met with e4-e5, there’s no reason to hurry, and 15.Kb1 Nc5 16.Bc2 was a good alternative.
15…Nc5 16.g4?!
16.Kb1! Nxd3 17.Qxd3 leaves White with a space advantage.
16…Qa4!
Attacking a2 and c4.
17.Kb1 Ba6?!
A) Better is 17…c6. For example, 18.g5! Nxd3 (18…fxg5 19.Rdg1! h6 20.Bxg5!) 19.g6! h6 20.b3 Qa3 21.Qxd3 cxd5 22.exd5 Bc8 23.Rdf1 Re8;
B) 17…Nxd3 18.Qxd3 c6, on the other hand, leads to 19.b3 Qa6 20.Rhg1! and g4-g5.
18.Bc2! Qxc4
18…Qe8 19.Rhg1 Bxc4 20.g5 and White’s attack is too strong.
19.b3 Qb5 20.g5 fxg5 21.Bxg5 Rf7 22.Rhg1 Kh8
22…Qd7 23.Rg3.
23.Rg4 Nd7?
23…Qe8 24.Rh4 Qg8 25.Rg1 Nd7 26.Bd1 Nf6 27.Bxf6 Rxf6 28.Rhg4.
24.Rdg1 Qc5 25.R4g3 Raf8 26.Qg2
The attack is winning.
26…Rg8 27.Bh6! Nf6 28.Rxg7 Qxg1+ 29.Qxg1 Rfxg7 30.Bxg7+ Rxg7 31.Qe1
White’s material advantage triumphs.
31…Kg8 32.Qc3 Bb5 33.a4 Be8 34.b4 a6 35.Qd3 a5
35…b5 36.a5 and the queen finds its way to a7.
36.bxa5 bxa5 37.Qc3 Bxa4
Or 37…Ng4 38.Qxa5.
38.Bxa4 Nxe4 39.Qxa5 Re7 40.Qe1 Nf6 41.Qh4 Kf7 42.Bd1
1-0
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 d6 3.Nc3 Bf5
This respectable setup is called the Janowski Indian Defense. Black concentrates on stopping e2-e4, while developing at the same time. Now 4.f3 e5! has been played with mixed results. Instead, we recommend Alekhine’s choice of a kingside fianchetto.
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 d6 3.Nc3 Bf5 4.g3!
This is a simple solution. White wants uncontested control of the long light-squared diagonal.
4…c6
4…e5 5.Bg2 (attacking b7) 5…Nc6 (5…c6 6.Nf3 transposes to the main line) 6.Nf3 exd4 7.Nxd4 Nxd4 8.Qxd4 c6 9.0-0, with the idea Bf4 and Rfd1, targeting the backward d-pawn.
5.Bg2 e5 6.Nf3 Nbd7
A) 6…exd4 7.Nxd4 gives White a good grip on the center and a target on d6;
B) 6…e4? 7.Nh4 Qd7 8.Qb3! b6 9.Nxf5 Qxf5 10.Qc2 d5 11.cxd5 cxd5 12.f3 wins a pawn in view of 12…Nc6 (12…Bb4?? 13.Qa4+) 13.fxe4 Nxd4?? 14.Qa4+.
7.Nh4!?
7.0-0 is a well-known line, with a small advantage for White, but we like chasing down Black’s prized bishop.
7…exd4
7…Bg4 8.h3 Bh5 9.g4 Bg6 10.Nxg6 hxg6 11.Be3 and White has two strong bishops.
8.Nxf5!
8.Qxd4 is the old line, when 8…Be6 9.0-0 Be7 10.Bf4 gives White only a small advantage.
8…dxc3
Thus far D.Gurevich-Gheorghiu, New York Open 1986. Now White has two strong ways of giving up a pawn for advantage:
9.0-0
9.Nxd6+ Bxd6 10.Qxd6 cxb2 11.Bxb2 Qa5+ (Michiels-Jobava, Warsaw Ech-tt 2013) 12.Kf1! also favors White.
9…Qa5 10.e4
Here too White stands better, with open lines, the bishop pair, and attacking chances.
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ne4
This is the Fajarowicz Variation of the Budapest Defense. Black aims for quick piece play with …Bc5 or …Bb4+. Ideally, White’s e-pawn will eventually be a target.
Yrjölä – Hamdouchi
Manila, Olympiad 1992
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ne4 4.a3!
This move, which Eric and John strongly recommended several decades ago, has become the accepted answer. It prevents …Bb4+ and also prepares b2-b4, which not only opens up the idea of Bb2 but discourages …Bc5. Black has a host of tries now, but none of them give him an equal game.
4…Nc6
A straightforward attack on e5. Black has tried just about everything here:
A) 4…b6 is often considered best, but it gives White time to consolidate his pawn advantage: 5.Nd2 (5.Nf3 Bb7 6.e3 Nc6 7.b3 with advantage. 5.Qd5?! Nc5! 6.Qxa8? Bb7 7.Qxa7 Nc6) 5…Bb7 (5…Nxd2 6.Bxd2 Bb7 7.Nf3 a5 8.b3 Nc6 9.Bc3 Bc5 10.Qd2 Qe7 11.Qb2 and Black lacks compensation, Koster-Naalden, Vlissingen 2004)
6.Nxe4 (or 6.Ngf3 a5 7.Qc2 Nc5 8.b3 and White stands better. Or 6.Qc2 Nxd2 7.Bxd2 a5 8.Nf3 Bc5 9.Bc3 with a solid extra pawn) 6…Bxe4 7.Nf3 Nc6 8.b4! with the idea that White has space, open lines, and the bishops following 8…Bxf3 9.exf3 Nxe5 10.Ra2! Be7 11.f4 Ng6 12.g3 0-0 13.Bg2;
B) 4…Qh4 is well answered by the normal 5 g3, but the move recommended by Schiller and Benjamin many years ago, 5.Be3!
is easier. White will gain time on the queen. For example, 5…Nc5 (5…Bc5?! 6.Bxc5 Nxc5 7.Nc3! Qxc4 8.e3 Qh4 9.Nf3 Qd8 10.Bc4, with a very large advantage) 6.Nc3! (or 6.Nd2 Nc6 7.Ngf3 Qh5 8.Bf4 Ne6 9.Bg3 g5!? 10.h3 g4 11.Nh2 gxh3 12.Nhf3) 6…Qxc4 (quite as bad is 6…Nc6 7.Qd5 d6 8.Nf3) 7.Rc1 c6 (versus Nd5) 8.Nf3 Ne6 9.g3 Be7 10.Bg2 0-0 11.Nd4 Qa6 12.Nf5 Bd8 13.0-0 and Black’s pieces are hopelessly passive while d6 is an ideal outpost;
C) 4…d6 5.Nf3 (or 5.Qc2. For example, 5…Bf5? 6.Nc3 d5 7.cxd5 Nxc3 8.Qxf5 Nxd5 9.e6! f6 10.e4 and already White is winning, Röder-Stefanova, Groningen 1996) 5…Bf5 (5…Nc6 6.Qc2 transposes to the main line with 4…Nc6) 6.g3 Nc6 7.Nh4! (Avrukh’s recommendation) 7…Be6 (7…Bd7 8.Bg2 Nc5 9.b4) 8.Bg2 Nc5 (8…f5 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.Nc3! Bxc4 11.Qa4 Be6 12.Bxc6+ bxc6 13.Qxc6+ Bd7 14.Qc4 c6 15.e4, ‘with a clear advantage’ according to Avrukh) 9.b4 Nd7 10.exd6 Bxd6 11.Nd2 (defending the c4-pawn) 11…0-0 12.0-0 a5 13.b5 Nce5 14.Bb2 Nc5 15.Qc2, with a clear advantage (Avrukh);
D) 4…a5 5.Qc2! Nc5 (5…d5 6.exd6 Nxd6 7.Nc3 Nc6 8.e4!?) 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Nc3
7…d6 8.Bg5 f6 (8…Be7 9.Bxe7 Qxe7 10.exd6 cxd6 11.Rd1) 9.exf6 gxf6 10.Bh4 Hermesmann-Rös, Dortmund 1987; Black suffers from weaknesses and poor development;
E) 4…Nc5 5.Nc3 Ne6 6.Nf3 g6 7.g3 Bg7 8.Bh3 0-0, and one forcing way to a substantial advantage is 9.Bxe6! dxe6 (9…fxe6 10.Bg5 Qe8 11.Nb5 Na6 12.Qd2) 10.Qxd8 Rxd8 11.Bg5 Re8 12.Nb5 Na6 13.Rd1.
5.Nf3 d6 6.Qc2
6…d5
Black has tried for many years to come up with something here, but to no avail:
A) White stands clearly better after the passive 6…Nc5 7.b4 Ne6 8.exd6 Bxd6 9.Bb2 0-0 10.e3, Spraggett-Milla de Marco, Madrid 2000;
B) 6…Bf5 is virtually refuted by 7.Nc3!
and:
B1) 7…Ng3 8.e4 Nxh1 (Avrukh analyses 8…Bxe4 9.Nxe4 Nxh1 10.Bg5 Be7 11.Bxe7 Qxe7 12.exd6 cxd6 13.0-0-0 and the knight on h1 will soon be captured) 9.exf5 dxe5 10.Be3 Nd4 (10…Be7 11.Rd1 Qc8 12.Nd5 with the idea Bd3 or g3 and Bg2) 11.Bxd4 exd4 12.0-0-0 with a winning game. Black’s best try is probably 12…Bc5 13.Re1+ Kf8, but 14.Ne4 Be7 15.Bd3 should suffice;
B2) 7…Nxc3 8.Qxf5 Na4 9.g3 Be7 10.Qc2 Nc5 11.b4 Ne6 12.exd6 cxd6 13.Bg2 leaves White a pawn ahead with the far superior position, Smejkal-Popovic, Novi Sad 1976;
B3) A stem game went 7…Nxf2 8.Qxf5 Nxh1 9.e6!? (definitely advantageous, but 9.g3! is simple and strong) 9…fxe6 10.Qxe6+ Qe7 11.Qd5 h6 12.g3 g5 13.Bg2 (13.Bh3!) 13…Nxg3 14.hxg3 Bg7 15.Bh3, Reshevksy-Bisguier, New York ch-USA 1954/55.
7.e3
7…Be6
Black’s problem in this variation is that if he ever does recover his pawn, it will be at the cost of giving White a dominant game:
A) 7…Bf5 8.Bd3! Bg6 (N.V. Pedersen-Slisser, Dieren 2004) 9.Nbd2! Nxd2 10.Bxd2 Bxd3 11.Qxd3 dxc4 12.Qxc4, and White is still a pawn up with superior development;
B) 7…Bg4 8.cxd5 Qxd5 9.Bc4 Qa5+ 10.b4! (or 10.Nbd2) 10…Bxb4+ 11.axb4 Qxa1
12.Bb2! Nxb4 13.Bxf7+ Kf8 14.Qxe4 Qxb2 15.0-0 Kxf7 16.Qxg4 and White’s threats are too strong. For example, 16…h6 (16…Rhe8 17.Ng5+) 17.Qc4+ Kg6 18.Nh4+ Kh7 19.Qe4+ Kg8 20.Qxb7 Re8 21.Ng6, etc.
8.Be2
Or 8.Nbd2 Nxd2 9.Bxd2 dxc4 10.Bxc4 Bxc4 11.Qxc4 followed by Bc3, Fokin-Beltugov, Orsk 2000.
8…Qe7 9.0-0 0-0-0 10.Rd1 f5
At this point,
11.cxd5 Bxd5 12.Nc3 Nxc3 13.Qxc3
… leaves White with an extra pawn and better position.
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 a6
A system used by Dzindzichaschvili and Alburt in the mid-80s with great success. Now it is hardly seen, however. This is probably due to White’s control of the center and attacking prospects.
Browne – Gurevich
Reno 1991
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 a6
This is a preparatory move, planning …c7-c5 and after d4-d5, …b7-b5. This is similar to the Blumenfeld Gambit (3…c5 4.d5 b5), but Black commits to a lot of pawn moves in the opening.
4.Nc3 c5 5.d5 b5 6.e4!
Aggressive and practical. Although 6.Bg5 is ultimately a little better for White, it is more difficult to play.
6…b4 7.e5 bxc3 8.exf6 d6
Black has tried every logical move here, to no avail:
A) 8…Qxf6?! 9.Bg5 9…Qf5?? (9…Qg6 10.Bd3 f5 11.0-0, with a huge lead in development and attacking pieces) 10.Bd3 Qg4 11.h3 c2 12.Qe2 (with the idea 12…Qxg2 13.Rh2) 1-0 Petrov-Tarabanko, corr. 1987;
B) 8…gxf6 9.Bd3
9…d6 (9…Bg7 10.0-0 f5 11.bxc3 d6 12.dxe6 fxe6 13.Bxf5! exf5 14.Qd5 Ra7 15.Re1+ Kf8 16.Rb1! with an overwhelming attack, Ftacnik-Fauland, Vienna 1986) 10.bxc3 Be7 11.0-0 f5 12.Re1 Rg8 13.Rb1 Rg6 14.dxe6 fxe6 15.Bxf5! exf5 16.Qd5 Ra7 17.Rxb8 and wins, Matamoros Franco-Meetei, Dubai Olympiad 1986;
C) 8…Qa5 9.bxc3 Qxc3+ (9…gxf6 10.Bd2 f5 11.Bd3 Bg7 12.0-0 d6 13.Re1 0-0 Christiansen-Alburt, US Championship, Estes Park 1985, and now either 14.Qc2 with a solid plus (Christiansen), or 14.Ng5! e5 15.Qh5 h6 16.Nh3 e4 17.Re3! exd3 18.Rg3 Kh7 19.Rxg7+ Kxg7 20.Bxh6+, Przewoznik and Pein) 10.Bd2 Qxf6 11.Bd3 Bd6 (11…Qd8 12.Ng5! Be7 13.h4 h6 14.Qh5 0-0 15.Nh7! with a decisive attack, Huss-Klauser, Postal 1987) 12.0-0 Bf4, Matamoros Franco-Zaichik, Camagüey B 1987. Now White obtained a lasting attack with 15.Qc2 Bd2 16.Nd2 Qh6 17.Rab1, but 13.Be4! Ra7 14.Ba5! is better still;
D) 8…cxb2 9.Bxb2 gxf6
‘and it is hard to believe that right now the attack is more important than a pawn’, say Przewoznik and Pein in their otherwise excellent book on the Blumenfeld Gambit. But in fact, Black is very uncomfortably placed after, for example, 10.Bd3 Bg7 (10…d6 11.0-0 Bg7 12.Nh4 Ra7 13.Qh5) 11.Qc2 Kf8 12.0-0 f5 13.Rab1 d6 14.dxe6! fxe6 15.Be4!! Markauss-Hjorth, corr. 1992, with the idea 15…fxe4 16.Qxe4 d5 17.Qf4+ Kg8 18.Bxg7 Kxg7 19.Rxb8 Rxb8 20.Qg3+ Kf7 21.Qxb8 with a dominant position.
9.Bd3 e5 10.0-0 gxf6
The 9th pawn move out of the first ten moves!
11.Nh4 Rg8 12.bxc3 Bg4 13.Qa4+ Bd7 14.Qc2 h5 15.Nf5
Black doesn’t even have a pawn for this mess.
15…Qc7 16.Rb1 Kd8 17.Be3 Ra7 18.Qe2 Rh8 19.f4 Bxf5 20.Bxf5 Bg7 21.Rb3 Nd7 22.Rfb1 Ke7 23.Bf2 Kd8
Browne-D.Gurevich, Reno 1991. Black managed to wriggle out with a draw, but after 24.Bh4! he would have been hopelessly tied down and quite lost. Several other moves maintain a winning advantage as well.
1.d4 e6 2.c4 Bb4+ 3.Bd2 Bxd2+ 4.Qxd2 b6 5.Nc3 Bb7 6.e4 Nh6
This odd variant of the English Defense is called the Kangaroo System. Tony Miles scored several notable successes with it and also suffered some big-time defeats. The knight hop …Nh6, leaving Black’s f-pawn free to advance (as opposed to …Nf6), is what defines the opening as a Kangaroo.
Karpov – Miles
Biel 1992
1.d4 e6 2.c4 Bb4+ 3.Bd2
3.Nc3 Nf6 is a Nimzo-Indian Defense, and here 3…b6 transposes to a form of the English Defense, 1.c4 e6 2.d4 b6 3.Nc3 Bb4, and avoids the most dangerous White setup with 3.e4.
3…Bxd2+
A) 3…a5 will transpose to a Bogo-Indian if White plays Nf3;
B) 3…Qe7 is another form of the Kangaroo: 4.e4! (White grabs the whole center. 4.a3 Bxd2+ 5.Qxd2 d6 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.e4 favors White, but 7.Nf3 0-0 8.e4 e5 9.d5 a5 10.h3 Na6 gave Black at least equality in Tomicic-Kovacevic, Makarska 1995. Alternatively, 4.g3 will reach a Catalan Opening or, after 4…f5, a Dutch Defense) 4…Nf6 (4…Nh6 5.Nc3!) 5.a3?! (5.Bd3! Bxd2+ 6.Qxd2 d6 7.Nc3 and White stands considerably better with control of the center and better pieces) 5…Bxd2+ 6.Nxd2 d6 7.Bd3 e5 8.d5 0-0, Llanos-Hoffman, San Luis Clarin 1995. Here Black has no problems. White has space, but he also has a bad bishop, while Black has managed to shed his.
4.Qxd2 b6 5.Nc3 Bb7 6.e4
The most ambitious move. A calm option for White is 6.Nf3 Nh6!? 7.d5 0-0 8.g3 Na6 9.Bg2 Nf5 10.0-0 Nd6 11.Qd4 with an edge, Cu.Hansen-Miles, Biel 1992.
6…Nh6
Black’s idea, as opposed to the usual …Ne7 positions, is to keep open the possibility of …Qh4 and also to be able to play …f7-f5 and …Nf7. Instead, 6…Nf6 7.Bd3 doesn’t challenge White’s powerful center.
7.f4!
Other moves are fine, but less direct. For example, 7.Nf3 0-0 8.Bd3 Nc6 (8…d6!?) 9.0-0 (9.d5 Ne7 10.0-0 Ng6) 9…Ne7!? 10.d5 d6 (10…f6!? 10…Ng6!?) 11.dxe6 (or 11.Ng5) 11…fxe6 12.Ng5 Qd7 13.e5! Nef5, Vyzhmanavin-Miles, Ostend Open 1991. White should play 14.exd6 Qxd6 15.Qe2 with a little pull.
7…f5
7…0-0 8.Bd3 (or 8.Nf3 with some advantage) 8…Qh4+ 9.g3 Qh5 10.Be2 Qg6 11.Nf3 and White stood better in Shirov-Miles, Biel 1992, which continued 11…f5 12.e5 Nc6 13.0-0-0!? a5 14.h3!? Qf7 15.Rhg1 with ideas of d4-d5 and g3-g4. 7…d6 8.Nf3 Nd7 9.0-0-0 f6 10.g4 Nf7 11.h4 h6 12.Bd3 Qe7 13.h5 0-0-0 14.Nh4, with a large space advantage, Van Wely-Miles, Matanzas 1994.
8.e5 Nf7 9.0-0-0 g5
How else to attack White’s center? This poses more problems than 9…d6 10.d5! (or 10.Nf3) 10…dxe5 11.fxe5, with the idea 11…Nxe5? 12.Re1.
10.Nf3!
We’ll follow Karpov’s notes from now on.
10…Rg8
White stands substantially better after both:
A) 10…g4 11.Ne1 with the idea Nc2-e3;
B) 10…Bxf3 11.gxf3 gxf4 12.h4.
11.Be2 Na6
11…gxf4? 12.Qxf4 Rxg2 13.Rhg1 and the White attack crashes through.
12.h3 gxf4 13.Qxf4 Qe7
13…Rxg2? 14.Rhg1 Rg6 15.Nh4 Rg5 16.Bh5, with a winning game.
14.g4 fxg4 15.hxg4 Ng5 16.d5
More accurate is 16.Rh6! Nxf3 17.Bxf3 Bxf3 18.Qxf3 Qg5+ (18…0-0-0? 19.Qa8+ Nb8 20.Nb5) 19.Kb1.
16…Nxf3 17.Bxf3 0-0-0 18.Rh6
Or 18.Ne4!.
18…Rg7?
18…Qg5 improves, but 19.Qxg5 Rxg5 20.Rxh7 (or 20.Rh5) 20…Rxe5 21.Rg1 can follow, when the passed pawn is dangerous.
19.Rf6 exd5 20.cxd5 Re8 21.g5
This will win eventually, but still better is 21.e6!.
21…Kb8 22.Bh5 Reg8 23.Bf7 Rc8 24.e6 dxe6 25.dxe6 Nb4
After 25…Nc5, 26.b4! Na6 27.a3 is too strong.
26.a3 Nc6 27.b4! Qf8
Or 27…a5 28.Nd5.
28.Nd5 Qd6 29.e7 Rxf7
Better but still losing is 29…Qxf4+ 30.Rxf4 Nxe7 31.Nxe7 Rf8 32.Be6!.
30.Rxf7 Qe6 31.Rf8 Ne5
31…Nxe7 32.Qxc7+ Ka8 33.Qxc8+!.
32.Rxc8+ Bxc8 33.Qf6 Qh3 34.Qxe5 Qxa3+ 35.Kd2
1-0
1.d4 c5 2.d5 f5
This attempt to control the center by using bishop pawns in called ‘The Clarendon Court Defense’. Preventing e2-e4 is logical, and Black’s setup is not easy to refute, but neither …c7-c5 nor …f7-f5 helps Black’s development, while …f7-f5 exposes the king. This opens the door to multiple solutions for White.
1.d4 c5 2.d5 f5
The move 2…b5 is well met by 3.e4, attacking the pawn on b5, when 3…a6 4.c4!
attacks b5 again. To limit the power of White’s center pawns, Black can play 4…bxc4 5.Bxc4 d6, but after 6.Nf3 it’s not so easy to develop: 6…g6 7.e5! (7.0-0 Bg7 8.Qa4+! Qd7 9.Qc2 Nf6 10.Re1 0-0 11.e5 with an edge) 7…Bg7 (7…dxe5? 8.Nxe5 Bg7 9.Nxf7! Kxf7 10.d6+ e6 11.Qf3+ and Qxa8) 8.Nc3 dxe5 (White has a clear advantage following 8…Nh6 9.Qa4+. For example, 9…Bd7 10.Qb3 Bc8 11.0-0 0-0 12.exd6 exd6 13.Bf4) 9.0-0 Nf6 10.Nxe5 0-0 11.Re1.
3.Nc3
The other reason to mistrust the Clarendon Court is the effective gambit 3.e4!? fxe4 4.Nc3 Nf6.
And White has three logical moves, all leading to a modest advantage:
A) 5.f3 exf3 (5…e6 6.fxe4 exd5 7.e5! Qe7 8.Nf3 d6 9.Bb5+! Nc6 10.0-0 dxe5 11.Nxd5 Nxd5 12.Qxd5 Bd7 13.Bg5 Qd6 14.Qb3! with a killing position) 6.Nxf3 d6 7.Ng5! (with the idea Bb5+) 7…a6 8.Bd3 g6 9.0-0 Bg7 10.Ne2! with the idea Nf4;
B) 5.Nh3 g6 (5…d6 6.Bb5+ Nbd7 7.Ng5) 6.Ng5 Bg7 7.Bc4 0-0 8.0-0 d6 9.Ngxe4 Nxe4 10.Nxe4, with pressure down the e-file and the hope of occupying Black’s weak e6-square;
C) 5.g4 h6 (5…e6!? 6.Nh3 Nxd5 7.Nxd5 exd5 8.Qxd5 Nc6 9.Bg5 and White has a pull. Nor does Black equalize by means of 5…g6 6.g5 Nh5 7.Be2 Ng7 8.h4! Nf5 9.h5 Bg7 10.Nxe4 Qc7 11.Nf3) 6.Bg2 d6 7.Nxe4! Nxg4 (7…Bxg4?? 8.Nxf6+; 7…g5 8.h4) 8.Qe2!? (suggested by Avrukh. 8.Ne2, intending Nf4, is also fine) 8…Na6? (9…Bf5) 9.Bh3 Ne5 (9…Nf6?? 10.Nxf6+ gxf6 11.Qh5+) 10.f4 Bxh3 11.Nxh3 Nf7 12.f5! Qd7 13.Nf4! with a considerable advantage based on the idea 13…Qxf5 14.Rf1!.
3…Nf6 4.f3
4…e5
Fighting back in the center. White stands better in any case:
A) 4…d6 5.e4 fxe4 6.fxe4 e5 7.Bb5+ Bd7 8.Bxd7+ Qxd7 9.Nf3 Na6 (to meet Ng5 with …Nc7) 10.0-0 Be7 11.Nh4!? 0-0 (11…g6 12.Nf3) 12.Nf5, with a clear edge;
B) 4…e6 5.e4 exd5 (5…fxe4? 6.fxe4 exd5 7.e5! Qe7 8.Nf3 d6 9.Bb5+ Bd7 10.0-0 dxe5 11.Re1+–) 6.Nxd5 Nc6 7.Bf4 d6 8.Bc4 Ne5 9.Bxe5 dxe5 10.Ne2 ‘with the more comfortable position’ (analysis by Maurits Wind).
5.Nh3!?
5.e4 is also good. For example, 5…f4 6.g3 d6 (6…Nh5 7.d6! – Levitt) 7.Bh3!? exchanges Black’s good bishop and leaves him with the bad one on f8: 7…Bxh3 (7…Nh5 8.Bg4) 8.Nxh3 Nh5 9.Qe2! with the idea 9…fxg3 10.Ng5.
5…d6 6.Ng5
Michiel Wind recommends 6.e4, with the idea 6…fxe4 (6…f4 7.Bb5+) 7.Ng5! exf3 8.Qxf3 and White has substantial pressure, especially on the light squares.
6…h6
6…Be7 7.e4 0-0 (7…fxe4 8.Bb5+! Kf8 9.0-0!) 8.exf5 Bxf5 9.Bd3; White’s control of e4 and e6 gives him the upper hand.
7.Ne6! Bxe6 8.dxe6 Qc8 9.e4 Qxe6 10.exf5 Qxf5 11.Bd3 Qd7 12.Bg6+ Kd8 13.0-0
Black has an extra pawn but, with his king in the center, faces a difficult fight against better development and White’s bishop pair.
Benoni Defense: Snake Variation (A60)
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.Nc3 exd5 5.cxd5 Bd6
This rather bizarre-looking manoeuvre is called the ‘Snake Benoni’. Instead of playing …g7-g6 and …Bg7, Black typically plays …0-0, …Re8 followed by either …Bf8 or …Bc7 with …Ba5 to follow.
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.Nc3 exd5 5.cxd5 Bd6 6.Nf3
If there’s a complete refutation of the Snake, it’s probably 6.e4 0-0 7.f4! Nxe4 8.Nxe4 Re8 9.Qe2
9…Bc7 (9…f5?! 10.Nxd6 Rxe2+ 11.Bxe2, with both material and position; 9…Bf8 10.g4 is similar to 9…Bc7 10.g4) 10.g4, when White tries to hang on to his extra piece. The complications are simply outrageous, but if you have a few afternoons and a powerful computer, you can probably work things out. In the meantime, 6.Nf3 should result in a comfortable edge.
6…Bc7
Black is hoping to play …Ba5 and control e4, but he frees White’s d-pawn to advance. The alternative is 6…0-0
when White can develop quickly with 7.Bg5 Re8 (7…h6 8.Bh4 b5!? 9.e3! has the idea 9…b4?? 10.Ne4 or 9…a6 10.Bxf6 Qxf6 11.a4 b4 12.Ne4 Qe7 13.Bd3! with an edge) 8.e3 h6 (8…Bc7 9.d6! Ba5 10.Bc4 Nc6, and 11.Qd3 or 11.Qb3 may be best, with advantage; instead, 11.0-0 Bxc3 12.bxc3 Ne5? 13.Nxe5 Rxe5 14.f4! Rxe3 15.Qd2 Re8 16.Rae1 Rf8 17.Re7 was overwhelming in Arbakov-Handke, Stuttgart 1998) 9.Bh4 a6 (White achieved a clear advantage following 9…g5 10.Bg3 Bxg3 11.hxg3 Kg7 12.d6 in Vaganian-Hodgson, Sochi 1986) 10.a4 Bf8 11.d6! Re6 12.Bc4 Rxd6 13.Qb3 Re6! (13…g5 14.Ne5!) 14.Bxe6 fxe6 15.e4 Nc6 Giorgadze-Lima, Elgoibar 1997, and now 16.e5! g5 17.Bg3 Nh5 18.Qc2! Qe8 19.0-0 was very strong.
7.d6
Forcing the pace. The more solid 7.Bg5 goes for a small but definite positional pull after, for example, 7…d6 8.e3 0-0 9.Bd3 Nbd7 10.0-0 h6 11.Bh4 a6 12.a4.
7…Ba5 8.Bg5 Qb6
A beautiful game followed after 8…h6 9.Bh4 Nc6 10.e3
10…b6 (White stands much better after 10…Qb6 11.Rb1 Ne4 12.Nd2! intending 12…Nxd6?? 13.Nd5) 11.Bc4 (11.Qb1! with the idea Qf5) 11…Bb7 12.0-0 Bxc3 13.bxc3 0-0 14.Re1 Re8 15.e4! g5 16.Nxg5! hxg5 17.Bxg5 Ne5! 18.Re3!! Kg7 19.Rg3!? (19.Bb3! wins, with f2-f4 next) 19…Bxe4! 20.Bxf6+ Kxf6 21.Bd5! Bg6? 22.f4 Nc6 23.f5! Bxf5 24.Qh5, winning, Moskalenko-Almeida Quintana, Banyoles (rapid) 2006.
9.Bxf6 Qxb2 10.Bxg7 Bxc3+!
10…Rg8!? 11.Rb1 Bxc3+ 12.Bxc3 Qxc3+ 13.Nd2 Rg6 14.Rb3 gives White a good game. Nf3 and g3 is a good follow-up.
11.Bxc3 Qxc3+ 12.Nd2
12…Qe5!
12…Qd4?! 13.Rc1 Qxd6 14.e3! with the idea Qf3 and Ne4, is extremely difficult for Black.
13.e3! Nc6 14.Bc4! Rg8 15.0-0
So far Schroll-Schwab, Vienna 2006.
15…Qxd6 16.Ne4 Qxd1 17.Rfxd1 Ke7 18.Nxc5 d6 19.Ne4
This is co-author Watson’s analysis from A Strategic Chess Opening Repertoire for White. Black has three isolated pawns to deal with, and several weaknesses, so White has the advantage, as demonstrated by the sample line:
19…Bf5 20.Bd5
Or 20.Ng3 Be6 21.Bd3!.
20…Rad8 21.Rab1 Rd7 22.Rb5! a6 23.Rb6
With considerable pressure.
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 Ne4
This is the Vulture, a product of the creative analyst Stefan Bücker’s imagination. The immediate idea is that Black’s move, …Qa5+, can draw White’s pieces to less than optimal squares. The other idea is that once White has committed to d5, the knight on f6 isn’t doing that much, and by moving to e4 it facilitates the move …f7-f5 and, in some cases, clears the path for a bishop on g7. On the negative side, of course, moving a piece twice in the opening tends to lose time, and when Black does so it often spells trouble.
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 Ne4 4.Qc2
This is the most popular line. 4 Qd3 is similar. The alternative 4.Nf3 Qa5+ 5.Nfd2,
with the idea Qc2 and f2-f3, is particularly interesting. Then the b1-knight, which normally goes to d2, can go to the more active square c3 (notice that instead of 4…Qa5+, 4…d6 5.Qc2 Qa5+ 6.Nfd2 transposes). For example, 5…g6 6.Qc2 (6.f3 Nd6! 7.e4 Bg7 with the idea …0-0 and …f7-f5) 6…f5 7.f3 (7.g3 Bg7 8.Bg2 is another approach) 7…Nd6 8.b4!? (White is also better after 8.b3 Bh6!? 9.Bb2 0-0 10.h4) 8…Qxb4 (8…cxb4 9.Bb2 Rg8 with the idea …Na6-c5 might lead to 10.a3 b3!? 11.Qxb3 Na6 12.e3 Nc5 13.Qb4 Qc7) 9.Bb2 Rg8 10.e3 b5!? (10…Bh6 11.f4 g5 12.g3), Ernst-Van Dorp, Wolvega 2010, and now 11.cxb5 is the most challenging move, when the Benko-like 11…a6 12.b6! Qxb6 13.Na3, with the idea Nac4, should favor White somewhat.
4…Qa5+
This gives White a choice of interpositions.
5.Nd2
Another critical continuation is 5.Nc3 Nxc3 6.Bd2!
when 6…Qa4?! 7.Qxc3 isn’t good, but Black can set up a Czech Benoni structure with 6…e5 7.Bxc3 Qc7 and …d7-d6. Then a sort of ‘main line’ goes 8.f4! (White plays dynamically before Black can solidify his center and get developed) 8…d6 9.Nf3 Nd7 (9…exf4 is risky, because it opens the long diagonal and strips the king of protection. White can open lines with 10.e3! fxe3 11.Bd3, with the idea 0-0 and Rae1) 10.e3 g6 11.h4 Bg7 12.h5 Nb6 13.fxe5 (other moves also look good; for example, 13.Bd3 Bg4 14.h6 Bf6 15.fxe5 dxe5 16.Nh2!? Bd7 17.0-0. Then 17…Bg5 18.Nf3! Bxe3+ 19.Kh1 0-0 20.Bxe5 Qd8 21.Rae1 Bxh6 22.Qf2 is slightly depressing for Black, with c5 under fire and his king exposed; 22…Rc8 23.Bd6) 13…dxe5 14.0-0-0 Bg4, Gawehns-Gallinnis, Germany tt 1989/90; and here 15.d6! is very strong, since 15…Qc6 16.Qf2 0-0-0 (16…Bxf3 17.Qh4!) 17.Be2 threatens Nxe5 and leaves Black struggling to unravel.
5…Nf6!
Most books give only variations with the original move 5…Nd6, when 6.e4 and Bd3 should produce some advantage, but 6.b3!
is easier, a main line proceeding 6…f5 (6…g6 7.Bb2 Rg8 8.Bc3! Qb6 9.Qb2 planning e2-e4 and Bd3. 6…e5 7.Bb2 f6 8.e3 Nf7 9.Bd3 g6 10.h4 Rg8 11.h5 f5 12.hxg6 hxg6 13.Bc3 Qc7 14.g4 e4 15.Bxe4! fxe4 16.Nxe4 Be7 17.Nf6+ Bxf6 18.Bxf6 and Black’s position is collapsing) 7.Bb2 e6 8.Bc3 Qb6 (8…Qd8 9.Ngf3 Na6 10.e4!) 9.Qb2! Rg8 10.Ngf3 (or 10.Nh3 intending Nf4) 10…Qd8 11.e3 b6 12.Bd3, with a clear advantage.
6.e4 d6
Now the plan is …e7-e5 with a Czech Benoni structure.
7.Nf3
Or 7.Ne2 g6 (7…e5 8.Nc3 Be7 9.Be2 Nbd7 10.a3, intending Rb1 and b4, while Nf1-e3-f5 can also be effective) 8.Nc3 Bg7 9.a3 0-0 10.Rb1 Na6 11.Be2 e6 12.0-0 Ne8 13.f4 Bd7 14.Nf3 Qd8 15.Be3 exd5 16.cxd5 Nac7 17.Bf2 Bh6 18.Bh4 and White stood better in Lazarev-Collas, San Benedetto 1998.
7…e5 8.Bd3 Be7 9.a3 Nbd7 10.h3
This is a typical pawn move after Nf3 and Bd3, but White also has simply 10.0-0 or 10.b4 Qc7 (10…cxb4?! 11.Nb3) 11.Nf1!? intending Ng3 or Ne3.
10…Qd8
10…Nf8 11.b4! has the idea 11…cxb4? 12.Nb3.
11.Nf1 0-0
11…Nh5 12.Ne3 Nf4 13.Bf1, followed by g2-g3 with an edge.
12.g4!?
White tries to generate kingside threats. The milder 12.Ng3 provokes 12…g6 (Black covers f5 and h5, but creates weaknesses on his kingside) 13.0-0 a6 14.Be3 Rb8 15.b4 Qc7 16.Rab1 and White is for choice.
12…h6 13.Ng3 Nb6 14.Be3 Bd7 15.0-0-0 a6 16.Rdg1 Ne8 17.Nf5
With a promising game.
1.d4 c5 2.d5 Nf6 3.Nc3 Qa5
The Woozle, so-named by Bücker, who did all the groundwork on this system. The idea is very concrete: to pin White’s knight and support the queenside advance …b7-b5.
1.d4 c5 2.d5 Nf6 3.Nc3 Qa5
3…e6 4.e4 exd5? is well-answered by 5.e5 Ng8 (5…Ne4 6.Nxd5 with ideas of Qe2 or Bd3) 6.Qxd5.
4.Bd2 b5
This is the point. Black doesn’t fear a discovered attack and intends to kick White’s knight out of the center. This is a provocative use of time that begs for a sharp response.
5.e4! b4 6.e5!
6…bxc3
6…Ba6 doesn’t work out well after 7.Bxa6 (or 7.exf6 Bxf1 8.Kxf1 bxc3 9.fxe7 cxd2 10.exf8Q+ Kxf8 11.c4! intending Nf3 and Qxd2) 7…Qxa6 8.exf6 bxc3 9.Bxc3, intending Ne2 and 0-0, with a serious advantage.
7.Bxc3 Qa4
7…Qb6!? 8.exf6 gxf6 9.Qh5!? (or 9.Ne2 Bb7 10.Ng3 d6 11.Be2) 9…d6 (9…Bb7 10.0-0-0 d6 11.Nh3 Nd7 12.Nf4) 10.Nh3! Bxh3 (10…Nd7 11.Ng5!) 11.Qxh3 Nd7 12.Bd3 0-0-0 13.a4 Kc7 14.Ra3 and Black’s king is too exposed.
8.exf6 gxf6
8…Qe4+ 9.Qe2 Qxe2+ 10.Nxe2 gxf6 11.d6! is awful for Black.
9.Bd3
9.Qf3 is also good, answering 9…Qxc2?! with 10.Bd3 (or 10.Nh3) 10…Qa4 11.Nh3 (also good are 11.b3 Qh4 12.Ne2, and 11.Ne2 d6 12.Ng3) 11…d6, when a particularly fun line is 12.Ng5!? Nd7 13.Qh5 Ne5 14.Bxe5 dxe5 15.Qxf7+ Kd8 16.Ne6+ Bxe6 17.Qxe6 Qb4+ 18.Kf1 Qb6 19.Bf5!.
9…Bb7 10.Qf3 Rg8 11.Bxh7
White comes out even better after 11.Be4. For example, 11…d6 12.Nh3 Nd7 13.b3 Qa3 14.0-0 Ne5 15.Qh5.
11…Rg5 12.Rd1 Qxa2 13.Be4 d6
Or 13…f5 14.Qf4!.
14.Nh3 Rg7 15.0-0 Qa6 16.Ra1 Qb5 17.b3
And White not only has a big lead in development and space, but he also threatens Bd3.
1.d4 c5 2.d5 Nf6 3.Nf3 c4
A silly-looking move from Bücker, who named it ‘HABICHD’, a German play-word which translates roughly to ‘Gotcha!’. In English-speaking countries, it has become known as ‘the Hawk’.
Black’s first idea is 4…Qa5+, threatening the pawn on d5 and forcing 5.Nc3, after which …b5-b4 will continue the attack on White’s center.
1.d4 c5 2.d5 Nf6 3.Nf3 c4 4.Nc3
4…Qa5
According to plan. The immediate 4…b5?! can be met in various ways, one good line being 5.e4 (5.Nxb5 Qa5+ 6.Nc3 e6 7.dxe6 fxe6 8.Bd2 is also good) 5…b4 6.Nb1 (6.Nb5!? a6 7.Nbd4 Qc7 8.Nd2, or even 8.Nf5! with the idea 8…Nxe4?! 9.Qd4 Nf6 10.d6!) 6…Nxe4 7.Bxc4 e6 8.0-0, with mounting threats.
5.e4
The most aggressive move, although there are others:
A) 5.Bd2!? Nxd5 (5…b5 6.b4! Qb6 7.a4) 6.e4 Nxc3 7.Bxc3 Qc7 (or 7…Qc5 8.Qd4 Qxd4 9.Nxd4 Nc6 10.Bxc4 Nxd4 11.Bxd4 e6 12.0-0-0) 8.Nd2! e6 9.Bxc4 Nc6 10.Qh5! with a nice edge;
B) 5.Nd2!? b5 (5…Nxd5 6.Nxd5 Qxd5 7.e4 and Bxc4) 6.e4 d6 7.a4
7…a6 (7…Ba6? 8.axb5! Qxa1 9.Bxc4 intending 9…Bb7? 10.Nb3) 8.Qf3! Bb7 9.Qe3 Nbd7 10.b4! intending 10…Qxb4 11.axb5 axb5 12.Rxa8+ Bxa8 13.Qa7, winning.
5…b5 6.Qd4
White also derives some advantage from 6.e5 Ne4 7.Bd2. For example, 7…Nxc3 (on 7…Nxd2? 8.Nxd2! threatens 9.a4) 8.Bxc3 b4 9.Bd2 Ba6 10.c3! Qxd5 11.cxb4 Nc6 12.Bc3.
6…Bb7 7.Bd2 b4 8.Nd1 e6 9.Bxc4 Bc5 10.Qd3
White has more space and better development, while the pawn on d5 cramps Black’s pieces. At first sight, it looks as though Black can win a pawn by…
10…exd5 11.exd5 Nxd5?
… with the idea 12.Bxd5 Bxd5 13.Qxd5?? Bxf2+.
But instead White plays…
12.Qe4+!
With the idea that if 12…Be7, then comes 13.0-0 followed by Re1. So the play might continue something like…
12…Kd8 13.0-0 Kc8 14.Qg4 g6 15.c3
… and White begins to crack open lines for the attack, while several of Black’s pieces can’t get developed.
English Opening: Duhm Gambit (A10)
1.c4 d5 2.cxd5 Nf6
Black wants to avoid 2…Qxd5?! 3.Nc3, and is willing to gambit a pawn. Unfortunately for him, White can decline the gambit and gain more central control than he normally gets in the English Opening.
1.c4 d5 2.cxd5 Nf6 3.d4
This transposes directly to the Marshall Variation of the Queen’s Gambit (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 d5 3.cxd5), which favours White!.
A) Duhm’s main line is 3.e4 c6! (3…Nxe4?? 4.Qa4+) 4.dxc6 (4.Qa4!? Bd7 5.Qb3 Nxe4 6.Qxb7 Qb6! turns out well for Black) 4…Nxc6 5.Nc3 e5 with a grip on d4. Maybe this isn’t enough for a pawn, but Black can enjoy long-term pressure. We’ll avoid that;
B) Another good move is 3.Nf3, intending 3…Nxd5 4.e4! Nb6 (4…Nf6 5.Nc3 and d2-d4) 5.d4 Bg4 6.Nc3 (or 6.Be2) 6…e5!? (6…e6 7.Bb5+ c6 8.Be2, with an edge) 7.d5 Bc5 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Qxf3, with space and two bishops.
3…Nxd5
This time 3…c6 4.dxc6 Nxc6 fails to control d4 after 5.Nf3, so Black would try 5…Bg4 6.Nc3 (6.e3 e5 7.Be2 is even simpler. For example, 7…Bxf3 8.Bxf3 exd4 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.exd4) 6…Bxf3 7.exf3 Qxd4, but 8.Qb3! Qb4 9.Qxb4 Nxb4 10.Bb5+ Nc6 (10…Kd8 11.0-0 e6 12.Rd1+) 11.Be3 is pleasant for the first player.
4.Nf3!
4.e4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5!? 6.dxe5 Qxd1+ 7.Kxd1 Ng4 8.Nh3 Nxe5 is nearly equal.
4…Bf5
Against anything else, 5.e4 is strong.
5.Nbd2
Threatening 6.e4. 5.Qb3 also gives White the advantage after 5…Nb6 (5…e6 6.Qxb7; 5…b6 6.Nbd2 Nf6 7.Ne5! e6 8.e4! Nxe4 9.Bb5+) 6.Nc3 e6 7.e4 Bg6 8.Be2 Nc6 9.Be3.
5…Bg6
5…Nf6 6.Qb3 Qc8, and now 7.e3 or 7.g3 favors White, but more entertaining is 7.e4! Bxe4 (7…Nxe4 8.Nxe4 Bxe4 9.Ng5 Bg6 10.Bc4 e6 11.d5!) 8.Nxe4 Nxe4 9.d5! (threatening 10.Qa4+) 9…c6 10.Be3, with the idea 11.Rc1; White has more than enough for a pawn.
6.e4 Nb6 7.h4!? h6
Or 7…Bh5 8.Qb3.
8.a4 a5 9.d5!?
White stands better, intending 10.Ne5, and if 9…N8d7, 10.h5 Bh7 11.Nd4 establishes a very effective bind on Black’s position.
Bird’s Opening: From’s Gambit (A02)
1.f4 e5
From’s Gambit is the most radical way of meeting 1.f4. Black immediately challenges the center at the cost of a pawn. You could argue that this is the soundest first-move gambit at Black’s disposal. In fact, we’ll avoid the main lines and try to establish only a modest advantage for White.
Grünberg – Cechalova
Stockerau 1993
1.f4
This is Bird’s Opening, a respectable debut which, however, doesn’t occupy the center and doesn’t put any pressure on Black.
1…e5
Naturally, Black can play any other normal move; for example, 1…c5, 1…d5, 1…Nf6, or 1…g6.
2.fxe5
White accepts the pawn. 2.e4 transposes to the King’s Gambit!
2…d6
This is the point. Black gambits a pawn to get active play with some kingside threats. 2…Nc6!? has several answers, a direct one being 3.Nf3 (3.Nc3 d6 4.exd6 Bxd6 5.Nf3 might lead to 5…g5 6.g3 g4 7.Nh4 Nge7 8.Bg2 Ng6 9.Nxg6 hxg6 10.Ne4 Be7 11.c3) 3…g5 4.d4
4…g4 5.Ng1 d6 6.e4 dxe5 7.d5 Nce7 8.Nc3, with a space advantage.
3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3
White has to see the threat: 4.Nc3?? Qh4+ 5.g3 Qxg3+! 6.hxg3 Bxg3.
4…g5
The most dangerous move, threatening 5…g4 and then 6…Qh4+. 4…Nf6 is an alternative, and the main line with 5.d4 Ng4 might be a good way to go, but you can also sidestep a mass of theory with the unusual but promising move 5.Nc3 (recommended by Larsen) 5…Ng4 6.g3!
6…h5 (6…Nxh2 7.Rxh2 Bxg3+ 8.Rf2 favors White, who can unwind with d2-d4 or play a timely Ne4. For example, 8…Bg4!? 9.d4! 0-0 10.Be3 Re8 11.Qd2 Bxf2+ 12.Kxf2 Bxf3 13.exf3 Qh4+ 14.Kg2 with a winning position) 7.d4 (7.Ne4 h4 8.gxh4 is also played, with many complications) 7…h4 (7…Nc6 8.e4!) 8.Bg5! f6 (8…Be7 9.gxh4) 9.Bxh4 g5 10.Qd3 gxh4 11.Bh3! with two pawns for the piece and numerous threats, including Qg6+, Bxg4, and Nxh4.
5.d4
This lesser-known move is safer, although not as ambitious, as the usual 5.g3. That move leads to loads of theory and requires accurate defense following 5…g4 6.Nh4 Ne7, when the knight is coming to g6 to defy the h4-knight.
5…g4 6.Ne5 Bxe5
6…Nc6!? is rather slow. For example, 7.Nxc6 bxc6 (7…Qh4+? 8.g3 Bxg3+ 9.hxg3 Qxh1 10.Ne5 f6 11.Nd3 Qg1 12.Bf4 Qxd4 13.Nc3 and White has super-active pieces with a winning position) 8.Qd3 Ne7 9.g3 h5 10.e4 h4 11.Rg1 and White is winning.
7.dxe5 Qxd1+ 8.Kxd1 Nc6
Black will win back the e-pawn, but White has an active bishop pair and some initiative.
9.Nc3 Be6
Not 9…Nxe5? 10.Bf4 f6 11.Nd5.
10.Bf4
The best line may be 10.Bg5 Nxe5 11.Nb5
11…Kd7 12.Ke1 f6 13.Rd1+ Kc8 14.Bh4! h5 15.e4 Bd7 16.Nc3 Ng6 17.Bf2 N8e7 18.Kd2 (18.Bd4! Ne5 19.Be2 and White has some advantage) 18…Be6 19.Kc1 a6, S. Williams-Quinn, Witley 1996. Here 20.Nd5 kept an edge, but better still was 20.Bd3. For example, 20…Nf4?! (20…Nc6 21.Rhf1 Nce5 22.Be3 Rf8 23.Be2 b6 24.Nd5!) 21.Bh4 Ng8 (21…Rf8 22.e5) 22.Rhf1 Nxg2 23.Bxf6 Nxf6 24.Rxf6 Re8 25.e5.
10…0-0-0+ 11.Kc1
The best retreat, getting the king out of the center. 11.Ke1 was played in Grünberg-Kotronias, Kavala 2002. Later White played Kd2-c1, so it makes sense to do it in one step.
11…Nge7 12.e3?!
A little slow. 12.e4 and 12.Bg5 both keep some advantage, and a more subtle approach is 12.b3 Ng6 13.g3! Ngxe5 (or 13…Ncxe5 14.Bg5 Rd7 15.Bg2 Nxf4 14.gxf4 h5 15.Bg2 Nd4 16.Be4 Bf5 17.Bd3) 14.Bg2, with a substantial advantage based on the activity of the bishop pair.
12…Ng6!? 13.Bg5 Rde8 14.Bf6 Rhg8 15.Bd3
15.b3 Ncxe5 16.e4 Nd7 17.Bd4 Nge5 18.Be2
. Now it was roughly equal after…
15…Ncxe5
And the position was roughly equal.