1 4925245491760857164 PDF

st rtin t:
slav ana semi-slav

GLENN FLEAR
Gloucester Publishers ole www.evervmanchess.com

First published in 2005 by Gloucester Publishers plc (formerly Everyman
Publishers plc), Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V OAT
Copyright© 2005 Glenn Flear
The right of Glenn Flear to be identified as the author of this work has been as
serted in accordance with the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a

retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electro
static, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior per
mission of the publisher.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
ISBN 1 85744 393 4
Distributed in North America by The Globe Pequot Press, P.O Box 4SO,
246 Goose Lane, Guilford, CT 06437-0480.
All other sales enquiries should be directed to Everyman Chess, Northburgh

House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V OAT
tel: 020 7253 7887; fax: 020 7490 3708
email: info@everymanchess.com
website: www.everymanchess.com
Everyman is the registered trade mark of Random House Inc. and is used in this
work under licence from Random House Inc.
EVERYMAN CHESS SERIES (formerly Cadogan Chess)

Chief Advisor: Garry Kasparov
Commissioning editor: Byron Jacobs
General editor: John Emms
Typeset and edited by First Rank Publishing, Brighton.

Cover design by Horatio Monteverde.
Production by Navigator Guides.
Printed and bound in the US by Versa Press.
Contents
Bibliography 4
Introduction 5
Part 1: The Slav
1 The Main Line Slav: 5 a4 Bf5 9

2 Black's Fifth Move Alternatives . 35
3 Gambit Lines: 5 e4, 5 Ne5 and 5 e3 49
4 The Quiet 4 e3 66
5 The Exchange Variation 78
6 The Chameleon Slav: 4... a6 90
7 The Slav with ... g7-g6 106
Part 2: The Semi-Slav
8 The Botvinnik Variation: 5 Bg5 dxc4 120

9 The Moscow Variation: 5 Bg5 h6 138
10 The Meran Variation 159
11 Black avoids the Me ran 183
12 White avoids the Meran 201
13 Early Deviations 223
Quick Quiz 245

Index of Variations 249
Index of Complete Games 252
Bibliography
Books
Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings Volume D, 4th Edition [Sahovski Informator
2004]
Nunn's Chess Openings, Nunn, Burgess, Emms & Gallagher [Gam
bit/Everyman 1999]
The Complete Semi-Slav, Peter Wells [Batsford 1994]
Semi-Slav: Non-Meran Variations, John Donaldson & Jeremy Silman [Summit
1988]
Play the Noteboom, Mark Van der Werf & Teun Van der Vorm [Cadogan 1996]
Slawisch, Egon Varnusz [Schachverlag 1991]
Winning with the Slav, Yuri Markov & Boris Schipkov [Batsford 1994]
The ... a6 Slav, Glenn Flear [Everyman 2003]
Periodicals
New in Chess Yearbooh 1 - 73
Informator 1-90
Software
ChessBase 9
' .
Deep Fritz 8
Introduction
This book lays the groundwo rk for those interested in trying out the Slav or
Semi-Slav in some form or other. So those positions arising after 1 d4 d5 2 c4
c6 are examined with the inexperienced in mind. By inexperienced I mean ei
ther those fairly new to chess who are looking for an opening against 1 d4, or
for stronger players tempted to try out the Slav (or Semi-Slav).
At first, more modest players should not try t o learn too much theory until
they have understood the basic ideas. Indeed, even stronger players who are
thinking of switching openings should give a priority to first sorting out their
aims for development and early middlegame plans.
Throughout the following pages the games are mainly illustrative and give
only a brief look at theory. The chapters discuss all the principal systems and
their strategies, but cannot go too deeply into specific variations. Think of the
book as the first step in the exciting world of Slav/Semi-Slav adventures. If
you become an aficionado then more advanced material will be necessary down
the line.
What are the Slav and Semi-Slav?
The Slav Defence and the Semi-Slav Defence are often considered to be two
distinct openings. They have their own unique personalities but have much in
common, almost like two brothers.
In both cases we are really looking at developments from Diagrams 1 and 2:
By playing 2 . . c6 (rather than 2 . e6) Black retains the option of developing his
. . .
queen's bishop along the c8-h3 diagonal.

The Slav can be thought of as those variations where Black delays playing
. . . e7-e6, usually because he w ill try and bring his bishop out early, even if it·
means delaying kingside development or at some point having to relinquish
some central control with . . . d5xc4.
5
Starti ng O u t: Slav a n d Sem i-S lav
Diagram 1 Diagram 2
Defending the d-pawn Developing the c8-bishop
In the Semi-Slav Black plays an early . . . e7-e6 before bringing out the light
squared bishop. He has other priorities. The problem piece (as Black's queen's
bishop is often called in queen's pawn openings) will be dealt with later, possi
bly coming to b7 after the b-pawn has moved out of the way.
Diagram 3 Diagram 4
The bishop stays at home Black has three main moves
Who plays the Slav and Semi-Slav?

Just about all the top players in the world play these openings, many with
both colours. Some prefer the Slav, others stick to the Semi-Slav, but it's hard
to name anyone who hasn't tried at least one of.them out at some time in their
career!
6
I ntroduction
Although there are earlier references these openings started to be played with
some frequency in the 1 920's and 30's, in order to obtain a more dynamic game
than the main d-pawn opening of the epoch, the Queen's Gambit Declined.
Their popularity has grown ever since and the recent exponential growth in
the Slav with ... a7-a6 suggests that these openings will continue to fascinate
the chess world.
There are other defences to choose from after 1 d4, but many top players keep
the Slav/Semi-Slav complex firmly in their repertoires. Why is this?
Why play the Slav and Semi-Slav?
The fact that l . ..d5 and 2 . . . c6 together build a solid foundation, appeals to
many a classically-minded player who prefers to have a sturdy foothold in the
central arena from the word go. The thinking goes that as Black, if you have a
fair share of the centre, not only will you be able to develop, but you can look
forward to the middlegame with confidence.
It's not just solidity that Black is seeking, as the threat of playing . . . d5xc4
(sometimes grabbing a pawn) or modifying the central pawn structure in other
ways keeps White on his toes.
Experienced players know that the Slav and Semi-Slav give the potential to
seek active piece-play without making early concessions.
The Structure of the book
The first five chapters deal with the pure Slav and Chapters 8- 12 with the
main body of the Semi-Slav.
The other three chapters, 6, 7 and 13 focus on newer or offbeat ideas. The idea
of playing an early ... a7-a6 in both the Slav or Semi-Slav is fashionable, and
this gets coverage in Chapter 6 and is also touched on in Chapters 5, 7 and 1 1 .
It's a good idea to read through all o f the book to see which variations suit
your own style. If you opt to play the Slav then be aware of certain move
orders which White players employ to steer the game into a Semi-Slav, see
Chapter 13.
Each section includes illustrative games to show how play may proceed. The
theory is admittedly skimpy to say the least, but I have aimed to recommend
which lines are in my opinion the most promising, so that you have an idea
where to concentrate further research.
Each section also tries to give an idea of the main plans for both sides, plus a
rough idea of whether the lines are theoretical or not. The word theoretical
really refers to book knowledge, so a very theoretical line will require the
player to do more memory work, etc.
Statistics and Summaries help indicate how well the lines are performing in
practice and, finally, in Chapter 14 there are a few exercises. 'They are there to
test what you have managed to pick up in the first thirteen!
7
Starting Out: Slav and Semi-Slav
Statistics, Damn Lies and Statistics

Mter 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 (Diagram 4)
The three principal moves are: the main line Slav with 4. . . dxc4, the a6-Slav
following 4 . . . a6, and 4 . . . e6 - the Semi-Slav.
As a bit of fun I have compared some statistics:
In the main lines of the Slav (Chapter 1) Black scores 42%.
Black scores 44% after 4 . . . a6 (see Chapter 6) .
Mter 4 . . . e6, the two principal variations are the Botvinnik (Chapter 8) and the
Meran (Chapter 10); in both of these Black scores 46%.
So the stats give a slight preference to the Semi-Slav.
The statistics at the end of each significant variation are only pointers, so
don't make the mistake of taking them too seriously, but they do help in build
ing an overall picture.
So now it's time to read the book and decide which you prefer!
Glenn Flear
Baillargues, France
June 2005
8
Chapter One
T h e M a i n L i n e S l av : 5 a4 Bf5
m Introduction
m The Dutch Variation
m White plays his knight to h4
m The Central Variation: 6 Ne5 e6
m The Central Variation: 6 Ne5 Nbd7

Introduction
In the Slav Black aims to develop his queen's bishop early and in most lines he
will do so as soon as possible. However, there are limits since if he were to play
the immediate 4 . . . Bf5?! , then 5 cxd5 cxd5 6 Qb3 would put pressure on the
light squares, such as b7 and d5. Instead, after 4 . . . Bf5?! 5 cxd5 the alternative
recapture 5 . . . Nxd5 leads to other problems, as 6 Nd2!? followed by e2-e4 gives
White a fine centre. So if Black really would like to develop his bishop, he has
to find better circumstances.
The standard method is to do so in an indirect way. First of all he captures the
c4-pawn that is en prise for the time being. If White takes the necessary steps
to recapture this pawn, then Black obtains enough time to get his bishop out
and about. The position in Diagram 1 is the subject of Chapter 1 and, statisti
cally speaking, the most significant chapter in this book.
White has two principal ways of reacting:
1. 6 e3 with Bxc4 to follow, which is sometimes called the Dutch Variation;
2. 6 Ne5 with two ideas in mind Nxc4 and f2-f3 followed by e2-e4, known as
the Central Variation.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4
Black captures the gambit pawn at a moment when the threat to support it
with . . . b 7-b5 forces White to make a decision.
5 a4
White essentially prevents . . .b7-b5 thus allowing him to pick off the c-pawn in
the near future. Drawbacks are the weakened b4-square and loss of time.
5 ... Bf5 (Diagram 1)
Diagram 1
The main line Slav
10
The Main Line Slav: 5 a4 Bf5
While White is getting ready to restore material equality Black takes the op
portunity to develop his queen's bishop. By choosing the f5-square White's de
sirable e2-e4 advance is hindered for the time being.
The Dutch Variation

Here White contents himself with recapturing the pawn and castling kingside
before seeking central expansion.
6 e3
This natural move enabling and preparing the recapture on c4 with the bishop
is the beginning of the Dutch Variation. It's known as such as it featured sev
eral times in the World Championship matches of 1935 and 1937 between Max
Euwe and Alexander Alekhine which both took place in Holland.
6 ... e6 7 Bxc4 Bb4
Using the hole on b4 created by White's early advance of the a-pawn.
8 0-0 0-0
Castling at this point is normal as one naturally wants to get the king to
safety. However, another popular idea is to bring the last minor piece into play
with 8 ... Nbd7, and although this often transposes, there are some lines when
Black's king stays in the centre or even castles queenside! White then has
three significant independent ideas:
a) 9 Qe2 Bg6 10 e4!? Bxc3 1 1 bxc3 Nxe4 12 Ba3 Qc7 13 Rfc1 (see Game 3) con
stitutes a sharp gambit. Black captures the important e-pawn, but in return
he has had to cede his dark-squared bishop and is unable to castle kingside.
He'll have to live with some dark square holes and castle queenside, but it's
playable.
b) 9 Qb3 a5 10 Na2 Be7 11 Nh4 (here 11 Qxb7 Rb8 is immediately drawn as
White's queen can't escape the perpetual attack) 1 l. . . Bg6 12 g3 Qb6 13 Nxg6
hxg6 14 Rd1 0-0 15 Qc2 c5!, G.Kasparov-A.Beliavsky, Tilburg 1981, and Black
doesn't fear the bishop pair as . . . c6-c5 guarantees a fair share of the centre.
c) 9 Nh4, hitting the bishop, is covered in the next section (see Game 4) .
Preparing e3-e4 with 9 Qe2
White is now ready for the e-pawn to start advancing. Black has to decide
whether to live with less space and then later hit back in the centre, or go for a
risky pawn grab.
9 Qe2 (Diagram 2) .
White signals his intention to advance in the centre in order to gain space and
give his dark-squared bishop more influence.
9 Nbd7
...
9 ... Bg4 restrains the e-pawn ·advance for one more move, but after 10 Rd 1 (not
11
Starting O u t : Slav and Semi-S lav
10 e4? Bxf3 1 1 Qxf3 Qxd4 etc.) 10 . . . Nbd7 1 1 e4 Qe7 12 h3 Bxf3 13 Qxf3 White
keeps a pull, L.Polugaevsky-G.Agzamov, USSR Championship 1983.
Diagram 2 Diagram 3
W h ite plans e3-e4 White occupies the centre
10 e4 Bg6
10 . . . Bxc3? is bad after 1 1 exf5.
1 1 Bd3 (Diagram 3)
White supports his e-pawn and prepares to complete his development, hoping
to keep his fine-looking centre intact. The most popular move now is . . .
1 1...Bh5
. . .when Black retains the light-squared bishops for now in order to keep up the
pressure on White's centre. Black is hoping to provoke White forward.
Strateg ies
At some point White will have to decide how and when to advance in the cen
tre. In the main line White follows up his e3-e4 advance with e4-e5 obtaining a
wedge which lends itself to pressing on the kingside. Black's plan depends on
how White resolves the central tension, but he'll need to keep White occupied
in the centre before the first player gets an attack.
Theoretical?
Even though it's been played umpteen times, most of the variations can be
handled with general principles. A few of the sharper lines will require delving
a little deeper into theory, especially the gambit line in Game 3.
Statistics
With 9188 games this is the most popular chapter in the book, and so referring
12
The M a i n Line Slav: 5 a4 Bf5
to it as 'The Main Line Slav' seems appropriate. Top players such as Anand,
Bareev, Shirov, Kramnik, Morozevich and, in his time, Smyslov tend to score
about 50%. However, overall Black only manages a disappointing 42%.
Of White's options, 6 e3 (5406 games) scores an average 56%.
Game 1
D C.Gabriel • V.Akopian
Germany vs. Armenia match, Baden Baden 1996
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bf5 6 e3 e6 7 Bxc4 Bb4 8 0-0
Nbd7 9 Qe2 Bg6 10 e4 0-0
Transposing back to the main line. The most common move order is 8 . . . 0-0 9
Qe2 Nbd7 10 e4 Bg6.
11 Bd3 Bh5 12 e5 Nd5 13 Ne4 (Diagram 4)
Diagram 4 Diagram 5
e4 vs. d5 outposts Hitt ing back in the centre
White uses the e4-square for his knight but allows Black in return to keep con
trol of d5.
The alternative plan 13 Nxd5 cxd5 14 Qe3 leads to a 'French Defence style'
centre. Blac k's light-squared bishop being outside the pawn chain which is a
plus for him, but even so Black will need to react to White's space advantage
at some point, probably with a timely . . .f7-f5. He can implement this almost
immediately or redeploy his pieces first, e.g. 14 . . . h6 15 Ne1 f5 16 exf6 Qxf6,
B.Gelfand-J.Lautier, Horgen 1994, or 14 . .. Be7 15 Bd2 NbS 16 Ne 1 Bg6 17 f4
Nc6 18 g4 f5, A.Beliavsky-Z.Ribli, Slovenia 2001, and in both cases Black can
look forward to the middlegame with confidence. Another example of this
pawn structure can be seen in Game 2.
13 ... Be7 14 Ng3 Bg6 1 5 Bxg6 hxg6
The alternative 15 .. .fxg6 would enable Black to have influence on the f-file and
13
Start i n g Out: Slav a n d Semi-Slav
keep his king snug behind the pawn mass. However, the e6-pawn would then
be weak and the doubled g-pawns will be devalued in the endgame.
16 Ne4
With the threat of planting a knight on g5 followed by bringing the queen to
the h-file. So it's imperative that Black opens the centre to create counterplay.
16 ... c5! (Diagram 5) 17 Rdl
1 7 Nc3 is probably better, to eliminate the d5-knight, e.g. 1 7 ... Qb6 18 Nxd5
exd5 19 dxc5 Nxc5 20 Be3 Qe6, Xu Jun-V.Akopian, Moscow Olympiad 1994
with chances for both sides. Black has achieved a fair share of the centre. In
stead Hubner points out that White can't simply play for mate with 1 7 Nfg5?,
because of 17 . . .cxd4 18 Qg4 Nxe5 1 9 Qh4 Bxg5 20 Nxg5 Nf6 and White's bra
vado has just cost him two pawns.
17 ... cxd4 18 Rxd4 Rc8
White's attacking ideas are no longer realistic and he will have to pay for his
weaknesses at e5, b3 and b4.
19 Be3 Qc7 20 Rcl Qb8
The e-pawn cannot be defended.
2 1 Nc3 Nxc3 22 bxc3 Nxe5 23 Bf4 Nxf3+ 24 Qxf3 Qa8
Black has a clear extra pawn and only needs to play . . . Rfd8 and . . .b7-b6 to tidy
up, so White must try and force the issue.
25 Rd7 Bf6 26 Qxb7 Qxb7 27 Rxb7 Rc4!
The long forcing line has left Black on top.
28 Bd6
Instead 28 Be3 a5 29 Ra7 Rxa4 30 c4 might be a better chance.
28 ... Rd8 29 Bb4 Bxc3!
Exploiting the back rank.
30 Bxc3 Rxc3 31 Rcbl a5 32 Ra7 Rcd3 33 g3 Rdl+ 34 Rxd1 Rxdl+ 35
Kg2 Rd5 36 Ra8+ Kh7 3 7 h4 g5
Black exchanges his front g-pawn t o improve his structure and free his king.
38 hxg5 Rxg5 39 Kf3 Rf5+ 40 Ke3 g5 41 Ra7?
Giving too much ground on the kingside. 41 f3 was better.
41...g4 42 Rc7 Kg6 43 Rc4 Kg5 44 Rc7 Kg6 45 Ke2 Re5+ 46 Kd3 f6 47 Ra7
f5 48 Kd2 Rc5 49 Ke3 Kf6 50 Kd3 Ke5 5 1 Ra6 Kd5 52 Ra8 Kd6 53 Ra6+
Ke5 54 Rb6 Kf6 55 Ra6 Rd5+ 56 Ke3 Re5+ 57 Kd3 Ke7 58 Ra7+ Kd6 59
Ra6+ Kd7
Bringing the king over to harass the opposing rook.
60 Kd4 Re4+ 61 Kc5 Rxa4 62 Ra7+ Ke8 63 Kd6 Re4 64 Rxa5 Kf7
Although all the pawns are on one small front, White's king is cut off and can
not help out as Black converts his extra pawn.
14
65 Ra2 Kf6 66 Rd2 f4 67 gxf4 Kf5 68 Ke7 Rxf4 69 Kd6 e5 70 Re2 Rd4+ 71
Ke7 e4 72 Ra2 e3 0-1
Game 2
D R.Hubner • D.Mastrovasilis
Germany vs. Greece match, Corfu 1999
1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 c4 c6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bf5 6 e3 e6 7 Bxc4 Bb4 8 0-0

Nbd7 9 Qe2 Bg6 10 e4 0-0 1 1 Bd3 Bh5 12 Bf4 Qe7
The favoured move these days. Instead the sharp 12 ... e5 is met by 13 dxe5
Ng4 14 Qc2 when Black hasn't been able to equalise, e.g. 14 ... Qa5 15 Na2!
Rfe8 16 Be2 Bg6 17 Bg3! and Black has problems getting his pawn back,
B.Kouatly-E.Meduna, Trnava 1987.
Once upon a time they used to play 12 ...Re8, but the text (which links the
rooks) is considered to be slightly more flexible. Play could then continue 1 3 e5
Nd5 14 Nxd5 cxd5 and we obtain the same central pawn formation as in the
next diagram. Continuing further with 1 5 h3 a6 16 Rfc 1 Nb8! (redeploying to
c6 is a typical manoeuvre in this line and represents a better option than
16 ... Be7 1 7 Rc3!? Bxf3 1 8 Qxf3 Nb8?, as after 1 9 Bxh7+ Kxh7 20 Qh5+ Kg8 2 1
Rg3 Black was in trouble in L.Polugaevsky-E.Torre, London 1984) 1 7 g4 Bg6
18 h4 Nc6 19 h5 Bxd3 20 Qxd3 f6 2 1 Kg2, L.Polugaevsky-J.Gomez Baillo, Lu
cerne 1985, and now Black should switch back to the f-file with 2 l . . .Rf8.
13 e5 Nd5 14 N�d5 cxd5 (Diagram 6)
Diagram 6 Diagram 7
... Bg6 defends the kingside Attacking Black's king
15 Rfc1
The continuation of L.Gofshtein-M.Sadler, Ischia 1 996, was instructive: 1 5
Qe3 Rfc8 1 6 a 5 Bg6 1 7 Ra4 Bxd3 1 8 Qxd3 Rc4 1 9 h4? (White should play
something like 19 Bg5 Qf8 20 Bd2 Bxd2 21 Rxc4 dxc4 22 Qxd2 to hold the bal-
15
ance) 19 . . :h6 20 h5 Nc5 ! (a surprise!) 2 1 dxc5 Rxf4 and Black had the advan
tage.
15 ...Nb8
The sensible 15 ... Rfc8! is playable, when (if need be) Black can play . . .Nf8 to.
defend.
C) TIP: Taking time to improve your pieces is commendable, but

don't forget to look after your king!
'f
16 Qe3 Nc6!?
Mter 16 ... Bxf3 17 Qxf3 Nc6 Black's king would be too vulnerable.
17 Ng5 (Diagram 7) 17 ... Bg6 18 Bxg6 fxg6 19 Qh3
Forking e6 and h7, but it's far from over. . .
19. . .h 6 2 0 Qxe6+ Qxe6 21 Nxe6 Rfe8?
Black misses a reasonable chance of saving the game with 2 1 . . . Nxd4! 22 Nxf8
(22 Nxd4 Rxf4 23 Ne6 Rf7 is equal) 22 . . .Rxf8 23 Be3 Nb3 24 Bxa7 Ra8 25 Bb6
Nxc1 26 Rxc1 Rxa4 27 Kf1 with only a small pull for White.
22 Nc7 Nxd4 23 Rd1 Ne2+ 24 Kfl Nxf4 25 Nxe8 Rxe8 26 Rd4
Black had probably overlooked this fork when playing 2 l . . . Rfe8, so now he
loses the exchange and with it any hopes of saving the game.
26 ... a5 27 Rxf4 Rxe5 28 Rd1
Threatening Rfd4.
28 ... Bc5 29 Re1 Rh5 30 h3 b6 3 1 Re8+ Kh7 32 Ke2 d4 33 Kd3 Rd5 34 Rf7
g5 35 Rb8 Rd6 36 Rbb7 Rg6 37 Ke4 d3 38 Kxd3 Rd6+ 39 Kc4 Bd4 40
Rfd7 Rxd7 41 Rxd7 1-0
Game 3
D V.lvanchuk • J.Lautier
Linares 1994
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bf5 6 e3 e6 7 Bxc4 Bb4 8 0-0
Nbd7 9 Qe2 Bg6 10 e4 Bxc3
Taking the plunge!
11 bxc3 Nxe4 12 Ba3 Qc7 (Diagram 8)
White's bishop pair combined with Black's shaky king give problems for the
defender. Nevertheless, if Black walks a fine line he can obtain a reasonable
game. Getting too greedy, however, isn't the way: 1 :L .Nxc3 13 Qb2 Nxa4, for
instance yields White a vicious attack with 14 Qb3 Nab6 1 5 Bxe6.
13 Rfc1
The most popular, but White has other tries:
a) 13 Nd2 an.d then:
16
Diagram 8 Diagram 9
White has good compensation White has the safer king
a1) 13 ... Nxc3?! 14 Qe3 Nd5 15 Bxd5 cxd5 16 Rfc 1 is very unpleasant for
Black's stranded king.
a2) 13 . . . Ndf6!? isn't that clear, e.g. 14 Nxe4 Nxe4 15 Rfe 1 0-0-0 16 Qb2 Rhe8
17 f3 Nd6 1 8 Bf1 Kb8, when Black has enough time to get organised, though
the latent pressure persists. G.Kasparov-E.Bareev, Tilburg 1991, then contin
ued 19 a5 Nc8 20 Bc5 f6, whereupon Kasparov proposes 21 Qb4 e5 22 dxe5
fxe5 23 Bf2 as offering White more than enough compensation.
a3) 13 ... Nxd2 14 Qxd2 c5 15 dxc5 0-0-0 16 Qe3 Ne5 17 Be2 Bd3,
E.Magerramov-S .Ionov, Cheliabinsk 1991, is generally considered to be un
clear.
b) 13 Rfe1 Nxc3 14 Qe3 Ne4 15 Ne5 Nxe5 16 dxe5 Qb6 17 Qf4 0-0-0! is Ftac
nik's suggested improvement. Instead 1 7 . . . Qd4? 18 Qh4! led to a win for White
in C.Lutz-E.Bareev, Munich 1 994.
13 ... 0-0-0 14 a5 Nd6
After 14 . . .Rhe8, White has tried several ideas but the most dangerous is 15 a6
b6 16 Nh4 Nd6 17 Bb3 e5 18 Nxg6 hxg6 19 Qg4, when White had a strong ini
tiative in Y.Razuvaev-G.Schwartzman, Dortmund 1993.
Another option is 14 . . . Kb8, when there could follow 15 Be7!? Rde8 16 Bh4,
aiming for chances on the b8-h2 diagonal, but then 16 . . . f5! (Y.Razuvaev
V.Tukmakov, Rostov 1993) with .. . e6-e5 to follow, hits back in the centre with
satisfactory play for Black.
15 Bb3 Bh5 16 h3 Rhe8 1 7 a6
Again this move, leaving a thorn in Black's side for the duration.
17 ...b6 18 c4 c5
Mter 18 . . . e5, Black would have to be ready to face 19 c5!.
17
Starti ng Out: Slav and Semi-S lav
19 Ba4 e 5 20 dxc5 bxc5 2 1 Qe3 (Diagram 9) 2 1 ... Re6?!

Lautier has defended well so far, but now makes an imprecision. Here Ftacnik
suggests 2 l . . .f5, as 22 Bxd7+ Rxd7 23 Nxe5? Nf7 favours Black, but White can
improve on this with 2 3 Bxc5! f4 24 Qa3 with complications and I prefer White
due to his safer king.
22 Ng5 Rf6 23 Bb2 h6 24 Ne4 Nxe4 25 Qxe4 Re6 26 Re l Bg6
The pressure is intensifying so Lautier seeks solace in an ending.
27 Qa8+ Qb8 28 Bxd7+ Rxd7 29 Qxb8+ Kxb8 30 Rxe5 Rdd6 31 Rxc5
Rxa6 32 Rxa6 Rxa6 33 Bxg7
White finally comes out a pawn up, but Black is no longer under attack and
opposite-coloured bishops will give him realistic hopes for a draw.
33 ... h5 34 f4 f5 35 Be5+ Kb7 36 Rc7+ Kb6 3 7 Kh2!
The start of an instructive manoeuvre.
37 ... Ka5 38 Kg3 Be8 39 Kh4 Kb4 40 g3 Rg6
Black is virtually running out of moves and doesn't want to allow Kg5.
4 1 Rxa7 Kxc4 42 Ra8 Bc6 43 Ra3 Be8 44 Re3 Kd5 45 Bf6! Bd7
Alternatives are no better: 45 . . . Rxf6 46 Rxe8 is hopeless with Black's king cut
off from the kingside, while if 45 .. . Bf7 then 46 Re5+ Kd6 47 Bg5 Be6 48 Kxh5.
46 Bc3 Be6 47 Bb4 Bd7 48 Kxh5 Rg8
Now White has to squeeze Black's pieces away so that he can advance his g
pawn.
49 Bc3 Kd6 50 Kh6 Be6 5 1 Kh7 Ra8 52 Bb4+ Kd7 53 Kg7 Ra4 54 Kf6 Bd5
55 Bc3 Be4 56 g4 fxg4 57 hxg4 Bc2 58 Re7+ Kd8 59 Be5 Ra6+ 60 Re6
Rxe6+ 61 Kxe6 Ke8 62 Bd6 Bdl 63 g5 Bc2 64 f5 1-0
WARN I NG: When grabbing pawns for the cost of a persistent

i nitiative, remember that you might have to defend a long time,
and even then you m ight not even win the ending. Meanwhile
even small mistakes can be fatal !
White plays his knight to h4

Instead of primarily advancing with e3-e4 White decides to harass the light
squared bishop. He is still interested in expanding in the centre, but he may
take the bishop along the way. While White is temporarily distracted, Black's
strategy is to find a satisfactory way of ceding the bishop pair, to dig in and
then be good and ready for any line opening by White.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bf5 6 e3
Another move order that has become popular in recent years is 6 Nh4 e6 7
Nxf5 exf5 8 e3 Bb4 9 Bxc4 0-0 10 0-0 Nbd7 which transposes to the position
after Black's lOth move. There are alternatives for Black in this line such as
18
6 . . . Bc8 (playable but a tad negative in my opinion) or later on 8 . . . Bd6 9 Bxc4 0-

0 10 Qf3 g6 11 h3 h5! which is respectable, but I prefer sticking to the same
plan as in the main game.
6...e6 7 Bxc4 Bb4 8 0-0 0-0
If ,Black plays 8 ... Nbd7 instead play will frequently transpose, e.g. 8 ... Nbd7 9
Nh4 Bg6 10 f4 0-0 1 1 Nxg6 hxg6 12 Qf3 Rc8 1 3 Rd1 Qb6, V.Tukmakov-Z.Ribli,
Germany 1 988, Black has a solid structure and is ready to hit back at White's
centre with . . . c6-c5.
9 Nh4 (Diagram 10)
Diagram 10 Diagram 11
White wants the bishop A tense middlegame
White decides to harass the light-squared bishop before committing his centre.
9 ...Nb d 7
Nonchalantly leaving the bishop where it is! Instead 9 . . . Bg4 10 f3 Bh5
(10 . . . Nd5 leaves White with some chances for an advantage after 11 fxg4 Qxh4
12 Qf3 Nd7 1 3 Bd2 a5 14 Rad1, V.Tukmakov-V.Kupreichik, USSR Champion
ship 1981) 1 1 g4 (risky-looking but Black doesn't seem to be able to exploit this
apparently loosening move at the moment) 1 l . . .Bg6 12 e4 Nbd7 13 g5 Ne8 14
Nxg6 hxg6 1 5 Be3, L.Polugaevsky-E.Torre, Biel 1989, and White's space ad
vantage supported by the bishop pair gives him the better prospects.
10 Nx£5
White takes the opportunity to capture the bishop when Black has to recap
ture away from the centre.
Keeping the tension is sometimes tried:
a) 10 f3 Bg6 1 1 Nxg6 hxg6 12 e4 e5 13 Be3 Qb6 14 Kh1 Rad8 with adequate
counter-pressure on the white centre, I.Sokolov-C.Horvath, Stary Smokovec
199 1 .
19
Start i n g Out: S lav and Semi-Slav
b) 10 h3 Rc8 11 Qe2 Nb6 12 Bb3 Nbd5 1 3 Bd2 Qe7 14 Rfc 1 Rfd8 when Black
achieves full development, G.Kasparov-V.Kramnik, Paris (rapid) 1994, and
after 15 Qf3 Ne4! the forced simplification leads to equality.
10 ...exf5 1 1 Qc2 g6
Black tries to maintain a grip on the light squares with his pawns. Note that
despite having doubled f-pawns, the front one makes any e3-e4 advance less
appetising.
12 f3 Rc8 1 3 Qf2 c5 (Diagram 1 1)
I.Sokolov-D .De Vreugt, Amsterdam 2001. A tense middlegame is in prospect.
Strategies
At all times the move Nf3-h4 has the same attitude in mind: hit the bishop
and punish him for daring to poke his nose out so early! In any case Black can
leave the bishop in place and isn't too concerned about ceding the bishop pair.
By completing development and using his pawn on f5 and knight on f6 to keep
an eye on the e4-square, he keeps White's desired expansion in check.
Apart from . . . c6-c5 Black also conducts a provocative/restraining approach al
most daring White to open up the game for his bishops. Open positions may
favour bishops in general, but White can't expand in the centre without careful
reflection as Black's pieces are well placed to pounce on weaknesses.
Theoretical?
General principles are still the most important despite the popularity of the
Nh4 idea.
Statistics
The position after ten moves for both sides scores· a respectable 4 7% for Black.
Against 6 Nh4 (against which Black has achieved only 36%) Black should aim
for transposition with 6 . . . e6 (see note to White's sixth) followed by . . . Bb4, as
experimental play has cost him dear in the past.
Game 4
0 J.Lautier • E.Bareev
Enghien-les-Bains 2003
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bf5 6 e3 e6 7 Bxc4 Bb4 8 0-0 0-
0 9 Nh4 Nbd7 10 Nxf5 exf5 1 1 Qc2 Nb6
Black avoids . . . g7-g6 which is discussed in the intrbductory text.
1 2 Bb3 Qd7 13 a5 Nbd5 14 f3 (Diagram 1 2)
,
White prepares for e3-e4, Black gets ready to react.
14 ... Rfe8 15 Nxd5 Nxd5
Black must not fall for 15 . . . cxd5? 16 Ba4.
20
16 e4 Nf61
Diagra m 12 Diagram 13
Preparing to play e3-e4 Where should the aS-rook go?
Instead the tame 16 ... Nc7 allows White to consolidate his centre, e.g. 17 Be3
a6 18 Bf2 Rad8 19 Khl Nb5 20 Qc4 left White on top in L. Ortega-D.Vismara,
Saint Vincent 2002.
17 Qc4 Bf8 18 Bg5
Mter 18 exf5 Rad8 19 Kh1 Re7 20 Qc2 a draw was agreed in V.Kramnik
V.Anand, Linares 2000- a sign that Black is OK after he captures on d4.
18 ... fxe4 19 fxe4 Rxe4 20 Bxf6 gxf6
� · NOTE: Opposite-coloured bishops can be a drawish factor in
U _
endgames, but in midd legames can boost a player's attacki ng
potential.
21 Radl (Diagram 13) 21...Ra_ e 81

Only this is new! Black escaped after 2 1 . . .Rd8 22 Rxf6 Rxd4 23 Rxd4 Qxd4+ 24
Qxd4 Rxd4 25 Rxf7 Rb4 (the only move!) 26 Rxb7+ Kh8 27 a6 Bc5+ 28 Kh1
Bb6 29 Bc2 Rxb2 30 Bxh7 c5, A.Rustemov-I.Rogers, Germany 2000, as the
strong c-pawn compensates for the couplet on the kingside.
22 Rxf6 Rel+ 23 Rxe1?1
The superior 23 Rfl! Rxfl + 24 Qxfl would be about equal.
23 ... Rxe 1 + 24 Kf2
Now if 24 Rf1, then 24 . . . Rxf1 + 25 Kxf1 Bg7 26 d5 Bxb2 would net Black a
pawn.
24... Re7 25 Kgl Bg7 26 Rf4 Bh6 27 Rfl
The unfortunate 27 Rh4? embarrasses White's king after 27 ... Qf5!.
21
Starti ng Out: Slav a n d Semi-Slav
27 ...Be3+ 28 Khl Bxd4

Black picks off the d-pawn. Now White is helpless as Black gradually takes
control.
29 Qcl a6 30 h3 Kh8 31 Qf4 f6 32 Qd2 Qd6 3 3 Qh6 Qb8 34 Qd2 Qe5 35
Qh6 Rg7 36 Qd2 Re7 37 Qh6 Qb8 38 Qd2 c5
There's no hurry to commit oneself when your opponent can't undertake any
thing positive. However, it's necessary to avoid a repetition, so don't overdo the
'passing' strategy!
39 Bc4 Qg3 40 Qh6 ReS 41 Qh5
Here 41 Rf3 Qe1 + 42 Rfl Qxa5 43 Rxf6 is met by 43 . . . Qe1 + 44 Rf1 Bg7 45 Qb6
Qb4 and Black retains the advantage.
41...Rb8
Threatening . . . Be5.
42 Rf3 Qel+ 43 Rfl Qxa5
Cheeky!
44 Qf7 Qd8 45 Bd5 Bxb2
Very cheeky! White has lost his whole queenside! Lautier is able to generate
some counterplay that at least allows him to continue the struggle into a pure
opposite-coloured bishop ending.
46 Rbl
If 46 Bxb7 Ftacnik points out that 46 . . . Qd3! leads to a decisive attack: 47 Rxf6
Be5 48 Rfl Qg3 49 Kg1 Qh2+ 50 K£2 Bd4+ 5 1 K£3 Rg8 52 Ke2 Qe5+ 53 Kdl
Rd8.
46... Be5 4 7 Rxb7
The desperate 4 7 Be4 Qg8 48 Rxb7 Qxf7 49 Rxf7 gives White no hope after
49. . . h5 50 Rh7+ Kg8 5 1 Rxh5 c4 52 Rh7 c3 53 Ra7 Rb2 54 Ra8+ Kg7 55 Rc8
Re2.
47 ... Rxb7 48 Qxb7 c4! 49 Qa8 Qxa8 50 Bxa8 f5 51 Bd5 c3 52 Bb3 Bd4 53
g3
Here 53 g4!? f4 54 Kg2 Kg7 55 Kf3 Be5 56 Ke4 Kf6 is the more active way to
try and defend, but according to Ftacnik Black should nevertheless be able to
Will.
53 ... Kg7 54 Kg2 h5 55 Kf3 Kf6 56 Kf4 Be5+ 57 Kf3 a5 58 Bc2 Bd6 59 Bb3
Bc5 60 Kf4 Bf2 6 1 Bc2 Bel 62 Kf3 . ·
Instead, after both 62 g4 fxg4 63 hxg4 h4, and 62 Bxf5 a4 63 Bb 1 a3, the
passed pawns are too strong.
62 ... Ke5 63 h4 Kd4 64 Kf4 Bxg3+! 0-1
A nice finale. The bishop is sacrificed to allow the black king to invade deci
sively, e.g. 65 Kxg3 Ke3 66 Bxf5 a4 67 Bb1 a3.
22
The Central Variation: 6 Ne5 e6

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bf5 6 Ne5
This is known as the Central Variation. Not a particularly imaginative name,
but accurate in that it does suggest that the action of the next few moves will
be geared towards central control.
6 e6
...
Black prepares to bring out his king's bishop and isn't unduly concerned by the
knight on e5. White will take the opportunity to try and build a strong centre.
The important alternative 6 . . . Nbd 7 is considered in the next section (see
Games 7-9).
7 f3 (Diagram 14)
Diagram 14 Diagram 1 5
W h ite enforces e2-e4 Three pawns for a piece
7 Bb4
...
The logical-looking 7 . . . c5 hits immediately at d4 before White can get in his

desired e2-e4 advance. However, it seems that by ignoring Black's idea and
getting on with his own White can keep an edge: 8 e4! cxd4 9 exf5 Nc6 10 Nxc6
bxc6 1 1 fxe6 fxe6 12 Bxc4! (giving back the piece is clearest) 12 . . . dxc3 13 Qe2
Bb4 14 Qxe6+ Qe7 15 0-0 and the bishop pair in the open position gives White
the better chances.
8 e4
Constructing the centre, against which Black really has to sacrifice a piece in
order to avoid becoming too passive. White has tried to avoid these complica
tions but Black reacts quickly with . . . c6-c5 to obtain full equality, e.g. 8 Bg5 h6
9 Bh4 c5! 10 dxc5 Qa5, or 8 Nxc4 0-0 9 Bg5 h6 10 Bh4 c5.
23
Starting Out: Slav a n d Semi-Slav
8 ... Bxe4
Inferior is 8 . . . Bg6?! as 9 Bxc4 Nbd7 10 h4 Qa5 1 1 Qb3 0-0-0 12 Bf4 leaves
Black with serious difficulties, M.Petursson-E.Meduna, Gausdal 1988.
9 fxe4 Nxe4 10 Bd2
10 Qf3 leads to a forced draw after 10 . ..Qxd4 1 1 Qxf7+ Kd8 12 Bg5+ Nxg5 1 3
Qxg7 Bxc3+ 14 bxc3 Qxc3+ 1 5 Ke2 Qc2+ 1 6 Ke 1 Qc3+, A.Beliavsky
M.Steinberg, Sukhumi 1971.
10 ... Qxd4 1 1 Nxe4 Qxe4+ 12 Qe2 Bxd2+ 1 3 Kxd2 Qd5+ 14 Kc2 Na6 15
Nxc4 (Diagram 15)
Black has three solid pawns for the piece. Many games have started this way
and experience suggests that Black has just about enough solidity to fend off
the extra piece.
Strategy
The story so far: White builds the centre and Black has to avoid giving too
much ground, so he sacrifices a piece for three pawns.
After the early tactical flurry things settle down to a period where White
probes away at the pawn front with his extra piece, whilst Black hopes to keep
formation and eventually advance further up the board.
Theoretical?
The diagram above has been the 'starting point' for numerous games and the
theory goes quite deep into the.game.
Statistics
Black hasn't done that well with the piece sacrifice line, only managing 37%.
Nevertheless 6 ... e6 has remained more popular than 6 ... Nbd7 (1596 games
compared to 1079).
Game 5
0 G.Vescovi • B.Gelfand
Bermuda 2004
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bf5 6 Ne5 e6 7 f3 Bb4 8 e4
Bxe4 9 fxe4 Nxe4 10 Bd2 Qxd4 1 1 Nxe4 Qxe4+ 12 Qe2 Bxd2+ 1 3 Kxd2
Qd5+ 14 Kc2 Na6 15 Nxc4 0-0 16 Qe5 (Diagram 16)
16 ... Rab8 ' .
With . . . b7-b5 in the air.

Instead, after 16 . . . Rac8 White cannot exchange queens due to the opening of
the c-file, but after 17 Be2 f6 18 Qe3 Q£5+ 19 Kb3 White keeps control of
events. In K.Sakaev-E.Solozhenkin, St. Petersburg 1995, Black tried 19 ... b5 20
axb5 cxb5 21 Rxa6 bxc4+ 22 Ka2 but this proved to be better for White. Rus
sian analysis has investigated the alternative 19 ... Nc5+, when 20 Ka2 Nxa4 2 1
24
Rhfl Qc5 22 Qxe6+ Kh8 23 Rf5 Qb4 24 Qd6 c5 25 Qd2 is perhaps best play
leading to a small edge for White.
Often these three pawns for a piece positions are difficult to judge, but here
none of Black's remaining pawns are passed and White's pieces can easily
keep out of trouble after the exchange of queens.
Diagram 1 6 Diagram 17
Three pawnsfor a piece Dynamic equilibrium
17 a5
If 17 Be2, then 17 . . Nb4+ 18 Kb3 b5 gives counterplay for Black, V.Babula
.
P.Haba, Czech Championship 2003.

17 ... £6 18 Qxd5 cxd5 19 Nd2 Rfc8+ 20 Kb1 Nb4 21 Ra4 Nc6 22 Nb3
Black has a fine pawn mass for the piece, but White's pieces try to play around
them.
22 ... Kf7 23 Be2 Ke7 (Diagram 1 7)
A dynamic equilibrium as the pawn phalanx balances the bishop.
24 Rg4 g5
A sign that Gelfand is playing ambitiously, otherwise he would have settled
for the more solid 24 ... g6.
25 Rg3 Kd6
Moving .the king away from the kingside proves to be risky.
26 Rfl Rf8 27 Rh3 f5 28 Rxh7?!
After this Black is able to organise himself and shouldn't really be worse.
Later Vescovi suggested the paradoxical 28 Rh6! g4 29 Bd3 just concentrating
on putting Black's pawns under pressure.
28 ... Rh8 29 Rg7 Rhg8 30 Rxg8 Rxg8 3 1 a6 bxa6 32 Bxa6 Rh8 33 h3 f4 34
Rd1 e5 35 Bd3 Nb4 36 Be4 Ke6 37 Nc5+ Kd6 38 Nb3 Ke6
25
Start i n g Out: Slav a n d Sem i·Siav
Black's pawns create the impression of an impenetrable wall.

39 Bf3!? e4 40 Nc5+ Ke5 41 Rel Kd6
Vescovi considers 4 l. ..e3 to be equal, e.g. 42 Rdl Rd8 43 Nd3+ Nxd3 44 Rxd3
d4 45 Kc2 Rc8+ 46 Kdl Rb8 47 Kc2.
42 Nxe4+
Sacrificing back the material leads to an endgame where White should never
lose.
42 ... dxe4 43 Rxe4 Rb8
A mistake! The straightforward 43 . . . a5 should hold. Now White takes the
chance to create some problems.
44 h4! gxh4 45 Rxf4 Kc5 46 b3 a5
Unfortunately for Black the h-pawn falls, as 46 . . . Rh8 loses a piece to 47 Rc4+
Kb5 48 Be2 Ka5 49 Rc5+ Kb6 50 Rb5+.
4 7 Rxh4 Rd8 48 Rh5+ Kh6 49 Kb2 Rc8?
These endings can be notoriously difficult to play, especially with limited time.
Gelfand could still apparently hold with 49 . . .Rd2+ 50 Kc3 Rc2+ 51 Kd4 Rd2+
52 Ke4 Rb2 53 g4 Rxb3 54 g5 Rb l ! as Vescovi has analysed this position out to
a draw.
50 Rh6+ Kc5 51 Ka3!
The a-pawn comes under pressure and is ultimately lost. Despite Black's best
spoiling efforts he can't save the game.
51...Nc2+ 52 Ka4 Nd4 53 Ra6 Rf8 54 Rxa5+ Kb6 55 Ra8 Rf5 56 Be4 Re5
57 Bd3 Nc6 58 b4 Rel 59 Rg8 Ne5 60 Bf5 Rfl 61 Rg5 Rf4 62 g3 Rd4 63
Rh5 Nc6 64 Rh4 Rd8 65 Be4 Nd4 66 Rh6+ Kc7 67 b5 Rb8 68 Bd3 Re8 69
Rh4 Rd8 70 Kb4 Rd6 7 1 Rh7+ Kh6 72 Be4 Nxb5 . 73 Rb7+ Ka6 74 Rxb5
Rd4+ 75 Kc5 Rxe4 76 Rb3
The black king is too far away to hold.
76 ... Rg4 77 Kd5 Ka5 78 Ke5 Rg8 79 Kf6 Ka6 80 Kf7 Rg4 81 Ke6 Rg8 82
Kf6 Ka5 83 Kf7 Rg4 84 Rf3 Kb5 85 Kf6 Kc6
Here 85 . . . Rg8 is met by 86 Rf5+ Kc6 87 Rg5, and the g-pawn can start to move
forward.
86 Kf5 Rg8 87 g4 Kd7
Or 87 . . . Rf8+ 88 Ke4 Re8+ 89 Kf4 Rf8+ 90 Kg3 Rg8 91 Rd3 and White will
eventually win with the king cut off by three files ..
88 Rd3+ Ke7 89 g5 Ra8 90 Kg6 Kf8 91 Kh7 Ra7+ 92 Kh8 Kf7 93 Rd6 1-0
Game 6
D D.Rogozenko • A. Murariu
Bucharest 2002
1 Nf3 Nf6 2 c4 c6 3 d4 d5 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bf5 6 Ne5 e6 7 f3 Bb4 8 e4
26
Bxe4 9 fxe4 Nxe4 10 Bd2 Qxd4 1 1 Nxe4 Qxe4+ 12 Qe2 Bxd2+ 13 Kxd2
Qd5+ 14 Kc2 Na6 15 Nxc4 0-0-0 16 Qe3 (Diagram 18)
A complex middl�game The knight has no targets
The continuation 16 Qe5 f6 17 Qxd5 cxd5 18 Na3 Nb4+ 19 Kd2 Kd7 yields a
similar pawn structure to the previous game, while 17 Qe3 is analogous to the
main game except that Black has the f-pawn on f6. The best response is to use
this characteristic positively by playing 17 .. . Kb8 18 Be2 e5, when a number of
games have reached the conclusion that Black is fine.
16 ... c5
Here 16 . . . Nc5 17 Be2 Qxg2 18 Rhg1 Qxh2 19 Rxg7!, V.Kramnik-A.Shirov,
Dortmund 1996, seems to be better for White.
17 Kb3
17 Be2 Nb4+ 18 Kb3 Nc6 has been played a few times without reaching an ·
overall conclusion. The text seems to be more dangerous.

1 7 ...Nb4 18 Rc1 Nc6 1 9 Ka3 Nd4
Compared to the line starting 17 Be2, Black is not hitting the bishop and
White can prepare to develop differently.
20 Rg1 f6 2 1 g4 Qc6 22 Bg2 (Diagram 19)
Seizing the initiative as Black's 'well-placed' knight on d4 doesn't have any
targets.
N OTE: A fine-looking outpost for a knight is one thing, but if it

doesn't influence play?
22 ... Qa6 23 b3 Kb8 24 Kb2 e5?1

Black should probably play 24 ...h6, as at least White wouldn't then be so ready
27
Starting Out: Slav a n d· Semi-Slav
to open the g-file.

25 g5 Rhe8 26 Reel Ne6 27 gxf6 gxf6 28 Qe4 Nf4 29 Bfl Ng6 30 h4?
A bit random. Instead the calm 30 Qc2 Qc6 3 1 Bd3 should win the h-pawn and
leave White in control.
30 ... Rd4 31 Qc2 Rxh4 32 Q£2
32 Nxe 5? fails to 32 . . . Qd6, as . . . Qd4+ is in the air.
32 ... Rd4?
Here 32 . . . Qc6 represents a better chance, but White keeps some advantage
with 33 Nxe5 Rxe5 34 Rxe5 fxe5 35 Rxg6 hxg6 36 Qxh4.
33 Nxe5 Qd6 34 Nc4 Qd8 35 Rxe8 Qxe8 36 Qxf6 Qel 37 Rxg6! Rd2+
37 . . .hxg6 is hopeless after 38 Qf8+ Kc7 39 Qxc5+.
38 Nxd2 Qxd2+ 39 Ka3 Qb4+ 40 Ka2 Qd2+ 41 Qb2
No, there's no perpetual!
4l ... Qxb2+ 42 Kxb2 hxg6 43 Kc3 Kc7 44 Kc4 b6 45 Kb5 1-0
The Central Variation: 6 Ne5 Nbd7

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bf5 6 Ne5 Nbd7 (Diagram 20)
Black doesn't want to give White a free hand in the centre, so first of all he
challenges the white knight and then follows up with . . . Qc7 and . . . e7-e5.
Diagram 20 . .
Diagram 21
Challenging the knight An amazing pawn thrust
7 Nxc4 Qc7
Preparing to hit back in the centre with . . . e7 -e5.
8 g3
28
The Main Line S l av : 5 a4 Bf5
Helping in the development of both bishops as one goes to g2, the other to f4.
Instead 8 Bg5 e5 9 Bx£6 gxf6 10 e3 Rg8 gives Black dynamic counterplay in
compensation for the doubled pawns, J.Timman-H.Bouwmeester, Husum
1982.
8... e5 9 dxe5 Nxe5 10 Bf4 Nfd7
Although 10 . . . Rd8 1 1 Qc1 Bd6 has been frequently played over the years, the
ory tends to prefer White after a continuation such as 12 Nxd6+ Qxd6 13 Bg2
0-0 14 a5 a6 15 0-0 as the bishop pair is an important asset.
11 Bg2 g5! (Diagram 2 1)
Morozevich's amazing move that seems to give Black enough chances after . ..
12 Ne3 gxf4 1 3 Nxf5 0-0-0!

with double-edged play, V.Kramnik-A.Morozevich, Astana 200 1 .
The older line 1 l . . .Rd8 12 Q c 1 f6 13 0-0 Be6 14 Ne4! Be7 (14 . . . Bxc4?! 1 5 Qxc4!)
15 a5 gives White small but persistent pressure, M.Taimanov-F.Ignatiev,
USSR 1971.
A viable alternative to 1 l.. . g5, however, is 1 l . . . f6 12 0-0 Nc5, leading to sharp
play that offers chances for both sides (see Game 8).
Strategy
As Black reacts quickly with . . . e6-e5 the centre opens up and active piece play
comes to the fore. Black has then to continue in a positive frame of mind, as if
he is too hesitant he will be worse, so he needs to react aggressively, even
riskily.
Theoretical?
Basically, yes. Black has to have some theoretical knowledge otherwise he'll
probably just end up with a passive game.
Statistics
Statistically it seems that 6 . . . Nbd7 is Black's most promising choice in the
Central Variation obtaining 40% (compared to the 37% achieved by 6 . . . e6).
Morozevich's contributions score even better: 1 l . . .g5 manages 42%, and 1 1 . . .£6
12 0-0 Nc5 as much as 45%.
Game 7
D M.Euwe • A.Aiekhine
World Championship match, Netherlands 1 937
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bf5 6 Ne5 Nbd7 7 Nxc4 Qc7 8
g3 e5 9 dxe5 Nxe5 10 Bf4 Nfd7 1 1 Bg2 f6 12 0-0 Rd8 13 Qc1 Be6 14 Ne4!
The knight is well placed on e4 and Black cannot easily release the tension,
e.g. 1 4 . . . Bxc4?! 15 Qxc4 Nxc4 16 Bxc7 ReS 17 Bf4 and White has the advan-
29
Starti n g Out: Slav a n d Sem i-Slav
tage of the two bishops, and the further 1 7 . . . Nxb2? 18 Rfb1 Nc4 19 Rxb7 would
already ruin Black's position.
14 ... Bb4
A lesser evil was 14 .. . Be7 1 5 a5 a6 (people have since learnt that this is neces
sary!) 16 Nxe5 Nxe5 17 Nc5 Bc8 18 Qc3, M.Taimanov-F.Ignatiev, USSR 1971 ,
with pleasant pressure for White.
15 a5 0-0 1 6 a6 (Diagram 22)
Softening up the queenside A weakening mo ve
16 ... bxa6?
Kasparov describes 16 . .. b6 as more natural, although he points out that with
17 Qc2 White will keep up the pressure.
17 Nxe5 Nxe5 18 Nc5 Bxc5 19 Qxc5 g5? (Diagram 23)
Weaknesses on the kingside will help White in the later stages. The patient
19 . . . Qb6 was better, although Black's structure would still be creaking on the
queenside, e.g. after 20 Qc3.
NOTE: When under pressure, keeping one's pawns solid can

make it hard for your opponent to find a way through.
20 Be3 Bd5 21 Rxa6 Bxg2 22 Kxg2 Rf7 23 Rfa1 Qd6 24 Qxd6 Rxd6 25
Rxa7 Rxa7 26 Rxa7 Nc4 27 Bc5 Re6 28 Bd4
. .
28 b3 Nd2 29 Be3 tidies up and retains the extra: pawn as 29 . . . Nxb3? drops the
knight to 30 Ra3.
28 ... Rxe2 29 Bxf6 g4
After 29... Nxb2? then 30 Ra2 illustrates another way to trap a piece!
30 Kfl Rc2 31 Rg7+ Kf8 32 Rxg4 Nxb2 33 Bxb2
30
Simplest. At World Championship level such endings are converted into wins.
33 ... Rxb2 34 Rc4 Rb6 35 Ke2 Kf7 36 Rh4 Kg6 37 Rf4 Rb3 38 Rc4 Rb6 39
Ke3 Kf5 40 g4+ Ke6 41 f4 Kd5 42 Rd4+ Ke6 43 f5+ Ke7 44 Re4+ Kf7 45 h4
Rb1 46 Kf4 Rc1 47 Ra4 h6 48 Ra7+ Kg8 49 g5 Rc4+ 50 Ke5 1-0
Game 8
0 D.Rogozenko • J.Hector
Hamburg 2001
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bf5 6 Ne5 Nbd7 7 Nxc4 Qc7 8
g3 e5 9 dxe5 Nxe5 10 Bf4 Nfd7 1 1 Bg2 f6 12 0-0 Nc5!? 1 3 Ne3
At one point 13 e4 was the height of fashion, but now it seems that White
players are no longer keen, due largely to the complications resulting from
13 . . . Be6 14 Qe2 Nb3 15 Rad1 Bc5, S.Ivanov-V.Popov, Russia 1998.
13 ...Be6 (Diagram 24)
Provoking White forward! Black has piece play
Also worthy of serious consideration is 13 . . . Rd8, e.g. 14 Ncd5 Qd7 15 Nxf5

Qxf5 16 Ne3 Rxd1 17 Nxf5 Rxa1 18 Rxa1 a5! with a balanced game,
H.Banikas-M.Gagunashvili, Athens 2003. White's bishop pair is compensated
for by Black's grip on the queenside.
14 b4 Rd8 15 Qc2 Na6 16 b5 Nb4 17 Qe4 Bc5 (Diagram 25)
Black aims for good piece play to counter any problems arising from pawn
weaknesses on the queenside.
18 bxc6
Instead 18 Rad1 0-0 19 Nc4 Rxd1 20 Rxd1 Bd5 21 Nxd5 cxd5 22 Rxd5 Nxd5 23
Qxd5+ was played in V.Anand-A.Morozevich, Wijk aan Zee 2000. White had
enough for the exchange but no more.
31
Starting Out: S lav and Semi-Slav
1 8 ... bxc6 (Diagram 26)

In my database this position has been reached on four occasions at a high level
with White trying four different moves! Suffice to say that the best path has
yet to crystallise!
19 Nc4 Bd4 20 Nxe5 fxe5 21 Rac1 0-0 22 Nb5 Qf7 23 Nxd4 exd4
W hat should White play? It's getting messy
White obtains the bishop pair in an open position. However, Black's forces are
well placed to cover the centre and queen's wing and White's kingside pawns
are hard to make much of for the moment. So it's still 'unclear'.
24 Bg5 Rd7 25 Qh4 a5 26 Bd2 Bd5 27 Bh3 d3!?
A provocative move aimed at getting White to C<:Jmmit himself.
28 e4
28 Bxd7?? loses on the spot to 28 . . . dxe2 29 Rfe1 Qxf2 mate.
28 ... Be6 29 Bg2 Nc2 30 f4 Rd4 31 f5 (Diagram 27)
White pushes his pawns forward and Black bites back where he can.
31. .. Bd5?
Better is 3 1 . . .Qa7 32 Kh1 Bxf5 according to Hector.
32 Rf4 Bb3 33 Rcfl
Here 33 f6! is slightly unpleasant for Black.
33 ... Rxa4 34 e5 Rxf4 35 Qxf4 Bd5 36 Qf2 Bxg2 37 e6! Qf6 38 Kxg2 Qe5
Black has three passed pawns but White's strong e-pawn keeps him in the
game.
39 g4 a4 40 Bf4?
Fortieth moves are notorious! White should try 40 Qf4! Qxf4 4 1 Rxf4 RaS 42
32
f6! gxf6 43 Rxf6, with enough play to keep the balance. After the text move
White's position is hopeless.
40 ... Qe4+ 41 Kg3 a3 42 Qa7 d2!
Passed pawns must be pushed, or so they say.
43 Qd7
43 Bxd2 drops the bishop to 43 . . . Qd3+.
43 ... Ne3 44 Bxe3 Qxe3+ 45 Kg2 Qe2+ 46 Kgl Qxg4+ 47 Khl Qe4+ 48 Kgl
Qd5 49 Rdl Qxf5 50 Qxd2 Qg4+ 51 Khl Qxe6 52 Ral Qb3 53 Kgl Rb8 54
Qd6 a2 55 Qe5 Qbl+ 0-1
Game 9
D J.Piket • L.Van Wely
Dutch League 2002
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 dxc4 5 a4 Bf5 6 Ne5 Nbd7 7 Nxc4 Qc7 8
g3 e5 9 dxe5 Nxe5 10 Bf4 Nfd7 1 1 Bg2 g5!? 12 Nxe5
Another try is 12 Ne3 gxf4 13 Nxf5 0-0-0 14 0-0 Nc5 15 Qc2 Ne6 16 Rad1 Bc5,
V.Kramnik-A.Morozevich, Astana 200 1, when Black has completed develop
ment, his king seems safe enough, and a tense game is in prospect.
12 ... gxf4 13 Nxd7 0-0-0
Although this elegant move seems to be best, 13 . . . Bxd7 14 Qd4 Rg8 15 Qe4+
Be7, B. Gelfand-E.Bareev, Wijk aan Zee 2002 , wasn't that clear either.
14 Qd4 Qxd7 (Diagram 28)
What should White take? Black has compensation
White now has to choose between capturing a pawn or a rook.

15 Qxf4
After 1 5 Qxh8, the continuation 15 . . . Qd2+ 16 Kf1 Qxb2 1 7 Re1 Bb4 18 Qf6 Qc2
33
Start i n g Out: Slav and Sem i-Slav
is given .in some books (helpfully!) as 'unclear'. The further 19 Ne4 Bxe4 20
Qxf4 Bxg2+ 21 Kxg2 Bxe1 22 Rxe1 is equal.
15 ... Bd6 16 Qh6 Bc7 (Diagram 29)
NOTE: Two bishops in such an open position are typically

adequate compensation for a pawn deficit.
17 a5?!
Putting this pawn on a dark square is positionally suspect. Instead 17 Rd 1
Qe6 18 Qxe6+ Bxe6 19 Be4 would be balanced. It's hard to imagine White get
ting enough control to be able to use the extra pawn.
17 ... a6 18 0-0 Qe6 19 Qh4 h5?
19 ... Qe5!? is correct as the text allows a trick.
20 Rfc1?
Missing his chance! After 20 e4 Bg6 2 1 Bh3 f5 22 Rfel Black is in trouble.
20 ... Bg4 2 1 Qg5 h4 22 Ne4 hxg3 23 hxg3 Bxe2
Regaining the pawn. Although it's tricky Black now gradually takes control.
24 Rel Rh5 25 Qcl?
Underestimating Black's attack. He should really keep his queen active with
25 Qf6, when something like 25 .. . Bg4 26 b4 probably favours Black, but White
is still in the game.
25 ... Bb5 26 Nc3 Qf6 27 Qe3
Mter 27 Nxb5 Rxb5, White's a5, b2 and f2 pawns are all weak.
27 ... Rdh8 28 b4 Bc4 29 Ne4 Qg6 30 Rad1 Bd5 31 Qc3 Qh6
The tripled maj or pieces mean business!
32 f4 Kb8 33 Qf6 Qh7 34 Rd2 Rh1 + 35 Kf2
35 Bxh 1 allows mate in three, but the text is almost as hopeless.
35 ... Rxe1 36 Ng5 Qh2 37 Kxe1 Qgl+ 38 Bfl Re8+ 39 Re2 Qxg3+ 40 Kd1
Bb3+ 0-1
Summary
The main line of the Slav with 5 ... Bf5 is very rich in possibilities for both sides.
The 6 e3 variation is largely positional with Black being well placed to cope
with White's inevitable expansion. Despite extensive practical tests many of
the key lines are considered to be strategically unclear.
The 6 Ne5 e6 variation leads to the unbalanced material situation of a piece
for three pawns. Theory considers Black to be just about OK, but I have a per
sonal preference for White. Instead 6 .. . Nbd7 has been revived by Morozevich
in recent years and I consider Black to be fine if he knows his stuff.
34
Chapter Two
B l ac k ' s F ifth M ove Alte rn atives
- Introduction
B Bronstein (Steiner) Variation: 5 Bg4 . . .
B S myslov Variation: 5 . . . Na6

Starting Out: S lav and Sem i-Slav
Introd uction
With 5 ... Bg4 or 5 . . . Na6 Black seeks to create slightly different problems for
White than those encountered in the 5 . . . Bf5 lines. Although these fifth move
alternatives have again dropped out of favour, they do give Black an intetest
ing game. Nevertheless, against best play they probably fail to equalise.
Bronstein (Steiner) Variation: 5 Bg4 . . .
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 N£3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bg4

Black immediately develops his light-squared bishop as in Chapter 1. How
ever, here he prefers to come to g4 where it's on the same diagonal as White's
queen. Although White can now move his e-pawn forward he would then be
pinned along the d1-h5 diagonal.
6 Ne5 Bh5 (Diagram H
Diagram 1 Diagram 2
The e-pawn is pinned! White keeps a pull
White now has three ways to counter Black's prophylactic idea.

7 f3
Threatening to build the centre with e2-e4. The other two important moves are
7 g3 and 7 h3: . .
a) 7 g3 Gust getting on with development by fianchettoing the light-squared
bishop and aiming for early castling) 7 .. . e6 8 Bg2 Bb4 and then:
a1) 9 Nxc4 Nd5 10 Qb3 0-0 1 1 Bd2 a5 1 2 e4 Nb6 1 3 Nxb6 Qxb6 1 4 Be3 c5! and
Black is OK, R.Leitao-A.Beliavsky, Yerevan Olympiad 1996. If then 15 dxc5?!,
Black has 1 5...Q a6 16 Bfl Qc6.
a2) 9 0-0 Nd5 10 Qc2 0-0 1 1 Rd1 BeT(dropping back to free the b4-square for a
36
Black's Fifth Move Alternatives
knight) 12 Nxc4 Na6, H.Mecking-P.Nikolic, Sao Paulo match 199 1. Both sides
have completed the first phase of their development and Black is well dug in.
b) 7 h3 (intending to push back Black's bishop with a gain of time) 7 ... Na6 8 g4
Bg6 9 Bg2 Nb4 (with the idea of accessing c2) 10 0-0 (the exchange 10 Nxg6?!
hxg6 in general isn't worrying for Black, and here he has an extra pawn to
boot) 10 ... Bc2 1 1 Qd2 Bb3 12 Ne4 Nc2 13 Nc5 with wild complications. One
example: 13 ... Rc8 14 Rb1 e6 1 5 Nxb7 Qb6 16 Na5 Bb4 17 Naxc4 Qxd4 18 Qxd4
Nxd4 19 e3 Bc2 20 exd4 Bxb1 2 1 Bd2 Bxd2 22 Nd6+ Ke7 23 Nxc8+ Rxc8 24
Rxb 1 Nd5 with calm equality! I.Farago-C.Pitschka, Salzburg 1999.
7 ... Nfd7 8 Nxc4 e5 9 Ne4
The threat of a knight coming to d6 leaves Black with little choice.
Instead 9 g3!? stops any . . . Qh4 tricks and prepares to bring the bishop to h3.
This is another promising way for White to fight for an advantage, e.g. 9 ... Bb4
10 dxe5 0-0 11 Bh3 Qe7 12 f4.
9 ... Bb4+ 10 Bd2 Qe7 1 1 Bxb4 Qxb4+ 12 Qd2 Qxd2+
12 . . . Qxc4?? loses immediately to 13 Nd6+.
13 Kxd2 exd4 14 Ned6+ (Diagram 2)
This ending has been tested on many occasions. Black will lose either the b
pawn or the d-pawn and then material will be equal. Although this line is
playable for Black most observers prefer White.
Strategies
Black hopes to disrupt his opponent with ... d5xc4 and the annoying pin, but ·
must stay flexible to react accordingly to White's choice of plan. White must
quickly decide how to nullify Black's light-squared bishop in order to obtain a
grip on the centre.
Theoretical?
There are a few sharp lines that need good theoretical knowledge, but these
are fairly well established. As there haven't been many recent developments,
once knows the basic theory there isn't much need to update it very often.
Statistics
In 1341 games Black has managed 43% which is on a par with 5 . . . Bf5 or
5 . . . Na6. Mter a period of popularity in the 80's and 90's the line has dropped
out of fashion. White's most successful line has been 6 Ne5 Bh5 7 h3 which
scores as high as 62% . .
Game 1 0
0 V.Kramnik • B.Damljanovic
Moscow Olympiad 1994
1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 c4 dxc4 4 Nc3 c6 5 a4 Bg4 6 Ne5 Bh5 7 f3 Nfd7 8
37
Start i ng O u t: Slav and Sem i-S lav
Nxc4 e 5 9 Ne4 Bb4+ 10 Bd2 Qe7 1 1 Bxb4 Qxb4+ 12 Qd2 Qxd2+ 1 3 Kxd2
exd4 14 Ned6+ Ke7 (Diagram 3)
Diagram 3 Diagram 4
Which pawn to go for? The h5-bishop is offside
White can now chose which pawn to go for.

1 5 Nf5+
After 15 Nxb7 Na6 16 e3 Ndc5 17 Nxc5 Nxc5 18 Na5 dxe3+ 19 Kxe3 Rhe8,
White has the slightly better pawn structure. The further moves 20 Bc4 Rad8
2 1 Kf4 (21 Nxc6+?? of course loses a piece to the discovered check 2 1 . . .Kd6+)
2 1 . . .Rd4+ 22 Kg3 Kf6 yield a complex position where White may have a slight
pull, A.Adorjan-G.Flear, Szirak 1986.
15 ... Kf6 16 Nxd4 Rd8 17 e4! (Diagram 4)
Building the centre and shutting the bishop on h5 out of play. There follows a
tactical sequence, but at the end of it White maintains his central control.
17 ... Nc5 18 Kc3 Rxd4
If Black proceeds more slowly with 18 ... Nbd7 then White can simply consoli
date his slight but persistent grip with 19 Be2, followed by Rhd1 etc.
19 Kxd4 Nb3+ 20 Kc3 Nxa1 2 1 Be2
White is temporarily a piece down but the knight on a1 will not be able to es
cape.
. .
21...Ke7
Lashing out with 2 1 . . .b5?! is calmly met with 22 Ne3 and Black's queenside is
weakened. After 2 1 . . .Nd7 22 Rxal Nc5, as in L.Polugaevsky-R.Hubner, Til
burg 1985, White obtains a clear advantage, according to Polugaevsky, by ex
panding his space advantage and putting Black under pressure with 23 g4!
Bg6 24 h4 h6 25 b4 Ne6 26 Na5.
38
Black's Fifth M ove Alternatives
22 Rxa1 Nd7 23 b4! f6 24 Rd1! Nb6 25 Na5 !

The b7 and c 6 pawns come under scrutiny.
25 ... Nxa4+
Preferring to avoid becoming too passive with 25 ...Rb8 26 Kb3 Bf7+ 27 Ka3
Be8, although it's not clear how White would then try to make progress.
26 Kb3 Nb6 27 Nxb7 Bf7+ 28 Kc3 Rb8 29 Ba6 Be8 30 Ra1 Nd7 31 h4
Black's weak queenside pawns and tangled pieces cannot be exploited imme
diately, so Kramnik just plays a useful space-gaining move. An instructive
way to reinforce the bind.
31...Nb6 32 Nc5 Nd7 33 Nb3
Exchanging White's knight would ease the defence.
33 ... g6 34 Nd4 Nb6 35 Bc4 Rb7
Black now intends to simplify with 36 . . . c5 37 bxc5 Na4+, so Kramnik puts a
stop to that. Instead 3 5 . . . Nxc4? loses a pawn to 36 Rxa7+.
36 Bb3! Bd7 3 7 Ra5! Na8 38 Ba4 Rc7 39 Rc5 Nb6 1-0
I presume that Black lost on time as it's a bit early to resign. However, after
the logical sequence 40 Bxc6 Bxc6 41 Rxc6 Rd7 42 Ne6 Rdl 43 Nc5 Rcl + 44
Kd2 Rc4 45 Rc7+ Kd6 46 Rxa7 Rxb4 47 Nd3, Black loses a second pawn.
Game 1 1
D A.Shirov • P.Nikolic
Manila lnterzonal 1990
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bg4 6 Ne5 Bh5 7 g3

Fianchettoing the bishop is the most cautious of White's options.
7 . .. e6 8 Bg2 Bb4 9 0-0 Nd5 10 Qc2 0-0 (Diagram 5)
Diagram 5 Diagram 6
Should White recapture? Black strikes back
39
Starting O u t : Sl av and Sem i-Slav
Following 10 . . . Be7 1 1 Nxc4 Nb4, A.Yusupov-P.Nikolic, Hastings 1989/90, an

interesting idea for White is 12 Qd2 in order to follow up with e2-e4.
11 Nxc4?!
More precise i s 1 1 Rd1 to defend the d-pawn first.
1 1...Nb6
With both the d-pawn and the knight en prise, White has little choice.
12 Nxb6 axb6 13 Be3
After 1 3 e3 Nd7 14 Bd2, the thematic 14 ... e5! gave Black a comfortable game
in A.Shneider-L.Oll, Podolsk 1993.
1 3 ...Na6 14 f4 f6 1 5 Bf2 Kh8 16 e4?!
Premature. White should complete development with 16 Rad1 with a more or
less satisfactory position. The text allows Black to seize the initiative.
16 ... e5! (Diagram 6) 1 7 dxe5 fxe5 18 fxe5 Rxf2! 19 Rxf2
19 Kxf2 allows mate in three starting with 19 . . . Qd4+.
19 ... Bc5 20 Kh1
If 20 Na2 (to stop . . .Nb4) then 20 . . . Bf7! 21 b4 Be3 looks shaky for White.
20 ...Nb4 21 Qb3
The alternative 21 Qd2 Bxf2 22 Qxf2 Nd3 is also favourable for Black, e.g. 23
Qc2 Qd4 24 Rfl Nxe5 with the better pieces and a blockade on e5.
21. ..Bxf2 22 Qxb4 Bc5 23 Qc4 Qg8
Cautious. More aggressive players would prefer 23 . . . Qd2 which looks unpleas
ant for White.
24 Qxg8+ Kxg8 2 5 Rfl Bg4 26 h3 Be6 2 7 Rd1 Kf8 28 Bf3 Ke7 29 Kg2 Rf8
Although Black is a pawn down, the extra doubled e-pawn has little value. In
fact the power of the two bishops combined with weaknesses in White's camp
are more important considerations. So Black is on top.
0
NOTE: A material 'advantage' is only an advantage if it's l i kely
to be of any use!
30 h4 Bb3
As this doesn't give anything Black should consider 30 . . . Bh3+! 31 Kxh3 Rxf3
32 Rd2 Ke6 33 Kg4 Rf7 and Black regains the pawn with an edge.
31 Rd2 Ke6 32 Ne2 Kxe5 33 Nf4 g6 34 Rd7 . .
Or here 34 Nd3+ Kf6 35 Nxc5 bxc5 36 Rd7 should also be OK for White.
34 ... Rf7 35 Nd3+ Kf6 36 e5+ Kg7 37 Nxc5 bxc5 38 Rxf7+ Kxf7 39 a5 Bd5
40 Kf2 Ke6
After 40 . . . Bxf3 41 Kxf3 Ke6 White holds onto his pawn with 42 Ke4.
41 Bg4+ Kxe5 42 Bc8 h6 43 Bxb7 Kd6 44 Ke3 g5 45 Ba6 Ke7 46 Be2 Kd6
40
47 Kd3 Bg2 48 Kc3 Bh3 49 a6 Kc7 50 a7 Kb7 51 Kc4 gxh4 52 gxh4 Kxa7
53 Kxc5 Bg2 54 h5 Bd5 55 Bdl Ka6 56 Bg4 Kb7 57 Kd6 Kb6 58 Be2 Bb3
59 Ke5 Kc5 60 Kf6 Kd4 61 Kg6 c5 62 Bg4 Bd5 63 Kxh6 B£7 64 B£5 Bxh5
65 Kxh5 c4 %-%
Mter 66 Kg4 Ke3 White cannot retain his last pawn.
Game 12
0 J.Levitt • G.Fiear
British Championship, Plymouth 1 989
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 N£3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bg4 6 Ne5 Bh5 7 h3 Na6 8 g4
Bg6 9 Bg2
My opponent makes it apparent that he's not afraid of complications!
Safer is 9 e3 Nb4 10 Bxc4, but it can still go wrong, e.g. 10 . . . Nd7 (10 . . . Nc2+??
1 1 Qxc2) 1 1 Nxg6 hxg6 12 Qf3 e6 13 K£1 Be7 14 Kg2 g5, followed by . . . Nd7-f8-
g6 gave Black an edge in L.Van Wely-P.Nikolic, Wijk aan Zee 1993.
According to Nikolic, 14 Ne4 followed by Bd2 with equality is better. It makes
sense to complete development of the minor pieces and decide where to put the
king later, but White still has to be careful as he has the worse pawn structure
with weaknesses on both wings and his bishop pair is not easy to get going.
9 ...Nb4
Going for the c2-square.
10 0-0 Bc2
Black has to take up the gauntlet, as following 10 . . . Nd7?! 1 1 Nxc4, B.Gelfand
A.Huzman, USSR Championship 1987, Black has a poor position, e.g. after
1 l . . . e6 12 e4 Be7 1 3 Ne3, as Gelfand points out, White just builds a big centre.
11 Qd2 Bb3 (Diagram 7)
Diagram 7 Diagram 8
Hanging onto the pawn White has good compensation
41
Starting Out: Slav and Sem i-Sl av
Defending the c-pawn, but provoking White's fury.

1 2 Qf4
This was one of the first games with this line and Levitt goes immediately for
the throat with latent threats against f7. Nowadays 12 Ne4 Nc2 1 3 Nc5 is con
sidered the main line, as in the introductory notes. Another way of stoki:hg the
fire is with 12 a5!? e6 (12 ... a6 can be met by 1 3 Na4!?, whereas 12 . . . Nc2? is bad
after 1 3 a6) 13 a6 Qc7 14 axb7 Qxb7 1 5 Ne4 Nxe4 16 Bxe4 Nd5, which was
messy in I.Zakharevich-A.Ignatiev, St. Petersburg 1999.
12 ... h6
Mter 1 2 . . .Nc2 13 g5 Nxa1 14 gxf6 gxf6 1 5 Nxc6 the position is complex.
1 3 Be3 e6
S.Krichevsky-I.Dolgov, corr. 1991 showed how Black could diffuse the attack:
13 . . . Nbd5 14 Qf3 Nxc3 15 bxc3 Qd5 16 Qf5 Qd6 17 Bf4 e6 18 Qb1 Qd8 19 e4
Be7, when White has practical compensation but nothing concrete. Note that
upon 20 a5! , Black has 20 . . .Rc8 keeping the game balanced.
14 Ne4 Nbd5 15 Qf3 Bd6 16 Nxd6+ Qxd6 1 7 Rac1 (Diagram 8)
White has enough compensation.
17 ... Nxe3?
A serious mistake. Black should first prepare to castle long with 17 ... Qc7, e.g.
18 Nxc4 Bxc4 19 Rxc4 Nxe3 with a reasonable game. However, I don't like
17 ... Qb4 as White obtains a strong initiative with 18 g5 hxg5 19 Bxg5 Rf8 20
e4 Ne7 21 Bxf6 gxf6 22 Qxf6.
1 8 fxe 3 Bxa4?
Nai:ve (I was young!). Instead 18 . . . Rf8 would be more cautious.
19 h4!
The f7-pawn falls and with it Black's defences.
19 ... Qc7 20 g5 hxg5 21 hxg5 Nd5 22 e4 Nb6 23 Nxf7 Qh2+ 24 Kf2 Rh4 25
Ke3
White's king finds some safety. Now Black has to be worried about his own!
25 ... Qc7 26 b4?
My opponent misses the beautiful 26 Nd8! ! , after which 26 . . . Qe7 (or 26 . . . Rxd8
27 Qf8+ Kd7 28 Rf7+ Kc8 29 Rxc7+ Kxc7 30 Qxg7+) 27 Nxe6! leaves Black in
dire straits.
26 ... cxb3 27 Rc5 Nd7
Black even has winning chances with 27 ... b2!, but in such a crazy position in
time trouble anything could happen!
28 e5 Qb6 29 Nd6+ Kd8 30 Qf8+ %-%
White finds a neat perpetual, as after 30 . . . Nxf8 31 Rf8+ Kd7 32 Rf7+ Kd8 3 3
Rf8+ neither side dare avoid the draw.
42
Black's F ifth Move Alternatives
Smyslov Variation: 5 Na6 . . .
Smyslov's 5 . . . Na6 is not particularly ambitious. Black avoids any immediate

conflict and heads for the b4-outpost. He just develops his pieces sensibly, al
though this does allow his opponent to construct a useful-looking pawn front
with central pawns on d4 and e4. Black then hopes to chip away at the centre
with ... Bg4 and . . . c6-c5.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 N£6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Na6 (Diagram 9)
Smyslov's Variation White has a n edge
Bringing the knight to a6 at this point is known universally as Smyslov's

variation. Murey's 5 . . . a5!? should also be met by occupying the centre with
pawns, e.g. 6 e4 Bg4 7 Bxc4 e6 8 0-0 Bb4 9 Re1 Bxf3 (White has to accept the
inconvenience of doubled pawns, but as Black is not that well developed, this
isn't a major problem) 10 gxf3 Nb!;l7 1 1 f4! 0-0 12 Qf3, and in Sosonko's opinion
White is somewhat better.
6 e4
6 e3 Bg4 7 Bxc4 e6 8 h3 Bh5 9 0-0 Nb4 10 Qe2 Be7 1 1 Rd1 0-0 12 g4 (only now
that White is good and ready) 12 . . . Bg6 1 3 e4, V.Kramnik-N.Short, Moscow
(rapid) 1996, and Black's position retains its solidity despite White's space ad
vantage . Ovetchkin suggests that best is now 13 ... Nd7 14 Bf4 Re8 15 Bg3 Qa5
16 Nh4 with a small edge.
Some players who like to give their opponent doubled pawns would be tempted
by 9 Bxa6, or 9 g4 Bg6 10 Bxa6. However, in return for an ugly structure,
Black would not only have the bishop pair but also be handed easy play on the
light squares and along the b-file. So best for White is to develop normally and
keep some central control.
43
Starti ng Out: Slav and Semi-Slav
TIP: Before getting carried away with 'static' weaknesses such

as doubled or isolated pawns, remember to first check for dy
namic potential.
6 ...Bg4 7 Bxc4 e6
Black can also try 7 ... Bxf3!? immediately: 8 gxf3 e6 9 0-0 Be7 10 Khl (an in
structive plan that involves using the g-file as well as putting the king safely
in the corner) 10 . . . 0-0 1 1 Rgl Kh8 12 Be3 Nb4 1 3 Qe2 with a slight preference
for White, I. Sokolov-S. Conquest, Reykjavik 2000.
8 Be3 Bb4
Otherwise 8 . . . Nb4 also leads to White keeping a pull due to his extra space,
e.g. 9 0-0 Be7 10 Be2 0-0 1 1 h3 Bh5 12 Ne5, Y.Razuvaev-J.Plachetka, Kesz
thely 1981.
9 Qd3 Bx£3 10 gx£3 Qa5 1 1 Ke2 (Diagram 10)
This position is from M. Cebalo-B.Ivkov, Yugoslav Championship 1981. White
decides that his king will be safest here and hopes to use his bishops, the g-file
and a central preponderance to keep an edge.
Strategies
Black may wish to double White's pawns and use the b4-square, but these are
not enough. At some point he'll need to hit back with . . . c6-c5 or . . . e6-e5 to stop
White taking control.
White will look for ways to find chinks in Black's armour, for instance by ad
vancing pawns to get open diagonals for his bishops.
Theoretical?
Not really; it's possible to play this way without any major problems to get de
veloped. However, White can also develop fairly naturally without knowing
reams of theory and still keep a pull due to his space and central edge. Bear in
mind, however, that in practice it's not easy to turn the central space edge into
anything more concrete.
Statistics
From the 617 games in the database Black made 42%, which is slightly less
than average. Relatively speaking, 5 . . . Na6 was at its most popular in the
1960's and has declined ever since.
. .
Game 13
0 L.Van Wely • D.De Vreugt
Dutch Championship, Rotterdam 2000
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 N£3 dxc4 5 a4 Na6 6 e4 Bg4 7 Bxc4 e6 8 Be3
Be7
Although this keeps the b4-square available for the knight, I prefer 8 . . . Bb4
44
Black' s F ifth Move Alternatives
putting pressure on e4. Then after 9 Qd3 or 9 Qc2, at least Black can double
the white pawns with . . . Bxf3. In the game Black doesn't have this opportunity.
9 0-0 0-0 10 h3
10 Be2 is more solid.
10...Bh5
Now 10 ... Bxf3 11 Qxf3 would be ideal for White.
11 g4!? Bg6 1 2 Ne5 (Diagram 11)
Pushing on the kingside Black loses material
12 ... Nb4
The most popular move, improving the knight, but the immediate 12 . . . c5!? hit
ting back at the centre is logical. M.Taimanov-V.Smyslov, USSR Champion
ship 1969, then continued 13 Bxa6 Gustifiable here as White now snatches a
pawn) 1 3 . . . bxa6 14 dxc5 Qc7 15 Nxg6 hxg6 16 Rc1 Rfc8 17 b4 a5 with equal
chances.
Note that Black cannot capture on e4 either way as he loses material:
12 . . . Bxe4?? 13 g5 Bd5 14 gxf6, or 12 . . . Nxe4?? 13 Nxg6 Nxc3 14 Nxe7+ Qxe7 1 5
bxc3.
13 Qe2 Qa5?
Underestimating the danger to his kingside.
13 . . . c5 is correct, hitting back at White's centre and not giving him the time or
space .to get too excited. Then 14 dxc5 Qc7 15 Nxg6 hxg6 16 Rac 1 a6 17 Rfd1
Rfd8 1 8 Kg2 Bxc5 was agreed drawn in J. Speelman-W.Hartston, Morecambe
1981.
WARNING: When your opponent has a big centre, don't delay

your pawn breaks too long.
45
14 g5 Ne8?
The only chance is 14 ... Nh5 holding up the kingside advance at the risk of hav
ing an offside knight.
1 5 Bb3
There's more to chess than simply grabbing material! Although 15 Nd7 nets
the exchange, after 15 . . . Nd6 16 Nxf8 Rxf8 1 7 Bd3 Bxg5 Black has reasonable
practical compensation. White's king is the more exposed of the two and his
rooks are not that impressive.
15 ... Nd6 16 Qg4
It's already too late for Black to deflect White from his single-minded inten
tions.
16... Na6
Now 16 . . . c5 is bad after 17 dxc5.
1 7 h4 (Diagram 12) 17 ... c5
Four moves overdue!
18 h5 cxd4 19 Bxd4 Nf5
Desperate stuff. Here 19 . . . Qb4 could well have been Black's intended move,
forking the white bishops. But then 20 hxg6 hxg6? (20 . . . Qxb3 21 gxh7+ Kh8 22
Qh5 allows Black to struggle on in a miserable position) 21 Nxg6 Rfe8 22 Qh3!
leads to mate.
20 exf5 Bxf5 21 Qg3 Rad8
Black remains a piece down for nothing as 2 1 . . .Qb4 is met by 22 Bc4 or by 22
Nb5.
22 Nb5 Qb4 23 Qc3 f6 24 Nf3 fxg5 25 Qxb4 Nxb4 26 Bxa7 Nc6 27 Nfd4
Be4 28 Nxe6 Rd3 29 Bc4 1-0
Game 14
D Z.Varga • L.Portisch
H ungarian Championship, Heviz 2003
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Na6 6 e3
This modest move hopes to avoid counterplay against the centre, so allowing
White to develop further and support the centre before expanding.
6 ... Bg4 7 Bxc4 e6 8 h3 Bh5 (Diagram 13) 9 g4!?
When faced with this position Kramnik preferred to include 0-0, Qe2 and Rd1
�- ·
before playing g2-g4.
9 ... Bg6 10 Qe2
Or 10 Ne5 Nb4 11 Nxg6 hxg6 12 Kf1 c5, W.Uhlmann-V.Hort, Marianske
Lazne 1965, with a type of position that can be found throughout the book:
White's bishops are compensated for by Black's better pawns and general so
lidity.
46
Black's F ifth Move Alte rnatives
Should White play g4? Black has counterplay
10 ... Nb4 11 e4 Nd7!

In S. Skembris-P.Velikov, Xanthi 1990, Black played the routine 1 l . . .Be7 and,
after 12 h4 h5 13 g5 Nd7 14 Be3 0-0 15 0-0 Qc7, had to face 16 Ne5 ! (a fine
pawn sacrifice to clear the way for the f-pawn advance). After the further
moves 16 . . . Nxe5 17 dxe5 Qxe5 1 8 f4 Qa5 19 Rf2, Velikov was in big trouble
after Rafl followed by f4-f5.
0
NOTE: Castling is not the only way to keep your king safe, an- ·
other is to nip your opponent's attack in the bud, before com

mitting your king.
12 Bf4
If 12 h4, then 12 . . . h5 13 g5 Bd6 14 0-0 Qe7 looks more flexible than the pre
mature castling of Skembris-Velikov above.
12 ... h5!? (Diagram 14)
An interesting idea to take the sting out of White's kingside advance.
13 0-0-0 hxg4 14 hxg4 Rxh1 15 Rxh1 Qe7
Preparing to castle long, but he never does as more pressing events take over.
16 Nh4 e5!
Another point behind ... Qe7!
17 dxe5 Nxe5 18 Bxe5 Qxe5 19 Nxg6 fxg6
Although White has managed to double his opponent's pawns, Black's dark
squared control gives him a comfortable game. Now the experienced Portisch
gives his opponent a fine lesson in technique.
20 Rdl Bd6 2 1 Qe3
47
Starting Out: Sl av and Semi-S l av
Stopping Black castling because a7 would fall, but Black doesn't need to
bother any more after the exchange of queens.
21...Qf4 22 Qxf4 Bxf4+ 23 Kb1 Ke7 24 Na2 Nxa2 25 Kxa2 Rh8
The h-file is quite rightly Black's property (he made the effort to open it with
. . . h7-h5 and . . . h5xg4) and White will suffer as a result.
26 e5?!
This attempt at activating his bishop and avoid being passive ultimately fails.
If 26 Rd3 Rh2 27 Rb3 b6 28 f3, then 28 . . . Be5 leaves White tied down and the
plan of . . . Ke7-f6-g5-f4 will be unpleasant to face.
26 ... Bxe5 2 7 Bd3 Rf8 28 Re1 Kd6 29 Re2 Rf4 30 Be4 Rxg4 31 f3 Rg1 32
Rd2+ Kc7 33 Re2
White has a solid defensive formation, but it's cost him two pawns to achieve.
33 ... a5 34 Kb3 Bf6 35 Ka2 Rfl 36 Rg2 g5 3 7 Kb3 g4! 38 fxg4
Mter 38 Rxg4, then simply 38 . . .Rf2 wins either the b-pawn or the f-pawn.
38 ... Rf4 39 Bf5 Rb4+ 40 Ka3 Be7 41 Ka2 Rxa4+ 42 Kb1 Rf4 43 Kc2 Bf6
0-1
Enough is enough. White can't do anything, while Black just advances on the
queenside.
Su mmary
Black's alternatives to 5 . . . Bf5 have surprise value but are not good enough to
equalise.
Bronstein's 5 . . . Bg4 creates tension, about which White needs to make a diffi
cult decision. The unprepared can easily go astray but, unfortunately for
Black, the main line after 7 f3 has been worked �ut to an ending virtually by
force where White keeps a small but persistent edge.
Smyslov's 5 . . . Na6 is perhaps more solid but allows White an easy time in con
structing his centre. Black is well dug in and White may have difficulty using
his space advantage if Black seeks timely counterplay with . . . c6-c5 or . . . e6-e5 .
. '
48
Chapter Three
G a m b i t L i n es : 5 e4, 5 N e5
a n d 5 e3
R Introduction
R The Geller Gambit
R 5 Ne5 Gambit
R 5 e3 Gambit
Starting O u t : Slav and Sem i-Slav
Introduction
After White's most popular move 5 a4, he normally recuperates the loose c
pawn fairly quickly, as we have seen in the first two chapters. Here we will
look at the consequences of three alternatives, all of which allow Black to de
fend the forward c-pawn with ... b7 -b5. They are all types of gambit, the most
notorious of which is Geller's 5 e4. These lines are not highly rated by the top
echelon and the statistics show that Black scores well in practice.
The Geller Gambit

An aggressive attempt by White to build up a strong centre and get on with a
kingside attack, whilst his opponent is consolidating the extra pawn. Black
has to try and catch up in development and be particularly careful about his
king's future.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 e4 (Diagram 1)
Diagram 1 Diagram 2
The Geller Gambit Going for the jugular!
White doesn't want to delay expanding in the centre even if it costs a pawn.
5 ...b5 6 e5 Nd5 7 a4
By battering away at the queenside edifice, White hopes to obtain a concession
·
from Black.
7 ... e6 8 axb5 Nxc3
Black releases the pressure on b5 but now White solidifies his centre.
9 bxc3 cxb5 10 Ng5 Bb7 1 1 Qh5 (Diagram 2)
White uses his slight lead in development to develop some threats against
Black's king. Nevertheless there are two solid defences that enable Black to
50
Gambit L i n es : 5 e4, 5 Ne5 and 5 e3
obtain satisfactory chances in a complex middlegame:

a) After 1 1 . . . g6, gaining a tempo to push the queen back at the risk of some
fragility on the dark squares, 12 Qg4 Be7 13 Be2 Bd5 14 Bf3 Nc6, Black can
look forward to the middlegame with confidence (see Game 15).
b) Otherwise Black has . . .
l l...Qd7
. . . keeping the kingside pawns intact.
12 Be2
It's premature to play 12 Nxh7?! Nc6 1 3 Be3 (13 Nxf8?, G.Kasparov
V.Kupreichik, USSR Championship 1979, is bad for White after the sensa
tional 13 . . . Qxd4!) 13 . . . 0-0-0 14 Be2 Be7, E.Budovic-V.Melnichenko, Dnepropet
rovsk 1966.
12 ... Bd5 13 Nxh7 Nc6 14 Nf6+
G.Flear-J.Delaney, Bath 1987, with interesting complications where both sides
have chances, as Black has enough activity for the exchange.
Also possible is 14 Nxf8 Rxf8 15 Qg5 a5, which can also be described as
murky. It will come down to a unusual pawn race in the middlegame!
Strategy
The late opening/early middlegame can often be summarised as White aiming
to land something nasty against Black's. king. Black hopes to survive and
counts on his queenside pawns to see him home later.
Theoretical?
Less than the main lines but sufficiently so to make it dangerous for the un
prepared.
Statistics
Over 1 1 14 games White manages only 50%. There is a low percentage of draws
(22%) which is typical of sharper lines. The line has lost the popularity it had
in the 50's, and again in the 80's, as Black's defences have been worked out.
Game 15
D E.Kahn • L.Portisch
Hungarian Team Championship 2003
1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 c4 c6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 e4 b5 6 e5 Nd5 7 a4 e6 8 axb5
After 8 Ng5!? h6 9 Nge4 b4 10 Nb1 Ba6 1 1 Nbd2 Nf4 12 Qg4 Nd3+ 13 Bxd3
cxd3, the game becomes very sharp: 14 0-0 (14 Nd6+ Bxd6 15 Qxg7 has been
discredited due to 15 . . .Bf8! 16 Qxh8 Qxd4 17 0-0 Nd7 18 Nf3 Qg4! when Black
was on top, L.Van Wely-P.Van der Sterren, Dutch Championship 1991) 14 ... h5
15 Qf4 Be7 16 Nc5 Bxc5 17 dxc5, I.Zakharevich-V.Ivanov, Moscow 1999, when
17 . . . Qd5, with ... 0-0 and . .. Nd7 to follow, should be fine for Black.
51
Starting O ut: Slav and Semi-Slav
8... Nxc3
Another way of defending is 8 . . . Bb4 9 Bd2 Bxc3 10 bxc3 cxb5, e.g. 1 1 Ng5 Nc6
12 Qh5 Qe7 13 Be2 b4 with a double-edged game in prospect, I. Zakharevich
E.Sveshnikov, Russian Championship 1995. Black's king lacks security but
White doesn't have it all his own way in the centre.
9 bxc3 cxb5 10 Ng5
Again this move to prepare direct threats against Black's king.
10 ... Bb7 1 1 Qh5 g6
For 1 1 . ..Qd7 see the introductory notes.
12 Qg4 Be7 13 Be2 Bd5 (Diagram 3)
Diagram 3 Diagram 4
A great outpost W here to seek compensation?
This fine move occupying the d5-outpost solidifies the centre and prepares
. . . Nc6. However, over the years 13 . . . Nd7 has been more popular (see the next
game).
14 Bf3 Nc6 15 0-0
After 15 Ne4 h5 16 Qf4 a5! 17 0-0 Ra7 18 Re1 Kf8 Black was favourite,
E.Magerramov-K.Sasikiran, Dubai 2002.
15 ... a5 16 Ne4 h6 (Diagram 4) 17 Nd6+?
Premature and smacking of desperation in the face of Black's intended . . . Kf8-
· ·
g7 and . . . b5-b4.
Instead 17 Re1 is correct, as after 17 . ..Ra7?! , then 18 Nd6+! works, e.g.
1 8 ... Bxd6 19 Bxd5 exd5 20 exd6+ Kf8 21 Bf4 Rd7 22 Be5, which led to a White
win in S.Guliev-O.Maiorov, Moscow 1996. Black should meet 17 Re1 with
17 . . . Kf8! , when 1 8 Bf4 would leave the tussle hanging in the balance.
17 ... Bxd6 18 Bxd5 exd5 19 exd6 Qxd6 20 Ba3 b4 21 cxb4 Nxb4
52
Gambit L i n e s : 5 e4, 5 Ne5 and 5 e3
There's nothing really to show for the two pawn deficit.

22 Bxb4 Qxb4 23 Rab1 Qd2 24 Rfd 1 Qg5 25 Rel+ Kf8 26 Qd7 Kg7 27 Rb7
Rhf8 28 h4 Qf5 29 Qb5
White is ready to play Re5 but Portisch stays calm.
29 c3! 30 Re5 c2! 3 1 Rc7 Rac8 0-1
•..
Mter 32 Rxf5 Rxc7 White's position is hopeless.

Game 16
0 T.Petrosian • V.Smyslov
USSR Championship, Moscow 1 951
1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 c6 5 e4
Petrosian playing the Geller Gambit would surprise more than a few!
5 ... b5 6 e5 Nd5 7 a4 e6 8 axb5 Nxc3 9 bxc3 cxb5 10 Ng5 Bb7 1 1 Qh5 g6 12
Qg4 Be7 1 3 Be2 Nd7 14 h4!?
White has also tried 14 Bf3 (14 Rb i ! ? a6 15 Bxc4 Qc7 16 Bxe6 fxe6 17 Qxe6
Rf8 led to a Black win in A.Wojtkiewicz-J.Donaldson, Las Vegas 2001) 14 . . . Qc8
(an unusual try was 14 . . . h5 15 Qg3 Bxg5 16 Bxb7 Bxc1 17 Bxa8 Qxa8 18 Rxc1
Nb6 19 0-0 Nd5, S.Guliev-K.Miton, Ohrid 1997, with enough compensation as
Black's king is now safe and the centre and queenside are relatively secure) 1 5
Bxb7 (15 h4?! is bad after 1 5 . . .h5 16 Qf4 Bxg5 1 7 hxg5 Bxf3 18 Qxf3 Nb6 when
Black is on top, and 1 5 Ne4 f5! 1 6 exf6 Nxf6 17 Nxf6+ Bxf6 18 Bxb7 Qxb7 19
Qxe6+ Qe7 gave Black an edge in L.Szabo-T.Petrosian, Moscow vs. Budapest
1955) l5 ... Qxb7 16 Ne4, S.Kindermann-A.Duer, Graz 1981, when it's unclear if
White has more than tricks for the pawn.
14 ... h5 15 Qg3 Nb6 16 0-0 a5! (Diagram 5)
Diagram 5 Diagram 6
Black has queenside ambitions Which way to castle?
53
Starting Out: Slav and Sem i -Slav
Getting ready for . . . b5-b4 so White must react fast.

17 d5!?
Almost outrageous. White gifts a second pawn to open the d-file.
17 ...Nxd5
Although 17 ... Bxd5! 18 Rdl Qc7 19 Bf3 is given as 'unclear' by various sources,
Black must be better after 19 ... Bxf3 20 Qxf3 0-0. If instead 19 Rd4, then
19 . . .Bxg5 20 Bxg5 Kd7 2 1 Bf3 Kc6 is given by Lukacs as better for Black.
18 Rdl Qc7 19 Ne4 (Diagram 6)
Black now has to decide what to do with his king.
19... 0-0-0
Going short with 19 . . . 0-0!? 20 Bxh5 Kh7 is interesting but risky for Black's
king. 19 . . . Kf8! is more normal in such positions these days. The king is not
easy to attack here and the inconvenience of not linking rooks can be lived
with.
TIP: Your king's futu re is always important, so don't automati

cally castle. Instead ask yourself: 'Am I castling away from
trouble or into it?'
20 Bg5!
Exchanging the dark-squared bishops earns the d6-square for the knight.
20 ...Bxg5 21 Qxg5 a4 22 Qg3 f5 23 Nd6+ Rxd6 24 exd6 f4
Instead 24 ... Qg7 25 Bf3 Rd8 has been suggested, but 26 Bxd5 Bxd5 27 Qe3
then gives Black some headaches.
25 Qxg6 Qxd6 26 Bf3 Bc6 27 Rel Re8 28 Bxd5 Qxd5 29 Radl! Qf5 30
Qxf5 exf5 31 Rxe8+ Bxe8 32 f3 Kc7 33 Kf2 KJ:>6 34 Ke2 Ka5 35 Rbl
If Black does nothing White will win by bringing his king to c2, play Rb4 and
Ka3, then recycle the rook to invade behind Black's lines to pick off pawns.
35 ... a3 36 Kd2
The king arrives in time to stop the a-pawn.
36 ...b4
Or 36 . . . Ka4 37 Rb4+ Ka5 38 Kc2 and Black is helpless as a2 falls.
37 cxb4+ Ka4 38 Kc3 a2 39 Ral Ka3 40 Kxc4!
A nice touch!
40 ... Kb2 41 Rdl alQ 42 Rxal Kxal 43 b5 Bd7 44 b6 Bc8 45 Kd4 Kb2 46
Ke5 Kc3 47 Kxf4 Kd4 48 Kg5 Ke5 49 Kxh5 Kf6 50 g4 Bb7 5 1 Kh6 1-0
For those unconvinced I suggest the following plausible continuation: 5l...fxg4
52 fxg4 Be4 53 g5+ Kf7 54 g6+ Kg8 (or 54 . . . Kf6 55 g7 Kf7 56 b7 Bxb7 57 Kh7
Be4+ 58 Kh8) 55 h5 Bf3 56 Kg5 Be4 57 Kf6 Bf3 58 h6 Bd5 59 Ke7 Be4 60 h7+
Kg7 61 h8Q+ Kxh8 62 Kf8 Bd5 63 g7+ Kh7 64 g8Q+ Bxg8 65 b7.
54
Gambit Lines : 5 e4, 5 Ne5 and 5 e3
5 Ne5 Gam bit

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 Ne5 (Diagram 7)
Diagram 7 Diagram 8
The 5 Ne5 Gambit How should Black respond?
Another gambit idea where White tempts Black to hold onto the c-pawn.
The Catalan-style gambit 5 g3 can also be met by 5 . . . b5, for instance 6 Bg2
Bb7 which transposes back to the main game after 7 Ne5.
5 ... b5
Black has good chances to equalise after 5 . . . Nbd7 6 Nxc4 (6 f4 b5! gave Black a
comfortable game in O .Romanishin-V.Akopian, Linares 1996, see Game 1 8)
6 . . . b5, e.g. 7 Nd2 (or 7 Ne3 Bb7 8 g3 c5 9 d5 a6 10 Bg2 g6 1 1 0-0 Bg7 12 a4 b4
13 Nb1 a5 14 Qc2 Nb6 with chances for both sides, O.Romanishin
A.Morozevich, Elista Olympiad 1998) 7 . . . e5 8 e3 exd4 9 exd4 Nb6 10 Nf3 b4 1 1
Na4 Bd6 when Black is OK, J.Tifuman-M.Illescas Cordoba, Pamplona 1999.
6 g3 Bb7 7 Bg2 (Diagram 8) 't . Nbd7!?
..
Black has such a big choice apart from the text move.
a) 7 . . . Qc8 8 0-0 e6 is a safe way to hold onto the booty, J.Stocek-E.Meduna,
Lazne Bohdanec 1996, when White has some pressure but nothing concrete.
b) 7 . . . Qb6 8 a4 a6 is possible, as after 9 0-0 e6 we reach a position that often
arises via the Catalan Opening (1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 g3 dxc4 5 Bg2 b5!?
etc.). Then 10 e4 Nbd7 (Black soon liberated after 10 ... Bb4!? 11 Be3 0-0 12 Na2
Be7 13 b3 cxb3 14 Qxb3 c5 in P.H.Nielsen-P.Jaracz, Warsaw (rapid) 2003, and
went on to win) 1 1 Nxd7 Nxd7 12 d5 Bc5 13 dxe6 fxe6 14 Bh3 Nf8 15 Qh5+ g6
16 Qh6 yields compensation for the pawn according to Raetsky & Chetverik.
c) The modest move 7 . . . a6 consolidates the extra pawn before continuing de-
55
Starting Out: Slav and Sem i-Slav
velopment. Mter 8 a4 e6 9 0-0 Nd5, we reach a position that can occur from
various move-orders, again including the Catalan (1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 d5 4
g3 dxc4 5 Bg2 b5 6 Ne5 Nd5 etc.), or an . . . a6-Slav (1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4
Nc3 a6 5 g3 dxc4 etc.), e.g. 10 e4 Nxc3 1 1 bxc3 Nd7 12 f4 Be7 13 Ng4 0-0,
M.Maciejewski-M.Matlak, Polish Championship 1987, when White has ag
gressive intentions but nothing that should worry Black too much.
8 Nxc6
8 Nxb5? is tempting, but it loses to 8 . . . Nxe5 9 dxe5 Qxd1 + 10 Kxd1 0-0-0+, and
then the knight on b5 can be safely captured.
8.. . Qb6 9 d5 e6 10 a4
Probing Black's defences, as in V.Ivanchuk-A.Shirov, Dos Hermanas 1996 (see
·
Game 1 7). Now after. . .

10 exd5 11 axb5 d4 (Diagram 9)
...
Diagram 9
Black is not worse
. . . as suggested by Har Zvi, Black isn't worse.
Strategy
Black can hold onto the pawn at the risk of allowing White an early initiative,
or give it back in order to catch up in development. White will generally press
along the long diagonal as in some gambit lines from the Catalan.
. .
Theoretical?
Not really; it has never been popular enough.
Statistics
In a smallish poll of 117 games White has scored an average 53%.
56
Gambit L i n e s : 5 e4, 5 NeS a n d 5 e3
Game 1 7
0 V.lvanchuk • A.Shirov
Dos Hermanas 1 996
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 dxc4 5 g3

Note the move order!
5 .b5 6 Bg2 Bb7 7 Ne5 Nbd7!?
..
Provoking sharp complications. For several calmer alternatives, see the intro
ductory notes.
8 Nxc6 Qb6 9 d5 e6 10 a4 (Diagram 10)
A critical moment Black loses material
10 ... Bc5?
Shirov is tempted by hitting f2, but this turns out to be dubious.
Black has a difficult choice here. For instance, Hubner demonstrates that
10 . . . b4? is tempting but also seem� to be inadequate: 1 1 Be3 Bc5 12 a5 Qa6 13
Bxc5 bxc3 (13 . . . Nxc5 14 Nxb4 is also somewhat better for White) 14 dxe6 cxb2
15 exd7+ Nxd7 16 Rb1 Bxc6 (16 . . . Nxc5 17 Qd6 is curtains) 1 7 Qd6 Qxa5+ 18
Bb4 and White is winning.
I think 10 . . . a6 is OK, e . g. 1 1 Be3 Bc5 12 Bxc5 Qxc5! 13 axb5 axb5 14 Na5 Qb6
15 Nxb7 Rxa1 16 Qxa1 Qxb7 17 0-0 exd5 18 Rd1 0-0 with equal chances.
White will have the bishop in the open position, but Black has a useful queen-
side majority.
\
The Israeli player, Har Zvi, points out another good defence: 10 ... exd5 1 1 axb5
d4! 12 Na4 Qxb5 13 Nxd4 Qb4+ 14 Kf1 (14 Bd2? is met by 14 ... Bxg2! with lots
of wood for the queen) 14 . . . Bxg2+ 15 Kxg2 Qb7+ 16 f3 Bb4 and Black is doing
fine.
57
Starting Out: Slav and Sem i -Slav
WARNING: Getting involved in tactical m i l Ees when behind i n

' development is fraught with danger.
X
11 axb5 Bx£2+ 12 Kfl Bc5
Mter the high of getting to capture on f2 with check, Black has to come down
to earth and lose time bringing his bishop to safety. Instead 12 . . . 0-0 lose� pro
saically to 13 Na4 Qxb5 14 Kxf2, and 12 . . . exd5 to 13 e3 Bxe3 14 Qe2 d4 1 5
Bxe3 dxe3 16 Na4 Qxb5 17 Qxe3+ (now it's Black's king in trouble - in fact,
serious trouble!) 17 . . . Kf8 18 Qa3+ Kg8 19 Ne7+ K£8 20 Ng6+ Kg8 21 Qf8+
Rxf8 22 Ne7 mate!
13 Na5 Bxd5?!
A sign that things have already gone badly wrong. 13 . . . e5 was a more sober
way to put up resistance, and although 14 Nxc4 Qc7 15 Na5! is unpleasant for
Black, it is by no means lost.
14 e4 (Diagram 1 1) 14 ... Bb4?
In this difficult position 14 . . . Bb7? is no improvement as 15 Nxb7 Qxb7 16 e5
Nd5 17 Nxd5 exd5 18 Bxd5 Qc8 19 Bc6 is also hopeless for Black. In fact ditch
ing a piece with 14 . . . Nxe4! represents the best hope: 15 Nxe4! (15 Nxd5 is less
clear after 15 . . . exd5 16 Qxd5 Qf6+ 17 Bf4 0-0 18 Nxc4 Nf2) 15 . . . Bb4 16 Nc6
Qxb5 17 Nxb4 Qxb4 18 Bd2 gives White a strong initiative and a piece, but
Black has three pawns and chances to resist.
15 exd5 Bxa5 16 Rxa5!
Deflecting the queen.
16 ... Qxa5 1 7 dxe6 Nb6
1 7 . . .fxe6 18 Bxa8 0-0 19 Bf3 leaves White virtually a whole piece up.
18 Qd6! ReS 19 Bc6+ Rxc6 20 Qxc6+ Ke7 2 1 Qc7+ Kxe6 22 Kg2 1-0
The threat of Re1 + is decisive.
Game 1 8
D O.Romanishin • V.Akopian
Linares 1 996
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 Ne5 Nbd7 6 f4?!
6 Nxc4 is objectively better, but after 6 ... b 5 Black obtains a reasonable game
(see the introductory notes).
6 ... b5!
Holding onto the c4-pawn at the expense of c6. White loses time in regaining
the material and Black hopes to punish White for his shaky pawn front.
7 Nxc6 Qb6 8 Ne5 e6 9 e3 Bb7 (Diagram 12)
White has a problem developing normally (g2 is under attack) and has a hole
on e4. Black also has a queenside majority, so he's better already.
10 Bd2 Be7 1 1 a4 a6 12 axb5 axb5 13 Rxa8+ Bxa8 14 Be2 0-0
58
Black develops more easily The queenside advances
Keeping things simple is often the best practical approach when you're guar
anteed an edge anyway, but 14 . . . Bxg2 must have been tempting!
In fact Akopian analyses 14 . . . Bxg2 15 Rg1 Qb7 16 Kf2 Nxe5 17 fxe5 Ne4+ 18
Kxg2 Nxd2+ 19 Bf3! as leading to equality. However, after the superior
17 . . . Ng4+! 18 Kg3 (or 18 Bxg4 Bh4+ 19 Ke2 h5! which is good for Black) he
must have overlooked 18 . . . Nf2! 19 Qe 1 Nhl+ winning for him. So 14 ... Bxg2 is
both playable and probably good.
0
NOTE: Most Grandmasters will opt for a safe advantage rather
than dabble in risky complications.
15 0-0 Nxe5 16 fxe5 Ne4 17 Bf3 Nxd2

Black could also opt for 17 . . . Nxc3 18 bxc3, but that helps White consolidate his
pawn structure somewhat.
18 Qxd2 Bxf3 19 Rxf3 b4 (Diagram 13) 20 Ne4 Qc6 21 Qc2 Ra8 22 Rfl h6
Safety first, giving his king some 'luft'. Black now intends to play . . . Ra2 with
out being worried by any ideas of Qf2 hitting f7. For instance, if immediately
22 . . . Ra2 then 23 Qf2 is annoying, whereas now . . . Ra2 is threatened.
23 Nd6 Bxd6 24 exd6 Rc8 25 Qf2 f6!
Here 25 . . . £5? is unnecessarily weakening, as after 26 Qg3 Rd8 White gets
enough activity to draw, e.g. 27 Ral ! Qxd6 28 Qxd6 Rxd6 29 Ra8+ K£7 30 ReS.
26 Qg3 c3 27 bxc3 bxc3 28 Rc1 Kf7! 29 h3?
29 h4! is more active, when 29... Qb5! 30 h5! Qxh5 3 1 d7 Rd8 32 Qc7 Ke7 33
Qg3! will give Black big technical headaches despite the extra pawn.
29 ... c2 30 Qf2 Ke8 31 Qg3 g5 32 Qf2 f5 33 Qd2 Kd7?
According to Akopian he should have preferred 33 . . . Qc3!, e.g. 34 Qxc3 Rxc3 35
59
Start i ng Out: Sl av and Semi-Slav
K£2 Kd7 36 Ke2 Kxd6 37 Kd2 Rc4 38 Rxc2 Rxc2+ 39 Kxc2 Kd5 40 Kd3 h5 41
g3 h4 42 gxh4 gxh4 and wins.
Romanishin puts up tremendous resistance, but can't quite save the game.
34 d5! exd5
Better than 34 . . . Qxd5 35 Rxc2 which would be tough to win.
35 Qd3 Ke6! 36 d7 Kxd7 37 Qxf5+ Qe6 38 Qh7+ Kd6 39 Rxc2 Qxe3+ 40
Kh2 Qe5+ 41 g3 Rxc2+ 42 Qxc2 d4 43 Qd3 Qe3 44 Qa6+ Kc5 45 Kg2 Kb4
46 Qxh6 d3 47 Qd6+ Kb3 48 Qd5+ Kb2 49 Qb5+ Kcl 50 Qc4+ Kdl 5 1
Qb3+ Ke2 52 Qb2+ Qd2 53 Qf6! Kdl +
As Akopian pointed out later, the most precise is 53 . . . Ke3+! 54 Kg1 Qd1 + 55
Kg2 Qe2+ 56 Kg1 Qf3 57 Qxg5+ Ke2 58 Qb5 (or 58 Qe5+ Qe3+ 59 Qxe3+ Kxe3
60 K£1 d2) 58 . . . Qxg3+ 59 Kh1 Qxh3+ with a book win.
54 Kfl Qel+ 55 Kg2 Qe4+ 56 Kf2 Kc2
There are no checks!
57 Qf7 Qd4+ 58 Kg2 Qe4+ 59 Kf2 Qe2+ 60 Kgl Qe3+ 61 Kg2 Kdl 62 Qb3+
Ke2 63 Qb2+ Qd2 64 Qd4?
64 Qf6! would get back to the position after move 53!
64 ... Kdl + 65 Kgl Qel + 66 Kg2 Qe2+ 67 Kgl Qf3! 68 Qe5 g4!
Disrupting White's defences in a unique way.
69 hxg4 d2
It's actually zugzwang!
70 g5
Natural but. . .
7 0. . .Kc2 71 Qc5+ Qc3 72 Qf5+ Kb2 7 3 Q f2 Kbl 7 4 Qf5+ Qc2 0�1
Mter 75 Qb5+ Kc1 White is denied access to the pinning square g5!
5 e3 Gambit
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 e3 (Diagram 14)
A positional gambit. White keeps his centre solid while he prepares to hit back
at the queenside. A few strong players have tried it once or twice, but not with
any regularity.
5 ... b5 6 a4 b4 7 Nbl
White hopes to regain the pawn and in the meantime leave Black with an in
ferior pawn structure. This knight hopes to come to c4 via d2.
Mter 7 N a2, the knight will struggle to get to a useful square before Black has
time to free himself, e.g. 7 . . . e6 8 Bxc4 Bb7 9 0-0 c5! (the standard freeing
break in this quasi Semi-Slav) 10 Qe2 Nbd7 11 Rd1 Qc7 and Black has a fine
game, R.Vera-M.Illescas Cordoba, Linares 1994.
60
The 5 e3 Gambit Black should equalise
7 Ba6 8 Be2
...
White's queen's knight worked overtime in the next example: 8 Nbd2 c3 9 bxc3
Bxfl 10 Nxf1 bxc3 11 Ng3 (five moves out of eleven! - no wonder Black has
time to get . . . c6-c5 in!) 1 l. . .e6 12 0-0 c5 13 Ba3 Nbd7 14 Rc 1 Qa5 and in
A.Shirov-J.Granda Zuniga, Moscow Olympiad 1 994, White couldn't find any
way for an advantage.
8 e6 9 0-0 c5
...
Similar is 9 ... Be7 10 Nbd2 c3! 1 1 bxc3 bxc3 12 Nb 1 Qa5 13 Ba3 c5, and again
Black can claim equality, P. .Nikolic-E.Bareev, Pula 1997 (see Game 20) .
10 Nbd2 c3!
Frustrating White's development.
1 1 bxc3 bxc3 12 Nb1 cxd4 13 exd4 Bb4 (Diagram 15)
S.Halkias-M.Gurevich, Silivri 2003. Although Black won't be able to hold onto
his c-pawn for very long, he'll catch up in development and should equalise.
Strategy
White aims to win back his pawn and leave Black with a compromised struc
ture. Black aims to oblige White to lose time in order to regain material equal
ity, and react with . . . c6-c5 liquidating to a comfortable game.
Theoretical?
Not really. It won't take long to learn the essential lines for either colour.
Statistics
The heyday of 5 e3 was really in the early years of the Slav before 1 950. Since
61
Starting O ut : Slav and Sem i-Slav
then ifs been used occasionally as a surprise weapon and has scored an aver
age 54% from 790 games. In the main line after 5 . . .b5 6 a4 b4 7 Nb 1 Ba6
White has a modest 52% from 179 games.
Game 1 9
D V.Salov • R.Htibner
Dortmund 1 992
1 d4 d5 2 N£3 Nf6 3 c4 dxc4 4 Nc3 c6 5 e3 b5 6 a4 b4 7 Nb1 Ba6 8 Be2 e6
9 0-0 c5!
Attacking White's centre is best
10 Nbd2 c3
Mter 10 . . . Nc6, the mass simplification of Z.Franco Ocampos-V.Smyslov, Barce
lona 1990, led to easy equality: 1 1 dxc5 Bxc5 12 Bxc4 Bxc4 13 Nxc4 Qxd1 14
Rxd1 Ke7. Instead 10 . . . Qd5? is just bad in view of 11 Ne5.
11 bxc3 bxc3 12 Nb1 (Diagram 16)
How should Black continue? White has a strong threat
12 ... Nd5?
Underestimating White's next. Instead Black has a couple of ways to equalise:
12 . . . cxd4 13 Nxd4 Bb4 14 Bb5+ Bxb5 15 axb5 0-0 16 Qb3 a5 17 Nxc3 e5,
S.Halkias-M.Gurevich, Silivri 2003, and 12 ... Qa5! which is featured in the
next game. . .
13 Bb5+! Bxb5 14 axb5

It's really a nuisance for Black that his queen's knight is denied both the a6
and c6-squares and that the a-pawn is backward. The b-pawn has a cramping
effect that just won't go away.
14 ... cxd4
62
Gambit Lines: 5 e4, 5 Ne5 and 5 e3
If 1 4 ... Nd7, Anand proposes 1 5 e4 N5f6 16 Nxc3 cxd4 17 Nxd4 with a pleasant
edge, especially as the c6-outpost is j ust asking to be occupied!
1 5 Qxd4 Be7 16 e4
Naturally White doesn't fall for 16 Qxg7? Bf6 17 Qh6 c2 and Black wins.
16.: .c2
Trying to disorientate his opponent's pieces. 16 . . . Nf6 is tame due to 17 Nxc3,
and 16 ... Bf6 is met by 1 7 e5 Be7 18 Nxc3 Nxc3 19 Qxc3 0-0 20 Be3! leaving
Black under significant pressure.
17 Na3 Bf6 18 e5 Be7 19 Nxc2 Qd7
Commentators have suggested alternatives but already nothing is really satis
factory.
20 Qg4! g6 2 1 Ncd4 0-0 22 Ba3!
Exchanging off Black's best defensive piece.
22 ... Rc8 23 h4 Rc4 24 Bxe7 Qxe7 25 Rfc1
Again seeking to exchange a pair of rooks as this leaves White in control of the
c-file.
25 ... Rxcl+ 26 Rxc1 Nd7 27 h5 Kg7 28 Rc6 Nf8 29 Rd6! (Diagram 1 7)
29 ... £5
Not exactly what Black wants to play but it's too late to find a defence of any
value! A move such as 29 . . . Rc8? allows the main threat of 30 Rxd5! Rc1+ 3 1
Kh2 exd5 3 2 Nf5+, while 2 9 . . . Qc7 goes down to 30 h6+!, e.g.
a) 30 . . . Kxh6 3 1 Qg5+ Kg7 32 Rxd5 exd5 33 Nf5+ Kg8 34 Ne7+ Kg7 35 Qf6+
Kh6 36 Nf5+ Kh5 37 Qg5 mate.
b) 30 . . . Kg8 3 1 Qg5 Qe7 32 Nc6 Qxg5 33 Nxg5 (when Black is short of moves)
33 . . . Re8 34 Nxa7 and the rest is easy.
30 Qg5! Rb8 31 h6+ Kf7 32 Rxd5! exd5 33 Qxe7+ 1-0
After 33 . . . Kxe7 34 Nc6+ wins the rook.
Game 20
D P.Nikolic • E.Bareev
European Team Championship, Pula 1 997
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 e3 b5 6 a4 b4 7 Nb1 Ba6 8 Be2 e6
9 0-0 Be7 10 Nbd2 c3 11 bxc3 bxc3 12 Nb1 Qa5 13 Ba3 c5
H.Olsen-G.Kasparov, Torshavn (simul) 2001, continued with 13 . . . Be7 14 Bxa6
Nxa6 15 Qd3 Nd5 16 Rc 1 Nab4 17 Qc4 c2 18 Bxb4 Nxb4 19 Na3 0-0 20 Nxc2
and a draw was soon agreed.
14 Bxa6 Nxa6 15 Ne5
Here 15 Qd3 is about equal, see the introductory notes.
15 ... Rc8 (Diagram 18) 16 Qb3?
This proves to be the wrong plan. Instead 16 Nc4 is recommended by Hubner,
63
who goes on to give 16 . . . Qd8 1 7 Qb3 0-0 18 Rd1 as unclear. Perhaps Black
could then continue with 18 . . . Rb8 19 Qxc3 Nd5 20 Qc1 cxd4 21 Bxe7 Qxe7 22
Rxd4 Rfc8 when he has an edge due to his slightly better development.
The critical m o ment The c-pawn i s strong
16 ... cxd4 17 Qb7

If 17 Bxe7 Kxe7 first, then 18 Qb7+ is well met by 18 . . . Qc7 19 Qxa6 Qxe5.
17 ... Rc7 18 Qa8+ Bd8 19 Bd6 Qd5!
Well j udged! Bareev sacrifices the exchange to dissolve White's threats and
obtain a good ending due to his advanced c-pawn.
20 Qxd5 Nxd5 21 Bxc7 Bxc7 22 exd4 Bxe5 23 dxe5 Ke7 (Diagram 1 9)
The problem for White is that the mega-passed pawn stymies his pieces.
24 Na3 Nab4 25 Rab1 Rc8 26 Rfc1 Nf4 27 Rxb4
27 K£1 Nfd3 is even worse.
27 ... Ne2+ 28 Kfl Nxc1 29 Rb7+ Kf8 30 Nc2 Rd8 31 Ne3
Not 3 1 Rc7? which loses on the spot to 3 l . ..Rd1 + 32 Ne1 Nd3.
31...Rc8 32 Nc2 a6 33 g3 Rd8 34 Ne3
It's now a better moment to try 34 Rc7, but it's still pretty grim.
34 ... Rc8 35 Nc2 Rd8 36 Ne3 Na2 37 a5 Rd1+ 38 Kg2 Rd3 39 Rc7 Ke8 40
Kf3 Kd8 41 Rc4 Kd7
. .
Slowly but surely Black improves his pieces.

42 h4 Rd2 43 Rc5 Rb2 44 Nc4 Kd8 45 Nb6
A valiant attempt to counter-attack. Instead after 45 Ne3 Rb5 46 Rxb5 axb5
4 7 a6 Kc7 or 45 Nxb2 cxb2, White can resign.
45 ... g5
64
Gambit L i n e s : 5 e4, 5 Ne5 and 5 e3
Giving himself a flight square for his king.
WARNING: When close to winning you should keep your guard

up. Your desperate opponent almost certai nly has one final
trick up his sleeve.
46. ReS+ Ke7 4 7 Re7+ Kd8 48 �e8+ Ke7 49 Re7+ Kf8 50 ReS+ Kg7 51 Nd7
g4+
The imprudent 5 l . . .c2? falls into White's trap: 52 Nf6 g4+ 53 Kg2 and perpet
ual is on the cards, e.g. 53 . . . c lQ 54 Rg8+ Kh6 55 Nxg4+ Kh5 56 Nf6+.
52 Kg2
Unfortunately for White, 52 Kxg4 takes away the valuable g4-square from his
knight, and so after 52 . . . c2, White cannot create the perpetual net of the previ
ous note.
52 ... Rb5!
Now Nf6 is always met by capturing the e-pawn, so the win is nigh.
53 h5 Rd5 54 h6+ Kg6 55 Nf6 Rxe5 56 Nxg4 Rg5 57 f3
Or 57 Rg8+ Kh5 58 Nf6+ Kxh6 59 Ng4+ Rxg4 60 Rxg4 c2 etc.
57 ... Rb5 58 Rg8+ Kf5 59 Rg7 e2 60 Rxf7+
60 Ne3+ K£6 61 Nxc2 finally picks off the c-pawn but, after 6 l . . .B,b2, only at
the cost of a piece.
60 ... Kg6 61 Rg7+ Kh5 62 Rg8 Rg5! 0-1
Summary
The Geller Gambit with 5 e4 can be best described as speculative. White has
chances for an attack but with best play Black shouldn't be worse.
The 5 Ne5 Gambit is often followed up by fianchettoing the king's bishop with
g2-g3 and Bg2. Not only does play seem akin to certain lines of the Catalan
Opening, some lines actually transpose. White seeks general activity, pressure
on the long diagonal and better harmony for the pawn. Black can obtain a good
game by picking his moment to return the pawn to achieve rapid development
or even hold onto his loot for the duration.
The more positional 5 e3 has been tried at the top level on occasion, but has
now been more or less abandoned as Black's routes to equality have been fath
omed out.
65
Chapter Four
T h e Qu i et 4 e 3
- Introdu ction
- Black plays 4 . . . Bg4
- Black plays 4 . . . Bf5

The Qu iet 4 e3
Introduction
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 (Diagram 1)
Diagra m 1
The quiet 4 e3
This doesn't apply any particular pressure. White defends his c4-pawn and
intends solid development. A practical choice for those seeking quiet positions
with little theory. Black has to decide where to place his queen's bishop.
Black plays 4 ... Bg4

4 ... Bg4!? (Diagram 2)
Black develops his bishop and at the same time pins the knight.
Diagram 2 Diagram 3
A provocative pin · White plays aggressively
67
A more provocative move than the more common . . . Bf5. White will now have to
find a solution to the pin on the d1-h5 diagonal.
5 h3 Bxf3
5 . . . Bh5 is also possible, provoking White to take a risk with g2-g4.
6 Qx£3 e6 7 Nc3 Nbd7 8 Bd2 Bd6 9 g4!? (Diagram 3)
White's most aggressive continuation requires careful handling by Black.
Theoretical?
No. Natural development is generally enough to get by.
Statistics
In a total of 982 games Black has scored an average 45%. White's best try
seems to be 5 h3 when Black only gets 40%.
Game 21
D A.Dreev • S.Movsesian
Sarajevo 2002
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 Bg4 5 Nc3
The other main idea is 5 cxd5 Bxf3 ! (safe and ultra-solid) 6 Qxf3 cxd5 7 Nc3 e6
8 Bd3 Nc6 9 0-0 Be7 10 Qe2 0-0 which permits Black a comfortable game. It's
not clear that the bishop pair constitutes an asset as the bishop on cl will have
some difficulty in becoming active.
5 ... e6 6 h3 Bxf3 7 Qxf3 Nbd 7 8 Bd2 Bd6 9 g4!?
An aggressive idea, aiming for g4-g5 pushing the knight back and gaining
space.
9 . . Bb4
.
The bishop changes its mind! Now if White plays g4-g5 Black aims to use the
e4-square. Although the rule of 'not moving a piece twice in the opening' is
widely respected, there are always exceptions! White's g2-g4 is his extra
tempo, which contains a direct positional threat, but from Black's point of view
such early machismo by White could j ust selrweaken the aggressor ..
0
NOT E : Moving a piece twice (or more) in the opening is ac
ceptable if there is a logical reason. In particular, if the oppo
nent does not gain a 'free' move for development in return.
· 1o Bd3 . .
Renewing the threat of g4-g5. If 10 g5 here, then 10 . . . Bxc3 1 1 Bxc3 Ne4 is sat
isfactory for Black.
10 e5!? (Diagram 4)
...
A surprising early counter in the centre.

11 cxd5 Bxc3
68
The Quiet 4 e3
Better than 1 l . . .cxd5?! , which lets White take the initiative with 12 dxe5 Nxe5
13 Bb5+.
Diagram 4 Diagram 5
An active counter-blow Black has the initiative
12 Bxc3
A later try, 12 bxc3 cxd5 13 Qf5 g6 14 Qg5 Qe7 15 f3 0-0-0 16 Bb5 Qe6, turned
out in Black's favour in A.Onischuk-R.Vasquez, Buenos Aires 2003.
12 ...Nxd5 13 Bc4 N7b6 14 Bxd5
White has also tried to keep the tension with 1 4 Bb3, e.g. 14 ... 0-0 1 5 0-0 (if 1 5
dxe5 Nxc3 1 6 bxc3, then 16 .. . Qd3! i s awkward) 15 . . . Qe7 16 Qe4 Qh4 17 Kg2 f5!
gave Black interesting counterplay in S.Anapolsky-S.Krivoshey, Ukrainian
Championship 2003.
14 ...Nxd5 15 Qe4 0-0 16 dxe5
Mter 16 Qxe5, Movsesian intended 16 . . . Qh4 17 Qh5 Nxe3! 18 Qxh4 Ng2+, re
cuperating the material with an equal game.
16 ... Qh4 17 Bd4 Rad8 18 Qf3 Qe7!
A timely switch-back to threaten . . . c6-c5.
19 Rc1
19 b3?! looks fishy after 19 . . . c5 20 Bb2 c4!.
19 ...b6! (Diagram 5) 20 0-0
Mter this the game fizzles out into a draw. But Movsesian points out that
White doesn't have anything better, e.g. 20 b3 c5 21 Ba1 Nb4 22 0-0 Nxa2
when Black regains the p�wn with a good game, while in the case of 20 Rxc6
Qb4+ 21 Kd1 Qa4+ 22 Rc2 Qxa2, White's king is a problem.
20 ... c5 21 Bc3 Nxc3 22 bxc3 Qxe5 23 Rfd 1 Rxdl+ 24 Qxd1 f5 25 c4 fxg4
26 hxg4 Kh8 2 7 Qe2 h5 '12-'12
69
Black plays 4 Bf5 . . .
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e 3 Bf5 (Diagram 6)
Diagra m 6
Black plays 4 . . . Bf5
The most common way for Black to meet 4 e3 is with 4 ... Bf5. There are then
three principal approaches for White, each with its own characteristics:
1 . Simplifying by exchanging bishops with Bfl- d3;
2. Trying to press on the queenside with c4xd5 followed by Qd1-b3;
3 . Harassing the bishop with Nf3-h4.
5 Nc3
White intends to follow up with Nh4, but let's first have a look at how play
may develop if White's tries the other two approaches.
a) 5 Bd3 is rather tame, as the early exchange of light-squared bishops eases
Black's development, e.g. 5 . . . Bxd3 (if Black prefers to keep more tension he
could try 5 . . . Bg6!? when a continuation such as 6 0-0 e6 7 Nc3 Nbd7 8 b3 Bd6
9 Bb2 Ne4 10 Qc2 f5, G.Tunik- E. Bareev, Russian Championship 1995, creates
chances for both sides) 6 Qxd3 e6 7 0-0 Nbd7 8 Nc3 Be7 (I quite like 8 .. � Bb4!?
as a dynamic try to play for more than dull equality, e.g. 9 Bd2 a5 10 a3 Be7
11 e4 Nc5! and Black was already slightly better, P.Lafuente-A.Wojtkiewicz,
Buenos Aires 2003) 9 e4 dxe4 10 Nxe4 Nxe4 1 1 Qoce4 0-0 12 Bf4, when the
simplified position is about equal. White's extra space is of no real practical
benefit against such a solid set-up.
b) 5 cxd5 cxd5 6 Qb3 (as Black has undertaken the early development of his
bishop, White puts pressure on b7) 6 . . . Qc7 7 Bd2 (7 Nc3 e6 8 Bd2 Nc6 9 Bb5
Bd6 10 Rc1 Rb8!? 1 1 Nh4 Be4 left play rather unclear, M.Gurevich-V.Anand,
Reggio Emilia 1991192) 7 . . . Nc6 8 Bb5 e6 9 Bb4 (Diagram 7)
70
The Quiet 4 e3
Diagram 7 Diagram 8
Exchanging bishops Black is solid
White hopes to exchange off his 'inferior bishop' and then obtain a nagging
edge. But Black can play the following ending with little cause for concern, e.g.
9 . . Bxb4+ 10 Qxb4 Qe7 1 1 Bxc6+ bxc6 12 Qxe7+ Kxe7 1 3 Nc3 Nd7 14 Na4
.
Rhc8 15 Rc1 Be4 16 Ng5 Bg6 17 Kd2 Kd6 18 Rc3 e5 with equal chances, as
pointed out by Khenkin.
5 ... e6 6 Nh4
Harassing the bishop on f5 is perhaps the most critical plan, but Black has
several ways to equality.
6 ... Be41?
I like this move, getting White to play the following double-edged reply.
The natural alternative 6 . . . Bg6 is straightforward, when after the typical 7
Nxg6 hxg6 8 g3 Nbd 7 9 Qd3, Black can fight for space and influence with
9 . dxc4 10 Qxc4 e5.
. .
7 f3
Pushing back the bishop but creating §Orne looseness on the b8-h2 diagonal.
7 ... Bg6 8 Qb3 Qb6 9 Nxg6 hxg6 10 Bd2 Nbd7 1 1 0-0-0 Qxb3 ' 12 axb3 Bd6
13 h3 Nh5 (Diagram 8)
V.Kramnik-A.Shirov, Astana 2001 . White has the bishop pair but Black has a
very solid position. Chances are equal.
Theoretical?
No. Early play relies on logical development rather than memory testing.
Statistics
A grand total of 3052 games shows that 4. ..Bf5 has been extensively played
71
over the years. Overall Black manages an average 46%, but 5 Nc3 e6 6 Nh4
has recently come to the fore in the last five years, against which Black has
struggled. For instance, 6 . . . Bg6 scores only 39% and 6 . . . Be4 7 f3 Bg6 a slightly
better 43%. The strongest grandmasters (Dreev, M.Gurevich, Shirov etc.),
however, seem to handle Black's game well and obtain better than 50%, It
seems to me that for the top echelon 4 e3 doesn't give anything for White, but
lesser players struggle in lines such as this one where there isn't always an
obvious plan for Black.
Game 22
0 P.Lafuente • A.Wojtkiewicz
Pan American Championship, Buenos Aires 2003
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 e3 Bf5 4 Nc3 e6 5 Nf3 Nd7 6 Bd3
A solid line. One of those where White would like to play for a win 'without
risk'. Believe me though, there is always a risk of something going wrong!
6 ... Bxd3 7 Qxd3 Ngf6 8 0-0 Bb4!? 9 Bd2 a5 10 a3 Be7 11 e4?! (Diagram 9)
It's better to complete development with 1 1 Rad l .
Black to play Black's majority i s healthier
11. . .Nc5!
A nice trap to obtain the advantage.
12 dxc5 dxe4 13 Qxd8+ Rxd8 . .
Now if the knight on f3 moves the bishop on d2 is left en prise.

14 Nxe4 Nxe4 15 Bxa5 Ra8 16 Bb4 Bxc5 17 Bxc5 Nxc5
The smoke clears and material equality is restored. In such cases (if time per
mits) it's always a good idea to take stock and judge the important factors in a
position. Here neither side has an advantage in development and they each
72
The Quiet 4 e3
have clear pawn majorities. Black's structure (as usual in this line) is very
solid whereas, in comparison, White has some holes around his queenside
which makes his majority hard to get going.
·�
TIP: Once a tactical flurry has calmed down, if you have the
time, take a few minutes to switch back into positional mode.
18 Rad1
18 b4 comes into consideration, but the a-pawn is then backward.
18 ... Ke7 19 Rd2 Rhd8 20 Rfd1 Rxd2 21 Rxd2 f6 22 Kf1 e5 23 Ke2 Nb3 24
Rd1 Ra4! (Diagram 10)
The c-pawn becomes a serious matter for concern.
25 Kd3 Nc5+ 26 Kc3 Ne4+ 27 Kb3 Ra8 28 Rfl
For now Lafuente holds onto his pawns, but loses the fight for the d-file.
28 ... Rd8 29 Kc2 g5! 30 h3 h5
The threat of ... g5-g4 followed by invading on d2 is becoming dangerous.
31 Kc1
After 31 g4 Ke6 White is close to being in zugzwang.
3 1...Ke6 32 Ng1 Rd4 3 3 Ne2 Rxc4+ 34 Kd1 Rc5 35 f3 Nd6 36 Rf2 Nc4 37
Ng3 Rd5+ 38 Kc1 Ne3
White isn't only a pawn down, he's still under just as much pressure.
39 Kb1 Rdl+ 40 Ka2 Rg1 4 1 Ne4 Rxg2 42 Nc5+ Kd5 43 Rxg2 Nxg2 44
Nxb7 Ne1 45 a4 Nxf3 46 a5 Nd4 0-1
Black stops the a-pawn and then his flood of kingside pawns rush forward.
Game 23
D V.Salov • E.Bareev
Dortmund 1 992
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 Bf5 5 cxd5 cxd5
This version of an 'exchange variation' leaves White's queen's bishop inside the
pawn chain, but he has an idea to solve that problem.
6 Qb3 Qc7 7 Bd2 e6 8 Bb5+ Nc6 9 Bb4 (Diagram 1 1)
White exchanges off his potentially 'bad' bishop and hopes that Black's minor
pieces will be inferior to his own in the following simplified position.
9 ... Bxb4+
Similar, but slightly more precise, is 9 . . . Bd6 10 Qa3 Ke7! 11 Bxc6 bxc6 12 Nc3
Nd7 1 3 Rc1 Rab8 14 Bxd6+ Qxd6 1 5 Qxd6+ Kxd6, S.Mohr-G.Hertneck,
Bundesliga 1992. The king is of course well placed on d6.
10 Qxb4 Qe7
Another way to a good game starts with 10 ... Nd7!, e.g. 1 1 Bxc6 (11 Qa3 Nxd4!
12 exd4 Qcl + isn't totally clear, but Black wins material and White's attack
73
isn't worth more than a draw) ll ... Qxc6 12 Nc3 a5 (to resolve the problem of
the a3-f8 diagonal) 13 Qb5 (13 Qa3 is well met by 13 . . . b5) 13 . . . Qxb5 14 Nxb5
Ke7 15 Kd2 Rhc8, and a draw was agreed in E . Solozhenkin-V.Bagirov, Jy
vaskyla 1991.
Exchanging bishops Controlling c5
1 1 Bxc6+ bxc6 12 Qxe7+ Kxe7 13 Nc3 Nd7 14 Na4 (Diagram 12)

Black will at some point have to play for ... c6-c5 or . . . e6-e5. With this in mind,
the sequence above (in the note to Black's 9th) leads to an analogous position
where the black king is on the more useful d6-square rather than e7.
14 ... f6?!
This proves to be a little slow and leads to some problems.
Better is 14 . . .Rhc8 15 Rc1 Be4! (instead 15 . . . Rab8 16 b3 Rb5 17 Nh4 Bg4 18 h3
Bh5 19 f4! f6 20 g4 Be8 21 Rh2 was unpleasant for Black in T.Pahtz-A.Dreev,
Berlin 1991; being stuck with a backward c-pawn and no counterplay is ex
actly what Black would like to avoid) 16 Ng5 (16 Ke2 is met by 16 . . . Bxf3+ 17
Kxf3 e5), M.Illescas Cordoba-I.Khenkin, Chalkidiki 1992, and now 16 . . . Bg6! 1 7
Ke2 Kd6 18 Rc3 e5 i s given b y Khenkin a s equal.
The immediate 14 . . . Be4 also comes into consideration.
15 Rc1 Nb6?!
First 15 ... Rhc8 is sounder.
16 Nc5 a5 17 Nh4 Bg4?
A blunder, but it's already difficult.
17 . . . Rhc8 is the lesser evil, though as Dautov points out, White still has a nice
endgame advantage after 18 Nxf5+ exf5 19 a4 Nd7 20 b3 Rab8 21 Nxd7 Kxd7
22 Rc3.
74
The Qu iet 4 e3
18 h3 Bh5 19 Nxe6! Kxe6 20 Rxc6+ Kd7 21 Rxb6 Rhb8 22 Rxb8 Rxb8 23

b3 a4
Black regains one pawn but he's not able to save the game.
24 g4 axb3 25 axb3 Rxb3 26 Ke2 Rb2+ 27 Kf3 Bf7 28 Nf5 g6 29 Nh6 Be6
30. Ra1 Rb7 3 1 h4 g5 32 hxg5 fxg5 33 Rh1 1-0
Here's a plausible continuation to clarify Black's resignation: 33 ... Ke7 34 Nf5+
Bxf5 35 gxf5 Kf6 36 Kg4 Rb2 and now White has varies ways, a logical one
being 37 Rh6+ Kg7 38 Kxg5 Rxf2 39 Rd6 h6+ 40 Kg4 h5+ 41 Kg5 Rf3 42 Rd7+
Kg8 43 Rxd5 Rxe3 44 Kxh5 with a technical win.
Game 24
D V.Tkachiev • A.Shirov
Bastia 2003
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 Bf5 5 Nc3 e6 6 Nh4 Be41? (Diagram 13)
P rovoking f2-f3 A dynamic approach
Shirov provokes his opponent to play f2-f3 before retreating. It's a moot point
whether this is a plus for Black, as the pawn on f3 may become useful to sup
.
port e3-e4, but it does loosen White's kingside structure somewhat, particu
larly along the b8-h2 diagonal.
0
NOTE: Pawn moves should be considered very carefu l ly. They
can never be retracted!
There are some subtle differences between all three bishop moves, but the
other two should also lead to equal chances; for instance:
a) 6 . . . Bg6 7 Nxg6 hxg6 8 g3 Nbd7 9 Qd3 dxc4 10 Qxc4 e5 1 1 Bg2 Nb6 12 Qe2
exd4 1 3 exd4+ Be7, A.Karpov-E .Bareev, Cannes 2002;
b) 6 . . . Bg4 7 Qb3 Qb6 8 h3 Bh5 9 g4 Bg6 10 Nxg6 hxg6 11 g5 Nfd7 12 e4 dxe4
75
Starting O u t : Slav a n d Semi-Slav
1 3 Be3 . e5, J.Ehlvest-M.Gurevich, Saraybahce 2002.

7 f3 Bg6 8 Qb3 Qc7!?
For mention of the solid alternative 8 . . . Qb6, see the introductory notes.
9 Bd2 Nbd7 10 cxd5
How to recapture?
10 ... Nxd5!?
The other way, 10 ... exd5, followed by 11 0-0-0 0-0-0 12 e4 dxe4 13 Nxg6 hxg6
14 fxe4 Nb6 15 Bg5, has been seen several times in games with Tregubov as
White. He has shown that White keeps an edge.
The text is less clear, so for practical purposes is probably better.
11 0-0-0
There is a case for expansion with 1 1 e4, e.g. 1 l . . .N5b6 12 g3 Be7 13 Be2 Qd6
14 Be3 Qb4, as in E .Bacrot-P.Varga, French League 2001, left White with a
minimal edge due to his extra space.
1 1...a5! (Diagram 14)
True to his nature Shirov can sense chances for play against White's king.
12 Nxg6 hxg6 13 Kb1 Nxc3+ 14 Bxc3 a4 15 Qc2 a3
The initiative is more important than the loose h-pawn, for instance after
15 . . . Rxh2?! 16 Rxh2 Qxh2 17 e4 Nf6 18 d5!, Black's king becomes very ex
posed.
16 b3 Be7 17 g3 Nb6 18 e4 0-0
Shirov tidies up at the back knowing that the white king will suffer from
chronic insecurity once things open up.
19 f4 Rfd8 20 Bg2 c5 (Diagram 15)
A double-edged position Is Black in trouble?
76
The Qu iet 4 e3
21 dxe5?
Tkachiev is in too much of a hurry to exchange queens.
Instead 21 h4! is critical with double-edged play. Black should then reply
2 l . . .Rdc8! (the alternatives 2 l . . .cxd4 22 Bxd4 Qxc2+ 23 Kxc2 Rac8+ 24 Kbl,
a�d 2 l . . .Rac8 22 d5! exd5 23 exd5 c4 24 b4 Bf6 25 Bxf6 gxf6 26 h5 Qd6 27
hxg6 Qxb4+ 28 Kal Qb2+ 29 Qxb2 axb2+ 30 Kxb2 fxg6 3 1 d6, yield an edge to
White) 22 Qd2 c4 23 b4 Na4, with chances for both sides.
21...Qxe5 22 Be5 Qb5!
Retaining the queens renders White's queenside somewhat shaky.
23 Rxd8+ Rxd8 24 Rel Re8 25 Qdl Rxel+ 26 Kxel Nd7 27 Bal Ne5
White has both the worse king and a number of soft spots in his camp.
28 Bf3?
28 Kb l is better, just keeping things as safe as possible.
28 ... Qe6 29 Kbl Nxe4 30 Qd4 (Diagram 16) 30 ... Nd2+!
Tkachiev must have overlooked this resource and now finds himself a pawn
down.
31 Qxd2 Qxf3 32 Be5 f6 33 Be3 Be5 34 Ke2 Bgl 35 b4 Qd5
When a pawn up, look for opportunities to exchange pieces.
36 Qxd5 exd5 37 h3 Bf2 38 g4 f5
Fixing White's f4-pawn on a dark square.
39 Kb3 d4 40 Bd2 Kf7 41 Ke2
Here 41 Kxa3 allows 4 l ...Be3.
41...Ke6 42 Kd3 Kd5 43 Bel Bg3 44 Bxa3
Otherwise after 44 gxf5 gxf5 45 Bd2, Black can win with 45 . . . Bf2 46 Bel Be3
4 7 Bxe3 dxe3 48 Kxe3 Kc4 49 h4 b5 50 h5 Kc3.
44 ...Bxf4 45 Bb2 Be5 46 Bel f4 4 7 Bd2 f3 48 a4 Bg3 49 a5 f2 50 Ke2 Ke4
51 Kfl d3 52 Kg2 Bd6 53 b5 Kxb5 54 Kxf2 Bb4 55 Bf4 Bxa5 56 Ke3 Ke4
57 Be5 0-1
Black has 57 . . . Bc3 followed by the advance of the b-pawn.
Su mmary
The quiet approach with 4 e3 tests Black's general positional understanding
rather than his theoretical knowledge.
Black should be able to achieve equal chances even against the most critical
move 6 Nh4. It's necessary for Black to be ready to adapt to White's choice of
approach, as 5 cxd5, 5 Bd3 and 5 Nc3 e6 6 Nh4 are all rather different.
77
Chapter Five
T h e Exc h a n g e Va r i at i o n
- Introd u ction
- White Plays Ng1 -f3
- White Delays or Avoids Ng1 -f3

The Exchange Variation
Introduction
The Slav Defence has a good reputation, but one of the reasons that some
players don't want to play it is the Exchange Variation. Virtually all openings ,
have their notoriously dull lines, but if you are motivated and armed with one
or two ideas you can get interesting games and winning chances. Remember
that, although the pawn structure is symmetrical, there are nevertheless 30
bits of wood left on the chessboard and with so many pieces a lot can happen.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 cxd5 cxd5 (Diagram 1)
Diagram 1
The Exchange Variation shouldn't be underestimated, however, as in expert

hands White's extra tempo can be transformed into a lasting pull.
On the other hand, in practice Black scores fairly well as some White players
think that 3 cxd5 should guarantee them at least a draw and drift planlessly.
They try and exchange a few pieces and assume that the draw will occur soon
enough. Well nearly a quarter of them have been proved wrong! Indeed statis
tically Black is more likely to win against the Exchange Variation than in
some sharper lines, where one thinks it should be easier for him to generate
'winning chances'. So the variation should be taken seriously - by both Black
and White!
I am recommending that Black plays a plan involving an early . . . a7-a6 and
have not covered other plans. This has scored well in practice and is a favour
ite of some of the world's elite.
White plays Ng1 -f3

4 Nc3 Nf6 5 Nf3 Nc6 6 Bf4 a6 (Diagram 2)
79
An early . . . a7-a6 is multi-functional: It cuts out one of White's most promising

plans involving Bfl-b5 pinning the knight, and prepares an eventual . . .b7-b5
gaining space on the wing. I also like to think of ... a7-a6 as a useful waiting
move, so that Black can decide a move later (depending on circumstances)
whether the bishop belongs on f5 or g4.
From a practical point of view Black has to stop copying his opponent eventu
ally and now is as good a time as any.
Diagram 2 Diagram 3
Breaking the symmetry Black has good chances
7 e3
The most testing is 7 Ne5, as in the two illustrative games that follow.
a) 7 . . .Bf5?! is less good here, e.g. 8 e3 e6 9 g4! Bg6 10 h4! , with the initiative
R.Schlindwein-G.Beikert, Viernheim 1995.
b) 7 ... e6 (solid but not very ambitious) 8 e3 Nxe5 9 Bxe5 Be7 10 Bd3 Bd7 11 0-
0 0-0 12 Qb3 Bc6 (although the bishop is inside the pawn chain this seems to
be a useful square) 13 Rfcl Ng4 14 Bg3 Bh4 and Black has equalised,
D.Zagorskis-M.Gurevich, Bonn 1996.
7 Bg4
...
The pin is appropriate here as White will eventually have to do something

about it!
8 Bd3 e6 9 h3 .
.
Look how things go wrong for White in the following game. 9 0-0 (it's probably
better to force a decision from Black's bishop before castling) 9 . . . Bd6 10 h3
Bh5 !? (keeping the tension; does White want to risk g2-g4?) 11 Bxd6 Qxd6 12
Rcl 0-0 13 a3 (13 Be2 is safest, but even so after 1 3 ... Rac8 14 Ne1 Bxe2 1 5
Qxe2 Nd7 16 Nd3 Nb4 Black had a t least equality, R.Hiibner-Kr.Georgiev,
Bundesliga 1995) 13 . . . Rac8 14 Na4 Ne4! 15 Re1 Na5 16 g4 (risky) 16 . . . Bg6 1 7
80
The Exch an ge Var iation
Ne5 Nxf2 ! 18 Kxf2 Rxc1 19 Qxc1 Bxd3 20 Nxd3 Qh2+ 2 1 Kf1 Nb3 (threatening
the queen and . . . Nd2+) 22 Nf2 Nxc1 23 Rxc1 f5 24 g5 f4 0- 1 Aamchamp
T.Luther, Internet (blitz) 2003. Yes I know that it was only a blitz game, but
the pin shouldn't be underestimated! .
Instead 9 Qb3!? Bxf3 10 gxf3 (10 Qxb7 loses material after 10 ... Na5) 10 ... Na5
1 1 Qc2 Be7 12 Rg1 g6 1 3 Ke2 b5 14 Rac1 ReS 15 Qb 1 Nc4, was adequate for
Black in A.Yusupov-A.Shirov, Bundesliga 1993.
9 Bh5
...
Otherwise 9 . . . Bxf3!? is possible. Black is not so worried about exchanging his

light-squared bishop for a knight as his remaining pieces should be able to find
good moorings, e.g. 10 Qxf3 h6 (the most solid, preventing Bg5) 1 1 Rc1 Bd6 12
0-0 0-0 13 a3 Rc8, with equality as in P.Nikolic-L.Fressinet, Selfoss 2003.
10 g4!? Bg6 1 1 Ne5 Nxe5 12 Bxe5 Bd6 13 Bxd6 Qxd6 14 Qa4+ Ke7 (Dia
gram 3)
E.Ghaem Maghami-R.Shetty, Mumbai 2003. The loss of castling is not impor
tant here. White's aggressive g2-g4 has j ust weakened himself and Black has
good chances.
Theoretical?
Despite being a popular choice amongst cautious players, the Exchange Varia
tion can basically be played with little theory. In order to obtain a comfortable
game, and even some possibilities of playing for a win, it makes sense to have
a robust method for developing one's pieces.
The ... a7-a6 idea is flexible, relatively dynamic and even less theoretical than
some of the older lines.
Statistics
There are an astonishing 6301 games with 3 cxd5. White manages 52% which
is nothing special, but the most notable figures concern draws. A very high
53% of Exchange Slavs are drawn, of which more than half are in less than 20
moves.
However, don't dismiss this line as just dull and rock-solid, Black wins 22% of
these, compared with White's 26%. The real figure for win percentages is even
higher as the Exchange Variation is often used by players who have tacitly
agreed to a draw before the game (which, I should add, is technically illegal),
and should explain away a fair number of these 10- 15 move draws.
The lines with ... a7-a6 score even better for Black; for instance the position
after 7 ... Bg4 scores 53% for Black.
So 3 cxd5 scores less well than most other White variations, and if Black
wants to play for a win then . . . a7-a6 gives him as good a chance as White of
getting the full point.
81
Game 25
D A.Wojtkiewicz • A.Shirov
Manila Olympiad 1 992
1 Nf3 d5 2 d4 c6 3 c4 Nf6 4 cxd5 cxd5 5 Nc3 Nc6 6 Bf4 a6 7 Ne5!?
The most testing. Instead after 7 e3 Bg4 Black seems to be well on the way to
equality.
7 ... Qb6!? 8 Nxc6 bxc6 9 Qd2 Bf5 10 f3! e6 1 1 e3?!
Shirov prefers 1 1 Rc1 ! (see the introductory notes).
1 1...Nd7 12 Rc1 Be7 13 Be2 0-0 14 0-0 Rfc8 15 a3 (Diagram 4)
Diagram 4 Diagram 5
Black aims for . . . c6-c5 Threateningto come to b3
1 5 ... Qb7
Black prepares to play the freeing move . . . c6-c5.
Shirov preferred to avoid the immediate 15 . . . c5, as he then prefers White after
1 6 e4! Bg6 (better than 16 . . . dxe4 17 fxe4 Bg6 18 d5, and 16 . . . cxd4 1 7 Na4) 1 7
exd5, but this looks about equal to m e after 1 7 . . . cxd4 1 8 Na4 Qb3 19 dxe6
Qxe6.
16 Na4
Rather negative and not even holding Black's play back. 16 e4 Bg6 17 Rfdl
would be better, with balanced chances.
16 ... c5 17 dxc5 Bxc5!? 18 Nxc5 Nxc5 (Diagram 5) 19 Qb4?!
Exchanging queens and hoping that opposite-coloured bishops will lead to a
draw. However, this weakens the queenside maj ority unnecessarily. I suggest
instead 19 b4 Nb3 20 Rxc8+ Rxc8 21 Qb2 Rc2 22 Qxb3 Rxe2 23 Rc1 with a
balanced position.
82
The Exc hange Variation
WARNING: Trying t o exchange everything isn't the way to

' draw. You r opponent who will sense that you are scared!
X
19 ... Qxb4 20 axb4 Nd3 21 Rxc8+?!
Giving up the c-file up is another concession.
2 l'...Rxc8 22 Bxd3 Bxd3 23 Rd1 Bb5 24 Be5 Rc2 25 Bc3 f6 26 Rd2 Rcl+
27 Kf2
White can't do a great deal as Black tries to improve his position. The white
queenside is devalued to the extent that he is in essence playing a pawn down.
27 ...Kf7 28 g4 Bc4 29 f4 Kg6 30 Kg2 h5 31 h3 h4!
Fixing the weakness on h3.
32 Kf3?!
Shirov points out how Black is able to make progress against 32 Kh2, i.e.
32 ... Rel 33 Bd4 Be2 34 Kg2 Bfl+ 35 Kh2 (35 Kf2 loses the h-pawn after
35 . . . Rcl) 35 . . . e5 (35 . . . Kf7 36 Rc2 Ke8 37 Rc7 e5 38 fxe5 fxe5 39 Bc5 Re2+ 40
Kgl Bxh3 would be another try) 36 fxe5 fxe5 37 Bxe5 Rxe3 38 Rxd5 Re2+ 39
Kgl Bxh3 with reasonable winning chances.
32 ... Bb3
Intending . . . Bc2-e4, followed by picking up the h-pawn.
33 e4 Rfl+ 34 Ke3 dxe4 35 Rf2 Rh1 36 Kxe4 Rxh3 37 Bd2 Rg3 38 g5
Bd5+ 39 Kd4 Kf5 40 gxf6 gxf6 0-1
Game 26
D S.Kasparov • S.Vysochin
Pavlograd 2000
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 cxd5 cxd5 4 Nf3 Nf6 5 Nc3 Nc6 6 Bf4 a6 7 Ne5 Qb6 8
Nxc6 bxc6 9 a3 (Diagram 6)
Should Black take on b2? W h ite gets the b-file
83
White leaves the b-pawn to its fate!

9 ...Bf5
This turns out to be too slow.
Sometimes in books one reads that the best way of testing a gambit is to take
the material. I don't always agree, but here it's probably true!
The courageous 9 . . . Qxb2 has been played a few times, though Black has to be
careful. After 10 Na4 Qb5 (the only decent square) 11 Bc7 Qb7 12 Ba5 Bf5 13
Nc5 Qb2! (after 1 3 ... Qc8 14 Rc1, White's bind offered him plenty of compensa
tion in S.Kasparov-V.Borovikov, Kiev 200 1) 14 e3 e6 (Hubner suggests
14 . . . e5!?) 15 Qc l Qxc1 + 16 Rxc1 Bxc5 17 Rxc5 Kd7 18 Bb4 Kc7 and Black
shouldn't be worse, J.Hodgson-J.Waitzkin, Bermuda 1997.
10 Na4!
White now has a strong grip on the queenside as Black is unable to free him
self in time.
10 ... Qb7 1 1 e3 e6 12 Be2 Nd7 13 0-0 Be7
The break 13 ... c5? falls short, i.e. 14 dxc5 Nxc5 15 Rc1 Nxa4 16 Qxa4+ Qd7 1 7
Qd4 and Black is in trouble.
14 b4 0-0 15 Qd2 Rfc8 16 Nc5!
An interesting decision. The standard plan would be to double on the c-file
with pressure, but although Black is rather passive he would probably be able
to hold. Sergei Kasparov instead aims for play on the b-file.
16 ... Nxc5 17 bxc5 Bd8 18 Ra2 (Diagram 7) 18 ... Qb3
18 . . . Bc7 19 Rb2 Qa7 20 Bxc7 Qxc7 21 Rb6 would also be unpleasant for Black.
19 Rfa1 Ra7 20 Rb2 Qa4 21 Rb4 Qa5 22 Qb2 g5 23 Bd6
Black hasn't lost any material, but is helpless against the b-file squeeze.
23 ... Bc7 24 Rb7 Raa8
After 24 . . .Rxb7 25 Qxb7 e5, White picks up an important pawn with 26 Qxc6.
25 Bxc7 Rxc7 26 Rb6
Naturally avoiding exchanges that would ease the defender's task. White now
threatens 27 Qb4, whereupon 27 . . . Qxb4 28 axb4 would leave Black facing the
loss of at least the a-pawn.
26 ... Qa4 27 Rc1 Kg7 28 Qc3 a5 29 Qb2 1-0
Black has no answer to the intended 30 Bd1 trapping the queen.
' .
White delays or avoids Ng1 -f3

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 cxd5 cxd5 4 Nc3 Nf6 5 Bf4 Nc6 6 e3
White doesn't want to commit his king's knight to f3 yet, as he would like to
see first what Black intends to do with his light-squared bishop.
84
6... a6!? (Diagram 8)
Diagram B .· Diagram 9
A useful waiting move · Black is comfortable
Black waits for White to show his hand.

7 Bd3
If 7 Be2, then Black places his bishop on the other diagonal with 7 ... Bf5 (the
tricky 7 ... Ne4!?, mixing things up has its followers; if White then tries f2-f3 or
Nxe4 then the knight on gl is short of squares) 8 g4!? (the only way to try and
disrupt Black's harmony) 8 . . Bg6 9 Qb3 e6! (development first!) 10 Qxb7 Na5
.
11 Qc7 Qxc7 12 Bxc7 Bb4, and Black had enough play for the pawn,
Z.Azmaiparashv'ili-V.Akopian, Wijk aan Zee 1 993.
The only other serious option is 7 Rcl . This time 7 . . .Bg4 is called for, e.g. 8
Qb3 Na5 9 Qa4+ b5 and then:
a) The ambitious 10 Nxb5? fails dismally as after 10 . . . axb5 1 1 Bxb5+ Black
can bring his bishop back: 1 1.. .Bd7 12 Bc7 Bxb5 13 Qxb5+ Qd7 and White is
seriously short of compensation. The idea of sacrificing on b5 becomes more
dangerous after Black's light-squared bishop is locked out of the pawn chain
once . . . e7-e6 has been played. In that case the move . . . b7-b5 requires serious
reflection.
b) 10 Qc2 e6 1 1 Bd3 Bd6 12 Nge2 Bxe2 (this exchange is typical with such a
solid pawn structure, where knights are not inferior to bishops if they have
interesting squares to go to; here Black has c4 for instance) 13 Nxe2 Bb4+ 14
Nc3 0-0 15 0·0 ReB with balanced chances, Z.Azmaiparashvili-E.Bareev, Rus
sia vs. Rest ofthe World (rapid) 2002.
7 Bg4 8 Nge2
...
Although 8 f3 is tempting, it's pushing the bishop where it wants to go, e.g.
8 . Bh5 9 Nge2 e6 10 0-0 Be7 11 Rc l 0-0 12 Na4 Nd7 1 3 a3 Bg6 (neutralising
. .
85
White's best bishop) 14 b4 ReS 15 Nc5 Nxc5 16 bxc5 Qa5 17 Bxg6 hxg6 lS Qb3
e5, P.Van der Sterren-A.Shirov, Bundesliga 2000.
S ... e6 9 Qb3
Or here 9 0-0 Be7 10 Rcl ReS 1 1 a3 Nd7 12 Rc2 Bh5, as in A.Vaisser
M.Gurevich, Andorra 199S. 12 . . . Bh5 is notable: a careful move where the
bishop drops back voluntarily to be able to come to g6 at leisure.
9 ... Nb4
I suppose that 9 . . . Na5 10 Qa4+ Nc6 is solid enough, but it's not such a great
idea if you want to try and win as Black! Z.Azmaiparashvili-E.Bacrot, Cap
d'Agde 2003, then continued 11 Rcl Be7 12 Ng3 Bh5 with no particular prob
lems for Black.
10 Bb1 Bxe2 1 1 Nxe2
After 1 1 Kxe2, Black could try l l . . .b5!?. Instead Z.Azmaiparashvili-E.Bareev,
Montecatini Terme 2000, continued with 1 1 . . . Bd6 (see Game 2S).
1 1 ...Qd7 12 0-0 ReS (Diagram 9)
with a comfortable position.
Theoretical?
Not really; it's more important to concentrate on sensible development and
watch the move order.
Statistics
The position after S Nge2 scores a below average 51% for White.
Game 27
D S.Halkias • I.Sokolov
Bled Olympiad 2002
1 d4 d5 2 e4 e6 3 exd5 exd5 4 Ne3 Nf6 5 Bf4 Ne6 6 e3 a6 7 Bd3
Stopping the bishop going to f5, so the bishop heads for g4.
7 ... Bg4 S f3 Bh5 9 Nge2 e6 10 0-0 Be7 11 Re1 0-0 12 Bg3 ReS 13 Nf4 Bg6
14 Na4
After completing development White tries to press on to c5 and b6. Black
naturally covers these squares to make it hard for White to make progress.
14 ... Nd7 15 Bxg6 hxg6 16 Nd3 Nb4
Exchanging one pair of knights limits White's optiQns.
17 Nxb4 Bxb4 18 a3 Be7 19 Qd2 Re4! (Diagram 10)
A slightly annoying move (for White!) that threatens to take the initiative.
20 b4 QaS 21 Nb2 Rxe1 22 Rxe1 ReS 23 Be7?!
The idea is to stop ... a6-a5 softening up the queenside.
23 ... a5!
86
for the initiative
Fighting W h ite is pinned down
A surprise! Black generates play with this move anyway. By provoking b2-b4
on move 19 Black has created some soft spots that he starts to probe in ear
nest .
. �
TIP: It's often a great psychological blow if you can play a
move that your opponent is hell bent on stopping.
24 Nd3
Capturing the a-pawn isn't on: 24 bxa5?! Bxa3 is awkward for White, whereas
24 Bxa5? b6 is downright bad!
24 ...axb4 25 axb4 Qa4 26 h3 Qb5 27 Kf2
Just temporising.
27 ... Ra8 28 Qc3 ReS 29 Qa3 Nf6 30 Ke2?! (Diagram 11)
Correct is 30 Rc3, which would keep Black's initiative in check.
30 ... Bxb4!
A clever way to win a pawn. Halkias is finally punished for occupying the
strange c7 -square with his bishop.
31 Qxb4 Qxb4 32 Nxb4 Ne8 33 Ral Rxc7 34 Ra8 Kf8 35 Rb8
White is somewhat tangled up though not yet lost. Sokolov now demonstrates
excellent technique in reorganising his pieces and making the extra pawn tell.
35 ... g5 36 e4
Halkias could have considered 36 Kd3, and after 36 ... Ke7, only then 37 e4.
36...dxe4 3 7 fxe4 Rc4 3 8 Rxb7 Rxd4 3 9 Kf3 Rc4 40 e5
All the pawns are on the same wing. Despite that, slowly but surely Black im
proves his pieces and winning chances.
87
40 ... Nc7 41 Rb6 Rf4+ 42 Kg3 g6 43 Nd3 Rd4 44 Rb3 Kg7 45 Kf3 Nd5 46
Kf2 g4
The doubled pawn is exchanged leaving White with a second isolated pawn.
47 hxg4 Rxg4 48 Kf3 Rd4 49 g3 Ne7 50 Ra3 Nc6 51 Ke3 Rd5 52 Ke4 g5 53
Rc3 Nxe5!
A neat combination that clarifies the result once and for all.
54 Nxe5 f5+ 55 Kf3 Rxe5 56 ReS Ra5 57 Rc6 Kf6 58 Rb6 Ra2 59 Ke3 g4
0-1
Game 28
D Z.Azmaiparashvili • E.Bareev
Montecatini Terme 2000
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 cxd5 cxd5 5 Bf4 Nc6 6 e3 a6 7 Bd3 Bg4 8
Nge2 e6 9 Qb3 Nb4 10 Bbl Bxe2 (Diagram 12)
Trading o ff the bishop Black attacks
White doesn't have a particularly convenient recapture.

1 1 Kxe2
1 1 Nxe2 looks fine for Black after l l . . Qd7 12 0-0 ReB.
.
1 l...Bd6 12 Bxd6 Qxd6 13 Na4

The greedy 13 a3 Nc6 14 Qxb7?? loses to 14 . . . Rb8 15 QxaG Nxd4+.
13 ... 0-0 14 f4
If 14 Nc5!?, then 14 . . . a5 1 5 a3 Na6 16 Nxb7 Qc7 1 7 Rc1 Qxh2 is wild.
14 ... Rac8 15 Nc5 b6 16 Nd3 Nc6!?
More ambitious than the equalising 16 . . .Nxd3 17 Bxd3 a5.
With 16 . . . Nc6 Bareev offers a pawn for promising piece play. Note how the
88
The Exchange Vari ati on
bishop on b l locks in the queen's rook and thus leaves White disorganised.
17 Qxb6 Rb8 18 Qc5 Qd7 19 Rc1 Rfc8 20 Qa3 e5! (Diagram 13)
Bareev goes for the attack. White's king is poorly defended and his queen is
out of touch on the queenside.
21 dxe5 Ne4 22 Kfl Nb4
Black has great play, but the deficit is two pawns. Does he have enough?
23 Re 1 Nd2+ 24 Kg1 Qg4
Creating further threats. Alternatively, White has enough pawns for the ex
change after 24 . . . Nxb l 25 Raxb l Nc2 26 Qxa6.
25 Nf2
Or if 25 Nxb4, then after 25 . . .Nf3+ 26 Kfl Nxel 27 Bxh7+ Kxh7 28 Rxel Kh8!
Black has the safer king. With that in mind he still has the better game due to
his attacking chances.
25 ...Nf3+ 26 Kfl Nd2+ 27 Kg1 Nf3+ 28 Kfl Nxh2+ 29 Kg1 Nf3+ 30 Kfl
Y,.-Y,.
If Bareev had had more time he would surely have played on with 30 . . . Nd2+
32 Kgl Qg3 with strong pressure.
Su mmary
The plan with ... a7-a6 is perfectly viable and adds a little spice to the game.
Black has good results with this line.
89
Chapter Six
T h e C h a m e l e o n S l av : 4 . . . a6
R Introduction
R White Plays 5 e3
R White Plays 5 c5
R White Plays 5 a4
The Cha meleon Slav: 4 . . . a6
Introduction
Older books hardly cover this idea at all, as it only started to hit the scene 1 5
years ago, and the developments continue a t a rapid rate.
The big idea for Black is to be flexible. The move ... a7-a6 invests a tempo on a
modest pawn move instead of spending the time on routine development. Why
is that? First of all the immediate threat to capture the c-pawn and then hold
onto it with . . . b7-b5 gives White something to think about. Gambiting the c
pawn has been shown to be risky so the main tendency is to handle the game
positionally by meeting this threat. Once White has shown which way he in
tends to proceed Black will organise his development accordingly.
Some of the lines are positional and general understanding will do, whereas
the sharper stuff would require some book knowledge. The most popular re
plies for White are: 5 e3 (defending the c4-pawn), 5 c5 (moving the c-pawn out
of danger and gaining space at the same time) and 5 a4 (which renders
. . . d5xc4 less attractive and has a cramping effect).
For Black, it's not yet clear how he will develop his queen's bishop. He may
simply play . . . e7 -e6, as in a Semi-Slav, or aim for . . . Bf5 or . . . Bg4 as in a Slav. A
typical theme in some lines is for Black to play . . .b7-b5 gaining space on the
queenside. This system has been aptly called the Chameleon in some quarters
because of this ability to change its aspect so rapidly.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 a6
This move enables Black to play .. .b 7-b5. Indeed the threat of ... d5xc4 followed
by . . .b7-b5 requires White to pay immediate attention.
White plays 5 e3
.Diagram 1 Diagram 2
White plays 5 e3 Challenging the e5-knight
91
Starti n g Out: S l av a n d Semi-Slav
5 e3 (Diagram 1)
Black's 4 . . . a6 is met with a fairly cautious reaction by White. The c4-pawn is
now defended by the king's bishop, though its compatriot on c 1 will have to
remain inside the pawn chain for now.
Black now takes the opportunity to gain some queenside space before getting
his bishop into action.
5 ... b5 6 b3
White can try to take the tension out of the central pawns with 6 cxd5 cxd5,
and then use his slight lead in development to get things going on the kingside
with 7 Ne5 e6 8 Bd3 Bb7 9 0-0 Nbd7 10 f4 (consolidating e5 but weakening e4)
10 . . . Be7 1 1 Bd2 0-0 12 Qf3, but Black has adequate play after 12 . . . b4! 13 Na4
Ne4, A.Karpov-V.Hort, Biel 1990.
6 ... Bg4 7 Be2
After 7 h3 Bxf3, White does best to recapture with the pawn as 8 Q:xf3?! e5l 9
dxe5 Bb4 10 Bd2 Bxc3 1 1 Bxc3 Ne4 12 Bb4 bxc4 1 3 bxc4 Qb6 gives Black ex
cellent chances. Then 8 gxf3 Nbd7 9 Bb2 !? (9 f4 is discussed in Game 3 1)
9 . . . dxc4 10 bxc4 e5 1 1 cxb5 axb5 12 dxe5 Nxe5 1 3 f4 was tried in E.Bareev
I. Sokolov, Sarajevo 2003, when 13 . . . Qxd1 + 14 Kxd1 Ned7 was later pointed
out by I. Sokolov as the way to equalise.
7 ... e6 8 0-0 Nbd7 9 h3 Bh5 10 Bb2 Bd6
The best square as 10 . . . Be7 has been shown to be a shade too passive.
11 Ne5 Bxe2 12 Nxe2 Qc7 13 cxd5 cxd5 14 Rei Qb8 (Diagram 2)
If 14 . . . Qb7?! , then 15 Qc2 followed by invading on the c-file is unpleasant.
By putting the queen on b8, Black forces White to make a decision about the
knight on e5.
Theoretical?
Although the Slav with ... a7-a6 has onlyrecently become popular, some lines
have already been well investigated. The main line can be considered to be 5
e3, which is becoming more and more theoretical these days.
Statistics
Of 1568 games played following 5 e3, almost all were played in the last 1 5
years and its popularity i s still increasing. White has achieved 55% overall,
but in the key main line (5 . . . b5 6 b3 Bg4 7 Be2 e6 8 h3 Bh5 9 0-0 Nbd7 10 Bb2
Bd6) an even better 59%, with draws as high as 60%.
Game 29
D I.Morovic Fernandez • R.Leitao
Santos 2004
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 e3 a6 5 Nf3 b5 6 b3 Bg4 7 Be2 e6 8 0-0 Nbd7 9
h3 Bh5 10 Bb2 Bd6 11 Ne5 Bxe2 12 Nxe2 Qc7 1 3 cxd5 cxd5 14 Rc1 Qb8
92
The C hameleon S l av : 4 . . . a6
15 Nxd7 (Diagram 3)
Diagram 3 Diagram 4
How to recapture? Blasting open the centre
Instead 15 f4 is risky as the hole on e4 is at least as important as the firm

support of the e5-point, e.g. 15 . . . 0-0 16 Rc6 Rc8 17 Qc2 Rxc6 18 Qxc6 Ra7 19
Rc1 Nb6 and Black had comfortable equality and can even play for more due
to the chronic weakness of e4, B.Avrukh-R.Dautov, Istanbul Olympiad 2000.
Trying to retain the knights with 15 Nc6 Qb6 16 Qd2, is met by 16 ... b4! keep
ing White out, e.g. 17 Rc2 0-0 18 Ne5 Rfc8 19 Rfc1 Qb7 with balanced chances,
I.Morovic Fernandez-P.Charbonneau, Buenos Aires 2003.
15 ... Nxd7
It looks odd to capture with the king, but Black can just about get away with
it, e.g. 15 . . . Kxd7 16 f3 Qb7 17 Nf4 Bxf4 18 exf4 Nh5 19 f5 exf5 20 Qd2 f4 21
Ba3 b4! (stopping any attacking ideas with Qb4) 22 Bxb4 Rhe8 with equality,
A.Khalifman-V.Malakhov, Russian Team Championship 2004.
16 e4!
It's necessary to smash open the position before Black is fully organised.
16 ... dxe4 17 d5! (Diagram 4)
Blasting open the centre.
17 ... 0-0 18 dxe6 Nc5 19 Nf4! Ra7
The inferior 19 .. .fxe6 20 Qg4 e5 2 1 Ne6 Nxe6 22 Qxe6+ Kh8 23 Rc6 left Black
under pressure in K.Sasikiran-K.Sakaev, Copenhagen 2003.
20 Nh5
Otherwise 20 Bd4 Bxf4 21 Bxc5 Bxc1 22 Bxa7 Qxa7 23 exf7+ Rxf7 24 Qxcl led
to a draw in Z.Gyimesi-S.Movsesian, Croatian Team Championship 2004.
20 ...Nxe6 21 Nf6+! gxf6 22 Qg4+ Ng5 23 Bxf6 h6 24 Rc6 Bh2+
93
Starti n g O u t : Slav and Semi-Slav
Only this move is new! Instead 24 . . . Be5 25 h4 Bh2+ 26 Kh1 Qf4 27 Qh5 Nh7
28 Bd4 left Black on the brink of defeat in P.Acs-S.Movsesian, FIDE World
Championship, Tripoli 2004.
25 Kh1 Be5 26 h4 Bxf6 27 Rxf6 Qc8 28 Qg3 Qb8 29 Qg4 'h-'h
This game illustrates the state of play in the key variation after 5 e3, which
shows just how theoretical it's become.
Game 30
D E.Mochalov • S.Berezjuk
Belarus Championship, Minsk 1 993
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 e3 Nf6 4 Nc3 a6 5 Nf3 b5 6 b3 Bg4 7 Be2 Nbd7 8 h3 Bh5
9 0-0 e6 10 Bb2 Be7 (Diagram 5)
Diagram 5 Diagram 6
Black plays passively The moment of truth
Too passive, whereas the bishop placed on the more dynamic d6 (see the previ
ous game) helps cover the e5-square.
11 Ne5 Bxe2 12 Qxe2!?
This recapture enhances White's chances of obtaining an attack. If the bishop
were on d6 then this active move wouldn't be possible and White would have
to recapture with the knight, as in Game 29. Of course 12 Nxe2 is still possible
here, e.g. 12 . . . Nxe5 13 dxe5 Nd7 14 cxd5 cxd5 15 Rc 1 ReS 16 Nd4 Bc5 17 f4 0-0
18 Qg4 with pressure for White, A.Dreev-Zhu Chen, Dubai (rapid) 2002.
· .
12 ...Nxe5 13 dxe5 Nd7 14 Rfdl Bc5

The na'ive 14 . . . Nxe5? is refuted by 15 cxd5 cxd5 16 Nxd5.
15 Qg4 Qe7
The desirable 15 ... 0-0 goes down to 16 cxd5 cxd5 17 Nxd5 exd5 18 Rxd5.
16 cxd5 cxd5 17 Rac1
94
The Chameleon Slav: 4 . . a6
.
17 Qxg7 0-0-0 is almost certainly good for White, but allowing Black counter
play down the g-file would give him some practical chances.
17 ... 0-0 (Diagram 6)
White now finds a way to break through.
18 Nxd5! exd5 19 Rxd5 Rfd8
Nor does 19 . .£5 solve Black's problems, e.g. 20 exf6 Nxf6 21 Bxf6 Qxf6 22
.
Rcxc5 Qxf2+ 23 Kh2 Qxe3, when material is equal but White's attack isn't
over yet: 24 Rc7 g6 25 Rxh7! and White wins.
20 e6! fxe6 21 Bxg7! Qxg7 22 Rg5
Black's king is now too open to resist for long.
22 ...Bf8 23 Qxe6+ Kh8 24 Rxg7 Bxg7 25 Rc7 Nf6 26 g4 h6 27 h4 Rd1 + 28
Kg2 Rd2 29 Rxg7! Kxg7 30 Qe7+ Kg8
Or here 30 . . . Kg6 loses the knight under worse circumstances after 3 1 h5+ Kg5
32 Qg7+ Kh4 33 Qxf6+.
31 Qxf6 Rf8 32 Qg6+ Kh8 33 Qxh6+ Kg8 34 Qg6+ Kh8 35 Kg3 Rdxf2 36
Qh6+ Kg8 37 Qg5+ Kh7 38 Qh5+ Kg8 39 Qg6+ Kh8 40 Qh5+ Kg8 41 Qd5+
Kh8 42 h5 Rxa2 43 Qe5+ 1-0
43 . . . Kg8 44 h6 Rf7 (or 44 . . . Kf7 45 h7) 45 Qe8+ and Black loses at least a rook.
Game 31
D F.Vallejo Pons • I.Sokolov
Mainz 2003
1 Nf3 d5 2 d4 Nf6 3 c4 c6 4 Nc3 a6 5 e3 b5 6 b3 Bg4 7 h3 Bxf3 8 gxf3
Nbd7 9 f4 (Diagram 7)
Diagram 7
Diagram 8
Black holds firm
White stops . . . e7-e5
The most popular move, cutting out the freeing ... e7 -e5.
95
Starti n g Out: Slav and Sem i-Slav
9 ... e6
Black �an also open the game (despite his opponent's bishops!) with 9 ... bxc4 10
bxc4 dxc4 11 Bxc4 e6 12 Bd2. This was P.Van der Sterren-A.Shirov, Biel 1 993,
when I suggest 12 ... Nb6! 13 Be2 c5 to obtain full equality. White has the bish
ops but Black will obtain reasonable development and the better structure.
10 c5 Ne4!?
A double-edged way of trying to get some activity. Instead 10 . . . g6 11 Bb2 Bg7
12 Qc2 NgS! 13 Bd3 Ne7 is another approach, where Black basically tries to
keep everything blocked up and defies White to take risks to break through.
Not everyone wants to just wait and hope nothing horrible will happen, so the
text is more interesting!
1 1 Nxe4 dxe4 12 Bg2 f5 13 f3 N£6!?
A previous encounter between the same two players continued 13 . . . exf3 14
Bxf3 ReS 15 Qe2 Nf6 16 Bd2 Nd5 17 e4 leading to wild complications,
F.Vallejo Pons-I. Sokolov, Selfoss 2003.
14 fxe4 fxe4 15 Qc2 Qd5 (Diagram 8)
White has the bishop pair, but Black's queen on the central d5 outpost holds
the fort.
16 a4 b4 17 Bd2 g5?!
A lot more fun than the routine 17 . . . a5, but not as sound.
18 Rfl Rg8 19 fxg5 Rxg5 20 Bxb4
White finally gets to take this pawn. However, in such a complex position
piece activity and king safety are more important than the odd pawn or two.
20 ... Be7 21 Ba5?
The exchange sacrifice 21 Rxf6! Bxf6 22 Bxe4 is more to the point, taking con
trol of the central arena, as after 22 . . . Qd 7 23 0-0-0 White must be better: his
king is safer and his light square domination is worth more than the exchange.
2 1 . .. Rg3 22 0-0-0 Rxe3 23 Kb2 Rb8 24 Bb6 Kd7 25 Ka2 Rg8 26 Rb 1
26 Rfe1? loses to 26 . . . Rxg2 ! .
26 ... Rgg3 27 Rfc1
If 27 Rfd1, then 27 . . . Rc3 is very awkward.
27 ... Qxd4 28 Bfl Nd5
White's efforts to protect the neighbourhood of his king has led to Black taking
control of the rest of the board.
29 Ba5 B£6 30 Bc4 Ref3 31 Rfl
31 Rd1 would lose more slowly but j ust as surely after 3 1 . . .Qxc5.
3 1...Ne3 32 Rxf3 Nxc2 33 Rxg3 Qf2
Moving in for the kill.
34 Rfl Nb4+ 35 Ka3 Bb2+ 36 Kxb4 Qd2+ 0-1
96
The Chameleon S l av: 4 a6
. . .
White plays 5 cS
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 a6 5 c5 (Diagram 9)
White plays 5 c5 Black i s OK
White gains space, cuts out . . . d5xc4 and hopes to make . . . b7-b5 less attractive.
Against this Black should prepare his retaliation with a timely ... e7-e5, ... b7-
b6 or a combination of both.
5 ... Nbd7
Solid development with 5 .. . Bf5 is also respectable, but I prefer the more dy
namic text move.
6 Bf4
Otherwise . . . e7-e5 comes very quickly.
6 ...Nh5
Hitting the bishop before White can secure its place on the b8-h2 diagonal
with h2-h3 .
7 e3
Following 7 Bd2, Black most often retreats with 7 . . . Nhf6 (for those with posi
tive intentions the best way to avoid a repetition is 7 . . . g6).
If, however, 7 Bg5 h6 8 Bd2, Black has to take into account the slight loosen
ing of his pawn structure, e.g. one of the points of provoking . . . h7-h6 can be
seen after 8 . . . Nhf6 9 Qc2 e5?! 10 dxe5 Ng4 11 e6! and the weakness of the g6-
square leads to some difficulties for Black.
Instead of 8 ... Nhf6, I suggest 8 . .. Qc7!? 9 e4 dxe4 10 Nxe4 Ndf6 11 Nc3 Be6 12
Ne5 Rd8 and, although White has more space, Black has an excellent square
on d5 to help keep his defences firm.
97
Starting Out: S l av a n d Semi-Slav
7 ... g6 8 Bd3 Bg7 9 0-0 0-0 10 h3 Nxf4

Capturing the bishop before it withdraws to h2.
1 1 exf4 Qc7
With 1 1 . . .b6 Black hopes to put pressure on the dark squares, but after 12
cxb6 Qxb6 13 Na4 Qa7 14 Rc 1! Bxd4 15 Bxg6! White had a strong initiative in
V.Topalov-Ki.Georgiev, Sarajevo 2001.
12 g3 b6 13 cxb6 Nxb6 (Diagram 10)
Black wins a tempo against the loose h3-pawn and has adequate play after . . .
1 4 Kg2 c5!
S.Halkias-S.Volkov, Panormo (rapid) 2002 ..
Strategy
White's space advantage can be used for play on tust about any front. Black
needs to hit back with either . . . e7-e5 or . . .b7-b6 before White can consolidate.
Theoretical?
'
The large number of games being played with 5 c5 is starting to make it that
way, despite it being a largely positional choice.
Statistics
With 5 c5 White has scored 57% which is fairly good, but it's a dangerous
weapon in the hands of some top grandmasters, who have scored more heavily
with White. Many of the 906 games were played in recent years, as 5 c5 only
really came to be used regularly ten years ago and particularly in the last five.
Game 32
D M.Krasenkow • S.Movsesian
Polanica Zdroj 2000
1 Nf3 Nf6 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 d5 4 d4 a6 5 c5 Nbd7 6 Bf4 Nh5 7 Bd2 Nhf6 8 b4
White finds a way to avoid repeating with Bf4. He gains space on the queen
side, but it's important to remember that the centre is more important!
8 ... g6 9 Qc 1 h6
To prevent White playing his bishop to h6.
10 e3 Bg7 1 1 Bd3 0-0 12 0-0 e5! (Diagram 1 1)
The logical counter-punch against White's centre.
1 3 Nxe5
After 13 dxe5 Ng4 14 e6 fxe6 15 Bxg6 Rxf3! Black obtains a strong attack, as
after 16 gxf3 Nge5 1 7 Bc2 Nxf3+ 18 Kg2 Qf6, White's position is a shambles.
1 3 ... Nxe5 14 dxe5 Ng4 1 5 Na4
Instead 15 f4 is strongly met by 15 . . . d4! .
98
The Chameleon Slav: 4 . . . a6
A thematic break Black has all the chances
15 ... Qh4 16 h3 Nxe5 1 7 Be2 (Diagram 12) 17 ... Bxh3!

A powerful sacrifice. White's pieces can't easily come to the aid of their de
nuded king.
18 gxh3 Qxh3 19 f4
Hoping that Black has nothing better than a draw. Instead 19 Qd l ? allows
mate with 19 . . . Nf3+! 20 Bxf3 Be5 21 Re1 Bh2+ 22 Kh1 Bg3+ 23 Kg1 Qh2+ 24
Kf1 Qxf2. Otherwise 19 Bc3 hopes to counter Black's control of the a1-h8 di- .
agonal, but after 19 . . . Rae8! 20 Qd1 Nf3+! (again!) 21 Bxf3 Re5! 22 Bg4 Rg5 23
f3 f5, Black's attack crashes through.
19 ... Qg3+ 20 Kh1 d4! 2 1 Qe1
There is nothing better: 2 1 fxe5 Bxe5 22 Rf4 dxe3 23 Bxe3 Rae8, or 21 exd4
Qh3+ 22 Kg1 Ng4 23 Bxg4 Bxd4+ 24 Rf2 Qxg4+, and finally 2 i Nb2 Qh3+ 22
Kg1 Ng4 23 Bxg4 Qxg4+ 24 Kf2 Bf6 all leave Black with a winning attack.
21...Qh3+ 22 Kg1 dxe3 23 Bc3 Ng4 24 Bxg4 Qxg4+ 25 Kh2 Rfe8
Black has excellent compensation with three pawns and White's king so open;
he can even take his time to s1:1pport his advanced e-pawn.
26 Qg3 Qf5 27 Bxg7 Kxg7 28 Nb6 Rad8 29 Rae1 Rd2+ 30 Kgl Re4 31 a3
Qf6 32 Nc8 Qd4 33 Rf3
After 33 Nd6, Black can continue in flamboyant style with 33 . . . e2+ 34 R£2 Rd1 !
which virtually forces a winning rook ending, e.g. 3 5 Nf5+ Kh7 3 6 Nxd4 Rxe1 +
37 Kh2 Rh1 + 38 Kxh1 e 1Q+ 39 Qg1 Qxg1 + 40 Kxg1 Rxd4.
33 ... e2+?
Correct was 33 . . . Rd1 34 Rxd1 Qxd1 + 35 Rf1 e2 with an easy win.
34 Kg2?
99
Start i n g O u t : S l av a n d Semi-Slav
Missing his chance! Instead 34 Qf2! would hold.

34 ... Rd1 35 Nd6 Qa1! 0-1
Now after 36 Nxe4 Rxe 1 37 Qf2, Black wins easily with 37 . . . Rg1 + 38 Qxg1
Qxg1 + 39 Kxg1 e 1Q+.
Game 33
0 V.Topalov • Ki.Georgiev
Sarajevo 2001
1 Nf3 Nf6 2 c4 c6 3 d4 d5 4 Nc3 a6 5 c5 Nbd7 6 Bf4 Nh5 7 e3 g6 8 Bd3
Bg7 9 0-0 0-0 10 h3 Nxf4 11 exf4 b6 (Diagram 13)
Diagram 13 D iagram 14
Gnawing a t the queenside Black's king is exposed
For the alternative 1 1 . . . Qc7, see the introductory notes.

12 cxb6 Qxb6 13 Na4 Qa7?!
Instead 13 . . . Qc7! seems adequate for Black:
a) If 14 g3, simply 14 . . . Nb6 forces the exchange of knights as Black is also hit
ting the h3-pawn.
b) Mter 14 f5 e5 15 fxe6 fxe6 16 Ng5 Qd6 1 7 Qg4 Nf6 18 Qh4 Rb8, Black ob
tained counterplay in C.Pritchett-T.Engqvist, Gausdal 1993.
c) Following 14 Qd2 Bh6 15 g3, as in Z.Gyimesi-B.Avrukh, Andorra 2001, I
suggest 15 . . . f6! (as an improvement on the slower 15 . . . Rb8), e.g. 16 Qe2 e5! 1 7
fxe5 fxe5 18 dxe5 Rxf3! 19 Qxf3 Nxe5 20 Qe2 Bxli3 2 1 Rfe1 Bg7 with advan
tage to Black.
14 Rc1 Bxd4 15 Bxg6!
The following complications leave Black's king very exposed.
15 ... Bxf2+ 16 Rxf2 hxg6 17 Nd4 Bb7 18 f5 (Diagram 14) 18 ... Qb8?!
Too sluggish. Instead 18 ... c5 is better: 19 fxg6 fxg6 20 Qg4 cxd4 2 1 Qxg6+ Kh8
1 00
.
22 Qh6t Kg8 23 Qe6+ Kh8 24 Qxd7!? (White could still take a draw) 24 . . Rxf2
25 Kxf2 Rf8+ is unclear.
19 fxg6 fxg6 20 Qg4 Rxf2 2 1 Qxg6+ Kh8 22 Qh6+ Kg8 23 Qg6+ Kh8 24
Qh5+ Kg8 25 Qg5+ Kf7 26 Qh5+ Kg8 27 Qg4+ Kf7 28 Kxf2 Qd6 29 Nf5
Qg6 30 Qxg6+?!
Apparently 30 Re l ! would keep an edge in the ending.
30 ... Kxg6 31 g4 Kf6?!
It was better to free up the aS-square for the bishop with 3 l . . .Rf8 32 Rel e5 33
Kg3 c5, leading to a double-edged struggle.
32 Kg3 a5 33 h4 e6 34 Nd6 Ba6 35 Rxc6 Ne5 36 Rb6?!
White would retain winning chances with the flashy 36 Ne8+! Rxe8 (or
36 . . . Kf7 37 Rxe6! Kxe6 38 Nc7+) 37 Rxa6.
36 ... Nd7 37 Rc6 1;2-1;2
White plays 5 a4
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 a6 5 a4 (Diagram 15)
Diagram 15
Diagram 16
White has hanging pawns
W h ite plays 5 a4
Another way for White to gain space. The other point is that it limits Black's
options on the queenside. If, for instance, Black were now to play 5 . . . dxc4, then
after 6 e4 Black cannot get away with 6 . . .b5(?) due to 7 axb5 cxb5 8 e5 Nd5 9
Nxb5 with advantage to White. Black has to settle for a more positional game
and play is often akin to various other Queen's Gambits or Semi-Slav varia
tions, except that White has the extra move a2-a4 and Black ... a7-a6.
5 ... e6 6 e3
The slow 6 a5 is met by central action 6 .. . c5!, when the continuation 7 cxd5
1 01
Starti n g Out: Slav a n d Semi-Slav
Nxd5 8 Ne5 Nc6 9 Nxc6 bxc6 10 e3 cxd4 1 1 Qxd4 c5 12 Qd1 Be7 was fine for
Black in Z.Azmaiparashvili-V. Epishin, Elenite 1994.
Another possibility is 6 Bg5 a5!? (6 ... Nbd7 is analogous to the Queen's Gambit
Declined, but the text is simplest) 7 e3 Be7 8 Bd3 Na6! 9 Rc1 Nb4 10 Bb1 b6
1 1 b3 Ba6, O .Gladyszev-E.Prie, Creon 2003, and Black has solved the problem
of how to develop his queen's bishop effectively.
6 ... c5
This is reminiscent of a position from the Semi-Tarrasch Defence where the a
pawns wouldn't have moved. There a typical plan for White is to play dxc5, a2-
a3 and b2-b4. This is not available here.
7 Be2 Nc6
Instead 7 . . . dxc4 8 Bxc4 Be7 9 0-0 0-0 gives Black a typical Queen's Gambit
Accepted position. There are a variety of plausible pawn structures depending
on taste, another one being a typical isolated queen's pawn position after
7 . . . cxd4 8 exd4 dxc4.
8 0-0 Be7 9 b3 0-0 10 Bb2 cxd4 1 1 exd4 Bd7 1 2 Ne5 dxc4 1 3 bxc4 Be8
(Diagram 16)
P.Kiriakov-A.Alavkin, Russian Championship 2002.
White has 'hanging pawns' which is the name given to White's central couplet.
These pawns have a positive side: space, limiting Black's minor pieces and the
potential to advance at an awkward moment. However, they also have a
downside: they can only be defended by pieces not pawns and thus require
constant attention. Play is complex and gives chances for both sides.
Theoretical?
Much less so than 5 .e3 or 5 c5. Rather than requiring loads of theory it's more
useful to have general knowledge about similar queen's pawn openings.
Statistics
With 680 games 5 a4 is another popular line against the Chameleon. White
scores 58% overall, but a lesser 56% against the recommended 5 . . . e6.
Game 34
D M.Gagunashvili • A.Morozevich
Moscow 2003
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 a6 5 a4 e6 6 Bg5 a5 7 e3 Be7 8 Bd3 (Dia-
·
gram 17) 8 . .Nbd7?!

.
This move doesn't fit in that well with the early ... a6-a5. Instead Black should
p lay 8 . . Na6 (or 8 .. 0-0 and 9. . Na6) as mentioned in the introductory notes.
. .
9 0-0 0-0 10 Qe2 dxc4

Mter 10 ... b6 1 1 cxd5 exd5 12 e4 dxe4 13 Nxe4 Bb7 14 Ne5 White has pressure,
as pointed out by Gagunashvili.
1 02
.
11 Bxc4 Nd5 12 Bf4!?

Trying to keep more tension than after the obvious exchange of bishops.
12 ... Nxf4 13 exf4 Nb6 14 Bb3 Nd5 15 g3 (Diagram 18)
In return for the doubled pawns White has a bind that leaves Black with pas
sive pieces. Black decides on a plan without . . . b7-b6 which Morozevich must
have adjudged to be too weakening.
White. has a bind
. . . Nbd7 o r . Na6 ?
..
15 ...f5!? 16 Rfe1 Bf6 17 Rad1 Bd7 1S Ne5 ReS 19 Na2

With Black not going anywhere Gagunashvili decides to bring this knight to
d3 where it bears down on c5 and e5.
19 ... Re7 20 Nc1 BeS 21 Ncd3 h6?!
This weakens the b l-h7 diagonal. In passive positions the potential weakening
of even minor pawn moves shouldn't be underestimated.
22 h4 Kh7 23 Nc5 b6 24 Ncd3 ReS 25 h5 Rcc7 26 Bc2
White is ready to switch to. attacking mode with g3-g4. Black tries to mix
things in the centre but it's too late to make any real difference.
26 ... c5 27 dxc5 bxc5 2S g4 c4 29 Nc1 KgS 30 gxf5 Qc8 3 1 fxe6 Nxf4 32
Qg4 Nxe6 33 Bf5 Rc5 34 Rd6 Qc7
Or if 34 . . . Bxe5, then 35 Bxe6+ Rxe6 36 Qxe6+ Qxe6 37 Rxe6 and wins.
35 Bxe6+ Kf8 36 Qd4 Rxe5 37 Rxe5 Bxh5 3S Rf5 Rf7 39 Qd5 Bg6 40 QaS+
1-0
Game 35
0 S.Skembris • V.Georgiev
Saint Vincent 2003
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 a6 5 e 3 e6 6 a4 c5 7 Be2
103
Start i n g Out: Slav a n d Semi-Slav
By first including 7 cxd5 exd5, and only now playing 8 Be2, Black's d-pawn is
on the verge of becoming isolated. Isolated pawns can become weaknesses if
there aren't compensating factors. However, after 8 . . . Nc6 9 0-0 Bd6 10 b 3 cxd4
11 Nxd4 Qc7 12 Nf3 Be6, Black's lively pieces compensate for the isolani,
E.Grivas-G.Giorgadze, Ankara 1 995.
7 ...Nc6 8 0-0 (Diagram 1 9)
Diagram 19
Diagram 20
Chances are balanced
A fluid centre
8 . Bd6
. .
One of the features of this line is the wide choice for both sides as to the possi
ble central pawn structure. Indeed Black can also release the tension, e.g.
8 ... cxd4 9 exd4 Be7 10 b3 0-0 11 Be3 Bd7 12 Ne5 dxc4 13 bxc4 Be8, as in
I. Efimov-R.Kasimdzhanov, Istanbul Olympiad 2000, led to another example of
'hanging pawns' versus a solid defence. White is temporarily more active but
his pawns may become vulnerable.
9 b3 0-0 10 Ba3 b6 1 1 Qd3 Bb7 12 Rfd1 cxd4 13 Bxd6 Qxd6 14 Nxd4 dxc4
15 bxc4
15 Qxc4?? would be rather unfortunate after 15 . . . Ne5.
15 ... Rad8 (Diagram 20)
Black has comfortable development. The isolated c- and b-pawns are equally
weak, so chances are about equal.
16 Qb 1 Qc5?!
1 6 . . . Qc7! is more solid.
17 a5!
Instigating interesting complications.
1 7 ... Nxa5 18 Na4 Qg5 19 g3 e5?
Too optimistic. Instead 19 . . . b5 should equalise.
1 04
20 h4!
The players are competing vigorously for the initiative.
20... Qg6 21 Nf5 Rxdl+ 22 Bxd1 ReS 23 Nd6
Skembris points out that he could have obtained an advantage with 23 h5!
Nxh5 24 Nxb6, when Black's pieces lack harmony, e.g. 24 ... Nc6 (24 ... Nb3?
loses nicely to 25 Nd5! Bxd5 26 cxd5 Nxa1 27 Ne7+! as Black's back rank is
exposed) 25 Nd5 Bc8 26 Nh4 Qg5 27 Qb6 and White is close to winning.
23 ... Qxb1 24 Rxb1 Rd8 25 Nxb7
If 25 Rxb6?, then 25 . . . Nxc4! .
25 ... Nxb7 26 Nxb6 Nc5 27 Na4 Nfe4
Material is equal, but there is still plenty of life in the position.
28 Bc2 Kf8
Note how Vladimir Georgiev gradually improves his pieces, especially his king
who comes to the centre to play an active role in the ending.
29 Bxe4 Nxe4 30 c5
The c-pawn is not that dangerous. Black's king is in the vicinity and the white
knight is far from the centre and kingside.
30 ... Ke7 31 Rb7+ Ke6 32 c6?
White could still hold with 32 g4!, as 32 .. . Rd1 + 33 Kg2 Rd2 can be met by 34
Rb6+ Ke7! (but not 34 . . . Kd5? which falls for a trick: 35 Nc3+! Nxc3 36 Rd6+)
35 Rb7+ Ke6 36 Rb6+.
32 ... Rd1+ 33 Kg2 Rd2 34 Rb4 Nxf2 35 c7 Nd3+ 36 Kfl Rf2+ 37 Kg1 Rc2
38 Rb7 Kd6
White's one redeeming asset (his c-pawn) is lost. Now Black finishes off the
game using fine technique.
39 c8Q Rxc8 40 Rxf7 Rc7 41 Rf8 Kd5 42 Kg2 Ke4 43 h5 Kxe3 44 h6 gxh6
45 Rf6 Rc2+ 46 Kg1 Ne1 0-1
Su mmary
The Chameleon or . . . a6-Slav is a new and exciting development. Much of the
theory is still developing so there is plenty of scope for individual interpreta
tion. Black is generally quite solid and has a choice of how to react to each
White approach. The danger for him, however, is not finding a good plan and
ending up with a passive game.
White can probably count on the tiniest of edges, but finds it hard to create a
chink in Black's armour. Statistically speaking White's chances are not really
better here than in the main lines of the Slav.
1 05
Chapter Seven
T h e S l av with . . . g 7- g 6
B Introdu ction
B The Schlechter System
B Com bining . . . a7-a6 with . . . g7-g6

The Slav with . . . g7-g6
Introduction
In some lines Black opts to fianchetto his king's bishop at an early stage. Here
we shall look at this idea in various circumstances, but the actual move order
is less important than the concept. The Schlechter System is really a hybrid
between the Slav and the Griinfeld, from where it can also arise.
Black aims to avoid mainstream theory and yet obtain a solid position. The
problem is that the line can be somewhat passive with limited opportunities
for counterplay.
The Schlechter System

This generally occurs via a Slav Defence where White plays an early Nc3 fol
lowed by e3 (hoping to steer the game into the Semi-Slav) and Black wants to
avoid being so compliant. So Black plays 4 . . . g6 rather than the most popular
4. . . e6.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3!?
Mter 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3, both . . . Bf5 and . . . Bg4 have sound reputations and there
is less incentive to play 4 . . . g6, but if Black really wants to go ahead with 4 . . . g6
then this will generally transpose to the main line after 5 Nc3 Bg7 etc.
An early deviation for White arises when, after 3 e3 Nf6 4 Bd3 g6 5 Nc3 Bg7,
White opts for 6 Nge2!? (rather than the standard 6 Nf3 which transposes to
the main game).
Then 6 . . . 0-0 7 0-0 dxc4 (7 . . . Nbd7 is less precise, as after 8 cxd5 cxd5 the knight
would really prefer to be on c6; the further 9 Qb3 Nb6 10 a4 gave White an
edge in L.Oll-R.Kuczynski, Manila Olympiad 1992) 8 Bxc4 Nbd7 9 e4 e5 (or
9 . . .b5!? 10 Bd3 e5) 10 d5 occurred in S.Yuferov-V.Kuporosov, Moscow 1999,
when 10 . . . cxd5 11 exd5 Ne8 would give Black an interesting game as his
knight heads for d6.
3 ... Nf6 4 e3
Black can also meet 4 Nf3 with 4 . . . g6, but White then has some promising op
tions as his dark-squared bishop can be developed outside of the pawn chain.
Mter 4 . . . g6:
a) ECO recommends 5 cxd5 cxd5 6 Bf4 Bg7 7 e3 0-0 8 h3 Nc6 9 Be2 Ne4 10
Rc1 Bf5 11 Qb 3 Nxc3 12 Rxc3 Qd7, K. Spraggett-A.Lein, Montreal 1986, as of
fering an edge to White, but this doesn't look like much to me.
b) Instead White can try 5 Bg5!?, e.g. 5 . . . Ne4 6 Bh4 Bg7 (grabbing the pawn
with 6 . . . Nxc3 7 bxc3 dxc4!? 8 e4 b5 is more combative) 7 e3 0-0 8 Bd3 Nxc3 9
bxc3 Nd7 10 0-0 Nf6 1 1 cxd5 cxd5 12 c4 offering White an edge, Zsu.Polgar
V.Korchnoi, Brussels 1 985.
c) My personal preference is to combine the two ideas: 5 cxd5 cxd5 6 Bg5! Bg7
1 07
Starti ng Out: Slav a n d Semi-Slav
and then play 7 Qb3 to force 7 . . . e6 out of Black, e.g. 8 e3 0-0 9 Bd3 Nc6 10 0-0
h6 1 1 Bxf6 Bxf6 12 Rfc1 Qe7 13 a3 Rd8 14 Rc2, with a small pull in J.Piket
G.Kamsky, Monaco (blindfold) 1985.
4 g6 (Diagram 1)
...
Diagram 1 Diagram 2
The Schlechter System A Slav-Gr, nfeld hybrid
5 Nf3 Bg7
This variation is often considered to be a Griinfeld, but actually arises more
often from the Slav move order.
6 Be2
Of the alternatives, 6 cxd5 cxd5 7 Bb5+ leads to exchanges where Black has to .
be on his toes: 7 . . . Bd7 8 Qb3 Bxb5 9 Qxb5+ Qd7 10 Ne5 Qxb5 1 1 Nxb5 Na6 12
b3 Ne4 1 3 Ba3 f6 14 Nd3 Kd7! and Black's king proved to be well placed in
B.Kurajica-S.Djuric, Yugoslav Championship 1984.
The other bishop development, 6 Bd3, is sometimes preferred to the text move.
This transposes to the main line if Black plays a quick . . . d5xc4. Instead 6 . . . 0-0
7 0-0 Bg4 8 h3 Bxf3 9 Qxf3 e6 10 Rd1 Nbd7 leads us to Diagram 2.
It's not that exciting for Black (see Korchnoi-Yusupov below), but it's rock
solid and White's bishop p air are not easy to get going. The further 1 1 b3 ReS
12 Bf1 a6 13 Bd2 Qe7, as in Y. Seirawan-O.Panno, Mar del Plata 1982, doesn't
leave Black under that much pressure, despite him having little counterplay
' .
in sight.
6 0-0 7 0-0 (Diagram 3)
...
Now Black has to decide how to get his queenside activated.

7 dxc4
...
The sharpest idea, but perhaps not the best. Some alternatives which give a
rough idea of how play may continue ifBlack retains the tension:
1 08
a) 7 ... Bg4 8 cxd5 cxd5 9 Qb3 b6 10 h3 Bxf3 11 Bxf3 e6, I.Stohl-P.Haba, Buda
pest 1993, allows White a pull. Black is likely to be a little sensitive on his
queenside light squares.
Diagram 3 Diagram 4
Decision time for Black A risky pawn offer
b) Mter 7 . . . Nbd7 8 cxd5 cxd5 9 Qb3 e6 10 Bd2 Ne4 1 1 Rfc1, White has a slight
lead in development but it's probably nothing significant, Y.Zimmerman
S.Farago, Budapest 1 999.
c) Solid is 7 ... Be6 8 cxd5 cxd5 9 Qb3 Qb6 10 Qxb6 axb6, when the doubled b
pawns are compensated for by the potential activity on the a- and c-files.
d) 7 . . . a6 is perhaps Black's most dynamic try, with ideas of playing for ... b7-b5
(see the next section).
8 Bxc4. Bg4 9 h3 Bxf3 10 Qxf3 Nbd7 1 1 Rd1 e5 12 d5 e4!? (Diagram 4)
An interesting pawn sacrifice for some activity. However, this probably isn't
quite enough against precise play.
Theoretical?
Much less so than 4 . . . e6. Over the years 4 ... g6 has been used by people who
just want to play a solid game with natural moves. The plus side is that Black
gets out of the opening in one piece, even if he doesn't know that much theory.
The downside is that White tends to keep a slight pull even if he doesn't know
a great deal either!
Statistics
Not great for Black. Over 2965 games White manages 63% with 40% draws.
Smyslov was, at one time, Black's greatest practitioner, but even he failed to
get near to 50% as Black. The main line with 7 . . . dxc4 8 Bxc4 Bg4 scores a con
vincing 70% for White.
1 09
Startin g Out: Slav and Sem i-Slav
Game 36 ·
D E.Bareev • V.Kramnik
Novgorod 1 994
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 e3 g6 5 Nf3 Bg7 6 Be2 0-0 7 0-0 dxc4 8 Bxc4
Bg4 9 h3 Bxf3 10 Qxf3 Nbd7 11 Rd1 e5 12 d5 e4
Kramnik goes for the sharp pawn sacrifice variation.
13 Nxe4 Nxe4 14 Qxe4 Nb6 15 Bb3 cxd5 16 Bxd5 Nxd5 1 7 Rxd5 Qb6
(Diagram 5)
White needs to develop How should Black defend?
Now White has to find a way to solve the problem of completing his develop
ment.
18 Qd3!? Rad8 19 e4!
This gives White the option of recapturing on d5 with the pawn, thus creating
a passed pawn, as well as preparing his bishop's entry into the game.
�
TIP: When a pawn up but under pressure, the best approach is
often to give the material back for the i nitiative.
19 ... Bd4
If instead 19 . . . Bxb2, then 20 Rb l Rxd5 2 1 exd5 Qd4 also favours White.
20 Kh l Bxf2 21 Bh6 Rxd5! · ·
After 2 1 . . .Rfe8 22 Rfl Rxd5 23 Qxd5! White goes for an attack.

22 exd5 Rd8 23 Rd1 Qd6
Kramnik avoids 23 . . . Qxb2?! 24 d6, as the d-pawn will be too hot to handle.
24 Qc3 f6 25 Rfl Bh4 26 Qb3! (Diagram 6) 26 ...Bg5?
According to Bareev, Black's best chance is 26 . . . Qb6! 27 Qc4 Qa6! 28 Qf4 Bg3
110
The Slav with . g7-g6
. .
29 Qxf6 Qxf6 30 Rxf6 Be5 31 Rf2 Bg7 32 Bxg7 Kxg7 and, despite having a
pawn less, Black would then have excellent drawing chances. It's an important
factor that his king is much closer to the centre than White's.
27 Bxg5 fxg5 28 Qxb7 Qxd5 29 Qxa7 Ra8 30 Qe3 Qxa2?!
A better practical try is to break up White's pawns first with 30 ... g4! 31 hxg4,
and only then capture the pawn with 3 1 . . .Qxa2.
31 Qxg5 Rb8 32 b4 Qc4 33 Rf4 Qe6 34 Rd4 Rxb4?
Losing immediately. Instead after 34 . . . Kg7 35 b5, White would still have to
work to convert his advantage.
35 Qd8+ Kg7 36 Qc7+ Kh6 37 Qc1 + 1-0
White can now safely capture the rook.
Game 37
D V.Korchnoi • A.Yusupov
Lone Pine 1 981
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 Bg4
So this game transposes from a line normally associated with Chapter 4!
5 h3 Bxf3 6 Qxf3 e6 7 Bd3 Nbd7 8 Nc3 g6 9 0-0 Bg7 10 Rd1 0-0 (Diagram 7)
Black is rock-solid Patience is a virtue
The more normal move order is outlined in the introductory notes (see the note
to 6 Be2 concerning 6 Bd3) . Black has a very solid looking position, but White
hopes to eventually get the bishops going.
11 Qe2
Premature is 1 1 e4?! dxe4 12 Nxe4 Nxe4 13 Bxe4 Nb6 14 Qd3?! (defending
both c4 and d4 but placing the queen on a poor square; after 14 b3 Black can
get away with cheekily snatching the d-pawn, e.g. 14 . . . Bxd4 15 Bb2 e5 16
111
Bxd4 exd4 17 c5 Nd7 18 Rxd4 Qf6 with approximate equality) 14 . . . Qh4! (in
tending . . . Rad8; open lines don't always favour bishops but they almost always
favour the better organised!) 15 c5 Nd7 16 Bf3 Rfd8 17 Qc3 e5!, striking while
the iron is hot and putting White on the defensive, Liang Shuai-Wu Wenjin,
Qingdao 1999.
ll ... Qc7
The most precise way for Black seems to be l l . . .Re8! 12 Bd2 Qe7 13 Bel a6! 14
b3 e5!, with a satisfactory game for Black, Zsu.Polgar-J.Piket, Dutch League
1994. White's pieces are not well placed to be able to take control in the result
ing 'isolated queen's pawn' position, e.g. 15 cxd5 cxd5 16 dxe5 Nxe5 17 Racl
Rad8 18 Na4 d4! with full equality.
12 Bd2
Now it's possible to play the direct 12 e4 dxe4 13 Nxe4 Nxe4 14 Bxe4, which
may also leave White with a pull.
0
NOTE : Central pawn breaks require adequate su pport if the re
sulting line opening is to be favourable.
12 ... Rad8 13 Racl Qb8 14 Bel (Diagram 8)

Korchnoi cautiously improves his pieces before aiming for any line-opening.
The bishop pair isn't anything special yet, but once the centre cracks open they
may come into their own.
14 ... Rfe8 15 Qc2 Rc8
15 . . .Bf8 would be more prudent, restraining the b-pawn's advance.
16 b4
With White ready to start pushing up on the wing Yusupov decides that the
time is right for counter-action in the centre.
16 ... e5 17 dxe5 Nxe5 18 cxd5 Nxd5 19 Be2!
The choice for Black is to take the pawn, or just wait while the pressure builds
up after White plays Qb3 next move.
19 ... Nxb4 20 Qb3 Nd5 21 Nxd5 cxd5 22 Qxd5 Rxcl 23 Rxcl Rc8 24 Rdl
Nc6? !
A poor practical choice, as White now gets his light-squared bishop to a strong
diagonal. Instead 24 . . . Qc7 25 Bb4 Qb6 makes sense, activating the queen. The
bishops would still offer White chances of an edge but nothing concrete.
25 Bc4 Qc7 26 Qe4 (Diagram 9) · ·
Now the light square pressure starts to tell.

26 ... Ne5 27 Bb3 b5 28 Qd5 a6 29 a4!
By reducing Black's queenside to one isolated pawn it's easier to control.
29 ... Bf6 30 Qe4 Nc4 31 axb5 axb5 32 Rd5 Ra8 33 Kfl!
Excellent. The king is safe on e2 and then Black's counterplay is nullified.
112
Diagra m 9 Diag ram 10

White has strong pressure Time for a combination
33 ... Ra1?
The rook will be missed from the defence. Instead 33 . . . Rb8 34 Rxb5 Rxb5 35
Qe8+ Kg7 36 Qxb5 would give the defender chances to hold, as all the remain
ing pawns are on the same side.
34 Ke2! Kg7 35 Bb4
Threatening Qe8.
35 ...Nb6 36 Rd6 Rc1 (Diagram 1 0) 37 Rxf6!
Extricating the black king out from his defences and into a mating net.
37 ...Kxf6 38 Qd4+ Kg5 39 Be7+!
A fine sacrifice decoying the black queen from its view of f4.
39 ... Qxe7 40 Qf4+ 1-0
It's mate in two.
Com bining . . . a7-a6 with . . . g7-g6

Although Black rarely employs . .. a7-a6 in the Schlechter System, he is start
ing to play . . . g7- g6 in a popular line of the Chameleon.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 e3 a6
Even after 4 . . . g6 5 Nf3 Bg7 6 Be2 0-0 7 0-0 (i.e. the Schlechter System), Black
can try 7 . . . a6!, when:
a) 8 c5 is not effective with White's bishop on cl, e.g. 8 ... Bg4 9 h3 Bxf3, with
. . . e7-e5 to follow, V.Malakhov-Bu Xiangzhi, Russia vs. China 2004.
b) 8 b3 yields nothing special after 8 . . . Bg4 9 h3 Bxf3 10 Bxf3 b5, L.Bernal
Moro-M.Illescas Cordoba, Spanish Team Championship 1993.
113
Starti n g O ut : Slav a n d Semi-Slav
c) 8 Qb3 dxc4 9 Bxc4 b5 10 Be2 can be met by 1 0 ... Bf5 (rather than 10 ... c5,
when 11 dxc5 Qc7 12 a4! yields an advantage, A.Karpov-L.Ljubojevic, Amster
dam 1988) 1 1 a4 Nbd7 with fine development, S.Mohr-R.Tischbierek,
Bundesliga 1 992.
5 Qc2
One of Black's most popular ways of meeting White's system is . . .
5. . .g6! ? (Diagram 1 1)
Combining . . a7-a6 and . . . g7-g6 The bishop sits well on e6
This makes a change from 5 . . .b5 6 b3 Bg4, which after 7 Nge2 Nbd7 8 h3 Bh5
9 Nf4 gives Black a playable, albeit stodgy position.
6 Bd3 Bg7 7 Nf3 0-0 8 0-0 Bg4
The bishop develops now that it has something to bite on.
9 Ne5 Be6 (Diagram 12)
Dropping back to a square that greatly influences the centre. The bishop sits
well on e6, as White cannot chase it away with his knight now that it has been
provoked to e5. White has a space advantage but Black has no real weak
nesses.
White now has to make a decision about his c-pawn.
10 Bd2!?
Keeping the tension. There are three alternatives'with varying characteristics:
a) 10 c5 aims for space but takes the pressure off Black's centre. Black will
organise . . . b6-b6 or an eventual . . . e7-e5 for counterplay.
b) 10 b3 hopes to maintain a pawn on c4, but weakens the long diagonal.
c) 10 cxd5 simplifies but hopes that a slightly more active disposition will lead
to a pull.
114
Theoretical?
Not particularly. The ... a7-a6 plus ... g7-g6 idea is relatively young and the the
ory hasn't been tested as deeply as some of the more traditional variations.
Statistics
This line has only really come to the fore in the last few years. Over 1 1 7 games
White scores well with 64% with 42% draws and long games in general. It's a
grind for White with few winning chances for Black.
Game 38
0 G.Fiear • E.Prh�
Creon 1 998
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 e3 a6 5 Qc2 g6 6 Bd3 Bg7 7 Nf3 0-0 8 0-0 Bg4
9 Ne5 Be6 10 Bd2
White just continues development. Instead 10 c5 has recently become a focus
of interest: 10 . . . Nbd7 1 1 Nxd7 Qxd7!? 12 Bd2 Rae8 13 b4 Bf5 is then very solid
for Black, V.Papadopolou-E.Sedina, European Championship 2002.
10 Nbd7
...
10 . . . c5!? is possible, e.g. 1 1 dxc5 Qc7! (but not 1 1 . . .Ne4? 12 cxd5 Nxd2 13 dxe6
Nxf1 14 Nxf7 Qc7 15 Rxfl Qxc5 1 6 Bxg6! with a winning attack as in G.Flear
R.Fontaine, Aix-en-Provence 2004).
But the most respected approach is to open the game with 10 ... dxc4! 1 1 Nxc4
b5 1 2 Ne5 c5! (Diagram 1 3)
Black's game is fine White maintains a bind
Black liberates his position and equalises, e.g. 13 dxc5 Qc7 14 Nf3 Qxc5 when
Black has a satisfactory game, L.Ftacnik-L.Fressinet, Bundesliga 2002.
115
Starti n g Out: Slav and Semi-Slav
1 1 cxd5 cxd5 12 f4 (Diagram 1 4)

By maintaining the strong point on e5 White keeps up the pressure.
1 2 ... Rc8
More precise is the immediate 12 . . . Nxe5 13 fxe5 Nd7, but I still prefer Wl;tite
after 14 Ne2, heading for f4.
13 Qb3 Nxe5!?
Gambiting a pawn for some freedom. My opponent didn't want to go too p as
sive with 1 3 . . .Rc7 14 Ne2 Qb8.
0
NOTE: It's always a critical decision : staying solid but passive,
or making a bold attempt at freedom.
14 fxe5 Nd7 15 Qxb7 Rb8

Prie rejected 15 ... Bxe5 because of the simple 16 Qxa6.
16 Qxa6 Rxb2 17 Bel Rb8 18 Qa3
White now requires some time to reorganise and exploit the extra pawn, so it's
natural for Black to get a move on . . .
1 8. . .Nxe5!? 19 dxe5 Bxe5 2 0 Rbl Qc7
By hitting both c3 and h2 Black is able to at least soften up the white king.
21 Rxb8 Rxb8 22 Nb5 Bxh2+ 23 Khl Qe5 (Diagram 15)
Diag ram 15 Diagram 16

The threat is 24 . . . Qh5 Qisrupt Black's defences!
At first it looks hard to see how White avoids getting into trouble after the
threatened . . . Qh5.
24 Qb2!!
The only good move. Now if 24 . . . Qh5, White has 25 g4! Bxg4 26 Qxh2.
116
24 ...d4 25 exd4 Qh5 26 Be2 Qh4 27 Bg5! Qxg5 28 Kxh2 Qh6+ 29 Kgl
Qe3+ 30 R f2 ReS 31 Bfl Rcl
White is somewhat tangled up, but the extra piece should see him home to vic
tory. The threat is 32 . Bc4.
. .
32 .Na3 Bf5 33 Nc4

Giving back some material in order to release the annoying pins.
33 ...Rxfl+ 34 Kxfl Qd3+ 35 Kgl Qxc4 36 a3 h5 37 Qb4 Qcl+ 38 Rfl Qe3+
39 Kh2
There is still much work to do to convert the material advantage as the white
king lacks cover.
39 ... Kg7 40 Rf3 Qe4 41 Qd2 Qd5 42 Qf4 f6 43 Re3 Qd7 44 d5 g5 45 Qb4
Kf8 46 a4 Bg6 4 7 a5 Bf7 (Diagram 16) 48 d6!
This disrupts Black's defences.
48 ... exd6 49 a6 Kg7 50 Qd4 d5 51 a7 Qc7+ 52 Kgl Qcl+ 53 Kf2 Qc2+ 54
Re2 Qc8 55 Ra2 Qf5+ 56 Ke3 Qb l 57 Ral Qb3+ 58 Kf2 h4 59 a8Q Qg3+ 60
Kgl h3 61 Qa2 1-0
Game 39
D M.Gurevich • I.Sokolov
Dos Hermanas 2001
1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 d5 4 e3 a6 5 Qc2 g6 6 Bd3 Bg7 7 Nf3 0-0 8 0-0 Bg4
9 Ne5 Be6 10 b3 c5! (Diagram 1 7)
Diagra m 1 7 Diagram 1 8
The freeingmove How should Black continue?
The logical reaction now that the long diagonal is temporarily vulnerable.
1 1 Ne2
The complications after 1 1 cxd5 Nxd5 12 Nxd5 Bxd5 13 Qxc5 Bxe5 14 dxe5
117
Bxg2 lead to an equal game, and otherwise 11 dxc5 Qc7 is fine for Black.
1 1...cxd4
Another reasonable method is 1 1 . . .dxc4 12 bxc4 Nfd7 13 Nxd7 Bxd7! 14 Rb1
Nc6 15 dxc5 Rb8 with chances for both sides, R.Dautov-J.Hodgson, Istanbul
· ·
·
Olympiad 2000. In such positions the extra pawn shouldn't last for long. • ·
12 exd4 Nc6 13 Nxc6 bxc6 14 Bf4 (Diagram 18) 14 ...Nh5?!

Now Ivan Sokolov considers the most precise way to be 14 . . . dxc4 1 5 bxc4 (1 5
Bxc4 i s met b y the rock-solid 1 5 . . . Nd5) 1 5 . . . Nh5 16 Be3 c5, when White has
nothing better than 17 d5 Bxa1 18 Rxa1 Bg4 19 f3 Bd7 20 Bxc5 Rc8, with an
unclear game in prospect.
15 Be5 dxc4
Something of a concession with the knight no longer ready to come to d5. In
stead 15 . . .f6 16 Nf4 Nxf4 1 7 Bxf4 Bf7 may be better.
16 Bxc4 Bf5 17 Qc3 Nf6 18 Ng3 Bd7 19 Rfe 1
White's pieces are the more active, so Black tries to stir up the waters.
19 ... Bh6! 20 h3 Nd5 21 Qf3 a5!? 22 Ne4!
The pawn grab with 22 Bxd5 cxd5 23 Qxd5 Be6 would give practical chances
for Black with his bishop pair and the minority attack on the queenside. White
decides instead to try and keep control.
22 ...Nb6 23 Nc5 Bd2! 24 Re2 Bb4 25 Bd3 Nd5 26 a3?!
It's better to try and recapture with a piece on c5 and, furthermore, the text
weakens the queenside. Instead 26 Rc2 is better, but Black's position is any
way a tough one to break down.
26 ... Bxc5 27 dxc5 f6 28 Bb2 e5 29 Bc4 Be6 (Diagram 19)
outpost
A fine knight Can White defend?
1 18
The Slav with .. . g7-g6
The strong pivotal point on d5 makes Black's position the easier one to play.
30 Rd2 Qe7 31 Rcl Rfd8 32 g3 Rd7 33 h4 Kg7 34 Qe2 Rad8 35 Qel Bg4
36 Bfl Qe6 37 b4 axb4 38 axb4 Bf3 39 Kh2 Rb8! 40 b5!
Creating a passed pawn.
40:.. cxb5 41 Bh3 Qc6 42 Bxd7
42 Bxe5 is met by 42 . . Re7.
.
42 ... Qxd7 43 c6?!

I prefer 43 Rd3 ! e4 44 Ra3, when White has provoked the opening of the long
al -h8 diagonal. Then it's not clear if Black has enough overall control to set
about attacking.
43 ... Qf5! 44 c7 Rc8 (Diagram 20) 45 Rc5?
White can still hold with 45 Qfl! Nf4 46 Kgl ! (a clever resource) 46 ... Nh3+ 47
Kh2 Nf4, with an amusing repetition.
45 ... Nf4 46 Qfl b4?
46 . . . Bg2! wins as in the game.
47 Rc4?
Missing his chance! 47 Kgl ! draws as in the notes to move 45.
47 ...Bg2 48 Qxg2 Nxg2 49 Kxg2 Qe6 50 Rcl Qf7 51 Rdc2 Qd5+ 52 Kgl h6
53 Rc4 Qd2 54 R4c2 Qd 7 5 5 Rc4 g5
Slowly but surely Black creates additional threats.
56 hxg5 hxg5 57 Rxb4 Rxc7 58 Rxc7 Qxc7 59 Ba3 Qc3 60 Ra4 Kg6 6 1
Ra6 Qd3 62 R a 7 Qdl+ 63 Kg2 Qd5+ 64 Kgl Qd4 65 Rc7 Qal+ 66 Bel f5
67 Kg2 Qa8+ 6 8 Kgl f4 69 gxf4 gxf4 70 Rc3 Kf5 71 Kfl Qal 72 Rc7 Qa6+
73 Kg2 Qa8+ 74 f3 Qa2+ 75 Kfl Qa6+! 0-1
White loses the rook or the f-pawn.
Su mmary
The Schlechter System with ... g7-g6 isn't very dynamic or ambitious for Black.
White tends to keep an edge and Black lacks counterplay, unless he tries the
violent pawn sacrifice line that, however, seems to fall short.
Against the 3 Nc3 and 4 e3 move order, Black can consider 4 . . . a6, and then
only play 5 . . . g6 in the case of 5 Qc2. Again it's not that exciting for the second
player, but it avoids the Semi-Slav and the need to learn reams of theory.
Overall . . . g7 -g6 combined with a Slav suggests that Black is seeking solidity
rather than dynamism, but there is a risk that he may just end up passive and
planless.
119
Chapter Eight
T h e B otv i n n i k Va r i ati o n :
5 B g 5 d xc4
- Introd u ction
- Early Deviations and the Anti-Meran
- Deviations from the Main Line
- The Main Line Botvinnik

The Botv i n n i k Variation: 5 Bg5 dxc4
Introduction
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 (Diagram 1)
Diagram 1 Diagram 2
The Semi-Slav The Botvinnik Variati o n
The defining position for the Semi-Slav.

Black decides to consolidate his centre and prepares his king's bishop for de
velopment. His light-squared bishop will have to wait patiently for now.
5 Bg5
An ambitious development. The pin along the h4-d8 diagonal is the subject of
this and the following chapter.
By playing 5 Bg5, White sets a challenge to Black. He intends to play e2-e3,
and continue developing in a natural way (for instance Bd3, 0- 0 , Qc2 etc.). If
Black just develops 'solidly', as in some lines of the Queen's Gambit Declined
(with moves such as . . . Be7, . . . Nbd7, . . . 0-0 etc.), he will soon face the problem of
how to get his queen's bishop into the game.
In the Semi-Slav Black plays more dynamically with 5 . . . dxc4 (snatching the c
pawn which White 'forgot' to defend) or 5 . . . h6 (putting the question to the
bishop immediately and reserving the option of . . . d5xc4, see Chapter 9).
The main alternative, 5 e3, as in Chapters 10-12, has the advantage of defend
ing the c-pawn but leaves the bishop inside the pawn chain.
5 ... dxc4 (Diagram 2)
Capturing the gambited pawn leads to great complications and is not for the
faint-hearted. Black's big idea is to play . . .b 7-b5 holding onto the booty and at
some point . . . Bb7, getting the bishop posted onto a potentially important long
diagonal. White tends to play e2-e4-e5 with the threat of winning a piece.
1 21
The mqve 5 ... dxc4 may or may not lead to the win of a pawn, but it certainly
upsets White's plan of smooth development and sends a message to him that
Black is ready for a fight!
6 e4
With two threats: e4-e5 exploiting the pin, and simply Bxc4 regaining the
pawn with a central advantage.
6 ... b5
Holding onto the c-pawn but allowing the seemingly stronger threat!
White can consider a2-a4, either here, or on the next few moves, with the in
tention of loosening Black's queenside grip. However, the main move is . . .
7 e5
Black has only one way to avoid losing a piece.
7 ... h6 8 Bh4 g5
Now White has three moves:
9 Nxg5
A temporary piece sacrifice. The other capture 9 exf6 gxh4 1 0 Ne5 Qxf6 1 1 a4
is also double-edged. White hopes that an early initiative will enable him to
create pressure against Black's loose structure and undeveloped position.
Black relies on the bishop pair to keep him afloat.
The final option 9 Bg3 should be compared to play in the next chapter. White
keeps his bishop and hopes to be able to gain compensation for the pawn, due
to Black's lack of development and advanced pawns.
9 .. hxg5
.
The wild 9 . . . Nd5?! is considered to be more or less refuted.

10 Bxg5 Nbd7 (Diagram 3)
Diagram 3 Diagram 4
W h ite regains the piece Weird and wonderful·
122
The Botv i n n i k Variati o n : 5 Bg5 dxc4
The powerful pin enables White to regain the piece and have a clear prepon
derance of pawns on the kingside. In return Black has his queenside phalanx,
but needs to generate counterplay.
Although White's main move in the diagram position is 1 1 exf6, regaining the
piece immediately, a large minority prefer 1 1 g3 with the intention of getting
the' bishop to the long a8-h1 diagonal as soon as possible. Against 1 1 g3, I rec
ommend that Black plays 1 1 . . . Qa5, and after 12 exf6 b4 13 Ne4 Ba6 14 Qf3,
.
continue with the strong centralisation 14 . . . Qd5 (see Game 44).
The main line continues as follows . . .
1 1 exf6
From Black's point of view, the f6-pawn is now best left alone, as recapturing
would leave Bla:ck in a debilitating pin. Instead the second player aims to
complete queenside development, including castling long.
1 1...Bb7 12 g3 c5
The light-squared bishop comes of age! There has also been a recent flurry of
interest in 12 . . . Qc7 where Black prepares to castle long (see Game 43) .
13 d5 Qb6
The older try 1 3 . . . Bh6 is under a cloud since, although he generally picks off
the f-pawn, Black struggles to contain White's initiative.
14 Bg2 0-0-0 15 0-0 b4 (Diagram 4)
Weird and wonderful play is in prospect. The fact that one player has an extra
pawn is less relevant here than the initiative, over which the coming battle
will be fought.
Strategy
This variation is known for the amazing complications that occur from very
double-edged play. So it's tactical play that dominates events despite any stra
tegic thoughts.
As for the strategy: Black snatches the c-pawn and supports this with ... b7-b5
enabling his problem-piece at some point to .come to b7 and, after a further
. . . c6-c5, to have influence on the long diagonal. So Black's pawn-grabbing can
be thought of a means towards the worthy end of harmonious development. In
the meantime White will try and punish Black for the time spent on the
queenside with e4-e5, which leads to Black's kingside getting messed up as a
direct consequence of the need to avoid losing a piece.
So White then has extra pawns on the kingside and Black on the queenside.
Black's king has the most difficulty finding pawn cover in the fight for the ini
tiative that seems to dominate middlegaine play.
Later on, endgames can come down to a pawn race between the respective ma
jorities.
1 23
Start i n g Out: Slav and Semi-Slav
Theoretical?
The forcing lines have led over the years to some frighteningly complex and
detailed theory. This is the most theoretical chapter in this book since the
variation requires detailed book knowledge to be able to play it with any confi-
·
dence.
Statistics
I found 3677 games where Black replied to 5 Bg5 with 5 . . . dxc4. Overall, Black
scored a reasonable 46%, with draws a modest 25% which reflects the sharp
ness of the variation.
About half the games reach the position after 10 . . . Nbd7 (Diagram 3) where
White has scored particularly well with 1 1 g3 (63%) , but Black scores about
average (45%) in his best defensive line: 1 1 . . .Qa5 12 exf6 b4 13 Ne4 Ba6 1 4
Qf3 Qd5 ! .
0
NOTE: Even razor-sharp tactical variations req u i re strategic
thinking.
Early Deviations and the Anti-Meran

Game 40
D Z.Azmaiparashvili • A.Chernin
Neum (rapid) 2000
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 e6 5 Bg5 dxc4 6 e4 b5 7 a4
White makes an early challenge to Black's queenside structure.
7 ... Bb7
Pinning with 7 . . . Bb4 is the major alternative, but this allows White to take the
initiative with 8 e5 h6 9 exf6 hxg5 10 fxg7, as Black must lose time to recap
ture this pawn, e.g. 10 . . . Rg8 1 1 h4 g4 12 Ne5 Rxg7 13 h5! and the h-pawn will
be a nuisance.
8 e5
If White really does insist on demolishing the queenside with 8 axb5 cxb5 9
Nxb5 Bxe4 10 Bxc4, Black strikes back with 10 . . . Bb4+ 1 1 Nc3 Nc6 12 0-0 Bxf3
13 Qxf3 Nxd4.
8 . h6 9 Bh4 g5 10 exf6 gxh4 1 1 Ne5 (Diagram, 5)
..
1 1 ...Qxf6?!
Kramnik chose 1 l . . . Nd7! when faced with this position. The critical continua
tion seems to be 12 axb5 cxb5 13 Nxb5 Bb4+ 14 Nc3 Nxe5 15 dxe5 Qb6, with
an unclear position.
12 axb5 c5 13 Be2 Bg7
1 24
The Botvi n n i k Variati o n : 5 Bg5 dxc4
The disruptive 13 . . . h3!? (a common theme) has been suggested, but this can be
met by 14 Bf3 after which I prefer White, e.g. 14 ... hxg2 (if 14 ... Bxf3 then 15
gxf3!) 15 Bxb7 gxh 1Q+ 1 6 Bxh l.
The best try could well be the immediate 1 3 . .. Bxg2.
14 Nxc4 0-0 (Diagram 6)
Diagram 5 Diagram 6
What should Black play? Black loses the queenside
Black gets his king to relative safety (something of an achievement in this

chapter!) but loses control of the queenside.
15 dxc5 Bxg2 16 Rgl h3 1 7 c6
With the knight on b8 and the rook on aS locked out of action, Black is clearly
in trouble.
17 ... Qf4 18 Qd6
The queenside pawns become more of a factor after the exchange of queens.
18 ... Qxd6 19 Nxd6 Be5 20 0-0-0 Kh8
20 . . . Bxh2 2 1. Bf3 Bxgl 22 Rxgl is no better. Winning the exchange won't com-
pensate for Black's paralysed queenside.
21 Bfl Bxh2 22 Rxg2 hxg2 23 Bxg2 Nxc6 24 bxc6 Kg7 25 Ncb5 a6 26 c7
Bxd6 27 Nxd6 Ra7 28 Bb7 1-0
Game 41
D l.lvanisevic • M.Zivanic
Herceg Novi 2001
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 e6 5 Bg5 h6 6 Bh4 dxc4 7 e4 b5!?

Transposing to the Botvinnik. The main alternative 7 g5 8 Bg3 b5 is consid
...
ered in Chapter 9.
8 e5 g5 9 exf6
1 25
The Anti-Meran gambit.

9 ... gxh4 10 Ne5 Qxf6 1 1 a4 Bb7
The relatively quiet option. Instead l l...c5 leads to crazy complications.
12 Be2 Nd7 13 Nxd7 Kxd7 (Diagram 7)
Diagram 7 Diagram 8
Black's king is OK What after 1 7 Nxb5 - ?
� WARNING: Don't jump to conclusions about seemingly inse-

cure kings. Other factors have to be taken into consideration.
X
Although Black's king finds itself in the central arena, after the exchange of
White's dangerous knight he has time to organise a solid defence.
14 Bf3 a6 15 axb5?!
In G.Vescovi-A.Abreu, Bermuda 2005, White first concerned himself with the
safety of his own king before seeking to probe away at his opponent's: 15 0-0!
Rg8 1 6 Ne4 Qf4 1 7 b3 cxb3 18 Qxb3 with practical compensation for the two
pawns, as Black's king will require long-term protection.
15 ... axb5 16 R xa8 Bxa8 (Diagram 8) 17 Qa1
Instead 17 Nxb5?? loses material, because of 17 . . . cxb5 18 Bxa8 Bb4+, followed ·
by 19 . . Rxa8.
.
1 7 ... Rb7 18 Qa7 Kc8 19 Nxb5?!

White is so involved in pressing against Black's kjng he fails to realise the
danger. Even so, if he tries the superior 19 0-0, then following 19 . . . Rg8 20 Kh1
h3, Black goes onto the attack!
19 ... Qg5 20 Nc3 Qcl+ 2 1 Bd1 Qxb2
Black now has extra pawns plus the attack.
22 Na2 h3 23 Qa4 Qxd4 24 0-0 hxg2 25 Rel Bd'6 26 Re3 Rg8 0-1
1 26
T h e Botvi n n i k Variati o n : 5 BgS dxc4
Game 42
0 P.San Segundo • R.Vera
Benidorm 2002
1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 d5 4 Nc3 c6 5 Bg5 dxc4 6 e4 b5 7 e5 h6 8 Bh4 g5 9
Nxg5 Nd5?!
A daring move that until recently remained unrefuted. This game shows why
it's not quite playable.
10 Nxf7 Qxh4 1 1 NxhS (Diagram 9)
Black doesn't have enough White to defend and win
So the discovered attack has netted the exchange, but a matter of concern for
White is that the knight on h8 is out of the game. The position is sharp and
full of surprising tactics.
l l Bb4 12 Rc1 c5 13 dxc5 Nd7
...
Mter 13 . . . Qe4+ 14 Be2 Bxc3+ 1 5 bxc3 Nf4, White has the calm 16 Rg1 Bb7 1 7
K£1, J.Eriksson-S.Ivanov, Stockholm 2001/02.
14 Be2 Nxe5 15 0-0 Bb7
Black's pieces are very active-looking, but that's only part of the story. There's
a lot going on!
16 Bh5+ Ke7 17 Qe2 Rg8
If 17 . . .Bxc3 18 bxc3 Qf6, White simplifies to a winning ending with 19 Qxe5!
Qxe5 20 Ng6+.
18 Qxe5 Rxg2+
Now Black would be delighted if White had to play 19 Kxg2 Nf4+ 20 Kgl Nh3
mate, but he doesn't!
19 Kh 1! Nf4 (Diagram 10)
1 27
The threats seem very strong, but as White has an extra rook he can give back
some 1naterial to defend.
20 Ng6+!
Back with a vengeance! In a noble gesture the knight sacrifices himself to give
his monarch time to organise the defence.
20 ... Rxg6+ 21 f3 Nxh5
Otherwise 2 l . . .Rg2 fails to the skewer 22 Qc7+ Kf6 23 QdS+.
22 Qc7+ Kf8 23 Qb8+ Kg7 24 Qxb7+ Kh8 25 Ne2 Qf6 26 Qxb5 Bd2 2 7
Qe8+ Kh7 28 Qd7+ Ng7 2 9 Qxd2 Qf5 3 0 Qc2 Qh3 31 Qxg6+ 1-0
Mter 3 l . . .Kxg6 then naturally 32 Nf4+ wins.
Deviations from the Main Line

Game 43
D V.Mikhalevsky • A.Shabalov
Philadelphia 2003
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 Bg5 dxc4 6 e4 b5 7 e5 h6 8 Bh4 g5 9
Nxg5 hxg5 10 Bxg5 Nbd7 1 1 exf6 Bb7 12 g3 Qc7!?
A popular choice of late, and this nice win demonstrates why.
13 Bg2 c5 (Diagram 1 1)
Tension along the diagona l ! ,Chances down the d-file
14 0-0
Black was able to defend and go on to win after 14 d5 b4 15 0-0 bxc3 16 dxe6
fxe6 17 Qe2 K£7, O.Almeida-L.Dominguez, Cuban Championship 2002 .
14 ... Bxg2 15 Kxg2 Qb7+ 16 f3
1 28
The Botv i n n i k Variation: 5 Bg5 dxc4
The slack 16 Qf3?? loses embarrassingly to 16 . . . Rxh2+.

1 6 ... 0-0-0 (Diagram 12) 1 7 a4?!
This proves to be too slow. White should play 17 dxc5 Nxc5 18 Qe2 Nd3 19 Ne4
with chances for both sides, Cu.Hansen-L.Dominguez, Esbjerg 2002.
1 77 Nb6 18 axb5 cxd4 19 Ne4 Bh6 20 Bxh6 Rxh6 21 Qd2 Rh5 22 Qb4
••
Kb8
It's often less important who has the extra pawn in this variation than who
has the initiative.
23 Nc5 Qd5 24 Qa5
Shabalov suggests 24 Na6+ as an improvement, when play could well continue
with 24 . . . Kb7 25 Qe7+ Rd7 26 Qe8 Qd6 27 Ra5 d3, whereupon Black's passed
d-pawn gives him the edge.
24 ...Qxc5 25 Qxa7+ Kc8 26 Ra6
White's attack looks dangerous, but Black has a nice ace up his sleeve . . .
2 6. . .Qe5! 27 Qxb6 Qe2+ 2 8 R f2 Rxh2+!
Black mates first.
29 Kxh2 Qxf2+ 30 Kh3 Rh8+ 31 Kg4 Rg8+ 0-1
Game 44
D lg.Jelen • M.Ragger
Kranj 2004
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c6 4 Nf3 Nf6 5 Bg5 dxc4 6 e4 b5 7 e5 h6 8 Bh4 g5 9
Nxg5 hxg5 10 Bxg5 Nbd7 1 1 g3
White delays capturing on f6 in order to get his bishop on the long diagonal as
quickly as possible. Play often transposes, but it does give Black an interesting
alternative.
l l ... Qa5! 12 exf6 b4 1 3 Ne4 Ba6
The bishop on a6 defends the c-pawn and is part of a plan to rapidly mobilise
the queenside.
14 Qf3 Qd5! (Diagram 13)
15 Be3 c5
Hitting back in the centre before White is properly organised.
16 Rd1
Instead 16 dxc5?! allows Black to seize the initiative with 16 . . . Ne5 17 Nd6+
Bxd6 18 Qxd5 exd5 19 cxd6 d4! 20 Bg2 Nd3+ 2 1 Ke2 0-0-0 22 Bxd4 Rxd6, as
pointed out by Beliavsky and Mikhalchishin.
1 6... Rd8 17 Ng5
Exchanging queens leads to a balanced game. Instead after 17 b3 Bb7 18 Bg2
cxb3 19 axb3, D.Komarov-A.Abdulla, Calcutta 2001 , Black has the interesting
19 . . . c4 with unclear play.
1 29
Starti ng Out: Slav and Sem i-Slav
A well-centralised queen Restoring material equality
1 7 ... Qxf3 18 Nxf3 Bb7 19 Be2 Nxf6 (Diagram 14)

For once in this variation Black gets a chance to capture the f6-pawn!
20 dxc5 Rxdl+ 21 Bxd1 Nd7 22 0-0 Bxc5?!
22 . . . Nxc5 is safer, avoiding White's next.
23 Ba4!
Using the pin to create some interesting play.
23 ... Bxf3 24 Bxc5 a5 25 Rc1 Bd5
Black protects his queenside as best he can, White single-mindedly under
mines it.
26 b3?
A poor move. Instead 26 Bb5! Rh5 27 Bd6 is more testing.
26 ... c3 27 Bd6 Bf3 28 a3 Rh5 ! 29 axb4 Rd5
The advanced c-pawn and threats on the d-file give Black has excellent play.
30 bxa5 Rxd6 31 b4 Rd4?
Missing his chance, as after 3 1 . . .Rd3! 32 a6 Kd8, he should probably win.
32 Rxc3 Bd5 33 ReS+ Ke7 34 Rc7 Rxb4 35 Rxd7+ Kf6 36 Rxd5!
White escapes with a draw thanks to this timely exchange sacrifice.
36 ... exd5 3 7 Bc6 Ke5 38 a6 Rbl+ 39 Kg2 Ra1 40 Bb 7 d4 4 1 Kf3 Ra3+ 42
Ke2 Ra2+ 43 Kd3 Ra3+ 44 Ke2 Ra2+ 45 Kd3 Ra3+ 46 Ke2 Ra2+ 1!2-1!2
Game 45
0 E.Bareev • V.Filippov
Russian Team Championship, Kazan 1 995
1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 c4 c6 4 Nc3 e6 5 Bg5 dxc4 6 e4 b5 7 e5 h6 8 Bh4 g5 9
1 30
The Botvi n n i k Variation: 5 Bg5 dxc4
Nxg5 hxg5 10 Bxg5 Nbd7 11 exf6 Bb7 1 2 g3 c5 13 d5 Bh6

Aiming to win the f6-pawn back by exchanging off its defender.
14 Bxh6 Rxh6 15 Qd2 Qxf6 16 0-0-0 (Diagram 15)
How should Black continue? W hite has dangerous threats
1 6 ...Kf8!?
It's amazing how the position of the opposing kings is so unpredictable in this
variation. This time it's White who castles long and Black who keeps his king
on the kingside!
Instead of the text, 16 . . . Bxd5 is plausible, e.g. 17 Nxd5 exd5 18 Bg2 Nb6 19
Bxd5 0-0-0. Then the simplified ending after 20 Bb7+ Kc7 2 1 Qxd8+ Qxd8 22
Rxd8 Kxd8 23 Ba6 isn't that clear, but Yusupov prefers White slightly.
17 f3 exd5 1 8 Nxd5 Qd6 19 Qg5! (Diagram 1 6)
Creating some dangerous threats but Black can just about wriggle out.
1 9 ... Rg6?!
The later game S.Savchenko-V.Filippov, Minsk 1996 continued with 19 . . . Rb8!
(getting the rook away from discovered attacks) 20 Nf4 Qf6 21 Qx£6 Nxf6 22
Bg2 Ne8 with chances for both sides.
20 Qf5 Ne5 21 Nf4 Rf6 22 Qh3! Qxdl+!
The best chance to make a fight of it.
23 Kxd1 Bxrn+ 24 Kc1 Bxh1 25 Qh4 Nd7 26 Bh3 Rd6
Black has somehow survived so far, but White's threats haven't yet abated.
27 Bxd7 Rxd7 28 Qh8+ Ke7 29 Qe5+ Kd8 30 h4!
Mter 30 Qxc5 Rb8 Black is still alive.
30 ... b4!
131
Black must try and create counterplay before the h-pawn gets too far.
31 h5 b3 32 axb3 cxb3 33 h6 B£3 34 Nd5 Rxd5 35 Qf6+ Kc7 36 Qx£3 Kc6! 37
h7 Re8 38 Qxb3 Rel+ 39 Kc2 Re2+ 40 Kb1 Rh2 41 Qa4+ Kb6 42 Qb3+ y,_y,
A brilliant defensive display by Filippov.
The Main Line Botvinnik

Game 46
D P.Nikolic • A.Shirov
Linares 1 997
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 e6 5 Bg5 dxc4 6 e4 b5 7 e5 h6 8 Bh4 g5 9
Nxg5 hxg5 10 Bxg5 Nbd7 1 1 exf6 Bb7 12 g3 c5 13 d5 Qb6 14 Bg2 b4 15
0-0 0-0-0
The complications after 15 . . . bxc3 16 bxc3 Qc7 1 7 dxe6 fxe6 18 Qb 1 , as in
K.Sakaev-S.Ivanov, Russian Teams 1995, haven't been fully worked out, but
as White won that game it's put most other folk off grabbing the piece!
16 Rb1!?
A move that makes . . . b4xc3 risky for the time being.
16 ... Qa6 17 dxe6 Bxg2 18 e7 (Diagram 1 7)
What's happening?! Black has difficulties
We are in the middle of a sharp tactical line that has been tried on many occa
sions.
1 8 ... Bxfl
Retreating the bishop with 18 . . . BaS, intending to counter-attack on the long
diagonal, is considered dubious because of the forcing line 19 Nd5 Qb7 20
exf8Q Rhxf8 2 1 Ne7+ Kc 7 22 Bf4+ Ne5 23 Bxe5+ Kb6 24 f3 Rxd1 25 Rbxd1,
1 32
The Botv i n n i k Variati o n : 5 Bg5 dxc4
when experience has shown that White has more than enough compensation
for the queen. An example of how deeply the theory can go in the Botvinnik
Variation!
Critical is the less-well known 18 ... Bb7 1 9 Nd5 (or 19 exd8Q+ Kxd8 20 Ne2
Bf3!?) 19 ... Qe6, and Black is doing fine, according to Sergei Ivanov.
19 Kxfl
Shirov has also faced 19 Qd5, when 19 . . . Bh6! 20 Bxh6 Bd3! is judged by ex
perts as to be about equal, e.g. 21 Qa8+ Nb8 22 exd8Q+ Rxd8 23 Re 1 bxc3 24
Bf4 Qb6 25 bxc3 (Black has an extra piece but is all tangled up and White does
have that h-pawn . . . ) 25 . . . Bf5 26 h4 Qb7! 27 Qxb7+ Kxb7 28 Re7+ Rd7 29 Bxb8
Kxb8 30 Rxd7 Bxd7 3 1 Kg2 Kc7 32 Kf3 Kd6 33 Kf4 Bc6! when a draw was
agreed in Z.Azmaiparashvili-A.Shirov, Madrid 1996.
19 ...Qc6 20 exd8Q+ Kxd8 21 Nd5 Rxh2 22 Kg1 Rh8 23 Bf4 (Diagram 1 8)
From this key position Black has had some difficulties:
23 ... Qe6?!
An earlier try was 23 . . . Bd6 24 Bxd6 Qxd6 25 Qf3 Ne5 26 Qe4 Re8 27 Ne3 Nc6
28 Qf3, V.Kramnik-A. Shirov, Monaco (blindfold) 1996, but White maintained a
persistent edge. Otherwise 23 . . . Kc8 24 Qf3 Kb7 25 Rd1 Nb6 26 Qg2 Bh6 27
Nxb6 Qxg2+ 28 Kxg2 Kxb6 29 Be5 leaves White with the better ending.
24 Qf3 Qh3 25 Rd1 b3 26 a4 Qh2+ 27 Kfl Qhl+ 28 Ke2 Qxf3+ 29 Kxf3
The smoke clears and White's pieces are clearly the better placed in the end
game:
29 ... Kc8 30 g4 Rh3+ 3 1 Ke4 c3!
Complicating Nikolic's task by creating a protected passed pawn, but it's not
enough to hold.
32 bxc3 c4 33 Ne7+ Kd8 34 Nc6+ Ke8 35 Bg3
Shutting the opposing rook out of the game.
35 ... Nc5+ 36 Kd5 Nd3 37 Rb1 Kd7 38 NbS+ Kc8 39 Kxc4 Nc5 40 Nc6 Ne4
41 Ne7+ Kd7 42 Rd1 + Ke8 43 Nd5 Bd6 44 Re1 1-0
Game 47
0 V.Salov • M.lllescas Cordoba
Madrid 1 993
Nxg5 hxg5 10 Bxg5 Nbd7 1 1 exf6 Bb7 12 g3 Qb6
A less popular move order, though one that generally transposes back to the
main line.
13 Bg2 0-0-0 14 0-0 c5
The trappy 14 ... Ne5!? provokes White a bit too far: 15 dxe5! Rxd1 16 Raxd1 b4
1 7 Ne4 Qa5 18 Bf4 with White obtaining plenty of compensation for the queen,
A.Yermolinsky-G.Kaidanov, USA Championship 1993.
1 33
Starting Out: S l av and �em i-S iav
15 d5 b4 16 Na4 Qb5 17 a3 NbS?!

Nowadays this has been superseded by 17 ... exd5 (see the next two games) .
18 axb4 cxb4 19 Qd4! (Diagram 19)
Black i s struggling How should White continue?
It seems that 19 Qg4!? Bxd5 20 Rfc1 Nc6 21 Bxd5 Rxd5 22 Rxc4 may be an
other way for White to keep the advantage.
1 9 ... Nc6
Mter 19 . . . Rxd5 20 Qxa7 Nc6 2 1 Nb6+ Kc7 22 Bf4+ Bd6 23 Nxd5+ exd5 24
Bxd6+ Kxd6 25 Qe3 White soon won in A. Shirov-L.Oll, Tilburg 1992.
20 dxc6!
A strong queen sacrifice that puts Black on the ropes.
20 ... Rxd4 21 cxb7+ Kc7 22 Be3 e5 (Diagram 20)
Here 22 . . . Rd5 is strongly met by 23 Bxa 7!.
23 Nc3! bxc3 24 bxc3
White only has one piece for the queen, but the b-pawn combined with the
open lines soon leaves Black in desperate straits.
WAR N I N G : Don't get obsessed with 'point counting' in the

Botvi n n i k Variation. A strong passed pawn is worth how ·
many? . ·
24 ... Rd6?
Not good, but 24 . . . Bc5 25 cxd4 Bxd4 26 Rfb 1 Qc5 27 Ra6, as in G.Kamsky
V.Kramnik, New York 1 994, was also difficult for Black.
25 Rab1 a6 26 Rxb5 axb5 27 Ra1
White is now 'only' the exchange down, but by having the monster b-pawn and
1 34
The Botvi n n i k Variation: 5 Bg5 dxc4
the most active pieces he is soon able to show who is in charge.

27 ... Rd8 28 Be4 Bh6 29 Bc5 Bf8 30 Ba7! Bh6 31 Ra6 Rb8 32 Rb6! 1-0
Black resigned because of 32 .... Bd2 33 Rxb5 Bxc3 34 Rc5+ Kd7 35 Bxb8 Rxb8
36 Rc8! Rxc8 37 Bf5+.
Gaf)1e 48
0 R.Ponomariov • A.Shirov
Wijk aan Zee 2003
Nxg5 hxg5 10 Bxg5 Nbd7 1 1 g3 Bb7 12 Bg2 Qb6 1 3 exf6 0-0-0 14 0-0 c5
15 d5 b4 16 Na4 Qb5 17 a3 exd5 18 axb4 cxb4 (Diagram 2 1)
Instead 18 . . . d4 is the subject of the next game.
An u nbalanced struggle A shocking move
19 Be3
Also sharp is 19 Rel Nc5 20 Re7 (or 20 Qg4+ Qd7 21 Qd4 Nxa4 22 Qxa7 Nc5!)
20 . . . Nb3, where yet again a judgement of 'unclear' seems appropriate!
19 ... Nc5 20 Qg4+ Rd7 21 Qg7!? (Diagram 22)
In the Botvinnik one almost expects the unexpected, but even so, this must
have came as a shock when first played.
2 1 ...Bxg7 22 fxg7 Rg8 23 Nxc5 Rxg7
In V.Ivanchuk-A.Shirov, Wijk aan Zee 1996, Black continued with 23 . . . d4!? 24
Bxb7+ Rxb7 25 Nxb7 Qb6, but White's pieces dominated after the further 26
Bxd4! Qxd4 27 Rfd 1 Qxb2 28 Nd6+ Kb8 29 Rdb 1 Qxg7 30 Rxb4+ Kc7 31 Ra6.
24 Nxd7 Qxd7 25 Rxa7 Rg6 26 Rfa1 ? !
White's rooks are not so well placed here. Instead 26 Rd 1 Qg4 is critical.
26 ... Re6! 27 Bd4
1 35
If 27 Bh3, then 27 . . . d4, opening the long diagonal.

27 ... Re2 28 h4 Rd2 29 Be3 Rxb2 30 R1 a5 b3!
Despite White's best efforts the passed pawns win the day.
31 Rc5+ Kd8 32 Rxb7 Qxb7 33 Rxd5+ Qxd5 34 Bxd5 Rbl+ 35 Kg2 b2 36
Be4 Rd1 37 Bg5+ Ke8 38 Bf6 b1Q 39 Bxb 1 Rxb1 40 h5 Kf8 41 g4 Rd1 42
Bb2 Kg8 0-1
The c-pawn will cost White his bishop.
Game 49
D R.Wojtaszek • R.Jedynak
Trzebinia 2002
1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 d5 4 Nc3 c6 5 Bg5 dxc4 6 e4 b5 7 e5 h6 8 Bh4 g5 9
Nxg5 hxg5 10 Bxg5 Nbd7 1 1 exf6 Bb7 12 g3 Qb6 1 3 Bg2 c5 14 d5 0-0-0 15
0-0 b4 16 Na4 Qb5 1 7 a3 exd5 1 8 axb4 d4!? 1 9 Bxb7+ Kxb7 20 Nc3!?
(Diagram 23)
An interesting piece offer Can Black even win?
The latest try. After 20 Re1 cxb4 21 Qxd4 Qxg5 22 Qxc4, V.Filippov-Wang Lei,
Shanghai 2000, Black got into hot water with 22 . . . Nb6 23 Nxb6 axb6 24
Qxf7+. However, after Lutz's suggestion of 22 . . . Rc8!, with the point that 2 3
Qxf7 i s parried b y 23 . . . Rc7, Black may even be better.
20 ... dxc3 21 Qd5+ Kb6 ' .
Not 2 1 . . . Qc6??, as White has 22 Rxa7+.

22 Bf4
K. Sakaev-S.Ivanov, St. Petersburg 1 996 varied at this point with 22 Ra5, and
demonstrated yet again the amazing asymmetry that frequently occurs in this
variation: 22 . . . Qxb4 23 bxc3 Qxa5 24 Rb l+ Qb5 25 Rxb5+ Kxb5 26 Qxf7 Bd6
1 36
The Botvi n n i k Variatio n : 5 Bg5 dxc4
27 Qd5 Nb6 28 Qf5 a5 with chances for both sides!

22 ... Rh5!
An amazing move to distract the white queen. Instead the obvious 22 . . . cxb2?
goes down to 23 Ra5.
0
NOT E : You will have to learn to expect the unexpected in the
Botv i n n i k!
23 Qxh5 cxb2 24 Rad1 cxb4 25 Bc7+ Kc6 26 Qxb5+ Kxb5 27 Bxd8 c3 28

Rxd7 c2
An improvement on an earlier game in which Black tried the slower 28 . . . a5.
29 Rdd1 (Diagram 24)
�
TIP: Get some analysis practice in. Try and resolve this posi
tion yourself!
29 ... cxd1Q?!
The over-ambitious 29 . . . Kc4? falls short against precise play: 30 Rde1 Kb3 3 1
Be7 Bh6 3 2 f4 a 5 33 Bd6 Ka2 34 g4 b1Q 35 Rxb 1 cxb 1Q 36 Rxb1 Kxb 1 37 g5
and White wins, as pointed out by Graham Burgess in NCO.
30 Rxd1 Kc4 31 Kfl
White could try 3 1 g4, but after 3 1 . . .Bh6 32 Rb 1 Kb3 33 Ba5 Bd2! the ending
looks fine for Black.
31...Kb3 32 Ke2 Ka2 33 Be7 Bh6
This position was tested in a computer match where White continued with 34
Bxb4. Black was then able to queen a pawn, but after 34 . . . Bcl 35 Bd2 b 1 Q 36
Bxc1 Qg6 the ending wasn't so clear. White drew both electronic encounters.
34 f4 b3 35 Bc5 b1Q 36 Rxb1 Kxb1 37 Bxa7 Kc2 38 Bd4 Bf8 39 g4 Bb4 40
g5 Bc3 41 Bxc3 Kxc3 42 g6 b2 43 gxf7 b1Q 44 f8Q Qe4+ 45 Kf2 Qxf4+ Y,.Y,
Summary
A line that comes in and out of favour depending on the latest developments in
theory. Overall it's almost as dangerous for White to go for 5 Bg5 as it is for
Black, as after 5 . . . dxc4 the complications take over! The best prepared and the
most tactically aware tend to shine. In the critical lines Black holds his own if
he's good at walking tightropes.
Going right down the main line or varying with 12 . . . Qc7 are Black's best lines
as things stand. This is an ideal choice for those who enjoy studying crazy
complications in depth and then trying out their analyses in practice.
1 37
Chapter Nine
T h e M os cow Va ri ati o n :
5 Bg5 h6
- Introduction
- Trad ing Bishop for Knight
- Retreating the Bishop

The Moscow Variation : 5 Bg5 h 6
Introduction
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 Bg5 h6 (Diagram 1)
Diagram 1
The Moscow Variation
In many books, this typical response to a pin is described with the hackneyed
cliche 'putting the question to the bishop'. Here White really does have a major
dichotomy between 6 Bxf6 and 6 Bh4.
Capturing on f6 cedes the bishop pair, but in return enables White to complete
his development in comfortable circumstances and maintain some central con
trol. Instead retreating the bishop leads to a sharper game, as Black will then
generally take the plunge and capture the gambited pawn.
Trading bishop for knight

6 Bxf6 Qxf6 (Diagram 2) 7 e3
White isn't restricted to this natural move, preparing to bring the bishop to d3.
He can also try 7 Qb3 Nd7 8 e4!? if he prefers a more direct struggle, or even 7
g3!? Nd7 8 Bg2 dxc4, which can be described as a 'Catalan gambit' approach. 9
0-0 Qd8 10 e3 Bd6 could then be Black's best.
7 Nd7 8 Bd3 dxc4
...
Another option is to get the queen out of harm's way with 8 . . . Qd8 9 0-0 Be7,
but this tends to be a little passive .
9 Bxc4 g6!?
9 ...Bd6, playing for an early ... e6-e5, is possible but the text move is the most
dynamic. The problem with trying to 'liberate' with ... e6-e5 or ... c6-c5 is that
White's pieces are better placed to profit from any line opening.
1 39
Startin g Out: Slav and Semi-Sl av
Diagram 2 Diagram 3
W h ite has traded on f6 Centre vs. bishops
10 0-0 Bg7 11 Rc1 0-0 12 Re1 Qe7 13 e4 Rd8 (Diagram 3)

Black has the bishop pair and will angle for an opportunity to open the game.
However, White retains a slight pull with his central control and easier devel
opment.
Strategy
In many lines after 5 . . . h6 6 Bxf6, it's manoeuvring and long-term strategy that
take precedence. Black seeks a way to get his bishops in action, especially the
light-squared one, and may have to wait patiently deep into the middlegame
before he gets an opportunity to break out. White uses his central pawns and
knight pair to restrain Black's pent-up energy, and hopes that control plus a
space advantage will reap benefits.
Theoretical?
As 6 Bxf6 is mainly about ideas and development schemes, then memory work
is less important. So, not really.
Statistics
The better-established 6 Bxf6 (it's about twice as popular as 6 Bh4) , favoured
by positional players such as Kramnik, has scored 5.4% from a total of 21 68
·
games, with draws scoring a fairly high 42%.

Game 50
D J .Speelman • E.Sveshnikov
Biel lnterzonal 1 993
1 c4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Bg5 h6 5 Bxf6 Qxf6 6 Nc3 c6
1 40
Note the unusual move-order to reach this position.

Now White has to decide on his plan of action
7 g3!?
Catalan-style. Another plan for White is to play for an early e2-e4 to exploit
his lead in development. He hopes that central action will lead to his remain
ing bishop becoming a strong piece, bearing down the long diagonal: 7 Qb3
Nd7 8 e4 dxe4 9 Nxe4 Qf4 10 Bd3 e5, and now a couple of examples:
a) 11 dxe5 Nxe5 12 Nxe5 Qxe5 13 0-0 Be7 14 f4 Qd4+ 15 Kh1 f5 16 Rae1 0-0
17 Ng3 Bh4 18 Re5 Bf6 19 Nxf5 Bxf5 20 Rxf5 Rad8 21 Bb 1 Rfe8 and Black had
compensation for his pawn in S.Savchenko-A.Naumann, Bad Wi:irishofen 1999.
b) 11 0-0 f5 (winning a piece but falling behind in development) 12 Ng3 e4 1 3
Rfe1 Kd8 14 Nxe4 fxe4 15 Rxe4 Qf7 16 Rae1 , D.Minic-S. Gligoric, Ljubljana
1947, and now Kishnev's 16 . . . Bd6 is generally considered to be 'unclear'.
7 Nd7 8 Bg2 (Diagram 4)
...
Diagram 4 Diagram 5
Take the pawnor not? A typical freeing move
8 dxc4
...
The idea isn't necessarily to hold onto the pawn, but if White is determined to
win it back this will cost him time, which Black can use to sort out develop
ment problems.
0
NOTE: Accepting a gambit doesn't imply out-and-out material
ism. Returning the material for positional gains is a common
modern approach.
There are a couple of noteworthy alternatives:

a) Mter 8 . . . Bd6 9 0-0 Qe7 10 e4 dxc4 11 Nd2 Nb6 12 e5 (if 12 Qe2 then 12 . . . e5)
12 . . . Bc7 13 Qe2 0-0 14 Nxc4, Black obtains a good game with 14 ... Qb4! 1 5
141
Starti ng O u t : S l av a n d Sem i-Slav
Nxb6 Bxb6 16 a3 (V.Bagirov-A.Fernandez, Lisbon 1986), if he then continues

bravely with 16 . . . Qxd4!, as after 17 Rfd1 Qc5 18 Na4 Qe7 19 Nxb6 axb6, Black
has an extra pawn in compensation for his cramped game.
b) 8 . .. Qd8 9 0-0 Be7 10 e4 dxc4 (instead 10 . . . dxe4 11 Nxe4 0-0 12 Rc1 b6 13 d5
cxd5 14 cxd5 exd5 15 Qxd5 Ba6 16 Rfd1 Nc5, S.Agdestein-J. Speelman, Hast
ings 1991192, would be risky for Black after 17 Qh5!) 11 Qe2 0-0 12 Qxc4 Nb6
13 Qe2 c5 (L.Oll-E.Sveshnikov, Pinsk 1986) illustrates an alternative way of
freeing the Black position. Mter the further moves 14 Rfd1 Bd7 15 dxc5 Bxc5
16 Ne5 Qe7 17 Nxd7 Nxd7 18 e5 Rab8 19 Ne4 Rfd8, Black was well on the way
to equality.
9 0-0 Be7
It's probably more precise to get the queen back into safe territory first, e.g.
9 ... Qd8 10 e3 Bd6 1 1 Qe2 0-0 12 Rfd1 Qe7 13 Qxc4 e5 when Black is comfort
able, A.Yermolinsky-I.Sokolov, Wijk aan Zee 1997.
10 e3
Here 10 Ne4 Qf5 11 Ned2 b5 12 a4 0-0 13 axb5 Qxb5 14 Qc2 also comes into
consideration, L. Christiansen-M.Gurevich, Antwerp 1993.
10 ...0-0 11 Nd2 e5 (Diagram 5)
White regains his pawn, but Black counters White's space superiority with
this typical freeing move.
12 Nxc4 exd4 13 exd4 Nb6 14 Ne3 Rd8 15 d5
Advancing the isolated pawn to exchange it off is a common strategy in such
positions. The opened centre tends to favour the better developed player, even
if he has knights rather than bishops!
TIP: If a position has the potential to open up dramatically,

'
mentally prepare yourself by judging i n advance who is the
most l ikely to benefit from such a turn of events.
15 ... Be6
Underestimating the danger. Preferable is 15 . . . Bb4! 16 Qb3 Bxc3 17 bxc3
Nxd5 18 Nxd5 cxd5 19 Bxd5 Rb8 with equal chances.
16 Qb3 cxd5 17 Ncxd5 Nxd5 1 8 Nxd5 Bxd5 1 9 Bxd5 (Diagram 6)
The bishop is a monster on d5 so White retains some winning chances, despite
the presence of opposite-coloured bishops.
1 9... Rd6?! . .
Giving up a pawn, but unnecessarily in my opinion. If 19 . . . Rd7 20 Rad1 Rad8,

White has 21 Rd3 with threats against f7. However, Black can still defend
with 2 l . . .Bc5 22 Rf3 Qg6 23 Rd1 Bb6.
20 Qxb7 Rad8 21 Rad1 R8d7 22 Qb3 Qf5 23 Bf3 Rxd1 24 Rxd1 Rxd1 + 25
Qxd1 g6 26 Kg2 (Diagram 7)
142
Diagram 6 Diagram 7
The d5-bishopis a monster White has an extra pawn
Unlike in many endings, an extra pawn is often not enough to win with oppo
site-coloured bishops. To that end White will have the difficult task of creating
two passed pawns. Speelman bears this thought in mind when he criticises
Black's next move, which has the disadvantage of allowing the pawns to be
come fixed on the same colour as White's bishop and thus easier to attack.
Black should probably keep his kingside pawns as they are to reduce White's
chances.
26 ...h5?! 27 h4 Bc5 28 a3! Bb6 29 b4 Qe5 30 Bd5 Kg7 31 a4 Bd4 32 Qf3
Qf6 33 Qe2
It's too early to exchange queens.
33 ... Bc3 34 b5 Ba5 35 Qe3 Bb6 36 Qd2 Qf5 37 Bc6 Qc5 38 Qb2+ Qd4
After 38 . . . Kg8, White can try his luck with either 39 Qa2 or 39 Qf6.
39 Qxd4+! Bxd4 40 a5 Kf6 4 1 f4
Rather committal.
4 1...Ke6 42 b6!?
Finally a passed pawn!
42 ... axb6 43 a6 b5 44 Bxb5 Ba 7?
Speelman, a noted endgame expert, points out a draw for Black with 44. . . Ke7
45 Kf3 f5 ! 46 Ke2 Ba7 47 Kd3 Bf2 48 Kc4 Kd8 49 Kd5 Kc7 50 Ke6 Bxg3 (only
now that Black's king can stop the a-pawn!) 5 1 Kf6 Bxf4 52 Kxg6 Bd6! 53
Kxh5 Be7 54 Bd3 Kb6, and White cannot get his h-pawn going.
45 Kf3 Bg1 46 Bc4+ Ke7 4 7 Ke4
With the black king restricted to defending the kingside pawns the white king
invades, either heading towards the a-pawn or coming round the back to eat
1 43
pawns on the kingside.

47 ... Kf6 48 Kd5 Kf5 49 Kd6 f6 50 Be2 g5
Waiting an extra move doesn't help either, e.g. the continuation 50 . . .Bf2 5 1
Kc6 g5 5 2 Bd3+ Ke6 5 3 hxg5 fxg5 5 4 fxg5 still enables White to obtain a sec
ond decisive passed pawn.
Instead after 50 . . . Ke4, White can penetrate on the kingside by 51 Ke6 Bd4 52
K£7 Ke3 53 Bc4 K£2 54 Kxg6 Kxg3 55 Kxh5 Kxf4 56 Kg6 with an easy win.
5 1 Bd3+ Kg4 52 hxg5 fxg5 53 f5 h4 54 gxh4 gxh4 55 f6 1-0
Game 51
D G.Kamsky • V.Kramnik
New York match 1 994
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 e6 5 Bg5 h6 6 Bxf6 Qxf6 7 e3 Nd7 8 Bd3

Qd8
Getting the queen back to base camp before bad weather sets in.
9 0-0 Be7 (Diagram 8)
Diagram 8 Diagram 9
Black is compact The Stonewall set-up
10 a3
Quick action in the centre with 10 e4 can be successfully countered by
10 . . . dxc4 1 1 Bxc4 b5 12 Bb3 b4, e.g. 1 3 Na4 0-0 14 F-c1 Bb7, as in L.Ftacnik
E. Sveshnikov, Moscow 1985, which seems acceptable for Black. If White wants
to avoid an eventual . . . c6-c5 he'll have to place a knight on c5, but Black can
then capture with his knight and redeploy his light-squared bishop with
. . . Ba6. Bearing this unpromising scenario in mind, Ftacnik chose 15 d5 cxd5
16 exd5 exd5 1 7 Bxd5 Bxd5 18 Qxd5 Nb6 19 Qb3, but as 19 . . . Qd5 gives full
equality, the players settled for a draw.
1 44
The Moscow Variati o n : 5 Bg5 h6
10. ..0-0 1 1 Qc2 a6 12 b4 f5! ? (Diagram 9)

As White seems intent on staking out extra space on the queenside Black
switches to a Stonewall set-up (the usual description of Black's central pawns,
which make a barrier on the light squares almost like a wall) to get a firm hold
on the centre.
Later in the same year, Kramnik as White faced an alternative plan: 12 . . . dxc4
13 Bxc4 a5 (V.Kramnik-E .Bareev, Novgorod 1 993), but kept an edge as his
knights retained a grip after 14 Qb3 Nb6 15 Ne5 Nxc4 16 Qxc4 Bd7 17 Ne4.
An example of the knight-pair being preferable to two bishops when one of the
bishops is badly hemmed in.
13 Na4!
An interesting choice, redeploying the knight to the advanced c5-square. Again
when playing the white pieces in the same position, Kramnik himself chose 13
c5, and after 13 ... Bf6 14 a4 g5 15 b5 a5 16 Ne2 Bg7 1 7 Rab 1 Qe7, retained a
slight initiative in V.Kramnik-M.Illescas Cordoba, Alcobendas 1993.
It's noteworthy to see strong players play certain variations with both colours.
The fact that while Kramnik obtained a pull for White, this clearly didn't put
him off playing this same plan with Black.
13 ... Bd6
Avoiding any weaknesses. Instead either 13 . .. b6? 14 cxd5 cxd5 15 Qc6 or
13 . . .b5 14 cxd5! cxd5 15 Nc5! Nb6 16 Ne5 create holes in the black camp.
14 Nc5 Qf6 15 Rac1 g5
0
NOTE: With the centre blocked, advancing pawns in front of
one's own king is not so risky.
16 Qc3 g4 17 Nxd7 Bxd7 18 Ne5 Be8 (Diagram 10)
A strong knight on e5 Is Black better?
1 45
Starting Out: Slav and Semi-S l av
Note how Black's light-squared bishop lacks scope as it's blocked by its own
pawns. This potential handicap is a perennial problem with this type of pawn
structure.
19 f4? !
I n view o f what happens in the game, commentators have decided that 1 9 a4,
sticking to a queenside advance, was a better plan.
19 ... gxf3 20 Rxf3 Kh8 21 Rh3 Rg8 22 Rfl Rg5!
Black is aiming to get his bishop into play using the h5-square, so White
should now try 23 Rf4!, according to Kramnik, as then Rh4 becomes an inter
esting option.
23 e4?! dxe4
23 . . . Qg7? is tempting, but Kamsky had prepared 24 exf5 Rxg2+ 25 Khl with
advantage to White who has more pieces in play.
24 Bxe4 Bh5 25 Bf3 Bxf3 26 Rfxf3 Kh7 27 Rf2 Bxe5
Black finally exchanges off the troublesome knight, but he is only ready to do
so now that the light-squared bishops have come off.
28 dxe5 Qg7 29 Rd3 Rg8 30 Rdd2
Despite there being only major pieces left on the board, the pressure along the
g-file enables Black to generate some advantage.
30 ... Rg4 31 Rfe2 Kh8 32 c5 Qg5 33 Qb3 Qh4 34 Qe3
The nai:ve 34 Qxe6?? would allow 34 . . . Rxg2+ 35 Rxg2 Qel mate.
34 ... R8g7 35 Qf3 Kh7 36 Qe3 Qh5 37 Qf3 Qg5 38 Qd3 Qf4! 39 Rdl Rh4
Provoking further weakening of the white king's defences.
40 g3 Rhg4 41 Kh1 Qg5 42 Qe3 Qh5 43 Qf3 Qh3?!
43 ... Qg6 would be more appropriate, when both ... f5-f4 or ... h6-h5-h4 are an
noying threats.
44 Re3! h5 45 Red3?
It's probably better to exchange queens as Black's pressure would then be less
worrisome: 45 Qg2 Qxg2+ 46 Kxg2 for instance.
45 ...h4 %-% (Diagram 1 1)
Kramnik offered a draw at this point despite being somewhat better. A sur
prise in view of the fact that he was 2-0 down in the match and really needed
to win to have any chance to catch up! He clearly Jllust have underestimated
his chances at the time.
It must be admitted, however, that the resulting rook ending isn't easy to
judge: 46 gxh4 (46 Qg2? is bad due to 46 . . . Qxg2+ 47 Kxg2 f4 48 Rd6 hxg3 49
h3 R4g6) 46 . . . Qxf3+ 47 Rxf3 Re4! 48 Rg3 Rxe5 49 Rxg7+ Kxg7 50 Rd7+ Kg6 51
Rxb7 Re2, but Kramnik believes that Black i s better due to his protected
passed pawns.
1 46
The Moscow Variation: 5 Bg5 h 6
Game 52
0 A.Chernin • T.Thorhallsson
New York 1 997
1 c 4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 e6 5 B g 5 h6 6 Bxf6 Qxf6 7 e3 Nd7 8 Bd3
Bd6 9 0-0 dxc4
Keeping the tension with 9 . . . Qe7 is inferior in view of 10 c5! Bc7 1 1 e4 dxe4 12
Nxe4 0-0 13 Re1 Rd8 14 Qc2, when Black's light-squared bishop will have dif
ficulty emerging into the light of day.
10 Bxc4 Qe7 1 1 Rc1
White continues to deploy his forces.
Another approach is to expand immediately with 11 e4, but the continu ation
1 l . . .e5 12 d5 Nb6 13 dxc6 bxc6 (13 . . . Nxc4? drops a pawn to 14 cxb7 Bxb7 1 5
Qa4+) 14 Bb3 Bg4 seems fine for Black, who has activated his game a t the cost
of slight structural weaknesses.
1 1...0-0 12 Ne4 Bc7 (Diagram 12)
White has more space Black i s very solid
Black will wait and hope to get his queen's bishop into the game and prepare
himself for any general opening. White aims to use his space edge to keep a
tight grip on affairs.
13 Qc2 Nb6!?
The main line continues 13 . ..Rd8 14 Rfd1 a5 15 Bb3 Nf8 16 a3 Bd7 17 Nc5,
when Black is under some pressure but he keeps his solidity, e.g. 17 ... Ra7 1 8
e 4 Be8 1 9 e5 Bb6 2 0 Ne4 Raa8 2 1 Ba2 Rd7 2 2 Qb3, A.Yusupov-A.Dreev, Til
burg 1 992, or 17 ... Rab8 18 e4 Bc8 19 Nd3 Ng6 20 e5, A.Yusupov-M.Gurevich,
Munich 1993, and in both cases White retained an advantage into the middle
game.
147
Starting out: Slav and Sem i-Slav
14 Bb3 e5
A practical approach from the Icelandic GM. Black accepts that he is slightly
worse , but as this freeing move can be played safely, White's pressure is re
duce d to a minimum.
0
NOTE : In positions where the defender has less space but no
weaknesses, exchanges generally ease the defence.
15 Nxe5 Bxe5 16 dxe5 Qxe5 1 7 Nc5 Nd7 (Diagram 1 3)

Not particularly ambitious, but White must retreat his knight if he wants to
keep any hope of retaining winning chances.
18 Nd3 Qe7 19 Nf4 Ne5 20 Kh 1
Black now simply completes development. His solid structure ensures that he
shouldn't have any particular worries in the ensuing play.
20 ... Bd7 21 f3 Rad8 22 Qc3 Bc8 23 Rfd 1 Rfe8 24 e4 Qf6 25 Ne2 Be6 26
Bc2 Bc8
Clearly 26 . . . Bxa2?? would be foolhardy in view of 27 b3.
2 7 a4 Qe7 28 h3
Chernin shows his intention of continuing the struggle by preparing to play f2-
f4.
28 ...Ng6 29 f4 Qh4 30 Qf3 Rxdl+ 31 Rxd1 Rd8 32 Rxd8+ Qxd8 33 Qc3
Qh4 34 f5 (Diagram 14)
Diagram 14 Jl • Diagram 15
Gaining space What happens o n 4 3 b5 ?
This pawn advance relies on gaining space and restricting the black pieces to
create some chances.
34 ...Nf8
1 48
The Moscow Variation: 5 Bg5 h 6
The tricky 34 . . . Qf2!? i s also playable, for example 35 fxg6 Qxe2 36 gxf7+ Kxf7
3 7 Bb3+ Be6 38 Bxe6+ Kxe6 39 Qxg7 Qfl+ 40 Kh2 Qf4+ with a draw on the
cards.
3 5 Ng1 g6 36 Nf3 Qf4 37 Qd2
Exehanging queens before his central pawns collapse.
37 ...Qxd2 38 Nxd2 b6 39 Nc4 gxf5 40 exf5 Nd7 4 1 Nd6 Ba6
The bishop finds a reasonable posting just in time!
42 b4 Kf8 (Diagram 15) 43 f6
Chernin was probably frustrated that 43 b5 doesn't work, as after 43 . . . cxb5 44
Nxb5 (44 axb5? Ke7 45 Nxf7 Kxf7 46 bxa6 Nc5 favours Black) 44 . . . Bxb5 45
axb5 Nc5, Black is the only one with chances to win.
43 ... b5!'!
Better than 43 . . . Nxf6??, which loses a piece to 44 b5 Ke7 45 Nf5+. However,
43 . . . Be2 44 Nc8 a5 is perfectly playable.
44 Bd3?
A mistake, though it doesn't prove to be too serious. Instead 44 Ne4 is correct,
when a draw would be the most likely outcome after a plausible continuation
such as 44 . . . bxa4 45 Bxa4 Bb5 46 Bxb5 cxb5 47 g4 Kg8 48 Kg2 Kh7 49 Nd6
Nxf6 50 Nxb5 Nd5.
44 ...Ne5 45 Bxb5
The only move, as 45 Be2 allows 45 ...bxa4.
45 ... cxb5 46 axb5 Bxb5 47 Nxb5 Nc6 48 g4 a6 49 Nc3 Nxb4 50 h4 Ke8 5 1
h 5 Nd3 52 Kg2 Kd7 5 3 Kf3 Ke6 54 Ne4 a 5 5 5 Ke3 Ne5 5 6 Kf4 Nd7 5 7 g5
hxg5+ 58 Nxg5+ Kxf6 59 h6 Nf8 60 Nf3 a4
Here 60 . . . Kg6 is met by 61 Ne5+.
61 Ke3 Kg6 62 Ne5+ Kf5 63 Nc4
But not 63 Nxf7?, when Black has 63 . . . a3.
63 ...Kg5 64 Kd3 Kxh6 65 Kc3 Kg5 66 Nd6 f6 67 Ne4+ Kf5 68 Nxf6 Kxf6 69
Kb4 Nd 7 lf2-lf2
Black was successful in that he obtained a comfortable game. However, it's not
a line where he finds it easy to generate winning chances early on.
Game 53
D V.lvanchuk • V.Kramnik
Novgorod 1 996
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 Bg5 h6 6 Bxf6 Qxf6 7 e3 Nd7 8 Bd3
dxc4 9 Bxc4 g6
The modern choice, where Black fianchettos the dark-squared bishop angling
for Griinfeld-style development.
10 0-0 Bg7 1 1 Rc1 (Diagram 1 6)
1 49
Diagram 1 6 Diagra m 17
'
Th e cB-bishop i s dormant Black needs to develop
If White tries the alternative plan of expanding on the queenside with 11 b4,
then Black can cope, e.g. 1 1 . . .0-0 12 Rc l Rd8 13 Qb3 Qe7 14 a4 a5 15 bxa5
Rxa5 16 Rfd1 b6, P.Nikolic-V.Kramnik, Yerevan Olympiad 1996, or 12 a4 Qe7
13 Qb3 b6 14 a5 Rb8 15 axb6 Rxb6 16 Rxa7 Qxb4 1 7 Rb 1 Qxb:;l 18 Rxb3 Rxb3
19 Bxb3 c5, A.Rakhmangulov-D .Yevseev, Alushta 2001 . In both cases Black
has full equality.
1 1. . 0-0 12 Re1
.
A subtle move, keeping his options open and making ... c6-c5 more difficult to
play.
If immediately 12 e4 Rd8 13 e5 Qe7 14 Qe2, then Black can indeed hit back
with 14 . . . c5!, T.Hillarp Persson-M.Gurevich, Corinth 1998. That game contin
ued with the critical 15 d5 Nxe5 16 Nxe5 exd5 1 7 Nf3 Qxe2 18 Bxe2 Be6, and
Black had two fine central pawns for the piece, which proved to be adequate
compensation.
1 2 ... Qe7
12 ... Rd8!?, anticipating a white expansion, has also been played. A typical ex-
ample was 13 Qc2 Qe7 14 a3 b6 15 e4 Bb7 16 e5 Rab8 1 7 Rcd1 b5 18 Ba2 c5,
V.Korchnoi-E.Bareev, Ubeda 1997, where Black had freed his position and was
ready for the fight ahead. Korchnoi later suggested 17 Ba2, (rather than 1 7
Rcd1) in order to meet . . . c6-c5 b y d4-d5, when BlaG:k may not b e able to liber
ate himself so comfortably.
1 3 e4 Rd8 14 e5 b6
If Black doesn't have the patience for such a slow game he could try 14 ... b5!?
1 5 Bd3 Bb7 16 Ne4 c5!?, as in A.Khalifman-A.Huzman, Amsterdam 1995,
which is fairly messy. Huzman then suggests 17 dxc5 Bxe4 1 8 Bxe4 Rac8 1 9 c6
Nxe5 20 Qb3 Nxf3+ 21 Bxf3 a6 with a small edge for White. This is a better
1 50
The Moscow Variation: 5 Bg5 h6
idea than 14 . . .c5? 15 d5 when, as Black doesn't have any interesting tactical
options, he's just worse.
15 Qe2 (Diagram 1 7) 15 ... Rb8
Kramnik is trying to avoid the problems associated with a continuation such
as 15 . . . Bb7 16 Ba6 Nf8 1 7 Bxb7 Qxb7 18 Ne4, when the knight comes into the
outpost on d6. Instead the game R.Vaganian-V.Akopian, FIDE World Champi
onship, Groningen 1997, continued 15 . . . a6 16 Bd3 Bb7 17 Be4 b5?! 18 Nb 1 ! ,
when White had serious intentions o f continuing with Nb 1-d2-b3 and then into
c5 or a5. Instead Black should avoid the committal 1 7 . . .b5, and settle for
17 . . . Rdc8, but he's still slightly passive.
16 Bd3!
The best plan, keeping Black under restraint.
The alternative idea of bringing the knight to d6 doesn't fare so well when
Black retains the bishop pair, e.g. 16 Ne4 Bb7 17 Nd6 Ba8 18 b4 c5, and
Black's long-suffering bishop on a8 becomes an excellent piece.
16 ... Bb7 17 Be4 Nf8
Black would dearly like to strike out with 17 . . . c5, but Ivanchuk points out that
White is still on top after 18 Bxb7 Rxb7 19 Qe4 Rbb8 20 Nb5, or if 19 . . . Nf8
then 20 d5.
18 g3 Rbc8 19 a3 Rc7 20 Red1 c5
Breathing space is necessary, but this standard break still doesn't equalise.
2 1 Bxb7 Rxb7 22 Ne4 Rc7 23 dxc5 Rxdl+ 24 Rxd1 bxc5 25 h4! (Diagram
1 8)
Preventing . . . g6-g5 Black cannot defend
Another prophylactic move from Ivanchuk who doesn't want Black playing
. . . g6-g5, with further ideas of . . . Ng6 and . . . g5-g4 to undermine the e-pawn.
1 51
TIP: When you have a better game but can't see a convincing
continuation, it's a good idea to look for moves that stop you r
opponent doing anyth i ng useful . I f you retain your bind you
might find something strong in a few moves time.
25 ... Nd7 26 Nd6 Nb6 27 Nd2 Rd7 28 f4 Rxd6

Probably the correct choice. Staying passive with 28 ... Nd5 29 N2e4 Rc7 30 Rc1
would basically lose the isolated c-pawn for nothing.
29 exd6 Qxd6 30 Ne4 Qc6?
Black could better resist with 30 . . . Qe7, but after Ivanchuk's intended 31 Kh2!
N d5 32 Qb5 Bd4 33 b4, White should be better despite the possibility of
33 . . . Be3!?, creating some counter-threats against White's slightly exposed
king.
31 Rd8+ Kh7 32 h5!
Softening up Black's kingside.
32 ... Qc7
Alternatively, 32 . . . gxh5 can be met with the combinative 33 Ng5+! .
33 hxg6+ fxg6 3 4 Rd6 (Diagram 1 9)
Black's loose position cannot be defended for long.
34 ... Bd4+ 35 Kh2 Nd5 36 Rxe6 Qb7 37 Qg4 Ne7 38 Nd6 Qd7 39 Qe2 Ng8
40 Qe4 Bf6 1-0
Kramnik threw in the towel in view of 41 Ne8.
If a player of Kramnik's class finds this variation tough to defend, then it's no
easy task for ordinary mortals, but'lvanchuk did play an excellent game.
Retreating the bishop

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 Bg5 h6 6 Bh4!?
Not everyone playing the Anti-Meran Gambit wants a subtle positional strug
gle normally associated with the Moscow Variation. So some ambitious players
have investigated a veritable gambit approach with 6 Bh4!?, and their efforts
have turned it into a dangerous weapon.
White sacrifices his c-pawn, but doesn't get an immediate material payback on
the kingside, unlike in Chapter 8: He has a lead in development, but to get
real compensation he must probe away against B�ack's vulnerable pawns.
Black's king is not that comfortable, but he does have an extra pawn for his
suffering.
6 ... dxc4 7 e4 g5
Here White has no choice and must retreat.
8 Bg3 b5 (Diagram 20)
1 52
The Moscow Variation : 5 Bg5 h6
The Anti-Moscow Gambit W h ite has compensation
Black retains his extra pawn, but White has an advance in development.
9 Be2 Bb7 10 h4!
Obtaining good practical chances for the pawn. Mter the text move, Black will
have to be careful to keep his position intact, especially as his king is likely to
be somewhat vulnerable wherever he makes his home.
The less dangerous alternatives are covered in the notes to Game 54.
Mter 10 h4, there are two important moves: 10 ... g4 and 10 . . b4.
.
10 g4
...
The alten'lative 1 0 . b4, leading to immediate complications, is covered in the

. .
notes to Game 55.

1 1 Ne5 h5 12 0-0 (Diagram 2 1)
White has positional compensation.
Strategy
The lines following 6 Bh4 are fundamentally different from the quiet 6 Bxf6.
Mter 6 Bh4 Black really should push back the bishop whilst taking the c-pawn
for keeps. The problem for Black is that by advancing pawns on both wings
White has an advantage in development and the more secure king. Further
more, he has ample opportunity to chip away at either wing in order to create
threats which tend to stretch Black's defences.
Theoretical?
These forcing lines are razor-sharp and definitely require a good theoretical
grounding.
1 53
Starti n g Out: S lav and Semi-Slav
Statistics
It's over the last ten years that 6 Bh4 has become really popular. White has
only managed 53% from 1 127 games, but the successes of Topalov and other
aggressive players have recently made it a dangerous weapon. Draws are quite ·
low on 24%.
Against the Moscow Variation White's dilemma is clear: 6 Bxf6 and 6 Bh4 are
just as strong, but with the latter you are much more likely to generate a deci
sive result.
Game 54
D S.Halkias • K.Asrian
European Championship, Ohrid 2001
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 c6 5 Bg5 h6 6 Bh4!?
Playing for more than a small positional edge.
6 ... dxc4 7 e4 g5 8 Bg3 b5 9 Be2
The daring 9 Qc2 offers further bait in the form of the d-pawn:
a) 9 . . . Bb7 10 0-0-0 Nbd7 is perhaps the most prudent course, e.g. 1 1 d5 cxd5 12
exd5 Nxd5 1 3 Nxb5 Rc8 14 Nfd4 Qa5 15 a3 c3, and Black was better in
L.Yurtaev-V.Filippov, Seversk 1997.
b) 9 . . . g4!? 10 Ne5 Qxd4 11 Rd1 Qb6 12 Be2 h5 1 3 Ng6 fxg6 14 e5 K£7 15 exf6
e5!?, with unclear complications, C.Gabriel-Zhu Chen, Bad Homburg 1998.
9 . Bb7
..
Alternatives have been shown to be inferior. For instance 9 ... Nbd7 allows 10
d5! with difficulties for Black.
10 h4!
a) If 10 e5 (blocking the centre but creating a pawn wedge) 10 ... Nd5 11 0-0
Nd7 12 a4 a6, Black's position is relatively solid. Nevertheless, after the fur
ther 13 Nxd5 cxd5 14 Ne1 (getting ready to open up the f-file, a negative as
pect of an early . . . g7-g5) 14 . . . Bg7 15 axb5 axb5 16 Rxa8 Bxa8 1 7 £4 0-0 18 fxg5
hxg5 19 Bg4, White has enough compensation as Black's g-pawn and kingside
are not secure, S.Ovsejevitsch- E .Miroshnichenko, St. Petersburg 2002.
b) The slower 10 0-0 is met by 10 . . . Nbd7, and then:
b 1) Following 1 1 a4 b4 12 e5 Nh5 13 Ne4 c5!, Black shouldn't be worse.
b2) After the quiet 11 Qc2 Nh5! Black has scored well, e.g. 12 a4 a6 13 Rad1
Nxg3 14 fxg3 Qb6 15 Kh1 Bg7 16 e5 0-0 17 Ne4 c5, (ECO gives this position as
unclear, but I prefer Black) A.Kirusha-I.Yagupov, St. Petersburg 2001, when
White went for 18 Nexg5 which doesn't look sound to me after 18 . . .hxg5 1 9
Nxg5 f5 2 0 exf6 Nxf6. Indeed, even the game continuation of 18 . . . f5 19 exf6
Nxf6 turned out in Black's favour.
10; .. g4 1 1 Ne5 h5 12 0-0 Nbd7 13 Qc2 Nxe5 14 Bxe5 Bg7! (Diagram 22)
1 54
The Moscow Variati o n : 5 Bg5 h6
Preparing to castle W h ite can force a d raw
Black's best defence, which prepares to get his king away from the centre.
1 5 Rad1
Another option is 15 Bg3 Qxd4! (after 15 . . .b4 16 Na4 Qxd4 1 7 Bxc4 it seems
that White is better, KSakaev-V.Borovikov, Chalkidiki 2002) 16 Rfd 1 Qb6 1 7
e5 (or 17 a4 a5 with a n unclear struggle ahead, R.Witt-M.Al Sayed, Amster
dam 2004) 1 7 ... Nd5 18 Ne4 0-0-0 19 Nd6+ Rxd6 20 exd6 f5 where Black had
good compensation for the exchange, Wu Shaobin-M.Al Sayed, Doha 2003.
15 ... 0-0 16 f3
After this White's best is a draw.
When Kramnik had this position he kept the game alive with 16 Bg3!? Nh7 1 7
e 5 f5 18 exf6 Qxf6 and eventually won, although his idea i s universally judged
as 'only' unclear, V.Kramnik-V.Akopian, Dortmund 2000.
16 ...Nh7! 17 Bxg7 Kxg7 18 fxg4 Qxh4 19 gxh5 Ng5 (Diagram 23) 20 Bf3?
This turns out badly. Instead 20 Qd2 Nh3+ 2 1 gxh3 Qg3+ 22 Kh1 Qxh3+ 23
Kg1 Qg3+ 24 Kh1 Qh3+ Y:! - Y:! L.Van Wely-J.Lautier, Monte Carlo (rapid) 2000,
is the logical finish.
20 ...f5! 21 d5?!
White can try either 2 1 exf5 Rxf5 or 2 1 e5 Rh8, but in either case Black's at
tacking chances give him the advantage.
The text move seems to lose in spectacular fashion.
21...fxe4 22 dxe6
Otherwise 22 Nxe4 fails to 22 . ..Rxf3! 23 Rxf3 (or 23 Nxg5 Rxfl + 24 Rxf1 Qxg5)
23 . . .Nxf3+ 24 gxf3 cxd5.
22 ...exf3 23 e7 Rf6 24 Rd8
155
Black .now finds a delightful combination.

24 ... Nh3+! 25 gxh3 Qg3+ 26 Kh1 Qxh3+ 27 Kg1 Qg3+ 28 Kh1 c5!
Mate is more important than promoting pawns!
29 e8N+
The other promotion 29 e8Q goes down to 29 . . .f2+ 30 Qce4 Qh3 mate.
29 ... Kf8 30 Nxf6+ Rxd8 31 Nce4 Bxe4 32 Nxe4 Qh3+ 33 Kg1 Ke7!
The threat o f . . . Rg8 i s too strong.
34 Re1 Rg8+ 35 Ng5+ Kf6 36 Qc3+ Kxg5 37 Re5+ Kf4+ 38 Kf2 Qh2+ 0-1
Game 55
0 J.Ehlvest • A.Stripunsky
New York 2003
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 Bg5 h6 6 Bh4 dxc4 7 e4 g5 8 Bg3 b5
9 Be2 Bb7 10 h4 (Diagram 24)
10 . . . g4 or 1 0 . . . b4 ? Can Black solve his problems?
10 ... g4
The important alternative 10 . . .b4 leads to two distinct variations:
a) 11 Na4 Nxe4 12 Be5 Rg8 13 hxg5 hxg5 14 Bxc4 Nd7 15 Qd3 g4 16 Qxe4
gxf3 17 gxf3 Qa5 18 Nc5 which is unclear, Xu Jun-P.H.Nielsen, Istanbul
Olympiad 2000. . ·
b) 1 1 hxg5 bxc3 and now White must find the right way:
b 1) 12 gxf6?! cxb2 13 Rb 1 Qa5+ 14 Nd2 (or 14 Kf1 c3 15 Ne5 Ba6) 14 . . . c3 15 0-
0 Ba6 16 Nb3 Qxa2 17 Nc5 Bb5 18 Qc2 Qa3 19 Rfd1 Rg8 and Black eventually
won in S.Atalik-A.Dreev, Sarajevo 200 1 .
b2) 12 bxc3! Nxe4 13 Be5 Nxc3 14 Qc2 Nxe2 15 Kxe2 Nd7 (Stohl suggests
1 56
The Moscow Variation: 5 Bg5 h6
1 5 ... c5 16 Bxh8 hxg5 as a possible improvement) 16 Bxh8 hxg5 1 7 Rh7 g4 1 8

Ne5 Nxe5 19 Bxe5 Qd5 20 Rah 1 ! c 5 2 1 Rxf7! and Black is busted, I. Stohl
R.Kuczynski, Bundesliga 2002.
Although 10 . . .b4 seems risky, Stohl's suggestion on move 15 in variation b2
offers hope for the second player.
1 1 Ne5 h5
Returning the pawn with 1 l . ..Rg8 12 Nxg4 Nbd7 13 Nxf6+ Nxf6 14 Bf3
(D.Rogozenko-I. Cosma, Rumanian Championship 2001) leaves White some
what better. Black still has a loose position and it seems a shame to give back
the pawn so lightly, since Black isn't sure to be able to profit from the half
open g-file.
12 0-0 Nbd7
Instead 12 . . . Nfd7 is met by 13 Nxf7!, e.g. 13 . . . Kxf7 14 f3 Kg8 15 fxg4 e5 16 g5
exd4 17 Bxh5 yielding White a raging attack in P.H.Nielsen-Ki.Georgiev, Is
tanbul Olympiad 2000.
13 Qc2 Nxe5 1 4 Bxe5 Rg8!?
Here 14 ... Bg7 was played in Game 54.
15 Rad1 Nd7 16 Bg3 (Diagram 25) 16 ... e5
This game seems to put this move under a shadow, but can Black do any bet
ter?
a) Ehlvest suggests 16 . . . Be7 1 7 d5 e5 18 Bxe5 Bxh4 as unclear.
b) Another try is 16 . . . b4 17 Na4 Be7 18 Bxc4 (18 Nc5 Nxc5 19 dxc5 Qa5 20
Bxc4 Qxc5 2 1 e5 is also dangerous) 18 . . . Bxh4 19 d5 Bxg3, which led to compli�
cations that ended in Black's favour in P.Benkovic-N. Sedlak, Subotica 2000.
However, in this position 20 dxe6! looks very strong for White.
c) 16 . . . Qb6 1 7 b3 cxb3 1 8 axb3 Bb4 19 Na2 Be7 20 Nc3 Bb4 was drawn by
repetition in M.Notkin-A.Galkin, Maikop 1998, though Notkin later claimed
that 17 d5 would be better for White.
In any case all these lines look precarious for Black.
17 dxe5 Qe7 18 b3!
A strong improvement on previous experience, the point of which can be seen
next move.
18 ...b4 19 Nd5! (Diagram 26)
Dramatic stuff.
19 ... cxd5 20 exd5 c3 2 1 e6
Black's king is coming under the cosh.
21...0-0-0 22 exd7+ Rxd7 23 Bd3 (Diagram 27)
There seem to be problems everywhere. The threat of Bf5 wins the exchange
as the bishop on g3 keeps the black king from hiding away.
1 57
Starti ng O u t : Slav and Sem i-Slav
Diagram 2 6 Diagram 2 7
A dramatic knight sacrifice Black has too many problems
Connoisseurs of beautiful variations will definitely appreciate the prettier win

that Ehlvest later pointed out: 23 Bb5 Rxd5 24 Rxd5 Bxd5 25 Qf5+ Qe6 26
Rel ! Qxf5 27 Re8+ Kb7 28 Rb8 mate!
23 ... Rd6 24 Rfel Qd8 25 Bb5 Qf6 26 Qe4!
Black's pieces cannot cope with all the threats.
26 ... Bg7 27 Qxb4 Rgd8 28 Qc5+ Kb8 29 ReS 1-0
Summary
Mter 6 Bxf6 Black obtains the bishop pair but finds it hard to open the game
on his own terms and he can easily find himselfwith a passive position.
White's central preponderance and easier development tend to yield an edge
for him, though it's hard to break down Black's defences.
The recently developed 6 Bh4 insists on gambit-style play. White seems to
have excellent practical compensation and Black will have to defend accu
rately.
In my opinion 5 . . . h6 isn't as good as 5 . . . dxc4.
. .
1 58
Chapter Ten
T h e M e ra n Va ri at i o n
m Introduction
B M e ran: 8 B b3 and 8 Be2
m Wade Variation : 8 Bd3 B b7
m Reynolds Variation
B Old Me ran: 8 Bd3 a6

Starting Out: Slav a n d Sem i-Slav
Introduction
The Semi-Slav with 5 e3 is covered in this and the next two chapters. The
most important of these is known as the Meran Variation, named after a tour
nament played in the Italian resort in 1924.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 e3
Defending the c-pawn and permitting the development of the king's bishop.
This a considered a more cautious choice than 5 Bg5.
5 ... Nbd7 6 Bd3 dxc4
Black takes the opportunity to release the central tension at a point where it
gains a tempo. In Chapter 1 1 we'll investigate alternatives.
7 Bxc4 b5 (Diagram 1)
Diagram 1 Diagram 2
The Meran Variation A desperado
Again Black gains time. There are two main ideas behind . . . b7-b5:
1. Freeing the b7-square for the development of Black's queen's bishop
2. Gaining influence on the queenside.
8 Bd3
The bishop drops back to its most natural square where it supports the e3-e4
advance. White will generally opt for early central expansion, as this improves
.
·
the prospects of his dark-squared bishop.

The alternatives 8 Bb3 (Game 56) and 8 Be2 (Game 57) are less popular.
8 ... a6
This quiet move supports the b5-pawn, permitting Black to play the liberating
...c6-c5 as soon as possible. Another way to solve the problem of the somewhat
1 60
The Meran Variatio n
exposed nature o f the b -pawn i s t o play 8 . . b4. My personal favourite i s a third

.
move, 8 . . . Bb7, developing the queen's bishop and keeping the queenside pawn
options open for now.
In all variations there is a positional risk associated with an early ... b5-b4,
concerning the c4-square which can no longer be attacked by a black pawn.
This square can then become a useful staging post for White's pieces.
9 e4
White continues with his central action. Less testing is 9 0-0 c5, when Black
achieves the desired counter without being put under undue pressure.
9 c5
...
Hitting back immediately before White can play e4-e5 (obtaining a dangerous
pawn wedge) free of charge.
10 e5
Gaining space with tempo.
The important alternative 10 d5 involves White taking a central majority
while Black has an extra queenside pawn. This often leads to a tense strategic
struggle in the middlegame.
After 10 e5, Black doesn't have any comfortable knight moves available, but
has the following counter. . .
1 0 cxd4!
...
. . . depleting the white centre. Both players now have knights en prise.
1 1 Nxb5 (Diagram 2)
A desperado. The attacked knight captures an opposing pawn.
This complicated position is discussed in the final four games (64-67) of this
chapter.
Black has to decide whether to play l l . . .axb5 capturing the knight, ll . . . Nxe5
(another example of a desperado) eliminating the e-pawn, or ll . . . Ng4 moving
the attacked knight and threatening the e-pawn for a second time.
Strategy
If he's given time Black will consolidate his queenside and get in . . . c6-c5 to
compete against White's centre. His queen's bishop goes to b7 and Black
achieves comfortable piece play. With this in mind, White will generally react
quickly in the centre, pushing either the e- or d-pawn to the fifth rank, ensur
ing a central space edge to counter Black's queenside advance. The two strate
gies have a tendency to clash early, and the central arena can easily become a
bloody battlefield where the initiative is highly sought after by both sides. One
major factor is that Black may not feel comfortable castling kingside early
where he can come under attack. Instead he will often try and resolve the
question of ... c6-c5 and strive for even further central clarification before his
king gets committed.
1 61
Starti n g Out: Sl av and Semi-Slav
Theoretical?
Many of the sharper forcing lines are in fact very theoretical indeed. White
players wanting to reduce the need for so much book knowledge will often play
6 Qc2 (Chapter 12), whereas Black players can fish in the waters of Chapter
11.
Statistics
With 7 1 70 games in the database this is the most commonly played line of the
Semi-Slav. Indeed the line has continuously maintained its popularity since
the Second World War. Black scores an average 46% and the draws at 36% are
more or less par for the course.
After 8 Bd3, Black's most popular move (2765 games) is 8 . . . a6, but the best
scoring line is 8 . . . Bb7 with 48% from 2282 games.
Meran: 8 Bb3 and 8 Be2

Game 56
D A.Butnorius • A.Panchenko
Cheliabinsk 1 975
1 d4 Nf6 2 Nf3 d5 3 c4 e6 4 Nc3 c6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 dxc4 7 Bxc4 b5 8 Bb3
(Diagram 3)
Diagram 3 Diagram 4
Playing on the a2-g8 diagonal Black has equal chances
The choice of b3 for the retreating bishop is largely because White wants to
gain play on the a2-g8 diagonal, particularly against the e6 and f7 squares.
However, as Black's correct defensive strategy is now known, this is no longer
considered dangerous.
1 62
The Meran Variation
8...b4
An opportune moment. If White now puts the knight on a4 then Black can
play ... Ba6, occupying a useful diagonal and stopping White from castling.
9 Ne2 Bb7! IO 0-0 Bd6!
An· important move, as we shall soon see.
11 Nf4 0-0 I2 Ng5
Now White is ready for all sorts of tactical fun based on sacrificing on e6, e.g.
12 . . . Qe7 13 Nfxe6 fxe6 14 e4 h6 1 5 Nxe6, Y.Razuvaev-R.Vaganian, Vilnius
1971.
It's a pity that Black now has the opportunity to be a spoilsport!
I2 ... Bxf4!
Taking all the venom out of White's approach.
1 3 exf4 e5
The standard counter, biting at White's centre and opening up for the remain
ing bishop.
14 Be3 h6 I5 Nf3 ReS I6 Rei (Diagram 4) I6 ... Ng4!?
16 . . . Ba6 is an interesting choice, with the idea that 17 Re 1 c4 yields a queen
side majority and a good share of available space. White should instead reply
with 17 dxc5! Bxfl 18 Qxfl, when he has excellent compensation for the ex
change: two bishops, a pawn and the useful-looking passed c-pawn.
So the natural 1 6 ... Qe7 is simplest.
I7 Bd2 a5 IS h3 Ngf6 I 9 Be3 Qe7 20 Rei Rfd8 2I f5?1
White tries to make something out of his bishop pair. After a quieter continua
tion such as 21 Qe2 Bd5, chances would be about equal.
2 1...e5! 22 Bf4
White hopes that by obtaining an entry route into Black's camp he will obtain
enough play.
22 ... Bxf3 23 Qxf3 exd4 24 Rxe8 Rxe8 25 Qb7 Qd8! 26 Bxe5? Nxe5 27
Rxe5 Rei+ 0-I
White finally sees the problem: 28 Kh2 Ng4+! 29 hxg3 Qh4 mate.
Game 57
0 A.Vyzmanavin • M.Sorokin
USSR Championship 1 99 1
I d 4 d5 2 e4 e6 3 Ne3 e6 4 e3 Nf6 5 Nf3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 dxe4 7 Bxe4 b5 8 Be2
This modest retreat has its points, one of them being that an eventual . . . c5xd4
can be met by Qxd4, whereas a possible ... c5-c4 by Black doesn't gain a tempo
(which it would do if the bishop were on d3).
8 ... Bb7 (Diagram 5)
1 63
Diagram 5 Diagram 6
9 e4 or 9 0-0 ? White's development is easier
9 0-0
An amazing alternative is 9 e4 b4 10 e5 bxc3 1 1 exf6 cxb2 12 fxg7 bxa1Q 13
gxh8Q Qa5+ 14 Nd2 Qf5 15 0-0 0-0-0 with four queens and equal chances !
9 ... a6
The most common move here, which defends the b-pawn and thus prepares
. . . c6-c5. An alternative is 9 . . . Be7 10 e4 b4 (the other way of preparing . . . c6-c5 is
to move the b-pawn off the exposed b5-square) 1 1 e5 bxc3 12 exf6 Bxf6 1 3 bxc3
c5 14 dxc5 0-0 15 Ba3 Be7 with a satisfactory game as in S.Volkov
A. Filipenko, Kazan 1995.
10 e4 c5 11 e5 Nd5 12 a4!
A key move in this line. Black now has to commit his queenside pawns.
1 2 ... b4
The inferior 12 . . . Nxc3 13 bxc3 c4 14 Ng5 yields White some pressure, e.g.
14 ... Be7 1 5 Bf3 with advantage, L. Christiansen-G.Flear, Szirak Interzonal
1987.
13 Ne4 cxd4 14 Bg5 Qa5 15 Qxd4 (Diagram 6)
White has the easier development and Black's dark-squared bishop has prob
lems emerging.
15 ... h6 16 Bh4 Qb6 17 Qd2 . .
The exchange of queens would ease Black's defence. The solid knight outpost
on d5 would then limit White's options.
17 ... Nc5 18 Nxc5 Bxc5 19 a5 Qa7 20 Rfc1 0-0 21 Bd3 Rfc8
Black completes development, but his king lacks support.
22 Rc4!
1 64
The Meran Variation
Using the c4-square to lift the rook in the direction of Black's king.
22 ... Bc6 23 Rg4 Kf8?!
An imprecision. Instead the tricky 23 ... Ne3! 24 Rg3 Kf8!, I.Khenkin
R. Sherbakov, USSR 1 989, would leave the issue unclear. Now White's pres
sure becomes dangerous as there are many pieces hovering in the vicinity of
the black king.
24 Re1!? Qc7?!
In view of what follows, exchanging off a pair of pieces with 24 . . . Be7 would be
wiser.
25 Bh7!
A killing move, threatening 26 Qxh6. The rest is a rout.
25 ... g5 26 Nxg5 hxg5 27 Qxg5 Ke8 28 Qg8+ Kd7 29 Qxf7+ Ne7 30 Bxe7
Bxe7 31 Rd4+ Bd5 32 Rxd5+! 1-0
After 32 . . . exd5 then 33 Qxd5+ Bd6 (or 33 . . . Ke8 34 Bg6+) 34 Bf5+.
With White having the p awn-wedge on e5, Black has to be careful about cas
tling as his pieces may not be able to help in the defence.
Wade Variation: 8 Bd3 B b7

Game 58
D M.Sadler • N.loseliani
Lucerne 1 997
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 dxc4 7 Bxc4 b5 8 Bd3
Bb7
This bishop move is the beginning of what is commonly known as the Wade
Variation.
9 0-0 b4
I prefer 9 . . . a6 here, when the most likely continuation is 10 e4 c5 1 1 d5 leading
to the Reynolds Variation (see Games 62 and 63).
10 Ne4 Be7 11 Nxf6+ Nxf6 1 2 e4 0-0
Black prefers to castle before getting in . . . c6-c5. This avoids any potential
problems on the a4-e8 diagonal.
13 Qe2 c5 14 dxc5 Rc8 (Diagram 7)
Continuing d�velopment and getting ready to recapture the c-pawn.
15 Rd1 Qc7 16 c6!
Hoping to disrupt Black's pieces somewhat. Instead 16 a3 bxa3 1 7 b4 a5 led to
drawish liquidation in P.Van der Sterren-I.Novikov, Antwerp 1997.
1 6 ... Bxc6 17 Nd4 BaS!? 1 8 e5 Nd7
Although d5 seems the obvious square for the knight, it does then block the
long diagonal. Mter 18 ... Nd5 19 h4! Qb8 20 Bd2 Rfd8 2 1 h5, White has attack
ing chances.
Diagram 7 Diagram 8
Black will regain the pawn Black's king is vulnerable
19 Bf4 Nc5 20 Bc2 a6 2 1 h4! (Diagram 8)

This audacious advance, aiming to soften up the kingside, can' be justified by
the lack of black pieces able to patrol that sector.
2 1 ...Rfd8
Not 2 1 . . . Bxh4? which loses to 22 Qh5.
22 h5 Qb 7?!
This doesn't stem the tide. Instead Black could try 22 ... Rd5, intending to dou
ble on the d-file, or 22 . . . f5 !?, aiming to block off lines of attack.
23 Qg4 Kh8 24 Nf3! Ne4 25 Rxd8+ Bxd8 26 h6!? g6?
Too passive. Instead 26 .. .£5! was now imperative, e.g. 27 exf6 Nxf6! 28 hxg7+
Qxg7 29 Qxg7+ Kxg7 30 Bd1 and Black survives into a slightly worse end
game.
27 Rd1 Bb6 28 Bxe4 Qxe4 29 Qh4
The dark squares around Black's king are a serious cause for concern.
29 ...Qf5 30 Nd4 Bxd4 31 Rxd4 Bd5 32 Rxb4
Mter all that kingside aggression, it's the b-pawn that falls!
32 ... Kg8 33 Kh2 Rf8 34 f3 Rc8 35 a3
White will soon be ready for g2-g4, pushing the queen away to allow Qf6 and
mate. So Black desperately tries to free herself.
35 ...f6 36 Qxf6 Qxf6 37 exf6 Kf7 38 Bg5 e5 39 Rb6 Rc2 40 Kg3 e4 4 1 Rd6
Bc6 42 fxe4 1-0
1 66
The Meran Variation
Game 59
0 W.Uhlmann • B.Larsen
Candidates match, Las Palmas 1 97 1
1 c4 Nf6 2 Nc3 e6 3 Nf3 d5 4 d4 c6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 dxc4 7 Bxc4 b5 8 Bd3
Bb7 9 e4 b4
Gaining time for the implemntation of ... c6-c5.
10 Na4 c5 1 1 e5 Nd5 (Diagram 9)
A tabiya An ideal Black disposition
Black has achieved certain strategic goals. He has successfully implemented

the . . .c6-c5 advance and has a fine knight on d5. The b-pawn cramps the white
position in general and in particular the knight on a4.
On the other hand, White has more space on the other wing due to the pawn
wedge on e5.
1 2 Nxc5
This simple exchange solves the problem of the c-pawn, but eases Black's de
velopment.
Keeping options open with 12 0-0 is now the most popular choice (see Games
60 and 61).
12 ... Nxc5 1 3 dxc5 Bxc5 1 4 Bb5+
This check forces the black king to move, but the fact that Black is often un
able to castle in the Meran isn't a problem if he is nevertheless able to develop
all his pieces. It's worth noting that the e-file tend to remain blocked for a
while, giving Black sufficient safety for the moment.
The unclear-looking alternatives show that Black should keep an open mind
about where to place his king:
1 67
a) I4 0-0 h6 I5 Nd2 0-0 (here it's the kingside) I6 Ne4 Bd4 I 7 Nd6 Bc6 IS
Bh7+ Kxh7 I9 Qxd4 f6 20 Bd2 fxe5 2 I Qe4+ KgS 22 Qxe5 Qd7, T.Radjabov
A. Shirov, Sarajevo 2003.
b) I4 Ng5 Qc7 I5 0-0 0-0-0 (going long!) I6 Qc2 KbS, R.Vera-I.Novikov, Saint
Vincent 2002.
14 ... Ke7 15 0-0
Mter I5 Bg5+ f6 I6 Bh4 Qa5, Black is very active, so his king isn't a major
ISSUe.
15 ... Qb6 16 Bd3 h6 17 Qe2 Rhd8 18 Bd2 Kf8 19 Racl Rac8 (Diagram 10)
Black has completed development and has the superior minor pieces. His king
isn't complaining either! White doesn't have anything particularly positive to
do.
20 Rc2 a5 21 Rfcl Kg8 22 h3 Ne7!
A new phase. The knight takes a rest from the front, giving his rook and
bishop more scope.
23 Ne l Bd4 24 Rxc8 Rxc8 25 Rxc8+ Nxc8 26 b3 Ne7 27 Nf3 Bc5 28 Bel
Exchanges haven't dented the pressure of Black's bishops.
28 ...Nf5 29 Kfl Qc6 30 Bb5 Qc7 3 1 Bd3 Nd4 32 Nxd4 Bxd4
Now the advanced e-pawn is under threat.
33 f4 Qcl 34 Qd2 Qal 35 Qc2 Bc3 36 Qb l Ba6! 0-1
A good example of White's long-term problems if he loses the initiative.
Game 60
0 G.Vallin • G.Fiear
French League, Clermont-Ferrand 2003
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 e3 e6 5 Nf3 Nbd7'6 Bd3 dxc4 7 Bxc4 b5 8 Bd3
Bb7 9 e4 b4 10 Na4 c5 1 1 e5 Nd5 12 0-0 h6!
A prophylactic approach. This little move avoids any problems with the g5-
square and bypasses the heavy theory following I2 . . . cxd4 (see Game 6I).
1 3 Rel
White can simply complete his queenside development with I3 Bd2 ReS I4
Rei , but after I4 ... cxd4 I5 Nxd4 Rxci I6 Bxci Qa5 I 7 Rei a6 I8 Bd2 g5!? (to
undermine the e-pawn with . . . Bg7 etc.), the players reached a dynamic equi
librium in Z.Ribli-M.Illescas Cordoba, Groningen I993.
13 ... Rc8 �- ·
Threatening I4 . . . c4 when the queenside majority would be very strong.

14 dxc5 Nxc5 15 Bc2 Nxa4 16 Bxa4+ Bc6 (Diagram 1 1) 1 7 Be3?!
A sign that White can't find a good middlegame plan. Instead, perhaps he
could have tried I 7 Bxc6+ Rxc6 I8 Nd4 ReS I9 Bd2 with a slight lead in devel
opment.
1 68
The Meran Variation
An excellent knight on d5 W h ite has weaknesses
17 ...Nxe31
Another example in the Meran of Black not being afraid of having a displaced
king. I suppose that, at first sight, trading off Black's superb knight for
White's bishop may seem a paradoxical choice. However, what's important is
what's left on the chessboard: Black's bishop will prove to be the superior mi
nor piece.
0
NOTE: What matters is not what is exchanged off but what's
left on the board!
18 Bxc6+ Rxc6 19 Qxd8+ Kxd8 20 Rxe3 Bc5 21 Rd3+ Ke7 22 Radl Rhc81
23 b3 Bb6 24 Kfl Rc2 25 R3d2 Rxd2 26 Rxd2 Rc5 (Diagram 12)
Equal and almost symmetrical pawns, but White has some weaknesses: e5
and f2 come under scrutiny and he'll have to keep a2 protected along the sec
ond rank.
27 Nd4 a5 28 g3 g51 29 Kg2 g4 30 Rc2 Rc3 31 Rxc3
Instead 3 1 Rd2 would be very passive for White after 3 1 . . .h5.
31 ...bxc3 32 Nc2 Bc7
The e-pawn falls, giving Black good winning chances in the ending that fol
lows.
33 f4 gxf3+ 34 Kxf3 Bxe5 35 Ke4 Kd6 36 Ne3 f5+ 37 Kd3 Kc5 38 Nc4 Bd4
39 Nxa5 e5 40 a3 e4+ 41 Kc2 Bgl 42 h3 B£2
White's queenside pawns are no match for his opponent's, especially as Black
has the advantage of having a long-range bishop.
43 b4+ Kd5 44 Kxc3 Bxg3 45 Kd2 f4 46 Nb3 f3 4 7 Ke3 Bc7 48 a4 Bb6+ 49
K,d2 Kc4 50 a5 Ba7 5 1 Ncl Kxb4 52 a6 Ka3 0-1
1 69
Game 61
0 M.lllescas Cordoba • V.Kramnik
Madrid 1 993
1 Nf3 d5 2 d4 c6 3 c4 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 dxc4 7 Bxc4 b5 8 Bd3
Bb7 9 e4 b4 10 Na4 c5 1 1 e5 Nd5 12 0-0 cxd4
The main continuation in the Wade Variation.
13 Re1
Here 13 Nxd4!? is a venomous gambit, against which it's hard to avoid getting
stung. Black's best is probably 13 . . . Nxe5 14 Bb5+ Nd7 15 Re1 ReS 16 Qh5 g6
17 Qe5 Qf6 18 Nf3 Bg7 with equal chances, V.Akopian-Y.Dokhoian, USSR
Championship 1991.
13 ... g6 14 Bg5 Qa5 15 Nxd4 a6
Unfortunately 15 ... Bg7? is dubious because of 16 Bb5 a6 1 7 Bxd7+ Kxd7 1 8
Nb3 ! with a strong initiative.
16 a3! (Diagram 13)
The critical variation Black wriggles out
White opens lines whilst he's ahead in development.

16 ... bxa3 1 7 bxa3 Bg7 18 Bd2 Qd8 19 Rb1 Rb8 20 Rxb7! Rxb7 21 Bxa6
The rook is trapped, so White regains the exchange with an extra pawn (for
the moment). However, both the a-pawn and e5-pawn are prone to attack and
it seems that Black has enough resources.
2 1 ...Qa8 22 Bxb7 Qxb7 23 Bb4!
In a more recent game Lautier tried 23 Nf3, but after 23 . . . 0-0 24 Nc3 Ra8 25
Qcl Bf8 26 Nxd5 Bxa3 27 Qc7 Qxd5 28 Ra1 Kg7 Black had managed to restore
material equality, J.Lautier-Y.Pelletier, European Team Championship 2001.
1 70
The Meran Variation
2 3 ... Nxb4 24 axb4 Qxb4!

Finely calculated.
2 5 Nc6 Qb7 26 Qd6 Bf8 27 Nc5! Bxd6 28 Nxb7 Bc7 29 Nd6+ Kf8! (Dia
gram 14)
A novelty by Kramnik on move 29! Yes, the Meran can be a touch 'theoretical'.
Instead, after 29 . . . Bxd6?! 30 exd6 0-0 31 Ra1 NbS! 32 Na7 Rd8 33 Nb5, White
kept an edge into the endgame in J.Pinter-G.Kaidanov, Budapest 1989.
30 Ral Nxe5! 31 Ra8+
Alternatively: 31 Nxe5 Bxd6 32 Ra8+ Kg7 33 Rxh8 Bxe5! 34 Ra8 h5! reaching
a book draw, as in the game.
3l...Kg7 32 Rxh8 Nxc6 33 Rc8 Bxd6 34 Rxc6 Bf4 35 g4 f5 36 h3 fxg4 37
hxg4 Kf6 38 Kg2 h5 39 Kf3 Bb8 '12-'12
The Reynolds Variation

Game 62
0 A.Shirov • A.Dreev
Sarajevo 2002
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 e3 e6 5 Nf3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 dxc4 7 Bxc4 b5 8 Bd3
Bb7 9 0-0 a6
I prefer this move, which allows transposition to the Reynolds Variation, to
the 9 . . . b4 of Game 58.
10 e4 c5 11 d5 (Diagram 15)
The Reynolds Variation. White's d-pawn advance aims to obtain a concession
from Black.
The Reynolds Variation A sharp pawn sacrifice
1 71
The pawn wedge can only be challenged directly by Black at the cost of serious
risks to his own king; for instance 1 l . . . exd5?! 12 e5 Ng4 13 Bg5 is frankly too
dangerous. Another idea 1 l . ..e5, blocking the centre, is met by 12 b3 when
White hopes that his protected passed pawn will give him the better chances.
Black's most popular options these days leave the centre fluid, and he relies on
active pieces to keep him afloat. For instance, one of the main lines runs
1 l . . .c4 12 Bc2 Qc7 13 dxe6 fxe6 14 Ng5 Nc5 15 e5!? (Black can get away with
taking the pawn, although White's initiative can be annoying . . . ) 15 . . . Qc6! 16 f3
Nfd7 17 Nxh7 Nxe5 seems fine for him. There, as in a number of variations,
White's pawn preponderance in the centre offers him some tactical possibili
ties, and Black will often have to put up with an isolated e-pawn.
1 1...Qc7 12 dxe6 fxe6 13 Bc2!?
The bishop can sometimes be exposed on the d-file, especially as Black may
play a timely . . . c5-c4. However, now that White has spent time anticipating
this possibility, Black decides to continue with development, 'saving a tempo'
by not advancing the c-pawn.
13 ... Bd6 14 Ng5
Hitting the isolated e-pawn and preparing to get the f-pawn rolling.
14 ...Nf8 15 f4 0-0-0
Black's queenside majority can enable him to obtain a passed .pawn in the
endgame, but before then he hopes to use it as a shield for his king.
16 Qe 1 e5 17 Nd5!? (Diagram 1 6)
A sharp pawn sacrifice in order to play for the initiative. Instead, the quieter
17 fxe5 Bxe5 18 Nf3 Ne6 has been shown to be adequate for Black, who has a
grip on some key central squares.
1 7 ... Bxd5! ?
Giving u p the bishop is a controversial decision a s the light squares may prove
to be fallible. Instead 17 . . . Nxd5 18 exd5 exf4 19 Bd2 b4 20 Rc1 Kb8 21 Bb3 a5
22 a3 also proved to be double-edged in M.Krasenkov-Z.Almasi, Polanica Zdroj
2000.
18 exd5 exf4 19 a4
Shirov isn't counting pawns; he just wants to open avenues of approach to
Black's king.
19 ...b4! 20 Qe2 c4 21 b3 h6 22 Ne6 Nxe6 23 dxe6 Nd5 ! 24 bxc4
White shouldn't exchange queens: 24 Qxc4? Qxc4.25 bxc4 Bc5+ 26 Kh1 Ne3 27
Bxe3 fxe3 would favour Black.
24 ... Nc3 25 Qf3 Qb7?!
The first slip. Shirov instead suggests 25 ... Kb8 and, after 26 Kh1, judges the
position to be unclear.
26 Qh3 Kb8 27 Kh 1 Qc7 28 Bb2 Be5?
1 72
The Meran Variation
This turns out to be too slow. Black should support his knight by taking the
plunge with 28 . . . Qxc4 29 Bd3 Qc6, although Shirov feels that White has an
edge after 30 Rfc 1 ! .
2 9 Rae l Bf6 30 Bg6 Qxc4 3 1 Qf3 B e 7 3 2 Rei
Ba.ttering away from all directions.
32 ... Rc8
If 32 . . . Qxe6, then Shirov intended 33 Bxc3 Qxg6 34 Be5+ Bd6 35 Rc6.
33 Bxc3 bxc3 34 Rbl+ Bb4 35 Rxb4+ Qxb4 36 Rbl Qxbl+ 37 Bxbl g5 38
h4 Rc5 39 Qd3 1-0
Game 63
0 L.B.Hansen • M.lllescas Cordoba
Moscow 1 994
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 dxc4 7 Bxc4 b5 8 Bd3
a6 9 e4 c5 10 d5 Qc7 1 1 0-0 Bb7 12 dxe6 fxe6 13 Bc2 Be7!?
By developing the bishop to this modest square Black intends to meet any
threat to the e-pawn with . . . Qc6.
14 Ng5 Qc6 15 Qf3 h6 16 Qh3 (Diagram 1 7)
Attacking the e 6 weakness Remarkable!
Pressing against Black's most obvious soft spot. Black's most dynamic ap
proach is not to go too passive with 16 . . .Nf8, but instead to sacrifice the ex
change to seize the initiative.
16...hxg5! 17 Qxh8+ Kf7 18 Qh3 g4 19 Qh4
Shabalov was recently successful with 19 Qe3, though this requires further
tests.
19... Ne5 20 Rd l!? Bd6
1 73
Start i n g Out: Slav a n d Sem i-S lav
Black has great minor pieces for the exchange; furthermore White will take
time to bring his bishops and rooks to effective squares. On a crowded board in
the middlegame minor pieces can be as useful as rooks.
0
NOTE: On a crowded board, exchange sacrifices for a m iddle
game i n itiative are not so unusual.
2 1 Be3?!
Probably best is 21 Bf4! Ng6 22 Rxd6, giving back the exchange for an easier
life (and a few dark squares!), e.g. 22 . . . Nxh4 23 Rxc6 Bxc6 24 Re1 and White
kept a pull in Ig.Jelen-D.Pavasovic, Vienna 1996.
2 1 . ..Bc7! 22 Rac1
Now Black has a startling combination to take the advantage.
22 ... Rh8!! (Diagram 1 8)
Giving the second rook away on the same square as the first!
23 Qxh8 Ng6
The queen is trapped despite having 13 possible moves.
24 Qd8!
Mter 24 Rd6 !? Qxd6 25 e5 White saves his queen, but then after 25 . . . Qc6 26
Bxg6+ Kxg6 27 f3 Bxe5 Black has a pawn plus excellent play £or the exchange.
24 .. ;Bxd8 25 Rxd8 b4! 26 Ne2 Nxe4
Two rooks are about the same on paper as queen and pawn, but here the black
army as a whole is a more powerful fighting unit. The rooks have few options,
whereas the long light diagonal is a problem for White.
27 Rcd1 Ne5 28 Rb8
28 Nf4 is met by 28 . . . g5.
28...Nf6 29 Nf4 g5 30 Rxb7+ Qxb7 3 1 Nd3 Nxd3 32 Bxd3 Ne4 33 Rc1 a5 34
g3 Qd5 35 Bxe4 Qxe4 36 Rxc5 Qbl+ 37 Kg2 a4 38 Rxg5 Qe4+ 39 Kg1 e5
Cutting off the rook from the queenside spells the beginning of the end.
40 Rh5 Qb l+ 41 Kg2 Qxb2 42 Rh7+ Ke6 43 Bc5 Qc2 44 Rh6+ Kf7 45 Bd6
Qc6+ 0-1
Mter the king retreats 46 . . . Qcl+ picks off the rook.
A good example of the tactical possibilities for Black in the Reynolds.
Old Me ran: 8 Bd3 a6 . '
Game 64
D B.Gelfand • A.Shirov
Linares 1 997
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 e6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 dxc4 7 Bxc4 b5 8 Bd3
1 74
The Meran Variation
a6 9 e4 c5 10 e5 cxd4 11 Nxb5 axb5 1 2 exf6 gxf6 13 0-0 Qb6!? (Diagram

19)
A double-edged option What n o wfor Black?
Black has the more ragged pawn structure, but his pieces are poised to find
active postings.
14 Qe2 Ba6
14 ... b4 15 Rd 1 Ra5!? is another way to cover the b5-square.
15 Rd1! Bc5?!
Based on more recent games, 1 5 . . . Rd8 is the preferred way of lending support
to the d-pawn, e.g. 16 Bf4 Nc5 17 Rac 1 , A.Huzman-R.Kuczynski, Ohrid 2001,
and now simply 1 7 . . . Be7. Black is well entrenched and his jumbled pawns are
well defended.
16 a3 Bb7
Shirov doesn't need much persuading to go over to 'active mode'. He ditches
the weak b-pawn for attacking chances.
17 Bxb5 Rg8! 18 b4
Shirov later recommended 18 Bf4!, intending to come to g3 and block the pres
sure on the g-file.
18 ... Be7 19 Rxd4? (Diagram 20)
Again 19 Bf4! e5 20 Bg3 is appropriate. Black's compensation for the pawn
would then be rather nebulous, though the position remains complex.
1 9 ... Qxd4!!
A surprise!
If instead 19.. Rxg2+ 20 Kf1! , Black is tangled up and probably already lost,
.
e.g. 20 ... Rd8 (if 20 . . . Bxf3, then 2 1 Bxd7+ Kd8 22 Qd3) 21 Be3 Bxf3 22 Qxf3
1 75
Starting Out: S l av and Semi-S lav
Rxf2+ (after 22 . . . Rg8, then 23 a4 will do) 2 3 Kxf2 Qxb5 24 Rgl , as Shirov
pointed out.
20 Nxd4 Bxg2
The threat of a discovered attack keeps Black alive.
2 1 Qe3 Bh3+ 22 Khl Bg2+ 23 Kgl Bh3+ 24 Qg3! Rxg3+ 25 hxg3 Bxb4 26
Bb2 Bc5!
After the middlegame excitement, we have reached a sharp ending where
Black's material advantage is just about compensated for by White's passed
pawn and the dangerous pin.
27 a4 e5 28 Nc6 Kf8! 29 a5 Nb8
Black finally frees his knight, but White's a-pawn is becoming dangerous.
30 Rcl Bd6 31 Nxb8 Rxb8 32 a6 Rxb5! 33 a7 Ra5 34 Ral Rxa7
The draw is now assured.
35 Rxa7 Kg7 36 Kh2 Be6 37 Ra8 Bc5 38 Kgl h5 39 Bel Kg6 40 Rh8 Bg4
41 Kg2 Kg7 42 Rb8 Be6 43 Rb5 Bd4 44 Rb8 %-%
Game 65
D J.Speelman • Z.Ribli
Subotica lnterzonal 1 987
1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 c4 c6 4 Nc3 e6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 dxc4 7 Bxc4 b5 8 Bd3
a6 9 e4 c5 10 e5 cxd4 11 Nxb5 Ng4
This line is both daring and provocative. If White knows his theory, however,
he seems to be able to navigate a path through the complications and obtain a
slightly favourable ending.
12 Qa4 Ngxe5 13 Nxe5 Nxe5 (Diagram 21)
W h ite has a double check! White has an edge
1 76
The Meran Variation
There is a double check available, but no knockout punch.

1 4 Nd6+
The materialistic 14 Nc7+! ? comes into consideration, e.g. 14 . . . Ke7 15 Nxa8
Nxd3+ 16 Ke2 Ne5 yielding practical chances for the exchange. Christiansen
then suggests 17 Qb4+ Ke8 18 Qb6, preferring White slightly, but after the
further 18 . . Qxb6 19 Nxb6 Bb7 20 f3 Bc6, White's stranded knight is a cause
.
for concern. I prefer Black's chances here.

14 ... Ke7 15 Nxc8+ Rxc8
The crazy-looking 15 . . . Kf6?! is refuted by 16 Bxa6 Nd3+ 17 Kfl Nc5 18 Qdl, as
pointed out by Velickovic.
16 Bxa6 Ra8 1 7 Qb5 Qd5
The slightly worse ending that follows was preferred by Ribli, who rejected
17 . . .f6 18 0-0 Kf7 on the grounds that 19 f4! would be too unpleasant.
18 Qxd5 exd5 19 Bb5 Kf6 20 0-0! (Diagram 22)
White has the bishop pair and more trustworthy pawns, but at least Black's
king is no longer a problem.
20 ... Bb4 21 Bf4 Rhc8 22 a4
A.Khalifman-M.Kuijf, Rotterdam 1988, continued 22 Rfdl Ng6 23 Bd2 Bd6 24
a4, when White's advantage was obvious (two connected passed pawns against
doubled pawns).
22 ...Nc4
It's too early for 22 . .. g5, e.g. 23 Bxg5+ Kxg5 24 f4+ Kf6 25 fxe5+ Kxe5 26 Rxf7,
and despite the opposite-coloured bishops White has excellent winning
chances.
23 Rad 1 Nxb2?
23 . . . g5! 24 Bel Bc5! is Black's best chance. Ribli then gives 25 b3 Nd6 26 Bd3
Rab8 as unclear, but instead o£.25 b3, White could still retain the better game
with 25 b4! Bxb4 26 Rxd4 Ke5 27 Rfdl.
24 Rxd4 Bc3 25 Rxd5 h6
Or here 25 . . . Nxa4 26 Bg5+ Ke6 27 Rfdl leaves Black's king in a pickle.
26 Rd6+ Ke 7 27 Rd7+ Kf8 28 Ra1
White emerges with an extra pawn, but he still has to play precisely to con
solidate his hold.
28 ... Bf6 29 g3!
Avoiding any back rank problems.
29 ...Kg8
Otherwise 29 ... Nd3 would be met by 30 Bd6+ Kg8 3 1 Ra3 Nc5 32 Rc7 and the
a-pawn is ready to roll.
30 Ra3 Rc5 31 Rb7 Bd4 32 Be3! Bxe3 33 Rxe3 Nxa4 34 Ra3! 1-0
1 77
After 34 . . . Ra5 (or 34 . . . Nb6 35 Rxa8+ Nxa8 36 Rb8+ Kh7 37 Bd3+ g6 38 Rxa8)
35 Bxa4 Rc4, White keeps the bishop with 36 Bc2!.
Game 66
0 V.Milov • E.Bacrot
Leon 2001

a6 9 e4 c5 10 e5 cxd4 1 1 Nxb5 Nxe5
The most popular choice these days.
12 Nxe5 axb5 13 Bxb5+ Bd7 14 Nxd7 Qa5+ 15 Bd2 Qxb5 16 Nxf8 (Dia"
gram 23)
How to recapture? Can Black stem White's attack?
The long sequence has left Black with a choice of how to recapture on f8.
1 6... Kxf8
The alternative 1 6 . . . Rxf8 is covered in Game 67.
17 a4
At present Black's queen stops White from castling. Therefore this aggressive
deflecting move, offering the b-pawn, aims to promote rapid development and
thus obtain the initiative, bearing in mind Black's awkwardly placed king.
White's main alternative is 17 b3, and then after 17 . . . Nd5 18 a4 Qd3, he has to
decide between sacrificing the b-pawn anyway with 19 Qe2 Qxb3 20 0-0 Qc2
21 Rfc 1 d3 22 Qe 1 Qb2, E.Bareev-A.Yusupov, Linares 1993, or damaging his
own pawns with 19 Qf3 Qxf3 20 gx£3 Ke7 2 1 Ke2 Rhb8, T.Halasz-G.Mann,
Hungarian Team Championship 1994. In either case Black seems to be fine.
NOTE: Having by far the safer king is often worth a small mate
rial i nvestment.
1 78
The Meran Variation
17 ...Qxb2 18 0-0 Ne4

Black has tried several moves in this position; Bacrot chooses the most compli
cated.
Two, perhaps less risky, alternatives are:
a) 18... h5 19 Rb1 Qa2 20 Bf4 Kg8 2 1 Rb4 Nd5, J.Silman-J.Donaldson, Vancou
ver 1988.
b) 1 8 . . .Kg8 1 9 Bf4 h6 20 Be5 Rd8 21 Qd3 Qc3 22 Qxc3 dxc3 23 Bxc3 Kh7,
L.Ftacnik-J.Van der Wiel, Thessaloniki Olympiad 1988.
It seems that, despite giving back the d-pawn, if Black catches up in develop
ment and exchanges queens, the a-pawn isn't advanced enough to worry
Black. He will be able to blockade it if necessary.
19 Qf3 f5 20 Bf4 Qc3 21 Qh5! (Diagram 24)
The less dangerous 21 Qe2 is best met by 2 1 . . .d3 when both sides hold several
trump cards, i.e. White has a fine bishop, a passed a-pawn and a safer king,
while in contrast Black has a knight outpost, an extra pawn and his advanced
d-pawn.
21...d3?!
After 2 1 . . .Qc6, Milov gives 22 Rfdl 'with the initiative'. Black could then con
sider 22 . . . Rxa4! 23 Rab1 Ra8 24 Rxd4 Nf6 25 Qg5 Ne4, and I'm not sure that
White has anything better than a draw.
22 Rac1 Qf6 23 Rc7
The rook on the seventh gives Black serious problems.
23 ...Qg6 24 Qf3 Rd8 25 Rdl d2 26 Be5 Nf6 27 a5
With Black tied down to the defence of his king, the a-pawn adds to his woes.
27 ... h6 28 Qb3 Nh5 29 a6
Later in his notes Milov pointed out a win involving 29 Rxd2!, e.g. 29 . . . Rxd2 30
Rc8+ Qe8 31 Rxe8+ Kxe8 32 Qxe6+ Kd8 33 g4 fxg4 34 Qxg4:
29 ...f4 30 f3 Kg8 31 a7 Kh7 32 Rb7?!
Keeping things simple with, for example, 32 Qc2 would have sufficed for vic
tory.
32 ... Rd3 33 Qb2 ReS! 34 Rb8?
Underestimating Black's resources. After 34 Qa1 I don't think that Black has
a good move.
34 ... Rcl! 35 Rh8+
Not 35 Rxcl??, which loses to 35 .. . d1Q+ 36 Rxd 1 Rxdl+ 37 Kf2 Qd3.
35 ...Kxh8 36 aSQ+ Kh7 37 Rxcl?
3 7 Qa4 was much better, but by now White had completely lost control. Time
trouble is a cruel acquaintance who is best avoided!
37� .. dlQ+! 38 Rxdl Rxdl+ 39 Kf2 (Diagrarp. 25)
179
White has lost control The endgame is drawn
39 ... Ng3!
A great resource threatening mate, which Milov presumably overlooked.
40 Qa6 Nhl + 41 Ke2 Rgl 42 Qd3! Rxg2+ 43 Kfl Rgl + 44 Ke2 Rel +
Black is two pawns up in the following ending and has every right to play for a
w1n.
45 Kxel Qxd3 46 Qe2! Qbl+ 4 7 Qdl Qxdl+
If 47 . . . Qb5 White has 48 Qe2.
48 Kxdl Nf2+
Otherwise 48 . . . g5 is interesting, but White can draw with the following con
tinuation pointed out by Milov: 49 Ke2 h5 50 Kfl h4 51 Kg2 Ng3 52 hxg3 hxg3
53 Kh3 Kg6 54 Kg4.
49 Ke2 Nh3 50 Kfl Kg6 5 1 Kg2 Ng5 52 Bxf4 (Diagram 26)
Black has some chances, but Milov now defends well to earn the draw.
52 ... Kf5 53 Bel e5 54 Kg3 Ne6 55 Bd2 Nd4 56 Bb4 h5 57 Ba5 g6 58 Bb4
Ke6 59 Ba5 Kd5 60 Kf2 Ne6 61 Bb6 Ne7 62 Bd8 Nf5 63 Ke2 Nd4+ 64 Ke3
Nf5+ 65 Ke2 Ke6 66 Kd3 Nd6 67 Ke3 Kf5 68 Kf2 Kf4 69 Be7 Ne4 70 Bb4
g5 71 h3 Nb6 72 Bd2+ Kf5 73 Ba5 Nd5 74 Kg3 Nf4 75 Bd8 h4+ 76 Kh2
Ne6 77 Bb6 Kf4 78 Kg2 Nd4 79 Kf2 Nxf3 80 Be3+ Ke4 81 Bel!
The point is that Black has to give a pawn back. · ·
81. .. Nd4 82 Bxg5 Nf5 83 Ke2 Kd4 84 Kf3 e4+ 85 Kg4 Ke5 86 Bf4+ Ke6 87
Bel lf2-lf2
With Black losing the right to castle and White ahead in development, Black
has to defend with care in this line. So the safer alternatives on move 18 might
be easier to handle.
1 80
The Me ran Variation
Game 67
0 Y.Kruppa • S.Vysochin
Kiev 2000
a6 � e4 c5 10 e5 cxd4 1 1 Nxb5 Nxe5 12 Nxe5 axb5 13 Bxb5+ Bd7 14 Nxd7 '
Qa5+ 1 5 Bd2 Qxb5 1 6 Nxf8 Rxf8 1 7 a4 (Diagram 27)
Diagram 27. Diagram 28

A critical line White has connected passed pawns
1 7... Qc4
In this position 17 . . . Qxb2 18 Rb1 Qa2 19 0-0 looks even more dangerous for
Black than in Game 66, as Black's king is stuck in the centre for the time be
ing.
18 b3 Qd3 19 Qf3
Following 19 Bh4 Qe4+ 20 Qe2 Rg8 (In a courageous mood Korchnoi once tried
the dubious-looking 20 . . . Qxg2?! 2 1 0-0-0 Qb7), M. Ezsol-P.Kiss, Hungarian
Team Championship 1 993, we reach a typical struggle between the queenside
and central pawns.
The sharpest line 19 Qe2 Qxb3 20 0-0 Rxa4 21 Qe5 Nd7 led to an exciting
draw in I.Ibragimov-P.Lukacs, Budapest 1992.
19 ...Qe4+ 20 Qxe4 Nxe4 21 b4 Ke7 (Diagram 28)
This position has been played a few times. White has two connected passed
queenside pawns and, in return, only one of Black's central couplet is passed.
White hopes that this factor will be enough to tip the balance in his favour.
22 Ke2!?
Otherwise 22 f3 Nc3 2 3 Bxc3 dxc3 24 Ke2 Rfd8 led to a draw in V.Kramnik
G.Kasparov, Wijk aan Zee 1 999. The text is the last word in this line and the
best chance for White to keep some advantage into the ending.
181
22 ... Rfc8 23 Rhc1 ! Rxc1 24 Bxc1 Nc3+ 25 Kd3 Nxa4 26 Kxd4

So now it's one passed pawn to zero and White's king is the more active. Even
so, Black's position seems robust enough.
26 ... Rd8+ 27 Kc4 Nb6+ 28 Kb5 Nd5 29 Ra7+ Kf6 30 Bb2+ Kg6 3 1 Be5
Covering the b8-square and preparing to advance the b-pawn. However, Black
is able to stop this by activating his rook to get it behind the passed pawn.
�
TIP: In endings when facing a passed pawn, getting a rook be
hind the passed pawn is often a very effective defensive ploy.
3 1...Rc8 32 Bd6 Rc2 33 Bc5 h5 34 Ra3 h4 35 Ka5 Rb2 36 Ka4

If 36 b5, then 36 . . . Nc7 37 b6 Rb5+.
36 ...Nxb4!
A neat combination that earns a draw.
37 Bxb4 Rxf2 38 Rh3 Rxg2 39 Rxh4 Kf5 40 Kb3 g5 41 Rh6 e5 42 Be7 g4
'liz-'liz
White cannot retain his last pawn.
It often happens in simplified Merans that White has a bishop and passed
queenside pawn (plus rooks), whereas Black has knight and a. 4 vs. 3 kingside
majority (plus rooks). In these cases the d5-square is a useful (virtually un
touchable) outpost that limits White's winning chances.
Summary
In the Meran with 8 ... a6, I consider the Reynolds Variation and right down the
main line with 10 e5 to be the most dangerous for Black. The Reynolds leads to
a double-edged middlegame, whereas 10 e5 leads to long forcing variations
that often go deep into the ending.
Although Black seems to have adequate drawing chances in the latter, I have
a personal preference for 8 . . . Bb7, which I consider to offer better winning
chances.
In any case there's quite a bit of theory to learn when White goes for the criti
cal stuff.
1 82
Chapter Eleven
B l ac k Avo i d s t h e M e ra n
m ,, Introd u ction
m Classical Defen ces : 6 . . . Bd6 an d 6 . . . B b4
m The Sem i-Slav with . . . a7 -a6

Introduction
Not everyone wants to get involved in a major theoretical discussion. So these
lesser lines are often an attempt to avoid the serious theory associated with
the Meran Variation of Chapter 10. The aim is to get on with standard devel
opment behind the present pawn front and put off until later the resolution of
the central tension.
A common drawback, as we'll see throughout this chapter, is that Black has
problems getting his light-squared bishop into action.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Bd3
The Classical Defences: 6 . . . Bd6 and 6 ... Bb4

Black avoids challenging the white centre for the moment, preferring to con
tinue developing before striking back at White's superior central control.
The older 'classical' lines involving 6 . . . Bd6 or 6 . . . Bb4 have a deserved reputa
tion for being stodgy and somewhat passive. On the plus side Black avoids
sharp theory and keeps his game solid, but White can usually keep more than
his fair share of the centre. Black may have problems bringing his queen's
bishop into the game.
6 ... Bd6 (Diagram 1)
Diagram 1 , . Diagram 2
The Classical 6 . . . Bd6 Black breaks with . . . e6-e5
This move was played so often by the American GM Arthur Bisguier that it
could quite reasonably be called the Bisguier Variation. Although this seems
to be the most natural developing move available, it puts no pressure on
White's centre. Instead, pinning with 6 . . . Bb4 is known as the Romih Variation.
Black hopes to delay White's inevitable e3-e4 and get his development further
1 84
Black Avo ids the Meran
advanced before the centre opens up. However, it isn't that effective, as White
can immediately chase the bishop away with 7 a3! .
7 e4
7 0-0 0-0 8 e4 is also fairly common, but this gives Black the added option of
8 . . . dxc4 9 Bxc4 e5 10 Bg5 Qe7, when Black has made progress in his quest to
libe�ate his queenside pieces while retaining a certain solidity.
The quieter 7 Qc2 transposes to a typical position from Chapter 12, but it's
rare to see this position occur via this particular move order. The reason being
that 7 e4 and 7 0-0 0-0 8 e4 are recognised as simpler ways to keep an edge.
7 . dxe4
. .
The alternative 7 . . . dxc4 8 Bxc4 e5 now fails to impress due to 9 dxe5 Nxe5 10
Nxe5 Bxe5 11 Qxd8+ Kxd8 12 Bxf7 Bxc3+ 13 bxc3 Nxe4, when White's bishop
pair in the open position gives him a pleasant edge.
8 Nxe4 Nxe4 9 Bxe4 0-0
As White hasn't yet castled Black has the option of giving a check on b4 to ex
change off a pair of bishops, e.g. 9 . . . Bb4+ 10 Bd2 Bxd2+ 1 1 Qxd2 c5 12 0-0-0
cxd4 13 Qxd4, or even 9 . . . Nf6 10 Bc2 Bb4+ 11 Bd2 Qa5 12 a3 Bxd2+ 13 Qxd2
Qxd2+ 14 Kxd2 Ke7 15 Rhe 1, but in either case White can count on retaining a
pull. As so often happens in these lines, Black will have his work cut out to get
his queen's bishop into the game.
10 0-0 h6
Prudently covering the g5-square with ... e6-e5 in mind. Alternatively 10 ... Nf6
1 1 Bc2 c5 aims to reclaim some space and central freedom.
1 1 Bc2 e5 (Diagram 2)
In this position White has to choose between 12 Re 1, 12 Qd3 and 12 b3. It's a
moot point which is best; in each case White should be able to keep a slight
initiative into the middlegame. Black, on the other hand, has kept his pawn ,
structure intact and dreams of getting his light-squared bishop into play along
the c8-h3 diagonal at some point, when he shouldn't be far from equalising.
Theoretical?
Not really. Both sides can get by without much book knowledge.
Statistics
The stodgy lines 6 . . . Bd6 (1983 games) and 6 . . . Bb4 (389 games) have scored
badly over the years, only 37% and 36% respectively.
Game 68
D G.Kasparov • J.Van der Wiel
Brussels 1 987
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 e3 e6 5 Nf3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 Bb4 7 a3!
1 85
White can play this with a clear conscience as Black doesn't really want to ex
change off his 'best' bishop for a mere knight. Essentially 7 . . . Bxc3+ would be
asking for trouble on the dark squares.
Alternatively, 7 0-0 0-0 8 Bd2 Qe7 9 a3 Bd6 10 c5 Bc7 1 1 e4 dxe4 12 Bxe4! also
gave White an edge in L.Portisch-R.Hiibner, Tilburg 1986.
7 .. Ba5 8 0-0 0-0 9 Qc2 dxc4 10 Bxc4 Bc7 11 Ba2 e5 1 2 h3 (Diagram 3)
.
Diagram 3 Diagra� 4
Black's position is passive White to play
Kasparov plays in prophylactic style. By giving no tactical targets to Black,

such as the h2-pawn or the loose bishop on c4, it's Black who will have to re
lease the tension if he wants to get his light-squared bishop out.
A point worth noting is that this actual position is analogous to one obtained
from Chapter 12, but here Black's bishop on c7 has taken three tempi to reach
that square rather than two (i.e. if he had played . . . Bf8-d6-c7). As White's ex
tra tempo (a2-a3) is useful then, arguably, Black has lost time.
12 ... h6
If 12 . . . Qe7, White can play 13 Bd2 ! with ideas of Nb5 and Bb4 in the air. Then
if 13 . . . e4?, after 14 Ng5 Qd6 15 g3, Black just loses the e-pawn.
13 e4
13 Nh4?! exd4 14 exd4 Nb6 15 Bxh6? is tempting, with the idea that if Black
captures then Qg6+ is strong as the f-pawn is pinned. However, Black can
then hit back with 15 . . . Nfd5! 16 Nxd5 Nxd5 1 7 Bxd5 Qxd5 18 Be3 Qh5 19 Nf3
Bxh3.
13 ... Re8 14 Be3 Nh5?!
Black will be made to regret putting his knight on the edge. Instead, with
14 . . . Qe7 1 5 Rfe1 exd4 16 Nxd4 (or 16 Bxd4 Ne5) 16 . . . Nc5, White's initiative is
kept to a minimum.
1 86
Black Avoids the Meran
15 Rad1 exd4
Mter 15 ... Qf6 White has the strong reply 16 Nd5 ! .
16 Bxd4 Q e 7 1 7 e5! Nf8? (Diagram 4)
Instead 17 . . . Nf4 would be a more logical continuation, but Kasparov intended
to meet this by 18 Rfe1 Ne6 19 Ne4 Nxd4 20 Rxd4 Nxe5 2 1 Nxe5 Bxe5 22 Nd6
with advantage.
18 Nb5!
A bolt from the blue!
18 ... Ne6
The main point is that 18 . . .cxb5 19 Bc5 traps Black's queen.
19 Bxe6 fxe6 20 Nxc7 Qxc7 21 Qg6 Qf7 22 Qxf7+ Kxf7 23 Be3
Black is saddled with two poor minor pieces.
23 ... Rf8 24 Rd4 Kg8 25 Rfd1 b6 26 Rh4 Rf5 27 Nd4 1-0
Black never did get his queen's bishop out!
The danger for Black in these lines is that he finds it hard to complete devel
opment and, as a general rule, White's position is easier to play.
Game 69
D H.Stefansson • L.E.Johannessen
Reykjavik 2001
1 d4 e6 2 c4 d5 3 Nf3 c6 4 e3 Nf6 5 Bd3
White's move-order can be annoying for out-and-out Semi-Slav players. The
surest path here is often considered to be 5 . . . dxc4 6 Bxc4 c5 transposing to a
Queen's Gambit Accepted, but that's not everyone's cup of tea! . Digressing
slightly, if Black employs a pure Slav move order, i.e. 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3
Nf6, then 4 e3 can be met by 4 . . . Bg4, 4 . . . Bf5 or even 4 . . . g6, rather than 4 . . . e6.
5 ...Nbd7 6 0-0 dxc4
Here 6 . . . Bd6 7 Nbd2 is calm enough, but after 7 . . . 0-0 8 e4, it. gets more lively
following the fine reaction 8 . . . e5!.
7 Bxc4 Bd6
An interesting alternative is to play in Meran-style with 7 . . . b5 8 Bd3, and then
. . . Bb7 or . . . a 7 -a6, e.g.
a) 8 . . . Bb7 9 e4 Be7 10 Bg5 a6 1 1 Nbd2 h6 12 Bh4 g5 13 Bg3 Nh5 14 Nb3 Nxg3
15 hxg3 c5, S.Halkias-I. Cosma, Cappelle la Grande 2002.
b) 8 . . . a6 always seems a little odd with White's knight not already on c3, as
the counter . . . b5-b4 (hitting the knight), commonplace in a 'real' Meran, is not
available here. However, it's not really clear that White can gain any profit
from avoiding (or further delaying) his knight coming to c3. For example, 9 e4
Bb7 10 e5 Nd5 1 1 Ng5 Be7 12 Qh5 Bxg5 13 Bxg5 Qb6 14 Qh4 c5,
N.Lomineishvili-E.Cosma, European Team Championship 200 1 .
1 87
startin g Out: Slav and Semi-Slav
8 Nc3 0-0 9 e4 e5 10 Bg5 Qe7 1 1 R e 1 Rd8 (Diagram 5)
Diagram 5 .Diagram 6
How should White continue? A key moment
In practice Black has done well from this position, as he retains solidity and
has a reasonable hold on the centre. His main problem is the usual one: how to
develop the queen's bishop without making concessions elsewhere. To this end
the text, pressing down the d-file, is a good move. 1 1 . . .h6 12 Bh4 Rd8 is simi
lar.
12 d5
White can try to maintain the tension with 12 Qe2, but after 12 ... h6 13 Bh4
exd4 14 Nxd4 Nb6 15 Nf3 g5 16 Bg3 Bxg3 17 hxg3 Nxc4 18 Qxc4 Be6 19 Qe2
Nd7, Black had found a way to get his bishop o.ut and had fully equalised in
M.Illescas Cordoba-V.Akopian, Linares 1995.
Instead 12 Qc2?! exd4 13 e5 doesn't break down Black's defences: 1 3 ... Nxe5 14
Nxe5 (14 Ne4? is met by 14 . . . Nxf3+ 15 gxf3 Be6) 14 ... Bxe5 15 f4 dxc3 16 Rxe5
cxb2 17 Qxb2 Qd6 18 Rae 1 b5 and Black is better.
The similar variation 12 Qb3?! exd4 13 e5 is seen in the next game.
12 ...Nb6
I prefer an alternative route: 12 . . .h6 13 Bh4 Nf8!? 14 dxc6 bxc6 15 Qc2 Ng6 16
Bg3 Nh5, as in D. Schlecht-I.Khenkin, Munster 1997, when Black obtains
counterplay. . '
1 3 Bb3 Bg4
The bishop emerges, only to now get kicked out of play!
14 h3 Bh5
Instead 14 ... Bxf3 15 Qxf3 Nbd7 16 dxc6 bxc6 leaves White with a small pull
for two reasons: he has the bishop pair, plus some prospects of tying Black
down to his fractured queenside.
1 88
1 5 g4 Bg6 16 Nh4
Naturally 16 dxc6 bxc6 1 7 Nh4 also comes into consideration.
16 ... Bb4 1 7 Qf3 cxd5 1 8 exd5 Rac8 1 9 Rad1 Nc4 (Diagram 6)
A key moment. Both sides are fully mobilised and White has to decide if he can
find anything stronger than 20 Bxc4, which would offer no advantage.
20 Nxg6 hxg6 2 1 d6!? Rxd6 22 Rxd6 Qxd6
After 22 . . . Bxd6 White can pin with 23 Ne4 and, following 23 . . . b5 24 Rd1, has
an annoying initiative. He will win back the pawn soon enough by capturing
twice on f6.
23 Qxb7 Rb8 24 Qf3 Nd2
Otherwise 24 . . . Nxb2 25 Ne4 yields attacking chances for White.
25 Bxd2 Qxd2 26 Re2 Qcl+ 27 Kg2
Black is slightly inconvenienced due to the pressure on f7, so he now seeks
solace in simplification.
27 ... Bxc3 28 bxc3 e4 29 Qe3 Qxe3 30 Rxe3 g5 3 1 f3!
After this White obviously has the advantage: Black's 3 vs. 2 majority is going
nowhere, whereas White has a passed pawn. Furthermore with active pieces
and the advantage of bishop vs. knight in an open position, White is clearly on
top.
3l...exf3+ 32 Kxf3 ReS 3 3 c4 Rc5 34 Re7 a5 35 Ke3 Kf8 36 Ra7
With Kd4 coming and the knight dominated, the result is no longer in doubt.
36 ... Re5+ 3 7 Kd4 Re4+ 38 Kc5 Re3 39 Kb6 Rxh3 40 c5 a4 41 Rxa4 1-0
Game 70
0 J.Lautier • V.Anand
Monaco (blindfold) 2000
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 e3 e6 5 Nf3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 Bd6 7 0-0 0-0 8 e4
dxc4 9 Bxc4 e5 10 Bg5 Qe7 1 1 Re 1 Rd8 12 Qb3?!
A sharp attempt that falls short in the face of cool defence. 12 d5 is better (see
Game 69).
12 ... exd4 13 e5 Nxe5 14 Ne4?
14 Nxe5 Bxe5 15 f4 dxc3 16 Rxe5 cxb2 17 Rae1 Be6 18 Qxb2 Qc7 19 Bxe6 fxe6
left White lacking compensation and fighting for equality in A.Beni
A.Bisguier, Vienna 1952.
14 ...b5! (Diagram 7) 15 Nxd6 Nxf3+ 1 6 Qxf3 Qxd6 17 Bxb5 Bd7 1 8 Bd3
ReS
Things have quietened down and Black has emerged with an extra pawn, for
which the bishop pair is insufficient compensation.
19 h3 Nd5 20 Re4 h6 21 Bh4 Qb4 22 b3 f5! 23 Rxe8+ Rxe8 24 Bg3 Qc3 25
Rd1 Kh8? !
1 89
Starting O u t : Slav and Semi-Slav
An over-cautious move. 25 .. .f4! is more direct, e.g. 26 Bxf4 Rf8 27 g3 Bxh3.

26 Bd6 Re6 27 Bb8 a5 28 Bc4
The f-pawn is defended: 28 Qxf5?? Rel + or 28 Bxf5? Rf6 29 Qxc3 Nxc3.
Diagram 7 Diagram 8
Taking the pressure off White has drawing chances
28 ... Rel+ 29 Rxel Qxel+ 30 Kh2 Nf6 3 1 Qf4 c5 (Diagram: 8) 32 Bd6?!

White can probably hold after 32 Ba7!, e.g. 32 ... Be6 33 Bxc5 Bxc4 34 bxc4 d3
35 Be3, while 32 . . . Qe4 is strongly met by 33 Qd6.
32 ... Qe4 33 Qg3 Be6 34 f3 f4! 35 Qf2
The alternative continuation 35 Bxf4 Qf5 36 Bxe6 Qxe6 still favours Black be
cause of the passed d-pawn.
35 ... Qc6 36 Bxf4 Bxc4 37 bxc4 Qe6 38 Qc2 Nd7 39 Bc7 Nb6 40 Bxb6
Qxb6 41 Kgl Qe6 42 Qd3 Qel+
In order to win Black will have to get his passed pawn moving forward without
allowing perpetual check or, alternatively, he must exchange queens.
43 Kh2 a4 44 Qf5 Qe7 45 Qd5 Kh7 46 Qf5+ g6 47 Qd5 h5 48 f4 h4!
Instructively fixing White's kingside.
49 a3 Qf6 50 g3 Qf5 51 Qg2 Kh6 52 Qd2 hxg3+ 53 Kxg3 g5!
The coming pawn ending is winning.
54 h4 Qxf4+ 55 Qxf4 gxf4+ 56 Kxf4 Kh5 57 Kg3 .d3! 58 Kf3 Kxh4 59 Ke3 Kg3
60 Kxd3 Kf3 61 Kd2 Ke4 62 Kc3 Ke3 63 Kc2 Ke2 64 Kc3 Ke3 65 Kc2 Kd4
Outflanking is complete.
66 Kd2 Kxc4 67 Kc2 Kd4 68 Kd2 c4 69 Kc2 c3 70 Kcl Kc5! 71 Kdl Kd5!
Triangulation.
72 Kcl Kd4 0-1
1 90
B l ack Avoids the Meran
Game 71
0 A.Poluljahov • J.Geller
Krasnodar 2001
1 Nf3 d5 2 d4 c6 3 c4 e6 4 Nbd2 Nf6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 Bd6 7 0-0 0-0 8 e4
dxe4 9 Nxe4 Nxe4 10 Bxe4 (Diagram 9)
A moment of decision for Black Combination time
10 ...Nf6
Of Black's alternatives to the most common move 10 ...h6 (Games 72-73),
10 . . . Qc7 is probably the most robust. However, after 11 Bc2 c5 12 Re1 Rd8 1 3
dxc5 Bxc5 14 Qe2, Black will struggle t o equalise, e.g. 14 ... Nf8 15 Bd2 b 6 1 6
Rad1 Bb7 1 7 Be4 Ng6 1 8 h4 Bxe4 19 Qxe4 ReS 20 b4 and White had the ini
tiative on both wings in R.Vaganian-A.Miles, Hastings 1974175.
11 Bc2 c5 12 Bg5
The powerful pin reminds Black that he could have played 10 . . . h6.
1 2 ... h6 13 Bh4 cxd4 14 Qxd4 g5?!
As Black lacks development he can't really expect to get away with such a
risky advance in front of his king. Better is 14 . . . Be7 15 Qc3 Qc7 16 Rad1 Bd7
17 Ne5 Bc6, L.Basin-M.Corvi, Rome 1990, and White is restricted to a small
pull. Black is solid and has solved the problem of his queen's bishop, although
White can play the middlegame with the advantage of having the pair of bish
ops.
15 Rad 1 ! Bxh2+ 16 Kxh2 Qxd4 17 Rxd4 gxh4 18 Ne5!
The h-pawn is not going to run away, so keeping the light-squared bishop from
developing is the best idea.
18 ...Kg7 19 Rfd1 b6 20 Rxh4 Rh8
1 91
After 20 . . . Bb7 2 1 Rd3 h5 22 Rf4 the pressure tells, e.g. 22 . . . Ng4+ 23 Nxg4
hxg4 24 Rd 7!.
2 1 Rd3 h5 22 Rg3+ Kf8 (Diagram 10)
Black is on the ropes so it's no surprise that there's a combination coming . . .
23 Bg6! fxg6 24 Rf4 Ba6 25 Rxf6+ Ke7 26 Rgxg6 1-0

After 26 . . . Bc8 27 Rh6 White wins a second pawn. A disastrous game for Black.
Game 72
D V.Popov • P.Skatchkov
Russian Championship, Krasnodar 2002
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 e6 5 Bd3 Nbd7 6 0-0 Bd6 7 Nc3 0-0 8 e4
dxe4 9 Nxe4 Nxe4 10 Bxe4 h6 11 Bc2
Sensible, withdrawing from a potentially exposed square and preparing Qd3.
1 1 ...e5 12 Qd3
The most forcing continuation. Instead 12 Re1 is seen in the next game, while
after 12 b3 ReS 1 3 Re1 exd4 14 Rxe8+ Qxe8 15 Qxd4 Bc5 16 Qd3, White keeps
slight but persistent pressure.
12 ...f5
Stopping mate, gaining space and threatening . . . e4, but there is a downside:
the weakening of the a2-g8 diagonal.
13 c5 Bc7 14 Qb3+ Kh8 15 dxe5 Nxe5 (Diagram 11)
Diagram 1 1 Diagram 1 2
The c8-bishop needs t o develop · Rook on the seventh
Yet again, Black's chances to get out of the opening and into the middlegame
with a respectable position depend upon him finding a way to develop his
queen's bishop.
16 Re1!
1 92
More precise than 16 Bf4?! Be6! 1 7 Qxe6? (correct is 1 7 Qc3 Nxf3+ 18 Qxf3
Bd5 which is just equal) 1 7 . . . Nxf3+ 1 8 gxf3 Bxf4, as White would then sud
denly find himself in trouble.
16 ... Qf6
16 . . . Re8! is best, as this doesn't leave White with much after 1 7 Bf4 Be6 18
Qc3 Nxf3+ 19 Qxf3 Bxf4 20 Qxf4 Qf6, C. Cruz Lopez-R.Cifuentes Parada, Am
sterdam 200 1 .
1 7 Bf4 Be6 1 8 Bxe5! Bxb3
Otherwise 18 . . . Bxe5 can be met by 19 Qxb7, when 19 . . .Rab8 20 Qxc6 Rfc8 21
Qa6 Rxc5 22 Nxe5 Rxe5 23 b3 leaves Black a pawn light.
19 Bxf6 Bxc2 20 Re7 Rxf6 21 Rxc7 (Diagram 12)
All this bloodletting has left us with a simplified endgame where the presence
of White's rook on the seventh grants him a strong initiative.
21...b6 22 Rcl Be4 23 Ne5 Kh7 24 f3 Bd5 25 a3
Maintaining a bind. Still, there is no clear breakthrough as yet.
25 ... Re6 26 f4 Be4 27 Rc3!
With the threat of Rg3. 27 cxb6?! axb6 28 Nxc6 is inferior, which allows Black
excellent counterplay with 28 . . . Rd6 intending . . . Rd2.
27 ... Rae8
Freeing the rook at the cost of a pawn.
28 Rxa7
Now 28 Rg3 can be parried by 28 . . . R6e7.
28 ...bxc5 29 Kf2
29 Rxc5 would allow 29 . . . Rd8.
It's worth remembering that endgames aren't just about material - the initia
tive is also important j ust as in the middlegame.
29 ... Kg8 30 h4 g5 31 hxg5 hxg5 32 Rg3!
Nipping Black's kingside counterplay in the bud.
32 ... g4 33 Rb3 R6e7 34 Rxe7 Rxe7 35 Rb8+ Kg7 36 Rd8 Re6 37 Rd7+ Kg8
38 Rd8+ Kg7 39 a4
The passed pawn starts to advance and Black has no satisfactory answer.
39 ... Rh6 40 Rd7+ Kf8 41 a5 c4 42 a6 c5 43 a7 Ke8 44 Rg7 c3 45 bxc3 Ra6
46 Nc4 Kd8 47 Ne3 Ra2+ 48 Kg3 Ra3 49 Nxf5 ! Rxc3+ 50 Kxg4 Ra3 5 1
Nd6 Bxg2 52 f5 Ra6 5 3 Nb7+ Kc8 5 4 Nxc5 Ra5 55 Ne6 Be4 1-0
Game 73
D R.Sherbakov • Y.Shabanov
Russian Championship 1 996
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 Bd6 7 e4 dxe4 8 Nxe4
1 93
Nxe4 9 Bxe4 h6 10 0-0 0-0 1 1 Bc2 e5 12 Re1 Bb4 13 Bd2

Although 1 3 Qd3 !? f5 14 Rxe5 Nxe5 15 Nxe5 Bd6 16 Bf4 Be6 offers White
enough compensation for the exchange, it's slightly risky in my opinion.
13 ... Bxd2 14 Qxd2 exd4 15 Qxd4 (Diagram 13)
How to negate W h ite's pull? White has a strong initiative
1 5 ... Qb6
The best defence could be 15 . . . Nf6 16 Qc3 c5!, limiting White's options, e.g. 17
Ne5 Be6 18 Ng6 ReS 19 Nf4 Qd6, as in J.Gustafsson-F.Lamprecht, Hamburg
1999, which soon led to a draw.
16 Qc3
With the pawn structure being symmetrical, White is relying on better devel
opment for a pull. If Black can get his queenside out then he will be OK, so
White must keep the threats coming to keep Black from mobilising.
16 ... a5 1 7 Rad1 Nf6 18 Rd6! Qb4
Others are worse, e.g. 18 . . . Re8? 19 RxeS+ NxeS 20 c5! Qc7 2 1 Qd3 !, or
18 . . . Be6? 19 Nd4 Qb4 20 Qxb4 axb4 2 1 Nxe6 fxe6 22 Bb3, or 18 . . . Qc5? 19 Rxf6!
gxf6 20 Qxf6 etc.
19 Qe5!
The attack is what interests Sherbakov.
19 ... Qxc4 20 Bd3 (Diagram 1 4) 20 ... Qg4 . ·
If instead 20 . . . Qxa2, then 21 Rxf6! gxf6 22 Qxf6 Qd5 23 Re3 and Black has
serious problems.
20 . . . Qb4!? could be the best chance, although after 21 a3 Qa4 22 Rxf6! gxf6 23
Qxf6 Qg4 24 Qxh6 Qg7 25 Qh4, White has great play for the exchange.
2 1 h3 Qh5 22 Qg3
1 94
With strong, if not decisive, threats.

22 ... Nd5 23 Re5 f5 24 Rg6 Rf7 25 ReS+ Kh7 26 Ne5 Rc7 27 f4! 1-0
Black is helpless in the face of 28 Be2! Qxe2 29 Rxh6+ gxh6 30 Qg6 mate.
It's appropriate that we end the section with another game in which Black
never moved his queen's bishop or rook. Avoiding the Meran with these classi
cal lines often leaves Black with a difficult defensive task and one small slip
spells big trouble.
The Semi-Slav with . . . a7-a6

The lines with . . . a7-a6 aren't so easy for White to pin down. Against this flexi
ble approach White has a number of options, but Black can handle his pawn
structure accordingly, challenging White's central control.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 e3 a6
At first sight it seems premature to play 5 . . . a6 (compared to the Slav with
4. . . a6 of Chapter 6), as Black can no longer get his light-squared bishop out
side the pawn chain. But here Black is looking for solidity and provokes White
to play the blocking 6 c5.
If White instead reacts with 6 Bd3, Black can gain a tempo by capturing on c4,
e.g. 6 Bd3 dxc4 7 Bxc4 c5, with transposition to a Queen's Gambit Accepted, in
which the early Nbl-c3 is not one of White's most challenging lines.
Otherwise, if White plays quietly then he may have to face ... c6-c5 followed by
. . . Nc6, the use of the c6-square being one of the points behind playing ... a6-a6
before committing the knight to d7.
6 Bd3 Nbd7 (Diagram 15)
Semi-Slav with . . . a7-a6 A square of pawns
1 95
Starting Out: Slav and Semi-S lav
Black keeps his options open. He may even switch back to a Meran-style con
tinuation, depending on White's next move.
7 b3
If 7 0-0, then 7 . . . dxc4 8 Bxc4 b5 9 Bd3 c5 gives Black a comfortable Meran.
Alternatively, the direct 7 e4 can be met by 7 . . . dxc4 8 Bxc4 c5, which looks
more like a QGA. Then 9 d5 exd5 10 Nxd5 Nxd5 1 1 Qxd5 is rebutted by
l l . . .Qe7 12 Qd3 Nb6 13 Bb3 Be6 with equal chances.
7 Bb4
...
The most precise. White now has to place his bishop on a less-active square.
8 Bd2 0-0 9 0-0 Bd6
Now, as in the Romih variation, Black drops the bishop back to its natural
posting.
10 Qc2 e5
Played with the light-squared bishop's emergence in mind.
11 cxd5 cxd5 12 e4! (Diagram 1 6)
The critical move and perhaps the only serious way to strive for a pull.
Strategy
With . . . a 7 -a6 Black is trying to angle the game towards analogous lines of the
Semi-Slav, Queen's Gambit Accepted or Semi-Tarrasch. His choice will depend
upon how White commits himself. The approach is flexible and adaptable.
Theoretical?
No, it hasn't got that way yet. However, some basic knowledge of other compa
rable opening systems is helpful.
Statistics
Although 5 . . . a6 (521 games) and 6 . . . a6 (141 games) were all the rage in the
1930's and 50's, they were then largely forgotten for decades. Now, however,
they are back with a vengeance. GMs Kobalia, Godena and M. Gurevich have
led the way in showing that the flexibility of the . . . a6-Slav can also be applied
to the Semi-Slav.
These lines have scored well, over 4 7%, with a fairly high percentage of draws
(38%). If we compare these statistics with those of the classical approach, the
conclusion is clear: if Black wants to avoid the Meran and yet seeks solidity
then 5 . . . a6/6 . . . a6 is the most successful approach.
Game 74
D G.Kasparov • Fritz X3D
New York match 2003
1 Nf3 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 d5 4 d4 c6 5 e3 a6!? 6 c5
1 96
Kasparov plays for an advantage in space.

After 6 a4, Black has 6 . . . c5! transposing to a position covered in Chapter 6.
The same riposte can be used against other slower choices such as 6 Qc2, or 6
Bd2, as the move . . . c6-c5 enables . . . Nc6 when the knight is more active than in
the. main lines of the Semi-Slav (which involve 5 . . . Nbd7), e.g. 6 Bd2 c5 7 cxd5
exd5 8 Be2 Nc6 9 0-0 Be6 10 Rc1 Rc8, with play similar to the Semi-Tarrasch
Defence where Black accepts an isolated pawn for active piece-play. Then
K.Bischoff-M.Gurevich, Bundesliga 2002, continued 1 1 dxc5 Bxc5 12 Na4 Ba7
with chances for both sides.
Another example of this approach by Black: 6 Qc2 c5!? 7 dxc5 Bxc5 8 a3 dxc4 9
Bxc4 b5 10 Bd3 (10 Nxb5? axb5 1 1 Bxb5+ fails to 1 l . .. Bd7! 12 Qxc5 Qa5+)
10 . . . Nbd7 and play is similar to that of the Queen's Gambit Accepted where
White has a small lead in development.
6 . Nbd7
..
After 6 . . . b6 7 cxb6 Nbd7 8 Na4 Nxb6 9 Bd2, White hopes to probe potential
weaknesses on Black's queenside.
7 b4 (Diagram 1 7)
Action o n the flank Black has n o counterplay
7 ... a5
The fashionable way is to do without this move and play uniquely in the cen
tre: 7 . . . g6! 8 Bb2 Bg7 9 Be2 Qc7 10 Qc2 (or 10 0-0 0-0 1 1 Rel e5 Y.Kruppa
S.Vysochin, St. Petersburg 2003) 10 . .. 0-0 1 1 Na4 Ne4 12 Bd3 f5 13 0-0 e5,
F.Vallejo Pons-M.Gurevich, Spanish Team Championship 2004. In this way
Black obtains space for his pieces without weakening the queenside.
8 b5 e5
A central counter is the recommended response to enemy action on the flank.
197
Starting O ut: Slav a n d Sem i-Slav
0
NOTE: Action on the flank is often best cou ntered by reaction
i n the centre.
9 Qa4 Qc7 10 Ba3 e4?!

It's probably better to retain the tension, as after 10 .. e4 White can manoeuvre
.
at will.
1 1 Nd2 Be7 12 b6
Kasparov's plan is to capture Black's a-pawn which lacks support. A slow plan,
but if Black can't undertake anything positive, then it's annoying and strong!
12 ... Qd8 13 h3 0-0 14 Nb3 Bd6
A tricky move to improve the bishop's prospects, since if now 15 cxd6? then
15 . . . Nxb6 and White loses his queen.
15 Rb1 Be7?!
15 . . . Bb8 would be more logical.
16 Nxa5
Now the next phase for White is to untangle. With the centre blocked there's
no rush to commit his king.
16 ... Nb8 1 7 Bb4 Qd7 18 Rb2 Qe6 19 Qd1 Nfd7 20 a3 Qh6 21 Nb3 Bh4 22
Qd2 Nf6 23 Kd1
With the queenside secure, the king finds refuge there in order to avoid any
counterplay.
23 ... Be6 24 Kc1 Rd8 25 Rc2 Nbd7 26 Kb2 Nf8
Now it's time for the a-pawn to show what it can do.
27 a4 Ng6 28 a5 Ne7 29 a6! bxa6 30 Na5 (Diagram 1 8)
By giving back the extra pawn Kasparov seals the a-file and leaves Black with
serious positional problems on the wing. Apart from facing an imposing pro
tected passed pawn, both the a- and c-pawns are weaknesses that require sup
port.
30 ... Rdb8 31 g3 Bg5 32 Bg2 Qg6 33 Ka1 Kh8 34 Na2 Bd7 35 Bc3 Ne8 36
Nb4 Kg8 37 Rb1
Black has no targets at all and so White can build up calmly, before angling to
break through decisively on the queenside where Black has so little space to
manoeuvre.
TIP: When you have total control, ther.e's no rush. Keep the
bind intact and slowly improve. It's excruciating for you r op
ponent!
37 ...Bc8 38 Ra2 Bh6 39 Bfl Qe6 40 Qd1 Nf6 41 Qa4 Bb7 42 Nxb7 Rxb7 43
Nxa6 Qd7 44 Qc2 Kh8 45 Rb3 1-0
The 5 ... a6 6 c5 line is for those who enjoy closed positions.
1 98
WARNING: Don't go too passive or you ' l l be squeezed out of

space l i ke Fritz 3D.
Game 75
0 E.Arlandi • M.Godena
Reggio Emilia 1 994
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e 6 3 Nc3 c6 4 e3 Nf6 5 Nf3 a6 6 b3 Bb4 7 Bd2
The only good square. White gets into trouble after 7 Bb2? Ne4 8 Qc2 Qa5 9
Rc1 Qxa2.
7 ... Nbd7 8 Bd3
This position can occur from a number of move orders, e.g. 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3
Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 a6 7 b3 Bb4 8 Bd2.
8 . 0-0 9 Qc2 Bd6
. .
With White having chosen a cautious way of developing and delaying central
action, Godena prepares to play for . . . e6-e5.
10 0-0 e5 11 cxd5 cxd5 (Diagram 1 9)
A fluid centre Effective centralisation
Note how . . . a7-a6 plays an important role stopping any ideas of Nc3-b5.
12 dxe5
12 e4!? is recommended, smashing open the centre while Black's queenside is
half-asleep. Then after 12 . .. exd4 13 Nxd5 Nxd5 14 exd5 Nf6 15 Rae1 h6 16
Nxd4 Nxd5 17 Nf5, White keeps an edge according to Yevseev.
1 2 ... Nxe5 13 Nxe5 Bxe5 1 4 Radl Bg4
Anoth�r example of Black accepting an isolated pawn, but in compensation
has aCtive piece-play.
1 99
L1
NOTE: Remember isolated pawns are only 'weaknesses' if
there is no compensating activity.
15 f3 Bh5 16 Ne2 ReS 1 7 Qb 1 Bg6

Once White has played f2-f3, the e3-pawn can equally become a target and
largely cancels out the risk that the d5-pawn will become a problem. Godeha is
now not at all concerned about exchanging pieces.
1S Rc1 Qe7 19 b4?!
The more prudent 19 Rxc8 Rxc8 20 Bxg6 hxg6 21 Rc1 would be about equal.
The text is optimistic.
19 ... b5 20 Nf4?!
Allowing his pawns to become compromised in order to play on the dark
squares, but ceding the initiative to his opponent.
20 ... Bxf4 21 exf4 Rxc1 22 Rxc1 Qa7+ 23 Kfl Qd4! (Diagram 20)
A powerful centralising move that rocks White back on his heels.
24 Rc3
24 Bxg6 loses a pawn to 24 . . . Qxd2 25 Bd3 Qxf4.
24 ... Ne4!
A strong blow that wins a pawn anyway.
25 fxe4 dxe4 26 Qe1 exd3 27 Qe7
With opposite-coloured bishops in middlegames, winning a pawn isn't enough;
it's more important to have the strongest attack.
27 ... Bh5 2S g3
28 Qe3 Be2+ 29 Kf2 would be a better chance, just trying to hold things to
gether. As the ending would be drawish, Black could instead keep the pot boil-
·
ing with 29 . . . Qd5.

2S ... Qd5 29 Kg1 Bg4 30 Rc5 Qxa2 3 1 Rg5 Qe6
Now with two pawns in the bag, the ending becomes interesting.
32 Qc5 h6 33 Re5 Qa2 34 Qe3 Qb1+ 35 Kg2 BcS 36 ReS Qc2 37 Kf2 Be6
3S Re7 RdS 39 Ra7 Qc6 40 Qe5 Qb6+ 4 1 Be3
And now a neat finish . . .
41...Qxe3+! 4 2 Kxe3 d 2 0-1
Summary
Although I have occasionally played these lesser lines myself, I can't really
recommend 6 . . . Bd6 and 6 . . . Bb4, as Black tends to end up with a passive game.
The modern 5 . . . a6/6 . . . a6 has the advantage of creating more problems for
White and might be worth a try.
200
Chapter Twelve
Wh i te Avo i d s t h e M e ra n
- Introd u ction
- 6 Qc2: The Aggressive Approach
- 6 Qc2: The Positional Approach
- The Quiet 5 Qb3

Introduction
As we have seen in Chapter 10, the Meran is complex and can involve long,
forcing variations which at times lead to considerable clarification. It's one of
the most theoretical areas of the Semi-Slav, and trying to keep ahead in the
opening is no easy task for White. So, for a number of reasons, there has been
a large minority of players seeking fresher pastures.
At one time there was interest in the calm 5 Qb3 (Game 83), defending the c
pawn with the queen, but this waned when it was generally perceived to be
impotent. Another cause of its demise was the rise of the multi-purpose 6 Qc2.
There are a variety of ways to handle the position after 6 Qc2, but there are
two schools of thinking: the aggressive and the positional. 6 Qc2 does give
White the added possibilities of e3-e4 or 0-0-0 in the early stages, but in most
cases it's just a 'useful semi-developing move' that will fit in well with the
overall scheme of things; for instance if White brings a rook to d 1 or places a
bishop on d3 bearing down the b 1 -h7 diagonal. But it's only a move or two
later that White will commit himself to either an aggressive or positional ap
proach.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Qc2 Bd6 (Diagram 1)
Diagram 1 Diagram 2
White plays 6 Qc2 Aiming for equality through exchanges
' .
6 Qc2: The aggressive approach

Mter the standard 6 . .. Bd6 the sharpest try is 7 g4!?. In this case White ex
ploits the fact that the g7 -pawn is no longer defended to create immediate ten
sion on the kingside.
7 g4
202
White Avoids the Meran
This is indeed a very unpleasant move to face if you are unprepared. White
seeks immediate action and Black may find it hard to gain the time to develop
his queenside pieces, as the immediate threats keep him occupied. The first
one is g4-g5 when the knight would be pushed out of the game.
A couple of other 'active' systems are worth a closer look. Taimanov's 7 Bd2 0-0 >
8 o·- 0-0 aims for e3-e4 after getting the king out of the centre (Game 78). In my
opinion Black should react with 8 . . . c5 making White's e3-e4 advance less at
tractive. Instead, immediate action in the centre with 7 e4 is well countered by
7 . . e5! as in Game 79.
.
7 Bb4!
...
A paradoxical move. Why should Black move the same piece twice? Isn't this a
loss of tempo? At first sight this move certainly comes as a surprise, so it's a
good idea to try and fathom out Black's reasoning. The position has changed as
White has committed himself to a flank attack with the controversial move g2-
g4. Black decides to 'invest' a tempo to assure temporary control of the e4-
square, in order that the knight has somewhere sensible to go, seeing as f6 is
no longer a secure vantage point. More deeply, the coming exchange of some
minor pieces takes the sting out of White's attack and leaves g2-g4 hitting at
thin air. Further down the road Black will be able to complete his queenside
development and castle safely, as in Games 76 and 77.
8 Bd2 Qe7 9 Rgl Bxc3 10 Bxc3 Ne4 (Diagram 2)
White will certainly still be interested in attacking if he can, but the com-
ing exchange of a second pair of minor pieces reduces White's pressure consid
erably. Even so, Black will still have to find a successful development for his
queen's bishop before he can claim full equality.
Strategies
White's development is somewhat easier in the early phase and he decides to
exploit this fact by precociously seeking conflict. The idea of an early destabi
lising g2-g4 thrust has become a popular concept in other openings (in certain
variations of the Sicilian, Nimzo-Indian and the English, for instance). It
doesn't necessarily lead to out-and-out attacking play; the main point is rather
to make one's opponent feel uncomfortable!
Theoretical?
The continuing popularity of 7 g4 has led to it becoming rather theoretical.
The Taimanov system and 7 e4 are less so. In any case there's still far less to
learn than in the Meran.
Statistics
The dangerous 7 g4 (attributed sometimes to Shabalov, who played it a couple
of times, or to Shirov who turned it into headline news) scores strongly with
62%. Against my recommended 7 . . Bb4 White has a more normal 55%.
.
203
Taimanov's 7 Bd2 (followed by 8 0-0-0) scores a respectable 54% for White, but
the antidote 8 . . . c5, scores 56% for Black.
Both of these lines lead to a high proportion of decisive games.
Game 76
D G.Sargissian • E.Sveshnikov
Stepanakert 2004
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 c6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Qc2 Bd6 7 g4
White shows his teeth.
7 ... Bb4
If Black takes the plunge with 7 . . . Nxg4, then after 8 Rg1 he can give the pawn
back for some solidity with 8 . . .f5 9 h3 Ngf6 10 Rxg7, or if he prefers, he can try
and hold onto the pawn (at the risk of dropping behind in development) with
8 . . . Qf6 9 Rxg4 Qxf3 10 Rxg7 Nf8 1 1 Rg1 Bxh2 12 Be2.
In both cases, White's position is easier to play and Black has to defend accu
rately. The text is safer and more frustrating for White, who thus finds it
harder to get attacking chances on the g-file.
�
TIP: When there's a choice in the opening, avoid the type of
position your opponent is looking for!
8 Bd2 Qe7
Now Black really threatens to capture on g4 unscathed, as after 9 . . . Nxg4 1 0
Rg1 f5, the queen would b e defending the g7-pawn.
9 Rg1 Bxc3
Exchanging two pairs of pieces takes the fire out of White's set-up.
10 Bxc3 Ne4 11 0-0-0 Nxc3 12 Qxc3 0-0! (Diagram 3)
Diagram 3 Diagram 4
Black is not afraid! A balanced position
204
Wh ite Avo ids the Meran
At this point castling is the most precise.

In my opinion 12 . . . dxc4 is tantamount to a loss of tempo as White's bishop has
yet to move. Mter 12 . . . dxc4, P.Harikrishna-J. Sriram, Indian Championship
2003, continued 1 3 Bxc4 b6 14 Bd3 Bb7 1 5 d5! (Black's uncastled king doesn't
de�end g7) 15 . . . cxd5 16 Qxg7, yielding White an edge.
13 g5
The continuation 13 cxd5 exd5 14 Bd3 can be met in a number of ways. It's
comparable to those lines of the Queen's Gambit Declined (Exchange Varia
tion) where White castles long except that here, with fewer pieces on the
board, there are less attacking chances for White.
a) 14 . . . Re8 15 Qc2 Nf8 is solid.
b) 14 . . . c5!? is OK as the isolated d-pawn will be compensated for by White's
ropey kingside structure.
c) 14 . . . Nf6 15 Ne5 Ne4 16 Qc2 f6 17 Bxe4 dxe4 18 Nc4 Re8 19 g5 !? Kh8! looks
fine for Black.
13 ... dxc4!
This is much better now, with the inclusion of . . . 0-0 by Black and g4-g5 by
White.
14 Bxc4
The position after 14 Qxc4 was reached by transposition in A.Aleksandrov
J.Lautier, Poikovsky 2004. Mter 14 ...Rb8!? (14... c5 is simpler, as for that mat
ter is 14 . . . e5) 15 Ne5 c5 16 f4 b5 17 Qc3 Nxe5 1 8 dxe5 Rb6 19 Rd6 Qc7 Black
held firm, but my impression was that White always had a pull.
14 ...b5!?
14 . . .b6 15 Bd3 Bb7 is even more solid, as Black has fewer potential weak-
nesses on the queenside.
15 Bd3 Bb7 16 Qc2 g6 17 Be4 Rab8!
An excellent move defending the bishop and preparing . . . c6-c5.
18 Kb1
The best chance to keep something is 18 Ne5!?, e.g. 18 . . .Nxe5 19 dxe5 Rfd8
(19 . . . c5!? 20 Bxb7 Qxb7 2 1 Rd6 also gives White a nominal pull) 20 Kb 1 c5 21
Bxb7 Rxd1 + 22 Rxdl Rxb7 2 3 f4 c4 24 Rd6 Qc7, and although Fritz prefers
White, I think Black is fine.
18 .. c5 19 Bxb7 Rxb7 20 dxc5 Nxc5 21 Ne5 Rc7 22 h4 Rfc8 (Diagram 4)
.
Black has completed development and his king is no worse than White's, so
chances are equal.
23 Ng4 Na4!
The sharpest line.
24 Qe4 Rc2 25 Qe5 Qc7 26 Nf6+
205
The slower 26 Qxc7 R2xc7 27 Nf6+ Kg7 28 Rcl gets nowhere after 28 ... Rxcl +
29 Rxc l Rxc l+ 30 Kxc1 Nc5 3 1 Kd2 b4 32 e4 h5, with a draw on the cards.
26 ... Kf8! 27 Nxh7+ Ke7 28 Qf6+
Now 28 Qxc7+ would be well met by 28 ... R8xc7!.
28... Ke8 29 Qh8+ Ke7 30 Qf6+ Ke8 3 1 Qh8+ lf2-lf2
Game 77
D A.Moiseenko • V.Potkin
Istanbul 2003
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 c6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Qc2 Bd6 7 g4 Bb4 8 Bd2
Qe7 9 Rg1 Bxc3 10 Bxc3 Ne4 11 Bd3
Forcing Black's hand, but not as dangerous as 1 1 0-0-0.
ll . .Nxc3 12 Qxc3 dxc4
.
In the Semi-Slav this capture is generally playable (and often advisable) once
White has already moved his light-squared bishop.
�
TIP: If you can, wait u ntil White moves his king's bishop before
capturing on c4.
13 Bxc4 0-0 14 h4 c5 (Diagram 5)
Diagram 5 Diagram 6
Black reacts in the centre Black reacts on the flank!
' .
15 g5 cxd4 16 Qxd4 Rd8 17 0-0-0
The pin on the d-file and Black's undeveloped queenside require urgent atten
tion. Potkin solves his problems in dramatic fashion...
1 7. ..b5! (Diagram 6) 1 8 Bxb5
If 18 Qe4, then 18 ...Rb8 19 Bd3 Nf8, followed by ... Bb7, bodes well for the sec
ond player.
206
18 ...Bb7 19 Qd6?
This loses immediately to a combination in two phases, but from White's point
of view the alternatives are not great either. If 19 Be2, for instance, then Black
has fine compensation that more than makes up for the pawn sacrifice, e.g.
19., .. Nc5 20 Qf4 Rac8 2 1 Kb1 Be4+ 22 Ka1 Bd3.
1 9 ... Rac8+ 20 Kb 1 Be4+ 21 Ka1 Rcl+!
Phase 1: winning the white queen by deflection.
22 Rxc1 Qxd6 23 Rgd1 Qb6 24 Rxd7 Bxf3 25 Rxd8+ Qxd8 26 Ba6
It's not yet over, due to the weakness of Black's back rank.
26 ... Bc6!
Now it is!
Phase 2: blocking the c-file leaves Black a clear queen for rook up. Whose back
rank did I suggest was weak?
27 b4
27 Rxc6 is of course answered by 27 . . . Qd1 +.
27 ... Qd6 28 f4 g6 29 b5 Bd5 30 h5 gxh5 31 f5 Qe5+ 0-1
A good example of the risks involved in castling long. If Black takes the initia
tive his attack can be stronger.
Game 78
D G.Fiear • A.Summerscale
French League 1999
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 e3 e6 5 Nf3 Nbd7 6 Qc2 Bd6 7 Bd2 0-0 8 0-0-0
(Diagram 7)
Diagram 7 Diagram 8
Taimanov's system Black plays in the centre
207
8 ... c5!
White rapidly completes queenside development, tucks his king away and is
ready to seek the initiative in the centre, so Black quite rightly reacts quickly.
Instead of this natural move, some books recommend 8 . . . b5 9 cxb5 c5, but
White can play better with 9 e4! b4 10 e5 bxc3 1 1 Bxc3 Be7 12 exf6 Nxf6 13 c5,
as in A.Rustemov-P.Haba, Bad Wiessee 1999, when he keeps an edge. Slower
play, with say 8 . . . Qe7, allows White to keep control, e.g. 9 e4 dxe4 10 Nxe4
Nxe4 1 1 Qxe4 e5 12 Bg5 f6 13 Bd3 g6 14 Bh6 Re8 15 c5, M.Taimanov
J. Gromek, Moscow Olympiad 1956.
9 cxd5
Instead 9 e4!? cxd4 10 Nxd4 Be5 1 1 Bg5 dxe4 isn't a problem for Black, as long
as he remembers to watch out for tricks on the d-file.
0
NOTE: If the centre opens up in positions with opposite-sides
castli n g , flank attacks lose their potency.
9 ...exd5 10 Bel
White can try for a direct attack with 10 Ng5!?, but cool defence pushes him
back: 10 . . . h6 1 1 h4 Re8 (giving the king a flight square) 12 Bd3 Nf8 13 dxc5
Bxc5 14 Nf3 Bg4, A.Huzman-R. Ekstrom, Ohrid 2001, and Black stands well.
10 ... c4 11 g4
A show of aggression that is best met by first solidifying the centre.
l l ... Nb6! 12 h3
12 g5?! is premature, as Black's firmly entrenched pieces lead to him obtaining
the better chances after 12 . . . Nh5 13 Rgl g6 14 Ne5 Bf5, M.Herink-J.Sefc,
Bratislava 1957.
12 ... Re8 13 Bg2 Bd7 1 4 Nd2 Bb4 15 Ndbl QeT (Diagram 8)
Black has a firm hold on the centre. Pinter recommends 15 . . . Bc6 16 g5 Bxc3 17
Nxc3 Ne4 and prefers Black, but after 18 h4 I would judge the position to be
unclear.
16 Rgl Rac8?
An error. The prudent 16 . . . a5! is simplest, defending the bishop and keeping a
bind on the central arena. If then 17 g5 Ne4 18 h4 Nxc3 19 Nxc3 Bg4 20 Rd2
Bxc3 and Black has an edge.
17 g5 Ne4 18 Bxe4 dxe4 19 Nxe4! Qxe4
' .
Instead 19 .. :Bxel is killed off by 20 Nf6+! .

2 0 Qxe4 Rxe4 2 1 Bxb4
So White has snatched a central pawn. Black now restores material equality
by picking off the sickly h-pawn, but in the meantime he definitively loses con
trol of the centre.
21 ...Nd5 22 Bd2 Rh4 23 Rg3 b5 24 a3 Rxh3
208
Wh ite Avoids the Meran
If 24 ... Re8, then White has 25 Re1 intending f2-f3 and e3-e4.
25 Rxh3 Bxh3 26 e4 Nb6 27 Nc3 a6 28 Be3 Re8 29 d5
The passed d-pawn, supported by White's harmoniously placed pieces, puts the
advantage firmly on his side.
29:..Nd7 30 Bd4 Ne5 3 1 Bxe5 Rxe5 32 f4 Re8 33 Kd2!
The king majestically strolls into the arena and shows who is boss.
33 ... Bc8 34 Ke3 h6 35 gxh6 gxh6 36 d6 Bb7 37 e5 Kg7 38 Rgl+ Kf8 39
Ne4 Bxe4 40 Kxe4 Rc 8 4 1 f5 c 3 42 bxc3 Rxc3 43 e6 1-0
Black played the opening impeccably and illustrates well the best antidote to
the Taimanov system. The oversight on move 16, just as he was about to take
charge, was the cause ofhis downfall.
Game 79
D V.Salov • A.Shirov
Dos Hermanas 1 995
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 e3 e6 5 Nf3 Nbd7 6 Qc2 Bd6 7 e4 (Diagram 9)
A precocious advance Tense b u t equal
How should Black meet such early central activity?

7 ... e5!
In my youth, after 7 . . . dxe4 8 Nxe4 Nxe4 9 Qxe4 e5 10 dxe5 0-0, I was the first
to face Mikhalchishin's famous novelty 1 1 exd6!, and after 1 l . . .Re8 12 Qxe8+
Qxe8+ 13 Be3 Ne5?! 14 0-0-0 Nxf3 1 5 gxf3 Bd7 16 Bd3 Qe5 17 Rhg1 White was
much better, A.Mikhalchishin-G.Flear, Mexico 1 980. Later it was shown that
the superior continuation 13 . . . Nf6 1 4 0-0-0 Be6 1 5 Bd3 b5, as in I.Naumkin
E.Sveshnikov, Moscow Championship 1983, is fine for Black. However, that
loss put me off playing 7 . . . dxe4, so I continue to prefer the text move.
209
8 cxd5 cxd5 9 exd5 0-0 10 Be2 ReS!?

Black develops rapidly in return for a pawn which White can't really expect to
hold onto anyway. The text arguably creates more tension than 10 . . . exd4 1 1
Nxd4 Nb6 1 2 Bg5 h6 1 3 Bh4 Be7 1 4 Qb3 Nbxd5 1 5 Rd1 Qa5 1 6 0-0 Nxc3 1 7
bxc3 Bd7!, a s in R.Mascarinas-G.Flear, Aosta 1 989, when Black had neverthe
less solved his opening problems.
11 Bg5 h6 12 Bh4 Qc7
Possible is 12 . . . e4!? immediately, as White certainly can't get away with 1 3
Nxe4?? Rxe4 1 4 Qxe4?? in view of the intermediate check 1 4. . . Qa5+.
13 0-0-0
Salov points out that 13 Bxf6!? Nxf6 14 dxe5 Bxe5 15 Nxe5 Rxe5 16 0-0-0 en
ables White to keep his pawn, but by continuing with 16 . . . Bf5 17 Bd3 Bxd3 18
Rxd3 Rc8, he believes that Black has adequate compensation.
13 ... e4 14 Nd2 g5 15 Bg3 Nb6 16 Nfl Bf4+ 17 Ne3 Qd8 18 d6 Qxd6 19 Kb1
(Diagram 10)
Material is equal and a tense middlegame is in prospect. Now I would suggest
19 . . . Bd7, as Black seems to have a pleasant game after 20 Nb5 Bxb5 21 Bxb5
Rec8 22 Qb3 Nfd5.
Instead, Shirov plays provocatively . . .
19 ... Be6 20 d5! Nfxd5 21 Nexd5

Otherwise White could try 21 Ncxd5 Nxd5 22 Bc4, but Salov analysed that the
mass exchanges following 22 . .. Nxe3 23 fxe3 Qe7 24 Bxe6 Bxg3 25 Bxf7+ Qxf7 ·
26 hxg3 Rac8 leave Black in good shape.

21...Nxd5 22 Rxd5! Bxd5 23 Rd1 Bxa2+ 24 Kxa2 Qe6+ 25 Qb3 Qxb3+ 26
Kxb3 Bxg3 27 hxg3
White has two pieces for the rook, and although Black has two pawns he will
have a hard time trying to defend all his weaknesses. So Shirov puts the em
phasis on getting active.
27 ... Rad8! 28 Nxe4 Rxd1 29 Nf6+ Kf8 30 Bxd1
One has to prefer White slightly, but Black is helped by the lack of a good an
chor square for the knight.
30 ... Rd8 3 1 Bf3 Ke7 32 Nd5+ Ke6 33 Ne3 Rd2 34 Nd1
If 34 Bxb7, then Black should play 34 . . . h5! with equal chances, rather than the
dubious 34 . . . Rxf2?! 35 Ng4 Rfl 36 Nxh6 f5 37 g4! . ,
3 4... £5 3 5 Kc3 Rd7 3 6 Ne3 Ke5 3 7 g4
The best chance, but Shirov is able to defend.
37 ... Rc7+ 38 Kb3 f4 39 Nc4+ Ke6 40 Na5 b6 41 Nc6 Kd6 42 Nd4 Ke5 4 3
Nb5!? Re7 44 Kc3 a6 45 Na3 b5 46 Be2
Fiddling about trying to find a way through and keeping his opponent on his
toes.
210
Wh ite Avo i ds the Meran
46...Rc7+ 47 Kd2 Rd7+ 48 Bd3 :ffi 49 g3 Rd4 50 Nc2 Rxg4 51 b3 h5 52 Ke3 a5!
The threat of . . . a4 frees the rook.
If Black plays 52 . . . h4? a curious trap would occur: i.e. 53 Kxf3 h3 54 Kxg4 h2
55 f4+! Kd5 56 Be2 and although Black queens with 56 . . .hlQ, it's immediately
eliminated with 57 Bf3+.
53 Bxb5 Re4+ 54 Kxf3 g4+ 55 Kg2 Kd6 5 6 f3? !
Instead 5 6 Ne3 Kc5 5 7 Ba4 would keep some small winning chances alive.
56 ... Re5! 57 Bc4 gxf3+ 58 Kxf3 Rc5 59 Ne3 Ke5 60 Ke2 a4!
A neat drawing combination.
61 bxa4 ¥2-¥2
Mter 61...Kd4 62 Bf7 Re5 63 Kf2 Rxe3 64 Bxh5 Ra3, it's dead drawn.
6 Qc2 : The positional approach

In this section, instead of being pushy, White prefers to simply use 6 Qc2 (Dia
gram 1 1) as a prelude for natural development, and the early phase of the
game is then generally much quieter. This 'solid' method is understandable as
White maintains his slight space superiority. Why upset a slightly favourable
status quo?
W h ite plays 6 Qc2 Black aims for . . . c6-c5
At some point Black will have to get round to developing his light-squared
bishop, and this will require the second player to alter the pawn structure in
some way. So if White gets his pieces prepared, he hopes to be better placed for
any inevitable central activity.
If Black is lethargic then White can play e3-e4, when the advance is well sup
ported by his developed pieces. In the case that he decides to develop his dark-
211
squared bishop on the long diagonal, there is no pressing need at all and he
can even complete development first.
From Black's point of view, I don't think it's a good practical approach to hang
around patiently for too long, if it enables White to pick his moment to get
things moving. I therefore recommend a more active approach from Black. The
plan I have suggested is a timely . . . d5xc4, when there are two rather different
pawn structures to take into account:
1. If White has played an early b2-b3 and recaptures after . . . d5xc4 with the b
pawn then Black is wise to react with a quick . . . e7-e5.
2. If White recaptures on c4 with his bishop then . . .b7-b5 and . . . Bb7 is the most
straightforward way to get the bishop into play.
There can be some subtle differences at times, depending on whether White
places his bishop on e2 or d3, but by playing my suggested . . . d5xc4 they come
to the same thing.
6 ... Bd6 7 Bd3
If instead 7 b3 0-0 8 Be2, with the point that White defends the c-pawn before
moving his bishop, then . . . d5xc4 can be met by b3xc4 keeping a pawn presence
on c4. A typical continuation is 8 . . . Re8 9 0-0 dxc4 10 bxc4 e5 11 Bb2 e4 12 Nd2
Qe7, when Black has active possibilities on the kingside (see Game 80).
7 ... 0-0 8 0-0
Waiting behind the lines and playing slowly with . . . Qe7, . . . b7-b6 and . . . Bb7 is
difficult to handle, so I recommend that Black force the pace . . .
8 . dxc4 9 Bxc4 b 5 1 0 Be2 Bb7 (Diagram 12)
..
Black has taken the first steps in the process of liberating his queen's bishop.
In the coming struggle, despite distractions elsewhere, he'll be continually try
ing to improve this bishop's potential, so although it may take time, the possi
bility of . . . c6-c5 will have to be borne in mind by both players (see Game 82) .
Theoretical?
These positional variations involving Qc2 with Be2 or Bd3 were particularly
popular in the 1980's, when the theory dramatically expanded. Since then pas
sion for this approach has cooled and by and large new developments haven't
been particularly noteable. So although the main lines are now well estab
lished, their positional nature means that they are not overly theoretical.
However, as I'm recommending an active response by Black, there are some
critical lines requiring theoretical preparation. · ·
Statistics
White scores about average in the lines involving an early b2-b3 and recaptur
ing after . . . d5xc4 with b3xc4. However, my recommended l l . ..Qe7 and 12 . . . e4
scores as high as 50% for Black. When . . . d5xc4 is answered by Bxc4 White's
percentage is about average, i.e. in the middle 50's.
212
Wh ite Avoids the Meran
Game 80
0 G.Fiear • L.Fressinet
Montpellier 2001
l d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 d5 4 Nc3 c6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Qc2 Bd6 7 b3 0-0 8 Be2
Re,8 9 0-0 dxc4 10 bxc4 e5 1 1 Bb2 Qe7 (Diagram 13)
D.iagram 13 Diagram 14
Black keeps his options open A double-edged position
A reasonable alternative is 1 l. .. exd4 12 exd4 Nf8, e.g. 13 Rad1 Qc7 14 c5 Be7

15 Ne5 Be6 16 f4 Nd5!, M.Taimanov-V.Chekhov, Tallinn 1980.
12 Rfe 1 e4
The sharpest try, where Black aims to gain space with prospects of a kingside
attack.
The more solid 12 . . . b6!? should also be comfortable, e.g. 13 a4 a5 14 Qb3 Rb8
15 Ba3 Ba6 with equality in A.Miles-A.Muir, Mendrisio 1989.
13 Nd2 Nf8 14 f3 exf3 15 Bxf3 (Diagram 14)
White now has a central pawn majority that he hopes to push forward as soon
as possible. In return, his exposed king and somewhat shaky pawns lead to
interesting tactical resources for Black. Play can become very double-edged.
15 Ng4 16 Nfl Qg5
...
Otherwise 16 . . . Qh4 17 g3 Qg5 is fairly similar.

1 7 c5
Mter 1 7 e4 Ne6 18 e5 Nxd4! 19 exd6 Bd7, Black had enough compensation in
the wild tussle L.Portisch-J.Van der Wiel, Tilburg 1 988. Indeed after the fur
ther 20 Rxe8+ Rxe8 21 Ne4 Nxf3+ 22 gxf3 Rxe4, his initiative and safer king
enabled him to take control and ultimately win.
213
Starting Out: Slav a n d Semi�Siav
1 7 ... Bc.7 18 e4 Ne6 1 9 Rad1 (Diagram 15)

Instead 19 Ne2? Bxh2+! favoured Black in S.Agdestein-M.Tal, Taxco Inter
zonal 1985.
W hat to d o about the centre? The position i s equal
Now the routine 19 . . . Rd8 20 h3 Nh6 2 1 Ne2 turned out better for White in
E.Jelling-S.Savchenko, Norresundby 1 992. So it would be advisable for Black
to break up White's centre before he can consolidate, and Fressinet seems to
have found a good way. . .
1 9 ...Nxd4!
A combination that demolishes White's centre.
20 Rxd4 Nxh2! 2 1 Nxh2 Bxh2+ 22 Kfl
If instead 22 Kxh2, then 22 ... Qh4+ 23 Kgl Qxe l+ 24 Kh2 Be6 gives Black two
pawns and a rook for the two pieces. Note the solidity of Black's structure
compared to White's four pawn islands.
22 ... Qxc5 23 Red1 Be6
Fressinet later regretted not playing 23 . . . Be5! 24 Rd8 Be6 25 Rxa8 Rxa8,
when three pawns and two fine bishops give Black excellent compensation.
24 Qf2 Be5 25 R4d2 Qa5 26 Ne2 Bxb2
Snatching the a-pawn with 26 . . . Bxa2 is foolhardy, as after 27 Bxe5 Rxe5 28
Qd4! the bishop on a2 is a cause for concern, e.g. 28.. .£6? 29 Ra 1 and the pin
spells trouble. 28 . . . Bb3 would be relatively best, but then after 29 Qd8+ Qxd8
30 Rxd8+ ReS 31 Rxe8+ Rxe8 32 Rb 1, followed by Rxb7, Black's queenside is
broken up.
27 Rxb2 Rad8 28 Nd4 (Diagram 1 6) 28 ... Bc4+?!
Still playing as if he is better. Instead 28 .. . Bc8 is solid and equal.
214
Wh ite Avoids the Mera n
29 Kg1 Rd7?!
29 ... c5? would be totally wrong, as White is much better after 30 Nf5 Rxdl+ 3 1
Bxd1 Rxe4 3 2 Rxb7!, e.g. 3 2 . . . Rel+? 33 Kh2 Rxd1 3 4 Rb8+ Rd8 3 5 Qxc5 Qxc5
36 Rxd8+ Qf8 37 Ne7+. Rather than the text, 29 ... Qc7 is more solid.
30 ·Rbd2 Qa3 Y2-Y2
At the last moment my opponent saw that 30 . . . Red8? loses to 31 Nxc6!, so he

changed his mind, played the text move and offered a draw.
In fact in the final position White can quite naturally continue the game, as he
has an edge with 31 Nf5 Rxd2 32 Qxd2 Be6 33 Qg5 Bxf5 34 exf5, but a draw
won me the tournament, so I cashed in.
Game 81
D H.Herraiz • G.Fiear
Elgoibar 2004
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c6 4 e3 Nf6 5 Nf3 Nbd7 6 Qc2 Bd6 7 Bd3 0-0 8 0-0
dxc4 9 Bxc4 b5 1 0 Bd3l?
10 Be2 Bb7 11 Rd 1 Qc7 12 e4 is White's main try (see game 82).
10 ... Bb7 1 1 e4
The modest-looking 1 1 a3 takes the bite out of . . . b5-b4 by Black, and even of
fers White the possibility of b2-b4 himself. In reply, I like 1 1 . . . Qe7, when 12
Ng5 (12 Bd2 Rfc8 1 3 b4 a5 was unclear after 14 bxa5 c5 in L.Van Wely
V.Borovikov, Panormo (rapid) 2002) can be met with 12 . . . Bxh2+! 13 Kxh2
Ng4+ 14 Kg1 Qxg5 1 5 f3 Ngf6 16 e4 Qh4 1 7 Qf2 Qxf2+ 18 Kxf2, A.Vyzma
navin-A.Shirov, Tilburg 1992, when Black has an extra pawn, but White
should have fair compensation due to his bishops and dark square potential.
ll ... e5 12 Bg5 (Diagram 1 7)
W hat now for Black? A sharp position
215
An interesting move, which had given me problems two weeks earlier. This
time I was prepared . . .
TIP: G o through your own games (as soon a s possible after

you have fi nished) and get your open ing sorted out for the
next time. Don't hesitate, do it straight away!
12 ... exd4 13 Nxd4 Bxh2+! 14 Kxh2 Ng4+ 15 Kg3 Qxg5 16 f4

My home preparation had concentrated on 1 6 Nf3 Qg6 1 7 e5 f5 18 exf6 Qxf6
19 Bxh7+ Kh8 20 Bf5 Qxf5 2 1 Qxf5 Rxf5 22 Kxg4 g6, with about equal
chances.
1 6 ... Qd8!
Better than 16 . . . Qc5, which fails to 17 Nb3 Qh5 18 Rh1 Qg6 19 e5.
17 e5
Mter 17 Nf5, I had intended 17 . . . g6, e.g. 18 Kxg4 gxf5+ 19 exf5 with a complex
struggle in prospect.
The important point behind the choice of d8 for the queen is that, after 1 7
Kxg4, there is 17 . . . Nf6+ 18 Kg3 Qxd4.
17 ... g6! (Diagram 1 8)
My opponent later told me that, when he had prepared this variation with
Ubilava, they had concentrated on 17 . . . h5, but after 18 Rh 1 White's attack is
too strong.
18 Kxg4
Alternatively 18 e6?! is dubious after 18 . . . Ne3, and 18 Qe2 Ndxe5 19 fxe5
Qxd4 20 Rf4 gives Black a pleasant choice between 20 . . . Qe3+ and 20 . . . Qxe5.
18 ... Nxe5+ 19 fxe5 Qxd4+ 20 Rf4?
A serious mistake. White should try 20 Kh3, when after 20 . . . Qxe5 Black has
three pawns and the safer king, but if White tucks his king away then the ex
tra piece may well come into its own. So, after the further 21 g3 White should
be OK
20 ... Qxe5 21 Rafl
If 21 Qf2, then 2 1 . . .Rad8 22 Bc2 g5 leaves White with no defence.
21. .. Rae8 22 Qf2 h5+ 23 Kh3 Bc8+
There's no rest for White's battered kingside. Now the only way to struggle on
is to give back the piece. . .
24 g4 Qe3+ 25 Kg2 Qxd3 26 Rdl Qe3 27 Qxe3 Rxe3 28 gxh5 Bf5

With two extra pawns the ending is a simply a matter of time.
29 Rd6 Re6 30 Rd2 Rfe8 31 Kf2 Kg7 32 hxg6 fxg6 33 Ne2 R6e7 34 Nd4
Be4 35 Kg3 a6 36 a3 Bd5 37 Nc2 Re2 38 Rf2 Rxd2 39 Rxd2 a5 40 Nd4
Re3+ 41 Kf4 Re4+ 42 Kg3 b4 43 axb4 axb4 44 Ne2 g5 45 Nd4 Re3+ 46
Kh2 Kf6 47 Ne2 Ke5 48 Ng3 c5 49 Rf2 Bf3 50 Rc2 Kd5 51 Kgl Be4 52
216
Wh ite Avoi d s the Meran
Rd2+ Rd3 53 Nxe4 Kxe4 54 Rc2 Rd5 0-1

This game gives the impression that a certain measure of preparation is re
quired, which is true, but tactical awareness is even more important.
Game 82
0 M.lllescas Cordoba • P.Harikrishna
Calvia Olympiad 2004
1 Nf3 d5 2 d4 Nf6 3 c4 c6 4 Nc3 e6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Qc2 Bd6 7 Be2 0-0 8 0-0
dxc4 9 Bxc4 b5 10 Be2 Bb7 1 1 Rd1 Qc7 1 2 e4
Against slower ideas Black can achieve either ... c6-c5 or ... e6-e5 in peace, e.g.
12 b3 a6 13 Ne4 Nxe4 14 Qxe4 c5, or 12 Bd2 a6 13 b4!? e5.
12 ... e5
Black stands his ground.
0
NOTE: Black needs to be prepared so that, as soon as White
makes a central advance, Black has his reaction ready in order
to avoid going too passive.
13 g3
The lesser known, but tricky 13 Bg5 !? requires precise defence: 13 . . . exd4 14
Rxd4 b4 15 Bxf6! Nxf6 16 Na4 Rfe8 17 Rad1 Bf8 18 e5!? (alternatively 18 Bd3
c5 19 Rxb4, V.Dydyshko-E.Miroshnichenko, Swidnica 2000, is murky, but
Black seems to be OK, e.g. 19 .. . Rad8 20 Rxb7 Qxb7 21 e5 Nd5 22 Bxh7+ Kh8
23 Be4 Nb4) 18 ... c5! 19 Rh4 (19 exf6 is countered by 19 . . . Rxe2) 19 ... Rxe5 20
Nxe5 Qxe5, and although Black only has one pawn for the exchange, White's
knight on a4 and rook on h4 are clumsily placed, and one shouldn't forget
Black's bishop pair of course.
13 ... Rfe8
Pointing towards White's e-pawn. Pressure down the e-file from Black tends to
counter-balance the slightly unwieldy pawns on b5 and c6. That's just as well,
since compared to many lines of the Semi-Slav, it's often quite a task for Black
to get his queenside pawns entirely sorted out.
14 dxe5 Nxe5 15 Bg5
Mter 15 Nd4 Black has:
a) 15 . . . Ng6 16 Bg5 Be5, when he's firmly dug in. As a follow up, he can con
sider the harassing . . .b5-b4, either to undermine the defences to e4 and/or pre
pare . . . c6-c5. Another way to activate the light-squared bishop is . . . Rad8 fol
lowed by . . . Bc8-e6.
b) 1 5 . . . Bc5! is even more dynamic: 1 6 Nb3 Bb6 17 Bf4 Qc8 18 Kg2 b4 19 Na4
Nxe4!, and the long diagonal will open with a vengeance, V.Tukmakov
E.Sveshnikov, Bled 200 1 .
1 5. . .Neg4!? (Diagram 1 9)
217
Start i n g Out: Slav a n d Sem i-Slav
The te:l):t has great surprise value, though 15 ... Nxf3+ 16 Bxf3 Qe7 1 7 Ne2 h6 is
a solid alternative, when Black has a reasonable game.
A new idea for Black Black should be OK
16 Bxf6
A tame response, but I'm not sure if White has anything better. 16 h3 is criti
cal, putting the question to the knight, but rather weakening White's kingside,
e.g. 16 . . . h6! 17 Bh4 (17 Rxd6!? looks flashy, but just leads to simplification and
equality after 17 ... Qxd6 18 Bf4 Ne5 1 9 Nxe5 Rxe5 20 Rd1 Qe7 2 1 Bxe5 Qxe5)
17 . . Nxf2! (the point!) 1 8 Kxf2 g5 19 Nxg5 hxg5 20 Bxg5 Bxg3+ 21 Kg2 Bf2!
.
(elegant stuff, but it's a shame that it only earns half the spoils) 22 Kxf2 Qh2+
23 Kf3 Qxh3+ 24 Kf2 Qh2+ with a draw by perpetual check.
16 ... Nxf6 1 7 Rac1
Threatening Nxb5 exploiting the pressure down the c-file. A common theme in
this line.
1 7 ... Qe7 1 8 Nd4 g6
Putting a stop to any ideas of Nf5 and therefore threatening to capture on e4.
19 Bf3 Rac8 20 Nb3 a6 21 Bg2 c5!?
Finally Black 'liberates', but I suspect that the more cautious 2 1 . . . Bc7, fol
lowed by . . . Bb6 and only then ... c5-c4, is slightly better.
Now if White does nothing special, then the bishop pair plus queenside major
ity will give Black the advantage, so . . .
22 Rxd6! Qxd6 23 e5 Rxe5 24 Bxb7 Rce8 25 B f3 c 4 (Diagram 20)
Two minor pieces for rook and pawn. This often favours the pieces but here,
with Black's fine pawns and the lack of central outposts for White's knights,
Black is OK.
218
Wh ite Avoi d s the Meran
26 Nd2 Rel+ 2 7 Kg2 Qd3!? 28 a3 Qxc2 29 Rxc2 Kg7 30 Bb7 Rle6 31 a4

Rb8 32 Bf3 h5 33 h3 Nd7 34 Bd5 Re7 35 axb5 axb5 36 Bc6!?
Forcing the issue.
NOTE: One of the most common ways to win with Black is

when White plays as if he's better when he isn't. There is then
a tendency for him to overpress.
36 ... b4 37 Nce4 Ne5 38 Bd5 b3 39 Rc3?

Instead 39 Rcl Rd8 40 Nc3 holds things together. The text loses material.
39 ... Rd8 40 Bxc4 Nxc4 41 Rxc4 f5 42 Nxb3 fxe4 43 Rc2 e3!
White is suddenly lost, as the advantage of the exchange is decisive.
44 Re2 Rd3 45 Ncl Rd2 46 fxe3 Rxe2+ 47 Nxe2 Rxe3 48 Nf4 Rb3 49 h4
Kf6 50 Kh3 Rxb2 51 Nd5+ Ke5 52 Nf4 Kf5 53 Nd3 Rd2 54 Nf4 Rd4 55 Ne2
Rc4 56 Ngl Ke4 57 Kg2 Rc2+ 58 Kh3 Ra2 0-1
Zugzwang!
The Quiet 5 Qb3

With 5 Qb3 (Diagram 21) White supports his c-pawn and can then concen
trate on continuing development, without worrying about Black chopping the
pawn off and holding onto it. So a typical follow up is to play Bg5, although
some players will use this early queen sortie as a prelude to a Catalan-style
g2-g3.
W hite plays 5 Qb3 A typical Semi-Slav set-up
With the c l-g5 diagonal still open, White hopes to have enough time for Bg5
and e2-e3 keeping the centre intact. (remember that the immediate 5 Bg5 can
219
Starting Out: Slav a n d Semi -Slav
be met by the sharp 5 ... dxc4) It's as if he wants a pleasant Queen's Gambit
Declined, where Black may have problems developing his queen's bishop.
In my opinion it's not advisable for Black to keep the tension too long, as he
will then struggle to get his queen's bishop into the game. In fact now is the
best moment to capture on c4, as he can gain time for his queenside develop
ment by attacking the queen.
5 Qb3 dxc4 6 Qxc4 b5 7 Qb3 Nbd7! (Diagram 22)
Black has a typical Semi-Slav set-up and, over the next few moves, will aim
simultaneously to pursue further development and the . . . c6-c5 advance. White
will now have to decide between Bg5 and g2-g3.
Theoretical?
No, Black can essentially get by with natural moves.
Statistics
The heyday of 5 Qb3 was the early 1980's, but it must still frustrate Black
players overall as White scores a surprisingly high 59% in the database. Those
in the know, however, who reply with the recommended 5 . . . dxc4 6 Qxc4 b5 7
Qb3 Nbd7 8 Bg5 a6, reduce White's chances to 50%.
Game 83
D V.Korchnoi • Z.Ribli
Reggio Emilia 1 987
1 c4 c6 2 Nc3 d5 3 d4 Nf6 4 Nf3 e6 5 Qb3 dxc4 6 Q:xc4 b5 7 Qb3 Nbd7 8
Bg5
Sometimes White prefers to play in Catalan-style: 8 g3 a6 9 Bg2 Bb7 10 0-0 c5!
(again the right way for Black to liberate) 11 dxc5 Bxc5 (Black already has a
comfortable game) 12 Bf4 0-0 1 3 Ne5 Bxg2 1 4 Kxg2 Nxe5 15 Bxe5 Ng4!? (play
ing for more than safe equality with 15 . . . Qe7 16 Racl Rac8) 16 Bf4 e5 with a
complex struggle, R.Kempinski-D.Rogozenko, Hamburg 1999.
8 . a6 9 e4!?
..
Instead 9 e3 Bb7 10 Be2 c5 is already equal, A.Butnorius-G.Sarakauskas,

Birstonas 2002.
9 .. h6 10 Bxf6
.
White has little choice as the alternative 10 Bh4 g5 1 1 Bg3 b4 12 Na4 Nxe4
won't leave White with enough compensation. . .
10 ...Nxf6 1 1 e5 Nd7 12 Be2 Bb7 13 0-0 (Diagram 23) 13 ...Be7

Ribli cautiously delays ... c6-c5. There's no real hurry as White isn't in a posi
tion to stop the standard freeing move coming soon anyway. The problem with
Black trying 1 3 . . . c5 immediately is that he can easily get into hot water due to
his backward development: i.e. 14 d5! c4 (if 14 . . . exd5 1 5 Nxd5 Nxe5; then 1 6
Radl i s awkward for Black) 1 5 Qc2 (better than 15 Bxc4? Nc5! 16 Bxb5+ axb5
220
17 Qxb5+ Qd7, when although White has three pawns for the piece, GMs
would prefer Black whose pieces will soon be very active, while White's pawns
are not that threatening) 15 .. . exd5 16 e6, and Black's king finds itself under
threat, e.g. 16 . . . Nc5 17 Ne5! Nxe6 18 Bh5 etc.
Black will soon play . . . c6-c5 Black's pieces support . . . c6-c5
14 Ne4 ReS 15 Rfcl!?

If instead 15 Rac 1, Ribli intended 1 5 ...c5! 1 6 Nxc5 Nxc5 17 dxc5 Bxc5 with fine
play for Black. A tactical point is that 1 8 Bxb5+ is tempting but not dangerous,
as after 18 ... axb5 19 Qxb5+ Qd7 20 Rxc5 Qxb5 21 Rxb5 Ba6, Black is slightly ·
better.
15 ... Qb6! 16 a4!? c5! (Diagram 24)
0
NOTE: In the Semi-Slav, playing . . . c6-c5 is the key idea more
often than not. The skill comes in the preparation and timing.
The time is right, since d4-d5 by White is no longer a serious option. Opening
the position should now favour the owner of the bishop pair.
17 Nd6+!?
Now after 17 Nxc5 Nxc5 18 dxc5 Bxc5 the f2-pawn is en prise, and 19 axb5
Bxf2+ 20 Kh1 0-0 then strongly favours Black.
1 7 ... Bxd6 18 exd6 c4! 19 Qb4 Bxf3! 20 Bxf3 0-0
Leaving White's d-pawns looking rather forlorn. Black also has a useful
queenside majority.
2 1 axb5 axb5 22 Ra5 Rb8 23 Rei Rfd8! 24 h3 Nf6 25 Re5 Qxd6 26 Qxd6
Rxd6 27 Raxb5 Rxb5 28 Rxb5 Rxd4
Simplification into the endgame has left White with difficulties, but at least
his bishop is the superior minor piece for the moment.
221
Starti n g Out: Slav a n d Sem i-S lav
29 Be2?!
An error allowing Black's knight too much of a free hand. Instead 29 Kf1! Rd2
30 Ke1 would make it much harder for Black.
29 ... Ne4 30 Rb8+ Kh7 31 Rb4 Rd2 32 Bxc4 Nxf2!?
Ribli later considered 32 ... Rd1+! 33 Kh2 Nxf2 to be more precise. Even so, he
retains good winning chances in either case.
33 Rb3 Rc2 34 Bb5 Kg8! 35 Rf3 Ne4!
But not 35 . . . Rxb2?, which would be met by 36 Be8!.
36 Bd3 Rcl+ 37 Rfl Rxfl+ 38 Kxfl Nf6 39 Ke2 Kf8 40 Ke3 Ke7 41 Kd4
Kd6 42 Bc4 Nd7 43 b4 f5 44 Be2 Nb6 45 Bh5 e5+ 46 Kd3 Nd5 47 Kc4 Nf4
48 Be8 Nxg2 49 Kb3 Ne3 0-1
S um mary
5 Qb3 is occasionally employed by those looking to avoid normal lines, but it's
no longer considered dangerous.
The flexible 6 Qc2 is more testing as White has a wide choice to suit all styles.
The 'aggressive' options require custom-made replies:
1) 7 e4 quickens the pace in the centre, but Black is well on the way to equality
after 7. . . e5.
2) Taimanov's 7 Bd2 with 8 0-0-0 is comfortably met by 8 . . . c5. Again Black
needs to react in the centre quickly against a vigorous showing by White.
3) The fashionable 7 g4 is the most dangerous. I then recommend 7 . . . Bb4, lead
ing to an early exchange of minor pieces and a significantly reduced attacking
potential for White. Black loses a tempo and White does stay slightly ahead in
development, but if Black handles his queenside carefully he seems to be OK
The other three moves, 7 Bd3, 7 b3 and 7 Be2, are quite similar and can be
lumped together as positional tries. There are a number of ways to handle
Black's position, but his main criterion should be a coherent overall scheme for
development.
One of the best ways is to respond in typical Semi-Slav style, i.e. with . . . d5 xc4
and, after Bxc4, to follow up with . . . b7 -b5. If White plays an early b2-b3 and
replies to . . . d5xc4 with b3xc4, then . . . e6-e5 is a promising way of liberating the
position without creating targets for White.
The popularity of 6 Qc2 is likely to continue, as thy variation contains a rich
tapestry of ideas without being excessively theoretical.
222
Chapter Thirteen
E a rly D ev i at i o n s
- Introduction
- The Rausis System
m Meeting 3 Nc3 with 3 . . . dxc4
m Meeting 3 Nc3 with 3 . . . e5
m The Triangle System
m The Marshall Gambit
m The Noteboom Variation

Starting Out: Slav and Sem i-S lav
Introd uction
In this chapter we look at a number of less well-known systems. They may oc
cur due to a conscious effort to avoid mainstream theory, or as a result of a
particular choice of move order.
Although each offbeat system has its own aims, they do have one theme in
common: the desire to play the Slav or Semi-Slav on one's own terms!
The Rausis System

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 dxc4!?
Earlier than usual, but Black has a tricky follow-up in mind.
4 e3 Be6! (Diagram 1)
Diagram 1 Diagram 2
The Rausis System Black's game is satisfactory
By defending the c4-pawn, Black aims to frustrate White's efforts to re

establish material equality. This move takes some getting used to, because it's
ingrained in our psyche that blocking one's own e-pawn in this manner can't
be right.
5 a4
Certainly not 5 Ng5??, as 5 . . . Qa5+ picks off the knight.
·
The important alternative, 5 Nc3 b5 6 a4, can lead to complications, but by
playing 6 . . . b4 7 Ne4 Nf6 8 Ned2 c3 9 bxc3 bxc3 10 Nc4 g6, Black has a fairly
solid game.
5 Nf6 6 Nc3
...
The slower 6 Na3 c5 7 Nxc4 Nc6 8 Nce5 is met by 8 . . Bd5! when Black's bishop
.
224
Early Deviations
has a fine outpost.

6 ... g6 7 Ng5 Bd5 8 e4 h6 9 exd5 hxg5 10 dxc6 Nxc6 1 1 d5 Na5 12 Bxg5
(Diagram 2)
S.Ivanov-I.Rausis, Narva 1998, and now 12 . . . Bg7! gives Black a fully satisfac
tory game.
Strategy
' Black generally doesn't get to hold onto the extra pawn for long. Instead he
obliges White to spend time and effort to get the pawn back. In the meantime
Black will either continue developing with a timely . . . g7-g6 or, if circumstances
are favourable, even . . . Bd5 followed by . . . e7-e6.
Theoretical?
Not really, there haven't been enough games for it to get that way.
Statistics
Rausis's cheeky 3 . . . dxc4 followed by 4 . . . Be6 scores 49% for Black from only 204
games, most of these being from the last ten years. Draws are as high as 40%
in this line.
Game 84
D J.Szabolcsi • I.Rausis
French League 1 997
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 dxc4! ?
Black captures the c-pawn and intends t o make White work t o get it back.
4 e3 Be6
Holding onto the c-pawn in this way raises a few frowns (or giggles) from those
who don't think much of blocking the e-pawn in this manner, but Rausis is
· deadly serious!
5 a4
White can try a more aggressive approach with 5 Nc3 b5 6 a4 b4 7 Ne4 Nf6 8
Ned2, but Black seems to be doing fine after both of the following:
a) 8 . . . Bd5 9 Bxc4 e6 10 0-0 Nbd7 1 1 Qe2 c5, K.Kappeler-V.Tukmakov, Win
therthur 2003.
b) 8 . . . c3 9 bxc3 bxc3 10 Nc4 g6 11 Ba3 Bg7 12 Bd3 0-0 13 0-0 Nbd7 14 Rc 1 Rc8
15 Rxc3 c5, Z. Gyimesi-Z.Varga, Croatian Team Championship 2000.
5 ...Nf6 6 Na3
This ensures the recuperation of the c-pawn, but now Black has time to hit
back at the centre.
6 ... c5! (Diagram 3)
225
Striking back at the centre Black has the bishop pair
7 Nxc4 Nc6 8 Nce5 cxd4!?

Not bad, but 8 . . . Bd5! is an even better move here, placing the bishop on a fine
outpost and freeing the e-pawn. White hasn't found a way to an advantage and
he can easily go wrong, e.g. 9 Nxc6 bxc6 10 Be2 cxd4 1 1 Qxd4 e6 1 2 0-0 Be7 1 3
R d 1 (I prefer 13 b4!?) 1 3 . . .0 - 0 14 Nd2?! (and here 14 Bd2) 14 . . . c 5 1 5 Qc3 Qc7 1 6
f3 Bd6 1 7 g3? Bxg3 18 hxg3 Qxg3+ 19 Kf1 Ng4! and White resigned a s mate is
forced, A.Beletsky-R.Hasangath, Russian Team Championship 2004.
9 Bb5 dxe3
Sneakily grabbing a pawn! Black drops behind in development but intends to
catch up while White is occupied with winning the pawn back.
10 Bxe3?!
When I faced lgors Rausis, I varied with 10 Qxd8+! Rxd8 11 Bxe3 Bd7 (here
1 1 . . . Bd5 !? might be better) 12 Nxd7 Nxd7 13 Rc1 e6 14 Bxc6 bxc6 15 Rxc6
Bb4+ 16 Ke2, and felt that after 16 . . . a5 White could claim a small edge. In
stead after 16 . . . 0-0? 17 Bxa7 Ra8 18 Rc4! , White had a clear extra pawn in
G.Flear-I.Rausis, French League 1998.
10 ... Qxdl+ 1 1 Rxd1 a6! 12 Bxc6+ bxc6 13 Nxc6 (Diagram 4)
Black's bishop pair give him the better chances.
1 3 ... Bd5 14 Rc1
14 Nce5 e6 15 0-0 is more solid, but still you have to favour Black.
14 ... Rc8 1 5 Nfd4?!
Fishing in troubled waters, but Rausis is not impressed. . .
15 ... Bxg2! 1 6 Rg1 Bd5 1 7 Ke2 e6 18 f4 Bd6!?

Black could even try 18 . . . g6, but White can then get some play with 19 b4 aim-
226
Early Deviati ons
ing to create a passed pawn.

19 Rxg7 Nh5 20 Rg4 f5 21 Rh4 Nf6
Material equality has been established, but the centralised black pieces will
create problems for White, especially as the rook is not happy on the h-file.
Black intends ... Rg8-g2.
22 Rh6?
White's only hope was to try 22 Nb4!, e.g. 22 .. . Bc4+ 23 Nd3 Nd5 24 b3.
22 ... Ng4 23 Rh3 Kd7 24 Ne5+ Nxe5 25 Rxc8 Kxc8 26 fxe5 Bxe5 27 Rh5
Rg8 28 Kd3 Rg7 29 b4 Be4+ 30 Ke2 Kd7 3 1 h4 Kd6 32 Rh6 Rg6 33 Rxg6
hxg6 34 b5 Bxd4!
Excellent judgement. The opposite-coloured bishop ending is winning!
35 Bxd4 axb5 36 axb5 e5 37 Bb2 f4 38 b6 Ke6 39 Bc3 Kf5 40 Bb2 Bb7 41
Bc3 e4 42 Bb4 Ba6+ 43 Kf2 Kg4 0-1
There's not much point in playing out 44 Be7 e3+ 45 Ke1 f3 etc.
Meeting 3 Nc3 with 3 . . . dxc4

When White plays 3 Nc3, there's a good chance that he intends to meet 3 . . . Nf6
with 4 e3, unashamedly steering the game away from a pure Slav. White in
stead seeks those lines of the Semi-Slav covered in Chapters 10-12.
Some readers will be delighted to play the Meran, but not all. So it's worth
spending some time to see how Black can take control of his own destiny.
There are several ideas and in fact the second player has some options as early
as move three to put his own stamp on the game.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 dxc4!? (Diagram 5)
Diagram 5 Diagram 6
Black snatches the c-pawn The a2-knight is out of play
227
Starti n g Out: S lav and Semi-Slav
Black varies from 3 ... Nf6 4 e3 e6 5 Nf3 (heading into the Semi-Slav), by
snatching the c4-pawn. Now, although White is able to regain his pawn, Black
aims to gain some time against the knight on c3 after ...b7-b5-b4.
4 e4
Mter 4 a4 e5!, Black obtains a comfortable game, e.g. 5 dxe5 Qxd1+ 6 Nxd1
Nd7 7 Nf3 Bb4+ 8 Bd2 Bxd2+ 9 Nxd2 Nxe5 1 0 f4 Nd7 11 Nxc4 Nc5, B.Jobava.
U.Atakisi, Turkey vs. Georgia 2002.
4 ...b5 5 a4 b4 6 Na2
White threatens both advanced black pawns and will therefore re-establish
material parity, but the sidelined knight on a2 will cost time to redeploy.
6 ...Nf6
The alternative 6 . . . e5 has dropped out of fashion. White's best is 7 Nf3, e.g.
7 ... exd4 8 Bxc4 Ba6 9 Bxa6 Nxa6 10 Qxd4 Qxd4 11 Nxd4 c5 12 Nb5 0-0-0,
A.Chernin-I.Rausis, Osterskars 1995, when I prefer White slightly after 1 3 0-
0! Nf6 14 f3 Kb7 15 Bf4 Be7 16 Rfdl.
7 e5 Nd5 8 Bxc4 e6 9 Nf3 Be7 (Diagram 6)
This is similar to a number of lines of the Meran where Black has his fine out
post on d5 and White access to c4. One specific aspect of this particular posi
tion is that at some point the knight on a2 will have to be recycled
. and this
takes time.
10 Bd2
White prepares to bring his knight to c1 and then b3 or d3. Black will soon
gear himself up for ... c6-c5, or ... Bb7-a6 (or even both) in order not to be left
with a feeble bishop.
The other main move is 10 0-0, against which Black has an interesting idea:
10 . . . Nd7!? 11 Bd2 a5 12 Nc1 N5b6! 13 Bd3 c5 with satisfactory play, G. Flear
D .Neelotpal, San Sebastian 2005.
Theoretical?
Not so much. Black can get by with natural moves in the main line.
Statistics
A total of 859 games with White scoring an average 55%. In the main line, i.e.
the position after Black's 9th move (Diagram 6), White scores a slightly higher
57%. . '
Game 85
0 L.Van Wely • J.Piket
Vlissingen 2001
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 dxc4 4 e4 b5 5 a4 b4 6 Na2 Nf6 7 e5 Nd5 8 Bxc4 e6
9 Nf3 Be7 10 Bd2 a5
228
Early Deviations
Mter the significant alternative 10 ... Ba6, which achieves the desirable trade of
light-squared bishops, White has 11 Qe2 Bxc4 12 Qxc4 Nb6 13 Qc2 a5 14 Nc1
Qd5 15 Nd3 N8d7 16 Be3 Rc8 17 0-0 0-0 18 Rfc1 , continuing to restrain the
freeing ... c6-c5 advance and thus keeping a small edge, T.Hillarp Persson
P. 9ramling, Swedish Championship 2001.
1 1 N c1 Nd7 12 Nb3 (Diagram 7 )
Diagram 7 Diagram 8
Once more . . . c6-c5 is the plan A critical choice
1 2 ...Bb7
There is a good case for the immediate 12 ... N5b6!? 13 Bd3 c5, freeing Black's
position, as in E.Arlandi-Z.Varga, Budapest 2000.
13 h4!?
Rather than routinely castle, Van Wely decides to spice things up a bit.
13 ... h6 14 Rh3 Kf8 15 Qe2
Only now that he's fully ready, Piket employs the familiar manoeuvre to get
the . . . c6-c5 break in . . .
15. . .N5b6 16 Bd3 c 5 1 7 dxc5 Nxc5 1 8 Nxc5 Bxc5 1 9 Rg3 Rc8 20 Rg4
The presence of the rook on g4 keeps Black's king under observation. Even so,
there's no real attack.
20 ... Bc6 21 Bb5 Bd5 22 h5 Rc7 23 Kfl Nd7 24 Ngl Be7 25 Bf4 b3!?
Aiming for queenside activity.
26 Qe3 Rc2 27 Qg3 (Diagram 8) 27 ...Nc5! ?
Not a bad move, but 27 .. . Bg5! could be even better, a s after 28 Bxg5 hxg5 29
Rxg5 Nc5 30 f3 (or 30 Rxg7 Ne4) 30 . . . Bc4+ 3 1 Bxc4 Rxc4, White's king is the
more vulnerable.
28 Rxg7 Bg5 29 Rxg5! hxg5 30 Bxg5 Ne4 3 1 Bxd8 Nxg3+ 32 fxg3 Bxg2+
229
Starting Out: Slav a n d Sem i-S lav
33 Ke1 Rxh5
Black's rooks are extremely active and he has plenty of play for only a slight
material deficit.
34 Rd1 Rxe5+ 35 Ne2 B£3 36 B£6 Rexe2+ 37 Bxe2 Rxe2+ 38 Kfl R£2+ 39
Kx£2 lh-lh
Meeting 3 Nc3 with 3 e5 . . .
Black immediately opens the centre with 3 .. . e5, which is known as the
Winawer Counter-Gambit.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 e5!? (Diagram 9)
The W inawer Counter-Gambit . W h ite will castle long
In the Winawer Counter-Gambit, Black wastes no time in hitting back at the

white centre. If White captures the loose pawn on e5, Black is able to regain
the pawn with his queen, though as a result he can drop behind in develop
ment.
4 dxe5
4 e3 e4 leads to a kind of reversed French Defence.
4 ... d4 5 Ne4 Qa5+ 6 Bd2
The older line 6 Nd2 Nd7 7 e6!? fxe6 8 Ngf3 e5 9 gQ Ngf6 doesn't give Black
any problems. He has a fair share of the centre and can develop harmoniously.
6 ... Qxe5 7 Ng3 N£6
White obtains the slightly freer development after 7 . . . c5 8 Nf3 Qc7 9 e3 dxe3
10 Bxe3 Nf6 11 Bd3.
8 N£3 Qd6 (Diagram 10)
230
Early Deviations
Now White's most aggressive line to try and exploit Black's queen position is
to castle long and then play e2-e3.
Theoretical?
Not especially. White's long-castling plan is the only line that requires serious ,
preparation.
Statistics
Against the Winawer Counter-Gambit, the first player has managed 56% in
621 games. With the main line, however, as in Kasparov's following win over
Nikolic, White scores a very high 66%.
Game 86
D G.Kasparov • P.Nikolic
Manila Olympiad 1 992
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 e5
Digressing slightly, one interesting point is that now 4 cxd5 cxd5 doesn't really
give White anything. The significance of this is that after the opening moves 1
d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 cxd5 cxd5 4 Nc3, Black can try 4 . . . e5!? and obtain a more dou
ble-edged game than in the regular lines of the Exchange Variation.
4 dxe5 d4 5 Ne4 Qa5+ 6 Bd2 Qxe5 7 Ng3 Qd6 8 Nf3 Nf6 9 Qc2 Be7 10 0-0-
0 0-0 1 1 e3 dxe3 12 fxe3!? (Diagram 1 1)
White recaptures with the pawn! Kasparov finds a combination
This is now the standard move, but it was Kasparov with this game that led
the way in showing White's attacking potential. White voluntarily accepts an
ugly isolated pawn but in return gets interesting play. The alternative 12 Bxe3
Qc7 13 Nf5 Bxf5 14 Qxf5 Nbd7 15 Bd3 g6, as in G.Flear-M.Kazhgaleyev, Aix-
231
les-Bains 2004, doesn't give White much due to the symmetrical pawns and
solid black position.
12 ... Qc7 13 Bc3 Bg4
Nikolic still plays the WCG but now prefers 13 ... Na6. Play typically continues
as follows: 14 a3 Ng4! 15 Re1 Bf6! (given a '?' by ECO but you shouldn't believe
everything you read!) 16 Bd4 (16 h3 Nxe3! 1 7 Rxe3 Qxg3 18 Bxf6 gxf6 19 Qd2
Be6 20 Nd4 Qf4 offers equal chances, G.Van der Stricht-P.Nikolic, Antalya
2004) 16 ... c5! 17 Bxf6 Nx£6 18 e4 Re8 when White has some initiative (the e
pawn push plus the fact that the knight o n a6 i s offside), but Black has a solid
enough position and the better pawn structure.
14 Bd3 Nbd7 15 Bf5 Bxf5 16 Nxf5 Rfe8 (Diagram 1 2)
Although White has the more active pieces, it doesn't look that special at first
sight. But Kasparov has an eye for combinations . . .
1 7 Nxg7!!
A strong sacrifice that ties Black up in knots.
17 ... K.xg7 18 Qf5 Nf8
After 18 . . . Rad8 19 Qg5+ K£8, White has 20 Nh4! and Black is basically losing,
e.g. 20 . . . Nc5 21 Nf5 Ne6 22 Qh6+ Kg8 23 Bxf6.
19 h4!
Now the threat is 20 Qg5+ Ng6 21 h5.
19 ...h6 20 g4 Qc8!
Without queens Black avoids being mated, but White still retains the more
active pieces.
21 Qxc8 Raxc8 22 g5 N8h7 23 e4
There's no hurry to recapture the piece.
23 ... Rcd8 24 Rdfl Kf8 25 gxf6 Bxf6 26 e5 Bg7 27 Rhg1
Black's minor pieces are cramped, but otherwise he has done well to survive so
far.
27 ... c5 28 Kc2 Re6 29 Rg4 Bh8 30 b4!
An example of the importance of a second front in endgames. Black is holding
the kingside at the moment, but opening the b-file gives him extra things to
worry about.
NOTE: When a defender battens down the hatches in one sec

tor, his passive pieces may then have difficulty in meeting new
threats in another part of the board.
30 ... b6 3 1 bxc5 bxc5 32 Rb1 Ra6 33 Rb2 Bg7?!

A tactically suspect square, but Black's defence was difficult in any case, e.g.
after 3 3 ... Rb6, White has 34 Rb5!, while if 33 ... Ke7, then 34 Rb7+ Ke6 35 Rf4
is strong.
232
Early Deviations
34 Rb7! Rxa2+ 35 Kb3 Ra6 36 e6! Rxe6

Mter 36 . . . Bxc3 White finishes off with 37 Rxf7+ Ke8 38 Rg8+ Nf8 39 Rgxf8
mate.
37 Rxg7 1-0
A fine game. Even now Kasparov's idea is still the most testing for Black in
the Winawer Counter-Gambit.
Game 87
D M.Gurevich • J.Piket
Antwerp 1 993
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 e5 4 dxe5 d4 5 Ne4 Qa5+ 6 Bd2 Qxe5 7 Ng3 Nf6 8
Nf3 Qd6 9 Qc2 Be7 10 0-0-0 0-0 1 1 e3 dxe3 12 Bc3 Qc7 13 fxe3 Na6 14
Kb l?!
This experimental move allows Black to become very active. Instead of this 14
a3 is now de rigueur.
14 ... Nb4 15 Qcl ?!
The superior 1 5 Qb3 Qb6 16 e 4 i s double-edged.
15 ...Ng4! (Diagram 1 3)
The cavalry is charging Black's attack starts t o h u rt
16 a3 a5! 17 axb4?!
If White doesn't take up the gauntlet and goes passive with 17 Be l , then sim
ply 17 ... Na6 yields a more than comfortable game, as the knight redeploys to
c5. White then has weaknesses in his pawn structure and would already be
worse.
17 ... axb4 18 Be l Qa5 19 Rd3 Qa2+ 20 Kc2 b5! (Diagram 14) 21 h3
Mter 21 cxb5, Piket intended 2l...cxb5 22 Qb l b3+! 23 Rxb3 Qa4! with a
233
Starti ng Out: Slav a n d Sem i-Slav
deadly pin.
2 1 . .. bxc4 22 hxg4 cxd3+ 23 Bxd3 g6
White's king has no shelter from the storm.
24 e4 Rd8! 25 Qh6 b3+ 26 Kd2
26 Kc1 goes down in grand style to 26 . . . Qal+ 27 Bb1 Qxb l+! 28 Kxb 1 Ral+! 29
Kxa1 Rdl+ 30 Qc1 Rxc l mate!
26 ... Qxb2+ 27 Ke3 Bc5+ 28 Kf4 Rxd3 29 Qxh7+ Kf8 30 e5 Ra4+ 31 Ne4
Rxe4+ 32 Kxe4 Rd4+ 0-1
A good example of what can go wrong for White!
The Triangle System

Some players are happy playing the Semi-Slav but don't like the symmetry of
the Slav Exchange Variation (see Chapter 5). So they choose to meet 1 d4 d5 2
c4 with 2 . . . e6, rather than 2 . . . c6, with the continuation 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 c6 in
mind, i.e. they have achieved the position covered in Chapters 8-12, without
risking the possibility of the Exchange Variation along the way.
Mter 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3, I have often played 3 . . . c6 which I call the 'Triangle
System' (look at Black's pawn structure!). This can in fact occur from the al
ternative move-order 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3!? e6!?, though this is rare.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c6 (Diagram 15)
Diagram 15
The Triangle System
White has four main moves.

1) The cautious 4 cxd5 exd5 leads to a Queen's Gambit Declined, Exchange
Variation.
234
Early Deviations
2) If White plays 4 e3, then with 4 ... Nf6 5 Nf3 we have arrived in a Semi-Slav
(Chapters 10- 12). It's worth noting, however, that White has been denied the
opportunity to play the 5 Bg5 lines covered in Chapters 8 and 9.
For those who really like to avoid the beaten track then 4 e 3 can be met with
4 . . .f5!?, which is akin to the Dutch Stonewall. There is, however, one inde
pendent idea that usually occurs from the Triangle move order: 5 g4!? Nf6 6
gxf5 exf5 7 Qb3 dxc4 8 Bxc4 Bd6! with a complex struggle in prospect.
3) Mter 4 Nf3, White hints that he would like to retain the option of meeting
4 . . . Nf6 with 5 Bg5. If Black prefers to avoid this possibility he can play
4 . . . dxc4, which is known as the Noteboom Variation. This is covered in Games
90-91.
4) 4 e4 is the sharpest, which is the subject of the next two illustrative games.
The Marshall Gambit

The expansive 4 e4 is known as the Marshall Gambit and leads to great fun
and complications.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 e6 4 e4 (Diagram 1 6)
The Marshall Gambit White has a dangerous initiative
White decides on a radical solution in the centre. If Black doesn't react appro
priately, White can develop quickly and take more than his fair share of the
central arena.
4 ... dxe4
The main alternative is 4 .. . Bb4, when 5 e5 c5! has proven to be satisfactory for
Black.
5 Nxe4 Bb4+ 6 Bd2!?
235
Starti ng Out: Sl av and Sem i-S lav
Gambiting a pawn. Instead after 6 Nc3 c5! Black's hits at the centre and ob
tains a reasonable game.
6 ... Qxd4 7 Bxb4 Qxe4+ 8 Be2 (Diagram 1 7)
White has the bishop pair and attacking chances on the dark squares. Black's
king is temporarily stuck in the centre and he is dangerously behind in devel
opment. The second player will have to demonstrate good defensive skills in
order to safely diffuse White's initiative.
Theoretical?
The Marshall is very theoretical in the sharper lines. So Black must have fair
book knowledge before playing the Triangle System.
Statistics
Overall 4 e4 scores 57% for the first player.
Game 88
0 L.Van Wely • L.Fressinet
French League 2001
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 e6 4 e4 dxe4 5 Nxe4 Bb4+ 6 Bd2
White sacrifices a pawn to obtain dark-squared compensation. Instead 6 Nc3
c5! isn't dangerous for Black.
6 ... Qxd4 7 Bxb4 Qxe4+ 8 Be2 Na6 9 Ba5 Bd7
I prefer 9 . . .b6, e.g. 10 Qd6 Bd7 11 Bc3 f6 12 0-0-0 0-0-0 with a complex mid
dlegame ahead.
10 Nf3 Nf6 1 1 Qd6 (Diagram 18)
Diagra m 1 8 Diagram 1 9
Pressing on the dark squares A tricky position
236
Early Deviations
Stopping Black castling short and continuing to press on the dark squares.
1 1...Qf5 12 Ne5 Qxf2+
Forcing the pace. Simplification doesn't mean the end to Black's defensive task
as White is still more active.
13 l{xf2 Ne4+ 14 Kf3 Nxd6 15 Rhd1 Ke7 16 c5!
The most dangerous. Instead Sherbakov points out that 16 Rxd6 Kxd6 1 7
Nxf7+ Ke7 18 Nxh8 Rxh8 19 Bc3 c5! i s fine for Black.
16 ... Nxc5 1 7 Bb4 b6 18 Rac1 Nce4 19 Bd3 (Diagram 19)
White may be a couple of pawns light, but there are pins and tricks every
where. Black has to be very accurate.
19 ...f5 ! 20 Bxe4 fxe4+ 2 1 Ke3 c5 22 Rxc5!
He has to keep putting coal on the fire.
22 ...bxc5 23 Bxc5 Be8 24 Bxd6+ Kd8
Although White is the exchange down, Black's rooks cannot get into play and
so the pressure continues. In Y.Yakovich-A. Galkin, Dubai 2001 , a draw was
agreed after 25 b4 a5. Galkin justifies this decision with the line 26 bxa5 Rxa5
27 Rb 1 Ra8 28 Rb7 Kc8 29 Rc7+ Kd8 30 Rb7 repeating.
Instead Van Wely goes for more . . .
2 5 h 4 a5 2 6 g4 Rg8 27 b3 Ra6 2 8 h 5 Bc6 29 Bc5+ Kc7 3 0 Rfl Be8 3 1 a4!?
The Dutchman later criticised this move, instead proposing 3 1 Rf2 Ra8 32 Rd2
Kb7 33 a3 as offering an initiative, but after the further 33 . . . Bc6 34 Rd6 Rgc8
35 Rxe6 Bd5 36 Rb6+ Kc7, Black is well on the way to freeing himself and is
still the exchange up.
3 1 ...Kc8 32 Rf4 Bc6 33 Rf7 Bd5 34 g5 Bxb3 35 h6 gxh6 36 gxh6 Rg5 37
Kxe4
Mter 37 Bd4 Rd6 38 Rxh7 Rh5, with the rook behind the pawn I don't think
Black is in any danger.
3 7 ... Bxa4
Now that the queenside is back in the box it's time to bail out to a draw.
38 Rf8+ Kc7 39 Rf7+ Kc8 40 Rf8+ Kc7 41 Rf7+ Kc8 V:.-V:.
Game 89
D J.Lautier • M.Gurevich
Biel lnterzonal 1 993
1 c4 e6 2 Nc3 d5 3 d4 c6 4 e4 dxe4 5 Nxe4 Bb4+ 6 Bd2 Qxd4 7 Bxb4
Qxe4+ 8 Be2 Na6
The greedy 8 . . . Qxg2 is met by 9 Qd6 Nd7 10 0-0-0 with a very dangerous at
tack.
9 Bc3 Ne7
Giving back the g-pawn isn't the only way. Instead 9 . . .f6 10 Nf3 Ne7 11 0-0 0-0
237
Starting Out: S l av and Semi-Slav
12 Re1 Ng6 1 3 b4 e5 enables Black to keep the pawn into the middlegame. I
quite like Black's position, although I have to admit that White has reasonable
compensation after 14 b5.
10 Bxg7 Rg8 11 Bf6 (Diagram 20)
A critical position The pressure is intense
Mter 1 1 Bc3, according to theory Black should play the astonishing l l . . . Nd5!
and then, following 12 cxd5, only now capture on g2 (12 . . . Qxg2) with complica
tions.
l l . Q£4?!
..
Nowadays ll . . . Rg6 is considered best, e.g. 12 Bxe7 Kxe7 13 Qd2 e5 14 Rd1

Be6 1 5 f3 Qf4! with full equality, D .Rensch-D.Schnei,der, Dallas 2002.
12 Bc3! Rxg2 13 Nf3 f6 14 Qd2!
It may surprise some but the best way to generate play is to exchange the
queens. Black's activity is snuffed out and the various soft spots in his camp
become more exposed.
14 ... Qxd2+ 15 Nxd2 e5 16 Ne4 Kf7 17 Rd1!
1 7 Ng3 is tempting, but although he loses the exchange, Black can hold his
position together and obtain reasonable compensation, e.g. 1 7 . . . Ng6 1 8 Bf3
Nh4 19 Bxg2 Nxg2+ 20 Ke2 Nf4+.
The text is stronger according to Lautier. . .
17 ... Rg8?!
Bringing the rook back from where it's becoming increasingly vulnerable. It's
not a raging success but Black has a difficult choice. For example, if he tries
17 . . . Be6 instead, then 1 8 Nd6+ Kg7 19 Nxb7 Rb8 20 Nd8 Bg4 2 1 Rd6 leaves
White well on top.
238
Early Devi ations
18 f4! (Diagram 2 1)
A strong move, slicing open the dark squares.
18 ...Ng6
The house of cards collapses after 18 . . . exf4 19 Bh5+ Ng6 20 Nxf6.
,
19 Rd6 Ke7
Here 19 . . . Be6? loses a piece to 20 f5 Bxf5 2 1 Rxf6+.
20 Rxf6 Nxf4
In the case of 20 . . . exf4, Lautier would surely have continued the attack with
2 1 h4! .
2 1 Bxe5 Nxe2 22 Bd6+! Ke8 23 Kxe2 Bh3 24 Rh6!
Winning material in view of all the threats.
24 ... Bg4+
The alternative 24 . . . Bg2 doesn't get out of jail, as after 25 Rg1 ! Bf3+ 26 Kxf3
Rxg1 27 Rxh7, Black loses a rook.
25 Ke3 Bf5 26 Nf6+ Kf7 27 Nxg8 Rxg8 28 Kf4 Bg6 29 Re1 Rd8 30 Re7+
Kf6 31 c5 Nb4 32 Rexh7 Nd5+ 33 Kf3 Re8 34 h4 Re3+ 35 Kf2 Kf5 36 Rg7
Re6 37 h5 1-0
The Noteboom Variation

As we have seen in other positions in the Slav and Semi-Slav, one of the main
ideas behind . . . d5xc4 is to disrupt White's comfortable development. In the
Noteboom Black also angles for a double-edged pawn structure, which enables
him to have significant counter-chances.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c6 4 Nf3 dxc4
Capturing the pawn and preparing to support it with . . .b7-b5 is a common
theme throughout this book. Here, however, by not having played . . . Nf6 Black
has in essence an extra tempo to spend on supporting his queenside.
5 e3 b5 6 a4 Bb4 (Diagram 22)
Black makes a concerted effort to defend his extra queenside pawn. Over the
years White has tried a few ways of generating play without bothering to re
gain the material, but these haven't been very successful, so most players con
tinue as follows . . .
7 Bd2 a 5 8 axb5 Bxc3 9 Bxc3 cxb5 10 b3
White wins back the pawn and has the bishop pair and a central majority. In
exchange Black obtains two connected passed pawns on the queenside: a dou
ble-edged structure that tends to favour White slightly in the middlegame, but
Black heavily in the endgame.
10 ... Bb7 1 1 bxc4 b4 12 Bb2 (Diagram 23)
239
The Noteboom Variation A very unbalanced position
If Black survives any middlegame attack, based on pushing central pawns and
kingside activity, then his queenside aces will cash in later.
Theoretical?
The Noteboom is very theoretical, particularly in the main lines. Just as in the
Marshall, Black is playing with fire. The player who knows his theory less well
is likely to be the one that gets burnt!
Statistics
The Noteboom (2844 games) has an excellent track r�cord (54% for Black!).
Many players as White have evidently found it hard to cope with such an un
usual pawn structure. However, it should be taken into account that, in the
Triangle, the sister variation 4 e4 scores 57% for White.
The Triangle was more popular a couple of generations ago and is not as well
known by white players as the Meran or Botvinnik.
Game 90
D A.Czerwonski • M.Krasenkow
Polish Championship, Plock 2000
1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 c6 3 c4 e6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bb4 6 e3 b5 7 Bd2 a5 8 axb5
· .
Bxc3 9 Bxc3 cxb5 10 b3 Bb7

Not 10 . . .b4?, because of 1 1 Bxb4 axb4? 12 Rxa8.
11 d5!? (Diagram 24)
The main line with 1 1 bxc4 b4 12 Bb2 is covered in the next game.
1 1...Nf6 12 bxc4 b4 13 Bxf6 Qxf6 14 Qa4+
Combined with distracting the black queen to f6 this check creates some dis-
240
Early Deviations
comfort in the black camp. Nevertheless, with correct handling Black can un
tangle.
14 ... Nd7 15 Nd4 e5!
If here 15 ... Ke7?!, then 16 d6+! Kxd6 1 7 Rd1 is unpleasant.
16 Nb3 Ke7!
Only now is it the right moment to unpin.
1 7 Be2
Mter 17 Rd 1, Black brings the queen to support the queenside pawns with
17 . . . Qb6. Then if 1 8 d6+ Kd8, Black prepares . . . Bc6. An odd variation, but
Black's king is actually quite well hidden here.
1 7 ... Qd6!? (Diagram 25)
Opening the long diagonal A key moment
A key moment where White has a wide choice:

a) The inferior 18 Bg4? Nb6 19 c5 Qxd5 20 cxb6 Bc6 21 Qa2 Qxg2 22 Rf1 Qxg4
favoured Black in I.Rogers-M.Krasenkow, Hastings 1 993/94.
b) 18 0-0 is sensible, when 18 . . . Nc5 19 Nxc5 Qxc5 would be equally balanced.
All the passed pawns are restrained for the moment and it's not clear which
side will be able to get theirs moving first.
c) Alternatively 18 Qb5 Ba6 19 Qc6 Qxc6 20 dxc6 Nb6 21 Rxa5 Bxc4 was equal
in V.Potomak-M.Matlak, Czech Republic 2000.
In this game, White played a fourth, but unsatisfactory option.
1 8 Nxa5?
This is refuted by Black's following incisive play...
1 8. .. Rxa5! 19 Qxa5 Ra8! 20 Qxa8 Bxa8 21 Rxa8 b3
241
Starting O u t : Slav and Sem i-Slav
Despite White being ahead on material, the b-pawn (being the most dangerous
passed pawn on the board) ensures a Black advantage.
22 0-0 Qb4 23 Ra 7 b2 24 Bd3 Qb6
Freeing the knight to join in the fray.
25 Ra2 Qb3 26 Bb1 Nc5 27 Ra7+ Kf6 28 Ba2 Qb6 29 Ra8 Ne4 30 Rc8 Qa7
3 1 Rc6+ Kg5
The king cannot be punished for its walkabout.
32 d6
Here 32 Bb 1 loses to 32 . . . Nd2.
32 ... Qxa2 33 d7 b 1Q 34 d8Q+ (Diagram 26)
Black's attack is stronger The pawns roll forward
An amazing position, but the fact that White queens with check doesn't unset
tle Black, whose king is still as safe as houses.
34 ... f6 35 f4+
Alternatively, following 35 h4+ Kxh4 36 Rxb 1 Qxb l+ 37 Kh2 Nxf2 38 g3+ Kg5
39 Kg2 Ng4, the threats of . . . Qe4+ and . . . Qc2+ will lead to Black claiming the
whole point.
35 ... Kh5 36 Qe8+ g6 0-1
Mate is close.
Game 91
D E.Vegh • Dao Thien Hai
Hungarian Team Championship 1 996
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c6 4 Nf3 dxc4 5 a4 Bb4 6 e3 b5 7 Bd2 a5 8 axb5
Bxc3 9 Bxc3 cxb5 10 b3 Bb7 1 1 bxc4 b4 12 Bb2 Nf6 13 Bd3 Nbd7 14 0-0
Qc7 15 Re1 0-0 16 e4 (Diagram 27)
242
Early Deviati ons
White has to make headway in the centre quickly, because any delay will soon
see Black's connected passed pawns advancing dangerously down the board.
1 6 ...e5!
It's important to stop White's threatened e4-e5.
17 c5 exd4 18 Rc1 (Diagram 28)
Black has a wide choice A strong pawn offer
1 8... Rac8?
Naive. Black needs an improvement at this point:
a) 18 . . . Bc6 also seems to be inadequate after 19 e5 Nd5 20 Nxd4 Ne7 21 e6,
G.Dizdar-S.Nikolov, Pula 1997.
b) 18 ... Nxc5!? is plausible, e.g. 1 9 Bxd4 Nfd7 20 Bb5 Rfd8 2 1 Bxd7 (after 21
Qc2 Bc6, Black is OK) 2 l . . .Rxd7 22 Rxc5 Qxc5 23 Bxc5 Rxd1 24 Rxd1 Bxe4
and Black has just about enough compensation for the piece.
c) 18 . . . Ne5! seems to be best: 19 c6 Ba6 20 Nxe5 Qxe5 21 Bxa6 Rxa6 22 Qd3
Raa8 23 Bxd4 Qe6, with chances for both sides, E.Bareev-E.Sveshnikov, Vi
enna 1996.
19 c6! (Diagram 29)
A strong pawn sacrifice that tangles Black's pieces and yields a strong initia
tive for White.
19 ... Bxc6 20 Nxd4 Qb6 21 e5 Nd5 22 Qg4
Strong enough, but according to Vegh 22 Nxc6! Rxc6 23 Be4 is even stronger,
e.g. 23 ... Rxc 1 24 Bxc1 Nc3 25 Qxd7 Nxe4 26 Rxe4 Rd8 27 Qg4 b3 28 Bb2 Qg6
29 h3 and Black is in trouble as he clearly doesn't have enough for the piece.
22 ...Nc3 23 Nf5 g6 24 Ne7+ Kg7 25 Nxc8 Rxc8 26 e6!
Blasting open further lines for his pieces.
243
26... Nf6 2 7 Qh4

27 Rxc3 bxc3 28 Bxc3 is tempting, but in that case Black can fight on with
28 . . . Qb4 29 Bxb4 Nxg4 30 Bxa5 fxe6 with drawing chances.
27 ... Be8?
Although 27 ... Bd5 would constitute a better defence, with 28 e7 White would
still be on top. Note how the queenside pawns seem insignificant with all the
action being elsewhere.
28 Bc4!
Preparing a nice combination.
28 ... Qc5 29 Rxc3! bxc3 30 Bxc3 Qf5 31 Bd3 g5 32 Bxf6+ 1-0
Summary
Rausis's 3 Nf3 dxc4 seems sound and gives White plenty of opportunities to go
wrong.
Against 3 Nc3, Black has several ways of deviating from a standard Semi
Slav:
1. The radical 3 . . . dxc4 steers the game into navigable backwaters where Black
shouldn't feel out of his depth. I can't see anything dramatic here for White.
2. Winawer's Counter-Gambit 3 . . . e5 has its followers and is certainly not bad,
but if White follows Kasparov's method he might obtain a small edge.
3. The Triangle System provokes Marshall's 4 e4 which is extremely sharp and
good theoretical knowledge is required. Black is usually on the defensive and
often has only a narrow path to safety.
4. If White meets the Triangle with 4 Nf3, then Black can opt for the Note
boom Variation with 4 . . . dxc4. Double-edged play ensues, characterised by a
battle of the respective passed pawns: White's in the centre and Black's on the
queenside. In the middlegame White may have attacking chances, but simpli
fied positions often favour Black.
244
Quick Quiz
Finally, although you are probably itching to give the Slav or Semi-Slav a try
out, one last chapter before you take the plunge!
I've included 12 positions, one from each of the first 12 chapters. You just need
to deduce what Black's next move was. There are little hints to help you, but
remember that .the solutions are not always combinations, they're often the
matic ways of obtaining freedom. How many can you work out or remember?
The answers are at the end, but if you don't understand a particular solution, I
suggest that you play through that game again! The complete game references
should enable you to find each of the game scores.
Exercise 1 Exercise 2
Exercise 1 (C.Gabriei-V.Akopian, Baden Baden 1 996)

White's previous move was 16 Ne4. Black would like some freedom!
Exercise 2 (Z.Varga-L.Portisch, Heviz 2003)
White's previous move was 12 Bf4. Should White be allowed a free hand on
the kingside?
245
Exercise 3 (O.Romanishin-V.Akopian, Linares 1 996)

White's previous move was 6 f4? ! . Development and central control are impor
tant considerations at such an early stage.
Exercise 4 (P.Lafuente-A.Wojtkiewicz, Buenos Aires 2003)
White's previous move was 1 1 e4. An elegant tactic!
Exercise 5 (S.Halkias-I.Sokolov, Bled Olympiad 2002) .

White's previous move was 23 Bc7. Black would like to generate counterplay.
Exercise 6 (M.Krasenkow-S.Movsesian, Polanica Zdroj 2000)
White's previous move was 12 0-0. Time to find a way to activate.
246
Quick Quiz
Exercise 7 (Liang Shuai-Wu Wenjin, Qingdao 1 999)

White's previous move was 17 Qc3. How should Black seize the initiative?
Exercise 8 (R.Wojtaszek-R.Jedynak, Trzebini a 2002)
White's previous move was 22 Bf4. It's still theory! Black needs something a
bit special!
Exercise 9 (G.Kamsky-V.Kramnik, New York match 1 994)

White's previous move was 12 b4. How did Black stabilise the centre?
Exercise 10 (L.B.Hansen-M.IIIescas Cordoba, Moscow 1 994)
White's previous move was 16 Qh3 . How does Black fight for the initiative?
247
Start i ng Out: S lav and Semi-Slav
Exercise 11 (E.Arlandi-M.Godena, Reggio Emilia 1 994/95)

White's previous move was 24 Rc3 .White's pieces are clumsily placed, aren't
they?
Exercise 1 2 (A.Moiseenko-V.Potkin, Istanbul 2003)
White's previous move was 17 0-0-0. Black needs to think about development
and counterplay.
Solutions
1: 1 6 c5 - from Game 1
...
2: 12 . h5 - from Game 14
. .
3: 6 .. b5 - from Game 18
.
4: Jl Nc5 - from Game 22

...
5: 23 ... a5 --' from Game 27

6: 12 . e 5 - from Game 32
..
7: 17 . e5 - from the notes to Game 37

..
8: 22 . Rh5 - from Game 49

..
9: 12 .. £5 - from Game 5 1
.
.
.
1 0 : 1 6 . hxg5 - from Game 6 3

. .
. 1 1: 24 .. �Ne4 - from Game 7 5

1 2 : 1 7 . b5 - from Game 77
..
248
I ndex of Complete Games
Arlandi.E-Godena.M, Reggio Emilia 1994 ............... ...................... ..................... 1 99

Azmaiparashvil �.Z-Bareev.E, Montecatini Terme 2000 ...................................... 88
Azmaiparashvili.Z-Cherni n.A, Neum (rapid) 2000 . . . ........................................ 124
Bareev.E-Filippov.V, Russian Team Championship, Kazan 1995 . . . ................. 1 30
Bareev.E-Kramnik.V, Novgorod 1994 ...... . . . . . .......................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Butnorius.A-Panchenko.A, Cheliabinsk 1 975 ................................ ................... 1 62
Chernin.A-Thorhallsson.T, New York 1997 ........ .............................................. 147
Czerwonski.A-Krasenkow.M, Polish Championship, Plock 2000 ..................... 240
Dreev.A-Movsesian.S, Sarajevo 2002 . . . .............................................. ................... 68
Ehlvest.J-Stripunsky.A, New York 2003 ........... ........... . . . . . . . ........ ....................... 1 56
Euwe.M-Alekhine.A, World Championship match, Netherlands 1937 ................ 29
Flear.G-Prie.E, Creon 1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..................... 115
Flear.G-Fressinet.L, Montpellier 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......................................... 213
Flear.G-Summerscale.A, French League 1 999 . . . . ............ ............. ...................... 207
Gabriel.G-Akopian.V, Germany vs. Armenia match, Baden Baden 1996 ........... 13
Gagunashvili.M-Morozevich.A, Moscow 2003 .................................................. 1 02
Gelfand.B-Shirov .A, Linares 1997 .................................................. ..................... 1 74
Gurevich.M-Piket.J, Antwerp 1993 ................ ..................................................... 233
Gurevich.M-Sokolov.l, Dos Hermanas 2001 ...................................................... 117
Halkias.S-Asrian.K, European Championship, Ohrid 200 1 ............................... 1 54
Halkias.S-Sokolov.l, Bled Olympiad 2002 ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................. ............. 86
Hansen.L.B.-Illescas Cordoba.M, Moscow 1994 ............................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... 1 73
Herraiz.H-Flear.G, Elgoibar 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 5
Hiibner.R-Mastrovasilis.D, Germany vs. Greece match, Corfu 1999 ................. 15
Illescas Cordoba.M-Harikri shna.P, Calvia Olympiad 2004 ............................ 21 7
Illes cas Cordoba.M-Kramnik.V, Madrid 1993 .................................................. 1 70
lvanchuk.V-Kramnik.V, Novgorod 1996 ................ ............................................. 1 49
249
Ivanchuk.V-Lautier.J, Linares 1994 ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ ............................ 16

Ivanchuk.V-Shirov.A, Dos Hermanas 1996 ............................. ............................. 57
Ivanisevic.I-Zivanic.M, Herceg Novi 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................ 125
Jelen.Ig-Ragger.M, Kranj 2004 ................................ ................. ........................... 129
Kahn.E-Portisch.L, Hungarian Team Championship 2003 ................................. 51
Kamsky.G-Kramnik.V, New York match 1994 .... ................. . . . . . . ......... ............... 1 44
Kasparov.G-Fritz X3D, New York match 2003 ................ ......... . . . . . . .................... 196
Kasparov.G-Nikolic.P, Manila Olympiad 1 9 9 2 ........... ....................................... 1 85
Kasparov,G-Van der Wiel.J, Brussels 1987 ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................. 231
Kasparov.S-Vysochin.S, Pavlograd 2000 . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................. ....................... 83
Korchnoi.V-Ribli.Z, Reggio Emilia 1987 ..... ........................................................ 220
Korchnoi.V-Yusupov.A, Lone Pine 198 1 . . ..... .. .. ....... .... .. ..................................... 110
Kramnik.V-Damlj anovic.B, Moscow Olympiad 1994 . . . ............ . . . . ....................... 37
Krasenkow.M-Movsesian.S, Polanica Zdroj 2000 . . . ............................................. 98
Kruppa.Y-Vysochin.S, Kiev 2000 ....................................... ................................. 1 81
Lafuente. P-Wojtkiewicz.A, Pan American Ch. , Buenos Aires 2003 ................... 72
Lautier.J-Anand.V, Monaco (blindfold) 2000 . . . . . . . . ................. ............................. 1 89
Lautier.J-Bareev.E, Enghien-les-Bains 2003 . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................. 20
Lautier.J-Gurevich.M, Biel Interzonal 1993 . . . . ........... ....................................... 237
Levitt.J-Flear.G, British Championship, Plymouth 1989 . . . . . . ............. .......... . . . . . . . . 41
Mikhalevsky.V-Shabalov.A, Philadelphia 2003 ...................... . . . . . . . . ................... 128
Milov.V-Bacrot.E, Leon 2001 ............ .............. . . . . ........... . . . . . . . . . . ............................ 1 78
Mochalov.E-Berezjuk.S, Belarus Championship, Minsk 1993 ............................ 94
Moiseenko.A-Potkin.V, Istanbul 2003 .................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............................. 206
Morovic Fernandez.I-Leitao.R, Santos 2004 ................................ ...................... 92
Nikolic.P-Bareev.E , European Team Championship, Pula 1997 ......................... 63
Nikolic.P-Shirov.A, Linares 1997 ................................... : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 32
Petrosian.T-Smyslov.V, USSR Championship, Moscow 1 9 5 1 ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Piket.J-Van Wely.L, Dutch League 2002 .... ............................ ............................... 33
Poluljahov.A-Geller.J, Krasnodar 2001 .................................. ............................ 1 91
Ponomariov.R-Shirov.A, Wijk aan Zee 2003 ............... ....................................... 135
Popov.V-Skatchkov.P, Russian Championship, Krasnodar 2002 ..................... 1 92
Rogozenko.D-Hector.J, Hamburg 2001 ................... .................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... 31
Rogozenko.D-Murariu.A, Bucharest 2002 .......... ................................................. 26
Romanishin.O-Akopian.V, Linares 1996 .............................................................. 58
Sadler.M-Ioseliani.N, Lucerne 1997 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ' · · · · · · · · · ; · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 1 65
Salov.V-Bareev.E, Dortmund 1992 · · · · · · · · ·· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ' · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·· · · · · · · · 73
Salov.V-Hiibner.R, Dortmund 1992 ..................................................................... .. 62
Salov.V-Illescas Cordoba.M, Madrid 1993 ..... .............. . . . . . . . . . ............................. 1 33
Salov-Shirov.A, Dos Hermanas 1995 .................. ................................................. 209
San Segundo.P-Vera.R, Benidorm 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... .............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
250
I ndex of Complete Games
Sargissian.G-Sveshnikov.R, Stepanakert 2004 ............ . . .

. . ..... . . .. ....................... 204
Sherbakov.R-Shabanov.Y, Russian Championship 1996 . . . . . . . . .......................... 1 93
Shirov.A-Dreev.A, Sarajevo 2002 ............ ......... .............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 71
Shirov.A-Nikolic.P, Manila Interzonal 1990 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Skembris.S-Georgiev.V, Saint Vincent 2003 . . . ..... . .......... .... ... . ... . ............ . . . . . . . . ... 1 03
Speelman.J-Ribli.Z, Subotica Interzon?-1 1987 .... .. .... . .
. . . ... . . .
. . ....................... . . . 1 76
..
Speelman.J-Sveshnikov.E, Biel Interzonal 1993 . ... ... ..... . . .

. . . . . . . ...... ................. . 140
.
Stefansson.H-Johannessen.L.E, Reykjavik 200 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ..... ..... . . . ...... . 187

.
Szabolcsi.J-Rausis.I, French League 1997 ..... . ......................... . . . . . .

. . .. . . ........ . . .
. . .. 225
Tkachiev.V-Shirov.A, Bastia 2003 ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Topalov.V-Georgiev.Ki, Sarajevo 2001 . . . .. ..... . .... . . .. ........................... . ..... . ...... . ... 1 00
Uhlmann.W-Larsen.B, Candidates match, Las Palmas 1 9 7 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 67
Vallejo Pons.F-Sokolov.I, Mainz 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Vallin.G-Flear.G, French League, Clermont-Ferrand 2003 ................. . ..... . ....... . 1 68
Van Wely.L-De Vreugt.D, Dutch Championship, Rotterdam 2000 : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Van Wely.L-Fressinet.L, French League 2001 ..... . . . . . . .............. . ......................... 236
Van Wely.L-Piket.J, Vlissingen 2001 ...... . .
. ..... . ..... . . . . . . . . .
.. . . . . . . . . .
.. . . ..................... . 228
Varga.Z-Portisch.L, Hungarian Championship, Heviz 2003 .................... . .......... 46
Vegh.E-Dao Thien Hai, Hungarian Team Championship 1996 . . . ..................... 242
Vescovi.G-Gelfand.B, Bermuda 2004 ..... . ...... . . .. .... . ....
. ... . . .
. .. ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Vyzmanavin.A-Sorokin.M, USSR Championship 1991 ... . .... . . . ...... . ................... 1 63
Wojtaszek.R-Jedynak.R, Trzebinia 2002 ....... .. ....... . .................... . ...................... 1 36
Wojtkiewicz.A-Shirov.A, Manila Olympiad 1992 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
251
Index of Variations
Part 1 : The Slav

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bf5 6 Ne5
6 e3 e6 7 Bxc4 Bb4 8 0-0 Nbd7
9 Nh4 0-0 1 8
9 Qe2 Bg6 10 e4
10 . . . Bxc3 1 1 bxc3 Nxe4 16
10 . . . 0-0 11 Bd3 Bh5
12 e5 1 3; 12 Bf4 1 5
6 ... Nbd7
6 . . . e6 7 f3 Bb4 8 e4 Bxe4 9 .fxe4 Nxe4 10 Bd2 Qxd4 1 1 Nxe4 Qxe4+ 12 Qe2
Bxd2+ 13 Kxd2 Qd5+ 14 Kc2 Na6 15 Nxc4
15 . . . 0-0 24; 1 5 . . . 0-0-0 27
7 Nxc4 Qc7 8 g3 e5 9 dxe5 Nxe5 10 Bf4 Nfd7 11 Bg2 f6
1 l . . . g5 29
12 0-0
12 . . . Rd8 29; 12 . . . Nc5 31

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bg4 · ·
5 . . . Na6
6 e4 41 ; 6 e3 43
6 Ne5 Bh5
7 f3 36; 7 g3 36; 7 h3 3 7
252
I ndex of Variatio n s
Gambit Lines: 5 e4, 5 Ne5 and 5 e3

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 e4
5 g3 55; 5 Ne5 55
5 e3 b5 6 a4 b4 7 Nb1 Ba6 8 Be2 e6 9 0-0
9 c5 61 ; 9 Be7 61
... ...
5. ..b5 6 e5 Nd5 7 a4 e6 8 axb5 Nxc3 9 bxc3 cxb5 10 Ng5 Bb7 1 1 Qh5 g6 1 2

Qg4 B e7 13 Be2
13 . . Bd5 52; 13 . . . Nd7 53
.
The Qu iet 4 e3
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 Bf5
4 . . . Bg4 5 h3 Bxf3 6 Qxf3 e6 7 Nc3 Nbd7
8 Bd2 Bd6 68; 8 Bd3 g6 1 08 (Chapter 7)
5 Nc3
5 cxd5 cxd5 6 Qb3 70
5 ... e6
6 Bd3 72; 6 Nh4 71

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 cxd5 cxd5 4 Nc3 Nf6 5 Nf3
5 Bf4 Nc6 6 e3 a6 7 Bd3 Bg4
8 f3 86; 8 Nge2 86
5 ...Nc6 6 Bf4 a6
7 e3 Bg4 80
7 Ne5 Qb6 8 Nxc6 bxc6
9 a3 83; 9 Qd2 82

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 a6 5 e3
5 c5 Nbd7 6 Bf4 Nh5
7 Bd2 Nhf6 8 b4 97; 7 e3 9 7
5 a 4 e6
6 Bg5 1 02; 6 e3 101;
5 Qc2 g6 1 14 (Chapter 7)
5 ...b5 6 b3 Bg4 7 Be2
7 h3 Bxf3 8 gxf3 92
7 ...Nbd7 8 h3 Bh5 9 0-0 e6 1 0 Bb2
10 . . . Be7 94; 10 . Bd6 92
..
253
The S lav with ... g7-g6

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 e3 g6
4 . . . a6 5 Qc2 �6 6 Bd3 Bg7 7 Nf3 0-0 8 0-0 Bg4 9 Ne5 Be6
10 b3 1 1 4; 10 Bd2 1 1 4
5 Nf3 Bg7
6 Be2 0-0 7 0-0 dxc4 108; 6 Bd3 0-0 7 0-0 Bg4 1 08
Part 2: The Semi-Slav
The Botvin n i k Variation: 5 Bg5 dxc4

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 Bg5 dxc4 6 e4 b5
7 a4 124
7 e4 h6 8 Bh4 g5 9 Nxg5
9 ex£6 125
9 Nxg5 hxg5
9 . . Nd5 1 27
.
10 Bxg5 Nbd7 1 1 exf6

1 1 g3
1 1 . . . Qa5 129; 1 1 . ..Bb7 12 exf6 - 1 1 ex£6
1 1 ...Bb7 12 g3 c5
12 . . . Qc7 128
13 Bg2 Qb6
13 . . . Bh6 1 31 .
'
14 d5 0-0-0 15 o-o b4 16 Na4
16 Rb1 1 32
16 ... Qb5 1 7 a3 exd5
17 . . . Nb8 1 34
18 axb4
18 . . . cxb4 1 35; 1 8 . . . d4 1 36
The Moscow Variation : 5 Bg5 h6

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 Bg5 h6 6 Bxf6
6 Bh4 dxc4 7 e4 g5 8 Bg3 b5 9 Be2 Bb 7 10 h4 g4 1 1 Ne5 h5 12 0-0 Nbd7
13 Qc2 Nxe5 14 Bxe5
14 . . . Bg7 1 54; 14 . . . Rg8 1 57 � ·
6 ... Qxf6 7 e3
7 g3 1 39
7 ... Nd7 8 Bd3 dxc4
8 . . . Qd8 1 44
9 Bxc4
9 . . . Bd6 1 4 7; 9 . . . g6 1 49
254
I n dex of Variations
The Meran Variation

1 d 4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 N f3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 e3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 dxc4 7 Bxc4 b5 8 Bd3
8 Bb3 1 62; 8 Be2 1 63
8 Bb7
...
8 ... a6 9 e4 c5
10 d5 Bb7 1 1 0-0 8 . Bb7 9 0-0 a6
- . .
10 e5 cxd4 11 Nxb5
1 1 . . .Ng4 1 76
1 l . . . axb5 12 exf6 1 75
1 l . . . Nxe5 12 Nxe5 axb5 13 Bxb5+ Bd7 14 Nxd7 Qa5+ 15 Bd2
Qxb5 16 Nxf8
16 . . . Kxf8 1 78; 16 . . . Rxf8 1 81
9 e4
9 0-0
9 . . . b4 1 6.5
9 . . . a6 10 e4 c5 1 1 d5 Qc7 12 dxe6 fxe6 13 Bc2
13 . . . Bd6 1 72; 1 3 . . . Be7 1 73
9 b4 1 0 Na4 c5 1 1 e5 Nd5
...
12 Nxc5 1 67
12 0-0
12 . . . h6 1 68; 12 . . . cxd4 1 70
Black avoids the Meran

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 e3 Nbd7
5 . . . a6
6 c5 196; 6 b3 1 99
6 Bd3 Bd6
6 . . . Bb4 1 85
7 0-0 0-0 8 e4 dxe4
8 . . . dxc4 9 Bxc4 e5 10 Bg5 Qe7 1 1 Re 1 Rd8
12 d5 1 88; 12 Qb3 1 89
9 Nxe4 Nxe4 10 Bxe4 h6
10 ... Nf6 191
1 1 Bc2 e5
12 Qd3 192; 12 Re1 1 94
255
Starting Out: Slav and Sem i-S lav
Wh ite avoids the Meran

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 e6 5 e3
5 Qb3 219
5 ... Nbd7 6 Qc2 Bd6 7 g4
7 Bd2 0-0 8 0-0-0 20 7; 7 e4 209; 7 b3 213
7 Bd3 0-0 8 0-0 dxc4 9 Bxc4 b5
10 Bd3 21 5; 10 Be2 21 7
7 ... Bb4 8 Bd2 Qe7 9 Rg1 Bxc3 10 Bxc3 Ne4
1 1 0-0-0 204; 11 Bd3 206
Early Deviations
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3
3 Nf3 dxc4 4 e3 Be6 224
3 ... e6
3 ... dxc4 4 e4 b5 228
3 . . . e5 4 dxe5 d4 5 Ne4 Qa5+ 6 Bd2 Qxe5 7 Ng3 Nf6 8 Nf3 Qd6 9 Qc2 Be7
10 0-0-0 0-0 11 e3 dxe3
12 fxe3 231 ; 12 Bc3 233
4 Nf3
4 e4 dxe4 5 Nxe4 Bb4+ 6 Bd2 Qxd4 7 Bxb4 Qxe4+ 8 Be2 'Na6
9 Ba5 236; 9 Bc3 23 7
4 ... dxc4 5 a4 Bb4 6 e3 b5 7 Bd2 a5 8 axb5 Bxc3 9 Bxc3 cxb5 10 b3 Bb7
1 1 d5 240; 11 bxc4 242
. .
256

1 4925245491760857164 PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

1 4925245491760857164 PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

st rtin t:

slav ana semi-slav

Gloucester Publishers ole www.evervmanchess.com

Copyright© 2005 Glenn Flear

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

ISBN 1 85744 393 4

All other sales enquiries should be directed to Everyman Chess, Northburgh

EVERYMAN CHESS SERIES (formerly Cadogan Chess)

Typeset and edited by First Rank Publishing, Brighton.

Part 1: The Slav

1 The Main Line Slav: 5 a4 Bf5 9

Part 2: The Semi-Slav

8 The Botvinnik Variation: 5 Bg5 dxc4 120

Quick Quiz 245

queen's bishop along the c8-h3 diagonal.

Who plays the Slav and Semi-Slav?

Statistics, Damn Lies and Statistics

m The Dutch Variation

m White plays his knight to h4

m The Central Variation: 6 Ne5 e6

m The Central Variation: 6 Ne5 Nbd7

The Dutch Variation

1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 c4 c6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bf5 6 e3 e6 7 Bxc4 Bb4 8 0-0

C) TIP: Taking time to improve your pieces is commendable, but

19 Ba4 e 5 20 dxc5 bxc5 2 1 Qe3 (Diagram 9) 2 1 ... Re6?!

WARN I NG: When grabbing pawns for the cost of a persistent

White plays his knight to h4

6 . . . Bc8 (playable but a tad negative in my opinion) or later on 8 . . . Bd6 9 Bxc4 0-

� · NOTE: Opposite-coloured bishops can be a drawish factor in

21 Radl (Diagram 13) 21...Ra_ e 81

27 ...Be3+ 28 Khl Bxd4

The Central Variation: 6 Ne5 e6

The logical-looking 7 . . . c5 hits immediately at d4 before White can get in his

With . . . b7-b5 in the air.

P.Haba, Czech Championship 2003.

Black's pawns create the impression of an impenetrable wall.

overall conclusion. The text seems to be more dangerous.

N OTE: A fine-looking outpost for a knight is one thing, but if it

22 ... Qa6 23 b3 Kb8 24 Kb2 e5?1

to open the g-file.

The Central Variation: 6 Ne5 Nbd7

12 Ne3 gxf4 1 3 Nxf5 0-0-0!

NOTE: When under pressure, keeping one's pawns solid can

Also worthy of serious consideration is 13 . . . Rd8, e.g. 14 Ncd5 Qd7 15 Nxf5

1 8 ... bxc6 (Diagram 26)

White now has to choose between capturing a pawn or a rook.

NOTE: Two bishops in such an open position are typically

B l ac k ' s F ifth M ove Alte rn atives

B Bronstein (Steiner) Variation: 5 Bg4 . . .

B S myslov Variation: 5 . . . Na6

Bronstein (Steiner) Variation: 5 Bg4 . . .

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 N£3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bg4

White now has three ways to counter Black's prophylactic idea.

White can now chose which pawn to go for.

22 Rxa1 Nd7 23 b4! f6 24 Rd1! Nb6 25 Na5 !

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Bg4 6 Ne5 Bh5 7 g3

Following 10 . . . Be7 1 1 Nxc4 Nb4, A.Yusupov-P.Nikolic, Hastings 1989/90, an

Defending the c-pawn, but provoking White's fury.

Smyslov Variation: 5 Na6 . . .

Smyslov's 5 . . . Na6 is not particularly ambitious. Black avoids any immediate

Bringing the knight to a6 at this point is known universally as Smyslov's

TIP: Before getting carried away with 'static' weaknesses such

other is to nip your opponent's attack in the bud, before com

TIP: Your king's futu re is always important, so don't automati