Alexey Dreev

The Meran
& Anti-Meran Variations
Technical Editor: 1M Sergey Soloviov

Translation by: GM Evgeny Ermenkov

Cover design by: Veronika Dreeva

Copyright © Alexey Dreev 2011

Printed in Bulgaria by "Chess Stars" Ltd. - Sofia

ISBN13: 978 954 8782 80-7
 Alexey Dreev

The Meran&
Anti-Meran Variations-

An Insider's View

Chess Stars
 Other CHESS STARS Books

Repertoire books:
Opening for White Ace. to Kramnik 1.€)f3 by A. Khalifman
Volume 1a: Old Indian, rare lines in the Classical Variation, 2006
Volume 1b: The Classical Variation, 2006
Volume 2: Anti-N"un-Ind,Anti~'s Indian, English, 2008
Volume 3a: Maroczy, English (1...c5), English (four knights), 2011
Volume 3b: Modern, Dutch, Rare
Volume 4: Queen's Gambit Accepted, Slav, Semi-Slav
Volume 5: Catalan Opening
Opening for White According to Anand 1.e4 by A. Khalifman
Volume 8: The Sicilian, Paulsen-Kan and rare lines, 2006
Volume 9: The Sicilian, Paulsen-Taimanov and other lines, 2007
Volume 10: The Sicilian, Sveshnikov, 2007
Volume 11; The Sicilian, Dragon, 2009
Volume 12: The Sicilian, Rauzer Attack, 2009
Volume 13: The Sicilian, English Attack, 2010

Opening for Black According to Karpov by Khalifman

Current theory and practice series:

An Expert's Guide to the 7.Bc4 Gruenfeld by Sakaev, 2006
The Sharpest Sicilian by Kiril Georgiev and At. Kolev, 2007
The Safest Sicilian by Delchev and Semkov, 2nd rev.ed. 2008
The Queen's Gambit Accepted by Sakaev and Semkov, 3rd. rev. ed., 2008
The Easiest Sicilian by Kolevand Nedev, 2008
The Petrosian System Against the QID by Beliavsky and Mikhalchishin, 2008
Kill I<.I.D. by Semko Semkov, 2009
The King's Indian. A Complete Black Repertoire by Victor Bologan, 2009
The Scotch Game for White by Vladimir Barsky, 2009
The Modern Philidor Defence by Vladimir Barsky, 2010
The Moscow & Anti-Moscow Variations by Alexey Dreev, 2010
Squeezing the Gambits by Kiril Georgiev, 2010
The French Defence. A Complete Black Repertoire by Nikita Vitiugov, 2010
A Universal Weapon 1.d4 d6 by Vladimir Barsky, 2010

More details at www.chess-stars.com

4
Contents
Preface .............................................. 7

The Meran Variation

l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.lLlf3lLlf6 4.lLlc3 e6 S.e3lLlbd7 6..id3 dxc4 7..ixc4 bS

1 8 ..ib3; 8 ..ie2 .................................. 11

2 8 ..id3 .ib7 9.a3 . .. . .................................. 22

The Classical System

8 ..id3 .ib7 9.0-0 a6 10.e4 c5 n.dS 'iNc7

3 12.'iNe2 c413 ..ic2 .id614.dxe6fxe61S.lLlgS .................... 31

4 12.'iNe2 c413 ..ic2 .id614.dxe6 fxe61S.lLld4 ................. 36
S 12.dxe6 fxe6 13 ..ic2 c4 14.lLlgS.............................. 42
6 12.dxe6 fxe613 ..ic2 c414.lLld4 ............................. S2
The Dreev-Filipenko Variation
7 12.dxe6 fxe613 ..ic2 J.d614.lLlgSlLlf8 1S.f4 0-0-0 16.~e1 ....... 63
8 12.dxe6 fxe613.J.c2 J.d614.lLlgSlLlf81S.f4 0-0-0 16.'iNe2 ...... 74

The Modern System

8.J.d3 J.b7 9.e4 b4 10.lLla4 c5 n.eSlLld7

9 12.dxcSlLlxcS 13.lLlxc5 .ixc5 ............................ 83

10 12.0-0 cxd413.lLlxd4 ..................................... 96
n 12.0-0 cxd413J;e1 g6 ..................................... 107
12 12.0-0 cxd413J;e1 J.e7 ..................................... 123

S
 The Anti-Meran Variation
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.ltlf3ltlf6 4.ltlc3 e6 5.e3 ltlbd7 6.~c2

The System 6 ...b6

1 7.a3. 7J'!bl. 7.e4. 7..td2, 7.cxd5........................... 133
2 7..te2 .......................................... 148
3 7..td3 .......................................... 154

The System 6 ... id6

4 7.a3, 7.e4. 7..td2 ...................................... 158
5 7.b3 0-0 8 ..td3; 8 ..tb2............................ 165
6 7..td3 0-0 8.0-0 dxc4 9 ..txc4 a6 ....................... 170
7 7..te2 0-0 8.b3 ..................................... 184
8 7.g4 h6 ........................................ 193

Rare Lines
9 6.a3, 6.id2, 6.cxd5, 6.ie2, 6.a3 ........................ 202

6
PREFACE
Dear readers,

After the moves 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.~c3 ~f6 4.~f3 e6 White has two
serious alternatives.

At first, this is the move S..igS, which may lead to the double-edged
positions of the Anti-Moscow Variation (S ...h6 6 ..ih4 dxc4 7.e4 gS
8 ..ig3 bS), or to the Botvinnik variation (S ... dxc4 6.e4 bS). The Anti-
Moscow Variation (as Black's more fashionable choice) has been ana-
lyzed in my previous book (together with the Moscow Variation - S...
h6 6.,ixf6 ~xf6, in which the developments are much calmer).
Secondly, White may choose the move 5.e3, in order to steer the
game into positional and not so sharp lines, planning to develop initia-
tive in the centre.
After 5 •.. ~bd7 6.J.d3 dxc4 7 •.lxc4 b5, there arises the position
of the Meran variation (in short - Meran) and the first part of this
book is devoted to it.
 As it is well-known, this variation was named like that after a game,
played in the year 1924 at a tournament in the Italian town Merano.
It was between Akiba Rubinstein and Ernst Gruenfeld. It was Akiba
Rubinstein who tried for the first time the move 6 ... dxc4 (They used to
play then moves like 6 ....ib4, 6 ....ie7, 6 ....id6. They are almost ignored
nowadays, more than 86 years later.). The main idea of the variation,
introduced by A.Rubinstein, was, in response to White's initiative in
the centre, to win a tempo by exchanging on c4 and to follow that with
the move b7-bS. Black wishes to organize an offensive on the queenside
(for example, to play Ab7, then a7-a6 and later to accomplish the es-
sential pawn-advance for him c6-c5). As a rule, the positions arising in
the Meran variation are very complicated and double-edged. Black has
great possibilities to create counterplay and it is practically irrelevant
who plays with what colour...
It is understandable that the Meran variation has long history and
extensive theory. Naturally, many of its variations are impossible to be
evaluated definitely even now, in the computer age. Its theory is per-
manently developing.
White however, enlarges the theory in another direction as well. He
is trying not to let Black enter the Meran variation. The most effec-
tive weapon, preventing the Meran, for many years has been the move
6.tfc2.

It has been named the Anti-Meran variation (in short anti-Mer-

an) and it has been analyzed thoroughly in the second part ofthis book.
At the same place, we have dealt in short with White's other attempts
to avoid entering the Meran variation.
In general, the positions of the anti-Meran are not so sharp as the
Meran and the game is more positional. Still, White has the possibility
to transfer the game into very complicated and double-edged positions

8
even in the anti-Meran, for example by countering 6 ... i.d6 with 7.g4.
Both openings, analyzed in this book, are among the most mod-
ern and popular in the contemporary theory and they are being played
by many outstanding players like Garry Kasparov, Vladimir Kramnik,
Viswanathan Anand, Alexey Shirov, Boris Gelfand, Levon Aronian, Te-
imur Radjabov and many others.
The author of these lines has a quarter century of experience in both
these variations in tournaments and matches, including the World
Championships and the Olympiads. I have introduced into the tourna-
ment practice numerous new schemes and I have defended them on
the board. I collected and wrote about 10 years ago a computer Ency-
clopaedia of the Meran variation (published by ChessBase). Still, time
is running and tournament practice introduces corrections in theory.
The development of the computer software and the chess programs
helps world's leading players in their home analyses. Naturally, during
the time passed, there were considerable re-evaluations of numerous
lines and many new ideas and possibilities were found for both sides.
Therefore, it has become necessary not only to introduce changes in
the already published material, but to write a new book altogether. It is
written from the point of view of Black, just like the analyses during the
game. This means that we have analyzed White's mains alternatives
in all the lines, but the emphasis is on how to play with Black (accord-
ingly, I have shared with you how I would react if I should encounter
a certain position in a practical game). Of course, if Black has several,
interesting and deserving attention possibilities, we have analyzed
them all. Similarly to my previous book, dealing with the Moscow and
anti-Moscow variations, I have included in this work many of my own
games and original analyses.
I would like to express my acknowledgement to my coach and help-
er for many years, international master and honorary coach of Russia
Alexander Filipenko. Many of his wonderful ideas were tested by me in
practice and his advice was always invaluable to me.
I would also like to thank sincerely the editor, international mas-
ter Sergey Soloviov, for his expert assistance in the preparation of this
book.

Alexey Dreev
Moscow, February 2011

9
 The Meran Variation

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.~f3 ~f6 4.~c3 e6 5.e3 ~bd7

6 ..id3 dxc4 7 ..txc4 b5
Chapterl l.d4 ~f6 2.c4 c6 3.~c3 ~f6 4.~f3 e6
5.e3 ~bd7 6.Ad3 dxc4 7 ..bc4 b5
In this chapter, we will ana-
lyze White's attempts to avoid the
main theoretical line beginning
with S..id3.
A) 8.Ab3
B) 8.Ae2
A) 8.Ab3
This retreat is played only very
rarely at top level. It used to be
popular in the pre-computer age.
Black has a very pleasant choice to
make, for example he can contin-
ue with S... b4 9.tlJa4 (9.tlJe2 .ib7)
9 ...i.a6 and here there has been
amassed plenty of theory. I think
it is useless to go into all this in
details, because Black can choose
a calm and straightforward move,
which solves all the opening prob-
lems for him in the variation with
8 ..ib3. So,
8 ••• Ab7!?
This is a logical and natural
move and it was played quite suc-
cessfully recently by Viswanathan
Anand.
9.0-0
9.e4?! - This move is not dan-
gerous for Black at all and after
it, he can even try to seize the
initiative. 9 ...b4 (this is a stand-
ard reaction) W.eS bxc3 11.exf6
tlJxf6 12.bxc3 .ie7. His plan is very
simple. Black wishes to castle and
then to advance c6-cS. White can-
not counter that plan with any-
thing really problematic for his
11
Chapter 1
opponent, for example: 13.0-0
0-0 14.~e2 (14J!b1 c5+ Fairhurst
- Reshevsky, Margate 1935 and
of course, here he cannot play
lS ..be6?, because of lS ....bf3-+;
14 ..ie3 cS lS.dxcS ~c7+; 14...
l:k8 lS.~e2 cS 16JUdl ~a5+ Dju-
ric - Gonda, Bern 2006) 14 ... c5
lS.dxc5?! ~c7 16.ltJeS .bc5 17..tf4
.td6=t 18J:'ifd1?! ltJdS 19 ..bdS
exd5-+ 20J!ab1 ~ae8 21.~e3
.ta8 22.~el f6 0-1 Kazhgaleyev -
Anand, Bastia 2006.
9 ••• .te7
10.ge1
This is a logical move for White
and he prepares e3-e4 with it.
About 1O.e4 b4 1l.eS bxc3
12.exf6 ltJxf6 13.bxc3 - see 9.e4.
10.~e2 0-0 ll.~dl ~aS!? This
maneuver is not so typical for this
position, but it looks like Black
can afford it. His queen avoids the
X-ray with White's rook on d1 and
Black wishes to prepare the the-
matic move c6-c5 (it is weaker for
him to opt here for 1l ... ~c712 ..td2
a6 13.e4 b4 14.ltJa4 c5 IS.eSt
E.Geller - Pilnik, Budapest 19S2,
12
The Meran Variation
or 1l ... a6 12.e4 c5 13.eSt). 12.e4
(12.a3 b4 13.ltJa4 bxa3 14.bxa3 cS
IS ..td2 ~c7 16.~ac1 ~ab8 17..ta2
.tc6 lR.lllxcS ltJxc5 19.dxc5 .b4
20.~e1 ltJe4= with approximate
equality) 12 ...b4 13.ltJa4 (13.ltJbl
.ta614.~c2 c51S.eSltJdS - White
lags in development and Black
has a very good game) 13 ....b6!
(Black exploits maximally the
drawbacks of the move 10.~e2)
14.~c2 c5 IS.eS c4 16.exf6ltJxf6+
10 ... 0-0 1l.e4 b4 12.~a4
c513.d5
13.eSltJdS14.~d3 ~c81S.ltJxc5
ltJxc5 (IS ....bcS?! 16..tc2! g6 17.
dxcS~) 16.dxc5 ~xcS 17..tc2 g6 18 .
.ih6 ~e8 and Black is not worse,
while after 19 ..b4?! ttlb6!+ he is
even slightly better, Korchnoi -
Ribli, MontpeHier 1985.
13 .•. exd514.e5
14.exdS .td6+
14... ~e8 15.hd5 hd5 16 .
• xd5~b6!?
Following 16... ltJc717.~c6ltJe6
18.ie3 ~c8 19.~b5 ~c7, Black has
no problems whatsoever, Kluger
- Polgar, Budapest 1965.

17.~xb6
17.~b3 ttJc7 18.ie3 ttJe6 19.
ttJxb6 axb6 20.a3 bxa3 2U'lxa3
~c7, draw, Kotov - Pfeiffer, Ham-
burg 1960.
17.~xd8 :1!xd8 18.ttJxb6 axb6
19.a319 ... :1!a8!? (19 ... bxa3 20J%xa3
ttJc7 2U'la7 ttJd5=) 20.:1!b1 bxa3
21.bxa3 :1!a6 22.e6 fxe6 23.:1!xe6
id6 24.ib2 c4= 25.id4?! b5!+
Tatai - Pinter, Rome 1984.
17... axb618.'ti'c6!
Black has problems complet-
ing his development, but he can
sacrifice a pawn.
18 ... ~c7! 19.'ti'xb6 ga6 20.
Vb7
20 ...'ti'a8! 21.Ve4 (21.~xc7?
:1!a7 22.~6 :1!b8+) 21 ...ftxe4
22.gxe4 gfa8 23.a3 ~b5=
B) 8.Ae2
This move used to be as popu-
lar as the variation with 8.id3.
They play like that nowadays too,
but its peak in popularity is long
past, because Black has found
very reliable paths and White can
hardly create any serious prob-
6.id3 dxc4 7.hc4 b5 B.ie2 i.b7
lems for his opponent. The main
difference between 8.id3 and
8.~e2 is that after 8.Ae2 White
has greater problems to prepare
the thematic pawn-advance e3-
e4, because Black can attack im-
mediately the e4-pawn after the
move b5-b4. The arising positions
after that are much different from
the positions following 8.Ad3.
8 ...Ab7
This is the simplest and the
best move for Black.
He plays sometimes 8 ... b4, as
well as 8 ... a6, but all these alter-
natives have certain drawbacks,
for example after 8 ... a6 9.e4! b4
10.e5 bxc3 1l.exf6, Black enters a
less favourable version of the var-
iation 8 ...ib7 9.e4, which we will
analyze below.
Therefore, our choice is cen-
tred on - 8 ... i.b7!
Bl) 9.e4
B2) 9.0-0
Bl) 9.e4
This move is not played by
White as often as 9.0-0. It is
13
Chapter 1 The Meran Variation

probably due to the fact that he is White to follow with 14..h6?!, be-
not so willing psychologically to cause he cannot win the c6-pawn
enter a position with four queens anyway. 14 ...~6 IS.hb7 %!I'xb7
on the board, which is reached by 16.ttJeS ~c8 17..ie3 ttJdS 18.~acl
force if Black so wishes. Another f6=) 14... 0-0 lS ..igS;t: Vadasz -
possible reason may be that Black Plachetka, Kecskement 1975.
can equalize easily without too
many "adventures". Bla) 1l .•. cxb2?! 12.&g7
9 ••• b410.eS bxc3
10 ... ttJdS?! 1l.ttJxdS cxdS 12 .
.id2!? (12 ..igS;t:) 12 ....ie7 13. %!I'a4
as 14 ..ibS;t:
1l.exf6

Here, Black has a choice be-

tween the calm move 12 ....ixg7
and the possibility, which leads
to irrational positions with four
queens present on the board -
Bla) 1l••. cxb2?! 12 ...bxal%!1'.
BIb) 1l••• ~xf6
Blal) 12 •••.ixg7
We must have a look at the al- Bla2) 12 .•. bxalft'
ternatives for Black as well.
1l ... gxf6?! - Of course, he Blal) 12•••.ixg7 13 ..ixb2
should not disrupt voluntarily his 'l'a5+
pawn-structure without necessity. Or 13 ... c5!? 14.0-0 0-0 IS.
12.bxc3 cS 13.0-0 'Hic7 14J~bl!? ~c1!?N;t: and the position is slight-
.id6 IS ..ih6!? ~g8 16.g3;t: ly preferable for White.
1l ... c2?! 12.~xc2 ttJxf6 (12 ... 14.~d2
.ib4 13 ..id2 hd2+ 14.ttJxd2 ttJxf6 14.~d2?! ~xd2+ lS.ttJxd2 cS+
IS.ttJb3 with a stable advantage Urchipia - Granara Barreto, Villa
for White, Ulibin - Gormally, Martelli 2004.
Samnaun 2008) 13.0-0 .ie7 14. 14••• cS!?
~d1 (it is not so convincing for This is the most principled

14
 6.id3 dxc4 7.hc4 b5 B..te2 .tb7

move for Black. After the alterna-

tives, White has a slight but stable
advantage: 14...1Lh6 15..tc!;!; Che-
khover- Spassky, Leningrad 1954;
14 ...ia6 15.0-0 ~b8 16.llJb3 he2
17. ~xe2! Domanski - R.Schmidt,
Bad Woerishofen 1999.
15.0-0 cxd4
15.. J~g8?! 16..tf"3 ~b8 17.hb7
.!'!xb7 18.llJc4 'ffc7 19Jkl± Bonda-
revsky - Kopylov, Leningrad
1950. able and Black has problems cas-
tling. White is obviously better,
for example: 19••••c7 (19 ... ~xb7?
20.~c1+-; 19...if8? 20.~c1 \1fxa2
21..txf8 ~ 22.ic6+-; 19 ... d3
20.~cl ~d4 21.~bl±) 20 •.Ae4!±
Yuneev - Semakin, Yerevan 1983
(20.Af3?! llJe5 21 ..!'!cl \1fd7 22 ..ie4,
Z.Polgar - Iclicki, Brussels 1985,
22 ...d3!oo).

81a2) 12 .•.bxal. 13.gxhS.

"a5+
16.~c4!
The move 16.llJb3 is not so
good, because after 16...'ffg5 17.
if3 .txf3 18.~xf3 0-0 19.hd4!,
White can rely only on a minimal
advantage, Lukov - Garcia Ares,
La Pobla de LiHet 1996.
16 ••••d5
16... ~c7?! 17..txd4 0-0 18 .
.txg7 <bxg719.~cl±
17•.Af'3 exc4IS •.lxb7 JllbS
18 ... 0-0 19 ..txa8 ~xa8 20Jkl
~d5 21 ..!'!c7!?± After the initial appearance of
(diagram) that variation, its evaluation was
19•.ta3! considered to be unclear, but later
This is the point! White's tournament practice confirmed
light-squared bishop is untouch- that White's position was prefer-

15
Chapter 1
able. His king is much safer and
this is a very important factor par-
ticularly if you have in mind the
number of queens present on the
board.
14.~d2
White is better after the ex-
change of queens as well: 14..id2!?
%'1xdl + 15.hdl %'1fSI6.0-0 0-0-0
17.%'1g8! (It is weaker for White
to opt for 17.d5 .id6 18.ti'd4? c5!
19.ti'a4 !f,\'xd5 20 ..ie2 gg8+ Pliester
- Dreev, New York 1989; the po-
sition would remain unclear after
18.~c3 %'1xd5 19.tlJg5oo) 17....ie7
(17 ...ti'g6 18.~xg6 hxg6 19.ttJg5
ih6 20.f4;!;; 17....ih4 18.~g3;!;)
18.%'1g7 %'1g6!? (18 ...c5 19 ..ia5!?
ttJb6 20.ttJe5t) 19.~xg6 hxg6
20 ..ib3t. The endgame is prefer-
able for White, because Black can
hardly manage to advance c6-c5:
20 ... c5?! 21.ttJg5 gf8 22.gcl.
14... c5
14....ia6?! 15.0-0 he2 16.
~xe2 ti'5xa2 17.ti'd3!± (but not
17.Wlxh7 Wlxd4 18.ti'ch5 0-0-0
19.ti'5xf7 .ic5 20.~e4;!; S.Hansen
- Muir, Aarhus 1990).
16
The Meran Variation
14.. :~5xa2?! 15.0-0 .ia6 16.
ha6 %'1xa6 17.ttJe4!N (l7.ttJb3?
ti'bl 18.ttJc5 ~ab5 19 ..ih6 ~xdl
20J:~xdl 0-0-0= Barsauskas -
Kholmov, Lithuania 1955) 17...
0-0-0IB.ti'xh7±
14 ... ~5c3?! 15.0-0 Wlxd4 16.
%'1xh7 ttJf6 17.ti'h3 (17.'~·hc2!?
0-0-0 IB.ttJb3 %'1xdI19 ..ixdl ~e5
20 ..ib2±) 17... 0-0-0 IB.ti'c2± Mi-
lov - TImofeev, playchess.com 2004.
14 ... %'1fS 15.0-0 (The position
is not so clear after 15.ttJc4 0-0-0
16.0-0 .ie7!? - 16 ... %'1xa2?! 17.
.id3± Pliester - N.Nikolic, Pur-
merend 1993 - 17.ti'g7 ~xa2
IB ..id3 ti'f6, Carnic - Vlatkovic,
Nis 1995) 15 ... 0-0-0 16 ..ig4!?
This is probably not the only way
for White to claim an advantage,
but it seems to be the simplest.
16 ... %'1g6 (16 ... %'1f6 17.%'1xh7 ~axd4
18.ttJe4± Akesson - Wengholm,
Sweden 2003) 17..ih5 ti'fS 18.~f3
%'1xf3 19.hf3±
15.0-0 'l'xd4
16.trxh7!
The spectacular move 16.ttJb3
may lead to an approximately

equal endgame: 16 ... ~xh8 17.
~xaS .tdS 18.~f3 (18.~c2 ~e5
19.id3 ig7 20.~c4 ~c3 21.~e2
~eS 2VuxeS ~xeS= Chatalba-
shev - Sveshnikov, Anapa 1991)
18 .. .'~)j'd4 19.'~'xd4 cxd4 20.hdS
exdS 2Ule1+ 'itid8 22.lLlc6=
16".ti'xa2
Black wins a pawn, trying to
compensate with that the draw-
backs of his position, which we
have already discussed.
16 ... W1c7 17.lilc4+ Pal us - Bu-
turin, Swidnica 1998.
17..tc4!
White has a powerful counter
argument, though ... !
17.•. lLlf6
17.. .'~*,aaI18.he6! 0-0-0 (18 ...
fxe6 19.'~dhS+ 'itid8 20.lLlb3+-
double attack!) 19.'?9xi7+- Sadler
- Payen, Hastings 1990.
18.Yfh8 Yfaa1 19.~b3!?
Vxd1 20.gxd1 ti'a4 21 •.txe6!?
fxe622.ti'xf6±
Bib) 11 •.• ~xf6
This move is simple and cor-
rect for Black.
6.~d3 dxc4 7.~xc4 b5 8.i.e2 i.b7
12.bxc3 .td6!
This is the most logical con-
tinuation for him. He develops his
bishop to d6 and not to e7 and he
solves all possible problems in the
opening.
13.0-0
13.~a4 0-0 14..igS cS 15.dxc5
hcS 16.0-0 h6 17J:lad1 ~e7 18.
ih4 l"l:fd8't Werle - Van Wely,
London 2007.
13J~bl ~c7 14.~b3 (14.c4?! c5
15.dxc5 hc516 ..if4 '?{fxf417.~a4+
'itif8 18.Elxb7 gb8 19J~xb8+ ~xb8
20.0-0 g6't) 14 .. j:~b8 15.~a4?!
0-0 16.Wxa7? lLldS+ Levin - Kai-
danov, Philadelphia 1993.
13.~b3Wic7(13 ... :gb8!?)14.h3
ba3 lS.'~·xa3 ~e7= Sherbakov-
Sakaev, Helsinki 1992.
13.igS 0-0 14.gb1 -eJc7 (14 ...
~b8!?) 15.~d2 cS 16.~6 gxf6
17J:(xb7 ~xb718 ..if3 '!!ie719.ha8
nxa8= with approximate equal-
ity.
13.~d2 0-0 14.l"l:b1 (14.~c4
cS't) 14 ... gb8 lS.lLlc4 cS 16.0-0
ttJdS= Gleizerov - Belozerov, Vo-
ronezh 2006.
13 ••. 0-0
17
Chapter 1 The Meran Variation

13 .. .'t'fc7!? 9 ... a6 lO.e4 cS (10 ... b4 n.eS bxc3

14.J.g5
14.c4 cS= S.Hansen - Kharlov,
Aalborg 1993.
14J:!b1 fic7=
14,..c5 15.gbl
15,..W1c7! Black is not afraid
of the doubling of his pawns (15 ...
.ie4 16 ..id3 .ig6= V.Georgiev -
Shulman, Mashantucket 2005)
16•.txf'6 gxf6 and he has an ex-
cellent game.
B2) 9.0-0
9,..J.e7
The other possibility for him is
12.exf6 lLixf6 13.bxc3 .id6) 1I.eS
lLidS 12.a4 b4 13.lLie4 fic7 and it
leads to very complicated, but
rather dangerous positions for
Black.
The move 9 ...i.e7 is simpler
and more reliable.
10.e4
This is the most principled
move for White.
10.a3!? (this is a very tricky
move) lO ... a5 - that is the best for
Black. He prevents White's plan,
connected with b2-b4, fixing the
pawn on c6, as well as n.e4, since
then n ... b4 would be even more
effective than after lO.e4 b4. Ac-
cordingly, White is trying to con-
ceal his intentions for a while, but
that would not help him to obtain
an advantage either (10 ... 0-0 II.
e4t; lO ... a6?! n.b4 as 12.8:b1 axb4
13.axb4 lLid5 14 ..id2! 0-0 15.lLie4
f5 16.lLic5 lLixc5 17.bxc5 .if6 18.
fic2 fie7 19.e4 fxe4 20.fixe4 El.a2
21.i.d3 g6 22.8:al± Aleksandrov -
Sharma, Dubai 2001) n ..id2 0-0
12.~c2 (12.'&b3 b4!? 13.lLia4 c5=;
13.axb4 axb4 14.lLia4 c5 15.dxc5
lLixc5 16.lLixc5 ixc5= and White
cannot play 17.ixb4?, because of
17...~b6-+; while the move 12 ...
gb8 is not convincing either: 13.
gfd1 b4 14.axb4 axb4 15.lLia4 c5
16.lLixc5 lLixc5 17.dxc5 ixc5 18.
gael fie7= Bocharov - Asrian, Is-
tanbul 2003; 13.El.fc1! h6 14 ..ie1
i.d6 15.lLid2 e5 16.lLice4:!: Bocha-
rov Galliamova, Samara 2000).

18

Now, Black has several inter-
esting possibilities:
12 ...'M>6!? 13.~fc1 ~fc8 14."lWdl
"lWd8= Harikrishna - Smeets,
Kochin 2004;
12 ...b4!? 13.axb4 axb4 14.~a4
c5 lS.dxcS idS!? with the idea to
follow with 16.ixb4 ~b8 17."lWc3
~e4 18.~e1 ~dxc5~; 14... "lWaS!?
lS.~fc1 ~fc8 16."lWdl h6 17.ixa6
'rWxa6=; 16J~b1 c5 17.~xc5 ~xa1
18."lWxal ~xa1 19.~xa1 ~xc5 20.
dxc5ixc5=;
12 .. :~b8 13.~fc1 (13.fiab1? b4
14.~a4 c5 lS.~xcS - lS.dxc5 ~c8+
- lS ... ixc5! 16.dxc5 ie4 17.id3
b3 18."lWc3 ~xc5+ Stefanova -
Harikrishna, Hoogeveen 200S;
13.~e4 ~xe4 14:~xe4 c5 lS."lWbl
c4 16.a4!;t; 15... ~d8! 16.ixb5
ixf3 17.ixd7 ~d718.gxf3 cxd4+;
16.~d1 h6= Speelman - Bareev,
Hastings 1992) 13... ~c8
6.id3 dxc4 7.ixc4 b5 8.ie2 ib7
14J~M1 (if 14."lWb1, then it is
good for Black to follow with 14 ...
b4 lS.axb4 axb4! 16.~a4 c5 and
his position is at least equal; it
is weaker for him to choose IS ...
ixb4 16.~a4 c5 17.ixb4 ie4
18.id3 ixd3 19.~xd3, Belia-
vsky - Gelfand, Nctanya 2009,
19 ... axb4 20.~xc5 ~xa1 2U!xa1
~xcS 22.dxc5 ~xc5=) 14... b4
lS.~a4 c5 (1S ... ~e4!?) 16.dxc5
idS 17.axb4 axb4 18:~'e1 ib3
19.c6 .ixa4 20.cxd7 ~xc1 21:~xc1
ixd7 22.~a8 "lWxa8 23.~eS ie8
24.M3= Harikrishna - Potkin,
Goa 2002.
10 ••• b4 n.eS bxc3 12.exf6
12 •••ixf6
It is also possible for Black to
continue with a move which is
played very often in practice -
12 ... ~xf6, but it seems to me that
White can create serious problems
for his opponent with the line:
13.bxc3 0-0 14.~b1 "lWc7 lS.if4
~xf4 16.~b7 tLldS 17.~c2.
13.bxc3 c5!?
He often plays in practice
13 ... 0-0 14.~b1 ~c7 lS.if4 ~xf4
19
Chapter 1
16J~xb7 ttJb6 17.g3!?, but I would
advise Black to avoid that tabia.
This is not because it is bad for
Black, but because after the move
recently played by Veselin Topalov
- 13 ... c5, White's choice is greatly
reduced and Black obtains a very
good position.
14.dxc5
14.gbl ie4 IS.id3 hd3 16.
~xd3 0-0= Ilivitzki - Geller, Tbi-
lisi 1949.
White cannot create any prob-
lems for his opponent with 14.if4
0-0 (14 ... cxd4 lS.cxd4 0-0 16.
gc1 ttJb6 17.ieS ixeS 1B.ttJxeS=
V.Georgiev - Shulman, Boling-
brook 2005) lS.id3 cxd4 16.cxd4
ttJb6= Nicoara - Collas, Port Bar-
cares 2005.
It is more or less the same af-
ter 14.ibS 0-0 IS.ia3 ie716.ttJeS
ttJxeS 17.dxeS ~b6 1BJ3b1 gfdB
19.~c2 V!!c7 20.gfe1 gabB 21.id3
g6f Vakhidov - Neverov, Bled
2002; lS ... ~aS!? 16.~a4 ~xa4
17.i.xa4 ttJb6 1B.ibS a6 19.ie2
gfbBf, with the idea to follow
with 20.ixcS ttJa4; 19.hc5 axbS
20
The Meran Variation
20.ixb6 ie'n and Black is even
better.
14.id3 0-0 lSJ%b1 idS 16.i.f4
cxd4 17.cxd4 .ba2 (17... ~aS=)
1B.ixh7+ @xh7 19.V!!c2+ wgB 20.
~xa2 ttJb6 21.ieS ttJdS 22.1~a6
~cB 23.gb7 !xeS 24.dxeS ttJb4
2S.~bS as= V.Georgiev - Koma-
rov, Reggio Emilia 2003.
14... ~xc5!?
This is a new move played for
the first time by Veselin Topalov.
Black is not afraid of the loss of
his castling rights and hopes to
consolidate his position using
in the future his superior pawn-
structure. I believe this is the
right choice for him, because after
14... ttJc5, the situation is clarified
much faster in comparison to the
other possibilities.
Black used to play before that
mostly 14... 0-0. There is plen-
ty of theory on this subject and
the evaluation is not definite at
all. See some exemplary varia-
tions: IS.ia3 (1S.ie3 gcB 16.gb1
.bf3 17..bf3 ttJxc5 1B.gbS! ~xd1
19.!!xd1 ttJa4 20.gaSttJxc3 21.gd7!,
 6.id3 dxc4 7.ixc4 b5 B.ie2 ib7

Semkov - Passerotti, Forli 1988; 16 ..,bdS+

16...id5!? 17.ia6 ~k7=; 17.c4 ie4 16.ia3 'lWc7! 17J':.i:bl (17.'tYe2
18.c6 hc6=) 15...ie7 16.~d4 cj{g8 18J'!ad1 a6 19.'lWe3 gc8+
~c7!? 17J~ab1 (17.c6 ha3 18.cxb7 Fromhach - Henrichs, Dortmund
18 ...~xb7= Odendahl- Sprenger, 2010) 17... cj{g8 18.'lWe2 g6!?, plan-
Germany 2002; 18.cxd7 J.c5= ning @g8-g7 and Black is not
Gleizerov - Blagojevic, Skopje worse at all.
1993) 17... id5 (17...ic6!? Brynell 16 ... gxdS17.i.a3 geS
- Carlsen, Gausdal 2005) 18.c4 17...ie7?! 18.lile5i
ic619.~e3 ia4 20.c6 (20.ll'ld4!?) lS.~d4
20 ...ha3 21.cxd7 (21.~xa3 hc6 18J:'!fdl ~g819.ib4 h5=
22.liJd4 ie4 23.gbd1 a6= Baburin lS ... .ie719.gfdl
- Ashton, Birmingham 2006)
21...ic5= Volkov - Filipenko, Ka-
zan 1995.
15.J.b5+
15.ia3!? 'lWc7!? 16J~b1 gd8
17.~c10-018.~e3hf3(18 ...ie7?
19.hc5 hc5 20J;xb7+-) 19.ixt"3
ie7, with an approximately equal
position.
15 ... ct>f8

19 ••• ~e4! with an excellent

position for Black.
In the first game played in
this variation, he did not play so
precisely: 19 ... a6 20.if1 ll'la4?!
(20 ... g6!? 2Uiabl ~c7=) 21.gab1
ie4 22.~b3 ixa3 23.~xa3 llJc5
24.llJb3~ Kramnik - Topalov,
Elista 2006.

21
Chapter 2 1.d4 ~f6 2.c4 c6 3.~c3 ~f6 4.~£J
e6 S.e3 ~bd7 6 ..id3 dxc4 7..bc4 bS
8 ..id3

prise and is worthy of another

We have reached an important
position of the Meran variation.
Black's task is to prepare the the-
matic pawn-advance c6-cS and he
can try to accomplish this in two
different ways.
One of them is to play 8 ... a6.
The other one is analyzed in de-
tails in this book - 8 ... ib7 and
Black plays later a6, followed
by c6-cS. Both these lines often
lead to the Classical system of
the Meran variation, but there is
certain difference between them
and it is very essential. The point
is that after 8 ... a6 9.e4 cS, White
can play not only 1O.dS, trans-
posing to the Classical system,
but also lO.eS!? cxd4 IV!ljbS. The
theory of this variation can com-
book altogether, but it seems to
me that the arising positions are
more promising to White and he
maintains the initiative in them.
It is also essential that the arising
pawn-structure is not typical at all
for the Meran variation. I am not
saying that 8 ... a6 is a bad move,
but it enables White to prevent
the realization of the main ideas
of the Meran for Black.
I have a great and successful
experience in the Meran varia-
tion. I have always treated it in
this particular fashion - 8 ....ib7
and this is what I recommend to
you as well.
8 •.. J.b79.a3

22
 6.1d3 dxc4 7.hc4 b5 8.~d3 .1i.b7 9.a3 b4
The idea of this move is to
prepare the pawn-advance e3-e4,
without being afraid of the reply
b5-b4. Its other idea is to have the
possibility to fix Black's queenside
at an opportune moment with the
moveb2-b4.
Meanwhile, White's main lines
here are 9.0-0 (the Classical sys-
tem) and 9.e4 (the Contemporary
system), which we will analyze
later.
9 ... b4
This is the most principled
move for Black.
He can try some other possi-
bilities as well: 9 ... i.d6, or 9 ... a6
1O.b4 a5, but they have a draw-
back - mostly the fact that they
do not clarify the situation. After
9 ... b4, contrary to them, it is much
easier to reach certain conclu-
sions and to make a long story
short, I will tell you in advance
that the evaluation is very opti-
mistic for Black.
A) IO.axb4
B) IO.~e4
A) 10 .axb4 .ixb4 11.0- 0
c5
12.~a2
He equalizes easily even after
the other possibilities for White.
12 ..ia6 ~b6 (12 ... ~b8!? 13.i.d2
0-0 14.~e2 cxd4 15.exd4 i.e7
16 ..ig5ttJd517.ttJxd5,bg518.,bb7
~xb7 19.ttJe3 il.f6, draw, Gelfand
- OIl, Klaipeda 1988) 13.,bb7
~xb7 14.~a4 (14.~e2 0-0 15J!d1
.B:fd8= I.Hansen - Ostergaard,
Helsingor 2009) 14 ... 0-0 15.~a6
~xa6 16 ..B:xa6 cxd4 17.exd4 ttJb8
18..B:a4 a5= Paehtz - Sveshnikov,
Bulgaria 1987.
12.dxc5 O-O! (12 ... ttJxc5?! 13 .
.ib5+ ctle7 14.ttJd4t Buitrago -
C.Lopez, Cali 2000) 13.c6 (13.
ttJa2?! ,bc5 14.b4 .id6! 15..ib2,
Weinzettl - Pavlovic, Oberwart
2003, Black can continue here
with 15 ...~b8 16.h3 a5!?=F and
he even obtains a small edge;
it would be bad for White to
choose 15.i.xh7+? ltJxh7 16.~xd6
hf3 17.gxf3 ~f6 18 ..ib2 ~xb2!
19.~xd7 ttJg5 20.f4 ttJf3+ 21.ct1g2
ttJd2! 22 ..B:fd1 ttJb3; 20.@g2 ~f6
23
Chapter 2
2l.f4 ltJe4 and Black has a strong
attack) 13 ... hc6 14.~d4 .tb7 15.
~b3 as with an excellent game
for him, Jovanovic - Carnic, Nis
1997.
12.Wle2 0-0 13.gd1
13 ... a5 (13 ...~b8!? 14.,ta6 cxd4
15.exd4 gc8 16..td2 .tfS 17..tg5
ha6 18J~xa6 Wlb7= Kozul - Pin-
ter, Sibenik 2005) 14.~e5 ~c7
15.~xd7 ~xd7= 16.~5 f5 17.~e2
cxd4 18.exd4 gae8 and Black
has a very good position, Ko-
zul- Shirov, Sarajevo 2004. The
position is not so clear after 13...
~e7 14 ..td2 (14 ..ta6 ~b6 15.~a2
ha616.~xa6 cxd417.~xb4 ~xb4
18.gxd4 ~b3 19 ..td2 gac8 20 ..tb4
nfrl8 21..tc3 lflfrl5 22.\Wd3± Kozul
- Miroshnichenko, Bled 2000)
14 ...cxd4 15.exd4 as 16..tg5 h6
17.ih4 ~d8 18.~e5 i.e7 19 ..tc2t
- White has powerful initiative,
Frare - Coelho, Americana 2000.
Black should not be afraid
of 12.~b5 ~b6 (He can sacrifice
a pawn reaching a rather un-
clear situation, but that is hard-
ly necessary: 12 ... 0-0 13.gxa7
.1!xa7 14.~xa7 cxd4 15.exd4 Ylib6
16.~b5;!; - Black has some com-
24
The Meran Variation
pensation indeed, but White's
prospects are still a bit better,
Fedin - Yevseev, Hammerfest
2000; 12 ...V9b8!? with an excel-
lent position for Black) 13.~e5
(13.Wle2 0-0 14.~a3 cxd4 with
a good game for him, Schindler
- Pfefferle, Oberwinden 2007)
13 ... 0-0 14.dxcS?! (14.Wle2!?=)
14... ll'lxc5=i= Madhy - Spiess, Co-
penhagen 1998.
12 ••• a5!
Black has no problems at all
after this move.
It is not so convincing for him
to opt for 12 ... 0-0 13.~xb4 cxb4
14.~e2 (14.b3 \!!!lb6 lS ..th2 J3:fc8
16.~d2 a5 17.e4 iLa6 18.~c4;!;
Granda Zuniga - Akopian, Biel
1993) 14 ... ~e4 15.~d2 ~xd2
16.hd2 as (16 ... ~b6 17J'!fc1
a5 IB ..te1 gfcB 19.£3;1; Basin -
S.Savchenko, Simferopol 1988)
17.e4 ~f6 18.gfcl ge8 19J'k4
.ta6 20.gc6 .tb7 21.gc5 (21.gc4
.ta6 22.gc6 .tb7 23J=k4t Basin
- Dreev, Simferopol 1988) 21 ...
~xd4 22 ..te3 WldB 23.f3;!;
13.~xb4 axb4
 6.id3 dxc4 7.1i.xc4 b5 8.ii.d31ib79.a3 b4
13 ... cxb4?! 14.'~e2lLle415.~d2
lLlxd2 16.hd2 lLlf6 17..1b5+ @e7
IB.f3 ~b6 19.e4 !!hbB 20 ..if4 );1dB
21..ie3± Shengelia - Mazi, Asch-
ach 2004.
14.~a8 'erxa8 lS •.ie2
15.dxc5 O-O!= 16.,td2 (16.i.e2
- scc 15.ii.c2) 16 ... lLlxc5 17.ii.xb4?!
(17. ii.e 2= ) 17... lLlxd3 1B.hfB ii.xf3
19.9xf3lLle5 20.c;t;>g2 ~xfB'1= Karpe-
shov - Galkin, St. Petersburg
1997.
15 ... 0-0 16.dxc5
16 ... ~xcS
This is the simplest for Black.
I believe he should not post-
pone regaining the pawn:
16... ~a5 17.ii.d2 lLlxc5 1B.lLld4
gdB 19.'~e1 ~d5 20.f3 e5 21.lLlc2
~a2 22.lLlxb4 ~xb2 23.lLlxd5 l'!xd5
24.ii.c3 ~c2 25.e4 l'!dB 26.1xe5
lLld3 27.ii.xd3 ~c5+ 2B.<:j:;h1 ~xe5
29.ic4± Ernst - Van Beek, Hoog-
eveen 2006;
or 16 ...ii.d5 17.ii.d2!? (It is not
so good for White to play 17.'~·d4
gbB 1B.ii.d2, because after 1B ...
~e4!, due to the threat 19 ... e5oo,
the position remains unclear; 1B ...
e5?! 19.1Llxe5 lLlxe5 20.~xe5 !!eB
21.~f4 hg2 22.l'!cl± Nogueiras
Santiago - Chernin, Madrid 19BB)
17... l'!bB 1B.'~~'a1 lLlxc5 19.~xaB
haB 20.);1dU and the endgame is
slightly preferable for White.
17.'I'd4 ~b3!
It is a bit weaker for Black to
follow with 17...ii.a61B.ha6liJxa6
19.!!dl and White preserves some
chances of obtaining a microscop-
ic edge; if 19.ii.d2 l'!dB 20.~c4,
then 20 ... liJe4! 21.hb4= Gelfand
- Shirov, Klaipeda 19BB and after
21...:rkB 22.~d4 l'!dB, the draw is
unavoidable.
18.'erxb4 .idS
White has no chances at all of
obtaining an edge and he must play
very precisely not to become even
worse. 19.~M1 (19.id2?! l'!bB 20.
~c3? lLle4 21.'~c2 liJexd2 22.lLlxd2
~k8-+; 20.~e7 liJxd2 21.lLlxd2
~xb2'1=; 19.e4?! ~bB 20.'~a3 liJxe4
21.'~xaB :fu{a8 22 ..ie3 ga2 23. l'!b1
f6'1= Jussupow - Stellwagen, Am-
sterdam 2006; 19 ... lLlxe4!? 20.
i.f4 ~a2 21.ii.e5 f6 22.,id4 ~a8+)
19 ..• gb8~ 20.'I'a3 (20.'~e1lLlxc1
25
Chapter 2
2U!xc1 gxb2=) 20 •••ftb721 •.ld2
~xd2 22.hd2 !!laS 23.'f!Yd3
!!Ia1 + 24.!!Id1 Yfxb2 25.ha1
Yfxa1+ 26.1fd1= Tunik - Zifroni,
Israel 2010.
B)10.~e4
10 ... ~xe4
Black has played very often (I
have done that too) the move 10 ...
cS, but now, I do not think that
he should weaken voluntarily his
kingside. Tournament practice
has proved in the last several years
that Black may have problems af-
ter: 11.ll'lxf6+ gxf6 12.0-0:t
1l.he4bxa3
11 ... ~c7?! 12.axb4! .txb4+ 13.
Ad2 .txd2+ 14.ll:lxd2 cS 15. 'tfc2
~b6 16.dxcS ~xcS 17.'tfa4 !!Ib8
IS.0-0 0-0 19.~xd7 !!IfdS 20 .
.txh7+ Wxh7? (20 ... WfS 21. 'tfa4
~d2 22JUc1!?±) 21.~xf7 gxd2?!
(21 ....txg2 22.\hg2 gxd2±) 22.
ga4!+- ~gS 23.g3 eS 24.l!h4+
~xh4 2S.gxh4 gd6 26.hS 1e4 27.
Wie7 gbb6 2S.~xeS ge6 29.~f4
1-0 Gelfand - Anand, Bie11993.
12.0-0
26
The Meran Variation
12.bxa31d6 - this is the most
natural move for Black.
Now:
13.vgc2 £5!? 14.1d3 cSoo;
13.1b2 0-0 14.gc1 gcSlS.ll:ld2
ll:lf6 16.1f3 1a6oo Krasenkow -
Shirov, Reykjavik 2003;
13.0-0 0-0 14.1b2 (14.~a4
~c7 IS.gbl gtbS 16.1d2 cS= Puth
- Rosenberger, Wittlich 1997)
14... gbS (14 ... ll:lf6!? IS.1d3 cS=
Trohimchuk - Shakhov, Rostov
on Don 1996) IS.~c2 cS (IS ...£5!?)
16 ..txb7 (16 ..lxh7+ whSI7.dxcS?!
.txf3 IS.cxd6 ~gS 19.93 ~g4-+;
IS.gxf3 gxb2 19.~xb2 1eS+; 17.
1d3.txf3 IS.gxf3 .txh2+ 19.Wxh2
~h4+ 20.Wg2 ~gS=) 16... gxb7
17.dxcS hcS ISJUdl ~e7 19.a4=
Karpov - Anand, Lausanne 1995;
13.1d2 gbS!? Black is prepar-
ing the thematic pawn-advance
c6-cS (13 ... ~c7!? 14.1b4 cS 15.
.txb7 Wixb7 16.dxcS .txcS 17.ixcS
ll:lxcS 18.~d4 ~b2!=; 14.~a4 0-0
IS.1aS ll:lb6 16.vgc2 h6 17.1b4 cS
IS ..txb7 ~xb7 19.dxcS gfcS=; 17.
ll:ld2 f5! This is the most precise
reaction by Black. IS ..tf3 cS 19.
dxcS ixf3 20.ll:lxf3 ~xcS=) 14.
~a4 (14.gbl 0-0 15.0-0 ll:lf6=;
 6.,id3 dxc4 7.:1i.xc4 b5 B.id3 ib79.a3 b4
Is."Wc2 ttJf6 16.i.d3 c5! 17.dxcs
!xcs IB.!xh7+ ttJxh7 19."Wxcs
'!Wd3+!; 14.0-0 cs?! Is ..bb7 Elxb7
16.ds exds 17.i.c3 ttJf6 IB.i.xf6
~xf619.'!Wxds gd720."WaB+ '!WdB;!;;
16.ic3! ttJf617 .dxcs!xc5 IB.'!WxdB
WxdB 19J'!abl±; 16 ... 0-0 17.ds;!;
M.Gurevich - Novikov, Antwerp
1995; 14 ... 0-0 IS ..ib4 c5 16.dxcS
1xcs 17..ixb7 gxb7 IB.ttJd4 "Wb6
19.hcS 1Wxc5= Karpov - Kram-
nik, Monaco 1996) 14 ... 0-0! It
would be very dangerous for
White to accept the pawn-sacri-
fice; otherwise, Black will advance
c6-cS without too much of an ef-
fort ... 15.'!Wxa7 (15.!xc6?? ttJb6 16.
~c2 l'kB-+) 15.. .f5 16.i.d3 cS~.
Black equalizes too with the line:
14 ... c5 IS.hb7 Elxb716.dxcS i.xc5
17.i.aS 1WbB! (17 ...1WcB IB.O-O
0-0 19.Elacl ttJb6 20.1We4 l!c7 21.
-tJg5t) IB.Eldl O-O! and he is not
worse at all, Karpov - Kramnik,
Dortmund 1995. Following 19.
fud7?! 1WeB 20.llJeSl!bl+ (20 ...i.d6
21.0-0.ixe5 22J':'!fdll!xd7 23.1Wxd7
'!WbBt) 21.liIe2 gxhl, White will
hardly manage to prove that he has
compensation for the exchange.
12 ••• tt:)f6
This seems to me to be the best
way for Black to equalize.
I would like to clarify for you
another important nuance. The
point is that a similar position (af-
ter 12.0-0) can be reached in the
Lundin variation, that is: B..id3
b4 9.ttJe4 llJe4 1O.,ie4 .ib7 11.0-0
.id6 12.a3. This is an important
and interesting topic, but I do not
plan to elaborate on it, because
Black's bishop has not been de-
veloped yet to the d6-square and
he can avoid advantageously the
main lines of the Lundin varia-
tion. In fact, Black can follow an
original and very promising line!
After 12 ... .id6, as I have already
mentioned, the game enters the
most critical position of the Lun-
din variation and White can play
the move 13.b3, which was tested
in the match Topalov - Kramnik,
Elista 2006, or he can continue
with 13.b4!?, or 13.llJd2!?
It would be too risky for Black
to accept the pawn-sacrifice: 12 ...
axb2 13.i.xb2 13 ... ttJf6 (13 ....tb4
14.1Wa4 as 15.i.a3 1Wb6 16J!abl
0-0 17.hh4 axb4 IB.1Wxb4 1Wxb4
19.1!xb4 Ela7 20.Elc1 ElcB 21.4::ld2±
A.Smirnov - Goganov, St. Peters-
burg 2009; 13 ...i.e7 14.1Wc2 h6
IS.hc6 gcB 16.dS exdS 17.i.xd7+
"Wxd7 IB.1Wb3± Najer - Potkin,
Ubeda 2001) 14.ttJd2 (14.1Wb3!?t)
4::lxe4 15.4::lxe4 .ie7 16.1Wg4 0-0
17.dSt Liedl - Zilka, Vienna
2009.
13 •.td3 axb2 14.,ixb2 a5!?
27
Chapter 2
This is a relatively new idea
and its author is Vladimir Kram-
nik.
15.d5!?
That interesting possibility
was played for the first time by
Magnus Carlsen.
After the alternatives for
White, Black obtains a very good
position almost effortlessly:
lS.e4 i.b4 16.~c2 ltJd7= Moi-
seenko - Illescas Cordoba, Cala
Mayor200B;
lS.~a4 i.b4 16.i.a3 (16.ltJeS
O-O! 17.ltJxc6 ~dS 1BJUc1 ~fcB
19.ibSltJd7+) 16... ltJdS! (16 ...i.xa3
17.~xa3 "e!e71B.~tb1 ~a719.ltJeS;!;)
17.e4 ltJb6 18.~b3 ~e7 19.~ab1
(19.~tb1 ltJd7 20.i.xb4 axb4 21.
~xaB+ i.xaB 22.~xb4 ~xb4 23.
~b4 ~e7=) 19...i.xa3 20.~xb6
i.b4 21. ltJe1 (21.dS!? cxdS? 22.
~fc1 ~cB 23.i.bS+-; 21...exdS 22.
exdS 0-0 23.dxc6 i.cB= with ap-
proximate equality) 21...0-0 22.
ltJc2 ~fdB 23.ltJxb4 axb4 24.~xb4
~xb4 2S.~b4 i.a6 26.i.xa6= Gel-
fand - Kramnik, Mexico City
2007.
2B
The Meran Variation
15... ~xd5
Of course not lS ... cxdS? 16.
i.bS+ ltJd7 17.ltJeS i.cB 1BJ~c1
(1B."e!hS g6 19.~f3+-) 1B ...i.d6
19.~cB+-
lS ... ~xdS 16.~c2 (16.~b~;
16.ltJeS~) 16..."e!cS 17.~e2 i.e7
(17... ~hS 1B.i.xf6 gxf6 19."e!b2t)
1B.i.d4 ~dS19.~fd1.
lS ... exdS 16.ltJd4!? i.b4 (16 ...
i.e7 17.ltJfS with the idea to fol-
low with 17... 0-0? 1B.ltJxg7! ~xg7
19."e!g4+ 'itlhB 20.i.xf6+ i.xf6 21.
~f5+-) 17.ltJf5 g6 1B.ltJh6~
16.~e5
White's initiative compensates
the sacrificed pawns indeed, but
that does not necessarily mean
that Black has real problems.
16... ~f6!
This seems to be the most reli-
able move for Black. He protects
his kingside in advance and pre-
vents White's possible queen-sor-
tie~d1-h5.
16 ..."e!c7!?oo 17.ltJc4 f6.
16... ltJb4!? 17."e!hS "e!c7 lB.
~fd1~
16...i.b4 17."e!hS ~c7 1B.ltJf3!?
 6.i.d3 dxc4 7.hc4 b5 B.i.d3 i.b7 9.a3 b4
(18J3fc1~) 18 ....ic3 19.hc3 ttlxc3
20.tyc5 ttldS 2U3fb1~
17.Ba4.ib4
It is also interesting for Black
to opt for 17....id6!? 18.ttlxc6 Y;Yd7
19.ttlxaS (19.i.bS 0-0 20JUc1
~fc8=) 19 .. .'~xa4 20J:!xa4 c;t>e7!?
(or 20 ...i.dS!? with the idea to fol-
low with 21 ..ixf6 gxf6 22.e4 .tc6=)
21 ..ixf6+ mxf6 (21...gxf6 22.~b1
.idS 23.e4 .ic7 24.exdS ~xaS
2S.~aS baS 26J3b7t) 22.ttlxb7
hh2+ 23.mxh2 ~xa4=
lS.tJxc6 hc6
18 ...tyxd3? 19.ttleS+-; 18 ...
Y;Yd7? 19 ..ibS .ia6 20 ..ixa6 E:xa6
21 ..![)xb4+-
19.Bxc6+ me7
20.gfdl gc8 21.Bf3 Bb6
21 ...tyc7 22 ..ia6 E:cd8 23.E:dc1
\Yfb8 24.E:c6t
22 •.id4BbS
22 ...tyc6!? 23.Y;Ye2 (23.Y;Yg3
E:hd8 24.~xg7? ~xd4! 2S.exd4
E:g8-+) 23 ... E:hd8 24 ..ia6 ~c2
2S.'~f3t
23 •.ia6 gcdS 24 •.ib7!?
24.E:dc1 eS 2S ..ic5+ hc5 26.
~c5 ~he8 27.E:cxaS ~f8=; 24.
E:ab1 E:d6!? with idea 2S ..ic5 .ixc5
26.E:b7+ ttld7 27.E:xb8 E:xb8=
24 ••• e5!
24 ... hS?! 2S.h3?! (2S.E:abl!t)
2S ... h4? (2S ... eS=) 26. E:ab1 ! eS
27.~b4!± Carlsen - Aronian, Bil-
bao 2008.
25 •.ib6
2S ..ib2 ~d1 + 26.E:xd1 E:d8
27.~d8 mxd8=
25 ..• gd6! and after 26.ftxd6
ti"xd6 27•.ixa5 ha5 (27... E:b8=)
2S.ftxa5 Bb4 the game would
end in a draw almost by force
29.ftxe5+ (29.E:a1? e4+) 29 ••.
<it?d6 30.ftd5+ tJxd5 31.1t'xd5+
<it?e7 (31 ... c;t>c7 32 ..ia6=) 32.1t'e5+
<it?f8 33.tfbS+ <it?e734.1t'e5=
29
 The Classical System

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.~f3 ~f6 4.~c3 e6 5.e3 ~bd7

6 ..id3 dxc4 7.,bc4 b5 8 ..id3 b5 9.0-0

White's castling short 9.0-0 dously complicated positions,

marks the beginning of the Clas-
sical system.
After the moves 9 ••• a6 10.e4
c5 H.d5 ftc7 12.dxe6 fxe6
13 •.1c2
(diagram)
Black is faced with a choice.
He can try the seemingly risky
variation Dreev-Filipenko - 13 •••
.td6!?, which leads to tremen-
which have not been analyzed to
complete exhaustion yet, or pre-
fer the more popular move 13 •••
c4. He has very good prospects in
both cases, but the positions aris-
ing in these two lines are in prin-
ciple entirely different. Black has
the choice and no matter what he
can rely on obtaining a very good
game.

30
Chapter 3 1.d4 tOf6 2.e4 e6 3.tOe3 tOf6 4.tOfJ
e6 5.e3 tObd7 6 •.id3 dxe4 7..ixe4 b5
8 •.id3 .ib7 9.0-0 a6
lO.e4
It is not so principled for White
to play here 10.a4, because after
10 ...b4 11..!t'le4 c5, Black equalizes
easily.
Naturally, White should re-
frain from 1O.a3 or 10.~e2, since
these moves do not prevent Black's
thematic pawn-advance c6-c5.
lO ••• e511.d5
It seems a bit strange for
White to play Il.ig5?! or lU'!el?!,
because after the possible move
ll ... cxd4 Black obtains an excel-
lent position.
It is just bad for White to opt
for ll.e5?!, because after 11 ...
cxd4 12 ..!t'lxb5 ixf3 13.~xf3 .!t'ld5!
14 ..!t'lxd4 .!t'lxe5, Black solves effort-
lessly all his opening problems.
1l.• :ec7
This move is more precise
than 11 ... c4, since Black preserves
more possibilities, for example
he can transfer to the Variation
Dreev-Filipenko.
12.ee2
This is a rarely played move.
White usually chooses here
12.dxe6 fxe6 13.ic2, without
determining the position of his
queen. One of the ideas behind
the early queen-sortie is to avoid
the variation Dreev-Filipenko
(l2.dxe6 fxe613.ic2 id6), which
cannot be entered any more. The
point is that after 12.~e2 it is not
so good for Black to play 12 ...id6,
(as he does after 12.dxe6 fxe6
31
Chapter 3
13.tc2) because of 13.dxe6 fxe6
14.i.bS! and he must reply with
12 ... c4 13.il.c2 td6 and we enter
the variation we analyze below.
It turns out that with this tricky
order of moves White manages
to avoid the variation Dreev-Fili-
penko. This is true but with a very
important nuance. White will
have to play a certain line of the
classical system with a queen on
e2 and this reduces his opportuni-
ties considerably. In addition, this
line is by far not the most popular
variation for him nowadays.
12 ..• c4 13.J.c2 J.d6 14.dxe6
After 14.~e1, it is good for
Black to play 14 ... ltJeS. It is not
so serious for White to try 14.J.gS
either, because Black can counter
that with 14... 0-0-0 solving all
his problems.
14... fxe6
15.~g5
We must analyze this move, of
course, but it should not be rec-
ommended to White.
We will deal with the variation
1S.ltJd4 in chapter 4, while the
32
The Meran Variation
moves lS.<.!fh1 and 1S.h3 are too
slow, therefore they do not de-
serve serious attention.
Against the seldom played
move 1S.~el, it is very good for
Black to follow with lS ... ltJeS!?
(1S ....ic5!? 16.eS ltJg400 Tunik -
Sorokin, Sochi 1989) 16.ltJd4 (16.
ltJgS We7 17.f4 J.c5+ 18.'i!lhl ltJd3
19.Jtxd3 cxd3 20.'Wxd3 ltJg4 21.
ltJh3 0-0 22.W1g3 h5~ Torre -
Mikhalchishin, Baku 1980) 16...
'Wd7 and he has an excellent game.
15 ... ~c5
Black has also tried in practice
here lS ... ltJf8, but it is not reason-
able to analyze that rather modest
move, because lS ... ltJc5 is obvi-
ously stronger.
16.f4
This is the principled reply.
16.i.e3? ixh2+ 17.<.!fhl J.f4+
16••.h6!
This is the beginning of an im-
portant plan for Black connected
with a positional pawn-sacrifice.
The alternatives for him are obvi-
ously weaker and cannot be rec-
ommended, for example: 16 ... e5
 9.0-0 a61O.e4 c511.d5 Vf/c712.We2 c413.!c2 !d614.defe 15.liJg5
17.a4! (17.liJdS?! hdS 18.exdS
0-0 19.b4 cxb3 20.axb3 exf4 21.
b4 ~fe8 22.~f3, Ramos Aguilar -
Rodriguez Guerrero, Santa Cruz
de la Palma 200S, 22 ... h6!+; 17.
fxeS?! he5 18.liJdS hdS 19.exd5
0-0+ Aceto - L.Sanchez, Genova
2002; lS.liJf3 hc3 19.bxc3 0-0
20.e5 gaeS 21.!e3 .txf3 (or 21 ...
liJdS!? 22.id2 itJe6=i= 23.g3? Vflb6
24.~f2 itJxc3 25.hc3 ~xf3 26.!b4
liJd4 27JWd2 c3 0-1 Solomon -
Dominguez, Bled 2002) 22-'!~xf3
WfxeS 23.!d4 ~d6+ Dorfman -
Sveshnikov, Tbilisi 1978) 17... h6
(17...b4 18.liJd5 ~xdS 19.exdS±
A.Petrosian - A.Panchenko, Riga
1973) 18.liJf3 liJd3 19.,txd3 cxd3
20.Vf/xd3 gdS 21.Vge2 Wc4 22.~xc4
bxc4 23.!e3 (23.itJxeS!?;!; Uhl-
mann - Fuchs, Aschersleben 1963)
23 ... exf4 24.!b6 gbS 2S.li':Jd2;!;
17.1(jf3
The complications are in fa-
vour of Black after 17.eS hxg5
lS.exd6 (or lS ..tg6+ i?e7) IS ...
Wfxd6 19.!g6+ i?e7 20'!'gd1 (20.
ie3 tDd3 21.~ad1? gxf4 0-1 Jones
- Kaidanov, Las Vegas 1995) 20 ...
liJd3 21.ixd3 gxf4! 22 ..ic2 ~c5+
23.'lWf2 Wxf2+ 24.'i!txf2 ~xh2:::-
After 17.tDh3
Black must choose between
two possibilities and they both
lead to a very good position for
him.
17... tDd3!? - This is a standard
pawn-sacrifice for similar posi-
tions, after which Black's light-
squared bishop becomes even
more important because of the
pressure it exerts against the e4-
pawn. Meanwhile, he parries
White's threat e4-eS and Black
can use the freed c5-square with
his dark-squared bishop with
tempo. 18.eS (or 18.bd3 cxd3 19.
'l!fxd3 b4 20.e5 ic5+ 21.tDf2 bxc3
22.exf6 0-0 and despite the extra
pawn, White's position is critical.
Black's bishops are too powerful,
for example: 23. ~xc3 gxf6 and he
is threatening 24 .. J~g6 24.Vflg3
Wff7-+) 18...!cS+ 19.i?h1 liJdS
20.tDe4 (20.a4 0-0+ Prudnikova
- Shumiakina, Lvov 1991) 20 ... 0-
0-0 2V~Jxc5 ~xc5 22.ixd3 cxd3
23.~g4 \t;Ib8+ Tsiganova - Shu-
miakina, Manila 1992.
17... eS 18.a4 (this is the most
principled move for White)
lS ... 0-0! That is an excellent re-
sponse by Black with which he
is trying to obtain an advantage!
(things are not so clear after 18 ...
ttJe6, because of 19.itJdS! ixd5
20.exd5 tDd4 21.!g6~ - While has
sacrificed a pawn, but he has de-
prived his opponent of his castling
rights, Prudnikova - Stepovaia-
Dianchenko, Podolsk 1990; the
position remain approximately
equal after lS ... tDd3 19.hd3 cxd3
33
Chapter 3
20:~xd3 h4 21.lildSlilxdS 22.exdS
0-0 23 ..ie3 exf4 24J~ac1 ~d7
2S ..ixf4 gad8 26.aS gfS 27..ixd6
gxf1+ 28JMl ~xd6 29.lilf4.ixdS=
Vallejo Pons - Shirov, Dos Her-
manas 2003) 19.axbSlile6 (Black
sacrificed a pawn for this particu-
lar maneuver) 20.bxa6 (there is
nothing better for White; 20.f5?!
lild4 21.~dl axbS+) 20 ...exf4!
This is again the best for Black.
(He has more than sufficient
compensation for the pawn after
20 ... gxa6 21.gxa6 .ixa6 22.iodS
lilxdS 23.exdS lild4 24.~e4 ltJxc2
2S.~xc2 exf4+; 22.fxe5 AxeS 23.
lildS ~d6 24.lilxf6+ .ixf6 2S.eS
Axe5 26.gxf8+ @xf8 27.~f3+
men Jelen - Beliavsky, Grize
1996; 22.f5 lild4 23.~dl .icS
24.@hl gd8't) 21.eS f3! 22.gxf3
ltJd4 23.~g2 (23.~dl ,ixeS 24.f4
.id6-+) 23 ...,ixe5 24 ..ixh6 lilxc2
25.~xc2 .ic8! 26.@hl?! (White
had better choose here 26.~g2)
26 ...hh3 27.gg1 ~g4 28J~xg4
0-1 Wells - Dreev, Cappelle la
Grande 1992.
17••• tld3!
34
The Meran Variation
But not 17....ixf4?, because of
18.eS! ,ixc1 19 ..ig6+ (19.exf6!?
.if4 20.t7+! ~xf7 21.lileS ~f6
22.~hS+-; 20 ... We7 21.lilh4±)
19... @d7 20.exf6 .if4 2U3adl+
@c8 22.t7 gf8 23.h4±
18.hd3
18.eS .ic5+ 19.1t>hl <t)g4!
(Black obtains a very good game
after 19... lild5 too, but the move
19 ... lilg4 is more ambitious) and
it seems impossible for White
to reach an acceptable position,
for example: 20.,ixd3 cxd3 21.
~xd3 lilf2+ 22.fuf2 .ixf2-+ Dan-
ner - Korchnoi, Ostrava 1994 or
20.lildl 0-0-0 (20 ... gd8!? 21.h3
hS+) 21.b3 (21.lilellilxel 22.~xel
~c6 23.~e2 h5 24.lilc3 gd3-+
Kachar - Yagupov, St Petersburg
2002) 21...~t7 22.,ixd3 gxd3!
(22 ... cxd3? 23.~el It>b8 24 ..id2't
Bratchenko - Galkin, Novgorod
1999) 23.bxc4 ~hS-+
18 ••• cxd319.'ft'xd3
This position can be treated
by Black in different fashions,
but it looks like its evaluation will
remain as about equal in all the
cases.
 9.0-0 a61O.e4 c5 JJ.d5 'iffc712-'1fffe2 c4 13.1i.c21i.d614.defe lS.liJgS
19 ••• l!!:d8!?
It may be also interesting for
him to opt for 19 ... 0-0!? 20.eS!
1i.cS+ 21.wh1 ~g4 22.~e2! ~b6
23.~d1 gad8 24.1i.d2oo with a
rather unclear game. It would
be worse for White to continue
with 20.lt>h1? gad8 21.ltJd4 (21.
'i!fe2 hf4 22.i.xf4 ~xf4+) 21.. ..ic5
22.i.e3 (22.ltJxe6 gxd3 23.ltJxc7
~xe4 24.ltJxe4 i.xe4 2S.ltJxa6
i.d6+; 2S.ltJe6 gc8 26.ltJxc5
lhcS+) 22 ... ltJg4 23.ltJce2 (23.Ag1
i.xd4 24.i.xd4 gxf4-+) 23 ... ltJxe3
24.'i!fxe3 gxd4! 2S./t)xd4 %Vb6
26.gad1 gd8+ Bareev - Shirov,
Hastings 1991.
20.Yfe2
This retreat is forced, because
it is very bad for White to opt for
20.ltJd4?! Ac5 21.i.e3 0-0 22.gac1
eS 23.fxeS ltJg4 24.~+ gxfB 2S.
'i!fe2 /t)xe3 26.%Vxe3 ~xeS 27./t)ce2
11d8 28.11d1 he4-+ Z.Szabo -
Comp Genius S, Debrecen 2000.
20 •••.bf4
Black regains immediately his
pawn, but he would have compen-
sation even if he chooses some-
thing else:
20 ...b4 21.eS ic5+ 22.li>h1 /t)g4
23./t)d1 Ac6 24./t)d4 (24./t)gS!?
hxgS 2S.~xg4) 24 ...i.xd4 2S.%Vxg4
~f7~ Gschnitzer - P.Lukacs, Bu-
dapest 1990;
20 ... 0-0 21.eS (21.a3?! i.xf4
22.ixf4 %Vxf4 23.gae1 %Vc7+ Toth
- Sorokin, Rio de Janeiro 1991)
21 ...Ac5+ 22.li>h1 /t)dS 23.tiJxdS
i.xdS 24.b3 ~f7!?~
21 •.bf4 ft'xf4 22.a4 0 - 0
Unfortunately, Black fails to
maintain an advantage after 22 .. .
b4, in view of 23.~c4! %Vd6 (23 .. .
bxc3?? 24.%Vxe6+ I!ff8 2S./t)eS+-)
24.eS %Vb6+ 2S.li>h1 bxc3 26.exf6
0-0 27.aS (27.fxg7 gxf3 28.gxf3
cxb2~) 27... ~c6 28.'i!fxc6 i.xc6
29.fxg71i>xg7 30.bxc3 i.xf3=
23.axb5 axb5=
Brenninkmeijer - S.Polgar,
Amsterdam 1990.
3S
Chapter 4 1.d4 ttJf6 2.c4 c6 3.ttJc3 ttJf6 4.ttJfJ
e6 S.e3 ttJbd7 6 ..id3 dxc4 7 •.i.xc4 bS
8 ..id3 .ib7 9.0 - 0 a6 10 .e4 cS ll.dS
Ylfc7 12.Ve2 c4 13..ic2 .id6 14.dxe6
fxe6 lS.ttJd4 ttJcS

A) 17.~f5
B) 17.~dxb5!?

White is attacking the e6-
pawn, so Black is forced to play:
1S ... lDc5.
16.f4
Now, White is threatening
e4-eS. Black's response is again
forced:
16... e5
A) 17.~f5
This standard move for simi-
lar positions is not dangerous for
Black, because of
17••. 0-0
This is the simplest.
It is bad for him to play 17... 0-
O-O? 18.ltJxd6+ (18.a4!?) 18 ...
~xd6 19.fxeS ~xeS 20 ..ElfS V#c7
21.a4 (the simpler line for White
here is: 21..ltf4!? ~c6 22.a4±) 21...
ltJfxe4?! (Black fails to obtain an
acceptable position even after the
more principled variation 21...ltJe6
22.axbS ltJd4 23.~f2) 22.lDxe4
ixe4 23.he4 ~he8 24.i.f4 'lWb6
2S.~e3 1-0 M.Marin - Delgado,
Seville 1992.
It deserves attention for him
however to try 17... ltJd3!?

Here, White must choose be-

tween two different possibilities:

36
 9.0-0 a6 IO.e4 c51l.d5 "?!!c712. "?!!e2 c413.1i.c21i.d614.defe 15.eiJd4
for example:
IB.hd3 cxd3 19."?!!xd3 .icS+
20 ..ie3! (it is worse for White to
choose here 20.mhl o-o~ and
Black has excellent compensation
for the pawn, Kharlov - Sherba-
kov, Kuibyshev 1990) 20 ... exf4!
(There arises an endgame after the
following tactical skirmishes, but
it may turn out to be very unpleas-
ant for Black: 20 .. J~dB 21.liJxbS!
~b6! 22.liJbd6+ l"lxd6 23.liJxd6+
~xd6 24J~adl exf4 2S."?!!xd6
txd6 26.l"lxd6 fxe3 27J~b6 i.cB
2B.l"leU) 21.1i.xcS ~xcS+ 22.~d4
~xd4+ 23.liJxd4 0-0-0 24.liJe6
~d2 2S ..!!xf4 b4 26.liJa4 liJxe4 -
Black's prospects in this ending
are not inferior at all;
White would not achieve any-
thing much even after the straight-
forward line: IB.liJxd6+ ~xd6
19.fxeS liJxcl! 20.~axc1 "?!!xeS
21.~f5 ~d4+ 22.mhl 0-0 (but not
22 ... 0-0-0? 23.a4 ~d2 24.~xd2
l'\xd2 25.axb5± Marin - Guerra
Bastida, Sitges 1992) 23.~dl
(White does not have enough time
for the undermining move 23.
a4?!, because of: 23 ... g6! 24.~dl
~b6 2S.~ffl ~aeB+; after 2S.~eS
~c7 26.l"le6 ~f7 27.!:1ed6 liJg4!
Black seizes the initiative; the
pseudo-active move for White 24.
~gS?! is too optimistic - his rook
is terribly misplaced there and
Black can make a very good use of
that by playing 24 ... liJd7! 2S.axbS
l"lf2 26.~el !:1afB 27.h3 axbS 2B.
~xbS ii.c6 29.l"laSliJcS and White's
position is very difficult despite
his extra pawn. Things are not so
clear after 24 ... h4 2SJidi ~h6 26.
~xc4+? mhB 27.liJdS liJxdS 2B.
exdS !:1acB 29.~e2 ~f6+; 26.eS!
bxc3 27.exf6 ~xf6 2B.~xc4+ gU
29 ..ib3 gafB 30.h4 cxb2 31.~c2oo)
23 ...~b6 24.eS ~aeBoo with mutu-
al chances.
17.. J:!dB? 18.liJxd6+ ~xd6 19.
fxeS ~xeS 20.~fS ~e7 21.eS liJd5
22.i.g5 1-0 Gligoric - Timmer-
mans, Stockholm 2003.
18.~xd6
This is the most reasonable
move for White, since the major-
ity of his alternatives may lead
to problematic situations for
him. For example after: IBJ!dl
liJd3! (of course not IB ... gadB?
19 Jl.xd6! !:1xd6 20.fxe5± M.Marin
- J.Pinter, France 1992) 19.1iJxd6
~xd6 20.1i.xd3 cxd3 21.~xd3 ~c7,
White cannot even dream about
an advantage, for instance 22.f5
b4 23.liJdS liJxdS 24.exd5 !:1xf5
2S ..!\e3, Koneru - Stellwagen,
Wijk aan Zee 2008, 2S ... ~d6+;
IB.mh1?! liJe6! This maneu-
ver is quite typical for the varia-
37
Chapter 4 The Meran Variation

tion - Black's knight is eyeing the 21.a4? ~d3 (21...llJe6!?) 22 .

d4-square: 19.~xd6 ~xd6 20.fxe5 .bd3 cxd3 23.~xd3 tiJg4 24.~g3
~xeS 2UtfS ~c7 22 ..ie3 g6 23JU2 ~b6-+ Goldenberg - Chandler,
~e5+ Malakhatko - Jaracz, War- Sydney 2007.
saw 2006; 21 ... ~fxe4 22.gns+ gns
1S.a4 exf4!? (it is inferior for 23.~xe4eeS
Black to continue with 1S ... lLle6,
Huebner - Kulaots, Finland
200S, 19.axb5lLld4 20.lLlxd4 exd4
21.e5; 1S ... li)d3!? 19.,ixd3 cxd3
20.~xd3 .ic5+ 2V.fih1 gadS 22.
~e2 lLlxe4't) 19.1i)xd6 'lWxd6 20 .
.ixf4 ~c6 21.e5 gaeS+
18.•.•xd6 19.fxeS .xeS
20.IU5
20 ..if4 ~e6 21.e5lLld5 22.lLlxd5
hd5+

24.~f6+! White must force a

draw now. 24 ... gxf6 2S •.txh7+!
c,txh7 26.'l'hS+ ~g8 (26 ... ~g7??
27 . .ih6+) 27••g6+, draw, Kas-
parov - Akopian, Yerevan 1996.

B) 17.~dxbS!?

20 ..••c7
After the other possible retreat
of Black's queen 20 .. .'~e7, he must
consider the possibility 21..ig5,
although even then he can con-
tinue with: 21..J~aeS 22.e5 ~c7
23.gdl!?CXl and the position would
remain unclear.
21 ..tgS This double-edged move was
21..if4?! ~c6 22.~d5 lLlxdS played for the first time by Ana-
(22 ...gaeS!?+) 23.exdS ~d7+ Lagu- toly Karpov in his match for the
now - Dokhoian, Muenster 1993. World Championship against

38
 9.0-0 a61O.e4 cS ll.d5 Vf!c712. Vf!e2 c413.ic2 id614.defe 15JiJd4
Viswanathan Anand in the year
199B. The novelty worked perfect-
ly and White won a spectacular
game. Some time later however,
Black has found more than suf-
ficient resources for equality and
we will get acquainted with them
now.
17••. axb5 18.~"b5 ffb6 19.
~"d6+
19.v~xc4? ~cxe4 20.'tt>hl id5-+
19 ..• ff"d6 20.fxe5 \W"e5 21.
IU5 \We7
This is obviously the best for
Black.
21...'?jj'd4+?? 22 ..ie3 Vf!xb2 23.
1=!bl+-
21...'<!~'c7? 22.'~'xc4 .E1c8 23.M4
~c6 24 ..E1e5+ <;!;>fB 2S.1=!xcS!+-
21...'&d6 22.Vf!xc4 (22.e5?!
Vf!e6+) 22 ... ~cxe4 (22 ... ~e6 23.
ie3t) 23.1MIb3! (it is not so con-
vincing for White to continue
with 23.ixe4 he4 24 ..E1xf6 gxf6
25.'&xe4+ <;!;>f7;j;; but not 23 ... ~xe4
24.,&f7+ <;!;>dB 2S.Vf!xb7 1MIdl+ 26.
.E1f11M1d4+ 27.ie3+-) 23 .. .'~'e7 24.
if4 idS 2SJhd5 ~xd5 26 ..E1el and
Black's position is very difficult.
22.1Yxc4
There has arisen a very compli-
cated position in which Black has
numerous possibilities to choose
from. We must have a look what is
the best route for him to follow.
22 .• J:~c8!
He loses immediately after
22 ... ~fxc4? 23.if4+-
The position is tremendously
dangerous for him after the seem-
ingly attractive line: 22 ... ~cxe4?!
23.Vf!bS+! (23.if4? ~c8! 24 ..h4+
<;!;>fB 25.1MIe2 ~c5!+; 24.1MIb3 ~c5+;
24.1MIb5+ ic6 2S.1MIb3 id5!?+)
23 ... <;!;>f8 (23 .. .'~d7 24J:l:eS+ 'tt>d8
2S.'&b6+ '&c7 26.W'xc7+ Wxc7 27.
~e7+ wcB 2B.il.f4+- Malakhatko
- Rabeyrin, Paris 2008; 23 ... Wf7?
24.ib3+?! <;!;>g6?? 25.~g5+ ~xgS
26.W'xgS#; 24 .. .'i!if8 2SJl:eS Vf!d6
26.ie3 ia600 27.1MIaS ib7 28.Vf!bS
.h6=; 24Jl:e5! 1MIc7 2S. ib3+ wf8
26.if4+-; 24 ... 1MId7 2S.ib3+ wf8
26.W'b4+ Vf!d6 27.id2!+-) 24.
ie3! - this is a very powerful
move for White (24.if4? icB+;
24 ..E1eS? Vf!d6! 2S.Vf!xb7?? ~d4-+;
2S.ie3 ic6+). White's prospects
are superior and his initiative is
very powerful, for example: 24 ...
~d6 (24 ... ~c8 25.~e5 ic6 26.W'a5
~a8 27.~xe7 ~xa5 28.~c7; 24 ...
ia6 2S.Vf!b6 wf7 26.'~·b3+ wfS
27 ..Ei:el+-) 2S ..Ei:xf6+! '&xf6 (2S ...
gxf6 26.ih6+ wg8 (26 ... wf7 27.
1MIh5+ we6 2BJl:el+-) 27. '&b3+!
~f7 2B.'&g3+ ~g5 29.ib3+-)
26.'&b4±
It may be interesting for Black
to opt for 22 ... ~cd7, but he may
fail to equalize completely after
39
Chapter 4 The Meran Variation

that. See some exemplary varia-

tions:
23.if4?! ~kB 24.i.c7 (24.Wlb3?
ixe4+) 24 .. .\'~td6!?, he forces
the trade of queens (Black can
force a draw if he so wishes 24 ...
~dB 2S:\We6+ ~e7 26.Wlc4=;
2SJ3cS Wie7 26 J:'if5 =) 25 ..ixd6
l%xc4 26.ib3 l%d4 - 26 .. J!xe4?!
27.gbSt - 27.e5 g6! 2BJ~xf6 (2B.
gf2 ltle4 29J!f4 gS 30.gf5 ltlxd6
31.exd6 h6:'f) 2B ... ltlxf6 29.icS 24.t:Yxb7
l%dS 30.,ixdSltlxdSf; He should not be afraid of 24.
he should not be afraid ia4 i.c6 (24 ... 'lWxe4?? 2SJ~eS+)
of 23.i.gS gcB 24.~b3 ixe4 25.~a6 O-O! (25 ... ltlb6 - this
2S.ixe4 ~xe4 26.l%f4 Wle5 27.gdl move leads to equality if both
~xgS (27... ltlcS!?) 28.~e6+ mfB sides play correctly. 26.ixc6+
29.~d6+ mgB 30.'lWe6=; E!xc6 27.~bS ~d6 2B.ie3 ltlbd7
23.eS?! gCB!f (it is weaker 29.eS ~e6 30.,td4 ltld5 31.a4CXl
for Black to opt for 23 ... ltlxe5 and the position remains unclear;
24.E!xeS? ~xe5 25.if4 'lWe7+; 24. or 31.gaflltle7 again with mutual
~bS+ ltlc6 25.i.d2 0-0 26.ic3 chances; 26.~aS 0-0 27.,tb3+
fladB 27Jiel Wld7 2BJ;dl=); idS! 2B.Wlxb6 Wlxe4 29.gf3 ~el+
23.id2! This is the best for 30JUl ~e4 31.gf3 Wfel + 32Jm
White! 23 ... gcB 24.Wfb3 :qxc2 (24 ... \We4=; White's attempt to play for
ia6 2S.i.b4 'lWf7 26.~a4 ~e6 27. a win may lead to serious prob-
Ei:dl± Flear - B.Kelly, Wrexham lems for him after 31.,bd5+ ltlxdS
2002; 26.e5! ~xb3 27.il.xb3 ltle4 32.~bS h6!? and despite the lack
2B.,if7+ wdB 29.e6+-) 25jWxc2 of two pawns, Black's pieces are
.be4 2().~cB+ wf7 27.~c4+ ~e6 so active that his prospects are
28.~xe6+ mxe6 29.E!g5 g6 30.gel preferable) 26 ..bc6ltlbB 27.Wlc4+
Ei:cB 31.ic3 ~f7 32.ga5 (32.a4!? (27.idS+ ltlxdS 2B.gxfB+ E!xfB
if5 33.flg3 ~d5 34.a5 ltlcS 35. 29.Wlc4 mhB!? 30.id2 ltlf6!?+;
flf3± Legky - Cosma, Metz 2002) 29 ... 'lWa7+!? 30.~hl ~f7 31..tgS
32 ... i.f5 33.h3± Onischuk - Kar- ltlb4't) 27 ... whB 28.eS (2B.E!cS?
jakin, Foros 200B. ltlxe4-+) 2B .. J%xc6 29.~flltlfd~
23. fi'bS+ ~cd7 24 ••. gxc2 2S.,tgS
Black comes on the verge of 2SJiaS!? - this is a very insidi-
disaster if he chooses something ous move, but Black has a power-
else: 23 ... ltlfd7? 24.,igS 'lWe6 25. ful argument against it: 25... <J;.f7!
gdl; 23 ... E!c6? 24.ie3. (2S ... 0-0? 26.'lWb3+-; 25 ... ~e6?

40
 9.0-0 a610.e4 c511.d5 Wlc712.'~e2 c413.ii.c2 i.d614.defe 15JiJd4
26J:!a8+ *e7 27J3xh8 ~g4 28.
~b4+ lLlcS 29.i.d2+-; 2S ...~d6
26.i.e3! l'!f8 27.eS ~d3 28.'&f3!±;
26 .. :~d3 27.l'!a3 ~e2 28.eS :B.xb2
29.~c6 gc2? 30.Wle6+- Vera Gon-
zalez - Coelho, Asuncion 2009;
29 ... 0-0 30.exf6 lLlxf6 31.:B.fU)
26.'Wb3+ 'We6 27.'&xc2 '&b6+
28.*hl (28.i.e3 'WxaS't) 28 ...'WxaS
29.'Wb3+. Here, Black can agree
to a draw after the line: 29 ... *g6
30.'Wg3 *f7 31.'Wb3, but he can
also try to play for a win with the
move 29 ... *e7.
25 ••. ~d6
This is the most reliable move
for Black.
He loses after 2S ... 0-0?
26.Wlb3+-
It is also bad for him to opt
for 2S ... 'Wxe4? 26.'Wxe4+ lLlxe4
27.1'~el :B.c4 (27... lLldc5 28.b4+-)
28.b3 :B.d4 29.:B.f2! White regains
his piece after this spectacular
move and after 29 ... lLldf6 (or 29 ...
h6 30J!d2!) 30.:5f4± :B.dl 3U!xdl
.!iJxg5 32.a4+- his pawns are un-
stoppable.
It may be interesting for Black
to continue with 2S .. J'1f8!? -
26.:B.el!? (26.e5? 'Wc5+ 27.~hl
liJxeS 28.:B.el liJfg4-+) 26 ... '&d6
27.eS ~d4+ 28.'iihl :B.e2! 29.:B.ffl
:B.xel 30.:B.xel liJg4 31.h3 lLlgxe5
32.'&b3 Wld6.
26.eaS+
There arises a transposition
of moves after 26.i.xf6 gxf6 (26 ...
.!iJxf6?? 27.'Wa8+ 'iif7 28.~xh8
'Wd2 29.:B.xf6+-) 27.'Wa8+ Wlb8.
26 •••ebS
In the first game in which
this variation was played (see
the notes to l7.liJdxbS), Black
succumbed to the tension and
made a terrible blunder playing
26 ...'iif7? 27.~xh8 ~d4+ 28.'i!lhl
~xe4 (28 .. :~xb2 29.:B.afl :B.xg2
30.~xh7+-) 29.1!f31!xg2 30.~xg2
liJe5 and White punished that in
a spectacular fashion 31. Wlxg7!
'iixg7 32.i.xf6+ 'iig6 33.he5
~xe5 34.:B.gl+- Karpov - Anand,
Lausanne 1998; 34.:5f2!?+-
27. ft'xbS +
27.:B.e5+? *f7.
27••• ~xb8 28.hf"6
28.e5?! ttJe4 29.:B.cl :B.xcl +
30.hel We7+
2S ••• gxf6
This position should be evalu-
ated as about equal. 29.gxf6 (29.
:B.f2 :B.xf2 30. ~xf2 ltJc6=) 29 •••
gxb2 30.a4 ~e7 (30 ... ltJd7
31.:B.f2 ~b4 32.a5 ~xe4 33.a6 We7
34.a7 :B.a8 35.h3= Flear - Galkin,
Port Erin 2001) 31.gf2 (3U'!h6
:B.c2 32.a5 :B.e6=) 31••• gb4 32.a5
gxe4= Li Shilong - Robson, Mos-
cow 2009.
41
ChapterS 1.d4 ~f6 2.c4 c6 3.~c3 ~f6 4.~f3
e6 S.e3 tlbd7 6.J.d3 dxc4 7.J.xc4 bS
8.J.d3 J.b7 9.0-0 a6 10.e4 c5 ll.dS
f!Jc7 12.dxe6 fxe6 13.J.c2

After 13 ... c4, White can react

in many different ways and we
will see now all the critical lines.
14.~g5
About 14.llJd4 - see Chapter 6.
14.~e2 id6 - see Chapter 3 (12.
~e2 c413.ic2 id614.dxe6 fxe6).
Black should not be afraid of
14.e5 llJxeS IS.llJxeS ~xeS 16J!el
~d6=
14... ~c5
We can consider this position
as basic for the entire Classical
system, because here Black can
choose between 13...c4 and the
Dreev-Filipenko variation.
13••• c4
The idea of Black's last move
is quite simple. He not only ac-
quires additional space on the
queenside, but what is even more
important frees the c5-square for
his knight and from there it will
protect the e6-pawn and attack 15.e5
the d3-square. This move usually leads to the
Still, I believe that it would be exchange of queens and a very
more interesting for Black to complex endgame with numerous
study the Dreev-Filipenko varia- ' pieces on the board. We will ana-
tion (see Chapters 7-8), neverthe- lyze it in details later.
less, "the old theory" has not been About ISJ'ge2 id6 - see 12.
refuted yet, so we will have a look ~e2 c4 13.ic2 id6 14.dxe6 fxe6
at it now. IS.llJgSllJc5.

42
 9.0-0 a61O.e4 cSll.d5 Y9c712.defe 13..tc2 c414.liJg5
IS ..te3?! h6 16.~h3 (16.eS
hxgS 17..tg6+ We7+) 16....td6 17.
f4 eS 18.fxeS .txeS 19.~f4 0-0+
Kempinski - Royer, Cap pelle la
Grande 1993.
IS.f4?! h6! (It is much weaker
for Black to play here IS .. J~d8?!
because of 16.Y9f3!oo with an un-
clear position and the idea 16... h6
17.Y9h3i 16.~e2? h6 17.~h3 ~d3
18.eS ~dSI9.~xdS ~dS 20 ..te3=
Anikaev - Mikhalchishin, USSR
1979; 18 ....tcS+ 19.whl ~dS 20.
liJe4 0-0+) 16.eS (l6.~f3 gd8
17.~e2 ~d3+)
16...hxgS (The move 16 ... ~d3
is probably only slightly weaker
than 16 ...hxgS, which leads to a
stable advantage for Black with-
out any risk at all. 17..txd3 0-0-0
18.~f3 (18.~xe6 ~b6+) 18 ... ~d3
19.~e2 .tcS+ 20.whl ~dS+ Gli-
goric - Yusupov, Vrbas 1980)
17..tg6+ we7 18.~e2 ~fd7 19.fS
'itld8 20.fxe6 IiJxe6 21 ..tfS We8
22.gdl.tc5+ 23.whl ~d4-+ Ftac-
nik - A.Panchenko, Sochi 1977.
This is not the right time for
White's maneuver IS.Y9f3, be-
cause of 15 ...h6! 16.Y9h3 0-0-0
17.~xe6 (17..te3 id6+) 17... ~xe6
18.~xe6+ 'itlb8. He has an extra
pawn indeed, but Black's pros-
pects are preferable.
19.~fS (19.~h3 .td6 20 ..te3?
.tc8!-+i 20.whl b4+) 19 ....td6
20.g3 (20.f4? ~c5+) 20 ...h4 21.
~a4 (21.~dS IiJxdS 22.exdS :ghfB
23.Y9hS .teS+) 21...:ghe8 (21...
ghf8!? 22.~g6 ~e7). White's po-
sition is tremendously dangerous
and this can be illustrated by the
following exemplary variation:
2211e1 geS 23.~f3 (23.~g6? .tc6
- Black is threatening .te8 -
24.hh6 gg8!-+) 23 ... ~xe4! 24.
R:xe4 (24 ..be4 gde8-+ ) 24 .. J~de8
(24 ... ~c6!?+) 2SJ%xeS ~eS 26.
~d1 ~c6 27.f3 ge1+! 28.~xel
~xf3 29 ..te4 (29.Y9f1? ~hl+ 30.
'itlf2 Y9xh2+ 31.'itle3 Y9xc2-+) 29 ...
.txe4 30.~f1 ~hl+ 31.'itlf2 Y9xh2+
32.We3 .tc6 33.~f2 ~hS~ 34.wd2
'it>c7!! with a crushing attack for
Black.
After 15. ~f3, it is weaker for
Black to play the seemingly at-
tractive line: 1S....td6 16.~h3
0-0-0, in view of 17.h4! (After
17.f4?! White can encounter seri-
ous difficulties, for example: 17...
h6 18.~xe6 IiJxe6 19.~xe6+ wb8
43
ChapterS
20:~fS ~c5+!? 21.~xc5 ,bc5+
22.@h1 b4 23.ltJa4 .td4 24.e5
ltJe4+, or 20 ... b4!? 21.ltJa4 ltJxe4
22.he4 i"ldfB+) 17 ... cxb3 1B.i.xb3
(lB.axb3 h6oo) 1B ... @bB (1B ...
1i.e5!? 19.1i.e3 ltJxb3 20.ltJxe6 ~xc3
21.axb3 @bB 22.1i.f4 @a7 23.,be5
~xe5 24:~'e3+ <;t>bB 25.ltJxdB
j"lxdB 26.f3;!;) 19.1i.e3 h6 20.ltJxe6
ltJxe6 21.he6 ltJxe4 (21...~xc3?
22 ..ta7+) 22.ltJxe4 .be4 23.a4±
Klauser - Pelletier, Switzerland
1993.
15••• Ybe5
Black has some alternatives
to this reliable move, but they
are very risky for him. 15.. .'~c6
16.f3 ltJfd7 (16 ... ltJd5?! 17.ltJxh7!?
ltJd3 IB.hd3 .ic5+ 19.<;t>hl
cxd3 20:~'xd3 0-0-0 21..ig5
~d7 22.~ac1±; 17.ltJxd5 ~xd5
18.~xd5 i.xd5 19.ixh7±; 17... 0-
0-0 18.ltJb4! ~b6 19.~e2 ltJb3+
20 ..te3 1i.c5 21.~ael!+-; 19 ...
ltJd3+ 20 ..ie3 .ic5 21.,bc5 'lWxc5+
22.<;t>h1 'lWxb4 23.ltJf7±) 17.'lWe2!?
(17.1i.xh7!?; 17.ltJxh7 - After a cor-
rect play, Black obtains a quite
acceptable position following this
44
The Meran Variation
simple move. 17 ... tiJd3 1B ..ixd3
.ic5+ 19.~hl cxd3 20.~xd3 ltJxe5
21.'lWc2 0-0-0 22. ltJg5;!;; 17...
ltJxe5 1B.ltJxfB @xfB! This is a
new move. Black needs his rook
on the h-fIle. 19 ..te3 ltJed300 with
a rather unclear position. It is
inferior for Black to opt for IB ...
~fB?! 19.'~d4?! ltJcd300 Kamsky
- Shirov, Madrid 1994; 19.\We2!N
ltJcd3 20.ltJe4;!;; 19 ... ltJed3 20.b4!
ltJxb4 21..ig6+ ~d7 22J~dl + ltJbd3
23 ..ie3;!;)
17... ltJd3 (17 ....te7 IB ..ixh7
0-0-0 19 ..ic2 b4 20.tiJdl ltJd3 21.
ltJf7 ltJ7xe5 22.,bd3 tiJxd3 23.
tiJf2±; 17... g6?! IB.ltJxh7?! ~xh7
19..ixg6+ ~f7oo Aniag - Voloaca,
Ottawa 2007; 18.ltJce4!? fie7 19.
b4 ltJxe4 20.,be4 \Wc7 21.a4;!;; 19.
~d1 0-0 20.tiJd6±) 1B.ixd3 cxd3
19.'lWxd3 ltJxe5 20.'~e2;!; I.Sokolov
- Shirov, Leon 1995.
16.gel ti'd6
16 ... 'lWc7? 17.b4! with the idea
17... cxb3 IB.ltJxe6 ltJxe6 19.1"1xe6+
.te7 20.ixb3 'lWxc3 21..ia3+-
17.ti'xd6
17.'lWe2?! i.e7 IB.ltJxe6 lDxe6
19.'lWxe6 'lWxe6 20Jl:xe6 <;t>fT+ Ash-
ley - Zs.Polgar, New York 1992.
 9.0-0 a610.e4 c511.dS ~c712.defe 13.ic2 c414.tiJg5
17.i.e3?! ~c6 1B.f3 i.e7!? 19.
~h1 0-0 20.,ixcS hcS 21.liJce4
l'l:adB 22.We2 i.cB+
17.liJxe6?! liJxe61B.~xd6 hd6
19J~xe6+ c;!;>d7+
17... hd6
IS ..ie3!
This is an important nuance
after which White can continue
his fight for an advantage.
1B.liJxe6?! liJxe619J'!xe6 ~d7+
IS .•. 0-0
This is the best for Black.
He reaches a slightly worse
and rather passive position fol-
lowing 1B ... liJd3 19.,ixd3 cxd3
20.:gad1! (Black has no problems
after 20.liJxe6 C;!;>f7) 20 ... 0-0 (20 ...
liJg4 21.h3 .ih2+ 22.~f1 liJxe3+
23.:gxe3 i.f4 24.l'l:xe6+ ~fB 2S.
:gb6.b.g2+ 26.<i!?xg2 hgS 27.liJe4
.idB 2B.l'l:b7± Goldbar - Kosten,
playchess.com 2006) 2U1xd3
idS 22.lt'lxe6!? (22.i.d4!? i.c4 23.
1.!ddH) 22 ... i.xh2+ 23.~xh2 he6
24J'!d6 ~feB 2S.i.d2!? (White
should better refrain from 2S.id4
ixa2! 26.~al .ic4 27 ..ixf6 gxf6
2B.b4 l'l:e6=; 26.l'l:xeB+ It'lxeB 27.
l'!b6 .ltf7= Kramnik - Kuczynski,
Gennany 1994) 2S ... @f7 26.f3t
19J'!adl
But not immediately 19.,ixcS
hcS 20.lt'lxe6 l'!fcB= Vera Gonza-
lez - Sorokin, Buenos Aires 1994.
19•••.ie7
19 .. J~fdB? 20J'!xd6+-
White seizes the initiative after
19 ...i.dS?! 20.lt'lxe6lt'lxe6 21.liJxdS
liJg4 22.lt'lf6+ fuf6 23.~xd6 It'lxe3
24.fue3t
20.he5 hc5 21.~xe6
lUeS
22.h3!?
This move is played not only
to open a leeway for White's king,
but also to take under control the
g4-square and to increase the ten-
sion at an opportune moment by
advancing the g-pawn. This plan
became quite famous after the
game Karpov - Kramnik Linares
1994, in which White scored a re-
markable victory. Naturally, the
theory of the variation developed
a lot after that game. Nowadays,
tournament practice has shown
that Black has nothing to be afraid
4S
ChapterS
of, but he must defend precisely.
He should not mind the
variation 22.lLJxc5 gxc5 23.Ele7
gbS!? (Black can also play here
23 ... ,ic6 24.f3 b4=; 24.h4 ElgS
2S.g3 lLJdS! He exchanges imme-
diately White's powerful knight.
26.lLJxds ElxdS 27.ElxdS hd5 and
Black has no problems at all, for
example: 28.f4 g6 29. 'i!1f2? ! as;
29.'i!1f1 c3 30.a3 a5=) 24.f3 'i!1f8
(He can try here the somewhat
riskier line: 24 ...h4 2S.lLJa4 gaSoc;
2S.lLJe4 he4 26.fxe4 ge8 27.
gxeS+ lLJxeS= Lukov - Battaglini,
Sautron 2002; 26 ... @f8 27.ga7
gaS and Black is not worse.)
2S.ge6 'i!1f7 26.ged6 gc6=
22.a3 - This move is useful for
White, but Black can retreat his
bishop to a very active position
22 ... i.b6!, not being afraid of 23.
lLJxg7, because ofthe possible sor-
tie of his knight to the g4-square.
This is a possibility for him, which
he does not have in the main line
with 22.h3 (It is a bit passive for
Black in comparison to 22 ... ,ib6,
but still quite possible for him to
choose 22 .. .1''1abS 23.lLlxc5 gXc5
24.gd6 @f7, or 23.ifS g6 24.lLJxc5
gxcS 25.ih3 'i!1f7.)
46
The Meran Variation
23 ... lLJg4! (23 ... hg2? 24.@xg2
~xg7 25.ge7 + @hS 26.ge6±) 24.
Elf! (24.ge2 )"!fS 2S.lLJfS Elae8 26.
)"ged2? i.cS 27.lLJd4 lLlxf2!-+; 26.
)"gd7 Fixe2 27. li'ixe2 and Black's
position is at least equal: 27 ...
hf2+ 2S.)f?f1lile3+ 29.~xf2lilxc2
30.)"gg7+ whS 31.~b7 gxfS+ 32.
'i!?g3=, but he can try to fight for
the advantage with 27... ic8 28.
lLJe7+ @hS 29.ltJxc8 hf2+ 30.
'i!1hl icS 31.1LJg3 geS!+) 24 ... )"gfS!
(it is weaker for Black to opt for
24 ... Eld8, in view of 2S.lLJe6! Elxd1
26.lLJxd1 Ele8 27.Ele11LJf6 2S.@fU;
White should better avoid 2S.
lLJfS?! gxd126 ..bdllLJxf2! 27.Elxf2
EldS=t Gelfand - Illescas Cordoba,
Dos Hermanas 1995, or 26.ltJxd1
EldS+ and Black's rook is headed
for the d2-square) 2S.lLJfS Elad8
26.h3 (26.Elxd8 Elxd8 27.i.e4 ixe4
28.ltJxe4 ltJeS~) 26 ... lLJxf2 27J~xf2
Elfe8! It is high time White con-
sidered fighting for equality. 28.
lLJh6+ (28.ltJd6 ge6 29.lilxb7 gxd1
30.lLJxdl gel+ 31.@h2 ixf2 32.
lLJxf2 Ele2+; 28.lLJe2 ie4 29.ElxdS
gxd8 30.he4 gdl+ 31.@h2 hf2=t
and despite the fact that White
has some material advantage, his
position is absolutely critical.
Black's rook is dominant in his
opponent's camp and White's
kingside pawns are defenseless.)
28 ... @g7 29.lLJfS+ @g8 (29 ... @h8?
30.lLJd6+-) 30.lLJh6+ 'i!?g7=
22 ... gab8
Tournament practice has
shown - this useful move, pre-
paring an eventual retreat of the
 9.0-0 a610.e4 cSll.d5 ~c712.defe 13.!c2 c414.lijg5
dark-squared bishop to d6, or a7,
(which was impossible immedi-
ately because of the tactical strike
23.llJg7!) is the best for Black.
22 ....b7? 23.llJxg7±
22 ....lib6? 23.llJxg7±
22 ...b4? 23.lba4 .lia7 24.llJxg7!
ixg2 (24 ... <;!i>xg7 2SJ~e7+-) 2S.
<;!i>xg2 mxg7 26J3e7+ mh8 27J'~d6±
22 ....tf8?! - Here, this move
may not be a great mistake, but
at least, it presents completely the
initiative to White... 23.g4 (23.
f4!?)
and now:
23 ... b4?! 24.llJa4 gab8 (24 ...
.tf3 2S.gd4 gab8 26.llJxf8 mxf8
27.gf4+-) 2S.ctlb6 .lif3 (2S ... gc6
26.llJd7 llJxd7 27J~xd7± with a
very powerful attack for White,
after 27... ge8, he has the pow-
erful argument 28 ..lixh7+! c;!.1h8
29..tf5±) 26.ctlxc8 .txd1 27.gxd1
~c8 28. c;!.1g2±;
23 ....tb4, now, this move is not
so interesting for Black, as on his
move 22, but still, it is quite possi-
ble. 24.a3! (24.gS llJd5=) 24 ....b5
(24 ....txc3 2S.bxc3 ge8 26.f4 .tdS
27.f5t and Black does not have the
move 27...c;!.1fl any more, which
was possible after the immedi-
ate 22 ....lib4, because of 28.g5!)
2S.llJxg7! (2S.gS llJdS 26.ctlxdS
.txdS 27.geS .txe6 28.gxe6 ge8=)
2S ....lif3 26.gd6 c;!.1xg7 27.ge7 + c;!.1f8
28.ge3 gc6 29.~c6 .txc6 30.ge6
ctldS 31.~c6 ctlxc3 32.bxc3 ixc3
33 ..txh7;!;;
23 ... h6 24.f4 .tf3 (24 ... b4
2S.llJa4.tf3 26.gd4 gab8 27. c;!.1f2±;
24.. J3e8 2S..tg6 l3e7 26.c;!.1f2t) 2S.
l3d2 (2S.l3d4!? l3e8 26.mf2 .lib7
27..Iif5!?t; 26 ... l3xe6 27.~e6 .teS
28.c;!.1xf3 hd4 29.l3d6t) 2S ....tc6
(2S ...b4 26.ctla4 c3 27.bxc3 bxc3
28JU2 .lidS 29.llJb6 .txe6 30.l3xe6
.lieS 31.ctlxa8 ~a8 32.l3c6+-)
26.gS hxgS 27.fxgS tDd7 (27 ...
llJhS? 28 ..tg6+-) 28.ctlxf8 llJxf8
(28 ... l3xf8 29.l3e6±; 28 ... c;!.1xf8?
29.!h7!+-) 29.l3d6± Karpov -
Kramnik, Linares 1994.
22 ....tb4!? - this is a bit pas-
sive, since after 23.a3 (23.l3eS
.txc3 24.bxc3 l3e8 2S.f4 llJdS 26.
f5±; 23 .. J~e8! 24.f4!? .bS 2S.l3d6
.ib4=) Black is forced to capture
on c3, improving White's pawn-
structure. Still, even after that,
White can hardly achieve anything
47
ChapterS
meaningful, but he has the initia-
tive, for example: 23 ... ixc3 (23 ...
hS?! 24.llJxg7! ixg2 2S.llJf5!?.if3
26J!d6t; 2S.Wxg2 Wxg7 26J~e7+
wg8 27J!d6+-; 26 ... wf8 27J:1e6
wf7 28J!dd6 llJe8 29J'!xa6± Po-
lak - Sergejev, Marijampole
1994) 24.bxc3 l'le8 2S.wfl!? (25.
f4 .tdS 26.f5 wf7=; 2S.llJc5 ~xe1+
26J!xel .idS 27J'!e7.tf7 28.i.e4t)
2S ... llJdS 26J''!d4 (26.i.e4 ~xe6
27..txdS i.xdS 28.~xdS gxel+ 29.
~xe1 ~e8+ 30.~d2 ge6=) 26 ...
1c6 (26 ... llJxc3? 27.~d7±) 27.llJgS
~xel+ 28.Wxelt
23.g4
This is the most amhitious
move for White.
The position is approximately
equal after 23.llJxcS sxc5
48
The Meran Variation
and now:
24.a3 as=;
24.~d6 b4 2S.llJa4 ~dS 26.~b6
.!!bS= Gelfand - Shirov, Biel
1995;
24.~e6?! b4! (24 ... ~c6 2S.~c6
hc6 26.EM6t; 24 ....tc6 2S.b4!
cxb3 26 ..txb3t; 24 ... ~f7!? 25.
~b6 gc6=) 2S.llJa4 (2S.llJe2
gaS!? 26.i.b1 ~dS 27.~xdS .txdS
28.sxa6? se8 29.'~fl c3f; 27.~d6
~d1 + 28.~d1 ~e8+) 2S ... ggS
26.g3 (26.g4? i.f3!+ with the idea
to follow with hS) 26 ... ~hS 27.h4
.tf3 (27 ... gdS!?+) 28 ..!!d4 gaS!?
(28 ...i.dS 29.gxa6?! ~e8! 30.~d1
gheS; 29J!el .tf7= Kramnik -
Shirov, Novgorod 1994) 29.gxc4
idS 30J'!eS llJd7 (30 ... gxa4? 31.
fudS gxa2 32.gd2+-) 31.ggS ge8
32.gxdS (32.~h2? llJeSf) 32 ...
gxdS 33.gxb4 ~d2+;
24.~e7 b4 (24 ... wf8 2S.~e6
gc6 26.ge3 gc7 27.g4 h6 28.a3
l"!e7= Gershon - Mastrovasilis,
Kavala 2004) 2S.llJe2 .idS 26.~eS
(26.llJf4 im Escobedo Tinajero
- Pedersen, Matinhos 1994) 26 ...
J5:e8=
23.a3 - now, Black must
choose where he will retreat his
bishop - to a7, or to b6. It looks
like both moves are about equally
strong and they lead to equality,
but I like 23 ....tb6 more (the game
is more complicated after 23 ...
.b7!? 24 ..!!d6 ge8 2SJ'!edl ge7 26.
llJd8 .ta8 27.i!xa6? .ib6f; 27.llJc6
i,xc6 28.gxc6 as=; 24.g4 ~e8 25.
gS llJhS 26.g6t; 24 ... i.f3! 25. ~d2
~e8= Khurtsidze - Volzhin, Yere-
 9.0-0 a61O.e4 c5l1.d5 ~c712.defe 13.1c2 c414.l'iJg5
van 1996; 25J~d6 :i!b6! 26J'!xb6
txb6 27.g5 tLleS!? and Black is
slightly better; it is weaker for him
to continue with 27... tLld5 2S.1d1
tLlxc3 29 ..ixf3 tLla4 30.id5 c;!{hS
31.g6 h6 32.ib7, Azmaiparashvili
- Kutirov, Strumica 1995, 32 ...
l'!bS! 33.ha6 tLlxb2=) 24.g4 (24.
l'!d6?! :i!c6 25.:1!xc6 hc6 26.tLlxg7
txg2? 27.@xg2 @xg7 2S.:i!e7+
@fS 29.:i!e6 @f7 30J:k6;l; Ehlvest
- Oll, Kalev 1997; 26 ... @xg7 27.
:i!e7+ @hS 2S.:i!e6 b4! 29.axb4
liJd5 30.:i!xc6 liJxb4 31.gxc4 tLlxc2
32.liJd5 liJe1-+) 24 ...i.f3 25Jl:d6
gc6 26.:1!xc6 ixc6 and Black's po-
sition is at least equal, Khurtsidze
- Kadimova, Leon 1996.
23 •••W 24.gd2
This position was reached in
several games and Black can con-
tinue in many different ways. It is
difficult to play with both sides,
but still, Black's prospects are at
least equal. Let us see what may
happen later.
24 ...h4
Black can also play calmer:
24 ... 1b4!? 25.a3 (25.:i!e5 geS 26.
g5 tLld5; 26J'l:e31b'n Shen Yang-
Sebag, Instanbul 2009). 25 ... h5
26Jl:e3 iaS 27.c;!{fl (27.g5 liJd5=i=)
27... g6!? and his chances are at
least equal.
24 ... h6!? 25.tLlxc5 (25.ifS
geS!=i= Akesson - Pedersen, Hal-
lsberg 1996) 25 .. J'~xc5 26.l'!e3 (26.
:i!d6 gc6=) 26 ...ib7 (26 ...ic6 27.
gd6 geS 2S.fu:eS+ tLlxeS 29J!dS
c;!{f7 30.!'!cS @e7 31.ig6;l;) 27.:i!e7
b4 2S.tLla4 :i!d5=
24 ...ib6?! 25.g5 tLlh5 26.
@fl!?t
24 ... geS?! 25.g5! (25.id1?!
1c6!=i=; 25.c;!{fl?! Ab4 26.a3 ixc3
27.bxc3 gb6=i= Filgueira - Sorokin,
Villa Ballester 1996) 25 ... liJh5
(25 ...:i!b6 26 ..tf5 g6? 27.gxf6 gxf5
2S.f7+ @xf7 29.tLlg5+-) 26.@fU
25.~a4.ta7
25 ...ie7? 26.tLlg5+-
25 ...if8 26.liJxfS! (26.g5 tLld5
27.g6?! - 27.:i!e5= - 27... h6 2S.
tLld4 ih5 29.if5 c3! 30J:k2 geS+
Henrichs - Kishnev, Reckling-
hausen 1995) 26 ... c;!{xfS 27J'!d4
h62S.ge5;!;
26.g5
49
ChapterS
26.tLlg5 .lc6 27J!e7 gb7 28.
gde2 gcc7 29.gxc7 !!xc7 30.tLle6
l!e7 31.g5 tLld5 325!;>fl ib5 33.tLlf4
b3 0-1 Prudnikova - Palac, Lju-
bljana 1994.
It is not good for White to
choose here 26.tLlxg7?, because
of 26 ...c3! (The position is equal
after 26 ... gd8 27.!!xd8+ l!xd8 28.
ge7 gd2 29.fu:a7 gxc2 30.tLlfS
tLle4 31.tLlh6+ wh8 32.tLlt7+ <!>g8
33.tLlh6= and Black's position
is quite acceptable; 28. tLlfS? !
l!d2 29.tLle3 .lc6+) 27.bxc3 bxc3
28.gd6 tLle4!! 29 ..lxe4 c2 30.J.xf3
gb1 31.gdd1 cxd1~ 32.hd1 cJJxg7
33.ge7+ cJJh8! (33 ... cJJg6 34.l!xa7
l!xd1+ 35.cJJg2 gc6+; 34.gd7!
gfB 35.gxa7 l!xd1+ 36.Wg2 gd2
37.gxa6+ cJJg7 38.cJJg3 gxa2 39.
tLlc5=) 34.gxa7 l!xd1+ 35.Wg2
l!c6+; 34.gd7 gf8 35.l!xa7 l!xd1+
36.Wg2 gd2 37.l!xa6 gdxf2+ 38.
wg3 g8f3+ 39.Wh4 l!xa2 40.tLlc5
l!xa6 41.tLlxa6 cJJg7 42.tLlc5 ge3+
26 ••. ~d5
27.g6
27..ie4? .lxe4 28.l!xe4 c3-+
27 ..id1? c3! 28.bxc3 hdH
50
The Meran Variation
27.ge5?! gb5!? (27 ... l!e8!? -
this is a very reliable move. 28.
.ie4? he4 29J'Qce4 c3 30.gxd5 c2
31.gc4 gbc8+; 28.g6 h6!?'+; 28 ...
hxg6 29 ..lxg6 ge7 30 ..lh7+ wxh7
3VtJg5+ cJJg8 32.l!xe7 tLlxe7 33.
tLlxf3 gf8'+; 28.gfS gxe6 29.gxf3
ge5 30.gfS=; 29 ... fld8!i") 28.g6
(28.gfS?! tLlc7!,+ Topalov - Lauti-
er, Dos Hennanas 1994) 28 ... hxg6
(28 ... h6? 29.gfS± tLlc7? 30.
tLlxc7 +-) 29.tLlg5 gf8! 30.tLlxf3
gxf3 31.gexd5 (31.ie4 tLlf6!'+) 31...
l!xd5 32.l!xd5 l!xf2 33.gd7 gt7+
34.l!xa7l!xa7+
27.tLld4!? this move leads to
a drawish position by force. 27...
c3 28.bxc3 bxc3 29.tLlxc3 gxc3
30.tLlxf3gxf3 31.ie4gg3+ 32. wh2
l!xg5 33.hd5= Nikolic - Bareev,
Munich 1994.
27••• c3!
27 ... h6 28.tLld4 (28.ge5?! tLlf6
29.tLlxg7 b3 30.axb3 cxb3 31 ..id1
hd1 32.l!xd1 .lxf2+ 33.cJJxf2
cJJxg7+; 28.b3!! - White fixes his
opponent's queenside, Morovic
Fernandez - Akopian, Leon 1995.
White's g6-pawn is so power-
 9.0-0 a61O.e4 c51l.d5 V!Jc712.defe 13.JJ.c2 c414.tiJgS

ful that he can rely on obtaining 29.gd3!

an edge.) 28 ... c3 29.bxc3 (29. 29. gxh7+?! It>h8 30.~d3? li)b4
~d3? cxb2 30.li)xb2 hd4 31..ib3 31.~xf3 li)xc2 32.~e4 ~bl+ 33 .
ic3+) 29 ... bxc3 30.li)xc..'i (30.~d3 ..t;h2 .ib8+ 34.li)f4 ~b4-+; 30.
li)b4 31.li)xf3? li)xd3! 32.hd3 c2 li)g5! gf8 31.li)xc3 li)xc3 32.
33.~c1 ~bl-+; 31.~f3 ixd4= ~e7 J.c5 33.li)t7+ l3xt7 34.~xt7
Nikolic - Shirov, Horgen 1994) li)e4!+
30 ... ~xc3 (30 ...hd4 31.li)xd5 29 ••. ~b4 30.gd7 ~xc2 31.
hd5 32.~xd4 ~xc2 33.~xd5 bg7+ wh8 32.gxh7+ wg8
~c6=) 31.li)xf3 ~xf3 32.JJ.e4 ~xh3 33.gg7+ wh8=
33.hd5+ 1t>f8 34. It>g2t
27... hxg6 28.li)g5 c3 29.bxc3
bxc3 30.~d3 JJ.g2! 31.li)e6! (31.
ib3? ~xb3 32.axb3 c2? 33.~d2+-;
32 ... ~f8! 33.li)xc3 hf2+ 34.lt>xg2
li)f4+ 35.'it>xf2 li)xd3+ 36.<.t1e2
li)xel 37...t;xel ~b8+) 31...li)b4
32.'it>xg2 li)xc2 33.~c1 (33J'~e4??
li\e3-+) 33 ... li)b4 34.~dxc3 ~c3
35.~xc3 ~e8=
28.bxc3 bxc3

We have already been con-

vinced that if White plays in the
most ambitious fashion, he may
end up in a worse position. Of
course, he has numerous possibil-
ities leading to complete equality
too. In general, the entire varia-
tion, which we have just analyzed
in details, should be evaluated as
leading to equality.

51
Chapter 6 1.d4 ~f6 2.e4 e6 3.~e3 ~f6 4.~f3
e6 S.e3 ~bd7 6.,id3 dxe4 7 ..be4 bS
8.,id3 ,ib7 9.0 - 0 a6 10 .e4 c5 ll.dS
'fIe7 12.dxe6 fxe6 13.,ie2 e4 14.~d4

pIe: 16.,ie3 (16.eS? 1:'!xd4 17.~xd4

This is the most popular move
for White and Black had problems
against it for some time. We will
see however, that he has reliable
ways of overcoming the difficul-
ties.
14... ~e51S ..ie3
In fact, this is not only the
most popular move for White, but
his only chance of fighting for the
advantage.
About 15.~e2 ,id6 - see
Chapter 4, 12.~e2 c4 13.,ic2 ,id6
14.dxe6 fxe6 lS.~d4 ~c5.
The alternatives for White are
clearly worse, for example:
lSJie1? 0-0-0 16.e5 ~d3+;
it is not reasonable for him to
opt for 15.f4?! O-O-O! and Black
seizes the initiative, for exam-
~d3-+ ) 16... b4+;
15.eS·?! ~xe5 (but not IS ...
~dS? 16.~xe6 ~xe6 17.~xd5
~xe5 18.~f4!± De Santiago Alba
- De la Fuente Gonzalez, Galapa-
gar 2004) 16J;cl ~d6 17.,if5 (17.
~xe6?! ~xdl 18.~xdl ~xe6 19.
ifS .tc8 20.he6 he6 2U!xe6+
<;f{f7+; 19J;xe6+ <;f{f7 20J~b6 ga7
21.,ie3 ~d5 22.ie4 ~xb6 23.hb6
he4+ Brittner - Schartz, Luxem-
bourg 1998; it is also good for
Black to play now 17... ~xe6
18.~xd6 hd6 19.,ifS ic8 20.
ixc6 he6 2L!:!xe6+ @d7 22J!e1
l!he8+ Shurygin - Skomorokhin,
Kstovo 1998; 19J'ixe6+ ~d7 20.
gel c;t:cT+') 17... 0-0-0 (17.. J!d8?!
18.~xe6 Wfxd119.~xdl ~xe6 20.
heM Vernay - K.Szabo, Caleta
2009) 18.~xe6 ~xe6 19.~xd6
(Black has an excellent position
too after 19.he6+ ~c7 20.~c2
~d3!? 21.if4+ id6+) 19 ...hd6
20.1:'!xe6 \!;lcT+' G.Orlov - Ippolito,
Internet ICC 2000.
A) lS •.• O-O-O?!
B) lS •.• eS

52
 9.0-0 a61O.e4 c511.d5 V9c712.defe 13.~c2 c414.&iJd4 0,c515..ie3
It is weaker for Black to play
IS ...ie7?! 16.b4! (16.f4!?) 16...
cxb3 (16 ... lLlcxe4 17.lLlxe4 0,xe4
IB.lLlxe6 VgeS 19.V9g4±) 17.axb3
!'!dB (17 ... eS 18.lLJf5 O-O? 19.b4
0,e6 20 ..ib3± Alterman - Enigl,
Bad Wiessee 1997) IB.Vge2, White
is threatening 19.b4 and he has a
clear advantage.
Following IS .. J~dB, there can-
not arise original positions, be-
cause White can transpose after
I6.Vge2 eS 17.0,13, to the variation
lS ... eS 16.0,13 ~dB, which we will
analyze later and it is not the best
for Black. White however, can
play better - 16.f4!?
A) lS ••• 0-0-0?!
This move is attractive, but it
is too risky for Black.
16.1re2 eS
This is the most principled re-
sponse.
The inclusion of the moves
16... hS 17.13 would not improve
Black's position.
16 ... wbB?! 17.b4! cxb31B.axb3
eS 19.0,dxbS axbS 20.0,xbS V9c6
21.b4 lL'lfxe4 22.13+- Wendt -
Lamprecht, Hamburg 1997.
It is just terrible for Black to
choose 16...id6? 17.llJdxbS! (It is
slightly weaker for White to con-
tinue with 17.f4 .ie7 - this is the
least of evils for Black. IB.eS!?
llJdS 19.1LJxdS 1LxdS 20.b4±; 17...
0,cxe4?! IB.llJxe4llJxe419.llJxe6+-
Braun - Tikkanen, Schwarzach
200B; 17... eS? IB.llJdxbS! axbS
19.0,xbS V9b6 20.tLlxd6+ ~xd6
21.fxeS+- Abrashkin - Nagimov,
Omsk 2004; 17...b4?! IB.tLlcbS
axbS 19.tLlxbS ~aS 20.tLlxd6+
~d6 21.eS+-) 17... axbS IB.lLlxbS
i.xh2+ 19.mhl VgeS 20.f4+-
17.~dxbS!
It was considered for a long
time that the knight-sacrifice was
not quite correct and White used
to retreat with his knight -17.tLlf3
(he played only seldom 17.0,fS)
and that was tested numerous
times at the highest level, for ex-
ample in the games: Radjabov
- Akopian, Moscow 2002, Naka-
mura - Lastin, Tripoli 2004, Gel-
fand - Akopian, Yerevan 1996,
S3
Chapter 6
Onischuk - D.Fernandez, Min-
neapolis 200S and about thirty
others. Many of these games have
been commented thoroughly and
there has arisen plenty of theory,
but the evaluation of the position
is not definite at all. The game is
too complex. We intend to study
it neither for White, nor for Black,
because the move 17.llJdbS! (in-
stead of the usual move 17.llJf3)
puts in fact the entire variation
with lS ... 0-0-0 under doubt.
That move has been played long
ago (only twice, though ... ) and the
first player who tried 17.llJdbS!
and demonstrated White's excel-
lent attacking possibilities was
the outstanding expert of the
Meran variation and a thorough
analytic too - grandmaster Alex-
ander Graf. We will analyze his
game below. I would like to men-
tion that I have managed to find
another way of treating this posi-
tion for White and it is objectively
even stronger. It still remains an
enigma for me why White did
not analyze thoroughly the move
17.llJdxbS! and continued for a
long time to waste time and effort
in the variation with 17.llJf3.
17..• axb5 18.~xb5 ef7
Black avoids the attack against
his queen and protects his c4-
pawn in the process.
(diagram)
19.b3!N
This is the right move for
White and the positions arising
after it are very unpleasant for
S4
The Meran Variation
Black. The game is opened and
his king is seriously endangered,
so White's compensation for the
piece is more than sufficient.
It is only slightly weaker for
him to play 19.9ac1 ~b8 20.%Ye1!,
since his queen goes later to the
as-square and his initiative is very
powerful, Neuman - Blaszczok,
Trinec 2002. Meanwhile, after
19 ...J.a6!? 20.a4 ~b7, the position
remains unclear, while following
20.b4!? J.bS 21.bc5 J.c6 22.gb1,
the comparison with the game of
GM Graf, where the rook is on c1
and not on fl, is clearly in favour
of the latter.
It i~ interesting to ~ee the con-
sequences of the move played by
GM Graf - 19JUcl!?, for exam-
ple:
19 .. .';!{b8! This is the only de-
fence for Black. 20.%Ye1. The mo-
ment Black's king goes to b8,
White's plan with the transfer of
his queen to the as-square be-
comes much more effective. 20 ...
llJa6 21.%YaS gc8! (21 ... gd7 22.J.b3!
cxb3 23.%Yb6 llJc7 24.llJxc7 E:xc7
2S.axb3 - White is threatening
 9.0-0 a61O.e4 cSll.d5 Wlc712.defe 13.fi.c2 c414.t:iJd4liJcS1S.J.e3

25J~!a8! - 25 ... ~c8 26J!xc7+ Wlxc7
27Jkl ti'xcl+ 28.iLxcl±) 22.Wlb6
~k6 23.ti'a7+ ~c8 and it looks like
Black is still defending successful-
ly, for example after 24 ..ia4 liJxe4
25.liJc3, he has the resource 25 ...
gg6 26.liJxe4liJc7!co;
After 19....h6?! it is very good
for White to playa move, which is
not obvious at all - 20.b4!, after
which Black's position is tremen-
dously dangerous (things are not
so clear after 20 ..ib3 cxb3 21.iLxc5
.ixc5 22.axb3 ti'xb3) 20 ...iLxb5 21.
bxcS .ic6 22J~abl
23 ....ixa4 24.Wlb2 <;!{d7 (24... \t;>c8
2S.Wlb8+ ~d7 26.ti'a7+ ~e8 27.
Wlxa4+ Wld7 28.c6+-) 2S.ti'xeS (it
is also good for him to opt here
for 2S.%Yb4!?) 2S ....ie7 26.c6+!
This move deflects Black's bishop
away from the control over the
dl-square. (26.fucc4 'tt>e8 27.fuca4
liJg4 28.ti'g3;!;) 26 ....ixc6 (26 ...
~e8 27J~b8! .ixc6 28J~xd8+
~xd8 29 ..ib6+ ~e8 30.ti'b8+ ~d7
31.%Yc7+ 'tt>e6 32.ti'xc6+ .id6 33.
gdl +-) 27.gdl + .idS 28.gb7+
~e8 29.exd5 liJd7 (29 ... liJg4 30 .
gxe7+! ~xe7 31.%YhS+-) 30.
%Ye4+- and the position is very
difficult for Black. The material is
practically equal, but his king is
terribly endangered and White's
passed pawns are very powerful;
22 ....ie7 23.gb6 'tt>c7

and now:
22 ... ti'e6 23J3b6liJd7 24J3xc6!
Wlxc6 2S.ti'xc4liJxc5. What else ?!
(25 ....bc5 26 ..h4+-; 25 ...liJb8 26.
ia4 ti'c7 27.Wle6+ <;!{b7 28.c6+ ~a8
29.Wlc4+-) 26 ..ia4 ~b6 27..ixc5
iLxc5 28.ti'xcS+ ti'xcS 29J'g(cS+ 24.gcbl! White brings addi-
~b7 30J'g(eS and White should tional forces (Black's response is
manage to win this endgame; forced, since White is threatening
22 ... <;!{c7. The move 23 ..ia4! is 25.l:k6 'tt>c6 26 ..ia4 'tt>c7 27.%Yb2!
not only beautiful, but it is also winning the game). 24 ...gb8 and
the best! If there are some fans of White continues with 2S.h4!
"living calmly" among the adher- iLxa4 26.%Yb2!+- and his attack is
ents to the variation with 17.liJdbS victorious! In the game, GM Graf
- I would recommend to them played imprecisely, but Black
23J!b4 with some edge for White. failed to exploit that; 24 ..ib3?!

SS
Chapter 6
~g6 (It would be correct for Black
to have played here 24 ... cxb3! 25.
~xc6+?! i>xc6 26.~a6+ wd7 27.
~a4+ i>c7=; 25.~a6 i>d7 26.ID:c6
b2 27.~b5! bxc1~+ 2B ..ixc1+-;
26 ... WeB 27.~a4 'it>fB 2B.axb3t)
25.~xc6+ 'it>xc6 26.~xc4+- 'it>c7
27. ~a6 ~xe4 2B.c6 ~d4 29.Yffa7+
'it>d6 30.YffcS+ 1-0 Graf - Bagatu-
rov, Kavala 1997.
19 .•• ~fxe4
I have failed to find any sat-
isfactory plan for Black. White's
initiative develops effortlessly
and Black has some material ad-
vantage indeed, but he is helpless
against his opponent's threats,
for example: 19 ... ttlcxe4 20.bxc4
\'Me6 2U'!abl±; 19 ... ttlh5 20.~e1!?
(20.~fd1!?±) 20 ... tDf4 21. \'MaS
E1d7 22.E1adl±; 19 ... hS 20.f3±;
it is worse for White to opt for
20.bxc4 ttlg4; 19... c3 20.E1fd1!
(The position is not so clear after
20.b4 tDce4 2l.f3 ttld6 22.ttlxc3~;
21..ib3! ?~; it is weaker for Black to
play 20 ... ttla6?! 21.a3!?±; 21..ib3
~eB 22.i.a4 ~f7 23'ttla7+ Wc7 24.
~b5+- Frolyanov - Stanojoski,
56
The Meran Variation
Belgrade 2009) 20 ...i.e7 21.ttlxc3
.b6 (21...wbB 22.~b5±) 22.ttlb5±
20.bxc4 f:9'e6 21.gabl t
B) IS ..• eS!
This is the best for Black!
Bl) 16.~f5
B2) 16.~fJ
Bl) 16.~f5
There were some theoreti-
cal discussions concerning this
move.
16 ... g6!
This move was not considered
immediately as the best for by
Black.
He tried in practice instead:
16... lLlce4 17.ttle4 lLle4 1B.a4, or
1B.\Wg4!? ttlf6 19.~h3; as well as
16 ... ~dB 17.~e2 (l7.~f3!?) 17...
ttJd3 1B..igS!? All these positions
are rather unclear, but it is obvi-
ous that White has sufficient com-
pensation and initiative. Black
should be reluctant to present his
opponent with the initiative, so
I suggest we analyzed the move
 9.0-0 a61O.e4 cS 1l.d5 "t!fc712.deJe 13 . .tc2 c414.liJd4 liJcS lS ..te3
16 ...g6, which clarifies the situa-
tion immediately.
17.~h6
17.liJg3? ~dS (It is worse for
Black to play here 17... .te718.~e2
0-0-0'1' Akesson - Arun Prasad,
Gausdal 200S) lS:~f3 il.g7-F
17..tg5 liJfxe4! (17... gxf5? IS.
hf6 ~gS19.liJd5+-; Black should
better avoid 17... ~c6?! lS ..txf6!
"t!fxf6 19.1iJe3. White occupies the
d5-square and plans the under-
mining move a2-a4, so his pros-
pects are superior, for example:
19... ~dS 20.liJcd5 "t!fg7 21.a4 liJe6
22.axb5 axb5 23.b3± Ostmoe -
Thomassen, Bergen 2009) 18.
he4 (or lS.liJxe4 liJxe4 19.he4
.ixe4) 18 ... liJxe4 19.1iJxe4 he4
20 ..tf6
20 ...gxf5! (after 20 ... ~gS 21.
liJg3, Black comes close to equali-
ty, but not more: 21.. ..ib7?! 22.
!!elt; 21.. ..ic6 22 ..txe5 "t!fd7 23.
~e2 0-0-0 24JUdl ~e6 25.
l'!xdS+ 'it>xdS and Black is not
worse; 22J~e1 'lWd7 23.~e2t; 22 ...
"t!fd6!? 23 ..ixc5 ~xd1 24J~axd1
B:a7 25.liJe4 .ixe4 26.B:xe4 ~e7 27.
!!d6 .tg7 2S.f4 'it>f7 29.!!xa6 l'!dS
30.a4t) 21..bhS (21.'lWh5+?? "t!ff7
22."t!fxf7+ @xf7 23 ..ixhS .td6-+)
21 ....id6! 22 ..tf6 'it>f7 23 ..ih4 !!gS
24.ig3 (24.g3 !!g6't and Black is
clearly better despite being an ex-
change down. His bishops are
very powerful, while the light
squares in White's camp are vul-
nerable; 24.~h5+ @e6 25.il.g3
"t!ff7 26."t!fh3 @d5~ and Black's po-
sition is at least equal; 26."t!fxf7+
@xf7 27J=l:fe1 'it>e6=; 25 .. .f4 26.
!!fe1 "t!fc6 27.f3 .tg6 2S:~g4+ @f7
29.if2 b4't) 24 .. .f4 25.!!e1.td3~­
his compensation for the ex-
change is more than sufficient, A.
Evdokimov - J.Gustafsson, Rije-
ka 2010. It is very interesting, but
not so ambitious for Black to play
here 21.. ..iCS!?N (this is a new
move, which has not been tested
in practice yet) 22.tyh5+ "t!ffl 23.
'lWxf7+ ~xf7 24.,txe5 ~eS, with the
idea to remove White's bishop
away from the long diagonal and
if he persists 25 ..tc3 (25.if4
.td4~), then Black suddenly cre-
ates a powerful attack against the
enemy king with minimal forces
and White must part with the ex-
tra exchange: 25 .. J~gS! 26.g3 f4
57
Chapter 6
27J~ael fxg3 28.hxg3 (28J~xe4??
gxf2+ 29.whl ggl+) 28 ....td3=
17•••.tg7
This is a solid developing move.
It is worse for Black to opt
here for 17... gd8 18.\l!!If3 .tg7 19.
gfdlt Skwarczylo - Gasik, War-
saw 2009.
17... liJcxe4? 18.W1f3! (18.liJxe4?!
liJxe4 19.\l!!Ig4~ Aguiar - Stamen-
kovic, Brasilia 2010 and White is
better, since it is bad for Black to
continue with 19 ... liJf6, because
of 20 ..tg6!+- ) 18 ... liJxc3 19.\!&,xf6
liJe2+ 20.whl .tg7 21.hg6+ bxg6
22.\l!!Ixg6+- with the idea to follow
with 22 ... 'tt>f8 23 ..tc5+.
Black should not look for trou-
ble with a move like 17... liJe6, be-
cause after 18.liJdS! liJxdS 19.exdS
gd8 20.\l!!Ig4 hdS 21.gadl \!&'c6
22.gfel, his position would be
very dangerous.
18.Yff3
This is the most active plan
for White. After his alternatives,
Black obtains a very good position
without any problems: 18.f3 liJe6
19.1iJg4 liJxg4 20.fxg4 liJd4+, or
S8
The Meran Variation
18.a4?! b4 19.1iJdS hdS 20.exdS
b3 21.J&.bl ~d8 22.\l!!Ie2 c3=t
18 ... ~e6 19.Yfh3
19.9adl liJd4! 20.hd4? exd4
21.gxd4? \l!!IeS!-+
19••• ~d4!N
Black has at his disposal a less
ambitious move, which is quite
playable too - 19 ....tc8 20.\l!!Ig3!?
(20.\l!!Ih4 "ffe7 21.gfel?! liJdS! 22.
\l!!Ixe7liJxe7+ Morozevich - Anand,
Mexico 2007; 21.gadl liJdS 22.
\l!!Ixe7+ liJxe7 23.gd6 liJd4 24 ..tdl
gf8=) 20 ... liJhS 21.\l!!Ih4 .tb7!?oo
with a complicated but approxi-
mately equal position. There may
arise the following repetition of
moves: 22.gadlliJef4 23."ffgSliJe6
24.~h4=. It is weaker for Black to
play here 21 ....tf6 22."ffg4 liJhf4
(22 ... liJd4 23.liJdS) 23.liJdSt
20.gac1
20.hd4 exd4 21.liJdS (21.eS
liJhS=t) 21 ... hdS 22.exdS hh6
23.~xh6d3=t
20 •••Yfd7(20 ... gd8!?) 21.Yfh4
(21.~g3 0-0-0) 21 ••• 0-0-0 -
and Black's prospects seem pref-
erable.
 9.0-0 a61O.e4 c511.dS 'rl:!Ic712.defe 13.i.c2 c414Ji~d4 liJc51S.i.e3

B2) 16.1t)f3 would not have this powerful re-

source. 19... bxc3 20.b4±) 19.1iJxe4
he4 (19 ... liJxe4 20.axb5 axb5 21.
~a7 liJf6 22.b3± Flear - Muir,
Torquay 2002) 20.he4 liJxe4 21.
axb5 axb5 22.~a7 ti'd6 23.i.d4!!-+
Alterman - Gabriel, Bad Hom-
burg 1997; 23.i.h6? §,d3!~
After 17... liJd3 18.~ad1 (1S.
!Ud1!?) lS ...i.b4 19.hd3 (19.
liJg5?! ti'd6 20.liJd5 hd5 21.exd5
§'xd5 22.i.b6 ~d7 23.ti'e3 h6 24.
liJh3 ti'e4+ Sadler - Piket, Monaco
16•••.ie7! 1995) 19 ... cxd3 20.~xd3 ~xd3 21.
This is the most precise and §'xd3 hc3 (21 ... 0-0?! 22.~c1
reliable move for Black. i.xc3 23. §'xc3 §'xc3 24.~xc3liJxe4
16 ....txe4? 17.liJxe4 liJcxe4 IS. 25.~c7 ~f7 26.~xf7 'it>xf7 27.liJxe5±
he4liJxe419.'rl:!Id5+- Sammour Hasbun - Fridman, In-
16... liJfxe4 17.liJxe4liJxe4 - see ternet 2007) 22.ti'xc3 ti'xc3 23.
16 ... liJcxe4. bxc3 liJxe4 24.c4!? the position
It is interesting but rather seems to be very close to a draw,
risky for Black to try 16...i.d6, but Black has not equalized com-
because of 17.liJg5! and if 17... pletelyyet... (24.~tl Lahlum - Hole,
0-0-0 (17... 0-0 lS.a4 h619.hc5 Gausdal 2001) 24 ... 'it>e7 25.cxb5
!xc5 20.liJe6 'rl:!Ic6 21.liJxfS ~S~; axbS 26.liJxe5 ~S 27.£3liJc3 2S.a3t
1S.b4!'t), then lS.b4! h6 19.bxc5 16 ... liJcxe4 - This looks like
i.e7 20.ti'b1 hxg5 21.a4±. The the second best move for Black in
move we analyze - 16... i.e7 is this position, but it can lead after
much more reliable for Black. a series of only moves to a some-
It would be a serious mistake what worse endgame for him, so I
for him to play the seemingly nat- cannot recommend it to Black.
ural move 16.. J'!dS?! because of 17.liJxe4liJxe4
17.ti'e2.
Now, the move 17....ie7 is not
so good as before, due to lS.a4!
liJcxe4 (1S ...i.c6?! 19.axb5 axb5
20.liJg5; lS ...b4?! 19.§'xc4! see
where the difference in the place-
ment of White's queen is essen-
tial! Without the inclusion of the
moves 16 .. J!dS 17.ti'e2, White

59
Chapter 6 The Meran Variation

1B.ge1! (It would not be easy, llJe6?! Wlb7 23.Wlxb7+ \tlxb7 24.
but still if Black reacts precisely, llJxdB+ i!xdB~; after 22.llJU!?
he can equalize after 1B ..b:e4 Black will have to sacrifice the ex-
.ixe4 19.1lJgS i.d3 20.~hS+ g6 change, but he will have a pawn
21.~f3 gbB 22JUe1+-; 21 ... 0- and a powerful bishop on d3 as
0-0 22.llJU e4 23.~f6 !J.g7 compensation for it. 22 ... mbB!
24.~xa6+ ~b7 2S.llJd6+ ~d6 26. 23.llJxhB ~xhBoo with a rather un-
~xd6;j;; 19....tb7 20.~g4 - 20. clear position; 22 ... ~b7? 23.
llJe6!? ~U - 20 ... Wld7 21.~xd7+ '&xb7+ 'it>xb7 24 ..igS!+-; 22 ...
'it>xd7 22.llJU ggB 23.gad1+ 'it>c7 ghfB? 23.~aB+ 'it>d7 24.ll:lxdB±;
24.llJxe5 .icB!?=) 1B....id6 (lB ... 22 .. J:;dfB?! 23.llJxd6+ ~xd6 24.
ib4? 19..b:e4 .b:e4 20 ..id2 .b:d2 ~aB+ 'it>c7 2S.Wla7+-; 24 ... wd7
21.~xe4+-; 1B ... ~dB?! 19..id4? 2S.~a7+ W1c7 26.~xa6-t; 22 ... e4!?
.icS 20 ..b:e4 .b:e4 21.gxe4 .ixd4 23.Wlf5+ mb7 24.llJxhB ~B~)
22.llJxd4 0-0:+= Janssen - De 22 ... ~d7 23.~xa6 ~bB 24.llJU
Vreugt, Yerevan 1999; 19.~bl! ghfB (24 .. J~heB?! 2S ..ta7!±) 2S.
llJf6 20.lf.JxeS .ie7 21..if4±; follow- llJxd6 ~xd6 26.~aS me6 27.f4 i!aB
ing 1B ...il.e7 19 ..b:e4 .ixe4, it 2B.fxeS ~aS 29.exd6 mxd6 30.
would be difficult to make a defi- .td2 ~a4 31.a3;t Gelfand - Bareev,
nite evaluation of the attractive Novgorod 1997.
line for White 20.llJgS ,tb7! - this 17.~g5
is almost the only defence for Following 17.~e2?! 0-0
Black. 21.llJe6?! ~c6 22.~g4 'it>f7+; 1B.llJgS i'!feB, Black defends with
21.WlhS+ g6 22.~h6 ~c6 23.f3 this move against 19.,tcS, fol-
gdB 24.llJe4oo with a rather un- lowed by llJgS-e6 (the situation
clear position; 24.a4!?oo; but it is not clear after 1B ...i'!aeB 19.b4,
would be interesting for White to Shariyazdanov - Adianto, Biel
opt for 20.,tgS!N ~dB 21.~e2.txf3 2003) 19.b4llJcd7 20.~ab1 h6+
22.~xeS WlxeS 23.gxeS ~U 24.
gxe7+ 'it>g6 2S.if4 ig4 26.ieS
gd7 27..ixg7!;t; 26 ... ~hgB 27.1c3;t
and he maintains an advantage in
the endgame) 19 ..b:e4 ixe4 20.
llJgS id3 (20 ...ib7? 21.llJe6 Wlc6
22.Wlg4~; 20 ... .tg6? 21.a4! and
Black cannot castle, because after
21...0-0?! 22.axbS, it would be
impossible for him to continue
with 22 ... axbS 23.fucaB ~aB, due
to 24.~dS+-) 2UWf3 0-0-0 (21...
~dB? 22.ib6+-) 22.~aB+ (22. 17.•• 0-0!

60
 9.0-0 a61O.e4 c5 1l.dS ~c712.defe 13.~c2
This is the point! It turns out
that Black is not forced to com-
promise his position defending
against the threat 18.ic5 and
then li'Jg5-e6. Instead, he can ig-
nore it and sacrifice the exchange
obtaining sufficient compensa-
tion for it.
This idea was tried for the first
time by Garry Kasparov and that
would be more than sufficient
proof of its quality...
Prior to that, Black suffered a
lot after playing 17... h6 18.,txc5
hxg5 19..te3 g4 20.~e2 0-0-0
21.a4 b4 22.li'Jd5 lLlxd5 23.exd5
ixd5 24.~xg4+ wb8 25.ElfdU
with a very unpleasant position
for him, Kruppa - Collas, Cap-
pelle la Grande 2001, or 17.. :~c6
18.lLld5! h6 (18 ... lLlxd5 19.exd5
~xd5 20.~h5+ wf8 21.f3 lLld3
22J''lad1±) 19.ixc5 (19.lLlf3!?)
19 ...1xc5 20.li'Je6 \!gfl 21.lLlxc5
~xc5 22.lLlxf6 gxf6 23.!f{fh5+ (23.
~d7+?! ~e7= Schlecht - Schaefer,
Germany 1998) 23 ... wg7 24J~ael±
and White transfers unavoidably
his rook to the third rank.
18.hc5
It is obvious that White must
capture the exchange; otherwise,
he simply loses tempi.
18 ... hc5 19.~e6 'ifb6 20.
~xf8 gxf8
(diagram)
Objectively speaking, this po-
sition should be considered as ap-
proximately equal. Black has the
initiative, his dark-squared bish-
op is very powerful and it has no
c4 I4.l2Jd4 li'Jc515.ie3
opponent. He has pawn-majority
on the queenside and dominates
on the semi-open f-file, so all that
should be more than sufficient
compensation for the sacrificed
exchange. I believe that from the
purely practical point of view, it
would be simpler and more en-
joyable to play this position with
Black. See for yourselves:
21.'ife2!
21.a4? 1xf2+ 22.wh11d4+
21.lLld5?! This is a serious im-
precision by White, which hap-
pened in the first game played in
this variation. We have already
mentioned that, though... 21.. .
.bd5! 22.exd5ixf2+! 23.whl(23.
!'!xf2? lLlg4 24.~xg4 ~xf2+ 25.
whl ~fl+ 26.iMl 1'!xfl#) 23 ... e4
(23 ... id4!?+) 24.~e2 (24.a4!?
1d4 25.~e2+; it is weaker for
Black to opt for 24 ... !'!d8 25.axb5
axb5 26.~e2 e3 27.!'!adl ~d6 28.
if5 ~f4 29.1h3 g6 30.g3oo; 24.d6
e3 25.1f5 g6 26 ..ih3 ~c5 27.d7
~e7+; but not 24 ...1d4? in view of
25.1xe4! - this is a brilliant com-
bination. White's idea can be best
illustrated by the variation 25 ...
61
Chapter 6
~xd6 26 ..if3t; 2S ... lLlxe4?! 26.
~xfB+ ~xf8 27.~f3+ lLlf6 28.~aB+
~f7 29.d7! ~e7 30.dB~+ ~xdB
31.~xdB+ ~xdB 32.~dl±; 29 .. .
lLlxd7 30.~dS+ @e7 31.~dl±; 30 .. .
~g6 31.~xd7 hb2=; 31.~e4+!
@h6 32.~h4+ @g6 33.~g4+ c,!>h6
34.~xd7 ~f6 3S.~dl.t; Black can-
not capture the pawn 34...hb2,
because of 3S.~d2+ - that was
why White wanted to have Black's
king on the h6-square with all
these checks) 24 ...e3 2S.~adl (25.
~fdl?! ~d6!-+ Kasimdzhanov -
Kasparov, Linares 2005) 2S ... ~d6
26 ..ifS ~hB 27J!xf2 exf2 28.~xf2
~eB+
21 •••ee6!?
The strongest move for White
now can lead to a beautiful draw-
ing variation:
22.a4!?
22.lLldS? lLlxdS 23.exdS ~xdS
24.~g4 .id4+, Jakovljevic - Vi-
tiugov, Plovdiv 200B.
22.~ael .td4 23 ..lbl .tc6=i= Wi-
rig - Huebner, Cannes 2005.
62
The Meran Variation
22.ltlhl lLlg4 (22 ....ld4!?) 23.
lLldl .ld4 24.h3 lLlf6 2S.~cl (25.
a4?! b4 26.~c1 as! 27..lbl .la6+)
2S ... ~f7!?+ with the idea to follow
with lLlf6-hS.
22.h3 .td4 23.~abl ~f7 (23 .. .
b4!?) 24.~h2?! (24.~f3=i=) 24 .. .
b4!? (24 ... ~hS?! 2S.lLldS g6 26.
lLle3 tt'lf4~ Korotylev - Dreev, Fu-
egen 2006) 2S.tt'ldS(2S.tt'ldl tt'lxe4+)
2S ... tt'lxdS 26.exdS hdS 27.f3 as+
22 •••h4
Meanwhile, Black can try to
play for a win here with 22 ... lLlg4!?
23.tt'ldl ~f4 24.h3 tt'lf6 2S.axbS
axbS 26.~d2 lLlxe4 27.~dB+ ~fB
28.~c7 ~dS 29.lLle3 ~c6 30.~xc6
hc6~ Kapaun - VampireBat,
playchess.com 2006.
23.~d5 ~xd5 24."bc4 ~f4
25.exc5 eg4 26 ..tb3+
26 ••. gf7 27 ..lxf7+ wxf7 28.
ec7 + (2B.g3 ~h3+ 29.Wg2 he4+
30.f3 tt'lf4+ 31.Wgl tt'lh3=) 28 •••
Wg6 29.'I'd6+ c,!>f7 30.ec7+
Wg6 31.ed6+ wf7= Gavrilov-
Kulaots, Tallinn 200B.
Chapter 7 1.d4 ~f6 2.c4 c6 3.~c3 ~f6 4.~f3
e6 5.e3 ~bd7 6.J.d3 dxc4 7.J.xc4 b5
8 ..id3 .ib7 9.0-0 a6 10.e4 c5 H.d5 1fc7
12.dxe6 fxe6 13 ..ic2 .id6!?

The Dreev-Filipenko Variation

cxd4 19.1t:ld1; 17... e5?! 18.a4 b4

The idea of this move belongs
to A.Filipenko and I was the first
to play it in a tournament game.
No doubt, the move looks attrac-
tive, but it used to be considered
as incorrect for some time.
It is interesting for Black to
try 13 ... 0-0-0?! and I played that
move successfully for a while.
Later however, GM M.Sadler re-
futed it with 14.lt:lg5 It:le5 15J~'e2!
(It is weaker for White to continue
with 15.§'e1 §'b616.f4lt:ld317.§'g3
c4+ 18 ..ie3 .ic519 ..ixc5lDxc5! 20.
~h1 b4 21.lDa4 lDxa4 22 ..ixa4 h6
23.lD17 lDxe4, draw, Bareev -
Dreev, Elista 1996, 24.~g6lDf2+?
25J%xf2 §'xf2; 24 ... l3d2 25.lt:lxh8
tiJg5) 15 ... l3e8 16.f4lt:lc6 17.lt:lf3 g5
(White maintains a positional ad-
vantage after 17... tiJd4 18.lt:lxd4
19.tiJd5 It:lxd5 20.exds tiJd4 21.
lLlxd4 cxd4 22.fxes; 18.fxes!?
lLlxes 19.tiJxeS §'xes 20 ..if4 §'hs
21.§'d2) 18.es! This move refutes
Black's idea (after 18.fxgs tiJg4 he
has excellent compensation). 18 ...
g4 19.exf6 gxf3 20.§'xf3 tiJd4 21.
§'hs .ie7 22.17 l3d8?! (It is a bit
stronger for Black to follow with
22 .. J~ef8!?, but even then after
23 ..ib1.id6 24.lt:le4, White's posi-
tion is preferable; 23 ..ie4!? .id6
24.,ie3 ~xf7 2s.§'h3) 23 ..ie4 b4
24 ..ixb7+ ~xb7 2s.tiJe2 (25.
It:le4!?) 2s ....if6 26.fs! exfS 27.
It:lxd4 hd4+ 28. ~h1 l3hf8 29.l3xf's
l3d7 30 ..if4 l3dxfl (30 ...§'c6 31.
ih6+-) 31 ..ixc7 l3xfS 32.§'e2
~xc7 33.h3 (Black's position is
very difficult) 33 ... l3es 34.§'xa6+-
Sadler - Dreev, Luzern 1997.
14.tiJg5!
This is obviously the best for
White, while the other possibili-
ties are in favour of Black, for ex-
ample:
14.b3?! 0-0 ls ..ib2 l3ae8 (15 ...
lLlg4 16.h3 l3xf3 17.~xf3 tiJh2
18.~e2 lLlxfl 19.13xfl .ies+ Saka-
lauskas - Fridman, Jyvaskyla
1998) 16.§'e2 tiJeS;

63
Chapter 7
14:~e2 h6!? (14 ... 0-0 IS.lLJgS
.bh2+ 16.<t!ihl ~aeB 17.f4 ~g3
IB.eS; IS .. .l'~feB 16.f4 eS 17.fS l2JfB
- 17... c4!? - IB.b3 Jakovljevic -
Waldmann, Pula 1999) IS.eS (15.
gellLJeSl6.lLJxeS heS17.f4 .tx£4?
IB.eS; 17... ~d4+ IB.<t!ihl hS!? and
Black has good prospects) IS ...
lLJxes 16.lLJxeS hes 17.~g6+ ~e7
- White's compensation for the
sacrificed pawn is insufficient.
14••. ~f8
14 ... ~e7? Is.f4+-
It would be too slow for Black
to choose 14.. :~c6 Is.f4 (ls.l2Jxe6
hh2+ 16.'it>xh2 ~xe6) Is ... ~c7
16.~e2 h6 17.lLJf3 eslB.lLJdS't and
White has powerful initiative.
15.f4
It would be rather dubious for
him to continue with Is.~f3? h6
16.~h3 hxgsI7.~xhB 'it>t7!N (This
move is even stronger for Black
than 17... 0-0-0 IB.~dl l2Jg6 19.
'&h3 g4 20.~e3 hh2+ 21.~f1~
and he has excellent compensa-
tion, D.Gurevich - Kaidanov, Las
Vegas 2003) IB.~h3 (1B.f4lLJBh7)
IB ... g419.'&e3 .\ixh2+ 20.\t{hll2Jg6
21.g3 ~eS!-+
64
The Meran Variation
15 ••• 0-0-0!
This is the essence of Black's
idea. He manages to castle and
parries temporarily White's threat
e4-es in the process.
It would be premature for
Black to play ls ... eS?! 16.lLJds
hdS (He may lose material after
16 ... lLJxd5 17.exds 0-0-0 lB.
~g4+ 'it>bB 19.fxes hes 20.lLJf7)
17.exdS 0-0-0 (17... h6 1B.fxes
hes 19.1LJf3 0-0-0 20.a4± !!xds
21.~e2 l2JBd7 22.axb5 ~eB 23.
lLJxeS !!exes 24.~f3 axbs 25.
if4+- Korotylev - Gagunashvili,
Moscow 2002) 1B.a4 b4 19.'&e2
c4 20.lLJf7! (The position is not so
clear after 20.b3, because of 20 ...
lLJxds) 20 ...~xf7 21.fxe5 heS 22.
'&xes ~xdS 23.ifS+ l2JBd7 24.
~xds l2Jxds 2s.igs (2S.!!dl!?)
2s ... !!deB 26.gac1 (It also looks
promising for White to play 26.
gadl!? !!es 27.hd7+ 'it>xd7 2B.
if4 !!heB - 2B .. JUS 29.g4 - 29 .
.ixeS :!!xes 30J:U4! c3 31.bxc3 bxc3
32.!!c4 and he has excellent
chances of winning the game.)
26 ... c3 27.bxc3 bxc3 28.id2± with
an overwhelming advantage for
White.
ls ... h6 - This move looks quite
logical, but after White's resolute
reaction 16.eS! (16.lLJh3 0-0-0
17.~e2 es - see 16.~e2 h617.lLJh3
es; it is not advisable for White to
follow with 16.lLJxe6 lLJxe6 17.es
O-O!?; 17... 0-0-0 1B.exf6 lLJd4;
16.l2Jf3 hf4 17:~~'e1 lLJg4 1B.hf4
~xf419:~'h4lLJg6 20.~h5 0-0 21.
~xg6 !!f6 22.~hs ~e3+ 23.'it>hl
 ll.dS ~c712.defe 13.ic2 id614.liJgSlDj81SJ4 0-0-0 16.~el
lDf2+ 24.M2 ~xf2 with a very
good position for Black, Brunner
- Sandipan, Nancy 2007) Black
may have problems.
16 ... 0-0-0 17.exd6 (17.ttlf7!?
~xf7 IB.exd6 ~d7 19.ie3 ~c6
20.lWe2 ~xd6 21. ~acllDBd7 22.a4
b4 23.lDbloo Brunner - Flear, Ch-
alons en Champagne 2009) 17...
llicd6 lB. ~e2 hxg5 19.a4 (19.
lDe4!?; 19.fxg5?! ~d4 20.g3? ~c6;
20.h3 ttlg4!) 19 ...b4 20.lDe4 ~d5
(After 20 ... lDxe4 21 ..Axe4 ~d4
22 ..Axb7+ Wxb7 23.g3!?;I; White's
position is more promising; but
not 23.ie3 ~d5 24J~adl? ttlg6!
25.lWg4 llicdl 26.llicdl lDxf4 and
Black is better, Palliser - Houska,
Scarborough 2004) 21.h3 (It is
bad for White to opt for 21.lDxf6
gxf6 22.ie4?! - he should better
play 22.h3 - 22 ... ~d4 23 ..Axb7+
si.?xb7 24.1Wf3+ ~d5 25.h3 gxf4
26.i.xf4 ~c6 27.~ael ~gB+ with an
advantage for Black, Kruppa -
Dreev, Chalkidiki 2002) 21 ...gxf4
22.ixf4 e5 23.ig5!? preventing
23 ... lDe6, since White would coun-
ter that with 24 ..tf6 gf6 25.lWg4!
(The position is rather unclear af-
ter 23.ie3 lDe6 24.lDxf6 gxf6,
Lastin - S.Ivanov, Krasnoyarsk
2003.) 23 ... ttlBd7 24.~ac1 wbB
25.ie3~ and White's compensa-
tion for the pawn is more than
sufficient.
16.Vel!?
About 16.Ve2 - see Chapter B.
16•••e5!
16...b6?! This move is the best
for Black after 16.lWe2, but here it
is in favour ofWhite. This becomes
obvious after 17.ttlf3 (17.lDh3?! e5
IB.f5 - preventing the maneu-
ver lDfB-e6-d4, but then Black's
knight will change its route: IB ...
ttlBd719.lDf2 c4 and he obtains an
excellent position; 17... c4!? IB.e5
ic5+ 19.whllDd5 with a wonder-
ful game for Black, but not 19 ...
lOg4? 20.ttle4 lDd7, Moranda -
Zawadzka, Warsaw 2007, 21.Ve2
h5 22.lDhg5) 17...ixf4 (Black's
position is not good at all after
17...e51B.fxe5.ixe519.lDxe5IWxe5
20.if4 lWe7 21.e5 lDd5 22.lDxd5
.ixd5 23.a4 b4 24.Ve2 and White
is better. It is also interesting for
him to choose 21.lDd5!? with an
advantage for him, Yevseev - No-
65
Chapter 7
vitzkij, Minsk 2001) 1B.e5. Now,
the move 1B ...1f3 would not work
(1B ...1xf3? 19 ..bf4+-), while the
line: 1B ...1xc119J!xc1lLld5 20.ttJe4
mbB 21.ttJd6, enables White,
thanks to his powerful knight on
d6, to rely not only on having ex-
cellent compensation, but even
the advantage, for example: 21...
.!!gB (21...lLld7 22.lLlf7) 22.a4 (22.
.ie4!?) 22 ... \Wb6 23.axb5 axb5
24 ..ie4lLld7 25.mh! E:gf8 (White's
initiative is very dangerous after
25 ... ttJxe5 26.ttJxe5 E:xd6 27.E:f7t)
26.b4! c4 27.E:al.
17.~d5!
This move was not confirmed
as the best for White immedi-
ately. At first sight, it seems that
he should include the moves a2-
a4 and b5-b4, in order to com-
promise Black's queenside pawn
structure. In dynamic positions
however, similar to this one, it
is much more important to gain
tempi to enhance the most impor-
tant plans and this means at first
the move .ltd2, which develops a
key-piece. Without the inclusion
66
The Meran Variation
of the moves a2-a4 and b5-b4,
White can win an important tem-
po thanks to his powerful threat
1d2-a5.
The alternatives for him can-
not create any serious problems
for Black:
17 ..id2 h6 IB.ttJf3 lLlBd7 19.f5.
This move is forced. White closes
the centre, but after this Black or-
ganizes counterplay on the queen-
side (19.ttJd5?! ttJxd5 20.exd5 exf4;
it is weaker for Black to play 19 ...
hd5?! 20.exd5?! exf4 21.1a5 ttJb6
22 ..tf5+ mb7 23.1e6<Xl Beckhuis
- Madl, Austria 2001; 20 ..ia5!N
ttJb6 21.fxe5 he5 22.ttJxe5 E:heB
23.exd5 E:xe5 24.\wf2 mb7 25.l'~ae1
and the position is very unpleas-
ant for Black from the practical
point of view, for example: 25 ...
.!!xe1 26 ..!!xel.!!xd5 27 ..tc3) 19 ... c4
- see 17.f5;
17.f5 h6 1B.ttJf3 ttJBd7
19 ..id2 (It seems too slow for
White to play 19.mh1, because af-
ter 19 ... c4 20 ..id2 \Wc6 2U!c1 ttJc5
22.a4 b4 23.ttJd5 ttJxd5 24.exd5
§'xd5 25.i.xb4 e4 26.ttJd2 e3
27.lLlf3 E:heB+, Black's prospects
 l1.elS ~c712.defe 13.iLc2 iLd614.f1'JgS f1'J.f81Sf4 0-0-0
are preferable, Wilhelmi - Pavas-
ovic, Lippstadt 1998.) 19...c4
(19 ... f1'Jb6!?) 20J~cl!? ~c6 21.a4
f1'Jc5 22.axb5 axb5 23.iLe3 c;t>b8oo
with a rather unclear position
(it is premature for Black to play
23 ... b4?! 24.f1'Jd5 f1'Jxd5 25.exd5
~xd5 26.W1c2 c;t>b8 27.iLbl?
f1'Jd3 28.iLxd3 cxd3 29.~f2 ~c8
30.iLa7+ c;t>a8 31.~al ~c6, with a
considerable advantage for Black,
Illescas Cordoba - Shirov, Leon
2000; 27.~fdIN f1'Jd3 28 ..ixd3
cxd3 29.~d3 ~b5 30.J.f2! and
in view of the threat W1e2-e3,
White's prospects are preferable,
for example: 30 ... e4 31.~e3 ~a6
32.~xd6 ~d6 33.f1'Jd4 ~k8 34.iLg3
~xc1 + 35JWxc1 c;t>a8 36.iLxd6
'if{xd6 37.~e3);
17.a4?! b4 18.f1'Je2 (Black is
better after 18.f1'Jd5 f1'Jxd5 19.exd5
exf4, as well as following 18.fxe5
he519.f1'Jd5f1'Jxd520.exdSiLxh2+
- 20 ...iLxd5!? - 21. c;t>hl iLxd5) 18 ...
h6 19.fxe5 iLxe5 20.f1'Jf3
20 ... f1'Je6! He realises one of
the most important ideas of this
variation - the inclusion of the
knight on f8 into the actions,
so he would not mind his dark-
16.~el
squared bishop to be exchanged
for White's knight. 21.f1'Jxe5 ~xe5
22JU5 tvd6! 23. iLf4 (23.e5 W1c6
24.~f2 f1'Jg4-+; 24.~f1 f1'Je4+) 23 ...
f1'Jxf4 24.f1'Jxf4
24 ... c4!N This is the only move
leading to an advantage for Black.
(The alternatives for him are
clearly worse, for example: 24 ...
he4?! 25J:~dl ~c6 26.~6 gxf6
27.~d8+ ~xd8 28.he4;!; W1xa4
29.i.f3; 24 ... b3?! 25.hb3 ~he8oo;
24 ...~d4+ 25.c;t>hl f1'Jxe4 26.f1'Je6;!;;
25 .. J~he8 26.~dl ~xb2 27.f1'Jd3
tvd4 28.f1'Jxc5 tvc3oo; 24 ... ~he8?!
25.~dl and here it would be very
bad for Black to opt for 25 ... ~e4?!
- after the correct reply 25...tvb600
the game is rather unclear - due
to 26.f1'Je2!;!; and White wins the
exchange; after White's mistake
26.~xd6? ~xel+ 27.c;t>f2 ~d6 28.
~xc5+ c;t>d8 29.c;t>xel g5 30.f1'Jd3
b3 31.f1'Je5 f1'Jd7!-+ Black in the
game Sadler - Dreev, Groningen
1997 won a convincing victory.)
25.c;t>hl (25.\¥Jf2 f1'Jg4 26.tvc5+
c;t>b8; 26.~a7 tvd4+ 27.~xd4
~d4+) 25 ... \¥Jd2! 26.~c5+ c;t>b8
27.~xd2 ~xd2 28.~c4 g5 (it is
also good for Black to play here
67
Chapter 7
2B .. .l:'kB) 29.ltJe6 .!3cB 30.ltJc5ltJg4
and White has serious problems.
A) 17... ~xd5
B) 17.•..txd5!
A) 17•.• ~xd5
Black's wish to preserve the
light-squared bishop is easily un-
derstandable.
18.exd5 exf4
After IB ...ixd5 19.iLd2! White
has the initiative and although it
would be far from easy to prove
that he has the advantage, I would
not recommend this line to Black.
There may follow: 19... c4!? (It
is weaker for him to choose 19 .. .
!l:eB 20 ..!3dl iLb7 21.ltJe4; 20 .. .
ltJd7 21.iLaS 't1rc6 22.'i;!fd2 ltlf6 23.
ltlxh7± Johannessen - Goloshcha-
pov, Dhaka 2002; as well as 19 ...
'i;!fc6 20.iLaS geB - 20·... ixg2
21.gf2 - 21.gdl exf4 22.~d2 geS
23.ltlf3 .!3h5 24.ltJh4!±; 19 ... ltld7
20.b5 ltlb6 21.gdl iLc4 22 ..!3f2
.!3heB 23JUd2 and Black's posi-
tion is very dangerous. It is bad
for him to play for example: 23 ...
exf4?, because of 24.~xe8! gxeB
6B
The Meran Variation
25 ..!3xd6+-; White should bet-
ter avoid 22.b3 ixfl 23.ltle6 Vlif7
24.ltlxd8 .!3xdB 25.ixb6 ~7) 20 .
.ia5 ic5+ (20 ... ~c5+ 21.'it>h1 ic7
22.fxe5t) 21.@h1 ~c6 22 ..if5+!?
(It seems more logical for White
to play 22 ..te4, but he cannot
maintain an advantage: 22 ... .!3d7
23.ixd5 Vlixd5 24.fxe5 h6 2S.ltJe4
ltle6 26.b3 gfB) 22 ... ltld7 (22 ...
gd7 23.~e2 @b7 24 ..!3adl exf4
25.ltle4+-) 23.~d2 (23.~e2!?)
23 ....!3df8 24.fxeS (24.iLh3!?) 24 ...
h6 25.e6 (25 ..!3ad1 gxf5 26.gxfS
hxgS 27.~xd5 gxh2+ 28.'it>xh2
~h6+ 29.'it>g3 ~h4+ 30.'it>f3
~f2+ 31.'ittg4 ~h4=) 25 ... hxg5
26.exd7+ @b7 27.d8~ (27.~xg5
iLd6 2B.i.h7!; 27 ...Vlid6 28.h4±)
27 ... .!3xd8 2B ..ixd8 !l:xdB (28 ...
iLd6 29.h3 !l:xdB 30.Vlixg5 i.c7)
29.1!~'xg5±
19•.id2!
This is a very important win
of a tempo for White and we have
mentioned it before. His position
is much better and although I
have found certain defensive re-
sources for Black, I recommend
 ll.dS 'i!fc712.deJe 13.fJ.c2 fJ.d614JiJg5 0,f815.f4 0-0-0 16. '?Ne1
to him to capture on dS with the
bishop - 17... fJ.dS. Still, I believe
that it would be very useful to see
in details the consequences of the
move 17... 0,dS as well.
19 ••• b4
Black is trying to neutralize the
threat fJ.d2-aS, but his last move
has certain drawbacks.
It is weaker for him to choose
19 ... '?Nd7?! 20.hf4 (20.iJ.aS!?
fJ.c7 2U~dl with the idea 21...ge8
22.J.f5; 20 .. J!e8 21.fJ.fS! ~xel 22.
hd7+ <.!>xd7 23.gfxel fJ.xdS 24.
gadl+-; 22 ... 0,xd7 23.gfxel±
and if 23 ...fJ.xdS? 24.gadl 0,f6,
then 2S ..ic3) 20 ...hf4 (20 ...
.txdS 21.gdl hf4 22J!xf4 '?Nc6
23.0,t7+-) 21.gxf4 ~xdS 22.~g3
and White maintains the advan-
tage and has numerous threats.
20.gcl!?
20.a3!? Naturally, this move
seems to be the most logical and
the best, but it is not easy at all
to prove that White has the ad-
vantage, for example: 20 ... C;!{b8!
21.c;!{hl (It may be interesting for
him to try here 21.axb4!?, but the
situation remains unclear too:
21...cxb4 22 ..ib3 0,g6 23.0,e6
'?Nb6+ 24.c;!{hl ghe8 2S.'?Ne2 i.c7!
26 ..iel lLlf8) 21...fJ.xdS 22.axb4
lLlg6!N (22 ...'i!fb7 23.ie4 lLlg6 24.
fJ.xdS '?NxdS 2S.~a6~ Korotylev
- Skatchkov, Krasnodar 2002)
23 ..ie4 (The position is with mu-
tual chances after 23.bxc5 '?Nxc5
24 ..ie4 ghe8 2S.~a6 .ib7 26.gaS
gxe4! 27.lLlxe4 '?Nc6; 23.~a6?!
'?Nb7oo) 23 ... ghe8 24.bxc5 (24.
fJ.xdS!? ~el 2S.fJ.xel) 24 ...fJ.xeSoo
20 •.• mb8
20 ... fJ.xdS?! 21.fJ.xb4 'i!fe7 22.
.ie4.
21 •.ib3
21 ••• ~g6!?N
This is an improvement for
Black. He has played until now
only 21...aS 22.'i!ff2!N - this
move seems to be the best (22.
lLle4?! ge8) 22 ....ta6 23.lLle4 fJ.xfl
24.0,xd6 and Black has great
problems.
After 21...aS , White has played
only 22.a3. And then:
after 22 ...h6 23.lLle4 ge8 24.
axb4 axb4, White sacrifices his
69
Chapter 7
queen: 25.tLlxd6! and following
25 ... fuel 26.Elcxel liJg6 27.~e6,
his advantage is decisive.
It seems too risky for Black to
opt for 22 ... ~b6!? 23.~f2! (The
position is unclear after 23.tLlf7
c4+ 24.mhl cxb3 25.tLlxd6 Elxd6
26.hf4 tLlg6 27.Elc6 ~xf4 28.fub6
:1'I.xb6) 23 ... tLld7!? (23 ...bxa3? 24.
ic4 axb2 25.:1'I.bl a4 26.ic3 a3
27.ixb2 axb2 28J'!xb2; 23 ... f3!?;
23 ... tLlg6!? 24.liJf7bxa3; 24.axb4!?
- see 22.a3 ~g6) 24.hf4! (24.
liJf7?! g5 25.axb4 axb4 26.:1'I.fel
:1'I.feB 27.liJxdB :1'I.xd8 2B.:1'I.e4 c4;
2B ... ~a7!?) 24 ... liJe5 25.~e3
~d3 26.~xd3 ixf4 27.:1'I.xf4 c4+
28.~xd4 ~xd4+ 29.fud4i;
22 ... liJg6!? 23.axb4 axb4 (23 ...
~b6!?liJ 24.~f2! liJe5 - 24 ... axb4
24.liJf7 - 25 ..ixf4 liJd3 26.ixd6+
gxd6 27.bxc5 ~xb3 28.gc3 ~xc3
29.bxc3liJxf2 30.cxd6liJd3 3l.liJf7
~fB 32.d7 mc7=; 28.~g3liJxcl 29.
~xd6+ ma8 - 29 ... ma7? 30.c6 -
30.c6 .b6 31.:1'I.f8+ ic8 32.h3 fuf8
33.lMfxfB lMfe3+ 34.mhl ~el+ 35.
mh2 lMfe5+ 36.mhl=; 30.liJe6 :1'I.cB
31.h3 - 31.c6 ia6 - 31...~xb2 32.
c6 ia6 33.~f7liJe2+ 34.mh2 ~b6
35.~c5 ~xc5 36.liJxc5 ib5 and
Black has good chances for a draw.
It is a bit weakerfor White to con-
tinue with 25.bxc5 '&xb3 26.cxd6
liJd3 27.~d4 liJxcl 2B.~xc1 :1'l.d7)
24.liJe6 ~b6 25.1~U2!? (He went
for material gains, capturing the
exchange: 25.liJxdB F1xdB 26.ic4
ie5 in the game Krasenkow - Al-
masi, Polanica Zdroj 2000.) 25 ...
liJe5 (25 ... :1'I.cB 26.:1'I.c4! and in view
70
The Meran Variation
of the threat ~b4, White's pros-
pects are clearly preferable. After
26J:k2?! - preparing doubling of
the rooks - 26 ... ~heB 27JUc1,
Black has the powerful argument
27 ... liJe5!) 26.liJxc5 (It is also very
attractive and promising for
White to sacrifice the exchange
with: 26.:1'I.xc5!? ixc5 27.liJxc5 g5
2B.:1'I.el!? ~c8 29.~xe5 :1'l.xc5 30.
E!xg5 and he has the edge, or
28.~d4 :1'I.he8 29.~el mc8 30.~c1
mb8 31.hb4t with powerful
initiative for him) 26 ... g5 27.~d4
.txc5 28.fuc5 liJd7 29.ixb4.
White's prospects are superior,
for example: 29 ... ~he8 (29 ...
liJxc5?! 30.ixc5 ~xb3 31.~e5+
mc8 32.~c1 ic6 33.~e6+-) 30.
:1'I.c4 iLa6 31.id6+ ~xd6 32.~c6
~e5 33.~xe5+ :1'I.xe5 34.~xa6liJc5
35.:1'I.b6+ ma7 36.~b5 liJxb3 37.
:1'I.xb3 :1'I.dxd5 38.~al+ :1'I.a5 39.
:1'I.xa5+ :1'I.xa5 40.~h3±
22.~e6 e'b6 23.~xd8 (23.
mhl :1'I.he8 24.~f2 tLle5!?) 23 •••
gxd8 24.,tc2t
White has the edge, but the
real fight is still ahead.
 11.elS Vfic7 12.defe 13.ic2 id614JiJgSltJj81S/4 0-0-0 16:iBel
B) 17•••J.xdS! 18.exdS exf4
18 ... ltJxd5? 19.a4 b4 20.Vfie4
19.a4!
This quite natural move was
played against me by Alexey Shi-
rov. He won that game and many
commentators were quick to de-
cide that the entire Dreev-Fili-
penko variation was under grave
doubt. That was not true how-
ever!
19.id2 - Here, the idea with
winning a tempo for White is not
working and this is very impor-
tant for Black. We must see and
understand why. 19 .. J:Ie8! This is
an important resource for him.
Now:
20.Vfih4 (20 ... h6!? 21.a4 b4
22J~ac1 ~b7 23J!£e1ltJg6 24.ixg6
hxg5 25.Vfixg5. This is how the
game Zhukova - Shumiakina,
Herceg Novi 2001 continued and
here, instead of the second-rate
move 25 .. J~ef8, it would be in-
teresting for Black to opt for 25 ...
!!xel + 26.hel f3 with a good game
for him.) 20 ... ltJg6 2U9h3+ ~b8
22.a4 b4 23J'!adl (23.ltJe6 ~b7!?)
23 ... ltJxd5 (It is worse for Black to
play 23 ...c4 24.ltJe6 Vfib6+ 25.~hl
ltJxd5 26.ltJxg71!e3!? Piket - Kha-
Ufman, Dortmund 2000) 24.ltJe6
24 ... Vfie7. This is probably the
simplest way for Black to neutral-
ize White's activity - to try to ex-
change his active knight (24 ...
~d7!? 25.,if5 ltJge7; 2S ...,ieS!?).
2S.iffi ltJc7! 26.EH"el J.e5 and White
cannot achieve anything much with
the exchange-sacrifice 27.l!xeS,
for example: 27 ... ltJxeS 28.ixf4
ltJxe6 29.ixe5+ ltJc7 30.J.d6 Vfie3+;
20.Vfif2!?N h6. Black must at-
tack the enemy knight (20 ... ltJxd5
21.a4; 20 ...c4 21.~hl) 21.ltJe6
(Black is better after 21.J.ffi+
~b8 22.ltJe6 ltJxe6 23.ixe6 ltJe4
24.Vfie2 liJxd2 25.Vfixd2 ,ie5.) 21...
liJxe6 22.dxe6
71
Chapter 7
22 ... c4!? (I believe that move,
with the purely "human" idea to
exchange queens and to ensure
the safety of the king, is more
practical than the alternatives
suggested by the computer pro-
grams 22 ... ~bB, or ~b7.) 23.~h1
(23'\~'f3 ~c5+ 24.~h1 ~d5 - see
23.~h1) 23 ... ~c5 24.~xc5+ (24.
YNf3 ~d5 25JUel!? YNxf3!? 26.gxf3
~dB?! 27 ..ig6 ~e7 2B.,lxeB iUc.eB
and Black has compensation for
the exchange; 26 ... 'tt>b7 27.1Lg6
ge7oo) 24 ...,lxc5 25J3xf4 (25.
.lxf4?! ~g4 26.g3 ghfB) 25 ....id6
26.gf3 'tt>dB!? with the idea to
block White's passed pawn with
the king. Black's prospects are not
worse at all.
19 ...b4
19 ... E:e8 - Here, this move
cannot be recommended. 20. ~f2
(White maintains an edge even
after the other possible retreats
of his queen: 20.'~h4!?; 20.~c3
lLlxd5 21.YNf3 i!e5 22.lLle4; 20 ... h6
21.lLle6lflxe6 22.dxe6 b4 23.YNc4)
20 ... b4 (20 ... h6 21 ..if5+ It>bB 22.
lLle6 lLlxe6 23.dxe6) 21..lxf4 .bf4
22.~xf4 ~xf4 23.iUc.f4.
20.ti"e2
It would not work for White
72
The Meran Variation
to play primitively 20 ..if5+ ~bB
21.~e6?! lLlxe6 22.dxe6 (or 22.
he6 g5) 22 ... g5 with a great ad-
vantage for his opponent.
20 •••c4
It is interesting for Black to try
the move 20 ... Wb7!?, which was
played by (at that moment) the
future World Champion A.Koste-
niuk. 21 ..td3 'tt>a7 (Naturally, it is
not in the spirit of the position for
Black to play the passive move
21 .. J3aB?!, since after 22 ..tc4,
White's compensation for the
pawn is more than sufficient.) 22 .
.b:a6 lLlxd5 23.ic4 h6 24.~h3
(24.lLlf3!? ~f6; 24.4Je4 .ie5) 24 .. .
f3 25.~xf3 (25.gxf3 .ie5+) 25 .. .
hh2+ 26.~hl lLlg6 27.~h5 (27.
ixd5!? ghfB 2B ..if7 lLle5 29.
~b3oo) 27... lLlge7 (27... lLle5 28.
hd5 gxd5 29.lLlf4.lxf4 30..ixf4~)
28.gf7. Now, after the correct re-
action for Black 28 .. J;hfB! his
prospects are preferable (28 ...
lLlb6?, Sasikiran - Kosteniuk,
Hastings 2002, 29.YNe2!+-) 29.
l!xg7.ie5.
21.b3! h6!
 11.d5 V!1c712.deje 13.j"c2 Jtd614.lDg5 lDf815.f4 0-0-0 16. fie1

This is the best for Black, 21... clear position.

VfJc5+ 22.l1thl ~xdS 23.'Hfxc4+ 23"'lDd5 24.bxc4 lDc3 (24 ...
fixc4 24.bxc4±; 21...cxb3? 22. ltJe3?! 25 ..lxe3 fx:e3 26.1'!t7 .lxh2+
VfJxa6+ Wfb7 23. fixb7 + s!fxb7 27.'t!?hl fie528.'lfff3fixal+ 29.ibl!
24.Jtxb3+- 'lffxbl+ 30.~xh2+-; 26 ...'lffc6
22.~e6 27.1'!dlt with powerful initiative
He should not be afraid of for White; 27.c5?! .lxc5 2B.,ie4
22.loc4 iOxc4 23.hc4 iOd7 24. sd2!) 2S.VfJf3 'i!fbBoo with mu-
bxc4 ghe8. tual chances (2S ...Wixc4!? 26.~hl
22 ... ~xe6 23.dxe6 ~bB 27.,id3 fixe6 2B.,ixa6 WidS=;
27.ixf4 Wixe6 2B.'lffc6±; 27 ...
.lxf4 2B.'lffxf4+ Wixf4 29.1'!xf4 as
30J'!eU; it is just a loss of valu-
able time for Black ifhe plays 2S ...
VfJb7?! 26.'lffh3 ~bB 27.~h1 tfic7
2B.ib2 ,ieS?! - 2B ...Vf1xc4!? -
29.1'!ael if6 30.ig6 Vf1xc4 31.fif3
ie7 32.sc1 1'!cB 33..ixc3 bxc3
34.1'!bl+- Shirov - Dreev, Sara-
jevo 2002).
23 •••g5!? This move consoli-
dates Black's position and it seems
Black's position does not seem to me to be the most promising
bad, but it is very difficult to play. for him. 24.bxc4 YlYcS+ 25.c;!>hl
Tournament practice will gradu- .Ae5 26.lnll gheS 27•.Ag6 ge7
ally clarify everything, but we feel 2S ..Ad2 a5
obliged to analyze the different
promising routes for him.
23 ... gheB!? 24.~g6! (24.
bxc4 ie5 2SJ'!bl fic5+ 26.whl
g5 27.Jtg6 se7 2B.Jtt7 as'i=) 24 ...
ge7 25.bxc4 and here it seems
very risky for Black to opt for
25 ... fic5+ (it is more reliable for
him to continue with 2S ... 't!?bB!?
26.'t!?hl lDd7) 26.s!fhl fie5 27.Wif3
(27.fixe5 ixeS 2BJ~bl as 29.ixf4
hf4 30J!xf4 1'!d2 31.h4 1'!e2+ and
despite the missing pawn, Black's The position is very complicat-
prospects are preferable) 27... ed indeed, but Black's prospects
VfJxal 2B.c5!?oo with a rather un- are at least equal.

73
Chapter 8 l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.tLlc3 tLlf6 4.tLlf3 e6
S.e3 tLl bd7 6.J.d3 dxc4 7.i.xc4 b5
8.J.d3 J.b7 9.0-0 a6 10.e4 cS H.d5
~c7 12.dxe6 fxe6 13.J.c2 J.d6 14.tLlgS
tLlfB IS.f4 0 - 0 - 0 16.~e2

The Dreev-Filipenko Variation

fxg5+- Brynell - D.Pedersen,

After this move Black must
play
16••• h6
Following 16... eS (which would
be the right response after 16.~el)
White has the powerful argument
17J3dl! - I think this is his most
convincing line. 17.. J3d7 (17 ...h6
18J'!xd6! i!xd6 19.fxeS hxgS 20.
exd6 tlIxd6 21.eS tlId4+ 22.tlIe3
lLl6d7 23.a4 b4 24.~xd4 cxd4
2S.lLle2 lLle6 26.i.f5 i!e8 27. i.d2
as 28Jk1+ ~b8 29.i.xe6 i!xe6
30 ..ixgS+-) 18.lLldslLlxd519.exd5
i!e7 20.lLle4i with an advantage
for White, Ortega Hermida - Vera
Gonzalez, Valencia 2002.
It also seems interesting for
him to opt for 17.a4 b4 (17...h6?
18.axbS hxgS 19.bxa6 i.c6 20.
Valby 2008) 18.lLldS lLlxdS (18 ...
i.xdS? 19.exd5 exf4 - it is better
for Black to play here 19... c4, but
White can counter that with 20.b3
and a clear advantage - 20.
~xa6+, AGershon - Pridorozhni,
Moscow 2004, 20 ... ~b7 21.~xb7+
~xb7 22.lLlf7; 20 ... ~b8 21.lLlfl!
~xf7 22.~b6+ ~c8 23.i.f5+ lil8d7
24.~a6+-) 19.exd5 exf4 20.i.d3!?
(But not 20.i!xf4? .bf4 21.~g4+
lLle6! 22.lLlxe6 hh2+ 23.~h1
~g3-+; in the game Hernandez
Cannenates - Prasca Sosa, Ha-
vana 2007, Black refrained from
capturing the rook and played in-
stead 20 ... i.xd5? and after 21.
~xa6+ i.b7 22.~c4 White could
have maintained the advantage. It
is interesting for him to try here
20.lLle4 .ie5 21.d6 ~c6 22 ..ixf4
.bb2 23.i!ae1lLld7; 23J~ad1.id4+
24.i!xd4 cxd4 25Jk1 ~b8 26.,id3
~d5 27.lLlcS; 23 ... lLld7 24 ..ib3
~xe4 25. ~xb2 with compensation
for the pawn.) 20 ...i.xd5 (Black
might opt here for 20 ... a5!? 21 .
.ia6!? with initiative for White)
21 ..ixa6+ ~b8 22 ..ic4! (White
should not lose time for the move

74
 12.defe 13.ic2 id614.'1Jg5 '1Jf815l4 0-0-0 16. ffe2 h617.'1Jj3 hf4

22.i.d2?, since Black seizes the Sarajevo 2002. Here, I accepted

initiative immediately with: 22 ... my opponent's draw offer under-
h6 23.'1Je4 i.e5 24J''tfd1 '1Je6-+ estimating the power of the line:
Bucher - Goessling, Rotterdam 2B ... g3! 29.hxg3 gh5, after which
199B.) 22 ....!e5 23.,ixd5 ~d5 Black's attack would be tremen-
24.ffc4 .!d4+ 25.'it>h1 ~g5 26. dously dangerous.
hf4 ge5 27.Yffb5+ 'it>a7 28.,ixe5 17•••.bf4
he5 29.gadl! (The line: 29Jtfl
ffxfl 30.Yffxc5 'it>bB 31.Yffe5 leads
only to a draw, but White should
try for more.) 29 ....if6 30.gfS with
an advantage for White.
17.~f3
Black should not be afraid of
17.'1Jh3!? e5 1B.f5!? (1B.a4 ltle6!
19.axb5 ltld4 20.ffd1 axb5 21.ie3
ffc6+ Alterman - Pinter, Reckling-
hausen 1998) 1B ... ltlBd7 19.1tlf2
tDbB! 20 ..ie3 tDc6+ Froewis -
Volkmann, Jenbach 2009. A) 18•.bf4
It is interesting for White to B) 18.e5
opt for the move 17.e5, which was
played for the first time against A) 18•.bf4
me by the then young, but already This is a serious alternative
very promising player Teimur for White and because of it there
Radjabov. 17... hxg5 1B.exd6 ffxd6 were rumours for a while that the
19.ie3 (19.h3 ltlh5) 19 ... ltl8d7 entire variation was to be buried.
20.gad1 Yffc7 21.ic1 g4 22.a4 As it usually happens, rumours
(In another game on the same were based on exaggeration ...
subject later, White preferred 18••••xf4 19.93
22.~xe6? gdeB 23.~fl - 23.ffd6
b4 - 23 ... c4, but came under
a crushing attack: 24.gf2 V#c5
25.gdfl g3 26.hxg3 ltlg4 27.'1Jd1
ltlxf2 2B.ltlxf2 Yffc6 0-1 Jelen -
Ribli, Pula 199B) 22 ... b4 23.ltle4
ltlxe4 24.,ixe4 ltlf6 25 ..id3 (25.
hb7+?! 'it>xb7 26.ffxe6 c4) 25 ...
~c6 26.ic4 gdeB 27.gfe1 (27.b3
g3! 2B.hxg3lL\e4 29.Yfff3 gh7) 27...
'it>bB 28.b3, Radjabov - Dreev,

75
Chapter 8 The Meran Variation

19 ••• Yfg4! 22 ... c4 (22 ... l;xd6?! 23.exd6

The other possible retreat of ~xd6 24.a4 c4 2S.axb5 axbS 26.
Black's queen may not lead im- E"(ael± Kosteniuk - Misiano, Biel
mediately to an obvious advan- 2003; it was also good for White
tage for White, but at least it to play 26.~e5!) 23.llJd4 (It is not
presents him with the initiative. easy to prove that White has the
19 ... ~c7 20.eS llJdS 21.llJe4! (It is advantage after the seemingly at-
not so good for White to follow tractive line: 23.a4 ~cS+! 24.'~f2
with 21.a4!? llJxc3 22.bxc3 ~c6 ItJd7! 25.axb5 axb5 26.l"l:a5 ~xf2+
23.axbS axbS 24J:l:a7llJd7 2S.~xb7 27.~xf2llJc7 28.llJf7 hf3 29.llJxh8
~xb7 26 ..te4 ~a6 27.~bl 'tIc7 28. llJxe5 30.llJg6 llJxg6 31.hg6 il.c6
l"l:xbS ~b8 29.~b7+ ~xb7 30 ..txb7 with a rather unclear endgame.
~xb7. The position arising after Instead of 23 ... ~cS+! it would be
this practically forced tactical in- dubious for Black to opt for 23 ...
troduction is with non-standard llJd7?! 24.axbS \Wb6+ 25.~f2 axb5
material ratio and is close to 26.\Wxb6 1tJ7xb6 and here not 27.
equality. Still, Black's king is very llJd4 llJe3 28J:~f7 ~d7, Osborne -
unsafe and White's play is much Josse, Coulsdon 2007, or 27.llJxb7
easier, so Black must be very cau- 'tIxb7 28.llJd4llJc7 29.il.e4+ llJbd5
tious. Later, in the game Akopian 30.~f7 It>b6, Yevseev - Filippov,
- Riazantsev, Dubai 2000, there Kazan 2001, but 27.il.e4! with the
followed 31.'tIg2 - 31.~a2!? - 31... very unpleasant threat for Black
l"l:f8 32.'tIh3 ~fS 33.g4 ~f8 34.rJig3 llJf3-d4. White is clearly better,
l"l:b6 3S.llJd2 ~b2 36.~e3 ~a8 37. for example: 27 ... llJa4 28.llJd4
~d3 ~aa2 38.~d6+ 'tId8 39.llJe4 llJc5 29.ihl, or 27 ... llJc8 28.lLlxb7
!'ig2+ 40.Wf3l"l:xh2 41.gS hxgS?! - - 28.lLlf7!? - 28 ... rJixb7 29.ltJd4
Black had to continue here with ghe8 30J~a5) 23 .. :~c5 24.~adl
41...~h3+ 42.rJig4 l"l:hl 43.~xe6 lLlb4 2S.ie4 ItJd3 (2S ... ~xeS 26.
hS+ 44.c;t;>f3 l'l:fl+ 4S.'tIg3 E"(gl= - lLlf7 \Wxe4 27.~xe4 he4 28.lLlxd8)
42.~xe6 ~ae2 43.~dS g4+ 44.'tIf4
!'ihS 4S.llJxcS gS+ 46.'tIxg4 ~h7
47.~g8+ 1-0) 21...'tIb8 22.llJd6

26.~e3!? (It seems very attrac-

tive for White to choose here 26.

76
 12.defe 13.1ic21i.d614.lt:Jg5liJj815f4 0-0-0 16. ~e2 h617.liJj3 ixj4
liJxb7 ~xd4+ 27.'i!lg2 ~d5 2S.liJa5,
but crushing Black would not be
so easy, for example: 2S ... 'i!lc7 29.
1i.xd3 cxd3 30.E:c1+ 'i!lb6 3l.E:c6+
'i!lxa5 32.~d2+ b4 33.E:f4+-; 31...
'i!la7 32.'~d2liJd7? 33. ~c7+-; 32 ...
~e4+ 33.'i!lglliJd7 34. ~f2+ ~d4
3S:l!*'xd4+ ~xd4 36.E:xe6 E:d5
37.liJc6+ 'i!lb7 3S.liJb4 E:xeS 39.
~d6 liJf6 40.liJxd3; 3S ... E:d4 39.
~f4 ~xf4 40.gxf4 liJc5 4l.E:d6 E:fS
42.liJxd3 liJxd3 43.E:xd3 ~xf4 44.
~d7 + 'i!lc6 4S.~xg7 'i!ld5 46.E:g6
~a4 47.a3 h5 4S.~h6 b4=) 26 ...
1i.xe4 27.~xe4 E:xd6. This is prob-
ably the best for Black. (He should
not hold on to the extra material,
since that may end up in a disas-
ter for him, for example: 27... E:d7
2S.E:t7 ~b6 29.~df1; 2S ... ~xt7 29.
liJxt7 ~gS 30.b3!; 29 ... ~h7 30.~fl
with very powerful initiative for
White; 2S ... ~dS 29.~xdS exd5
30.~df1 ~xt7 3l.liJxt7 E:gS 32.
liJc6+ 'i!lc7 33.liJe7; 31...~h7 32.
liJd6 .Q:hS 33.e6) 2S.exd6 e5 29.
l"1xd3 cxd3 30.'\Wxe5 liJd7 3l.Wxc5
liJxc5 32.~dU and the endgame is
preferable for White.
20.e5
20 .•• ~d5!
Black should refrain from the
passive line: 20 ... liJ6d7 2l.a4 (2l.
i.e4!? liJg6 22.a4 b4 23.i.xb7+
<.t>xb7 24.liJe4 liJgxe5 25.h3 Wh5
26.g4;t Jovanic - Pavasovic, Ri-
jeka 2005) 21...b4 22.liJe4 liJxe5
23.'l!*'e3 and White has compensa-
tion and powerful initiative.
2t.c~Je4 ~d7 22.~d6+ I!;>b8
It would be somewhat worse for
Black to continue here with 22 .. .
<t;c7 23.a4 liJf4 24."We3 liJd5 (24 .. .
.bf3!? 25 ..Q:xf3 liJd5 26.\&f2 ~hfS
27.liJt7t) 25.~d2 liJb4 26.liJxb7
wxb7 27.axbS axb5 2S.ibl ~hfS
29.~e3co
23.a4 ~f4 24:Be3
24 •••ht'3! (24 ... liJd5 25.~e4;
24 ... liJh3+?! 25.'i!lg2.) 25."Bxf4
(25.E:xf3? ltJd5) 25 ••• ghfB 26.
trxg4 ixg4 27. gxf8 gxf8 28.
axb5 with an approximately
equal endgame, for example:
28 •.• a5!? (2S ... ltJxe5!? 29.bxa6
@a7 30.ie4 ltJf3+ 3l.'i!lg2 ~dS
32.liJb5+ 'i!lb6 33.a7?? ~d2+; 33.
'i!if2 liJd2) 29.~a5 ~xe5 30.
ie4 <llc7 31.ga6 gd8 32.~b7
77
Chapter 8 The Meran Variation

B) 18.e5.brJ!
It would not be in the spirit of
the variation for Black to play 18 ...
hc1 19.9axc1 ltJdS 20.ltJe4 c;t>b8
21.a4 c4 22.ltJd6 ltJd7 23.axbS
%Yb6+ 24.~f2;!; Hahn - Krush, Se-
attle 2003.

him: 21...~b7 22.~e2! id4+ 23.

BI) 19.9xfJ
B2) 19.tfxfJ
BI) 19.!xfJ
This move became very popu-
lar and created great problems for
Black mostly due to several spec-
tacular wins by Alexander Shaba-
lov.
Indeed, Black must play very
carefully to avoid the worst, but in
general the forecast should not be
so bad for him ...
19•••.txe520.a4
(diagram)
20 ••• .rsg4!
It is also interesting for him
to opt for 20 ... b4!? 21.~xa6+
c;t>b8! This is the best for Black.
(The alternatives are worse for
'it>h1, Shabalov - Mulyar, Denver
2002; 21 ... 'it>d7 22.ltJbS ~c6 23.
~a7+ 'i!fe8 24.%Yxg7! gg8 2S.ltJc7+
~xc7 26.~xc7 ixc7 27J~~xf6 ieS
28JU3 and the endgame is very
favourable for White; it is possi-
ble, but not so clear after 24.ie3
c4 2S.gd1 gxd1 + 26.hd1 ltJ8d7
27.gf2 c;t>e7 28.if3 ltJdS 29.hdS
%YxdS! - Black should better avoid
29 ... exdS 30.~aS, since White's
initiative is dangerous, Akopian -
Khenkin, Bad Wiessee 2001 -
30.gd2 ib8!! 31.~aS %YeS 32.
~xb4+ c;t>e8 33.if2 ~xh2+ 34.c;t>f1
~h1+ 3S.c;t>e2 ~hS=) 22.ie3!?
(22J~xf6? gxf6 23.ie4 ~a7 24.
WlbS+ ~c8 2S.~c6+ Wlc7 26.~a6+
'it>d7 27.ltJbS hh2+ 28.c;t>h1 ~eS;
22.ltJbS ~b7 23.~aSltJ8d7)

78
 12.defe 13.~c2 ~d614JiJg5liJf815!4 0-0-0 16. '?!fe2 h617.liJj3 hf4

22 ... liJ8d7!? (22 ... bxc3? 23. 31.~xb4 ~c6 32.g3 ~a8=
bxc31xc3 24.~f4+-; 22 .. :~b7 23. 21.g3
'?!fe2! - 23.'?!fa5 liJ8d7 - 23 ... bxc3
24.bxc3 ffc6 25J~bl+ ~a7 26J3xf6
gxf6 27.~e4 'eic7 with a very dan-
gerous position for Black; 22 ...
gd6?! 23.'eib5+ ~b6 24.ffxc5±;
22 ...1xh2+ 23.~hl13d6 24.'eib5+
l3b6 25.ffxc5 'eixc5 26 ..ixc5 13c6
27.1xb4±; 23 ...~e5 24.~xf6 gxf6?
25.~e4; 24 ...13d6 25.'eib5+ 13b6
26.ffe8+ 'eic8 27.'eixc8+ ~xc8 28.
l3xf8+ - 28.liJd5!? - 28 ... l3xf8
29.liJb5;!;; 22 ...~d4? 23.1xd4 cxd4
24.~e4 liJxe4 25.liJxe4 liJd7 26. Only now Black must play
gb3+-; it is also good for White to 21 •••b4!
continue with 24.liJb5 fib7 25. It is obviously weaker for him
'l!ia5 liJ8d7 26.liJxd4 e5 27.~b3 to opt for 21...id4+, Shabalov
liJd5 28.~e4; 24 .. .'~c5 25.~d3 - AI Modiahki, Bermuda 2003,
liJ8d7 26.liJd6 'eib6 27.ffxb6+ 22.~g2.
liJxb6 28.liJf7±; 25 ... ~c8 26J3f2 22.1fxa6+ (22.liJe4 c4 23.
liJ8d7 27J3C2 ffb6 28.'eixb6+ gxf8? ~hxf8 24.'eixg4 ffc6-+)
liJxb6 29.liJxd4; 25 ... liJd5 26J~f7 22 .••tfb7
~b6 27.ffxb6+ liJxb6 28.a5) 23.
liJb5 'eib6 (23 ...fib7?! 24.'eixe6
ghe8 25.~f5) 24.'eixb6+ liJxb6 25.
1xc5 ~c8! 26.1xb6 ~xc2 27.~b3!?
13xb2 28J!xb21xb2 29.~bl.

Here, you can see the difference

The endgame seems to be
slightly preferable for White but
not more. 29 ... lt>b7 30.~e3 ~e5
between 20 ...b4 and 21...b4 - the
bishop on e5 is protected and the
move 23.1fe2 is not so strong as
before: 23 ••• bxc3 24.bxc3 J.d6,
freeing the important e5-square

79
Delpt.,. 8
for the knight. 25.gbl Va7. The
position is tremendously compli-
cuted and White's full compensa-
tion for the piece is not so easy
to prove: 26.c4!? (26.ie4 lLle5
27.:rm lLlfd7 2S.ie3 lLlb6) 26 •.•
~e5 27.gtb3 ~c6 (27 ... lLlfd7!?
28.ie4 :1'1.dfS).
B2) 19.ti'xf3 .he5 20.Va8+
<i!?d7 21.ti'xa6
21 ••• ixh2+
It would be interesting for
Black to test here 21...b4!? and
although this move presents the
initiative to his opponent, but
it preserves the b-pawn. White
maintains the initiative, but it is
not easy to prove his advantage,
for example: 22.lLlb5 (The game
is unclear after 22.lLle2 .!h2+
23.mhl ie5 24.a3, as wcll as fol-
lowing 22.lLle4 <tJe7 23.ie3 lLlxe4
24.ixe4 ixh2+25.<tJhl lLld7; it
is somewhat weaker for Black to
play 24 ...ixb2, Koneru - Zhu-
kova, Mallorca 2004) 22 .. .'~c6
23.:1'1.dl+ (23.'~a7+ <tJeS 24.i.f4
so
The Meran Variation
1I.f4 25.:1'1.f4 lLlSd7 26.ia4 ~b6
27J'~el <tJf7?! 28.~xb6 lLlxb6
29.ib3; 27... ~xa7 2S.lLlxa7 :1'1.aS
29.:1'1.e6+<tJdS with approximate
equality) 23 ... lLld5 24J;xd5+ exd5
25.if5+ lLle6 26.~a7+ <tJcS 27:~f7
<tJbS 2S.~a7+ (2S. ~xe6?! ~xe6
29.he6 l!hfS) 2S ... mc8 29.~f7=
22.q"hl <i!?e7
It is rather dubious for Black
to opt for 22 ... b4?! 23.lLlb5 ~e5
24.ia4 (24.~b7+?! meS) 24 ... ~h5
25.lLla7+ me7 (25 ... mc7? 26.~c6+
with a checkmate) 26.lLlc6+ <tJeS
27.lLlxd8 <tJxdS 2S:~d3+ id6+
29.~h3 with an advantage for
White.
23.~xb5
After 23.~xb5 ~e5 24.~e2,
Frolyanov - P.Smirnov, Khanty-
Mansiysk 200S, 24 ... .E1d4! 25J;f3
l"lh4 26 ..E1h3 l"lxh3 27.gxh3 ~xe2
2S.lLlxe2 ic7 - White has no com-
pensation for the pawn.
23.ie3!? ~e5 24.l"lf3
and now:
it is bad for Black to play 24 ...
lLlg4? 25.l"lafl!;
he should be reluctant to con-
tinue with 24 ... lLl8d7 25.l"lel!? (25.
lLlxb5!?; 25.i.g6!? b4 26.lLle4 .E1hf8
 12.defe 13.~c2 id614.liJgS fiJj81Sj4 0-0-016. ViJe2 h617.fiJ/J hf4

27J'~af1) 25 ... b4 26.fiJb5 ~g3 27. 2S.ltJa7! ViJh5 26.ltJc6+ ~d6 27.
hcS+ fiJxcS 28J~xe5 fiJxa6 29. .1d1 ViJh4.
:9.xg3 fiJe8 30.ib3 fiJac7 3Uk5
and White has a minimal advan-
tage in the endgame; after 25 ...
ViJd6!? 26.ViJxb5 ~b8, I managed to
equalize somehow, but I would
not recommend this variation to
Black. White has too many differ-
ent resources ... 27.ViJe2 (27.ViJf1!?
~xb2 28.ib3) 27 ... ~g3 (27 ... ~xb2
28 ..1c1!?) 28.:9.d1 VileS 29.i.g6!
(29 ..1b3 ~b4 30.he6 Vf!xe6 31.
:gxg3 'i!if7 32.~c2 ~g4 33.~xg4
ttJxg4 34.ViJe4 ttJxe3 35.'lWxe6+
'i!ixe6 36.~e1, draw, Graf - Dreev,
Groningen 1997) 29 ... ~b4 30.'lWd3
(30.a3? :9.h4+ 31.'i!ig1ih2+ 32.~f1
.1f4) and the game is very un-
clear;
24 ...b4! This is the best for
Black! 2S.fiJa4 (2S.fiJbS .1g3) 2S ...
fiJ8d7 with excellent prospects for
him.
23 ... Yfe5 24.eb7+

25 .• .filh5! (This is a very im-

24 ••. gd7!
This is the right decision!
White's idea triumphs if Black
plays routinely - 24 ... tD8d7?!
portant resource and Black's en-
tire defensive plan hinges on it.)
26.tef7+ mdS 27.tef2 g5 (The
game is rather unclear after 27...
fiJg3+ 28. mxh2ltJxf1 + 29.';t{gl fiJg3
30.i.e3). The position is compli-
cated, but Black's prospects are
not inferior, for example: 2S.gel
(28.a4 ltJg3+ 29.~xh2 fiJxf1+
30.wg1 tDh2) 28 .•. lLg3 29.gxe5
.txf2.

81
 The Modern System

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.~f3 ~f6 4.~c3 e6 5.e3 ~bd7

6.i.d3 dxc4 7..ixc4 b5 8.i.d3 b5 9.e4

White crosses the demarcation

line with the move 11.eS.

White accomplishes immedi-

ately the thematic pawn-advance
9.e4, occupying space in the cen-
tre and planning to push his e-
pawn even further.
Black must react to this with
utmost precision, because he has
no time at the moment for the
preparation of c6-c5, therefore he
should play 9 ••• b4 10.~a4 and
only then 10 ••• c5, after which
We will call this the Modern
system and the play in it is vel)' dy-
namic, for example after 11••• ~d5
12.0-0 cxd4 13.~xd4!? White
can sacrifice his pawn in eS and
this may lead to quite irrational
positions, in which evel)' move of
both sides may be invaluable.

82
Chapter 9 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tLlc3 tLlf6 4.tLlfJ e6
5.e3 tLlbd7 6 •.id3 dxc4 7•.lxc4 b5
8 •.id3 .ib7 9.e4 b4 lO.tLla4 c5 1l.e5
tLld5

there are some players trying this

line, but we will analyze the more
solid and natural move 12 ... ltJc5.
13.~xeS
Black should not fear 13 ..tbS+,
because of 13... ltJd7=
13 •••.AxCSI4.0-0
After 14..tb5+?! Wf8, it would
be senseless for White to deprive
his opponent of castling and you
will soon understand why after
12.dxcS you see our next comments.
It is a transposition of moves 14•••h6 IS.~d2
after IVtJXc5 ltJxcS 13.dxcS .b:cS. White can hardly improve his
It seems to me that the often position without this maneuver.
played move 12.ltJgS is not so
good, because of 12 ....te7 13.\1!Yh5
g6 14.\1!Yh6 cxd4! This simple
move was not analyzed properly
at the time. Now, after IS.Wlg7 l3f8
16.~xh7, Black seizes the initia-
tive with 16.. :~aS.
12 ••• ~xeS
The move 12 ...i.xcS has also
been tested in serious tourna-
ment practice, but I have never
played it. My hand was probably
reluctant to give up a bishop for
a knight: 13.ltJxc5 ltJxc5 and then A) 15.•• 0-0
after 14 ..tb5+ to leave the king in B) IS ••• ~c3
the centre of the board. I repeat, C) IS •• :ere7

83
Chapter 9
ls ... ttJe7?! 16.ttJe4 Wds? 17.
ibs+ Belozerov - Sutyrin, Novo-
sibirsk 199B.
ls ... ie7?! 16.ttJc4 0-0 17.Wg4
ttJe3 IB.ixe3 Wxd3 19 ..ixh6 Wh7
20.ie3± Yakovich - Shabalov,
Port Erin 2006.
The move Is ... liJf4 cannot be
refuted directly, but it presents
the initiative to White. 16.i.e4 .idS
(16 ...Wc7 17.Wf3 he4?! IB.ltJxe4
liJds 19.Wg3± Brynell - Mikkels-
en, Copenhagen 2006; 17... liJdS
IB.ltJb3 ib6 19.Wg3 fs 20.exf6
Wxg3 21.hxg3 gxf6= Sasikiran -
Van Wely, Venacu 2006; 17.'~g4!
gs 1B.hb7 Wxb7 19.1tJb3 .ib6
20.hf4 We4 2U;ae1 Wxf4 22.
Wxf4 gxf4 23 ..!3e4;!; Mamedyarov -
Smeets, ICC 2007) 17.Wf3ltJg61B.
ttJb3
IB ....ib6 (lB ... liJxes? 19.Wg3)
19.1:!dl liJxes 20. Wg3 (20.We2
f6) 20 ... ltJg6 (20 .. .'~f6 21.i.xdS
exds 22.gel 0-0 23.'~xe5 .bf2+
24.~f1 ixe1+ 25. Wxf6;!;) 21.hds!
(21.hg6 fxg6 22.'!Wxg6+ ~fB
23 ..ie3;!;) 21...exds 22 ..!3e1+ ~fB
23 ..id2 as 24.gac1 Wf6 2s.liJcst
and White has the initiative for a
pawn.
84
The Meran Variation
A) 15 ... 0-0
This is a serious and logical
move, but it has certain draw-
backs.
16./t)e4
It is not so promising for
White to opt for 16.liJc4?! fs!
(This move is even stronger than
a line, which equalizes for Black:
16... ttJe7 17.liJd6 hd6 18.exd6
liJds 19.Wg4 fS 20.Wg3 f4 21.Wg6
Wxd6 22.Wh7+ ~f7, draw, Ya-
kovich - Sorokin, Podolsk 1989.)
17.exf6 ttJxf6, threatening 18...
~ds. White fails to complete his
development harmoniously and
to exploit the weakness of the
e6-pawn. Black is already bet-
ter, for example: 18 ..ie2 (18.'&e2
Wds 19.1tJe3 .ixe3 20.fxe3 liJe4)
18 .. .'o!ffc7!? (18 .. :~xdl19J':!xdlliJe4
20.i.e3 i.xe3 21.fxe3= Prudniko-
va - Shumiakina, Podolsk 1990;
1B ... ttJe4!? 19.WxdB .!3axd8 20 ..ie3
he3 21.ttJxe3 1"1.d2; 21.fxe3 .!3xfl't)
19 ..ie3 gad8 20.Wb3liJds 21.i.xcS
'lWxcS 22.g3 .!3f6!?+
16••• Ad4
Of course not 16... ie7?!, which
 1O.liJa4 c5l1.e5 tiJdS 12.dxc5 tiJxc513.tiJxc5 hc514.0-0 h615.tiJd2
gives up completely the initia-
tive to White. 17.'~·g4 V!fc7 (17.. .fS
lS.exf6 lLlxf6 19.'~g6i; 17.. .'~hS?!
lS.V!fh3±) lS.lLld6 .ixd6 19.exd6
V!fxd6 20 ..b:h6 V!feS 2U3ael!?
(21.b3!?;!;) 21...'~xb2 22.V!fg3 Y;Vf6
23 ..igS V!fc3 24J;eS! f6 2S..ih6
Y!!c7 26.Y!!g6± Seres - Volodin,
Budapest 1996.
17.~d6
At) 17••• .Ac6
A2) 17•••.beS!?
At) 17•••.Ac6
This move is played much
more often than 17....ixeS, but it
leads to an edge for White.
18 •.Ah7+
With this exchange White re-
duces the pressure against the
pawn on eS and hopes that his
active knight and his space ad-
vantage will guarantee for him a
certain positional edge.
IS.Y;Ve2 - After this rarely
played but quite logical move,
Black has two interesting possi-
bilities. We will analyze them:
18 ... Y!!h4!? 19.93 Y;Vh3 20.Y;Ve4
g6 21..tbS .ixbS 22.iDxbS ic5 23.
id2 gab8 24.lLld4 (24.tiJd6 l3fdS=)
24 .. J3bcS=. It also deserves atten-
tion for him to try 20 ... fS!? 21.exf6
(White avoids the beautiful, but
simple trap: 21.Y;Vxd4?? Y;Vg2+
22.'~xg2 tiJf4+ 23.@gl tiJh3#) 21 ...
gxf6 (21...lLlxf6? 22.Y;Vxc6lLlg4 23.
Y!!g2+-) 22.~e3 tiJxe3 23.Y;Vxc6
tiJxf124.Y!!xa8+ gfS 2S ..ih7+ 'it>xh7
26.'efe4+ 'i!ig8 27J~xfl eS=
The other move for Black IS ...
fS!?, enables his to take control
over the important e4-square
for maneuvers and to ensure
the safety of his king. White can
counter that with 19.9dl, creating
the threat 20 ..ifS.
19... ic5!? This is the most
logical response for Black. He re-
moves his bishop from the attack
and is threatening his opponent's
knight in the process. (19 ...V!fb6!?;
here 19 .. .'8'h4 is not so strong
any more. 20.a3?! tiJf4! 21.hf4
i'lxf4+; 20.ic4!? ib6 21..ie3 he3
22.fxe3;!;; it cannot be recom-
mended to Black to continue with
19... Y;Ve7?!, since White should not
play 20 ..ixf5?! ib6 21.V!fc2 ib7
with a very dangerous position for
85
Chapter 9
him, but 20.,ia6! ,ib6?! 21.,id2
~ad8 22.~ac1 .ia8 23.l!flc8!?±;
20 ...,ic5 21.,id2! Now, it is bad
for Black to choose 21.. ..ixd6?!
22.exd6 ~xd6? 23 ..ixb4!±, or
22 .. :~d7 23J;ac1 i!ad8 24 ..ic4±
and if 24 ... ~xd6?, then White
has the resource 25 ..ixb4!+-,
while following 21.. ..ia4 22.b3
id7 23.,ib7 i!ab8 24.hd5 exd5
25.'Wf3! ,ie6 (25 ...~xe5? 26 ..if4
~e6 27.~e1+-) 26.~ac1,ib6 (26 ...
hd6?! 27.exd6 'Wxd6 28.,if4+-)
27.,ie3 .ixe3 28.fxe3!± White has
a clear advantage thanks to his
powerful knight on d6, Korchnoi
- M.Gurevich, Antwerp 1993).
White is faced with a choice
now - whether to sacrifice a
pawn for the control over the
dark squares and the two-bish-
op advantage, or to retreat with
his knight, but in both cases he
can hardly claim any advantage.
20 ..ic4 (following 20.~c4 ~c8
21 ..id2 'We7 22J;acl gfd8, Black
has no problems to say the least)
20 ....ixd6 21.exd6 ~xd6 22.b3
gad8 23 ..ib2 ~f4 24. 'We5 ~xe5
25 ..ixe5 ~xdl + 26.~xdl ~d5=
Black has an extra pawn in this
86
The Meran Variation
endgame, but after White trades
his bishop for Black's knight, the
position is naturally quite draw-
ish.
18••• \tlxh719.Yfxd4 f6
Black begins to undermine
the position of the enemy knight,
since it would not be easy for him
to put up with it for long, for ex-
ample: 19... 'Wb6 20.\"t'e4+ c,!;>h8
21.,id2 a5 22.'Wh4 ~d8 23.'WhS
c,!;>g8 24J~fc1 ,ie8 25.~g4± Le
Quang - D.Pedersen, Budapest
2005.
20 •.td2
Black has no reasons to be
afraid of 20.a3 fxe5 21.'We4+ 'i!;lg8
22.'Wxe5 'Wf6= Bareev - Kramnik,
Dortmund 1995.
20 •••fxeS
20 ...'Wd7 21.~acl a5?! (21 ...
fxe5 22.W1e4+ c,!;>g8 23.\"t'xe5, leads
to the variation 21...fxe5 22.~eS
'Wd7 23.~acl) 22.'Wd3+ fS (22 ...
c,!;>h8 23.'Wc2!?±; 23.~fel!? fxeS
24.~c4±) 23Jk5 ~e7 24.i!fcl±
Mamedyarov - Topalov, Hoog-
eveen 2006.
21.1&"e4+!
 1O.tiJa4 c511.e5liJd512.dxc5liJxc513.liJxc5 hc514.0-0 h615.liJcl2
The idea behind this interme-
diate move will become clear a bit
later.
If White plays immediately
21.~xe5, then after 21..:~d7 (21 ...
~f6?! 22:~xf6 gxf6 23J~ac1 .Ad7
24.gfel± Sasikiran - Ippolito,
Hampstead 1995) 22.gae1 (22.
~fe1? gadS 23.liJe4 !!f5 24.~d4
liJf4:j: Lesiege - Akopian, Bled
2002) 22 ... gadS 23.liJc4 gf5 24.
~g3 liJf600 the game will be very
unclear. Here, you can see the dif-
ference in the position of Black's
king, we have mentioned before.
It is better placed on h7, since
with a king on gS, White will have
the resource 25 ..th6!
21 ••• Wg8 22.'ffxe5 Bd7
22 ... ~f6 23.~xf6 gxf6 24.
gacl±
23.gac1
It would not be so good for
White to follow with the natu-
ralline: 23.gfe1 gadS! 24.~xe6+
(24.liJc4?! liJb6! 25.liJxb6 ~xd2
26.~xe6+ whS 27.~xc6 ~xf2+
2S.whl axb6+ Radjabov - Shirov,
Sarajev02003;24.liJe4~f725.~g3
wh7 26.gacl±; 24 .. J3f5 25.~d4?!
liJf4!:j: Milov - P.Nielsen, Istan-
bul 2003; 25.~g3 liJf6! 26.liJxf6+
gxf6 27.hb4 Wh7! 28.~c3 ~g6,
Tukmakov - Dreev, Odessa 19S9,
29.f3 hf3! 30.~xf3 ~d4+ 31.wh1
~xb4=) 24 ... ~xe6 25.~xe6 liJf4!
(I think that GM Kasimdzhanov's
recommendation is a bit weaker -
25 ... liJc7!? 26.~e7? ~xd6 27.hb4
~g6-+; 26.~g6 wh7 27.~g4 ~xd6
2S.hb4 ~fdS 29.hd6 ~xd6
30.h4t) 26.hf4 gxf4 27.f3 .Ad5
2S.~eS+ ~xeS 29.liJxeS ~c4~
It would be too slow for White
to opt for 23.b3 ~adS 24.liJc4 ~f5
25.~e1 .Ab5 26.f4 liJb6 27.hb4
liJxc4 2S.bxc4 hc4 29.~f2 ~d5
30.h3 gd1 31.gxd1 ~xdl 32.Yfxd1
gxd1= Mikhalchishin - Maksi-
menko, Murska Sobota 2006.
23 ••• gad8 24.~c4
Now, after the principled line:
24••• gfS (The alternatives for
Black lead to inferior positions for
him, because of his compromised
pawn-structure, for example: 24 ...
liJb6? 2S ..ixb4ltJxc4 26.l3xc4 YfdS
27.~xd5 hd5 2S.gc3± Bruzon
S7
Chapter 9
Bautista - Dominguez, Havana
2004; 24 ...ibS 2S.b3 as 26J~fel
~f6 27.~g3 - 27.f3!? - 27...!iJe7
2B.if4 ~g6 29.~h3 lLldS 30.ieS:t
Vaganian - Klimov, Togliatti
2003;24 ...iaB2S.~g3~f626.lLleS
~eB 27.~c4 as 2B.~g4 'WfB
29.~h4!± and Black has no ade-
quate defence against the threats
igS and ih6; 29.~d4? lLlf4 30.
~4 ~xd2= Vaganian - L.Johan-
nessen, Gennany 2003) 25.Vg3
~f6 and here it is very strong for
White to continue with 26 •.ixh6!
~e4 27.Vg4 ~f6 28. Vg6 'l'e7
29.ig5 .le8 30 •.lxf6 Vxf6 31.
Vxf6 gxf6 32.~fdl± Gelfand -
Aronian, Moscow 2009.
A2) 17•••,be5!?
This move was played regular-
ly by GM Alexey Shirov, but lately
it went out of fashion mostly be-
cause of its wrong evaluation by
the majority of the commenta-
tors. I think it is better for Black
than 17...ic6.
18.~xb7 'ffb6
But not IB ...~c7?, in view
B8
The Meran Variation
of 19.ia6 'lffb6 20.~e2 if6 21.
~bS+-
19.fi'h5!
Black defends successfully
after 19.'We2 if6! (19 ... id4? 20.
lLlaS! ~xaS 21.'We4+-) 20.'We4
~fc8 21.if4! (21.a3?! 'Wxb7 22.
axb4 'Wxb4 23.~7+ It>fB 24.
fua7?! (24.ie4!?) 24 ... ~xa7 25.
~h8+ rJJe7 26.~xc8 ~c7 27.~a8
ixb2 2B.ixb2 'lffxb2 with an extra
pawn for him, Ljubojevic - Shi-
rov, Leon 200B) 21...1L1xf4 (White's
knight is untouchable: 21 ... 'Wxb7?
22.~h7+ rJJfB 23.id6 rJJeB 24.
'WgB+ ~d7 2S.~xf7+-) 22.~xf4
~xb7 23.ie4 'WbB 24.'Wf3 ixb2
2S.~abl ic3 26.~fdl as 27.~d7
if6 with approximate equality.
19 •••.ld4!
This looks like the best move
for Black. See for yourselves:
19 ...if4?! 20.lLlc5! (but not
20 ..!LlaS? ixc121 ..!Llc4 'Wd4 22. ~dl
ixb2 23 ..th7+ rJJxh7 24.fud4
ixd4+) 20 ...~xc5 21.ixf4 'Wd4
22.id6 'Wxd3 (22 ... ~fdB 23.
~adl+-) 23 ..hfB ~xf8 24.~eS±
Bareev - Shirov, Linares 1994;
 IO.liJa4 cS n.eS tiJd512.dxcS tiJxcS 13.tiJxcS hcS 14.0-0 h615.tiJd2
19 ... ~c7?! 20.~e1!? (but not im-
mediately 20.hh6?! gxh6 21.
~xh6 f5 and Black still holds)
20 ... ~xb7?! 21.hh6+-; 19 ...~f6
20.hh6 ~fc8 21.~e3! ~xb7 (21...
tiJxe3 22.ti'h7+ wf8 23.fxe3 ti'xb7
24.~e4+-) 22.ti'h7+ wf8 23.~e4±
20.fth4N
20.~g4 f5!? 21.ti'e2 'i:t>h8=i=
20.J.xh6 gxh6 21.ti'xh6 f5 22.
gael gae8 23. ~g6+ ~g7 24. ~c4
tiJc7! 25.tiJd8 ~f6 26.gxe6 gexe6
27.~h5 'i:t>f8~
20.\Wf3?! and in this position
in the game Tkachiev - J.Pinter,
Pula 1999 the opponents agreed
to a draw, but Black should have
continued the game with 20 ...
gtb8! 21.hh6 hb2 22.gab1
1c3. He regains unavoidably his
piece and White will hardly prove
that he has compensation for the
pawn.
20 ••• M6!?
Here, the move 20 ...!!tb8??
would not work, because of 21.
li.:Id6 ~f6 22.~g3.
It seems too dangerous for
Black to play 20 ... e5 21. ~g3 ti'xb7
(or 21...f5 22.~c4 ~xb7 23.ixh6;
21...'i:t>h8!? 22.ti'h3!) 22.J.xh6 f5
23.1c4t
21.fte4 ife8 22.trh7+ c;W'8
23 •.le4 ftxb7 24.idl
It would not be so risky for
White, as it may look at first sight,
to try 24.M4 'i:t>e7 25.ixd5 ti'xd5
26.gfd1, because of 26 ...~f5! 27.
~d6+ 'i:t>d7 28.hb4+ 'i:t>c6 with
approximate equality.
24••. ie4!?
24 ... 'i:t>e7? 25.hd5 exd5 26.
ge1+-
25 •.lxd5 exdS 26.iel
26 ..le3?! ixb2 27J::tel f5!+
26 ••• ie4 27.J.e3
Black should not be afraid of
27..1f4 id8 with about equal posi-
tion.
27••• ie828.iadl
White has sufficient compen-
sation for the sacrificed pawn,
but he can hardly brag about any-
thing more than that. 28 ••• cbe7
(it would be interesting for Black
to try the double-edged line:
28 ... ~e6!? 29.~c1 g5! 30.~xh6+
<bg8) 29.BfS cbf8 30.ixd5 ie6
89
Chapter 9
31.gedl 'i!?g8 32.b3 .a6 with
approximate equality. So, the
question remains whether White
has in this variation anything real.
Only future tournament practice
can clarify this dilemma.
B) 15••• ~c3
This spectacular move used to
be considered as dubious, but GM
Boris Gelfand tried to rehabilitate
it. Let us try to see its consequenc-
es in details.
16.•c2
16.bxc3? ~xd3 17.cxb4 ~dS
(Black can also play here 17...
id4!?) 18.ltJf3 ~xd119J!Xd1.ixb4
20J!b1 aSi 21.a3?! .ie4! Solymosi
- E.Kovacs, Hungary 2001.
16••••d5 17.~f3 gd8
17... 0-0-0? 18.ltJe1+- Limon-
taite - Sanchez Castillo, Reykja-
vik 2008.
18.~el!
This is the key-move for
White's concept. He has pro-
tected his bishop and waits to see
what Black intends to do with his
knight.
90
The Meran Variation
The position is completely
equal after 18.bxc3 ~xd319.~xd3
.!!xd3 20.cxb4 hb4 (20 ....ib6
21..ie3 he3 22.fxe3 .!!xe3 23 ..!!ac1
.!!d3 24J:k7 .!!d7 2S ..!!fc1=) 21..!!b1
as 22.a3 .ixf3 23.axb4 .ie2 24J3e1
axb4=
18....id4!
Black has an only move here,
but it is good enough.
Of course not 18 ... ltJe4? 19.
he4 ~xe4 20. ~xc5.
19•.td2
19.bxc3? .ixc3+
19••• ~b5!
The other retreat of the knight
is obviously weaker: 19 ... ltJe4?!
20.hb4 heS 21J3d1 id4 (21 ...
ltJgS? 22.a4!+- and now White is
threatening ibS. 22 ... iDh3+ 23.
~h1 a6 24.ha6 ~xd1 2s.ibS+
1-0 Vaganian - Bergez, Belgium
2002) 22.~e2± Dautov - Dreev,
Tbilisi 1989.
20 ..txb4
This is the main line for
White.
It may be also interesting for
him to opt for 20.ltJf3!? and after
 10 JiJa4 cS n.eS ltJd512.dxcS ltJxcS 13.ltJxcS i.xcS 14.0-0 h615.ltJd2
20 ....ib6! 21..ic4, Black has two
possibilities. They lead to entirely
different positions, but they are
both acceptable.
1) 21..:~c6 22.hh4 ltJd4 23.
~c3ltJxf3+ 24.gxf31'!d4! (It would
be too risky for Black to choose
here 24 ....id4 25.~b3 he5 26.
1'!felt) 25 ..ie2 1'!g4+ 26.~hl ~xc3
27.bxc3 (27.hc3 1'!g5~) 27 ... 1'!f4
28.lt>g2 !lg4+ 29.~h31'!g5oo
2) 21..:~~·c5!? 22 ..ie3 ~c6 23.
~e2 ltJc7 24.!lacl he3 25.fxe3
(25.~xe3 ~b6 26.~xb6 axb6 27.
.ib3 ltJa6=) 25 ... 0-0 26 ..id3 ~b6
27.ltJd2 .ia6 (27... ltJd5!? 28.ltJc4
~c5) 28.ha6 and the opponents
agreed to a draw in the game
Mamedyarov - Gelfand, Moscow
2006.
20 ••• .ixe5!
The position is very complicat-
ed. On one hand White prevents
his opponent from castling, on
the other hand that is compen-
sated by the awkward placement
of his knight. The play is rather
concrete, so we have to analyze
the eventual developments.
In the famous game in which
this variation was played for the
first time, Black did not follow
the right path - 20 ... .ib6?! and
after 21.~c4! ltJd4 22.~xd5 fud5
23 ..id6 ltJf5 24 ..ic4 1'!d4 25 ..ib5+
~d8 26 ..ia3 1'!d5 27..ic4 fue5
28.ltJd3 1'!e4 29.!lfdl @c7 30.1'!ac1
~b8 31.ltJc5, his position became
terribly difficult and he lost, Polu-
gaevsky - Mecking, Manila 1975; it
is also bad for Black to opt for 20 ...
~xe5?! 21.!ldl (but not 21.ltJf3?!
.ixf3 22.gxf3 ltJd6 23.~c6+ ~e7
24.1'!ael %Vg5+ 25.*hl ~f4 and
Black is not worse 26.1'!e4? ~xf3+
27.*gl ~xd3 28.~c7+ ~e8 29.
~c6+ <;!?fB 30..txd6+ <;!?g8-+ Mo-
rais - Sandstroem, ICCF 1997)
21. .. ltJd6 22.~a4±
2Uic1
The variation 21:~a4 a6 22.
1'!clid6, transposes to the main
line (21.1'!c1 id6 22.~a4 a6).
21.!ldl!? ltJd4 22.%Va4+ (22.
~c5 ltJc6=) 22 ... ~c6 (22 ... 1'!d7?!
23:~'xa7±) 23.~xa7 ~c7oo
21.ic4 ltJd4! This is an impor-
tant resource for Black! He solves
his problems in all the variations
(21. .. ~c6?! 22.~e2±) 22.~a4+
(22:~d3 ~c6 23.<;!?hl ~b6 24 ..ia3
id6'+ Miannik - Najvelt, corr.
1989; 22.hd5 ltJxc2 23.hb7
ltJxb4+Taylor - 0' Donnell, Wind-
sor 1989) 22 ... ~c6 23.Wlxc6+ (23.
~xa7? ~xc4 24.~xb7 id6 25.
hd6 ltJe2+ 26.~hl ltJg3+ 27.
hxg3 ~xfl+ 28.~h2 1'!xd6+) 23 ...
ltJxc6 24.i.a3 i.d6+
21 ....id6!?
91
Chapter 9
21...a6!?
22.'§'a4
It is again a transposition of
moves after 22 ..bd6 rucd6 23.~a4
(23.hb5+?! ~xb5+ Nigamet-
zianov - Kmet, Dagomys 2004)
23 ... a6.
22 ... a6 23.hd6 gxd6 24.
gc4!
White is threatening 25 ..ie4.
Black should not be afraid
of 24.~b4 0-0 (24 .. J!d7 2SJk5
~d4 26Jk4 ~d6+ Shalimov - Su-
mets, Kharkov 1999) 2SJ:!cS ~d4
26..Ek4 ~b6 27.a4 ttla7+ Magerra-
mov - Bagirov, USSR 1976.
24 ... '9'e5!= (but not 24 ...f5?
25.Ek7 Ei:d7 26 ..ic4 ~d6 27.rucd7
~xd7 28.ttld3±; White should also
consider here 2S ..ie2!? Ei:c6 26.b3
~d7 27.ttld3 Seres - Ceteras, Gyor
1991) 25.fi'b4 gd7 26.~f3 'Bd6
27.'9'xd6 ~xd6=
I believe that there will be nu-
merous new efforts to analyze the
variation with lS ... ttlc3 extensive-
ly, but at this moment Black man-
ages to solve all the opening prob-
lems.
92
The Meran Variation
C) 15 .••'Bc7
The idea of this move, attack-
ing the eS-pawn, is to postpone
castling with Black for some time,
since White will create a powerful
attack after that. Moreover that
Black can bring his king to safety
by "an artificial castling" with g6,
@e8-f8-g7. This might seem a bit
slow, but White cannot organize
an attack on the kingside so easy
after that.
We have already seen how
dangerous White's attack can
be after the immediate 1S ... 0-0
16.ltJe4 !i.e7 17.~g4.
16J'iel
He protects at the moment his
eS-pawn and leaves different pos-
sibilities for the deployment of his
knight, preparing in addition ~g4.
16.ttlb3 .ib6! (it is worse for
Black to opt for 16 ...!i.e7 17.\'~~e2
Ei:d818.!i.d2 ~b619.Ei:acH Milov-
Borovikov, Lausanne 2003) with
the idea to follow with 17J:!e1 0-0
18.~g4 f5+
16.ttle4 (Black is already well-
prepared for this move.) 16 ....ie7
 10 JiJa4 c511.e5 CiJdS 12.dxc5 CiJxc513.CiJxc5 hc514.0-0 h615.CiJd2
(Now, White must worry about his
e5-pawn and this impedes the de-
velopment of his initiative.) 17.1"lel
(Black should not fear 17.iLb5+
@fS lS.ed4 a6 19.iLe2 !!dS; IS.
!!e1 exe5 19.CiJc5 ec7 20.CiJxb7
~xb7 21.ee2 g6) 17... exe51S.CiJc5
(18.CiJg5?! ed6 19.eh5 O-O! and
White's attack turns out to be an
illusion; of course not 19 ...hg5?!
20.hg5 @f8 2U~ad1 and White
has compensation for the pawn,
Le Roux - Sumets, Cappelle la
Grande 2010) lS ... ec7 19.CiJxb7
~xb7 20.ef3 j.f6 21.a3 0-0 22.
~e4 g6=F Aleksandrov - Skudnov,
Podolsk 1990.
16.CiJc4
and now:
after 16 ... CiJb617.CiJa5 (17.CiJxb6
axb618.1"le1 0-0-0 19.'ltfb3oo Kon-
nyu - Stohl, Hungary 2005; IS ...
@e7! with the idea !!hS-d8 and
eventually @e7-f8, for example:
19.eg4 E:hd8 20 ..ifl @f8+) 17...
.id5 IS.CiJb3 and Black still has
some problems to solve, for exam-
ple: 18 ... iLe7 (18 ...,bb3 19.axb3
0-0 20.ee2 E:fdS 21.ee4) 19 ..if4;
16... 0-0-0!? - this move is
not necessary right now, but still,
it deserves attention. 17.ee2 'i!lb8
18.id2 CiJb6 19.CiJa5 'ltfd7 20 ..te3
(20.iLe4? iLxe4? 21.exe4 ed5=
Staniszewski - Matlak, Bielsko
Biala 1985; 20 ... exd2 21.'ltfxd2
E:xd2 22.CiJxb7 E:cS+) 20 ...,be3
21.i.b5 ed2 22.fxe3 exe2 23.he2
E:hf8 with approximate equality;
16 ... 0-0. With a knight on c4,
Black can afford natural castling
and not "an artificial one", be-
cause after the standard reaction
by White 17.eg4 (17 ..id2 CiJb6!?)
it is very strong for Black to fol-
low with 17... f5 1S.exf6 E:xf6 and
he seizes the initiative, because
White's knight is totally misplaced
after the opening of the f-file .
16 ••• 1!d8
Black, in his stead, finds a
useful move not determining his
plans yet.
Castling for him seems a bit
premature, for example: 16 ... 0-0
17.CiJe4 (but not 17.eg4, because
of 17... f5! 1S.exf6 CiJxf6 19.'l!fxe6+
@h8) 17....ie7 1S.CiJg3 !!ad8 19.
eg4i and White has powerful ini-
tiative.
93
Chapter 9
The move 16 ... ltle7 is interest-
ing and I have played it once with
success, but I will not recommend
it to you. White has an only argu-
ment against it, but it is very pow-
erful: 17.ltle4! Here it is! He sacri-
fices a pawn for initiative, because
if he does not do that, then Black
obtains a very comfortable posi-
tion, since the maneuver ltld5-e7
is an integral part of his plans. (17.
Wg4?! EldB! 1B ..ie4 Wb6 19.Wf3
.idS 20.hd5 Elxd5 2l.ltlc4 Wa6
22.b3 0-0 23.1e3 ixe3 24.~xe3
ltlf5 25. We2 ElfdB+ Kuzmin -
Dreev, St Petersburg 2004; lB.
Wg3 0-0 19.1tlb3 ltlg6?! 20.ixg6
fxg6 2l.ltlxeS 'fixeS 22.1xh6!±;
19 ... mhB 20 ..ig5! .ib6 21.Elac1
'fid7 22.ltlc5 ixeS 23.fu:eS;!;; lB ...
a519.ltlc4 Eld4! 20.ltld6+ hd6 21.
i.b5+ i.c6 22.exd6 'fixd6+; 20.b3
h5! 21.ltld6+ ixd6 22.i.b5+ .ic6
23.exd6 'fixd6 24 ..ib2 ~xg3 25.
hxg3 Eld5 26.,ixc6+ ltlxc6 27.hg7
!%gB=) 17... 'fixe5 1B.i.e3! ,ixe3
(18. ..,ixe4 19.,ixe4 'fixe4 20.,ixc5
'fic6 2l.ixb4±) 19.1tld6+ mfB 20.
lilxb7 'fid5 2Uhe3. Here, in the
game Sundararajan - Fridman,
Pardubice 2005, the opponents
agreed to a draw a bit premature-
ly. White could and should have
continued the game: 21...'t&xb7
22.i.e4 ltld5 23.,ixd5!? ~xd5 24.
!%d3 ~g5 25.Elc1t with powerful
initiative for the pawn.
(diagram)
17.~e4
17.~g4!?
This is a quite appro-
priate move for White and Black
94
The Meran Variation
can react to it in different ways:
17... ltle7 1B.~g3 g6!? - his
prospects are not inferior (It is
weaker for Black to opt here for
1B ... 0-0 19.1tlb3 ~hB 20..1g5! 1b6
21.E1ac1 ~d7 22.ltlc5 hc5 23.fu~);
17 ... ~fB - White has not decid-
ed yet the future of his knight and
Black should not be in a hurry to
castle artificially. He has enough
resources even then however, for
example: 1B.ltlb3 i.e7 19.1d2 g6
20.lt:Jd4 (20.Elac1 'fib6) with some
initiative for White, although
even then after 20 ... g5!? the posi-
tion remains unclear. The move
17... ltle7 seems both more reliable
and stronger.
It is also interesting for Black
to choose the provocative move
17... 0-0!? 1B.ltle4 (lB.lbb3 fS 19.
~g6? ixf2+! 20.<;i]xf2 ~b6+ 2l.
\t>e2ltle7 22.Wg3 f4 and his attack
is victorious, for example: 23.,ixf4
Elxd3 24.mxd3 ltlfS 2S.'t&h3 EldB+
26.mc2 .ie4+ 27.Elxe4 ~c6+ 2B.
ltleS WfxeS+ 29.mb3 ~dS+; 19.'t&g3
mhB 20.ltlxc5 ~xcS and Black has
nothing to worry about) IB ...WxeS
19.1xh6 .id4 20.4.'JcS ltJe3 (20 ...
 10.ti:Ju4 c511.e5lDd512.dxc5lUxc513.lUxc5 hcS14.0-0 h615.lUd2
'flff6!? 21.lUxb7 .hf2+ 22.'.!fh1 'IMIxh6
23.lUxdB. The endgame is a bit
more pleasant for White after 23 ...
he1 24.lUxt7 gxt7 2SJ!xe1 'flfd2
26.~e2 V!fxe2 27.he2 '.!ff8 2B.g3;
26JI~e4!? ~f6 27.h3; 23 .. J!xdB
24.~e2 1i.b6 2S.~f3 lUe3 26.1i.e4
g6 and Black's compensation for
the exchange should be sufficient.
Still, he has given up material and
must play very precisely; other-
wise, the material deficit may be-
come decisive.) 21.,he3 ,hcS 22.
gad1 (22.hc5 ~xc5 23J!ad1
1:!dS=) 22 ...he3 23J!xe3 ~xb2
24 ..th7+ (24.~h4fS!) 24 ... whB.1t
looks like this storm may subside
to a draw soon. 2SJ%h3 (2S.~d3
g6; 2SJ'!b1 ~kB! 26J'!ee1 ~d2) 2S ...
1:!xd1+ 26.Wxd1 gcB 27.i.e4+ \!1g8
2B ..ih7+ ~hB; it is again complete
equality after 2B ... ~fB 29.~d6+
\!leB 30 ..tc2 (30.i.d3?! ~c1+ 31.
ifl g6=F - Black's queen joins in
the defence quite effectively.) 30 ...
Wa1+ 31.1i.d1 g6 32.ghB+ ~xhB
33.h4+ 1i.c6 34 ..txc6+ gxc6 3S.
V4'xc6+ We7 36.'~cS+ Wf6=
17.•. .Ae718.~g3
It is not good for White to
choose 1B.Wg4? yt[xeS19.1i.d2 0-0
(this is even stronger for Black
than 19 ... i>fB 20.lUcSlDf6 21.gxeS
lUxg4 22.lDxb7 gxd3=F Chabanon
- S.Savchenko, Cannes 2000)
20.hh6 ~xb2 21.'~g3 fS 22.gab1
yt[d4 23.lDgS ~f4 and he is nearly
winning.
White practically gives up
the fight for the advantage after
1BJ1~'a4+ .ic6 19..ibS .ad7 (Black
has no problems at all after 19 ...
hbS 20.'~'xbS+ ~d7) 20.i.d2
0-0 21.,hd7 gxd7 22 ..!!ac1 ~b7
23.'ffb3 IkB Radjabov - Vallejo
Pons, Linares 2003.
18 •••g6
It is also good for him to con-
tinue with 1B ... lDc3!? 19JWc2 (19.
bxc3 vnxc3) 19.. .'?;Yc6 (19 ...vnd7!?
20 ..AflltJdS) 20.1i.fllDa4.
19•.Ad2 ~f8 20.'Be2 ~g7
2Ulac1ti'b6 22.gedl
22 ..Ac4 vnd4 23.1i.b3lUc3! (23 ...
hS 24J~ed1 ~b6, draw, Epishin
- Dreev, Tilburg 1994) 24.hc3
bxc3 2S.gxc3 ~b6~ with excellent
compensation for the pawn.
22 .•• aS 23.h3 a4
Black has a very good game
here and after White's principled
reply 24 •.tbS? he has the counter
argument 24••• .tgS! and he seizes
the initiative altogether. 2S.ha4
~f4 26 •.Axf4 .Axf4 27.gc4
hg3-+ 28.gg4 'BaS 29. ~d8
gxd8 30 •.AbS 1rxbS 31.'BxbS
gdl+ 32.1rfl .Ah2+ 33.~xh2
gxf134.~b4 AdS 0-1 Sashikiran
- Dreev, Linares 1999.
9S
Chapter 10 l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tLlc3 tLlf6 4.tLlf3 e6
5.e3 tLlbd7 6.J.d3 dxc4 7.J.xc4 b5
8.J.d3 J.b7 9.e4 b4 10 .tLla4 c5 1l.e5
tLld5 12.0-0 cxd413.tLlxd4

i.e7 14.ttJd4 0-0 lS.~g4, which I

This is a principled pawn-sac-
rifice and it leads to a complicated
tactical fight, which is of a semi-
forced character. Tournament
practice and the subsequent anal-
yses show that Black should not
be afraid of this sacrifice, but only
if he knows quite well all the nu-
ances of this variation; otherwise,
he would hardly manage to find
the right path over the board ...
13 ... ~xe5
He is not obliged to accept
the pawn-sacrifice, but after 13...
i.e714J~el (but not 14.~g4? lLlxeS
lS.\1llJxg7 i.f6 16.i.bS+ me7 17.~h6
:Bg8 - Black is threatening 18...
lLlf4 18.f3 a6 19.i.e2 ~aS 20.b3
ttJg4) 14 ... 0-0 lS.~g4, the game
transposes to the variation 13J~el
do not recommend to Black and
he should better avoid it.
14..lb5+ ~d7 15.gel
FollowinglS.ttJc6?~c716.~d5,
Black can accept the queen-sacri-
fice, because White does not have
full compensation for it. I would
recommend to players with Black
who are more r.alltiollS the line:
16...i.d6 17.l!el 0-0 18.~c4 gfcB
with an excellent game for him,
Christiansen - Bareev, Bie11991.
It is not good for White to opt
for IS.~hS?! ttJSf6 16.lLlxe6 lLlxhS
17.ttJxd8 l!xd8 18.l!el+ i.e7 19.
ttJc5 i.c8 20 ..igS f6! (This rather
simple move was ignored by Black
players for some time and they
preferred the "solid" move 20 ...
ttJhf6?!, which led to an advantage
for White after 21.ttJc5 i.c8 22.
hf6 gxf6 23.l!adl 0-0 24.ttJxd7).
There may follow 21.i.d2 (21.i.c1
gS!? 22.ttJe6 tJdf7+ Vasquez -
Vallejo Pons, Tripolis 2004) 21 ...
mfl 22.i.c4+ \t>g6 23J~e7 ttJeS!+
15... gc8!
This move is necessary!
After lS ...i.e7?! White has the
powerful argument 16.ttJc6! ~c7

96
 9.e4 b410.tiJa4 cSll.e5l:iJdS12.0-0 cxd413.l:iJxd4
17.l:iJxe7 ~xe7 (17... l:iJxe7 IS ..1f4)
IS ..igS+ ~fSI9J~c1.
16.1Th5
16.'Wg4 - This move is not
so popular, but it requires great
precision by Black, just like the
other possibilities and we will
be soon convinced about all this.
16 ... l:iJSf6! This is the only move
and it is the best. 17.'We2 (17.
~h3 a6 IS.1xd7+ 'Wxd7 19.1Llxe6
fxe6 20.l:iJb6 'Wfl 2U:~xe6+ i.e7
22J'3xf6? 13dS 0-1 Yermolinsky -
Dreev, Simferopol19SS; 22.lLlxcS
.ixcS 23.13xf6 ,ixh3 24.13xf7 ~xfl
2S.gxh3 i.f6+ with a better end-
game for Black) 17...i.e7 IS ..ig5
i.d5 (it is still too early for Black
to castle: IS ... 0-0? 19.1:iJxe6 fxe6
20.~xe6+ gfl 21..txd7) 19J~adl
0-020.l:iJfS
(diagram)
20 ... exfS!N This is a novelty
and it has not been tested in prac-
tice yet. It has been overlooked by
the vigilant commentators and it
is the right answer to all the ques-
tions. Until now, Black had played
only:
20 ....ic6? 21.,ixc6 (of course
not 21.l:iJd6? .ixd6 22.13xd6,ixbS
23.'WxbS 13bS 24.~a6 'WcS with
an advantage for Black, Norri -
Bryson, Debrecen 1992) 21...13xc6
22.'WbS ~c7 23 ..if4+-;
the game is approximately
equal after 20 ...h6 21.l:iJxe7+ (The
knight-sacrifice for White is not
correct 21.l:iJxb6+?! gxh6 22 ..hh6
i.d6! 23.,ixd7 - 23.13d4lLleS - 23 ...
%Yxd7 24.13d4 eS 2S.%Yd2 'WfS-+
Norri - Dreev,Arnhem 19S9) 21...
%Yxe7 22.13xdS hxgS 23.13xgS ~d6
(23 ... lLlc5!? 24.'We3 lLlce4 2S.13eS
l:iJd6= with nearly equal position,
Skatchkov - Filipenko, Ishevsk
200S) 24.,ixd7 %Yxd7 2S.ltJc5 and
Black has a slight edge after 2S ...
%Yd6, or 25 ...~d4 Skatchkov -
Khachatryan, Yerevan 2004.
We will go back to 20 ... exfS.
There may follow: 21.~xe7 ~xe7
22.13xe7 ie6 and suddenly it be-
comes clear that Black is already
planning gfS-dS, followed by
\i>gS-fS. 23.,ixd7 lLlxd7 24.13exd7
1xd7 2SJ;xd7 h6 26 ..ie3 13fdS
27.13xdS+ 13xdS and he has the
advantage: 28.~f1 gdl+ 29.~e2
gal!
16•••g6
97
Chapter 10
Here, White can retreat
his queen to several different
squares: A) 17.trg4, B) 17.Yfh3,
C) 17.treS, D) 17.tfe2.
A)17.tfg4
This is a very interesting, but
only seldom played move.
17••• a6N
Black forces a draw.
It is bad for him to play instead
17... ltlSf6 IB.ltlxe6! (White has
tried in practice 18.~h4?, but
Black can counter that effectively
with IB ...a6; 18 ...,tg7!? 19 ..ih6
0-0 20.hg7 It>xg7 21..!'~xe6 = He-
geler- K.Mueller, Hamburg 198B)
IB ...fxe6 19.~xe6+ 'flIe7 20. ixd7+
ltlxd7 21.~xe7+ he7 22 ..tgS+-;
17....te7!?N After this solid
move, the effectiveness of the per-
manent threat of White sacrific-
ing on e6 is considerably reduced.
It has one definite drawback,
though ...After White's obvious re-
action IB.ih6, Black will have
problems castling (White's at-
tacking dream after a rook-sacri-
fice is only an illusion: 18.fixe6?!
fxe6 19.1tlxe6 ~aS 20 ..ixd7+
98
The Meran Variation
c;t.xd7) IB ... a6 19 ..id3 ~aS 20.b3
It'lSf6 21.%Ye2 '8'hS (It seems at-
tractive, but too risky for Black to
choose here 21...V9dS 22.ltlf3 ltlg4
23.,tg7 gg8 24.id4 id6 2S.ixa6
- 2S.h3? ltlh2 - 2S ...hh2+ 26.
\tlfl ,tf4 27..bb7 V9xb7 28J3adl~
with excellent compensation for
the pawn for White) 22.,txa6
'i!fxe2 23.ixe2 .itB= with approxi-
mate equality.
IS.JogS
18.ltlxe6 fxe6 19.~xe6+ - see
17.~h3 a6 IB.ltlxe6.
After an amusing move-or-
der, just like after 18.igS, there
arises the same position follow-
ing IBJ:!xe6+!? fxe6 19.,tgS ie7
20.lilxe6 axbS 21.ltlxdB wxdB 22.
ixe7+ ~xe7 23 ..E!el+@dB.
IS ••• Joe7
19 •.lxe7
After 19.1ilxe6?! fxe6 20.,txe7
ltlxe7 21.ixd7+ ~xd7 22.lilb6 ~bS
23.lt'lxc8 ixcB, White has no com-
pensation for the sacrificed mate-
rial.
His attempt to avoid the forced
draw may lead to another forced
 9.e4 b4 IO.l:iJa4 cSll.e5 1:iJd512.0-0 cxd413.l:iJxd4

draw, or (depending on Black's White is incorrect: 18J!xe6? fxe6

mood) to a very unclear position 19.1:iJxe6 ~aS 20.l:iJg7+ '>fif8 21.
with a non-standard material ra- hd7 (21.ih6 ~xbS-+) 21...l3xc1+
tio: 19.hd7+ ~xd7 20.he7 <t1xe7 22.l3xc1 'i!?xg7; 20.hd7+ 'i!?xd7
(20 ...~xa4 21.ic5 gxc5 22.l:iJxe6 21.ih6 'i!?d6!-+; 21.l:iJec5+ <t1e8
fxe6 23.~xe6+ 'i!?f8 24.~d6+ <t1g7 22.~d7+ 'i!?17 23.~xb7 !!xc5; 23.
25.~e5+ 'i!?17=) 2U!ad1 ~k7!? 22. ~e6+ 'i!?g7 24.if4 I:iJxf4 2S.~xe7+
%Vg5+ 'i!?f8 23.~e5 gg8oo; 21 ... 'i!?h6; 23.l:iJxb7 l3c7! 24.'@Yxe7+
~xa4 22.l:iJxe6 and here it would l3xe7 2S.l:iJxaS l3e1#; 24.l:iJd6+ 'i!?g7
be a quick draw after 22 ...fxe6 2S.l:iJe8+ l3xe8 26.~xe8 I:iJf6 27.
23.'~xe6+ '>fif8 24.E:xd5 hd5 ~b8 !!d7-+; 2S.~e6 !!f8-+ Mo-
25.~xc8+ 'i!?g7 26.~c7+ i17 27. rovic Fernandez - Shabalov, Bel-
~e5+ '>fig8 28.~b8=; while 22 ... grade 1988) 18 ... a6 19.if1, Black
~xd1 23.E:xd1 fxe6 24.ge1 gc6? cannot castle indeed, but White is
25.~d4!+-; 24 .••<t1d6 25.~xe6+ a pawn down, although his queen
'i!?c7; 24 ... e5 25.E:xe5+ 'i!?d6 26. is better placed in comparison to
ge6+ 'i!?c5 would lead to a position variation A, which we have al-
with approximate equality. ready analyzed (but not 19.hd7+?
19 •••tfxe7 20.l?Jxe6 fxe6 21. ~xd7 20.ig7 !!g8 21.~xh7 l3xg7
~e6 axbS 22.~e7+ mxe7 (22 ... 22.~xg7 ~xa4 23.l3ad1 if6 24.
0,xe7 23.~xb4) 23.ftel+ (23.~e2? I:iJxe6 hg7 2S.I:iJc5+ 'i!?f8 26.l:iJxa4
'i!?d6 24.~xb5 ic6) 23 ••• md8 ih6 27.g3 l3c2 28.!!d3 J.c6 29.b3
24.tfgS+ me7 2S.tfg3+ md8= !!xa2 30.l:iJcS as 0-1 Bukhman -
Smagin, Sibenik 1988) 19 ...1:iJ7f6
B) 17.tfh3 20.!!ad1 l3g8 (with the idea to fol-
low with g6-g5) 21.J.gS ~aS 22.
b3. Black's position is tremen-
dously dangerous, since he can-
not castle. In the game Kazh-
galeyev - Nolte, Subic Bay 2009,
he made a mistake playing 22 ...
1:iJc3? and after 23.<tlxe6 <tlxd1
24.J.xf6 he lost quickly.
18.J.gS
18.l:iJxe6 - After this move
Black must act very precisely, but
his prospects are preferable. 18...
17••• a6 fxe619.~xe6+ J.e7 20.ha6 ha6
The move 17...ie7 cannot be 21.~xa6 I:iJb8!N (It is weaker for
recommended to Black in view of him to choose 21 ...§'c7?! 22.ig5
18.J.h6 (The rook-sacrifice for ~c6 23.~d3! <t117 24.l3ac1~ with

99
Chapter 10 The Meran Variation

compensation for White, Yevseev rifice on e6, but then after 19.1tJf3
- Dreev, Novgorod 1999; it may 0-0, he had no chances of ade-
be interesting for Black to opt for quate compensation, Temirbaev
21 ...1tJc5!? 22.ltJxc5 ~c5 23 ..ih6- OIl, Uzhgorod 19S5.) 19 ... fxe6
~d7 and he is better) 22.~d3 0-0 20.1'!xe6+ (20.V!ixe6+? Wle7 21 •
23.~b3 ih4! 24.g3 (24.ie3 ~hS .bg6+ ~dS 22.'lWxe7+ ltJxe7 23.
2SJ':!ed1 ltJxe3 26J~xdS .ixf2+ .1gS .1f6) 20 ... ~f8 (It is also dan-
27.~h1 1'!fxdS-+; 25.id4+ if6 gerous for Black to opt for 20 ...
26.ic5 1'!t7 - White's compensa- ~t7 21.1'!d6 ltJSf6 22.'lWe6+ ~
tion for the piece is insufficient; 23.ltJb6) 21.1'!d6! (this is a very
26.1'!adl ixd4 27.~d4 'lWf6!-+) important resource for White)
24 ... ltJc6! Black has weakened the21 ....tc6 (21 ... ltJSf6 22.id2 as 23.
f3-square and he plans to transfer ltJb6) 22.1tJc5 ltJxcS 23J':!xdS+
immediately his knight there. His gxdS 24.ic4. Black's position is
position is considerably better, tremendously precarious, for ex-
for example: 2SJ':!d1 1'!f5 26.gxh4 ample: 24 ... ltJb6? 2S.ie3 ltJxc4
§'xh4 27.Wlg3 'lWhS; 26 ..ih6 ltJaS 26.ixc5+ ~t7 27.'lWh4!+-;
27.Wld3 Wld7 2S.1'!ac11'!xc129.~c1 lS ... eS!? 19.ih6 'lWf6 20 ..1e4
'lWxa4 30.gxh4 ltJc6. (but not 20.gad1?! .ixh6 21.'~xh6
It is interesting for White to ltJe7) 20 ... gc7 21.gad1 ixh6 22.
test in the tournament practice Wlxh6 Wlf4 23.'lWg7 Wlf6=;
the rarely played move lS ..1d3!? lS ... WlaS!? 19..igS ltJe7 (Black
should better refrain from 19 ...e5
20 ..1e4!?) 20.'lWh4 (He defends
successfully against White's direct
attack: 20..ixe7 fixe7 21.ltJxe6 fxe6
22.~xe6 WIgS 23.ie4.ixe4 24J~xe4
gfS 2S.gae1 ~t7) 20 ... gc7!?oo
18 •.. .1e719..lxe7 ~xe7
The position is equal after 19 ...
V!fxe7 20.ltJxe6 fxe6 21.~e6 axb5
22.~e7+ (White loses following
and now: 22.gae1? V!fxe6! 23.~e6+ ~t7 24.
it is a bit risky for Black to gel 1tJ7f6 25.V!fe6+ ~g7 26.V!fd6
choose a move, which was played gheS 27J':!d1 bxa4 2S.h3 gcdS 0-1
by the outstanding Estonian Oll- Novikov, Tallinn 19S5) 22 ...
grandmaster Lembit OIl, who un- ~xe7 23.gel+ ~dS 24.§'h4+ ~c7
fortunately passed away so early 2S.V!fg3= C.Hansen - Rasmussen,
in life - lS ...ig7, because of 19. Esbjerg 19S5.
ltJxe6! (In the above mentioned (diagram)
game, White was reluctant to sac- 20.~xe6 fxe6 21•.lxd7+

100
 9.e4 b4 JO.liJa4 c511.eS liJd512.0-0 cxd413.liJxd4
~xd7 22.ltJb6 ~bS! (22 .. ,'~·d8!?
23.liJxc8 .bc8 24J'!adl ~b6 25.
\&h4 liJf5 26.~f6 l'!f8+ with an
advantage for Black, on - Svesh-
nikov, Tallinn 1988; but not 22 ...
\&c6? 23.l'!xe6 \&cl+ 24.l'!el ~c6
25.liJxc8 il.xc8 26.~h4 Almasi
- SchIegl, Balatonlelle 2006)
23.ltJxcS (23.~xe6 l'!c7) 23 •.•
hcS+ and Black is better.
C) 17.'ffeS Vf6
lS.ltJf3
Following 18 ..if4, Black's
simplest reaction would be 18 ...
\&xe5 (it is weaker for him to
play 18 ....ie7 19J:!acl~ Pragua
- M.Hofmann, Germany 1992)
19.he5 ~g8 20.l'!acl ~c121.l'!xc1
me7!+ with superior prospects for
Black.
18.~xf6?! liJ5xf6 19.ig5 fJ.g7
(After 19 ... liJd5, White's correct
reaction would be 20.l'!ac1~ with
good compensation for him; he
should not play here 20.ltJxe6?
fxe6 21.l'!xe6+ mt7 22.hd7
l'!c7!-+ ) 20 ..ixf6.ixf6 21.ltJxe6 (21.
l'!adl? l'!c7! 22.ltJc2 l'!xc2 23.~xd7
fJ.a6 24.l'!b7+ i.xb5 25.E1xb5 0-0
26.E1xb4l'!d8-+ Ftacnik - Tukma-
kov, Bie11988) 21...fxe6 22.l'!xe6+
mt7 23.i.xd7 l'!c2, because despite
the extra pawn, White will have to
fight for a draw, since his minor
pieces are terribly misplaced.
18.~e4 l'!c7! (18 ... .ig7?! 19.
ltJxe6! \&xe6 20.ig5!; 19 ... fxe6
20 ..tg5! ~t7 21,'~xe6+ ~xe6 22.
l'!xe6+ mt7 23.il.xd7 l'k7 24.l'!d6
and Black has no compensation
for the pawn, Mikhalchishin -
Lanc, Trnava 1988; it would be
interesting for Black to test the
tremendously risky line: 20 ...
~xg5 21.\&xe6+ '.t>f8 22.~xd7 fJ.d4!
23J!ad1 - 23.~xb7?! l'!c7 24.~a6
mg7 - 23 ...fJ.xf2+ 24.'it>xf2 ~c2+
25.~e2 .ic6 26.'lWxa7 ltJc3 27.bxc3
~xg2+ 28.'.t>e1 'lWhl+ 29.'.t>f2
~xh2+ 30.'it>f1 ~h3=) 19.ie3 (19.
~g4 ie7 20.ih6 a6 21..bd7+
'k!?xd7 - 21...l'!xd7!? - 22.l'!adl
mc8 23.l/Jxe6 fxe6 24.~e6 ~f5-+
Wells - Kaidanov, Dublin 1991)
19 ...fJ.g7 20.il.xd7+ ~d7 21.liJcS
~e7 and White has no compensa-
tion at all.
lS ••• .ig7
101
Chapter 10
This is the best, because after
lS ... i.e7?! 19 ..th6 E!gS 20.E!ac1-+
Black has serious problems,
Shabalov - Sorokin, Minsk 1990.
19 •.lxd7+
19.~d6?! ~c7.
Black should not fear 19.~g3
~d8 (it is weaker for him to opt
for 19 ... ~e7 20.i.gS f6 21.t1JeS)
20.t1JeS (20 ..tgS ~c7) 20 ... heS
21.~xeS 0-0 22.~d4?! (White's
relatively best line here is: 22.hd7
~xd7 23.,ih6 f6 24.~xe6+ ~xe6
2S.E!xe6 E!fdS+, but Black is bet-
ter in the endgame anyway.) 22 ...
~f6! 23.~xa7 ~c7 24 ..te3 (24.
hd7 E!a8-+) 24 ... i.c6 2S.~xc7
(2S.~a6 E!a8) 2S ... t1Jxc7 26.hc6
t1JeS=F with a serious advantage for
Black, Aseev - Dreev, Lvov 1990.
19.~e2!? a6!? (19 ... h6!?; 19...
~d8 20 ..tgS ~c7 21.E!ac1 ~d6 22.
hd7 - 22.t1Jd2!? - 22 ...~xd7 23.
t1Jc5 E!xc5 24.E!xc5 0-0 2S.~d2:j::
Koen - Cosma, Calimanesti 1992)
20.i.gS ~f5 21.hd7+ Wxd7 22J'~ac1
h6 23 ..te3 We7 24 ..tcS+ WeSco
19 ... <itxd720.ti'e2
20 ...ee7
102
The Meran Variation
He has several possibilities
now and it is not clear what is the
best for Black, but I like most the
move in the text.
20 ... E!c7!? 21.'t!fbS+ 'it>cB 22 ..tgS
1/fff5 23.E!ac1 ~bS 24.E!xc7 t1Jxc7
2S.~xb4'it>a8 26 ..te3 t1JdS 27.~aS
t1Jxe3 28.t1Jb6+ 'it>b8 29.t1Jd7+
~a8 30.t1Jb6+ 'it>b8 31.t1Jd7+ 'it>aS,
draw, Almasi - Muir, Budapest
2004.
20 ... ~dS 2l.<~JeS+ (21.a3 b3
22 ..td2 'it>e7 23.'MlS .tc6 24.exb3
@fS 2S.t1JeS .teS 26.~c3 ~b6
27.ea2 CiJe7 2S ..tf4 h6 29.E!ad1 gS
30 ..te3 ~c7 31.tt'ld3 tt'lfS 32 ..tc5+
@gS 33.a4 E!d8+ Obukhov - Do-
roshkievich, Kuibyshev 1990; 25.
E!ad1 @gS 26.tt'leS .te8 27.tt'lc3
~b6 2B.ec2 \'Nb8 29.~e4 tt'lf6 30.
I/ffb1 h6 31.b4 @h7= with approxi-
mate equality, Obukhov - R.
Sherbakov, Kuibyshev 1990) 21...
@e7 22 ..tgS+ f6 23.tt'ld3 fxgS (23 ...
~d6 24.tt'lac5 E!xc5 2S.tt'lxcS I/ffxcS
26.~xe6+ @d8 27J:!ac1 't!fe7 28.
E!CS+ hcB 29.~xdS+ Wld7 30.
~aS+ ~c7 31.WldS=; 2S.Wlh3 ~d7
29.~g3 fxgS 30.WlbS+ .tcS 31.
E!xcB+ ~xc8 32.~d6=) 24.exe6+
@f8 2S.tt'lac5 ic6 26.E!ad1 as
27.tt'leS heS 28.exe5 @gS 29.
~e6+ @g7 30.WfeS+ 'it>gB (30 ...
Wff6?! 31.tt'le6+ 'it>h6 32.E!xdS exeS
33.EldxeS) 31.Wle6=
21.a3!?N
Black should not be afraid of
the straightforward line: 21.'t!fbS+
@c7 (21...ic6!? 22.Wfa6 Wfd6) 22.
a3 @b8 23.axb4 a6 24.~a5 \'Nxb4
(He could have tried to fight for
 9.e4 b4 IO.tiJa4 c511.eS tiJd512.0-0 cxd413.tiJxd4
more with 24 ... \WdS 25.tiJc5 \Wxa5
26.fixa5 tiJxb4 27 ..if4+ maS) 25.
Wlxb4 tiJxb4 26 ..if4+ ma7 27 ..ie3+
mb8 28 ..if4+, draw, Akopian -
Dokhoian, Moscow 1991.
21 ..• 'it>e8
Black does not have enough
time to roam around comfortably
with his king 21..J'lhd8?!, in view
of 22 ..ig5! f6 23 ..id2 e5 24.axb4.
It is interesting for him to try
here 21...bxa3!? 22.fixa3 'itieS.
22.axb4
22 •••1bb4oo - with a rather
unclear, but promising position
for Black: 23 ..id2 \Wc4 24.\Wd1 \Wc2.
D) 17.ft'e2
17.•• a6!
This move was played for the
first time by I.Novikov and it re-
placed the "old" move 17...\We7!?,
which, by the way, had not been
refuted yet...
Let us try to analyze the even-
tual developments:
1S.tiJf3!? .ig7 19 ..ig5 f6 20.
\Wxe6 (After 20.tiJe5 0-0, White
can win the exchange in two dif-
ferent ways, but Black has suffi-
cient compensation in both cases:
21.hd7 fxg5 22.hcS tiJf4 23.\We3
ElxcS; 21.tiJxd7 fxg5 22.tiJxfS tiJf4
23.\We3 fixf8) 20 ...\Wxe6 2U~xe6+
'it>f7 22.hd7 (22.Elae1 fihdS 23.
Eld6 tiJ5b6=) 22 ... Elc7=
It is also interesting for White
to try 18.'\!;Vg4 tiJ5f619.~h3 .idS (it
is worse for Black to opt for 19 ...
a6 20 ..ixd7+ \Wxd7 21.lt)xe6 fxe6,
in view of 22.lt)b6! ~f7 23.Elxe6
.ie7 24 ..ih6! White must continue
with his attack!; after the rather
indifferent move 24.lt)xcS?! he
will have to fight for a draw: 24 ...
hc8 25.fixf6 .ixh3 26.!M7 'itixf7
27.gxh3 ElcS) 20 ..ia6 (20 ..ih6
.ixh6 21.\Wxh6 It)g4 22.'\!;Vf4 It)gf6
23.\Wh6=; 22 ... h5!?) 20 ... gdS!
103
Chapter 10
(20 ... ~aS?! 21..if4 ~h5; 21 ..igS
.ig7 22 ..ib7! .ixb7 23.llJxe6 fxe6
24.~xe6 .idS 2SJ:!xe7+ I!?xe7 26.
~d1 h6 27J~xdS hxgS 2S.'We3+
~fB 29.~dl; 29.~aS!?; in his
game against me, Alexey Vyzh-
manavin overlooked the beauti-
ful combination - 22 ..ib7! which
would have provided White with
an advantage. He chose instead
22.~adl?! and after 22 ... 0-0, he
did not have sufficient compen-
sation for the pawn: 23.llJfS gxf5
24J;xd5 'WdS 25.gbS 'Wc7 26.gc1
'Wd6 27.gaS llJe4 2S ..ih6 bh6
29. ~xh6 gfdS 30..ib7? llJdc5
0-1 Vyzmanavin - Dreev, Mos-
cow 19S9) 21.,tf4! (It is worse for
White to play 21 ..igS .ig7 22J~adl
0-0 23.llJfS gxf5 24.Etxd5 ~bS
with an edge for Black.) 21 ....ig7
22.llJbS ti:'\bS 23.llJc7+ i>fS 24 ..ifl
~gS 2S.gac1llJc6oo
IS ..ig5 ~xgS19.llJxe6
19... 'Wxg2+ 20.i>xg2 llJf4+ 21.
~f1llJxe2 22J~adl fxe6 23.hd7+
<;t.>t7 (Black should better refrain
from 23 ... l!?e7 24.hcS hcS 2S.
~xe2 .ia6+ 26.1t>f3 1J.g7 27.llJcS±
Anglada Lobarte - J.Ruiz, Spain
1992; White is better too after
104
The Meran Variation
2S ....ig7 26.1t>f1 gfS 27.ge4! Kum-
mer - Volkmann, Oberwart 1996,
or 26.1t>f3 gfB+ 27.~g3 gfS 28.
ge4!) 24.hcS hcS 25.lt>xe2
.ta6+ 26.l!?e3! (26.1t>f3 .ib7+
27.~g3 .idS 2S.b3 .id6+ 29.lt>h3
l!fS 30.llJb2 ~g7+ Nadera - Dreev,
Manila 1992) 26 ....ibS 27.b3J.h6+
2S.It>f3 gcS 29.gd6 gc2! (It is
much weaker for Black to opt for
29 ....ic6+ 30.l!?g3 .id5 31..E:d7+
i>f6 32J:!xa7 e5 33.gaS .if4+ 34.
~h3 .if3 35.llJb6 gdS 36.llJc4;1;
I.Sokolov - Shirov, Stockholm
19S9; Black would not equalize
completely, but still, his best line
would be: 31...lt>gS 32.gxa7 gfB
33.llJb6 gf3+ 34.~g4 gf4+ 3S.
~h3 gf3+ 36.l!?g2 gt7+ 37.llJxd5
gxa7 3S.llJxb4 .ifS 39.~d3 gxa2
40.Etxe6!) 30.gdxe6 .ifS! and he
cements the situation around his
king. White's a2-pawn is hanging,
while Black's bishops are very
powerful and his prospects are
superior.
It is rather dubious for Black
to play 17... ~f6 IS.hd7+ It>xd7
19.i.e3 a6 20.llJb3; White is better
after 17....ie7? 1S ..ih6 a6 19.ha6
ha6 20.'?ffxa6 gaS 21.\!:td3! (21.
'Wc6?! \!:tcS= Blanco Fernandez
- Medina, Manzanillo 1991) 21...
gxa4 22.llJc6 \!:tb6 23.'?ffxdS.
(diagram)
18..txa6
1S.J.c4!? This interesting move
was played against me by GM
Miguel Illeskas and it was an ab-
solute surprise for me. I thought it
over for about an hour and found,
 9.e4 b41OJi:Ja4 cS 11.eS tiJdS12.0-0 cxd413.tiJxd4
as I thought, a very reliable path. I
understood that Black's position
was objectively not worse even
without the forceful line, which I
chose, but I was afraid that if I
had reacted in a normal fashion, I
would have to fight over the board
against a well-prepared computer
home-analysis. 1B ... ~xc4!? With
the help of this exchange-sacrifice
Black neutralizes his opponent's
attacking possibilities and relies
on having compensation based on
his two powerful bishops and the
misplacement of White's knight.
(See how dangerous Black's posi-
tion may be if he does not sacri-
fice the exchange. 1B ... ig7? 19.
tiJxe6; 1B ... ie7 19.ih6!?; 18...
ltJ7f6!? 19.ig5 ie7 20.ixa6 Jl.xa6
21.~xa6 0-0 22.ltJc6 ~d6 23.~ac1
*g7; 23.ltJxe7+ Wlxe7 24.ltJb6 E1c5
25.ltJxd5 Eixd5 26.h4 ~g7; 19.
ixa6 19 ...ha6 20.Wlxa6 ig7
21.ltJxe6 fxe6 22.Wlxe6+ *f8 23.
ig5; 20 ... Wld7 21.ig5 ie7 22.ih6
ltJc7 23. Wlb7 tiJcd5; 1B ... ltJcS 19.
tiJxcS .i!xc5!; 19 ...hc5 20.tiJxe6
fxe6 21.Wlxe6+ Wffe7 22.hd5; 21...
ie7 22.b3! ~d7 23.~e5 @f7
24.ib2 E1hg8 25J:~ad1) 19.Wlxc4
~h4! This queen-sortie is essen-
tial for Black's idea. 20.b3 (the
position remains very unclear af-
ter 20.Wld3!? !g7 21.ltJf3 ~dB)
20 ...!d6 21.tiJf3 (21.h3 ~f6!? and
the situation is double-edged, for
example: 22.ib6 tiJe5 23.~c2 g5;
White is better after 21...ltJe5 22.
ltJf5! ltJxc4 23.ltJxh4 ltJa3 24.ib2
0-0 25 ..i!ed1) 21...~xc4 22.bxc4
ltJ5f6 (Black equalizes too follow-
ing 22 ... tiJ5b6!? 23.ib2 0-0 24.
lLlxb6 lLlxb6) 23.ltJd4 *e7 24.ib2
l!cB 25J'iac1 lLle4. In this fighting
position, which is approximately
equal, the opponents agreed to a
draw, Illescas Cordoba - Dreev,
Dos Hennanas 2005. I believe
that the move 18.ic4!? may at-
tract followers in this variation,
but it can hardly create any seri-
ous problems for Black in the fu-
ture tournament practice.
18 ••. i.xa619.exa6
19••. ig7
But not 19 ... .i!aB? 20.Wlc4
~a4 (20 ... ie7?! 21.lLlc6 ~c7 22.
~xd5 - it is also good for White
105
Chapter 10
to play calmly 22.~b5!? - 22 ...
exd5 23JExe7+ I!lfB 24.~h6+
I!lgB 2SJ'k1 ~d6 26Jl:xd7 ~xd7
27.ttJb6 ~b7 2B.ttJxa8 f6 29.ttJeS
fxeS 30J'lc7 Yffxc7 31.ttJxc7 with
an advantage for White in the
endgame, Butnorius - Grabliaus-
kas, Klaipeda 1990) 21.~xd5 i.e7
22.ttJxe6 fxe6 23. ~xe6 gaS 24.i.h6
iU8 25 ..!befB ttJxfB 26.Y!fc4+- Tim-
man - Nogueiras Santiago, Rot-
terdam 1989.
19 ... ttJeS?! 20.ttJxeS .!beeS 21.
ttJxe6 fxe6 22.~xe6+ ttJe7 23.i.h6
~d7 24.~eS ~d4 2S.~f4 and the
position is tremendously un-
pleasant for Black, I.Sokolov -
V.Bagirov, Palma de Mallorca
1989.
20.Jl.g5!
20.ttJxe6?! fxe6 21.i.gS ttJc7
22.gxe6+ (22.Y!fb7 gbB) 22 ... 1!lt7
23.~d3 ttJxe6 24 ..!bed8 l!hxd8 25.
Yffb3 ttJeS 26.~xb4 ttJd3.
20 ••. ~c7!
106
The Meran Variation
This is Black's only counter ar-
gument, but it is very effective!
21.ti'b7
It is very bad for White to
choose 21.ttJxe6 fe6 22.l!e6 1!lt7
23.Y!fd3 ttJe6 24.,td8 ghd8'l= and
Black has the advantage.
After 21.~a5 l!aB 22 ..!bed8
gxaS 23 ..ixc7 l!xa4 24.gedl (or
24.b3 ga6 2S.l!ad1 ttJf6) ttJf6
(24 ... 0-0 2S.ttJxe6 fxe6 26Jlxd7
.!beb2 27J:lb1 ic3=) 2S.ie5 (25.
ttJc6 ttJdS 26.ieS .ixe5 27.ttJxe5
0-0) 2S ... 0-O'-f and Black is bet-
ter I.Sokolov - Chernin, Wijk aan
Zee 1991.
21 ••• gb8 22 •.txd8 (or 22.ttJc6
gb7 23.,tdB ttJd5) gxb7 23..Axc1
~c7 24.~b5 gc2 25.gac1 ~c1
26.gxc1 0-0
After this short but rather live-
ly fight, there arises an endgame
in which Black has no problems to
say the least, Vyzhmanavin - No-
vikov, Moscow 1990.
Chapter 11 l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.~c3 ~f6 4.~f3 e6
S.e3 ~bd7 6.Ad3 dxc4 7 •.bc4 bS
8.Ad3 Ab7 9.e4 b4 1 0 .~a4 cS 11.eS
~dS 12.0-0 cxd413Jlei

A) 14•.ld2

White protects his e5-pawn,

preparing lDf3-d4 and waits to see
what plan of development Black
will choose. In fact he has two
I)()ssibilities 13 ... g6 and 13 ...i.e7
(chapter 12).
13••• g6
The line: 13... a6 14.lDxd4 g6 is
not promising for Black, because
Df 15.~g4. White prevents IS ...
ig7?, since he has the resource
16.1gS with the idea 16... ~a5
17.lDxe6!
A) 14.i.d2
B) 14.i.g5
After 14.i.bS, Black's simplest
reaction would be 14 ... a6 IS.i.g5
Ic7 (1S ... axb5 !?) 16.i.d7 (16J~cl?
axbS!-+) 16... ~d7.
Now, Black is faced with the
choice between two basic lines:
Al) 14... a6 and A2) 14... i.g7.
It would be too passive for
him to play 14 ...i.e7 IS.lDd4 0-0
16.i.h6~e817.Wlg4ifB 18.1fB ~fB
19.h4 Wle7 20.h5t and White has
the initiative, Alterman - Spasov,
Munich 1991.
It is also interesting for
Black to choose the very rarely
played waiting move 14.. J~c8!?,
which needs an additional
practical test. 15.i.gS (1S.lk1 ~xc1
16.Wlxcl WlaS 17.Wlc2 i.g'T+ Dya-
chkov - Kryakvin, Dagomys
2009) 15...ie716.i.h6 i.fB 17.Wld2
i.c6oo

107
Chapter 11
Al) 14... a6!?
This move is not so risky as
14 ....tg7.
15•.Ae4
After lSJkl ~g7 16.i.gS 'ml8
17.'lJc5 'lJxc5 18j'lxc5 0-0, Black
is not worse at all, Santos - Coe-
lho, Guarulhos 200S.
15 •• J:!b8
It is a bit weaker for him to opt
for lS ... ~b816.~c1 (16.~c2!? !g7
17.'lJc5) 16... ~a717.!h6t San Seg-
undo - Anand, Madrid 1993.
16.gc1
16.a3 bxa3 17.bxa3 !g7 18.
!gS ~aS 19.!d2 ~d8 20.!gS
~a5 21.i.d2 liJc3 22.hb7 gxb7
23.liJxd4 ~xa4= Gustafsson -
Fressinet, Germany 2002.
16 .••.Ag717.lLg5 ea518.~d2
0-0 19.~c4 eb5 20.~d6 ea5
21.~xb7 (21.'lJc4 ~bS=) 21 ...
gxb7 22.Ae7 ge8 23 ..Ad6 gb5
24 •.Ad3 gb7 25 •.Ae4 gb5 26.
Ad3 gb7= Mamedyarov - Galkin,
Moscow 200S.
A2) 14....Ag7 15•.lb5
108
The Meran Variation
15 ... a6
It is bad for Black to continue
with the natural move IS ... 0-0? in
view of 16 ..igS! forcing the reply
16 .. .f6 (Following 16 .. :~c8 17.ik1
'lJc7 18.'lJxd4 liJxe5 19 ..ie7! gd8
20.hd8 ~xd8 21.!c6, Black's
compensation for the exchange
is insufficient; the position is not
so clear after 19.f4 ~b8! 20.fxeS
lLlxbS 21.lLlxbS heS with the idea
22.lLlc5? hh2+ 23.~h1 hg2+!
24.~xg2 ~g3+ 2S.~h1 ~h3+)
and after 17.exf6 lLl7xf6 (17...
4lSxf6 18.lLlxd4+-) 18.liJxd4 'lJc7
19.!c4± White has an obvious ad-
vantage, Mamedyarov - Vescovi,
Mainz 2006.
It is rather dubious for Black
to try lS .. .:1k8?! 16.igS ~aS 17.
liJxd4 (after 17.hd7+!? ~xd7
18.a3! White has some chances
for an advantage; it is weaker fOl
him to opt for 18.'lJxd4 h6 19.1d2
Elhd8 20.a3 ~e8 and Black's po-
sition is acceptable, Cruz Lope2
- Blokhuis, Amsterdam 1996)
17... Elc7 (17 ... a6 18.hd7+ <!!xdi
19.'lJb3 ~bS 20.a3±) 18.a3! (i1
is obviously weaker for White tc
 9.e4 b41O.liJa4 cSll.e5liJdS12.0-0 cxd413.'8el g6
choose 1S.gel 0-0 19 ..txd7 .Elxd7
20.ElcS ~a6 21.'8c1 ~aS 22.ElcS
~a6, draw, Altennan - J.Pinter,
Beersheba 1991) lS ... 0-0 19 ..td2
and Black has great difficulties,
because of the vulnerable place-
ment of his queen, for example:
19 ...he5 (or 19 ... lLlxe5 20.axb4
liJxb4 21.~b3) 20.axb4 lLlxb4 21.
'8xeSlLlxeS 22.~el±
16.~c5!
16 ..tgS?! axbS! 17.hdS '8xdSl
16.,bd7+ ~xd717.lLlc5 ~c61B.
lLlxb7 ~xb7 19.1Llxd4=
16 ... axb5!
16 ....tcS? 17..tc6 ElbB lS.lLlxd4
0-0 19.1Llcxe6+-
17.~xb7m,6
17...~bB?! 1B.liJd6+ s!lfB 19 .
.Elel±
18.~d6+
18 ... ~e7
This is again the only move for
Black!
It is bad for him to play lB ...
s!lfS?, because of 19.1LlgSlLlxeS 20.
ElxeS (it is also good for White to
continue with 20.lLldxf7! lLlxf7 21.
~£3 ~b7 22.Elxe6 WgB 23.lLlxU+-)
20 ....txeS (20 ... ~xd6? 21.'&£3!+-
if6 22.ElxdS! exdS 23.ixb4!) 21.
liJdxf7 if6 22.lLlxhS .bgS 23 ..bgS
\t>g7 24.'&e2 \t>xhS 2S.'l1*'eS+ i>gS
26.ih6 Wffc7 27.'&xe6+ '&f7 2S.
'&e4+- Suvrajit- Visweswaran,
Dhaka 2004.
19 ..tg5+
19.Elel?! liJxeS (19 ... h6?! 20.
'I1*'b3±) 20.liJxeS
After 20 ... 'I1*'xd6 21.igS+! it is
essential for Black to include this
move! (following 2Ulc6?! 'I1*'xeS
- 21 .. .'l1*'dS? 22J!xe6± - 22.ElxeS
heS 23.'I1*'e2 id6! 24.'l1*'xbS '8hbS
25.~c4 ieS, Black is not worse; it
is weaker for him to opt for 23 .. .f6
24.~xbS .ElhbS 2S.'I1*'c4 <flU 26.f4!)
21...i>fB 22.'8c6 'I1*'xe5 23 ..Elxe5
ixeS 24.'&e2± and White main-
tains a clear advantage.
20 ... ixeS! This is the right de-
cision for Black! 21.lDxf7 ii.xh2+!
22.i>xh2 i>xf7 and White will
hardly prove that his compensa-
tion for the pawn is sufficient ...
19.1DgS
(diagram)
And now:
It is bad for Black to choose
here 19 ... Elaf8? 20.'I1*'£3! (White
109
Chapter 11
should better refrain from 20.
~gxf7 ~ 21..igS+ r;Ws 22.l'kl,
because of 22 ... ~cS! and if 23.
,,",xd4 ~xd6 24J3xcS 1f1d7 2S.gecl,
then 2S ... 'if;>g8!+; but not 22 ...
!xeS? 23.gc8+ 'if;>g7 24..th6!±; or
22 ... ~c7? 23 ..id8+-) 20 ... ~xeS,
then White has a fantastic re-
source 21.~c8+!! ~c8 22.gxeS
and Black is helpless against his
opponent's numerous threats.
It deserves attention for Black
to try 19 ... ~xeS!? 20.~dxf7 ~xt7
21.gxe6+ Wxe6 22.~xe6 'if;>xe6
23.Wb3 ga4 24.gcl! (It is advis-
able for White to continue with
24.a3 ~eS 2S ..txb4 gd800 and the
game is unclear, Kolesar - Cer-
nousek, Pardubice 2005) 24 ...
gd8 2S.gc6+ gd6 26.gcS - the po-
sition remains complicated, but it
would be very difficult for Black
to play it in a practical game. His
king is open and vulnerable and
his pieces lack coordination;
19... ghfB! This move seems
to me to be the right decision for
Black. 20.~xh7! This is the best for
White. (His alternatives are clear-
ly worse: 20.~xe6? fxc6 21 ..igS+
.lf6!-+; 20.f4?! h6 21.~ge4 d3+
2v;t'hl fS 23.exf6+ ~7xf6+)
110
The Meran Variation
20 ... ~xe5! (20 ....ixeS?! 21.~xf8
.ixh2+ 22.~xh2 V;Yxd6+ 23.'~gl
gxfB 24.%Yg4±; 21 ... 'if;>xf8 22.~e4±
Stohl - Sakaev, Dortmund 1992)
21.~e4 (21.~xf8? V;Yxd6 22.~h7
gh8 23.~gS ~d3+) 21 .. .fS! This
is the most principled reply for
Black. (The other possibilities
are worse for him: 21...gfc8?!
22 ..igS+; 21...gh8? 22 ..igS+ f6
23.~exf6 ~xf6 24.~xf6 .ixf6
2S.~eS±) 22.~xf8 (22.~eg5?!
gfc8=+) 22 ... fxe4 23.~xg6+ ~xg6
24.Wg4 'if;>f1 25.V;Yxe4 and the p0-
sition remains complicated with
mutual chances.
19 ••• ~f8
20.gc1
This is the only move for White
to fight for the opening advan-
tage.
Black should not be afraid
of 20 ..th4 ~xeS 21.~xeS '?;Yxd6
22 ..ig3 V;Ye7 23J3Cl (23.V;Yxd4
.if6+) 23 ... ~g8 and he is already
better, for example: 24.~c6 (24.
'?;Yxd4 h5!; 24.h4 hS 2S.~f3 ~f6)
24 ... Wd7 2S.Wf3 d3! (2S ... gfB?1
26.~e5 Wd8 27.~c6, draw, San
 9.e4 b4lOJi)a4 cSll.e5liJd512.0-0 cxd413.'8el g6
Segundo - Slobodjan, Pamplona
1996) 26.~xd3 ~xb2+
Following 20.liJxd4 liJxeS (It
would be interesting for Black
to check the more ambitious
move 20 ... c;t>g8!? with the idea
to counter 21.liJ4xbS with 21 .. .
AxeS; but not immediately 20 .. .
AxeS? 21.liJxe6+! fxe6 22.~f3+-)
21.liJ4xbS h6 22.~h4liJc4 23.liJxc4
and the position is about equal,
Yakovich - Novikov, Yerevan
1996.
20 •••h6
20 ... liJxeS? 21.liJxe5 ~xd6 22.
'8c6 ~xe5 23.'8xe5,heS 24.~e2±
21 •.lh4
21 ... ~xe51
Black should refrain from 21 ...
c;t>g8?! in view of 22.ig3! c;t>h7
23.liJxf7 '8hf8 24.liJd6± Alterman
- Dreev, Manila 1992.
22.~xe5 ffxd6 23 •.ig3!
After 23.'8c6?!, because of the
inclusion of the important moves
h7-h6 and ~gS-h4, Black can sac-
rifice advantageously his queen
with the line: 23 ...~xeS 24.'8xeS
.ixeS 2S.~e2 ig7 26.~xbS c;t>g8
27.~c4 wh7 28.h3 '8a7+ Hjartar-
son - Akopian, Luzern 1993.
23 ••••e7 24.h4!?
24.~f3?! c;t>g8! 2S.liJxg6 fxg6
26.~xdS exdS 27.'8xe7 d3!+
24.~xd4 if6+
24 •.• lit>g81?
24 ...lLf6 2S.liJg4t; 24 ... hS!?
25.h5
This position needs an addi-
tional practical test. White has
some initiative for the two miss-
ing pawns, but not more. There
may arise the following devel-
opments: 25 •.•gxh5 (The move
25 ... c;t>h7, may lead to a draw after
26.hxg6+ fxg6 27.liJxg6 c;t>xg6 28.
'8c6 c;t>fl 29.'8cxe6 ~xe6 30.'8xe6
c;t>xe6 31.~g4+ c;t>fl 32.~S+
c;t>e6) 26 ••xh5 gh7 (26 ...•e8!?)
27.ge4 J.f6 28.gxd4 gg7 and
Black's prospects are superior.
B) 14•.ig5
(diagram)
14••••a5
It is a mistake for him to choose
14...~b8? IS ..ibS! h6 16..if6
liJSxf6 17.exf6 idS 18.,hd7+
111
Chapter 11
~xd7 19.1LleS+ ~eS 20.lLlc3! ~b7
21.lLlxd5 1-0 Staniszewski - Os-
trowski, Zakopane 2000.
Black presents the initiative to
his opponent, but still he can try
14...ie7!?
and now:
I5.he7!? V#xe7 I6.il.h5 0-0
17.ixd7 (17.~xd4 lLlSb6=) 17...
~xd71S.lLlcS ~e7 (1S ... ~b5!?) 19.
~xd4 (19.lLle4 lLle3!=) This is an
"eternal" problem - with which
rook to occupy the open file. It
seems to me that in this particular
case it would be more natural for
Black to continue with 19 .. JUd8!?
(although it is also possible for
him to choose 19 .. J:'1ad8 20.lLlxb7
~xb7 21.lLlg5 'iilg7 22.lLle4 ~b6;
20.lLle4!? lLlb6!? 21.lLlf6+ \tig7 22.
112
The Meran Variation
~h4 EihS - 22 ... h6? 23.lLlh5 - 23.
lLld4lLld5 24J~ac1 Eid7 2SJ:'1edl h6;
20J'lac1 lLlb6!? 21.~xb4?! - 21.
~e3!? - 21.. ..ixf3 22.gxf3 gd5 23.
f4 )'kS!? 24.lLld3 ~dS; 23 ... gfdS
24.~a3 gd2~ with full compensa-
tion for the pawn, Kozul - Tuk-
makov, Toronto 1990) 20.lLle4
lLlb6 21.lLlf6+ ~g7 22.~h4 h6.
Black plans to follow with lLlb6-dS
and it is not clear how White can
improve his position, therefore
the natural end of the game would
be a repetition of moves after:
23.lLlh5+ ~fS 24.lLlf6 ~g7=;
lS.ih6 ifS (It would not work
for Black to play the slow move
15 ... a6?! I6.il.e4!? - 16.Eic1!? -
16 ...if8 17.~d2 ~b8 18.~ac1 lLle7
19.1Llxd4± Wells - K.Mueller, Ger-
many 1995; or lS ... EicS 16.ie4;l;;
16.~d2?! ~a5 17.b3 lLlc3 IS.
lLlxd4co with an unclear position,
Wahlbom - Sigurjonsson, Dres-
den 1969) 16.~d2 (Black should
not be afraid of 16.,ixfS 'iilxf8 17.
.Ill.bS 'iilg7 18.~xd4 lLlSb6!=, or
17.lLlxd4 ~g7 IS.~g4 a6?! 19.h4t
Ghaem Maghami - Mallahi, Te-
heran 2001; lS ... ~a5 19.b3l!hdS)
16 ...ic6 (Black should avoid 16...
ixh6?! 17.~xh6 ~a5 lS.b3 lLlc3
19.1Llg5± Tukmakov - Sveshnikov,
Leningrad 1977; or 16 ...~aS?! 17.
hf8 'iilxfS 18.~h6±) 17.ie4! This
move has not been played yet
(White has tested in practice only
17.ixf8 'i!ixfS IS.ie4 'i!ig7!? 19.
lLlxd4 ,ixa4 20 ..bdS exd5 21.b3
Eie8; lS ... ~a5 19.b3 .ixa4 20.
\1ffh6+?! 'i!igS 21.bxa4l!cS 22.lLlxd4
 9.e4 b410.liJa4 cSll.e5liJd512.0-0 cxd413.'Sel g6
liJc3=F Tukmakov - Polugaevsky,
Leningrad 1977; 20.j,xd5 ~xd5
21.~xb4+ rllg7 22.Y;ba4 d3= with
approximate equality) and it
seems to me that Black will hardly
succeed in equalizing, for exam-
ple: 17...ti'a5 18.b3 ha4 19.bxa4
'ScS 20.liJxd4t
B1) 15.~xd4
B2) 15.~d2!?
Bl) 15.~xd4 a6!
This move is necessary for
Black. It is bad for him to play
15 ... 'ScS 16.a3, or 15....tg7? 16 ..tb5
a617.liJc5!+-
16.a3
This decision is logical and
principled, because after White's
alternatives Black has no prob-
lems to say the least.
16.liJf3 .tg7 17.'Sc1 0-0 lS ..td2
(18 ..tft 'Sac8 19 ..tc4 .tc6 20 ..tb3
h6 21 ..td2 liJ7b6 22.liJc5 .ta8
23.liJd3 'Sxe124.liJxe1 ti'b5 25.~e2
~xe2 26.liJxe2 a5+ "Genius" -
S.Polgar, Oviedo 1993) lS ... 'SaeS
19J3xeS '!'!.xcS 20.a3 .te6+ Bui
Vinh - Banusz, Budapest 2003.
16..td2 .tg7! (It is weaker for
Black to follow with 16...ti'd8?!
17.'Sc1!? .tg7 18 ..te4 he5 19.tl)f3
.id6 20 ..ih6 liJ7f6 21.ti'd4± Mo-
rozevich - Anand, Nice 2008; 17.
ti'g4 .tg7 18..tg5 liJe7 19.'Sad1
liJxe5 20.liJxe6!+- I.Sokolov -
Habu, Brussels 2007) 17.a3liJxe5
18 ..te4 0-0 19.axb4 ~d8 20.liJc5
~b6 with an about equal position.
The move 16..te4 is not dan-
gerous for Black: 16....ig7 17.a3
0-0 lS.j,d2 ti'e7 19.f4 bxa3 20.
'Sxa3 'Sfe8 21.rllh1 'SabS with a
good game for him, Conquest -
Vasquez, Calvi a 2004.
16.'Sc1 .tg7 17.liJe6 hc6 lS.
'Sxe6 0-0 (18 ... liJxe5? 19J~c5+-;
lS ...he5? 19.'!'!.xe5 liJxe5 20.
'Sc5+-; lS ...b3?! 19.axb3 liJxe5
20.'!'!.xe5 he5 21.'Sc5 eb4 22.ti'e2
ti'b8 23.'!'!.xd5 exd5 24.f4?! 0-0
25.fxe5 'SeS 26 ..tf6 ~a7+! 27.rllh1
ti'd4oo and the position is unclear;
24 ..tf6 0-0 25.he5±)
19 ..te4 (It would not be so in-
teresting for White to try 19.'Se4
and here not 19... he5?? 20.'Sxe5
tDxe5 21. 'Sc5+-, but 19... h6 20.
.th4 'SfeS and Black has no prob-
lems. 20 ... g5!? 21 ..tg3 'Sfc8oo with
113
Chapter 11
a rather unclear position, Kaka-
geldyev - Beliavsky, Ashkhabad
197B) 19 ... h6!? (It is also possible
for Black to follow with 19 ...
ttJSb6!? 20.ttJxb6 ttJxb6 21..ib3
~fcB - but not 21.. ..ixeS? 22.E:xb6
~xb6 23.E:xeS+- - 22.E:xcB+ ~xcB
23.~d4 ~bS 24.h4 itJd7 2S.i.f6
.ifB 26.~dlitJxf6 27.exf6 as= Piket
- Anand, Dortmund 1992) 20.
hdS ~xdS (Black has an interest-
ing possibility here - 20 ... hxgS!?
21.i.xe6 fxe6 22.~xd7 ~xa4 23.
~xe6+ ~f7) 21.~xdS exdS 22 ..if6
ltJxeS! (22 ....ixf6 23.exf6 E:feB 24.
'>!lflt Yegiazarian - Asrian, Yer-
evan 1999) 23 ..ixeS (23.E:xeS ~fcB
24. ,bg7 E:xc6 2S ..ixh6 gS 26.
hgS f6 27.~xdS fxgS 2B.~xgS+
'>!lh7 29.h4 l'!cl+ 30.'>!lh2 l'!al! and
Black is not worse) 23 ... E:aeB 24.
f4 f6 2S.ttJb6 fxeS 26.itJxdS exf4
27.E:xeB E:xeB 2B.E:xg6 '>!lh7 (2B ...
as!?) 29. E:xa6 l'!e2! 30.'>!l£1 (30.
ltJxf4? .id4+ 31.'>!l£1 E:f2+) 30 ...
l'!xb2= Piket - Kramnik, Amster-
dam 1993.
16•.• bxa3
This is a very reliable move.
114
The Meran Variation
Black cannot equalize after
16 ....ig7 17.axb4! (The move 17.
itJf3 is not dangerous for him
17... 0-0 IB ..id2 ~c7 -IB ... E:abB!?
- 19.~c1 ~bB 20.itJc5 itJxcS 21.
l'!xc5 bxa3 22.bxa3 ~a7, Cherep-
kov - Abrashkin, St Petersburg
1993; 19.~e2 i.c6 20.axb4 ~fb8
21.l'!ec1 ltJxb4= Sakaev - Gallia-
mova, Pinsk 19B9) 17... ~xb4 (17.. .
lLlxb418..ic4!±) IB.l'!e4! ~aS (IB .. .
~fB 19Jkl±) 19.itJb3 ~c7 20.E:c1
~bB 21.ltJac5 .icB (21...lLlxe5?!
22.lLlxb7 ~xb7 23.itJc5 V:Yxb2 24.
~a4+ '>!lfB 2S.E:bl ltJc3 26.E:xb2
itJxa4 27.~xa4 lDxd3 2B.~xa6 E:e8
29.lLld7+ '>!lgB 30.E:b7+-) 22 ..ic4
0-0 23.i.xdS exdS 24.~xdSlLlxcS
2S.lLlxcS .ifS 26.~e2± I.Sokolov -
Stellwagen, Amsterdam 2002.
17.bxa3.ig718.l:lbl
IB ..id2 ~dB 19.f4 (19.lLlf3 0-0
20.l'!cl l'!cB= Vaganian - Kram-
nik, Moscow 1991) 19 ... 0-0 20.
l'!bl l'!bB 21.~e2 ~e7 with an about
equal position (it is bad for Black
to choose the seemingly attractive
move 21...lLlxeS?! in view of 22.
fxeS ttJf4 23.~e3? Mlynek - Sla-
dek, Bmo 2005, 23 ... itJxg2; 23.
hf4 ~xd4 24..ie3 ~xa4 2S.i.a7!±).
18 ... gb8 19 ..id2 Vd8 20.
~b7 E:xb7 21.,ixa6
(diagram)
Black has here two approxi-
mately equally strong possibili-
ties: Bla) 21 ... gc7 and BIb)
21 ... ft'a8.
Bla} 21 ... gc7 22 •.ia5
22.lDbS?! 0-0 23.lLlxc7 ~xc7+
 9.e4 b41O.li'Ja4 cS 1l.e5l:iJdS12.0-0 cxd413.'i!.el g6
I.Sokolov - Luther, Istanbul
2003.
22 ••. 0-0 23 ..Ac4
23.1:iJf3?! ~bB! (23 .. J'kl 24.
-bdB llicdl 2S.~dl llicdB 26.i.c4
I:iJxeS 27.l:iJxeS .\beeS 2B.l:iJb6:t)
24 ..ixc7 ~xc7 2S.~e2 ElbB (It also
seems good for Black to try 25 ...
ElaB 26.i.b5 'i!.a5) 26.i.c4 ~aS
27.hdS (27.~dl EldB 2B.J.xdS
I:iJxe5!) 27... ~xa4 2B.i.e4 ~xa3+
Vasquez - L.Dominguez, Buenos
Aires 2003.
23.l:iJb5?! he5 24.l:iJxc7 (24.
Elxe5?! I:iJxe5 2S.l:iJxc7 I:iJxc7 26.
WTxdB ElxdB 27..\bec7 Eld1 + 2B.i.f1
I:iJc4 29.ti4=; 24 ... Elc1!2S.WTxc1
~xa5+) 24 ... hc7 and Black has
the edge. It would be a disaster for
White to continue with 2S.i.b4?!
I:iJxb4 26.axb4 ~h4! 27.g3 (27.
WTxd7 ~xh2+ 28.<;!;>f1 gdB 29.WTc6
Eld2-+) 27 ... WTxb4 Gustafsson -
Ribli, Germany 2002.
The move 23.l:iJc6 is not
dangerous for Black: 23 .•. ~aB
24.l:iJe7+ I:iJxe7 2S ..\bec7 I:iJdS 26.
i.f1 I:iJxc7 27.~xd7 I:iJd5 (or 27 ...
~aS!? ) 28.ltJcS ~aS 29.ltJd3 ~xa3
Seifert - Ribli, Berlin 2009.
23 ... l:iJxe5
23 ... ~aB? 24.hc7 I:iJxc7 25.
ltJxe6; 23 ... l:iJf4 24.1:iJf3!?±
24.,txd5 exd5 25.l:iJb5
25.1:iJc3 I:iJc4!? (25 ... ~d7 26.
hc7 ~xc7 27.l:iJxd5 ~c5 2B.ltJc2
with a symbolic edge for White,
Batchuluun - Gundavaa, Phu
Quoc 2007) 26 ..ixc7 ~xc7 27.
ltJxd5 ~c5 2B.l:iJc6 <;!;>hB=
25 ... gcl! This is the only
move for Black, but it is suffi-
cient for equality. 26.,txd8 Elxdl
27.lhdl gxd8 28.l:iJac3 I:iJc4
29.l:iJxd5 ga8 (but not 29 ... <;!;>fB?
30.ltJe3± Mecking - Dominguez,
Rio de Janeiro 2003) 30.l:iJdc7
Ela5 31.gd3 .Af8=
BIb) 21 ... Va8 22.,txb7
Vxb7
(diagram)
23 •.Ab4
23.ltJc3 0-0 24.1:iJf3 (24.f4 ElaS
25.l:iJcb5 .ifS) 24 ... ElaB 2S.~c1 (25.
~al I:iJSb6= Dorfman - Novikov,
Lvov 19BB) 25 ...§dB (25 ... ltJ5b6!?)
26.l:iJxd5 .\bea3 (26 ... ~xd5?! 27 .
.ib4) 27.~c7 ~xd5 2S.Ela1 ltJc5!
115
Chapter 11 The Meran Variation

Kramnik, Madrid 1993.

25.tJf3
2S.lLlcS lLlxc5 26.bxcS ~c7=

(28 .. .c.!;'g7?! 29.h3;t Lautier - Pel-

letier, Leon 2001) 29.h3lDa6=
23 ••• tJxb4
23 ...heS? 24.lOc5!
24.axb4 0-0 25 •••1fb5!? and it is evident
24...heS!? that White will fail to hold on to
It would be unnecessarily his extra pawn.
risky for Black to by 24 ...ti'xb4
2S.lDc6 ti'b7 26.~d6, although B2) 15.tJd2!?
even then he has chances of a fa-
vourable outcome. 26 ....1fB 27.
lOc5! hd6 (27...~c8?? 28. lLle4 !
\Was 29.\Wc7!+-) 28.lOxb7 .1c7
(28 ....1e7? 29J~al!+-) 29.lLld6+
(29J~cl? lLlxeS 30.lOb8 O-O!-+)
29 ...'itlf8! (29 ...hd6 30.exd6 0-0
3Utal lLlf6 32.~a7+-; 31...lLlb8
32.lDa7 ~d8 33.lObS 1-0 Pinter -
Kaidanov, Budapest 1989; 32.
lLleS!?) 30.~al (30.~dl 'itlg7? 31.
lLlxt7!+-; 30 ... lOc5? 31.~al±; 30 ...
hd6! 31.exd6 'it>g7=; 31.~xd6 The move B2b) 15••• .1a6 used
lLlb6=) 30 ... lLlxeS! 31.~a8+ (31. to be considered for a long time as
lLlxeS hd6 32J!a8+ 'itlg733Jhh8 the main line for Black, but then
heS! 34.~a8 hS=) 31... 'itlg7 there appeared a real alternative
32J!xh8 lLlxc6 (32 ... 'it>xh8? 33. - B2a) 15... gc8!?, which we
lOxeS hd6 34.lLlxt7+-) 33.:Sc8 should analyze in details now. He
hd6 34.~c6 .1f4 3S.g4 f5 36.h3 has chances of obtaining a good
fxg4 37.hxg4 wf6 38.Wg2 hS position in both cases.
39.'it>f3 .1b8= Illescas Cordoba - Black cannot equalize after

116
 9.e4 b41O.tiJa4 cSJ1.e5l:iJd512.0-0 cxd413.'8el g6
the seemingly attractive line: 15 ...
ic6?! 16.l:iJc4 .ixa4 (16 ... ~xa4?
17.b3 tlfb5 1B.l:iJd6+-) 17.l:iJxa5
.ixd1 1B.'8axdl. The endgame is
obviously preferable for White,
but it is not a foregone conclusion
at all. 1B ... h6 (1B ...J.e7 19..ixe7
~xc7 20.l:iJc6+ 'it'f8 21.i.c4 lil7b6
22.ia6 'it'g7 23.'8xd4 g5 24.h4
h6 25.lilxb4 l:iJxb4 26.'8xb4+-
Kiss - Varga, Borsodtavho 1991)
19 ..ic1!? (It seems reasonable for
White to make this somewhat an-
aesthetic move immediately, be-
cause afterforexample: 19.J.d2 a6
20.l:iJc6 J.c5 21.J.e4 a5, White will
have to play it anyway. 22.J.cU
Roos - Bruehl, Reil 2000; 19...
1kB 20.lilb3) 19...i.c5 (19 .•.'8cB
20.l:iJb3!? i.c5 21.J.c4) 20.ia6.
B2a) 15.•• l!ic8!? 16.~c4
It is weaker for White to play
16.l:iJe4, but Black must react pre-
cisely: 16... h6! 17..ih4 g5 1B ..ig3
l:iJf4 19.b3 l:iJxc5 20.lilf6+ <tle7
21.J.e4 .ixe4 22.l:iJxe4 tlfd5-+
Quezada - A.Fernandez, Cuba
2006. Gobbling pawns with 16 ...
l:iJxe5? may cost Black very dear-
ly. 17.J.£1 J.e7 (following 17... l:iJc6
IB.J.c4 h6 19 ..ih4 g5 20.hd5
gxh4 21.~h5! Black will have great
problems; or 17... h6 1B.l:iJf6+ ~dB
19..ih4) 18.~xd4 .ixg5 19.1:iJd6+!
(but not 19.J.b5+? J.c6 20.~xe5
0-0 with an advantage for Black,
Kryschilovskij - Yevseev, St Pe-
tersburg 2005) 19... <tld7 20.tlfxe5
.tf4 21.lilxb7 ~xa4 22.tlfxhB!+-
16... l!ixc4
This is the exchange-sacrifice,
which Black had in mind making
his previous move.
17.,bc4 i.g7 18.gel ~xe5
There will be hardly any adher-
ents to the possibility 1B... 0-0?!
19.1b3 he5?! 20.'8xe5! l:iJxe5 ~l.
lilc5i.c8 22.'lWxd4lilc6 23.tlfh4 and
White's attack is crushing. 23 ...
f6 24 ..ih6 g5 25.'lWe4 f5 26.~e1
'8dB 27.lilb7 hb7 2B.tlfxe6+ <tlhB
29 ..ixd5 1-0 T.Petrosian - Koste-
niuk, Moscow 2006.
19.i.f1
19J~xe5?! It is obvious that
GM Carlsen acted too straightfor-
wardly after he encountered an
unpleasant surprise and he was
soon in a hopeless situation. His
sacrifice was refuted promptly
by Black: 19 ....txe5 20.~e2 l:iJc7!
21..ih6 .id6 22 ..ib3 'lWf5 23J~d1
'it'e7 24.'8xd4 '8dB 25.'8d1 l:iJd5
26.g4 l:iJf4 27.gxf5 l:iJxe2+ 2B.'it'£1
J.a6-+ Carlsen - Karjakin, Bilbao
2007.
19.1ilc5 tlfxc5 20.ia6 tlfb6 21 .
.ixb7 'lWxb7 22.'lWa4+ lild7 23.'lWb5
l:iJ5b6 24.tlfxb4 .if6!+ and White's
117
Chapter 11
attack was neutralized.
19.~b3 lbd7 20.~d2 0-0 21.
a3 :!'!bB 22.~e2 ~a6 23.%Yd1. M-
ter 23 ...~b7, Black's position is
at least equal, Rainer Zufall -
Klosterfrau, playchess.com 2006
(but he can try to play even for a
win after 23 ... %Yb5!? 24 ..ic4 %Yc6).
19••• tld7!
19 ... 0-0? 20.:!'!c5+-
20.a3
Following 20.~b3, Black man-
ages to consolidate his position.
20 ... 0-0 21.~d2 (The position is
full with intricate tactical possi-
bilities, for example it would not
be good for White to continue
with the "common sense" move
21.:!'!c2?, because of 21...lbe3!
22.he3 dxe3 23.:!'!xe3 ~d5 24.~c4
~c6-+ ) 21 ... h6!?oo
20 ••• 0-0
20 ...bxa3? 21.%Yb3.
21.Ad2 gb8 22.'l'b3
It is not good for White to play
22J'k4 ~d8 23.axb4 ~a6.
22 ••• Af8!N
I believe Black can try to ob-
118
The Meran Variation
tain an advantage with this move.
22 ...h8 leads to approximate
equality: 23.:!'!c4 lbeS 24J:kS ~d8
2S.axb4 d3! 26.%Yd1 (26.h3!?oo)
26 ... ~d7 (26 ... %Yh4!?; 26 ... %Yd6)
27.:!'!c4 lbeS 28JkS lbd7 29.lk4
~e5, Mamedyarov - Gelfand,
Moscow 2007.
23.gc4 tl7b6 24.tlxb6
Wxb6 25.axb4 .b6 26.Bcel
AxfJ.27.wxfl hb~
B2b) 15 ••• ~a6
16.tlc4
White should better avoid 16.
ha6 \&xa6, for example: 17.lbe4
h6!N (It is also good for Black to
play simply 17...,ig718.lbac5lbxc5
19.1bxcS ~bS 20.~xd4 0-0= Tuk-
makov - Sveshnikov, Lvov 1978)
18.Af6 (lB.Ah4 gS19 ..tg3 hS) lB ..•
lb7xf6 19.exf6 d3 20.:!'!c1 :!'!d8+, or
17Jk1 Ag7 (17... h6!?; 17... ~d3!?)
1B.lbc4 0-0 19.b3 h6 20.Ah4
:!'!acB 21.~xd4 :!'!c6 22.Ag3 gfc~
Reshevsky - Dorfman, Vilnius
1978.
16•••hc417.hc4
 9.e4 b41O.li'Ja4 c511.e5
B2bl) 17•••Ag7
B2b2) 17••• h6!?N
The move
17••• h6!? was found and ana-
lyzed by me long ago, but it had
not been tested in practice. The
point was that I was unhappy with
the position arising after the main
theoretical variation 17••• .ig7 (we
will analyze it thoroughly as well);
in addition there have been dis-
covered new interesting possibili-
ties for White and we will have a
look at them as well.
It is rather dubious for Black
to try 17... 'ScB?!, because after
IB.'Scl! (this is the most energetic
reply for White; 18..ib3 this move
is a bit slow, but it is still possi-
ble. 18 ....ig7 19.Yfixd4 0-0 20.f4;!;;
IB ... h6!? 19 ..id2 .ig7 with the
idea 20.hd5 Yfixd5 21.hb4 ~xe5
22.'Scl 'Sxc1 23.Yfixc1 ~b7 24 ..ia3
~d3 25.~c5 ~xc1 26.~xb7 ~d3
27.'Sdl ~f4 28.g3 ~d5 29 ..ic5
e5; 29.~d6+ ~d7 30.~xf7 'SbB+;
19 ..ih4 ~e7!? with a complicat-
ed position) 1B ....ie7 (18 ... h6?!
19 ..if6!±; 18....ig7? 19.hd5±) 19.
~d512.0-0 cxd413.'Sel g6
.ih6 and it would not be sufficient
for Black to equalize with 19 ... .!tJc3
20.bxc3 'Sxc4 21.~b3!±
B2bl) 17•••.ig718.1bd4
18.a3? ~xe5 19.axb4 ~xb4
20.~c3 ~b6 21.Yfia4+ ~f8!?+ Ku-
ligowski - Matlak, Wroslaw 19B7.
18 •••1Jxa4
1B ... h619.hd5 ~xd5 20.~xd5
exd5 21 ..id2;!;
It is not easy to find a clear-cut
road to equality for Black after the
seldom played move 1B ... 0-O, for
example, 19.hd5!? (It deserves
serious attention for White to try
19.ib3!? 'SacB 20.f4;1;) 19... exd5!?
(19 ... Yfixd5 20.Yfixd5 exd5 21.'Sad1
~b6 22.~c5!;!;; 21 ... ~xe5 22.'Sxd5
~c4!? (22 ... 'Sfe8 23.~f1 ~c4
24.b3;!;) 23.b3 ~b6 24.'Sa5 ~xa4
25.'Sxa4;!;) 20.b3 'Sfe8 (20 ... 'Sae8
21.f4 f6=i=; 21..if6!?; 21 ..if4! 'Se7!?
22.'Sadl 'SfeB 23.~xd5 ~xd5 24.
gxd5 ~xe5 25.~fl;!;; 24 ...he5 25.
.ig5!? .!tJf6! - 25 .. .f6?! 26 ..id2 -
26 ..ixf6.ixf6 27.'Sxe7 'Sxe7 28. ~f1
and with precise play Black should
manage to make a draw) 21.M4!
119
Chapter 11
(2l.f4llJfB!? 22.llJc5llJe6 23.llJxe6
fxe6=; 22.~d2 llJe6 23 ..ih4
~b5!?=) 21..J~e7!? (21 .. .!!e6 22.
~adl ~ae8 23.~xd5 ~xd5 24.~xd5
llJxe5 25.cj;>fU with better end-
game for White; 24 ...,he5 25.
~d7 .ixf4 26.~e6 ~e6 27.g3;!;)
22.~adl ~ae8 23.1fxd5 1fxd5 24.
gxd5 he5 25 ..ig5!? llJf6! 26.,hf6
hf6 27.~xe7 ~e7 28. cj;>fU
19.hd5 exd5 20 ••xd5
20 ••• ~b6
But not 20 ... 0-0? 21.b3± and
Black cannot play 21...llJb6?, be-
cause of 22.'~xa8.
21.tfd6
The move 21.~c5 leads to
a repetition of moves 21 ....ifB
22.'~'e3 .ig7 (22 ... \1;\'d7? 23.e6 fxe6
24.~adlllJd5 25.\1;\'f3 .ie7 26.he7
~xe7 27.~xd5±) 23.~c5=
21 ••••d722.1bb4!
22 ..if6? \1;\'xd6 23.exd6+ cj;>fB+
22.~adl?! ~xd6 23.exd6+ cj;>d7
24.~e7+ cj;>c6 25.~c7+ cj;>b5 26.
gxf7 hb2 27.d7 llJxd7 (27...
~hd8!? 28.,hd8 ~xd8 29.~xh7
as! with a rather unclear position)
28.~fxd7 a5+
120
The Meran Variation
22 •••.lf8
22 ... llJd5? 23.~e4 h6 24.M6
0-0 25.~adl± Rashkovsky -
Sveshnikov, Sochi 1979.
23.'ffh4!
Before some time, theory con-
sidered as the best for White the
line: 23.\1;\'c3 \1;\'c8! (This is the only
defence for Black; otherwise,
White's attack becomes decisive,
for example: 23 ... ~c8? 24.e6+-;
23 ...~e6? 24 ..if6 ~g8 25.~adl g5
26.~d6 \1;\'c4 27.\1;\'f3 ~b8 28.V;\'b7
~c8 29.\1;\'xa7 1-0 Djachkov - Ko-
rotylev, Korolev 1999; 25 ...ie7
26.~d6! ~c8 - 26 ... ~c4 27,~f3+­
- 27J~c6 ~d8 28.gc7!? ~d5 29.
~c6+ cj;>fB 30.~d7 ~e8 31.\1;\'xd5
.ixf6 32Jhf7+! 1-0 Jussupow - L
Dominguez, Yerevan 2001; it is
also good for White to continue
here with 28.he7 \1;\'xe7 29.e6 f6
30.~b6+-) 24.\1;\'f3 ig7 (24...
\1;\'e6? 25.if6 ~g8 26.~acl+-) 25.
e6 (White's alternatives lead to
draw: 25.\1;\'a3 if8 26.~f3 .lg7=;
25.~acl \1;\'e6 26.\1;\'a3 - 26.~c6?
\1;\'xa2 - 26 ....ifB 27.~a6 .ig7 28.
\1;\'a3=) 25 ... 0-0 26..le7! (26.
 9.e4 b41O.liJa4 c5 ll.eS CiJd512.0-0 cxd4 13.11.el 96
~ac1?! ~a6 27.e7 l:!fe8+ Brittner
- Muir, Leon 2001; 27.~e7 fxe6
28.1xf8 11.xf8 29.~b3 CiJdS+) 26 ...
fxe6! (26 ....b:b2? 27 ..b:f8 .ba1
28.~xf7+ wh8 29.e7+-; 27 .. '\~fxf8
28.l:!ab1 i.d4 29.e7 ~e8 30.
l:!xb6!+-) 27 ..ixf8 ~xf8 28. ~b3
Wffl 29.l:!xc6 ixb2! 30.l:!d1 (30.
~ae1.id4! 3U!e8+ l:!xe8 32J::txe8+
't!£g7 33.~xf7+ 'it>xf7 34.~b8 'it>e6
35J~b7 CiJd7=) 30... .ig7!? (30 ...
gf8?! 3U~xb6±; 31..!je7 ~xb3 32.
axb3 as 33.~a7 .ic3 34.g3t; 30 ...
gb8!? 31.~e3 .if6=) 31.h3 (It is
bad for White to play 31.l:!d3?!
~c8 32.g3 CiJc4, because he must
already think about equality.) 31...
gb8 32J~e7 (32J~d3 CiJd7=). Here,
in the game Dreev - Akopian, Re-
thymnon 2003, the opponents
agreed to draw, but White could
have tried to play for a win with-
out any risk at all with: 32 ...~xb3
33.axb3 as 34.11.a7 .ic3 3S.g3;t;
23 ••• .1g7
23 ....ie7?! 24 ..1f6!? h6 25.e6
fxe6 26J%ad1 CiJdS 27.he7 ~xe7
28.~e4+- Muir - Bryson, Cum-
bernauld 2007.
24.gadl 'ffa4 25.gd4 1Yxa2
26 •.1e7! This is a magnificent
resource for White. Black's cas-
tling has been impeded and
White's attack continues. 26 •••
.e6 (26 ... h6? 27..ia3 gS 28.ti'e4
ti'e6 29.l:!ed1 1:k8 30.~d3 f5 31.
:ad6 ~xe5 32.l:!xb6+- Knott -
Ccrnousck, Sunningdalc 2006; it
was also good for White to play
27J;ed1 g5 28 ..b:gS+-) 27•.1h4
.1t'S (this move only worsens
Black's situation 27... aS?! 28.
.icS±; 28 ..b3!?) 28 ••f6 gg8 29.
gd6! .t'S 30.~b6 1Yxf6 31.
exf6+ ~d7 32.gal! This is the
right move for White! (32.gb5?
'it>c6 33.l:!eeS a6; 32.:ab7+? 'it>c6
33.gbe7 .he7 34.fxe7 ggb8 3S.
ta3 I!;>d7 36.g4 gb5+ Jussupow -
Ippolito, Philadelphia 2006) 32 •••
We7 33.gb5 (33.l:!aa6 ge8 34.
11.c6+ 'it>b7 35..ic3 .ic5=) 33••• We6
34.iaaS id8 35•.lel! with an
advantage for White in the end-
game, Dreev - Harikrishna,
Khanty-Mansiysk 200S.
B2b2) 17.••h6!?N
18 •.ld2!?
121
Chapter 11 The Meran Variation

lB.ih4?! !g7+ with the idea

19.WI'xd4?! g5! 20.hd5 exd5 21.
!g3 Wl'xa4 22:~xd5 lLlb6 23.WI'd6
gdB 24.b3 Wl'b5 25.a4 bxa3
26.~xa3 gd5 27.WI'xa7 0-0-+;
27.gacl Wl'a5-+; 27.e6 hal 2B.
exf7+ (2B.~xal 0-0 29.~f6
Wl'e2!-+) 2B .. .'i!.>xf7 29.VlYe7+ wgB
30.WI'e6+ wh7 3l.WI'e4+ gfS-+
lB.!f6 lLl7xf6! 19.exf6 !d6 -
this is the simplest way for Black
to equalize. (He can play even 2l.cxb4 gxc1 22.hc1 Wld5!?
sharper-l9 ... lLlc7!? 20.gcl!d6!?+ (22 ... hb4!? 23.ge4lLlb6) 23.~c2
2l.WI'xd4? gdB-+; 20.ge4!? !d6!? !g7oo
2l.~d4 !e5+; 2l.f4 0-0 22.Wlxd4 2V!iJb2 gxc3! 22.hc3 dxc3
gfdB+; 22.~d4 !c5 23.lLlxc5 Wlxc5 23.lLlc4 (Black's position is quite
24.whl lLleB!?oo; or 24 ... WI'fSoo) acceptable too after 23.lLld3 !g7;
20.WI'xd4 0-0 2l.hd5 (21.Wlh4 23 ....ie7!?) 23 ... WI'c5!? (It is worse
1f4!+) 21...Wlxd5 22.WI'xd5 exd5 for him to opt for 23 ... WI'c7?!, be-
23.gadl gfeB= cause of 24.lLld6+!? hd6 25.exd6
18••• ftc8!? 19.ftcl! ~c5 26.a3 as 27.~a4±; or 23 ...
White's alternatives here are Wl'xa2?! 24.lLld6+! ixd6 25.~xd6
not so dangerous for Black, for ~c4 26.gedl Wlb5 27.Wlc7;!;) 24.
example: 19.WI'b3?! ~c4 20.Wlxc4 ~b3 .ie7 25.a3 as and Black is not
Wl'xa4 2l.WI'cB+ we7+; 19.!b3 !g7 worse at all.
20.h:d5 Wl'xd5 21.ixb4 lLlxe5, 21 •.• ftxc1 22.hcl J.e7!?=
with the idea 22.gcl gxc123.~xc1
~b7+; 19.b3 lLlc3!? 20.ixc3 dxc3
21.~e2 (or 21.\Wd3lt\xe5+ with the
idea 22.gxe5? Wlxe5 23.!b5+ We7
24.Wld7+ wf6 25.~xcB ~xb5-+)
21...!g7 (21...'~e7+) 22.!b5 We7+
(diagram)
19 ... t1c3!?
This spectacular move helps
Black to clarify quickly the situa-
tion on the board and to solve his
problems in the opening.
20.bxc3 ftxc4 21.cxd4 He transfers his king to the g7-
21.WI'b3? ixc3-+ square and he has no problems.

122
Chapter 12 l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.tLlc3 tLlf6 4.tLlfJ e6
S.e3 tLlbd7 6 •.id3 dxc4 7.hc4 bS
8 •.id3 .ib7 9.e4 b4 10.tLla4 c5 n.eS
tLldSI2.0-0 cxd413J:tel.ie7!?

After 14 ... g6, White's most

This is no doubt a natural and
logical move. Black completes his
development, but he presents his
opponent with possibilities on the
kingside that he would not have
after 13 ... g6.
Let us see how the game may
develop and how dangerous
White's kingside initiative would
be?!
14.~xd4 0-0
This is the most natural and
best move for Black. His alterna-
tives have definite drawbacks.
It is not reasonable for him
to play 14 ... a6?!, because after
IS.~g4, White's advantage is evi-
dent, Gonzalez Velez - Bravo Bar-
ranco, Barbera 1997; the same ap-
plies to the move 14 .. J'kS.
energetic reaction is IS.ih6! (IS.
~g4!? ~aS 16.b3;!; Villavicencio -
Gonzalez Perez, Spain 1995) IS ...
i,gS (ls ...ifS 16.~d2±) 16 ..tbS!
.ixh6 17.ltJcS 0-0 (17... icS? IS.
ltJdxe6!+-) IS.ltJxd7 a6 19.ia4
ltJb6 20.ltJxfSltJxa4 21.~xa4 ~xd4
22.ltJd7±
14 .. .'~~a5 - This move looks
here rather strange to me, al-
though it was tested in practice
by very strong players. I think
White's position is much more
promising after 15.ibS (1S ..td2!?
0-0 16.a3) lS ... ~dS 16.~g4 g6
17.b3!?
It is not so easy to say the same
about another strange move at
first sight like 14 .. .'~c7!?
for example:

123
Chapter 12 The Meran Variation

lS.i.d2 0-0 (but not lS .. .:1kB?

16JJ:c1 ~bB 17.i.bS± Lupik -
Bensdorp, Chisinau 200S; or IS ...
llJxeS 16Jk1 ~d6 17.i.bS+ <;!{fB
1B.llJcS+- Bjelobrk - Baron, Mel-
bourne 2000) 16Jk1 ~aS 17.11Jc6
(17 ..ibSllJ7b6=) 17... hc61B.~xc6
~acB and White has not achieved
anything much.
His most energetic reaction White's compensation for the
seems to be lS.~hS!?, but the po- pawn is sufficient, since Black will
sition still remains rather unclear. have problems with ensuring the
lS ...g6 16.~h6 tLlxe5 17.i.bS+ llJd7 safety of his king; nevertheless, I
18.~g7 (lB.i.d2 a6! 19.~ac1 axbS would not define this position as
20.~xc7 llJxc7 21.i.f4 tLldS 22. better for White, just like I would
llJxbS ~xa4 23.~g7 !UB 24.11Jd6+ be reluctant to recommend the
hd6 2S.hd6 ~a2+) 1B .. JUB move 14... ~c7 to Black. The rea-
(1B ...i.f6? 19.11Jxe6+-) 19.i.gS!? son is that White has too many at-
hgS 20.llJcS 0-0-0 (20 ... ~xcS? tacking possibilities.
21.11Jxe6+-) 21.llJxd7 (21..ixd7 +
<;!{bB 22.llJc6+ @aB 23.llJxb7 ~xb7
24.llJxdB ~xdB 2S.h4 llJf4 26.f3
tLld3~) 21...~feB! 22.tLlf3 (22.h4
i.f4 23.tLle2 ~d7 24.!!ac1 .bel
2S.!!xc1 tLlc3 26.bxc3 b3=) 22 ...
i.f4 23.g3 !!xd7 24.ixd7+ @xd7
2S.gxf4 ~xf4 26.11JeS+ <;!{e7 27.
f3CX)
It is probably reasonable for
him to enter the following posi-
tion: lS.~g4llJxeS (this is the idea
behind the move 14...~c7) 16 ..ibS+ A) 15.Wlh5
(16.'&xg7? llJxd3 17.Wl'xhB+ <;!{d7 B) 15.Wlg4!
1B.Wl'g7 llJxe1 19.~xf7 llJd3 20.
~xc6+ <;!{cB 21.,igS ~eS-+) 16 ... A) 15.eh5
<;!{fB 17.~h3!? (17.~xe6Ieads only This move was considered to
to a draw: 17... fxe6 18.11Jxe6+ be as strong as lS.~g4 to a certain
<;!{f7 19.11Jxc7 tLlxc7 20.!!xeS tLlxbS moment, but later, after some
21.!!f5+ <;!{gB 22.:BeS! - 22.:BxbS? games and among them mine as
.ic6 - 22 .. .'.!if7 23.:Bf5=) 17... a6 well, that opinion began to change.
1B ..ifl. Let us see what this is all about.

124
 9.e4 b410JiJa4 c511.e5l1JdS12.0-0 cxd413.'fl,el ~e7 14.lIJxd4 0-0
IS ... g6 16. Yfh6
16.~e2?! ~7b6:j'
It is not good for White to play
16.~g4, because this may lead
after 16... ~xe5 to a position ana-
lyzed following 15. ~h5 g6 16. ~h6
~e5! (it is also good for Black to
play here 16 ... ~a5 17.b3 lIJc3+)
17.roce5 ~f6.
16•• Ajxe5!
This is a fantastic counter at-
tacking resource for Black, as a
result of some temporary dis-co-
ordination of White's pieces.
The move 16 ... 'fl,e S? with the
idea ~e7-fS is refuted by the spec-
tacular reply 17.hg6! This is the
correct reaction and not 17.lIJxe6?!
fxe6 lS ..bg6 ltJf8!oo with an un-
clear position, Oknayan - Sevian,
Yerevan 2010) 17... hxg6 lS.lIJxe6
fxe6 19.~xg6+ mhS 20.V9h6+
\tgS 21.'i?fxe6+ mhS 22.~h6+
\tgS 23J~e4!+- Knott - Walker,
London 1986.
It is a bit too clever for Black
to opt for 16 ...1M'eS?! after which
White can afford falling into the
trap: 17.h4! (17.b3!?) 17... ltlxe5
18Ji;xe51M'xa4 19.b3 '&d7 20 ..1b2t
with a very dangerous attack
for Black, for example: 20 ... ltlf6
(20 ....1f6 21.'fl,h5 EtfdS 22.f1e1!
with a crushing attack for White)
21.ltJxe6 fxe6 22.hg6 'fl,fdS 23.
hh7+ ltJxh7 24.~g6+ (it is even
better to play here 24J3h5+ - )
24 ... mfS 25.Eth5+- .1e4 26.~xe4
lIJf6 27.f1hS+ 1fff7 2S.Eth7+ ltlxh7
29.'&xh7+ IfffS 30.1M'g7+ 1-0 Bai-
kov - Pridorozhni, Elista 2001.
17.gxe5.!Of6!
White's knight on d4 is under
attack.
18. Yff4
This is in fact his only reason-
able move.
Re should refrain from IS ..1e3?
ltJg4 19.1M'f4 ltlxe5 20.'&xe5 .1f6
21.~c5 (21.~f4 e5-+), because
of 21.. .e5 and White is already
beyond salvation: 22.'~xb4 exd4
23.ih6 ~d5! 24.f3 !'!fcS 25 ..1e4
'&h5 26.hb7 ~xh6 27..ba8 i.e5!
with a very difficult position for
him.
It is rather dubious for White
to play lS.lIJxe6 fxe6 19.'I1~h3
125
Chapter 12 The Meran Variation

lMfd4! (but not 19 .. J~f7 20.~e2oo; 21.gae1? ~xe5 22.gxe5 (22.

it is also not so good for Black to !xe5? he5 23.1%xe5 (23.%Yxe5
choose 19 ... ~g4= Kallai - Dorf- ~xe5 24.1%xe5 1%fd8-+ ) 23 ...
man, France 2000) 20.lMfe3 (20. 1%fd8 24.~e3 1%xd4! 25.~xd4 gd8
gxe6 ~d5 21.ih6 ~xf2+ 22.<bh1 26.~e3 gxd3 27.'~xd3 ~xe5-+)
gf7) 20 .. J~ad8! (20 .. .'~d7?! 21. 22 ... 1%fd8+
ib5 ~d1+ 22.~e1 ~g4 23.if1=) 21 ....ixe5 22 ..ixe5 ~xe5
21.~xd4 gxd4 22.~e2 ~g4+ 23 ..ixb7 gad8 24.~c6 (24.~b3
18 ••• lLd6! 19.'ffg3 ILlc4+) 24 ... ~xc6 25.hc6 'l'f5;
This is again the best for White. and despite White's minute mate-
It is worse for him to continue rial advantage Black is better, Dy-
with 19.~c5 li.d5 20.~db3 (20. achkov - Dreev, Smolensk 2000.
~cb3? ~d7-+). In this position So, we have to say that the move
in the game Greenfeld - Speel- 15.~5 cannot be satisfactory for
man, Tilburg 1992, the opponents White.
agreed to a draw, but after 20 ...
hb3 21.axb31xc5 22.gxc5 ~xd3, B) 15.'ffg4!
Black would be clearly better.
It would be bad for White to
play 19.~g5? hoping for a repeti-
tion of moves after 19...,ie7. 19 ...
~g4! No, there will be no repeti-
tion ... 20.'~xg4 he5 21.,ie3 h5-+
19 .•. ~d7 20.1Lf4
20.f4 he5 21.fxe5 ~b6 22.
~xb6 '&'xd4+ 23.~e3 ~xd3 24.
~xa8 1%xa8+
20 •.. %U6

15.. J~e8
Black has also tried in practice
here 15 ...\!ih8. This move cannot
be refuted, but it seems to me less
principled than 15 .. J::1e8. The fol-
lowing developments may arise -
16.~e4!? (or 16.'~·h3!? g6 17..ih6
1%e8 18.ib5 - 18.~f3!? - 18 ...1%c8
19.'~f3 <bg8 20.~g4t Dorfman -
Bednarski, Polanica Zdroj 1978)
16... g6 17..th6 1%e8 18J=:!aclt
21.lLe4! 15 ... ~xe5? this knight-sacri-

126
 9.e4 b41O.tiJu4 c.51l.e5 CfJd512.0-0 cxd413.'g,el i.e714.tiJxd4 0-0
fice, as it was made in the vari-
ation 14.Wh5 g6 15.~h6 tDe5!,
would not work here: 16J!xe5
CfJf6, because of17.~d1!+-
Of course not 15 ... g6? 16 ..ih6
8:e8, because of 17.ltJxe6! Wa5
(17... fxe6 18.,bg6+-) 18.CfJd4+-
Goldstern - Ammann, Switzer-
land 2004.
16 ..ih6
This is the best for White.
He should avoid 16.CfJxe6? fxe6
17.Wxe6+ 'ibh8 18 ..ib5, because of
18 ...i.h4! (18 ... ic5? 19.~xe8+!
~xe8 20.tDxc5oo Saucey - Duffau,
St Chely d'Aubrac 2008) 19.Wfxd7
ixf2+ 20.'ibxf2 Wh4-+
That is not the right time for
the maneuver 16.CfJf3, because af-
ter 16 ... Wa5 17.b3 CfJc3 18.i.h6 g6t
Black seized the initiative in the
game Batchuluun - Russell, Doha
2006.
16.Wh3 g6 17.i.b5 i.f8 18.i.h6
a6 19.i.xd7 Wxd7 20.il.xf8 CfJf4 21.
~h6 'g,xf8 22.~xf4 ~xa4 23.h4
%i:fd8= Batchuluun - Paragua,
Cebu City 2007.
16 ..ib5!? - This insidious move
obviously deserves attention. 16 ...
'tt>h8! This is practically the only
move for Black (His other possi-
bilities lead to difficult positions
for him: 16...i.f8?! 17.i.g5±; 16...
a6? 17.tDxe6 fxe6 18.~xe6+ 'ibh8
19.,bd7+- Baumbach - Pelling,
Dresden 2007; 16 ... CfJc7? 17.i.h6
17 ...i.f8 18.i.g5 i.e7 19.i.c6 \Wc8
20.i.xe7 'g,xe7 21.gacl±; it is also
very good for White to choose
17.CfJc6± Pap - Werner, Budapest
2005), but here, it is much better
for Black than after the move we
have analyzed before 15.. .'itlh8,
since White cannot provoke the
weakening of Black's kingside
withg7-g6.
White cannot achieve anything
re,al in this position, for example:
I 17.~f3 gf8 18.Wlh3 gc8 19 ..id3
g6 20 ..ih6 gg8, Gonzalez Gar-
cia - Perez Candelario, Mallorca
2004. Black has very good pros-
pects now: he can counter 21.Wf3
with ii,g5 seizing the initiative,
while after 2U!ad1, he can play
again 21.. ..ig5 with rather unclear
consequences. White's pieces are
active, but he should not forget
about his knight on a4, which
may turn out to be misplaced in
the long run;
17.i.d2 l:!.c8 (Black should re-
frain from 17... a618.,ic6 i.xc619.
CfJxc6 ~c7 20.E:ac1~ Tarasova -
Baciu, St. Petersburg 2009) 18.a3
a6 19.il.d3 CfJc5 20.CfJxc5 .ixc5 21.
~h3 g6 22..!'~e4 f5 with a good po-
sition for him, A.Smirnov - Yev-
seev, St. Petersburg 2009;
17.CfJc6 ~c7 18.CfJxe7 l:!.xe7 19.
Wc4 ~a5 20.i.xd7 E:xd7 21.CfJc5
127
Chapter 12
~c7 22.iDXb7 ~b6+ and Black has
superior prospects thanks to his
powerful knight on d5, Greenfeld
- Coelho, Sao Paulo 2008.
16•••.tf8 17•.ig5
But not 17.iDb5? ~bB!+ and
Black is threatening 1B ....ic6 and
1B ... iDe5.
17J!adl!? a6!?oo he takes the
b5-square under control. The sit-
uation is unclear (it is weaker for
Black to opt for 17...~a5?! 1B ..ib5
~adB 19 ..ig5 .ie7 20 ..txe7 ~xe7
21.~c1! and he has certain diffi-
culties; but not 20.iDxe6? ~xb5
21.iDxdB ,ixdB+ I.Sokolov - Pre-
dojevic, Sarajevo 200B).
17..ib5 a6! - this is the best
for Black! (the move 17.. JkS
leads by force to an advantage
for White: 1B ..ig5 Ae7 19.1iJxe6
fxe6 20.~xe6+ 'it>fB 21.Axd7 ,ixg5
22.~f5+ 'it>gB 23.AxeB ~xeB 24.
~xg5 ~xa4 25.e6±; 20 ... 'it>hB
21..b:d7 Axg5 22.~xeB+ ~xeB
23.,ixeB ~eB 24.liJc5±) 1B.,ixd7
~xd7 19.1iJc5 f5! 20.liJxd7 fxg4
21.liJxfB 'it>xfB 22 ..id2 'it>f7 with an
about equal position, Stmgatsky
- Stripunsky, Philadelphia 2002.
12B
The Meran Variation
Bl) 17••• Ae7
B2) 17•••1rbS!?
Of course not 17... ~a5? due to
1B ..tb5.
Bl) 17••• Ae7
In this variation Black should
manage to neutralize White's ini-
tiative after a precise play.
IS.h4
IS •...hg5
Black has some problems
after 1B ... ~cB 19 ..ih6 (It would be
less dangerous for him if White
chooses 19.a3 a6 20.iDf3 bxa3
21.bxa3 iDc3 - 21.. ..ic6!? -
22.41xc3 ~x('3 23J~adl Vlfc7= with
approximate equality, Dyachkov
- Shirjaev, Ufa 2004; or 19... Axg5
20.hxg5 a6=) 19 ....ifB 20.~ad1 f5
(20 ... a6 21.h5t; 20 ... ~a5 21.Ab5t)
21.~g3! (It would be too optimis-
tic for White to play 21..ixf5?!
exf5 22.iDxf5 g6 23.f4?! I.Sokolov
- Perez Candelario, Zafra 2007
and here Black could have practi-
cally settled the issue with the
move 23 ...liJ7b6.). Now, after 21 ...
~a5 (21...'it>hB 22 ..ig5 ~a5
 9.e4 b41O.~a4 c51l.e5 ~d512.0-0
23.i.bS±) it is very strong for
White to continue with 22.i.xf5!
~xa4 (22 ... exf5? 23.i.xg7+-) 23.
he6+ 'it>hS 24.b3! %Ya6 2S.i.xd7
%Yxh6 26.~fS WlhS 27.WlgS!? forc-
ing an endgame, which is difficult
for Black: 27... WlxgS 2S.hxgS g6
29.hcS ~cS 30.~d6 .ixd6 31.
exd6 i!.dS 32.i!.e5 i!.xd6 33.i!.eS+
~g7 34.i!.bS i.c6 3S.lhb4±
It would be interesting for him
to try IS ... a6!?
and now:
19.he7 V!fxe7 20.hS h6 21.%Ye4
WIgS with a good position for
Black;
19.V!fe4 i.xgS! This excellent
counter attacking resource for
him has not been tested in prac-
tice yet (l9 ... ~fS?! 20.~c5!±
Malakhatko - Cau, Rhone 200S)
20.V!fxh7+ ~fS 21.hxgS (21.V!fhS+
~e7 22.%Yxg7 ggS-+) 21 ...V!fxgS
and Black is not worse. It may be
the best for White to force here
a draw with 22.~f3 %Yg4 23.lDh2
V!fgS 24.~f3=;
19.i.h6 1f8 20J:~adl (it is du-
bious for White to opt for 20.hS?!
in view of 20 ... ~Sf6!+) 20 ... WlaS
21.b3 ~c3 (21 ... gacS?! 22.hSt)
cxd413.i!.el i.e714.~xd4 0-0
22.~xc3 bxc3 23.%Yg3 whS 24.i.f4
~b6oc
19.hxgS
It seems at first sight that
Black's king may come under at-
tack after opening of the h-file,
but that is not true, because he
has always the defensive resource
- ~d7-f8.
19•••a6
19... i!.cS!?
20.gadl
20.a3!? gcS!?oc (Naturally,
Black should not let the enemy
rook into action with 20 ...bxa3?!
2U~xa3 and White is already
threatening 1d3-h7).
20 •••traS!? 21.b3 ~c3 22.
~xc3 bxc3 23.b4 and here not
23 ... %Yb6, as it was played in the
game Kasimdzhanov - Khenkin,
Moscow 2001 and the opponents
agreed to a draw in this position,
but White could have tried to
fight for the advantage, for ex-
ample after 24.1c2, or 24.l'!e3!?
~f8 2S.~e2 gacS 26.1i.c2, but
23 •••'I'a2 and White has hardly
anything better than 24.gal 'l'd2
129
Chapter 12
25.gad1 fia2 26. gal with a
draw.
B2) 17...fib8!?
This interesting possibility was
found only recently.
18.ti'g3
After IS.'&e4, Black has an
only defensive resource, but it is
sufficient for equality: IS ... g6 (but
not IS .. .fS? 19.1tJxf5! exfS 20.'&xfS
ltJxeS 21.'&xh7+ 1f.>f7 22 ..te2! ltJf6
23.hf6 If.>xf6 24.f4 ltJf3+ 2S.i.xf3
hf3 26.f5!) 19..ibS ltJc7 (19 ...
ltJc3?! 20.ltJxc3±) 20 ..ic6 ixc6 21.
ltJxc6 (21.'&xc6 ltJb6=) 21...'&bS
22.b3ltJdS=
18 ... a6!
We have already seen this
standard prophylactic move; nev-
ertheless, it deserves an exclama-
tion mark.
19.9ac1
After 19.h4, it is again good for
Black to play 19... g6.
19... g61
(diagram)
This is another good move.
130
The Meran Variation
Black's bishop must be placed on
g7 and it will attack the enemy eS-
pawn from there, protecting the
king in the process. I believe he is
not worse and after White's active
move 20 .h4 (Following 20J'k4, it
is good for Black to play 20 ....ig7
21.ltJf3 .EkS and if 22J:'gh4, then
22 ....tc6 23.b3 ha4 24.bxa4 ~c3,
seizing the initiative.) 20 ....ig7
21.<tlf3 ge8! (it is a bit weaker for
Black to continue with 21...ltJe7
22.ltJc5ltJxcS 23.!!xc5ltJf5 24.Wg4
h6 2S ..ic1 i.xf3 26.'&xf3 ltJxh4
27.'&e4 ttlf5 2S.g4 ltJe7 29 ..td2
ltJdS 30 ..ic4 Wb6, draw, Socko -
Bobras, Krakow 2006) 22J~xe8+
fixe8 23.h5 Yflc7 24.hxg6 hxg6
25 •.ie4 ge8:f - Black seizes the
initiative. White's attack has back-
fired and his knight on a4 is mis-
placed, I.Sokolov - Morozevich,
Sarajevo 2007.
We have seen that the move
13 ....ie7 is quite playable, moreo-
ver that Black can choose how to
obtain a good position between
several about equally strong
lines.
 The Anti-Meran Variation

1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.~f3 ~f6 4.~c3 e6 S.e3 ~bd7 6.'Bc2

 Anti-Meran Variation
6 ...b6

Zvjaginsev and my coach 1M

Alexander Filipenko.
After 6...i.d6, there often arise
complicated and double-edged
positions, while following 6...
b6 the game is much calmer and
the positions are not so complex,
but quite stable and reliable. In
my own tournament practice the
variation with 6 ... b6 was tested
seriously for the first time in the
White avoids the Meran vari- first World Championship played
ation (6.i.d3 dxc4) by playing under the knock-out system (Gro-
6.~c2 and therefore it is called ningen 1997), when its theory
the Anti-Meran variation. was just at the beginning of its
He has some other ways, not development. In my two matches
so popular though, of avoiding against GM Vadim Zvjaginsev and
the Meran and we will deal with GM Boris Gelfand I played it four
them in the final chapter of this times with Black (in two games
book. with a classical time-control and
6 ... b6 two games in active chess) and
This move is much more sel- obtained reliable positions. I won
dom played than 6... i.d6, but it is one of these games and drew the
at least as reliable. The point is that other three.
the move 6 ... i.d6 has been played Lately the variation with 6 ... b6
very often even at the beginning of is tested more and more often in
the 20th century, while the theory tournaments at the highest leve1.
of the variation with 6 ... b6 began This can be explained by the fact
developing relatively recently - at that it is much easier for Black to
the beginning ofthe 1990ies. Two avoid unclear positions (contrary
of the greatest contributors to the to the system with 6...i.d6), main-
system with 6 ... b6, at the dawn of taining good chances of equaliz-
its development, were GM Vadim ing without too many problems.

132
Chapterl l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.tLlc3 tLlf6 4.tLlf3 e6
5.e3 tLlbd7 6.~c2 b6
In this chapter we will ana-
lyze some relatively seldom
played variations like A) 7.a3, B)
7.gbl, C) 7.e4, D) 7 ..td2 and E)
7.cxd5, while the more popular
and fashionable lines: 7..ie2 and
7..id3!? will be dealt with in chap-
ters 2 and 3 accordingly.
After 7.b31b7, the game most
often transposes to the variations
with 7.1e2 or 7.1d3 and it is dif-
ficult for White to steer the game
into original positions without
taking too many chances. 8 ..ib2
(about 8.i.e2 i.e7 - see 7..te2;
B..td3 i.e7 - see 7..td3) B...i.e7
9.0-0-0!? (9.i.e2 0-0 - see
7.~e2; 9.1d3 0-0 - see 7..id3)
9 ... 0-0. This particular position
has not been analyzed properly
yet and it is encountered in the
tournament practice only very
rarely. After the attractive line:
1O.st>b1 aS oo, the position remains
very unclear and Black's attack-
ing prospects are not worse than
White's.
A) 7.a3
This is a rarely played move
and it is not dangerous for Black
at all. White wishes to advance
b2-b4, followed by 1c1-b2 and
c4-cS, occupying eventually space
on the queenside and postponing
for a while the development of his
light-squared bishop.
This plan is a bit slow however
and as you will see later Black can
obtain a very good position rely-
ing on his lead in development.
7.••.te7!?
(diagram)
This is a simple and dynamic
move. Black develops his king-
side, delaying 1cB-b7, since his
light-squared bishop may occupy
later the wonderful a6-square af-
ter the preliminary move a7-aS.
8.b40-0
Black's prospects in this posi-
133
Chapter 1
tion are not worse at all. Natural-
ly, White has a space advantage,
but Black leads in development
and can look optimistically into
the future.
9.Ab2
After 9.id3, it is possible for
him to play 9...dxc4 (or 9 ...,tb7!?,
after which it would be reason-
able for White to continue with
1O.cxd5 cxd5 with an equal po-
sition, because variations of the
type of 10.0-0 dxc4 11:. as, or
1O.eS as 1l.,tb2 axb4 12.axb4l!xa1
13.,txa1 ~a8 14.0-0 ,ta6= do not
promise him anything positive,
while Black has a very comfort-
able game) 1O.,txc4 a5=
9 •••Ab710.cxd5!?
White should better avoid
lines like: 1O ..id3 dxc4 1l.,txc4
as; 1O.eS as, or 10 ...bxeS 1l.bxc5
(ll.dxeS as) 1l ... ~a5 12 ..id3 (12.
.ie2 .ia6) 12 ....ia6, in which he
may end up being even worse.
10 •••cxd5
This is the simplest way for
Black to equalize.
The game would be much more
complex after 1O ... exd5!? 1l ..id3,
134
The Anti-Meran Variation
but even then after 11...a5 12.b5
c5, his chances are at least equal.
1l•.id3
He has no problems and the
position is about balanced.
11 ••• a5!? - This move leads to
a complicated and approximately
equal position (Black can play
here even simpler 1l... l!c8, with
the idea to follow with llJf6-e4).
Here, after 12.b5 he plans to con-
tinue with 12 ••• gc8 with the idea
to counter 13.0-0, or 13."'e2 with
13...11Je4!?, while after 13.etJd2, he
has the resource 13 ... e5!? with a
good position.
B) 7.gb1
This move (with the idea b2-
b4 and following later with c4-eS)
is played very seldom in tourna-
ment practice.
(diagram)
7 •••.ie7!?
This is the simplest. Black
continues with his development,
ignoring the threat b2-b4 and not
preventing it with the move 7...
as.
 6.Y9c2 b6

equal after 9 ... aS 1O.bS!? follow-

ing 10.a3 axb4 1l.axb4 "ific7 with
the idea .icB-a6j or 1l ... bxc5 12.
dxc5 ~c7+ with the idea .icB-a6,
or 12.bxc5 ~c7+ again with the
idea .icB-a6, Black's position is
preferable) 10 ....ib7 (10 ... cxbS
1l.c6 b4oo) 1l.bxc6 ixc6 12.cxb6
l3bB 13 ..id3 l3xb6= and he should
not be afraid of 14.liJeS, because
of 14... liJxeS lS.dxeS liJg4 16.
He can also play 7....ib7, but hh7+ 'i!lhB 17.0-0 (17.f4?
the move 7....ie7!? is more flex- gxb1-+) 17... l3xb1 1B.liJxb1 liJxeS
ible. If White reacts straightfor- 19.f4 .ibS+ with superior pros-
wardly like 7....ie7!? B.b4 0-0 pects for Black.
9.c5 as (or 9... ~c7!? 1O..ie2 as) 10 •.ie2
Black's plans include the trade of 1O ..id3 as 1l.cxb6!? (1l.a3?!
the light-squared bishops after axb4 12.axb4 bxcS 13.bxc5 eS:fj
icB-a6. Therefore, he should not 13.dxc5 h~) 1l ...\Wxb6!? (11 ...
be in a hurry to play .icB-b7. liJxb6 12.bxaS l3xaS 13.liJbS ~b7
8.b4 14.liJc3 ~c7=) 12.bS cxbS13.hbS
Following B..id3 0-0 9.0-0 (13.liJxbS h6=) 13 ...h6!? - en-
ib7 1O.b4 dxc4!? 1l.ixc4 liJdS tering complications (after 13 ...
12.a3 aS~, Black has no problems Y9a7 Black's prospects are at least
at all and his position seems even equal) 14.ixd7 (14.0-0?! gfcB=t
slightly better. lS.,ixd7?! gxc3-+) 14....ib4 15.
8 ... 0-09.c5 .id2liJxd716.a3 gfcB17.axb4 axb4
1B.liJgS (18.~d1 bxc3 19.9xb6
cxd2+ 20.liJxd2 liJxb6t) 1B ... g6
19.h4!? (19.Y9b3?! bxc3 20.\Wxb6
tiJxb6 2IJ'ixb6 .ibS!-+ with the
idea 22 ..ic1 gal 23.\t>d1 .id3!-+)
19 ... Y9d6 20.hS bxc3 21.,ixc3
"ific6!? 22.hxg6 hxg6 23.gc1 (23.
l3b3 gabB 24.l3a3 6'bS+) 23 ...
gabB!? 24.W1d1 f6!? 2S.liJh3 (25.
tiJf3 'i!lg7t) 2S ... eS!? 26.f3!? (26.
dxeS?! d4!=t) 26 ... gb4!?~ and
Black's chances are even better.
9 ••••c7!? 10 ... a5
The game would be about He obtains a promising posi-

135
Chapter 1
tion, in which his prospects are
not worse to say the least.
1l.cxb6 (after 11.a3 axh4
12.axb4 .ia6+ Black's position is
slightly preferable) 1l••• ~xb6
(he can also choose here 11... ~xb6
12.bS cxbS13.lllxbS .b6+; 13..txbS
.ia6!? - see 10 ..id3) 12.bxa5 (12.
lllbS ~d8 13.~xc6?! .id7 14.~c2
axb4+; 13.bxaS ~c4 14.,ixc4 dxc4
1S.lllc3 ~xaS+) 12 ••• ~bd7!? (12 ...
:IDea5=) 13.0-0 1fxa5+ and Black
is slightly better thanks to his
pressure along the a-file against
the a2-pawn and the possibility to
make the thematic maneuver for
!;imilar positions - ic8-a6, plan-
ning the favourable exchange of
the light-squared bishops.
C) 7.e4
This move is in principle
thematic for similar positions,
but it seems premature in this
case, because White has not cas-
tled yet and Black can obtain a
very comfortable position exploit-
ingthis.
136
The Anti-Meran Variation
7 ... dxe4 8.~xe4 ~xe4!?
He has an excellent counter-
play after this simple and strong
move.
It is also possible for Black to
follow with 8 ....ib7 9 ..id3 ltlxe4
10 ..ixe4
1O ....ih4+!? 11.,id2 (after 11.
'i!le2 ltlf6, Black's prospects are
not worse at all with White's
king stranded in the centre) 11...
.txd2+ 12.~xd2 ltlf6 13.,ic2 (13.
~e3 ltlxe4 14.~xe4 ~e7!?+) 13...
cS!?= Now, White cannot achieve
anything much after 14 ..ia4+
'i!lf8!? 15.dxc5 ixf3 16.gxf3 bxc5=,
or 14.dxc5 ixf3 1S.gxf3 ~xd2+
16. 'i!lxd2 bxcS=
The position is more compli-
cated following 10 ... ltlf6 11.0-0

\Wc7!? and there arises a situation
with mutual chances. Black should
not fear 12J"!el (after 12 ..id3 cS,
he has no problems at all, while
the move 12.id2leads to a rather
complex and unclear position),
because of 12 ... lLlxe4 13J'!xe4 (or
13.'cl>Yxe4 cS 14.dS iLd6 IS.b4!?
O-O-O!? with a sharp position in
which Black is not worse, since
he has a powerful bishop-pair.
The move IS.'~Yg4, after IS ... 0-0!?
16.dxe6 fxe6 17.\Wxe6+ mh8, pro-
vides Black with more than
sufficient compensation for the
pawn, since his two bishops,
pointed at White's kingside, are
very powerful force.) 13 ... cS 14.
~f4 iLd6!? (Black can equalize
here with the following, practi-
cally forced, variation: 14 ....ixe4
lS:'I*'xe4 ~c8 16.i.c7!? 1e7 17.
~c6+ <j)f8 18.dS \WeB 19.\Wb7 \WcB
20.\Wc6 \WeB=) IS.ixd6 ~xd6 16.
dS O-O-O!? and his prospects are
at least equal.
9.Wlxe4 .ib4+!? IO ..ld2
hd2+ II.~xd2 .ib7
Black has a good position and
6.\Wc2 b6
he has no problems at all. White
cannot prevent the oncoming
thematic pawn-advance for Black
c6-cS. In the game Mitanovic -
Dreev, Canarias (blitz) 2004,
there followed: 12•.ld3 (after 12.
1e2 \Wc7 13.M3 0-0 14.0-0 eS!?
Black's prospects are not worse)
12 •••tfc713.0-0 ~f6 (l3 ... c5!?'1'
with the idea 14.dS 0-0-0+)
14.tfh4 c5 with a good position
for Black.
D) 7 •.ld2
This move is encountered very
rarely in practice. Its main idea is
to castle long for White as quickly
as possible and to continue with
the thematic pawn-advance e3-
e4, with the idea to dominate
in the centre. Still, this plan is a
bit too slow and White's king is
not so safe after castling long as
it would be after a short castle.
Black obtains good counterplay in
this variation and he has no prob-
lems at all.
7 •••.lh7
137
Chapter 1
8.0-0-0
This is the most logical move
for White as a continuation of
the plan begun with the move 7.
~d2.
It seems premature for him
to opt for 8.e4, because after 8. ..
dxe4 9.ltlxe4 cS!?f2 Black has
good counterplay (it is also rea-
sonable for him to continue with
9 ... ltlxe4 10.'lWxe4 V9c7!?, planning
c6-cS and castling long later).
It is not logical for White to
play here 8.i.d3. If he wishes to
develop his bishop to d3, then he
should better choose immediately
the scheme with 7.id3 (Chapter
3), in which, as you will see later,
the move i.cl-d2 is not so use-
ful. After 8.i.d3, Black's simplest
reaction would be 8 ... dxc4!? (it
is also possible for him to opt for
B...i.e7 9.0-0 0-0, with a com-
plicated and approximately equal
position) 9.hc4 cS, with a com-
fortable game.
White would not achieve any-
thing much with B.cxdS, since
Black can equalize simply with
B... cxdS. (If he wishes to enter a
13B
The Anti-Meran Variation
more complicated fight, he can
respond with B... exdS. Then, after
9.0-0-0 cS!?, or 9.i.d3 .te71O.g4,
there arise very complex posi-
tions, which we have analyzed in
the variation with 7.cxdS (line E)
after the order of moves 6.V9c2 b6
7.cxd5 exdS 8.id2 ib7 9.0-0-0
cS!? and B.i.d3 i.b7 9.id2 i.e7
lO.g4). You may have noticed that
White's queen is not very well
placed on c2 in similar structures,
since Black will soon play l"1a8-
cB, solving all his problems in the
opening, for example: 9.id3 ~c8
(it is also quite acceptable for him
to follow with 9 ... a6 10.0-0 .id6
1l.e4 dxe4 1VLlxe4 ltlxe4 13 ..be4
l"1c8 14.V9d3 he4 15.V9xe4 0-0=
Raffaele - Marchiani, Italy 2000)
10.0-0 .id6 1U!.fc1 0-0 12.V9b3
a6=
8 ....ie7
This is the main line for Black.
It may be interesting for him
to try a move, which is only sel-
dom played and not analyzed
properly yet - B... V9c7!? Now, af-
ter White's standard reaction 9.
e4 (9.'it>b1 ie71O.e4 dxe411.ltlxe4
ltlxe4 12. V9xe4 cS=) there may fol-
Iowa variation like: 9 ... dxe4 10.
ltlxe4 ltlxe4 11.W1xe4 c5!? (11...
0-0-0=) 12.d5 0-0-000 with a
complicated position in which
Black's prospects are not worse,
for example: 13.V9f4 (13 ..tf4 .td6
14.hd6 W1xd6 IS.llJg5 !l:hf8 16.
ltlxh7 !l:feB 17.ltlg5 !l:e7 18.W1h4
ltlf6+) 13 ....id6 14.W1xf7 exd5 15.
W1xg7 d4~ with sufficient compen-

sation for the pawn for him.
9.e4
This is the most fashionable
move in this position for White.
He cannot achieve much with
the prophylactic 9.'it>bl. Black can
reply to this with 9 ... c5= with an
approximately equal position, or
try to enter a much more compli-
cated situation after the natural
reaction 9 ... 0-0 1O.liJg5!? (fol-
lowing 10.e4 dxe411.liJxe4liJxe4!?
12:~xe4 4'Jf6 13:~c2 c5+ he has no
problems and his position seems
even preferable; or 1l...c5 12.i.d3
cxd4=; it may be interesting for
Black to continue in a gambit style
- 12 ... b5oo and if 13.cxb5, then
13 ... liJxe4 14.,ixe4 ,ixe4 15:~xe4
a6!~) 10 ... c5!? 1l.cxd5 (1l.id3
h6 12.h4 dxc4!? 13.hc4 cxd4 14.
exd4 gc8 15.i.d3 a6!?+) 1l ... exd5
12.i.d3 h613.h4 gc8+! and the po-
sition remains very complicated
and double-edged with mutual
chances.
9 ... dxe4
It would be interesting for
Black to try a move, which has not
6.Wfc2 b6
been tested in practice yet - 9... b5
and that would be an attempt to
seize the initiative with a pawn-
sacrifice. White is not obliged in
that case after 1O.exd5 (He can
choose more reliable paths, in-
stead of accepting the pawn-sacri-
fice, with 10.e5 b4 1l.exf6 bxc3
12.i.xc3 liJxf6=, or 12.fxe7 cxd2+
13J':!xd2 Wfxe7=, or 1O.exd5 cxd5
11.c5 b4 12.liJa4=, with approxi-
mately equal positions in all the
cases.) 10 ... cxd5, to accept the
pawn sacrifice: 1l.cxb5 (1l.cxd5?!
b4 12.dxe6 fxe6=F), after 1l ... liJe4!?
(1l ... a6oo) 12 ..ie1 O-Ot Black
maintains the initiative for the
pawn.
1 0 .~xe4 c5!?
This is the most energetic re-
sponse for him.
He can also play the waiting
movelO ... Wfc7, forexample: 1l ..id3
liJxe412.i.xe4liJf6 13 ..id3 0-0 14.
i.c3 gfd8 15J'!he1 b5!? 16.c5 (it is
rather dubious for White to opt
for 16.cxb5?!, because after 16...
cxb517.i.xb5?! gabS1S.ia4 gdcS,
or 18.!d3 gdc8, Black's initiative
is very dangerous) 16... a5 17.g3
b4 18 ..id2 .ia6 with a reliable po-
sition for him, Ivanisevic - Tadic,
Serbia 2007.
11.~xf6+!?
It is worse for White to con-
tinue with 1l.i.d3, in the game Po-
povics - Al.Kharitonov, Chalkidi-
ki 2003, after 11...cxd4 12.liJxd4
liJxe4 (12 ... liJe5!?+) 13.i.xe4 i.xe4
14:~'xe4 !kS+ Black had better
prospects.
139
Chapter 1
11 •••J.xf6
He has never tried in practice
the move 1l... ltJxf6, but I think
that it deserves a serious atten-
tion. Here, after 12.dxc5 (12.i.c3
Yffc7=) Black can reply with 12 ...
bxc5, reaching an about balanced
position. Now, he should not
fear 13.i.h6, because of 13 ... Yffa5
14.hg7 E1gS 15.Yf!b3 ~b6 16.i.xf6
(16 ..th6ltJg417.i.e3 Yf!xb318.axb3
ltJxe3 19.fxe3 a5~) 16 ....txf6, or
15 ...Yf!c7 26 ..th6 ltJg4 17.1e3 E1bS
and in both cases Black maintains
the initiative with good compen-
sation for the pawn.
He can also play 12 ... 0-0, of-
fering a positional pawn-sacrifice
for the pawn.
140
The Anti-Meran Variation
For example:
13.1c3 ~c7 14.cxb6 axb6 15.a3
(15.wbl :gfdS~) 15 ...1e4 16 ..td3
i.xd3 17.~xd3 b~;
13.1f4 YffcS 14.cxb6 axb6 15.a3
(15.wbl b5!~; 15.b3?! b5!?+) 15...
i.c6~, threatening i.c6-a4;
13.cxb6i.e4!? 14.~b3 ~xb6!?~
(14 ... axb6~) and here, it would be
rather dubious for White to play
15.Yf!xb6?! axb6+ and he cannot
continue with 16.a3? in view of
16 ... ~a3!-+
White may refrain from ac-
cepting the pawn-sacrifice by
playing 13.1d3 and it deserves at-
tention for Black to counter that
with 13 ...Yffc7!? (13 ... bxc5=), with
the idea to capture on c5 with his
queen. Now, after 14.cxb6 axb6,
Black has sufficient compensa-
tion for the pawn, because of the
threat e6-e5, for example: 15. wbl
(15.a3 e5 16.ltJg5 h6 17.ltJe4 ltJxe4
lS.he4 i.xe4 19.~xe4 :ga4+; 17.
ltJh7 ltJxh7 IS.i.xh7+ wh8 19.f3
g6 20.i.xh6 :gfd8+; 19.i.e4 i.xe4
20.Yffxe4 :ga4 21.'i!ibl b5!?+) 15 ... e5
16.ltJg5 h6 17.ltJh7 (17.ltJe4 ltJxe4
18.i.xe4 i.xe4 19.Yf!xe4 Yffa7 20.a3
i.xa3 21.1c3 1e7+) 17... ltJxh7 IS.
hh7+ 'i!ih8 19.f3 (19.1e4 he4
20.Yf!xe4 ~a7 21.a3 .ba3+) 19 ...
g6 20.i.xh6 Wxh7 (20 .. J'~fdS? 21.
hg6±) 21.i.xf8 MSoo - with a
complicated and unclear position,
with approximate material equal-
ity. Black however, has a bishop-
pair and his prospects are not
worse. For example, he can coun-
ter White's seemingly attractive

move 22.h4 with 22 ... e4!? 23.hS
wgB+! with a double-edged posi-
tion.
12.d5
The game is about equal after
12.dxc5 lLlxc5 (it also deserves at-
tention for Black to try 12 .. :ll:Yc7!?
entering the variation 13.cxb6
axb6 14.wbl lLlcS and White's
situation is precarious, because
Black has powerful initiative for
the pawn) 13..if4 'Il:YcB= G.Stoltz -
K.Junge, Gennany 1942.
12••• exdS 13.cxdS 0 - 0
The prospects of both sides are
about equal in this complicated
position. In the game Istratescu -
H.Stefansson, Turin 2006, there
followed: 14.h4!? c4!? (It may
be interesting for Black to test
the somewhat strange move 14...
iLd4 with the idea to parry the
threat IS.lLlgS with the move IS ...
~f6, while after IS ..tgS lLlf6, or
IS.wbl lLlf6, the position would
remain rather unclear.) 15.~g5
g6 16.~e4 hd5 17.~xf6+ (17.
.ib4!? l3cB!? IB.hfB WxfB~) 17•••
.xf618.,th6 .ie619•.lxf8 gxf8
6."Il:Yc2b6
20 .h5 ~~ with a good game
for Black, since he has more than
sufficient compensation for the
pawn.
E) 7.cxd5
This variation is encountered
in practice much more often than
the other possibilities for White,
which we have already analyzed.
With the move 7.cxdS White forc-
es his opponent to clarify the situ-
ation in the centre immediately.
7 •••exd5!
This move leads to a compli-
cated struggle.
Black has tried in the tourna-
ment practice 7...cxdS as well, but
that move is too passive, because
after 8.~bS! he is forced to en-
ter the variation B....ib4+ 9.iLd2
hd2+ 10.~xd2, exchanging his
dark-squared bishop and that is
in favour of White in this position.
He obtains as a result a minimal
but long-lasting positional ad-
vantage and Black is forced into
a passive and laborious defence.
In addition, in a similar pawn-
141
Chapter 1
structure, he cannot even dream
about active counterplay after the
trade of his dark-squared bishop.
Therefore capturing 7... cxd5 does
not deserve attention at all.
8 •.id3
This is the most popular and
natural move for White.
He cannot achieve anything
much if he delays the develop-
ment of his bishop to d3. After
B..id2 .ib7 9.0-0-0, the simplest
reaction for Black would be 9 ...
.ie7 (It is also possible for him to
play immediately 9 ...c5!? 1O.c.tJb1
.ie7=; 10 ....id6!?=; 10 ... a6 11.~e5
.id6 12.f4 gcB with a complicated
position in which the prospects of
both sides are about equal, Na-
kamura - Dreev, Canarias (blitz)
2004) 10 ..id3 (lO.c.tJbl c5 1l..id3
a6!?=) 10 ... c5 11.c.tJb1 a6!? After
this move, Black has a more solid
position (He should not be in a
hurry to castle - 11 ... 0-0, since
then he would have to consider
the knight-sortie 12.c~Jg5 and af-
ter 12 ... g6 13.h41' White will have
the initiative, while following 12 ...
h6 13.h4oo the position would be
unclear.).
142
The Anti-Meran Variation
12.~e5 - He must play ener-
getically; otherwise, after c5-c4,
followed by b6-b5, Black will seize
the initiative. 12 ... c4 13 ..if5 g6!?
14..ih3 (His position is not worse
after 14..ixd7+ ~xd7 15.h4 lL'lxe5
16.dxe5 Yfffc7 17.f4 0-0-0 1B.lDe2
c.tJbB= with the idea .ib7-cB, or
17... h5 1B.lDe2 .icB!? 19. lDd4
.ic5:+:; 1B.f5!? gxf5 19.Yfffxf5 YfffcB=;
1B ..ie1 0-0-0= and if 19.1De2,
then 19 ... c.tJbB 20.lDd4 .icB=F)
14... 0-0. Black's chances are not
worse. Here, after 15.f3 b5 16.e4
lDb6 17..ib6 geB, Black has no
problems, while following 15.f4
b5 16.f5 b4 the position would be
double-edged. In variations of the
type of 17.fxg6 bxg61B.lDxg6 bxc3
19.1DxfB hfB 20.hc3+± or 17.lDa4
g5!? 1B.e4 g4+± Black's prospects
are not worse thanks to his slight-
ly better coordination of pieces.
8 ....ib7!?
This is the most precise order
of moves for him.
After B....ie7, he must consider
the possibility 9.g4 (this idea
belongs to Garry Kasparov), or
9 ..id2 0-0 (The best for Black
here is 9 ....ib7!? - see B....ib7.)
1O.g4!? with dangerous initiative
for White. Later, in the game
Kasparov - Deep Junior, New
York 2003, there followed: 10 ...
If.'lxg4 1U!gl!? (11 ..ixh7+!? c.tJhB
12.h3 ~gf6 13 ..id3 c5 14.0-0-0;1;)
11 ... ~df6?! (Black had better
play here 11 ... lf.'lgf6 12.e4 dxe4
13.~xe4 lL'lxe4 14.he4 lL'lf6 15.
hc6 .ig4 16.haB YfffxaB 17.~e5

.ihSJ; - Kasparov) 12.h3 ttJh6
13.e4 dxe4. In the above men-
tioned game, White played
14 ..ixh6, but that provided Black
with the possibility after 14... exd3
lSJ~g7+ C;!;>h8 16.%Yxd3 gg8 17.
~g8+ ltJxg8 18.if4 f6! to hold the
position. According to G.Kaspa-
rov, it would be stronger for White
to continue with 14.ixe4! C;!;>h8
(14 ... ltJxe4? lS ..ixh6 ifS 16.gxg7+
~h8 17.ltJxe4 %YdS 18.gg4! ib4 -
18 .. J~g8 19.1'U4!± - 19.wfi gg8
20.igS ie7 21..ixe7 ~g4 22.hxg4
he4 23.if6+ Wg8 24.%Yd2+-) IS.
hh6 gxh616 ..ixc6 gb817.0-0-0
hh3 18.ltJeS hS 19.~d3 ig4 20.f3
ie6 21.dS ic5 22.ggel .ih3 23.
d6± with a great advantage for
him.
EI) 9.id2
E2) 9.0-0
EI) 9.id2
White plans to prepare later
g2-g4 and castle long, which
would lead to a more complicated
and double-edged game.
6.%Yc2 b6
9 •••.ie7
This move seems to be the
most natural. It is reliable and
has been tested in practice, but
provides White with the possibil-
ity after lO.g4 to enter a very com-
plicated and unclear position.
If Black wishes to avoid the
complications after 10.g4, he can
avoid this variation with the move
9 .. J'!c8, which is very seldom
played and not analyzed at all.
Now, if White plays lO.O-O, then
after lO ....ie7, the prospects of
both sides are about equal. For
example, after the thematic move
11.e4 (l1.ltJeS g6!? 12.f4 0-0(0) it
is possible for Black to follow with
11 ...dxe4 IViJxe4 0-0= reaching
an equal position, since White is
incapable of preventing c6-c5. Af-
ter lO.O-O-O the game becomes
sharper and Black can enter a very
tactical position, which has not
been tested in practice, with the
move lO ... cS (he can also react
more tentatively with 10 ...ie7 11.
~bl 0-000, or 11... %Yc700 with com-
plicated and approximately equal
positions) 11.ltJeS!?00 (ll.C;!;>bl 11.
id6!?=) and which requites a
thorough analysis. I would like to
show you the following rather
amusing variation: 11 ....id6 (11 ...
g6(0) 12.ltJxd7 (12.f4 cxd4 13.exd4
ltJe4=) 12 ... ltJxd7 13.ixh7 (13.
C;!;>bl!?oo) 13 ... cxd4!? 14.exd4 bS
lS.c;!;>bl b4 16.ltJbS ~c2 17.ltJxd6+
c;!;>e700 18 ..ixb4 gxb2+ 19.c;!;>xb2
C;!;>f6 20.gd3 gxh7 21.gf3+ c;!;>g6
22.gg3+ C;!;>f6 23.gf3=
143
Chapter 1
lO.g4
This aggressive pawn-advance
leads to a double-edged position.
10.0-0-0 c5 I1.Wbl a6 - see
7.cxd5 exd5 8 ..id2.
The move 10.0-0 cannot cre-
ate any serious problems for
Black, because after castling short
the early development of his
bishop to d2 is not so useful for
him and after 10 ... 0-0, the posi-
tion remains equal. Following the
standard move for simi1ar situa-
tions 11.~eS, Black's best response
would be 1l... cS!? (It is too risky
for him to enter the complica-
tions after 11...ltJxe5 12.dxe5 lLlg4,
at least because of the following
semi-forced variation: 13.hl7+
~h8 14.f4!? d4 15.lLldl .ic5 16.j;f3
dxe3 17.lLlxe3 ~h4 18J~h3 lLlxe3
19 ..ixe3 ~xh3 20.gxh3 .ixe3+
21.Wf1!? and White's position is
at least equal. Now, it would be
rather dubious for Black to play
21...g6?! in view of 22.~e4±; or
14.edl!? ~c8 lS.i.c2 g6?! 16.f4
d4 17.lLle4 dxe3 18.~c3t; 15 ...
'i!i>g8!? 16.f4!? d4 17.lLle4 dxe3
18 ..ic3;!:;) 12.f4 a6!?~ with suf-
144
The Anti-Meran Variation
fident counterplay for Black. In
the game Landa - Dreev, Russia
1998, there followed: 13.a4 (after
13 ..tfS g614.~3 bS, or 13J:~adl b5
Black's prospects are not worse)
13 ... lLlb8!? 14 ..tfS lLlc6 IS.lLle2 g6
16 ..th3 lLle4 17J''1adl Wic7 18.i.el
Elad8 19.whl Elfe8co with a com-
plicated position with at least
equal position for him.
lO ... g6!?
I believe this move is more re-
liable than W ...h6 and I prefer it
for Black.
After W ... h611.1!gl, there aris-
es a complicated and unclear po-
sition, but due to White's perma-
nent threats g4-gS or h2-h4 (fol-
lowed by g4-gS), his chances in it
seem preferable. For example,
following Black's immediate at-
tempt to organize active counter-
play with 1l ... c5, White can react
with 12.gS hxgS 13.lLlxgS Elxh2?
14..ig6!+-; 13 ...1!h6!? (Black par-
ries the permanent threat ~d3-
g6) 14.0-0-0t
1l.g5!?
This move looks more logical

than lU!gl if we have in mind his
fight for the opening advantage.
After lU~gl, in the game
M.Eriksson - Dreev, Copenhagen
2009, Black played ll ... cS!? 12.h4
a6 13.tDgS c4 14 ..ie2 bS and his
prospects were at least equal.
11 ••• ~h5
This position is very compli-
cated and it has not been analyzed
extensively yet, or tested in the
highest level. I would like to dis-
cuss with you several of the most
attractive possibilities for White.
12.e4
It seems too slow for him to
opt for 12.h4, because after 12 ...
cS 13.0-0-0 a6+! Black has suf-
ficient counterplay.
He can counter 12.0-0-0
with 12 ... 0-0 with the idea after
13.e4 (13.wbl E:c8!? 14.e4 bS!? IS.
exdS b4!?oo) to reply with 13 ...bS!?
with good counterplay, or to
choose 12 ... cS 13.wbl 0-000,
which leads to a complicated and
approximately equal position.
Meanwhile, White must consider
the possible capturing of the gS-
6.'fic2 b6
pawn after 12 ...hgS 13.tDxgS
'fixgS, indeed, in that case after
14.h4, he will have no doubt suf-
ficient compensation for the
pawn. I do not like this idea for
Black however, since he will have
to part with his dark-squared
bishop.
12 ••• 0-0!?
This is the most reliable re-
sponse for him.
The situation is not so clear and
reliable for Black after 12 ... dxe4
13 ..b:e4 fS, for example: 14.i.d3
(14.gxf6 tDhxf6? IS ..ixg6!+-; 14 ...
tDdxf6 IS.0-0-0 ttJxe4 16.'fixe4
0-0 17J3hel i.f6oo) 14 ... cS!? lS.d5
a6!? 16.0-0-0 b5 17.d6!? hd6
18J'!hel+ i.e7 19.ttJh4 0-0 20.
i.xf5 gxf5 21.ttJxf5 E(xfS 22.'fffxf5
ttJg7 23.'11ttg4 ic600 the position is
double-edged indeed, but White's
prospects are not worse at all.
13.0-0-0 b5!? 14. ..t>bl
14.exd5 b41S.ttJa4 cxd516. wbl
P.:c8 17.\¥fb3 Wa5=i'
14... gc8 15.exd5
If Black wishes to obtain an
equal, reliable and solid position
145
Chapter 1
without too many problems he
should enter the variation 15 ...
b4!? (Naturally, he can compli-
cate the situation with IS ... a6,
having in mind the variation 16.
dxc6 ixc6 17.~e4 b4 IB.ixc6 -
IB.lLJa4? b3!=F - 18 .. J~xc6 19.~a4
bxc3 20. ~xc6 cxd2 21.h4 ItJb6
22J%xd21tJf4 23.dSltJfxdS 24J~hdl
~bB!+ 2S.EixdS? l'kB-+; 23.ltJeS
f6!?co, but it is understandable
that it would involve a certain de-
gree of risk from him.) 16.d6!?
hd6 17.~e4 1e7 IS.1e3 c5
19.dxc5 ~xc5 20.hc5 (20.
lLJxc5?! .ixf3 21.ixg6 hxg6 22.
l"lxdB l"lfxd8 23. Eiel ixcS 24.ixc5
lLJf4=F, or 23.l"lgl i.xcs 24.i.xcS
tLlf4=F) 20 •.. .Axc5 21.1a6 "f!¥b6
22.hb7 ti'xb7 23J'!hel gfeS=
E2) 9.0-0
This relatively calm move is
encountered most frequently in
tournament practice.
9 •••1e7
10.e4
That is White's most popular
move in this position.
146
The Anti-Meran Variation
About 10.~d2 0-0 - see 9.~d2
:lJ.e7 10.0-0 0-0.
Black should not fear at all
the move 10.l"lbl. After 10 ... 0-0
Il.b4 as= in the game Sorokin -
Dreev, Elista 1996, there followed
12.bxaS l"lxaS 13.ltJeS (13.a4 ~a6=)
13 ... h6 14.ltJxd7 ItJxd7 IS.i.d2 ~a7
16.a4 ItJf6 17.~fcl :lJ.a6 18.ixa6
Eixa6 19.E!b3 ~a8 20.E!cbl ~bB
21..telltJeB=
The move 10.lLJeS is played
only very seldom. Black's most re-
liable reaction would be 10 ... 0-0
(The position after 10 ... lLJxeS 11.
dxeS lLJd7!? 12.f4 tLlc5 has not
been tested in the serious tourna-
ment practice yet and it is rather
unclear. It requires an extensive
practical test, but it very interest-
ing for the analysis of variations
of the type of 13.:lJ.e2 as!? 14.e4
d4 IS.~dl 0-0 16.~e3 lLJe6 17.f5
~eB IB.fxe6 dxe3co, or 13.:lixh7 g6
14.:lixg6 fxg6 IS.~xg6+ ~d716.b4
lLJa6 17.bS ItJcS 18.e4 mc7 19.bxc6
i.xc6 20.exdS ixdS 21.l"ldl ~e4 22.
l"lxdB ixg6 23.l"lxaB ~xa8 24.g4
~g8co) 1l.f4 g612.:lJ.d2 c5= with an
approximately equal position.
After 1O.b3 0-0 11.ltJeS (Black
should better counter 11.:lJ.b2 with
11 ...:lJ.d6, not letting the enemy
knight to the eS-square, with an
about equal position, or ll .. J;eB
12.ltJeS :lJ.d6 13.f4 ItJfBco with a
complicated game, with about
equal chances, while following 12.
Eiacl.id6 13.Eifdl V/ie714.lLJe2ItJe4
IS.tLlg3 tLlxg3 16.hxg3 ItJf6 17.V/ie2
as, Black's position is a bit better,
Ivanisevic - Sakaev, Dos Her-
manas 2003.) 1l ... c5!? 12 ..tb2 (12.
f4?! cxd4 13.exd4 :Ek8 14 ..tb2
4Je4=t) 12 ... a6!?, there arises a
complicated situation, which is
nearly balanced. In the game Sve-
tushkin - Itkis, Eforie Nord 2009
there followed: 13.a4 l':!e8 14.l':!adl
4.'lf8 lS.4Je2 l':!c8 16.'Wbl id6 17.
ttJg3 cxd4 18.exd4 ib400 the posi-
tion remains equal and Black's
prospects are not worse at all.
10 ••• dxe4 11.c!ilxe4 0-0
12.o!ileS
White is trying with this move
to obtain at least a minimal ad-
vantage.
He cannot achieve much with
the seldom played move 12.~el,
because after 12 ... lLlxe4 13.he4
lLlf6 14 ..tfS (14.id3 c5=) 14... g6
IS.id3 ltJdS=, in the game Pau-
wels - Repp, corr. 2000, there fol-
lowed later 16 ..td2 (16.a3 'Wd6=)
16 ... ltJb4 17..bb4 hb4=
12••• cS!
After this move, Black equal-
izes easily without any problems.
13.o!ilxd7
The position remain equal af-
ter 13.lLlxf6+ lLlxf6 14.dxc5 hc5
IS.~dl and his best reaction would
be IS ... Wc7 (IS ... We7=) 16.if4
l':!ae8 17.b4 (17.4Jg6? 'lWc6+; 17.l':!el
lLlg418.llJxg4 'lWxf419.hh7+ @h8
20.WfS? ~xel+ 21.~xel 'lWd2-+
threateningib7-c8; 20.ifSid4GG)
17....td6 18.Wxc7 hc7 19.1tJg6
hf4 20.ltJxf4 gS=
There arise complications af-
ter 13.ltJgS g6 14.ic4 (14.ltJexf7
~xf7 lS ..tc4 ltJdS 16.lLlxf7 'i!lxf7
17.'Wb3 ltJ7f6 - see 14 ..te4) 14 ...
ltJdS IS.ltJgxf7 ~xf7 16.lt:Jxf7 @xf7,
but Black's prospects are not
worse at all. In the game Danie-
lian - T.Kosintseva, Ekaterinburg
2007, after 17.'Wb3 ltJ7f6 18.dxc5
'i!lg7 19.~dl hc5 20.igS 'Wf8 21.
'Wh3 @h8 22.'Wf3 'Wg7 Black par-
ried his opponent's initiative and
obtained an edge.
13••• ft'xd7! (13 ... ltJxd7?! 14.
dxc5 bxc5 IS.if4± Xu Jun - Sa-
sikiran, Hyderabad 2002.) 14.
o!ilxf6+ .ixf6 15.dxcS hg2= 16.
'iflxg2 ti'g4+ 17.'O!lhl 'l'f3+, draw,
Wang Yue - Dreev, Moscow 2004.
147
Chapter 2 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.~c3 ~f6
5.e3 ~bd7 6.Uc2 b6 7 ..ie2
White cannot create any great
problems for his opponent with
this tentative move.
7....i.h7
Black has two main lines here:
8.0-0 and S.b3 and we will ana-
lyze them both.
A) 8.h3
B) 8.0-0
A) 8.h3 .i.e7
Naturally, it is also possible for
him to play here S... il.d6, but the
variation with S...,ie7 is simpler
and more reliable. He wishes to
castle short and to complete his
development with ~dS-c7 and
later, depending on White's set-
up, to place his rooks in the centre
14S
4.~f3 e6
on dS and cS, or on eS and bS and
to prepare the thematic pawn-ad-
vance c6-cs equalizing. White is
practically incapable of counter-
ing effectively this plan as you are
going to see later.
9 •.i.h2
White would not change
anything much if he delays the
move il.c1-b2, after 9.0-0 0-0
lOJ'!dl (10.il.b2 ~c7 - see 9.il.b2;
1O.e4 dxe4 l1.tLJxe4 cs=) 10 ... ~c7
U.il.b2 gadS!? (U ... gfdS 12.gacl
gacS 13.il.d3 h6 14.~e2 ~S,
Black in the game Brenkmeijer
- Sakaev, Groningen 1992, equal-
ized, since after Is ..ibl, he would
have the resource 15 ... cs 16.cxd5
It:ixd5 17.tLJxd5 hd5=. while after
 6. ~c2 b6 7. .te2 ib7

lS.h3 - lS ... dxc4!? 16.bxc4 c5=; lLlxdS= Sarakauskas - Bucher,

16.ixc4 bS!?=) 12J!:acl §'b8 (af- Winterthur 2003.
ter 12 .. J'lfe8? ! he must consider 14 ...1nJ8 15.!fe2 dxe4 16.
13.cxdS exdS - but not 13 ... cxdS? he4
14.lLlxdS! - 14.lLleS g6 lS.f4t) 16.bxc4 cS=
13.h3 (13.cxdS cxdS=) 13 .. JUe8
14.§'bl h6 lS ..ifl dxc4 16.bxc4 cS
17.dS exd5 18.cxd5 .id6oo Droz-
dovskij - Galkin, Russia 2004.
9 ••• 0-010.0-0 !fe7

16 ...b5!? 17•.ld3 b4 18.~a4

c519.~xc5 ~xc5 20.dxc5~c5
21.~c5 hc5 22 •.lxf6 gxf6
23.~e1 f5= Black's bishop-pair
compensates his somewhat com-
This position is dynamically promised pawn-structure, Nikolic
balanced, but the prospects of - Malakhov, Sibenik 2008.
both sides are approximately
equal.
1Ulac1 B) 8.0-0
l1.~fdl - see 9.0-0.
11.~adl ~ad8. This is the sim-
plest for Black. He maintains the
dynamic balance by a symmetrical
deployment of his rooks. 12J'lfel
~fe8 13 ..id3, Farago - Nikolov,
Ljubljana 2003, 13 ...h6 14.h3 a6=
planning lS ... dxc416.bxc4 cS.
1l... gae8 12.gfd1 gfd8
13 •.id3
13.e4 dxe4 14.lLlxe4 c5=;
13.§'bl ~b8=
13 ... h614.h3 He has two basic moves at his
14.§'e2 ~b8 lS ..I\bl c5 16.cxdS disposal: B2) 8 ...J.e7 and the

149
Chapter 2
seemingly more active H1) 8...
.Ad6.
Black plays sometimes the
move 8 ... dxc4 9..ixc4 cS lOJ~dl
(It is not so energetic for White to
continue with 1O.'8'e2, because af-
ter 1O ... a6, Black has no problems.
In the game Timman - Kasparov,
Reykjavik 2004, there followed
later l1.a4 .Ad6 12J~dl 0-0 13.dS
exdS14.~xdS ~xdS1S ..txdS J.xdS
16JhdS ~f6 17J!dl ~e4 18.~d2
~xd219 ..bd2 'iffc7= with an equal
position. Following lU!dl bS 12 .
.Ab3 'iffc7, Black's prospects are
at least equal, while after 13.dS
c4 14.dxe6 fxe6 lS ..tc2 .id6 16.e4
O-Ot Black seized the initiative,
Straeler - P.Nielsen, Germany
2008) 1O... cxd4 (l0 ... a6?! l1.dS;!;;
10 ...'iffc8 l1.dS exdS12.~xdS .bdS
13.i.xd5 ~xd5 14J~xdS .Ae7 lS.e4
0-0 16..igS ge817.gadU Wang-
Carlsen, Wijk aan Zee 2009; 16 ...
i.xg5 17.~xgS h6 18.gadl lLlf6?!
19.e5!±; 18... lLlb819.lLlf3;!;) l1.exd4
(l1.~xd4 a6 12.e4 'iffc7!?oc) 11 ...
.b:f312.gxf3 .Ad6.
White's prospects are prefera-
ble here, despite the fact that his
pawn-structure is compromised,
150
The Anti-Meran Variation
for example: 13.dS eS 14.~bS 'iffe7
IS ..Af1! 0-0 16.Wlc6 icSl7.d6 'iffd8
18 ..Ah3;!;
H1) 8 ••• .Ad6
The immediate move 9.e4 is
not so dangerous for Black, since
he has not castled short yet. 9 ...
dxe4 10.~xe4 (lO.lLlgS? c5 11.
lLlgxe4 ~xe4 12.lLlxe4 .Axh2+! 13.
~xh2 mt4+ 14.~gl .txe4+) 10...
lLlxe41UYxe4lLlf6. This is a relia-
ble response (It is interesting for
Black to try 1l ... 'iffc7!?, planning
06-05. 12.'iffg4 - this is a princi-
pled move, which he can counter
in a gambit style: 12 ... c5!? 13.dxc5
lLlxc5 14.~xg7 0-0-0 lS.Yfh6
gdg8oo, or 13.'iffxg7 0-0-0 14.
Wlxt7 gdf8 lS.'iffhS ghg800 and in
both cases there arise complicated
an unclear positions. They can be
evaluated definitely only after ex-
tensive practical tests, since they
have not been tried in tourna-
ments yet.). 12.~h4 (12.'iffc2 c5=)
12 ... c5 13.dxc5, Pogorelov - Prie,
Andorra 1994, 13 ...bxc5 14J::tdl

~e7 15 ..ig5 h6 and Black has no
problems. He can simply castle long.
9 ••• 0-0
9 ... ~e7!?
10.e4 dxe4 11.c!tJxe4 lOxe4
12.~xe4
12 ... ~c7
12 .. J'!e8?! 13.c5 .if8 (13 ...
bxc5? 14.dxc5 ~xc5 15.~c2 ~c7
16 ..ie3 ~d7 17.~d2+-; 16 ... ~a6
17.~g5 g6 18.~a4+-) 14.~c2 ~c7
15 ..ie3i Piket - Dreev, Monaco
(m/6) 1996.
Black has some other interest-
ing possibilities here.
12 ... ~e7!? 13 ..if4 ~f6= (It is
somewhat inferior for him to con-
tinue with 13 ....ixf4 14.~xf4 llJf6
15.~e5 c5 16..if3 .txf3 17.~xf3
[lac8 18.:gd3 ~c7 19.~e3 :gfd8 20.
:gada with a slight but stable posi-
tional advantage for White, Ftac-
nik - Gormally, Hastings 2000);
12 ... llJf6 13.~h4 ~e7 14.llJe5
(Black should not be afraid of
14 ..id3 c5 15..ig5 h6 16.hh6?
gxh6 17.~xh6 llJe4! 18.d5 f5
19.~g6+ \Wg7 20.~xe6+ wh8
21.,he4 :gf6-+; 19 ..txe4 fxe4
6. ~c2 b6 7. .ie2 .ib7
20.~g6+ ~g7 21.~xe6+ gf7 22.
IMlxe4 :gaf8 23.whl .ic8-+) 14 ...
~c7!? (14 .. JUd8?! Zvjaginsev
- Filipenko, Orel 1992, 15 ..ig5
h6 16.ixh6! gxh6 17.1'!d3 with
a crushing attack for White, for
example: 17... wh7 18.:gf3+-; 17...
~e8 18J~g3+ ~g7 19.~xh6+-;
17... c5 18J!g3+ wh7 19 ..id3+
llJe4 20.,ixe4+ .txe4 21.1Mlxe4+ f5
22.1Mlf3 he5 23.dxe5±) 15 ..ig5!?
he5 16.dxe5 ~xe5 17..ixf6 ~xf6
(17 ... gxf6?! 18.:gd3 :gfd8 19.:gg3+
wf8 20.~h6+ We7 21.Jili5 l'!d7
22 ..ixf7 gad8 23.1'!£1 gdl 24.Jili5
l'!xfl+ 25.Wxfl±) 18.~xf6 gxf6
19.:gd7. His prospects in this end-
game are superior, despite Black's
extra pawn, for example: 19 ...
l'!ab8 20 ..if3 gfd8 21.gadl gxd7
22.gxd7±, or 19 ....ic8 20.gc7 e5
21.:gxc6;!;; 20 .. J'!d8 2U!dl ~dl +
22.,ixdl e5 23.~c6 .ie6 24.w£1i
13•.td3
13.c5 bxc514.~h4gfe815.dxc5
.ie716 ..ig5 ~xc517.:gac1~ Karpov
- Ivanchuk, Tilburg 1993.
13... g6
13 ... ltJf6? 14.~h4±
14.~h4
151
Chapter 2 The Anti-Meran Variation

14... c5! would have the resource 1I ... eS.)

14.. J~feS?! 1S.ttlgS ttlfS? (Black 1O.e4 dxe4 11.ttlxe4 'HIc7.
had better play here 1S... ttlf6)
16.ttle4 i.e7 17..igS± Kasparov -
De Poi, Asiag Ludi 1991.
15.~g5
1S ..ie4 ixe4 16:~xe4 cxd4!
17.'HIxd4 ttleS and he has no prob-
lems to say the least, since White
cannot play 1S.'HIxd6?, because of
1S....E\adS-+
15... ~f600
The chances of both sides are
approximately equal, since White
B2} 8 ....Ae7 can hardly prevent Black's the-
matic pawn-advance c6-eS. If he
tries to do that with 12.tLlxf6+ (12 .
.tg5 eS - 12 ... EifeS!? - 13.d5 exdS
14.cxdS E:feS! with excellent pros-
pects for Black. He should not fear
the line: 12.tLlc3 eS! 13.dS exd5
14.cxdS a6 and his chances are not
worse, while following 1S.ttlh4 (it
is better for White to opt here for
1S.a4) 1S ... g6 16.il.gS :gfeS 17.'~"Yd2
il.d6 1S.g3 bSt he even seizes the
initiative, Cifuentes - Zvjagin-
This is no doubt Black's most sev, Hoogovens 1995) 12 ... ttlxf6
solid and reliable move. (12 ....ixf6?! 13.ttlg5;l;) 13.c5, then
Its idea is quite simple. After Black's simplest road to equality
White's standard pawn-advance is 13 ... bxcS 14.dxeS as, followed
in similar positions e3-e4 (now by il.b7-a6.
or later), Black plays dxe4 tLlxe4 9 ... dxe4 10.~xe4 c5 11.
eS and he can continue without Itlxf6+
the obligatory exchange on e4 if (diagram)
he wishes to have his bishop de- 1l....ixf6!
ployed on the d6-square. 1I ... ttlxf6 12.dxcS i.xeS (12 ...
9.e4 bxeS 13.if4;l;) 13.b4 il.e714.il.b2;l;
9J:!d1 0-0 (It is also interest- 12.gdl cxd4
ing for Black to choose 9 .. .'ffc7, so 12 .. :ffc7!? 13 ..ie3 (13.d5!? exd5
that after 1O.e4 dxe4 11.ttlxe4, he 14.cxdS 0-000) 13... cxd4 14.ttlxd4

152

a6= N.Birjukov - V.Popov, St. Pe-
tersburg 1996.
12 ... 0-0 13.dxc5 bxc5 14.M4
~cS 15..!i'Jg5 g6 16..!i'Je4 (16.l3d2?!
id4 17..!i'Jf3 ~c6 with a better
position for Black, Skatchkov -
Filipenko, Tula 1999) 16....txe4
17.~xe4 .txb21S.l3abl id419.if3
.!i'Jb6 20.~c2 l3bS 21..txbS ~xbS
22.g3;t
13.tlxd4 0-0 14.tlbS 'lfe7
lS.Af4eS
6.V!Jc2 b6 7.ie2 ib7
Black's position is not infe-
rior, for example: 16•.te3 (16.ig3
.!i'Jc5 17..!i'Jc3 .!i'Je6 IS ..!i'Jd5 .txd5
19J:~xd5 .!i'Jf4 20 ..txf4 exf4 21.if3
l3adS=; 17..!i'Jd6 ic6 18..!i'Jf5 ~b7
19..!i'Jd6 V!Je7=) 16••• tlc5 17.tlc3
(17..!i'Jd6 ic6=) 17••• tle6 (17...
.ig5!? IS ..!i'JdS bd5 19.bg5 V!Jxg5
20.cxd5 l3fdSoo) 18.tldS .txdS
19.cxdS (19.l3xd5 .!i'Jf4 20 ..txf4
exf4=) 19 ••• tld4 20 •.txd4
exd4=
153
Chapter 3 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.~c3 ~f6
S.e3 ~bd7 6.~c2 b6 7.id3
This is the most active move
for White and it is the most popu-
lar too.
7 ....ih78.0-0
B.b3 ie7 9.ib2 (9.0-0 0-0
- see 8.0-0) 9 ... 0-0 10.lLleS
(10.0-0 h6 - see 8.0-0; lOJ3d1
h6 11.0-0 Vffc7 - see B.O-O) 10 ...
h6 11.f4 (11.0-0-0 lLlxeS 12.dxeS
lLld713.f4 lLlcS 14.ie2 a5=; 11.0-0
lLlxeS 12.dxeS lLld7 13.f4 lLlcS 14.
ie2 aSoo with a complicated game
in which Black's prospects are not
worse; 13.l'!ad1 lLlxe5 14. lLlxdS
lLlf3+!? 1S.gxf3 cxdS16.cxdS hdS
17.e4 ~cB 1B.Vffe2 ib719 ..ibS id6
20.Vffd2?! hh2+ 21.l!Ixh2 Vffh4+
22.l!Ig2 1'!cS't; 20.l!Ih1 Vffc7 21.~g1
g6=) 11 ... cS 12.0-0-0. This is a
very risky decision (it is better
154
4.~f3 e6
for White to play 12.0-0 cxd4 -
see B.O-O). 12 ... E!cB 13.l!Ib1 a6!
14.~hg1 bS 1S.cxbS axbS 16.hb5
cxd4 17.exd4 lLlxeS 1B.fxeS lLle4+
Gireada - Danilov, Baile Tusnad
1999.
8 ••• .A.e7
That is the most popular and
reliable response for Black.
The position after B... dxc4
9.hc4 cS has been analyzed in
the variation with 7.ie2.
It would not be so sensible for
him to play B... i.d6, because after
9.e4 dxe4 1O.lLlxe4lLlxe4 11.1i.xe4,
White has some initiative, for ex-
ample:
11 ...h6 12.,te3lLlf6 13.cS!?t;
11 ... lLlf6 12.igS h6 (12 ... ti'c7

13 ..bf6 gxf6 14.c5;t) 13.ixf6 W!xf6
14.c5;t;
1l ...W!c7 12 ..ie3!? cS (12 ... fS
13.cS:t; 12 ... lLlf6 13.cS;t) 13..ixb7
W!xb7 14J3adl 0-0 lS.dS exdS
(1S ... eS?! 16.lLlgS fS 17.g4 g6 18.
lLle6± Ftacnik - Zhao Zong, Bris-
bane 2005) 16J~xdS;t
9.b3
This is the main line and it is
encountered most often in the
tournament practice.
9.e4 dxe4 10.lLlxe4 c5 (10 ...
lLlxe4!? 1l ..ixe4 lLlf6 12.lLleSoo
Mamedyarov - Timofeev, Mos-
cow 2004) lU3dl W!c7 12 ..igS (12.
lLlxf6+ lDxf6= Ziyang - Nadera,
Manila 2008) 12 ...h6!? 13..ih4
lLlxe4 14 ..ixe4 (14 ..ixe7 lLlgS!+)
14 ....ixh4 IS.lLlxh4 he4 16.~xe4
0-0=
White would not achieve
much with 9.lLleS, because after
9 ... lLlxeS 1O.dxeS lLld7 1l.f4 lLlc5
12 ..te2 0-0, Black's chances are
not worse at all.
After 9J:tdl, it would be very
good for him to continue with 9 ...
W!c7, removing the queen from
6. W!c2 b6 7..id3 .ib7
the d-file and preparing to coun-
ter the pawn-advance e3-e4 (he
can also choose 9... 0-0, without
being afraid of the variation 1O.e4
dxe4 1l.lLlxe4 lLlxe4 12 ..ixe4 lLlf6
with an approximate equality, for
example: 13..if4 lLlxe4 14.~xe4
W!c8=; or 13 ..id3 ~c7 14.c5 h6=;
14..igS h6 IS ..ih4 c5=; or 13.lLleS
lLlxe4 14.W!xe4 W!c7 lS.ti4 c5=;
IS ...gS!?; 10.lLleS h6!? 1l.f4 c5
12.~e2 a6!?=; 12 ... dxc4!? 13 ..ixc4
lLldS=) 10.b3 (10.e4 dxe4 1l.lLlxe4
c5=; 1l ... lLlxe4!? 12 ..ixe4 lLlf6=)
10 ... 0-0 1l ..ib2 h6!? 12J~acl (12.
lLleS ~xeS 13.dxe5 dxc4! 14.bxc4
~g4, or 14..ixc4 ~g4 with an ex-
cellent game for Black) 12 .. J::!ac8
(it is weaker for him to play 12 ...
gad8, in view of 13.cxdS! cxdS?
14.lLlxdS+-; 13... exdS 14 ..ifS;t
with the idea ~f3-eS and then to
follow with f2-f4) 13.~e2 dxc4!?
14.bxc4 (14 ..ixc4 gfd8=) 14...c5,
with a complicated and about
balanced position, for example:
lS.dS exdS 16 ..ifS gcd8 17.~xdS
(or 17.cxdS a6) 17... lLlxdS 18.cxdS
.tf619.d6 W!b8.
9 ... 0-0
155
Chapter 3
10 •.lb2
lOJ;dl ~c7 - see 9J;dl.
After the knight-sortie 10.ttJeS,
Black's simplest and most reliable
response would be 10 ...h6!? with
a complicated position. 11.f4 (11.
.ib2 ttJxeS!? 12.dxeS ttJd7 13.f4
ttJc5 14 ..ie2 aSoo) 11... c5 12 ..ib2
(12.cxdS ttJxdS 13.ttJxdS .lxdS=;
12J~d1 cxd4! 13.exd4 ttJxeS 14.
fxeS dxc4 lS..lxc4 ttJdS=) 12 ...
cxd4 13.exd4 dxc4 14.bxc4 ttJxeS
lS.fxe5 lWxd4+ 16.~h1 ttJg417.ttJe4
~d7 18.~e2 ~ad8 19J:~ad1 .lxe4
20.~xe4 (20 ..lxe4? ~xd1!-+)
20 ...f5 21.exf6 (21.lWe2? .ic5-+)
21...ttJxf6 22.~e2 (Black should
not fear 22 ..lxf6 ~xf6 23.lWh7+
~f8) 22 ... lWc6 23.~de1 ttJe8!?=
with approximate equality.
10 •••h6
This is a reliable reply after
which he equalizes without too
many problems.
1l.Bad1
This is the most popular move
for White.
11.~fd1 ~c7 12.ttJeS (12.~ac1
lS6
The Anti-Meran Variation
gac8 with the idea 13.~e2 dxc4
14.bxc4 c5=) 12 ... ttJxeS 13.dxeS
ttJg4 14.h3 (14.cxdS?! ~xeS) 14 ...
ttJxeS lS.-"7+ ~h8 16.cxdS cxdS
17.ttJxdS ~xc2 18 ..lxc2 .lxdS 19.
.lxeSgac8=
1l ••••c712 ••e2
12.gfe1 gad8!?=
12.e4 dxe4 13.ttJxe4 ttJxe4 14.
.lxe4 ttJf6 (14 ... gad8!?=) IS ..id3
c5=
12 ••• gadS 13.~e5
13..ibl c5 14.cxdS ~xdS IS.
ttJxdS .lxdSI6.e4 .ib717.~c2 gfe8
18.dS exdS 19.exdS ttJf8 20.~f5
.id6 21.~g4 ttJg6! This sacrifice is
an important resource for Black
and he obtains an excellent com-
pensation for the pawn. 22.,ixg6
fxg6 23.~xg6 ~f7 24.~xt7+
~xt7= Gelfand - Dreev, Gronin-
gen 1997.
13••• dxc4 14.bxc4 ~xe5
15.dxe5 ~d7 16.f4 ~c5
17•.lb1 gxd1 1S.Jlxd1 (18.
ttJxdl bS!+t) 1S••• gdS= with ap-
proximate equality, Sasikiran -
Malakhov, Pamplona 2008.
 The Anti-Meran Variation
6 ....id6
This move is more popular
than 6 ...b6 and it leads to compli-
cated and often double-edged po-
sitions with mutual chances.
Before we begin the analysis
of 6 ••• .Ad6, I would like to share
a few words with you about the
move 6 ....Ae7 - it may lead to
original positions only if White
continues with the not so well
analyzed move 7.g4, which Black
should better counter with 7... g6
(7...h6!?oo; 7...dxc4!?oo) B.gS tl)hS
9.h4 (or 9J~~gl 0-0) 9... 0-0 with
a solid and reliable position. M-
ter 7.~e2, 7.~d3, or 7.b3, Black
should reply with 7... 0-0 with the
idea to follow with b7-b6, or im-
mediately 7...b6, transposing to
reliable positions, which we will
deal with later.
157
Chapter 4 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.~c3 ~f6 4.~f3 e6
5.e3 ~bd7 6.ec2 .id6

In this chapter we will analyze: This is the most energetic re-

A) 7.a3, B) 7.e4 and C) 7 •.Ad2. sponse for him and it seems quite
logical. White has a space advan-
tage, but Black leads in develop-
A) 7.a3 ment and he should better avoid
This is a very rarely played waiting strategy connected with
move. Its idea is to delay the de- moves like 8 .. J~e8; or 8 ...~e7 and
velopment of the light-squared must start active actions immedi-
bishop and to wait until Black ately.
captures dxc4, so that to be able 9.cxdS cxd5 10.~bS .tb8
to advance b2-b4 in the nearest 1l.dxeS ~xeS 12•.Ab2
future and to follow that with .tc1- It is not preferable for White
b2. Still, this plan with the post- to choose 12.<~jxe5 ixe5 13.ib2,
ponement of the development of because of 13 ...if5! 14.Wxf5 ixb2
White's queenside is somewhat 15.gb1 a6, or 15... g6!? and Black
slow and as you will see later, has no problems whatsoever.
Black can obtain very good coun- 12 ••••e7
terplay with simple and natural It may be also interesting for
moves. him to try a move, which has
7 .•• 0-0 8.b4 eS!? never been tested in practice 12 ...

158

tLlxf3+ 13.gxf3 a614.tLld4l!e8 with
a complicated and approximately
equal position.
13.gcl ~xf3+ 14.gxfJ .teS
His chances are not worse
at all and the only drawback of
his position is the isolated pawn
on d5, but it is compensated by
Black's superior development and
White's king stranded in the cen-
tre. In the game Dao Thien Hai -
Kasimdzhanov, Bratislava 1993,
there followed later lS •.txeS
~xeS 16.~c3 1fltS 17.~d6 .te6
lS ..te2 b6 19.Bd4 gfdS with a
nearly balanced position, which
needs great precision from White,
since his king is rather unsafe in
the centre.
B) 7.e4
This move does not create any
serious problems in the opening
for Black, although it is standard
in similar positions. In this situa-
tion however, it is a bit premature,
because White has not completed
his development yet and has not
castled.
6. Wfc2 .td6
7".~xe4 S.~xe4 dxe4 9.
1be4
9".cS!
I believe this is the most active
and the best move for Black, after
which he has active counterplay
and excellent chances of seizing
the initiative at an opportune mo-
ment.
He can reach approximate
equality with 9 ....tb4+ 10 ..td2
hd2+ 11.tLlxd2, but in that case
the game is simplified and Black
loses his chances of seizing the
initiative altogether.
It is interesting for him to
try the variation 9 ... e5 10.dxe5
O-O!? 11.exd6 (11..td3?! is+'; 11.
159
Chapter 4
tLlg5? .ib4+ 12.'>!ie2 f5-+; 11 ...
tLlf6 12J~'e3 ixe5-+) 11 .. J3e8 12.
~xe8+ ~xe8+ 13.~e3 and White
has compensation for the queen.
This position is well familiar in
the theory of this variation, but
I think Black's prospects are not
worse. Still, that position, in com-
parison to the variation with 9 ...
n5!, which we analyze in the main
line, is not so solid and clear.
10 •.ig5
This is the most fashionable
move for White.
10.id3 cxd4 1l.ffxd4 tLle5!'t
He cannot achieve much with
1O..id2, because after 1O... ~f6
11.~c2 (lUM3 cxd4!? 12J1Mxd4
e5!?+; 11.YMh4 cxd4= with the
idea 12.~xd4 e5!?'t) 1l... cxd4
12.<~Jxd4 .ic5 (12 ....id7=) 13.tLlb3
iJ.e7 14.ie2 ~c7 15.0-0 .id7,
Black's prospects are not worse at
all, Smyslov - Chernin, Subotica
1987.
10 •••.ie7!?
That is his most reliable reply.
After 10 ... ~a5+ 11.i.d2 ~c7,
White has more possibilities to
fight for the initiative, but in that
case the position remains approx-
imately equal.
1l.,lxe7 "Ba5+!
Following 11 .. .'l!fxe712.0-0-0,
White maintains an edge thanks
to his slight lead in development.
12.me2
Black has no problems at all af-
ter 12.tLld2 cJJxe7 13.0-0-0!? (fol-
lowing 13.dxc5 ~d8!?; 13.YMh4+
~f6 14.tYg5 b6; 13 ..ie2 gd8!?;
160
The Anti-Meran Variation
or 13..id3 cxd4!? his chances
are not inferior) 13 .. J''!d8!? (13 ...
~xa2 14 ..id3~) 14.tYxh7 tLlf6 (14 ...
~xa2?! 15.d5!±) 15.V='Ixg7 gxd4,
his prospects in this complicated
position are not worse. Now, it is
rather dubious for White to con-
tinue with 16.tLlb3?!, because af-
ter 16.. J3xd1+ 17.'i!?xd1 ~xa2 18.
@c2 .id7 19.tYg5 b6 20.h4 .ia4
21.gh3 gg8 22.~e5 gg4! 23.tYc7+
llJd7 24.h5 Y9a1, he ended up in
a hopeless position in the game
Bakhtin - Filipenko, Moscow
1989. In another game - Gorelov
- Kishnev, USSR 1984, there fol-
lowed 16.tYg5 16....id7! 17..id3?!
(17 ..ie2!?oo) 17.. J~g8 (17.. J:!xd3?
18.tLle4+-) 18.llJb3 l3xg5 19.tLlxa5
gxg2 20.tLlxb7 tLlg4! 21.llJxc5 tLlxf2
and Black had an overwhelming
advantage.
12 ••• Wxe713.g3
Black's chances are about
equal in this position. For ex-
ample: 13 ••• Y:fb6!? - this is the
simplest. 14.b3 ~f6 15.'ffe5
cxd4 16.:!!:dl :!!:d8= 17.:!!:xd4
.id718 •.ig2 .ic619.mtdl :!!:xd4,

draw, Erdos - Gustafsson, Rogas-
ka Slatina 2009.
The position is much more
complicated after 13 ... cxd4 14.
i.g2 (following 14.~xd4 e5!? only
White may have problems. In the
game Bojgo - Bruzon, Aosta
2004, after 15.~d2 ~c716.~g5+?!
't!ifB 17Jk1 f6 1B.~e3 ltJc5 19.ig2
ig4 20.'t!ifl ~dS 21.ltJe1 as 22.h3
ie6 23.'t!ig1 @f7 24.~h2 !3d7 25.
:gfl :ghdS, Black seized the initia-
tive) 14 ... lt'lf6 15.~xd4 gdS 16.
~f4 (16.~e3 It'lg4 17.~g5+ ~xg5
IB.lt'lxg5 id7=) 16 ...id7 17.lt'le5
ia4!? (It is not so precise for him
to play 17... ieB1BJ:~hda Kramnik
- Gelfand, Dortmund 2007.) IS.
:ghe1!? (lB.b3 gd2+!? 19.~xd2
~xe5+ 20.~e3 ~b2= Laznicka -
Atalik, Polanica Zdroj 2007) IS ...
~b6= with a nearly balanced po-
sition.
C) 7 ..td2
This is a very popular move.
White prepares castling long,
hoping that his lead in develop-
6.~c2 id6
ment will help him to maintain
a slight positional advantage and
therefore Black must play ener-
getically in order to prevent that.
At first, he must decide how to
bring into the actions his light-
squared bishop.
7 ... 0-08.0-0-0!?
This is the most fashionable
and no doubt White's most ener-
getic move.
His alternatives of the type of
B..te2, S..td3, or S.a3 are much
less active and seem to be second-
rate, mostly because he has played
too early the move ic1-d2, which
is not so useful in similar set-ups.
8 ... c5!?
This move was introduced into
the serious tournament practice
at the beginning of the 50ies of
the past century by Mikhail Bot-
vinnik and it provided Black with
active counterplay.
His other possible pawn-break
- B... e5, leads after the practically
forced line: 9.cxd5 cxd5 1O.lt'lb5
.ibS 11.dxe5 (H ..ib4 !3eSCXl) H ...
It'lxe5 12.lt'lxe5 he5 13 ..tc3 .ixc3
161
Chapter 4
(13 .. :~e7!?00) 14.lDxc3 .ie6, to a
relatively simple and approxi-
mately equal position, but it is
understandable that in a pawn-
structure with an isolated pawn
for Black, he would hardly obtain
an active counterplay. His even-
tual attempts to seize the initia-
tive are doomed to failure. Still, if
we have in mind only equalizing,
the entire variation is quite ac-
ceptable for him.
9.cxd5
White would not achieve much
with 9.dxc5 lDxc5 (9.lDb5 i.e7+),
because that would only enhance
Black's development, for example:
1O.i.e1.id7!? 1l.cxd5 exd5+. Here,
it would be too risky for White to
capture the pawn on d5, because
after 12.lDxd5 ~c8 (with the idea
.ia4) Black has very dangerous
initiative for the pawn.
Following 9.wb1 a6!? (it is also
possible for him to continue with
9 ... dxc410 ..ixc4 a6 with approxi-
mate equality) 1O.cxd5 exd5, there
arises by a transposition of moves
a situation, which we will analyze
later in the main line after the
move-order 9.cxd5 exd510.wb1 a6.
White has also tried in tourna-
ment practice the sharper move
9.e4 and Black's simplest reac-
tion to that would be entering the
variation 9 ... cxd4 10.lDxd4 .ie5!?
1l ..ig5 (1l.i.e1 .ixd4 12.~xd4 e5+;
1l ..ie3 dxc4!? 12 ..ixc4 V!!c713 ..ie2
a6=; 1l ....hd412.~xd4 e513.~xd5
lDxd5 14.exd500) 1l ... dxe4!? and
his prospects would be at least
162
The Anti-Meran Variation
equal. In the game Khurtsidze -
Zhukova, Groningen 1999, there
followed later 12.f4 (12.Wbl V!!b6!?
13..ie3 tilg4+; 12.lDxe4 V!!a5+) 12 ..•
.ixd413.fixd4 V!!a514.~d1 (14.wbl
e5!?) 14 ... b6 15.lDxe4 V!!xa2+ with
a better position for Black. The
game is much sharper and not
so clear after 1O ... dxc4 (instead
of 1O ....ixe5!?) 1l ..ixc4 a6!?00 the
position remains very compli-
cated and its pawn-structure re-
sembles the Sicilian Defence in a
very good version for Black and
his prospects in it are not worse
at all. For example, in the game
G.Kuzmin - Filipenko, USSR
1985, there followed later 12.i.g5
(12 ..he6 fxe6 13.lDxe6 V!!eB!? 14.
lDxfB.ixf'8oo 15.f4lDc5!?) 12 ...V!!a5!
(12 ... b5? 13.lDxe6!+-; 12 ...V!!c7?!
13..ixe6!?t) 13.f4 h6!? 14.e5?!
(14.lDxe6!? hxg5 15.~xd6 fxe6
16 ..ixe6+ WhBoo; 16.~xe6 Wh800)
14...hxg5 15.exd6 gxf4 16.~hel
ltJb6! 17..ib3 i.d71B.lDf3 ~acB and
he had a great advantage.
9 ... exdS

This is a useful prophylactic
move.
It would not be advisable for
White to postpone the removal
of his king away from the c-file.
For example, after 10.~el, Black's
best reaction would be 1O ... c4!?
11.g4!? (this is his most fashion-
able and logical move) 11 ... lLlb6!?
and his prospects are not worse to
say the least, for example: 12.h3
(Black should not fear 12.gS, be-
cause after 12 ... ~g4 13.~e2 lLle4!?
- 13... lLlfd7= - 14.lLlxe4 dxe4
15. ~xe4 ~c8 16. ~c2 ge8, he has
good compensation for the pawn
and here following 17.lLle5 (there
is nothing better for White in view
of the threat .ig4-fS) it is possible
for Black to continue with 17...
he2 18.§'xe2 he519.dxeS ~eS
and his chances are not worse at
all) 12 ... ge8 13..ig2 ~d7 with a
good position for Black, because
after 14.lLld2, he has the resource
14...~b4!?f with a more promis-
ing position for him.
Following 1O.h3 ge8!? 11.g4
lLle4, Black has a good position.
In the game Lovkov - Vitiugov,
Herceg Novi 2005, there followed
12 ..iel lLlxc3 13.hc3 c4 14.lLle5
f6 IS.lLlxd7 hd7 16 ..ig2 ie6t
with initiative for Black. His most
promising plan is connected with
b7-bS, followed by b5-b4 and it is
quite obvious.
White cannot inflict any dam-
age with the knight-sortie 10.lLlgS,
because after 10 ...h6 11. h4 ge8!,
Black's prospects are at least
6. VfJc2 ~d6
equal. Later, in the game Avrukh
- M.Gurevich, Lost Boys 1997,
there followed 12.~d3!? (He
should not be afraid of 12.lLlxdS
hxgS 13.lLlxf6+ 13 ...§'xf6 14.hxgS
~xgS IS.~h7+ 'it>f8+ with a com-
plicated position, in which Black's
prospects are clearly preferable,
since he has an extra piece; 13.
hxgS lLlxdS 14.§'h7+ 'it>f8-+) 12 ...
lLlf8!? 13.dxc5 hc5 14.lLlf3 ~e6
(14...ig4!?) IS.lLld4 gc816.f3lLl6d7
17.'it>bl a6 18.lLlxe6 fxe6 19.f4 bS
with excellent counterplay for Black.
10 ••• a6
This is the most popular
move.
He can also try the rarely
played line: 1O... ge8 1l.lLlb5 ~f8
12.dxc5 lLlxc5 13..ib4 b6 with a
complicated and approximately
equal position.
H.Ad
This prophylactic positional
move is most often encountered
in practice.
White would not achieve much
with the immediate 11.e4, because
after 11 ...dxe4 12.lLlxe4 lLlxe4 13.
163
Chapter 4
~xe4 lDf6, Black's prospects are
at least equal, Panno - Bisgkier,
Bogota 1958.
The move 11.dxc5?! only en-
hances the comfortable develop-
ment of Black's queenside and is
not good for White at all. After
11 ... lDxc5 12.i.cl i.e6 13.lDd4 ~c8,
Black's position is clearly better,
Goczo - Zhukova, Tusnad 2004.
He should not fear the knight-
sortie l1.lDg5, because after 11 ...
h6!? 12.h4 ~e8!? (12 ... lDb6!?oo)
Black's chances are not worse. In
the game Sahovic - Pavlovich, Nis
1988, following 13.lDh3 b5 14.f3
cxd4 15.exd4 lDb6t he seized the
initiative, since it was more than
obvious that his queenside coun-
terplay was much more danger-
ous than White's attack on the
kingside.
1l •••c4
It deserves attention for
Black to try the riskier move 11 ...
b5, since after 12.g4 (follow-
ing 12.dxc5 lDxc5 13.lDxd5 i.b7!?
White's queen is misplaced on
the c2-square and Black has more
than sufficient compensation for
the pawn and dangerous initia-
tive after 14.lDxf6+ 'iexf6 15.l3d4
l3fe8 16.Wal ~ac8, as well as fol-
lowing 14.lDf4 l3c8 15.~d2 lDfe4
16.~el 'ief6) 12 ... b4 13.dxc5 lDxc5
14.lDxd5lDxd515.~d5 .ib716 ..ic4
ixd517.hd5, there arises practi-
cally by force a position, which
has never been tested in tourna-
ment practice. No doubt, White
has some compensation for the
164
The Anti-Meran Variation
exchange in it, but Black's pros-
pects are not worse at all.
12.g4 ~b6 13.h3
After 13.g5 i.g414.i.g2 (14 ..ie2
lDe415.lDxe4 dxe416.~xe4 ~c8~)
14... ~e8 15.e4 ~c7, he has a good
game.
13,..ge8 14•.tg2 .tb4!?
This move was first played by
M.Botvinnik and it provided Black
with active counterplay. It is now
well-familiar in theory and his
chances are at least equal in it. In
the game Taimanov - Botvinnik,
Moscow 1952, there followed later
15.~e5 (According to M. Botvin-
nik, White's best move here is
15.~d2!?oo but it has not been
tried in practice yet.) 15,..hc3
16.1fxc3 ~e4 17.1fc2. After 17.
he4 dxe4 18.~xc4 ~d5~ Black's
compensation for the pawn is suf-
ficient (M.Botvinnik). 17,..~d6
18.J.d2 a5 19.J.el f6 20.~f3
J.d7+ with a slightly better posi-
tion for him, since White has some
difficulties with the development
of his queenside. Black has threats
like i.d7-a4 and ~b6-a4.
ChapterS 1.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.tl~c3 ~f6
S.e3 ~bd7 6.Bc2 .ld6 7.b3
White plans to develop his
dark-squared bishop to the b2-
square, preparing in the proc-
ess to capture in the future after
dxc4, with his pawn and not with
the bishop.
7••• 0-0
A) 8 •.ld3
B) 8 •.lb2
Both these moves are not dan-
gerous for Black from the point
of view of fighting for the initia-
tive. It is stronger and more solid
for White to continue with B.!e2
and we will analyze this after the
move-order 6.~c2 !d6 7..le2 0-0
B.b3.
4.~f3 e6
A) 8 ..ld3
The idea of this move is that
in the pawn-structures after B...
dxc4 (or B...b6 9.0-0) 9.bxc4 e5,
White's bishop on d3 is much
more actively placed, than in
analogous schemes with a bishop
on e2 and this fact provides him
with more possibilities to fight for
the opening advantage in similar
structures.
Still, Black is not obliged at all
to respond to B..td3 with B... dxc4,
or B... b6 and he has instead the
much more powerful and ener-
getic reply
8 ••• e5!
with good counterplay.
9.cxd5
165
ChapterS
After 9.dxeS tt:lxeS 1O.tt:lxeS
AxeS 11 ..lb2 (11.0-0 d4!? 12.exd4
Wfxd4 13..lb2 Wfh4=) 11 ... dxc4 12.
Axc4 (l2.bxc4 ~e7=) 12 ...~aS!?
13.0-0-0 (13.0-0 .lfS+) 13 .. J~eB,
Black's prospects are not worse.
9 ••• cxd510.dxe5
AfterlO.tt:lbS, the simplest road
for him to equality is 10 ....lb4+
11 ..ld2 Axd2+ 12.lDxd2 e4!? (The
position is about equal too after
12 ... exd4 13.tt:lxd4 liJeS 14.0-0
.ld7) 13..le2 tt:lb6!?=. In the game
Lenic - Asrian, Crete 2007, there
followed 14.a4 (l4.WfcS tt:leB -14 ...
.lg4!? - ISJkl .ld7 16.liJd6 ~gS
17.liJ2xe4 Wfxg2 18.liJg3 ~h3=
Safronov - Kharitonov, Chebok-
sary 2006) 14....ld7 IS.aS AxbS
16.AxbS tt:lc817.a6 b61B.0-0 liJd6
19 ..le2 ~cB and Black's prospects
are at least equal.
10 ••• ~xe5
1l./t)xe5
11 ..le2?! tt:lxf3+!? (l1 ....lg4+)
12.i.xf3 d4!? 13.exd4 ~eB+ 14.',!;>f1
(14 ..le3 ~aS+ with the idea .lcB-
fS; 14.i.e2 i.b4+; 14.ltJe2 i.g4t)
14...~aS IS.i.b2 .lf516.Wfd2 ~acBt
166
The Anti-Meran Variation
Black should better counter
11.tt:ld4 with 11 ....ld7!? (after 11 ...
.tg4oo; it would be interesting for
him to try 11 ... ltJxd3+ 12.Wfxd3
tt:le4!? with the idea 13.liJxe4 dxe4
14.Wfxe4 ~eB IS.~d3 WfgS~ with
compensation, but that variation
has not been tested in practice
yet) 12.0-0 !kB 13 ..ib2 !leB!?
with a good position for Black,
since White's queen is not so well
placed on the c2-square .
After 11 ..ib2 tt:lxf3+!? (11 ...
i.g4oo) 12.gxf3 i.h3!? Black's
chances are at least equal. In the
game Vubowic - Ciric, Yugoslavia
1960, there followed later 13 ..lf1
(13.~gl ~cB!?) 13 ...i.xfl 14.@xf1
Wfd7i IS.Wfd3?! Wfh3+ 16.@e2 .le5
17J:'~agl tt:lh5 IB.~gS ~feB+ with a
great advantage for Black.
1l••• .lxe5 12 ..lh2
His prospects are not worse in
this position.
12 ••• d4
This is the simplest.
There arise more complicated
and not so clear positions after
12 ... ~e813.liJe2!? (after 13.0-0-0

i.g4!? 14.f3 i.d7 1S.~b1 lk8,
Black's chances are at least equal;
following 13.0-0, it is possible
for him to continue with 13 ... d4!?
14.exd4 ~xd4= with equality) 13 ...
~d6 (13 ... d4 14.e4!?CXl; 14.exd4
i.xd4=) 14.i.xeS ~xeS with a com-
plicated and approximately equal
position, Polugaevsky - Mecking,
Mar del Plata 1971.
It is also possible for Black to
choose 12 ... 1d7!? 13.lLle2!? (but
not 13.0-0-0?! in view of13 .. Jk8
14.<tt>b1 i.xc3 1S.i.xc3 d4! 16.exd4
lLldS-+; 16.i.xh7+ lLlxh7 17.~xd4
~e7+; and after 13.0-0, it is good
for him to opt for 13 .. J''!c8 with
at least equal chances) 13 ... ~c8
14.~d2 hb2!? 1S.~xb2 .tbS!?
16.i.xbS ~aS+ 17.~d2 ~xbS= with
a balanced position.
13.exd4 hd41?
13 ...~xd4 14.0-0-0!?;1;
14.0-0
14.0-0-0 i.e6 1S.<tt>b1 Eic8=
14•••J.e6 15.gadl gc8 16.
§'d2 .lg4= with equality.
B) 8.i.b2
6. vtic2 iid6 7.b3 0-0
8 .•• e5!
Black solves all his problems
in the opening with this reply and
he has very good counterplay in
this scheme.
9.cxd5
The variations 9.i.e2 exd4 and
9 ..te2 e4 will be analyzed after the
move-order 6.vtic2 i.d6 7.i.e2 0-0
8.b3 eS 9.iib2.
Following 9.0-0-0 e4 1O.lLld2
lLlg4 (or 1O .. J~e8) 11.lLldb1, only
White may have problems.
After 9.dxeS lLlxeS 10.0-0-0
(10.lLlxe5 i.xeS 11.0-0-0 ~aS!?
with the idea 12.f4?! i.fS!?=; 11.
i.d3 dxc4 - see 8.i.d3) 10 ...i.g4
11.i.e2 Eie8!? Black's prospects are
not worse. In the game Roman-
chuk - Borovikov, Alushta 2008,
there followed 12.h3 .ills 13.lLlxeS
i.xe2 14.~xe2 heS lS.cxdS cxdS
16.~b1 Eic8 17J'%d3 vtiaS~ with ex-
cellent counterplay for him.
9 ••• cxd5
10.lLlb5
After 1O.i.e2 e4 11.lLld2 a6, or
1l ... lLlb8 12.lLlbS lLla6, Black's po-
sition is even slightly preferable.
167
ChapterS
Following 10.dxeS ~xeS, he
has again good counterplay,
for example:
11 ..ld3 ~xf3+!? 12.gxf3 .ih3!?;
11.~d4 .ld7 with the idea
12 ..ld3lk8 13.0-0 ge8!?~;
l1.~xeS heS 12 ..ld3 .ld7 (or
12 ... d4!? 13.exd4 hd4 14.0-0-0
.ie6=) 13.~e2 gc8 14.Wld2 .ixb2
lS.Wlxb2 i.bS 16.hbS 'fffaS+ 17.
Wld2 WlxbS=;
White cannot achieve anything
much with 1l ..le2, due to 11...
lLixf3+ 12 ..ixf3 d4! 13.exd4 ge8+
and Black's initiative for the pawn
is very dangerous.
See several examples, which
deserve most attention:
14.~e2?! .ig4!? lS.hg4 (IS.
0-0 gc8 16.~d3 .ixf3 17.gxf3
~dS+) lS ... ~xg416.h3 gc817.~d3
168
The Anti-Meran Variation
Wlh4 18.g3 ~hS!?-+ with the idea
to follow with 19.CO!;>f1 ~e3;
14..ie2 .ig4 lS.f3 .ihSt 16.
co!;>f2?! .if4+; it is also interesting
for Black to consider the possibil-
ity 14... ~g4!?, for example: lS.g3
Wlf6!? 16.0-0 .lf5!?t with the idea
17.~d2lLixh2!? 18.@xh2 'fffh4+ 19.
co!;>gl.ixg3 20.fxg3 't'Ixg3+ 21.CO!;>hl
.ie4+, or lS.h3 'fffh4 16.0-0 ~h2!?
17.gfe1? (it is preferable for White
to continue here with 17.lLibS
.if4+) 17...hh3 18.gxh3 ge6-+
Nagibin - Parhomov, Dagomys
2010;
14.co!;>f1 'fffaS lS.'fffdl (lS.dS .ig4
16..ixg4 lLixg4 17.h3 lLif6 18.~d3
gac8 19.a3 .leSt Marhovev - Kor-
neev, Albacete 2009) lS ....lb4
16.gc1 .id7 17.a3 .ixc3 18.!!xc3
lLidS 19.hdS (19.gc5? .lbS+ 20.
co!;>gl ge1-+) 19 ...~xdSt Korchnoi
- Beliavsky, Leon 1994.
10 ••• .th4+ 1l•.tc3 txc3+
12.~xc3
After 12.Wxc3, only White may
have problems. In the game Jere-
mic - Portisch, Rethymnon 2003,
there followed 12 ... a6!? (12 ... e4

13.llJd2 llJb6=; Black's position is
slightly preferable following 12 ...
llJe4 13.'~c7 V!Je7, or 13.V!Jb2 a6)
13.llJc7 (White would not fare any
better after 13.llJd6 e4 14.llJe5
lLlxe5 15.dxe5 llJeBt, or 14.lLld2
llJg4!+ with the idea 15.ie2 lLlxf2
16.'it>xf2?! V!Jf6-+; 16.0-0 llJf6 17.
ltJxb7lLlh3+ 1B.gxh3 bb719.wh1
V!Jd'T+) 13 ... exd4 14.lLlxd4 lLle4
(14 .. J':!bB!? 15J~c1 ltJe4 16-'~'b4
ltJe5+) 15.~c2 ~bB 16.b4 llJe5 17.
1'!c1 b5+ and Black has a great ad-
vantage.
12 ... e4 13.~d2 ~b8!?
This is the main line for Black
in this position. The game would
be approximately equal too after
13 ... ltJb6 14..ie2 (or 14.h3ltJeB!?=
with the idea V!Jg5) 14....ig4=
14.b4
14..ie2 lLlc6 15.0-0 .ig4=
14.•. ~c6
(diagram)
Black's prospects in this po-
sition are not worse at all. The
6.V!Jc2 .id6 7.b3 0-0
fact that his pawns on d5 and e4
are placed on the same colour of
squares as his bishop is not det-
rimental to his chances, because
his space advantage is much more
important. In the game Speelman
- Dreev, ACP (blitz) 2004, there
followed 15.trb3 "d6 16.gbl
.ld717..le2 gac818.0-0?! (lB.
a3 ltJe7!?=) 18 ... ~xb4 19.9fc1
a5!1 20.a31! ~d3 21•.lxd3
exd3 22.h3 b5 23.~xb5 gxc1+
24.~c1 hb5 25."xb5 "xa3+
and Black maintained a great ad-
vantage.
169
Chapter 6 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.lLlc3 lLlf6 4.lLlf3 e6
5.e3lLlbd7 6.9c2 .id6 7.J.d3

more passively placed in compar-

ison to the classical scheme of the
Carlsbad variation (1.d4 d5 2.c4
e6 3.~c3 ~f6 4.ig5 ie7 5.~f3
~bd7 6.e3 0-0 7.cxd5 exd5 8.ti'c2
c6 9.id3), where the same dark-
squared bishop is very active on
g5.
8".dxc4 9.i.xc4 a6!?

This move is more active than

7.ie2.
7 ••• 0-08.0-0
This is White's most popular
choice. Castling seems more logi-
cal and stronger than his alterna-
tives.
About 8.b3 - see 6.~c2 id6
7.b3 0-0 8.id3 (Chapter 5).
He has also tried 8.id2, but
Black can counter this effectively This is the most flexible and
with 8 ...b6. dynamic move for Black and he
White can hardly obtain even a does not define his plans yet,
minimal opening advantage with planning to counter 10.a4 with c5,
the line: 8.cxd5 exd5. The pawn- 10.E:d1 with b5 and 10.e4 with e5.
structure of this position resem- It is also possible for him to try
bles the Carlsbad variation of the three other moves, which are rela-
Queen's Gambit, but in a better tively popular as well: 9... b5, 9...
version for Black, since White's ~e7 and 9 ... e5. They are all quite
dark-squared bishop on c1 is acceptable for Black, but are too

170
 6:eic2 1J.d6 7.1J.d3 0-0 8.0-0 dxc4 9.hc4 a6

straightforward and there is plen-

ty of amassed theory concerning
them. I belong to the adherents
to the more dynamic 9 ... a6!? and
this particular move is preferred
among all by Viswanathan Anand
as well.

A) 10.Ad2
B) 10.a3
C) 10.Ad3
D) 10.e4
E) 10.a4
F) 10.gdl
A) 10.Ad2
This move leads to approxi-
mate equality after
10 ••• c5! 1l.Ad3 h6 (11 ... cxd4
12.exd4 h6 13.'~·c1 ~eB 14.i.f4 e5=
Burmakin - Dreev, Linares 1999)
12.gadl cxd4 13.exd4 1Yc7
14.gcl 1Yb8 15.gfel b5 16.~e4
Ab7 17.~d6 1Yd6= Topalov -
Kramnik, Dos Hermanos 1997.
Black's prospects in this posi-
tion are not worse at all.
14.Ae2
14.h2 Ab715.~fdl ~cB 16.'eie2
Vlfc7 17.~acl 'm>B= Jussupow -
Karjakin, Amsterdam 2006.
14.i.d3 Ab715.~fdl (15.e4 V!fbB
16.~adl ~cB=) 15 ... ~cB 16J!acl
(16.Vlfe2 Vlfc7=) 16... h6= (but not
16 ...Vlfc7?!, because of 17.~d5!t,
with the idea 17... ~xd5 IB.hh7+
<tt>hB 19.'~·xc7 ~c7 20.~xc7 ~xc7
21.~xd7 ~dB 22.~dB+ .b:dB 23 .
.td3±).
14••• Ab715.gfdl
15.a4 a5 16.~xb5 axb4 17.~fdl
gcB IB.'eibl .ie4= Beliavsky -
Cheparinov, Amsterdam 2007.

B) 10.a3 c5!? 1l.dxc5 (11.

~dl Yffc7=) 1l ....b:c5 12.b4
Ae7!? 13.Ab2 b5

171
Chapter 6
l5 .•• ~c7!? l6.tlli3 (16.
E!acl E!ac8=) l6 ... gac8 l7.h3
gfd8 l8.gael tlli6 (18 .. :~b8!?)
19.~a2 h6 with an about equal
position, Mozharov - P.Smirnov,
Sochi 2009.
C) 10 •.td3
10 ••• c5
This standard response is the
most popular in the contemporary
practice and Black equalizes after
it without too many problems.
It is also acceptable for him
to try the seldom played move
10 ... e5 with an approximately
equal position. In the game Topa-
lov - Ivanchuk, Monaco 2005,
there followed later 11.id2 h6!?
12.E!fel E!e8 13.h3 Vlie7 14.1L1e4
lLlxe4 15 ..be4 lLlf6 16.dxe5 lLlxe4
17.Vlixe4 .be5 18.tLlxe5 Vlixe5 19.
~xe5 E!xe5= with equality.
1l•.td2
This is the main line for
White.
After 1l.a4 ~c7 the chances of
both sides are balanced. 12.a5 h6
172
The Anti-Meran Variation
13 ..td2 cxd4 14.exd4 b5 15.axb6
tLlxb6 16.E!fcl ib7= Svidler - Gel-
fand, Monaco 2007.
Following 1l.tLle4 tLlxe4 12.
he4 f5!? Black has good counter-
play, in the game Maric - Koste-
niuk, Goeteborg 2005, there fol-
lowed 13.id3 b514.~e2?! (White's
relatively best move here would
be 14.e4, but even then after 14 ...
c4 15.ie2 .tb716.tLlg5 Vlie8!? 17.e5
ib4, Black's prospects would be
at least equal.) 14 ....tb7 15J'Edl c4
16.,ic2 tLlf6 17.id2 Vlic7t with ini-
tiative and considerable advan-
tage for him.
1l ••. exd4
1l ... h6 - see line A.
12.exd4 b6!?
Black's chances in this posi-
tion are not worse. In the game
Onischuk - Akopian, Bursa 2010
there followed 13.~e4 i.e7 14.
~e5 i.b7l5.~e6 he616.Ybc6
~c5! l7.~xc5 hc5 18.mc5
~xd3 19•.te3 bxc5 20.Ybc5
~d5, and his knight on d5 is so
powerful that his prospects are
not inferior at all.
 6. Vlfc2 j.d6 7.j.d3 0-0 8.0-0 dxc4 9.hc4 a6
D) 10.e4 e5 1l.h3
1l.d5ltJb6 12.j.b3 cxd513.exd5
ig4=
1l.j.e3 b512.j.e2 geB=
1l.gd1 b5 12.j.e2 Vlfc7 - see
1O.gd1 b5 1l.j.e2 V!lc712.e4 e5.
1l•••b512 •.le2
12 ... ge8
This is the simplest way for
Black to equalize.
It is also possible for him
to choose 12 ....ib7 with an ap-
proximately equal position after
13.j.g5 exd4 14.ltJxd4 V!lc7 15.ltJf5
j.h2+ 16.'i!?h1 if4 17.Ah4 gfeB=
Virovlyansky - Yagupov, St. Pe-
tersburg 199B, as well as follow-
ing 13.gd1 Vlfc7=, or 13.dxe5 ltJxe5
14.ie3ltJxf3+ 15..ixf3 V!le716.gfe1
ltJd717.gad1ltJe5= Kakageldyev-
Kaidanov, Bled 2002.
In the game AKuzmin -
I. Novikov, Moscow 1991, there
followed 13.a3 .lb7 14.dxe5
~xe5 15.~h4?! c5 16.~f5 ~c6=i=
with a slight edge for Black.
E) 10.a4 c5!?
1l.dxc5
1l.ltJe4 ltJxe4 12.V!lxe4 'l!!fe7!?
13.b3 e5= W.Browne - Kaidanov,
USA 2002.
White would not achieve much
with 1U~d1, after 1l ... cxd4!? 12.
exd4 (12.gd4 Vlfc7=; as well as
following 12.ltJe4 ltJxe4 13.V!lxe4
ltJf6 14.Vlfxd4 j.c7 15.j.d2 - 15.b3
Vlfxd4 16.ltJxd4 .id7= - 15 ...Vlfxd4
16.ltJxd4 .id7= Black equalized
in the game Carlsen - Gelfand,
Wijk aan Zee 200B) 12 ...Vlfc7
and his prospects are not worse
at all. In the game Van Wely -
Dreev, New Delhi/Teheran 2000,
there followed later 13 ..id3 (He
has no problems after 13.'l!!fe2
geB!? 14.ge1 b6 15.j.d3 j.b7=
Karpov - Anand, Prague 2002,
or 14.i.g5 h6 15.ih4 b6 16.gac1
ib7 17..tg3 hg3 1B.hxg3 'l!!fd6=
Anand - Leko, Miskoic 2009.)
13 ...b6 14.j.e3 .ib7 15.V!le2 ltJd5=
16.ltJe4?! ltJf4! 17.hf4 hf4 1B.g3
ih6=i= with a more promising posi-
tion for Black.
ll ... ~xc5!?
This is his simplest road to
equality.
173
Chapter 6
After 1l ...,bcSI2.liJe4!?, White
has more possibilities to fight for
the initiative.
12.gdl
Black has no problems at all
after 12 ..td2 b6=, or 12.e4 vtic7=
12 ••. 'iHc7
The prospects in this posi-
tion are approximately equal.
In the game Aronian - Gelfand,
Ohrid 2009, there followed later
13.a5 (13.e4 liJcd7=; 13.b3 b6=)
13 ... ~cd7 14.b3 (14.liJe4 liJxe4
IS.~xe4 liJf6 16.vtih4 fie7 17.b3
liJdS= Bindrich - P.Nielsen, Ger-
many 2009) 14 .••b5 15.axb6
~xb6 16..id3 .ib7= 17.~e4
~xe4 18 •.ixe4 'lfxc2 19•.ixc2
gfd8, draw.
F) 10.gdl b5
This is the most fashionable
and popular move for Black in
this position. His alternatives
1O ... cS, 1O ... ~c7 and 1O ... vtie7 are
quite acceptable, but they are en-
countered in practice much more
rarely, since they provide White
with more possibilities to fight
174
The Anti-Meran Variation
for the initiative in comparison
to 1O ... bS!?, therefore they do not
deserve serious attention.
After 10 ... bS, White's main
line, which is most often played in
practice, is F3) 1l..ie2. He choos-
es only rarely the other retreats of
the bishop like Fl) 1l •.id3 and
F2) 1l.J.f1.
The move 1l ..ib3 is played
very seldom and Black's simplest
response against it is 1l... cS!?
12.dxcS .ixcSI3.liJe4 ~b614.ttlxcS
It'\xcS with at least an equal posi-
tion.
Fl) 1l . .id3 "ec7!?
That is the most reliable move
for Black.
He should better avoid the
complications after 1l ....ib7 12.
liJgS!?, since they lead to less sta-
ble and reliable positions for him.
Here, after 12 ... h6 13.liJge4 lie7
14.a3!? ~bB IS.b4 as 16.l';bl axb4
17.axb4 liJdS IB.ttlcS;l; Wojtazek
- Van Wely, 2010, as well as fol-
lowing 12 ....ixh2 + 13. 'thh2 ttlg4+
14.mgl ~xgS1S.f3 ttlgf616.e4 ~h4
 6.'~c21d6 7.1d3 0-0 8.0-0 dxc4 9.hc4 a61O.l'!dl b5
17.~e3 eS 18.ltJe2 ltJhS 19.b4 ltJg3
20.a4~, White maintains the initi-
ative, Eljanov - Inarkiev, Khanty-
Mansiysk 2009.
12.a4
Black should not fear his op-
ponent's alternatives either.
White would not achieve much
with 12.e4, because after 12 ... eS
13.h3 (13.g3 exd4 14.ltJxd4 ttJeS
IS.1e2 b4 16.ltJa4 cS 17.ltJfS ixfS
18.exfS l'!fe8=) 13 ...1b7, Black's
prospects are not worse, since he
has a reliable and dynamic posi-
tion.
After 12.ttJe4 ttJxe4 13 ..ixe4
ltJf6 14.i.d3 (White would not
achieve much ifhe tries to gobble
a pawn with 14J~Yxc6, because af-
ter 14 ... ltJxe4 IS.~xe4 .ib7t Black
has excellent compensation for
the pawn and initiative and his
bishop-pair is very powerful; af-
ter 14 ..id2, he can continue with
14 ....ib7 IS ..id3 c5=, or 14 ...ltJxe4
IS.'lffxe4 h6= with equality) 14...
cS, the chances of both sides are
balanced.
Black has no problems after
12.1d2 cS!? 13.hbS (13.dxc5
~xcS=) 13 ... cxd4!? (13 ... axbS 14.
ltlxbS ~b6 15.ltJxd6 ~xd6 16.dxc5
~c7 17.c6oo) 14.hd7 hd7!? IS.
exd4 .ic6 and he has excellent
compensation for the pawn.
After the rarely played move
12.a3, Black equalizes with 12 ...
cS=. Here, after 13.dxc5 (there is
nothing better for White in sight)
13 ....b:c5. This is the simplest. (It
may be interesting for Black to
opt for a move, which has never
been tried in practice 13 ... ltJxcS!?
14 ..b:b5!?otherwise, White'sposi-
tion is simply considerably worse
- 14 ...1b7 IS ..ie2 ltJce4~, or 14 ...
ElbB IS ..ic4 .ib7 16.h3 l'!fcB~ and
in both cases Black has reason-
able compensation for the pawn)
14.b4
14....id6! (It is worse for him
to choose 14 ....ie7?!, because after
15.1b2, Black in the game Lputian
- Dreev, Sanjin 2004, was faced
with serious problems, since it
was not good for him to play the
seemingly attractive move 15...
~b7?! due to 16.ttJd5!, with a great
advantage for White after 16...
~dB 17.ltlxf6+ .ixf6 IB ..b:f6 ~xf6
17S
Chapter 6
19.i.xh7+ wh8 20.~e4±, as well as
following 16 ... ltJxdSI7.hh7+ wh8
18.~xc7 etJxc7 19.fud7±) IS.ltJe4
(IS.~b2 ~b7 16.Elac1 Elac8=) IS ...
WIxc2 16.hc2 ~e717..ib2 (17.etJd6
etJb6 18.~b2 ltJfdS=) 17... i.b7 and
Black's prospects are not worse.
12 ••• b4 13.~e4 ~xe4 14.
he4 ~f6 15•.id3 c5
The position is equal. The
game Eljanov - Aronian, Jermuk
2009 continued later with 16.b3
exd4 17.ftxe7 he7 18.~xd4
.ib719 ..ib2 iiae8=
F2) H.W
H ...fte7!?
176
The Anti-Meran Variation
Black's queen avoids the jux-
taposition along the d-file with
White's rook. This move looks
much more logical and solid than
ll ... cS, which has also been tested
in practice.
12.e4
12 ..id2 cS=
12 ... e5
13.g3
The line 13 ..tgS exd4 14.,Egxd4
ltJeS provides Black with a good
game .
After 13.ttJe2 ~e8 14.dxeS (14.
etJg3 g6=) 14 ... ttJxeSlS.ttJxeS heS
16.g3 .ib7 17.~g2 Elad8 he has no
real problems and his position is
not worse at all.
Following 13.h3, Black can
play 13... ,Ege8!? 14.g3 (After 14.a3
i.b7 IS.dxeS ttJxeS 16.ttJd4 ttJed7!?
17.ttJf5 .th2+ 18. 'it>h 1 .teS, his
chances are at least equal, Bur-
makin - Yevseev, Nefteyugansk
2002; if 14.dxeS etJxeS 1S.ttJd4,
Black can choose 15 ... ttJed7oo, or
IS ... ttJg6!? with a complicated po-
sition in which his prospects are
not worse at all, in view of the
 6.'ffJc2 Ad6 7.Ad3 0-0 8.0-0 dxc4 9.bc4 a610.gd1 b5
threat b5-b4 and the maneuver
.i.d6-h2, followed by Af4 or Ae5)
14....ib7 15..ig2 c5 with a com-
plicated and an approximately
equal position. In the game Mel-
kumyan - Andriasian, Yerevan
2010, there followed 16.dxe5 (16.
d5 c4 17.t!)h4 g6!? and there arose
a complex and nearly balanced
position) 16... t!)xe5 17..ig5 t!)xf3+
18.i.xf3 .ie5 19.hf6 hf6 20.t!)d5
.txd5 2U~xd5 c4= with an equal
game.
13 ••• e5!?
This is a powerful move after
which Black has good counterplay
without any problems.
14.dxe5
Following 14.d5 c4, he has
again satisfactory counterplay.
The game Ivanchuk - Leko,
Wijk aan Zee 2010, continued
with 14... ~xe5 15.~xe5 he5
16.ig5 ig4!? (It is also pos-
sible for Black to play here 16 ...
.ib7 17..ig2 c4= with an equal po-
sition, Beliavsky - Berkes, Pars
2004.) 17.ie2 hc3 18.bxc3
he2 19.ti'xe2 ti'e5 20.ixf6
Bxf6 21.ti'e3 ti'e6= 22.ti'xe5
ti'xe4 23.a4 gae8 24. ti'd.51txd5
25.llxd5 Ilxc3 26.axb5 axbS
27.llxb5, draw.
F3) 1l.ie2 Be7
This is the most fashionable
move and the best for Black. He
removes his queen away from
the juxtaposition with his oppo-
nent's rook along the d-file and
is prepared to counter effectively
White's two main possibilities:
F3a) 12.e4 and F3b) 12.~e4.
Besides these two moves, he
has chosen sometimes the harm-
less 12.J.d2, which Black should
better counter with 12 ... c5!? with
equality. See several examples,
which I think deserve attention:
13.dxc5 'ffJxc5 14.b4 '!fic7 15J~acl
J.b7 16.'lfibl '!fib8= Gelfand -
Dominguez, Bermuda 2005; 14.
gael J.b715.J.el .ie716.'lfibl 'lfia7=
Sargissian - Potkin, Moscow
2009; 15... '!fib616.a4 b417.a5 '!fic5
18.t!)a4 'ffJxc2 19J:~xc2 .id5= Stern
- Fridman, Germany 2009.
177
Chapter 6
He has no problems at all after
12.b3 il.b7 13.~e4 (13.il.b2 c5=)
13 ... ltJxe4 14.'~xe4 il.e7!? (There
arises an approximately equal
position after the standard reply
14 ... cS lS.'.Wb4, but the move 14 ...
i.e7!? deserves thorough atten-
tion, since after the unavoidable
pawn-advance 14...il.e7!?, it does
not let White's queen to its most
active possible position on the h4-
square.) lS.il.d3 (lS.il.b2 c516.'.Wc2
~ac8 17J~ael ~b8 18.'~b1= Ev-
dokimov - P.Nielsen, Helsingor
2008) lS ... g6 16..ib2 c5 17.'.Wg4
i.f6 and Black's prospects are not
worse. In the game Mikhalchishin
- Dreev, Sibenik 2008, there fol-
lowed 18.l!ael l!ac8 19.i.bl 'W'b8
with a complicated position in
which Black's chances are not
worse at all.
The game is equal too after
variations of the type of 12.a4
il.b7= with the idea 13.b3 b4=, or
13.i.d2 b4=; as well as 12.a3 cS
13.dxc5 hcS 14.b4 i.e7 lS.i.b2
.ib7 16.l!aell!ac8=
F3a) 12.e4 e5
178
The Anti-Meran Variation
13.g3
This is the main line for
White.
His alternatives are only sel-
dom played and they are not dan-
gerous for Black at all.
13.dxeS ltJxeS=
After 13.h3, it is good for
Black to continue with 13 ... exd4!?
14.ltJxd4 l!e8= lS.a3 il.h2+ 16.wfl
il.eS 17.il.e3 cS 18.~f5 ~b6 19.i.f3
il.xfS 20.exfS l!ad8= Gutman -
Pavasovic, Pardubice 1998, as
well as 13 ... l!e8 14.a3 (14.dxeS
ltJxeS lS.~xeS heS 16.i.f3 i.b7=
Ramesa - Saric, Umag 200S) 14...
i.b7= Van Wely - Kramnik, Mo-
naco 1999.
Following 13.i.gS, Black's
simplest reaction would be 13 ...
exd4!? (it is also possible for him
to opt for 13 ... l!e8, but in that
case he must consider the varia-
tion 14.dxeS ItJxeS lS.i.xf6 ltJxf3+
16 ..ixf3 gxf617.g3co with a compli-
cated and rather unclear position,
Beinoras - Kulaots, Plovdiv 2008)
14.l!xd4 ltJg4!? (14 ... l!e8=) lS.h3
ItJgeS= 16.ltJxeS heS 17.l!ddl h6
18.il.e3ltJf6 19.i.f3 l!e8= Lafuente
- Dreev, Bhubaneswar 2010.
13 ••• :Be8!?
This is the most flexible and
best response for Black. He takes
indirect control over the enemy
e4-pawn with it.
14.a3
That is White's most popular
move.
14.dxeS ltJxe5 15.il.g5 (lS.ltJd4
i.c5!?~ with the idea 16.il.gS '.Wb6)
 6. "fffc2 .td6 7..td3 0-0 8.0-0 dxc4 9.hc4 a610.'i'!.dl b5
15... llJxf3+!? 16.hf3llJg4!? 17.llJe2
(17J!acl h6 IB ..id2 V9a7 19 ..iel=
Morovic - L.Dominguez, Havana
2003) 17... h61B.if4 ixf419.llJxf4
itJe5 20 ..ie2 iLg4 21..ixg4 llJxg4=
A.Shneider - Karjakin, Evpatoria
2007.
Black has no problems either
after 14..tg5 exd415.llJxd4 .te5!?=
(this is the simplest and most reli-
able move) 16.if3 (16.llJf5llJb6=)
16 ...h6 17.ie3 c5 1B.llJf5 llJb6
and his prospects are not worse,
Carlsen - Anand, Monaco 2007.
There arise positions, which are
not so solid and clear after 15 ...b4
16.llJf5 iLc5 17.llJa4, for example:
17... hf2+ 18.'.tfg2 iLa719 ..if4llJe5
20.llJd6 ge7 2IJ!acl°o Tratar -
Filipenko, Pula 2000, or 17... llJxe4
1B.llJxc5llJxg5 19.1lJd6 'i'!.e5°o Bani-
kas - Kulaots, Istanbul 2000.
14.•• exd4!?
This is a powerful move after
which Black obtains an excellent
counterplay. He should not com-
plicate the situation with moves
of the type of 14... h6, or 14...iLb7,
since that may provide White
with more possibilities to fight for
the initiative. In general, I think
that in similar pawn-structures
Black should not be in a hurry
to play iLcB-b7, since his light-
squared bishop us very useful in
such schemes on the cB-square,
because it controls from there the
important fS-square.
IS.~xd4 .leS!?
This is his simplest road to
equality and it is the most popular
in the contemporary tournament
practice.
It is also possible for Black
to choose the relatively seldom
played move 15....ib7. In the game
Kolev - Korneev, Spain 1999,
there followed 16.tllf5 .ie5 17.iLf3
g6 1B.llJh6+ ~g719.iLg5 c500 with
a complicated and approximately
equal position.
16•.113
This is White's main line.
16.f4?! .ixd4+ 17.fud4 c5 lB.
'i'!.d1.ib7+ Konnov - J.Geller, Ka-
zan 200B.
16.llJf5llJb6=
After 16..te3 c5 17.llJf5 llJb6,
Black's prospects are at least
equal.
He has no problems either
following 16..tg5 c5 (he can also
try here 16...h6!? 17..txf6 llJxf6=;
17.ie3 c5 1B.llJf5llJb6!?=i= and only
White may have problems) 17.llJf5
with an about balanced position.
In the game Dreev - Iskusnyh,
Smolensk 2000, there followed
17...g6(17 ...h6!?) IB.tllh6+@g719.
llJg4 llJxg4 20.llJd5 "ffffa7 21.hg4
179
Chapter 6
lLlfS 22.hc8 .!3axcS 23.if4 and
here, instead of the line, which
happened in the game: 23 ...hf4
24.lLlxf4 YfJe7 2S.f3;!; with a slight
edge for White, Black had to play
23 ... id4!?= with the idea to fol-
low with lLle6 equalizing.
16•.. c5
It also deserves attention for
him to opt for the very rarely
played move 16... lLlb6!? with the
idea c6-cS and Black's chances are
not worse at all.
17.~de2
After 17.lLlfS lLlb6!?, he has no
problems either. The game Mo-
randa - Miton, Lublin 200S con-
tinued with 18.a4!? (18 ..lgS hf5
19.exfS .!3acS=) 18 ...b4 19.aS bxc3
20.axb6 YfJxb6 21.bxc3 gbS=
17... c4
It is acceptable for Black to
continue with 17....ib7 lS ..ie3 c4
and his prospects are not worse,
Epishin - Lautier, Germany
1999.
18.~d5
lS.tLlf4 .ib7 19.tLlcdS tLlxd5 20.
tLlxd5 hdS 21.exdS (21.llxd5
180
The Anti-Meran Variation
lLlb6+ Obodchuk - Lautier, Poiko-
vsky 2003) 21...YfJd6= Stanisze-
wski - Laane, ICCF 200S.
18 ... ~xd5 19.exd5 old6,
Black's chances are about equal
and he is threatening lLleS, or
lLlc5, Bologan - Karjakin, Dort-
mund2004.
F3b) 12.~e4 ~xe4 13.1be4
His two main lines here are:
F3bl) 13...ole7!?
F3b2) 13... e5
It is premature for Black to
play 13 ... c5?!, because of 14.
WlxaS!? .ib71S."*,a7 .!3aS16."*,xaS+
haS 17.dxc5 lLlxc5 18..ld2!? and
White's position is clearly better,
since his two rooks are superior to
Black's queen, for example: IS ...
lLle4 (1S ....ixf3?! 19..ixf3 .ixh2+
20.<;!{fl± with the idea 20 ...,ie5?!
21.gac1 hb2 22.gc2 .la3 23.
ic1+-) 19.9ac1 YfJbS 20 ..ia5t with
initiative for White.
It is possible for Black to con-
tinue with 13 ...olb7 14..id3!? g6
(14 ... lLlf6 lS.YfJh4 c5 16.e4;!;) 15.
 6.YNc2 ~d6 7.i.d3 0-0 8.0-0 dxc4 9.hc4 a61O.gcll b5
YNh4 c5 16.ttJgS hS 17.ttJe4 (17.g4
ttJf6oo) 17....txe4 1B ..txe4 gaeBoo
with a complicated and approxi-
mately balanced position, Gelfand
- Najer, Odessa 2009.
It is also interesting to try
the rarely played and not so well
analyzed move 13 ... geB!?, in the
game Svetushkin - Kharitonov,
Rethimno 2009, there followed
14.~d2 (14.~d3!? fS!? lS.YNh4 c5
16.e4 c4 17..ic2 ttJf8oo) 14...~b7
lSJ!acl eS!? 16.dxeSlt'Jxe5 17.YNh4
c5 1B.ttJxeS .txeS 19 ..ic3 .txc3 20.
gxc3 c4=i= with a slight edge for
Black.
F3bl) 13....le7!?
11ris move deserves very se-
rious attention. Black takes the
h4-square under control, so that
White's queen cannot go there in
the nearest future.
14..ld2
The alternatives for White are
played only very seldom and are
not dangerous for Black at all.
14:~c2 J.b71S.a4 gfcB=
14..id3 g6 lS ..id2 (1S.b3 .ib7
16.~b2 c5=) lS ....ib7 16.gac1 c5
17.YNg4 YNb6 IB.dxc5 ttJxc500 with
a complicated and approximately
equal position, Bocharov - Timo-
feev, Ulan Ude 2009.
14.b3 J.b7 lS.J.b2 (lS ..id3 g6
16.J.b2 c5 17.ti'g4 J.f6= Mikhal-
chishin - Dreev, Sibenik 200B)
15 ... cS 16.ti'g4 (16.YNc2 gacB 17.
gac1 ti'bB=) 16 ... ttJf6= E.Gomez -
Korneev, Elgoibar 2001.
14.a4 .ib7 lS.ti'c2 gfcB 16..id2
b4 17.aS (17.gacl ~aS=) 17...c5=
Karpov - Gelfand, Monaco 1999.
14•••.lb7 IS.gael
lS.YNc2 c5 16.gac1 (16.dxc5
YNxc5=) 16...YNb6=
IS ••• c5 16.1rbl
After 16.V;Yg4 c4!?, Black
has a good position. The game
Ki.Georgiev - Bareev, Bosna
2000 followed with 17.~e1?! gacB
(17... f5!?t) 1B.ttJd2 f5!? 19.YNh3
ttJf6 20.ttJb3 ttJe4+ with a great
advantage for Black.
16...1rb6 17.dxc5 ~xc5 18 •
.ic3 .le4 19.•al b4 20 ..ld4
gac8
This position is well-familiar in
1B1
Chapter 6
the contemporary opening theory
and the prospects of both sides in
it are about equal.
In the game Y.Timoschenko -
Dreev, Calvia 2004, there fol-
lowed 2l.olt:Jd2 (21.llJe5l'!fd8 22.f3
idS) 21 .•. AdS (21...if5 22.l'!c4
1Mib8 23.b3 f6 24J''{dcl id3 25.
hd3 llJxd3= Zabotin - Smirnov,
Moscow 2008) 22.b3 f6 23 •.t.f3
.!.xf3 24.~xf3 gfd8 2S.heS
(25.1Mibl ~b7 26.hc5 l'!xdl+ 27.
l'!xdll'!xc5 28.llJd2 ~dS 29.llJc4 fS
30.l'!xdS ~xdS 31.f3 if6 32.'t!tf2
'itfl 33. 'ite2 'ite7 = Karpov - Kram-
nik, Frankfurt 1999) 2S ..• fucdl+
26.fucdl "xeS 27.~d2 YiJc2 28.
~c4 gd8 29.fucd8+ hd8 30.
g3 .ie7= 31.YiJb2 'e'dl+ 32.~g2
YiJdS+ 33.~gl YiJdl+ 34.~g2
9dS+,draw.
F3b2) 13 ••• eS
This is the most popular move
for Black nowadays.
14.Vh4
That is White's main line.
He would not achieve much
with 14.~c2, because after 14...
182
The Anti-Meran Variation
exd4!? (14 ... ~e8!? 1S.id3 h6
16.id2 exd4 17.exd4 llJf6 18.l'!ac1
ig4= Farago - Prohaszka, Buda-
pest 2008) lS.exd4 l'!e8!? (15 ...
llJf6 16.ig5 llJdS=) 16.id3 h6 17.
ie3 llJf6 18.l'!ac1 ig4= Black's
chances are not worse, Farago -
K.Szabo, Hungary 2007.
White has also tried here
14.~d3 exd4 lS.~xd4 ie7 16.
~f4!? (16.~e4 if6 17.~c2 c5=
Riazantsev - Sjugirov, Dagomys
2010) 16 ...~xf4 17.exf4 if6 18.
llJd4. In this complicated end-
game he has some initiative,
but Black can hold the balance
with a precise play. 18 ... cS!? (Fol-
lowing 18 .. .E;e8 19.ie3 c5 20.llJf5
hb2 21.~ab1 id4 22 ..tf3 l'!b8 23.
llJxd4 cxd4 24.fu:d4 llJb6 25.g4!?
ib7 26.ixb7 l'!xb7 27.a4!? llJd7
28.l'!bd1 llJf8 29.aSt White main-
tained his initiative and some po-
sitional pressure in the game
Kasimdzhanov - Aronian, Nal-
chik 2009. In the game G.Kovacs
- K.Szabo, Budapest 2009, after
18 ... ixd4 19.fu:d4 llJb6 20.l'!d6 -
20 ..ie3!? - 20 ... .ib7 21 ..id2 llJd5,
Black held the balance, but this
plan - 18....bd4 19.~xd4 llJb6 is
too passive and he would have to
fight for the draw without active
counter chances.) 19.if3 E:a7 20.
tLlc6 l'!c7 21.kd2 b4 22.l'!ac1 ib7
23.ltJxb4 ixb2 24.l'!c2 ixf3 25.
gxf3 if6 26.ie3 (26.ltJxa6 l'!a7
27.ie3 l'!xa6 28.l'!xd7 l'!c8=) 26 ...
13fc8= The prospects of both sides
in this position are equal. In the
game Grachev - Balogh, Sibenik
 6:~c21i.d6 7.1i.d3 0-0 8.0-0 dxc4 9.1i.xc4 a61O.'8dl b5
2009, there followed later 27.
lLld5 (27.lLlxa6 '8c6 28.'8xd7 '8xa6
29. '8b7 h6 30.'8xc5 .1.!xc5 31.hc5
'8xa2= Erdos - Balogh, Hungary
2009) 27 ... '8c6 28.lLlxf6+ lLlxf6 29.
'8xc5 l'!xc5 30.hc5 h6 31.i.e3
'8c4!? 32.'8d4 '8xd4 33.hd4lLld5=
34.1i.c3 lLlc3 35.a3 f5 36.~f1 'i!;>f7
37.i.d4 lLlb5 38.1b2 g6 39.'i!;>e2
We6 40.wd3 Wd5= with complete
equality.
14 ..• :Be8!?
This is Black's best move and
he is threatening e5-e4.
15..id3
After 15.a4i.b7=, 15.lLlg5lLlf6=,
or 15.dxe5 lLlxe5 16.1d2 194= he
equalizes easily.
Following 15.e4 exd4 16.lLlxd4
lLle5 17.1i.f4 c5 18.lLlf5 hf5 19.exfS
'8ad8= Black has no opening
problems whatsoever, Zabolin -
Filippov, Sochi 2008.
15... h6
The prospects of both sides are
about equal in this position.
Now, Black can counter 16.
1d2 with 16... i.e7! and White has
nothing better than 17.'?;lrg3 .1d6
18.'?;lrh4 i.e719.'?;lrg3, repeating the
moves.
Black can react analogously af-
ter 16.b3 i.e7! 17.'?;lrg3 i.d6 18.'?;lrh4
!iJ.c7=
After 16.1c2, he can repeat
the moves if he so wishes 16 ...1e7
17.'?;lrg3 1d6 18.'?;lrh4 ie7=, or he
can continue with 16 ... ib7, or 16 ...
exd4 17.'?;lrxd4 1f8, entering com-
plicated and approximately equal
positions. For example, in the
game Karpov - Anand, Lausanne
1998, after 16.1c2, there followed
16 ... exd4 17.'?;lrxd4 .if8 18.b3 lLlf6
19.'Wh4 g5!? 20.'Wg3 'Wxg3 21.
hxg3 c5 22.ib2 ig7 23.l'!d6 1i.e6
24.l'!ad1 '8ec8= with an equal po-
sition.
After 16.a4, Black's simplest
reaction would be 16... ie7 (16 ...
ib7oo) 17.'?;lrg3 1d6= and here
White can avoid the repetition
of moves - 18.'?;lrh4 iLe7= with
18.dxe5 4:\xeS 19.1LlxeS heS, but
he has no advantage at all. In the
game Morovic Fernandez - No-
vikov, Buenos Aires 2003, there
followed 20.f4 1f6 21.axb5 cxb5
22.hb5=. In the final position,
Black can easily maintain the bal-
ance with 22 ...1g4!? 23.he8 (23.
'?;lrxg4 axb5 with compensation
and initiative) 23 ....ixd1, with
good compensation for the pawn.
183
Chapter 7 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.~c3 ~f6 4.~tJ e6
5.e3 ~bd7 6.ec2 .ld6 7..le2
This quiet developing move is
a worthy alternative of 7.i.d3.
7 ... 0-08.b3
With this move White avoids
the variation 8.0-0 dxc4 9.hc4
a6 (Chapter 6), in which there
arise numerous very complicated
and rather unclear positions and
he tries to steer the game into
calmer positional lines. He cannot
obtain any particular dividends
from the move 9.a4 (after 8.0-0
dxc4) at all, for example: 9 ... c5
(9 ... a6!? with the idea c5) 10.dxc5
(about 1O.hc4 a6 - see Chapter
6, variation E) 10 ...hc5, entering
positions resembling some pawn-
structures of the Queen's Gambit
Accepted in a good version for
Black. White's early queen-sortie
184
to the c2-square is not so useful in
similar structures.
A) 8 .•• e5
B) 8 •••dxc4
C) 8 ••• b6
A) 8 ••• e5 9.cxd5
This is his main and most pop-
ular line.
After 9.0-0, Black's simplest
response is 9 ... e4!? 1O.lLld2 ~e8
(with the idea ttJd7-f8-g6), obtain-
ing a space advantage and good
queenside counterplay. Here, fol-
lowing 1l.cxd5 cxd5 12.ttJb5 i.b8
13.i.a3 ttJf8 14J~~fcl (14.hf8?!
~xf8 15J'!fc1 a6+ 16.lLlc7? ~a7-+)
14 ... lLle6 (with the idea a6) and
Black's prospects are not worse.

He has no problems at all in
the variation 9.dxe5lDxe510.cxd5
cxd5 11.0-0 (After 11.i.b2, it is
good for Black to choose 11 ...
lDxf3+ 12.hf3 d4!? 13.exd4 ~e8t
with initiative and more than
sufficient compensation for the
pawn. This position was analyzed
in details after the move-order
6.~c2 i.d6 7.b3 0-0 8.i.b2 e5 9.
cxd5 cxd5 10.dxe5 lDxe5 11 ..ie2
lDfJ 12 ..ifJ d4!? 13. exd4 ~e8).
Following 11 ...i.g4!?, Black's pros-
pects are not inferior.
12.lDxe5 (after 12 ..ib2lDxf3+!?
- 12 ... ~c8= -13.i.xfJ i.xf314.gxf3
~c8!? with the idea 15.'ttg2 d4!?
16.exd4 lDh5, Black has an excel-
lent position) 12 ...,be5 13.ib2
(13.i.xg4 lDxg4 14.h3 ~c8 15.J.b2
lDf6=, or 15...~h4=) 13 .. J~c8
14.i.xg4 lDxg4 15.h3 and he can
counter this with the simple move
15 ... lDf6= with equality, or enter
complications after 15 .. :~h4 and
his chances are again not worse,
for example: 16.~ac1 d4!? 17.exd4
i.h2+ 18.lt>h1 i.f4 19.~cd1 (19.
~ce1?! lDh2 20J~gl lDfJ+) 19 ...
~fe8~, or 16.~d2 lDh2!? 17J~fd1
(17.~fe1?! lDfJ+ 18.gxfJ ~xh3
6. ~c2 .id6 7.i.e2 0-0 8.b3
19.f4 ~c6-+) 17... d4! 18.tlJd5 (18.
exd4? lDfJ+ 19.9xf3 i.f4-+) 18...
~fd8 (18 ... lDfJ+ 19.9xfJ ~xh3
20.f4 ~g4=) 19.e4 ttJfJ+ 20.gxf3
~xh3 2l.f4 ~g4+ 22.1t>f1 ~h3+
23.lt>gl \!9g4=
Black can counter 9 ..ib2 with
9... exd4 1O.ttJxd4 (10.exd4 ~e8
11.0-0 tlJf8=) 10 ...dxc4 11.i.xc4
tlJe5 12.i.e2 ~e7 with an approxi-
mately equal position. In the game
K.Bischoft - C.Gabriel, Germany
2003, there followed 13.h3 tlJg6!?
14.0-0-0 (14.0-0 lDh4!?t) 14...
i.a3 15.i.xa3 ~xa3+ 16.lt>b1 a500
with a complicated game with
mutual chances. It deserves atten-
tion for Black to try 9 ... e4 1O.ttJd2
ttJb8!? (1O ... a6?! 11.g4!?t; 10 ... ~e8
11.g4!?oo), as it was played in the
game Yasakov - A.Horvat, corr.
2004, which continued with 11.h3
(11.cxd5 cxd512.tlJb5 tlJa6!?= with
the idea i.g4 and tlJb4) 11 ... tlJa6!?
12.a3 ~e8 with a very complex
position. Black had some space
advantage and his prospects were
not inferior at all.
9 •.. cxd5!?
The line: 9 ... tlJxd5 1O.lDxd5
cxd5 11.dxe5 ttJxe5, after 12 ..ib2!
(12.tlJd4?! ~g5t; it is bad for
White to choose here 12.0-0?,
because of 12 ... lDxf3+ 13 ..ixf3
~h4 and Black's attack is victo-
rious, in the game Portisch - Ri-
bli, Montpellier 1985, there fol-
lowed 14.h3 i.xh3 15.~d1 .ih2+!
16.1t>f1 - 16.lt>h1 .ie5-+ - 16...
~f617..ixd5 .tf518.e4 .ig419.i.a3
\!9a6+ and White resigned. 14.g3
185
Chapter?
~f6 15.ixd5 .tf5! 16.~e2 ~xa1
17.ib2 .td3!-+; 16.e4 .th3 17J~d1
.te5-+ ) provides White with more
chances of obtaining an advan-
tage in the opening. In the game
Gelfand - Shirov, Moscow (blitz)
2007, there followed 12 ....tb4+
(After 12 ...1Dxf3+ 13 ..txf3 .tb4+
14.'it>fl.te615.~d3!? i.e716.'it>e2!?
.tf6 17.ixf6 ~xf6 18.~d4~; 16...
~c8 17.~hc1 ~a5 18.a3;!;, White's
position is preferable, Portisch -
Huebner, Brussels 1986.) 13.lf1fl
tlJxf3 14..txf3 ie6 15.h4 .te716.g3
.tf6 17.c;t>g2 ~c8 18.~d2 and his
position is clearly better, because
Black's d5-pawn is isolated and
he can only remain passive with-
out any good prospects.
10.~bS!?
This is White's most active
move and this is his only way to
fight for a slight opening advan-
tage.
10 ••• .lb4+!?
1O ....tb8 1l..ta3!
1l..td2 hd2+ 12.~xd2
Black has to problems at all fol-
lowing 12.~xd2 e4 (12 ... tlJe4!?=)
186
The Anti-Meran Variation
13.tlJe5 a6 14.tlJc3 (14.tlJd6 ~e7=)
14.. :~e7= with equality.
12 ••• a6!?
This is his most precise re-
sponse and it practically forces
White to enter the variation
13.dxeS (After 13.tlJc3 exd4 14.
exd4 tlJb8!?, or 13.tlJc7 fia7 14.
dxe5 tlJxe5 15.~c1 tlJc6, or 14.tlJf3
e4 15.tlJd2 tlJb8!?, Black's pros-
pects are at least equal.) 13•••
~xeS 14.~d4, but after 14•••
.lg4!?, the tournament practice,
in the last several years, shows
that the position remains approx-
imately balanced.
See several examples, which T
think deserve most attention:
lS.hg4 ~fxg4 16.0-0 ge8
17.'ffdl (17.~b1 g6 18.tlJ2f3 ~e7
19.h3 tlJf6 20.tlJxe5 ~xe5 21.~b2
gc7 22.~ac1 ~fc8 23.~c7 ~c7=
Ftacnik - Miton, Banicky Kaha-
nec 2009) 17••• ~f6 18.~2f3
~xf3+ 19.'ffxf3 (l9.gxf3 tlJd7
20.c;t>h1 %Yf6 21.~g1 tlJc5 22.gc1
tlJe6f' Wang Vue - Kramnik, Nice
2009) 19••• geS 20.gfc1 fle7
21.~eS VxeS 22.'ffe2 ge8 23.

f3 h5= Karjakin - Leko, Nice
2009.
B) 8 ... dxc4 9.bxc4 e5
10.0-0
About 10.i.b2 1"1e8 11.0-0 'r!le7
- see 10.0-0.
10 ... ge8!?
This is Black's most flexible re-
ply. He keeps waiting strategy and
is not in a hurry to exchange exd4,
preserving the possibility to play
eS-e4 at an opportune moment.
lU~dl!?
This is White's most fashion-
able move in the contemporary
theory.
The move 11.a4 may be also
an important possibility for him,
just like 11.1"1d1, or 11.1"1b1, eyeing
the b7-pawn, for example after
11 ... exd4 12.exd4 tt)f8 13.h3 tt)g6
14J':!d1 tt)f4 lS ..ixf4 ixf4 16J!ab1
'r!laS, Black obtained a good posi-
tion in the game Buhmann - Ca-
brera Trujillo, Spain 2009.
11.1"1b1 exd4!? 12.exd4 tt)f8 13.
1"1dl!? - see 11.~dl!? exd4 12.exd4
tt)f8 13.1"1bl.
6. 'r!lc2 il.d6 7.il.e2 0-0 B.b3
The move 11.i.b2 defines too
early the deployment of White's
dark-squared bishop and Black's
simplest way to counter it is by
playing 11 ...'r!le7 (11 ...exd412.exd4
tt)f8oo) keeping waiting strategy
and having the option to play later
cSxd4, as wcll as c5-c4. 12.~fcl
(12J3adl e413.tDd2 tDf8=; 12.~ae1
after 12 ... e4!? 13.ttJd2 tDf8, pro-
vides Black with a quite satisfac-
tory position, in the game Cmilyte
- Kosteniuk, Elista 2004, there
followed 14.f3 exf3 lS ..txf3 'r!lc7
and the position remained com-
plicated and approximately equal.
Instead of lS ...'r!lc7, it deserved at-
tention for Black to follow with
lS ... tDg4!?, which after the practi-
cally forced line: 16.ixg4 ixg4
17.e4 f6!?+i would lead to a very
complicated position with mutual
chances, Dziuba - Borovikov,
Swidnica 2000) 12 ... e4!? 13.tDd2
tDf8 14.f3. This is the most fash-
ionable move here (after 14.tDf1
i.fS, Black is not worse at all). 14...
exf3 lS ..b:f3 tDg4!? 16.tDf1 'r!lgS!?
His prospects are not inferior
in this position, which is quite
well-known in the contemporary
187
Chapter 7
opening theory. For example in
the game Gelfand - Anand, Mo-
naco 2000, there followed 17.e4
(Black has no problems after 17.
~d2 i.c7!? 18.tiJe4 ~g6=; he has
good counterplay too following
17.cS i.c7 1B.e4 tiJe6!? 19.tiJe2
i.xb2+!? 20.tiJxh2 1Mfe3+ 21.<;!;>h1
tiJf2+ 22. <.t>gl tiJxe4+ 23.<.t>h1
tiJf2+ 24.<.t>gl tiJd3+ 2S.<.t>h1 tiJef4t;
19J3ad1 tiJxd4!? 20J'l:xd4 ~xcS
21.~d1 ~xd4+ 22.~xd4 iLb6+)
17 ... tiJe6 18J'l:ad1!? (18.eS? tiJxd4
19.exd6 tiJeS!-+; 1B.tiJe2 iLxh2+!?
19.tiJxh2 ~e3+ 20.<.t>h1 tiJf2+ 21.
<.t>gl tiJxe4+ 22.<.t>h1 tiJf2+ 23.<.t>gl
tiJd3+ 24.<.t>h1 liJef4+) 18 ... tiJxd4
19J~xd4 tiJxh2 20.tiJxh2 i.xh2+
21.~f1 (21.~xh2?! ~h4+) 21 ... i.eS
22J1d3 i.e6 23.liJe2 (23.tiJd1
.ig3~) 23 ... hb2 24.~xb2 hc4
2SJ~d7 b5 with a very complicated
position in which Black has three
pawns for the piece and his chanc-
es are not worse at all.
1l••. exd4!?
I believe, that is his most re-
liable move and I prefer it in my
games, although there arise after
it very complicated and unclear
positions.
1l ... e4 12.tiJd2 ~e7 13J;J.b1!?
liJf8 14.cS!? .ic71S.liJc4;!;
Following 11...~e7 12J'l:bl!?,
White has more possibilities
than after 1l ... exd4!?, in his fight
for the opening advantage. For
example, in the game Avrukh -
Nepomniachtchi, Natanya 2009,
there followed 12 ... e4 (Black still
has some problems after 12 ... exd4
188
The Anti-Meran Variation
13.exd4 cS 14.i.e3 cxd4 IS.tiJxd4
liJcS16.tiJdbS;!;, or 13 ... tiJfB 14.h3!?
liJg6 lS.i.d3;!;) 13.tiJd2 tiJfB 14.cS!?
.ic7 lS.tiJc4;!; (with the idea .ic1-
a3, tiJc4-d6) with a preferable po-
sition for White.
12.exd4 ttJf8
The prospects of both sides in
this position are approximately
equal, but still White's game is
much simpler. He can continue
with 13.h3, or 13J:~b1 and Black
must react very precisely.
After 13.liJe5, he obtains a
quite satisfactory position by
playing 13 ... ~e7 14.f4 (14 ..if4?!
tiJe615.ie3 tiJxd4+) 14 ... cS1S.tiJbS
cxd4 (15 ...i.bB 16.i.a3 tiJe6co) 16.
tiJxd6 ~xd6 17.cS ~c7 1B.E!xd4
tiJg6= with equality.
In the game Svetushkin -
Dreev, Moscow 2009, there fol-
lowed 13J~bl!? ~bB!? 14.h3 tiJg6
lS.a4 i.d7 16.M1 ~c7 17J;J.b3 h6
18.i.d2 ~bd819.~db1.icBoo with a
complicated and about balanced
game.
After 13.h3, Black's best re-
sponse would be 13 ... liJg6 14.!f1
 6. Wfc2 !d6 7.!e2 0-0 B.b3 b6 9.0-0 !b7
(14J~b1 );b8!?oo; 14.!d3 ~f4 15.
ixf4 ixf4=) 14.. :~a5!? 15.c5
(15.d5 cxd5 16.cxd5 !d7=) 15...
!f4 16.ixf4 (16.~g5 !e6 17.!xf4
lDxf4 18.ltJce4 ltJxe4 19.1tJxe4
id5 20.ltJd6 ~e6oo with the idea
21.lDxb7 Wfa3~) 16... ltJxf4 with a
complex and nearly equal posi-
tion. Here, after 17.V!fd2 (17.ltJe5
!e6 18.V!fd2 lDg6) it would be
good for Black to continue with
17...!e6 18J3ab1 Wfc7= with equal-
ity, Drasko - Blagojevich, Yugo-
slavia 1998.
C) 8 •••b6
This is a solid move and it is
the most popular for Black. He
provokes a complicated position-
al struggle, without forcing the is-
sue. His plans include the set-up
!c8-b7, Wfd8-e7, );a8-d8 and in
the nearest future the thematic
pawn-advance c6-c5.
9.0-0
About 9.,tb2 ,tb71O.0-0 - see
9.0-0.
9 •••.lb7
We will analyze White's three
main possibilities:
Cl) 10.e4
C2) lo.gdl
C3) 10 •.lb2
CI) 10.e4
This move is not dangerous for
Black at all. This pawn-advance
seems to be thematic for similar
positions, but here in fact White
has lost a tempo for the move b2-
b3 and it is not so useful for him
in a plan connected with e3-e4.
10 ••• dxe4 11.~xe4 ~xe4
12.'I'xe4 ~f6 13.'I'h4
After 13.Wfc2 (13.Wfe3 c5
14.,tb2 ltJg4!?+) 13 ... c5 14.dxc5
(14 ..ib2 !e4 15.Wfc3 Wfe7 16J~ad1
gad8= Dragomarezkij - Zvjagin-
sev, Moscow 1994) 14...bxc5!?
(14 ... ixc5=) 15.!b2 'fic7, Black's
chances are at least equal.
13•.• c5 14•.lb2
Following 14.dxc5.lxc515..ib2
Wfe7 16J~ad1 ~fd8= the position
is balanced, while after 14..ig5
h6 15 ..ixf6 V!fxf6 16.V!fxf6 gxf6
17.~ad1 !3fd8, Black's bishop-pair
189
Chapter 7
is so powerful that only White
may have problems.
14... ~e4!
Black has a very comfortable
game after this move.
The game Granero Roca -
Dreev, Benidorm 2009, followed
with IS.W1hS W1e7!? (This is the
simplest for him, but he can even
try the sharper move IS ... f5!?, in
the game Quan Zhe - V.Akobian,
Chicago 2008, after 16J'~adl Vlfc7
17.dxc5 bxc5 18 ..id3 ltJf6oo, there
arose a complicated position with
mutual chances.) 16J~adl !'!ad8
17..id3 cxd4 18.hd4.ic5 19.he4
ixe4 20 ..bc5 Vlfxc5 21.VlfxcS
bxcS= with equality.
Black's position is acceptable
too after IS.W1xd8 !'!fxd8. In the
game Doric - Pavasovic, Rabac
2004, following 16.!'!adl cxd4 17.
ltJxd4 .ics 18 ..if3 eS!? 19.he4
(19.ltJbS? !'!xdl 20.hdl !'!d8=t)
19 ... he4 20.ltJbS .id3 2UUel e4t
he seized the initiative.
He has no problems either
after 15.Vlfh3 ltJg5!?= 16.ltJxg5
Vlfxg5 17.dxc5 hc5 18.V!fg3 Vlfxg3
190
The Anti-Meran Variation
19.hxg3 !'!fd8 20.!'!fdl f6 21 ..tf3
ixf3 22.gxf3 e5 23.@f1 h5 24.~e2
@f7+ with a slight edge for Black,
Seirawan - Dreev, Hoogovens
1995.
C2) 10.gd1
This move is not particularly
dangerous for him either.
10 ..•ti'e7 1l..lb2
White would not achieve any-
thing much with the variation
1l.e4 dxe412.ltJxe4ltJxe413.Vlfxe4,
because after 13 ... ltJf6 (13 ...f5!?)
14.Vlfe3 c5 15..ib2 !'!ad8= Ariandi
- Asrian, ECC 2001) 14.W1h4 c5,
Black's prospects are not worse at
all.
1l••• gfd8 12.gac1 gac8 13.
Vb1
There arises a complicated po-
sition with about even chances.
13 ..• a6!? 14•.lfl c5!?
In the game Gelfand - Kram-
nik, Moscow 2008, Black chose
14 ...h6 and after 15.g3 .ib8 16..ig2
b5 17.e4 dxc4 18.e5 ltJe8 19.bxc4
c500 the situation was rather com-
plex with mutual possibilities.
 6. vtlc2 ~d6 7.~e2 0-0 B.b3 b6 9. 0-0 ~b7
l5.cxd5 exd5 with a good
game for Black, Chuchelov - Shi-
rov, Germany 2009. Following
16.g3 c4!? 17.a4?! cxb3 lS.llJd2
hS!? 19.1lJxb3 h4 20.~g2? hxg3
21.hxg3 .ixg3! 22.~f3 (22.fxg3?
~xe3+ 23.whl llJg4-+) 22 ...~bS
23.llJd2 llJfS, White ended up in a
hopeless position.
C3) lO.Ab2 Be7
This is the most popular and
reliable move for Black.
ll.gadl
This is also the most fashion-
able move for White, according to
contemporary theory.
11.~fd1 - see 1O.~dl.
1l.~fe1 gfeS 12.gadl gadS -
see ll.gadl.
The move 1l.e4 enables Black
after 1l... dxe4 12.llJxe4 lLlxe4 13.
'lWxe4 fS!? (The exchange of the
dark-squared bishops leads to ap-
proximate equality after 13 ...~a3.)
14.'lWc2 cS lS.gfe1 gadS 16.gad1
llJf6, to obtain chances of seizing
the initiative, Czerwonski - Mi-
ton, Warsaw (rapid) 2006.
H ••• gad8 l2J~fel!?
About 12.~d3 geS 13.gfe1 -
see 12.~fe1.
l2 ••• gfe8
This is the critical position of
the variation 6.~c2 ~d6 7..ie2
0-0 S. b3 b6. Black's prospects in
it are not worse at alI.
l3.Ad3
After 13.e4 dxe4 14.llJxe4
lLlxe4 lS.~xe4 .ib4!? 16.gf1 ~d6=
the position is equal. In the game
Carlsen - Leko, Morelia/Lin-
ares 2007, following 17.~fe1 .ib4
lS.gf1 .id6, the opponents agreed
to a draw. If White avoids the
repetition of moves and enters
the line: 17..id3 f5 18.~e2 cS, or
17.lLleS f5!? 18.~e3 (1S.~f3 llJxeS
19.dxe5 .ib4=) lS ... llJxeS 19.dxe5
.ic5, then Black again has nothing
to complain about.
13 ..if1 c5 14.cxdS cxdS lS.g3
(1S.~fS ~e6= 16.~xe6?! fxe6 17.
g3 a6 lS ..ig2 bS 19.dxcS llJxc5:f
Kornev - Motylev, Sochi 2006)
lS ... a6!? 16 ..ig2 gcSco with a com-
plicated, Swapnil - Hillarp Pers-
son, Kolkata 2009.
191
Chapter 7
13••• eS!?
This is the simplest move for
Black to obtain good counter-
play.
It is also acceptable for him
to opt for 13... c5, in the game
Gelfand - Kasimdzhanov, Elista
2007, there followed 14.cxd5exd5
15.i.f5 ltJf8 16.J.h3 ltJg6 17.ltJb5
i.b8co with a complex position
with mutual chances.
14.cxdS
White would not achieve much
with 14.e4, because after 14... dxc4
15.hc4 b5 16..ifl exd4 17.ltJxd4
ie5= the position is equal, Khaki-
mov - J.Geller, Izhevsk 2010.
14..• cxdS lS.dxeS
Black should not fear at all
15.e4 dxe416.ltJxe41tJxe417.he4
.ixe4 18.W1xe4 ltJf6, since his pros-
pects are not worse after 19.W1f5
e4 20.d5 i.b4!?+ Ki.Georgiev -
Kasimdzhanov, Khanty-Mansiysk
192
The Anti-Meran Variation
2007, as well as following 19.~h4
e4 20.d5 i.c5 21.hf6 ~xf6 22.
1"!xe4 ~xh4 23.fudl4 1"!e2 24.h4
.ixf2+ 25.'it>fl ~a2 26.1"!e4 b5= Bu
Xiangzhi - Van Wely, Biel 2007.
15 ... ~xe5 16.~d4 ~xd3 17.
Bxd3 ~e4!?
He has at least an equal game
after this move.
Black can also play the more
tentative line: 17 ...W1e5 18.1tJf3,
again with equality.
The game Gelfand - Anand,
Dortmund 2007 continued with
18.~f5 (l8.lLlxe4?! dxe4 19.~b5
J.b4t or 19 ...W1h4t) 18 ••• Bg5 (It is
also interesting for him to choose
18... hh2+!? 19.Wxh2 ~e5+ 20.
ttJg3 ttJxf2 21.~d4 ttJxdl and Black
has no problems.) 19.~xe4 (19.
ttJxd6 ttJxd6co) 19 ••• dxe4 20.
Bb5 .la6= (20 ....if8!?=) and the
opponents agreed to a draw.
ChapterS 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.~c3 ~f6
5.e3 ~bd7 6.YHc2 .id6 7.g4
This aggressive pawn-advance
is very popular in the contempo-
rary tournament practice.
The positions arising after
7.g4 are very complicated and
rather unclear and what is very
important for the tournament
players, using that move, is that
their computer analyses are not
so reliable. The point is that the
present day computer programs
of the type of Fritz or Rybka rec-
ommend after 7.g4, accepting the
pawn-sacrifice 7... lLlxg4, or the
line: 7...dxc4, with the idea after
8.g5, to free the d5-square for the
knight. They ignore the fact that
White's light-squared bishop goes
to the c4-square at once (without
the moves .tf1-e2 or .tf1-d3).
4.~t3 e6
These schemes (7... lLlxg4 and
7... dxc4) have amassed plenty
of theory, but I do not like them,
because I think they are not solid
enough for Black.
The variation 7.g4 .tb4 is for
me rather passive for him and
from the positional point of view a
second move in a row with Black's
dark-squared bishop does not
seem attractive to me. There is a
lot of theory in that variation as
well, though ...
Therefore, I believe Black's
most solid, reliable and logical
move after 7.g4 is the "human"
response 7...h6!? and we will ana-
lyze it in details later.
7 ••• h61?
This is a solid positional move.
Black prevents eschewing his
knight from the f6-square with
the move g4-g5 and creates the
threat to capture on g4 at some
moment. In addition, due to the
fact that White has compromised
his kingside, Black is permanent-
ly threatening the maneuver dxc4
i.xc4 b7-b5, followed by .tc8-b7
and subsequent pressure along
the hl-a8 diagonal with his light-
193
ChapterB
squared bishop.
White has two basic moves,
which he uses most often in the
tournament practice:
A) 8.gg1
B) 8 •.td2
He has tried sometimes 8.h3,
but this move does not seem very
active. The simplest reply for
Black is 8 ... e5!? (it is also possi-
ble for him to opt for 8 ... a6, which
leads to complicated and rather
unclear positions). Now, in the
variation 9.cxd5 cxd5 1O.dxe5
liJxe5 1l.liJxe5 he5 12 ..id2 (12.
.ig2 0-0=) 12 ... 0-000 Wojtkevicz
- Khalifman, Rakere 1993, as well
as in the lines: 9 ..id2 0-0 1O.dxe5
(10.0-0-0 e400; 10.cxd5 cxd5
1l.liJb5 .ib8 12 ..ib4 ~e8 13.~c1
liJe4!?= Ivanchuk - Leko, Jermuk
2009; 1O.g5 hxg5 1l.liJxg5 exd4
12.exd4 ~e8+ 13 ..ie2 liJf8= Svi-
dler - Gelfand, Monaco 2010)
1O... liJxe511.liJxe5 he512.0-0-0
dxc4!? (12 ...§'e700) 13.hc4 ffe700
Jakovenko - Gelfand, Khanty-
194
The Anti-Meran Variation
Mansiysk 2009, there arise com-
plex situations in which Black's
prospects are not worse at all.
A) 8.gg1 e5!?
This is his most energetic re-
sponse.
9.cxd5
This is the most fashionable
move here.
White has tried only seldom
9.g5, which after 9 ... hxg5, is not
dangerous for Black. In the game
Huzman, Kitchener 2006, there
followed 1O.~xg5 (10.liJxg5?! V!fe7
1l.cxd5 exd4+) 10 ...e4 (it is pos-
sible for him to opt for 10 ...exd4
1l.liJxd4 i>f8+ and his position is
slightly preferable) 1l.liJd2 i>f8!?
12.h3 liJe8 13.~gl liJdf6 14.V!fb3
liJc7+ with better prospects for
Black.
After 9.h4, he obtains good
counterplay following 9 ...exd4
1O.liJxd4 liJe5 1l.g5 hxg5 12.hxg5
lDfg4 13.cxd5 (13.f4?! liJxc4 14.
hc4 dxc4 15.liJf5 - 15.V!fe4+
cJlf8+ - 15... liJh2 16.~g3 .ib4 17.
.id2 liJg4 18.V!fe4+ i>f8+ Ibraev
 6. Wi c2 i.d6 7.g4 h6

- Singh Parsvnath, New Delhi Al) IO.tLJb5

2006) 13 ... c5!? 14.~e4 cxd4!? This knight-sortie is not dan-
(14 .. .l::!:h2oo) lS.exd4 0-0 (15 ... gerous for Black.
fS!?t) 16.dxeS iLxe5~, as well as IO ••• .ib8 H •.td2
after 9 ... dxc4 1O.g5 hxg5 1l.hxg5 ll.dxeS tDxe5 12.lDxeS ixe5
lDdS 12.iLxc4 exd4 13.lDxd4 (13. 13.f4 i.b8~
We4+ We7 14:~rxe7+ @xe7= Ale- Following ll.gS (ll.dxeS ltlxeS
ksandrov - Lastin, Voronezh 12.ltlxc5he513.f4i.b8+) 1l...hxgS
2008) 13 ... ltlxc3 14:~xc3 (14.g6 12.ltlxgS O-O!? (12 ... e4oo) there
ltleS lS.hf7 + 'i!lf8 16:~xc3 c5+ or arises a complicated and nearly
15.gxt7+ 'i!lf8 16:~xc3 c5+) 14 .. . balanced position. The game Ale-
ltle5 15.i.e2 (15.Jib3? .ib4-+ ) 15 .. . ksandrov - Yakovich, Serpukhov
i.g4!? and Black's chances are not 2008, continued with 13.i.d2
worse to say the least, for exam- a6 14.lDc3 tDb6 15.0-0-0 id7
ple: 16J!xg4 (16.iLxg4? ib4-+; 16.i.e2 '&c8!? 17.f3 exd4 18.exd4
16.g6!? iLxe2 17.gxf7+ lDxf7+) 16 ... .tf5 19.i.d3 ixd3 20.Wixd3= with
ltlxg4 17.iLxg4 '&xgS~ approximate equality.
9 ... cxd5

AI) lO.~b5
A2) lO.g5
He has no problems after 10.
h4 e4 1l.ltld2 (ll.gS hxg5 12.hxgS
exf3 13.gxf6 tDxf6 14.l!xg7? l!hH;
14.i.d2 wf8~ Gonda - Ragger,
Germany 2008) ll ... gS! and
Black's prospects are not inferior,
Bocharov - Sjugirov, Budva
2009.
H ... O-O!?
This is Black's most trustwOf-
thy answer.
His position is not so solid af-
ter 11...e4 12.tDh4!? a6 13.tDf5!?
In the game Aronian - To-
palov, Nice 2008, there followed
13... 0-0 (13 ... axbS 14.tDxg7+
@f8~) 14.tDbd6 ixd6 lS.liJxd6oo
with a complicated and very un-
clear position.
12 •.ib4

195
Chapter 8
12.gS hxgS 13.tLlxgS a6 14.tLlc3
tLlb6 - see 1O.tLlbS ,ib8 1l.gS hxgS
12.tLlxgS 0-0 13.i.d2 a614.tLlc3 tLlb6.
It hardly deserves serious at-
tention for White to try 12.lk1,
because after 12 ... e4!? 13.,ib4 (13.
tLlh4?! tLlb6!?'t with the idea 14.h3
tLlh7!? lS.tLlfS ii.xfS 16.gxf5 'lWd'T-F;
13 ... hh2!? 14J:'!g2 tLlxg4 lS.l:!xg4
tbb6 16.\Wdl fSf) 13 ... exf3!? (13 ...
.B:e8=) 14 ..hfB hh2 lS ..B:h1 tLlxf8
16 ..B:xh2 tLlxg4 17..B:h1 \WgS, in the
game Almeida - Becerra Rivero,
New York 2008, Black obtained
more than sufficient compensa-
tion for the exchange and seized
the initiative.
12 •.• geS
He has a reliable position.
The game Almeida Quintana -
Dreev, Barcelona 2009, followed
with 13.gS hxgS 14.liJxgS ~f8
IS.dxeS .beS 16.0-0-0?!
(it was preferable for White to
opt for 16.tbf3 tLlg6= with equal-
ity Gelfand - Leko, Odessa 2007)
16•.• .lg417.f3 gcSIS •.lc3 ixc3
19.tOxc3 .1hSf with a consider-
able advantage for Black.
196
The An ti-Mera n Variation
A2) 10.gS bxgS
1l.~xgS
White plays only very seldom
here 1l ..B:xgS. After 1l ... e4 12.tbg1
(or 12.tLld2 tLlb6) 12 ... tLlb6, Black's
chances are somewhat preferable
thanks to his slight lead in devel-
opment, Adly - Mastrovasilis,
Groningen 2007.
White cannot achieve much in
the variation 11.dxe5 tLlxe5 12.tLlxe5
heS 13 ..B:xgS \We7!?, in which
Black is worse neither after 14.i.d2
'it>f8, nor following 14J~xg7 d4.
1l•••t¥e7!?
This move is the simplest to
provide good counterplay for
him.
The situation is not so clear af-
ter 11...e4.
12.tObS exd4 13.~xd4
Following 13.tLlxd6+ \Wxd6 14.
exd4 (after 14.tLlxf7?! 'it>xf7 15.
~g6+ c;t>e6, White's compensa-
tion for the piece is insufficient)
14 ... 0-000 the position is bal-
anced.
13 •.• tOeS
13... tLlcS!?

14•.ld2
This position was reached in
the game Gelfand - Lautier, Wijk
aan Zee 2002. Black's prospects
are not worse, but here, instead
of what he played in the game
14... lLlfg4oo, it would have been
simpler and more reliable for
him, according to B.Gelfand, to
play 14.•• mf8!?, after which only
White might have problems, for
example: 15.tfb3 gxh2 16.~gf3
~xtJ+ 17.~xtJ gh6 18..lc3
.if5+ and Black's position would
be preferable (this variation was
recommended by B.Gelfand).
B) 8 •.ld2
6. V9c2 i.d6 7.g4 h6
8 •.. dxc4!?
This is the most modern and
energetic reply for him. The move
8 ... dxc4 seems quite logical, since
after the practically forced re-
sponse 9 ..ixc4, Black chooses 9...
b5, followed by ic8-b7, planning
in the nearest future the pawn-
break c6-c5 with powerful pres-
sure along the hl-a8 diagonal
with the light-squared bishop.
The alternatives for him - 8 ...
V!!e7, 8 ... a6 and 8 ... e5 are less ac-
tive and not so reliable.
9.hc4b5
10 •.le2
This is the main line for
White.
He plays much more rarely in
the tournament practice the move
10.M3. After 10...i.b71U!gl (White
would not achieve anything with
1l.g5 hxg5 12.liJxg5 V!!e7, or 1l.e4
O-O!? 12.e5 c5 and in both cases
Black obtains an excellent posi-
tion) 1l....!k8!? and his chances
arc at least equal. In the game
Krasenkow - Vallejo Pons, Sanx-
enxo 2004, there followed 12.g5
197
Chapter 8
(12.h4 c5!? 13.'DxbS .ie7t; after
12.a3, Black has a good reply 12 ...
cS!? with an excellent position.
Later, in the game Aronian -
Vallejo Pons, Khanty-Mansiysk
200S, there followed 13.'DxbS .ib8
14.~dl cxd4 - 14 ... eS!? - IS.exd4
'Dc5 16 ..te2 .txf3 17..txf3 ltJd3+t
with initiative and considerable
advantage for Black) 12 ... hxg5 13.
'Dxg5 ~e7 (he was threatening i.d3-
g6) 14.h3 a615.'Dce4'Dxe416.i.xe4
'Df6'f with a very good position.
The move 10 ..ib3 is only very
seldom tested in practice and af-
ter 10 ....ib7, Black is clearly bet-
ter after lU!g1 b4!? 12.ltJa4 (12.
ltJe4 'Dxe4 13.~xe4 ~cT+) 12 ... cS
13.dxc5 )3c8t with initiative for
him, as well as following 1l.gS hxgS
12.ltJxg5 ~e7!? (12 ... b4 13 ..be6!?
0-0 14.ltJce4t) 13.e4 c5+
10 ..•.ih7
White has three main lines in
this position:
B1) ll.e4
B2) 1U~tgl
B3) ll.g5
198
The Anti-Meran Variation
B1) ll.e4 .ie7 12.g5
Black should not fear 12.eS, be-
cause of 12 ... b4! 13.exf6 (13.41a4
'DdS=) 13 ... bxc3 14.fxe7 cxd2+
IS.'Dxd2 ~xe7= and his position
is not worse, while after 16..if3
l"lbB 17.ltJb3 0-0 IB.O-O-O?! c5
19.il.xb7 l"lxb7t in the game Hari-
ka - Nakamura, Gibraltar 2008,
he seized the initiative.
12 ..• hxg5 13.~xg5 c5!?
This is Black's most energetic
reply with which he is trying for
claim an advantage in this line.
14.dxc5
It is not satisfactory for White
to choose 14.d5, since after 14 ...
exd5, he may have problems, for
example: lS.tlJxb5 a6 16.tlJc3 tlJe5
17.exd5 (17.f4 'Dxe4'f) 17... 'DxdS'f
with an advantage for Black.
He is better too following
14.ltJxbS aM
14...h4!
This move became fashionable
relatively recently, in the years
2008-2009 (Black used to play
before that 14... lLlxc5 IS.hb5oo)
and it provides him with excellent

counterplay.
15.ftla4 gh4!?t
He has the initiative. White
has problems (very serious at
that!). See several most interest-
ing interesting examples:
Aloma Vidal - S.Savchenko,
Palma de Mallorca 2009: 16.f4
j'k8+ 17.Wd3 lLlxc5 18.lLlxcS ixcS
19.Wb5+ Wd7 20.Wxd7+?! lLlxd7
21.id3 id6+ 22.0-0?! ~g4+ 23.
'i!lhl lLlc5 24.ib5+ 'i!le7 25.gael
~xgS 26.fxg5 lLlxe4 27.if4 lLlf2+
0-1;
Miedema - Grin, Haakssber-
gen 2009: 16.c6?! ~c8 17.cxd7+
ttJxd7 18.ttJxe6+ 18. .. fxe6 19.~b3
~xe4 20.~gl WaS 21.'i!lfl :8.xe2 22.
'i!lxe2 lLle5 23.~g3 Wb5+ 24.'i!lel
ia60-1;
if 16.f3, Black has 16 ...ic6!?,
with the idea lLlf6-h5.
B2) lUl:gl gc8!
This is the most energetic and
modern move for him after which
he has very good counterplay.
With 11...~c8!? Black emphasizes
the not so comfortable placement
6. ~c2 id6 7.g4 h6
of White's queen along the c-file
and is threatening the immediate
c6-cS, as well as the maneuver bS-
b4, followed by c6-c5.
12.g5
This is the most fashionable
and popular move for White.
Black should not be afraid of
12.e4, because of12 ... b4 13.e5 (13.
lLla4? c5+) 13 ... bxc3 14.bxc3 (14.
.bc3 cS IS.exf6 lLlxf6+) 14 ...ie7
15.exf6 hfM with the idea c6-c5.
The move 12.h4 is a bit too
slow and after 12 ...b4 13.lLle4 (or
13.ttJa4 c5) 13... ttJxe4 14.~xe4
Wb6'f, with the idea c6-cS, Black's
prospects are clearly preferable,
since he has the initiative in these
variations, Belous - Bukavshin,
Kirishi 2009.
After 12.a3, the simplest re-
sponse for Black would be the
standard move for similar posi-
tions 12 ... aS with at least an equal
game after 13.e4 b4 14.axb4 axb4
15.eS bxc3 16.ixc3 (16.bxc3 ie7+)
16 ... c5, as well as following 13.h4
b4 14.axb4 axb4 lS.ttJa4 (lS.ttJe4
lLlxe4 16. ~xe4 ~b6+ with the idea
199
Chapter 8 The Anti-Meran Variation

c6-c5) 15...c5. Meanwhile, it may

be also interesting for him to opt
for 12 ... c5, since after 13.lLlxb5
.ibB 14.lYfa4 (14.lLlc3 cxd4 15.exd4
lLle4~ Sbarra - Korneev, Rome
2007) 14 ... a6 15.lLlc3 0-0, there
arises a complicated position in
which Black's compensation for
the pawn is quite sufficient. In the
game Staratorzhsky - Jauinean,
ICCF 2008, there followed 16.h4
(16.g5 hxg517J'!xg5lLlb6~ IB.lYfa5 After 14.lLla4 cS, Black has
.bf3, draw, Kempinskj - Bobras, good counterplay and his pros-
Opole 2007) 16... cxd4 17.exd4 pects are superior, for example:
lLlb6 IB.'M>3 .ixf3 19 ..ixf3 lLlc4t 15.dxc5 (the game Rajlich - Kai-
with initiative and good compen- danov, Gibraltar 2007, followed
sation for the pawn. with 15.~xc5?! .ixc5 16.dxc5 lLle4
12 ••• hxg513.~g5 17.l'!xg7 lYff6 18J%g4 ~xc5 19.~a4
It is not preferable for White lLlxd2 20.lLlxd2 E:xh2 21.E:f4 ~hl+
to choose 13.lLlxg5, because after 22.!fl %Vxb2 23.E:dl E:cE) 15 ...
the calm and reliable move 13... lLle4~
~e7!?, with the idea h4 and c6-c5, 14... ~xe4 15.'fbe4 g6+ -
Black's prospects are not inferior Black has a slight edge, Nasybul-
at all. He can also try the sharper lin - Lafarga, ICCF 2007.
line: 13 ....bh2 with a complex and
about balanced position. Here, B3) 1l.g5 hxg5 12.~xg5
following 14.lLlxf7 (14J;hl cst;
14J%g2 ~e7+) 14... 'itJxf7 15.lYfg6+
We7 16.lLlxbS, Milanovic - Salem,
Dubai 2009, 16.. .r~gB!? 17.!h4+
c5 18.dxc5 lLlxcS 19.1Llxa7 )jc7oo
the position is sharp and compli-
cated, but Black has good counter
chances with an extra piece for
two pawns.
(diagram)
13•••b4!?
The game is sharp and very un-
clear after 13 ...'itJf8 14.lLle5 lYfe700 12•• :tVb6!?
Radjabov - Anand, Mainz 2006. This is a fashionable move
14.~e4 with which he is threatening to

200

seize the initiative after the the-
matic pawn-advance c6-c5.
13.0-0-0
White would not achieve much
after 13.lLlce4, since Black can
counter that with 13 ... lLlxe4!? (it is
less reliable for him to choose 13 ...
c5, because following 14.lLlxd6+
~xd6 IS.dxc5 lLlxc5 16J~gloc there
arises a very complicated position
in which White has more possi-
bilities to fight for the initiative
than in the variation with 13...
lLle4!? For example, in the game
V.Aleksandrov - J.Geller, Mos-
cow 2008, there followed 16...
~k8?! - 16... 0-0!?oc - 17.lLlxf7!
lLld3+ 18.~xd3 ~xd3 19.,txd3
'i!?xf7 20 ..tg6+ 'i!?g8 21 ..tc3± with
an overwhelming advantage for
him.) 14.lLlxe4 .te7
In view of the threat of the the-
matic pawn-break c6-cS, Black's
prospects are at least equal.
6. V9c2 .td6 7.g4 h6
White's attempt to prevent radi-
cally the pawn-advance c6-c5 with
the move 15.b4, was countered
by Black, in the game Sargissian
- Smeets, Wijk aan Zee 2007, in
a very interesting fashion: 15...
as! 16.bxaS ~aS 17.lLlcS (17 ..txaS
\Wxa5+ 18.'i!?fl!? c5~; 18.lLld2 ~
with compensation and initiative
for him) 17... li)xcS 18.dxc5 ,txc5
19.,txaS V9xaS+ 20.'~f1 .td6t -
Black seized the initiative and his
compensation for the exchange
was more than sufficient.
13•••b414.~a4 BaS
He is not worse in this posi-
tion. The game Svidler - Kar-
jakin, Foros 2007, continued later
with 15.gbgl hb2 16.Ael gc80c
with a complex situation, in which
Black had an extra pawn and ex-
cellent prospects.
201
Chapter 9 1.d4 ~f6 2.c4 c6 3.~c3 ~f6 4.~f3 e6
5.e3 ~bd7

7.J.d2
It is bad for him to choose
7.i.b2? ttJe4 8.~c2 ~aS and Black
wins a pawn.

In this chapter we will deal

with some of White's less popular
attempts to avoid the Meran vari-
ation.

A) 6.b3 7 ••• V!Je7

B) 6.J.d2 It is of course quite possible
C) 6.cxd5 for him to continue with 7... 0-0
D) 6.J.e2 S.i.d3 and here, it is interesting
E) 6.a3 for Black to opt for S... cS!? (8 ...
~e7!? 9.0-0 b6= with approxi-
A) 6.b3 mate equality) 9.cxdS cxd4 10.
This move is not so advanta- tt'lxd4 ttJeS 1l.i.c2 ttJxdS 12.tt'lxdS
geous for him, because Black can hd2+ 13.~xd2 ~xdS 14.f4 ltJg6
play without a problem 6....id6, 1S.4'lf3 ~xd2+ 16.i>xd2 EidS+ 17.
or 6...b6, but he can also continue i>e2 b61S ..ie4 i.a6+ 19.@f2 EiacS
with 20.Eiad1 tiJe7 21.tiJd4 ttlds= Naka-
6 ... J.b4 mura - Beliavsky, Barcelona
forcing White's bishop to oc- 2007.
cupy the not so good d2-square. 8.V!Jc2

202
 Rare Lines

Or B.i.d3 e5 9.~c2 e4 1O.ttJgl

ttJfB 1l.ttJge2 ltJg6 12.cxdS cxd5
13.a3 .ba3 14.ltJb5 ~d6 IS.ltJxa7
lLlh4t and Black seized the initia-
tive in the game Abbasov - Van
Wely, Baku 2007.
8 ..• 0-09.i.e2
After 9.~d3 e5!, he at least
equalizes, since it is bad for White
to play 10.cxd5, in view of 10...
.bc3 11.~xc3 e4 12.dxc6 bxc6
13.~xc6 ElbB and Black's position i.d6 with 7 •.id3, without being
is superior, Mihailov - Kalugin, afraid of transition to the Meran
Krasnodar 1999. variation, because the inclusion
9 .••b6 10.0-0 .tb71U~ad1 of the moves .td2 .td6 would not
~ac8 12. Yfb2 dxc4 lead to positions typical for the
Meran and may turn out to be in
his favour.
Black has however numerous
ways of obtaining a good posi-
tion. We will analyze a variation,
which has practically forced that
scheme out of use by White at the
top level.
7 ••• 0-08.0-0 dxc4
Black can also follow with the
standard move B... b6, but B...
dxc4, I believe, is his simplest
13.bxc4 road to equality.
13 ..bc4?! c5 14.a3 ~xc3 15. 9.,txc4
.bc3 .ixf3 16.gxf3 ltJdS 17.lithl
- 17..bd5 Y9gS=i= - 17... ttJxc3
IB.~xc3 ltJf6=i= AKovalyov - Shul-
man, Montreal 2009.
13 ••• c5=

B) 6.id2
(diagram)
The idea of this a bit strange
move is for White to counter 6 ••.

203
Chapter 9

9 ••• c5! blanca, New York 1913.

This is an excellent response. 9 ••• ge810.Yfe2 ~f8 ll.Ab2
White has no chances of obtain- With the move 1l.h3, White
ing any real advantage at all. prevents the sortie J.c8-g4, but
It is obvious how awkward the that cannot change the evaluation
placement of White's bishop on of the position. 1l ... ltJg6 12.J.b2
d2 is in this line. V!!e7=
10.dxc5 ~xc5 ll.Yle2 a6
12.J.e2 bS 13.b4 ~ed7 14.~e4
J.e7 IS.~xf6+ ~xf6 16.a4
bxa417.gxa4 J.b718.gfaliCe4
19.,ixa6 ,ixa6 20.~6 ba6
21.ba6 ~xd2= Ivanchuk -
Cheparinov, Sochi 2008.

C) 6.cxdS

1l••• Ag4 12.lCd2

12.ltJh4 ltJe4 13.g3 i.h3= and
here, if White does not sacrifice
the exchange with 14.ltJe4oo with
a rather unclear game, then after
14J~fel fSr, Black's position seems
to be even slightly preferable.
12 ••• .thS 13.gfelAg6 14.~f1
'We7 IS.gad1 ~e6 16.f3 gad8=
This move was very often 17.'Wf2 a6 18.mhl
played at the peak of the popu- 18.ltJe2 J.b4 19.i.c3 a5=
larity of the Meran variation, but
nowadays it is only seldom tried
in practice. Black equalizes effort-
lessly.
6 ••• exdS 7.id3 J.d6 8.0 - 0
0-09.b3
9J:!el ~e8 10.V!!c2 lLlfB 1l.e4
dxe4 12.<~Jxe4 ltJxe4 13.he4=
9 ..id2 ~e8 10.ti'c2 V!!e7 11.~ael
lLle4 12.i.cl lLldf6, with a good
game for him, Stapfer - Capa-

204

lS ••• c5! 19.dxc5. The oppo-
nents agreed to a draw in this ap-
proximately equal position, Vyzh-
manavin - Khalifman, Gronin-
gen 1993 (19.dxc5 !xcS 20.lLle2?
~b4+; 20.lLla4 JLe7 21.!xg6 hxg6
22.!k1 ~b8=).
D) 6.JLe2
6 ••• JLd6
I think this is the best move
for Black. White's main idea in
this line is to avoid the Meran
variation after 6... dxc4, by play-
ing 7.a4.
7.0-0 0-0 S.b3
About R.\¥fc2 - see 6.\¥fc2 id6
7.ie2 0-0 8.0-0 (Chapter 8).
Rare Lines
S ••• ~e4!?
Naturally, it is quite possible
for Black to continue here with
8 ... b6, but his last move empha-
sizes the drawbacks of White's
approach to avoid the move ~c2
and transfers the game into a
very good version for Black of the
"Stonewall system".
9.JLb2 f510.~d2
lO.eS!? i.c7 11.h4 a6 12.a4 ~f6
13.~c2 ~h6 (13 ... eS!?oo) 14.g3 gS.
His kingside initiative compen-
sates White's queens ide activ-
ity. lSJ''!fe1?! (It was preferable
for White to play here lS.b5 g4
16.lLld2 lLlgSoo) 15 ... lLldf6 16.if1
.id717.i.g2 ie818Jjf1ig619.lLle5
ixeS 20.dxe5 ttJg4 21.h3 f4!
22.~e2 f3 23.M3 lLlxe5 24.~g4
lLlxg4 25.hxg4 ~h3+ with an over-
whelming advantage for Black,
Z.Polgar - Dreev, Tunja 1989.
10 ••. b611.f4
11 ... ~xc3! 12.,hc3 'l'e7 13.
gel JLb7 14.gel?! ~f6 15•.lf3
gaeS 16.~f1 gfdS 17.ge2 c5
lS.dxc5 .Axc5; Epishin - Dreev,
Dos Hermanas 2003.
205
Chapter 9
E) 6.a3
This is one of the most serious
alternatives to the main "anti-
Meran" system - 6.~c2.
White plans to occupy space
on the queenside with b2-b4,
followed by the fianchetto of his
dark-squared bishop. Meanwhile,
tournament practice shows that
Black can obtain a good position
in many different ways. He usu-
ally counters his opponent's plan
with the standard counter strike
in the centre e6-e5.
6 ••• Ad6
It deserves attention for him
to try an interesting idea suggest-
ed by V.V.Smyslov - 6 ... g6: 7.id3
ig7 8.0-0 0-0 9.b4 e5 lO.cxd5
and now 10 ... ltJxd5 (Obviously,
it is a bit inferior for Black to opt
here for 1O... exd4 1l.exd4 lDxd5
12.ltJxd5 cxd5 13.~g5 f6 14.tf4
ltJb6 15J'kl :!'U7 16.E:eU Little-
wood - Smyslov, Hastings 1981.)
1l ..ib2 ltJxc3 12.ixc3 ~e7 13.%'c2
13e8=, equalizing.
7.h4
206
This is White's most consist-
ent and logical answer.
The move 7..id3 does not com-
bine well with his previous move.
After 7... 0-0 8.0-0 dxc4 (8 ... e5!?
9.cxd5 cxd5 lO.dxe5 ttJxe5 11.~e2
ltJxf3+ 12 ..ixf3 ie6 13.ltJb5 ~e5
14.ltJd4 't'fd6 15.h3 :gac8= Hesse
- Dvoretzky, Varna 1980) 9.hc4
e5, Black obtains an excellent po-
sition and if lO.e4?!, then he has
the resource 10 ... exd4 1l.'&xd4
'&c7 12.ig5 ttJeS! 13 ..ixf6 gxf6
14.@hl c5+ Shengelia - Sargis-
sian, Dubai 2010.
It is not convincing for him
either to continue with 7.cS - 7...
1i.c7 8.b4 e5 9.dxeS (it is prob-
ably better for White to play here
9.i.e2, preserving the tension in
the centre, 9 ... 0-000 and Black's
prospects are not worse at all)
9 ... ltJxe5 1O.ttJd4 '&e7 1l.'&c2 0-0
12.h3 id7 (it would be interesting
for him to opt for 12 ... aS!? 13.gbl
axb4 14.axb4 ltJc4!?, preparing
the maneuver ~e7-e5; 13.~b2?!
axb4 14.axb4 13xal+ IS.hal b6+)
13.XJ.e2 b614.ltJa4ltJe4+ and Black
had a clear advantage in the game,
Aleksandrov - Potkin, Moscow
2002.
The move 7.g4 is a very original
idea and its author is the famous
Russian grandmaster Vladimir
Epishin. By the way, I do not think
this move at the moment can be
better for White in comparison to
the variation with 6.'&c2 ~d6 7.g4,
analyzed in Chapter 8.

Black's most logical response
seems to be 7... 0-0. He plans to
use the e4-square for the retreat
of his knight on f6 and in that
way White's entire idea, con-
nected with the pawn-advance
g2-g4, loses its effect altogether.
In the game Epishin - Jaracz,
Benasque 2007, there followed
B.gS ~e4 9.h4 eS! 1O.cxdS ~xc3
1l.bxc3 cxdS 12.,ib2 fie7 13.fic2
e4 14.tLld2 fS IS.c4 and here after
the sharp move IS .. .f4! (instead
of what was played in the game -
15 ... b6?! 16.cxdS ib7oo) 16.cxd5
fxe3 17.fxe3 tLlb6 IB.'!Wxe4 ,ig3+
19.1t;>dl '!Wd6i Black would have
very powerful initiative.
The other possibilities for him
(after 7.g4) are also possible, hut
they are not so fashionable, for
example:
7... tLle4!? B.cxdS (B.tLlxe4 dxe4
9.tLld2 fS 1O.h4!? 0-0 with a good
position for him; or B.h4 tLlxc3
9.bxc3 eS) B... tLlxc3 9.bxc3 exd5
1O.gS tLlb6 lU~gl ,ifS 12.h4 '!We7
and Black has an excellent game,
Epishin - Debray, France 2006;
7... h6 BJ:!gl eS (B ... dxc4 9.,ixc4
bSlO.~e2 b411.axb4 .ixb412.h4i
Epishin - Kobalia, Dresden 2007)
Rare Lines
9.cxdS cxd5 10.h4 e4 1l.tLld2 ~b6
12.gS hxgS 13.hxgS tLlgBoo Epishin
- Vega Gutierrez, Dos Hennanas
2006;
7... eS B.gS tLle4 9.cxdS tLlxc3
1O.bxc3 cxdS 1l.ffb3 '!Wc7 12.a4
0-0 13.h4 tLlb6 - he is not worse
at all, Hillarp Persson - L'Arni,
Malmo 2007.
It is rather dubious for Black
to reply with 7... dxc4?! B.gS tLldS
9.tLle4 ,ie7 10 ..ixc4 bS 1l..ie2
,ib7 12.,id2 a6 13.YtIc2 ~cB 14.b4;t
Epishin - Vosshard, Utrecht
2007, as well as 7...b6?! B.gS tLlgB
9.cxdS exdS 10.e4± Epishin -
Godena, San Marino 2006.
7 ••• 0-08.J.b2
About B.fic2 eS - see Chapter
4, variation A.
8 ...•e7
It also deserves attention for
Black to try here B... dxc4 9 ..ixc4
b51O.,id3 as.
9 .•c2
9 ••• e5
This resolute response seems
to me to be stronger than the
waiting move 9 ... a6!?, so that af-
207
Chapter 9

ter 10 ..td3, to continue with 10 ... at all. Still, the fact that White has
dxc4 1l ..txc4 eS 12 ..ia2 (12 ..tb3 the d4-outpost is not sufficient for
exd413.liJxd4 g614.0-0 c5coj 12 ... him to claim any real advantage;
as 13.bSco Ki.Georgiev - Dorfman, moreover that his pawn-structure
Moscow 1990) 12 ....tc7 13.0-0 on both sides of the board is com-
exd4 14.exd4 (14.liJxd4 liJg4 1S.g3 promised.
liJdf6+t) 14... liJb6 1SJ~ae1 ~d6= lS.lJc3
Bauer - Gelfand, Biel 2005. In the game Agrest - Serper,
10 .cxdS cxdS Oberwart 1994, White played
But not 1O ... e4?!, because of carelessly 1S.liJd4?! and after 15...
1l.dxc6!± Ki.Georgiev- P.Lukacs, J'!e8 16..ie2 .th3 17.@d2 gac8,
Stara Zagora 1990. Black had the edge.
1l.dxe5 ls ...'fIhS
If 1l.liJbS, then 1l ... e4 12.liJxd6 It deserves attention for him
(12.liJd2?! ~b6 13..te2?! .tg4 to choose IS ... ~xc3+!? 16.liJxc3 as
14.liJxd6 ~xd6 IS.f3 gac8 16.~b3 17.bS d4 18.exd4 gd8 19.0-0-0
exf3 17.gxf3 .tfS=t Ki.Georgiev i.e6 20.@b2 !!ac8 21.i.d3 .tdS
- Markus, Bar 2003) 12 ... ~xd6 22.~e4 ~hS~
13.ttJeSliJb6 14.i.e2 i.e6= with ap- 16.~d4 .td7 17.fic7 gfc8
proximate equality. lS.lJxb7 as 19.bS \1feS 20.'I'b6
ll ... ~xeS 12.~bS ~xf3+ 13.
gxf3 .teS 14..ixeS fixeS

Here, Black can force a draw if

he so wishes: 20 .. JkbS 21.1Jc5
Black's position is not worse gcS.

208
Alexey Oreev Is one of the most popular
contemporary Russian grandmasters.
He was twice World junior champion
(under 16) In 1983 and 1984, IUver
medalist under 20 in 1984, European
champion under 20 in 1988.
Dreev is the winner of many
international tournaments.
With the Russian team, he was
three times Olympic gold medalist
and once he got the silver,
he also won two times
the World team championship-
in t997 and 2005.
Oreev is a leading expert on opening
theory and renown chess author. His
previous books, published by Chua
Stars, are My One H~ IMI Gomeos
and The Moscow'" Antl·Moscow
Variadons.