[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "Introduction"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "10"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 {This move is important. White wants to fianchetto his king's bishop, but before he does so he eliminates the possibility of Black playing 2. ..d5.} (2. g3 d5 {is playable for White, but that's outside our repertoire!}) 2... Nc6 {Other black options will be studied later in this chapter.} ({ The text is the normal move order to reach the position after 5 d3, but are there others, for example} 2... g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 Nc6 5. d3 {.}) 3. g3 g6 { Black's most popular and successful way of dealing with the Closed Sicilian is to follow suit with his own fianchetto. The bishop on g7 will have a great influence over events in the centre and on the queenside.} 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 { Now we will concentrate on Black's three main choices from this position:} Z0 ( {A:} 5... e6) ({B:} 5... Rb8) ({C:} 5... d6) ({Before moving onto Black's main moves, let's take a brief look at other possibilities for Black.} 5... Nf6 { is likely to transpose to Variation C1 after} 6. Be3 d6 {.}) ({Likewise,} 5... e5 {will transpose to Variation C2 after} 6. Be3 d6 {.}) (5... b6 {is unusual, but quite playable. White should continue as normal with} 6. Be3 {. Hort-Toran Albero, Palma de Mallorca 1969, continued} Bb7 7. Qd2 d6 8. Nh3 Qd7 9. O-O e6 10. Rae1 Nge7 11. Bh6 O-O 12. Bxg7 Kxg7 13. f4 f5 14. Ng5 {and Black's slightly weak kingside gave White the advantage.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "A: 5...e6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "45"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 e6 {With this move Black delays committing the d-pawn with ...d7-d6 and prepares to develop with ...Nge7. This line often simply transposes to 5...d6 variations, but here we concentrate on Black refraining from playing an early ...d7-d6, as in some lines Black looks to gain from this by playing ...d7-d5 instead and thus saving a tempo with this central counterattack.} 6. Be3 ({It must be said that} 6. f4 {is also very possible, but in the main I'm recommending playing the Closed Sicilian with an early Be3 and Qd2. The reasons for this are threefold: firstly, I believe lines with Be3 and Qd2 to more direct and aggressive than those with an early f2-f4; secondly, there is less theory for the white player to learn and lastly, I think lines with Be3 and Qd2 are easier to play. More often than not, White will later offer the exchange of bishops with Be3-h6, thus weakening Black's control over the dark squares on the kingside. Indeed this is one of White's key ideas here.}) 6... Nd4 {Black occupies the all-important d4-square. The knight is actively placed here and it certainly prevents White from playing d3-d4 in the near future. The knight is also reasonably secure on d4, being protected by both the bishop on g7 and the pawn on c5. However, the d4-square isn't an outpost in the strictest sense of the word – White can fight for its control by moving the c3-knight and playing c2-c3. Other possibilities for Black include:} (6... d6 {transposes to Variation C4. In fact this move is Black's most popular choice and may well be Black's best option.}) (6... Qa5 7. Qd2 (7. Nge2 Nd4 8. O-O Ne7 9. Nc1 d6 10. Nb3 Qc7 {looks okay for Black}) 7... Nd4 8. f4 Ne7 9. Nf3 d6 10. O-O { transposes to Variation C43.}) (6... Nge7 7. Bxc5 Qa5 8. Be3 Bxc3+ 9. bxc3 Qxc3+ 10. Bd2 Qc5 11. Ne2 {and Black has no compensation for losing his dark-squared bishop, Jansen-Langer, Budapest 1999.}) (6... b6 7. Qd2 Bb7 8. Nge2 Nge7 (8... Nd4 9. Bxd4 cxd4 10. Nb5 d5 11. Qb4 {is very unpleasant for Black}) 9. Bh6 O-O 10. h4 f6 11. Bxg7 Kxg7 12. O-O-O Nd4 13. f4 h5 14. Nxd4 cxd4 15. Ne2 e5 16. g4 hxg4 17. h5 {and White had a very strong attack, Medina Garcia-Benko, Siegen Olympiad 1970.}) 7. Nce2 {With this surprising move White immediately makes use of the unprotected state of the c5-pawn in order to challenge the d4-knight.} Ne7 {Or:} (7... d5 8. c3 Nxe2 9. Nxe2 dxe4 10. Bxc5 exd3 11. Nf4 d2+ 12. Qxd2 Qxd2+ 13. Kxd2 Nf6 14. Rad1 Nd7 15. Bd6 Be5 16. Bxe5 Nxe5 17. Rhe1 Nd7 18. Kc1 {and White has a terrific lead in development, Barczay-Uhlmann, Trencianske Teplice 1979.}) (7... Nxe2 8. Nxe2 Bxb2 9. Rb1 Bg7 (9... Qa5+ {loses to} 10. Bd2 Qxa2 11. Rxb2 Qxb2 12. Bc3) 10. Bxc5 {and the exchange of the c5-pawn for the b2-pawn is favourable for White. Black can now grab a pawn with} Qa5+ 11. Bb4 Qxa2 {, but following} 12. c4 {White has excellent compensation.}) (7... b6 8. Bxd4 cxd4 9. e5 Rb8 10. f4 f6 11. Nf3 fxe5 12. fxe5 Qc7 13. Nexd4 Bxe5 14. Qe2 Bxd4 15. Nxd4 Qc5 16. Nb3 Qg5 17. O-O {and Black was simply overrun in Spassky-Hjartarson, Belfort 1988.}) 8. c3 Nxe2 9. Nxe2 d6 ({Black can also protect the c5-pawn with} 9... b6 {. Following} 10. d4 cxd4 {we have:} 11. Z0 (11. Bxd4 e5 12. Be3 Bb7 { looks equal,} ({but not} 12... O-O 13. Qd6 Bb7 14. O-O Rc8 15. Rfd1 Rc7 16. a4 Nc6 17. b4 Re8 18. Qd3 Qa8 19. a5 bxa5 20. b5 {, which was very good for White in P.Kovacevic-Peev, Pancevo 1989.})) (11. Nxd4 Bb7 12. O-O O-O 13. f4 f5 14. e5 Bxg2 15. Kxg2 g5 {and I prefer White, Bronstein-Korzubov, Minsk 1983.})) 10. d4 ({White was also slightly better after} 10. Qd2 O-O 11. h4 Nc6 12. d4 {, as in Smyslov-Renter, Parnu 1947, but the text move looks more direct.}) 10... cxd4 11. Nxd4 O-O 12. O-O a6 13. Qd2 {White has an easy plan and a comfortable edge; the d6-pawn is vulnerable and White can increase the pressure along the d-file. King-Domont, Swiss League 1999, continued} Qc7 14. Bh6 e5 15. Bxg7 Kxg7 16. Nc2 Be6 17. f4 f6 18. Ne3 Rad8 19. Kh1 Qc5 20. Rad1 a5 21. f5 Bc4 22. Rf2 gxf5 23. exf5 {and White eventually won.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "B: 5...Rb8"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "28"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 Rb8 {With this move Black delays showing his hand on the kingside and immediately prepares for the ... b7-b5-b4 push. This will gain important space on the queenside, force the white knight away from c3 and increase the scope of Black's dark-squared bishop. It must be said that 5...Rb8 has little independent value and usually transposes to lines considered later. Here we will look at possible deviations for Black.} 6. Be3 {Once again preparing Qd2 and incidentally attacking the c5-pawn.} Nd4 {Once again occupying the d4-square. Alternatively:} (6... d6 {, transposing to Variation C3, is Black's most obvious choice.}) (6... b5 7. Qd2 (7. Bxc5 b4 8. Na4 Qa5 9. b3 {is an interesting looking exchange sacrifice}) 7... b4 8. Nd1 d6 9. Ne2 {once again leads us to Variation C3.}) 7. Nce2 {Following the same recipe as in Variation A.} (7. Nge2) ({or} 7. Qd2 { are likely to transpose to Variation C3.}) 7... Nxe2 8. Nxe2 Bxb2 9. Rb1 Bg7 ( 9... Qa5+ {once again loses to} 10. Bd2 Qxa2 11. Rxb2 Qxb2 12. Bc3 {.}) 10. Bxc5 d6 (10... Qa5+ 11. Bb4 Qxa2 12. c4 {once again gives White immense compensation for the pawn.}) {After} 11. Bd4 ({White could deviate earlier, keeping the dark-squared bishops on with} 11. Be3) ({or} 11. Bb4 {, in either case with a slight edge for White.}) 11... Bxd4 12. Nxd4 Bd7 13. f4 { (Sarfati-Rogers, Wellington 1988) Rogers gives} Qc7 14. Qd2 Nf6 {as being equal.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C: 5...d6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B25"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "12"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 {This sensible move is Black's most popular choice. Black opens a diagonal for the c8-bishop, but other than this, he keeps all options open as to how he will develop both on the kingside and queenside.} 6. Be3 (6. f4 {is also very playable, but as I've said before, we are mainly concentrating on Be3 lines for this repertoire.}) 6... Z0 {Now Black must make an important choice. The main options are:} ({C1: } 6... Nf6) ({C2:} 6... e5) ({C3:} 6... Rb8) ({C4:} 6... e6) ({Others possibilities include:} 6... Qa5 7. Qd2 Nd4 8. f4 Nf6 (8... e6 {transposes to C43}) 9. h3 O-O 10. Nf3 Nxf3+ 11. Bxf3 Rb8 12. g4 b5 13. O-O {and White will push his pawns on the kingside, Arwanitakis-Mitter, Graz 1999.}) (6... Nd4 {is another transpositional move:} 7. Qd2 Rb8 (7... e5 8. f4 {transposes to C22 }) 8. Nge2 b5 {transposes to Variation C32.}) (6... h5 {is an adventurous move. Black aims to activate his h8-rook with ...h5-h4. A good reply to this is } 7. h3 {, which prevents a black piece coming to g4 and prepares to answer ...h5-h4 with g3-g4.}) (6... b5 7. e5 Qd7 (7... Bb7 8. exd6 exd6 9. Nxb5 Nge7 {(Ljubojevic-Miles) and now Miles gives} 10. Ne2 {with an advantage to White}) 8. exd6 exd6 {and now:} 9. Z0 (9. Nge2 Nge7 (9... b4 10. Nd5 Bxb2 11. Rb1 Bg7 12. c3 {gives White an edge – Romanishin}) 10. d4 b4 11. Ne4 O-O 12. Bh6 c4 13. Bxg7 Kxg7 14. d5 Ne5 15. f4 Ng4 16. h3 Nh6 17. g4 {and White has a clear plus, Romanishin-Torre, Indonesia 1983.}) (9. Bf4 Nge7 (9... b4 10. Ne4 Bxb2 11. Rb1 Be5 12. Bxe5 dxe5 13. Qf3 {is good for White}) 10. Nxb5 O-O 11. Nxd6 Bxb2 12. Rb1 Qe6+ 13. Ne2 Bc3+ 14. Kf1 Bg7 {and Black has insufficient compensation, Lebredo-R.Hernandez, Bayamo 1984.})) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C1: 6...Nf6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B26"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "14"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 Nf6 ({A very sensible move, one of the first that springs to mind. Having said that, on my database this move is actually less popular than} 6... Rb8) (6... e5) ({and} 6... e6 {.} ) {Black develops the knight to its most aggressive square, prepares to castle and throws in the positional threat of ...Ng4. On the other hand the knight blocks the g7-bishop and thus loosens Black's control over d4. Another point, which may work in White's favour, is that the knight on f6 (compared to e7) is more vulnerable to a kingside pawn assault by White. In fact, instead of the usual Qd2, I believe White should aim for a slow pawn assault on the kingside.} 7. h3 {Preventing at once any annoyances with ...Ng4, while preparing a later assault with g3-g4. Now Black has two ways of playing.} Z0 ({C11:} 7... e5) ({C12:} 7... O-O) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C11: 7...e5!?"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B26"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "35"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 Nf6 7. h3 e5 { It may seem like a sweeping statement, but I've always thought that ...Nf6 and ...e7-e5 don't really mix that well in the Closed Sicilian, and I'm not alone in this belief. On the other hand, none other than Garry Kasparov has played this move, so it certainly deserves some respect, and it's true that White is already committed to h2-h3 and Be3.} 8. Nge2 ({One of the points of Black's play is that} 8. f4 {can be met by the annoying} Nh5 9. Nge2 Nd4 {, which looks quite pleasant for Black.}) 8... O-O 9. O-O Nd4 ({More recently two of Adams' opponents has played the inventive} 9... b5 {. After} 10. Nxb5 (10. f4 b4 11. Nd5 Nxd5 12. exd5 Nd4 13. fxe5 Nxe2+ 14. Qxe2 Bxe5 {is fine for Black }) 10... Rb8 {we have:} 11. Z0 (11. a4 a6 12. Na3 Rxb2 13. Nc4 Rb8 14. f4 exf4 15. Nxf4 Na5 ({Adams gives} 15... Ne5 16. Nxe5 dxe5 17. Nd5 Nxd5 18. exd5 Qd6 19. Qd2 Bd7 {as unclear}) 16. Nd2 Bd7 17. Ra2 {with a roughly level position, Adams-Kasparov, Linares 1999.}) (11. Nec3 a6 12. Na3 Rxb2 13. Nc4 Rb8 14. Bg5 h6 (14... Be6 15. Nd5 Bxd5 16. exd5 Ne7 {looks unclear}) 15. Bxf6 Bxf6 16. Nd5 Bg7 17. Rb1 Rxb1 18. Qxb1 {and White had the tiniest of edges in Adams-Topalov, Dos Hermanas 1999.})) 10. f4 Rb8 ({Or} 10... Nxe2+ 11. Nxe2 exf4 12. Nxf4 Bd7 13. Qd2 Bc6 14. Kh2 Nd7 15. c3 {and White has the straightforward plan of doubling rooks on the half-open f-file, promising him some advantage, Kuijf-Sunye Neto, Amsterdam 1983.}) 11. Qd2 Ne8 12. Rf2 b5 13. a3 a5 14. Raf1 b4 15. axb4 axb4 16. Nd1 Nxe2+ 17. Qxe2 Ba6 18. f5 {Ostojic-Memic, Wiesbaden 1994. Here White's extra space on the kingside guarantees him some advantage, so black players would do well to take a second look at 9...b5!?.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C12: 7...0-0"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B26"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "43"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 Nf6 7. h3 O-O 8. f4 { Naturally Qd2 is also possible, but the idea of Be3-h6 is less enticing when Black hasn't weakened his dark squares by moving the e7-pawn.} Rb8 {Black follows the logical plan of expansion on the queenside by preparing ... b7-b5-b4.} ({After} 8... e5 9. Nge2 (9. Nf3 Nh5 {targets the g3-pawn}) 9... exf4 (9... Nh5 10. f5 Nf6 11. g4 {was clearly better for White in Jurkovic-Voitsekhovsky, Pardubice 1995, but of course Black's play here was pretty awful}) 10. Nxf4 Rb8 11. O-O b5 12. a3 a5 13. Qd2 b4 14. axb4 axb4 15. Nce2 Bb7 16. Rf2 Ra8 17. Raf1 Ra2 18. b3 {White can hope to take advantage of the semi-open f-file, Moldovan-Nevednichy, Bucharest 1995.}) 9. Nf3 b5 10. O-O b4 11. Ne2 a5 ({An important alternative here is} 11... Nd7 {, freeing the g7-bishop and attacking the b2-pawn. I prefer} 12. Qc1 ({now} 12. Rb1 { is answered by} Qa5) ({and} 12. c3 Ba6 13. Rf2 bxc3 14. bxc3 Qa5 {was fine for Black in Tischbierek-Van Wely, Antwerp 1998}) {, for example} 12... a5 13. g4 Qb6 14. f5 Nd4 15. Nexd4 cxd4 16. Bh6 {.}) 12. g4 Ba6 ({Or} 12... Ne8 13. Rb1 Nc7 14. f5 Nb5 15. h4 a4 16. h5 a3 17. b3 Nbd4 ({King prefers} 17... Nc3 18. Nxc3 bxc3 {, intending ...Nb4}) 18. Qd2 Nxf3+ 19. Rxf3 Ne5 20. Rg3 Bb7 21. Rf1 Rc8 22. hxg6 hxg6 23. Bh6 Kh7 24. Rh3 {and Black has no good answer to White's inevitable attack, Berg-Dinstuhl, Richmond 1994.}) 13. f5 a4 14. Nf4 c4 15. Rf2 Ne5 16. g5 {. We are following Iuldachev-Tisdall, Jakarta 1997, which continued } Nfd7 17. d4 c3 18. b3 Nxf3+ 19. Qxf3 Bb7 20. Qg4 Ra8 21. Raf1 Ra5 22. h4 { and White had an impressive looking kingside attack.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C2: 6...e5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B26"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "14"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 e5 {This move is one of Black's most solid options available. Immediately he takes a vice-like grip on the d4-square and thus rules out for a long time the possibility of d3-d4. On the other hand, some players might be averse to blocking the long diagonal and hence restricting the affect of the g7-bishop on the queenside. Nevertheless, a study of the diagram quickly points to the fact that White's main pawn break is f2-f4, a move which will allow the g7-bishop back into the game. In view of this, it's really no surprise that White still often angles for the exchange of dark-squared bishops with Qd2 and Bh6.} 7. Qd2 (7. f4 { will tend to reach the same position as the main line after} Nge7 8. Nf3 O-O 9. O-O Nd4 10. Qd2 {.}) 7... Z0 {Now Black has two main choices:} ({C21:} 7... Be6 ) ({C22:} 7... Nge7) (7... Nd4 8. f4 Ne7 9. Nf3 O-O 10. O-O {transposes to Variation C22.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C21: 7...Be6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B26"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "27"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 e5 7. Qd2 Be6 { Delaying the development of the kingside and thus ruling out Bh6 for the time being.} 8. f4 exf4 ({Another possibility is} 8... Nd4 9. Nd1 {(to chase the knight away with c2-c3)} exf4 (9... Nf6 10. fxe5 dxe5 11. c3 {wins a pawn for White}) 10. gxf4 Ne7 11. c3 Ndc6 12. Nf3 O-O 13. O-O Kh8 {(intending . ..f7-f5)} 14. Ng5 Bc8 15. Nf2 f6 16. Nf3 f5 17. Nh1 {(planning Ng3)} Be6 18. Ng3 Rc8 19. Ng5 Bg8 20. h4 h6 21. Nf3 {and White had a useful edge in the game G.Giorgadze-San Segundo, Vigo 1994.}) 9. Bxf4 Nd4 (9... h6 {is a little played but interesting idea. Black prevents Bh6 and prepares ...g6-g5 and ... Nge7-g6. Following} 10. Nf3 Nge7 11. O-O Qd7 12. Nd1 ({I prefer} 12. Be3 {(preparing d3-d4)} Nd4 13. Rab1 g5 14. a3 {, because 12 Nd1 was a little too accommodating in my mind}) 12... d5 13. Qf2 g5 14. Be3 d4 15. Bd2 Ng6 { Black was fine in the game Neumeier-Loginov, Oberwart 1994.}) 10. Nf3 Nxf3+ 11. Bxf3 Qd7 12. O-O (12. O-O-O Ne7 13. Bh6 Be5 14. Rde1 O-O-O {was equal in the game Sturua-Loginov, Borzomi 1984.}) 12... O-O-O 13. Rab1 Ne7 14. b4 { . White has a useful attack on the queenside, M.Buckley-Mirzoeva, World Girls Under-18 Championship, Oropesa del Mar 1999.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C22: 7...Nge7"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B26"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "20"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 e5 7. Qd2 Nge7 { The normal square for the g8-knight in this system. With this move Black prepares to castle and blocks neither the g7-bishop nor the f-pawn.} 8. f4 ({ Naturally White can also play for the immediate exchange of bishops with} 8. Bh6 {but in comparison to Variation C44 (6...e6 7 Qd2 Nge7 8 Bh6), Black is much better placed here. In effect he is a tempo ahead, because in the other line Black usually plays ...e6-e5, increasing his dark-squared grip once the bishops have been exchanged. For this reason I believe it's better for White to delay Bh6 until later. Nevertheless, 8 Bh6 is still playable, for example} O-O 9. Bxg7 Kxg7 10. f4 Nd4 11. Nf3 Bg4 12. O-O {and now:} Z0 (12... Qd7 {(Ljubojevic-van der Wiel, Tilburg 1983)} 13. fxe5 Nxf3+ 14. Bxf3 dxe5 15. Bxg4 Qxg4 16. Qf2 {and White wins a pawn (Van der Wiel).}) (12... Bxf3 13. Bxf3 Qb6 14. Nd1 ({King suggests} 14. Rab1 {as an improvement for White, after which the position looks roughly equal}) 14... c4 15. Kh1 cxd3 16. Qxd3 Rac8 17. c3 Nxf3 18. Rxf3 f5 {was very good for Black in Narayana-King, Calcutta 1993.})) 8... Nd4 ({Black can also try to do without this move, for example} 8... O-O 9. Nf3 Rb8 (9... Nd4 10. O-O {transposes to the main line}) 10. O-O {and now:} Z0 (10... b5 11. fxe5 Nxe5 12. Nxe5 Bxe5 13. d4 (13. Bh6 $5) 13... cxd4 14. Bxd4 b4 15. Nd5 {and I prefer White.}) (10... exf4 11. Bxf4 f5 ({it looks tempting to strike back on the kingside but White's pieces are better placed to exploit the open space;} 11... b5 {looks stronger, after which I would carry on with} 12. Bh6) 12. Bh6 b5 13. Bxg7 Kxg7 14. Rae1 { and the black king is a little bit exposed, the consequence of ...f7-f5 and the exchange of dark-squared bishops. The conclusion of A.Ledger-Duncan, British League 1997 is quite instructive:} b4 15. Nd5 fxe4 16. dxe4 Bg4 17. Ng5 Qd7 18. Nf6 Rxf6 19. Rxf6 Kxf6 20. Qf4+ Bf5 (20... Kg7 21. Qf7+ Kh6 22. Qxh7+ Kxg5 23. Qh4# {is mate}) 21. exf5 Qxf5 (21... Nxf5 22. g4 {wins,}) ({ while after} 21... gxf5 22. Qh4 {White's attack is decisive}) 22. Qxd6+ Kxg5 23. Rf1 Qxf1+ 24. Kxf1 Rb6 25. Qf4+ {1-0.})) 9. Nf3 O-O 10. O-O {Now we have a further split:} Z0 ({C221:} 10... Bg4) ({C222:} 10... exf4) ({Other possibilities are:} 10... Rb8 {(preparing ...b7-b5)} 11. Nd1 b5 12. c3 Nxf3+ 13. Bxf3 b4 14. fxe5 (14. Nf2 exf4 15. Bxf4 Nc6 16. Bh6 bxc3 17. bxc3 Bxh6 18. Qxh6 Qf6 19. Qf4 Qe5 {was a little better for Black in Niebling-Ivanchuk, Frankfurt 1998}) 14... bxc3 15. bxc3 Bxe5 16. Bh6 Bg7 17. Bxg7 Kxg7 18. d4 Qb6 19. Ne3 Ba6 20. Rf2 cxd4 21. cxd4 Nc6 22. Rd1 {and the idea of Nd5 gives White a pull, Frost-Fantin, York 2000.}) (10... Qb6 {(this looks a bit one dimensional, but in fact it has useful nuisance value)} 11. Rab1 Bd7 12. a3 Rac8 13. Kh1 a6 14. f5 ({a typical sacrifice;} 14. Rf2 {, keeping the tension, is another possibility}) 14... gxf5 15. Bh6 f6 16. Nh4 fxe4 17. dxe4 Rf7 18. Bxg7 Kxg7 19. Nd1 c4 20. Ne3 Qc6 21. c3 Nb3 22. Qe2 {and White has enough compensation for the pawn, An.Rodriguez-Spangenberg, Buenos Aires 2000.} ) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C221: 10...Bg4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B25"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "23"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 e5 7. Qd2 Nge7 8. f4 Nd4 9. Nf3 O-O 10. O-O Bg4 11. Nh4 (11. Rf2 {is the solid approach:} Z0 ( 11... Nxf3+ 12. Bxf3 Bxf3 13. Rxf3 exf4 14. Bxf4 d5 15. Re1 Qd7 16. Bh6 Rae8 17. Bxg7 Kxg7 18. Qf4 {gave White an edge in Hort-Ostojic, Hastings 1967.}) ( 11... Qd7 12. Raf1 exf4 13. Bxf4 Nxf3+ 14. Bxf3 Bxf3 15. Rxf3 b5 16. Bh6 b4 17. Bxg7 Kxg7 18. Nd1 {and I prefer White, Short-Nataf, FIDE World Championship, New Delhi 2000.} (18. Z0))) 11... Qd7 ({Or} 11... exf4 {and now:} 12. Z0 ( 12. Bxf4 Qd7 13. Rf2 b5 14. Bh6 Rae8 15. Raf1 b4 16. Bxg7 Kxg7 17. Nd1 Bxd1 {(eliminating the knight, which would otherwise influence White's attack from e3)} 18. Qxd1 d5 19. c3 bxc3 20. bxc3 Ndc6 21. Qf3 d4 22. Qf6+ Kg8 23. c4 { (Romanishin-J.Horvath, Balatonbereny 1993)} ({and now King suggests} 23. Nf3 {. })) (12. Rxf4 Be6 13. Rf2 d5 14. Bh6 {(the same old story; off come the bishops and Black's kingside is weakened)} Rc8 15. Bxg7 Kxg7 16. Raf1 f6 17. exd5 Nxd5 18. Ne4 {and White is slightly better, Liljedahl-Spassky, Gothenburg 1971.})) 12. Z0 {This position is ripe for further investigation. Possibilities include:} (12. Rf2 f6 {and now:} 13. Z0 (13. fxe5 {releases the tension much too soon, giving Black unnecessary counterplay on the half-open d-file;} dxe5 14. Nb1 b6 15. c4 Rad8 16. Nc3 g5 {was good for Black in Orlov-Lerner, St Petersburg 1997.} (16... Z0)) (13. Raf1 {(preparing f4-f5)} exf4 14. gxf4 f5 {and Black has equalised.}) (13. f5 {(Black always has to be wary of this positional sacrifice)} gxf5 14. Raf1 fxe4 15. dxe4 {and White has reasonable compensation for the pawn.})) (12. f5 gxf5 13. Bh6 Ng6 (13... fxe4 {looks more resilient}) 14. Bxg7 Kxg7 15. h3 Nxh4 16. gxh4 f4 (16... Bh5 17. Qg5+ Bg6 18. exf5 f6 19. Qg4 {is good for White}) 17. hxg4 Qxg4 18. Rf2 Kh8 19. Nd5 Qxh4 20. c3 {and White went on to win, Todorcevic-Velikov, Marseille 1990.}) (12. Rae1 {looks interesting, for example} f6 13. f5 gxf5 14. Nd5 fxe4 15. Nxe7+ Qxe7 16. dxe4 {and White will follow up with c2-c3, followed by Nf5. White's position is easy to play and I believe he has more than enough compensation for the pawn.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C222: 10...exf4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B25"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "31"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 e5 7. Qd2 Nge7 8. f4 Nd4 9. Nf3 O-O 10. O-O exf4 {Releasing the tension in the centre is probably Black's most reliable course of action.} 11. Bxf4 {White recaptures with the bishop and keeps alive the possibility of Bh6.} (11. gxf4 f5 {puts an immediate block on White's kingside ambitions.}) 11... Nxf3+ ({Or} 11... Bg4 12. Nxd4 Bxd4+ (12... cxd4 13. Nb5 a6 14. Nxd6 g5 15. Nxb7 Qb6 16. Bd6 Qxb7 17. Qxg5 {was very good for White in Fahnenschmidt-Gauglitz, German Bundesliga 1994}) 13. Kh1 {and White has a comfortable edge. He can play Bh6, answering ...Re8 with Be3, followed by doubling on the f-file.}) 12. Rxf3 Qb6 $1 {I believe this was originally played by the Hungarian Grandmaster Lajos Portisch in a game against Bent Larsen. White would love to double on the f-file, but this annoying move prevents this plan, at least for the time being. Now White must simply protect the b2-pawn.} 13. Rb1 Be6 14. Be3 ({ Alternatively:} 14. Bg5 {(this simply loses time)} Nc6 15. Be3 Ne5 16. Rff1 Ng4 17. Bf4 c4+ 18. Kh1 cxd3 19. cxd3 Bd4 20. h3 Ne3 21. Rfe1 Nxg2 22. Kxg2 Qc6 {and Black's bishop pair promise him an advantage, Larsen-Portisch, Rotterdam 1977.}) (14. Bh6 {(exchanging the bishops looks logical)} Rae8 15. Bxg7 (15. Kh1) 15... Kxg7 16. Kh1 f6 17. a3 d5 18. b4 cxb4 19. Rxb4 Qc7 20. Nb5 Qd7 21. Nd4 Bg8 {with an unclear position, Adams-Kramnik, FIDE World Championship, Las Vegas 1999.}) 14... Nc6 15. Rff1 {The Hungarian GM Forintos gives this prophylactic move in 'ECO'. White takes the sting out of ...Ne5 or . ..Nd4.} ({In a way} 15. Rf2 {option of doubling rooks on the f-file. However, after} Ne5 {White has to expend another tempo with} 16. h3 {,} ({as} 16. b4 $2 Ng4 17. bxc5 Bxc3 18. cxb6 Bxd2 19. Bxd2 Nxf2 20. Kxf2 axb6 {results in a winning position for Black.})) 15... Nd4 ({Or} 15... Ne5 16. b4 Qc7 17. Nb5 Qc6 18. bxc5 dxc5 19. a3 a6 20. Nc3 {, followed by Nd5.}) {and now:} 16. Z0 ({A.Ledger-Emms, British League 2000, continued} 16. a3 Rac8 17. Nd1 Ba2 (17... f5) 18. Ra1 Be6 ({or} 18... Bb3 19. Rc1) 19. Rb1 Ba2 20. Ra1 {and a draw was agreed, as it's difficult for White to make any progress.}) ({Instead of 16 a3, White could try} 16. Rf2 {, an interesting loss of tempo now that ... Ne5 is no longer possible. White can consider following up with a2-a3 and b2-b4, while with c2 protected, White has the option of Bh6. If Black's queen leaves b6 (to take the sting out of b2-b4) White goes back to the older plan, for example} Qc7 17. Bh6 b5 18. Rbf1 b4 19. Nd1 {and White fill follow up with c2-c3.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C3: 6...Rb8"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B26"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "16"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 Rb8 {A very flexible continuation. Black refuses to commit himself at all on the kingside and immediately begins preparations for a queenside offensive with ...b7-b5-b4.} 7. Qd2 b5 (7... e6 {transposes to Variation C42.}) 8. Nge2 {White blocks neither the f-pawn nor the dark-squared bishop with f2-f4, so White keeps both plans of f2-f4 and Be3-h6 available. Now Black has an important choice: whether or not to occupy the d4-square.} Z0 ({C31:} 8... b4) ({C32:} 8... Nd4) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C31: 8...b4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B26"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "35"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 Rb8 7. Qd2 b5 8. Nge2 b4 {Here we look at variations where Black, in general, refrains from playing . ..Nd4.} 9. Nd1 e5 {Clamping down on the d4-square is Black's most solid option, but there is also something to be said for keeping the long diagonal free of obstacles.} (9... a5 10. O-O Ba6 11. f4 Qc8 (11... Qc7) 12. Rb1 Nf6 13. Nf2 O-O 14. Bh3 Qc7 15. g4 c4 16. g5 Nd7 17. Ng4 b3 18. axb3 cxd3 19. cxd3 Rxb3 20. Nc1 Rb7 21. f5 {and White has a strong kingside attack, Van Putten-Middelburg, Dutch League 1996. The rest of the game is attractive:} Bd4 22. Nh6+ Kg7 23. f6+ exf6 24. Bxd7 Qb6 25. gxf6+ Kh8 26. Ng4 Bxe3+ 27. Nxe3 Rxd7 28. Kh1 Nb4 29. Rf3 Qd4 30. Nc2 Nxc2 31. Qh6 Rg8 32. Qxh7+ {1-0.}) (9... e6 10. O-O Nge7 11. Bh6 {(White sticks to the main plan of exchanging bishops)} O-O 12. Bxg7 Kxg7 13. f4 e5 14. f5 f6 15. Ne3 Nd4 16. Rf2 Bd7 17. Raf1 g5 18. h4 h6 19. Nc1 Be8 20. c3 {and White has a healthy space advantage on the kingside, Ramik-Belunek, Czech League 1999.}) (9... h5 {prevents Bh6 ideas, but slightly weakens the kingside. White should now head back to f2-f4 plans.} 10. h3 Nf6 11. f4 Qb6 12. Bf2 e6 13. Ne3 a5 14. Nc4 Qc7 15. e5 dxe5 16. Bxc5 {and White has a clear advantage, A.Ledger-O'Shaughnessy, British League 1998.} ) (9... Nf6 {(this may be the best of Black's alternatives)} 10. Bh6 (10. h3 O-O 11. f4 Nd7 12. O-O a5 13. g4 Ba6 14. f5 Nde5 15. Bh6 Nd4 16. Bxg7 Kxg7 17. Nf4 a4 18. Ne3 a3 {was unclear in Kosten-Georgiev, Toulon 1999}) 10... O-O 11. Bxg7 Kxg7 12. Ne3 Bb7 13. O-O Nd4 14. f4 e6 15. g4 Nxe2+ 16. Qxe2 Nd7 17. g5 {and I prefer White, De Jager-Hoeksema, Dutch League 2000.}) 10. O-O Nge7 { Black continues to develop sensibly.} (10... h5 {should once again be answered by} 11. f4 h4 12. f5 {and Black already looks to be in trouble.}) 11. Bh6 O-O 12. Bxg7 Kxg7 13. a3 ({Alternatively White can play} 13. Ne3 Nd4 14. f4 f6 15. Rf2 a5 16. c3 Nxe2+ 17. Rxe2 exf4 18. gxf4 f5 19. Rae1 {with an unclear looking position, Veresagin-Shtyrenkov, Volgograd 1994.}) 13... a5 14. axb4 axb4 15. c3 Be6 16. f4 f6 17. Ne3 Na5 18. Rad1 {Bricard-Foisor, St Affrique 1999. Black's position is solid enough, but White has still more possibilities, including d3-d4.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C32: 8...Nd4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B26"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "24"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 Rb8 7. Qd2 b5 8. Nge2 Nd4 {Occupying the important d4-square.} 9. O-O b4 {Black pushes the knight back to d1. Other moves include:} (9... e6 10. Nd1 Ne7 11. Nc1 (11. Nxd4 cxd4 12. Bh6 O-O 13. Bxg7 Kxg7 14. f4 f6 {was equal in Spassky-Portisch, Mexico (3rd matchgame) 1980}) 11... O-O (11... b4 {transposes to the main line} ) 12. c3 Ndc6 13. Bh6 d5 14. Bxg7 Kxg7 15. exd5 Nxd5 16. Ne3 Nce7 17. Nb3 Qd6 18. d4 Nxe3 19. fxe3 cxd4 20. exd4 {and White's central structure promises a small edge, Markarov-Inarkiev, Moscow 1998.}) (9... h5 {is very ambitious! With this move Black rules out Bh6 for a long time and prepares to make use of the h8-rook on its home square. The downside of the advance 9...h5 is that it's another non-developing move.} 10. Z0 (10. h3 Bxh3 {(beware of this trick!)} 11. Bxd4 cxd4 12. Bxh3 dxc3 13. Nxc3 Nf6 14. f4 b4 15. Nd1 Qa5 { and Black was a little bit better in Castelein-Rogers, Ostend 1992.}) (10. b4 $5 {(White tries to exploit Black's lack of development in an extreme way)} a5 $5 (10... Nxe2+ 11. Nxe2 Bxa1 12. Rxa1 {gives White obvious compensation for the exchange; one amusing continuation would be} cxb4 13. Bxa7 Ra8 14. Qxb4 Rxa7 15. Qd4 {and we have the unusual situation of the white queen forking two black rooks}) 11. bxc5 dxc5 12. Rab1 Bd7 (12... b4 13. Na4 Qc7 14. c3 Nxe2+ 15. Qxe2 bxc3 16. Bxc5 {and Black's lag in development begins to tell}) 13. e5 {(White must continue energetically)} Bxe5 14. Ne4 Bg4 ({ Ivanchuk gives the line} 14... Bc6 15. c3 Nxe2+ 16. Qxe2 Bxe4 17. dxe4 Qb6 18. Rfc1 Bd6 19. a4 b4 20. cxb4 axb4 21. e5 {and Black is in trouble}) 15. f3 Bf5 16. f4 Bg7 17. Nxc5 {, Adams-Ivanchuk, Linares 1999. Black has survived the early onslaught and has a reasonable position, but I still prefer White's activity.}) (10. h4 {(the safest choice)} b4 11. Nd1 e5 12. c3 bxc3 13. bxc3 Nxe2+ 14. Qxe2 Ne7 15. f4 Bg4 16. Qd2 Qa5 17. Rc1 Qa3 (17... O-O 18. f5 gxf5 19. Bh6 f6 20. Bxg7 Kxg7 21. Ne3 fxe4 22. Nxg4 hxg4 23. Qe2 {was unclear in Adams-Illescas, Madrid 1998}) 18. Nf2 Be6 19. Rc2 Bd7 20. Qe2 {with a roughly level position in J.Houska-Nicoara, Saint Vincent 1999. The rest of the game is an illustration of White's continuing attacking chances in this line:} Rb6 21. Nd1 Bg4 22. Qf2 Bxd1 23. fxe5 Bxc2 24. Qxf7+ Kd8 25. Qxg7 Re8 26. Bg5 dxe5 27. Bxe7+ Rxe7 28. Rf8+ Re8 29. Rf7 Qa4 30. Bh3 Rbe6 31. Bxe6 Rxe6 32. Rb7 Rb6 33. Qc7+ {1-0.})) 10. Nd1 e6 {At the present time this logical move, preparing ...Ne7, is Black's most popular choice, but there are some other enticing alternatives:} (10... a5 {(continuing the policy of no commitment on the kingside)} 11. c3 (11. Nc1) 11... Nxe2+ 12. Qxe2 Ba6 {and now:} 13. Z0 (13. Re1 {(this move looks out of place)} a4 14. Qd2 a3 {and Black has good counterplay – Gelfand.}) (13. f4 {(it's time to start the launch on the kingside)} a4 14. Rc1 {is a promising suggestion from Gelfand. White removes the rook from the long diagonal and takes some sting out of Black's queenside play. In particular} a3 {can now be answered by} 15. b3 {, keeping the queenside relatively closed. At some point Black must try and catch up in development, while White can continue to push on the kingside.} (15. Z0))) ( 10... e5 {(once more clamping down on the d4-square – this is a very sensible approach)} 11. c3 (11. Nc1 Ne7 12. c3 bxc3 13. bxc3 Ne6 14. Bh6 O-O 15. Bxg7 Kxg7 16. Ne3 f5 {was equal in A.Ledger-Donaldson, Isle of Man 1997}) 11... bxc3 12. bxc3 Nxe2+ 13. Qxe2 Ne7 {and now White has two choices:} 14. Z0 (14. f4 exf4 15. Bxf4 O-O (15... Be6 16. Qd2 Nc6 17. Bh6 O-O 18. Bxg7 Kxg7 19. Ne3 {looks a bit better for White, A.Ledger-Cherniaev, Hastings 2000}) 16. Qd2 Nc6 17. Bh6 (17. Kh1 Ne5 {was at least okay for Black in Uritzky-Tsesarsky, Tel Aviv 1997}) 17... Ba6 18. Bxg7 Kxg7 19. Nf2 Ne5 20. Rfe1 {with a roughly level position.}) (14. Qd2 {(going back to Plan A with Bh6)} O-O 15. Bh6 {and White will follow up with Bxg7, Ne3 and either d3-d4 or f2-f4. })) (10... Nxe2+ {(Black doesn't wait for c2-c3 and prevents White from playing Nc1)} 11. Qxe2 Nf6 12. a3 a5 13. axb4 cxb4 (13... axb4 14. e5 Ng4 15. exd6 Qxd6 16. Bf4 e5 17. Bd2 O-O 18. h3 Nf6 19. Ne3 {gives White an edge}) {, and now Adams-Anand, Dortmund 1998, continued} 14. Bd2 ({Klaus Bischoff's suggestion of} 14. e5 {looks good, for example} dxe5 15. Ba7 Rb7 16. Bxb7 Bxb7 17. Qxe5 O-O 18. Qxa5 Qd7 19. Ne3 {and White has a clear advantage}) 14... Nd7 {and Black was better.}) 11. Nc1 {At first sight this makes a strange impression, as now White has two knights nestling on the back rank. However, White's whole idea is to evict the d4-knight with c2-c3, swap bishops with Bh6 (at some point Black must complete development on the kingside) and then advance his knights back into the game. This plan can be very effective.} Qa5 {This suggestion from the American GM Joel Benjamin has caught on over the last few years; at the present time it's the most popular move at Black's disposal.} ({The main alternative is the developing} 11... Ne7 {, which looks very sensible, although it does allow White to carry out his plan. After} 12. c3 bxc3 13. bxc3 Ndc6 14. Bh6 O-O 15. Bxg7 Kxg7 16. Ne3 {Black has a few options:} Z0 (16... Bb7 17. Nb3 a5 18. a4 Ba6 19. Rfb1 Qb6 20. h4 Ne5 21. d4 Nc4 22. Qe1 cxd4 23. cxd4 Nxe3 24. Qxe3 Rfc8 25. Kh2 Nc6 26. Nc5 Qa7 27. Rxb8 Nxb8 28. Nxa6 Nxa6 29. h5 {and White has a pleasant initiative, Ljubojevic-Tringov, Lucerne 1982.}) (16... d5 17. Nb3 Qd6 18. Rad1 Ba6 19. exd5 Nxd5 20. Nxd5 exd5 21. Rfe1 Rfd8 22. d4 {and Black's slightly vulnerable d5-pawn gives White the faintest of edges, A.Ledger-Mah, British League 1998.}) (16... e5 17. Ne2 Ba6 18. f4 f6 19. Rac1 Qa5 20. Rc2 Rb7 21. Bh3 $1 Rfb8 22. Be6 Rb1 23. Nc1 Qb6 24. Qf2 Rf8 25. h4 Qd8 26. f5 {and White's attack is beginning to unfold, Short-Hossain, Dhaka 1999.} (26. Z0))) 12. a3 {This move, counterattacking on the queenside, is the latest word on this line. } ({Previously the main line was} 12. c3 bxc3 13. bxc3 Nc6 ({now Nb3 isn't possible due to ...Rxb3 – one of the points of 11...Qa5; in contrast} 13... Nb3 $2 {loses to} 14. Qb2) ({and} 13... Nb5 14. Nb3 Qc7 15. d4 {is good for White}) {. White has a few options after 13...Nc6, but Black seems to be okay, for example} 14. Bf4 e5 15. Be3 Nge7 16. Nb2 Be6 17. Nc4 Qc7 18. Ne2 O-O 19. Rab1 {with an equal position, J.Houska-Calzetta, Saint Vincent 1999.}) 12... Z0 {After 12 a3!? Black has some fresh problems to solve. It's not clear what his best continuation is.} (12... Ne7 {(natural, but not good)} 13. Bxd4 { (this anti-positional move works well here)} cxd4 14. Nb3 Qb6 15. axb4 { and White is simply a pawn up.}) (12... Qa4 13. Bxd4 {(once again White gives up the dark-squared bishop)} cxd4 (13... Bxd4 14. Nb3 {is good for White} ) 14. b3 Qa6 15. Nb2 Ne7 16. Nc4 O-O 17. Ne2 {and Black has some problems on the queenside, A.Ledger-Shaw, Port Erin 1998.}) (12... Nc6 13. Nb3 Qb6 14. axb4 Qxb4 15. e5 Nxe5 16. Qxb4 (16. Rxa7 Nf6 17. d4 cxd4 18. Bxd4 Ned7 { was okay for Black in Mason-Abayasekera, British League 1997}) 16... Rxb4 17. Rxa7 {and now S.Lalic-Dishman, British League 2001 continued} Nxd3 ({ in his notes in 'Chess', Richard Palliser gives} 17... Nf6 {as an improvement for Black, but concludes that White is still better after} 18. d4 cxd4 19. Bxd4 O-O 20. Ne3) 18. cxd3 ({the immediate} 18. Bc6+ Kf8 19. Ra8 Ne7 20. Bd7 {may be even stronger}) 18... Rxb3 19. Bc6+ Kf8 ({or} 19... Kd8 20. Bd2 $1 {and there is no good defence to Ba5+}) 20. Ra8 Ne7 21. Bd7 Bf6 22. Bh6+ Bg7 23. Bxc8 Bxh6 24. Bxe6+ {and White eventually converted her advantage.}) (12... Qa6 {looks like a sensible move. In comparison to line 12...Qa4, above, after} 13. Bxd4 cxd4 {White does not gain a tempo on the queen with} 14. b3 {.} ({ Perhaps White should play} 14. Nb3 {instead, but this line could certainly do with a practical test.})) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C4: 6...e6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B26"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "14"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 e6 {This is perhaps Black's most flexible move. You can see its attractions immediately: Black keeps the long h8-a1 diagonal open and prepares ...Nge7, once again not blocking the bishop. Black's position is very fluid and can be enhanced by such moves as ...Nd4 and perhaps ...Nec6 and/or ...Rb8 with ...b7-b5-b4.} 7. Qd2 {Preparing to meet ...Nge7 with Bh6. Now Black has a choice:} Z0 ({C41: } 7... Nd4) ({C42:} 7... Rb8) ({C43:} 7... Qa5) ({C44:} 7... Nge7) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C41: 7...Nd4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B26"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "31"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 e6 7. Qd2 Nd4 {This advance looks premature, as the knight is soon kicked away. As a very general rule in the Closed Sicilian, Black should wait for both Be3 and Nf3/e2 before playing ...Nd4. Then Nxd4 is often impossible as it allows ...cxd4 forking c3 and e3, while after Nd1 and c2-c3 Black has the option of exchanging knights on e2 or f3.} 8. Nd1 {Preparing to kick the knight away with c2-c3, after which White will be ready to play Bh6 (once the g8 knight moves).} Ne7 (8... f5 {looks a bit too weakening. After} 9. c3 Nc6 10. Ne2 Nf6 11. exf5 exf5 12. O-O O-O 13. h3 Bd7 14. c4 Qb6 15. Ndc3 Rae8 16. Rfe1 {White had an advantage in Spassky-B.Ivanovic, Niksic 1983 (Black has a slightly weaker king and White has good control over d5).}) (8... Nf6 {doesn't really fit in well with ... e7-e6. Svetushkin-Bologan, Linares 1999, continued} 9. c3 Nc6 10. h3 ({instead of entering these complications, White could also simply opt for} 10. Bh6 { , which looks good enough for an edge}) 10... b6 11. f4 Ba6 12. Ne2 d5 13. e5 Nd7 14. O-O f6 15. c4 Ne7 16. f5 Nxe5 17. Nf4 exf5 18. Ne6 Qd7 19. Nxg7+ Kf7 20. Nxf5 gxf5 21. Bf4 {and White was better.}) (8... e5 9. c3 Nc6 10. Ne2 Nge7 11. Bh6 O-O 12. Bxg7 Kxg7 13. Ne3 Be6 14. h4 d5 ({Blatny prefers} 14... f5) 15. exd5 Nxd5 16. h5 {and White has a dangerous kingside initiative, Hjartarson-Novikov, Tilburg 1992.}) 9. c3 Ndc6 10. Bh6 {Naturally.} O-O 11. h4 ({White was also better after} 11. Bxg7 Kxg7 12. f4 e5 13. Ne3 exf4 14. gxf4 f5 15. Ne2 {, Zaichik-Hazai, Kecskemet 1983.}) 11... f6 12. Bxg7 Kxg7 13. Ne3 e5 14. Ne2 Be6 15. h5 g5 16. d4 {. White has a comfortable positional advantage, Ljubojevic-Small, Thessaloniki Olympiad 1984.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C42: 7...Rb8"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B26"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "31"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 e6 7. Qd2 Rb8 8. Nf3 {A tricky move, which is an interesting attempt to exploit Black's move order.} ({If White is not happy with this, then} 8. Nge2 {should transpose to earlier lines, for example:} Z0 (8... b5 {and now:} 9. Z0 (9. O-O b4 10. Nd1 { transposes to Variation C31.}) (9. d4 b4 10. Nd1 cxd4 11. Nxd4 Nge7 (11... Ne5 12. Qe2 Qa5 13. Nb3 Qa4 14. Bd4 Ne7 15. f4 Ba6 16. Qd2 Nc4 17. Qf2 Bxd4 18. Qxd4 O-O 19. O-O {was better for White in Westerinen-Hjorth, Gausdal 1999}) 12. Nxc6 Nxc6 13. O-O Qc7 14. Bh6 O-O 15. Bxg7 Kxg7 16. Ne3 Ba6 17. Rfd1 {and White's pressure on the vulnerable d6-pawn ensured an edge in Klinger-Schumi, Zurich 1993.})) (8... Nd4 9. O-O (9. Bxd4 cxd4 10. Nb5 Qb6 11. Qb4 Ke7 12. Qb3 Bd7 {is okay for Black}) 9... b5 10. Nd1 b4 11. Nc1 {transposes to Variation C32.})) 8... b5 (8... Nd4 {looks natural enough, but in fact it's bad in this situation. White can play} 9. Bxd4 cxd4 10. Nb5 Qb6 ({or} 10... Ne7 11. Nbxd4 {and White has simply won a pawn}) 11. Qb4 Kd7 (11... Ke7 12. e5 { is good for White}) 12. e5 dxe5 13. Nd2 {and White has a strong attack, for example} a5 (13... a6 14. Nc4 Qxb5 {loses to} 15. Qd6+ Ke8 16. Qxb8) 14. Qa4 Ne7 (14... Kd8 15. Nc4 Qa6 16. Qa3 Bd7 17. Nbd6 Bf8 18. Nxb7+ Kc7 19. Qxa5+ Qxa5+ 20. Nbxa5 Bb4+ 21. Kd1 Ba4 22. Nb3 {and White was a clear pawn up in Kovalevskaya-Arakhamia, Elista Olympiad 1998}) 15. Nc4 Qa6 16. Ncd6 Nd5 17. Nxf7 Rf8 18. Nfd6 Kd8 19. Qc4 Qc6 20. O-O Bd7 21. a4 Ke7 22. Qb3 Qc5 23. c3 dxc3 24. bxc3 Bxb5 25. Ne4 Bxa4 26. Rxa4 Qb6 27. Qa2 Qc6 28. Rxa5 Rfd8 29. Qa3+ Ke8 30. c4 {and White won, Kovalevskaya-Hernandez, Elista Olympiad 1998.}) ( 8... e5 {loses a tempo over the immediate ...e7-e5, but on the other hand, now d3-d4 has been ruled out and White's knight is committed to f3:} 9. O-O Nge7 10. Bh6 O-O 11. Bxg7 Kxg7 12. Nh4 Nd4 13. Rae1 f5 14. exf5 Ndxf5 15. Nxf5+ Bxf5 16. f4 {was slightly better for White in Narciso Dublan-Catalan Escale, Barcelona 1996.}) 9. O-O (9. d4 {looks logical, but after} b4 10. Ne2 Na5 11. b3 Nf6 {the attack on the e4-pawn is rather awkward (this is no problem when White's knight is on e2).} 12. e5 Ne4 (12... dxe5 13. dxe5 Qxd2+ 14. Nxd2 Nd7 15. f4 {is pleasant for White}) 13. Qd3 d5 {looks unclear, for example} 14. dxc5 Qc7 15. O-O Nxc5 16. Qd4 {(A.Ledger-Collier, British League 1998) and now} Nc6 {is good, as} 17. Qxc5 {loses to} Bf8 {.}) 9... b4 10. Nd1 Nd4 11. Ne1 {We've reached a position similar to Variation C32, except that the knight is on e1, rather than c1.} (11. c3 Nxf3+ 12. Bxf3 Ne7 13. Bh6 O-O 14. Bxg7 Kxg7 15. d4 {looks roughly level.}) 11... Ne7 12. Bh6 O-O 13. Bxg7 Kxg7 14. c3 ({Also interesting is} 14. f4 e5 15. c3 Ndc6 16. Ne3 {.}) 14... bxc3 15. bxc3 Ndc6 {White now has to decide where to put his knights:} 16. Z0 (16. Ne3 d5 17. exd5 (17. Ng4 f5 18. exf5 exf5 19. Qh6+ Kh8 20. Ne3 d4 {was slightly better for Black, S.Lalic-G.Jones, British League 2001}) 17... exd5 18. N1c2 d4 19. cxd4 Nxd4 20. Nxd4 Qxd4 21. Nc2 {is equal.}) (16. Nc2 { may be stronger, for example} d5 17. exd5 exd5 (17... Nxd5 18. Nde3) 18. d4 cxd4 19. Nxd4 Qb6 20. Ne3 {and White has an edge due to Black's isolated d-pawn.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C43: 7...Qa5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B26"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "25"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 e6 7. Qd2 Qa5 { Recommended by Joe Gallagher in 'Beating the Anti-Sicilians'. Black delays developing the g8-knight, pins the knight on c3 to the white queen and supports ...b7-b5.} 8. f4 {A slight departure from our normal lines. White's idea is to play as in the f4 lines where Black's queen is already committed to the a5-square.} ({White can also continue with} 8. Nge2 {, for example} Nd4 9. O-O Ne7 10. Nc1 O-O 11. Nb3 {and now:} Z0 (11... Qd8 12. Nd1 b6 13. c3 Nxb3 14. axb3 Bb7 15. Bh6 e5 16. Bxg7 Kxg7 17. f4 f6 18. Ne3 { with an edge for White in Rohde-Rechlis, Beersheba 1987.}) (11... Qb6 12. Nd1 a5 13. c3 Ndc6 14. Bh6 e5 15. Bxg7 Kxg7 16. Ne3 f5 17. f4 exf4 18. gxf4 Be6 19. c4 fxe4 20. Bxe4 d5 {was unclear in Spraggett-Vaisser, Oropesa del Mar 1996.} ( 20... Z0))) 8... Nge7 9. Nf3 Nd4 ({If Black delays this move, then White can contemplate advancing with d3-d4, for example} 9... O-O 10. O-O Rb8 11. d4 cxd4 12. Nxd4 Nxd4 13. Bxd4 {and White has a pleasant game.}) 10. O-O Nec6 { Adding extra support to d4. Black has two significant alternatives:} (10... O-O 11. Nd5 (11. e5 Nef5 {is fine for Black}) 11... Qd8 (11... Nxf3+ 12. Bxf3 Qd8 13. Nxe7+ Qxe7 14. d4 {was slightly better for White in Jurkovic-Bakalarz, Ceske Budejovice 1995}) 12. Nxe7+ Qxe7 13. c3 Nc6 {(J.Houska-Ioseliani, Bundesliga 1999) and here I like the simple} 14. d4 {.}) (10... Bd7 {and now:} 11. Z0 (11. Nxd4 cxd4 12. Ne2 Qxd2 (12... Qc5 13. Bf2 O-O 14. c3 Nc6 15. Rab1 Rfc8 {is better for White}) 13. Bxd2 Rc8 14. c3 dxc3 15. Bxc3 {is equal according to Donev.}) (11. Qf2 Nxf3+ ({after} 11... Nec6 {Donev gives} 12. e5 {, which looks good for White, for example} dxe5 13. Nxe5 Nxe5 14. fxe5 O-O 15. Ne4) 12. Bxf3 {with a further split:} Z0 (12... Bxc3 13. bxc3 Qxc3 14. e5 {and the absence of Black's dark-squared bishop gives White excellent compensation for the pawn.}) ({. After} 12... O-O {both} 13. d4 ({and } 13. e5 {look promising.})) (12... Nc6 13. e5 {(Donev)} dxe5 14. Bxc6 Bxc6 15. fxe5 Qc7 16. Bxc5 Bxe5 17. Rae1 Bg7 18. d4 {and White has a strong attack.}))) 11. e5 {This pawn break is typical for the f4 lines of the Closed Sicilian, although it's quite rare in this actual position.} ({If White wants a quieter life he could consider either} 11. a3) ({or} 11. Qf2 {.}) 11... dxe5 ({Taking the pawn is too risky:} 11... Nxf3+ 12. Bxf3 dxe5 ({Short suggests} 12... d5) 13. Bxc6+ bxc6 14. fxe5 Bxe5 15. Qf2 {and White hits both f7 and c5.}) 12. Nxe5 O-O ({Or} 12... Nxe5 13. fxe5 Bxe5 14. Qf2 { and now:} Z0 (14... f5 15. Ne4 Qc7 16. Nxc5 Qxc5 17. c3 {and White regains the piece with an advantage.}) (14... O-O 15. Ne4 Nf5 (15... f5 16. c3 Bd7 17. Nxc5 {is good for White}) 16. Bxc5 b6 ({or} 16... Bxb2 17. g4 Bxa1 18. Rxa1) 17. Bxf8 Bd4 18. Qxd4 Nxd4 19. Bd6 f5 (19... Nf5 20. b4 Qa4 21. Nf6+ Kg7 22. Be5 Qxc2 23. Bxa8 {was clearly better for White in Dudek-Schmenger, Germany 2000}) 20. Nf6+ (20. Nf2) 20... Kg7 21. Ne8+ Kf7 22. Bxa8 Kxe8 23. c3 Nc2 24. Rac1 Ne3 25. Rfe1 {and White's two rooks and two bishops should outweigh the queen, knight and bishop, Rohacek-Kottnauer, Bratislava 1948.})) 13. Z0 {An important position for the assessment for 8 f4. White has several possibilities:} (13. Bxc6 Nxc6 14. Nc4 Qa6 15. Bxc5 Rd8 { with good compensation for the pawn. Black will follow up with ...b7-b6 and ... Bb7.}) (13. Rae1 {and now:} Z0 (13... f5 14. Bxc6 Nxc6 15. Nxc6 bxc6 16. Nd1 $1 Qxa2 17. Bxc5 Rd8 18. b3 Rb8 19. Rf2 {and White's better pawn structure gave him an advantage in Short-Kasparov, Wijk aan Zee 2000.}) ({. Black should be brave and grab a pawn with} 13... Nxe5 14. fxe5 Bxe5 15. Bh6 Bg7 16. Bxg7 Kxg7 17. Qf2 {and now Short gives} f5 ({Donev's suggestion of} 17... f6 { is a very tough nut to crack: after} 18. Ne4 e5 {Black hangs on, as} 19. Nxf6 {fails to} Qd8) 18. Ne4 Nxc2 19. Rc1 Nd4 20. Nxc5 {with good compensation for the pawn. This seems right, especially as} e5 21. Rfe1 Re8 22. Rxe5 Rxe5 23. Qxd4 {wins for White.})) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 1"] [Black "C44: 7...Nge7"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B26"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "24"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 e6 7. Qd2 Nge7 { A consistent follow-up to 6...e6, but this allows White to carry out one of his main plans.} 8. Bh6 {Of course!} O-O ({After} 8... Bxh6 9. Qxh6 Nd4 10. O-O-O Nec6 11. Nge2 {White is better simply because Black cannot castle for the moment. Hort-Hodgson, Wijk aan Zee 1986, continued} Bd7 12. Nxd4 cxd4 13. Ne2 Qa5 14. Kb1 Qa4 15. c3 dxc3 16. Nxc3 Qb4 17. d4 Rc8 18. Qg7 Rf8 19. Rhe1 Na5 20. Nd5 Qa4 21. Qf6 Nc6 {and now} 22. Qh4 {would have been very strong.} ) 9. h4 ({Or} 9. Bxg7 Kxg7 10. h4 h6 11. f4 f6 {and now} 12. g4 ({but maybe the quieter} 12. Nf3 {gives White an advantage}) 12... Nd4 13. Nh3 Nec6 14. O-O f5 {was unclear in Smyslov-Brinck Claussen, Copenhagen 1986.}) 9... Bxh6 ({ Black has to be very careful, for example} 9... Nd4 10. O-O-O f5 11. h5 Rf7 12. Nh3 Bxh6 13. Qxh6 Rg7 14. Ng5 fxe4 15. hxg6 Ndf5 16. gxh7+ Kh8 17. Qf6 Qe8 18. g4 Qg6 19. Qf8+ {and Black resigned, Dworakowska-Madejska, Brzeg Dolny 1995.}) 10. Qxh6 f6 {At first sight this move only seems to weaken Black's position further, but in fact this clever move is directly aimed against the idea of h4-h5. Now it's White's turn to be careful.} 11. Qd2 {After this move Black may be doing okay theoretically, but White's position is easier to play and in practice White has scored quite heavily from this position.} (11. f4 { fails to} Nd4 12. O-O-O Ndf5) ({while} 11. h5 {runs into} g5 {, and Black will trap White's queen with ...Kh8 and ...Ng8.}) 11... e5 {Freeing the c8-bishop. Black now sensibly opts to put his pawns on dark squares.} 12. f4 ({ Or} 12. h5 g5 13. h6 (13. f4 h6 {and Black's position is rock-solid}) 13... Ng6 14. Nd5 Nce7 15. Ne3 Be6 16. Ne2 d5 17. exd5 Nxd5 18. Nc3 Nge7 19. O-O-O Nxe3 20. Qxe3 Qd4 21. Ne4 Qxe3+ 22. fxe3 Bd5 23. Rd2 b6 24. c4 Bxe4 25. Bxe4 Rad8 26. g4 {and White's bishop is superior to Black's knight, Golubovic-Boyd, Cannes 1996.}) 12... Z0 {Most players would prefer White in this position. Here are three practical examples:} (12... exf4 13. gxf4 Bg4 14. Bf3 Qd7 15. Bxg4 Qxg4 16. Nge2 d5 17. exd5 Nd4 18. O-O-O Nxe2+ 19. Nxe2 Nxd5 20. h5 { and White has a strong attack, Shaw-Berry, Marymass 1999.}) (12... Bg4 13. Bh3 Qd7 14. h5 gxh5 15. f5 Rf7 16. Bxg4 hxg4 17. Rh4 Rg7 18. Nd1 d5 19. Nf2 Kh8 20. Nxg4 Ng8 21. O-O-O {with an edge to White in A.Ledger-Novikov, Port Erin 1996. The rest of the game is interesting:} Rd8 22. Ne2 dxe4 23. dxe4 Qf7 24. Qxd8 Nxd8 25. Rxd8 Qxa2 26. Nc3 Qa5 27. Rf8 Qa1+ 28. Kd2 Qa6 29. Nd5 Qd6 30. Re8 Rf7 31. Rxg8+ Kxg8 32. Nh6+ Kg7 33. Nxf7 Kxf7 34. Rxh7+ Kg8 35. Rxb7 Qa6 36. Rc7 Qa5+ 37. c3 Kf8 38. Rc6 Qb5 39. Rxf6+ Kg7 40. Rg6+ Kf7 41. Rf6+ Kg7 42. Rg6+ {1/2 1/2.}) (12... h5 13. Nf3 Kg7 14. O-O Nd4 15. Rf2 Be6 16. Raf1 Qd7 17. Nh2 Rad8 18. Nd1 exf4 19. Rxf4 d5 20. Nc3 {and White has good pressure on the kingside, Hamdouchi-Bezold, France 1999.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 2"] [Black "Introduction"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B23"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "9"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 {Black plans to play an early ...d7-d5. This is nowhere near as popular as the ...g6 lines, but it's certainly a solid continuation that should be respected; Garry Kasparov, amongst others, has used this move order before.} 3. g3 {White fianchettoes as normal.} d5 ({Black still has a chance to transpose into earlier lines with} 3... Nc6 4. Bg2 g6 {.}) 4. exd5 exd5 {Now I'm going to give two quite different suggestions:} 5. Z0 ({A:} 5. d4 $5) ({B:} 5. Bg2) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 2"] [Black "A: 5 d4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B23"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "10"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. g3 d5 4. exd5 exd5 5. d4 {White immediately strikes back in the centre. Black's d-pawn will become isolated and White hopes to benefit from this. Unusually for the Closed Sicilian, play becomes very sharp at an early stage. Black's main choices are:} Z0 ({A1:} 5... Nf6) ({A2:} 5... cxd4) ({Another interesting option here is} 5... Nc6 6. dxc5 (6. Bg2 ) 6... d4 7. Ne4 Bxc5 {and now:} 8. Z0 (8. Nxc5 Qa5+ 9. Bd2 Qxc5 10. Bg2 { has been given as advantageous to White in some texts, but I think the matter is far from clear after the accurate counter} Bf5 {.} 11. Qe2+ ({Black's speedy development and the attack on the c2-pawn are awkward for White, for example} 11. Rc1 Nb4) ({, or} 11. c3 O-O-O) 11... Kd7 12. Qf3 Nf6 13. Qb3 Rae8+ 14. Ne2 Kc8 {gave Black a strong attack in Bauerndistel-Langhein, correspondence 1982.}) ({. I prefer the less committal} 8. Bg2 {; for example,} Bf5 9. Ne2 Qe7 10. Nxc5 Qxc5 11. c3 {, after which} dxc3 ({while after} 11... d3 12. Nf4 Rd8 13. O-O {it's not clear whether Black's passed pawn on d3 is a strength or a weakness}) 12. Nxc3 Rd8 13. Qe2+ Nge7 14. Be3 Qa5 15. Rd1 {gives White an edge due to having the bishop pair in an open position. })) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 2"] [Black "A1: 5...Nf6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B23"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "25"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. g3 d5 4. exd5 exd5 5. d4 Nf6 6. Nge2 {This is a clever move order designed not to expose White's queen too early.} ({ Alternatively, White has} 6. Bg2 cxd4 {and now:} 7. Z0 (7. Nce2 Nc6 8. Nxd4 Bc5 9. Nge2 O-O 10. O-O Bg4 {and Black has a very comfortable game. Schubert-Kerek, Budapest 2000, continued} 11. Nb3 Re8 12. Re1 Bxf2+ 13. Kxf2 Qb6+ 14. Kf1 Ne4 {and White was in big trouble (} 15. Bxe4 Rxe4 16. Kg2 Rae8 {win for Black) .}) (7. Qxd4 Nc6 8. Qa4 d4 9. Nce2 Bd7 {and Black is not worse here – White's queen is awkwardly placed.} (9... Z0))) 6... Nc6 (6... Bg4 7. Bg2 cxd4 { forces White to recapture with} 8. Qxd4 {, but the big difference with the previous note is that the black bishop is already committed to g4, so after} Nc6 9. Qa4 {the white queen is now well placed (there are tactical possibilities against the light-squared bishop).} Z0 (9... Bb4 10. O-O O-O 11. Bg5 {and the pressure on the d5-pawn gives Black some problems.}) (9... Bc5 10. Nxd5 (10. O-O O-O 11. Bg5 d4 12. Bxf6 Qxf6 13. Ne4 Qe7 14. Rfe1 { is a safe way to play}) 10... Bxe2 11. Bg5 (11. Nxf6+ Qxf6 12. Qe4+ Kf8 $1 13. Qxe2 Re8 14. Be3 Bxe3 15. fxe3 Nd4 16. Qc4 Rxe3+ {and White's king was in trouble in Tseshkovsky-Gorelov, Aktjubinsk 1985}) 11... O-O 12. Bxf6 Qe8 13. Kd2 {with a very unclear position. White's a pawn up, but his king is wandering around in the centre. However, it's not clear if Black can take advantage of this.})) 7. Bg2 cxd4 8. Nxd4 Bb4 {Or:} (8... Be7 9. O-O O-O 10. Re1 Bg4 11. Qd3 Nb4 12. Qd2 {(White's queen is awkwardly placed at the moment but Black is in no position to exploit this and his pieces will soon be pushed back)} Re8 13. h3 Bc8 14. Qd1 Bc5 15. Rxe8+ Qxe8 16. Be3 Bb6 17. Kh2 Bd7 18. Qd2 Rc8 19. Re1 Qd8 20. a3 Nc6 21. Nxd5 Nxd5 22. Bxd5 {and White went on to win in Kupreichik-Lau, Meisdorf 1996.}) (8... Bg4 9. Qd3 Be7 10. h3 Be6 11. Nxe6 fxe6 12. O-O O-O 13. Bg5 h6 14. Bd2 Qd7 15. Rae1 {and White's two bishops plus the weakness on e6 promises White a clear plus, Fischer-Bertok, Rovinj/ Zagreb 1970.}) 9. O-O O-O 10. Bg5 Bxc3 11. bxc3 h6 12. Bxf6 (12. Bf4 Bg4 13. Qd3 Qd7 14. Rfe1 Rfe8 {looked okay for Black in Spassky-Garcia Gonzales, Linares 1981.}) 12... Qxf6 {Both sides have pawn weaknesses here, but White is slightly more active. Now White must make a choice between grabbing on d5 or increasing the pressure on the queenside.} 13. Z0 (13. Bxd5 Rd8 (13... Bh3 14. Bg2 Bxg2 15. Kxg2 Rad8 16. Qf3 Nxd4 17. Qxf6 gxf6 18. cxd4 Rxd4 19. Rad1 { gave White a tiny edge in Maslik-Babayev, Bratislava 1993,}) ({while Black had no compensation for the pawn after} 13... Nxd4 14. Qxd4 Qxd4 15. cxd4 Rd8 16. c4 {, Vershinin-Yurkov, Briansk 1995}) 14. Bxc6 bxc6 15. Qf3 Qxf3 16. Nxf3 c5 {with an unclear position; Black has sufficient compensation for the pawn in the form of light square control and White's doubled c-pawns.}) (13. Rb1 { (I think this causes Black more problems)} Rd8 14. Re1 Rb8 (14... Nxd4 15. Qxd4 Qxd4 16. cxd4 b6 17. c4 Be6 18. Re5 {won a pawn in Parkanyi-Orso, Budapest 2000 }) 15. Rb5 Be6 16. f4 Nxd4 17. cxd4 b6 18. Re5 Rbc8 19. Rb3 Qg6 20. c3 { occurred in Morovic Fernandez-Illescas, Leon 1993. White can claim an edge here; his pieces are still more active – White's bishop is superior to its counterpart.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 2"] [Black "A2: 5...cxd4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B23"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "39"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. g3 d5 4. exd5 exd5 5. d4 cxd4 {Black's main answer to 5 d4. White's queen is forced out into the open.} 6. Qxd4 Nf6 7. Bg5 {We've now reached a position similar to the Goring Gambit Declined (with colour reversed) , which arises after 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 exd4 4 c3 d5 5 exd5 Qxd5 6 cxd4 Bg4. This line of the Goring is considered at least equal for Black and possibly more. In the Closed Sicilian the extra move for White is g2-g3, which in some lines is probably a slight hindrance.} Be7 (7... Nc6 {. White should follow the path after 8 Bb5, as} 8. Bxf6 (8. Bb5 Be7 {transposes in the main line}) 8... Nxd4 9. Bxd8 Nxc2+ 10. Kd2 Nxa1 11. Bg5 d4 12. Nd5 Bd6 13. Bb5+ Bd7 14. Bxd7+ Kxd7 15. Ne2 Rac8 16. Rxa1 Rc5 {looks good for Black. In this line g2-g3 is definitely a hindrance.}) 8. Bb5+ Nc6 9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. Qc5 Bxc3+ ({Also possible for Black is} 10... Qb6 11. Qxb6 axb6 12. Nge2 ({or} 12. Nxd5 Bxb2 13. Nc7+ Kd8 14. Nxa8 Bxa1 15. Nxb6 Bf5 {and Black has some compensation for the pawn}) 12... O-O 13. a3 Ra5 {, which looks roughly level.} ) 11. bxc3 Qe7+ 12. Qxe7+ Kxe7 13. O-O-O Be6 14. Ne2 Kd6 {I believe Black best way to equalise is to activate his king, which should find a pleasant home on c5.} ({Gdanski-Wojtkiewicz, Warsaw 1993, continued} 14... Rhd8 15. Rhe1 Rd6 {and now King's suggestion of} 16. Nf4 {keeps an advantage for White – the d5-pawn is more vulnerable than the c3-pawn.}) 15. Rhe1 {. Lane-Nunn, Stroud 1980, now continued} Kc5 16. c4 (16. Ba4 {is equal.}) 16... dxc4 (16... Rad8 {.}) 17. Bxc6 bxc6 ({Lane points out that} 17... Kxc6 18. Nd4+ Kc7 19. Nxe6+ fxe6 20. Rxe6 Rhe8 {leads to a level rook ending.}) 18. Nf4 Bg4 19. Re5+ Kb4 (19... Kb6 {would have been stronger.}) 20. Rd4 {and White had a winning attack. However, Black's king was far too adventurous here.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 2"] [Black "B: 5 Bg2"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B23"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "10"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. g3 d5 4. exd5 exd5 5. Bg2 {This is White's most logical move. Black is forced to do something about his threatened d-pawn. Black can choose between the two replies:} Z0 ({B1:} 5... d4) ({B2:} 5... Nf6) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 2"] [Black "B1: 5...d4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B23"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "43"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. g3 d5 4. exd5 exd5 5. Bg2 d4 ({Theoretically speaking, this move is meant to be inferior to} 5... Nf6 {, but in my opinion things are not so clear.}) 6. Qe2+ {This move interferes with Black's development plans.} ({Notice that} 6. Ne4 f5 {leaves the knight with nowhere to go.}) ({ However,} 6. Nd5 {is playable, for example} Bd6 (6... Nf6 7. Qe2+) 7. d3 Nc6 8. Ne2 Nge7 9. Nxe7 Nxe7 10. Bf4 O-O 11. O-O Bg4 12. Bxd6 Qxd6 {with an equal position, Klinger-Rovid, Budapest 1993.}) 6... Be7 (6... Be6 7. Bxb7 { is obviously bad}) ({while} 6... Qe7 7. Nd5 Qxe2+ 8. Nxe2 {gives White a big lead in development –} Bd6 {can be answered very effectively by} 9. b4 { .}) ({The line} 6... Ne7 7. Nd5 Nbc6 8. d3 {is also good for White – Black is rather tied up.}) 7. Nd5 Nc6 8. d3 Be6 9. Nf4 (9. Nxe7 {gains the bishop pair, but allows Black to complete his development with ease. Following} Ngxe7 10. Nf3 O-O 11. O-O Re8 12. Ng5 Bd5 {Black has equalised comfortably.}) 9... Bd7 (9... Qd7 10. Nxe6 Qxe6 11. Qxe6 fxe6 12. Nf3 {is clearly better for White: the backward pawn on e6 is a real weakness.}) 10. g4 {This energetic move, played by the German FM Rene Borngässer, may well be White's best chance for an advantage. Two other moves come into consideration.} (10. Nd5 Be6 11. Nf4 Bd7 12. Nd5 {is good for a draw if that's what White wants (this was actually how Davies-Beim, Tel Aviv 1992 ended).}) ({The other try is simple development with} 10. Nf3 Nf6 11. O-O O-O {, although this looks reasonably comfortable for Black. For example} 12. Ne5 Nxe5 13. Qxe5 Re8 14. Nh5 (14. Bxb7 Bf8 15. Qg5 h6 16. Qh4 Rb8 {and ...g5 is coming}) 14... Qb6 {and Black was better in Westerinen-Ihonen, Kuopio 1992.}) 10... Nf6 {This allows White to gain a large space advantage on the kingside, but it's not easy to suggest worthwhile alternatives.} (10... Nh6 11. Nh5 O-O (11... Bxg4 12. Nxg7+ Kf8 13. Bxh6 {wins for White,}) ({while} 11... Nxg4 12. h3 Nge5 13. Nxg7+ Kf8 14. Bh6 {is promising}) 12. Bxh6 gxh6 13. O-O-O {looks good for White – Black's kingside is a bit of a mess.}) ({The move} 10... h6 {prevents the immediate g4-g5, but White could consider following up with} 11. h4 {.}) 11. g5 Ng4 12. Nd5 Nge5 13. Bf4 {Borngässer-Mozny, Prague 1990, continued} Ng6 14. Bc7 Qc8 15. h4 Be6 (15... Bg4 {.}) 16. Bg3 Bd8 17. h5 Nge7 18. h6 Nxd5 19. hxg7 Rg8 20. Bxd5 Rxg7 21. Nf3 Qd7 {and now:} 22. Z0 ({King suggests that both } 22. Bb3) ({and} 22. Be4 {keep a white advantage. This seems right, as the h7-pawn is weak and White has some pressure down the half-open h-file.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 2"] [Black "B2: 5...Nf6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B23"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "11"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. g3 d5 4. exd5 exd5 5. Bg2 Nf6 {This sensible move, protecting the d5-pawn, is Black's most popular choice. We will now consider two different approaches for White.} 6. Z0 ({B21:} 6. Nge2) ({B22:} 6. d3) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 2"] [Black "B21: 6 Nge2"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B23"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "36"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. g3 d5 4. exd5 exd5 5. Bg2 Nf6 6. Nge2 d4 7. Ne4 Nxe4 8. Bxe4 Nd7 {Preparing to attack the bishop with ...Nf6 is Black's most solid response to White's play.} ({After} 8... Be7 9. O-O Nc6 10. d3 O-O 11. Nf4 { White has an advantage – the bishop is well centralised on e4 and it's hard for Black to challenge it.}) 9. O-O Nf6 10. Bg2 Bd6 11. c3 {Challenging the centre gives Black something to think about and the chance to go wrong.} (11. d3 O-O 12. Bf4 Bg4 13. Bxd6 Qxd6 14. h3 Bd7 15. Nf4 Rfe8 16. Qd2 Bc6 { is very comfortable for Black.}) 11... d3 {Black has two alternatives to this ambitious move:} (11... dxc3 12. dxc3 {reveals one of the points of White's move order.} O-O 13. Qc2 {is very uncomfortable for Black – the g2-bishop pressurises b7 and Black will have some problems after Rd1.}) (11... O-O {(this is Black's safest response)} 12. cxd4 cxd4 13. d3 Re8 14. Nf4 (14. Nxd4 Bxg3 15. hxg3 Qxd4 {and Black is very active – King}) 14... Qb6 15. Qb3 Qa5 16. Qc2 Bf5 17. Bd2 (17. Bxb7 Rab8 18. Bg2 Rbc8 {gives Black too much compensation for the pawn}) 17... Bb4 18. Bxb4 Qxb4 19. a3 Qb5 {and the position looks equal, Hug-Ribli, Lucerne 1982 – both d-pawns are weak.}) 12. Nf4 O-O (12... Bxf4 13. Qa4+ Bd7 14. Re1+ Kf8 15. Qxf4 {is very good for White; the bishop can develop with b2-b3 and both the d3- and b7-pawns are vulnerable.}) 13. Nxd3 {White must get rid of this troublesome pawn, otherwise it would be very difficult to finish developing.} Bxg3 {Regaining the pawn with this discovered attack.} 14. fxg3 Qxd3 15. Qf3 {White must challenge Black's dominating queen.} Qxf3 ({Against} 15... Rd8 {King gives} 16. Qxd3 Rxd3 17. Re1 {, with the idea of Bf1.}) 16. Bxf3 Bh3 ({Or} 16... Rd8 17. b3 Bh3 ( 17... Rb8 18. d4 cxd4 19. Bf4 Ra8 20. Rfd1 d3 21. Rd2 {, followed by Rad1, is good for White}) 18. Bxb7 Rab8 19. Bg2 Bxg2 20. Kxg2 Ne4 21. Re1 Nxd2 22. Re2 {and the black knight is trapped as in the game Dudek-Kern, Bundesliga 1997.}) 17. Bxb7 (17. Rd1 Bg4 {exchanging off one of the bishops, eases Black's task.}) 17... Rae8 ({After} 17... Bxf1 18. Bxa8 Bd3 19. Bf3 Re8 20. b3 {White is slowly untangling, leaving Black with little compensation for the pawn deficit.}) 18. Bg2 {. In this position White remains a pawn to the good, but Black's activity and White's undeveloped queenside balances the scales.} Z0 (18... Bg4 {loses the initiative. After} 19. b3 Re2 20. Ba3 Rc8 21. Rf2 { White was clearly better in Thimognier-Muneret, correspondence 1991.}) (18... Bxg2 19. Kxg2 Re2+ 20. Rf2 Rfe8 21. b3 Rxf2+ 22. Kxf2 Ng4+ 23. Kg2 f5 24. h3 Ne5 25. d4 cxd4 26. cxd4 Nd3 27. Bg5 h6 28. Rd1 hxg5 29. Rxd3 Re2+ 30. Kf3 Rxa2 31. d5 Kf7 32. d6 Ke8 {(in the stem game Spassky-Kasparov, Bugojno 1982, the players agreed a draw here)} 33. g4 g6 34. gxf5 gxf5 35. Rd5 g4+ 36. hxg4 fxg4+ 37. Kxg4 Kd7 38. Kf5 Re2 39. Ra5 Kxd6 40. Rxa7 {1/2 1/2 J.Claesen-Chuchelov, Belgian League 1998. In the final position White's extra pawn is meaningless – the position is drawn.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Sicilian 2"] [Black "B22: 6 d3"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B23"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "39"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. g3 d5 4. exd5 exd5 5. Bg2 Nf6 6. d3 ({In most people's view this is more combative than} 6. Nge2 {, the reason being that after Black plays ...d5-d4 and White replies with Ne4, White can answer ...Nxe4 by recapturing with the pawn, thus creating an asymmetrical pawn structure and a more unbalanced position.}) 6... d4 ({Black may also refrain from this central advance, for example} 6... Be7 7. Nge2 O-O 8. O-O Nc6 9. Bg5 d4 10. Bxf6 Bxf6 11. Ne4 Be7 12. Nf4 Bf5 (12... Re8 13. Re1 Bf8 {, as in Panbukchian-Poluljahov, Anapa 1991, is also possible}) 13. Re1 Rc8 14. Nd5 Be6 15. Nxe7+ Nxe7 16. Qh5 $1 {. Larsen-Suetin, Copenhagen 1965, continued} Bf5 17. Re2 Qd7 18. Rae1 Nd5 19. Nd6 Qxd6 20. Qxf5 Nf6 21. Bxb7 Rb8 22. Re7 {and White was a pawn to the good.}) 7. Ne4 Nxe4 8. dxe4 Nc6 ({Or} 8... Bd6 9. Ne2 Nc6 10. O-O O-O 11. a3 ({the immediate} 11. f4 {looks reasonable}) 11... a5 12. f4 f5 13. c3 Kh8 ( 13... fxe4 {looks stronger}) 14. cxd4 Nxd4 15. e5 Bc7 16. Be3 Ne6 17. Qc2 Rb8 18. Rfd1 Qe7 19. Nc3 {and White had a very pleasant position in A. Ledger-Stephenson, British Championship 1998 – White's minor pieces have much more scope than their counterparts.}) 9. Ne2 Be7 (9... Be6 {, with ideas of ... Bc4, is another option for Black. After} 10. O-O (10. Nf4 Bc4 11. Nd3 Bd6 12. O-O O-O 13. f4 f6 14. b3 {was unbalanced in Lagvilava-Skripchenko, FIDE Women's World Championship, New Delhi 2000}) 10... Bd6 11. Nf4 Bxf4 12. Bxf4 O-O 13. Qh5 f5 14. Rfe1 {, Kovalevskaya-Skripchenko, Belgrade 2000, I slightly prefer White, as the two bishops may become very useful when the position opens up.}) 10. O-O O-O 11. Nf4 Re8 ({Black can also try to exchange a pair of minor pieces with} 11... Bg5 {, for example} 12. c3 (12. Re1 Re8 13. Nd5) ({ or} 12. Nd5 {look interesting}) 12... Bxf4 13. Bxf4 Be6 {and now the game Short-Topalov, Sarajevo 1999 finished abruptly after} 14. Qh5 b6 15. e5 Bd5 16. Bg5 Qd7 17. Bf6 Kh8 18. Bh3 Be6 19. Bxg7+ Kxg7 20. Qg5+ {and it's perpetual check.}) 12. Nd5 {I very much like White's well centralised knight here. Donev-Felsberger, Austrian Team Championship 1995, continued} Bd6 13. c4 dxc3 ( 13... Ne7 14. Bg5 Qd7 15. Bxe7 Bxe7 16. f4 b6 17. Qd3 Bb7 18. Rae1 {is better for White according to Donev.}) 14. bxc3 Rb8 15. Qc2 Be6 16. Rd1 f6 17. Bf4 Bxf4 18. Nxf4 Qe7 {and now White kept an edge with} 19. Nxe6 ({It is also possible to play more aggressively with} 19. e5 {(threatening Nxe6)} Bc4 20. e6 {, followed by the move 21 Be4.}) 19... Qxe6 20. Rd5 {.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Other Variations"] [Black "?"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "47"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 {Alternatively:} (2... d6 {is a move order often chosen by Najdorf players. The reason is that after 2...Nc6 3 Nf3 or 3 Nge2 White has the possibility of playing for an Open Sicilian where Black has committed his knight to c6 and thus cannot play the Najdorf.} 3. Z0 ({. With} 3. Nge2 Nf6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 a6) ({, or} 3. Nf3 {Black has his beloved set-up}) ({. This doesn't really affect the Closed Sicilian player. Following} 3. g3 Nc6 4. Bg2 g6 ({otherwise} 4... Nf6 {transposes to the text}) 5. d3 Bg7 {we have transposed directly to ...g6 lines.})) (2... e6 3. g3 d6 4. Bg2 Nf6 5. d3 Be7 6. f4 O-O {(Black can miss out ...Nc6 altogether, but this shouldn't concern White – normal development and expansion on the kingside is still the key)} 7. Nf3 Nbd7 8. O-O a6 9. h3 b5 10. g4 {and White develops an attack on the kingside as normal.}) (2... a6 {(Black pays for an early queenside expansion)} 3. g3 b5 4. Bg2 Bb7 5. d3 e6 (5... g6 6. Be3 d6 7. Qd2 Bg7 8. Nge2 Nc6 9. O-O h5 10. h3 Nd4 {was played in Shaw-MacKay, Scottish Championship 1993; now I like the usual plan of} 11. Nd1 e6 12. Nc1 Ne7 13. c3 Ndc6 14. Ne2 O-O 15. Bh6) 6. f4 d6 ({after} 6... d5 {White can play} 7. e5) 7. Nf3 Nd7 8. O-O b4 9. Ne2 Ngf6 {(Spraggett-Gelfand, Moscow Olympiad 1994), and now I like} 10. b3 { preventing ...c5-c4.}) 3. g3 Nf6 4. Bg2 d6 ({Black can also play for a delayed ...d7-d5;} 4... e6 5. f4 ({or} 5. d3 d5 {– see the 2...e6 and 3...d5 line}) 5... d5 6. e5 Nd7 7. Nf3 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. d3 Rb8 10. Kh1 b5 11. Ne2 b4 12. g4 f6 13. exf6 Nxf6 14. h3 {and White will follow up with Ng3, Lukin-Sveshnikov, St Petersburg 1994.}) 5. d3 e6 ({It's not too late for a fianchetto; for} 5... g6 6. h3 Bg7 7. Be3 {brings us back into ...g6 lines.}) 6. f4 {With Black avoiding a fianchetto, it makes much more sense to play f2-f4, followed, in time, by a kingside pawn storm.} Be7 7. Nf3 O-O (7... a6 {is a normal Open Sicilian move but it has less point here, although it does prepare ...b7-b5. Spraggett-Vilalta, Manresa 1995, continued} 8. O-O O-O 9. h3 Qc7 10. g4 { (starting the usual expansion)} Re8 11. g5 Nd7 12. Ne2 b5 13. Ng3 Bb7 14. Nh2 Rad8 15. Ng4 Nb6 16. Nh5 d5 17. Qe1 Nd4 18. Qf2 dxe4 19. dxe4 b4 20. Kh1 Nc4 21. c3 bxc3 22. bxc3 Nb5 23. a4 Nbd6 24. Qe2 Na5 25. Rb1 Ndc4 26. f5 exf5 27. Rxf5 Nd6 28. Rf1 Bc8 29. Bf4 Be6 30. Rg1 Bc4 31. Qf3 Qd7 32. Be5 Bxg5 33. Bxg7 Nxe4 34. Qxe4 {1-0 (after} Rxe4 35. Bxe4 {there is no good defence to Ngf6+).}) 8. O-O Rb8 ({Black has many possible ways to develop, but White's reaction is normally the same, for example} 8... Bd7 9. h3 Nd4 (9... Rb8 10. g4 b5 11. f5 b4 12. Ne2 Ne8 13. Qe1 Ne5 14. Nxe5 dxe5 15. Be3 {was better for White in Pinto-Panken, Parsippany 2001}) 10. Be3 Nxf3+ 11. Qxf3 Bc6 12. Qe2 Qc7 13. Bf2 Rfe8 14. g4 Nd7 {and White is better, Hickl-Martens, Groningen 1988 – Black is passive and has no obvious plan.}) 9. h3 d5 10. g4 ({Naturally} 10. Qe1 {is also possible, but White has no need to fear an exchange of queens here.}) 10... dxe4 11. dxe4 Qc7 {Black correctly declines the exchange.} ({ After} 11... Qxd1 12. Rxd1 {White's advantage holds in the endgame – he will gain more space with e4-e5 and Ne4.}) 12. e5 Rd8 13. Qe1 Ne8 14. Be3 {White has more space and an active position. Spraggett-Lesiege, Vancouver 1998, continued} Nd4 15. Qf2 b5 16. Kh2 b4 17. Ne4 Ba6 18. Rfc1 Qb6 19. Nfd2 f6 20. exf6 gxf6 21. Nb3 Bb7 22. Rg1 Ng7 23. Rad1 e5 24. f5 {and White converted his undoubted advantage on the kingside into the full point.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "Introduction"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C27"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "6"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 {This is by far the most popular choice for Black at move two. Black develops his king's knight, prepares to castle and attacks the e4-pawn.} 3. d3 {With this move we are choosing to play a 'Bishops Opening Proper', rather than transposing into the Vienna Game with 3 Mc3.} ({Often the Bishop's Opening transposes in to the Vienna in any case (for example,} 3. Nc3 Nc6 4. d3 {gives us another route to Variation B). Choosing the 3 d3 move order, though, cuts out some of Black's options, although I should say it also gives Black some extra ones. For example, after 3 Nc3 White has to be concerned with 3...Bb4 and 3...Nxe4, both of which are perfectly playable moves. With 3 d3 we avoid these lines; the other side of the coin is that White has to prepare for 3...d5 (this is not such a problem) and the very popular 3...c6.}) 3... Z0 {Now we will take a look at these black possibilities:} ({A:} 3... c6) ({B:} 3... Nc6) ({C:} 3... Bc5) ({D:} 3... d5) ( {E:} 3... Be7) (3... d6 {is a passive move, which is seen from time to time. White should continue with the plan of f2-f4, for example} 4. Nc3 Be6 5. Bb3 Nc6 6. f4 Be7 7. Nf3 O-O 8. O-O {and White stands better.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "A: 3...c6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "8"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 c6 {This line, attributed to Louis Paulsen, is perhaps the critical test of the Bishop's Opening. Black immediately tries to take the initiative in the centre by preparing the logical ...d7-d5 advance. White must now abandon any fanciful ideas of launching his f-pawn (4 f4 is effectively met by the simple 4...d5). Instead White must prepare to do battle in the centre.} 4. Nf3 {The most logical move, attacking the pawn on e5 and trying to take advantage of the fact that Black no longer has the c6-square for his knight. Black can react in the following ways:} Z0 ({A1:} 4... d5) ({ A2:} 4... Be7) (4... d6 {is likely to transpose to Variation A2 after} 5. O-O Be7 {.}) (4... Qc7 {also transposes to Variation A2 after} 5. O-O Be7 {.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "A1: 4...d5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "10"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. Bb3 {With this move White keeps the pressure on the black centre, without releasing any of the tension.} (5. exd5 cxd5 6. Bb5+ ({while} 6. Bb3 {allows Black to develop with} Nc6) 6... Bd7 $1 {is comfortable for Black.}) 5... Z0 {Now Black must deal with the threat to his e5-pawn. His choices are:} ({A11:} 5... Bd6) ({A12:} 5... a5) ({ Alternatively:} 5... d4 {runs into} 6. Ng5 {.}) (5... dxe4 6. Ng5 {and now:} Z0 (6... Bc5 7. Nxf7 Qb6 8. O-O ({but not} 8. Nxh8 Bxf2+ 9. Kf1 Bg4 10. Qd2 e3 {and Black wins!}) 8... Ng4 (8... Rf8 9. Nxe5 {leaves White a clear pawn up}) 9. Nxh8 {and I don't see any real compensation for Black.}) (6... Be6 7. Bxe6 fxe6 8. Nxe4 Nxe4 9. dxe4 Qxd1+ 10. Kxd1 {and Black's doubled e-pawns are a permanent liability in the ending, Honfi-Lukacs, Hungary 1975.})) (5... Bb4+ {(the point of this mover is to provoke c2-c3, so that White no longer has this square for his knight)} 6. c3 ({or} 6. Bd2 Bxd2+ 7. Nbxd2 dxe4 8. Nxe5 O-O 9. dxe4 Nxe4 10. Ndf3 Nd7 11. O-O Nxe5 12. Nxe5 Qf6 13. Qd4 {and White's pressure on f7 gives him an edge, Larsen-Nunn, London 1986}) 6... Bd6 7. Bg5 Be6 8. Nbd2 Nbd7 9. d4 exd4 10. exd5 Bxd5 11. Bxd5 cxd5 12. Nxd4 Qe7+ 13. Be3 O-O 14. Nf5 Qe5 15. Nxd6 Qxd6 16. O-O {and White was better in the game Yudasin-Alterman, Tel Aviv 1994 – the d5-pawn is a permanent weakness for White to target.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "A11: 5...Bd6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "11"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. Bb3 Bd6 {The most logical move. Black develops a bishop, defends the e-pawn and prepares to castle.} 6. Z0 { I'll now give two ways forward for White:} ({A111:} 6. Nc3) ({A112:} 6. exd5 ) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "A111: 6 Nc3"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "12"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. Bb3 Bd6 6. Nc3 {Until recently this was virtually the only choice, but Black's equalising prospects in Variation A1112 have forced White to look elsewhere for an advantage.} Z0 {Now we will look at the following lines:} ({A1111:} 6... Be6) ({A1112:} 6... dxe4) ({Or} 6... d4 7. Ne2 c5 (7... Na6 8. c3 dxc3 9. bxc3 O-O 10. O-O Nc5 11. Bc2 Bg4 12. Ng3 Nh5 13. h3 Nxg3 14. fxg3 Bh5 15. g4 Bg6 16. h4 {was clearly better for White, Nunn-Korchnoi, Johannesburg 1981}) 8. Ng3 Nc6 9. O-O h6 10. Nd2 g6 11. Nc4 Bc7 12. a4 Kf8 13. f4 Kg7 14. f5 {and White has a useful space advantage on the kingside, Hendriks-Kroeze, Enschede 1998.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "A1111: 6...Be6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "22"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. Bb3 Bd6 6. Nc3 Be6 {With this move Black tries to keep his centre intact, but practice has shown this to be a difficult task.} 7. Bg5 {Stepping up the pressure on d5.} Qa5 ({Or:} 7... Nbd7 8. exd5 cxd5 9. Bxd5 {wins a pawn.}) (7... d4 8. Ne2 Nbd7 (8... Bxb3 9. axb3 {and White can continue with Ng3-f5}) 9. Bxe6 fxe6 10. c3 dxc3 11. bxc3 h6 12. Bxf6 Qxf6 13. O-O O-O 14. Ng3 {was better for White in Nun-Tichy, Czech Team Championship 1999.}) 8. O-O Nbd7 9. Re1 O-O-O ({A major alternative for Black is} 9... O-O {and now:} 10. Nh4 {, with idea of Qf3 and Nf5 gives White an edge – Nunn.} (10. Bd2 Qc7 11. exd5 Nxd5 12. Ne4 Be7 {(Traut-Kappes, correspondence 1987)} 13. d4 {and I prefer White.}) (10. exd5 {and now there's another split:} Z0 (10... Nxd5 11. Ne4 Bb8 {(Sikora-Karch, correspondence 1989)} 12. Bd2 Qc7 13. Nfg5 {, annoying the bishop on e6.}) ( 10... cxd5 11. Qd2 b6 (11... d4 {is more resilient}) 12. Bxf6 Nxf6 13. Nxe5 d4 14. Nb1 Bb4 15. c3 Bxb3 16. cxb4 Qa6 17. b5 Qa4 18. Na3 {and White is a clear pawn up, Nunn-Murey, Lucerne Olympiad 1982.}))) 10. exd5 cxd5 11. Qd2 { . Black now has many possible moves, but none seems to reach equality:} Z0 ( 11... Qc5 12. d4 exd4 13. Nxd4 {with pressure on e6, Packroff-Kohn, correspondence 1984.}) (11... Bb4 12. a3 Bxc3 13. Qxc3+ Qxc3 14. bxc3 h6 15. Bh4 g5 16. Bg3 e4 17. Nd4 {and White has an excellent pair of bishops, Koch-Mohaupt, correspondence 1965.}) (11... Bc7 12. Bxf6 gxf6 13. Bxd5 Bxd5 14. b4 Qxb4 15. Nxd5 {is better for White, Honfi-Radulov, correspondence 1982.}) (11... h6 12. Bxf6 Nxf6 13. Nxe5 d4 14. Bxe6+ fxe6 15. Nb1 {and White is a pawn up.}) (11... d4 12. Bxe6 fxe6 13. Ne4 {.}) (11... Rde8 12. d4 exd4 ( 12... e4 13. Nxe4) 13. Nxd4 Bb4 14. Bf4 Bxc3 15. bxc3 Ne4 16. Qd3 Qxc3 17. Nb5 Qf6 18. Nxa7+ Kd8 19. Be3 Ne5 20. Qb5 Nd6 21. Qa5+ {1-0 Bodisko-Mitchell, correspondence 1985.}) (11... Kb8 12. Bxf6 (12. Bh4) 12... Nxf6 13. Nxe5 d4 14. Nb1 Qc7 15. f4 {.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "A1112: 6...dxe4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "40"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. Bb3 Bd6 6. Nc3 dxe4 {Until recently this move has been mysteriously overlooked, or at least underestimated. Kramnik, however, has shown that Black has good equalising chances with it.} 7. Ng5 ({White can't really hope for much after the quiet} 7. Nxe4 Nxe4 8. dxe4 {, but Black must still be a little careful, for example} Qe7 $6 (8... Bb4+ {is safer}) 9. Ng5 O-O 10. Nxh7 Kxh7 11. Qh5+ Kg8 12. Bg5 Qc7 13. Rd1 Nd7 14. Rd3 Nc5 15. Rg3 Be7 16. Bh6 Bf6 17. Qg6 Qa5+ 18. c3 Qd8 19. Bxg7 Nxb3 20. Qh6 Qd2+ 21. Qxd2 Nxd2 22. Bxf6+ Kh7 23. Kxd2 {and White went on to win in Mitkov-Gabriel, Pula 2000.}) 7... O-O 8. Ncxe4 Nxe4 9. Nxe4 Bf5 ({ This is stronger than} 9... Na6 10. Qh5 Qc7 11. Ng5 h6 12. Ne4 Be7 13. Bxh6 gxh6 14. Qg6+ Kh8 15. Qxh6+ Kg8 16. h4 {and White has a very strong attack, Tischbierek-Beliavsky, Novi Sad Olympiad 1990.}) 10. Qf3 (10. O-O Na6 11. Nxd6 Qxd6 12. Qf3 Be6 {was equal in Anand-Kramnik, Frankfurt (rapid) 1998.} ) 10... Bxe4 ({Or} 10... Bg6 11. h4 Bxe4 12. dxe4 Nd7 13. c3 Nc5 14. Bc2 Qe7 15. Bg5 f6 16. Bd2 {and White has a tiny edge due to the bishop pair, as in Ki.Georgiev-Alterman, Recklinghausen 1998.}) 11. dxe4 Nd7 12. c3 a5 13. a4 (13. O-O {allows Black to gain space with} a4 14. Bc2 Nc5 {.}) 13... Nc5 14. Bc2 b5 15. O-O {. Adams-Kramnik, Tilburg 1998, continued} Qc7 16. Rd1 Rab8 17. axb5 cxb5 18. g3 b4 19. cxb4 Rxb4 20. Bd2 Rxb2 {, and in this level position the players agreed a draw.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "A112: 6 exd5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "29"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. Bb3 Bd6 6. exd5 {This move looks quite promising.} Nxd5 ({After} 6... cxd5 {White can play:} 7. Z0 (7. O-O Be6 ( {or} 7... O-O 8. Bg5 Be6 9. Nc3 {and Black's centre is under pressure}) 8. Bg5 Nbd7 9. Nc3 Qa5 10. Re1 O-O 11. Qd2 {and we have transposed to note '10... cxd5' to Black's ninth move in Variation A1111.}) (7. Bg5 d4 8. Nbd2 O-O 9. O-O Nc6 10. Re1 a6 11. h3 h6 12. Bh4 Re8 13. Nc4 {and White was a bit better, Benjamin-Nielsen, FIDE World Championship, Las Vegas 1999.} (13. Z0))) 7. O-O O-O 8. Re1 ({White also kept initiative in Malisov-Birnboim, Israeli Championship 1996, after} 8. Nbd2 Bc7 9. Re1 Nd7 10. Ne4 h6 11. h3 N7f6 12. Ng3 Re8 13. Bd2 a5 14. a3 a4 15. Ba2 c5 16. Nh2 Be6 17. Qf3 Qd7 18. Ng4 Nxg4 19. hxg4 Nf4 20. Bxe6 Nxe6 21. Ne4 Nd4 22. Qd1 Qc6 23. Be3 Rad8 24. Bxd4 exd4 25. Qf3 Re6 26. g3 Rde8 27. Kg2 {.}) 8... Nd7 ({Or} 8... Re8 9. Nbd2 Bc7 10. Ne4 Bg4 11. h3 Bh5 12. Ng3 Bg6 13. Bg5 Qd7 14. Nh4 Na6 15. Nxg6 hxg6 16. d4 exd4 17. Qxd4 {and White has the advantage of the bishop pair in an open position, Tseshkovsky-Agzamov, Yerevan 1982.}) 9. Nbd2 Re8 10. Ne4 Bc7 11. Bg5 f6 12. Bd2 Kh8 13. h3 ({I quite like the idea of the immediate} 13. d4 {as well.}) 13... Nf8 {. We are following the game Bosboom-Raetsky, Hafnarfjordur 1998. White now keeps a small plus by opening the centre with} 14. d4 exd4 15. Nxd4 { .} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "A12: 5...a5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "39"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. Bb3 a5 {Black gains space on the queenside by threatening to trap White's light-squared bishop. This move came into fashion after the Russian GM Evgeny Bareev utilised it against world number one Garry Kasparov.} 6. Nc3 {This was Kasparov's choice;} ({but} 6. a3 $5 {is also interesting:} Z0 (6... a4 7. Ba2 Bd6 8. Nc3 dxe4 9. Ng5 O-O 10. Ngxe4 Nxe4 11. Nxe4 Be7 (11... Bf5) 12. Qh5 Nd7 13. O-O Qe8 14. f4 { and White has a very strong attack, Lane-Henris, Brussels 1995.}) (6... Bd6 7. Nc3 {and now:} Z0 (7... Be6 8. exd5 Bxd5 (8... cxd5) 9. Nxd5 Nxd5 10. O-O O-O 11. Re1 Nd7 12. d4 Re8 13. Bg5 {and White is better, Zhelnin-Raetsky, Smolensk 2000.}) (7... dxe4 8. Ng5 O-O 9. Ncxe4 Nxe4 10. Nxe4 Bf5 11. Qf3 Bxe4 12. dxe4 Na6 13. O-O Nc7 14. Rd1 {and the bishop pair gives White the tiniest of edges, Atlas-Rabiega, Austrian League 2000.}))) 6... Bb4 ({Kasparov's idea after} 6... d4 {is} 7. Nxe5 dxc3 8. Nxf7 {.}) 7. a3 Bxc3+ 8. bxc3 Nbd7 { Alternatively:} (8... Bg4 9. exd5 Nxd5 10. h3 Nxc3 11. Bxf7+ {– Kasparov. }) (8... a4 9. Ba2 Nbd7 10. exd5 cxd5 ({or} 10... Nxd5 11. Bd2 O-O 12. O-O Re8 13. Re1 h6 14. c4 N5f6 15. Bc3 e4 16. Nd2 {and the position will open up for White's bishop pair, Dam-Bosboom, Leeuwarden 1993}) 11. O-O O-O 12. Bg5 Qc7 13. Qd2 b6 14. Rae1 Re8 15. Nh4 Qc6 16. Nf5 Qe6 17. f4 {and Black's centre is crumbling, Berkvens-Jonkman, Essent 2000.}) (8... Qc7 {is an untried suggestion from Kasparov.}) 9. exd5 Nxd5 ({Keeping the centre intact with} 9... cxd5 {looks more natural, although this would undoubtedly come under attack from the white pieces. After} 10. O-O O-O 11. Re1 {we have:} Z0 ({. Both} 11... e4 12. Nd4 Nc5 13. Bg5 Be6 14. Ba2 h6 15. Bh4) ({, and} 11... a4 12. Ba2 Re8 13. Bg5 {are given by Kasparov; in each line White appears to be more comfortable.}) (11... Qc7 {(Kasparov gives this a question mark, but is it really so clear?)} 12. Nxe5 (12. Bb2 {is less committal}) 12... Nxe5 13. Bf4 {(Kasparov stops here)} Re8 14. d4 Bg4 15. f3 Nxf3+ 16. Qxf3 Qd7 {and this looks unclear to me.})) 10. O-O O-O (10... a4 11. Bxd5 cxd5 12. Nxe5 { is good for White.}) 11. Re1 Re8 ({Kasparov has some impressive analysis refuting} 11... Nxc3 {. The main line runs} 12. Qd2 Nb5 13. Bb2 Nc5 14. Ba2 e4 15. Ng5 exd3 16. Re5 Ne6 17. Nxh7 Re8 (17... Kxh7 18. Rh5+ Kg8 19. Bxe6 fxe6 20. Rh8+ Kf7 21. Qf4+ Ke7 22. Qg5+ Kd7 23. Qxg7+) 18. Ng5 dxc2 19. Qxc2 Nxg5 20. Rd1 Bd7 21. Rxe8+ Qxe8 22. Qg6 {and White's attack is decisive.}) 12. c4 Ne7 ({Kasparov also gives the lines} 12... Nc7 13. Bb2 f6 14. c5+ Kh8 15. d4) ({and} 12... a4 13. cxd5 axb3 14. dxc6 bxc2 15. Qxc2 bxc6 16. Bb2 {.}) 13. Ng5 h6 14. Ne4 {. Once again the potential of the bishop pair promises White an advantage. Kasparov-Bareev, Linares 1993, continued} a4 15. Ba2 c5 16. Nd6 Rf8 17. c3 Ng6 18. Bb1 Nf6 19. Nxc8 Qxc8 20. Qf3 {and White was better.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "A2: 4...Be7"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "35"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 c6 4. Nf3 Be7 {With this move, Black shows he is quite content to develop before making plans in the centre. More often than not, Black will simply play ...d7-d6, rather than ...d7-d5.} 5. O-O (5. Nxe5 Qa5+ {has caught out more than one person.}) ({Another move, though, is} 5. Nc3 {(see Variation E).}) 5... d6 {Alternatively:} (5... b5 {trying to claim space on the queenside, is an interesting strategy. Emms-I.Sokolov, Hastings 2000, continued} 6. Bb3 d6 7. c3 a5 8. Nbd2 (8. a4 {, preventing Black's expansion on the queenside, is a suggestion of the Hungarian GM Peter Lukacs; he gives} b4 9. Re1 O-O 10. d4 Nbd7 11. Nbd2 {with a slight advantage to White} ) 8... a4 9. Bc2 O-O 10. d4 Nbd7 11. Re1 Re8 12. Nf1 Bf8 13. Ng3 Qc7 (13... Bb7 $5) 14. h3 g6 15. Be3 Bg7 16. Qd2 Nf8 17. Bd3 Ne6 18. Rac1 Bd7 {. I should have kept an edge with} 19. Bb1 ({instead of} 19. c4 exd4 20. Nxd4 bxc4 21. Nxe6 Bxe6 22. Bxc4) 19... c5 20. d5 Nd8 {.}) (5... Qc7 {(keeping options open with the d-pawn)} 6. Re1 O-O {and now:} 7. Z0 (7. Nbd2 d5 8. Bb3 Nbd7 9. exd5 (9. d4 dxe4 10. Nxe4 exd4 11. Qxd4 {looks interesting}) 9... cxd5 10. c4 d4 11. Nxd4 Nc5 12. Nb5 Qd8 13. Rxe5 Nxd3 14. Re2 {Larsen-Yusupov, Linares 1983), and here Larsen gives the equalising} Bc5 15. Nf3 Ng4 16. Be3 Nxe3 17. fxe3 Nf4 18. Re1 Nd3 {.}) (7. Bb3 d6 (7... Na6 8. d4 d6 9. c3 { is good for White}) 8. c3 Nbd7 9. d4 b5 10. Nbd2 (10. a4) 10... a5 11. Nf1 a4 12. Bc2 Re8 13. Ng3 Nb6 {and the position was level, Mainka-Mikhalcisin, Dortmund 1998.}) (7. h3 d5 8. exd5 cxd5 9. Bb3 Nc6 10. Nc3 {and Black centre is under some pressure. Note that the natural} Be6 {is met by} 11. Nxe5 Nxe5 12. Bf4 Nfd7 13. d4 {, and White wins material.})) 6. Re1 { White has two other possibilities here:} (6. Bb3 O-O 7. c3 Bg4 (7... Nbd7 8. Re1 Nc5 9. Bc2 Bg4 10. h3 Bh5 11. Nbd2 Ne6 {reaches the same position after eleven moves}) 8. Nbd2 Nbd7 9. h3 Bh5 10. Re1 Nc5 11. Bc2 Ne6 12. Nf1 Nd7 ( 12... Ne8 13. N1h2 Bg5 14. d4 {gave White a pull in Psakhis-Tseshkovsky, Vilnius 1980}) 13. Ng3 Bxf3 14. Qxf3 g6 15. Be3 Bg5 {and Black has equalised, Gelfand-Yusupov, Munich 1994.}) (6. h3 {(preventing black ideas involving .. .Bg4)} O-O 7. Re1 Nbd7 8. a4 a5 (8... d5 9. exd5 cxd5 10. Ba2 e4 11. dxe4 dxe4 12. Ng5 Bc5 13. Nc3 {was clearly better for White in Vogt-Magerramov, Baku 1980}) 9. Nc3 h6 (9... Nc5 10. d4 exd4 11. Nxd4 Re8 12. Qf3 { gave White an edge in Lau-Treppner, German Bundesliga 1982}) ({, while} 9... Qc7 {is a suggestion from 'ECO'}) 10. Ba2 Re8 11. d4 Bf8 12. Be3 Qc7 13. Nh4 b6 14. dxe5 dxe5 15. Qf3 Bc5 16. Nf5 {and White has a very powerful bishop on a2, Vogt-Chekhov, Halle 1981.}) 6... O-O 7. Nbd2 Nbd7 8. a3 Nc5 (8... h6 { is a bit slow: White is better after} 9. Ba2 Re8 10. Nf1 Nf8 11. Ng3 Be6 12. Bxe6 Nxe6 13. d4 {(Larsen-Torre, Brussels 1987).}) ({White also keeps a typical edge after} 8... Qc7 9. Ba2 b5 10. Nf1 a5 11. Ng3 Nc5 12. c3 Be6 13. d4 Bxa2 14. Rxa2 Ne6 15. b3 Rfe8 16. Rd2 Bf8 17. Bb2 Rad8 {, as in the game Anand-I.Sokolov, London (rapid) 1995.}) 9. Ba2 (9. Nf1 d5 10. exd5 cxd5 11. Ba2 e4 12. dxe4 Ncxe4 13. Be3 a6 14. c4 dxc4 {led to an early handshake in Nunn-Rozentalis, Hastings 1997/8, although there is still much to play for in the final position.}) 9... Re8 10. Nf1 Bf8 11. Ng3 g6 ({Lukacs suggests} 11... Be6 {as an improvement.}) 12. h3 Bg7 13. c3 d5 14. exd5 (14. b4 Ncd7 15. Bg5 {also looks better for White.}) 14... Nxd5 15. Bg5 f6 16. Be3 {. We have been following the game Kornev-Balashov, Samara 2000. After} Ne6 {Lukacs suggests} 17. Qd2 Qd6 18. Bh6 {as a way to keep a white advantage.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "B: 3...Nc6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "8"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 ({Along with} 3... c6 {, this is a very popular move. Black simply develops another piece (knights before bishops!), and keeps his options open over the placement of his dark-squared bishop.}) 4. Nc3 { This is the move which keeps White's options open regarding the f2-f4 thrust.} (4. Nf3 {would simply transpose into the Two Knights Defence, which lies outside the repertoire.}) 4... Z0 {We've now reached a very important crossroads. Black must choose between:} ({B1:} 4... Bc5) ({B2:} 4... Na5) ({B3: } 4... Bb4) ({Other moves are less important:} 4... Be7 {(this passive move is seen from time to time)} 5. f4 d6 6. Nf3 O-O ({or} 6... exf4 7. Bxf4 Na5 8. Bb3 Nxb3 9. axb3 O-O 10. O-O {and White has the better structure and more active pieces, Mirumian-Ho Cheng Fai, Yerevan Olympiad 1996;}) ({note that} 6... Bg4 7. O-O Nd4 8. fxe5 dxe5 {fails to} 9. Bxf7+) 7. O-O Bg4 ({or } 7... Nd4 8. fxe5 Nxf3+ 9. Qxf3 dxe5 10. Qg3 {and White has an automatic kingside attack, Mirumian-Hala, Czech League 1998}) 8. h3 (8. Qe1 {is also interesting; G.Mohr-Rozakis, Ikaria 1993 led to a quick conclusion after} Qd7 9. f5 Bxf3 10. Rxf3 Nd4 11. Rh3 Nxc2 12. Qh4 Nxa1 13. Bg5 c6 14. Bxf6 h6 15. Rg3 Bxf6 16. Qxf6 g5 17. Qg6+ {1-0}) 8... Bxf3 9. Qxf3 Nd4 10. Qf2 c6 11. a4 { and I prefer White. Isaacson-Assar, Munich 1958, continued} Qc7 12. Be3 c5 13. f5 a6 14. a5 Nc6 15. g4 h6 16. Nd5 Nxd5 17. Bxd5 {and now} Nxa5 {is answered by } 18. Qd2 Nc6 19. Bxh6 {.}) (4... d6 5. f4 Na5 (5... Be7 {transposes into the previous note}) 6. f5 Nxc4 7. dxc4 g6 8. g4 gxf5 (8... h5 9. g5 Nh7 10. f6 {incarcerates Black's kingside pieces}) 9. gxf5 Bd7 10. Qf3 Bc6 11. Nh3 $1 Rg8 12. Nf2 a6 13. Be3 b5 14. O-O-O bxc4 15. Qe2 Qb8 16. Qxc4 Qb7 17. Rhg1 Rxg1 18. Rxg1 {and White has a strong initiative, Morovic Fernandez-Yurtaev, Yerevan Olympiad 1996.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "B1: 4...Bc5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C28"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "12"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nc3 Bc5 {With this natural move Black develops his dark-squared bishop onto its most active square.} 5. f4 { The most aggressive move. White aims to reach a position that can also arise from the King's Gambit Declined.} d6 {Black has two noteworthy alternatives:} ( 5... O-O 6. Nf3 (6. f5) {, and now:} 6... Z0 (6... Ng4 7. Rf1 (7. Ng5 d5 8. exd5 exf4 9. dxc6 Qxg5 {was awful for White in A. Ledger-Yeo, British League 1998,}) ({but} 7. Qe2 {also looks fine}) 7... Nxh2 8. Rh1 Nxf3+ 9. Qxf3 {and White has the use of a very nice half-open h-file.}) (6... exf4 7. Bxf4 Na5 8. Bg5 Nxc4 9. dxc4 Be7 10. Qd4 d6 11. O-O-O Be6 12. e5 Ne8 13. Bxe7 Qxe7 14. Rhe1 {and White has some pressure in the centre, Skytte-De Vreugt, Yerevan 2000.})) (5... d5 6. Nxd5 Nxd5 7. Bxd5 Bxg1 8. Rxg1 Ne7 9. Bb3 exf4 10. Bxf4 Qd4 {. Here Korneev believes that Black has some compensation for the pawn, but after} 11. Rf1 {I don't see it.}) 6. Nf3 { With this move we transpose into a variation of the King's Gambit Declined, which arises after 1 e4 e5 2 f4 Bc5 3 Nf3 d6 4 Nc3 Nf6 5 Bc4 Nc6 6 d3. Theoretically speaking, Black hasn't found a clear route to equality from here, and from a practical viewpoint White has scored quite reasonably from this position (57% on my database; the average for White is 55%). Black now has three main moves:} Z0 ({B11:} 6... Bg4) ({B12:} 6... O-O) ({B13:} 6... a6) ({ After} 6... Ng4 {White has no need to venture into the complications of} 7. Ng5 {(they may well be good for White),} ({because} 7. Qe2 {leads to a safe and substantial advantage, for example} Bf2+ 8. Kf1 Nd4 9. Nxd4 Bxd4 10. f5 Qh4 11. g3 Qh3+ 12. Qg2 Qxg2+ 13. Kxg2 c6 14. Kf3 Nf6 15. Bg5 {and Black is very cramped, Kopal-Kalivoda, Czech Team Championship 1995.})) (6... Na5 { (this move is underrated)} 7. Bb3 (7. f5 {allows} Nxc4 8. dxc4 Bb4 9. Qd3 Bxc3+ 10. bxc3 {, after which White is left with the so-called 'Irish Pawn Centre' – not a recommendation!}) 7... Nxb3 8. axb3 a6 9. Qe2 {(preparing Be3) and now:} Z0 (9... Qe7 10. Be3 Bxe3 11. Qxe3 O-O (11... Bd7 12. fxe5 Ng4 13. Qd2 Nxe5 14. Nd5 {gave White the initiative in Mitkov-Rocha, Porto 2000}) 12. O-O {and White has a slight advantage.}) (9... Bg4 10. fxe5 (10. f5 h6 11. Be3 Bd4 12. O-O O-O 13. h3 Bxf3 14. Qxf3 Re8 {was equal in Tischbierek-Smagin, Dresden 1985}) 10... dxe5 11. Be3 {and White will continue with 0-0.})) (6... Be6 7. Bb5 a6 (7... Bd7 8. Na4 Nd4 9. Bxd7+ Nxd7 10. Nxc5 dxc5 11. O-O Nxf3+ 12. Qxf3 O-O 13. Qg3 {gives White good attacking chances on the kingside, Emms-Anand, Oakham 1986}) 8. Bxc6+ bxc6 9. f5 (9. fxe5 dxe5 10. Qe2 { and 11 Be3 also promises an advantage – Black has no real compensation for his split pawns on the queenside}) 9... Bc8 ({or} 9... Bd7 10. Qe2 Qb8 11. Nd1 Qb5 12. c3 a5 13. Be3 Bc8 14. O-O Ba6 15. c4 Qb6 16. Kh1 Bxe3 17. Nxe3 Nd7 18. g4 f6 19. g5 {with a clear advantage, Fedorov-Norri, European Team Championship, Pula 1997}) 10. h3 Qe7 11. g4 Bb7 12. Qe2 d5 13. Bd2 Nd7 14. O-O-O d4 15. Na4 Bd6 16. g5 {and White has the initiative on the kingside, W.Adams-Yerhoff, Pittsburgh 1946.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "B11: 6...Bg4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C30"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "14"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nc3 Bc5 5. f4 d6 6. Nf3 Bg4 {Pinning the knight. This is Black's most logical move and also the most popular.} 7. Na4 {White gets ready to exchange this knight for the bishop on c5. With this done, White will be able to castle kingside. Black now has two main tries:} Z0 ({ B111:} 7... Bxf3) ({B112:} 7... Bb6) ({Alternatively:} 7... Nh5 8. Nxc5 dxc5 9. f5 Nf6 10. Be3 Qd6 11. h3 Bxf3 12. Qxf3 Na5 13. Bb5+ c6 14. Ba4 b5 15. Bd2 Nb7 16. Bb3 {and White was better, J.Kristiansen-Nielsen, Danish Championship 1992.}) (7... Nd4 8. Nxc5 dxc5 9. c3 Nxf3+ 10. gxf3 Bh5 (10... Nxe4 11. O-O {wins material}) 11. Qe2 ({but now} 11. fxe5 {is answered by} Nxe4 ) 11... Qd6 ({or} 11... Qe7 12. O-O O-O-O 13. Qf2 Nd7 14. Qg3 {and I like White, Pantaleoni-Molzahn, correspondence 1993}) 12. Rg1 g6 13. fxe5 Qxe5 14. Be3 {and White's two bishops and pawn centre give him a clear advantage.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "B111: 7...Bxf3"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C30"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "32"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nc3 Bc5 5. f4 d6 6. Nf3 Bg4 7. Na4 Bxf3 8. Qxf3 Nd4 9. Qd1 ({For the record,} 9. Qg3 {is also promising, albeit in a more complicated way.}) 9... b5 10. Bxf7+ ({This sacrifice is much stronger than} 10. Nxc5 bxc4 11. fxe5 dxc5 12. exf6 Qxf6 {, which looks at least equal for Black.}) 10... Kxf7 11. Nxc5 dxc5 {Black should accept the material.} (11... exf4 12. Nb3 Ne6 ({or} 12... Nxb3 13. axb3 g5 14. O-O { , followed by g2-g3}) 13. O-O g5 14. g3 fxg3 15. Bxg5 gxh2+ 16. Kh1 Nxg5 17. Qh5+ Ke7 18. Qxg5 {left Black in big trouble in the game Lane-S.Jackson, British Championship 1989.}) 12. fxe5 Nd7 13. c3 {It was the Russian grandmaster Yuri Balashov who came up with this move;} ({which is more accurate than} 13. O-O+ Kg8 14. c3 Nxe5 {. As Tim Harding wrote in 'Bishop's Opening', 'Balashov's improvement appears to guarantee White a slight initiative at worst, and a winning attack if Black tries to hold his extra material. This is remarkable since White is undeveloped!' Nothing much has happened in the past 28 years to alter this assessment.}) 13... Ne6 ({ If Black tries to return the piece immediately with} 13... Nxe5 {, White has the very strong reply} 14. Qh5+ {and now:} Kg8 (14... g6 15. Qxe5 Nc2+ 16. Kd2 Nxa1 17. Rf1+ Kg8 18. Qe6+ Kg7 19. Rf7+ Kh6 20. Qh3+ Kg5 21. Kd1# {.}) (14... Ng6 15. Rf1+ Ke8 16. Bg5 Qd7 17. cxd4 Qxd4 18. O-O-O {and White has a clear plus – Black's king is stuck in the centre.}) (14... Ke6 15. Qh3+ (15. cxd4 Qxd4 16. Qf5+ Kd6 17. Bf4 Rad8 {is unclear – Harding}) 15... Kf7 ({or} 15... Kd6 16. cxd4 cxd4 17. Bf4 {and Black's king is on a dizzy walk}) 16. O-O+ Kg8 17. cxd4 Qxd4+ 18. Be3 Qd6 19. Rad1 {and again Black is in big trouble, for example} Qe7 20. Bxc5 Qxc5+ 21. d4 Qb6 22. Qh5 {.}) 15. Qxe5 Qh4+ ( 15... Nc2+ {loses after} 16. Kd2 Nxa1 17. Qe6+ Kf8 18. Rf1+) 16. g3 Nf3+ 17. Ke2 Nxe5 18. gxh4 {and White is a clear pawn ahead. Note that} Rd8 19. Bg5 Rxd3 {loses material after} 20. Bf4 {.}) 14. O-O+ Ke8 ({Also possible is} 14... Kg8 15. d4 cxd4 16. cxd4 Nxe5 ({Korchnoi's idea;} 16... h6 17. Qb3 Qe8 18. Be3 { leaves White with excellent compensation for the piece}) 17. dxe5 Qxd1 18. Rxd1 Kf7 {and White has an endgame advantage, Rahman-Lodhi, Dhaka 1995.}) 15. d4 cxd4 16. cxd4 {and now:} Z0 ({The stem game Balashov-Matanovic, Skopje 1970, concluded} 16... Qe7 17. Be3 Rf8 18. d5 Rxf1+ 19. Qxf1 Nd8 20. e6 Nf6 21. Rc1 Nxe4 22. Qxb5+ c6 23. Rxc6 Kf8 24. Rc1 Kg8 25. Rc7 Qd6 26. Qe8+ Qf8 27. Rxg7+ {1-0.}) ({Instead, Black should restrict White's advantage by giving back the piece with} 16... Nxe5 17. dxe5 Qxd1 18. Rxd1 Ke7 {.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "B112: 7...Bb6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C30"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "25"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nc3 Bc5 5. f4 d6 6. Nf3 Bg4 7. Na4 Bb6 { This move doesn't look too threatening, but in fact White must play carefully if he wants to keep the advantage.} 8. Nxb6 {This move is made automatically;} ({but there is some point to delaying it and playing} 8. c3 {instead. The main point is seen in the variation} exf4 9. Bxf4 Nh5 10. Bg5 Qxg5 (10... Bxf3 11. Bxf7+) 11. Bxf7+ Ke7 12. Nxg5 Bxd1 13. Rxd1 {(with an exchange on b6, the a-pawn would now be hanging)} Nf4 14. Nxb6 axb6 15. O-O h6 16. Rxf4 hxg5 17. Rff1 {and White went on to win in Jonkman-Ellenbroek, Leeuwarden 1995. Compare this to 9...exf4 below.}) 8... axb6 9. c3 { Alternatively:} (9. O-O {is the developing move White would like to play. Unfortunately Black can equalise with} Bxf3 ({but not} 9... Nd4 10. fxe5 dxe5 11. Bxf7+ {, as in Mitkov-Mikhalevski, Mamaia 1991}) 10. Rxf3 (10. gxf3 {is answered by} Na5 {,}) ({and} 10. Qxf3 {by} Nd4 11. Qd1 b5) 10... Nd4 11. Rg3 b5 12. c3 bxc4 13. cxd4 cxd3 14. Qxd3 O-O {.}) (9. a3 {has the same motive as 9 c3 – to retain the c4-bishop, However, White has problems as the d4-square isn't covered. After} exf4 10. Bxf4 Nh5 (10... d5 11. exd5 Nxd5 12. Qe2+ Kf8 {was unclear in Finkel-Mikhalevski, Israel 1999}) 11. Be3 (11. Bg5 Bxf3 12. Qxf3 Qxg5 13. Bxf7+ Kd8 14. Qxh5 Qxg2 {is probably a bit better for Black}) 11... Ne5 12. Bb3 Qf6 {Black has sufficient counterplay.}) 9... O-O (9... d5 10. exd5 Nxd5 11. h3 Bxf3 12. Qxf3 Nxf4 13. O-O O-O 14. Bxf4 exf4 15. Qxf4 Qd7 16. d4 {was better for White in Todorovic-Blagojevic, Herceg Novi 2001; he has a strong centre and a superior minor piece.}) ({ Interesting, however, is the immediate} 9... exf4 10. Bxf4 {. Stronger is} Nh5 ({after} 10... d5 11. exd5 Nxd5 12. Qe2+ Kf8 13. Bg3 {White has a clear advantage}) {, and now:} 11. Z0 (11. Bg5 {with a further split:} Z0 ( 11... Bxf3 12. Bxf7+ Kf8 (12... Kxf7 {loses to} 13. Qb3+) 13. Qxf3 Qxg5 14. Bxh5+ {and White is a pawn ahead.}) (11... f6 12. Be3 Ne5 13. Bb3 { sees the point of inducing ...f7-f6: Black queen has no route to the kingside.} ) (11... Qxg5 12. Bxf7+ Ke7 13. Nxg5 Bxd1 14. Kxd1 (14. Rxd1 h6 15. Bxh5 hxg5 16. Be2 Rxa2 {looks equal}) 14... Nf4 15. Bc4 Ne5 {and Black will regain his pawn.})) (11. Be3 Ne5 12. Bb3 (12. O-O Nxc4 13. dxc4 Qe7 {was fine for Black in Zukertort-Anderssen, Leipzig 1877,}) ({while} 12. Bb5+ c6 13. d4 Bxf3 14. gxf3 cxb5 15. dxe5 dxe5 16. Qxd8+ Rxd8 17. Bxb6 Rd3 {looks equal}) 12... Bxf3 13. gxf3 {. Black should play} Qf6 ({after} 13... Qh4+ 14. Kd2 { Keres assessed the position as better for White}) {, and now:} 14. Z0 (14. O-O Nf4 15. Bxf4 Qxf4 16. d4 Ng6 17. Qc1 {was equal in De Vilder-Kroeze, Bussum 1995.}) (14. d4 Qxf3 (14... Nxf3+ 15. Ke2 g5 16. Bd5 c6 17. e5) 15. Qxf3 Nxf3+ 16. Ke2 Nh4 17. Raf1 {and the two bishops and open lines gives White reasonable compensation for the pawn.}))) 10. O-O exf4 (10... d5 11. exd5 Nxd5 12. h3 Bxf3 13. Qxf3 Nxf4 14. Bxf4 exf4 15. Qxf4 {is better for White, as discussed in the note to Black's 9th move.}) ({After} 10... Na5 {White can keep the bishop with} 11. Bb5 {, for example} Qe7 12. b4 Nc6 13. f5 d5 14. Qe1 Na7 15. Ba4 dxe4 16. dxe4 Nc8 17. Bb3 {and White kept the advantage in Tait-Hawkins, correspondence 1993.}) 11. Bxf4 Nh5 ({After} 11... Ne5 12. Bxe5 dxe5 13. h3 Bxf3 14. Qxf3 Qe7 15. Rf2 {White will follow up with Raf1 and perhaps g2-g4-g5, increasing the pressure on f7.}) 12. Be3 ({Also possible is} 12. Qd2 Nxf4 13. Qxf4 {and now:} Z0 (13... Bxf3 14. Rxf3 Ne5 15. Rg3 Kh8 (15... Nxc4 {loses to} 16. Qh6 g6 17. Rh3) 16. Bb3 {and White is better, Kuijf-Leventic, Mitropa Cup 1995.}) (13... Be6 14. Bxe6 fxe6 15. Qg4 Rf6 16. d4 Qe7 {and Black has equalised, Torres-Pergericht, Novi Sad Olympiad 1990.})) 12... Ne5 13. Z0 ({After} 13. Bb3 Kh8 {(Arizmendi Martinez-Jonkman, Reykjavik 2000) Black has promising counterplay with ...f7-f5.}) ({The queen sacrifice with} 13. Nxe5 {looks more critical. Play continues with} Bxd1 14. Nxf7 Qe7 (14... Rxf7 15. Rxf7 {is good for White}) 15. Nxd6+ Kh8 16. Nf7+ Kg8 17. Raxd1 {(naturally White can take a draw via a perpetual, but why not play for more?)} Nf6 18. e5 b5 19. Bb3 c5 (19... Rxf7 20. Bd4) {, and now, White should play} 20. Bxc5 ({'Fritz'; instead of} 20. Rde1 c4 {, which was unclear in Mitkov-Sharif, Lyon 1993}) 20... Qxc5+ 21. d4 {, when White has the advantage despite having only a minor piece for the queen. For example} Qb6 ( 21... Qa7 22. exf6 gxf6 23. Rd3 {,}) ({or} 21... Qc7 22. exf6 gxf6 23. Rd3 $1 Rxf7 24. Rxf6) 22. exf6 gxf6 23. Ne5+ Kg7 24. Nd7 {.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "B12: 6...0-0"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C30"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "25"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nc3 Bc5 5. f4 d6 6. Nf3 O-O {A sensible looking move, but in some ways Black is just 'castling into it'.} 7. f5 { Establishing the impressive pawn wedge, which is the basis of a quick kingside attack.} ({White can also play for an advantage, as against 6...Bg4, with the move} 7. Na4 {, for example} Bb6 8. Nxb6 axb6 9. fxe5 (9. O-O Na5 {is annoying,}) ({while after} 9. a3 exf4 10. Bxf4 d5 11. exd5 Re8+ 12. Kf1 Nxd5 13. Bxd5 Qxd5 14. Bxc7 Bg4 {Black has compensation for the pawn}) 9... Nxe5 10. Nxe5 dxe5 11. Bg5 (11. O-O Qd4+ 12. Kh1 Nxe4 {;}) (11. Qf3) 11... Qd6 12. Qf3 Bg4 13. Qg3 Bh5 14. Qh4 {and White has an edge, Ochsner-A.Christiansen, Aarhus 1983.}) 7... h6 {Black takes steps to prevent the annoying pin with Bg5. Alternatives include:} (7... Na5 8. Bg5 c6 9. a3 b5 (9... Nxc4 10. dxc4 h6 11. Bh4 a5 12. Qd2 a4 13. g4 {gave White a strong attack in Nun-Lehner, Oberwart 1992}) 10. Ba2 Nb7 11. g4 {and White's initiative is very threatening, Becker-Lejlic, Berlin 1997.}) (7... Nd4 8. Bg5 c6 9. a3 h6 10. Bh4 b5 11. Ba2 a5 12. g4 g5 13. fxg6 Bxg4 14. Bxf7+ Kg7 15. Nxd4 Bxd4 {(Fischer-Puto, Cicero simultaneous 1964) and now the great man could have won with} 16. Bxf6+ Qxf6 17. Qxg4 Qf2+ 18. Kd1 {.}) 8. Nd5 (8. Qe2 {is dubious on account of} Nd4 9. Nxd4 exd4 10. Nd5 ({or} 10. Na4 Bxf5) 10... Nxd5 11. Bxd5 c6 12. Bb3 Bxf5 $1 {.}) (8. a3 {, giving the bishop an escape square on a2, is playable though. The game Jakubowski-Lopusiewicz, Koszalin 1998, continued} Nd4 9. Nxd4 exd4 10. Nd5 Nxd5 11. Bxd5 c6 12. Bb3 Qh4+ 13. g3 Qh3 14. Qf3 Re8 15. Rf1 d5 16. Bd2 Bd6 17. Rf2 Bd7 18. O-O-O dxe4 19. dxe4 c5 20. Bc4 h5 21. Qb3 Re7 22. Bg5 {and White went on to win the game.}) 8... Nd4 ({Black should consider } 8... Na5 {, although after} 9. Nxf6+ Qxf6 10. g4 Nxc4 11. dxc4 { White still has a powerful attack.}) 9. Nxf6+ Qxf6 10. Nxd4 Bxd4 11. c3 Bb6 12. Qh5 {. In the game Hebden-Martinovsky, London 1986, Black played} c6 { , and now Gary Lane's suggestion of} 13. g4 {gives White an awesome attack.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "B13: 6...a6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C30"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "13"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nc3 Bc5 5. f4 d6 6. Nf3 a6 {With this move Black expends a tempo in order to nullify the threat of Na4 and thus he preserves his dark-squared bishop. White has quite a few ways to proceed now, but I will just be concentrating on two suggestions:} 7. Z0 ({B131:} 7. f5) ({ B132:} 7. Nd5) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "B131: 7 f5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C30"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "20"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nc3 Bc5 5. f4 d6 6. Nf3 a6 7. f5 h6 {Once again Black takes steps to prevent Bg5.} ({The other possibility is here is to attack the bishop with} 7... Na5 {, for example} 8. a3 (8. Bg5 b5 9. Bb3 c6 10. Qd2 Qb6 {looks unclear}) 8... Nxc4 9. dxc4 h6 ({or} 9... c6 10. Bg5 b5 11. Qd3 bxc4 12. Qxc4 a5 13. Bxf6 gxf6 14. Na4 Ba6 15. Qc3 Ba7 16. Qxc6+ Ke7 17. O-O-O {with a clear advantage, Schlechter-Janowski, Budapest 1896}) { . After 9...h6 White can proceed in two ways:} 10. Z0 (10. Qd3 O-O 11. Be3 { gives White an edge according to 'ECO',} ({but not} 11. h3 Bxf5 {, as in Nikolaev-Faibisovich, USSR 1975.})) (10. Qe2 {also looks reasonable, for example} Bd7 11. Be3 Bxe3 12. Qxe3 b5 13. c5 O-O (13... Qb8 {is stronger}) 14. O-O-O Qb8 15. g4 Nxg4 16. Qd2 Kh8 17. Rhg1 Nf6 18. Rxg7 Kxg7 19. Rg1+ Kh7 20. Ng5+ Kh8 (20... hxg5 21. Qxg5 {wins}) 21. Ne6 Nh7 22. Qxh6 Rg8 23. Rg7 Rxg7 24. Qxg7# {, Hartston-Richardson, London 1983.})) 8. Nd5 ({ It's also possible to keep the light-squared bishop with} 8. a3 {and now:} Z0 (8... Ng4 9. Qe2 Bf2+ 10. Kf1 Ba7 11. h3 Nf6 12. g4 {and again Black is cramped on the kingside, Buchanan-Robertson, Scottish Championship 1996.}) ( 8... g6 9. fxg6 fxg6 10. Nd5 Nxd5 11. Bxd5 Qe7 {(Perez-Garcia Bueno, Mondariz 2000)} 12. Qe2 Be6 13. Bxc6+ bxc6 14. Be3 Bxe3 15. Qxe3 {and I prefer White: it's not clear what Black should do with his king.}) (8... Ne7 9. Qe2 g6 10. fxg6 Nxg6 11. Bd2 Nh5 12. g3 Ng7 13. Rf1 Be6 14. Bxe6 Nxe6 15. O-O-O c6 16. Be3 Qe7 17. Bxc5 dxc5 18. Qf2 O-O-O 19. Nd2 {with an edge, Schiffers-Von Bardeleben, Frankfurt 1887.}) (8... Qe7 9. Nd5 Nxd5 10. Bxd5 Bd7 11. c3 O-O-O 12. Qe2 g6 13. b4 Bb6 14. fxg6 fxg6 15. Be3 Bxe3 16. Qxe3 Nb8 17. O-O Rdf8 18. a4 {and White's pawn attack on the queenside is virtually decisive, Emms-Olesen, Hillerod 1995.}) (8... Nd4 {(a suggestion of the Scottish grandmaster Paul Motwani)} 9. Nxd4 Bxd4 10. Nd5 (10. Qf3) 10... Nxd5 11. Bxd5 c6 12. Bb3 g6 {with an unclear position.})) 8... Na5 {Given the chance, Black should whip the bishop off.} ({Instead} 8... Nd4 9. c3 Nxf3+ 10. Qxf3 c6 11. Nxf6+ Qxf6 12. g4 b5 13. Bb3 Bb7 14. h4 O-O-O 15. g5 Qe7 16. f6 gxf6 17. gxh6 {gave Black many problems in Tomescu-Bracaglia, Padova 1999.}) 9. b4 (9. Qe2 b5 10. Bb3 Nxb3 11. Nxf6+ Qxf6 12. axb3 Bb7 13. Be3 { , as in Gallagher-Davidovic, Szolnok 1987, is probably enough for a small advantage.}) 9... Nxd5 ({English GM Stuart Conquest gives the line} 9... Nxc4 10. Nxf6+ Qxf6 11. bxc5 Na5 12. Bb2 {, assessing the position as slightly better for White.}) 10. bxc5 Z0 ({The game Conquest-Smejkal, German Bundesliga 1996, continued} 10... Nf6 11. Bb3 dxc5 12. Nxe5 Nxb3 13. axb3 Qd4 (13... Bxf5 14. Bb2 Be6 15. O-O {gives White good play on the dark squares}) 14. Bf4 Nxe4 15. dxe4 Qxe4+ 16. Qe2 Qxe2+ 17. Kxe2 Bxf5 18. Kd2 {and White's knight was worth slightly more than Black's three extra pawns.}) ({In his notes to the game Conquest suggest} 10... Nxc4 {, giving the unclear continuation} 11. exd5 Na5 12. Bd2 b6 13. c6 (13. cxb6 cxb6 14. Bxa5 bxa5 15. O-O Bxf5 16. Nxe5 dxe5 17. Rxf5 Qxd5 18. d4 Qxd4+ 19. Qxd4 exd4 20. Re1+ {looks equal}) 13... Bxf5 14. O-O O-O 15. Qe1 {.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "B132: 7 Nd5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C30"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "17"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nc3 Bc5 5. f4 d6 6. Nf3 a6 7. Nd5 {This move has been played by the young Belarussian grandmaster Alexei Fedorov. It certainly makes more sense to move this knight to d5, now that Na4 is no longer effective.} Bg4 {Alternatives include:} (7... Be6 8. Nxf6+ Qxf6 9. f5 Bxc4 10. Bg5 {and White wins. This trick is well worth remembering.}) (7... b5 8. Nxf6+ Qxf6 9. Bd5 Bb7 10. fxe5 dxe5 11. Rf1 O-O 12. Ng5 {1-0 Delanoy-Carrasco, Paris 1994.}) (7... Nxd5 8. Bxd5 O-O ({after} 8... Qe7 9. c3 Bg4 10. h3 Bxf3 11. Qxf3 {White will continue with Bd2 and 0-0-0,}) ({while after} 8... Be6 9. Bxc6+ bxc6 10. fxe5 dxe5 {White plays} 11. Qe2 {and Be3}) 9. f5 {(here comes the attack!)} Nd4 10. c3 (10. Nxd4 Bxd4 11. Qh5 c6 12. Bb3 d5 13. c3 Ba7 14. Qf3 dxe4 15. dxe4 Qb6 16. Bd2 c5 17. O-O-O {was also good for White, Hresc-Wiechert, Kirchheim 1990}) 10... Nxf3+ 11. Qxf3 c6 12. Bb3 b5 13. h4 Kh8 14. g4 Ra7 15. Bg5 f6 ({or} 15... Qb6 16. f6 g6 17. Bh6) 16. Bd2 d5 17. O-O-O {and White's attack is stronger, Al.Sokolov-Karpatchev, Nizhnij Novgorod 1998.}) (7... Ng4 8. Qe2 Bf2+ 9. Kf1 ({this looks stronger than} 9. Kd1 {, which was played in Rahman-Booth, Los Angeles 1991}) 9... Nd4 10. Nxd4 Bxd4 11. c3 Ba7 12. h3 (12. f5) 12... Nf6 13. fxe5 dxe5 14. Bg5 Be6 15. Qf3 Bxd5 16. Bxd5 c6 17. Bb3 {and White can follow up with Ke2 and Rhf1.}) 8. c3 O-O {Again Black has a few alternatives:} (8... h6 {(preparing ...Be6)} 9. f5 (9. h3 Be6) 9... g6 10. fxg6 fxg6 11. b4 Ba7 12. Qe2 {and White will play Be3.}) (8... Nxd5 9. Bxd5 O-O (9... exf4 10. Bxf4 O-O 11. d4 Bb6 12. O-O { was good for White in Sonnet-Poupinel, correspondence – Black's bishop on b6 is out of the game}) 10. h3 (10. f5) 10... Be6 11. Bxc6 bxc6 12. f5 Bc8 { (Jackson-Bisguier, Ventura 1971) and here I like} 13. Qe2 {, planning Be3.}) ( 8... Nh5 9. f5 h6 (9... Ne7 10. Bg5 f6 11. Ne3 {is good for White – Bangiev} ) 10. b4 Ba7 11. Be3 Ne7 ({after} 11... Bxe3 12. Nxe3 Bxf3 13. Qxf3 Nf6 14. O-O O-O {White will continue with} 15. Kh1 {and g4-g5}) 12. Bxa7 Nxd5 13. Bxd5 Rxa7 14. O-O Nf4 15. Bb3 h5 16. d4 Qe7 17. Qd2 h4 18. Rae1 {and White was better, Fedorov-Fyllingen, Aars 1999.}) 9. Z0 {After 8...0-0 White has a few promising tries:} (9. h3 Bxf3 ({but not} 9... Be6 10. Nxf6+ Qxf6 11. f5 Bxc4 12. Bg5) 10. Qxf3 Na5 11. b4 Nxc4 12. Nxf6+ Qxf6 13. bxc5 Na5 14. cxd6 cxd6 15. O-O {.}) (9. b4 Ba7 10. h3 Bxf3 11. Qxf3 Nxd5 12. Bxd5 exf4 13. Bxf4 Qf6 14. Rc1 {and I like White's bishop pair, Sebestyen-Hermann, Sopot 1951.}) ( 9. f5 Nb8 10. h3 (10. Bg5) 10... Bxf3 11. Qxf3 Nxd5 12. Bxd5 c6 13. Bb3 a5 14. Qg4 Kh8 15. Bg5 f6 16. Bd2 a4 17. Be6 {and again White is a little better, Laird-Sharif, Jakarta 1978.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "B2: 4...Na5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C28"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "53"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nc3 Na5 {Despite Black breaking the 'golden rule' of moving the same piece twice in the opening, 4...Na5 should not be underestimated. We've already seen how effective it can be to exchange this knight for the light-squared bishop, so expending a couple of tempi to do this is by no means an extravagance.} ({Indeed, many white players see this as a spoiler's move, as the positions that arise are not as sharp as the ones arising after} 4... Bb4) ({or} 4... Bc5 5. f4 {.}) 5. Qf3 {A speciality of the Australian grandmaster Ian Rogers, this move has also recently found support elsewhere. The thinking behind this is that the queen is well placed on f3, so White moves it there before playing Nge2.} ({The older line is} 5. Nge2 Nxc4 (5... c6 {is also possible}) 6. dxc4 Bc5 7. O-O ({but not} 7. Bg5 Bxf2+) 7... d6 8. Qd3 {and now:} Z0 (8... c6 9. b3 (9. Na4) 9... Be6 10. Na4 Nd7 (10... Bb6 11. Ba3 Bc7 12. Rad1 {puts lots of pressure on d6}) 11. Nxc5 Nxc5 12. Qe3 b6 (12... Qe7 13. Ba3 b6 14. Bxc5 dxc5 15. f4 { gives White an bigger advantage}) 13. f4 f6 14. Ba3 Nb7 15. Nc3 (15. f5) 15... Qc7 16. Rad1 O-O-O 17. Bb2 {and White is more comfortable, Short-Karpov, Tilburg 1991.}) (8... Be6 {(this seems more reliable than 8...c6)} 9. b3 O-O 10. Be3 Bxe3 11. Qxe3 Kh8 12. Rad1 (12. f4) 12... b6 13. h3 Nd7 14. Ng3 { with an equal position, Tischbierek-Kuzmin, Biel 1993.})) 5... Nxc4 6. dxc4 d6 (6... Bb4 {is interesting. Rogers-Tunasly, Singapore 1997, continued} 7. Nge2 d6 8. h3 Be6 9. b3 Nd7 10. O-O O-O 11. Ng3 Qf6 12. Qxf6 Nxf6 13. Bb2 { and a roughly equal ending was reached.}) 7. Nge2 ({If White wants to avoid any ...Bg4 ideas, then playing} 7. h3 {now looks like a good idea.}) 7... Be6 ( {Or} 7... Bg4 8. Qg3 Bxe2 9. Kxe2 {(White can get away with 'castling by hand' as the centre is fairly closed)} Be7 10. Rd1 O-O 11. Kf1 Qd7 12. Kg1 Qe6 13. b3 c6 14. a4 Bd8 15. a5 a6 16. h3 Bc7 {with a level position, Rogers-Beliavsky, Polanica Zdroj 1996.}) 8. b3 Be7 ({After} 8... c6 9. Be3 Be7 10. h3 O-O 11. g4 Qa5 12. Bd2 Qc7 13. Rg1 {White can play for a kingside attack.}) 9. h3 O-O 10. O-O c6 {Gaining some control over d5 but, at the same time, weakening the d6-pawn.} ({A.Ledger-Spanton, Port Erin 1998 went instead} 10... Nd7 11. Ng3 Bg5 12. Nd5 Bxc1 13. Raxc1 Bxd5 14. cxd5 g6 15. c4 a5 16. Rfe1 Qg5 17. Qg4 Qxg4 18. hxg4 {and White held an endgame advantage. The rest of the game is quite instructive:} b6 19. f3 Kg7 20. Kf2 Nf6 21. a3 Nd7 22. Rc3 Rh8 23. Rh1 h6 24. Ke3 Rhe8 25. Ne2 Ra7 26. Rcc1 Nc5 27. Rb1 Rc8 28. Nc3 Nd7 29. Nb5 Raa8 30. Rh2 Nf6 31. Rbh1 h5 32. g5 Nd7 33. g4 hxg4 34. Nxc7 Rab8 35. Ne6+ {1-0.}) 11. Rd1 Qc7 12. Ng3 Rfd8 13. a4 a5 14. Ba3 {. White's position is slightly more comfortable; Black must always be aware of pressure on his vulnerable d6-pawn. The game Rogers-Sinclair, New Zealand Championship, continued} Rd7 15. Rd2 Rad8 16. Nd5 cxd5 17. cxd5 Rc8 18. c4 Bxd5 19. exd5 Qb6 20. Re1 Bf8 21. Rde2 Ra8 22. Nf5 Rc7 23. Qe3 Qxe3 24. Rxe3 Rd8 25. Rf3 Ne8 26. g4 g6 27. Ng3 {and Rogers eventually converted his advantage.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "B3: 4...Bb4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C28"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "15"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nc3 Bb4 {This move is considered by many leading players to be Black's safest response at move four. I also gave this as my recommendation for Black in 'Play the Open Games as Black'. By pinning the knight Black prepares the freeing advance ...d7-d5, which in turn makes White very wary of opening up too quickly with f2-f4.} 5. Nge2 {Protecting the knight on c3 and keeping the option open of playing f2-f4.} ({The immediate} 5. f4 d5 6. exd5 Nxd5 7. Nge2 Bg4 {gives Black very active play.}) ({5 Ne2 is sharper than the alternatives} 5. Bg5) ({and} 5. Nf3 {.}) 5... d5 ({The most consistent reply. Against other moves White can castle and then play for f2-f4. For example,} 5... O-O 6. Bg5 h6 7. Bxf6 Qxf6 8. O-O d6 9. Nd5 Qd8 10. c3 Ba5 11. b4 Bb6 12. a4 a6 13. Nxb6 cxb6 14. f4 {and White was better, Malivanek-Kulhanek, Czech Team Championship 1998.}) 6. exd5 Nxd5 7. O-O Be6 { Protecting the knight is the most popular choice.} ({Black does have two major alternatives:} 7... Bxc3 8. Nxc3 Nxc3 9. bxc3 O-O 10. f4 Na5 11. Bb3 exf4 12. Bxf4 Nxb3 13. axb3 Qd5 ({or} 13... f6 14. Qh5 Be6 15. Rfe1 Re8 16. Qc5 { and White won a pawn in Mirumian-Biolek, Czech Team Championship 1998}) 14. Qe1 f6 15. Qg3 c5 16. c4 {(White has a nice diamond shaped pawn structure!)} Qc6 17. c3 b6 18. d4 cxd4 19. cxd4 b5 20. d5 Qc5+ 21. Kh1 Rd8 22. Be3 Qe7 23. Bd4 { and White's passed pawns are very threatening, Lengyel-Von Buelow, Vienna 1996. }) (7... Nxc3 8. bxc3 {and now:} Z0 (8... Bd6 9. f4 ({or} 9. Ng3 O-O 10. Qh5 $5) 9... O-O 10. f5 Qh4 (10... Na5 {looks stronger}) 11. Bd5 Ne7 12. Be4 Qh5 13. Qe1 f6 14. Be3 Kh8 15. Rf3 {and White has the makings of a strong kingside attack, Levitsky-Nikolaev, Kiev 1903.}) (8... Be7 9. Ng3 (9. f4) 9... Na5 10. Bb3 O-O 11. Qh5 Nxb3 12. axb3 Re8 13. Re1 Be6 14. Bb2 ({there doesn't seem too much wrong with grabbing a pawn by} 14. Rxe5) 14... f6 15. d4 Bd6 16. Ne4 Bf7 17. Qf3 exd4 18. cxd4 Bb4 19. c3 Bf8 20. c4 {and White was more active, A. Ledger-Mestel, British Championship 1997.}) (8... Bc5 9. d4 (9. Ng3 O-O 10. Re1 ({but White could try} 10. Qh5) 10... Qh4 11. Re4 Qf6 12. Qe2 Bd7 13. Rb1 b6 {was equal in D.Ledger-Kennaugh, British Championship 1998}) 9... Z0 { After 9 d4 it's very risky for Black to accept the pawn sacrifice:} (9... exd4 10. cxd4 Nxd4 11. Nxd4 Qxd4 ({after} 11... Bxd4 12. Ba3 {looks strong –} Bxa1 {loses after} 13. Qe2+ Be6 14. Bxe6 Bf6 15. Bb3+ Be7 16. Re1) 12. Qe2+ Kf8 13. Be3 Qe5 14. Bxc5+ Qxc5 15. Rad1 {and White has more than enough compensation for the pawn.}) (9... Bd6 10. a4 O-O 11. a5 a6 12. Ng3 { was interesting in Richards-Ford, British League 1999. Note that it's too risky for Black to try and win a pawn with} exd4 13. cxd4 Bxg3 {, as after} 14. fxg3 Qxd4+ 15. Qxd4 Nxd4 16. Ba3 {White keeps the advantage.}))) 8. Z0 { After 7...Be6 I'm giving two possibilities for White:} ({B31:} 8. Bxd5) ({B32: } 8. Ne4) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "B31: 8 Bxd5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C28"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "32"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. Nge2 d5 6. exd5 Nxd5 7. O-O Be6 8. Bxd5 {Traditionally this has been White's most popular choice. The knight is removed from d5 in preparation for f2-f4.} Bxd5 9. f4 O-O ({Preparing to castle queenside with} 9... Qd7 {is probably too slow. White can immediately gain a tempo with} 10. Nxd5 {, and after} Qxd5 11. fxe5 O-O-O 12. c3 Be7 13. d4 Nxe5 14. Nf4 Qd7 15. Qb3 {White is in control.}) 10. f5 {The point of White's previous play. Instead of meekly exchanging on e5, the f-pawn moves further forward and acts as a spearhead for a white attack on the kingside.} Bxc3 { A difficult decision to have to make. With this move Black gives up the bishop pair and cedes the d4-square as a possible outpost. On the other hand, White's queenside pawn structure is compromised, and, if kept, the dark-squared bishop could actually prove to be a liability.} ({The other main option is} 10... f6 { and now:} 11. Z0 (11. Ng3 Bf7 12. Nce4 (12. Be3 Ba5 13. Kh1 Bb6 14. Bd2 a5 15. a3 Nd4 16. Rc1 Qe7 17. Nce4 c5 18. Qg4 Rfd8 19. Be3 a4 20. Rf2 Ra6 {was unclear in Mitkov-Motwani, Yerevan Olympiad 1996}) 12... Kh8 13. a3 Ba5 14. Kh1 Nd4 15. Be3 {with a tense position, Mitkov-Norri, European Team Championship, Pula 1997.}) (11. Nxd5 {(it seems logical to eliminate Black's light-squared bishop)} Qxd5 12. Ng3 {and then:} Z0 (12... Bc5+ 13. Kh1 Rad8 14. Ne4 Bb6 15. Bd2 {and here Black should offer the exchange of bishops with} Ba5 {.} ({ Instead Emms-Eames, London 1997, continued} 15... Nd4 {, which lost material after} 16. c4 Qc6 17. c5 Bxc5 18. Rc1 b6 19. b4 {.})) (12... Rf7 13. Ne4 Bf8 14. Be3 b6 15. Qh5 {was better for White in Kosteniuk-Shchekachev, Moscow 2000 – White can follow up with Rf3-h3.}))) 11. bxc3 f6 12. Ng3 (12. c4 $6 {is inaccurate: Emms-Parker, Cambridge 1996, continued} Bf7 13. Rb1 Bh5 14. Qe1 Bxe2 15. Qxe2 b6 16. Be3 {and now instead of} Nd4 {,} ({Black should play} 16... Qd6 17. Rf3 Nd4 18. Bxd4 Qxd4+ 19. Qf2 Rfd8 {, when if anything Black is better due to White's inferior pawn structure.})) 12... Re8 (12... Ne7 13. c4 Bc6 14. Ba3 Qd7 15. Qg4 {looks promising for White.}) 13. Qg4 Kh8 { . We are following the game A.Ledger-Twyble, British League 1999. After} 14. a4 Qd7 15. Ba3 Rad8 16. Rae1 e4 {a very unclear position arose.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "B32: 8 Ne4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C28"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "20"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. Nge2 d5 6. exd5 Nxd5 7. O-O Be6 8. Ne4 {This move has been played with some success by the young Romanian player Vigen Mirumian. I think I underestimated the strength of this move when studying it for 'Play the Open Games as Black'. Objectively speaking, Black should be okay, but he has to play accurately.} Be7 {Alternatively:} (8... h6 9. N2g3 Qd7 10. Nh5 O-O-O (10... O-O {allows} 11. Bxd5 {followed by Nf6+! }) 11. Nxg7 Bg4 12. f3 f5 13. fxg4 fxe4 14. dxe4 Qxg7 15. Bxd5 Bc5+ 16. Kh1 { and White went on to win in Mirumian-Brestak, Komarno 1997.}) (8... Qd7 9. Ng5 O-O-O 10. Nxe6 Qxe6 11. a3 Bc5 12. b4 Bf8 13. Nc3 Nce7 14. Qf3 c6 15. Re1 { and White has strong pressure, Mirumian-Kolar, Czech Team Championship 1998.}) (8... O-O 9. Ng5 (9. N2g3 {may be stronger}) 9... Bg4 10. f3 Bh5 11. Ne4 Kh8 12. N4g3 Bg6 13. Kh1 Nce7 14. f4 exf4 15. Nxf4 Nxf4 16. Bxf4 Bd6 17. Qf3 Bxf4 18. Qxf4 {was equal in Winawer-Alapin, Berlin 1897.}) 9. N2g3 (9. f4 { loses material after} exf4 10. Nxf4 Nxf4 11. Bxf4 Qd4+ 12. Kh1 Bxc4) ({while } 9. Bb3 O-O 10. f4 exf4 11. Nxf4 Nxf4 12. Bxf4 Nd4 {was equal in Belkhodja-Hebden, French League 1988.}) 9... O-O {Or:} (9... f5 10. Ng5 Bxg5 11. Qh5+ g6 12. Qxg5 Qxg5 13. Bxg5 f4 14. Ne4 Kf7 15. f3 (15. Bh6 { looks stronger}) 15... h6 16. Bxd5 Bxd5 17. Bh4 Bxe4 18. dxe4 g5 19. Bf2 Rhd8 20. Rfd1 {with an equal ending, Maidla-Tiilikainen, Tuusula 1997.}) (9... Qd7 10. Ng5 Bxg5 11. Bxg5 f6 12. Bd2 O-O-O 13. Ne4 Qe7 14. Rb1 Kb8 15. b4 {and White can attack on the queenside, Huber-Wenaas, North Bay 1998.}) 10. Qh5 Z0 ({Now the game Mirumian-Barglowski, Trinec 1998, continued} 10... Qd7 11. Ng5 Bxg5 12. Bxg5 f6 13. Bd2 Nb6 14. Bxe6+ Qxe6 15. f4 exf4 16. Rxf4 Qe5 17. Nf5 {and White had a strong attack.}) (10... Nf4 {, however, looks more resilient. In Dumont-Cipolli, Sao Paulo 1995, Black equalised after} 11. Bxf4 exf4 12. Ne2 g6 13. Qf3 Bxc4 14. dxc4 Nd4 15. Nxd4 Qxd4 16. b3 f5 17. Nc3 c6 18. Ne2 (18. Rad1) 18... Qe4 19. Nxf4 Qxc2 20. Rae1 Bb4 21. Re2 Qc3 {.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "C: 3...Bc5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "10"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Bc5 {Another natural move. Black develops his dark-squared bishop and prepares to castle.} 4. Nc3 {Keeping the option open of f2-f4.} d6 ({Also possible is} 4... c6 {and now:} 5. Z0 (5. f4 exf4 (5... d6 {see Short-Speelman below}) 6. Bxf4 (6. e5 d5 7. exf6 Qxf6 { looks at least equal for Black}) 6... d5 7. exd5 cxd5 8. Bb5+ Nc6 9. d4 Bb6 10. Nf3 O-O 11. O-O Bg4 12. Ne2 Ne4 13. c3 f6 14. Bd3 Qd7 15. Qb3 Rae8 16. Rae1 { with a roughly level position, Jaksland-Cooper, Hastings 1995.}) (5. Nf3 d6 ( 5... d5 6. Bb3 dxe4 7. Ng5 O-O 8. Ngxe4 {looks nice for White}) 6. O-O O-O ( 6... Bb6 7. d4 Nbd7 8. Be3 Bc7 9. Ng5 O-O 10. Bxf7+ Rxf7 11. Ne6 Qe7 12. Nxc7 Rb8 13. dxe5 Nxe5 14. Bxa7 Qxc7 15. Bxb8 Qxb8 16. Qd4 {was better for White in Tischbierek-I.Sokolov, Antwerp 1998}) 7. Ne2 Qe7 {and now White should continue with} 8. Bb3 Nbd7 9. Ng3 {.})) 5. f4 {White once again aims to transpose into the King's Gambit Declined, but here Black has extra options: } Z0 ({C1:} 5... Ng4) ({C2:} 5... Be6) ({Alternatively:} 5... Nc6 6. Nf3 { transposes to Variation B1.}) (5... c6 6. Nf3 b5 7. Bb3 Qe7 8. Qe2 (8. Rf1) 8... Nbd7 9. Rf1 Bb4 (9... Bb6 {, intending ...Nc5, may be stronger}) 10. fxe5 dxe5 {(Short-Speelman, London (2nd matchgame) 1991) and now} 11. Qf2 O-O 12. Nh4 {looks strong for White.}) (5... Bxg1 {(this exchange on g1 is rarely good for Black, as White can always castle long)} 6. Rxg1 Bg4 7. Qd2 exf4 8. Qxf4 Nbd7 9. h3 Bh5 10. g4 Bg6 11. h4 {was good for White in Tartakower-Jankowitsch, Hamburg 1910.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "C1: 5...Ng4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C27"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "37"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Bc5 4. Nc3 d6 5. f4 Ng4 {This looks very enticing for Black, but in fact it's White who has all the fun!} 6. f5 {The only move, but a good one.} Nf2 ({Or:} 6... h5 7. Nh3 Qh4+ 8. Kf1 Ne3+ 9. Bxe3 Bxe3 10. Nd5 Bb6 11. Qd2 {gives White a clear advantage, Honfi-Witkowski, Munich Olympiad 1958.}) (6... Qh4+ 7. g3 Qh5 ({or} 7... Bf2+ 8. Kf1 Bxg3 9. hxg3 Qxh1 10. Qxg4) 8. h3 Bxg1 9. Qxg4 Qxg4 10. hxg4 Bb6 11. g5 {and White makes use of the half-open h-file.}) 7. Qh5 {Now Black must deal with the threat of mate.} g6 {Other defences are:} (7... Qd7 8. Be6 Qe7 9. Nd5 g6 10. Qh6 Qf8 11. Bxc8 Nxh1 12. Bxb7 Bxg1 13. Bxa8 Kd7 14. Qxf8 Rxf8 15. Bh6 {and Black resigned, Emms-A.Jackson, Port Erin 1999.}) (7... O-O 8. Bg5 Qe8 9. Nd5 Nxh1 ({or} 9... Nd7 10. Nxc7) 10. Nf6+ gxf6 11. Bxf6 {and Black cannot prevent mate.}) (7... Rf8 {(this may be the most resilient)} 8. Bg5 (8. Nf3 Nxh1 9. Ng5 { is also a very dangerous attack}) 8... g6 (8... Qd7 9. Be6 Qc6 10. Bxc8 Nxh1 11. O-O-O {requires further investigation!}) 9. Qh6 f6 10. fxg6 hxg6 11. Qxg6+ Kd7 12. Bh6 Nxh1 13. Qg7+ Qe7 14. Qxf8 Qxf8 15. Bxf8 Bxg1 16. Ke2 {and White is better.}) 8. Qh6 Nxh1 ({There's no time to turn back:} 8... Ng4 9. Qg7 Qf6 10. Bxf7+ {wins for White.}) 9. Bg5 f6 10. fxg6 (10. Qg7 Rf8 11. Nd5 Nd7 {is less clear.}) 10... fxg5 ({Or} 10... hxg6 11. Qxh8+ Kd7 12. Be6+ Ke7 13. Qxf6+ {and White wins.}) 11. g7 Kd7 ({After} 11... Rg8 {White simply captures on g8 and then promotes the g-pawn.}) 12. Qe6+ Kc6 13. Qd5+ Kd7 (13... Kb6 14. Na4+ Ka5 15. Nxc5 {is winning for White.}) 14. Qf7+ Kc6 15. Bb5+ Kb6 16. Be8 {I like this move very much! White uses the motifs of line clearance (the b-file) and interference (the eighth rank) to come up with a stunning way to win.} Qxe8 17. Qb3+ Ka6 18. gxh8=Q {and White wins; i.e. } Qxh8 19. Qb5# {.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "C2: 5...Be6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C27"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "33"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Bc5 4. Nc3 d6 5. f4 Be6 {A more sober approach from Black.} 6. Bxe6 (6. Bb3 Nc6 7. Nf3 {looks like a playable alternative for White. Following} O-O {I like} 8. Na4 {.}) 6... fxe6 7. Nf3 (7. fxe5 dxe5 8. Qe2 Nc6 9. Be3 Bxe3 10. Qxe3 O-O {was equal in Spielmann-Tarrasch, Bad Kissingen 1928.}) 7... exf4 (7... O-O {is met by} 8. Na4 {.}) ({After} 7... a6 8. fxe5 dxe5 9. Nxe5 ({White should be content with} 9. Bg5) 9... Qd4 10. Ng4 Nxg4 11. Qxg4 Qf2+ 12. Kd1 O-O {Black had an attack in Vasiesiu-Olarasu, Sovata 1998.}) 8. Bxf4 O-O 9. Na4 Bb4+ (9... Nxe4 { loses to} 10. dxe4 Rxf4 11. Nxc5 {.}) 10. c3 Ba5 11. b4 Bb6 12. Nxb6 axb6 13. O-O Nc6 ({Now} 13... Nxe4 {is met by} 14. Nd4 Nxc3 15. Qd2 {.}) 14. b5 Ne7 15. Qb3 Qd7 16. Nd4 d5 {. We are following the game Short-Speelman, London (4th matchgame) 1991. Here Kavalek suggests} 17. Bg5 {, leaving White with an advantage.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "D: 3...d5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "33"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 d5 {This move is just about playable, but probably a bit too ambitious. Black's e5-pawn comes under tremendous pressure early on. Indeed, in the main line, Black sacrifices the pawn, but practice has shown that he doesn't get enough compensation.} 4. exd5 Nxd5 5. Nf3 Nc6 ( 5... Bg4 6. h3 Bxf3 7. Qxf3 c6 8. O-O {is obviously nice for White.}) 6. O-O Be7 ({A major alternative here is} 6... Bg4 7. Re1 {and now:} Be7 { transposes to the note to Black's seventh move.} (7... f6 {loses to the trick} 8. Nxe5 {.}) (7... Bc5 8. h3 ({now} 8. Nxe5 {loses to} Bxf2+ 9. Kxf2 Qh4+) 8... Bh5 9. d4 Bxd4 10. g4 {and White wins material.}) ( 7... Qd6 {(the best move; I can find nothing devastating against this)} 8. h3 Bh5 9. Nc3 (9. d4 Bxf3 10. Qxf3 Nxd4 11. Qxd5 Qxd5 12. Bxd5 Nxc2 { is very unclear}) 9... Nxc3 10. bxc3 Be7 {and White is better, but Black's position is quite playable.})) 7. Re1 Nb6 ({Or} 7... Bg4 8. h3 Bxf3 (8... Bh5 9. g4 Bg6 10. Nxe5 Nxe5 11. Rxe5 Nb6 12. Bb3 {transposes to the text}) 9. Qxf3 Nd4 (9... Nf6 10. Bb5 Qd6 11. Bxc6+ bxc6 12. Qg3 {is clearly better for White – Larsen}) 10. Qg4 Nxc2 ({after} 10... O-O 11. Rxe5 Nf6 12. Qd1 {White is just a clear pawn ahead, Larsen-Berger, Amsterdam 1964}) 11. Rxe5 c6 ({or} 11... Nxa1 12. Qxg7 Rf8 13. Bh6 Kd7 14. Rxd5+ Bd6 15. Qg4+) 12. Qxg7 Rf8 13. Rxd5 {and White wins.}) 8. Bb3 Bg4 {With this move Black is ready to sacrifice a pawn.} (8... Bf6 9. Nc3 ({but} 9. Bf4 {looks even stronger}) 9... O-O 10. h3 Bf5 11. Ne4 {was good for White in Vallejo Pons-Baena, Cala Galdana 1994.}) 9. h3 Bh5 10. g4 Bg6 11. Nxe5 Nxe5 12. Rxe5 O-O 13. Nc3 Kh8 14. Bd2 { . Black has some compensation for the pawn in the shape of White's loose kingside, but White is well developed to cope with this. Play continues with} f5 15. Qf1 Bd6 16. Re2 Be8 {and now:} 17. Z0 ({both} 17. gxf5 Bh5 18. Be6 Bxe2 19. Qxe2 Nd7 20. Ne4 Be7 21. Bc3 Bf6 22. Nxf6 Nxf6 23. Kh1 c5 24. Rg1 { (Kuczynski-Breutigam, Germany Bundesliga 1996)}) ({and} 17. Be6 fxg4 18. hxg4 Bc6 19. Ne4 {(Dolmatov-Chekhov, USSR Championship 1980) led to white victories. }) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays 2...Nf6"] [Black "E: 3...Be7"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "47"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Be7 {At first sight this looks like a passive move, but it's actually quite deceptive. Black plans to castle quickly and then strike in the centre with ...d7-d5 (with or without ...c7-c6).} 4. Nc3 O-O { Alternatively:} (4... Nc6 5. f4 d6 6. Nf3 {transposes to Variation B, note to Black's fourth moves.}) (4... c6 5. Nf3 O-O (5... d6 6. O-O O-O {transposes} ) 6. O-O (6. Nxe5 d5 7. Bb3 d4 8. Nxf7 Rxf7 9. Ne2 {looks interesting}) 6... d6 7. h3 b5 8. Bb3 Nbd7 9. a3 (9. Be3 Qc7 10. a4 b4 11. Ne2 d5 12. exd5 cxd5 13. Rc1 d4 14. Bd2 Bb7 15. Ng3 a5 {was unclear in Vogt-Garcia Gonzales, Leningrad 1977}) 9... Nc5 10. Ba2 Be6 11. Bxe6 Nxe6 12. d4 {and White was slightly better in the game Mirumian-Comp P ConNers (a computer), Lippstadt 1999.}) 5. f4 exf4 (5... d6 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. O-O {once again transposes to Variation B, note to Black's fourth moves. In general Black is trying to avoid playing the passive ...d7-d6.}) 6. Bxf4 c6 7. e5 Ne8 {Black has two interesting alternatives:} (7... d5 8. exf6 Bb4 9. Bb3 Qxf6 (9... Re8+ 10. Kf1 Qxf6 11. Qf3 Bxc3 12. bxc3 Qxc3 13. Rb1 {and White won, Keogh-De Bruycker, Ostend 1975}) 10. Nge2 d4 11. O-O dxc3 12. Bxb8 Qe7 13. bxc3 Bc5+ 14. d4 { and White is winning, Pulkkinen-Norri, Finnish Championship 1995.}) (7... Nd5 $5 8. Bxd5 (8. Nxd5 cxd5 9. Bb3 d6 10. Nf3 dxe5 11. Nxe5 {looks interesting}) 8... cxd5 9. Nxd5 d6 10. Qf3 Nc6 11. exd6 Bxd6 12. Ne2 Bxf4 13. Ndxf4 Nb4 14. Kd2 Bd7 {and Black has some compensation for the pawn, Pulkkinen-Pihlajasalo, Finnish Team Championship 1997.}) 8. Nf3 ({Another idea here is} 8. d4 { , for example} Bg5 ({or} 8... d5 9. Bd3) 9. Qd2 Bxf4 10. Qxf4 d6 11. Nf3 dxe5 12. dxe5 Be6 13. Bd3 f6 14. O-O-O {and White has a good lead in development, Del Rio-Kopp, Hessen 1992.}) 8... d5 9. exd6 Nxd6 ({Or} 9... Bxd6 10. Qd2 Qc7 11. Be3 Bg4 12. Ne4 Nd7 13. O-O Bxf3 14. gxf3 Nb6 15. Bb3 Nd5 16. f4 Rd8 17. Rae1 Kh8 18. Kh1 {and White is more active, Larsen-Nikolic, Buenos Aires 1992.}) 10. Bb3 Nd7 11. d4 Nb6 ({After} 11... Nf6 12. O-O Bg4 13. Qd2 Nfe4 14. Nxe4 Nxe4 15. Qe3 Nf6 16. Rae1 {White has a good attacking position, Pulkkinen-Salimaki, Helsinki 1999. This whole line seems to be something of a Finnish speciality!}) 12. O-O Bg4 13. Qd3 {. White has a good attacking position, with play on the half-open f-file and a powerful bishop on b3. Kharlov-Kuzmin, Alushta 1992, continued} Bf5 14. Qe2 Bg4 15. Rad1 Bf6 16. Qf2 Bh5 17. d5 Bxf3 18. Qxf3 Bxc3 19. dxc6 Bb4 20. cxb7 Rb8 21. Qc6 Rxb7 22. Rxd6 Bxd6 23. Qxb7 Bc5+ 24. Kh1 {and White went on to win.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Second Moves for Black"] [Black "Introduction"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "4"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 {. Now 2...Nf6 is by far Black's most popular choice against the Bishop's Opening. There are, however, quite a few playable alternatives, although sometimes these merely transpose to 2...Nf6 lines. We shall look at the following lines:} Z0 ({A:} 2... Nc6) ({B:} 2... Bc5) ({C:} 2... c6) ({Or:} 2... d6 {could well transpose into earlier lines involving ...d7-d6. One independent example is} 3. Nc3 Be6 4. d3 Nf6 5. Nge2 Be7 6. O-O O-O 7. Bxe6 fxe6 8. d4 Nc6 9. d5 exd5 10. exd5 Nb8 11. Ng3 Nbd7 12. f4 {and White was better in Vogt-Braun, Strausberg 1971.}) (2... f5 {is the so-called Calabrese Counter Gambit; this looks incredibly risky, but it's not that bad! Here are a couple of interesting tries for White:} 3. Z0 (3. d3 Nf6 {and now:} 4. Z0 (4. f4 {is given by 'ECO' (amongst others), but} Nc6 {seems an effective reply, for example} 5. Nf3 fxe4 6. dxe4 Nxe4 7. fxe5 (7. Qd5 {;}) (7. Bd5 Nf6 8. fxe5 Nxd5 9. Qxd5 d6 {looks equal}) 7... Nxe5 {, as in Emms-Lyell, British Championship 1986.}) (4. Nf3 {looks more sensible. After} Nc6 5. O-O Bc5 6. Nc3 d6 7. Bg5 {it's Black who's playing the King's Gambit Declined with a tempo less. White can try to make use of this extra tempo, for example,} Na5 8. Bxf6 Qxf6 9. Nd5 Qd8 10. b4 Nxc4 11. bxc5 fxe4 12. dxc4 exf3 13. Qxf3 { and White is better.})) (3. f4 {(why not?)} exf4 ({or} 3... Nf6 4. fxe5 Nxe4 5. Nf3 {, after which Black has trouble castling;}) (3... Nc6 {look interesting}) 4. Nc3 Qh4+ (4... d5 5. Nxd5) (4... Nf6 5. d3 c6 6. Bxf4 d5 7. exd5 cxd5 8. Bb3 Bb4 9. Qe2+ Kf7 10. Nf3 Re8 11. Ne5+ Kf8 12. d4 {was better for White in Westerinen-Kiltti, Jyvaskyla 1994; both this and the next reference came via the move order 1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Bc4 f5!?}) 5. Kf1 Nf6 ( 5... fxe4 6. Nxe4 Nf6 7. Nf3 Qh5 8. Nxf6+ gxf6 9. d4 {looks good for White}) 6. Nf3 Qh5 7. d3 fxe4 8. dxe4 Qc5 9. Qe2 g5 10. e5 {and White has a strong attack, Anderssen-Mayet, Berlin 1855.})) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Second Moves for Black"] [Black "A: 2...Nc6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C23"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "8"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nc6 3. Nc3 Bc5 ({Instead:} 3... Nf6 {transposes to 2...Nf6 3 Bc4 Nc6.}) (3... d6 4. d3 ({or, for the more adventurous,} 4. f4 exf4 5. d4 Qh4+ 6. Kf1 Bg4 7. Qd3) 4... Na5 5. Bb3 (5. f4) 5... Nxb3 6. axb3 { and White follows up with f2-f4.}) (3... g6 4. d3 {, followed by f2-f4.}) 4. Qg4 {This aggressive move contains a devilish trap and causes Black quite a few problems.} ({For the more sedate minded White can play} 4. d3 d6 {, transposing to Variation B,} ({although Black could also try} 4... Na5 {.})) 4... Z0 {After 4 Qg4!? Black must decide what to do about the attack on the g7-pawn. He has two main options, both of which result in a weakening of his position:} ({A1:} 4... Qf6) ({A2:} 4... g6) ({Or} 4... Kf8 5. Qg3 d6 ({ alternatively,} 5... Nf6 6. Nge2 d6 7. d3 h6 8. Na4 Bb6 9. Nxb6 axb6 10. f4 { was better for White in the game Rogers-Olarasu, Saint Vincent 2001}) 6. Nge2 Nd4 7. Nxd4 exd4 8. Na4 Be6 9. Bxe6 fxe6 10. Nxc5 dxc5 11. Qb3 Qc8 12. Qf3+ Ke7 13. Qg3 Kf7 14. Qf4+ Kg6 15. Qg4+ Kf6 16. d3 {and Black's king was very uncomfortably placed, Anand-Ravisekhar, New Delhi 1986.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Second Moves for Black"] [Black "A1: 4...Qf6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C25"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "31"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nc6 3. Nc3 Bc5 4. Qg4 Qf6 {A very natural reaction, defending g7 and attacking f2 at the same time, but...} 5. Nd5 Qxf2+ 6. Kd1 {And suddenly Black is in some trouble. There are threats to both g7 and c7. More importantly, though, Black's queen is lacking retreat squares.} Nf6 {This looks a bit desperate, but alternatives show how much danger Black is in.} ( 6... g6 7. Nh3 Qd4 8. d3 {(threatening c2-c3) and now:} Z0 (8... d6 9. Qf3 Bxh3 10. Rf1 f5 11. gxh3 Bb6 12. c3 Qc5 13. b4 {and White won, Ford-Blackburn, Bruges 1999.}) (8... Bd6 9. c3 Qc5 10. b4 {wins a piece.}) (8... Bf8 9. Qf3 Kd8 10. Ng5 Nh6 11. Qf6+ {1-0 Stripunsky-Oparaugo, Passau 1997.}) (8... Bb6 9. Qf3 f6 10. Rf1 d6 11. c3 Qc5 12. b4 {and again White wins, Emms-Hawksworth, British Championship 1986.} (12. Z0))) (6... Kf8 7. Nh3 Qd4 8. d3 d6 9. Qf3 Bxh3 10. Rf1 Be6 11. c3 {and Black's queen is trapped.}) (6... Nge7 7. Nh3 Qd4 8. Qxg7 Ng6 9. d3 Be7 10. Rf1 Kd8 11. Ng5 Rf8 12. Qxf8+ {1-0 Leisebein-Tuchtenhagen, correspondence 1990.}) 7. Qxg7 Nxd5 8. exd5 (8. Qxh8+ {is less accurate. The game Moody-Thompson, Trenton 1994, continued} Ke7 9. exd5 Qxg2 10. dxc6 d6 11. Be2 Bg4 {and it was White who had to resign!}) 8... Bf8 9. Qxh8 Qxg2 10. dxc6 d6 ({Or} 10... Qxh1 11. Qxe5+ Be7 12. Qg3 Qxc6 13. Qg8+ {1-0 Leisebein-Andre, correspondence 1990.}) 11. cxb7 { and now the game Leisebein-Fiebig, correspondence 1980, concluded} Bg4+ 12. Ke1 Qe4+ 13. Be2 Rb8 14. d3 Qxh1 15. Bh6 Ke7 16. Bg5+ {1-0.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Second Moves for Black"] [Black "A2: 4...g6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C25"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "22"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nc6 3. Nc3 Bc5 4. Qg4 g6 5. Qf3 (5. Qg3 {also promises White an edge after} Nf6 6. d3 d6 7. Nge2 {and now:} Z0 (7... Be6 8. Bg5 Nh5 ({after} 8... h6 9. Qh4) ({and} 8... Bxc4 9. Qh4 {White makes use of the pin on the knight}) 9. Qh4 f6 ({better is} 9... Qd7 10. Nd5) 10. Bxf6 Qxf6 11. Qxf6 Nxf6 12. Bxe6 {and White is a pawn up, Bangiev-Steinkohl, Dudweiler 1996.}) (7... Nh5 8. Qf3 Qf6 (8... Be6 9. Nd5 Bxd5 10. exd5 Ne7 11. Bb5+ Kf8 12. c3 h6 13. g4 Ng7 14. Ng3 Bb6 15. h4 {gave White a strong attack in Conquest-Kristensen, Espergarde 1992}) 9. Qxf6 Nxf6 10. Bg5 Nh5 11. Nd5 Bb6 12. Ng3 h6 13. Bd2 Ng7 14. a4 Nd4 15. Kd1 c6 16. Nxb6 axb6 17. c3 {when White's bishop pair and Black's dark-squared weaknesses give White a clear edge, Stripunsky-Tolstikh, Volgograd 1994.})) 5... Nf6 (5... Qf6 6. Nd5 Qxf3 7. Nxf3 Bb6 8. d3 {, Capablanca-Gomez, Panama 1933, gives White a pleasant ending – the weakness that ...g7-g6 creates is quite noticeable.}) 6. Nge2 d6 7. d3 Bg4 ({Or} 7... h6 8. h3 Qe7 9. g4 (9. Na4) 9... Be6 10. g5 Ng8 11. Nd5 Bxd5 12. Bxd5 Nd8 13. h4 c6 14. Bb3 Ne6 15. gxh6 {and White was better in Milutinovic-Savic, correspondence 1972.}) 8. Qg3 h6 (8... Be6 {transposes to 7. ..Be6 to White's fifth move}) ({while} 8... Qd7 9. Qh4 {is good for White.}) 9. f4 Qe7 10. Nd5 Nxd5 11. Qxg4 Z0 ({We have been following the game Larsen-Portisch, Santa Monica 1966, which continued} 11... Nf6 12. Qh3 Na5 13. Bb5+ c6 14. Ba4 b5 15. Bb3 {and White was clearly better.}) ({Larsen suggests} 11... Ne3 {as an improvement, but White still holds the advantage after} 12. Bxe3 Bxe3 13. f5 {.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Second Moves for Black"] [Black "B: 2...Bc5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C23"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "27"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Bc5 {The Symmetrical Defence. This is most likely to transpose into one of the lines we have already studied.} 3. Nc3 d6 (3... Nc6 { transposes to Variation A}) (3... Nf6 4. d3 {transposes to 2...Nf6 3 d3 Bc5 4 Nc3.}) 4. d3 (4. f4 Bxg1 5. Rxg1 Qh4+ {is a bit annoying}) ({but the immediate} 4. Na4 {looks playable.}) 4... Nc6 (4... Nf6 5. f4 {transposes to Variation C in the Main Line.}) 5. Na4 {White will exchange off Black's dark squared bishop, and then he will play for f2-f4.} Nge7 (5... Bb6 6. a3 (6. Nxb6 axb6 7. f4 Na5) 6... Nf6 7. Ne2 Be6 8. Nxb6 axb6 9. Bxe6 fxe6 10. O-O O-O 11. Ng3 Nd7 12. Be3 Qh4 13. c3 Nf6 14. f3 {and White's better pawn structure gives him an small edge, Evans-Addison, New York 1969.}) (5... Qf6 6. Nxc5 dxc5 7. Be3 b6 8. Qd2 Nge7 9. Ne2 Be6 10. Bb5 Qg6 11. f4 Qxg2 12. Rg1 Qxh2 13. O-O-O O-O-O 14. f5 Bd7 15. Rh1 Qg2 16. Rdg1 Qf3 17. Rf1 Qg2 18. Qe1 Nd4 19. Nxd4 cxd4 20. Bxd7+ Rxd7 21. Bd2 g5 22. Rfg1 {and finally Black's queen is trapped, Mitkov-De Vreugt, Bolzano 1999.}) (5... Na5 6. Nxc5 dxc5 ( 6... Nxc4) 7. Bb3 Nxb3 8. axb3 Nf6 9. Ne2 {, followed by f2-f4.}) 6. Nxc5 dxc5 7. f4 exf4 8. Bxf4 Ng6 9. Bg3 Nce5 10. Bb3 Bg4 11. Ne2 Qg5 12. Qc1 Qxc1+ 13. Rxc1 O-O-O 14. Nc3 {. We are following the game Mitkov-Stojcevski, Skopje 1998. White once again has the advantage of the bishop pair in an open position. White's next move will be to castle kingside.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Second Moves for Black"] [Black "C: 2...c6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C23"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "33"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 c6 {Aiming for a quick counter with ...d7-d5.} 3. d4 d5 ({Or } 3... Nf6 4. dxe5 Qa5+ (4... Nxe4 5. Qe2 {is better for White – Keres}) 5. Nc3 Nxe4 (5... Qxe5 6. Nf3 {and Black's queen is kicked around}) 6. Qf3 d5 7. exd6 Nxd6 8. Bb3 {and I prefer White.}) 4. exd5 cxd5 5. Bb5+ Bd7 6. Bxd7+ Nxd7 7. Nc3 ({Also possible is} 7. dxe5 Nxe5 8. Qe2 (8. Ne2 Nf6 9. O-O Be7 10. Nbc3 { gives White an edge – Lisitsin}) 8... Qe7 9. Nc3 O-O-O 10. Bf4 Ng6 11. Bg3 h5 12. h4 Nf6 13. O-O-O Qc5 14. Nf3 Bd6 15. Bxd6 Rxd6 16. Nd4 {and White can hope to put pressure on the isolated d-pawn, Zifroni-Boim, Ramat Hasharon 1993.}) 7... Ngf6 8. dxe5 Nxe5 9. Qe2 Qe7 10. Be3 Nc6 11. O-O-O O-O-O 12. Nf3 Qc7 13. Nd4 Qa5 14. Nb3 {. White has some awkward pressure on the d5-pawn. Marcelin-Boim, Herzeliya 2000, continued} Qb4 15. a3 Qg4 16. Qxg4+ Nxg4 17. Nxd5 {and White was better.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "Introduction"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B40"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "10"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 {At all levels this is the most popular way of handling the black side of the King's Indian Attack. With the moves ...d7-d5 and ...c7-c5, Black has claimed a fair share of the centre and can develop comfortably. Indeed, as we shall now see, Black has a number of different development methods from which to choose.} Z0 ({A:} 5... Nf6) ({B:} 5... g6) ({C:} 5... Bd6) ({Here are some rare alternatives:} 5... Nge7 6. Bg2 ( 6. h4 {, planning to meet} g6 {with} 7. h5 {, looks worth a try}) 6... g6 7. O-O Bg7 {transposes to Variation B.}) (5... b6 6. Bg2 Bb7 7. O-O Nf6 { transposes to Variation A.}) ({The game Dyce-Mikuev, Elista Olympiad 1998, followed an original course after} 5... g5 {(the chances of meeting this move are quite slim; I found only one example on my database!)} 6. exd5 exd5 7. Qe2+ Be6 8. Bh3 Qe7 9. Bxe6 fxe6 10. Nb3 h6 11. h4 g4 12. Ne5 {and White was better.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "A: 5...Nf6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B40"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "14"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 {A very popular choice. With this move Black plans to develop classically; he will continue with ...Be7, and this is followed by ...0-0 or, more ambitiously, by ...b7-b6, ...Qc7 and .. .0-0-0.} 6. Bg2 Be7 (6... Bd6 {is generally frowned upon as it doesn't mix well with ...Nf6. In particular Black will generally have to expend a tempo preventing a later e4-e5 by White, which would otherwise fork two pieces. After } 7. O-O O-O 8. Re1 {the threat of e4-e5 forces Black to act immediately:} Z0 ( 8... Bc7 9. c3 d4 (9... e5 10. exd5 Nxd5 11. Nc4 {puts annoying pressure on the e5-pawn, for example} f6 12. d4 cxd4 13. cxd4 b5 14. Ne3 {and Black's position is riddled with weaknesses}) 10. cxd4 cxd4 11. e5 Nd7 12. Nc4 Rb8 13. Bg5 f6 14. exf6 Nxf6 15. Nfe5 Nxe5 16. Nxe5 h6 17. Bd2 {and White held the advantage in Oratovsky-Gravel, Montreal 1998 – White's pieces are well placed and Black has some problems along the half-open e-file.}) (8... Qc7 9. Qe2 { (once again threatening e4-e5)} dxe4 10. dxe4 e5 11. c3 b6 12. h3 a5 13. a4 Ba6 14. Nc4 {(this self-pin is easily broken)} Ne8 15. Bf1 Rc8 16. Qc2 Qb7 17. Nh4 Be7 18. Nf5 Bxc4 19. Bxc4 Nd6 20. Nxd6 Bxd6 {with a clear plus for White in Loginov-Szirti, Budapest 1992 – compare White's bishop on c4 to Black's on d6!})) (6... b6 {, however, makes some sense. This may just transpose to Variation A1, but Black can also delay playing ...Be7, in the hope that the bishop may have other options. After} 7. O-O Bb7 8. Re1 Qc7 { we have:} 9. Z0 (9. c3 O-O-O 10. a3 Be7 {transposes to Variation A12.}) (9. e5 $5 Nd7 10. c4 (10. Qe2 g5 ({or} 10... h6 11. h4 g5 {is Black's idea: the bishop may develop on g7})) 10... Ncxe5 ({for} 10... Be7 {see Variation A11}) 11. cxd5 Nxf3+ 12. Qxf3 e5 13. Nc4 Bd6 14. Qg4 g6 15. Bh6 f5 16. Qe2 Kf7 17. Rac1 {and White was slightly better in M.Saunders-Milnes, correspondence 1993.})) 7. O-O {Now Black faces a major decision: whether to castle kingside or to develop on the other wing.} Z0 ({A1:} 7... b6) ({A2:} 7... O-O) ({ Alternatively:} 7... b5 {(beginning early queenside operations, but this is too loose)} 8. exd5 exd5 9. c4 bxc4 10. dxc4 O-O 11. b3 Bf5 12. cxd5 Nxd5 13. Bb2 {was clearly better for White in Schöneberg-Zinn, Germany 1972: White's pieces are well placed and Black has weak pawns on the queenside.}) ( 7... Qc7 {(a sneaky move order)} 8. Re1 h6 9. c3 (9. e5 Nd7 10. Qe2 g5 11. h3 h5 {gives Black a quick attack against the e5-pawn; White must always be careful of this when playing an early e4-e5}) 9... b6 10. a3 ({now} 10. e5 {gives Black counterplay after} Nd7 11. d4 cxd4 12. cxd4 Nb4 {,}) ({ while} 10. exd5 Nxd5 11. Nc4 Bb7 12. a4 Rd8 {was equal in Jansa-Marjanovic, Nis 1983}) 10... a5 (10... Bb7 {transposes to Variation A12}) 11. a4 ({ securing the b5-square;} 11. e5 Nd7 12. d4 {also looks good as Black no longer has ...Nb4 ideas}) 11... Ba6 12. exd5 Nxd5 13. Nc4 Rd8 14. Qe2 Bf6 15. Bd2 Rd7 16. h4 Bb7 17. Nh2 Kd8 18. Ng4 Kc8 19. Qd1 Ba6 20. Qb3 {and I prefer White, Seeman-Alzate, Elista Olympiad 1998.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "A1: 7...b6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "17"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O b6 { Planning to develop the bishop on a6 or, more normally, b7. This move is also an indication that Black is more likely to castle on the queenside.} 8. Re1 Bb7 ({Alternatively Black can play a cunning move order with} 8... Qc7 {, not yet committing the bishop to b7. After 8...Qc7 White can play:} 9. Z0 ({. After } 9. a3 {Black should play} Bb7 {, when} 10. c3 {transposes to Variation A12.}) (9. c3 Ba6 {(this is Black's idea: the bishop develops on a6 and hits the d3-pawn)} 10. exd5 (10. e5 Nd7 11. d4 cxd4 12. cxd4 Nb4 {is very annoying for White}) 10... Nxd5 11. Nc4 O-O 12. a4 Rad8 13. Qb3 Bf6 14. Bd2 Rd7 15. Rad1 Rfd8 {with an equal position in Frias-Cifuentes Parada, Wijk aan Zee 1991.}) ( 9. e5 Nd7 {and now:} 10. Z0 (10. Nf1 Ndxe5 (10... Bb7 11. Bf4 { transposes to Variation A11}) 11. Nxe5 Nxe5 12. Bf4 Bd6 (12... f6 13. Ne3 Bd7 14. Ng4 Bd6 15. Nxe5 fxe5 16. Bxe5 {gives White a slight edge due to Black's backward pawn on e6 –} Bxe5 {is answered by} 17. Qh5+) 13. Qh5 Ng6 $1 (13... g6 {is answered by} 14. Qxe5) 14. Qxd5 Nxf4 15. Qc6+ Kf8 16. Qxa8 Nxg2 17. Qxg2 Bb7 18. f3 h5 {with an unclear position. White is the exchange up but will face some uncomfortable moments on the kingside.}) (10. Qe2 { with a further split:} Z0 (10... Bb7 11. h4 {(preventing ...g7-g5)} O-O-O 12. Nf1 h6 13. N1h2 Rdg8 14. Ng4 Nf8 (14... g5 15. h5 Kb8 16. c3 Re8 17. Bd2 f5 18. exf6 Nxf6 19. Nfe5 {and White has a firm grip on the e5-square, Bates-Vallin, Witley 1999}) 15. Bf4 g5 16. hxg5 hxg5 17. Bd2 {with a typically complex position, C.Hansen-Kasparov, La Valetta 1980; White's pieces are more actively placed but Black may be able to use the open h-file at some point.}) ( 10... g5 11. g4 (11. c4 {, trying to exploit Black's lack of development, is critical, but after} g4 12. cxd5 gxf3 13. Nxf3 exd5 14. e6 Nf6 15. Bf4 Qb7 16. exf7+ Kxf7 {it's doubtful that White has enough compensation, V. Fedorov-Khait, Yerevan 1969}) 11... h5 12. h3 hxg4 13. hxg4 Bb7 14. Nf1 O-O-O { with another unclear position. Black will try to follow up with ...Nf8-g6.})) ( 10. c4 {may be White's most testing answer. Now Black has the following choices:} Nb4 (10... Bb7 {transposes to Variation A11}) 11. cxd5 exd5 12. d4 cxd4 13. Nxd4 Nxe5 14. N2f3 {and White has good compensation for the pawn.}))) 9. Z0 {After 8...Bb7 I'm giving the white player a choice of two different lines:} ({A11:} 9. e5) ({A12:} 9. c3) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "A11: 9 e5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "63"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O b6 8. Re1 Bb7 9. e5 {With this move White blocks the centre.} Nd7 10. c4 {Striking out at the d5-pawn. If this pawn moves, White will gain possession of the important e4-square.} ({The more traditional method for White is with} 10. Nf1 {and now:} Z0 (10... g5 {(the normal pawn lunge: Black is hitting back on the kingside and undermining White's support of the e5-pawn)} 11. Ne3 (11. g4 h5 12. h3 hxg4 13. hxg4 Qc7 14. Qe2 O-O-O 15. c3 Rdg8 {has been played a few times and Black has good results; he will continue with ...Nf8-g6}) 11... h5 (11... Ndxe5 12. Nxe5 Nxe5 13. Nxd5 Bxd5 14. Rxe5 Bxg2 15. Kxg2 Bf6 16. Re4 {is slightly better for White: Black's king has no safe place to hide}) 12. c4 d4 13. Nd5 exd5 ({or} 13... Rg8 14. Nxe7 Qxe7 15. a3 g4 16. Nh4 a5 17. Qa4 Rc8 18. Rb1 Kd8 19. Bf4 {and White's king is much safer than Black's, Masola-Cristobal, Mar del Plata 1993}) 14. cxd5 g4 15. dxc6 Bxc6 16. e6 fxe6 17. Nxd4 Bxg2 18. Nxe6 Bf3 19. Nxd8 Bxd1 20. Nc6 Rh7 21. Bg5 Bf3 22. Nxe7 Kf7 23. Bh4 {and White is a pawn up as in the game Schlenker-Raicevic, Linz 1980.}) (10... Qc7 11. Bf4 O-O-O 12. h4 h6 13. Qd2 Rdg8 14. h5 {(taking the sting out of ...g7-g5)} g5 ({or} 14... Qd8 15. Bh3 Nf8 16. N1h2 d4 17. Ng4 Nb4 18. Bg2 Nd5 19. c4 Nxf4 20. Qxf4 f5 21. exf6 gxf6 22. Nd2 Bxg2 23. Kxg2 {, which was unclear in Kasparov-Sturua, Tbilisi 1976}) 15. hxg6 Rxg6 {. Now Konstantinopolsky-Banas, correspondence 1985, continued} 16. Ne3 h5 17. Nxd5 {(this trick occurs quite often in the KIA – see later)} exd5 18. e6 Qd8 19. exd7+ Qxd7 20. Rxe7 Qxe7 ({more resilient, however, is} 20... Nxe7 21. Ne5 Qf5 {, after which the position is still very unclear}) 21. Bh3+ Rg4 22. Re1 {and White went on to win.})) 10... d4 {This advance looks very natural, but it's actually quite accommodating to White, who now has possession of the important e4-square. Black should consider alternatives.} (10... Nb4 11. cxd5 Bxd5 ({or} 11... exd5 12. Nf1 O-O 13. a3 Nc6 14. h4 {and White will continue with Bf4 and N1h2}) 12. Ne4 {(once again White has the e4-squareunder control)} Nxa2 13. Rxa2 Bxa2 14. b3 b5 15. Qc2 Bxb3 (15... Qa5 16. Re2 { picks up the bishop}) 16. Qxb3 Rb8 17. Nd6+ Bxd6 18. exd6 O-O 19. Bg5 Nf6 20. Qc3 Rb6 {with a complex position, although I prefer White's attacking chances to Black's queenside pawns, Ree-Vogel, Leeuwarden 1974.}) (10... Qc7 {(this could arise from the move order 8...Qc7 9 e5 Nd7 10 c4 Bb7 and may well be Black's most promising move)} 11. cxd5 (11. Qe2 dxc4 12. dxc4 g5 { puts White's e5-pawn under early pressure, Hracek-Kveinys, European Team Championship, Debrecen 1992}) 11... exd5 12. d4 (12. e6) 12... Nf8 (12... cxd4 13. Nb3 {regains the pawn}) 13. Nf1 Ne6 14. Ne3 Rd8 15. Nf5 O-O 16. h4 { with a complex position, Milanovic-Arsovic, Belgrade 1989.}) 11. h4 (11. Ne4 $5 Ndxe5 12. Nxe5 Nxe5 13. Nxc5 Bxg2 14. Kxg2 bxc5 15. Rxe5 {looks pretty equal }) ({while 'ECO' just gives} 11. a3 Qc7 12. Qe2 g5 {(Banas-Novak, Trencianske Teplice 1974) as unclear. 11 h4 looks like an improvement, as counterplay involving ...g7-g5 is suppressed.}) 11... Qc7 ({Or} 11... h6 12. h5 { (preparing to meet ...g7-g5 by capturing en passant)} Qc7 13. Qe2 O-O-O 14. a3 Rdg8 15. b4 {(opening up the queenside)} g5 16. hxg6 Rxg6 17. bxc5 bxc5 18. Rb1 h5 19. Ne4 h4 20. Bf4 hxg3 21. fxg3 Ba8 22. Rb5 a6 23. Rb2 Qa5 24. Reb1 Kc7 25. Nd6 Bxd6 26. exd6+ Kc8 27. Ne5 Ndxe5 28. Bxe5 Rhg8 29. Qf3 Nxe5 (29... f5 { loses to} 30. Qxc6+ Bxc6 31. Bxc6 Rxg3+ 32. Bxg3 Rxg3+ 33. Kf2) 30. Qxa8+ Kd7 31. Qb7+ Kxd6 32. Rb6+ Nc6 33. Qxc6+ Ke5 34. Rf1 {1-0 Rogoff-Bellon Lopez, Stockholm 1969.}) 12. Ne4 {This pseudo pawn sacrifice is very effective;} ({ although White was also better after the quieter} 12. Qe2 O-O-O 13. a3 h6 14. Nf1 Rdg8 15. N1h2 g5 16. hxg5 hxg5 17. Ng4 Rh5 18. Bd2 Rgh8 19. b4 {, as in Hartston-Trikaliotis, Siegen Olympiad 1970.}) 12... Ncxe5 (12... O-O-O { is probably safer. White should reply with} 13. Bf4 h6 14. h5 {, followed by a2-a3 and b2-b4!.}) 13. Nxe5 Nxe5 (13... Qxe5 14. Nxc5 Qxc5 15. Bxb7 { is better for White – he has the bishop pair and can expand on the queenside with a2-a3 and b2-b4.}) 14. Bf4 {. Now Jadoul-Kruszynski, Copenhagen 1988, continued} O-O 15. Qh5 f6 (15... f5 {loses to} 16. Bxe5 Qxe5 17. Ng5 {.}) 16. Ng5 fxg5 17. Bxe5 Qd7 18. hxg5 Bxg2 19. Kxg2 {with a large advantage for White. Black has problems down both the e- and h-files. The game concluded} Qe8 20. Qxe8 Rfxe8 21. f4 Kf7 22. Re2 Bf8 23. Kf3 h6 24. gxh6 gxh6 25. a4 Rec8 26. Rh1 a6 27. b3 Ra7 28. g4 Kg6 29. Bd6 Kg7 30. Rxe6 Kf7 31. f5 Rc6 32. Bb8 { 1-0.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "A12: 9 c3"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "53"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O b6 8. Re1 Bb7 9. c3 ({This move is more flexible than} 9. e5 {. White keeps the tension in the centre and begins play on the queenside in anticipation of Black castling long.}) 9... Qc7 10. a3 {Preparing b2-b4 in some lines.} ({White could also consider} 10. Qe2 {, which transposes to the text after} O-O-O ({ if Black plays} 10... O-O {White plays on the kingside with} 11. e5 Nd7 12. Nf1 Rae8 13. Bf4) 11. a3 {, but eliminates some of Black's 10th move alternatives.} ) 10... O-O-O {Black has quite a few alternatives:} ({After} 10... O-O { White reverts back to Plan A with} 11. e5 Nd7 12. d4 cxd4 13. cxd4 {(now a2-a3 has proved useful in preventing ...Nb4)} Na5 14. Nf1 Rfc8 {(preparing ... Qc2)} 15. b4 Nc4 16. h4 b5 (16... a5 17. b5) 17. Ng5 {with the initiative on the kingside, Psakhis-Paunovic, Minsk 1986.}) (10... a5 {and now: } 11. Z0 (11. a4 {expends a tempo in order to win the b5 square as an outpost; this is a common theme. Again we have a further split:} Z0 (11... O-O-O 12. e5 Nd7 13. d4 g5 14. Nb1 {(preparing Na3-b5)} h6 15. Na3 Ndb8 ({or } 15... g4 16. Nd2 cxd4 17. Nb5) 16. Be3 Ba6 17. Nb5 Qd7 18. Rc1 {and White had the initiative in Psakhis-Kohlweyer, Vienna 1990.}) (11... O-O 12. e5 Nd7 13. Qe2 (13. d4 cxd4 14. cxd4 Nb4 {gives Black counterplay}) 13... Rae8 ( 13... Rfe8 14. Nf1 f5 15. exf6 Bxf6 16. Ng5 Nf8 17. h4 Re7 18. Nh2 Be5 19. h5 { gives White good attacking chances on the kingside, Knezevic-Jovcic, Yugoslavia 1975}) 14. Nf1 f6 15. exf6 Bxf6 16. Ng5 Nde5 {with a very messy position, Ostermeyer-Breutigam, German Bundesliga 1988.})) (11. Nf1 { (perhaps White does best to ignore ...a7-a5)} O-O-O 12. Qb3 Ba6 13. Bf4 Qb7 14. e5 Nd7 15. c4 h6 16. cxd5 exd5 17. h4 c4 18. dxc4 Bxc4 19. Qc2 {and I prefer White, Hall-B.Sorensen, Danish Team Championship 1999 – Black's king is a bit vulnerable.})) (10... dxe4 {(Black normally avoids this exchange as it gives up the control over the e4-square, but here White's a2-a3 and c2-c3 encourages Black to open things up a little)} 11. dxe4 Rd8 12. Qe2 O-O 13. e5 Nd7 14. h4 b5 (14... Qc8 15. a4 Qa8 16. Bh3 Na5 {, as in Varavin-Vunder, St Petersburg 2000, looks interesting}) 15. a4 b4 16. Nc4 Nb6 17. Nxb6 axb6 18. Bf4 bxc3 19. bxc3 Na5 20. h5 h6 21. Rab1 {with an unclear position, Varavin-Moskalenko, Leningrad 1989.}) (10... h6 11. Qe2 (11. b4) 11... O-O-O {transposes the main text.}) 11. Qe2 h6 {Preparing the advance ...g7-g5.} ({ The game Mkrtchian-Kovaljov, Tallinn 1997, varied with} 11... Ba6 12. e5 Nd7 13. h4 h6 14. h5 {(we already know the idea behind this move)} g6 15. hxg6 fxg6 16. Bh3 Nf8 17. b4 {and White's attack is quicker.}) 12. b4 { Softening up Black's queenside pawn structure.} g5 {Alternatively:} (12... c4 $5 13. exd5 cxd3 (13... Nxd5 14. dxc4 Nxc3 15. Qf1 Bf6 16. Nb3 Na4 17. Ra2 g5 18. Rc2 Kb8 19. c5 bxc5 20. Nxc5 Nxc5 21. Rxc5 {wasn't a pleasant experience for me in Jansa-Emms, Hillerod 1995 – Black has only one defensive pawn left on the queenside and even that isn't much use}) 14. Qxd3 Nxd5 15. Qc2 Bf6 16. Bb2 Kb8 17. c4 Bxb2 18. Qxb2 Nf6 19. c5 {and again White's attack is faster, Psakhis-Nikitin, Berlin 1991.}) (12... Ne5 {(a suggestion from Mark Dvoretsky)} 13. exd5 Nxf3+ 14. Nxf3 Nxd5 15. Bb2 Bf6 16. bxc5 bxc5 17. d4 c4 18. Nd2 Nb6 19. Bxb7+ Kxb7 20. a4 {, followed by Ba3, promises White the advantage.}) 13. bxc5 {Or:} ({'ECO' only gives} 13. Nb3 dxe4 14. dxe4 g4 15. Nfd2 Ne5 { as unclear in Osmanovic-Martinovic, Sarajevo 1981.}) (13. h3 Rhg8 14. Nb3 c4 15. exd5 cxd3 16. Qxd3 Nxd5 17. Qc2 Bf6 18. Bb2 Nde7 19. c4 Bxb2 20. Qxb2 { and once again White looks to have the safer king, Kraschl-Niklasch, Budapest 1993.}) 13... Bxc5 14. Nb3 Be7 15. exd5 Nxd5 16. Bb2 {. White must now look to advance both the c- and d-pawns in order to prise open the queenside. Fries Nielsen-Cramling, Copenhagen 1982, continued} g4 17. Nfd4 h5 18. c4 Nf6 19. Nb5 Qd7 20. d4 a6 21. d5 axb5 22. cxb5 Nxd5 23. Rac1 Rhe8 {and now} 24. bxc6 $1 Bxc6 25. Qa6+ {seems to be winning for White; for example,} Kc7 ({Or} 25... Kb8 26. Na5 bxa5 (26... Ba8 27. Be5+ Bd6 28. Bxd5 Bxd5 29. Bxd6+ Qxd6 30. Rb1) 27. Be5+ Bd6 28. Bxd6+ Qxd6 29. Rxc6 {.}) 26. Be5+ Bd6 27. Nd4 {.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "A2: 7...0-0"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "16"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O O-O { This is still Black's most common choice, despite White scoring a healthy 60% from this position on my database. Black gets his king out of danger, at least for the time being, and will concentrate on creating counterplay on the queenside.} 8. Re1 {Now Black has a choice of ways forward:} Z0 ({A21:} 8... dxe4) ({A22:} 8... Qc7) ({A23:} 8... b6) ({A24:} 8... b5) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "A21: 8...dxe4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "37"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Re1 dxe4 {The King's Indian Attack would lose a lot of its sting if Black were able to successfully simplify in the centre like this. Fortunately this exchange almost always helps White more than Black. White now has more presence in the centre than Black, and after e4-e5 White will be able to use the important e4-square.} 9. dxe4 b5 {Alternatively:} (9... b6 10. e5 Nd7 ( 10... Nd5 11. Ne4 Ndb4 12. Nd6 Bxd6 13. exd6 Bb7 14. c4 Qd7 15. a3 Na6 16. Bf4 {looks good for White – the passed d-pawn is a real thorn in Black's side}) 11. Ne4 (11. Nd4 cxd4 12. Bxc6 Rb8 13. Nb3 {also looks good for White}) 11... Ba6 12. Bf4 b5 13. c3 {and White was better in Petrosian-Kan, Moscow 1955. The game continued} Qb6 14. Qc2 Rfd8 15. h4 Nf8 16. h5 Rac8 (16... h6) 17. h6 $1 {and White's attack on the kingside was far more effective than Black's on the other wing.}) (9... e5 {(a radical move which prevents e4-e5 but at the same time weakens the d5-square)} 10. c3 h6 11. Nc4 Qxd1 ({after} 11... Qc7 {White should play} 12. Ne3) 12. Rxd1 Nxe4 (12... Bg4 13. h3 Bxf3 14. Bxf3 Rfd8 15. Rxd8+ Rxd8 16. a4 b6 17. Kf1 Bf8 18. Ke2 {was better for White in Tkachiev-Handoko, Jakarta 1996 – White has the bishop pair and the d5-square}) 13. Nfxe5 Nxe5 14. Nxe5 {and White had a big endgame plus in the game Badea-Danilov, Bucharest 1998. In particular the bishop on g2 is a very strong piece.}) 10. e5 Nd5 11. Ne4 Qc7 12. c3 Bb7 (12... Nxe5 13. Nxe5 Qxe5 14. c4 bxc4 15. Nc3 Qd6 16. Nxd5 exd5 17. Bxd5 Be6 18. Bxa8 {is winning for White – Shirov.}) 13. Bg5 Bxg5 ({Safer is} 13... h6 14. Bxe7 Ncxe7 15. a4 a6 {, but White still enjoys some advantage after} 16. Nd6 {.}) 14. Nexg5 h6 {. Now Shirov-Estrada Gonsalez, French League 1995, continued} 15. Qc2 (15. Ne4 Qb6 16. Qe2 {is slightly better for White.}) 15... hxg5 16. Nxg5 g6 17. Nxe6 fxe6 18. Qxg6+ Kh8 19. Re4 {and White had a very strong attack.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "A22: 8...Qc7"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "65"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Re1 Qc7 {In anticipation of e4-e5, Black develops his queen to put extra pressure on that square. There is a question mark, however, as to whether the queen is well placed here. On the minus side White has tricks involving Nf1, Bf4 and then Ne3xd5. It's surprising how often this theme works for White.} 9. e5 Nd7 ( 9... Ng4 {is a little loose. White was clearly better after} 10. Qe2 f6 11. exf6 Bxf6 12. Nb3 b6 13. c4 dxc4 14. dxc4 e5 15. h3 Nh6 16. Bxh6 gxh6 17. Nh2 {in Savon-Radulov, Sinaia 1965.}) 10. Qe2 b5 {Black has two major alternatives:} (10... b6 {(with this move Black's bishop will not be blocked when it goes to a6, but in general Black's counterplay on the queenside is slower)} 11. Nf1 Ba6 12. h4 {and now:} Z0 (12... Nd4 {(this idea is double-edged; after the exchange Black has play down the half-open c-file, but the pawn on d4 can become vulnerable)} 13. Nxd4 cxd4 14. Bf4 Rac8 15. Rec1 { (the other rook is required to cover b2)} Nc5 16. Nh2 Kh8 ({Black should play} 16... Na4 {, which is answered by} 17. Rab1) 17. Nf3 Na4 18. Nxd4 Nxb2 19. c4 {and White wins material, Berg-Rian, Novi Sad Olympiad 1990.}) (12... Rfe8 13. Bf4 Nf8 14. h5 h6 15. N1h2 Nh7 16. Qd2 c4 17. dxc4 Bxc4 18. Ng4 Bf8 19. c3 Rad8 20. Qc2 a5 21. Rad1 {and White has a pleasant space advantage, Quinteros-Bjelajac, Novi Sad 1982.})) (10... f6 11. exf6 Nxf6 12. Nb3 { and now:} Z0 (12... Bd6 13. c4 ({or} 13. Ng5 e5 14. c4) 13... Bd7 14. Be3 b6 15. Rac1 Rae8 16. d4 {and the tension in the centre favours White, Matera-Nunn, Birmingham 1975.}) (12... Bd7 13. Bf4 Bd6 14. Bxd6 Qxd6 15. Ne5 Nxe5 16. Qxe5 Qxe5 17. Rxe5 {(the weakness on e6 gives White a slight pull)} Rac8 18. d4 b6 19. dxc5 bxc5 20. c4 Ng4 21. Re2 dxc4 22. Na5 Bb5 23. a4 { and White went on to win, Reshevsky-De Winter, Siegen Olympiad 1970.})) 11. Nf1 b4 {Alternatively:} (11... Ba6 {(it seems strange putting the bishop in front of the a-pawn, but Black plans a quick-fire ...Rfc8 and ...Nd4)} 12. h4 Rfc8 13. Bf4 Nd4 ({but this is too early; Black should prepare it with} 13... Qb6 ) 14. Nxd4 cxd4 15. Bxd5 {(this standard combination is often advantageous to White)} exd5 ({in Votava-Stocek, Turnov 1996, Black simply gave up the pawn with} 15... Bb7) 16. e6 Bd6 17. exd7 Qxd7 18. Bxd6 Qxd6 19. Rac1 {with a clear advantage to White. Black's bishop is looking silly on a6 and White will follow up with Nh2-f3 and Qe5, picking up the loose d4-pawn.}) (11... a5 { (this may transpose to the text, but here we will concentrate on lines where Black refrains from playing an early ...b5-b4)} 12. h4 {. Now Black has a further choice:} Z0 (12... Nd4 13. Nxd4 cxd4 14. Bf4 Ra6 {(planning ... Rc6)} 15. Nh2 (15. Bxd5 {is ineffective here due to the surprising zwischenzug} Bb4 16. Reb1 (16. Rec1 exd5 17. e6 Rxe6 18. Qxe6 Qxf4 19. Qxd7 {loses to} Qxc1) 16... exd5 17. e6 Qc6 18. exd7 Bxd7 {and Black is okay }) 15... Rc6 16. Rac1 Ba6 ({Black should play} 16... Qb6) 17. Bxd5 { (now this works well)} exd5 18. e6 Qd8 19. exd7 Re6 20. Qg4 f5 21. Qh5 Qxd7 22. Nf3 g6 23. Qh6 Bf6 24. Rxe6 Qxe6 25. Be5 {and White had a big advantage in Fischer-Geller, Netanya 1968. This game concluded} Bxe5 26. Re1 f4 27. Rxe5 Qd7 28. h5 fxg3 29. hxg6 gxf2+ 30. Kxf2 hxg6 31. Qxg6+ Qg7 32. Rg5 Rf7 {1-0.}) ( 12... Ba6 13. Bf4 Rfc8 14. Ne3 Qd8 (14... Nd4 15. Nxd4 cxd4 16. Nxd5 { is good for White again}) 15. Rac1 (15. h5) 15... b4 16. c4 bxc3 17. bxc3 Rab8 ({Uhlmann suggests} 17... Nf8) 18. Nxd5 {(here we go again – it's really surprising how many black players have fallen for this trick)} exd5 19. e6 Nf8 20. exf7+ Kxf7 21. Ne5+ Nxe5 22. Qxe5 Bb7 23. Rb1 Ng6 24. Qe6+ Ke8 ( 24... Kf8 {loses to} 25. Bxb8 Rxb8 26. Rxb7 Rxb7 27. Bxd5) 25. Qg8+ Nf8 ({or} 25... Kd7 26. Bh3+ Kc6 27. Qe6+ Bd6 28. Qxd5+ Kxd5 29. Bg2#) 26. Qxg7 Rc7 27. Bxc7 Qxc7 28. Bxd5 Ng6 29. h5 Nf8 30. Bc6+ Kd8 31. Qxf8+ {1-0 Bednarski-Doroshkievich, Polanica Zdroj 1971.})) 12. h4 a5 13. Bf4 Ba6 ({After } 13... a4 {White can prevent Black from playing ...a4-a3 with} 14. a3 { , for example} Ba6 15. Ne3 bxa3 16. bxa3 Nd4 (16... Rab8 17. Nxd5 exd5 18. e6 Bd6 19. Bxd6 Qxd6 20. exd7 Qxd7 21. Ne5 Nxe5 22. Qxe5 Bb7 23. Qe7 {was better for White in Paragua-Roiz, St Lorenzo 1995}) 17. Nxd4 cxd4 18. Nxd5 exd5 19. e6 Bd6 20. Bxd6 Qxd6 21. exd7 Qxd7 22. Qe5 {and both Black's d-pawns are weak.} ) 14. Ne3 {Lining up Nxd5 ideas, as well as Ng4.} a4 {Or:} (14... Rfc8 15. Nxd5 $1 exd5 16. e6 Bd6 17. Bxd6 Qxd6 18. exd7 Qxd7 19. Ng5 Nd4 (19... h6 20. Bh3 f5 21. Ne6) 20. Qh5 h6 21. Nxf7 {and White wins a pawn, D.Gross-Petrik, Guarapuava 1995.}) (14... Nb6 {(this stops Nxd5 tricks but removes a defender from the kingside)} 15. Ng4 Qa7 16. h5 Rfc8 17. h6 g6 18. c3 bxc3 19. bxc3 Nd7 20. Bg5 {and White has annoying pressure on the dark squares around the black king, Benko-Csom, Palma de Mallorca 1971.}) 15. b3 ({Uhlmann gives} 15. Nxd5 exd5 16. e6 {, with a slight plus top White}) 15... Ra7 16. h5 {and now the game Vasiukov-Uhlmann, Berlin 1962, continued} Rfa8 17. h6 g6 18. Nxd5 exd5 19. e6 Qd8 20. exf7+ Kh8 (20... Kf8 21. Ng5 Bxg5 22. Bxg5 Qxg5 23. Qe8+ ) ({or} 20... Kxf7 21. Qe6+ Kf8 22. Ng5 Bxg5 23. Bd6+ {are winning for White.}) 21. Ne5 Ncxe5 22. Qxe5+ Bf6 (22... Nxe5 {loses after} 23. Bxe5+ Bf6 24. Bxf6+ Qxf6 25. Re8+ {.}) 23. Qe8+ Nf8 24. Be5 Qb6 25. Bxd5 Rc8 26. Be6 Bxe5 27. Bxc8 Bd6 28. Bxa6 Rxa6 29. bxa4 Ra7 30. Re6 Qc7 31. Rae1 c4 32. Rxd6 Qxd6 33. Re6 {and Black resigned,} ({on account of} 33. Re6 Qc5 34. d4 {.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "A23: 8...b6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "27"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Re1 b6 {This move shouldn't concern White too much. Indeed, Black often winds up playing ...b6-b5, arriving a tempo down on Variation A24. These positions are worth studying, however, as Black often stumbles into them after having played an earlier ...b7-b6, before deciding to castle short.} 9. e5 Nd7 ({Or} 9... Ne8 10. Nf1 f5 11. exf6 Bxf6 12. Ne3 Nd6 {(Jansa-Kostro, Polanica Zdroj 1968), and now Uhlmann recommends} 13. c3 {, intending Ng4.}) 10. Nf1 Ba6 ({Or} 10... Bb7 11. h4 {and now:} Z0 (11... b5 12. N1h2 a5 13. Ng4 a4 14. a3 b4 { (Ciocaltea-Zivkovic, Bar 1977), and now} 15. h5 {, intending h5-h6,} ({looks stronger than the game continuation of} 15. Bg5 {.})) (11... h6 12. N1h2 Re8 13. Ng4 Nf8 14. c3 Rc8 15. Bh3 a5 16. Bd2 b5 17. d4 {and White was doing well in Liberzon-Murey, Reykjavik 1975. The rest of the game is interesting; White successfully sacrifices on the kingside and crashes through:} cxd4 18. cxd4 Qb6 19. Bxh6 gxh6 20. Qd2 Nh7 21. Qf4 Nd8 22. Bf1 Kh8 23. Bd3 Rg8 24. Qxh6 Rg6 25. Bxg6 fxg6 26. Nf6 Bxf6 27. exf6 Qc7 28. Ne5 Kg8 29. Rac1 {1-0.})) 11. h4 Rc8 ({ Or} 11... Qe8 12. Bh3 Bd8 13. Bf4 Bc7 14. N1h2 Nd8 15. Qd2 {and White gradually builds up the pressure, Petrosian-Barcza, Budapest 1952.}) 12. N1h2 b5 13. Bg5 (13. h5 {also comes into consideration.}) 13... b4 {We are following the game Ljubojevic-Korchnoi, Sao Paulo 1979.} 14. Z0 ({Here Korchnoi erred with} 14. Qd2 {and after} c4 15. d4 c3 16. bxc3 bxc3 17. Qf4 Nb4 18. Rec1 Be2 19. a3 Nc6 20. Re1 Ba6 {Black was doing well.}) ({Instead White should continue actions on the kingside with} 14. Qc1) ({or} 14. Ng4 { (Cabrilo).}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "A24: 8...b5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "18"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Re1 b5 {Black's most popular and ambitious move. Queenside operations are not delayed any further.} 9. e5 {and now Black has a choice of knight retreats:} Z0 ({A241:} 9... Ne8) ({A242:} 9... Nd7) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "A241: 9...Ne8"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "32"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Re1 b5 9. e5 Ne8 ({This is much less popular than} 9... Nd7 {, although it is not clear whether there is any particular reason for this.}) 10. Nf1 {White carries on operations on the kingside.} b4 {Alternatively:} (10... Nc7 11. h4 Bd7 12. h5 b4 13. h6 g6 14. Bf4 Nb5 15. Qc1 {was unclear in Reinderman-Bischoff, Venlo 2000.}) (10... f6 {(this seems premature)} 11. exf6 Bxf6 (11... gxf6 12. Bh6 Rf7 13. c4 Nc7 14. cxd5 Nxd5 15. a3 Rb8 16. Rc1 { and Black's pawn structure leaves a lot to be desired, Borik-Sonntag, German Bundesliga 1995}) 12. Ne3 Qd6 (12... e5 13. Nxe5) 13. c4 Nc7 14. Ng4 e5 15. Nxf6+ gxf6 (15... Qxf6 16. cxd5 Nxd5 17. Nxe5 {is strong for White}) 16. cxd5 Nxd5 17. Nd2 Be6 18. Ne4 Qe7 19. Bh6 Rfd8 20. Rc1 c4 21. Qh5 { and Black's position was full of weaknesses, Dolmatov-Meyer, Philadelphia 1991. }) 11. h4 a5 12. N1h2 (12. Bf4 a4 13. a3 {(Fischer's recipe – see also Variation A2421)} bxa3 14. bxa3 Nc7 15. h5 Nb5 16. h6 g6 17. c4 Nbd4 18. Nxd4 Nxd4 19. Ne3 Bb7 20. Rb1 Bc6 {was equal in Sandipan-Davies, Dhaka 2001.}) 12... a4 13. Ng5 {Or:} (13. a3 {(to prevent ...a4-a3)} bxa3 14. bxa3 Nc7 15. Bg5 Ba6 16. Qd2 Rb8 17. Ng4 Kh8 18. Bxe7 Qxe7 19. h5 h6 {(preventing h5-h6) was unclear in McShane-Davies, British League 1997.}) (13. Ng4 a3 14. h5 f5 15. exf6 gxf6 16. bxa3 bxa3 17. Nh6+ Kg7 18. c4 {, with a complicated position, Szabo-Darga, Winnipeg 1967.}) 13... a3 14. bxa3 Nd4 ({The more miserly} 14... bxa3 {should be considered.}) 15. axb4 cxb4 16. Ngf3 Nb5 {, when Black has some compensation for the pawn, but it's probably not quite enough, Musil-Velimirovic, Portoroz/Ljubljana 1975.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "A242: 9...Nd7"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "24"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Re1 b5 9. e5 Nd7 {This is by far Black's most popular retreat.} 10. Nf1 a5 11. h4 b4 (11... a4 12. a3 b4 13. Bf4 {transposes to Variation A2421.}) (11... Bb7 12. N1h2 a4 {(Pavlov-Sveshnikov, Moscow 1977) and now White should play} 13. a3 $1 {.}) 12. Bf4 {Here we will look at two possible ideas for Black, which are closely linked.} Z0 ({A2421:} 12... a4) ({A2422:} 12... Ba6) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "A2421: 12...a4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "61"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Re1 b5 9. e5 Nd7 10. Nf1 a5 11. h4 b4 12. Bf4 a4 {This move has been criticised, perhaps unfairly, in some texts.} 13. a3 {Bobby Fischer's important move, which breathed new life into this variation for White. The main point is that Black is prevented from playing ...a4-a3 and thus weakening the c3- and d4-squares. From a practical viewpoint White has scored very well from this position.} bxa3 {Given as the 'main line', but in my opinion this may be a slight inaccuracy.} (13... Ba6 {loses a pawn after} 14. axb4 cxb4 15. Rxa4 { , but Black's compensation is considerable after} Nc5 16. Ra1 b3 {. In which case, White might have nothing better than to transpose to Variation A2422 with 14 Ne3 or 14 N1h2.}) 14. bxa3 Ba6 (14... Nd4 15. c4 Nb6 ({better is } 15... Nxf3+) 16. Nxd4 cxd4 17. Qg4 {gave White a strong attack in Sasikiran-Reefat, Kelamabakkam 2000.}) 15. Ne3 Na5 {Or:} (15... Bb5 16. c4 $1 {is strong – compare with Variation A2422.}) (15... Nd4 16. c4 Nb3 ({ after} 16... Nb6 17. cxd5 Nxd5 18. Nxd5 exd5 19. Nxd4 cxd4 20. Qxa4 Bxd3 21. Qxd4 {White was simply a pawn up in Geurink-Tondivar, Leeuwarden 1995}) 17. cxd5 Nxa1 18. Qxa1 exd5 19. Nxd5 {and White has excellent compensation for the exchange, for example} Bxd3 20. e6 fxe6 (20... Nf6 21. Nxe7+ Qxe7 22. Ne5 Bg6 23. Nc6 Qb7 24. Bd6 {was very good for White, Gheorghiu-Uhlmann, Sofia 1967 }) 21. Rxe6 Bf6 {(Vogt-Schauwecker, Swiss League 1994) and now} 22. Qa2 { looks strong, for example} Kh8 (22... c4 23. Bc7 Qc8 24. Rxf6) 23. Nxf6 Rxf6 (23... gxf6 24. Bh6 Re8 25. Ng5 {;}) (23... Nxf6 24. Rd6) 24. Rxf6 Nxf6 25. Ne5 Ra7 26. Qd2 c4 27. Nxc4 {and despite being the exchange up, Black has serious problems dealing with the threat of Ne5.}) 16. Bh3 (16. Ng5 { also looks good, for example} Rb8 17. Bh3 Rb6 (17... h6 18. Nxf7) 18. Qg4 Bc8 19. Qh5 Bxg5 20. hxg5 g6 21. Qh6 Qe7 22. Ng4 Re8 23. Nf6+ Nxf6 24. gxf6 Qf8 25. Qh4 {and White's attack is looking very dangerous, Eisenmann-Drechsler, correspondence 1988.}) 16... d4 17. Nf1 ({Strange at first sight, but} 17. Ng4 {would block the queen's route to the kingside.}) 17... Nb6 18. Ng5 { . White has a very menacing attack. We are following the stem game Fischer-Miagmiasuren, Sousse Interzonal 1967, which continued} Nd5 19. Bd2 Bxg5 20. Bxg5 Qd7 21. Qh5 Rfc8 22. Nd2 Nc3 23. Bf6 Qe8 (23... gxf6 24. exf6 Kh8 25. Nf3 Nd5 26. Qh6 Rg8 27. Ne5 Qc7 28. Bg2 {– Black has no good defence to Be4 –} Rae8 29. Be4 Nxf6 30. Qxf6+ Rg7 31. Rab1 Qe7 32. Ng4 {and White has a winning advantage.}) 24. Ne4 g6 25. Qg5 Nxe4 26. Rxe4 c4 27. h5 cxd3 28. Rh4 Ra7 ({Or} 28... dxc2 29. hxg6 c1=Q+ 30. Rxc1 Rxc1+ 31. Kh2 fxg6 32. Rxh7 Kxh7 33. Qh4+ Kg8 34. Qh8+ Kf7 35. Qg7# {.}) 29. Bg2 dxc2 30. Qh6 Qf8 31. Qxh7+ {1-0.} (31. Qxh7+ Kxh7 32. hxg6+ Kxg6 33. Be4# {is mate.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "A2422: 12...Ba6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "29"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Re1 b5 9. e5 Nd7 10. Nf1 a5 11. h4 b4 12. Bf4 Ba6 {This move has taken over the mantle of being the main line.} 13. N1h2 ({Also interesting is} 13. Ng5 { and now:} Z0 (13... Bxg5 {(this gives White a free attack)} 14. hxg5 Qc7 15. Qh5 Bb7 16. Nh2 Nd4 17. Ng4 Nxc2 18. Nf6+ Nxf6 19. gxf6 Kh8 20. fxg7+ Kxg7 21. Qg5+ {1-0 Minkov-Hanzel, correspondence.}) (13... h6 14. Nh3 {, followed by Qg4 or Qh5.}) (13... Qe8 {(the best defence)} 14. Qg4 (14. Qh5 Bxg5 15. hxg5 f5 {blocks the White attack; players should be aware of this defence }) 14... Kh8 (14... a4 15. Nxe6 {1-0 was the abrupt conclusion of Bronstein-Uhlmann, Moscow 1971,}) (14... Nb6 15. h5 Bb5 16. Nf3 Kh8 17. h6 g6 18. Bg5 a4 19. Qf4 Bxg5 20. Nxg5 Qe7 21. Ne3 Ra7 22. Ng4 {gave White a strong attack on the dark squares, Van der Weide-Visser, Dutch League 1995}) 15. Nh2 Bxg5 ({Black should play} 15... Nd4) ({or} 15... a4) 16. hxg5 Nd4 17. Rac1 a4 18. Nf3 b3 19. axb3 axb3 20. Nxd4 cxd4 21. Bd2 {and the d-pawn is dropping off, Baur-Schneider, Badenweiler 1994.})) ({It's also possible to play as in Variation A2421 with} 13. Ne3 a4 14. a3 Bb5 (14... bxa3 15. bxa3 { transposes to Variation A2421}) 15. h5 ({after} 15. c4 {we see the point of Black not exchanging on a3; he can play} bxc3 16. bxc3 Na5 17. Rb1 Bc6 18. c4 dxc4 19. dxc4 Rb8 {and Black is even better, Damjanovic-Uhlmann, Monte Carlo 1968}) 15... Rc8 16. Ng4 c4 17. d4 c3 18. bxc3 bxa3 19. h6 {and once again we have a very finely balanced position, J.Kristiansen-Sorensen, Lyngby 1989.}) 13... a4 14. a3 {Once again following Fischer's idea of preventing Black from playing ...a4-a3.} ({An example of White allowing the advance is the following:} 14. Rc1 a3 15. b3 Rc8 (15... Na7 16. Ng5 Nb5 17. Qh5 h6 18. Ngf3 Qe8 19. Qg4 Kh8 20. Bf1 Nb8 21. Bd2 Nc6 22. Bh3 {was unclear in Polugaevsky-Guyot, France 1993}) 16. Ng4 Nd4 17. Nxd4 cxd4 18. Nh2 Qc7 19. Qg4 Kh8 20. Nf3 Qc3 21. Bg5 Bxg5 22. Nxg5 h6 {. Now in the game P.Claesen-Muir, European Team Championship, Batumi 1999, White played passively with} 23. Nf3 $2 ({instead Horn analyses the following variation to a draw:} 23. Nxf7+ Rxf7 24. Qxe6 Rcf8 25. Qxa6 Rxf2 26. Qd6 Qd2 27. Bxd5 Rh2 28. Rf1 Rff2 29. Qc6 Qe3 30. Qa8+ Nf8 31. Qxf8+ Rxf8+ 32. Kxh2) {, and after} 23... Qb2 {Black went on to win.}) 14... Bb5 {Alternatively:} (14... c4 15. d4 c3 16. bxc3 bxc3 17. Ng5 Nb6 ({Kaidanov suggests that} 17... h6 {is stronger, against which White should play} 18. Nh3 {and Qh5}) 18. Qh5 {and now:} Z0 (18... h6 19. Ng4 hxg5 ({or} 19... Nxd4 20. Nxh6+ gxh6 21. Qxh6 Bxg5 22. Bxg5 f6 23. Bxf6 Rxf6 24. exf6 Qc7 25. Re5 {and White wins}) 20. hxg5 g6 (20... Nxd4 {loses after} 21. Nf6+ gxf6 22. gxf6 Bxf6 23. exf6 Qxf6 24. Be5) 21. Qh6 Nxd4 22. Nf6+ Bxf6 23. gxf6 Nf5 24. Qh3 {and Kaidanov assesses this as winning for White, which seems correct. After} Nd7 25. g4 Nd6 26. Qh6 Ne8 27. Re3 Nexf6 28. Rh3 {Black has no good defence.}) (18... Bxg5 19. Bxg5 Qe8 20. Bf6 Nxd4 ( 20... gxf6 {is more resilient, but Kaidanov's} 21. Ng4 Nd7 22. Bxd5 exd5 23. exf6 Kh8 24. Rxe8 Raxe8 25. Qxd5 Ncb8 {is still clearly better for White}) 21. Ng4 {and White's attack proved to be much too strong, Kaidanov-Nijboer, Elista Olympiad 1998. The game concluded} Nf5 22. Qg5 Kh8 23. Bxg7+ Nxg7 24. Nf6 Qd8 25. Qh6 Qxf6 26. Qxf6 Rae8 27. g4 Nd7 28. Qf4 Bc4 29. h5 Rc8 30. Rab1 f5 31. exf6 {1-0.})) (14... bxa3 15. bxa3 Rb8 16. Ng5 Qe8 17. c4 Nb6 18. cxd5 Nxd5 19. Bxd5 exd5 20. e6 {and the complications favour White, Kaidanov-S. Anderson, Dallas 1996.}) 15. Z0 {The position after 14...Bb5 is rich in possibilities and gives both sides ample opportunity to play for the win. Here are some examples:} (15. Bh3 Qe8 16. Ng4 Rc8 17. Qc1 (17. h5) ({or} 17. Bg5 {look stronger}) 17... Nd4 18. Nxd4 cxd4 19. Qd1 bxa3 20. bxa3 Rc3 21. Bc1 Qc8 22. Re2 Qc7 23. Bb2 Rc8 24. Bxc3 Qxc3 {and Black has more than enough compensation for the exchange in C.Hansen-Ye Jiangchuan, Istanbul Olympiad 2000.}) (15. Ng5 {and now:} Z0 (15... Nd4 16. c3 Nb3 17. Ra2 { (incarcerating the rook!)} Rc8 (17... Qc7 {may be stronger; the position is unclear after} 18. c4 dxc4 19. Bxa8 Rxa8 20. dxc4 Bxc4 21. Qc2 Bxg5 22. Qxc4 Nb6 23. Qe4) 18. c4 dxc4 19. dxc4 Bc6 20. Bxc6 Rxc6 21. axb4 Nb6 22. Qc2 g6 23. b5 Rc7 24. Ng4 {and White was better in Jansa-Krallmann, Hamburg 1995.}) (15... Qe8 16. Qh5 Bxg5 (16... h6 17. Ng4 hxg5 18. hxg5 {gives White a powerful attack}) 17. Qxg5 (17. hxg5 f5 {is a defensive trick}) 17... Nd4 { (Fleitas-Perez, Cuba 1998) and now, according to Perez, White can keep the advantage with} 18. Ng4 Qd8 19. Ne3 {.})) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "B: 5...g6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B40"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "15"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 g6 {This is an ambitious move and a popular choice, especially at grandmaster level. From g7 Black's fianchettoed bishop controls the vital e5-sqare, and thus puts pressure on White's spearheading pawn, if and when it arrives there. The bishop also provides protection to the black king, if he castles short. On the other hand, the move ...g7-g6 does weaken the dark squares on the kingside, and White can always hope to take advantage of this later on.} 6. Bg2 Bg7 7. O-O Nge7 (7... Nf6 {has always been less popular, perhaps because it blocks the bishop on g7. More recently, however, it's been used by some strong grandmasters, so we should take a quick look. Adams-Khalifman, Dortmund 2000, continued} 8. c3 ({ one possibility is} 8. exd5 {, when} exd5 ({while} 8... Nxd5 {transposes to Variation B1}) 9. Re1+ {is annoying for Black}) 8... O-O 9. e5 Nd7 10. d4 b5 11. Re1 b4 12. Nf1 Ba6 13. h4 bxc3 14. bxc3 Qa5 15. Bd2 Nb6 16. c4 Qa4 17. cxd5 Qxd1 18. Raxd1 Nxd5 19. dxc5 {and White held a slight plus.}) 8. Z0 {After 7... Nge7 I'm giving White a choice of two different approaches. Variation B1 is tricky, but Variation B2 offers White more serious chances for an opening advantage.} ({B1:} 8. exd5) ({B2:} 8. Re1) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "B1: 8 exd5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "27"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 g6 6. Bg2 Bg7 7. O-O Nge7 8. exd5 $5 {Immediately releasing the tension, White plans to open the centre as quickly as possible, perhaps making use of Black's uncastled king. This is a deceptively tricky line, although Black should be okay, if he knows what he's doing.} exd5 ({For a long time the natural looking} 8... Nxd5 {was considered wrong after} 9. Nb3 ({perhaps White should consider diverging with} 9. Ne4) 9... b6 10. c4 Nde7 11. d4 {, when apparently the position opens up to White's advantage. For example, Csom-Ivkov, Ljubljana/Portoroz 1973, continued} cxd4 ({however,} 11... Ba6 {is much stronger, after which Black seems to be fine}) 12. Nfxd4 Bd7 13. Bg5 f6 14. Be3 O-O 15. Qe2 e5 16. Nb5 { and White's pieces were much more active than their counterparts.}) 9. d4 { I believe this is an idea of the well-known Russian International Master and trainer Mark Dvoretsky. White offers a pawn to mess up Black's pawn structure. If this pawn can be regained then White usually keeps an advantage.} cxd4 (9... Nxd4 {leads to a similar position to the text after} 10. Nxd4 cxd4 (10... Bxd4 11. Nb3 {is annoying for Black; after} Bg7 12. Nxc5 {White has an edge due to the weakness of the isolated d5-pawn}) 11. Nb3 Nc6 (11... Qb6 12. Re1 Be6 13. Bg5 {is strong}) 12. Re1+ Be6 13. Bf4 O-O 14. Nc5 {and White has reasonable compensation for the pawn.}) ({For those black players not willing to accept the sacrifice there's the enticing} 9... c4 {, gaining space on queenside. However, this move has its own drawback in that it leaves the d5-pawn backward and inevitably vulnerable. Here's an excellent example of White exploiting this:} 10. c3 Bf5 11. Re1 O-O 12. Nf1 h6 13. h4 {(preventing . ..g6-g5)} Re8 14. Bf4 Qd7 15. Ne5 Nxe5 16. Bxe5 f6 17. Bf4 g5 18. hxg5 hxg5 19. Bd2 Bg4 20. Bf3 Bxf3 21. Qxf3 g4 22. Qh1 f5 23. Qh5 Rf8 24. Bg5 { (Black has problems defending all his weak points)} Rae8 25. Ne3 Nc8 26. Kg2 Rf7 27. Bh6 Bxh6 28. Qxh6 Ref8 29. Rh1 Rg7 30. Rh5 Ne7 31. Rg5 Rff7 32. Rh1 Kf8 33. Rxg7 Rxg7 34. Qf6+ Kg8 35. Rh5 Qc6 36. Qe5 {1-0 Gormally-Zagorskis, Copenhagen 1998 – f5 is dropping and then Black's whole position collapses.}) 10. Nb3 Qb6 {Black should definitely try to hang on to his pawn, otherwise he will simply be worse due to his weakened pawn structure:} (10... O-O 11. Nfxd4 Nf5 12. Ne2 (12. Nxc6 bxc6 13. c3 a5 {was better for Black in Moskovic-Emms, Barking 1994}) 12... d4 13. Nf4 Re8 14. Nd3 {and White is better here – the knight is well placed on d3 and the d4-pawn can eventually become vulnerable.}) (10... Bg4 11. h3 Bxf3 12. Qxf3 O-O 13. Bf4 {'and White retains positional compensation for the sacrificed pawn' – Dvoretsky.}) 11. Bf4 ({In the stem game Dvorietzky-Vulfson, USSR 1986, White played} 11. Bg5 $5 Nf5 ({Dvoretsky, however, gives} 11... O-O {as an improvement, with the continuation} 12. Nfxd4 Nf5 {, when White's pressure on d5 is compensated by Black's pressure on b2}) 12. Re1+ Be6 13. g4 Nd6 14. Nfxd4 Bxd4 15. Nxd4 Qxd4 16. Bxd5 O-O 17. Bxc6 Qc5 18. Bf3 {and emerged from the complications with an edge.}) 11... O-O (11... d3 {. White could try} 12. cxd3 $5 (12. c3 Bf5 {is similar to the text}) 12... Bxb2 13. Rb1 Bg7 14. Nbd4 Qa5 15. Nb5 {, although after} O-O {the best I can see is a draw by repetition after} 16. Nc7 Rb8 17. Nb5 {.}) 12. Bd6 {In the excellent book 'Opening Preparation' Dvoretsky claims White has the better chances here, but it's certainly not clear-cut.} d3 13. c3 {White must allow Black a passed pawn on d3 for the moment.} (13. cxd3 Bxb2 {would actually lead to a position which is normally reached (with colour reversed) via the move order 1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 exd5 cxd5 4 c4 Nf6 5 Nc3 g6 6 Qb3 Bg7 7 cxd5 0-0 8 Nge2 Nbd7 9 g3 Nb6 10 Bg2 Bf5 11 0-0 Bd3 12 d6 exd6 13 Bxb7. The position after 13 Bxb7 is known to be good for White, so 13 cxd3 certainly cannot be recommended!}) 13... Bf5 { . This is a critical position for the assessment of 8 exd5. White has some compensation and certainly if he picks up the d3-pawn he will be better, but that's quite a big 'if'.} 14. Z0 (14. Bc5 Qb5 {achieves little for White.}) ( 14. Nh4 Rfd8 ({or} 14... Be4 15. Bc5 Qb5 16. f3 f5) 15. Bc5 Qc7 16. Re1 Be4 17. f3 Bf5 18. Nxf5 Nxf5 19. Bh3 Qxg3+ 20. Bg2 d4 {was unclear in Vinke-Bergstrom, Lindesberg 1993.}) (14. Re1 Rfe8 15. Bc5 Qc7 16. Nh4 Be6 ({ Black could try the interesting} 16... Be4 {, when both} 17. f3 ({and} 17. Bxe4 dxe4 18. Rxe4 Rad8 {are unclear}) 17... f5) 17. Qxd3 (17. Nf3 Bf5 18. Nh4 Be6 19. Nf3 {1/2-1/2 was the end of Poettinger-Novkovic, Vorarlberg 1995}) 17... Ne5 18. Qc2 {; White has succeeded in regaining the pawn and keeps an edge due to his better structure. In conclusion, 8 exd5 is very tricky and certainly worth a try, but it seems more logical to delay this capture until Black has committed himself.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "B2: 8 Re1"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "16"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 g6 6. Bg2 Bg7 7. O-O Nge7 8. Re1 {This flexible move, maintaining the tension in the centre, is White's most popular choice. Now Black must make an important decision: whether to castle or to leave his king in the centre and develop elsewhere.} Z0 ({B21:} 8... O-O) ({B22:} 8... b6) ({Alternatively:} 8... Qc7 {(the queen is not necessarily well placed here)} 9. exd5 exd5 (9... Nxd5 10. Nb3 b6 11. c4 Nde7 12. d4 {exploits White's pressure on the long diagonal}) 10. d4 c4 (10... Nxd4 11. Nxd4 Bxd4 12. Nb3 Bg7 13. Bf4 Qd8 14. Qxd5 Qxd5 15. Bxd5 Bxb2 16. Rab1 Bf6 17. Nxc5 {leaves White with a dominating position,}) ({while after} 10... cxd4 11. Nb3 Bg4 {White gains time on the black queen with} 12. Bf4) 11. Nf1 O-O 12. c3 {and White will follow up with Bf4.}) (8... dxe4 9. Nxe4 b6 10. Bg5 Bb7 ( 10... Bxb2 11. Nf6+ Bxf6 12. Bxf6 O-O 13. Ne5 {is horrible for Black}) 11. Qd2 {and the dark squares around the black king are looking very shaky. Abello-Riff, Bescanon 1999, concluded} Qc7 12. Bf6 Rg8 13. Bxg7 Rxg7 14. Nf6+ Kf8 15. Qh6 Nf5 16. Nxh7+ Ke7 17. Qg5+ Kd7 18. Nf6+ Kc8 19. Ne8 {and Black resigned.}) (8... d4 {(an obvious space gaining move which blocks the centre; there is, however, a major drawback to this move)} 9. e5 {(now that White has possession of the e4- and c4-squares, this advance is stronger than normal) } Qc7 10. Nc4 O-O 11. a4 {and White's pieces are well placed.}) (8... h6 { (the idea of this move is to support the pawn thrust ...g6-g5-g4 which can be effective when White has pushed e4-e5 – the e5-pawn can become vulnerable)} 9. exd5 ({White is aiming for a more favourable version of Variation C1, with Re1 being more useful than ...h7-h6;} 9. h4 {is the most popular move, transposing after} b6 {to Variation B222}) 9... exd5 (9... Nxd5 10. Nb3 b6 11. c4 Nde7 12. d4 cxd4 13. Nfxd4 {again causes Black problems along the long diagonal}) 10. d4 cxd4 11. Nb3 Bg4 (11... Qb6 12. Bf4 O-O 13. Bd6 {– here the inclusion of Re1 and ...h7-h6 really helps White –} Re8 14. Bc5 Qc7 15. Nfxd4 {and Black has no compensation for his weak isolated d5-pawn}) 12. h3 Bxf3 13. Qxf3 O-O 14. Bf4 {and White has the usual positional compensation for the pawn.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "B21: 8...0-0"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "40"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 g6 6. Bg2 Bg7 7. O-O Nge7 8. Re1 O-O {'Castling is bad for Black; White's attack is very dangerous' – Dvoretsky. I wouldn't necessarily agree that castling is 'bad'. After all, some good Grandmasters have been fully aware of the dangers and have still chosen the move. Black does, however, have to play very carefully in order not to be blown off the board, and there's more good news in that in some lines White's position virtually plays itself.} 9. h4 ({Previously the more direct} 9. e5 Qc7 10. Qe2 {was thought to be strong, but Black's play in the 10...g5 variation casts doubt upon this.} Z0 (10... b6 11. Nf1 Ba6 12. Bf4 Rad8 13. h4 d4 14. N1h2 Nb4 15. Qd2 {(White's attack is automatic)} Rfe8 16. Ng4 Ned5 17. Bh6 Bh8 18. Bg5 Rd7 19. a3 Nc6 20. Bf6 Nxf6 21. exf6 h5 22. Nh6+ Kf8 23. Ng5 Bxf6 24. Nh7+ Kg7 25. Nxf6 Kxf6 26. Nf5 exf5 ({it's mate after} 26... gxf5 27. Qg5# { ,}) (26... Kxf5 27. Qg5# {,}) ({or} 26... e5 27. Qg5+ Ke6 28. Ng7+ Kd6 29. Qf6+ Re6 30. Ne8#) 27. Rxe8 Kg7 28. Rae1 Nd8 29. Qg5 c4 30. Rh8 Ne6 31. Qh6+ Kf6 32. Re8 {1-0 Ciocaltea-Ilijin, Romania 1976.}) (10... g5 11. h3 (11. Nxg5 Qxe5 { looks okay for Black}) 11... h6 (11... Ng6) 12. Nb3 b6 13. d4 Ng6 14. Be3 cxd4 15. Bxd4 Nxd4 16. Nbxd4 Bd7 {with an unclear position, Movsesian-Ulibin, Dresden 1994.})) 9... h6 {This move nearly always seems to follow h2-h4, but Black does have other options:} (9... e5 {certainly prevents White from playing e4-e5, but loosens the centre. White can claim an edge using quieter means, for example} 10. exd5 Nxd5 11. c3 b6 12. Nc4 Re8 13. Qb3 Bb7 14. Ng5 Qd7 15. Ne4 Re6 16. a4 Rd8 17. a5 {, as in Lau-Löffler, German Bundesliga 1989.}) ( 9... Qc7 10. h5 h6 (10... b6 {looks stronger}) 11. hxg6 fxg6 12. c3 Kh7 13. Nb3 d4 14. cxd4 cxd4 15. e5 Bd7 16. Nc5 {and Black has many weaknesses, Mortensen-Agdestein, Espoo 1989.}) (9... d4 10. e5 Qc7 11. Qe2 Nd5 12. Nf1 { and White will continue with N1h2-g4.}) 10. e5 f5 {Recently it's been shown that Black should strike back on the kingside before falling into a passive position, in which White's play is automatic.} ({The quieter alternative is} 10... Qc7 11. Qe2 {and now:} Z0 (11... g5 {(with the addition of h2-h4 and . ..h7-h6 this just doesn't work)} 12. hxg5 hxg5 13. Nxg5 Qxe5 14. Nde4 Nd4 ( 14... dxe4 {loses to} 15. Qh5) 15. Qd1 (15. Qh5 Qf5 {stops White's attack}) 15... f6 ({or} 15... dxe4 16. Qh5 Qf5 17. Bxe4 {and Black can resign}) 16. Bf4 Qf5 17. Nd6 Qg6 18. Nxc8 Raxc8 19. Nxe6 {with a winning position, Nanu-Puscas, Baile Tusnad 1999.}) (11... b5 12. Nf1 b4 13. N1h2 Kh8 14. Bf4 Ng8 15. Ng4 Qe7 16. Qd2 h5 17. Ngh2 {and White will continue the attack with Ng5 and Nhf3, Iordachescu-Prasad, Yerevan Olympiad 1996.}) (11... b6 12. Nf1 d4 13. N1h2 Kh7 14. Ng4 Nd5 {and now Dvoretzky-Feuerstein, Parsippany 2000, continued} 15. Qd2 ({the more direct} 15. h5 {looks even stronger; after} g5 16. Bxg5 hxg5 17. Nxg5+ Kg8 18. Qe4 f5 19. exf6 Nxf6 20. Qg6 {White has a winning position}) 15... h5 16. Nf6+ Kh8 17. Qg5 Qd8 18. Nxd5 exd5 19. Bf4 { , with an edge to White.})) (10... b5 {(Black begins his queenside counterplay) } 11. Nf1 a5 12. Bf4 Ba6 13. Qd2 Kh7 14. N1h2 Nd4 15. Nxd4 cxd4 16. Ng4 Nf5 17. Bf3 Rc8 18. Kg2 a4 19. a3 Rc6 20. Rac1 Qe7 21. Bg5 {. After this move Black cannot defend his position:} Z0 (21... Qc7 22. Nf6+ Bxf6 ({or} 22... Kh8 23. g4 $1 hxg5 24. hxg5 Nh4+ 25. Kg3 Bxf6 26. gxf6 Kh7 27. Kxh4) 23. Bxf6 Rc8 24. Bd1 Ng7 25. Qf4 Qa5 26. Rh1 b4 27. Bxg7 Kxg7 28. h5 {and Black resigned, Solomunovic-Horther, Germany 1999.}) (21... hxg5 {forces White to show the true depth of his idea.} 22. hxg5 Qc7 23. Nf6+ Bxf6 24. gxf6 Rc8 25. g4 { and then:} Z0 (25... Rxc2 26. Rh1+ Kg8 27. Rxc2 Qxc2 28. Qf4 Ne3+ 29. Kg3 { and White wins.}) (25... Nh4+ 26. Kg3 Rxc2 27. Qg5 Rh8 28. Rh1 Kg8 29. Rce1 $1 Qa5 ({what else? –} 29... Kf8 {loses after} 30. Rxh4 Rxh4 31. Qxh4 Ke8 32. Qh7 Qc5 33. Rh1 Qf8 34. Qg7) 30. Rd1 Qc7 31. Rxh4 Rxh4 32. Qxh4 Qxe5+ 33. Kg2 {and Rh1 will be decisive.}) (25... Ne3+ 26. Rxe3 Rxc2 ({Black will be mated after} 26... dxe3 27. Rh1+ Kg8 28. Qxe3) 27. Be2 Rxd2 28. Rh3+ Kg8 29. Rch1 {and it's mate next move.}))) 11. exf6 Rxf6 {Now White's spearhead pawn on e5 has been eliminated so Black is less likely to come under the same sort of pressure on the kingside. Black's pieces could become active and he has use of the semi-open f-file. On the other hand, there are other causes for concern, including Black's airy kingside and the pressure down the half-open e-file.} 12. Nb3 {Planning Bf4.} ({Also possible is} 12. Nh2 {(planning Ng4)} Rf7 13. Ng4 Qd6 (13... e5 14. c4 {looks good for White}) 14. Nb3 Kh7 15. c4 { and now in Oratovsky-Maiwald, Vejen 1993, Black erred with} Bd7 ({Oratovsky suggests} 15... b6 {as an improvement, giving} 16. Be3 Bb7 17. Qc1 {as unclear} ) {, allowing White to claim an advantage with} 16. Be3 b6 17. d4 {.}) 12... Qd6 (12... b6 {is too slow; White simply plays} 13. Bf4 {, followed by Qd2.} ) (12... e5 {is playable, however. White should continue with} 13. Nh2 Qd6 14. Ng4 Bxg4 15. Qxg4 Raf8 16. Re2 {, when the bishop pair promises an edge.}) 13. d4 (13. Bf4 Rxf4 14. gxf4 Bxb2 {gives Black excellent compensation for the exchange}) ({while} 13. Be3 b6 14. Qd2 Kh7 15. Bf4 {is once again answered by} Rxf4 16. gxf4 Bd7 17. d4 Rf8 {with an unclear position, Sheremetieva-M. Socko, Kishinev 1995.}) 13... cxd4 14. Nfxd4 e5 15. Nb5 {. French GM Joel Lautier assesses this double-edged position as slightly better for White, but White must play accurately to bear this assessment out. The game Skorchenko-Kiseleva, Krasnodar 1998, continued} Qd8 16. c4 Qb6 17. Qe2 ({ Instead, White should play} 17. Be3 d4 18. Bd2 Be6 19. Nd6 Raf8 20. Ne4 R6f7 21. Nbc5 Bf5 22. b4 {and I prefer White.}) 17... dxc4 18. Qxc4+ Be6 19. Qe2 Nf5 20. Kh1 Raf8 {and Black was very active.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "B22: 8...b6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "17"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 g6 6. Bg2 Bg7 7. O-O Nge7 8. Re1 b6 {This is Black's most popular move. For the time being he keeps White guessing about where his king will go and instead prepares to fianchetto the c8-bishop. White now has three very playable alternatives:} 9. Z0 ({B221:} 9. exd5) ({B222:} 9. h4) ({B223:} 9. c3) (9. e5 {releases the tension too early and allows Black an easy plan of undermining the support of the pawn:} Qc7 10. Qe2 h6 {(preparing ...g6-g5)} 11. h4 g5 {(anyway)} 12. hxg5 hxg5 13. Nxg5 Qxe5 14. Qxe5 Bxe5 {and Black is better – Dvoretsky.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "B221: 9 exd5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "27"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 g6 6. Bg2 Bg7 7. O-O Nge7 8. Re1 b6 9. exd5 {This move is very direct.} Nxd5 ({After} 9... exd5 10. d4 { White once again reaches a more favourable version of Variation B1 – Re1 is more useful than ...b7-b6. Black has three possible replies:} Z0 (10... cxd4 11. Nb3 Bg4 12. Bg5 O-O 13. Bxe7 Nxe7 14. Nbxd4 {and the isolated pawn on d5 is more of a weakness than a strength.}) (10... Bf5 {(this is tricky)} 11. c4 Nb4 (11... cxd4 12. cxd5 Na5 13. Nxd4) ({and} 11... dxc4 12. Nxc4 O-O 13. dxc5 Qxd1 14. Rxd1 bxc5 15. Be3 {are both clearly favourable for White}) 12. cxd5 Nc2 13. d6 Qxd6 14. Nh4 Nxe1 15. Nxf5 Nxf5 16. Bxa8 Nd3 17. Qe2+ Kd7 18. dxc5 Nxc5 19. Ne4 Nxe4 20. Bxe4 {and Black's vulnerable king on d7 gives White an advantage.}) (10... O-O 11. dxc5 bxc5 12. Nb3 Qb6 13. c3 c4 14. Nbd4 {and White has a nice outpost on d4, Oratovsky-Kiriakov, Vejen 1993.})) 10. d4 {Again a sharp response, as White tries to exploit Black's unfinished development and the long h1-a8 diagonal.} (10. Nc4 {would be the solid approach.}) 10... cxd4 (10... Nxd4 11. Nxd4 ({although White also has the extra option of} 11. c4 Nc7 12. Nxd4 cxd4 13. Bxa8 Nxa8 14. Qf3) 11... cxd4 12. Nb3 {transposes to the text.}) 11. Nb3 O-O ({A major alternative is} 11... Bb7 12. Nfxd4 Nxd4 13. Nxd4 Rc8 {(preventing c2-c4).} 14. Z0 ({. Now White has the unexpected blow} 14. Rxe6+ {, leaving Black with two options:} Ne7 { (Peter Horn – this surprisingly calm retreat, exploiting the pin on the d-file, is enough to keep a balanced position)} (14... fxe6 15. Nxe6 Qd7 16. Nxg7+ Qxg7 (16... Kf7 17. Bh6 {left Black in big trouble, Howell-Soln, Bled 1995}) 17. Bxd5 Bxd5 18. Qxd5 Qd7 19. Qe5+ Kf7 20. Bh6 {and White has a very strong attack, Komliakov-Moskalenko, Noyabrsk 1995}) 15. Bxb7 fxe6 16. Be3 (16. Bxc8 $2 {loses to} Bxd4 {, when Black threatens both to capture on c8 and ...Bxf2+}) 16... Rc4 17. Nxe6 Qxd1+ 18. Rxd1 {with an equal position. In fact, best play from here looks to be} Bxb2 19. Rd8+ Kf7 20. Ng5+ Kg7 21. Ne6+ {with a draw by perpetual check.}) ({. Given Black's resources in the above line, maybe White should consider a more positional route with} 14. c3 {, for example} O-O 15. a4 e5 16. Nb5 a6 17. Na3 Bc6 18. Qe2 {and the pressure on Black's queenside ensures that White maintains a slight plus, Tringov-Janosevic, Belgrade 1969.}) ) 12. Nbxd4 Nxd4 13. Nxd4 Ba6 ({Following} 13... Qc7 {White can play quietly with} 14. c3 {,} ({or else try} 14. Bxd5 exd5 15. Bf4 Qc4 16. Be5 {.})) 14. Z0 ({Here White can win a pawn with} 14. Nc6 Qd7 15. Bxd5 exd5 16. Qxd5 { , but after Horn's suggestion of} Rae8 {White has nothing better than to force a draw with} 17. Qxd7 (17. Rxe8 Qxe8 {threatens ...Bb7 and ...Qe1+}) 17... Rxe1+ 18. Kg2 Bf1+ 19. Kf3 Be2+ {with a perpetual, as} 20. Kf4 { loses to} Bh6+ 21. Ke4 Bg4+ {.}) ({If White is playing to win, then he should consider} 14. h4 {, for example} Rc8 (14... h6 {transposes to Variation B222 }) 15. Bg5 Qd7 16. Qd2 Rc4 17. c3 Bxd4 (17... Rfc8 {look safer}) 18. cxd4 f6 19. Bh6 Re8 20. Bf1 Ra4 21. Bh3 {and White's bishops look dangerous, Boyd-Sulava, Cannes 1996.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "B222: 9 h4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "26"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 g6 6. Bg2 Bg7 7. O-O Nge7 8. Re1 b6 9. h4 {A multi-purpose move. White prevents ...g6-g5 and in some positions he can soften up the black kingside with h4-h5. As well as this, White is not committing himself just yet in the centre.} h6 {The most common reply, keeping White's pieces out of g5 and preparing to answer h4-h5 with ...g6-g5!.} 10. c3 {The move c2-c3 is useful in that some lines White is ready to play e4-e5, quickly followed by d3-d4. On the other hand Black can try to benefit from the fact that the d3-pawn is now more vulnerable.} ({After} 10. exd5 {Black must be very careful – the insertion of h2-h4 and ...h7-h6 is sometimes to White's advantage.} Z0 (10... exd5 {(this is probably Black's safest move)} 11. d4 {(we've seen this idea before)} cxd4 12. Nb3 Bg4 13. Bf4 O-O 14. Qd2 Bxf3 15. Bxf3 Kh7 16. Re2 Qd7 17. Rae1 {and White has the usual structural compensation for the pawn, Shirov-G.Hernandez, Merida 2000.}) (10... Nxd5 { (this can lead to great complications)} 11. d4 cxd4 12. Nb3 {and now:} Z0 ( 12... Bb7 13. Nfxd4 Nxd4 (13... Nde7 14. Nb5 O-O 15. Nd6 {is annoying for Black, but is probably better than the text}) 14. Nxd4 Rc8 15. Nxe6 { . Here we see an important difference to Variation B221. The insertion of h2-h4 and ...h7-h6 has left the g6-pawn very weak. After} fxe6 16. Rxe6+ Kf7 17. Qg4 Bf6 ({or} 17... Nf6 18. Rxf6+ Qxf6 19. Bxb7 Rxc2 20. Bd5+ Kf8 21. Bf4 { and Black is unlikely to survive against White's queen and rampaging bishops}) 18. c4 h5 19. Qe4 Rxc4 20. Rxf6+ Nxf6 21. Qxc4+ {White had reached a winning position in Kaiszauri-Mortensen, Gladsaxe 1979.}) (12... O-O 13. Nfxd4 Nxd4 14. Nxd4 Ba6 {and now once again White can win a pawn with} 15. Nc6 ({White should consider instead both} 15. c3) ({and} 15. h5) 15... Qd7 16. Bxd5 exd5 17. Qxd5 {, but Black has sufficient counterplay after either} Rfd8 ({or} 17... Qxd5 18. Ne7+ Kh7 19. Nxd5 Rfe8 {;}) ({notice though that in comparison to Variation B221,} 17... Rae8 {now loses as the white king has the h2-square}) 18. c4 Qxd5 19. cxd5 Rd7 {.}))) 10... a5 {Another common move by Black, who continues to gain space on the queenside. If allowed Black will follow up with ...a5-a4(-a3), but normally White puts a stop to this advance straight away. Another point to Black's move is that it prepares ...Ba6.} ({ Notice that Black is still in no hurry to commit his king to the kingside. After} 10... O-O {White is now ready to advance with} 11. e5 {, knowing that Black will hardly be able to undermine White's protection of e5 with ... g6-g5 now that the king is stuck on the kingside. After 11 e5, White's attack should flow smoothly, for example} Ba6 12. Nf1 b5 13. Be3 d4 14. cxd4 cxd4 15. Bd2 b4 16. Qe2 Rc8 17. N1h2 Nd5 18. Ng4 Kh7 19. h5 {and White has good pressure on the kingside, Vavra-Sulava, Charleville 2000.}) 11. a4 {Preventing Black's expansion plans and claiming the b5-square.} Ba6 {A natural move, targeting the vulnerable pawn on d3.} ({Black's other common choice here is the slightly strange looking} 11... Ra7 {, vacating the dangerous h1-a8 diagonal and thus avoiding many tactical problems. White should now continue} 12. exd5 exd5 (12... Nxd5 {leads to similar lines to text}) 13. Nb3 d4 ({ a point of ...Ra7 –} 13... O-O 14. d4 c4 15. Nbd2 {, followed and b2-b3, gives White an advantage}) 14. cxd4 cxd4 15. Bf4 O-O 16. Ne5 {and White keeps a small advantage. Yudasin-Jukic, Bern 1989, continued} Nxe5 17. Bxe5 Bxe5 (17... Bb7) 18. Rxe5 Qd6 19. Qe2 Be6 20. Nd2 Nc6 21. Rxe6 fxe6 22. Nc4 Qd7 23. Nxb6 Qe8 24. Rc1 {and Black's weakened position more than compensates for the sacrificed material.}) 12. exd5 Nxd5 ({After} 12... exd5 { White plays for d3-d4 with} 13. Nb3 O-O (13... d4 14. Nfxd4 Nxd4 15. cxd4 {is strong for White}) 14. d4 c4 15. Nbd2 {(now the bishop on a6 is misplaced)} Bc8 16. Nf1 Be6 17. Bf4 Qd7 18. b3 {and White will increase the pressure with Ne3, Benjamin-Eingorn, Saint John 1988.}) 13. Nc4 {. By recapturing on d5 with the knight, Black has neutralised any d3-d4 ideas by White, but in return White's knight mow has a very favourable outpost on c4. Black will always have to think twice about playing ...Bxc4, as this would leave him vulnerable on the light squares and prone to tactics along the long diagonal. Here are two possible continuations:} Z0 (13... O-O 14. Qb3 Rb8 15. Bd2 Re8 16. Rad1 Bb7 17. Bc1 Ba8 18. Na3 e5 19. Nd2 Nde7 20. Ndc4 Nc8 21. Nb5 { and White has made good use of his outposts, Lau-Jackelen, Bad Wörishofen 1989. }) (13... Qc7 14. Qb3 (14. h5 g5 15. Nxg5 hxg5 16. Bxd5 O-O-O { is not what White wants,}) ({while} 14. Na3 Rd8 15. Nb5 Bxb5 16. axb5 Nce7 { was fine for Black in Kholmov-Pähtz, Varna 1987;}) (14. Qe2 {looks okay though} ) 14... Rd8 15. Bd2 O-O 16. Rad1 {and White has a small advantage.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "B223: 9 c3"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "57"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 g6 6. Bg2 Bg7 7. O-O Nge7 8. Re1 b6 9. c3 ({Here White follows a more positional course than with} 9. exd5) ({or } 9. h4 {.}) 9... a5 {We've already discussed the ideas behind this move. Black does, however, have many alternatives:} (9... Qc7 {(Black's queen is misplaced and there are now some tricks both along the e-file and the possibility of a later Bf4)} 10. exd5 exd5 (10... Nxd5 11. d4 cxd4 12. Nxd4 Nxd4 13. Bxd5 Nc6 14. Nc4 O-O 15. Bf4 Qb7 16. Bg2 {left Black with a horrible pin along the long diagonal, Filipowicz-Jaracz, Mikolajki 1991}) 11. Nf1 O-O 12. Bf4 Qd7 {and Black's pieces aren't ideally placed, Yurtaev-Dvoretzky, Frunze 1983. Here Dvoretsky suggests} 13. h4 {.}) (9... h6 10. d4 ({White doesn't have to resort to these violent means;} 10. h4 { transposes to Variation C222,}) ({while} 10. exd5 exd5 11. d4 cxd4 12. Nxd4 Nxd4 13. cxd4 O-O {looks equal}) 10... cxd4 11. Nxd4 Nxd4 12. cxd4 dxe4 (12... O-O {is safer –} 13. e5 Ba6 14. Nf3 Qd7 15. h4 Rfc8 16. Bf4 Kh7 17. Qd2 { was slightly better for White in Van der Weide-Podzielny, Essen 2000}) 13. Nxe4 Nd5 (13... Bb7 14. Bf4 O-O 15. Nf6+ {wins material}) 14. Qa4+ Kf8 (14... Qd7 15. Qa3) 15. b3 Kg8 16. Ba3 Bd7 17. Qc4 Rc8 18. Qd3 Bc6 19. Nd6 Rc7 20. Rac1 {and White has a good initiative. Kochetkov-Kalegin, Minsk 1994, continued } Bf8 21. Rxe6 {and White had a crushing attack.}) (9... Bb7 {looks sensible, but now there is a case for} 10. e5 {here, even though Black has yet to castle and can arrange ...g6-g5;} ({otherwise White could continue with noncommittal moves such as} 10. Qe2) ({, or} 10. h4) 10... Z0 {After 10 e5 we have:} (10... Qc7 11. d4 {(the point of 9 c3 – White builds the pawn chain)} O-O-O ({or} 11... cxd4 12. cxd4 Nb4 13. Qa4+ Nec6 14. Re3 {and the knight will be pushed away with a2-a3}) 12. Nf1 h6 13. h4 Kb8 14. Bf4 Rc8 15. Rc1 Nf5 16. Qd2 Bf8 17. Ne3 cxd4 18. cxd4 Nxe3 19. Qxe3 {and White has a comfortable edge, Van der Weide-Baklan, Groningen 1996.}) (10... g5 {(the critical move)} 11. Nxg5 Nxe5 12. Ndf3 N5g6 (12... Nxf3+ 13. Qxf3 O-O 14. Qh5 {is very good for White according to Moiseev}) 13. d4 h6 14. Nh3 Qd7 15. a4 {(Black's king won't want to be on the kingside, so White discourages queenside castling)} Nc6 ( 15... a5 {– Moiseev}) 16. Nf4 Nxf4 17. Bxf4 {and Black's king has problems finding a really safe place, Yurtaev-Gulko, Moscow Olympiad 1994.})) (9... O-O {and now:} 10. Z0 (10. exd5 Nxd5 (10... exd5 11. Nb3 h6 12. a4 a5 13. d4 c4 14. Nbd2 Bg4 15. b3 cxb3 16. Qxb3 Rb8 17. Ba3 {was very pleasant for White in Spraggett-Munoz Sotomayor, Elista Olympiad 1998 – both d5 and b6 are sensitive}) 11. Nc4 Qc7 12. a4 Bb7 13. h4 h6 14. Bd2 Rae8 15. Qc1 Kh7 16. Qc2 { with an unclear position, Todorcevic-Miralles, Marseille 1987.}) (10. e5 { (this is the move which 10...0-0 encourages, but Black can still hit out with . ..g6-g5; if White is not happy playing this line he could choose either 10 h4 or 10 Qe2)} Qc7 11. Qe2 (11. d4 cxd4 12. cxd4 Nb4 {gives Black counterplay}) 11... g5 12. Nxg5 (12. h3 {is also possible, for example} h6 13. Nf1 Ng6 14. d4 a5 15. Be3 cxd4 16. cxd4 Ba6 17. Qd2 {with a small plus for White, Iuldachev-Murugan, Kuala Lumpur 1993}) 12... Qxe5 13. Nde4 {.} ({First played by the Belarussian IM German Kochetkov, this move is much stronger than the previous choice of} 13. f4 Qxe2 14. Rxe2 Ba6 {, when Black was clearly better in Höhn-Pedersen, Duisburg 1992}) 13... Z0 {. After 13 Nde4 Black must make another decision:} (13... h6 14. Bf4 Qf5 15. Nd6 Qg6 16. Nxc8 hxg5 ( 16... Raxc8 17. Nf3 {reduces White's advantage}) 17. Nxe7+ Nxe7 18. Bd6 Rfe8 19. Bxe7 Rxe7 20. Bxd5 {and White was a clear pawn to the good in Van der Weide-Van de Mortel, Leeuwarden 1996.}) (13... dxe4 {has only been 'refuted' by some dodgy published analysis, and it looks quite playable to me. White plays} 14. Bf4 Qf6 (14... Qd5 {loses after} 15. Bxe4 Qd8 16. Bxh7+ Kh8 17. Qh5) 15. Bxe4 ({now} 15. Nxh7 Kxh7 16. Bxe4+ Ng6 17. Qh5+ Kg8 18. Bg5 Qe5 19. Bxc6 Qb8 {is very unclear}) 15... e5 16. Bxh7+ Kh8 17. Qh5 (17. Ne4 $6 Qe6 18. Qh5 {– the refutation – loses to the simple} Qg4) 17... Bg4 18. Qxg4 exf4 19. Be4 {.}) (13... Ng6 14. f4 Qc7 15. Nf2 h6 16. Nf3 f5 17. Be3 Ba6 18. Qd1 {and White has a slight pull, Maje-Tu Hoang Thong, Elista Olympiad 1998.}))) (9... Ba6 {is yet another playable move, immediately putting pressure on the d3-pawn. White now has:} 10. Z0 (10. Qa4 {is a tricky move. Black should play} Bb7 {,} ({rather than} 10... Bxd3 11. exd5 b5 12. Qa6 Nb8 13. Qb7 {, which is good for White.})) (10. exd5 {and now} exd5 $6 ({perhaps Black should play} 10... Nxd5 {, when} 11. Qa4 Bb7 12. d4 cxd4 13. Nxd4 Qd7 {looks equal}) 11. d4 cxd4 (11... O-O 12. dxc5 bxc5 13. Nb3 c4 14. Nbd4 {left White better in Bates-G.Buckley, Hampstead 1998}) 12. Qa4 Bb7 13. Nxd4 O-O 14. N2f3 {leaves White with the usual pressure against the isolated d5-pawn.}) (10. Bf1 O-O 11. e5 h6 12. h4 Qc7 13. Qa4 Bc8 14. d4 {and White has an edge, Minic-Marjanovic, Bar 1980.})) 10. a4 Ba6 {Alternatively:} (10... h6 11. exd5 ({for} 11. h4 {see Variation C222}) 11... exd5 12. Nb3 O-O 13. d4 c4 14. Nbd2 {and White will follow up with b2-b3.}) (10... Ra7 11. exd5 exd5 12. Nb3 {(the plan of Nb3 and d3-d4 is particularly effective when Black has played ...a7-a5)} O-O 13. d4 c4 14. Nbd2 Bf5 ({or} 14... Be6 15. b3 cxb3 16. Qxb3 h6 17. Ba3 {with advantage, Ostermeyer-Jackelen, Porz 1988}) 15. b3 Bd3 (15... cxb3 16. Qxb3 {leaves Black with pawn weaknesses on d5 and b6, the second weakness being a consequence of ...a7-a5}) 16. Bf1 (16. bxc4 dxc4 17. Ba3) ({and} 16. Nf1 {should be considered}) 16... Bxf1 17. Kxf1 cxb3 18. Qxb3 {and White is slightly better, Zolnierowicz-Gleizerov, Bydgoszcz 2000.}) 11. exd5 Nxd5 {Giving White an outpost on c4;} ({but after} 11... exd5 { White reverts to Plan A with} 12. Nb3 O-O (12... d4 13. Nfxd4 {makes good use of the pins}) 13. d4 {, for example} c4 14. Nbd2 Nf5 15. b3 cxb3 16. Qxb3 Rb8 17. Ba3 {and White is clearly better, M.Müller-Glek, Berlin 1994.}) 12. Nc4 {The knight is very well placed here and I feel this is enough to give White the edge in the position.} O-O 13. h4 (13. Qe2 Qc7 14. Bd2 h6 15. h4 Rad8 16. h5 g5 17. Nxg5 {was interesting in Vogt-Kindermann, Biel 1990, which continued} hxg5 18. Bxg5 f6 (18... Rde8 19. h6 Bh8 20. h7+ Kxh7 21. Qh5+ Kg8 22. Be4 f6 23. Bxd5 fxg5 24. Rxe6 Rxe6 25. Bxe6+ Kg7 26. Qxg5+ Kh7 27. Kg2 {wins for White,}) ({as does} 18... Nf6 19. Bxf6 Bxf6 20. Qf3) 19. Qxe6+ Qf7 20. Bh4 Ne5 {with a very unclear position.}) 13... Qc7 14. h5 Rad8 15. Qe2 Rfe8 16. hxg6 hxg6 17. Ng5 {. White has considerable attacking chances on the kingside. We've been following the game Kaidanov-Zapata, New York 1993, which now continued} e5 18. Qe4 Bb7 19. Qh4 Nf6 20. Ne4 Nh7 ( 20... Nxe4 21. dxe4 {, intending Bg5 and Ne3-d5.}) 21. g4 {(planning Re3-h3)} Rxd3 22. Bf1 Rd7 23. Re3 Nd8 ({According to Dimitry Gurevich,} 23... g5 {keeps the balance.}) 24. Rh3 Bxe4 25. Qxh7+ Kf8 26. Bh6 f6 27. Re1 Qb7 28. g5 fxg5 29. Qh8+ {and Black resigned.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "C: 5...Bd6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B40"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "16"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Bd6 {introduces another reliable system for Black, who intends to follow up with ...Nge7 and 0-0. In many ways this line is similar to Variation C, the only difference being that the bishop is developed on d6 rather than g7. It's less active on d6, but on the other hand Black has not had to weaken his dark squares on the kingside with ... g7-g6.} 6. Bg2 Nge7 7. O-O O-O 8. Nh4 {This ambitious move, planning kingside expansion with f2-f4, was introduced at the highest level by Bobby Fischer. Although less common than 8 Re1, 8 Nh4 has scored better and I believe it reaches more complex positions.} ({For the record I believe} 8. Re1 {is playable, but the line} Qc7 9. c3 Bd7 10. Qe2 f6 {seems to be extremely solid for Black – White simply cannot advance with e4-e5.}) 8... Z0 {After 8 Nh4 we will look at the following black options:} ({C1:} 8... b6) ({C2:} 8... Bc7) ({C3:} 8... Bd7) ({Black also has some other possibilities:} 8... f5 9. f4 Bd7 {transposes to Variation C3.}) (8... g5 {(outrageous, but not that bad!) } 9. Nhf3 ({not} 9. Qg4 f6 10. Nhf3 Qe8 11. Ne1 e5 {and White is driven back, Sadiku-Nikcevic, Pula 1990}) 9... Z0 {and now:} (9... Ng6 10. Nb1 ({ for those not so keen on this redevelopment,} 10. Nb3 {looks worth a try}) 10... f6 11. exd5 exd5 12. Re1 Bf5 13. Nc3 Nce7 14. d4 c4 15. Bxg5 fxg5 16. Nxg5 Bb4 17. Qh5 Nh8 18. Re5 {and White had a strong attack, Nevednichy-Vasilescu, Bucharest 1992.}) (9... f6 10. exd5 exd5 11. c4 Be6 12. Re1 Bf7 13. cxd5 Nxd5 14. Ne4 Be7 15. h4 h6 16. d4 c4 17. Nc5 {and Black hasn't entirely justified weakening his kingside, Sedina-Mrdja, Porto San Giorgio 1996.})) (8... b5 9. f4 {and now:} Z0 (9... c4 10. e5 Bc5+ 11. Kh1 Ba6 12. dxc4 bxc4 13. c3 Qb6 14. Qh5 {and White can build up an attack on the kingside. Nevednichy-Saltaev, Tiraspol 1994, continued} g6 15. Qg5 Rad8 16. Ndf3 Nf5 17. Nxf5 exf5 18. Qh6 Be7 19. Re1 Bc8 20. Be3 {and now} Qxb2 { loses immediately to} 21. Bc5 Bxc5 22. Ng5 {.}) (9... f6 {(restraining White's e-pawn)} 10. Kh1 {(avoiding any trouble along the g1-a7 diagonal)} c4 11. Ndf3 dxe4 12. dxe4 e5 (12... Bb7) 13. a4 b4 14. Nf5 {and now Wolff-Spangenberg, Buenos Aires 1997, continued} Bc5 ({Horn gives} 14... Bxf5 {as an improvement, continuing} 15. exf5 exf4 16. Nd4 Nxd4 17. Qxd4 Rc8 18. Bxf4 Bxf4 19. Qxf4 {, when White has an edge – on an open board the bishop on g2 is stronger than the knight on e7}) 15. Nxe7+ Bxe7 16. Qd5+ Qxd5 17. exd5 Na5 18. Nxe5 Bf5 19. d6 Bxd6 20. Bd5+ Kh8 21. Bxa8 fxe5 22. fxe5 Bxc2 23. Bg5 {and White won.}) (9... f5 {(blocking the f4-pawn; this is a common idea for Black)} 10. exd5 (10. c3 Rb8 11. exf5 exf5 12. Ndf3 b4 13. c4 d4 14. Re1 h6 15. Bd2 {was unclear in Meier-Bönsch, Berlin 1992}) 10... exd5 11. Ndf3 h6 12. Re1 Qb6 13. Be3 d4 14. Bf2 Bd7 15. c3 Rae8 16. cxd4 cxd4 17. Rc1 { with a tense position in Stripunsky-Goldin, Philadelphia 2000 – it's not clear whether Black's pawn on d4 is a strength or a weakness.})) (8... Qc7 9. f4 f6 10. c3 Bd7 11. Re1 ({Nevednichy-Horvath, Odorheiu Secuiesc 1993, continued} 11. Nb3 d4 12. c4 a6 13. Bd2 Rab8 14. Rc1 Be8 15. Qe2 Bf7 {and now White should have played} 16. Kh1) 11... Rae8 12. Nf1 b5 13. a4 a6 14. axb5 axb5 15. exd5 Nxd5 16. f5 {and White was slightly better, Vujosevic-Fogarasi, Budapest 1990.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "C1: 8...b6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "57"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Bd6 6. Bg2 Nge7 7. O-O O-O 8. Nh4 b6 {A sensible move. Black prepares to activate his bishop via either b7 or a6. } 9. f4 dxe4 {Alternatively:} (9... f5 {(we've already seen the motives behind this move)} 10. exf5 exf5 11. Ndf3 Qc7 12. c3 Ba6 13. Re1 Rae8 14. Be3 h6 15. d4 Rd8 16. Bf2 {and White was better in Dvoretzky-Chekhov, Sverdlovsk 1987. Both sides have outposts, but it's easier for White to use e5 than it is for Black to use e4.}) (9... f6 10. Ndf3 Bc7 11. Qe1 {(White is slowly building up on the kingside)} Rb8 12. Be3 e5 13. f5 Ba6 14. Nd2 c4 ({after} 14... d4 15. Bf2 {White will continue with g3-g4, Nhf3, h2-h4 and g4-g5}) 15. dxc4 d4 (15... dxc4 16. c3 {makes the bishop on a6 look rather silly}) 16. Bf2 b5 17. c5 b4 18. Qd1 Bxf1 19. Bxf1 {and White has good light square control for the exchange. Jaracz-Haba, Koszalin 1999, continued} Na5 20. Nb3 Nec6 21. Be1 Rf7 22. Nxa5 Nxa5 23. a3 bxa3 24. b4 Nc6 25. b5 d3 26. Bxd3 Nb4 27. Bc4 Nxc2 28. Qxc2 Qd4+ 29. Kg2 Qxa1 30. Bxf7+ Kxf7 31. Qc4+ Kf8 32. Ng6+ hxg6 33. fxg6 Ke8 34. Qe6+ Kd8 35. c6 {1-0.}) 10. dxe4 Ba6 {Naturally gaining a tempo on the f1-rook, although interestingly the Slovakian GM Ftacnik gives this move a dubious sign.} 11. Re1 Bc7 {Alternatively:} (11... c4 12. c3 ({once again this kills the bishop on a6 –} 12. e5 Bc5+ 13. Kh1 c3 14. bxc3 Rc8 {was Black's idea}) 12... Na5 (12... Bc5+ 13. Kh1 e5 14. f5 Nc8 {was still good for White in Dvoretsky-Mikhalcisin, Tbilisi 1980; Dvoretsky suggests} 15. Qh5 { , followed by g3-g4-g5}) 13. e5 Bc5+ 14. Kh1 Nd5 15. Ne4 Bb7 16. Qh5 Ne7 17. g4 {with a very strong attack, Fischer-Ivkov, Santa Monica 1966. The rest of game is quite instructive:} Bxe4 18. Bxe4 g6 19. Qh6 Nd5 20. f5 Re8 21. fxg6 fxg6 22. Nxg6 Qd7 23. Nf4 Rad8 24. Nh5 Kh8 25. Nf6 Nxf6 26. exf6 Rg8 27. Bf4 Rxg4 28. Rad1 Rdg8 29. f7 {and Black resigned on account of} Qxf7 30. Be5+ R4g7 31. Qxh7# {.}) (11... e5 12. f5 f6 13. Bf1 Bxf1 14. Nxf1 (14. Rxf1 {prevents ...c5-c4}) 14... c4 15. c3 (15. Qg4) 15... Bc5+ 16. Be3 Bxe3+ 17. Nxe3 Na5 18. Qxd8 {and the players agreed a draw in Koch-Hauchard, Vichy 2000.}) 12. c3 (12. e5 {is interesting. Following} Qd7 (12... Qd4+) 13. Qh5 {Black has two choices:} Z0 (13... Qd4+ 14. Kh1 Qf2 15. Nhf3 Rad8 (15... Be2 {is a stronger defence}) 16. Ne4 Qxc2 17. Nfg5 h6 18. Nf6+ gxf6 19. Be4 Bd3 (19... Qf2 20. Be3) 20. Qxh6 Bxe4+ 21. Nxe4 Nd5 22. exf6 {and Black resigned, Gottardi-Harding, correspondence 1990.}) (13... Nd4 { and now:} 14. Z0 (14. Bxa8 Rxa8 ({but not} 14... Nxc2 15. Be4 g6 16. Qd1 Nxa1 17. Ndf3 {and the knight on a1 is trapped}) 15. Qd1 Bb7 {gives Black good compensation for the exchange, according to Chekhov.}) (14. Be4 Nef5 15. Nhf3 Rad8 16. c3 Ne2+ 17. Kf2 Nxc1 18. Raxc1 f6 {, with an unclear position, Bologan-J.Horvath, Vienna 1996.}))) 12... Bd3 (12... Qd7 13. e5 Rad8 14. Qh5 { was good for White in Lerner-Dolmatov, Kharkov 1985. Now Black compounded his difficulties with} f5 {and after} 15. exf6 Rxf6 16. Ne4 Rh6 17. Qxh6 { White was winning.}) 13. e5 Qd7 ({Dolmatov suggests} 13... b5 {as an improvement, although I still prefer White's attacking chances on the kingside to those of Black's on the queenside after} 14. Ne4 c4 15. Qg4 Bb6+ 16. Kh1 {.} ) 14. Ne4 Rad8 15. Qg4 {Black is facing a rather daunting attack on the kingside. The game Dolmatov-Lautier, Polanica Zdroj 1991, continued} Bxe4 ({ Dolmatov suggests} 15... Kh8 {.}) 16. Bxe4 Ng6 17. Nf3 Nce7 18. Bc2 Nf5 19. Ng5 Rfe8 20. Qh5 Nh6 ({Dolmatov gives the line} 20... h6 21. Nxe6 Nxe5 22. Qxf5 g6 23. Qe4 Rxe6 24. fxe5 Rxe5 25. Qxe5 Bxe5 26. Rxe5 Re8 27. Rxe8+ Qxe8 28. Kf2 {, when White's rook and two bishops outweigh Black's queen.}) 21. h4 b5 22. Kh2 b4 23. Qe2 Nf5 24. h5 Nf8 25. Ne4 Qc6 26. g4 Ne7 27. h6 Nd7 28. hxg7 Kxg7 29. Kg3 {and Black was positionally lost.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "C2: 8...Bc7"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "31"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Bd6 6. Bg2 Nge7 7. O-O O-O 8. Nh4 Bc7 {A non-committal move. Black puts his bishop on a safer square and awaits White's plan.} 9. f4 f5 {Black chooses to block White's f-pawn. Alternatives are:} (9... dxe4 10. dxe4 b6 (10... f5 {doesn't work very well with ...dxe4; after} 11. c3 Rb8 12. exf5 exf5 13. Re1 {Black's position was full of weak squares in Nevednichy-Florescu, Bucharest 1998}) 11. c3 Ba6 12. Re1 { and we have reached Variation C1.}) (9... f6 10. Ndf3 (10. exd5 exd5 11. Re1 b6 12. c3 Qd7 13. Nb3 Bb7 14. d4 c4 15. Nd2 Rfe8 16. Nf1 b5 17. Ne3 {was better for White in David-Rodgaard, Moscow Olympiad 1994 – Black's d5-pawn looks rather vulnerable}) 10... dxe4 11. dxe4 Qxd1 12. Rxd1 {and the extra space on the kingside grants White an edge in this ending, Szmetan-Rubinetti, Buenos Aires 1977.}) (9... Ng6 10. Nxg6 (10. Nhf3) 10... hxg6 11. Nf3 ( 11. e5) 11... dxe4 12. dxe4 b6 13. Be3 (13. Qe2 {is more ambitious}) 13... Ba6 14. Rf2 Qxd1+ 15. Rxd1 Rad8 {with a level position, Radulov-Damjanovic, Sarajevo 1971.}) 10. c3 Kh8 11. exf5 exf5 12. Ndf3 Be6 13. Re1 Bg8 ({Sznapik-Holm, Polanica Zdroj 1972, continued instead with} 13... Qd7 14. Ng5 Bg8 15. Qh5 Rf6 16. Bd2 Raf8 17. Re2 Rh6 18. Qf3 Nc8 19. Rae1 Nd6 20. a3 c4 21. dxc4 Nxc4 22. Bc1 d4 23. Qd3 Bb6 24. Kh1 Rd6 {and now White should probably capture on d4. Instead he played for tricks with} 25. g4 {and was rewarded after} dxc3 (25... Ne3) 26. Ng6+ {.}) 14. Bd2 Qd7 15. a3 a5 16. a4 {. We are following the game Ciocaltea-Liberzon, Netanya 1983. White's position is slightly more comfortable than Black's – he has both e5 and b5 under his control.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...d7-d5"] [Black "C3: 8...Bd7"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "31"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. g3 Bd6 6. Bg2 Nge7 7. O-O O-O 8. Nh4 Bd7 9. f4 f5 {This is a solid approach: Black stops White advancing too far on the kingside. The price for luxury is giving away the e5-square, although it's not that easy for White to take advantage of this.} 10. exd5 ({Great complications were created in the game Vasiukov-Krasenkov, St. Petersburg 1994, after} 10. c4 b5 (10... d4 {is safer}) 11. cxd5 exd5 12. exf5 Nb4 13. Ndf3 c4 14. dxc4 Bc5+ 15. Kh1 dxc4 16. Ng5 Nxf5 17. Bd2 (17. Bd5+ Kh8 18. Nxh7 Nxd5 19. Nxf8 Bc6 {gives Black good compensation}) 17... Nxh4 18. Bxb4 Bxb4 (18... Nxg2 {loses to} 19. Qd5+) 19. Qd5+ Kh8 20. gxh4 { and now, according to Krasenkov, Black's only way to stay in the game is with} Qe8 {.}) 10... exd5 11. c3 ({Or} 11. Ndf3 Qb6 12. c3 Rae8 13. Re1 d4 14. Ng5 g6 15. Bd2 Nd8 (15... h6 16. Ngf3 Qxb2 {is more critical}) 16. cxd4 cxd4 17. b4 Bb8 18. Qb3+ Kg7 19. Qb2 {and Black has problems along the long diagonal, An.Rodriguez-Milos, Villa Gesell 1996.}) 11... Qb6 12. Kh1 Rae8 13. Ndf3 { . Artishevsky-Cherepkov, Minsk 1985, continued} d4 14. c4 Qc7 15. Re1 a6 16. Bd2 {, with a fairly level position.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black doesn't play ...c7-c5"] [Black "Introduction"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "8"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 {In this section we look at lines where Black refrains from playing ...c7-c5. The most promising alternatives to this move are lines with an early ...b7-b6 (A) or lines with ...Nc6 and ...e6-e5 (B), although this second approach does effectively lose a tempo.} Nf6 { Alternatively:} (3... Nc6 4. Ngf3 Nf6 {transposes to Variation B,} ({as does} 4... e5 5. c3 Nf6 {.})) (3... dxe4 {(Black does better to delay this exchange)} 4. dxe4 e5 5. Ngf3 {(White has gained a significant tempo)} Bc5 6. c3 Qe7 7. Qc2 a5 8. Nc4 Nc6 9. Ne3 Nf6 10. Bb5 O-O 11. O-O h6 12. a4 Nd8 13. Bc4 Ng4 14. Nd5 Qd6 15. b4 {and White was better, Galdunts-Freitag, Bad Wildbad 2000.}) (3... b6 4. g3 {(here White's knight is not committed to f3, so White has some more options compared to the line 3...Nf6 4 Ngf3 b6 5 g3)} Bb7 5. Bg2 {and now:} Z0 (5... Nf6 6. e5 Nfd7 7. f4 {(an advantage of delaying Nf3)} c5 8. Ngf3 Be7 9. O-O Nc6 10. c3 Qc7 11. a3 {and White has an edge, Varavin-Bus, Krasnodar 1991.}) (5... dxe4 6. Nxe4 Nc6 7. Nf3 h6 8. O-O Nf6 9. Ne5 Nxe4 10. Bxe4 Nxe5 11. Bxb7 Rb8 12. Bg2 {and White is better, Xie Jun-De Wolf, Vlissingen 1997 – the bishop pair and the weak light squares on the queenside.} ) (5... c5 6. Ngf3 (6. Ne2 {;}) (6. f4) 6... dxe4 ({or} 6... Nf6 7. O-O dxe4 (7... Nc6 {transposes to Main Line 1}) 8. Ng5 Be7 9. Ndxe4 {with an edge}) 7. dxe4 Ba6 8. c4 Nc6 9. O-O Bb7 10. e5 Nge7 11. Qa4 Qc7 12. Ne4 Ng6 13. Rd1 Be7 14. Nd6+ Bxd6 15. exd6 Qd7 16. h4 {and I prefer White, Davies-Raicevic, Vrnjacka Banja 1988.})) 4. Ngf3 {. Now we shall look at two main possibilities for Black:} Z0 ({A:} 4... b6) ({B:} 4... Nc6) (4... dxe4 {is likely to transpose to lines similar to B1.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black doesn't play ...c7-c5"] [Black "A: 4...b6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "9"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. Ngf3 b6 {A move favoured by French Defence stalwarts Alexei Dreev and Evgeny Bareev. Black's play is very much directed towards punishing an early g2-g3 from White.} 5. Z0 {Instead of 5 g3, I'm advocating two different approaches here for White.} ({A1:} 5. e5) ({A2:} 5. c3 $5) ({Indeed, in this position} 5. g3 dxe4 6. dxe4 Bb7 {looks fine for Black, for example} 7. Qe2 ({or} 7. Bg2 Nxe4 8. Ne5 Nc3) 7... Ba6 8. c4 Nc6 9. e5 Nd7 10. Bg2 Nc5 11. O-O Bb7 12. Rd1 Qd3 {, as in Zhang Zhong-Dreev, Shenyang 1999.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black doesn't play ...c7-c5"] [Black "A1: 5 e5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "37"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. Ngf3 b6 5. e5 Nfd7 6. d4 c5 7. c3 Be7 {A good waiting move.} ({After} 7... Ba6 8. Bxa6 Nxa6 {we reach a position which can also be reached via a French Tarrasch after 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nd2 Nf6 4 e5 Nfd7 5 Bd3 c5 6 c3 b6 7 Ngf3 Ba6 8 Bxa6 Nxa6, where White's space advantage gives him a small plus. One example here is} 9. O-O Be7 10. a3 (10. Qe2 Nc7 11. dxc5 bxc5 12. c4 O-O 13. Rd1 f6 14. cxd5 exd5 15. e6 Ne5 16. Nxe5 fxe5 17. Qxe5 Bd6 18. Qh5 Qf6 {was unclear in Frolov-Moskalenko, Simferopol 1990}) 10... Nc7 11. Re1 Nf8 12. Nf1 Ng6 13. Ng3 h5 14. h3 h4 15. Nf1 c4 16. a4 a6 17. N3h2 b5 18. Qg4 Qd7 19. axb5 axb5 20. Rxa8+ Nxa8 21. f4 Nc7 22. Ne3 b4 23. f5 { and White went on to convert his advantage, Dolmatov-Rakic, Frunze 1983.}) 8. Bb5 {A clever move, anticipating ...Ba6 from Black.} ({After} 8. Bd3 Ba6 { Black gains a tempo on the line we were discussing in the previous note.}) 8... Ba6 ({After} 8... a6 9. Ba4 b5 10. Bc2 {the bishop has found its best diagonal, while its black counterpart is stuck on c8.}) ({Another possibility is} 8... a5 9. O-O Ba6 10. a4 Qc8 11. c4 Nc6 12. cxd5 exd5 13. dxc5 bxc5 14. Nb3 Nb4 15. Bd2 O-O 16. Nxa5 c4 17. Bxb4 Bxb4 18. Nc6 {and White was better, Turner-Conquest, British Championship 1997.}) 9. a4 {The point of White's previous move. White is only willing to exchange bishops at a cost; following a recapture on b5 the pawn cramps Black and makes it difficult for him to develop his queenside.} O-O ({Despite the statement above, it doesn't make sense for Black to opt out of exchanging bishops with} 9... Bb7 {, for example} 10. O-O Nc6 11. Re1 cxd4 ({or} 11... Rc8 12. Nf1 c4 13. Ng3 h5 14. b4 cxb3 15. Qxb3 Na5 16. Qc2 Nc4 17. Nd2 h4 18. Ngf1 h3 19. g3 a6 20. Bxc4 dxc4 21. Ne4 O-O 22. Qe2 b5 23. axb5 axb5 24. Qg4 {and White was clearly better, Anand-Dreev, London (rapid) 1995}) 12. Nxd4 Qc7 13. N2f3 O-O 14. Bxc6 Bxc6 15. Bg5 Bd8 16. Bxd8 Raxd8 17. b4 {and White has a typical 'good knight versus bad bishop', Anand-Dreev, London (rapid) 1995.}) 10. O-O cxd4 ({This is an improvement over the previously played} 10... Qc8 11. Qe2 Bxb5 12. axb5 a6 13. c4 Qb7 14. cxd5 Qxd5 15. dxc5 Nxc5 16. Nc4 {, when White has a good initiative, Psakhis-Raicevic, Moscow 1986.}) 11. cxd4 Qc8 {Preparing to play ...Nc6.} 12. Re1 Nc6 13. Re3 Qb7 ({In a later game Bareev diverged with} 13... Bxb5 { , and after} 14. axb5 Nb4 15. Rc3 Qb7 16. Nf1 a6 17. bxa6 (17. Bg5) 17... Rxa6 18. Rxa6 Nxa6 {an equal position was reached, Adams-Bareev, Frankfurt 2000.}) 14. Nf1 Rfc8 15. Bd2 Bxb5 16. axb5 Na5 {. Adams-Bareev, Sarajevo 1999, continued} 17. b3 a6 18. bxa6 Rxa6 {and now White finally began operations on the kingside with} 19. h4 {.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black doesn't play ...c7-c5"] [Black "A2: 5 c3"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "19"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. Ngf3 b6 5. c3 {A tricky move;} ({which perhaps gives Black more to think about than} 5. e5 {.}) 5... Be7 {Black has various other tries:} (5... Bb7 6. e5 Nfd7 7. d4 Be7 (7... c5 8. Bb5) 8. Bd3 c5 9. O-O Ba6 {transposes to the note to the seventh move in Variation A1 (with both sides having played an extra move).}) (5... c5 6. Qa4+ Qd7 ({ after} 6... Bd7 7. Qc2 {the bishop misplaced on d7,}) ({while} 6... Nbd7 7. e5 Ng8 8. d4 {is also good for White}) 7. Qc2 Qc7 8. Be2 Be7 (8... Nc6 9. O-O Bd6 10. Re1 O-O 11. Nf1 h6 12. Ng3 dxe4 13. dxe4 Bb7 {was roughly level in Bauer-Bareev, Cannes 2001}) 9. O-O O-O 10. Re1 Ba6 11. Nf1 Nc6 12. Ng3 dxe4 13. dxe4 Bxe2 14. Qxe2 {and White has a small plus, Nevednichy-Matlak, Odorheiu Secuiesc 1995. The rest of the game is worth quoting:} Rfd8 15. e5 Nd7 16. h4 h6 17. Bf4 Rac8 18. h5 Bf8 19. Rad1 Ndb8 20. Ne4 Rxd1 21. Rxd1 Rd8 22. Rxd8 Nxd8 23. Bxh6 f5 24. exf6 gxh6 25. Nh4 Nbc6 26. Qg4+ Kh7 27. f4 Qf7 28. Ng6 c4 29. Qe2 b5 30. g4 Kg8 31. g5 Qd7 32. Qg4 Nf7 33. gxh6 Nxh6 34. Ne7+ Kh8 35. Qg8+ {(what a move!)} Nxg8 36. Ng6+ Kh7 37. Nxf8+ {1-0.}) (5... Ba6 6. Be2 Be7 7. O-O O-O (7... dxe4 8. dxe4 Bxe2 9. Qxe2 O-O 10. e5 Nd5 11. Ne4 {gives White a pleasant space plus}) 8. e5 Nfd7 9. Re1 c5 10. Nf1 Nc6 11. Bf4 Rb8 12. Qa4 ({or} 12. g3 {, with the idea of h2-h4 and N1h2-g4}) 12... Qc8 13. Bg3 c4 14. d4 b5 15. Qc2 b4 16. Bh4 Re8 17. Bxe7 Rxe7 18. Qd2 f6 19. exf6 Nxf6 20. Ng3 {with an edge to White, Yudasin-Gelman, Chicago 1997 – Black's bishop on a6 is out of the game.}) 6. Qa4+ (6. e5 Nfd7 7. d4 c5 {transposes to Variation A1.}) 6... c6 7. Be2 ({It's also possible to swing the queen over to the kingside after} 7. e5 Nfd7 8. Qg4 {. Davies-Komarov, Saint Vincent 2000, continued} O-O 9. d4 c5 10. Nb3 f5 11. Qg3 Ba6 12. h4 Bxf1 13. Kxf1 a5 {with an unclear position.}) 7... O-O 8. O-O Qc7 {Alternatively:} (8... Ba6 9. Re1 Qc7 10. Nf1 Nfd7 11. Ng3 Bd6 12. exd5 cxd5 13. Qh4 Nc6 14. Nh5 {and Black is lacking defenders on the kingside. Oratovsky-Kalinitschev, Fuerth 1998, continued} Nde5 15. Nxg7 Kxg7 16. Bh6+ Kg8 17. Nxe5 Bxe5 18. d4 Bg7 19. Bxg7 Kxg7 20. Qg5+ Kh8 21. Qf6+ Kg8 22. Qg5+ Kh8 23. Qf6+ Kg8 24. Bxa6 {and White was a clear pawn ahead.}) (8... b5 9. Qc2 c5 10. d4 Qb6 11. dxc5 Bxc5 12. Bd3 $1 Nc6 13. exd5 exd5 14. Nb3 Bg4 15. Nxc5 Qxc5 16. Be3 {was Bologan-Bunzmann, Biel 1999. Here White's bishop pair and the weak pawn on d5 gives White a clear advantage.}) 9. Re1 Nbd7 (9... c5 10. Bf1 Nc6 11. a3 ({but perhaps White can play more ambitiously with} 11. e5 {, for example} Nd7 12. d4 Bb7 13. a3 a5 14. Bd3 Ba6 15. Bb1 {, intending Qc2}) 11... a5 12. Qc2 a4 13. g3 Ra7 14. Bg2 Rd8 15. exd5 Nxd5 16. Ne4 h6 {was equal in Todorcevic-Itkis, Yugoslav Team Championship 1994.}) 10. Z0 ({After 9...Nbd7 the game Orlov-Kruppa, St Petersburg 2000, continued} 10. Qc2 Bb7 11. Nf1 c5 12. Ng3 Bd6 13. Bf1 h6 { and Black had equalised. Perhaps retreating the queen on move 12 is not the right idea.}) ({Possible is} 10. Bf1 {(intending e4-e5), for example} Bb7 ( 10... e5 11. d4 {,}) ({or} 10... Nc5 11. Qc2 Ba6 12. e5) 11. e5 Ne8 12. Qg4 $1 c5 13. d4 {, all of which look interesting for White.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black doesn't play ...c7-c5"] [Black "B: 4...Nc6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "10"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. Ngf3 Nc6 {Black plans to play an early ... e6-e5 and perhaps ...dxe4.} 5. c3 (5. g3 dxe4 6. dxe4 Bc5 7. Bg2 e5 { looks equal. If Black plans to exchange on e4 and play ...e6-e5, it makes more sense for White to keep his light-squared bishop on the f1-a6 diagonal. A Philidor arises, with colours reversed and White having two extra tempi.}) 5... Z0 {After 5 c3 Black must make a choice between:} ({B1:} 5... dxe4) ({B2:} 5... a5) ({Or} 5... e5 6. Be2 (6. b4) 6... Be7 (6... a5 {transposes to B2}) 7. O-O O-O 8. b4 a6 9. Bb2 Bg4 10. a3 Qc8 11. Re1 Rd8 12. Qc2 {and White was better in Lobron-Reyes, New York 1988.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black doesn't play ...c7-c5"] [Black "B1: 5...dxe4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "53"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. c3 dxe4 6. dxe4 Bc5 ({Or} 6... e5 7. Bb5 Bd6 8. O-O O-O 9. Qc2 Ne7 10. Re1 c6 11. Bf1 Ng6 12. Nc4 Bc7 13. a4 Bg4 14. Nfd2 b6 15. Ne3 Qc8 16. Ndc4 a6 17. Nf5 b5 18. Nce3 Bxf5 19. Nxf5 { and White was better, Shchekachev-Schuette, Bad Zwesten 1999.}) 7. Bb5 Bd7 8. O-O O-O 9. Qe2 ({Dvoretsky also suggests} 9. b4 Bb6 10. Qe2 {.}) 9... a6 10. Bd3 e5 11. b4 Ba7 12. Nc4 Re8 13. Bg5 h6 14. Bh4 Bg4 15. Rad1 Qe7 16. h3 Bh5 17. a4 Qe6 18. Ne3 {. We are following the game Dvoretsky-Orlov, Moscow (rapid) 1984, which continued} g5 19. Bg3 g4 (19... Bxe3 {restricts White's advantage.}) 20. hxg4 Nxg4 21. Nd5 Rac8 22. Bc4 Qg6 23. Rd3 Ne7 24. Nh4 Nxf2 25. Nxe7+ Rxe7 26. Bxf2 Bxe2 27. Nxg6 {1-0.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black doesn't play ...c7-c5"] [Black "B2: 5...a5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "19"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. Ngf3 Nc6 5. c3 a5 {A useful restraining move; Black makes it harder for White to achieve the liberating b2-b4.} 6. Be2 e5 ({ Also possible is} 6... g6 7. O-O Bg7 8. Re1 ({or} 8. e5 Nd7 9. d4 O-O 10. Re1 b6 11. Nf1 Ba6 12. Bxa6 Rxa6 13. h4 b5 14. h5 {with a slight plus, Reinderman-Tondivar, Leeuwarden 1993}) 8... O-O 9. Bf1 b6 10. e5 Nd7 11. d4 f6 12. exf6 Qxf6 13. Bb5 Ncb8 14. Nf1 c6 15. Ba4 Qf7 16. Bg5 Ba6 17. Bh4 h6 18. Bg3 {and White held the advantage in Ansell-Sarkar, London 2000.}) 7. O-O Bc5 $5 ({A major alternative here is the more restrained} 7... Be7 {and now:} 8. Z0 (8. Re1 O-O 9. Qc2 (9. b3 Bc5 10. Qc2 d4 11. Bb2 dxc3 12. Bxc3 Re8 13. a3 Qe7 14. Qb2 Bg4 15. h3 Bxf3 16. Nxf3 Rad8 {was equal in Bates-N.Pert, British League 1998}) 9... h6 10. Bf1 Re8 11. b3 {(with the plan of a2-a3, Bb2 and b3-b4)} Bg4 (11... d4 {looks critical}) 12. h3 Bh5 13. a3 Bd6 14. Bb2 Nb8 15. exd5 Nxd5 16. c4 Nf4 17. g3 Ne6 18. Nxe5 {and White was just a clear pawn up, Dvoretzky-Ek, Wijk aan Zee 1975.}) (8. b3 {(I think this is more the point – it's not clear whether White needs the rook on e1)} O-O 9. Bb2 (9. a3 Be6 10. Bb2 dxe4 11. dxe4 Nd7 12. Qc2 Qe8 13. Bc4 Bc5 14. b4 Bxc4 15. Nxc4 {was slightly better for White in Maiwald-Moor, Bern 1996}) 9... Re8 10. a3 Bf8 11. b4 (11. Qc2) 11... axb4 12. axb4 Rxa1 13. Qxa1 b6 14. Bd1 (14. b5 $5) 14... Bb7 15. Bb3 Qd7 16. Re1 b5 {and the players agreed a draw in Visser-Psakhis, Groningen 1993, although White can still claim an edge after} 17. Qa2 Ra8 18. Qb1 Re8 19. exd5 Nxd5 20. d4 {.})) 8. b3 O-O (8... d4 9. cxd4 Nxd4 10. Bb2 {looks better for White, for example} Bg4 11. Nxd4 Bxd4 12. Bxd4 Bxe2 13. Qxe2 Qxd4 14. Nf3 Qd6 15. d4 {.}) 9. Bb2 ({There's also something to be said about leaving the bishop on c1, especially if White is going to block the centre with c3-c4 (after the advance ...d5-d4). So White should consider} 9. a3 d4 ({or} 9... Re8 10. Rb1) 10. c4 {, followed by Ne1-c2 and Rb1.}) 9... Re8 ({This looks better than} 9... Qe7 10. a3 Rd8 11. b4 dxe4 12. dxe4 Bb6 13. Qc2 {and I prefer White. Jakupovic-N.Pert, Yerevan 1999, continued} axb4 14. axb4 Rxa1 15. Bxa1 Bg4 16. h3 Bxf3 17. Bxf3 Nb8 18. Nc4 {and White's advantage was evident.}) 10. Z0 ({The game Lastin-Gavrilov, Moscow 1996, continued} 10. Qc2 Nh5 (10... d4 11. cxd4 Nxd4 12. Bxd4 Bxd4 13. Nxd4 exd4 14. Rac1 Re7 15. Bf3 {looks better for White}) 11. Rfe1 Nf4 12. Bf1 dxe4 13. Nxe4 Ba7 14. Bc1 Ng6 15. Be3 Bg4 16. Bxa7 Nxa7 {with a roughly level position.}) ({As well as 10 Qc2, White can consider} 10. a3 d4 11. cxd4 (11. c4) 11... Nxd4 12. Rc1 b6 13. Nxd4 Bxd4 14. Bxd4 exd4 15. f4 {.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Black plays ...c7-c5"] [Black "Introduction"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "11"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 c5 {This is actually a popular choice for French players who would rather play Sicilian type set-ups without ...d7-d5 against the KIA.} 3. g3 {Keeping White's options open.} ({There are many games and much theory on the line} 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. g3 g6 ({or} 4... Nge7 5. Bg2 g6 {, which is one of Black's most respected lines against the King's Indian Attack, and can obviously arise from both the French Defence and the Sicilian Defence. I must confess that rather than striving to find an advantage for White in these lines, I've taken something of a shortcut, but I hope you'll agree that this is a good practical decision, which makes full use of our repertoire.})) 3... Nc6 ({Naturally Black can still advance his d-pawn;} 3... d5 4. Nd2 Nc6 5. Ngf3 {transposes to Main Line 1.}) 4. Bg2 g6 (4... d5 5. Nd2 {will once again transpose to Main Line 1}) ({while} 4... Nf6 5. Nc3 (5. f4) 5... d5 { transposes to the Closed Sicilian.}) 5. Nc3 Bg7 6. Be3 {and suddenly we are back in the Closed Sicilian, in a line where Black is committed to an early ... e7-e6 (see Variation A, Main Line 1 of the Closed Sicilian).} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Rare Moves for Black"] [Black "Introduction"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "4"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 {We'll finish off this section by looking at a few rare second moves Black has.} Z0 ({A:} 2... Nc6) ({B:} 2... b6) ({After} 2... b5 {White should just develop sensibly, for example} 3. g3 Bb7 4. Bg2 c5 5. f4 Nf6 6. Nf3 {.}) (2... f5 {can be met in a few ways.} 3. Nf3 fxe4 4. dxe4 Nf6 5. e5 Nd5 6. Bc4 Nb6 7. Bd3 {looks good for White.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Rare Moves for Black"] [Black "A: 2...Nc6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "21"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 Nc6 ({Or} 2... e5 3. Nf3 ({although White should also consider playing a souped-up King's Gambit with} 3. f4) 3... Nc6 {.}) 3. Nf3 e5 (3... d5 4. Nbd2 Nf6 {leads to Main Line 2.}) {With 3...e5 Black is trying to play a king's pawn opening, claiming that White's extra d2-d3 is of no real consequence.} 4. Nc3 ({Black was equal after} 4. g3 Bc5 5. Bg2 d6 6. O-O Nf6 (6... f5) 7. c3 a6 {, Shirov-Ivanchuk, Novgorod 1994. 4 Nc3 is Shirov's improvement.}) 4... Nf6 5. g3 {This is Shirov's point. Now White is playing the so-called 'Glek system' (1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 g3), but with an extra tempo.} Bc5 6. Bg2 d6 7. O-O a6 8. Be3 Bg4 9. h3 {. Shirov-Short, Yerevan Olympiad 1996, continued} Bxe3 10. fxe3 Bxf3 {and here Shirov recommends} 11. Qxf3 {with a slight advantage to White.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Rare Moves for Black"] [Black "B: 2...b6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "C00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "49"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 e6 2. d3 b6 3. g3 Bb7 4. Bg2 f5 {This gives the variation its own character.} ({For} 4... d5 5. Nd2) ({and} 4... Nf6 5. Nd2 d5 {see Main Line 2.} ) 5. Nf3 (5. Nd2 Nf6 6. Ngf3 {is possible, as} fxe4 7. dxe4 Nxe4 8. Nh4 d5 9. Nxe4 dxe4 10. Qh5+ Kd7 11. Bg5 {looks very strong for White.}) 5... fxe4 (5... Nf6 {is less accurate, as after} 6. e5 Nd5 7. Nh4 {Black has big trouble dealing with the treats of c2-c4 and Qh5+, for example} Qc8 8. Qh5+ Kd8 9. Bxd5 Bxd5 10. Bg5+ Be7 11. Ng6 {.}) 6. Ng5 Nf6 7. O-O Be7 8. Nc3 O-O 9. dxe4 e5 10. Be3 ({White should also consider the immediate} 10. f4 {.}) 10... Na6 11. f4 {. The game Benko-Sills, USA 1967, continued} exf4 12. gxf4 h6 13. e5 Bxg2 14. Kxg2 hxg5 15. exf6 Rxf6 16. Qd5+ Kh8 17. fxg5 Nb4 18. Qd1 Rxf1 19. Qh5+ Kg8 20. Rxf1 Nxc2 21. Bd2 Bxg5 22. Bxg5 Qe8 23. Qxe8+ Rxe8 24. Rd1 d6 25. Nd5 {1-0.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "Introduction"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "4"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 {The Caro-Kann has a reputation of being a very solid defence and is a favourite of, amongst others, Anatoly Karpov. All the main lines have withstood the test of time; they are unbelievably hard to break down (I should know – I've done my fair share of trying!).} (2. c4 {, however, is a deceptively tricky move, which may simply be used as another way of reaching the popular Panov-Botvinnik Attack (1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 exd5 cxd5 4 c4) after} d5 3. exd5 cxd5 4. d4 {However, by delaying the move d2-d4 White gives himself extra options; he can try to force Black into transpositions that may not be comfortable for the second player (this will become apparent when we study the theory and the numerous transpositions). It's true that Black also has extra options after 2 c4, but the white player has no need to fear these. In any case, the majority of Caro-Kann players will be attempting to steer the game back into a normal path with 2...d5, and it's here where White can adopt some devious move orders!}) 2... Z0 {We shall concentrate on Black's two main replies to 2 c4. These are:} ({A:} 2... d5) ({B:} 2... e5) (2... e6 { is a strange-looking move, but it's not so bad. In the game Gulko-Shabalov, Bern 1992, White kept the advantage after} 3. Nf3 d5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. exd5 cxd5 6. Bb5+ Nc6 7. Qe2+ Qe7 8. Ne5 Bd7 9. Bxc6 bxc6 10. O-O Kd8 11. b3 Qe6 12. Bb2 f6 13. Qf3 Bd6 14. Nxd7 Kxd7 15. Nc3 Nh6 16. Na4 {.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "A: 2...d5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "8"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 d5 {This is by far the most popular choice for Black;} ({ on my database, games with 2...d5 outnumber games with} 2... e5 {by more than three to one.}) 3. cxd5 ({With our repertoire it really doesn't matter which way you capture first, as} 3. exd5 Z0 (3... cxd5 4. cxd5 {comes to the same thing.}) ({. Be wary of} 3... Nf6 {, though. Now} 4. dxc6 ({so White should react with} 4. Nc3 cxd5 5. cxd5 {, transposing to the main line}) 4... Nxc6 { is known to give Black good play for the pawn.})) 3... cxd5 ({Again Black could offer a pawn with} 3... Nf6 {, but White can simply decline with} 4. Nc3 {.}) 4. exd5 {Now Black must make a decision concerning the d5-pawn: whether to capture it with the queen or try and capture it with the g8-knight.} Z0 ({A1:} 4... Nf6) ({A2:} 4... Qxd5) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "A1: 4...Nf6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "10"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 d5 3. cxd5 cxd5 4. exd5 Nf6 ({This move is more popular than} 4... Qxd5 {.}) 5. Nc3 ({White has various other playable moves here, including } 5. Bb5+) ({and} 5. Qa4+ {, both of which try to hang onto the d5-pawn (for the time being at least). It's probable that an opponent will feel less prepared for 5 Nc3, which on first sight appears less critical. After all, Black can simply win his pawn back immediately.}) 5... Z0 {After 5 Nc3 Black has another decision to make. The possibilities are:} ({A11:} 5... Nxd5) ({A12: } 5... g6) ({Other moves are less important:} 5... Nbd7 6. Nf3 a6 7. d4 Nb6 8. Ne5 Nbxd5 ({Oh dear! –} 8... Nfxd5 {is playable, but better for White }) 9. Qa4+ Bd7 10. Nxd7 {1-0 Lautier-Bologan, Enghien-les-Bains 1999;} Qxd7 {loses material to} 11. Bb5 {. So even grandmasters have trouble getting to grips with 5 Nc3!}) (5... a6 6. d4 g6 7. Qb3 {(now we have a ...g6 variation of the Panov-Botvinnik Attack, where Black's ...a7-a6 is a bit irrelevant)} Bg7 8. g3 O-O 9. Bg2 Ne8 10. Nf3 Nd6 11. O-O Bf5 12. Ne5 Qc8 13. Re1 Bh3 14. Bh1 h5 15. Bf4 {and White has a clear advantage, Keitlinghaus-Schuste, Bad Wörishofen 1997 – Black has no chance of regaining his pawn.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "A11: 5...Nxd5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "12"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 d5 3. cxd5 cxd5 4. exd5 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nxd5 6. Nf3 {Again we have a further split:} Z0 ({A111:} 6... Nc6) ({A112:} 6... e6) ({A113:} 6... Nxc3) ({ Now} 6... g6 {looks risky after} 7. Qb3 Nb6 (7... Nxc3 8. Bc4 ({ or simply} 8. Qxc3 {is good for White}) 8... e6 9. Qxc3) 8. Bb5+ Bd7 ({or} 8... N8d7 9. Ne5 e6 10. Ne4 Be7 11. d4 O-O 12. Bh6 Re8 (12... Nxe5 13. Bxf8 Kxf8 14. dxe5 Qd4 15. Nc3 Qxe5+ 16. Be2 Bd7 17. O-O {and White converted his material advantage, Thesing-Trzaska, Dortmund 1992}) 13. O-O a6 14. Bxd7 Nxd7 15. Rfe1 {and Black is rather tied up}) 9. Ne5 e6 10. Ne4 Be7 11. d4 Nc6 ( 11... Bxb5 12. Qxb5+ N8d7 13. Bh6 a6 14. Qe2 Bb4+ 15. Kf1 {– White is already doing well here –} Nd5 16. Nxf7 Kxf7 17. Ng5+ Ke8 18. Qxe6+ Qe7 19. Qxd5 {and White won, Illescas-Kamsky, Manila 1990}) 12. Nxd7 Qxd7 13. Be3 O-O 14. Nc5 Qc7 15. O-O Nd5 16. Rac1 a6 17. Be2 Rab8 18. Bf3 Rfd8 19. Qa4 Bxc5 ( 19... Qb6 20. Nxb7 Qxb7 21. Rxc6 Qxb2 22. Bxd5 Rxd5 23. Qxa6 {and White is a clear pawn up, Miljanic-Todorovic, Niksic 1991}) 20. Rxc5 {and White has an edge, according to the Czech GM Pavel Blatny.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "A111: 6...Nc6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "37"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 d5 3. cxd5 cxd5 4. exd5 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nxd5 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. Bb5 (7. d4 {would reach one of the main lines of the Panov-Botvinnik Attack (Black will be ready with 7...e6, 7...Bg4 or 7...g6!?), but this move forces Black to think for himself.}) 7... e6 ({Another possibility for Black is to exchange on c3 immediately with} 7... Nxc3 8. bxc3 {and now:} Z0 (8... Bg4 9. h3 (9. Qe2 a6 10. Bxc6+ bxc6 11. Qe4 Bxf3 12. Qxf3 Qd5 13. Qxd5 cxd5 {was equal in Lalic-Hodgson, Aberdeen 1996;}) (9. Rb1 {looks interesting}) 9... Bd7 ( 9... Bh5 {is the logical follow-up, after which White could try} 10. Rb1) 10. O-O e6 11. Rb1 Bd6 12. d4 {and White was better in Conquest-Astolfi, French League 1992.}) (8... g6 9. O-O Bg7 10. Re1 O-O 11. Ba3 Bf6 12. Bxc6 bxc6 13. Qa4 Qc7 14. d4 Bf5 15. Ne5 Rfc8 16. Bc5 {and White has a pleasant bind on the position, Tkachiev-Van der Werf, Wijk aan Zee 1995.})) 8. O-O Be7 9. d4 O-O (9... Nxc3 10. bxc3 O-O 11. Bd3 b6 12. Re1 {transposes to Variation A11222.}) 10. Re1 {Normally White's light-squared bishop is on either c4 (see Variation A1122) or d3. The position with the bishop on b5, however, is still very playable for White.} Bd7 {Alternatively:} (10... Nxc3 11. bxc3 Bd7 (11... Bf6 12. Rb1 Ne7 13. Qc2 Qc7 14. Ng5 g6 15. Qd3 a6 16. Ba4 Qa5 17. Ne4 Bg7 18. Ba3 { was very unpleasant for Black in Forster-Palat, Geneva 1996}) 12. Qe2 Re8 13. Bd3 Rc8 14. h4 (14. Rb1 {looks like a good alternative}) 14... Qa5 (14... Bxh4 {loses to} 15. Qe4 {, hitting h7 and h4}) 15. Rb1 Qxc3 16. Rxb7 { and White is very active, Belikov-Filipenko, Moscow 1998.}) (10... Nf6 11. Bf4 Nb4 12. Ne5 a6 13. Be2 Nbd5 14. Bg3 Nxc3 15. bxc3 Ne4 16. Qd3 Nxg3 17. hxg3 Qc7 18. a4 {and again White has an active position, Korchnoi-Serper, World Team Championship, Lucerne 1993.}) (10... a6 11. Bxc6 {(weakening Black's pawn structure – White will target the isolated c-pawn and the weak dark squares around it)} bxc6 12. Ne5 Bb7 (12... c5 13. Nc6 Nxc3 14. bxc3 Qd7 15. Nxe7+ Qxe7 16. Ba3 {– Lukacs}) 13. Na4 a5 (13... Rc8 14. Nd3 { left Black in a very passive position in Karpov-Dreev, Cap d'Agde 200}) 14. Nc5 Bxc5 15. dxc5 Qe7 16. Qg4 Rfd8 17. Bh6 f6 18. Nc4 e5 19. Nd6 Bc8 20. Qg3 { and White is better – Lukacs.}) 11. Bd3 ({Also promising, and perhaps more consistent, is} 11. Nxd5 exd5 12. Qb3 {and now:} Z0 (12... Bg4 13. Bxc6 bxc6 14. Ne5 Rb8 15. Nxc6 Rxb3 16. Nxd8 Rd3 17. Nc6 Bf6 18. Be3 {and White is a clear pawn ahead, Damaso-Silva, Portuguese Championship 1996.}) (12... a6 13. Bxc6 Bxc6 14. Bf4 (14. Ne5) 14... f6 15. Bd2 a5 {(to prevent the positionally desirable Bb4)} 16. Nh4 Re8 17. Nf5 Bf8 18. Rxe8 Qxe8 19. Re1 Qd7 20. Qh3 Kh8 21. Qg4 g6 22. Ne3 f5 23. Qf3 {with an unclear position, Peptan-Maric, European Women's Team Championship, Batumi 1999.})) 11... Bf6 { Or:} (11... Ncb4 12. Bb1 Rc8 13. a3 Nxc3 14. bxc3 Nd5 15. Qd3 Nf6 16. Bg5 g6 17. c4 {and White is better, Kiik-Maki Uuro, Vantaa 1994.}) (11... Rc8 { (this looks natural, but...)} 12. Nxd5 exd5 13. Ne5 Nxe5 (13... Nxd4 { is probably stronger, although I still prefer White after} 14. Bxh7+ Kxh7 15. Qxd4) 14. Rxe5 {,} Be6 ({perhaps Black should give up the d-pawn with} 14... Bf6) 15. Qh5 {and now:} Z0 (15... h6 16. Bxh6 gxh6 17. Qxh6 { gives White a winning attack.}) (15... g6 16. Qh6 {Black is in some trouble, for example} Bg4 (16... Bf6 17. Rh5 Rxc1+ 18. Rxc1 Re8 19. Re1 {was better for White in Belikov-Guliev, Moscow 1998}) 17. h3 f6 18. Bxg6 hxg6 19. Qxg6+ Kh8 20. Re3 {and Black resigned in Vaganian-Serper, Groningen 1993, on account of} Bd7 21. Rg3 {.})) 12. Be4 {. The game Balashov-Yandemirov, Moscow 1998, continued} Re8 13. Qd3 (13. Nxd5 exd5 14. Bxd5 Qa5 15. Bxc6 Bxc6 16. Rxe8+ Rxe8 {gives Black good counterplay for the pawn.}) 13... h6 ( 13... g6 {.}) 14. Ne5 ({But not} 14. Nxd5 exd5 15. Bxd5 Rxe1+ 16. Nxe1 Qa5 17. Qe4 Re8 {and Black wins – Blatny.}) 14... Ndb4 15. Bh7+ {,} Kf8 16. Qe4 Nxe5 ({Blatny suggests} 16... Rc8 {as an improvement.}) 17. dxe5 Be7 18. Qg4 g5 19. h4 {and White had a strong attack.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "A112: 6...e6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "18"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 d5 3. cxd5 cxd5 4. exd5 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nxd5 6. Nf3 e6 {A popular and solid move. With 6...e6, Black is inviting White back into a main line of the Panov-Botvinnik Attack again.} 7. Bc4 {But White is not so accommodating! With 7 Bc4, White is making use of the fact that the d-pawn hasn't yet moves, so Black has no ...Bb4 pin at his disposal. This means we can simply bypass a lot of unwanted theory!} ({After} 7. d4 {we have the Panov-Botvinnik Attack, against which Black can play:} Z0 ({, either} 7... Be7) ({, or} 7... Bb4 {. For the record, against the latter line White has been struggling to find an advantage, both after} 8. Bd2 ({and} 8. Qc2 Nc6 9. Bd3 Ba5 10. a3 Nxc3 11. bxc3 Nxd4) 8... O-O 9. Bd3 Nc6 10. O-O Be7 {- Karpov has used this line effectively with Black.})) 7... Be7 ({Or:} 7... Nxc3 8. bxc3 Be7 9. O-O O-O 10. d4 {transposes to Variation A1121.}) (7... Nb6 8. Bb3 Be7 9. d4 O-O 10. O-O Nc6 11. a3 {is a nice isolated queen's pawn (IQP) position for White – Black misses his defensive knight on f6. Kiik-Ovetchkin, St Petersburg 1999, continued} Bf6 12. Be3 Na5 13. Ba2 Nac4 14. Ne4 Be7 15. Qe2 Nxe3 16. fxe3 Bd7 17. Ne5 {and White had very active pieces.}) 8. O-O O-O 9. d4 {In this position Black has a choice:} Z0 ({A1121:} 9... Nxc3) ({A1122:} 9... Nc6) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "A1121: 9...Nxc3"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "24"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 d5 3. cxd5 cxd5 4. exd5 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nxd5 6. Nf3 e6 7. Bc4 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. d4 Nxc3 {After this move Black generally plays ...b7-b6, ...Bb7 and ...Nbd7(-f6).} 10. bxc3 Qc7 {Alternatively:} (10... Nc6 11. Re1 {transposes to A11222.}) (10... Nd7 11. Bd3 Qc7 12. Qe2 Re8 {(grabbing on c3 looks very risky) } 13. c4 g6 14. c5 Nf6 15. Ne5 Bd7 16. Bf4 Qc8 17. Rab1 {and White was better, Anand-Adams, FIDE World Championship, Groningen 1997.}) (10... b6 11. Bd3 Bb7 12. Re1 Nd7 13. c4 {and White has an edge, according to the Danish IM Jacob Aagaard.}) 11. Qe2 ({Also enticing is the pawn offer with} 11. Bd3 { , Onischuk-Liang Chong, Beijing 1998, continued} Qxc3 12. Bg5 Nc6 13. Rc1 Qa3 14. Re1 g6 15. Bb5 Bxg5 16. Nxg5 Qa5 17. Qd3 a6 18. Bxc6 Qxg5 19. Bf3 Rb8 20. Rc7 Qa5 21. Rec1 Qxa2 22. Qe3 Qb2 23. h4 {and White had unmistakable pressure.} ) 11... Nd7 12. Bb2 {White plans to drop his bishop back to d3 and play c3-c4. Here are two examples:} Z0 (12... Nf6 {(it looks natural to defend the kingside, but perhaps the knight is better on d7)} 13. Bd3 b6 14. Ne5 Bb7 15. f4 g6 16. c4 Rad8 17. Rae1 (17. Rad1) 17... Bb4 18. Rd1 Qe7 19. Qe3 Ba8 20. Kh1 Qb7 21. Qh3 Rd6 22. Rf3 {and White's position is beginning to look threatening, Psakhis-Porper, Israeli Championship 1996.}) (12... b6 13. Bd3 Bb7 14. c4 Rfe8 15. Qe3 Bxf3 16. Qxf3 Bf6 17. Rfe1 Rad8 18. Rad1 Nc5 19. Bc2 Nb7 20. Ba4 {and White's bishop pair compensate for the weakness of the hanging pawns on d4 and c4, Alterman-Khlian, Rostov 1993.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "A1122: 9...Nc6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "D41"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "20"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 ({'ECO' gives the route to move 10 as} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 c5 5. cxd5 Nxd5 6. e3 Nc6 7. Bc4 cxd4 8. exd4 Be7 9. O-O O-O 10. Re1 { , but there are seemingly endless ways of reaching this position.}) 1... c6 2. c4 d5 3. cxd5 cxd5 4. exd5 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nxd5 6. Nf3 e6 7. Bc4 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. d4 Nc6 {The most popular choice.} 10. Re1 {We have now officially transposed into the Semi-Tarrasch Defence! The important thing to remember is that White has very good chances of keeping an advantage in this line. On my database White has scored a healthy 64% from this position. The following moves are Black's most popular choices:} Z0 ({A11221:} 10... a6) ({A11222:} 10... Nxc3 ) ({A11223:} 10... Bf6) ({Firstly, let's look at a couple of less important moves:} 10... b6 {(this is only playable after an exchange on c3)} 11. Nxd5 $1 exd5 12. Bb5 {(now ...b7-b6 has merely created weaknesses in the black camp) } Bd7 (12... Bb7 {more resilient, although White kept a clear positional advantage after} 13. Bf4 Bd6 14. Bxd6 Qxd6 15. Rc1 a6 16. Bxc6 Bxc6 17. Ne5 { , Comas Fabrego-Pomes Marcet, Platja d'Aro 1994}) 13. Qa4 Nb8 14. Bf4 Bxb5 15. Qxb5 a6 16. Qa4 Bd6 17. Bxd6 Qxd6 18. Rac1 Ra7 19. Qc2 Re7 20. Rxe7 Qxe7 21. Qc7 Qxc7 22. Rxc7 {and White's activity gives him a virtually winning ending, Botvinnik-Alekhine, AVRO 1938.}) ({After} 10... Nf6 {it's another transposition! This position can also be reached via the Queen's Gambit Accepted, and it's known to be somewhat better for White. One powerful example of White's attacking prospect is seen in the following line:} 11. Bg5 b6 12. a3 Bb7 13. Qd3 Rc8 14. Rad1 Re8 15. h4 g6 (15... Nd5 16. Bxd5 exd5 17. Bxe7 Nxe7 {keeps White's advantage to something more bearable for Black}) 16. d5 Nxd5 17. Bxd5 exd5 18. Nxd5 Bxg5 19. hxg5 Rxe1+ 20. Rxe1 Qf8 21. Nf6+ Kh8 22. Qd7 Ba8 23. Qh3 h5 24. g4 {and Black was forced to resign, Ribli-Wells, Szeged 1997.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "A11221: 10...a6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "D41"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "45"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 d5 3. cxd5 cxd5 4. exd5 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nxd5 6. Nf3 e6 7. Bc4 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. d4 Nc6 10. Re1 a6 11. Bb3 (11. Qe2 {is an interesting suggestion from Aagaard.} Z0 ({. Grabbing a pawn with} 11... Nb6 12. Bb3 Nxd4 { is very risky; White has plenty of compensation after} 13. Nxd4 Qxd4 14. Be3 Qd8 15. Red1 {.}) ({. Instead Black should play} 11... b5 {, after which} 12. Nxd5 ({while White could also simply drop back with} 12. Bd3) 12... exd5 13. Bd3 Bg4 14. Bxh7+ Kxh7 15. Qc2+ Kg8 16. Qxc6 Bxf3 17. gxf3 {is unclear.})) 11... Nf6 {After this retreat, we step back into Queen's Gambit Accepted territory.} ({Instead Black can keep an independent flavour with} 11... Nxc3 12. bxc3 b5 {and now:} 13. Z0 (13. Qd3 Bb7 14. Bc2 g6 15. Bh6 Re8 { (Matveeva-Anand, Frunze 1987), and here Anand likes White after} 16. a4 {.}) (13. Bc2 {(shifting to the more dangerous diagonal)} Bb7 14. h4 {with a further split:} Z0 (14... Bxh4 15. Nxh4 Qxh4 16. Re3 {gives White a strong attack (compare with Variation A11222).}) (14... Bf6 15. Ng5 g6 ({or} 15... h6 $2 16. Qd3 g6 17. Nxe6 fxe6 18. Qxg6+ Bg7 19. Bxh6 Qf6 20. Qh7+ Kf7 21. Bxg7 Qxg7 22. Bg6+ Kf6 23. Rxe6+ {and White wins}) 16. Qg4 {and White will continue with h4-h5, An.Sokolov-Kharitonov, Moscow 1990.}) (14... Na5 {is an untried suggestion from 'ECO'.}) (14... Qd5 15. Bg5 Rfe8 16. Qd3 g6 17. Bb3 Qd6 18. h5 Bxg5 19. Nxg5 Qf4 20. hxg6 hxg6 ({or} 20... Qxg5 21. gxf7+ Kxf7 22. Qxh7+ Qg7 23. Bxe6+ Rxe6 24. Qxg7+ Kxg7 25. Rxe6) 21. Nxe6 fxe6 22. Qxg6+ Kf8 23. Re4 Qf5 24. Qh6+ Ke7 25. Rf4 Qd3 26. Qxe6+ Kd8 27. Qd6+ Kc8 28. Be6+ Rxe6 29. Rf8+ {1-0 Muhutdinov-Nenashev, Swidnica 1997.}))) ({Another idea is} 11... Re8 12. Qd3 Nxc3 ({Aagaard criticises this; perhaps Black should try} 12... Ncb4) 13. bxc3 Bf6 14. Qe4 Bd7 15. h4 Ne7 16. Ng5 Bxg5 17. Bxg5 {and White is clearly better, An. Sokolov-Burger, Reykjavik 1990.}) 12. Bf4 Na5 {Or:} (12... Nb4 13. Ne5 Nbd5 14. Bg3 Bd7 15. Bxd5 Nxd5 16. Nxd5 exd5 17. Qb3 Bc8 18. Rac1 { and Black is very passive, Christiansen-Kaidanov, Seattle 2000.}) (12... b5 13. d5 exd5 14. Nxd5 Nxd5 15. Qxd5 Bb7 16. Qh5 Bf6 17. Rad1 {and White's rooks are posted powerfully in the centre, Epishin-Jonkman, Amsterdam 2000.}) 13. d5 $5 {A new try.} ({White got nothing after} 13. Bc2 b5 14. d5 exd5 15. Qd3 Nc6 16. Bc7 Qd7 17. Ne5 Nxe5 18. Bxe5 g6 19. Bxf6 Bxf6 20. Nxd5 Bg7 {, Kasparov-Anand, Wijk aan Zee 1999.}) 13... Nxb3 14. Qxb3 exd5 {Or:} (14... Nxd5 15. Rad1 (15. Nxd5) 15... Nxf4 16. Rxd8 Rxd8 17. Rd1 {and White has an edge, Gelfand-Shirov, FIDE World Championship, New Delhi 2000.}) (14... Bd6 15. Bxd6 Qxd6 16. Rad1 exd5 17. Nxd5 Nxd5 18. Rxd5 Qf6 19. Nd4 {and Black has problems developing his c8-bishop, Kaidanov-D.Gurevich, Seattle 2000.}) 15. Rad1 { . We are following the game Kramnik-Anand, Monaco (rapid) 2001. White kept an edge after} Be6 16. Qxb7 Bc5 17. Be5 Qa5 18. Nd4 Bxd4 19. Rxd4 Nd7 20. Bd6 Nc5 21. Qc7 Qxc7 22. Bxc7 Rfc8 23. Bg3 {.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "A11222: 10...Nxc3"] [Result "*"] [ECO "D41"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "41"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 d5 3. cxd5 cxd5 4. exd5 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nxd5 6. Nf3 e6 7. Bc4 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. d4 Nc6 10. Re1 Nxc3 11. bxc3 b6 ({After} 11... Bf6 12. Bd3 {, I can see nothing better for Black than} b6 {, after which White continues with} 13. h4 {.}) 12. Bd3 {An important move. White quickly focuses his attention on the kingside, where Black is missing his normal defensive knight on f6.} Bb7 13. h4 {White has scored very well with this move (70% on my database). The idea is to start a quick attack with Ng5.} Na5 {Alternatives leave Black struggling:} (13... Qd5 14. Rb1 Rac8 15. Rb5 {and the b5-rook can swing over to help the kingside attack, Anand-Timman, Moscow 1992.}) (13... Bxh4 14. Nxh4 Qxh4 15. Re3 g6 16. Rh3 Qf6 17. Bh6 Rfe8 18. Qg4 Rac8 19. Bg5 Qg7 20. Qh4 f5 21. Re1 Na5 22. Rhe3 Qf7 23. Bb5 Bc6 24. Bxc6 Nxc6 25. c4 Qd7 26. Bf6 {and Black has major dark-squared weaknesses around his king, Kasparov-Gonda, Cannes simultaneous 1988.}) (13... Bf6 14. Ng5 g6 15. Qg4 h5 ({or} 15... Ne7 16. h5 Nf5 17. hxg6 hxg6 18. Rxe6 fxe6 19. Nxe6 {and White wins – Nunn}) 16. Qg3 Qd7 (16... Ne7 17. Ba3 Rc8 18. Nxe6 fxe6 19. Rxe6 Rc7 20. Rae1 Rf7 21. Bxg6 Rd7 22. Bxf7+ Kxf7 23. Rxf6+ Kxf6 24. Qe5+ Kf7 25. Qe6+ Kf8 26. Qf6+ { was the grisly conclusion to C.Hansen-Ki.Georgiev, Kiljava 1984}) 17. Ne4 Bg7 18. Bg5 Ne7 19. Qd6 {and White has a decisive advantage, Onischuk-Magem Badals, New York 1998.}) 14. Ng5 {The natural follow-up;} ({although Aagaard also suggests} 14. h5) ({and} 14. Bc2 {.}) 14... Bxg5 {This is virtually forced.} ({After} 14... h6 {we have:} 15. Z0 (15. Qh5 Rc8 (15... Bd5 16. Nh7 Re8 17. Bxh6 gxh6 18. Qxh6 f5 19. Re3 {led to a quick win in Razuvaev-Farago, Dubna 1979}) 16. Bh7+ (16. Nh7 Rxc3 {is unclear}) 16... Kh8 {and now, according to Nunn, White should repeat with} 17. Bb1 Kg8 18. Bh7+ {.} ) (15. Nh7 Re8 16. Qg4 Kh8 17. Ng5 Rf8 18. Nxe6 fxe6 19. Qg6 Rf5 ({or } 19... Kg8 20. Qh7+ Kf7 21. Bg6+ Kf6) 20. Rxe6 {and White wins – Nunn.})) ( 14... g6 {is only marginally stronger. Nunn gives the winning line} 15. Qg4 Rc8 16. h5 Rxc3 17. hxg6 Rxd3 18. gxf7+ Kh8 19. Nxe6 {.}) 15. Bxg5 ({After} 15. hxg5 {Black should play} f5 {(Pachman)} 16. gxf6 ({not} 16. Rxe6 Qd5 $1) 16... Qxf6 17. Qe2 Rac8 {, which is unclear.}) 15... Qd5 16. Qg4 f5 17. Qg3 {. Both sides have weaknesses, but I prefer White's position. The game Poluljahov-Balashov, St Petersburg 1998, continued} Rac8 18. Re5 Qd7 {and now} 19. Rc1 Nc4 20. Re2 Bd5 21. h5 {keeps White's initiative going.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "A11223: 10...Bf6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "D41"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "43"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 d5 3. cxd5 cxd5 4. exd5 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nxd5 6. Nf3 e6 7. Bc4 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. d4 Nc6 10. Re1 Bf6 11. Ne4 ({Also interesting is} 11. Bb3 Nce7 12. Ne4 b6 13. Nxf6+ Nxf6 14. Bg5 Ng6 15. Ne5 Qd6 16. Bxf6 gxf6 17. Qf3 {and White was better, Shavtvaladze-Bystron, Herculane 1994.}) 11... b6 (11... h6 { , avoiding a later Bg5, is not very common, but it certainly has something to said for it. In Kokkila-Karttunen, Tampere 1998, White kept an advantage after} 12. a3 b6 13. Qd3 Bb7 14. Bd2 Nce7 15. Rad1 Nf5 16. Ne5 {.}) 12. Nxf6+ Nxf6 ({ Or} 12... Qxf6 13. Bg5 Qg6 14. Rc1 Bb7 15. Bd3 Qh5 16. Re4 f5 17. Rxe6 Nxd4 18. Nxd4 Qxg5 19. Nf3 Qd8 20. Qa4 Kh8 {(Sokolovs-Schlosser, German Bundesliga 1999) , and now I like the move} 21. Rd1 {.}) 13. Bg5 {Normally an exchange of a pair of minor pieces helps Black in an IQP position, but here Black suffers as he has no good way to break the pin on the f6-knight and is reduced to allowing his kingside pawns to be broken.} Bb7 14. a3 Qd6 ({Israeli IM Ilya Tsesarsky gives the line} 14... h6 15. Bh4 Rc8 16. Ba2 Nb8 17. Ne5 g5 18. Bg3 Ne4 19. Qf3 Qxd4 20. Nxf7 {and Black is in trouble.}) 15. Bxf6 gxf6 { . Black's apparent weakness on the kingside gives White a promising position. In the game S.Ivanov-Hillarp Persson, Stockholm 2000, White increased his advantage after} 16. d5 Na5 17. Ba2 Bxd5 18. Qd4 Nc6 19. Qxf6 Bxa2 20. Rxa2 Qd3 21. b4 Qg6 22. Qh4 {.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "A113: 6...Nxc3"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "29"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 d5 3. cxd5 cxd5 4. exd5 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nxd5 6. Nf3 Nxc3 {With this move Black immediately gives White the 'hanging' c- and d-pawns.} 7. bxc3 g6 { Logically Black follows up by fianchettoing his f8-bishop, thus securing a safe kingside.} (7... e6 {is not so good:} 8. d4 Be7 9. Bd3 O-O 10. O-O Nd7 11. Re1 Qc7 12. c4 b6 13. Bb2 Bf6 14. Qd2 Bb7 15. Ng5 g6 16. h4 {and White has a powerful attack, Sher-Ferguson, Hastings 1995.}) 8. d4 {Or:} (8. h4 { is in some ways quite logical, but it's probably a little too ambitious.} Bg7 $1 9. h5 Nc6 10. Rb1 Qc7 11. Ba3 Bf5 {left Black with a good position in An. Sokolov-Karpov, Linares (11th matchgame) 1987.}) (8. Bb5+ {(this looks quite promising – White keeps the d-pawn at home for the moment)} Bd7 (8... Nc6 {transposes to Variation A111, note to Black's seventh move}) 9. a4 Bg7 10. O-O O-O 11. Ba3 (11. Re1 a6 12. Bf1 {is another idea}) 11... a6 (11... Nc6 12. Re1 Re8 13. d4 a6 14. Bf1 Qc7 15. Ng5 h6 16. Ne4 {was better for White in Balashov-Lastin, Elista 2000}) 12. Bxd7 Qxd7 ({Dautov gives} 12... Nxd7 13. d4 Rc8 14. Qb3 {with an edge to White}) 13. Re1 Nc6 14. Rb1 Rfd8 15. Bc5 Qf5 ({Black should play} 15... e5 {– Dautov}) 16. d4 Rd7 17. Qe2 {and White has strong pressure down both b- and e-files, Christiansen-Dautov, Essen 1999.}) 8... Bg7 9. Bd3 O-O 10. O-O Nc6 11. Re1 Bg4 {Black has quite a few alternatives here:} (11... Re8 12. Bg5 Be6 13. Rxe6 {(this move is fun, especially in a blitz game!)} fxe6 14. Bc4 Qd6 15. Qe2 Nd8 16. Re1 Rc8 17. Nd2 Kh8 18. Ne4 Qc7 19. Bb3 e5 20. h4 exd4 21. h5 gxh5 22. Qxh5 Rf8 23. Bc2 Qe5 24. Ng3 Qxe1+ 25. Kh2 h6 26. Bxh6 Kg8 27. Bxg7 Rxf2 28. Qh7+ Kf7 29. Qg6+ Kg8 30. Bh6+ {1-0 Tal-Karpov, Brussels (blitz) 1987. Don't be surprised if Black has improvements in this last line, but certainly 13 Rxe6 is interesting.}) (11... b6 12. Bg5 (12. Be4 Bb7 13. Bf4 e6 14. Rc1 Qd7 15. h4 Rad8 16. h5 Ne7 { was equal in Thesing-Gipslis, Pardubice 1995}) 12... Re8 13. Qd2 Bg4 14. Qf4 Bxf3 15. Qxf3 Qd6 16. Bc4 {was roughly level, Fernandez Garcia-Magem, Spanish Championship 1998.}) (11... Qa5 12. Bd2 Bg4 13. Be4 e5 14. d5 Ne7 15. c4 Qd8 16. Qb3 f5 17. d6 {and the complications favour White, Korneev-Evseev, Novgorod 1997.}) 12. Be4 Rc8 ({Or} 12... Qd7 13. Rb1 Rac8 14. h3 Bxf3 15. Bxf3 Na5 16. Bg4 e6 17. d5 f5 18. dxe6 Qxd1 19. Bxd1 Bxc3 20. Re2 a6 21. Rc2 b5 22. Ba3 {1-0, Korneev-Oms Pallise, Linares 1998, on account of} Rfe8 23. Rbc1 {.}) 13. Bg5 Qd7 14. h3 Bxf3 15. Qxf3 {, Winants-C.Hansen, Wijk aan Zee 1994. White's bishop pair promises him a slight edge.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "A12: 5...g6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "39"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 d5 3. cxd5 cxd5 4. exd5 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 {This move's a bit cheeky. Black forgets about recapturing the d5-pawn for the time being and concentrates on developing the kingside. White should aim to punish Black by hanging onto his pawn as long as possible.} 6. Bc4 (6. Qb3 Bg7 7. d4 { would transpose to the ...g6 variation of the Panov-Botvinnik Attack. After 6 Bc4 White can aim to use the fact that the d-pawn is still on d2.}) 6... Bg7 7. Nf3 O-O 8. O-O Na6 {Planning to increase the pressure on the d5-pawn with ... Nc7. Alternatives are less testing:} (8... Nbd7 9. d3 {(in this line the pawn is better on d3, where it supports the bishop)} Nb6 10. Qb3 Bf5 11. Bf4 Rc8 12. Rfe1 Nfd7 13. Bg5 Nc5 14. Qa3 {and Black is in trouble, Kalinichev-Tischbierek, Berlin 1986.}) (8... b6 9. d4 Bb7 10. Qb3 Na6 11. Ne5 Qd6 12. Nb5 Qb8 13. d6 e6 14. Bg5 Re8 15. d7 Rf8 16. Rfe1 {and White has a dominating position, Balashov-Skatchkov, Novgorod 1998.}) 9. d4 Nc7 10. Qb3 ({ Black answers} 10. Re1 {with} Nfxd5 {, after which} 11. Nxd5 Nxd5 12. Bxd5 Qxd5 13. Rxe7 Bg4 {gives Black good compensation for the pawn.}) 10... a6 ( 10... Nfe8 {is too slow. White is better after} 11. Bf4 Nd6 12. Bd3 b6 13. Rfe1 Bb7 14. Ne5 e6 15. Nc6 Bxc6 16. dxc6 Bxd4 17. Rad1 {, P.Claesen-Rogers, Wijk aan Zee 1996.}) 11. Ne5 b5 12. Be2 {. In the game Korneev-Alavkin, Novgorod 1997, White kept an edge after} Bb7 (12... Ncxd5 {.}) 13. Nc6 Qd6 14. Bf3 e6 15. Bg5 Nfxd5 16. Na5 Bc8 17. Rac1 Bd7 18. Nb7 Qb6 19. Nc5 Bc6 20. Rfd1 {.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "A2: 4...Qxd5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "22"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 d5 3. cxd5 cxd5 4. exd5 Qxd5 {With this move Black immediately recaptures the pawn, but White can now gain time by attacking the black queen.} 5. Nc3 Qd6 {The most popular retreat, but there are alternatives:} (5... Qe5+ $6 {(now White can gain further time with d2-d4)} 6. Be2 Bg4 7. d4 Bxe2 8. Ngxe2 Qa5 9. Qb3 Qb6 10. Nd5 Qxb3 11. axb3 Na6 12. Rxa6 bxa6 13. Nc7+ { and White went on to win in Kiik-Nykanen, Jyvaskyla 1999.}) (5... Qd8 6. d4 Nf6 7. Nf3 e6 8. Bc4 Be7 9. O-O O-O 10. Re1 Nc6 {transposes into Variation A122, note to Black's tenth move,} ({while} 10... a6 11. Bb3 Nc6 {transposes to A1221.})) (5... Qa5 6. d4 Nf6 7. Nf3 e6 8. Bd3 Be7 9. O-O Nc6 10. Qe2 O-O 11. a3 Rd8 12. Rd1 g6 13. Be3 a6 14. b4 Qc7 15. Rac1 Bd7 16. Bb1 Be8 17. Ba2 { and I prefer White, Finkel-Payen, Cannes 1996.}) 6. d4 Nf6 7. Nf3 {It's time for those transpositions again! This particular position can also be reached via the c3 Sicilian after 1 e4 c5 2 c3 d5 3 exd5 Qxd5 4 d4 cxd4 5 cxd4 Nf6 6 Nc3 Qd6 7 Nf3. I'll stick my neck out a little and say that this is a good version of the c3 Sicilian – Black has given White extra options by exchanging early on d4.} e6 ({I can find no example of} 7... Bg4 {in this actual position, even though I believe White has nothing better than to reach a slightly favourable variation of the c3 Sicilian after} 8. Be2 e6 9. h3 Bh5 10. O-O Nc6 11. Qb3 (11. Be3 Be7 {is known to be okay for Black}) 11... Qb4 ( 11... Bxf3 12. Bxf3 Nxd4 13. Qa4+ Qd7 14. Qxd7+ Nxd7 15. Bxb7 {gives White an endgame edge due to the bishop pair}) 12. Be3 {and now:} Z0 (12... Qxb3 13. axb3 Be7 14. g4 Bg6 15. Ne5 Nb4 (15... O-O {transposes to the next note}) 16. Bb5+ Kf8 17. Rfc1 a6 18. Be2 Nfd5 19. Nxd5 Nxd5 20. Bf3 {and Black's king is misplaced, Ravi-Neelotpal, Calcutta 1996.}) (12... Be7 13. g4 Bg6 14. Ne5 O-O 15. g5 {White has scored well from this position:} Z0 (15... Nh5 16. Nxc6 bxc6 17. Qd1 Qxb2 18. Rc1 Bb4 19. Nb1 c5 20. a3 Bxa3 21. Bxh5 Bxh5 22. Qxh5 cxd4 23. Bxd4 Qxc1 24. Rxc1 Bxc1 25. Nc3 {left White with a winning position in Sermek-V.Georgiev, Cannes 1996.}) (15... Nd5 16. Nxd5 exd5 17. Nxc6 bxc6 18. Qxb4 Bxb4 19. Rfc1 Bf5 20. a3 Be7 21. Rxc6 Bxh3 22. b4 Rfd8 23. b5 {and White has a dangerous queenside pawn majority, Smagin-Paschall, Bad Wiessee 1999.}) ( 15... Qxb3 16. axb3 Nd5 17. Nxd5 exd5 18. Rfc1 Bf5 19. Nxc6 bxc6 20. Rxc6 a5 21. Bf3 Rfd8 22. Bd2 Be6 23. Rxa5 Rab8 24. Bg4 {and White went on to win, Sermek-Sher, Bled 1993.} (24. Z0)))) 8. Bc4 (8. g3 {is interesting, for example} Be7 9. Bg2 Nc6 10. O-O O-O {(Down-Emms, Cambridge 1993) and now} 11. a3 Rd8 12. Bf4 Qd7 13. Ne5 Nxe5 14. dxe5 {favours White.}) 8... Be7 9. O-O Nc6 ({After} 9... O-O {White has the chance to play} 10. Qe2 Nc6 11. Rd1 Nb4 12. Bg5 Nbd5 13. Ne5 a6 14. Qf3 {, with strong pressure on d5, Stoica-Przewoznik, Timisoara 1987.}) 10. Bg5 {White has two enticing alternatives here:} (10. Nb5 $5 Qd8 11. Bf4 O-O 12. Bc7 Qd7 13. Ne5 Nxe5 14. dxe5 Ne8 15. Ba5 b6 16. Bd2 a6 17. Nc3 Bb7 18. Qe2 b5 19. Bb3 Bc5 20. Ne4 Be7 21. Rfd1 {was better for White in Blatny-Muse, Poznan 1986.}) (10. Qe2 Nxd4 ({while the alternative} 10... O-O {transposes to the note to Black's ninth move}) 11. Nxd4 Qxd4 12. Nb5 {looks dangerous.}) 10... O-O 11. Re1 {Black must play accurately to solve his problems here:} Z0 (11... a6 12. d5 Na5 (12... exd5 13. Nxd5 Nxd5 14. Qxd5 Qxd5 15. Bxd5 {gives White a favourable ending}) 13. Bd3 Rd8 (13... Nxd5 $2 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 15. Nxd5) ({and} 13... exd5 14. Nxd5 Qxd5 15. Bxf6 { are winning for White}) 14. Qc2 exd5 15. Bxh7+ Kf8 16. Rad1 {and Black's in some trouble, Godena-Lazarev, Cannes 1992.}) (11... Rd8 12. Nb5 Qb4 ( 12... Qd7 13. Ne5 Nxe5 14. dxe5 Nd5 15. Bxe7 Qxe7 16. Nd6 {is unpleasant for Black}) 13. Rc1 Qa5 14. Bf4 Nd5 15. Bxd5 Qxb5 {and Black was okay in the game Guseinov-Speelman, Baku 1983.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "B: 2...e5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "6"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 e5 {Black takes advantage of the fact that White didn't play 2 d4.} ({This is not such a popular choice for Black, perhaps because Caro-Kann players prefer to play} 2... d5 {, rather than learning lines of the Old Indian or Kings Indian (more transpositions, I'm afraid!).}) 3. Nf3 { Attacking the e5-pawn, and making use of the fact that Black doesn't have the c6-square for his knight. Now we shall take a look at Black's choices:} Z0 ({ B1:} 3... Qa5) ({B2:} 3... d6) ({Alternatively:} 3... f5 {(a kind of Latvian Counter Gambit!)} 4. Be2 fxe4 5. Nxe5 {and now:} Z0 (5... Nf6 6. O-O Be7 7. Nc3 d6 (7... d5 8. cxd5 cxd5 9. Bb5+ Bd7 10. Nxd7 Nbxd7 11. Nxd5 { won a pawn in Gofshtein-Hector, Manila Olympiad 1992}) 8. Ng4 Bxg4 9. Bxg4 d5 10. cxd5 cxd5 11. d3 {and Black will be left with a weak pawn in the centre.}) (5... Qh4 6. Nc3 d6 7. Bg4 Na6 8. Bxc8 Rxc8 9. Ng4 Nc5 10. O-O Nf6 11. Nxf6+ gxf6 12. g3 Rg8 13. Re1 {and Black's king has no safe place to hide, Sher-Hector, Vejle 1994.})) (3... Qc7 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. g3 (5. a3 Bxc3 6. dxc3 $5 {also looks like a promising way to play}) 5... Nf6 6. Bg2 Bxc3 7. bxc3 Nxe4 8. Qe2 d5 9. Ba3 Be6 10. O-O Nd7 11. cxd5 cxd5 12. Rfe1 Ndf6 13. Rab1 O-O-O 14. Nxe5 Qxe5 15. d3 {and White has a strong attack, An.Sokolov-Glek, Vilnius 1984.}) (3... Nf6 4. Nxe5 {(this is a good version of the Petroff Defence – the insertion of c2-c4 and ...c7-c6 helps White)} d6 5. Nf3 Nxe4 6. Nc3 {and now:} Z0 (6... Ng5 7. d4 Be7 8. Nxg5 Bxg5 9. Qe2+ Be7 10. Bg5 Be6 11. Bxe7 Qxe7 12. d5 {was better for White in Fernandez Garcia-Gil, Cala d'Or 1986. }) (6... Bf5 7. Bd3 Nxc3 8. dxc3 {(the d6-pawn is vulnerable)} Qe7+ 9. Be3 Bxd3 10. Qxd3 Nd7 11. O-O-O Ne5 12. Nxe5 dxe5 13. Rhe1 g6 14. Bxa7 Bg7 15. Qe3 Qe6 16. Qc5 Bf6 17. Bb6 Rxa2 18. Rxe5 {1-0 Beliavsky-Tavadian, Yaroslav 1982.}) (6... Nxc3 7. dxc3 Be7 8. Be2 (8. Bf4 {is more ambitious; after} O-O {White plays} 9. Qc2 {and 0-0-0}) 8... Nd7 9. O-O O-O 10. Bf4 { and White has an edge, Kuporosov-Meduna, Lazne Bohdanec 1994.})) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "B1: 3...Qa5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "27"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 e5 3. Nf3 Qa5 {A rather extravagant way of dealing with the threat to the e-pawn. Black's idea is to keep the f8-a3 diagonal free so that the dark-squared bishop can develop to an active post.} 4. Be2 Nf6 (4... f5 {is too ambitious, for example} 5. exf5 e4 6. Ng5 Qxf5 7. d3 Bb4+ 8. Nc3 exd3 9. Bxd3 Qe5+ 10. Be3 Nf6 ({or} 10... Bxc3+ 11. bxc3 Qxc3+ 12. Kf1 { and White has a strong attack –} Nf6 {runs into} 13. Bd4) 11. O-O O-O 12. Nce4 Nxe4 13. Bxe4 h6 14. Bh7+ Kh8 15. Bc2 {and Black's kingside is full of weaknesses, M.Gurevich-Hector, Taastrup 1992.}) 5. O-O Nxe4 (5... d6 {is inconsistent. Following} 6. Nc3 Be7 7. d4 {it's not clear what the black queen is doing on a5.}) 6. Re1 d6 7. d4 Nf6 8. Bd2 Qc7 9. dxe5 dxe5 10. Nxe5 Be7 11. Bf4 {. In the game Lautier-Kuczynski, Polanica Zdroj 1991, White kept a useful edge after the moves} Qb6 12. Qc2 O-O 13. Nc3 Be6 14. Rad1 {.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "B2: 3...d6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "8"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 e5 3. Nf3 d6 4. d4 {. Now we will look at:} Z0 ({B21:} 4... Bg4) ({B22:} 4... Nd7) (4... Qc7 5. Nc3 Bg4 6. Be2 Nf6 7. Be3 Nbd7 8. h3 Bxf3 9. Bxf3 Be7 10. O-O O-O 11. g3 {gave White a comfortable edge in Hübner-Bachmann, Berlin 1999.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "B21: 4...Bg4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "26"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 e5 3. Nf3 d6 4. d4 Bg4 5. dxe5 Bxf3 6. gxf3 dxe5 7. Qxd8+ Kxd8 8. f4 {It makes sense to open the position, as White has the bishop pair and Black's king is misplaced.} f6 {Or:} (8... Bb4+ 9. Ke2 (9. Nc3 Nf6 10. f3 Nbd7 11. Be2 Bd6 12. fxe5 Bxe5 13. O-O g5 {was equal in Nevednichy-Becerra Rivero, Yerevan Olympiad 1996}) 9... Nd7 10. Bh3 { is better for White, according to the Yugoslav IM Vojinovic.}) (8... Nd7 9. fxe5 Nxe5 10. f4 Nf3+ 11. Kf2 Nd4 12. Nc3 Ke8 13. Bh3 {and White will follow up with Be3, Gheorghiu-Malich, Romania 1983.}) 9. Nc3 Bd6 ({Or} 9... Kc7 10. fxe5 fxe5 11. f4 {.}) 10. fxe5 ({Also possible is} 10. Rg1 g6 11. fxe5 Bxe5 (11... fxe5 {transposes to the text}) 12. f4 Bxc3+ 13. bxc3 Nd7 14. Ba3 {and Black will have a hard time coping with the power of White's bishops.} ) 10... fxe5 11. Rg1 g6 12. Bg5+ Kc7 ({After the alternative} 12... Ne7 13. O-O-O Kc7 14. Bh3 {, White has the awkward threat of Rxd6.}) 13. Bh3 {White has a very active position. Here are some examples:} Z0 (13... Nd7 14. O-O-O Ngf6 15. Rg3 {(threatening Rgd3)} Bc5 16. Rf3 Raf8 17. Bh6 Rfg8 18. Bxd7 Nxd7 19. Rf7 Bd4 20. Ne2 c5 21. Bg7 {and White wins an exchange.}) (13... h6 14. Be3 g5 15. O-O-O Nf6 16. Bf5 {(Kaidanov-Blocker, Washington 1994), and here Kaidanov gives} Nbd7 17. Na4 {as better for White.}) (13... Na6 14. O-O-O Rf8 15. Rg3 Bc5 16. Rgd3 Bd4 17. Rxd4 exd4 18. Rxd4 {gave White a very strong attack against the black king in Berkovich-Vainshtein, Israel 1994. The rest of the game is of some interest:} Nb8 19. Bh4 Re8 20. Bg3+ Kb6 21. Na4+ Ka5 22. Nc5 b6 23. Nb7+ Ka6 24. Nd6 Rf8 25. Rd3 b5 26. c5 Ka5 27. f3 b4 ({or } 27... Kb4 28. Nb7 Kc4 29. Rd6 Rxf3 30. Be6+ Kb4 31. Rd4#) 28. Ra3+ bxa3 29. Be1+ {and Black resigned on account of mate after either} Ka4 ({or} 29... Ka6 30. Bf1#) 30. b3# {.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "B22: 4...Nd7"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B10"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "12"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 e5 3. Nf3 d6 4. d4 Nd7 5. Nc3 Ngf6 6. Be2 {. Black must now make a decision as to where to develop his dark squared bishop. Variation B221 leads to a line of the Old Indian Defence, while B222 reaches a line of the King's Indian Defence!} Z0 ({B221:} 6... Be7) ({B222:} 6... g6) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "B221: 6...Be7"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A55"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "16"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 e5 3. Nf3 d6 4. d4 Nd7 5. Nc3 Ngf6 6. Be2 Be7 7. O-O O-O ({After } 7... a6 {White has scored very well with} 8. Nh4 {:} Z0 (8... Nxe4 9. Nxe4 Bxh4 10. Nxd6+ {is obviously bad news for Black.}) (8... O-O 9. Nf5 Re8 10. Nxe7+ Qxe7 11. f3 {and White will follow up with b2-b3 and Ba3 – Ribli.}) ( 8... exd4 9. Qxd4 Qb6 10. Qxb6 (10. Nf5) ({and} 10. Be3 {also promise an edge}) 10... Nxb6 11. Be3 {and Black has to worry about his weak d6-pawn, V. Ivanov-Shchukin, St Petersburg 1999.}) (8... g6 {(preventing Nf5, but weakening the dark squares on the kingside)} 9. Bh6 Bf8 ({against} 9... Qb6 {Ribli gives} 10. dxe5 dxe5 11. Rb1 {, intending b2-b4}) 10. Bxf8 Kxf8 11. Qd2 Kg7 12. f4 {and White has an impressive looking pawn centre, Dreev-Serper, Tunja 1989.})) 8. Be3 {. Now we have a further split. Black can play:} Z0 ({ B2211:} 8... Re8) ({B2212:} 8... a6) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "B2211: 8...Re8"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A55"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "30"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 e5 3. Nf3 d6 4. d4 Nd7 5. Nc3 Ngf6 6. Be2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Be3 Re8 9. d5 c5 {Closing the centre. Now White has three possible plans: to play for b2-b4, to play for f2-f4, or a mixture of both.} ({Black's other options include:} 9... a5 {(trying to secure the c5-square for the knight)} 10. a3 Ng4 11. Bd2 Nc5 12. Qc2 (12. b4 axb4 13. axb4 Rxa1 14. Qxa1 Nb3 15. Qa7 Nxd2 16. Nxd2 Bg5 {was unclear in Z.Polgar-De Armas, Thessaloniki Olympiad 1988}) 12... a4 13. h3 Nf6 14. Be3 Nfd7 15. Rad1 Qa5 16. Nd2 Qd8 17. Bg4 Nb6 ( 17... Bg5) 18. Nf3 Bxg4 19. hxg4 Qc8 20. Bxc5 dxc5 21. d6 {and White was clearly better, Atalik-Vorobyov, Bled 2001.}) (9... cxd5 10. cxd5 a6 11. a4 b6 12. Nd2 Bb7 13. f3 Nh5 14. g3 g6 15. Nc4 Rb8 16. f4 exf4 17. gxf4 Ng7 18. Bf3 { and Black was passively placed in Psakhis-Escobar Forero, Linares 2001.}) 10. Ne1 {The knight comes to d3, where supports both b2-b4 and f2-f4.} Nf8 ({Or} 10... Bf8 11. Rb1 h6 12. a3 g6 13. b4 b6 14. Nd3 Nh7 15. Qd2 h5 16. Kh1 h4 17. h3 Bg7 18. f4 {and White has succeeded in his plan, Lukacs-Zhang Pengxiang, Budapest 1999.}) 11. Nd3 Ng6 12. a3 Bd7 (12... a5 13. b4 axb4 14. axb4 Rxa1 15. Qxa1 b6 16. Rb1 {gives White a quick attack on the queenside.}) 13. b4 b6 14. Rb1 {Preparing to open the b-file.} Rf8 {This looks strange, but Black wants the e8-square for his knight.} 15. bxc5 Z0 ({After} 15... bxc5 {, in the game Ilincic-Tosic, Subotica 2000, White broke through with the typical pseudo-sacrifice} 16. Nxc5 dxc5 17. d6 {, and now Illincic gives the variation} Re8 18. dxe7 Qxe7 19. Nd5 Nxd5 20. cxd5 {, assessing the position as better for White.}) ({Another option is} 15... dxc5 {, planning ...Ne8-d6. White should reply with} 16. a4 {, intending a4-a5.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "B2212: 8...a6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A55"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "30"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 e5 3. Nf3 d6 4. d4 Nd7 5. Nc3 Ngf6 6. Be2 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Be3 a6 {Preparing queenside counterplay with ...b7-b5.} 9. d5 cxd5 ({Or} 9... c5 10. Ne1 Ne8 11. Qd2 {(preventing ...Bg5) and now:} Z0 (11... h6 12. g3 { (preparing to meet ...bg5 with f2-f4)} Ndf6 13. f4 Ng4 14. Bxg4 Bxg4 15. fxe5 dxe5 16. Nd3 Qc7 17. Qg2 Nf6 18. h3 Bh5 19. g4 Bg6 20. Rad1 {and White is harmoniously placed, Wells-Martin, British Championship 1998.}) (11... g6 12. Nd3 Ng7 13. Bh6 Kh8 14. Kh1 Nf6 15. f4 {and again White has achieved the desired pawn break, Rowson-Summerscale, British Championship 1998.} (15. Z0))) 10. cxd5 b5 {This is consistent with Black's eighth move.} ({Another idea is to harass e3-bishop first with} 10... Ng4 11. Bd2 b5 12. Ne1 Ngf6 13. Nc2 { and now:} Z0 (13... Nb6 14. Nb4 Bb7 15. Rc1 Rc8 16. b3 {and White is better – Stohl.}) (13... Nc5 14. f3 Bd7 ({after} 14... b4 {White can safely play} 15. Nxb4 {, as} Qb6 16. Nc6 Ncxe4+ 17. Kh1 {wins material for White}) 15. b4 Na4 16. Nxa4 bxa4 17. Na3 {and White has a clear advantage, Chekhov-Hickl, German Bundesliga 1992.})) 11. Nd2 Nb6 {Or:} (11... Nxe4 12. Ncxe4 f5 13. a4 b4 14. a5 fxe4 15. Nxe4 Nf6 16. Nxf6+ Bxf6 17. Bb6 {and Black's queenside pawns are vulnerable, Psakhis-Zapata, Manila Olympiad 1992.}) (11... Ne8 12. b4 Bg5 13. Bxg5 Qxg5 14. a4 {and again White is making headway on the queenside, Psakhis-Herndl, Vienna 1998.}) 12. a4 bxa4 (12... b4 { is answered by} 13. a5 {.}) 13. Nxa4 Nxa4 14. Rxa4 Bd7 15. Ra3 (15. Rxa6 Rxa6 16. Bxa6 Ng4 {exchanges off the dark-squared bishop and promises Black counterplay.}) 15... Z0 {After 15 Ra3 White can make good use of his extra space on the queenside, for example:} (15... Qb8 16. Rb3 Qe8 17. Rb6 Rb8 18. f3 Rxb6 19. Bxb6 Qb8 20. Nc4 Bb5 21. Bf2 Bxc4 22. Bxc4 Qxb2 23. Qa1 Qxa1 24. Rxa1 {and Black faces a nightmare ending, S.Ivanov-Shchukin, St Petersburg 1998; a6 is dropping and Black will have to grimly defend the d6-pawn.}) (15... Bb5 16. f3 Nh5 17. Bxb5 axb5 18. Rxa8 Qxa8 19. Qb3 Rb8 20. Rc1 Nf4 21. Kf1 { and White was better in Yakovich-Kremenietsky, Moscow 1996.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Caro-Kann"] [Black "B222: 6...g6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A55"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "41"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 c6 2. c4 e5 3. Nf3 d6 4. d4 Nd7 5. Nc3 Ngf6 6. Be2 g6 {With this move Black aims for a King's Indian set-up, although it's one where he is already committed to the moves ...Nbd7 and ...c7-c6.} 7. O-O Bg7 8. Be3 O-O ({Black's main alternative is} 8... Ng4 9. Bg5 f6 10. Bc1 O-O 11. h3 Nh6 12. Be3 { and now:} Z0 (12... Qe7 13. Qc2 Nf7 14. Rad1 Re8 15. Rfe1 Bh6 16. Bxh6 Nxh6 17. b4 {and White begins activity on the queenside, Miles-Zapata, Manila 1990.}) ( 12... Nf7 13. Qc2 Bh6 14. Bxh6 Nxh6 15. Rfd1 Qe7 16. c5 dxc5 17. d5 f5 ({ or} 17... Nb6 18. dxc6 bxc6 19. Na4 Nxa4 20. Qxa4 {, followed by Rac1}) 18. dxc6 bxc6 19. Qd2 Kg7 20. Qd6 Qxd6 21. Rxd6 {and Black's queenside pawns are extremely weak, Nogueiras-Zapata, La Habana 1991.})) 9. d5 c5 {Or:} ( 9... cxd5 10. cxd5 Ng4 11. Bd2 {transposes to the next note.}) (9... Ng4 10. Bd2 f5 ({or} 10... cxd5 11. cxd5 Bh6 12. Rc1 a6 13. a4 f5 14. exf5 gxf5 15. h3 Bxd2 16. Qxd2 Ngf6 17. Ng5 {and White's better, Chekhov-Casper, Leipzig 1988 }) 11. Ng5 Ndf6 12. b4 cxd5 13. cxd5 Qe7 (13... fxe4 14. Ne6 Bxe6 15. dxe6 Nh6 16. g4 {left Black in total disarray in Ivanchuk-Piket, Wijk aan Zee 1996}) 14. Qb3 Nxe4 15. Ncxe4 fxe4 16. Nxe4 {and the white knight has an excellent outpost on e4.}) 10. Ne1 {Preventing ...Ng4 and preparing Nd3.} Ne8 {Preparing ...f7-f5.} (10... a6 11. a3 Kh8 12. b4 b6 13. Nd3 Ng8 14. a4 f5 15. a5 {attacked the base of Black's pawn chain in Shumiakina-Kovalevskaya, Chisinau 1998.}) 11. g4 {Anticipating ...f7-f5. White wishes to attack along the g-file!} f5 (11... Qh4 {proved to be a waste of time in Gelfand-Ivanchuk, Kramatorsk 1989, after} 12. Kh1 Kh8 13. Rg1 Qe7 14. a3 Ndf6 15. b4 {.}) 12. exf5 gxf5 13. gxf5 Nb6 ({Or} 13... Ndf6 14. Bd3 {and now:} Z0 ( 14... e4 15. Nxe4 Nxe4 16. Bxe4 Bxb2 17. Rb1 Bg7 18. Kh1 Qh4 19. Qc2 Qh3 20. Ng2 {and White went on to win in Michaelsen-Lane, Wijk aan Zee 1995.}) (14... Qe7 15. Qf3 Qf7 16. Kh1 Nh5 17. Rg1 Bxf5 18. Bxf5 Qxf5 19. Qxf5 Rxf5 20. Ne4 { and White has a very favourable ending, C.Hansen-Djurhuus, Reykjavik 1996; The d6-pawn is weak and the knight on e4 is a monster.} (20. Z0))) 14. Nf3 Bxf5 15. Ng5 {White uses both the g-file and the e4-square for the basis of an attack.} Qe7 16. Kh1 Nf6 (16... h6 {is met by} 17. Nge4) ({while} 16... e4 17. Rg1 Nd7 18. Rg3 {is also good for White.}) 17. Rg1 {. We are following the game Kramnik-Knaak, Dortmund 1992, which continued} Kh8 18. Qd2 (18. Rg3 {intending Qg1-g2 and Rg1, is also promising.}) 18... Bg6 19. Raf1 Nh5 20. Ne6 Rf7 21. b3 {and White was in total control.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "Introduction"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B07"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "6"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] {After} 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 {, Black's has the following choices:} Z0 ({ A:} 3... e5) ({B:} 3... c6) ({C:} 3... g6) (3... Nbd7 4. f4 e5 5. Nf3 { transposes to Line A.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "A: 3...e5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B07"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "41"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 e5 {This move is not particularly common.} ({ Black's main idea is that} 3... e5 4. Nf3 Nbd7 {transposes to the Philidor Defence (1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 Nf6 4 Nc3 Nbd7), without giving us the option to play the our beloved Bishop's Opening!}) 4. f4 exd4 {Black's alternatives include:} (4... Bg4 5. Qd3 exd4 6. Qxd4 d5 (6... Nc6 7. Bb5 Bd7 { transposes to main text}) 7. Nxd5 Nxd5 8. exd5 c6 9. Qe5+ Qe7 10. d6 Qxe5+ 11. fxe5 Nd7 12. Bf4 {and White has a favourable ending, Leko-Zetocha, Hungarian League 1998.}) (4... Nbd7 5. Nf3 exd4 6. Qxd4 c6 7. Be3 d5 {(this leads to great complications)} 8. exd5 Bc5 9. Qd3 Qe7 10. Nd4 {and now:} Z0 (10... Nb6 11. dxc6 bxc6 (11... O-O 12. O-O-O bxc6 13. Bg1 Qc7 14. g3 Rd8 15. Ndb5 {led to two quick victories for Judit Polgar in the same year – J. Polgar-Rivas Pastor, Dos Hermanas 1993 and J.Polgar-Khalifman, Seville 1993; White wins after} Rxd3 16. Nxc7 Rxd1+ 17. Nxd1 Bxg1 18. Nxa8) 12. Be2 Ba6 13. Qd2 Nbd5 14. Nxd5 Nxd5 15. Nf5 Bxe3 16. Nxe7 Bxd2+ 17. Kxd2 Kxe7 18. Bxa6 Nxf4 19. Rae1+ {and White has a slight advantage in this ending – the bishop is superior to the knight on the open board.}) (10... Nxd5 11. Nxd5 cxd5 12. O-O-O O-O 13. g3 Nf6 14. Bg2 Ne4 15. Rhe1 Bd7 16. Bg1 {and I prefer White, Galissot-Verheyen, Artek 2000.})) 5. Qxd4 Nc6 6. Bb5 Bd7 7. Qf2 Be7 ({Also possible is} 7... g6 {, for example} 8. Nf3 Bg7 9. Bd2 O-O 10. O-O-O a6 11. Bxc6 Bxc6 12. Rhe1 Re8 13. e5 Ng4 14. Qg3 Nh6 15. Ne4 Nf5 16. Qf2 Bxe4 17. Rxe4 dxe5 18. Bc3 Nd6 19. Rxe5 {and White has an edge, Kotronias-Jansa, Gausdal 1995.}) 8. Nf3 O-O 9. O-O a6 10. Bd3 Nb4 11. Bd2 {White has a nice space advantage. The game Hector-Zagorskis, Roskilde 1998 continued} c5 12. e5 Nxd3 13. cxd3 Ne8 14. Nd5 Bb5 15. Ba5 Qd7 16. Nb6 Qd8 17. b4 Rb8 18. Rfd1 dxe5 19. bxc5 exf4 20. d4 Nf6 21. a4 {and White has excellent compensation for the pawn.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "B: 3...c6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B07"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "12"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 c6 {This is a relatively new defence, utilised by the Russian Anatoly Ufimtsev, and then popularised by some leading Czech players in the late eighties. Black very much keeps his options open and waits to see how White proceeds.} 4. f4 {The most aggressive way to play against this system.} Qa5 {With the obvious threat of ...Nxe4, winning a pawn.} 5. e5 Ne4 6. Qf3 {Now Black has a choice of moves:} Z0 ({B1:} 6... d5) ({B2:} 6... Nxc3) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "B1: 6...d5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B07"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "33"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 c6 4. f4 Qa5 5. e5 Ne4 6. Qf3 d5 7. Bd3 Na6 { This is an interesting idea from Julian Hodgson.} ({Otherwise} 7... Nxc3 8. Bd2 {gives White a big lead in development}) ({while} 7... c5 8. Bxe4 dxe4 9. Qxe4 cxd4 10. Qxd4 Bf5 11. Qd5 Nc6 12. Qxa5 Nxa5 13. Nb5 O-O-O 14. c3 Nc6 15. Be3 { worked out well for White in D.Ledger-Summerscale, British Championship 1999.}) 8. Nge2 ({One of the points of Black's idea is seen after} 8. Bxe4 dxe4 9. Qxe4 g6 {, planning ...Bf5; Black has good pressure on the light squares.}) 8... Nb4 9. O-O ({But not} 9. Bxe4 dxe4 10. Qxe4 f5 11. exf6 Bf5 { (unfortunately it was me who fell for this trick in the stem game against Hodgson).}) 9... Nxd3 10. cxd3 Nxc3 11. bxc3 g6 {Black must prevent White from steamrollering with f4-f5.} 12. a4 (12. g4 h5 13. h3 hxg4 14. hxg4 Bd7 15. f5 gxf5 16. gxf5 O-O-O {gives Black unwanted counterplay, according to Scottish GM Jonathan Rowson.}) 12... h5 13. h3 h4 14. Ba3 Bf5 15. Rfb1 ({ White also kept an edge after} 15. Kh2 e6 16. Qe3 Rc8 17. Bxf8 Kxf8 18. Rfc1 Kg7 19. c4 c5 20. dxc5 Rxc5 21. Nd4 dxc4 22. dxc4 Rcc8 23. Nb5 a6 24. Nd6 Rc7 25. Ra3 b6 26. Rcc3 Qc5 27. Qxc5 Rxc5 28. Rcb3 {, Krizsany-Morrison, Koszeg 1999; White's knight certainly overshadows Black's bishop.}) 15... Qc7 { . We are following the game Motwani-Summerscale, Scottish Championship 1999. Now, instead of Motwani's 16 Qe3, White should play} 16. a5 e6 17. Bc5 { , when the two weaknesses on b7 and h4 give White a clear advantage – Motwani.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "B2: 6...Nxc3"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B07"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "59"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 c6 4. f4 Qa5 5. e5 Ne4 6. Qf3 Nxc3 7. Bd2 Bf5 ({ Also possible here is} 7... Qd5 8. Qxc3 {and now:} Z0 (8... Qe4+ 9. Kf2 dxe5 10. fxe5 e6 11. Nf3 {and White will follow up with Bd3.}) (8... dxe5 9. dxe5 Bf5 10. Nf3 e6 11. Bc4 Qe4+ 12. Kd1 Bg4 13. Re1 Bxf3+ 14. gxf3 Qg6 15. Qb3 b6 16. Bd3 Qh5 17. f5 Qxf3+ 18. Kc1 Nd7 19. Be4 Qxb3 20. axb3 {and White has a strong initiative – Beliavsky.}) (8... Bf5 9. Nf3 dxe5 (9... Qe4+ 10. Kd1 Bg4 11. Bd3 Bxf3+ 12. Kc1 Qd5 13. gxf3 Qxf3 14. Rf1 Qh5 15. Qb3 b6 16. d5 { gives White a strong attack}) ({, while} 9... b5 10. Be2 e6 11. O-O Be7 12. a4 dxe5 13. Nxe5 b4 14. Qe3 O-O 15. Bf3 Qd6 16. c3 {was good for White in Palliser-Hickman, Port Erin 1998}) 10. Bc4 {and then:} Z0 (10... Qe4+ 11. Kd1 Bg4 12. Qb3 e6 13. Qxb7 Bxf3+ 14. Kc1 Qxd4 ({or} 14... Bxg2 15. Qc8+ Ke7 16. Bb4+ Kf6 17. Qd8+ Kf5 18. Qg5#) 15. gxf3 Qxc4 16. Qc8+ Ke7 17. fxe5 f6 18. Qb7+ Nd7 19. Qxa8 {and White has a winning advantage.}) (10... Qd8 11. Qb3 e6 12. Qxb7 {(Beliavsky-Bezold, Portoroz 1996)} Nd7 13. Nxe5 Nxe5 14. dxe5 Be4 15. O-O-O Rb8 16. Qxa7 Ra8 17. Qe3 Bd5 18. Bb3 Bxb3 19. Qxb3 {and White has a clear advantage – Beliavsky.}))) 8. Bd3 Bxd3 (8... g6 9. bxc3 Qd5 10. Qe2 Bxd3 11. cxd3 c5 12. c4 Qxd4 13. Rb1 dxe5 14. Nf3 Qd7 15. Nxe5 Qc7 16. Qe4 {gave White a strong attack for the pawn in Kengis-Hausner, Luxembourg 1990.}) 9. cxd3 Qd5 10. bxc3 dxe5 (10... Nd7 {may be more resilient. Black was okay in Beaumont-Lund, British League 1999, after} 11. Qxd5 cxd5 12. Rb1 (12. a4) 12... b6 13. Nf3 e6 14. Ke2 dxe5 15. fxe5 f6 16. a4 Be7 17. Rhc1 Rc8 {.}) 11. fxe5 Qxf3 12. Nxf3 {White has an impressive centre and is ahead on development. The game Motwani-Adams, Moscow Olympiad 1994, continued} e6 13. Ke2 Nd7 14. Rhb1 b6 15. a4 Be7 16. a5 b5 17. c4 a6 18. Rc1 O-O 19. cxb5 cxb5 20. Rc7 Rfd8 21. Rac1 Kf8 22. d5 exd5 23. e6 Nf6 24. Ng5 h6 25. Rxe7 hxg5 { and now Motwani points out that the quickest win is} 26. Rcc7 Ne8 27. Bb4 Nxc7 28. exf7 Re8 29. Rxe8+ Kxf7 30. Re7+ {.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "C: 3...g6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B07"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "8"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 {Reaching the starting position of the Pirc Defence.} 4. Be3 {It's pretty straightforward stuff: White prepares Qd2, followed possibly by Bh6 and 0-0-0. Now Black has a decision. Black now generally develops his bishop with 4...Bg7, but this can also be delayed. The choices are:} Z0 ({C1:} 4... Bg7) ({C2:} 4... c6) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "C1: 4...Bg7"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B07"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "10"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 Bg7 5. Qd2 {And immediately we have another intersection. Black can play the following:} Z0 ({C11:} 5... O-O) ({ C12:} 5... c6) ({Lesser alternatives are:} 5... Nc6 6. Bb5 (6. f3) 6... O-O 7. Nf3 a6 8. Bxc6 bxc6 9. Bh6 Bg4 10. Bxg7 Kxg7 11. Qf4 Bxf3 12. Qxf3 Nd7 13. O-O {(White's already a little better)} e5 14. Rad1 exd4 15. Rxd4 Re8 16. Qd1 Qb8 17. b3 Qb6 18. Kh1 Qa5 19. Qa1 Qe5 20. Rc4 c5 21. f4 Qf6 22. e5 dxe5 23. Ne4 Qe7 24. f5 {and White has a very strong attack, Hebden-Beikert, France 1993.}) (5... Ng4 {(White used to play the cautious 5 f3 to prevent this move, but more recently players have realised that 5...Ng4 isn't such a threat at all)} 6. Bg5 h6 7. Bh4 {and now:} Z0 (7... c6 8. h3 Nf6 9. f4 b5 10. Bd3 b4 11. Nce2 a5 12. Nf3 O-O 13. O-O d5 (13... Ba6 {is stronger, although White keeps an edge – Piket}) 14. Bxf6 {(Piket-Epishin, Dortmund 1994), and now} Bxf6 ({and} 14... exf6 15. f5) 15. e5 Bg7 16. a3 {are both promising for White.}) ( 7... g5 8. Bg3 e5 9. dxe5 Nxe5 10. O-O-O Nbc6 11. f4 gxf4 12. Bxf4 Be6 13. Nd5 a6 14. Nf3 {was better for White in Millican-Davis, correspondence 1990; Black can hardly contemplate castling kingside here.})) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "C11: 5...0-0"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B07"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "35"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 Bg7 5. Qd2 O-O {Black 'safely' castles before developing queenside counterplay.} ({This is not as popular as} 5... c6 {and, by committing his king early, Black has given White an obvious target to aim at.}) 6. O-O-O {The good news for white players is that, according to my database, White has scored a massive 74% from this position!} c6 {Or:} ({After } 6... Nc6 {White can simply continue the attack with} 7. Bh6 {.}) (6... Ng4 { (preventing Bh6)} 7. Bg5 h6 8. Bh4 Nc6 9. h3 Nf6 10. f4 a6 11. g4 b5 12. e5 dxe5 13. dxe5 Qxd2+ 14. Rxd2 Nh7 15. Bg2 {and White has an excellent position, Yudasin-Janjgava, Lvov 1987.}) 7. Bh6 {White plays in a very direct manner. Black's defensive bishop must be exchanged!} b5 ({Black has to get going on the other side of the board. Here's a example of what can happen to Black if he plays too slowly:} 7... Re8 {(planning ...Bh8, but the horse has bolted long ago...)} 8. Bxg7 Kxg7 9. f4 Qa5 10. Nf3 Bg4 11. Be2 Nbd7 12. h3 Bxf3 13. Bxf3 e5 14. g4 {(White's kingside attack is automatic)} Nb6 15. Be2 exf4 16. Qxf4 h6 17. h4 g5 18. Qf3 Re7 19. e5 dxe5 20. hxg5 hxg5 21. Qf5 Re6 22. Qxg5+ Kf8 23. Rdf1 Ke7 24. Rxf6 {and Black resigned in Hübner-Nautsch, Germany 1981, on account of} Rxf6 25. dxe5 {.}) 8. f3 {Protecting the e4-pawn and thus taking much of the sting out of ...b5-b4.} Qa5 (8... Bxh6 { just seems to speed up White's attack, for example} 9. Qxh6 b4 10. Nce2 Qa5 11. Kb1 Be6 12. Nc1 {(the knight does a great defensive job here; Black's attack is going nowhere)} Rc8 13. h4 Qd8 14. Nge2 Qf8 15. Qd2 a5 16. Nf4 Nbd7 17. h5 Qg7 18. g4 Nf8 19. g5 Ne8 20. hxg6 hxg6 21. Rh4 c5 22. d5 Bd7 23. Bc4 f6 24. Rg1 fxg5 25. Rxg5 Nf6 26. e5 N6h7 27. Rg1 Bf5 28. e6 Qd4 29. Nxg6 Qxg1 30. Nxe7+ Kh8 31. Nxf5 Rc7 32. Rg4 Qh1 33. Qf4 Qe1 34. Nxd6 a4 35. Nf7+ Rxf7 36. Qxf7 {and Black resigned, Efimov-Sarno, Reggio Emilia 1998.}) ({An even quicker disaster befell Black in the game Hamdouchi-Battikhi, Dubai 1995, which continued} 8... Qc7 9. h4 Nbd7 10. h5 {(there's no point hanging around!)} e5 11. g4 exd4 12. Bxg7 dxc3 13. Qh6 cxb2+ 14. Kb1 Qd8 15. g5 { and Black resigned, as} Nxh5 16. Rxh5 gxh5 17. Bf6 {leads to mate.}) 9. Kb1 b4 ({After} 9... Be6 {White has the clever retort} 10. Nd5 {(Oratovsky) and now:} Z0 (10... Qa6 11. Nxe7+ Kh8 12. Bxg7+ Kxg7 13. d5 {and White is simply a pawn up.}) (10... Qxd2 11. Nxe7+ Kh8 12. Bxd2 ({but not} 12. Bxg7+ Kxg7 13. Rxd2 Re8 14. Nxc6 Nxc6 15. d5 Bxd5 {with a back rank mate trick}) 12... Re8 13. Nxc6 Nxc6 14. d5 {and White regains the piece with some advantage – Black's pawns will be weak in the ending.}) (10... Qd8 11. Nxf6+ exf6 12. d5 { and White will continue with h2-h4-h5.})) 10. Nce2 Nbd7 ({Or} 10... Be6 11. Nc1 {, and White will continue the attack with g2-g4 and h2-h5.}) 11. h4 c5 12. h5 {White's attack is quicker than Black's. The game Matikozian-Minasian, Yerevan 1999, continued} c4 (12... Nxh5 {loses to the standard} 13. Rxh5 gxh5 14. Qg5 {.}) 13. hxg6 fxg6 14. Bxg7 Kxg7 {, and now White missed the very strong continuation} 15. Qh6+ Kf7 ({Or} 15... Kg8 16. Nf4 Ba6 17. Nxg6 {.}) 16. Nh3 c3 17. Ng5+ Ke8 18. Nxh7 {.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "C12: 5...c6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B07"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "12"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 Bg7 5. Qd2 c6 {This is Black's most sensible approach. He keeps his king in the centre, for the time being at least, and prepares queenside counterplay.} 6. Nf3 ({Also very playable are} 6. f3) ({and the immediate} 6. Bh6 {, although I believe the latter line has lost a bit of its sting since Black players discovered the line} Bxh6 7. Qxh6 Qa5 8. Bd3 c5 {.}) 6... Z0 {After 6 Nf3, it's decision time again for Black. His main choices in this position are the following:} ({C121:} 6... O-O) ({C122:} 6... b5) ({C123:} 6... Qa5) ({Alternatively:} 6... Ng4 7. Bg5 h6 8. Bh4 O-O 9. h3 Nf6 10. Bd3 Qc7 11. Bxf6 {(normally White wouldn't consider this exchange, but here Black is forced to capture with the e-pawn)} exf6 12. O-O Nd7 13. Ne2 Re8 14. c3 {and White has a slight advantage, Hebden-Strikovic, Oviedo (rapid) 1993; Black will find it hard to activate his dark-squared bishop.}) (6... Bg4 {(Black often waits for White to commit his bishop to d3 before doing this)} 7. Be2 ({the more aggressive} 7. Bd3 {is also promising, for example} Bxf3 8. gxf3 Nbd7 9. O-O-O Qa5 10. Kb1 b5 11. Bh6 Bxh6 12. Qxh6 Nb6 13. Rhe1 Na4 14. Nxa4 Qxa4 15. e5 dxe5 16. dxe5 Nd5 17. Qg7 Rf8 18. e6 $1 {and White broke through, Gallagher-Ramseier, Zurich 1999}) 7... O-O 8. h3 Bxf3 9. Bxf3 Nbd7 10. O-O {(on this occasion White chooses a quieter life)} Re8 11. Rfd1 Qc7 12. a4 Rad8 (12... a5 13. Qe2 e5 14. d5 cxd5 15. Nxd5 Nxd5 16. Rxd5 Ra6 17. Rb5 {was nice for White in Emms-Belov, German Bundesliga 1995}) 13. g3 e5 14. d5 Nb6 15. Qd3 a5 16. Rab1 {with an slight edge for White as in Gallagher-C.Hansen, Reykjavik 1998.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "C121: 6...0-0"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "37"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 Bg7 5. Qd2 c6 6. Nf3 O-O 7. Bh6 {There's no reason to delay this move any longer; White wants to get rid of Black's defensive bishop.} Bg4 {Black has some other moves here:} (7... b5 8. Bd3 { transposes to Variation C1222.}) (7... Nbd7 8. O-O-O b5 9. Bxg7 Kxg7 10. e5 {(this lunge in the centre, forcing Black to move his defensive knight, is usually very desirable)} Ne8 11. h4 h5 12. Bd3 Nb6 13. Rhe1 {with lots of pressure down the central files, Corvi-De Luca, Palocco 1998.}) (7... Qa5 8. h4 (8. O-O-O Bg4 {transposes to the note White's eighth move}) 8... Bg4 9. Bxg7 Kxg7 10. e5 dxe5 11. Nxe5 h5 12. f3 Be6 13. Bc4 Bxc4 14. Nxc4 Qc7 15. O-O-O { with a slight advantage to White, Stripunsky-Vulicevic, New York 1998.}) 8. Bxg7 (8. O-O-O {is also dangerous:} Z0 (8... Qa5 9. h3 ({American GM Joel Benjamin suggests the line} 9. Bxg7 Kxg7 10. e5 dxe5 11. dxe5 Nfd7 12. Qd4 Bxf3 13. e6+ Nf6 14. gxf3 fxe6) 9... Bxf3 10. gxf3 Bxh6 11. Qxh6 Nbd7 12. h4 Nh5 13. Rg1 Kh8 14. f4 Ndf6 15. f5 {and White's attack is very quick, Emms-Spraggett, Paris 1990.}) (8... b5 9. Bxg7 Kxg7 10. h3 Bxf3 11. gxf3 Nbd7 12. h4 b4 13. Ne2 Qa5 14. Kb1 h5 15. Rg1 Rh8 16. Bh3 {and White has the initiative, Reefat-Nikolic, Istanbul Olympiad 2000.}) (8... Bxf3 9. gxf3 Nbd7 10. Bxg7 Kxg7 11. f4 {and White can look to push with e4-e5.}) (8... Nbd7 {(this may be best)} 9. Bxg7 Kxg7 10. e5 Nd5 11. exd6 exd6 (11... Nxc3 12. Qxc3 exd6 13. d5+ {is good for White}) 12. Nxd5 cxd5 13. Qf4 Bxf3 14. Qxf3 Qg5+ 15. Kb1 Nf6 { (Speelman-Piket, Tilburg 1992), and here White should play} 16. h4 Qg4 17. Be2 Qxf3 18. Bxf3 {, which is roughly level.})) 8... Kxg7 9. Ng5 {We will frequently come across this idea. In the 150 Attack, Black's light-squared bishop is a often a problem piece for him, as it has no useful role. Black sees it as an achievement if it can be exchanged. White, on the other hand, is often prepared to go out of his way to avoid such a trade. In this instance the bishop is left hitting thin air, and it will soon have to retreat after h2-h3.} h6 10. h3 Bc8 (10... Bh5 {is answered by} 11. Nxf7 Rxf7 12. g4 { , and White regains the piece with some advantage.}) 11. Nf3 Qa5 {. We are following the game Degraeve-Ponomariov, Belfort 1998, which continued} 12. e5 dxe5 13. Nxe5 Nbd7 14. Ng4 Nxg4 15. hxg4 Rh8 16. f3 Nf6 17. Bc4 b5 18. Bb3 Bb7 19. O-O-O {and White was better.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "C122: 6...b5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "14"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 Bg7 5. Qd2 c6 6. Nf3 b5 {A popular choice. Black delays castling for another move, expands on the queenside and threatens ...b5-b4. On the other hand, this also gives White a target on the queenside. Often in this variation White abandons a direct kingside attack in favour of striking back on the queenside with a2-a4. The trick is to know when to do this!} 7. Bd3 {Now Black's main moves are:} Z0 ({C1121:} 7... Bg4) ({C1122:} 7... O-O) ({Alternatively:} 7... Ng4 8. Bg5 f6 ({or} 8... h6 9. Bh4 g5 10. Bg3 e5 11. dxe5 Nxe5 12. Be2 Be6 13. O-O O-O 14. Rfd1 {and Black has problems with his vulnerable d-pawn, Spraggett-Mezcua Coronil, Cala Galdana 1994}) 9. Bh4 e5 10. h3 Bh6 11. Qe2 exd4 12. Nxb5 Ne5 13. Nbxd4 {with an extra pawn, Ermenkov-Popchev, Ikaros 1999.}) (7... a6 {(this is too slow; the rest of the game is a severe example of what can happen to Black if he is not careful)} 8. Bh6 O-O 9. e5 dxe5 10. dxe5 Nd5 11. h4 Nb4 12. h5 Nxd3+ 13. cxd3 Bf5 14. Bxg7 Kxg7 15. O-O-O b4 16. hxg6 Bxg6 17. Qh6+ Kg8 18. Nh4 {1-0 Spraggett-McTavish, Toronto 1995.}) (7... Nbd7 8. Bh6 Bxh6 (8... O-O {transposes to note 'b' to Black's eighth move in Variation C1222}) 9. Qxh6 e5 10. dxe5 dxe5 11. O-O Qe7 12. Rfe1 Ng4 13. Qd2 O-O 14. a4 b4 15. Nd1 Kg7 16. b3 a5 17. Nb2 {and the white knight will find a nice home on c4, Beliavsky-Marangunic, Slovenian Team Championship 1998.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "C1221: 7...Bg4"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "25"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 Bg7 5. Qd2 c6 6. Nf3 b5 7. Bd3 Bg4 { Black looks to exchange his problem piece.} 8. e5 {This idea is fairly new.} ({Instead of this,} 8. Ng1 {is an amusing retreat, which certainly prevents the exchange, and leaves Black's bishop 'hanging' on g4.}) ({White will regain lost time with h2-h3 (for those not liking the aesthetic value of this move,} 8. Nh4 {probably comes to the same thing). Following} e5 9. dxe5 dxe5 10. h3 Be6 (10... Bc8 11. Nf3 Nbd7 {actually reaches Variation C2, note 'b' to Black's ninth move}) 11. Nf3 Nbd7 12. Ng5 Qe7 13. Nxe6 Qxe6 14. a4 b4 15. Ne2 a5 16. O-O O-O 17. c3 Rab8 18. Ng3 bxc3 19. Qxc3 Qb3 20. Rfc1 Rfc8 21. Ba6 Qxc3 22. Rxc3 Rc7 23. Bb5 {White was better in Ramesh-Hendriks, Amsterdam 2000. }) (8. O-O-O {looks natural, but Black achieves good counterplay after} Nbd7 9. h3 Bxf3 10. gxf3 a5 11. f4 b4 12. Na4 Nb6 13. Nxb6 Qxb6 {, Adams-Hodgson, Dublin 1993.}) 8... b4 (8... Nfd7 9. Bh6 O-O 10. Bxg7 Kxg7 {was unclear in Beckemeier-Tischbierek, German Bundesliga 1999. Perhaps White should settle here for} 11. exd6 exd6 12. Qf4 Re8+ 13. Ne2 {.}) 9. Ne4 ({Also interesting is } 9. Ne2 Nd5 10. Bh6 O-O 11. h4 {and now:} Z0 (11... Bxf3 12. gxf3 dxe5 13. Bxg7 (13. h5 Bf6 14. hxg6 hxg6 15. Bxf8 Qxf8 {and Black has good compensation for the exchange, Apicella-Hickl, Kaufbeuren 1996}) 13... Kxg7 14. h5 {transposes to the next note.}) (11... dxe5 12. Bxg7 Kxg7 13. h5 Bxf3 14. gxf3 Nd7 15. hxg6 hxg6 16. Qh6+ Kf6 17. Rg1 {and Black is living very dangerously, S-B.Hansen-Yrjola, Reykjavik 2000.})) 9... Nxe4 ({After} 9... Nd5 $6 10. Bh6 {White has all the makings of a successful attack. Short-Irzhanov, Elista Olympiad, continued} O-O 11. h4 Bxf3 12. gxf3 dxe5 13. h5 Bf6 14. Nxf6+ exf6 15. hxg6 fxg6 16. Bxf8 Qxf8 17. dxe5 {and Black didn't last much longer.}) 10. Bxe4 d5 {Or:} (10... Bxf3 11. Bxf3 dxe5 12. O-O-O a5 13. Bh6 {and White has a strong attack; one possible line is} Bxh6 14. Qxh6 exd4 15. Qg7 Rf8 16. Rxd4 Qb6 17. Rhd1 Na6 18. Rd6 {.}) 11. Bd3 Bxf3 12. gxf3 Qb6 (12... a5 {looks a bit irrelevant. The game Leko-Beliavsky, Madrid 1998, saw a large White advantage after} 13. h4 Nd7 14. h5 Qb6 15. c4 bxc3 16. bxc3 e6 17. Rb1 Qc7 18. Bh6 {.}) 13. Z0 {An important position for the evaluation of this line. Here are two practical examples:} (13. h4 Nd7 14. h5 c5 15. dxc5 Nxc5 16. Be2 O-O (16... e6 { looks stronger}) 17. Qxd5 Rac8 18. hxg6 hxg6 19. Qd4 {and White was better, Deep Junior 6-Khalifman, Dortmund 2000.}) (13. a3 bxa3 14. b4 Na6 15. c3 Nc7 16. Rxa3 O-O 17. Ra5 Qb7 18. Rg1 {and I prefer White, who can attack on either side, Nguyen Anh Dung-Postny, Budapest 2000.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "C1222: 7...0-0"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "28"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 Bg7 5. Qd2 c6 6. Nf3 b5 7. Bd3 O-O 8. Bh6 { White wishes to trade bishops.} Bg4 {Again Black is looking to exchange his problem piece. Alternatively:} (8... b4 {(this unprovoked lunge just drives the knight to where the action is – the kingside)} 9. Ne2 a5 10. Ng3 Qc7 11. Bxg7 Kxg7 12. e5 dxe5 13. dxe5 Ng4 14. Qf4 Qb6 15. O-O f6 16. Rae1 Ra7 17. e6 { and White has a clear advantage, Dunnington-Fabris, Cappelle la Grande 1994.}) (8... Nbd7 9. a4 ({after} 9. e5 dxe5 10. dxe5 Ng4 11. Bxg7 Kxg7 12. Qf4 {Black has a little trick:} Ndxe5 13. Nxe5 Qd6 14. Nxg6 fxg6 15. Qxd6 exd6 {with an equal position}) 9... b4 10. Ne2 a5 {and now:} 11. Z0 (11. Ng3 e5 12. dxe5 Nxe5 13. Nxe5 dxe5 14. h4 Qd4 15. Bxg7 Kxg7 16. O-O-O h5 17. Qg5 Be6 {is unclear,} ({but not} 17... Nh7 18. Nxh5+ Kh8 19. Nf6 Qxf2 20. Nxh7 Kxh7 21. Rdf1 Qa7 22. h5 {and Black resigned in Gaulin-Leygue, Bescanon 1999.})) (11. Bxg7 Kxg7 12. e5 (12. Ng3) 12... dxe5 13. dxe5 Ng4 (13... Nd5 14. h4 {, intending h4-h5, gives White a very quick attack}) 14. Qf4 Nc5 15. Bc4 f6 16. e6 f5 ({or} 16... Nh6 17. Ned4 Qb6 18. b3 Ba6 19. Bxa6 Nxa6 20. O-O-O Nc7 21. Qe4 Ra6 22. Ne2 Nd5 23. Nfd4 {and White's better, Kaidanov-Bishop, Las Vegas 1997}) 17. h3 Nf6 18. Qe3 {with a complex position, Ansell-Koneru, London 1999.})) 9. Bxg7 ({Interesting is} 9. a4 {, which is more to gain a tempo for kingside action rather than the start of an attack on the queenside. After} b4 10. Ne2 {(now the b-pawn needs to be defended)} a5 11. Ng3 Nbd7 12. h4 {White has the makings of a successful kingside offensive. The game Zapata-Schussler, Santa Clara 1996, continued} e5 13. dxe5 dxe5 14. h5 $1 Bxh5 15. O-O-O Nc5 16. Bxg7 Kxg7 17. Qg5 {and Black was unable to resist White's assault.}) 9... Kxg7 10. Ng5 {Once again White avoids the exchange on f3.} (10. e5 {is probably a bit premature, but still playable. After} dxe5 11. dxe5 Nfd7 12. Qe3 Qc7 13. e6 Bxe6 14. Ng5 Qe5 15. Nxe6+ fxe6 16. a4 Qxe3+ 17. fxe3 b4 18. Ne4 {White has some compensation for the pawn, Adams-Shirov, Dos Hermanas 1995.}) 10... e5 {Or:} (10... h6 {(obviously this is the critical test of 10 Ng5)} 11. h3 Bh5 ({or} 11... b4 12. hxg4 bxc3 13. Ne6+ fxe6 14. Qxh6+ Kf7 15. e5) 12. Nxf7 Rxf7 13. g4 {and White regains the piece with some advantage. This trick associated with Ng5 is worth remembering.}) ( 10... b4 11. Ne2 Qb6 ({Black should play} 11... h6) 12. f3 Bc8 13. h4 e5 14. h5 {and White's attack plays itself. De la Riva Aguado-Iruzubieta, Spanish Team Championship 1998, concluded} h6 15. dxe5 dxe5 16. hxg6 hxg5 17. Qxg5 c5 18. Qh6+ {and Black resigned.}) 11. dxe5 dxe5 12. h3 Bc8 13. a4 b4 14. Ne2 { . White can combine play on the kingside with threats to Black weaknesses on the other wing. Here are two practical examples:} Z0 (14... a5 15. f4 Nbd7 16. O-O Qe7 17. Rf2 Ne8 18. Nf3 f6 19. Ng3 exf4 20. Qxf4 Nd6 21. Re1 Re8 22. Nd4 Ne5 23. Bf1 {with an edge for White, Sadler-Szmetan, Buenos Aires 1995.}) ( 14... c5 15. Qe3 Qe7 16. O-O Nc6 17. c3 Bb7 18. a5 a6 19. Ng3 h6 20. Nf3 Ne8 21. Nd2 Nc7 22. Nb3 Ne6 23. Bc4 {and Black has pawn weaknesses on c5 and a6, Yagupov-Irzhanov, Nizhnij Novgorod 1998.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "C123: 6...Qa5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B08"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "22"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 Bg7 5. Qd2 c6 6. Nf3 Qa5 {A solid choice that has been a favourite of grandmasters Julian Hodgson and Colin McNab. By moving the queen to a5, Black puts White off castling queenside; White may have to look for another way forward.} 7. h3 {With this move, preventing both . ..Bg4 and ...Ng4, White signals his intentions of playing in a more positional manner.} ({For those with more aggressive intentions there's} 7. Bd3 {, with the following variations:} Z0 (7... O-O 8. Bh6 (8. h3 {transposes into the text }) 8... Bg4 9. O-O-O Nbd7 10. Bxg7 Kxg7 11. Be2 e5 12. h3 Bxf3 13. Bxf3 Rad8 14. g4 Nb6 15. Be2 exd4 16. Qxd4 Rfe8 17. f4 {with an unclear position, Khalifman-Bogdanovski, Paide 1999.}) (7... Bg4 8. e5 dxe5 ({or} 8... Nfd7 9. exd6 Bxf3 10. gxf3 exd6 11. Ne4 Qxd2+ 12. Kxd2 Ke7 13. Rae1) 9. Nxe5 Nbd7 10. f4 Rd8 (10... Nxe5 11. dxe5 Nd5 12. Nxd5 Qxd2+ 13. Kxd2 cxd5 14. h3 Bd7 15. Bd4 {was slightly better for White, Stripunsky-Vulicevic, New York 1998}) 11. h3 Bf5 12. Bxf5 gxf5 13. O-O-O h5 14. Kb1 Nb6 15. Qd3 e6 {with a small plus for White, Gadjily-Bogdanovski, European Team Championship, Batumi 1999.})) 7... O-O ({Or} 7... Na6 {and now:} 8. Z0 (8. a4 b5 (8... Nb4) 9. Bd3 b4 10. Ne2 c5 11. c3 bxc3 12. bxc3 O-O 13. O-O Rb8 {and probably White's a bit better, Kinsman-Hodgson, British League 1998.}) (8. a3 b5 9. Bd3 Nb4 10. O-O Nxd3 11. cxd3 O-O 12. Bh6 Qb6 13. e5 Ne8 (13... Nd5 {looks stronger}) 14. Ne4 Be6 15. Qf4 f6 16. exf6 Nxf6 {(Emms-Vigus, British Championship 2000), now I should have played} 17. Bxg7 ({instead my} 17. Qh4 Bxh6 18. Qxh6 Nxe4 19. dxe4 Rxf3 20. gxf3 Qxd4 {Black was better}) 17... Kxg7 18. Qh4 Bf5 19. Rfe1 {, with an edge to White.})) 8. Bd3 Nbd7 9. O-O e5 (9... b5 {is met by} 10. Nd5 $1 Qd8 11. Nxf6+ Nxf6 12. a4 {, and White begins to probe on the queenside.}) 10. a4 {Gaining space on the queenside.} ({English GM Mark Hebden has preferred the slightly more restrained} 10. a3 {, and he has an ongoing theoretical debate with the Scottish Grandmaster and Pirc expert Colin McNab in this line. So far I can count three battles between the two (there may well be more). The latest encounter continued} Re8 (10... Qc7 11. a4 b6 12. a5 b5 13. dxe5 dxe5 14. Ne2 a6 15. c4 bxc4 16. Bb1 Rb8 17. Nc3 Nh5 18. Ra4 Rd8 19. Rd1 Bb7 20. Qe2 c5 21. Qxc4 {was better for White in Hebden-McNab, London 1994} ) 11. Bc4 exd4 12. Nxd4 Qc7 13. Nf3 Ne5 14. Nxe5 dxe5 15. Rfd1 Be6 {and Black has equalised, Hebden-McNab, London 2000.}) 10... Re8 11. Rfd1 ({Interesting is } 11. Rfb1 {, for example} Qc7 12. a5 d5 13. Re1 dxe4 14. Nxe4 Nxe4 15. Bxe4 Nf6 (15... exd4 16. Bxd4 {is an edge for White}) 16. Bh6 Bxh6 17. Qxh6 exd4 18. Bd3 Rxe1+ 19. Rxe1 Qxa5 20. Bc4 {and White has a dangerous attack, Smagin-Hebert, Montreal 2000.}) 11... Z0 {Now Black can play:} (11... Nf8 { and now either} 12. d5 ({or} 12. dxe5 dxe5 13. Nd5 Qxd2 14. Nxf6+ Bxf6 15. Nxd2 {gives an edge – Nunn.})) (11... Qc7 12. a5 {(gaining more space on the queenside)} exd4 13. Bxd4 {and White was better in Nunn-Azmaiparashvili, Wijk aan Zee 1993.}) (11... exd4 12. Bxd4 Ne5 13. Be2 Be6 14. b3 (14. Ng5 { looks more promising}) 14... Rad8 15. Rab1 c5 16. Be3 {with a level position, Summerscale-McNab, Aberdeen 1999.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "The 150 Attack"] [Black "C2: 4...c6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B07"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "37"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 c6 {This is a tricky move order that may be employed by more devious opponents. Black's idea is that White will play Be3-h6 at some point, so why waste a move with ...Bg7 if it can exchange immediately on h6? Instead Black immediately begins queenside operations.} 5. Qd2 {White carries on as normal.} b5 (5... Bg7 6. Nf3 {transposes to Variation C122}) ({while} 5... Nbd7 6. Nf3 b5 7. Bd3 {transposes to the text.}) 6. Bd3 Nbd7 7. Nf3 e5 {Or:} (7... Bg7 8. Bh6 {reaches Variation C122.}) (7... Qc7 8. O-O e5 ({for} 8... Bg7 {see Chapter Six, Variation C1}) 9. a4 b4 10. Ne2 exd4 11. Nexd4 c5 12. Nb5 Qc6 13. Bc4 Bb7 14. Bf4 a6 15. Bd5 Nxd5 16. exd5 Qb6 17. Rfe1+ Kd8 18. Ng5 {and White went on to win in Nunn-McNab, Walsall 1992.}) 8. dxe5 ({There's also some sense in delaying this capture with} 8. O-O {and now:} Z0 (8... Ng4 9. Bg5 f6 10. Bh4 Bh6 11. Qd1 {and Black must do something about the threat of h2-h3.}) (8... Bb7 9. Rad1 (9. dxe5 dxe5 10. h3 { transposes to the text}) 9... a6 10. a4 Bg7 (10... Be7 11. Bh6 exd4 12. Nxd4 b4 13. Nce2 c5 14. Nf3 Qc7 15. Nf4 {was better for White in Gelfand-Ponomariov, Biel 2000}) 11. axb5 cxb5 12. dxe5 dxe5 13. Nxb5 axb5 14. Bxb5 Ba6 15. Bxa6 Rxa6 16. Nxe5 {with a very unclear position, Kupreichik-Karasev, Minsk 1976.})) 8... dxe5 ({Or} 8... Nxe5 9. Nxe5 dxe5 10. h3 a6 (10... Bb7 11. Nxb5 cxb5 12. Bxb5+ Nd7 13. O-O-O Bc8 14. Qd5 {and White wins}) 11. a4 {with an edge to White – Nunn.}) 9. h3 (9. Bh6 Bxh6 10. Qxh6 Qe7 {effectively gains a tempo for Black, who will follow up with ...Qf8. With 9 h3 White signals his intentions to keep the dark squared bishops on the board (it's makes less sense to exchange bishops once Black has blocked his in with ...e7-e5). White's chances will come in the form of attacking Black's new weaknesses on the queenside.}) 9... Bb7 {Or:} (9... Qe7 10. O-O-O ({Nunn prefers} 10. O-O Nc5 11. Rfd1) 10... a6 11. Rhe1 Bg7 12. Bh6 Bxh6 13. Qxh6 Bb7 14. Kb1 O-O-O {with an equal position, Tolnai-Ftacnik, Stara Zagora 1990.}) (9... Bg7 10. a4 b4 11. Ne2 a5 12. c3 c5 ({or} 12... bxc3 13. Qxc3 {, intending Nd2-c4}) 13. cxb4 cxb4 14. O-O O-O 15. Rfd1 {and White has a promising position, Nunn-Gelfand, Munich 1991.}) 10. O-O Bg7 {It makes good sense for Black to complete his development. } ({The game Adams-Bisby, Hastings 1995 is a graphic example of what can happen to Black if he fails to do so:} 10... a6 11. a4 Qe7 12. axb5 cxb5 13. Nxb5 axb5 14. Rxa8+ Bxa8 15. Ra1 Qd8 16. Bxb5 Be7 17. Nxe5 Bxe4 18. Nxd7 Nxd7 19. Ra7 Bf5 20. Bxd7+ Bxd7 21. Bb6 Qc8 22. Qd4 f6 23. Rc7 Qd8 24. Rc3 Qa8 25. Re3 Qc6 26. Qc5 {and Black resigned – White regain the piece and keeps a decisive two-pawn advantage.}) 11. a4 a6 12. Ne2 O-O 13. Ng3 Qe7 { . After} 14. c4 b4 15. c5 a5 16. Qc2 Rfd8 17. Rfd1 Ne8 18. Bc4 h6 19. Rd2 { White was slightly better, Palac-Ftacnik, Ljubljana 1998.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Modern"] [Black "Introduction"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B06"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "6"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 {. Black now has three main choices:} Z0 ({A:} 3... c5) ({B:} 3... c6) ({C:} 3... d6) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Mod"] [Black "A: 3...c5 "] [Result "*"] [ECO "B06"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "21"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 c5 {This move is seen from time to time. Black is offering White the chance to transpose into a Benoni or an Open Sicilian. There is a third option...} 4. dxc5 Qa5 5. Bd2 Qxc5 6. Nd5 Na6 {Or:} ( 6... b6 7. Bb4 Qc6 8. Bb5 Qb7 9. Bc3 f6 10. Qf3 a6 11. Bd3 Nc6 12. O-O-O {and White is better – Bangiev.}) (6... Bxb2 7. Rb1 Be5 ({or} 7... Ba3 8. Rb3 Qd6 9. Qa1 f6 10. Rxa3 Qxa3 11. Nc7+ Kd8 12. Nxa8) 8. f4 Bc7 9. Rb5 Qc6 10. Rb3 Bb6 11. Rxb6 axb6 12. Bb5 Qc5 13. Bb4 {and the black queen is trapped.}) 7. Nf3 e6 8. Bc3 Bxc3+ 9. Nxc3 Nf6 10. Qd2 O-O 11. O-O-O {. We are following Barle-Forintos, Maribor 1977. The absence of dark-squared bishops leaves Black vulnerable on those squares.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Modern"] [Black "B: 3...c6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B06"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "37"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 c6 {The Gurgenidze System, which is a kind of cross between the Modern and the Caro-Kann. Black prepares to play ...d7-d5.} 4. Be3 {White carries on in '150 Attack' fashion.} d5 (4... d6 {transposes to Variation C1.}) ({After} 4... Qb6 5. Rb1 {White changes tack and castles kingside, leaving the black queen somewhat misplaced on b6.}) 5. Qd2 dxe4 ({Or } 5... Nf6 6. e5 Ng4 7. Bf4 {and now:} Z0 (7... h5 8. h3 Nh6 9. g4 Qa5 (9... hxg4 10. hxg4 Nxg4 11. Rxh8+ Bxh8 12. f3 {traps the knight}) 10. O-O-O Na6 11. a3 Nc7 12. Be2 Bd7 13. gxh5 gxh5 14. Bxh5 Ne6 15. Be3 Nf5 16. Bg4 {and White has a clear plus, Gyimesi-Barczay, Hungarian league 1995.}) (7... f6 8. exf6 Nxf6 9. Bh6 O-O 10. Bxg7 Kxg7 11. O-O-O Qd6 12. Re1 b5 13. Nf3 b4 14. Nd1 a5 15. Ne5 c5 16. dxc5 Qxc5 17. f3 Nbd7 18. Nf2 Nxe5 19. Rxe5 Qc7 20. Qd4 { and White has a good bind on the dark squares, Kholmov-Karlik, Pardubice 1999.} )) 6. Nxe4 Nd7 7. O-O-O Ngf6 8. Nxf6+ (8. f3 {is interesting. Kupreichik-Grigorov, Lvov 1986, saw} Nxe4 9. fxe4 Nf6 10. e5 Nd5 11. Bh6 Bxh6 12. Qxh6 Bf5 13. Nf3 Qa5 14. Bc4 {and White has a slight edge.}) 8... Nxf6 9. Nf3 O-O 10. Ne5 Be6 11. Kb1 a5 12. h4 {. J.Polgar-Dunnington, London 1988, continued} h5 13. f3 a4 14. a3 Qa5 15. Qxa5 Rxa5 16. Re1 Raa8 17. Bg5 Bf5 18. Rg1 Rad8 19. g4 {and White was better.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Modern"] [Black "C: 3...d6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B06"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "8"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Be3 {. Now Black has a further choice:} Z0 ({ C1:} 4... c6) ({C2:} 4... a6) (4... Nf6 {transposes into the Pirc Defence (see Chapter 5).}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Modern"] [Black "C1: 4...c6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B06"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "22"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Be3 c6 {Black begins operations on the queenside.} 5. Qd2 {White sticks to the normal '150 Attack' plan. He is now ready to play Bh6 once the g8-knight moves. White will simply continue developing until the opportunity arises.} b5 (5... Nd7 6. Nf3 b5 7. Bd3 { transposes to the text.}) 6. Bd3 Nd7 7. Nf3 Qc7 {At this point Black has many alternatives:} (7... Bb7 8. O-O Qc7 9. Rfe1 a6 10. a4 b4 11. Ne2 c5 12. Ng3 { and White is fully ready for action on the kingside. Emms-Mestel, British League 1998, continued} Rc8 (12... Ngf6 {is stronger}) 13. c3 bxc3 14. bxc3 Ngf6 15. Bh6 O-O 16. Bxg7 Kxg7 17. Qg5 e6 18. e5 Ng8 19. Be4 Bxe4 20. Nxe4 d5 21. Nd6 {and White had a large advantage.}) (7... Nb6 8. O-O Bg4 9. Ne1 { (we've seen the idea of avoiding this exchange in the Pirc)} e5 10. dxe5 dxe5 11. a4 Nc4 (11... b4 12. Ne2 a5 13. c3 b3 14. c4 {is nice for White}) 12. Bxc4 bxc4 (12... Qxd2 13. Bxf7+ Kxf7 14. Bxd2 b4 15. f3 {and White wins a pawn}) 13. Qxd8+ Kxd8 14. a5 {was clearly better for White in Delchev-Movsziszian, Andorra la Vella 1999 – Black's queenside pawns are very weak.}) (7... a6 8. a4 Bb7 9. O-O {and now:} Z0 (9... Ngf6 10. e5 dxe5 11. dxe5 Ng4 12. e6 fxe6 13. Ng5 {is good for White.}) (9... Qc7 10. axb5 cxb5 ({Adams gives} 10... axb5 11. Rxa8+ Bxa8 12. Ra1 Bb7 13. d5 b4 14. dxc6 bxc3 15. cxd7+ Qxd7 16. bxc3 Nf6 {with just a small advantage for White}) 11. Nd5 {. Now we have a further split:} Z0 (11... Bxd5 12. exd5 Qb8 13. Qa5 Nb6 14. Bxb5+ axb5 15. Qxb5+ Nd7 16. Qc6 Rxa1 17. Rxa1 Ngf6 18. Ra8 {and White went on to win in Hinks Edwards-Pein, British League 1998.}) (11... Qd8 12. Qa5 Bxd5 (12... Rc8 13. Qxd8+ Kxd8 14. Nb4 Ngf6 15. e5 dxe5 16. Nxe5 Nxe5 17. dxe5 Nd7 18. f4 g5 19. Rfd1 {left White in a winning position, Adams-Dunnington, Hastings 1995}) 13. exd5 Nb6 {(Maljutin-Rashkovsky, Soviet Championship 1991), and now I like} 14. b3 {, followed by c2-c4.}))) 8. O-O Ngf6 {Finally Black develops his g8-knight.} 9. Bh6 {Like clockwork, the bishop goes to h6.} O-O 10. Ne2 c5 ({It's also possible to challenge the centre with} 10... e5 {. After } 11. c3 Nb6 12. Ng3 Re8 13. Bxg7 Kxg7 14. Nh4 Ng8 15. f4 f6 16. Rf2 {White was better in Ambroz-Baum, Bad Ragaz 1993.}) 11. c3 {. This position has been reached on quite a few occasions. Here are some practical examples:} Z0 (11... a5 12. Ng3 b4 13. Bxg7 Kxg7 14. Qg5 bxc3 15. bxc3 e6 16. e5 Ng8 {was Hodgson-Webster, British Championship 2000. Here White played} 17. exd6 ({ instead White could consider keeping the tension with} 17. h4) 17... Qxd6 18. Ne4 Qe7 19. Nxc5 Qxg5 20. Nxg5 Nxc5 21. dxc5 {and the game was eventually drawn.}) (11... a6 12. Bxg7 Kxg7 13. Ng3 Re8 ({or} 13... h6 14. Rae1 Nb6 15. Qf4 Nc4 16. Qc1 Nb6 17. e5 dxe5 18. dxe5 Nfd5 19. Nh4 e6 20. Re4 Ne7 21. Rfe1 Nf5 22. Rg4 Nxg3 23. Rxg3 Nd5 24. Nxg6 fxg6 25. Rxg6+ Kf7 26. Qxh6 Ke8 27. Rg7 Bd7 28. Qg5 {1-0 Belikov-Sretenskij, Moscow 1996}) 14. Nh4 e5 15. d5 c4 16. Bc2 Nc5 {with an unclear position, Fressinet-Tkachiev, Bordeaux 2000.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Modern"] [Black "C2: 4...a6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B06"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "34"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Be3 a6 {This move is similar to 4...c6 in that Black quickly organises queenside counterplay. However, in this line Black is more likely to try and arrange ...Bb7, ...Nbd7 and ...c7-c5.} 5. Qd2 b5 6. h4 $5 {White angles for a quick h4-h5. Black either prepares for this or prevents it.} h5 {Alternatively:} (6... Nf6 7. f3 Nbd7 (7... h6) 8. O-O-O Bb7 (8... h5 {transposes to the text}) 9. Bh6 Bxh6 10. Qxh6 e5 11. d5 Qe7 12. g4 b4 13. Nce2 Nc5 14. Ng3 Rc8 15. Qd2 a5 16. h5 Nfd7 17. Kb1 Rb8 18. g5 Ba6 19. Bxa6 Nxa6 20. Nh3 Ndc5 21. b3 a4 22. Nf2 Nd7 23. Ng4 Nac5 24. Rh3 {and White doubles on the h-file, A.Ivanov-Burnett, New York 2000.}) (6... h6 {(planning to meet h4-h5 with ...g6-g5)} 7. O-O-O Nd7 8. f4 h5 {(White now gets a very good position, so perhaps the idea of ...h7-h6 and then ...h6-h5 is just too slow; on the other hand, if Black does nothing White will be in a position to play h4-h5)} 9. Nf3 Ngf6 10. Bd3 Nb6 11. f5 {(a crucial move; many would be tempted to play e4-e5 instead, but that would only give Black counterplay on the light squares)} gxf5 12. exf5 Nc4 13. Qe1 {(another good move; it looks dangerous to give up the dark-squared bishop, but surprisingly Black cannot take advantage of the pin along the c1-h6 diagonal)} Nxe3 14. Qxe3 Bh6 15. Ng5 Bb7 16. Kb1 Rg8 ({Black could grab a pawn for his troubles, although after} 16... Bxg2 17. Rhg1 Bb7 18. Nce4 {White continues as in the game}) 17. Nce4 Bxe4 18. Bxe4 d5 ({or} 18... Nxe4 19. Qxe4 Bxg5 20. hxg5 Rxg5 21. Qc6+ Kf8 22. Qf3 {and White captures on h5}) 19. Bf3 Qd6 20. Rde1 Kd7 21. Re2 Ng4 22. Qb3 Bxg5 (22... c6 23. Nxf7 {wins}) 23. hxg5 c6 24. g6 Raf8 (24... fxg6 25. Re6 Qc7 26. Bxd5) 25. gxf7 Rxf7 26. Re6 Qc7 27. Rxc6 {1-0 Adams-Hodgson, Southend 2001.}) 7. f3 Nf6 8. O-O-O Nbd7 9. Nh3 ({Also interesting is} 9. e5 {, for example} b4 10. Na4 Nd5 11. Bg5 Bb7 12. Bc4 a5 (12... N7b6 13. Nxb6 Nxb6 14. Qxb4 {is good for White}) 13. Nh3 N7b6 14. Bb3 Qd7 15. Nxb6 cxb6 16. e6 fxe6 (16... Qxe6 {runs into} 17. Bxe7) 17. Qd3 O-O-O 18. Qxg6 { and White was better in Ye-Timman, Manila Olympiad. This could do with a further practical test.}) 9... Nb6 ({Or} 9... Bb7 {and now:} 10. Z0 (10. Be2 Rc8 11. Ng5 O-O 12. g4 b4 13. Nd5 Nxd5 14. exd5 Nf6 15. Ne4 Bxd5 16. Nxf6+ exf6 17. gxh5 {and Black's kingside is starting to open up, Schmitzer-Alber, German Bundesliga 1991.}) (10. Ng5 {(this is a nice outpost for the knight once Black has played ...h7-h5)} O-O 11. g4 c5 12. gxh5 Nxh5 13. dxc5 b4 14. Nd5 dxc5 15. Bh3 Nb6 16. Nxb6 Qxb6 17. Qh2 a5 18. e5 {and I prefer White, Karabalis-J. Schmidt, Bad Wildungen 1998.} (18. Z0))) 10. Bd3 {and now the game Adams-Speelman, Hastings 1989/90, continued} b4 11. Ne2 a5 12. Nf2 (12. Ng5 {.}) 12... c6 13. Kb1 Qc7 14. e5 Nfd5 15. exd6 exd6 16. Bg5 Be6 17. Ne4 Kd7 {with an unclear position.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Scandinavian"] [Black "Introduction"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B01"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "4"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] {After} 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 {Black chooses between:} Z0 ({A:} 2... Nf6) ({B:} 2... Qxd5) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Scandinavian"] [Black "A: 2...Nf6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B01"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "36"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. Bb5+ Bd7 ({Black's can offer a pawn sacrifice with} 3... Nbd7 {here, but instead of trying to hang on to the pawn with the theoretical} 4. c4 {,} ({I'm advocating the simple} 4. Nf3 Nxd5 5. d4 {and now: } Z0 (5... c6 6. Be2 {(the bishop is happy to retreat now that it has forced Black to play the slightly passive ...Nbd7)} e6 7. O-O Be7 8. c4 N5f6 9. Nc3 Qc7 10. Re1 O-O 11. Bf1 a6 12. Bg5 {and White has a nice edge, Sedina-Spinelli, Turin 1998.}) (5... e6 6. O-O Be7 7. Re1 O-O 8. Bf1 {(White just plays simple chess)} c5 9. c4 N5f6 10. Nc3 cxd4 11. Nxd4 {and I prefer White, Jonkman-Fernandez Barrera, Linares 2000.}) (5... g6 6. O-O Bg7 7. Re1 O-O 8. Nbd2 c6 9. Bf1 N5f6 10. a4 c5 11. a5 cxd4 12. Nxd4 e5 13. Nb5 a6 14. Nd6 { and again White is better, Kogan-Carvalho, Loures 1997.} (14. Z0)))) 4. Be2 Nxd5 5. d4 Bf5 {Moving the bishop to a more active square is Black's most popular choice here. Alternatives are:} (5... g6 6. c4 Nb6 7. Nc3 Bg7 ({or} 7... c6 8. c5 Nd5 9. Qb3) 8. c5 {(White takes advantage of the unfortunately placing of Black's bishop)} Nc8 9. Nf3 e6 10. Bg5 Ne7 11. Ne4 h6 12. Bf6 O-O 13. O-O Bxf6 14. Nxf6+ Kg7 15. Ng4 {and Black has some dark-squared weaknesses on the kingside, Honfi-Blachmann, Bad Wörishofen 1991.} ) (5... e6 6. Nf3 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. c4 Nf6 9. Nc3 {and White has a typical space advantage, Matsuura-Silveira, Brasilia 2000.}) 6. Nf3 {Note that this position can also be reached via the move order 1 e4 d5 2 exd5 Nf6 3 d4 Nxd5 4 Nf3 Bf5 5 Be2 (with each side having played one move less). With our move order we have avoided certain possibilities for Black (the 'Portuguese Gambit' – 3...Bg4!?, as well as 4...Bg4, and the main line with 4...g6). So, in a sense, we've tricked Black into our territory.} e6 7. O-O Be7 ({Or} 7... Bd6 8. c4 Nf6 (8... Nb4 9. Na3 O-O 10. Bd2 N8c6 11. Nb5 {looks pleasant for White}) 9. Nc3 Ne4 10. Qb3 Nxc3 11. bxc3 Qc8 12. c5 Be7 13. Ne5 {and the players agreed a draw in Van der Weide-Reinderman, Leeuwarden 1997. They obviously had their own reasons for calling it off so soon; the final position is probably a bit for White.}) 8. a3 {In order to prevent ...Nb4 after c2-c4.} ({The immediate} 8. c4 {is also interesting. Kupreichik-Gipslis, Aalborg 1993, continued} Nb4 9. Na3 O-O 10. Bf4 N8c6 ({in this line Black should probably prevent Nb5 with} 10... a6) ({or} 10... c6) 11. Nb5 Rc8 12. a3 a6 13. d5 axb5 14. dxc6 Nd3 15. cxb7 Rb8 16. Bxd3 Bxd3 17. Ne5 Bxf1 18. Qxf1 Qe8 19. cxb5 Bd6 20. a4 Rxb7 21. Qc4 {and White's powerful queenside pawns were well worth the slight material disadvantage.}) 8... O-O 9. c4 Nb6 {With this retreat Black leaves the f6-square available for his dark-squared bishop.} ({Also possible is} 9... Nf6 10. Nc3 c6 (10... Ne4 {may be stronger, although White was still a bit better after} 11. Be3 Nxc3 12. bxc3 c5 13. d5 Qc7 14. Qd2 e5 15. a4 a5 16. Ne1 Bd6 17. f3 Nd7 18. Kh1 Bg6 19. Nc2 f5 20. Na3 {in Skripchenko Lautier-Liardet, Cannes 1997}) 11. Nh4 Bg6 12. Be3 Na6 13. Nxg6 hxg6 14. Bf3 { , Wang Zili-Arkell, London 1997; White has the usual advantage that comes with having more space and the bishop pair.}) 10. Nc3 Nc6 (10... Bf6 11. h3 Nc6 { transposes to the text.}) 11. h3 {This idea has recently risen to prominence. One idea is to prevent Black from adding pressure on the d4-pawn with ...Bg4, while there's also a sneaky trick lurking in the background.} ({ After} 11. Be3 Bf6 12. b3 Qe7 13. c5 Nd5 14. Nxd5 exd5 15. b4 a6 {Black was okay in the game Svidler-Terekhin, St Petersburg 1994.}) 11... Bf6 12. Be3 Qd7 {Alternatively:} (12... Qe7 {walks into} 13. g4 Bg6 14. g5 {and a piece goes – another point of 11 h3.}) (12... h6 {(preparing ...Qe7)} 13. b4 Qe7 ( 13... a6 14. Qb3 Nxd4 15. Bxd4 Bxd4 16. Rad1 e5 17. Nxe5 Qf6 18. Rxd4 Qxe5 19. Rfd1 c6 20. Bg4 {was pleasant for White, Turov-J.Ivanov, Ubeda 2000}) 14. Qb3 ( 14. b5 Na5 15. c5 Nd5 16. Bd2 {is also good for White, Kaminski-Gipslis, Cappelle la Grande 1998}) 14... Rfd8 15. Rfd1 a5 16. c5 Nd5 17. b5 Na7 18. Nxd5 exd5 19. Re1 {and White has a big space advantage on the queenside, Baklan-Melnik, Alushta 1999.}) 13. b4 (13. g4 {is expansion on the wrong side. After} Bg6 14. g5 Be7 15. b4 Rad8 {Black has reasonable counterplay, Stripunsky-Prokopchuk, Azov 1996.}) 13... Rad8 ({After} 13... Rfd8 {White can play as in the main text with} 14. Qb3 {.}) 14. Qb3 ({Also interesting is} 14. Ra2 {and now:} Z0 (14... Nxd4 15. Nxd4 Bxd4 16. Rd2 {with a further split:} Z0 (16... e5 17. Nb5 Qe7 (17... Bxe3 18. Rxd7 Rxd7 19. Qb3 {is good for White}) 18. Nxd4 exd4 19. Rxd4 {and the bishop pair gives White an edge.}) (16... Bxe3 17. Rxd7 Rxd7 18. Qb3 Bg5 19. Rd1 {and White's queen is worth more than Black's rook, bishop and pawn, Kovalevskaya-Anisimov, St Petersburg 1999 (this isn't always the case – see the note to 16 Nxd4, below).})) (14... a5 15. b5 Nxd4 16. Nxd4 (16. Bxd4 Bxd4 17. Rd2 e5 18. Nxe5 Bxf2+ 19. Rxf2 Qxd2 20. Qxd2 Rxd2 21. Rxf5 Rc2 22. c5 {is very unclear}) 16... Bxd4 17. Rd2 Bxe3 (17... e5 18. c5 Nc8 19. Bf3 Na7 20. a4 Qe7 21. Bxd4 exd4 22. Rxd4 Rxd4 23. Qxd4 {was good for White in Leconte-Feuvrier, French League 2000}) 18. Rxd7 Rxd7 19. Qb3 Bc5 {is fine for Black – the bishop is very well placed on c5.})) 14... Nxd4 ({Of course Black doesn't have to take the pawn, but after} 14... Rfe8 15. Rfd1 {White has a big space advantage.}) 15. Bxd4 Bxd4 16. Rad1 e5 17. Nb5 Qe7 18. Rfe1 ({White can keep a small advantage after} 18. c5 Nd5 19. Nbxd4 exd4 20. Nxd4 {.}) 18... Z0 {Here are a couple of practical examples for the position:} (18... c5 19. Bf1 Qf6 20. Nbxd4 cxd4 21. Rxe5 {is a bit better for White, Hait-Ulko, Moscow (rapid) 1997 – Black's d-pawn is a bit vulnerable. }) (18... Qf6 19. Nxc7 Be4 ({after} 19... a6 {White should play} 20. c5) 20. Nb5 Bc6 21. c5 Bxb5 22. Bxb5 Nd5 23. Bc4 Nf4 24. Nxd4 Rxd4 25. Rxd4 exd4 26. Qf3 {and White has a clear plus, Hait-Rasskazov, Moscow 1997.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Scandinavian"] [Black "B: 2...Qxd5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B01"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "6"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 {. Now Black's main moves are:} Z0 ({B1:} 3... Qd8 ) ({B2:} 3... Qd6) ({B3:} 3... Qa5) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Scandinavian"] [Black "B1: 3...Qd8"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B01"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "45"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qd8 {This looks a bit passive, but it does have some positive points (the queen is certainly less vulnerable on this square), and recently there's been a few top level games with this move.} 4. d4 Nf6 ( 4... g6 {has been under a cloud ever since the crushing win for White in Fischer-Robatsch, Varna Olympiad 1962:} 5. Bf4 Bg7 (5... Nh6 6. Be5) 6. Qd2 $1 Nf6 7. O-O-O c6 8. Bh6 O-O 9. h4 Qa5 10. h5 gxh5 11. Bd3 Nbd7 12. Nge2 Rd8 13. g4 Nf8 14. gxh5 Ne6 15. Rdg1 Kh8 16. Bxg7+ Nxg7 17. Qh6 Rg8 18. Rg5 Qd8 19. Rhg1 Nf5 20. Bxf5 {1-0.}) 5. Nf3 c6 {Or:} (5... Bg4 6. h3 {and now:} Z0 ( 6... Bxf3 7. Qxf3 c6 8. Be3 e6 9. Bd3 (9. O-O-O) 9... Nbd7 10. O-O Qc7 11. Ne2 Nd5 12. Bd2 Nb4 13. Bc4 Nf6 14. a3 Nbd5 15. Bb3 b5 16. Rac1 {and White plays for c2-c4, Tzermiadianos-Makropoulou, Greek Championship 1994.}) (6... Bh5 7. g4 Bg6 8. Ne5 e6 9. Bg2 c6 10. O-O (10. Nxg6 hxg6 11. Qd3 {gives White a safe edge}) 10... Nbd7 11. Qe2 Nxe5 12. dxe5 Nd7 13. Ne4 {and White has the initiative, Chandler-Santo Roman, Cannes (rapid).})) (5... Bf5 6. Ne5 e6 ( 6... c6 7. Bc4 {transposes to the text;}) (6... Nbd7 7. Qf3 {is good for White}) 7. g4 Be4 (7... Bg6 8. Bg2 c6 9. h4 {with a clear edge}) 8. Nxe4 Nxe4 9. Bg2 Nd6 10. Qe2 {and White will follow up with Bf4 and 0-0-0.}) 6. Bc4 Bf5 7. Ne5 e6 8. g4 ({White can aim for a small advantage with} 8. O-O {, but this move promises greater rewards.}) 8... Bg6 ({Or} 8... Be4 9. Nxe4 Nxe4 { (the exchange of these minor pieces normally helps White)} 10. Qf3 Nd6 11. Bb3 Nd7 12. Be3 ({White is better after} 12. Bf4) 12... Nxe5 13. dxe5 Qa5+ 14. c3 Qxe5 15. O-O-O Be7 16. Rhe1 Bg5 (16... Qa5 {is stronger}) 17. h4 Bxe3+ 18. Rxe3 Qc5 19. Bxe6 O-O 20. Bb3 {and White has a clear advantage. Sermek-Gerencer, Pula 1999, concluded} a5 21. Qf4 a4 22. Re5 Qa7 23. Bc2 Nb5 24. Rh5 g6 25. Qh6 {1-0.}) 9. h4 Nbd7 ({A major alternative is} 9... Bb4 { and now:} 10. Z0 (10. h5 {(this is probably good enough for an edge):} Z0 ( 10... Bxc3+ 11. bxc3 Be4 12. f3 Bd5 13. Bd3 b5 14. h6 g6 15. Bg5 {(Karsten Müller) – Black is in a very awkward pin.}) (10... Bxc2 11. Qxc2 Qxd4 12. f4 Nxg4 13. Nxg4 Qxc4 14. h6 {and White has a clear advantage – Müller.}) (10... Be4 {(this is Black's best move)} 11. f3 Bd5 12. Bd3 {and White follows up with Bd2 and Qe2.} (12. Z0))) (10. f3 {(this leads to complications that seem favourable for White)} Bxc2 11. Qxc2 Qxd4 12. Qe2 {and now:} Z0 (12... b5 13. Nxf7 (13. Bb3 Bxc3+ 14. bxc3 Qxc3+ 15. Kf2 Qxa1 16. Rd1 Qc3 {was unclear, Herrera-Del Rio Angelis, Santa Clara 2000}) 13... Bxc3+ ({or} 13... O-O 14. Bxe6 Rxf7 15. Bxf7+ Kxf7 16. Bd2) 14. Kf1 O-O 15. Bxe6 {and White is winning – Müller.}) (12... Bxc3+ 13. bxc3 Qxc3+ 14. Kf2 Qxa1 {(this is the critical test)} 15. Rd1 {and now Black must do something about the threat of Bb2.} Z0 (15... b5 16. Nxf7 O-O 17. Bxe6 Qc3 18. Bb2 Qc5+ 19. Kg2 Qe7 (19... Na6 20. Bxf6 gxf6 21. Ng5+ Kh8 22. Rd7 fxg5 23. Qb2+ {mates}) 20. Ng5+ Kh8 21. Qc2 {and White has an overwhelming attack;} Na6 ({and} 21... Re8 {by} 22. h5 {and h6}) {, is answered by} 22. Rd7 {.}) (15... Qc3 16. Bb2 Qb4 17. Nxf7 O-O 18. Bxf6 gxf6 19. Qxe6 Qc3 ({or} 19... Kg7 20. h5) 20. Rd8 Nd7 21. Rxa8 Qd4+ 22. Kg2 Qd2+ 23. Kh3 Kg7 24. Qe7 Qf4 25. Ng5+ {1-0 Perez-Lopez Martinez, Varadero 2000.})))) 10. Nxd7 Qxd7 11. h5 Be4 12. Nxe4 Nxe4 13. Be3 ({White was still also a bit better after} 13. c3 O-O-O 14. Qe2 Nf6 15. Bd2 Bd6 16. O-O-O Rhe8 17. f4 Qc7 18. Qf3 c5 19. dxc5 Bxc5 20. Kb1 Qc6 21. Qxc6+ bxc6 22. Be2 { , Svidler-Adams, Frankfurt 1999.}) 13... O-O-O 14. Qf3 {. I prefer White. The game Lutz-Adams, Frankfurt 1999, continued} Bb4+ 15. c3 Nxc3 16. bxc3 Bxc3+ 17. Ke2 Bxa1 18. Rxa1 f5 19. gxf5 exf5 20. d5 cxd5 21. Bd3 Kb8 22. Qf4+ Ka8 23. Qd4 {and White kept his advantage.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Scandinavian"] [Black "B2: 3...Qd6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B01"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "21"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qd6 4. d4 Nf6 5. Nf3 a6 {Black prevents a white piece from moving to b5 and can also consider playing ...b7-b5 and ...Bb7. However, expending a tempo like this is a risky business, especially since Black has already lost time with his queen.} ({Or} 5... Bg4 6. h3 Bxf3 (6... Bh5 7. g4 Bg6 8. Ne5 c6 9. Bf4 Nd5 10. Qd2 Nxf4 11. Qxf4 Nd7 12. O-O-O Nxe5 13. dxe5 Qc7 14. Bd3 Bxd3 15. Rxd3 {and Black's king is stuck in the centre, Psakhis-Sygulski, Jurmala 1987}) 7. Qxf3 c6 8. Be3 e6 9. O-O-O Qc7 10. Kb1 Nbd7 11. Bc1 Nb6 12. g4 h6 13. h4 O-O-O 14. Bh3 {with a typical advantage, Bologan-Muse, Berlin 1995.}) 6. g3 (6. Be2) ({and} 6. Be3 {are the main moves, but this move has arisen as an interesting possibility for White. One obvious point is that White prepares Bf4, attacking the black queen.}) 6... Bg4 {Alternatively:} (6... g6 7. Bg2 Bg7 8. O-O O-O 9. Re1 Nc6 10. Bf4 Qd8 11. d5 $1 {and Black is getting pushed off the board, Nevednichy-Kurajica, Ljubljana 1999.}) (6... b5 7. Bg2 Bb7 8. O-O e6 (8... c5 9. Bf4 Qb6 10. Re1 Nbd7 11. d5 h6 12. a4 b4 13. Nd2 Qa7 14. Nc4 Kd8 15. Ne4 {was virtually winning for White, Tringov-Donchev, Bankia 1991}) 9. Bf4 Qb6 10. a4 Bd6 11. Be3 Ng4 12. Bd2 Nf6 13. Qe2 c6 14. Ng5 O-O 15. Nce4 {with an edge for White, Beshukov-Hasangatin, Koszalin 1999.}) 7. h3 ({Also interesting is} 7. Bg2 Nc6 8. O-O O-O-O ({Black must put pressure on the d-pawn; after} 8... e6 9. Bf4 Qd7 10. h3 Bxf3 11. Qxf3 Rd8 12. Rad1 Be7 13. d5 exd5 14. Nxd5 Nxd5 15. Qxd5 Qxd5 16. Bxd5 {White has opened up the position to his obvious advantage, Varavin-Vokarev, Ekaterinburg 1996}) 9. d5 Nb4 ({after} 9... Nxd5 10. Nxd5 Qxd5 11. Qxd5 Rxd5 12. Ng5 {White regains his pawn with some advantage, as} Rf5 { runs into} 13. f3) 10. h3 Bh5 ({or} 10... Bxf3 11. Qxf3 Nbxd5 12. Rd1 e6 13. Nxd5 exd5 14. c4 {with a strong attack – Müller}) 11. Bf4 Qc5 12. Be3 {and now: } Z0 (12... Qa5 {(Nataf-Fressinet, Vichy 2000)} 13. g4 Bg6 14. Nd4 { (threatening Nb3)} Nbxd5 15. Nb3 Qb4 (15... Nxe3 16. Bxb7+) 16. Nxd5 Nxd5 17. Bxd5 e6 18. a3 Qb5 (18... Qe7 19. Bxb7+ Kxb7 20. Qf3+ Kb8 21. Na5 {wins for White}) 19. c4 Qe8 20. Bxb7+ Kxb7 21. Na5+ Kc8 22. Qf3 {and White is winning}) ({, but after} 12... Qd6 {I must admit that I can't find anything better than repeating with} 13. Bf4 {.})) 7... Bxf3 ({After} 7... Bh5 8. Bg2 Nc6 9. O-O O-O-O 10. g4 Bg6 11. Be3 {I prefer White, for example} h5 ({or} 11... e5 12. Nxe5 Nxe5 13. dxe5 Qxe5 14. Qf3) 12. g5 Ne4 13. Nh4 Nxc3 14. bxc3 {.}) 8. Qxf3 c6 (8... Nc6 {can be answered by} 9. Be3 {.}) 9. Be3 Nbd7 (9... e6 10. O-O-O Be7 11. g4 {gives White the initiative – Glek.}) 10. O-O-O e6 11. Bf4 {. White has a small advantage, Glek-Kekelidze, Böblingen 2000.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Scandinavian"] [Black "B3: 3...Qa5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B01"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "31"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5 {This is the main line of the Scandinavian.} 4. d4 Nf6 (4... Nc6 {can be met by the obvious and strong} 5. d5 {.}) ({ The most critical alternative is} 4... e5 {, but this move has been under a cloud ever since the game Ivanchuk-Angelov, Varna 1987, which continued} 5. dxe5 Nc6 6. Nf3 Bb4 7. Bd2 Bg4 8. a3 Nd4 9. Bb5+ c6 (9... Nxb5 10. axb4 Qxb4 11. Ra4 Nxc3 12. Rxb4 Nxd1 13. Rxg4 Nxb2 14. Rb4 {is winning for White}) 10. O-O Bxf3 (10... cxb5 11. axb4 Qxb4 12. Nxb5 Qxb5 13. Nxd4 Qd7 14. Nf3 { gives White an extra pawn}) 11. axb4 Bxd1 12. bxa5 Bxc2 13. Ba4 Ne7 14. Bxc2 Nxc2 15. Ra4 {and White has a very favourable ending.}) (4... c6 5. Nf3 Nf6 { transposes to the text.}) 5. Nf3 c6 {Alternatively:} (5... Bf5 6. Bd2 c6 { transposes to the text.}) (5... Nc6 6. Bd2 (6. Bb5 Bd7 7. O-O O-O-O 8. Qe2 a6 9. Bxc6 Bxc6 10. Ne5 Be8 11. Be3 Nd5 12. Nxd5 Qxd5 13. c4 {was slightly better for White in Belikov-Maljutin, Sochi 1990}) 6... Bg4 7. Nb5 Qb6 8. c4 Bxf3 9. Qxf3 Nxd4 10. Nxd4 Qxd4 11. Qxb7 Qe4+ 12. Qxe4 Nxe4 13. Be3 {is known to be a very good ending for White.}) (5... Bg4 6. h3 Bh5 (6... Bxf3 7. Qxf3 c6 8. Bd2 Nbd7 9. O-O-O e6 10. Kb1 {gives White a typical edge – two bishops and more space}) 7. g4 Bg6 8. Ne5 e6 9. Bg2 c6 10. h4 Be4 (10... Nbd7 11. Nxd7 Kxd7 12. d5 exd5 13. h5 Re8+ 14. Kf1 Qa6+ 15. Kg1 Be4 16. f3 Bc5+ 17. Kh2 Bd6+ 18. Kh3) ({and} 10... Bb4 11. Bd2 Qb6 12. h5 Qxd4 13. Nf3 Qxg4 14. hxg6 Qxg6 15. Bf1 {are both better for White}) 11. Bxe4 Nxe4 12. Qf3 Nd6 13. Bf4 f6 14. Nd3 { and White has the advantage, Popovic-Rogers, Vrsac 1987.}) 6. Bd2 Bf5 ({After} 6... Bg4 {White should play} 7. h3 Bh5 8. g4 Bg6 9. Ne5 {.}) 7. Ne4 (7. Bc4 e6 {is the main line at the moment, but with 7 Ne4 White keeps his options open regarding the development of the light-squared bishop.}) 7... Qb6 (7... Qc7 8. Nxf6+ gxf6 9. g3 {(now the fianchetto is suitable; White blunts any ideas Black may have on the half-open g-file and points his bishop towards Black's kingside)} e6 10. Bg2 Nd7 11. O-O Be4 12. Re1 f5 (12... Bxf3 { was necessary}) 13. Ng5 Bxg2 14. Rxe6+ Be7 15. Qh5 Rf8 16. Kxg2 Nf6 17. Rxf6 Bxf6 18. Nxh7 O-O-O 19. Nxf8 {and Black resigned, De Firmian-Owen, Las Vegas 1995.}) 8. Nxf6+ gxf6 ({After} 8... exf6 {White plays} 9. Bc4 { , pointing the bishop at Black's f7-pawn.}) 9. Bc4 {White has other moves here:} (9. b4 e5 10. Bc4 Nd7 ({or} 10... exd4 11. O-O {, followed by Re1 – Blatny}) 11. O-O Bg6 12. c3 Qc7 13. dxe5 fxe5 14. Qb3 {and I prefer White, Nijboer-Prie, Linares 1995.}) (9. Bc3 e6 (9... Nd7 10. g3 O-O-O 11. Bg2 e6 12. Nh4 Bg6 13. O-O Bb4 14. Qd2 Bxc3 15. Qxc3 {was a touch better for White, De Firmian-Matamoros Franco, Las Palmas 1999}) 10. Qd2 h5 11. Nh4 Bh6 12. Qe2 Bh7 13. g3 Nd7 14. Bg2 O-O-O 15. a4 {and White's attack is very quick, Galkin-Feoktistov, Novgorod 1999.}) 9... e6 (9... Qxb2 {may be more of a test, but White certainly has compensation for the pawn after} 10. Rb1 Qxc2 11. Qxc2 Bxc2 12. Rxb7 {.}) 10. O-O Bg7 (10... Bd6 11. Re1 Nd7 12. Nh4 Bg6 13. Bxe6 O-O-O (13... fxe6 14. Rxe6+ Be7 15. Qe2) 14. Bh3 Qxb2 15. Ba5 b6 16. Qf3 Kc7 17. Bc3 {was very pleasant for White, Glek-Willemze, Utrecht 1999.}) 11. Re1 O-O {. Glek-Lau, Willingen 1999, continued} 12. Nh4 Bg6 13. Nxg6 hxg6 {and now Glek unleashed the move} 14. Rxe6 {. Now} fxe6 ({Instead Lau tried} 14... Qxd4 {, but after} 15. Qe2 Qxb2 16. Rd1 Qxc2 17. Rc1 Qb2 18. Re8 {Black was under tremendous pressure.}) 15. Bxe6+ Rf7 16. Qg4 {gives White a very strong attack.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Alekhine"] [Black "Introduction"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B02"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "10"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 (2... Ne4 {is a cheeky move which Black shouldn't really be allowed to get away with.} 3. d4 {, aiming to trap the knight in mid-board, is stronger.} ({White keeps an advantage simply by attacking the knight with} 3. d3 Nc5 4. d4 Ne6) {. Then we have the following lines:} 3... Z0 (3... e6 4. Nh3 {(threatening f2-f3)} h6 5. Qg4 d5 6. f3 h5 7. Qf4 g5 8. Nxg5 Nxg5 9. Qxg5 Be7 10. Qg7 {and White has a clear advantage – 'NCO'.}) (3... f6 4. Bd3 d5 5. Nc3 {and now we have:} Z0 (5... Nxc3 6. Qh5+ Kd7 (6... g6 7. Bxg6+ hxg6 8. Qxh8 Nb5 9. Bh6 {is winning for White}) 7. bxc3 e6 8. c4 { and again White is clearly better – Bücker.}) (5... Bf5 6. Qf3 e6 7. g4 Bg6 8. Nxe4 dxe4 ({or} 8... Bxe4 9. Bxe4 fxe5 10. Bd3 e4 11. Bxe4 dxe4 12. Qxe4 { and White is better}) 9. Bxe4 Bxe4 10. Qxe4 Nc6 11. exf6 Qxf6 12. Be3 {and White has a safe extra pawn.}))) (2... Ng8 3. d4 d6 4. Nf3 Bg4 5. h3 Bh5 6. g4 Bg6 7. Nc3 e6 8. Bf4 d5 9. Bd3 {and White has a good lead in development, Ernst-Welling, Copenhagen 1988.}) 3. c4 Nb6 4. d4 d6 5. exd6 {. Now Black has a choice:} Z0 ({A:} 5... exd6) ({B:} 5... cxd6) (5... Qxd6 6. c5 Qe6+ 7. Be2 {is good for White.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Alekhine"] [Black "A: 5...exd6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B03"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "41"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. c4 Nb6 4. d4 d6 5. exd6 exd6 {This is Black's most solid choice. By keeping a symmetrical pawn structure Black is trying to keep White's opening advantage to a minimum.} 6. Nc3 Be7 {Black sensibly prepares to castle. Other choices are not so good:} (6... Nc6 {(this prevents Bd3, but now White can take advantage of Black playing an early....Nc6)} 7. Nf3 Bg4 8. Be2 Be7 (8... Bxf3 9. Bxf3 Nxc4 10. Qe2+ Qe7 11. Nd5 {is very good for White}) 9. d5 Bxf3 10. Bxf3 Ne5 11. Be2 O-O 12. b3 Bf6 13. Bb2 a5 14. O-O Re8 15. Qd2 Ned7 16. Rad1 Nc5 17. Qc2 g6 18. Rfe1 Bg7 19. Bf1 {and White has a small but secure advantage, Emms-Baburin, Port Erin 1997.}) (6... g6 7. Nf3 {(White is no longer afraid of the pin, as Black won't be able to keep it)} Bg4 8. h3 Bxf3 ({obviously} 8... Bh5 {loses to} 9. g4 {– a consequence of 6...g6}) 9. Qxf3 Nc6 10. Be3 Bg7 11. O-O-O O-O 12. h4 {and White will continue in caveman fashion with h4-h5, Jepson-Westerinen, Manhems 1998.}) 7. Bd3 {To me this set-up with 7 Bd3 and 8 Nge2 seems quite promising for White, and in practice White has scored highly. Yet it's mentioned neither by 'NCO' nor 'ECO'!. It's not particularly new: World Champions Alekhine and Fischer used it in their time, which serves as another recommendation.} Nc6 8. Nge2 O-O ({ Another important line is} 8... Bg4 9. f3 Bh5 10. O-O Bg6 11. Bxg6 hxg6 12. b3 (12. d5 Ne5 13. b3 g5 14. Ng3 Nbd7 15. Nce4 Nf8 16. Qd2 f6 17. Nf5 {looks good for White, Cicak-Freisler, Czech League 1998}) 12... Bf6 13. Ne4 (13. d5 Ne5 14. Bb2 O-O 15. Ng3 Re8 16. Nge4 {keeps an edge – Finkel}) 13... d5 14. Nxf6+ Qxf6 15. c5 Nc8 16. Bf4 Kd7 17. Qd2 {and suddenly Black's position looks a bit of a mess, Minasian-Nalbandian, Yerevan 1999.}) 9. O-O Bf6 {Or:} (9... Nb4 10. Bb1 {and now:} Z0 (10... Nxc4 {loses after the cunning} 11. a3 Nc6 12. Qd3 {. This is a useful trick to remember.}) (10... a5 11. b3 Re8 12. Be3 a4 13. Nxa4 Nxa4 14. bxa4 Nc6 15. Nc3 Na5 16. Bd3 c6 17. Qc2 g6 18. h3 d5 19. cxd5 cxd5 20. Rab1 {and White's extra doubled a-pawn is of definite use, Kaminski-Baburin, Biel 1995.} (20. Z0))) (9... Bg4 10. f3 Bh5 11. Nf4 Bg6 12. Bxg6 hxg6 13. d5 Ne5 14. b3 {(this queenside structure is good for White)} Qd7 15. a4 a5 16. Ra2 Qf5 17. g4 Qc8 18. Ng2 c6 19. Be3 Qc7 20. f4 Ned7 21. g5 Rfe8 22. Rd2 Bf8 23. Qf3 {and White keeps an advantage, Djuric-Miles, Aegina 1993.}) 10. Be3 (10. b3 {, preparing to answer ...Nb4 with Bb1, is also a worthwhile possibility. White was better after} Re8 11. Be3 Bg4 12. h3 Bxe2 13. Nxe2 d5 14. c5 Nd7 15. Qd2 Nf8 16. b4 {, Kaminski-Miroshnichenko, Vienna 1995.} ) 10... Bg4 (10... Nb4 {is an enticing alternative. After} 11. b3 ({now} 11. Bb1 {allows} Nxc4 {, so White must cede the bishop pair;}) (11. Ng3) 11... Nxd3 12. Qxd3 Bg4 13. f3 Bh5 14. Ng3 Bg6 15. Qd2 Bh4 16. d5 Re8 17. Rae1 Nd7 18. Re2 Bxg3 19. hxg3 a6 20. Rfe1 Nf8 21. Bd4 {White kept an edge in Sermek-Zelcic, Makarska 1994.}) ({Interestingly, when the two players met again in the same line six years later, Black opted for} 10... Bg4 {instead.}) 11. h3 Bh5 12. Qd2 Bg6 13. b3 Bxd3 14. Qxd3 d5 15. c5 Nc8 {. Sermek-Zelcic, Pozega 2000, continued} 16. b4 Nxb4 17. Qb1 Nc6 18. Qxb7 N8e7 19. Rab1 Qd7 20. Qb5 Rad8 21. Rfd1 {and White kept an edge.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Alekhine"] [Black "B: 5...cxd6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B03"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "18"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. c4 Nb6 4. d4 d6 5. exd6 cxd6 ({This is slightly more popular, and certainly more ambitious, than the other recapture} 5... exd6 { . The structure is now asymmetrical (Black now has an extra central pawn). He will continue development with the natural moves ...g7-g6 and ...Bg7.}) 6. Nc3 g6 7. Be3 Bg7 8. Rc1 {This system of developing the queenside early is very ambitious, and so far White's results have been very encouraging. White is taking prophylactic measures against Black's two major pawn lunges in ...e7-e5 and ...d7-d5. Kingside development will be completed only once Black has committed himself to a certain course of action.} O-O (8... Nc6 9. d5 Ne5 10. Be2 ({an alternative is} 10. f4 Ng4 11. Bd4 Nf6 12. Nf3 O-O 13. Be2 e6 14. dxe6 Bxe6 15. b3 Nc8 16. O-O Ne7 17. Ng5 {which was better for White in Akopian-Minasian, Armenian Championship 1995}) 10... O-O 11. b3 {transposes into Variation B1.}) 9. b3 {. Protecting c4 and preparing to meet ...d6-d5 with c4-c5. Now Black has a choice:} Z0 ({B1:} 9... Nc6) ({B2:} 9... f5) ({B3: } 9... e5) ({White was better after} 9... Bf5 10. d5 Na6 11. Nf3 Bg4 12. Be2 Bxf3 13. Bxf3 Nc5 14. b4 Ncd7 15. Qb3 Rc8 16. Be2 Nf6 17. O-O {, Yagupov-Petit, Ubeda 1996.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Alekhine"] [Black "B1: 9...Nc6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B03"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "33"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. c4 Nb6 4. d4 d6 5. exd6 cxd6 6. Nc3 g6 7. Be3 Bg7 8. Rc1 O-O 9. b3 Nc6 {This move, encouraging White's d-pawn forward, has not scored well in practice.} 10. d5 Ne5 11. Be2 {Preparing f2-f4. In my database White has an enormous score from this position.} f5 {Or:} (11... a5 12. f4 Ned7 13. Nf3 Nc5 14. O-O Bg4 15. Bd4 Bxf3 16. Rxf3 Bxd4+ 17. Qxd4 Nbd7 18. Bf1 Qb6 19. Re1 {and Black's e7-pawn is a major worry, Emms-McDonald, Hastings 1997/8.} ) (11... e6 12. f4 Ned7 (12... Bh6 13. Qd2 Ng4 14. Bxg4 Qh4+ 15. Qf2 Qxg4 16. h3 Qf5 17. g4 Qd3 18. Nge2 exd5 19. Rd1 {and the black queen is trapped – Stoica}) 13. dxe6 fxe6 14. Qxd6 e5 15. Nf3 exf4 16. Bxf4 Nc5 17. O-O Bg4 18. h3 Bxc3 19. hxg4 {and White has a good extra pawn, V.Ivanov-Bagirov, Moscow 1995.} ) (11... h5 12. f4 Ng4 13. Bd4 e5 ({or} 13... Bh6 14. Nh3 e5 15. dxe6 fxe6 16. Bxg4 hxg4 17. Qxg4 {and Black is virtually lost, Howell-Trifunovic, Hastings 1995}) 14. dxe6 Bxe6 15. Nf3 {with an edge, Benjamin-Segal, New York (blitz) 1998.}) 12. f4 Ng4 13. Bd4 e5 14. dxe6 Bxe6 15. Nf3 Re8 16. Bxg7 Kxg7 17. O-O { . We are following the game Howell-Panchenko, Hamburg 1995. The weakness of the d6-pawn promises White a solid advantage.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Alekhine"] [Black "B2: 9...f5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B03"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "27"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. c4 Nb6 4. d4 d6 5. exd6 cxd6 6. Nc3 g6 7. Be3 Bg7 8. Rc1 O-O 9. b3 f5 {If allowed, Black plans to gain space on the kingside with ... f5-f4.} 10. g3 {Alternatively:} (10. Nf3 f4 11. Bd2 e5 {gives Black unnecessary counterplay.}) (10. d5 {and now:} Z0 (10... e5 11. dxe6 Bxe6 ({ or} 11... Nc6 12. Nh3 Bxe6 13. Be2 h6 14. Nf4 Bf7 15. Nfd5 {and White has a nice outpost on d5, Zhao Zong Yuan-Gluzman, Gold Coast 2001}) 12. Nf3 Nc6 13. Qd2 Ne5 14. Be2 Qd7 15. O-O Rad8 16. Nb5 {and again Black has problems with his isolated d-pawn, An.Rodriguez-Borges, Sao Paulo 1997.}) (10... f4 11. Bd4 e5 12. dxe6 Bxd4 13. Qxd4 Nc6 14. Qd2 Bxe6 15. Nf3 Qe7 16. Be2 d5 17. cxd5 Rad8 18. O-O Nxd5 {with a roughly level position, Milu-Ignatescu, Romania 1995.})) 10... Nc6 ({A major alternative line is} 10... e5 11. dxe5 dxe5 (11... Bxe5 12. Nh3 {and White aims for that juicy d5 outpost again}) 12. Qxd8 Rxd8 13. c5 $1 {and now:} Z0 (13... N6d7 14. Bc4+ Kf8 (14... Kh8 15. Nb5 {, threatening both Nc7 and Nd6}) 15. Nd5 Na6 16. Bxa6 bxa6 17. Nc7 Nf6 18. Nxa8 Bb7 19. Nc7 Bxh1 20. Ne6+ Ke7 21. Nxd8 Kxd8 22. c6 {and White was winning in Pavasovic-Galje, Graz 1998.}) (13... f4 14. Bd2 N6d7 15. Bc4+ {and now:} Kf8 ( 15... Kh8 16. Nb5 Nxc5 17. Nc7 b6 18. Nxa8 Bb7 19. f3 Bxa8 20. b4 Ne4 21. fxe4 $1 Bxe4 22. Nh3 Bxh1 23. Ng5 {and Black has problems dealing with the threat of Nf7+, Pavasovic-Bawart, Bled 1998}) 16. Nd5 Nxc5 17. Nc7 b6 18. Nxa8 Bb7 19. Nc7 fxg3 20. hxg3 Bxh1 21. Bb4 Bh6 22. Rc2 Rc8 23. Ne6+ Ke8 24. Bxc5 bxc5 25. f3 Be3 26. Rh2 Bxg1 27. Rxh1 {and White is better – Ardeleanu. This final line could use a practical test.})) 11. d5 Ne5 12. Be2 e6 13. dxe6 Bxe6 {. Ardeleanu-Grunberg, Buzias 1997. Now} 14. Nh3 {, preparing Nf4, looks good for White.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Attacking the Alekhine"] [Black "B3: 9...e5"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B03"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "30"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. c4 Nb6 4. d4 d6 5. exd6 cxd6 6. Nc3 g6 7. Be3 Bg7 8. Rc1 O-O 9. b3 e5 {This is Black's most critical response to White's set-up.} 10. dxe5 dxe5 {Once again capturing with the bishop is not really what Black wants. } ({White had a pleasant edge after} 10... Bxe5 11. Nf3 Bg4 12. Be2 Bxf3 13. Bxf3 Nc6 14. O-O {, Raetsky-Gutkin, Riazan 1982.}) 11. Qxd8 Rxd8 12. c5 N6d7 ({It's certainly worth remembering that} 12... Nd5 {simply loses material after} 13. Rd1 Be6 14. Bc4 {(Benjamin-Johansen, Stockholm 1996).}) 13. Bc4 Nc6 14. Nf3 ({Also interesting is} 14. Ne4 Nf8 15. Nd6 Ne6 16. Nf3 Ncd4 17. Ng5 Nxg5 18. Bxg5 Rd7 {, as in Yagupov-Ukolov, Moscow 1996. White probably has a slight edge here too.}) 14... Na5 {Or:} (14... h6 15. Ne4 (15. O-O) 15... Nf8 (15... Na5 16. Bd5 Nf6 17. Nxf6+ Bxf6 18. Rd1 Kg7 19. O-O Re8 20. Nd2 { gave White something in Finkel-Drazic, Nova Gorica 1997,}) ({while Raetsky gives the line} 15... Nd4 16. Nd6 Nxf3+ 17. gxf3 Rf8 18. Rg1 {, which is also favourable for White}) 16. Nd6 Rd7 17. O-O Re7 18. Nxc8 Rxc8 19. Rfd1 Kh7 { and White must aim to advance his queenside pawn majority, Gross-Bagirov, Berlin 1996.}) (14... Nd4 15. Ng5 Rf8 16. Nce4 Nf5 17. O-O ({or} 17. Nxf7 Rxf7 18. Ng5 Nh6 19. Ne6 {(Olsson-Zetterberg, Borlange 1995), and here Black should play} b5 20. Bd5 Nf6 21. Bxa8 Bxe6 {, which is unclear}) 17... Nf6 18. Nd6 Nxd6 19. cxd6 Bd7 20. a4 Bc6 21. Rfd1 a6 22. f3 {and White's passed d-pawn gave him an edge in Dzhindzihasvili-Alburt, US Championship 1996.} (22. Z0)) ( 14... Nf8 15. Ng5 Ne6 16. Nxe6 Bxe6 17. Bxe6 fxe6 {and White has a clear plus – Raetsky.}) 15. Be2 {. So far this position has been reached a few times in practice:} Z0 (15... h6 16. O-O Nf8 17. Ne4 Nc6 18. Nd6 Rb8 19. a3 f5 20. Rfd1 Be6 21. b4 {and White's queenside pawns are beginning to roll, Hunt-Schnabel, Oxford 1998.}) (15... Nf8 16. O-O Nc6 17. Rfd1 Bf5 18. Nb5 Ne6 19. Nd6 Rab8 20. Ng5 Nxg5 21. Bxg5 {, Mitkov-Dischinger, Sitges 1997; the big White knight on d6 gives him a plus.}) (15... Nc6 16. Nb5 Nf8 17. Nd6 Ne6 18. Bc4 Ncd4 19. Ng5 {and again White is better, Mitkov-Toth, Rio de Janeiro 2000.} ) (15... b6 16. cxb6 (16. Na4 bxc5 17. O-O c4 18. b4 Nc6 19. Bxc4 Nxb4 20. a3 Na6 21. Ng5 {is very good for White, Kiik-Hautala, Tampere 2000}) 16... Nxb6 17. Nb5 Bb7 18. O-O Nd5 19. Rfd1 Nc6 ({Finkel gives} 19... Nxe3 20. fxe3 e4 21. Nfd4 Bf8 {, with equal chances}) 20. Rxd5 Rxd5 21. Nc7 Rdd8 22. Nxa8 Bxa8 23. Bb5 {and Black's a-pawn is vulnerable, Varga-Llanos, Budapest 1999.}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Other Black Defences"] [Black "Introduction"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "2"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 {Finally we should take a look at some unusual moves that Black can play on move one. There are twenty legal moves at Black's disposal; as well as the ones we've already studied, I will draw the line with the following three:} Z0 ({A:} 1... Nc6) ({B:} 1... b6) ({C:} 1... a6 {. Against anything else my advice is: 1) Try not to laugh (this is discourteous to your opponent). 2) Don't think for hours trying to find a quick refutation; just play normal sensible moves and enjoy the game!}) * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Other Black Defences"] [Black "A: 1...Nc6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "19"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 Nc6 {The Nimzowitsch Defence. This is a favourite of, amongst others, England's first grandmaster Tony Miles.} 2. Nc3 (2. Nc3 {fits in well with our repertoire, as the natural} e5 3. Bc4 {transposes to the Bishops Opening (see Chapter 2). Here we will deal with attempts by Black to stay strictly in Nimzowitsch territory.}) 2... e6 {Or:} (2... Nf6 3. d4 d5 4. e5 Nd7 5. Nf3 Nb6 6. h3 {is better for White according to 'NCO'. Black would like to challenge with ...c7-c5, but this is difficult with Black's knight misplaced on c6.}) ( 2... d6 3. d4 {looks like a kind of Pirc/Modern Defence. After} g6 {White can continue as against these openings with} 4. Be3 Bg7 5. Qd2 {.}) 3. Nf3 { I like this tricky move.} ({Normal is} 3. d4 Bb4 {, which is just a bit better for White.}) 3... Bb4 (3... d5 {should be answered by} 4. Bb5 {.}) 4. Ne2 { A very nice idea. White deploys the knight on g3 and makes the bishop on b4 look a bit silly.} Be7 (4... d5 5. e5 d4 6. c3 {is good for White after either} dxc3 ({or} 6... Bc5 7. b4 Bb6 8. b5) 7. bxc3 Ba5 {.}) 5. d4 d6 6. Ng3 Nf6 7. c3 O-O 8. Bd3 e5 9. O-O Re8 10. h3 {, A.Ledger-Miles, British Championship 1998. I like White's position. His pieces are set up as in the Ruy Lopez, but Black has lost time with his dark-squared bishop and hasn't got the usual Lopez counterplay on the queenside.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Other Black Defences"] [Black "B: 1...b6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "35"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 b6 {This is Owen's Defence (otherwise known as the Queen's Fianchetto Defence). Another old favourite of Tony Miles, while more recently it's been used by the 1999 FIDE World Championship finalist Vladimir Akopian and fellow Armenian Artashes Minasian.} 2. d4 Bb7 3. Nc3 e6 4. Nf3 Bb4 (4... d5 5. Bb5+ c6 6. Bd3 {is nice for White. Alekhine-Rozanov, Moscow 1908, continued} Nf6 7. e5 Nfd7 8. Ng5 Be7 9. Qg4 Nf8 10. Nxh7 Rxh7 11. Bxh7 Nxh7 12. Qxg7 Nf8 13. h4 Bxh4 14. Rxh4 Qxh4 15. Bg5 Qh1+ 16. Kd2 Qxg2 17. Qf6 Qxg5+ 18. Qxg5 { and White won.}) 5. Bd3 Nf6 ({After} 5... Ne7 {White should just continue playing natural moves, for example} 6. O-O Bxc3 7. bxc3 d6 8. a4 a5 9. Ne1 O-O 10. f4 f5 11. Qe2 Qd7 12. Nf3 Nbc6 13. exf5 exf5 14. Bc4+ Kh8 15. Re1 Ng8 16. Be6 Qe8 17. d5 Nd8 18. Nd4 {and White was better, Crouch-Basman, London 1974.}) 6. Bg5 h6 7. Bxf6 Qxf6 8. O-O Bxc3 9. bxc3 d6 (9... d5 10. exd5 Bxd5 11. Ne5 O-O 12. Qh5 ({or} 12. f4 {; gives White good play on the kingside, Kramnik-Ehlvest, Moscow Olympiad 1994.})) 10. Nd2 e5 {Or:} (10... Qg6 11. f4 f5 12. Qf3 Qf7 13. d5 fxe4 14. Nxe4 exd5 15. Rae1 {gave White a strong attack in Ilincic-Filipovic, Yugoslavia 1997.}) (10... g5 {(this looks drastic, but Black wants to stop f2-f4)} 11. Qe2 (11. Bb5+ {may be stronger} ) 11... e5 12. Qe3 Nd7 13. Bb5 O-O-O 14. a4 a5 15. Rab1 Rhe8 16. Rfe1 Qg6 17. Qd3 Kb8 18. Bxd7 Rxd7 19. Qb5 Ree7 (19... Rde7 {is better – Minasian}) 20. Nc4 exd4 {(Nikolaidis-Minasian, Panormo 1998), and now} 21. cxd4 d5 22. Ne5 { is very good for White.}) 11. f4 {. White has a promising attacking position. The game Dautov-Kengis, Daugavpils 1989, continued} exd4 12. e5 dxe5 13. fxe5 Qg5 14. Nf3 Qe3+ 15. Kh1 O-O 16. cxd4 {and now best for Black is} Nd7 17. c3 Be4 18. Bc4 {, and White will continue with e5-e6.} * [Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Other Black Defences"] [Black "C: 1...a6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "B00"] [Annotator "John Emms"] [PlyCount "31"] [SourceTitle "Attacking with 1 e4"] [Source "Everyman Chess"] [SourceDate "2011.06.25"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2011.06.20"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. e4 a6 {The St George Defence. This had its fifteen minutes of fame when Tony Miles used it sensationally to defeat World Champion Anatoly Karpov back in 1980. (Is this the only opening that has scored 100% at the highest level?) Despite this, Black's plan of early queenside expansion has never really caught on.} 2. d4 b5 3. Nf3 Bb7 4. Bd3 Nf6 ({Or} 4... e6 5. O-O c5 6. c3 Nf6 7. Re1 h6 8. Nbd2 Be7 9. e5 Nd5 10. dxc5 Bxc5 11. Ne4 Be7 12. a4 bxa4 13. Rxa4 Qc7 14. Bb1 Nb6 15. Nd6+ Bxd6 16. exd6 Qd8 17. Rg4 {and Black is in big trouble, Hennigan-Basman, British Championship 1991.}) 5. Nbd2 e6 6. O-O c5 7. dxc5 { There are other ways to play, but this straightforward method guarantees White some advantage.} Bxc5 8. e5 Nd5 9. Ne4 Be7 10. a4 (10. Bg5 {also looks strong.} ) 10... b4 11. c4 bxc3 12. bxc3 O-O 13. c4 Nb4 14. Bb1 {, Faibisovich-Frog, St Petersburg 1993. After} Qc7 15. Qb3 N8c6 16. c5 {White is ready to jump in with Nd6.} *