|
Opening Lanes
Gary Lane
Play through and download
the games from
ChessCafe.com in the
DGT Game Viewer.
The Complete
DGT Product Line
|
State of Play
There are some openings that people avoid on the basis
of a memorable loss, but this can be an extreme reaction. After all the
opening might be improved by a tweak here and there, while a quick look
at the current state of play at tournament level might indicate it is
perfectly playable. Therefore, why waste valuable time learning a
completely new opening when you can just try out a new variation?
Mikkel Andreassen from
Denmark writes, “I try not to specialize too
much in opening theory and aim towards making good and simple developing
moves in the opening. I am rated around 1800 so this ‘nonchalant’
behaviour is seldom punished. However, the other day I played black and
very quickly ran into problems. Already from move three, I started using
serious time on the clock. Can you recommend something for black after 1
c4 Nf6 2 Nc3 e6 3 e4? I have faced this before without ever finding out
how to play against it. Already white is threatening e5; and where will
the knight jump to? Play continued 3…d5 4 e5 Nfd7?! and soon my position
deteriorated. I lost in about thirty moves. I looked up my reference
opening bible and found 4…d4 to be a sort of equalising move, but it
really isn’t very interesting. Is there anything else after 3…d5? And
what other options are there for black?”
There are plenty of options, but admittedly Black is
usually keen to strive for an equal position. However, I think there is
a way to complicate matters and give White a chance to go wrong. Just
for the record, let’s see what White hopes to achieve with 3 e4.
Joachim Asendorf-Andre Fleischer
Travemuende 2002
1 c4 Nf6 2 Nc3 e6 3 e4
 The
Flohr-Mikenas Attack is designed to threaten 4 e5 and stop Black from
obtaining a standard Nimzo-Indian position after 3 d4 Bb4. The variation
was called the Flohr Attack after the game Flohr-Kashdan, Folkstone
1933. However, elsewhere it was known as the Mikenas System after the
Lithuanian player Vladas Mikenas used it with success. Hence, the names
were combined to please everyone. 3…d5 After
3…Bb4, White has the advantage upon 4 e5 Ng8 5 Qg4 Kf8 6 Nf3 with the
better chances. 3…d6 just looks like a King’s Indian gone wrong; while
3…c5 is discussed in the next game. 4 e5 d4!
This has been proven by the test of time to be Black’s best option.
5 exf6 dxc3 6 bxc3 Qxf6 7 d4 7 Nf3 is often
played, when 7…e5 8 d4 transposes to the game. 7…e5
Also possible is 7…c5, if Black is looking for something different in a
familiar line. 8 Nf3 If White tries to take
advantage of the situation with 8 Qe2 Be7 and now: a) 9 Qxe5 Qxe5+ 10
dxe5 Nc6 11 Nf3 Bg4 12 Be2 0–0–0 13 Rb1 f6 14 exf6 Bxf6 gives Black
sufficient counterplay. b) 9 dxe5 Qg6 10 Qe3 Nc6 11 Ne2 Qe6 (I prefer
11…0–0! when play might continue: 12 Nf4 Qc2 13 Nd5 Bg4 and the threat
of checkmate will force White to defend with equal opportunities) 12 Nd4
Qxe5 13 Nxc6 Qxe3+ 14 Bxe3 bxc6 15 Be2 quickly led to a draw in
P.Harikrishna-C.Sandipan, Mumbai 2000. 8…exd4 9 Bg5
 White
attacks the queen and Black needs to know the precise route to avoid a
calamity in the opening. 9…Qe6+ Instead,
9…Qg6?! is just a poor choice: 10 Bd3 Bf5? (perhaps10…Qh5 is necessary,
but Black has lost time in development and his queen is still a target)
11 Qe2+ and now incredibly Black is completely lost, because 11…Qe6
allows 12 Bxf5, while 12 Bxf5 wins. Also, 11…Kd7 allows the knight fork
12 Ne5+ and of course 11…Be7 allows 12 Qxe7 checkmate.
10 Be2 d3?! Black is trying to be clever by
not allowing White to undouble his c-pawns by taking back with cxd4. I
think it is fair to say that when your in the national championship you
should take extra care, because your game is likely to be scrutinised
even further. Therefore, F.Baragar-R.Hamilton, Canadian Championship,
Hamilton 1994, is a timely reminder because the unfortunate 10…dxc3??
allowed 11 Qd8 checkmate. A calmer approach is 10…Be7. For example: a)
11 Bxe7 d3 12 Qxd3 Qxe7 13 0–0 0–0 is roughly equal. b) 11 cxd4 Bxg5 12
Nxg5 Qe7 13 Qd2 h6 (or 13…Nc6 is interesting with the idea of ...Nxd4 to
deflect the white queen away from the defence of the knight on g5) 14
Nf3 0–0 15 0–0 c5 (maybe 15…Bg4!? is worth a go) 16 Rfe1 gave White an
edge in D.Reinderman-J.Hammer, Gausdal 2007. 11
0–0!
 An
excellent riposte taunting Black to take the piece and accept the
consequences. 11…d2 Instead, 11…dxe2 allows
12 Qd8 checkmate and 11…Qxe2 suffers from 12 Re1 pinning the queen. The
best chance is arguably 11…f6 to cancel out the checkmate threat on d8
and threaten ...dxe2, but it is snuffed out by 12 Bxd3, threatening Re1,
pinning the black queen. 12 Qxd2 Be7 13 Rfe1 0–0?
Instead, 13…f6 allows Black to fight on although 14 Bf4 Qd7 15 Bd3 0–0?
16 Bxh7+ Kxh7 17 Qxd7 Bxd7 18 Rxe7 wins. 14 Bd3
 The
pin on the e-file causes Black’s immediate downfall.
14…Bxg5 15 Nxg5 Qh6 16 Bxh7+ Kh8 17 Bc2 1–0
I think the reader should try 3…c5 to mix things up.
White is used to the standard 3…d5, but the change will do you good. In
the next couple of games an English grandmaster shows how it is done.
Andrew Ledger-Peter Wells
Port Erin 2006
1 c4 e6 2 Nc3 Nf6 3 e4 c5
 I
think Mr. Andreassen should try this if he is fed up with the 3...d5
lines. If White does nothing constructive, then the simple aim is to
play ...Nc6 and ...d7-d5. 4 f4!? This is a
fashionable continuation and the plan is to play Nf3 before
contemplating advancing the e-pawn. The main alternative 4 e5 is
discussed in the next game. 4…Nc6 5 Nf3 d5
Black rightly challenges the centre. 5…d6 6 d3 (I prefer the Sicilian
position that occurs upon 6 d4 cxd4 7 Nxd4) 6…a6 7 Be3 Rb8 8 a4 Qc7 with
roughly equal chances, J.Cronan-L.Jones, Auckland 2005.
6 e5 Instead, 6 cxd5 exd5 7 e5 Ne4 is equal.
6…d4!? This is the key move that needs to be
adopted by the reader. At a stroke it avoids the majority of theory on
the alternatives: a) 6…Ng4 7 cxd5 (7 h3 should be considered) 7…exd5 8
Qb3 Nb4 9 a3? (9 Bb5+ looks more sensible) 9…c4! 10 Qa4+ Bd7 11 Qd1 Qb6!
0–1, I.Mazel-M.Botvinnik, Leningrad 1938. b) 6…Nd7 7 cxd5 exd5 8 Bb5
Nd4?! (8…Nb6!? is a wiser choice) 9 Bd3?! (9 Nxd4 cxd4 10 Nxd5 is very
good for White) 9…Nxf3+ 10 Qxf3 c4! 11 Bc2 d4 12 Ne4 d3 13 Bd1 (13 Ba4
Qa5 14 Nc3 with equal opportunities) 13...Nc5 gave Black a slight edge
in Y.Gusev-M.Tal, Moscow 1991. 7 exf6 dxc3 8 bxc3
Qxf6
 Anyone
who has seen the previous main game will realise that the queen comes to
f6 frequently in this line. However, the game R.Naranja-B.Larsen, Siegen
1970, saw 8…gxf6, which eventually worked out well for Black: 9 Be2 f5
10 0–0 Bg7 11 Qe1 b6 12 d3 Bb7 13 Be3 Qe7 14 Rc1 Rg8 15 Rf2 0–0–0 at the
time Black was one of the strongest players in the world, so he is keen
to step up the pressure by whisking his king to safety, as then he can
concentrate on the attack. 16 d4 cxd4 17 cxd4 Qa3 18 Bf1 (18 Rc3 seems
to be a superior option, when 18...Qxa2 grants White a strong initiative
upon 19 c5) 18…Nxd4! 19 Nxd4 Rxd4 20 c5 Re4 the pin on the e-file is
very awkward for White 21 cxb6+ (21 Re2 Rxe3 22 Rxe3 Bd4 23 Rcc3 Qxa2
favours Black) 21…Kb8 22 bxa7+ Ka8 23 Rf3 Bd4 24 Bxd4 Rxe1 0–1.
9 d4 White might argue that he has won a
concession in that compared to lines with 3...d5, Black is unable to
play the freeing move ...e6-e5. However, the problem is that the pawn on
f4 is really a liability because it limits the scope of the bishop on
c1. 9…cxd4 10 Nxd4 10 cxd4 is met by 10…Bd6
(10…Bc5 is also tricky) 11 g3 0–0 12 Bg2 Rd8 favours Black who can
contemplate ...Bc5. 10…Bc5 11 Nb3 11 Be3
0–0, with the plan of ...e6-e5, looks wonderful for Black because
White’s pieces lack coordination. 11…Bb6 The
bishop retreats, but crucially it remains on the a7-g1 diagonal stopping
White from being able to castle kingside. 12 Qf3
Or 12 c5 Bxc5! 13 Nxc5 Qxc3+ 14 Bd2 Qxc5 wins.
12…0–0 Black has the better position, so he does the right thing
by castling, as he brings the king’s rook into the action.
13 Be2?! In the annoying circumstances White
has to get his king to safety so that 13 c5 is required, when 13…Bc7 14
Bd3 Qxc3+ (14…Qh4+ 15 g3 Qh3 looks interesting and stops White from
getting his own way) 15 Bd2 Qf6 16 0–0 Qh4 slightly favours Black.
13…e5
 This
sort of move should be easy to find because it is essential in these
sorts of variations to allow the white-squared bishop on c8 to be more
influential. Also, with the white king stuck in the centre, it makes
sense to open more lines for the benefit of the black rooks.
14 fxe5 Qe7 Or 14…Qxe5 15 c5 Bxc5 16 Bf4 Qe7
17 Nxc5 Qxc5 18 Qe3 gives White some chances for survival, because the
bishop-pair works well in an ending, and if the queen exchange is
rejected, then 0–0 is possible. 15 Bf4 Nxe5 16 Qe4
Re8 17 Rd1 The ending after 17 Bxe5 Qxe5 18 Qxe5 Rxe5 19 Kf1 Bf5
is miserable for White, because his pieces are poorly placed.
17…Qh4+! 18 g3 The pawn blocks the check
because the bishop on f4 is pinned. 18 Kf1 is just silly because of
18…Qf2 checkmate. 18…Bf5 19 Qxb7 If 19 Qxf5,
then Black wreaks havoc with 19…Nf3+ 20 Kf1 Nxh2+ 21 Ke1 (21 Kg2 allows
21…Rxe2 checkmate) 21…Nf3+ 22 Kf1 Qxh1 checkmate. Instead, 19 gxh4 Bxe4
20 Rf1 Nf3+ 21 Rxf3 Bxf3 is horrible for White.
19…Qf6 20 Kd2
 The
king goes on a walk, which is hardly surprising when ...Nf3+ is a
constant danger. 20…Nxc4+! Now a forced
sequence nicely tidies up the game. 21 Bxc4 Rad8+
22 Bd5 Or 22 Kc1 Qxc3#. 22…Re7
A simple but effective way of stopping the queen from defending the
bishop on d5. 23 Qxe7 Rxd5+ 24 Kc1 Qxc3# 0-1
The big test has to be if White plays the logical 4
e5.
Jonathan Speelman-Peter Wells
London 2007
1 c4 e6 2 Nc3 Nf6 3 e4 c5 4 e5
 Forcing
the black knight to go back to its original square has to be the
critical test. Instead, 4 Nf3 Nc6 5 d4 (if 5 Be2, intending to castle
first in order to avoid the pin on b4, can be met by 5...d5 6 exd5 exd5
7 d4 with roughly equal chances) 5…cxd4 6 Nxd4 is a Sicilian, but 6…Bb4
is fine for Black. 4…Ng8 5 Nf3 Or 5 d4 cxd4
6 Qxd4 Nc6 7 Qe4 is equal. 5…Nc6 Black can
also try to undermine the e5-pawn, in view of 5…d6 6 exd6 Bxd6 7 d4 cxd4
8 Nxd4 with a slight edge. 6 d4 cxd4 7 Nxd4 Nxe5
White is happy to concede the pawn in return for an initiative. This has
been known for some time and has been analysed in depth. Yes, sometimes
you just have to work on openings, but, if you don’t want to do the
study, the good news is that Black is a pawn up and the aim is to hang
on to it. 8 Ndb5 f6 Black supports the
central knight. The obvious move is 8…d6, but White does well in
practice: a) 9 c5!? seems to be good in view of dxc5 (9…d5 10 Bf4 a6 11
Bxe5 axb5 12 Nxb5 Qa5+ 13 Qd2 with the superior chances. Or 9…a6! 10
Nxd6+ Bxd6 11 cxd6 Nf6 12 Bf4 (12 Be2 is interesting) 12…Ng6 13 Bg3 Bd7
14 h4 gave White the initiative in J.Timman-M.Najdorf, Haifa Olympiad
1976.) 10 Bf4! f6 11 Bxe5 fxe5 12 Qh5+ g6 13 Qxe5, threatening the rook
on h8 and Nc7+ winning easily. b) 9 Ne4 d5! 10 cxd5 exd5 11
Qxd5 Bb4+ 12 Bd2 Qxd5 13 Nc7+ Kd8 14 Nxd5 Bxd2+ 15 Nxd2 Be6 with equal
chances in the ending, J.Markos-S.Movsesian, Banska Stiavnica 2007.
9 Be3 9 Bf4 allows Black to get on with the
job of developing and then trying to make the most of his extra pawn:
9…a6 (9...Be7? 10 Bxe5 fxe5 11 Qh5+ favours White) 10 Nd6+ Bxd6 11 Qxd6
Nf7 12 Qa3 Ne7 13 0–0–0 0–0 14 g3 Re8 15 Be3 b6 16 f4?! (16 Bg2 Rb8 is
better for Black) 16...Nf5 17 Bg2 Nxe3 18 Bxa8 Nxd1 19 Rxd1 gave Black
all the winning chances, H.Jolles-A.Barsov, Haarlem 1999.
9…a6 10 Nd6+ Bxd6 11 Qxd6 Ne7 Black is
following a tried and tested line of defence that has all been played
before. 12 Bb6 Nf5 13 Qc5
 This
is a winning attempt, but when you are a pawn down you have to be
careful. Also possible: a) 13 Bxd8 Nxd6 14 Bc7 and now: a1) 4…Ndxc4? 15
f4 d5 16 fxe5 Nxe5 17 Na4, when the three pawns for the piece is not
enough for Black, V.Nevednichy -D.Smerdon, Paks 2007. a2) 14…Ke7 15 c5
Ne8 16 Bb6 d5 17 cxd6+ Nxd6 18 Bc5 b6 ½–½, N.Kostic-A.Saric, Plovdiv
2008. b) 13 Qc7 Qxc7 14 Bxc7 d6 15 f4 Nf7 16 Bd3 (16 g4 to try and win
the d-pawn is poor in view of 16...Ne3!) 16…Bd7 17 Bxf5 Rc8 18 Bb6 exf5
19 b3 Bc6 20 0–0 0–0 21 Rfe1 Rfe8 ½–½, D.Fridman-P.Wells, Senden 2002.
13…d6 14 Qa5 Qd7 Or 14…Qe7 15 0–0–0 0–0 with
a double-edged game, C.Gouw-T.Timman, Dieren 2006. Yes, the great Dutch
player Jan Timman has a brother named Ton. 15 f4
Nc6 16 Qa3 Nce7 17 0–0–0 The game A.Aleksandrov-Y.Balashov,
Kstovo 1998 tried another approach with 17 g4. That saw 17…Qc6 18 Qa4
Bd7 19 Qxc6 Bxc6 20 Rg1 Nh4 21 0–0–0 h5 (21...0–0 is a possible
improvement) 22 h3 hxg4 23 hxg4 d5 24 Rg3 Rc8 25 Re3 Kf7 26 Kb1 Nhg6 27
f5 ½–½. 17....Qc6 18 c5 White should have
tried 18 Qb3 to maintain the tension. 18...d5!
Instead, 18....Kf7 has been tried, but I like 19 Be2 with decent
compensation, because Black still needs to look after his king. However,
18...dxc5? is just wrong because of the line 19 Rd8+ Kf7 20 Rxh8 Qxb6
21 Be2, which looks very good for White. 19 Bd3 Ne3
20 Rd2 0–0 In this variation it always seems that Black is
relieved to find time to castle kingside. This is because it will be
easier to do something with the bonus pawn if his king is safe.
21 Re1 d4 22 Nd1 If 22 Ne4, then 22...N7d5
threatens to pick a free piece on b6 or a pawn on f4.
22...N7d5 23 Be4 A desperate defence, but
stopping ...Nxb6 just introduces another tactical possibility.
23...Nc4 24 Qd3 White is in a mess and 24
Qb3 is grim upon 24...Nxd2 25 Kxd2 Bd7 with a big advantage.
24...Ncxb6 25 Bxh7+ Kh8 26 Qh3 Nxf4 Wells
plays the prepared move to stop any hint of a White attack. Not
26...e5?, which is revealed to be an error after 27 Bf5+ Kg8 28 Qh7+ Kf7
29 Bg6+ Ke6 30 f5+ Kd7 31 Qxg7+ winning. 27 Qh4
Qxc5+ 28 Bc2+ Or 28 Kb1 Qh5 should be enough to prompt White to
resign. 28...Kg8 29 Qxf4 After 29 Qh7+ Kf7,
the checks runs out and White is lost. 29...e5 30
Qe4 Be6 Black is two pawns up with a raging attack.
31 Nf2 Rac8 32 Qh7+ Kf7 33 Ne4 Qb4 34 a3 Rxc2+! 0–1
White gave up in view of 35 Rxc2 (or 35 Kxc2 Qb3+ 36 Kc1 Rc8+ 37 Kb1
Qa2#.) 35...Qxe1#.
Ian Simpson from
England writes, “In the well-known Goring
Gambit line 1 e4 e5 2 d4 exd4 3 Nf3 Nc6 4 c3 d5, what do you think of 5
Bd3? This is one of the few lines not covered in Müller and Voigt’s
Danish
Dynamite. Indeed the only sources I can find with the move
are BCO 2, which gives 5...dxe4 6 Bxe4 Nf6 7 Bxc6+ bxc6 with equality,
and Fritz 10’s openings book, which gives 5...dxc3 6 exd5 Qxd5 (6...cxb2
looks more critical to me, when after 7 Bxb2 Qxd5, I doubt White has
enough for two pawns) 7 Nxc3, when White has compensation. In view of
the ...cxb2 line, 6 Nxc3 might be better. Do you think this is viable
for White?”
My first thought was that it seemed unlikely to have been
played before. However, I did find about ten games where White was brave
enough to play something unusual after just five moves.
M. Molerovic-Mladenovic
Yugoslavia1967
1 e4 e5 2 d4 exd4 3 Nf3 Nc6 4 c3!? d5 5 Bd3
 This
is the unusual move that Mr. Simpson wants to see more of in the future.
It will certainly have some surprise value. 5 exd5 is the usual
continuation. 5...dxc3 6 exd5 6 Nxc3 dxe4 7
Nxe4 Bb4+ 8 Nc3 (8 Bd2? is met by 8...Qxd3) 8...Nf6, aiming to castle
kingside, is better for Black. 6...Qxd5 Mr.
Simpson might be right to say that 6...cxb2 is the critical test, but if
you are playing Black and still reeling in shock from 5 Bd3, I doubt the
average person would want to help White’s development. Admittedly, Anand
might take on b2, but when did he last turn up at your local weekend
tournament? 7 Bxb2 Qxd5 8 0–0 Bg4 9 Re1+ Nge7 10 Nc3 Qd7 (10...Bxf3? 11
Nxd5 Bxd1 12 Nxc7+ Kd7 13 Nxa8 is very good for White) 11 h3 0–0–0!
gives Black an edge. 7 0–0 7 Nxc3, as
suggested by the Fritz 10 opening book, seems fine for White. For
instance, 7....Bb4 8 0–0 Bxc3 9 bxc3 Nge7 10 Bf4 with adequate
compensation for the pawn. 7...Be6 Black
indicates that he is keen to castle queenside by moving his
light-squared bishop out of the way. 8 Nxc3 Qd7 9
Qe2 White is a pawn down, but his pieces are well coordinated,
which will allow him to exert some pressure and is enough compensation
for the pawn. 9...0–0–0 9...Bd6, with the
idea of ...Nge7 and castling kingside, is another option.
10 Rd1 Bd6 11 Nb5 Bg4?! Black should really
concentrate on catching up on development with 11...Nf6. At this point
it is obvious that Black intends ...Ne5, so using the predict-a-move
method he should set a trap. 12 Be3 Ne5?
 Or
12...a6 13 Nxd6+ cxd6 14 Rac1 Kb8 15 h3 Bh5 16 Be4 is better for White,
because his pieces are well placed for an attack on the queenside.
13 Nxd6+? It would be great to report that
that predict-a-move worked wonders as usual, but White missed a crushing
continuation. I found this game in Informator 3,
which is from an era when top computer software was just science
fiction. Then again, you don’t really need a computer to find the
stunning line: 13 Nxe5!! Bxe5 (or 13...Bxe2 14 Nxa7+! Kb8 15 Nxd7+ Rxd7
16 Bxe2 and it is time for Black to start counting the pieces) 14 Qxg4
Qxg4 15 Bf5+ (this is the point, because White uncovers the d-file to
facilitate mate) 15...Qxf5 16 Nxa7+ Kb8 17 Rxd8+.
13...cxd6 14 Bxa7 White has a top class position, as the
beleaguered black king is very exposed. 14...Bxf3
15 gxf3 Re8 Instead, 15...Qh3 allows the spectacular finish 16
Qxe5! dxe5 17 Bf5+ Qxf5 18 Rac1+ Qc2 19 Rxc2 checkmate.
16 Qc2+ The correct move-order to avoid the
prospect of ...Qc6 is 16 Rac1+ Nc6 17 Qc2. 16...Kd8
Perhaps 16...Qc6 is the best chance. 17 Bf5 Qc7 18
Qb3 Ke7 19 Rac1 Nc6 20 Bb6 20 Rxd6 also looks good, in view of
20...Kxd6 21 Bb6 Qb8 22 Qc3 (threatening Qc5 checkmate) 22...Ke7 23 Bc5+
Qd6 24 Bxd6+ Kxd6 winning. 20...Qb8 21 Qa3 g6
 22
Rxd6! Qa8 Or 22...Qxd6 23 Re1+! Ne5 24 Rxe5+ wins. 23 Re6+! Kd7 24 Re7#
1–0
In the next game, White is the only player that I know
of who has played it a few times at tournament level.
Leonid Sobolevsky-Manfred
Schober Jena Fair 2005
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 exd4 4 c3
d5 5 Bd3 Nf6 Black develops and puts extra pressure on the
e4-pawn. Also possible: a) 5...Bg4 6 0–0 Be7 7 Re1 (7 cxd4 dxe4 8 Bxe4
Nf6 9 Bxc6+ bxc6 10 Nc3 is roughly equal) 7...dxe4 8 Bxe4 Nf6 9 Bxc6+
bxc6 10 Qxd4 led to equal chances in J.Stoilkovski-V.Sekulovska, Skopje
1998. b) 5...dxe4 6 Bxe4 Nf6 7 Bxc6+ bxc6 8 0–0 is fine for White.
6 e5 Ne4 7 cxd4 In a later game, White tried
something different to avoid any preparation: 7 0–0 dxc3 8 Nxc3 Nxc3 9
bxc3 Be7 10 Re1 Be6 11 Rb1 Rb8 12 Qc2 with a slight initiative,
L.Sobolevsky-S.Halkias, Dresden 2007. 7...Bb4+
 8
Kf1?! It looks odd to voluntarily move the king and give up the
chance of castling. I assume that because he is higher rated he wants to
keep his options open, especially since 8 Bd2 Nxd2 9 Nbxd2 Bg4 is easy
for Black to play when chances are level. 8...0–0 9
Qb3 a5 Or 9...Be7 there is no reason to move the bishop, so Black
should at least wait until White plays a2-a3. 10 Nc3 Nxc3 11 bxc3 f5 12
exf6 Bxf6 13 h4 Bg4 (13...Kh8 seems to be obvious with equal chances) 14
Qxb7 Na5 15 Qb1 Bxf3? 16 Bxh7+ Kh8 17 gxf3 c5 18 Qf5! Nc4 19 Qh5 Re8 20
Bg6+ Kg8 21 Bxe8 Qxe8 22 Qxd5+ 1–0, LSobolevsky-D.Maric, Bad Zwesten
2005. I prefer 9...Bg4!?, when a sample line runs: 10 a3 Be7 11 Qxb7 Na5
12 Qb5 c5 with the advantage. 10 Nc3 Nxc3 11 bxc3
Be7 12 h4 White has vague ambitions of playing Ng5 to attack the
pawn on h7 and this helps to support the idea.
12...f5 13 a4 b6 14 Bf4 Be6 15 Ng5 Bxg5 16 hxg5 g6 17 Rh6
 The
position might be fairly blocked, but everything is in White’s favour.
Basically, he can exert pressure on the h-file by doubling his rooks and
then try to undermine Black’s position as part of a gradual process.
17...Kg7 18 Ke2 Ne7 19 Rah1 Rh8 20 R1h3 Rb8 21 Qb1
Rc8 22 Qh1 Qg8 Black has to suffer a dour defence and adopt a
wait and see policy. 23 Bc1! The bishop is
going to end up on a3, where it can exert more influence.
23...c5 24 Ba3 Rc7 25 Qb1 The b6-pawn is now
the target, so White shifts his queen. 25...c4
Or 25...Qb8 26 dxc5 bxc5 27 Rxh7+! Rxh7 28 Rxh7+ Kxh7 29 Qxb8 winning
easily. 26 Bc2 Nc8 27 R3h4 Qd8 28 f4 Rd7 29 g4
White has carefully prepared this advance and now Black’s position falls
apart. 29...Rf7 29...fxg4 is met by 30 Bxg6!
and Black can resign. 30 gxf5 Bxf5 31 Bxf5 Rxf5
 32
Qh1! Qg8 33 Ke3 Rf7 34 Qxd5 1–0
It is worth pointing out that the main line can
transpose to a Closed Sicilian! Now compare the following position after
nine moves with last month’s game Antoaneta Stefanova-Pavel Tregubov
after ten moves. This line in the Closed Sicilian is something I have
played a few times in the 1980s, including a win again against
grandmaster John Nunn and it certainly makes Black think, because he is
hardly expecting the Goring Gambit Declined with colours reversed
Jose Villarreal Felix-Nikola
Mitkov Abierto Mexicano de Ajedrez Aguascalientes 2008
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 exd4 4 c3 d5 5 exd5 Qxd5 6 cxd4
Bb4+ 7 Nc3 Bg4 8 Be2 Bxf3 9 Bxf3 Qc4
 Just
for the record the rest of the game continued: 10
Bxc6+ bxc6 11 Qe2+ Qxe2+ 12 Kxe2 Ne7 13 Rd1 0–0–0 14 Be3 Rhe8 15 Rd3 Ba5
16 Rad1 Bb6 17 d5 Ng6 18 R3d2 Rd6 19 dxc6 Bxe3 20 fxe3 Rxc6 21 Nd5 Ne5
22 Rd4 Rg6 23 g3 Rh6 24 h4 Rg6 25 Rc1 c6 26 Kf2 Rge6 27 Rc3 f5 28 Nb4
R8e7 29 Nc2 g6 30 Rb4 Rd6 31 Ke2 Rc7 32 Rcb3 Nd7 33 Rd4 Re6 34 Rbd3 Re8
35 Rc3 Nf6 36 Kf3 Ne4 37 Ra3 c5 38 Rd5 Rb7 39 b3 Ree7 40 Ne1 c4 41 Rd4
c3 42 Nc2 Re6 43 Ra5 Rc7 44 Rad5 Re8 45 Kf4 Nf6 46 Rd6 Ne4 47 R6d5 Nc5
48 Kf3 Re6 49 g4 fxg4+ 50 Rxg4 Rf7+ 51 Rf4 Rxf4+ 52 Kxf4 Rf6+ 53 Kg5
Ne4+ 54 Kh6 g5+ 55 Kg7 gxh4 56 Re5 Rg6+ 57 Kxh7 Rg4 58 Kh6 h3 59 Rh5 Nf2
60 Nd4 Rxd4 61 exd4 h2 0–1
If anyone else can think of an opening that works well
when you reverse colours, such as 1 f4 d5 being a Dutch Reversed, then
please let me know.
Opening Lanes is based
in large part on readers’ questions. Do you have a question about a particular
opening line? Baffled by a branch of the Benoni or Budapest? Submit your
questions (with your full name and country of residence please) and perhaps
Gary will reply in his next ChessCafe.com
column...
Yes, I have a question for Gary!
© 2008 Gary Lane. All Rights Reserved.
|
Check out these
bestselling titles from USCFSales.com:
Deluxe Tournament
Scorebook
A Strategic
Opening Repertoire
by John Donladson
& Nikolay Minev
Danish Dynamite
by Karsten Müller
& Martin Voigt
|
