(Grandmaster Repertoire) 1A
Boris
Avrukh
l.d4
The Catalan
Tired of bad positions? Try the main lines!
QUALITY CHESS
Grandmaster Repertoire
The Catalan
By
Boris Avrukh
Quality Chess
www.qualitychess.co. uk
IA
First edition 20 1 5 by Quality Chess UK Ltd
Copyright© 20 1 5 Boris Avrukh
Grandmaster Repertoire IA-The Catalan
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored
in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,
electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior
permission of the publisher.
Paperback ISBN 978- 1 -907982-88-0
Hardcover ISBN 978- 1 -907982-89-7
All sales or enquiries should be directed to Quality Chess UK Ltd,
Suite 247-248 , Central Chambers, 1 1 Bothwell Street G2 6LY, UK
Phone +44 1 4 1 204 2073
email: info@qualitychess.co.uk
website: www. qualitychess.co.uk
Distributed in North America by NBN
Distributed in Rest of the World by Quality Chess UK Ltd through
Sunrise Handicrafts, ul. Poligonowa 3 5A, 20-8 1 7 Lublin, Poland
Typeset by Jacob Aagaard & Colin McNab
Edited and proofread by Andrew Greet, Daniel McGowan & John Shaw
Cover design by Barry Adamson; Cover photo by capture365.com
Printed in Estonia by Tallinna Raamatutriikikoja LLC
Preface
More than six years have passed since Quality Chess published my original contribution to its
opening series, appropriately titled Grandmaster Repertoire I J.d4 Volume One, which was
followed by its companion Grandmaster Repertoire 2 1.d4 Volume Two early in 20 1 0. (These
works will henceforth be abbreviated to GM I and GM 2 respectively.)
To my great surprise and satisfaction, these volumes were extremely successful. The recommended
lines were employed by players at all levels, and demand grew to such an extent that the volumes
were translated into several languages. Chess players took to referring to these texts as "The
Opening Bible" and the term "to Avrukh" became part of the chess lexicon, meaning to have
easily obtained an opening advantage after employing one of my novelties or recommendations.
Six years is a lifetime in the evolution of opening theory, especially in a battleground such as the
Catalan, where ideas are constantly being tested and refined by the world's top players and their
pet computers. I do not claim to have refuted Black's various defensive tries, but I have strived to
offer fresh, challenging ideas that an opponent will find difficult to face over the board. That is
the approach I take when working with my students, including some of the world's top players.
-
-
Series Structure
GM I and especially GM 2 were hefty books, numbering well over a thousand pages between
them. Many of my original recommendations have since been tested and scrutinized by top
grandmasters and correspondence players, making this new repertoire not so much an updated
edition as a complete reworking, using the original repertoire as a loose template. In view of
the many new games and discoveries that have occurred since the previous 1 .d4 works, it was
necessary to divide each book into an 'Nand a 'B' volume, with some slight reorganizing in terms
of the grouping together of certain systems.
The opening moves 1 .d4 lll f6 2.c4 e6 3 .g3 provide the starting position for the current volume
IA. By far the biggest section of the book is devoted to the Catalan after 3 . . . d5 4.lll f3, which
is one of the 'signature openings' that defined GM I. Against certain set-ups I was able to keep
approximately the same recommendations for White, although in such cases I almost always
found ways to tweak things to squeeze the best possible value from White's position. In some
lines, however, I opted to go in a completely different direction from before. See, for instance, the
main line in Chapter 1 6, where 8.'\Mi'xc4 has been replaced by 8.a4, which I have employed with
considerable success in recent years.
Although this volume is titled The Catalan, it also covers the Boga-Indian, as well as any Benoni
variants that may arise after 3 . . . c5 in the aforementioned tabiya. In the Modern Benoni, important
new resources have been uncovered against the sharp set-up I recommended in GM 2. That is
why, in Chapters 24 and 25, you will find the more positional 1 0.�f4 as our weapon of choice.
I know that many devoted chess players of all levels have been looking forward to this new
Grandmaster Repertoire on l .d4. I hope that the new series, beginning with the present volume
IA, will provide the reader with many stimulating ideas, and, of course, excellent practical results.
Boris Avrukh
Chicago, March 20 1 5
Contents
Preface
Key to symbols used & Bibliography
3
6
Catalan
1
Introduction
7
Catalan 4 ... dxc4
2
5...id7
24
3
5...c6
34
4
5...ib4t
51
5
5... llibd7
63
6
Introduction to 5...c5
73
7
5...c5, 6...Clic6 and 7...id7
8
5...a6 and 6...b5
87
112
9
5...b5
126
10
5...a6 and 6... ctJc6
134
11
5... Clic6
146
Catalan 4 ...i.b4 t
12
Various 5th Moves
169
13
Introduction to 5...ie7
5...ie7 - Main Line
180
14
196
Catalan 4 ... i.e7
15
Closed System
228
16
6...dxc4
252
Bogo-Indian
17
4...ie7 and 4...c5
284
18
4...ixd2t
295
19
4...a5
303
20
4...We7 5.'llf3
21
4...We7 5.'llf3 'llc6
-
Various 5th Moves
314
336
Odd Benonis
22
Catalan Benoni
362
23
Snake Benoni
376
Modern Benoni
24
Introduction
382
25
9... �e8
399
Variation Index
426
Key to symbols used
±
+
+-
-+
?
iii
m
??
!!
!?
?!
#
White is slightly better
Black is slightly better
White is better
Black is better
White has a decisive advantage
Black has a decisive advantage
equality
with compensation
with counterplay
unclear
a weak move
a blunder
a good move
an excellent move
a move worth considering
a move of doubtful value
mate
Bibliography
Aagaard & N tirlis: Grandmaster Repertoire 10- The Tarras ch Defence, Quality Chess 20 1 1
Antic & Maksimovic: The Modern Bogo J.d4 e6, New In Chess 20 1 4
Avrukh: Grandmaster Repertoire l - J.d4 Volume One, Quality Chess 2008
Avrukh: Grandmaster Repertoire 2- 1.d4 Volume Two, Quality Chess 20 1 0
Bologan: The Powerfal Catalan, New I n Chess 20 1 2
Cox: Declining the Queen's Gambit, Everyman Chess 20 1 1
Kotronias: Beating the Flank Openings, Batsford 1 996
Petrov: Grandmaster Repertoire 12- The Modern Benoni, Quality Chess 20 1 3
Periodicals
The Week in Chess
Electronic/Internet resources
ChessBase Magazine
ChessPublishing.com
Catalan
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Introduction
Variation Index
1 .d4 tiJf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5
4.tiJf3
A) 4 ... g6 5.i.g2 i.g7 6.0-0 0-0 7.ffc2
Al) 7 ...tiJc6
A2) 7 ...tiJa6
A3) 7 ...tiJbd7
B) 4 ... c6 5.i.g2 tiJbd7 6.0-0 i.d6 7.tiJfd2! 0-0 8.tiJc3
B l) 8 .. J�e8
B2) 8 ...i.b4
C) 4 ... c5 s.i.g2
Cl) 5 ...i.e7
C2) 5 ...tiJc6 6.0-0
C2 1) 6 ... i.e7
C22) 6 ... cxd4
B) note to 7 . . 0-0
B2) note to 1 O ...d4!?N
.
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 1 .tlib3!N
g
8
9
9
10
11
12
13
14
14
18
18
21
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 4 .tlib3!N
g
C l ) after 1 1 ...i.c?
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 2 .i.e3!N
g
h
h
8
Catalan
1 .d4 tll f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tll f3
This is our starting position for the Catalan,
which is the primary topic of this book. In
this chapter we will analyse three options that
I neglected to mention in GM I: A) 4 g6,
B) 4 c6 and C) 4 c5 .
fine for Black; 1 1 .l:!ad l !?N could also be
considered) l l . .. ib7 1 2 .ie5;!; The same
position is reached at the end of variation A2
below.
.••
•.•
.••
A) 4 ... g6
This looks like an odd choice, but it has been
played quite a lot in recent years, including by
some strong grandmasters.
5.J.g2
Initially I was drawn to 5.b3!? with the
idea to develop the bishop to a3, but I soon
realized that 5 . . . dxc4!N 6.bxc4 c5 offers Black
interesting play.
5 J.g7 6.0-0 0-0 7.V!ic2
From this position Black can arrange his
pieces in all kinds of ways, but I have focused
on the three knight developments: Al)
7 tll c6, A2) 7 tll a6 and A3) 7 tll bd7. A
couple of other ideas include:
••.
•••
.•.
.•.
7 . . . b6 8.cxd5 exd5 9.if4 lll a6 1 0 .lll c3 c5 leads
to an interesting version of a Queen's Indian,
with the bishop on g7 instead of e7 .
7 . . . c6
This posmon has occurred many times
in practice, but I was surprised to see that
hardly anyone has played:
8 .if4!?
The more popular 8 .lll bd2 lll bd7 9.e4 dxe4
1 0 .lll xe4 lll xe4 l 1 .'\Wxe4 has achieved terrific
results for White, but after 1 1 . . .l:!e800 the
situation seems rather double-edged to me.
8 . . . b6N
This is the most logical reply, and a definite
improvement over 8 . . . lll h5?!, when 9.ig5
if6 1 0.ixf6 lll xf6 l 1 .lll b d2 obviously
favoured White in Boege - Azzi, corr. 20 1 4 .
9.lll bd2 c5
9 . . .ib7 1 0.e4 dxe4 l 1 .lll xe4 lll xe4 1 2.'\Wxe4
lll d7 1 3.l:!adU gives White a pleasant space
advantage.
1 0.dxc5 bxc5 1 1 .l:!ad l
White has a promising position, for instance:
7
6
8
4
5
7
6
8
3
2
4
5
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 .l:!fd l N (The premature l 1 .dxc5?! occurred
in Unapkoshvili - Kobeshavidze, Batumi
20 1 0 , when l l . . .bxc5N would have been
�-�·�
;
, ,,,%� ,,v,� i
'f""''�
�
� T.-----7.�
,��
',,,, ,;�
�- '�
�� -zr� �� �%�
�� �� -----"�-r
"
�"'"//, �;4J��-0
�
[j bV� [j b�rt5
'l.
·
��'Ei'
, , %� �--g�-i[""
'0
a
3
�.i..�z
'l!i' �
A,
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 . . .lll bd? 1 2.e4 ib7 1 3.l:!fe l ! dxe4
1 3 . . . d4 1 4.id6 would be annoying for
Black.
1 4 .lll g 5
White is in good shape, as he will recapture
the pawn while keeping a better structure.
Chapter 1
-
Al) 7 ... �c6 8.gdl
Introductio n
9
1 1 .i.f4 f6
Now I would like to propose an improvement
over Tukmakov - Kurajica, Cetinje 1 99 1 .
13.gacl i.h7 14.cxd5 �xd5 1 5.�el gc8
16.tll d3 ¥Ne7 17.¥Nc4
White enjoys a stable edge.
8.a3 has been played more frequently, but it is
hardly necessary, as . . . lt:J b4 is not a threat just
now.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0 . . . i.b7 1 l .cxd5 exd5N This looks natural.
(The only game went l 1 . . .lt:J fxd5, Kekki Merriman, London 1 989, and now the obvious
1 2.e4 lt:Jxc3 1 3.bxc3;1; would have given White
the better game) 1 2.b4 c6 1 3 .a4;t; White has
the more comfortable side of a complex game.
9.�c3 �xc3 10.¥Mxc3 � e7
I was surprised to see that the Bosnian
grandmaster Bojan Kurajica has defended this
position against three opponents, all of whom
chose different moves. My personal preference is:
10
Catalan
8 ... b6
White is ready for the Griinfeld-like
approach:
8 . . . c5N 9.dxc5 Wa5 1 0. tli c3! Wxc5
Or 1 0 . . . dxc4 1 l ..if4 tli d5 1 2 . .id6 E!:d8
1 3 .tlid2! with the better game for White.
1 l .cxd5 tlixd5
1 1 . . .exd5? 12 . .ie3± is unpleasant for Black.
A3) 7... tli bd7
8 .i � .t�
1 --• -•'iu ·iv,�% i
��-�
u -·-,· �
6
:�.i�.-)
�- U Utt:J-�
3
- � �v
_ u ld�r!
1��� � Bim----
2
a
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 2.'Wb3 tlixc3
1 2 . . . Wb4 1 3 . .id2 'Wxb3 1 4.axb3± White
retains annoying pressure.
1 3.bxc3 'Wxc3 1 4 .'Wxc3 .ixc3 1 5 .E!:b l .ig7
1 6 . .ia3 E!:e8 17.tlig5
Black is doomed to a passive defence and
White can play for two results.
9.cxd5N
This natural novelty improves over 9.a3 c5
1 0.tlic3 .ib700 as in Recuero Guerra - Narciso
Dublan, Don Benito 20 1 2, when the position
resembles the main line below, but a2-a3 is a
redundant move.
9 ... exd5
White would be happy to see 9 . . . tlixd5 ?
1 0.e4 tli db4 1 l .'We2±.
1 0.t£ic3 �b7 1 1 .�f4 c5 12.�e5t
The position is complex, but I like White's
chances against the potentially hanging pawns,
and the bishop on e5 does a good job of
neutralizing its counterpart on g7.
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8.�f4 c6
I also considered:
8 . . . b6 9.tlic3N
The tempting 9.cxd5 led to success for White
in Ortega Hermida - Perez Castellano, Gran
Canaria 2009, but things would not have
been so clear after 9 . . . tlixd5N, intending
1 0 . .ig5 'We8! ( 1 0 . . . f6? 1 l .'Wc6! wins
material) 1 1 .e4 tli b4 1 2.'Wxc7 .ia6 with a
lot of counterplay.
9 . . . .ib7 1 0.cxd5!
This is a more favourable moment to release
the tension.
1 0 . . . tlixd5
10 . . . exd5? is bad in view of 1 1 .tli b 5 ± .
Chapter 1 - Introduction
11
book, but it may also prepare a Closed Catalan
set-up with the bishop on d6 instead of e7.
5.i.g2 �bd7
5 . . . dxc4 leads straight to Chapter 3.
6.0-0 i.d6
6 . . . dxc4 transposes to variation B of Chapter
5, while 6 . . . i.e7 7.Wi'c2 0-0 takes us to variation
B2 of Chapter 1 5 .
7.�fd2!
A small refinement. In the aforementioned
update I recommended 7.tll c3 0-0 8 .tll d2!,
but if White opts for that move order he
should reckon with the possibility of 7 . . . dxc4.
lOJUdl �h5 1 1 .i.d6 f5 12.e3;t
In Srebrnic - S. Nikolic, Ptuj 2009, White
had a pleasant position against the Stonewall
formation, with an easy plan of attacking on
the queenside.
B) 4 c6
•••
s X-..t�9�
,
-- , ,,,% ,,�-,�.i
7
6
5
4
·· � �
uZ� T� T·z�
� �
�� ,, �� �
��
��., wr
�
,
,
7 ... 0-0
The only real way for Black to question
White's last move is:
7 . . . e5
This looks slightly premature, even though it
was played by Radjabov.
8 . cxd5 cxd5
8 . . . lll xd5N 9.tt:lc4 i.c7 1 0 .tll c3 lll xc3
1 1 .bxc3 looks great for White.
9.dxe5 lll x e5 1 0.tll c3 i.e6
We have been following Grischuk Radjabov, Moscow 20 1 2, and here White
should have played:
3 �y;z �� ���IW*
21 i���if��-.:
�J[J � ,0 ��Jtlrff}tJ
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
neglected to mention this option in
GM I, although I did rectify the oversight
by publishing an update on the Quality
Chess website. The text move might quickly
transpose to a line examined elsewhere in the
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
I I .lll b3!N
This definitely looks like a favourable
position against the IQP, for instance:
12
Catalan
1 1 . . . .ib4
1 1 . . .0-0?! 1 2 . .ig5 wins a pawn.
1 2 . .if4 lt'i c6 1 3 .l'!c l 0-0 1 4Jl9d3
White has a nice positional edge.
1 0 . . . h6 1 1 .lt'ixf6t
1 l .f4!? has also been played, and is a worthy
alternative.
1 l . ..lt'ixf6 1 2 . .ie3 e5 1 3 .d5! cxd5 14.lt'ixd5
lt'ixd5 1 5 . .ixd5 We? 1 6.Wf3±
Despite the simplifications, White's
advantage was obvious in Koziak Nalbantoglu, Izmir 20 1 3 .
Bl) 8 .. J�e8 9.e4
8 i.-�__
tJ·� i. �
·�
�
,%_'
7
�
�
��.,,,,%�
�
W0
6 - · ··
� �
�
.1�£ �
�- ,�-/, , ,;-
s.tlJ c3
Many moves have been tried here, but in
most cases White simply plays e2-e4 with an
easy game. We will look at the most popular
Bl) 8 .. J�e8 followed by the slightly more
challenging B2) 8 i.b4.
•••
Here is a brief example of a line where White
gets an easy advantage:
8 . . . ic7 9.e4 dxe4
9 . . . dxc4 1 0.lt'ixc4 e5 1 1 .d5 lt'ib6 1 2.lt'ie3!
The knight is perfectly placed here. 12 ... '1Mfe7
1 3 .b3 White had a pleasant advantage in
Evans - Zielinski, email 20 1 0.
1 0.lt'idxe4
White is dearly better. One model example
continued:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
:3�
�� %�n:n��
-,,//,!,,,,%� ·w�
�
�
f
,
%
�
,,,
.
//
%
��K/J.:%�/W
-�
:
"
w
2 8 �� . m r(j�rb
•
i o/i;%� ,
1 gl . %�d\iii
� '§-��� ..
,, , ,
a
,
,,
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
9 ... dxe4
Black is not ready to strike in the centre
with 9 . . . e5?! in view of 1 0.exd5 cxd5
(or 1 0 . . . exd4 1 1 .lt'i ce4 lt'ixe4 1 2.lt'ixe4 ie5
1 3.lt'ig5! with a strong initiative) 1 1 .lt'ixd5
exd4 1 2. lt'i f3 lt'ixd5 1 3 .cxd5± when the d4pawn is falling, Sundararajan - Prakash,
Calcutta 2008.
IO.tlJdxe4 tlJxe4 1 1 .tlJxe4 i.e7 1 2.i.£4 tlJf6
13.tlJc3!
By avoiding the unnecessary exchange,
White obtains a dream advantage, and the c8bishop will remain passive for a long time.
13 ...i.d6 14.i.e5!
This is an important detail, which is worth
remembering in similar positions. White
is much better, and I will mention a recent
example.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 1
-
14 VNc7 1 5.£4 gds 16.YNO c!li e8 17.!'fadl
l 7.c5N i.xe5 l 8.dxe5 also gives White a big
advantage. The text move sets a positional trap,
into which Black now falls.
•••
8
7
6
5
4
Introduction
13
9 ... e5
The only serious alternative that I would like
to mention is 9 . . . i.xc3 1 0.bxc3 dxe4 1 1 .lll xe4
lll xe4 1 2.i.xe4 e5 as occurred in Olszewski Hadzimanolis, Peristeri 20 1 0. Here I propose
1 3 .i.c2N, for instance 1 3 . . . Ei:eS 1 4.Ei:el
exd4 1 5 .ElxeSt '1Mfxe8 1 6.cxd4 lll f6 1 7.i.g5
when White's bishop pair gives him excellent
chances.
1 0.dxe5 d4!?N
This new move seems like an interesting try
for Black.
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0 . . . lll xe5 1 1 .cxd5 i.xc3 1 2.bxc3 cxd5
1 3 .exd5 lll xd5 was played in Filippov - Tunik,
Novgorod 1 995, when White failed to choose
the best knight move:
17 £6? 1 8.c5! he5 19.fxe5 f5 20.c!li e4!
With the knight coming to d6 next, White
had a crushing advantage in Jakovenko Rydstrom, Gibraltar 20 1 5 .
.••
B2) 8 ...i.b4
8
7
6
5
4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.lll b3!N i.e6 (Obviously the c3-pawn is
untouchable: 1 4 . . . lll xc3 ?? 1 5 .'\We l ! and Black
loses one of his knights) 1 5 .Ei:e l '\Wf6 1 6.'1Mfe2!
lll c6 1 7.i.b2 White's bishop pair should be a
telling factor in the long run.
3
2
1
a
b
c
e
f
g
h
This seems like the only move that demands
any real accuracy from White.
9.e4
9.'1Mfb3 a5 is less clear in view of 1 0.e4N e5!,
but the text move is simple and strong.
1 1 .c!lid5
Another interesting continuation is:
1 1 .exf6 dxc3 1 2.fxg7 cxd2 1 3.gxf8='1Mft lll xf8!
Otherwise Black is j ust lost. 1 4.a3 i.a5 1 5 .b4
dxc l =Wf 1 6.'IMfxc l i.c7 1 7.'1Mfe3 The position
is extremely complex, but it seems to me that
White has the better prospects, as he is slightly
ahead on material and has an easy plan of
advancing with f2-f4 and e4-e5 .
Catalan
14
1 1 . .. tlixdS 12.exdS
1 2.cxd5 tll xe5 1 3 .tll b3 d3 seems less
convincing.
popular move order in Grandmaster practice,
although I noticed that Aronian won some
recent games with it.
12 ... tlixeS
1 2 . . . cxd5 1 3 .tll f3 dxc4 1 4.W/xd4 tll b6
1 5 .i.e3;!; leaves White strongly centralized.
s.i.g2
5 . cxd5 exd5 leads to a Tarrasch Defence,
but I intend to recommend something other
than the g2-g3 variation against that opening,
as you will see in Volume 1 B. (Black also has
the independent alternatives of 5 . . . tll xd5 and
5 . . . cxd4!?.)
13.tlie4 cxdS 14.cxdS
Black has two main continuations:
Cl) 5 ...i.e7 and C2) S ... tli c6.
6 ... dxc4 leads to a branch of the Catalan which
is covered in Chapters 6 and 7.
5 ... cxd4 6.0-0 is also likely to transpose
elsewhere. 6 . . . tll c6 reaches the later variation
C22, while 6 . . . . dxc4 leads to variation A of
Chapter 6 on page 74.
Cl) 5 ...i.e7
This move order was recommended by Aagaard
and N tirlis in Grandmaster Repertoire I0 - The
Tarrasch Defence (abbreviated to GM JO from
now on) .
C) 4 cS
•.•
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
6.0-0 0-0 7.dxcS hcS
7 . . . dxc4 8.W!'c2 takes us a long way ahead to
variation A of Chapter 1 6 - see page 253.
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
This is another option that I forgot to cover
in my previous l .d4 volumes. It is not the most
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 1 - Introduction
8.cxd5!
8.a3 was recommended by Marin in his
English repertoire book, but GM 10 shows a
good solution for Black. Without going into
details, the fact that the knight has not yet
gone to c6 helps Black.
8 ... exd5
A lesser option for Black is:
8 . . . tt'lxdS 9.Wc2! We7
9 . . . Wc7 1 0. tt'l c3 tt'l d7 l l ..id2 is clearly
better for White. l I . . . .ib4 occurred in the
most recent game, Romanov - Ippolito,
Philadelphia 20 1 2, and now the simple
1 2 .E!:ac l ± would have given White an
obvious advantage.
9 . . . ie7 1 0.E!:d l Was 1 l ..id2 Wes 1 2 .tt'lc3
1 2 . . . tt'lxc3 1 3.ixc3 Wb6 Ladanyi - Kelemen,
Budapest 200S, and after 14.tt'leS!N White
would claim an overwhelming advantage.
si.•.t � �·
�&fiy,.,
7 ifi·'
" %� .....%�
%� �
�
-,� �
6
• �
.....
� � �
� � �� ��
�
: ��;.�J a
�� ��-�
�" �� ��J��-�
�J�!•j�tJJ;JtJ
� lt:J�·� � �� �
'0
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0.a3 tt'l c6 1 l .b4 .ib6 1 2 . .ib2
Here too, White seizes an obvious advantage
with simple and natural moves.
12 . . .id7 1 3.e4 tt'lf6 1 4.eS tt'ldS 1 S .tt'lbd2
E!:ac8 1 6.We4!
White has a pleasant space advantage and
good chances to seize the initiative on the
kingside, Bezold - Lipinsky, Budapest 1 997.
9.Wc2!?
An important moment. The inevitable
development of the black knight to c6 will
15
complete the transposmon to the Tarrasch
Defence. As mentioned before, I do not intend
to recommend the old main lines with g2-g3
against the pure Tarrasch move order, so the
present variation presented a real challenge.
Fortunately, I found a good way to make use
of the delayed development of the b l -knight.
First the queen attacks the enemy bishop,
while making room for the rook to go to d l
i f needed.
9 ....ib6
Other moves are inadvisable for Black.
Certainly 9 . . . Wb6? should be avoided, as
1 0. tt'l c3 threatens a fork on a4. After the further
1 0 . . . id7 1 1 ..igS Black already had serious
problems with the dS-pawn in Andriessen Rietveld, Alkmaar 1 982.
9 ... ie7 1 0.E!:d l tt'l c6 1 l .tt'l c3
The isolated pawn and X-ray along the d-file
render Black's position unpleasant.
1 1 . . .Was
I would also like to mention: l l . . ..ie6
1 2.tt'lgS! h6? ( 1 2 . . . E!:c8 1 3 .tt'lxd5! .ixdS
1 4.E!:xdS! is given in GM JO) This was
lzzat - Kowsarinia, Kigali 20 1 1 , and now
1 3 . .ixdS!N would have won material.
1 2 . .ie3 .ie6 1 3.a3!
The black queen is unstable on aS.
1 3 . . . l"1ac8 1 4.b4 Wc7 l S .E!:ac l a5
Now in Ribli - Lalk, Sarajevo 1 98 S , White
missed a powerful idea.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Catalan
16
1 6.lLigS!N axb4
1 6 . . . h6 1 7.lLixe6 fxe6 1 8 . .ih3 is also
excellent for White.
1 7.lLixdS .ixdS 1 8 ..ixdS WaS
1 8 . . . bxa3 loses by force: 1 9 . .ixf7t! !!xf7
20.lLixf7 i>xf7 2 1 .Wb3t i>f8 22 . .if4 Was
23.Wxb7+1 9.axb4 Wxb4 20 . .ib3
White is clearly better.
10. tll c3 tll c6
1 0 . . . h6 1 1 .lLia4 lLi c6 transposes to 1 1 . . .h6 in
the note to Black's next move below.
��--
s .1 •..t.B
1
6 ,,
.d•'••'•t
../,mrm�.-- -%
�:,,,�� �� ',,. . ,;� �
�
�
��
: �� /,�
�
�
/
/,
r�
�
'
"
3 � � mtZJw�
80��
28ftii
....ef . . /,�;�. /,(b:
.
�
1 � � mM�
,,
a
b
c
d
e
f
i,f
·
g
""
h
1 1 .tll a4!
The more common 1 1 . .igS .ie6 is analysed
in GM 10. The text move has only been played
once out of more than thirty games, but it
is the most accurate choice, as White avoids
committing the bishop prematurely.
.
1 1 .. i.c7
This is an obvious candidate and it was
Black's choice in the only game, so I will take
it as the main line. Nevertheless, giving up the
dark-squared bishop is quite a common theme
in the Tarrasch, so I considered some other
moves, a couple of which may soon transpose
to existing games.
1 1 . . .!'!:e8N 1 2.lLixb6 Wxb6 ( 1 2 . . . axb6 1 3 . .ie3
also looks advantageous for White) 1 3 .igS !
Provoking the knight j ump t o e 4 i s a common
theme to weaken the dS-pawn. 1 3 . . . !!e6
( 1 3 . . . tLi e4 14 . .ie3! d4 1 S .lLixd4! lLixd4 1 6 .Wd3
White is clearly better) 1 4.b3 h6 l S . .ic l !
White will slowly establish control over the
blockading d4-square.
1 1 . . . .ie6 1 2 .lLixb6 Wxb6 ( 1 2 . . . axb6 13.!'!:dl
clearly favours White; it is worth mentioning
that 1 3 .igS h6 transposes to analysis in
GM JO, so you can see how White benefits
from keeping the bishop flexible) 1 3 . .igS ! lLie4
1 4 .ie3
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4 . . . Wa6 (Black is forced to move his queen,
as 14 . . . d4 is not possible now that the knight
has been lured to e4) 1 S .b3 ( 1 S .Wd3! ? is also
worth considering) 1 S . . . .ig4 1 6.Wb2 !'!:fe8
1 7.!'!:fe l White obtained a stable positional
advantage in Malaniuk - Giorgadze, Odessa
1 989.
1 1 . . .h6 1 2 .lLixb6 Wxb6
1 2 . . . axb6 opens the a-file but further
weakens Black's pawn structure. A good
illustrative game continued: 1 3.!'!:d l .ig4
14 . .ie3 !'!:e8 1 S .h3 .ixf3 1 6 . .ixf3 !'!:xe3?! A
desperate attempt to change the character of
the game. 1 7.fxe3 Wc7 1 8 .®g2± Black failed
to prove his compensation in Wojtaszek Shkapenko, Gorzow 20 1 2 .
1 3.b3 !'!:d8
Chapter 1 - Introduction
1 3 . . . ie6 occurred in Gajewski - Koch,
Haguenau 20 1 3 . Here White could have
played 1 4.ie3!N, as 1 4 . . . d4 can be met by
1 5 .lll xd4! ttJxd4 1 6.'<Mfb2 lll xe2t l 7.'<Mfxe2,
when White gets a pleasant edge thanks to
his bishop pair.
Now in Lazarev - T.L. Petrosian, Lausanne
2005, White should have gone for simple
development with:
s z•.t��
,� , ,.,.Y,
••·
�
�'0
�
�
,%
�·,,,,.,/,��
�� ��l/.I�
6 ··B'))
;•t
Ii
.
,
.
,
.
,
� �
���
: �� �
��
�
�� � ��
,.,. %�Jr%
,
�
�
�
W
�
�
�
2 ��,��[j�JlJ
7
,.,.,
3
�
a
b
� .:m
c
d
e
f
g
h
14.ib2 lll e4
1 4 . . . d4? j ust loses the pawn: 1 5 .:B:ad l ie6
1 6.'<Mfd3±
1 5 .:B:ad l if5 1 6.lll d4 ig6 1 7.'<Mfc l
l 7.lll xc6 bxc6 1 8 .id4 also deserves
attention.
1 7 . . . :B:acS 1 8.'<MfaU
White has a stable advantage, thanks to his
control over the d4-square and of course the
bishop pair.
17
12.i.e3!N
1 2.:B:dl was played in Jumabayev - Senador,
Al-Ain 20 1 2, but I was not altogether happy
with the position that might have arisen after
1 2 . . . :B:eSN, so I found a new concept.
12 ... ges 13.�d3!
White had better prevent the possible
exchange sacrifice, which might prove effective
after 1 3 .:B:ac l :B:xe3 14.fxe3 '<Mfe7';;, . After the
text move, I believe a logical sequence is:
1 3 ...i.g4 14.gacl h6
1 4 . . . :B:cS 1 5 .h3 ih5 1 6.ig5! is clearly
inferior for Black.
1 5.gfdl gcs 16.a3
White has completed development and
should retain a slight but pleasant advantage
in all lines. I will offer a few brief examples:
16 ...�e7
1 6 . . . ibS 1 7 .lll c3 ie6 1 8 .b4 '<Mfd7 1 9 .'<Mfd2±
17.�c3 gcd8 18.b4 �d7
1 8 . . . ixf3 is well met by 1 9.ic5 id6
20.ixd6 :B:xd6 2 1 .exf3! followed by f3-f4,
when the d-pawn will come under serious
pressure.
18
Catalan
After 1 9 . . . b6 20.ie3± Black's pieces on the
c-file have been destabilized.
20.'Wd2 ih3 2 1 .ihI ;!;
The position remains complex, but White is
better for sure.
8.a3!?
If you compare this position to variation
Cl above, you will see that I rejected the
a2-a3 plan in that line. However, with the
black knight already committed to c6, the
b2-b4 idea has a bit more bite, so I decided to
cover it here.
C2) 5 .. tll c6 6.0-0
.
I should mention that 8.cxd5 is a good
alternative. The most likely continuation is
8 . . . exd5 9.°Wc2 ib6 1 0 .lll c3 0-0, reaching
the same Tarrasch transposition as in variation
C l above. Black can try 8 . . . lt:lxd5 instead, but
9.'Wc2 looks promising for White, who has
scored heavily from this position. In short,
8.cxd5 is a decent alternative which you may
consider more convenient, but I decided to
cover another option to give you a pleasant
choice.
This is an important branching position,
where Black's two main tries are C2 1) 6 ... 1e7
and C22) 6 ... cxd4.
6 . . . dxc4 is another significant option, but it
immediately transposes to a major variation
of the Catalan, coverage of which begins in
variation B of Chapter 6 on page 80.
C2 1) 6...1e7 7.dxc5 .ixc5
8 ... 0-0
Black has tried several other moves, but in
most cases White gets an easy advantage by
developing his pieces on natural squares.
One way for Black to alter the character of the
game is:
8 . . . dxc4 9.°Wxd8t lll xd8
9 . . . @xd8 is worse: 1 0. lt:l bd2 c3 l l .bxc3
@e7 1 2 .lll b3 id6 1 3 .lll fd4 id? ( 1 3 . . . lll xd4
1 4.cxd4 �d8 1 5 .id2±) 1 4 .lll b5 ie5 1 5 .a4
Black was already under significant pressure
in Kochyev - Yurenko, St Petersburg 1 999.
1 0.lll e 5 id? l 1 .lll c3!
l 1 .lll xc4 ib5 is not so bad for Black.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
19
Chapter 1 - Introduction
l l . . .:B:c8 1 2.:B:d l h6!?
This was played in a remarkable game.
I also considered 12 . . ..ic6N 1 3.tt'lxc4
.ixg2 1 4.mxg2 .ie7 1 5 .tt'le5 tt'l c6 1 6.tt'lxc6
:B:xc6 1 7 . .if4 0-0 l 8.e4 when, despite the
simplifications, White retains solid pressure.
1 3 . .if4 g5 1 4 . .id2 a6 1 5 .:B:ac l b5
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
l l .Wi'c2 .id? 1 2.Wxc4 :B:c8 when White's
advantage is minimal.
After the text move Black's position is
surprisingly unpleasant, due to his spatial
inferiority and difficulty coordinating his
pieces. I will mention a couple of plausible
continuations.
1 0 . . . b6
1 0 . . ..id? 1 l ..ib2 :B:c8 1 2.:B:cl a6 1 3 .tt'lb3!
dxc4 1 4.:B:xc4 tt'l b8 1 5 .:B:xc8 Wxc8 occurred
in Kengis - Ginsburg, Zurich 2003 . Now the
most accurate would have been 1 6.Wd2N
.ic6 1 7.:B:cl Wi'd8 1 8 .Wxd8 .ixd8 1 9.tt'lfd2!
.ixg2 20.mxg2t with an unpleasant
endgame for Black, as White's queenside
initiative is rather serious.
l l ..ib2 .ib7 1 2.:B:cl
h
1 6 . .ie l ! :B:h7 1 7.a4 b4 1 8 .tt'l e4 tt'lxe4 1 9.:B:xd?
tt'ld6 20.:B:d l ±
Black was crushed i n Sharpe - Sibbald, corr.
20 14.
s i. � .l.S ��-1 %�
. . %�
. %� r�_ .••
6 . ��.�� ,,,
5 �W,11 -� �
�� �
4
�m liJf
��r�
3 fff/��
�
�
. m �
2�
�i>r:w�Jt-�7,M
1 %.����'§'BM�
.
_
,y,
,_,
,
7,
...
.
�.
. . %��-8�t�. .
a
b
.
c
d
e
f
g
h
9.b4 J.h6
The following alternative has been more
popular, but it has scored less than 25% for
Black:
9 . . . .ie7 1 0.tt'lbd2!
It is important to get the move order right.
The more common 1 0 . .ib2 allows 1 0 . . . dxc4!
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 2 . . . dxc4
Another good example is: 1 2 . . . :B:c8 1 3.Wa4!
White intends to increase the pressure
with :B:fd l . Black tried 1 3 . . . a5 in Kraai Kavutskiy, San Diego 2009, and now the
natural 1 4.b5N tt'lb8 1 5 .cxd5 :B:xc l 1 6.:B:xc l
.ixd5 1 7.tt'ld4 .ixg2 1 8 .mxg2 would have
retained definite pressure for White.
1 3 .tt'lxc4 Wxd l N
This i s definitely a better try than 1 3 . . . b 5 ?
1 4.tt'ld4! tt'lxd4 1 5 . .ixb? :B:b8 1 6.tt'la5 when
Black already had a lost position in Adhiban
- Syed Anwar, Panaji 20 1 2 .
1 4 .:B:fXd l :B:ac8 1 5 .b5 tt'l b8 1 6.a4;!;
Black is doomed to a passive defence.
Catalan
20
8
7
6
will simply develop his rooks and continue
improving his position.
12 ... d4 is another attempt to force the play,
but 1 3.c5 flc7 1 4.e3 is excellent for White:
14 . . . e5 ( 1 4 . . . dxe3 1 5 .Wxe3 lll d5 1 6.We4 f6
1 7.lll c4 clearly favours White) 1 5 .exd4 e4
1 6.lll g 5 lll xd4 1 7 .flxd4! :B:xd4 1 8 .°Wb2 fle5
1 9 .:B:ae l Black loses his central pawn.
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
10.i.b2!
In contrast to the note above, 1 0.tl:ibd2
would be inaccurate here due to 1 0 . . . e5!.
1 3.cxd5
1 3.b5 leads to interesting complications that
seem to favour White, but one good line is
enough.
13 ... tl:ixd5
10 ...�e7
1 0 . . . dxc4 is no problem for White in view
of 1 1 .tl:ibd2.
1 1 .tl:i bd2 �d8 12.�b3!N
For some reason almost everybody has
played 1 2.°Wc2 instead, but after 1 2 . . . e5 I am
not so convinced by White's position.
8
7 ,�
�
··,
%
,
,
,, , %�·
,%
;
.
,
�
6
, ,, %� �� �, , , ,�
�-£���"'-'·'1!�
�
�
� ��,j
�
�
� �
�
�
�
r
3 ,�, �%"'//, ��,��§�
2
� � t3J r�iLrlj
1
w
,
':�, , ,�.,, , ;·�=,, ,
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
12 ... e5
In view of the previous comment, it seemed
logical to consider this move as the main
line. If Black plays a quiet move then White
14.b5!
After 1 4 .lll x e5 lll xe5 1 5 .flxd5 fle6 1 6.flxe6
:B:xd2 1 7 .flxe5 :B:xe2 1 8 .flxf7t Wxf7 1 9 . W xf7t
@xf7 Black's active pieces should enable him
to hold the endgame a pawn down.
14 ... tl:ia5 15.�a4 i.e6
Black has to sacrifice his e-pawn, as 1 5 . . .f6?
1 6.e4 lll c7 1 7.flc3 traps the knight on a5 .
1 5 . . . a6 1 6.lll xe5 We8 1 7.Wh4 also favours
White.
16.i.xe5 �d7 17.tl:ie4
Black does not have enough for the pawn.
Chapter 1
-
C22) 6 cxd4 7.l£ixd4
•••
7.cxd5 is another decent option, but I would
prefer to maintain the tension for a little
longer.
s �m.!.Bfl� ��
tlf
"� ····
�
: , �1 � !�1'�
,�
� �
: ��,��.�.
llill
3
2
1
�� � �,
�w�£--- %w-�
•�
8 ww��w�
8 w�� ��
,,
llill
':S(��,·�=- b
a
d
c
f
e
g
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
b
c
d
e
f
g
21
9 ... dxc4 was played in Ellers - Held, Fuerth
1 998, and now 1 0.fi.xc6! bxc6 1 1 .tlixc6
Wes 1 2.tlixe7t ( 1 2.Wa4!? is also interesting)
1 2 . . . Wxe7 1 3.'l.Wd4;!; gives White a lasting
edge.
1 0.cxd5
There is nothing wrong with 1 0.Eic l , but
the central exchange had become rather
tempting, as Black's next move leads to a
standard Tarrasch position with a full extra
tempo for White.
1 0 . . . exd5 1 l .'l.Wa4! fi.d7
l 1 . . .tli a5 1 2.'l.Wc2! followed by Eiad l leads to
a dream position for White.
1 2 .tlixd5 tlixd5 1 3 .fi.xd5 tli b4 1 4 .'l.Wb3 Wa5
1 5 .fif3±
White was a healthy pawn up in Benidze Guliev, Malatya 20 1 3 .
h
7... i.c5
Less challenging is:
7 . . .fi.e7 8.tlic3 0-0 9.fie3!
9.cxd5 exd5 leads to a version of the Tarrasch
Defence where Black has exchanged on d4
prematurely. White should be better here
too, but the text move seems even stronger.
a
Introduction
h
9 . . . h6
It is hard to know what to suggest for Black.
9 . . . tlig4 1 0.cxd5 tlixe3 1 l .fxe3 exd5
1 2.tlixd5 tlie5 1 3 .%%3± White had an extra
pawn and a powerful pair of knights in
Modestov - Ananchenko, Samara 2003.
8.l£ib3
8.tlixc6 bxc6 9.'l.Wc2 is an interesting
alternative, which also gives White chances
for an edge. However, it seems more logical
to fight for an advantage with a move that
does not involve strengthening Black's pawn
centre.
Catalan
22
trying to hold on to the extra pawn is too
risky for Black: 1 0 . . . lll a5 1 l .b4 cxb3 1 2 .ia3!
id7 1 3.axb3 i.c6 1 4.b4 ixg2 1 5 .bxa5 ixa5
occurred in Perez - Montiel, Havana 1 993,
and now 1 6.lll b5!N would have decided the
game instantly.
1 0.ig5
1 0.cxd5 lll xd5 1 1 .lll xd5 exd5 1 2.Wxd5 ig4
gave Black significant compensation for the
pawn in Postny - Sebenik, Legnica 20 1 3 .
s
!, �£ %... -�� ��;�
i if�i
%,�·, ,% ; •
··- -%
� � ,,, �
�
__�_ _,y,_
,_,
��, ;�
l
�
�f"'/,1 �� ��-�
��
� lt);�� •
2 8�--- - ����
"'f " 'z� '•:�-if""
7
6
5
,;,,,,<
4
3
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0 . . . dxc4 1 1 .lll d2 h6 1 2.ixf6 1Mfxf6 1 3.lll xc4
ic7
This position was reached in Dathem H. Schmidt, corr. 1 986, and another more
recent correspondence game. White has
good prospects on the queenside, and the
only question is how best to develop his
initiative. My suggestion is:
1 4 .Wa4N id7 1 5 .�fd l �fd8 1 6.Wa3
With ongoing pressure.
9.c:x:d5 tL!xd5
9 . . . exd5 1 0 .lll c3 gives Black an unfavourable
version of the Tarrasch, for instance:
1 0 . . . ie6 1 l .ie3 0-0 1 2.Wd2 ( 1 2.�cl is also
promising) 1 2 . . . Wd7 ( 1 2 . . . lll e5 is a better try,
although White keeps the advantage after
1 3 .i.d4N lll c4 1 4.Wc2 followed by attacking
the d5-pawn) 1 3 .�fd l �fd8 1 4.�ac l lll e5
1 5 .lll c5 ixc5 1 6.ixc5± White was clearly
better in Karasek - Zavadil, Zlate Hory
2006.
10 ... 0-0
1 0 . . . if6 1 1 .'IW cl ! 0-0 1 2.lll c3 lll xc3 1 3.ixc3
e5 occurred in Burmakin - Laketic, Padova
20 1 2, and here I see no reason to refrain from
winning a pawn by means of 1 4.ixc6N bxc6
1 5 .ib4 �e8 1 6.Wxc6.
11. tLJ c3
tLlxc3
1 1 . . .lt:l f6 1 2.�cl e5 fails to solve Black's
problems after:
Chapter 1
-
l 1 . . .c!li b6 1 2.c!lie4 c!lid5 1 3 .l'!cl '1Mfb6 1 4 .'1Mfc2
h6 1 5 .c!liec5;!; gave White solid pressure in
Azmaiparashvili - Zaichik, Philadelphia 1 99 1 .
12.hc3 Y!Yb6 13.lLJd4!?
1 3.'1Mfd3N l'!d8 1 4.'!Mfe4 id? 1 5 .l'!fd l;!; is
a safe alternative which retains a pleasant
advantage.
Introduction
23
Conclusion
4 . . . g6 is an odd-looking move, but there is
nothing much wrong with it, and after 5 .ig2
ig7 6.0-0 0-0 7.'1Mfc2 we j ust have a typical
Catalan situation except that Black's bishop is
on an unusual square. White should be slightly
better, as long as he avoids any early conflict in
the centre, which might allow the g7-bishop to
make its presence felt.
4 . . . c6 is an important option, when 5 .ig2
c!li bd7 6.0-0 .id6 leads to a situation where
the bishop on d6 has some pros and cons
compared to the main Closed Catalan positions
examined later in Chapter 1 5 . White's most
accurate move order is 7.c!lifd2! 0-0 8.c!lic3,
when the simple plan of e2-e4 is hard for Black
to meet. 8 . . . .ib4 is the only move that really
gives White something to think about, but
Black still falls short of equality.
1 3 . . . c!li b4 1 4.a3 c!lid5 is a safer choice, when
I propose: 1 5 .ixd5N ( 1 5 . c!li f5 is not so
convincing, and after 1 5 . . . if6 1 6 . .ixd5 exd5
l 7.'1Mfxd5 l'!d8 1 8 .'1Mf e4 ixf5 l 9.'1Mfxf5 ixc3
20.bxc3 '!Mfc6 Black managed to hold his
own in Mego - Pikus, corr. 20 1 0) 1 5 . . . exd5
1 6.'1Mfd3;!; White has a small but stable edge.
14.c!lixc6! gxdl 15.c!lixe7t ©f8 16.gfxdl
©xe7 17.gacl .id7 1 8.i.d4
White had a great position in Jankovic
- Cebalo, Croatia 20 1 3, with full material
equality for the queen (once the b7- and/or
g7-pawns fall) and a strong initiative.
Finally, 4 . . . c5 is not such a popular move
among strong players, but it forced me to
think carefully about possible transpositions
to the Tarrasch. After 5 .ig2 ie7 we ended
up going down just such a path, but I found
a good way to make use of the fact that c!li c3
had been delayed. 5 . . . c!li c6 6.0-0 reaches
an important branching point, where I did
not find equality for Black after 6 . . . ie7 or
6 . . . cxd4. Of course Black can capture on c4
on move 5 or 6, but this leads straight to one
of the Catalan variations that you can find in
a later chapter.
Catalan
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
4 ... dxc4 and 5 ... id7
Variation Index
1 .d4 � f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.� a dxc4 s ..tg2 .td7
6.�e5 .tc6 7.�xc6 �xc6 8.0-0
26
27
29
30
31
A) 8 .te7
B) 8 � d5!?
C) 8 '!Wd7 9.e3
Cl) 9 ... �b8
C2) 9 ... 0-0-0
•••
•••
•••
C) note to 9.e3
a
b
c
d
e
1 4. f4N
f
C2) after 19 ... E:dh8
C I ) after 1 4 . . . i.e 7
g
h
a
b
c
d
e
1 5.d5N
f
g
h
a
b
c
d
e
20 .a6!N
f
g
h
h
Chapter 2 - 5 . . . id7
I .d4 tLJf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.c!l) f3 dxc4 5.ig2
id?
I am quite surprised that this move remains
fashionable. I assume that Black is excited
at the prospect of queenside castling in the
Catalan - and this is probably the only line
where he can realize his dream!
25
1 0.bxc3 lll xc3 1 1 .'\Mf d3. White dominates
with his bishop pair, while Black cannot
even grab the d4-pawn: 1 1 . . .lll xd4 1 2.l:!e l !
lll dxe2t 1 3 .l:!xe2 lll x e2t 1 4.'\Mi'xe2 0-0
1 5 .ia3 l:!e8 1 6.l:!dl '\Mi'c8 1 7.lll a5 c6
1 8 .lll c4!+-) 1 0.bxc3 ixc3 1 1 .l:! b l �
9 . . . '\Mff6 1 0.e3
There is no point for White to enter the
complications arising after: 1 0 .a3?! lll xd4
1 1 .axb4 lll xb4 1 2.'\Mfb l lll bc2t 1 3 .'it>fl
lll xa l 1 4.'\Mi'xa l lll b300 With mutual chances.
1 0 . . . '\Mf g6 1 1 .ie4
l 1 .e4 is another strong possibility.
1 1 . . . '\Mfh5
This was Razuvaev - Klovans, Bern 1 993,
and here easiest is:
1 2.0-0N 0-0 1 3.a3 ie7 1 4.ig2
With a pleasant edge for White.
7.c!l)xc6 c!l)xc6 8.0-0
6.c!l) es
Definitely the most challenging move.
6 ic6
The most popular continuation and a logical
follow-up to Black's previous move.
••.
Putting the other piece on c6 looks rather
dubious:
6 . . . lll c6 7.lll xc4
Black's light-squared bishop remains passive
on d7.
7 . . . ib4t
Another line here is 7 . . . lll d5 8.0-0 lll b6,
which occurred in Babik - Husson,
Stockerau 1 99 1 . I believe the simple 9.b3N
ie7 1 0 .lll c3 0-0 1 1 .ib2 leads to a clear
advantage for White.
8.lll c3 lll d5 9.'\Mf d3
Razuvaev's recommendation from Chess
Informant 57 also looks very attractive:
9.0-0! ? lll xc3 (Much worse is 9 . . .ixc3
8 . . . lll xd4?!
This has only occurred twice in practice, as
Black quickly understood that his position
was rather dubious after:
9.ixb7 l:!b8 1 0.ig2
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
26
8
Once again White has a tough choice. Finally
I decided to go with the following move:
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0 . . . Wd7
1 o . . . ic5 l 1 .lDd2 c3 (after 1 1 . . .0-0 1 2.lt:Jxc4
White has a long-term advantage, thanks to
his bishop pair and better pawn structure.)
1 2.bxc3 lDb5 1 3 .Wc2± Black faced serious
problems in Gulko - Korchnoi, Amsterdam
1 989.
l l .e3 lt:Jf5
l 1 . ..lt:Jb5 1 2.Wc2 is also much better for
White.
1 2.Wc2 Wb5 1 3.lDd2 lDd6 1 4.b3 cxb3?
This happened in Tratar - Plesec, Slovenia
1 994.
The lesser evil would be 14 . . .ie7, though
White is clearly better after 1 5 .bxc4 Wa6
1 6.c5 lDf5 1 7.lDb3 0-0 1 8.:gd l .
White could now grab a decisive advantage
with:
1 5 .ic6tN �d8 1 6.axb3
A) 8 ...�e7
9.1Wa4
9.e3 seemed unclear to me after 9 . . . e5!
1 0.ixc6t (the endgame arising after 1 0.dxe5
Wxd l 1 1 .:gxd l lDxe5 1 2.ixb7 :gb8 1 3 .ig2
0-0 is fine for Black due to his activity,
as in Gyorkos - Farago, Zalakaros 1 994)
1 0 . . . bxc6 l l .dxe5 Wxd l 1 2.:gxd l lt:Jg4
( 1 2 . . . lt:Jd7 1 3.id2! is better for White)
1 3.f4 ic5 with sharp play in Kallai - Anka,
Balatonbereny 1 99 5 .
9 ... 0-0
White is comfortably better after 9 . . . Wd7
1 0.:gdl 0-0 l 1 .lDc3 :gfd8 1 2.Wxc4 with an
obvious advantage, Johnson - Stracy, Dunedin
1 999.
Unfortunately Black's try to complicate the
game falls short: 1 0 . . . 0-0-0 l 1 .lDc3 lt:Jd5
1 2.Wxc4 lt:Jb6 1 3.Wb5! with a nice refutation
should Black take the central pawn: 1 3 . . . lt:Jxd4
1 4 .Wa5 �b8 1 5 .e3 lDe2t 1 6.�fl lt:Jd5
l 7.lt:Jxd5 lt:Jxc l 1 8 .:gaxc l exd5 l 9.:gxd5 id6
20.:gb5 b6 2 1 .Wa6 Wc8 22.:!! x b6t Mate in
two follows.
Or 1 0 . . . lt:J b4 l 1 .Wxd7t lDxd7 1 2.lt:Ja3;!:;
regaining the pawn with advantage.
10.e3
27
Chapter 2 - 5 . . . id7
10 ... e5
The move which I suggested for Black in
GM J.
White is obviously better after 1 0 . . . tli b4
1 1 .a3 tli bd5 1 2.°Wxc4:;!; C. Horvath Lukacs, Budapest 1 994, or 1 0 . . . a6 1 1 .°Wxc4:;!;
J. Horvath - Bokros, Szekszard 1 996.
8
12 ... bxc6 13.:axd4 �e8
White looks better in every line:
1 3 . . . lli d? 1 4.Wxc6 tlie5 1 5 .°We4 id6 1 6.tlid2
Ei:e8 1 7.°Wg2:;!;
1 3 . . . id6 1 4.Wxc6 °We7 1 5 .tli d2 and White
wins a pawn for nothing.
14.:axc4 c5 1 5.�xeS :af.xe8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
l U�dl!
Other options are worse: 1 1 .dxe5 llixe5
1 2.ixb7 Ei:b8 1 3 .ig2 °Wd7 with counterplay,
or 1 I .ixc6 bxc6 1 2.dxe5 tli g4 with mutual
chances.
1 1 ... exd4
After 1 1 . . .°Wc8 1 2.°Wxc4 (There is no point
in White giving up his light-squared bishop:
1 2.ixc6?! bxc6 1 3.dxe5 tli g4 1 4.f4 We6 Black
always will have plenty of counterplay against
White's king.) 1 2 . . . exd4 1 3 .exd4 id6 1 4.tlic3
White is better, thanks to his strong light­
squared bishop.
12.i.xc6
Black gets a solid position after 1 2.°Wxc4
tli d7! 1 3.exd4 tli b6 1 4.Wfl tli b4! ( 1 4 . . . if6
1 5 .tlic3 °We7 1 6.ie3:;!; is better for White)
1 5 .tlic3 c6 1 6.a3 tli 4d5 1 7.°Wd3 Ei:e8 1 8 .id2
°Wd7 and Black is close to equality.
16 ... :aedS 17.@e2 tl:id7 1s.:ac2
This endgame is quite unpleasant for Black:
18 ... lLJe5
1 8 . . . tlifS 1 9.tlia3 tli e6 20.tlic4 with a clear
advantage.
19.tl:ia3 :aab8 20.id2
Black is going to suffer for the rest of the
game.
B) 8 ... tl:id5!?
A playable alternative that has occurred several
time in tournament practice.
28
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
After 1 2 . . . lll c2 1 3.d5! exd5 1 4.�b l (less
clear is 1 4 .lll xd5 0-0-0) 1 4 . . . 0-0-0 (Black
cannot play 1 4 . . . d4?! 1 5 .lll b5 0-0-0 1 6.if4
id6 1 7.lll xd6t cxd6 1 8 .�fd l and White will
regain the d4-pawn with a clear advantage)
l 5 .ixd5 White is better thanks to his pair of
bishops.
13.hb7 :Sbs I 4.i.e4
1 4.ig2 lll bc2 1 5 .�b l ib4 with counterplay.
14...£5
9.�a4
I still like this move, despite the fact that
White has lost both games in which it has been
played.
9 ...�d6
9 . . . Wld7 1 0.Wlxc4 lll b6 ( 1 0 . . . 0-0-0 1 1 .e3
would j ust transpose to our main line) l 1 .Wld3
0-0-0 1 2.Wlf3!;l; and White's light-squared
bishop should secure him an advantage.
I also mentioned 9 . . . lll b6 1 0.ixc6t bxc6
1 1 .Wlxc6t Wld7 when White has a pleasant
choice: 1 2.Wlxd7t ( 1 2.W/f3 ie7 1 3.lll c3 0-0
1 4.�d l t and White is slightly better, due
to Black's damaged pawn structure on the
queenside) 1 2 . . . c;t>xd7 1 3 .e4;l; White's chances
are slightly preferable in this endgame, thanks
to his better pawn structure.
10.�xc4 �b4
The point of Black's idea.
1 1 .�xb4N
This was also my recommendation in GM 1 .
I f 1 1 .ixd5 exd5 1 2.Wfxd5 Wfxd4 White has
nothing special, as in Sanchez Enriquez Hernandez Carmenates, Merida 20 1 1 .
1 1 ... lll dxb4 12.lll c3 lll xd4
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
c
e
15.i.e3!
Only in this way can White fight for the
advantage. Now Black has a choice:
1 5 ... lll xe2t
This looks like Black's best option.
1 5 . . . fxe4?! 1 6.ixd4 lll c6 1 7.ie3 �xb2
1 8 .�ab l White will regain the e4-pawn,
keeping an obvious advantage in the endgame
due to his better pawn structure.
1 5 . . . ic5 1 6.ib l ! ( 1 6.�ad l lll xe2t 1 7.lll xe2
ixe3 is equal) 1 6 . . . 0-0 (White is clearly better
after 1 6 . . . lt:\d5 1 7.lll xd5 exd5 1 8 .'it>g2! �xb2
1 9.�d l �b4 20.ixf5 ±) 1 7.�d l �fd8 1 8 .'it>g2
lll bc6 1 9.id3 and White is better thanks to
his bishops.
Chapter 2
16.tll xe2 fxe4 17.tll c3
Less convincing is 1 7.ixa? Ei:b? 1 8 .id4
@fl.
17... � d5 1 8.id4!
Black comfortably equalizes after 1 8.ixa?
E!:xb2 1 9.lll xe4 ( 1 9.id4 @f7 20.lll xdS E!:d2=)
followed by 20 . . . E!:a4.
1 8 ... tll f6
Or 1 8 . . . E!:b4 1 9.Ei:ad l c5 20.ieS lll b6
2 1 .b3±.
19Jffe l ib4 20J�e3!
White has the better prospects.
-
5 . . id7
.
29
9 . . . e5 1 0.dxeS lll xe5 1 1 .ixb? E!:b8 1 2.ig2
Wfxd l
If Black continues with 1 2 . . . icS White has
another interesting idea: 1 3.b3!? 0-0 1 4 .ib2
E!:fd8 1 5 .'1Mfxd7 lll fxd7 1 6.lll d2 cxb3 1 7.axb3
lll d3 1 8 .ic3 White is clearly better.
1 3 .E!:xd l id6
This was Cvitan - Vaganian, Neum 2000.
White played 1 4 .lll d2 and also achieved an
advantage, but the following line looks even
more convincing:
1 4.f4N lll d3
1 4 . . . lll ed? 1 5 .if3! (with the idea of 1 6.e4)
1 5 . . . lll cS 1 6.lll d2 and White wins a pawn.
C) 8 ...�d7
This is Black's main continuation.
9.e3
According to the old theory Black equalizes
after 9.lll c3 lll xd4! 1 0.ixb? E!:b8 1 1 .ig2 ie7
1 2.e3 lll b5! as in Yusupov - Karpov, Belfort
1 988.
9 . . . lll d5
This is met strongly by:
1 0.lll d2 h5
1 0 . . . lll aS has occurred in a few
correspondence games, and in one of them
White convincingly proved his advantage:
1 1 .'1Mfe2 WfbS 1 2 .lll f3 c6 1 3 .e4 lll f6 1 4.E!:d l c3
1 5 .'1Mfc2 cxb2 1 6.ixb2 '1Mfc4 1 7.Wfb l ! White
has more than enough compensation for a
pawn, Cuccumini - V. Popov, corr. 20 1 3.
1 1 .lll xc4 h4 1 2.e4 lll b6
This happened in Cheparinov - Grachev,
Moscow 20 1 1 , and here I suggest the
following improvement:
30
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 3 .llixb6N axb6 1 4 .ie3
A logical sequence of moves is the following:
14 . . . 0-0-0 1 5 .Wa4 ri> b8 1 6.�fd l hxg3
1 7.hxg3
It looks like Black has no play on the
kingside, while White's positional advantage
will tell in the long term.
1 7 . . . ie7 1 8.�ac l if6 1 9.d5 llie5 20.Wb3±
Cl) 9 ... �b8 10.Vl\'e2 b5 1 1 .b3
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.Wxb5 llia5 1 7.Wd3 0-0 1 8.e4 lli f6 1 9.�d l;!;
White enjoys a pleasant Catalan edge, with
the bishop pair and a strong centre.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 ... cxb3
Certainly not 1 1 . . .llia5?! which runs into
1 2 .id2 b4 1 3 .bxc4 with an advantage to
White, Nesis - Engel, corr. 1 98 8 .
12.axb3 �b6
By far Black's most popular option.
12 ... ib4 1 3 .�a6 lli d5 14.ib2 �b6
I checked 14 ... 0-0 1 5 .e4 lli f6 ( 1 5 ... lli de7
1 6.d5i is j ust bad for Black) 1 6.d5 exd5
1 7.ixf6 gxf6 1 8 .exd5 lli e7 1 9 .�xf6 when
White has an obvious positional advantage.
1 5 .�xb6 axb6
This is definitely the stronger recapture.
After 1 5 . . . cxb6?! 1 6.e4 lli f6 1 7.Wxb5 ie7 as
in Hofland - Westerman, corr. 1 99 1 , White
could have decided the game on the spot:
1 8 .�c l !N lli a5 1 9.�c8t id8 20.Wxd7t
ri>xd7 2 1 .�a8 lli xb3 22.�xa7t ic7 23.d5+-
13 ... a6
In the event of l 3 . . . ib4 1 4.ib2 0-0, White
has the strong 1 5 .d5! exd5 1 6.ixf6 gxf6
1 7.�xd5 We6. Now in the game Gleizerov
- C. Horvath, Budapest 1 989, White could
have played: 1 8 .Wc2N (threatening 1 9.�h5)
18 ... llie5 1 9.�xa7 With level material White's
advantage is indisputable, due to Black's
damaged structure on the kingside.
14.tlic3 Ae7
Chapter 2 - 5 . . . id7
This has occurred in two games, but for some
reason in both cases White refrained from the
following tempting continuation:
31
Currently the most fashionable continuation
at grandmaster level.
10.V9a4
For a long time I had confidence in 1 0.tlld2,
until I saw the game Giri - Harikrishna, Biel
20 1 4, which continued 1 0 . . . e5.
10 �d5
1 0 . . . h5
This has been tried a few times by Black, but
it allows White an additional option:
l 1 .tlld2
l l .ixc6 Wxc6 1 2.Wxc6 bxc6 1 3.tll d2 h4
1 4.tlixc4 id6 1 5 .\t>g2 �h5 1 6.id2 �dh8 is
surprisingly unclear.
l 1 . . .tll d 5 1 2 .tllxc4 h4 1 3 .id2 \!;>b8
White was ready to launch an attack with
1 4.b4.
1 4.�fcl f5 1 5 .b4!
A thematic idea in this line. Accepting the
pawn sacrifice with the Catalan bishop still
in play looks suicidal.
1 5 . . . id6
Apparently Black's best idea would have
been 1 5 . . . tlle 5 1 6.Wxd7 tllxd7 1 7.b5±, but
White definitely has the better endgame
with his bishop pair.
1 6.b5 tll ce7
This happened in Stefanova - M. Socko,
Warsaw 20 1 3, and here the following idea
looks very strong:
•••
18.if3! V9e6
1 8 . . . We7 loses to 1 9.�xa6 �xa6 20.Wxb5.
19.ig4 '9e7 20.id7t ©f8 2 1 .ia3 b4
22.ib2 i.xb2 23.'9xb2
With a pleasant advantage for White.
C2) 9 0-0-0
•••
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
32
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 7.'1Wb3N
Followed by pushing the a-pawn.
l 7 . . . lll g 8 l 8.a4 lll gf6 l 9.a5 hxg3 20.hxg3 g5
2 1 .b6 cxb6 22.lll x b6!
White's attack will win the race.
1 5 ...i.d6
1 5 . . . ixb4 1 6.ixb4 lll cxb4 1 7.lll d2 will be
too difficult for Black to defend. White has his
Catalan bishop, a knight heading for c5 and
open files for his rooks.
I I .VNxc4 h5
Obviously this is Black's key attacking idea,
otherwise the whole strategy would be foolish.
l 5 . . . lll cxb4 This seems to be critical, although
White's position looks attractive after 1 6.a3
lll c6 1 7 .lll c3 l"tib8 1 8 .'1Wb3 lll b6 1 9.lll e2. Here
I developed the following line:
12.id2 h4 13Jkl
The last preparatory move before the real
action begins!
An immediate 1 3 .b4 seems premature in view
of: 1 3 . . . lll cxb4! 1 4.ixb4 ixb4 1 5 .e4 ( 1 5 .ixd5?
'1Wxd5 l 6.'1Wxb4 hxg3 and Black's attack decides)
l 5 . . . lll f4! 1 6.gxf4 \Wxd4 l 7.\Wxd4 E!:xd4 I am
not sure White has anything here.
a
8
7
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 9 . . . e5 20.E!:xc6! bxc6 2 1 .a4 e4 22.a5 E!:h6
23.axb6 cxb6 24.f3! exS 25 .ixS g5 26.ig2±
White's light-squared bishop should be an
important factor to prove an advantage.
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 hxg3
1 3 . . . f5 occurred in Rodshtein - Shyam,
Benasque 20 1 3, with Black obtaining a good
game. However, after the thematic 14.b4N we
would soon transpose into the main line.
•••
14.hxg3 f5 1 5.b4!
White has to start active play on the
queenside in order to maximize his light­
squared bishop's power. The only game here
continued with:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
16.b5 lll ce7 17.�c3 ©bs
This is too slow.
Black should have tried 1 7 . . . lll xc3 1 8 .Ei:xc3
33
Chapter 2 - 5 id7
. . .
tt'ldS 1 9.gb3 gS, although White can switch
to a positional strategy: 20.e4! £Xe4 2 1 .ge l
gh5 22.ixe4 gdh8 23 .'1We2 With a serious
positional advantage.
18.a4 gh5 19.a5 gdhs
This position occurred in Swinkels Polaczek, Germany 20 1 3 . White has a few
attacking ideas, with my preference being as
follows:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
20.a6!N b6 2 1 .e4 tll xc3
2 1 . . . £Xe4 22. tt'lxe4 is clearly better for White.
22,gxc3 fxe4 23.ge3 gxb5 24.gxe4
Despite his extra pawn, Black's position
is difficult. White will simply increase the
pressure along the h 1 -a8 diagonal.
Conclusion
The first part of the chapter shares many
similarities with GM I, with some general
improvements added along the way. The overall
assessment remains favourable for White.
After 5 . . . .id7 6.tt'leS .ic6 7.tt'lxc6 tt'lxc6
8.0-0 �d7 9.e3 the most critical test is now
9 . . . 0-0-0, which has recently been employed
with increasing frequency at the top level.
Black aims to launch a quick attack on the
kingside, hoping to crash through before
the rather unsafe position of his own king is
exploited. White should be alert to the danger,
but I am satisfied that my analysis shows how
to maintain an initiative in all cases.
Catalan 4 ... dxc4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
5 c6
...
Variation Index
1 .d4 � f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.�f3 dxc4 5.i.g2 c6
6.� e5
35
36
38
39
41
41
43
44
44
45
45
A) 6 ... b5 7.�xc6 �b6 8.�a5!
Al) 8 ... �xa5t
A2) 8 ... � d5 9.i.d2
A21) 9 ... a6
A22) 9 ... � c6 1 0.�xc6 �xc6 l l .e4
A22 1) 1 1 ... � b4
A222) 1 1 ... � £6
B) 6 ...i.b4t 7.i.d2!
B l) 7 ...i.e7 8.e3
B l l) 8 ... 0-0
B l 2) 8 ... b5
B2) 7 ... �xd4 8.i.xb4 �xe5 9.� a3 b5 lO.i.d6! �xb2
1 1 .0-0 � d5 12.e4 � c3 13.�h5!
B2 1) 1 3 ... � d7
B22) 1 3 ... h6!?
A2)
note to
Bl 1)
9.�d2
a
1 7.a5!N
b
c
note to
d
82 1 )
9 . . . c5
e
1 2 .a3!N
f
g
46
48
49
note to
2 I . . .ma6!
h
26.WaS!!
h
Chapter 3 - 5 . . . c6
1 .d4 tlif6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tlif3 dxc4 s ..tg2
c6
I wouldn't say that Black has tried hard to
rehabilitate this line, but there have been some
attempted improvements recently.
6.tli e5
In my opinion this is the most principled
continuation. White is aiming to regain the
pawn, and maintain typical Catalan pressure.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
35
avoids the knight swap and maintains a clear
positional edge, thanks to his space advantage
and strong Catalan bishop. There are a large
number of games which have reached this
position, but the evaluation is obviously
in White's favour so I will j ust show one
continuation: 1 0 . . . lll fd7 l 1 .lll f3 lll d5 1 2.i.d2
(I also like 1 2.Wfc2 b6 1 3 .l"!:d l i.b7 1 4.e4 lll xc3
1 5 .bxc3±) 1 2 . . . b6 1 3.e4 lll xc3 1 4.i.xc3 i.b7
1 5 .Wfe2 a5 1 6.l"!:fd l;!; White had a nice version
of a Queen's Indian in Gleizerov - Racioppo,
Turin 2000.
A) 6 ... b5
In this position White has a promising idea at
his disposal. If White manages to regain the
pawn he would get a very pleasant position
with typical Catalan pressure.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
In this posmon we have to look at two
major alternatives for Black: A) 6 b5 and B)
6 j,b4t. I would also like to mention two
minor options, which deserve a little attention,
though not more.
.••
7.tlixc6
7.a4 transposes to a line after 5 . . . b5 that
I prefer to avoid; see 7.lll e5 in the notes on
page 1 27.
7 ...°%Vb6 s.tlia5!
..•
6 . . . lll bd7 7.lll xc4 lll b6 (Black's idea is to get
some play on the queenside after 8.lll x b6
axb6, but certainly White has a different
plan) 8.lll e5! c5 9.i.e3 lll bd5 (9 . . . cxd4
1 0.i.xd4 i.b4t l 1 .lll c3 lll bd5 1 2.0-0 0-0
1 3 .Wfb3± was also clearly better for White
in Favarel - Resnjanskij, Naujac 20 1 2.) This
is what happened in D'Costa - Richmond,
Birmingham 2000. White should have
continued 1 0.dxcS Wf aSt l l .i.d2 Wfxc5
1 2.lll a3! with a nice position.
6 ... i.e7 7.0-0 0-0 8.lll c3 lll bd7 9.lll xc4 lll b6
1 0.lll eS Once again it is the same idea: White
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
This move was first played by Viktor
Korchnoi in 2004. Even after more than 60
years of playing the Catalan, the closest we
have to a superhero in chess still has something
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
36
new and surprising to add to opening theory.
Actually the knight jump to the edge of the
board looks extremely strange, as we should
not forget that Black can capture it with check!
Nevertheless, White has serious threats along
the h l -a8 diagonal, and all the tactics look
great for him.
We now have two serious options: Al)
8 ... �xa5tN or A2) 8 ... tll d5.
Just bad is 8 . . . ib4t? 9.id2 ixd2t (9 . . . ixa5
1 0.ixa8 tll c6 1 1 .0-0 ixd2 1 2.ixc6t Wxc6
1 3.Wxd2± and Black has no compensation
for the exchange) 1 0.Wxd2 tll d 5 1 1 .tllc 3!
and Black cannot avoid losing material. For
example, 1 I . . .ib7 1 2.tllxb7 Wxb7 1 3 .tllxd5
exd5 1 4 .We3t ©f8 1 5 .Wg5 +-.
Al) 8 ...�xa5tN
Capturing the knight leads to a forced line,
which has never been tested in practice, so you
will have to be content with my elaborations
on Korchnoi's analysis.
9 ..id.2 c3
10 ... tll d5 1 1 .c4 b4 12.cxd5 exd5
Pinning the d-pawn is possible, but White
also has a promising position in this case:
1 2 . . . ib7 1 3. 0-0 ixd5
1 3 . . . exd5 allows a tactical solution: 1 4 .Wb3
ie7 (Black loses the pawn after 14 . . . tlld7
l 5.a3) 1 5 .tll c 3! tllc6 1 6.tllxd5 tllxd4 1 7.Wc4
With a winning advantage.
1 4.e4 ib7 1 5 .a3! ie7
Or 1 5 . . . Wb5 1 6.axb4 ixb4 1 7.tll a 3! with a
clear advantage.
1 6.d5!
Black faces serious problems: most probably
he will lose the b4-pawn, as White is threatening
simply Wb3 and then j ust capturing the pawn.
Let's return to the main line. White should be
better in the long term thanks to his superior
pawn structure, but the computer claims that
White can also strike immediately with the
unexpected:
8 i. -.i.
�· - ��
,
7 �6_ , , ;� �� .,�--,
6
5
4 ��
,, .Ji ���
, , % -���
''111111111111111111 111111 111 "111'111
-�-% �A ��111 �%�
�
�
3. �
w·, ef, , , %�r�
2 -�
8 - �w0
��
8 ¥�1L¥�
�, "•
1
���•vm_ %� ·1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
13.tll a3!
This subtle manoeuvre was suggested to
me by my computer. White is only slightly
better after more 'human' play:
1 3.if4 ie6 1 4.tlld2 ie7 1 5 .0-0 0-0 1 6.tllb 3
Wb5 1 7 .tllc 5! tlld7
Black cannot take the pawn with 1 7 . . . ixc5
1 8 .dxc5 Wxc5, as after 1 9.e4± White regains
the pawn with a clear advantage.
Chapter 3 - 5 . . . c6
1 8 .lll xe6 fxe6 1 9 .ih3
The pair of bishops gives White a pleasant
edge.
13 ... c\Li c6
Certainly bad is 1 3 . . . Wxa3 1 4.ixdS and
White wins.
If 1 3 . . . ie7 14.tlic2 WbS 1 5 .a3! lll c6 1 6.tlixb4
tt'lxb4 1 7.axb4 ixb4 1 8 .Wa4! White gets
exactly the kind of desirable position he was
aiming for.
14.c\Lic2 Wb5
Otherwise Black gets into deep trouble:
14 . . . ie6 1 5 .0-0 ie7 ( 1 5 . . . WbS is met
strongly by 1 6.e4! with the idea 1 6 . . . ie7
l 7.a4! WaS [ l 7 . . . bxa3 loses to 1 8 .exdS ixdS
1 9 .:B:b l +-] 1 8 .tt'le3 and Black cannot avoid
losing material.) 1 6.a3 WbS l 7.ixb4 tt'lxb4
1 8 .tt'lxb4 ixb4 1 9.axb4 Wxb4 20.Wa4t Black
is going to lose the a7-pawn.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
37
1 5 ... bxa3
After 1 5 . . . WaS the central push 1 6.e4 would
come with great effect. 1 6 . . . id6 ( 1 6 . . . ie6
1 7. 0-0 ie7 1 8 .tt'l e3! is already lost for
Black) 1 7.0-0 ia6 1 8 .:B:e l 0-0 1 9.exdS tli e7
20.tt'lxb4! A nice touch that secures White's
advantage. 20 . . . ixb4 2 1 .d6 ixd2 22.dxe7
ixe l 23.exf8='Wt :B:xf8 24.Wxe l White has a
healthy extra pawn.
16.0-0!
With idea of waiting for the f8-bishop to
move and only then capturing on a3, winning
a tempo compared with the immediate capture
on a3 .
Clearly worse is 1 6.tt'lxa3 ixa3 1 7.:B:xa3 0-0
and White has some difficulties defending the
d4-pawn.
16 ... .ie6
If 1 6 . . . ie7 then we play l 7.tt'lxa3 ixa3
l 8 .:B:xa3 and Black cannot take with
1 8 . . . tt'lxd4? in view of 1 9 .:B:aS followed by
20.:B:xdS with decisive threats.
17.:ael .ie7 18.c\Lixa3 .ixa3 19.:axa3 0-0
Black still cannot take the central pawn:
1 9 . . . tt'lxd4 20.e4! White's initiative is decisive.
20.�al a5 2 1 .e3
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5.a4!
A very effective move which forces Black to
accept an inferior pawn structure.
1 5 .0-0 ifS! would allow Black to escape to an
unclear position.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
38
The bishop pair and Black's weak pawns
on a5 and d5 give White a clear positional
advantage.
A2) 8 ... �d5 9.i.d2
l 1 . . .ll:id7
Black cannot play l l . . .ia6 1 2.1Mfa4t 'kt>d8
1 3 .ll:ie3! as White has a clear advantage.
1 2.ie3 Wg4 1 3.ll:ibd2 ie7
1 3 . . . ib7 is met strongly by 1 4.ll:ie4! with the
unpleasant idea of ll:i ed6t. After 1 4 . . . ll:ixe3
1 5 .ll:ixe3 Wg6 1 6.�dl Black faces serious
problems with development.
8
7
:
4
2
3
:( -�£ � ��-), . , .
-
,.,.,
a
9 . . . b4 1 0.ll:ixc4 1Mfxd4 l l .1Mfc2
It is difficult for Black to deal with White's
initiative.
,.,.,
�� �� ��
�
-� �! �•if�
�f�lD•
� ��
%� �?3)i'0 �;w-0
�;w-0 �% "'/.f�;w-J�;w-0
8 f�.tf�
8 f���
'
f "& � 1 "•:
"'
9 . . . Wxd4?!
This capture is very risky for Black.
1 0. ll:i c3 a6
Other option are much worse:
1 0 . . . 1Mf c5 1 1 .0-0 and Black is helpless against
White's simple threat of ll:ixd5 followed by
ie3 and the d5-pawn will fall.
1 0 . . . ll:i d7 l 1 .ll:ixb5 1Mfc5 1 2.a4 a6 1 3.b4! and
White wins material.
1 1 .0-0 ll:i d7 1 2.a4 ll:i 7b6
1 2 . . . b4 runs into 1 3.ll:ixd5 exd5 1 4.ll:ic6 and
Black's position collapses.
1 3.1Mfc2
Black is in serious trouble due to his poor
development.
�� -,��
I.
�� •'fA)• .t. &�%�
,.,.,%
"'
b
c
"""
d
-
e
----
f
g
h
1 4.ixa7!
White wins the pawn, as Black cannot take
the bishop.
Amazingly enough my engine likes the
mysterious 1 4.h4! ?, creating problems for
the black queen.
14 . . . �xa7 1 5 .ll:id6t! ixd6 1 6.1Mfxc8t cJle7
1 7.1Mfxh8
This wins for White.
9 . . . ll:i d7 1 0.ll:ic3 ll:i 7f6
l l .a4!
Chapter 3 - 5 . . . c6
Using the fact that Black cannot play 1 1 . . . a6
1 2.axb5 axb5 1 3.lll xd5 lll xd5 14 . .ixd5 exd5
1 5 .lll xc4! l:!xa l 1 6.lll xb6 l:!xd l t 1 7.iixd l ,
when he remains a pawn down
1 l . . .b4 1 2.lll xc4 bxc3
1 2 . . .'\Wxd4 is apparently the best chance for
Black, though White retains a nice positional
advantage after 1 3.lll xd5 lll x d5 1 4.:!:!c l ±.
1 3 .lll xb6 cxd2t 1 4.Wxd2 axb6 1 5 .0-0
The position is clearly in White's favour as he
is able to seize the initiative, while Black will
have to develop his pieces:
1 5 . . . .ia6
1 5 . . . .ib4 1 6.Wc2 0-0 1 7.e4 lll e7 1 8 .Wi'b3
.ia5 1 9 .Ei:fc l White has an overwhelming
advantage, with one of the threats being
20.Wi'a3 with the idea of b2-b4.
1 6.:!:!fcl l:!d8
The lesser evil would have been 16 . . . .ib4
1 7.Wi'd l .ia5! ( 1 7 . . . 0-0 loses immediately
after 1 8.e4 lll e7 1 9 .Wi'b3 .ia5 20.Wi'a3!
followed by b2-b4, trapping the bishop on
a5 .) 1 8 .e4 lll b4 1 9 . .ifl .ixfl 20.Wxfl 0-0
2 1 .f3 E!:fd8 22.E!:c4± Black is doomed to a
passive defence.
We have been following Slugin - Kharlov,
St Petersburg 2007, and here the winning
idea would be:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 7.a5!N b5
One of the ideas comes to light after 17 ... .ib4
1 8.Wi'c2 .ixa5 1 9.l:!xa5! bxa5 20.Wi'c6t and
White is winning.
39
1 8 .e4 .ib4 1 9.Wi'd3 lll e7 20.l:!c7 0-0 2 1 .l:!a7+­
Black is losing the b5-pawn.
9 . . . lll a6
7 �
�
�£ �-��rJI
•�� • • t� .t.
'iB �� - - -"�
����
5 �,,, , ;�,%�1�
0 ��
�
�4 • • t� • �
3 � -�
- - -"���-ef��- 3�..-�
��(0
�0
2 8 f� � 8 f��f�
s
6
1
- -ef�mv;·�r--"� -�
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0.lll c3N
A natural improvement over 1 0.a4 b4
1 1 .lll xc4 Wxd4, when Black was fine in
Colls Gelaberto - Perez Candelario, La
Massana 2008.
10 ... lll ab4 1 1 .lll xd5 lll xd5
1 l . ..exd5 1 2.a3 and White wins material.
1 2.a4 .id?
1 2 . . . b4 1 3 .lll xc4 Wxd4 1 4.:!:!cl transposes to
a position from the 9 . . . lll d7 line above.
1 3 .axb5 .ixb5 1 4.0-0!
White doesn't have much after 1 4 . .ic3 .ie7
1 5 .0-0 0-0.
1 4 . . . .ie?
In the event of 1 4 . . .'\Wxd4 1 5 .Wcl .ie7 1 6.e4
lll f6 1 7 . .ie3 Wd7 1 8 .lll xc4 0-0 1 9.:!:!d l
Wc6 20.e5 lll d5 2 1 .lll d6 White develops an
initiative.
1 5 .We l !
Covering the b4-square.
1 5 . . . 0-0 1 6.e4 lll f6 1 7 . .ic3
White preserves a pleasant positional edge.
A21) 9 a6
...
I have promoted this move from a sideline
in GM I to a main line. The idea is quite
logical, preparing to remove the rook from the
dangerous diagonal.
40
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
10.�c3
There is only one game in the database here,
with Black choosing to capture on c3 :
1 3.d5 b4
Black cannot play 1 3 . . . .ib7 14.dxe6 :B:xd2
1 5 .'Wxd2 .ixg2, as after 1 6.exf7t 'tt> xf7
1 7.:B:gl followed by Vfid2-f4xb8, White wins
material.
1 4.dxe6
1 4 .'Wa4 Vfff b 6 1 5 . .ie3 .ic5 1 6 . .ixc5 Vfffxc5
1 7.tl:ie4 Vfib5 Black has a reasonable position.
1 4 . . . fxe6
1 4 . . . :B:xd2 1 5 .'Wxd2 bxc3 1 6.exf7t 'tt> xf7
1 7.bxc3 .ie7 1 8 . .id5 t White has an obvious
advantage, because of Black's exposed king.
1 5 .tl:ie4 .ib7 1 6.Vfff c2
White is better positionally, due to Black's
vulnerable pawn structure.
1 1 .i.xc3 :B:a7
Now I would like to propose a different
approach:
1 1 . .ixd5
1 1 .lll xd5 exd5 12 ..ixd5 allows Black the
following tactical resource: 1 2 . . . c3! 1 3 . .ixc3 b4
14.lll c4 'Wd8 with unnecessary complications.
1 l . . .'Wxa5
After 1 l . . .exd5 1 2.tl:ixd5 Vfff e6 1 3.tl:if4! Vfff e4
1 4.0-0 Vfffxd4 1 5 .Vfic2± White's advantage in
development starts to tell.
1 2 . .ig2 :B:d7
12 . . . .ib7 1 3 .e4 .ie7 14.Vfffg4 allows White
an obvious initiative.
12 ... :B:c7
1 2 . . . .ie7 1 3.d5 0-0 1 4.tl:ic6 tl:ixc6 1 5 .dxc6±
is clearly better for White.
13.a3
White has to prevent 1 3 . . . b4.
Chapter 3
-
5 . . . c6
41
13 ....ie7 14.Wd2 0-0 15,gfc1
White's plan is to follow up with 1 6.b3,
exchanging Black's c4-pawn. The following is
a good illustrative line:
Black has tried two knight moves here:
A22 1) 1 1 ... tLJb4 and A222) 1 1 . .. �f6.
15 ... .id7 16.b3 cx:b3 17.�xb3 gfc8
1 7 . . . .ixa3? doesn't work in view of 1 8 .E!:xa3
E!:xc3 1 9.'1Wxc3 b4 20.\Wc5 Wxc5 2 1 .dxc5 bxa3
22.c6+-
Landing the knight on d3 is a tempting idea,
but the problem is that Black is unable to
achieve his plan as White quickly seizes the
initiative in the centre.
A22 1) 1 1 ... tLJ b4
12.0-0 .ib7 1 3.a4 a6N
This must be the critical continuation.
13 ... tt::l d3?! was played in Korchnoi Moskalenko, Barcelona 2004. Now White
should have played the simple l 4.axb5N Wxb5
1 5 .E!:a5 ! '1Wb3 (the b2-pawn is untouchable:
1 5 . . . Wxb2? 1 6.Wa4t and White wins) 1 6 . .ic3
with a clear advantage, as suggested by
Moskalenko.
a
b
14.axbS axb5
c
d
e
f
g
h
18 ..iaS gxcl t 19.gxcl gxcl t 20.Wxcl Wa7
21 ..ib4
With a clear positional advantage for White.
His Catalan bishop is proving to be extremely
effective.
A22) 9 ... � c6 10.�xc6 Wxc6 l l .e4
18.�c3 .ic5
Another line is 1 8 . . . Wd? 1 9.\Wh5 .ie7 (Or
1 9 . . . tt::l d3 20.E!:al .ic6 2 1 ..ih3! '1Wb7 22 . .ie3
and I do not see how Black can prevent E!:a7.)
42
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
20.'Wxb5 'Wxb5 2 1 .lll x b5 lll d3 22.i.c3 and
White has an extra pawn.
19.tlidS!?
1 9.lll x b5 0-0 20.i.xb4 i.xb4 2 1 .'Wa4 also
looks strong enough, but maybe Black has
some chances for survival, thanks to his bishop
pair.
19 ... tlia6
1 9 . . . lll xd5 20.exd5 'Wd7 2 1 .Ei:e l t mfs
22.i.c3 looks horrible for Black.
��.B*
-,Y,. ...
7s �.i. �-��.
� �� ��� - - "�
� !1 ��
6: aT
��,
������m-0 �
WJ
£
�
�
l'
3 . �·� • ��
� ,;, , '.•
� �m-f�d'j,,- - �m-f�0
2 �•
�� 1� 1�- - �
1
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
22.i.h3 'Wxh3 (22 . . . 'Wxe4 23 .i.g2 'We6 24.Ei:e l
leaves the black queen with no squares, for
example 24 . . . 'Wh6 25.lll e7t lff h8 26.lll f5 and
White wins.) 23.lll e7t mhs 24.Wd6 White
has a winning attack, with threats such as
25.lll g 6t, or 25 .i.xg7t followed by lll f5t and
Wf6.
21 .�xb3 i.c6
2 1 . . .0-0 22.Wxb5± leaves White with a
healthy extra pawn.
22.Ei:cl
22.Ei:al 0-0 23.Ei:xa6?! i.xd5 24.Wxd5 i.xf2t
25.mxf2 Wxa6 should be drawish.
20.b4!
A welcome tactical resource, as Black was
close to solving his opening problems.
22 ... 0-0
20 ... cxb3
Other options are:
20 . . . i.d4 2 1 .i.f4 i.e5 22.'Wh5 i.xf4 23.lll xf4
'Wb6 24.'We5 t with a winning position for
White.
20 . . . i.a7 2 1 .i.c3 0-0 22.lll f4! 'Wb6 23.'Wg4 g6
24.lll h 5 with a decisive attack.
20 . . . i.b6 2 1 .i.c3 0-0 and now White has a
beautiful manoeuvre:
a
b
c
d
e
f
23.i.e3!
The point behind White's play.
g
h
Chapter 3
-
5 . . . c6
43
23 J.xd5
23 . . . 'Wd6 24 . .ixc5 lll xc5 25 .°Wb4 .ixd5
26.exd5 and White wins a pawn.
.••
24.exd5 '!Wb6 25.J.xc5 lll xc5 26.'!We3 lll a4
26 . . . lll d7 27.°We7! is even worse, as the
d-pawn should decide the issue.
27.'!We7
The dangerous passed pawn promises White
a clear advantage.
A222) 1 1 ... lll f6 12.0-0 i.b7 13.d5! '!Wd7N
8 � - ··- ��
7 , , , , , %�
-,
,,' , d'�, , , , 7,�
�
�
�
6 • -·- �
-.i�%1�
5 -ru8•�, , , ;4 �- .-� 8� ��
liMI� �� �mr
3 �W'0 �� �� ,Jfl_w ,�
2 � w� � b�w�
0
1
14.i.g5 i.e7
After 1 4 . . . exd5 1 5 . .ixf6 ( 1 5 .exd5 .ie7
1 6.lll c3 0-0 1 7.d6 .id8 1 8 . .ixb7 'Wxb7 is
quite defendable for Black) 1 5 . . . gxf6 1 6.exd5
0-0-0 I now prefer: 1 7 .°Wh5 <J;>bs 1 8 .a4 b4
1 9.lll d2 With a clear positional advantage.
·0
��ttS•V•fm ,,,,
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
The most solid response, though Black has
also tried a more ambitious approach:
1 3 . . . 'Wa6 1 4 . .ic3 exd5
Other possibilities do not promise Black
adequate play either:
a) l 4 . . . .ie7 is actually not so bad, as after
1 5 .d6! .ixd6 1 6.e5 .ixg2 1 7 .<J;>xg2 Black
has 1 7 . . . b4! enabling him to save the piece.
However, White still has the better game
after 1 8 .exf6 bxc3 1 9.fXg7 :B:g8 20.lll xc3
:B:xg7 2 1 .°We2±.
b) 1 4 . . . b4 1 5 . .ixf6 gxf6 1 6.:B:el .ic5 1 7 .lll d2
0-0 ( 1 7 . . . c3 1 8 .bxc3 bxc3 1 9 .lll b3±)
1 8.:B:cl ± and White is obviously better.
1 5 .exd5 0-0-0
We have been following Trilobit Daverundle, Internet 20 1 0. I found a simple
improvement for White:
1 5 ... gxf6
The problem for Black is that he cannot
recapture with the bishop: 1 5 . . . .ixf6 1 6.e5!
.ie7 ( 1 6 ... .ixe5 1 7.°Wh5! 'Wc7 1 8 .d6! .ixd6
l 9.°Wxb5t +- wins a piece) 1 7.dxe6 'Wxd l
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
44
1 8 .�xd l ixg2 1 9.<;tixg2! (An improvement
on GM l, as 1 9.exf7t mxf7 20.mxg2 �hd8
2 1 .lll c3 b4 gives Black some counterplay.)
1 9 . . . fxe6 20.a4! b4 2 1 .lll d2 c3 22.bxc3 bxc3
23.tt:le4 Black is unable to hold the c-pawn,
thanks to the following line: 23 . . . �c8 24.�dc l
ib4 25.�ab l a5 26.tt:lxc3! ixc3 27.�b3
White should convert his extra pawn.
16.tlic3
White is clearly better positionally.
Dubious is 7 . . . ixd2t 8 .'Wxd2 tt:l bd7 (8 . . . b5?!
doesn't work due to 9.lll xc6 'Wb6 1 0 .lll a5!
lll d5 1 1 .lll c3 and Black loses at least a pawn)
9.lll xc4 and, as usual, White has regained the
pawn with a clear advantage. 9 . . . 0-0 1 0.0-0
'We7 1 1 .lll c3 e5 was played in Gawlikowski
- Weiner, Prague 1 955, and now 1 2.�fd l N
�e8 1 3.e4;!; would have secured White's
advantage.
Bl) 7....ie7
B) 6 .ib4t 7 .id2!
•.•
.
White sacrifices a second pawn, but in return
he gets a dangerous initiative for his material
deficit.
Another line runs 7.lll c3 lll d5 with double­
edged play.
We have reached another branching point. The
main lines are Bl) 7 .ie7 and B2) 7 Y*fxd4.
••.
••.
7 . . . tt:l a6 cannot be a serious move, after which
I recommended 8 .ixb4 lll xb4 9.0-0 in
GM 1. Like many ideas it has now been
employed in practice: 9 . . . 0-0 was R. Popov
- Dibrov, Berdsk 2008, and now the simple
1 0.tt:la3N followed by 1 1 .lll axc4 would have
secured a clear Catalan edge.
8.e3
This is White's best way to defend the
d4-pawn.
After 8 .ic3 White's bishop appears to be
rather vulnerable, and Black gets normal
play after: 8 . . . a5 (The exchange sacrifice
8 . . . b5!? 9.lll xc6 lll xc6 1 0.ixc6t id7 1 1 .ixa8
'Wxa8 1 2.0-0 0-0� might be an interesting
alternative as well, and was tried in Zenzera
- Kreis!, Moscow 20 1 2.) 9.a4 (9.lll xc4 allows
the queenside advance 9 . . . b5 1 0.lll e 5 b4
1 1 .id2 0-0 and Black is fine) In Stefanova Kurajica, Benasque 1 997, the simple 9 . . . lll d5
gave Black comfortable play after 1 0.tt:lxc4 b5
1 1 .axb5 cxb5 .
Black immediately has another decision to
make. He can try Bl I) 8 ... 0-0 or B12) 8 ... b5.
Chapter 3
Bl I) 8 ... 0-0 9.�xc4
9.lLia3 ixa3 1 0.bxa3 b5 is double-edged
- especially the following important line:
l l .ib4 (l l ..1Lixc6 doesn't work: l l . . . .1Lixc6
1 2.ixc6 �b8 1 3 .ib4 We?! and Black is
simply better. l l .a4 .1Lid5 is unclear.) l l . . . �e8
1 2.lLixc6 lLixc6 1 3.ixc6 id? 1 4.ixa8 '1Wxa8�
Black has interesting compensation.
-
45
5 . . . c6
12 . . . a6 1 3 .lLiaS .1Lid5 1 4.a3 b6 1 5 . .1Li c4 ib7=
Rausis - Goloshchapov, Germany 2003.
12 ...�c7 13.�ba3 i.d7
So far we have followed Schwing - Becking,
Merzig 1 996. White should have continued
with:
8
6
9 ... c5
Black's natural attempt to undermine
White's centre.
7
Other options are not so attractive. 9 . . . b5?!
1 0.ia5! '1We8 1 1 .lLieS ia6 was Romero Holmes
- Murillo, San Jose 20 1 3, and now White
should have continued with the following
accurate move:
4
5
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14.bS!N
Preventing the simplifying idea of . . . ic6.
14 ... a6 1 5.b6 �c8 16.� aS � c6 17.� 3c4
White has very unpleasant pressure along
the h l -a8 diagonal.
Bl2} 8 ... b5
This move has been the most recent trend for
Black.
10.dxcS .ixc5 1 1 .b4!?
The quiet 1 1 . 0-0 is also worthy of
consideration. 1 1 . . . .ILi cG 1 2.lLic3 e5 13 . .1Li a4
ie7 1 4.ixc6 bxc6 1 5 .lLixe5 'IWc7 1 6 . .1Li c4 ih3
1 7.�e l;:!; Though Black has compensation for
the pawn I would prefer to be White.
1 I. ..i.e7 12.�b3
After 1 2.0-0 Black managed to solve his
opening problems in the following encounter:
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
46
9.a4
I would be tempted to grab the exchange by
9.lll xc6 lll xc6 1 0.ixc6t id7 l l .ixa8 'Wxa8
1 2.£3, but I have my concerns about 1 2 . . . e5!N
1 3 .dxe5 lll g4 14.0-0 lll xe5 1 5 .ic3 lll d3 with
an unclear game.
12.bxc3 i.xfl 13. ©xfl.
White's Catalan bishop appears to be
very efficient and the pressure along the
h l -a8 diagonal promises him interesting
compensation.
13 bxc3
Another
important
continuation
is
1 3 . . . lll fd7 l 4.lll xd7 lll xd7 l 5.cxb4 0-0
1 6.ixc6 �c8 1 7.'We4. Play might continue
with the following logical sequence of moves:
1 7 . . . lll f6 1 8 .'Wg2 e5 1 9.d5 e4 20.b5 lll xd5
2 1 .'Wxe4 lll f6 22.'Wd4! White has excellent
compensation.
••.
9 ... b4 10.0-0
I wasn't satisfied with 1 0.lll xc4 0-0 1 1 .0-0
ia6 1 2.b3 lll bd7! which has occurred twice in
practice. Black has an adequate game here.
10 ia6
Here I discovered an interesting idea,
connected with an exchange sacrifice:
••.
��
8 .1�,•, , ;-�·
·
,·
,
,
,
%·
·
7 , ,, %
, ., , %
�
6 � ·�
,
Y,
5 �� �� · · �
·
·
·
,� �,��·
�
�
� �----%®,� �® '�
4
2 �� v-- - - �JZ�
3 � W� W�% W�
1 '·�··· -· �a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14.c!lixc6! c!lixc6 1 5.hc6t c!lid7 16.ixaS
'Wxa8 17.V;Yxc3 V;Yhl t 1 8.©e2 0-0 19.V;Yc7
gds 20.iel V;Yxh2 2 1 .c!li c3;!;
Although material is balanced, White has
the more active game.
1 1 . c3
Another line is 1 1 . . .0-0 1 2.�d l , when
White will grab the c4-pawn without having
to worry about a pin on the fl -a6 diagonal.
1 2 .. JWc7 1 3.ie l ! White intends to grab the
c4-pawn, but with his other knight ( 1 3.lll xc4
lll bd7 1 4.e4 e5 is unclear) . The following
variation is instructive: 1 3 . . . �c8 1 4 .lll d2 ib7
1 5 .'1Wxc4 c5 1 6.ixb7 'Wxb7 1 7.lll b3 lll bd7
1 8.lll a5 'Wb6 1 9.'Wb5! With a typical Catalan
pull.
•.
B2) 7 ...V;Yxd4 8.hb4 V;Yxe5 9.tLJa3 b5
Definitely the only move. Black once tried
9 . . . 'Wc7? and lost quickly after: 1 0.lll xc4 c5
l l .'Wd6! 'Wxd6 1 2.lll xd6t lff d7 1 3.ixc5 lll c6
1 4.�d l Wc7 1 5 .tt:.\b5t Black resigned before
getting mated in one with id6 in Yevseev Paulsen, Norway 1 997.
Chapter 3
8 � -..i..
-�
·- �-�-%'% '•" "
�
--�
�
-�
1 %1�
•
r�
,
,
%
m
6 , , - ·� ··- - - �
�
�- �
5 ��wi:�
:11 �� ,,�,���-��.�
'
"
/
!
�£
3 �: m �• r�
4
2 '8·;� �B8HJZ
�
�
---- ·
1 �
- - rt - - -��vm
� -i( - - --%w
�M
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
10.i.d6!
This strong idea was employed by the former
European Champion Tkachiev in his game
against Ukrainian Grandmaster Goloshchapov
in 2003. I believe it poses Black serious
problems.
Previously White had tried mainly 1 0.f4 Vfic7
( 1 0 . . . Vfixb2? ? loses to 1 1 .E:b l Vfixa2 1 2.'Wd6
with inevitable mate) l I .lll x b5 cxb5 1 2.ixa8
ib7 1 3.ixb7 'Wxb7�, but, as was proven by
developments in this line, Black has very good
positional compensation for the exchange.
14.0-0 Vfib6t 1 5 .@hl lll c600
Tkachiev's move is the beginning of almost
forced play.
10 '11Mxb2
Black does not have a real alternative to the
text:
•••
1 0 . . . Vfif5 ? ! l I .Vfid2 Played with the idea of
castling long (less convincing is 1 1 . 0-0 ib7) .
1 l . . .ib7 1 2.Vfia5 ! Another of the ideas of
l 1 .Vfid2 - White is threatening Vfic7. 1 2 . . . lll a6
1 3 .lll x b5 E:d8 (White is winning after 1 3 . . . E:c8
14.0-0 'Wxb5 1 5 .Vfixb5 cxb5 1 6.ixb7 @d7
17.E:fd l +-) 1 4 .lll c7t <Jid7 1 5 .ie5 With a
huge advantage.
-
5 . . . c6
47
1 0 . . . Vfih5 ? loses immediately after: l l .if3 'W f5
( 1 l . . .'Wg6 1 2 .lll x b5+-) 1 2.g4! lll xg4 1 3.ixb8
0-0 ( 1 3 . . . E:xb8 1 4.'Wd6 E:b6 1 5 .E:d l ! with
a decisive advantage) 1 4.ig3 lll e5 1 5 .ig2
Despite having three pawns for the piece,
Black's position is lost.
1 1 .0-0
Now White is threatening 1 2.E:b l followed
by 1 3 .lll x b5 with decisive threats.
1 1 ...lll dS
Black has to block the h l -a8 diagonal.
l l . . .a6?! is not really an option, as can be
shown by the following example: 1 2.E:b l Vfic3
1 3 .ixb8 E:xb8 1 4 .Vfid6 E:b6 1 5 .lll xc4! Vfixc4
1 6.E:bcl White was winning in Rodshtein Novita, Khanty-Mansiysk (ol) 20 1 0.
12.e4 lll c3
Once again Black doesn't have an alternative,
as after 1 2 . . . lll e7 1 3.E:b l Vfic3 ( 1 3 . . . Vfixa2 loses
to 1 4.E:e l followed by E:e2 trapping the queen
on a2) 1 4.e5+- Black cannot prevent both of
White's ideas: lll x b5 and ixe7, followed by
Vfid6t and ixc6.
48
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
B2 1) 13 c!lid7
.••
This move has been entirely refuted due to the
following line:
14.e5 .ib7 1 5.'?Mg5 f6 16.exf6 0-0-0
Black is ready to sacrifice two pawns to
remove his monarch from the danger zone.
Black's position is hardly acceptable after
1 6 . . . gxf6N 1 7.'1Mfh5t 'tt> d8 1 8 .:B:ae l :B:e8
1 9.Wff7.
17.fxg7 ghg8
8
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
20 . . . Wfxb5 (20 . . . cxb5 2 1 .ixb7t c;;t> xb7
22.'1Mfxd8 leaves Black a rook down) 2 1 .Wi'xg7
'1Mfxd5 22.ie7 c5 23.f3 :B:e8 24.W/f7 :B:h8
25 .Wfxe6+- With a decisive material advantage.
I considered 1 8 . . . a6 in GM I. 1 9.Wi'e3!!
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
1 8.gael!
I gave this move a s an improvement over
existing theory in GM I. Since then it has
been used effectively in several correspondence
games.
1 8 gxg7
Other options are as follows:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
With this brilliant idea White's queen
penetrates to a7 with great effect. 1 9 . . . tll d5
( 1 9 . . . :B:xg7 20.Wi'a7 tll d5 2 1 .lll xc4! bxc4
22.:B:b l wins on the spot) 20.Wi'a7 c3 2 1 .ixd5
cxd5 22.:B:b 1 WI e2 23.:B:fc l +- White is winning.
.••
1 8 . . . c!li d5 looks solid for Black, but White
crashes through quickly: 1 9.ixd5! :B:xg7N
( 1 9 . . . exd5 runs into 20.:B:e7 Wff6 2 1 .Wi'xf6
lll xf6 22.:B:c7t 'tt> b 8 23 .ie5 lll e8 24.:B:f7t 'kt>a8
25.f4 with a big advantage for White, Kleiser
- Murlasits, corr. 20 1 4) Now the brilliant
20.lll xb5!! decides the issue, for example:
19.'?Me3 c5
This is the most stubborn try; other moves
are easier for White:
If l 9 . . . tll d5 20.Wi'xa7 Wff6 2 l .:B:e2 I believe
Black is strategically lost, as he is completely
tied up on the queenside, while White can
gradually improve his position with :B:fe l , ih3,
or tll c2-e3 . He can also sacrifice with lll xc4
Chapter 3 - 5 . . . c6
49
followed by l'!b I at any appropriate moment.
(Instead 2 1 .tLlxc4 bxc4 22.l'!b l tLl7b6 23 . .ic5
tLl f4 is still defendable for Black.)
28.hc5
White should convert his extra pawn
without too much difficulty.
19 . . . tLl b6 20.'Wxe6t l'!gd7 2 I ..ih3! c5 22 . .ie7
tLlcd5 23 .ii.xd8 Wxd8 24.'WeSt rtlc7 25.'We5t
'Wxe5 26.l'!xe5 +- White is winning.
B22) 13 ... h6!?
20.hb7t Wxb7 2 1 .�Bt Wa6!
White's task is easier after 2 1 . . .Wb6 22.l'!xe6
l"ig6 (the only move) 23.l'!fe l tLle5. Now
White has an amazing winning line: 24 . .ie7t!
E:xe6 25 . .ixdSt Wa6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
26.'Wa8!! lLiSt 27.rtlh l ! (27.Wg2 lLi xe l t
28.Whl also wins) 27 . . . l'!xe l t 28.rtlg2 l'!gl t
29.Wh3 Black cannot avoid mate.
14.e5 .ih7 15.l'!fb l !
A nice tactical idea which will reveal itself
fully in a couple of moves time.
1 5 ... tll xb l
I also checked an obvious alternative:
1 5 . . . 'We2 1 6 . .if3 (This is even stronger than
1 6.'Wxe2 lLixe2t 1 7.rtlfl tLl c3 1 8 .tLlxb5!
lLixb l 1 9.tLlc7t Wd7 20.l'!xb l Wc8 2 1 .tLlxa8
tLl a6 22.tLl b6t axb6 23.l'!xb6± where White
is better.) 1 6 . . . 'Wd3 I 7.tLlxb5 cxb5 1 8 . .ixb7
lLixb l 1 9.'Wg4 tLl d7 20 . .ixa8 tLl c3 2 1 .'Wxg7
'Wh7 22.'Wg4 'Wf5 23.'Wxf5 exf5 24.ib4! tLl e4
25 . .ic6 White is close to winning.
50
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
Conclusion
As in GM I, I believe that White is doing well
in all variations in this chapter. Following the
sequence 6.lll e5 b5 7.lll xc6 'Wb6 8 .lll a5 lll d5
9.i.d2, I have updated and improved my
analysis of 9 . . . a6 - with the Catalan bishop
often playing a starring role.
17 ... cxb5 1 8.hb7
White looks to be winning in both of the
following lines:
18 ... a6
1 8 . . . c3 1 9."Mrh4 g5 20."Mre4+-
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
19.i.xaS '?Nal t 20.<it>g2 '?Nd4 2 1 .tLJ c2N
2 1 ."Mrf3 has also scored heavily
correspondence games.
2 1 . .. '?Nb6 22.'?Ng4! g6 23.tLJd4
With a decisive advantage.
in
After 6.lll e5 i.b4t 7.i.d2! "Mrxd4 8.i.xb4
"Mrxe5 9.lll a3 b 5 , Tkachiev's 1 0.i.d6! remains
the strongest move. Following the further
sequence 1 0 . . . 'Wxb2 1 1 . 0-0 lll d 5 1 2.e4 lll c3
1 3."Mrh5 ! I now also considered 1 3 . . . h6!?,
which was Black's most recent try in the realm
of correspondence chess. However, White has
a powerful exchange sacrifice at his disposal
on move 1 5 which would appear to lead to a
decisive advantage in all cases.
Catalan 4 ... clxc4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
5 ih4t
...
Variation Index
1 .d4 t;J f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tLl f3 dxc4 5.i.g2 i.b4t
6.i.d2
A) 6 ...i.xd2t
B) 6 c5
C) 6 ... i.e7
D) 6 ... a5 7.fNc2
D l) 7 ... tLl c6
D2) 7 ...i.xd2t s.YNxd2 c6 9.a4
D21) 9 ... tLl e4
D22) 9 ... b5
52
53
54
56
56
57
58
59
•••
D l ) after 13 . . .E1fc8?
D2 1 ) after 13 ... lll b4
D22) note to 22 . . . :i"i:d8
a
1 4 .i.xb4!N
b
c
d
e
23.d5!N
f
g
h
h
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
52
I .d4 tlif6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tlif3 dxc4 5.i.g2
i.b4t
Black's idea is simple: he intends to hold on
to the c4-pawn for a while and so force White
to waste time regaining it.
6.1d2
Black has tried a lot of moves here. We shall
look at the four important ones: A) 6 i.xd2t,
B) 6 ... c5, C) 6...1e7 and D) 6 ... a5.
s.tlia3! Wf e7
The character of the game is not really
changed by:
8 . . . c5 9.dxc5
Obviously there is nothing wrong with
9.tll xc4.
.••
A) 6 ...i.xd2t
This is not a popular choice at a high level,
as White regains the pawn and keeps good
positional pressure along the h l -a8 diagonal.
7.Wfxd2
8 .i -.i.BeB ��
7 lfi"-""'
·--"�
·'•
"� "�%�
: �� �� , � �
��
��rn
�� �@:0
m
.t. �-it�
m
�%' -�
- --%� •
��
3 �%''� ��•'L•. ��'�®'�
2 t3J �� ii t3J �����
4
1
�tt5B., , , ,%m - - - - %�-�
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
7 ... 0-0
It is certainly important to know the
following line: 7 . . . b5 8.a4!N (In the only
game in this position, Sosonko - Furman,
Wijk aan Zee 1 975, White played 8 .Wfg5
which is actually pretty unclear after 8 . . . a6!N
9 .Wfxg7 �g8 1 0.Wfh6 ib7 1 1 .0-0 tll bd7.)
8 ... c6 9 .axb5 cxb5 1 0.tll c3 b4 (even worse for
Black is 10 . . .Wfb6 l l .Wi'g5 0-0 1 2.Wfxb5 ib7
1 3. 0-0± when White is clearly better) l 1 .tll b5
0-0 1 2.Wfxb4 tll d5 1 3 .Wfd6 The arising
endgame will be a long-term torture for Black,
due to his weak queenside pawns.
9 . . . tll a6
A good example of this variation is 9 . . . tll e4
1 0.Wfxd8 �xd8 l 1 .tll xc4 tll c6 1 2.0-0 lll xc5
as in Lupor - Klundt, Bad Wiessee 2000,
and there is no relief for Black even after the
queen trade, so after the accurate 1 3 .�fd l N
id? 1 4.�ac l ± White's pressure i s significant.
1 0.c6!?
A more original approach in this position,
though White certainly would also be better
after the natural 1 0.tll xc4.
1 0 . . . bxc6 l 1 .tll xc4 �b8 1 2. 0-0 Wfxd2
1 3 .tll fxd2 c5
This occurred in Ganguly - Li Bo,
Qinhuangdao 20 1 1 , and White retains
long-term pressure after the best line:
Chapter 4 - 5 . . . ib4t
1 4.lli b3N id? 1 5 .gfc l ;:!;
Black never has an easy life with this pawn
structure.
9.0-0 c5 1 0.dxc5 gds
1 0 . . . 'Wxc5 1 1 .gac l is also nice for White.
53
9 ... ltl c6
No one has tried 9 . . . bxa3 which is
understandable, since after 1 0.llixa3 llid5
1 1 .lli axc4 ( 1 1 .lli exc4 lli c6 1 2.0-0 llidb4
1 3 .e3;:!; is also nice for White) 1 1 . . .f6 1 2.llid3
llic6 1 3 .e3 b6 1 4.0-0 ib7 1 5 .°Wa4;:!; White
has a pleasant edge, which is exactly what he
is aiming for.
9 . . . llid5 1 0.llixc4 °We? 1 1 .llie5 lli c6 1 2.llixc6
bxc6 (if 1 2 . . . 'Wxc6 1 3 .0-0 'Wb6 1 4.°Wd2 then
White has a slight advantage) 1 3 .0-0 'Wb6
This position occurred in Loginov - Hacker,
corr. 20 1 3.
� .,. . %e�,�������fa
�- -..%�...
J� �� ��
�!��
4 ��it�. %� •"" ��
-�it�
· ·�%�
�r��
-�. . �r���
it�� � �
it� .i,it�
8 �rn[��r�
6
�
...
5
�
3
2
B) 6 ... c5 7.i.xb4 cxb4 8.ltl e5 0-0 9.a3!?
This is a big change compared to GM I .
My recommendation 9.llixc4 lli c6 1 0.e3 has
been tested quite a lot, and Black seems to be
doing okay in this line by entering the sharp
sequence 1 0 . . . e5 1 l .d5 b5!.
...
. ef� ;z:r·if· ·
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
I believe White should keep a slight edge
after 1 4.°Wd2N gds 1 5 .gd l gbs 1 6.axb4
llixb4 1 7.llia3 ia6 1 8 .llic2 llid5 1 9 .gdc l and
from a human point of view, it seems White
retains pressure due to Black's weak queenside
structure.
9 . . . 'Wc7 occurred in one computer game, when
after 1 0.°Wc2 llid5 1 l .°Wxc4 'Wxc4 1 2.llixc4
lli c6 1 3 .e3 White has a nagging pull in the
arising endgame.
I O.ixc6
This was my original novelty, which was
found during my work with Boris Gelfand.
He managed to exploit my idea in his game
versus Adams.
54
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 O.ll:ixc6 bxc6 l 1 .axb4 as in Bareev - Grachev,
St Petersburg 2009, is unclear due to the
improvement: 1 1 . . . E:b8!N
10 ... bxc6 1 1 .a:x:b4 VNb6
The aforementioned game continued:
1 1 . . .i.b7 1 2.0-0 a5 1 3 .bxa5 E:xa5 1 4.E:xa5
Wxa5
• •
•• "
""'��f%
�
�
�
�
�
!
� i� f.��
M��
" " ' ��
�� �
���rn�
�
,,,,, � !8""'
'
,
,
�
�
3 �-0 �
�
�t� ��- �� -�, Jll�
e&� 1•�m" "
8
5
1 5Jkl !
Now this works well for White.
1 5 ... i.b7
Black tried 1 5 . . . ll:i d5 in Baryshpolets Simonian, Kiev 20 1 3. Again I like 1 6.ll:ixc4N
i.d7 1 7. ll:i bd2 E:fc8 1 8 .E:a5!t with a stable
advantage.
In Baryshpolets - Munkhgal, Kazan 20 1 3,
White should have played:
;
'' '
4
__
,
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 .Wd2! A key move that clarifies White's
advantage. 1 5 . . . Wa7 1 6.ll:ixc4 E:d8 ( 1 6 . . . c5
doesn't change much after 1 7.dxc5 Wxc5
1 8 .ll:iba3± with an extra pawn) 1 7.E:d l c5
1 8 .Wa5 Wxa5 1 9.ll:ixa5 i.a8 ( 1 9 . . . i.a6 20.e3
cxd4 2 1 .ll:i c6±) 20.ll:ib3 cxd4 2 1 .E:xd4 E:b8
22.ll:ic5 g5 23.ll:ic3± White convincingly
converted his extra pawn in Gelfand - Adams,
Eilat 20 1 2.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
16.tl'ixc4N :!:Uds 17.tl'ia5! i.e4 1 8.e3
White has a pleasant edge in this endgame.
C) 6 ...i.e7
This move does not impress me, but we should
still know how to meet it.
Chapter 4 - 5 . . . ib4 t
7.flc2 id7
In the event of 7 . . . a6 8.Wfxc4 bS 9.Wf c2 ib7
1 0.0-0 we have a well-known position from the
classical line of the Catalan with . . . fie?, but with
an extra tempo for White; which is a serious
achievement. 1 0 . . . ie4 ( 1 0 . . . 0-0 transposes
to variation A of Chapter 1 3 on page 1 82)
1 1 .Wfc l 0-0 1 2.l'l:d l ib7 1 3.if4 llid5 1 4.llic3
llixf4 1 5 .Wfxf4 id6 C. Horvath - Mochalov,
Rethymnon 2003, is once again a theoretical
position, but White's extra move l'l:dl is crucial
to the evaluation. Now was the right time for
1 6.llieSN ixg2 1 7.'kt>xg2 llid7 1 8.llie4 with a
nice positional pull.
55
1 2.ih6 is not so efficient, as Black can go for
queenside castling.
12 �xc3 13.hc3 fies
I also checked the natural 1 3 . . . c6 when
White has the same idea: 1 4.ie4 Wfc7 ( 1 4 . . . 0-0
is dangerous in view of 1 5 .h4 h5 1 6.Wff3± and
1 7.g4 is coming with great effect) 1 5 .Wff3 l'l:f8
1 6.0-0 0-0-0 1 7.b4t The black king is not
safe on the queenside either.
•.•
This was played in Lemke - Bebersdorf,
Germany 1 995, and now a strong continuation
would have been:
8.�e5 �c6
8 . . . ic6 has been tried only once: 9.llixc6
lli xc6 1 0 .e3 e5 1 1 .Wfxc4 exd4 1 2.ixc6t bxc6
1 3 .Wfxc6t �f8 1 4.0-0 White was better in
Urbanek - V. Ivanov, email 2008.
1s.fif'3 i;bs 16.h4 h5
Much worse is 1 6 . . . 0-0 1 7.hS ic6 1 8 .ixc6
Wfxc6 1 9.Wfxc6 bxc6 20.0-0-0± when
strategically White is almost winning.
1 1 . g6
1 1 . . . 0-0 1 2.ih6± is hardly acceptable for
Black, as he loses an exchange.
••
12.�c3
17.0-0-0
And it's not so clear how Black is going to
solve his king issue.
56
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
D) 6 a5 7.Vfic2
8 i. -j_�-"� �-•••
.,,,-, , ,%� lS�'l
: .I#��
��" '���·
!•
'
·
�
, , j�f� ��,� �� ���6� ���%�
3 ��
;4J��W0
8 �V� 8 �JLW�
1 �eti.' " "�� , , %� ,�
1 4.lt.Jb5 id6 1 5 .e3 id5 1 6. lt.J e l with a slight
edge.) 1 3 .e3 lt:\ e4 1 4.ie l 0-0 1 5 .lt:\fd2 White
preserves some pressure in this endgame, as
was proven by:
5
4
'0
2
a
b
'0
d
c
e
f
g
h
Another big change from GM 1 . There I
gave 7.0-0, but lately Black has been doing
quite well after 7 . . . 0-0 8 .ig5 b 5 . We will
now analyse Dl) 7 tll c6 and the main line
D2) 7 hd2t. But first there is a minor line
to consider:
•••
.•.
7 . . . b5 8.a4 bxa4 (8 . . . c6 is simply bad in view
of 9.axb5 ixd2t 1 0. lt.J fxd2!. After 1 0 . . . �xd4
1 l .�xc4 �b6 1 2.lt:\c3 ib7 1 3 .lt.Ja4! White had
a substantial advantage in Gulko - Ljubojevic,
Linares 1 990.) 9.lt:\e5 i"i:a6 1 0.�xa4t id7
1 1 .lt.Jxd7 �xd7 1 2.0-0 0-0 1 3.�xd7 lt.J fxd7
Tkachiev - Moiseenko, Santo Domingo
2002. White should have played 1 4.i"i:c l N c5
1 5 .i"i:xc4 cxd4 1 6.ixb4 axb4 1 7 .i"i:xa6 lt.Jxa6
1 8 .i"i:xd4 lt.J dc5 1 9.lt.Jd2;!; when his advantage
is quite annoying.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 . . . i"i:fe8 1 6.lt:\c3! lt.Jxc3 l 7.bxc3 ixg2
1 8 .cxb4 id5 1 9.b5 lt.J b4 20.a3 lt.J d3 2 1 .i"i:c3
lt.Jxe l 22.i"i:xe l c6 23.i"i:b l !;!; With a positional
edge, Giri - Landa, Mulhouse 20 1 1 .
9 . . . 0-0?! 1 0.lt.Jc3 �h5 1 1 .h3! i"i:d8 Black's
strategy looks dubious and it's no surprise that
White retains a solid advantage here. 1 2.a3
ixc3 ( 1 2 . . . ie7 can be met by 1 3 .i"i:cl !, when
it is not so clear how Black can move.) 1 3.bxc3
�g6 1 4.�xg6 hxg6 1 5 .ig5 Even without
queens, White's advantage is significant.
1 5 . . . i"i:d7 occurred in Fridman - Bartel,
Dresden 2008, and now I like:
D l ) 7 .. tll c6 8.Vf!xc4 Vfid5
.
An old and well-known line, though White
should be able to gain a pleasant edge:
9.V!id3 V!!e4
Black has other options:
9 . . . �f5 1 0.�xf5 exf5 1 1 .0-0 ie6 1 2.i"i:cl id5
( 1 2 . . . 0-0 has been played three times. Here
I like the simple and natural 1 3.lt.Jc3N a4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.lt:\e5!N lt:\xe5 1 7.dxe5 lt.Jd5 1 8 .c4 lt.J b6
1 9 .i"i:cl White is clearly better.
Chapter 4 - 5 . . . ib4t
10.YNxe4 c!bxe4 1 1 .e3 id?
The main alternative here is 1 1 . . .lll xd2,
when my preference is to recapture with the
f3-knight. 1 2.lll fXd2 a4 occurred in Garcia
Palermo - Marin, Benasque 20 1 0, and now
1 3.0-0N id? 1 4.:!'l:cl 0-0 1 5 .lll e4 :!'l:a5
1 6.lll a3 would promise White nice pressure
on the queenside.
12.0-0 o-o 1 3.gc11 gfcs?
Relatively better is 1 3 . . . lll xd2 1 4 .lll bxd2 a4,
but White retains an advantage after: 1 5 .a3
id6 1 6.lll c4 lll a5 1 7.lll fd2!:t
The text was played in Baumbach - Gudyev,
corr. 1 987, and here White missed a powerful
continuation:
57
Austria 2008, and here White would have been
left with a healthy extra pawn after: 1 2.0-0N
'Wb8 1 3.'Wd2±
8 . . . lll c6 was I.:Ami - Balogh, Germany 2007. I
think this was an opportune moment for:
-�i
�-J•- i. - �· J;J�• t�
f�
•
- - 7-�
��-� 'i�� ·-'
,
,
,
;
�
��
�
�
4 - - j� T� � ��
�� �-- - �� ��n�
W'
tixJ �8 �J�w
8 �[!fi" �i��
�[!fi j.}�-0
2 �
g(lt)·· - ?.�-1 - - ?.� 7:�
7
6
8
5
3
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
9.lll a3!N A possible continuation is 9 . . . lll e4
1 0.'Wc2 lll d6 1 1 .lll xc4 lll b4 1 2.'Wb3 lll d5
( 1 2 . . . lll xc4 1 3 .'Wxc4 b6 1 4 .lll eS ia6 1 5 .'Wc3
is unpleasant for Black) 1 3 .0-0 0-0 1 4 .:!'l:fe l
a4 1 5 .'Wc2 lll xc4 1 6.'Wxc4:t White has an
obvious advantage.
a
b
d
c
e
f
g
h
14.ixb4!N a:x:b4 15.�e5 c!bxe5 16.dxe5
Winning at least a pawn.
D2) 7 . .ixd2t s.YNxd2
.
8 . lll bxd2 b5 9.a4 c6 allows Black to hang on
ro the c4-pawn.
8 ... c6
Black's first choice by far, however I would
also like to mention some other possibilities:
8 . . . b5 runs into 9JWg5 ! - one of the ideas
behind the 'Wxd2 recapture. 9 . . . 0-0 1 0.'WxbS
k6 1 1 .'WxaS lll bd7 was Laznicka - Kosten,
8 . . . id7 9.lll e5 ic6 1 0.lll xc6 lll xc6 1 1 .lll a3
0-0
After 1 1 . . .lll xd4 1 2.ixb? :!'l:b8 1 3.ig2
0-0, which happened in Huzman - Yul,
Montreal 2007, White could have secured
a dear advantage with: 1 4 .lll xc4N c5 1 5 .e3
lll f5 1 6.:!'l:d l !±
1 2.e3 lll b4
Faure - Soldano, corr. 20 1 3, continued
1 2 . . . 'We8, and now the best continuation
would have been: 1 3.lll xc4N e5 14.0-0
exd4 1 5 .exd4 :!'l:d8 1 6.:!'l:fel 'Wd7 1 7.dS.
White is better after both 17 ... lll b4 1 8 .d6!
and 1 7 . . . lll x dS 1 8 .:!'l:ad l lll ce7 1 9.'WxaS.
1 3.lll xc4 c5 ?! 1 4.a3 lll bd5 1 5 .0-0
White is dearly better, as Black has no
compensation for the pressure along the h l -a8
diagonal. White went on to win in Delchev Giorgadze, Olite 2006.
58
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
9.a4
White is planning to regain the pawn by
means of ll'l a3xc4 with a thematic edge.
l l . . .'Wxb2 1 2.tt'le5 0-0
12 .. .f6?! 1 3 .tt'lxc4 'Wxa l 1 4.'Wxe4 looks scary
for Black.
1 3.ll'la3 ll'l c3 1 4.'We3 ll'l d7
After 1 4 . . . tt'lxe2t 1 5 .\t>h l ll'l c3 , the best way
to trap the black queen is: 1 6.tt'laxc4 'Wb4
1 7.:B:fc l ll'ld5 1 8 .ixd5 exd5 1 9.ll'ld3 'Wxc4
20.:B:xc4 dxc4 2 1 .tt'l f4 White is better.
l 5 . tt'l exc4 'Wb4 1 6.'Wd3 tt'l d5 l 7.e4 'Wc3
1 8 .'Wd l !
I think it's important fo r White to avoid the
queen swap, in order to have chances to seize
the initiative on the kingside.
1 8 . . . tt'l b4 1 9.e5 'Wd3 20.'Wg4
White's compensation is obvious.
1 1 .tll a3 tlia6 12.tli e5 0-0 13.0-0 tli b4
9.ll'le5 b 5 doesn't promise anything for White.
We have reached another split, with Black's
two options being 02 1) 9 ... tli e4 and 022)
9 ... b5.
D2 1) 9 ... tli e4 10.'Wf4 tlid6
1 0 . . . 'Wb6
An interesting alternative, which has
occurred in several correspondence games.
Here I have a new proposal:
14... £6
By provoking this move White makes the
e6-pawn a potential target for the future.
After 1 4 . . . tt'l d5 1 5 .'Wc l tt'l b6 1 6.'Wc2!? id7
1 7.ll'lexc4 ll'l dxc4 1 8.ll'lxc4 ll'lxc4 1 9.'Wxc4 the
difference in the power of the light-squared
Chapter 4 - 5 �b4t
59
. . .
bishops is noticeable, and should give White a
long-lasting pull.
1 5.c\l)exc4 c\l)xc4 16.c\l)xc4 b6 17,gd2 �a6
1 8.b3 ga7 1 9.e4 gd7 20,gadl
Black is still solid, but White's space
advantage is beyond doubt.
022) 9 ... b5
1 2.'1Wxg7N (After 1 2.lll e 5 in Harutjunyan Poghosyan, Yerevan 20 14, Black missed the
surprising 1 2 . . . h6!N, when the g7-pawn is
untouchable in view of 13 . . . l'!h7, and instead
1 3.'1Wf4 l'!a7 14.lll xc4 .ia6 leads to double-edged
play.) 1 2 . . . l'!gS 1 3.'1Wh6 ib7 14.lll bd2 The black
king's miserable position should eventually tell.
12.VNxb5 �a6
1 2 . . . lll a6?! fails to work and after 1 3.'1Wxc4
( 1 3 .lll bd2!? is also interesting) 1 3 . . . lll b4
1 4 .'1Wb3 e5 1 5 .lll xe5 l'!b8 1 6.0-0 '1Wxd4
1 7.gxa5 .ie6 1 8 .'1Wc3 Black was j ust two pawns
down in Grischuk - Moiseenko, Sochi 2006.
13.VNa4
I undertook a detailed investigation of this
line in 2006 during my work with Vladimir
Kramnik, and found that 1 3.'1Wxa5 doesn't
give White an advantage in view of: 1 3 . . . �b7
1 4.'IWxdS l'!xa l ! 1 5 .'IWxfSt 'iil xf8 1 6.0-0 l'!a2
The game should end peacefully.
This position has been contested at the
highest level, so it is important to go into some
detail.
1 3 ...VNb6!
Black must play actively to compensate for
his pawn weaknesses.
10.axb5 cxb5 1 1 .VNgS
The point behind 8 .'1Wxd2.
1 1 ... 0-0
Only one game has seen 1 1 . . .b4 and, despite
White's crushing win after 1 2.lll e5, I prefer:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14.0-0
1 4 .lll bd2 �b5 1 5 .'1Wa3 lll c6 1 6. 0-0 l'!ab8
is dead level; which was proven in Leko Kramnik, Dortmund 2009.
60
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
14 ...Y*fxb2 15.tll bd2 J.h5 16.tll xc4 ha4
17.tll xb2 J.h5!
After a fairly forcing sequence of moves, we
have reached a double-edged endgame. White's
idea is to coordinate his pieces with the help of
his powerful bishop and try to attack Black's
a5-pawn - which can be a serious weakness
under some circumstances. Black mostly relies
on active piece counterplay, as was seen in the
Kramnik - Topalov World Championship
match.
8 x-
�
� ��-­
?6 ·-·
�-�����'•
'�
5
� 1�
�
, �
�
�
��
�
n
,�
��,,� !-o
3
, , , %�;�r�
�
�r�
"//, ��
JJt
�
2 �%'m
�
�
,
1 i�, , ;� WAW�rfi""
� 4
,,a
, , , '1
b
1 9.l'!fe l l'!c8
1 9 . . . ll'l c6 20.e3 lt'i b4 2 1 .l'!eb l allows White
to comfortably regroup.
Here I found an interesting idea:
'
c
d
e
f
L , ,�
g h
1 8.tll es
I have to confess that I was the first one
to discover these sequences back in 2006, an
accomplishment which I am proud 0£ I was
shocked when Vladimir Kramnik asked me to
analyse this position in detail on the first day
of our training camp before his match with
Topalov, but his instincts were accurate - the
position arose in the very first game!
1 8 .ll'l d2!?
This move is not without venom, and has
been employed twice by Gupta.
1 8 . . . l'!a7
This looks like the best move for Black, since
after 1 8 . . . J.c6?! 1 9.ll'lb3 J.xg2 20.<;t>xg2
ll'l bd7 2 1 .ll'lxa5 Black lost his passed pawn
surprisingly quickly in Gupta - Greenfeld,
Chennai 20 1 1 .
20.e3N
20. ll'l a4 ll'l bd7 2 1 .e3 was Gupta Maheswaran, Kochi 20 1 1 . Black should
now have played 2 l . . .J.xa4!N 22.l'!xa4 lli b6,
followed by 23 . . . a3, when it is hard to see
White's advantage.
20 . . . lli bd7
20 . . . l'!c2 2 1 .l'!eb l ! The point. Now
2 1 . . . ll'l bd7 transposes to 20 . . . lt'i bd7, while
after 2 1 . . .l'!xd2 22.ll'lc4 Black would have to
play: 22 . . . l'!dl t! 23 .l'!xd l J.xc4 24.l'!dcl J.a6
25 .l'!xa5 The endgame is quite unpleasant
for Black.
2 1 .l'!eb l l'!c2 22.ll'le4 J.c6 23.ll'lxf6t gxf6
23 . . . ll'lxf6 24.J.xc6 l'!xc6 25.ll'ld3! and the
white knight comes to c5.
24.J.xc6 l'!xc6 2 5 . lt'i a4 f5 26.l'!a2
White retains a slight pull here, as Black is
doomed to defend passively. This all happened
because White managed to block Black's pawn
on a5 .
.
18 . J:fa7
A clearly worse alternative is: l 8 . . . l'!a6?!
1 9. ll'l bd3 ll'l bd7 20.l'!fb l ll'lxe5 ?! (20 ... J.xd3
was preferable, although White is still better
after 2 1 .ll'lxd3) 2 1 .ll'lc5! This is why the rook is
so miserably placed on a6. Meier - Wojtaszek,
61
Chapter 4 - 5 . . . .ib4t
Novi Sad 2009, continued 2 1 . . . tli c6!
(2 1 . . . tli ed7 22.l:'i:xb5 lll xc5 23.dxc5 a4 24 . .ib7
2:a7 25 .l:'i:b4 would be hopeless, according to
Meier) and now most convincing is Meier's
recommendation from ChessBase Magazine
1 33 : 22.ixc6!N l:'i:xc6 23 .l:'i:xb5 l:'i:e8 24.f4! Not
even allowing 24 . . . e5.
19.tli bd3
1 9.if3 tli bd7 20.tli ec4 l:'i:b8 2 1 .l:'i:fb l g5!
gave Black lots of counterplay in Kramnik Topalov, Elista ( 1 ) 2006.
19 ... tlifd7
Much worse is: 1 9 . . . tli bd7 20.tlic6!N
(20.l:'i:fb l lll x e5 2 1 .l:'i:xb5 lll xd3 22.exd3 was
drawish in Ushenina - T. Kosintseva, Rijeka
20 1 0.) 20 . . . ixc6 (20 . . . l:'i:c7 2 1 .l:'i:fc l ! forces
rhe exchange on c6 anyway, but in a worse
,-ersion for Black.) 2 1 .ixc6 l:'i:c8 22.l:'i:fcl;!;
White is better as his light-squared bishop is
too powerful.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
23.d5!N I believe only this move, which Cox
does not mention in his QGD repertoire
book, promises White winning chances. (In
the game Gleizerov - Luther, Predeal 2007,
White went for 23.l:'i:a3 tli d7 24.ic6 tli f6
25 .l:'i:b4 l:'i:d8 26.l:'i:axa4 l:'i:xa4 27.l:'i:xa4 �f8=
and despite winning the pawn it's an easy
draw for Black, as Cox correctly points out.)
23 . . . exd5 24.ixd5 l:'i:d8 25 .l:'i:b4!;!; White wins
a pawn and has a fifty/fifty chance between
winning and drawing.
23.d5 a4
23 . . . exd5 24.ixd5 a4 25 .l:'i:b4
transpose to the above note.
would
The text was played in Ki. Georgiev - Pavasovic,
Valjevo 2007, and now White should have
played:
20 ... tlixe5 2 U�xb5 tlixd3 22.exd3 �d8
22 . . . a4 has also been tried, and here I like:
62
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
24.dxe6N fxe6 25.ga3! tll d7 26,gb4 ll)f6
Conclusion
This chapter saw some significant changes
from GM I, with the first coming in the
variation 6.t.d2 c5 7.t.xb4 cxb4 8.lLie5
0-0. I now suggest 9.a3!?, which I originally
prepared while working with Boris Gelfand who employed it to win a model game against
Adams at the 20 1 2 European Club Cup.
Further ideas have been tried from Black's
side, but two improvements over the games
of the young Ukranian Grandmaster Andrey
Baryshpolets have convinced me that White is
doing well here.
The second major change arrived after 6.t.d2
a5, where I proposed 7.0-0 in GM I. This
time I am suggesting 7.Wlc2, having found
some new ideas which give White every chance
to fight for an advantage. This is an extremely
solid line for Black and there are no easy
answers - but my analyses show the ideas and
subtleties required for White to turn the game
in a favourable direction.
Catalan 4 ... dxc4
s � h d7
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
...
Variation Index
1 .d4 � f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.� f3 dxc4 5.i.g2 � bd7
6.0-0
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
71
A) 6 ... c5
B) 6 ... c6
C) 6 ... a6
D) 6 ... �b8
E) 6 ...i.e7
F) 6 ... � b6 7.� bd2 c5 8.�xc4 �xc4 9.V;Va4t i.d7 1 0.V;Vxc4
Fl) 1 0 ...V;Vb6
F2) 1 0 ... �cS
F3) 1 0 ... bS
B) note to 8 . . . tll b6
A) after 9 . . . ti:lb6
a
1 0 .�e3!N
b
c
d
e
1 5 . e4!N
f
g
C) after 1 1 . . .tll d5
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 2 .�d2!?N
g
h
h
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
64
1 .d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.lll f3 dxc4 s.i.g2
lll bd7
A developing move, but too passive to
equalize.
8.lll xc4
The position is definitely favourable for
White, since the black knight is misplaced
on d7.
6.0-0
8 ... i.c5
Other moves are less promising for Black:
s
7
6
5
4
� •.ts•- ��
&rim'i� ,,�--,Y.
llllll'llllll lll,�fIll'llIlll
��n��� ��
��
��
.t. w,�
,,, ,%� m
��/�
lllwr0 lll'lll lll�Pj}J
� /lr/).' j �ll! ll
"Ill
,,
0
J
�
J
1 ,�tt:J�v� M m
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
�
h
Black has a wide choice of possibilities:
A) 6 ... c5, B) 6 c6, C) 6 ... a6, D) 6 �b8,
E) 6 i.e7 and the main line F) 6 ... lll b6.
These moves cover a huge range of different
motifs such as attacking White's centre, simple
development or desperately hanging on to
the c4-pawn, This variety makes it sensible to
explain the themes as they arise in the analysis
rather than attempt a strategic overview now.
..•
•..
••.
A) 6 ... c5 7.lll a3 cxd4
7 . . . tll b6 8.tll xc4 will be covered in line F.
8 . . . i.e7 9.tll xd4 0-0 1 0 ,tll b5! tll c 5 1 1 .tll bd6±
and White was clearly better in Timoscenko Kholmov, USSR 1 982.
8 ... tll b 6 9.tll ce5 ! i.e7 1 0 .tll xd4 0-0 1 1 .tll b5!
and White had a lot of pressure in Fernandez Lopez Martin, email 20 1 1 .
9.�xd4 lll b6
Another possibility is 9 . . . 0-0 1 0.tll b3 i.e7
1 1 .i.f4 tll b6 1 2.Wfxd8 i.xd8, and now in the
game Mchedlishvili - T.A. Petrosian, Yerevan
2004, White could have capitalized on his
initiative by means of: 1 3.�fc l N tll fd5 1 4 .i.d6
�e8 1 5 .tll ca5 With a pleasant advantage.
After the text I believe White can improve on
existing theory with a strong novelty.
8
6
7
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
IO.i.e3!N
Black has a tricky idea of meeting 1 0 .tll x b6
i.xb6 1 1 .tll b5 with a nice tactical shot:
1 1 . . .i.xf2t! 1 2.iixf2 '1Wb6t 1 3 .tll d4 e5 Black
Chapter 5 - 5 . . . tt:l bd7
was more or less fine in Tal - Danov, Moscow
1 972.
10 ... 0-0 1 1 .ltJ bS .he3 12.tll xe3;1;
White has lasting pressure.
B) 6 ... c6 7.a4 a5
7 . . . .td6?! 8.tt:l bd2 0-0 9.lll xc4 .tc7 is hardly
a recommendable idea, although it has been
played several times. 1 0.a5! Elb8 1 U Wc2N±
White is much better.
7 . . . .te7 8 .lll bd2 (This is more accurate than
the previously recommended 8 .°Wc2, as after
8 . . . b6 9.°Wxc4 .tb7 Black had a decent game
in Ozturk - Adamowicz, Pardubice 2009.)
8 ... 0-0 9.a5! (There is nothing wrong with
9.tll xc4, but the text is more ambitious, as
White doesn't want to allow . . . tt:l b6.) 9 . . . b5
1 0.axb6 tt:lxb6 1 1 .tll e5 'Wc7 1 2.lll dxc4 lll xc4
1 3 .lll xc4 lll d5 1 4 . .td2± White was clearly
better in Mester - Blasko, Eger 1 997.
65
1 5 .Elxa5 .td7 1 6.Elfal .te7 1 7.l'l:a7± and
Black is in serious trouble.
b) 12 . . . °Wd7 1 3.l'l:d l .tb7 1 4.e4 lll b4
1 5 .l'l:xd7 tt:lxc2 1 6.l'l:xb7 lll xa l 1 7.lll x b5
leads to a clear advantage for White.
c) 12 . . . .tc5 1 3.lll x b5 .ta6 14 . .tg5 ! f6
( 1 4 . . . 'Wxg5 loses to 1 5 . .txd5 exd5 1 6.lll c7t
md7 1 7 .lll xa8 l'l:xa8 1 8 .l'l:xa5 as the threat
of 1 9.'Wa4 decides the game.) 1 5 .exf6 gxf6
1 6 . .txd5 exd5 1 7 . .txf6! 'Wxf6 1 8 .tll c7t md7
1 9 .lll xa8 l'l:xa8 20.l'l:xa5+- White is winning.
1 3 .l'l:dl .txc3 1 4.bxc3 f5
All this occurred in Guzy - Salvatore, email
2006, and now White should have played:
8
7
6
5
9.tll bd2 ltJ fd5
The character of the game would not be
changed by: 9 . . . .te7 1 0.tt:lxc4 tt:lxc4 ( 1 0 . . . lt:l bd5
happened in Arkhipov - Shovunov, Orel
1 997, when White could have improved with:
1 1 .lll fe 5N 0-0 1 2 . .td2;!;) 1 1 .°Wxc4
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8.Wfc2 tll b6
Trying to hold on to the pawn is too
dangerous for Black:
8 . . b5 9.lll e5! lll x e5 1 0.dxe5 lll d5 1 1 .axb5
cxb5 1 2.lll c3 .tb4
Other moves don't offer Black relief either:
a) 1 2 . . . tll b4?! 1 3.°Wd2 'Wxd2 1 4 ..txd2 l'l:b8
78
6
.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
66
1 1 . ..0-0 ( 1 1 . . .Wb6 1 2.tll e5 0-0 1 3.e4 Wb4
14 . .te3 tll d7 1 5 .Wxb4 .txb4 was Timman
- Kuijf, Amsterdam 1 996, and now best is
1 6.lll c4!N) 1 2.tll e 5 ( 1 2.l:%dl Wd5 1 3 .tll e 5
Wxc4 1 4 .lll xc4±) 12 . . . tll d5 1 3.l:%d l .td7 This
was Stajcic - Baburin, Budapest 1 992, and
now I like:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
C) 6 ... a6 7.a4 gbs
A logical follow-up to Black's previous play.
I would also like to mention 7 . . . c5 8.tll bd2
cxd4 9.tll xc4, when White has similar pressure
to that shown in variation A. One good
example is: 9 . . . tll b6 1 0.tll ce5 .tc5 1 1 .Wc2
.td6?! 1 2.l:%d l Wc7 1 3.Wxc7 .txc7 1 4.l:%xd4±
White was clearly better in Gonzalez Garcia Thompson, Barcelona 20 1 1 .
h
1 4 . .td2N .te8 1 5 .tll d3±
IO.ti)xc4 tli b4 1 1 .Wb3 tlixc4 12.'119xc4 i.e7
13.gdl 0-0 14.ti)es i.d6
This was Maksimovic - Laketic, Vrnjacka
Banja 20 1 0, and here my preference is for:
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
8.a5 b5
8 . . ..td6 9.lll bd2 b5 1 0.axb6 lll x b6 1 l .e4
.tb4 1 2.tll e5 .tb7 1 3 .tll dxc4 0-0 1 4.Wd3 saw
White regain his pawn and maintain a solid
positional edge in Meins - Proehl, Germany
1 998.
8 . . . .tb4 9.Wc2 0-0 1 0.Wxc4 .td6 1 1 .Wc2 b5
l 2.axb6 cxb6
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 5 - 5 . . . lll bd7
1 3.e4 was agreed drawn at this point in Jaracz
- Gaponenko, Schwaebisch Gmuend 200 5 .
However, White i s better after the following
logical line: 1 3 . . . '1Mfc7 14.'1Mfe2 e5 1 5 .ttJ c3 .ib7
1 6 . .ig5
9.axb6 cxb6
9 . . . �xb6 1 0. tli bd2 .ib7 1 1 .tll xc4 �b4
occurred in Rahman - Boshku, Dresden (ol)
2008, and now I like:
IO ..if4 B:b7
1 0 . . . �a8 1 1 .tll fd2 ( 1 1 .ttJe5 tlid5 1 2.llixc4 is
the same) 1 l . . .ttJ d5 1 2.llixc4 ttJ7f6 does not
look like much fun for Black.
67
the idea 1 3 . . . .ib4? 1 4.e4 lli e7 1 5 .e5 tli fd5
1 6.tlic3 0-0 1 7. tli a2!. White has a winning
advantage.
1 1 .B:xa6 tlid5
This happened in Tukmakov - Rodriguez
Vargas, New York 1 988, and now my choice is:
1 5.bxc4 bxc4 16 ..iaS VNeS 17.� hd.2±
Black is losing the c-pawn.
D) 6 ... B:bs 7.a4 b6
7 . . . a6 leads back to variation C.
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
68
8.�fd2!
It is important to put the correct knight on
this square!
8 ...i.b7
Black has tried other moves as well:
8 ... e5 9.llixc4 exd4 1 0.'Wxd4 i.c5 l l .'Wd3
0-0 1 2.tlic3 i.b? 1 3.i.xb? �xb7 1 4 .'Wf3
'Wa8 1 5 .i.f4 gave White a solid edge in the
well-known encounter Kasparov - Korchnoi,
London (9) 1 983.
After 8 ... i.a6 9.llic3! White's knight is heading
for the b5-square, showing the reason for
playing the other knight to d2. 9 . . . i.e7 1 0.llib5
llid5 was Tashkov - Spasov, Bulgaria 1 995, and
now a simple and efficient improvement is:
78
65
4
23
a
b
c
d
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14.Y:Yf3N 0-0 1 5.gdl ;!;
E) 6...i.e7 7.tll bd2
I was somewhat surprised by the number of
previous games to have reached this position.
e
l l .e4N lli b4 1 2.llixc4 0-0 1 3 .i.f4 White has
a substantial advantage.
9.J.xb7 gxb7 1 0.tll xc4 i.e7
Another Black try is 1 0 . . . i.b4 l l .'Wb3
a5 1 2.'Wf3 'Wc8 1 3 .llic3 0-0 as played
in Khalifman - Portisch, Bazna 2008.
White could obtain a solid advantage with:
1 4.llib5N!±
1 1 .tll c3 � d5 12.e4 tll xc3 13.bxc3 �f6
We have been following Bandza - Klovans,
Lvov 1 984. White would retain a pleasant
edge with:
Of course it is important to investigate Black's
attempt to hold on to his extra pawn:
7 . . . b5 8.a4 c6 9.axb5 cxb5 1 0.llie5 llixe5
10 . . . llid5 l 1 .llic6 'Wb6 1 2.llixe? �xe7 cannot
be good for Black, as in Pleshkov - Gorny,
69
Chapter 5 - 5 . . . lll bd7
St Petersburg 2007. White could have seized
a serious initiative by means of 1 3.b3N c3
1 4.�c4 bxc4 1 5 .bxc4 with a clear plus.
1 l ..ixa8 Wxd4 1 2.llif3 lli xf3t 1 3 .ixf3 Wb6
White's next move is important, as otherwise
Black would be absolutely fine:
1 4.b3! id?
1 4 . . . c3 doesn't work in view of 1 5 . .ie3 .ic5
1 6 . .ixc5 Wxc5 1 7.b4! Wb6 1 8.Wd3 with a
large advantage.
1 4 . . . 0-0 1 5 .bxc4 bxc4 1 6 . .ie3 .ic5
1 7 . .ixc5 Wxc5 1 8 .Wa4± and it looks like
Black is going to lose both his queenside
pawns. White went on to win in Ni Hua Jakubowski, Oropesa de! Mar 1 999.
1 5 .bxc4 bxc4 16 . .ie3 ic5
1 7.:ga6!!
A beautiful exchange sacrifice, which
changes the course of the game.
1 7 . . . Wxa6 1 8 . .ixc5
It's hard for Black to solve the problem of
his king, and White unsurprisingly crashed
through in the following game:
1 8 . . . e5 1 9.Wd2 e4 20.:gb l We6 2 1 .:gbst .ic8
22.Wa5 Wd7 23 .ib4!
Black resigned in Dimitrov - Spasov, email
20 1 0.
s.%Yc2 0-0 9.�xc4 �xc4 IO.%Yxc4 c6 1 1 .%Yc2
%Yb6 12 ..id2 .id7 13J:Uc1 �ac8 14.b4�
White had a dream position in Smejkal Unzicker, Amsterdam 1 980.
F) 6 ... �b6
This logical follow-up
continuation.
is
Black's
main
7.� bd2 c5
7 . . . .ie7 transposes to variation E on the
previous page.
7 . . . id7
White should react aggressively:
8.a4! .ic6
In the event of 8 . . . a5 9.tlie5 lli fd5 1 0.llidxc4
lli xc4 1 1 .llixc4 .ie7 1 2 . .id2 b6 1 3.e4 lli b4
we can play ambitiously and improve on
Lilienthal - Kan, Leningrad 1 947: 1 4.e5N
:gc8 1 5 .Wg4 With a pleasant initiative.
9.a5 lli bd7 1 0.llixc4 ie7 1 1 .Wb3 0-0 1 2.:gd l
Wc8
More natural would be 1 2 . . . id5 , but even
here after 1 3.llife5 c5 1 4.ie3;!; White retains
definite pressure.
1 3 .if4 .id5
This occurred in Kiss - P. Horvath, Aggtelek
1 997. White could have increased his
advantage by means of:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.llife5N .ixg2 1 5 .'itixg2 llid5 1 6 . .id2 c5
1 7.:gac l
8.�xc4 �xc4
8 . . . cxd4 is examined in the 6 . . . c5 line.
9.%Ya4t .id7 IO.%Yxc4
70
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
White, who went on to win in Radashkovich Razuvaev, USSR 1 97 1 .
7
6
8
5
4
3
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
At this point Black can choose between
Fl) 10 ... �b6, F2) 10 .. J�cS and F3) 10 b5.
2
1
•.•
Fl) 1 0 �b6 l l .i.e3! tll d5
•..
l 1 . . .l''k 8 1 2.ttJe5
1 2.Elfc l !? also looks powerful.
1 2 . . . cxd4
T. if&!Jf
� . ..�%s�m
la-�- -%�
6 ,,,, z� �m·----·
-- - ·'� ��
43 ��1- - - %�'�0 ��-���
� ���2 �
a
1
--8Y.�t�
��
--- -� --- - "� �.----"�---�
a
�
b
c
d
-:�
e
f
g
h
1 3.ixd4! ic5
1 3 . . . Elxc4 leads to a losing endgame for
Black after 1 4.ixb6 Elb4 1 5 .ixa7 Elxb2
1 6.Elfb l .
14.lll xd7 lll xd7
1 4 . . . '.t>xd7 1 5 .Wi°a4t '.t>e7 1 6.ic3± leaves
White with a comfortable advantage thanks
to his bishop pair.
1 5 .b4! Wi'xb4 1 6.Wi'xb4 ixb4 1 7.ixb7 Elc7
1 8.Elfc l ±
The arising endgame is clearly better for
c
d
e
f
g
h
12.tll e5 tll xe3
Just bad is 1 2 . . . ib5 , as in Carlhammar L. Schneider, Stockholm 1 987. After 1 3.dxc5!N
lll xe3 14.'1W f4! Wi°c7 1 5 .fxe3 f6 1 6.ttJd3 Wfxf4
1 7.lll xf4 ixc5 1 8 .lll xe6 ixe3t 1 9.'.t>h l White's
material advantage should decide.
13.fxe3 i.b5 14.�b3 f6
-
5
b
i.�
- �-� . . ...��r�·�-....
. . . z�•
r�
%-m..
z�
.
�m�. . ���
:r-"�
� . �
�� %��· ��r�
3 � vm
��
%
. . . . ... � .8
2 l�
��%•t�
/,
.� �
1 �
�mi{ ""
� ��·
7 �
.z•m
.
6 _
8
z
..
5
.
.
. ..
4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
15.tll c4N
All four games here went 1 5 .ic6t, which
looks extremely attractive. However, I found
things to be less clear after 1 5 . . .ixc6 1 6.Wi'xe6t
'.t>d8!N ( 1 6 . . . ie7 1 7.Wi'f7t cj;id8 1 8.Elad l does
indeed lead to a powerful attack for White) .
71
Chapter 5 - 5 . . . t2J bd7
1 5 i.xc4 16.Wfxc4
Despite the presence of opposite-coloured
bishops, White has a significant initiative. For
example:
•••
16 i.e7 17.i.h3 f5 1 8.dxc5 i.xc5 19.�!
i.xe3t 20. <it>g2±
••.
1 9.ie4
White's advantage was undisputable in
Levitt - Steckner, Hamburg 1 982.
13.Wfc2
White is clearly better here, with a critical
line being as follows:
13 tlid5 14.a4 a6
F2) 10 :ScS 1 I.tlie5 b5
.••
••.
Even worse is l l . . .cxd4 1 2.Wxd4 ic5 1 3 .Wd3
Wb6 1 4 .lll xd7 tbxd7 1 5 .We4 0-0 1 6.Wxb7±
when White was just a pawn up in Vukic Cvetkovic, Umag 1 972.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
12.Wfd3 c4
1 2 . . . id6 1 3 .ig5 c4
1 3 . . . 0-0 1 4 .E:fd l c4 1 5 .Wc2 ie7 1 6.a4± is
much better for White.
1 4.Wc2 Wc7
I also checked the following line: 14 . . . 0-0
1 5 .a4 bxa4 1 6.ixf6 gxf6 1 7.lll xd7 Wxd7
1 8 .E:xa4 c3 1 9.bxc3 E:xc3 20.:!':!:xa7 :!':!:xc2
2 l .E:xd7 ± It looks like White should prevail
- by slowly building towards the d4-d5
break.
1 5 .ixf6 gxf6 1 6.lll xd7 Wxd7 1 7.d5! 0-0
1 8 .:!':!:ad l e5?
Even after the best 18 . . . We7 1 9.E:d4 ie5
20.E:h4 f5 2 1 .e4 White has a dangerous
initiative on the kingside.
1 5 ... tlib4 16.Wfc3 i.e7 17.d5 0-0 1 8.axb5
White has a pleasant advantage after either
1 8 . . . axb5 1 9.ie3± or 1 8 . . . ixb5 1 9.dxe6 fXe6
20.ih3 Wd6 2 Lif4±.
F3) 10 b5 I l .Wfc3!
••.
This uncommon move is the most attractive
here. The main advantage is that the cl-pawn is
now protected, so White is ready to play lll e5
on the very next move.
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
72
1 3 ...J.b4
1 3 . . . tll b6 1 4.d5t leads to a serious initiative
for White.
14.�e2 c!li b6 1 5.d5 0-0 16.dxe6 fxe6
After 1 6 . . . J.xe6 1 7. tLl g5 'W e8 1 8 .J.e3 White's
chances are better.
12 ... c4
Here I found an improvement over an
existing game:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
7
17.J.f4
White's position is definitely more
prom1smg, although Black retains some
chances of his own.
5
Conclusion
8
6
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
13.e4N
The only game in which l l .°Wc3 occurred
continued 1 3 .lll e5 J.b4 1 4 .°Wc2, Romanov
- Likhachev, corr. 20 1 3 . Black should have
played 1 4 . . . 0-0N 1 5 .a3 J.e7 when his position
looks satisfactory.
In GM 1 I stated that Black was simply worse
in this line. Not much has changed in that
respect, but I have added some new lines of
analysis to cover relevant games played in the
interim. Variation F in particular should be
studied carefully, as Black's play should not be
underestimated. However, I am satisfied that
my main line offers White excellent prospects.
Catalan 4 ... dxc4
Introduction to 5 ... c5
Variation Index
1 .d4 tLl f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tLlf3 dxc4 s.J.g2 c5
6.0-0
A) 6 ... cxd4 7.tLlxd4
Al) 7 ...�b6
A2) 7 ...J.c5
A3) 7 a6!?
B) 6 ... tLl c6 7.�a4 cxd4 8.tLlxd4 �xd4 9.hc6t J.d7 10.:gdl
B l) 10 ...hc6
B2) 10 ...�xd l t 1 1 .�xdl hc6 12.tLld2
B2 1) 12 ... c3?!
B22) 12 ... bS
74
75
76
78
80
82
83
83
84
.•.
A2)
a
b
note t o
c
d
e
.
f
1 3 . ti:l cxb5!N
g
B2 1 ) after 14 ... .l\c5
A3) after 7 ... a6! ?
8 . . 1/;Vd?
h
a
b
c
d
e
8 . ti:l c3!N
f
g
h
a
b
c
d
e
1 5 . ti:l c4N
f
g
h
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
74
1 .d4 t[}f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tlif3 dxc4 s ..tg2
c5
This remains a popular variation, and it has
recently been used successfully by some top
grandmasters, including Vishy Anand.
to me, as Black is doing nothing against
White's pressure along the h l -a8 diagonal.
I found no .new games since GM I, so the
following idea remains a novelty:
a
6.0-0
In the Catalan it is quite common for White
to build a lead in development while Black is
mainly making pawn moves. Black will often
then revert to catching up on development
while White regains the sacrificed pawn.
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8 .lll b5!N Wfxd l
8 . . . lll c7 9.Wfxd8t �xd8 1 0.lll 5a3!? and
White will be clearly better after regaining
the pawn on c4.
8 . . . .id7 9.lll d6t .ixd6 1 0.Wfxd6 .ib5
1 1 .Wfxd8t l:l:xd8 1 2.tt'la3 .ic6 13 . .ixc6t
bxc6 14.lll xc4± White has a pleasant edge,
thanks co Black's damaged pawn structure
on the queenside.
9.Ei:xd l tt'ld5
Sometimes Black tries to solve his opening
problems by removing the tension in the
centre with A) 6 cxd4, but the more popular
B) 6 tli c6 is probably a sounder approach.
•••
••.
6 . . . tt'l bd7 transposes
Chapter 5 .
to variation A of
A) 6 cxd4 7.tlixd4
• • •
7.Wfa4t is playable, but I see no reason to
change the recommendation from GM I. The
three most important replies are Al) 7 Wfb6,
A2) 7 J.c5 and A3) 7 a6!?.
•••
.••
.••
7 . . . tt'l a6
This move was awarded an exclamation mark
in Chess Informant 48, but it looks strange
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0.lll l c3! .id7 1 1 .lll xd5 .ixb5 1 2 .lll c3 .ic6
1 3 . .ixc6t bxc6 1 4.Ei:d4 tt'l b4 1 5 .l:l:xc4
White has an obvious advantage.
7 . . . lll d5?!
This move has been employed at a high level,
but it cannot be recommended.
75
Chapter 6 - Introduction to 5 . . . c5
8 .Wfa4t ll'ld7 9.Wfxc4 ll'l7b6 1 0.Wfb3 .id7
After 1 0 . . . .ic5 Kramnik gives 1 l .Wfb5t ll'l d7
1 2. ll'l b3 with White's advantage.
1 1 .ll'l c3
l 1 .e4! ?N might be a worthy alternative.
1 1 . . . .ic5
l 1 . . .ll'lxc3 1 2.Wfxc3 E:c8 1 3 .Wfd3 leaves Black
under pressure along the h l -a8 diagonal.
This move has some tricky ideas, but White
has a clear route to an advantage.
8.Wfa4t i.d7 9.Wfxc4 tll a6
The key move, intending to exploit the slight
vulnerability of the white pieces in the centre
by means of . . . E:c8 and perhaps . . . ll'lc5.
9 ... e5 1 0.tlib3 .ic6 is hardly an improvement.
In Romanishin - Podlesnik, Ljubljana 1 997,
White should have played 1 l ..ig5 .ie7
1 2.ll'lc3 .ixg2 1 3.iixg2 Wfc6t 1 4.Wfxc6t lll xc6
1 5 .E:fd l ± when Black faces an unpleasant
endgame.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0.Wfb3!
This strong move enables White to solve
his problems tactically while at the same time
grabbing the initiative.
1 2.tlixd5 ll'lxd5
1 2 . . . exd5 gives White a pleasant edge after
1 3 . .ie3 or 1 3.Wfe3t Wfe7 1 4.b3.
Now White found a nice tactical resource:
1 3 .ll'lf5! 0-0
In the event of 1 3 . . . exf5 1 4.Wfxd5± Black
loses the b7-pawn.
14.tlixg7!±
White won a pawn in Kramnik - Naiditsch,
Turin (ol) 2006, as 14 . . . ltixg7 would be met by
1 5 . .ixd5 followed by 1 6.Wfc3t and 1 7.Wfxc5 .
Al) 7 ...Wfb6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
10 tll b4
1 0 . . . ll'lc5 1 l .Wfxb6 axb6 1 2.tlic3 leaves
Black with an unpleasant endgame in view of
his weaknesses on the queenside.
.••
1 1 .a3 i.c5
Other moves also fail to bring Black much
relief:
1 1 . . . tli bd5 1 2.Wfxb6 axb6 1 3 .e4;!; gives White
a pleasant advantage.
76
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
A2) 7...J.c5
l 1 . . .Wxd4 1 2 . .ie3 Wd6 1 3 .axb4 .ic6 1 4 . .ic5
Wb8 1 5 . .ixf8 Elxf8 1 6 . .ixc6t bxc6 1 7.Elc l ±
gave White a big advantage i n Swinkels - Van
der Wiel, Groningen 2009.
12.axb4 hd4 13.i\Lia3 0-0
14.e3!
14.ll:\c4 was not so convincing in Razuvaev
- Murey, London 1 983.
14 ...J.c5 1 5.J.d2 J.e7 16.i\Lic4 V!lc7
Now in Atakisi - Hofstetter, email
2005, instead of putting the knight on a5
immediately, White should have first played:
s.V!la4t! V!ld7
The alternative is:
8 . . . lll bd7
This is not covered in GM I, but Aronian
has used it twice against Gelfand, albeit at
fast time controls.
9.Wxc4 0-0 1 0.lll c3 a6
10 ... .ib6?! l 1 .lll f3 Wc7 occurred in Schmidt
G. Szabo, Bucharest 20 1 0, and now the
simple 1 2.Wxc7N .ixc7 1 3 .Eldl a6 14.b3±
leaves Black with an unpleasant defensive task.
-
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 .Eld l !
After l 1 .lll b3 .ia7 1 2.Eld l h6 Black
eventually prevailed in Gelfand - Aronian,
77
Chapter 6 - Introduction to 5 . . . c5
Zurich (blitz) 20 14, although White is still
slightly better at this point.
1 1 . . .'!Mf c7
1 1 . . .b5 1 2.'1Mfd3 E!:a7 1 3 .ie3! is an important
detail, when Black faces serious tactical
problems. ( 1 3.ttJc6 '1Mfb6 1 4.ttJxa7 ixf2t
1 5 .Wh l '1Mfxa7 is less dear.)
1 2.b4 b5
This occurred in Junge - F. Mueller, Germany
1 995, and here White missed a strong idea:
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
9 ... 0-0
9 . . . a6? 1 0.tlJc7t was embarrassing for Black
in Kiss - Gutdeutsch, Koszeg 1 996.
1 0.Y!Vxc4 Y!Ve7
Clearly worse is 1 0 . . . ib6?! 1 1 .ttJ l c3 a6
1 2.ttJa3 ttJ c6. Now in Sandipan - Tari,
Gibraltar 20 1 4, the simple 1 3 .ig5N would
have led to dear advantage for White, for
instance: 1 3 . . . ttJ a5 1 4.'!Mfh4 '!Mfd4 1 5 .e4 h6
1 6.ie3 '!Mfd8 1 7.E!:fd l ttJ d7 1 8 .'1Mfxd8 ixd8
1 9.f4±
h
1 3 .tlJcxb5!N axb5 1 4.'1Mf c2
Black is in trouble, for instance:
1 4 . . . E!:a4 1 5 .bxc5 E!:c4 1 6.'!Mfb l '1Mfxc5 1 7.ie3
'1Mfh5 1 8 .if3 tlJ g4 1 9 .ixg4 '1Mfxg4 20.f3 '1Mfh3
2 1 .tlJxb5±
White emerges with an extra pawn.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 .b4!
The natural 1 1 .ttJ l c3?! gives Black an
opportunity to solve his problems by means of
1 l . ..a6 1 2.ttJd4 b5 1 3.'1Mfd3 ib7 with equal play.
In GM 1 I recommended l 1 .tlJ 5c3 in order to
prevent the above plan. However, to my great
surprise I discovered 1 1 . . .ttJ bd7!N 1 2.'1Mfh4
E!:b8, when I don't see how White can prevent
. . . b6 and . . . ib7.
a
b
1 1 ...i.b6 12.a4
White is playing with great energy and
aggression.
c
9.tlJb5!
The key move.
d
e
f
g
h
12 ...i.d7
In the event of 1 2 . . . a6 1 3.tlJ 5c3 ttJ c6 1 4.ia3
ttJe5 l 5 .'1Mfb3i White retains a lot of pressure.
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
78
8.c!lic3!N
This novelty from GM 1 remains untested,
although it does briefly transpose to a game
from 2009.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
13.a5 a6
1 3 . . . �xf2t? was a surprising move for an
elite player, and after 1 4.Wxf2 E:c8 1 5 .°Wd3
White was a healthy piece up in Gelfand Aronian, Zurich (rapid) 20 1 4 .
14.c!li 5c3 J.a7 1 5.hb7 J.b5 16.liJxbS 'Wxb7
17.c!lixa7 gxa7 18.J.e3 gas 19.gcl ±
White had a solid extra pawn in Postny I. Sokolov, Sibenik 20 1 2.
A3) 7 ... a6!?
8 .°Wa4t °Wd7! 9.°Wxc4 b5 1 0 .°Wb3 �b7 enables
Black to neutralize the pressure along the h l -a8
diagonal and obtain a normal game. 1 1 .E:d l N
( l I .�xb7 'Wxb7 1 2.a4 b 4 1 3.tlid2 occurred
in Scheeren - Van der Wiel, Hilversum 1 984,
and now the simple 13 . . . tlibd?N 1 4.tlic4 tlic5
would have been equal.) l l .. .�xg2 1 2.Wxg2
�c5 1 3 .°Wf3 E:a7 Black has good chances for
equality.
8 ... e5!N
This seems like the only critical test. Other
moves are clearly worse:
The aforementioned game continued 8 . . . tli bd7
9.°Wa4 e5, and here White should have played:
�.I
87 i. �·�.l�·�·�.,�� , ,, ,% ,
�
�
�
6 T �� ��r�,., , � �
���-�r
� l��f"/T�J�
""
�
'
,�, , ;•�lrit�
��
23 �8""(�,
" %�;� �., , %� i{'""
� " � - � =,
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
I O.tlif3!N ( I O.tlif5 E:b8 1 1 .E:dl b5 1 2.°Wc2
occurred in Czaja - Wyczawska, Rewal
2009, and now 1 2 . . . °Wc7!N would have been
unclear.) 1 0 . . . 'Wc7 l l .�g5 White easily seizes
the initiative, for instance: 1 1 . . .E:b8 l 2.�xf6
gxf6 1 3 .tlid5 'Wc6 1 4 .°Wa5!�
This move remains relatively unexplored,
but it is one of the more interesting options
available to Black.
8 . . .�e7N 9.°Wa4t 'Wd7 (Also after 9 . . . tli bd7
1 0.°Wxc4 tli b6 l l .°Wd3 Black fails to solve his
opening problems.) I O.tlidb5! Threatening a
check on c7. (Once again White should avoid
Chapter 6 - Introduction to 5 . . . c5
1 0.'Wxc4 b5 followed by . . . ib7.) 1 0 . . . 0-0
1 1 .E!:d l lll d5 1 2.if4 White maintains a clear
advantage, for example: 1 2 . . . lll xc3 1 3 .lll xc3
'Wxa4 1 4 .lll xa4 lll d7 1 5 .E!:ac l ±
8 . . . ic5N 9.'Wa4t 'Wd7 1 0.ie3!
White regains the pawn under favourable
circumstances.
1 0 .lll db5 is less convincing here due to
1 0 . . . 0-0 l l .'Wxc4 'We7 1 2.lll d4 b5! followed
by . . . ib7.
�.1
s z •.t � • �
7 ,,.,.
,.r--- % ,
�
�
�
-�
!
6 ��-� ��!.
,
,
, , ��
��
�
: 1 �T
,,.,,,;?m
--- --'� ·0 �w--�
m � 1�
23 ��
:r�---8�·: ·=
��·� ·�
- - %�- -·'·
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0 . . . 'Wxa4 l 1 .lll xa4 ia7 1 2.E!:fc l 0-0
1 2 . . . e5 1 3 .E!:xc4 0-0 1 4 .lll c2± leaves White
with strong pressure along the h l -a8
diagonal.
1 3 .E!:xc4 lll d5 1 4.ixd5
1 4.lll f5 ! ? also looks interesting.
14 . . . exd5 1 5 .E!:c7±
79
9.tlic2!
9.lll f3 'Wxd l 1 0.E!:xd l lll c6 l l .ie3 if5 is
less convincing.
9 ...'Wxdl 1 0.�xdl l£ic6 1 I ..ig5 .ie6 12.tlie3
White's chances are slightly preferable in this
endgame. Here are a few illustrative lines:
12 ... .tcs
1 2 . . . ie7 1 3.ixf6 gxf6 1 4 .lll cd5;!;
s � � � · � �B
7 � ln �n lm·1
6 r�
.��r-0 �
��-ef'- - · '�-.�
� � w� �
5 �
� .,�� ..... � .....Y,m
4
3 -·�·�2 ef�"'IS '�
- - - -'�
�
. (b:".£�
%�
��
1 -� � .n � .. .. �
r.- -
�
'
%
f
""
a
�
%
""
b
c
d
e
%
f
,
""
g
h
13.i.xfG
1 3 .E!:ac l is a serious alternative. 1 3 . . . ixe3
1 4.ixe3 E!:d8 (After 1 4 . . . 0-0 1 5 .lll a4! White
will regain the pawn in a favourable situation.)
This way Black holds on to his extra pawn,
but after 1 5 .ic5 E!:xd l t 1 6.E!:xd l lll d7 1 7.ia3
\t>d8 1 8 .lll e4� White has nice compensation.
13 ... gxf6 14.tlied5 0-0-0
1 4 . . . ixd5?! would be premature in view
of 1 5 .E!:xd5 id4 1 6.e3 ixc3 1 7.bxc3 \t>e7
1 8 .E!:b l E!:ab8 1 9.E!:c5 and Black is under
unpleasant pressure.
15.tlixf6;!;
White's position is more flexible and the
knight on f6 rather restricts Black's forces.
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
80
B) 6 ... tlic6 7.Y:Va4
1 0 . . . a6 1 1 .E:dl Wb6 1 2.lll e4 ie7 1 3 .b3 lll f6
1 4 .ib2 lll xe4 1 5 .Wxe4± White had strong
pressure in Bischoff - Sonntag, Germany
1 987.
7 . . . Wb6 8 .lll a3!
White immediately uses the placement of
the black queen to win a tempo.
8 . . . cxd4 9.lll xc4 Wb4
Otherwise the previous queen move would
be absolutely senseless.
1 0.Wxb4 ixb4 l 1 .a3 ie7 1 2.E:dl
White will regain the pawn with a typical
Catalan edge in the ensuing endgame.
7... cxd4
Some other moves have been tried, but I do
not regard any of them as serious options for
Black, so I have just given a few examples of
model play by White with brief accompanying
notes.
7 . . . lll d7 8.dxc5 ixc5 9.Wxc4 0-0 1 0.lll c3
Such positions without c- and cl-pawns, in
which the black bishop remains stuck on c8,
almost always favour White in the Catalan.
One example continued:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 2 . . . lll d5
Trying somehow to neutralize White's
pressure along the h l -a8 diagonal.
1 3 .lll xd4 lll xd4 1 4.E:xd4 id7 1 5 .e4
l 5 .lll e3 if6 1 6.E:d3 was equally strong.
1 5 . . . ic5
The lesser evil was 1 5 . . . lll b6 1 6.lll d6t ixd6
1 7.E:xd6 E:c8 1 8 .b3, although White's
bishop pair gives him a pleasant edge.
1 6.E:d2 lll b6 l 7.lll a5±
Nesis - Galdanov, USSR 1 975.
A final alternative is:
7 . . . Wa5 8 .Wxc4 cxd4
8 . . . b5 9.Wc2 lll b4 has occurred in six
games, but no one found the strongest
reply: 1 0.Wd2!N (After 1 0 .Wd l ib7 Black
is all right) . The main point can be seen in
Chapter 6 - Introduction to 5 . . . c5
the following line: 1 0 . . .ib7 1 1 .dxc5 ixc5
1 2.Wfg5! if8 1 3 .id2 h6 1 4.Wfh4± Black is
behind in development and his knight is in
an awkward pin.
9.lll xd4 lll xd4 1 0.Wfxd4 ic5
This seems like the best attempt to j ustify
Black's 7th move.
7
8
5
4
3
2
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 .Wf c3! ib4
1 l . . .Wfxc3 1 2.lll xc3 gives White a typical
endgame initiative.
1 2.Wfb3 0-0 1 3.a3 ie7
Now in Machelett - Poschke, Berlin 1 993,
White could have secured an advantage
with:
14.lll c 3N
Black is under heavy pressure on the
queenside.
a
b
8.�xd4 �xd4
c
d
e
f
g
Black should obviously avoid 8 . . . id7?!
9.lll xc6 Wfb6 (9 ... bxc6 1 0.Eld l lll d5 1 1 .Wfxc4
ie7 occurred in the recent game Schlosser Sochacki, Pardubice 20 1 3, and here 1 2.e4N
lll b6 1 3 .Wfc2 0-0 1 4.if4± would have given
White an indisputable positional advantage)
1 0 .lll d2 ixc6 1 1 .ixc6t Wfxc6 1 2.Wfxc6t bxc6
1 3 .lll xc4;!; with a pleasant endgame advantage
for White, Rise - T. Olafsson, corr. 1 99 5 .
9.hc6t .id7
9 . . . bxc6?! 1 0.Wfxc6t Wfd7 l 1 .Wfxa8 ic5
I noticed this exchange sacrifice mentioned
in one of the Dvoretsky books, where he
evaluated it as an interesting idea. Indeed
it looks so, but once you arm yourself with
an engine things suddenly become shaky for
Black!
6
a
81
h
i ��-JI
�
7s �.�. .%��£�iV�
i
i if�%�
�� ,.
�-0 ��',, . ,;�
� ��
�.
: �.,.
�� �� ,
....
6
3
2
1
..
.
�
!�. . ":�f0 .!n
�� %�
.
. . . z.
a
�llJ�
b
c
d
�
e
.
g=
""' "�·0{ ""
f
g
h
1 2 .ie3! ixe3 1 3 .fxe3 0-0 1 4 .lll c3 Wfc7
14 . . . ia6 1 5 .Wff3 ib7 1 6.e4 Wfc7 was no
better in Eslon - Gonzales, Coria del Rio
1 995, in view of 1 7.Elad l N Wfb6t 1 8 .Wff2,
with an exact transposition to the main line
below, with one less move played.
1 4 . . . ib7 1 5 .Wfxa7 Wfc6 1 6.Elf3 e5 1 7.Wfa5
Wfe6 1 8 .Eld l ! ixf3 1 9.exf3± saw White
return the exchange to secure his kingside
while remaining a healthy pawn up in
Ladanyi - D. Berczes, Budapest 200 1 .
The text move occurred in Diaz Hollemaert
- Aguiar, Blumenau 20 1 3 . Here White
should have played:
82
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
12 ... c5
1 2 . . . ie7 1 3.gxc4 'kt>d7 1 4 .lll d2 lll d5
occurred in Kessler - Farago, Triesen 20 1 3 ,
and now 1 5 .e4N lll b6 1 6.i':l:c2 c 5 1 7.lll f3 i':l:hc8
1 8 .ie3;!; would have been pretty unpleasant
for Black.
1 2 . . . lll d 5 1 3 .i':l:xc4 �d7 1 4.e4 lll b6 1 5 .i':l:c2
f5 was played in the recent game, Krush Zatonskih, Saint Louis 20 1 4 . Here the simple
1 6.ie3N fxe4 1 7.lll c3 would have brought
White a clear positional advantage.
0
13,gxc4 i.e7
This is one ofthe more popular continuations,
and has been played by Mamedyarov, but I like
White's play in the following encounter.
IOJ�dl
This is the only way for White to fight for
the advantage. We will analyse Bl) 1 hc6
and B2) 1 0 ...YNxdlt.
.••
Bl) 10 ...hc6 l 1 .'iNxc6t bxc6 12.gxd4
8
7
6
5
4
3
1
14.i.f4 0-0 15.lll d2 �d7
1 5 . . . lll d5 1 6.lll e4 also leads to White's
pleasant advantage.
8 %" �� �� , )�,7 ,,�
, , %� -6)�
�� ��· -%�·
6
5
4
llll
l!J
"
llll
ll
ll
llll
�
llll
ll
ll
llll'llllllll •lll!
llll
¥i'
;
+
i llll,, �" "
,,,,,
,,,,,
3 �W'0 �% '"'/, -W'J�W'�
8 Wfj
8 Wfj
/, , ,,,,�
, , %=w�, ,
, , %� �
.
1
2
2
a
a
c
d
e
f
g
h
This position has occurred in a lot of games,
but it is obvious that Black is fighting for the
draw, while White can press for a long time
without taking any risks. Many moves have
been tested, but the general ideas are the same,
so I will j ust mention a few instructive lines.
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
16.�b3 a5 17,gdl l£ib6
This position occurred in Vladimirov
Ghaem Maghami, Kelamabakkam 2000, and
here the most accurate continuation would
have been:
18,gcclN gfc8 19.l£id2;!;
Intending to put the knight on c4. Black is
still a long way from a draw.
Chapter 6 - Introduction to 5 . . . c5
B2) 10 ...Y;Yxdl t 1 1 .Y;Yxdl i.xc6
8
7
6
5
4
83
1 6.lll e5! lll xg3 1 7.lll xc6! lll xe2t 1 8 .'!Wxe2 bxc6
1 9 .°1Wa6 id6 20.°1Wxc6t @e7 2 1 .°1Wb7t @f6
22.Wf3t @e7 23 .°1Wb7t @f6 24.'!Wf3t @e7
25 .h3 In Fahnenschmidt - Herbrechtsmeier,
Germany 1 986, White reached what I believe
to be a technically winning position, in view
of his potential to create a passed pawn on the
queenside.
B2 1) 12 ... c3?! 13.bxc3
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
For the moment Black has full material
equality for the queen, but the c4-pawn is
rather weak.
12.tll d2
Now we will consider the somewhat
dubious B2 1) 12 ... c3?! and the more reliable
B22) 12 ... b5.
1 2 ... h5?! 1 3 .lll xc4 h4 1 4.if4! is clearly in
White's favour: 1 4 ... hxg3 ( 1 4 ... l'!d8 1 5 .°1Wb3
hxg3 1 6.ixg3 lll e4 1 7.ttJe5 ttJxg3 occurred in
Vanheste - Blauert, Groningen 1 989, and now
after 1 8 .fxg3N ic5 t 1 9 .e3± White is ready to
eliminate the light-squared bishop, after which
rhe c6-pawn will become a target.) 1 5 .ixg3
-2. e4
It looks tempting to damage White's structure,
but now White does not have to spend time
going after the c-pawn, and can instead activate
his pieces and force favourable exchanges.
13 ... �ds
1 3 . . . 0-0-0?! 14.°1Wb3 ic5 1 5 .ttJf3 lll e4?!
was too ambitious in Hjartarson - Hardarson,
Neskaupsstadur 1 984. At this point, the
surprising 1 6.ttJe5!N ixf2t 1 7.@fl would
already have been winning for White.
1 3 . . . ie7?! 1 4 .Wb3 l'!d8 ( 1 4 . . . 0-0 1 5 .ia3 is
also excellent for White) 1 5 .ttJf3 0-0 1 6.ll'ie5
was clearly better for White in V. Mikhalevski
- Onischuk, Gibraltar 20 1 1 .
1 3 . . . ic5 1 4.ttJb3 l'!d8 1 5 .°IWe l ie7 was
a bit more solid for Black in Nikolaidis Bojkov, Istanbul 200 1 , but it gives White an
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
84
opportunity to exchange the dark-squared
bishops: 1 6.lll d4! id5 l 7.a4 0-0 1 8.ia3
ixa3 1 9.l':'i:xa3t White has a better version of
the main variation B22 which will be analysed
shortly.
14.�b3 i.c5
Now in Wood - Micklethwaite, corr. 1 993,
White missed a simple yet strong idea:
1 3.a4 i.e7
It is impossible for Black to keep all of his
queenside pawns, and he should not waste
his time trying: 1 3 . . . a6? 1 4.axb5 ixb5 (Even
worse is 1 4 . . . axb5 ? 1 5 .l':'i:xaSt ixa8 1 6.lll xc4!+­
when the b-pawn will soon be lost as well.)
1 5 .Wi'c2 l':'i:c8
1 6.l':'i:xa6! Without this finesse Black would be
okay. 16 ... ixa6 1 7.Wi'a4t lll d7 1 8 .'1Wxa6 l':'i:d8
1 9 .lll xc4 ie7 20.lll a5! lll b8 2 1 .Wi'b5t iif8
22.if4+- Kochyev - Kilpi, Jyvaskyla 1 996.
16.i.e3 i.xe3 17.tLlxe3±
The trade of dark-squared bishops obviously
favours White.
B22) 12 ... b5
14.axb5 i.xb5 1 5.lLJxc4 0-0
This position was tested several times in
the mid- 1 980s but, even though White was
having a hard time proving a clear advantage,
it then disappeared for a couple of decades
before making a comeback in more recent
years. When the Dutch grandmaster Erwin
I.:Ami played it against me in the Bundesliga
in 2008, I was forced to improvise.
Chapter 6 - Introduction to 5 . . . c5
16.tll a3!?
This is what I came up with at the board,
and home analysis has given me no reason to
deviate from it.
A well-known theoretical line is 1 6.b3 �fd8
1 7.'1Mfc2 �dc8! 1 8 .ia3 ixa3 1 9.�xa3 �c7
20.�a5 ixc4 2 1 .bxc4 h6 and I do not see any
real winning chances for White, as Black will
soon trade his a-pawn for White's c-pawn.
85
his position on the kingside with moves like
'kt>g2 and e2-e4, while avoiding unnecessary
exchanges - especially of the last remaining
queenside pawns. A useful point to keep in
mind is that situations with opposite-coloured
bishops will tend to favour White, as he will be
able to attack the dark squares on the kingside.
Black's position is pretty solid, but he is unable
to do much other than sit and defend.
16 .. JUdS 17.Wfel i.c6
17 . . . ie8 occurred in Figura - Stern, Berlin
2009, but 1 8 .tll c4N seems promising, for
instance 1 8 . . . lll d5 1 9.id2 ib5 20.lll e5± and
White continues to improve his position.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
18.f3!
My game continued: 1 8 .id2 �ab8 1 9.if4
�xb2 20.'IMf c l �b3! (Stronger than 20 . . . ixa3
2 l .'1Mfxc6 if8 22.:!'!xa7 �xe2 23 .ig5 when
\\'hite has some initiative.) 2 1 .'1Mfxc6 �xa3
22.�b l tll d5 23.ie5 �a2 After losing the
last of the queenside pawns, White's winning
..:hances were diminished in Avrukh - rAmi,
Germany 2008.
The text move is my suggested improvement
irom GM I, which has since been employed
:n one game, although the move order was
;lightly different. White's plan is to improve
l 8 . . . ic5tN 1 9.'kt>g2 lll d5 20.id2 threatens
�c l , and after 20 . . . id4 2 1 .e4 lll b6 22.ic3
White keeps a nice edge.
1 8 . . . �ab8N
I mainly focused on this move in GM I.
i 9.mg2 h6
19 . . . tll d 5 transposes to the main line.
1 9 . . . �b7 20.lll c4 id5 2 1 .tll e5 �c8 22.e4
�c2t 23.iih3 The king is surprisingly safe
here! 23 . . . ib3 24.ie3 �xb2 25 .ixa7!±
19 ... �b3 20.tll c4 ib5 2 1 .lll a5 ib4 22.'\Mffl
ixa5 23.�xa5 a6 24.�a3!;!; As mentioned
earlier, the presence of opposite-coloured
bishops gives White attacking chances.
86
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
Here I found an improvement over my
analysis in GM 1.
19.@g2 gabs 20.�c4
This is a suitable moment to jump with the
knight.
20 ... .ibS 2 1 .b3 a6 22 ..ia3 hc4
My previous analysis concluded 22 . . . if6
23.l'!c l ;!; .
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
23.he7 tLlxe7N
23 . . . l'!eS? was an inexplicable mistake,
and after 24.bxc4 lLixe7 25.l'!xa6 White was
obviously winning in Giemsa - Jahnz, Berlin
2009.
h
20.lLi c2!
Previously I gave: 20.lLic4 id5 2 1 .lLie5
(2 1 .lLie3 ib4 22.Wi'fl ic5 23.lLixd5 lLixd5
24.c;!,ih3 lLi e3=) 2 1 . . .id6 22.lLid3 e5!? Trying
to create counterplay. 23.e4 (23 .l'!xa7?! e4
24.fxe4 ixe4t 25.�fl lLig4 leaves White's
king too exposed.) 23 . . . ic4 24.lLif2 Now
instead of 24 . . . a6, Black can play 24 . . . ib4!
25 .Wi'e3 a5 when it is hard for White to
improve his position.
20 . . . l'!b7 2 1 .e4;!;
White will continue to improve his pieces,
while retaining the all-important queenside
pawn.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
24.bxc4 gdc8 25.�c3 gc6 26,gdl t£lg6
27,gd4;1;
This position can be compared with the
drawish 1 6.b3 line as given in the notes above.
The big differences here are that Black's knight
is misplaced and White has real chances to
create threats on the kingside.
Conclusion
5 . . . c5 6.0-0 remains an important branch
of the Catalan. After 6 . . . cxd4 7.lLixd4 White
has good chances for an advantage based on
his thematic pressure on the long diagonal,
although it helps to be aware of a few important
nuances in certain lines.
The main line is 6 . . . lLic6 7.Wi'a4, when
this chapter dealt with the forcing option of
7 . . . cxd4 8.lLixd4 Wi'xd4 9.ixc6t id7 1 0.l'!d l ,
when Black must decide what type o f position
to defend. 10 . . . ixc6 leads to a slight, risk­
free endgame advantage for White, while
10 . . . W/xd l t 1 1 .Wi'xd l ixc6 1 2. lLi d2 leads to an
interesting situation with queen against pieces.
With the ideas presented here, White has good
chances to put his opponent under long-term
pressure.
Catalan 4 ... dxc4
5 ... c5, 6 ... �c6 and 7...id7
Variation Index
1 .d4 � f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.� f3 dxc4 5.�g2 c5 6.0-0 � c6 7.�a4 �d7
8.�xc4
A) 8 .. Jk8
B) 8 ... �b6 9.dxc5
Bl) 9 ...�xc5 10.�c3
B l l) 10 ... � aS
B 1 2) 1 0 ... �b4
B2) 9 ...�xc5 10.�a3
B2 1) 1 0 ... �e7
B22) 1 0 ... �c8
C) 8 ... b5 9.�d3
CI) 9 ... c4
C2) 9 .. Jk8 I O.dxc5 hes I l . � c3
C2 1) 1 1 ... 0-0
C22) 1 1 ... � b4
C23) 1 1 ... b4
D) 8 ... cxd4 9.�xd4 �c8 10.�c3
D I) 10 ... �b6
D2) 10 ...�e7
D3) 10 ... �xd4 1 1 .�xd4 �c5 12.�h4
D3 1) 12 ...�c6
D32) 12 ... 0-0
88
89
89
90
91
92
92
93
94
94
96
97
99
1 00
1 02
1 02
103
105
106
107
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
88
1 .d4 c!Lif6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.c!Lif3 dxc4 5.i.g2
c5 6.0-0 t£ic6 7.�a4 i.d7
This position occurred in Molnar - Honfi,
Budapest 1 950, and a couple of subsequent
games. Here I found an interesting new idea:
8 .
�·
7 •�r•t��•
�� .�•�
,, , ,, , %""'
Tll"""
5 .,, ,,,.,���,�., v,B��•
�� •
�
4 �% ., ,y:, , �� ��-��
�-;���'��-�
2 �� 1�
� � 1�.t1�
" ""
� �
6
�
,,, , , , , ;
'"//,
3
,""ef'"""�;� ." �·i,f'
l � � • .:"�
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 .'IMl'd3!?N tll c4
The main point is that 1 3 . . . i.c6 runs into
1 4.Wxd8 Elxd8 1 5 .i.e3 Elh5 1 6.i.xa7
winning a pawn.
1 4.b3 tt:l b6 1 5 .e4 Wes 1 6.i.b2 Eld8 1 7.Elfca
White's space advantage makes the difference.
In this position there are four moves for us to
consider: A) 8 .. Jk8, B) 8 ...�b6, C) 8 ... b5
and D) 8 cxd4.
•..
A) 8 .. Jk8
This looks natural, but Black will have to
compromise his position to regain the pawn
after White's next move.
9.dxc5 �a5
Black may also try:
9 . . . tll a5 1 0 .Wh4!?
I decided to go in a new direction, since my
previous suggestion 1 0 .'IMl'd3 does not seem
fully convincing. 1 0 . . . i.xc5 1 1 .tll e5 0-0
1 2.tll c3 i.c6 1 3.'IMl'xd8 Elfxd8 1 4 .tll xc6 tll xc6
1 5 .i.f4 I evaluated this as slightly better for
White in GM l, but after 1 5 . . . i.d4! 1 6.Elac l
i.xc3!N 1 7.Elxc3 tll d5 Black seems t o be
fine.
10 . . .Elxc5 1 1 .tll c3 i.e7 1 2.Wd4 0-0
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
IO.c!Lifd2!?N
My previous recommendation of 1 0 .i.g5
'IMl'xc5 1 1 .tll bd2 now looks pretty innocent to
me, but this new idea seems more challenging.
1 0 �xc5
1 0 . . . i.xc5 ?? would run into 1 1 .tll b3.
•••
I 1.c!Lic3 �xc4
Chapter 7 - 5 . . . c 5 , 6 . . . lll c6 and 7 . . . id7
1 1 . . .lliaS 1 2JMf d3 ic6 1 3.llide4! llixe4
1 4 .lll xe4 Wi'c4 1 5 .Wi'e3 also gives White some
advantage.
12.tlixc4 ie7
1 2 . . . llid4 runs into 1 3 .llie5 ic6 1 4.llixc6
llixc6 1 5 .ie3 and White is clearly better,
thanks to his bishop pair.
b
c
d
e
Bl} 9 ...i.xc5 10.tlic3
And now we have another split between Bl l)
10 ... tlia5 and Bl2} 10 ...Wi'b4.
After 1 0 . . . 0-0 1 1 .llia4 Wi'b4 1 2.Wi'xc5 Wi'xa4
it's obvious that White is much better with his
bishop pair. The most convincing continuation
seems to be 1 3 .b3 Wi'a6 1 4.e3 l:'!ac8 1 5 .ib2
lli e4 1 6.Wi'h5 with a nice edge for White,
Konik - Grass, Frankfurt 2006.
10 . . .ie? 1 I .ie3 Wi'a5
After l 1 . . . Wb4 White can even trade queens:
1 2.Wi'xb4 ( 1 2.Wi'd3 is also fine.) 1 2 . . . llixb4
Hoelzl - Tsomis, Olympus 20 1 1 , and now
the aggressive 1 3 .llie5!N would have been
strong. There is no need to fear 1 3 . . . lli c2
1 4.l:'!ac l llixe3 1 5 .fxe3 l:'!b8 1 6.l:'!fd l when
White has a lot of pressure.
1 2.a3 0-0
1 2 . . . l:'!c8 1 3.l:'!fd l 0-0 occurred in Nemeth
- Seres, Hungary 20 1 2. Here the right idea
to seize the initiative is 1 4 .Wb5!N l:'!fd8
1 5 .l:'!ac l ( 1 5 . lli e l ! ? also deserves attention)
1 5 . . . Wxb5 1 6.llixbS a6 1 7.llid6 ixd6
1 8 .l:'!xd6 ie8 1 9.l:'!xd8 l:'!xd8 20 . .ib6± and
the bishop pair is significant.
1 3.b4 Wh5 1 4.h3!
Highlighting the misplacement of the black
queen.
1 4 . . . llid5
Now in Stanciu - Bazaj Bockai, Bled (ol)
1 992, White should have played:
B) 8 ...Wb6
a
89
f
g
h
9.dxc5
Here Black may opt for Bl} 9 ...i.xc5 or B2)
9 ...Wxc5.
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
90
1 S.tt:lxdS!N '\Mi'xdS
Or l S . . . exdS 1 6.'\MfbS! intending 1 6 . . . E:ab8
1 7.ii.xa7!±.
1 6.lll d2!
The IQP position would be favourable, but
this is even stronger.
1 6 . . .'\Mi'xc4 1 7.lll xc4
White's advantage is obvious.
l S.a3 gives White a clear advantage, and Black
found a way to lose on the spot with 1 S . . . E:c8?
1 6.ii.xdS exdS 1 7.'\Mi'g4!+- in Buhmann - Bax,
Hengelo 2000.
1 l . . .ii.e7 1 2.lll eS ii.c6 1 3 .lll xc6 tt:lxc6 also
leaves Black well short of equality. Here is a
good example of what might happen:
Bl l) 10 . . tl:ia5
.
a
This has been the most popular move in
the position, but Black has scored miserably
against White's next move.
1 1 .Wh4! 0-0
1 l . . .ii.c6?! 1 2.tll a4 ( 1 2.ii.h6!? is also
excellent) 12 . . . ii.xa4 1 3 .'\Mi'xa4t lll c6 1 4.tt:leS
lll dS
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.'\Mi'a4 E:c8 l S .E:b l a6?! ( 1 6 . . . 0-0N is better,
though White remains on top after: 1 7.ii.e3
ii.cs 1 8 .ii.xcS '\Mi'xcS 1 9.E:bc t t) 1 6.ii.e3 ii.cs
1 7.ii.xcS '\Mi'xcS 1 8 .E:fc l White does not even
need the bishop pair, as his Catalan bishop was
powerful enough to secure a clear plus in Brito
Garcia - Aleman Alamo, Las Palmas 20 1 0.
Chapter 7 - 5 . . . c5, 6 . . . lli c6 and 7 . . . id7
thematic idea for this variation, of which we
will see a few more examples later in the chapter.
12 ... �b4
1 2 . . . llie8 does not help, as 1 4.llie5 gives
White a considerable advantage.
91
1 1 .�d3!
The black queen is rather vulnerable on b4,
so White should avoid the exchange.
1 1 ...0-0
Black has also tried: 1 l . . .Ei:d8 1 2.a3 'Wg4
( 1 2 . . . 'Wb3 ? 1 3 .lli d2 'Wb6 14.llia4 'Wa5
occurred in Abhyankar - Rendon, Thessaloniki
[ol] 1 988, and here White could have secured
a serious advantage with: 1 5 .llib3!N ixf2t
1 6.E!:xf2 'Wxa4 1 7.llic5 Wfd4 1 8 .'Wxd4 llixd4
1 9.llixb7±) 1 3.if4 0-0 1 4.h3 'Wg6 1 5 .'Wxg6
hxg6 1 6.E!:fd l White had a typical Catalan
advantage in Petrosian - Pomar Salamanca,
Havana (ol) 1 966.
12.a3 �g4 1 3.b4 ib6
Two games have reached this position, but
White's play was not convincing. I would like
to propose a simple improvement.
13 ... t£ie8 14.a3 �xb2 1 5.�xcS!?
1 5 .ixg7 llixg7 1 6.llie4 is a simpler route to
a clear plus.
15 ... t£ib3 16.�b4 a5 17.�xb7 �xc3
18.�fabl ic6 19.hg7! tlixg7 20.�xb3±
White emerges with a healthy extra pawn.
B12) 10 ...�b4
8
7
6
5
3
2
1
15.�d2!
Once again White should avoid the queen
exchange, as the black queen is rather exposed
on the fifth rank. The following line confirms
White's advantage.
4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
92
1 5 ...i.xe3 16.�xe3 gfd8 17.h3! tlJ d5
Otherwise the black queen may find herself
in serious trouble.
1 0.tl'la3
Now most games have continued with either
B2 1) 10 ... i.e7 or B22) 10 ... gc8.
10 . . . lll d 5 has been tried a few times. Now
1 l .:!'%d 1 N seems like the most useful move,
and after 1 1 . . .t.e7 1 2.e4 lll b6 1 3.°1We2 :!'%d8
1 4 .t.e3 °1Wa5
a
19.gfdl �b5 20.tll d4
White maintains the pressure and is clearly
better.
B2) 9 ...�xc5
b
c
d
e
f
h
1 5 .lll b5 0-0 1 6.t.fl ! White has a nice
initiative.
1 0 . . . lll a5 1 l .°1Wxc5 ( 1 1 .\Wh4!?N t.e7 1 2.:!'%d l
is also worth considering.) 1 1 . . .t.xc5 Now
1 2 .lll e5N looks natural, and after 1 2 . . . :!'%c8
1 3 .t.d2 lll c6 1 4.lll ac4 White will soon enjoy
the advantage of the bishop pair, which should
secure a long-term pull.
B2 1) 1 0 ...i.e7
This seems like the more reliable choice,
and it has been used by some strong players
including Adams.
g
Chapter 7 - 5 . . . c5, 6 . . . lll c6 and 7 . . . id7
93
Now that Black has wasted a tempo moving
his bishop, it makes sense to exchange queens.
14 ... gdc8 15.id6 tll d8 16.tll fe5
1 6.lt'lfd2 is a decent alternative.
1 1 .YlYxc5 hc5 12.tll c4 0-0
It is essential that White can meet 1 2 . . . Ei:c8N
with 1 3 .ie3!, and 12 . . . 'iii e7 with 1 3 .a3!. In
both cases Black experiences problems on the
dark squares.
16 ....ib5 17.b3
White keeps some pressure.
B22) 10 ... gcs
1 2 . . . lll d5 should be met by: 1 3 .Ei:d l N
( 1 3 .a3 occurred i n Golovanj - Derjabin,
Alushta 200 5 , but it is not so convincing after
1 3 . . . Ei:c8 1 4 .id2 f6.) 1 3 . . . Ei:d8 1 4.a3 lll b6
(Also after 1 4 . . . 0-0 1 5 .b4 ie7 1 6.ib2 f6
1 7.Ei:acl White is obviously better.) l 5 .lll ce5
f6 1 6.lll xd7 Ei:xd7 17.Ei:xd7 @xd7 1 8.id2 lt'lc4
1 9 .ic3± White's bishop pair gives him an
enduring edge.
13 ..if4!?N
1 3 .a3 is a sensible move which gave White
a small plus in Arkell - Player, Bedford 20 1 3 .
The text move poses more concrete problems
for Black.
13 .. J:Uds
l l . . .lt'l d5 1 2.'Wb3 'Wb4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 .'Wd3! 'Wg4? 1 4.e4 lt'l b6 1 5 .lt'lc4 gave White
a decisive advantage in Garnica - Benyounes,
corr. 20 1 2.
l l . . .'Wb6 1 2.'Wh4! ie7 (In the event of
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
94
1 2 . . . ixa3 1 3.bxa3 h6 1 4.ig5 lll d5 1 5 .�ab l
We? 1 6.�dc l Black is under considerable
pressure.) 1 3 .lll c4 Wb4 1 4.b3 Wb5 1 5 .ig5
White had a huge advantage in Andersen Dasaolu, Gibraltar 20 1 1 .
This active move remains quite popular.
9.Wd3
Obviously 9.Wxb5 ? is not working for
White, since after 9 . . . lll xd4 1 0.Wc4 Black has
1 0 . . . ib5 ! .
12.�xc5 i.xc5 13.t£ic4 @e7 14.t£lfe5
8
7
6
5
4
Now Black has two major options: Cl) 9 c4
and C2) 9 gcs.
.•.
•••
Cl) 9 ... c4 10.�c2 gcs
This looks like the most natural continuation,
as Black will most likely wish to remove his
rook from the h l -a8 diagonal at some point.
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14 ... ghdSN
1 4 . . . ieS ? 1 5 .lll d3 was nasty for Black in
Cifka - Simek, Prague 20 1 1 . The text move is
a better try, but I found a nice reply for White.
1 5.i.xc6! i.xc6 16.gxd8 gxd8 17.t£ixc6t
bxc6 18.i.d2;!;
White's superior pawn structure gives him a
long-term edge.
C) 8 ... b5
10 . . . lll b4?! 1 1 .Wd l ic6 is revealed to be
dubious after 1 2 .a3 lll a6 (or 1 2 . . . lll bd5
1 3 .lll e5 ib7 1 4.e4 lll b6 1 5 .lll c3 a6 1 6.ie3
and White's advantage is obvious) 1 3 .lll c3
lll c7 1 4.e4 when White had a clear advantage
in Stean - Ristic, Smederevska Palanka 1 982.
10 ... ie? has been quite a popular choice
in recent years. Here I like the relatively
unexplored l l .e4 0-0 1 2 .We2 Wb6, and now
the new idea:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 .ie3N ( 1 3.�dl �fe8 was played in Wen
Yang - Xiu Deshun, Ningbo 20 1 1 . I couldn't
find anything special here; it's just an extremely
complex position.) 1 3 . . . lll g4 1he logical reply,
as the black queen did not have a convenient
Chapter 7 - 5 . . . c5, 6 . . . lll c6 and 7 . . . id7
retreat square. 1 4.if4 l'!ad8 1 5 .h3 ltJ f6 1 6.l'!d l
The position remains complex, but I like
White's pawn centre. A possible continuation
is 1 6 . . . ie8 1 7.ie3 Wb8 1 8 . ltJ e l a6 1 9.ltJc2
when White has a harmonious position with
good central control. Possible pawn breaks
include a2-a4, b2-b3 and d4-d5 .
l l .e4
1 l .ig5 was my previous recommendation,
but the following game, played after the release
of GM l, shows the right way for Black:
1 l . . .ie7 1 2.ltJc3 Wb6 1 3.l'!ad l 0-0 1 4.ltJe5
�fd8 1 5 .ltJxd7 l'!xd7 Black was doing all right
in Gourlay - Cernousek, Hinckley Island 2009.
l l ...ie7
1 1 . . . ltJ b4 1 2.We2 ltJd3 occurred in Sanna Passerotti, Napoli 1 98 1 . Now I believe White
should have tried 1 3 .ig5N, with the following
point: 1 3 . . . h6 1 4.ixf6 Wxf6 1 5 .b3!
95
White is ready to meet 1 5 ... e5 with powerful
play: 1 6.a4! exd4 1 7.e5 Wb6 1 8 .axb5 ixb5
1 9.bxc4 ixc4 20.ltJ bd2 Black has problems
with his development.
1 1 . . .Wb6 1 2.a4!?N
This looks like an interesting novelty,
especially taking into account that after
1 2.l'!d l ltJ b4 1 3.We2 ltJd3 Black was doing
fine in Badea - Berescu, Brasov 2004.
1 2 . . . ltJ b4
This looks critical, although it is worth
checking a few other options:
12 . . . a6 is too compliant, and after 1 3 .axb5
axb5 1 4.ltJc3 ltJ b4 1 5 .We2 ltJ d3 1 6.ig5 it
is obvious that the opening of the a-file has
benefited White.
1 2 . . . ltJxd4 1 3 .ltJxd4 Wxd4 1 4.axb5 also
favours White in view of 14 . . . Wd3 1 5 .Wa4
Wb3 1 6.ltJc3 ic5 1 7.Wxb3 cxb3 1 8 .ie3!,
followed by grabbing the a-pawn with a clear
advantage.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 .Wd l bxa4
1 3 . . . ltJxe4? is too risky in view of 1 4.ltJe5
ltJ f6 1 5 .ltJxd7 ltJxd7 1 6.axb5 ie7 1 7.ltJc3,
followed by ie3 and Wa4, with a clear
advantage.
1 4. ltJ c3 ltJd3 1 5 .ltJxa4 Wb3
Black is hanging on, but White's chances are
better, for example:
1 6.ltJc3 a5 1 7.ltJe5 Wxd l 1 8.l'!xd l ltJxe5
1 9.dxe5 ltJ g4 20.l'!xa5 ! ic5 2 1 .l'!xc5 l'!xc5
96
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
22.f4�
Black will suffer with his knight on the edge
of the board.
1 5 ...J.d6?
An unfortunate decision, but even after the
improvement 1 5 . . .'1Wb7 1 6.a4 a6 1 7.J.e3 tll b4
1 8 .tll c3 White maintains a nice edge.
16.�xd7 �xd7 17.eS J.h4 1 8.a3 J.f'8
19.�c3 a6 20.dS ±
Black was in serious trouble in Badea - ltkis,
Bucharest 2003.
C2) 9 .. JkS
13 .. J�eS 14.� eS!
This idea was not available in the 1 o . . . J.e7
line. I found one practical example from this
position, which we will follow for a few more
moves.
14 ...Wfc7 1 5.J.f4
10.dxcS J.xcs
Worse is:
10 . . . tll b4?! l l .'1Mfb3! J.xc5 1 2.tll c3 a6
12 . . . tll bd5 1 3 .lll x d5 lll xd5 1 4 .tll e5± secures
a clear advantage for White.
1 2 . . . J.c6 1 3.a3 tll bd5 was played in Tanacs
- lzso, Kecskemet 20 1 2, and here White
missed the simple 1 4 .tll e5N with a clear
plus, in view of 1 4 . . . tll xc3 1 5 .J.xc6t E:xc6
1 6.tll xc6 lll xe2t 1 7.@h l '1Mfb6 1 8.'1Mff3!±
when Black does not have enough for the
exchange.
Now in Mate - Peredy, Hungary 2000,
White could have got some advantage with:
97
Chapter 7 - 5 . . . c5, 6 . . . ll\ c6 and 7 . . . .id7
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 . .igS!N
The following analysis from GM 1 still looks
good:
1 3 . . . .ic6 1 4.a3 ttJ bd5 1 5 .ttJe5 .ia8
1 5 . . . ttJ xc3 runs into 1 6 . .ixc6t l'!xc6
1 7.ttJxc6 ttJxe2t 1 8 .cJig2 'Wa8 1 9 . .ixf6!
'Wxc6t 20.'Wf3 with a decisive advantage.
1 6.l'!ac l ttJ xc3 1 7.l'!xc3 .ixg2 1 8.lt>xg2 'Wd5t
1 9.'Wxd5 ttJ xd5 20.l'!c2!
The pin along the c-file decides.
20 . . .f6 2 1 .hf6! gxf6 22.ttJ d3
White should eventually win the endgame
with his extra pawn.
n .lll c3
1 1 . . . a6?!
This slow move gives White an easy initiative.
1 2 . .ig5 lt:\ b4
This was a recent attempt to reanimate this
line for Black.
1 2 . . . h6 1 3 .ixf6 gxf6 ( 1 3 . . . 'Wxf6? loses to
1 4.lt:\e4 'We7 1 5 .'Wc3!, attacking both the
bishop and the g7-pawn) 1 4.l'!ad l ie7
1 5 .l'!d2± gave Black serious problems in
Badea - Marjanovic, Bucharest 1 998.
1 3 .'Wd2 .ic6 1 4.'Wxd8t l'!xd8 1 5 .a3 ttJ bd5
Even without queens, White has the makings
of a strong initiative. In Farago - J. Pinter,
Paks 20 1 2, he should have played:
a
b
c
d
e
f
h
1 6.lt:\e5N .ia8 1 7.ttJxd5 .ixd5 1 8.l'!fd l
With a clear advantage.
C21) 1 1 . .. 0-0
At this point Black's three most important
options are C21) 1 1 ... 0-0, C22) 1 1 ... ll:\b4
and C23) 1 1 . .. b4.
g
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
98
This looks natural, but White can
energetically exploit the disharmony of Black's
pieces with:
12.J.g5 tll b4 13.J.xfG gxf6 14.Y«d2!
1 4.We4 is also promising, but I like the idea
of transferring the queen to h6.
14 ...J.c6
1 4 . . . 'kt>g7 guards the h6-square, but enables
White to seize the initiative in the following
instructive way: 1 5 .a3 lll a6 1 6.Elad l ( 1 6.b4!?
is a good alternative, playing against the
misplaced knight on a6.) 1 6 . . . ic6 1 7.Wf4
We? 1 8 .Wg4t 'kt>h8 1 9 .Wh5± With an obvious
advantage.
1 9.Elxd5! f6 20.lll xf6t Elxf6
In GM I I gave the almost identical 20 . . . Wxf6
2 1 .Wxf6 Elxf6 22.Eld2 ixf3 23.ixf3t.
2 1 .Wg5t Wg7 22.Wxg?t mxg7 23.Eld2 ixf3
24.ixf3
The opposite-coloured bishops offer Black
some chances to survive. Nevertheless, White
was still able to convert his extra pawn in
Reinhart - Gach, email 20 1 1 .
15.Y«h6 ges
Intending . . . if8 to expel the queen.
1 5 . . . We? 1 6.a3!
This recommendation from GM I has since
been tested in a few games.
1 6.Elad l is less accurate due to 16 . . . Elfd8
1 7.a3 lll c2! 1 8 .Elxd8t Wxd8 and Black was
fine in Pribyl - Ivkov, Nice 1 974.
1 6 . . . lll d5
16 . . . lll a6 was tried in C. Horvath - Guido,
Vaujany 20 1 0. Here White could have
played 1 7.Elfd l N b4 1 8 .axb4 lll xb4 1 9 .Ela5!
Elfd8 20.Elxd8t Elxd8 2 1 .g4!, followed by
trading the light-squared bishops, with a
clear advantage.
1 7.lll e4 ib6 1 8 .Elad l f5
1 8 ... tll c2
1 8 . . . lll d5? is refuted by 1 9.lll d4! .
1 8 . . . ixf3 1 9.ixf3 lll c6 20.lll xb5 ± gave White
a healthy extra pawn and a clear advantage in
Anastasian - Kaidanov, Lucerne 1 997.
The text move was played in D . Berczes
D. Horvath, Budapest 20 1 2 . Here there was
no reason to refrain from the obvious capture:
-
19.tll xb5N hb5 20.Y«xb5 gbs 2 1 .Y«a4
gxb2 22.gd2 gcs
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
99
Chapter 7 - 5 . . . c5 , 6 . . . tL:i c6 and 7 . . . id7
�
�
-·
�
"ii �. �• •.• .t.
6 /,,�, , ?,.?,��
���,----%���
8
7
�
�
�
�
: jj;i1�
�
'
%
�
�mr
�
�
�
�
" " �%'�"" �8 �,��,
23 ��%'��·�
w��w�
1 - - , Y-.. .. ,Y,mrm- - �
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
23.�fdl!
Black has serious coordination problems,
and he cannot get away with taking the a3pawn:
23 ...YMxa3 24.Wg4t i>hs 25.�d7!
White has a decisive attack.
C22) 1 1 ...tll b4
- Moiseenko, Maalot 2008. However, a much
better continuation is 1 4 . . . 0-0 1 5 .l':'!:ac l l':'!:c8
16 . .ixf6 gxf6, when Black should hold without
much trouble.
12 ... 0-0
This has been played
correspondence games.
in
several
12 . . . ttJ bd5 1 3 .ll:ixd5 ll:ixd5 ( 1 3 . . . exd5?! 1 4.b3
0-0 1 5 ..ib2 gave White a stable advantage in
Zhang Zhong - Wang Yu, Manila 2007.) This
was Wessman - Jepson, Stockholm 1 993, and
now 1 4.ll:ie5N;:!; leads to a typical situation
where White's bishop pair gives him the
advantage.
1 2 . . . .ic6 1 3.a3 '1Mfxd2N
1 3 . . . ttJ bd5 1 4.ll:ie5! gave White a pleasant
edge in Hase - Dodson, corr. 1 994.
1 4 . .ixd2 tL:i a6
1 4 . . . ll:i bd5 1 5 .ll:ie5!± is problematic for
Black.
�! ��
�,JIi
i fi%
•
,.,
, , /,�
6 ��
��-.r��
''l, , , ,, ;�
��
" "'" •�� •
5 �" · �� �� �3 � m - ��
7s
4
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
12.YMd2!
A deep study of this variation convinced
me that the text is stronger than 1 2.'!Mf d l . I
won an easy game with the latter move after
12 . . . .ic6 1 3.'1Mfxd8t l':'!:xd8 1 4 . .ig5 .ie7? 1 5 .a3
� a6 1 6. tL:i e5 .ixg2 1 7.i>xg2± when Black was
unable to avoid the loss of a pawn in Avrukh
�-% •
"" "�f[§'0
-:'%'�,,,,
, , �f�, _ , /,� �
""'" �8 �f�J..
�
,,,,,,,,�ref'"""�f0
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 .b4 .ib6 1 6.l':'!:ac l
The misplaced knight on a6 is a serious
factor, for instance:
1 6 . . . 0-0 1 7.tL:ie5 .ixg2 1 8 .\t>xg2 l':'!:fd8
Both 1 8 . . . tL:i c7 1 9.ll:ic6! and 1 8 . . . .id4 1 9.f4
.ixc3 20 . .ixc3 leave White with a clear
advantage.
1 9 . .if4
Black has a difficult position.
1 00
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
13.tll e5 .ie8 14.�xdS gxd8
This position occurred in M.A. Dos Santos
- Sutkalenko, Internet 20 1 0, and several other
games. Here I found a new idea:
12 ... 0-0 13.tll d6!
I also considered 1 3 . .if4 and 1 3 . .ie3, but
Black has clear paths to equality against both
of them.
1 3 ... �d4
This initiates serious complications, but
White has a well-defined path to an advantage.
8
7
6
Black can hardly hope to equalize by giving up
his dark-squared bishop: 1 3 . . . .ixd6 1 4.'Wxd6
'We7 1 5 . .if4 White had a definite advantage in
Poluljahov - Koniushkov, Novorossijsk 1 996.
5
4
3
2
1
15 ..if4N
1 4 . .ig5 h6 1 5 . .ixf6 gxf6 has been played
in all the games so far, but Black has been
pretty successful at neutralizing White's slight
initiative. That is why I prefer the slightly more
reserved development of the bishop. A brief
illustrative line is:
15 ... �fd5 16 ..id2 f6 17.tll xd5 �xd5
18.tll d3 .ib6 19.gfcl
White has typical pressure on the queenside.
C23) 1 1 ... b4 12.�b5
1 2.�e4 has been played in quite a lot of games,
but the text move is much more principled.
1 3 . . . l'!c7
This rare yet interesting move has a hidden
idea behind it.
1 4 . .if4
Obviously the critical continuation. Stohl
analysed it in Chess Informant 87, and it has
been tested a couple of times since GM 1
was published.
14 . .ig5 occurred in Verat - Hartereau, Paris
1 99 1 , and here the surprising 1 4 . . . .icS!N
would have threatened ... l'!d7. White must
therefore simplify with 1 5 .�xc8 'Wxd3
1 6.exd3 l'!cxc8 1 7.l'!ac l .id6, when Black
has the d5-square at his disposal, and I
believe White's advantage is rather symbolic.
1 4 . . . � e7
1 4 . . . �d5? allows 1 5 .� g5+- and White wins
material.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 7 - 5 . . . c5, 6 . . . lll c6 and 7 . . . id7
1 5 .tlig5! tli g6 1 6.tlide4 tli xe4
1 6 .. J'k8 occurred in Yotov - Davidov,
email 2009. Here I propose 1 7.:!:!fd l N tli d5
1 8 .id6! ixd6 1 9.tlixf7 l:!xf7 20.tlixd6 Wle7
2 1 .tlixc8 ixc8 22.:i:!ac l ib7 23 .Wid4 when,
despite the approximate material equality,
White dominates the board.
1 7.ixe4
I also considered: 1 7.ixc7N tlixfL. 1 8 .Wlxg6
tli g4t 1 9.c;t>h l hxg6 (Stohl gives only
1 9 . . . fxg6? 20.ixd8± .) Now a logical sequence
is 20.ixd8 :!:!xd8 2 1 .tlixf7 l:!f8 22.if3
tlifL.t 23.c;t>g2 '4fxf7 24.:!:!ac l ib6 25 .:!:!xfL.
ixfL. 26.@xfL. l:!c8 27.l:!xc8 ixc8 when the
endgame looks drawish, although White
can certainly play on for a while with no
risk.
17 . . . e5 1 8.ie3 ixe3 1 9.Wixe3 Wle7 20.:i:!ac l
:!:!fc8 2 1 .id5 ie8 22.l:!xc7 l:!xc7
This position occurred in Petukhov Rawlings, email 2009, and here I would
prefer:
23.:i:!c l Nt
Black's position has two clear drawbacks: the
exposed queenside pawns and the misplaced
knight on g6.
101
1 5 ... g6 16.�ge4 �xf4 17.gxf4 ib6!
Worse is 1 7 . . . ic6 1 8 .tlixc8 ib5 1 9.Wih3
tli xe2t 20.c;t>h l Wlxc8 (20 . . . tlixf4 2 1 .Wih6
ixfl 22.:!:!xfl +-) 2 1 .:i:!ac l ± with a material
advantage to White.
19 ...�xcS
After 1 9 . . . tli xe2t 20.c;t>h l Wlxc8 2 1 .Wixb4±
White is the exchange up for no compensation,
and has achieved a huge score from this
position.
20.e3 ixfI 2 1 .�xfl �5
2 1 . . .f5 22. � g3 �c2 23.�xb4 was similar i n
Stohl - A. Sokolov, Germany 2003.
14.if4 �d5 15.�g5!
This is the point of White's play. The
following sequence is relatively forced.
22.�xb4 ±
White was a pawn up for minimal
compensation in Bang - Kuiper, email 2006,
and several subsequent games. Black ended
up drawing quite a few of them, but I cannot
see why anyone would want to defend such a
position.
1 02
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
D) 8 ... cxd4 9.�xd4
Several top GMs have played this way with
Black. Compared with the previous variation,
he avoids weakening the queenside and tries to
neutralize White's opening initiative.
9 .. J'k8
9 . . . lt:\xd4 1 0.1Wxd4 i.c6 1 1 .i.xc6t bxc6 is
occasionally seen, but the weakening of Black's
pawn structure gives White an automatic
advantage. Here I suggest the simple 1 2.ie3N
1Wxd4 1 3.ixd4 c5 1 4.i.xf6 gxf6 1 5 .ttJ a3 f5
1 6.lt:\c4 ig7 1 7.E!:ad l We? 1 8.Ei:d3;!; with an
unpleasant endgame for Black.
1 0.�c3
Here we will consider DI) 10 ...'%Yb6, D2)
10 ..i.e7 and D3) 10 ... lll xd4, the last of
which is the main line by far.
.
D I ) 10 ...'%Yb6
Black serious problems. For instance, 1 3.ttJa4
i.xa4 1 4.1Wxa4t rJle7 1 5 .ixc5t E!:xc5 1 6.Ei:acl
E!:hc8 1 7.1Wa3 rJle8 was close to equal in
Hardicsay - Oger, email 2009.
1 1 ... lll a5
This was played in both of the existing games
from this position.
I also considered 1 I . . .1Wb4N, but 1 2.1Wxb4
i.xb4 1 3 .E!:dl 0-0 (or 1 3 . . . b6 1 4.ttJb5)
1 4.lt:\e4! leads to a typical endgame edge for
White.
1 1 . . . i.e?N is well met by 1 2.i.e3 1Wc7 1 3.if4!,
intending 13 ... e5 1 4 .ig5 i.e6 1 5 .1Wa4 0-0
1 6.i.xf6 i.xf6 1 7.ttJc5 with some advantage.
-� �
��.1 ��•� ,,,,,Y,�ref,,,,,�zv,
: �, �,!
�
�
�
�
, ,�''��� ��, ·
: If
��
�r�
�
�� �•
3 �tt:Jm
�
�p
�
2
s
;w.
8
8���
- - ;Q-----%'%',
""efni{ ""
""%�7�
1 � � • lt ��
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
I2.'%Yh4!N
White needs to improve on the harmless
1 2.1Wd4 1Wxd4 1 3.ttJxd4, as played in Miguel
Lago - Almagro Mazariegos, Linares 1 998,
when 13 ... i.b4N would have given Black a
comfortable game.
1 1 .ttJ b3!?
In GM I I gave l 1 .ttJxc6 i.xc6 1 2 .ie3, but I
discovered an unpleasant surprise in 1 2 . . . ic5 !.
All other moves were working perfectly for
White, but now I don't see how we can pose
I2 ... lll xb3
1 2 . . . i.e? 1 3 .ttJxa5 1Wxa5 1 4 .i.xb7 E!:b8
1 5 .i.f3 0-0 1 6.a3 can be compared with the
later variation 032. Here White has a better
version of the position with an extra pawn.
Chapter 7 - 5 . . . c5, 6 . . . tll c6 and 7 . . . J.d7
13.axb3 J.e7 14.b4!
White maintains definite pressure, for
instance:
14 ... a6 15.J.e3 V!fc7 16.V!fd4 0-0 17J�fcl
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
17... e5
Also after 1 7 . . . J.c6 1 8 . b 5 J.xg2 1 9. iixg2
Wb8 20.Wa4 White maintains the more active
position.
1 03
This is a pretty solid option for Black, but
solid does not necessarily mean equalizing.
I U�dl tll a5
Other options are worse:
1 1 . . .Wa5
White may use the exposed position of the
queen to develop his initiative. Recently a
new move appealed to me:
1 2 .J.e3!?N
Previously I recommended 1 2.lll b3, but
things are not so simple after 12 . . . Wh5! .
1 2 . . . 0-0
1 2 . . . tll e5 1 3 .Wb3 b6 1 4.lll db5 0-0 1 5 .J.f4
lll c4 1 6.a4 gives Black problems connected
with his bad queen position.
12 . . . lll xd4 1 3 .Wxd4 ic5 1 4 .\We5 clearly
favours White. One illustrative line is
1 4 . . . Wb6 1 5 .ixc5 :gxc5 1 6.Wb8t :gc8
1 7.Wxb? Wxb7 1 8 .ixb7 :gb8 1 9.lll e 4!
tll xe4 20.ixe4 :gxb2 2 1 .:gab l :gxb l 22.:gxb l
and White will win the a-pawn, reaching a
winning endgame.
IS.V!id3 V!ibs 19.tll d5 tll xd5 20.J.xd5
White's excellent piece activity means that
Black still faces a battle for equality.
D2) 10 ...J.e7
a
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 .Wb5! Wc7
1 3 . . . Wxb5 14.lll dxb5 is obviously better for
White.
1 4.tll xc6 J.xc6 1 5 .ixc6 bxc6
Black must weaken his pawn structure,
since 1 5 . . .Wxc6 runs into 1 6.ixa7 Wxb5
l 7.lll x b5 :gc2 1 8.id4 :gxe2 1 9.:gac l with a
big plus for White.
1 04
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 6.1Wa6 l'!b8 1 7.b3;!;
White has a pleasant edge, as is customary
for this pawn structure.
1 I . . .1Wb6 1 2.llixc6 .L:c6 1 3.ie3 1Wa5
13 . . . 1Wxb2? is no good: 1 4.l'!ab l 1Wc2 The
most stubborn attempt. ( 1 4 . . . 1Wa3? was
played in Korniushin - Kofanov, Novgorod
1 997, and here 1 5 .lli b5N+- followed by
llixa7 would have decided the game on the
spot.) 1 5 .ixc6t bxc6 ( 1 5 . . . l'!xc6? 1 6.1Wxc6t!
bxc6 1 7.l'!b8t id8 1 8 .l'!bxd8t cJ;; e7 1 9 .ic5
is mare!) 1 6.l'!d2 1Wf5 1 7.l'!b7! White has a
winning advantage.
1 4.ixc6t l'!xc6
Black can hardly hope to equalize with
1 4 . . . bxc6, and after 1 5 .1Wa4! 1Wxa4 1 6.llixa4
llid5 1 7.id4 White's advantage is obvious.
1 5 .1Wb3 'Wa6
Now in Shlykov - Kunitson, Narva 2006,
White could have played more energetically
with:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
12.�d3 0-0
Now White must play energetically to
prevent Black from developing his pieces freely.
1 3.tll db5 �b6
1 3 . . . ixb5?! 1 4.1Wxb5 1Wb6 1 5 .1Wxb6 axb6
l 6.if4± gave White an obvious advantage
thanks to his bishop pair in Kraemer Faibisovich, Bad Wiessee 20 1 3 .
14 ..ie3 .ixb5 1 5.�xb5
1 5 .llixb5?! ic5 allowed Black to equalize
comfortably in M.M. Ivanov - Lie, Gausdal
1 996. By exchanging queens, White gives
himself better chances to exploit the bishop
pair.
15 ...�xb5 16.tll xb5 a6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.l'!d4!N
With the unpleasant threat of l'!a4.
16 ... 'Wb6 1 7.'Wxb6 axb6
Worse is 17 . . . l'!xb6 1 8.l'!c4!, when 1 8 . . . l'!xb2?
loses to 1 9.l'!c8t id8 20.l'!d l lli d7 2 1 .lli a4!
followed by lli c5 .
1 8 .l'!ad l 0-0 1 9.l'!a4
Black faces a difficult endgame in view of the
weak pawns on b6 and b7.
Chapter 7 - 5 . . . c 5 , 6 . . . ttJ c6 and 7 . . . id7
1 05
17.�d4N
This improves over 1 7.ltJd6 i.xd6 1 8 .:!:%xd6
ll:i c4 1 9 .:!:%d3 ll:i xe3 20.:!:%xe3 :!:%c7 with an
easily holdable endgame for Black, Voelzke Joppien, Kiel 2003.
1 7.ll:ia7!?N
This alternative is 'inhuman', but the
computer likes it.
1 7 . . . :!:%c2 1 8.b3!
White should avoid 1 8 .:!:%ac l ?! :!:%xb2 1 9.:!:%d2
:!:%xd2 20.i.xd2 b6, when he has nothing
better than 2 1 .i.xa5 bxa5 22.ll:ic6= with a
drawn endgame. Refusing the draw with
2 1 .ll:ic8?! is rather dangerous in view of
2 1 . .. i.c5 22.:!:%xc5 bxc5 23.ll:ie7t 'ktih8
24.ha5 :!:%b8! when White is in danger of
losing the a-pawn.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Black is under pressure, and 2 1 . . . ll:i b2? is
strongly met by 22.ll:ic6! ll:ixd3 23.ll:ixe?t
iih8 24.exd3 :!:%d7 25 .i.xa6 :!:%xe7 26.i.d6 with
a winning endgame.
1 8J�dcl!
I prefer this over 1 8 .:!:%ac l :!:%c4!.
18 ... tlid5
After 1 8 . . . :!:%c4 1 9 .i.d2! :!:%dxd4 20.i.xa5
White has a comfortable edge with his pair of
bishops.
19Jhc8 :!:%xc8 20.Ld5 exd5 2 1 .b3;!;
White is slightly better, as he has easy play
against the isolated pawn.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 8 . . . ll:id5
1 8 . . . :!:%xe2?! 1 9.i.b6 i.b4 20.a3 i.c3 2 1 .:i:%ac l
:!:%d2 22.b4 ll:ib3 23.:!:%xd2 i.xd2 24.:!:%c7±
gives White excellent winning chances.
1 9.i.xd5 exd5 20.:!:%xd5 i.f6 2 1 .:i:%cl :!:%xa2
22.b4 ll:ib3 23.:!:%c7;!;
White's pieces are much more active.
17 ... :!:%fd8
Another line is 1 7 . . . ll:i c4 1 8 .i.f4! when the
two bishops are starting to work: 1 8 . . . :!:%cd8
1 9.hb7 ll:ixb2 20.:!:%d2! ll:i c4 2 1 .:i:%d3
D3) 10 ... �xd4 I 1 .¥Nxd4 ic5 12.¥Nh4
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 06
This way Black develops his bishop to a
more active square, but in doing so he drives
the queen to a good location where it sets up
the thematic idea of ih6. From here we will
analyse 03 1) 12 . . .ic6 followed by the main
line of 032) 12 . . . 0-0.
1 2 . . . 'Wb6? allows the typical strike: 1 3.ih6!
��-JI
--�����i�,�a��!f
�
��• ·'•, , , ;·��t
'"""�-�•
� �� ij'�/,'0},,B, ,
: �� �
/,
/
"
"'
3 � �� ��
- �'*ff!J
7
8
&�
6
2
,,,,,
88""'
'- ��i�
�
- g � i,f ""
�
""{"'"� �-"""�·
a
b
c
d
e
�
f
g
h
1 3 . . . gxh6 (Black's main problem is that
1 3 . . . 0-0? runs into 1 4.ixg1! �xg7 1 5 .'Wg5 t
with a winning advantage.) 1 4.'Wxf6 id4
1 5 .'Wxh6 'Wxb2 1 6.tt:le4± Black is facing
a dangerous attack with his king stuck
in the centre, Zigura - Mancini, Massy
1 993.
03 1) 1 2 . . .J.c6 13J�dl
1 3 . . . 'Wb6
This allows a familiar idea.
1 4.ixc6t 'Wxc6
14 . . . E1xc6 1 5 .ih6! gxh6 1 6.'Wxf6 0-0
1 7.tt:le4 was clearly better for White in
Portisch - Radulov, Buenos Aires (ol) 1 978.
1 5.ih6 0-0
.i � �·
�
-·,�,,,,%
Y,·W.·'"lf.
7 � l· ��,.,-,,
&1W•
/, , , �
��-� ��A •
� �� ;;.'��
: �� �
/,
/
"
"'
� ��r/,'0�'\, ,
3 � �� �B
8
6
,,,,,%� ��
�·
,,,,,
2
1
J�
88""'
'
�wti,
,
""£"""�
g�
� ��
�
��
""'
a
b
c
d
e
f
"
�
-
g
�
,,,,
h
1 6.E1ac l !N
This is stronger than 1 6.ixg? ixf2t
1 7.�xf2 'Wc5 t 1 8.mg2 �xg?;!; when Black
managed to hold the draw in G. Davies Gysi, corr. 1 99 5 .
1 6 . . . e5 1 7.tt:la4 b6 1 8 .ie3±
White has a serious advantage.
1 3 . . . lll d? 1 4.ixc6 E1xc6 1 5 .'Wg4
White should keep the queens on the board.
1 5 .'Wxd8t?! mxd8 1 6.if4 me? gave Black
nothing to worry about in Grigoryan Hayrapetian, Yerevan 20 1 3 .
1 5 . . .'Wf6 1 6.tt:le4 'Wg6
Chapter 7 - 5 . . . c5, 6 . . . lll c6 and 7 . . . id7
1 7.Wf3!N
This is stronger than 1 7.Wf4 e5 1 8 .Wf3 as
in Hoffmann - Bartels, St Ingbert 1 999.
Here Black has a surprising resource in
18 ... id4!N 1 9.e3 ib6, when White can
hardly develop much of an initiative with
his bishop blocked in.
17 . . .ie? 1 8 .ie3 f5 l 9.tll c3 a6 20.:B:ac l
There i s n o doubting White's advantage.
8
7
6
5
4
1 9 ... gxf6 20.gacl
This innocent-looking endgame is actually
quite dangerous for Black.
- · � �-�
%� ·�
��
·, �
.
:w;,,·
�
�
��
.i
�
• -·
� �� ���, 3�
�� �� �: ��
� � �
�Y<rr'h�� �
�w;d'�
2
1 � ��r,t�,� �
M ���wJ�
� m
8
7
6
% , , , , %�
3 .
'm "
�
3
1
1 07
a
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14.hc6t gxc6 15.J.g5!
Now 1 5 .ih6 is not so strong in view of
1 5 . . . 0-0 1 6.ixg? ixf2t 1 7.<tti xf2 <tti xg7 with
unclear play, Csom - Peters, Hastings 1 978.
15 ...ie7 16.tll e4 �e5
1 6 . . .Wf5 1 7.ixf6 ixf6 1 8.lll xf6t Wxf6 just
transposes.
17. tll xf6t J.xf6
1 7 . . . gxf6 1 8 .ih6! leaves Black's king stuck
in the centre.
18.J.xfG �xf6
In the event of 1 8 . . . gxf6 1 9.Wg4 h5 20.Wg?
l'!f8 2 1 .E:d2 <tti e? 22.E:ad l E:c7 23.h4;!; Black is
doomed to a passive defence.
19.�xf6
After 1 9 .Wb4 We?! 20.Wd4 0-0 2 1 .Wxa?
l'!c2 Black was fine and a draw was agreed in F.
Olafsson - Ciric, Wijk aan Zee 1 969.
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
20 ... <tle7
After 20 . . . E:xc l 2 1 .E:xc l �d7 22.�g2;!;
Black's problem is that 22 . . . E:c8 is impossible,
as White can exchange rooks and march his
king towards the h7-pawn.
2 U�xc6 bxc6 22.gd4 gbg 23.h3 gb5
24.ga4 a5 25. <tlg2;!;
The game Lein - P. Littlewood, Hastings
1 980, demonstrated that it is by no means easy
for Black to hold this endgame.
032) 12 ... 0-0
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 08
I faced this move the very next day after
GM 1 was launched, in a match between Israel
and Denmark at the 2008 Dresden Olympiad.
My opponent was Peter Heine Nielsen, one of
the world's top theoreticians. I had noticed this
idea when writing my first book, but it was
rather unexplored. Nowadays there are over
fifty games in the database.
13.hb7
White has to accept the challenge if he is
to fight for an advantage. There are several
games showing that 1 3 .i.g5 h6 1 4.i.xf6 Wxf6
1 5 .Wxf6 gxf6 1 6.i.xb7 E!:b8 1 7.i.f3 E!:xb2=
gives Black nothing to worry about.
I4 ... gb4 1 5.Wg5
Obviously White should refrain from e2-e4,
as this would lose control over the d4-square
while leaving White's queen cut off from the
centre.
� B �.le
��
}."� '· '- ·
�
�
,�
6 '�
'�f
,.
�� ,0 �
��
5 �
���
""'�� ,,,,,%�
�
�
4 �� � �
•,,,,,Y,%m
'"//, �
w�
3
��
-�if
�
;
W'
�
, , W'0
W'
�
,
�
2 [)J[!J%� ,0 ����wJ�
1 � � � ��
s
%
7
,,,, , , , , ;�txtJ·
....
13 .. J�bs
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 ...i.d4
1 5 . . . Wb6? allows 1 6.b3 when White
develops more comfortably. 1 6 . . . h6 1 7.'?Md2 e5
was played in Nyback - Brunello, Rijeka 20 1 0,
and now 1 8.e3N i.c6 1 9.i.xc6 Wxc6 20.E!:dl
would have left Black with no compensation
for the missing pawn.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14.i.f3
I gave this as a novelty in GM 1, and it has
since been played in a lot of games.
One of the key differences with 1 4 .i.g2 is
control over the g4-square. 14 . . . E!:b4 1 5 .Wg5
Wb6 1 6.a3 (The previous point is illustrated
after 1 6.b3 lll g4! 1 7.lll d l h6 1 8.'?Md2 E!:d4
1 9 .'?Mc2 E!:c8 when Black has a lot of activity.)
1 6 . . . E!:c4 1 7.'?Md2 i.c6 1 8 .i.xc6 This was
Batchuluun - Omar, Istanbul (ol) 20 1 2, and
now the simple 1 8 . . . '?Mxc6N would have left
Black with sufficient compensation.
I6.YNd2
1 6.E!:d l has been played a couple of times,
but I am not completely happy with the
position after 16 . . . Wb6!?N.
I6 ...YNc7 17.� dl!
This move was first employed by Kramnik
against Naiditsch, and I now believe it to be
White's best.
1 7.'?Md3 was my superficial recommendation
from GM 1. However, it is hardly dangerous for
Black in view of 17 . . . e5 1 8.E!:d l i.c6 1 9.i.xc6
Wxc6, when it is hard for White to untangle his
queenside without returning his extra pawn.
This has been tested in some correspondence
games, all of which ended in draws.
1 09
Chapter 7 - 5 . . . c 5 , 6 . . . ttJ c6 and 7 . . . id7
1 7 .E:d l was my choice in 2008, but I got
nowhere after 17 . . . E:fb8 1 8.'1Mfd3 '1Mfc5 1 9 .e3
ie5 20.lll e4 lll xe4 2 1 .'1Mfxd7 lll f6
An important alternative is:
1 8 . . . E:a4 1 9.lll e3 e5 20.'1Mfc2!
The key point. Now Black has tried a few
different queen moves.
a
8
� ��-�
�
� �Era£�mt
1 %,,,,%� ,,,, %� ·- -%�
,�
�
6
--�
�
�
5
��
%"' " ��-�0 ��
4 ���
� �- �
,
3
2
1
•_ _ y, ,,,,,�
w
�
w-��0 ���,-, �j,;
if_�J[jwif.ff<0
-0
% � �A
��---- ·tt5·�=---A
%
0 %'LJ%
a
b
c
%
d
0 %'LJ%
e
f
%'LJ
g
h
17 .. J:Hbs
17 . . . '!Mfb6 has been played in one game,
and here 1 8 .E:b l N appeals to me the most.
( 1 8 .lll e3 E:c8 1 9.lll c2 ixb2 20.'!Mfxb4 '1Mfxb4
2 1 .lll xb4 ixa l 22.ie3 ic3 was fine for Black
in Li - Alavi Moghaddam, Zaozhuang 20 1 2.)
18 ... e5 1 9.b3 White should be able to solve his
queenside problems and remain with a healthy
extra pawn, as seen after 1 9 . . . E:c8 20.ib2 ih3
2 1 .E:e l and so on.
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
20 . . . '!Mfxc2
20 . . . '1Mfa5 is not the best square for the queen.
I suggest the surprising novelty: 2 l .ic6!N
(I found that 2 1 .b4 is not that clear. White
went on to score a beautiful win in Kaidanov
- Yang, Saint Louis 20 1 1 , but Black's play
can be improved.) 2 1 . . .ixc6 22.'1Mfxc6 '1Mfb5
23 .'1Mfxb5 E:xb5 24.ll:\f5 White has a healthy
extra pawn.
20 . . . '1Mfd8 2 1 .E:b l !N Another important
novelty. (2 1 .lll f5 ? E:c8 22.'1Mfb3 E:b8 23.'1Mfc2
E:c8 24.'!Mfd l E:ac4 gave Black a lot of
compensation in Yanayt - Yang, Arlington
20 1 1 .) 2 1 . . .E:c8 22.'1Mfd2 ixe3 Otherwise
White will just play b2-b3. 23 .'1Mfxe3 if5
24.E:al e4 25 .ig2! Black does not have
enough for the pawn.
2 1 .lll xc2 ixb2 22.E:b l e4 23.E:xb2
23 .ig2 ie5 is close to equal.
1 8.a3 gc4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 10
23 . . . Elxb2
23 . . . Elc8 24.ig2 Elac4 25 .ig5 Elxc2 26.Elxc2
Elxc2 27.Eld l reaches an endgame where
Black will be tortured for a long time by the
bishop pair.
24.ixb2 exf3 25.exf3
White has a solid extra pawn with several
pieces remaining. His winning chances are
quite real, although the opposite-coloured
bishops give Black some hopes of salvation.
8
This posmon occurred in Kramnik Naiditsch, Dortmund 20 1 0, and now 2 1 .b3!N
is the most convincing continuation. (In the
game White played 2 1 . b4 and won in good
style, but Black could have made things more
difficult.) 2 1 . . .Ela6 22.ib2 ixb2 23.°1Wxb2
e4 24.ig2± Black has no real targets for
counterplay.
20.YNxe3
8
�� .% �%�� .r�
'ef"'"�:{/.'''-' .
if�� �.i.
i if�
, ,, /, �,.
,,, , /,�i
�
6
7 /, , , , , /,
6
4
4
7
5
5
��� , �
�
��
�
��
r�
�
�
, , �� ��,, �¥1"-
3 /, , , , , % ,�
�
2
3
2
1
1
a
c
e
g
h
19.�e3 .ixe3
This improvement over the stem game was
recommended in different sources, and has
been tested in some correspondence games.
Black is short of resources after: 1 9 . . . Ela4
20.Elb l e5 (20 . . . ixe3 2 1 .°1Wxe3 tLl d5 22.°1Wd3
ib5 23 .°IWd l ± leaves White with a healthy
extra pawn.)
�8%
il.��8%
, , , ,%�,
, , , , %�,
�%� �•
�
�P�/�
� ���W"
.: ��
,,
a
b
:%
/
c
d
e
f
g
h
20 e5 2 1 .b4
I remember seeing 2 1 .id2 Elxb2 22.Elab l
recommended somewhere, with a supposed
advantage for White, due to his bishop pair.
However, after 22 . . . Elxb l 23.Elxb l h6, Black
seems totally fine.
•.•
21 . .Jk3 22.§°d2 ge8!?
22 . . . Elc2 23.°1Wd3 Ele8 24.ig2 ig4 25 .°1Wb3
ie6 26.'!Wb l led to an eventual victory for
Black in Bobarnac - Kovalsky, corr. 20 1 1 ,
but the result was due to White's subsequent
mistakes. At this point Black does not have
sufficient compensation.
The text move occurred in Antonenko Foulds, corr. 20 1 3 . This is incredibly tricky
play from Black, who is trying to stay flexible,
while White is suffering from a lack of activity.
However, I believe I have found a suitable
solution.
Chapter 7 - 5 . . . c5, 6 . . . tt:l c6 and 7 . . . id7
111
Conclusion
23 ..ig2N
My idea is to give up the extra pawn, in
return for activating the dark-squared bishop.
The following illustrative line looks most
logical to me.
23 ... ih5 24.Vfidl gds 25.id2 '?Nc4
25 . . Jk2 is not dangerous in view of 26.:B:c l .
26Jkl �xcl 27.'?Nxcl '?Nxe2
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
28 ..ie3
White has the bishop pair and should be
able to create a passed pawn on the queenside,
which makes his chances clearly preferable.
After 5 . . . c5 6.0-0 lll c6 7.'Wa4, the 7 . . . id7
variation remains an important battleground,
with many new games having occurred since
GM I was published. After the automatic
8.'Wxc4 we looked at four main options.
8 . . . E:c8 and 8 . . . 'Wb6 are playable, but both
moves suffer from a similar problem. The
point is that, after 9.dxc5 , recapturing the
c5-pawn will require Black to misplace his
pieces in one way or another, thus ensuring a
slight initiative for White.
8 . . . b5 is an interesting move, although it
carries certain strategic risks after 9.'Wd3. Black
may proceed with the space-gaining 9 . . . c4, but
this grants White full control over the centre.
On the other hand, if he maintains the tension
with 9 . . . E:c8, then 1 0.dxc5 ixc5 1 1 .lll c3
leaves him with some holes on the queenside,
as well as a bishop that would be better placed
on b7 than on d7.
The most solid and popular option is
8 . . . cxd4 9.lll xd4 E:c8, when the main line
continues 1 0.lt:lc3 lll xd4 1 l .'Wxd4 il.c5
1 2 .'Wh4. Now 1 2 . . . il.c6 allows White to
develop his initiative, putting Black under
pressure without taking much risk. The most
critical line is 1 2 . . . 0-0, when 1 3.il.xb7 E:b8
1 4.il.f3 reaches a key position that has been
tested many times since GM I was published.
The position is challenging for both sides, but
my overall feeling is that Black does not have
quite enough activity for the sacrificed pawn.
Catalan 4 ... dxc4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
5 a6 and 6 b5
...
...
Variation Index
1 .d4 � f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.� f3 dxc4 s .i.g2 a6 6.0-0 b5
7.� e5
A) 7 ... c6
B) 7 ... � d5 8.a4 i.b7 9.e4 �f6 1 0.axbS axb5 1 1 .�xa8 has
12.�c3 c6 1 3.dS
B l) 1 3 ... cxdS
B2) 1 3 ... i.d6
B3) 1 3 ... exdS
B4) 1 3 ... i.e7 14.dxe6 fxe6 15.�e2 0-0 16.i.h3
B4 1) 1 6 ... @hs
B42) 1 6 ... �c8
B3) after 1 7 . . . WeS!
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 8 .Wb7!?N
b
c
d
e
1 8 .Ag5N
f
1 14
1 15
1 17
1 19
120
121
1 23
B42) after 20 . . . Ab7
B42) note to l 7 ... lll a6
a
1 13
a
b
c
d
e
f
2 1 .We3N
g
h
h
Chapter 8
-
5 . . . a6 and 6 b5
1 .d4 tLJf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.�f3 dxc4 5.i.g2
a6 6.0-0
6.�e5 is an important alternative for White
in this position, but I am sticking with my
preference from GM 1 .
6 ... b5
This is the most direct way to hold on to the
extra pawn and Black's second most important
choice in this position.
7.� e5
1 13
. . .
8.a4!
Breaking up Black's pawn structure.
8 . . . i.b7 9.axb5 i.xg2 1 0.iixg2 Wd5t 1 1 .iigl
Though this is good, I prefer 1 l .e4!?N Wxb5
(Or 1 1 . . .Wxe4t 1 2.f3 Wb7 1 3.Wa4 lli fd7
1 4.lt'ic3 i.d6 1 5 .lt'ixd7 lt'ixd7 1 6.bxa6 Wb3
1 7.Wxb3 cxb3 1 8 .lll b 5 E!:a8 1 9.:B:d l +-.
Black is helpless against White's idea of
picking up the b3-pawn by means of E!:d l ­
d3xb3.) 1 2 .lll c3 Wb3 1 3 .We2 i.b4 1 4 .i.e3
lt'i bd7 1 5 .lll xc4± White has a big positional
advantage.
1 1 . . . Wxb5
Two games have reached this position, when
White should play the simple:
1 2. lt'i c3N Wb3 1 3.E!:a4
Regaining the c4-pawn and maintaining a
clear positional advantage.
A) 7... c6
White has a strong idea at his disposal:
8.b3
8.lt'ixc6 Wb6 is another line, which we will
not go into at this point.
7 . . . E!:a7?!
This is clearly inferior in view of:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 14
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 5 .a4! bxa4 1 6.E:xa4± with definite positional
pressure, Razuvaev - M. Gurevich, Riga 1 98 5 .
l l . . .ib7?! allows White to seize an early
initiative with 1 2.d5!, creating the threat of
1 3 .ie3 . After 1 2 . . . �c7 1 3.ie3 E:a8 1 4.dxe6
(my engine gives the amazing 1 4 .tll c3! , when
the knight is untouchable in view of l 4 . . . �xc3
1 5 .:B:c l �e5 1 6.dxe6! and White is winning)
1 4 . . . fxe6 1 5 .ixb7 �xb7 1 6.lll d4± White was
clearly better in Lingnau - Thesing, Germany
1 992.
12.e4 .ib7 1 3.!�el .ie7
Most probably Black should have tried the
more active 1 3 . . . ib4, but even then after
1 4 .id2 ixd2 1 5 .tll l xd2 0-0 1 6.a4± White
has clear targets on the queenside.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
19.%Yxd8t
White maintains the pressure in the arising
endgame, though I would prefer to keep the
queens on by means of 1 9.�d2N.
19 gxdS 20.gcl @e7 2 1 .tll c3
White maintains a nagging edge, Querci De Carlos Arregui, email 20 1 1 .
•.•
B) 7 tll d5
.••
This is by far Black's most popular reply.
8.a4
Definitely the most ambitious continuation.
White's main alternatives are 8.tll c3 and 8.e4.
8 .ib7
8 . . . c6 9.axb5 cxb5 1 O.b3 cxb3 l l .�xb3 ib7
transposes to Chapter 9. See page 1 28 for the
continuation, beginning with 1 2 .e4.
••.
1 5 @f8
1 5 . . . g6 1 6.ih6 lll b4 l 7.ixb7 �xb7 1 8 .E:e2
(defending against . . . tll c2) 1 8 . . . tll 8c6 1 9 .tll c3±
Black's king will be stuck in the centre for a long
time and his prospects are grim, Krasenkow Kohlweyer, Ostend 1 990.
••.
16 .ig5 h5 17.%Yh4 hg5 1 8.%Yxg5 %Yd8
•
Chapter 8 - 5 . . . a6 and 6 . . . b5
9.e4
The most popular move for White has been
9.b3, but I believe Black has a great positional
piece sacrifice at his disposal: 9 . . . c3! 1 0.axb5
axb5 l l .E1xa8 ixa8 1 2.e4 b4!! 1 3.exd5 ixd5
With unclear play.
9.axb5 axb5 1 0.E1xa8 ixa8 l l .e4 lt:\ f6 is j ust
another move order that transposes to our
main line.
9 ... c!lif6
This i s the black knight's only retreat
according to theory. It is very important for
Black to control the h5-square, otherwise the
queen's sortie to h5 will pose Black definite
problems.
I also checked another knight move:
9 . . . lt:\ b4?!N 1 0.axb5 axb5 l l .E1xa8 ixa8
1 2.Wh5! g6 ( 1 2 . . . We7 1 3 .ig5 g6 1 4.Wh4
looks even worse for Black) 1 3 .lll xg6! This is
the point behind White's 1 2th move. 1 3 . . . fxg6
14.We5 lt:\ 8c6 1 5 .Wxh8 Wxd4 1 6.Wxh7 White
has a technically winning position.
10.axb5 axb5 l 1 .�xa8 ixas 12.tDc3 c6
1 2 . . . b4?!
This dubious move has rarely been played,
and for good reason:
1 15
Wb8 1 6.Wxb8t lll x b8 1 7.lll xc7t <J;; e7
l 8.d5± with a large advantage.
1 5 .ixe4 lt:lxe4 1 6. lt:\ c6 lt:l b6
I also examined the following funny line:
16 . . . Wc8 1 7.Wa8! lt:l b6 1 8.lll xc7t <J;; d7
1 9 .lll e5t! <J;; xc7 ( 1 9 . . . <J;; e7 20.Wa7+- is also
hopeless for Black) 20.Wc6t <J;; d s (20 . . . <J;; b s
allows mate in four after 2 1 .Wxb6t)
2 1 .Wxb6t <J;; e8 22.Wb5t+- White wins.
1 7.Wa7
White was winning in Cirino - Wingender,
email 200 1 .
1 3.d5
I have no doubt that this central thrust is the
most challenging move. 1 3.ig5 is the main
alternative, but it does not look effective to me.
8
7
6
4
3
2
1
5
a
c
d
f
e
g
h
Finally we have reached the main branching
position of this line. Black has a choice of four
different moves: Bl) 13 ... cxd5, B2) 13 ... i.d6,
B3) 13 ... exd5 and B4) 13 i.e7.
••.
Bl) 13 ... cxd5 14.exd5
White has no advantage after 1 4.lt:lxb5 Wa5 !.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 .Wa4t lt:l bd7 1 4.lll b5 ixe4
1 4 . . . ib7 does not change anything: 1 5 .Wa7
14 ...i.xd5
Naturally Black has other possible recaptures:
1 4 . . . exd5 1 5 .lll x b5 Wa5 ? (The best move is
1 16
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
l 5 . . . ic5! , as examined in variation B3, arising
from the 1 3 . . . exd5 move order.) This position
has occurred three times, but for some reason
White has never played the simple 1 6.'\We2!N
when Black's position is hopeless. For instance,
1 6 . . . ie7 ( 1 6 . . . '\Wxb5 loses to 1 7.tll g6t �d7
1 8 .tll x h8) 1 7.tll d6t ixd6 1 8 .tll xc4t wins the
black queen.
1 4 . . . tll x d5 1 5 .'\Wh5 ( 1 5 .tll xb5 ! ? also comes
into consideration.)
1 5 . . . g6
( 1 5 . . . '\Wf6
1 6.ixd5 ixd5 l 7.tll xd5 exd5± transposes
to the position from the game Kohlweyer Nisipeanu, Germany 1 997, which is examined
in the note to Black's 1 5th move in the main
line below.) 1 6.tll xg6! We will see this blow
again in the main line. 1 6 . . . fxg6 1 7 . \Ml e5 tll xc3
1 8 .ixa8 tll e2t 1 9.'\Wxe2 '\Wf6 20.id2± White's
initiative looks very powerful.
( 1 8 . . . ib4? loses to 1 9.tll g4t) White could
have decided the game with the smooth
1 9 .ig5 !N ( 1 9.tll xc4? 0-0 led to an equal
position in Kohlweyer - Nisipeanu,
Germany 1 997) 1 9 . . . '\Wf5 ( 1 9 . . . '\Wxg5
20.'\Wxf7t @d8 2 1 .'\Wxd5t �c7 22.'\Wxb5 +­
doesn't help either) 20.tll g6! with a decisive
advantage.
l 7.tll xg6!
As promised, this tactical blow returns.
l 7 . . . fxg6 l 8 .'\We5 tll f6
l 8 . . . '\Wf6 l 9.'\Wxb8t @f7 20.'\Wxb5 would
leave White with an extra pawn, as the c4pawn is falling next.
l 9.'\Wxe6t '\We7
If 1 9 . . . ie7 then 20.l'!dl easily decides the
game: 20 . . . tll b d7 2 1 .tll x b5+20.'\Wc8t '\Mids
The most tenacious defence. 20 . . . @f7
2 1 .'\Wxb8 b4 22.tll b5± leads to an obvious
advantage for White.
Now we have a logical sequence of moves:
2 1 .l'!e l t ie7 22.'\We6 l'!f8 23.tll x b5 '\Wd7
24.'\Wxc4 '\Wc6 25 .'\Wb3 tll a6 26.ih6
Black is in serious trouble, as was proven in
Evans - Sindelar, email 2009.
16.tll g4!
This fine move opens the e-file for White's
rook and allows him to use his lead in
development.
15.hd5!
White should get a clear advantage by
playing in this way. Less clear is 1 5 .tll xd5 .
1 5 ... exd5
l 5 . . . tll x d5
This loses control over the h5-square,
after which the standard queen lift is very
effective.
1 6.'\Wh5! g6
After 1 6 . . . '\Wf6 1 7.tll xd5 exd5 1 8 .l'!e l ie7
16 ... tll e4
1 6 . . . ie7
1 7.tll xf6t ixf6
( 1 7 . . . gxf6
1 8 .tll xd5 looks hopeless for Black) 1 8 .l'!e l t
�f8 ( 1 8 . . . ie7 loses by force after 1 9.tll xd5
tll c6 20.ig5 f6 2 1 .ixf6! gxf6 22.Wh5t
�f8 23.l'!e6!+-) 1 9.tll xd5 and White has
a decisive initiative for the pawn. 1 9 . . . tll c6
20.ie3 h5 (20 . . . ie7 2 1 .'\Wh5 also leads to a
large advantage for White) . In GM 1 I stated
that 2 1 .ic5t would be decisive here, and this
was shown to be the case in the following
game:
Chaptet
8 - 5 a6 and 6 . . . b S
· · ·
1 17
18 Y*fd7 19. g e 1 i.c5 20.i.e3 hc3 l t .!lxe3
. g Black now.
.
There is
n 0 savm
•.•
position.
1 7 . . . i.e7 loses to l 8 . Y*f d4 .
.
1 7 . . . ! 5 1 8 . b4! ! Brilliantly p layed: this
'
fl
ulvan<e all °"' the white qu<en t enter the
Y9
fltt
game with great e
t. 1 8 . . . cxb3 � 9 . d3
.
both
( 1 9. . . 11\ d6 lo= to 20. W 3 attackmg
Y9
' '
the b.IB h o p on c 5 and the g7-p awn) 20. xb 5 1
� d7 2 1 . ll:i e 5 White'' ulvantage proved to be
· Ghafan. - Skulteti, ema11. 2 002.
decisive m
8
7
6
WU • • �' �
f�
tm
,, ·�?J..r��'=
i
'1Jf@.
" •·%er�
"
•
•0 �. !'It • •
/.
y,
.%, � . '•
5 •,,• • . ,,.,
i:.lll.
�.·""
4 .%,.
.•
"'•,
�� �
23 �f�
�� -0
1 %
,
;
,,,
--
"
,
�- - %���
.
%� 7.;, , %�1ffef"r.Q"
\UK/
� i;;r
� ��
,
,
d
%
e
f
g
18.ll:ih6!
An amusing yet p owerful response.
b
. h his next
Th.is looks fairly natura1 but Wlt
'
move White uses t he vu1 n erable position o f
.
Black's bishop on d6 to grab the initiative.
118
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
14 ....he5
17 . . . lLi xe4
Black has a wide choice of moves, but
(or
17 . . . Wb6
1 8 .ixf8
Wxb5
1 9 .ie7± Feldmann - Rolle, email 2009)
1 8 .ixf8 Wxf8 1 9 .ixe4 dxe4 20 .Wa4! ic6
nothing really helps.
Certainly 14 . . . g5 ? does not work: 1 5 . dxe6
2 1 .Wxc4 White's material advantage should
decide the game, as in Hollands - Laczay,
fxe6 1 6. lLi xc6!+-
email 20 1 0 .
14 . . . Wc7 is rather critical:
8
.i.. .
,, , ,
_.�
�.�
��p:1�· ----
��
:5 �.,�.TM
�
��•�r �A �•�·2rm"""�
'y8,.,.,;"Wc@
� �•
4
a wr
��- - - '. ��iwt!
:-- - �� 1�7,:r·1- •
3� m
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 .lLixf7! mxf7 1 6 . dxe6t cJle7 (The e6-pawn
is untouchable in view of 1 6 . . . mxe6 1 7 .ih3t
me7 1 8 .e5! ixe5 1 9 .ixe5 Wxe5 20.�e l and
White wins .) 1 7.ixd6t Wxd6 1 8 .Wa l ! (the
point of White's sacrifice) 1 8 . . . ib7 1 9 .Wa7
Wc7 20.e5!
(I recommended 20.Wc5 in GM I,
but this i s much more convincing. ) 20 . . . lLi e S
2 1 .�d l ic8 22.Wc5t mxe6 2 3 . lLi e4 We7
24. lLi d6 White crashes through.
After 1 4 . . . cxd5 1 5 . lLi xb5 ixe5 1 6 .ixe5 0-0
Black has almost unravelled his position, but
1 7.id6 wins the exchange and it doesn't seem
as if Black has sufficient compensation. For
example:
1 4 . . . exd5 1 5 . exd5 cxd5
Black has no time for 1 5 . . . 0-0, as after
1 6 . lLi xc6
lLixc6
1 7 . dxc6 ixf4
1 8 .Wxd8
�xd8 1 9 .gxf4 White's passed pawn easily
decides the issue.
1 6 .Wa l ixe5
1 6 . . . d4 is met by 1 7.Wxa8 ixe5 1 8 .ixe5
dxc3 1 9 .Wa3 ! , which wins on the spot.
16 . . . ib7 is nicely refuted by 1 7.Wa7 Wc8
1 8 . lLi d7!!, with two lines to consider:
a) 1 8 . . . ixf4 1 9 .�e l t tLi e4 ( 1 9 . . . mxd7
obviously loses to 20.ih3t) 20.lLixe4 dxe4
2 1 .ixe4 ixe4 22.�xe4t mds 23 . lLi xb8
Wxb8 24.�d4t! mes 2 5 .Wd7t mf8 26.�xf4
We8 27 .Wd2 and White will at least pick up
both of Black's queenside pawns.
b) 18 . . . Wxd7 1 9 .ixd6 Wxd6 20.�e l t mfs
(20 . . . tLi e4
2 1 .Wxb7
0-0
22.lLixd5
tLi f6
23 .Wxb5 and the c4-pawn will soon drop)
2 1 . lLi xb 5 '.Wd8 22.Wxb7 g6 2 3 . lLi c7 tLi bd7
24.ixd5
cJlg7
2 5 .ixc4
Wb8
26.Wxb8
�xb8 27. lLi b 5 White is a healthy pawn
up.
1 7.ixe5
We have reached the position from our main
line with 14 . . . ie5 .
1 5.i.xe5 exd5N
1 5 . . . 0-0 leads to a clear advantage for
White after: 1 6. dxe6 fxe6 (there is no doubt
the endgame after 16 . . . Wxd l 1 7.exf7t mxf7
1 8 .�xd l is very difficult for Black, due to his
poorly placed minor pieces on the queenside)
1 7 .id6 �e8 1 8 .e5 lLi d 5 1 9 . lLi e4± White has
every chance of deciding the game with a direct
attack, Tolstikh - Paramonov, St Petersburg
2002.
Chapter
8
-
1 19
5 . . . a6 and 6 . . . b 5
19.�xaSt lLJdS
1 9 . . . tll bS 20.:!'l:e 1 t Wd8 2 1 . tll xdS wins for
White as well.
20.l3el t @f8 2 1 .�a3t @gs 22.lLJxd5+­
White won in a few moves in Ulibin Antunes, Cuba 1 99 1 .
B3) 1 3 ... exd5 14.exd5 cxd5
1 4 . . . lll xd5 ? would be a serious mistake, as it
allows 1 5 .WfhS Wff6 1 6. tll xc6! +- and Black's
position collapses.
16.exd5 cxd5
Probably more stubborn is 1 6 . . . 0-0 , but
even here after 1 7.Wfa 1 tll bd7 1 8 . .id6 White
is clearly better.
17.�al
By transposition we have reached a position
from a game by Ulibin, which continued:
17 ... lLJc6 18.i.c7!
Only this elegant tactical blow allows White
co develop a dangerous initiative.
8 ... .
7
,.,
%
.
,
�
,
,
,
/,
�
-.•�--"�.
�
�� �
5 � •� Tm" �
��� r��, �� ��
�
�-� �.i
•
/
6
4
3�
-
� �r�
f"/:�/,�: if�
��tr!
2 ����- - '�.....
%w;{'---.... %?1;�
1 � � v • .: m
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
15.lLJxb5 i.c5!
This line looks to be the only playable
alternative to the main variation with 1 3 . . . .ie?.
1 5 . . . WI a5 ? was discussed on page 1 1 5 , in the
note to Black's 1 4th move of variation B l .
16.�a4
Black has no reason for concern after
1 6 . tll xc4 0-0 1 7 . .ie3 tll bd7 = .
16 ... 0-0 17.�xaS �e8!
This double attack is the point behind Black's
1 5 th move. There have been only two games
where this position arose, and in both of them
Black was perfectly okay from a theoretical
point of view. For this reason I would like to
recommend the following improvement:
1 20
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
8 Vi'� �ii'�� · �
� � .' ..
6 � ' �
111
,
,
,
:
%
�%,
,
,,
,!"
0
W
�
5 � �� 1. tm �
,
? - � �� .
� ,�� /, , , ;� ��
3
�����
�,J�
, ���
��
�if��p Ill
�
2 �£�
r,
�
""
, , %�:�•
,
,
%
,
%:
� .: �
i m � ��
4
,�
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
18.�b7!?N
White has tried 1 8 . l0 c3 Wxe5 1 9 .if4 and
now instead of 1 9 . . . Wh5 ? ! as in V. Mikhalevski
- Naiditsch, Heviz 2008, Black should have
played 1 9 . . . We6N 20.l0xd5 l0 bd7 2 1 . lLi xf6t
lLi xf6 22 .Wa5 id4 23.l'!el Wb6= when I
believe the bishop pair is not so relevant, as
Black will be able to swap the queenside pawns.
2 1 ..ixb7
Black cannot swap the queenside pawns, so
White keeps definite pressure with his pair of
bishops.
8 -�,�·
�
�
Y,
%
·
7 �
- -·
�
6 ��- �., , ,, %�
5 �
% � �
�
u
,
W&�rfli�B
,
·�
�
,,,,,
%
�
�
�
� w�� � �
�®,if��, , %®,if�0
�
�
if
�
2
•
4
3
1
� �, , %� �� �,rd""
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
21 ...ttl bd7 22.gdl h6 23.@fl lli b6 24.lli c3
ges 25 ..if3;!;
Black is still far from equality, as White has
1 9 .ixc4 ixf2t 20.l'!xf2
the advantage of the two bishops and the c4-
Wxe5 was Plauth Herr - Daw, corr. 1 996.
pawn could become a target in some endgames .
1 8 .ixd5 1Mfxb5
White is marginally better, but the slightly
B4) 1 3 ....ie7
exposed position of his king allows Black
sufficient counterplay.
By far the main continuation and the move
1 8 ...�xeS 19 ..if4 �e7
you are most likely to face in practice.
The piece sacrifice hardly works : 1 9 . . . Wxb2?!
20 .ixb8 l0 g4 (or 20 . . . d4 2 1 .ie5 l0 g4 22.Wc6
14.dxe6 fxe6 15.�e2 0-0
and White should be winning) 2 1 .id6 ixd6
1 5 . . . l0 a6
22.lLixd6 1Mfxb7 23.l0xb7 d4. Now best is
Here
24 . lLi a5 c3 25 .ie4 and White should convert
react energetically:
I believe White has an opportunity to
his material advantage.
1 9 . . . We8
2 0 . l0 c7 Wa4
2 1 .l0xd5
l0 bd7
22. lLi c3 Wa5 23 .ic6 (White should watch
out for tactics, for example the most natural
23.l'!d l runs into 23 . . . g5!) 23 . . . Wb6 24 . l0 a4
Wxb7 25 .ixb7;!; and Black is doomed to long­
term suffering.
20 ..ixdS �xb7
After 20 . . . l0 xd5 2 1 .1Ml'xd5 Black loses the c4pawn.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 8 - 5 . . . a6 and 6 . bS
121
. .
have two options to look at. The alternative to
1 6 .:gd l !
GM 1
has now been successfully employed.
protecting the e6-pawn is rather surprisingly
to give it up with B41) 16 ... @hs. As Black
After l 6 .ie3 Black has only tried 16 . . . lll c5 ?!
is a pawn up, he should consider this, but it
The novelty which I recommended in
1 7.:gd l Wf c7 l 8 . lll xc4! eS (It was better to
appears to make too much of a monster out
accept the sacrifice with 1 8 . . . bxc4 1 9 .Wfxc4
of White's e-pawn. Therefore
lll cd7, though after 20.Wfxe6 WfeS 2 1 .Wlb3�
continues to be the main line.
B42) 16 ... YNcS
White has two pawns and a powerful
initiative for the piece.) l 9 . b4 lll cd7 20 .Wla2
ib7 2 1 . lll aS± and White had a great
16 . . . Wfe8
1 7 .ixe6t
�h8
is
a
simple
transposition to variation B4 1 below.
positional advantage with equal material,
].
B41) 16 ... @hs 17.he6
Horvath - Hoelzl, Budapest 1 994.
However, Black can improve with the simple
1 6 . . . 0-0 l 7.ih3 Wfc8! and get a good version
of our main line.
1 6 . . . Wlb6
1 6 . . . Wfc8 1 7. g4! To tell the truth, I have
never come across this idea in this variation
before, but it appears to be very strong in
this case. For example: 1 7 . . . 0-0 1 8 .gS lll e8
1 9 . lll d7 :gf7 20.g6! hxg6 2 1 . lll eS Black has
to give up the exchange.
1 7 . .ih3 lll cS 1 8 . .ie3 Wlb8 1 9 .f4 Wfc8 20.�fl
lll d3 2 1 . lll xd3 cxd3 22.Wfxd3
White regained his pawn with a clear
positional advantage in Curator - Gbsalvio,
In a grandmaster game 1 7 .ie3 was tested.
I believe Black should calmly defend his pawn
with 1 7 . . . Wfc8 and not play 1 7 . . . b4 1 8 . lll b l;!;
as i n V. Mikhalevski - Nisipeanu, Heviz 2008.
17 ...YHes lSJ�dl
Somehow I do not like 18 . .ifS , which was
played in Krasenkow, - Kaidanov, Gausdal
1 99 1 . For example, Black can try 1 8 . . . lll bd7
1 9 . lll xd7 lll xd7, when he has a clear plan of
penetrating with his knight to the d3-square.
1 8 ....ib?
Internet 20 1 0 .
Another line to consider is 1 8 . . . cS 1 9 .if4
lll c6 20. lll xc6 ixc6 when White has the
1 6 ..ih3
strong: 2 1 . lll dS!N (The solid and positional
2 l . f3 ,
restricting the mobility of Black's
minor pieces, might be a serious alternative. )
2 1 . . . lll xdS 22.exdS ib7 23.d6 Th e cl-pawn
should easily decide the game.
1 22
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
19 ... i.cS! 20.i.xcS �xc8
19.i.e3
This was my original solution for Black, but
this time I decided to go deeper in my analysis.
This is my new suggestion.
In GM 1 I recommended:
1 9 .i.f4
2 1 .£4 tli a6 22.garn �b7
Threatening to play 20.li:\f7t as Black's knight
will be hanging at the end of the variation.
The threat of White penetrating with Ela7
stops Black from moving his a6-knight.
19 . . . li:\ a6 20.li:\d7 li:\ xd7 2 1 .i.xd7 'Wf7 22.e5
22.i.d6?! allows Black to create counterplay:
22 . . . li:\ c5 23 . e5 i.xd6 24.Elxd6 li:\ d3+±
22 . . . 'Wg6N
I now believe this to be a strong improvement.
22 . . . li:\ c5 23.e6 'Wg6 24.i.d6± and White's
passed pawn decided the game quickly in
Danailov - Maksimovic, Cannes 1 990.
23 .i.e3 li:\ b4
In the case of 23 . . . li:\ c5 24.i.xc5! i.xc5
2 5 . li:\ e4 i.e7 26.li:\d6 White has a clear plus,
thanks to his e-pawn.
24 .Elal c5!
A powerful idea indicated by my computer.
I had previously only considered 24 . . . Ela8
2 5 . Elxa8 t i.xa8 26.e6 li:\ d3 27 .'Wd l ! with
an edge for White, as his queen is aiming
to penetrate via the a-file into Black's camp.
27 . . . 'Wf5 28 .'Wa l 'Wf8 29 .'Wa6 b4 3 0 . li:\ a4 c5
3 1 .i.c6 i.xc6 32.'Wxc6 White's chances are
clearly preferable.
8
6
7
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
23.�f3!
Pushing the e-pawn is always a key idea in
this type of position.
23 ... gas 24.eS tli g4 25.i.d4!? � b4
25 . . . c5 26.i.£2 is good for White.
26.gxast �xa8 27.tligS �h6
27 . . . c5 28.'Wxg4 cxd4 29.li:\f7t mg8 30 .'We6
is promising for White.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
2 5 .i.xb 5 li:\ c6!
Due to his problems along the h l -a8
diagonal, White has to settle for a draw:
26. li:\ d5 'We4 27. li:\ c3 'Wg6=
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter
8
- 5 . . . a6 and 6 . . . b S
28.e6
1 23
1 8 .igSN ( 1 8 . lll gS looks attractive, but after
White has a healthy initiative.
1 8 . . . lll c7 1 9 .if4 lll ba6 White had nothing
special in Molina - Santiago , Laranj eiras 20 1 2)
B42) 16 'Wcs 17.tlif3
1 8 . . . l"lxf3 ( 1 8 . . . ixgS 1 9 . lll xgS lll c7 20 .'1Wg4
••.
8
��-..i.. li1if�
�
w�_
, , v,��1-�
�
,Z,
,
,
,
�
7 w
m��
�
w
,
.
%
· ,, ,, �
6
:� �� � , , ;�
�
4 .,.,. �.
3 u m � eh�
%r
,
%
%
� •
Y,
5 �
!wAW,
'��
WKZ,%m,:�, ��.,,,,%WY/""
§' r� , , WAf
rts
,
,
,
1 - � m .: �
2
�
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
This looks to me to be the most logical
continuation. First of all, White threatening
to increase the pressure against the e6-pawn
with tli gS . Secondly, the idea of pushing
e4-e5 followed by lll e4 appears in some lines
and makes a pleasant impression.
According to theory White has an important
alternative in 1 7 .l"ld l but, for the reasons
l"le8 2 1 .eS! h6 22. lll ge4 is clearly dangerous
for Black) 1 9 .ixe7 l"lf7 20.i.a3! Grabbing
Black's dark-squared bishop is definitely an
achievement for White.
20 . . . lll a6 2 1 .l"ld l
lll ec7 22 .i.d6 White's positional advantage is
obvious.
18.tligS
It's too early for 1 8 . e S ? ! , which only helps
Black to activate his pieces: 1 8 . . . lll dS 1 9 .lll e4
cS +
18 tlic7
••.
Clearly worse is 1 8 . . . lll cS ? l 9 .i.e3! \t>h8
20.i.xcS ixcS 2 1 .eS and White had a winning
attack in Haba - Meier, Pardubice 1 99 9 .
19.i.£4 tlifes
Black also cannot solve his problems with:
1 9 . . . h6 20.i.xc7 hxg5 2 1 .eS lll dS (2 1 . . . g4
allows White to develop a powerful attack
with 22.exf6 l"lxf6 23.i.xg4 'Wxc7 24.i.xe6t
mentioned above, I prefer the text,
�f8 2 5 . l"le l !) 22.i.d6 lll xc3 23. bxc3 'Wd7
17 tlia6
Jardorf - Schroll, corr. 1 993.
24.'Wg4!± With a clear advantage to White,
•••
Played with the idea of defending the pawn
with . J i J c7.
After 17 . . . lll e8 I would like to suggest a new
move:
8
7
6
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 24
My proposal from
tested a few times .
GM 1 has now been
2 1 .�e3N
Once again White plays a quiet move. The
was V. Zilberstein - I . Novikov, Blagoveschenk
queen takes control of the g l -a7 diagonal and
1 9 8 8 , and now of course Black should have
some cases.
continued 22 . . . '\Wxe6 2 3 . tll xe6 Elc8 . Despite
White's extra pawn I am not sure about the
assessment of this position. Without queens on
After 2 1 . '\W g4 I believe that 2 1 . . . lll f6N is
20.'\Wg4 tll f6! ? 2 1 .'\Wxe6t tll xe6 22.ixe6t
the board, Black's pawn mass on the queenside
prepares the move ie5 , which is useful in
critical (2 l . . .ixg5 22.'\Wxg5 h6 23 .'\Wc5 doesn't
required much comment, Critter - Rybka,
can quickly become a powerful force.
Internet 20 1 2) . 22.'\Wh4 h6 23 .ixc7 hxg5
20 ....ib7
24 .'\Wxg5 lll d5 (24 . . . '\Wxc? loses on the spot to
2 5 .ixe6t Elf7 26.e5) 2 5 . exd5 ixg5 26 .ixe6t
With 20 . . . h6 Black is weakening the g6-
Elf7 27.ixc8 ixc8 Despite White's extra
square, which could become significant at a
pawn, I feel that Black has decent chances to
later stage. One game continued:
hold thanks to his bishop pair.
2 1 ...h6
Black has virtually no useful options, so
perhaps he has to play this weakening pawn
move.
22.ti)f3 tll a6
Black cannot
22 . . . g5
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
Ele8 24 .e5 lll fd5 25. lll e4± with a dangerous
initiative was the line from GM I) 22. lll e5
id6 ?! 23 .'\Wh5 ixe5 24.'\Wxe5 White had a clear
advantage in Geisler - Galanov, email 2009.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
solve
his
tll a6
(23 . . . c5
problems
runs
with
into
24. lll d5!±) 24. lll d4 lll c5 2 5 . f4 tll g7 26.f5 '\We8
27.ixg? iixg7 28.e5! with a winning attack.
2 1 . tll f3 Wh7 (2 1 . . .ic5 22.tll e5 lll f6 23. tll g6
1
23 .ie5
h
23.tll e5 tll ec7 24.tll g6 .ic5 25.�e2
This is even stronger than 2 5 .'\Wd2 as
suggested in
GM 1 .
Chapter
8
-
Conclusion
25 .. J�dS
If 25 . . . :gf6
26. lll e5 i.f8
27.�h5 ,
1 25
5 . . . a6 and 6 . . . b5
then
White's initiative on the kingside should easily
The 5 . . . a6 and 6 . . . b5 variation seems to me to
decide the game.
be slightly risky for Black, as White obtains
rich play for the sacrificed pawn. I have always
26.i.d6! i.xd6 27 Jhd6
had the opinion that it would be too easy if
Black could solve his opening problems in such
a direct way. It has been especially pleasing
to see many of my ideas and novelties from
GM 1 successfully tested in this line. I have
also added some other improvements, and
can say with confidence that White is in great
shape here.
a
b
c
d
Having successfully
e
f
traded
g
h
dark-squared
bishops, White's initiative looks extremely
powerful.
Catalan 4 ... dxc4
s ... h s
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Variation Index
1 .d4 tl) f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.ti)f3 dxc4 s.J.g2 b5
6.a4 c6 7.axb5 cxb5 s.ti)eS ti) dS 9.0-0! J.b7 10.b3! cxb3 1 1 .�xb3 a6 1 2.e4
129
129
130
131
A) 12 ... tl) f6 13.dS
Al) 13 ...J.d6
A2) 13 ... exdS
B) 1 2 ... ti) b4N
note to move 1 2
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 3 .�f3!N
g
A l ) after 16 . . . e5
A) note to move 1 3
h
a
b
c
d
e
1 8 .�g5N
f
g
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 7.tll xe5 ! !
g
h
h
Chapter
1 .d4 c!lif6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.�a dxc4 s ..ig2
b5
9 - 5 . . .b 5
1 27
8.tlie5 tlid5
Nothing could be more natural than Black's
last move: he defends his extra pawn, planning
later to complete development and convert his
material advantage.
Of course matters are not that simple, and
essentially the whole variation is known to be
quite dangerous for Black: White's advantage
in development allows
him
to
seize
the
initiative in many lines .
a
b
c
d
f
e
g
h
9.0-0!
This is a simple solution compared to the
complex lines covered in
GM 1. There are
not many games in which this move has been
played, so there is great scope for creativity.
9 ...i.b7
The only move which Black has chosen, but
it was also important to check the alternatives:
6.a4
In my opinion this is the best move order.
After
9 . . . ie7
White
easily
develops
an
initiative by means of 1 0 . lll c3 f6 1 1 .e4!, when
one illustrative line is: 1 1 . . . lll xc3 1 2 .°Wh 5 t
6... c6
Obviously Black cannot play 6 . . . ib4t ? due
g6
1 3 . lll xg6 lll e2t
1 4 .Wxe2 hxg6
1 5 . e5!
Unfortunately for Black this move gives White
to 7.id2 ixd2t 8 . c!li fXd2! c6 9 . axb 5 ± with a
a decisive advantage.
clear advantage.
1 6 .exf6 Wxf6 1 7.ixa8 +- is hopeless for Black)
1 5 . . . id7 ( 1 5 . . . 'Wxd4
1 6 .ixa8 lll c6 1 7.ib7!? 'Wb6 1 8 .ixc6 'Wxc6
7.axb5
1 9 .exf6 ixf6 20.'Wg4± White is winning.
Once again this is the correct move order.
9 .. .f6 runs into the same idea, but with a
7. lll e5 allows Black 7 . . . ib4t (or even
7 . . . lll d5 8 . axb5 ib4t!?N and after 9 . lll c3
different
lll xc3 1 0 . bxc3 ixc3t 1 1 .id2 'Wxd4 1 2 . lll f3
g6 1 2. lll xg6 lll xg6 1 3 .e5 White has a huge
ixd2t 1 3 . lll xd2 c3 Black should easily hold
advantage.
execution:
1 0 .e4
lll e7
1 1 .°Wh5t
the position) 8 . lll c3 lll d 5 , and this leads to a
different line from the one I want.
1 0.b3!
7 ... cxb5
his queen.
Before striking in the centre White activates
7 . . . ib4t? 8 .id2 ixd2t 9 . lll fXd2±
1 28
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
10 ... cx:b3 1 1 .¥Nxb3 a6
1 9 . dxc5 ¥Nc8 20.l"ifd l ic6 2 1 .'1Mfxb4 e5
22 .ie3 0-0 23 .ih3 White has a huge
Black's only choice in practice.
advantage.
I also checked a natural attempt to give the
pawn back: 1 I . . . ll:J c6 1 2 . lll xc6! ( 1 2 .'1Mfxb 5 '1Mfb6
allows Black to simplify into a decent endgame
after 1 3 .'1Mfxb6 axb6 1 4 .l"ixa8 t ixa8) 1 2 . . . ixc6
1 3 .'1Mfa4t iif8
1 3 . . . ll:J d7 I 4 . lll xd5 ixd5 1 5 .e4 ib7 1 6 .d5!
is pretty hopeless for Black.
1 3 . e4 The following sample line shows how
1 4 .lll xd5 ixd5 1 5 .e4
1 5 .ixd5 '1Mfxd5 1 6 .id2 also looks good.
dangerous Black's position is: 1 3 . . . lll b6 I 4 .d5!
1 5 . . . ib7 1 6 .d5
White has a clear advantage.
exd5 I 5 . exd5 ixd5 1 6.¥Nxb 5 t '1Mfd7 1 7. lll c3!
'1Mfxb 5 1 8 . lll xb5 ixg2 1 9 .iixg2± The black
12.e4
king is horribly exposed.
1 l . . . b4
This runs into an elegant solution:
At this point the most common move
1 2 . lll c3!
Now Black's lack of development begins to
tell.
1 2 . . . ie7
A) 12 ... tLJf6, but we must also consider
B) 12 ... til b4N.
is
1 2 . . . lll c7
Other moves are no better:
a) 1 2 . . . a5 1 3 .%Ya4t lll d7 1 4 . lll xd5 ixd5
( 1 4 . . . exd5 1 5 .'\Mfb5 is even worse for Black)
1 5 . e4 ib7
1 6.d5 id6
1 7. lll xf7! iixf7
1 8 . dxe6t iixe6 1 9 .'1Mfb3t iie7 20 .ig5 t lll f6
2 1 .e5 ixe5 22.l"ife l and White is winning.
b)
1 2 . . . f6
lll d7
cannot
1 5 . e4
hold
1 3 . lll xd5
ib7
the
ixd5
1 6 . lll d3
pawn
1 4 .'1Mfa4t
id6
with
(Black
1 6 . . . a5 ,
since 1 7 . lll f4 l"ia6 1 8 . d 5 ! gives White a
decisive initiative.) 1 7.if4 ie7 1 8 . lll c5!
Now White is
not even interested
in
regaining the pawn immediately: 1 8 . . . ixc5
a
1 3 .'1Mff3!N
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter
This is even more convmcmg than the
continuation 1 3 .d5 !d6 ( 1 3 . . . lll d7 is also
worthy of consideration)
1 4 . lll c4!
bxc4
1 5 .Wxb7 0-0 1 6 . lll d2, when after 1 6 . . . exd5
1 7.exd5 lll d7 1 8 . lll xc4± White had regained
9 - 5 . . .b5
1 29
1 3 . . . Wb6 1 4 . lll c4!
A nice idea, although White is also better
after the natural 1 4.ie3 ic5 1 5 .dxe6 .
1 4 . . . Wc7
The main point behind White's idea is
his pawn and kept a pleasant advantage in
that 14 . . . Wd4 runs into :
Iskusnyh - Sarana, Samara 20 1 3 .
convincing is 1 5 .�a4 Wc5 1 6 . lll a5 ixd5
1 3 . . . Wf6
1 5 . lll ba3 ! (less
1 3 . . . We7 runs into 1 4 .ia3 b4 ( 1 4 . . . Wf6
1 7. exd5 bxa4 1 8 .Wb7 Wxa5 1 9 .!f4 Wd8
20.dxe6 fxe6 2 1 .Wxa8 lll bd7) 1 5 . . . Wxa l
1 5 .Wc3!
1 6 .ib2 Wxfl t
Wd8
1 6.�cl
is
winning
for
White) 1 5 .!xb4 Wf6 1 6 .Wb3± with a huge
advantage.
1 7. Wxfl
White's
deadly
threat of lll a5 give him a clear advantage.
1 5 . lll a5 e5 1 6 .ie3 id6 1 7.�c l We7
This happened in Agzamov - 0. Foisor, Sochi
1 4 .!f4 !d6 1 5 .Wh5 ! We7
1 5 . . . g6 1 6 .Wh6 !f8 1 7.Wh3 looks horrible
1 9 8 5 , and now the strongest continuation
for Black.
was :
1 6.!g5
Wf8
1 7.�c l
!xe5
1 8 .dxe5
lll c6
1 9 .�a2!
Black will lose material when the white
rooks double up on the c-file.
A) 12 ... tlif6 1 3.d5
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 8 .ig5N 0-0 1 9 .ih3!
Black can hardly move any of his pieces White's advantage is decisive.
Al) 13 ...i.d6
a
b
c
d
f
e
g
h
We have reached another split, with Black's
main continuations being
A2) 1 3 ... exd5.
1 3 . . . lll bd7N
refutation:
meets
Al) 13 ...i.d6 and
a simple yet
1 4 . lll xf7! lll c5
1 6 . lll xb7 lll xa l
elegant
1 5 .lll xd8 lll xb3
1 7.dxe6 �c8
1 8 .e5
lll b3
1 9 . .ib2 lll g4 20. lll d6t ixd6 2 1 . exd6+- Black
will not be able to hold this.
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 30
A2) 13 ... exdS 14.exdS!
14.dxe6N
Surprisingly,
this
is even stronger than
capturing on fl, thanks to an amusing idea on
the 1 7th move.
It is admittedly hard to refrain from: 1 4 . lli xfl
'it;>xf7 1 5 .dxe6t 'it;>e8 1 6 .eS! (the main finesse of
White's combination) 1 6 . . . ixg2 1 7 . exf6 'Wxf6
1 8 . 'it;>xg2 'Wxa l 1 9 .'WdSN (An improvement
over
1 9 .ib2 'Wa4 20.'Wf3 as in Giri -
Morozevich,
Beij ing
[rapid]
20 1 2 . White
won quickly, but it seems like the astonishing
20 . . . 'Wc2!!N may hold the game for Black.)
19 . . . 'WeS 20.'Wxa8 'Wxe6 2 1 . tli c3 ± Obviously
White has a dangerous initiative, but Black has
some defensive resources.
14 .. . hdS
14 ... fxe6 15JM1 Vlie7 16.tll d3 e5
with 1 4 . . . id6, as 1 5 . tli c6 'Wc7 1 6 .Ei:el t
It transpires that Black cannot develop
The last sequence was forced, but now a
brilliant blow comes from nowhere:
®f8
1 7.ia3 tli bd7 1 8 .Ei:c l +- leaves White with a
decisive advantage.
15.Vlie3 Vlie7
The only move, since 1 5 . . . ie7 loses to
1 6 .Ei:d l .
16.i.a3 b4
1 6 . . . 'We6 1 7.Ele l doesn't change a lot.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
17.tll xeS!! he4
White wins easily after 1 7 . . . ixeS 1 8 .ia3 +­
or 1 7 . . . 'WxeS 1 8 .if4 'Wxa l 1 9 .ixd6+-.
1 8.he4 tll xe4 19J:fol Vlixe5 20.tll c3
It's curtains for Black.
Chapter
1 8.hfs @ xf8 1 9.hd5 �xd5
9
-
131
5 . . . b5
1 3 . . . id6 runs into a familiar theme: 1 4 . lLi xf7!
1 9 . . . 'Wxd5 2 0 . lLi c3 only helps White.
i>xf7 l 5 . dxe6t i>e8 Now the most convincing
is 1 6 . lLi c3 lLi 8c6 1 7 .l'!d l 'We? 1 8 .e5 lLi xe5
1 9 .l'!xd6 'Wxd6 20 .hb? l'!b8 2 1 .ig2± with a
large advantage to White.
1 3 . . . f6 1 4 . lLi g4!
At first
I was excited about 1 4 .'Wf3 fxe5
1 5 .'Wh5 t ,
but somehow after
1 6 .dxe6t
i> c7
1 7 .'Wxe5t
1 5 . . . i> d?
'it>c8
things
become less clear.
1 4 . . . exd5
After 14 . . . e5 1 5 . lLi a3! Black has a hard
a
b
time stopping White's id2 idea. 1 5 . . . lLi d?
c
d
e
f
g
h
20.'Wc5t tll e7 2 1 .gel � bc6 22.�c3 �xe5
23.gxe5 gcs 24.�a5+Black cannot hold such a position for long.
B) 12 ... tilb4N
According to my engine this is the best square
for the black knight.
1 6 .l'!d l ! White can even afford to not rush
with id2; after 1 6 . . . ic5 1 7 .id2 a5 1 8 . d6!
White has a huge advantage.
1 4 . . . 'Wc8 (with the idea of . . . 'Wc4) is easy
to parry with
1 5 . lLi a3 .
Now
1 5 . . . exd5
1 6 .exd5 'Wxg4 doesn't really work for Black
as 1 7.l'!e l t 'it>d8 1 8 .'We3 ! wins on the spot
for White.
1 5 . exd5 ixd5 1 6 .l'!e 1 t i>f7
16 . . . ie? is impossible in view of l 7.'Wxb4.
1 7 .l'!d l ixb3 1 8 .l'!xd8 l'!a7 1 9 .l'!xb8 lLi c2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
13.d5!
This central break is an obligatory move for
White in this line.
13 ... exd5
There are two important alternatives to
consider:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
20.l'!a5!
The only square for the rook, but it is enough
to retain an advantage.
An important line is
as follows:
20 . . . l'!d?
2 1 . lLi d2
lLi d4
22.lLixb3
lLi xb3
23. l'!xa6 l'!dl t 24.ifl l'!xc l 2 5 . l'!a?t 'it>g6
26. i>g2±
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 32
Black has regained his piece, but White is
clearly better.
14.exd5 J.d6
1 4 . . . J.xd5
The only worthwhile alternative, although
Black will find it surprisingly difficult to
solve all his problems:
1 5 .1Mf e3 1Mf e7
l 5 . . . tll c2
1 6 .1.We2
lll d4
1 7 .1Mfh 5 !
:ga7
(or 1 7 . . . g6 1 8 . tt'l xg6 hxg6 1 9 .:ge l t tt'l e6
20 .1.Wxh8 J.xg2 2 1 .J.a3 tt'l d7 22.J.xf8 tll dxf8
23.<i>xg2 and Black does not enough for
the exchange) 1 8 .J.xd5 1.Wxd5 l 9 . tt'l c3 1Mf c5
20.:ge l ! 1Mfxc3 2 1 .J.e3 and Black is helpless
against White's crushing attack.
1 6 .J.xd5 lll xd5 1 7 .1Mfe4 1Mfe6 1 8 .:gd l tll c7
The last sequence has been fairly logical, but
now comes the key move:
16 . . . :ges
1 7 . tt'l c6!
tt'l 8xc6
1 8 . dxc6
tll xc6
1 9 .:gfd l and Black is unable to avoid material
losses, for instance 1 9 . . . :ge6 20. tll e4± .
1 6 . . . 1.Wb6 1 7.:gad l
Black has an unpleasant choice here; to
either give up his dark-squared bishop or to
allow tll c6.
1 7 . . . J.xe5
1 7 . . . a5 1 8 .J.e3 1.Wa6 (after 1 8 . . . J.c5 1 9 . tt'l e4!
a
b
c
d
e
J.xe3 20.fxe3 the open f-file only helps to
f
g
h
1 9 .:ga2! J.e7
1 9 . . . J.d6 loses to 20.:gad2 .
20.:gc2 0-0 2 1 .:gxc7 J.d6 22.1Mfxa8 J.xc7
2 3 . tt'l f3 ±
White should convert his material advantage.
1 5.J.f4 0-0 16.tll c3
Even though he has managed to castle,
Black is still some way from overcoming his
difficulties.
increase White's initiative)
1 9 . tt'l c6 tt'l d7
20. tt'l e4 J.c7 2 1 . tt'l e7t <i>h8 22.d6 J.b6
23. tll g5 With a decisive initiative.
1 8 .J.xe5 a5 1 9 .J.d4 1.Wa6
Or 1 9 . . . 1.Wg6 20. tll xb5 tll 8a6 2 1 . tll c3 and,
having regained the pawn, White has a
comfortable positional advantage thanks to
his bishop pair and strong passed pawn.
20.:gfe l tll d7 2 1 .:ge7 :gad8 22.:gde l
White has more than sufficient compensation
for a pawn.
17.:!:Udl %Yb6
1 7 . . . J.xe5 1 8 .J.xe5 :ge8 1 9 .J.f4± offers Black
no relief.
Chapter
1 33
9 - 5 . . .b5
Conclusion
After 5 . . . b5
tll d5
6 . a4 c6 7.axb 5 cxb 5 8 . tll e5
I have decided to now recommend
9 . 0-0 . This move has not been played often,
which gave me the chance to include many
fresh ideas . 9 . . . Ab7 1 0 .b3! is an important
follow-up - activating the white queen. Then
1 0 . . . cxb3 1 1 .'Wxb3 a6 1 2 .e4 tll b4N seems like
the critical test, but White stands well in my
main line. There are some wonderful attacking
themes in this chapter, which
will thoroughly enj oy.
19.hc5 VNxc5 20J�acl
White has full compensation for the pawn,
with the only question being whether or not
Black can hold the position. One important
line runs as follows :
20 ... a4 2 1 .%¥b 1 a3
I hope the reader
Catalan 4 ... dxc4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
5 ... a6 and 6 ... �c6
Variation Index
1 .d4 � f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.� f3 dxc4 s.�g2 a6 6.0-0 � c6
7.e3
A) 7 ... � d5
B) 7 ... �b8 8.�fd2
B l) 8 ..."!Wd7
B2) 8 ... e5 9.�xc6t bxc6 1 0.dxeS � g4 1 1 .�xc4 �e6 12.� bd2
B2 1) 1 2 ... hS
B22) 1 2 ...�b4
C) 7 ...�d7 8."!We2 b5 9.b3!? cxb3 10.axb3
Cl) 1 0 ...�b4
C2) 10 ...�e7
C3) 1 0 ...�d6 l l .�b2 0-0 12.�cl
C3 1) 1 2 ... � b4
C32) 1 2 ... � dS
C l ) after 19 ... Wf6
82) note to 1 l . . .i.e6
a
b
c
d
e
f
20 J::1 d 5!N
g
C2) after l 4 . E1a7
..
a
h
20.Wc2!N
1 35
1 36
136
138
139
139
140
141
141
143
144
144
b
c
d
e
f
1 5 .tll e l !N
g
h
h
Chapter 1 0 - 5 . . . a6 and 6 . . . lt:J c6
1 .d4 lt:Jf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 dS 4.&£!f3 dxc4 5 ..ig2
a6 6.0-0 &£ic6
This is an ambitious choice from Black. In
most of the lines he will retain his extra pawn,
but White has a few interesting ways to fight
for the initiative.
1 35
A) 7... �dS
This move is not as bad as I suspected it might
be when I first saw it. Black wants j ust to play
. . . lli b6 in order to keep his extra pawn .
8.e4 � b6
Other squares are much worse:
8 . . . lli db4? 9 .ie3 id6 1 0 .a3 lll d3 occurred
in Weiler - Grzeca,
Altenkirchen
20 1 2,
and now White could have obtained a huge
advantage with:
�-� �
8 i.
7 � r•,
·
·
7.·
�.... %�-�
� •-·
�.... % 1
�
� ..t�
�� � ���
6 · a � �: ����,��---- %�-�����rn�
3 �
• l.A)�tiJr�
.
7.e3
This is another significant change from
GM l, in which I recommended 7 . � c3 B:b8
8 . e4. There have been many developments
in that line, and overall
I am not completely
satisfied with White's prospects. Here is one
relevant example: 8 . . . ie7 9 .Wi°e2 b5 1 0 .B:d l
0-0
l l . d5
exd5
1 2 .e5
d4
1 3 . exf6 ixf6
1 4 .Wi°e4 ib7 1 5 . lll d5 lll b4! 1 6 . lll xf6t Wi°xf6
1 7.Wi°f4 c5! 1 8 .Wi°xf6 gxf6 1 9 .if4 B:bc8 With
highly unclear play, Caruana - Cheparinov,
Villafranca de los Barros 20 1 0 .
Here
Black
has
three
main
2
. ,,%� m.- - - -��:r�
. . ,th� 1� 7:,;·f""
-�
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 l .Wi°c2N b5 1 2 .e5 ie7 1 3 . b3! It is hard
to suggest anything for Black. A possible
continuation
is
13 . . . lll a5
1 4 . bxc4
bxc4
1 5 . lll fd2! Elb8 1 6 .llixc4 lli xc4 1 7.Wi°xc4 lll b2
1 8 .Wi°c2 and Black's knight is in big trouble.
8 . . . lli f6 9 . lll c3 b 5 (Other moves allow White
to regain the pawn, for example 9 . . . ie7
1 0 .Wi°a4 id? 1 l .Wi°xc4 0-0 1 2 .Eldl b5 1 3 .Wi°e2
options :
A) 7 ... l£id5, B) 7 ... �b8 and C) 7 ....id7.
with a comfortable edge, Kachiani - Burtman,
Azov 1 990.) 1 0 .d5 lll b4
7 . . . id6? ! is hardly a good idea, as after
8 . lll bd2 lll a5 White has the strong 9 . lll e 5 ! .
In the event of 9 . . . ixe 5 , a s in Yevseev Khuseinkhodzhaev, Peterhof 2009, White can
even try 1 0 .Wi°a4t!?N c6 l l . dxe5 b5 1 2 .Wi°c2
lll d5 1 3 . b3 ib7 1 4 . lli e4 0-0 1 5 .id2 with a
serious advantage.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 36
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
l l .a4! Beneficially opening up the a-file.
8.�fd2
l l . . . exd5 (After l l . . .'3b8N 1 2 .axb5 axb5
1 3 .i.g5 i.e7 1 4. lt'l d4 White's initiative plays
alternative, but it gives Black a better version
itself.) Now in a couple of games White
of variation
failed to find 1 2 .axb5!N when Black is in
bishop can be developed comfortably to b7.
8 .We2 b5 9.b3 cxb3 1 0 .axb3 is an interesting
C below, since his light-squared
serious trouble. For instance, 1 2 . . . i.e7 1 3 .e5
lt'l e4 1 4. lt'l d4! i.b7 1 5 . lll f5 � with an almost
Here the two main options are
decisive initiative.
and
Bl) 8 �d7
••.
B2) 8 e5.
•.•
8 . . .i.d7 9 . lt'l xc4 b 5 works out well for White
8
after 1 0 . lt'l e 5 ! lt'l xe5 l l . dxe5 lt'l d5 as in Le
7
Quang - Ponkratov, Moscow 20 1 3 . Here
White should j ust continue with normal
6
�
� �·.,�•.�,
, , ,Y.•:r
development as follows :
5
� , , ,%
,
,
,
%
f��� ���r�
f��� �
� � �
�
� �� a
��� - �
��-r
�
�
3�
��-� � ��, , %�.,;�, , %�,�
2 �j��/0 �
�� ��!}!J
8
7
4
3
6
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
�
h
9.i.e3 i.e7 10.�e2 0-0 1 1 .� c3 ges 12.a3
i.d7 1 3.gadl
1
White has promising compensation for the
pawn, Kireev - Kruk, corr. 20 1 2 .
B) 7 ... gbs
�
� llJ�if � .: �
a
b
c
d
e
f
i.
g
h
1 2 . lt'l d2N i.e7 1 3 .b3 0-0 1 4 . lt'l e4 White
has good chances to seize the initiative on
the kingside, for instance 14 . . . c5 1 5 .i.b2 c4
1 6 .Wg4 g6 1 7. '3fd l and Black's dark squares
look rather vulnerable.
Bl) 8 ...�d7 9.tlixc4 b5 10.tlicd2
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
1 37
Chapter 1 0 - 5 . . . a6 and 6 . . . tli c6
10 ... ib7
14 . . . tli d8
1 0 . . . e5 l 1 . tli b3 id6 was a less challenging
1 5 . tli xa5
ixa5
1 6 .l'!xa5
ixg2
1 7. 'it?xg2 l'!xb2 1 8 .'11*° c l l'!b8 1 9 .°Wa3 Despite
alternative seen in Gorelov - Kharitonov,
the simplifications, Black is a long way from
Volgodonsk 1 9 8 1 . At this point 1 2 . dxe5N
solving his problems.
tli xe5 1 3 .e4 tli c4 1 4.'Wc2 0-0 1 5 . tli l d2± would
have given White a comfortable advantage.
1 1 .� b3N
I like this idea more than 1 l . a4 and 1 1 . tli c3
as played previously. The knight establishes
control over the c5-square and prepares e3-e4
and ie3 .
1 1 ...�ds
This has been
Black's choice in games
featuring the other moves mentioned above,
but it does not work so well here.
I also
considered:
1 l . . . e5 proves to be premature after 1 2 .d5
tlid8 1 3 .e4 c6 1 4 .ig5 , when Black is not ready
for such a tense clash in the centre, since his
king is still uncasded.
1 l . . .id6 also does not work well after 1 2 .e4
e5 1 3 .dxe5 ixe5 1 4. tli c 5 ! 'Wxd l 1 5 .Eixd l
ic8 1 6 . tli c3 0-0 1 7.ie3 with an unpleasant
endgame for Black.
Finally, 1 l . . . a5 runs into 1 2 . a4! bxa4 1 3 . l'!xa4
ib4 1 4 .id2 when the a5-pawn is a clear
target. The continuation might be:
12.f3!
There will be no bishop trade!
I don't see
what Black can do to oppose White's simple
plan of expanding in the centre.
12 ... h5
My engine recommends this advance, but
I don't see what Black accomplishes after the
'human' reply:
1 3.e4 h4 14.g4 h3 15.ihl
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 38
White dominates the centre and his light­
squared bishop will get back into the game
easily enough, while the h3-pawn is a long­
term target.
B2) 8 ... e5
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
20.:B:d5!N :B:xd5 2 1 . cxd5 lli e7 22.:B:cl lli xd5
23.llixc5
Black is destined to suffer with his queenside
weaknesses.
12.� bd2
From this position Black's two main ideas
are
B2 1) 12 ... h5 and B22) 12 ... i.b4.
1 2 . . . Wf d5 1 3 .b3 h5 was Carlhammar Schneider, Helsingborg 1 99 1 . Now I believe
White could have simply played 1 4 .h3N lli xe5
9.hc6t bxc6 10.dxe5 �g4 1 1 .�xc4 i.e6
Other options are clearly worse:
1 l . . .Wfd5 ? 1 2 .b3 Wfe6 1 3 .f4 Wfh6 1 4.Wfe2 i.c5
1 5 .i.a3 ± Zaichik - Anikaev, Telavi 1 9 82.
1 1 . . .Wfxd l 1 2 .:B:xd l i.e6 1 3 . lli bd2 :B:d8 1 4 .b3
White maintains a comfortable edge in the
endgame, for instance:
14 . . .i.xc4 1 5 . bxc4 i.b4 1 6 .:B:b l c5
Another game continued 1 6 . . . i.a5 1 7. 'kt>fl !
0-0
( 1 7 . . . llixh2t
1 8 .'kt>e2
lli g4
1 9 .:B:b7
i.xd2 20.i.xd2 0-0 2 1 . f4±) 1 8 .We2 i.xd2
1 9 .i.xd2 lli xe5 20.i.e l ! ? with a nice edge for
White, Lissang - Welin, Sweden 2007.
1 7.h3 lli xe5 1 8 .i.b2 lli c6 1 9 .llib3 0-0
Now in Kunte - lstratescu, Montreal 2008,
White could have secured a clear plus with:
( 1 4 . . . h4 fails to work due to 1 5 .hxg4 hxg3
l 6.Wff3 i.xg4 1 7.Wfg2!±) 1 5 . e4 Wfc5 1 6 .i.a3
Wfb5 1 7.i.xf8 'kt>xf8 1 8 . lli xe5 Wfxe5 1 9 .'kt>g2
:B:d8 20 .Wfe2 Wfb2 2 1 .:B:fd l ± with a clear
positional advantage.
Chapter 1 0
-
1 39
5 . . . a6 and 6 . . . ttJ c6
B2 1) 12 ... h5 1 3.f3!
1 8 .:gf4!N id5 1 9 .:gf3 ! , intending to complete
White needs to be accurate. I went wrong with
development with ib2 and :gafl , when Black
does not have much to show for his material
1 3 . h3, and after 1 3 . . . h4! l 4. hxg4 hxg3 l 5 . fxg3
deficit.
'Wd3! Black obtained a dangerous attack in
Avrukh - A. Mikhalevski, Israel 20 1 0 .
1 3 ... h4
16.©hl 'Wd7 17.b3 hg4 1 8.'Wg3 i.e6
19.i.h2±
Black hardly has any dangerous ideas .
1 3 . . . lll h6? 1 4 .'Wc2 'Wd5 1 5 . b3 leaves Black
B22) 12 ...i.b4
clearly worse.
14.fxg4 hxg3
1 3 ... h5
This is
Black's principal
idea in these
positions.
1 3 . . . ixd2 is no problem for White after the
accurate:
1 4 .ixd2!
1 6 .'Wf4 'Wd5
ixc4
1 7 .ic3
1 5 .'Wxc4
lll f3 t
1 8.�hl
lLl xe5
0-0
1 9 .:gad l 'Wh5 20.h4±
14.b3 h4!
Of course
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Here the most convmcmg way to deal
with the . . . ixg4 threat would have been
not
1 4 . . . ixd2?
1 5 . lLl xd2 h4
1 6 . lLl f3 hxg3 l 7.hxg3 with a big advantage for
White.
1 5.tlif3 hxg3
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 40
8.Y«e2 b5
In a number of recent games Black has tried
8 . . . id6 9 .�xc4 0-0, returning the pawn and
aiming for a quick strike in the centre. I suggest
following Gelfand's example:
1 0 .B:d l !!b8
l 1 . tt'l bd2 e5 1 2 . dxe5 ixe5 (Apparently Black
was not satisfied with 1 2 . . . tt'l xe5 1 3 .tt'lxe5
ixe5 1 4 . tt'l f3 id6 1 5 .e4, when White indeed
has good prospects .) 1 3 .�e2 �e7 1 4 . tt'l c4
!!fd8 1 5 .id2
This
critical
posmon
requires
further
investigation and testing. I like White's
chances, and will present one illustrative line:
16 ...Y«dS 17.ib2 ic5 18Jfadl i.xe3t
19.c!ll xe3 c!ll xe3 20,gxdS c!ll xc2 2 1 .gd2 tLl b4
22.tll d4
White is obviously better and can continue
playing without much risk.
C) 7 ...id7
8
7
6
1 5 . . . id4 ! ? This was an interesting try for
Black in Gelfand - Wang Hao, Tashkent
20 1 2 . Perhaps Boris got confused by Black's
last move, as the direct 1 6 . tt'l xd4N tt'l xd4
1 7.�fl tt'l c6 1 8 .ic3 ! tt'l e4 1 9 .i e t :t would
have reached a position where Black can
hardly claim to have sufficient compensation
for White's bishop pair.
9.b3!?
This strategic pawn sacrifice greatly appeals
to me.
5
9 ... cxb3 10.axb3
3
White has made no real effort to regain the c4-
1
structural weaknesses, leading to long-term
4
2
We have reached the main tabiya for the
7 . . . id7 variation. Unlike the previous lines,
pawn, instead simply exchanging it in order
to open the a- and c-files and expose Black's
positional compensation.
Chapter 1 0
-
141
5 . . . a6 and 6 . . . llJ c6
1 3 ....ie7 14.tlic3 tlicb4 1 5.tlixb4 hb4
16.tlixdS
White accepts the challenge.
16 ... exdS 17.hdS .ih3 1 8 ..ic6!
A fresh positional sacrifice.
18 ... J.xfi 19.@xfl °1Wf6
Now in Schiller - Wharrier, email 20 1 2 ,
White rushed to take on a8 .
A stronger and
more thematic option would have been:
C l ) 1 0 .ib4
.••
This gives White an opportunity to carry out a
strong manoeuvre.
1 1 .tlieS! tlidS
The exchange sacrifice
does
1 I . . . tli xe5?N 1 2 .i.xa8 '1¥fxa8
1 4 .f3 lt'ic5 1 5 .'1¥f c2±
not work:
1 3 .dxe5 lt'i e4
12.tlid3 0-0 13 .ib2
•
This
move
has
only
been
played
in
correspondence games, but it is undoubtedly
the most logical choice. The following game
gives a good illustration of how play may
proceed.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
C2) 10 ....ie7
1 42
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
This is not the most active choice, but Black
13.tll c3 �xc3
Other moves are hardly satisfactory for
Black. For instance, both 1 3 . . . ctJ db4 1 4 . ctJ e4
f6 1 5 . ctJ e l and 1 3 . . . 'Wc8 1 4 . ctJ e l ctJ db4
is hoping to keep things solid.
1 1 .J.d2!?
Somehow this move appeals to me the most,
1 5 . ctJ e4 give White clearly better play.
despite the fact that 1 l .ib2 and 1 1 . ctJ c3 are
more popular.
14.J.xc3
1 1 . .. 0-0 12Jkl tll d5
a5 1 6. ctJ e l ctJ b4 1 7.ixb4 ixb4 1 8 . ctJ d3 id6
This is better than 1 4 .E!:xc3 ? ! E!:a7 1 5 .E!:c2
I would also like to mention: 1 2 . . . E!:a7 1 3 . ctJ c3
when Black was fine in Arnn Prasad - Arnold,
ctJ b8 (I also checked 1 3 . . . ie8 ! ?N, which looks
better than the text move. Nevertheless, after
Paris 20 1 1 .
1 4 . ctJ e l ! ctJ b4 1 5 . ctJ a2! ctJxa2 1 6 .E!:xa2 ctJ d 5
14 ... ga7
1 7 . ctJ d3 White has excellent compensation.)
This position first occurred in Kachiani
Gersinka - Ar. Petrosian, Dortmund 2000,
1 4 . ctJ e 5 ie8
and it has since been repeated numerous times.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 . ctJ a2! Intending ctJ b4 - a strong manoeuvre
which
is
worth
remembering.
1 5 . . . ctJ d5
1 6 .'We l ! ? id6 1 7 . ctJ d3 White was clearly better
in D. Berczes - Goloshchapov, Griesheim
20 1 1 .
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
15.�el!N
I find it strange that nobody has played this
logical move yet.
1 5 ... � b4
I also analysed: 1 5 . . . a5 1 6 .'Wxb 5 ! It is best
to accept the challenge. 1 6 . . . ctJ xd4 1 7 .'Wc4
ctJ b 5 The only move. 1 8 .E!:xa5 E!:xa5 1 9 .ixa5
Despite the simplifications, White maintains
definite pressure, as shown after 1 9 . . . id6
2 0 . ctJ d3 'We7 2 1 . ctJ b4 ! .
16.J.xb4 J.xh4 17.�d3 J.d6
1 7 . . . 'We7 does not change the character of
Chapter 1 0 - 5
the game after 1 8 .Wc2 Ei:c8 1 9 .ic6!� with
good positional compensation.
. . .
a6 and 6 . . . tll c6
1 43
1 2 .Ei:c l 0-0
1 2 . . . Ei:a?? 1 3 . lll e5! is already winning, and
after 1 3 . . . ixe5 1 4 .dxe5 lll d5 1 5 .lll c3 lll cb4
1 6 . lll xd5 lll xd5 1 7 .id4 Ei:a8 1 8 .e4 lll b6
1 9 .Ei:xc7 Black was in a hopeless situation in
Gupta - Stockmann, Bad Wiessee 20 1 3 .
1 3 . lll e5! ixe5 1 4 .ixc6! ?
1 4. dxe5N lll d5 1 5 . lll c3 i s also great fo r
White.
a
C3) 1 0 ...�d6
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4 . . . id6 1 5 .ixa8 Ei:xa8 1 6 . lll d2 e5 1 7 .dxe5
ixe5
8
Somehow White went on to lose from this
6
5
4
position in Evdokimov - Shinkevich,
7
Ufa
2004. The simplest way to maintain a clear
advantage would have been:
1 8 .ixe5N Wxe5 1 9 .e4±
Intending We3 and f2-f3 . Black clearly does
not have enough for the exchange.
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
This has been the most popular choice. The
bishop is more active here than on e7, but less
0-0
exposed than on b4.
l
b
1 1 .�b2
1 . . .We7?!
This has been played a few times, but it
allows White to develop a quick initiative.
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 44
12.gc1
Here we will consider C3 1)
followed by the more popular C32)
12 tLJ b4
12 ... tLJdS.
.••
15.dxcS gxc5
In the event of l 5 . . . :!i.xc5 1 6 . lt:l c2 a5 1 7 . lt:l a3
Wb6 1 8 . lt:l xd7 lt:lxd7 l 9 . lt:l xb5;!; White
maintains a pleasant edge, thanks to the
C3 1) 12 ... tLJ b4 13.tLJes gcs
bishop pair.
1 3 . . . lt:l fd 5 ? is no good in view of 1 4 . lt:l xd7
Wxd7 1 5 .e4 lt:l b6 1 6 .e5 :fie7 1 7.:!i.xa8 E:xa8
1 8 . lt:l d2± when Black does not have enough
for the exchange.
1 3 . . . E:a7 is playable, but 1 4 . lt:l a3 :!i.e8 1 5 . e4�
gave White great compensation in Bucek Hnatovsky, Internet 20 1 1 .
.i � j, ��· 8
�
7u
,Y,m
- - %�r
- - - %- ·-· �-1-6 5
�
� :�
� -----Y-m-----;�
��
. W[f n� �
�
%
%''
�
�
-;
�
�
---3�
m 8 a v� %'v��
f\ef�%��
w� ��\iiil
-00
2
•�.w
�('._j1
----%p::
-��b----%
0�ir,;���
4
\§J
1
f� t.z.J��
a
b
c
d
m
e
�
m
f
g
h
14.tLJa3!?
20.i.d4 Wd6 2 1 .i.cS Wc7 22,gxa6;!;
White has regained the pawn, and can
continue pressing with no risk.
I like this, although 1 4 . lt:l d2 We7 1 5 . lt:l d3
E:fd8 also looked dangerous for Black in Zilka
- Navara, Czech Republic 2009.
continuation is:
c5
1 8 . dxc5
A logical
1 6 .lt:lxb4N :!i.xb4 1 7 .E:xa6
E:xc5
1 9 .E:xc5 :!i.xc5 20.:!ixf6
Wxf6 (20 . . . gxf6?! 2 1 . lt:l e4 is riskier for Black.)
2 1 . lt:l e4 We7 22.lt:lxc5 Wxc5 23 .Wd3 Wc7
24.E:d6 �f8;!; Black should be able to hold,
although White can certainly keep playing for
a while without risk.
14 ... cSN
This seems like a logical attempt to improve
on 1 4 . . . :!i.xe5 1 5 .dxe5 lt:l fd5 1 6 .:!i.d4, when
White had great compensation in Fortune Weiss, email 20 1 1 .
C32) 12 ... tLJdS
Chapter 1 0
-
5 . . . a6 and 6 . . . lll c6
This is by far the most popular move in
the position, although most of the games are
from correspondence/email play. Most of the
1 45
16.tli e5 .ixe5 17.dxe5
Again White's compensation was obvious in
Oppitz - Hirr, Internet 20 1 1 .
ideas are the same as in the previous lines, and
Conclusion
White does not have to do anything fancy to
maintain his compensation.
5 . . . a6 6 . 0-0 lll c6 is a challenging system,
13.tlic3
which is generally played with the intention
White does not mind exchanging pieces,
of holding on to the c4-pawn. I recommend
GM I with 7.e3, when Black
as the removal of the d5 -knight will help to
departing from
increase the pressure on the long diagonal.
has two main options .
13 ... tli cb4
7 . . . E:b8 leads to dynamic play after 8 . lll fd2
1 3 . . . tll xc3 ?!N is too compliant, and after
e5 9 .i.xc6t bxc6 1 0 . dxe5 lll g4 1 1 . lll xc4 i.e6
1 4 .i.xc3 White's initiative is quite potent. A
1 2 . tll bd2, when White has gone from being a
sample line is: 1 4 . . . tll e7 1 5 . tll e5 lll d5 1 6 .i.a5
pawn down to a pawn up, but has been forced
f5 1 8 .E:c2 White has typical
to part with his important 'Catalan bishop' .
i.e8 1 7. tll d3
compensation, with an even better version
Black has some attacking prospects with
than in some of the other lines given.
. . . h5-h4, but my analysis indicates that White
can keep control and steer the game towards
13 . . . '11N e7 1 4 . tll e4 The knight is heading for
favourable simplifications .
c5 . 14 . . . a5 1 5 . tll e5 lll cb4 White has several
interesting ideas here, but I prefer 1 6 . tll c5
7 . . . i.d7
i.xe5 1 7 .dxe5 with rich compensation, as in
Foulds - Coyne, corr. 20 1 4 . White's pieces are
straightforward plan of swapping it off with
8 .'11N e2
b5
sees
Black
firmly
protecting his extra pawn on c4, so I like the
perfectly placed, and he has good chances to
9 . b 3 ! ? cxb3 1 0 .axb3. White has long-term
seize the initiative on the kingside.
positional compensation and the black bishop
is misplaced on d7. We analysed three moves
14.t£ie4 a5 15.t£ic5 .ic6
1 5 . . . i.xc5 is well met by 1 6 .dxc5 !�, opening
for Black but, although some of the finer
details vary from one line to the next, the
a path for the dark-squared bishop, as in
general ideas remain similar. In all cases, White
Tinjaca Ramirez - Sheretyuk, corr. 20 1 3 .
gets a lasting initiative with natural, easy-to­
understand moves.
Catalan 4 ... dxc4
s �c6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
...
Variation Index
l .d4 � f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.� f3 dxc4 5.i.g2 � c6
6.'%Va4
A) 6 ...i.d6
B) 6 ...i.d7 7.'%Vxc4 � a5 8.'%Vd3 c5 9.0-0
Bl) 9 ...'%Vb6
B2) 9 ... �c8
B3) 9 ...i.c6 10.�c3
B3 1) 1 0 ... cxd4
B32) I O ... i.e7
C) 6 ... � d7 7.'%Vxc4 � b6 8.'%Vb5!
CI) 8 ... i.b4t
C2) 8 ...i.d7
C3) 8 ... a6 9.'%Vd3
C3 1) 9 ... � b4
C32) 9 ... e5
D) 6 ... i.b4t 7.i.d2
D I) 7 ...i.d6 8.�a3
D l l) 8 ... � e4
D 1 2) 8 ...i.xa3
D2) 7 ... � d5 8.'%Vb5!?
D2 1) 8 ... 0-0
D22) 8 ...i.xd2t
147
148
148
149
1 50
151
153
1 54
155
156
1 57
1 57
158
1 60
1 60
161
162
164
164
1 65
h
Chapter 1 1 - 5
1 .d4 tll f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tll f3 dxc4 5.J.g2
tll c6
. . .
1 47
lll c6
8.hc6t bxc6 9.dxe5 tll d7
9 . . . Wd5 1 0 . 0-0 lll e4 has also been played.
A similar situation can arise via the 6 . . . ib4 t
7 .id2 id6 variation, but there exists a vital
difference: the bishop is not hanging on d2
here! This allows White to seize the initiative
as follows:
�• �
�fJI
��'2
.t. w•
� 7:w•% ,,,,,%
�L.% .t.
·
·�
�
��
��-%�
�� �
•
•
� ·ift�
��
if�
i)�
�
�
�
�
w
�
3 �� ��
�
�
�-0
�
��J
2 �)'.�- �& �
����-J[j
8
1
6
5
4
6.�a4
� �� - � �
a
This chapter resembles the corresponding
chapter of
GM 1. Broadly speaking, I have
mostly recommended the same basic lines for
White, but with some fine tuning based on
more recent games and analysis.
A) 6 ...J.d6,
B) 6 ...J.d7, C) 6 ... tll d7 and D) 6 ...J.b4t.
6 . . . lll d5 7.Wxc4 lll b6 takes us directly to
C.
e
f
important
�
g
h
move
natural to develop while preparing . . . e 5 .
GM l,
but after 7 . . . 0-0 8 . lll xc4 Black came up with a
useful improvement in 8 . . . �b8!, when 9 . lll xd6
cxd6 1 0 . 0-0 b5 l 1 .Wb3 ib7 led to equality in
Evans - Buczinski, email 20 1 0 .
7 ...J.xe5
7 . . . 0-0 ? ! 8 . lll xc6 bxc6 9 . lll d2 will lead to
a serious positional plus for White after he
regains the c4-pawn.
would
D1
I recommend a different course
d2 instead of c 1 . That is why, in variation
of action with lll a3 instead of lll e5 a few moves
earlier.) 1 1 . . . lll c5 1 2 .Wa5 ! 0-0 1 3 .ie3 lll d7
1 4 .Wxc7 c3 1 5 .bxc3 White was clearly better
in Ragger - Baumegger, Vienna 20 1 0 .
Here too, this is an excellent move.
This is a pretty rare choice, but it is quite
7. lll bd2 was my recommendation in
d
10.0-0 0-0 1 1 .�a5!
A) 6 ...J.d6
7.tll e5!?
(This
c
obviously not be available with the bishop on
on page 1 60,
Black has four main options :
variation
l l . ttJ a3 !
b
1 48
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
Bl) 9 ...VNb6 10.tlic3
1 1 ..J:�bs
Another game continued 1 1 . . . f6 1 2 .:§:d l
fxe5 1 3 . lt:l c3 and Black's pawn structure was
a sorry sight in Sherwood - Keevil, Internet
20 1 2 .
12.gdl f6 13.tlia3 c3 14.b3 fx:e5 1 5.il.e3±
White was much better in a game between
engines with unknown names .
B) 6 ...Jl.d7 7.VNxc4 tlia5
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
10 ... cxd4
The alternative is:
10 . . .ic6 1 I .ie3 :§:d8
The b2-pawn is obviously poisoned:
1 1 . . .Wfxb2? 1 2 . lt:l e 5 ixg2 1 3 .:§:ab l Wfa3
1 4 . 'tt> xg2 and Black is j ust lost.
1 2 .l'!fd l Wfxb2?
This pawn grab is too dangerous .
White is also better after other moves, for
instance: 1 2 . . . cxd4N 1 3 . lt:l xd4 ( 1 3 .ixd4 is
also promising.) 1 3 . . . ixg2 1 4 . 'it>xg2 ie7
1 5 . lt:l a4 Wfb4 1 6.Wfb 5 t lt:l c6 1 7.Wfxb4 lt:l xb4
1 8 . lt:l b 5 ! t
1 3 . lt:l e 5 ixg2
s.VNd3 c5 9.0-0
This is a significant branching point, where
Black's main options are
Bl} 9 ... VNb6, B2)
9 ... gcs and B3) 9 ...il.c6.
9 . . . c4? can be considered an inferior version
of variation Cl of Chapter 7, which can be
found on page 94, as Black has played the
decentralizing . . . lt:l a5 instead of the more useful
. . . b 5 . Here is the model example: 1 0 .VNc2 ic6
1 1 . lt:l c3 ib4 1 2 .ig5 0-0 1 3 .l'!ad l h6 1 4 .d5
exd5 1 5 .ixf6 Wfxf6 1 6 . lt:l xd5 ixd5 1 7.:§:xd5±
Black's minor pieces were badly misplaced on
the queenside in P. H . Nielsen - Hj artarson,
Copenhagen 1 996.
7 8
6
5
3
2
4
-·
,,,,,v, �
-,�--•
,
-�
,___ _%�
,,, ,�, % ·�
� �
�
�
� � -- -11
- - - ' · '•
,,,,,,; .
,,,,,/. m
��
�
�/.'"'-�l-�
-\�;,<'0 �" -�
- �
p�\Wll§"
��· � �
�
?!'
fl�
iO�
� ""'"r:·i,{ ""
��
""£'"""�
�'
�
[sf""''� -�����
a
�
b
c
d
e
z
f
�
g
h
1 4 .:§:ab l ! Wfa3 1 5 . 'tt> xg2
White was winning, and he smashed his
opponent in a few more moves:
Chapter 1 1
1 5 . . . ll\ c6
1 6 .'1Wb5
'!Wxc3
1 7. ll'l xc6
bxc6
1 8 .'!Wxc6t ll'l d7 1 9 . dxc5 +Golombek - Ed. Lasker, Hastings 1 9 5 3 .
I I .Y!Yxd4
1 1 .ll'lxd4 ic5 1 2 .ie3 ll'lg4 looks fine for
Black.
-
5 . . . ltJ c6
1 49
B2) 9 .. Jk8 10.tll c3
8
i. � �·� �.i
�
7
6•
,,i .... . /,�
/,,,,./,�
llll'l,
llll.��
5
Ill!
llll
4 Ill! ,�
•
rx-·
�
'"/2. . %�
�%mv
�
3
. �®·�
�®.�. �� m �t�
�
2 �Jll� .0 -�ll!Jl!s
�•-r-·1%m·1
,,
,
....
1
. .
llllllll
��.J
...
� � mM�
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
10 ... cxd4
Another direction is:
10 . . . ic6 1 1 .El d l c4
1 1 . . . cxd4
1 2 . ll'l xd4 ixg2
1 3 . )f{xg2 ic5
1 4.Wb5t! causes problems before Black
can complete his development: 1 4 . . . Wd7
( 1 4 . . . ll'l d7 1 5 .ig5 ! practically decides the
game
instantly,
for
example:
1 5 . . . Wb6
1 6 . ll'l f5 ! '!Wxb 5 1 7. ll'l xg7t iif8 1 8 . ll'l xb5 +-)
1 5 .Wxd7t ll'l xd7 1 6. lll e4 ll'l c4 ( 1 6 . . . ie7
1 7. ll'l b 5 ± is also bad for Black.) 1 7 .b3 ll'l ce5
1 8 . ll'l b 5 ! Black was losing at least a pawn in
12.�xd4 .ic5
Now I like the following slightly surprising
idea.
Nogly - Halasz, Dortmund 1 992.
1 2 .'!Wc2 ib4
Black is trying to control the light squares
and restrain White's central pawns, but the
13.tll b3!? �xb3 14.axb3
White has serious pressure on the queenside,
for instance:
14 ... i>e7 15 ..if4 .ic6 16.hc6 bxc6 17.l::! a6
.ib6 18.�a4 � d5 19.l::! al �fad8 20.tl:ixb6
axb6 2 1 ..ieS!±
Black was in real trouble i n M. Grabarczyk Taimanov, Germany 2002.
next move shatters that illusion.
8
7
6
5
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
150
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 3 . dS! exd5 1 4 . e4 0-0
1 4 . . . ixc3 ? ! 1 5 .exd5 lll xd5
1 6 . bxc3 0-0
1 4 . lll g5 ! The key idea is 1 4 . . . h6 1 5 . lll dxe6!
.ixe6 1 6 . lll xe6 fXe6 1 7 .'!We4!!, an amazingly
1 7 . lll g5 g6 was even worse in Ftacnik -
calm move which would be hard to find over
Lechtynsky, Czechoslovakia 1 979. Here the
the board.
simple 1 8 .if4!N l"le8 1 9 . l"ld4 would have
White has an extremely dangerous initiative
1 7 . . . lll f6
1 8 .'!Wg6t rJle7
1 9 .b3
given Black serious trouble along the d-file.
for the sacrificed piece.
1 5 .exd5 id7 1 6 .if4 b5 1 7 . lll e5±
White's advantage was obvious in Gofshtein
The text move is more solid for Black, and was
- Berkovich, USSR 1 976.
played in Gustafsson - Groszpeter, Austria
1 1 .�xd4
200 5 , and several subsequent games. In GM 1
I gave 1 2 .l"ld l as a novelty leading to an edge
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
for White, which seems like a valid assessment,
but in practice Black has been quite successful
neutralizing White's slight pressure. Therefore
I would like to propose a new direction
here.
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
1 I . .. ic5
1 I . . .'!Wb6 has been played almost as often.
1 2 .l"ld l lll c4 ( 1 2 . . . ie7 1 3 . lll e4 lll d5 1 4. lll f5 !
exf5 1 5 .'!Wxd5 ie6 1 6 . lll d6t ixd6 1 7 .'!Wxd6
'!Wxd6 1 8 .l"\xd6 rJle7 1 9 .l"ld l l"\hd8 20 .id2
lll c6 2 1 .b3;!; White kept an edge thanks to the
bishop pair in Schueppen - Feco, email 20 1 0 .)
1 3 . lll e4 lll d5 Now in Schuster - Shpakovsky,
email 2009, White could have developed his
initiative with:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
12.�e4!?N �xe4
1 2 . . . .ie7
1 3 . lll xf6t
ixf6
1 4 .lll b 5 t
is
problematic for Black, as both of his queenside
pawns are under attack.
1 3.he4 i.c6 14.�xc6 �xd3 1 5.hd3 �xc6
I6JMI ©e7 17.©g2 ghd8 18.i.d2;!;
Black is unable to do anything special with
his slight lead in development. White will soon
get coordinated, and his bishop pair provides
real chances for a long-term pull.
B3) 9 ...ic6 10.�c3
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 1 1
-
151
5 . . . ttJ c6
main line, with two fewer moves played - see
12 . . . ic5 1 3 .'!Mi°b 5t! lll d7 1 4.E!:dl a6 1 5 .'1Mi°d3
lll f6 below.) 1 4 .'!Mi°f3 White had an obvious
initiative in Solari - Rivas Mongrut, corr. 2007.
12 . . . lll c6 was played in Antic - Lazarevic,
Niska Banj a 1 996. Here the only chance for
White to fight for the advantage is 1 3 .ie3 !N,
as pointed out by Marin. Play may continue:
1 3 . . . ie7 ( 1 3 . . . lll xd4 ? 1 4 .ixd4 ie7 1 5 .'!Mi°b 5 t !
'1Mi'd7 1 6 .Wxd7t Wxd7 1 7 .El:fd l W e 8 1 8 . lll b S
i.� lll
.lll ··-�·
••B•�
6 %,,,,7,ll
"'l lllll'i l.•ill,,,,7,lll
llll ll
: llllll lll� llllll llllll
, !117, '0/�" ''�·"" lll�,i'""
"
3 � mv�A]
r�
2 �ft""' '-����
lll
1 �,,,,7,lll j@
'illl "' "
leaves Black in serious trouble.)
Now Black can either remove the central
B3 1) 10 ...cxd4 or maintain it
with B32) 10 ...i.e7.
tension with
B3 1) 10 ... cxd4 1 1 .tlixd4 i.xg2
1 1 . . .icS 1 2 . E!: d l ixd4 ( 1 2 . . . ixg2 1 3 .'!Mi°b St!
lll d7
1 4 .Wxg2
1 2 . c;t>xg2 icS
transposes
to
1 3 .'!Mi°b S t ! lll d7
1 l . . .ixg2
1 4 .E!:d l , as
covered in the main line below.) 1 3 .'!Mi°xd4
Wxd4 1 4 .E!:xd4 ixg2 1 S . c;t>xg2 lll c6 1 6 .E!:d t t
White keeps a pleasant edge i n this endgame.
s
7
,,,,
%
·
',, , , , , ;
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.E!:fd 1 This looks like the best way to develop
White's initiative. 14 . . . '!Mi°c8 (After 1 4 . . . '!Mi'd7
12.Wxg2
1 5 .'!Mi°c4 lll eS 1 6.'!Mi°b5 '!Mi'xb 5 1 7. lll dxb 5 0-0
1 8 .ixa7± White safely grabs a pawn.) 1 5 .E!:ac l
0-0 1 6 . lll e4;!; White has a pleasant edge which
may easily become more serious .
The text move runs into a thematic idea.
1 52
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
13.¥Bb5t! �d7 14.gdl
has managed to simplify, but after 22.e4 he
still faced an unpleasant endgame in Tkachiev
1 4 . lll f3 ! ?N
This
new
idea
may be
even stronger.
However, I have kept the rook move as the
main line because Black can also reach it
via the 1 I . . .ic5 or 1 2 . . . a6 move orders, as
noted earlier.
- Solozhenkin, France 2000.
1 5 . . . lll f6 is the most solid choice for Black,
but it still does not equalize. 1 6 .ie3 {It is
also worth considering 1 6.ig5 ! ? , for instance
1 6 . . .ixd4
1 4 . . . a6
1 4 . . . Wfb6 1 5 .:B:d l lll c6 1 6.Wfa4! E!:d8 1 7.Wfg4!
gives White a clear advantage.
Wfxd4
1 8 .E!:xd4
lll c6
22. lll c5 E!:b8 2 3 . a3± and White maintains
nagging pressure) 1 6 . . . ie7 1 7.if4 0-0 1 8 .Wff3
1 5 .Wfa4 ie7 1 6.E!:d l lll c6
1 6 . . . b5 1 7.Wfe4 leaves Black in an unpleasant
pin along the d-file.
1 7.Wfxd4
1 9 .E!:d3 E!:d8 20.E!:xd8t lt>xd8 2 1 . lll e4 lt>e7
An important detail is
Wfb6 This position occurred in Villar Ramos Semenov, email 2007. Here I suggest:
that 1 7 . . . Wfc8 can be met by 1 8 .E!:xd7! 'it>xd7
1 9 .Wfd4t 'it>e8 20.Wfxg7 E!:f8 2 I .ih6 with a
huge advantage.
�6 !fD�lf-'
·� ;� ,,%� � - - ��
�� �� ��
: 1��"•�"//, ������ ��
32 � � • ttJ �
�9- - , B �d��
"
.,, f ' "D !m ···· "m ····
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 7.Wfb3 lll a5
17 . . . b5 1 8 . lll e4 0-0 1 9 . lll fg5 ±
16.i.g5!
A very nice move, which gives White the
1 8 .Wfc2 Wfc8
1 8 . . . 0-0 ? allows 1 9 . lll e 5 ± .
opportunity to seize a dangerous initiative.
1 9 .if4 0-0 20.:B:ac l ±
Black has managed to castle, but h e i s a long
way from equalizing, as White's pieces are
much better placed.
14 ... a6 15.¥Bd3 gcs
This
move has been
played
at World
Championship level, but it does not solve
Black's problems .
1 5 . . . ie7
1 6.if4
1 7. lll xe6!)
1 7. lll f3 lll c4 1 8 . lll a4 b5
E!:c8
( 1 6 . . . 0-0 ?
allows
1 9 .b3
lll cb6 20. lll xb6 lll xb6 2 1 .Wfxd8t ixd8 Black
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 1 1
16 ... lll f6N
The bishop
untouchable:
1 6 . . . 'WxgS ?
decisive attack.
1 6 . . . ie7 was played in Kramnik - Topalov,
Elista (3) 2006, and now l 7. tll e4! would
have given White a considerable advantage, as
mentioned in numerous sources .
l 7 . . . 'Wxf6?
5 . . . lt.J c6
1 53
allowed Black to escape with equality in
is
1 7. tll xe6 'We7 1 8 . tll xg7t cj;1d8 1 9 . tll dS with a
17.J.xf6 gxf6
-
Ilincic - Brkic, Teslic 2006, but the text
move keeps him under real pressure.
E i •iV•
.t. 1
�
- - "�
6 "�
�
�
r
•
�
�
�'
5 � �
� ,, , ;�
�
�
��,,
��ij'�/,'0 �
3 ��
� -��-----' ��-���
---��-0
8
1
4
runs
into
1 8 . tll e4
'Wxd4
( 1 8 . . . °We7 loses to 1 9 .°Wc3 !) 1 9 .'Wxd4 ixd4
20. tll d6t +- winning an exchange.
18.�e4 �e7 19.�g4
White is clearly better.
B32) 10 ...J.e7
2
" �� �* ��-JI
� 1.
. ...
.
�
.
.
,J----·'�
...
�Jll� �
��J!lJ;JrJ
� �·� � - � · �
'0
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4 . . . idS 1 5 . tll xd5 tll xd5
After 1 5 . . . exdS 1 6 .if4 0-0 1 7.°Wb 5 ! Black
has no activity to compensate for the isolated
pawn.
1 6 .e4 ib4
1 6 . . . tll f6
l 7.if4
also
gives
White
a
significant plus.
1 7 .'WbS 'Wxb5
1 8 . tll xb 5 a6 1 9 .exdS axb 5
20 .if4
Black is under pressure and it will be hard
for him to avoid the loss of a pawn.
12.e4 �b6
This is definitely Black's best.
1 2 . . . cxd4 ?! 1 3 . tll xd4 'Wb6 has been played
in a few more games, but it is significantly
inferior. 1 4 .'We2 is a good answer, and now
1 4 . . . e S ? made things even worse in Govchiyan
- Sulava, Nice 2004. For some reason, White
avoided the obvious and strong:
1 1 .�dl 0-0
If Black switches to the other plan, he runs
into a familiar problem:
l l . . . cxd4 1 2 . tll xd4 ixg2 1 3 .°Wb S t !
Once again, this intermediate check allows
White to seize the initiative.
1 3 . . . °Wd7 1 4 .'Wxa5 !N
1 4 . cj;1xg2 'Wxb 5 1 5 . tll cxb 5 0-0 1 6 .if4 a6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 54
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 5 . lLi f5N .ic5 1 6 . .ig5 lLi e8 1 7 .:gab l ! With a
decisive advantage.
17 ... exd5 1 8.l3xc5 �xe4 19.l3ccl
Despite the extra pawn, Black's position is
quite unstable, and in the game he went down
quickly.
19 ... �e7 20.�g4!? b6 21.�e3 �e6? 22.b4
�c4 23.he4
Black suffered a fatal loss of material in
Eljanov - Goloshchapov, Dubai 20 1 4.
C) 6 ... �d7
s i. �.t�•� �I
- ·--� .•�--.
6 "� •� '� "�
��
� �� ��
: 1�� ,� �� �� lt:Jw
��r�
• - - %� ���
7
3 %
14.�e5 cxd4 1 5.hd4 �c7?!
An unfortunate square for the queen . The
lesser evil was 1 5 . . . 'l&b4N, although after
1 6 .'l&e3 lLi c4 1 7 . lLi xc4 'l&xc4 1 8 . .if3! White
maintains the better chances.
2 .8
J£�
-- - %•
- - g'�- - %�w����8-�d
1 glt:J�
a
b
c
d
m
e
f
-�
g
h
With this concrete approach, Black forces
White to take on c4, and intends to attack the
queen and create active play in the centre.
16.l3acl .ic5 17.tLJd5!
the simple tactical j ustification of winning
7.�xc4 tLJb6 8.�b5!
I consider this idea ofTkachiev to be White's
back the piece, but rather about the evaluation
only real chance for an opening advantage. The
of the position two moves later.
idea is to provoke . . . a6 in order to destabilize
The clever point of this move is not so much
the knight on b6, which may prove useful for
White in some endgame positions. Black has
8
Cl) 8 ....ib4t, C2) 8 ....id7
7
three main moves :
and C3) 8 ... a6.
5
better than 9 . . . .ib4, transposing to variation
6
8 . . . 'i&d5 9 . lLi c3 leaves Black with nothing
4
Cl below.
2
3
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 1 1 - 5 . . . lll c6
C l ) 8 ...i.b4t 9.lll c3 �d5 10.�d3 e5
1 55
13 ... �xd3 14.exd3 i.f6
White
retains
a
clear
advantage
after
ixc6
1 6 .E:e l t
�d8
This concrete approach is the idea behind
14 . . . id7
bringing the queen to d5. If instead 1 0 . . . Wi'c4
(or 16 . . . �d7 1 7.ih3t �d8
1 l .Wi'xc4
1 9 .id4±) 1 7.ixc6 bxc6 1 8 .ia3 ± .
lll xc4
1 2 . 0-0;!; White enjoys a
1 5 . bxc3
1 8 .ie3 lll d5
pleasant endgame.
1 1 . ..hc3 12.ltixe5!
This is the only way to fight for the advantage.
16.lll e5
Previously I recommended this as a novelty,
After 1 2 . bxc3 e4 1 3 .'1Mi'e3 f5 Black has a
and it has since been tested in one game.
comfortable position with full control over the
light squares.
16 ... g5
12 ...�xd4 1 3.ltixc6!
In GM I I gave 1 3 .ixc6t bxc6 1 4 .Wi'xc3
it seemed like the most obvious try to develop
Black's queenside. However, after 1 7 .a4 White
'1Mi'xc3 l 5 . bxc3 as my main recommendation,
keeps the initiative everywhere, for instance:
believing that White had a risk-free edge.
However, some time afterwards I noticed that
17 . . . ixe5 (or 17 . . . g5 1 8 .a5 lll d5 1 9 .a6 c;t>g7
20.axb7 ixb7 2 1 . lll g4 with advantage for
1 5 . . . c5!N should enable Black to hold without
White) 1 8 .E:xe5 f6 1 9 .E:a5 ie6 20 .ie3 �f7
too many problems. (Instead 1 5 . . . lll a4 1 6 .c4
2 l .b4 and Black remains under pressure.
1 6 . . . c6 was the move I analysed in
ie6 l 7.ie3 gave White a pleasant edge in
Roiz - Gofshtein, Israel 2007.)
GM I, as
In the following game Black tried to organize
his pieces in a different way, but he still failed
I also considered the text move in the notes in
GM I, and have updated the analysis here to
take into account a recent game.
to equalize.
17.a4 a5 18.£4 h6 19.i.e3 gxf4 20.gxf4 ga6
20 . . . ie7N
looks
better,
although
after
1 56
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
2 1 .:gac l .id6 22 . .ixb6 cxb6 23.d4;!; White has
a pleasant, risk-free edge.
9.�b3 tli a5
This is the principled follow-up, although
the modest
We have been following the game Perez Ponsa
9 . . . .id6 seems like the best way
to minimize Black's disadvantage. 1 0 . 0-0 0-0
- Tristan, Resistance/Saenz Pena 20 1 3 . Here
1 1 . lll c3 a5 occurred in Zueger - Ekstroem,
White could have obtained a serious advantage
by means of:
Switzerland
2007,
and
now
the
simple
1 2 .Wc2N a4 1 3 .e4 e5 1 4 .dxe5 lll xe5 1 5 . lll xe5
.ixe5 1 6 . .ie3 would have given White the
better game.
10.�d3 c5 1 1 .dxc5 i.xc5 12.�d!
This triple attack poses serious problems.
� ,,,
, , %�_
�,,,�
� ·� �- - - %�
6
'"f
�
�
'ii
��
: - � -� �
��
��
� �� ��r�
3 � f(X�
�ti§�
mll)r�
��ref,,,,, /,� �®-� ----/-®,�
2 �J��-� ��'�'�[§
1 �ll)� � � :
a
C2) 8 ....id7
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
12 .. Jks
This tactical defence does not quite work,
but the alternative 1 2 . . . lt:\ d5 1 3 .Wxg7 Wf6
1 4 .Wxf6 lll xf6 1 5 . lll e5 j ust leaves Black a
pawn down for no compensation.
13.�xg7 i.£8
This position first occurred in Kramnik
-
Naiditsch,
Dortmund
2006,
when,
unbelievably, White did not capture the rook.
14.�xhS!
a
b
Instead Vladimir settled for 1 4 .Wg5 Wxg5
c
d
e
f
g
h
Black logically breaks the pin and chases the
1 5 . .ixg5 .ig7, when Black was perfectly okay.
14 ... gxd t 1 5.©d2
queen away, but at the same time he blocks
No doubt the position looks a bit scary, but
the pressure against the d4-pawn and allows
the white queen can always come back to d4 to
White to arrange his pieces comfortably.
block the discovered check.
Chapter
1 1 - 5 . . . tt:l c6
1 57
( 1 0 . . . c5 1 1 . 0-0 cxd4 1 2 . lll xd4 e5 1 3 .a3 exd4
1 4. axb4 ixb4 was also decent for Black in
Houriez - Anikaev, Figueres 20 1 1 ) l l . a3N
(l 1 . lll a3 ?! exd4
1 2 .'!Wxd4 '!Wxd4
1 3 . lll xd4
occurred in Batsiashvili - Poulopoulos, Kavala
20 1 3 , and now the accurate 1 3 . . . ie?N 1 4 . 0-0
0-0 leaves Black with no problems in the
arising endgame) 1 1 . . .e4 With complex play.
C3) 8 a6 9.V9d3
8 ��
... �·�
.%.,,
, ,,%� ,,%_,��
,y,
�
· ·�·!·
,,, ,,,,� �� �� ·�
•••
7
6
: �. �D �.-.
3 �'w��uvu�'
��
. 'w��xwrw
1
� %Wif
,�g'��
m �
�M
2 L::I ��%
%
%,,,, ,, , , ;�
a
b
L::I
""
d
c
e
%
�� dlb ��
f
,,,,,
g
h
This is the main line, where White hopes
to benefit from having provoked Black's last
move. Now C3 1) 9 tli b4 is a fresh idea that
••.
has been tested a few times since
GM 1 was
published. The most popular move, however,
is still
C32) 9 e5.
•••
C3 1) 9 tli b4 10.VBd2!
•••
This is the best square for the queen. 1 0 .'!Wd l
can be met by the interesting reply: 1 o . . . e5 ! ?
10 c5
I only found one game in the database from
••.
the above position, which was contested by
two computer engines . I considered a couple
of other candidate moves :
1 0 . . . e 5 ? ! l l . a3 e4 1 2 .axb4 exf3 1 3 .ixf3 is
clearly better for White.
1 0 . . . ie? l 1 . a3 lll c6 1 2 . 0-0 0-0 1 3 . lll c3;!;
gives White a comfortable edge.
1 1 .dxc5 hc5
Exchanging queens only helps White to
develop:
l l . . .'!Wxd2t 1 2 .ixd2 ixc5 (After
1 2 . . . lll c2t ? 1 3 . lt> d l lll xa l
1 4 . cxb6± White
will soon pick up the knight in the corner.)
1 3 . 0-0 0-0 1 4 .:B:cl id6 1 5 . lll c3± White
maintains solid pressure in the endgame - j ust
compare the Catalan bishop to its undeveloped
counterpart on c8 .
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 58
8
19.tll b l !!
Suddenly it becomes
clear
7
knights are poorly placed.
4
3
19 ... tll d7 20.e4 tll 5b6 21 .i.e3
6
5
that Black's
White was clearly better in Hannibal - Deep
Junior, Internet 20 1 2 .
C32) 9. . .e 5 1 0.tlixeS
2
I once played 1 O .i.e3 and scored a good victory
1
after 1 0 . . . exd4 l 1 . ttJ xd4 ttJ xd4 1 2 .'1Mfxd4 '1Mfxd4
a
c
e
f
g
h
1 3 .i.xd4 i.b4t
1 4 . lt:\ c3 0-0
1 5 .0-0-0 in
Avrukh - Berg, Santa Cruz de la Palma 200 5 .
12.0-0 0-0 13.tlic3 �xd2
Avoiding the queen trade with 1 3 . . . '1Mfc7
does not solve Black's problems. 1 4 .a3 lt:\ 4d5
1 5 . ttJ xd5 ttJ xd5 1 6 . b4 i.b6 1 7.'1Mfb2! White
keeps a nice pull.
This game nicely illustrates the usefulness of
provoking the . . . a6 move, as the knight on b6
has become vulnerable, and Black is unable to
stabilize his queenside with . . . c6.
Unfortunately, as I noted in
14.hd2 i.e7 1 5.gacl gds 16.gfdl
Normally it would be enough to stop here
and say that White has the more pleasant
game, as all his pieces are in play, while Black
has yet to solve the typical problem of his light­
squared bishop. However, it is worth showing
a few more moves of the computer game, as it
featured a remarkable idea.
GM I, Black can
improve with 1 0 . . . lt:\ b4!, when both l l .Wfe4
'1Mfd5 and 1 1 .Wfd l exd4 1 2 . ttJ xd4 c5 should be
fine for him.
•�
s ' i. U.i.E
""'
""'��'%��
��'�,_ ,,,7,�
Tellll�·�
:•
'JI JI� Jill
4 llll llO ll llll
3 Rllll
�w0 �\!Ill
ef"" %�r�
� ��JrIi�
5
16 ... £6 17.b3!? @f7 18.a3 tli4d5
2
i
,� tZJ � � m :
'�/tlW2;�/JtJll�fJ
a
b
c
d
f
e
g
h
1 0 ... tlib4
This has been played in all games so far.
1 0 . . . ttJxd4N l l .i.e3! c5 gives White more than
one route to an advantage; even the simplistic
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 2 .i.xd4!?
( 1 2 . ttJ d2
is
1 2 . . .'1Mfxd4
1 3 .'1Mfxd4
cxd4
more
ambitious)
1 4 . ttJ d2±
gives
White a slightly better endgame with virtually
no risk.
Chapter 1 1 - 5 . . . lll c6
�· �i-�rJ,
,,
7 i: · £
1.
r
�
1.
•
�
�
" " ' "�
·�
6 �
�-�
�-� �
5
1 1 .'9c3 '9xd4 12.'9xd4
ambitious 1 2 . . . .ie6 ! ? can also be considered)
1 3 . lll f3 Wc4 1 4.Wxc4 lll xc4 1 5 . lll d4 .if6
1 7. lll xa3 .ixd4
�
8
1 2 .Wxc? is less convincing: 1 2 . . . .ie? (The
1 6. a3 lll xa3 !
1 8 .0-0 0-0
Black has held this position in a couple of
3
2
12 ... tll c2t 13.@dl tlixd4 14 . .ie3
1
I have always felt that this was a pleasant
�
�
"�
��� ���-0 ��
•
B'!A)f
�
-� l5'� ��
�
-� , , ��-0
8 ��-� �f"'-�/�' �8 ���..t��
"' f "' �� >�;� �, , �-�
4
correspondence games .
a
position for White, who enjoys a slight pull
without much risk.
1 59
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 7 . . . lll d6 (In the event of 1 7 . . . lll xd2 1 8 .mxd2
it will be hard for Black to cope with the
activation ofa rook along the c-file, for instance:
1 8 . . . .id6 1 9 .B:hc l @e7 20.B:c4±) 1 8 .B:cU The
arising endgame is quite unpleasant for Black.
15.hb6 cxb6
White's superior pawn structure gives him
a strategic advantage, but Black's bishop pair
should not be underestimated.
a
b
8
c
d
e
f
g
h
14 ... tll f5
1 4 . . . c5 occurred in one game, Brandstetter
- Neubauer, Graz 20 1 2 . Strategically, this
consolidation of the knight in the centre looks
risky, as several light squares have now been
weakened. In principle, White would like to
exchange on d4 at an appropriate moment,
obtaining the excellent d3-square for his e5knight, but there is no hurry for the time
being. I propose 1 5 . lll d3!?N in order to put
the c5-pawn under observation and prevent
Black from moving his knight away from d4
- especially to f5 . 1 5 . . . lll c4 1 6 . .ixd4 cxd4
1 7. lll d2
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
16.tll c3
In GM 1 I recommended 1 6 . lll d2, but have
since changed my mind about White's optimal
set-up.
16 ....ic5 17.e3 0-0 18.@e2 B:e8 19.tll d3
B:b8
19 . . . .id6?! significantly eases White's task.
20. lll d5 b5 2 1 . lll b6 B:b8 22.lll xc8 B:exc8
1 60
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
D) 6 i.b4t 7.i.d2
23 . .!h3 g6 24 . .!xf5 gxf5 25 .:gac l It will be
hard for Black to hold the endgame with such
•••
a damaged pawn structure.
At this point I would like to suggest a surprising
new idea.
D I ) 7 i.d6
••.
This is not a trendy move, bur it is played from
time to time by strong grandmasters. There
have been only minor developments since I
analysed it in
20 bxc5 2 1 .:ghdl i.e6 22.tlid5
••.
White has received some clear benefits
GM I.
8.tlia3
Surprisingly, this remains in the shadow
of more popular moves such as 8 . tt'l e 5 and
in return for improving the enemy pawn
8 . 0-0 . It is highly desirable to capture the c4-
structure. Black no longer has the bishop
pawn with the knight, as this will significantly
pair, and White has reached a completely safe
complicate Black's idea of freeing his position
position where he keeps long-term pressure.
Here is a nice illustrative line.
with . . . e5.
We will focus on D 1 1) 8 t£i e4 and D 1 2)
8 ha3, after having a look at Black's other
•.•
.••
22 b6
Otherwise tt'\ b6 will leave Black in a bind.
•••
possibilities:
8 . . . .!d7 9 . tt'l xc4 tt'l e4 1 0 .Wi'b3!N ( I O.e3 was
23.tlic7 i.c4t 24.li>el :ge7 25.tli d5 hd5
played in Khotenashvili - Tregubov, Kanya
25 . . . :ge6? ! is worse: 26 . .!h3 tt'l d4 27. :gxd4!
cxd4 28 . .!xe6 fxe6 2 9 . tt'l e7t mfs 3 0 . tt'l c6 :gcs
20 1 2 , but this unnecessarily allows Black to
simplify with 1 0 . . . tt'le5 !N) 1 0 . . . tt'l xd2 1 l . tt'l cxd2
3 1 . tt'l xd4±
0-0 1 2 .0-0 e5 1 3 .d5 tt'l e7 ( 1 3 . . . tt'l d4? is hardly
26.:gxd5 g6 27.:gadU
Wff6 1 6 .:gfd l ± when the d4-pawn falls) 1 4 . tt'l c4
a good idea in view of 1 4 .tt'lxd4 exd4 1 5 . tt'l f3
Black is doomed to a passive defence.
White has a pleasant edge.
Chapter 1 1 - 5 . . . ltJ c6
161
8 . . . a6 ? ! 9 . lll e 5 !
9 . lll xc4 b5 1 0 . lt:l xd6t cxd6 1 1 .'Wa3 .ib700 i s
reasonable for Black.
9 . . . .id7
9 . . . .ixe5 1 0 . .ixc6t bxc6 1 1 .dxe5 is clearly
better for White.
1 0 . lll xc6 bxc6
1 1 . 0-0
c5
1 2 .'Wxc4
cxd4
1 3 . .ixa8 ! ?
This i s the maximalist try.
1 3 .'Wxd4N e5 1 4 .'Wd3 is a safe alternative,
when White keeps a solid positional edge
due to Black's weak pawn structure.
13 ... 'Wxa8 1 4.'Wxd4 e5 1 5 .'Wh4 h6 1 6. lt:l c4
.ie7
All this happened in Mamrukov - Salvatore,
corr. 20 1 3 . Here
I believe White should
play:
1 0 . 0-0N
This natural move is much stronger than
1 0 . Eld l ? ! .id7 l 1 .'Wc2 'We7= as occurred in
Beliavsky - Farago, Hungary 1 99 8 .
1 0 . . . .id7
1 0 . . . e5 is no problem due to 1 1 . dxe5 lll xe5
1 2 . lll xe5 .ixe5 1 3 .'Wc2!, intending lll c4,
when White gets nice play.
1 1 .Elac l 'We7 1 2 .'Wd3
Preparing lll c4 .
1 2 . . . e5 1 3 .dxe5 lll xe5 1 4 . lll xe5 .ixe5 1 5 . lll c4
.ib5 1 6.'Wb3 .ixc4 1 7.'Wxc4
White's bishop pair should enable him to
exert long-term pressure.
0 1 1) 8 ... tll e4 9.tll xc4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 7 . .ig5 !N 0-0 1 8 . .ixf6 .ixf6 1 9 .'Wh5 'We4
20. lll e3 .ic6 2 1 .'Wf3 'Wxf3 22. exf3 .ixf3
23.Elac l
Black does not have enough fo r the exchange.
8 . . . Elb8 9 .'Wxc4!
Obviously the main idea behind Black's
last move was to meet 9 . lll xc4 with 9 . . . b 5 ,
after which 1 0 . lll xd6t cxd6 1 1 .'Wc2 .ib7
left Black in good shape in Michalik Zakhartsov, Aix-les-Bains 20 1 1 .
9 . . . 0-0
1 62
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
a) 1 0 .e3 seems fine, and after 1 0 . . . id? 1 1 .1M'b3
the position resembles the main line below,
20 1 1 , the strong 1 5 .f4!N would have secured
a solid positional advantage.) 1 4 .d5 lL'l e7
and an exact transposition might occur after
1 5 . lL'l e4! White has a clear plus.
1 l . . .lL'lxd2
1 2 . lL'l fxd2. The engine suggests
1 l . . . b 5 instead, but 1 2 . lL'l ce5 looks better for
13.tlixd6
1 3 . lL'l e 5 could be checked, but I am not sure
White.
how to assess the situation after 1 3 . . . lL'l xe5
b) 1 0 .ie3 ! ? is a more ambitious alternative.
1 4 .dxe5 ixe5 1 5 .ixa8 1M'xa8 1 6. 0-0 ic6.
After 1 0 . . . ib4t 1 1 .i>fl White has lost the
opportunity to castle, but Black's pieces are
shaky in the centre and White preserves an
obvious space advantage. After 1 1 . . . lL'l f6
1 2 .E:d l ie7 1 3 .a3 a5 1 4.ic l E:a6 1 5 .1M'c2
White was better in Shimanov - Frolyanov,
13 ... cxd6 l 4.d5!
Otherwise White has nothing special.
14 ... tli e5 15.0-0 :acs 16.:afdl
Previously I assessed this a s slightly better fo r
White, and I found o n e practical example.
Irkutsk 20 1 0 .
10.tLJfxd2
1 0 . lL'l cxd2 0-0 1 1 . 0-0 enables Black to carry
out his main idea of l 1 . . . e5, with complicated
play.
1 0 ...i.d7
1 0 . . . 0-0
gives White the useful option
of 1 1 .ixc6! ( 1 1 . e3 is obviously fine, and
may transpose to the main line) 1 l . . . bxc6
1 2 . 0-0 with a favourable change in the pawn
structure. After the natural sequence 1 2 . . . c5
1 3 .dxc5 ixc5 1 4 .E:fd l id? 1 5 .1M'c2 Black is
under unpleasant pressure, and there is every
chance for the white knights to outwork the
enemy bishops.
l l .e3!?
I
found
no
reason
recommendation from
to
change
the
GM 1.
0 1 2) 8 ... i.xa3 9.°1Wxa3
1 1 . .. 0-0 12.°1Wb3 b5
This
looks
like
the
most
challenging
continuation.
12 . . . E:b8 enables White to comfortably meet
the . . . e5 advance with: 1 3 .E:cl e5N (The only
game here saw the rather passive 1 3 . . . 1M'e7
1 4 . 0-0 E:fc8. In Iskusnyh - Vasilov, Samara
After 9 . bxa3 Wd5! 1 0 . 0-0 b5 1 1 .\Wd l (or
1 1 .1M'c2 ib7) 1 1 . . .ib? Black was perfectly
okay in Loetscher - Doettling, Pula 2003.
Chapter 1 1 - 5 . . . lll c6
8 � ��-�· ��-Ji
1 � • r�.t• .t. r� .t.
i)-r�
----- '-�
- - - '-�
�
��
, ·�� �
��� ,0'
1 63
6
5
4
�L, %�
w0 ��rr��
�� Iiy,O".f.f!
2 -2r�
�r-r�-� �%�-i?- - %•- .:- ��
3 � •
'0
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14.lLJxc4
After 1 4 . 0-0 f6 1 5 . lll xc4 lll f5
1 6.:B:fd l
lll xe3 1 7.lll xe3 0-0-0 1 8 . lll c4 :B:he8 l 9 . e3;!;
White retained definite pressure thanks to
So far nobody has grabbed the second pawn
the powerful Catalan bishop in Tkachiev -
with
Schenk, Gonfreville 2006. Nevertheless,
9 . . . lll xd4
understandable,
1 0 . lll xd4 'Wxd4,
as
1 1 .:B:d l �
which
gives
is
White
I like
the text move even more.
fantastic compensation. His bishops are strong
and the black monarch will most probably
have to remain in the centre for a long time.
14 lLJf5 1 s .if4 �ks
•.•
•
After 1 5 . . . lll fxd4? 1 6 .�xc? 0-0 1 7 . lll d6±
Black is most probably going to lose his b7-
9 . . . 'Wd6 1 0 .:B:c l ( I O .°Wc3 ! ? has also been played
pawn.
successfully, but I would prefer to regain the
pawn without any adventures.)
1 0 . . . 'Wxa3
Another game continued 1 5 . . . 0-0-0 1 6 .e3
1 l . bxa3 �d7 1 2 .:B:xc4 0-0-0 1 3 . 0-0 lll d5
lll fe7 1 7. g4! h5 1 8 . h3 hxg4 1 9 .hxg4;!; and
1 4 .:B:fc l f6 1 5 .:B:4c2;!; After a logical sequence,
White retained the usual pressure thanks to his
White retained an edge thanks to his bishop
bishop pair in Godat - Muttoni, email 2009.
pair in Ingersol - Mueller, email 20 1 1 .
16.e3 f6
In GM I I mentioned 1 6 . . . lll fe7 1 7. g4, when
I O .ie3 %Vd6 1 1 .:l:k l %Vxa3
•
1 1 . . . 0-0N
might
soon
transpose
after
White preserved the dark-squared bishop and
1 2 . lll e5, but Black's last move gives White the
maintained a pleasant advantage in Gustafsson
useful extra option of 1 2 .'Wa4, avoiding any
- Khenkin, Altenkirchen 200 5 . The text move
damage to the queenside structure.
was played in a more recent game, but it
changes nothing.
12.bxa3 lLJd6 13.cl£ie5 .id7
1 3 . . . lll xe5 ? ! 1 4. dxe5 lll f5 1 5 .�d2 reaches a
difficult position for Black.
17.g4 cl£ife7
This occurred in Cernousek - Haba, Czech
Republic 20 1 1 , and now the right idea for
White would have been:
1 64
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
18.h4N 0-0 19.B:gl !?
White has an enduring edge, the main factor
to the main line. (Instead after 1 2 . dxe 5 ? !
Wi'xd3 1 3 .exd3 E: d 8 Black was doing well i n
Zubritskiy - Duzhakov, S t Petersburg 20 1 4. )
being the bishop pair once again .
D2) 7 ... �d5
1 1 .�xe5!
s !�J,;}'iiiU ?rJI
,
. 1*!111 111111 111111
��-% �!�� ��
%�
I overlooked this move in
GM l , but it is the
1. w�� •
1 %�
, , , %�·
·�• w��
, , %�.t.
only way to fight for the advantage.
5
1 2 . . . lll b4 1 3 .Wi'b l !
6
4
.t. w�
-��
°if�
, , %-�
, ,,,��
,, 0
, , %�r�
�
�
r0 ��- ��
?r�
2 8 -�W�
8 W��w
, ,% �
1 ��-, , , ,�= , -�
3
b
a
c
d
e
f
g
h
8.Wfb5!?
In GM 1 I mentioned this as an interesting
alternative to 8 ..ixb4 lll dxb4, which I gave
as my main recommendation. Since then the
theory has developed a lot in this line, and
1 1 . hd2t 12.�xd2 �xd4
A natural alternative is:
.•
This is the best retreat square, avoiding the
queen trade.
1 3 . . . Wi'xd4 1 4 . lll df3
White is not about to refute his opponent's
set-up, but his superior piece coordination
and extra central pawn should offer him a
persistent edge.
1 4 . . . W/d6
Another good example is: 14 . . . Wi'd8 1 5 .a3
lll 4d5 1 6. 0-0 Wi'e7 1 7.Wi'c2 a5
1 8 .E:ad l
a4 1 9 .e4 lll f6 20.E:fe l .ie6 De Boer - So.
Polgar, Breda 1 996. Black is pretty solid,
but I like White's position after 2 1 .:B:c l N
Black currently seems to be close to equality.
c 6 22. lll d4± . I n this type o f structure i t is
I will not go into further details about this,
other than mentioning that 9 . lll c3 .id7
majority.
1 0 . 0-0 a5
1 1 .Wi' d l 0-0
important line that
1 2 .e3 a4 is one
I looked at.
Black can either return the c4-pawn with
D2 1) 8 0-0, or play for a material advantage
D22) 8 J.xd2t.
•.•
with the critical
•••
D2 1) 8 0-0 9.Wfxc4 � b6
•••
This is obviously one of the ideas behind
Black's 7th move.
1 0.Wfd3 e5
This pawn push is highly thematic for this
variation. Black can also do it after trading
bishops: 1 0 . . . .ixd2t 1 1 . lll bxd2 e5 Now White
should simply play 1 2. lll xe5 , transposing
always easier for White to advance his pawn
8
�A�� �it
.l.
7 •J, i i�� · �, , ���
·
�.,
6
,
,, R �
5 ,,, , , ,� ?,��r//� �
4
,,
,,,,
�-, ,,, , �� , , , ,� ��
,, , � �� �w�
J, 3w·0
23 �w• �wt3J"" t�0 ��
t3J �.tt�
(ii� �=_,,,%•:
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 . 0-0 E:e8
1 5 .. .f6 1 6.E:d l Wi'e7 1 7. a3 lll a6 (White is also
better after 1 7 . . . fXe5 1 8 . axb4 .if5 1 9 .W/c l ;!;)
1 8 . lll d3 c5 1 9 . b4! c4 20. lll b2 .ie6 2 1 . lll d4
.if7 22.Wi'c2 White kept an advantage due
Chapter 1 1
to the passivity of the black knights in
W. Schiller - Markus, email 2008.
1 6. l:! d l Wle7 1 7. a3 llJ 4d5 1 8 . e4 llJ f6 1 9 .Wic2
c6 20.l:!e l Wfc7 2 1 .Wic3 a5 22.h3;!;
-
1 65
5 . llJ c6
. .
14 Wle7 1 5.0-0 c6 16.e4 tll d6 17.a4! i.e6
18.tlid3 f6
•.•
We have been following Tosi - Andersen,
corr. 20 1 1 . Here I favour:
This was Deep Junior - Hiarcs, Internet
20 1 2 .
Once again, White's advantage is
not huge, but his pieces are much better
coordinated, his e4-pawn is restricting Black's
minor pieces, and he has the more mobile
pawn majority.
8
1
1. m..tB
��,,
,_,
,
,
z
,,v,_ '
�
�
6 " "• "� ��
"�
, .,�m ��
�4 �-�- �
�� " � �Mir
3
W, %���w2 �i
8 w�
8 r�j,,
r-�
�
, _ ,J%���l�
-,
, %.,��, , �,=
5
,
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
19J:Uel!N �ad8 20.tlif3
White has a definite edge, as his pieces are
better coordinated and the e4-pawn limits the
movement of Black's minor pieces.
h
D22) 8 ...i.xd2t 9.tli bxd2
13.e3 tlif5
Black has also tried: 1 3 . . . lll e6 1 4 .Wic3 !N
(White should keep the queens on the board,
since after 1 4 .Wlxd8 l:!xd8 the arising endgame
was perfectly playable for Black in Chabanon
- Lautier, Aix-les-Bains 2003, and he soon got
the upper hand after further unconvincing
play from White) 14 . . . Wie? ( 1 4 . . . li:ld5 1 5 .Wib3
c6 1 6. 0-0 is also slightly better for White)
1 5 . 0-0 c6 1 6 . lll df3 lll d5 1 7 .Wfc2 White has a
typical slight plus, for similar reasons to those
mentioned in the lines above.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
14.Wic3
Once again, White should avoid the queen
exchange. The less challenging 1 4 .Wlxd8 l:!xd8
1 5 .<i>e2 was seen in Mads - Harutyunian,
Yerevan 20 1 4 , and now 1 5 . . . l:!e8N 1 6 . li:l d3
c6 would have left Black with no serious
problems.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
9 ... c3
Black does best to accept the challenge,
otherwise he may find himself in a worse
position without many active prospects .
9 . . . lll b6 1 0 . lll e5!N
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
1 66
But not 1 0 . tLl xc4 'Wd5 l 1 . tLl a3 a6 1 2 .'Wd3
13J:Ucl
e5! 1 3 . dxe5 'Wxd3 1 4. exd3 if5 and Black
It is best to start with this move. It is useful
to remain flexible, especially with regard to
was fine in Ulibin - Arnaudov, Marrakesh
the e-pawn, which may advance one or two
20 1 0 .
squares.
1 0 . . . 'Wxd4
I
also
considered
1 0 . . . 0-0
1 l . tLl xc6
( 1 Lixc6! ? bxc6 1 2 .'Wc5 is an interesting
13 ... h6
alternative) 1 1 . . . bxc6 1 2 .'Wc5 'Wd6 1 3 . 0-0
I will take this as the main line, as it was used
E:b8 1 4.E:fd U ; which looks promising for
by Frolyanov to draw with Ponomariov. Three
White.
other moves have been tried:
1 1 . tLl xc6
1 l . e3 'Wd6 1 2 . tLl xc6 id? 1 3 .tLlxc4 tLl xc4
1 3 . . . We? gives White more than one decent
1 4.'Wxc4 ixc6 1 5 .E:d l ixg2 1 6 .E:xd6 cxd6
option . 1 4.E:ab 1 N (There is also 1 4. e4 ttJ b6
1 7 .E:gl !d5 1 8 .'Wa4t !c6 1 9 .'Wb4 0-0 is
1 5 .'We3, transposing to the game Duzhakov
not so clear.
- Eryshkanova, St Petersburg 20 1 1 , which
continued 1 5 . . . E:d8 1 6 . ttJ b3 with good
1 1 . . . bxc6 1 2 .ixcGt id? 1 3 . 0-0-0 ixc6
1 4 .'Wxc6t 'Wd7 1 5 .Wxd?t tLl xd7 1 6. tLl xc4t
White has an enduring advantage thanks to
compensation.) 14 . . . E:d8 1 5 . a3 f6 1 6 .e3 'Wf7
1 7 .E:c5� With continuing pressure for the
his better pawn structure.
pawn.
10.bxc3 l£ixc3 1 1 .�d3 l£id5 12.0-0 0-0
1 3 . . . ttJ bG 1 4 .E:ab l We?
After a relatively forced sequence of moves,
we have reached an important position for the
8 .Wb 5 ! ? line. Black has a healthy extra pawn,
Here I found an improvement.
1 5 . e3!?N
After the more aggressive 1 5 . h4 h6 1 6. e4 E:d8
while White has a significant space advantage,
1 7.'We3 id? 1 8 .g4 ie8 Black's defensive
along with open b- and c-files, and the clear
resources proved more than adequate in
superiority of the Catalan bishop over its
Gundavaa - Zhao, Khanty-Mansiysk (ol)
counterpart on c8. These factors promise
20 1 0 .
White long-term
compensation,
although
accurate play will be required to prevent Black
from untangling his queenside.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 . . .f6
1 5 . . . E:d8 runs into the tactical trick 1 6.E:xc6!
bxc6 1 7 . tLl e 5 'Wf8 1 8 . tLl xc6 E:e8 l 9 . tLl e4�
with great compensation.
Chapter 1 1
-
5 . . . lll c6
1 67
1 6 . lll e l lll d5
16 ... .id7 is met by 1 7 . lll e4 followed by the
unpleasant lll cS .
1 7.Wfc4 :!'!d8 1 8 . lll d3�
White has regrouped his pieces in the ideal
way.
1 3 . . . lll ce7
This is a slightly more challenging move,
intending . . . b6 followed by . . . .ib 7.
I believe
White should react by switching to a
different plan .
1 4 . e4!N
1 4 .:!'!ab l has been played a couple of times,
but it allows 14 . . . b6N 1 5 .e4 ll:\ f6 followed
by . . . ib7, which is something
I would like
to prevent.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14.e3!?N
As you may have noticed from some of the
previous lines,
I would tend to favour this set­
up unless there is a compelling reason not to.
1 4 .:!'!ab l was used successfully by Tkachiev
in the stem game, which
I quoted in GM I.
However, Black subsequently improved with
1 4 . . . lll de7!, and after 1 5 . lll b3 a5 1 6 .Wfc2
:!'!a7 1 7 .e3 b6 1 8 .a3 .ib7 1 9 . lll bd2 Wl'a8 he
easily solved his problems in Ponomariov Frolyanov, Olginka 20 1 1 .
a
b
c
d
e
14 ... � de?
f
g
1 4 . . . Wfe7 1 5 .:!'!ab l :!'!d8 1 6. a3 lll b6 1 7 .Wfc3
h
1 4 . . . lll b4
1 4 . . . lll f6 is met by 1 5 .Wfc3 c6 1 6 . lll eS�
lll d5
1 8 .Wfb2� does not really alter the
evaluation.
when Black is still a long way from solving
the problem of the passive bishop on c8 .
1 5 .Wf c3
lll bc6
1 6 .:!'!d l
b6
1 7 . lll c4!
.ib7
1 8 . lll e3�
Black has succeeded in developing his light­
squared bishop, but White has arranged his
pieces harmoniously and is ready to seize the
initiative in the centre by means of d4-d5 .
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 68
Catalan 4 . . . dxc4
Conclusion
15.VNc3! �d5
An important detail is that 1 5 . . . b6 is
impossible due to 1 6. lll e 5 ! .
After 5 . . . lt:\ c6 6.Wi'a4 we covered four main
16.VNb2i
ambitious 7. lll e 5 ! ? damages Black's queenside
structure, leading to an advantage for White
branches .
6 . . . i.d6
is
playable,
but
the
with correct play. The three other branches are
rather more popular.
6 . . . i.d7 7.Wi'xc4 lll a5 8 .Wi'd3 c5 9 . 0-0 is
out of fashion for Black, but it should not
be forgotten. The most popular continuation
is 9 . . . i.c6 1 0 . lll c3, when White's lead in
development gives him a pleasant initiative.
An important recurring theme is seen in
positions where Black exchanges on d4 and g2,
after which a timely queen check on b5 may
seriously disrupt Black's development.
6 . . . lll d7 7.Wi'xc4 lll b6 is another important
line, when 8 .Wi'b5! is an important refinement.
White retains solid compensation.
Most of the recommendations are similar to
those in
GM 1, with j ust a few refinements
here and there.
Finally, 6 . . . i.b4t 7.i.d2 gives Black a choice.
7 . . . i.d6 is quite playable, when the position
of the bishop on d2 instead of cl gives White
good reason to take a different path from
variation
A. 8 . lll a3 is my preference, and
my analysis shows that it leads to an edge,
regardless of whether Black tries to eliminate
the bishop with 8 . . . lt:\ e4 or gives up his own
bishop with 8 . . . i.xa3 . The other main option
is 7 . . . lll d5, after which 8 .Wi'b5 ! ? has gone from
being my number-two suggestion in
GM 1
to my top recommendation here. The critical
line involves a pawn sacrifice, after which my
analysis shows that White can obtain a lasting
initiative.
Catalan 4...i.b4t
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Various 5th Moves
Variation Index
1 .d4 � f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.� f3 i.b4t
5.i.d2
A) 5 ... c5
B) 5 ...hd2t 6.� bxd2 0-0 7.i.g2
Bl) 7 ...fle7
B2) 7 ... b6
B3) 7 ... c6
C) 5 ...i.d6 6.� c3!
Cl) 6 ... c6
C2) 6 ... 0-0
B l ) after 15 . . i.b?
B) note to move 7
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 1 .dxcS!N
g
170
171
171
173
174
176
176
178
B3) note to 10 . .i.b?
.
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 6.dxcS!N
g
.
h
a
b
c
d
e
1 7.cS!N
f
g
h
h
1 70
Catalan 4 . ib4t
.
1.d4 tl\f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tl\f3 ih4t 5.id2
.
This position might also arise from the Bogo­
lndian with 4 . . . c5 . In that variation, however,
Black normally plays the more flexible . . . d6.
I believe the set-up with the pawn on d5 to
be slightly inferior, and White should get easy
play with mostly natural moves .
From
this posmon the
most
common
continuation has been 5 . . . ie7, hoping to
show that the bishop is misplaced on d2. In
this chapter we will consider the three main
alternatives:
A) 5 ... c5, B) 5 ... ixd2t and
C) 5 ...id6.
5 . . . We7 looks odd with the pawn already
committed to d5, and after 6.ig2 Black will
probably end up with an inferior version of
some other Catalan or Bogo variation.
9 ... b6
9 . . . We7 1 0 .Wc2 E:d8 1 1 .E:ad l ! ? ( 1 1 .E:fd l
5 . . . a5 6.ig2 transposes exactly to variation
looks like a good alternative) 1 1 . . . .id? 1 2 . e4
C of Chapter 1 9 , although Black can also
dxc4 1 3 .lLixc4 E:ac8 1 4 .We2 b5 1 5 . lLi ce5t
change directions with 6 . . . dxc4, in which
case we transpose to 4 . . . dxc4 5 .ig2 ib4t
6.id2 a5 , which was covered in variation D of
Chapter 4.
A) 5 ... c5
This is pretty rare, but it seems quite playable.
6.ixb4
The alternative 6 . cxd5 exd5 7 .ig2 0-0
8 . 0-0 lLi c6 does not give Black as many
problems.
6 ... cxb4 7.tl\ bd2 0-0 8.ig2
171
Chapter 1 2 - Various 5 th Moves
1 0.�kl i.h7 l l .e3 a5
1 1 . . .'Wd6 1 2 .'Wa4 Elfc8 1 3 .Elc2 occurred in
lvanchuk - Gulko, New York 1 9 8 8 . White
followed up with 1 4.:!:!fc l and, step by step,
several top GMs have played this way, so I will
analyse it in a bit more detail than in GM I.
Black's three main moves are Bl) 7 ...V!Je7,
B2) 7 ... b6 and B3) 7 ... c6.
Black came under serious pressure.
There is also:
7 . . . 4.J bd7 8 . 0-0 c5
8 . . . c6 leads straight to variation B3.
9 . cxd5 lt.Jxd5 1 0 . e4
This is more ambitious than 1 O . dxc5 lt.J xc5
1 1 .Elc 1 b6, when Black had a decent game in
Cheparinov - Naiditsch, Bol 20 1 3 .
1 0 . . . lt.J e7
1 0 . . . ttJ 5 f6
1 1 . e5
lt.J d 5
occurred
in
Astrakhantsev - Shutemov, Dagomys 2004,
and now 1 2 .Ele l N would have been most
accurate. Play may continue 12 . . . b6 1 3 . lt.J e4
i.b7
1 4 . lt.J d6
Elb8
( 1 4 . . . i.c6 ?
1 5 .Elc l ±)
1 5 . ttJ d2 cxd4 1 6 . ttJ 2c4± and White remains
on top.
Now in Ibrahim - Malkawi, Beirut 2007,
White could have claimed an edge with:
8
7
B) 5 ...J.xd2t 6.�bxd2 0-0 7.i.g2
6
s
4
3
2
1
.i � j.) � ��·
iai)m�� ,,, ,�.
,�, , %.
, , , . %�,
.
�� �"
� -�
�
w�" • •
��
�
�
��
�
�� �-- - �� ��
�� �r"'t� �,,.�,,/, ��-t�..t�
�- A
�
----
a
----
b
·i'-�k if
"
c
d
e
'
f
g
.,
""
h
1 1 .dxc5!N lt.J xc5 1 2 .°Wc2
The c5-knight is more of a target than a
strength, for instance:
1 2 . . . b6 1 3 .Elfd l i.b7 1 4 . b4 lt.J a6 1 5 .°Wb3
White's space advantage definitely counts.
Bl) 7 ...V!Je7 8.0-0 b6
Black's 5 th move seems like a concession,
as he swaps off his more active bishop while
facilitating White's development. Nevertheless,
Another possible set-up is:
8 . . . Eld8 9 .°Wc2 ttJ c6
1 72
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
This looks a bit too passive, and White
should get easy play by carrying out the
thematic e2-e4 advance.
I also paid attention to 9 . . . c5 1 0 .cxd5
cxd4 1 1 . ll'i xd4 ll'i xd 5 , as in Balog - Kosic,
Budapest
2009,
and
now
the
simple
1 2 .E!:fd l N id7 1 3 . ll'i c4 ie8 1 4 . e4 ll'i b6
1 5 . ll'i a5 ll'i a6 1 6 . a3;!; retains a pleasant edge
for White.
1 0 .E!:ad l id7
Another good example continued 10 . . . a5
1 1 .E!:fe l id7 1 2 . e4 ll'i b4
1 4 .ll'ixc4 ib5
1 3 .Wl'b l
dxc4
1 5 . ll'i e3;!; and White was
beautifully centralized in Postny - Radulski,
Barcelona 200 8 .
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 O.cxd5 exd5
1 0 . . . ixd 5 ? ! 1 1 .Ei: e l threatens e2-e4, and
1 l . a3 a 5 1 2 . e4
It is generally not a good sign for Black that
White is managing to play e2-e4 so easily.
1 2 . . . dxe4
b
a
1 3 . ll'ixe4
ll'i xe4
1 4 .Wl'xe4
E!:ab8
1 5 .E!:fe l Wl'f6
In Jovanic - Zelcic, Otocac 20 1 0, White
could have increased his advantage with:
after 1 1 . . . ll'i e4 1 2 . ll'i xe4 ixe4 1 3 .Wl'a4!± Black
will find it hard to develop the knight from b 8 .
1 1 .�a4 c5
After
1 l . . . a5 ? !
1 4 . ll'i xe4 dxe4
1 2 . E!: fe l
c6
1 3 .e4! ll'i xe4
1 5 . ll'i e5 White obtained a
dangerous initiative thanks to his development
advantage in Salov - I. Sokolov, Amsterdam
1 996.
12.tLJeS �ks 13J�fel tlic6 14.tlixc6 ixc6
15.�a3 ib7
We have been following the game Philippeit
- Pukropski, email 20 1 0 . This would have
been a good moment to define the central
structure with:
a
b
1 6 .d5!N exd5
c
d
e
f
1 7.cxd5 ll'i a7
g
h
1 8 .ll'ie5 ie8
1 9 .Wl'c2±
The difference in piece coordination is
obvious.
9.Ei:cl ib7
With the bishop committed to b7, this is a
good moment for White to remove the tension
in the centre.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 1 2 - Various 5 th Moves
16.dxc5!N gxc5
1 73
but there is no need to commit the rook so
1 6 . . . bxc5 ? runs into 1 7.ttJb3 ttJ d7 1 8 . .ih3±
when Black loses at least a pawn .
soon)
1 l . . . c5
( l 1 . . . ttJ bd7? !
would
allow
1 2 . ttJ c6) 1 2 .e3
17.gc3 Y*fffi 1 8.gecl gxc3 19J�xc3 Y*fxa3
20J�xa3it
Black has to defend an inferior endgame.
B2) 7 ... b6
8
7
6
a
5
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 2 . . . lt:l bd7 ( 1 2 . . . cxd4 1 3 .exd4 lll bd7 1 4 .E:e l
4
maintains
1 4 .dxc5
3
the
bxc5
pressure)
1 5 .Wi'a4;!;
1 3 . ttJ xd7
White
has
lll xd7
good
prospects against the hanging pawns .
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8.cxd5
Good timing! If White delays this exchange,
then Black will have the additional option of
recapturing with the bishop on d5 .
8 ... exd5
8 . . . lll x d5 does not equalize, as the following
recent game convincingly demonstrates: 9 . 0-0
.ib7 1 0 .E:c l ttJ d7 l l . e4 ttJ 5 f6 1 2 .Wi'e2 1'k8
1 3 .E:fd l Wi'e7 1 4.e5 ttJ d5 1 5 . lll e4 h6 1 6 .a3 a5
1 7.h4;!; White got a significant advantage in
Cernousek - Bokros, Slovakia 20 1 4.
9.0-0 .ib7 1 0.gcl
This is the most natural. I would also like
to mention 1 0 . b4 c6 1 l .Wi'c2N ttJ bd7 1 2 .a4,
when I believe White can claim a modest edge.
10 ... tlJbd7
1 0 . . . E:e8 demands a new approach from
White: 1 l . ttJ e5 ! ?N ( 1 1 .E:e l was played in
Postny - Huzman, Beer Sheva [rapid] 20 1 3 ,
1 1 ... tlJxe5
l l . . . c5?!
1 2 . ttJ xd7
lll xd7
1 3 .dxc5
bxc5
1 4. ttJ b3! c4 1 5 . ttJ d4 gave White an obvious
positional advantage in Mareco - C.E. Toth,
Osasco 20 1 2 .
12.dxe5 t£ig4 1 3.t£if3 Y*f e7
1 74
Catalan 4 . . . .ib4t
Another interesting path is: 1 3 . . . c5 1 4. b4!
(This is much more challenging than 1 4 .h3
tll h6
1 5 . g4 Vfie7, when the position was
unclear in Ragger - Salgado Lopez, Warsaw
20 1 3 .) 14 . . . c4 1 5 .Vfid4 h5 1 6 . tll h4! Vfie7 1 7. f4
Vfixb4 l 8 . tll f5 White obtained a dangerous
19.ttlc2N ttl e6 20.Wf d3
White retains a positional advantage and
is ready for tll d4 next. The following line is
critical :
20 ... a5 2 1 .b5 ttlc5 22.Wfd2
initiative for the pawn in the computer game
Hannibal - Vitruvius, Internet 20 1 3 .
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14.Wfd4 f5 15.b4!
1 5 . exf6N tll xf6 1 6 . b4 looks marginally more
comfortable for White, but the text move is
more ambitious.
15 ... c6 16.h3 tll h6 17.ttl el! ttlf7 18.f4 ttl ds
This position was reached in Novoa Rudolf, Gibraltar 20 1 3 . Here the most logical
continuation would have been:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
B3) 7... c6 8.Wfc2 tll bd7 9.0-0
1 75
Chapter 1 2 - Various 5 th Moves
9 ... b6
This seems best. 9 . . . :B:e8 allows 1 0 .e4 with
an easy advantage for White.
A good example
is: 1 0 . . . dxe4 1 1 . tll xe4 tll xe4 1 2 .Wi°xe4 tll f6
14 . . . tll xeS 1 5 .dxe5 :B:fd8 1 6.b4 :B:ab8
This position occurred in Sheremeta
V. Tomashevsky, Pechora 20 1 1 . Here White
-
could have obtained a clear advantage with:
1 3 .Wi°c2 We?
�•
�i ;
�E, , 7, �l. �
1
t�
��
,
7,
••
, , 7,�i
�
�
,
: �� �� '" ""�
' ���
��� t�
, , %, 7,���•
���W.
��'0
,% �� ��
0
1��·
23 ��
�Ji.�
� t�V8
� , ,,7,� �� ·�;·if""
8
1
4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
a
h
1 4.c5! Playing against Black's light-squared
bishop is a basic idea in this type of position
so, once the opportunity for c4-c5 pops up,
I prefer not to wait and give Black a chance
to play . . . c5 himself. White's advantage is
obvious, and it is not surprising that he has
won most of the games from this position.
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 7 .cS!N bxc5
The immediate 1 7 . . . :B:d5 is met by 1 8 .Wi'f4
:B:xe5 1 9 .:B:ac 1 when Black is severely tied up.
1 8 . bxcS :B:d5
This is surely what White was concerned
about, but he has a powerful reply.
1 9 .Wi°c4! :B:xd l t
In the event of 1 9 . . . :B:xeS 20.:B:ab l :B:f8
2 1 .:B:d6 ia8 22.Wi°c3± Black's bishop is
10.e4 i.b7
completely out of the game.
Black can also exchange some pieces:
1 0 . . . dxe4
b
1 1 . tll xe4
tll xe4
1 2 .Wi°xe4
i.b7
1 3 .:B:fd l
Once again, White will make it as hard as
possible for Black to carry out . . . c 5 .
1 3 . . . Wi°c?
This is the most popular move. Notice that
Black is keeping the knight on d7 to control
the c5-square.
1 4 . tll eS
This is the natural follow-up, but I found
another attractive possibility: 1 4.cS!?N bxc5
1 5 . tll gS! tll f6 (After 1 5 . . . g6 1 6 . dxcS tll xc5
1 7.Wi'b4! tll a6 1 8 .Wi°h4 h5
1 9 . tll e4 :B:fd8
20.:B:ac l ± White has a dangerous initiative
and the weak dark squares are starting to
tell) 1 6 .Wi'eS :B:fc8 1 7.Wi°xc? :B:xc7 1 8 . dxcS
tll d5 1 9 . tll e4 a5 20.:B:d4± White keeps the
better chances in the arising endgame.
20.:B:xd l Wi'xe5 2 1 .Wi°a4! g5
After 2 1 . . .Wi'xcS 22.:B:b l ! Black cannot avoid
material losses .
22.Wi°xa7 ic8 23.a4±
Black is in serious trouble.
176
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
C) 5 ...i.d6
1 1 .e5 � es 12.cxd5
This time White should refrain from 1 2 .c5,
when 12 ... bxc5 1 3 .dxc5 a5 1 4. B: fe l 4J c7 was
unclear in Meier - Margvelashvili, Lubbock
20 1 3 .
1 2 ... cxd5 13.l:Uel
A thematic idea to vacate the fl -square for
the bishop.
13 ... a5
1 3 . . . ia6 was played in Tutisani - Savenkov,
Maribor 20 1 2 , and now the natural 1 4 .1.W a4N
id3 1 5 .B:e3 ig6 1 6 .B:c l ± would have given
White a substantial plus.
14.i.fl �ks 15.VNb3 �c7 16Jfac1 �a6
This retreat has become popular in recent
years. It has been employed by several strong
grandmasters and Black has statistically been
doing well.
6.�c3!
After the more popular 6.ig2 c6 7. 0-0
4J bd7 there are a lot of games showing that
Black seems to be okay.
I believe that the surprising knight move
constitutes White's best chance for an opening
advantage, the point being to prepare a quick
a
b
e2-e4. We will consider
c
d
e
f
g
h
17.� b l !
Cl) 6 ... c6 and C2)
6 ... 0-0.
Cl) 6 ... c6 7.VNc2 � bd7
Th e knight i s heading fo r c 3 - a great square
to control the queenside.
It is also worth mentioning
7 . . . ib4 8 .ig2
dxc4 9 . e4 b 5 , as in Rombaldoni - C. Horvath,
17 ...VNe7 1S.�c3 �abs 19.�b5
White was clearly better in Stohl - Kovacevic,
Rabat 2003 .
Bratto 2008. Here 1 0 .a4!N would have been
strong, for example 1 0 . . . a5 1 1 .axb5 ixc3
1 2 . bxc3 cxb 5 1 3 . 0-0 and White has a great
deal of compensation with Black's dark­
squared bishop missing.
1 77
Chapter 1 2 - Various 5 th Moves
White should not be satisfied with the
positional 1 2 .Wie2, and can instead play for an
attack.
12 ... b5
Another game continued 1 2 . . . �e8 1 3 . 0-0-0
..t� . .i%�
i. �
··
� �.
·�
78 i.
.
�
..... %. r
.,Y..
.... %�
.0 ��
'"""
�
�
5 �£�� . �� �
��"' "
�r�0
•
•%
���
'""
�
:£�
��·% � ·% ��.q Jw�
2 8 ft9.
.. . � tt9. ... ftj
.. 7.m·:� ..... %� ·:
b5 1 4.c5 ie7 Diermair - Matt, Linz 20 1 1 .
%
,,
6
4
3
1 0 . . . c5 I I .ig2 0-0 1 2 .ic3 Wle7 1 3 . 0-0 cxd4
1 4 . lll xd4 lt:\ f6 1 5 .Wic2± White emerged from
the opening with a lot of pressure in Ax. Smith
- Pedersen, Skanderborg 20 1 0 .
1 0 . . . lt:\ f6 1 I .Wic2 b 6 1 2 .ig2 ib7 1 3 . c5!
ic7 1 4 . 0-0 lll d5 1 5 .� fe l h6 1 6. lll e5 0-0
1 7.�ad 1 ± The thematic plan of c4-c5 against
the bishop on b7 yielded a clear advantage in
Llanes Hurtado - Meier, Belfort 20 1 2 .
1 1 .J.d3 lll f6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Here White could have easily seized the
initiative with 1 5 . lll e5N ib7 1 6 . Wb l , for
instance 1 6 . . . a5 1 7.ig5 h6 1 8 .ixf6 ixf6
1 9 .Wie4± with a strong attack.
1 3.J.g5 h5
Black also fails to solve his problems with:
1 3 . . . h6N 1 4.ixf6 (after 1 4.ixh6 gxh6 1 5 .Wixh6
bxc4 White has a perpetual, but
I don't see
anything more) 14 . . . Wlxf6 1 5 .Wle4 Wif5
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6 .c5! ( 1 6 .Wie3 is less clear after 1 6 . . . ib4t
1 7.We2
Wih3
1 8 .cxb 5
e5!
with
some
complications, as White's king is a bit exposed)
1 6 . . . ic7 1 7. lll e5 White is clearly better.
1 78
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
14.c5!
7 ... c6 8.i.g2 �bd7 9.e4
White has some other options, but it is
Definitely the most challenging idea.
difficult to argue with Ragger's execution of
9 ... dxe4 10.�xe4 i.b4t 1 1 .�c3!
the attack.
1 1 .i.d2 ixd2t 1 2 . ltJ exd2 is well met by
1 2 . . . e5! 1 3 . dxe5 E:e8 1 4 . 0-0 ltJ xe5 1 5 . ltJ xe5
E:xe5 when Black was perfectly okay in Ghaem
Maghami - Moiseenko, Jakarta 20 1 3 .
17.Lf<i Lf6 18.g5
White had a winning attack in Ragger Braun, Solingen 20 1 0 .
C2) 6 ... 0-0 7.i.g5!
7.Wic2 c5! shows the advantage of Black's move
order, so White should alter his plan from the
previous variation.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
This was Kunin - Klek, Wunsiedel 20 1 3 , and
now White could have secured a big advantage
with 1 5 .E:fd l !N Wixe3 1 6 .ixe3 ± .
12.id2
1 79
Chapter 1 2 - Various 5 th Moves
1 2 . 0-0! ?
1 2 . . . .ixc3
also
deserves
1 3 . bxc3
'1Mfxc3
attention,
since
1 4 .'1We2�
leaves
Conclusion
White with great compensation.
5 . . . c5 is not really a serious equalizing attempt,
and White gets a good game after exchanging
12 ... e5 13.a3 i.xc3 14.i.xc3 �a6
on b4, followed by developing normally and
Black's position was rather suspicious in
preparing e2-e4.
Meier - Adams, Baden-Baden 20 1 3 . White's
strongest continuation would have been:
5 . . . .ixd2t
6 . tt'l bxd2
0-0
7 ..ig2 is also
rather pleasant for White. Black's position is
reasonably solid, but we saw that White could
maintain pressure in all three of the lines
examined.
5 . . . .id6 is the trickiest of the three main lines
examined, since the stereotypical development
of the bishop on g2 does not give White
anything special. Fortunately for us, 6 . tt'l c3 !
has a l o t more bite. Depending o n how Black
continues, White will play either '1Mf c2 or .ig5
next, intending to force through a quick e2-e4.
16.tlid.2 tll b6 17.b3 ges IS.gel ±
With a serious advantage.
Catalan 4 ...ib4t
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Introduction to 5 ie7
...
Variation Index
1 .d4 tli f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tli f3 i.h4t 5.i.d2 i.e7
6.i.g2 0-0 7.0-0
1 82
1 84
1 86
1 86
1 88
1 89
1 90
191
1 94
A) 7 ... dxc4?!
B) 7 ... tli bd7
C) 7 ... c6 8.�c2 b6 9.i.£4
Cl) 9 ...i.a6 1 0.cxdS cxd5 1 1 .�cl! tli bd7 12.tlic3
Cl 1) 1 2 ... tlihS
C 12) 1 2 ... bS
C2) 9 ...i.h7 10.�dl
C2 1) 10 ... tli hS
C22) 1 0 ... tli a6
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 6.�c?!N
g
C22) after 12 ... dxc4
C l l ) after 17 . . . gS
C l ) note to 1 I . . .fiJ bd7
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 8 . liJ c?!N
g
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 3 .�xc4!N
g
h
h
Chapter 1 3
-
181
Introduction to 5 . . . ie7
1 .d4 tlif6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tlif3 ih4t s.id2
ie7 6.ig2 0-0
If Black plays something else, then the game
b) 8 . . . exd5 9 . tll c3 ib7 I O .if4 tll a6 ( 1 0 . . . tll bd?
1 1 .Wlc2 would transpose to variation B 1 2
o f Chapter 1 5 , although via this move order
will j ust continue along similar lines as the
1 1 .Ei: c l ! looks more accurate, in order to keep
variations below, with a probable transposition
the option of developing the queen to a more
after both sides castle.
active square such as a4 or b3.)
7.0-0
8
.I. ��.ref""'"j
� � �fef�·
�
'"'�-0
�..tr� • ""• r� 1.
'0
- -- �
: 'im""' "�- -"���-----Y-·
,,, ,, ,,�"
�A�
��
��
-�'
��
f/i
lt
&•
?,
·�
,,
-�
�
•
�
2 ��- - - '- �wtiiwtj
- -- 1
4
3
�f"' "� l•:�-1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
This position has occurred in hundreds
of games (mostly via a Queen's Indian move
a
b
order) , and it would take a few pages to analyse
c
d
e
f
g
h
This is the main tabiya for the entire 4 . . . ib4 t
variation. Black's three most popular moves are
A) 7 dxc4?!, B) 7 tli bd7 and C) 7 c6.
•••
••.
.••
Black's most popular system involves . . . c6 and
. . . tll bd7, and it will be discussed in detail in
the next chapter. Needless to say, variations
B and C of this chapter will cover the various
possibilities involving one move but not the
other.
7 . . . b6 8 . cxd5 gives Black a choice:
a) 8 . . . tll x d5 is unusual but worth a quick look:
9 . e4 lll f6 I O . lll c3 ib7 1 1 .Ei: e l lll bd7 Now
I like 1 2 .Wlc2N, intending to meet 1 2 . . . cS
with 1 3 . d5! exd5 1 4. exd5 when the d5-pawn
is untouchable due to some simple tactics:
1 4 . . . lll xd5 ? 1 5 . lll xd5 ixd5 1 6. Ei:xe?! Wlxe7
1 7 . lll gS and White wins .
it in detail. I do not feel it is necessary to do
so, as it has fallen out of fashion from Black's
perspective, and the chances of reaching it via a
Catalan are minimal. I will j ust mention that a
logical continuation is 1 1 . Ei: c l c5 1 2 . lll e5! tll c7
1 3 . dxc5 bxc5 1 4 .Wla4 tll e6 1 5 .Ei:fd l , when
White has strong pressure against the hanging
pawns and has achieved a heavy plus score.
7 . . . lll c6
This can be mentioned as a playable sideline
for Black, but my feeling is that White will
always be better with the knight on this
square. Here are a few illustrative lines.
8 .Wlc2 tll e4 9 . Ei: d l
I find this t o be the most flexible set-up fo r
White.
9 . . .f5
9 . . . a5 I O . tll c3 f5 1 1 .a3 if6 1 2 .e3 'it>h8
1 3 .Ei:ac l lll e7 1 4. lll e2 c6 1 5 . lll f4 id7 1 6 .ie l
tll g6 l 7. tll d3 gave White an excellent game
in Sjugirov - Fressinet, Moscow 20 1 3 .
I O . tll c3 if6 1 1 .ie l a6 1 2 . cxd5 ! ?
Catalan 4 . . . ib4 t
1 82
There was nothing wrong with maintaining
also gives White easy play, fo r instance:
the pressure with the simple 1 2 .Ei:ac I N;:!;.
1 1 . . . tlixc3 1 2 . bxc3 (It is also worth considering
1 2 . . . exd5 1 3 . tlie5
1 2 .Wfxc3 tli d7 1 3 .Ei:ac l tli f6 1 4.Wfa5 !;:!; with the
The point behind White's trade in the centre.
better game) 1 2 . . . W/d5 1 3 .Wfb3 Wfxb3 1 4 . axb3
id5
1 5 . c4 ie4
1 6. tli e5
ixg2
1 7 .'it?xg2
White reached a clearly favourable endgame
in
Miroshnichenko
-
Peschel,
Plovdiv
20 1 0 .
9.�xc4
9.a4 is also playable, but in that case it is not
so clear if the bishop will be useful on d2. The
text move is a more principled way to utilize
the extra tempo.
a
c
b
e
d
f
g
h
1 3 . . . tli e7 1 4 .Ei:ac l c6 1 5 .Wfb3 'it?h8
Now in El Debs - Korobov, Moscow 20 1 1 ,
White should have continued:
Followed by f2-f3, with a clear advantage.
1
If you skip ahead to Chapter 1 6, you will see
that I am no longer advocating this position
for White against the 4 . . . ie7 variation with
1 6 . tli xe4!N fxe4 1 7.ib4
s
9 ... b5 1 0.�c2 ib7
. . . dxc4. However, with White to move instead
of Black, it is a totally different story.
A) 7 ... dxc4?! 8.�c2
S"�-7J��·�-�-.i..
-----�
r�,,------��
.t. w�� •
.t.Y-�r�
.t.�
w��
,.
,,,,,%
% , , , , /,
,
%
,_,,%
111111 111111 , Ill
: 111111111 To 111111 111�
•
111 "'111 ��·
3
�w0 �
�
�w-�
0
w� �J
� r�v�
r�JLr�
1 Sf
_ lt58""'%·�=- 6
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
There is little sense in this line for Black, as
he simply has an inferior version of the 4 . . . ie7
variation with the white bishop on d2 instead
of c l , which is a useful extra tempo.
8 ... a6
8 . . . id7 9.Wfxc4 ic6 1 0 . tli c3 tli e4 1 1 .Ei:fd l
1 1 . ..id6
1 1 . . . tli c6 1 2 .e3 reaches a known position
with the free move Ei:fl -c l for White. I don't
see much point in analysing this in detail here,
but if you have a copy of GM
1 on your shelf,
Chapter 1 3
-
Introduction to 5 . . . ie7
you can find the position without the free
tempo analysed from page 2 0 8 .
1 83
( 1 7 . lli e S ! ? is a worthy alternative) 17 ... ixcS
1 8 .°IMfxcS '1Mfxc5 1 9 .�xcS lli d7 20.�c3 c5
2 1 . dxc5 �xc5 22. �xc5 llixc5 23.�cl Even after
1 2.ig5 tLJbd7 1 3.Lf6!?
There are other ways to fight for the
advantage, but this direct approach still seems
carrying out . . . c5, Black experiences definite
problems. 23 . . . lli a4 24.b3 lli b6 2 5 . lli eS ixg2
26.'itixg2
fine.
13 tLJxf6
•••
The natural 1 3 . . . '1Mfxf6 runs into 1 4 . lli g S !
( 1 4 .llie5 lli xe5!
1 5 .ixb7 �a700 is n o t s o
dear) 1 4 . . . 'IMfxgS 1 5 .ixb7 �ab8 1 6 .ic6 lli f6
1 7. lli d2± when White has prevented the . . . c5advance and is in full control.
14.tLJ bd2 gcs 1 5.tLJb3 ie4 16.°1Mfc3
Here too, White has succeeded in stopping
. . . c5, and his chances are better. There is
certainly no need to memorize any more
than this, and the following examples are j ust
included for instructive purposes.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Despite the simplification, the endgame was
unpleasant for Black in Larsen - Cu. Hansen,
Copenhagen 1 9 8 5 . It is worth mentioning that
the further simplifying 26 . . . �c8N 27.�xc8t
lli xc8 28.'itif3 f6 2 9 . lli c6
\tif7 30.cj{e4 reaches
a knight endgame that will be difficult, perhaps
even impossible, for Black to hold.
17.tLJfd2 .ixg2 18.cj{xg2 tLJd5
1 8 . . . b4 ? is a dear positional mistake that
renders Black's queenside highly vulnerable.
1 9 .°1Mfc6 e5 20.dxeS ixe5 2 1 . lli c4± White had
a strategically winning position in Khalifman
- Tissir, Shenyang 2000.
1 8 . . . c6N looks like the lesser evil, although
White is obviously better after 1 9 . lli f3;!;, as
pointed out in
GM 1 .
19.'i!Yc6 tll b4 20.'i!Yf'3 f'5 2 1 .a3 tll d5 22.tll c5
'i!Ye7 23.gc2 ga8 24.gacl gf6 25.e3±
White's positional advantage was beyond
any doubt in Quaresma - Salvador Marques,
corr. 20 1 1 .
Another game continued: 1 6 . . . °1Mfe7 1 7 .llicS
1 84
Catalan 4 . . . .tb4t
B) 7 ... lLJbd7 8.Vfic2
Stonewall set-up with . . . f5 and quite possibly
. . . g5 .
The great maj ority of games from this position
have continued with 8 . . . c6, transposing to the
next chapter. In this section I will mention a
few other possibilities.
7
6
8
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
IO.lLJfd2
This looks like the best way to fight for an
advantage.
Initially I was optimistic about the natural
1 0 . lll c3 , but I noticed the strong reply:
1 0 . . . g5 ! ( 1 0 . . . f5 gave White time to arrange his
pieces optimally with 1 1 .E!:ad 1 g5 1 2 . .icl
\t> h8
1 3 . ll\ e l;!; in Levin - Karpman, Lvov 1 9 8 8 )
(There
1 1 ..ic l f5 1 2 .b3 .if6 1 3 .ib2 Vfie7 (Botvinnik
is a reason why most players prefer to
8 . . . b6 can be dealt with quickly.
put his bishop on g7 instead, but the text
preface this move with . . . c6 .) 9 . cxd5 ! lll xd5
move is more accurate) 1 4. e3 Vfig7 Black was
(9 . . . exd5 1 0 .if4 c5 1 1 . lll c3 ib7 transposes to
solid enough in Rogers - Papaioannou, Agios
variation B l 2 of Chapter 1 5 , with one extra
Nikolaos 1 99 5 .
move having been played - see page 234.)
The text move is an independent alternative,
10 ... �xd2
but it is not much of an equalizing attempt.
Worse is:
The simplest answer is 1 0 .e4N lll b4 1 1 ..ixb4
ixb4 1 2 .a3 ie7 1 3 .lll c3 ib7 1 4 .E!:ad l and
White has a pleasant edge thanks to his central
superiority.
9 ..if4 c6
I was surprised to find well over a hundred
10 . . . f5?! 1 1 . lll xe4! fXe4 1 2 . lll d2
White has the simple plan of f2-f3, breaking
up Black's pawn chain and opening a path
towards the weak e6-pawn.
1 2 . . . .tf6
1 2 . . . .tg5 1 3 .ixg5 Vfixg5 1 4.Vfic3 lll f6 1 5 .f3
exf3 1 6 . lll xf3 Vfih5 1 7. lll e 5 ! ± gave White a
games from this position, including Game 9
clear positional advantage in Tukmakov -
of the Moscow 1 963 World Championship
Boric, Pula 2000.
match, in which Botvinnik held with Black
against Petrosian. Black's idea is to establish a
1 85
Chapter 1 3 - Introduction to 5 . . . ie7
Black should not rush with 1 3 . . .f4?!, when
1 4 . .if2 lll f6 1 5 . e4 gave White a clear advantage
in the old game Fine - Steiner, Washington (2)
1 944.
1 3 . . ..id6 14 . .if2 lll f6 1 5 . e4
White should not delay this move, otherwise
. . . g4 might prevent it.
1 5 . . . fxe4
1 5 . . . dxe4 1 6 .fxe4 lll g4 leads to a different
type of structure, but after 1 7. lll f3 ! f4 1 8 .e5
.ic7 1 9 .gxf4 :B:xf4 20 . .ig3 White retains an
1 3 .id6
1 3 .:B:ad l ! ? has also been played, and looks
like an interesting alternative.
1 3 . . . :B:f7 1 4.e3 e5
It is understandable that Black wanted to
take action before f2-f3 was played, but
White is much better suited to deal with the
opening of the centre.
obvious advantage.
1 6 . fxe4 lll g4 1 7. lt:\ f3
I n GM 1 I suggested something else, but
actually the game continuation is fine for the
next few moves.
1 7 . . . dxc4 1 8 . .ih3 !
An excellent move by Tukmakov.
1 5 .'\Wb3 exd4 1 6 .cxd5 cxd5 1 7.Wxd5 lll b6
1 8 .Wc5±
Black's pawn on e4 was doomed in Kaidanov
- Benjamin, Long Beach 1 993.
1 1 .tl:!xd2
If White is allowed to carry out the e2-e4
advance he will have an obvious advantage,
which explains Black's next couple of moves.
a
b
c
e
d
f
g
h
1 8 . . . lll xf2 1 9 .:B:xf2 b5 20.e5!N
It is important to insert this move. In
Tukmakov - Cifuentes Parada, Wijk aan Zee
1 992, White played 20.:B:afl ?! instead, when
Black missed the opportunity to complicate
the game with 20 . . . e5!N.
20 . . . .ie7 2 1 .:B:afl
White has a dangerous initiative on the
kingside.
a
c
d
e
1 1 . .. gS 12 ..ie3 f5 1 3.B �U7
f
g
h
14.i.fl tl:!f8 15.e4 tli g6
This position occurred i n Lautier - Bareev,
Dortmund
1 99 5 .
Now
White
interesting idea at his disposal.
has
an
1 86
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
White's chances seem preferable, as Black's
king is slightly exposed.
C) 7 ... c6
s I a1-.i. �
�·-;� >s - , %--��-�
,Y,� I.
�
6 " "� T� �
'
'
'
·
·
·•
%
�
��
�
�
�
�
: ����,,
�
�
L'� 1111 1'
3 �
2 ��P
8 W� �w0
8 W�ilw�0
� ��J��7
1 �g{�•w•:m- - a
19 J:U6
Black cannot defend the pawn with 1 9 . . . ie6,
as after 20.E!:ae l \Wd7 2 1 .E!:xe6! \Wxe6 22.ixd5
\Wf6 23 .\Wxb?± White emerges with an extra
pawn.
.•
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
This is Black's first choice by a long way. Let
me remind you that . . . tll bd7 on the next move
or two will transpose to the next chapter, so
here we will only deal with lines where Black
delays the knight's development for longer.
s.'?Nc2
This is the most accurate move order. 8 .if4
allows Black the additional option of 8 . . . dxc4,
when 9.tll e5 b5 1 0.tt:lxc6 tt:lxc6 1 l .ixc6 id?
1 2.ixa8 \Wxa8 led to a fascinating game in
Anand - Topalov, Sofia (7) 20 1 0 .
8 ... b6 9.i.f4
Now Black's two main possibilities are
Cl) 9 ...ia6 and C2) 9 ...ib7.
Cl) 9 ...ia6 1 0.cxdS!?
Previously I recommended 1 0.b3, but I later
realized that this would be an interesting
moment to make the central exchange.
22 ...id7 23.tll c4 �ks 24.b3
10 ... cxdS
1 0 . . . tt:lxd5 1 1 .E!:d l tll d7 1 2.tll c3 E!:c8
1 3.tll e5 transposes to variation C 1 3 1 of the
next chapter on page 209.
Chapter 1 3
-
1 87
Introduction to 5 . . . ie7
1 7.Wa4 ib7 1 S.f4 lll xd4 l 9.Wxd4 lll h6
20.ih3! White's positional advantage was
clear in Komodo - Spike, Internet 20 1 2.
1 1 . . .tll h5 1 2 .ie3 (After 1 2.ic7 Wes 1 3.e4
dxe4 1 4.Wxe4 ib7 1 5 .We3 Wes White fails to
achieve anything significant) 1 2 . . . lll f6 1 3 .tll e5
lll fd7 1 4 .lll d3 lll f6 1 5 .if4 lll h5 Again we
have a computer game, Naum - Gull, Internet
20 1 4, but this time I have an improvement:
1 1 ...tlibd7
This has been by far the most popular
continuation, but I considered some other
possibilities.
1 l . . .id6 1 2.tll e5! This strong move has been
played in a computer game. (After 1 2 .tll c3
lll c6 1 3.Wa4 ib7 Black had no problems
in Sengupta - Vaibhav, New Delhi 20 1 0)
1 2 . . . tll h5 1 3.ie3 lll f6 (I also considered the
logical 1 3 . . . tll d? 14.f4 lll hf6 1 5 .lll c3 �cS
1 6.Wb3 We? 1 7.tll b5 ixb5 1 S.Wxb5 lll bS
1 9.a4;!; and White retains definite pressure)
a
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.ic?!N Wes 1 7.tll c3! The bishop is
untouchable, and after 1 7 . . . lll d? 1 S.lll f4 lll hf6
1 9.Wa4 ic4 20.b3 Wxc7 2 1 .bxc4± White is
clearly better.
1 1 . . .Wd7 1 2.lll e5 Wb7
a
lll c6
b
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 .Wd l N
This i s my idea to improve o n 1 3.Wc7
Wxc7 1 4.�xc7 id6 1 5 .�c2 lll h5, when
Black equalized without much difficulty in
Aronian - Topalov, Nice (rapid) 2009.
1 88
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
1 3 . . . tt:Jh5
After 1 3 . . . id6 White can develop his play
with 1 4.tLlc3 tt:J bd7 1 5 .a3 followed by b2-b4.
1 4 .i.d2 tt:J f6 1 5 . tLl c3 tt:J bd7 1 6.b4!
Once Black's queen has landed on b7,
advancing the pawn to b5 is White's main
idea.
1 3 . . . i.xc3 1 4.:gxc3 i.xe2 1 5 .:gac l i.c4
Originally I found White's 1 3th move as a
novelty, but then it was played in Laxman Vidit, Kottayam 20 1 4 . The next move of my
prior analysis improves on that game.
a
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6 . . . i.xb4
This is more or less forced, as 1 6 . . . b5 1 7.a4
is too dangerous for Black.
1 7.tt:Jxd5 tt:Jxd5 1 8 .i.xb4;!;
White will enjoy long-term pressure, thanks
to his bishop pair.
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.tLld2N b5 1 7.'Wd l tt:J b6 1 8 .:g3c2!
1 8 .b3 b4 1 9.:g3c2 i.d3 20.:gc7 tLle8 is less
convincing.
1 8 . . . b4 1 9.'We l i.d3 20.:gc6
White's compensation is beyond any doubts.
Cl I) 12 ... llih5
12.lli c3
At this point Black's two main tries are Cl I)
12 ... llih5 and C12) 12 ... b5.
12 ... 'Wc8 has done okay for Black in a few
games, but I found a promising new idea
in 1 3 .'Wb3!N, trying to exploit the unsafe
position of Black's queen. 1 3 . . . 'Wb7 14.e4!
i.c4 (The e4-pawn appears to be untouchable:
14 . . . dxe4? 1 5 .tLl g5 and 14 . . . tt:Jxe4? 1 5 .tLlxe4
dxe4 1 6.tt:Jd2 are both bad for Black) 1 5 .'Wdl
dxe4 1 6. tLlxe4 White has a dangerous initiative.
1 2 . . . i.b4 1 3 .'Wa4!
This interesting pawn sacrifice seems more
promising than 1 3 .i.fl , when 1 3 . . . :gc8
1 4.'Wa4 i.xc3 l 5.bxc3 i.c4 1 6.tt:Jd2 tt:J e4 was
unclear in Wang Yue - Lysyj , Zurich 20 1 0 .
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3.Y:Va4! llixf4
1 3 . . . i.b7 runs into the thematic 1 4.ic7!.
When this idea works, Black will usually be in
trouble, as his knight will be left misplaced on
h5. 14 . . . 'We8 1 5 .'Wb3 tLlb8 This position was
reached in Kuzubov - Sivuk, Alushta 20 1 1 ,
Chapter 1 3 - Introduction to 5 . . . ie7
1 89
C12) 12 ... b5 13.a4!
and now the simple 1 6.a4N tll c6 1 7.a5 would
have won a pawn.
14.�xa6 �xg2 15.®xg2 �c8 16.�xcS
l:Uxc8 17.�b5!
The arising endgame is rather unpleasant for
Black.
17 ... g5
After 1 7 . . .l':l:xc l 1 8 .l'!xc l a6 1 9 .l'!c7 axb5
20.l'!xd7 @f8 2 1 .a3 White went on to convert
his advantage in Tkachiev - Pavlidis, Skopje
20 1 4 .
Th e text move seems t o b e Black's best resource,
and it was played in Avrukh - Mitkov, Chicago
20 1 4 .
8 � �1� �� ,0 �7 � -�
��
·-·
'A) �
,
6 % ,,,, ?,�
,
'
%
�
�%1
�
WJ
£,,,,
�
�
s -� a • • w�
�-��'"D
,,,,, �B' " " "m
�
/,� �'
4
3
�
��
,,,, ?,w,�, ,�
,,�%�
2 ��
8 �r�
w�
•8 ww��w
, %���
,
,,,
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
18.�c7!N
In the game I chose 1 8 .tll e l , when my
opponent missed a chance to relieve the
pressure: 1 8 . . . l'!xc l N 1 9.l'!xc l a6 20.tll c?
(20.l'!c7 axb5 2 1 .l'!xd7 if6 is not dangerous
for Black) 20 . . . l'!a7 2 1 .tll e8 I was pinning my
hopes on this unexpected resource, but the
engine immediately points out the amazing
2 1 . . .tll c5!!, when Black traps the knight and
simplifies into a drawish endgame.
1 8 ... :aabS 19.a4;t
White keeps a risk-free edge.
13 ...�b6
1 3 . . . bxa4? 1 4.'Wxa4 ib7 1 5 .tll b 5 already
puts Black in big trouble. 1 5 . . . tll b 6 1 6 .'Wb3
tll e8 was played in Beckhuis - Sprenger,
Germany 2006, and now 1 7.tll c7 tll xc7
1 8 .l'!xc7 +- would have won material.
1 3 . . . b4 1 4 .tll b5 is also difficult for Black. A
good example is: 1 4 . . . 'Wb6 1 5 .'Wc6 l'!ac8
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.ic?! 'Wxc6 1 7.l'!xc6 .ib7 1 8 .l'!cc l l'!a8
1 9 . .id6 .ixd6 20.tll xd6 .ia6 2 1 .e3± White had
serious pressure thanks to his domination over
the c-file in Sychevsky - Bortnyk, Mukachevo
20 1 3 .
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
1 90
14.axb5 ixb5 1 5.tlixb5 �xb5 16.ifl
With the two bishops and more active rooks,
White can exert lasting pressure without any
risk. The following lines show the most
accurate ways of achieving this.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
25 .l'!c? White won a pawn and eventually the
game in Gelfand - Wang Hao, London 20 1 2.
h
16 ... a5
1 6 . . . Wfb? can be met by 1 7.Wfc6N Wfxc6
1 8.l'!xc6 a5 1 9.l'!c? with the prospect of long­
term torture for Black.
1 6 . . . Wfb6 1 7.ic? Wl'b7 1 8 .e3 a6 1 9.Wfc6
Wfxc6 20.l'!xc6 tll b8 occurred in Lim - Myo,
Nay Pyi Taw 20 1 3 , and now the obvious
2 1 .l'!b6N l'!c8 22.l'!b? would have left White
with a clear plus.
20 gfaS 2 1 .ia4
Black is doomed to passive defence.
..•
C2) 9 ib7 10.gdl
•.•
17.e3 �b7
1 7 . . . Wfb4 is well met by 1 8 .tll e l ! followed by
lll d3 .
1 8.�c6 �xc6 19.gxc6 ga7
This is apparently the best way to defend
Black's inferior position.
The stem game continued: 19 . . . a4 20.ib5
a3 2 1 .bxa3 ixa3 (2 1 . . .l'!xa3N 22.l'!xa3 ixa3
23.l'!a6 ib4 24.g4!±) 22.l'!c7 Surprisingly,
trading the last of the queenside pawns has
not solved Black's problems, as White's bishop
pair and more active pieces give him ongoing
pressure. 22 . . . tll b6 23.l'!b7 tll c4 24.ixc4 dxc4
I consider this White's most flexible move.
Now Black's main continuation is 1 0 . . . tll bd?,
which transposes to variation C2 of the
next chapter on page 2 1 4. In the rest of this
chapter we will focus on C2 1) 10 tlih5 and
C22) 1 0 tli a6.
••.
.••
Chapter 1 3 - Introduction to 5 . . . ie7
1 0 . . . a5 is sometimes a useful move in similar
positions, but I do not see much point in it
here. I 1 .lll c3 lll a6 (l l . . . dxc4 1 2.lll e5 lll d5
1 3 .lll xc4 lt:\xf4 1 4.gxf4 gives Black an inferior
version of a thematic type of position, as he has
wasted a tempo and weakened his queenside
with . . . a5.) 1 2.a3! Simply restricting the
knight. 1 2 . . . dxc4 1 3 .lll e5 lt:\d5 1 4.lt:\xc4 lt:\xf4
1 5 .gxf4 V!ic7 1 6.e3 g6 1 7.E!:ac l E!:fd8 1 8 .lll e5
White was clearly better in Verduyn - Roeder,
Vlissingen 20 1 0.
.
C2 1) 1 0 .. tlihS 1 1 .icl
This is a better square than d2; the bishop
avoids blocking the d l -rook, and may be
developed on b2 later.
1 1 t!£if6
1 1 . . . 5 is always an option when the knight
has moved from f6, but it fails to equalize
here. 1 2 .lll e5 id6 ( 1 2 . . . lll d7N allows 1 3.cxd5
cxd5 14.lt:\c6;!; when White eliminates one of
the bishops) 1 3 .lll d2 lt:\ f6
•••
191
Black has also tried:
1 1 . . .lll d7 1 2.lll c3
In GM 1 I recommended 1 2.lll e5, but
it is hard to say if White has much of an
advantage after the cool-headed 1 2 . . . lt:\ hf6.
Still, after 1 3.cxd5 cxd5 1 4.lt:\c6 ixc6
1 5 .V!ixc6 E!:c8 1 6.V!ib5 I had the two bishops
and eventually won in Avrukh - Nisipeanu,
Germany 20 1 4, so you may wish to keep
this as a playable alternative.
1 2. . .5
1 2 . . . lt:\hf6 transposes to 1 1 . . . lt:\ f6 1 2.lll c3
lll bd7, as covered in the main line below.
1 3.id2!?
This is an unusual way of developing against
the Stonewall, and it looks especially odd
after retreating the bishop to cl a few moves
ago. The surprising point is that Black is
short of useful developing moves. This
position has occurred only once with Black
to move, in a computer game.
8 1. • � i �·
1
.. .'.2•
. . .. %� ·0 �� -, �%"'
·· · · %�
.
6 t�
�
i
%l
�
·
.
·
5
4
2
3
�I'� '>. . ?.� . � .t.
%
� . . . � ., m•. �
� !n. . . :�� ��
."'/, ���@·flef��·· ·· \�·�ff.rn
�zW�
�%'��
·0 �
�'l.WIP
..%
A
A
�
0 iOz ��: 0 iOz db iO
.. ..t·· · "w� �......., .... "�·V1' ....
� � - � ..�
.
a
�
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.lt:\d3N (In the only game White
prematurely released the central tension with
14.cxd5 , and after 1 4 . . . cxd5 1 5 .lt:\df3 lll e4 he
failed to achieve anything in Pashikian - Jojua,
Istanbul 2007) 14 . . . lt:\ bd7 1 5 .b4!;!; White has
a promising position and is already getting
active on the queenside.
1 3 . . . V!ie8
1 3 . . . ltJhf6? is not possible in view of
1 4 .lll g 5 !.
13 . . . E!:c8 is met by 1 4.V!ia4! a6 1 5 .'\Wb3 when
the b6-pawn may become a target in some
lines.
1 4.E!:acl dxc4
This ruins Black's pawn structure and gives
White a lot of compensation.
1 5 .lll e5! lll xe5 1 6.dxe5 Vfic8 1 7.if3 g6 1 8.ih6
E!:f7 l 9.E!:d2 b5 20.E!:cd l
1 92
Catalan 4 . . . ib4 t
White had plenty of play for the pawn in
Houdini 4 - Stockfish, Internet 20 1 3 .
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Black easily solved his opening problems after
1 4.lLid2 b5! 1 5 .e4 dxc4 1 6.bxc4 bxc4 1 7.lLia4
c5 with a double-edged game, Chandra Boros, Saint Louis 20 1 4) 1 4 . . . c5 1 5 .ib2
We have reached a typically tense Catalan
middlegame position. A brief illustrative line
is:
h
12.tlic3 tlibd7
1 2 . . . tlia6 should be met by: 1 3 .b3 ( 1 3.a3
dxc4 was not so clear in Gupta - Tiviakov,
Bhubaneswar 2009) 1 3 . . . c5 (White should not
worry about 1 3 . . . tli b4, as 1 4 .'Wb l c5 1 5 .dxc5
bxc5 1 6.a3 lLi c6 l 7.cxd5 lLixd5 1 8 .ib2;:!; leaves
him with a pleasant edge) 1 4.dxc5 bxc5 This
was Bereolos - Scekic, Schaumburg 2006, and
now my preference would be 1 5 .a3N 'Wc8
1 6.e3;:!; with a pleasant edge.
13.b3 gcs
This has been by far the most common
move, but it may not be best.
1 3 . . . c5 gives White a favourable version of
a Queen's Indian position: 14.cxd5 lLixd5
1 5 . lLixd5 exd5 l 6.ib2 Ei:c8 17 .dxc5 ! lLixc5
(After 17 . . . bxc5 1 8. lLi e l lLib6 1 9.a4 White's
pressure is obvious) l 8 .ih3 lLie6 l 9.'Wd2;:!;
White had a pleasant game playing against the
IQP in Postny - Nigalidze, Yerevan 20 1 4 .
1 3 . . . ia6!? i s quite interesting, despite the
loss of a tempo with the bishop. 1 4.'Wd3!?N
Usually I am not a big fan of this move, but
in this position it looks sensible, as it prevents
Black's main idea of . . . b 5 . (In a recent game
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14.e4
This should lead to a comfortable advantage.
14 ... c5
1 4 . . . dxe4 1 5 .lLixe4 lLixe4 1 6.'Wxe4 As usually
happens in this type of Catalan position, if
Black is unable to carry out . . . c6-c5 right away,
Chapter 1 3
-
Introduction to 5 . . . ie7
he will probably fall into trouble. 1 6 . . . .!Ll f6
(Another good example continued: 1 6 . . . h6
1 7.if4 ia8 1 8 .'We2 'We8 1 9.l'l:d3 White is
now ready to meet . . . c5 with d4-d5. 1 9 . . . .!Ll f6
20.l'l:ad l l'l:d8 2 1 .lLle5 White was clearly better
in Paehtz - Ushenina, Kanya 20 1 2.) 1 7.'We2
'We? 1 8 . .if4 .id6 1 9.lLle5 .!Ll d7
1 93
1 5 ... exd5 16.ib2
White's active pieces give him excellent
chances, despite the symmetrical pawn
structure. It is worth following the game for a
few more moves.
16 ...�c7
1 6 . . . dxc4 runs into 1 7.d5! cxb3 1 8 .axb3±
and White threatens both d5-d6 and l'l:xa7.
17.cxd5 tll xd5 1 8.tll xd5 hd5 1 9.dxc5
Black is forced to give up his light-squared
bishop.
19 ...La 20.hB
a
c
b
e
d
f
g
h
20.c5! A thematic idea, blocking Black's light­
squared bishop. 20 . . . ixe5 2 l .ixe5 lLlxe5
22.dxe5 bxc5 23 .l'l:d6 l'l:cd8 24.l'l:ad l White
had a clear advantage in Mamrukov - Tanda,
email 20 1 1 .
I� � ��·
�
�
7 [�J; �! -%!J�£
6 ���
· �·
,,,, ���
: /,,,,, ;� �
�.
�-8"�
,
.
,
,
%
� ��w�/%�
� �f"'
8 ;�;,f -tt:J
28Biia
,,,,� ��7� '%, ����
, , %%:,�, ,
.
1 � -�- �
s
,, , , ,
� '0
� 'd" " ' v,� ,0
;,,
5 %
4
3
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5.exd5!
In 2007 I played 1 5 .dxc5 and eventually
won a nice game against Neverov, but Black's
play can be improved. Nowadays I consider
the text move a more convincing route to an
advantage.
20 . . . .!Llxc5N 2 1 ..id5 gives White a clear
positional plus.
2 1 .�e2 .if6 22J'facl :aces 23.:axc5 :axe2
24.he2 tDxc5 25.hf6 gx:f6 26.b4±
Black will have to defend an extremely
unpleasant endgame.
1 94
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
C22) 10 .. tlia6
14.cxd5 lLixd5 1 5 .lLixd5 ixd5 1 6.ixd5
( 1 6.lLic6N± was equally strong) 1 6 . . . 'Wxc2
1 7.lLixc2 exd5 Now in V. Mikhalevski Vasovski, Ohrid 200 1 , White could have
simply grabbed the pawn with 1 8.E\xd5N if6
1 9.E\b l .
.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Black has no compensation.
1 1 .a3
One of the points behind Black's last move
can been seen after 1 1 .lll c3 dxc4 1 2.lll e5 lt:\d5
1 3.lLixc4 lt:\xf4 1 4.gxf4 lt:\ b4! when the knight
comes into play with tempo. 1 5 .'Wd2 lt:\d5
Black had a decent position in V. Mikhalevski
- Tiviakov, Hoogeveen 2000.
1 1 .. �c8
Black is not ready to open the centre, as
was clearly demonstrated in the following
game: 1 l . . .c5 1 2.lLic3 cxd4?! 1 3 .lLixd4 'Wc8
(The natural 1 3 . . . E\c8 is met strongly by
1 4.cxd5 lll xd5 1 5 .lLidb5 !±)
.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 l . . .'Wc8 1 2. lt:\ bd2 c5 1 3.E\ac l h6
Pawn exchanges do not solve Black's
problems: 1 3 . . . dxc4N 1 4.'Wxc4 lll d5
1 5 .dxc5 lLixc5 1 6.b4 lt:l d7 1 7.'Wb3 'Wd8
1 8 .lL!d4t White retains a lot of pressure.
This position occurred in Cordts - Graf,
Bad Wiessee 20 1 3 . Here White could have
obtained an advantage against his 2600-rated
opponent as follows:
1 95
Chapter 1 3 - Introduction to 5 . . . i.e7
White much the better game.
14 . . . tll xd5 1 5 .i.e5 cxd4 1 6.tll c4! also clearly
favours White.
1 5 .dxc5 bxc5 1 6.tll b3 Wd8
There is no better way for Black to stop tll a5 .
1 7.Wd2! tll e4 1 8 .We l
White will follow up with either tll e5 or
tll a5, and his position looks clearly preferable.
s
7
65
4
3
2
1
• 1. s ��•
Y,
-, m
lfr•- - - -�-,%.
- - - %�,
�
'imr
� �� ·····�
�% ��-�- - - b -0 ��
%
�
�mvw�
�-- - - %--�
- - ���
, , , %� �- 8�i.wtf
dtt)� ,., , %=, , ,
"
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 ... tll d5 14.tll c3 lll xf4 1 5.gxf4;!;
With the queen placed on c4 and the knight
active on e5, White has a favourable version of
this thematic pawn structure.
Conclusion
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
12.tll e5!
This is where I am diverging from GM 1.
1 2 .tll c3 dxc4 1 3 .lll eS tll d5 1 4 .tll xc4 lll xf4
1 5 .gxf4 tll c7 1 6.e3 tll d5 transposes to a
position mentioned in the next chapter, which
I now prefer to avoid, for reasons explained on
page 2 1 4 in the note to move 1 1 .
12 dxc4 1 3.ti'xc4!N
An obvious improvement over 1 3 .tll xc4
tll d 5 14.tll c3, which transposes to 1 2 .tll c3
above.
•..
7 . . . dxc4?! is a pointless move that leaves Black
a tempo down compared to normal lines.
7 . . . tll bd7 will usually transpose to the next
chapter after a subsequent . . . c6, but switching
to a Stonewall set-up with . . . tll e4 and .. .f5 is an
interesting alternative. White should keep the
tll fd2 idea in mind, intending to eliminate the
strong knight and get active in the centre with
f2-f3 and e2-e4.
7 . . . c6 8 .Wc2 b6 9.if4 is the most important
branch of the chapter. Now 9 . . . ia6 looks
active, but my new recommendation of
1 O.cxd5 cxd5 1 1 .�cl is deceptively unpleasant
for Black, as White often retains a nagging,
risk-free advantage, even after multiple
exchanges. 9 . . . ib7 is a bit more solid. I still
like the white position after 1 0.�d l , especially
taking into account the new discoveries I have
made since GM 1 was published.
Catalan 4 ...ib4t
5 le7 - Main Line
...
Variation Index
1 .d4 tli f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tli f3 .ih4t s ..id2 .le7 6 ..ig2 0-0 7.0-0 c6
8.�c2 tli bd7
9 ..if4
A) 9 ... tli h5
B) 9 ... a5 1 0.E:dl tli h5 1 1 ..icl
B l ) l l . .. f5
B2) 1 1 . .. bS
C) 9 ... b6 1 0.E:dl
Cl) 10 ....la6 1 1 .tli eS
C l l) 1 1 ... �c8
C l 2) 1 1 . .. tlixeS
C l 3) l 1 . .. E:c8 1 2.cxdS!
C l 3 1 ) 1 2 ... tlixdS
Cl 32) 12 ... cxdS 13.tlic6
C l 32 1 ) 1 3 ...�e8
C l 322) 13 ....ihS
C l 323) 1 3 ... tli hS
C2) 1 0 ....ih7 1 1 .tli eS!
C2 1) 1 1 . .. tlixeS
C22) 1 1 . .. tli hS
C23) 1 1 ... hS
C24) l 1. .. E:c8 12.tlic3 tli h5 13 ..icl
C241) 13 ... f5
C242) 1 3 ... tli hf6
1 97
1 98
1 99
200
202
202
202
203
208
209
210
210
21 1
213
214
214
217
22 1
222
224
225
Chapter 1 4
- ..
1 97
5 ie7 - Main Line
1 .d4 c!tJf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.� a ib4t 5.id2
ie7 6.ig2 0-0 7.0-0 c6 8.%Yc2 c!tJ bd7
knight on h5, then the most interesting
opportunity is 1 1 . . .g5 . White should simply
carry out his main positional plan of trading
the dark-squared bishops: 1 2 . .ia3 (In GM 1
I gave 1 2 .e3, but I subsequently realized that
after 1 2 . . . g4 1 3 .etJe5 etJhf6!, as in Jirka - Kaspi,
Israel 20 1 2 , White is deprived of the crucial
plan of opening the centre with f2-f3 and
e3-e4) 1 2 . . . g4
·-- - - V.� ,
r�
�
. . %�� T� -,�� ��
5
'·��'··
��� ·��
f�
�·
8 .I. � ..t.J �
7
.
6
-.
��
3 � � - • tZJ
4
9.if4
Improving the bishop seems most logical to
me. Black has three main ideas: A) 9 ... c!tJh5,
B) 9 ...a5 and C) 9 ... b6.
A) 9 ... �h5 10.�cl f5
1 0 . . . etJhf6 transposes to variation B2 of the
next chapter, with three extra moves played,
after which 1 1 . etJ bd2 reminds us of why the
bishop is better on c l than d2.
1 1 .b3 �d6
Black has tried numerous other moves, but
in most lines White keeps a typical edge, as
is the case in most Stonewall positions with
the bishop on e7 rather than d6. I decided not
to devote too much space to this section, as
I don't see any special way for Black to make
use of the . . . etJh5 move. Moreover, I think the
probability of encountering this line is pretty
low since, if Black really wanted to play a
Stonewall structure, he could have j ust played
a Dutch in the first place.
If Black is going to try and make use of the
2
'0
�� %�
��:r�
-�- - �-,.�.,
��
;·1""
a
,,
b
c
.
,,
d
e
f
g
h
This occurred in Antic - Maksimovic,
Vrnjacka Banja 1 998, and now the simple
1 3 . etJ e l N would have been good for White.
It is important to realize that 1 3 .. .f4 is no
problem, as 14.etJd3 .ixa3 1 5 .etJxa3 Wf6
1 6.Wc3 keeps everything under control for
White.
1 98
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
ib7 1 6.a4 ( 1 6.tt'ice l allows 16 . . . dxc4! 1 7 .bxc4
c5 when Black is fine) 1 6 . . . a5 1 7.tt'le5 tt'i hf6
1 8 .tt'i d3 !!ae8 1 9.tt'ie3!? A slightly surprising
square for the knight, but from this spot it
restrains Black's central pawn breaks. 1 9 . . . tt'i e4
20.!!ac l White maintained a slight edge in
Evans - Petters, Internet 20 1 1 .
15.tll c2 b6 16.tll cel ia6
Even after the more accurate 1 6 . . . ib7N
1 7. tt'i d3 dxc4 ( 1 7 . . . c5 1 8 .cxd5 ixd5 1 9.Eiac l;!;
also favours White) 1 8 .bxc4 c5 1 9.e3 !!ac8
20.Eiac l White's position remains slightly
more pleasant.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
17J'kl tll e4 18.tll d3 gac8 19.tll fe5 tll df6?
This occurred in Nyback - Yusupov,
Puhajarve 20 1 1 , and here both players
overlooked an important resource for White:
20.c5!N
Putting serious pressure on Black's queenside.
B) 9 ... a5
This was played in a bunch of games in the
1 990s, but it became more fashionable after
Topalov employed it against Kramnik in the
2006 World Championship. It has been played
many times since GM I was published.
s .i �.i.B ��·
7
1.
�
��!I
� ��
,
�
t"/
/.{
""%
!I , ,ll,!I Ll
�r-4im-•v,m
: � �
Jex A
�
� �
�
�
�
�
m l /!Jx � m
;�
4
/,
�� , , , %� lti�
�wl!fif
��
r�
�----X��
2 8 �r�
•�
8w
w��w
1 /�lti� �-�=- - - '
3
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
/,
h
10.gdl tll h5
It may seem strange to make two consecutive
moves on opposite flanks, but the logic will
soon become clear.
1 0 . . . b5 has scored amazingly well for Black,
but White has a good answer: 1 1 .c5 tt'lh5
1 2.id6! This implies a pawn sacrifice, but
White gets some significant positional trumps
in return. 1 2 . . .ixd6 1 3.cxd6 lll b 8 (I also
considered 1 3 . . . ib7N 14.tt'i bd2 '!Wb8 1 5 .e4
'!Wxd6 1 6.e5 '!We7 17.lll b 3 a4 1 8 .tt'lc5 tt'ixc5
1 9.dxc5 when White's compensation is obvious)
14.lll bd2 f5 Here it is easy to improve White's
play from Meier - Postny, Copenhagen 20 10.
�·
·
""'"'• '
7 � ---- � �
� � � �-- - -%�
5 ,,�
� '))
��,%� T�
, ,, % T�
�
�
�
- --%� ��-r
�
�
3 ��-0 �%"'//, ��1��-�
8 i.ai- ' .t�%,,, , ,%�
, ,
6
4
2
� t�- - %�
� t�.tt�
�:-.
- - %= , ,
.�
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 .'!Wc5 !N tt'i f6 1 6.tt'le5 tt'ie8 ( 1 6 . . . tt'ifd7
1 7.'!Wc2 tt'i f6 1 8 .tt'ixc6 '!Wxd6 1 9.tt'ixb8 Eixb8
20.tt'ib3 leaves White with a small but stable
edge.) 1 7.d7! ixd7 1 8 .Eiac l White has a lot of
compensation.
Chapter 1 4 - 5 . . . ie7 - Main Line
1 1 .icl
1 99
lLi c7 1 6.id3 h6 Black was all right in Colon
Garcia - Potkin, Barcelona 20 1 3) 14 . . . E!:c8
l 5 .e5 lLi e8 1 6.lLifl ! With the c4-pawn secure,
White can bring his knight to the ideal e3square. 1 6 . . . c5 1 7.dxc5 lLixc5 1 8 .lLi e3 lLi c7
l 9.lL:id4 Black is under pressure.
Bl) 1 1 ... fS
1 1 . . .lL:ihf6 1 2.lL:ibd2 allows White to play a
quick e2-e4, which is usually an indication
that the opening has gone well for him.
1 2 . . . b6 ( 1 2 . . . b5 is well met by 1 3 .c5 !, for
instance 1 3 . . . °1We8 14.e4 lLi xe4 1 5 .lLixe4 dxe4
1 6.'Wxe4 lL:i f6 1 7.'Wc2± and White got a
typical advantage thanks to Black's long-term
problem with the light-squared bishop, Marin
- Pogorelov, Barcelona 1 993.) 1 3 .e4 ia6 Now
White should not rush to take action in the
centre, but should instead take a moment to
consolidate.
12.tlic3!?
1 2.b3 lL:i hf6 was not so special for White in
Wempe - L'Ami, Dieren 20 1 3 . Since Black has
already weakened his queenside position with
. . . a5, it makes a lot of sense to bring the white
knight to a4 in some positions.
1 2 ...id6
1 2 . . . dxc4N 1 3 .e4 promises White a lot of
compensation for the pawn.
1 2 . . . b6N 1 3.lLie5 ib7 1 4.lL:ixd?
1 5 .lL:ia4! looks unpleasant for Black.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.b3!N (After the hasty 1 4.e5 lL:i e8 1 5 .ifl
'Wxd7
1 3.ig5
1 3.lL:ia4N lL:i hf6 1 4.c5 ic7 1 5 .if4!? also
deserves consideration.
Catalan 4 . . . ib4 t
200
� ��Y.
•
fa'i
m
�
ill
l!
r
�
'ill!
"'
ill
·
6
111
��;��
-"•�-� �r£�r£
- · -" · �%&
"
�
4 �
�
�
8 .i � ..tJ
7
5
�r�
"
Once again, White has clear ideas to seize
the initiative on the queenside, thanks to the
weakening . . . a5 move.
B2) 1 1 . .. b5
,,,,,
�r�
3 � ��J!l�
�� •�r�
2 8�•� 8d��
l �f 'ill
,m
a
b
c
rill
d
e
f
g
h
13 ...�e8 14.e3!
The idea is to play if4 and, after Black takes,
to recapture with the e-pawn, changing the
structure in White's favour.
14 ... h6
I also considered 1 4 . . . E!:b8N 1 5 .c5 ic7
1 6.if4 e5 1 7.dxe5 tt'lxe5 1 8 .tt'lxe5 ixe5
1 9.ixe5 Wxe5 20.ttla4 when the weak a5pawn will give Black headaches.
1 5 ..if4 .ie7
Now in Rahman - Adhiban, Sharjah 20 1 4, I
believe White should have played:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Before setting up the Stonewall, Black
first intends to clarify the situation on the
queenside.
12.�e5!
I believe this is White's only chance to fight
for an advantage. In the event of 1 2.c5 f5
Black has a solid position and does not have
to worry about his queenside like he did in the
previous variation.
After 1 2.cxd5 cxd5 1 3.e4 dxe4 1 4.W/xe4 E!:b8
White has scored well, but it seems to me that
Black is okay. See, for instance, Radjabov Topalov, Wijk aan Zee 2007, where the former
World Champion improved on Game 1 0 of
his famous match encounter against Kramnik.
12 ....ib7
Black has no time for 1 2 . . . lll x e5 1 3.dxe5
bxc4?, as 1 4.g4 traps the knight.
1 3.c5
White has also tried 1 3 .tt'lxd7 Wxd7 1 4.c5
f5 1 5 .ttl d2 Wc7 1 6.tt\8 .if6, as in Gelfand -
20 1
Chapter 1 4 - 5 ie7 - Main Line
. . .
Kamsky, Sochi 2008. At this point GM Lysyj
pointed out that l 7.°®c3N would have retained
an edge for White, thanks to the positional
idea of °®e3 followed by llie5. Nevertheless, I
believe it is more promising for White to keep
both pairs of knights.
1 5 . .Wes
Defending against a possible lli f4.
.
Black's most recent try was 15 ... lli e4 1 6.llif3
if6, Wagner - Banusz, Sibenik 20 1 2. White
should be able to claim a positional edge in
any case, but the move I like most is:
a
13...£5
Black has also tried doing without this
move by means of 1 3 . . . g6 1 4 .ih6 lli g7 in
Bromberger - Onischuk, Bavaria 20 1 0 . Here
the simple 1 5 .llixd7N '®xd7 1 6.llid2 f5 1 7.a3!
would have kept some advantage. The last
move is a useful way to prepare future ideas on
the queenside. For instance, White may attack
the a5-pawn to provoke . . . a4, and later open
things up with b2-b3 .
14.tlid2 tll hf6
After l 4 . . . llixe5 1 5 .dxeS± Black's knight has
no good route into the game, and White has
a clear plan of strengthening his position by
transferring his knight to d4. Black's position
remains solid but passive.
15.tll d3
This is the proper moment to remove
the knight from the centre, as Black was
threatening to exchange it and retreat the other
knight to d7.
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 7.a3!N This flexible move prevents Black's
idea of . . . b4 and . . . ia6 to activate the bishop.
17 . . . '®e7 ( 1 7 . . . g5 runs into the unpleasant
1 8 .llife5! followed by f2-f3) 1 8 .if4 g5 1 9 .ie5
g4 20.ixf6 lliexf6 2 1 .lli fe5 White retains a
pleasant edge.
16.tll f3 h6
Now in Miroshnichenko - Macieja,
Halkidiki 2008, White should have played:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
17.if4N g5
c
d
e
f
g
h
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
202
17 . . . tli e4 1 8 .tlife5 llixe5 1 9.ixe5 looks
excellent for White, who can confidently make
all the necessary preparations for the e2-e4
advance.
important additional possibility in 1 2 . . . llixe5
1 3.dxe5 E:c8 (or 13 . . . tli g4 immediately)
1 4. tli c3 tli g4, as played in Anand - Topalov,
Nanjing 20 1 0 .
The text move is probably what White was
concerned about, but there is a good answer
available.
Black may respond with C l l ) 1 1 Y!YcS,
C12) 1 1 t£ixe5 or C13) 1 1 JkS.
•.•
••.
••
Cl l ) 1 1 Y!Ycs
•..
18.ic7!?
With the following point:
18 ...Y!Ycs 19.i.d6! .ixd6 20.cx:d6 lile4
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
21.t£ic5 t£ixd6 22.lilxe6 E:f6 23.t£ic5 t£ixc5
24.Y!Yxc5
White has a clear positional advantage. There
is even an interesting alternative in 24.dxc5!?
followed by lli d4.
C) 9 ... b6
This is the most important and popular set-up.
1 0.E:dl
Now Black must make an important choice
between Cl) 10 J.a6 and C2) 10 i.b7.
••.
••.
Cl) 10 i.a6 1 1 .t£ie5
•.•
It is important to start with this move,
since 1 1 .cxd5 cxd5 1 2.tlie5 allows Black an
12 lilh5!?
The knight j ump is a common motif in such
positions.
•.•
1 2 . . .ixc4 1 3.llixc4 dxc4 has occurred in
several games, but I am not so concerned about
this. After 1 4.tlie4 b5 1 5 .tli d6 ixd6 1 6.ixd6
E:d8 1 7.a4 White's strong pair of bishops gave
him excellent compensation in Wojtkiewicz Zubarev, Moscow 2002.
White retreated the bishop to e3 in Sambuev
- Smirnov, Krasnoyarsk 2003, and one other
game, but I believe Black is okay after returning
with the knight to f6. That is why I developed
another plan.
Chapter 1 4 - 5 ie7 - Main Line
. . .
203
17.�acl °Wb7
Now White can exploit the awkward position
of the enemy queen with the following forcing
continuation.
13 ... tll hf6
An obvious alternative is 1 3 . . . tlixeS 1 4.dxe5 ,
when Black has t o play 1 4 . . . g 6 t o rescue his
knight. 1 5 .cxd5 cxd5 ( 1 5 . . . exd5?! 1 6.E:ac l
leaves White with a lot of pressure) 1 6.ih6
( 1 6.'Wa4!? looks interesting as well) 1 6 . . . E:d8
1 7.E:d2 tli g7 1 8 .E:ad l White's pieces are much
better coordinated, and he should be able to
carry out e2-e4 in the near future.
C12) 1 1 . .. tll xe5 1 2.dxe5
14.'!Wa4! lll xe5
1 4 . . . ib7 1 5 .E:acl obviously cannot be good
for Black.
15.dxe5 tll d7
1 5 . . . tli g4 would have been an annoying
reply in the analogous line with the bishop on
e3, but here 1 6.cxd5 exd5 1 7.J.h3 h5 1 8 .f3
b5 1 9.°Wc2 ic5t 20.�g2 favours White. Even
though the black knight cannot be captured
immediately, the pin looks pretty awkward for
Black.
16.cxd5 cxd5
1 6 . . . exd5 runs into 1 7 .J.h3! E:d8 1 8 .e6
f:xe6 1 9.J.xe6t �h8 20.J.e3 with White's
advantage.
1 2 ... tll d7
1 2 . . . tlih5? is clearly inferior, and 1 3 .J.e3
already threatens to win the knight. After
the further 1 3 . . . f5 1 4.cxd5 cxd5 1 5 .tLlc3±
Black has an unpleasant position due to the
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
204
misplaced knight, Tkachiev - Tukmakov,
Poree 1 998.
Also risky is:
1 2 . . . lll g4 1 3 .if3!N
This move is new, but somehow I have a
feeling that many players who have worked
on this variation are aware of it.
It is essential to understand the problem
with 1 3 .h3. A recent example continued
1 3 . . . lll x f2! 1 4 .'tt> xf2 ic5t 1 5 .ie3 ixe3t
1 6.©xe3 Wg5t 1 7.'tt> f2 f6 with promising
counterplay, Shaydullina - Kovalenko,
Khanty-Mansiysk 20 1 3.
1 3 . . . gS !?
I also considered:
1 3 . . . hS 14.cxdS cxd5 1 5 .Wa4! shows one of
the benefits of the bishop on f3 : the e2-pawn
is protected! 1 5 . . . ib 7 1 6.h3 g5 1 7 .hxg4
gxf4 1 8 .Wxf4 Black is a pawn down with an
exposed king.
1 3 .. .fS 1 4 .exf6 lll xf6 1 5 .lll d2 i.d6 1 6.i.xd6
Wxd6 1 7.l'!ac l White has the more
comfortable position, and will soon carry
out e2-e4 to attack Black's centre.
8
1
6
5
.i. �
�
i
�·
�
E -- ---%w.�-.�. ,
��
£•
•
·
�
�
- - %• �
�� - - �
£ m% -�1& �•
. J�:lii�
��� f�%1
�
� � ��-r
8 1. -. ii ��·"
7 � �� i)9' lv,- .t.
6
,�
111 i"tll
w
W'
.l
'111
tll
0 �� II
5
-� � ���7���
4
8•
��
�� �%�•"
3
2
1
'I•f
�
,,,,,
ef----?i�r�
�"
�� �r��r
8 �v • 8 w
�
-0
���'-"""W"""
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
13.cxd5 cxd5 14.e4 �c8
1 4 . . . g5 ? is poor, and after 1 5 .ie3 lll x e5
1 6.exdS l'!c8 1 7.lll c3± Black had no
compensation for having weakened his
kingside in Wojtkiewicz - Kustar, Sioux Falls
2000.
14 . . . d4 1 5 .l'!xd4 ic5 ( 1 5 ... l'!c8 1 6.lll c3
transposes to the main line below) 1 6.l'!d l
g5 1 7.ic l We7 Black is about to regain the
e5-pawn, but White has just enough time to
get active. 1 8.Wa4 i.c8 1 9.lll d2 lll xe5 20.lll b3
i.d7 2 1 .Wa6 Despite the material equality,
Black's position is rather unpleasant, as the
following game illustrates.
� !�l.!l% ��
' " 'eflt)� l� =
4
a
b
c
d
e
,,,,,
f
,,,,
g
h
1 4.i.xg4 gxf4 1 5 .lll d2
The position is complicated, but I like
White's chances. An illustrative variation is:
1 5 . . . ©h8 1 6.cxdS cxd5 1 7.Wa4 fxg3! 1 8.hxg3!
ib7 1 9.©g2!
The open h-file might turn into a serious
headache for Black.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
2 1 . . .l'!ad8 (2 1 . . .f6N is a better try, although
22.lll xcS Wxc5 23 .ie3;!; still favours White)
22.lll xc5 i.c8 23 .We2 l'!xd l t 24.Wxd l bxc5
25 .Wd2 f6 26.Wc3± White clearly had the
Chapter 1 4 - 5 . . . ie7 - Main Line
205
better game in Tkachiev - Filippov, Fuegen
2006.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
15.�c3 d4
This pawn sacrifice is forced. Black hopes
to obtain compensation due to the doubled
pawns in the centre. An important point is
that the e4-pawn blocks both the Catalan
bishop and the knight's route towards d6.
1 5 . . . dxe4?N is effectively refuted by 1 6.'!Wa4!
id3 1 7.ll'lxe4 b5 1 8.Wxa7 l'!c7 1 9 .'!We3 when
Black is a pawn down anyway, but under
highly unfavourable circumstances.
16.E:xd4 V!fc7
This is the main line.
Nakamura once experimented with
1 6 . . . .icS ?! in a blitz game. Despite his eventual
victory, there is no doubt that after 1 7.l'!d2 ib7
1 8.l'!adl ic6 1 9.h4 We? 20.a3 a5 2 1 .ll'l a4!±
his position was poor in Gelfand - Nakamura,
Moscow (blitz) 20 1 0 .
17.E:adl E:fd8
Please note that l 7 . . . ll'lxe5 ?? is refuted by
1 8.'!Wa4! ib7 1 9.l'!d?.
One game continued 17 ... ll'l b8 1 8.h4 b5
1 9.a3 .ic5 20.l'!4d2 ixa3, and now a clear
improvement is:
2 1 .'!Wb3!N (After 2 1 .bxa3 '!Wxc3 22.'1Mfxc3
l'!xc3 23 .ie3 lt'i c6 Black was okay in Verat
- Shchekachev, Paris 200 I ) 2 1 . . . .ic5 (An
important point is that 2 1 . . .ixb2 runs into
22.ll'ld5! exd5 23 .'!Wxb2 dxe4 24.e6 with a
decisive initiative) 22.ll'lxb5 '!Wb7 23.ifl ±
White still has an extra pawn and his pieces are
much more active.
1 8.h4
It is essential to prevent . . . g5 .
1 8 ... h6
This has been the clear first choice, but I
would like to mention two other possibilities.
1 8 . . . ic5 1 9.l'!4d2 ll'l b8 was played in Kengis ­
Kayumov, Arad Abudhabi 2003.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
And now the simple 20.a3N would be a clear
improvement, for example: 20 . . . l'!xd2 2 1 .l'!xd2
b5 22.Wb3 '!Wb7 23.ll'la2! Wb6 24. lli b4 ib7
206
Catalan 4 . . . ib4 t
25.tlid3 id4 26.'W'd l ± White keeps an extra
pawn plus a space advantage.
1 8 . . . tlib8 1 9.l'!xd8t l'!xd8 20.l'!xd8t 'W'xd8
occurred in Gelfand - Alekseev, Moscow 2008.
The exchanges have removed the pressure from
the e5-pawn, giving White an opportunity to
free his bishop.
challenge over how to improve his position
while maintaining the indirect defence of his
extra pawn.
19 ...ic5
Black has tried three other moves, all of
which seem reasonably sensible.
19 . . . tlib8 20.l'!xd8t ixd8 2 1 .'W'a4! 'W'c6
22.'W'xc6 tli xc6 23.ifl ixfl 24.Wxfl a6
occurred in Colovic - Pogorelov, Sort 2009.
It is understandable that Black wanted to take
away the b5-square from the knight, but White
could have exploited the last move as follows:
·�
�
,
,
%
.
,
7 � �
_ ��� 7,� �
��
�
�
6 £ �41l•
••
�
�
�
�
w�
.....
: � - - ��� ��� ����
�"'"//, �� �
3 � � . �
�
2 8��-- - ��- - =,��wr1��-j
� .1. �
8
,.,.,
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
2 1 .ie3!N tli d7 22.f4 tlic5 23 .ifl ! White has
an obvious advantage.
-
:
,,,,, ,�
/-"
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
2 5 . tli a4!N Black's queenside looks extremely
vulnerable, for instance: 25 . . . b5 26.tli c5 a5
27.tli b7 ib6 28.l'!cl l'!b8 29.l'!xc6 :B:xb7
30.id2± White has excellent winning chances.
19.h5
This ensures that White will never have to
worry about . . . g5 ideas, while also securing a
space advantage on the kingside, which might
be useful in a future endgame. We now have
an interesting situation where Black is unable
to recapture on e5 yet (as l'!xd8t followed by
'W'a4 will be devastating) , but White faces a
1 9 . . . tli c5 20.ifl ! ixfl
Worse is 20 . . . ig5 ?! 2 1 .ixg5 l'!xd4 22.l'!xd4
ixfl 23 .if4 ia6 24.'W'd l 'W'e7 25 .:B:d6±
and White went on to win convincingly in
Tkachiev - Jakovenko, Dresden 2007.
2 1 . Wxfl l'!xd4 22.l'!xd4 a6
22 . . . tlid7 23.'W'a4! tli c5 24.'W'd l 'W'c6
occurred in Afanasiev - Demianjuk, Anapa
20 1 2 . Here White could have slowly
improved his position by means of: 25.a3N
b5 (25 ... a5 ? 26.a4!±) 26.b4 tli a6 27.id2:t
Followed by f2-f4, with the better game.
23 .'W'd l b5
Chapter 1 4 - 5 . . . ie7 - Main Line
207
transposes to the main line below. Other
moves are possible, but White's general ideas
remain the same as in other lines. However,
it should be noted that 20 . . . tll xe5 ? still does
not work in view of 2 1 .�xd8t �xd8 22.�xd8t
ixd8 23 .Wl'a4 ic8 24.tll b5± winning pawn.
24.a3!N
Improving over the hasty 24.b4 tll b7 25 .�d7
Wl'c4t! 26.Wl'e2 ixb4 when Black was fine in
Kobo - Baert, Gibraltar 20 1 4 .
24 . . . �d8
I also considered 24 . . .Wl'c6 25.b4 tll b7
26.id2 and White slowly improves.
25.�xd8t ixd8 26.Wl'd6! Wl'c8 27.mg2
Black is a long way from equality.
1 9 . . . mf8 ! ? is partially a waiting move, but it
also serves a specific purpose, as shown in the
next note. I propose:
20J�4d2 ie7
Now we face an interesting question: how
should White improve his position if Black just
sits and waits? I have two possible solutions.
2 1 .a3
2 I .if3 is another way to improve. White
frees the g2-square for the king, keeping in
mind the possibility of a future g4-g5 push.
2 1 . . .mf8 22.mg2 mg8N 23.�d4! ? Preparing
ie2, while also setting up some possible
tactics:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
20.�4d2!N (In the only game to feature Black's
last move, White played the hasty 20.ifl ,
and after 20 . . . ixfl 2 1 .mxfl tll xe5! 22.�xd8t
�xd8 23.�xd8t ixd8 24.Wl'a4 if6 Black had
equalized in Kovalenko W. Zhou, Moscow
20 1 1 . Black's 1 9th move served an important
function in covering the e8-square.) After the
text move Black may play 20 . . . mg8!?, which
-
208
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
23 . . . .ic5 24.lll d5! '1Wb7 (In the event of
24 . . . exd5 25.:!:%xd5 lll f8 26.:!:%xd8 :!:%xd8 27.b4!
White is much better) 25 .'1Wd2!?;!; Black is
under some pressure.
2 1 . @£8
After 2 1 . . .lll c5 ?! 22.:!:%xd8t :!:%xd8 23 . .ifl
White significantly improves his position.
••
retains an extra pawn plus the initiative, and
can increase the pressure with moves like :!:%d6
and .ih3.
24.exd6
White enjoys rich compensation thanks to
his strong passed pawn and pair of bishop.
24 Y!Yc5
I also considered 24 . . . '1Wb8 25.e5 'itig8
26.'1We4 :!:%c5 27.:!:%c l '1Wc8 (after 27 . . . :!:%dc8
28 .'1We3 the rook is in danger on c5) 28.if3
with long-term compensation.
••.
22.�d4 ic5
Now in Vitiugov - Tomashevsky, Moscow
2008, White settled for the draw. However, I
discovered an interesting way to play for more.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
25.e5 @gs 26.�el Y!Yd4 27.Y!Ycl
White remains in control, and has more
than enough compensation for the exchange.
C13) 1 1 �cS
•••
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
26.b4! .ixf2t 27.'1Wxf2 lll e6 28 .'1Wf3;!; White
Chapter 1 4 - 5 . . . ie7 - Main Line
12.cxd5!
I believe this is the only way to fight for the
advantage. 1 2.tt:lc3 is more popular and has
scored better, but after 1 2 . . . ixc4 1 3.tt:lxc4
dxc4 1 4.e4 b5! I believe Black is doing well.
Black may recapture with C131) 12 tL!xd5
or C132) 12 cxd5 .
.••
.••
1 2 . . . tt:lxe5N has not yet been tested. White
should react with l 3 .d6! (Surprisingly, 1 3.dxe5
tt:lxd5! ? 14.e4 tt:lxf4 1 5 .E!:xd8 tt:le2t 1 6.'it>h l
E!:fxd8 is not so clear) 1 3 . . . tt:l f3t 1 4.ixf3 ixd6
l 5 .ixd6 °1Mfxd6
s
z ��.-��Y,.
� �.•
, • ...
�-·�·-%� � �- - %�
: �� �� �� ��
�� �- % ��-%
3 �� -��- - �
�-0
2 8 t�V• �
8 J:;
t�.J% llt�
�ltS� ,. . . =, , ,
7
6
,,
,,,,,
a
b
c
,,,,
d
13.tLlc3
White should refrain from 1 3 .tt:lxc6 in
view of: 1 3 . . . tt:l b4! 1 4.\Mi'a4 tt:l xc6 1 5.°1Mfxa6?!N
( 1 5 .ixc6 is objectively better, although
1 5 . . . ixe2 1 6.E!:e l b5! 1 7.\Mi'xa? E!:xc6 1 8 .E!:xe2
tt:l f6gg still gave Black a great game in Krotov
- Shkuro, Azov 20 1 0) 1 5 . . . tt:l c5 ! 1 6.\Mi'c4 tt:la5
White will have to fight for a draw by giving
up his queen for some pieces.
13 tL!xe5
1 3 . . . tt:lxf4 1 4.gxf4 gives White a good version
of a well-known pawn structure. I only found
one example from here, which continued:
14 . . . tt:lxe5 1 5 .fxe5 White intends to fortify his
central position with f2-f4 and e2-e3.
••.
s
>,, , , , , :
le
e
f
g
C131) 12 l£ixd5
•.•
7
6
5
4
2
3
h
1 6.°1Mfa4!? ib5 The only move. 1 7.°1Mfb3 ia6
( 1 7 . . . e5 1 8 .dxe5 °1Mfxe5 1 9.tt:lc3;:!; is unpleasant
for Black) 1 8 . tt:l c3 White has the more pleasant
position. An important point is that 1 8 . . . c5 ??
is refuted by 1 9.°1Mfa3! when the bishop has
nowhere to go.
209
�z � - - -�le-••
.,Y,. ...
��
�r���.,y,���- - - %�
�- - %�
�.�
�n�- - - %� ��
� - -% ��
�
�--�- - - '� �
�t�.t�
-.%%�,�i[W�
8, , , t�V•
8
.
""
%
� - � ,.
--
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 . . . b 5 ? A bad positional error, restricting
the light-squared bishop. Now in Gleizerov
- Rigo, Banska Stiavnica 20 1 0, White could
have played 1 6.a3N ± followed by b2-b4, with
a serious positional advantage.
14.he5
1 4.dxe5 °1Mfc7 is nothing for Black to worry
about.
14 tLlxc3 1 5.hxc3 !c4!
Otherwise White will play c3-c4, claiming
an obvious positional advantage.
.••
16.!e4
This is White's only challenging idea.
210
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
16 ... g6
An obvious alternative is: 1 6 . . . h6 1 7 .ih7t
i;t>hs 1 8.id3 ixd3 1 9.l:!xd3 b5 20.c4 if6
This logical sequence occurred in Maletin Volokitin, Moscow 20 1 1 . Now the natural
continuation would have been:
19 ... a5
1 9 . . . ixe5 20.dxe5 �c7 2 1 .Ei:d6! obviously
favours White.
20.c4 he5 2 1 .dxe5 �g5 22.£4 �f5 23.�b3;t
Black is under some pressure.
C1 32) 12 ... cxd5
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
2 1 .cS!N a5 22.l:!ad l White retains an obvious
positional edge.
C1321) 13 ...�e8 14.tlixe7t �xe7 15.tll c3
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
17.id3!?N
So far White has played 17 .h4 in three
games, all of which have been drawn. Clearly
a fresh idea is needed, and I consider the text
move the most promising new direction.
17 ...ixd3 18.gxd3 if6 1 9.�a4!
Without this important resource, I don't see
anything special for White. Now it is not so
easy for Black to defend the a-pawn.
Chapter 1 4 - 5 . . . ie7 - Main Line
1 5 ... tlih5
Other moves also fail to equalize:
1 5 . . . ib7 occurred in Naumann - Levin,
Mulheim 2009.
21 1
16.i.e3
White has a typical slight edge, and it is only
a matter of time before he gets his bishops
working. In the one game from this position,
Black soon went downhill.
16 ... ic4?! 17.b3 ia6 18.a4 f5
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
believe White should have taken the
opportunity to control the fl -a6 diagonal
right away with 1 6.Wd3N, for instance 1 6 . . . a6
1 7 .:B:ac l :B:c6 l 8.f3± and White is improving
the position nicely.
1 5 . . . bS?! looks interesting at first sight, but after
1 6.Wd3! lt'l b6 l 7.b3! it transpires that Black is
in trouble. 17 . . . Wb7 ( 1 7 . . . b4N 1 8 .Wxa6 bxc3
1 9.:B:ac l ± does not bring him any relief.)
s
�
�•
�x �
�
� � ,,,,,v,�p
7 %�:1 � �%l1�£
�
6 •�
5
4
2
3
-�
..t.
.,.
��',, , , ;�
,,, , , ;�
�"�
�£
�!
��'0
•mw�
�
�
�
�
---,,. �
�
�
�-',
, , , ;.
�rii
�.....
;.;'fb'·� ---­
----� ��
�
�
a
b
� :c
d
e
f
�
g
�
h
1 8.lt'lxbS li:J e4 1 9.:B:dc l :B:xc l t 20.:B:xc l :B:c8
2 1 .a4 :B:xdt 22.ixc l Wc6 23.ia3± White
had won a pawn and smoothly executed
his opponent in Le Quang Liem - Nabaty,
Gibraltar 20 1 2.
78
6
5
43
21
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
19.i.cl!
The bishop heads towards its best diagonal.
19 ... �b4 20.tlia2 �d6 21 .�d2! ib7
22.tli c3 �b8 23.ia3
White was clearly better in Bacrot Ibrahimov, Basel 20 1 1 .
C1322) 1 3 ...i.b5 14.tlixe7t �xe7 15.tlic3
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
212
So far Black has achieved solid practical
results, drawing every game from this position.
However, I believe in White's long-term
chances with the bishop pair.
1 s ... cths
1 5 . . . a5 is a logical move which has been
played by Grischuk. Here I like the following
idea: 1 6.Wd2 ia6 1 7.!'i:acl :B:fd8 ( 1 7 . . . h6
1 8 .f3 b4 1 9.h4 also favoured White in Stupak
- Almasi, St Petersburg 20 1 2) The present
position was reached in Yefremov - Cleto,
email 20 1 1 . Since Black's last move prepared
the plan of . . . lll f8-g6, I suggest countering
with:
� .i. �.1.1-
8
�·
7 � �.,sr� ,
6 ..t� "•'i"lf"""�
5 � - -- - "� r� '- - -- - -�
, . , . , !(.
%�
� ��-,��!( ��/%�
� �
�
�
"m----".-----"
�t�<?-- -- ·ytnJ
�w.-ef -- -- "w.t�-�
2 ��w.�� � t�i..
.- - - - "���� ---- · m - - -4
3
a
b
c
d
e
"
f
g
h
1 8 .if3!?N lll f8 1 9.g4! lll g6 20.ig3;!; White
has preserved the bishop's placement on the
optimal h2-b8 diagonal, while also gaining
some space on the kingside. Later he may
consider h4-h5 when the time is right. Overall
White's advantage is not that large, but he
maintains a pleasant pull.
16.icl!N
I find this new idea perfectly natural. The
unopposed dark-squared bishop is key to
White's opening strategy, and it makes sense
to try and activate it via a3. White failed to
impress after 1 6.ie3 lll hf6 1 7 .Wd2 ia6
1 8 .if4 lll h5 1 9.ig5 lll hf6 when a draw was
agreed in Wen - Yu, China 20 1 4 .
17. . .ia6 1 8.b3 �k6 1 9.ib2!
1 9 .a4 is premature in view of 1 9 . . . Wb4, and
after the forced 20.lll a2 Wxd2 2 l .!'i:xd2 !'i:fc8
Black gets a lot of activity.
19 .. JUcS 20.gacl
Even though the bishop has not yet made it
to a3, White has still achieved a good level of
harmony, and can aim to improve his position
with f2-f3 and later e2-e4. Here is a brief
illustrative line.
20 ...'%Yb4 2 1 .f3 h6 22.gc2
22.e4 is a bit premature due to 22 . . . dxe4
23.fxe4 e5 when Black looks to be okay.
213
Chapter 1 4 - 5 . . . !e7 - Main Line
22 ....ib7 23.e3;!;
Black has a solid position and his queen
and rooks are active, but it is hard for him
to threaten anything. Meanwhile White can
continue making small improvements, with
the e3-e4 advance being the primary objective.
C1323) 13 ... �h5
18 ... �£6
18 . . . b4? runs into 1 9 .a3! tl'ia5 20.'We3 :!:%c2
2 l .:!:%d2± when Black is in trouble.
14 ..icl !
Once again, White should aim t o post his
bishop on a3 . Amazingly, this strong move has
only been played in one out of thirteen games
on my database.
All the other games continued 1 4 .ie3 tt:'ib8!
1 5 .tl'ixe?t 'Wxe7 1 6.tt:'ic3, after which Black
has yet to lose a single game. 1 6 . . . tt:'i c6 looks
like the most natural move, when Black is
doing fine.
14 ... �bS 15.�xe7t V!fxe7 16.V!id2!
It makes sense to keep the knight on b 1 for
the moment, in order to facilitate the plan of
b2-b3 and ia3 .
16 ... �c6 17.b3 b5
19.�c3 �fd8 20.�dcl h6 21 .e3;!;
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Taking into account that . . . b4 would be a
positional error, Black has to remain with the
pawn on b5, which makes his position feel rather
awkward. White is undoubtedly slightly better.
214
Catalan 4 . . . i.b4t
C2) 10 i.b7
on the kingside by means of . . . g5 or . . . Ei:f6-h6.
The stem game continued 1 8.Ei:ac l g5 1 9. fxg5
i.xg5 20.f4 .if6 2 1 .'!Wf2 Ei:c7 22.ttJe2 <tt> h 8
and Black was at least not worse in Gupta Maiorov, Metz 20 1 1 .
••.
Black may react to my recommended
move with C2 1) 1 1 c\LJxeS, C22) 1 1 c\LJh5,
C23) 1 1 b5 or C24) 1 1 . J�cS.
•.•
•.•
••.
.
C2 1) 1 I. tlixe5 12.dxe5 c\LJd7
1 3.cxd5 cxd5 14.e4
••
I I .clLJe5!
I have chosen to depart from the
recommendation in GM 1 at a relatively
early stage. It is worth briefly mennonmg
the problem I found: 1 l .ttJ c3 dxc4 1 2.ttJd2
ttJd5 1 3 .ttJxc4 ttJxf4 1 4.gxf4 ttJ f6 1 5 .e3 ttJd5
1 6.a3 Ei:c8 1 7.b4 I considered this position
to be rather promising for White, but in
the following game Black came up with an
excellent plan:
The position bears an obvious similarity to
the earlier variation C 1 2 , but this time Black is
not forced to sacrifice a pawn.
14 dxe4
I believe this is Black's best bet. He has two
other reasonable options at his disposal:
••.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 7 . . .f5 ! By fixing the pawn structure, Black
gets significant chances to seize the initiative
14 . . . d4 1 5 .Ei:xd4 .ic5 1 6.Ei:d2!N (This is
an obvious improvement over 1 6.Ei:d l g5 !
1 7 . .ic l '!We7 1 8 .ttJd2?! tlJ xe5 1 9.ttJb3 Ei:ad8
when Black was perfectly fine in Anwesh
- Sethuraman, Porto Carras 20 1 0) 1 6 . . . g5
(In the event of 1 6 . . . '!We7 1 7.tlJc3 Ei:fd8
1 8 .Ei:ad l ± White comfortably retains his extra
pawn.)
Chapter 1 4 - 5 . . . ie7 - Main Line
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
21 5
h
1 7. W d 1 ! It is not j ust the second rook that
can utilize the d l -square! l 7 . . . ic6 ( l 7 . . . gxf4
1 8.:B:xd? Wc8 1 9.gxf4±) 1 8 .Wg4 ii.el 1 9 .h4
White has a powerful attack in addition to his
extra pawn.
1 4 . . . :B:c8 1 5 . ttJ c3 d4
Black has also tried this familiar pawn
sacrifice, j ust like in the earlier variation with
the bishop on a6.
1 5 . . . dxe4?! 1 6.!i.xe4 !i.xe4 l 7.Wxe4 clearly
favours White, for instance: 1 7 . . . Wc?
1 8 .ttJb5 lll c5 1 9.Wf3 Wb8 20.b4 lt:l a6
2 1 .ttJd6± White was dominating in
V. Mikhalevski - Vescovi, Sao Paulo 2002.
l 6.:B:xd4 !i.c5
16 . . .Wc? has been played, but it was
practically refuted after: l 7.We2 a6
( 1 7 . . . lt:lxe5 1 8 .ttJb5 Wb8 1 9 .ttJxa? wins a
pawn) 1 8 .ttJd5! exd5 1 9.exd5 Wc5 20.:B:dd l !?
White had a huge initiative for the sacrificed
piece in Terreaux - Aiken, corr. 20 1 2 .
1 7.:B:dd l
I like this move, although l 7.:B:d2 also looks
promising.
l 7 . . . !i.b4
17 . . . ic6 1 8.Wd2 We? runs into the familiar
1 9.ttJd5! exd5 20.exd5 with a decisive
advantage.
Now in Bugalski - Mallek, Solec Kuj 2003,
White missed a strong continuation:
17.'9e2!
This is more accurate than 1 7.Wf3, after
which Vladimir Kramnik convincingly
demonstrated that Black has a reliable game:
17 . . . We8 1 8 . ttJ c3 ( 1 8 . ttJ d2 :B:d8 1 9. ttJ e4 Wb5
gives Black no problems) 1 8 . . . lt:l a4! 1 9.ttJxa4
Wxa4 20.b3 Wa3 2 1 .:B:d? !i.c5 22.We2 a5
216
Catalan 4 . . . !b4t
23.:i:!ad l a4 The players soon agreed a draw in
Giri - Kramnik, Dortmund 20 1 1 .
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
19 ... Wfb7 20.b4 tD d7 21.tlie4!?
This pawn sacrifice seems quite promising,
but it is not essential. The calm 2 1 .a3N is also
fine, for instance 2 1 . . .b5 22.lll e4 lll b6 23.ig5
!xg5 24.lll xg5 l:!ad8 25 .l:!d6! and White keeps
a slight pull.
2 1 . ..i.xb4 22Jk4 !e7
In the event of 22 . . . !c5 23 .Wi'g4 )f;ihs White
can develop his initiative with: 24.\Wh5! )f;ig8
25.lll g5 h6 26.lll e4 f5 Otherwise !xh6 will
decide the game. 27.exf6 lll xf6 28.lll xc5 bxc5
29. WI e2;:!; White regains the pawn and keeps the
better chances thanks to his superior structure.
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
17 ...Wfc7 18.tlic3 a6
Here another game pops up, which reached
this position via a different move order.
1 8 . . . l:!ad8 1 9.lll b5 Wfc6 Now in Stachowiak
- Grabarczyk, Wroclaw 20 1 3 , White should
have played 20.lll xa7!N, when 20 . . . \Wa4
2 1 .lll b5 l:!xd l t 22.:!:!xd l Wi'xa2 23 .!e3 Wi'b3
24.lll d6 leaves Black under some pressure. The
knight is powerful on d6, and exchanging it
would give White a dangerous passed pawn.
19J�acl
1 9.b4 would be met by 19 ... lll b3!.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
23 ...i.xd6
If Black ignores the knight with 23 . . . Wi'a7,
then 24.Wi'c2 lll c5 25 .ie3 sees White win back
the pawn while retaining the better chances.
24.exd6 tli c5 25.J.g5!
This strong move threatens to put the bishop
on e7, while also clearing a path for the rook to
go to the kingside, which may lead to a serious
attack.
217
Chapter 1 4 - 5 . . . ie7 - Main Line
25 .. JUcS
After 25 . . .f6 26.ii.e3± White regains the
pawn and his mighty passed pawn should
easily decide the game.
26.�h5 f6
Otherwise :gh4 will be hard to meet.
I found more than sixty games from this
position.
13.cxd5
I regard this as the only serious way to
fight for the advantage. Not for the first time,
White's strategy involves an early trade of
a knight for an enemy bishop, followed by
gradually improving his position.
13 ... cxd5 14.tl)c6 ixc6 1 5.�xc6 :Sc8
This has been the most popular choice, but it
is worth mentioning some other moves:
1 5 . . . °1Wc8 has led to a couple of draws for Black,
but it is not too hard to improve White's play.
1 6.°1Wb5 lll e8
28.:SxcSt :Sxc8 29.ib2
Material is equal, and White has an obvious
advantage thanks to his powerful passed pawn
and active pieces.
C22) 1 1 ... tl)h5 12.id2 tl)hf6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 7.:gc l N ( 1 7.lll c3 lll d6 1 8 .°1Wd3 Wc4 1 9.°IWb l
lt:\ f6 20.e3 Wc6 2 1 .ii.e l :gfc8 22.:gc l °1Wb7
was nothing special for White in Artemiev Movsesian, Loo 20 1 4) 1 7 . . . lll d6 1 8 .°1Wd3 °1Wb7
1 9.ctJc3 lt:\ f6 20.:gc2 :gac8 2 1 .:gacl We have
reached a normal type of middlegame with a
lot of play ahead, where White's bishop pair
makes him the slight favourite.
1 5 . . . a6 1 6.e3 b5 is sensible, placing the pawns
on the opposite colour to the remaining bishop.
I think White's most interesting continuation
is: 1 7.:gc l !?N ( 1 7.°1Wc2 °1Wc8 1 8 .°1Wd3 Wc4
1 9 .ii.fl lll e4 20.ii.e l led to a pleasant edge and
an eventual win for White in Giri - Meier,
218
Catalan 4 . . . ib4 t
Dortmund 20 1 1 , but after the improvement
l 7 . . . lLi b6!?N 1 8.b3 b4 I think Black should be
okay)
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
It is understandable that Black wanted to
create some counterplay in the centre, but his
last move makes White's light-squared bishop a
more dangerous piece. In Caruana - Gelfand,
Zurich 20 1 3 , White could have obtained a big
advantage with:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
h
1 7 . . . lLi b6 (In the event of 1 7 . . . b4 1 8 .a3 a5
1 9.axb4 axb4 20.:ga6! White can develop his
play on the queenside) 1 8 .ia5 lLi fd7 1 9.lLid2
Wfb8 20.Wfc2 :gc8 2 1 .Wfd l White has the
slightly better prospects; his bishop pair may
prove crucial in the long term.
1 5 . . . Wfb8 has also been played at the elite level.
1 6.Wfc2 b5 1 7.Wfd3 b4 1 8 .ie l
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
This move offers a convenient way of
developing the knight to d2, which is obviously
necessary after Black's last move. 1 8 . . . Wfb6 (In
the event of 1 8 . . . e5 1 9.lLid2 e4 20.Wfa6! White
clearly has the better game) l 9.lLid2 a5 20.:gac l
:gac8 2 l .e3 e5 (After 2 1 . . .:gc6 22.ifl :gfc8
23.:gxc6 Wfxc6 24.Wfb5 Wfa8 25 .:gb u White
slowly starts to take over on the queenside)
d
e
f
g
h
22.ifl !N e4 (22 . . . exd4 23.exd4 :gfeg 24.lLif3
id6 25.Wf a6±) 23.Wfa6 Wfxa6 24.ixa6
:ga8 25 .ib5 Black is under pressure, for
example: 25 . . . :gfbg 26.ifl l'!c8 27.lLi b3 a4
28.lLic5±
� � s �� •
s
-·
v,
·
'fi
�
7 -�
,.·�,.•
y �,.
W'd.
' '·
: ·� ���
� �L,
� � 0 . �-�,,/,
3 ��-0 �
� - � ---- %�-�
8 r� � 8 r��r�
6
a
c
b
,
,
21 �
S{ •rm- - - %=- - a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.�bS
1 6.Wfa4 has been played a few times,
including by Gelfand against Kramnik, but
I am not so sure about the position after
1 6 . . . :gc4!?N 1 7.Wfxa7 :gxd4 1 8 .lLi c3 :gc4. My
feeling is that the pawn trade has helped Black,
who now boasts a central majority.
..
Chapter 1 4 - 5 . ie7 - Main Line
16 ... lli es
1 6 . . . lt'ib8 has also been tried in several
games. After the natural l 7.lt'ic3 there are two
main directions:
a) l 7 . . . a6 1 8 .'l&d3 b5 Despite solid practical
results for Black, advancing the queenside
pawns is slightly risky, as it gives White a
potential pawn lever on that flank. 1 9.E:ac l
lt'ic6 20.e3 'l&b6
219
.i� � ��·
�
% �� , %
5 •w�
:���,. . . ��. ��
��·�
��
�
2 8 �,,,,,,,. ,,,,7,���
....ef·· · ·"ai• ·· . m
7
8
6
·�. ,
·�r•�
� ,,, , ,7,�·�.
,,.,,
,,,,
,, , , , , ;
·,, ,,,d' "" "�r'l;
W1i'
·-�:
K.::i�z
4
3
a
b
c
d
e
fl�
if
iOz
"
f
g
····
h
1 9.b3!?N ia3 ( 1 9 . . . lt'i b? 20.f3 lt'i d6 2 1 .'1Mfa6
'l&d7 22.E:acl also favours White) 20.E:ab l
'l&e7 2 1 .lt'ie2 'l&c7 (2 1 . . .E:c2 runs into 22.'l&a4!
threatening b3-b4, and if 22 . . . E:xa2 23.lt'ic3
E:b2 24.lt'ib5 White has a big advantage)
22.ie l ie7 23.E:dc l ;!; White is steadily
increasing the pressure.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
2 1 .a4! Proving the above point. 2 1 . . .b4
22.lt'ie2 id6 23.ifl When the light-squared
bishop starts to get active, it is generally an
encouraging sign for White. 23 . . . e5 As usual,
aiming for central counterplay is natural, but
there is an obvious risk that the light-squared
bishop will become even more powerful.
24.dxe5 lt'ixe5 25.'l&f5;!; Acevedo Villalba Muck, corr. 20 1 1 .
b) 1 7 . . . lt'ic6 1 8 .e3 lt'i a5 ( 1 8 . . . lt'ie8 is a worse
version for Black, as White can keep his
queen more active: 1 9.'l&a4! lt'id6 Now in
Vorobiov - Clery, Cappelle la Grande 20 1 3,
the simple 20.ie l !N 'l&d7 2 1 .ifl would
have left White with an ideal position) At
this point in Sasikiran - Alekseev, New Delhi
20 1 2, White unnecessarily retreated his queen
to e2. Instead I would prefer the more active
alternative:
17 ... tll d6 18.tll c3
Here is an important point regarding move
orders. 1 8 .b3 has been played j ust as frequently
as the text move, and sometimes transposes; it
was even the choice of Caruana in both of the
games mentioned below. However, I would
argue that it is less accurate, as it allows Black
the useful possibility of 1 8 . . . lt'ib8! 1 9. lt'i c3
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
220
lll c6 20.e3 '1Mfd7, when he has regrouped his
pieces harmoniously and has scored well
in practice. For instance, after 2 1 .lll e2 :B:c7
22.:B:acl :B:fc8 Black had good prospects on
the queenside and drew fairly effortlessly in
Perez Ponsa - Illescas Cordoba, Tromso (ol)
20 1 4 .
1 8 ... lll f6
l 8 . . . lll b8 has only been played in a single
game, Sandipan - Wojtaszek, Jurmala (rapid)
20 1 3 . The difference from the previous note
could have been emphasized by 1 9.e4!N,
and after 19 . . . dxe4 20.lll xe4 lll xe4 2 1 .ixe4
h6 22.d5 the opening of the position
makes White's bishop pair into a significant
advantage.
1 8 . . . lll c4 does not achieve much for Black.
1 9.ic l ib4 20.a3 ixc3 2 1 .'1Mfxc3 a5 occurred
in Ilincic - Acs, Hungary 2008, and now the
accurate 22.'IMfe l !N lll d6 23.a4 lll f6 24.b3
would have nullified Black's activity, leaving
White with great long-term prospects with
two bishops against two knights.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
26.a4 White slowly improves his position all
over the board. 26 . . . ia3 27.:B:c2 a5 28 .'1Mfa6
:B:b8 29.lll f4 id6 30.lll d3;!; Black was still
solid, but there is no doubt that White had
made progress and enjoyed the better chances
in Caruana - Yu Yangyi, Tromso 20 1 3 .
22.tlie2 i:Ud8 23.:B:acl a5 24Jhc8 :Bxc8
This position occurred in another game of
the Italian superstar, Caruana - Nisipeanu,
Bucharest 20 1 3, which took place a couple of
months after the aforementioned game against
Yu Yangyi. I believe White should have kept
one pair of rooks on the board, and continued
to improve his other pieces. This could have
been achieved by:
h
19.b3 'i«d7 20.f3 l£if5 2 1 .e3 h5
Surprisingly, this move has occurred in three
games. Another example continued: 2 l . . .:B:fd8
22.lll e2 '1Mf c7 23.:B:ac l '1Mfd7 24.:B:xc8 '1Mfxc8
25.:B:cl '1Mf d7
25.ielN :Bd8
Abandoning the open file is not ideal, but
Black must be mindful of e3-e4.
Chapter 1 4 - 5 . . . ie7 - Main Line
26.ifl �d6 27.h3
White can continue preparing e3-e4 or
g3-g4, with the aim of gradually opening lines
for his bishop pair.
s i. �
�
�
Er&.r�����
-- - - -
"
-----
V-
-0
:5 ��,TIT�'
% �% '"/�_ , , ;�
�
·-·� .
-0
�
��r
;
�
;13�
�
%
4 ��
•
t
lt!J%
�
�
�
�
%
�
, , , ��rJ-�- - j�r/,'l,
3 �
�
�
�
8 � if� 8 ftl�f[!j
21 ���
� ,. , , %=, , , ,
-----
a
b
c
d
e
f
�
g
h
This has still only been played in two games
as yet, but it is quite challenging. The following
analysis contains some instructive points which
may prove useful in other positions involving a
similar pawn structure.
12.�xd7 �xd7 1 3.c5 g5!?
With the queenside more or less closed,
it makes sense to gain some space on the
kingside, and especially to prevent e2-e4.
14.id2
1 4 .id6 looks tempting, but after 1 4 . . . ixd6
1 5 .cxd6 1Ml'b8 I was unable to find any
advantage for White.
14 ... f5 1 5.a4
It is essential to play this before Black has
time for . . . a5, which would prevent any future
opening of the queenside.
1 5 ... a6
s i. � E ��- ��
,, , , /,�'%" "
�� - ' v,�
� ��,
�
: '�,
-�
� •£
�
m�
& if�- % �
m� �
• w�
%
,
,
,
4 �8 �� ,,
� �,
�
�
3
%m,0
mef
""
�
0
�w�flif�
0� �
8 f��f[!j
s
C23) 1 1 ... b5
22 1
�- - -
21 ���--:----- -= --- a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
16.ic3!N
After 1 6.axb5 axb5 1 7.l'!xa8 1Mfxa8 1 8 .Wc l
h6 1 9.h4 1Ml'd8 Black is just in time to hold the
kingside together. 20.hxg5 hxg5 2 1 .lLic3 l'!f7
22.lLia2 if6 The position remains interesting,
but it seems to me that Black was in good
shape in Ovetchkin - Alekseev, Yekaterinburg
20 1 3 . The point of the text move is to maintain
the tension on the queenside and bring more
pieces into play before taking any direct action.
16 ... e5!?
This is the most principled reaction, though
other moves can of course be considered. Here
are a couple of examples:
After 1 6 . . . a5 1 7 .axb5 cxb5 we have the
important resource 1 8 .c6! ixc6 1 9.ixa5
1Ml'c8 20.l'!cl Wa6 2 1 .lLid2 l'!fc8 22.lLib3 1Ml'b7
23 .1Mfd2, when the opening of the queenside
clearly favours White.
16 . . . lLi f6 1 7.lLid2 1Ml'c7 1 8 .lLib3
Black's passive light-squared bishop could
become an important positional factor, but
things are still not simple due to the closed
nature of the position and the number of
other pieces that remain on the board.
1 8 . . . l'!ae8 1 9.ia5 1Ml'c8 20.l'!dc l !
The point o f this move is to prevent Black
from recapturing on b5 with the c-pawn,
222
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
as can happen after 20.axb5 cxb5! 2 1 .ie l
lll d7 22.lll a5 lll b8, followed by . . . lll c6,
when White will have a hard time breaking
through.
Now Black's queenside is under pressure,
and his counterplay on the other flank
might easily backfire, as the following line
illustrates.
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
••
h
20 . . . f4 2 1 .axb5 axb5 22.lll d2!
Heading for f3 .
22 . . . lt:Jg4 23.lll f3 fxg3 24.hxg3 lll xf2 25.'it>xf2
g4 26.E:h l E:f7 27.id2! gxf3 28.ixf3
Black is vulnerable on the kingside.
1
C24) 1 1 . :acs
g
h
17.dxe5 c!lixc5 18.axb5 axb5 19.ti:id2 g4
l 9 . . . lll e6 20.b4 leaves White in control.
20.id4 lll e6 21.:axas Wxa8 22.tlib3 :af7 23.e3
White has an obvious positional superiority.
12.ti:ic3 tli h5
This has been Black's most popular choice
by far. It is worth mentioning a couple of
alternatives:
1 2 . . . lll xe5 1 3 .dxe5 lll d7 1 4.cxd5 cxd5 1 5 .e4
transposes to a position covered earlier on
page 2 1 5 - see 1 4 . . . E:c8 1 5 .lll c3 in the notes to
variation C2 l .
1 2 . . . b5 1 3 .c5
Once again, the blocked structure yields a
slight plus for White.
1 3 . . . lll xe5
Black can try to activate his problematic
bishop by means of 1 3 . . . b4 1 4 .lll a4 lll xe5
1 5 .ixe5 ia6, but the b-pawn makes an
inviting target after 1 6.b3! ib5 l 7.a3, when
White's queenside play gets underway.
1 4.ixe5 lll g4 1 5 .if4 f5
Black must prevent e2-e4, and he should
certainly avoid 1 5 . . . e5? 1 6.dxe5 ixc5
1 7.lll e 4! ie7 1 8 .h3 when White has an
overwhelming advantage, Aronian - Ghaem
Maghami, Mainz 20 1 0.
223
Chapter 1 4 - 5 . . . ie7 - Main Line
1 5 . . . tll f6 is definitely a concession and
White is comfortably better after: 1 6.eS
(Maintaining the tension with 1 6.b3!?N
also looks promising) 1 6 . . . tll e8 1 7.Wa4!
tll c7 This position occurred in Shchekachev
- Bunzmann, France 2002. The present
moment would have been an appropriate
time for the central exchange: 1 8 .cxdSN
exd5 1 9.ie3! ( 1 9.Wxa7 ia6 20.Wxb6
E!:b8 2 1 .1.MfaS E!:a8 is rather unclear) 1 9 . . . aS
20.E!:ac l White has a solid positional edge.
1 6.b4 a6
16 . . . aS is met strongly by 1 7.a4!, when the
queenside opens up in White's favour.
1 7.a4 E!:a8 1 8.E!:a3 1.Mfd7 1 9.tll a2!
The knight is heading for d3 and e5.
19 ... gS 20.ic l li<h8 2 1 .ib2 f4 22.h3 tll f6
23.g4
The position remained tense but preferable
for White in Avrukh - Sargissian, Gibraltar
200 5 . Black's light-squared bishop may prove
to be a serious problem in the long run.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.eS!N
White failed to impress after 1 6.We2 tll f6
1 7.1.Mfxc4 c5! 1 8 .dxc5 1.Mfc7 in Ernst - Stohl,
Germany 2007.
1 6 . . . g6
White's position is rich with potential. I like
the following line:
1 7.ih6 tll g7 1 8 .1.Mf e2 E!:fd8 1 9.g4 tll e8 20.Wxc4
tll c7 2 1 .Ei:ac l tll d5 22.tll e4
13.icl
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
From this position C241) 13 ... fS is a
significant option, but the most popular choice
has been C242) 13 ... c!Lihf6.
Another line worth mentioning is:
13 ... Wc7 1 4.tlixd7 1.Mfxd7 1 5 .e4 dxc4
224
Catalan 4 . . . ib4t
Material is equal and White remains more
active.
C241) 13 ... £5
1 8 .lll xa4N dxc4 1 9.lll e c5 ia8 20.id2 would
have given White a clear positional plus, as
he has full material parity for the queen while
Black is pretty much playing without his light­
squared bishop.
1 5.dxeS a6
Black has also tried: 1 5 . . . Wc7 1 6.if3 g6
1 7.ih6 :B:f7 ( 1 7 . . . lll g7 does not change much,
for instance: 1 8 .:B:ac l Wb8 1 9.e3 :B:f7 20.h4 a6
2 1 .'!Wb3 b5 22.cxd5 cxd5 23.if4;!;) 1 8.:B:acl
Wxe5 1 9.cxd5 cxd5
14 ... lll xeS
1 4 . . . a6 is risky: 1 5 .lll xd7 b5 (Obviously
Black cannot be satisfied with 1 5 . . . Wxd7?
1 6.cxd5 exd5 1 7.lll xd5 when he was j ust a
pawn down in Slavin - Almond, Newport
Pagnell 20 1 0) 1 6.lt:lxf8! The key point.
16 . . . bxa4 1 7.lll xe6 We8
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
20.lll xd5! ic5 (The knight is untouchable:
20 . . . exd5? 2 1 .:B:xcSt ixc8 22.WeSt+-} 2 1 .b4!
White was better in Hammer - Clery, Cappelle
la Grande 20 1 0 .
16.¥Nb3 b 5 17.e4!
I found this strong idea in 2004. It is a clear
improvement over 1 7.cxd5 cxd5 1 8 .ie3 f4!
when Black had real counterplay in Van Wely
- Spassky, France 2002.
17 ... fxe4
1 7 . . . dxc4? is impossible in view of 1 8.:B:xd8
cxb3 1 9.:B:d7! and Black loses one of his
bishops.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
All this happened in Wojtaszek - Korobov,
Warsaw 20 1 3 . At this point the simple
18.ih3! @h8
1 8 . . . Wd7? is refuted by 1 9.cxd5 cxd5
20.lll xd5 ixd5 2 1 .:B:xd5 ! and White crashes
through.
Chapter 1 4 - 5 . . . ie7 - Main Line
19 ..L:e6 d4
Another important point is that 1 9 . . . ic5
does not work in view of 20.lll xe4 dxe4
2 1 .Ei:xd8 ixfL.t 22.c;t>g2 E!:cxd8 23.ie3 and
White wins.
This position occurred in Skoberne Predojevic, Plovdiv 2008. Here White should
have played:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
b
a
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
20 ..ixcS!N
The weakness of the light squares will not
be a serious problem, as Black is unable to get
his pieces into the necessary positions to take
advantage.
20 ....L:cs
After 20 . . . Wfxc8 2 1 .Ei:xd4 ic5 White simply
returns the exchange with 22.ie3 ixd4
23.ixd4 c5 24.ie3, keeping an extra pawn
and a clear advantage.
2 1 .tlixe4 i.g4 22.cxb5 axb5 23.Ei:el
Black does not enough compensation, and
White should win with careful play.
C242) 13 ... tlihf6
Chasing the bishop away and returning with
the knight to f6 is a thematic occurrence in
the Catalan.
225
d
c
f
e
g
h
14.e4 dxc4
Black does not have much to offer aside
from this move. It is worth mentioning the
tricky 1 4 . . . c5 ! ? 1 5 .exd5 cxd4 1 6.lll xd7 Wfxd7
1 7.E!:xd4 exd5 1 8.cxd5 ic5 1 9.E!:h4 h6 20.ih3
Wfe7, when Black exploited some subsequent
inaccuracies and scored a quick win in
Lingnau - Farago Hungary 1 993. However,
at this point White could have established his
superiority with:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
2 I .ixh6!N (Accepting the exchange sacrifice is
inadvisable: 2 1 .ixc8 ? We i t 22.c;t>g2 E!:xc8 and
White's pieces are completely uncoordinated)
2 1 . . . gxh6 22.Wfd2 lll h7 The only move.
23.Ei:e l Wff6 24.lll e4 Wi'g7 25.ixc8 E!:xc8 26.d6
After this virtually forced sequence, White
stands clearly better.
1 5.tlixc4 b5 16.tlie3 Y«b6
Catalan 4 . . . J.b4t
226
The only decent alternative is 16 . . . l'!e8 1 7. b3
J.f8 1 8.ib2, when Black hardly has anything
better than 1 8 . . . Wfb6, transposing to the main
line.
the following example provides a convincing
demonstration: 22 . . .ixe3 23.l'!xe3 l'!xe3
24.fxe3 c4 25.Wf d2 f6 26.id4 Wf d6 27.bxc4
l'!xc4 28.ixa7! lll c5 29.l'!dl Black was unable
to demonstrate compensation for the pawn
in Terreaux - Barbalic, email 20 1 1 .) This
position occurred in Dziuba - Tiviakov 20 1 0 .
I n order to fight fo r the advantage, White has
to play:
17.b3 E:fe8
White is ready to meet 17 . . . c5N with 1 8.d5.
The main alternative is: 1 7 ... l'!fd8 1 8.ib2 a6
( 1 8 . . . tll f8 looks too passive. 1 9.a4 a6 20.Wfe2
This is a good square for the queen. 20 . . . tll g6
2 1 .h4 White was clearly better in Vaganian Gyimesi, Antwerp 2008.) 1 9.Wfe2 (It is also
worth considering 1 9.tll e2!?, heading for f4)
The only game from this position continued
1 9 . . . l'!e8, and after 20.l'!acl if8 2 1 .e5! tll d5
22.tll e4 White had a clear positional plus in
Laznicka F. Berkes, Paks 20 1 0.
22.ixf6!N lll xf6 (White's task is easier after
22 . . . Wfxf6 23.a4 a6 24.ih3! l'!ed8 25.axb5
axb5 26.Wf e2±) 23.a4 a6 24.l'!acl White
retains a lot of pressure.
-
18.J.b2 J.f8
This is a logical follow-up to Black's previous
move. He has also tried striking in the centre:
1 8 . . . e5?! proved to be an unfortunate choice
after 1 9.dxe5 lll xe5 20.tll a4! bxa4 (20 . . . Wfc7
2 1 .tll c5 is also not much fun for Black)
2 1 .ixe5 Wfc5 22.ic3 and White was clearly
better in Maletin - Pogorelov, Mumbai 20 1 0 .
1 8 . . . c 5 1 9.d5 exd5 20.lll cxd5 lll x d5 2 1 .exd5
if6 (2 1 . . .ig5 is well met by 22.l'!e 1 ! when
19.e5
I think this is the right moment ro advance
the e-pawn.
19 ... tti ds 20.Wf d3
Chapter 1 4 - 5 . . . !e7 - Main Line
After 20.lll cxd5 cxd5 2 1 .�d2 b4 22.f4
f5! White did not have much in Rozum Lafuente, St Petersburg 20 1 0 .
20 ... tDxe3
I also considered 20 . . . a6 2 1 .:!"!:ac l :!"!:ed8
22.lll e4 h6 23.�e2 when White retains an
edge. An important point is that 23 . . . c5 can
be met by 24.dxc5 lll xc5 25 .i.d4! with an
advantage.
21 .V!Yxe3 ged8
227
Conclusion
The set-up with . . . c6 and . . . lll bd7 presents
a serious challenge, especially as the bishop
on d2 prevents the otherwise desirable plan
of lll bd2 followed by e2-e4. After 9.i.f4 we
reach our tabiya. The relative sidelines of
9 . . . lll h5 and 9 . . . a5 1 0.:!"!:d l lll h5 should not
be underestimated; the latter in particular has
become quite popular, but I found some ways
to put the black queenside under pressure by
taking advantage of the weaknesses created by
the . . . a5 advance.
The main line is 9 . . . b6 1 0.:!"!:d l , when Black
must decide where to develop his light-squared
bishop. 1 0 . . . i.a6 l 1 .lll e5 is an important
variation where Black has several options.
The analysis of l 1 . . .lll x e5 runs quite deep,
but in general White should be quite happy
to play a position with an extra pawn, even
if it is doubled on the e-file. The main line
is l l . . .:!"!:c8 1 2.cxd5! cxd5 1 3 .lll c 6, when
White's strategy is simple: get coordinated and
eventually exploit the bishop pair. It is worth
remembering the idea of retreating the dark­
squared bishop all the way to c l , in order to
reroute it to the optimal a3-square.
23.d5
White was undoubtedly better in Muck Rattinger, email 2007.
The final part of the chapter covered 1 0 . . . i.b7,
when once again l 1 .lll e5! seems like the best
way forward. The game is rich in possibilities,
and White should be ready for various position
types. After l 1 . . .lll xe5 1 2.dxe5 , followed by
cxd5 and e2-e4, he will have a space advantage
and initiative in the centre. l 1 . . .lll h 5 1 2.i.d2
lll hf6 leads to a different situation where
1 3 .cxd5 followed by lll c6 forces the exchange
of Black's light-squared bishop. Next we
looked at l l . ..b5, when 1 2.c5 leads to another
version of the blocked centre and queenside.
And finally, the most popular l l . . . :!"!:c8 1 2.lll c3
lll h 5 1 3 .!c l reaches another thematic Catalan
position where it seems to me that White keeps
the better chances.
Catalan 4 ie7
...
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Closed System
Variation Index
1 .d4 � f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.� f3 fie7 5.Jig2 0-0
6.0-0
A) 6 ... c6
B) 6 ... � bd7 7.fic2
Bl) 7 ... b6 8.cxd5
B l l) 8 ... �xd5
B 1 2) 8 ... exd5
B2) 7 ... c6 8.� bd2 b6 9.e4
B2 1) 9 ... dxe4
B22) 9 ... Jib7 1 0.e5 � e8 1 1 .cxd5
B22 1) 1 1 ... exd5
B222) 1 1 ... cxd5 12J;e1
B222 1) 12 ...Jia6
B2222) 12 ...f!c7
B2223) 1 2 ... gcs
B23) 9 ... lia6 1 0.b3 gc8 1 1 .Jib2 c5 12.exd5 exd5 1 3.gfd l !
B23 1) 13 ... ges
B232) 13 ... cxd4
A) note to 14 . . . l"lc8
a
b
c
d
e
f
l 7.tll g5!N
g
B2222) after l 4 . . . tll b8
B l 2) after 14 . . . bxc5
a
h
1 5 .tll g5!N
229
232
232
233
234
235
236
237
237
239
240
241
243
245
248
249
b
c
d
e
f
1 5 .tll b l !N
g
h
h
229
Chapter 1 5 - Closed System
1 .d4 Eilf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Eilf3 J.e7 5.J.g2
0-0 6.0-0
a
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
From this posmon Black's most popular
continuation has been 6 . . . dxc4, which will
be discussed in the next chapter. The present
chapter will focus on the Closed Catalan
positions that may arise after A) 6 ... c6 or
B) 6 ... Eil bd7.
A) 6 ... c6
This usually leads to the main lines after
a subsequent . . . lll b d7, but there are some
independent possibilities. Recently Black came
up with an interesting idea of developing the
knight to a6.
7.ffc2 b6 s.lll bd2 J.h7
8 . . . .ia6
This prevents e2-e4 for the moment, as the
c4-pawn would be hanging after a double
capture on e4, but White has another strong
move at his disposal.
9.lll e5
A typical move in the Closed Catalan.
9 . . . lll fd7
Nobody has tried 9 . . . dxc4?! yet, and
rightly so, as after 1 0 .lll dxc4 the d4-pawn
is untouchable: 1 0 . . . '\Wxd4? 1 1 .l'!d l '\Wc5
1 2 . .ie3 '\Wb5 1 3.a4 '\Wb4 1 4 . .id2 '\Wc5 1 5 .b4
'\Wd4 16 ..ie3+- Black's queen is trapped.
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0 .lll d3!
White has a space advantage, so it makes
sense to avoid the knight swap.
1 0 . . . lll f6
1 0 . . . .if6 l 1 .e3 .ib7 1 2.b4 gave White a
pleasant edge in Ovetchkin - Mokshanov,
Tyumen 20 1 2.
1 1 .l'!d l !
Only this accurate move - which I
recommended in GM I and has since been
tested in one game - promises White an
advantage.
1 1 .e3 soon led to a clear advantage for
White in Gheorghiu - Radulov, Budapest
1 970, but only because Black failed to play
l l . . .c5!N, which would have given him a
reasonable position.
l 1 . . .lll bd7
l l . . .dxc4
1 2.lll xc4 '\Wxd4?
1 3 .lll de5
transposes to 9 . . . dxc4?! 1 0 .lll dxc4 '\Wxd4?
1 1 .l'!dl as mentioned above.
1 2.e4 l'!c8
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Catalan 4 . . . ie7
230
This position occurred in Brunello - Tristan,
Porto Madryn 2009. Instead of pushing the
pawn to e5, I would prefer to maintain the
tension for a moment longer with:
1 3.b3!N
Black's position is not easy, as the obvious
freeing move runs into a problem:
1 3 . . . c5 1 4.exd5 exd5 1 5 .dxc5 lll xc5 1 6.lll xc5
ixc5 l 7.lll e 4!
Black will soon lose the d-pawn.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
9.e4 tll a6!?
This move has been known since the late
1 980s, and it has become fairly popular
recently, mostly thanks to the efforts of GM
Kovalyov, as well as the young Indian talent
Vidit.
This is the main move, but Black has also
tried:
1 0 . . . :B:c8 l l .e5 lll d7 1 2.cxd5
1 2.b4 c5 1 3.dxc5 bxc5 1 4.b5 lll c7 1 5 .a4 is
interesting but rather double-edged.
1 2 . . . cxd5 1 3 .Wi'd l
This looks like the most convenient square
for the queen.
1 3 . . . lll ab8 1 4.:B:e l Wi'c7 1 5 .lll b l !
This is White's key idea, anticipating . . .Wfc2
and preparing to post the knight on c3,
where it seriously hampers Black's play on
the queenside, leaving White with excellent
prospects on the kingside.
1 5 . . .ia6
1 5 . . . Wfc2N 1 6.Wi'xc2 :B:xc2 17.tlic3 f6 Black
does not have much choice, as White was
threatening to trap the rook with either
ifl -d3 or :B:dl followed by lll e l . However,
White has another unpleasant idea: 1 8 .exf6
:B:xf6 1 9.if4! :B:xb2 ( 1 9 . . . lll c6 20.:B:eb l !
leaves Black helpless against the plan of ie3
and tli e l .) 20.tlig5! lll f8 2 1 .tli d l ! White
wins material.
1 6.tlic3 Wi'b7
Now in Plischki - Stross, Prague 20 14, the
right way to seize the initiative was:
9 . . . dxe4 1 0 .lll xe4 lll bd7 and 9 . . . tli bd7
transpose to the later variations B2 l and B22
respectively.
1 0.a3
This modest move is White's best chance for
an advantage.
Black's main idea is revealed after 1 0 .e5 tlid7
l l .cxd5 lll b4!, when a subsequent . . . lll x d5 and
. . . c5 will give Black an easy game.
10 . c5
..
a
b
e
f
g
h
l 7.lll g5!N :B:fe8
1 7 . . . h6 1 8 .lll xe6! fxe6 1 9.Wi'g4
extremely dangerous .
1 8 .Wi'h5 ixg5 1 9.ixg5 lll c6 20.Wi'g4
White has good attacking chances.
looks
23 1
Chapter 1 5 - Closed System
a
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
1 1 .exd5 exd5 12.dxc5 lll xc5 1 3.b4 tll e6
This move has been played in all the games
where this position arose. I also considered
the natural-looking alternative: 1 3 . . . ttJ ce4N
1 4.ib2 �c8 ( 1 4 . . . ttJxd2 is more solid, but
after 1 5 .ttJxd2 Wfc7 1 6.�fe l dxc4 1 7.ixb7
Wfxb7 1 8 .ttJxc4t the difference between the
dark-squared bishops is significant, despite the
symmetrical pawn structure.) 1 5 .�ad l Wfc7
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.ttJd4! ttJ xd2 1 7.Wfxd2 dxc4 (After 1 7 . . . Wfxc4
1 8.�cl Wia6 1 9.ttJf5 White's attack is decisive.)
1 8.ttJf5! Surprisingly enough, White's attack is
crushing, for example: 1 8 . . . h6 1 9.�fe l mes
20.�xe7 �xe7 2 1 .ixf6+-
14..ib2 gcs
1 4 . . . Wfc8 1 5 .�acl �d8 1 6.�fe l a5 occurred
in Wojtkiewicz - Velz, Neuchatel 1 996. Here I
found a nice improvement:
d
e
f
g
h
1 7.ttJg5 !N d4 (Worse is 1 7 . . . ttJxg5 ?! 1 8 .�xe7
�d7 1 9.ixf6 gxf6 20.�xd7 Wfxd7 2 1 .h4!
ttJ h3t 22.iifl and Black will lose his knight.)
1 8.ixb7 Wfxb7 1 9.ttJxe6 fXe6 20.Wfb3± Black
will have a hard time defending the d4-pawn.
8
7
6
5
4
3
a
a
c
b
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
15.tll e5 V!fc7 16.gacl gfd8
I also checked 1 6 . . . dxc4N 1 7.Wfxc4 Wid8
( 1 7 . . . Wib8 runs into the unpleasant 1 8 .ic6!)
and now the queen sacrifice 1 8.ixb7! ? �xc4
1 9. ttJ dxc4 is surprisingly promising for White,
whose main idea is to install a knight on c6.
1 6 . . . d4N may be Black's best try, although
l 7.ixb7 Wfxb7 1 8.�cd l maintains an edge for
White.
17.V!ff5! g6 18.V!!ON
1 8.Wih3 d4 occurred in Hergott - Hoffman,
Matanzas 1 993, and now White should have
Catalan 4 . . . ie7
232
played: 1 9.ixb7N Wxb7 20.�fe l Threatening
lll x f7. 20 . . . �d6 2 1 .f4 With a nice initiative.
The text move seems like a simpler way to
maintain the pressure. A possible continuation
is:
of course, the most popular continuation by
far. The following alternatives can be dealt
with quickly:
7 . . . c5 8.cxd5 tZ:i xd5 (8 . . . exd5 9.lll c3± will
either result in a Tarrasch Defence where
Black's knight is misplaced on d7, or a
transposition to variation B l 2 below after
9 . . . b6 etc.) 9.tLlc3 White stands better and
has achieved a huge score from this position.
One example continued 9 ... lll b4 1 0 .Wb3 cxd4
l l .tZ:ixd4 Wb6? 1 2.ie3 tZ:i c5 1 3 .Wc4!+- and
Black was already losing material in Espig Moehring, Potsdam 1 974.
7 . . . tZ:i e4 does not make much sense, as after
8 .lll c3 Black does not have time to set up a
Stonewall formation. 8 . . . tL:i df6 (After 8 . . . tZ:i xc3
9.Wxc3 if6 1 0.�d l c6 l l .if4 White obtained
a pleasant edge thanks to his space advantage
in Miroshnichenko - Boons, Leuven 2006.)
9.tLle5 tZ:ixc3
B) 6 . . c!ll bd7 7.V!fc2
.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0.bxc3! This structural change is highly
beneficial for White. 1 0 . . . c5 1 1 .�d l dxc4
1 2.tZ:ixc4 cxd4 1 3.cxd4 White had a stable
positional advantage in Hillarp Persson Archer, Guernsey 20 1 2.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
At this point we should consider the Queen's­
Indian-like Bl) 7... b6, although B2) 7 ... c6 is,
Bl) 7... b6 8.cxd5
I think is this is more precise than 8 . tZ:i c3 ib7
9.cxd5 tZ:ixd5! 1 0.lt:\xd5 exd5 l l .if4 c5, when
233
Chapter 1 5 - Closed System
the knight exchange had improved Black's
chances in Plenkovic - Rogic, Zupanja 2008.
We will check both recaptures: Bl l) 8 ... tlixd5
and B12) 8 ... exd5.
B l 1) 8 .. tlixd5 9.a3
.
White should cover the b4-square, as 9.e4
tt:l b4 1 0 .Wfb3 c5 leads to double-edged play.
1 3 . . . :B:c8 1 4.Wf e2 ic5 occurred in Quinteros
- Medina Garcia, Olot 1 97 1 , when for some
reason White refrained from the strong and
obvious 1 5 .e5±.
13 ... Wfc? 1 4 .Wfe2! once again sets up the
unpleasant threat of e4-e5. Black tried
1 4 . . . tll c5 in Barcza - Liebert, Debrecen 1 969,
and here 1 5 .tll cb5!N Wfb8 16 . .if4 e5 1 7.tll f5
id8 1 8 .ig5± would have emphasized White's
advantage.
14.�e2!
Another novelty from GM I which has since
been tested in practice.
14 ...i.a6
Other moves are possible, but it is not
hard for White to maintain some advantage.
After the text move I would like to show a
simple improvement over Trella - Konijn,
Netherlands 20 1 4 .
12J�dl
1 2.d5 exd5 1 3.exd5 looks tempting, but the
critical 1 3 . . . tt:lxd5!N has not yet been played.
After 1 4.tt:lxd5 .ixd5 1 5 .:B:dl .ie6 1 6 . .if4
.if6 the position seems pretty double-edged.
White can try 1 7.tt:ld2 ( 1 7.:B:d2 also deserves
consideration) , but after l 7 . . . .id4! it is Black
who will get reasonable compensation for the
exchange.
12 ... cxd4 1 3.tlixd4
Black faces some problems with the
coordination of his pieces.
13 ... �cS
This has been the usual choice.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5.tlicbSN i.c5 16.a4 tli e5 17.tlib3
White is clearly better; he controls more
space and Black's pieces are highly unstable.
Catalan 4 . . . ie7
234
B12) 8 ... exd5
the recent game Goganov - T.L. Petrosian,
Yerevan 20 1 4 .
12 ... ges
12 . . . g6?! looks too weakening after 1 3 .°Wh3 .
1 3.gacl tll f8 14.dxc5!
Good timing.
14 ... bxc5
Both 1 4 . . . ixc5 1 5 .ig5 and 1 4 . . . :B:xc5
1 5 .ll\ d4 give White a favourable version of the
IQP structure.
Here I found a significant improvement
over Goksel - Yildiz, Antalya 2004.
9.tll c3
9.'Wc6 :B:b8 1 0.if4 seems tempting, but
after 10 . . . ib7 1 1 .'Wxc7 'Wxc7 1 2.ixc7 :B:bc8
1 3 .if4 :B:c2 Black had reasonable counterplay
in Zelcic - Dusi, Madonna di Campiglio
1 99 1 .
9 ...ib7 10.if4
We now have a typical Queen's Indian
position, with a pawn structure that slightly
favours White - especially as Black has lost the
option of developing his knight via a6. I don't
see much point in analysing this position in
detail, as it is only a rare occurrence via the
Catalan move order, so I will just focus on a
few key lines.
10 ... c5
1 0 . . . c6 is rather passive, and after 1 1 .:B:fd l
:B:e8 1 2.lLle5 ll\ f8 1 3 .e4 ll\ e6 1 4 .ie3± White
had a pleasant edge in Kunte - Lalith, Mumbai
2008, and a few other games.
1 1 .gfdl gcs 12.YMf5!?
This is actually quite a common motif in this
type of structure.
1 2.dxc5 lLl xc5 1 3 .ih3 ll\ e6 1 4 .ie5 lLld7
1 5 .id4 :B:c4 was decent enough for Black in
%
.1 •
•
� .1 �
.
.. ,/,.
,_.
8 ��r
�� nn" .
" "� �
yj'
7
"�
,,
6
� �
T�w�
:�
�� ./,'�
wi;+ ��
�
��·
�%'
�
� "/ �
3
�
m
. . ;m
8d��
%= . .
,.....
..... %��
21 �8n
a
� �U�:JW�
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
15.tll g5!N
I also considered 1 5 .lLle5!?N, but found
it less convincing after 1 5 . . . g6! ( 1 5 . . . id6?!
1 6.ll\g4! removes a key defender and wins
the d5-pawn) 1 6.'Wd3 id6 1 7.ll\xd5 ixd5
1 8 .ixd5 ixe5 when White does not seem to
have a route to an advantage.
1 5 ... g6 16.YMc2
White maintains pressure against the
d5-pawn. A logical continuation is:
16 ... tll e6 17.tlixd5! tll xd5 18.tll xe6 fxe6
19.e4;!;
Black remains under pressure.
Chapter 1 5 - Closed System
B2) 7 ... c6
a
b
clearly better in Khismatullin - Stanojoski,
Plovdiv 2008.
a
c
d
e
23 5
f
g
h
We have already covered the similar position
where the white bishop has been lured to d2.
Here White can prepare e2-e4 much more
conveniently.
s.til bd2 b6
This is the main line by far. Many moves
have been tried, but in most cases White will
simply play e2-e4 and get an advantage in a
similar fashion to the lines examined below.
Therefore I will only mention one alternative,
which leads to a different type of game.
8 . . . b5?!
This is premature in view of White's strong
reply.
9.c5!
Black should only allow this type of position
if he able to prevent e2-e4, which is obviously
not the case here.
9 . . . Vflc7
9 . . . a5 1 0 .e4 dxe4 1 1 .lll xe4 tt'lxe4 1 2.'\Wxe4
leads to a thematic situation where Black's
light-squared bishop is too passive and
White has good chances to seize the
initiative on the kingside. One model game
continued 1 2 . . . lli f6 1 3.Vflc2 ( 1 3.Vflxc6?! id?
1 4.Vflb6 Vflxb6 1 5 .cxb6 !!ab8 gives Black a
reasonable endgame) 1 3 . . . llid5 1 4.!!e l if6
1 5 .h4 a4 1 6.a3 Vflc7 1 7.ig5 and White was
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0.e4 e5
This avoids the fate of the previous note,
but Black is not ready to create this level of
tension in the centre.
1 1 .exd5 lll xd5
1 1 . . .cxd5 1 2.dxe5 llixe5 1 3 .lli b3 tt'lxf3t
1 4.ixf3 tt'l e4 occurred in Ibragimov Marcelin, Linares 200 1 , and now 1 5 .!!d l N
ib7 1 6.if4± would have given White a
clear positional advantage.
1 2.!!e l ! exd4 1 3 .lll xd4 ixc5
No better is 1 3 . . . lll xc5 1 4.lli2b3 llixb3
1 5 .axb3 lll b4 1 6. Vf1 c3 and White will recover
the pawn with interest.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.lll 2b3 V!lb6 1 5 .llixc5 lll xc5 16.tt'lxc6
This small combination works fine, although
1 6.id2!?N followed by !!ac l might be even
stronger.
...
Catalan 4 .ie7
236
1 6 . . . '1Wxc6 1 7 . .ie3 .ie6 1 8 .'1Wxc5 '1Wxc5 1 9 . .ixc5
With two bishops in an open position, White
had strong positional pressure in Petursson Sorensen, Copenhagen 1 98 1 .
illustration is: 1 2 . . . lll f6 1 3.'1Wc2 ( 1 3 .'1We2 is
also promising) 1 3 . . . '1Wc7 1 4 . .if4 .id6
9.e4
This move brings us to the main branching
point of the chapter. B2 1) 9 ... dxe4 has been
played in a lot of games, but I consider it a
clear concession from Black. Our main focus
will be on the more challenging options of
B22) 9 . ..J.b7 and B23) 9 . . .J.a6.
B2 1) 9 ... dxe4 I O.tl)xe4
s i. �
� .i.E �� ·
� -'i--iv.m '
6 ,,,,, 7,- ·� -.�. ---- %�
7
5 � "� �� ,, �
� ,��� ���, ·� �0�
�
�� ��
J��r�
r�V•
r
�ilr�
2 ,,,t3J" "ef�P
�
1 � ,_ , , 7,�
- ll%-,,,,
�
�7� .---4
3
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 . .ixd6 '1Wxd6 1 6.c5! '1Wc7 1 7.lll e 5± White
has succeeded in shutting Black's light-squared
bishop out of the game, and he has the strong
positional plan of lll e 5-c4-d6. The database
contains a long list of games from this position,
consisting of many white wins and a few draws
here and there.
1 3 ..if4 c5
Sometimes Black starts with 1 3 . . . Eie8, but
after 1 4.'1Wc2 c5 1 5 .d5 it transposes.
h
Black's main problem is that he usually fails
to free his position with . , ,c5 in a favourable
situation, and thus may end up in a passive
position with an inferior light-squared bishop.
10 ... tl)xe4
1 0 . . . .ib7 1 1 .Eidl is likely to transpose to one
of the lines below after a subsequent knight
exchange.
1 1 .Y;Yxe4 .ib7 12.:Sdl Y;Ycs
This is the only critical line, as Black it trying
his hardest to prepare . . . c5 .
If Black plays passively then he may soon
find himself in a positional bind. A good
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14.d5 :Se8
14 . . . .if6 1 5 .'1Wc2 exd5 1 6.cxd5 leaves Black
with nothing better than 1 6 . . . Eie8, transposing
to the main line.
Chapter 1 5
-
15.Y«c2 exd5 16.cxd5 .if6
We have reached a critical moment. After
investigating this position for the second time,
I concluded that a slight change of direction
was needed.
237
Closed System
B22) 9 ....ib7
17.a4!
In GM I I gave this as an interesting
alternative, but now I believe it should take
centre stage.
l
My previous recommendation of 1 7.tll g5
does not look so convincing now in view
of: 7 . . . ixg5 ( 1 7 . . . tll f8?! runs into 1 8.tll e4!
followed by tll d6) 1 8 .ixg5 tll e5! (I overlooked
this in GM I and only mentioned a game with
1 8 . . . tli f8) 1 9.h3 'Wd7 Black was fine in Maurer
- Dreis, corr. 200 1 .
1 7... lli f8 1 8.a5 l£ig6
s ,i � if � .i �*
7 %1.i- �- ·-�·
, , , ,- �- �-6
5
4
8�
(�,7,�Y,, ?,�, , %�-?,�
�
%�
, , ��, , - �� �w r'
3
J�w·¥��
� ��- ��
w�V
¥��
21 �w·
..... %� ,.....%m ....
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
19 ..ie3!N
Improving over 1 9.ig5 as played in Yevseev
- Lovkov, St Petersburg 2006, after which
1 9 . . . °Wd8!N would have been unclear.
The text move sees White refrain from
the bishop trade, leaving Black in a passive
position without much counterplay.
19 ...Y«d7 20.llid2
White is significantly better.
1 0.e5
I believe White has to play this in order to
fight for the advantage.
1 0 .b3 Ei:c8 1 1 .ib2 c5 1 2.exd5 exd5 can be
compared with the later variation B23, but
the position of the bishop on b7 instead of a6
clearly helps Black.
10 ... llieS 1 1 .cxd5
Now B22 1) 1 1 . .. exd5 should be considered,
but the main line is B222) 1 1 ... cxd5.
B22 1) 1 1 . .. exd5
238
Catalan 4 . . . ie7
The arising pawn structure gives Black the
clear plan of transferring his knight to e6,
followed by attacking the centre with . . . c5.
Nevertheless, White should be able to obtain
the better chances by regrouping his pieces
behind the strong d4-e5 pawn wedge.
12.�el lll c7 13.lll fl
The knight is heading for e3 and hopefully
f5 later.
1 3 ... lll e6
1 3 . . . c5 1 4 .lll e3 should lead to the same
thing, as the knight will surely go to e6 in the
near future.
14.lll e3 c5
1 4 . . . :Be8 gives White time to improve his
bishop with 1 5 .id2 c5 1 6.ic3. An important
game continued: 1 6 . . . cxd4 1 7.lll xd4 lll xd4
1 8 .ixd4 ib4 1 9.:Bed l lll xe5
a
d
e
f
g
h
l 5 . . . :Bc8
The more active 1 5 . . . c5 was met by 1 6.ib2
:Bc8 1 7. V!i e2 and White got a nice edge,
which significantly increased after 1 7 . . . cxd4
1 8 .lll xd4 lll dc5 1 9.:Bad l ia6 20.V!ig4 in
Meier - Schloetzer, Dresden 20 1 0 .
1 6.ib2 :Be8 1 7.Vfid2 a 5 1 8.:Bed l
I prefer this modest move to 1 8 .a3, which
was played in Khetsuriani - Pelletier, Athens
200 5 . A possible continuation is:
1 8 .. .f5 1 9.exf6 lll xf6 20.lll e5 id6 2 1 .:Bac l ;l;
White maintains a pleasant edge.
a
1 4 . . . g6
This prevents White's knight from coming
to f5 , but weakens the dark squares around
Black's king.
1 5 .b3
1 5 .lll g4 is premature due to 1 5 ... h5, as in
Schreiner - Lautner, Aschach 20 1 1 .
c
b
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
15.lll fS �es
This seems like Black's best idea.
1 5 . . . cxd4?! removes the tension prematurely,
and after 1 6.lll 3xd4 lll xd4 1 7.lll xd4 lll c5
l 8 .ie3 White has excellent prospects. 1 8 . . . :Bc8
19 .ih3 :Be? occurred in Diermair - Kubinger,
Chapter 1 5 - Closed System
Aschach 20 1 0, and now the simple 20.:B:ac l N
a 5 2 1 .Wd l would have stabilized White's
positional advantage.
1 5 . . . :B:c8 1 6.Wd l :B:e8 has been played in
a couple of games, and both times White
exchanged on e7. Instead I would prefer
17 . .ie3N .if8 1 8 . .ih3!, when White keeps the
better chances in a complex position.
The present position first occurred in Montalvo
- De Toledo, Mermaid Beach 1 997, and has
been repeated in a few subsequent games.
I propose a simple improvement:
239
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
20 ... £6 21 .h4 �xd6 22.h5 gac8 23.�d2
White has promising play for the pawn.
B222) 1 1 . .. cxd5 12.gel
16 ....ifS
After 1 6 . . . cxd4 1 7.ttJxe7t Wxe7 1 8 . .ib2
:B:ac8 1 9.Wd2 White will regain his pawn and
exert lasting pressure against the isolani.
17 ..ib2 g6 1 8.�d6!
An interesting pawn sacrifice.
18 ... .ixd6 1 9.exd6 �b8 20.�c3
20.:B:ad l Wxd6 2 1 .Wd2 also looks pretty
good.
White's last move is almost an automatic
choice when this 'French' pawn centre occurs.
Depending on circumstances, White may
activate his light-squared bishop with .ifl -d3,
or improve his misplaced knight with ttJ d2-fl ­
e3-g4, perhaps developing the dark-squared
bishop to f4 or g5 along the way. White's
general aim is to active his pieces in a way that
will enable him to generate kingside attacking
chances, while at the same time keeping
Black's queenside activity in check, as well as
preventing a queen exchange, which would
significantly ease Black's defensive task.
240
Catalan 4 . . . ie7
I have identified three main continuations
in B222 1) 12 ... !a6, B2222) 12 ...�c7 and
B2223) 12 ... gcs, although I should make it
clear that the last option has been the most
popular by far.
1 2 . . . lll c? 1 3 .lll fl l'!c8 1 4 .lll e3 a5 1 5 .h4 l'!e8
1 6.a3± gave White a comfortable edge in
Tukmakov - Lalic, Tucepi 1 996.
12 ... b5 1 3 .lll fl b4 does not make much sense to
me, and White can easily develop his initiative:
1 4.h4 We? 1 5 .Wd3 l'!c8 1 6.ig5! ixg5
1 7.lll xg5 Wc2 1 8 .Wb5± White won a pawn in
Baumegger - Velcheva, Budapest 1 997.
B222 1) 12 ...J.a6 13.tll fl
It is also worth considering: 1 3 .ifl ! ? lll c7
( 1 3 . . . ixfl 1 4 .lll xfl We? 1 5 .Wa4 a6 occurred
in Avrukh - Trajkovic, Internet 2004, and
now 1 6.id2N b5 1 7.Wb3 would have been
the most accurate, when White's advantage
is beyond any doubt.) 1 4 .a3!N (In GM I I
only mentioned 1 4.id3 ixd3 1 5 .Wxd3 Wc8,
followed by . . . Wa6, when Black is fine.) White
can continue making useful waiting moves,
and it is not clear how Black should organize
his pieces. If 1 4 . . . l'!c8 1 5 .id3! White just
continues with his regrouping, while Black's
counterplay is under a cloud now that the
. . . Wc8-a6 manoeuvre has been prevented.
13 ... gcs 14.�dl
Black's main problem is the passivity of his
minor pieces, especially his knights, so it is
logical to try and improve their positions.
14 ... tll bs
Here is another example where White
instructively seized the initiative on the
kingside: 1 4 . . . lll c? 1 5 .h4 h6 This move
prevents the bishop from going to g5, but also
creates a target for possible sacrifices. 1 6.h5
lll b8 1 7.lll e3 lll c6 1 8 .lll g4 l'!e8 1 9.ixh6! gxh6
20.l'!cl With Wd2 coming next, White had
a dangerous attack in Filippov - Frolyanov,
Sochi 2005 .
15.h4 tll c6
Another option is:
1 5 . . .Wc? 1 6.lll e3
Certainly White should prevent Black's
queen from coming to c2: 1 6.lll g5 Wc2
1 7.Wg4 lll c6 1 8 .lll e3 Wg6! White cannot
avoid the queen swap (afrer . . . h6) , as 1 9.Wd l
is answered by 1 9 . . . Wd3!.
16 . . . lll c6
And now instead of creating additional
targets for Black on the queenside with
1 7.a3, as in Mandekic - Tratar, Zadar 2004,
I would recommend:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 7.id2N id3
1 7 . . . lll b4?? loses material after 1 8.Wa4.
1 8 .ic3 ie4 1 9 .!fl
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 1 5 - Closed System
White will follow up with ill d2, chasing the
bishop from e4 and gaining plenty of space to
develop a kingside initiative.
16.i.g5
This is quite a tricky move.
24 1
- Khenkin, Fuegen 2006, but White has every
reason to play on.
7
6
5
4
8
3
2
1
16 ...hg5
White does not need to worry about
16 . . . lll b4?! 1 7.lll e3 h6 in view of 1 8.a3! lll c6
( 1 8 . . . ill d3 ? runs into 1 9.ixe? Wfxe7 20.l:!e2±
and Black's knight is trapped) 1 9.if4 when
Black has achieved nothing, while White's
attack plays itsel£
a
b
e
f
g
h
20 i.xfl 2 1 .<i>xfl Yfa4 22.<i>g2 tlixe3t
23.Yfxe3 ��k2 24J�e2±
White has the simple plan of attacking along
the h-file, and it is hard to suggest a good
answer for Black.
••.
B2222) 12 .tf c7
..
17.hxg5
Now White can look to prepare a future
knight sacrifice on f6.
.••
d
20.i.fl !
In GM I I gave 20.ill xf5N exf5 2 1 .Wfb4!,
with ideas of a positional sacrifice with e5-e6.
However, I later realized that the text move
was a much simpler route to a clear advantage.
The natural 1 6 . . . h6 gives White a pleasant
choice: 1 7.id2!? (The simple 1 7.ixe? Wfxe7
1 8 .l'l:cl;!; also gives White an edge thanks to
his space advantage.) Retreating the bishop
to d2 is an ambitious choice, aiming for a
future sacrifice on h6. It should be noted
that 1 7 . . . lll b4?! is no good, as 1 8 .Wf a4! ixfl
1 9.l'l:xfl ± leaves White with a clear positional
advantage.
17 tlie7 18.tlie3 Yfd7 1 9.Yfcl2 tlif5
At this point a draw was agreed in Filippov
c
a
b
c
d
e
f
This also looks pretty logical.
g
h
242
Catalan 4 . . . ie7
13.�b3
1 3 .'!Wd3 will probably transpose after a
couple more moves. There is also 1 3 .'!Wa4 '!Wc6
1 4 .'!Wb3, which should reach the same position
with an extra move played.
13 .. J:ks
After 1 3 . . . a5 1 4 .lll fl even a high-level
grandmaster and theoretician failed to create
any serious counterplay for Black: 1 4 . . . :B:c8
1 5 .tll e3 ia6 1 6.id2 '!Wc6 1 7.:B:ac l '!Wb7
1 8 .:B:xc8 '!Wxc8 1 9.:B:cl lll c7 20.h4 Wd8
2 1 .'!Wc2! lll a8 22.tll g 5 ixg5 23.hxg5 White
had an overwhelming advantage in Swinkels Tiviakov, Haaksbergen 2009.
14.ifl � b8
The older move is:
1 4 . . . '!Wc2 1 5 .'1Mfe3!
It is essential for White to avoid the queen
trade. In the event of 1 5 .'!Wxc2N :B:xc2
l 6.id3 :B:c8 he is only marginally better,
and Black should hold without any serious
difficulties.
1 5 . . . Wg6
This seems stronger than 1 5 . . . lll c? 1 6.id3
'!Wa4, when Black's queen is misplaced. l 7.b3
'!Wa5 This position occurred in Zakharevich
- Geller, Tula 200 1 , and here I like 1 8 .ib2.
In Chess Informant 8 1 , Zakharevich gives
1 8 . . . ia3 ( 1 8 . . . tll b5 1 9.a3) , but White has
a strong riposte: 1 9 .b4! ixb4 ( 1 9 . . . '!Wxb4? ?
loses t o 20.ixa3 '!Wxa3 2 1 .ixh?t followed
by 22.'!Wxa3) 20.a4! Threatening to trap
the queen with lll b3. 20 . . . b5 2 1 .axb5 '!Wb6
22.'!We2!± The strong b5-pawn seriously
limits Black's activity on the queenside.
1 6.id3 Wh5
This position occurred in Larrass - Flemm,
corr. 1 988. A good continuation for White
is:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 7.tll b3N lll c7 1 8 .id2 ia6 1 9 .:B:ac l
1 9 .ic2 f6! gives Black counterplay.
1 9 . . . ixd3 20.'!Wxd3 '!Wg6 2 1 .'1Mfe2;!;
White is better, as Black's pieces lack
coordination.
The text move was first played in Alburt
- Westerinen, Reykjavik 1 982, and it has
recently emerged as Black's latest attempt to
rehabilitate this line. His practical results have
been decent, but so far nobody has found the
best continuation for White.
1 5 .. tll c6
A key point is that 1 5 . . . '!Wc2? is impossible
in view of 1 6.'!Wxc2 :B:xc2 1 7.lll c3 ib4 1 8 .:B:e3
.
Chapter 1 5 - Closed System
243
when the black rook is trapped behind enemy
lines.
White was comfortably better in Stefanova Molchanova, Sochi 200 5 .
16.tlic3 tli aS 17.�dl tli c4 18.J.d3
White has succeeded in keeping the queen­
side under control, and it will not be at all easy
for Black to do the same on the other flank.
1 3 . . . a5 1 4.lt:Jfl !
1 4.ifl lt:J c7! transposes to 1 3 . . .lt:J c? 1 4.ifl
a5 , which I now prefer to avoid, for reasons
explained under the 1 3 . . . lt:J c? line below.
1 4 . . . ia6 1 5 .'1Md l !
In GM 1 I referenced a game after 1 5 .h4 id3
where White kept an edge, but preventing
the bishop move is more ambitious.
B2223) 12 .. Jks 13.�a4
1 3 .'1Md3 is less accurate due to 1 3 . . . lt:Jb8!
( 1 3 ... '1Mc7 1 4.ifl '1Mc2 1 5 .'1Me3! transposes
to the note to Black's 1 4th move in the
previous variation) 1 4.lt:Jfl ia6 1 5 .'1Md l lt:J c6
1 6.lt:Je3 lt:J b4 1 7.ifl ixfl 1 8 .E:xfl f600 with
counterplay for Black, Villamayor - Sandipan,
Calcutta 200 1 .
8
a
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
13 ...J.c6
Black has tried several moves, but White has
achieved good results against all of them, and it
is hard to call any of them the definitive main
line. For the sake of simplicity, I have kept the
same main line as in GM 1 .
1 3 . . . '1Mc7 1 4.ifl gives White easy play, and
not much has changed since GM 1. 14 . . . a6
1 5 .id3 lt:Jb8 1 6.h4 a5 1 7.a3 ia6 1 8.ib l f6
A logical reaction, as Black clearly lacks space,
but now the e6-pawn becomes a permanent
weakness. 1 9.exf6 ixf6 20.lt:Jfl '1Mf7 2 1 .if4
b
c
d
e
I 5 . . . lt:Jb8
15 ... b5 was once played against the young
Carlsen, but the future world champion
convincingly prevailed after 1 6.h4 b4
1 7.lt:Jg5 '1Mc7 1 8 .lt:J e3 ixg5 1 9.hxg5 '1Mb6
20.ifl ! ? ixfl 2 1 .'it>xfl f5 ? 22.exf6 gxf6
23.lt:Jg4 in Carlsen - Leer Salvesen, Oslo
2006.
1 6.h4 lt:Jc6 1 7.a3 ib5 1 8.b3!?
Not the only good move, but it certainly
limits Black's counterplay. In the following
game Black tried a rather desperate pawn
sacrifice, which soon backfired.
1 8 . . . a4?! 1 9.bxa4 ic4 20.lLie3 lLi a5 2 1 .lLixc4
dxc4 22.E:b 1 !
White was clearly better in Mchedlishvili Karakehajov, Konya 20 1 0 .
1 3 . . . lt:Jc?
This seems like quite a logical try, improving
the passive knight and preparing . . . ia6.
244
Catalan 4 . . . i.e7
1 4.tt'lfl !
In GM I I gave 1 4.i.fl a5 1 5 .i.d3 i.a6
1 6.ib 1 as my main line. It looks tempting
to involve the light-squared bishop in the
kingside offensive, but it turns out that
Black can exploit White's temporary lack of
coordination to create counterplay. 1 6 . . . f5 !
(Improving over 1 6 . . . tt'lb5 1 7.Wb3 as seen in
Avrukh - Filippov, Halkidiki 2002.) l 7.exf6
:B:xf6 With double-edged play, Halldorsson
- Kuzubov, Reykjavik 20 1 0.
1 4 . . . b5 1 5 .Wdl b4
This has been Black's most popular plan in
this line, but White has achieved a huge
practical score. I will just mention one
practical example.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.h4 tt'lb8 1 7.ig5 tt'l c6 1 8.tt'le3 f6 1 9 .exf6
gxf6 20.i.h6±
Black was in trouble in lzoria - Agrest, Las
Vegas 2003.
14.�b3
I prefer not to allow 1 4.Wd l ib5 , even
though 1 5 .i.fl ixfl 1 6. tt'lxfl still gives
White the better chances thanks to his space
advantage.
14 ... b5
Obviously Black should try to get some
activity on the queenside.
15.i.fl �b6
After 1 5 . . . b4 I won a smooth game: 1 6.i.a6!
This strong intermediate move disturbs Black's
coordination. 1 6 . . . :B:b8 1 7.id3 ib5 1 8.i.b l
:B:c8 1 9.tt'lfl tt'l b6 20.h4 Wc7 2 1 .i.g5 ixg5?
(2 1 . . . tt'l c4N is a better try, although 22.tt'l l h2
keeps a clear advantage for White) 22.tt'lxg5
h6 23 .tt'lh7 +- Avrukh - Al Tamimi, Bajada de
la Virgen 200 5 .
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
16.i.d3 b4 17.tlifl h6
Covering the g5-square. In a more recent
game Black neglected to do so, and after
1 7 . . . ib5 1 8 .ig5! i.d8 White suddenly
switched to a positional approach: 1 9.i.xd8!
:B:xd8 20.i.xb5 Wxb5 2 1 .:B:ac l Black had
no easy life with his knight stuck on e8 in
Hillarp Persson - Carstensen, Copenhagen
20 1 0 .
18.tll e3!N
Chapter 1 5
-
Improving on 1 8.if4 ib5 1 9.ib l f5
20.exf6 tLlexf600 when Black obtained decent
counterplay in lzoria - Nadera, Dubai 2004.
Closed System
245
the centre with e4-e5 then the bishop would
be more active on a6, but if we maintain the
central tension then the opposite is true.
10.b3 �ks
1 0 . . . c5 1 l .exd5 exd5 1 2.ib2 almost always
transposes after l 2 . . . l'!c8. The only noteworthy
independent path is 1 2 . . . cxd4 1 3.tLlxd4
l'!c8, when 1 4.a4!N transposes to a game
that turned out nicely for White: 1 4 . . . ib4
( 1 4 . . . dxc4 1 5 .tLlxc4 tLle5 1 6.tLlb5! also favours
White) 1 5 .l'!fd l l'!e8
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
18 ... ti:)c7 19.i.b l
Black was threatening . . . tLl b 5 .
19 ..J:Uds 20.i.d2 a5 2 1 .�g2!;!;
White's chances are preferable, as he has
good prospects of developing an initiative on
the kingside by means of °We3-f4-g4, and/or
tt:J f4-h5 .
B23) 9 ...i.a6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.tLlfl ! 'We7 1 7.tLle3 dxc4 1 8 .tLl c6 'Wf8
1 9.tLlxc4± The c6-knight had become a
monster in Kirov - Boehm, Lyon 1 99 5 .
Catalan 4 . . . ie7
246
1 3 .:B:fe l left the knight clearly misplaced on e8
in Kostiukova - Mironenko, Evpatoria 2007.
l l . . . dxe4 1 2.lLixe4 lLixe4 1 3 .'W'xe4 b5
13 ... c5 1 4.:B:ad l clearly favours White, as
Black's bishop is misplaced on a6 and Black
will hardly want to capture on d4, as White's
knight would be heading straight to c6.
The present position has been considered
worse for Black ever since following game
from 1 979, which remains as instructive as
ever.
1 9 . . . ttJ f6 20.i.g5 lLid5
In the event of 20 ... h6 2 1 .i.d2 tLl d5 22.lLi e5
Black cannot chase the knight away with
.. .f6, as it would decisively weaken the
g6-square.
2 1 .i.xe7 lLixe7 22.lLi e5;!;
White had an obvious positional advantage
thanks to Black's weak queenside pawns in
Quinteros - Petrosian, Buenos Aires 1 979.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.c5 b4 1 5 .:B:fd l i.b5
Black has managed to activate his light­
squared bishop but, in doing so, he has
created other weaknesses in his camp, which
White expertly exploits.
1 6.'W'e l ! :B:b8 1 7.a3 bxa3 1 8.:B:xa3 :B:b7 1 9.i.cl !
Another strong move; the bishop will be
more active on the c l -h6 diagonal.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
12.exd5 exd5 1 3JUdl!
This is a major departure from my previous
recommendation of 1 3 .'W'f5 g6 1 4.'W'h3, when
1 4 . . . b5! is a recent invention that seems to
solve Black's opening problems. For instance:
1 5 .cxb5 I checked some other moves, but was
unable to find anything convincing for White.
1 5 . . . i.xb5 1 6.:B:fc l i.d3!? 1 7.dxc5 h5 1 8.tLld4?
Black eventually lost due to subsequent
mistakes in Jaworski - Rojicek, Czech
Republic 20 1 1 , but at this point 1 8 . . . tLixc5N
would have left him with a clear advantage.
Apart from posting the rook on an active
square, White's last move also has the
advantage of preparing the lLi fl -e3 manoeuvre.
Black's two most important continuations
are B23 1) 13 ... ges and B232) 13 ... cxd4.
I would also like to mention a couple of minor
options:
Chapter 1 5
-
1 3 . . . b5 1 4.cxd5
I also considered the remarkable 1 4.b4! ?,
although after 1 4 . . . cxb4 1 5 .c5 ib7 1 6.'!Wd3
ic6 ( 1 6 . . . a6 1 7.ih3�) 1 7.a3 bxa3 1 8 .'!Wxa3
lll e4! Black was doing okay in Kalinitschew
- Dgebuadze, Meisdorf 1 996. This could
be investigated in more detail, but the main
continuation seems more straightforward.
1 4 . . . c4
In the event of 1 4 . . . lll xd5N 1 5 .dxc5 lll xc5
1 6.lll fl ib7 1 7.'!We2 '!We8 1 8 .lll e5 lll b6
1 9.ixb7 lll xb7 20.lll e3 White has a serious
initiative thanks to his much more active
pieces.
This position occurred in Grigorian - Ilinsky,
Moscow 1 983, and seven subsequent games.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
247
Closed System
(The position has also occurred with Black
to move quite a few times.)
1 4. lll fl ! ?N
This typical knight manoeuvre looks best,
especially taking into account that 1 4.'\Wf5
dxc4 1 5 .lll xc4 b500 has proven pretty reliable
for Black.
1 4 . . . dxc4 1 5 .d5! c3
The pawn is poisoned: 1 5 . . . ixd5 ? 1 6.lll g5
ixg2 17 .ixf6 wins material, while
1 5 . . . lll xd5 ? 1 6.bxc4 lll b4 1 7.'!Wf5 E!:c7
1 8.lll e5± also leaves Black in trouble.
.1. �
��
s
�B•
�
i)�-��-,Y..
- - "�,
, , ;<. ��
,�r
""'"�!� ',, , , ;�
: ��� - -j�� ��� �­
�F � � �
�
3 l>:J� � �J8l
2 �/:j �if�.i.�
---- -� lmllS
m- 7
6
�
-
,
a
a
b
c
d
e
1 5 .lll e5!N
Surprisingly, 1 5 .bxc4 has been the
unanimous choice so far.
1 5 . . . c3 1 6.ixc3
This is my preference, although 1 6.lll c6 is
also worth considering. I analysed 1 6 . . . cxb2
1 7.'!Wxb2 E!:xc6 1 8.dxc6 lll b6 1 9 .lll e4! and
White's position looks promising.
16 . . . lll x d5 1 7.ixd5 lll xe5 1 8 .'!We4 lll d3
1 9 .ia5! '!Wxa5 20.'!Wxd3
Black does not have enough compensation
for the missing pawn.
1 3 . . . ib7
This was played in Polovodin - Lputian,
Irkutsk 1 983, and several subsequent games.
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.'!Wxc3 lll e8 1 7.lll e3
1 7.d6 seems tempting, but after 1 7 . . . if6
1 8 .'!Wc2 ixb2 1 9.'!Wxb2 '!Wf6! I am not sure
about the future of the d6-pawn after the
queen exchange, even though the computer
still prefers White.
17 . . . if6 1 8 .'!Wc2 lll d6 1 9.lll c4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
White is definitely better; the d5-pawn is well
supported, and Black has no real counterplay.
...
Catalan 4 ie7
248
-
s �-r�
i
•'111
i r�. . %�
�
.....%...
'::(�
�E
�!
� J�i!
B231) 13 ... �eS
1
6
8
7
s aTwTar��-fi�wtj �-- · •
6
4
3
2
5
4
3
2
1
1
�� -0 �� �� -�- . %�r�
8 �•• r�.t,r�
��- - -�-rmtEm- - a
b
a
� 8� �---- %� �'
d
c
f
e
g
h
14.c!ll fl !
Surprisingly, this strong move has been
tested only once. 1 4.Wf5 and 1 4.:B:ac l have
been more popular.
14 ... b5
1 4 . . . cxd4N is obviously an important
alternative. Play continues 1 5 .lLixd4 dxc4
1 6.lLie3! with the following idea: 1 6 . . . cxb3
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5.cxd5!N c!ll xd5
1 5 . . . ib7 1 6.ltJe5 ixd5 ( 1 6 . . . ltJxd5 1 7.Wf5
transposes to the main line) 1 7 .ixd5 ltJ xd5
1 8 .1Wd3! cxd4 1 9.ixd4 if8 20.ltJg4! is better
for White, who can meet both 20 . . . b4 and
20 . . . a6 with 2 1 .ixg7!.
16.c!ll e5
1 6.dxc5 :B:xc5 1 7.1Wd3 ib7 does not seem
like anything special for White.
16 ...ib7
In the event of 1 6 . . . cxd4 1 7. lLi c6 lLie5
1 8.:B:xd4 :B:xc6 1 9.Wd l Black is under
unpleasant pressure.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 7.Wb l ! :B:c7 1 8 .axb3 Wc8 1 9.1Wa2 ib7
20.lLi b5 :B:c5 2 1 .lLixa7 Wb8 22.b4 :B:c7 23.lLib5
:B:cc8 24.1Wb3 ixg2 25.lt?xg2 White has a large
positional advantage.
The text move was played in A. Mikhalevski
- Zoler, Israel 20 1 0. According to my analysis,
White has only one way to fight for an
advantage.
249
Chapter 1 5 - Closed System
White retains the better chances, thanks to
the following critical line:
18 ... gxc5 19.b4 �c8 20.tild7! gc7 2 1 .hd5
tll xd5 22.gxd5 hd5
8
7
6
5
4
15.tll f5!
This rare move is stronger than the more
popular 1 5 .Wf5 .
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
23.�e5 f6 24.�xdSt i>hs 25.tll c5 hc5
26.bxc5 gxc5 27.�b3;t
White's two minor pieces are stronger than
Black's rook and pawn.
s
The most popular alternative is 14 . . . l'!e8,
but the following game offers a convincing
argument for White: 1 5 .Wf5 g6 1 6.Wg5! The
queen does not have to retreat to h3, which
it usually does after Wf5 in these positions.
16 . . . ifS 1 7.lt'if5 dxc4 1 8.bxc4 l'!c5 1 9.lt'ih6t
ixh6 20.Wxh6 l'!h5 2 1 .Wf4 Wbs 22.Wxb8
l'!xb8 23.llie4 White had a clear advantage in
Lima - Pelikian, Santos 200 1 .
B232) 1 3 ... cxd4 14.tll xd4
'0
1 5 . . . l'!e8 resembles our main line below.
1 6.ixd5! llixd5 1 7.lt'ixg7 if6 1 8 .lt'ixe8 Wxe8
occurred in A. Mikhalevski - Kaganskiy, Israel
20 1 1 , and here White could have obtained
some advantage with:
�
� x s�fd���•
7,
Y,
-0
�
" � ,
6
� �
�� �
��
��
: ji"
��,, �0r
3 � � �
� %'"/"/, �w -Jtl�r�
2
%
1 5 ... bxc4
1 5 . . . ic5 ? was played in Eljanov - Azarov,
Ohrid 200 1 . Apparently both players
overlooked 1 6.ixd5!N llixd5 1 7.llie4! with a
winning position for White.
,, , , ,
"'"
1 '.f�l�a���
,,
1
�,,,,,%•.:-� %; 1
8 �°ii m r��r�
a
b
- - - - -
c
d
e
f
-
g
----
h
14... bS
This seems critical, and was the reason why
I rejected 1 3 .l'!fd l previously. However, I
changed my mind after taking a fresh look at
the ensuing complications.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 9.l'!e l !N ( 1 9.llie4!?N ixb2 20.llid6! We5
2 1 .lt'ixc8 ixa l 22.cxd5 also favours White,
but the text move seems clearer) 1 9 . . . WdS
20.lt'ie4 bxc4 2 1 .l'!ad l ! The following sequence
is more or less forced. 2 1 . . .ixb2 22.l'!xd5 ib7
23.l'!dd l ie5 24.We2 ixe4 25 .Wxe4 ig7
26.Wf5 l'!c7 27.bxc4 White has good winning
chances.
250
Catalan 4 . . .�e7
16.bxc4
7
��--
J,
� 1. �
8
,Y,m
r
� �••11%
,
,
,
�
�
r�
,
,
Y,
.
�
�
5
� !�
tti�
�
��
�ir
�
�
4
�� �� �,
3
�� -0 �%'"//, �W��¥r!J
-ef ��l�
t!J �-� ¥ "" ,
21 -�
_, , Y,-� ,- , , %= , ,
6
b
a
c
d
f
e
g
h
17.hdS! t£ixd5 1 8.tlixg7
This piece sacrifice is an important attacking
motif, which we also encountered after
l 5 . . . l:'i:e8 in the notes above. The position can
be investigated more deeply, but I consider it
promising for White, and will just show a few
illustrative lines.
1 8 ...�cS 19.tlifl t£i 5f6 20.tlixeS ¥Mxe8
2 1 J�el VMds
2 1 . . .Wi'f8 ? 22.l:'i:ad l is much worse for Black.
22.¥Mf5!
22.tlJe3 Wi'b6 23.l:'i:ab l Wi'c6 24.Wi'f5 Wi'e4 is
not so clear. Now a logical sequence might be:
16 .. J�eS!N
This untested move seems like the only
playable option for Black. Others are much
worse:
16 . . . �c5 ?N 1 7. tlJ b3 �xc4 1 8 .tlJxc5 lll xc5
1 9.ttJxg7! r,t>xg7 20.Wi'f5 h6 2 1 .l:'i:d4! White's
attack is too powerful.
16 . . . �xc4? 1 7.tlJxc4 dxc4 ( 1 7 . . . l:'i:xc4N 1 8 .Wi'd3
also leads to serious problems for Black, who
must worry about ideas such as hd5 , lll xe7t
followed by �a3, and Wi'e3 followed by Wi'g5 .)
1 8 .�c3 g6 1 9.ttJ h6t r,t>g7 occurred in Gregory
- Gray, England 20 1 2 .
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
22 ... ¥Mb6 23.l:'i:abl �d4 24.hd4 ¥Mxd4
25.YMgSt @hs 26.tlie3 l:'i:g8 27.¥Mf5
White has an ideal situation, with realistic
winning chances and not much risk at all.
Conclusion
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
And now 20.Wi'c l !N would have left Black
without a good defence against lll g4.
The Closed Catalan remains a popular choice
for Black, making the present chapter one
of the more important ones in the book.
Starting with the sidelines after both 6 . . . c6 and
6 . . . lll bd7, we dealt with a variety of position
types resembling different variations of the
Queen's Indian, where White's chances seem
preferable.
Chapter 1 5
-
The main lines occur after 7 . . . c6 8 .tll bd2
b6 9.e4, when Black has three main moves.
9 . . . dxe4 is the worst-scoring option for Black,
who needs to play accurately j ust to avoid
sinking into abject passivity. Even after his
most resilient continuation, I found a suitable
improvement over GM 1 to maintain White's
pleasant advantage.
9 . . . ib7 1 0.e5 tll e8 is a popular continuation,
when the usual l l .cxd5 cxd5 reaches a French­
like structure. The overall verdict is the same
as in GM 1, as White has enough resources
to limit his opponent's counterplay while
generating real attacking possibilities on the
kingside. However, I was able to fine-tune the
recommendations, with several refinements at
key moments.
Finally we looked at 9 . . . ia6 1 0.b3 Ei:c8
1 l .i.b2 c5 1 2.exd5 exd5, which leads to an
extremely tense middlegame where multiple
pawn captures might be available at any time.
1 3.Ei:fd l ! is an important departure from my
previous recommendation, when the tll fl -e3
manoeuvre offers White excellent chances in
many lines, although a good level of tactical
awareness will be needed.
Closed System
25 1
Catalan 4 ie7
...
6 dxc4
...
Variation Index
1 .d4 tll f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tll f3 j.e7 5.j.g2 0-0 6.0-0 dxc4
7.fic2
A) 7 ... c5
B) 7 ...j.d7 8.fixc4 j.c6 9.tll c3
B l) 9 ... a6
B2) 9 ... tll bd7
C) 7 ... b5!?
D) 7 ... a6 8.a4
D l) 8 ... b6
D2) 8 ... c5
D3) 8 ... tll c6
D4) 8 ...j.d7 9.fixc4 j.c6 10.j.f4
D4 1) 1 0 ... tll d5
D42) 10 ...j.d6
D43) 10 ... tll hd7 l 1 .tll c3
D43 1) 1 1 ... j.d6
D432) 1 1 . .. �c8
D433) 1 1 ... tll b6
D44) 10 ... a5 1 1 .tll c3 tll a6 12.�ac l ! tll b4
13.tll e5 j_xg2 14.®xg2 tll fd5 15 .tll xd5
D441) 1 5 ... fixd5t
D442) 1 5 ... tll xd5 1 6.j.d2
D442 1) 1 6 ... j.b4
D4422) 1 6 ... c6
253
256
257
258
260
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
272
273
274
275
277
280
28 1
28 1
282
Chapter 1 6 - 6 . . . dxc4
I .d4 c!Lif6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.c!Lif3 !li.e7 5 .ig2
0-0 6.0-0 dxc4
This is Black's most popular reaction to the
Catalan. He can also shuffle the move order,
for instance by starting with 4 . . . dxc4, without
it making much of a difference.
•
7.Y!fc2
8
1
.iw•�.i..��� ef��·
�
,
,,,,,,
,
,, , , ,
;:
,
,,,,,
Y,
,
0
•
�• r�
• r�
,,,,,/,
,,,,, /,� �
,,Y,.
,,,,/,�
253
9.c!Li bd2!
I believe this to be more precise than 9.'Wxc4
'We? 1 0 .tll c3, though not for the exact reasons
given in GM 1. 1 0 . . . tll bd?! (Previously I
suggested that 1 0 . . . a6 should be okay for
Black, but this does not look at all convincing
after 1 1 .tll g 5!?, for instance 1 1 . . .b 5 ? 1 2.'Wh4
!i.b7, Straub - Bader, Germany 2003, and
now the elegant 1 3 .tll xh?!N would have won
a pawn.) 1 1 .tll a4 b6 Black was more or less
okay in Vesely - Janosi, Internet 20 1 2.
�j �-��f ��
l!Jij
�
� �
: ����rLZ
� �'
6
#JI
J
J%i(
��r� �� ��r�,,,,%�Jr�
21 /�Jl!J
�!-�JllJ:;JlJ
��tt:J �
a
b
c
-��
d
e
f
g
h
This is by far White's most popular
continuation. Needless to say, it is a
permanent battleground for the world's elite
players. We will start by analysing A) 7 c5
and B) 7 !/i.d7, neither of which have the
best reputation, but which demand a degree
of accuracy all the same. Next we will consider
C) 7 b5!?, which, amazingly, only came to be
regarded as a serious option in the years after
GM 1 was published. Finally, the main line is
of course D) 7 a6.
..•
.••
••.
.•.
A) 7 c5
•••
Obviously this is not the way to solve Black's
problems, as White keeps unpleasant pressure
along the h l -a8 diagonal.
8.dxc5 .bc5
8 . . . tll c6 9.tll bd2 gives Black nothing
better than transposing to the main line with
9 . . . !i.xc5.
IO.c!Lixc4 Y!f e7
Definitely the most natural move, although
a couple of alternatives are worth mentioning.
1 0 . . . !i.d? 1 1 .tll ce5
White exploits the hanging bishop on c5 to
obtain the two-bishop advantage.
1 1 . . .'Wb6
This has been used recently, and seems like
the best option available.
1 1 . . .'We? 1 2.tll xd? tll xd7 1 3 .!i.g5 'We8 ?!
(Black should probably have tried 13 . . .f6N,
254
Catalan 4 . . . ie7
but after 1 4 .id2 Ei:ac8 1 5 .Ei:ac l ± the
weakening of the e6-pawn and the h3-c8
diagonal gives White additional targets.)
1 4.Ei:ad l ie7 1 5 .if4± Wojtkiewicz Voelker, Philadelphia 1 999.
1 2 .lll xd7 lll xd7
This was Boos - Dunlop, email 20 1 2, and
now I recommend the accurate:
Otherwise Black would solve his problems
by neutralizing the Catalan bishop with
. . . ib7.
1 2 . . . lll bd5
Now in Azarov - Berndt, Panormo 200 1 ,
White could have maintained some initiative
with:
� ..,. ������j·'''
r.. .��
..
��-0 �� �
�� y. , , . , ,�
��
��
-%
�
��
�
�
3 ��-0 �
�� �� -J�w�
6
5 � , .41).
4
2
t3J � •
t3J t�.i.t�
�
%._ . .
.
"�_
W
'
....
lf
�
�
.
�if0.
� .�. �
. ..
a
b
c
�
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 .ie3!N lll xe3
1 3 . . . ixe3 1 4 .lll xe3 h6 1 5 .lll xd5 exd5
1 6.lll f3;1;: gives White a pleasant position
playing against the isolated pawn.
1 3 . . . 'Wc7 1 4.ixc5 'Wxc5 1 5 .lll e5 h6 1 6.lll e4
lll xe4 1 7.'Wxe4 'Wd6 1 8 .'Wd4± also favours
White.
1 4 .lll xe3 Ei:b8
Black has no time for 14 ... ixe3 ??, as after
1 5 .fxe3 White threatens Ei:xf6 in addition to
the rook on a8.
1 5 .Ei:d l 'We7
1 0 . . . lll b4!?
a
,, . , . , ;% ""//,
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
This is perhaps the most interesting try for
Black, and it was not mentioned in GM I.
1 1 .'Wb l b5
I also considered 1 I . . .id7N 1 2.lll fe5 lll bd5 ,
but found that 1 3 .a4!? 'We7 1 4.b3 Ei:fd8
1 5 .ib2 retains a pleasant edge for White.
1 2.lll g 5 !?
255
Chapter 1 6 - 6 . . . dxc4
1 9.lll xc5 Wxc5 20.b4
20.Wd3 is also possible. In both cases the
position is rather simplified, but White's
pieces are more active and he can keep playing
without any risk.
not an improvement for Black, Tukmakov Eksrroem, Zurich 1 999.
1 2 ... id4 1 3 .if4 lll d5 1 4.l:!fd l lll xf4 1 5 .gxf4
W c5 is a recent try, but hardly an improvement.
( 1 5 . . . ib6 1 6.e3 f6 1 7.lll c4 ic7 1 8 .l:!d2 l:!b8
1 9.l:!ad l gave White a serious advantage in
Yusupov - Gerusel, Moscow 1 9 8 1 )
8 � �£ �� -" -
7 �·- ••••
. . . %. �.�Z'"//,t.�z - - %�
ltiJJ
s � �tmt
m �•
�- - -�� - - - '� ��
""'"�
��r�>%�
��
��-- - �- "�
�>%
� f� if- � f�Jl�
� -� !m- - - "r�- - -
6
4
3
2
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
-�
h
1 1 .�fe5
Increasing the pressure along the h l -a8
diagonal.
a
c
----
----
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.Wxc5 ixc5 1 7.l:!ac l ib6 1 8 .lll c4! The
endgame was extremely unpleasant for Black
in Zhao Xue - Ding Yixin, Xinghua 20 1 0 .
1 1 . .. �xe5
White should not be afraid of 1 1 . . .lll d4,
when 1 2.Wd l l:!d8 1 3.e3 lll c6 1 4 .lll xc6 bxc6
1 5 .Wa4 gave him an obvious advantage in
Kern - Siepmann, Recklinghausen 200 1 .
12.�xe5 Wc7
1 2 . . . id6 1 3.lll c4 ic7
a
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.b3! l'!d8 1 5 .ia3 We8 1 6.l:!fd l ± is obviously
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
13.i.e3 i.d6
1 3 . . . Wxe5 occurred in V. Mikhalevski
- Goletiani, Kapuskasing 2004, and now
1 4.ixc5N l:!e8 1 5 .l:!fd l would have given
White a large advantage.
14.�xc7 i.xc7 15.i.d4
Catalan 4 . . . !e7
256
I recommended this as an improvement in
GM l, and it has since been played in one
game.
1 5 ... tlid5 16,gacl
Black intends to post the bishop on c6. There
is an obvious parallel with the later variation
04, coverage of which begins on page 268. You
can think of this as a 'lazy version' for Black:
he has avoided the major theoretical paths of
7 . . . a6 8.'1Wxc4, but the absence of the moves
. . . a6 and a2-a4 helps White, as Black will not
have the b4-outpost for his pieces.
8.f«xc4
8.lll e5 may look promising at first sight,
but after 8 . . . lll c6! (but not 8 . . . !c6 9.lll xc6
lll xc6 1 0.e3;!;) I found no advantage for
White: 9.lll xc6 (9.'1Wxc4 lll x e5 1 0.dxe5 lll d500)
9 . . .�xc6 1 0.�xc6 bxc6 I 1 .'1Wxc4 Wf d5! Black
was fine in Kiss - Bakos, Fuzesabony 2004.
17.he5 !d7 18.e4 tlib6 19,gfdl !c6
20.f'3;1;
With the bishop pair and more active pieces,
White had achieved a Catalan player's dream
position in Saric - Zorko, Nova Gorica 2009.
B) 7 ... .id7
8 ....ic6 9.tlic3
This is the first concrete difference from the
parallel variation 04, where . . . a6 and a2-a4
have been played. In the latter position, the
knight development runs into the annoying
. . . b5!, when Black equalizes comfortably.
9.�f4 is less convincing after 9 . . . lll bd7 1 0 .lll c3
�d6!. Sure, White can play 1 1 .�d2N and get
a modest edge, j ust as in the later variation
043 1 , but the text move is stronger and more
ambitious. Our aim should be to make Black
suffer for avoiding the 7 . . . a6 variation.
Chapter 1 6 - 6 . . . dxc4
Black has two main options: Bl) 9 .. a6 and
B2) 9 ... tli bd7.
.
9 . . . lll e4 has also been played, but 1 0.°1Wd3
lll xc3 l l .bxc3 lll d7 1 2.E:e l leads straight to
variation B2.
Bl) 9 ... a6 1 0.i.gS b5
Another direction is 10 . . . lll bd7 1 1 .E:fe l , when
Black has tried two ideas:
a) l 1 . . .E:b8 prepares . . . b5, as after Wxc6 E:b6
the queen will be trapped. However, the simple
1 2.a4 is a good answer, and after 1 2 . . . lll d5
1 3.ixe7 lll xe7 1 4.e4 a5 1 5 .b3 White was
clearly better in Vaganian - Smagin, Germany
1 993.
257
the version with the pawn on a2 instead of
a4 is favourable for White. Now . . . b4 has
been prevented, and White's control over the
e4-square has been strengthened. The last
move also prepares b2-b4, which will prevent
the . . . c5 advance.
12 ...i.b7
Practice has also seen: 1 2 . . . h6 1 3 .ixf6
(This has always been played, but 1 3.if4!?N
certainly deserves consideration.) 13 ... lll xf6
1 4.E:ac l ixf3 ? This is an obvious concession
which gives White a big positional advantage.
( 1 4 . . . Wb8N is better, although 1 5 .E:fd l Wb6
1 6.Wc2 ib7 1 7.e4 maintains a pleasant edge
for White) 1 5 .ixf3± Stefansson - Delgado
Ramirez, Havana 200 1 .
b) l 1 . . .ll:l b6 1 2.°1Wd3 h6 occurred in the recent
game Sethuraman - Surendran, Calcutta
20 1 4, when White exchanged on f6. I would
prefer to keep the dark-squared bishop with
1 3.id2N (or even 1 3 . .ic l ! ?N); there is no
need to eliminate the knight, as White has
already established control over the e4-square.
Play may continue 1 3 . . . lll fd5 1 4.e4 lll xc3
1 5 .Wxc3 with a pleasant edge to White.
1 3.b4
Needless to say, White does not intend to
grant Black permission to play . . . c5 .
13 ... tlids
This is a recent innovation, but it does not
really change anything.
1 3 . . . h6 1 4.ixf6 lll xf6 1 5 .lll e5 ixg2 1 6.iixg2
id6 1 7.lll c6! We8 1 8.Wf3 gave White a
big positional advantage in Gleizerov Akhmadeev, Kstovo 1 997.
...
Catalan 4 j,e7
25 8
1 3 . . . aS 1 4.Wl'xbS axb4 1 5 .Wfxb7 bxc3 occurred
in Wojtkiewicz - Berset, Geneva 1 995, and
now I would like to point out an improvement
that I overlooked in GM 1:
t£ixc3 19.¥Nxc3±
White is in full control, and Black will suffer
for his pawn weaknesses.
B2) 9 t£!bd7
.••
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.lll eS!N :gb8 ( 1 6 . . . lll xe5 1 7.Wl'xa8! wins
the exchange) l 7.Wl'c6 lll x e5 1 8 .dxeS lll d5
1 9.he7 Wl'xe7 20.e4 lll b6 2 1 .:gfc l ± White
will soon be a pawn up with a clear advantage.
I 4.he7 ¥Nxe7
8 �y� �
�,0 -�,
.,,J-if�.t.
..tw�41)B
� ,,, , % .t. w��
1
�
��
• Ill.Ill Ill� Ill.Ill
: Ill�,J:,,,,x%.,,/Jl,,,,xWA
' Ill./ , & Ill.Il��l�
l Ill.Ill
3
, , , ,�
� �V•tt:Jw�
2 , , �% � .,
8��
, ,,%� ,��
�
�
1 � � • .: � , ,,
,,,,,%
,,,,,%
6
,,,,,
a
b
c
IO.gel
I prefer this calm move over the more
popular 1 0 .Wl'd3 .
d
e
f
g
10 t£ie4
White was threatening e2-e4, establishing
full control over the centre.
.••
1 0 . . . lll b6 l l .Wi'd3 leaves Black unable to
prevent White's plan. A good illustrative
example continued: 1 1 . . .lll bdS
h
1 5.t£!d2!N
A significant improvement over 1 5 .lll e4 f5!
1 6.lll cS lll xc5 1 7.bxcS lll f6! when White had
only slightly better chances in a double-edged
position in Laxman - Liew Chee Meng, Kuala
Lumpur 20 1 4 .
1 5 fS 16Jfacl gac8 17.gfel j,as 18.e4
••.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 1 6 - 6 . . . dxc4
1 2.e4 llixc3 1 3.bxc3 b5 14.llie5 ie8 1 5 .c4 c5
1 6.d5 White was clearly better in Pogonina Sukhareva, Moscow 2009.
20.�al lt'ld5 2 1 .Wxe6t Wxe6 22.�xe6 r;l;f7
23 .�e5 if6
��
�
•�
�."""
•
••.••
7 �.
a
b
c
��
d
e
�
f
g
h
1 1 .�d3!
Previously I recommended 1 l .d5 exd5
1 2.llixd5 lli b6 1 3.lt'lxe7t Wxe7 1 4 .Wc2 as
played in Jovanic - Lazovic, Pula 1 999, but
White's advantage is not that great, especially
after the accurate 1 4 . . . lli f6!N.
1 1 ... tbxc3 12.bxc3 f5
A natural attempt to prevent e2-e4.
1 2 . . . b6? is j ust a blunder, and after 1 3 .lt'lg5 !
ixg5 1 4.ixc6 Black had t o part with the
exchange in Ki. Georgiev - Can, Sarajevo
20 1 1 .
13.tbd2
The fight for the e4-square continues!
1 3 ....ixg2 14. @xg2 tb b6
Another game continued 14 . . . c5 1 5 .�b l
lt'l b6 1 6.e4 cxd4 1 7.cxd4 Wd7 1 8 .lt'lf3 �ac8
1 9.if4 and White retained a solid advantage
in Grochowski - Krygier, email 2008.
15.e4 �d7 16J:�bl �c6
1 6 . . . �ac8 makes White's task was easier
after: 1 7.exf5! �xf5 1 8.We4 �cf8 1 9.f4 �a5
,,,,,
, ,,J� •,Jm�r,,, •�
s
;2 ��J[j�
- , , /,,,,,, � � �
�-,��m� •tJ
�
�
�
�
7, 7,
�
,,,,, >@� �c,,%"'""�
,,,,,
6
6
�
�
8
•�-ef�
��-�
s x-�
"''%��fef'"''Y.
� ,0
1 ,,�
i
r
�'!l)�
i
i
�
,
,,,,,%�
%
, ,,%� � , � r�
� � �
� � � �
� ��f1"//.{�- - %�
�
1
��l�
3 � �� •�r�
��r�-- - - %�r�
��r�J;�JllJ;;JlJ
[!J%�,- 0- ;�
21 J;�J
�
,
25 9
a
c
b
d
e
f
,,,,,
g
h
24.lt'lb3! ixe5 25.llixa5 if6 26.id2± White
emerged with an extra pawn in Ahleao Andriytx, email 20 1 2 .
We have been following Szczepanski - Ottesen,
email 2009. Here I like:
��-��-J-i
8 ,��,,,%•ii
�i
,,% r,,,,,%
-i r� �
5
1
6
� � �
� �� ��
,
�
� �
�
�
� o !�
�
3 "
% � o
� B'fl•
4
21
8------ �
% ,,,,
,,,,, 0��
,. ,�- ---- .
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
17J;b3!N gab8 18.�b5 �xb5 19.gxb5
White has a pleasant endgame with
continuing pressure.
260
Catalan 4 . . . ie7
C) 7 ... b5!?
9.lll fd2!
Several games have shown that 9.tll e5 '1Wxd4
1 0.ixa8 '1Wxe500 is extremely double-edged,
and most strong players have switched to the
text move.
9 . . c6
Other options are rarely played, and not
without reason.
.
9 . . . b3
This forcing approach is too risky.
1 o.'1Wxc4 ia6 l 1 .'1Wxb3 c6
This position first occurred in Ashwin Rusev, Golden Sands 20 1 3. Instead of the
natural 1 2 .lll c3, which somehow failed to
impress in the game, I propose:
8.a4 b4
It is well known that 8 . . . c6? is a serious
mistake due to 9.axb5 cxb5 1 0 .tll g5! when
White is almost winning: 1 0 . . . h6 (Obviously
1 0 . . . lll d5 is not possible due to mate on
h7.) 1 1 .lll x f7! (even stronger than 1 1 .ixa8)
1 1 . . .E:xf7 1 2.ixa8 '1Wxd4 1 3 .ie3 '1Wg4 1 4.if3
'1Wh3 This occurred in Plassmann - Blanke,
Germany 2007, and now the simple 1 5 .E:xa7N
would have given White an easily winning
position.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 2.tll e 4!N ixe2
Capturing the central pawn with 1 2 . . . '1Wxd4
enables White to generate serious pressure
after: 1 3 .ie3 Wfc4 1 4 .lll xf6t ixf6 1 5 .'1Wa3!
lll d7 1 6.lll c3;!;
1 3 .lll xf6t ixf6 1 4.E:e l ia6
14 . . . ig4 1 5 .Wc4 lll d7 1 6.a5 E:b8 1 7.lll c 3;!;
also favours White.
1 5 .lll c3 ixd4
1 5 . . . W/xd4? is much worse due to 1 6.ie3
'1Wc4 1 7.'1Wa3! when the threat of tll e4 is close
to decisive.
1 6.lll b5 ib6 1 7.ie3�
White has powerful compensation.
Chapter 1 6 - 6 . . . dxc4
9 . . . lll d5
This has occurred in several games, but
without much success for Black.
1 0 .lll xc4 c5
In the event of 1 0 . . . lll c6 1 l .e3 ia6, White
should be careful and anticipate Black's
possible ideas. A strong stabilizing move is
1 2 .b3!N± which leaves White with a clear
positional superiority. Instead the seemingly
natural 1 2 .lll bd2 was played in Yevseev Serrano Salvador, St Petersburg 20 1 2, when
Black could have obtained counterplay
with 1 2 . . . b3!N 1 3.'Wxb3 :gbs 1 4.'Wd l
lll cb4�, followed by . . . c5 , with a lot of
compensation.
1 1 .dxc5 ixc5
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
26 1
1 4.lll b3 lll a6 1 5 .:gdl ib7 1 6.a5 lll d7 1 7.if4
e5 1 8 .ie3
White has a clear positional edge.
?-j_�
�mt
�
��'9-W?,
-----_��,a·�
, - I.
� �
�
;D,,f, .. ,�
, , �� ��
�
��/���
��,
��
4_
l. i�� •
�
8 i��_ �
��
8
7
•
A
6 ,
5
3
�
__
%
�
%
f�
,, , , ,
y,
,
�-- - - %
��/� ��:'//,� ��'ef""\§0
� iO
if.�
iff���� 0A i0%
iff� d\b
2
i0% �ffe-J:
�-----�
tr,;¥
�
.
F
�
ii/f/i(""
I � �� - § �
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
10.l£ixc4 �xd4
Grabbing the pawn is the only challenging
idea. Instead after 1 0 . . . ia6 1 1 .:gd l lll bd7
1 2 .lll bd2 :gc8 1 3.e4 lll b6 1 4.a5 lll xc4 1 5 .lll xc4
White had a stable positional advantage in
A. Mikhalevski - Hess, Wheeling 20 1 2.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 2.e4!?N
I consider this a natural improvement
over 1 2 .lll bd2 lll d7 1 3 .e4 lll 5b6 1 4.e5?!
Melkumyan - Can, Sarajevo 20 1 1 , when
1 4 . . . ia6!N would have given Black a
comfortable game.
1 2 . . . lll b6
In the event of 12 . . . lll f6 1 3 .ig5 ib7
14.lll bd2 White has a stable advantage.
1 3 .lll cd2!
I prefer this calm regrouping over 1 3 .lll e 5,
which seems less clear after 13 ... lll 8d7 1 4.a5
b3!.
1 3 . . . 'Wc7
Black cannot play 1 3 . . . ie7? in view of 1 4.a5
lll 6d7 1 5 .e5 and White wins.
l l Jldl �c5 12.J.e3
White has a lead in development and a
brilliant outpost on c4. This, along with Black's
undeveloped queenside, gives him a lot of play
for the sacrificed pawn.
12 ...'WhS
So far nobody has tried 1 2 . . . 'Wf5N, and
indeed after 1 3.'Wxf5 exf5 1 4 .lll bd2 ie6
1 5 .lll a 5 followed by :gac l , Black is doomed to
passive defence.
13.lll bd2 �g4
1 3 . . . e5 1 4 .lll e4 lll g4 1 5 .h4 if5 occurred
in Bu - Yang, China 2 0 1 4 . Black has some
activity on the kingside, but it is hard to
believe he can succeed this way when three of
his pieces have yet to come into play. White
could have obtained a clear advantage as
follows:
Catalan 4 . . .i.e7
262
8 -'}'1� ��,Jl7 �' •
� · f� I.
6
5
4
2
3
1
, , , %�
"" "�
"'" '�
·�
��
�
�
�
�
"� ��
��'0 •�� w'""�..t•"if
"
8 -�-�-!1b
� • �·� ��
��,-��wrii•
d""%� r� �, , %,
�
,
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.'Wc l !N With ideas of .ic5 or llJ cd6.
1 6 . . . .ixe4 ( 1 6 . . . llJ xe3 1 7.'Wxe3±) 1 7 . .ixe4
f5 1 8 . .if3 e4 1 9 . .ixg4 'Wxg4 20.llJe5 'Wxe2
2 1 .E!:d2 'Wh5 (2 1 . . .'Wa6 22 . .ic5 also puts Black
under serious pressure) 22.'Wc4t \t>h8 23.E!:ad l
White has a huge initiative.
I also considered:
1 3 . . . .ia6 1 4 . .if3!N
This is stronger than 1 4.llJf3 when, in Gupta
- Munkhgal, Sharjah 20 1 4, Black should
have continued 14 . . . llJd5N with unclear play.
1 4 . . . 'Wg6
1 4 . . . llJ g4 1 5 ..ixg4 'Wxg4 1 6.f3 'Wg6 1 7.llJe4�
also gives White a lot of compensation.
••
�
�""". �-,, ,�,�
s z r-
7
�
.
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
14 .!lif3 lll xe3
Eliminating the bishop is natural. I found
two examples where other moves were tried:
1 4 . . . llJ d??! 1 5 ..id4 .ic5 ( 1 5 . . . c5N 1 6.h3!
ttJ gf6 17 . .ixf6 .ixf6 1 8.g4 'Wg6 1 9. 'W c l ! also
gives White a clear advantage.) 1 6.h3 llJ gf6
This occurred in Sieglen - Kutzner, Berlin
20 1 2.
I.
,,Y,.
'i�
·�
��
��
��
'"""�
: �-, , ����'�0 ���'�0 �
� %�
�
�-0 �%'"/J�J:;Jtl�'0
2 lt� if� t!J � t�
"' { "' %� ,}f·, , ,,%�, ,
6
1 6 . . . llJ e5 1 7.llJxc6 llJxf3t 1 8 .exf3 E!:fe8
1 9.llJxe?t E!:xe7 20.'Wc5 E!:ee8 2 1 .llJd6±
3
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 .llJe4! llJ bd7
After 1 5 . . . llJd5 1 6.llJe5 'Wf5 1 7 ..id4± the
black queen is in danger.
1 6. llJ a5
White easily develops his initiative, for
instance:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
And now the simple 1 7.g4!N 'Wg6 1 8 .'Wc l +­
would have decided the game on the spot,
thanks to Black's vulnerable queen.
1 4 . . . e5 1 5 . .id2!
The threat of h2-h3 is a pain for Black here
too.
263
Chapter 1 6 - 6 . . . d.xc4
1 5 . . . b3
1 5 . . . t.c5N 1 6.t.e l ± does not help Black.
The text move was played in Edvardsson
- Zumsande, Reykjavik 20 1 2. Instead of
capturing on b3, which might have allowed
Black some counterplay, I would prefer:
•.t
- - '- �
�--••
,v.. ,
7s -.i�- -"� r� "'""� - - -"�
6
:
3
2
1
�� �� ��
�
� �������J���11
-,,,,
���-0 ��
��
1��-0
t�if
t3J t��t�
�- - - "m-�•"""m""
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.'Wd3!N
Luring the enemy rook to d8.
1 6 . . . �d8
16 . . . t.c5 1 7.t.e l t.e6 1 8 .�ac l is clearly
better for White, as Black cannot do much
against the plan of h2-h3 and g3-g4.
1 7.'Wxb3 e4
The main point of White's play is that
l 7 . . . t.c5 ? loses to 1 8.t.e l !, when the position
of the rook on d8 starts to tell.
1 8 .h3 lll xf2
1 8 . . . exf3? 1 9.hxg4 t.xg4 20.exf3 t.e6
2 1 .t.b4! is winning for White.
1 9.st>xf2 exf3 20.'Wxf3
20 . . . 'Wc5t
20 . . . 'Wxf3t leaves White with an endgame
advantage after any of the three possible
recaptures; the computer's top choice is
2 1 .st>xf3!? t.e6 22.lll a5 .
2 1 .lll e3
White has an obvious initiative thanks to his
lead in development.
15.�xe3 a5
8 .1 •.t � �·
.. . .. ;- - ,Y,- ·
7
6
5
4
3
�
�� ·� ··"� , , , /,�
,
llllllllllll •llllllllllll llllllllllllllli •ie
��/�
. �f",�//,� lZJw�
Ii
ii'•
� , , %�
�
-
R
1£�
d
'
8
��;-�
/,
..
1 ,d""%� ,. =
2
a
b
,,,,
,,
c
d
e
f
g
h
16.�d4!
1 6. lt:\ c4 was played in the stem game, but
after 16 . . .t.a6 White failed to prove any
advantage in Gelfand - Ponomariov, Olginka
20 1 1 . The text move has since emerged as an
improvement.
16 ...i.a6
1 6 . . . �a7 1 7 .�ac l t.a6 transposes to 1 7 . . . �a7
below.
17Jfac1
White continues to improve his position
with every move. His compensation is beyond
any doubt, but it is important co understand
that he can fight for an advantage.
17 ... �c8
Black can also try:
1 7 . . . �a7 1 8.t.f3! 'We5 1 9.lll g4!N
264
Catalan 4 .te7
. . .
A clear improvement over 1 9.tlixc6?! tlixc6
20.'IM!xc6 'IM!b8!, when Black had absolutely
no problems in Ju Wenj un - Wei Yi, Ho Chi
Minh City 20 1 2 .
1 9 . . . '1Mfc7 2 0 . .ixc6 '1Mfc8
20 . . . B:c8 runs into 2 1 .'!Mfe4! '1Mfb6 22 . .ib5
and White retains serious pressure.
a
b
c
d
e
l
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
20J�d2!?N
This is more flexible than 20.tlic4 .ixc4
2 .'1Mfxc4 B:a7 as occurred in Helbich - Kupsys,
email 20 1 1 .
f
g
h
2 1 ..ib5 !
Exchanging the light-squared bishops will
enable White to attack the enemy pawns
on the queenside. The following line looks
pretty logical.
2 1 . . .'!Mfxc2 22.B:xc2 B:d8 23 ..ixa6 B:xa6
23 . . . tlixa6?! 24.tlie5±
24.B:d3 B:ad6 25.tli b3;i:;
With ongoing pressure.
18 ..tf3 V«g6
1 8 . . . '!Ml e5 N is a logical alternative, when
1 9. tli g4 '1Mfc7 20.'1Mfe4! B:a7 2 1 .tli e5� seems like
the right way to develop White's initiative.
19 ..te4
It is too early for a queen swap: 1 9.'1Mfxg6
hxg6 20.tlib3 r;t>fg and Black should hold
easily.
19 ...V«h5
a
20 ... B:a7 2 1 .B:cdli
It goes without saying that White has great
compensation for the pawn. Black's position
remains solid, but I would definitely prefer to
be playing White's side.
D) 7 ... a6
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
This is the classical main line, which remains
popular at all levels. Here we have perhaps
the most significant change of direction from
GM I in the entire Catalan.
...
Chapter 1 6 - 6 dxc4
8.a4
Previously I recommended 8.'\Wxc4 b5
9.'\Wc2 ib7 10 . .id2, but my impression at the
moment is that Black has found more than
one route to equality. 1 0 . . . ie4 1 1 .'l.Wc l ib7
is one main line, while 1 0 . . . id6 has become
Black's most popular move at high levels in
recent years.
The text move leads to a radically different type
of game, where White prevents his opponent's
queenside expansion at the cost of a slight
weakening of his own queenside, especially
the b4-square. At this point D l ) 8 ... b6,
D2) 8 c5 and D3) 8 tll c6 are all playable,
but D4) 8 i.d7 is the main line by far.
•..
.•.
.•.
D l ) 8 ... b6 9.tll e5
265
I consider this more accurate than 1 O.'\Wxc4,
which allows 1 o . . . c5.
10 i.b7 1 1 .e4!
An important move, as after 1 l ..ixb7 E:xb7
1 2.'\Wxc4 c5 1 3 .tLlc3 cxd4 Black is close to
equality.
.•.
�-::'.:: .,, }'�ii!Y,�' �%��- �
,,,,,,,��
..i.. W��
i W��
.
,�
,,, ,,Y,v.,,,,,,,
,r�, %�
,,f�,,,,,,,
Y,.
_ ,-0, %�i" "
8
:
'
�
1
6
/..
�
.� · ·
'l,;,:
�m"�- .
���
54 .
�
.
�
8 � r�'8"
3
�o, ,%��
. � ,���r;_
��r���
2 J�!-J�!JJr�
m
1 �lZJ � � - � rJ
'
::::
,,,,
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 tll c6 12.tll xc6 i.xc6 13.tll c3 i.aS
1 3 . . . ib7 was played in Adamski - Luczak,
Piotrkow Trybunalski 1 977, and a couple
of other games, but for some reason White
never chose the obvious plan of regaining the
pawn with 1 4.'\We2N. A logical continuation
is 14 . . . ib4 1 5 .ig5 ixc3 1 6.bxc3 h6 1 7.ixf6
'\Wxf6 1 8 .'\Wxc4;!; and White maintains a
pleasant edge.
.••
14.�e2 c6 1 5.�xc4 b5
9 . . . lll d5 does not make much sense, and after
1 0.'\Wxc4 ib7 1 1 .tLlc3 c6 1 2.E:dl White had a
dream Catalan position in Morovic Fernandez
- Rodriguez Vargas, Copenhagen 1 990.
10.a:d1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Catalan 4 . . . ie7
266
16.�fl !N
An important nuance. Instead after 1 6.Wfe2
b4 1 7.e5 bxc3 1 8.exf6 c2! 1 9.Wfxc2 ixf6 Black
had a decent position in Hubner - Spassky,
Bad Kissingen 1 980.
White has more than one way to maintain
an edge, but I especially like 1 4.ig5 ! ?N f6
1 5 .id2, when the slight weakening of Black's
light squares increases the value of the Catalan
bishop.
16 ... b4 17.e5 bxc3
1 7 . . . tt'ld5 1 8 .tt'l e4 is clearly better for White.
12.tC!feS tlixe5
Other options hardly improve Black's
chances:
1 8.exf6 Lf6 1 9.bxc3;!;
Having prevented the . . . c2 idea, White
changes the pawn structure and maintains an
edge.
1 2 . . . tt'l d4?! 1 3 .Wfd l :B:d8 1 4 .id2 tt'l e8 occurred
in D. Gurevich - Schwarz, Biel 1 99 1 , and now
the simple 1 5 .e3 tt'l f5 1 6.Wfb3± would have
given White a strategically winning position.
02) 8 ... c5 9.dxc5 tCic6
9 . . . ixc5 is likely to lead to the same thing after
1 0.tt'lbd2 tt'l c6 1 l .tt'lxc4.
8 .i � .i. �
7
6
��· �
j,
·� ·�- -?-�·--,�-·
,,%._
, , %�
�- �� , �
'· ··� �� �jl§i� �- �mr
�� ��J��r�
32 �, , ,�W%.,
� ����J!J
1 �l2J� R M �
5
4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
IO.tC!a3 hc5 l l .tC!xc4 �e7
This has been by far the most popular choice
in the position. Other moves also fail to bring
Black an easy life, as the following brief lines
illustrate:
1 1 . .. tt'l b4 1 2.Wfb3 Wfe7 1 3.id2 tt'l bd5
1 4.tt'lfe5± was clearly better for White in
Koshy - Parameswaran, New Delhi 1 982.
l 1 . . .id7 1 2.tt'lce5 Wfe7 1 3.tt'lxd7 tt'lxd7
occurred in Menezes - Kleiser, Vienna 20 1 4.
12 ... tt'l b4 1 3 .Wfb3 a5 14.id2 tt::l fd5 1 5 .:B:fd l
b 6 1 6.e4 tt'l c7 ( 1 6 . . . tt::l f6N i s a better try,
although 1 7.:B:ac l ia6 1 8 .ie3 still gives
White a clear plus} 1 7.ixb4! axb4 1 8 .tt'l d3±
White was much better in Franco Alonso Barez Menendez, Madrid 200 5 .
1 3.tC!xeS
Many games have been played from this
position, but the general assessment is obvious,
as White keeps a pleasant advantage thanks to
his powerful Catalan bishop. The following
game remains as good an example as any:
Chapter 1 6 - 6 . . . dxc4
267
Black was under annoying pressure in
Tukmakov - Petursson, Bern 1 99 1 .
D3) 8 tll c6 9.YMxc4
•••
s i. U..te �� •
7 � · �� � · �� ·
6 ,�U'iU'iy,lf _ _ _ ;-:�
�
��-%", , ,;-:�f�,, , Y,�'0
-� �� �- - - -�
� !ll
l�llllli�.
llll
�wr�
3
� 'll
;41
� '0
�-0 �L
�
�
�
21 , , JrJrf/0 -�tlJrftJ
,�ltJ�
a
b
c
-��
d
e
f
g
h
Black has tried many different moves
from here, but in most cases White will get
an easy advantage with natural play. Rather
than wasting space discussing a lot of inferior
options in what is already a sideline, I will
focus on a few of the more forcing options.
9 ...YMd5
This natural move has been the most
popular choice by far. It is also worth briefly
mentioning:
9 . . . lt:\ b4 1 0.id2 a5
1 0 . . . b5?N fails to l 1 .1Mi'b3 bxa4 1 2.�xa4 a5
1 3 .lll e5 and Black is in trouble.
l 1 .lll a3
1 1 .�d l !?N is also worth considering.
l 1 . . .lt:\ e4 1 2.ixb4 ixb4
1 2 . . . axb4N 1 3 .lll c2 id7 1 4.a5 c6 1 5 .a6
�xa6 1 6.�xa6 bxa6 1 7.1Mfxa6 c5 1 8 .lll e 5
ll\ f6 1 9.dxc5 ixc5 20.lll d3 leaves White
with thematic Catalan pressure.
Now in Sturm - Raedeker, Wuerttemberg
1 998, a logical continuation would have
been:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3.1Mfc2N lt:\ f6 1 4.lt:\c4±
White enjoys a pleasant edge.
10.lt)bd2 gds
It is important to understand that the
queenless position after 1 0 . . . 1Mfxc4 l 1 .lll xc4
a5 , as occurred in Quinteros - Sharif, Jakarta
1 978, is quite pleasant for White. I suggest
1 2.id2N �d8 1 3.�fc l id7 1 4.e3 lll d5
1 5 .lll e l ie8 1 6.lll d3 when White maintains a
small but stable edge.
1 1 .e3
I was surprised to find well over a hundred
games from this position. Once again, I will
just focus on the few continuations that I
consider most logical for Black.
Catalan 4 . . .ie7
268
1 1 . . . a5 was played in a recent game, which
continued: 1 2.b3 ( 1 2.°We2!?N also comes into
consideration) 12 . . . 'WhS 1 3 . .ib2 .id7 Zhou
Weiqi - Wei Yi, China 20 1 3 . Now 1 4.gac l N
looks natural, and i f 1 4 . . . gac8 1 5 .e4!? lLi b4
1 6.lLieS c5 1 7 . .if3 'Wh6 1 8.°We2 White has a
clear advantage.
1 1 . . .'Wxc4 1 2.lLixc4 gbg
12 . . ..id? 13 ..id2 a5 1 4.gfc l lLi d5 transposes
to 1 0 . . .'Wxc4 1 1 .lLixc4 a5 12 . .id2N, as
covered in the note to Black's 1 0th move
above.
1 3 .gd l !
This is more accurate than 1 3 . .id2 lLi e4
1 4.mcl lLixd2 1 5 .lLifxd2 ltJ b4 1 6.lLib3
f6 when Black had an adequate game in
Ftacnik - Beliavsky, Yerevan ( ol) 1 996.
1 3 . . . .id? 1 4 . .id2 lLie4 1 5 . .ie l
By keeping the dark-squared bishop alive,
White maintains some pressure.
�� �� � ·
8
7 �:r�r�
·�1v,m
'i)�
,,Y,� , . , . , /,�•
�� �� ��
��
�
: !.�
��- - - -%��'
2 ��� �-- - -- %W[JJ:Wfj
t � �m:ef----"� -k' ---6
3
1
"
� � �� =
----
a
---
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 . . . .ie8 1 6.gdc l gdc8
16 .. .f6N 1 7.ltJfd2 ltJxd2 1 8 .lLixd2 .ib4
1 9.lLic4 .ixe l 20.gxe l;!; also gives White the
better game.
1 7.ltJfeS lLixe5 1 8 .lLixeS lLi f6
Now in Wen Yang - Wei Yi, Danzhou 20 1 3 ,
White should have played:
1 9.ltJd3N
With a typical Catalan edge.
12.h3
I like to secure the kingside, while preparing
a possible g3-g4 at a suitable moment. I will
just mention one example from this position.
12 ... ltJ dS!? 1 3.e4 lLJ db4
s I �J,;J�
�-�
�
� l. w� � l. w� I.
·� ·� , �� , , ,,,/,�
: �� ��, �� �
�!
,,,,,,/, ��rn �
�
4 �
•
8
•Vw�
8
•
---,
,
,
,,
�
�
,?
,
:
�
�W%�
8
3 mw,0 �,,-, ,,/, ��J���
�
�
2
�� �� �,/fl� ��
�
,
,
""ef """�;�1 �
� - - -� n%�'§t
1
iOx
a
b
?-0% �
��:
c
d
�
e
f
g
h
14.lLJ b3!?N
1 4.'Wc3 brought White a convincing victory
after 1 4 . . . a5 ?! 1 5 .lLic4 .if6 1 6 . .ie3 h6 1 7.gfd l
b 6 1 8 . .if4 gd7 1 9.lLie3± when h e was clearly
better in Banusz - Sebenik, Sarajevo 20 1 3 .
However, Black can improve with 1 4 . . .f6!N
1 5 .lLic4 b6, with an adequate position.
14... b6 15.id2 ib7 16.�fcl �ac8 17.aS!;I;
White has a pleasant game, with more space in
the centre and some pressure on the queenside.
D4) 8 ...id7 9.�xc4
Chapter 1 6 - 6 . . . dxc4
269
9 ....ic6
This is the obvious follow-up to Black's last
move.
9 . . . b5 is a risky move which weakens the
queenside unnecessarily. 1 0 .Wc2 tt'l c6 1 1 .tt'le5!
tt'l b4 occurred in Hoffman - Franco, Sao Paulo
200 1 , and now White should have played
1 2.Wd2!N l'!b8 1 3 .tt'l c3 bxa4 1 4 .lll xa4 ib5
1 5 .l'!d t t with a pleasant edge.
10 ..if4
1 0.lll c3 b5! is fine for Black with the knight
on c3 as a target. I also failed to find anything
interesting after the most popular I O.ig5 , but
fortunately the text move is more promising.
Black now has several options: D41) 10 ... tt'l dS,
D42) 10 ... .id6, D43) 10 ... c!LJbd7, and the
most popular D44) 10 ... aS.
D41) 10 ... c!LJ dS 1 1 ..id2!
1 1 .lll c 3
Despite having achieved a most memorable
victory with this move, I must confess that it
is not the best.
1 1 . . .lll xf4 1 2.gxf4 id6!
This seems most accurate. My game
continued: 1 2 . . . a5 1 3 .lll e5 ixg2 1 4.<;t>xg2
c6 1 5 .l'!ad l lll a6 1 6.e3 tt'l b4 1 7.l'!gl lll d5
1 8.<;t>hl f6?! This weakens the light squares
and the kingside, and I was able to take
full advantage. 1 9.lll f3 Wb6 20.Wfl Wxb2
2 1 .lll xd5 cxd5 22.f5! Wb6 23 .Wh3 l'!fe8
24.l'!xg7t! <;t>xg7 25 .l'!gl t <;t>hs 26.tt'lh4 h6
27.lll g 6t <;t>h7 28.fXe6 l'!a6 29.Wf5 Wxe6
30.lll fSt 1 -0 Avrukh - Sanikidze, Novi Sad
2009.
1 3 .e3 lll d7
There was a time when I felt inspired by
this type of structure with a half-open
g-file, but objectively speaking the position
is j ust unclear and double-edged. A good
illustrative line is:
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.<;t>hl tt'l f6 1 5 .l'!gl ixf3!N
1 5 . . . lll e4?! 1 6.lll xe4 ixe4 1 7.lll g5 ! ixg2t
1 8 .l'!xg2± was good for White in Kraai Rosen, Indianapolis 2009, as his remaining
knight was stronger than Black's bishop.
1 6.ixf3 c6
Black has a solid position with balanced
chances.
8 1. • s ��-�------�ref'"" %�f�-----V.;:; ,�
7
6
�
·
·
�l�· 1�
�
�.���.-.� �, , , /,�
�.
: �!��•""
ti��.�wr
3
- 8 1��1&
2 ��r0
1� ���0� ��J��r�
-1 ��� - - - , �j=
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 . .. c!LJd7
It is important to mention that 1 I . . .ib5 ? ?
does not work i n view o f 1 2.axb5 axb5
1 3 .Wxd5! Wxd5 1 4.l'!xa8+- as first occurred in
Kozul - Lekic, Neum 2004.
12J'MI a5 13.�c2
I prefer this to 1 3 .Wb3, which encourages
1 3 . . . l'!a6 followed by . . . l'!b6.
1 3 ... ct b4 14.i.xb4 i.xb4 15.e4
Catalan 4 . . . J.e7
270
White has gained space in the centre and
enjoys a pleasant edge.
17.ti)a2 J.e7 18.ti)cl�
White retains a pleasant advantage.
D42) 1 0 ...J.d6
1 5 ... ti)b6
16 ... J.es
Obviously White should take the possibility
of 1 6 . . . J.xc3 1 7. bxc3 WI e8 into consideration.
Black indeed grabs a pawn, but White gets
fantastic compensation after:
78
65
4
23
1 1 .�cl !
This rare move i s White's most promising
option. He fails to achieve any advantage after
1 1 .tll c3 .ixf4 1 2.gxf4 a5 , or 1 1 ..ig5 tll bd7
1 2 .tll c3 h6 1 3 . .ixfG lll xf6. The latter line has
been tested extensively at grandmaster level,
but Black generally holds the position without
much effort.
1 1 . . a5
I will take this as the main line, as it seems
like the most logical move and was used
successfully by Kramnik last year. Here are a
few other possibilities:
.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 8.:B:db l .ixa4 1 9 .'1Wd3! followed by c4-c5.
1 l . . . .ixf4 1 2 .'\Wxf4 '\Wd6 1 3 .'IWcl !N
This is a pretty obvious improvement over
1 3.'IWxdG cxd6 1 4.tll bd2, when the arising
endgame is harmless for Black, who can
even simplify with 1 4 . . . .ixf3!? 1 5 . .ixf3 d5
1 6.:B:fc l tll c6= as in Nowak - Bielavsky,
Warsaw 1 979.
271
Chapter 1 6 - 6 . . . dxc4
1 5 .lll e5! lll xc3 1 6.bxc3 ixg2 1 7.'tt> xg2 lll d5
1 8 .Wff3
White has a pleasant edge, with a central
pawn majority, more active pieces and pressure
on the queenside.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 . . . id5
1 3 . . . lll bd? 1 4.lll bd2 White intends 1Mfc2
followed by e2-e4, and if 1 4 . . . lll e4 1 5 .lll c4
1Mfb4 1 6.lll fe5 lll xe5 1 7.lll xe5 id5 1 8 .e3± he
maintains the better game.
1 4 .lll c3
1 4.lll bd2?! lll c6 1 5 .e3 lll b4 looks solid
enough for Black.
1 4 . . . lll c6 1 5 .e3 l:!ad8 1 6.a5±
1 I . . .lll bd7 1 2.lll c3 lll e4 1 3.l:!d l !
After this useful move, i t transpires that all
the central tension is favourable for White.
1 3 . . . ixf4
I also considered the ambitious 1 3 . . . lll xc3!?N
1 4.bxc3 lll b6, but after 1 5 .a5 lll c4 1 6.1Mfc2
ixf4 1 7.gxf4 Wfd5 1 8 .Wfa2! lll d6 1 9.Wfxd5
ixd5 (or 1 9 . . . exd5 20.lll e5) 20.lll e5 White
has the better endgame.
1 4.Wfxf4 lll df6
All this happened in P.H. Nielsen Antonsen, Koge 20 1 3 . Here White could
have increased his pressure by means of:
8
7
6
4
5
3
",•� ·
�."-��""'/,�� �,�,v,_� i
�
"-, ,� . . �
��
. . �J.P� �
�.i.�
·
� � , , ,Y, �... , ; �
am
.
'SI �-
. .
.
.
�
�
�
0
�
�%�
�
,l, J�
�p
®.'
�
• w�
�
�
.
.
�� - ,,� �D
.
�
111111 111®
21 lll. . Jm�f\m
� ��JrJlJ
-� tiJ�� j�
� m
&' "m "
"
"
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
12.l£ic3
1 2 .id2?! is too passive, and after 1 2 . . . lll bd?
1 3 .l:!dl Wfe8 1 4.ic3 lll e4 1 5 .lll fd2 f5 1 6.lll xe4
fXe4 1 7.ie l 1Mfh5 1 8 .lll c3 lll f6 Black easily
obtained a comfortable position in Giri Kramnik, Stavanger 20 1 4.
12 ... c!£i a6 13JMIN
The only game from this position continued
1 3 .ig5 h6 1 4.ih4 ixf3 1 5 .ixf6 ( 1 5 .ixf3 c6
does not change much) 1 5 . . . Wfxf6 1 6.ixf3 c6
1 7.l:!d l l:!ad8 and Black had easily solved his
problems in Fridman - Boruchovsky, Warsaw
20 1 3 .
Th e text move seems like an obvious attempt
to improve. I will offer some illustrative lines
showing logical play on both sides.
1 3 ... c!£ib4 14.ig5
This seems like the most ambitious try.
1 4 .lll b5!? also deserves some attention. It is
not clear if White will want to exchange on
d6 with either the knight or the bishop, but
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
272
Catalan 4 . . . ie7
it certainly gives Black something to think
about. You may wish to explore this in more
detail by yourself, but I will just mention that
1 4 . . . .ixf4 1 5 .'1Wxf4 seems to favour White, for
instance: 1 5 . . . lll fd5 (or 1 5 . . . ixb5 1 6.axb5
'1Wd7 1 7.'IWgS ! lll bd5 1 8 .ifl !;t;) 1 6.Wfc l lll b6
( 1 6 . . . lt:\ f6 1 7.lll e5 ixg2 1 8 .iixg2;!;) 1 7.b3
id5 1 8.'1Wb2 White keeps a slight pull.
14 ... h6
We will take this as the main line, as Black
reacted similarly in the aforementioned
Fridman - Boruchovsky game.
14 . . .ie7 is a playable alternative. White
does not have anything serious, but he has
the freedom to choose between two decent
types of positions of differing characteristics.
1 5 .lll e 5 ixg2 1 6.iixg2 lll d7 1 7.ixe7 '1Wxe7
1 8.lt:lc4 reaches a solid position with a slight
space advantage, while 1 5 .ixf6!? ixf6 1 6.e4
is a more ambitious idea, relinquishing the
bishop pair in order to establish a strong pawn
centre and stifle the c6-bishop.
16.ha c6 17.e4
Compared to the Fridman - Boruchovsky
game, the inclusion of the moves E!:dl and
. . . lt:\ b4 means that Black is unable to meet this
move with . . . e5.
17 ...ie7
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
1 8.e5 tll fd5
In the event of 1 8 . . . lt:l d7 1 9.ixe7 '1Wxe7
20.lt:le4 White keeps a slight pull.
1 9.J.xe7 V!fxe7 20.tll e4
We have reached a complex position where
both sides have their trumps, but I slightly
prefer White. One of the many possible ideas
is to try and generate some kingside play with
E!:a3, ih5 , E!:f3 and so on.
D43) IO ... c!ll bd7
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
15.ih4 hf3
1 5 . . . ie7 1 6.ixf6 ixf6 1 7.e4 can be
compared with 1 4 . . . ie7 1 5 .ixf6!? above. The
extra . . . h6 move slightly favours White, as the
typical plan of . . . g6 followed by . . . ig7 will
leave Black's kingside slightly less secure.
Chapter 1 6 - 6 . . . dxc4
273
043 1) 1 1 ....id6
This has been quite a popular choice.
The drawback is that Black passes up the
opportunity to make use of the weakened
b4-square.
1 1 .tli c3
Now the three most important options
are 043 1) 1 1 ... .id6, 0432) 1 1 ... �cS and
D433) 1 1 ... c!li b6.
It is worth briefly mentioning:
l 1 . . . lLi d5 1 2.lLixd5 exd5
In the event of 1 2 . . . .ixd5N White should
not rush to capture the c7-pawn, as 1 3 .'!Wxc7
Wxc7 1 4 . .ixc7 �fc8 1 5 .�fc l lLic5! gives
Black excellent chances to hold. 1 3 .Vfff c 2!
is stronger, when Black must either allow
e2-e4 with tempo or give up his light­
squared bishop, both of which give White
an obvious advantage.
1 3.Vfff c2
1 3 .Vfff b 3!?N could also be considered.
1 3 . . . �e8 1 4.�fd l a5 1 5 .lLie5! �a6
Now in Parappalli - Ganesan, Calcutta
1 992, White should have played:
78
65
4
23
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
This move has been tried by several strong
players, but White's best reply is almost
unknown.
12 ..id2!?
This is almost a novelty, having occurred in
j ust a single email game.
12 ... c!li e4
The quiet 1 2 . . . We7N enables White to
establish control over the e4-square: 1 3 .�fe l
.ib4 1 4.lLie4 lLi d5 1 5 . .ixb4 Wxb4 1 6.Wc2t
I also considered 1 2 . . . lLi b6N 1 3 .Vfff d3 lLi bd5
14.lLixd5 il.xd5 ( 1 4 . . . exd5 1 5 .lLie5 looks
promising for White) 1 5 . .ig5 .ie7 1 6 . .ixf6
.ixf6 1 7.e4 ilc6 1 8 .�fd l Vfff d7 1 9.b3 �fd8
20.�ac l and White is slightly better.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.lLixc6!N bxc6
1 6 . . . �xc6 1 7.Vfff b 3 lLib6 1 8 . .id2! wins the
a5-pawn, but the text move is not much fun
for Black either.
1 7.e4
White has a serious advantage.
13.c!lixe4 he4 14.tlig5!
A well-timed operation. Once again, the
main idea is to win control over the e4-square.
14 ... .ixg2 15.©xg2 c!lif6
274
Catalan 4 J.e7
. . .
This seems like the most flexible choice. The
next few moves are logical, and have occurred
a few times in practice.
12 ... �b6 13.%Vb3 tll bdS 14.i.gS!
This strong move enables White to develop
some pressure.
14 ... tll d7
1 4 . . . h6 l 5 .J.xf6 .ixf6 1 6.tll e4! �e7 occurred
in Buhmann - Oud, Bad Wiessee 20 1 0 . At
this point the most convincing way to increase
White's advantage would have been 1 7 .tll e l !N,
for instance: 17 . . . :B:fd8 1 8.tll xf6t �xf6 1 9.e4
tll b6 20.a5 tll d7 2 1 .tll c2±
The text move just leads to a calm position
where White has a slight space advantage and
better central control.
1 5.i.d2 tll xc3 16.bxc3 b6
This position occurred in Miton - Bulski,
Warsaw 20 1 0, and now I like the following
idea.
16 ... h6
1 6 . . . :B:c8 runs into the annoying 1 7.'\Wb3!.
17.tll f'3 � e4 18.iaS
White maintains some pressure.
a
c
d
e
f
g
h
17.YNc4!N J.b7 18.tll el i.xg2 19.@xg2 aS
From now on, the thematic . . . c5 will leave
Black with a permanent weakness on b6.
20J�ab l �£6 21 .i.gS YNdSt 22.YNxdS tll xd5
22 . . . exd5 23.e3 leaves White with the
straightforward plan of :B:dc l , tll d3, .ixf6 and
c3-c4, with a lot of pressure.
Chapter 1 6 - 6 . . . dxc4
This is my new idea, offering a pawn sacrifice.
Most games have continued 1 3 .lt:lxd5 lt:lxd5
1 4.id2 lt:l f6 when Black is perfectly okay.
1 3 . . . lt:lxc3
1 3 . . . lt:l b4 should be met by 1 4.Wd l , which
explains why the bishop went to c l rather
than d2 on the previous move. Now White
is nicely coordinated and ready for e2-e4.
1 4.bxc3
8
7
6
5
4
3
1
275
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
23.he7 tll xe7 24.e4;!;
Despite the simplifications, White can
continue pressing for a long time.
0433) 1 1 tll b6
••.
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 4 . . . lt:lxa4
1 4 . . . ixa4 1 5 .c4 gives White excellent
compensation while also setting a nice trap:
the logical 1 5 . . . c5 runs into 1 6.id2! when it
is hard for Black to deal with the ia5 threat.
1 5 .c4
White's powerful centre gives him plenty of
compensation for the pawn.
8
7
6
12.Y!Yd3!
1 2.Wb3 has scored slightly higher, but I
failed to discover any advantage for White
after 1 2 . . . lt:l fd5!.
12 tll bdS
An important alternative is:
1 2 . . . lt:l fd5 1 3 .ic l !N
.••
5
4
3
1
2
a
1 3.�gS
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
276
Catalan 4 . . . !e7
Several players have exchanged knights on
d5, but I see absolutely no point in doing so.
1 3 ... tll xc3
1 3 . . . lll b4 has been played twice, but for
some reason neither White player chose
1 4 .Wfb l N, fighting for control over e4.
A logical continuation is: l 4 . . . h6 1 5 .!xf6 ixf6
1 6.e4 Wfd7 ( 1 6 . . . ixd4? 1 7.�d l e5 1 8 .lll xe5 !
i s clearly better fo r White) 1 7.�dl We have
reached a typical double-edged middlegame,
where I would favour White's strong centre
over Black's bishop pair.
14.bxc3 .ie4 1 5.VNe3
s
E ��-� �
I���-J,,,,%�f�---,,��• w� •
�
· • w�
, ,, , % •
-.%.,
, , %�
In the event of 1 6 . . . �c8 White is better
placed to take action in the centre: l 7 .ixf6!
ixf6 1 8 .Wfd3 c5 1 9.e4 ic6 20.d5! exd5
2 1 .exd5 id? 22.lll d2±
This position occurred in Luppi - Lotti, corr.
1 998. Here I found a remarkable idea:
8
7
6
5
4
3
�
2
l!llllll l!llllll ,
�: '·llll
,llll
.
·
-�f,�fl/���
:
w
·
''
%
- - �ff;"\ �/�
��
1
1
6
3
2
1
� �
m�
,,
�� , , , %� -�%���
- - � �� �� �- - - - %� -&?- -� � �:�
iL...:s%
a
b
c
��� r:.z...J r-L...:s%
d
e
f
g
h
15 ...!d5
1 5 . . . ic6 1 6.a5 h6 1 7.ixf6 ixf6 has been
played a few times. A good example for White
is: 1 8 .Wfd3! Wfd6 ( 1 8 . . . �b8 1 9.e4±) 1 9.�fb l
ib5 20.c4 ic6 2 1 .e3 White maintained a
favourable position in Djoudi - Migliorini,
email 200 5 .
16.gfdl
White should not force the issue with
1 6.ixf6 ixf6 1 7.Wfd3, as 1 7 . . . c5 1 8 .e4 ic600
led to double-edged play in Cummings Upton, Pula 1 997.
16 c5
.••
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
17.c4!N .ixc4 18.dxc5 VNc7
1 8 . . . id5 1 9.lll e 5 retains some pressure for
White.
19.!f4!
An important follow-up.
19 VNxc5
If the queen moves somewhere else then
White's bishop comes to d6 with a lot of power.
.•.
Chapter 1 6 - 6 dxc4
. . .
20.Y!Yxc5 i.xc5 2 1 J�dcl :aacs
2 1 . . .b5 is hardly a good idea in view of
22.tll e5! !'i:ad8 23.tll xc4 bxc4 24.!'i:xc4 with a
clear advantage for White.
22.:axc4 .ixflt 23.'it>xfl :axc4 24.tlid2
Materially Black is okay for the moment,
but White is still the clear favourite, with two
strong bishops against a rook.
D44) 1 0 ... a5
277
12.:aacl!
All of White's sensible-looking rook moves
have been tested numerous times, but a deep
investigation convinced me that the text move
is the best way to fight for an advantage.
1 2.tll e5 ixg2 1 3.iixg2 is the main alternative,
which has been tested extensively at a high
level. Black's most reliable reply seems to be
1 3 . . . tll d5 1 4.!'i:ad l tt:\xf4t 1 5 .gxf4 id6!. Sergei
Karjakin has demonstrated the viability of
Black's position, having scored two wins and
three draws with no defeats, against world­
class opposition.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
1 1 .tlic3 tli a6
This logical follow-up has been almost
universally played.
I found one example where Black placed his
bishop on b4 instead of the knight: 1 l . . .ib4
1 2.tll e5 (I also like 1 2.!'i:fd l N tll bd7 1 3 .tll e5
i.xg2 1 4 .iixg2 tll b6 1 5 .'\Ml'd3 '\Ml'e7 1 6.e4 !'i:fd8
l 7.tll f3 with a pleasant edge.) 1 2 . . . ixg2
1 3 .iixg2 tll d5 14.tll d3! (This is stronger
than 1 4.id2, when 1 4 . . . tt:\b6 1 5 .'\Ml'd3 tll 8d7
1 6.tt:\f3 '\Ml'e7 1 7.e4 e5 leads to balanced play.)
1 4 . . . tt:\c6 This was Diermair - Boensch,
Austria 20 1 3 , and now the simple 1 5 .!'i:fd l N
would have maintained a nice edge fo r White.
12 ... tli b4
Many other moves have been tried, but the
text is the most logical and popular.
I will not discuss every Black option in detail,
as the general plans will tend to remain pretty
similar. Here is one alternative which slightly
alters the character of the game:
1 2 . . . id6
This has been tested by such strong players
as Bacrot and Beliavsky.
1 3 .ig5 !
1 3 .tll e5 can be met by 1 3 . . . id5!N 1 4.tt:\xd5
exd5 when Black is perfectly okay.
1 3 . . . h6 1 4.ixf6 '\Ml'xf6 1 5 .e4 '\Ml'd8
l 5 . . . e5 is a playable alternative, although in
Catalan 4 . . . ie7
278
Pawlus - Zawadka, corr. 1 992, the accurate
1 6.lll d 5!N Wf e6 l 7.Wf c2! E:ad8 1 8 .E:fd l
would have retained better chances for
White.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
for the insertion of the moves E:fd l and
. . . h6, which undoubtedly favours White.
1 3 . . . id6 was played in Stoll - Gerigk,
Germany 1 997, and now I don't see any
reason to refrain from the standard plan:
1 4.lll e5N ixg2 1 5 .iixg2 lll b4 ( 1 5 . . . lll h 5
l 6 ..id2 does not help Black) 1 6.e4;!; White
achieves his optimal set-up.
h
1 6.E:fd l lll b4
In Harika - Melia, Plovdiv 20 1 0, White
definitely had the better game, the only real
question being how to improve his position.
I would recommend the knight manoeuvre:
1 7.lll d2!N ie7 1 8.lll fl
Followed by lll e3 and, at a suitable moment,
advancing the f-pawn.
1 2 . . . h6
This move has brought Black a good score,
but I am not a big fan of it. True, Black
prevents a future ig5 , but the weakening of
the g6-square may make it harder for Black
to chase the white knight from e5 later.
1 3 .E:fd l !
1 3 .E:fe l ib4 makes i t hard fo r White to
carry out e2-e4, so it is better to put the rook
on the d-file.
1 3 . . . ib4
This is a typical idea to establish control
over the e4-square, but it leaves the knight
misplaced on a6.
1 3 . . . lll b4N immediately transposes to
another game, and after 1 4 .lll e5 ixg2
1 5 .iixg2 White had a pleasant edge in
Mastrovasilis - Forsaa, Gibraltar 20 1 3 . The
position is the same as the main line, except
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.lll e5 ixg2 1 5 .iixg2 lll d5
1 5 . . . c6 1 6.Wfb3 lll d 5 1 7.id2;!; did nor
change much in Morrow - Wilhelmi, corr.
20 1 4 .
1 6 . .id2 c 6 1 7.e4 lll f6 1 8 .f3 lll d7 1 9.lll d3;!;
White had a nice edge in Johnston - Reis,
corr. 20 1 3 .
13.lll e5
1 3.E:fe l has been tried by several strong
players, including Kasparov, but it seems to me
that 1 3 . . . .id6 should be fine for Black.
Chapter 1 6 - 6 . . . dxc4
13 ...Lg2
This is the only move to have been played,
with good reason.
13 . . . id5 ?! is a thematic idea in similar
positions, but after 1 4.llixd5 exd5? 1 5 .°1Mi'xc7
White wins a pawn while highlighting the
importance of placing the rook on c l , rather
than some other square, on move 1 2 . Black
would therefore have to resign himself to
1 4 . . . lli fxd5, and after 1 5 .id2 c6 1 6.:!'l:fd l
White's bishop pair gives him a pleasant edge.
279
variation 04422 below. The position of the
white queen on d3 instead of c4 is pretty
inconsequential, but the inclusion of . . . h6
is slightly unfavourable for Black, as he may
find it harder to chase the knight away with
. . . f6 due to the weakening of the g6-square.
14.@xg2 tll fd5
This is Black's first choice by far. Without it,
he risks falling into a passive situation.
14 . . . c6 allows White to seize space in the
centre, although Black remains pretty solid.
A good example continued: 1 5 .e4 lli d7 1 6.llif3!
Avoiding unnecessary exchanges. 16 ... °1Mfb6
( 1 6 . . . °1Mfc8 1 7.°1Mfe2;!; brought me a recent
victory in Avrukh - Fedorovsky, Germany
20 1 4.) 1 7.:!'l:fd l llif6 1 8 .llie5 E:fd8 1 9.i.e3
°1Mi'a6 20.f3 lli d7 2 1 .°1Mi'xa6 E:xa6 22.llic4!;!;
White maintained an edge in Sasikiran - Talla,
Czech Republic 20 1 2, and went on to win a
nice game.
1 4 . . . ll:i bd5 1 5 .ig5 !?N
White can of course play 1 5 .llixd5 and
transpose to one of the two main lines
given below. The text move could also be
considered as an attempt to punish Black's
last move.
1 5 . . . h6
1 5 . . . llib6 1 6.°1Mfd3 h6 ( 1 6 . . . c6 1 7.e4 lli fd7
1 8.i.xe7 °1Mfxe7 1 9.llif3 Having a stable space
advantage, White is not interested in trading
a pair of knights. 1 9 . . . E:ad8 20.b3;!;) 1 7.if4
(I generally prefer to keep my bishop,
although 1 7 .ixf6 ixf6 1 8 . lli f3 is another
route to a slight edge.) 1 7 . . . lli fd5 1 8.llixd5
llixd5 1 9.i.d2 The position is similar to
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.i.xf6
This time I think White should exchange, as
1 6.i.d2 llib6 1 7.°1Mfd3 lli fd5 is not so clear.
1 6 . . . llixf6 1 7.e4
White keeps a typical slight pull. Even the
more restrained 1 7.:!'l:fd l ! ? c6 1 8 .°!Mfb3 :!'l:b8
1 9 .llic4 i.b4 20.e3 looks sufficient for a tiny
edge. I am not sure if this line is really any
better than transposing to the lines below with
1 5 .llixd5, but it is always useful to have more
than one decent option.
a
15.�xd5
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
.
Catalan 4 . . .te?
280
Now Black must decide whether or not
to exchange queens. We will analyse D441)
1 5 ...Wxd5t and 0442) 1 5 ... �xd5 in turn.
and an eventual win in Wang Yue - Onischuk.
Ningbo 20 1 1 , but the text move is even
better.) 20 . . . .!xe5 2 1 .dxe5 tli xa4 22.:B:al tli c5
23.:B:xa5 ± White has a serious advantage.
D441) 15 ... Wxd5t 16.Wxd5 �xd5 17 ..td2
ur�
s1
U .t. �,
i r� i
,�
, �,�J�t
1
6
�� , , %� ,,Y,� ,,,,,%�
,�
%'"/
5 � �� � /, ��
'11!Ii
�
4 '8%�
,,, , , ;�
��
��
!Ii�
!Ii�{
!Ii
3
2
1
'
�,�, , %�r�
��r�
r� ���,% �
8 r�@rr!f
a
, , , , %�w"'"�m:•,,,, ,
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
This endgame is deceptively tricky for Black
to handle, and he will have to work hard to
equalize. According to the database, White has
won more games than he has drawn from this
position, and has yet to suffer a single defeat.
17... c6
Worse is: 1 7 . . . :B:fd8?! 1 8 .e4 tli b6? ( 1 8 . . . tli f6N
is a better try, but after 1 9.:B:xc? :B:xd4 20.tlif3
:B:d7 2 1 .:B:c4± Black's position is quite
unpleasant.) 1 9.:B:xc? .id6 Now the strongest
continuation would have been:
1 8.gfdl
I also like 1 8.tlid3!?N, with the idea tc
j ump to c5 at a suitable moment. A plausible
continuation is 1 8 . . . :B:fd8 1 9.e3 f6 20.:B:fd l
©f7 2 1 .h4 and White retains some pressure.
18 ... gfd8 19.�c4 � b4 20.e3 f6 2 1 .b3
Black remains pretty solid, but the position is
much easier to handle for White, as evidenced
by a practical score of 4/4 from here.
8
7
.i �
�
��
�
r
Y,
,
,
,
�
� · , Y, ,
��
.'!Ii, , , %�
�
,
!Ii��
!Ii�
5� % "/ ,� � %�
6
' /, �� �• ��
, , %•tt:Jr�
4 8
�
,,
�ef�
, 'd, %�
.8,
;�
,
,
%
�'
""%�
��
�
�
• � r�@r�,�
1 � ��w,:m, , , %. , ,
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
2 1 . .. ©f7
Another instructive example continuec
2 1 . . .:B:a6 22.cJif3 h5 23.©e2 :B:d7 24.h3 'ktt�
25.g4 hxg4 26.hxg4 tli a2 27.:B:al tli b4 28 .g5'.�
when White managed to seize the initiatiYe
on the kingside in Stefanova - Xu Yuhua.
Ulaanbaatar 20 1 0 .
22.f4 b5?!
This is not a good idea, as Black will be lefr
with a permanent weakness on c6. Objectively
he should have defended passively, even thougl:
it would not have been much fun.
Chapter 1 6 - 6 dxc4
28 1
. . .
.2�.©f3 h6 27.h4 h5 28.©e4 g6 29J:k4
Black was doomed to suffer for a long time
in Meyner - Wosch, email 20 1 3 .
0442) 1 5 tll xd5
•••
1 9 .f4 is a bit too aggressive, and after
1 9 . . . �h8 20.l"lfd l f6 2 1 .tli f3 '1Mfd7 22.b3 l"lad8
23.l"ld2 l"\fe8 24.h4 '\Mrf7 25.l"lel Wh5 White
was left without many constructive ideas in
Topalov - Jakovenko, Nanjing 2009.
19 '1Mfe7 20.'1Mf c5!
20.'1Mfe2N l"\ad8 2 1 .tlic4 We? 22.e5 is
another possible plan, but White must take
into account the possible exchange sacrifice
22 . . . l"\d5 23.tlid6 l"\xd6!? 24.exd6 '1Mfxd6, when
it will be hard to break Black's defence.
8
•••
7
6
5
4
20 �c7 2 1 .tll c4 gfdS
I also considered 2 1 . . . f5 ! ?N 22.'1Mf d6! (but
not 22.f3 fx:e4 23.fxe4 '\Mff7 24.l"\fl ? Wg6
when suddenly White is in trouble) 22 . . . Wxd6
23.tlixd6 l"\ab8 24.f3 l"\fd8 2 5 . tli c4 b6 26.l"\d2
and White retains a slight advantage.
3
..•
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
This seems like a better choice for Black,
avoiding the passivity of the previous line.
16 ..id2
Now we have a final split. 0442 1) 16 .ib4
has been played by a few strong GMs, but
the most popular choice has been 04422)
16 ... c6.
•.•
White had a small but stable advantage in Ni
Hua - Kravtsiv, Dubai 20 1 2 . At this point the
best way to increase the pressure would have
been:
04421) 16 .ib4 17 .ixb4 tll xb4 1 8.e4 c6
•••
•
a
a
19.gfdl
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
22.gc3!N
The rook may go to b3, creating the tactical
threat of lll xa5 , or it may go to the kingside
via f3 and f4 to create threats there. White
definitely keeps the better prospects, and can
continue probing without taking any risks.
Catalan 4 . . . .ie7
282
D4422) 16 ... c6
8
i. �
·� �-�- -�--��·
,Y,- '%
��%'i'"//,'���'�
: ��
!�
�
5 i�
;n-'ll m--;� •
�%-•
�
4
�
�
�
�
'
'
?!�
3
�ww�-0 ���-0 �
J�w-�
w�@w�
8 w'0
2
1
a
�
----- %��-----Y-mim---b
c
d
f
e
g
h
17JUdl !
White had better include this useful
supporting move before he advances the e-pawn,
as demonstrated by the following game:
1 7.e4 tli b6!
17 . . . tli b4 was Anand's choice in a rapid
game, but the text move gives White some
problems with the defence of his pawns.
1 8 .Wb3
1 8 .Wd3 if6! (Black should not rush with
1 8 . . . tlixa4?! 1 9.�a l !) 1 9.tll f3 tlixa4 20.Wa3
tli b6 2 1 ..ixaS �a6! 22.Wc3 was played in
Ashwin - A. Rychagov, Paleochora 20 1 1 ,
and now the simple 22 . . .Wd7N 23 .ib4 �fa8
leaves Black with nothing to worry about.
1 8 . . .Wxd4 1 9.tlif3 Wd8 20.�fd l
Black only has one move, but i t i s good
enough.
20 . . . �a6! 2 1 .ixaS Wc7 22.Wc3 �fa8 23.ixb6
�xb6
Black held relatively easily in Wang Yue Wang Hao, Shenzhen 20 1 1 .
_ ,_,_ ,,/,__,y,_ '
��
·��%,,'"//,����, , , /,�
'�0 ��
• 'll m 4 lr� lwtJ
_ _ _ ;�
' L ,�
�0}��
8
7
i. ;-� � �� ·
6
s
3
2
�w-w�0 -��-0 �
J�w-�
8 ww�@w�
1
a
,,,,, /,��:[� , , , /,� , , ,
b
c
d
f
e
g
h
17 ... �b6
Black has also tried:
1 7 . . . ib4 1 8 .e4!?N
1 8.ixb4 tlixb4 1 9.e4 transposes r e
variation 0442 1 above, and was the actu<L
move order of the Ni Hua - KravtsiY
game. The text move is an independent
alternative which also gives White some
advantage.
1 8 . . . tlib6 1 9 .Wc2 f5 ! ?
Obviously the d4-pawn i s untouchable, as
1 9 . . . Wxd4? 20.if4! wins material.
7
6
5
4
2
a
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
20.Wb3 Wd6 2 1 .f3 fxe4 22.fxe4 tll d7
22 . . . Wxd4? 23.Wxe6t �h8 24.ixb4±
283
Chapter 1 6 - 6 . . . dxc4
23 .ixb4 axb4 24.tli c4 V:!f e7 25 .e5t
White clearly has the better game.
Conclusion
18.�c2!
1 8 .V!ib3 enabled Black to equalize
comfortably with 1 8 . . . V!f d5t l 9.Vlfxd5 exd5=
in Z. Tan - Melia, Mardin 20 1 1 .
18 ... £6
1 8 . . . V!ixd4? is a bad idea in view of 1 9.ixa5!
V!fxe5 20.ixb6 when White is clearly better,
thanks to his control over the d-file. The
continuation might be: 20 . . . :B:a6 2 1 .a5 ib4
22.:B:d7 :B:aa8 (After 22 . . . ixa5 23.ic5 :B:e8
24.:B:xb7 Black is helpless against the simple
plan of :B:d l -d7.) 23.:B:xb7 ixa5 24.ie3±
White will soon be able to pick up the
c-pawn.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
19.�f3 �d7 20.e4 �c8 2 1 .i.e3;!;
We have been following the game Martinez
Martin - Bieliauskas, corr. 20 1 2. White
maintains a typical slight edge for such
positions. His centre is secure and he can
continue making small improvements, while
Black must constantly be on the lookout for
ideas such as d4-d5 .
The set-up with 4 . . . ie7, 5 . . . 0-0 and 6 . . . dxc4
can perhaps be considered the absolute main
line of the Catalan. After 7.Vlfc2 we started by
checking the sidelines 7 . . . c5 and 7 . . . id7, both
of which are pretty respectable, yet also have
clear drawbacks that we can aim to exploit.
On the other hand, 7 . . . b5!? has proved to be
something of a revelation since GM 1. I believe
that the pawn sacrifice starting with 8.a4 b4
9.lll fd2! is promising for White, but careful
study is needed.
The big main line is 7 . . . a6, when 8.a4 is a major
departure from GM 1 . After the standard
8 . . . id7 9.Vlfxc4 ic6 1 0.if4, it took me a lot
of analytical effort, as well as my own practical
testing, to identify the most promising paths.
Perhaps the most important general rule is
that White should almost always avoid having
his bishop exchanged on f4 by an enemy
knight. Many strong GMs (including myself)
have allowed it, believing the open g-file and
additional central control (after gxf4) to be
beneficial. However, it has become clear to me
that this structure 'only' leads to an interesting
game, with no objective advantage if Black
plays correctly.
Thus, whenever a black knight goes to d5,
we should generally retreat the bishop to d2,
or occasionally even c l . White's general aim
will be to take control over the e4-square
and seize some space in the centre. This often
leads to nagging pressure, even after further
piece exchanges. Another important point in
the most popular 044 variation is that the
outpost on b4 does not seem to be of much
use to Black. Although White's advantage is
often pretty small, it will often persist into the
endgame, without involving much risk at all.
Bogo-Indian
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
4 ie7 and 4 c5
...
...
Variation Index
1 .d4 tl) f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 .ib4t
4 ..td2
285
287
287
288
289
290
29 1
292
293
A) 4 .te7
B) 4 ... c5 5 ..ixb4 cxb4 6 ..ig2
Bl) 6 ... d5
B2) 6 ... 0-0 7.e4 d6 8.tl) e2 e5 9.a3
B2 1) 9 ... bxa3
B22) 9 ... tl) a6
B23) 9 ... �b6 10.0-0
B23 1) 1 0 ... tl) c6
B232) 1 0 ....tg4
•..
a
b
c
d
e
1 2.e4!N
f
g
B23 1 ) after 1 4 . . . ti:lc5
B22) after 1 3 . . . Wl'b6
B 1 ) after 1 l . . .E:fd8
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 5 .E:a3!N
g
h
h
285
Chapter 1 7 - 4 . . . i.e? and 4 . . . c5
I .d4 c!Lif6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 i.b4t 4.i.d2
Besides the main line of 4 . . . Wfe7 Black can
play several other moves that will take us into
Bogo-lndian territory.
In this chapter we will consider A) 4 i.e7 and
B) 4 c5 .
•••
•••
A) 4 i.e7
••.
One of the main lines is . . . ib4-e7 followed by
. . . d 5 , but here I will consider a different idea.
5.i.g2 0-0 6.c!Lif3
In this case 6.e4 is not so clear, as after 6 ... d5
7.e5 lll e4 Black is doing okay.
6... c5
6 . . . d5 (or 5 . . . d5 on the previous move) will
transpose to one of Black's main set-ups against
the Catalan - see Chapters 1 3 and 1 4 .
s.lLJxd4 c!Lic6
Black is unable to obtain a good version of
a Hedgehog-rype position by playing slowly,
for example: 8 . . . a6 9.0-0 Wf c7 1 0.:B:cl lll c6
1 I .lll b3 Creating the rypical threat of lll d5.
(1 I .ie3!? is also possible) 1 1 . . .d6 1 2.lll d5! As
usual this move proves to be very strong. White
was clearly better after 1 2 . . . lll xd5 1 3.cxd5
exd5 1 4 .ia5 Wfd7 1 5 .ic3± in Retamozo Torres, Lima 20 1 3 .
9.i.f4 a6
Black has some other options:
9 . . . Wfb6 must be met accurately:
.i � .i. � �� ·
� · � . �-�··"•% •
65 -----"-B, , ,,%l��!,, , ,, , ,�---- �
�
�
���
�%"
/
/.
�m.�-0��
43 ��
•
8
m
'
�m- - - - �
� �8 �-r�li.�
2 �8"' �r�"'%-��- - -'�
--J% - , J�,,,,,
'(' -�-1 - - •:
8
1
:
. ,,.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
7.c!Ll c3 cx:d4
If 7 . . . d5 8.cxd5 exd5 9.0-0 lll c6 1 0.dxc5
ixc5 1 1 .:B:c l , then White has a favourable
version of a Tarrasch-rype position. This
could be improved even further by 1 1 . . .ie7
l 2.if4!N when White has reached a well­
known Tarrasch position with an extra move
in :B:c l .
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0 .lll b3!N ( 1 0.lll db5 a6 l I .ic7 Wfc5 1 2 .id6
was unimpressive for White in Gaerths Kaiser, Berlin 2003, when Black should have
responded with the natural 1 2 . . . ixd6N. After
1 3 .lll xd6 lll d4! 1 4.e3 Wfxd6 1 5 .'\Wxd4 Wfxd4
1 6.exd4 :B:b8, followed by . . . b6 and . . . ib7,
Black would have solved his problems.)
10 ... d5 l l .cxd5 exd5 1 2 .ie3 Wfa6 1 3. 0-0 ie6
1 4.:B:c l ± White will have an easy game playing
against the isolated pawn.
9 . . . lll xd4 1 0.Wfxd4 d6 occurred in Petrik
- A. Zhigalko, Dresden 2008, with White
retreating his queen to d2. I believe l I .Wfd3N
to be much better, as after l 1 . . .lll h 5 1 2.ie3
lll f6 1 3.b3± White keeps a nagging edge.
B ogo-lndian
286
9 . . . e5 was employed successfully by Gashimov.
1 0.lt:lxc6 bxc6 (Black can hardly claim
compensation after 1 0 . . . dxc6N 1 1 .°1Wxd8 E:xd8
1 2.ixe5 ie6 1 3.b3 ia3 1 4.lt:la4!) 1 I .ixe5
\W a5 was Dominguez Perez - Gashimov,
Nice 20 1 0, and now I like the following
improvement:
1 1 .°1Wxd4 d6 12.°1Wd3
This is the most flexible square for the white
queen.
12 ...°1Wc7 13J:Udl E:d8 14.E:acl tll h5 15.ie3
1 5 .id2 E:b8 1 6.lt:le4 lt:l f6 1 7.lll xf6t ixf6
1 8 .if4 e5 1 9.ie3 ie6 20.b3 h6 2 1 .a4;!; was
also better for White in Topalov - Kramnik,
Las Vegas 1 999.
15 ...J.d7
Black has achieved some good results from
here, but White's position is clearly better. My
personal preference is as follows:
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 2.id4N ia6 1 3 .°1Wd3 d5 1 4.0-0 ixc4
1 5 .°1Wc2;!; By giving up his extra pawn White
has managed to stabilize his positional
advantage.
10.0-0
s i. � ..t e
6
7
16.b3 tll f6
1 6 . . . E:ac8 can be met by 1 7.lll a4! ixa4
1 8 .bxa4 and White's pressure on the queenside
is significant.
17 .J.f4 tll e8
1 7 . . . ieS runs into the annoying 1 8 .c5!±,
while 17 ... ic6 allows the typical 1 8.lll d5!±.
��·· �
,
W& •�•?,_
_
- Y,_% r
r� �
r� �·Y-·
, ill- - �
ill • illilll
ill !mill
� ill•
�- - - - -:- - ---Y-wr
3 �
!wi""'
;
f���
%
1 ,..... � 1•:�- - -
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
10 ... tll xd4
Once again, 1 0 . . . d5 1 l .cxd5 exd5 1 2.E:cl
leads to a favourable version of a well-known
Tarrasch line.
18 ... g6N
1 8 . . .f5 ? is not possible in view of 1 9.ixf5!
exf5 20.lll d 5.
287
Chapter 1 7 - 4 . . . ie7 and 4 . . . c5
1 8 . . . h6 1 9.Wf3 left White in control in Greig
- Tocklin, corr. 20 14.
19.°!Wf3 gabs 20.c5!±
White has a large advantage.
B) 4... c5
8 1. •
• � �.i
..t�
, 7,�
·"�
h
�
/ 0
.
, ,_,,
,
� ��
,, �'�
: , ,�
'•
�-�
5
4
3
2
1
,J . \w0 �� ��
�,�
�
, , ,��8... ��
, , , %� •
��%�
W'0 �'0 8 w�d.... xw·w��
�
8 W� �� �w·
�lt)··=���
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
In my opinion this allows White an improved
version of the corresponding position with a
white knight on f3 rather than a pawn on g3.
The reason for this is that White now has the
extra option of developing his knight to e2.
5.i.xb4 cxb4 6.ig2
Now I would like to mention Bl) 6 ... d5,
although B2) 6 ... 0-0 is clearly Black's first
choice.
Bl) 6 ... d5
In general I don't believe this to be a good idea
for Black, as the arising structures are not well
suited to his doubled b-pawns.
7.tll d2 tll c6 8.tll gf3 0-0 9.0-0
Everything has remained similar to the lines
given in GM 2, and I have added some new
examples. Here I will consider two possibilities
for Black:
8 i.
��
..i.. �
�·
,_ , ,7,� ��··v,- ·
7
�
, ,�
E�
T•
'
�� r�,, �
�
�
�
��.���% ��r��
�
�
�
8
�
.
�
�""%
. .. � � ��
3
�w·
/J,,. .�w·���
� �c,
,,�, �w·
�
8
8 ��
;
ID
�
1 id. . %Bv•�k·1""
6
5
4
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
9 ...id7
Another line runs:
9 . . . b6 1 0.E:c l ib7 1 l .e3 Wd6
A relatively recent example was: 1 1 . . .a5
1 2.cxd5 lt:lxd5 ( 1 2 . . . exd5 was strongly met
by 1 3 .Wa4 We8 ?! 1 4 .Wb5 E:a6 1 5 .E:c2 lll e7
1 6.Wxe8 E:xe8 1 7.E:c7± with a clear plus for
White in Baraeva - Butneva, St Petersburg
20 1 1 .) 1 3.lt:lc4 E:c8 1 4.e4 lt:\ f6 1 5 .Wd3 ia6
1 6.E:fd 1 It feels as if White is playing with
an extra pawn. 1 6 . . . lt:l e7 1 7.lt:lfe5 lt:l e8 This
was Maiwald - Hertneck, Germany 20 1 3,
and now the simple 1 8 .We3N± would keep
a pleasant edge for White.
1 2.Wa4 E:fc8 1 3.E:c2 E:c7 1 4.E:fc l E:ac8
1 5 .cxd5!
A well-timed decision.
1 5 . . . exd5 ?
Black misses White's next idea.
The correct recapture was 1 5 . . . lt:lxd5,
although after 1 6. lt:l e l White retains a
pleasant edge.
1 6.ih3! lll d7 1 7.lll e5 +Black cannot avoid losing material, lvanchuk
- Gulko, New York 1 988.
1 0.e3 '!We7
A fresh example here is: 1 0 . . . E:c8 1 1 .We2
dxc4 1 2.lt:lxc4 lt:l a5
288
Bogo-lndian
B2) 6 ... 0-0 7.e4
As I mentioned already, this is the difference
from the more common position with a knight
on f3.
l l .�e2
Also 1 1 .ttJe5 :gfc8 1 2 .Wi°e2 �e8 1 3 .:gac l
comes into consideration, with better chances
for White.
1 1 .. JUdS
This position occurred in Braun - Jojua,
Batumi 2006. Commenting on this game in
ChessBase Magazine 1 1 5 Braun proposed the
following improvement:
7 ... d6
7 . . . d5
This move hasn't had many followers.
A convincing line is:
8.cxd5 exd5 9.e5 lt:l e4
This is a more interesting try than 9 . . . tll e8
1 0 .tll e2 tll c6 1 1 .0-0, and now:
a) 1 1 . . .�g4 is met comfortably by 1 2.f3 .
b ) 1 1 . . . tll c7 1 2.a3 Quite a natural idea.
as White wants to gain the c3-square for
his knight. (Also worthy of consideration
was 1 2 .tll d2. I examined the following
line: 1 2 . . . �g4 1 3 .tll b3 f6 1 4.f3 �f5 1 5 .f4
b6 1 6.:gcl Wi°d7 1 7.tll a l ! A remarkable
move: White's knight is heading for
e3 via c2. White is better.) 12 ... �5
1 3 .axb4 tll xb4 1 4.tll bc3 White has the
advantage, thanks to his better pawn
structure.
c) 1 1 . . .�f5 This move occurred in De
Marchi - Gueneau, Aix-les-Bains 2003.
I believe White should play the simple
1 2 .tll d2N tll c7 1 3 .tll b3 tll e6 1 4.Wi°d2 with
better chances.
1 0.ttJe2 ttJ c6 1 1 .0-0 f6 1 2.tll d2 �f5
Chapter 1 7 - 4 . . . ie7 and 4 . . . c5
Both sides have played logical moves up
until now.
1 3 .tll xe4 dxe4 1 4.'Wb3t 'kt>h8 1 5 .�ad l a5 ?
Black should have played 1 5 . . . ig4N, but
after 1 6.'We3 fxe5 1 7.'Wxe4 ixe2 1 8 .'Wxe2
exd4 1 9.ixc6 bxc6 20.'Wc4;!; he will still be
suffering for the rest of the game.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
289
At this point I checked B2 1) 9 bxa3 and
B22) 9 tll a6, which are Black's two main
alternatives to B23) 9 ¥Nb6.
.•.
..•
.••
B2 1) 9 bxa3 I O.tll xa3 tll c6 1 1 .0-0
•••
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
h
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
1 6.e6! 'Wd6 1 7.'We3±
The e6-pawn is untouchable and 1 8 .d5 is
coming next. White's advantage was obvious
in Mason - Hatipoglu, email 20 1 1 .
In my opinion this position is favourable for
White, thanks to his extra space. Nothing has
changed since GM 2 in terms of evaluating the
position.
8.ttle2 e5 9.a3
White has to trade the annoying b4-pawn
in order to gain more space for his pieces especially his queenside knight.
1 1 ...¥Nb6
Another line is 1 I . . .ig4 1 2.f3 id? ( 1 2 . . . ih5
is not the best place for Black's bishop; it was
better was to leave it on the h3-c8 diagonal.
1 3 .'Wd2 'Wb6 1 4.�ad l �ad8 1 5 .©hl White
had a clear positional advantage in Gleizerov
- Bindrich, Stockholm 2006.)
9.0-0 is still considered to be the main line,
but I am concerned about the position that
might arise after: 9 . . . ig4 1 0.f3 ie6 1 l .'Wd3
(1 I .b3 a5 1 2.a3 tll a6 1 3.axb4 axb4 1 4.'kt>hl
was Bosiocic - Farago, Graz 20 1 1 , and now
play should have continued 1 4 . . . 'Wb6N
1 5 .'Wd2 exd4 1 6 .tll xd4 tll c5 1 7.�xa8 �xa8
when Black's activity compensates for his
damaged pawn structure.) 1 I . . .'Wb6 1 2.'kt>hl
exd4 1 3 .tll xd4 tll bd7 1 4.b3 This was Coelho
- Leitao, Santos 2008, and now 14 . . . a5N
would lead to double-edged play, for example
1 5 .tll b5 a4 1 6.tll d2 �a5! and Black has active
pieces.
8
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Bogo-lndian
290
1 3.°1Mfd2N This looks like the most accurate
decision. ( 1 3.lLib5 occurred in Elsness - Lien,
Fagernes 20 1 3 , when 1 3 . . . WfbGN would have
left White in some discomfort over his d4pawn.) 1 3 . . . Wfb6 14.E:fd l E:fe8 1 5 .i>h a
White has neutralized all Black's active ideas
and his positional advantage is beginning to
tell.
12.Wfd2 exd4
The critical test. Black's other moves are
hardly acceptable:
1 2 . . . lLixd4 would lead to an inferior position
for Black after 1 3 .lLixd4 exd4 1 4.E:fd l ± .
1 2 . . . a 5 1 3.lLib5! E:d8 1 4.b3 ( 1 4.lLiec3 i s also
strong) 1 4 . . . lLi b4 1 5 .lLiec3± and White was
clearly better in A. Horvath - Toth, Budapest
2006.
We have been following Makhmutov Zhurikhin, Loo 20 1 4, and now White should
simply recapture on d4:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
b
a
13.tll b5 ges
c
d
e
f
g
h
15.tLJexd4N tll xd4 16.Wfxd4
White maintains a clear positional edge.
8
7
6
B22) 9 i\lia6 10.axb4 tll xb4
1 1 .Wfd2 a5 12.0-0 i.e6!?
.••
Black tries to create some counterplay by
attacking the white centre. He would be
happy to see d4-d5 , weakening White's dark­
squares.
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
e
f
g
h
14.Wfd3!?
A very interesting move. 1 4.lLixdGN is also
worth considering, when 14 . . . E:d8 could be
met by 1 5 .E:fc l !?.
14 Wfc5?!
Much better was 14 . . . .tg4 1 5 .lLiexd4 lLie5
1 6.Wf c3 a6 1 7.lLia3 E:ac8. Black has some
•..
activity, but after 1 8.E:fe l it seems like White
keeps everything under control and his better
structure should tell in the long term.
Passive tactics would not work well for Black,
as was proven by the following encounter:
1 2 . . . b6 1 3. lLi a3 .ta6 1 4.E:ad l Wfe7 1 5 .f4 E:ac8
1 6.b3 E:cd8 1 7.lLic3 White had an obvious
advantage in Grischuk - Yemelin, Sochi
2004.
13.tll a3
An interesting alternative is 1 3 .b3 Wfb6
1 4.lLibc3.
13 Wfb6
•..
...
..
Chapter 1 7 - 4 ie7 and 4 . c5
� - ��-��-·Y,� ·
·7 ��
0� �
6 - ��ef�
.JL �!a);
�-·
.... m
% %_ lwiti% m%4
m�wr
�
3 fil�
%
- - -�
���/ J'� � ef�
�� ltj
�
�
2
�'
1 �� %· Bi�
8
----%
% ""/�
�
A ?1'iie
�
�%
��
-- · , ,
·· < ' '" ·
5
----·%
·
%
� -�
�"
0- - - - - -
'" '
: '- '- ;
b
V," :
-- - - -"
--·-- ·
a
------
c
d
e
�
w
-
?.!
%
f
----·
+
g
B23) 9 ...V!!b 6 10.0-0
This is the best move order.
1 0 .°Wd2
The problem with this move is that Black
has an interesting resource:
%� ·�
iO
----
h
14.cS!N
This is a strong improvement over
1 4.lll c3, which seems inaccurate, as it allows
1 4 . . . exd4N ( 1 4 . . . 'Wxd4 1 5 .°Wxd4 exd4
1 6.lll c b5 d3 1 7.lll xd6 led to a favourable
position for White in I. Porat - Ilincic,
Budapest 2005) 1 5 .lll a4 'Wc6 when I do not
see how White can fight for an advantage.
1 4 .:!'!fd l is a more positional move which also
looks good for White.
14 ... dxc5 1 5.d5 id7
No better is: 1 5 . . . 1'!fd8 1 6.lll c4 'We? 1 7.lll c3
(I definitely prefer this move to 1 7.f4 exf4
1 8 .lll xf4 b5 with unnecessary complications)
Now White has a clear advantage, as he is not
only threatening to play °Wg5 regaining the
pawn, but also the simple f2-f4 advance is very
powerful, as I cannot imagine how Black can
stop White's central pawns. 1 7 . . . id? 1 8.f4±
White is much better.
16.lll c4 V!!c7 17.d6 V!!b 8 1 8.tlixe5
White has a promising position.
29 1
1 0 . . . b3!
Amusingly, I once mixed up my move order
and played 1 0 .°Wd2, but my opponent
wasn't familiar with the 1 0 . . . b3 resource and
soon found himself in a passive position:
1 0 . . . lll c6 1 1 .axb4 lll xb4 1 2.lll a3 ig4 1 3.f3
ie6 1 4.0-0 1'!fc8 1 5 .b3 1'!d8 1 6 .c;;t> h l Black
was under unpleasant positional pressure in
Avrukh - Moiseenko, Eilat 20 1 2.
1 1 .lll bc3
After 1 1 .°Wc3 Black has 1 1 . . .lll c6 1 2.d5 lll a5
1 3 .lll d2 lll d7 14.lll c l lll c5 1 5 .lll d3 lll a4
1 6.'Wb4 id? with an unclear game.
1 1 . . .lll c6 1 2.:!'!d l
This position was reached in Iskusnyh Maletin, Nizhnij Tagil 2007, and now Black
should have played:
1 2 . . . exd4N 1 3 .lll xd4 lll e5 1 4.lll d5
Unfortunately White cannot play 1 4.'We2
in view of 1 4 . . . ig4 1 5 .f3 id7 followed by
. . . 1'!ac8 .
1 4 . . . lll xd5 1 5 .cxd5 id? 1 6.0-0 1'!ac8
With double-edged play.
292
Bogo-lndian
1 1 � bs
The best of Black's available knight retreats.
...
It's important to mention 10 . . . bxa3 1 1 .lll xa3
Wxb2? 1 2 .lll b5 when Black is in trouble.
After 10 . . . E!:e8 1 l .axb4 Wxb4 1 2.lll a3 ig4
1 3.f3 id7 1 4.b3 a5 1 5 .Wd3 lll a6 both sides
gradually conclude their plans. 1 6.E!:fc l exd4
Probably Black should refrain from releasing the
pressure in the centre. Now White consolidates
his advantage. 1 7.lll c2 Wb6 1 8.Wxd4 lll c5
1 9 .E!:cb l E!:a6 20.lll c3;!; White had an edge in
Avrukh - Kosashvili, Israel 2004.
B23 1) 10 �c6 1 1 .dS
...
This seems promising for White.
1 I . . .lll e7 1 2.Wd2!
I believe this is stronger than 1 2.axb4 Wxb4
1 3 .Wd2 Wxc4 1 4.E!:cl Wb3 1 5 .lll a3 ig4
with an unclear game, Prusikin - Laznicka.
Steinbrunn 200 5 .
1 2 . . . bxa3
Inferior is 1 2 . . . b3 1 3.Wb4! when the
b3-pawn is a serious target.
1 3 .lll xa3 ig4
1 3 . . . a5 looks natural, but is well met b,·:
1 4.c5! (White should prevent Black fro �
maintaining control over the dark-squares
on the queenside [b4 and c5] , which might
happen after the natural 14.lll b 5 id7 1 5 .lll ec3
ixb5 1 6.lll x b5 lll d7 with reasonable play for
Black.) 14 . . . Wxc5 (Clearly bad for Black is
14 . . . dxc5 1 5 .lll c4 and his pawn structure in
the centre collapses.) 1 5 .E!:fcl Wb4 1 6.Wxb-t
axb4 1 7.lll c4 Now the following sequence is
fairly forced: 1 7 . . . E!:xa l 1 8 .E!:xa l tll e8 (much
worse is 1 8 . . . E!:d8 1 9.E!:a5! lll e8 20.E!:b5 f5
2 1 .E!:xb4 fxe4 22.lll c3 with a clear plus ro
White) 1 9.E!:a7 White obviously has the
initiative, and after 1 9 . . . f5 20.exf5 lll xf5,
2 1 .lll b6 lll f6 22.E!:a4 White is better.
Chapter 1 7 - 4 . . . ie7 and 4 . . . c5
14 . . . !!fc8 1 5 .lll d3 Wd4 1 6.!!fe l
To be followed by 1 7.b3 and 1 8.lll c2 White is clearly better.
12.axb4 '%Yxb4 13.'%Yc2 lll a6 14.lll cl tll c5
This happened in Andersen - Slavin, London
20 1 0, and now White could have played an
elegant manoeuvre:
293
1 1 . ..'%Yxb4
Another direction is:
1 1 . . .lll c6 1 2.f3 exd4
1 2 . . . ie6 1 3 .lll a3 lll xb4 ( 1 3 . . . exd4 1 4.'it>h l
Wxb4 1 5 .lll xd4± leaves White with a
positional advantage.) 1 4.Wd2 transposes to
my game against Moiseenko on page 29 1 .
s ,i �- � ��·
7
� � . , . , v,�
3�
£
65 �§J�.... "�,���. .-30����-�
,.. . ;� �
��F �� �-�
��-r�....0. .
43 �
t!J r...�. . 7..
...
t!J .
l'W/]
.
'0
-�
..
2
1
''l
z
� -�� --;·7.�·0
gilt)� 1� ,��
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
B232) 10 ...ig4 1 1 .axb4
1 3.!!f2N
1 3 .fxg4 d3t 1 4.'it>hl dxe2 1 5 .Wxe2 lll xb4oo
was unclear in Troff - Timman, Wijk aan
Zee 20 1 4 .
1 3 . . . ie6 1 4 .lll a3!
It seems like White will retain definite
pressure, for example:
14 . . . lll e5 1 5 .lll xd4 ixc4 1 6.lll xc4 lll xc4
1 7.lll f5 !±
I couldn't find anything significant after 1 1 .f3
ie6 1 2.b3 lll c6 1 3.�h l id7, as in Sogin Horwitz, corr. 20 1 3 .
12.f3 ie6 1 3.b3
I now checked an obvious unexplored
continuation:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
15.�a3!N
Black cannot stop White from seizing the
initiative on the queenside by means of lll a2
followed by b2-b4.
B ogo-lndian
294
13 ... aSN
1 3 . . . b5 immediately attacks White's pawn
structure, but I found a good reply:
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.Wd2!N (Much stronger than 1 4.ltJa3 bxc4
l 5 .d5 as in Berry - Slavin, Rogaska Slatina
20 1 1 . Now Black could have grabbed the
initiative with a piece sacrifice: 5 . . . .ixd5!N
1 6.exd5 cxb3) 14 ... Wxd2 (The main point is
14 . . . Wxb3 1 5 .:ga3 Wxc4 1 6.:gcl +-) 1 5 .ltJxd2
bxc4 1 6.d5 White seizes the initiative on the
queenside.
l
14Jfa4
After 1 4.liJbc3 a4! 1 5 .ltJxa4 b5 1 6.liJac3
:gxa l 1 7.Wxa l bxc4 1 8 .bxc4 Wxc4 1 9.:gd l
:gc8 White's positional advantage is rather
symbolic.
14 �b6 1 5.tiJ bc3 .id7
Or 1 5 . . . ltJ c6 1 6.tiJb5±.
..•
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
16J�a2 tl:!c6 17.�d2�
White retains a slight positional pull.
Conclusion
We began this chapter by examining 4 . . . .ie7
- concentrating on lines where Black chooses
not to play an immediate . . . d5 and transpose
to a Catalan. If Black does decide to play . . . d5
at a later stage, White should stay alert to
the possibility of transposing to a favourable
Tarrasch-type position. Our main line ends
favourably, and although Black has some
options along the way, I am confident White
stands well in all cases.
The main branch of the chapter was devoted to
4 . . . c5. This move leads to interesting positions,
but White is better with accurate play. White
benefits, compared to the main lines of the
Bogo-lndian, from the increased flexibility
caused by not having committed his king's
knight to f3 .
The above paragraph was my conclusion
in GM 2, and the overall assessment has not
changed much since then. I have added some
new examples and ideas to keep the reader
fully updated and equipped to tackle Black
effectively in this line.
Bogo-Indian
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
4 ixd2t
...
Variation Index
1 .d4 lll f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 .ih4t 4. .id2
4 ...hd2t
296
297
299
300
300
30 1
A) 5.�xd2 d5 6.lll a 0-0 7 ..ig2 lll bd7 s.o-o
Al) 8 ... dxc4
A2) 8 ... c6
B) 5.lll xd2
Bl) 5 ... d6
B2) 5 ... lll c6
A2) note to 1 1 . . . b S
A l ) after 8 . . . dxc4
B 1 ) after 5 . . . d6
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
9.a4!?N
f
g
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 7.ll'ibS!N
g
h
a
b
c
d
e
6.e3!?N
f
g
h
h
296
B ogo-Indian
I .d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 .ib4t 4..id2 .hd2t
This move may look simplistic compared to
the 4 . . . a5 and 4 . . . We7 options we will see in
the following chapters, but the exchange on
d2 is a highly respectable choice. If White can
secure even the smallest edge, then we should
consider it a success.
There are two options for White to consider:
A) 5.YlVxd2 was my chosen line in GM 2, but
Black has found several reasonable ideas to deal
with it. This time I will recommend the knight
recapture B) 5.�xd2 followed by a very rare
idea. I will explain my objections to 5 .Wxd2
in some detail. Even though I do not think
White should play this way, studying this line
is useful to gain a deeper understanding of the
opening, and what works and what doesn't.
A) 5.YlVxd2 d5
This leads to a typical Queen's Indian type
of position, but with dark-squared bishops
exchanged, White has a pleasant advantage.
I like the following example:
8.cxd5 exd5 9.0-0 ib7 1 0. � c3 lli bd7 1 1 .:gacl
:ge8 1 2.:gfd l a6
Black refrains from 1 2 . . . c5 and indeed
after 1 3. lli h4 then 1 3 . . . c4 is needed, as
otherwise it's not clear how to hold on to
the d5-pawn ( 1 3 . . . lli e4 runs into the strong
1 4.llixe4 dxe4 1 5 .llif5! when White has the
advantage) . 1 4.b3 cxb3 1 5 .axb3 With a
positional advantage.
1 3 .Wc2 lli f8 1 4.b4 We7 1 5 .Wb3 lli e6 1 6.e3
White enjoyed a small but stable positional
edge in Beliavsky - Kasimdzhanov, Pune 2004.
7 . . . dxc4
This is a playable idea for Black.
8 . lli a3
This is considered to be Black's main option
and seems the most convincing to me. The
same position can be reached after 5 . . . 0-0
6.ig2 d5.
6.�8 0-0 7..ig2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8 . . . id7
The point: Black's light-squared bishop
transfers to the h l -a8 diagonal, neutralizing
White's Catalan bishop.
Clearly worse is 8 . . . c5 9.dxc5 lli e4 1 0.Wxd8
:gxd8 1 1 .llixc4 lli c6 1 2. 0-0 llixc5 and now
in Lupor - Klundt, Bad Wiessee 2000,
White could have gained an advantage by
simple means after 1 3 .:gfd l id7 1 4.llid6
with serious pressure.
9.llixc4 ic6 1 0.0-0
White's space advantage should guarantee
him a slight edge.
Chapter 1 8 - 4 . . . ixd2t
1 0 . . . lll bd7
1 0 . . . idS was recommended by Vlatko
Kovacevic in Chess Informant 45 and in this
case White should continue with 1 1 .:B:ac l
lll c6 1 2.:B:fd l lt:\e4 1 3.Wc2 retaining the
better chances.
1 i .:B:fc I ids 1 2.b4
Gaining more space on the queenside. The
following encounter proves that Black is far
from equality.
1 2 . . . We7 1 3 .Wb2 :B:ac8 1 4. ttJ aS ttJb8 1 5 .ttJeS
ixg2 1 6.�xg2
White was significantly better in Portisch Nikolic, Linares 1 988.
8.0-0
297
1 3 . . . ie6! Black was alright in Timman Schebler, Antwerp 2008.
9 ... c5
I also analysed a few other options:
9 . . . b6 doesn't solve Black's problems, for
example 1 0.lll eS ttJd5 1 1 .lll xc4 ia6 1 2.ttJba3
c5 1 3.e4 lll b4 1 4.e5 ttJd5 1 5 .ttJbS with serious
pressure.
9 . . . a5 1 0.ttJa3 e5 1 l .ttJxc4;!; is simple and
pleasant for White.
�
�Z ' 1:18 � �• J,;•'JI)�
ii��
7 �
• r� •
9 . . . We7 1 0.ttJa3 e5
�
""'".""'"�
,, ,, "lif"'"
�----��,,,,,,,, �- - - - %, �
�� �
4 �
� -· �-J-• �
6
-
5
..
, , , ;� ""�-- ft�:fwtj
d,,,,7,� � --%� "'�if""
�
1 l .ttJxc4
2
a
Al) 8 ... dxc4
In this position I came up with a novelty:
9.a4!?N
The main point of Black's idea is that he
would meet 9.lll a3 with 9 . . . e5! when the
critical line is: 1 0.dxeS lll x e5 1 1 .Wxd8 (after
1 l .Wc3 lll xf3t 1 2.ixf3 We7 1 3 .lll xc4 c6 Black
gets a perfectly playable position) 1 l . . .ttJxf3t
1 2.ixf3 :B:xd8 1 3.:B:fd l (or 1 3.ttJxc4 ie6)
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 .lll x eS ttJ xe5 1 2.dxeS Wxe5 1 3 .ttJxc4 We7
does not offer White much, although he did
manage to win a tempo with ttJ c4.
l 1 . . .e43
If 1 l . . .exd4 1 2.ttJxd4 and White's pressure
is annoying.
1 2 .lll fe5 lll b6
Here I focused on:
1 3 .ttJe3
Although White has other options to fight
for the advantage.
1 3 . . . ie6
If 1 3 . . . c5 1 4.dxc5 Wxc5 1 5 .a5! Wxe5 1 6.axb6
a6 1 7.:B:aS and White keeps some pressure.
Also after 1 3 . . . aS 1 4.Wc2 c6 1 5 .WcS 'Wxc5
1 6.dxcS ttJ bd7 1 7.ttJxd7 ixd7 1 8 .ttJc4;!;
White retains a pleasant advantage.
298
B ogo-Indian
1 4.a5 lll bd5 1 5 .a6 b6 1 6.lll c6 '1Md6 1 7.E1fc l
lll xe3 1 8 .'1Mxe3 i.d5 1 9.'1Ma3!;!;
White definitely has pressure, thanks to his
strong knight on c6.
Black has no problems after 1 2.lll xd4 lll c5
1 3 .'\1Mb4 e5.
12 ... e5
13.Y*fc3!
1 3 .'1Mxc4 lll b6 doesn't pose Black any
problems.
10 ...'1Me7
We can understand the value of White's
previous move if Black tries 1 0 . . . b6. The line
continues: l 1 .lll e5 lll d5 1 2.e4 lll 5f6 (it's
important to note that Black cannot play
1 2 . . . lll xe5 ? due to 1 3.dxe5 and here we see the
point of 1 0 .:!::1 d l , as Black's queen is hanging
on d8) 1 3 .lll xc4 i.a6 1 4 .lll ba3 cxd4 1 5 .'1Mxd4
White is better.
The last couple of moves are one of the
reasons I want this section to remain in the
book, even though it is no longer part of
my recommended repertoire. One needs to
understand how to fight against Black's light­
squared bishop, and have a feel for the standard
ideas against . . . b7-b6, and know when they
will not work (as with 1 0 .lll a3) .
1 1 .tlia3 cxd4 1 2.Y*fxd4
1 3 ... e4 14.tlid4 tli c5
Or 1 4 . . . lll e5 1 5 .lll xc4 lll xc4 1 6.'\1Mxc4 is also
an edge.
1 5.tlixc4 i.d7 16.Y*fb4
Chapter 1 8 - 4 . . . ixd2t
White is slightly better. It's important to
mention that Black cannot play:
16 ... tlid5
In view of the pleasing reply:
17.tlif5!
And after the forced:
17 ... tlixb4 1 8.ttlxe?t ©hs 19.tlid6
White's advantage is undisputable.
299
And now Black has two main choices:
a) l 2 . . . dxc4 This capture seems quite principled,
but White can secure an edge. 1 3.l:!fd l '!Wxd2
1 4.l:!xd2 id7 1 5 .lll xc4!?N This is White's
best chance (In Avrukh - Khetsuriani, Athens
2005, I instead opted for 1 5 .l:!ad l l:!fd8 1 6.e4
@f8 1 7.ifl , but after 1 7 . . . @e7 1 8 .ixc4 ie8
Black is not worse.) 1 5 . . . lll xc4 1 6.l:!xd7 l:!ab8
1 7.l:!ad l;!;;
b) Another game continued:
1 2 . . . '!We7 1 3 .l:!ac l l:!d8 1 4.l:!fd l .id7 1 5 .c5
White decides to remove the tension in the
centre and rightly so, as Black is doomed to
passivity.
1 5 . . . lll c8 1 6.e4 b6
Obviously Black is seeking counter-chances.
This is Dorfman - Spassky, France 2003,
where White missed a beautiful tactical
solution:
1 7.tll b5!N
A2) 8 ... c6 9.ttle5
9 ... tlixe5 10.dxe5 tlid7 l l .f4 b5
Equally common is: 1 1 . . .lll b6 1 2.tll a3
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 7 . . . .ie8
17 . . . bxc5 1 8 .lll c7 l:!b8 1 9 .lll a6 l:!b6 20.lll xc5
is of course great for White.
Black can try to accept the knight sacrifice
with 1 7 . . . cxb5 but after 1 8 .exd5 .ic6
( 1 8 . . . exd5 1 9.°1Wxd5 l:!b8 20.c6 is awful for
Black) 1 9.cxb6 Black has to give back the
piece: 1 9 . . . lll x b6 ( 1 9 . . . .ixd5 20.l:!c7 °!We8
2 1 .b7 l:!b8 22.bxc8=°1W l:!bxc8 23.l:!xc8
l:!xc8 24 . .ixd5 l:!d8 25 .°1Wg2 °1Wd7 26.°1Wh3!
300
B ogo-Indian
A very important resource, as now White
is threatening 27.if3 . 26 . . . exd5 27.Wxd7
E:xd7 28.'it>f2± The rook endgame is difficult
for Black.) 20.E:xc6 lll xd5 2 1 .Wc l White
definitely has pressure.
1 8 .exd5 exd5
1 8 . . . cxd5 l 9.c6 is hardly playable for Black.
1 9.cxb6 axb6 20.lll d4 lLi a7 2 1 .E:e l !
With the idea o f pushing the f-pawn; White's
advantage is obvious.
16 bxa4
This occurred in a game between two
engines; Black has no problems in reaching
equality.
•••
B) 5.tlixd2
Also possible is 1 l . .. f6 1 2.exf6 lLixf6 1 3.Wd4!?
with a slight edge to White in Hechl - Vecek,
email 20 1 1 . I could investigate this line further,
but since it is not part of the repertoire, I will
stop here.
12.c:x:d5
Instead you can find 5 . . . d5 6.ig2 (or 6.lLi gf3)
6 . . . 0-0 7.lll gf3 via the 3 . . . d5 and 4 . . .ib4t
move order in variation B of Chapter 12 on
page 1 7 1 .
Bl) 5 ... d6
13.e3 c:x:d5 14.tlic3 i.b7
White has very few ways to improve his
position; mostly they are connected with
transferring the knight to d4.
1 5.b4 i.c6 16.a4
Black is j ust in time after 1 6.lLie2 Wc7
following up by . . . lll b6-c4.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 1 8 - 4 . . . J.xd2t
This is pretty much the same idea as variation
B2, but with some different nuances. Strangely
enough, I came to the conclusion that in order
to get a position similar to line B2, White has
to play a novelty:
6.e3!?N
6.J.g2 runs into 6 . . . e5 7.e3 exd4! and
Black easily solves his problems, as in the
game Volokitin - Khairullin, Aix-les-Bains
20 1 1 , which continued 8.exd4 0-0 9.lll e2 d5
1 0.0-0 lll c6 1 1 .cxd5 lll e7 1 2.lll c3 lll exd5 with
equality.
6 ... 0-0
Or 6 . . . e5 7.lll e2 with the idea of having the
option of recapturing on d4 with the knight.
7 . . . 0-0 8 .J.g2 transposes to our main line.
30 1
8 . . . exd4 9.lll xd4 The main point of White's set­
up: the knight recapture secures a favourable
pawn structure for White, thanks to his strong
light-squared bishop. The stem game continued
9 . . . lt:lbd7 1 0.0-0 a5 1 1 .lll b 5! lll c 5 12.lll b3
lt:lfe4 and in Dolezal - Volfl, Czech Republic
2009, the accurate choice 1 3.'W'c2N l'!e8
1 4.l'!fdlt would have retained a pleasant edge.
8 . . . l'!e8 9.0-0 c6 transposes to the main line,
but it is important to mention that 9 . . . e4?!
does not work for Black in view of 1 O.lll c3 J.f5
1 1 .f3! with a clear advantage for White.
9.0-0 l3e8
7.J.g2
This position has arisen several times from
the move order 6.J.g2 0-0 7.e3.
7 e5 8.�e2
White is definitely not claiming to have
anything huge here, but obtaining a position
with good chances of an edge is quite an
achievement nowadays.
•••
10.'?Nc2N '?Ne7 1 1 .b4 e4 12.�c3 J.f5 1 3.b5�
B2) 5 ti)c6 6.e3
•.•
This is my preferred set-up, instead of the
common e2-e4 lines.
8 ... c6
Obviously Black has other options:
6.lll gf3 d6 7.e4 e5 8.d5 lll b8 9 . .ig2 0-0
1 0.0-0 a5 1 1 .lll e l lll a6 1 2 .lll d3 'W'e7 Finally,
via a different move order, the players reached
302
B ogo-Indian
an important theoretical tabiya (I assume
Black could try to play without . . . Vfle7 with
1 2 . . . c6!?) . 1 3.a3 One of many possibilities
for White. 1 3 . . . ig4 1 4.f3 id7 1 5 .b4 axb4
1 6.axb4 c6 With unclear play in Rogozenco Parligras, Hamburg 2008.
1 3 ...i.g4
After the more natural 1 3 . . . id7 White
should start with 1 4. b4! not allowing . . . lll c5 , as
then Black would have the a4-square available
for his knight after b2-b4. Then after 1 4 . . . :gcs
1 5 .¥Mb3 I like White.
6 ... 0-0 7.i.g2 e5 8.d5
Here Black always chooses:
14.0-0 gcs 1 5.gcl ¥Md7 16.¥Md3;!;
White had a pleasant edge in Kasimdzhanov
- M. Gurevich, Essen 200 1 .
8 ... c!li b4
It's hard to give a serious analysis after Black's
other knight retreats, but I want to mention
the following lines where theory might be
developed in the future:
8 . . . ll:ib8 9.lll e2 d6 1 0.ll:ic3 a5 1 l .Vflc2!? I
prefer not to allow . . . if5 . 1 1 . . .ll:i a6 1 2.a3 This
is a typical position for the Bogo-Indian, but
White's pieces are well placed for the coming
fight.
8 . . . lll e7 9.lll e2 d6 1 0 .lll c3 lll d7 1 1 .0-0 f5
1 2.f4 with an interesting and complex game.
9.YMb l c6
Another encounter between two engines
continued 9 . . . a5 1 0 .lll e2 Vfle7 1 l .a3 ll:i a6
1 2.lll c3 lll c 5 1 3 .b3;!: when White seemed
better to me in Rybka 4 - Gull, Internet 20 1 3 .
10.a3 c!lia6 1 1 .tli e2 cxd5 12.cxd5 d6 13.�c3
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Conclusion
In this chapter I covered 4 . . . ixd2t in the
Bogo-Indian, and I have completely changed
my choice since GM 2. The 'rejected' 5.Vflxd2
is still worthy of study, as the ideas involved
will prove useful in other lines. But my
recommendation is 5 .lll xd2 followed by a set­
up with e2-e3 . Note how we benefit from our
3.g3 move order, rather than 3 .lll f3 allowing
a 'normal' Bogo, as our king's knight instead
goes to e2 with a harmonious set-up.
My chosen line leads to relatively unexplored
territory, but my analysis and the few games so
far suggest that White has good chances of an
edge. We must accept that White's advantage
is not huge, as Black has chosen a safe and
respectable line.
7
6
5
Bogo-Indian
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
4 a5
...
Variation Index
1 .d4 � f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 .tb4t 4 ..td2 a5
5 ..tg2
304
304
305
306
307
308
308
309
311
A) 5 ... d6
B) 5 ... 0-0 6.e4
Bl) 6 ... d5
B2) 6 ... d6
C) 5 ... d5 6.� f3 0-0 7.flc2
Cl) 7 ... b6
C2) 7 ... c6
C3) 7 ... � c6
C4) 7 ... c5
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 4 .�e3!N
g
C3) note to 8 . . . dxc4
C 1 ) after 1 2 . . . cS
B l ) after 1 3 . . . '11M d7
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 3 .ixb4!N
g
h
a
b
c
d
e
1 l .a3!N
f
g
h
h
B ogo-lndian
304
1 .d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 �b4t 4.�d2 a5
This is the typical Bogo-Indian reaction.
Black wants to keep his bishop on b4 for
a while with the idea of either provoking
a2-a3, or exchanging the bishop for White's
dark-squared bishop or queenside knight at a
suitable moment.
9 ... exd4 10.�xd4 � e5 1 1 .b3 �c5 12.�f5
White seems to me to be better after:
5.�g2
Because of the flexible nature of the position,
Black has a number of sensible moves at this
point. He can play A) 5 ... d6, B) 5 ... 0-0 and
C) 5 ... d5 .
A) 5 ... d6
This is quite a popular set-up for Black; next
he intends to develop his b8-knight to d7,
followed by . . . e6-e5 .
6.e4 �bd7
6 . . . 0-0 transposes to variation B2 on
page 306.
g3-g4 and so on.
B) 5 ... 0-0
7.� e2 0-0 8.0-0 e5
So far we have followed Agovic - Schein,
Graz 200 1 , but now White should vary with:
6.e4
This idea should now be very familiar. We
benefit from our early fianchetto set-up by
developing the gl -knight to e2, while at the
same time avoiding a major theoretical tabiya
that could arise after 6.�f3 b6. We will
consider Bl) 6 ... d5 and B2) 6 ... d6.
Chapter 1 9 - 4 . . . a5
305
Bl) 6 ... d5 7.e5
Certainly this is much more accurate than 7.a3
!ie7 8.e5 as was played in Cipra - Willim,
Bechhofen 1 994, because Black could have
created excellent play after 8 . . . ltJ e4!N followed
by . . . c7-c5 .
7 ... tll fd7 8.cxd5 exd5
Here the play might continue:
8 1. •.t�
�� ·
�
�,,, ;.i) , - i
11
���'111l,
��t111l,
�1l, ��'111l,
r
�
%1.....�·�%�f���
• .t.·��
.... %� •
�%�
�
.
. �
. ., .� /.�%
.. . � - �
J,
: 111l,111l,
5
4
3
2
1
�
.
% ��.
,
�
��r0 ��·0 �;iJref... %�·�
f!J w� � w�.fJ�
....
��·-= %�:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
9.�c3 � b6
Another option is:
9 . . . c5 1 0.a3 ixc3
Clearly worse is 1 0 . . . cxd4 1 l .axb4 dxc3
1 2./ixc3 GtJ c6 as in Kappeler - Ovsejevitsch,
Leukerbad 20 1 1 . White should have played
1 3 .GtJf3!N with the much better game, for
example: 1 3 . . . b6 1 4.Wxd5 /ib7 1 5 .E!:d l
axb4 1 6.Wxd7 Wxd7 1 7.E!:xd7 E!:al t 1 8 .'ii> e2
ia6t 1 9.'ii> e 3 E!:xh l 20./ixh l bxc3 2 1 .bxc3±
1 l ./ixc3
I recommended this recapture in GM 2 and
still I believe it to be better than 1 l .bxc3,
which occurred in the computer game
Rybka - Gull, Internet 20 1 2 . The position
was unclear after 1 1 . . . GtJ b6 1 2. GtJ f3 cxd4
1 3 .cxd4 GtJ c4.
1 1 . . .GtJc6
My preference now is for the following pawn
sacrifice:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 2.GtJe2
1 2.f4!? looks good as well.
1 2 . . . cxd4 1 3 .GtJxd4 GtJ cxe5 1 4.0-0
White has a lot of compensation.
1 0.tll ge2 tll c6
1 0 . . . c6 1 1 .0-0 leads to a complex position,
where in my opinion White has every chance
of fighting for the advantage after, for instance,
1 1 . . ./if5 1 2.h3.
1 1 .0-0 .ig4 12.h3 .ixe2
It is not the best idea to give up the light­
squared bishop.
13.�xe2 Y«d7
This was Collins - Rochev, Dun Laoghaire
20 1 0 . Now the most accurate move would
have been:
B ogo-lndian
306
14.i.e3!N
White retains an obvious advantage.
B2) 6 d6 7.� e2 e5
•••
i.d7 1 6.f4 Vlic7 l 7.lll 4 f3 h6 The situation is
unclear. Black's positional achievements on the
queenside were seriously restricting White's
ideas in Genutis - Fedorchuk, Salou 2 0 1 1 .
8 . . ge8
I checked two other natural options for
Black:
.
8.0-0
I have changed my opinion in favour of this
move, since my recommendation from GM 2
didn't fully satisfy me.
8.a3 i.xd2t 9.lll xd2 (9.Vlixd2 allows Black to
play a nice positional idea: 9 . . . a4 1 0 .lll bc3
lt:l c6 and the possibility of . . . lll a5 is somewhat
annoying) 9 . . . a4 I now believe that Black is
doing fine here and so we shouldn't allow this.
An example line is:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
8 . . . exd4 9.lll xd4 lll c6 (9 . . . E:e8 1 0.Vfic2 will be
covered in our main line) In this case White
experiences some difficulties in arranging his
pieces in an optimal way, taking into account
that i.xb4 is hardly a good idea, while Black's
dark-squared bishop might be transferred to
c5 . 1 0.lll xc6 ( 1 0.i.c3 i.d7! l l .a3 i.c5 1 2 .lll xc6
i.xc6 1 3 .lll d2 a4 leads to complicated double­
edged play) 1 0 . . . bxc6 l 1 .lll c3N (There is one
computer game which continued l l .a3 i.xd2
1 2.lll xd2 lll d7 and Black was absolutely fine in
Sting - Deep Sjeng, Internet 20 1 3.) l 1 . . .E:e8
1 2.Vlic2 Again transposing to a position from
our main line.
8 . . . lll c6 9.d5 lll e7 1 0 .lll bc3 i.d7 was Stohl
- Fauland, Vienna 20 1 1 . Now I like the
following improvement:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0.0-0 lt:l bd7! l 1 .h3 (or l l .Vfic2 exd4 1 2.lll xd4
c6 1 3.E:fe l lll c5 1 4.E:ad l E:e8) l l . . .c6 1 2.Vlic2
E:e8 1 3.'itih2 exd4 1 4 .lll xd4 lll c 5 1 5 .E:ae l
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 .lll c l N This significantly improves White's
coordination. An illustrative line is l l . . . c6
1 2 .lll d3 b5 1 3 .b3 bxc4 1 4.bxc4 Wc7 1 5 .E\:cl;!;
and White still retains better chances thanks to
his space advantage secured by the d5-pawn.
Chapter 1 9 - 4 . . . a5
9.�c2 exd4
After 9 . . . .ixd2 1 0.tZ:ixd2 c5 1 1 .d5 tZ:i a6 Black
was certainly solid in Munteanu - Machan,
Prague 20 1 2. However, I believe it's always
White who controls the game in these kind
of positions. 1 2.Eiae l N .id? 1 3 .tZ:i c3 followed
up with f2-f4 would give White a promising
game.
307
White should have continued to improve his
position with:
1 0.lLJxd4 .ic5
I also considered the natural 1 0 . . . tZ:i c6N
1 1 .tZ:ixc6 ( 1 L.ic3 .id? seems rather double­
edged to me) 1 l . . .bxc6 1 2.tLlc3 . The position
is complex and it is not possible to analyse
anything concretely, but I would like to
mention the following direction: 1 2 . . . .icS
1 3 . tZ:i a4 .id4 14 . .ic3 .ixc3 1 5 .tLlxc3;!; I prefer
White's chances.
C) 5 ... d5 6.tlif3 0-0
6 . . . dxc4 transposes to a position covered in the
Catalan section - see variation D of Chapter 4
on page 56.
8
7
6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 I ..ic3 tli a6
Apparently not the best square for the
knight.
1 1 . . .tZ:i bd? looks more natural. After 1 2.tLld2
tZ:i e5 1 3 .c;t>h l ! I still prefer White, though the
position is complicated.
12.a3! a4 13.lLJd2 lLJ bs
Black has realized that his knight has no
future on a6, but he has lost important time.
In Lesavouroux - M. Urban, email 20 1 0 ,
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
C
d
f
e
g
h
7.�c2
7.0-0 was my choice i n GM 2, but after
7 . . . dxc4 we reach a position that no longer
fits our repertoire. Black has a wide range
of choices here: Cl) 7 b6, C2) 7 .. c6,
C3) 7 tli c6 and C4) 7 c5 .
.•.
.•.
.••
.
308
B ogo-Indian
Cl) 7 ... b6 8.0-0
This occurred in Kachiani - Vasilevich,
Chisinau 200 5 , and now I found the following
improvement:
8
7
6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
8 ... dxc4
8 . . . c6 transposes to variation C2 below.
8 . . . ib7 9.cxd5 .ixd5 was played in Demina
- Ubiennykh, Sochi 2004. (9 . . . exd5 1 0 . .ig5;!;
should be a good version of a Queen's Indian
position.)
14.a4! gc7
1 4 . . . bxa3 1 5 .ttJxa3;!;
15.�d2 %Vxd4 16.%Vxd4 cxd4 17.tLJdf3
The arising endgame is unpleasant for Black.
C2) 7 ... c6 8.0-0 b6
9.�e5 ga7
9 . . . Wfxd4N is an important line. 1 0 . .ixa8
Wi'xe5 I l ..if4 Wi'h5 1 2 . .if3! lt:\ g4 1 3 .ixg4
Wi'xg4 1 4 . .ixc7± and Black hardly has enough
for the exchange.
1 0.gdl .ib7 1 1 .hb7 gxb7 12.lVxc4 c5
309
Chapter 1 9 - 4 . . . a5
After 8 . . . tt:'i bd7 9.if4 White threatens 1 0.c5
with the idea of trapping Black's dark-squared
bishop. After the more or less forced 9 . . . ie7
1 0.E:dl we again transpose to a Catalan
position.
15.d5!
I can say that the following game was decided
thanks to GM 2:
9.i.g5 i.e7 1 0.tt:'i bd2
Now Black has a choice between developing
his light-squared bishop to b7 or a6.
10 i.b7
Or 1 0 . . . ia6 1 l .tl'ie5! tt:'i fd7 1 2.i.xe7 Vfixe7
1 3.tt:'id3! As always, it is essential to keep both
pairs of knights. 1 3 . . . tt:'i f6 This was Ilincic Raicevic, Nis 1 996, and now White should
have continued 1 4.E:ac l N E:d8 1 5 .E:fe l tt:'i bd7
1 6.e4 E:ac8 1 7.e5 tt:'ie8 1 8.tt:'if4;!; with better
chances.
.••
C3) 7 tLJ c6 8.0-0
•••
1 1 .e4
Given as a novelty in GM 2, but it has now
been played.
1 1 . .. dxe4
1 1 . . .h6 is met by 1 2.ie3! . Of course
White has no intention of giving up his dark­
squared bishop. 1 2 . . . tt:'i a6 1 3.E:fd l White has a
promising version of a Catalan position.
12.tt:'ixe4 tt:'ixe4 1 3.i.xe7 Vfixe7 14.Vfixe4 c5
White is ready to meet Black's last move:
8 . . . tt:'i e4
This makes a lot of sense for Black. Here
I like:
310
Bogo-lndian
9.l'!dl lll xd2
Another direction is 9 . . . f5 1 0 .lll c3 lll xd2 as in
McDougall - Hanley, Eastleigh 20 1 1 . Now
the correct recapture would be l l .°Wxd2N.
White shouldn't worry about: l l . ..dxc4
(if l l . . .a4 1 2.a3 ixc3 1 3 .°Wxc3;:!; White
retains a pleasant edge) 1 2.a3 ie7 1 3.°Wc2
White will have no problems regaining the
pawn, while Black's pawn structure has
collapsed.
1 0 .lll bxd2
The stem game continued as follows:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
best retreat. There is only one example from
this position: 1 2 . . . dxc4 (after 1 2 . . . c6 1 3 .a3
lll a6 1 4.°Wc2;:!; White retains a pleasant edge)
1 3 .lll e5 c6 1 4 .lll xc4 lll d5 1 5 .l'!cl White
obtained a thematic, long-term Catalan edge
in Lombart - Rattay, email 20 1 1 .
1 0.°Wc l dxc4
This is Avrukh - Ferguson, Internet 2004.
In the game I played the slightly inaccurate
1 1 . W c4 and allowed Black to gain reasonable
play after l l . . . b6, while instead I had a
simple improvement:
a
h
1 0 . . . a4 1 1 .lll b l ! ie7 1 2.lll c3
1 2.a3!?N deserves attention as well.
12 . . . a3 1 3 .b3 lll b4 1 4 .°Wd2 id7 1 5 .l'!ac l c6
1 6.c5;:!;
White was better in Greenfeld - Laxman,
Chennai 20 1 1 .
8 . . .ie7 9.l'!dl lll b4
a) 9 . . . l'!a6 has been played by Topalov, but
to tell the truth it looks too artificial to me,
and after 1 0.a3 id7 l l .if4N I do not really
understand what Black's rook is doing on a6.
b) 9 . . . lll e4 is comfortably met by: 1 0 .lll c3
lll xd2 (White enjoys a pleasant edge after
1 0 . . . f5 l l .a3! , as was proven in the following
example: l l . . .if6 1 2.e3 Wh8 1 3.l'!acl
lll e7 1 4.lll e2 c6 1 5 .lll f4 id7 1 6.ie l lll g6
l 7.lll d3 Sjugirov - Fressinet, Moscow 20 1 3)
l l .l'!xd2 Black's main idea here is l 1 . . .lll b4,
and now I believe 1 2 .°Wd l to be White's
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
l l .a3!N lll bd5 1 2.°Wxc4
This would secure White a pleasant
advantage, with the following point: 1 2 . . . b6 is
now strongly met by 1 3.°Wc2! with the idea of
1 4.e4.
9.Wxc4 Wd5
Black can also try 9 . . . id6 with the idea of
carrying out the . . . e6-e5 advance, but after:
1 0.lll c3 e5 l l .d5 (also worth considering is
1 1 .l'!fd l exd4 1 2 .lll xd4 lll xd4 1 3.°Wxd4 °We7
1 4 .ig5 ie5 1 5 .°We3!?) l 1 . . .lll e7 1 2.l'!ac l In
both cases . . . a5 is not exactly a move Black is
happy to have played. White was better in Van
der Stricht - Sarakauskiene, La Fere 2002.
1 0.Wxd5
I believe this is the simplest road to an
advantage.
1 0 ... exd5
Chapter 1 9
Recapturing with the knight would lead to
an advantageous position for White, as his
Catalan bishop is very strong. For example,
1 0 . . . llixd5 1 1 .lli c3 .id7 1 2.E!:ac l lli xc3 was
Tanggaard - 0. Larsen, Aalborg 1 993. Here
I believe White should keep the pressure
along the c-file by playing 1 3 . .ixc3N with
a pleasant edge after 1 3 . . . E!:fd8 1 4.a3 .id6
1 5.llid2.
I I .J.f4 J.g4 12.a3 J.e7
Black has also experimented with 1 2 . . . .id6
1 3 . .ixd6 cxd6. Now instead of the natural
1 4.e3 White temporary sacrificed a central
pawn with: 14.llic3 .ixf3 1 5 . .ixf3 llixd4
l 6 . .ig2! Black did not manage to challenge
the validity of White's idea and ended up in a
clearly worse position after: 1 6 . . . llib3 1 7.E!:ad l
d 4 1 8 .llib5 E!:ac8 1 9.llixd4 llixd4 20.E!:xd4
E!:c2 2 1 .Ei:b l E!:xe2 22.E!:xd6 Once again the
a5-pawn is not really helping Black, Van der
Sterren - Garcia Ilundain, Linares 1 99 5 .
-
311
4 . . . a5
1 6 . .igSN c6 1 7.llia4 E!:a6 1 8.Ei:ac l White's
pieces are much better coordinated.
13 ... i.xf3 14.i.xf3 llixd4 1 5.hc7 �xf3t
16.exf3;!;
Black has an unpleasant endgame ahead.
C4) 7 c5 8.dxc5 d4
..•
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Another important direction here is:
8 . . . .ixc5 9.cxd5 'Wxd5 1 0.llic3 'Wh5 1 1 .h3
The black queen is clearly misplaced on h5.
1 1 . . .llic6 1 2.g4 'Wg6 1 3 .'Wxg6 fxg6 14.0-0
a4 1 5 .Ei:ac l White had a lot of pressure in the
arising endgame, Zuchowski Filho - Almeida,
corr. 2003 .
8
7
6
5
4
9.J.xb4 axb4 10.0-0 � c6 1 1 .�bd2 e5
1 1 . . .'We7
Now it is only White who can fight for an
advantage.
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
13.llic3N
This looks strong here, although 1 3 .E!:d l
E!:fc8 1 4.llic3 is also advantageous for White.
14 . . . llid8 Obviously Black wants to play
. . . c6 as soon as possible to remove White's
pressure against the d5-pawn. 1 5 .llie5 .ie6 was
Vittorino - Morales Rivera, Bogota 2006, and
now White could have played more strongly:
B oga-Indian
312
1 2.lll g S ! e5
After 12 . . .'�xcS White executed his idea
perfectly in the following game: 1 3.lll de4
lll xe4 1 4.lll xe4 Wfe7 1 5 .cS! e5 1 6.lll d6 ie6
1 7.a3 b3 (Black understandably avoids
1 7 . . . bxa3 1 8 .bxa3 as his b7-pawn would be
a serious target.) 1 8 .Wid2 f5 Morein - Silva
Filho, email 20 1 1 . White should now have
played 1 9 .e3!N dxe3 20.Wixe3t with the
better game.
1 3 .lll ge4 lll xe4 1 4.lll xe4 if5
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 .a3!
Again an important positional idea, which
enables White to seize the initiative on the
queenside.
1 5 . . . g6 1 6.axb4 lll xb4 1 7.Wib3 ixe4 1 8 .ixe4
Wffxc5 1 9.Elxa8 E!:xa8 20.ixb7 E!:b8 2 1 .ig2
Black definitely has some compensation for
the pawn, but he will have to fight hard for the
draw, Mihai - Foulds, corr. 20 1 3 .
12.tligS h6
If 1 2 . . . ig4 then White has 1 3.lll de4 lll xe4
1 4 .lll xe4 if5 as in Gagarin - Osmanodja,
Pardubice 20 1 2 . White should have gone for:
13.�ge4 � es 14.a3!
As usual White seeks to open up the
queenside at the right moment. Here we have
two games:
14... £5
Another game continued: 1 4 . . . bxa3 1 5 .Wib3!
Ela5 1 6.E!:xa3 f5 1 7.lll d6 lll xd6 1 8 .cxd6 Elc5
Black's strategy had failed in Shen Yang - Zhao
Xue, Jiangsu Wuxi 20 1 1 , and White could
have easily decided the game with:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 9.ixc6N Elxc6 20.cSt \tih7 2 1 .WidS+-
Chapter 1 9 - 4 . . . a5
15.tll d6 lll xd6 16.cxd6 �xd6 17.cS �f6
1 8.axb4 .ie6
Black managed to hold in Buhmann Fressinet, Germany 20 14, but here I found an
improvement:
313
Conclusion
Our first major departure from GM 2 came
after the moves 4 . . . a5 5 .�g2 0-0 6.e4 d6
7.tll e2 e5. I now recommend 8.0-0, when my
analysis shows that White enjoys the better
prospects.
Another significant change arose after
5 . . . d5 6.tll f3 0-0, when in GM 2 I continued
with 7.0-0. Should Black then reply with
7 . . . dxc4 we would reach a position no longer
in our repertoire, and for that reason I gave
7.Wfc2. Some of Black's subsequent replies will
transpose back to previously covered territory,
with my previous recommendations standing
the test of time.
The final variation of the chapter saw us
follow a high level game between Buhmann
and Fressinet, when my improvement leaves
Black struggling to defend against White's
powerful passed pawn.
Bogo-Indian
4 ...ie7 5.�f3 - Various 5th Moves
Variation Index
1 .d4 � f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 .ih4t 4 . .id2 fie?
5.�f3
A) 5 ....ixd2t 6.flxd2
Al) 6. . .d5 7..ig2 0-0 8.0-0
Al l) 8 ... dxc4
Al2) 8 ... �d8
A13) 8 ... � bd7
A2) 6. . . � c6 7.� c3 d5 8.� e5 dxc4 9 ..ig2 �xe5 10.dxe5 � d7 1 1 .fid4
A21) l l ...f!b4
A22) 1 1 ... 0-0
B) 5 ... b6 6 ..ig2 .ih7 7.0-0
Bl) 7 ... 0-0
B2) 7 ... .ixd2 8.f!xd2
B2 1) 8 ... d6
B22) 8 ... d5
B23) 8 ... 0-0
C) 5 ... 0-0 6 ..ig2 .ixd2t 7.flxd2 d6 8.�c3 e5 9.0-0
Cl) 9 ... � c6
C2) 9 ... c6
C3) 9 ....ig4
C4) 9 ... �e8
315
315
315
316
318
321
322
323
324
324
326
327
327
328
33 1
332
332
332
333
Chapter 20 - 4 . . . '1We7 5 . ltJ f3 - Various 5 th Moves
1 .d4 tlif6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 i.b4t 4.i.d2 '1We7
s.tll a
After this we reach a usual Bogo-Indian
position, which I have always been happy to
see with White over the board.
5 . .ig2 is quite possible, but after 5 . . . ltJ c6
6.ltJf3 Black captures on d2 with 6 . . . .ixd2t
forcing the knight recapture, as 7.Wi'xd2 runs
into 7 . . . ltJ e4 followed by . . . Wi'b4t with a great
game for Black. After 7.lU bxd2 d6 in general
Black is doing well according to current theory.
315
Al) 6 ... d5 7.i.g2 0-0 8.0-0
It might be slightly confusing that after
3 . . . .ib4t 4 . .id2 .ixd2t we do not capture
with queen, avoiding the type of position we
see right now. However there is one important
detail - in this chapter Black is already
committed to the move . . . Wi'e7, which is
redundant in my opinion, since he can quickly
go for . . . ltJ bd7, . . . c6, . . . b6, . . . .ib7. This small
detail makes a difference and allows White to
fight for an advantage in this line.
The options we must consider in this chapter
are: A) 5 ...i.xd2t, B) 5 ... b6 and C) 5 ... 0-0.
Many transpositions are possible, but for
clarity I will consider . . . d7-d5 plans in line A,
and . . . d7-d6 then . . . e6-e5 ideas in line C.
5 . . . ltJ c6 is examined in the next chapter.
A) 5 ...i.xd2t 6.'1Wxd2
Unlike 4 . . . .ixd2t , which we saw in Chapter 1 8,
this time we recapture with the queen, since
after 6.ltJ bxd2 Black is fine if he plays 6 . . . d6
and switches to the . . . e6-e5 plan we saw in the
earlier chapter.
8 . . . c6 generally transposes to variation Al 3
after 9.Wi'c2 ltJ bd7.
Al l) 8 ... dxc4
The always seemed like a concession to me,
as the capture opens up White's light-squared
bishop.
9.tli a3 gds
The alternative is 9 . . . cS when the following
example looks convincing: 1 0.dxcS Wi'xcS
1 1 .!!ac l ltJ c6 1 2.lUxc4 E!:d8 1 3 .Wi'gS ( 1 3.Wi'f4
is an interesting alternative, as several games
have shown) 1 3 . . . Wi'xgS 1 4.ltJxgS ltJ d4
316
Bogo-Indian
In Aronian - Hi.ibner, Internet 2004, White
should have played: 1 5 .l'!fd l N h6 ( 1 5 . . . tll xe2t ?
loses t o 1 6.�fl tll d4 1 7.tll e5) 1 6.e3! hxg5
1 7.l'!xd4 l'!xd4 1 8 .exd4 tll e8 (otherwise
1 9.tll d6 is highly unpleasant) 1 9.l"lc3 White
clearly has a dangerous initiative.
IO.tt)xc4 c5 1 1 .gfdl tt) a6
I also checked the natural 1 l . . .tll c6 when
1 2 .We3 tll d 5 1 3 .Wb3 would keep serious
pressure.
To my great surprise, I realized the following
capture works very well:
13.tt)xf7!
My recommendation from GM 2 was
1 3 .tll xd7 l'!xd7 1 4.Wa5 l'!ad8 1 5 .e3;!; which
obviously secures a pleasant edge for White.
13 ... Y*fxf7 14.tt)es Y*Te8 1 5.Lb7 i.h5
16.Y*faS he2 17.gd2 Y*fh5 1 8.Y*fxbS hb5
19.a4
White regains the piece with a clear
advantage.
A12) 8 ... gd8
12.tt)ceSN
I examined the following line:
12 ...i.d7
9.gcl
Even more popular is 9.Wc2, but in my
opinion our queen is not so badly placed on
d2 and might be transferred to the f4- or e3squares; especially after 8 . . . l'!d8 this idea works
well for White.
9 c6
Black has also tried another set-up with
9 . . . tll c6 and now I like the following play for
White: 1 0 .tll e5 .id7 1 1 .We3 .ie8 1 2 .tll d2;!;
White had a preferable position in Su. Polgar
- Garcia Trobat, San Sebastian 1 99 1 .
•.•
317
Chapter 20 - 4 . . . We7 5 . ll'l f3 - Various 5 th Moves
10.�e3
A good square for White's queen, controlling
the important central squares e4 and e5, and
vacating the d2-square for the queenside
knight.
a
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0 ... b6
This has recently been played by Short, so
I will consider it the main move. There are a
couple of other options.
Removing the tension in the centre is hardly
a good idea: 1 0 . . . dxc4 1 1 .E'l:xc4 tt:l bd7
1 2 .'Wa3!? An interesting idea (though the
natural 1 2.lll bd2 lll d5 1 3.'We4 would also
keep a pleasant edge) . 1 2 . . . iif8 1 3 .E'l:cl 'Wxa3
1 4 .lll xa3 The endgame clearly offers White
an advantage, which he managed to increase
with the next series of moves: 1 4 . . . tt:l e4
1 5 .lll c4 f6 1 6.lll e l lll g5 1 7.a4 lll b6 1 8 .a5
lll d5 1 9 .lll d3± Boensch - Kveinys, Augsburg
1 994.
10 . . .id? 1 1 .lll bd2 ie8 1 2 .lll b3
A remarkable concept. White's knight is
heading for a5 , where it will put additional
pressure on Black's queenside.
A worthy alternative is 1 2.a3 a5 1 3 .c5 a4
1 4 .lll e5t as in Timman - Nikolic, Reykjavik
1 988.
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 2 . . . lll bd?
Other options for Black are:
1 2 . . . a5 1 3 .lll c5 lll a6 14.lll d3t was the
assessment of Kasparov in Chess lnformant 48.
12 ... lll a6 1 3 .a3 El:ac8 was Razuvaev
- Kholmov, Moscow 1 99 1 , and now
Kholmov's recommendation from Chess
Informant 52 seems to me to be very good
for White: 1 4.c5! White's chances are better,
as he has a clear plan of a queenside offensive
(lll a5, b4, a4 and so on) while it will not be
so easy for Black to create counterplay in the
centre.
1 3 .lll a5 E'l:ab8 1 4.El:ab l
Preparing the b2-b4 advance.
1 4 . . . E'l:dc8
1 4 . . . lll f8 1 5 .c5 lll g6 1 6.b4 would leave
White with a pleasant edge.
1 4 . . . 'Wb4 1 5 .'Wc3 'Wxc3 1 6.bxc3±
1 5 .cxd5
As always, Kasparov takes a concrete
approach to the position, while the
alternative would have been 1 5 .c5!? with a
slightly better position for White, as he has a
clear offensive plan on the queenside.
1 5 . . . lll xd5
1 5 . . . cxd5 would leave Black a pawn down for
questionable compensation after: 1 6.E'l:xc8
E'l:xc8 1 7.lll xb? 'Wb4 1 8 .'Wb3 Wxb3 1 9.axb3±
1 6.Wd2 c5?!
This move was condemned by Kasparov
in Chess Informant 48, and he instead
recommended 1 6 . . . lll 5b6 as the road to
Bogo-Indian
318
equality, but I disagree with this evaluation,
since after 1 7.b4 f6 1 8 .e4 e5 1 9.a3 i.f7
20.'1We3 White seems pleasantly better.
1 7.e4 lll 5b6 1 8 .eS!
White seized the initiative in Kasparov Timman, Belgrade 1 989.
1 1 .cxd5!
This is the right moment to release the
tension in the centre.
16 ... ttlxe5 17.dxe5 d4
But after:
18.�a3! �xa3 19.bxa3 i.xg2 20.©xg2 b5
21.ttlcsi
White kept serious pressure in the arising
endgame in Hengl - Stegariu, corr. 20 1 2.
A13) 8 ... tll bd7
1 1 ...cxd5
Instead 1 1 . . .lll xdS allows White to take
control over the centre: 12.'1Wb3 i.b7 ( 1 2 . . . cS?!
1 3 . dxcS bxc5 14.lll c3 is clearly inferior for
Black due to the weakness of the c5-pawn)
1 3 .e4 lll f6 1 4.lll c3 With a pleasant edge.
12.lll e5 i.b7 13.ttla3!
Black is experiencing definite problems in
trying to develop his pieces.
13 ... ttl eS 14.ttlb5 a6
1 4 . . . lll d? allows 1 5 .lll c6 (though maybe
even stronger is 1 5 .'1Wb3! ?) 1 5 . . . i.xc6 1 6.!'i:xc6
and White retains pressure.
15.lll c3 ttl d7 16.ttl a4!
9.�c2
This time we choose another plan. As we
know already, White can leave his queen on
d2 and continue with 9.!'i:c l , but I failed to
discover anything special for White after
9 . . . c6. Black has easy play; after both 1 0 .'\Wf4
and 1 0 .'1We3 his plan includes . . . i.b7 or . . . i.a6
and then eventually carrying out . . . c6-c5 .
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
White has managed to seize an mmative
on the queenside. In one game Black tried to
simplify with:
9 ... c6
The most playable alternative is 9 . . . c5, but this
seems to me absolutely not in the spirit of this
variation. White gains better chances by simple
means: 1 0.cxdS lll xd5 1 1 .lll c3 lll xc3 1 2.'IWxd
cxd4 1 3 .lll xd4 lll f6 14.!'i:fdl e5 1 5 .lll bS i.g4 In
Gordenko - Semenov, Kiev 2006, White could
Chapter 20 - 4 . . . 'We7 5 .lll f3 - Various 5 th Moves
retain strong pressure in various ways, but the
most accurate is 1 6.°We3N.
IO.tlibd2
White intends to carry out e2-e4 quickly.
Black has two options: either allow White to
execute his idea, or play 1 0 . . . e5 himsel£
s
1
6
K•..t. � ��·
;:fBINiflY,
_ ,_ , .m�A
,
%,,,,%
,,,,%
%
�� �� /, , , ,�
1$.�
: 1$.1$.1$.1$.!Al$.1$.
� "1$. �wr
3
0 ��2%m'"//, �A �
��\WJP,
��J�
�fl-�0
A w�w
2 �
1 �- - - %- /, , , �j= ""
�
0 iQ%
b
a
319
My recommendation from GM 2 of 1 3 .:B:fe 1
is not so convincing.
1 3 . . . tlixf6
1 3 . . . 'Wxf6 allows an immediate 1 4.c5.
But after the knight recapture, White should
not rush with c4-c5 , and instead simply
continue with:
1 4.:B:fel
In fact, 1 4.c5 bxc5 1 5 .dxc5 a5 is also a little
better for White, but Black will gain some
counterplay when his knight gets to d5, his
bishop to a6, and so on.
1 4 . . . :B:adS 1 5 .c5
White has a pleasant edge.
l l .cxd5
�-J: 0 i0% � %'0
d
c
f
e
g
h
10 ... e5
The other path is:
10 . . . b6 1 1 .e4 dxe4 1 2.tlixe4 ib7
In another game Black tried 12 . . . tlixe4
1 3.°Wxe4 ib7 and now after the best line
1 4.:B:fe l tli f6 1 5 .°Wc2 we get the same
position as after 12 . . . ib7.
After the text move, Black easily made two
quick draws from this position, but neither
of the White players went for the simple:
a
1 3.tlixf6t!N
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
l l . ..cxd5
This would allow White a pleasant choice
between:
1 2 .e4!?
Or 1 2.dxe5 tlixe5 1 3 .tlixe5 'Wxe5 14.tlif3
with a nice position playing against the
isolated pawn.
1 2 . . . dxe4
Or 1 2 . . . exd4 1 3 .exd5 lll x d5 1 4.:B:fe l °Wc5
B ogo-Indian
320
1 5 .'!Wxc5 lll xc5 1 6.lll xd4 with serious
pressure.
1 3 .lll xe4 exd4 1 4.:!'l:fe l !
An important move.
1 4 . . . lll xe4 1 5 .:!'l:xe4 '!Wc5 1 6.'!Wd2!? lll f6
l 7.:!'l:xd4 a5
l 7 . . . ie6 allows l 8.lll g 5 !.
1 8 .:!'l:cl '!Wb6 1 9.a3
And despite the simplifications, Black was
under severe positional pressure in Rychagov
- Kholmov, Moscow 2003.
12.e4 c!Ll 5b6
The knight also has a couple of other
options:
1 2 . . . lll b4 1 3 .'!Wc3 exd4 1 4 .lll xd4 '!Wc5
14 . . . lll b6 1 5 .a3 lll a6 1 6.:!'l:ac U and White is
slightly better.
14 . . . c5 ? Moving the c-pawn is really not a
good idea. 1 5 .lll f5 '!We5 1 6.lll c 4± White was
clearly better in Plaskett - Hund, London
1 982.
After the text move I like the way White
played in the following game:
1 5 .:!'l:fc l '!Wxc3 1 6.:!'l:xc3 lll b6 1 7.a3 :!'l:d8
1 8 .lll 2 b3 lll a6
In Camarena Gimenez - Granero Roca,
LAlfas del Pi 20 1 1 , White missed the
important follow-up:
12 . . . lll 5f6 1 3 .:!'l:fe l :!'l:d8
Or if 1 3 . . . exd4 there are two lines worth
analysing:
a) 1 4.e5 lll d5 1 5 .lll xd4 was Carlsen Galego, Khanty-Mansiysk (ol) 20 1 0,
when I believe Black should have tried the
principled l 5 . . . lll xe5N. White's best reply is
1 6.lll c4 (obviously 1 6.f4 '!Wb4! doesn't work)
1 6 . . .f6 1 7 .lll b3 but after 1 7 . . . a5 ! this is not
something I would be happy to play with
White, especially since the alternative offers
a clear positional superiority.
b) Thus I still prefer my recommendation
1 4.lll xd4 over Carlsen's choice. After
1 4 . . . '!Wc5 1 5 .'!Wxc5 lll xc5 1 6.lll c4 the
endgame is unpleasant for Black.
1 4.E:adl
White naturally enjoys a space advantage,
but Black's position is quite sound. It's really
remarkable how Anatoly Karpov handles
this position.
14 . . . exd4 1 5 .lll xd4 lll b6 1 6.lll 2b3 ig4 1 7.f3
ie6 1 8 .'!Wc5
I would also consider 1 8.lll xe6 '!Wxe6 1 9.lll c5
We? 20.f4 with better chances, but Karpov
prefers to keep more tension.
18 ... '!We8 1 9.e5 lll fd7
1 9 . . . lll fd5 20.f4 looks much better for
White as well.
20.'!Wc l lll f8 2 1 .f4
White had a solid edge in Karpov Andersson, Reykjavik 1 99 1 .
8
7
6
5
a
b
c
d
e
4
f
g
1 9.a4!N lll c7 20.a5 lll d7 2 1 .:!'l:dl
With a pleasant edge.
h
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
32 1
Chapter 20 - 4 . . . We7 5 . lD f3 - Various 5 th Moves
13.:aacI !?N
A move that was recommended by Pelletier
in ChessBase Magazine 1 24 but it has not been
tested yet.
It's important for White to maintain control
over the c5-square, thus preventing Black's
idea of . . . Wc5 trying to trade queens, as
happened in the following encounter: 1 3.�fe l
exd4 1 4.lLixd4 Wc5 1 5 .Wxc5 lLixc5 And the
arising endgame was reliable enough for Black,
Pelletier - Schebler, Germany 2008.
After the novelty I examined the following
natural line:
13 ... :ads 14.�b3 exd4 15.tlifxd4
And White is setting the tone after both:
1 5 ... � eS
Or 1 5 . . . lLi f8 1 6.�fe l .
16.f4 tli ec4 17.We2 tli a5 18.�fl tlixb3
1 9.�xb3;!;
A2) 6 ... � c6
8.�e5
A pet continuation of Kozul.
8 ... dxc4
Black's only decent choice.
9 ..ig2
Now Black mostly plays:
9 ... �xe5
Only a couple of games have tested 9 . . . 0-0
when it seems White's best idea is to play
1 0.ixc6 bxc6 1 1 .0-0 c5 as in Pages - Glinz,
email 20 1 0, and now I like 1 2.lLia4N which
forces Black to play: 1 2 . . . cxd4 1 3.°Wxd4 White
retains a small but pleasant edge after both
1 3 . . .ia6 14.�fdl ib5 1 5 .lLic3 �fd8 1 6.'Wf4±
and 1 3 . . . E!:d8 1 4.'Wxc4 �d5 1 5 .f4! °Wd6 1 6.E!:ac l .
10.dxeS � d7 1 1 .�d4
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
1
a
b
2
c
d
e
f
g
h
7.�c3
7.ig2 runs into the annoying 7 . . . lLi e4
followed by 8 . . . Wb4t.
7... d5
This has recently been Black's top choice in
the Bogo with . . . We7, at least among strong
players. Eventually I came to the conclusion
that White's best chance of fighting for the
advantage is in the following line:
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
In this position Black has tried four different
moves. A2 1) 1 1 ...�b4 is an option but my
main continuation will be A22) 1 1 . .. 0-0. The
two other alternatives are:
B ogo-lndian
322
1 l . . .a6 1 2.�d l 0-0 1 3 .f4 will be covered via
the 1 1 . . .0-0 move order of line A22.
1 1 . . .tll b6 1 2.0-0 �b8 1 3 .�fd l id7 1 4.�d2
0-0 1 5 .�ad l We8 ( 1 5 . . . ic6 leaves White
with typical compensation after 1 6.ixc6 bxc6
1 7.tll e4 h6 1 8 .a3 a5 1 9.h4�) This occurred in
Kozul - Zelcic, Zadar 20 1 3, and now I found
a remarkable solution:
��
��·
�
�
�-�r�i .,Y,�
,
··
·
·····".r····"�
''·····'� ��)'T%�
��· ·"�
: ���%�lJ.���'<�W0�
"�
32 �t3J �
� .,J!i!t�-�•wPw-�0
t3J t�..i.t
·
· ··
8
7
6
...
��
·····"-�
....
a
b
c
d
e
··· ·"� if ··
f
g
h
1 6.Wh4!N It's always important to remember
about attacking ideas, since Black has hardly
any pieces on the kingside. 1 6 . . . ic6 1 7 .ixc6
Wxc6 1 8.tll e4! And suddenly Black is in
trouble. 1 8 . . . h6 ( 1 8 . . . tll d5 1 9 .tll f6t is very
strong for White) 1 9.�d4 @h8 20.tll f6 lll d 5
2 1 .�xc4 Wa6 22.lll xd5 exd5 23.�xd5 Wxa2
24.Wd4 And White dominates.
A2 1) 1 1 ...'i«b4
I recommending starting with:
12.f4N
This has never been played, but should
eventually lead to a normal position.
After 1 2.0-0 I am not happy with Black having
the option of 1 2 . . . Wb6. The following example
is quite instructive: 1 3.�fd l Wxd4 1 4.�xd4
tt::l xe5 1 5 .tll b5 �e7 1 6.�e4 c6 1 7.�xe5 cxb5
1 8 .�xb5 �b8 1 9.�cl �d8 Black had no
problems whatsoever in Corfield - Catt, email
20 1 1 .
12 ... 0-0
If 1 2 . . . Wxb2 then White has a lot of
compensation after: 1 3 .�b l Wa3 1 4.Wxc4 c6
(it is very important that Black cannot play
1 4 . . . Wc5 in view of 1 5 .Wxc5 lll xc5 1 6.�b5±)
1 5 .tll e4!
1 3.0-0
This position has been reached several times,
but usually via the 1 2.0-0 move order.
13 ... 'i«b6
Nobody has been brave or foolish enough to
take the b2-pawn with 1 3 . . . Wxb2 and indeed
after 1 4.�ab l Wa3 1 5 .Wxc4� White has too
much for the pawn.
1 3 . . . tt::l b 6
Chapter 20 - 4 . . . °We7 5 . ctJ f3 - Various 5 th Moves
A22) 1 1 . 0-0 12JM 1
This is a significant alternative to the main
continuation. Now I like a new idea:
1 4.Ei:fc l !?N
Since I failed to find anything for White
after 1 4.Ei:fd l 1Ml'xb2 1 5 .a4 c5 1 6.1Ml'e3 tll d 5!
as has occurred in a few games.
1 4 . . . Ei:b8
After 14 ... 1Wxb2 1 5 .a4! tll d5 1 6.Ei:ab l '!Wa3
17 . .L:d5 exd5 1 8 .tll xd5 White will regain the
c4-pawn and his central pawn mass looks more
dangerous than Black's queenside majority.
1 5 .tll e4 '1We7 1 6.Ei:d l f6
Another logical line is 1 6 . . . id7 1 7.1Ml'c5 !
1Wxc5t 1 8.tll xc5 ic6 1 9.ixc6 bxc6 20.b3!
with great compensation.
1 7.exf6 gxf6 1 8 .1Ml'c5 !?
White has alternatives, but this way obtains
dear compensation.
1 8 ... 1Ml'xc5t 1 9.tll xc5 e5 20.if3�
14JUdl
Several correspondence games have arrived
at this position and in all of them Black chose:
14 ... f6
323
.•
12 a6
1 2 . . . 1Wb4 can be met by the calm 1 3.Eld2.
The following game shows how careful Black
must be: 1 3 . . . a6 1 4.0-0 Ei:b8 1 5 .Ei:fd l b5?
(much stronger would have been 15 ... '\Wc5 but
even so after 1 6.f4 b5 1 7.tll e4 '1Wxd4t 1 8 .Ei:xd4
f5 1 9.exf6 lll xf6 20.tll c5 White has excellent
compensation) 1 6.ic6 tll b6 1 7 .1Wh4+­
Suddenly Black is lost as the threat of Ei:d8 is
decisive, Kozul - A. Saric, Opatija 20 1 2 .
.•.
13.f4
Every game has continued:
13 ... tll b6
And now I recommend:
14J�d2!? gbs 15.tlie4 ges
1 5 . . . tll d5 makes life easier for White:
1 6.<i>f2 b5 1 7.1Ml'c5! 1Ml'e8 1 8 .tll c3 c6 1 9.tll e 4!
White was dearly better in Schoch - Zatko,
corr. 20 1 3 .
15.exf6 l£ixf6 16.tll a4N °Wxd4t 17Jhd4;!;
Black faces a lot of hard work to try to hold
the game.
16.©f2 .id7 17.tll c5 .ic6 1 8.hc6 bxc6
19.ghdl h6 20.©f3i
Bogo-Indian
324
the alternative, so we will analyse Bl} 7 ... 0-0
and B2) 7....L:d2.
Bl) 7 ... 0-0
White can underline the drawback of Black's
arrangement with:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
This position occurred in Legrand
Fransson, email 20 1 2 . White's last move looks
funny, but it shows that Black cannot do much
and has to wait passively. Obviously the main
question is if White can break through. But
what is guaranteed is that nobody would be
happy to reach such a position with Black.
B) 5 ... b6
The following set-up is of course in Queen's
Indian style.
6.J.g2 J.b7 7.0-0
s.J.gS
More frequently White opts for 8 . .if4 with
the tricky idea of meeting 8 . . . d5 with the
strong 9.c5 when Black faces serious problems.
The problem is that the correct 8 . . . .id6 9 . .ixd6
cxd6 gives Black reasonable play.
8 ... h6
The most playable alternative to the text is:
8 . . . d5
But in this case quite strong is the natural
reply:
9.lll e5 h6
Otherwise the pin along the h4-d8 diagonal
is annoying.
1 0 . .ixf6 WIxf6
�·
�
�
ifI'• .-.v.�
. . . %... . %. l&""%11
"� , , ,
"
"
rm'
�-�, , -,�, %�
�
�"�
�"""�
�
•
, , , , 8 %1-�
��
, , , %� �
�
�
�L. %%1,�
•�
8 %1-t�..tt�
8 %1-t�0 ��
""ef�� 1� -� ·;·� ""
8 �-
1
6
4
5
2
3
.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Now the simplest and most convincin�
continuation is:
1 1 .Wi'b3N .id6
1 1 . . .c5 1 2.cxd5 cxd4 1 3 .dxe6 .ixg2 1 4.exr"'
rJ:?h8 1 5 .rJ:?xg2 Wfxe5 1 6.Wfxb4± j ust leaYe>
White with extra material.
1 2.cxd5 .ixe5
Or 1 2 . . . exd5 1 3 .lll c3 c6 14.f4! lll a6 1 5 .e-±:::
and White is clearly better.
Chapter 20 - 4 . . . �e7 5 . lli f3 - Various 5 th Moves
325
1 3.dxe5 'Wxe5 1 4.f4 'Wxe2 1 5 .i.f3
The point behind White's play.
1 5 . . . 'Wa6 1 6.dxe6
Black is in trouble.
After the text move, the most recent game
continued:
12 . tll d7
There are ocher moves to consider:
..
1 2 . . . 'Wg6?! 1 3.'Wxg6 fxg6 1 4 .i.h3 ©f7 1 5 .d5
was clearly better for White in Kulaots Zavoronkov, Tallinn 2003.
l l . . .d5 1 2 .tll e5 is clearly better for White.
For example: 1 2 . . . c6 1 3.e4 :B:d8? (somewhat
better was 1 3 . . . dxc4 14.tt:lxc4 although
White's advantage is obvious) 14.llig4 'Wg6
l 5.cxd5 cxd5 1 6.exd5 exd5 l 7.tll e3 Black lose
his central pawn in L. Bronstein - Fuentes,
Buenos Aires 1 99 1 .
1 2 . . . c6
This is hardly a good idea.
1 3.:B:ad l tt:ld7
Black has no time co play 1 3 . . . d5, as after
1 4 .lll e5 i.d6 White has the strong idea of
1 5 .e4! i.xe5 1 6.dxe5 'Wxe5 1 7.exd5 cxd5
1 8 .cxd5 when he is clearly better.
A vital line co note is: l 1 . . .c5 1 2.d5 exd5
1 3 .llie l ! This secures White's advantage, as
he will recapture the black pawn with a piece.
1 3 . . . tt:l c6 1 4.tt:lxd5 'Wd6 1 5 .'Wc2 :B:ad8 1 6.e3
White was clearly better in the computer game
Gull - RobboLico, Internee 20 1 3 .
12.�c2
White creates the tactical threat of 1 3 .tll g5 .
In my opinion the new and natural 1 2.d5N
also comes into serious consideration.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
l 4.d5
The key move in White's concept.
326
B ogo-lndian
1 4 . . . exd5 1 5 .lll d4!
The play in this game of my good friend
Vladislav Tkachiev made a great impression
on me.
1 5 . . . E!:fe8
13.:Sadl
Also good was 1 3 .lll g5 hxg5 1 4 .ixb7 E!:ad8
1 5 .E!:ad l t when White would gain a pleasant
positional edge.
13 ... a6 14.h4 g5?
This is j ust a blunder, but even after
1 4 . . . E!:ab8 1 5 .d5;!; White has a solid edge.
15.tll xg5 hxg5 16.i.xb7+Black could have resigned in Wang Yue Akylbekov, Khanty-Mansiysk (ol) 20 1 0 .
B2) 7. . .i.xd2 8.'i'xd2
1 6.b4
A fine positional idea. White is not satisfied
with a slight edge after 1 6.cxd5 c5 1 7.lll c6,
but instead intends to undermine Black's
pawn structure, and especially the d5-pawn,
by means of b4-b5 .
1 6 . . . a6 1 7.b5 cxb5 1 8.cxb5 if8
Unfortunately Black cannot play 1 8 . . . E!:ac8
as White has the strong 1 9 .ih3 and if Black
plays 1 9 . . . E!:c7 then 20.bxa6 ixa6 2 1 .ixd7
E!:xd7 22.lll xd5 is horrible for Black.
1 9.ixd5 ixd5 20.lll xd5
White had a clear positional advantage in
Tkachiev - Nikolaidis, Belfort 2004.
Instead I believe it is premature for Black to
jump in with his knight:
8 . . . lll e4 9.Wf4 d5 1 0.lll fd2
White gets a good version of a Queen's Indian.
1 0 . . . lll xd2 1 1 .lll xd2 0-0 1 2.E!:ac l c5 ?!
Much stronger was the modest 12 . . . lll a6
but then after 1 3 .cxd5 exd5 1 4 .lll c4! White
would be better, with the following point:
14 . . .Wxe2 1 5 .E!:fe l Wh5 1 6.E!:e5 '1Ng6
1 7.lll e3 And White will regain the pawn
(on d5) with dividends, as Black cannot play
1 7 . . . c6, due to 1 8.E!:g5 We6 1 9 .ih3!! Wxh3
20.Wff6 g6 2 1 .lll f5 winning on the spot.
Chapter 20 - 4 . . . �e7 5 .lll f3'�Various 5 th Moves
327
The text move was played in Poljakov
- Subaric, Novi Sad 1 945, when White
overlooked a strong possibility:
1 3 .cxd5 exd5 1 4.dxc5 bxc5 1 5 .b4!±
With a clear positional advantage, as White
will establish control over the d4-square.
B2 1) 8 ... d6
This is a serious alternative to the main line.
9.d5!
An important improvement over 9.lll c3,
which allows 9 . . . lll e4 1 0 .lll xe4 ixe4. The line
from GM 2 continued 1 1 .�e3 ib7 1 2.d5.
Otherwise White can hardly fight for an
advantage. And somehow I didn't pay enough
attention to 1 2 . . . lll d7 which has brought
Black very good results in practice. My new
idea was 1 3 .b4 but for some reason I missed
the simple: 1 3 . . . exd5 ( 1 3 . . . 0-0 1 4 .lll d4 and
1 3 . . . e5 1 4 .lll d2 are both fine for White)
With the following point: 1 4.�xe7t r:Jlxe7
l 5 .lll d4 a5! Black either gets the c5-square
for his knight, or gains counterplay along the
a-file.
9 ... exd5
This is the critical line in my opinion.
9 . . . e5 1 0.lll c3 Despite Black's great score,
I believe White should always be better in
this kind of position when the b7-bishop is
blocked by White's d5-pawn. For example:
10 . . . a5 1 1 .a3 lll a6 Not the best square for the
knight, but Black obviously missed that White
is able to play b2-b4. 1 2.b4 axb4 1 3.axb4 0-0
(instead 1 3 . . . lll xb4? does not work in view
of 1 4.!!xa8t ixa8 1 5 .E:al 0-0 1 6.!!a7! �d8
1 7.lll b5 c6 1 8 .lll c7 with a decisive advantage)
1 4 .�b2 White was clearly better in Stoll Schmidt, Germany 1 982.
1 0.c!lih4 � e4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Now in Ikonnikov - Vaysberg, Esslingen
20 1 2, White should have played:
1 1 .�e3!N
With the following point:
1 1 ... dxc4 12.c!lif5 �e5 13.c!lic3 d5 14.f3
�xf5 1 5.fxe4 We5 16.gf5 We7 17.Wd4 0-0
1 8.exd5
White has a great position.
B22) 8 ... d5
This is a normal move in this type of position,
but after:
9.cxd5 exd5
I consider that this structure is always very
playable for White and here I would say we
have a favourable version, as the black queen is
misplaced on e7 and the trade of dark-squared
bishops makes White's life easier.
9 . . . lll xd5 1 0.E:e l 0-0 1 1 .e4 lll f6 1 2 .lll c3 E:d8
1 3 .E:ac l ;!; offered White a pleasant advantage
in Rybka 4. 1 - Gull, Internet 20 1 3 .
10.�c3 0-0 1 1 .gacl
I have changed my mind compared with
GM 2 and now I recommend this move rather
than 1 I .lll h4 as I first suggested. Now I am
328
Bogo-Indian
not sure what we achieve after l l . . . g6. Let's see
a fairly recent example: 1 2.Wfg5 Wf d8 1 3 .:B:ac l
lll a6 1 4 .lll f3 c6 1 5 .:B:fe l Wg7 1 6.Wfd2 c5 In
Bars - Gunkel, corr. 20 1 3 , I still believe White
is slightly better, but it's obvious that we didn't
achieve much with our knight j ump to h4.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
In Wells - Czaja, Liverpool 2008, White
should have continued:
1 5.%Yf4N ge8 16.a3 ge6 17.b4�
With a pleasant edge.
B23) 8 ... 0-0 9.tlic3
1 1 . . .lll bd7 1 2.lll h4 This time the knight
hop to h4 is stronger. 1 2 . . . c6 ( 1 2 . . . g6
1 3 .Wfg5 and Black is struggling to protect his
d5-pawn, since 1 3 . . . c6 runs into 1 4.e4!) This is
Sokolowski - Sadomsky, corr. 1 980, and now
I like the following idea for White: 1 3.f3N
c5 If White carries out e2-e4 then he would
be clearly better. 1 4 .lll f5 Wfe6 1 5 .i.h3 Wh8
1 6.Wg2 g6 l 7.lll e 3 Wfe7 1 8 .dxc5 lll xc5 1 9.lll c2
White has good play against the isolated pawn.
Premature is l 1 . . .c5 1 2.dxc5 ! bxc5 1 3 .lll h4
Wfd7 1 4 .:B:fd l d4 1 5 .lll a4± with a clear
advantage, as in Khismarullin - Fedoseev,
Khanry-Mansiysk 20 1 3 .
12J:Ud1 �:Uds 13.tlih4 c6
White also has an edge after: 1 3 . . . g6 1 4.Wf g5
Wf e6 l 5 .lll f3 lll e4 1 6.W/f4;!;
14.tlif5 VNfll
9 . . . d5 1 0.cxd5 lll x d5 (the more popular
1 0 . . . exd5 would transpose to line B22 above)
1 1 .:B:ac l White's position is preferable; Black's
best chance is: 1 1 . . .lll a6 1 2.lll e5 c5 1 3 .dxc5
lll xc5 1 4 .lll xd5 exd5 1 5 .lll f3 White had a
slight but long-lasting advantage in TukmakoY
Chapter 20 - 4 . . . �e7 5 .tll f3 - Various 5 th Moves
- Reshevsky, Vilnius 1 978 (and 1 5 .ltJ d3 also
looks good) .
329
1 6.exf5 :B:xf5 1 7.a3 ltJ f8 1 8. b4 ltJ cd7 1 9.ltJe4±
White had a clear positional advantage in
Yevseev - E. Levin, St Petersburg 2007.
9 . . . d6 1 0 .dS! e5
This position has occurred many times
in practice but, as I already mentioned
above, in my opinion this type of position
with a white pawn on d5 blocking Black's
light-squared bishop is always better for
White.
l l .e4
Worthy of consideration is l l .b4N. It is
a novelty in this concrete situation, but in
two moves it transposes to the game Huch
F. Schmid, Germany 1 999. 1 1 . . .aS 1 2 .a3
ia6 1 3 .�a2 ltJ bd7 1 4 .�b3 tll g4 1 5 .e4 f5
Definitely a premature decision. 1 6.exf5
:B:xf5 l 7.ltJe4 White had a nice positional
edge.
l l . . .a5 1 2. ltJ e l
It's pretty pointless t o play 1 2.ltJh4 since
after 1 2 . . . g6! it would be hard to carry out
f2-f4 and recapture with the g-pawn, since
the knight would be vulnerable on h4.
12 . . . ltJ a6 1 3.b3 ltJ c5 1 4.ltJc2
I like White's position as he can combine
play on both sides.
1 4 . . . ltJ fd7
Even after the best option 1 4 . . . ic8 1 5 .:B:ae l
id7 1 6.f4 White has the better game.
1 5 .:B:ab l f5
A premature idea, which only helps White.
-
1 1 d5
1 1 . . .ixf:3 is obviously a concession, and
after 1 2.ixf:3 c6 1 3.:B:ac l ltJ a6 1 4.:B:c3 :B:fc8
1 5 .a3 White's advantage was obvious in Tatai
- Kopec, London 1 978.
...
12,gacl tlia6
I also found the following line quite
interesting:
1 2 . . . c5 1 3.cxd5 exd5 1 4.dxc5 bxc5 1 5 .�e3!
'!Wb7
This is Black's best continuation; the rest are
much worse:
1 5 . . . Wf6 1 6.:B:xcS Wxb2 1 7.'!Wd2! White is
clearly better. After 17 . . . Wb 7, as in Arkell Dive, Norwich 1 994, the natural 1 8 .:B:fc I N
ltJ a6 1 9.:B:c6 :B:ac8 20.ltJd4 would have
secured White a big advantage.
1 5 . . . tll a6 is also not good. 1 6.tll d2 :B:fe8
1 7.ltJxe4 dxe4 1 8 .:B:c4 f5 1 9.g4! gave White
a clear advantage in Stupka - Lagudin,
Slovenia 1 996.
Bogo-Indian
330
l 5 . ttJ e5 f6 1 6.ttJc6 Wes l 7.Wd6±) l 5 . ttJ h4! (in
suggested the positional l 5.a3 which is
good enough for an edge) The more ambitious
knight j ump is stronger, for example: l 5 . . . c5
1 6.f3 g5 1 7.ttJf5! ixf5 1 8.Wxf5 We3t 1 9.©hl
:!'l:ad8 20.dxc5 bxc5 2 1 .f4 White has the
advantage.
GM 2 I
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.Wxc5N
I believe this new move is White's best
option. To compare with 1 5 . . . Wf6, now
after 1 6.:!'l:xc5 Black has the intermediate
1 6 . . . ttJ d7 at his disposal, which would allow
him reasonable play.
1 6.b3 is too soft and after 1 6 . . . lt:\ a6 Black
had a normal and safe position in Tai Cardoso, Las Palmas 1 975.
1 6 ... Wxb2 l 7.Wc3!?
Intending to go into a favourable endgame,
with play against Black's isolated pawn.
1 7 . . . Wxa2
Black can also try to capture the other pawn:
1 7 . . . Wxe2 1 8 .ttJd4 Wh5 (White is clearly
better after 1 8 . . . Wa6 1 9.ixe4 dxe4 20.ttJf5
Wf6 2 1 .Wxf6 gxf6 22.:!'l:fe l ±) 1 9.f3 ig6
20.Wc7 Wg5 2 1 .:!'l:fd l Wd8 22.ifl ! White's
powerful compensation is obvious.
1 8 .tt:ld4 Wa6
White was threatening 1 9.:!'l:a l , while
1 8 . . . hg2? loses to 1 9.ttJf5 f6 20.Wc7.
1 9.ixe4 dxe4 20. ttJ f5 Wf6 2 1 .Wxf6 gxf6
22.:!'l:c4
In my opinion this endgame is difficult for
Black.
1 3.cxd5 hd5
Black can also recapture with the pawn:
1 3 . . . exd5 In Budo - Bondarevsky, Tbilisi
1 937, I believe White should have played:
1 4 .ih3 f6 (otherwise 1 5 .ttJe5 might cause
Black serious problems, for example 1 4 . . . c5
14.�e5
A strong and concrete method, which proves
sufficient for an advantage.
14 ... c5
The following option has no independent
significance: 1 4 . . .ixg2 1 5 .©xg2 c5 1 6.dxc5
bxc5 (Unfortunately for Black, the desirable
recapture with the knight doesn't work:
1 6 . . . lt:\xc5 l 7.b4 Wb7t 1 8.Wf3! Wxf3t
1 9.©xf3 ttJ a6 20.ttJc6± With a large advantage
for White.) l 7.Wa4 This would transpose to
1 4 . . . c5.
1 5.dxc5 bxc5
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
16.�a4
1 6.:!'l:fd l might be even stronger.
l6 ...J.xg2 17.©xg2 �b7t 1 8.©gl �Ud8
The b2-pawn is untouchable: 1 8 . . . Wxb2
1 9.ttJc4 Wb7 20.:!'l:b l and Black loses his
knight.
Chapter 20 - 4 . . . We7 5 . ltJ f3 - Various 5 th Moves
19.tiJd3 gd4 20,gc4 gxc4 2 1 .Wxc4
White had secured a stable advantage in
Hi.ibner - Larsen, Las Palmas 1 976.
C) 5 ... 0-0 6.i.g2 i.xd2t 7.�xd2
Cl) 9 ... c!iJ c6
This is clearly inferior, due to:
10.tiJdS!
8 !�!��
,.,'"?m!!
wi�
;:;;:
·� �
�w·�
"""
z �w·-"
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
%1
z
8.c!iJc3 e5 9.0-0
&
z A :%'.
z
&
z A %1
,�
�
&
z A
" �. �
llJllJ �.. Ill
��
��
�
�
�
"�
•
8 �rif�
%
-�
,
,
,
�
,
, , ��n��
..
z
�
�
��r�
8 �r�
f� ��.,�..,. �
8 �J
f��f
�
- - - Z.,, , ,/,•fm""
a
7 ... d6
This move is quite thematic for the line with
. . . We?. Certainly 7 . . . d5 would transpose to the
4 . . . ixd2t line.
33 1
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
10 ... �d8
After 1 0 . . . tll xd5 1 1 .cxd5 tll xd4 1 2.tll xd4
exd4 1 3 .:!'l:ac l White gains a serious strategical
advantage, due to the permanent weakness
of the c7-pawn. A good illustrative line is:
1 3 . . . :!'l:e8 1 4.:!'l:fe l Wf6 This attempt to create
some counterplay fails short (however after
1 4 . . . if5 1 5 .Wxd4 'i.Wd7 1 6.:!'l:c4± it's not a
fun position for Black, Bilobrk - Jezidzic,
Sesvete 20 1 1 ) . 1 5.:!'l:xc? b6 1 6.:!'l:c4 d3 1 7.:!'l:f4
Wg6 1 8 .e4 Black's d3-pawn was falling in
H. Olafsson - Bonin, New York 1 986.
1 1 .gadl ges
After the natural 1 I . . .ig4 White favourably
releases the tension in the centre by l 2.dxe5
tll xd5 ( 1 2 . . . dxe5 also fails to solve Black's
problems, as White has the strong: 1 3.We3! In
Euwe - Henneberger, Bern 1 932, he was clearly
better after 1 3 . . . tll d? 1 4.:!'l:d2 ixf3 1 5 .exf:3! as
Black cannot maintain a strong outpost on d4.
For example: 1 5 . . . tll d4 1 6.f4 f6 1 7.fxe5 fxe5
1 8.f4!±) 1 3.cxd5 tll xe5 1 4 .lll d4 Once again
White had a desirable type of position with
Black's c7-pawn a permanent target, Zirngibl
- Handel, Leipzig 1 959.
332
B ogo-Indian
12.dxe5 �xe5
1 2 . . . dxe5 could be met strongly by 1 3.'We3
followed by doubling rooks on the cl-file.
13.�xe5 dxe5
1 3 . . . E!:xe5 1 4 .lll c3 leaves White with a
pleasant edge.
1 0.e4 Ag4 1 1 .�h4
1 1 .lll e l !? also works very nicely. For
example: 1 1 . . .exd4 1 2.'Wxd4 c5 1 3 .'We3 lll c6
1 4 .lll c2 'We5 1 5 .h3 'Wh5 1 6.lll d5!± White had
a big advantage in Ki. Georgiev - Lajthajm,
Cetinje 20 1 2.
1 1 ... �a6
After 1 1 . . .ie6 we have a fresh example:
1 2.b3 c5 1 3 .d5 ic8 In Halkias - Musalov,
Yerevan 20 1 4 , White refrained from the
obvious 1 4.f4N. Maybe the reason was
1 4 . . . exf4 1 5 .gxf4 lll xe4 but after 1 6.lll xe4
'Wxh4 1 7.lll xd6 White is much better.
12.gael gfes 1 3.f4 exf4 14.%Vxf4
White had a promising position in Radjabov
- Sadiku, Kerner 2007.
C3) 9 . Ag4 1 0.� el!
..
C2) 9 . c6
.
.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
A key idea in this line; obviously White
should not allow Black to solve the problem of
his light-squared bishop.
1 0 ... exd4
Another option is:
1 0 . . . lll c6
But this could run into the thematic reply:
1 1 .lll d 5!?N
The natural 1 1 .d5 in my opinion also leads
Chapter 20 - 4 . . . 'We7 5 . ll:J f3 - Various 5 th Moves
to a slightly favourable position for White,
but Black was very much in the game after
1 1 . . .lLib8 1 2.e4 c6 1 3 .lLid3 cxd5 1 4.cxdS
lLi a6 in Malaniuk - Moiseenko, Krasnodar
1 999.
l l . . .'Wd8
One point is that Black cannot play
1 1 . ..lLixdS 1 2.cxdS lLixd4? as he would lose
material after 1 3 .e3 lLi f5 1 4.h3 followed by
1 5 .g4.
1 2.dxeS dxe5
After the other recapture 1 2 . . . lLixe5 then
1 3 .lLi e3 attacks both the b7-pawn and Black's
light-squared bishop. Following 1 3 . . . .tc8
1 4.E!:d l 'We? 1 5 .lLi d3 White definitely has
pressure.
1 3.h3 .te6 1 4 .E!:dl E!:e8 1 5 .lLic2;!;
White has the better chances, as his central
knight is very annoying for Black.
1 1 .'Wxd4 lLl c6 12.'Wd2 'Wd7 13.lLld5
As the reader has no doubt noted, this move
is a thematic idea in this type of structure.
13 ... lLlxd5 14.cxd5 lLl e5
333
1 5.l:klN 'Wb5 16.�f'3!
A very strong move.
16 ....ixa 17.exf.3 gac8 1 8.gc3
White will follow up with E!:fc l and f3-f4,
when he will have serious pressure.
C4) 9 ... ges I O.e4 i.g4
a
b
C
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 .�el
Despite being only White's second most
popular choice, I prefer this move, as I believe
the right concept is to prevent Black from
trading his poor light-squared bishop so easily.
More often White chooses 1 1 .d5, but after
1 I . . . .txf3 1 2 . .txf3 a5 followed by . . . ltJ a6, we
get a thematic double-edged position, which is
typical for this line.
1 1 ... � c6
Another option is:
1 l . . . exd4
Now I like the following example:
1 2.�xd4 lLi c6 1 3 .�d2 a5
A fairly recent game used another approach:
1 3 . . . 'Wd? 1 4.£3 .th3 1 5 .b3 .txg2 1 6.lLixg2
This time White doesn't mind trading light­
squared bishops, since he has a favourable
pawn structure. 1 6 . . . E!:e5 1 7.lLie3 E!:ae8
1 8 .E!:ac l lLid8 1 9.lLicd5± White was
Bogo-Indian
334
much better in Damljanovic - Ratkovic,
Obrenovac 20 1 3 .
14 ... �e5 15.�d2 �h5
It is no wonder that Black wants to solve the
problem of his misplaced light-squared bishop.
16.f3 i.h3
Black manages to trade his troublesome
bishop, but White still retains the better
chances after:
17J�acl
With the idea of playing tt:ld5 at a suitable
moment.
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.f3
Another reasonable choice is 1 4 .�cl 'Wd8
1 5 .b3 as in Manor - Adams, Adelaide 1 98 8 .
1 4 . . . ie6 1 5 .tt:ld5 'Wd8 1 6. tt:l c2 tt:le5 1 7.tt:lce3
White retained clearly the better chances in
Tukmakov - Kurajica, Solin 1 999; note that
Tukmakov was right to deploy the knights
before the rooks.
� .f.% �!mi!�
7 iL,%
f.% i �--ef�F
i ef.f.%
- - %-•
�----% i
6
� ,� ,, �
8 l�
��
�
�� �� �1
: ��
� � �/,'��
3 � �%�
� �- �
� ..i..
%
8ft""'
;�
-�WJ
.,,
%
�
�
,
%
�
1
rm - - "
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
17 ... ge7
If instead 1 7 . . . ixg2 1 8 .'tt> xg2 'We5 1 9.�fdl
�ad8 20.'Wf2 and Black fails to create any play,
while White's position improves naturally.
20 . . . a6 2 1 .�d2 b6 22.b4 tt:ld7 23.tt:ldS± was
Vyzmanavin - Landenbergue, Manila (ol)
1 992.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
12.tll c2!
The point of White's idea; he has no
intention of playing d4-d5 .
12 ... c!ll xd4 13.tilxd4 exd4 14.�xd4
This is the sort of favourable position White
should aim for in this line. The main line
continues:
18.g4!
White takes the opportunity to head for a
favourable endgame.
18 ...�c5t 19.�fl �xflt 20.gxfl hg2
2 1 .'itixg2 c6
Naturally Black wants to cover the d5square, but now the d6-pawn becomes a
permanent weakness.
Chapter 20 - 4 . . . °1We7 5 .lll f3 - Various 5 th Moves
335
Conclusion
22.gd.2 c!ll es 23.h4
After 3 . . . ib4t 4.id2 Wle7 we reply 5 . lLi f3 ,
and then this chapter considered three main
moves: A) 5 . . . ixd2t , B) 5 . . . b6 and C) 5 . . . 0-0.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
23 h5
23 . . . g6 was played in the recent game
Guramishvili - Khurtsidze, Tbilisi 20 1 4 ,
though i t obviously doesn't change anything.
After 24.�g3 Eid8 25 .Eicdl White still has
excellent chances due to her space advantage.
•.•
24.g5 a5 25.tll a4 ga6 26.gcdl <i>h7 27.<i>g3
<i>g6 28.c5
White had obviously gained the upper hand
in Cvitan - Kovacevic, Pula 1 996.
The first point to note after 5 . . . ixd2t is that
we recapture with the queen, not the knight as
we did in Chapter 1 8 . In the . . . d7-d5 plans that
follow, there are plenty of details to study in
my analysis, but the general impression is that
White has slightly the better chances. Studying
those details is essential, as often White should
choose a totally different approach in reaction
to different defences by Black.
5 . . . b6 leads, unsurprisingly, to play in the style
of the Queen's Indian Defence. The QID is
highly respectable, but in this chapter White
gains a pleasant version of lines against it.
Variation C covered ideas with . . . d7-d6 and
. . . e6-e5 after 5 . . . 0-0. In this case there are a
couple of general ideas that can guide White:
lLi d5 is a standard theme, and making it
awkward for Black to exchange his light­
squared bishop is also a useful concept.
Overall, the Bogo-Indian with 4 . . . Wle7 is a
respectable defence, but after 5 . lLi f3 the lines
I suggest will offer White good chances of an
edge.
Bogo-Indian
s �c6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
...
Variation Index
I .d4 lil f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 i.h4t 4.i.d2 V!f e7 5.lll a lll c6
6.lil c3
A) 6 ... d5
B) 6 ...0-0 7.i.g2
Bl) 7 ... d6 8.0-0
Bl I) 8 ... a5 9.�cl
Bl l l ) 9 ... e5
Bl 12) 9 ...hc3
B1 13) 9 ...i.d7
B12) 8 ...hc3
B2) 7... lll a5 8.b3 b6 9.0-0 i.h7 10.'1Wc2
B2 1) 10 ... d5
B22) 10 ... �ac8
C) 6 ...hc3 7.hc3 lll e4 8.�cl
Cl) 8 ... d6 9.d5! lll xc3 10.�xc3
Cl l) 10 ... lil d8
CI2) 10 ... lil b8
C2) 8 ... 0-0 9.i.g2 d6 IO.d5
C2 1) 10 ... lll b8 1 1 .dxe6
C2 1 1) 1 1 ... fxe6
C2 12) 1 1 ... he6
C22) 10 ... lil d8 1 1 .0-0
C22 1) 1 1 ... lilxc3
C222) 1 1 . .. e5 12.lild2 lilxc3 13.�xc3
C222 1) 13 ... b6
C2222) 13 ... f5 14.c5 lilf7 15.1Wb3 b6
16.cxd6 cxd6 17.'1Wa3
C2222 1) 17 ...i.b7
C22222) 17 ... e4
C22223) 17 ... a5
337
339
339
340
340
340
342
342
344
344
345
347
347
347
349
352
352
352
353
354
354
356
356
358
359
360
360
h
Chapter 2 1 - 5 . . . llJ c6
1 .d4 tl:Jf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 i.b4t 4.i.d2 Yfie7
s.c!ll f3 c!ll c6
By far Black's first choice.
6.c!ll c3
In my opinion this is the most promising
line for White. Black now has three choices:
A) 6 ... d5, B) 6 ... 0-0 and C) 6 ... J.xc3.
After 6 . . . b6 7.i.g2 i.b7 8.0-0 0-0 (8 . . . lll a5
9.b3 0-0 transposes to variation B2 on
page 344) I like the simple 9.a3 i.xc3 1 0.i.xc3
lll e4 1 l .Wf c2 lll xc3 1 2.Wfxc3. This looks like
an innocent position, but actually Black's
knight is misplaced on c6. 1 2 . . . lll d8 (Black is
immediately trying to find a better square for
his knight) 1 3.c5 f6 1 4.b4 lll f7 1 5 .�acl i.e4
1 6.lll d2 i.xg2 1 7.�xg2 White was better in
Rawlings - Pezikov, corr. 20 1 2.
337
8 . . . 0-0 9.i.g2 �d8
9 . . . lll e4 1 0 .Wf c2 a5 1 1 .0-0 would lead to the
same position after 1 0 . . . a5.
1 0.0-0 lll e4 1 l .Wf c2
Now Black usually plays 1 l . ..a5, transposing
to the 8 . . . a5-variation, otherwise:
1 I . ..i.d7
1 1 . . . lll d6 gives White a nice choice between
1 2.c5 lll e4 1 3 .b4 lll xc3 1 4.Wfxc3 a6 1 5 .�fel
Wf e8 1 6. Wfd3 f6 1 7 .e4± RobboLito Stockfish, Internet 20 1 3 , and 1 2.b3!? dxc4
1 3 .lll e5 cxb3 1 4 .lll xc6 bxc6 1 5 .Wfxb3� with
great compensation in Shadrin - Karayilan,
corr. 20 1 3.
1 2.b4 lll xc3
Otherwise White can keep his bishop with
i.b2.
1 3.Wfxc3
White's stable advantage is obvious.
A) 6 ... d5 7 .a3 J.xc3 8.J.xc3
a
8 ... a5
Sooner or later Black should opt for this
move. It would make no sense for Black to
play 8 . . . dxc4, as after 9.Wfa4 White regains the
pawn with dividends, as his Catalan bishop
becomes strong along the h l -a8 diagonal. Of
course Black has other options:
8 . . . lll e4 9.Wfc2 a5 1 0.i.g2 transposes anyway.
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 . . . �ac8 1 4.�fe l
1 4.e3!?N is also a possibility.
1 4 . . . i.e8 1 5 .e4 dxc4 1 6.d5 lll b 8 1 7.Wfxc4±
White went on to win in Harika - Karason,
Reykjavik 20 1 1 .
9.i.g2 0-0 10.0-0 l3d8
I also checked:
1 0 . . . lll e4 1 l .Wfc2 a4
This looks quite tempting, but in fact it is
nothing special, as Black hardly can carry
out his idea of . . . lll a5-b3.
1 1 ... �d8 transposes to our main line.
338
Bogo-lndian
1 2 .!!ac l id7 1 3 .!!fd l !!fd8 1 4.ie l
Also worthy of consideration is 1 4.ltJe l ! ?.
14 ... ie8
1 4 . . . ttJ d6, as played in Razuvaev - Rozentalis,
Geneva 1 990, might have allowed White
1 5 .cxd5N exd5 1 6.ltJe5! ltJxd4 1 7.!!xd4
Wxe5 1 8 .!!xd5± with a clear advantage.
1 5 .ltJh4 ltJ f6
So far this is Babula - Vehi Bach, Dresden
2007, and here I worked out the following
line for White:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.cxd5N exd5 1 7.ltJf5 We6 1 8 .£3
In such situations it is essential for White to
activate his dark-squared bishop.
1 8 . . . g6 1 9.ltJh6t @g7 20.Wd2 ltJg8 2 I .ltJg4!?
2 I .ltJxg8 <Jixg8 22.if2 is better for White
as well.
2 1 . . .ltJf6 22.ltJf2
With an advantage for White.
1 1 .�c2 �e4
This is the main arrangement of the pieces
for Black. As was proven in the following
encounter, this is not a good moment for Black
to play l l . . .a4 1 2.ltJe5! id7 1 3 .!!fd l ie8
1 4.!!ac l and Black could hardly generate any
activity in Razuvaev - Rashkovsky, Moscow
1 989.
1 2.b3 j,d7
Another idea is to exchange the knight for
the bishop:
1 2 . . . ttJxc3 1 3.Wxc3 e5
This attempt to create immediate counterplay
in the centre falls short.
After 1 3 . . . id7 1 4.e3 I like the following
example: 1 4 . . . ie8 1 5 .!!fc l b6 1 6. ltJ e l !!a7
1 7.ltJd3 ltJb8 1 8.b4± White was clearly
better in Kharitonov - Khasin, Kursk 1 987.
1 4.dxe5
Also quite promising looks 1 4.ltJxe5N ltJxe5
1 5 .dxe5 d4 1 6.Wb2 Wxe5 1 7.e3±.
14 . . . d4 1 5 .Wb2 ig4 1 6.!!fd l Wc5
Of course Black can regain the pawn with
1 6 . . . ixf3 1 7.ixf3 Wxe5, but after 1 8.!!d3
his position is very unpleasant, as the d4pawn appears to be a serious target. White
went on to win in Jankovic - Hecht, Zadar
20 1 1 .
1 7.!!d2 a4 1 8 .b4 Wxc4 1 9.!!cl Wb3 20.Wa l !
i f5
This was Nikolic - Adams, Hastings 1 989,
and now White has an improvement:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 2 1
2 1 .tll e l !N
This would have been extremely strong. The
idea is to play tll d3-c5 , while after:
2 1 . . .Wfe6 22 ..ixc6 bxc6 23.�xd4
White is just a pawn up with a winning
position.
-
5 tll c6
339
. . .
The computer recommend a tactical solution
with 2 1 .tll xd6 Wfxd6 22.e5 !, but my move is
good enough.
2 1 . .. Wfxd5 22.�e3 Wff7 23.Wffl
The position had opened up clearly in
White's favour, Avrukh - Rashkovsky, Biel
2002.
B) 6 ... 0-0 7.i.g2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
13.i.b2
It is always nice to keep the bishop pair.
13 ...i.eS 14.gacl f6
Black intends to activate his bishop along
the e8-h5 diagonal, but his position in the
centre appears to be vulnerable, as was shown
in the following encounter:
Bl) 7 ... d6 8.0-0
Boga-Indian
340
I recommended 8.d5 in GM 2, but I now
prefer this direction. Black can either play
Bl I) 8 ... a5 or B12) 8 ....L::c3.
Clearly inferior is 8 . . . e5, as it allows the
powerful 9.tlid5! tlixd5 1 0.cxd5 .ixd2
1 l .dxc6! when White gets a clear plus. For
example, 1 1 . . . .ih6 1 2.dxe5 dxe5 1 3 .Wfd5 bxc6
1 4.Wfxe5 E:e8 1 5 .Wfxe7 E:xe7 1 6.e3 E:b8 1 7.b3
.id7 1 8 .E:ac l and the arising endgame was
difficult for Black due to his damaged pawn
structure in Cvek - Kulhanek, Ostrava 2003.
10 ... tll xe5
1 0 . . . dxe5 1 1 .tli d5 tlixd5 1 2.cxd5 tli d8 was
Epishin - Ikonnikov, Schwaebisch Gmuend
20 1 1 . White has a favourable pawn structure,
and now 1 3 . .ig5N f6 1 4 . .ie3 would retain a
pleasant edge.
1 1 ..ig5
The following sequence is fairly logical:
1 1 . .. hc3 12.gxc3 h6 1 3 ..L::f<i �xf6
Bi l) 8 ... a5
I do not see much point in this waiting strategy
for Black.
9.E:cl
At this point I analysed three options: Bl l l)
9 ... e5, B1 12) 9 ....L::c3 and B1 13) 9 ...J.d7.
Bl l l) 9 ... e5
� �m1J-i�
8!
m .t. �
w� �� • w� .t.
1
6
�� ·-,, -- -�- - - - - %�
• �
Ill·
5 %,,,�
,
_
%
_
8
n.,
%
- �4
3 � -- - - -Y.m - - %- ��
%%�-�,n?·- ----·%!-0 � � %1,�
2 8 W� � 8 �r
W��w�
---- %
1
----- %�•VEfm--- ,.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 0.dxe5!
1 0.tlid5 may appear good for White after
1 0 . . . tlixd5 1 1 .cxd5 tlixd4 1 2.tlixd4 exd4
1 3 . .ixb4 axb4 1 4.Wfxd4 and occurred in
Khalifman - Yermolinsky, Manila (ol) 1 992.
However, 14 ... E:xa2N 1 5 .Wfxb4 Wfxe2 1 6.E:xc7
Wfxb2 1 7.Wfxd6 Wf d4! looks to be enough for
a draw.
B 1 12) 9 ....L::c3 1 0.hc3
Chapter 2 1
-
5 . . . tll c6
34 1
10 ... e5
The alternative is 1 0 . . . lt:l e4, when I like
l l .d5. Black's main option is then l I . . .lt:lxc3
1 2.:B:xc3 lt:l b4 1 3.a3 lt:l a6, and now the
following game is a great example of White's
play in this line:
8 �.i �1. £����m�
t\tf
'%�
�*
l. t.E
.
. % I.
%
�
;-��
�� 7:�7.� ��
�- ��
4 . 0J� %!
�
�
···
��-�
· �§· � �if
1
-
.,.,.
....
6
5
.
3
..
2
..
� ··· - �
. 7.n· ·9,� ��t�
.
a
. . . %� 1•:m·· ·
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.dxe6 fxe6 1 5 .lll d4 c6 1 6.:B:e3! (it transpires
that the white rook can be very useful on
the third rank) 16 . . . i.d? 1 7.f4 :B:ae8 1 8 .lll f3
i.c8 l 9.°1Wc2 °1Wc7 20.lll g5 g6 2 l .°1Wc3 With a
big advantage for White, Prohaszka - Tratar,
Sarajevo 20 1 0 .
1 1 .d5 t£ib8
l I . . .lt:l b4 forces White to play 1 2.:B:a l but
the idea of a2-a3 appears to be too strong
for Black. In the following game Black tried:
1 2 . . . i.d??! (Apparently best would have been
1 2 . . . lt:l e4 1 3 .i.e l b6, but still after 14.a3
lt:l a6 1 5 .b4 f5 1 6.°1Wc2 White is better due to
the exposed position of Black's queenside.)
1 3.a3 lt:l a6 1 4.i.xa5 lll c5. Now White kept
everything under control with precise play:
1 5 .i.b4 i.a4 1 6.°IWe l lll b3 1 7.:B:b l e4 1 8.lll d2
e3 1 9.lll x b3 hb3 20.°1Wc3!± Timman Djuric, Oviedo 1 993.
There have been several high-level games
to reach this position, but for some reason
nobody has played the most natural (in my
opinion) move:
I considered the following direction:
12 ... tl:i bd7 13.tl:id3 b6
It is not a good idea to open the diagonal
for White's dark-squared bishop by means of
1 3 . . . e4 1 4 .lll el lll e5 1 5 .°1Wd4 i.f5 1 6.lll c2,
when White stands better.
14.b3 i.a6 1 5.e4
White is ready for the following logical
sequence:
B oga-Indian
342
15 ... b5 16.ha5 bxc4 17.bxc4 hc4 1 8J�xc4
gxa5 19.gxc7 gfag 20.Wb l gxa2 2 1 .Wb7
1 3 . . . e5 would leave Black with a difficult
position after 1 4 .tll db5 as his knight is badly
placed on d8.
14.e3 We7 1 5.dxe6 fxe6
This was Razuvaev - Osnos, Moscow 1 979,
and now I like:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
With an initiative for White.
Bl 13) 9 ...J.d7 10.d5
White's pieces are well placed to start a concrete
plan of action.
16.Wc2N c!Llc6 17.gcdl
White has secured a positional advantage.
10 ... c!Lids
B12) 8 ...hc3 9.J.xc3 c!Ll e4
Another option is clearly worse:
9 . . . e5 1 0.d5 lll b8 1 1 .Wc2!
White covers the important e4- and f5squares and prepares a kingside offensive
with tll h 4, e2-e4 and f2-f4. Now most of the
games continued:
1 1 . . .a5
1 1 . . .c6 occurred in Rohde - Yermolinsky,
Los Angeles 1 99 1 , and now White should
have changed direction with the more
positional: 1 2.dxc6N lll xc6 (clearly worse
would be 1 2 . . . bxc6? 1 3 .c5 with a huge
advantage for White) 1 3 .:B:ad l With better
chances for White, as his bishop pair should
tell in the long term.
1 1 . .. h6 12.J.xfG Wxf6 13.lLJd4 J.c5
Chapter 2 1 - 5 . . . tb c6
. � ��·
� -.i.
,
. �.
i
�
��
. . . . %.Sfl"'
. . ••
.,.,%�
·
·
�
· 2r•···% - --··
.�. . %�-�
·· · ��
4
�· r�
��·0 ��
Blt:Jf�
� �w.
. . � - �g:r�
2 ��,
d z �-��··· ·
8
1
6
,,%
5
3
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 2 .tll h4 tll bd7 1 3 .e4 tll c5 1 4 .:gae l tll h5
1 5 .'!Mfd l g6 1 6.f4
White was clearly better in Lagarde - Ider,
Sautron 20 1 3, using the fact that 1 6 . . . exf4?
runs into the devastating 1 7.tll f5! .
343
1 1 .d5 til ds
Now I have a new suggestion, which I am
surprised hasn't been tested before:
8 i. � .i.- ��·
w.� ��·····;�\iff" . v,W.� &
7
. . , ,� ��
. . . ,-, -.,� . . , , �
� � � ��
��
: ��
!ii�
�� �� �wr
3
��Pw·"
21 �w*��
��J��J
�1��
�
� wl}
n � rJ
6
�-� • r.•�
��
r.•� •
:m
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
12.V!ic2N
If l 2.dxe6 tll xe6 Black is very much in the
game, thanks to his active pieces. This gives
him good compensation for White's bishop
pair, as in Gleizerov - Bocharov, Abu Dhabi
2004.
12 ... e5
Black cannot play 1 2 . . . tll f7 in view of
1 3.tlJd4, when he will at least have to give up
his light-squared bishop.
13.lll h4! lll g5
1 0 ... f5
1 0 . . . e5 allows a favourable opening of the
position for White: 1 l .tll xe5! dxe5 1 2.d5
tll xg3 1 3.fxg3!? (an interesting approach,
although there is nothing wrong with the
natural 1 3 .hxg3) 1 3 . . . lll d4 1 4.e3 tll f5 1 5 .'1Mfd3
g6 This was Yevseev - Gasanov, Alushta 200 1 ,
and now the natural 1 6.:gc l N, followed by
1 7.c5, would have led to a clear advantage for
White.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
B ogo-Indian
344
14.£4! exf4 15.:Sxf4 g6 16.ll:Jf3
I believe the strength ofWhite's dark-squared
bishop should tell in the long term.
Here I offer a new idea:
� �it'i11 ��
7 "�..t.. !
• • t� • �. � ·
8
B2) 7 ll:Ja5
.••
6
4
5
This is probably the most interesting sideline.
An important position arises after the following
sequence:
2
3
8.b3 b6 9.0-0 J.b7 1 0.�c2
1
·z-. .. 7.�
. . . .. 7.�% ��'>
. . . . . ��:,, . . ;.
�·%"8""%�t�,% ��
�·�
'"""•
�
• �
.
7.
.
·zrm. . ;�f0. �
��-�%'�
��
"" 7.�-�
.
.
t�.i.t�
8
8. . �•if��
� ��
� � . . . . 7.� V1""
�. ��
'>
a
b
c
d
e
�
f
g
�
h
1 2 .d5 ! ?N
1 2.a3 ixc3 1 3.ixc3 ie4 1 4.Wb2 d5 was
Czebe - A. Horvath, Balatonlelle 2007, and
now I suggest: 1 5 .dxc5N dxc4 l 6.ixa5 bxa5
1 7.bxc4 Wxc5 1 8 .lll e5;!;
12 . . . exd5 1 3 .lll xd5 ixd5 1 4.cxd5 ixd2
1 5 .Wxd2 d6 1 6.:Sac l ;!;
B2 1) 10 dS 1 1 .cxdS exd5
.••
Here I would like to take a positional approach:
1 0 . . . c5 has occurred in a few games. White
should play 1 1 .a3N ixc3 1 2.ixc3 when
he looks to be better, for example: 1 2 . . . cxd4
1 3 .lll xd4 ixg2 1 4 .<ii xg2 lll c6 1 5 .E:fd l :t
1 0 . . . E:fc8 1 1 .E:fd l c5
1 1 . . .d5 1 2.cxd5 exd5 1 3.lll g5!?N ( 1 3 .e3
was Baldomero Garcia - Suarez Sedeno,
email 2000) 1 3 . . . c6 ( 1 3 . . . h6 1 4 .lll xd5 ixd5
1 5 .ixb4 Wxb4 1 6.ixd5 lll xd5 [ 1 6 . . . hxg5
1 7.ixa8 E:xa8 1 8.Wxc7±] 1 7.Wh7t mf8
1 8 .Wh8t <ii e7 1 9.Wxg7 hxg5 20.Wxg5t
<ii f8 2 1 .Wxd5;!;) 1 4.a3 ixa3 ( 1 4 ... ixc3
1 5 .ixc3;!;) 1 5 .e4 h6 1 6.lll xf7 mxf7 1 7.e5
lll d7 1 8.lll b l ib4 1 9.e6t Wxe6 20.ixb4
With an initiative for White.
12.e3
Strengthening the d4-pawn and preparing to
move the knight from f3.
12 :SacS
I found an improvement over an existing
game after 1 2 . . . ll:l c6.
..•
Chapter 2 1 - 5 . . . tll c6
345
14.J.h3! J.a6
The main point of White's idea is that
1 4 . . . gbs runs into 1 5 .tlJb5 J.b4 1 6.J.xb4
Wi'xb4 1 7.tll xc?t with the better structure.
Importantly, the tactics connected with
17 . . . gfc8 ?! don't work for Black: 1 8 .J.xc8 gxc8
1 9.gfc l Wi'e7? 20.tlJxd5!+-
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
15J�fel gees
1 5 . . . gcd8 1 6.e4± is an even better version
for White.
1 3 .tll g5N (The idea of 1 3 .a3?! unfortunately
doesn't work. Black reacted well with
1 3 . . . J.xa3 1 4.tll g5 tll b4 1 5 .Wi'b l h6 1 6.tll h3
tll a6 when he was j ust a pawn up in Kunte Sagar, Bhopal 20 1 3 .) 1 3 . . . g6 1 4 .gfe l gad8
1 5 .tlJ h3 The knight is coming to f4 and in
general I would prefer White's chances in the
forthcoming battle.
13.a3!
Now this move works well for White.
13 ....ixa3N
This is the most principled move. 1 3 . . . J.d6
obviously allows 1 4.tlJb5, grabbing the
bishop: 1 4 . . . Wi'd? 1 5 .a4!? tll c6 1 6.tll xd6
Wi'xd6 (relatively better was 1 6 . . . cxd6N, but
after 1 7.'1Mf d3± White still retains a long-term
advantage) 1 7.J.h3 gce8 1 8 .a5 White had a
pleasant initiative on the queenside, Saidashev
- Romm, corr. 20 1 2.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
16.tll g5! c6 17.e4 h6 1 8.e5±
White is clearly better.
B22) 10 ... gacS 1 1 .a3!?
This was recommended as a novelty in
and has been tested several times now.
GM 2,
346
B ogo-Indian
1 1 ... J.xa3
The most principled reply.
1 1 . . .i.xc3 1 2.i.xc3 i.e4 1 3 .°1Wb2 lll b7
After 1 3 . . . d6 we get a typical Queen's Indian
position, but I believe White should be
better after 1 4.i.h3 (with the idea of playing
lll d2) , as Black's knight is slightly misplaced
on aS.
1 4 .i.h3! ? i.fS
White is not concerned about 1 4 . . . i.xf3
1 5 .exf3 dS. After 1 6.l:'ffe l c6 1 7.Ei:ac l White
had a pleasant edge in Nechaev - Chubukin,
email 20 1 0 .
1 4 . . . c6 i s strongly met by: 1 5 .lll h 4!N dS
1 6.f3 i.g6 1 7.lll xg6 hxg6 1 8 .Ei:ac l t and the
bishop pair should be a factor in the long
term.
1 5 .i.x5 exfS 1 6.d5 lll e8 1 7.lll h4 g6 1 8 .lll g2t
White was better in Reinhart - Morgan,
email 20 1 1 .
12.e4 i.b4 13.e5 hf3
It appears that Black has to give up his light­
squared bishop, as 1 3 . . . lll e8 runs into a strong
reply: 1 4 .lll g S 5
8
-0 �J•!P�
-�r� f��i
6
��rr�
5 �-.
�g
- - z�', , , :.
- - '�, , %.
1
4
3
2
1
i �m�
�..t..
·•�
-----%
----%
-----%
�
m"tiY-m - - %.
�W'efwr
��
•V� t�.i""z�r
J��
��-,_, ,Y,·�=- - ,,,,,,,m.-0
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 .i.xb7!N (This is much better than
l 5 .exf6 lLixf6 1 6.i.xb7 lLixb7 l 7.E!:xa7 lLi aS
as in Andraschko - Loew, Forchheim 20 1 0.)
15 ... lLixb7 1 6.E!:xa7 Regaining the pawn and
keeping clearly better chances.
I4.i.xf3 fli es 1 5.i.g2
White could have won the pawn back
with 1 5 .E!:a4 cS 1 6.dxcS i.xcS 1 7.lll bS lll c6
1 8 .lLixa7 lll xa7 1 9.E!:xa7, but after 1 9 . . .f6
Black should be alright.
l 5 .i.e4!?N
also
gives
White
compensation: 1 5 . . . i>h8 1 6.E!:fe l �
good
Th e main point o f 1 5 .i.g2 i s to remove the
bishop from the f-file, and thus to be ready
to meet . . . f6 with f2-f4. There are no concrete
lines, but I believe White has wonderful
positional compensation for the pawn, due to
Black's poorly placed minor pieces. There have
been two games played in this position since I
recommended
new idea:
�
1 5 ... c6?!
l 5 . . . d6 was not much better in Berczes Adamski, Warsaw 20 1 0. It allows a simple
tactical trick:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.lLidS!N exdS l 7.i.xb4 White's bishop pair
is too powerful, for example: l 7 . . . lLi c6 1 8 .i.c3
dxeS 1 9 .dxeS d4 20.i.b2 lLixeS 2 1 .i.xd4 cS
22.WfS! With a clear advantage.
16Jfa4! c5
This occurred in Golod - Chernov, Germany
20 1 0, and now White could have played:
Chapter 2 1 - 5 . . . lli c6
347
8 . . . tli b4 is hardly a serious option; the
following example seems quite convincing:
9.Wfa4 a5 I O.ig2 0-0 1 1 .'ll d2 'll xc3 1 2.bxc3!
With Black's pawn on a5 , recapturing with
the b-pawn looks logical and strong. 1 2 . . . tlic6
1 3 .c5 d5 1 4.cxd6 cxd6 1 5 .l"lb l Wi'c7 1 6.Wfb3
White had much better chances in Tukmakov
- Rashkovsky, Minsk 1 987, as Black had
seriously weakened his queenside pawn
structure with the . . . a7-a5 move.
Cl) 8 d6 9.d5! tLJxc3 1 0.gxc3
••.
20.hc6 gxc6 2 1 .gxa7
Despite the massive simplifications, White
retains a lot of pressure.
C) 6 ...i.xc3
Black's most common choice.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
I
a
b
d
c
e
f
g
h
This is a big theoretical tabiya. Obviously
Black has two knight moves: CU} 10 c!b ds
or C12) 10 tLJbs.
•.•
•••
Cl I) 10 c!b dS I I ..ig2 0-0
••.
Playing 1 1 . . .e5?! before castling would be
dubious in view of the following impressive
game: 1 2.c5 0-0 1 3 .cxd6 cxd6 1 4 .Wfcl id7
1 5 .0-0 f5 1 6.1"lc7 Wfe8 1 7.Wi'e3 (this is the
point behind 1 4 .Wfc l ) 1 7 . . . ib5 1 8 .l"lfc l ia6
1 9.'ll h4! Black's bishop is missing from the
defence, so White immediately starts playing
on the kingside. 1 9 . . . h6 20.ih3 Wfh5 2 1 .Wi'f3!
White had a decisive advantage in Yevseev
I. Smirnov, Alushta 2002.
-
12.0-0
1 2.dxe6 'll xe6 is quite playable for Black.
B ogo-lndian
348
12 ... e5 13.c5 dxc5
Definitely the critical response.
After 13 . . . f5 1 4.cxd6 cxd6 1 5 .°1Wd2 White
quickly seizes the initiative on the queenside:
1 5 . . . lll f7 1 6.E!:fc l °1Wd8 ( 1 6 . . . \Wf6 looks more
natural, but still after 1 7 .E!:c7 b6 1 8.e3 White is
much better.) 1 7.Ei:c7 ©h8 1 8 .h4 h6 1 9.Ei: I c3±
White had the better chances in Leupold Carter, email 2006.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
1 8.ixa8
I also found the following surprising idea:
1 8 .Ei:d l ! ?N °1Wf6 1 9.id5 t \tih8 20.Ei:f3 if5
2 1 .Ei:xf5 \Wxf5 22.°1Wxf5 E!:xf5 23.ixa8 lll e6
24.E!:d7 Despite being a pawn down, White
definitely has the better game.
1 8 . . . c6
This occurred in Morrison - Arkell, Hinckley
20 1 3, and now White should have played:
h
14.VNc2 e4
Black's best choice.
14 . . . c6 leads to an advantage for White
after: 1 5 .E!:xc5 if5 1 6.°1Wc3 f6 (The natural
1 6 . . . cxd5 ?!, as in Moiseenko - Amin, Egypt
20 1 2, allows 1 7.Ei:c7!N \We6 1 8.°1Wxe5± with
a clear positional advantage) 1 7.lll d2N cxd5
1 8 .ixd5t ie6 1 9 .lll e4 White is left with a
pleasant edge.
1 4 . . . b6
Of course White should now carry out his
plan of d5-d6.
l 5 .E!:e3 f6 1 6.lll xe5! fxe5 l 7.d6 °1Wxd6
Black has also tried: 1 7 . . . cxd6 1 8 .ixa8
lll e6 1 9 .id5 \tih8 20.ixe6 ixe6 2 1 .Ei:d l
Black only has one pawn for the exchange,
which is obviously not enough. White won
convincingly in Chuchelov - Vasilchenko,
Cuxhaven 1 993.
1 5.lLJel f5 16.f3 exf3 17.La c6
In this position I like the simple recapture:
Chapter 2 1
-
5 . . . ltJ c6
This was Shpakovsky - Fineboim, email
2009, and here an improvement is:
12 ... 0-0 13.i.g2
Now Black has mainly tried two moves:
22.t£if4N l3ad8 23.l3fdl i.cS 24.a3
White retains a serious positional advantage.
1 3 ... e5
This is Black's most popular choice.
C12) 10 ... � bS 1 1 .dxe6 fxe6
1 l . . .i.xe6 leads to a stable advantage for White
after 1 2 . ltJ d4 0-0 1 3 .i.g2 c6 1 4. 0-0. Recently
one of my own games reached this position:
�··'� ��•��•�. i
. . . .. 7.� T.:t.. . . 7-�
�� " "'"� ��
: �� 7,!.... ��-�� ��rr
�� . . . .;32 �8 "�
J�
""' "� •
1�t::i f�jj�
·g�·i[" "
8 .1 •
7
6
p
�
-
a
c
b
d
�
e
��
-
-
f
g
h
1 4 . . . ltJ d? 1 5 .e4 ( 1 5 .:B:e3!?, intending to keep
the h l -a8 diagonal open, is another approach
which might be good) 1 5 . . . lli b6 1 6.b3 a5
1 7.f4 f6 1 8 .:B:d3 lli c8 1 9.a4 i.d7 20.:B:e l
Black's position was really tough in Avrukh M. Porat, Israel 20 1 3 .
a
b
c
d
e
f
12.�d4
The most accurate move order.
g
h
349
It is important to note that 1 3 . . . lli d?? would
j ust be a blunder, as 1 4.llixe6!+- makes clear.
This shows that one of the ideas behind 1 2.ltJd4
is to prevent Black comfortably redeveloping
his knight.
A more respectable alternative is:
1 3 . . . c6 1 4. 0-0
Now Black's best option is 1 4 . . . e5, when
1 5 .llic2 reaches 1 4 . . . c6 1 5 .0-0 in the notes
on the next page.
1 4 . . . lli d?
1 4 . . . a5 is a risky concept, as was shown
in the following encounter: 1 5 .Wfd2 llid7
1 6.:B:dl lli e5 1 7.llif3! Black's d-pawn is a
serious target. 1 7 . . . lli f7 1 8.!'i:a3 '1Mfc7 1 9.llig5!
White immediately takes the opportunity to
exchange Black's knight, which will make
the d6-pawn more vulnerable. 1 9 . . . d5 This
is certainly not a move Black wants to play,
as now his bishop remains passive, while the
weakness of the dark squares in the centre is
a significant detail. 20.:B:f3 llixg5 2 l .:B:xf8t
'it>xf8 22.Wfxg5 Wf e7 23.Wf d2 In Davies Arkell, London 1 989, White gained a clear
advantage, as it is difficult for Black to
develop his bishop. For instance, 23 . . . i.d?
just loses a pawn to 24.e4!.
1 5 .e4 lli f6
Here I like the following example:
Bogo-lndian
350
1 6.l:'!:e l e5 1 7.lll f5 ixf5 1 8 .exf5
This structure promises White the better
game.
1 8 . . . l:'!:ad8 1 9.g4! d5 20.cxd5 lll xd5 2 1 .Wi'b3
<tt> h 8 22.l:'!:c4;!;
White had definite pressure in Ciciotti Boschma, email 20 1 0.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
as after 1 7.b5! cxb5 1 8 .cxb5 ixa2 1 9 .lll e3
White has powerful compensation, with the
following nice point: 1 9 . . . a4 20.!d5t !xd5
2 1 .lll xd5 W/f7 22.l:'!:f3! is winning.) 1 7.lll e3
lll d7 1 8 .Wi'c2 lll f6 1 9.l:'!:d3 White doubles
his rooks on the d-file, putting pressure on
Black's d-pawn. 1 9 . . .l:'!:fd8 20.l:'!:fd l l:'!:d7
2 1 .Wi'b2 l:'!:ad8 22.a4 Black is pretty solid,
but White obviously had some pressure in
Zakharevich - Kulikov, Tula 2002.
b) 1 5 . . . lll a6 1 6.b4 ie6 l 7.Wi'd2 lll c7 1 8 .lll e3
l:'!:ad8 1 9.l:'!:d3 l:'!:f6 20.a4 and Black's position
was deeply unpleasant in N. Pert - Kobese,
Gibraltar 200 5 .
This was Ulko - A . Filippov, Moscow 20 1 1 .
I found nice improvement here:
h
14.lll c2 lll d7
This is Black's most popular move, but let's
have a look at some others:
1 4 . . . lll c6 1 5 .0-0 ie6 1 6.b4
This leads to a pleasant edge for White, as
was proven in the following game:
1 6 . . . a6
Black cannot play 16 . . . a5 1 7.b5 lll b4, as after
1 8.ixb? l:'!:ab8 1 9.ig2 lll xa2 20.l:'!:a3 lll b 4
(20 . . . ixc4? loses to 2 1 .lll e3 ie6 22.lll d5 +-)
2 1 .l:'!:xa5 he remains a pawn down.
1 7.b5 lll d8 1 8.lll b 4 axb5 l 9.cxb5 cj(h8 20.a4
Wfd7 2 1 .Wi'c2
White had a clear advantage in Malaniuk ­
Fedorchuk, Ordzhonikidze 200 1 .
1 4 . . . c6 1 5 .0-0
Black has three logical continuations here:
1 5 . . . lll d?
White has easy play on the queenside after
both 1 5 . . . ie6 and 1 5 . . . lll a6:
a) 1 5 . . . ie6 1 6.b4 a6 ( 1 6 . . . a5 makes no sense,
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.l:'!:d3N l:'!:f6 1 7.Wi'd2 lll c5 1 8.l:'!:a3 if5
1 9.lll e3 ie4 20.f3 ig6 2 1 .l:'!:dl Wi'e8 22.ih3;!;
White has a pleasant edge.
1 4 . . . lll a6 1 5 .0-0 c6 1 6.l:'!:d3
My new move. In GM 2 I recommended
1 6.Wfd2, but I found something that I
would like to avoid: 1 6 . . . lll c5 1 7.l:'!:dl
lll a4! 1 8 .l:'!:b3 lll b6 Black deflects White's
natural play with a permanent attack on the
c4-pawn. The only example here continued
1 9.Wfxd6 Wfxd6 20.l:'!:xd6 lll xc4 2 1 .l:'!:d l lll b6
and Black was close to equality in Schild Koch, email 20 1 1 .
1 6 . . . l:'!:f6
1 6 . . . ie6 1 7.lll e3 l:'!:ad8 1 8 .l:'!:a3± is similar.
Chapter 2 1 - 5 . . . lll c6
8 I. £8 �itifi. �7 �� �
• I.
•�
r��
-7.
�
-6 �� -- - -- "�ref--- --"�- --7,�
��
: ����!����
3 ��-0 �!�����-J�r���-0
twice. In both games White missed the simple
1 7 .lll d5N '1Mff7 1 8 .lll x f6t '1Mfxf6 1 9.c5! with a
clear advantage.
�mi
2
17J:�d3 gds 1s.�d2
We will examine Black's latest try here:
8 �,,,,,r,�ttJ•
·:=---; 8 t�..i.t�
8
� �
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
b
c
d
e
f
g
6
5
4
3
2
1
7
h
1 7.'1Mfd2N
The problem with 1 7.lll e3, as in Yrjola Zvan, Pula 20 1 3 , is that Black missed the
following resource: 1 7 . . . lll cSN 1 8.:B:a3 lll e 6!
Black is okay.
1 7 . . . lll c5 1 8.:B:a3;!;
White has every chance to seize the initiative
on the queenside.
a
35 1
h
1 5.0-0 tli f6
I f 1 5 . . . a 5 White has the unpleasant 1 6.:B:a3!
and he was clearly better after 1 6 . . . lll c5 1 7.b4
lll e6 1 8.:B:xa5 :B:xa5 1 9.bxa5 lll c5 20.lll b4 in
Shneider - Naiditsch, Istanbul 2003.
16.�e3 c6
Good or bad, Black has to take control over
the d5-square.
Black has mistakenly opted for 1 6 . . . :B:b8
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 8 ... e4
1 8 . . . ie6
This is the most popular move here, but
White is allowed a simple game.
1 9.:B:dl lll e8
White has mobilized his pieces optimally, so
now this is the right moment to push the
b-pawn.
20.b4 :B:d7
A couple of other moves are worth
mentioning:
20 . . . :B:ac8 2 1 .b5 (I would prefer the modest
2 l .a4 but the game move is good enough)
2 1 . . .cxb5 22.cxb5 :B:c5 23 .Wb4 White was
obviously better in C. Horvath - Sulc, Pula
1 998.
20 ... a6 2 1 .a4 :B:d7 22.b5 axb5 23.axb5
:B:c7 (23 . . . cxb5 24.cxb5 with unpleasant
pressure for White) 24.:B:b3 '1Mff7 25.bxc6
bxc6 26.:B:b6 :B:ac8 27.'1Mf c3 White had a big
advantage in Archer - Maltez, email 20 1 0.
2 1 .b5
White combines pressure along the d-file
with activity on the light squares.
B ogo-lndian
352
C2) 8 ... 0-0 9.i.g2 d6 1 0.d5
2 1 . . .cxb5 22.cxb5 �c8
This is Tkachiev - Adams, Cannes 200 1 .
Now as correctly pointed by Ftacnik, who
� ,,. azzne
.
annotated this game in ChessBase 1nag
82 Wh'lte could have increased h"1s pressure
'
as fio11ows:
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
b
Bla;_k now has a familiar choice: C2 1)
10 ... "L.lbS or C22) 10 ... lt'i ds.
a
h
23.lt'i d5!N Wd8
23 . . .ixd5 24.ixd5t @h8 25 .�a3±
24.�a3 �c5 2 5 .�xa7 �xb5 26.lt'i c3
White has a clear advantage.
c
d
e
f
g
h
C2 1) 10 ... tlibs 1 1 .dxeG
19.gd4 i.e6 20.gdl d5 2 1 .cxd5 cxd5
No:V in Malek - Taylor, email 20 1 0, the
.
nght
idea was:
e
f
g
h
We immediately reach another
C2 1 1) 1 1 ... fxe6 or C2 12) 1 1 ...i.xe6.
split:
C2 1 1) 1 1 ... fxe6 12.0-0 c!lixc3
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
22.f4!N ges 23.h3
Intending to push his ki ngs1'd e pawns .
Wh lte should be better here.
!
Black second most popular move here is
1 2 . . . lt'i d7. n this case White has the chance
to keep his dark-squared bishop by means
f 1 3.£e
r}. l
(even stronger is 1 3.id4N e5
.
.ie3
lt'idf6 1 5 .lt'id2;!; with a pleasant edge)
1 3 . . . a5 1 4.lt'id2 lt'i ef6 1 5 .lt'i b3 a4 1 6.lt'id4 e5
��
Chapter 2 1 - 5 . . . lll c6
1 7 .lll b 5 lll c5 1 8 .ib4;J; White definitely
had the better game in Laznicka - Bologan,
Khanty-Mansiysk 2009.
13.:B:xc3
Here I considered three moves for Black.
�
8 � -J.. �
���
7 (i{'& "��
ftlff"'
� A&
y,iA%
•% A iA%
��
, , , , , -i - �
�� " ·� �� �
: �� �� �� ��
�•�r
��r�
3 � �%�
�
��- �
2 8d"" ' y,- 8dir�
- - %�;� -fm - 1
�
" " "'
'
"
"'"
6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
353
1 6.Wfxd4 d5 1 7.:B:e3 Wff6 1 8 .:B:e5± in
Viterbo Ferreira - Mateus, Amadora 20 1 0)
1 6.e4 lll xd4 1 7.Wfxd4 c6 1 8 .Wfe5 :B:f7 1 9.f4t
White was better in Christiansen - Herder,
USA 1 996.
1 5 .Wfxd4 Wff6 1 6.Wfd2 :B:b8 1 7.c5! d5 1 8 .:B:f3
Wfe7 1 9.:B:xf8t Wfxf8 20.e4 c6 2 1 .Wfa5±
White is clearly better, Michalik - Straka,
Brezova pod Bradlom 20 1 0 .
14.tlid2
I like this knight move, although 1 4 .lll d4
also looks promising.
14 ... c6
We can see White's main idea from the
following line: 1 4 . . . e5 1 5 .lll e4 :B:b8 1 6.c5!
dxc5 7.b4 With a serious initiative on the
queenside in Eingorn - Hasan, London 1 989.
l
h
1 3 ... �d7
1 3 . . . e5 1 4.c5 lll c6 1 5 .cxd6 cxd6 has been
played in several games, and now I like the
following new idea:
1 3 . . . lll c6 1 4 .lll d4 lll xd4
1 4 . . . id7 1 5 .c5! A key idea in this pawn
structure. 1 5 . . . d5 (White stabilized his
positional advantage after
5 . . . lll xd4
l
C2 12) 11 ...Le6 12.tlid4 i.d7 1 3.0-0 :B:e8
l
1 3 . . . lll c6 allows the following regrouping:
1 4 .lll b5! :B:ac8 1 5 .id4 b6 1 6.lll c3 lll xd4
7.ixe4 lll c6 1his was Romm - Alfredo, email
Bogo-Indian
1 1 .0-0
" the 1 0 lll b8 line we arrive at an
sp lit Block "'" 'apture o n c3
& '
immediate
.
.
lm mediately with C221) 1 I . .. l£ixc3, while the
.
.
. C222) 1 1 . e5.
mam continuano n lS
·
· · ·
.•
1 1 . . . f5 1 2 . lll d2 lll xc3 1 3.Ei: �c3 i.d7 ( 1 3 . . . e 5
1 4 . c5 transposes to the mam line) has been
.
played m two correspondence games. Block
.
would be perfectly okay were lt no t for:
8
7
a
b
6 �'•·· ·. �
;ii;'•,i ��
D
�
4 �"•� �...8i'li��
�f/MDkJ � ti
5
c
14 . i.el c!LJc6
This occurred 1·n Kurowski - Ravnik, email
.
2008, and now White S hO Uld continue:
lS.f3N c!LJf6
l 5 . . . lll c5 1 6 . lll b5;!;
16.e4;!;
White has a p leasant edge.
C22) 10 c!LJ ds
••.
-
%?��-�
z� ��,l .
<i �
'-'_1- ��
,,
,
�
,,
/
,,
,
j;�� r/�
z
�
-�
li• ..t.J� �I.
1
----
"
Wd
3
2
iu
-
...
a
'i�
ff "i z�
f.�
Jl:J
, . , , Z�
A----- ' o �b" �
,,
A
Q
�- - - - Z
b
£�it�
·ifw:�
c
d
e
�
f
�
g
h
.
1 4.eS.'N With the followmg
important l'm e·.
1 4 . . . dxc5 1 5 . � b3 L4 1 6.1"1d i.xb3 l 7.axb3
White regains the p awn and has a po 'irion.I
advantage.
C221) 1 1 ... l£i Xic3 12.�xc3
.
·
Now 1 2 . . . e5 transp oses to variation
Cl l
above, where Wh"ite has a cl early better game
1 to cons1'der
after 1 3 .c5 . Therefore I would l"ke
other Blac k p ossibilities.
.i.. �
�B• �
Chapter 2 1 - 5 . . . tli c6
12 ... a5
1 2 . . . f5 1 3.Wi'c2
I believe it is most important to anticipate
Black's . . . f5-f4 idea. Most games now
continued:
1 3 . . . e5
White is ready for 13 .. .f4 1 4.We4 e5 1 5 .c5
.if5 1 6.Wi'b4 and Black is under a lot of
pressure.
1 4.c5
Again we have a favourable version of
the main line, since White hasn't even
committed to tli d2.
1 4 . . . tLl f7 1 5 .cxd6 cxd6 1 6.Elc7 Wf6
Here White has tried different approaches.
I will present the line I believe to be most
convincing.
1 7.Elcl e4 1 8 .tLld2 Wd4
If 1 8 . . . tLl e5N I propose the following idea:
1 9.tlic4 lLlxc4 20.Wi'xc4 Wxb2 2 1 .Elc3!
(threatening 22.Wi'd4) 2 1 . . .Wi'd2 22.Elc2 Wg5
23.Wd4± With a clear advantage.
1 9.tLlb3 Wxd5 20.Elxc8! Elaxc8 2 1 .Wi'xc8 Elxc8
22.Elxc8t tli d8 23.Elxd8t ii>f7
This was Margvelashvili - Samsonkin,
Wheeling 20 1 4 , and after gaining material
White should have now played:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
24.Eld7tN mf6 25.e3
Securing a nice outpost on d4 and obtaining
an almost-winning position.
13.c!LJd2
355
1 3.tLld4 also deserves attention. 1 3 . . . e5
1 4 . tL\ b 5 b6 was Arabidze - Khurtsidze, Anaklia
20 1 1 , and now the natural 1 5 .f4 would give
White a pleasant game. For example: 1 5 . . . tLl b7
1 6.Ele3 f6 1 7.tlid4 tlic5 1 8 .f5!;:!;
1 3 ... e5 14.c5!
The tactics are in White's favour; the . . . a5
move is not really a good idea for Black.
B ogo-lndian
356
C222) 1 1 ... eS 12.�d2 �xc3
1 2 . . . ctJ xd2 is not such a good idea, as White's
dark-squared bishop will eventually become
very powerful. For example: 1 3 .Wfxd2 b6
1 4.b4 f5 1 5 .f4! An important move in White's
strategy, as he has no intention of allowing
Black to play .. .f4 himself. At the same time,
opening up the a l -h8 diagonal is one of his
main strategic ideas. 1 5 . . . ctJf7 1 6.l'ke l With
the intention of opening up the position
with the advance e2-e4. 1 6 . . . e4 1 7.Wf d4 ctJ h6
1 8.h3± Black had a strategically difficult
position in Cvitan - Matijevic, Zadar 1 99 5 .
Black i s tied t o the defence o f the g7-pawn,
while White controls the long diagonal and
slowly prepares c4-c5 .
13.gxc3
1 5 .ctJ b3 .ia4) 1 5 . . . b6 1 6.ctJxc5 bxc5 1 7.d6
cxd6 1 8 . .ixa8 Black does not have sufficient
compensation for the exchange.
1 5 .cxd6 cxd6 1 6.:gc7
Since the d7-bishop blocks Black's queen,
the c7-square is available for White's rook;
he has seized the intiative.
1 6 . . . :gc8 1 7,:gxc8 .ixc8 1 8 .Wfa4 a6 1 9.:gcl
.id7 20.Wfa5 .ib5 2 1 ..ifl Wff6 22.:gc8 lt:\f7
23 .Wfc7!±
White had a clear advantage in Gyimesi Ikonnikov, Vlissingen 2002.
C222 1) 13 ... b6
This is quite a tricky move to deal with.
I believe White should switch to the kingside.
14.£4
After 1 4. b4 a5! 1 5 .a3 axb4 1 6.axb4 f5 Black
gets an improved version of our main line with
a couple of pawns exchanged on the queenside
and an active rook. 1 7.c5 bxc5 1 8 .bxc5 lt:\ f7
1 9.Wfc2 f4 20.cxd6 cxd6 2 1 .:gc7 Wf6 22.Wfc3
.ig4 led to balanced play in Tkachiev Benjamin, Cap d'Agde 2000.
14 ... exf4
I believe this is critical.
1 4 . . . f6 should be met by 1 5 .f5 . All three games
here continued 1 5 . . . a5 , which transposes to
the 1 4 . . . a5 line directly below.
1 3 . . . a5 transposes to variation C22 1 above.
1 3 . . . .id7
This does not help Black as White can play
his planned advance anyway.
1 4.c5 f5
If 1 4 . . . dxc5 then White has the e4-square for
his knight: l 5 . lt:\ e4 (this is more precise than
1 4 . . . a5 1 5 .f5! f6 1 6.g4 lt:\ f7 (The most recent
example here was 1 6 . . . ctJ b7 1 7.b3 ctJ c5 1 8 .:gg3
.id7 1 9.ctJe4 :gf7 20.Wfd2 and White was
definitely better in Gibas - Daroczy, corr.
20 1 3 .) 1 7.ctJe4 White has easy play on the
kingside, while Black lacks any counterplay.
In Zakharevich - Ulibin, Azov 1 996, it is not
surprising that Black tried to change the course
of the game with the risky 1 7 . . . h5 1 8.gxh5
ctJ h6, but this only helped White to build his
kingside offensive by 1 9 . .ih3 .id7 20.:gg3 .ie8
Chapter 2 1
-
5 . . . tli c6
357
2 1 .Wd2 @h8 22.@h l ii.xh5 23.E!:fgl with a
dangerous attack.
position looks unclear, as a subsequent b2-b4
will give Black easy counterplay on the a-file.
1 5.gxf4
After l 5 .E!:xf4 Black can set up a solid
position with 1 5 .. .f6 followed by . . . tli f7-e5 .
16 ... tll b7 17.�g3 i.d7 1 8.exf5
Black now has two recaptures.
1 5 ... 5
Black has tried other moves, but without
much success:
1 5 . . . tli b7 1 6.f5 ! ? tli c5 1 7.f6! gxf6 1 8 .b4 tli d7
1 9.l0e4 f5 20.E!:xf5 f6 2 1 .Wfl saw White easily
seize a dangerous initiative on the kingside in
Matlakov - Khismatullin, Sochi 20 1 2.
1 5 . . . E!:e8 1 6.e4 l0 b7 1 7.E!:e3 Wh4 1 8 .e5± left
White with a solid plus in Sjugirov - Oms
Pallisse, Barcelona 20 1 2 .
At this point I found a new move:
1 6. tiJ b3 l0 b7 1 7.tlJd4 is what I recommended
in GM 2, but now instead of 1 7 . . . ttJ cS?! Black
has a simple improvement in 1 7 . . . aS !. This
1 8 ...Lfs
1 8 . . . E!:xf5 1 9.E!:e l Wf8 20.ii.h3 E!:f7 2 1 .ii.xd7
E!:xd7 22.tiJ f3 ! (a key move) 22 . . . Wxf4 23.tlJgS
E!:f8 24.l0 e6 Wf2t 25.'it>hl White has a
dangerous initiative thanks to the following
brilliancy: 25 . . . E!:ff7?
Bogo-Indian
358
C2222) 1 3 fS
.••
This is the right way to activate Black's knight.
8 %���J,;
�f\if
�mJ
w�
,,,,,;%-,,
,, ,J/, :ii
,,,, , •
,,,, % • w�
1
6
s
4
3
1
2
� /,�
�
�•
�a
� �-8- - x�f�
w,,,,,
�•�
� /,� ���
Ill�l llllll lll'J�
r�
'"//, �
�
m-J�m-�
t�J�l%lfj
8 m,
8 t��t�
b
-----
a
W#'
mv�Jfm
"
c
d
e
f
g
----
h
14.c5 tl:Jf7
Instead of the text move Black sometimes
tries:
1 4 . . . dxc5 1 5 .lll b3
1 5 .Wc2 e4 1 6.E!:xc5 c6! is good for Black, as
has been proven in several games.
1 5 . . . e4 1 6. lll xc5
I believe White's chances are better, for
instance:
1 6 . . . b6
1 6 . . . lll f7 1 7.f3 (I recommended 1 7.Wc2
in GM 2 but it seems like the text move is
even stronger. Still, after 1 7 . . . Wd6 1 8.E!:d l
White's position is preferable.) 1 7 . . . exf3 This
was Lange - Mohrlok, email 2007, and now
in my opinion the most natural is 1 8 .exf3N.
White's plan of E!:el and lll e6 promises him
a clear edge.
1 7.lll b 3 ib7 1 8 .f3!
It is always a key idea to trade Black's e4pawn in these types of positions.
1 8 . . . B:e8
Another good example was 1 8 . . . We5
1 9.fXe4 fXe4 20.E!:xf8t iixf8 2 1 .Wd4 Wxd5
22.E!:xc7 ± when White was clearly better in
Veng - Macieja, Copenhagen 20 1 0 .
s ,I ���-�al:, ,,,,iUli.I �*
7 �_tr,
.• ��-r,•0 i
,, ?, �� �� �
.,
� � �
: �� Z' " " 1� r� �.
8�
32 �ln
tLJg,_, ,V,•Ulat.wtJ
, , , ?,
,,
� '� '�
'0
,,,,,
6
?,
,,,,
�m�?,
�
?,
�
-,,,
,,,,
?,
�
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 9.fXe4 fXe4 20.E!:f4 lll f7 2 1 .E!:xe4±
White was j ust a healthy pawn up in Gordon
- Zakarian, England 20 1 4 .
15.�b3
There is no great difference between the text
and 1 5 .cxd6 cxd6 1 6.Wb3.
1 5 ... b6
Black has no time for the thematic attack
on the kingside: 1 5 . . . f4 1 6.cxd6 cxd6 1 7.E!:fc l
White i s clearly better, as we can see from the
following example: 1 7 . . . fXg3 1 8 .hxg3 Wg5
1 9.lll e4 Wh6 20.E!:c7 if5 2 1 .Wxb7 E!:ab8
22.Wxa7 E!:xb2 23.Wa3! White won a pawn
and kept everything under control in Dautov
- Reeh, Baden-Baden 2008.
16.cx:d6 cx:d6 17.�a3
I believe this is more accurate than 1 7.E!:fc l ,
as i t does not allow Black the extra option of
1 7 . . . ia6.
Chapter 2 1
The final branching point of the chapter
sees us examine C2222 1) 17 ...i.b7, C22222)
17 ... e4 and C22223) 17 ... aS.
C2222 1) 17 ...i.b7
-
359
5 . ltJ c6
.
.
20.l'!xc3 fxe4
Black once tried to keep his pawn on f5
by means of 20 . . . g6. Now 2 1 .h4 i;t>g7 was
Cernousek - Zatko, Slovakia 20 1 3 , when a
strong reply would have been:
This is Black's most popular choice.
18J::i: fcl �Uc8
In his comments in ChessBase Magazine 1 06,
Dautov gave the following illustrative lines:
1 8 . . . e4 1 9.l'!c7 Wg5 20.f4! exf3 2 1 .ltJxf3 Wh6
22.lll d4 l'!ac8 23.e3± with a big advantage.
1 8 . . . Wg5 1 9 .e3 e4 20.f4! Wh5 (it seems more
natural to me to try 20 . . . Wf6, but White carries
out the same idea, 2 1 .lll b3 ixd5 22.lll d4,
with excellent compensation) 2 1 .lll b3 ixd5
22.lll d4 a6 23.l'!c7 Despite being a pawn up,
Black is almost paralysed.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
22.ih3N fxe4 23.Wb3! e3 24.fxe3 l'!f8 25.e4±
White clearly has the superior game.
2 1 .lDxe4 ©h8
Black's most recent attempt to hold this
position. Other options are as follows:
It is easy to understand why Black was scared
of grabbing the pawn with 2 1 . . . ixd5, as after
22.lll f6t gxf6 23.ixd5� it is difficult to defend
such a position.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
19.e4
Now the key game in this line continued:
19 ... l'!xc3
Black's position is too passive after 1 9 . . . g6
20.h4 �g7 2 1 .lll c4, and it is no wonder he
now committed a serious mistake: 2 1 . . .b 5 ?
22.lll a5 a6 23.ltJc6 ixc6 24.dxc6 In
Bocharov - J. Grant, Istanbul 2003, Black was
strategically lost.
2 1 . . .Wd8 22.h4 a6 (22 . . .ic8 was suggested
by Dautov as an improvement over the game.
I believe after 23.l'!c6 id7 24.lll xd6! ixc6
25.lll xf7 �xf7 26.dxc6 White's position is
almost winning.) 23.Wb3! This is Dautov Wahls, Germany 200 5 . White's positional
advantage is obvious. He is threatening the
positional idea of ih3-e6, while after 23 . . .ic8
he penetrates along the c-file by means of
24.Wc4 followed by Wc7.
22.�b3 �d7 23.h4 �c8
We have been following Cheng - Xiong,
Philadelphia 20 1 3, and here White didn't spot
the right plan:
B ogo-Indian
360
22.�xc8t .ixc8 23.ll'lb5 White won a pawn
in Kazhgaleyev - lzeta Txabarri, Cannes 1 999.
18 V9e5
1 8 . . . exf3 1 9.ll'lxf3 ll'le5 20.ll'ld4 is clearly
better for White.
.••
a
b
19.V9b4
This is my new idea, which I prefer to my
previous proposal of 1 9.�d l exf3 20.ll'lxf3
Wxe2 2 1 .�el Wa6 22.�e7 when White has
strong compensation.
c
d
f
e
g
h
24J�f3!N
Switching the play to the kingside.
1 9 V9xd5 20J;c7 V9e5 2 1 .fxe4 d5 22Jfo7!
a5 23.gxe5 axb4 24,gxd5 gxa2 25.gbl
White holds the advantage.
24 tlJh6 25.VBdl!
White holds a dangerous initiative.
C22223) 17 ... a5 18.gfcl
•••
•••
C22222) 17 e4
.••
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 8 .ia6
1 8 . . . .id7 was played in Bochev - Karacsony,
corr. 20 12, and now I suggest the following
idea: 1 9.�c7!?N �fc8 20.�xc8t �xc8 2 1 .�xc8t
.ixc8 22.°1Mfc3 °1Mf d8 23.°IM!c6± With a pleasant
game for White.
•.•
1 8 .�fcl .id7 1 9.ll'lb3 ll'le5 (Somewhat better
was 1 9 . . . °1Mfe5 , though after 20.�c7 �fd8 2 1 .e3
Wxd5 22.�xa7 White would enjoy a pleasant
advantage.) 20.ll'ld4 �fc8 A serious error in
an already difficult position. 2 1 .�xc8t �xc8
1 9.gc7 V9f6 20.e3
Certainly White has no intention of allowing
Black any counterplay along the f-file, as might
happen after 20.e4 f4.
Chapter 2 1 - 5 . . . tll c6
36 1
2 0... e4 2 1 .�b3 \Wes
It looks as if Black has managed to trick his
opponent and is winning the d-pawn, but
Tkachiev executes a wonderful positional idea.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
22.�d4 \Wxd5 23.f4
Taking control over the e5-square and
completely restricting the black knight.
Strategically, Black's position is very difficult
and in the game he failed to put up serious
resistance.
23 tll h6
I believe 23 . . . E:ac8 was more tenacious, but
even so, after 24.1Mfa4! Black is doomed to
passivity.
.••
24.i:Hc6 l�fac8 25.\Wc3 i:hc7 26.gxc7 gf7
27.gc6
There are many ways White could end
Black's resistance, but the game continuation
is quite elegant.
27 ...\Wxa2 28.h3!
White consistently restricts Black's knight,
denying it the active g4-square. Black's position
is hopeless.
28 ...\Wb l t
29 ...\Wd3 30.\Wcl!
Black's queen is trapped on d3 and there
is no defence against 3 1 .E:c3 that does not
allow 3 1 . .!fl , so Black resigned in Tkachiev
- Korchnoi, Biel 2002. I witnessed this game
live and it made a deep impression on me,
especially taking into account that Tkachiev
played this game with one eye, after being
beaten up two days before by some criminal
in a bar.
Conclusion
This chapter dealt with the 4 . . . \We7 5.tlif3 tlic6
line of the solid and respectable Bogo-Indian.
With accurate play White retains an edge,
but it is important that he is well prepared, as
Black has many options at his disposal. The
current chapter contains many improvements
over GM 2, while also keeping the lines in
which I believe White to be doing especially
well. A thorough examination of the chapter
should give the reader the best possible chance
to tackle anything Black may throw at them.
Odd Benonis
Catalan Benoni
Variation Index
1 .d4 tll f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 b5 6.e4 lll xe4 7 ..tg2!? tll d6
8.lll f3
366
368
369
369
37 1
371
372
374
A) 8 ...�e7t
B) 8 ....te7 9.0-0 0-0 10 ..tf4
B l) 10 ... �eS
B2) 10 ... tll c4!?
B3) 10 ... tll a6 1 1 .�el .tb7 12.tll c3
B3 1) 1 2 ... �eS
B32) 12 ... tll c7
B33) 1 2 ... b4
A) note to 1 2 .. .f6
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 4 .tll c3!N
g
832) note to 14 . . . a6
82) after l 5 . . tll a3! ?
.
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 6.tll e4!N
g
h
l 7.tll c6!N
Chapter 22 - Catalan Benoni
1 .d4 tll f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5
This is an important possibility, which I have
encountered quite often in my own praxis. I
can easily understand Black's thinking, as the
Benoni offers him more counterattacking
possibilities than many of his defensive set­
ups against the Catalan. White's fianchetto
system is not considered the most dangerous
choice against the Benoni, and Black has a few
different ways to handle the position, so there
is decent potential to surprise an opponent.
Catalan players have tried to solve this problem
in different ways. Some react to Black's last
move with 4.lll f3, leading to a version of the
English Opening. Others favour the 3.lll f3
move order, intending to meet 3 . . . d5 with 4.g3,
but this obviously allows the major option of
3 . . . b6 with a Queen's Indian. Personally, I
have always enjoyed playing against all Benoni
variants, and have achieved a fantastic score
with White. In the next four chapters I will
share my knowledge and hopefully guide the
reader towards similar success.
4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5
363
move order which is favoured by Catalan
players.
Unlike some other variations covered in this
book, this one requires detailed opening
knowledge from White's side - you don't have
to memorize every last detail, but nor can you
rely solely on general principles. I remember
a time when Black's last move was considered
highly problematic for White, which was
understandable, as Black normally has to work
hard to carry out the . . . b5 advance in the
Modern Benoni. However, the fact that Black
has not yet castled gives White chances to seize
the initiative with a pawn sacrifice.
6.e4
I mentioned this as an interesting possibility
in GM 2, but subsequent games and analysis
have led me to recommend it as the main line.
In GM 2 I recommended 6.tll f3, which
brought White an excellent victory in Gelfand
- Aronian, Mexico City 2007. This has also
been tested in many games, and the popular
6 . . . ib7 7.e4 lll xe4 resembles our main line,
and may even transpose. However, the text
move is more forcing and reduces Black's
options.
6 ... tll xe4
This is obviously the critical continuation,
but it is important to mention Black's
alternatives.
s ... bs
This move will be the exclusive subject of the
current chapter. I call it the Catalan Benoni
because it almost always arises via the 3.g3
6 . . . 'We7
Black is trying to deflect White's light­
squared bishop from attacking the b5-pawn.
However, I found a remarkable email game
where White found a convincing antidote.
7.f3!?
Maintaining the attack on b 5 . Black would
get a comfortable position after 7.ig2 d6
followed by . . . g6, . . . ig7 and so on.
Odd Benonis
364
7 . . . a6 8 .ih3!
Impressive play, avoiding the stereotypical
development to g2 in favour of a more active
diagonal.
8 . . . ib7
8 . . . g6 9.lLie2 ig7 1 0.a4 pretty much forces
1 O b4, with similar play to the game. Instead
1 0 . . . ib7?! runs into 1 1 .axb5 axb5 1 2.Elxa8
ixa8 1 3 .lLia3! with a clear advantage.
9.lLie2 d6 1 0.a4 b4
Forced.
has easy development and should be better
regardless.
• • •
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
9.0-0 0-0 1 0.lLia3! lLi a6??
This move blunders a piece, but even after
the superior 1 0 . . . Ele8 1 1 .Wfd3 if8 1 2.lLic3
lLi d6 1 3.if4 Black is under a lot of pressure.
1 1 .Wfd3 lLi b4 1 2.Wfxe4+Duzhakov - E. Levin, Peterhof 2009.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 .lLi d2 lLi bd7 1 2.lLic4 lLie5 1 3.lLixe5 Wfxe5
1 4 .a5 ! Eld8
1 5 . WIa4 t was threatened.
1 5 .0-0 ie7 1 6.lLif4 lLi d7 1 7.lLid3 Wfd4t
1 8 .ltig2 0-0 1 9.if4 h6 20.Ele l Elfe8 2 1 .b3
White had a pleasant advantage in Bergmann
- Kolar, email 20 1 3 .
6 . . . ib7
This prevents the e4-e5 threat, but ignores
the b5-pawn.
7.ixb5 lLixe4 8 . lLi e2
8.lLic3 also looks promising: 8 . . . Wf e7 9.lLige2
lLixc3 1 0.bxc3 Wfe4 1 1 .0-0 Wfxd5 1 2.Wfxd5
ixd5 1 3 .lLif4 if3 14.Ele l t @d8 1 5 .ic4
lLi c6 1his was Terreaux - Nyvlt, corr. 20 1 2,
and here I would recommend 1 6.Ele3N ig4
1 7 .ixf7 id6 1 8 . llJ d3;:!;, followed by ia3,
with a pleasant edge for White.
8 . . .id6
Black might try to improve, but White
�·��v,
%
ef
l
"""
,
,
,
�-,
� � ',
7
8 .1 •.t�
ll
ll
.
� llj•' : .ll
.
ll· ll·.ll�
il,'10 jljl jlWef
6
il,'lll, jl
" ,ll
il,'1¥lil,'I•
'0
ll
"
3
'
0·"'
2 �Jll� �� ,Jll% 'N/J[j
1 ,� ��if=.f.� :
%
..
'/
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
7.�g2!?
This surprisingly rare move seems extremely
promising to me, and the arising positions
are much easier to understand than after the
messy 7.Wf e2 Wf e7 8 .ig2. I spent many hours
analysing the latter variation for Vladimir
Kramnik back in 2007, helping him to score
a nice win over Alekseev at the Tai Memorial
that same year.
Chapter 22 - Catalan Benoni
7 � d6
This is the standard reaction. White's main
idea is that the knight will block the d7-pawn
for several moves, meaning that Black will
experience serious difficulties developing his
queenside pieces.
Obviously 7 . . . tli f6?? is impossible due to
8 .d6, hitting the rook while threatening to win
material with °We2t.
...
7 . . . 'We7? 8 . tt'l e2!N
In both of the existing games White failed
to exploit Black's error, and merely played
8 .°We2?, transposing to 7.°We2 as mentioned
above. I find it much more logical to go for
castling, since Black's last move has left him
a long way from completing development
on the kingside, and the open e-file puts him
in serious danger.
8 . . . d6 9.0-0 lll f6 1 0.:B:e l
My engine suggests the surprising positional
sacrifice 1 0 .b4!? cxb4 1 1 .:B:e l °Wd8 1 2.a3,
evaluating the position heavily in White's
favour.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
365
A final option is:
7 . . . 'Wa5t!?N
This was mentioned
by
Grandmaster Rep ertoire 12
-
Petrov
The Modern
(henceforth abbreviated to GM 12)
as an interesting alternative for Black, but it
does not really help him.
8.ltld2 ltl d6 9.lll gf3 j,e7 1 0.0-0 0-0
Benoni
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 .:B:e l !
Petrov analyses 1 1 .a4 tt'la6 1 2. ltl b3 °Wd8
1 3 .axb5 tt'lxb5 1 4.tt'le5 when White has a lot
of compensation. However, I find the text
move even more convincing.
1 l . . .j,f6 1 2.a4 ltl a6
Also after 1 2 . . . bxa4 1 3 .:B:xa4 °Wd8 1 4 . tt'l b3
lll a6 l 5 . .if4± White's activity is too much
for Black.
1 3 .tt'l e5 !
Th e threat o f tt'l g4 i s difficult t o meet.
h
1 0 . . . 'Wd8 1 1 ..ig5 .ie7 1 2 . .ixf6! gxf6
Unfortunately for Black, 1 2 . . . .ixf6 runs into
the powerful 1 3 . ltl f4t .ie7 (neither 13 . . . �f8
1 4.ltle6t nor 1 3 . . . .ie5 1 4. tt'l d3 are much
help either) 1 4. ltl e6! fXe6 1 5 .dxe6 and Black
is losing material.
1 3 . tli f4
Black has a miserable position.
in
a
1 3 . . . .ixe5
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
366
Odd Benonis
Other moves are even worse. For instance,
1 3 . . . lll b4 1 4 .lll b3 Vfic7 1 5 .lll g4, followed by
.if4, and 1 3 . . . Ei:e8 14.lll g4 ie7 1 5 .ctJ b3 Wib6
l 6 . .if4± both clearly favour White. I also
considered 1 3 . . . Ei:b8 1 4.lt:\g4 Wid8 1 5 .lll xf6t
Wixf6 1 6 .lll f3 and White's kingside initiative
plays itself.
1 4.Ei:xe5 ib7 1 5 .ctJ b3 V!ib6 1 6.axb5 lll x b5
1 7.lll a5 Ei:ae8 1 8 .lll c4 Wid8 1 9.Ei:xe8 Ei:xe8
20.Ei:a5! lll d4 2 1 ..ie3
Despite being a pawn down, White has an
overwhelming positional advantage.
A) 8 ... �e7t 9.ie3 tl}f5
8
1
i. tlt.i.. � -� �,i,
fiifl%W,
, , ,%� , , , %�l
��
,�
, , %�.... , ;B
� �� Ill
�
�
a�.
� �j·�
� � ,0 � �
� a � lt:J w�
��
� �--,��
6
3
�'m%
�
a
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
s.tl}f3
This is the right moment to share a nice
story with my readers. When I played in the
Croatian League in 20 1 2 , one of my team­
mates asked for my assistance in preparing the
Catalan. We scheduled an appointment a few
hours before the game, and he duly arrived
at my hotel room armed with his laptop. He
was actually happy enough with the Catalan,
but he was worried about this version of the
Benoni involving 5 . . . b5.
The story continues under A) 8 �e7t, the
move that was troubling my team-mate.
We will then move on to the main line of
B) 8 ...ie7.
�
�r
,,,,,%�r�'"'\�r�
��r�
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
I was really surprised when my team-mate
told me about his approach to openings. He
mentioned that he was relying on the Houdini
Opening Book, where everything is perfectly
analysed with Houdini, and all that the user
has to do is memorize the moves. I started to
explain to him that you cannot always trust
such a source, and that there is still a need for
human reasoning when preparing openings.
He proceeded to open the program on his
laptop, and we quickly moved to the present
position, which Houdini had dismissed as
unfavourable for White. I was surprised that
nobody had tried this line for Black, and was
keen to explore more deeply. The next few
moves are obvious.
1 0.0-0 c!ll xe3 1 1 .fxe3 d6
1 1 . . .Wixe3t?? 1 2 .rii h l is j ust lost for Black.
The Houdini analysis ended here with an
evaluation of clearly better for Black, but I was
not ready to give up.
.••
12.e4!
White wants to break through in the centre,
exploiting the fact that Black, despite having
won a pawn, is way behind in development.
Chapter 22 - Catalan Benoni
A few months after our analysis session, I was
lucky enough to be able to test this position for
myself against the Israeli GM Ram Soffer in
a rapid tournament. He had played 8 . . . �e7t
with a triumphant look, but you can imagine
his surprise when I blitzed out my next four
moves. At this point he sank into deep thought
and came up with:
367
14.lll c3!N
14.d6 only led to an unclear endgame
after 1 4 . . . �xd6 1 5 .�xd6 ixd6 1 6.lll g5 f6
1 7.ixa8 fxg5 when Black had three pawns
for the exchange in Fordham-Hall L. Van
Damme, corr. 20 1 3 .
1 4 . . . :gbs
1 4 . . . c4? 1 5 .lll e4 f5 1 6.d6 �e6 1 7.lll fg5 wins
easily for White, so the text move is the best
try.
1 5 .lll e4t
Black is in grave danger. Apart from the
obvious d5-d6, White also has attacking
resources such as ih3 and lll fg5 .
-
1 3.e5!
This secondary sacrifice improves the scope
of all of White's pieces.
1 3 ... fxe5 14.�c3 a6 1 5.a4!
I wanted to provoke . . . b4 in order to get a
powerful outpost on c4 for my second knight.
12 ... £6
I had briefly considered 1 2 . . . ig4, but after
1 3.e5! lll d7 14.exd6 �xd6 1 5 .ttJ c3 Black is in
big trouble, due to the coming check along the
e-file.
1 2 . . . lll d7
This seems like Black's best try. It was the
main option we investigated, and it was
tested in a subsequent correspondence game.
1 3 .e5! dxe5
1 5 .. g6
My opponent realized that he needed to
speed up the development of his kingside,
and decided to return one pawn, but it is not
enough to save him.
.
368
Odd Benonis
1 8 0-0 19.b6!
Black soon found himself in a completely
lost position in Avrukh - Soffer, Givatayim
(rapid) 20 1 3 . Already he has no good moves,
since l 9 . . . lLid7 loses to 20.g4!.
10 ... a5 1 1 .E:el E:a6 is hardly a good idea. In
Korchmar - Taysayev, Taganrog 20 1 4 , the
simple 1 2.a4N b4 (or 1 2 . . . bxa4 1 3 .lLi c3!
followed by lLixa4) 1 3 .lLi bd2 ib7 1 4. lLi b3
would have given White a huge advantage.
B) 8 ....ie7 9.0-0 0-0
1 0 . . . ib7
I only found one game where this move
was played, but it gives rise to a major
transposition.
1 1 .E:e l
This position has occurred in more than 60
games, most of them featuring Gelfand's
6.lLif3 idea. However, in the great majority
of cases, Black has developed his knight to
a6 in the next few moves, transposing to a
later variation.
1 1 . . . E:e8
1 1 . . . lLi a6 takes us to variation B3.
1 2. lLi c3 b4
Again 1 2 ... lLia6 transposes, this time to
variation B3 1 . The text move is an independent
try, but White has a good answer.
1 3.ixd6 ixd6 1 4.E:xe8t Wxe8 1 5 .lLib5 Wffi
1 6.Wd3!
This excellent move secures White's
advantage. Aside from the obvious idea of
E:e l , Black also has to watch out for lLig5,
which explains his next move.
.••
This leaves Black in less immediate danger than
the previous line, but he still faces problems in
coordinating his pieces.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
IO ..if4
White's strategy becomes clear. The d5-pawn
seriously restricts Black's queenside pieces,
and finding a suitable way to develop them is
no easy task - especially taking into account
that moving the knight from d6 (in order ro
facilitate . . . d6) will leave him susceptible to
d5-d6. In short, I believe White's compensation
is more than sufficient.
Black's three most important moves are Bl)
10 . . �e8, B2) 10... i!Cic4!? and B3) 10 ... i!Ci a6.
It is worth pointing out that the moves . . . lLi a6,
... ib7 and ... E:e8 can be played in different
orders, meaning there are transpositions
galore. To make things easier to follow, I would
like to point out that any set-ups where the
knight goes to a6 in the next few moves will be
covered under variation B3.
.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6 . . . g6 1 7.lLid2 ia6 1 8 .E:e l
Unfortunately for Black, the simplifications
have not solved his main problem: the
undeveloped queenside.
Chapter 22 - Catalan Benoni
18 . . . Wl'd8 1 9 .lll e4 if8 20.d6 lll c6 2 1 .lll xc5
ixb5 22.Wl'xb5 :B:b8 23 .Wi'd3
White was clearly better in 'gelmonbi' 'marmoloff, email 20 1 2.
369
threats against the knight on a6, is quite
annoying for Black.
Bl) 10 .. J�e8 1 1 .tlic3 tli a6
We have not yet transposed to the 1 0 . . . lll a6
variation, as the white knight does not go to
c3 as quickly in that line. Of course, we could
easily converge on the same position.
12.gel
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14 i.fS 1 5.gxe8 Wl'xe8 16.i.fl ga8
This is not the most desirable move, but it
is probably Black's best defence. We have been
following Schubert - Seuchter, corr. 2009.
White went on to win a good game, but at this
point the most convincing way to maintain his
advantage would have been:
.••
17.tli eS!N i.b7 18.VNb3 tlic7 19.gdl ! gbs
20.tlixcS i.xd5 21 .'9a4
Black has problems, as several of his pieces
are tactically vulnerable.
B2) 1 0 ... tli c4!?
12 ... b4N allows White to seize the initiative on
the kingside: 1 3.i.xd6 ixd6 ( 1 3 ... bxc3? loses
to 1 4.Wl'e2) 1 4 .lll e4 if8 1 5 .d6 ib7 1 6.lll fg5!t
12 ... lll c?! ? is not a bad move, and was played
in the old game Csapo - Forintos, Budapest
1 968. White's best continuation looks to be
1 3.lll g5!N ixg5 1 4.ixd6 :B:xe l t 1 5 .Wl'xe l
ib7 1 6.Wl'e2! when he has great compensation
and will most likely regain the material in the
near future.
13.a4! bxa4 14.tlixa4
Surprisingly, the idea of !fl , with potential
Odd Benonis
370
This is quite a challenging continuation,
since Black is trying to insist on playing . . . d6.
l l .l£ic3!
This looks more convincing than 1 l .d6,
when 1 1 ... if6 1 2.tt'lc3 tt'l c6 1 3.tt'le4 was rather
unclear in Ponkratov - Chekhov, St Petersburg
20 1 3 . White certainly has rich compensation,
but Black also has a lot of defensive resources.
1 1 ... d6
This looks consistent, and was played in the
one existing game. Naturally, I checked some
other possible moves:
Firstly, the b2-pawn is untouchable:
1 l . . .tt'lxb2?N 1 2.'Wc2 tt'l c4 1 3.tt'lxb5 and
White wins material.
1 1 . . .ia6N looks like a serious contender, but
White's initiative develops smoothly: 1 2.d6
if6 1 3 .tt'ld5! tt'l c6 1 4.E:e l Black's position
is perilous, as the following line illustrates:
1 4 . . . tt'lxb2 1 5 .'Wb l tt'lc4 1 6.tt'lxf6t 'Wxf6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
.i lat.i..
�%-��-�
�
"""
�
,v,- ·
7
8
6 T• �•- ·• "m
,, , , ,
-
5 -�•£t;���
�� , , , %� -��3 ���r0�1�����1
m-��
,, , xm-0
4
1
2
8 if[j - if[j JLif�
�d""x_i.,rri/" "
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
13.tlic3 i.f5 14.gel i.f6 1 5.%Ye2 tlia3!?
Evidently Black was not happy with
1 5 . . . tt'l b6!? 1 6.a4! ( 1 6.tt'ld2 also looks
good) 1 6 . . . tt'l c8 (The central pawn is taboo:
16 . . . ixc3 1 7.bxc3 tt'lxd5 ? 1 8 .ig5 followed by
tt'l d2 gives White a winning position.) 1 7.tt'ld2
tt'l d7 1 8.tt'lc4 'Wc7 1 9.a5 White has a pleasant
positional edge.
Now in Koneru - Dzagnidze, Mardin 20 1 1 ,
White missed the refutation of her opponent's
creative idea.
h
1 7.tt'lg5! g6 1 8.ixc6 dxc6 1 9.d7 Surprisingly,
Black is already lost.
1 2.tlixb5 a6
I also considered another attempt to develop
the queenside pieces: 1 2 . . . ia6 1 3.a4 ixb5
1 4.axb5 tt'ld7 Now White can strike with the
unexpected resource: 1 5 .b4! cxb4 1 6.'Wb3
tt'l cb6 1 7.tt'ld4 with a clear advantage.
h
16.clli e4!N
The main point is revealed after:
"' 4 17.""
"' --b2 �.
axe4 £X
16 £Xe
.•.
Chapter 22
-
1 7 . . . ttJb5 is the lesser evil, but even here
1 8 .a4 ttJ c7 ( 1 8 . . . lll d4? 1 9.ttJxd4 ixd4 20.'We7!
wins the d6-pawn and the game) 1 9.ttJd2
leaves White with a large positional advantage.
18.tlig5 g6
37 1
Catalan Benoni
12.tlic3
Black has completed the task of developing
his queenside pieces from their initial squares.
Nevertheless, the d5-pawn continues to act
as a barrier. Black has attempted to solve his
problems with B3 1) 12 ... ges, B32) 12 ... tli c7
and B33) 12 ... b4.
B3 1) 12 ... ges 13.tlid2
Obviously White should not rush with
1 3.ixd6N ixd6 1 4.:B:xeSt Wxe8 1 5 .ttJxb5, as
Black is okay after 1 5 . . . ifS .
1 3.ttJe5 i s a playable alternative, but I prefer
the text move.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
19.tlie6! fxe6 20.dxe6 ga7 2 1 .gad l +­
Despite the extra piece, Black has no answer
to White's domination.
B3) 10 ... tll a6 1 1 .gel i.h7
13 ...i.£8 14.gxe8 tl:ixe8 1 5.tlixb5 tl:i b4
I also found one game where Black preferred:
1 5 . . . d6 1 6.ttJc3 (I would also consider
1 6.lll c4! ?N lll ac7 1 7.ttJxc7 'Wxc7 1 8 .:B:cl with
the better game for White) 1 6 . . . lll ac7 1 7.lll c4
:B:b8 1 8 .ttJ a5 ia8 1 9 .°Wd2 'Wd7 20.a3 ttJ f6 It is
obvious that White has the superior position,
and the unpleasant lll c6 might come at any
moment. In the following game White opted
for an interesting pawn sacrifice.
a
This position has arisen in more than 50
games, most of them via the 6.lll f3 move
order. The earliest examples are from 20 1 0,
making this a truly modern variation.
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
2 1 .b4!? This is in no way essential, and White
can keep the advantage with j ust about any
sensible move. Still, it is interesting to see how
he can keep some initiative even after drastically
changing the nature of the position. 2 l . . .cxb4
372
Odd Benonis
22.axb4 �xb4 23.llic6 �b7 24.'Wc2t The
light-squared bishop was a serious headache
for Black in R. Williams - Pino Munoz, corr.
20 1 2.
24.tLl c7 '?Nc4 25 ..id5 '?Ne2 26.tLlxa6 '?Nxa6
27.bxc5
White has an obvious advantage that may
easily become decisive.
B32) 12 tli c7
•••
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
b
a
1 8 '?Na5 19.d6 gds
Here I found an improvement over Terreaux
- Dearnley, corr. 20 1 2 .
••.
d
c
e
13.tLle5!
In GM 12, Marian Petrov only gives
1 3 .tlid2!?, but I believe the text move to be the
most powerful option for White.
1 3 ... gcs
This has been the most popular choice.
In the only over-the-board game, Black
responded with the unfortunate 1 3 . . . �e8 ?.
Now in Ghosh - Lalith, Nagpur 20 1 2, the
energetic 14. lli e4!N would have been extremely
strong. Already I see no way for Black to hold;
his position collapses amazingly quickly.
A sample line is: 1 4 . . . c4 1 5 .llixd6 .ixd6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
20.tLld5!N tL!xd6 21.tLle4 tLlxe4 22.i.xe4
tLl e5 23.b4! '?Nb5
Surprisingly, the pawn is untouchable, as
23 . . . cxb4? 24.'Wh5! lli g6 25.llif6t wins the
queen.
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
373
Chapter 22 - Catalan Benoni
1 6.tll x f7! :B:xe l t 1 7.Wfxe l @xf7 1 8 .ixd6 With
a serious advantage.
This is a natural idea now that Black's rook
has left the a-file.
1 3 . . . tll de8 is playable, but it allows the
forcing continuation: 1 4.d6 tll xd6 1 5.ixb7
tll xb7 1 6.tll xd7 :B:e8 1 7.ixc7 Wfxc7 1 8 .tll d5
( 1 8 .tll x b5 Wfc6 1 9.tll c3 was also slightly better
for White in Klug - Ramsden, corr. 20 1 2)
1 8 . . . Wfd6 Now a logical sequence is:
14 ... a6
1 4 . . . b4?!
This has been played more frequently but, in
view of what follows, it seems worse.
1 5 .tll b5! tll cxb5 1 6.axb5 ig5
1 6 . . . tll xb5 ?N loses to l 7.d6! tll xd6 l 8 .ixb7
tll xb7 1 9.:B:xa7 d6 20.tll c4 :!':l:c7 2 1 .tll b6!
with total domination. Despite being two
pawns up, Black has no good defence against
Wa l followed by :B:a8 .
1 6 . . . g5 allows White to seize the initiative
on the kingside: 1 7.id2 if6 1 8.Wfh5 ixe5
1 9.:B:xe5 f6 20.:B:ee l :B:f7 2 1 .h4!--+ Mercadal
Benejam - Hyldkrog, corr. 20 1 3 .
The text move was played i n Bieliauskas
- Laube, corr. 20 1 2, and two subsequent
games. Surprisingly, White did not choose
the strongest move in any of them.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
�� �i ��
�·-lZJ��
'� �'
, , , , . %� �-��
· · ··· "�
�
!•
��
��
�� ��
�- - - -��
� ��
��
�� ��·ef· · ··%�-�
��-0 �
�I�� �r - -.1.���-J� t.j
� � v�
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 9.:B:xe7 :B:xe7 20.tll xe7t Wfxe7 2 1 .Wfd5
:B:d8 22.:B:d l Wfe2 23.'iil g2 b4 24.:B:d3 :B:e8
25.:B:f3 tll d8 26.tll xc5 Wfb5 27.:B:d3 White
has an obvious endgame advantage with no
risk whatsoever. Black managed to hold this
position in two correspondence games, but
his position is no fun at all, especially over the
board.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
l 7.tll c6!N
An elegant tactical trick, leading to the
following forcing sequence.
1 7 . . . dxc6 l 8.ixg5 Wfxg5 1 9 .dxc6 ixc6
20.bxc6 tll b5 2 1 .Wfcl !±
Black's extra pawn has little effect, and the
c6-pawn is a serious threat.
a
14.a4
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5.axb5 t£icxb5
1 5 . . . axb5 ?!N 1 6.:B:a7 is unpleasant for Black.
At any rate, exchanging a pair of knights can
only improve his chances.
Odd Benonis
374
16.tlixb5 axb5 17Jfa7 .ig5 18.hg5
1 8 .lt'lxd7 ixf4 1 9.lt'lxf8 ih6 20.ih3 'kt>xf8
has been played a few times, and looks rather
messy.
18 ...YNxg5 1 9.tlixd7 gfds 20.h4 YNf5
20 . . . °Wh6 2 1 .i.h3 clearly favours White.
8
m1 �m m;•
�
�.i.• lt:J • i ef� i
,,,,,
, , ,��mi'
����
�- , - ���
,
�
�
�
�
�
�WI'"
: j•'
�� ���1�"
�"'efftt•
2 ����
,
,
,
%
�'
� ""%ta,��
1
� vp�
7
6
5
13 ..ixd6 hd6 14.c!lie4 .ie7
Black has to allow d5-d6, since after
1 4 . . . 'Wc7 White can easily launch his initiative
on the kingside: 1 5 .lt'lh4! g6 ( 1 5 .. .f5 runs into
1 6.°Wh5! and White's attack decides quickly)
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
2 1 .ge7! gxd7 22.g4 YNxflt 23.@xfl gxe7
24..if'3
It is clear that White is playing for two
results. In the latest game, Podvoysky - Fritz,
email 20 1 2 , he eventually prevailed.
B33) 12 ... b4
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
1 6. lt'l f5! It turns out that Black's last move
did not stop the knight at all. 1 6 . . . ie5
( 1 6 . . . gxf5 ? 1 7.lt'lf6t 'kt>g7 1 8 .°Wh5 wins on
the spot) 1 7.lt'le7t 'kt>g7 1 8 .d6 'Wb6 1 9.lt'lxc5!
lt::l xc5 20.Elxe5 ± White has a clear positional
advantage and continuing attacking chances.
� � B ��-.!. 'i"••"r8t
6 il� �� , ·� v,�
5 " �.,. �.
�
'
�
!�
�
?»-ef��
3 •�,,,, �%- ��
�
•
lt:J
�� �w-�, ,,, �w-�
2 �!fl� m�_
, _ Jll!JtJ
s
1
4
1
�
� -,,,,
�
�
-
a
b
- v�� m
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5.d6 .if6 16.tlixf6t Y!Yxf6 17.tli e5 hg2
18.@xg2
Black has almost solved the problem of his
queenside, but the poor placement of the
knight on a6 makes the difference. White
easily regains the pawn while maintaining
powerful pressure.
375
Chapter 22 - Catalan Benoni
1 8 J'fad.8 19.Wd.5!? � b8
1 9 . . . Wfe6 20.Wfd3 �b8 2 1 .b3 is not much
fun for Black either.
••
20.Wl'xc5 tli c6?!
A mistake in a difficult position.
2 1 .tlixc6 dxc6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
22J�ad.1! Wxb2 23.d.7 Wc3 24.We7
White's passed pawn easily decided the issue
in Tomashevsky - Bocharov, Taganrog 20 1 1 .
Conclusion
The Catalan Benoni has been debated in
numerous games since GM 2 was published.
Certain details have changed, but overall the
idea of a quick e2-e4 remains a good bet for
White. After 5 . . . b5, I now consider 6.e4 lll xe4
7.ig2!? tll d6 8 .tll f3 to be the most promising
version. My game against Soffer after 8 . . . Wf e7t
shows the dangers that await Black if he
neglects his development.
The main line is 8 . . . ie7 9.0-0 0-0 1 0.if4,
when Black has tried several different set­
ups and move orders. White keeps a strong
initiative in all variations, and we saw several
examples where Black's position collapsed
after j ust one or two inaccuracies. Even when
he defends precisely, White will usually be
able to regain his pawn at some point while
maintaining some pressure.
Odd Benonis
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Snake Benoni
Variation Index
1 .d4 tll f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 i.d6
6.i.g2
377
378
378
380
A) 6 ... i.c7
B) 6 ... 0-0 7.tll c3
B l) 7 ...i.e5
B2) 7 ... �e8
a
b
c
d
e
1 U1e l N
f
g
B2) note to 10 . . . h6N
B2) note to 8 . . . �f8
B l ) after 1 0 . . . ill bd?
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 6.ill e?!N
g
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 1 .ill gS!N
g
h
h
Chapter 23 - Snake Benoni
l .d4 tlif6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5
Ad6
This is the Snake Benoni system, so called
because the intended path of the bishop from
f8-d6-c7-a5 resembles the slithering motion
of the elongated reptile - although nowadays
Black often tries to get his bishop back to f8 .
To tell you the truth I do not rate this idea
highly, as it seems rather artificial, and our
strategy will be to immediately play d5-d6
once Black's bishop moves from the d6-square.
Not only does this activate White's light­
squared bishop, it also severely hampers the
development of Black's queenside.
6.Ag2
We will consider A) 6 ...Ac7 and B) 6 0-0.
••.
A) 6 ...Ac7 7.d6!
AI; I mentioned above this is always a good
idea - especially when it comes with tempo!
377
1 7.lLig5 :B:f8 1 8 .lLi e4 White easily obtained
a decisive attack in Khismatullin - Stupak,
Minsk 2008.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
c
e
9.tlih3!
White should keep his light-squared bishop
more active, while at the same time allowing a
quick advance of his e- and f-pawns.
9 ....ixc3t
9 . . . lLi c6 is probably more stubborn - see the
note on 8 . . . lLic6 above.
10.bxc3
It seems to me that Black will struggle to
prevent White from carrying out his desired
plan of action.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
7 ...Aast s.tlic3 0-0
8 . . . lLi c6 9.lLih3! The best square for our
knight. 9 . . . 0-0 1 0. 0-0 b6 ( 1 0 . . .hc3 l l .bxc3
transposes to our main line) l l .e4 ia6 1 2.:B:e 1
:B:e8 1 3 .f4 Black is helpless against White's
simple plan of advancing his central pawns
followed by an attack on the black king.
1 3 . . . g6 1 4.e5 ixc3 1 5 .bxc3 lLih5 1 6.id5 lLi g7
10 ... ttl c6
1 0 . . . Wfa5
This doesn't really help Black, since the
c3-pawn is not worth defending.
1 1 .0-0 :B:e8
l l . . .Wfxc3 will only help White to activate
his dark-squared bishop: 1 2.:B:b l ( 1 2.ie3
lLi a6 1 3.:B:cl is clearly better for White
as well) 1 2 . . . Wfd4 1 3.Wfxd4 cxd4 1 4 .ig5
White's advantage is beyond doubt.
1 2 .Wfd3 Wfa6 1 3 .c4
White's position is completely winning
despite the material equality.
Odd Benonis
378
13 . . . tll c6 14.ib2 lll e5 1 5 .ixe5 :B:xe5 1 6.f4
:B:e6 1 7.:B:fd l h6 1 8.e4
White had a decisive advantage in Burmakin
- Ardeleanu, Schwarzach 2004.
B.i.S
s X-�
,,,,,/, ��-­
,,,,,v,� -7�
�
�
7 -�£ �! �%lJ�£
6
41)t�
•
- - -j /•
y,,,,,; �
�� �
llJllJ
llJllJ �
:
3
2
1
��� ��7� ��Jfl�jl3
mv�� - �
b
d
c
e
f
g
h
12.e4 i.a6 13.:B:el tll e5
This has occurred in three encounters. White
is strategically winning in many ways, but the
most convincing continuation looks to be:
6
5
4
3
2
1
B) 6 ... 0-0 7.� c3
�w-t� �
w-t��
ct:J
m
�
�
�� �----%� w-ef1----%w-�
1 1 .0-0 b6
1 1 . . . :B:e8 1 2.e4! h6 (Black cannot grab the
white central pawn in view of 1 2 . . . lll xe4
1 3.ixe4 :B:xe4 1 4 .tll g5 , followed by 1 5 .'1Wh5
with a winning position.) 1 3 .:B:el :B:b8 1 4.if4
lll h7 1 5 .e5 :B:e6 1 6.id5 White was winning in
Sabel - Mauermann, email 20 1 1 .
7
16.f«f3
White has a large advantage.
'��� llJ��
a
8
14.i.f4N tll d3 1 5.:B:e3 tll b2
1 5 . . . lll xf4 1 6.lll xf4+-
��
�-----� •
�·��
-�
x��� ,,,,,,%
� �
-�
llJ'm\ llJ,l��
llJllJ
llJ'm
� �v��
11J, D�
�. 11J0"
� ··
(Im%
.i_
ef�
""""�
,,,,% ,,?-,,,, /,..,,t�
� �
,
�.
'
�
'
'
E
llJ
llJ
llJj}J" llJllJ
ct:J�
ef�%�r
�� t�L�. %� ��wdL.
?.!
%
?.!
%
:
0
�
a
b
�
%
'
c
al
�
,
d
e
f
�z. - ��
g
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
This is the main branching position
of the whole line. Sometimes Black opts
for Bl) 7 i.e5, but his main choice is
B2) 7 :B:e8.
•••
.••
7 . . .ic7 8.d6 ia5 9.tll h 3! transposes to
variation A.
8
Bl} 7 i.e5 8.tll f3 J.xc3t 9.bxc3 d6
•.•
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 23
-
Snake Benoni
379
Giving up the dark-squared bishop is too high
a price to pay for completing development.
10.0-0 � bd7
White was dominant in the following game:
10 . . . 1%e8 I I .1%e l h6 1 2.tll d2 b5 1 3.a4! b4
14.cxb4 cxb4 1 5 .tll c4 ia6 1 6.tll e3 ib7 1 7.a5
ti::l a6 1 8 .Wfd4± White was clearly better in
Konstantinov - Straka, corr. 20 1 3 .
Three games have been played i n this position
but White's play seemed unconvincing in all of
them. Therefore I decided to develop my own
solution:
.i � jJ �
��- �
7 � l� 4i� -·y,- ·
'� �-�. ,�
5 � �•zr� ,, _ �
�� � -,� �- �.
��r� �� lt:J��
��r�
-� ���?- •
��r�, , ,,7,%1,�
� - - ��
2 ��� �W(;��
�j;JtJ
1 9 �Vm � ��
8
6
4
3
�
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 .1%e1N
A logical question is why nobody played the
most natural move:
1 1 .c4!?N
To be followed by developing White's dark­
squared bishop to b2. The only possible
answer lies in the following idea for Black:
1 1 ...b5 1 2.cxb5 a6
Still, I believe White is better in this line.
1 3 . bxa6 ixa6
Or 1 3 . . . ti::l b 6 1 4 .ti::l h4 1%e8 1 5 .ib2 ixa6
1 6.1%e l ti::l c4 1 7.ic3 and White is clearly
better.
1 4.1%e l 1%e8 1 5 .if4 ti::l e4
Black has some compensation, but I don't
think it is enough:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.Wfc2 h6 1 7.tll d2 ti::l xd2 1 8 .ixd2!
1 8 .Wfxd2 Wff6 would allow Black some play.
1 8 . . . 1%xe2 1 9.1%xe2 ixe2 20.ic3 ia6 2 I .Wff5
ti::l f6 22.a4±
White's bishop pair, combined with his
passed a-pawn, promises him the better game.
1 1 . 1%e8
Other moves are not attractive at all:
.•
1 1 . . .b5 1 2.a4! bxa4 1 3.Wfxa4 ti::l b6 1 4.Wfc2
ti::l bxd5 1 5 .e4 ti::l e7 1 6.e5 dxe5 1 7.tll xe5 if5
1 8 .Wfa4±
l I . . .ti::l b6 1 2.e4 1%e8 1 3 .Wfc2 looks pretty
senseless for Black, as White has control of the
centre and the bishop pair.
12.'?Nd3
I can barely imagine what Black can offer in
this position, for example:
12 � e4
1 2 . . . ti::l g4 1 3.c4 ti::l ge5 1 4.ti::l x e5 ti::l xe5
1 5 .Wfc3 and White will advance his central
pawns while grabbing a lot of space.
•••
13.�h4!? �df6 14.c4! g5 1 5.f.3 gxh4 16.fxe4
�g4 17.1%fl tlJ e5 18.'?Nc3
White stands better.
380
Odd Benonis
B2) 7 .. J�e8 8.tll f3
1 0 .e4! .ib7 (Winning the e4-pawn only helps
White to develop an initiative: 1 0 . . . b4 l 1 .lLi a4
lLixe4 1 2.E!:e l .if8 1 3 .Wi'd3 lLi f6 1 4.E!:xe8
Wi'xe8 l 5 .d6 with a large advantage to White.)
l I ..ig5 h6 12 . .ixf6 Wi'xf6 1 3 .E!:e l c4 1 4.Wi'd2
.ib4 1 5 .e5 Wi'b6 1 6.lLid4± White was clearly
better in S. Saric - Runic, Croatia 2 0 1 1 .
8 ....if8
We should also examine some other options:
8 . . . .ic7 is again strongly met by: 9.d6! .ia5
1 0.0-0 tll c6 l I .lLih4! Black has no way to stop
the advance of White's central pawns. l l . . . b6
1 2. lLi f5 .ia6 1 3 .E!:el h6 1 4.e4 'ii? h7 1 5 .f4 lLi d4
This was Sidenko - Valderrama, email 2006,
and now White has a simple improvement:
7
6
5
4
3
2
9.d6!
More commonly played is 9.0-0 d6
1 0.lLid2 lLi bd7 and, although I find it hard
to understand the point behind placing the
bishop on f8 instead of the normal g7, I will
admit that Black's position has some promise.
9 E!:e6
Black has also tried: 9 . . . h6 1 0.0-0 E!:e6
(I O . . . a6 is just a waste of time, and after
l I .lLi h4 lLic6 1 2 .e4 E!:b8 1 3 .f4 lLid4 as in
Huber - Raynolds, email 2002, l 4.e5N would
have given White a decisive advantage.) l l . .if4
lLi c6 Transposing to our main line.
8
•••
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.lLie?!N .ib? l 7.e5 .ixg2 l 8 .'ii? xg2 lLi g8
l 9.lLied5+- White is strategically winning.
If 8 . . . a6, White is not obliged to react with the
automatic 9.a4, but can instead play 9.0-0 b5
IO ..if4
White can win the exchange with 1 0. lLi g5 ! ?N
E!:xd6 l l .Wi'b3 Wi'e7 1 2 . .if4 E!:d4 1 3 .lLid5 lLixd5
14 . .ixd5 E!:xd5 1 5 .Wi'xd5 but in my opinion the
position remains double-edged after l 5 . . . lLi c6.
38 1
Chapter 23 - Snake Benoni
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
1 0 ... h6N
The most playable continuation.
The natural 10 . . . lll hS, which occurred in
Otero Acosta - Castellanos Sanchez, Santa
Clara 20 1 0, would have led to a winning
position for White had he found the following
powerful continuation:
.i •.iJ
�
�
�·
.•z� ••Y-. i
ff•. ,�
�
. , . , . ��
<,,. , Z 1�
��- - - ��
��rn;�
�
: �� -� �
��;��
a
�%'"//, ��
� � BttJt�
7
8
6
2
3
�w:J· · · '- �d��
,;,,,Y,w-·0
d· - - "� lm - - "� �
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 1 .lll gS!N lll xf4 1 2.gxf4 l"lxd6 1 3 .i.dS l"lf6
1 4 .'\Wd3 g6 1 5 .l"lgl +-
1 1 .0-0 tll c6
The arising position looks like the best Black
can hope for in the whole line, but after:
Conclusion
The Snake Benoni remains a dangerous
weapon against an unprepared opponent but,
as we have seen, begins to look rather suspect
when challenged effectively.
This chapter saw two main departures from
GM 2. After 5 . . . i.d6 6.i.g2 0-0 7.tll c3 i.e5
8.lll f3 i.xc3t 9.bxc3 d6 1 0.0-0 lll bd7 I now
recommend the new move 1 1 .l"le l N . Black
will have to play accurately j ust to reach a
playable position, but even then White stands
well.
My other improvement was in variation B2,
after the moves 5 . . .i.d6 6.i.g2 0-0 7.lll c3 l"le8
8.lll f.3 i.f8. Now I suggest 9.d6! , which is much
less frequently played than the normal 9.0-0.
White's position soon becomes overwhelming,
and the reader should expect to score heavily if
Black dares to test this line.
Modern Benoni
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Introduction
Variation Index
1 .d4 � f6 2.c4 e6 3. g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.� c3
g6 7.J.g2 J.g7 8.�8 0-0
9.0-0
A) 9 ...J,g4
B) 9 ... b6
C) 9 ... � a6 1 0.J.£4 � c7 1 1 .e4
C l } l l ...J.g4
C2} l l ... � g4
D) 9 ... � bd7
E) 9 ... a6 1 0.a4 � bd7 1 1 .J.f4
El} l l . .. � e8
E2} 1 1 . .. �c7
E3) 1 1 ... �e7 1 2.�b l !
E3 1} 1 2 ... � h5
E32} 1 2 ... � g4
384
385
386
387
388
389
391
392
392
394
394
396
A) after 1 7 . . . f6
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 8 . .ih4!N
E l ) after 13 .. .f6
D) after 13 . . . ti:l deS
g
h
a
b
c
d
e
1 4.h3!N
f
g
h
a
b
c
d
e
f
1 H1ab l !N
g
h
h
Chapter 24 - Introduction
l .d4 ltJ f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5
d6 6.ltJc3
8
7
6
5
383
would lead to problems on the long diagonal,
but this is obviously not an issue when the
bishop has not gone to g7! 1 3 . . . 'Wb8 1 4.lt:\c4
lt:le5 1 5 .lt:la3! lt:l ed7 1 6.:B:el Black had no
counterplay, while White was free to improve
his position in Komljenovic - Orev, Ruse
1 984.
7 ..ig2 .ig7 s.ltJf3 0-0 9.o-o
4
3
2
1
6 ... g6
If Black plays . . . a6 at any point over the next
few moves, you should just play a2-a4 with an
almost certain transposition to one of the later
lines in which these moves occur.
6 . . . .ie7 7 . .ig2 0-0 8.lt:\f3 has occurred in quite
a few games, but I find it hard to understand
why Black would opt for a Modern Benoni
pawn centre without a kingside fianchetto.
I will just mention one illustrative example:
8 . . . :B:e8 9 .0-0 .if8 1 0.lt:\d2 lt:l bd7 l l .h3 b6
1 2.a4 .ia6
b
a
c
d
e
f
g
h
We have reached a major tabiya. Before going
into the details of the different lines, let me
make it clear that we are going in a completely
different direction from GM 2. Against most
Black options, I will be recommending an early
.if4, intending to exert positional pressure,
instead of the previous recommendation of
lt:ld2 and h2-h3 .
In this chapter we will examine five options:
A) 9 .ig4, B) 9 b6, C) 9 ltJ a6, D) 9 tli bd7
and E) 9 . . a6.
•••
••.
•..
••.
.
9 . . . :B:e8 is perhaps the most challenging move
order against the .if4 set-up, and it will be
given special attention in the next chapter.
1 3 .b3! (Gashimov once employed this set-up
with Black and eventually won after 1 3 .lt:lb5,
but the text is stronger.) Normally such a move
9 . . . 'We7 was quite popular in the 70s and 80s,
but has since gone out of fashion, although it
was tried by Pavel Eljanov against me at the
20 1 2 Olympiad. I responded with I O . .if4!,
384
Modern Benoni
as I had already taken the decision to deviate
from the 1 0.lll d2 set-up of GM 2. After the
obvious 1 0 . . . lll bd7, we immediately transpose
to variation D on page 389.
A) 9 ...J.g4
Not really an impressive idea. Black tries
to carry out the exchange of light-squared
bishops, but he loses too much time.
10.tDd2
Here I will make an exception, as retreating
the knight seems like the most logical way to
question Black's last move.
1 0 ...�d7
Black has tried an assortment of other
moves, but this is the only serious attempt to
justify the bishop on g4.
1 2 . . . lll h5?! j ust loses a pawn, and after
1 3.lll b5 E:fe8 1 4.£3 J.h3 1 5 .lll bxd6 J.xg2
1 6.@xg2 White had a huge advantage in
Korpics - Szalanczy, Budapest 1 993.
12 ... lll c7 1 3 .J.f4 lll fe8 occurred in Lacrosse
- Cuypers, Gent 2003, and now White
could have simply grabbed the d6-pawn
with 1 4.lt:\e4!±.
1 3.J.f4 lll e8 1 4 .lll e4! ?
1 4.Wi°d2 i s a good alternative.
1 4 . . . Wi°e7 1 5 .J.g5 f6 1 6.J.f4
White was clearly better in V. Mikhalevski Tsesarsky, Givatayim 1 997.
12.tDc4 .ixg2 13.©xg2 �e7
Having carried out her duty of controlling
h3, the queen shifts to a more suitable square.
1 3 . . . E:d8 1 4.J.f4 lll e8 is too passive, and after
1 5 .Wi°d2 lll a6 1 6.e4± White was in full control
in Vesely - Hacha, Klatovy 2000.
The only other sensible option is:
1 3 . . . lll a6 1 4.J.f4
8
1
6
:
� � � ��,
� �%
•
-�A !U'•
l!JA
'l, ,,,,; • �
411 •
"""
��-efr�
�
� �
!��% '"//, 1�� � ��
!
""'"lj'/;'�
�n;��wri�wtJ
7:'� �---"' f ' " r.�- · - '•
3 � � - '?![J
l l .a4
This is White's most popular and logical
choice, intending to secure the c4-square as a
safe outpost for the knight.
l l ...J.h3
The only alternative that makes any sense is:
1 1 . . .lll a6 1 2.lll c4 E:fd8
1 2 . . . J.h3 1 3.J.f4 hg2 1 4 .@xg2 transposes
to 1 3 . . . lll a6 1 4.J.f4 in the notes to the main
line below.
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4 . . . lll eSN
Black should obviously defend the pawn.
Other moves simply don't work:
1 4 . . . lll h5 ? 1 5 .J.xd6 E:fe8 occurred in
Pedersen - Bradbury, Copenhagen 1 997,
and here the simple 1 6.f3N f5 1 7.E:e l ±
followed by e2-e4 would have left White
with a healthy extra pawn.
Chapter 24
-
Introduction
38 5
1 4 . . . E:fd8?! 1 5 .i.xd6 lll e8 1 6.i.e5! i.xe5
1 7.lll xe5 also left Black a pawn down for
no compensation in Razuvaev - Gufeld,
Chelyabinsk 1 972.
1 5 .e4 f5 1 6.f3t
White's chances are clearly preferable.
14.i.f4 gds
1 4 . . . lt:\ e8 occurred in Jirka - Simacek,
Cartak 2005, and a few other games. For some
reason no one has gone for the most ambitious
1 5 .lll b5!N. The natural reply is 1 5 . . . lll d?, and
now I like the following solution:
8
7
19.g4 gxh4
Or 1 9 . . . llif4t 20.iih l with a huge advantage.
6
5
4
20.gxhS±
White is much better placed to take
advantage of the open kingside.
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
B) 9 ... b6
h
1 6.Wfd3! ( 1 6.lt:\cxd6 i.xb2 1 7.:!:l:b l i.e5
1 8 .i.xe5 lll xe5 1 9.lt:\xe8 E:axe8 20.llixa7 lt:\ c4
leaves Black with some counterplay, although
White is still better.) 1 6 . . . llie5 1 7.i.xe5 i.xe5
1 8 .f4 i.g7 1 9.e4± With a clear positional
advantage.
15.'i°d2 lll a6 16.8!
White has an easy game, and his strong
knight ties Black to the defence of the
d6-pawn.
16 ... tlihS 17.i.gS f6
This position occurred in B. Ivanov - Badev,
Sofia 20 1 1 . White is better after any of the
plausible bishop moves, but my preference is:
This is a rare guest in modern tournaments,
but it is important to know how to deal with
the bishop on a6.
10.i.f4
Modern Benoni
386
This is not the most popular choice, but it
was my recommendation in GM 2. It makes
even more sense for us in the context of the
present book, as developing the bishop to f4 is
our standard plan against almost all of Black's
other moves.
10 ...i.a6
In the event of 1 0 . . . ltJ aG 1 1 .h3 ltJ c7, White
can proceed with an immediate central
breakthrough: 1 2 .e4 ltJ fe8 1 3 .E!:e l b5
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
12.i.gS �c7
This position was reached in Yudkevich Chasovnikova, Moscow 20 1 0 . Here I favour
the simple continuation:
h
1 4.e5! White's play is as powerful as 1t 1s
simple. 1 4 . . . i.b7 1 5 .exd6 ltJxd6 1 6.ltJe5 b4
1 7.ltJa4 g5 1 8.ic l E!:e8 1 9.ltJc6 ixc6 20.dxc6±
White had a strategically winning position in
Greenfeld - Praveen Kumar, Calicut 2007.
1 1 J�el!
In GM 2 I recommended l 1 .a4. There
is nothing wrong with this move, but it
is a bit slow and allows Black some extra
options. 1 1 . . .Wfc7 1 2.E!:e l ltJ bd7 was played
in Bacrot - Derieux, Ajaccio 2007, and now
1 3 .Wfc2!?N would be my preference. A possible
continuation is 1 3 . . . ltJh5 1 4.id2 ltJe5 1 5 .ltJb5
Wfd7 1 6.ltJ xe5 ixe5 1 7.f4 ig7 1 8.ic3 ixb5
1 9.axb5 Wfxb5 20.e4 ixc3 2 1 .bxc3� with
excellent compensation for White, but the
situation is still pretty double-edged.
1 1 . tll hs
This was Black's choice in the only game. It is
.•
important to realize that White has no reason
to fear 1 1 . . .b5N, since after 1 2.e4 b4 1 3 .ltJa4
Black has hardly achieved anything, while the
e4-e5 threat is extremely powerful. Black can
hold up the central break with 1 3 . . . ib7, but
after 1 4.E!:cl ltJ a6 1 5 .ltJ d2 White's positional
advantage is beyond any doubt.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
13.e4N h6 14.i.d2 c\li d7 1 5.a4 :!:Ue8 16.�c2
With the better game for White.
C) 9 ... c\lia6
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 24 - Introduction
This is a typical idea for the Benoni. The
knight is heading for c7, where it supports the
. . . b5 advance.
1 0.J.£4
I consider this to be White's best chance for
an advantage, as well as the most consistent
choice with our i.f4-based repertoire.
1 0.h3
This was my recommendation in GM 2, and
it became the most popular choice among
strong players after that book was published.
However, when rechecking this line I found
a problem, which I was unable to solve.
1 0 . . . i'l:e8 1 1 .tll d2
1 1 .i'l:e 1 is an interesting alternative, when
the following line is critical: 1 1 . . .tt::l e4
1 2 .lll xe4 i'l:xe4 1 3 .lll d2 i'l:e8 14.a4 lt:l b4
1 5 .lt:\c4 b6 1 6.i.f4 i.f8 1 7.Wd2 i.a6 1 8.b3
i.xc4 1 9.bxc4 Now in Li Chao - Zhou
Jianchao, Xinghua 20 1 3 , Black should have
played 1 9 . . . i.g7N 20.i'l:a3 W/d7 2 1 .e4 a6
22.i.fl i.d4 when I believe the position is
about balanced.
1 1 . . .tll c7 1 2.a4 b6! 1 3.e4
1 3 .tll c4 i.a6 1 4 .W/b3 i.xc4 1 5 .Wxc4 a6
looks perfectly playable for Black.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 . . . lll d7!
In GM 2 I analysed a few other options for
Black, but did not pay attention to this move.
I failed to find any advantage for White here.
1 4 .tt::l c4 lll e5 1 5 .lll xe5 i.xe5 1 6.i.e3 tt::l a6!N
387
This logical move improves over 16 ... a6,
which was played in Stamenkovic - Grujic,
Vrnjacka Banja 1 996.
1 7.i'l:e l tt::l b4
With double-edged play.
10 ... tll c7
Black other logical follow-up of 1 O i'l:e8 will
be covered in variation E of the next chapter
on page 408.
..•
1 1 .e4
1 1 .a4 i'l:e8 1 2.tll d2 lll h5 1 3 .i.e3 b600 reaches
a big tabiya, where I believe Black is doing fine.
Now Black has two serious possibilities:
Cl) 1 1 ...J.g4 and C2) 1 1 . .. tll g4 .
1 1 . . .i'l:e8 1 2.i'l:e l transposes to variation E3 of
the next chapter on page 4 1 1 .
1 1 . . .b 5 ? is an unfortunate idea for Black, and
after 1 2.e5! dxe5 1 3 .lll xe5 i.b7 1 4.lt:lc6 Wd7
1 5 .i.xc7 Wxc7 1 6.tt::l x b5 he was a pawn down
with a losing position in Orlov - Arganian,
Seattle 1 994.
Cl) 11 ...J.g4 12.h3 J.xf3 1 3.J.xa
Modern Benoni
388
13 ... c!l)fes
I also considered:
1 3 . . . �d7 1 4.©g2!N
In this instance I would prefer not to rush
with the central pawn break.
1 4.e5 dxe5 1 5 .i.xe5 looks attractive at first
sight, but 1 5 . . . Ei:ad8 1 6.�b3 b6, intending
to bring one of the knights to the blockading
square d6, gave Black an adequate game in
Marovic - L. Szabo, Zagreb 1 964.
1 4 . . . Ei:fe8
1 4 . . . b5? allows 1 5 .e5! with much more
power: 1 5 . . . dxe5 1 6.i.xe5 lll ce8 1 7.l"i:e l ±
1 5 .l"i:e l
14 ...i.eSN
This is an obvious attempt to improve
on 1 4 . . . g5 ?! 1 5 .i.e3 b5 as was played in
Heilemann - Bialas, Minden 1 959. After the
simple 1 6.Ei:cl N White is clearly better, and
Black's kingside weakening has certainly not
improved his chances.
1 5 ..ie3 b5 16 ..ig2
White has a clear plan of advancing his
pawns, for instance:
16 ... b4
1 5 . . . b5
It is hard to suggest anything else for Black.
1 6.e5 dxe5 1 7.i.xe5 Ei:ad8 1 8 .l"i:c l ;!;
White retains a pleasant edge.
14J�el
1 4 .�d2!?N is a good alternative.
C2) 1 1 ... c\i.)g4
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Chapter 24 - Introduction
12.a3!
With this clever move, White gets ready for
the closed position that arises after Black plays
. . . lLie5 and recaptures with the d-pawn.
12 ... £6
Black prepares to recapture with the f-pawn
instead.
1 2 . . . Ei:e8N runs into 1 3 .h3 ltJe5 1 4.ltJxe5 .ixe5
(or 1 4 . . . dxe5 1 5 .ie3 b6 1 6.b4!) 1 5 .ixe5 dxe5
1 6.f4 with a clear advantage to White.
13.b4 b6 14.�el l£ie5 1 5.�xe5 fxe5 16.i.e3
a6
This position arose in Sanz Algarrada - Rost,
email 20 1 1 . Strategically speaking, Black has
failed to create counterplay in the centre, and
his dark-squared bishop is at least temporarily
out of play. I suggest the following method of
developing White's initiative on the queenside.
389
D) 9 ... �bd7
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
c
f
e
h
g
IO.i.f4 V!!e7
1 0 . . .1.Wc7? is not possible due to l 1 .ltJb5, but
Black has two other alternatives to the queen
move.
1 0 . . . ltJb6
Now is a good time for White to play in the
centre.
l l .e4 Ei:e8
The aggressive l 1 . . .ltJh5 1 2.ig5 f6 13 . .ic l
f5 was well met by 14.exf5 .ixf5 1 5 .ltJ g5
'IMfd7 1 6.lLie6! ixe6 1 7.dxe6 '1Mfxe6 1 8 .a4! and
White was clearly better due to the powerful
light-squared bishop in the computer game
Stockfish - Hiarcs, Internet 20 1 2.
1 2.Ei:e l h6
This position occurred in another computer
game, 'DiscoCheck' - 'Gull', Internet 20 1 4 .
Now I like:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
390
Modern Benoni
1 3 .1M'd3N i.g4
White is ideally placed to meet 1 3 . . . g5
with 1 4.i.xd6! Wxd6 1 5 .e5, with a clear
advantage.
1 4 . ll:i d2
White has a promising position, and it is
hard to see what the knight is doing on b6.
1 0 . . . ll:i e8
After this move it is logical to focus on the
queenside.
1 1 .1M'd2 a6 1 2.a4 E:b8 1 3 .E:ab l !
Preparing b2-b4 is a common theme in the
i.f4 lines.
1 1 .E:el and 1 l .e4 are both well met by
1 I . . .ll:ig4!.
1 1 .h3 allows 1 1 . . .ll:ih5!?, when the weakening
of the g3-pawn is surprisingly relevant. The
critical line continues 1 2 .i.g5 f6 1 3 .i.d2 f5 ,
and now our thematic idea o f 1 4.ll:ig5 runs
into 14 .. .f4! 1 5 .ll:i e6 fxg3 1 6.ll:ixf8 ll:ixf8, when
Black has rich compensation for exchange.
1 1 . .. �g4
This looks like the most challenging idea.
1 1 . . .a6 transposes to variation E3 below.
Nobody has tried 1 1 . . . ll:ih5N, and indeed after
the thematic 1 2 .i.g5 f6 1 3 .i.d2 f5 1 4.ll:ig5!
White has a promising game.
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 . . . b5
1 3 . . . b6 1 4.b4 also looks unpleasant for
Black. 14 . . . E:b? 1 5 .E:fc l We? occurred in
Sulava - Csom, Paks 2000, and now the
natural 1 6.e4N ll:ic7 1 7.E:el would have
maintained a pleasant advantage.
14.axb5 axb5
After 14 ... ll:i b6 1 5 .bxa6 i.xa6 1 6.E:fe l Black
hardly has enough for the pawn, but this
may still have been the lesser evil.
1 5 .b4 c4 1 6.ll:id4 i.xd4 1 7.1M'xd4
White had a huge positional advantage in
Sorokin - Capellini, Buenos Aires 1 996.
l l .a4!
An important decision! This semi-waiting
move seems like the best option. I will briefly
show you why I was not completely satisfied
with the alternatives:
12 ... f6
1 2 . . . We8 ?N is impossible in view of 1 3.ll:ib5!
and Black loses material.
1 2 . . . i.f6N 1 3.i.xf6 ll:i gxf6 1 4.ll:id2;!; also does
not make much sense for Black.
13.i.d2 �de5
Chapter 24 - Introduction
1 3 . . . a 6 1 4.E!:b l occurred i n m y game against
Eljanov, which is discussed via the more
common 9 . . . a6 move order in variation £32
below.
The natural 1 3 . . . tt:l ge5 has been played a couple
of times, but both times White missed the
strong idea of 1 4 .tll b5!N. The threat is lll c7,
and both 14 . . . tt:l b6 1 5 .lll x e5 fxe5 1 6.b4 and
14 . . . tt:lbS 1 5.lll xe5 fxe5 1 6.e4 tt:l a6 1 7.tll a3 are
better for White.
The text move was played in Arngrimsson Akopian, Golden Sands 20 1 4 . Here White has
a strong idea at his disposal:
391
1 7.g4! tt:l h4 1 8.i.e4 h5 1 9.f3 With a clear
advantage.
1 5.exf3!
This is a thematic idea that we will encounter
again later.
15 ... tll e5 16.E!:el �d8 17..ifl !
Before driving the knight away, White takes
control over the c4-square.
17 ....id7
Neither 1 7 . . . c4 1 8 .tll b5! nor 1 7 . . .i.f5 1 8 .f4
are acceptable for Black.
18.£4 tll f7 19.�b3 f5 20.E!:e6!
White has a powerful initiative.
E) 9 ... a6 10.a4 tll bd7
The other main possibility is 1 0 . . . E!:eS, when
l l .i.f4 leads straight to variation F of the next
chapter on page 4 1 4.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
e
f
g
h
1 1 .if4
Black has three sensible ways to deal with
the attack on the d6-pawn. We will consider
the sideline El) 1 1 ... tll eS, the more popular
E2) 1 1 ...�c7 and finally the main line of
E3) 1 1 ... �e7.
•
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Modern Benoni
392
El) 1 1 . .. ltJ eS
This is somewhat passive, and White can easily
gain some space in the centre.
All these moves seem pretty logical. The
continuation might be:
12.e4 gbs 13,Y;Ve2
This is a slightly unusual square for the
queen, but it is good to prevent . . . b5, and the
knight on e8 prevents the black rook from
coming to the e-file to harass the queen.
1 3 ... £6
1 3 . . . lt'l e5 allows White to obtain a
comfortable edge with 1 4.lt'lxe5 .ixe5 1 5 . .ixe5
dxe5 as played in Orsatti - Obregon, Buenos
Aires 2002. White has more than one good
continuation here, but the one I like the most
is 1 6.f4N 11Me7 1 7.d6! 11Mxd6 1 8 .Elad l followed
by lt'l d5 , with a dangerous initiative.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
17 ... fS
1 7 . . . 11Ma5 1 8 .11Me3 is comfortably better for
White.
18.Y;Ve3 ltJxf3t 19.ixa ixf3 20.Y;Vxf3 fxe4
21 .Y;Ve3
White will regain the e4-pawn while keeping
a clear positional advantage.
E2) 1 I . ..Y;Vc7
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
14 ... ltJ eS
1 4 . . . b5 1 5 .axb5 axb5 1 6.b4! is much better
for White.
1 5.b4 cxb4 16,gxb4 ig4 17,gfb l
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
12.Y;Vd2 ges 1 3,gfcl
By directing his rook towards the black
queen, White prepares b2-b4.
393
Chapter 24 - Introduction
13 lli e4
This looks like the most challenging idea. I
considered two other options:
•••
1 9.b3!?N A possible continuation is
1 9 . . . cxb3 20.tt'lxb3 tt'l ec4 and now 2 1 .tt'la5! is
an important point, when White keeps some
advantage.
13 . . . b6 1 4.b4 Ei:b8 1 5 .Ei:ab l gives White nice
pressure. Black can try to create counterplay
with the thematic 1 5 . . . tt'l g4 1 6.h3 tt'l ge5,
but White is well prepared for this: 1 7.tt'lxe5
( 1 7.tt'le4!?N is also worth considering)
1 7 . . . tt'lxe5
a
a
b
c
d
e
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14.tlixe4 l:l:xe4 1 5.tlig5!?
This forcing move seems promising.
f
g
h
1 8 .a5 ! c4 1 9.axb6 W/xb6 20.tt'l d l ! ? White kept
a positional edge in Fessler - Viard, email
20 1 1 .
1 3 . . . c4 forces White to find the strong
prophylactic move: 1 4.W/c2! Ei:b8 (White's idea
was to anticipate 1 4 . . . tt'lc5, which will now run
into 1 5 .tt'ld2) 1 5 .a5 b5 1 6.axb6 tt'lxb6 1 7.tt'ld2
tt'l g4 1 8 .h3 tt'le5 This position was reached in
Szymanski - Meyer, corr. 20 1 2, when White
retreated the queen to d l . Instead I would like
to propose a more forcing continuation:
15 Ei:d4
1 5 . . . Ei:e8 allows White to regroup optimally:
1 6.tt'le4 tt'le5 1 7.b4 c4 1 8 .a5 .if5 1 9.tt'lc3 Ei:ac8
20.h3 h5 2 1 ..ie3± White keeps the better
chances.
.••
16.�e3 tliffi 17.tlie4!
Forcing the following reaction.
17 ... l:l:xe4 1 8.�xe4 .ixb2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Modern Benoni
394
19.i.d2!N
White went for the tempting 1 9.°1We8 in the
only game so far, but this enabled Black to solve
his problems: 1 9 . . . E:b8 20.E:ab l .ixc l 2 1 .E:xc l
.ih3! 22.E:xc5 dxc5 23 .°1Wxb8 °1Wxb8 24 . .ixb8
.ixg2 2 5 .i>xg2 f5 ! 26.mf3 ill d7 Black was able
to hold the endgame in Khan - Pepermans,
email 20 1 3 .
My idea i s to post the bishop o n the long
diagonal. A logical continuation is:
19 ... i.f5 20.�e3 f6 2 1 .i.c3 i.xcl 22.E:xcl
lll d7 23.�d2!
White is ready to advance his central pawns.
He has more than enough compensation for
the sacrificed pawn, with good attacking
chances and a wonderful dark-squared bishop.
E3) 1 1 ...�e7
12 . . . h6 is slow and does nothing to oppose
White's plan. 1 3. b4 cxb4 1 4.E:xb4 lll c5
1 5 .°IWc l i>h7 This was Wojtaszek - Gajewski,
Warsaw 2008, and now a small improvement
would be 1 6.°1Wa3!N E:e8 1 7.a5 .ig4 1 8 .ill d2!
when Black is under a lot of pressure.
Black has also tried:
1 2 . . . E:e8 1 3.b4 lll g4
1 3 . . . cxb4 14.E:xb4 lll c5 1 5 .lll d4 h6 occurred
in Schubert - Grott, email 2009, and now I
like 1 6.E:b6N lll fe4 17.lll xe4 lll xe4 1 8 .°1Wd3
g5 l 9 . .ie3 lll c5 20.°1Wc2 .id7 2 1 .a5 with
continuing positional pressure.
8 �£ ��� �A
:e: · -��m� i - i
7 �
6
5
4
3
2
·���'�.,,
ef' " ' ��, , z�
��,, ,�
, ��
�w-J.1�
[}J f� • ��,�·���
�.,,, ,;. lW!1i�
�r� l•f�- - �
� ----· "m a�,�
..
a
This is the most important option.
12.E:b l !
1 2 .h3 i s the only move mentioned by Petrov,
but I favour the text move in many lines. This
seems like a good moment for it, now that the
black queen has left the d8-a5 diagonal.
With b2-b4 on the way, it makes sense for
Black to play on the kingside. His two main
tries are E3 1) 12 ... �h5 and E32) 12 ... lLJg4.
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4 . .ig5 !?N
This idea works well in similar positions, and
I like it here too.
White failed to achieve anything special after
1 4 .°1Wb3 cxb4 1 5 .°1Wxb4 lll c5 1 6.h3 lll e5� in
Mochalov - Belichev, Yalta 1 99 5 .
1 4 . . . °1Wf8
1 4 . . . f6 1 5 . .id2± is exactly what White is
looking for.
1 5 . .id2 cxb4 1 6.E:xb4 lll c5 1 7.a5 .id7 1 8.h3
lll f6 1 9.ill d4±
White has an ideal set-up, with a better
pawn structure and good coordination.
E3 1) 12 ... lLJh5 1 3.i.g5 f6
Black has also tried 1 3 . . . °1We8, but without
much success: 1 4.°1Wc2 h6 1 5 . .id2 E:b8 1 6.b4
cxb4 1 7.E:xb4 lll c5 1 8 .a5 °1We7 1 9.lll d4
395
Chapter 24 - Introduction
(My engine suggests the surprising 1 9.'IWc l N
i>h7 20.tlie4!! with a clear advantage; the
text move is also strong though.) 1 9 . . . \Wc7?!
A mistake in a worse position.
�B*
7s �. · %�� �· · �
4 8. . • .• .,�.-��
�" S8 �
--�
��
··--· ��-----'" .,,,,
,,
4 � m -
8£ .
6
5
. .v,�. .
... .
. . ;. ��-�
2 �a.v
/,.,., ·m 8 ·� �·�
�
1
3
a
b
a
c
d
jf!J1"� . .
mik.
e
f
g
h
This position occurred in Wojtaszek Maciol, Krynica 2003, and now the simple
20.tlie4!N .id7 2 Uk l :B:fc8 22.\Wd l would
have given White a winning position.
14 ..id2 f5 15.�g5!
This is one of my favourite ideas against the
Modern Benoni. Thanks to the bishop on g2,
the knight's arrival on e6 will be extremely
powerful.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Up to now White has played perfectly
Guramishvili - Art. Minasian, Jermuk
20 1 2, and here the simple 23.'1Wd2N i>h7
24.a5 would have left him with a huge
advantage.
m
.
16.b4 c4
Neither 1 6 . . . cxb4 1 7.:B:xb4± nor 1 6 . . . b6
1 7.tlie6 .ixe6 1 8 .dxe6 :B:ab8 1 9.'1Wb3± can be
considered acceptable for Black.
17 ... a5 1 8.b6 t£i e4
1 8 . . . h6 1 9.tlie6 .ixe6 20.dxe6 :B:ab8 2 1 .:B:b 5 ±
does not change much.
19.�gx:e4 fxe4 20.Ekl �f6
Modern Benoni
396
We have been following Tkachiev David, Cannes 1 999. At this point the most
convincing would have been:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
e
c
f
g
h
2 1 . ltl b5!N lll xd5 22.�xc4 i.f5
22 . . . llixb6 23 .l'!c7 is hopeless for Black.
23.J.h6!+Black's position is collapsing.
E32) 12 ... ll:lg4
to our main line) . It's not every day that you
beat a 2700 player at an Olympiad!
1 3 ... f6N
Amazingly this is a novelty, but it soon
transposes to the aforementioned game. It is
certainly Black's most ambitious move, so it
deserves to be treated as the main line.
1 3 . . . .tf6
This has been played a few times, but I do
not understand why Black would be so keen
to trade the dark-squared bishops.
1 4 . .ixf6 llidxf6 1 5 . lli d2N
1 5 .b4?! has been played, but the timing is
unfortunate, and after 1 5 . . . cxb4 ( 1 5 . . . .if5N
is also good for Black) 1 6.l'!xb4 llie3! White
ran into some difficulties in Predein Bazhin, Podolsk 1 993.
The knight manoeuvre is a more appropriate
plan at this moment. A logical continuation
is:
1 5 . . . llie5 1 6.h3 l'!b8
16 . . . llih5 1 7.b4;!; is also nice for White.
8
7
6
5
4
3
a
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
13.J.g5!
This is a thematic reaction against the knight
on g4. I used the same idea in an almost
identical position, and it brought me my most
memorable victory with the i.f4 set-up (the
game can be found below, as it soon transposed
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 7.a5 b5 1 8 .axb6 l'!xb6 1 9.f4 lli ed7 20.llic4
20.e4 l'!b4 2 1 .l'!e l ! ? is also worthy of
consideration.
20 . . . l'!b4 2 1 .'Wd3;!;
White retains a pleasant edge.
I found one other game, where Black retreated
his queen:
1 3 . . . 'We8 1 4.h3 h6
Chapter 24 - Introduction
Unfortunately for Black, 14 . . . lll ge5 ? does
not work in view of 1 5 .ttJe4± when he is
unable to defend the d6-pawn.
1 5 . .ic l ! ?
An interesting concept, although there is
nothing wrong with the natural l 5 .id2N
lll ge5 1 6.lll x e5 lll xe5 1 7.b4± with a
promising position for White.
l 5 . . . ttJ ge5
After 1 5 . . . ttJ gf6N White is well placed for
1 6.b4.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.ttJd2!
Obviously the point of White's previous
move. He now threatens to trap the black
knight with l 7.f4.
1 6 . . . g5 1 7.b4
l 7.f4!?N gxf4 l 8 .gxf4 lll g6 l 9.lll c4 'We?
20.'Wd3! also looks quite promising.
17 . . . cxb4 1 8 .l'l:xb4 f5 1 9 .ia3
White was better in Straub - Koch, Germany
200 5 .
397
14 .id2
We have now transposed to my game against
Eljanov, which featured the somewhat unusual
move order of 9 . . . 'We7 1 0 . .if4 ttJ bd7 l l .a4
lll g4 1 2.ig5 f6 1 3 .id2 a6 1 4.l'l:b l .
•
14 lll geS
l 4 . . . f5N as usual runs into l 5 . ttJ g5! lll df6
1 6.b4± with advantage to White.
.••
15.b4 cxb4?!
This tempting move is typical for the Modern
Benoni: Black gets the nice c5-outpost for his
knight, but his activity will be short lived,
while his structural problems will be felt for
a long time.
1 5 . . . b6N would have been the correct decision,
but I still like White's position. There is a
pleasant choice between clarifying the pawn
structure by means of 1 6.bxc5 bxc5 l 7.a5,
and maintaining the pressure on the queenside
with 1 6.'Wb3!?, with the better game in either
case.
16.l'l:xb4 c\lixf3t
16 . . . ttJ c5 1 7.lll xe5 fxe5 1 8 .ie3! is also
clearly better for White.
17.exf3!
17 .ixf3 f5 l 8.a5 l'l:b8 would leave Black
only slightly worse.
398
Modern Benoni
Recapturing with the e-pawn is an important
idea, especially after having provoked the
weakening .. .f6. White gains control over the
e4- and e5-squares, and opens the e-file.
2 1 .�b6 �f6 22.�cl �fe8
Black is trying to get active, but his position
is j ust bad, and an earlier improvement was
needed.
17 ... f5
Black needs to free his bishop at some point.
17 . . . lll c5 could be met by 1 8 .a5 with similar
play to the game, but 1 8 .lll e4! ? may well be
even stronger.
23.i.fl !±
This accurate move eliminates any possible
counterplay connected with the knight jump
to d3. White has a substantial advantage,
which I managed to convert to victory in
Avrukh - Eljanov, Istanbul (ol) 20 1 2 , after
some adventures in mutual time trouble.
1 8.aS
Now it becomes clear that the pawns on b7
and d6 are long-term targets.
1 8 ...�d8 19.�a4
My computer prefers the tactical
alternative: 1 9 .lll a4!?N '1Mfxa5 20.l'!xb7 '1Mfd8
(after 20 . . . '1Mfxd5 2 1 .f4 '1Mfxg2t 22.i;t>xg2
ixb7t 23.f3± Black does not have enough
compensation for the queen) 2 1 .l'!b l lll e5;!;
The machine likes White a lot, but from a
human point of view it doesn't seem like such
a huge advantage. Considering the position I
achieved in the game, I do not see much point
in changing the character of the position.
19 ... �cS 20.�a3 i.d7
Conclusion
I am happy with my new recommendations
against the Modern Benoni, with the general
strategy being to place the bishop on f4 and
aim for either central play with e4-e5 , or a
queenside initiative with l'!b l and b2-b4,
depending on how Black responds. Although
there are a few forcing lines, White's system
relies mainly on positional principles,
compared with the recommendation in GM 2
which had a lot of concrete tactics.
When it comes to specific details, vananon
D with 9 . . . lt:l bd7 1 0.if4 '1Mfe7 is worth
mentioning, as White needs to remember
the less-than-obvious 1 1 .a4! to maximize his
chances. Another recurring theme for White is
to meet . . . lt:l g4 (or . . . lll h 5) with ig5 , attacking
the queen on e7. If Black chases the bishop
with . . . f6 and then advances with . . . f5 , the
lll g5-e6 manoeuvre will be painful for Black.
If he leaves the pawn on f6 and brings a knight
to e5, then White should be ready to meet
. . . lll xf3 t with the dynamic exf3! . Generally
speaking, it is hard for Black to generate much
counterplay in any of the lines in this chapter,
and he often ends up under positional pressure.
Modern Benoni
9 �e8
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
...
Variation Index
1 .d4 � f6 2.c4 e6 3. g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6
6.� c3 g6 7.i.g2 i.g7 8.�f3 0-0 9.0-0 ge8
I O.i.f4
A) I O ...i.g4
B) 1 0 ... h6
C) 1 0 ... � h5
D) 1 0 ... � e4 1 1 .�xe4 gxe4 12.�d2
D I ) 1 2 .. ,gb4
D2) 1 2 ... gxf4 1 3.gxf4 i.xb2 14,gb l i.g7 1 5.e4
D21) 1 5 ...�h4
D22) 1 5 ... � d7
E) 1 0 ... � a6 1 1 .gel
El) 1 1 ...i.:5
E2) 1 1 ...i.g4
E3) 1 1 ... � c7
E4) 1 1 ... � h5
ES) 1 1 ... � e4
F) 1 0 ... a6 1 1 .a4
F l ) 1 1 ... h6
F2) 1 1 ... b6
F3) 1 1 ...�e7
F4) I I ...i.g4
F5) 1 1 ... � h5
F6) 1 1 ... � e4
400
40 1
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
408
409
41 1
412
412
414
414
416
417
420
42 1
423
h
Modern Benoni
400
1.d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.dS exd5 5.cx:d5
d6 6.�c3 g6 ?.i.g2 i.g7 s.tLJf3 o-o 9,0-0
:Se8 1 0.i.f4
This is a big conceptual change compared
to my recommendation in GM 2. I have to
confess that I thought it was the most exciting
chapter of that book, but modern theory keeps
moving forward and often you change your
preferences. 1 0.if4 leads to a more positional
game, but there are still lines where the reader
will find a sharp tactical battle.
For those who are looking for concrete evidence
as to why I made my change, the following
line is scoring well for Black: 1 0.lt:ld2 a6 1 l .a4
lt:l bd7 1 2 .h3 :gbs 1 3 .lll c4 lll e5 1 4 .lll a3 lll h 5
1 5 .e4 id? 1 6.a5 b5 1 7.axb6 ib5 !
We will analyse six main options: A) 10. . .i.g4,
B) 1 0 ... h6, C) 10 ... �hS, D) 10 ... � e4,
E) 10 ... tLJ a6 and the main continuation
F) 1 0 ... a6.
A) 10 ...i.g4 I l .�d2
The most natural move. Black should react
swiftly, as he cannot afford to have a white
knight on c4.
is probably better, but after 1 3 .lll ce4 lll xe4
1 4.lt:lxe4 ixh3 1 5 .lll xd6 ixg2 1 6.©xg2
:ge7 1 7.lll x b5 :gb7 1 8 .lt:l a3 White has a clear
edge.) This occurred in Chlevistan - Holeksa,
Ostrava 200 1 , and now the simple 1 3.hxg4N
bxc3 1 4. bxc3 lll xg4 1 5 .lt:lc4 lll e5 1 6.ixe5!
ixe5 l 7.'Wd2 would give White an obvious
advantage, as his knight on c4 is too strong.
12.i.e3
Two previous encounters have reached this
position, and in both of them Black was overly
aggressive:
12 ... tLJ d??!
12 . . . f5 ? ! was V. Mikhalevski - Piscopo,
Trieste 2009. White could have won material
with: 1 3 .h3N ixh3 1 4.ixh3 lll xg3 1 5 .fxg3
:gxe3 1 6.:gf3! Black does not have enough for
the sacrificed piece.
s ,i R S .i � ·
&(fBi)Bf�
, , , , % � � ••y, i
,
6
� � � �
� �-8� �� 'Sl
: �-" '� �� '�r//,� ��-� ��r�
3 •
� ;� � r�
1
�
1
2
' N/�,,,,,Y,
�/ef''"h�l�
A �lef''"'';
�ff� ��-�
'. A ,�ff�
� ��
0 iOz
�; 0 iOz dib iO
�
f� - - %mwm!m - - -a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
13.h3 i.xh3
Or 1 3 . . . lt:lxg3 1 4.hxg4 lll xfl which, with
the insertion of . . . a6 and a2-a4, is the topic
under investigation in variation F4. 1 5 .lll xfl ±
(or even 1 5 .'Wxfl !?) looks excellent for White.
14.i.xh3 �xg3 1 5.fxg3 :Sxe3 16.:Sf3! i.d4
1 6 . . . :ges 1 7.lll c4 lll e5 1 8.lll xe5 ixe5
1 9.'Wd2 :gbg 20.:gafl f5 2 1 .g4± doesn't change
much, and White has a clear advantage.
Chapter 25
17J�xe3 he3t
This all occurred in Eljanov - Topalov, Wijk
aan Zee 2008 . Now there was nothing wrong
with the natural:
19 Y!Ve7 20.Y!Vc2 f5 2 1 .gel ges 22.lll dl
i.g5 23.lll xe5 Y!Vxe5 24.e4±
White's extra piece should soon tell.
•••
B) 10 ... h6
This waiting move can often be a useful
resource for Black, and is currently popular
when played a move later - see variation F 1 .
In this case I would like undertake a concrete
plan:
-
9 . . . E1e8
40 1
1 1 .Y!Vcl ©h7
An obvious alternative is:
1 l . . .g5 1 2.ie3!?
Most previous games saw 1 2 .id2, but after
1 2 . . .if5 I couldn't find an advantage for
White.
1 2 . . . if5N
12 . . . lll bd7 was played in the computer game
Deep Fritz - Hannibal, Internet 20 1 5 , but
I see no reason for Black not to develop his
bishop first.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 3 .h4! g4
After 1 3 . . . lll g4 1 4 .id2 gxh4 1 5 .lll xh4 ih7
1 6.ih3 h5 1 7.ig5 if6 1 8 .ixf6 �xf6 1 9.e4
Black's kingside is too vulnerable.
1 4 .lll d2
Now the critical test is as follows:
1 4 . . . E1xe3 1 5 .fxe3 ig6 1 6.lll c4
7
6
5
4
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
The arising position is complex, but in my
opinion Black will find it hard to prove his
compensation. One example line runs:
Modern Benoni
402
16 ... lll h5 1 7.We l i.xc3
Or 1 7 . . . lll a6 1 8 .Wf2 We7 1 9.e4 lll c7 20.a4
and White is better.
1 8 .bxc3 b5 1 9 .lll d2 We7 20.Wf2 lll d7 2 1 .a4!±
C) 10 ... tll h5 1 1 .i.g5 �b6
�
1. •.t� i. �
7 %,,,,
••
�.r�
..��-,,.r
, , %•
�w� ���&ef,,,,,,Y,
�r · �·
�
45 � -�r� /,,,,,;� �,, ,�
.,
8
6
.� ��
32 �lD'%m""'--�,
.
:wtJtwtri
,,
1
�a
b
�
c
�-1i=,, ,
d
e
f
g
h
12.lll d2N
Improving on 1 2.E!:e l , as in Gleizerov Shilov, Barlinek 200 1 . Black could have played
1 2 . . . i.f5N 1 3 .lll d2 g5 1 4.e4 i.g6 1 5 .i.e3 lll g4
with unclear play.
Obviously l l . ..f6 1 2.i.d2 f5 is not a good
idea. After 1 3 .lll g5 ! i.f6 1 4 .lll e6 White had
a clear advantage in Dragomirescu - Bleuzen,
Split 20 1 2.
12 g5
It seems like Black has to play this, since
1 2 . . . lll h5 1 3 .lll c4 lll xf4 1 4 .Wxf4 leaves him
struggling.
l 1 . . . Wd7 This strange move was first tried
by Smyslov back in 1 977. Black's idea is
thematic for the Benoni; he wants to carry out
. . . b7-b5 , while gaining the b4-square for his
knight should White play a2-a4. 1 2.a4 h6
.••
13.i.e3 .�.f5
This seems to be the most natural move.
The tempting 1 3 . . . lll g4 runs into the strong
reply 1 4.lll c4 lll xe3 1 5 .fxe3!, when Black
cannot be happy with his . . . �h7 move.
14.tll c4 tll a6 15.tll b5 i.f8 16.h4 gxh4
17.i.f4
White has a pleasant initiative.
Chapter 2 5
important square for his knight: 1 5 .lt:ld2! lt:l b4
1 6.lt:lc4 White is better.
12.VNc2
I like this idea for White, keeping the
d2-square for the bishop.
-
9 . . . Ele8
403
17.axb6 VNxb6 18.c!LJa4 VNb5 1 9.e4 i.d7
This was Akobian - Bluvshtein, Montreal
2009. Until now it was a smooth positional
game by White, but at this moment he missed
the right idea:
12 ... tl:!d7 13.a4
Black is fine after 1 3 .lt:ld2 h6 1 4.ie3 Elxe3!
l 5 . fXe3 lt:l e5�.
13 ... tl:Je5 14.a5 VNa6 15.c!LJxe5 �he5 16.i.d2
b5
Another example is 1 6 . . . id7 1 7.Elfb l Elee8,
which was Leung - Saxena, email 20 1 0. Here
I like:
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
20...£5 2I.c!LJb2 gee8 22.i.c3 fxe4 23.c!LJc4
VNbs 24.gfeu
White maintains a solid positional advantage.
h
1 8 .e4N b5 1 9.axb6 'Wxb6 20.lt:l d l !:t White's
dark-squared bishop comes to c3, fully
neutralizing the a l -h8 diagonal, while the
white knight is heading for an excellent square
on e3 .
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
D) 10 ... tl:!e4
Definitely an ambitious move, which leads to
sharp and double-edged play.
Modern Benoni
404
1 1 .lll xe4 l3xe4 12.lll d2
After a short and logical sequence of moves
we have reached a branching point. Black
can choose between D I ) 12 ... l3b4 and the
exchange sacrifice 02) 12 ... l3xf4.
l
l
l
1 5 ... l3xb2
5 . . . B:b6 obviously allows 1 6.ie4! ixe4
7.llixe4 h6 8.b4± with a clear advantage.
This is my personal preference for White,
despite it only being the third choice according
to theory.
In general the idea behind Black's 1 2th
move is to provoke 1 3.a3, when the exchange
sacrifice is even stronger. 1 3 . . . B:xf4 1 4.gxf4
ixb2 is given by Petrov in GM 12 - the white
rook must go to a2, which is hardly the most
desirable square, to defend the a3-pawn.
13 ... g5
A concrete and aggressive move, but White
keeps everything under control.
l
I also checked the obvious novelty 3 . . . ixb2N,
when after 1 4.llie4 B:xe4 (if 14 . . . if5
1 5 .B:xb2! B:xb2 1 6.llixd6� White has huge
compensation) 1 5 .ixe4 if6 1 6.°Wc2 White's
position is definitely preferable.
14.i.e3 i.f5 15.a3!
An important move to deal with Black's
threats.
1 8 ...i.g4?
This is just losing.
I also checked 1 8 . . . ic8N, when White can
develop an initiative in the centre by means
Chapter 25
of 1 9.f4 g4 20.if2 followed by e2-e4. Black's
position is too passive.
19.�xd6 %Vb6 20J�bl %Vxb3 2 Uhb3 b6
22.� eS!
White gained a decisive advantage in Stein Buechling, corr. 2007.
02) 12 .. Jhf4 1 3.gxf4 hb2
I4J�bl �g7 1 5.e4
Petrov gives 1 5 .lll c4 as better for White, but I
prefer the text move.
8
7
6
5
4
3
-
..
9 . E:e8
405
1 6.e5N
We will see this idea again in line 02 1 , and
it works well here too.
1 6.Wff3 lll d7 1 7.lll c4 lll b6! 1 8.lll e3
Wff6 1 9.f500 was unclear in Michalik Huschenbeth, Merlimont 20 1 1 .
1 6 . . . ixf4 1 7.e6
The point behind 1 6.e5 . White has a
powerful initiative, a sample line being:
17 . . . lll a6 1 8.E:e l Wfe7 1 9.lll c4 f5
It is always dangerous to capture on e6 opening up White's light-squared bishop:
1 9 . . . fxe6 20.dxe6 lll c7 2 1 .Wf g4 Wff6 22.ixb7
ixb7 23.E:xb7 d5 24.lll e3 White holds the
advantage.
20.lll a5 !
White manages to generate play on the
queenside.
20 . . . ig5 2 1 .Wfe2 lll b8 22.E:b3 b6 23.lll c6
lll xc6 24.dxc6 E:b8 25 .E:g3 if6 26.id5
White has a clear edge.
1 5 . . . lll a6 This has recently been fashionable
and has brought Black good results. I have a
natural and unexplored idea:
2
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Now I believe that all four of Black's
possibilities are important, with the most critical
being: 02 1) 15 ... %Vh4 and 022) 15 ... tll d7.
1 5 . . . ih6
A logical move, which has only occurred
once.
8 .i. � j)
-· �
�··- - , %··�� i
6 6)� �- �� ·�
�1�eflS' "' %� ��
•
� �4 �� "" ' "� ��
'9 , , % ��
�
�
3
��- ��" ���-�
2 �
lS B � D.i.1�
r� if� ·r;·� ""
�
7
5
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.E:e l ! ?N Now the critical test is: 1 6 . . . lll b4
(bear in mind that 16 . . .ih6 1 7.e5 ixf4 1 8 .e6
would transpose to the 1 5 . . . ih6 line above)
1 7.E:b3! lll xa2 1 8 .e5 I like White's initiative
after both 1 8 . . . lll b4 1 9.e6!-t and 1 8 . . . dxe5
1 9.fxe5 a5 20.e6� .
406
Modern Benoni
D21) 1 5 %Yh4 16.e5 %Yxf4 17.e6!
•••
This is White's key idea to develop an initiative,
as Black is in trouble thanks to his undeveloped
queenside pieces.
�
s x • .t �
.
- ;u �-r�
,
7 .,
Ill!
, , , %� %- 8� ,,Y,�
�hi.tf,'�
��
Ill!.
5
lll!lll!
��
�� �� " Jilli "'
�
� �r,
2 �
w��w�-�
��/,�; �w��
8a
6
4
3
1
i� v•�m - b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
17 tlia6
Another game went:
17 . . . fxe6 1 8 .dxe6 lll c6 1 9.l'!e l .te5
1 9 . . . lll d4 would run into a nice line: 20.e7
.te6 2 1 .l'!xe6! lll xe6 22.'1Wb3 @f7 23 . .th3 c4
24 . .txe6t c;t>xe6 2 5 .lll xc4 d5 26.l'!e l t @f7
27.lll e3± White manages to hold on to his
e7-pawn with a clear advantage.
20.ttJf3 .txe6 2 1 .ttJxe5 lll xe5
2 1 . . .dxe5 wouldn't help Black in view of
22.°Wd6! lll d4 23.l'!xb7 l'!f8 24.Wxe5 Wxf2t
25 .'itih l Wf6 26.Wxf6 l'!xf6 27.l'!xa7+- and
the a-pawn should decide the game.
All this occurred in Cooke - Borocz,
Budapest 2000. White now missed a decisive
idea:
•.•
7
6
5
4
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
22.l'!e4!N Wf5 23.°Wxd6 .txa2 24.l'!xb7 lll f3t
25 . .txf3 Wxf3 26.°We5
White should win from here.
1 8.:Bel lll c7
s X �.t•
�.
"/
��
�
�
�f
1 w� • �•
• ���0
•�•
% , , , %� �- - - ;� 8� ,,Y,�
5 Ill! �-8"1!1! �Ill!
��
�
"''�
..
: lll!ll�l! �
L!
�
Ill! � �%'�
� ��
�0
/,
"
/
�
�
2 8 - m w��w�1 u�•v�� - - %= - 6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
19.:Bb3!N
This is my improvement over the game
Koba - Sanal, Budva 20 1 3, where White went
for 1 9.l'!e4 Wg5 20.l'!e3. White went on to win
a nice game, but the position is objectively not
so clear and the idea of l'!e4-e3 doesn't look
overly convincing. By the way, Kobo is one
of my Israeli students, so you can guess who
taught him to play this line.
19 £5
If Black could manage to coordinate his
pieces he would be fine, but White moves
rapidly.
Another try is 1 9 . . . fxe6 20.dxe6 lll xe6, but
with both rooks joining in Black can hardly
expect to hold:
•••
Chapter 25
2 1 .:B:f3 Wlh4 (or 2 1 . . .Wlg4 22.Wfb3 ie5
23.lll c4±) 22.:B:fe3 id4 (22 . . . lll f8 23 .:B:e8 is
hopeless for Black) 23.lll f3 Wff6 24.lll xd4 cxd4
25 .:B:f3 White is dominant.
20.e7 tli e8 2 1 .V!Ye2! b6 22.V!Yb5 .ib7 23.tlic4
Black is in trouble.
D22) 15 ... tlid7 1 6.V!YO
-
9 J�e8
407
. .
1 6 ... b5
The only drawback ofWhite's queen move is
that it allows this.
16 . . .ih6 1 7.lll c4 lll b6 1 8 .lll e3 id? 1 9.Wlg3
looks promising for White, as he will follow
up with f4-f5 and seize the initiative on the
kingside.
1 6.:B:el
It was my original intention to recommend
this move, but then Bacrot came up with
an amazing idea which forced me to
re-evaluate it.
16 . . . ihG 1 7.eS ixf4 1 8.e6 lll e5
Now of course there is a big difference
compared to the lines where Black's knight
is still on b8.
1 9.:B:e4
8
7
6
5
4
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 9 . . . W/f6!!
I had only considered 19 ... gS 20.lll f3 fxe6
2 1 .lll xeS ixe5 22.h4! when White has a
serious initiative.
20.e?
Another critical line is 20.Wla4 ixd2
2 1 .Wfe8t mg? 22.:B:xeS dxe5 23.e? if5
24.Wlxa8 Wfxe7 25 .:B:xb? Wff6 and the
situation remains unclear.
20 . . . ig4 2 1 .Wla4 ixd2 22.e8=:B:t :B:xe8
23.Wfxe8t mg? 24.:B:xb? c4!
The position is extremely complicated, but
objectively balanced, Ding Liren - Bacrot,
Tromso (ol) 20 1 4 .
17 . . . :B:b8N 1 8.Wlg3 WlaS ( 1 8 . . . lll f6 1 9.Wlh4
doesn't help Black.) 1 9.lll f3 Without doubt
this position requires serious investigation, but
I like White's chances to seize the initiative on
the kingside.
1 7 . . . a6
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Modern Benoni
408
1 8 JMfg3N (Better than the immediate 1 8 .eS
as played in Kobo - Rausis, Riga 20 1 4.) The
following analysis expands on that given by
Emms in Chessbase Magazine: 18 . . . c4 1 9.eS
lll c5 20.tt'l e4! t.f5 (20 ... lll d3 2 1 .tt'lxd6 lll xe l
22.Elxe 1 also leaves White with a pleasnt
game.) 2 1 .tt'lxcS! .ixb l 22.E:xb l dxc5 23.d6
E:c8 24.fS--t White's attack seems increasingly
dangerous.
E) 10. . . c!ll a6 1 1 .gel
1 7 . . . '!WaSN should be critical, and now for
maybe the first time I would like to leave
this position for my readers to explore. Some
starting points are 1 8 .tt'lb3 '!Wxa2 1 9.eS dxe5
20.d6 E:b8, and 1 8.'!We2 .ia6 1 9.eS . The
position is hugely complicated, with exciting
developments undoubtedly lurking for both
sides.
18.Y«a3!
Suddenly Black loses the b5-pawn.
El) 1 1 ...i.fS
8
At first I was concerned that this move solves
all of Black's problems, but I managed to come
up with the following line:
7
6
3
12.tll d2 tll h5 13.e4 tll xf4 14.gxf4
Despite losing his dark-squared bishop,
White still retains good chances due to his
pawn mass in the centre. Black has tried two
bishop retreats:
1
14 ...i.cS
1 4 . . . .id7 1 5 .tll c4 has occurred in two games:
5
4
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 8 ...i.cS 19.gxbS i.h6 20.V«g3 i.a6 2 1 .gb3!
Y«f6 22.eS Y«xf4 23.tll e4
White was clearly better in Eljanov Sj ugirov, Yerevan 20 1 4 .
a) 1 5 . . . '!Mff6 1 6.eS! '!Mfxf4 1 7.E:e4 '!Wh6 1 8 .e6!
fxe6 1 9.tt'lxd6 l'!e7 20.dxe6 .ic6 was Gupta S. Zhigalko, Tashkent 20 1 4 . Having played
with a lot of power and inspiration, White
went wrong here with 2 1 .tt'lf7. The simple
2 1 .lll dS!N .ixd5 22.'IMfxdS would have secured
White an obvious advantage thanks to his
powerful passed pawn.
Chapter 2 5
b) Another game was 1 5 . . . i.fB 1 6.e5 dxe5
1 7.fxe5 b5 1 8 .e6! bxc4 1 9.Wf3! f5 20.d6 :gbg
Li Chao - Zhou Weiqi, Tianjin 20 1 3 . Black
was still in the game, but after the correct
2 1 .exd7N Wxd7 22.:gxe8 1'!xe8 23.i.fl Wxd6
24.i.xc4t \tih8 White perhaps missed the
following brilliant idea:
-
9 . . . Ei:e8
409
E2) 1 1 Ji.g4 12.h3
.••
I came to the conclusion that in this concrete
position we have to force an immediate trade
on f3. I also have to mention two other natural­
looking possibilities:
1 2 .Wb3 is considered by Petrov, but I would
agree that Black was doing well after the
unexpected 1 2 . . . b5! in Grischuk - Gashimov,
Nice 20 1 0 .
1 2 .tll d2 allowed the positional exchange
sacrifice 1 2 . . . lUh5 1 3 .i.e3 :gxe3 1 4. fxe3 We7�
in Gleizerov - Cvitan, Zadar 200 5 .
a
c
b
d
e
f
g
h
25 .Wb7 lU c7 26.tll b5! lUxb5 27.Wf7 White is
winning.
8
7
6
5
4
a
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
12 ....L:B 13.i.xf3 tll d7
Black's first choice according to theory, but
there are three other decent options we have
to consider:
3
1
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5.ltJc4 .L:c3 16.bxc3 b5 17.tll d2 E:b8
1 8.�f3 tll c7 19.�g3
This was Polyakov - Janisch, corr. 20 1 4 .
Th e engine considers Black's position t o be
okay, but from a human point of view White's
chances look much more promising.
1 3 . . . Wb6 1 4.:gb l N (I am not convinced
about the queen trade with 1 4.Wb3, as after
1 4 . . . Wxb3 1 5 .axb3 White's structure was
damaged on the queenside in Alavi - Can,
Ankara 20 1 1 .) The following sequence looks
logical: 1 4 . . . lUd7 1 5 .i.g2 lU c7 1 6 .Wa4!? :gad8
1 7.:gec l The position remains complex, but in
the long term White's bishop pair should give
him better chances.
410
Modern Benoni
1 3 . . . lll c7
Black won both games where he employed
this move.
14.e4 if8
fu in Farid - Leon Hoyos, Tromso ( ol) 20 1 4 ,
and now I like:
1 5 .Wi'a4! Wxa4 1 6.lll xa4 lll e4 1 7.ixe4 :gxe4
1 8 .lll c3
The arising endgame is pleasant for White,
who went on to win in Sargissian - Stellwagen,
Dresden (ol) 2008 .
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 .a4N lll d7 1 6.a5 ! ? lll e5
Black is unable to carry out 16 . . . b5? in view
of 1 7.axb6 axb6 1 8.:gxa8 Wxa8 ( 1 8 . . . lll xa8
1 9.Wa4 lll c7 20.:gal is clearly better for
White as well) 1 9.e5! with a clear advantage.
17.ie2
White has a pleasant edge, as Black is lacking
any serious counterplay.
1 3 . . . Wd7
The right way to meet this is as follows:
14.©g2
The premature 1 4.e4 has occurred in several
games, and Black can now play 1 4 . . . c4!N
1 5 .e5 dxe5 1 6.:gxe5 :gxe5 17 .ixe5 ltJ b4
with good counterplay.
1 4 . . . c4
1 4 . . . b5?! Somehow without the light­
squared bishop this advance is not so strong,
and this was convincingly shown in the
following encounter: 1 5 .a4! b4 1 6.lll b5
lll e4 1 7 .Wd3 c4 (17 ... f5 runs into 1 8 .lll xd6!
lll xd6 1 9.Wi'xa6 with a large advantage)
1 8 .Wi'xc4 :gac8 1 9 .Wb3 lll ac5 20.Wi'xb4 a6
2 1 .lll c3 :gb8 22.Wi'c4 lll xc3 23.bxc3 :gec8
24.:gab l White was winning in Leitao Saldano Dayer, Campinas 2009.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14.tll e4!
The beginning of an original strategy which
works well here for White.
14.e4 has occurred in several high-level
games, but nobody chose the strong 1 4 . . . c4!N
1 5 .ixd6 lll ac5 , when Black has a lot of
compensation.
14 ... tll e5 1 5.i.g2 h6
1 5 . . . b5 is not as powerful as in other Benoni
positions. A logical follow-up is: 1 6.g4 (the
immediate 1 6.ig5N, provoking 1 6 .. .f6
1 7.if4, also deserves attention) 1 6 . . . lll c7
1 7.ig5 f6 1 8 .ih4± White had a promising
position in V. Georgiev - lvanisevic, Heraklion
2007.
16.g4 b5
Another game saw 16 . . . Wi'e7, when White
convincingly secured an advantage after 1 7 ,:ge l
b5 1 8.Wd2 ©h7 1 9.g5 hxg5 20.!xg5 f6
2 Lif4 ©g8 22.Wi'a5! f5 23.ig5 Wd7 24.lt:\ f6t
ixf6 25 .ixf6 Wi'b7 26.Wi'd2 Antonenko Grabliauskas, email 2009.
Chapter 25
-
9 �e8
41 1
. . .
E3) 1 1 <!LJc7 12.e4
.••
At this point I checked three continuations for
Black:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
17.'\Wcrn 'i!?h7 1 8.g5 hxg5
If 1 8 . . . h5 1 9.ig3 ctJ c7 20.b3 White
maintains full control over the position.
19.hg5 f6 20 .ih4 c!Llc7 2 1 .a4!
A well-timed decision.
•
2 1 . b4 22.'\Wc2
Black's main problem is the lack of any
serious counterplay.
.•
22 c!Lif7
This was Andriulaitis - Enescu, email 2008.
White now missed the strong idea of bringing
his rook into play:
•.•
1 2 . . . CiJ g4 1 3.h3 ctJe5 1 4.ctJxe5 dxe5
If 1 4 . . . ixe5 1 5 .ixe5 dxe5 the play develops
in more or less the same way: 1 6.ifl '\Wd6
I 7.'1Wb3 id7 1 8.a4 White has the better
game.
I 5 .ie3 '\Wd6
a
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
23.l:�adlN '\We7 24J�d3!
White clearly has the better game.
h
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.a4!?N
This seems logical to me, especially taking
into account that White failed to achieve
anything special in the only game here.
Modern Benoni
412
1 6.E:cl i.d7 1 7.tll b l b6 1 8 .tt:'ld2 tll b5!
l 9.tll c4 V!le7 was unclear in Michalik - Plat,
Czech Republic 20 1 0.
1 6 . . . i.d7 1 7.Vflb3 b6 1 8.tll b l !
The knight is heading for the c4-square, and
White clearly has the better prospects.
1 3.Ag5 f6 14 ..te3 b5
Black has managed to carry out . . . b7-b5 , but
his knight is misplaced on h5.
13.Y«cl
Keeping in mind the d2-c4 route for our
knight.
13 ....td7 14.e4
It is worth considering 1 4.tt:'ld2!?N h6
( 1 4 . . . V!lc7 1 5 .a4 is also good for White)
1 5 .i.e3 V!lc7 (worse is 1 5 . . . i;t>h7 1 6.tt:'lc4 V!lc7
1 7 . .if4 i.f8 1 8 . tLl e4 ! and Black has to give up
an exchange) 1 6.a4 with a nice pull.
14 ... c4
Now White played a strong move:
1 5 ..tfl ! gac8
1 5 . . . tll c5 1 6.i.e3 tll f6 1 7. tt:'l d2 is not much
fun for Black either, though admittedly it is
better than the game continuation.
16.�d.2 h6 17.Ae3 V«d8 1 8.�xc4
White was already winning in Docx Edouard, Antwerp 20 1 1 .
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
15.�d.2 b4 16.� a4 Af8 17.a3±
White was clearly better in Maiorov A. Vovk, Lviv 200 5 .
E4) 1 1 . . . �h5 12.Ag5 Y«b6
E5) 1 1 ... �e4 1 2.�xe4 gxe4 13.�d.2 gb4
8
7
6
This has been played a few times. My preference
is as follows:
5
4
3
8
2
7
1
6
5
4
Black's most common response, but I also
checked other rook moves:
2
1 3 . . . E:d4 has been employed by Victor
Moskalenko, but after 14.e4N b5 1 5 .a3± Black's
rook is totally misplaced.
3
1
a
b
c
d
e
g
h
Chapter 2 5
-
9 . . . E!:e8
413
1 3 . . . l'!xf4 14.gxf4 ixb2 1 5 .l'!b l ig7 1 6.e4
would transpose to a position covered in the
note to 1 5 . . . llia6 in variation D2 on page 405.
13 ... l'!e8 is too passive, and White has an easy
plan: 1 4.llic4 iffi 1 5 .'l&b3 f5 1 6.a4 White
has a clearly better game, as Black is tied up
defending his d6-pawn. 1 6 . . . l'!b8 1 7.a5 lli c7
1 8.h4 �f6 1 9 .�a4! h6 occurred in Soltau Dosi, email 2007, and now the simple 20.b4!N
g5 2 1 .hxg5 hxg5 22.id2 cxb4 23.ixb4±
would secure White a clear advantage.
14.e4!?
This seems more promising for White than
1 4.a3 l'!xf4 1 5 .gxf4 ixb2.
14 ... gxb2
Black has always captured this way, but I also
checked the obvious: 1 4 . . . ixb2N
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
17.tll xf7
1 7.�h5!? gxf4 1 8 .�xf7t 'kt>h8 1 9.e5 could
be an interesting alternative.
17 ... @xf7 18.'iNhSt ©gs 1 9.ixgS VNfS
20.gadl
20.e5 would allow 20 ... ig4 2 1 .�h4 if3
22.�h3 ig4=.
20 ....id7
20 . . . l'!d4 2 1 .l'!xd4 ixd4 was seen in
Arngrimsson - Medvegy, Budapest 20 1 3, and
now White should have played:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 .a3! An elegant exchange sacrifice. ( 1 5 . l'!b l
ig7 is not so clear) 1 5 . . .ixal 1 6.�xa l l'!d4
(or 1 6 . . . l'l:a4 1 7.ih6 f6 1 8 .f4� and e4-e5
will come with a lot of power) 1 7.ie3 l'!d3
1 8 .e5 dxe5 1 9.�xe5 White has a dangerous
initiative.
15.�c4 gb4 16.tll xd6 g5!
Otherwise Black is strategically lost. Now
White must play actively.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
22.ie3!N (stronger than 22.if4, which
nevertheless brought White success in the
game) 22 . . . �g7 23.ixd4 cxd4 24.�d l It will
be hard for Black to stop White's pawn mass
in the centre.
414
Modern Benoni
Here I'll try to improve over a correspondence
game played in 20 1 3 :
F) 10 ... a6 1 1 .a4
.i •
,
y, , ,,,, .iJ,,,,,%�.! -·�
��-%
7 �£ �
w.- � %lJ�£
.t. m �w�0 �• • �
�
�
�,�Y----.;7 �
�-·
: ���.lr
�-�t�
� ��r�
8 ��:-��,/��
�
2 ��. . - . _ rtHIL�
----�r --- %� �. %: if
8
6
�
,
3
---- %�· ---1 a Rifm M
.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Having reached our sixth branch of the
chapter, there are now another six moves that
deserve serious attention: Fl) l 1. .. h6, F2)
1 1 . .. b6, F3) l l . .. °We7, F4) 1 1 ....ig4, FS)
1 1 ... tlihS and F6) 1 1 ...tlie4.
2 1 ....id4
Another line is 2 1 . . .'\We8 22.°We2 �e5 23.:gd5
:gb2 24.'Wf3 �d4 25.�f6! 'Wf7 26.�xd4 cxd4
27.e5 and White is clearly better.
1 1 . . .°Wc? 1 2.°Wd2 (At first I thought 1 1 . . .°Wc?
should always be met with 1 2.:gcl followed by
b2-b4, but now I am less sure of any advantage
after 1 2 . . . lt:\ bd? 1 3.b4 lt:\h5 1 4.�d2 b6, or
even 1 4 . . . °Wd8.) 1 2 . . . lt:\ bd? This position was
covered in variation E2 of the previous chapter
on page 392.
Fl) 1 1 . .. h6
As I mentioned earlier chis move has recently
become trendy. You may be surprised to find
names like Kramnik, Nakamura, Bruzon,
Nisipeanu and Rodshcein on the Black side.
1 2.VNc1
As usual, Black has two possibilities to
defend the h6-pawn:
12 ... gS
1 2 . . . 'kt>h? 1 3.a5 ! ?
This has only occurred i n one computer
game.
Chapter 25
1 3 . . . lll h 5
White is ready for 13 ... lll e4?! 1 4 .lll xe4 !!xe4
1 5 .lll d2! l::!: xe2 1 6.lll c4 if8 1 7.'IMl'c3± with
complete domination.
1 4.id2 lll d7 1 5 .E:a4
An exciting idea: by transferring the rook
to h4, White obtains good chances on the
kingside.
I believe the natural 1 5 .e4N also should
work for White.
5 .. .f5 1 6.e4!
Just in time.
16 . . . b5 1 7.axb6 lll x b6 1 8 .exf5 lll xa4
1 8 . . .ixf5 1 9.E:h4 if6 20.ixh6 ixh4
2 1 .lll xh4 would leave White with a nice
initiative for the exchange.
-
9 . . . !!e8
l
a
415
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14 ... g4N
1 4 . . . lll g4 1 5 .id2 f6 1 6.a5 left White with
an advantage in Houdini - Critter, Internet
20 1 1 .
15.lll el
I like this more than 1 5 .lll d2 E:xe3 1 6.fxe3
lll e 5, when I think Black has compensation.
1 5 ... @h7 16.'IMl'c2t @gs 17.�d2 @h7
White has improved his position and now is
the right time to start play on the queenside:
8
7
6
13.i.e3
The same idea as in variation B without . . . a6
and a2-a4 inserted.
1 3 ... lll bd7
1 3 . . . if5 runs into the thematic 1 4.h4
lll g4 ( 1 4 . . . g4 1 5 .lll d2 Wh7 1 6.lll c4 is clearly
better for White) 1 5 .id2 gxh4 1 6.lll xh4 ih7
1 7.ih3± with an advantage for White.
14.h4
5
4
3
2
1
f
White has seized the initiative.
g
h
416
Modern Benoni
F2) 1 1 ... b6 12.gel
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
a
e
12 ... �h5
1 2 . . .l':'fa7
This is often a thematic idea for Black in
the Benoni, but somehow it doesn't work
properly for him here.
1 3.e4 ig4
1 3 . . . gae7 1 4.tl\d2! We will now follow an
exemplary game by White: 1 4 . . . tl\g4 1 5 . tl\ c4
id4 1 6.gfl ( 1 6.ge2! ?N also looks okay)
1 6 . . . tLle5 1 7.tLlxe5 ixe5 1 8.ig5 ! f6 1 9 .ie3
gb7?! 20.f4 ixc3 2 1 .bxc3 f5 22.e5! dxe5
23.fxe5 gxe5 24.if4 ge8 25 .gel White had
a decisive advantage in Kaidanov - Vazquez,
Andorra 1 99 1 .
Seirawan, Lone Pine 1 979. Black could have
equalized comfortably with: 1 4 . . . dxe5N
1 5 .gxe5 gxe5 1 6.ixe5 gd7=
1 4 . . . gae7
1 4 . . . ixf3 is a positional concession. 1 5 .t.xf3
gae7 stops e4-e5, but now White can switch
to the queenside: 1 6.gab l ! With the idea of
b2-b4. White looks clearly better to me, as
Black cannot place either of his knights on
d7 due to his d6-pawn.
1 5 .e5 ixf3
Or 1 5 . . . tl\h5 1 6 .ig5 f6 1 7.exf6 ixf6
1 8.gxe7 gxe7 1 9.ixf6 tl\xf6 20.tl\g5! with
a clear advantage.
1 6.exf6
The next sequence is almost forced:
1 6 . . . gxe l t 1 7.gxe l gxe l t 1 8 .Wxe l ixg2
1 9.fxg7 ih3 20.tl\e4 lll d7 2 1 .f3
Black looks to be in some danger.
1 3.J.g5 V!lc7 14.e4 �d7
1 4 . . . h6 1 5 .ie3 tLl d7 1 6.h3 Wb8 1 7.Wd2 iih7
Here I found a new move:
8 .iJ
�.i.
��
��
�
-7 � - --" � a � •"�-� .
�-0 �� �-�-0
6 , .
�
·�
%� . .,%.�
��
8
,
,
5
���- -- -%� �� ��
4
m-�
fw0 �8
8 •'ikl
3
�·�'-'Z.Jf�
�
2 �9- --- --sr · ·n:r•
�---- "� ' " ""�rg """'
..
a
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 4.Wd2N
This looks like a strong improvement
over 1 4.e5, which happened in Sosonko -
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 8 .gab l N
1 8.g4 lt:\hf6 1 9.gab l ( 1 9.if4N was better)
1 9 . . . h5! surprisingly gave Black some
counterplay in Michalik - Olszewski,
Livigno 20 1 1 .
1 8 . . . ib7
After 1 8 . . . Wc7 White has 1 9.gec l ! renewing
his threat.
1 9.b4 Wc7 20.bxc5 bxc5 2 1 .Wc2 gab8
Chapter 2 5 - 9 . . . i::i: e 8
417
20.£4 tlid3 21 .e5! dxe5 22.Lf<i exf4
22 . . . .ixf6 23.lt:\e4 wins material.
22.lll d2
White has a pleasant edge.
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
23.he7 Y!Yxe7 24.d6! Y!Yxd6 25.hb7 fxe3
26.has Y!Yxg3t 27.Y!Yg2 Y!Yflt 28.<i>hl
�xel 29.Y!Yxfl exfl 30.i.g2
White emerged from the complications with
a winning position in Beecham - Deneuville,
corr. 20 1 3 .
16.Y!Yc2 �hf6 17.tlid.2
Black is too passive here with his bishop on
b7.
F3) l l . . .Y!Ye7 1 2.gel � bd7
1 2 . . . .ig4 1 3 .lt:\ d2 lt:\h5 1 4 . .ie3 .if5 was played
in Matnadze - Kovacevic, Pedrido 2004, when
White should have continued:
� .1. �•
s i, •
�· �·-�
���
� -J.1-�
�
•£ �
- � •..t.•&
�0 � w-�0 �
��
-----"'/,��
�
%��
� �� � · · "w·�
3�
�w '11'· ·--·'r. ·,,,/,{�w-eff�
-,, , , , , ;
� �ittiJ! ��-0
7
6
5
4
a
b
�
2
c
d
e
f
g
h
17 ... ge7 18.�c4 � e5 19.�e3! c4
White is dominating, and this attempt at
counterplay failed due to:
1
"'
a
t�- " � � t�.i.t�
'(' � "�� ---- "; ·if
"'
b
c
d
e
""
f
g
h
1 5 . .if3!N Black is forced to retreat with
1 5 . . . lt:\ f6 after which White's play is simple.
1 6 . .if4 lt:\ bd7 1 7.e4 .ih3 1 8. lt:\ c4 lt:\ e5 1 9 . .ixe5
dxe5 20.a5 with a clear positional advantage.
418
Modern Benoni
1 3.h3
An important prophylactic move, since the
immediate 1 3.e4 would run into the thematic
1 3 . . . ll1 g4 followed by . . . ll1 ge5 . Now Black has
two main possibilities:
1 3 ... tll h 5
1 3 . . . :B:b8 1 4.e4 ll1h5
Black has to stop 1 5 .e5.
1 5 .J.g5
Wxd6 20.ll1e4 Wf8 2 1 .g4 f5 22.gxf5 ll1 df6!
The only defensive idea which allows Black
to stay in the game, but White retains an
initiative after 23.ll1 dxf6t lll xf6 24.ll1d6!
:B:d8 25 .Wb3t i>g? 26.ll1xc8 c4 27.Wg3
:B:dxc8 28.:B:xe5 ± as in Solan - Sirius,
Internet 2008.
Now the following idea is quite strong:
1 6.g4 ll1hf6 1 7.i.f4!
Black cannot really do much against the
oncoming e4-e5 .
1 7 . . . h5
Or 17 ... b5 1 8 .axb5 axb5 1 9.e5 dxe5
20.ll1xe5 ll1xe5 2 1 .:B:xe5 i.d? 22.:B:xe8 :B:xe8
23.d6± and White was clearly better thanks
to his strong passed pawn in Drasko Cebalo, Budva 1 986.
1 8 .e5 dxe5 1 9.ll1xe5 hxg4 20.ll1xg4! ll1xg4
We have been following Shengelia - Krebs,
Graz 200 5 , and now White should continue
with:
a
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 . . . Wf8
1 5 . . . J.f6 allows White to break through
in the centre with great effect: 1 6.e5! dxe5
( 1 6 . . . ll1xe5 1 7.ll1xe5 dxe5 was Shumiakina
- Art. Minasian, Cappelle la Grande 1 99 5 ,
and now 1 8.i.e3!N i.g7 1 9 .d6 Wd8 20.a5!
would have been excellent for White.)
1 7.d6 Wf8 ( 1 7 ... Wd8 1 8 .Wd2! is no fun
for Black either) 1 8 .ll1d5! i.xg5 l 9.ll1xg5
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
2 1 .Wxg4N ll1 f6 22.Wh4±
White retains a clear advantage.
14.J.g5 %Yf'8
1 4 . . . i.f6 has been seen several times, but
after 1 5 .i.xf6 Wxf6 1 6. ll1 d2 We? as in Decroix
- Sellos, Torey 1 99 1 , White should play
1 7.e4N seizing space. He needn't worry about
1 7 . . . ll1e5, as 1 8 .:B:e3! covers the d3-square and
prepares to follow up with f2-f4.
Chapter 25 - 9 . . . E:e8
I S.e4 til es
Black's most interesting reply.
1 5 . . . h6 has also been played, but it's not so
attractive after 1 6.ie3 lll hf6 1 7.lll d2 E:b8
1 8.a5! b5 1 9.axb6 lll xb6 20.'1Wc2 lll h 7. In
Dautov - Cvitan, Switzerland 2004, White
should have played:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
2 1 .ifl !N Black's operation on the queenside
hasn't achieved much, and he is left with a
weak pawn on a6.
419
18.�xf3 tilf6 19.eS! til d7
1 9 . . . dxe5 20.ixh6! shows the point of
White's idea: 20 . . . ixh6 2 1 .'W'xf6 ig7 22.1.Wb6
White is clearly better, thanks to his powerful
cl-pawn.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
20.exd6 til es 2 1 .�g3 tilc4 22.gxe8 �xe8
23.gel �d8 24.i.cl tilxd6
This was Prohaszka - Polzin, Germany
20 1 0, and now a clear improvement over the
game would be:
b
f
16.g4!
It's the right time to push the black pieces
back.
2S.i.e3!N
With the following instructive lines:
16 ... h6 17.i.d2 tilxf3t
17 ... lll f6 1 8 .lll x e5 E:xe5 1 9.f4 E:e8 20.a5!
also looks enjoyable for White.
2S ... c4
Or 25 . . . b6 26.a5 bxa5 27.ixc5 iffi 28.id4
ig7 29.ixg7 <ii xg7 30.lll e4 lll xe4 3 1 .ixe4± .
a
c
d
e
g
h
Modern Benoni
420
26.i.c5 i.f'8 27.a5±
White holds a clear advantage in both cases.
F4) 1 1 . ..i.g4
An aggressive idea.
� es K • ,,� ?-J. K �
;� ---- � �-�
16 �A �7},rn �%lJ�A
,.
-·�
�� -eff�
""%� ,,,,,,,;�
�� �;,,,�%!-�
� �% ' "//,
__
.ixe5 20.'Wc2 followed by :gafl ) 1 8 .:gxe3
.ixe3t 1 9.Wg2 lll e5 20.lll f3 'We7 2 1 .'Wb3 In
both cases Black's compensation is not enough.
1 5.hxg4 �xfl
Here I would prefer to recapture with the
queen, but the knight recapture isn't bad either.
,,
•a•.!.
: !.
�
3
2
1
m •ct:Jr�
8���
��,·
,,, , ?,_- - ;m
�=- a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
12.tLJd2 �h5 13.i.e3 � d7
A logical follow-up from Black. The
exchange sacrifice 1 3 . . . :gxe3 1 4. fxe3 'We7
doesn't really work: 1 5 .lll c4 lll d7 1 6.h3 lll xg3
1 7.hxg4 lll xfl 1 8.'Wxfl lll e5 1 9 .lll xe5 .ixe5
20.Wif3 Black's compensation is insufficient.
16 ...�h4
1 6 . . . lll f6 runs into 1 7.g5 lll g4 1 8 . .if4 .ie5
1 9 ..ixe5 :gxe5 20.f4 and White is much better.
.
Chapter 25 - 9 . . E1e8
17.�ce4! .ie5N
Two correspondence
1 7 . . .'Wxg4 1 8 .ltJxd6± .
games
continued
.i �9
s .i • .t. �
�
��
��-0 �
.t.
• .t. •
16 � .t. e
,,�, ,, , ,,, , , , , ;:b'"" .
·�
��
��-wY�
��-ef% - - ��
� ¥,�, � �
, , ,% '11
�
�
�
,,,/ %�
8�
�
�
�
�r�
�:'
/
�
�
� ;� • ttJ¥�
�o- - - - ;- 80��
� - - - - %� l•im---,
5
4
6
3
5
4
2
1
3
a
2
1
b
a
d
c
f
e
g
h
1 8.f4 i.xh2 19,gbl .ig7 20.g5!
White has excellent prospects.
F5) 1 1 ... �h5 12 ..ig5 Y!fc7
If 1 2 . . . 'Wb6 then I like 1 3.°Wc2, keeping the
d2-square for the bishop or knight. 1 3 . . . ltJ d7
1 4.e4 'Wc7 occurred in Lastin - Akopian,
Sochi 2005, and here I found the following
idea for White:
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 5 .�fc l ! ?N �b8 (or 1 5 . . . ltJe5 1 6 .ltJxe5 i.xe5
1 7.�ab l followed by 1 8 .b4) 1 6.�ab l White
is ready to meet 1 6 . . . b5 with 1 7.b4, with the
better chances.
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
13.Y!fd2 �d7
1 3 . . . i.g4 occurred in Ashwin - G. Szabo,
Golden Sands 20 1 2. I believe White should
continue 1 4 .h3N i.xf3 1 5 .i.xf3 ltJf6 1 6.a5
ltJ bd7 1 7.�fcl b5 1 8 .axb6 ltJxb6 1 9.b3 when
he should enjoy a pleasant edge.
14,gfcl
I like the idea of getting my rook to cl while
the black queen is on c7.
a
a
42 1
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
14 ... b6
This continuation will be our main move, but
we will take a look at three other possibilities:
14 . . . �b8 1 5 .�ab l 'Wa5
1 5 . . . b5 1 6.axb5 axb5 1 7.b4 i.a6 1 8.e4 leaves
White with a nice edge.
Modern Benoni
422
1 5 . . . Wb6 was Barczay - Lengyel, Budapest
1 963. Here I would recommend 1 6.g4!?N
lll hf6 1 7.Wf4 when White seems to have
a promising game, for instance: 1 7 . . . Wb4
(if 17 . . . h6 1 8 . .ixh6 ixh6 1 9.Wi'xh6 lll xg4
20.Wh4 lll gf6 2 1 .lll g5 then White prepares
a dangerous attack) 1 8.h3!;!; White has the
better chances.
The text move occurred in Tan Zhongyi Eljanov, Reykjavik 20 1 3 . It seems to me that
now was the right moment for:
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 6.g4!N lll hf6 1 7.Wf4
The following sequence looks forced:
1 7 . . . b5 1 8.axb5 axb5 1 9.b4 cxb4 20.Wi'xb4
Wxb4 2 1 .:B:xb4 lll c5 22.lll d4!
White will retain some pressure after:
22 . . . lll xg4 23.lll c6 :B:b7 24.lll xb5 .if8 25 .h3!;!;
14 . . . Wa5 1 5 .ih6 lll hf6 1 6.ixg7 i>xg7
This was Cernousek - Cyborowski, Prague
20 1 4 . I believe White missed an interesting
opportunity here:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
1 7.lll e4! ?N Wb6
17 . . . Wxd2? 1 8 .lll fXd2 is disastrous for Black,
since his d6-pawn is fall i ng.
1 8 .lll fg5! h6 l 9.a5 Wc7 20.lll xf7! i>xf7
2 1 .Wi'xh6
White has good compensation, for example:
2 1 . . .lll xe4 22.Wh7t @fg 23.ixe4 :B:e7!
23 . . . :B:xe4? loses to 24.:B:a3 :B:e5 25.:B:f3t :B:f5
26.:B:e3 :B:e5 27.:B:c4!+24.Wxg6 :B:g7 25 .Wh6 ltig8 26.We6t lff f8
27.Wh6 i>g8 28.f4±
White's pawn mass looks extremely
dangerous.
1 5J:�ab l tLldf6
Black has also tried:
1 5 . . . lll e5 1 6.lll xe5
1 6.b4 brought White success in Fedorowicz
- Sevian, Montreal 20 1 4 , but I found a nice
resource for Black: 1 6 . . . if5!N 1 7.e4 lll xf3t
18 . .ixf3 ixc3 1 9.Wi'xc3 ixe4 20 . .ixh5 f6!
With an unclear game.
16 . . . ixe5 1 7.b4 .id7 1 8 .a5!
Attacking Black's structure on the queenside.
1 8 . . . :B:ab8?
18 ... c4 is relatively best, but after 1 9.axb6
Wxb6 20.ie3 Wi'd8 2 1 .f4 ig7 22.id4
White is still better.
1 9.axb6 :B:xb6 20.bxc5 :B:xb l 2 1 .lll xb l dxc5
22.lll a3±
White was clearly better in Hausner Havranek, Czech Republic 1 994.
Chapter 2 5 - 9 . . . E1e8
16.h3 lt:\ e4 17.lt:lxe4 gxe4 1 8.b4
Everything has worked out nicely for White,
and his pieces are all well placed.
42 3
F6) 1 1 . .. lt:l e4 12.tl::i xe4 gxe4 1 3.lt:Jd2
A thematic reaction to Black's . . . lt:le4-idea.
s
.1 •�
.,
, , ;�..t �,r, ,1%� B
��,
••
: fj
·�,l�j,�
l!ll
5;ii;'l!ll *';'ii l!ll.
: •• L>•
���l!ll, .�%'•j�
�
��'
"//, ef, , %�,�
3
@Z
A �fl� � �&
%""
� , ., %�
� ��
;,
,
,
;
, , %{0 ,ij' ""
1 ,� � iV- � �
�
:dfi%
'..:5%
�
2
a
19.bxcS bxc5 20.g4 tl::i f6 21.ltJd4! gxd4
22.�xd4 lt:lxg4
We have been following Wang Yue - Vallejo
Pons, Bejing 20 1 1 . White can improve with:
b
��: 0 �0% � �0
c
d
e
f
g
h
13 ... gb4
One of the biggest differences now that . . . a6
and a2-a4 have been inserted is that Black does
not have 1 3 . . . l"lxf4?! 1 4.gxf4 il.xb2, since after
1 5 .l"lb l il.g7 1 6.lt:\c4 the above-mentioned
moves are clearly favourable for White. It is
important to note that after 16 . . . b5 1 7.axb5
axb5 1 8 .l"lxb5 il.a6 ( 1 8 . . . lt:l a6 1 9 .l"lb6± was
hopeless for Black in P.H. Nielsen - Janssen,
Germany 20 1 0) White has 1 9.l"la5!±.
14.aS!?
When I first analysed this position the text
move was a novelty, but nowadays theory
develops rapidly and we have two games where
the text was employed. Nevertheless it is still a
rare choice.
14 ... bS
Another encounter saw 14 . . . g5 1 5 .il.e3
lll d7, when White reacted strongly with
1 6.lt:\e4!. Black came up with an interesting
approach in 1 6 . . . Wff8 1 7.il.xg5 f5 1 8 .lll d2
b5 1 9 .axb6 lt:l xb6 when, by sacrificing a
pawn on the kingside, he started to develop
play on the queenside. Still, White was better
with accurate play: 20.l"la2 a5 2 1 .b3 il.d7
424
Modern Benoni
22.t.f4 a4 23.bxa4 gaxa4 24.°Wc2 gxa2
25 .°Wxa2 lll a4 26.t.f3!t Linkov - Solar, corr.
20 1 2.
I believe it's also important to consider both
captures of the b2-pawn: 1 4 . . . t.xb2 is strongly
met by 1 5 .ga4! gxa4 1 6.'Wxa4 t.e5 1 7.t.xe5
dxe5 1 8 .lll c4 lll d7 1 9.d6 with strong pressure
for the pawn.
a
c
e
1 4 . . . gxb2 is easily refuted by: 1 5 .lll c4 gb4
1 6.ga4! gxa4 1 7.'Wxa4 t.f8 1 8 .°Wb3 Black has
gained an extra pawn, but he can hardly move.
1 9 . . . f5N 20.lll g5 gxb2 2 1 .lll e6 'We7 With a
complex battle.
1 5.axb6 a5 16.ga4!
This move is a key idea of 1 4.a5 and is often
a strong resource in this type of position.
17 ... cxb4
White is clearly better also after 1 7 . . . axb4
1 8 .lll e4 'Wxb6 1 9.'Wa4!.
16 ...i.a6
Black is striving for counterplay. 1 6 . . ,gxb6
1 7.lll c4 gba6 is too passive, and after 1 8.°Wc2
White enjoys a positional edge.
1 8.h7
There is nothing wrong with 1 8 .lll e4 either.
b
d
f
g
h
18 ...hb7 19.tlie4 ga6 20.�d2
Despite the equal material, Black's position
is almost lost. One sample line is:
Chapter 2 5 - 9 . . . E1e8
Conclusion
This chapter saw us move in a completely
different direction to GM 2, as I am now
recommending the more positional 1 0 . .if4.
Black has a wide range of options at this point,
but I am satisfied that White is doing well
against each of them.
The main bulk of the chapter was devoted to
1 0 . . . lll a6 and 1 0 . . . a6. Against the former I
recommend 1 1 .E1e 1 - again leaving Black with
a choice. I was initially concerned by 1 l . . . .if5 ,
but a recent correspondence game has
convinced me that White stands well. Another
important point occurs after 1 l . . . .ig4, when
White should force the immediate exchange
of bishops with 1 2.h3. Black's other moves
lead to rich and interesting play, but on many
occasions White will be left with a powerful
pawn mass in the centre.
1 0 . . . a6 is our main line, when 1 1 .a4
immediately leads to another branching
point. After 1 1 . . .lll e4 1 2.lll xe4 E1xe4 1 3 .lll d2
it is important to understand here why the
insertion of . . . a6 and a2-a4 prevents the
exchange sacrifice . . . E!:xf4. There is a wealth of
new material in this section and I hope that
the readers - armed with a variety of novelties
and improvements - will enjoy a great deal of
success in their upcoming battles against the
Benoni.
425
Variation Index
Chapter 1
I .d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.�f3
A) 4 . . . g6 5 .ig2 ig7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Wc2 8
A l ) 7 . . . lll c6 9
A2) 7 . . . lll a6 9
A3) 7 . . . lll bd7 JO
B) 4 . . . c6 5 .ig2 lll bd7 6.0-0 id6 7.lll fd2! 0-0 8.lll c3
Bl) 8 . . .E!:e8 12
B2) 8 . . . ib4 13
C) 4 . . . c5 5 .ig2 14
C l ) 5 . . . ie7 14
C2) 5 . . . lll c6 6.0-0 1 8
C2 1 ) 6 . . . ie7 1 8
C22) 6 ... cxd4 2 1
11
Chapter 2
1 .d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.t£if3 dxc4 5 ..ig2 .id? 6.�e5 .ic6 7.&tixc6 �xc6 8.0-0
A) 8 . . . ie7 26
B) 8 . . . lll d 5!? 27
C) 8 . . . Wd7 9.e3 29
C l ) 9 . . . E!:b8 30
C2) 9 . . . 0-0-0 3 1
Chapter 3
1 .d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.�f3 dxc4 5 ..ig2 c6 6.�e5
A) 6 . . . b5 7.lll xc6 Wb6 8.lll a5! 35
A l ) 8 . . . Wxa5t 36
A2) 8 . . . lll d5 9.id2 38
A2 1 ) 9 . . . a6 39
A22) 9 . . . lll c6 1 0.lll xc6 Wxc6 l 1 .e4 41
A22 1 ) l 1 . . .lll b4 41
A222) l 1 . . .lll f6 43
B) 6 . . . ib4t 7.id2! 44
B l ) 7 . . . ie7 8.e3 44
B 1 1 ) 8 . . . 0-0 45
B l 2) 8 . . . b5 45
B2) 7 . . . Wxd4 8.ixb4 1Wxe5 9.lll a3 b5 I O.id6! Wxb2 1 1 .0-0 lll d5 1 2.e4 lll c3 1 3 .Wh5!
B2 1 ) 1 3 . . . lll d? 48
B22) 1 3 . . . h6!? 49
46
Variation Index
Chapter 4
I.d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.�f3 dxc4 5.i.g2 i.b4t 6.i.d2
A) 6 . . . .ixd2t 52
B) 6 . . . c5 53
C) 6 . . . .ie7 54
D) 6 . . . a5 7.Wc2 56
D I ) 7 . . . lt:l c6 56
02) 7 . . . .ixd2t 8 .Wxd2 c6 9.a4 57
02 1 ) 9 . . . lt:l e4 58
022) 9 . . . b5 59
Chapter 5
I .d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.�f3 dxc4 5.i.g2 � bd7 6.0-0
A) 6 . . . c5 64
B) 6 . . . c6 65
C) 6 . . . a6 66
D) 6 . . . l'!b8 67
E) 6 . . . .ie7 68
F) 6 . . . lt:l b6 7.lt:l bd2 c5 8.lt:lxc4 lt:lxc4 9.Wa4t .id7 1 0.Wxc4 69
F l ) 1 0 . . . Wb6 70
F2) 1 0 . . . l'!c8 71
F3) 1 0 . . . b5 71
Chapter 6
I .d4 tll f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.�f3 dxc4 5.i.g2 c5 6.0-0
A) 6 . . . cxd4 7.lll xd4 74
A l ) 7 . . . Wb6 75
A2) 7 . . . .ic5 76
A3) 7 . . . a6!? 78
B) 6 . . . lll c6 7.Wa4 cxd4 8 .lll xd4 Wxd4 9 . .ixc6t .id7 1 0.l'!d l 80
B 1 ) 1 0 . . ..ixc6 82
B2) 1 0 . . . Wxd l t 1 1 .Wixd l .ixc6 1 2.lll d2 83
B2 1 ) 1 2 . . . c3?! 83
B22) 1 2 . . . b5 84
427
428
Grandmaster Repertoire IA - The Catalan
Chapter 7
1 .d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 dS 4.�f3 dxc4 5.i.g2 c5 6.0-0 �c6 7.�a4 i.d7 8.�xc4
A) 8 . . . �c8 88
B) 8 . . . '\Wb6 9.dxc5 89
B l ) 9 . . . ixc5 1 0.lt'ic3 89
B 1 1 ) 1 0 . . . lli a5 90
B l 2) 1 0 . . . '\Wb4 91
B2) 9 . . .'1Mfxc5 1 0.lt'ia3 92
B2 1 ) 1 0 . . . ie7 92
B22) 1 0 . . . �c8 93
C) 8 . . . b5 9.'1Mf d3 94
C l ) 9 . . . c4 94
C2) 9 . . . �c8 1 0.dxc5 ixc5 1 l .lt'i c3 96
C2 1 ) 1 1 . . .0-0 97
C22) 1 1 . . . lt'i b4 99
C23) 1 1 . . .b4 J OO
D) 8 . . . cxd4 9.llixd4 �c8 1 0.lt'ic3 1 02
D l ) 1 0 . . . '\Wb6 1 02
D2) 1 0 . . . ie7 1 03
D3) 1 0 . . . lt'ixd4 1 l .'1Wxd4 ic5 1 2 .'1Wh4 1 05
D3 1 ) 1 2 . . . ic6 1 06
D32) 1 2 . . . 0-0 1 07
Chapter s
1 .d4 tll f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 dS 4.�f3 dxc4 5 ..ig2 a6 6.0-0 bS 7.tlieS
A) 7 . . . c6 1 13
B) 7 . . . lt'id5 8.a4 ib7 9.e4 lt'i f6 1 0 .axb5 axb5 1 l .�xa8 ixa8 1 2.lt'ic3 c6 1 3 .d5 1 14
B l ) 1 3 . . . cxd5 1 15
B2) 1 3 . . . id6 1 1 7
B3) 1 3 . . . exd5 1 19
B4) 1 3 . . . ie7 14.dxe6 fxe6 1 5 .We2 0-0 1 6.ih3 120
B4 1 ) 1 6 . . . lifh8 121
B42) 1 6 . . . Wc8 123
Chapter 9
1 .d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 dS 4.�f3 dxc4 S.i.g2 bS 6.a4 c6 7.axbS cxbS 8.�e5 tll dS 9.0-0!
.ib7 1 0.b3! cxb3 1 1 .�xb3 a6 12.e4
A) 1 2 . . . lli f6 1 3 .d5 129
A l ) 1 3 . . . id6 129
A2) 1 3 . . . exd5 130
B) 12 . . . lt'i b4N 131
429
Variatio n Index
Chapter 10
I .d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.�f3 dxc4 5.J.g2 a6 6.0-0 � c6 7.e3
A) 7 . . . tll d5 135
B) 7 . . . 1:%b8 8 .tll fd2 136
B l ) 8 . . .Wfd7 136
B2) 8 . . . e5 9.!xc6t bxc6 1 0.dxe5 tll g4 l 1 .tll xc4 !e6 1 2.tll bd2
B2 1 ) 1 2 . . . h5 139
B22) 1 2 . . . !b4 139
C) 7 . . . !d7 8 .Wfe2 b5 9.b3!? cxb3 1 0.axb3 1 40
C l ) 1 0 . . . !b4 1 41
C2) 1 0 . . . !e? 1 41
C3) 1 0 . . . !d6 l l .!b2 0-0 1 2.1:%c 1 1 43
C3 1 ) 1 2 . . . tll b4 1 44
C32) 1 2 . . . lll d5 1 44
Chapter 1 1
I.d4 � f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.�f3 dxc4 s.J.g2 � c6 6.%Ya4
A) 6 . . . !d6 147
B) 6 . . . !d7 7.Wfxc4 tll a5 8.Wf d3 c5 9.0-0
B l ) 9 . . . Wfb6 1 48
B2) 9 . . . 1:%c8 1 49
B3) 9 . . . !c6 1 0.tll c3 150
B3 1 ) 10 . . . cxd4 151
B32) 10 . . .!e? 153
C) 6 . . . tll d7 7.Wfxc4 tll b6 8.Wfb5! 154
C l ) 8 . . . !b4t 155
C2) 8 . . . id7 156
C3) 8 . . . a6 9.Wfd3 157
C3 1 ) 9 . . . tll b4 157
C32) 9 . . . e5 158
D) 6 . . . !b4t 7.id2 1 60
D l ) 7 . . . !d6 8 .tll a3 1 60
D l 1 ) 8 . . . lll e4 1 61
D l 2) 8 . . . !xa3 1 62
D2) 7 . . . tll d5 8 .Wfb5!? 1 64
D2 1 ) 8 . . . 0-0 1 64
D22) 8 . . . !xd2t 1 65
1 48
138
430
Grandmaster Rep ertoire IA
-
The Catalan
Chapter 12
I .d4 lLif6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tlif'3 i.b4t 5.i.d2
A) 5 . . . c5 1 70
B) 5 . . . ixd2t 6.ll'i bxd2 0-0 7.ig2 1 71
B l ) 7 . . . Vfff e7 1 71
B2) 7 . . . b6 1 73
B3) 7 . . . c6 1 74
C) 5 . . . id6 6.ll'ic3! 176
C l ) 6 . . . c6 176
C2) 6 . . . 0-0 1 78
Chapter 13
I .d4 tlif6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.lLif'3 i.b4t 5 ..id2 .ie7 6.i.g2 0-0 7.0-0
A) 7 . . . dxc4?! 1 82
B) 7 . . . ll'i bd7 1 84
C) 7 . . . c6 8.Vfff c2 b6 9.if4 1 86
C I ) 9 . . . ia6 1 0.cxd5 cxd5 1 Uk l ! ll'i bd7 1 2. ll'i c3
C l I ) 1 2 . . . ll'ih5 1 88
C 1 2) 1 2 . . . b5 1 89
C2) 9 . . . ib7 1 0.E!:d l 190
C2 1 ) 1 0 . . . ll'ih5 191
C22) 1 0 . . . ll'i a6 194
1 86
Variation Index
43 1
Chapter 14
1.d4 tll f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tlif3 i.b4t 5.i.d2 i.e7 6.i.g2 0-0 7.0-0 c6 8.�c2 tll bd7 9.i.f4
A) 9 . . . ll\h5 191
B) 9 . . . a5 1 0.E:d l ll\h5 1 1..i c l 198
B l ) 1 1 . . .f5 199
B2) 1 1 . . . b5 200
C) 9 . . . b6 1 0.E:dl 202
C l ) 1 0 . . . ia6 l 1 .llie5 202
C l l ) 1 1 . . .Wcs 202
C l 2) l 1 . . .lll x e5 203
C 1 3) l 1 . . .E:c8 1 2.cxd5 ! 208
C 1 3 1 ) 1 2 . . . llixd5 209
C l 32) 1 2 . . . cxd5 1 3.llic6 2 1 0
C 1 3 2 1 ) 13 ... Wes 21 0
C 1 322) 1 3 . . . ib5 21 1
C l 323) 1 3 . . . llih5 213
C2) 1 0 . . . ib? l 1 .llie5! 214
C2 1 ) l 1 . . .lll x e5 214
C22) l 1 . . .lll h 5 211
C23) l 1 . ..b5 221
C24) l 1 . . .E:c8 1 2.llic3 ll\ h5 1 3 .ic l 222
C24 1 ) 1 3 . . . f5 224
C242) 1 3 . . . llihf6 225
Chapter 15
1 .d4 tlif6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.tlif3 i.e7 5.i.g2 0-0 6.0-0
A) 6 . . . c6 229
B) 6 . . . lll bd7 7.1Mfc2 232
B l ) 7 . . . b6 8.cxd5 232
B l 1 ) 8 . . . lll xd5 233
B 1 2) 8 . . . exd5 234
B2) 7 . . . c6 8.ll\ bd2 b6 9.e4 235
B2 1 ) 9 . . . dxe4 236
B22) 9 . . . ib7 1 0.e5 ll\ e8 l 1 .cxd5 231
B22 1 ) l 1 . . . exd5 237
B222) l 1 . . .cxd5 1 2.E:el 239
8222 1 ) 1 2 . . . ia6 240
B2222) 1 2 . . . Wc? 241
82223) 1 2 . . . E:c8 243
B23) 9 . . . ia6 1 0.b3 E:c8 l 1 .ib2 c5 1 2.exd5 exd5 1 3.E:fd l ! 245
B23 1 ) 1 3 . . . E:e8 248
B232) 1 3 . . . cxd4 249
432
Grandmaster Rep ertoire IA
-
The Catalan
Chapter 16
I .d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.�f3 J.e7 5.J.g2 0-0 6.0-0 dxc4 7.V!ic2
A) 7 . . . c5 253
B) 7 . . . id7 8 .\M/xc4 ic6 9.llic3 256
B l ) 9 . . . a6 257
B2) 9 . . . lli bd7 258
C) 7 . . . b5!? 260
D) 7 . . . a6 8 .a4 264
D I ) 8 . . . b6 265
02) 8 . . . c5 266
03) 8 . . . lli c6 267
04) 8 . . . id7 9.\M/xc4 ic6 1 0.if4 268
04 1 ) 10 ... lli d5 269
042) 1 0 . . . id6 270
043) 1 0 . . . lli bd? I 1 .lli c3 272
043 1 ) 1 I . . .id6 273
0432) 1 1 . . .E!:c8 274
0433) 1 1 . . . lli b6 275
044) 1 0 . . . a5 I 1 .lli c3 lli a6 1 2.E!:ac l ! lli b4
1 3 .llie5 ixg2 1 4 .'it>xg2 llifd5 1 5 .llixd5 277
044 1 ) 1 5 . . . \M/xd5t 280
0442) 1 5 . . . llixd5 1 6.id2 281
0442 1 ) 1 6 . . . ib4 281
04422) 16 . . . c6 282
Chapter 17
I .d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 J.b4t 4.J.d2
A) 4 . . . ie7 285
B) 4 . . . c5 5 .ixb4 cxb4 6.ig2 287
B l ) 6 . . . d5 287
B2) 6 . . . 0-0 7.e4 d6 8.llie2 e5 9.a3 288
B2 1 ) 9 . . . bxa3 289
B22) 9 . . . lli a6 290
B23) 9 . . . \M/b6 1 0.0-0 291
B23 1 ) 1 0 . . . lli c6 292
B232) 1 0 . . . ig4 293
Variation Index
Chapter 18
I .d4 li:if6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 .ih4t 4 ..id.2
A) 5 .'1Wxd2 d5 6.lll f3 0-0 7.ig2 lll bd7 8.0-0 296
A l ) 8 . . . dxc4 297
A2) 8 . . . c6 299
B) 5 .lll xd2 300
B l ) 5 . . . d6 300
B2) 5 . . . lll c6 301
Chapter 19
I .d4 li:if6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 .ih4t 4..id.2 a5 5 ..ig2
A) 5 . . . d6 304
B) 5 . . . 0-0 6.e4 304
B l ) 6 . . . d5 305
B2) 6 . . . d6 306
C) 5 . . . d5 6.lll f3 0-0 7.Wlc2 307
C l ) 7 . . . b6 308
C2) 7 . . . c6 308
C3) 7 . . . lll c6 309
C4) 7 . . . c5 3 1 1
Chapter 20
I .d4 clll f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 .ih4t 4..id.2 V!le7 5.tll f3
A) 5 . . . ixd2t 6.Wfxd2 315
A l ) 6 . . . d5 7.ig2 0-0 8.0-0 315
Al l ) 8 . . . dxc4 315
A l 2) 8 . . . l:!d8 316
A l 3) 8 ... lll bd7 318
A2) 6 ... lll c6 7.lll c3 d5 8 .lll e5 dxc4 9.ig2 lll xe5 1 0.dxe5 lll d7 l 1 .Wid4 321
A2 1 ) l l . . .V!ib4 322
A22) 1 1 . . . 0-0 323
B) 5 . . . b6 6.ig2 ib7 7. 0-0 324
B l ) 7 . . . 0-0 324
B2) 7 . . . ixd2 8.Wfxd2 326
B2 1 ) 8 . . . d6 327
B22) 8 . . . d5 327
B23) 8 . . . 0-0 328
C) 5 . . . 0-0 6.ig2 ixd2t 7.Wlxd2 d6 8 .lll c3 e5 9.0-0 331
C l ) 9 . . . lll c6 332
C2) 9 . . . c6 332
C3) 9 . . . ig4 332
C4) 9 . . . l:!e8 333
433
434
Grandmaster Rep ertoire IA - The Catalan
Chapter 2 1
1 .d4 �f6 2.c4 e 6 3.g3 �b4t 4.�d2 V!fe7 5 . � 6 tl:i c6 6.�c3
A) 6 . . . d5 337
B) 6 . . . 0-0 7.�g2 339
B l ) 7 . . . d6 8.0-0 339
B l l ) 8 . . . a5 9.l'l:cl 340
B l 1 1 ) 9 . . . e5 340
B l 1 2) 9 . . . i.xc3 340
B l 1 3) 9 . . . i.d7 342
B l 2) 8 . . . i.xc3 342
B2) 7 . . . lll a5 8 .b3 b6 9.0-0 i.b7 1 0 .°Wc2 344
B2 1 ) 1 0 . . . d5 344
B22) 1 0 . . . l'l:ac8 345
C) 6 . . . i.xc3 7.i.xc3 lll e4 8.l'l:cl 347
C l ) 8 . . . d6 9.d5! lll xc3 1 0.l'l:xc3 347
C l l ) 1 0 . . . lll d8 347
C l 2) 1 0 . . . lll b8 349
C2) 8 . . . 0-0 9.i.g2 d6 1 0.d5 352
C2 1 ) 1 0 . . . lll b8 1 l .dxe6 352
C2 1 l ) l l . . .fxe6 352
C2 1 2) l l . . .i.xe6 353
C22) 1 0 . . . lll d8 1 1 .0-0 354
C22 1 ) l 1 . . .lll xc3 354
C222) l l . . .e5 1 2.lll d2 lll xc3 1 3.l'l:xc3 356
C222 1 ) 1 3 . . . b6 356
C2222) 13 . . .f5 14.c5 lll f7 1 5 .Wfb3 b6 16.cxd6 cxd6 17.Wfa3 358
C2222 1 ) 1 7 . . . i.b7 359
C22222) l 7 . . . e4 360
C22223) 1 7 . . . a5 360
Chapter 22
1 .d4 tl:if6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 b5 6.e4 �xe4 7.�g2!? tl:id6 8.�6
A) 8 ... °We7t 366
B) 8 . . . i.e7 9.0-0 0-0 1 0.i.f4 368
B l ) 1 0 . . . l'l:e8 369
B2) 1 0 . . . lll c4! ? 369
B3) 1 0 . . . lll a6 1 1 .l'l:e l i.b7 1 2.'ll c3 371
B3 1 ) 1 2 . . . l'l:e8 371
B32) 1 2 . . . lll c7 312
B33) 1 2 . . . b4 374
Variation Index
Chapter 23
1 .d4 tl)f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 i.d6 6.i.g2
A) 6 . . . i.c7 377
B) 6 . . . 0-0 7.ttJc3 378
B l ) 7 . . . i.e5 378
B2) 7 . . . �e8 380
Chapter 24
1 .d4 tl) f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.ti) c3 g6 7.i.g2 i.g7 8.�8 0-0 9.0-0
A) 9 . . . i.g4 384
B) 9 . . . b6 385
C) 9 lli a6 1 0.i.f4 lli c7 l 1 .e4 386
C l ) l l . . .i.g4 387
C2) l 1 . . .lli g4 388
D) 9 lli bd7 389
E) 9 . . . a6 1 0.a4 lli bd7 l 1 .i.f4 391
E l ) l l . . .ttJ e8 392
E2) l 1 . . .VNc7 392
E3) l 1 . . .VNe7 1 2.�b l ! 394
E3 1 ) 1 2 . . . llih5 394
E32) 1 2 . . . lli g4 396
. . .
. . .
43 5
436
Grandmaster Repertoire IA
-
The Catalan
Chapter 25
1 .d4 �f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.�c3 g6 7.ig2 ig7 8.�f3 0-0 9.0-0 ge8
lO.if4
A) 1 0 . . . .tg4 400
B) 1 0 . . . h6 401
C) 1 0 . . . tll h 5 402
D) 1 0 . . . tll e4 1 1 .tll xe4 l'i:xe4 1 2 .tll d2 403
D l ) 1 2 . . . Ei:b4 404
02) 1 2 . . . Ei:xf4 1 3 .gxf4 hb2 1 4.Ei:b l .tg7 1 5 .e4
D2 1 ) l 5 . . . '1Wh4 406
D22) 1 5 . . . tll d7 407
E) 1 0 . . . tll a6 1 1 .l'i:e l 408
E l ) 1 1 . . . .tf5 408
E2) 1 1 . . . .tg4 409
E3) 1 1 . . .tll c7 41 1
E4) 1 1 . . .tll h5 412
E5) 1 1 . . .tll e4 412
F) 1 0 . . . a6 1 1 .a4 414
F l ) 1 1 . . .h6 41 4
F2) 1 1 . . .b6 41 6
F3) 1 1 . . .'1We7 41 7
F4) 1 1 . . . .tg4 420
F5) 1 1 . . .tll h5 421
F6) 1 1 . . .tll e4 423
405
Grandmaster Preparation
GRANDMASTER PREPARATION
POSITIONAL
PLAY
GRANDMASTER PREPARATION
STRATEGIC
PLAY
GRANDMASTER PREPARATION
The Grandmaster Prep aration series
Jacob Aagaard offers a comprehensive training program
Scottish/Danish Grandmaster and trainer of Champions,
towards the highest tide in chess.
Negi
on
1 .e4
Grandmaster Repert
Pari marja n
Negi
1 .e4 vs The
French, Caro­
& Philidor
Reaction to 1 .e4 vs The French,
Caro-Kann & Philidor:
It's so good! It shows everything that you
n eed to produce world-class preparation.
GM Matthew Sadler, New in Chess
Grandmaster Repertoire
QUAUTY CHESS
·�
The day after the book was on sale
I won a n ice game at the Olympiad
with White against a French Defence
in a topical variation, following one of
his recommendations. No, it was not
a coincidence! And yes, I am a quick
reader.
GM Anish Giri, World No. 6
QUALITY CHESS
·�
POSITIOD A L
D EC I S I O n m A H I n G I n C H E S S
BORIS GELFA D D
Boris Gelfand
Positional Decision Making in Chess
20 1 2
World Championship Challenger Boris Gelfand
describes his approach to positional chess, based on his
own games and those of his great hero Akiba Rubinstein.
GAMES/CHESS
B o r i s Avru kh
1 .d4
The Catalan
When Boris Avr u k h rel ea sed the fi rst vo l u m e of h i s 1 .d4 re pe rtoi re
i n 2008, it revo l ution ized c h ess open i n g books. As GM M ichael
Ad a m s said: "The h ig h-q u a l ity G ra n d m a ster Repertoi re series has
ta ke n this fo rmat to a co m p letely d iffe rent leve l :' O r a s G M G l e n n
Flear p u t it: "Th i s book re p resents noth i n g s h o rt o f a tec h nologica l
adva n ce i n chess open i n g theo ry:'
Now Av ru kh is back with a n expa n d ed, u pd ated a n d reva m ped
1 .d 4 repe rto i re. Vol u m e 1 A dea l s p r i m a r i l y with the Cata l a n ,
w h i c h is a n Avr u kh special ity. I n G M S i m e n Agd estei n's wo rd s :
"It's i n Avrukh h a s beco m e a sta n d a rd co m m ent fo r th ose t ryi n g
t o u n d ersta n d t h i s o p e n i n g :'
Th i s vo l u m e covers the position after the o p e n i n g m oves 1 .d4 <cif6
2.c4 e6 3.g3, concentrat i n g on the Cata l a n w h i c h ari ses after 3 ... d S ,
w h i l e a l so d ea l i n g w i t h the Boga-I n d i a n w i t h 3 ...� b4t, a n d B e n o n i
system s after 3 ... cs.
Boris Avr u kh i s a g ra n d m a ster from I s rael. H e i s a n Olym piad gold
meda l l i st, fo rmer Wo rld J u n ior C h a m p ion a n d a n alysis pa rtner of
Wo rld C h a m p i o n s h i p fi n a l i sts.
€24.99
ISBN
$29.95
978-1 -907982-88-0
5 2 995
�•
QUALITY CHESS
www.q u a I ityc h ess.co. u k