Caro Kann with Be3.pdf

TWIC THEORY Tuesday 3rd May, 2005

CARO-KANN ADVANCE WITH 4.Be3 By WGM Yelena Dembo Yelena Dembo is a Women Grandmaster. Yelena has been a medallist in the World or European Youth Championships 7 times, including winning first place in the Girls European under 20 rapid Championship in 2002. Yelena became a WGM in 2001 and Men's IM in 2003. Yelena was the winner of Bykova's Memorial tournament (women's WGM event) in December 2004. Yelena has had more than 70 games published in the famous Yugoslav publication "Chess Informant" with her analysis and novelties. She has been a chess journalist from the age of 15. She writes for Austrian, German, Hungarian, Russian and Czech Republic magazines. Yelena has been a professional chess trainer from the age of 13. She has students from more than 36 countries, ranging from unrated to 2450 Elo. Yelena has written a chess book (in Russian so far but will also be in English!) about modern methods in the middlegame.

Caro-Kann Advance 4.Be3 - Introduction [B12] 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 Black has several other moves at his disposal here, but they are very rare and theoretically unchallenging. White should be able to retain a plus with sensible play. 3...c5 is the only real alternative; while it is not the subject of this discussion, I can suggest 4.Nf3 as an interesting way of playing, intending to follow up with a quick c2-c4, e.g.: 4...Nc6 5.c4!? As an example of this idea I can mention the game Rublevsky-Asrian, Aeroflot Open 2004 (Rublevsky actually played 4.c4 and transposed later).

4.Be3

This system has become popular in the last few years, and the key idea is flexibility. It has many similarities with the Short system (4.Nf3), but also a few key differences, that will be explained later. 4.Nc3 e6 5.g4 Bg6 6.Nge2 This aggressive system was all the rage a few years ago, but has now been discarded from top-level practice, as it entails considerable risk. The main drawback is that White is unable to either discourage ...c5 or protect his centre adequately; this is the dark side of having the knight on c3. Black has found a couple of strong antidotes, the most popular of which is 6...c5 7.h4 (7.Be3 cxd4 8.Nxd4 is yet another possibility, but Black has been doing well here recently.) 7...h5! 8.Nf4 Bh7 9.Nxh5 Nc6! 4.Nf3 e6 5.Be2 This is called the "Short" system, named after the English GM who popularised it in the 90s. White usually aims for calm development, hoping to make use of his space advantage later. In comparison with the French, Black has got his light-squared bishop outside of the pawn chain here, but at the cost of losing a tempo when he eventually plays the natural break ...c5. In fact White often prepares to meet an early ...c5 with Be3 and c2-c4, breaking open the centre and hoping to make use of his better development; in these lines the Bf5 often turns out to be a target. Thus Black has often resorted to more solid systems, first completing his development. For example: 5...Nd7 6.0–0 Bg6 intending ...Nh6-f5, ...Be7, ...0–0. While White's space advantage remains unchallenged in this way, his piece setup does not help him to make substantial gains, while Black's position is very solid; he can contemplate going for ...c5 or ...f6 later. 4.h4 h5 (4...h6) 5.c4 is another popular system, but hardly dangerous. Black will often capture on c4 at some point and develop comfortably with ...Nd7-b6, ...Ne7-f5 (after ...Bg6 for example), ...Be7 and ...Qd7; his control of d5 promises good play. Moreover, White even meets specific difficulties in actually forcing Black to take on c4 in the line 5...e6 6.Nc3 Be7! Black has always scored well in this line (but also in others).

So, what are the specifics of our system? Perhaps the most significant factor is that with his last move White strongly discourages the natural ...c5 break, which will now require additional support. He can also meet ...f6 with f2-f4, retaining his space advantage in the centre. White's next move will usually be Nd2, keeping all options open. He intends to support his centre with c2c3 if necessary, but he can also consider meeting ...c5 with simple development and after ...cxd4 to recapture with a knight. The move Nf3 is delayed, because if Black chooses a slow setup White would definitely like to play f2-f4 first, gaining more space on the kingside. The lightsquared bishop will be developed to e2, as the Bf5 should not be exchanged; it may become a target for the pawn advance later on. Of course White will castle short. It is immediately clear that if White can develop along the above guidelines without being disturbed, he will enjoy a very good position; Black will be squeezed and have no play. However, Black's position is not as bad as the previous paragraph makes it sound! He has himself some good options to rely on - the key point is to remain flexible as well! For example, if White plays f2-f4 then Black can consider playing ...h5, controlling some squares and freezing White's advances. This would be very risky without f2-f4 played, as then White could access the weakened g5-square. Another idea, depending on White's next few moves, is to play ...c5 anyway; sometimes there can be tactical or positional justification for this move. But the most important of all ideas is the one that takes advantage of White's flexible 4th move: an attack on b2! The move ...Qb6 features in practically every plan of Black's. It can cause some discomfort to White with the defence on b2 (although White even sacrifices it sometimes!), it supports ...c5, and sometimes even creates the preconditions for kingside action, thanks to the indirect attack on the Be3 (more on this later!). White can meet ...Qb6 in four different ways, always depending on the moment it is played: a) he can play Nb3 (if the knight is already on d2), also increasing his control over c5; this is the most common method. b) he can play b2-b4 (if he has already played c3); this prevents ...c5 for good, but may give Black a target for counterplay with ...a5. c) he can play Qb3 (again if c3 has been played); a queen exchange would dramatically reduce Black's active potential. d) he can play Qc1 or Rb1 (usually White's last resort, when none of the above is applicable). Of course, in certain cases White can even sacrifice this pawn, hoping to exploit his development lead; this is usually combined with c2-c4 to open up the position. So let's get on to the specifics! 4...e6 4...Qb6 This is Black's most direct move, practically forcing Qc1. There is a dark side to this move, however, as White now obtains an aggressive option that promises him an initiative. 5.Qc1 e6 6.c4! Compared to lines such as 4.h4 h5 5.c4 or even 4.c4, this is much stronger now. White threatens to put a clamp on Black's position with c4-c5 (with tempo!) and will be ready to support his advanced pawns with b4 and f4, thus keeping Black's pieces very restricted. The queen is misplaced on b6 for the structure arising after ...dxc4 and will have to move again. 6...dxc4 7.Bxc4 5.Nd2

This has emerged as White's most flexible and promising move, through a process of elimination. 5.c3 was mostly played at first, actually via the move order 4.c3 e6 5.Be3, but Black has discovered a concrete way to combat White's setup in this move order. 5...Nd7 6.Nd2 Qb6 (6...f6 can also be tried, in order to avoid 6...Qb6 7.b4, although that is not strictly necessary. …7.f4 (7.Ngf3!? may be an interesting alternative.) 7...Qb6 8.Qb3 Otherwise ...fxe5; the loose Be3 harms White in this case. 8...g5!) 7.Qb3 (7.b4 was tried in the impressive game ZvjaginsevDautov, but later Black improved with 7...a5! securing adequate counterplay.) 7...f6 8.f4 g5! With this dynamic move Black breaks down White's pawn chain and ensures good counterplay. In fact, Black has been very successful from this position in practice. 5...Nd7 Black's most logical move, preparing ...c5 but also ...f6 (all thanks to the pressure on e5). 5...Qb6 6.Nb3 Nd7 will transpose to the main lines. White has again almost all his normal options available and indeed several games have started in this way rather than 5...Nd7. There seems to be no real significance to the move order, apart of course from the fact that it doesn't give White a second chance to go for the c3 lines. White now must choose how to proceed, with each of his natural choices having specific pros and cons. 6.f4 The most popular move, immediately setting in motion White's plan of expansion. Black meets it in two fundamentally different ways, both of which appear to be satisfactory. 6.c3 This leads back to 5.c3 and therefore doesn't challenge Black at all. 6...Qb6 (6...f6) 6.Ngf3!? This interesting move was played in Kruppa-Dreev, Aeroflot Open 2004, and to great effect; admittedly, Dreev's handling was a bit too ambitious, but still the move is worth attention. The drawback of course is that White renounces the possibility of f2-f4. 6.Be2!? This move is the latest trend, not committing White to f2-f4 until he sees what Black does. The similarities with the Short system are even more obvious here, but note that Black has committed himself to the move ...Nd7 already (which he rarely does in the Short system if he intends to play ...c5, as the knight has no influence over the centre there) and White is ready to meet ...c5 with c2-c4! White may even be intending a massive pawn advance on the kingside. 6...c5 The dynamic option, immediately getting in the desired break; the danger lurks however, that White's superior development will benefit from the opening up of the centre. 6...h5 A solid plan, exploiting the main drawback of White's 6.f4: lack of flexibility! Now that the kingside structure is clarified, Black immediately obtains a nice plan to continue his development. He will play ...Nh6, ...Be7 and then clear f5 for his knight, most usually by some active move like ...Be4 or ...Bg4. In this way Black manages to erect a blockade on the kingside, where he can later hide his king in all safety, and will then slowly but steadily proceed with preparations for ...c5. So far White has not managed to prove any real advantage in the resulting positions.

6...Qb6 is an interesting try as well. Black wishes to stick to the 6...h5 plan, but tries to extract a slight positional concession from White. The idea becomes clear after 7.Nb3 (7.Qc1 evades Black's idea, but Black argues that his ...Qb6 is more useful than White's Qc1. 7...h5 With play similar to 6...h5.) 7...a5 8.a4 Bb4+! 9.c3 Be7 The Nb3 has lost its natural protection and thus White is somewhat restricted by the need to keep the queen on d1. In this line the strength of the Bf5 becomes evident. Black has done well from this position as well. 7.Ngf3 Qb6 White must now meet the threat to his Pb2 - or not? 8.Be2!? Morozevich's idea, sacrificing the Pb2. 8.Rb1 and 8.Qc1 are rather meek and do not create any problems for Black. 8...Nh6 9.h3 Qxb2 10.c4! With a strong initiative for the pawn, in a very unclear position!

4...Qb6 5.Qc1 [B12] 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 Qb6

5.Qc1 e6 5...Nd7 does not change anything. White should go ahead with 6.c4!

5...Nh6 This move aims to exchange the Be3 with ...Ng4, but does not in fact work out well. 6.Nf3 (worse is 6.h3 Very submissive. 6...e6 7.Nf3 Bg6 8.c3 Nf5 9.Bf4 c5 10.g4 Ne7 11.dxc5 Qxc5 12.Nbd2 h5 unclear Smirin-Bareev, RUS-ROW rpd 2002; Black has successfully negotiated the opening reefs.) 6...e6 (6...Ng4 7.Bf4 and h2-h3 will kick the knight back.) 7.c4! (7.Nbd2 was played by Svidler but seems clearly inferior to Anand's move.) 7...dxc4 8.Nbd2! Black now has no time to avoid the mangling of his structure after a capture on h6. 8...Bd3 (8...Qa5 9.Bxc4 Bg6 10.Bxh6 gxh6 11.0–0+/=) 9.Bxd3 cxd3 10.Bxh6 gxh6 11.0–0 Nd7 (better is 11...Na6! This was probably better, setting the knight on a course towards d5; White would still retain a plus though, thanks to his superior pawn structure. 12.Nc4 Qb5 … Nc7-d5, … Nb4-d5) 12.Rd1 Qa6 13.Ne4 White is already much better. 13...Rg8 (13...0–0–0? 14.Qf4) 14.Ne1 0–0–0 15.Nxd3 Nb6 AnandKhenkin, Bundesliga 2002 16.Ndc5! Qc4 17.Qe3+/- Khenkin,I

6.c4! Bxb1 In a sense this is the most critical move. Black prepares an annoying check on the a5-e1 diagonal. 6...Nd7 7.c5 Qc7 8.Nc3 f6 9.f4 Nh6 10.h3 Bg6 11.Nf3 b6 12.b4 Nf5 13.Bf2 fxe5 14.fxe5 Be7 15.g4 Nh6 16.Be2 0–0 17.0–0+/- Leitao-Barbosa, Santiago 2005. This is a good example of what can happen to Black if he plays passively: all of his pieces lack scope and he has no way to obtain play. 6...Ne7 7.c5 Qa5+ 8.Bd2 Qc7 9.Nc3 Nd7 10.Be2 (10.b4 fits in well with White's plans as well.) 10...h6?! The beginning of a bad plan. (10...f6 11.f4+/=; 10...Bg6 11.Nf3 Bh5 was suggested by Kasparov, but it surely does not equalize for Black either. 12.0–0+/=) 11.b4 g5? 12.g4! Bg6 13.h4 Bg7 14.hxg5 hxg5 15.Rxh8+ Bxh8 16.Bxg5+/- Kasparov-Shirov, RUS-ROW rpd 2002

6...dxc4 This again is too complacent and allows White to develop his pieces comfortably. 7.Bxc4 Ne7 8.Ne2 Qd8 9.0–0 Nd7 10.Ng3 Bg6 11.Nc3 Nf5 12.Bg5 Qb6 (12...Be7 was a safer choice.) 13.Nxf5 Bxf5 14.Rd1 h6 15.Bh4 Qb4 16.Be2 g5 17.Bg3+/= Shirov-Anand, Monaco blind 2005. White is steadily better, although he later made a horrible blunder in a winning position and lost the game. 7.Rxb1 Bb4+

8.Kd1! This move of Kasparov creates great problems for Black; suddenly his bishop and queen prove terribly misplaced. 8.Bd2+/= is good enough for a slight edge. 8...dxc4 9.Nf3! Played with great accuracy.

9.Bxc4 c5! offers Black counterplay. 9...Nd7 10.a3 Be7 11.Bxc4 White again has a stable plus, due to his space advantage and Black's passivity. 11...Qc7 11...c5?! Opening up the position is hardly a good idea with such lag in development. 12.Ke2 It is not clear how Black intends to proceed. 12.Ke2 Nb6 13.Bd3 Nd5 14.Bd2 14.Re1!? Artificial castling is also feasible; Black is so passive that no matter how much time White spends, he will still be better. 14...h5 15.Kf1 Nh6 16.Kg1+/= 14...h5! 15.b4 Nh6 16.Re1+/=

Kasparov-Jobava, Rethymnon ECC 2003. White has maintained an obvious advantage.

4...e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.c3 [B12] 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.c3

As I pointed out in the Introduction, this line is no longer popular. Black has discovered an energetic way of solving all his problems. 6...Qb6 6...f6! This move order aims to avoid 7.b4 in the main line. 7.Ngf3 The only serious alternative, but rather harmless. (7.f4 Qb6 8.Qb3 transposes to 6...Qb6 7.Qb3 f6 8.f4 (8.b4? fxe5 9.fxe5 Nxe5-/+) ) 7...fxe5 8.dxe5 Qc7 unclear This is similar to 6...Qb6 7.b4 f6 8.Ngf3, but here Black probably benefits from the fact that White hasn't got b2-b4 in; he may play ...c5 later. And now 9.Be2!? Nxe5 10.Nxe5 Qxe5 11.Qa4

may or may not give adequate compensation; my computer definitely likes it, but it doesn't really look serious.

7.Qb3 White, by intending to exchange the queens, enables f2-f4 to be played. In general, this way of meeting ...Qb6 is the most comfortable for White: he doesn't give Black targets by advancing pawns (7.b4) and doesn't misplace his knight with Nb3. Should Black opt for quiet play, White has proven in practice that he has good chances to maintain his space advantage at no cost. The only real problem with this line is that Black can employ a sharp but effective counterattack on the kingside, which leads to the destruction of White's centre and thus the elimination of all his hopes for an advantage. 7.b4!? A very ambitious move, aiming to put a clamp on Black on both sides of the board. 7...a5!? This seems to be an effective counter to White's ambitions. (7...f6 8.Nb3! A very good move, preventing ...a5 and retaining the option of supporting the centre with f2-f4. (8.f4? fxe5 9.fxe5 Nxe5-/+; 8.exf6 Ngxf6 causes Black no problems whatsoever. 9.Ngf3 Qc7 10.h3 Bd6 11.Be2 0–0 12.0–0 e5 13.dxe5 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Bxe5= Rytshagov-Huzman, Istanbul OL 2000; Black is at least equal here.; 8.Ngf3 fxe5 9.dxe5 Qc7 unclear also gives Black good play against the Pe5.) 8...fxe5 (8...Nh6 9.Bxh6 gxh6 10.f4 fxe5 11.fxe5+/-) 9.dxe5 Qc7 10.f4 Nh6 (10...g5 11.Qh5+ Bg6 12.Qxg5+/-) 11.Nf3 Be7 12.Be2 0–0 13.0–0 b6 (13...Ng4!? 14.Bd4 (14.Bd2+/-) 14...b6 15.c4 c5 (15...Bxb4 16.Ng5+/-) 16.cxd5 cxd4 17.d6 Bxd6 18.exd6 Qxd6 19.Nfxd4+/-) 14.Nbd4 c5 15.Nxf5 Nxf5 16.Bd2+/-

And White was clearly better in Zvjaginsev-Dautov, Essen 2002, as Black's pieces lack scope (especially the Nd7).) 8.Qa4 (8.a3!? is interesting and may preserve a slight edge. White is ready to meet 8...Qa7?! intending ...b5, with 9.Nb3!+/-) 8...Qa7 9.b5 Nb6 10.Qd1 a4 11.bxc6 bxc6 12.Ngf3 h6 Preserving the bishop from exchange. 13.a3 Qa5 14.Qc1 Ne7 15.Be2 Nec8 16.0–0 Be7= Najer-Bologan, Aeroflot Open 2003. Black has equal play. 7.Nb3 is certainly possible, but also fails to meet the requirements of the position. 7...f6! 7...f6 8.f4 g5!

This is the idea; White's centre collapses and Black obtains easy development for his pieces. 9.Ngf3 9.exf6?! g4! secures some important squares (especially f5 and e4). (9...Ngxf6 10.fxg5 Ng4 is unnecessary.) 10.f7+ To gain some time. 10...Kxf7 11.h3 White tries to eliminate Black's spatial plus on the kingside. (11.Ne2 Ngf6 12.Ng3 Qxb3 13.axb3 Bd6 14.Nxf5 exf5=/+ Haba-Dautov, Bundesliga 2003. It is obvious that Black stands excellently; he has the e4-square for his knights, play on the e-file and a space advantage on the kingside.) 11...Ngf6 12.Bf2 Bd6 13.hxg4 Nxg4 14.g3 c5 15.Be2 c4 16.Qxb6 axb6 17.Ngf3 b5= Karpov-Dreev, Reykjavik rpd 2004. Black clearly stands well. 9...gxf4 10.Bxf4 Bh6! Black continues to systematically break down White's central structure. 10...Bg7 This more passive move has been tried in the past as well, but seems less efficient than the text. 11.Bxh6 11.Qxb6 axb6 12.Bg3!?

An interesting attempt to retain control of e5. I tried this move in 2002 but it now seems to me that Black can meet it efficiently. (12.Bxh6 Nxh6 13.exf6 Nxf6=) 12...fxe5! This is the best solution in my opinion. (12...Ne7 13.exf6 Nxf6 14.Be5 Rf8 15.h3 Ne4 16.g4 Bg6 Dembo-Khurtsidze, Bled OL 2002 17.Be2!+/=) 13.Nxe5 (13.Bxe5 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Nf6=/+ With an edge thanks to the bishop-pair.; 13.dxe5 This leaves White's pieces biting on granite. 13...Ne7=/+) 13...Ngf6 14.Ndf3 and now Black should even be slightly better after either 14...Rg8 (or 14...Nxe5 15.Nxe5 (15.Bxe5 Rf8) 15...Rg8) 15.Nxd7 Kxd7 16.Ne5+ Ke7=/+ 11...Nxh6 12.exf6 Nxf6 Black has done very well from this position. 13.Be2 13.0–0–0 Rg8 (13...Nhg4! is most accurate.) 14.Re1 0–0–0 15.Ne5 Nhg4 16.Ndf3 L'AmiJohannessen, Gausdal 2004. And now Black could have even assumed the initiative with 16...Qxb3 17.axb3 Be4 initiative 13.Ne5 Occupation of the e5-square does not mean much in itself; Black can well play around this knight. 13...Rg8 14.Ndf3 Nhg4 15.Nxg4 Nxg4 16.h3 Nf6 17.Qxb6 axb6 18.Ne5 h5 19.a3 Ke7 20.0–0–0 Rg3=/+

Smirin-Dreev, RUS-ROW rpd 2002. Black is obviously better with his kingside pressure. 13.h3!? is an interesting idea, hoping to prevent Black's usual kingside play. It is not entirely clear to me how Black should meet it. 13...Nh5?! This is probably not the way though. (13...Nf7!? Since the prospects for this piece on the kingside have been eliminated, it makes sense to quickly transfer it to d6, from where it eyes the e4-square; moreover, the possibility of ...h5 is introduced, which forces White's hand. 14.g4 Bg6 15.0–0–0 Qxb3 16.Nxb3 Ne4 with a tough game ahead, though I do have the feeling that White may be enjoying a slight advantage here.) 14.g4 Ng3 15.Rg1 Nxf1 16.Qxb6 axb6 17.Kxf1+/= Sax-Zimina, Bratto 2004. White has a small but stable edge. 13...Ne4 The most natural move, and a good one too! 13...Rg8 14.Qxb6! Realistically aiming for an equal position. (14.0–0 Qc7 initiative) 14...axb6 15.0–0 Ne4 16.Nxe4 Bxe4 17.Ne1!? Nf5 18.Bf3 (18.Bd3? Ne3 19.Rf2 Nxg2!) 18...Ne3!

Grischuk-Leko, Linares 2001. Black is certainly no worse in the complications.

13...Qc7!? An ambitious suggestion of Leko, avoiding the exchange of queens and thus discouraging White from castling short. 14.0–0–0 (14.0–0 Rg8 15.Ne5 0–0–0 initiative With ideas of both ...Nhg4 and ...c5; White seems to be thrown on the defensive.) 14...Nhg4 15.Rde1 0–0–0 16.h3 Nf2 17.Rhf1 N2e4 (17...Qg3!?) 18.g4 Bg6 19.Ne5 c5 Leko; Black has excellent counterplay; note the strength of the Bg6 (who will have to be exchanged). 14.Nxe4 Bxe4 15.0–0 Rg8 16.g3 Nf7 17.Nd2 Bf5 18.Qxb6 axb6=

Alekseev-Dreev, Aeroflot Open 2004. Black later won this game with excellent play!

4...e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.f4 [B12] 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.f4

6...c5 This is Black's most dynamic option, but it is not clear whether it is the best. Black has a couple of very solid and sound alternatives at his disposal. In any case, this move promises a lot of fun! Its essence is that it practically commits White to a pawn sacrifice, one with a lot of poison though. 6...h5 As White has clarified his kingside setup, Black immediately adapts to the new situation erecting a blockade on the light squares. 7.Be2 Trying to extract some concession from Black, such as an early ...Bg6. (7.Ngf3 This leaves Black even more freedom. 7...Nh6 8.g3 White hopes to slowly set his kingside pawns in motion, but such slow moves surely cannot trouble Black. On the other hand, please note that playing Be2 and 0–0 is not so simple, because Black can always meet this with ...Ng4, exchanging the dark-squared bishop. Note that in this case Black refrains from ...Qb6 altogether, not giving White a square for his bishop on d2 (after Nb3). In general, ...Qb6 here only makes sense in connection with the idea of ...a4 and ...Bb4-e7, as in 6...Qb6 below. Returning to our subject, White will have to prepare castling with h2-h3, and maybe this is why Svidler chose to play 8.g3 (he doesn't want to see h2-h3 answered by ...h4). In any case, this is clear evidence that Black's setup is very healthy. (8.Be2 Be7 9.Nb3 White cannot find a useful move so he plays this without any provocation. 9...Rc8 Black's moves make perfect sense. The rook was better placed on a8 in case White opted for a setup with c3 and - perhaps - b4, as it could then support ...a5. Now that the possibility of b2-b4 is renounced, the rook comes to support ...c5. Black probably intended to play ...b6 before ...c5 as well, ensuring that he will not surrender control of the d4-square and emphasizing the misplacement of the Nb3. 10.Qd2 Be4 Black is developing comfortably, winning a lot of time in the process, and clearly has no problems here. Another negative aspect of Nb3 is highlighted with this move. 11.0–0–0?! A rather dubious idea, which was however prepared by White's previous moves. 11...b6 12.Kb1 c5 13.dxc5 bxc5=/+ Black's position is already for preference. 14.Ng5?! Bxg5 15.fxg5 Ng4 16.Bb5 0–0!-/+

Golubev-Grischuk, Internet 2003. White is on the verge of defeat and his opening has clearly been a failure.) 8...a6 (8...Qb6 9.Nb3 a5 10.a4 Bb4+ 11.c3 Be7= The slow 8.g3 clearly does not affect the evaluation of this position.) 9.c3 Rc8 Black is angling for a quick ...c5, but perhaps the way he seeks to accomplish this is not ideal. 10.b4 Be7 11.h3 Bg6 12.Be2 a5 13.a3 b5 14.0–0 Nb6 15.Bf2 Ra8 Svidler-Erenburg, Internet 2004. One gets the feeling that Black should be OK here, although of course White can finally start advancing here with 16.Nh2 (which he did).) 7...Qb6 (7...Bg6 is of course fully possible, along the lines of Black's setup. This move would have to be played anyway at some point, so it doesn't seem to make much difference. 8.Ngf3 Nh6 9.a3?! The point behind this move is not clear to me. 9...Be7 10.h3?! And the same applies to this one as well. White probably didn't want to castle because of ...Ng4, but his "solution" to this problem is even worse. 10...Bh4+! 11.Bf2 Bxf2+ 12.Kxf2 h4 13.Nf1 Nf5 14.Bd3 c5=/+ Degrave-P.Czarnota, Cappelle la Grande 2005. Black is better here, having blockaded the kingside and enjoying a much more harmonious position.) 8.Qc1!? This idea of Rublevsky avoids future problems with a loose knight on b3, but on the other hand seems somewhat artificial. 8...Nh6 9.Ngf3 Be7 10.c3 (10.h3 h4 11.Bf2 Qd8 12.0–0 Bg6 13.b4 ½–½ Nisipeanu-Khenkin, Andorra 2003. One should not attach much significance to such short games, but once again it is clear that Black stands well!) 10...Bg6 Black sticks with the well-tried strategy. (10...c5 This is possible, but in general the idea of ...c5 seems too accommodating. Almost all of White's pieces are on a course revolving around d4, so why free this square from the pawn that occupies it? In this particular position it seems fine, however. 11.0–0 (better is 11.dxc5 This seems more accurate, clearing the d4-square for the pieces.) 11...Rc8?! (better is 11...Ng4! The normal reaction to castling, and it seems to me that Black would be fine after this move.) 12.dxc5 Bxc5 13.Nd4 Ng4 14.N2b3 Nxe3 15.Qxe3 g6?! (better is 15...Bxd4 16.Nxd4! With an edge for White, as 16...Qxb2 17.Nxf5 exf5 18.e6! emphasizes Black's lag in development.) 16.Nxc5 Rxc5 Rublevsky-Lastin, Serbia & Montenegro 2004 and now 17.b4!+/-

would have been a strong and incisive way to exploit the lead in development.) 11.b4 a5! A prompt reaction to White's expansive plans. 12.a3 Qd8 Black now threatens to take the initiative on the queenside with ...b5, thus forcing White's next. 13.Nb3 b6= ½–½ Rublevsky-Dreev, Poikovsky 2005. All these games emphasize that White is completely unable to get even the slightest bit of play after 6...h5. 6...Qb6 7.Nb3 (7.Qc1!? will transpose to 6.f4 h5 7.Ngf3 Qb6 8.Qc1 most likely, and was the actual move order in Rublevsky-Lastin. There seems to be no way for Black to reasonably deviate.) 7...a5 An interesting plan, disturbing White's coordination. 8.a4 Bb4+! 9.c3 Be7 White is now tied to the defence of the Nb3, which greatly restricts his plans. 10.Nf3 h5 (10...Nh6 11.Be2 f6 This direct plan also seems to work well. 12.h3 fxe5 13.fxe5 Nf7 14.Bf2 Ng5 15.Nxg5 Bxg5 Arzumanian-Deviatkin, Pardubice 2004. White has still not solved the problem of the Nb3.) 11.Be2 Nh6 12.h3 Be4 13.0–0 Nf5 14.Bf2 White hopes for Nfd2, but... 14...Bxf3! 15.Bxf3 Bh4 16.Bxh4 Nxh4 17.Be2 Nf5 18.Rf3 h4= Yagupov-Galkin, Tomsk 2004. Black has a comfortable position and White's future plans are not immediately apparent. 7.Ngf3 Qb6 Clearly the point behind Black's play, as otherwise White will safely complete his development and stand better. White must now meet the threat to his Pb2, or so Black thinks... 8.Be2!?

Morozevich, true to style, prefers to sacrifice the pawn! It has to be said that his decision is fully justified, as Black is very underdeveloped and also it is easy to break open the centre. 8.Rb1?! This is a very unfortunate way of defending the pawn and only leads White to trouble. 8...Nh6 What now? How does White intend to continue his development? 9.Be2?! (9.Nb3 is not a solution either. 9...c4 10.Nbd2 Bg6 (better is 10...Qa5!=/+ would have been even better.) 11.h3 Nf5 12.Bf2 h5 13.g3 Qa5=/+ Shirov-Gustafsson, Bundesliga 2004. Black is obviously better in this position; he can castle queenside and break on the kingside, which he actually did later on.) 9...Rc8 Black calmly eyes c2. White has great coordination problems in this position. 10.h3?! This allows Black to commence an amazing tactical operation, but it is not clear what White can play instead; he greatly suffers from the fact that the Pc2 is pinned. (10.0–0 Ng4!=/+) 10...cxd4 11.Nxd4 (11.Bxd4 may have been the least of evils. 11...Bc5 12.Nb3 Bxd4 13.Nbxd4 0–0=/+ And Black clearly has the initiative.) 11...Bc5 12.N2b3 (12.N2f3? Bxc2!; 12.Nf1?! Be4-/+) 12...Bxc2! 13.Qxc2 Bb4+ 14.Kd1 (14.Kf1 Rxc2 15.Nxc2 Bc5 16.Nxc5 Nf5-/+; 14.Kf2 Rxc2 15.Nxc2 Bc5-/+) 14...Rxc2 15.Nxc2 Bc5! Other moves were good for White; this is probably what Short overlooked. 16.Nxc5 Nf5!!-/+

Or in fact this little detail! (16...Nxc5? 17.b4 Qc6 18.bxc5!+/-) 17.Nxd7 Nxe3+ 18.Kd2 Kxd7 19.Nxe3 Qb4+ 20.Kd3 Qe4+ 21.Kd2 Qb4+ 22.Kd3 Qe4+ 23.Kd2 Qxf4! 24.Rhf1 Qb4+ 25.Kd3 Qe4+ 26.Kd2 Qb4+ 27.Kd3 Ke7–+ Short-Vallejo Pons, French League 2004. Black won the game later on without many problems. 8.Qc1 This is more acceptable, but hardly earth-shattering. Black can count on equalizing, although it is not so simple. 8...Ne7 Black, having played a quick ...c5, is now committed to quick development as otherwise White may well play c2-c4. a) 8...Nh6 is not so good, as can be seen from the following line: 9.c3 (9.h3?! Be4 10.g4 cxd4 11.Bxd4 Bc5=/+) 9...Bg6 10.Be2 Nf5 11.Bf2 cxd4 12.Nb3 Be7 13.g4 Nh6 14.Nfxd4+/= b) 8...h5!? 9.c4 Nh6 may be just playable but looks very risky. 9.dxc5!?

This move does offer White some hopes for advantage. In general the resulting positions are strategically very complicated. The following variations stem from Anand. (9.Be2 Nc6 10.c3 cxd4 11.Nxd4 Nxd4 12.Bxd4 Bc5 13.Nb3 Bxd4 14.Nxd4 0–0 15.0–0 Nc5 16.Kh1 ½–½ KasimdzhanovAnand, Hyderabad 2002 16...Ne4= And Black should stand well with such a strong centralized knight.) 9...Nxc5 10.Nd4 Nc6! 11.Bb5 (11.Nxf5 exf5 12.Nf3 Qa5+ 13.c3 Ne4 14.Bd3 Bc5 15.0–0 Qb6 unclear) 11...Bg6 12.0–0 (12.b4 Nd7 13.c3 Be7 14.N2b3 Qc7 15.0–0 0–0 16.Qd2 Nxd4 17.Nxd4 Be4=/+) 12...a6 13.Bxc6+ bxc6 14.f5!? a) 14.N4b3 Nxb3 15.Nxb3 c5 b) 14.a3 Nd7 15.f5 (15.b4 c5 16.bxc5 Bxc5 17.N2b3 Qc7 18.Nxc5 Nxc5) 15...exf5 16.b4 Nxe5 17.Nxf5 Qc7 18.Bd4 f6 19.c4 compensation 14...exf5 15.Nxf5 Bxf5 16.Rxf5 Qc7 17.Nb3 Ne6 18.c4 initiative 8...Nh6 9.h3 As White has no better answer to ...Nh6 than this, it obviously makes sense for Black to include this pair of moves before playing anything else. 9...Qxb2

In a sense Black is forced to accept the challenge, as otherwise ...Qb6 will prove both destabilizing and a loss of time. For example, the following were given by Bareev: 9...Rc8 10.0–0 Qxb2 11.Rb1 Qa3 12.Rb3 Qxa2 13.Rxb7 c4 14.Qa1 Qxa1 15.Rxa1 Bxc2 16.Raxa7+/9...Be4 10.g4 Qxb2 11.Nxe4 dxe4 12.Ng5 cxd4 13.Bxd4 Bb4+ 14.Kf1 Qa3 15.Nxe4 0–0 16.Qd3+/- Black's pieces are spread over the edges of the board. 10.c4! initiative Fighting for the initiative at all costs! 10.Rb1 would have been less precise, because of 10...Qxc2 11.Rxb7 c4 12.g4 Bd3 13.Qxc2 Bxc2 14.Kf2 Be7 15.Rc1 Bg6 Bareev 10...Bc2 What else? 10...Qc3 11.Kf2! and the pressure continues. 11.Qc1 Qc3 12.Kf2 Nf5

Black plays some only moves not to lose material, but as becomes obvious he is using the same 2-3 pieces all the time, while White's army is entering the game quickly. 12...Be7? 13.Nb3+12...Rc8? 13.Nb3 dxc4 14.Bd2+13.Nf1 Nxe3 Other options were hardly a picnic. 13...Nxd4 14.Nxd4 cxd4 15.Bd2 Ba3 (15...Qa3 16.Qxc2) 16.Bxc3 Bxc1 17.Rxc1 dxc3 18.Rxc2 d4 19.Ng3+/- The dP will drop off soon, followed by the cP, and then Black's position will be quite bad.

13...cxd4 14.Bd2 Qa3 15.Qxc2 Rc8 16.Qb3+/14.Nxe3 cxd4 15.Nxc2 d3 15...Bc5 16.cxd5 initiative 16.Ne3! Qxc1 17.Rhxc1+/-

Morozevich-Bareev, Dagomys 2004. White's initiative has brought appreciable gains: Black's pieces are still stuck on the back rank and it seems very unlikely that he will manage to castle without surrendering at least the extra pawn.

4...e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.Be2/6.Ngf3 [B12] 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.Ngf3

This (and 6.Be2) is the modern interpretation of the line. White normally continues development and plays similarly to the Short system, now that Black's knight is committed to d7 and thus ...c5 is less likely. In my opinion, 6.Be2 is the preferable move order (and has been chosen by Shirov recently), as it retains the option of f2-f4. It is not clear whether this is so important, but why not to keep it in mind? 6.Be2

6...Qb6 This move is almost essential, as it forces White's knight to an awkward position. a) 6...h6 7.Ngf3 Ne7 8.0–0 Bh7 Black's play is too slow. 9.c4! Playing to exploit Black's backward development. Due to the strange tangle of pieces on the kingside Black is absolutely incapable of countering back. (9.g4!? was rather unnecessary in Movsesian-Conquest, Warsaw rpd 2003) 9...dxc4 10.Nxc4 Nf5 11.Bd2! initiative Intending Ba5; White has a firm hold on the initiative. b) 6...Ne7 7.f4!

Again we see an important point: Black cannot opt for the (almost) equalizing line of 6.Ngf3 Ne7 7.Be2 Bg6 so simply, because White is ready to meet ...Ne7 with f2-f4! 7...Bg6 8.Ngf3 Rc8 9.0–0 c5 10.c3+/= gives White a solid edge thanks to his space advantage. Note how, in contrast to the French Advance, Black has no pressure on White's centre. c) 6...Bg6!? In my mind this move makes more sense than what has been played so far. If White now goes for 7.f4, then Black switches to the ...h5 & ...Nh6 plan. Alternatively, if 7.Ngf3 then ...Ne7 and ...Nf5 will transpose to the main line of this article. This does not mean of course that Black equalizes completely; for example: 7.f4 (7.Ngf3 Ne7 - 6.Ngf3 Ne7 7.Be2 Bg6) 7...h5 8.Ngf3 and we transpose to the 6.f4 h5 line, but with Black committed to ...Bg6 whereas in that line he could find a better square for the bishop (e4 or g4). And of course the resulting positions are full of play. d) 6...c5!? This move, while generally not the best solution in this system, may be a good idea in this particular position. Black takes advantage of White's somewhat unconventional development to play this break, at a moment when White cannot really reply with c2-c4 effectively or exchange on c5. And what is Black's idea? 7.Ngf3 c4! 8.0–0 b5 unclear

This is it! Black invited White to play Nf3 (renouncing the option of f2-f4) and then blocked the position, turning the game into a race on opposite wings! White's potential expansion has been slowed down by his lack of the f4-resource, but on the other hand Black will not easily break through on the queenside. All in all it seems to me that White's chances should be better, but only detailed analysis can give an idea of whose attack will touchdown first! After 6…Qb6, 7.Nb3 Ne7 a) 7...f6 Again trying to exploit the looseness of the Be3 after f2-f4, but White is here better placed to meet this. 8.Nf3 Ne7 9.0–0 Bg6 10.c4!+/-

Shirov-Erenburg, Gibraltar 2005. Black's position looks horrible, particularly the weakness on e6. White is fully mobilized and ready for action. b) 7...Bg6 Black chooses the solid plan of developing his pieces before undertaking any action, and waits to see which setup White will choose. 8.f4 I don't really like this setup when the black knight is still on g8; the possibility of ...Nh6-g4 can be very annoying at times. (8.Nf3 should certainly retain a slight plus, typical of these positions. 8...a5 This idea doesn't work very well here. (8...Ne7 9.0–0 Nf5 10.Bd2! is another critical detail, specific to the ...Qb6 lines of course.) 9.a4 Ne7 (9...Bb4+?! 10.c3 Be7 11.0–0+/= Now the difference is clear: ...Nh6 will simply be met by Bxh6.) 10.Bf4+/= Intending to meet ...Nf5 with g2-g4! Black will have to struggle to complete development.(10.0–0 Nf5 11.c4!? initiative) ) 8...a5 9.a4 Bb4+ This standard positional idea is met often in the 6.f4 line. 10.c3 Be7 11.Nf3 h5 12.g3 (12.Bf2 Nh6 13.0–0 (13.Bh4 Ng4!=/+) 13...Ng4=) 12...Nh6 13.Nfd2 Nf5= Timofeev-Riazantsev, Noyabrsk 2005. Black stands well here, although of course the fight is still ahead. c) 7...a5 8.a4 Ne7 As with 7...Ne7, this move ought to be a signal for f2-f4. 9.Nf3 (better is 9.f4!) 9...Bg6 10.0–0 (10.Nh4? Nxe5! 11.dxe5 Qb4+-/+ is the point of Black's play.) 10...Nf5 11.c4 Nxe3 12.fxe3 Be7= Gelfand-Kacheishvili, Rethymnon ECC 2003. It seems hard for White to dent Black's position, and this is a good argument in favor of playing f2-f4 instead! After 7…Ne7, 8.f4 Now that the knight has been developed to e7, it makes perfect sense to go for f2-f4! 8...Bg6 9.Bf2 h5 10.Nf3 Nf5 11.0–0 Be7 12.g3 White will slowly prepare to expand on the kingside. It is significant that Black lacks real counterplay. 12...Kf8 13.h3 Qd8 14.Kg2 Kg8 15.c3+/=

Shirov-Johannessen, Drammen 2005. Black is very passive, thus one can even claim a clear advantage for White here. 6...Ne7 6...h6 This prophylactic move seems once again too slow, and may perhaps prove weakening as well. 7.Be2 Ne7 8.0–0 Bh7 9.Nb3 (9.g4!? is rather too violent, although it did work out well in an earlier game of Shabalov. 9...f6?! 10.c4! A typical strike against Black's pawn structure after ...f6. 10...Ng6 11.cxd5 cxd5 12.Qb3+/- Shabalov-Iordachescu, Bermuda 2004) 9...Rc8 10.Bd2 Ng6 11.c4 Again this logical approach, creating play before Black is fully developed. (11.Ba5!? This trick is very useful in this structure. White entices ...b6, which in reality is quite weakening for Black: Ba6 might win control of the c-file later on, while Black does not have the b6-square available anymore for his queen. Finally, White obtains a target on the queenside (a4-a5 might follow).) 11...dxc4 12.Bxc4 Be7 13.Ba5!? b6 14.Bd2 0–0 Shabalov-Vallejo Pons, Calvia OL 2004. And now some move preparing for Black's ...c5 would retain an edge. 15.Rc1+/= (15.Qe2+/=) 6...Bg6!? makes a lot of sense here as well, intending ...Ne7-f5, and will almost certainly transpose to the text. 6...f6 This is a rather risky undertaking. White has not weakened himself in any way, while Black's development cannot exactly be called "harmonious". 7.Be2 (worse is 7.exf6 Ngxf6 8.Nh4 Bd6 9.Nxf5 exf5 10.Qf3 g6 11.0–0–0 Qe7 12.g3 0–0–0= Wall-A.Ledger, Great Britain 2004. Black of course has an excellent position.) 7...Bg6 8.0–0 Nh6 9.exf6 Qxf6 (9...gxf6 10.Nh4 and Black's light squared are beginning to creak.) 10.Bg5 Qf7 11.Nh4 (11.c4!? initiative This suggestion of Kruppa also seems promising, the idea being 11...Bd6 12.Qb3 Rb8 13.cxd5 exd5 14.Bxh6 gxh6 15.Qe3+) 11...Bd6 12.Nxg6 hxg6 Kruppa-Dreev, Aeroflot Open 2004. And now White could have presented Black with great problems had he chosen 13.c4! Nf5 14.Nf3 e5 15.dxe5 Nxe5 16.Re1+/- Kruppa, Komarov

7.Be2 7.h3 Bg6 8.g4 was played by Shabalov on the Internet but looks rather extravagant. 8...h5!=/+ 7...Bg6 7...Qc7 8.0–0 a6 9.b4 Bg6 10.Nh4 Nf5 11.Nxf5 Bxf5 12.c3 Be7 13.f4+/- was a good example of purposeless play by Black and its punishment. 7...c5?! As is usual in this line, this move proves premature. 8.c4! initiative Just as in the Short system! Black is hardly able to meet this break and in this case also the drawbacks of having a bishop on f5 are revealed.(8.0–0!? also looks good. 8...cxd4 9.Bxd4 Nc6 10.c4 initiative) 8.Nh4 Another idea borrowed from the Short system. White gains the bishop pair and then continues to build his space advantage. In case this all seems accidental, I have to point out that it is White's accurate and flexible opening play that creates these possibilities. White discourages ...c5, thus forcing Black to go for the slower options, delays f2-f4 so as not to give Black easy kingside play, delays c2-c3 so as not to lose time and allow a kingside break. Black must somehow develop his kingside and particularly the Ng8, but how? ...Nh6 allows Bxh6 and a structural weakness, ...Ne7 allows Nh4 and loss of the bishop pair. Quick breaks do not work properly, ...h6 and ...Bh7 is too slow and allows White to break in the centre... 8.0–0 is less accurate in my opinion. 8...Nf5 9.c4 Nxe3 10.fxe3 Be7 11.cxd5 cxd5 12.Qb3 This position has been played a couple of times, but it seems to me that Black does not face particular problems. 12...Rb8 (12...Qb6 13.Bb5 Rd8 14.Qa4 a6 15.Bxd7+ Rxd7 16.Rac1 Qd8 17.Rc3 0–0 18.Rfc1 Qe8 19.Nb3 h6 20.Rc8 Rd8 21.Qxe8 Rfxe8 22.R8c7 b6 23.R1c6 Rb8 24.Kf2 a5 25.Ke2 Bd8 26.Rc8 Rxc8 27.Rxc8 Kf8= Smirnov-Mchedlishvili, Istanbul 2003. Black seems to be holding his own after all.) 13.Bd3 Bxd3 14.Qxd3 0–0 15.Rfc1 Qb6= Pedersen-Palo, Koge 2004 8...c5 Natural but perhaps not the best.

8...Nf5 This reply looks logical, but in fact allows White to expand on the kingside with gain of time. 9.Nxf5 (worse is 9.Nxg6?! hxg6 is as usual a bad idea as ...Qh4 is coming and an exchange on e3 is also on the cards.) 9...Bxf5 10.0–0 Black seems to be doing OK here (and he generally is!) but his lag in development means that White will be able to start active play before Black is ready to strike back. Also the Bf5 might provide White with a target for expansion (with tempo!). (10.g4!? This definitely merits attention, especially since 10.0–0 does not offer White much. 10...Bg6 11.h4 f6 12.h5 Bf7 13.f4 unclear was a bit extravagant but perhaps quite good in Korneev-Peralta, Seville 2005) 10...Be7 (10...f6?! An unfortunate reaction. 11.f4 (White could also consider 11.exf6!? Nxf6 (11...Qxf6 12.Nf3 initiative) 12.g4! with initiative; Black's uncastled king makes a juicy target!) 11...fxe5 12.fxe5 Be7 13.Bh5+ g6 14.Be2 Bg5 15.Bf2 h5 16.Nf3 Be7 17.Qd2+/- A.Ivanov-Rubenchik, Washington DC 2004. Both sides' play leaves a lot to be desired (White was perhaps not resolute enough), but still it is clear that Black's central break has backfired.) and now the rather strange move 11.Bg4!?

seems to promise White an edge. 11...Bg6 (11...Bxg4 12.Qxg4 forces the undesirable 12...Rg8+/; 11...0–0 12.Bxf5 exf5 13.Qh5 g6 14.Qh6+/= White develops a stronghold on the dark squares and Black has no real counterplay.) 12.f4 Qb6! Trying to distract White. (12...0–0 13.f5+/=) 13.Nb3 0–0 And Black is finally very close to equality, as f4-f5 is not on for the moment: 14.f5? exf5 15.Bxf5 Nxe5-/+ 9.c3 Nc6 10.Nxg6 hxg6 11.Nf3+/= White is just in time to prevent ...g5. Play has now transposed to a line of the Short system that is slightly better for White, namely 4.Nf3 e6 5.Be2 Nd7 6.0–0 Ne7 7.Nh4. White retains his space advantage and the two bishops and will slowly expand on both sides of the board. 11...Be7 12.0–0 0–0 12...a6 13.Qd2 b5 14.a4 b4 15.dxc5 Nxc5 16.Bxc5 Bxc5 17.Rac1! Be7 18.c4+/- Movsesian-Iljin, Izmir ECC 2004. White again opens up the position to his benefit. 13.Bd3 Qb6 14.Qe2 Rfc8 Svidler-Macieja, Bundesliga 2004. Black now threatens ...cxd4 followed by ...Nb4, which escaped Svidler's attention. He still won an incredible game in the end, but objectively here it would have been better to proceed with

15.Rac1+/-

retaining a clear advantage.

Supplementary Games Smirin,I (2676) - Dreev,Alexey (2676) [B12] RUS vs. ROW Moscow RUS (10), 11.09.2002 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.c3 f6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qb3 g5 9.Ngf3 gxf4 10.Bxf4 Bh6 11.Bxh6 Nxh6 12.exf6 Nxf6 13.Ne5 Rg8 14.Ndf3 Nhg4 15.Nxg4 Nxg4 16.h3 Nf6 17.Qxb6 axb6 18.Ne5 h5 19.a3 Ke7 20.0–0–0 Rg3 21.Bd3 Ne4 22.Bxe4 dxe4 23.h4 Rxg2 24.Nc4 Rag8 25.Rde1 R8g3 26.Rhf1 Rh2 27.Ne3 Bg6 28.Rg1 Rxg1 29.Rxg1 Kf6 30.Rf1+ Bf5 31.Rf4 b5 32.Nf1 Rh3 33.Kd2 e5 34.Rf2 exd4 35.cxd4 Rb3 36.Ne3 Rxb2+ 37.Ke1 Rxf2 38.Kxf2 Be6 39.Ke2 b6 40.Kd2 c5 41.Kc3 Bf7 42.Nc2 Kf5 43.Kd2 Kf4 0–1

Sax,G (2535) - Zimina,O (2430) [B12] Open A Bratto ITA (7), 26.08.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.c3 f6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qb3 g5 9.Ngf3 gxf4 10.Bxf4 Bh6 11.Bxh6 Nxh6 12.exf6 Nxf6 13.h3 Nh5 14.g4 Ng3 15.Rg1 Nxf1 16.Qxb6 axb6 17.Kxf1 Bg6 18.Kg2 Nf7 19.Rge1 Kd7 20.Kg3 c5 21.c4 Rhe8 22.Re3 cxd4 23.Rb3 e5 24.cxd5 Ra4 25.Rxb6 e4 26.b3 Ra5 27.Nxd4 e3 28.N2f3 Nd6 29.Re1 Rxa2 30.Nb5 Nxb5 31.Rxb5 Kd6 32.Rxb7 Kxd5 33.Rd7+ Kc5 34.Rd4 Rb2 35.Rc4+ Kb6 36.Rc3 e2 37.Kf2 Bc2 38.Rxe2 Rxe2+ 39.Kxe2 Bxb3+ 40.Ke3 Bd5 41.Ne5 Rh2 42.Kf4 Kb5 43.Kg5 Kb4 44.Rg3 Kc5 45.Nd7+ Kd6 46.Nf6 h6+ 47.Kh5 Bg2 48.h4 Ke5 49.Ng8 Bc6 50.Rb3 Kf4 51.Nf6 Bf3 52.Ra3 Kg3 53.Ne4+ Kf4 54.Nf6 Kg3 55.Kxh6 Rxh4+ 56.Kg5 Rh8 57.Kf5 Rb8 58.g5 Rb5+ 59.Ke6 Kf4 60.g6 Rb6+ 61.Ke7 Rb7+ 62.Nd7 Bd5 63.g7 Kf5 64.Ra6 Bb3 65.Rf6+ Kg5 66.Re6 1–0

Smirin,Ilia (2676) - Bareev,Evgeny (2726) [B12] RUS vs. ROW Moscow RUS (6), 10.09.2002 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 Qb6 5.Qc1 Nh6 6.h3 e6 7.Nf3 Bg6 8.c3 Nf5 9.Bf4 c5 10.g4 Ne7 11.dxc5 Qxc5 12.Nbd2 h5 13.gxh5 Bxh5 14.Nd4 a6 15.N2b3 Qc7 16.Qe3 Nd7 17.Bd3 g5 18.Bxg5 Qxe5 19.Qxe5 Nxe5 20.Be2 Bxe2 21.Kxe2 Nc4 22.Rab1 Rc8 23.h4 e5 24.Nf3 Rc6 25.Nbd2 Nxd2 26.Bxd2 Nf5 27.h5 Bh6 28.Rbg1 Bxd2 29.Kxd2 f6 30.Nh4 Nd6 31.Nf3 Kf7 32.Rg6 Nf5 33.Rg4 Rc4 34.Rxc4 dxc4 35.Ke2 Ng7 36.Nd2 b5 37.h6 Nf5 38.h7 Nd6 39.Kf3 Kg6 40.Rg1+ Kf7 41.Rh1 Kg7 42.Rg1+ Kxh7 43.Ne4 Nxe4 44.Kxe4 Rg8 45.Rh1+ Kg6 46.Rd1 Ra8 47.Rd6 Kg5 48.Rb6 Ra7 49.Re6 Rd7 50.Ke3 a5 51.Rb6 Rd5 52.f3 a4 53.Ke4 Rd2 54.Rxb5 Re2+ 55.Kd5 Kf4 56.Ke6 Kxf3 57.Kxf6 e4 58.Ke5 e3 59.Kd4 Rd2+ 60.Kxc4 e2 61.Rf5+ Ke4 62.Rf8 Rd5 0–1

Anand,Viswanathan (2755) - Khenkin,Igor (2603) [B12] Bundesliga 2002-3 Stuttgart GER (6), 15.12.2002 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 Qb6 5.Qc1 Nh6 6.Nf3 e6 7.c4 dxc4 8.Nbd2 Bd3 9.Bxd3 cxd3 10.Bxh6 gxh6 11.0–0 Nd7 12.Rd1 Qa6 13.Ne4 Rg8 14.Ne1 0–0–0 15.Nxd3 Nb6 16.Qe3 Qc4 17.Nf4 Nd5 18.Qf3 Nxf4 19.Qxf4 Rg7 20.Nf6 Be7 21.Qxh6 Rg6 22.Qxh7 Bxf6 23.exf6 Qd5 24.Qh3 Rxf6 25.g3 Qe4 26.Qg2 Rxd4 27.Qxe4 Rxe4 28.Rd2 c5 29.Kg2 c4 30.Rad1 b5 31.h4 Rf5 32.f4 c3 33.bxc3 Re3 34.Rd8+ Kb7 35.R8d7+ Kb6 36.R1d6+ Kc5 37.Rd2 a5 38.R2d3 Rxd3 39.Rxd3 Kc4 40.Rf3 Rh5 41.Kh3 Rd5 42.g4 Rd2 43.a3 Ra2 44.h5 Rxa3 45.h6 Ra1 46.Kg2 Rd1 47.f5 exf5 48.h7 Rd8 49.Rxf5 Kxc3 50.Rxf7 b4 51.g5 b3 52.Rc7+ Kd2 53.Rb7 1–0

Leitao,R (2580) - Barbosa,Manuel [B12] II Copa ENTEL Santiago CHI (11), 21.03.2005 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 Qb6 5.Qc1 e6 6.c4 Nd7 7.c5 Qc7 8.Nc3 f6 9.f4 Nh6 10.h3 Bg6 11.Nf3 b6 12.b4 Nf5 13.Bf2 fxe5 14.fxe5 Be7 15.g4 Nh6 16.Be2 0–0 17.0–0 Rf7 18.Qe3 Raf8 19.Kg2 bxc5 20.dxc5 a5 21.a3 axb4 22.axb4 Rf4 23.Nd4 Be4+ 24.Kg1 Qxe5 25.Nxc6 Qg5 26.Nxe7+ Qxe7 27.Bg3 Rxf1+ 28.Rxf1 Rxf1+ 29.Bxf1 Nf6 30.g5 Nf5 31.gxf6 gxf6 32.Qf2 1–0

Shirov,A (2713) - Anand,Viswanathan (2786) [B12] Amber Rapid Monte Carlo MNC (1), 19.03.2005 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 Qb6 5.Qc1 e6 6.c4 dxc4 7.Bxc4 Ne7 8.Ne2 Qd8 9.0–0 Nd7 10.Ng3 Bg6 11.Nc3 Nf5 12.Bg5 Qb6 13.Nxf5 Bxf5 14.Rd1 h6 15.Bh4 Qb4 16.Be2 g5 17.Bg3 h5 18.h4 gxh4 19.Bxh4 Bh6 20.f4 Nxe5 21.a3 Qb6 22.Na4 Qa5 23.dxe5 Qxa4 24.Qc5 Bf8 25.Qf2 Qa5 26.b4 Qb6 27.Rd4 Bc2 28.Ra2 Bb3 29.Rad2 Bd5 30.f5 Qc7 31.Bf6 Rh6 32.Qg3 Rxf6 0–1

Kasparov,Garry (2830) - Jobava,Baadur (2596) [B12] ECC Rethymnon GRE (3), 30.09.2003 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 Qb6 5.Qc1 e6 6.c4 Bxb1 7.Rxb1 Bb4+ 8.Kd1 dxc4 9.Nf3 Nd7 10.a3 Be7 11.Bxc4 Qc7 12.Ke2 Nb6 13.Bd3 Nd5 14.Bd2 h5 15.b4 Nh6 16.Re1 Rc8 17.Kf1 Qd7 18.Rb3 Nc7 19.Bg5 a6 20.Be4 Qd8 21.Bd2 Nf5 22.Rd3 g6 23.g3 Nd5 24.h3 Rc7 25.Kg2 Rd7 26.Rd1 Nb6 27.Qc2 Nd5 28.Rb3 Nc7 29.Bc1 Nd5 30.h4 Nc7 31.a4 Nxd4 32.Nxd4 Rxd4 33.Rxd4 Qxd4 34.Bxg6 Nd5 35.Be4 Nxb4 36.Qe2 b5 37.axb5 cxb5 38.Qf3 Nd5 39.Rd3 Qc4 40.Bd2 Rg8 41.Kh2 b4 42.Bxd5 exd5 43.Rxd5 Rg6 44.Rd3 Rc6 45.e6 Qxe6 46.Re3 Qc4 47.Bxb4 Re6 48.Bxe7 Kxe7 49.Rc3 Qg4 50.Rc7+ Kd6 51.Qc6+ Ke5 52.Qc3+ Kd5 1–0

Kasparov,Garry (2838) - Shirov,Alexei (2697) [B12] RUS vs. ROW Moscow RUS (4), 09.09.2002 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 Qb6 5.Qc1 e6 6.c4 Ne7 7.c5 Qa5+ 8.Bd2 Qc7 9.Nc3 Nd7 10.Be2 h6 11.b4 g5 12.g4 Bg6 13.h4 Bg7 14.hxg5 hxg5 15.Rxh8+ Bxh8 16.Bxg5 a5 17.b5 Nxc5 18.Bf6 Bxf6 19.exf6 Ng8 20.dxc5 d4 21.Nf3 dxc3 22.Qxc3 Qf4 23.g5 Rd8 24.bxc6 bxc6 25.Rd1 Rxd1+ 26.Bxd1 Qe4+ 27.Kf1 Bh5 28.Qb3 Qf4 29.Qb7 Qc4+ 30.Ke1 1–0

Rytshagov,Mikhail (2491) - Huzman,Alexander (2589) [B12] 4th IECC Istanbul TUR (2), 31.05.2003 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.c3 Qb6 7.b4 f6 8.exf6 Ngxf6 9.Ngf3 Qc7 10.h3 Bd6 11.Be2 0–0 12.0–0 e5 13.dxe5 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Bxe5 15.Rc1 Bh2+ 16.Kh1 Bf4 17.Bxf4 Qxf4 18.Nf3 Rae8 19.Kg1 Kh8 20.Nd4 Bd7 21.Bf3 Ne4 22.Rc2 Qg5 23.Bg4 Bxg4 24.Qxg4 Qf6 25.Qd7 Nd6 ½–½

Zvjaginsev,Vadim (2645) - Dautov,Rustem (2636) [B12] 4th Borowski GM Essen GER (5), 20.05.2002 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.c3 Qb6 7.b4 f6 8.Nb3 fxe5 9.dxe5 Qc7 10.f4 Nh6 11.Nf3 Be7 12.Be2 0–0 13.0–0 b6 14.Nbd4 c5 15.Nxf5 Nxf5 16.Bd2 a5 17.a3 axb4 18.axb4 Qc6 19.Bd3 g6 20.b5 Qb7 21.c4 Rxa1 22.Qxa1 Nd4 23.Qd1 Ra8 24.Nxd4 cxd4 25.Qg4 Kg7 26.Qxe6 Nc5 27.Qh3 Ra2 28.f5 Rxd2 29.f6+ Kg8 30.Bxg6 hxg6 31.Qh6 Bf8 32.Qxg6+ Bg7 33.f7+ 1–0

Najer,Evgeniy (2585) - Bologan,Viktor (2630) [B12] Aeroflot Open Moscow RUS (4), 14.02.2003 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.c3 Qb6 7.b4 a5 8.Qa4 Qa7 9.b5 Nb6 10.Qd1 a4 11.bxc6 bxc6 12.Ngf3 h6 13.a3 Qa5 14.Qc1 Ne7 15.Be2 Nec8 16.0–0 Be7 17.c4 dxc4 18.Nxc4 Nxc4 19.Qxc4 Be4 20.Nd2 Nb6 21.Qc1 Bd5 22.Bd3 Rc8 23.Rb1 Ba2 ½–½

Haba,Petr (2516) - Dautov,Rustem (2604) [B12] Bundesliga 2002-3 Erfurt GER (8), 11.01.2003 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.c3 f6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qb3 g5 9.exf6 g4 10.f7+ Kxf7 11.Ne2 Ngf6 12.Ng3 Qxb3 13.axb3 Bd6 14.Nxf5 exf5 15.Bd3 Kg6 16.Kf2 a6 17.h4 Nh5 18.g3 Rhe8 19.Rhe1 Re7 20.Nf1 Ndf6 21.Bd2 Rae8 22.Rxe7 Rxe7 23.b4 Ne4+ 24.Bxe4 Rxe4 25.Re1 Nf6 26.Rxe4 Nxe4+ 27.Ke2 b6 28.Be1 a5 29.bxa5 bxa5 30.b3 Kf7 31.Kd3 Ke6 32.Ne3 Be7 33.Nf1 c5 34.c4 cxd4 35.Kxd4 Bf6+ 36.Kd3 Nc5+ 37.Kc2 dxc4 38.bxc4 a4 39.Bb4 Ne4 40.Ba3 Bd4 0–1

Karpov,Anatoly (2682) - Dreev,Alexey (2682) [B12] Rapid Reykjavik ISL (2.1), 19.03.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.c3 e6 5.Be3 Qb6 6.Qb3 Nd7 7.Nd2 f6 8.f4 g5 9.exf6 g4 10.f7+ Kxf7 11.h3 Ngf6 12.Bf2 Bd6 13.hxg4 Nxg4 14.g3 c5 15.Be2 c4 16.Qxb6 axb6 17.Ngf3 b5 18.Ne5+ Ndxe5 19.fxe5 Be7 20.Bxg4 Bxg4 21.Be3 b4 22.0–0+ Ke8 23.cxb4 Bxb4 24.a3 Be7 25.Nf3 Rg8 26.Kh2 Kd7 27.Rf2 Bh5 28.Raf1 Bg6 29.Bg5 Bd3 30.Bxe7 Kxe7 31.Rd1 Raf8 32.Rdd2 Rg4 33.Kh3 Rfg8 34.Rg2 Bf1 0–1

Dembo,Y (2375) - Khurtsidze,N (2455) [B12] Olympiad w Bled SLO (10), 05.11.2002 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.c3 e6 5.Be3 Nd7 6.Nd2 Qb6 7.Qb3 f6 8.f4 g5 9.Ngf3 gxf4 10.Bxf4 Bh6 11.Qxb6 axb6 12.Bg3 Ne7 13.exf6 Nxf6 14.Be5 Rf8 15.h3 Ne4 16.g4 Bg6 17.Rh2 Kd7 18.h4 Nxd2 19.Nxd2 Bf4 20.Bxf4 Rxf4 21.Be2 c5 22.h5 Bc2 23.Rf2 Raf8 24.Rxf4 Rxf4 25.Rc1 Ba4 26.b3 Bc6 27.Nf3 Kd6 28.Ng5 cxd4 29.Nh3 Re4 30.Ng5 Re3 31.Kd2 Rxc3 32.Rxc3 dxc3+ 33.Kxc3 e5 34.Nxh7 d4+ 35.Kd2 e4 36.Ng5 Ke5 37.h6 Kf6 38.h7 Ng6 39.Nh3 Kg7 40.Ng5 Kf6 41.Nh3 Kg7 42.Ng5 Nf8 43.Bc4 b5 44.Bg8 e3+ 45.Kd3 Bg2 46.b4 b6 47.Bb3 Bf1+ 48.Kxd4 e2 49.Nf3 Nxh7 50.Ke4 ½–½

L'Ami,E (2486) - Johannessen,Leif (2538) [B12] GM Classic Gausdal NOR (6), 28.09.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.c3 Nd7 6.Nd2 f6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qb3 g5 9.Ngf3 gxf4 10.Bxf4 Bh6 11.Bxh6 Nxh6 12.exf6 Nxf6 13.0–0–0 Rg8 14.Re1 0–0–0 15.Ne5 Nhg4 16.Ndf3 Nxe5 17.Nxe5 Be4 18.Rg1 Ng4 19.Nxg4 Rxg4 20.g3 Rf8 21.Bg2 Qxb3 22.axb3 Rf2 23.Bxe4 Rxe4 24.Rxe4 dxe4 25.Re1 Rxh2 26.Rxe4 Rg2 27.Rg4 a5 28.Rg7 h5 29.Rg5 b6 30.Rxh5 Rxg3 31.Rh7 Rg1+ 32.Kc2 Rg2+ 33.Kb1 Re2 34.Re7 Kb8 35.Ka2 Re1 36.Rh7 ½–½

Grischuk,A (2663) - Leko,Peter (2745) [B12] SuperGM Linares ESP (3), 25.02.2001 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.c3 e6 5.Be3 Qb6 6.Qb3 Nd7 7.Nd2 f6 8.f4 g5 9.Ngf3 gxf4 10.Bxf4 Bh6 11.Bxh6 Nxh6 12.exf6 Nxf6 13.Be2 Rg8 14.Qxb6 axb6 15.0–0 Ne4 16.Nxe4 Bxe4 17.Ne1 Nf5 18.Bf3 Ne3 19.Rf2 Bf5 20.Be2 Ke7 21.Bd3 c5 22.Bxf5 Nxf5 23.Nf3 h5 ½–½

Alekseev,Evgeny (2609) - Dreev,Alexey (2682) [B12] Aeroflot Open Moscow RUS (7), 23.02.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.c3 e6 5.Be3 Qb6 6.Qb3 Nd7 7.Nd2 f6 8.f4 g5 9.Ngf3 gxf4 10.Bxf4 Bh6 11.Bxh6 Nxh6 12.exf6 Nxf6 13.Be2 Ne4 14.Nxe4 Bxe4 15.0–0 Rg8 16.g3 Nf7 17.Nd2 Bf5 18.Qxb6 axb6 19.Bh5 Bg6 20.Bg4 Ke7 21.Rfe1 e5 22.dxe5 h5 23.Bh3 h4 24.Re3 hxg3 25.hxg3 Nh6 26.a3 Bf5 27.Bg2 Bg4 28.Rae1 Nf5 29.Rd3 Bh5 30.Nf1 Raf8 31.Kh2 Rh8 32.Kg1 Rhg8 33.Kh2 b5 34.Bh3 Nh6 35.Rd2 Rg5 36.Ne3 Bf3 37.Rf2 Rh5 38.Rxf3 Rxf3 39.Kg2 Rf8 40.Nc2 Nf7 41.e6 Ne5 42.Nd4 Nd3 43.Re3 Nf2 44.g4 Rxh3 45.Rxh3 Nxh3 46.Kxh3 c5 47.Nxb5 Kxe6 48.b4 b6 49.Kg3 Ke5 50.bxc5 bxc5 51.g5 d4 52.cxd4+ cxd4 0–1

Movsesian,S (2629) - Conquest,S (2488) [B12] Amplico AIG Life Gp4 Warsaw POL (1), 19.12.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.Be2 h6 7.Ngf3 Ne7 8.0–0 Bh7 9.g4 Ng6 10.c4 Be7 11.cxd5 exd5 12.Qb3 Rb8 13.Bd3 0–0 14.Rac1 Kh8 15.h3 Re8 16.Bf5 Ndf8 17.Ne1 Nh4 18.Bxh7 Nxh7 19.f4 f5 20.Bf2 Qd7 21.Bxh4 Bxh4 22.Ng2 Bd8 23.Ne3 fxg4 24.hxg4 Rf8 25.Qd3 Bb6 26.Kg2 Rbe8 27.Kg3 Rf7 28.Nf3 Bc7 29.Nh4 Nf8 30.Rh1 Kg8 31.Nhf5 Ne6 32.Rc2 c5 33.Rch2 Kf8 34.g5 Nxd4 35.Nxd4 cxd4 36.gxh6 gxh6 37.Rxh6 Ke7 38.Qxd4 Rg8+ 39.Kf3 Kd8 40.Rh8 Rfg7 41.Rxg8+ Rxg8 42.Qxd5 Rf8 43.Qxd7+ Kxd7 44.Ke4 1–0

Shirov,A (2713) - Erenburg,S (2551) [B12] It (Open) Caleta ENG (5), 29.01.2005 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.Be2 Qb6 7.Nb3 f6 8.Nf3 Ne7 9.0–0 Bg6 10.c4 a5 11.Nc5 Nxc5 12.dxc5 Qxb2 13.Nd4 Nf5 14.exf6 gxf6 15.Nxe6 Nxe3 16.fxe3 Qe5 17.cxd5 cxd5 18.Qb3 Be7 19.Bg4 Kf7 20.Rad1 a4 21.Qxb7 Be4 22.Nf4 Rhg8 23.Qd7 Rxg4 24.Qxg4 Bxc5 25.Nxd5 f5 26.Qh3 Kg8 27.Kh1 Rf8 28.Nf4 Qe7 29.Rd2 Bc6 30.Rc2 Be4 31.Rc4 a3 32.Qg3+ Kh8 33.Rxc5 Rg8 34.Qe1 Bxg2+ 35.Nxg2 Qxc5 36.Qa1+ Rg7 37.Rc1 Qf8 38.Rc7 1–0

Timofeev,Arty (2619) - Riazantsev,A (2596) [B12] ch-RUS u20 Nojabrsk RUS (6), 07.03.2005 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.Be2 Qb6 7.Nb3 Bg6 8.f4 a5 9.a4 Bb4+ 10.c3 Be7 11.Nf3 h5 12.g3 Nh6 13.Nfd2 Nf5 14.Bf2 Qc7 15.0–0 f6 16.Nf3 Bf7 17.Qd2 Rg8 18.c4 Bb4 19.Qc2 Nb6 20.c5 Nd7 21.Bd3 Nh6 22.Be1 Bxe1 23.Raxe1 f5 24.Nbd2 Ke7 25.Rb1 b6 26.cxb6 Qxb6 27.Rfc1 Rgc8 28.Nb3 Be8 29.Qc3 Rcb8 30.Nc5 Nxc5 31.dxc5 Qb4 32.b3 Nf7 33.Kf2 Bd7 34.Ke3 Bc8 35.Nd4 Nd8 36.Be2 g6 37.h3 Ba6 38.Qxb4 Rxb4 39.Bxa6 Rxa6 40.g4 g5 41.Rf1 fxg4 42.fxg5 Nf7 43.Rf6 Nxg5 44.h4 Rxd4 45.Kxd4 Nf3+ 46.Ke3 Nxe5 47.Rh6 Ra8 48.b4 g3 49.Rxh5 Ng4+ 50.Kf4 Nf6 ½–½

Shirov,Alexei (2726) - Johannessen,Leif (2519) [B12] Smartfish Masters Drammen NOR (6), 02.01.2005 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.Be2 Qb6 7.Nb3 Ne7 8.f4 Bg6 9.Bf2 h5 10.Nf3 Nf5 11.0–0 Be7 12.g3 Kf8 13.h3 Qd8 14.Kg2 Kg8 15.c3 Rc8 16.Rc1 c5 17.c4 dxc4 18.Nxc5 b5 19.a4 Nxc5 20.dxc5 Qf8 21.b4 Rd8 22.Qe1 a6 23.Qc3 Nh6 24.axb5 axb5 25.Nd4 Be4+ 26.Bf3 Bxf3+ 27.Qxf3 Qe8 28.Qc6 Qxc6+ 29.Nxc6 Rd7 30.Rfd1 Rc7 31.Nd4 Rb7 32.c6 Rc7 33.Nxb5 Rxc6 34.Nd6 Nf5 35.b5 Rc7 36.b6 Rc6 37.Nxf5 exf5 38.b7 Kh7 39.Ba7 Ba3 40.Rc2 1–0

Shabalov,Alexander (2623) - Iordachescu,Viorel (2634) [B12] It Bermuda BER (1), 15.01.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.Ngf3 h6 7.Be2 Ne7 8.0–0 Bh7 9.g4 f6 10.c4 Ng6 11.cxd5 cxd5 12.Qb3 Be7 13.Qxb7 0–0 14.Qc6 Kh8 15.Qxe6 fxe5 16.Qxd5 Nf4 17.Bxf4 Rxf4 18.dxe5 Bg8 19.Qd3 Bh7 20.Qd5 Bg8 21.e6 Nf8 22.Qxd8 Rxg4+ 23.Kh1 Rxd8 24.Bc4 Rf4 25.Rae1 g5 26.Re2 Kg7 27.Bb3 a5 28.Ne5 a4 29.Bc4 Rd6 30.Ne4 Rd4 31.f3 Nxe6 32.b3 Ba3 33.Nc6 Rd7 34.Ng3 Rxc4 35.bxc4 Nf4 36.Re4 Rd2 37.Nf5+ Kf6 38.Ne3 Rxa2 39.h4 Bc5 40.hxg5+ hxg5 41.Ng4+ Kg6 42.Nce5+ Kg7 43.Nd7 Ba3 44.Re5 Kg6 45.c5 Rd2 46.Re7 Bb2 47.c6 a3 48.c7 Rc2 49.Ne3 Rc6 50.Ng4 Rc2 51.Re8 Be6 52.c8Q Rxc8 53.Rxc8 Bxd7 54.Ra8 Kh5 55.Ne3 Bb5 56.Rf2 Nd3 57.Rd2 Kg6 58.Ra5 Bc1 59.Rc2 Bxe3 60.Rxb5 1–0

Shabalov,Alexander (2608) - Vallejo Pons,F (2678) [B12] 36th Olympiad Calvia ESP (9), 24.10.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.Ngf3 Ne7 7.Be2 h6 8.0–0 Bh7 9.Nb3 Rc8 10.Bd2 Ng6 11.c4 dxc4 12.Bxc4 Be7 13.Ba5 b6 14.Bd2 0–0 15.Re1 c5 16.Rc1 Rc7 17.dxc5 Nxc5 18.Nbd4 Nh4 19.Be3 Rd7 20.Nxh4 Bxh4 21.b4 Ne4 22.g3 Bg5 23.f4 Be7 24.Bb5 Rc7 25.Nc6 Qxd1 26.Rexd1 f6 27.Nxe7+ Rxe7 28.Rd7 Rxd7 29.Bxd7 Bf5 30.Bd4 fxe5 31.Bxe5 Nf6 32.Bxf6 Rxf6 33.Rc7 a5 34.b5 Be4 35.Bc6 Bb1 36.Rb7 Bxa2 37.Rxb6 e5 38.fxe5 Re6 39.Ra6 Bc4 40.Rxa5 Rxe5 41.Ra8+ Kh7 42.b6 Bb5 43.Bf3 Re1+ 44.Kg2 Rf1 45.Be4+ g6 46.Ra7+ 1–0

Smirnov,P (2615) - Mchedlishvili,M (2560) [B12] 4th IECC Istanbul TUR (10), 10.06.2003 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.Ngf3 Ne7 7.Be2 Bg6 8.0–0 Nf5 9.c4 Nxe3 10.fxe3 Be7 11.cxd5 cxd5 12.Qb3 Qb6 13.Bb5 Rd8 14.Qa4 a6 15.Bxd7+ Rxd7 16.Rac1 Qd8 17.Rc3 0–0 18.Rfc1 Qe8 19.Nb3 h6 20.Rc8 Rd8 21.Qxe8 Rfxe8 22.R8c7 b6 23.R1c6 Rb8 24.Kf2 a5 25.Ke2 Bd8 26.Rc8 Rxc8 27.Rxc8 Kf8 28.Ne1 Ke7 29.Nd3 Kd7 30.Rc1 Be7 31.Nf4 Bh7 32.Nh5 Bf8 33.g4 Bg6 34.h4 Be4 35.Ng3 Bh7 36.Rf1 Ke7 37.Rc1 Kd7 ½–½

Pedersen,Steffen (2417) - Palo,D (2505) [B12] ch-DEN Koge DEN (3.1), 08.04.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.Ngf3 Ne7 7.Be2 Bg6 8.0–0 Nf5 9.c4 Be7 10.cxd5 cxd5 11.Qb3 Nxe3 12.fxe3 Rb8 13.Bd3 Bxd3 14.Qxd3 0–0 15.Rfc1 Qb6 16.e4 dxe4 17.Qxe4 Rbc8 18.b3 Qa6 19.Nc4 b5 20.Ne3 Nb6 21.Rf1 Rc3 22.h4 b4 23.Rae1 Qxa2 24.Ng5 Bxg5 25.hxg5 Qxb3 26.Rf3 Nd5 27.Rh3 h6 28.gxh6 Rxe3 29.Rexe3 Nxe3 30.Rxe3 Qd1+ 31.Kh2 Qh5+ 32.Rh3 Qf5 33.Qe3 g5 34.Rf3 Qg4 35.Rg3 Qh4+ 36.Kg1 Kh8 37.Qf2 Qf4 38.Rf3 Qh4 39.Rg3 Qf4 40.Rf3 Qh4 ½–½

Korneev,Oleg (2583) - Peralta,Fe (2531) [B12] It (Open) Seville ESP (8), 14.01.2005 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.Ngf3 Ne7 7.Be2 Bg6 8.Nh4 Nf5 9.Nxf5 Bxf5 10.g4 Bg6 11.h4 f6 12.h5 Bf7 13.f4 Qb6 14.Nf3 h6 15.b3 0–0–0 16.a4 fxe5 17.a5 Qc7 18.fxe5 Bb4+ 19.Bd2 Be7 20.b4 g6 21.c3 gxh5 22.gxh5 Rdg8 23.Be3 a6 24.Kd2 Qd8 25.Qf1 Kb8 26.Qh3 Qe8 27.Rag1 Nf8 28.Rxg8 Bxg8 29.Rg1 Bh7 30.Nh4 Qf7 31.Bxh6 Bb1 32.Rg7 Qf2 33.Rxe7 Rxh6 34.Nf3 Bg6 35.Qh2 Qxh2 36.Nxh2 Bxh5 37.Bxh5 Rxh5 38.Ng4 Nh7 39.Rxe6 Rh4 40.Re8+ Kc7 41.Rg8 Nf8 42.Rxf8 Rxg4 43.Rf7+ Kc8 44.Ke3 Rh4 45.Kf3 Re4 46.Kg3 Kb8 47.Rf4 Re3+ 48.Kg4 Kc7 49.Rf7+ Kd8 50.Kf5 Rxc3 51.Ke6 1–0

Ivanov,Alexander (2582) - Rubenchik,R (2356) [B12] 31st Eastern Open Washington DC USA (6), 28.12.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.Ngf3 Ne7 7.Be2 Bg6 8.Nh4 Nf5 9.Nxf5 Bxf5 10.0–0 f6 11.f4 fxe5 12.fxe5 Be7 13.Bh5+ g6 14.Be2 Bg5 15.Bf2 h5 16.Nf3 Be7 17.Qd2 h4 18.h3 Nf8 19.Be3 Nh7 20.c4 dxc4 21.Bxc4 Qd7 22.Rac1 0–0–0 23.Qa5 b6 24.Qe1 g5 25.d5 exd5 26.Bb5 Kb8 27.Bxc6 Qc8 28.Nd4 1–0

Svidler,Peter (2735) - Macieja,Bartlomiej (2613) [B12] Bundesliga 2004-5 Baden Oos GER (1), 13.11.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.Ngf3 Ne7 7.Be2 Bg6 8.Nh4 c5 9.c3 Nc6 10.Nxg6 hxg6 11.Nf3 Be7 12.0–0 0–0 13.Bd3 Qb6 14.Qe2 Rfc8 15.h4 cxd4 16.cxd4 Nb4 17.Bb1 Qa6 18.Qd1 Qc6 19.Ne1 Bxh4 20.a3 Na6 21.g3 Be7 22.Nd3 Nf8 23.Qg4 Nb8 24.Kg2 Nbd7 25.Rh1 Nh7 26.Qh3 Ndf8 27.Nf4 Bg5 28.Nxg6 fxg6 29.Bxg5 Nxg5 30.Qh8+ Kf7 31.Rh4 Qc1 32.Bd3 Nfh7 33.Rxc1 Rxh8 34.Rc7+ Kg8 35.Rg4 Rf8 36.Bxg6 Nf7 37.Rxb7 Nhg5 38.Rxa7 Rh6 39.Bxf7+ Nxf7 40.Rf4 g5 41.Rf3 Nd8 42.Rxf8+ Kxf8 43.b4 Nc6 44.Ra8+ Kf7 45.b5 Nxd4 46.b6 Kg6 47.b7 Nc6 48.g4 Rh7 49.Re8 Rxb7 50.Rxe6+ Kf7 51.Rxc6 Ra7 52.Rd6 Rxa3 53.e6+ Kf6 54.Rxd5 Ra4 55.Rf5+ Kg6 56.Re5 Rxg4+ 57.Kf1 Kf6 58.e7 Kxe5 59.e8Q+ Kf5 60.Qf7+ Ke5 61.Qg6 1–0

Golubev,M (2535) - Grischuk,A (2712) [B12] Bundesliga 2002-3 Luebeck GER (13), 09.03.2003 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.f4 h5 7.Ngf3 Nh6 8.Be2 Be7 9.Nb3 Rc8 10.Qd2 Be4 11.0–0–0 b6 12.Kb1 c5 13.dxc5 bxc5 14.Ng5 Bxg5 15.fxg5 Ng4 16.Bb5 0–0 17.Bxd7 Qxd7 18.Nxc5 Qb5 19.Nxe4 dxe4 20.Bd4 Rfd8 21.Qf4 e3 22.Rdf1 Rd7 23.Bxe3 Rxc2 24.Bc1 Nxe5 25.Qe4 Re2 26.Qa8+ Kh7 27.Re1 Rdd2 28.Bxd2 Nc4 29.Bc3 Rxb2+ 30.Ka1 Rxa2+ 0–1

Svidler,Peter (2733) - Erenburg,S (2513) [B12] ACP Blitz Final playchess.com INT (1.1), 17.04.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.f4 h5 7.Ngf3 Nh6 8.g3 a6 9.c3 Rc8 10.b4 Be7 11.h3 Bg6 12.Be2 a5 13.a3 b5 14.0–0 Nb6 15.Bf2 Ra8 16.Nh2 Bf5 17.Kg2 g5 18.fxg5 Bxg5 19.Bxh5 Na4 20.Nb1 Nb2 21.Qe2 Nc4 22.h4 Be7 23.Bf3 axb4 24.cxb4 Bxb4 25.Rc1 Be7 26.Nd2 Rg8 27.Kh1 Bh7 28.a4 Nf5 29.Nhf1 bxa4 30.Nxc4 dxc4 31.Bxc6+ Kf8 32.Qf3 Rc8 33.Be4 Rg7 34.Rxa4 Nxd4 35.Qe3 Nf5 36.Qf4 Qd4 37.Bxd4 Nxd4 38.Bxh7 Rxh7 39.Qxd4 1–0

Degraeve,JM (2569) - Czarnota,P (2432) [B12] 21st Open Cappelle la Grande FRA (3), 14.02.2005 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.f4 h5 7.Be2 Bg6 8.Ngf3 Nh6 9.a3 Be7 10.h3 Bh4+ 11.Bf2 Bxf2+ 12.Kxf2 h4 13.Nf1 Nf5 14.Bd3 c5 15.Bxf5 Bxf5 16.Ne3 Be4 17.Ng5 Bg6 18.c4 Qb6 19.cxd5 Qxb2+ 20.Qe2 Qxd4 21.dxe6 Qxf4+ 22.Nf3 Qg3+ 23.Kg1 fxe6 24.Qc4 Bf7 25.Rd1 0–0–0 26.Nf1 Qg6 27.Nxh4 Qh6 28.Nf3 Kb8 29.Rd6 Rhe8 30.h4 Bh5 31.Ng5 Nxe5 32.Qxc5 Qf6 33.Rh3 Rc8 34.Qf2 Qxf2+ 35.Kxf2 Rf8+ 36.Nf3 Rc3 37.Rxe6 Nxf3 0–1

Rublevsky,Sergei (2686) - Lastin,A (2611) [B12] TCh-SCG Men Budva SCG (7), 15.09.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.f4 Qb6 7.Qc1 h5 8.Ngf3 Nh6 9.Be2 Be7 10.c3 c5 11.0–0 Rc8 12.dxc5 Bxc5 13.Nd4 Ng4 14.N2b3 Nxe3 15.Qxe3 g6 16.Nxc5 Rxc5 17.Rfd1 Be4 18.b4 Rc8 19.a4 a6 20.a5 Qd8 21.c4 0–0 22.cxd5 Bxd5 23.Bxh5 gxh5 24.Nf5 h4 25.Qh3 Nxe5 26.fxe5 exf5 27.Rd3 Re8 28.Qe3 Rc2 29.Rad1 f4 30.Qxf4 Rxg2+ 31.Kf1 Qc8 32.Rxd5 Qh3 33.R1d3 Rg4+ 34.Rxh3 Rxf4+ 35.Kg2 Rxb4 36.Rf3 Re7 37.Rf5 Rc7 38.Rf3 Rb5 39.Rxb5 axb5 40.Rf6 Re7 ½–½

Arzumanian,G (2433) - Deviatkin,A (2506) [B12] Skanska Open Pardubice CZE (3), 25.07.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.f4 Qb6 7.Nb3 a5 8.a4 Bb4+ 9.c3 Be7 10.Nf3 Nh6 11.Be2 f6 12.h3 fxe5 13.fxe5 Nf7 14.Bf2 Ng5 15.Nxg5 Bxg5 16.0–0 0–0 17.Ra2 Rf7 18.Nd2 Nf8 19.Nf3 ½–½

Yagupov,Igor (2441) - Galkin,Alexander (2602) [B12] 57th ch-RUS Qualifier Tomsk RUS (6), 28.05.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.f4 Qb6 7.Nb3 a5 8.a4 Bb4+ 9.c3 Be7 10.Nf3 h5 11.Be2 Nh6 12.h3 Be4 13.0–0 Nf5 14.Bf2 Bxf3 15.Bxf3 Bh4 16.Bxh4 Nxh4 17.Be2 Nf5 18.Rf3 h4 19.Bd3 Rh5 20.Qc2 g6 21.Kh2 Kf8 22.Rd1 Kg7 23.c4 dxc4 24.Bxc4 Qb4 25.Nc5 Nxc5 26.dxc5 Qxc5 27.Qc3 Re8 28.Be2 Qxc3 29.bxc3 Re7 30.Rfd3 Rh8 31.Bf3 Rb8 32.Kg1 Rc7 33.Rd8 Rxd8 34.Rxd8 Ne3 35.Ra8 Nd5 36.Rxa5 Nxf4 37.Ra7 Nd3 38.a5 Nc5 39.Kf2 Rd7 40.Ke2 g5 41.a6 bxa6 42.Ra8 Rc7 43.Ke3 Rd7 44.Rc8 Rd3+ 45.Ke2 Rxc3 46.Rxc6 a5 47.Bh5 Ne4 0–1

Shirov,Alexei (2713) - Gustafsson,J (2579) [B12] Bundesliga 2003-4 Baden Oos GER (15), 25.04.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.f4 c5 7.Ngf3 Qb6 8.Rb1 Nh6 9.Nb3 c4 10.Nbd2 Bg6 11.h3 Nf5 12.Bf2 h5 13.g3 Qa5 14.a3 Be7 15.Be2 Nb6 16.0–0 Na4 17.Re1 0–0–0 18.Bf1 Kb8 19.b4 Qc7 20.Qc1 Nc3 21.Ra1 Ka8 22.Ng5 Bxg5 23.fxg5 h4 24.g4 Ng3 25.Bxg3 hxg3 26.Re3 Qb6 27.Nf3 Ne4 28.Kg2 Rh7 29.h4 Rdh8 30.h5 Qd8 31.Re2 Bxh5 32.gxh5 Rxh5 33.Qf4 Nxg5 34.Nxg5 Rxg5 35.Kg1 Rf5 36.Qg4 Rg5 37.Qf4 Rf5 38.Qg4 Rg5 ½–½

Short,Nigel D (2712) - Vallejo Pons,Francisco (2666) [B12] FRA-chT fin Belfort (11), 10.05.2004 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Be3 e6 5.Nd2 Nd7 6.f4 c5 7.Ngf3 Qb6 8.Rb1 Nh6 9.Be2 Rc8 10.h3 cxd4 11.Nxd4 Bc5 12.N2b3 Bxc2 13.Qxc2 Bb4+ 14.Kd1 Rxc2 15.Nxc2 Bc5 16.Nxc5 Nf5 17.Nxd7 Nxe3+ 18.Kd2 Kxd7 19.Nxe3 Qb4+ 20.Kd3 Qe4+ 21.Kd2 Qb4+ 22.Kd3 Qe4+ 23.Kd2 Qxf4 24.Rhf1 Qb4+ 25.Kd3 Qe4+ 26.Kd2 Qb4+ 27.Kd3 Ke7 28.Rfc1 Qe4+ 29.Kd2 Qxe5 30.Bf3 Rd8 31.Re1 Qf4 32.Ke2 d4 33.Nd1 Qc7 34.Kf1 Qc4+ 35.Kg1 Qxa2 36.Nf2 Qb3 37.Rbd1 d3 38.Rd2 f5 39.Re3 Qb6 40.Re1 Qb3 41.g4 g6 42.Kg2 Kf6 43.Re3 Qb4 44.Rdxd3 Rxd3 45.Rxd3 e5 46.gxf5 gxf5 47.Bd1 e4 48.Re3 Qxb2 49.Kf1 Qd4 50.Rb3 b6 51.Be2 a5 52.Nd1 a4 53.Rc3 Ke5 54.Rc4 a3 55.Nc3 Qd2 0–1 About TWIC Theory

A new electrical magazine for the chess community. High quality articles delivered to you in ChessBase, PGN or PDF format. Buy a subscription for 3 months for March, April and May 2005 here: US & Canada http://www.classicalgames.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=P ROD&Product_Code=001316 Rest of the World http://www.chess.co.uk/shop/cat183_1.htm