Hi,

I know this thread and DVD are quite a few years old now, but I recently picked up this work for what seemed like a relatively cheap price (like $15 CAD). I was in part prompted by a recent game I had, where after 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 e6, I went for 3 c3. The game continued 3...d5 4 exd5 Qxd5 5 d4 Nf6 6 a3 (which I vaguely recalled was Collins' tip for White, avoiding the line after 6 Be3 with ...Bb4xc3 and ...b6/...Ba6). After 6...Be7 7 Be3, we come to my question.

My opponent "obliged", so to speak, and took on d4, leading to one of the standard main lines of this variation, also reachable via 6 Be3 (I had my chances in that game, but eventually lost). However, there's also the possibility of 7...0-0!? (or some other non-...cxd4 move). Collins discusses this briefly and gives a game of his going 8 Be2, when after 8...cxd4 9 cxd4 etc., he admits that Black has forced White to put his Bishop on e2 instead of d3, but he likes the IQP for White anyways. Fair enough.

But wait, if 8 Be2 is the best White can do there, and the Bishop would rather be on d3 than e2, does that mean 7...0-0!? is simply the more accurate move order for Black? And if White can be move-ordered into sticking his Bishop on e2, does that mean 6 a3 is unnecessary, and that we should just start with 6 Be2.

I notice Collins has switched to 6 Bd3 for his more recent "Simple Repertoire" book. Could this have something to do with it?

Thanks.

Hi all,

Thanks to everybody for the various suggestions and questions relating to Anti-Sicilians. I have covered some of the lines in the January 2012 Chess Pub update, including a detailed look at 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.cxd4 d6 7.Bc4 dxe5!?, where my previous recommendation of 8.Bxd5!? Qxd5 9.Nc3 only leads to rough equality after 9…Qd6! 10.d5 Nd4 11.Nxd4 exd4 12.Qxd4 e5!. Accordingly I’ve provided some coverage of the endgame after 8.dxe5 and the IQP position arising after 9.Nxe5!?.
I hope to deal with some more of the problem lines in forthcoming updates.

Please do continue to post questions, several of the lines were new to me. As illustrated by Howell – Wang Yue, Hastings 2011/12 (also covered in the January update), there are many lines in the Anti Sicilians which have fallen out of fashion for no particular reason, so it’s always useful when people post a suggestion.

All the best,
Sam

This c3 dvd is almost the same as his dvd for chessbase

Sorry Top - was meant to be dxe5


Paul

Markovich wrote on 12/06/11 at 13:06:13:


I agree with TopNotch that 8.Nxe5 is the least well explored move. In DW anti-Sicilians it gets very little coverage (less than the alternatives A and B in the earlier post). In the line above, Wells considers 10.Qf3 to be critical (and hard for Black to equalise against) - he also discusses  the merits of 9. ...Bd6 although this has even less coverage, for which his conclusion is that it is fully satisfactory.

I disagree that Nxe5 is the best move for practical chances - I think that against a well prepared opponent both Bxd5 and exd5 offer more chance of achieving an edge from the opening.

Paul

Well of White's three posibilities I think option C offers the best practical chances:

1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.d4 cd4 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.cxd4 d6 7.Bc4 dxe5!?

A) 8.Bxd5 - Completely over-rated by official theory, primarily on the basis of one game by Kaidanov played in the mid 70's. For a more accurate illustration of this move's effectiveness, see the games Ekstroem, Roland - Gallagher, Joseph [2004] and Rakovic, M -Aguilar, S [2007].

B) 8.dxe5 Ndb4 has been shown to be non challenging.

C) Nxe5 Equal, but not so sterile as to deter either player from trying for the win. 

Collins almost total silence on these lines in his Repertoire Books and DVD's to date is rather suspicious in my opinion. Has he become another Dzinzi.

Tops

Well I prepared soemthing for Yang-Fan at the British this year, but then he played something else...

PatzerNoster wrote on 12/04/11 at 12:07:20:


That's very disappointing, lets hope he responds here before someone uploads a full review pointing out this continued shortcoming 

I'm sure that most people here are aware of it - but there is coverage of this line in the Everyman Dangerous Weapons Anti-sicilians title. I believe that Peter Wells wrote that chapter, but it could have been Richard Palliser ...

I believe I have found a way to a stable edge for White - but established theory and indeed the Sveshnikov mega-tome do not convince for White.

Paul

Does Sam Collins analyse the following important line on his new DVD:

1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.d4 cd4 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.cxd4 d6 7.Bc4 dxe5!?

In has past efforts Collins has brushed over this important continuation, despite it being of integral importance to the viability of his proposed repertoire. Now that he is working for chesspublishing.com it is hoped that he will rectify this.

Thoughts welcome.

Tops