ghenghisclown wrote on 08/11/13 at 18:55:58:


Instead 13... Nd7 (attacking both the e- and c-pawns) seems fine for Black and was recommended by Watson in PTF4.  He didn't give analysis but some possibilities include:

14.Bxc3 dxc3 15.Ne2 Qc7 16.f4 Nxc5
14.Nf3 Nxc5 15.Bg5 Nxd3+ 16.cxd3 Qb6

ghenghisclown wrote on 08/11/13 at 09:48:51:


I would suggest looking more closely at 12...d4.

Markovich wrote on 06/07/10 at 20:47:18:

I take your point. I suppose if 21...Bg6 is OK, then surely 21...Bd5 is too.

Quote:

My plan is to get a new chess engine
...which I have done! Fritz8 was starting to look a bit tired, so Rybka4 seemed like a good idea. It's interesting to see how the two programs evaluate these positions differently - Fritz8 likes White, whereas Rybka4 thinks it's equal. In general, I think Rybka is more on the ball - after you play through some lines, Fritz climbs down.

So 20.Rd1 Bxe4 21.Rxd4 Bxc2 can be met with 22.O-O Rd8 23.Rc1 Rxd4 24.Nxd4 Ba4 25.Rxc3 Kd7, but Rybka's assessment of equality sounds fair.

I've come round to the idea of 16...Qd4 being a viable alternative to my suggestion of 16...Qc7. It may yet prove to be more accurate, as 16...Qc7 can lead to sharp positions where Black could get his fingers burnt.

Quote:

derdudea wrote on 06/02/10 at 13:32:39:


After 16...Qd4 17.Qxd4 (17.Qxg5 is harmless for Black on the evidence on your game) 17…Nxd4 18.Be4 Bd7 19.Ne2 Bc6 20.Nxd4 Bxe4 21.f3, your 21...Bd5!= looks to be a clear improvement on my 21…Bg6 – the bishop is offside on g6 (as Markovich’s lines perhaps show). So, to play devil's advocate, can White try for the advantage with an earlier improvement: 20.Rd1  ?

derdudea wrote on 05/29/10 at 09:15:12:

Markovich wrote on 04/27/10 at 00:21:02:


I like the idea of multiple alternatives, however I need some convincing about the viability of these! Both 16…Rg8 and 16…Qd4 ignore the plan of undermining e5 (which is a key idea of Black’s setup imo). Viz:

(a) 16...Rg8 17.h4! g4 (or 17...gxh4 18.Nf3) 18.f4 gxf3 19.Nxf3, when White offers the g-pawn to maintain the strongpoint on e5.

(b) 16...Qd4 17.Qxd4 Nxd4 18.Be4! Bd7 19.Ne2 Bc6 20.Nxd4 Bxe4 21.f3 Bg6 22.O-O-O, with a slight edge?

I would prefer White in either case (unless you can change my mind ).

derdudea wrote on 04/22/10 at 20:32:49:

Thanks for this . I look forward to seeing the full game!

You mean the rare 15.Bxc3, don't you?

Sorry, my bad, I was confused since the rest of the line is so similar.

Fllg wrote on 03/23/10 at 18:51:46:



If you read page 3 of this thread you will find that 14...g5 as played in Sutovsky -  Wang Hao 2008 is stronger and at least equal for Black.

Net Warrior wrote on 04/07/10 at 16:46:15:


That´s the point, isn´t it? In the end it all depends on personal tastes.

I for one quite like the positions after 4.Bg5 for White irrespective of a theoretical advantage and haven´t found something here to discourage me from playing it. I doubt White´s chances for an edge are greater after 4. e5.....

Ok I took time to see what you, Net Warrior, responded to me.

Net Warrior said:
Quote:


First of all, 12.Ne2 Nxc3 13.0-0 has been played by Kasparov just to give one name, against Korchnoi. The game is quickly equal despite the pawn, nothing more. And the game has been a quick draw as a corr game between 2 iccf's 2400 players in the same way as Kasparov-Korchnoi , year 2000.

I watched my own notes from months ago and I have a novelty in mind after 11..Qa5, I won't reveal my idea for the moment but to be honest it might not be enough to get an advantage as White. So the current evaluation of the line may be: equal. But even with 6.Bd2 I am not convinced that White has anything!

Fllg wrote on 03/23/10 at 18:51:46:


15...f5 looks like a blunder.  15...h4 takes a nice square away from the white queen which makes ...f5  more playable.  It allows a possible Rh5 rook lift and/or a possible h3 pawn assault.  After 15...h4  16. h3 white maintains a slight edge.   

Net Warrior, I will  try to find improvments for White in your last line with "my" Qf4 and I may post them soon.

Markovich, 6.Be3 may give anything to White, but I know a strong corr. player who always plays the MacCutcheon and never lost with him and he have faced mostly 6.Bd2, so this is maybe not sufficient for an advantage too. But if you think White is better, then what would you play after 6.Bd2 Bxc3 7.bxc3 Ne4 8.Qg4 g6 9.Bd3 Nxd2 10.Kxd2 c5? If the Mac Cutcheon don't give winning chances to White in strong corr level, maybe we will have to play 4.e5, the eternal debate 4.e5 vs 4.Bg5.

I'm having a very hard time understanding what has gone before on this thread, where very few have seen fit to supply the moves that precede their no doubt brilliant ideas.  But I've recently been reading Moskalenko on this subject, not only his book but also in the letters section of NIC-94.  I find his reasoning very persuasive.

6.Be3 Ne4 7.Qg4 g6! 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 c5! 10.Bd3 h5! 11.Qf4 (11.Qf3 Nxc3) 11...g5! 12.Qf3 Nxc3 is his main line (I think I have the moves right; I don't have the material in hand right now).  I looked at it and had trouble finding anything for White.  Moskalenko has a fanciful term for his kingside pawn expansion: Black Jet.  Obnoxious perhaps, but besides bowing to his chess strength, I admire his enthusiasm.

For one thing, I agree with him that 7...g6 should be preferred on principle to 7...Kf8.  Black should preserve his queenside castling option.  Only if 7...g6 were found wanting would I turn to the other.  Furthermore to me, 9...c5 looks a lot more active than taking right away on c3.

MNb wrote on 05/31/06 at 04:05:42:


I've been working on the white end of the Mac for a few months now.  I found an interesting intermezzo, 10...h5, that seems to offer black fair counterplay: 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Bb4 5. e5 h6 6. Be3 Ne4 7. Qg4 Kf8 8. a3 Bxc3 9. bxc3 c5 10. Bd3 h5 11. Qf3 Nxc3 12. dxc5 Nc6 13. Qf4 d4 14. Bd2.  Fritz 10 finds only a marginal edge for white here and this seems to be blacks best line.  Here's a game that white won but black is bound to improve somewhere.   Comments? 

 http://www.365chess.com/view_game.php?g=35682    

I thought about playing  7....g5 some time ago. Many lines, especially the sac-lines are quite faszinating, but the positional approach after 8.Ne2 Moskalenko gives in "The flexible french" deterred me from doing so. Moskalenko himself cites one of his own games, a terrible loss with the black pieces and offers no improvement.

Paul Cumbers wrote on 01/19/10 at 11:48:04:

ok ... this line quite convincing and White has 21.Rh1 Kc7 22.Bh6 +/- too

Now my best line for Black is 14..g3 (instead of 14...c6) 15.Nh5 (15.fxg3 Qxg5 ; 15.g6 fxg6 16.Bc4 Bxf2 17.gxf2 Nxe6 18.Nb6) Qb4 16.Nf6+ Nxf6 17.gxf6 Bd7 18.a3 Qa4 19.Bh6 ooo

dom wrote on 01/18/10 at 20:39:00:

That's an interesting question about the relative merits of 13...d4/13...Nc6. I'm not sure exactly why 13...d4 has taken over as the main move. In general terms, there are certain situations where Qd5 is available, or Nd5 can be a useful regrouping move, or the bishop can seize the long diagonal on b7/c6. Or maybe it's just fashion! At any rate, it's notable that David Smerdon has played this way twice - once via 7...g6 (against Goh Wei Ming) and once via 7...g5 (against Areshchenko). In both games, White played Qf6 (instead of 15.Bxc3 in Ledger v Cumbers) and Black got a good position.

Wow, those lines in the queen sac variation are pretty terrifying! But after 7...g5 8.h4 h5 9.hxg5 hxg4 10.Rxh8+ Bf8 11.Nxe4 dxe4 12.Ne2 Nd7 13.Ng3 (or 13.Nf4 Qe7 14.O-O-O c6 15.g6 fxg6 16.Bc4 Nb6 17.Nxg6 Qg7 18.Rxf8+ Kd7 how can you stop there??  e.g. 19.Bxe6+! Kxe6 20.Rf6+ Kd7 21.d5! cxd5 22.e6+ Kd6 23.Bd4 Qg8 24.e7+ Be6 25.Nf4 Kxe7 26.Rxe6+ Qxe6 27.Nxe6 Kxe6 looks about level) 13...b6 14.Nxe4 Bb7 White has 15.g6! fxg6 16.Bg5 Bxe4 17.Bxd8 Rxd8 with approximate equality.

Paul Cumbers wrote on 08/16/09 at 13:55:40:

Yesterday, I finally got the chance to play 10...h5 in a serious game, and it was a disaster . White tried 11.Qf4 (instead of 11.Qf3), and came up with an interesting novelty on move 15:

Dave Ledger 2245 v Paul Cumbers 2218, 4NCL 17.1.2010
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Be3 Ne4 7.Qg4 g6 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 c5 10.Bd3 h5 11.Qf4 g5 12.Qf3 Nxc3 13.dxc5 d4 14.Bd2 Nc6 15.Bxc3!? dxc3 16.Qe3 Qd5? 17.Nf3 g4 18.Be4! Qc4? 19.Bxc6+ bxc6 20.Ng5 and with the knight coming to e4 and d6, I was busted and duly lost (the rest of the game is academic).

A painful experience, but not enough to put me off this line... The good news is I think Black can improve with 16...Qc7! e.g. 17.h4 Nxe5 (17... g4?! 18.f4! gxf3 19. Nxf3 and White holds onto e5) 18.hxg5 Bd7 19.Be4 O-O-O 20.Qxc3 Bc6 21.Bxc6 Nxc6 22.Nf3 e5, unclear.

Maybe next time... 

Matemax wrote on 08/17/09 at 11:44:50:
Quote:


Okay,let's have a look:
13. Rf3 Bd7 14. Bd2 Ne4 15. Bb4 c5! 16. dxc5 a5! 17. cxb6 axb4 18.Bxe4 dxe4 and black seems to have a slight edge. Improvements might be found, of course.

Matemax wrote on 08/16/09 at 21:02:29:


This is an important suggestion. I think the best variation for black is 12... Nb6 13. h5 g5 14. f4 gxf4 15.Qxf4 (15. Bxf4 Bd7 16. Qg7 O-O-O 17. Bh7 Ne4 18. Bxh6 Ba4 19. c3 Qd7 20. Ne2 f5! 21. Bg6 Qb5 with an attack) 15... Bd7 16. Bf2 Ne4 17. Bh4 Qf8 18. Ne2 Rg8 19. Bxe4 dxe4 20. Ng3 Nd5 21. Qxe4 Bc6 22. c4 Ne7 23. Qc2 O-O-O 24. O-O-O Rg4 with a good position for black. 

[quote author=Porcus link=1104416123/45#49 date=1250430940
I also wonder whether McDonald wrote the material for his book before the Sutovsky v Wang Hao game. Either way, I would take some convincing about the line he recommends (i.e. 9.bxc3 Nxc3 10.Bd3 Nc6 11.h4 Bd7!?, although I don't have the book). I'll be giving 10...h5 a try if/when I get the opportunity! [/quote]

I saw the Wang Hao game - with his comments - at least 6 month before McDonald´s book was published.
His booked is aimed at OTB players with an rating between 1200 - 2000 and he tries to pick variations based on understanding, so 10....h5 could not have been his choice because it is is way to complicated and only playable if you 
- have an excellent memory and analysed it deeply
- or like russian roulette
- or play CC (I will love to play it there)

If he had written a 400 pages repertoire book for experts he would have chosen 10....h5.

But only GM McDonald can enlighten us.

derdudea wrote on 08/15/09 at 08:06:59:

Food for thought.

I also wonder whether McDonald wrote the material for his book before the Sutovsky v Wang Hao game. Either way, I would take some convincing about the line he recommends (i.e. 9.bxc3 Nxc3 10.Bd3 Nc6 11.h4 Bd7!?, although I don't have the book). I'll be giving 10...h5 a try if/when I get the opportunity!

derdudea wrote on 08/10/09 at 21:49:12:

Wow!

Knights on the border will help to bring order!
Knights on the side will (a) give you much pride, (b) surely provide!

Who'd have believed that the knight on a4 would be well-placed even with White's bishop on d4? But the knight pressurises the pawn on c5, and leaves the d-file clear for when a rook comes to d8. White can't maintain his bishop on d4 anyway, so the knight is only stranded temporarily.

So is 19...Na4! the move that Wang Hao had prepared against Sutovsky? Your analysis certainly indicates that Black is OK here. It might be slightly drawish, but you can't have everything I suppose! I reckon this line with 10...h5 could be Black's best against 6.Be3.

derdudea wrote on 08/10/09 at 18:33:43:


It might be useful to know that Grabuzova was a pupil of Mikhail Shereshevsky, who is, or at least was, a great expert in the Mac.

Here's a fascinating attempt by Black to combat 6.Be3 (this game was analysed by Neil McDonald in the August 2008 French update):

Sutovsky v Wang Hao, RUS 2008
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Be3 Ne4 7.Qg4 g6 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 c5 10.Bd3 h5 11.Qf3 Nxc3 12.dxc5 Nc6 13.Qf4 d4 14.Bd2 g5 15.Qxg5 Qxg5 16.Bxg5 Nxe5 17.Nf3 Rg8 18.Bf6 Nxd3+ 19.cxd3 Nd5 20.Bxd4 Rxg2 21.Be5 Rg4 22.h3 Ra4 23.Rg1 f6 24.Bb2 Kf7 25.d4 b6 26.cxb6 Nxb6 27.Nd2 Rb8 28.Rg3 Nd5 29.Rb3 Rxb3 30.Nxb3 Ra6 31.Nc5 Rb6 32.Bc1 h4 33.Bd2 e5 34.dxe5 Bxh3 35.Nd3 Bg2 36.Nf4 h3 37.Nxd5 h2 38.Ke2 Bxd5 39.f3 Rb3 40.Be3 f5 0-1

What I'm trying to figure out is why Sutovsky didn't play the obvious 17.Bf6!. I wonder what Wang Hao had prepared against this... As far as I can work out, after 17.Bf6 Nxd3+ 18.cxd3 Rg8 19.Bxd4 Nd5 20.g3! (20.Nf3 Rxg2 would transpose to the game), White just seems to be a pawn up for not much! Any suggestions?

Not so quick. You can follow my example and chose the Classical classical instead: 4...Be7. I like the variation 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.f4/7.Qd2 a6.

Yes, hmm. I see I shouldn`t even have suggested Nd7 in the first place. To me Qg4 g5 then looks like black`s most interesting option. I`ll have a closer look at it and tell you my conclusions when they are ready.

Hmm, why has 10...Nd7 never been tried?

I have given up the MacCutcheon, as White's play appeals more to me. I don't see the point of 13.f3 in the Memers/Amonatov line. Anything wrong with 13.f4 ? My quick analysis runs Nf5 14.Bd2 Ne4 15.fxg5 hxg5 16.Bxe4 dxe4 17.Qxg5 Qxg5 18.Bxg5 Nxd4 19.o-o-o c5 20.Bf6 Rh6 21.c3 Nc6 22.g4 and I prefer White, despite of the opposite coloured bishops.
Good old hacker Klovans played 13.Nf3 Bd7 (c5!?) 14.Nxg5 against Shereshevski in the Sokolsky Mem 1978. I am not sure what to make of that. All in all White has many interesting attacking chances.

@Inn2,

Sorry for the delay. I agree with your statement except for the reply to 7.Qg4 g6(still alive) 8.a3 Bxc3 9.bxc3 Nxc3 10.Bd3 Nc6 11.h4 Ne7 12.h5 g5 13.f3 c5(best not Bd7) 14.dxc5 Nc6 15.Bd2 f5(not d4) 16.exf6 Qxf6 16.Bg6+ with chances for both side.
                                                       15.f4 Qa5(not f5) with chances for both side.  This is the lines I like against 6.Be3 Ne4.

Best regards
Memers

Hello;

1. I, also agree with majority. Both main lines, 7.Qg4 g6 and 7.Qg4 Kf8(Coffin Rook), are in dire strait. I, like HgMan, have scuttled toward 7.Qg4 g5!?.
2. I noticed that CBM 106 have an opening section on 6.Be3, what is GM Finkel's conclusions?? and does he analyze 7.Qg4 g5 in depth?? Specifically that fascinating, out of box, and anti-computer game of GM Shirov-GM Volkov 2003?? The game is given below.

Shirov,A (2730) - Volkov,S (2620) [C12]
ECC, Rethymnon GRE (2), 2003
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Be3 Ne4 7.Qg4 g5 8.h4 h5 9.hxg5 hxg4 10.Rxh8+ Bf8 11.Nxe4 dxe4 12.Ne2 c5 13.0–0–0 Qa5 14.Nc3 cxd4 15.Bxd4 Nc6 16.Nxe4 Nxd4 ½–½

Thanks

I started this thread suspecting black has problems. And I still do! Even if black is theoretically okay, the problem is White's position is practically easier OTB.

Is there any verdict available on the current status of the Be3-McCutcheon ? Black having problems?

Sorry.  18 ... Qe7 loses out to 19 Nxg5 hxg5 20 Bxg5.  Back to the drawing board, I suppose. 

Its ok, it happen to all of us.

Hello;


Guadalpi,D (2315) - Vallin,G (2356) [C12] 
FRAchT Nat1 (5.5), 2002 
 
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Be3 Ne4 7.Qg4 Kf8 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 Nxc3 10.Bd3 c5 11.dxc5 Nc6 12.Nf3 f5 13.exf6 Qxf6 14.Qh5 e5 15.Bg6 Be6 
Black wants to win; after 15...Kg8 White can force a draw with 16.Bg5. 
 
16.o-o Kg8! 
Black is facing problems after 16...Bf7?! 17.Nh4 Rae8 18.Bd2! see above.

To Mnb;

1. Don't you mean the other way? 15....Kg8!,the right move order, as 15....Be6 allows white to play the drawish endgame with 16.Bg5 Bg4. After 16.0-0 Be6 the game gets back to your quoted game and analysis.

2. IMO, this actually should be the right move order. Now, 17.Rae1, black can force a draw with 17....Ne7. The other  moves are 17....Rd8(Fressinet-Vallejo Pons, 2000) and 17.....Bf7(probably main) 18.Nh4 Re8 transposing back to Lanka-Morozevich 1998). Here, instead of 19.f3, white should play 19.Bd2 Ne4 20.Bc1 completing deveopment of his pieces and offering the c5 pawn. I believe this is the critical postion in this variation.

3. There may be holes in the above variation, but I recommed black should take the draw at 17.Rae1 Ne7=

4. I'm curious, how do you highlite and put the previous postings in the white square ?? As you can see from this posting, I just cut and paste. Overall, this method looks clumsy.

Have a nice one!!

Incidentally, 18 f4! in the mainline looks very persuasive as well.

18.Bd2!! looks strong. Two exemplary lines:
a)18...Ne2+ 19.Kh1 Ned4 20.f4! e4 21.Bc3 e3 22.Rfb1 (to avoid 22.Rab1 e2!)
b)18...Ne4 19.f4! exf4 20.Bxf7 Qxf7 21.Rxf4 Nf6 22.Ng6.

My initial feeling is that Black has better options later.  Goloschapov seems to have improved on Kasparov's play with the White pieces.

[Site "Dhaka"]
[Date "2003.03.08"]
[White "Goloshchapov,Alexander"]
[Black "Reefat,Bin Sattar"]
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Be3 Ne4 7.Qg4 Kf8 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 c5 10.Bd3 h5 11.Qf3 Nxc3 12.dxc5 Nc6 13.Qf4 d4 14.Bd2 Na4 15.Bb5 Nxc5 16.Bxc6 bxc6 17.Bb4 Qd5 18.0-0-0 Kg8 19.Nf3 Qe4 20.Qg5 Nb7 21.Rxd4 Qf5 22.Rf4 Qxg5 23.Nxg5 c5 24.Bc3 Nd8 25.Rd1 Bb7 26.Rd7 Bxg2 27.Ba5 Nc6 28.Rfxf7 Rh6 29.Rxg7+ Kh8 30.Bd2 Bd5 31.Nh3 Nxe5 32.Bxh6 1-0

11 Qf3 and 12 dxc5 look like important improvements that put the question to Black.  Reefat's 14 ... Na4 looks weak, but 14 ... Nd5 looks better.  See this junior game (U-12--!!), which is now quite old.  Jakab does seem to have produced a number of innovations in the Mac.

[Site "Paks"]
[Date "1996.??.??"]
[White "Hudecz,Viktor"]
[Black "Jakab,Attila"]
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Be3 Ne4 7.Qg4 Kf8 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 c5 10.Bd3 h5 11.Qf3 Nxc3 12.dxc5 Nc6 13.Qf4 d4 14.Bd2 Nd5 15.Qe4 Nde7 16.Ne2 Qd5 17.Qxd5 Nxd5 18.f4 Ke7 19.Bc1 Nc7 20.Bb2 Rd8 21.Rd1 Nd5 22.g3 Ne3 23.Rd2 Rd5 24.a4 Ke8 25.Bb5 Bd7 26.Ba3 a6 27.Bd3 Na5 28.Be4 Bc6 29.Bxd5 Bxd5 30.Rg1 Nac4 31.Bc1 Nxd2 32.Kxd2 Ng4 33.h3 Nf2 34.Nxd4 Ne4+ 35.Ke3 Nxc5 36.a5 Rc8 37.g4 Ne4 38.gxh5 Rc3+ 39.Ke2 Bc4+ 40.Kd1 Rxh3 41.f5 Rxh5 42.fxe6 fxe6 43.c3 Bd3 44.Nf3 Rh3 45.Ng5 Nxc3+ 46.Kd2 Nb1+ 47.Ke1 Rh2 0-1

I'm still not crazy about Black's chances in this line.  The most recent game I've come across is De Vreugt-Porat 2004.  11 ... Qa5 doesn't look terribly persuasive, though.

[Site "Hoogeveen"]
[Date "2004.10.15"]
[White "De Vreugt,Dennis"]
[Black "Porat,Shi"]
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Be3 Ne4 7.Qg4 Kf8 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 c5 10.Bd3 h5 11.Qf3 Qa5 12.Ne2 cxd4 13.Bxd4 Nc6 14.Qe3 b6 15.0-0 Bb7 16.Rfb1 Nxd4 17.Qxd4 Qc5 18.f3 Qxd4+ 19.cxd4 Nd2 20.Rb4 Ke7 21.a4 Rhc8 22.a5 Nc4 23.Kf2 Rc7 24.Bxc4 Rxc4 25.Rxc4 dxc4 26.axb6 axb6 27.Rxa8 Bxa8 28.h4 Kd7 29.Ke3 Kc6 30.Kd2 Kb5 31.Kc3 g6 32.Nf4 Bc6 33.Nh3 Bd5 34.Ng5 Ka4 35.Kb2 b5 36.c3 b4 37.Nxf7 Bc6 38.Ng5 Bd5 39.Nh3 b3 40.Nf4 Kb5 41.Nxg6 Kc6 42.Nf4 Kd7 43.Nxd5 exd5 44.g4 Ke6 45.gxh5  1-0

Quote:


I'm inclined to agree that 13 ... d4 may be a bit premature, but I wonder if we aren't dismissing the move a little too quickly.  d4 is commonly played in lines where White plays 13 exf6, and the trouble in this game emerges after White plays 18 Bxf5.  Is there a way Black can follow his plan of d4/Qd5, but get back in time before 19 Rd6?

As I never trusted 6.Be3 Ne4 7.Qg4 Kf8! for White, I used to play 6.Bd2 Bxc3 7.bxc3 Ne4 8.Qg4 g6 and only now 9.Be3, with the only difference, that the pawn is on a2 in stead of a3. In a club game Van Engen-Stellwagen, Hilversum 2003, happened 9...Nxc3 10.Bd3 Nc6 11.h4 Qe7 12.h5 g5 13.f4 Qb4! (shows that the pawn belongs on a3) 14.Nf3 Ne4 15.Ke2 f5 16.exf6 e5 17.f7+ Kf8 18.f5 Bxf5 0-1.
According to Van Engen, who wrote 4 articles on the McCutcheon in Dutch magazine Schaaknieuws, somewhat better is 12.Bd2 Qa3 13.Bxg6 Nxa2! Van Engen concludes that White should therefore prefer 6.Be3. But is this final position really good for Black? What about 14.Bxf7+ Kxf7 15.Rh3!?
So what should White play, 6.Be3 Ne4 7.Qg4 Kf8 or 6.Bd2 Bxc3 7.bxc3 Ne4 8.Qg4 g6 (Kf8 9.h4 or 9.Bd3) 9.Be3!?

Those relying on statistics should note that 6.Be3 Ne4 7.Qg4 Kf8 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 c5 10.Bd3 scores a very healthy 67% from 48 games. Still I think White is struggling to prove something.

After 13...Qe8 14.Qh3 (which has netted White 3 out of 3) Qg6 15.Bd4 I simply think Nxd4 a positional mistake, as after 16.c3 this bishop almost equals a pawn. Now I am not a positional genius, but I do not see a way to make progress after Kf7. My comments on the four points of HgMan:

1. There are no open files and to keep the Whites bishops passive, Black must keep the position closed. So for the time being the bishop is OK on c8. In eventual endgames it can be played to a4, but also to h5. Indeed there is the option of b6 too.

2. The Black knights are the most active pieces on the board, so Black must not trade them unless there is a very good reason for it. At the other hand White will only play Bxe4 if there is an immediate follow up with f2-f3, opening an attacking file.

3. If Black postpones the exchange Nxd4, this point can be dropped. Instead Black sometimes has the option Qg4 as an introduction to a favourable simplification.

4. Yes, but the knight on e4 solves this problem.

I have looked at a few ways for White to open the position after 13...Qe8 14.Qh3 Qg6 15.Bd4 Ne4, but both 16.c4 and 16.Rg1 fail to Qg4! Also 16.c3 Kf7 17.Rg1 (17.Nd2 Rf8 or Nxd2 18.Kxd2 Qg5+) h5 18.Qh4 (18.c4 Ng5) Qg4 19.h3 Qxh4 20.Nxh4 g5 21.Nf3 g4 22.Nd2 Rg8 (g3!?) looks like Black having a decent position.
If I am wrong somewhere, shoot me.

1.  I don't have NIC72 and the analysis and evaluation by Goloshapov. 13....Qe8 14.Qh3 Qg6!? 15.Bd4 Nxd4 16.Nxd4 But, the tactical threat of 17.Bxf5 looks very strong and for a pawn, white has very good attack.

2.  Therefore, 15.Bd4 Ne4 16.c3 and Kf7 or Kg8 17.0-0 looks more natural.

3.  From the above position, Black's real time strategy should be b6 break to activate the Bishop or King safety and h5 to trade off the queens.

Which has urged me, to take up the McCutcheon as Black and means that I have a problem as White.

1. Yes, MNB, 13....Qe8 looks like the remedy to the game.  With plus 80 rating points, GM Volkov probably looked at the queen manuver and did not like the drawish nature of 14.Qxe8. His subsequent games in this variation, he played 10....Nc6 and 10....Bd7.

2. Usually, if you play g6 against both 6.Bd2 and 6.Be3, that is the "Main" line.  I'm pretty sure if you play Kf8 against both Bishop moves, the "Main" line would be Kf8.  I guess the "Maine" line depends upon which system you play.

3.  Finally, Happy New Years

Whoops, wrong variation. What I meant was 7.Qg4 g6! 8.a3 Bxc3 9.bxc3 Nxc3. So, instead of 7...Kf8!? why not the main line??

To my eyes (and in retrospect) it appears that 13... d4 is premature. Perhaps Black should finish development with 13... Kg8 first. 14. g4?! is met by 14...f4! 15. Bxf4 Qf8 16. Bd2 Ne4 (=+). 

Any other ideas?