Quote:


afraid not..Mamedyarov-Smeets is a dead drawn endgame if Black returns the exchange and takes abit of care, there is some (unexceptional) analysis by Smeets in NIC yb 77 which comes to same conclusion. Perhaps thats why you don't see the Panov nowadays!~ 

with respect to Markovich, i have seen Aagaards book, but am not convinced (Aagaard is presumably writing for the white cause!?).  if White wants to squeeze anything out of the ending, perhaps should go for line with 15. Bg5+: 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 cxd5 4. c4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Nf3 Bg4 7. cxd5 Nxd5 8. Qb3 Bxf3 9. gxf3 e6 10. Qxb7 Nxd4 11. Bb5+ Nxb5 12. Qc6+ Ke7 13. Qxb5 Qd7 14. Nxd5+ Qxd5 15. Bg5+ f6 16. Qxd5 exd5 17. Be3 Ke6 18. O-O-O, but as Karpov-Kramnik Linares 1993 shows, the Black king is nicely active in the centre, and even the great master of the Caro-Kann failed to beat his own defence!

see inn2 good focus on games what did u think about memenderov-smeets and do u see any improvement for white it is a critical line

Hello, i think 5... Nc6 should be studied by every Caro-Kann player, even if you prefer playing against the IQP with 5... e6 (Emms' Scandinavian book 2nd ed covers 5... e6 by transposition and is excellent). I have played both moves, usually prefer 5... Nc6 against a stronger player, and 5... e6 against a weaker player. 

After 5... Nc6, White can force a drawish ending with 6. Nf3 Bg4 7. cd5 Nd5 8. Qb3 Bxf3 9. gxf3 e6 10. Qb7 Nd4 11. Bb5 etc, but this is theoretically acceptable for Black. So now White players go for 6. Bg5 and after dc4 7. Bc4 (a critical pawn sac) Qd4 8. Qd4 Nd4 9. 0-0-0 e5 10. f4 Bg4 11. Nf3, White has some compensation, see Grischuk-Bareev and Mamedyarov-Smeets (Smeet's 14... h6 is probably an improvement over Bareev's 14... Rc8).

its a matter of taste and occasion, 5... Nc6 liquidates pieces quickly so you can go home fast if you don't have much ambitions with Black, while 5... e6 gives more chances for both sides.