Quote:


@Psiaczek,
The simple 7.Nh5 g6 ask the question to the rim Knight. Better for White is 7.exf6 Qxf6 and 7.Ng5 Ndxe5.

@French2006,
Since 3.Nd2 Nc6 in most lines concentrate on f6 center counter vs. 3.Nd2 Nf6 c5 break, the Guimard system looks more volatile. Of course IMO.

Regards
Memers

3...Nc6 is an interesting move in my opinion, but still I prefer 3...Nf6. With litle theoretical knowledge i ve done prety well with this move. It is sharper than 3...Nc6 isnt it why you play the french!?

This does look good thanks. 11 o-o stops black from playing e4 effectively (now Bxe4 is very dangerous) which is very important for white. My computer suggested the rather natural 11 .. Nf6!? which might be a slight improvement for black over taking on d4.

Certainly it can rapidly  get quite obscure eg 12 de Nxe5 13 Nxf8 Nxd3 14 Nxh7 Bf5!? etc. 

Sadly 12 de Nxe5 13 Bb5+! and then .. Kf7 14 Ng5+ Kg8 15 Be2 or .. Ke7 14 Nxf8 Qxb5 15 Re1 Kxf8 16 Rxe5 or 14 .. Kxf8 15 Be2 simply seem to leave black with a typical enough unpleasant IQP position before you start wondering about what his king & rook on h8 are doing  

I guess 13 .. Kf7 is best for black and you might manage to survive somehow from that position but it's not something to aim for. Still the line is probably tricky enough that it merits a footnote somewhere.

Since this seems to be a defacto 9 Nf4 thread I thought I should put this here.

I was intrigued to see 9 .. fe mentioned elsewhere - this isn't (iirc) mentioned in either Psahkis or Pedersen's recent Tarrasch books and is hardly played judging from the chessbase online database.

Is there any established refutation of this to account for the rarity? It certainly seems a fair bit riskier than 9 .. Nxd4 but I couldn't find any simple way to tie it down.

9 .. fe 10 Qh5+ Ke7 11 Ng6+ hg 12 Qxh8 e4 seems fine after (say) Bb1 Nxd4, although something like 13 Bxe4!? de 14 Nxe4 certainly looks like it could prove rather dangerous.

or 10 Nxe6 Qb6 11 Qh5+ Ke7 and then maybe 12 Nxf8 Kxf8/Rxf8 seem like more or less reasonable tries or 12 Ng5 trying to get the queen into f7. This line does seem annoying enough to account for Nxd4 being a better idea, but not for the ideas complete neglect.

Just interested really

Dom, 

Lost will appreciate my following comment:

14.0-0=

(Actually, there is plenty to analyse here, but the conventional wisdom and your own concrete analysis are plenty to go on for now!)

15.Nb3 Nxb3 16.axb3 Bf5 (and not Be7) 17.Bxf5 gxf5 18.Bg5 Bc5! and now

A) 19.Qh4 Qd6 20.Bxf6 (20.Rad1 Ne4 ... advantage to Black, I'll post next moves if you wish) Qxf6 21.Qxf6 Kxf6 22.Ra5 b6 23.Ra6 e4 24.Rac1 (24.Rfa1 Rc8 25.Kf1!? (25.Rxa7 Bd4! 26.Rd1 Rc2 -/+ ) Bb4!! Kramer-Chernin Somerset 1986 and advantage to Black according to Psakhis & Drasko, small advantage to White for Short with the same game reference)  with the idea b4 - Drasko. 

B) 19.Qxd8 Rxd8 advantage to Black

C) 19.Qh3 Qd7 20.Rad1 (20.b4 Bb6 21.Bxf6 Kxf6 22.Ra3 g6 Kengis-Moskalenko, SSSR 1984 Drasko ; 20.Bxf6 Kxf6 21.Rac1 Bb6 22.Rc3 g6 23.Qh4+ Ke6 Horvath-Barsov,Val Thorens 1996 Psakhis) Ne4 21.Be3 d4 22.Bc1 Nf6 = Bednarski-Kosten, Lille 1985

------------

15.Nxf3..... 18...Qh4 (and not Bh3, Black wants more than a draw) 19.f3 Bh3 20.Qh7 Bc5! 21.Bxc5 Qg5+ 22.Kf2 Qd2+ 23.Be2 Nf4 24.Kg3 and now instead of Nxe2+ given by MCO Sveshnikov-Vinokurov (MCO), Black has 24....Bxf1! 25.Bxf1 Nh5+ 26.Kh3 (26.Kg4?? Qf4+ and mat in 6 moves) Rc8 -+
or 19.f4 Qg4+ 20.Kf2 (20.Kh1 Qh3-+) Bf5!! 21.exf5 Be7 22.fxg6+ Ke6 23.f5+ Ke5 and advantage to Black
or 18.exd5 Qh4 19.Bxg6+ Kxg6 20.Qf8 and instead of 20...Bh3 MCO ( for example 21.Qf3 Rf8 22.Qe2 Rf6 23.a4 Kh7 24.Ra3 Rg6+ 25.Rg3 Nxg3 26.hxg3 Bxf1 27.Qxf1 Qd4 and draw: Qh3+-Kg8-Qc8+), Black has 20...Bf5 21.Qa3 Qg4+ 22.Kh2 Rh8 =

Is 14.oo an improvement ? I don't believe it.
I give some variations after 14...e5

A) 15.Nb3 Nf5 (15...Be6 is given by MCO but I prefer Nf5 keeping the pawns in the center) Beliavski-Cuartas,Bogota 1979 Zlotnik  and now 16.Bg5 (16.Kh1?! e4 17.Be2 Be6) Qb6! (e4 or a5 give unclear play ; Be6 is given in Psakhis's book Kosteniuk-Slavina, Minsk 2001) 17.Rac1 a5! Matanovic & Minev & MCO. The simple 15..Nxb3 might be better , giving same advantage as in the "main line" 14.Qh4 ,  Bednarski-Kosten, Lille 1985 - Drasko

B) 15.Nf3 Nxf3+ 16.gxf3  and now Black can play the line with Bf5 given in Psakhis's book Zlochevsky-Barsov,URSS 1987, but I prefer trapping the queen: 16..e4 (16..Nh5 17.Qh7) 17.fxe4  Nh5 is given in Short's book about the French, Krocian-Kolcak corr. 1988

In the 14.Qh4 line, maybe the move 18...Be7!? might be tried with the idea to exchange queens, since after 19.oo Black has 19..Qh8. Then 20.Qxh8 Rxh8 and Ke6 next move or 20.Qg3 f4 21.Qg2 Qh5. Unhappily I didn't a good variation vs 19.ooo!, computer move but can Black really attack White's king and defend his own king.

Klick, 

I had never seen those notes to the Timman game.  I was aware that Timman had tried the position as White against Morozevich, but as Karpov said in The Semi-Open Game in Action  there were several sharp alternatives at move 18, including 18...Rc8 which had been played before 1988.

Karpov stopped his analysis of the position at 24. and proclaimed that Black "had a strong center and a pawn for the exchange".  He didn't claim that Black has the advantage, but did point out that Timman "gradually outplayed his opponent and won the game."  (p.101).

Karpov's notes and subsequent practice have bourne out that Black has at least enough compensation for the exchange and perhaps a bit more.