Hi, I have a question.

1 e4 e6
2 d4 d5
3 Nd2 Nc6
4 Nf3 Nf6
5 e5 Nfd7
6 Bd3 f6

What should Black play after 7. Nh4 ?  Is not Qh5 a serious threat?

Darthmambo wrote on 01/25/03 at 20:13:41:


@Darthmambo,
1. I do play this variation! I have background in the 3.Nd2 Nf6 and found the lines very complex. I switched to 3.Nd2 Nc6 based upon less theory and less lines to memorize.
2. In a nutshell, I haven't notice any lines critical for Black.
3. This is what I use for the French Guimard from the Black side.
   
   A. 4.c3 e5 5.dxe5 Nxe5
                  5.exd5 Qxd5
   B. 4.Ngf3 Nf6 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bd3 f6
                                      6.Be2 f6
                                      6.Bb5 a6
                                      6.c3 f6
                                      6.Nb3 a5 with delayed c5 in the air for black.
                                      6.b3 f6
                                      6.c4 GM Mac talks about this line in pub.com.
 If there are critical lines for Black, I, also like to know.

Regards
Memers 
                 

9...fxe5?! and now

A) 10.Qh5+ Ke7 11.Ng6+ hxg6 12.Qxh8 e4 13.Bb1 Nxd4 14.Nb3 Kb7 with the threat Bb4+ . Matous-Felix,Tchecoslovaquie 1978 (Templare on chesspublishing forum) or 13.Fxe4 dxe4 14.Cxe4 Qa5+ 15.Bd2 Qh5 and Black has a good game 

B) 10.Nxe6! Qb6 11.oo! (11.Qh5+ Ke7 12.Nxf8 Kxf8 and Black king is safer on f-file than on e-file)  Nxd4 12.Nxd4 Qxd4 13.Nf3 Qg4 14.h3 Qh5 15.Bb5 e4 16.Ng5 Qxd1 17.Rxd1 and White has initiative.

I didn't find a way to escape as Black in line B).

Yes good idea to exchange (poor) bishop for the knight, but I don't think White will manage an attack, and White might have some problems on the h file.
21.Rad1 g6 

You can look at the same idea in 20.b4 Bb6 21.Bxf6 Kxf6 22.Ra3 (looks better than Rad1&Rd3 because one tempo more and 3-rank is longer for the queen) g6! Kengis-Moskalenko, SSSR 1984  Drasko =+

---------

14.oo "equal game and Black has good practical chances to win"

Dom -

I like 19.Qh3 in line C, but after 19...Qd7, I prefer 20.Bxf6 Kxf6 21.Rad1.  Black's knight can become too strong, so white needs to remove it.  There is still quite a lot of play left in this position.  My intentions are to use my rooks against black's king as quickly as I can.  I plan a rook lift (Rd3) coupled with Kh1 so I can push my f-pawn.  Meanwhile, my queen is ready to invade via h7 or h4.   

- Lost Highway

Dom –

15.Nb3 Nxb3 16.ab3 Be7 17.Qxd8 Bxd8 18.Be3 is ok for white.  15.Nf3?! Nxf3+ 16.gf3 e4 17.fe4 Nh5 18.Be3 leads to a quick draw (18…Bh3 19.Qh7 Qh4 20.f3)

- Lost Highway

Oh, by the way Lost, 

Karpov, in the same book mentioned above, says after 13...Kf7 "Black has quite a pleasant game for the small material loss."(p. 100) I remember some student olympiad game that I studied with 14.0-0 before the age of computer databases in which Black simply crushed White.  It waren't purty.

MNb, 

This time, it was a pure typo.  Thanks for pointing it out though!

Here is the game Van der Wiel - Timman:

[Event "Brussels SWIFT"]
[Site "Brussels"]
[Date "1986.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Van der Wiel, John TH"]
[Black "Timman, Jan H"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C06"]
[WhiteElo "2555"]
[BlackElo "2645"]
[PlyCount "110"]
[EventDate "1986.03.??"]
[EventType "tourn"]
[EventRounds "11"]
[EventCountry "BEL"]
[EventCategory "13"]
[Source "ChessBase"]

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7 5. c3 c5 6. Bd3 Nc6 7. Ne2 cxd4 8. cxd4
f6 9. Nf4 Nxd4 10. Qh5+ Ke7 11. exf6+ Nxf6 12. Ng6+ hxg6 13. Qxh8 Kf7 14. Qh4
e5 15. Nf3 Nxf3+ 16. gxf3 Bf5 17. Bxf5 gxf5 18. Bg5 Qa5+ 19. Kf1 g6 20. Bxf6
Qa6+ 21. Kg2 Qxf6 22. Qxf6+ Kxf6 23. Rac1 Bd6 24. Rhd1 Ke6 25. Rc3 g5 26. Rdc1
Kd7 27. Rb3 b6 28. Rd3 d4 29. h4 gxh4 30. f4 Rg8+ 31. Kh3 Ke6 32. fxe5 Bxe5 33.
Re1 Kd5 34. Rf3 Rg5 35. Kxh4 Rg4+ 36. Kh3 Re4 37. Rg1 f4 38. Rb3 Re2 39. Rg5
Kc4 40. Rg8 Bd6 41. Kg2 Bc5 42. Rg4 a5 43. Kf1 Rc2 44. Rxf4 a4 45. Rc3+ Rxc3
46. bxc3 Kxc3 47. Re4 a3 48. f4 d3 49. Ke1 Kb2 50. Kd2 Kxa2 51. Kxd3 Kb3 52.
Rc4 Bb4 53. Rc1 a2 54. f5 b5 55. f6 Kb2 0-1

I think the position after 26...Kd7 is worth a diagram:



Obviously Timman did not think this is that unpromising for the 1st player, as he went into this exact line again against Morozevich in 2000, but this time as White! (The game differed with 18...Rc8?) It can be found here commented by NM on chesspublishing, in which the game Van der Wiel - Timman is mentioned in the notes. I allow myself to quote  from this game: (from diagram position) 27. Rb3 b6 28. Rd3

Quote:


If this is indeed true and black cannot go for more without doing any dubious moves, then  this certainly looks like an unpleasant line to play against people eager to draw!

Obviously we must look closer on the 28...d4 29.h4-line to investigate if there is anything better, or if there is anything bad with it all. But seeing Timman`s comment after the game make me think that he was not entirely happy with his position during the game.

"Van der Weil"
Ouch, Dutch is such a difficult language. The GM's name is Van der Wiel.
Wiel means wheel.
I agree, that Van der Wiel-Timman is the model game.

Klick,

My source is Psakhis' 2003 book on the Tarrasch:

Following the game you cite above, Psakhis mentions

22. Qa4

(22. Qf6+ looks dubious according to Psakhis who cites Van der Wiel - Timman, Brussels 1986)

22. ... Qc6
23. Qb3 

... and now, instead of Bh6 as in Belov - Kozyrev, St. Petersburg 2001 or Belov - Smikovsky, Berlin 1998, Psakhis suggests ....

23. ... Bc5 as in Kurnosov - Iljushin, Samara 2002

24. Rac1 b6
25. Rhe1 Kf6
26. Qe3 Qd6
27. Qh6 a5
28. Rg1 Qf8
29 Qh4+ g5
30. Qa4 Qe8

P.S.: I believe that chesspub only mentions the Smikovsky but not the Kozyrev game

I prefer 3...Nf6 for Black, but 3...c5 and even 3...a6 have been effectively played in the past.  Klick, your question about 9.Nf4 had been answered pretty definitively several years ago:  White gets a small material plus for a large positional deficit.  However, recent games suggest that the position may yet be playable for White after all.  I personally still prefer Black, but now have to do more homework to find specific, concrete lines to prove it.   

I used to love playing against 9.Nf4 because it required an understanding of the position rather than specific moves, but now even this variation is beginning to get fritzified.  The final conclusions on this line will probably never be completely resolved.  But I believe in the old Steinitzian idea that if you haven't made any opening mistakes, any attack against you should be doomed.  (Yeah, I like to defend!)

I would have thought that the traditional view is that 3...c5 is the best.  For instance, Raymond Keene annotating Korchnoi's 3...c5 in one of his candidates matches against Karpov:  "No nonsense from Korchnoi.  Other 'interesting' moves are 3...Nf6 and 3...Nc6, but White is better in both cases."  It seems to me that 3...Nf6 has gained some theoretical ground in the years since then, but this may be the first time I've ever seen the opinion that it is better than 3...c5.  

The 3...Nf6 lines has traditionally been black`s move, although the Guimard is interesting. In many lines of the Nf6-Tarrasch, black gains dynamic play with good winning-chances after the exchange-sac on f3. Excellent if you want to try for a win! M.Gurevich has tremendous results with black in this variation. Take a look at some of his games and you will se what I mean.

However, is there any consensus on the 9.Nf4-move? How can black best play for a win without going into dubious territory with for instance 15...e4 in the mainline? I`ve found it a little hard to maintain reasonable winning-chances when playing against lower rated opponents....

Almost with 5.Nxe4 dxe4 6.Bc4 c5 (a6 7.a4 is no improvement) 7.d5 Nd7 8.dxe6 fxe6 9.Nh3!

this is a reply to the question on Qxf6 in the Tarrasch. It it not simply bad, however if you wish to know more I believe there is a topic covering it "Tarrasch, 3...Nf6, 5.Bd3, 9...Qxf6"

I think 1.e4 d6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nc6 is a rather risky option for Black after 4.Ngf3 Nf6 5.e5 Nd7 6.Nb3 (I think White has the better chances after 6.Be2 as well.)  This is of course the main line which Black doesn't get a chance to safely get in ...f6 anytime soon.  The positions may be playable, but are passive and certainly not to my tastes.

Just a brief reply as i dont have time to provide analysis but according to Tiviakov one of the worlds experts on the white side of the tarrasch the qxf6 line isn't very good, just look up some of his games and you'll find how to play the positions.

Yep sorry for being over the top in my assessment of your comments Dom, i realised that you meant Ngf3 first my main point was concerning the Nc6 which does have potential, and is the key question to the whole viability of the Guimard. I only wished to make it clear that Ngf3 had to be played thus limiting the options, White essentially has to play e5 he cannot just leave the pawn there as otherwise the d-pawn will drop with dxe4 and Nxd4.

Well i play the guimard variation and whilst some of what Dom said is correct i think on the whole is he is wrong about his assessment of the main lines.

Firstly e5 isnt an option because of simply Nxd4, so White must play either c3 or Ngf3 (the main move).
After 4. c3 black plays e5 and has excellent play in a sharp position, so 4. Ngf3 is the only move to challenge black. Then black plays Nf6 5. e5 Nd7 and Dom is completely wrong here the knight on c6 is by no means useless at all. The whole point of this line is that black intends a well timed f6 exf6 and then hopefully qxf6 when the knight is immediately ready to support the e5 break. It is upto White to prove this to be premature and restrain Black's activity and he is not very accurate then Black usually succeeds in making the e5 break then on the whole he will probably be even better as his pieces are naturally placed with the open f-file. With great accuracy White can gain an edge but it is nothing too significant, and in practice most players will be thrown by this unusual variation. I will post some analysis when i have more time, but I whole heartedly reccomend this variation, it may not be sound at gm level but for everyone else it is an ideal line creating instantly sharp play.

Also whilst Watsons play the french is ok its quite outdated, eg look at eddie dearings opinions on Qb6 in our discussion

Have your tried Watson's book "Play the French".  He has two  pretty good recomendations.