Quote:After 1. e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Qb6 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.a3 Nh6 7.b4 cxd4 8.cxd4 Nf5 9.Be3 f6 10.Bd3 Nxe3 11.fxe3 fxe5 12.b5 Nxd4 13.exd4 e4 I feel that chances are balanced and complicated. Black faces an attack in the hopes of winning all of whites pieces.
My problem is that after 9...f6 10.b5 leads either to a draw or a better white position. the variation goes like this: 9.Be3 f6 10.b5 Nxe5! 11.dxe5 Nxe3 12.fxe3 Qxe3+ 13.Qe2 Qc1+ 14.Qd1 Qe3+ draw.
any comments on 10.b5 or proposed alternatives to blacks 9...f6 would be greatly appreciated.
thanks,
Nolan
(a) I think Black can successfully avoid the draw in the 10.b5 line: 9.Be3 f6 10.b5 Nxe5 11.dxe5 Nxe3 12.fxe3 Qxe3+ 13.Qe2 Qc1+ 14.Qd1, and now
14...Qb2! 15.Nbd2 fxe5 16.Rb1 Qxa3 17.Nxe5 Qc3! taking control of e5 (I had previously only considered 17...Qe3+ 18.Qe2, when White keeps a grip on e5), e.g. 18.Nd3 Bd6 preparing ...e5. With a strong centre and three pawns for the piece, Black has a good game.
(b) However, things aren't so clear in the other line! After 9.Be3 f6 10.Bd3 Nxe3 11.fxe3 fxe5 12.b5 Nxd4 13.exd4 e4 14.Bxe4 dxe4 15.Ne5 g6 16.0-0 Bg7 17.Kh1 Bxe5 18.dxe5 Qxb5, White has improved on 19.Nc3 (see Watson's PTF3) with
19.Nd2!. The knight is eyeing c4 (and d6) as well as e4. Look what happened in these two games:
Malvasio v Valli (email, 1999)
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.a3 Nh6 7.b4 cxd4 8.cxd4 Nf5 9.Be3 f6 10.Bd3 Nxe3 11.fxe3 fxe5 12.b5 Nxd4 13.exd4 e4 14.Bxe4 dxe4 15.Ne5 g6 16.0-0 Bg7 17.Kh1 Bxe5 18.dxe5 Qxb5 19.Nd2 Qd3 20.Qc1 Rf8 21.Rd1 Qe3 22.Re1 Qf4 23.Nxe4 Qxc1 24.Raxc1 Bd7 25.Nf6+ Rxf6 26.exf6 Bc6 27.Rxe6+ Kf7 28.Re7+ Kxf6 29.Rxh7 Rd8 30.Rf1+ Kg5 31.Kg1 Rd2 32.h4+ Kg4 33.Rf2 Rd3 34.h5 Kg5 35.hxg6 Kxg6 36.Rh3 1-0
Liedtke v De la Cruz (Germany, 2004)
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.a3 Nh6 7.b4 cxd4 8.cxd4 Nf5 9.Be3 f6 10.Bd3 Nxe3 11.fxe3 fxe5 12.b5 Nxd4 13.exd4 e4 14.Bxe4 dxe4 15.Ne5 g6 16.0-0 Bg7 17.Kh1 Bxe5 18.dxe5 Qxb5 19.Nd2 Qxe5 20.Nc4 Qd5 21.Qc2 Rf8 22.Rfd1 Qc6 23.Nd6+ Kd8 24.Qb2 Bd7 25.Rac1 Qa6 26.Qg7 Rf2 27.Nxe4 1-0
I don't see how Black can survive here, so instead of 15...g6 I think he should fall back on the alternative
15...Bd7! (given in Watson's PTF3). Let's look at three of White's continuations:
(i) 16.Qh5+ g6 17.Nxg6 hxg6 18.Qxh8 0-0-0 "with excellent play" (Watson), as happened in Karttunen v Tella (Finland, 2006) and Richter v Offinger (Germany, 2006).
(ii) 16.0-0 0-0-0! =+ when Uribe v Orsini (Buenos Aires, 2005) continued 17.Nf7?! Bxb5 18.Nxd8 Bxf1 19.Nf7 Bd3! with advantage to Black.
(iii)
16.Nc3! is critical. Now 16...0-0-0?! 17.Nf7! really does win the exchange, so Straka v Kolar (Czechia, 2004) went 16...Qa5 17.Rc1 Bxa3 18.Nc4 Qb4 19.Nxa3 Rc8. At this point, 20.0-0! would have given White a strong initiative. He has at least a draw with 20...Rxc3 21.Qh5+ g6 22.Qe5 Rf8 23.Rxf8+ Kxf8 24.Qh8+ Ke7 25.Rf1 Rc8 26.Qf6+ Kd6 27.Qf4+ Ke7 28.Qf6+ etc., if not more. So I suggest
19...0-0! (instead of 19...Rc8), turning this into a piece sacrifice! After 20.Qa4 Qe7 (20...a5!? is also interesting), Black switches his queen over to the kingside. The opponent's king is caught in the centre. Does Black have enough play? I spent some time analysing this position, but couldn't come to a clear assessment! It's complicated...
Any thoughts?