Rick, 

Thank you for sharing your game and its in-depth analysis.  I'll take a closer look at it later.  Do you have any comments to the game as well as lines?  Thanks again!

I recently played an email 2.a3!? game with a friend in Ireland. It was a lot of fun, but frustrating, as I missed some basic ideas in the positions, and often felt like my game with White was like a balloon with its air slowly leaking out. 

Rory and his trusty computers annotated the game for me; Later I added Fritz8 comments, which sometimes vary.

Kennedy,R - Nolan,R [B20]

Hi Rick. I've had a fairly good look at the game now and as you will see there are a couple of moves that seemd to alter the evaluation greatly. More than this though when it goes to show how inaccurate computers are. Several time I went down the computers suggested line only to find that actually it was crap. You really have to hold the comps'. hand and 'walk it' through. This in actual fact makes computer assisted analysis longer!   

1.e4 c5 2.a3 g6 3.b4 Bg7 4.Nc3 cxb4 5.axb4 e6 

[Fritz 8 (120s): 'Consolidates d5'] 
[0.59 Shredder 9.1 UCI  UCI: 5...d5 Nolan,Rory 6.exd5 Nf6 7.Bb5+ Nbd7 8.Nf3 Nxd5 9.0-0 0-0 10.Bb2 Nxb4 11.Re1 Nb6 12.Ne5 Bf5; 
5...d6 6.b5 +/=] 

6.d4 
'
[±' Fritz 8 (120s).]   
[6.Bb2 Ne7 7.h4 d5 8.Ra3 d4 9.Nb5 Nbc6 10.Nf3 e5 11.Bc4 f6 12.h5 a6 13.hxg6 hxg6 14.Rxh8+ Bxh8 15.Bb3 Bg4 16.Qa1 Rc8 17.Nh2 f5 18.f3 axb5 19.fxg4 Nxb4 20.gxf5 Rxc2 21.Kf1 Rc6 22.Ra8 Nc8 23.Be6 Nd3 24.Nf3 Nf4 25.Bb3 gxf5 26.exf5 Qf6 27.Qa7 Qg7 28.Ne1 Qg4 29.Rxc8+ Rxc8 30.Qxb7 Qe2+ 31.Kg1 Qxe1+ 32.Kh2 Qh4+ 33.Kg1 Ne2+ 34.Kf1 Ng3+ 35.Kg1 Qh1+ 36.Kf2 Qf1+ 37.Kxg3 Qf4+ 38.Kh3 Qxf5+ 39.g4 Qd7 40.Qb6 Qc6 41.Qxc6+ Rxc6 42.g5 e4 43.Kg3 Be5+ 44.Kg4 e3 45.dxe3 dxe3 46.Bxe5 e2 47.Bg3 Rc3 0-1 Pudas,T-Siebarth,R/Mureck 2004 (47)] 

6...Nc6 

[6...d6 7.Nf3±] 

7.Nf3 Qb6 

'?' Fritz 8 (120s).   
[2.24 Shredder 9.1 UCI  UCI: 7...d5 Nolan,Rory 8.e5 Bd7 9.Nb5 Bf8 10.c3 Qb6 11.Be2 Nxe5 12.Nxe5 Bxb5 13.0-0 Bg7 14.Bf4] 

8.Nb5 

'+-' Fritz 8 (120s).   

8...Nxb4 

When I was playing I felt that this was the critical positon, but as the analysis engines show there is huge variation in white's percieved advantage, what they all agree on though is that white is winning. 9.Ba3 
[Fruit 2.2: 9.c3 Na6 10.Bf4 Bh6 11.Qc1 Bxf4 12.Qxf4 Ke7 13.Bd3 h6 14.Qh4+ Kf8 15.0-0 Kg7 16.e5 g5 17.Qh5; 
Shredder 9.1 UCI  UCI: Nolan,Rory: 2.00 
Shredder 9.1 UCI  UCI: 9.c4 Qc6 10.Ba3 Bf8 11.Qb1 Na6 12.Bxf8 Kxf8 13.Ne5 Qb6 14.c5 Nxc5 15.dxc5 Qxc5 16.Qb2 f6 17.Nd3 Qb6 18.Qb4+ Kg7; 
Deep Junior 7: 9.Bf4 Qc6 10.Bd3 (10.Nd6+ Nolan,Rory 10...Kf8 11.c4 f6 12.Qb3 Na6 13.c5 Ne7 14.Bb5 Qc7 15.Bg3) 10...d5 11.Nc7+ Kd8 12.0-0 e5 13.Bxe5 Bxe5 14.Nxa8 Bb8 15.Ne5 Bxe5 16.dxe5 Qc5 17.Qf3 Be6 18.exd5] 

9...Bf8 10.c4 

[Fruit 2.2: 10.Qb1 Na6 11.Nd6+ Bxd6 12.Qxb6 axb6 13.Bxd6 Nh6 14.Bd3 f5 15.e5 Nf7 16.Bb4 Kd8 17.0-0 Kc7 18.Rfb1] 

10...Qa5 11.Nd2 Qd8 

[2.92 Shredder 9.1 UCI  UCI: 11...Rb8 Nolan,Rory 12.e5 d5 13.Be2 Bd7] 

12.c5 Nc6 

[The computer reckons that 13.d5 is definitely the best move. It does have tha advantage of preventing my 14...Nd5 (after which I felt much more comfortable).] [Fruit 2.2: 12...Na6 13.Nc4 Be7 14.Nbd6+ Kf8 15.Qf3 f6 16.Be2 Bxd6 17.Nxd6 Qa5+ 18.Kf1 Kg7 19.Bb2 Qd8 20.Bc3 Ne7 21.Bxa6 bxa6 22.Ba5 Qf8 23.Bd2] 

13.Bb2 

[Fruit 2.2: 13.d5 a6 14.Bb2 f6 15.dxc6 dxc6 16.Nd6+ Bxd6 17.cxd6 Qxd6 18.Qf3 e5 19.Nc4 Qb4+ 20.Bc3 Qc5 21.Rd1 b5 22.Nd6+ Kf8 23.Nxc8 Rxc8 24.Rd7 h5] 

13...Nf6 

[13...Bg7 14.Nc4+-] 

14.Qf3 is Fruits' suggestion and it does seem to keep the air in your balloon:) After 14.e5 Whites advantage is halved. 14.e5 
[Fruit 2.2: 14.Qf3 Be7 (14...Ng8 15.Qg3 e5 16.dxe5 Bg7+-) 15.d5 exd5 16.exd5 0-0 17.d6 Ng4 18.dxe7 Qxe7+ 19.Be2 Nge5 20.Qd5 Re8 21.0-0 Nb4 22.Qd6 Qxd6 23.Nxd6; 
14.d5 Bxc5 15.Qf3] 

14...Nd5 15.Ne4 Be7 16.Nbd6+ Kf8 17.Qf3 f5 18.exf6 Bxd6 19.Nxd6 

[19.cxd6?! Qb6 20.Rb1 Qb4+ 21.Nd2 Nxd4+/=] 

19...Ncb4 20.Bd3 

[0.87 Shredder 9.1 UCI  UCI: 20.Ra4 Nolan,Rory 20...a5 21.f7 Nc2+ (Fruit 2.2: 21...b6 22.Bc1 h5 23.Bd2 bxc5 24.dxc5 Rb8 25.Bb5 Ba6 26.Bxa6 Nxa6 27.0-0 Qf6 28.Qxf6 Nxf6 29.Rxa5) 22.Kd1 Ncb4 23.Bc4 b5 24.Bxb5 Ba6 25.Bxa6 Rxa6 26.Ke1 Qf6 27.Qxf6] 

20...Qxf6

From here on all the computers are showing a draw (more or less) 21.Qxf6+ Nxf6 22.Kd2 Ke7 23.Bc3 
[0.08 Shredder 9.1 UCI  UCI: 23.Bc4 Nolan,Rory 23...Rf8 24.f3 h6 25.Rhb1 g5 26.Ba3 Nc6 27.Kd3 Na5; 
23.Ba3 Nc6±] 

23...Nbd5 24.Rhb1 Nxc3 25.Kxc3 Nd5+ 

[0.99 Shredder 9.1 UCI  UCI: 25...b6 Nolan,Rory 26.Bc4 (26.Kd2 bxc5 27.dxc5±) 26...bxc5 27.dxc5 Rf8 28.f3 a5 29.Ra3 Ba6 30.Bb3 Rab8 31.Re1 Bb7] 

26.Kd2 Rf8 27.f3 b6 

[27...Nf4!?± Fritz 8] 

28.Be4 

'+-' Fritz 8 (120s).   

28...bxc5 29.dxc5 a5 

[1.75 Shredder 9.1 UCI  UCI: 29...Kd8 Nolan,Rory 30.Bxd5 exd5 31.Ke3 g5 32.Kd4 a5] 

30.Bxd5 

[1.12 Shredder 9.1 UCI  UCI: 30.Ra4 Nolan,Rory 30...Kd8 (30...Ra6+-) 31.Rb5 Kc7 32.Rbxa5 Rb8 33.Ra7+ Kc6 34.R4a5 Rb2+ 35.Kd3 Rb8 36.Ra8 Bb7 37.Rxb8] 

30...exd5 31.Re1+ Kf6 32.Kd3 

[0.32 Shredder 9.1 UCI  UCI: 32.Ra4 Nolan,Rory 32...Ba6 33.Rf4+ Kg5 34.Rd4 Kh6 35.Rh4+ Kg7 36.Re7+ Kf6 37.Rxd7 Bf1 38.g3 h6 39.Rxh6 a4 40.h4; 
32.Kc3!?±] 

32...Ba6+ 

+/= Fritz 8 (120s).   

33.Kd4 Bc4 34.Nxc4 dxc4 35.Kxc4 Rfb8 36.Re2 Rb4+ 

Fritz 8 (120s): 'Black prepares a4' 

37.Kd5 a4 38.Ra3 h5 39.g3 Ra5 40.Re4 

[40.Rc2 Rb1+=] 

40...Rxe4 

'=' Fritz 8 (120s).   

41.fxe4 Ke7 42.e5 g5 1/2 - 1/2

Rick Kennedy

then according to bezgodov white has the choice of 9.d5 leading to a forced draw; 9.Bd2 with good compensation for the pawn or best: sacrificing another pawn with Nc2 which he analyses pretty deep leading to a winning advantage for white.

Hi!

I have played 2.a3 in blitz games.

An example  could be:

Me vs. someone, I remenber,

1.e4 c5 2.a3 Nc6 3.b4 cb 4.ab Nb4 5.c3 Nc6 6.d4 d5?! 7.ed5! (not 7.e5?) Qd5 8.Na3! this is the key move! 8...Nf6 9.Nb5 Qd8 10.d5! that's it! Ne5 11.Bf4 Nfd7 12.Nf3 black is already lost.

Another line , critical line is 

2...g6 3.b4 Bg7 4.Nc3 etc

and 3.c3!?

Bye!

er, obviously g6 itself isn't one of the declinations, but if used as the extra move in an already playable declined line, the extra piece on the d4 square makes it much more difficult for white to grab onto the center.

??? Still unsure about Challenging the Sicilian with 2.a3!? ? ???

Check out my review at chessville.com. Very good book even if the author, in his enthusiasm, tends to be a bit like Nimzovich, who supposedly rejoiced over advantages so small that his opponents couldn't even see them... Lots of new analysis by Bezgodov. This one was not "phoned in," and is nothing like a "database dump."

The earliest example I have of 1.e4 c5 2.a3 is the already mentioned game Randviir - Keres, Tallin, 1943 (0-1, 26), which actually came out of the move order 1.a3 c5 2.e4. Keres' idea was 2...Nf6 3.Nc3 Nc64. Nf3 d5. 

According to Canadian IM Lawrence Day, Bezgodov did not know of van Duijn's games (1950s onward) and articles, or of the games played by Duncan Suttles, Day, and Jonathan Berry in the 60s and 70s. (For that matter, Ariel Mengarini was playing 1.e4 c5 2.a3 as early as 1952) Dutch IM Gerard Welling passed the information on to Bezgodov.

Anyhow, van Duijn explained that he invented the opening during the championships of his school in The Hague. "What made me thinking about 2.a3 was simply the need to eliminate blacks c-pawn, in order to conquer the space in the center. And that succeeded.
Every year I became champion of the school!"

I agree with the poster who suggested that Wing Gambit fans scoop up the book.

Yes, I also think that after 8.Qb3! white has more than sufficient compensation.

Typing from memory is a bad habit.
This line is similar to Sireta-Edel, 1987:
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 g6 5.Nf3 Bg7 6.Bc4 d6 (imprecise; Nc6 7.o-o d6 8.e5) 7.e5 Nc6 8.o-o (White could have played 8.Qb3! according to Carr) Nxe5 9.Nxe5 Bxe5 10.Re1 e6 11.Nd5 exd5 12.Qxd5 and here Carr gives Qc7!
So after 1.e4 c5 2.a3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c3 dxc3 5.Nxc3 Bg7 6.Bc4 d6 7.Nf3 instead of Nf6 Black must play Nc6 first, when 8.e5 leads to nothing. Exactly in such lines it is hardly probable, that White can get away with the loss of tempo a3. So I meant 7.Nf3 Nc6 8.o-o Nf6 and 9...o-o with the ideas Bg4 and Ne5 or (in case White plays h3) Nf6-d7-e5. Because of the loss of tempo even the pseudo-sac Nxe4 comes into consideration sometimes.