Hello,

I am probably confused at what is being discussed here, but don't see the theoretical relevance of the Short v Andersson game. (Autually in this particular game the Bf8-d6-e7, and Qd8-a5-d8 oscillating look like something a weak club player would come up with.)
          I thought that to make sense of Qa5, black should play n*d5, instead of e6*d5. Then in a gambit book, that I browsed they suggest that after 8Qd2 the old fashioned 8...Nd-b6 is better than the more common 8...Bb4 (Indeed this is what Kasparov played in a game against Karpov, and in match with Smyslov with white was very sucessful in 8..Bb4 line).
                    In the other main-line of the Cambridge Springs with 7.Nd2 they suggest 7..p*p is better than the more common 7..bb4.In 7...Bb4 they think white can get a edge in all lines

Bye John S

Well, that's nice, but I don't play 9...Nxg5.  I play 9...Nxc3 here.  Maybe you'll find something for that.   

On second thought, you don't have to bother checking your voluminous database if you prefer not to.  My guess is that this discussion is probably boring most people.   

- Lost Highway

Smyslov_Fan -

I'm not impressed with the Short - Andersson game you quoted.  Instead of Andersson's move, black equalizes with 8...Ne4.  Quote something for that. 

- Lost Highway

Let's just go with your first one, 7.e3 Qa5.

The main reason the pawn exchange on d5 is considered weak for White in the Cambridge Springs is that Nxd5 leads to variations which Simagin and others have proven to be very dangerous.  In the line that we're analysing, Black doesn't have that option.  In fact, playing ...Nbd7 is pretty rare in the last decade.

In the position after White plays 6.cd5 cd5 (since 1993 and in games where both players were rated over 2300), White has scored an astounding 65%-35%.  I will present just one game here, which is rather famous. 

I no longer think that White has a small edge.  Rather, White has an excellent position where he has very little chance of losing.  If Black isn't careful (or even if he is), he can get stuck in a very uncomfortable situation playing a miserable position for thirty or more moves just to scrape a draw.  Here's the game:



Short,N (2660) - Andersson,U (2635) [D52]
Keres mem Tallinn/ Parnu (9), 29.06.1998

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Nf3 e6 5.Bg5 Nbd7 6.e3 Qa5 7.cxd5 exd5 8.Bd3 Bd6 9.Qc2 0-0 10.0-0 Re8 11.a3 h6 12.Bh4 Qd8 13.Rae1 Be7 14.Bg3 Nf8 15.h3 Be6 16.Ne5 N6d7 17.f4 Nb6 18.f5 Bd7 19.e4 dxe4 20.Rxe4 Bf6 21.Nxf7 Kxf7 22.Qb3+ Ne6 23.Rfe1 Nd5 24.Nxd5 cxd5 25.Qxd5 Bc6 26.fxe6+ Kg8 27.Qf5 Bxe4 28.Bxe4 Qxd4+ 29.Bf2 Qd6 30.Qh7+ Kf8 31.Bg6 Ke7 32.Bxe8 Rxe8 33.Qe4 Rc8 34.Qxb7+ Rc7 35.Qe4 Bxb2 36.Bh4+ g5 37.Qh7+ Kd8 38.Qg8+ Ke7 39.Bf2 Bc3 40.Qf7+ Kd8 41.Qg8+ Ke7 42.Re4 Bd2 43.g3 1-0

I wouldn't go so far as to say it's equal after 6.cd5 ed5.  After all, White does continue to score with this line, even with the N on f3.  I do think that White's advantage is minimal.  The problem for the Cambridge-Springs player is that in order to prove that, he may have to give up the Cambridge Springs in this move-order.  I don't have a problem with requiring a player to be flexible, but for people short on time, the Cambridge Springs Defense becomes even less appealing if you can't use it all the time.

I don't want to say a lot more than I usually arrive at the Cambridge-Springs (or I could) via a Slav (or Semislav) move order.

Say 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.Bg5 Nbd7 6. cd5

would be what bothers me. It seems you have reached a very good version of the Exchange for white...

My problem would be cd5 before Qa5 is played... as mentioned before, all that study for nothing... and I cannot see any book(s) and /or authors actually catering for that!

"What's your recipe after [8 ...Ne4] 9 Nde4 de 10 Bh4 here?"

That’s a good question.  I don’t know if black has anything good after 10.Bh4.  I looked at my notes and saw that I had planned 10…h5 and then g5, trying to squeeze white’s bishop, but I apparently was too optimistic and overlooked the simple 11.h3! which stops that idea pretty effectively.  Maybe I have to give up on an early 8…Ne4 and tone it down a bit by playing the main line with 8…O-O.  Rats.  I thought I had something.  I guess there are good reasons why some lines are considered to be the main lines and others are not.  Thanks for the reality check.  My back-up opening against 1.d4 is the Benko Gambit.  That probably sounds schizophrenic when combined with the Queen’s Gambit Declined.