Feb:

Thanks again for pointing me in the right direction...it looks like your 14. a5! is very strong. The position gets bad quickly:

14. a5! bxc3 15. axb6 bxc2 16. Rxa7 Rb8 17. Bc4 Be7 18. Qh6, is not to my liking.
And while Fritz would like to consider 15. ...g5 16. Qe3 Qxb6 17. bxc3, I'm a bit sceptical...

I was ready to give up on 7. ...Ng4, when it occured to me that maybe black can play 13. ...bxa4 instead of 13. ...b4?. So I tried out some of these lines, and the variations under line A look like they *might* be okay, but line B looks tough to handle.
1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 c6 5. Qd2 b5 6. Bd3 Nbd7 7. Nf3 Ng4 8. Bg5 f6 9. Bf4 e5 10. h3 Nxf2 11. Kxf2 exf4 12. Qxf4 Nb6 13. a4 bxa4
A) 14. d5 cxd5 15. Bb5+ Bd7 16. Bc6 ( 16. Bxd7 Qxd7 17. Rhe1 Bg7 18. Kg1 0-0 =; 16. Rhe1 Bxb5 17. Nxb5 a6 18. Nc3 Bg7 19. Nxa4 0-0 =) Bxc6 17. dxc6 Be7 18. Nd5 0-0 19. Rhe1 f5 =
B) 14. Nxa4 Be7 15. Nxb6 Qxb6 16. b3 0-0 17. Rhe1 Bd7 18. Ra6 Qc7 19. Bc4+ Kg7 20. d5 c5 +- And white has something of a bind, and the a-pawn is a liability.

Going back to the first topic...does anyone know if the variation originally played by Gufeld in the 150 attack is sound? Or if there are any other games floating around in that line? I'm still wondering if the line is considered playable still, or if a clear way to white advantage is known.

Kevin

Feb:

Thanks for the post!

I hadn't really looked at the line with Bf4. My first instinct was to play Nxf2--I thought Bf4 was just bad, i.e. 9.Bf4 e5 10.h3!? Nxf2 11. Kxf2 exf4 12. Qxf4 Nb6. But the position seems fairly dangerous for black, with lots of ways to go wrong. Mostly it seems like black has pawn problems AND trouble castling. Meanwhile, white only needs to move his rook on h1 somewhere and back his king up to g1 or h1.

I began thinking that maybe this was the way to bust black after all. So I put it into Fritz, and it looks like Black *might* be OK.   Below is a few lines that I worked out, with the help of Fritz:

1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 c6 5. Qd2 b5 6. Bd3 Nbd7 7. Nf3 Ng4 8. Bg5 f6 9. Bf4!? e5 10. h3 Nxf2 ( 10. ...exf4 11. hxg4 g5 12. d5! b4 13. dxc6 Ne5? 14. Bb5 Kf7 15. Nxe5 fxe5 16. Nd5 +-) 11. Kxf2 exf4 12. Qxf4 Nb6, and now:

A. 13. a4 b4 14. Ne2 (14. Nd1 a5 15. Ne3 Bg7 16. Nc4 Nxc4 17. Bxc4 Ba6 18. Bxa6 Rxa6 19. Rhf1 0-0 20. Rad1 Ra7 21. Kg1 d5 22. Rde1 Re7 23. c3 Rfe8 =) 14. ...a5 15. d5 Bd7 16. dxc6 Bxc6 17. Ned4 Bd7 18. Bb5 Rc8 19. Rhf1 Qe7 20. Bxd7 Nxd7 21. Kg1 Ne5 22. Rf2 Bg7 23. Rd1 0-0, near equal.

B. 13. d5 b4 14. Ne2 c5 15. Bb5+ Bd7 16. Bxd7 Qxd7! 17. a3 ( 17. Qxf6? Bg7 18. Qh4 0-0 ) bxa3 18. Rxa3 Bg7 19. Rd1 0-0, near equal.

So I'm hoping black is able to walk a tightrope and survive. Does anyone see improvements for white that will K.O. black in these lines with 9. Bf4?

Kevin

MNb, I do not disagree that black must have something planned for 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 c6 5. h3!?. The book I have, and also this site I think, recommends 5. ...Nbd7 as the best move. Although I haven't really looked at all the theory on this line, I accept that it represents a different way for White to play, which does not allow any lines with Ng4 for black. However, since I play the Pirc from the black side (usually), I am most interested in what I can get away with in the lines that I originally posted.

Alumbrado: You say you don't like the Ng4 ideas. Fair enough, I can't say that I ever cared much for them before I had a look at Benjamin-Gufeld.

Really what I'm hoping is for some strong (2200+) players to get involved and indicate what they think of the position that I cite in the 4. Be3 variation.  (1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 c6 5. Qd2 b5 6. Bd3 Nbd7 7. Nf3 Ng4 8. Bg5 f6 9. Bh4 Bh6 10. Qd1 Bg7 11. h3 Nh6) In a lot of ways, the position looks bad for black: there's a hole on e6, the Bg7 is shut in by black pawns, the kingside is weakened, and the queenside pawns might turn out to be targets. On the other hand, I think the position has some potential to get complicated, or even downright messy. And white will have to come up with his own plans here, which is a particularly nice feature.

Does anyone think that this line is so bad that it is just not playable? Thanks,

Kevin

Well I am not at all sure I agree with that!
(1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Be3 c6) 5.h3 is a decent move - one idea is to play the Finnish Attack with a subsequent g2-g4!?, which is very interesting and not at all easy to meet,while Black must also be careful to avoid 5...b5?! 6.e5! with a strong attack; but I think 5.Qd2 is very much the main move for White here.

I don't really like the ...Ng4 ideas, but I also don't like playing ...b5 too early, as it allows White to change plans and go for a set up with Bd3, Nf3 and 0-0, when the early queenside pawn push has given him a target for future activity.

I tend to go for 5...Nbd7 and then if 6.0-0-0 Qa5!? is interesting.

As a related question, I was wondering if the same idea would be playable in a variation of the 5. Be3 Pirc. The following moves are usually cited as one of the mainlines of the 4. Be3 Pirc:
1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 c6 5. Qd2 b5 6. Bd3 Nbd7 7. Nf3.

In "Starting Out: The Pirc/Modern", Joe Gallagher simply states, "7. ...Ng4 8. Bg5 is still not a worthwhile idea for Black...". But I wonder if Black can steal the idea from the Benjamin-Gufeld game, and play 8. ...f6 9. Bh4 Bh6.

The only "problem" I can find with it is that in this variation, White castles Kingside and tries to exploit Black's queenside weaknesses. So although Black has succeeded in breaking up Whites bishop & queen battery on the c1-h6 diagonal, that battery wasn't black's biggest problem in the position anyway. But on the other hand, it does mix the position up a bit, for whatever that's worth.

What do you guys think?