TalJechin wrote on 05/11/05 at 16:55:17:


Filipenko-Gleizerov, USSR 1987 went 1. e4 Nf6  2. e5 Nd5  3. d4 d6  4. c4 Nb6  5. f4 dxe5  6. fxe5 Nc6  7. Be3 Bf5  8. Nc3 e6  9. Nf3 e6  10. d5 exd5  11. cxd5 Nb4  12. Nd4 Bd7  13. e6 fxe6  14. dxe6 Bc6  15. Qh5+ g6  16. Qh6 Bf6  17. 0-0-0 Qe7  18. a3 N4d5  19. Nxc6 bxc6  20. Nxd5 Nxd5  21. Rxd5 cxd5  22. Bb5+ Kd8  23. Rf1 Rf8.   Here as pointed out by Thomas above, White did indeed miss 24. Rd1! winning.

However, Gleizerov didn't need to play 23...Rf8?

The answer is 23...Rb8! and now:

I. 24. a4 Rf8 25. Rxf6 Rxf6 26. Bg5 Rb6! and Black is fine, maybe even somewhat better.

II. 24. Bd7 Rxb2! 25. Rxf6 Rxg2! (some rook!) 26. Rf2 (forced) 26...Qxa3+ and draws.

III. 24. Rxf6 Rxb5 25. Rxg6 (25. Rf6 Qd6) 25...Kc8 26. Rg7 Qf8! and Black's impending ...Qf1+ creates sufficient counterplay. For example 27. b4 (cuts off the rook) 27...Qf1+ 28. Kd2 (other moves draw also) 28...d4! 29. Bf4 (or 29. Bxd4 Rd8 30. Rd7 Qxg2+) 29...Qf2+ 30. Kd3 Qf1+ 31. Kxd4 (otherwise it's a perp) 31...Rd8+ 32. Rd7 Qd1+ =.

When I showed this to Thomas elsewhere, he said that this is superceded by 17...Bh4+  18. g3 Bg5.  I'm not so sure.  After Thomas's suggested 19. Nxc6, it seems that Black does best to withhold ...Nc2+, e.g. 19...Bxh6  20. Nxd8 Bxe3  21. Nxb7 0-0, and here I prefer Black.   However, just 19. Qxg5! Qxg5  20. Bxg5 Bxh1  21. 0-0-0 and White seems to have considerable compensation for the exchange, for example 21...h6  (21...a6!?) 22. Bf6 Rf8  23. Bg7 Rf2  24. a3.   

So pertinent to Filipenko-Gleizerov, 23...Rb8! deserves to be noted and definitely equalizes (if my analysis here holds up, anyway), while 17...Bh4+  18. g3 Bg5 is perhaps less certain but worth investigating.

1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. d4 d6 4. c4 Nb6 5. f4 dxe5
6. fxe5 Nc6 7. Be3 Bf5 8. Nc3 e6 9. Nf3 Be7 10. d5 exd5 11. cxd5 Nb4 12. Nd4 Bd7 13. e6 fxe6 14. dxe6 Bc6 15. Qh5+ g6 16. Qh6 Bh4+ 17. g3 Bg5!?

after the queens come off will white be able to keep an advantage? will the e6 pawn be a strength or a weakness?

17...Bg5!? certainly appears to be an interesting try.

Almost five years ago by now, I published a TN I had found but had no use for as I was preparing to play the Alekhine as black. And then a swedish site offered a book of your choice in return for a novelty...

Anyway, I haven't given it much though the last few years, then I got Cox's Starting Out: The Alekhine which is indeed a good book - and not just mainly an introduction as most of the other works in that series.

But to my surprise nothing has happened the last five years in the line I gave. There's still only two games with 15.Qh5 and John just gives a couple of moves in this Qh5+ line ending with 16...Bh4+ 17.g3 Bf6, and concentrates instead on 15.Qg4 like most works on the Alekhine do.

So, naturally I'm a bit curious - isn't 15.Qh5 the better move and even offering white an advantage? Or did I miss something???

Naturally, there are lots of different explanations e.g, the 4pawns may be completely out of fashion (which hardly surprises me as 9...Qd7 or ...Bg4 both look quite solid and Mikenas' ...c5 line is wild but interesting).
Those who do play the 4pawns with white may be unaware of my old novelty or they may simply have found a refutation, etc... So, which is it?

The article can be found here:
http://hem.passagen.se/tjmisha/quattrocujones.html

(some of the diagrams may look strange - or perhaps it depends on which browser you use?  )