Sorry about that! Luckily for me, as I said, at my level I don't have to worry about theory too much (although perversely I still like to) but when I do venture a Tartakower I go for 11...c6 without really being sure why....my QGD books (Lalic, Sadler, Janjgava) all fail to mention (predict?) 14.Ne5!? but Alfonso Romero, in his excellent but quite advanced book says of the move '...the main line here is actually 14.Ne5' whilst he is looking at the well known Topalov-Kramnik game from Linares 1998 featuring 14.Re1. Anyway, he goes on to examine 14.Ne5 in some detail within his annotations to one of the games you mention, Zviagintsev-Kasimdzhanov, Essen 2002. He looks at all the games you mention bar the most recent, Epishin-Upton, which featured the move I thought best when I looked at the position, 14...Bxe5. However, I wasn't satisfied with this and wondered what had happened since - it seems Black hasn't come very far in this line yet. There is plenty of analysis in his annotations worth looking at if you can get a copy of the book, and I think it would probably be wrong of me to say much more than that here out of respect to the author, other than to reiterate that it doesn't look great for Black. Not disastrous, but not great. The final thing I'll note that Romero did say was that after 23...f6?? he thought that 23...Nd7 would have retained some practical chances, but I think all Tartakower players will likely be looking for something rather better than that and at a much earlier stage of the game.....
I'll take a look at 14...Re8, thanks for that suggestion. It wasn't mentioned by Romero. Oh, and by the way - the chapter in which he looks at the Tartakower and this game is entitled 'The Dead Bishop'. Ouch!
|