Accolon wrote on 09/20/08 at 23:23:13:


It's losing even before that. 28...Bxb2?? 29.e5! +-

16...Bb7 seems to be a playable option but it leads to rather passive positions for black. I`m currently looking at the game Gashimov-Schandorf 2007. It went 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6
5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Nd7 12.Nbd2 exd4 13.cxd4 Nc6 14 d5 Nce5 15 Nxe5 Nxe5 16 a4-Rb8 17.axb5-axb5 18.f4-Ng6 19.Nf3-Bh4 20.Rf1-Bg3 21.f5-Ne5
22.Ng5-Nd7 23.e5-Bxe5 24.Nxh7-Qh4 25Nxf8 with advantage for white. I wonder if black can defend with 24...Re8. Probably I`m missing something, but e.g. 25.f6-g6 26.Bg5-Rb7(!) 27.Bxg6-fxg6 28.f7+-Kxh7 29.Ra8-Rf8 30.Bxd8-Rxd8 and black is ok.
I`m really curious what GM Becerra-Rivero had prepared when he played 19...f5. I have no idea where an improvement for black can be found in that line where white plays Rf1 and later Be4.

I found 2 GM games played at the Foxwoods Open march 2008. Ivanov-Friedel 1-0 (Friedel played Bd7 after a4) and Friedel-Becerra-Rivero 0-1. Becerra-Rivero doesn`t seem to be convinced by Khalifman`s analysis and keeps playing f5 even after a4 by white.
15.a4-Rb8 16.axb5-axb5 17.Nxe5-Nxe5 18.f4-Ng6 19.Nf3-f5
Food for thought.

Last week I was browsing the internet and to my grief everyone was so negative on the Graf variation.

Anyway I spend a whole day analysing Renet's 'claim' of a refutation after which I shared my analysis with him. A week after this Renet reported he had been wrong (but is still looking for a refutation - yeah right!) yes he had been wrong (but I'm not a member here) so member who did mail Renet too congratulations with finding the same analysis as I did. Renet's Nxh7!? is stunning but a draw, which should not be any problem since white can force one after f6 Bxh3 anyway (although f6 g5!? is a scary alternative).

About that Khalifman link, I don't think skembris had a lot of problems and if only his idea of g6 can be refined somewhat black will be favorite with his structure. Black is still OK there too no refutation. As a matter of fact one IM2464 (Nxe5 Nxe5 Nf1?!) asked me to explain the theory to him after our game and a GM tried a4 (instead of d5 Nce5) both ended in easy draws.

I'd advise all to stay on the Graf variation and don't let GM's scare you with unsupported claims! Before I forget, here's an awnser to the Rowson idea of Nh2 g3... instead of davies's Nf6+h5 just play c4!N CosaZeelandai f4 Nc5 h4 Bxh4!?....

If you ask me the Graf is more alive than the Zaitsev

This line is good for  whoever knows the analysis below 1800. AS a 1700 rated player I find that in most of my game I am on my own by move 10. I have given up looking to deep into positions as I find my oponents usually play something different
long before the end of any theory line

Thanks for your reply. I appreciate it. Seems I have the Pono game in my Davies book, just got the move order mixed up...

The other thing is that Nxh7 is indeed a very tricky line. I believe anybody below 2000 (and above) will have severe problems meeting it. 1500-1700 players probably won't survive unless they're good at defending or know the analysis. This makes it a practically great weapon for rapid and blitz games and for must win situations. It also makes it an excellent time zapper, as I call it, because the opponent is likely to take an hour just for the 8 moves or so (maybe more) it takes to survive.

This could be like the Keres attack in the regular sicilian scheveningen move order. It's not a refutation, as black can survive, but would put the line out of business as a practical matter as it is too much of  pain to defend merely to reach approx. equality.

I don't know what Renet's analysis looks like, but I'll post my line and hope it doesn't violate the rules or something:

22. Ng5 Nd7! ( as played by Joel Banawa --look it up oin the databases 2300 High school player, nice Filipino kid I know) 23.Nxh7! Kxh7 24.f6 (only move) g6 25.Qd2 Nxf6 26.Qh6+ Kg8 27.Bg5 Be5 28.Qh4 [at this point a tacit draw offer can be made by Kg7 by black] Bxb2 29.Bxf6 Bd4+ 30.Kh1 Bxf6 31.Rxf6. Now Rb6 loses for black which gives you an idea how sharp this is. Rb7! is correct. The rook is need to defend along the seventh rank and stop an upcoming check along the g file.

Black survives but the attack is not over. If he could only exchange queens he passers on the queenside would tell. Black has winning chances but based on beating off the attack as White is going to sack again and try to break down g6, with mobilizing the rooks as well. In other words, throw the kicthen sink @ black's king.

Have you seen this:
http://www.berlinerschachverband.de/rezensionen/0506khalifman.html?&template=/te...

Isn't this the refutation? (scroll down to the first board)

ghenghisclown wrote on 07/19/06 at 14:53:19:


Maybe the Breyer variation would have been a safer bet