On (5...e5 6.Nb3) 6...a5 I must confess that I don't see the point.  Given the chance, Black will play a4/Qa5, it would seem, and so what?  White still seems fine.  Moreover, White has 7.a5 as another possibility.

So instead I've been looking at two ideas.  One of them, to transpose to a favorable version of the acc. dragon, seems not to work so nicely since Knaak's idea of postponing castling in an effort to stave off Black's b5, as in (by transposition):

Knaak,R (2515) - Kindermann,S (2515) [B38]
Hamburg SKA Hamburg, 1991

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 c5 7.Nge2 Nc6 8.Qd2 cxd4 9.Nxd4 Nxd4 10.Bxd4 Be6 11.Be2 Qa5 12.b3 Rfc8 13.Rb1 Nd7 14.Bxg7 Kxg7 15.0-0 Nf6 16.Kh1 a6 17.a4 Qb4 18.Qb2 Kg8 19.Na2 Qc5 20.Qd2 a5 21.Nc3 Bd7 22.f4 Bc6 23.Bf3 e5 24.Rbd1 exf4 25.Qxf4 Qe5 26.Qd2 Rd8 27.Rde1 Nd7 28.Nd5 Nc5 29.Bd1 Kg7 30.Bc2 Ne6 31.Nf6 Nc5 32.Ng4 Qh5 33.Qd4+ Kf8 34.Qh8+ Ke7 35.Qf6+ Kd7 36.Qxf7+ Kc8 37.Bd1 Qg5 38.Nf6 Kb8 39.Qe7 Ka7 40.Bg4 h5 41.Bh3 Nxb3 42.Qg7 Nd2 43.Rg1 Nxc4 44.Nd5 Ne5 45.Qc7 Bxd5 46.exd5 Nd3 47.Re2 Qxd5 48.Rb1 Rf8 49.Qb6+ Kb8 50.Be6 Ra6 51.Qxa6 1-0

The cavalier 13.0-0 allows b5!.  I don't really see any improvements for Black.  The canonical move order in this variation would be 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.f3 Nc6 6.c4 g6 7.Be3 Bg7 8.Nc3 0-0 9.Qd2 Nxd4 10.Bxd4 Be6 11.Be2 Qa5 12.b3 Rfc8 13.Rb1 in case someone else has some ideas.

The second possibility is to play for a quick Qb6, namely, after 5...Nc6 6.c4 Qb6, and then to continue with 'normal' dragon development...I am not sure exactly what this gains in the long run, however; possibly nothing.

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. f3 e5 6. Nb3 d5 7. Bg5 Be6
8. Bxf6

(8. exd5 Qxd5 9. Nc3 (9. Bxf6 Qxd1+)  9... Bb4 10. Kf2 Bxc3
11. Qxd5  Nxd5 12. bxc3 Nd7)

8... gxf6
9. exd5 Qxd5
10. Qxd5 Bxd5
11. Nc3 Be6
12. O-O-O  Nc6
13. Bb5

(13. Ne4 Bh6+ 14. Kb1 Ke7 15. Nec5 Rad8 16. Bb5 Rxd1+
17. Rxd1 Rd8 18. Rxd8 Nxd8 19. Nxe6 Nxe6 White better plan on shaking hands and take some rest for the next round.  If he pushes too far he could get in trouble i.e. 20. Bd3 Nf4
21. Bxh7 Nxg2 22. Na5 b6 23.Nc6+ Ke6 24. Nxa7 f5 {White's bishop is in trouble.})

13...     Rg8
14. g4

(14. Bxc6+ bxc6 15.g3 Bh6+ 16. Kb1 Ke7)
(14. Bxc6+ bxc6 15. g3 Bh6+ 16. Kb1 Ke7)

14...    Rc8   =

and I prefer Black still.

I seem to recall not being satisfied with Black's position in the Suba move order, but it's been a while, and perhaps things are OK.

BladezII, I don't see any way for White to break through -- but Black has to be more careful than I had originally expected in this line, so I'd still be interested in alternatives.

Scholar, IM Palliser, and anybody else....   Do you have anything else here for White?  I am interested in discussing this line since I would like to know how White might cause trouble for Black here.  From what I can see, Black has no real problems to equalize in this line.

BladezII wrote on 06/24/06 at 06:32:39:


I'd also like to make e5/d5 work -- it just seems like the most natural reply to White's loosening of d5 by omitting Nc3 --  but Black's position is not as simple as I had thought it would be to play.  I think the most testing lines follow 8.Bxf6.  White can deviate from your analysis with 13.Ne4 (either Bxc6+ works or the bishop belongs elsewhere).  My unease with this line stems from the fact that the pawn structure is much more favorable to White...in the long run, I feel like Black has only an unpleasant defense, but I'll take a second look.

Interesting stuff -- I'd only looked at 5.f3 e5 6.Bb5+ before, when Black is fine, but 6.Nb3 seems like a sterner test, since 6...d5 is definitely not the way to go for Black.

Perhaps 6...Be7 aiming to castle kingside and play for a quick f5 is the best plan?

All this makes me think that 5...Nc6 is worth a closer look.  In addition to 6.Nc3 Qb6, Black can play for an improved version of the bind with Be6 after 6...g6.

H-HH wrote on 06/15/06 at 21:26:44:

I dont like 3..Nf6 because of 4 Bb5+. It would put you in a Bb5 sicilian where I dont like the black setup, though objectively there may be nothing wrong with it.

This is what happened to Fcatnik:
[Event "CSR-ch"]
[Site "Trencianske Teplice"]
[Date "1979.11.??"]
[Round "11"]
[White "Dobosz,Henryk"]
[Black "Ftacnik,Lubomir"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Eco "B51"]
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Nd7 4.d4 Ngf6 5.e5 Qa5+ 6.Nc3 Ne4 7.Bd2 Nxc3 8.Bxd7+ Bxd7 9.Bxc3 Qa6 10.d5 Bg4 11.h3 Bh5 12.exd6 exd6 13.g4 Bg6 14.Nh4 Kd7 15.Nf5 Bxf5 16.gxf5 Re8+ 17.Kd2 Qc4 18.Qf3 Re4 19.Rad1 Rf4 20.Qg2 Rxf5 21.Kc1 h5 22.Rhe1 Rh6 23.Re4 Rg6 24.Qh1 Qxa2 25.b3 Qa6 26.f4 Rg3 27.Qe1 Rg2 28.Rd3 g5 29.Re8 Rg1 30.Qxg1 Kxe8 31.fxg5 Be7 32.g6 Rg5 33.Qe1 Qa3+ 34.Kb1 Kd7 35.gxf7 c4 36.Re3 Bf8 37.Bb4 Qa6 38.Re8 cxb3 39.Qe6+ Kc7 40.Re7+ Kb6 41.Qxd6+ Kb5 42.Qc5+  1-0

And a nice one by Shirov.
[Event "Nordhorn op act"]
[Site "Nordhorn"]
[Date "2005.09.??"]
[Round "0"]
[White "Shirov,Alexei"]
[Black "Bredemeier,Dirk"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Eco "B53"]
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Bb5+ Bd7 5.Bxd7+ Qxd7 6.dxc5 Nxe4 7.cxd6 Nxd6 8.0-0 Nc6 9.Bf4 0-0-0 10.Nc3 f6 11.Bxd6 Qxd6 12.Qe2 e5 13.Qc4 Qc5 14.Qg4+ Kb8 15.Rad1 Nd4 16.Nxd4 exd4 17.Ne2 f5 18.Qg3+ Bd6 19.Qxg7 Rhg8 20.Qh6 Rg6 21.Qh5 Rdg8 22.g3 Rg4 23.Rd2 Qb4 24.Rfd1 Bc5 25.Qxf5 Bb6 26.Nxd4 Qxb2 27.c4 Qc3 28.Rc2 Qa3 29.c5 Bc7 30.Nb5 Rxg3+ 31.hxg3 Rxg3+ 32.fxg3 Qxg3+ 33.Rg2 Qe3+ 34.Qf2  1-0

Wasn't there a McShane-Grischuk game where black played a very quick ...e6 and ...d5, which was given in the Anti-Sicilians section as just giving black easy equality?

Regards

Paul Hopwood