I tend to agree with MartinC.  8.e4 runs into 8..cxd4 9.cxd4 d5! 10.cxd5 exd5 11.e5 Ne4 12.Ne2.  Milov evaluated this as better for White on his old ChessBase CD, but Emms (cited by Dearing) pointed out 12..Bg4 13.Be3 (12.f3 is met by 12..Bxf3 followed by Qh4+) 13.Be3 Qa5 14.Kf1 f6 with what Rybka gives as an edge to Black.  Never Give Up, your 10.e5 Ne4 line is nice but Black can play 10..dxc4.  

Although its a Black repertoire book, Dearing's book from 2005 has very good coverage of the Samisch that is also worth looking at as White.  I haven't really kept up with theory that carefully since then, but I'm not aware of any major changes or improvements for White.  That includes the 12.e5 d6 line discussed above.  At least according to ChessBase, no one's tried 13.Qa4 or 13.g4 yet.  Maybe the biggest disappointment for Samisch fans is that Aleksandrov, who was a big specialist in this line in the early 2000s, seems to have stopped playing it.

After 12.exf5 gxf5 13.dxc5 bxc5 14.Ng3 g6 15.Be3 d6 16.Bxf5 gxf5 17.Qd5 Rf7 18.Qxc6 White hopes for 18..Bxc4, but 18..Bb7! 19.Qa4 h5! is considered to give Black good comp for the pawn.  The Bb7 is better than the Be3, and Black has ideas of h5-h4 and Rf7-g7 hitting g2.  Now, 20.Rab1 Ng7 21.Qd1 of N.Pedersen-Schandorff improves on the old Hollis-Hovde postal game.  In these positions, the engines tend to favor the extra pawn, but, I still think I would prefer Black in these positions, at least in practical play.  

I would look into 14.Be3 d6 playing for the Spassky plan of Bf2-h4, Ng3-f1-e3-d5, etc.  There's a famous game from the 60s, Spassky-Bykhov, where this worked well and some early 2000s examples from Aleksandrov with more mixed results (for these see ChessPub, Dearing's book or Peter Well's annotations in ChessBase.)  Dearing views this line as ok for Black, but it's a game and there's chances for both sides.      

MartinC wrote on 07/27/11 at 14:48:56:

I recently smashed a strong opponent in 24 moves who didn't take, where the game went 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Bc3: 5.bc3: c5 6.e3 Nc6 7.Bd3 0-0 8.e4 Ne8?! 9.Nf3 b6 10.e5 (threatening Bh7:+) 10. ... f5 11.d5 Na5 12.Bg5 Qc7 13.d6 Qc6 14.Be7 Rf7 15.Rg1 h6 16.g4 fg4: 17.Nh4 and I won quickly. So the knight on f3 makes a big, big difference.
 
And my computer came up with the amazing line 8.. cd 9 cd d5 10.e5 Ne4 11.Ne2 Qa5+ 12.Bd2 Nd2: 13.Qd2: Qd2: 14.Kd2: Na5 15.cd5:!? Nb3+ 16.Kc3 Na1: 17.d6 where white will win the Na1 and then has has excellent compensation for the exchange, and is probably better. A very remarkable idea indeed.

LeeRoth wrote on 03/08/08 at 03:33:48:

I'm coming back to this relatively old thread since I've been looking at the merits of the Saemisch from white's point of view and this thread is very relevant for this.

The position above (Saemisch main line) seems critical since after 12.e5!? Na5 13.d5 Bc4: 14.Bc4: Nc4: 15.d6! white is clearly better since black's knight on e8 is buried alive - a very interesting positional idea stemming from Bronstein. So black should go either 13. ... d6!? after which 14.g4!? is interesting, or 12. ... d6!? straight away as in the diagram. Then white should avoid 13.d5?! ed5: 14.cd5: Bd3: 15.Qd3: as in Carlsen-Aronian, but both suggestions 13.Qa4!? or 13.g4!? are interesting, and also 13.Be3!? seems a good choice to me. 

In addition not much seems wrong with 12.ef5:!? ef5: 13.dc5: bc5: 14.Ng3 g6 15.Be3 d6 16.Bf5: ef5: 17.Qd5+ Rf7 18.Qc6: with a very resonable position for white, I'd say.

And if white is still not happy then there is the interesting gambit 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Bc3: 5.bc3: c5 6.e3 Nc6 7.Bd3 0-0 8.e4!? with the point 8. ... cd4: 9.cd4: Nd4: 10.e5 Qa5+ 11.Kf1 Ne8 (11. ... Qe5:?? 12.Bb2) and now white can go 12.Bd2 Qc7 13.Bb4 d6 14.Bh7:+ Kh7: 15.Qd4: a5 16.ed6: Qd7 17.Bc5 with a complex position where white is a pawn up rather than down, or Botvinnik's 12.Bb2 Nc6 13.Nf3 f5 14.Re1 followed by Rg1 and g4 with fair compensation for the pawn.   

All these lines may be viable ways for white to play the main line Saemisch. So what's your verdict on this line, then?

vasilicus wrote on 03/06/10 at 04:45:39:


Either way Black has options not available the other way.  I have a hunch that Black's systems with an early ...b6 are the main reason for the very strong modern preference for 4.f3 (as opposed to the other, anyway).  The main reason for preferring 4.a3 is if you plan to play e2-e3 against Black's main line, which is ...c5, ...Nc6, ...O-O in some order.  Black's stock in that line has risen, however.  If White intends instead and eventual f2-f3, e2-e4 against that, then avoiding the ...b6 ideas is perhaps a good reason for playing f3 on already on the fourth move.

You wind up having to know a more theory with 4.f3, however, since Black has his 5...Be7 and 5...Bd6 ideas after 4...d5 5.a3, and he further has 4...c5, which creates situations quite unlike those that arise form 4.a3.

A game with some theoretical relevance:

MNb - Kostanjšek, em WS/H/187 ICCF

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 O-O 5.Bd3 c5 6.a3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 Nc6 8.Ne2 b6 9.e4 Ne8 10.O-O Ba6 11.f4 f5 12.Ng3 g6 13.Be3 cxd4 14.Bxd4 Rc8 15.exf5 gxf5 16.Bf2 Na5 17.c5 Bxd3 18.Qxd3 bxc5 19.Nh5 d5 20.Rfe1 Rc6 21.Rab1 Rf7 22.Re3 Kf8 23.Rbe1 Qc8 24.Qe2 Nf6 25.Nxf6 Rxf6 26.Qh5 Qc7 27.Rh3 Nc4 28.Qh4 Rg6 29.Qxh7 Qxh7 30.Rxh7 Rg7 31.Rh6 Kf7 32.a4 Nd2 33.Rd1 Ne4 34.Rxd5 Rb6 ½-½

CheckMate wrote on 08/28/08 at 20:17:51:


After 9.g5, Black should play 9..Ne4.

The only other game I know in this line is Hernando Rodrigo-Levin, 2005, where White tried 9.cxd5 exd5 10.f3 Ne8 11.Ne2 instead.  GM Emms now says 11..f5!  If you are a subscriber, you can check out the game, with his annotations, in the archive.    

Yes, after 12.d5.