When White plays Be2 instead of Bd3, Black has the extra possibility of playing Bf5-g6 and then ...f5. I don't know about "proving an advantage" in this variation, but it remains a decent choice for White.

Yes indeed.  It seems odd that I forgot about Ligterink being a co-author, since I actually know who he is ...

MNb wrote on 06/04/07 at 02:07:10:


I've had a tendency to prefer Be2, from seeing a couple of nice games with it as well as just thinking it somehow looks better.  Maybe because it doesn't block the queen's protection of d5 and thus might facilitate the break c5.  Or that having the bishop on d3 might allow Black (after playing ...g5, I suppose) to play an ...e4 followed by ...f4 pawn sac (a sealer-sweeper, if I have my Kmoch terminology right), whereas with the bishop on e2 White can answer ...e4 with f4.  I believe in an old Dutch book I have, the author (one Christofoor Baljon) preferred Be2, for at least the last of those reasons.  But I recall a NIC Yearbook article not too long ago which thought Bd3 was better.  It thought that Be2 is well met by ...Bf5, which I think was connected with the idea of ...Nd7-f6 and ...Ne4.  "But even if that's something White has an interest in avoiding, what if he just plays f3 at the appropriate point?", I hear you say.  Alas, I don't recall such detail at the moment ...

Thanks, I did not know of this book!
This variation is really appealing to me but for it's simplicity compared to other lines against the sveshnikov. Apparently it's played at the top level quite often too.

I'm very curious however about how good it is in reality. In the position whites results are worse then blacks according to my database. Can anyone tell me why white is doing to badly in this line (which is more or less mainline)?

White to move (...ofcourse)


Rowson lost both of his games and I don't think he was even close to get some advantage in the opening.

Hello everyone!

As I don't know of any theoretical material on Sveshnikov 7.Nd5 for white I thought I would start a thread and ask some questions.

After 7.Nd5 Nxd5 8.exd5 Nb8 9.c4 Be7 10.Bd3 0-0 11.0-0 a6 12.Nc3 f5 13.f3 we come to a standard position in this opening


In this position whites only plan seems to play for b2-b4,c4-c5. I have played a few games in this variation and all games have been more or less non-theory from here on but I haven't been able to prove any advantage.

One game I played recently continued: 13...Nd7 14.Be3 Nc5 15.Bc2 a5!? 16.Bxc5 dxc5 17.Ndb5 Ra6 and black gets some threats going by Rh6 and white is at least not better. 

Believe me, I have analysed this position extensivley with the help of friends and my computer. 16.Bxc5 is not possible but this leaves white with the question of how to play instead and I can't find anything satisfactory. If you have any suggestions please share them.

Another game went 13...Qb6+ and couldn't get anything concrete here either. 

Both Qb6+ and Nd7,a5 idea are never played according chesslive.de In a lot of the arising positions it seems unlikley that it will be possible to play b2-b4,c4-c5 but this leaves white without a concrete plan I think. So...what is theory on these two variations and is 7.Nd5 Sveshnikov good for an advantage at all? The reason I was attracted by it in the first place was the simplicity of the queenside play but maybe the idea is too simple.