Seth_Xoma wrote on 10/13/09 at 02:14:58:


I think ChessPubber Seth_Xoma is too modest to post his game but that game has been blogged at USCF_ChessLife Online (http://main.uschess.org/content/view/9783/141/) by FM Alex Betaneli (with some comments). Here is the game: 

Midwest Class Championships, Wheeling, IL, 2009
White: Amanov, Mesgen
Black: Homa, Seth

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.a4 Bf5 6.Ne5 Nbd7 7.Nxc4 Nb6 8.Ne5 a5 9.g3 e6 10.Bg2 Bb4 11.O-O O-O 12.Na2 Be7 13.Re1 h6 14.e4 Bh7 15.b3 Nfd7 16.Nxd7 Nxd7 17.Be3 f5 18.e5 Nb6 19.f4 Nd5 20.Qd3 Qd7 21.Red1 Bg6 22.Nc3 Nxe3 23.Qxe3 Bh5 24.Rd3 Rfd8 25.Bf1 Kh8 26.Ra2 Bb4 27.Rc2 Qc7 28.Bg2 Qb6 29.Na2 Be7 30.h3 Rd7 31.Kh2 Rad8 32.Rcd2 Qa7 33.Qg1 Bc5 34.Qc1 Rxd4 35.Rxd4 Rxd4 36.Rxd4 Bxd4 37.Qc4 Qc5 38.Qxe6 Qc2 39.g4 Qd1 40.Qc4 Qg1+ 41.Kg3 Qf2+ 42.Kh2 fxg4 43.hxg4 Qxf4+ 44.Kh1 Qf2 45.Qf1 Qh4+ 0-1

James Vigus wrote on 07/19/09 at 11:53:33:


Damn - I knew that this question was too obvious to have never been asked before! I searched this thread, but it never occured to me that there could be another one    

In any case, thanks for great pointers! After looking at the notes by IM Watson and recent games I tend to agree that this line, though certainly playable for White, shouldn't scare any of the true Slav devotees.

I decided to compare the lines offered in "Play the Slav" against other opening books and immediately noticed one notable omission - in "Errot" chapter the variation, which is suggested in "GM Repertoire 1.d4" by GM Avrukh, is not even mentioned in "Play the Slav". The variation is:

1. d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 Bg4 5.Qb3 Qb6 6.Nc3 e6 7.Nh4!?

Basically, after 5.Qb3 Qb6 Dr. Vigus considers only ideas related to Nf3-e5, which are indeed not very promising for White. Any advice  for Black in this line?

Thank you much for your answer James. I was not aware of the analysis given at Rochade Europa, so your updates here confirmed my faith in the book line. I also checked moves and agree that situation is not gloomy for Black here. I also agree that future improvements for Black should not surprise us in this topical line.
My question regarding the forced draw issue was stemming from Exchange variation, not this line. (I think your  13...Bc4 was meant for the main line that we have been discussing) I noticed that  at page 201 line A22 which is starting with 10.g4 forces draw if White deems it so and I could not see an alternative move for Black to deviate in this particular line.
One final note, after studying Play the Slav last few days, I honestly admit it is a very nice book for players who want to add Slav to their opening arsenal. I recommend it to everybody.

Keep in mind that opening books tend to become out-of-date within a few years, as opening theory is constantly changing and evolving. It has been 1.25 years since 'Play the Slav' was released, so I would expect some improvements over the book for both sides to be discovered by now. However, Vigus's excellent idea of offering several alternatives for Black ensures that if one line is refuted, the entire chapter is not rendered out-of-date.

As I mentioned at my previous message, I recently owned the book and am still on the process of analysing the opportunities this Slav repertoire book offers. I generally liked the book but there are a few things which catch my eyes just after a quick skimming.
Lets start with a critical line. In the latest Sofia Super GM Tournament, Topalov and Chinese player Wang Yue tried one of the proposed lines of PTS (Play The Slav) :
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5437
Topalov,V (2812) - Wang Yue (2738) [D17]
Super GM Sofia BUL (4), 16.05.2009
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.a4 Bf5 6.Ne5 Nbd7 7.Nxc4 Nb6 8.Ne5 a5 9.f3 Nfd7 10.e4 Nxe5 11.dxe5 (1-0 / 37 )
In PTS, The Sokolov Defence section, page 52,  11.dxe5 is mentioned as "an important alternative" and drawn F.Vallejo Pons-G.Kasparov game is cited. However, in New In Chess magazine both players agree that Black loses because of "bad opening". Topalov further comments that "Kasparov got a lucky draw against Vallejo Pons" in this variation.
Only alternate PTS offers is 10...Bg6!? and it is given as bit better for White.
Under the light of these developments, can we assume that one of the main lines given in PTS is under crisis ? Or is there an improvement for Black side of this Slav game ?
The second point I will bring about is Slav Exchange. Everywhere inside the book, author James Vigus mentions that a Slav game necessarily should not mean a drawish game if White deems so necessary and proposes ways to unbalance game anywhere possible. Slav Exchange is notoriously used by weaker players to obtain a draw against higher rated opposition (sometimes !) So Vigus proposes the accelerated version of Russian Attack (6...Nh5) to let Black player to play for a possible 3rd score. However, if we carefully follow his line A22 which starts with 10.g4 (page 201) we notice that White player can force perpetual at the end (or play on in an unclear position; but the draw is there for White) although Black does everything right and forced.
What does that mean if your opponent knows about your reportiere ? He can force a draw in the Exchange Variation. And that is something I would not like to allow against lower rated opposition.
Is there an improvement in this second line, also ?

Reading all the positive feedback here, I decided to to give this book a try since I have been considering to add Slav to my opening repertoire as one of the main answers to (almost )everything other than 1.e4. Finally the book has arrived and I started to read it. I rather liked the initial section where the author mentions about the inticacies of Slav main line, and I am still on the book.
Before reading through, may I ask if there are some updates on the lines given in the book ? I noticed there have been some discussion about a few critical lines and I would like to know if I also should be alert to recent developments. After all I don't want to get smashed otb while playing one of the recommended lines of "Play the Slav"
Maybe the author himself can drop a few words here to criticize outdated parts ? (I am not sure if I demand too much a thing)

Yes, that exchange sac might be critical - engines don't like it, but Petrosian might have, and White needs a plan...