Herbie

Could you please give us link to that game? Or post the first moves?

Thanks, lg

Markovich wrote on 12/17/07 at 13:47:22:


I am resurrecting this thread because John Watson talks about it in his latest update.  In general he is most generous with his citations of my Alekhine's thinking here.  But I'm not sure if he noticed my last post above, because in the update, he suggests that I concede this line to be much better for White.  For several months I thought so, but my latest understanding, for whatever it's worth, is that Black is probably O.K. if he puts his b8 knight not on d7, but on a6 -- as explained in my post just above.  It seems that Black can then organize himself fast enough to prevent White from planting a knight permanently on d6.  One key point is that the knight on d7 interferes with Black's control of that square, blocking the eventually necessary d8 rook; another is that with a knight on a6, Black can react to Nd6 with ...Nc8 and not have to worry (not right away, anyhow) that White will play c4-c5. 

I actually wrote to Baburin to share this idea, but I never heard back -- not that I particularly expected to.

well

the alekhine fanatics (pas well as the Miles fanatics) should be happy because M. Carlsen played several
games with the Miles in the rapid WC.

As far as I know yesterday he played 3 (against Anand - he lost, against Adams - draw and against
Shirov - he won), and today he played at least one (against Grichuk - draw). Maybe he played more today.
I agree with one comment in chessbase.com. He equalized quite easily in the opening and the variations
played were all different. Interesting was the game agianst Anand, where Anand, aparently "improved"
on an old game of Kasparov- Short.

lg

lg wrote on 11/09/07 at 19:46:26:


Based on my researches, this is quite difficult to pull off.  If White is careful to overprotect d6 (and there are various tactical tricks whereby this square can be defended indirectly), he just answers ...f6 with exf6 and leaves you with bad pawns.  He still retains c4-c5 to support his knight.

White has all sorts of play in these positions, for example, running his a-pawn; Black is just sitting there with less space, something nasty on d6 whether knight or pawn, and no counterplay.

If Black can get castled queenside, play ...Kb8, and sufficiently attack d6 while also somehow dodging a4-a5-a6, then there is some chance to react to Nd6 with ...f6 or ...f5 and ...g5 in combination, with kingside counterplay.  But White has to play chess like a cow to allow all this.

Markovich wrote on 11/09/07 at 20:18:48:



Resistance is futile.  

Give in to the darkside of light square play in the Moderrn Alekhine (Miles Var) for any hope of a full point.



And even then, keep fingers crossed that white is negligent in being fully prepped.  

Markovich

Your comments on the Alekhine are always welcome, however, you should note that
one: i) may not have nothing to add; ii) need time to think about it; iii) not be inclined
to the Flohr's variation

I should say that I am the convex combination of the three with parameter 1/3 for each item
(sorry, linear programming jargon).

About your ideas, I could quickly add that: i) I prefer 6 ... Nc7 and ii) the Knight in d6
may cause trouble as you say, but Black may try to play f6 to undermine the pawin in e5.

The two "main" lines currently endorsed by "good" players (whatever that means)
for Black against 4 Nf3 are the Miles and the Flohr (although in a less strong way)
variations. And, although none of them raise my mental activity, I have to agree that both have a point.

On the other hand, this does not prevent me to look at the databases, every day, hoping to see
i) a very good or a good player playing the Alekhine and not losing
ii) a player playing the old 4 ... g6 against 4. Nf3 (which I never understood why it come out of
fashion - take a look at chessgames.com and see a nice and quite recent game with 5 Bc4 Nb6 6. Bb3 and the unusual 6...d5) or even 9 ... Qd7 against the 4PA

As another less played variation, consider 4. Nf3 Bg4 (somehow I dont fancy this, but I played it
a few times in the past) 5 Be2 Nc6 6. 00 PxP 7. NxP NxN !? 8. PxN

and now, we have
i) 8 ... BxB (the "main" line which is known to be bad for Black, but looking at the final positions given
in the analysis in several books, I dont see why Black is worse than in other recomended positions)

ii) 8...Bf5 endorsed in the second book by Burguess. It is also funny to see how Burguess and Khalifman
disagree on this line

iii) 8...Be6 which is entioned byKhalifman and although his analysis show that White is better (well,
he is writing a repertoire for White) I think the move is perfectly playable

howevr, interesting and quite funny is the Pawn sacrifice

iv) 8...h5. After 9 BxB PxB 10. QxP Black can play e6, Bc5, Qe7 and castle long and try to use the
opened h row. I played a few games with this line against the computer and lost all of them (but NOT because
of the opening - this applies to lines ii) and iii) above).

Any opinions?

By the way I noticed thta baburin played 4. ...Bg4 5. Be2 e6 recently. Had anything prepared
against Bologan's line? The game is interesting also because White played an unusual b4 quite soon.

Sacapawn wrote on 10/29/07 at 21:35:42:


Perhaps, but Black can easily avoid this by playing 8...h6.  He meets 9.Ne4 with 9...d5. 

Note: Anyone reading this please go up two posts and read my inquiry there concerning whether the Flohr Variation is refuted by 6.c4 Nb6 7.Ng5 (or perhaps, whether 6...Nc7!? is necessary).

Markovich wrote on 09/05/07 at 11:37:19:


Well, when I wrote the words quoted above, I hadn't yet given much examination to 4...Bg4 5.Be2 c6 6.c4! Nb6 7.Ng5!.  Having done so, not only does this seem to be a very serious challenge to the Flohr Variation, but I have yet to discover Black's path to a defensible position.  I've played the Flohr in perhaps 20 recent games, but oddly enough, my opponents have never seen fit to play this way.  Most play 6.0-0, and those who play 6.c4! follow up with Levenfish's 7.Nbd2.

Black's problem after 6.c4! Nb6 7.Ng5! is that White preserves his knight for eventual occupation of d6.  Yes, against these Caro/Scandinavian structures an excellent winning plan is to force an exchange on e5, recapture with the d-pawn, then finagle a knight into d6.  If permitted to remain there it radiates power, and if exchanged it gives White a passed pawn on the 6th and a beautiful outpost on e5. Here in contrast to the Caro, White has a pawn on e5, but it's the same principle, since Black pretty well has to exchange there and follow up with ...e6. Because 7...Bf5 fails to 8.e6! fxe6 9.g4 Bg6 10.Bd3, Black must play 7...Bxe2 8.Qxe2 after which, in view of the threat of e5-e6, there is no good way for Black to avoid playing ...e6 soon.  Likewise because of his knight on b6, he must play ...dxe5 before ...e6.  Then I believe that no matter what, White can plant a knight on d6.

Let us say play continues 8...dxe5 (8...h6  9. Nf3 exd5 10.dxe5 transposes into line 2 below) 9.dxe5, after which it can go one of two ways:

(1) 9...e6 10.0-0 Be7 11.Rd1! and White will very soon play Ne4-d6.  Indeed, 9...e6 is condemned by Burgess and scores miserably for Black in my database.  After 11...Qc7 12.Bf4, Black can't afford to play 12...Bxg5, which leaves d6 more or less devoid of defenders, or so I think. 

(2) 9...h6 is supposed to be more sophisticated.  It has reasonably good statistics which are due, it seems to me, to a general failure among Whites to recognize the paramount importance of hastening a knight to d6.  10.Nf3 e6  11.0-0 N8d7 12.Nc3 Qc7 13.Bf4 Nc5 (Westerininen versus Wahls in 1987 instead played 12...0-0-0?! and was very lucky to escape with a draw, I opine, after 13.Ne4 c5  14.Bg3 and soon Nd6) 13.Rad1 a5 was played (as Black) by Kovacevich in a game from the 1980's.  For a long time I thought this was Black's equalizing path.  Black will exchange White's knight if it comes to e4.  Kovacevich's game went, as I recall, 14.b3 Be7 15.Rd2 0-0 16.Rfd1 and while White's buildup looked impressive, he was doing nothing. Black brings his rooks to d8 and exchanges them, and the coming ending is fine for Black.  His king is safe enough. 

But unfortunately, White has two knights, not one.  Instead of 15.Rd2, White has 15.Nd2! intending 16.Nde4 Nxe4 17.Nxe4 and 18.Nd6. I don't see anything that Black can do against this.  White perhaps could even have played 14.Nd2.

Instead of Kovacevich's 13...a5, Black could hasten his kingside with 13...Be7, since 14.b4 Nca4 looks O.K. for Black.  But here too White can just go 14.Nd2 or, in case he's worried about Nba4, he can go 14.b3 0-0 15.Nd2 Rfd8 16.Ne4 Nxe4 17.Nxe4 Rxd1 18.Rxd1 Rd8 19.Nd6.  Happily for White, he preserves a rook to back up his potential d-pawn.

I know that Baburin regularly plays the Flohr Variation, and some other biggies sometimes play it as well, so what the heck do they have in mind against White's plan to maneuver a knight into d6?  I would appreciate some help here, dear Alekhine afficionados, and that includes IMs who have written books on the subject.