Very interesting! My Rybka indeed follows your line a(i).

I had in fact already wondered about the ...Kf7--g8 idea in another variation! In the 6 Bb5 line, I believe Neil, in one of his updates, gives 6 ...Bd7 7 Bg5 f6! 8 Nh4 fg 9 Qh5 g6 10 Ng6 Ng7 (10 ...hg =) 11 Qh6 Nd4!? (11 ...hg =) 12 Bd3 Ndf5 13 Bf5 Nf5 14 Qh5 Ng7 15 Qh6 Nf5 16 Qh5 Ng7 =. But here it looks like 15 ...Kf7!? can be played, idea 16 Nh8 Kg8 17 Nf7 Kf7 or 17 Ng6 Bc5!

The H-R lives!

[quote author=Michael Ayton link=1193755505/15#18 date=1195074944]I've decided to get myself the Keilhack & Schlenker, Wisnewski and Watson books/articles for Christmas, so I can make a proper study of this variation!

Meanwhile could someone briefly tell me the theoretical state of 4 e5? I guess 4 ...b6 is OK, but while 4 ...Nge7 5 Nf3 Nf5 looks at least equal for Black in the line 6 Bb5!? Bd7 7 Bg5 f6!, I don't know what to think about 6 Ne2 -- I'm willing to be told that Black's all right after say 6 ...Be7 (is 6 ...f6 under a cloud or OK?) 7 Ng3 0-0 8 c3, but the position looks a little thankless to me and I don't really know how it should be handled. All help gratefully received![/quote]

Keilhack & Schlenker do not deal with this variation, in fact they do not have any Nc6+e6 variations except for 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nc3 e6 where black will follow up with Bb4 and d6 (not d5). But it is a great 1...Nc6 book!
Wisnewski has 4 ...Nge7 5 Nf3 Nf5, but doesn't mention 6.Ne2 (grrr). Searching for games, I see that Rozentalis plays 6...f6, but I don't know what the theoretical status is (anyone?).
([b]edit:[/b] I just found analysis of that game on [url]http://www.newinchess.com/SOS/Games/2005_11.zip[/url])
([b]edit2:[/b] aargh, of course the chesspub pgn archive also has analysis of Negi - Rozentalis 2005, should have looked there first)
Watson has the sharper 4...f6.
Wisnewski and Watson have different recommendations in places, eg 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.e5 Ne4 6.Bd3, and now Wisnewski has 6...f5!? while Watson goes for 6...Bb4.

I've decided to get myself the Keilhack & Schlenker, Wisnewski and Watson books/articles for Christmas, so I can make a proper study of this variation!

Meanwhile could someone briefly tell me the theoretical state of 4 e5? I guess 4 ...b6 is OK, but while 4 ...Nge7 5 Nf3 Nf5 looks at least equal for Black in the line 6 Bb5!? Bd7 7 Bg5 f6!, I don't know what to think about 6 Ne2 -- I'm willing to be told that Black's all right after say 6 ...Be7 (is 6 ...f6 under a cloud or OK?) 7 Ng3 0-0 8 c3, but the position looks a little thankless to me and I don't really know how it should be handled. All help gratefully received!

linksspringer wrote on 11/10/07 at 00:35:55:



after 12...Ne4 13.Qxg7 O-O-O, why doesn't white play 14.Qxf7:
The troubles white gets are not worth the pawn(s) 14...Rhg8 15.g3 e5 - and a sample variation if your greedy now: 16.Qh7 Nf6 17.Qh4 Rh8 18.Qg5 Rh2! -+

12...b6 13.Ba3 0-0-0 14.c5 h5 15.f3 Rhg8 16.cxb6 axb6 17.c4 Qa4 - this leads to a position, where white can improve and black has to sit and wait: e.g. 18.Rb3 Bc6 19.Rfb1 Bb7 20.Qe5

computer suggests 13...Qb4 - this is clearly better, I didnt check the comp-line deeply - but I wanted to say, that over the board black will be lost - I hope I can try 8.de6 in one of my games in the future! 

12.Rb1 looks really dangerous - well I tried some analyses (with a little help  ):

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Bd3 Bb4 6.O-O Bxc3 7.exd5 Nxd4 8.bxc3 Nxf3+ 9.Qxf3 Qxd5 10.Qg3 Bd7 11.c4 Qc6 12.Rb1 O-O-O

a) 12. ... O-O ?! 13.Bb2 Ne8 looks very passive
b) 12. ... Ne4 transfer the knight to the other wing 13.Qxg7 O-O-O 14.Qd4 Nc5 15.Be3 b6 maybe this could hold?
c) 12. ... b6 ? 13.Ba3 where does the black king go? After 0-0-0 there white plays c5...

13.Be3 Rhe8 play in the center

13. ... h5 - is still a good alternative, I think -  14.f3 Rdg8 15.Bxa7 h4 (15. ... g5? 16.Qe5;  15. ... b6??16.Rxb6 cxb6 17.Qb8#) 16.Qf4 e5 17.Qxe5 Rh5 18.Qf4 (18.Qd4 b6 19.Bxb6 cxb6 20.Rxb6 Qc5 thats what you need Rh5 for) 18. ... g5 19.Qd4 g4]

14.Bxa7 this should be critical

a) 14.Rfe1 e5 15.Bxa7 h5 with counterplay
b) 14.f3 e5 Black is OK! 15.Qxg7 (15.Bxa7 e4) 15. ... e4 (15. ... Rg8 16.Qh6 e4 17.fxe4 Nxe4 18.Qxc6 Bxc6) 16.fxe4 Nxe4 17.Qd4 Bh3 18.Qxa7 Rg8

14. ... e5 15.Be3 Ng4 16.Bd2 (16.Rb4 Nxe3 17.fxe3 e4 18.Be2 Qg6) 16. ... f5 (16. ... h5!?)
17.Be2 Be6 18.Bg5 Rd4 19.Bf3 (19.c3 Rd6) 19. ... e4 20.Bxg4 fxg4 21.Qa3 Lxc4

---

I was just thinking about the beginning of the variation and thought that the maniacs choice could also be
8.de6!?

some lines  :

8.dxe6 Nxf3+ 9.Qxf3 Be5 (9. ... Ba5 10.exf7+ Kf8 11.Bc4;  9. ... Bd4 10.exf7+ Kxf7 11.Bc4+ Kf8 12.Bg5) 10.exf7+ Kxf7 (10. ... Kf8 11.Bg5 (11.Be3 Qd5) 11. ... Be6 12.Rfe1 Qd6 13.Rad1) 11.Bc4+ Kf8 12.Be3 Bd6 (12. ... Qd6 (a strange comp-line coming up...)  13.Rad1 Bxh2+ 14.Kh1 Qb4 15.Rd8+ Ke7 16.Rxh8 Bg4 17.Bc5+ Qxc5 18.Re1+ Kd7 19.Be6+ Bxe6 20.Rxa8 Bd6 21.Kg1) 13.Rfe1 Bd7 14.Qxb7 Rb8 15.Qxa7 Rxb2 16.Rad1 with good compensation!

so perhaps black has to turn to:
8. ... Nxe6 9.bxc3 O-O
or  8. ... Bxe6 9.bxc3 Nxf3+ 10.Qxf3 Qd5 11.Qg3 O-O-O (11. ... O-O 12.c4 Qc6 13.Bb2 Bd7 14.Rad1)
which is certainly better for white

well let me hear from you 

Back at my desk and I can see I was guilty of some late-night thingy-up in suggesting 7 ...Bb2 was OK!!    But glad to see the discussion has moved on! The 7 ...Nd4 lines look to be critical. Is 12 Rd1 clearly best? I wondered about 12 Rb1, then Be3 -- the Bishops might be useful?

Also 5 ...Nb4 looks interesting. Is there any theory on this move? Does Watson or anyone else discuss it?

I would play: 9...Qd5 10.Qg3 Bd7
a) 11.Qc7 (11.Qg7?? Rg8-+) Bc6 12.Qg3 0-0 and if now 13.Bh6 then Qg2 -+
b) 11.c4! Qc6 12.Td1 (idea 12...0-0?! 13.Bg5 with attack) 0-0-0!? 13.Be3 h5 and interesting play for black (for what you play this variation  )

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Bd3 Bb4 6.O-O Bxc3 7.exd5!

7...Nd4 looks interesting