Certainly looks odd to me.  I know of White playing a5 in the Breyer, but in a much different kind of position, as in a Fischer-Spassky ('72) game.   

This reminds me of a comment by Kavalek, annotating a Breyer game in the '70s (when "everybody" was playing it) -- "Having the wind blowing from only one side gives Black better sailing possibilities, unless that wind becomes a hurricane."

I'm flattered that you think my comments are worth reading, never mind worth heeding.  I should preface my comments by stating that I have not yet faced 15.b3, and as a result have not given this line careful attention.  Nevertheless, I suspect that I would be inclined to play 15.b3 Bg7 16.d5 Rc8.  Witness this older game from Nigel Short, which I find rather persuasive:

[Site "Skanderborg"]
[Date "2003.10.10"]
[White "Kasimdzhanov,Rustam"]
[Black "Short,Nigel D"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Nb8 10.d4 Nbd7 11.Nbd2 Bb7 12.Bc2 Re8 13.Nf1 Bf8 14.Ng3 g6 15.b3 Bg7 16.d5 Rc8 17.Bg5 c6 18.c4 h6 19.Be3 Nb6 20.Rb1 cxd5 21.cxd5 Nbxd5 22.exd5 Nxd5 23.Bd2 f5 24.Nxf5 gxf5 25.Bxf5 Rb8 26.Rc1 Qf6 27.Be4 Qe6 28.Qc2 Kh8 29.Qd3 Ne7 30.Bxb7 Rxb7 31.Rcd1 Rd7 32.Bc3 Nc6 33.Kh1 Qf7 34.Nh4 d5 35.Nf5 Rf8 36.g4 Rfd8 37.Rc1 Bf6 38.Nxh6 Qh7 39.Nf5 d4 40.Bd2 Ne7 41.Qf3 Nxf5 42.Rc6 Rd6 43.Rxd6 Rxd6 44.gxf5 Rd8 45.Kh2 Rf8 46.Bb4 Re8 47.Qc6 Qf7 48.Bd2 Bg7 49.f4 Rf8 50.Bb4 Rg8 51.Qe6 Qh5 52.f6 Qf3 53.Qg4 Qf2+ 54.Kh1 Bh6 0-1

In his TWIC Theory piece from March 2008, IM Malcolm Pein calls this the "fallback position," instead of 15...d5, which he analyzed in-depth.  The main staple of the Breyer is Black's flexibility: the knights are able to swing to both the kingside and the queenside to combat White's assault on both wings, while the bishops are similarly able to fight on both sides of the board.  It strikes me that 15...d5 opens the position too soon; Black has time available to organize his pieces better for the inevitable opening of the position, so why not take advantage of it?  15.b3 Bg7 16.d5 Rc8 seems to allow for that.  Short's play above is rather instructive, as is Harikrishna's nice win against Karjakin (Karjakin-Harikrishna, ESP CEClub Final 2008).

Berg-Butnorius, Gibraltar 2008 offers the darker side of this line for Black, but even here, I can't help thinking that Black might have improved somehow.  

[Site "Gibraltar"]
[Date "2008.01.22"]
[White "Berg,Emanuel"]
[Black "Butnorius,Algimantas"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Nb8 10.d4 Nbd7 11.Nbd2 Bb7 12.Bc2 Re8 13.Nf1 Bf8 14.Ng3 g6 15.b3 Bg7 16.d5 Rc8 17.c4 c6 18.dxc6 Rxc6 19.cxb5 axb5 20.Bd3 b4 21.Bb5 Rc5 22.Ba4 d5 23.Bg5 d4 24.Qd2 Qc7 25.Qxb4 Rc8 26.Rac1 h6 27.Bxd7 Nxd7 28.Bd2 Bf8 29.Rxc5 Nxc5 30.Rc1 h5 31.Bg5 Qb8 32.Qb5 Nxe4 33.Nxe4 Bxe4 34.Qxb8 Rxb8 35.Nxe5 Ra8 36.Nd7 Ba3 37.Rd1 Bf5 38.Rxd4 Bb2 39.Rd2 Bc3 40.Rd5 Rxa2 41.Nf6+ Kg7 42.Nxh5+ Kh7 43.Nf6+ Kg7 44.Ne8+ Kh7 45.Bf6 Bxf6 46.Nxf6+ Kg7 47.Ne8+ Kf8 48.Nd6 Be6 49.Rb5 Ra1+ 50.Kh2 Ra2 51.f3 Rb2 52.Nc4 Rb1 53.Kg3 Rc1 54.Ne5 Rb1 55.b4 Rb2 56.Rb8+ Ke7 57.Rb7+ Kf6 58.Nd3 Rd2 59.Nc5 Bf5 60.h4 Rc2 61.Nd7+ Ke6 62.Nf8+ Kf6 63.Nh7+ Kg7 64.Ng5 Bd3 65.Rxf7+ Kg8 66.Rd7 Bf1 67.Rd8+ Kg7 68.Ne6+ Kf6 69.Nf4  1-0

My instinct is that I would be happy to defend this line--and, indeed, more comfortable doing so than I might against 15.b3 d5.  So, in short, my answer to your queries is: I don't know, but it might be worth looking elsewhere...

I'm happy to discuss 15.b3, but it seems that Black is finding ways to respond effectively (witness Victor's most recent update, although Wells and others have pointed to this line in the past).

In my correspondence experience, I have almost only faced the older mainline: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 O-O 9.h3 Nb8 10.d4 Nbd7 11.Nbd2 Bb7 12.Bc2 Re8 13.Nf1 Bf8 14.Ng3 g6 15.a4 c5 16.d5 c4 17.Bg5 h6 18.Be3 Nc5

A couple of examples:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 O-O 9.h3 Nb8 10.d4 Nbd7 11.Nbd2 Bb7 12.Bc2 Re8 13.Nf1 Bf8 14.Ng3 g6 15.a4 c5 16.d5 c4 17.Bg5 h6 18.Be3 Nc5 19.Qd2 h5 20.Bxc5 This just can't be right, but I found it tougher to face than I had anticipated.  Ponomariov has played this way for White, and it seems to have some merit 20...dxc5 21.Nf1 Qc7 22.Red1 Bd6 Maybe not the right plan 23.Ne3 Qe7 24.Rdb1 Reb8 25.b3 cxb3 26.Rxb3 c4 27.Rb2 Ba3 28.Rbb1 Bd6 29.Qc1 Qe8 30.Nf1 Bc8 31.Qg5 Nh7 32.Qh4 Bd7 33.Qg3 Qe7 34.Ne3 Qf6 35.Kh1 Qf4 36.Qxf4 exf4 37.Nf1 f6 38.N1d2 Ng5 39.Nxg5 fxg5 40.Nf3 bxa4 41.Rxb8+ Rxb8 42.e5 g4 43.hxg4 hxg4 44.exd6 gxf3 45.Bxa4 1/2-1/2

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 O-O 9.h3 Nb8 10.d4 Nbd7 11.Nbd2 Bb7 12.Bc2 Re8 13.Nf1 Bf8 14.Ng3 g6 15.a4 c5 16.d5 c4 17.Bg5 h6 18.Be3 Nc5 19.Ra3 Bit of an early diversion from the mainline 19.Qd2 Nfd7 20.Qe2 Qc7 21.Rea1 Nb6 22.axb5 axb5 23.Rxa8 Rxa8 24.Rxa8 Bxa8 25.h4 Bb7 26.h5 Bc8 27.Qd2 Kh7 28.Nh2 Nba4 29.Bd1 Qd8 30.Ng4 Bxg4 31.Bxg4 Be7 ! I kind of liked this plan, but then maybe mis-stepped later; I thought for awhile that I might have some winning chances. 32.hxg6+ fxg6 33.Bxh6 Bh4 34.Be3 Bxg3 35.fxg3 Nxe4 36.Qc2 Nec5 37.Qf2 Kg7 38.Bc1 Qf6 39.Qd2 g5 40.Qe2 Nd3 41.Be3 Ndxb2 42.Bd7 Qg6 43.Qg4 Qb1+ 1/2-1/2 

Neither game has any particular theoretical value in themselves, but I think they are suggestive of how solid Black's position is.  I'm finding I'm having the typical Ruy Lopez experience: tough defense for the first 20-30 moves and then Black looks a bit better.  Enough to convert for the win?  Not yet, but a couple more games look good for me at the moment and I'm still developing a "feel" for the Breyer...

I´m not following you there - this is the sequence:

23.Qd3 Nb4 24.Qf3 Be7 25.Bf5! Black is in big trouble.

If 25.Bb1?! then 25....Ne4 may indeed be strong.

yes 23.Qd3! was what I thought basically was the refutation - there was some analysis by Kavalek online in the Washington Post somewhere - actually I think Kavelek was more or less quoting Navara analysis. I think instead of Grischuks Bb1?! the move Bf5! is a killer.

By the way Breyer fans need not panic about all of this, since instead of ...d5 Kasmsky was playing ..a5!? successfully - after all the whole concept of the Breyer is to play positionally - why go into this madness even if Black can escape with a draw.

LeeRoth wrote on 05/15/08 at 16:24:58:


Time flies! 2006, oh well. Didnt know there was a Hazai survey in 2007 - also as I recall there was some online Shipov analysis somewhere. Not one of my lines but be curious to know if it is in fact refuted or not.

Keano wrote on 05/15/08 at 15:59:57:


This was the 2006 Tal Memorial.  According to Lukacs and Hazai, it was Mamydarov who forgot his home analysis, not Grischuk.  After the game, Mamydarov said he had forgotten his analysis because he has so many variations.  However, he does not believe that White has anything more than a draw.  In the game itself, Mamydarov missed 25..Ne4, got a bad position and was lucky to draw.  BTW, Lukacs and Hazai surveyed this line of the Breyer in a 2007 issue of ChessBase Magazine and concluded that there is no final verdict on it.