NeverGiveUp wrote on 11/29/10 at 15:08:04:


there's a book by Tim Taylor forthcoming
it should be out early next year

Here you go. Quite possibly a problem somewhere as I'm not super strong and my comp merely OK

9 Qb3 .. b5 10 Qd5 ba 11 Qxc6+ Kf8 12 Nd4 ed 13 Qf3+ x d3 doesn't seem nice for black. Or even 11 Qxd3 really but thats a really cute piece of computer think

9.. Rb8 10 Qd5 e4 (Junior wants 10.. Bg6 to work but not convinced) 11 Bb3 Nh6 12 Ng5 Ne5 (BxN QxB etc) 13 Ne6 and then white can repeat/take g7 and eventually go Rxe4 with what certainly looks like a lot of comp. 

Not that black is lost at the end of this but far from convinced if its any fun.

Topical because I was going to check my notes about that tonight

As I remember 9 Qb3 is certainly dangerous - a lot of the time it seemed to end up with white sacrificing an exchange on e4 for the P & B and getting a floating black K and light squared holes as comp. Didn't seem at all fun for black really.

In fact, if I remember right, even the rather cheeky looking 8 Qb3 is quite playable.

The danger for white is of course never getting round to developing his queenside.

In the Siesta variation, how about White's alternatives to 9.Bc2? I.e. 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 d6 5. c3 f5 6. exf5 Bxf5 7. O-O Bd3 8. Re1 Be7 and now 9. Qb3!? or 9. Re3!?. Engines seem to think both are worth analysing.

P.S. NeverGiveUp: You might want to correct your move numbers.

Yes what's wrong with the modern Steinitz!!

Must say I'm seriously considering putting it on my repertoire. What is holding me back somewhat is lack of recent good books about it, as well as the work (time) I have to put into it. The former reason is also it's advantage - it's very much out of fashion (white may not be familiar with it, or with the types of positions arising) while it's not bad at all. In fact some relatively recent developments have made it quite playable. 

So what has white got after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6?

-He can go 4.Bc6: dc6: 5.d4, but then black should be quite OK with the double-edged 5. ...f6!? keeping the tension in the centre and the bishops pair.

-He can go 4.0-0 after which black has the very double-edged 4. ... Bg4!? 5.h3 h5 where black should be OK with Yandemirov's novely 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 Nd4: 8.hg4: Nb3:! 9.ab3: hg4: 10.Ng5 Qd7! followed by ...f6. Also the more tame 6.Bc6:+ bc6: 7.d4 Bf3: 8.Qf3: ed4: seems quite OK for black.

-And then the "Siesta variation" (Capablanca) has been revitalised: 4.c3 f5!? 5.ef5: Bf5: 6.0-0! (better than 6.d4 e4 with double-edged play and good chances for black) 6. ... Bd3 7.Re1 Be7 8.Bc2! Bc2: 9.Qc2: Nf6 10.d4 e4 11.Ng5 d5 12.f3 h6 13.Nh3 0-0 and black is basically OK.

-The famous Noah's ark trap goes 4.d4?! b5 5.Bb3 Nd4: 6.Nd4: ed4: 7.Qd4:?? (7.c3 is unclear) c5 8.Qd5 Be6 9.Qc6+ Bd7 10.Qd5 c4 and black wins. There are some other move 4 alternatives that are not dangerous for black, like 4.c4 (Maroczy) where black is OK after 4. ... Bg4.

All this lot then lead to very sharp positions where it's not easy at all for white to show any advantage.

So yes indeed - what's wrong with the modern Steinitz!!

Unfortunately I haven't gotten around to examining your suggestions in any detail yet, but rest assured I haven't forgotten this thread and will post my thoughts in due course.

Hopefully in the meantime somebody good will risk the line against Leko, but it seems like at the top only Mamedyarov has faith in this defence.

Regards, 

Toppy

Excellent post, TopNotch! – thanks. A great example of it being concrete moves, and not opinions, which push the debate on! As is obvious, I had completely underestimated/ignored the deferred Bxc6 ideas. I’d love to ‘rescue’ the Steinitz from the Tal-based assaults on it, but it ain’t easy! Here are my thoughts so far.

(1) After 5 …Nge7, are the 6 c3 Bd7 lines really so bad for Black after 12 …Nf6 or 12 …c5? Whatever the case here, 6 d4!? looks potentially very dangerous! But 6 …ed 7 Nd4 (7 c3 d3 might be OK?) Bd7!? (I think Black is suffering after 7 …b5 8 Nc6) might be worth investigating? (Just a thought -- I haven’t really looked at this yet.)

(2) In the 5 …Nf6 6 Bc6 bc 7 d4 line, I guess Black has to try 7 …ed (I had “7 …Be7!?, Malaniuk” in my notes, but unfortunately the manoeuvre Na3-c4 looks just to refute this) 8 Qd4 c5 9 Qd3 Be7 10 Re1 0-0 11 Nc3 Bb7, but although these moves can be played in various orders I think White retains an annoying edge.

(3) 5…Bd7 6 d4 Nf6 looks to me the soundest bet. Tal--Knaak but with 11 …0-0 might not be too bad, but I notice that 10 …0-0 has been tried in a few games. Now after 11 Nc6 obviously White has better pawns, but his position has lost a lot of its dynamic potential and it’s no wonder Tal has preferred 11 Nf5. But Black can regroup with …Nd7 and …Bf6 (and similarly after Bf4 or b3/Bb2) -- can White prove a real advantage after that?

LOL!!

I really hadn't expected someone to respond so fast before I got the chance to fill in the space.
 
You must be a mean Bullet player  

Topster