Latest Updates:
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it? (Read 23121 times)
BabySnake
Full Member
***
Offline


Opening repertoire construction
underway

Posts: 174
Joined: 10/21/10
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #33 - 02/16/11 at 16:10:03
Post Tools
Ametanoitos wrote on 01/31/11 at 18:09:17:
Didn't Jansa in his "Dynamic Chess Strategy" book examined this variation in some detail? I had this wonderfull book but it was stolen from me along with my laptop.... Angry


"Dynamics of Chess Strategy" in fact  Smiley

The other book is the one by Suba  Cool
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Ametanoitos
God Member
*****
Offline


The road to success is
under construction

Posts: 1427
Location: Patras
Joined: 01/04/05
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #32 - 02/08/11 at 14:40:38
Post Tools
Kritz has an article on CBM 140 on the Modern Steinitz which some of you may find interesting as this probably will and fuel to the discussion.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4681
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #31 - 01/31/11 at 18:10:59
Post Tools
Ametanoitos wrote on 01/31/11 at 18:09:17:
Didn't Jansa in his "Dynamic Chess Strategy" book examined this variation in some detail?


Yes.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Ametanoitos
God Member
*****
Offline


The road to success is
under construction

Posts: 1427
Location: Patras
Joined: 01/04/05
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #30 - 01/31/11 at 18:09:17
Post Tools
Didn't Jansa in his "Dynamic Chess Strategy" book examined this variation in some detail? I had this wonderfull book but it was stolen from me along with my laptop.... Angry
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
NeverGiveUp
Full Member
***
Offline


Never despair in a lost
position

Posts: 221
Joined: 11/18/09
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #29 - 01/31/11 at 16:43:56
Post Tools
So is this the final verdict then -
and the answer to the original question The Modern Steinitz - what's wrong with it? Tongue

The usual view has long been that there are a few ways for White to get a slight advantage in this old variation.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4681
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #28 - 01/27/11 at 15:44:25
Post Tools
NeverGiveUp wrote on 01/27/11 at 09:14:35:
Especially in the Rubinstein it's not easy at all for white to obtain any advantage.


It seems to me that the usual view has long been that there are a few ways for White to get a slight advantage there.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
NeverGiveUp
Full Member
***
Offline


Never despair in a lost
position

Posts: 221
Joined: 11/18/09
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #27 - 01/27/11 at 09:14:35
Post Tools
Thanks Martin.

Against 5.0-0 I play 5. ... Bg4!? 6.h3 h5 a variation that is very old but has been seriously re-vitalised by Yandemirov. There has been a NIC survey on it and with the current state of affairs, theoretically black seems fine here.

I don't think 5.0-0 Bd7 is good, since white goes 6.d4! what is a seriously improved version of the 5.d4 variation. I would say black is in trouble here and white is scoring very well accordingly.

Of course after 5.c3 black can go 5. ... Bd7 6.d4 and now either 6. ... Nge7 (Rubinstein) or 6. ... g6 (Bronstein). Both of these are very respectable variations that have been around for a long time. Especially in the Rubinstein it's not easy at all for white to obtain any advantage.

And the Siesta is definitely doable - but only if black is willing to go for 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.c3 f5 6.ef5: Bf5: 7.0-0 Bd3 8.Re1 Be7(!) 9.Bc2(!) Bc2: 10.Qc2: Nf6 11.d4 e4 12.Ng5 d5 13.f3 h6 14.Nh3 0-0 15.Nd2 ef3: 16.Nf3: Rf7.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MartinC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 2007
Joined: 07/24/06
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #26 - 01/26/11 at 14:38:47
Post Tools
Whatever you'd do against 5 o-o ^ 6 c3 & 7 d4 I assume. Probably only a big problem if thats meant to be the Bg4 and h5 stuff?

I have to say that playing into that line as white feels a tiny bit kind to black to me, but then I'm somewhat offended by people playing f5 against the Lopez Smiley

In the end you're playing a very classical defence (and white playing very sensibly) so fully sound fun is always likely to be a little limited.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
NeverGiveUp
Full Member
***
Offline


Never despair in a lost
position

Posts: 221
Joined: 11/18/09
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #25 - 01/26/11 at 10:49:40
Post Tools
I have now played the line above in a 4NCL game which went 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.c3 f5 6.ef5 Bf5 7.0-0 Bd3 8.Re1 e4 9.Nd4 Qd7 10.Nc6: bc6: 11.Bc2 Be7 12.Bd3: ed3: 13.Qh5+ g6 14.Qf3 Nh6 15.h3 Nf5 (Nf7!?) 16.Qd3: 0-0 with a very complex position where I'm confident black has sufficient compensation for the pawn.

Unfortunately I now believe the 8. ... e4?! variation is unsound because of 9.Bc2! Kd7 10.Bd3: ed3: 11.Qb3! Qf6 12.Qb7: Ra7 13.Qb3 followed by Qa4! and Nd4 and black is lost due to the pin on the Nc6. 9. ... Be7 10.Bd3: ed3: 11.Qb3! is also pretty nasty for black because he can't complete his development.

Black therefore has to go 8.Be7(!) 9.Bc2 Bc2: 10.Qc2: Nf6 11.d4 e4 12.Ng5 d5 13.f3 h6 14.Nh3 0-0 15.Nd2 ef3: 16.Nf3: Rf7.
There has been a NIC survey about this line where it is concluded black is OK although white may be slightly better.

They also conclude (rightly) that the fun has gone out of playing the siesta since if you have to go into a boring position where white is slightly better that's definitely not what black has in mind! 

If black can hold his own it' still doable though... but I wonder ... what to do against 5.c3 if you play the Modern Steinitz?  Shocked
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
NeverGiveUp
Full Member
***
Offline


Never despair in a lost
position

Posts: 221
Joined: 11/18/09
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #24 - 12/07/10 at 11:14:46
Post Tools
Line C should read:
C] 9.Nd4!? Qd7 10.Nc6: bc6: 11.Bc2 Be7 12.Bd3: ed3: 13.Qh5+ g6 14.Qf3 d5 (Nh6!?) 15.Qd3: Nf6 16.Qc2 (16.Qe3 0-0! 17.Qe7:?? Rae8) 0-0 with compensation.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
NeverGiveUp
Full Member
***
Offline


Never despair in a lost
position

Posts: 221
Joined: 11/18/09
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #23 - 12/07/10 at 10:42:44
Post Tools
I have been analysing some amazing variations for black in the Siesta that seem very doable. Really fun stuff.

After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.c3 f5!? 6.ef5: Bf5: 7.0-0 Bd3 8.Re1 e4!? (instead of Be7). Now white can go:

A] 9.Bc2 Kd7!? 10.Bd3: ed3: 11.Nd4 Qh4, or 11.Qb3!? Qf6 12.Qb7: Ra7(!) 13.Qb3 Nge7 14.Qc4 g5 15.Qd3: Bg7 with good compensation for the 2 pawns - white has lost 5 moves pawn grabbing! 

B] 9.Qb3?! given by ECO as the refutation but really not very good - 9. ... b5! 10.c4 (ECO stops here saying white is winning) 10. ... Nge7! 11.cb5: ab5: 12.Bb5: Bb5: 13.Qb5: Ra5 14.Qc4 d5 15.Qc3 Qd6 and black is doing very well. Alternatively 10.Qe6+ Nge7 11.Bb3 d5 12.Ng5 Qd6 - same verdict.

C] 9.Nd4!? Qd7 10.Nc6: bc6: 11.Bc2 Be7 12.Bd3: ed3: 13.Qh5+ g6 14.Qf3 d5 (Nh6!?) 15.Qd3: 0-0 with compensation.

D] 9.Re3 Be7! transposes to a main line where black is OK (10.Ne1 Bg5! Maroczy/Keres)

I'm starting to love this line!   

I saw on NICbase that e4 has been played quite a lot of times, and is quite a respectable variation.

Any reactions are most welcome.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
NeverGiveUp
Full Member
***
Offline


Never despair in a lost
position

Posts: 221
Joined: 11/18/09
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #22 - 12/01/10 at 10:10:06
Post Tools
Re agropop:

There has been a Smirnov-Yandemirov game in 2008 which you didn't mention where the great Y improved upon the earlier game and went 19. ...Qh1+ 20.Ke2 Qg2: 21.Nc7:+ Kf7 22.Nd5+ Kg6 23.Nf6: Qf3+ 24.Kd3 gf6:; the game ended in a draw.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
NeverGiveUp
Full Member
***
Offline


Never despair in a lost
position

Posts: 221
Joined: 11/18/09
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #21 - 12/01/10 at 09:26:28
Post Tools
Thanks Martin.

I'll have a more detailed look later but looking at the diagram I'd say Kc8 is the preferred option over Ke8. Then in teh diagram position -with the king on c8 that is- black can play Nh6-f7 followed by ... d5 attacking Queen and knight and blocking out white's bishop. Black seems to be doing reasonably OK then, although materially white isn't doing too bad. Maybe black should try to use his lead in development (white's queenside is totally undeveloped) to grab the initiative and maybe launch an attack, if feasible.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
agropop
Junior Member
**
Offline


Use your brain

Posts: 51
Location: Madrid
Joined: 04/13/10
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #20 - 12/01/10 at 09:25:19
Post Tools
NeverGiveUp wrote on 11/30/10 at 15:08:11:
There has however been an article in NIC yearbook about 5. ... Bg4 stating that with Yandemirov's novelies black is OK.



Maybe this article is a bit dated now. These games of Yandemirov as black were played after the NIC article you mention:
[Event "20th European Club Clup"]
[Site "Izmir TUR"]
[Date "2004.10.07"]
[EventDate "2004.10.03"]
[Round "5"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[White "Pavel Smirnov"]
[Black "Valeri Yandemirov"]
[ECO "C72"]
[WhiteElo "2626"]
[BlackElo "2488"]
[PlyCount "193"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 d6 5. O-O Bg4 6. h3 h5
7. d4 b5 8. Bb3 Nxd4 9. hxg4 Nxb3 10. axb3 hxg4 11. Ng5 Qd7
12. c4 Rb8 13. Rxa6 f6 14. Nc3 fxg5 15. Nxb5 Nf6 16. Ra7 Rc8
17. Re1 Qf7 18. Be3 Qh5 19. Kf1 Kd7 20. b4?! Qh1+ 21. Ke2 Qxg2
22. Qa4 Kd8 23. Nxc7 Rxc7 24. Qa5 Ne8 25. Kd2 Kd7 26. Qb5+ Ke7
27. Rxc7+ Nxc7 28. Qb7 Kd7 29. Bb6 Be7 30. Qxc7+ Ke6 31. Qb7
g3 32. Re2 Rh2 33. Qc8+ Kf7 34. Qg4 Qg1 35. Qxg3 Qb1 36. Kc3
Rh1 37. Qd3 Rc1+ 38. Rc2 Rd1 39. Rd2 Rc1+ 40. Kb3 Qa1 41. c5
dxc5 42. bxc5 Kg6 43. Rc2 Rd1 44. Qf3 Rd4 45. Rc4 Rd2 46. Qc3
Rxf2 47. c6 Rf6 48. c7 Rxb6+ 49. Kc2 Rd6 50. Qf3 Rb6 51. Qf5+
Kh6 52. Qxe5 Bf6 53. c8=Q Rxb2+ 54. Qxb2 Qxb2+ 55. Kd1 Qb3+
56. Kd2 g4 57. Qe6 Qf3 58. e5 Qf2+ 59. Kd3 Qf3+ 60. Kd4 Qd1+
61. Kc5 Qe2 62. Kd6 Kg5 63. exf6 Qxe6+ 64. Kxe6 gxf6 65. Kd5
g3 66. Ke4 g2 67. Rc8 f5+ 68. Kf3 g1=N+ 69. Ke3 Nh3 70. Rc6
Nf4 71. Kd4 Ng6 72. Rc1 Kf6 73. Ke3 Kg5 74. Kd4 Kf6 75. Kd5
Nf4+ 76. Kd6 Ng6 77. Re1 Nf4 78. Re8 Ng6 79. Ra8 Kf7 80. Kd5
Kf6 81. Ra6+ Kg5 82. Ke6 Nf4+ 83. Kf7 Nd5 84. Rg6+ Kh4
85. Rh6+ Kg5 86. Rh1 Ne3 87. Ke6 f4 88. Rg1+ Ng4 89. Rf1 Ne3
90. Rf2 Ng4 91. Rf1 Ne3 92. Rg1+ Ng4 93. Rf1 Ne3 94. Rg1+ Ng4
95. Kd5 Kf5 96. Kd4 f3 97. Rf1 1/2-1/2

Both players continued the discussion. Smirnov Improved at move 20:
[Event "European Club Cup"]
[Site "Feugen AUT"]
[Date "2006.10.11"]
[EventDate "2006.10.08"]
[Round "4"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Pavel Smirnov"]
[Black "Valeri Yandemirov"]
[ECO "C72"]
[WhiteElo "2623"]
[BlackElo "2528"]
[PlyCount "112"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 d6 5. O-O Bg4 6. h3 h5
7. d4 b5 8. Bb3 Nxd4 9. hxg4 Nxb3 10. axb3 hxg4 11. Ng5 Qd7
12. c4 Rb8 13. Rxa6 f6 14. Nc3 fxg5 15. Nxb5 Nf6 16. Ra7 Rc8
17. Re1 Qf7 18. Be3 Qh5 19. Kf1 Kd7 20. Qa1 Qh1+ 21. Ke2 Qxg2
22. Nxc7 Rxc7 23. Qa4+ Kd8 24. Qa5 Ne8 25. Kd2 Kd7 26. Qb5+
Ke7 27. Rxc7+ Nxc7 28. Qb7 Kd7 29. Bb6 Be7 30. Qxc7+ Ke6
31. Ra1 Qxe4 32. Ra7 Re8 33. Qd7+ Kf7 34. Qxd6 g3 35. fxg3
Qg2+ 36. Kc1 Qxg3 37. Bc5 Qf4+ 38. Kc2 Qf5+ 39. Kc3 Qf3+
40. Kb4 Qf6 41. Qd5+ Kg6 42. Qe4+ Kh5 43. Rxe7 Rxe7 44. Bxe7
Qxe7+ 45. c5 g4 46. Kb5 g3 47. c6 Qd6 48. Qh7+ Kg4 49. Qxg7+
Kf3 50. Qf7+ Ke3 51. c7 Qd3+ 52. Qc4 Qd7+ 53. Kb6 Qc8 54. Qa6
Qe6+ 55. Ka7 Qd7 56. Qb6+ Ke4 1-0

I supose an improvement over this is needed to play this line as black

Sorry for no PGN attachment, i'm at work now.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MartinC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 2007
Joined: 07/24/06
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #19 - 11/30/10 at 15:34:38
Post Tools
Nd4 seems a fun idea. But I was following the move order from Stigma's post with 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 9 Qb3 etc.

Makes Ne7 rather tricky Wink I guess that was about 8 Qb3. Fair enough then perhaps.

I just can't see the attraction in the other line, although perhaps its not so bad.

Position after 9 Qb3 Rb8 10 Qd5 e4 11 Bb3 Nh6 12 Ng5 Ne5 13 Ne6 Qd7 (iirc c8 perhaps required for some odd reason?) 14 Nxg7+ Kd8 15 Ne6+ Ke8 (or c8) 16 Rxe4 c6 17 Qd4 BxR 18 QxB

Obviously a few minor (or not!) options getting here, but its pretty representative and seemingly non trivial to avoid, unless there's something before white gets Ne6 in?

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *


Of course its scarcely like blacks forced to go f5 Smiley
« Last Edit: 11/30/10 at 16:44:37 by MartinC »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
NeverGiveUp
Full Member
***
Offline


Never despair in a lost
position

Posts: 221
Joined: 11/18/09
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #18 - 11/30/10 at 15:08:11
Post Tools
Thanks everyone.

Martin - I had a (quick) look at Qb3 and it's quite an old line (Capablanca) where black is OK. after 9.Qb3 b5 10.Qd5 black has to play the amazing 10. ... Nd4!! and holds his own after 11.cd4 Ne7. Also 9. ... Rb8 should certainly be doable (equal) and transposes after 10.Re1 Be7. actually this is exactly what black is after - very compicated interesting lines with an about equal verdict.

agropop - your 5.0-0 is certainly much more critical. I'd say after 5. ... Bd7 white can go 6.d4! what is an improvement over 5.d4 since black has already played Bd7. Your 6.c4 is also an interesting idea. There has however been an article in NIC yearbook about 5. ... Bg4 stating that with Yandemirov's novelies black is OK.

Jon - thanks for bringing the book to my attention, about time someone starts writing about this amazing stuff! All kinds of stuff is being written about the RL including almost any sideline (see for instance Sokolov's excellent book) but unfortunately the Modern Steinitz keeps being left out!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jonathan Tait
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 497
Location: Nottingham
Joined: 07/11/06
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #17 - 11/30/10 at 14:39:33
Post Tools
NeverGiveUp wrote on 11/29/10 at 15:08:04:
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


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

blog inspired by Bronstein's book, but using my own games: http://200opengames.blogspot.co.uk/
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
agropop
Junior Member
**
Offline


Use your brain

Posts: 51
Location: Madrid
Joined: 04/13/10
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #16 - 11/30/10 at 10:07:01
Post Tools
I think modern Steiniz is quite well explained in Bronstein's clasic 200 open games. (of course not a great theoretical value these days, but very instructive)
Most principled (but also complicated) is 5.0-0. Of course Yandemirov's games are very important in this line. I think he has played v.s Smirnov (not sure, i'll try to check that and post the games tomorrow) at least 3 games with 2 draws and one defeat. Anyway it seems that black is suffering here.
Main point of 5.0-0 is that against 5...Bd7 white plays 6.c4! and white has an improved version of Duras variation. In Bronstein's view, black should counter this variation (5.c4) with 5...Bg4!, with the logical idea of playing ...Nf6-d7-c5-e6, since d4 is a nice square. Of course after 5...Bd7 black's bishop has been commited too early.
A model game i recall in this line with 5...Bd7 is Rodriguez Céspedes-Reyes Larenas, Novi Sad 1990. In fact black got a bad king's indian, as sometimes happens in the Ruy Lopez.
Since i haven't looked at the modern steiniz for quite a while i don't know if theory regards 6.d4 stronger than 6.c4.
« Last Edit: 12/01/10 at 08:45:15 by agropop »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MartinC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 2007
Joined: 07/24/06
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #15 - 11/29/10 at 19:15:51
Post Tools
Here you go. Quite possibly a problem somewhere as I'm not super strong and my comp merely OK Smiley

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 Smiley

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.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
NeverGiveUp
Full Member
***
Offline


Never despair in a lost
position

Posts: 221
Joined: 11/18/09
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #14 - 11/29/10 at 16:45:03
Post Tools
just an aside - two funny anecdotes about the Modern Steintiz

1.The strong grandmaster Steiner has fallen for Noah's ark trap.
2.No one less than Alekhine (another great expert on the modern Steinitz) said that white could force a draw after 1.e4 e5 2.nf3 nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.d4?! b5 6.Bb3 Nd4: 7.Nd4: ed4: 8.Qd4:?? c5 9.Qd5 Be6 with 10.Qc6+, whereas it's an easy win for black after 10. ... Bd7 11.Qd5 c4 rather than Be6.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MartinC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 2007
Joined: 07/24/06
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #13 - 11/29/10 at 16:22:07
Post Tools
Topical because I was going to check my notes about that tonight Smiley

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.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
NeverGiveUp
Full Member
***
Offline


Never despair in a lost
position

Posts: 221
Joined: 11/18/09
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #12 - 11/29/10 at 16:19:56
Post Tools
Thanks for this Stigma.

9.Re3 is a very old and well known variation from Keres' days where black is OK after 9. ... e4! followed by ... Bg5 hitting the Re3.

9.Qb3 is double-edged but also quiet an old variation where black is OK. I would have to look up the precise variations of this.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3175
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #11 - 11/29/10 at 15:42:27
Post Tools
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.
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
dfan
God Member
*****
Offline


"When you see a bad move,
look for a better one"

Posts: 739
Location: Boston
Joined: 10/04/05
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #10 - 11/29/10 at 15:23:52
Post Tools
If you're studying the modern Steinitz you may want to check out the games of the young American GM Robert Hess; he plays it a lot.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
NeverGiveUp
Full Member
***
Offline


Never despair in a lost
position

Posts: 221
Joined: 11/18/09
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #9 - 11/29/10 at 15:08:04
Post Tools
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!!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1883
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #8 - 04/10/08 at 02:37:07
Post Tools
Good on yer! -- look forward to hearing your thoughts sometime! I confess I haven't looked at the line M'dov played against Leko, which is a bit silly/illogical, but I'm sure I will in due course. Meanwhile my Cozio thread seems so far to have proven a lead balloon! Maybe I should give up my habitual attempts to rescue purportedly suboptimal defences! -- but then, if Radjabov had thought that ... (Plus it's fun!)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2084
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #7 - 04/10/08 at 01:13:46
Post Tools
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 Smiley

  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1883
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #6 - 04/10/08 at 00:05:45
Post Tools
Should I take it that you take my points here then, Toppy? -- (1) is OK, (2) isn't, (3) is but could be tedious to keep repeating?  Wink
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1883
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #5 - 03/26/08 at 22:01:05
Post Tools
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?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Matemax
God Member
*****
Offline


Chesspub gives you strength!

Posts: 1302
Joined: 11/04/07
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #4 - 03/23/08 at 13:49:52
Post Tools
Quote:
Ruy Lopez - Deferred Steinitz [C73]
Analysis, 13.01.2008
[Toppy]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.0-0 Nf6 6.Bxc6+!? bxc6 7.d4! intending Nxe4?! 8.Qe2!

Also good is 8.Re1 f5 9.dxe5 d5 10.Nc3! (10.Nd4 Qh4!) 10...Bc5 11.Be3 Bxe3 12.Rxe3 0-0 13.Nd4 Qe8 14.f3± Boleslavsky-Smyslov/Moscow/1941

8...f5 9.Nbd2 Nxd2 10.Nxd2 e4 11.f3 d5 12.fxe4 fxe4 13.Qh5+!

13.Nxe4! Müller 13...dxe4 14.Qxe4+ Be7 15.Bg5+-

13...g6 14.Qe5+ Qe7 15.Qxh8+-


Filling some space I'd like to give some variations after the possible 10...Qe7 (preferred by my chess engine) to show some potential of the position - especially if Black acts greedy:

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

11.dxe5 Qxe5 (11...de5?!) 12.Qd1 Kf7 13.Re1 Qf6 14.Nf3 Kg8 15.Bg5 Qxb2 16.Qd3 d5
(16...Bd7 17.Reb1+-)
(16....Qb5 17.c4 Qa4 18.Re8 h6 (18...Kf7 19.Rxc8) 19.Nh4+-)
(16...Qb6 17.Re8 h6 18.Rae1 (18.Be7?! Kf7 19.Rxc8 Bxe7 20.Qxf5+ Bf6 21.Qd7+ =) 18. ... hxg5 19.Qe2 Kh7 20.Rxc8 Rxc8 21.Qe6 g6 22.Nxg5+ Kh6 23.Nf7+ Kh7 24.Nxh8 Kxh8 25.Qxc8+-)
17.a4
(17.Reb1?! Qa3 18.Rb3 Qd6)
17...Rb8 18.c3 Qb7 19.Rab1 Qa8 20.Rxb8 Qxb8 21.Re8+ +-
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2084
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #3 - 03/22/08 at 19:33:26
Post Tools
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  Grin

Topster Smiley
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Matemax
God Member
*****
Offline


Chesspub gives you strength!

Posts: 1302
Joined: 11/04/07
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #2 - 03/22/08 at 19:10:26
Post Tools
Quote:
[WATCH THIS SPACE]

Space - the final frontier. Where no one has gone before - Topster: you did it  Cool

Edit: Meanwhile SPACE has turned into massive INFORMATION - its like E=mc2
« Last Edit: 03/23/08 at 07:49:52 by Matemax »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2084
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
Reply #1 - 03/22/08 at 19:04:51
Post Tools
Michael Ayton wrote on 03/12/08 at 00:30:07:
I’ve asked ‘What’s wrong with it?’, since this variation of the Spanish has a somewhat controversial reputation. A few years ago now, Paddy (I think it was -- he’ll correct me if I’m wrong) teasingly related that an English GM (?; he didn’t say who ...) had told him there wasn’t likely to be a book written on this line since it was felt White had at least one route to a safe advantage. That, however, was pre-Mamedyarov ... More recently, Topnotch, in another thread, recommended for White the line Leko has twice used to beat Mamedyarov at Corus: 5 0-0 Bd7 6 d4 ed 7 Nd4 b5 8 Nc6 Bc6 9 Bb3 Nf6 and now: 10 Nc3 0-0 11 Re1 0-0 12 a4 (2006), or 10 c4 Be7 11 Nc3 0-0 12 Re1 (2008). Black, however, has move orders which rule this out.

Move orders can be critical here. For example, after 5 0-0 Black is unlikely to start with 5 …g6?! since 6 d4 is strong, whereas after 5 c3, 5 …g6 looks playable. As Leko’s line shows, Black must, of course, always be prepared for a quick d2-d4. But after 5 ...Bd7 6 d4, instead of taking Black could play 6...Nf6 -- how then can White advantageously stop him reaching mainline positions? Even supposing he can, Black might also have 5 ...Nf6, since 6 d4 b5!? (6 …Bd7!?) 7 Bb3 (7 de de is nothing?) Nd4 8 Nd4 de 9 c3 dc 10 e5 c2 is meant to be unclear. (There’s also 5 …Ne7, but that’s another story/thread.)

So -- what’s wrong with the Modern Steinitz?


Michael Ayton wrote on 02/28/08 at 11:55:07:
@ Toppy: in the Deferred Steinitz with 5 0-0, what do you think is Leko's intention after (A) 5 ...Bd7 6 d4 Nf6, (B) 5 ...Nf6, and (C) 5 ...Ne7?!


I cannot say with any certainty what Leko has in mind against the options you mentioned, but I can share with you in a bit more detail why I like his approach and why I agree with Paddy's Grandmaster that Black has problems in this line.

So lets take a closer look at the three alternatives you gave to Mamedyarov's chosen line, and confirm whether they promise Black an easier life:

Ruy Lopez - Deferred Steinitz [C73]
Analysis, 13.01.2008
[Toppy]


1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.0-0 Nf6 6.Bxc6+!? bxc6 7.d4! intending Nxe4?! 8.Qe2!

Also good is 8.Re1 f5 9.dxe5 d5 10.Nc3! (10.Nd4 Qh4!) 10...Bc5 11.Be3 Bxe3 12.Rxe3 0-0 13.Nd4 Qe8 14.f3± Boleslavsky-Smyslov/Moscow/1941

8...f5 9.Nbd2 Nxd2 10.Nxd2 e4 11.f3 d5 12.fxe4 fxe4 13.Qh5+!

13.Nxe4! Müller 13...dxe4 14.Qxe4+ Be7 15.Bg5+-

13...g6 14.Qe5+ Qe7 15.Qxh8+-


Tal,M (2635) - Knaak,R (2515) [C79]
Halle DSV Halle, 1974
[Toppy]


1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 e5 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.0-0 Bd7 6.d4 Nf6 7.Bxc6!?

Tal was a big expert in this line, and this exchange is a familiar theme for us : 7.Re1 Be7 8.Bxc6 Bxc6 9.Nc3 transposes to the mainline

7...Bxc6 8.Re1 Be7

8...Nxe4? 9.d5 Wins; 8...Bxe4 9.Nc3 Gives white a strong initiative 9.Nc3 exd4 [9...0-0? Is a well known, but east to overlook trap 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.Qxd8 Raxd8 12.Nxe5 Bxe4 13.Nxe4 Nxe4 14.Nd3 f5 15.f3 Bc5+ 16.Nxc5 Nxc5 17.Bg5 Rde8 18.Be7+- Black will be an exchange down without compensation

10.Nxd4 Bd7 11.Qf3 Bg4?

Tal:"A pseudo - active continuation." 11...0-0 12.Bf4 (or 12.Nf5) 12...Re8+/=

12.Qg3 Qd7 13.h3 Bh5

13...Be6!? 14.e5! dxe5 15.Nxe6 fxe6 (15...Qxe6 16.Rxe5) 16.Qxe5±

14.Nf5 0-0-0 15.Bg5+- Ng8!?

15...Bg6 16.Nxe7+ Qxe7 17.Nd5 Qe6 18.Bxf6 gxf6 19.Qc3 c6 20.Nxf6

16.Bxe7!

16.Nxe7+!? Nxe7 17.Qh4 f6 18.Qxh5±

16...Nxe7 17.Qg5 Nxf5?

17...Nc6 18.Qxh5 g6 19.Nxd6+ Qxd6 20.Qg4+ Kb8 21.a3+-

18.exf5 g6 19.g4 Qc6

19...gxf5 20.Qxh5 fxg4 21.hxg4 Rhg8 22.Kf1 Rxg4 23.Re7+-

20.f6 d5 21.Re7 h6 22.Qe5 d4!? 23.Ne2 Rd5 24.Nxd4! 1-0



Nikolenko,O (2510) - Frog,I (2415) [C70]
RUS-Cup03 (Geller mem) Moscow (4), 13.02.1999
[Toppy]


1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nge7 5.0-0 d6 6.d4

Sticking with our theme, but with the Black knight misplaced on e7 preferable maybe the standard Spanish build up of  [6.c3 Bd7 7.d4 Ng6 8.d5 Nb8 9.c4! White has a useful space advantage on the Queeniside and a nagging edge, while Black is very  cramped. Strategically the type of play that occurs here is typical of the Classical Kings Indian, except that Black's counterplay is far less effective.

6...b5 7.Bb3 Nxd4 8.Nxd4 exd4 9.c3 dxc3

9...d3 is perhaps less dangerous.; 9...Bb7 10.Qf3! f5 11.cxd4 Bxe4 12.Qe2+-

10.Nxc3 Be6

10...Ng6 11.f4 Be7 12.Qh5 Bf6 (12...0-0 13.Nd5 Be6? 14.f5 Bxd5 15.fxg6+- 1-0 Kindermann,S-Castro Rojas,O/Novi Sad 1990/TD (20)) 13.e5! dxe5 14.Rd1 (The immediate 14.f5 is also quite strong) 14...Bd7  (14...Qe7 15.Nd5 Qd8 16.fxe5 Bxe5 (or 16...Nxe5 17.Nxf6+ Qxf6 18.Re1+-) 17.Bg5 Qd7 18.Nf6+ gxf6 19.Rxd7+/-) 15.f5 +/-

11.f4 Bxb3 12.axb3 Nc6 13.Nd5 Ne7 14.Be3

There is an old rule of thumb saying that a couple of tempi are worth a pawn. Well White is approximately three moves ahead here, so it's hardly a surprise that Black is worse.

14...c5 15.f5 Nxd5 16.Qxd5 Ra7 17.Rfd1 Qa8

17...Be7? 18.Bxc5 dxc5 19.Qc6+ Rd7 20.Rxa6+-

18.b4! Qxd5 19.Rxd5 Be7 20.bxc5 dxc5 21.Bxc5 Bxc5+ 22.Rxc5±

White wins a pawn and went on to score the victory on move sixty.


Despite being cramped the Deferred Steintz remains eminently playable, nevertheless it seems to me that White has few problems establishing a comfortable advantage with minimal risk.

Toppy Smiley
« Last Edit: 03/23/08 at 02:55:09 by TopNotch »  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1883
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
The Modern Steinitz -- what's wrong with it?
03/12/08 at 00:30:07
Post Tools
I’ve noticed there’s been a bit of interest on the Forum recently (from Bibs and others) in the Modern Steinitz, so I thought I’d open a couple of new threads on it. This one is intended to be general, but also to focus on the Modern Fianchetto Variation (C79) as played by Keres; the other one will be on the older Rubinstein Variation (C75) and the interesting Bronstein Variation (C76). Here, I've considered only 5 0-0 and 5 c3, since the possible move orders and transpositions here alone are quite baffling enough for me. (I’m certainly not suggesting other people should be so limited, though!)

I’ve asked ‘What’s wrong with it?’, since this variation of the Spanish has a somewhat controversial reputation. A few years ago now, Paddy (I think it was -- he’ll correct me if I’m wrong) teasingly related that an English GM (?; he didn’t say who ...) had told him there wasn’t likely to be a book written on this line since it was felt White had at least one route to a safe advantage. That, however, was pre-Mamedyarov ... More recently, Topnotch, in another thread, recommended for White the line Leko has twice used to beat Mamedyarov at Corus: 5 0-0 Bd7 6 d4 ed 7 Nd4 b5 8 Nc6 Bc6 9 Bb3 Nf6 and now: 10 Nc3 0-0 11 Re1 0-0 12 a4 (2006), or 10 c4 Be7 11 Nc3 0-0 12 Re1 (2008). Black, however, has move orders which rule this out.

Mainline MFV theory (such as there is!) begins after, to cite just one rather arbitrary move order, 5 0-0 Bd7 6 c3 Nf6 7 d4 g6 8 Re1 b5 9 Bb3(!) Bg7. Matulovic-Keres went [u]10 h3[/u] 0-0 11 Bg5 h6 12 Bh4 and Black held the balance with 12 ... Qe8! (a common theme) 13 a4 Nh5. Against [u]10 Nbd2[/u], Nigel Davies has succeeded with 10 …0-0 11 Nf1 h6 (idea 12 ...Re8), while [u]10 de[/u] Ne5! 11 Ne5 de is, I believe, meant to be OK for Black after 12 Bg5 h6 13 Bh4 0-0 or 12 Be3 Qe7 13 f3 0-0. My ancient notes suggest a White edge after [u]10 Bg5!?[/u] h6 11 Bh4 0-0 12 a4!?, but I’d like to ask what’s wrong with, say, 12 …ed here (13 cd g5!?).

Move orders can be critical here. For example, after 5 0-0 Black is unlikely to start with 5 …g6?! since 6 d4 is strong, whereas after 5 c3, 5 …g6 looks playable. As Leko’s line shows, Black must, of course, always be prepared for a quick d2-d4. But after 5 ...Bd7 6 d4, instead of taking Black could play 5 ...Nf6 -- how then can White advantageously stop him reaching mainline positions? Even supposing he can, Black might also have 5 ...Nf6, since 6 d4 b5!? (6 …Bd7!?) 7 Bb3 (7 de de is nothing?) Nd4 8 Nd4 de 9 c3 dc 10 e5 c2 is meant to be unclear. (There’s also 5 …Ne7, but that’s another story/thread.)

So -- what’s wrong with the Modern Steinitz?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo