6 ...Qe7 might look more natural, but what is your improvement over, say, Luther--Dautov (or Sax--Smyslov)? I looked at these positions quite a bit a year or two ago and concluded White is better, but I'd be delighted to be proved wrong!

I noticed 4 ...Nd4 for the first time the day you mentioned it! Initially I liked it, but on reflection I can't say I'm too keen on this ending. Isn't Black a little cramped?

Returning to the 3 ...a6 4 Ba4 d6 move order, what an interesting state of affairs! A number of GMs suggest [u]5 0-0[/u] renders this uninteresting; meanwhile in some other quarters [u]5 Bc6[/u] is considered the problem; and finally, Khalifman/Anand recommend [u]5 c3[/u]! This disagreement doesn't, of course, imply that the Modern Steinitz is OK, but it does seem to suggest that the defence is controversial and thus deserving of attention! So, I'm still hoping people might like to debate one or two of the lines I've given ...

It's slightly off-topic, but in view of Viking's Cozio move-order suggestion it might be worth mentioning 3 ...Nge7 4 0-0 a6 5 Ba4 g6 6 c3 Bg7 7 d4 ed 8 cd. Now 8 ...b5 9 d5! is meant to be a bit better for white, but 8 ...0-0 is possible, e.g. 9 d5 Na5 or 9 Nc3 d6, delaying or omitting ...b5. Anyone got any thoughts on this?

[quote author=nmga link=1205346205/0#11 date=1205856226]
Do you think the GM who expressed his doubts about the Modern Steinitz did so on the basis of 5 Bc6? I'd still like to know why this might be so clear a White plus, but then I'd like to debate any of the critical (?) lines I mentioned (in either post)!

[/quote]

My tame GM advised me that the main problem is in what to play against 5 0-0.

[quote author=nmga link=1205346205/0#0 date=1205346205]As a supplement to the recent thread I started on the Modern Fianchetto Variation (C79) of the Steinitz, I’m hoping here to stimulate discussion of two other lines, the Bronstein Variation (C76) and (less critically perhaps) the Rubinstein Variation (C75).

The Bronstein begins (again several different move orders are possible) 5 0-0 Bd7 6 c3 g6 7 d4 Bg7.

[/quote]

I share Michael's interest in the Modern Steinitz (aka Steinitz Defence Deferred), since some of my favourite players played some very good games with it: Rubinstein, Capablanca, Keres, Bronstein ...

Some key games in its early evolution are given in Koenig's fascinating book Chess from Morphy to Botvinnik.

One slightly pedantic point: I'm not sure that the line with 6...g6 should really be named after Bronstein. OK, he played it a fair bit, but so did many others. Incidentally, the first game with it in Koenig's book features the great 19th century English player Blackburne against GM Mackenzie, played in 1877 in a short match following the Bradford tournament! This game is missing from the main databases, so I give it below.

I suggest that much of the modern understanding of this line is due to Smyslov, who generally reached it via 3...g6 (and if 4 c3 a6!) thus enabling him to avoid the Exchange Variation. Smyslov scored about 60% with 3...g6 from more than 40 games. Other frequent adopters of the 3...g6 4 c3 a6 idea were Spassky and Malaniuk.

[Event "Match of three games"]
[Site "Bradford"]
[Date "1877.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Mackenzie, GH."]
[Black "Blackburne, JH."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C76"]
[PlyCount "66"]
[EventDate "1877.??.??"]
[EventType "match"]
[EventRounds "3"]
[EventCountry "GBR"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 d6 5. c3 Bd7 6. O-O g6 7. d4 Bg7 8. Be3 Nge7 9. Qd2 O-O 10. Bh6 Bg4 11. Na3 Bxf3 12. gxf3 d5 13. Rad1 exd4 14. Bxg7 Kxg7 15. cxd4 f5 16. e5 f4 17. Kh1 Qc8 18. Bxc6 bxc6 19. Kg2 Nf5 20. Qxf4 Qd8 21. Kh1 Nh4 22. Qg4 h5 23. Qg1 Nxf3 24. Qg3 Qd7 25. Nc2 h4 26. Qg2 Rf4 27. Ne3 h3 28. Qg3 Raf8 29. Rd3 c5 30. Rc1 cxd4 31. e6 Qxe6 32. Rxc7+ R4f7 33. Nf1 Qe2 0-1

Thanks for your replies.

I might investigate into Be7!? in the exchange later. So far I try to limit white options with the cozio move order (mainly in order to be more focused myself) As has been pointed out, it is not very flexible though...

However the cozio move order has its points. Bxc6 as mentioned above against the modern steinitz is out of the question. After 3..Ne7 white seams to have three main moves. This is how I plan to handle these now:

after 4.Nc3 I play a6!? (instead of the dangerous typical cozio moveorder g6 5.d4 exd4 5.Nd5! as mentioned else on the forum)5.Ba4 d6 - Black seams to have a nice version of the steinitz

after 4.c3 I play d5!? which is some kind of a Ponziani. I see that Anand met this once and only got a draw. Looks reasonable.

after 4.0-0 I think that the h4!? variations in the rubinstein is not that attactive anymore. Topalov-Jussupow show how dangerous this plan is for white. However the fact that white has castled must be to blacks advantage - and I will continue with typical rubinstein (Ng6 / h6...)

Comments?

Hello Viking,

The book "Dynamics of Chess Strategy - Vlastimil Jansa" has a good explanation of the h6 idea, based mostly around Keres games, and particularly one against Tal, which put the idea in doubt if my memory is correct.

Bye John S

Viking
You may like to consider the ...Be7 line versus Exchange. More fun thatn the usual stuff. In the Johnson/johanneson (sp?)Zaitsev  book. Also played by shirov iirc.

May open up some flexibility in your move order.

...h6 plus ...Be7 and ...Bg5 is an old standard idea in that line (though ...h6 used to be forced by White playing 7. Bb3, which was long considered the main line).