CraigEvans wrote on 10/24/08 at 20:55:20:


Thanks for the ideas,

Another try might be 8...e5!? then Fritz pointed out a nice line 9.Nxe5 Bxe2 10.Qxe2 Nxd4 11.Qg4+ f5! 12.Qxd4 Bc5 13.Qc4 Rhe8 and White can't defend against both Rxe5 and Bxf2+ and so has to give up the Knight. White keeps an extra pawn but Black has some compensation with his active pieces.

tipau wrote on 10/05/08 at 22:54:34:


Isn't Black just cake after 6.exd6 Bg4? 7.d5 Ne5 8.c5 Nbd7 9.c6 ?

Tipau, 
Thanks for your comments, and apologies for my delay in responding (and also in having missed the original discussion!).

5.exd6 certainly does seem a problematic concept here, and one which I'd not really considered in depth. 5...cxd6 6.c4 seems to lead to an inferior version of the ...cd exchange where black commits prematurely to ...Nc6, so I agree that black needs something else here. However, I'm not so sure that after 5...Bg4, white's additional option of c3 makes the position particularly more (or less!?) clear:

1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.exd6 Bg4!? 6.dxc7 Qxc7 7.Be2 O-O-O (Surely critical - black needs to cash in on his slight development lead and the thematic pressure on the d-file) 8.O-O (Logical, keeping the independent flavour and not committing to c3 or c4 yet) Nf6! (Setting up ...e5 threats instantly, as well as targeting e4 for the knight) 9.c3 (9.Be3 transposes, and nothing else seems to meet the threat of ...e5) e5!? seems to give black interesting play for the pawn, for example 10.h3 h5!? may be playable, and 10.Be3 looks most critical, but can be met by 10...e4!? 11.Ng5?! Bf5! intending ...h6 with attacking chances, or 11.Nfd2! h5!? with at least some hacking chances on the kingside. Alternatively if 11.Nfd2 is too strong, then black could also try 10...h5 immediately, again with practical chances.

I'm sure this won't hold up in correspondence play, but in practical play against someone unfamiliar with the lines (which I imagine would be pretty much everyone, since 1...Nf6 is already unpopular, 4...Nc6 is extremely rare and 5...Bg4 is all but a novelty) this looks well worth a punt? Any opinions?

Yes, I looked at 5...Qxd6 briefly, but 6.c4 Nf6 7.Be2 Bg4 just looks slightly better for white - I have doubts that black can organise counterplay with ..e5 quickly enough to tackle white's positional trumps.

Folks
Firstly, thanks for your replies. I went down Bibs' suggestion and e-mailed him, within a few days a nice shiny new copy of Kaissiber 19 was on my doorstep. The lack of German is problematic, but I can start working through it slowly at least.

I must confess that 6.exd6 was one problem I was worried about... however, I'm intrigued by the idea of 6...Bg4 - I can't claim to have looked at it in great detail, nor can I believe it's 100% sound, but it looks like an interesting try.

I equally find myself attracted to the complications after 7.Ng5/7.h4 - and whilst of course Fritz/Rybka cannot be trusted with their assessment of opening positions, I find it interesting that so far I've not found any lines that the computer really does not like the look of for black. On top of this, black seems to score very heavily when white doesn't try to transpose into an exchange variation, so perhaps this line is waiting to be rediscovered?

However, I have to agree with Khalifman's assessment of the position after 12.Be3 - 12...Qd7 looks far better, but with the space advantage that white has, I think he mist have a tiny pull. I see no reason to deviate from 7...g6 currently, black seems to be doing okay in most of these positions.

So, what do people make of 6...Bg4? 7.c5 seems to be critical, when 7...Nd7 8.dxc7 Qxc7 intending ...e5 and Rd8/O-O-O seems to give black okay play, though again I make no claim to have looked in great detail yet. I'm sure white still retains a small pull, but without getting the same level of comfort that he does in the exchange variation.

Markovich wrote on 09/30/08 at 12:18:49:

Sometimes I fear that I begin to suffer from dyslexy. It is more probable that I am just careless when typing.

Please read "so the safe but also far less attractive approach is 6...exd6." That is a matter of taste of course. 6.exd6 is only a problem from a subjective point of view; the asymmetrical pawn structure after 6...cxd6 is more to my taste.

As Craig knows that I have a few German languaged books he obviously hopes that I will react and how can I disappoint him? I played 4...Nc6 some 20 years ago. Siebenhaar/Delnef/Ottstadt (1989) spend two chapters and 30 pages on this move.

1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Nc6
Suetin 1983: Black will have to conduct a difficult defence.

5.c4 Nb6 6.e6
SDO: 6.exd6 cxd6 allows White to play 7.d5 gaining a tempo: Ne5 8.Nxe5 dxe5 9.Bg5 Hernandez-Bryson, Dubai 1986 and it's hard to understand why White ruined a completely won game (at move 20) into a draw at move 42.
MNb: so the safe but also far less approach is 6...exd6.
Suetin: Black's weaknesses on his King's wing and his problems with the development of his pieces offer White sufficient compensation.

7.Nc3
The golden oldies give 7.Ng5 as the main line with 7.h4 as a dangerous option. I always have been attracted by the exchange sac after 7.Ng5 e5 8.Bd3 (recommended by Hort and Bagirov in the 70's; 8.d5) Nxd4 9.Bxh7 Rxh7. Suetin ends with a white advantage based on Nej-Honfi, HUN 1970. Pachmann (1983) gives Völfl-Podgorny, corr 1978 -+, where Black deviated with 11...Nxc4. SDO follow the game Kuijpers-Böhm, Hoogovens 1982: 10.Nxh7 Bf5 11.Na3 Nxc4 12.Nxc4 Nc2+ 13.Kf1 Nxa1 14.Nxf8 Kxf8 15.Ne3 Qd7 and here SDO analyse 16.Bd2 Nc2 17.Nxc2 Qa4 18.Ne3 Bd3+ 19.Kg1 Qxa2 without evaluating this line.

7...g6
SDO and Suetin agree that 7...e5 is playable: 8.d5 Nd4 9.Nxd4 exd4 10.Qxd4 e5 11.dxe6 Bxe6 =Vogt-Böhm, Polanica Zdroj 1980.

8.h4 Bg7 9.Be3
SDO treat 9.h5 e5 as the main line.

9...e5
SDO give also 9...0-0 10.h5 e5 Lau-Fleck, BL 1984 and 9...d5 10.c5 Nd7 11.h5 e5 12.h6 Bf6 13.Nxd5 exd4 14.Nxf6+ exf6 unclear.

10.d5 Nd4 11.Nxd4 exd4 12.Bxd4 Bxd4
12...e5 13.Be3 +=Kudrin-Behrhorst, Lugano 1983.

13.Qxd4 0-0
13...e5 14.dxe6 0-0 15.h5 (iso 15.Ne4) transposes.

14.h5 e5 15.dxe6 Qf6 16.Qxf6 Rxf6 17.hxg6 hxg6 18.Ne4 Rf4
draw, Lau-Fleck, BL 1984.
If that move 15.Ne4 really is a problem Black should castle first, as Fleck did.

For me 6.exd6 cxd6 7.d5 was one reason to give up the Alekhine. The other one consisted of three painfull losses against a pretty strong player who chose the 4-Pawns.

Like most people, I'd never really considered this (I thought 5.c4 Nb6 6.e6 was too strong). I gave up the Alekhine in the main due to the Exchange Variation, but I was never overly comfortable in the Flohr either. I bought Cox's starting out more to get some coverage from the white side in the Four Pawns Variation if I'm being honest, but the first page I opened the book at suggested 4...Nc6 as actually being playable and, the more I've looked at it, the more I like it. Cox makes reference to an extensive article in Kaissiber 19 on the subject - does anyone have access to this and, if so (and if they've actually looked at it) does the analysis hold up? Does anyone have any opinions on the line? Finally, does anyone have any idea where I can get a copy of this article from? (Excluding the USCF, as a non-US resident and recently becoming a student again, I can barely afford the $10 for the magazine, let alone the $27 shipping costs! Ebay doesn't seem to be of much use, and I've not been able to find anywhere else...) And, as a non-German speaker, do I have any chance of navigating the analysis anyway?

I like a challenge as much as anyone, but if I have to reconstruct the theory myself from games in a database, I'm likely to just stick to my boring 1...e5!

For what it's worth, my last ICC game saw (after the critical line above to 6.e6), 6...dxe6 7.Nc3 g6 8.h4 Bg7 9.Be3! (I believe this is meant to be the critical line according to Haakert and Fleck?) e5 10.d5 Nd4 11.Nxd4 exd4 12.Bxd4 Bxd4 13.Qxd4 e5 14.dxe6!? (I had only been expecting Qe3, so I was on my own by now) O-O (what else?!) 15.Ne4 Bxe6 16.O-O-O Qe7 17.h5 g5!? (Rybka suggests Bg6 is stronger, which is quite possible) 18.h6 Bf5 and though black's position looks a little shaky, I actually felt rather comfortable and went on to win. Still, it was only a 3-minute game and I don't want to suffer from Zilbermintsitis, so I don't want to draw too many conclusions so far.

If anyone can help me out with any part of my queries, or is interested in investigating this line further, I'd be most grateful!