TN wrote on 02/24/09 at 07:34:03:
There is a good reason for the lack of coverage of the delayed castling plan in 11.Be3 Nbd7 12.Rc1 Rc8 13.f4 Qb8 and now 14.Nd5!! as played in Tomashevsky-G. Meier, Heraklion 2004, which definitely seems better for White.
I also agree that the 12...0-0 13.f4 Re8 14.g4 line is promising for White. However, the move 13...h5 14.h3 Rfe8 to restrain White's pending kingside attack is a viable alternative; in many cases Black can gain good counterplay with a timely ...d5.
Interesting. For everyone's benefit, the position arises from 1.Nf3 c5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.g3 b6 5.Bg2 Bb7 6.0-0 a6 7.Re1 Be7 8.e4 d6 9.d4 cxd4 10.Nxd4 Qc7 11.Be3 Nbd7 12.f4 Rc8 13.Rc1 Qb8 14.Nd5. Now both the game you cite and Vaganian-Wojtkewicz, Belgium 1996, the latter cited by Shipov in his book, continued 14...exd5 15.exd5 Kf8 16.Nc6 Bxc6 17.dxc6 Nc5 18.b4 Ne6 19.f5 Nc7 20.Bf4. Here the paths diverged, Meier choosing 20...Re8 and Wojtkewicz 20...Nfe8. Although my Russian is nonexistent, Shipov's notes don't appear to suggest any notable improvements for White in a game that eventually ended in a draw. Meier lost, but is this really so definitive? Perhaps you know better than I.
I have three other high-level games in my data base with 14.Nd5, in most of which 15...g6 was played instead of 15...Kf8. Shipov thinks that White does well then if he plays 16.Qe2, although 16.b4 produced a win for White in Libeau - Michaelson, Germany 1994. In the other game 15...0-0?! lost.
At any rate I am not at all sure that 14.Nd5 is the definitive answer to Black's play, are you?
P.S. I've looked at this some more, and I think Shipov is wrong about Black's prospects in Vaganian-Wojtkewicz in view of 20...Nfe8 21.c5 bxc5 22.bxc5 d5 23.Bxd5 Rd8 24.Qe2 Bf6 and now instead of Shipov's 25.Bf3, 25.Qc4. However I'm still not convinced that 14.Nd5 is winning.