downward wrote on 08/31/09 at 21:05:57:


As I see it, this flexibility is also what draws me to this system. I won't employ it regularly, but with understanding of the Chebanenko, I can also do the opposite, i.e. play ...a6 in the exchange Slav, or against an early e3.

The Chebanenko Slav is one of my all time favourite openings, and I still play it today. Bologan's book is of course excellent, as all New in Chess publications are. However, I do have a soft spot for Flear's excellent book and still refer to it regularly. Of course, its dated somewhat, but it crucially covers lines that Bologan doesn't. I'm referring to lines where White delays Nc3 or Nf3. Even Martin covers this in his DVD, and does it well.

I still think that 5.c5 is the crucial move, especially in that everything except 5...Nbd7 has been found wanting. Martin recommends 5...Bg4 in his DVD as presents some good games. Its certainly playable, but I wouldn't use it as a main repertoire choice in a FIDE open where preparation plays a part.

A new twist on an established variation came to my attention this month in the 1.d4 d5 update - Eljanov - Sokolov, which started 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 a6 5. e3 b5 6. c5 g6 7. Ne5!?.....looks dangerous, no?  

If it was good enough to get the seal of approval from Kasparov, not to mention other GMs who are known for their uncompromising play, I'd say its probably good enough to play for a win at the club level.  Wouldn't worry so much about it.  Maybe play over some annotated games, and see if you like the positions Black gets.   

That said, I will say that, imho, you sometimes -- thinking here in particular about the 5.e3 b5 lines -- get into positions where White has a choice of playing on the queenside or in the center, whereas Black's active play is pretty much limited to  trying to get in the ..e5 break.  So you can feel like you're back on your heels sometimes.  But its not that easy to break down the Black position and when White tries to do so, Black usually finds enough counterplay.

I started playing the ...a6 Slav after buying IM Andrew Martin's topical DVD on it. I find however, my main problem is not players who smash me with GM level innovative variations, but that they tend to combine variations, in a rather unexpected way. 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. e3 a6 (I didn't know this was now considered bad for Black; can anyone give me some games or info on all the latest developments across the whole picture of the ...a6?) 5. c5 for example, is particularly senseless, and it took me a while to figure how to play this. 

Even more common is 5. Nf3 Bf5 6. cxd5 which is totally useless for White! I played a guy rated roughly 1850 tonight and he had nothing on me. I agree that perhaps in weekend congresses or rapids it can be a slightly odd choice of opening, but if you work hard you will find it easy to pounce on inaccuracies from lower rated opponents, and isn't that what chess is all about anyways; exploiting tiny imbalances? It worked for Capablanca Karpov and Smyslov

I find such attempts at subvariation transposition relatively easy to diffuse; tactics can abound though. As far as winning chances, well, tactically the variation mentioned above with 6...cxd5 7. Qb3 can be particularly fruitful against an overly confident White; and I won my first ever Cheb slav game in 21 moves, plenty of good positions since online against 1600-1700s

Gilmour,
Your comments are revealing. I could feel the experience. I went through some recent games in Slav. It seems, major part of the game, black is just equalizing or playing an equal game. Yes, black wins but that needs much more and needs help from white. I have started thinking it won't suit me. I do not have the skill or technique to outplay slightly weaker players from symmetircal & equal positions (thats why I am still a 1980 rated). Nimzo/QID, though demands more but I guess will be better choice.

Thanx
Souvik

I've been playing the slav for years now and am particularly tired of the Quiet Variation and the Exchange that Allow black really no winning chances if white wants a draw. For these reasons i've been searching for a second main weapon.

Flear's book has an expansive chapter on 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 a6 5. e3 b5 6. cd cd  which Bologan's does not.  He also devotes separate chapters to move order issues regarding White's commitment of his Knights to Nf3 and c3 respectively.

All the old opening book caveats apply, but it's still good.

Rogozenko's chessbase cd on the Slav is also useful, offering a good overview.

You share that sentiment, in my experience, with august company.  Of the three players 2400-2510 I have ventured Slav against not one has allowed the a6 mainline.  Of course their choices are indicative of the style and character of play of the Ims and Gms in question, and possibly of their facing a vastly inferior opponent, but still, my preparation has been for naught in the face of 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. e3.

 4... Bf5 in that position is part of my repertoire on account of the time saving transposition from Colle to Slav after 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. e3 Bf5/Bg4, but out of sheer frustration I played 4... a6 anyway, despite its mooted inferiority, both occasions very strong players put me in that position.

 The comparison with the Petroff is probably unfair, as nothing is as gruelling, from my perspective, as 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. Qe2 or 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. Nc3  and the like.  Not even 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 a6 5. cd cd 6. Bf4 Nc6 7. e3 Bg4 with Black playing Bd6 and Bxf3, where quite often tense games can result, and a familiarity with the levers and mechanisms of that inescapable middlegame should leave Black reasonably confident of capitalizing on any sloppy play by White.

 Instead of 7. e3, I used to struggle horribly against 7.Rc1 by blithely following Rogozenko's recommendation of 7... Ne4.  After 8. e3 Nxc3 9.bc it would be nothing but strife.  Bologan gives 7... e6 as the best response, the mainline.  It's a perverse claim that the exchange with a6 gives  greater scope for 'interesting' play when, in a normal Slav, Black has so many more options.  In this respect it's possible to hone a pet line against the exchange when you're intending to relieve the tension with 4...dxc4.  4... a6 5. cd is a bottleneck where most Black deviations seem to be markedly inferior, now.

 With theory expanding in Vigus's chosen line I can't see that the mainlines of a6 should be any the harder to keep up with, and if positions like 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. e3 or the exchange are anathema to you, then the Slav has very little to recommend it at all.  Maybe one has to be of a dour disposition to play this as an amateur.