Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov (Read 22411 times)
adal
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 6
Location: Vienna
Joined: 12/12/16
Gender: Male
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #31 - 02/19/21 at 13:19:16
Post Tools
Ender wrote on 11/02/09 at 22:59:47:
Thank You guys!
Is this 1.c4 e5 2.g3 is so tricky? Maybe black can transpose to some of other lines in the book? Where can i foun more about this and line i asked in Queens Indian?
Thank You once again


I am quite late to the party, but after some time I give this repertoire a go.

1. About the 1.c4 e5 2.g3 problem

These lines are popular and the Bc5 lines are depressing. 2 Options: 1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 (2.Nc3 e5; 2.Nf3 b6) c6 going for the Reti line in the book. Anyway missing in the book is the Slav with g3, but you need to add that anyway for black.

2nd option is the recently fashionable 1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 h6!? putting the ball back in whites court and doing a semiuseful wating move.

2. Missing Line

Caro-Kann Fantasy Variation

3. Under a severe cloud

The piece sac line after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nc3 e6 5.g3 Bg6 6.Nge2 Ne7 7.Nf4 c5 8.h4 cd 9.Nb5 Nec6 10.h5 Be4 11.f3 Bf3 12.Qf3 Ne5 given unclear ist more or less refuted by 13.Qf2!

Still unclear but very risky is 11. -a6! 12.fe (12.Nd6 Bd6 13.cd g5!) ab 13.ed ed 14.Bg2 (14.h6!? Nd7!) Bb4=

The main line 6. -c5 - while a lot of theory - is rock solid, so the Nc3 system ist not played much. An interesting alternative for Black imho is 6. -f6.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LostTactic
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 336
Joined: 02/19/11
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #30 - 04/21/14 at 11:31:09
Post Tools
I've been trying to find something in the 4...c5 5.Ne2 line for Black as I want the option to be able to play a "delayed castles Huebner" as well as the Karpov line, and finding something against 5.Ne2 seems to be the main obstacle to this, after looking for a while I think 8...Re8 deserves some attention.

4...c5 5.Ne2 cxd4 6.exd4 0-0 7.a3 Be7 8.Nf4 Re8 only played 21 times in my database (8...d5 9.cxd5 Nxd5 10.Ncxd5 exd5 11.Bd3 leads to +/= for White in all lines) 9.Bd3 b6N 10.0-0 Nc6 11.Be2 Bb7 12.Be3 Rc8 13.b4 Bf8 14.Bf3 d5 15.cxd5 Ne7 instigating a mass simplification 16.Rc1 now engine says all recaptures are playable but 16...Nexd5 17.Nxcd5 Nxd5 18.Rxc8 Qxc8 19.Nxd5 Bxd5 20.Bxd5 exd5 = seems easiest.

The line 8...Re8 9.Be3 initially gave me some problems but I now think 9...b6 works here too, but it’s a hedgehog like set-up for Black which might not be everyone’s cup of tea 10.Be2 (10.Rc1 Bb7 11.Be2 d6 12.Bf3 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 Qd7 14.b4 (14.Qxa8 Nc6 15.Qxe8+ Qxe8= interesting material imbalance) Na6 15.0-0 Rac8= there's many reasonable moves for both sides so it’s hard to fully analyse all positions)) Bb7 11.0-0 Ne4 12.Nxe4 Bxe4 13.Rc1 d6 14.Qa4 (14.Bd3 Bxd3 15.Qxd3 Nd7=) Qd7 15.Qb5 g6 16.Qb3 Qc8 17.Bd3 Bxd3 18.Qxd3 Nd7=

More investigation is obviously needed but I prefer this 8...Re8 with ...b6 to the alternative Black tries after 5.Ne2, here at least Black doesn't seem to be suffering.

edit in: found a problem for Black in 9.Be3 line with 16.Rfd1 instead of 16.Qb3, not sure if Black equalises, will look at it more later.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LostTactic
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 336
Joined: 02/19/11
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #29 - 04/20/14 at 22:05:58
Post Tools
I've looked further and I think this 12.Qf3 move looks quite dangerous for Black: 4...0-0 5.Bd3 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.0-0 Bxc3 8.bxc3 d6 9.e4 e5 10.d5 Ne7 11.Nh4 h6 12.Qf3 Ng6 13.Nf5 and 13...Bxf5 seems to be a mistake due to 14.Qxf5 (Tomashevsky won a quick 32 move game against Michiels in EU-ch 2013) and Sokolov thinks White is better due to his space advantage on kingside and he can continue to improve his position whereas Black has no counterplay. Instead he offers a line 13...Nh7 14.Rb1 Ne7 15.Nxe7+ Qxe7 16.Qg3 Kh8 17.f4 and at end says it's complex where Black tries to get counterplay with ...b5 and White goes for the king with later h4 g4 g5 etc. I get the impression Sokolov thinks White is just better though, it's hard to see Black's counterplay on queenside leading to much whereas White's going for mate.

I think a key difference with the 4...c5 move-order is White doesn't have time for this knight manoeuvre to h4 then f5 followed by Qf3 :

4...c5 5.Bd3 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 d6 8.e4 e5 9.d5 Ne7 10.Nh4 h6 now 11.f4 Ng6! Spassky-Fischer 11.f3/0-0/g3 Khalifman's ...g5 recommendation seems to be in fine shape but there's other options for Black, point is Black gets active counterplay.

Basically as far as I can tell an early castles is just bad for Black in the Huebner unless you're satisfied with Sokolov's 13...Nh7 plan or can find something better along the way. I think these ...g5 ideas in delayed castles are important deterrents against early Nh4's for Black to get active counterplay. I expect I'm missing something but that's the way it seems to me atm.

Regarding 7.d5 in castles early lines I agree Kasparov's idea with 7...d6 and exchanging minors on f5 looks like the easiest way for Black to equalise in that line. Problem is in the mainline with 12.Qf3.

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



Posts: 4720
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #28 - 04/20/14 at 19:46:24
Post Tools
Some older books thought 4...0-0 5.Bd3 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7. d5 favorable for White, e.g. citing a game Taimanov-Short which went 7...Ne7 8. e4 Bxc3+ (instead of Kasparov's 8...d6); perhaps that is the crux of the matter.  I notice one of those books (from the 1990s) reaching a Hübner with both sides castled (4..c5 5. Bd3 Nc6 6. Nf3 Bxc3+ 7. bc d6 8. e4 e5 9. d5 Ne7 10. 0-0 0-0) and thinking it should lead to equality.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2520
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #27 - 04/20/14 at 18:56:19
Post Tools
We've discussed Huebner move orders on the forums before.  In the old days, early ...0-0 lines were considered inaccurate for getting a Huebner (I'm thinking of Mednis, Pliester, Khalifman, Taimanov, and others).  I don't play these lines any more for either side, but nowadays I don't think there's much of a distinction, for instance Sokolov's book on the 4.e3 Nimzo only discusses the early castling move order for getting into a Huebner, though if I remember correctly (I don't own the book), he doesn't discuss early move order issues much. 

I don't know what has changed to make the early castling lines fine for Black, though.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LostTactic
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 336
Joined: 02/19/11
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #26 - 04/20/14 at 18:43:06
Post Tools
I think trying to enter the Huebner from 4...0-0 move-order may have some problems.

In Khalifman's summary for the Blockading Chapter he says "He should be very accurate and calm, especially with the castling which, as a rule should not be performed too early. In the struggle for the initiative Black uses typical advances f7 -f5 and b7 -b5 . Also a king transfer via e8 - d8 - c7, followed by a
counterplay on the kingside, is profitable for Black in many cases."

So perhaps a Huebner from the 4...0-0 move-order is an inferior version because he no longer has the options Khalifman mentions in his summary. It's confusing that Sokolov gives the 4...0-0 as his mainline way into the Huebner, although he mentions that 4...c5 is a popular alternative way to get into it he doesn't elaborate on the significant benefits Black has in the mainline Huebner by delaying castling. The resulting positions for Black in his early castles mainline look passive compared to those from a delayed castling. Mainly due to White's space advantage on the kingside, it looks too risky to expand with ...h6 ...g5 because the king will be too exposed, whereas with delayed castling it seems like a good source of counterplay. Sokolov also shows 1 independent option for White after 4...0-0 5.Bd3 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 and now 7.d5 instead of 7.0-0 going into his mainline Huebner. He uses the stem game Ponomariov-Kasparov, Linares 2003, for 7.d5 and says Black is fine. It would be interesting to know how Kasparov would have handled this early castles version of the Huebner if Ponomariov had allowed it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MartinC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 2025
Joined: 07/24/06
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #25 - 04/20/14 at 09:40:52
Post Tools
Very different lines Smiley 5 .. Ne4 simplifies rather, but the b6/c5 set up makes for a straight up brawl in a lot of lines, with some very strangely placed pieces.

If you like the feel of that 5.. cd 6 ed etc line then play it. Not talking big advantages here, mostly small ones. Often a matter of taste really, so what you'd be happy with.

Both sides get huge amounts of move order/set up options in this stuff. Bewildering even.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LostTactic
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 336
Joined: 02/19/11
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #24 - 04/20/14 at 00:43:15
Post Tools
Is it possible to avoid 4...c5 Nge2 problem by using a different move-order?

4...0-0 5.Nge2 d5 6.a3 Bd6 I realise this is outside the repertoire but this line seems to be doing well for Black.

4...0-0 5.Bd3 c5 back into repertoire.

4...0-0 5.Nf3 c5 back into repertoire.

I'm new to Nimzo so expect I'm missing something or is the above viable? I think after 4...c5 5.Nge2 I prefer Tiviakov's recommendation from his dvd: 5...cxd4 6.exd4 0-0 7.a3 Be7 8.Nf3 d5 but Sokolov thinks White's better after 4...c5 Nge2 in general. Interesting that he says 4...b6 5.Nge2 Ne4 is fine for Black whereas 5...c5 transposing to 4...c5 5.Nge2 b6 isn't, if I understand it right it's because Black doesn't have time to play ...Ne4 after 6.a3 Ba5 as White continues to develop with threats.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #23 - 01/13/10 at 00:56:52
Post Tools
For the repertoire - 5...0-0 is selected because the famous "Karpov Nimzo-Indian" requires Nbd7.  All Khalifman was trying to do was get black to be able to play a famous Karpov line.

Aside from that, not much of a difference.

Something I should mention in regards to the book - the recommendation against 5. Nge2 doesn't suffice for equality. An interesting try (that I've been using) is 5...b6 6. a3 Ba5 7. Rb1 Na6, where I'm not sure white can prove anything.

Also, the Caro-Kann Advance recommendation in the Short complex is lacking, given white's best (8. Na3) goes unmentioned. Here's it's probably better to follow Wells' book and pick a continuation to your liking.

Those are the only two really glaring issues.
  

2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
HoemberChess
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 512
Location: Lake d4 on Planet Chess
Joined: 10/08/07
Gender: Male
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #22 - 01/12/10 at 21:15:40
Post Tools
Dangerous Weapons - The Nimzo-Indian
Chapter Seven doesn't seem to distinguish them, but presents White with weapons in these lines...
Black definitely has to study that book.
  

as
*W 1d4) Torre/Barry/Pirc/Philidor/ early _d5:early c4(QGD/Slav/QGD/etc)
*B) 1e4:e6 [+1_c5 2Nf3 a6]| 1d4:e6 2c4 Bb4+ BID/pseudoNID [+1_Nf6 NID]| 1c4:c5,_Nc6,_e5,_g6| 1Nf3:c5
Back to top
WWWGTalk  
IP Logged
 
HoemberChess
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 512
Location: Lake d4 on Planet Chess
Joined: 10/08/07
Gender: Male
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #21 - 01/10/10 at 19:43:48
Post Tools
To answer my own question, I am not completely sure, but I think that the main reason for choosing 5..0-0 as the repertoire-move is that this Nimzo and the Caro-Kann Panov (with 5..e6 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Bd3!? dxc4 8.Bxc4 0-0 9.0-0 b6) move-orders can meet after 6.Nf3 d5 7.0-0 dxc4 8.Bxc4 cxd4 9.exd4 b6, which couldn't happen with a knight already on c6.

Otherwise, it would have been wiser to include 5..Nc6 instead,
when upon
- 6.a3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 0-0 we reach Chapter 7, a fundamental position of the Saemisch (w/ 6.e3), on page 67.
- 6.Nf3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 d6 play immediately transposes into Chapter 8, the initial position of the Blockade System on page 71.
- 6.Ne2 cxd4 7.cxd4 d5 (most sample games for "5.Bd3 0-0 6.Ne2" (page 54 - b1)) actually start this way)
                       * 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.0-0 0-0
                       we are nowhere else than "5..0-0 6.Ne2 d5 7.cxd5 cxd4 8.exd4 Nxd5 9.0-0 Nc6" (p.55 - b1a)).            
                       * 8.0-0 dxc4 9.Bxc4 0-0
                       we arrive at "5..0-0 6.Ne2 d5 7.0-0 cxd4 8.exd4 dxc4 9.Bxc4 Nc6" (p.56 - b1b)).

That is, on move 9 the lines (..Nc6 & ..0-0), which split on move 5, meet again--provided White has nothing better at his disposal on the way... (That's something I couldn't yet tell due to my lacking knowledge about Nimzo-Indian plans. Sad)
                       
So, I conclude for the time being that we could happily live on without "5..0-0 6.Nf3 d5 7.0-0 dxc4 8.Bxc4 cxd4 9.exd4 b6" (b2)) (when the b8N can still develop anywhere depending on circumstances) , which is the only independent line that 5..Nc6 rules out.
(But why does the book let White take the opportunity to reach b2) if that means independent lines, thus more study for us...? Maybe because the Caro-Kann Panov (w/ 5..e6) is also in the repertoire book.)
This would also mean that if you don't play the C-K, or you react the Panov Attack some other way, then you can choose 5..Nc6 and still remain in the repertoire, without being bothered about 5..0-0 6.Nf3.
                 
What have I missed? (where White could exploit 5..Nc6 and drive us out of the repertoire for his advantage)
« Last Edit: 01/11/10 at 14:58:06 by HoemberChess »  

as
*W 1d4) Torre/Barry/Pirc/Philidor/ early _d5:early c4(QGD/Slav/QGD/etc)
*B) 1e4:e6 [+1_c5 2Nf3 a6]| 1d4:e6 2c4 Bb4+ BID/pseudoNID [+1_Nf6 NID]| 1c4:c5,_Nc6,_e5,_g6| 1Nf3:c5
Back to top
WWWGTalk  
IP Logged
 
HoemberChess
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 512
Location: Lake d4 on Planet Chess
Joined: 10/08/07
Gender: Male
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #20 - 01/10/10 at 00:02:47
Post Tools
Willempie wrote on 01/09/10 at 22:07:28:
HoemberChess wrote on 01/09/10 at 20:36:52:
This repertoire is very subtle and I don't yet understand a lot of things about the move-orders, which are very crucial.

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e3 c5 5. Bd3

Now here why 5..0-0?
Why not 5..Nc6? (6.Nf3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 d6 would be the basic position of the Hübner System, which is also in the book.)

I have Watson's Mastering Chess Openings as well, but it doesn't gives the answer, what's more it gives this exact move-order, 5..Nc6, to reach the Hübner -- not that of the book.

The main difference is that the knight can still move to e2, leaving the f-pawn free to move (the main point why the Hubner works so well is that a quick f4 is not possible). Still I think there is nothing wrong with 5..Nc6 just dont et your hopes up for a Hubner.


Yes, of course, 6.Ne2 is a _possibility_ after 5.Bd3 Nc6. I know that, but it doesn't answer my question. Sad

In the repertoire we find 5.Bd3 0-0 (page 54-62) 6.Ne2 d5 (and 6.Nf3 d5).

I'll ask the question another way.
Consider the positions with early Nge2, after 4.e3 c5 5.Bd3.
Why
- 5..0-0 6.Ne2 d5
(a line in the repertoire, but White could have chosen 6.Nf3 (6..d5 is our answer) as well, also with considerable theory)
is preferred over
- 5..Nc6 6.Ne2 (the possibility you mentioned) cxd4 7.cxd4 d5 [the center is fixed already, which is incidentally a recurring scenario in this repertoire]
(which would also be a theoretical continuation and quite a good one for Black)?

Wouldn't it have been easier to choose 5..Nc6, as in the 5.Nf3-variations, for the repertoire?
Or does the book choice of 5..0-0 have something to do with transpositions to other parts of the repertoire book?

What is more, I have checked the sample games of the book for the line 5.Bd3 0-0 6.Ne2 d5.
Most of them, actually started with 5.Bd3 Nc6 6.Ne2 cxd4 7.cxd4 d5...
Why, then 5..0-0 ?
Should we secretly hope that something better could as well happen to us following that move-order (5..0-0)  than entering the Hübner (Blockade) System?

-----
I have found a strange redundancy already, but it also has something to do with my question about the book's preference of 5..0-0 over 5..Nc6:
There are two separate "Yusupov vs. Karpov" games (from 1989 & 1993) --
one on page 54 in Chapter 6 (Rubinstein System), in which Karpov himself played (4.e3 c5 5.Bd3) 5..Nc6,
and the other one on page 70 in Chapter 7 (Saemisch System).
Interestingly enough, the book doesn't mention that the two games go together from move 8 to 13, which is a mistake. The book should have preceded the reader in pointing this out.
Instead, the book analyzes the same position (after Black's 7th move in both "Yusupov-Karpov" games) in two different chapters and starts presenting the possibilities (8.d5, 8.dxc5, etc on page 54 and 67, respectively)...
« Last Edit: 01/10/10 at 18:47:20 by HoemberChess »  

as
*W 1d4) Torre/Barry/Pirc/Philidor/ early _d5:early c4(QGD/Slav/QGD/etc)
*B) 1e4:e6 [+1_c5 2Nf3 a6]| 1d4:e6 2c4 Bb4+ BID/pseudoNID [+1_Nf6 NID]| 1c4:c5,_Nc6,_e5,_g6| 1Nf3:c5
Back to top
WWWGTalk  
IP Logged
 
Willempie
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 4312
Location: Holland
Joined: 01/07/05
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #19 - 01/09/10 at 22:07:28
Post Tools
HoemberChess wrote on 01/09/10 at 20:36:52:
This repertoire is very subtle and I don't yet understand a lot of things about the move-orders, which are very crucial.

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e3 c5 5. Bd3

Now here why 5..0-0?
Why not 5..Nc6? (6.Nf3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 d6 would be the basic position of the Hübner System, which is also in the book.)

I have Watson's Mastering Chess Openings as well, but it doesn't gives the answer, what's more it gives this exact move-order, 5..Nc6, to reach the Hübner -- not that of the book.

The main difference is that the knight can still move to e2, leaving the f-pawn free to move (the main point why the Hubner works so well is that a quick f4 is not possible). Still I think there is nothing wrong with 5..Nc6 just dont et your hopes up for a Hubner.
  

If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HoemberChess
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 512
Location: Lake d4 on Planet Chess
Joined: 10/08/07
Gender: Male
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #18 - 01/09/10 at 20:36:52
Post Tools
This repertoire is very subtle and I don't yet understand a lot of things about the move-orders, which are very crucial.

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e3 c5 5. Bd3

Now here why 5..0-0?
Why not 5..Nc6? (6.Nf3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 d6 would be the basic position of the Hübner System, which is also in the book.)

I have Watson's Mastering Chess Openings as well, but it doesn't gives the answer, what's more it gives this exact move-order, 5..Nc6, to reach the Hübner -- not that of the book.
  

as
*W 1d4) Torre/Barry/Pirc/Philidor/ early _d5:early c4(QGD/Slav/QGD/etc)
*B) 1e4:e6 [+1_c5 2Nf3 a6]| 1d4:e6 2c4 Bb4+ BID/pseudoNID [+1_Nf6 NID]| 1c4:c5,_Nc6,_e5,_g6| 1Nf3:c5
Back to top
WWWGTalk  
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: Khalifman's 'Opening for Black According to Karpov
Reply #17 - 01/08/10 at 22:45:39
Post Tools
HoemberChess wrote on 01/08/10 at 21:13:29:
I have found the game. That was long ago. And you seem to have been prepared to play the French... Also, already in 2003. I didn't know much theory at the time, let alone serious defenses. I was still experimenting. I am almost blank paper compared to a lot of players here. Sad
Aagaard says in his CBFT on the Nimzo that most (not top-) GMs don't know as much theory as we think they should know--they, too, often just make up the moves and play by themselves...


I played the French at that time, so there was no difference between starting 1...e6 and 1...Nf6. It was also was easier on preparation given I didn't need to know anything versus the Tromp, even if that's not a big deal.

Aagard probably has a point. I know, personally, there's not much point knowing really deep theory on the NID. Provided you know maybe the first 8-10 moves (not much to ask for at all these days) in the key variations you can usually safely play it from there if you know the ideas. You'd be amazed how easy it is to still play the correct theoretical moves even if you're actually out of preparation in the NID.

It may be the single biggest benefit to the NID in general. It's really hard to screw it up if you're comfortable with it. The game against Taylor was one of the very few games with it I ever actually had discomfort out of the opening.
  

2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo