My second footnote above might be better beginning:

**  Black can also try here the risky 6 …ed!? 7 cd a6!? (7 …Nf6 is a Classical Benoni). After 8 Bf4 (8 a4 Bg4!, Gupta-Koneru) NCO gives only 8 …Bg4 9 Be2 with advantage, but Topalev’s 8 …b5!? is obviously critical ...

[quote author=787B7177160 link=1258418490/9#9 date=1260190659]
(b) 7 Be2 0-0 8 0-0 a6 (8 ...e5!?) 9 a4 e5!? (NCO, p. 69/n. 33, gives 9 …ed 10 cd without an assessment and as transposing to a position it seems not to mention, but ECO gives a slight white edge) 9 a4 e5! 10 Ne1 f5. Kylemeister, in another thread, says that ECO calls this equal citing Matamoros-Jo. Armas, Palma Soriano 1987. Can anyone post the score of this game?[/quote]

Actually ECO calls it unclear.

[Event ""]
[Site ""]
[Date "1987.??.??"]
[White "Matamoros,Carlos"]
[Black "Armas,Jorge"]
[Round ""]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "A43"]

1. d4 c5 2. d5 g6 3. c4 d6 4. Nc3 Bg7 5. e4
e6 6. Nf3 Ne7 7. Be2 O-O 8. O-O a6 9. a4
e5 10. Ne1 f5 11. f3 f4 12. a5 h5 13. Bd2
Nd7 14. Na4 Rf6 15. Nd3 Qc7 16. Qb1 Rb8 17. Re1
g5 18. b4 Ng6 19. Bc3 Bf8 20. Ra3 1/2

Glad you think the basic idea (transposition to A43) is sound, TN! I’d tentatively suggest the ‘objections’ can be met, but it would be interesting to explore this further. Here are some provisional thoughts (and questions!):

On 4 Nf3, I agree 4 ...cd is best. But I’d like to ask whether Black can still avoid normal lines if he wants with 5 Nd4 Qb6!? 6 Nb3 d6. According to NCO (p. 63, n. 50) this is OK, but there’s an interesting post on this by Marc Narciso Dublan in this thread: http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1084376999/2#2


Returning to 4 d5 d6!? (it’s a moot point whether this or 4 ...e6 is most accurate?) 5 Nc3* e6, now there is:

I  6 de!?. Now all three responses have been seen! I imagine Black’s OK but I admit I’ve never looked at this.

II  6 Nf3 Ne7** and now:

(a) 7 de!? Be6! 8 Bf4 Qa5!, see ChessPub notes to Bu Xiangzhi--Zhou Jianchou.

(b) 7 Be2 0-0 8 0-0 a6 (8 ...e5!?) 9 a4 e5!? (NCO, p. 69/n. 33, gives 9 …ed 10 cd without an assessment and as transposing to a position it seems not to mention, but ECO gives a slight white edge) 9 a4 e5! 10 Ne1 f5. Kylemeister, in another thread, says that ECO calls this equal citing Matamoros-Jo. Armas, Palma Soriano 1987. Can anyone post the score of this game?

(c) 7 Bd3 0-0 (assuming that 8 h4 is no problem because of 8 …ed and 9 …Bg4, but am I right?) 8 0-0 ed!? (8 …a6 and 8 …e5!? are possible but this is simplest?) 9 cd (9 ed is III below) a6 10 a4 Bg4 (Yrjola-Efimov).


III  6 Bd3 ed! (6 ...Ne7?! 7 h4! ed 8 cd! is better for White as you point out while 6 ...Nf6?! 7 Nf3 leads to KID lines [NCO p. 523] where White can obtain a bind if Black takes on d5 and White replies with exd5!, or a small edge if he doesn’t) 7 ed!? (after 7 cd Black doesn’t have to play 7 …Ne7?! 8 h4 but can transpose to a Benoni with 7 …Nf6!) Ne7!? 8 Nf3 (8 Nge2!?) 0-0 9 0-0 Nd7!? (9 ...Bg4!? and 9 ...h6!? have also been seen) intending ...Ne5 with a reasonable position.

IV  6 f4, 6 ...Nf6 7 Nf3 0-0 (or 7...ed first) is a Four Pawns Attack, but Black can also try 6 ...Ne7!?, or 6 ...ed!? 7 cd and now 7 ...Ne7 (7 ...Nf6?! 8 Bb5! being a Taimanov Benoni).



*  5 Nf3, 5 Bd3 or 5 f4 will transpose if Black responds with 5 ...e6, but there might be a few independent possibilities: (1) 5 Bd3 e5!?; (2) 5 f4 e5!?; and (3) 5 f4 Nf6 6 Nc3 0-0 7 Nf3 e5!? (7 ...e6 8 Be2 ed 9 cd is a Benoni).

**  Is 6 …ed!? also OK here? After 7 cd a6 8 a4, 8 …Bg4! (Gupta-Koneru) seems fine, while 7 ed Ne7 (Topalev has tried 7 …Bg4) 8 Bd3 0-0 transposes to III. This leaves 8 Be2 and 8 h3 (Vigorito-Anka) as independent. (Does the fact that NCO gives cxd5 in IIb above imply the first of these is fine?)

What is wrong with 1 e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 c4 c5!?, meeting 4 d5 with 4 ...d6 then ...e6, as in games like Yrjola-Efimov, Gupta-Koneru or Bu Xiangzhi-Zhou Jianchao?

dmp4373 wrote on 11/18/09 at 05:30:19:


I think 3.Nc3 is a small concesion. Usually one of the themes of the Pirc is, because Nc3 is played, the d4 pawn weakness. Here, because there is not a Knight on f6, you can attack that pawn in an easier way. You can use a Bishop from g7, a pawn from c5 and e5 a Knight from c6 and a queen from b6 to attack that pawn.

I think I would prefer to play 3.Be3 or 3.Nf3 remembering black that my c pawn is free to advance.

I think it depends of your evaluation of the two critical lines : 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.c4 d6 4.Nc3 Nc6 (called the Averbach variation) and now most books gives 5.d5! with a White plus or 4.Nc3 e5 and now 5.Nf3 and 5.Nge2 are possible but theory "gives" 5.dxe5 dxe5 6.QxQ+ KxQ 7.f4! with a White edge, although Black has also chances (see some Morozevitch games)

Black never has to transpose to a KID or Pirc, though he would often be accepting a slight theoretical disadvantage by not doing so.