Nice try Tony, but the pin is deeply annoying indeed! I repeat my question from several previous posts -- what in particular is wrong with 6 Bg5 h6 7 Bd2 0-0 8 a3 Bc3 9 Bc3 [b]a5[/b] (10 e4 Qe7)? After 11 e5 (not forced of course!) Black is hanging on, one may say; but if Black's careful has White many real chances?

Maybe [b]9 ...Re8 [/b]deserves more attention too? 10 0-0-0 Qe7 11 h3! was the famous slaughter and 10 ...e5 looks good for White (?) but how about [b]10 ...d5[/b]? (Of course, White's tenth wasn't forced either and 10 e3 is possible.)

19...Nxe5 20.Rxe5 g4 21.Qc4+ Qf7 22.Qxf7+ Rxf7 23.Ne1 Rfd7 looks also pretty good for Black. Having too much faith in GM-recommendations is not very useful either.
So only 7.e3 is left.

What I think is that a database is very handy. Jarovik-Terekhov, St Petersburg 1999 went 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 0-0 5.Bg5 Nc6 6.Nf3 d6 7.e3 h6 8.Bh4 e5 9.d5 Nb8 10.a3 Bxc3+ 11.Qxc3 Nbd7 12.Be2 and it seems to me that White is somewhat better.

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nf3 e6 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.Qc2 d6 6.a3 Bxc3+ 7.Qxc3 0-0 8.Bg5 h6 9.Bh4 g5 10.Bg3 Ne4 11.Qc2 f5 12.e3 Qf6 13.0-0-0 e5 14.dxe5 dxe5 15.c5 a6 is mentioned by Stohl in his annotations of Hertneck-Titov, Olympiade 1994. After 16.Bc4+ Be6 17.Bd5 he gives White some advantage.

Hello all, 

I've been perusing through Richard Palliser's excellent book on the Two Knights' Tango, mostly just for fun, and had the thought to compare his Zurich coverage to Vigorito's. I came up with some ideas in a few variations - I'd love to analyze some of these or receive some criticisms:

After:

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 Nc6 3. Nf3 e6 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. Qc2 d6 6. a3 Bxc3+ 7. Qxc3 0-0 8. Bg5 h6 9. Bh4 g5 10. Bg3 Ne4 11. Qc2 f5 12. e3 Qf6 and now Vigorito gives 13. 0-0-0 as best, following 13...e5 14. dxe5 dxe5 15. c5 Be6 16. Bb5 Nxg3 17. hxg3 g4 18. Nd2 Kg7 19. Bxc6 bxc6 20. Rh4, when he thinks that this "looks good for White". 

This may be true, but I'd be interested to hear what he intended against 15...a6!N. I see no reason to voluntarily take on g3, weaken his kingside with ...g4, or let White take on c6. A possible line is 16. Bd3 Nxg3 17. Bc4+ Be6 18. hxg3 Rad8 (18...Kg7!?) 19. Kb1!? Kg7 with an approximately equal position. I might even be inclined to take Black here, given the ...e4 + ...Ne5 possibility.

There's also another option against his oft-mentioned Bg5-Bd2 + 0-0-0 option:

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 Nc6 3. Nf3 e6 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. Qc2 d6 6. Bg5 and now instead of 6...h6, weakening the kingside and allowing White this 0-0-0 + g4 plan, why not just simply castle immediately? Black will have ...h6 later, and it makes some sense to stay flexible until White declares his intentions. Vigorito doesn't mention 6...0-0, possibly because a transposition back to the above is possible. White's tries are:

a) 7. a3 Bxc3+ 8. Qxc3 h6 9. Bh4 g5 10. Bg3 Ne4 transposes to the above line.

b) 7. e4 h6! is okay now, for instance 8. Be3 e5 7. d5 Nd4! 8. Nxd4 exd4 9. Bxd4 Nxe4! with an okay position for Black. 8. Bxf6?! Qxf6 9. a3 Bxc3 10. bxc3?! e5 11. d5 Nb8 leaves White with a bad bishop and difficulties in dealing with ...Nd7-c5. 10. Qxc3 is better, but 10...Qg6 leaves White with development problems.

c) 7. 0-0-0 Bxc3 8. Qxc3 Ne4! will lead to a solid, albeit slightly cramped ending for Black. 8. bxc3 Qe7 9. e3 h6 10. Bh4 e5 is fine for Black.

d) 7. e3 h6 8. Bh4 e5 9. d5 Nb8 10. Nd2 Nbd7 is solid for Black, although maybe White has a slight advantage, I don't have a lot of experience in these types of positions. There is also 9. a3, but I like 9...exd4!?, which looks okay.

Let me know what you guys think!