Yes, that is sort of what I had in mind. I will look at this in more detail.

The Cambridge Springs is fine for me.

It's possible, but I was also thinking of using 3.Nc3 e6 4.e4, since 2...c6 3.Nc3 dc4 4.e3 b5 5.a4 seems to offer real chances of an edge. But maybe it's just a matter of taste.

Also sorry for not posting on the QGR threads in the last 4-5 days, I have been busy with other projects lately.

Zwischenzugzwang wrote on 12/04/11 at 07:35:49:


I think option 1 is more in the spirit of the repertoire (trying to prove +=), however if people want to analyse the Moscow/7.a4 Botvinnik then they can do so - I will add their analysis to the D43 and D44 files and will contribute myself with any ideas I have in these lines. 

Edit: I made a mistake, the line in the survey by Ikonnikov is 6.a4 Bb4 7.e4. I am sorry for the confusion.

TN wrote on 12/04/11 at 02:08:04:

Indeed. If White accepts the Anti-Moscow, he also has to accept the Botvinnik

Most annotators seem to agree that the Moscow 6.Bxf6 is not really promising for White. What I wrote in an earlier post about my relation to D44 - that I've no clue of it - also holds true for D43, therefore the following considerations are just from an outsider's point of view.

White's options

(i) Play the Botvinnik and the Anti-Moscow, depending of Black's choice in move 5 (5...dxc4 vs. 5...h6). If Black plays 5...h6, he can still switch to the Botvinnik in move 7 by choosing (6.Bh4 dxc4 7.e4) 7...b5, whereas 7...g5 is the Anti-Moscow. White doesn't seem to have a reasonable alternative for 7.e4. White also needs something against the Main Slav move order (with 5...e6), as mentioned earlier.

(ii) Play consequently for avoiding this stuff: Answer 5...h6 with the Moscow (which, according to the statistics and the who-is-who of it's players, might not be worse than the Anti-Moscow), and 5...dxc4 with the "Ikonnikov", which could be also useful against the aforementioned Main Slav variation.

From an economical point of view, option (ii) makes more sense. (But of course, from an economical point of view, playing 1.a3 or giving up chess is an even better choice.) The consequences for our investigation of the QG might be therefore (a) choose option (i), (b) choose option (ii), and (c) go for both directions, and it's up to you, TN, and to the contributors which way to go. (I personally would opt for (c).)

Best regards,

Zwischenzugzwang

Edited:

6. cxd5 versus the Cambridge Springs cannot be ignored, either. 

Aside from that, 7. cxd5 if going with full-blown main lines.

Just to clarify the discussion between the two threads, here's the current plan for our examination of the Botvinnik (more than one of these may be done at once):

1) Examine 9.Bg3 until we either prove an advantage for White or prove equality for Black. 

2) Have another look at the 16.Na4/19.Bf4 (or 19.Be3) lines of the main line Botvinnik.

3) Analyse 7.a4, using Ikonnikov's survey as a starting point.

4) Examine the 9.ef6 gh4 10.Ne5 Qf6 11.g3, looking at new material since sources such as Dangerous Weapons. 

Basically if 9.Bg3 doesn't give White an edge, we move on to 16.Na4, and if that doesn't work, then 7.a4, and if not that then 9.ef6. 

If you have some ideas in a different line to the one the group is focusing on, don't hesitate to post them. 

The risk of analysing so many lines (16.Na4 against the Botvinnik, 9.Bg3 Botvinnik, 7.a4 Botvinnik) is that we end up creating a repertoire for Black in the Botvinnik, but if you or another member posts analysis that extends or improves on Ikonnikov's survey I will add it to the D44 file. Right now I am extremely curious about 9.e5 - I think White has real chances of getting some sort of edge there.