JonathanB wrote on 05/20/12 at 16:51:08:

Probably, I used this line twice as Black in my last tournament when my opponents wanted to draw as White and I was happy with that (I rarely play to win as Black in morning rounds!) it allows you to draw while making a reasonable number of moves, and every strong player knows it.
In super tournaments where they know their opponents well in advance they can mutually prepare longer forced draws, of course.

true!     I guess then we back at our strarting point unless black wants to punt with:

10 Ng5 Rf8 11. Nf3 h6 !?   

I have yet to have anyone play for the 3 fold in this line with the Re8 prior to Bb7 but I guess that's a strong possibility ...maybe that Qd7 line is something i should look into... 

I think another way to avoid this 'drawing' line is to play Re8 and Bf8 prior to Bb7 and then answer Ng5 with Re7.

1 e4 e5, 2 Nf3 Nc6, 3 Bb5 a6, 4 Ba4 Nf6, 5 0-0 Be7, 6 Re1 b5, 7 Bb3 d6, 8 c3 0-0, 9 h3 Re8,  10 d4 Bf8 11 Ng5 Re7 and Black is fine.

Gilchrist is a legend wrote on 05/20/12 at 22:10:02:


Van der Wiel - Karpov, Rotterdam 1989. They repeated five times then K played ...Na5 instead of ...Re8 iirc. Basic answer to your question, however, is that you dont play Zaitsev if you're bothered about an immediate draw. Evidentially Karpov wasn't.

In answer to your later post, back in the day it used to be fairly common for GMs to repeat once then play the normal continuation of Nbd2 or a4.  I suppose they wanted to get nearer to the time control. 

At club level in my experience people just don't play for immediate draws - perhaps the only exception being the last round of a tournament when neither fancies playing and would rather go home.

I played the Zaitsev for years and nobody took the draw against me. 

I never played to draw in that fashion, I was stipulating a hypothetical person so I used "I" as an example, but there certainly are players who will play a drawing line if possible against higher rated players in order to gain rating points. I am especially wary of this and for this reason do not play the Poisoned Pawn move order against the Najdorf 6. Bg5, because of 10. f5/15. Ne4 Qxa2 drawing line. If a 2100 plays 10. f5 and even more so 10. f5 with 15. Ne4, I will become very wary that my opponent is trying to draw out of the opening. But since mentioned above, one can play other moves to avoid the Zaitsev draw, but does an opponent playing 10. d4 Re8 11. Ng5 Rf8 12. Nf3 indicate that the opponent probably wants to end the game as a draw rather than play further? Or perhaps a psychological trick to repeat only twice to entice the Zaitsev player to play overaggressively? Or perhaps White will attempt to repeat the position twice on moves 11-12, then play something else, but Black does not know this and so thinks the opponent plays for a draw, so breaks the repetition after one repetition and plays overaggressively. So White's aim was to cause Black to play overaggressively due to thinking White is playing to draw, but White is actually trying to win by repeating twice and then confusing opponent. I am not sure if anyone has done this before though.

Not to mention that, if you're 2300, that's basically a expectation value for your past performance in which you weren't trying to simply draw as White. I might wager that with this model, your base rating would go down simply based on approach!

Johnson & Johannsen recommend 12...Qd7 as a way to avoid the repetition in their 2007 book on the Zaitsev.  I think this is linked up with their secondary repertoire recommendation of 9...Qd7 as the 'regrouping' variation of the main line Ruy.

There are other options: 12...Nd7, 12...h6, 12...Na5 ("possibly Black's objectively best way to play on"), etc.

Sorry.  I don't understand the question.

Thanks,

what you found matches my suspicion: that this kind of draw doesn't appear at tournaments of the same calibre (or in games of players of the same standing) as it used to.

I know the Zaitsev isn't as fashionable as it once was, but this *type* of draw - the theoretical three-fold - seems to have disappeared from top-level chess.  Perhaps because they prefer to play lines that last longer but are pre-analysed to a draw anyway?

You know the one

1 e4 e5, 2 Nf3 Nc6, 3 Bb5 a6, 4 Ba4 Nf6, 5 0-0 Be7, 6 Re1 b5, 7 Bb3 d6, 8 c3 0-0, 9 h3 Bb7, 10 d4 Re8, 11 Ng5 Rf8, 12 Nf3 Re8, 13 Ng5

etc.

Does anybody know any examples of Karpov playing this aside from against:-

Hubner, Turin 1982
Chandler, Vienna 1986
Nunn, Vienna 1986
Hubner, Tilburg 1986
Ljubojevic, Brussels 1987
Sokolov (Andrei), Madrid 1987
Smyslov, Moscow 1988
Hubner, Tilburg 1988
Nunn, Skelleftea 1989
De Firmian, Reggio Emilia 1989/90

Also, can anybody think of a top-level (both sides 2700+) game that ended this was recently?


Many thanks.


J