Stefan Buecker wrote on 07/23/12 at 18:29:23:
TalJechin wrote on 07/20/12 at 12:59:12:
[...] I wonder why you're not discussing something simpler and more positional. [...] Can White really get any real compensation for the pawn in the long term after 4...d6, or will Black's extra pawn slowly become increasingly important?
Your analysis involves the advance f4-f5, which I find plausible, since the idea had also appeared in some of the early games.
1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. d4 Nxd4 4. f4 d6 5. Nf3. Your mainline was 5.Be3, an important alternative.
5...Bg4 6.Be2 Nxe2 7. Qxe2 c6 8. h3 Be6 9. f5 Bd7 10. Bg5 Nf6 11. 0-0-0 b5. Instead of your continuation 12. Qd3 b4 13. Ne2 Qa5 now I prefer the more flexible
12.Rd3, the empty square d1 can be useful for an eventual Nc3-d1-e3.
Well, I suppose this thread will go on until a forced win in 40 moves is found...
From a strategical perspective after 10.Bg5 I don't see how White's half-open d-file and slightly better development could challenge a Black =+ or -/+ in the long run, as an extra pawn and the bishop pair is often enough for an edge by themselves. (Not to mention the 2-1 in centre pawns...)
But from the technical perspective of playing it out to a win, I'm not sure if the line I gave is optimal. (All the lines I gave took about half an hour together...). And by perfect defence it may not be too late to draw for White, I suppose.
The question is how Black should continue after 10.Bg5, regarding a long term plan. It's tempting to try to keep the bishop pair, especially if a later, crushing, d6-d5 can be arranged. But at the moment I don't see how to do that.
Another, more pragmatic idea could be
10...Be7 which weakens the d6-pawn a little after 11.Bxe7 but on the other hand, Black gains in development, can castle long and remains with the right bishop complementing the dark squared pawn chain.
The following is far from deep analysis, but it illustrates what can happen in practice. Surely, there must be a better use for the bishop than what happens...