A Question of Style

As a comment to my entry 'A Grossly Unfair Test', a reader has sent the following question:

"In your book, 'The Ruy Lopez: A Guide for Black', you recommend the move 8...d5 after the moves 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 Qe2 b5 6 Bb3 Be7 7 0-0 0-0 8 c3 (Dia) and you say that 'the more conservative 8...d6 9 Rd1 Na5 10 Bc2 c5 11 d4 Qc7 leads to standard Chigorin positions where White's chances should be slightly preferable.' The 8...d6 line is recommended by Nigel Davies in 'Play 1 e4 e5!' and by Mihail Marin in 'A Spanish Repertoire for Black' which came out after your book. You have 'Play 1 e4 e5!' in your bibliography so you must have thought that White has improvements over Davies' lines. What do you think about Marin's analysis of this line? How does both books analysis compare to Greet's Play the Ruy Lopez?"

Actually the decision to recommend 8...d5 was not mainly a result of any dissatisfaction with 8...d6 or Davies' analysis of the move. The two moves have a roughly equal theoretical status so our choice was more a matter of taste and of finding a move that fitted into our general repertoire. Space considerations also was an issue as the Worrall clearly had to be considered a minor line - even more so before the arrival of Greet's book.

It must be taken into consideration that Davies and Marin both are recommending a Chigorin based repertoire where 8...d6 followed by ...Na5 and ...c5 fits very nicely in - the main strategies are the same whether White's rook is on e1 or on d1. We, however, offer a Zaitsev based repertoire. That doesn't totally exclude Chigorin like lines but it would require extra space for strategical explanations. Another factor is more subjective: we chose to recommend the Zaitsev variation because it involves rapid and natural development. Correspondingly we avoided the Chigorin because we were not really happy with the knight excursion to a5. It is a fact that Black often finds it quite hard to activate this knight in the Chigorin. These considerations apply in the diagram position too.

So, why didn't we recommend a Zaitsev development scheme with ...Bb7 and ...Re8 then? That is indeed a good question and this should have been stated clearly in our book: Against the Worrall attack, 8...d6 9.Rd1, 9...Bb7 doesn't seem to be working very well, as 10.d4 creates threats to e5, thanks to the pin in the d-file.

Fortunately this isn't a great problem as 8...d5 is an active and strong move which fits well with the general philosophy behind the Zaitsev. It takes a bit more theoretical preparation than 8...d6 but once Black masters a few sharp lines he can expect quite a pleasant life against the Worrall. This claim has to be backed up by analysis (and in our book we supply some). But to some extent it can also be supported by visual evidence.












If you compare these two diagrams which shows the positions after 11 moves in the two mainlines there can be no doubt that Black appears more active in the second:

• In the first diagram (arising from 8...d6 9.Rd1 Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Qc7) White has achieved an central advantage (e4&d4 vs. e5&d6) while Black's knight on a5 appears somewhat misplaced.
  
• In contrast White in the second diagram (arising from 8... d5 9. d3 Bb7 10. Nbd2 Re8 11. a3 Bf8) has spent a move on the modest a3 while Black is almost fully developed (Zaitsev style!) and has even taken the active stance in the centre (e5&d5 vs. e4&d3).

Obviously this doesn't prove that 8...d5 is better than 8...d6 but I think it shows that 8...d5 is a more ambitious approach (and consequently better if it actually works).

Chigorin Mainline

I promised to try identifying the current "Chigorin Mainline". My quest starts after 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 Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 (Dia) when we have the first real split:

11...Qc7!

This is the Classical Chigorin - as the eponymous master himself played it. Black has tried other moves but none of them are as popular:

a) 11...Nd7, Keres’ variation is Davies’ recommendation in ‘Play 1.e4 e5!’, but has recently run into certain theoretical difficulties. Most likely this is only temporary but it’s Black that’s looking for improvements now.

b) 11...cxd4, I.Sokolov’s favorite is very playable but it appears slightly illogical to allow White the option to develop his knight to c3.

c) 11...Nc6, Borisenko’s variation too is fully playable, but White tends to play 12.d5 when Black doesn’t really have an attractive square for his knight.

d) 11...Bb7, Romanishin’s variation is fully playable but Black will frequently have to return his bishop to c8 in order to re-activate it if White plays d5.

e) 11...exd4, has no accepted name but has been played by Chiburdanidze among others.

f) 11...Re8, Hebden’s gambit line may be theoretically suspect but has been used relatively recently by Gustafsson.

12.Nbd2

This is played more than ten times as frequently as 12.d5 which is White’s second most popular move. The knight is on its way to g3 via f1 and the e-pawn may soon need protection.

12...cxd4

It’s not at all obvious that it’s in Black’s interest to exchange his c-pawn for White’s more modestly placed c-pawn. But the open c-file will ensure that something is happening on the queenside and distract White from his slow but dangerous kingside plans. In addition Black gains temporary access to b4 for his knight.

a) 12...Bd7 is what Marin in ‘A Spanish Repertoire for Black’ calls the ‘Petrosian System’ - or more accurately that’s what he calls the natural follow-up 13.Nf1 Nc4. In my opinion ‘Petrosian variation’ would have been a more appropriate name.

b) 12...Nc6 is what Marin calls the ‘Rubinstein System’ (again I prefer ‘variation’ rather than ‘system’).

c) 12...Re8 could reasonably be called the Donner variation.

d) 12...Rd8 is a sensible move that has been played by many strong players, but it seems Romanov is the most consistent patron.

e) 12...Bb7 I suppose could be called the Panov variation after the strong player who was one of the early practitioners.

f) 12...Be6, 12...h6, 12...g6, 12...Nd7, 12...exd4 are rare moves that have been tried by strong players and that may well be valid tries for equality.

13.cxd4

(Dia)

13...Nc6

At this point Black only has a very few independent alternatives:

a) 13...Bb7 14.Nf1 transposes to 12...Bb7 13.Nf1 cxd4 14.cxd4

b) 13...Bd7 14.Nf1 transposes to 12...Bd7 13.Nf1 cxd4 14.cxd4

c) 13...Be6 14.Nf1 transposes to 12...Be6 13.Nf1 cxd4 14.cxd4

d) 13...Rd8 is relatively independent and has been played by Shirov, Kasimdzhanov and Bologan among others. Not at all a bad line-up but I could find only 180 games versus more than one thousand with 13...Nc6.

14.Nb3!

The fact that this move is necessary is one of Black’s small triumphs in the Chigorin. The knight will soon be on its way to the king's wing again but it will cost two extra moves.

14...a5

The Chigorin variation is extremely solid but also slightly passive. It is hardly a coincidence that the most active sub-variations have become the mainlines. This is Black's choice in almost 90% of the games.

15.Be3

The d-pawn needs new protection so the knight can be released for worthier tasks.

15...a4

And this natural follow-up is Black's choice in almost 95% of the games.

16.Nbd2

This is the natural move, even if there actually are 11 games with 16.Nc1 - some of them with quite strong white players.

16...Bd7

At this point there again is a split. This is the preferred move in more than 50% of the games but there are alternatives that have been played by world-class players:

a) 16...Nb4 has been played by Adams and Beliavsky among others.

b) 16...Be6 too has been played by Beliavsky in addition to Tkachiev, Sturua and some other GMs.

17.Rc1

There can hardly be a more natural move than placing the rook vis-a-vis Black's queen and making room for the bishop on b1. Still 17.a3 is quite a popular move which is fairly likely to transpose at some point.

17...Qb7

(Dia)

With this move we reach what I declare the starting point of the Modern Chigorin Mainline in the Ruy Lopez. This is Black's preferred move in 140 out of 217 games in MegaBase 2007. The two main alternatives 17...Rac8 and 17...Rfc8 can both transpose. One reason I choose to stop here is the fact that it's not absolutely clear what's White's main continuation in this position. From the 140 MegaBase 2007 games we have this distribution:

• 18.Qe2: 51 games, with Kramnik and Shirov as the most prominent recent players.
• 18.Nf1: 39 games, with Ivanchuk, Svidler and Leko as recent top players.
  
• 18.a3: 28 games, with Karjakin and Bologan as leading practitioners.
• 18.Bb1: 18 games with Almasi and Kotronias as recent top players (and Anand with a 10-years old game)
• There also are games with 18.d5 and 18.Bd3 by strong GMs.

I suppose I will return to this position in a future blog.

Chigorin or Zaitsev

The Chigorin or the Zaitsev - that's the question; at least if you have decided to buy a book on the Closed Ruy Lopez for Black.

While there certainly are other aspects to be taken into account, one main consideration when choosing a repertoire based theory book, is the quality of the recommended lines.

In my and GM Leif E. Johannesen's "The Ruy Lopez: A Guide for Black" we primarily recommend the Zaitsev variation, starting 9...Bb7 10.d4 Re8 11.Nbd2 Bf8.
(Dia)












In "A Spanish Repertoire for Black" on the other hand, GM Mihail Marin recommends the Chigorin variation, starting 9...Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Qc7.
(Dia)












So, what is best - Chigorin or Zaitsev?

Obviously there is no definite answer to that question. Both lines have been played at absolute top-level and have withstood detailed computer assisted analysis. But there nevertheless are some differences that may help you decide:

• Zaitsev development is quicker and more natural.
• Black's knight on a5 tends to create problems in the Chigorin.
• The Chigorin is the oldest line, and has developed a correspondingly larger body of theory.
• The Zaitsev tends to lead to sharper lines where both players must follow a narrower theoretical path.
• In the Zaitsev Black must worry about weaker players going for a repetition of moves.
• In the Chigorin Black tends to be a little passive for quite a long time.
• In the Zaitsev mainlines Black's kingside tends to come under fire.
• Experience pays well in the Chigorin and your results are likely to improve over time.
• Strategic ideas tend to be clearer and easier to understand in the Zaitsev.
• Chigorin strategy tends to be extremely slow and often quite subtle.
• In the Zaitsev mainline the centre frequently becomes quite open.
  
• In the Chigorin White can close the centre permanently with d5.

If that didn't help, I suppose the best you can do is comparing the mainlines and try to decide what suits your style the best. For the Zaitsev you only need to check my entry "Worthy of Study" to find the critical position. It's a bit harder when it comes to the Chigorin - actually I think identifying the Chigorin mainline could be a nice topic for a future blog entry.

In the meantime it's nice to know that even if you should happen to choose the wrong line (it could even be that the Breyer variation is the line for you!), there will be very little work wasted. Your study of one Closed Ruy Lopez line is almost guaranteed to deepen your understanding of any other line within that complex. And whenever you decide to do a switch you will save a lot of time.