Ruy Lopez Review Under Way

I am having some busy days and there will be no substantial entries in this blog for the next week (but possibly some minor ones).

This morning I noted that there in the web pages for the German chess magazine KARL, there now is a review of Marin's "A Spanish Repertoire for Black". It's an excellent book (even if the experimental format doesn't please me) and an excellent review. However, what excites me more is a promised review of my and Leif Johannessen's "The Ruy Lopez: A Guide for Black".

Stonewall II

Monday evening I finally laid my hands on a copy of Aagaard's 'Stonewall II'. I have not had the time to study it any detail yet, but here are some observations and first impressions:

• There are enough verbal annotations to make the book hard to read for non-German readers. In particular this is the case for the long introduction (almost 60 pages).
• As far as I can see, all the games from the first edition are still there - mostly in the same order. One has been moved and one has had the name of a player corrected.
• I have not yet been able to determine to which extent the annotations of the older games have been updated but obviously some new game references have been added.
• There is a list of complete games, but surprisingly the games from the introduction can not be found there.
• There is no complete index of variations, but at the end of each chapter there is a summary of important lines with references to relevant complete games.
• The book seems to be only very lightly updated after 2004. I have so far only found four game references to 2005 games (Pogorelov-Moskalenko, Salou 2005; note to game 10. Feller-Petrisor, Herceg Novi 2005; note to game 10. Mamedjarova-Gleizerov, Abu Dhabi 2005; note to Game 17. Rogers-Jasim, Gibraltar 2005; note to game 67) but no doubt there are some more hidden in the notes.
• It seems that the new games are somewhat better annotated than the older ones, but this is only my first impression.

Compared to the original English edition, there are 17 new games:

Mainline 7.b3
Game 5: Farago-Ulibin, Obervart 2001 (1/2-1/2)
Game 13: Korotylev-Ulibin, Genf 2001 (1/2-1/2)
Game 17: Romanov-Gleizerov, Minsk 1997 (0-1)
Game 20: Agdestein-Straeter, Germany 2001 (1/2-1/2)

Mainline 7.Bf4
Game 29: Hanley-Williams, Port Erin 2001 (1-0)
Game 31: Kahn-Vajda, Hungary Ch 2003 (0-1)
Game 34: Barkhagen-Jussupow, Stockholm 2002 (1/2-1/2)

White's Rare 7th
Game 51: Schandorff-Sandner, Germany 2004 (1-0)
Game 53: Schandorff-L.B. Hansen, Denmark 1997 (1-0)

5.Nh3
Game 58: Dreev-Radjabov, Tallinn 2004 (1/2-1/2)
Game 63: Anand-Schmittdiel, Germany 2004 (1-0)
Game 70: Kempinski-Radjabov, Antalaya 2004 (1/2-1/2)

Lines with an Early e3
Game 83: Cu. Hansen-Hillarp Persson, Copenhagen 2004 (1-0)
Game 85: Sasikiran-Krasenkow, Calvia Ol 2004 (1-0)
Game 89: Bareev-Jussupow, Prague rapid 2002 (0-1)
Game 90:Yakovich-Kharlov, Elista 2001 (0-1)
Game 93: Bareev-Grischuk, Enghien-les-Bains 2001 (0-1)

PS: For the Table of Content see my entry of August 8th.

Addendum:
Another 2005 reference: Lomineischvili-Tereladze, Georgia 2005; note to game 61. I will add more here if I come by anything.

The Zwaig Variation II

There are indications that the critical line in Zwaig's variation (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 b5 5.Bb3 Na5 6.0–0 d6 7.d4 f6) may be 8.Bxg8 Rxg8 9.b4!?. Tisdall describes this move as 'too ugly to be true'. But although I cannot claim to understand why, it has been the choice of some of the best prepared players ever to face 7...f6.

9...Nc4 (Dia)

10.Nbd2 Nxd2

10...Nb6!? has been played by a correspondence World Champion and should be taken seriously: 11.Qe2 Be6 12.Rd1 c6 13.dxe5 dxe5 14.Nc4 Nd7 (14...Qc7 15.Nxb6 Qxb6 16.a3 c5 +=) 15.Nd6+ Bxd6 16.Rxd6 Bc4 17.Qe3 (17.Qd1 Qc7 18.Be3 Nf8 19.a4 may be even stronger) 17...Qc7 18.Rd1 a5 19.Nd2 Be6 20.bxa5 Rxa5?! (20...Kf7! Oim; 20...Qxa5) 21.Qe2 Ke7 22.Nb3 Ra4 23.Be3 += Stern-Oim, corr 1994.

11.Qxd2

11.Bxd2 c6 (11...c5 12.c3 Bg4 13.Re1) 12.c3 Be6 13.Be3 Be7 14.Nd2 (14.a4) 14...a5 15.Qc2 g5?! (15...axb4 16.cxb4 Qd7 17.Nb3 +=) 16.a4 Qb8 17.axb5 Qxb5 18.c4 +- Helmers-O.Moen, Norway 1975.

11...Bb7 12.Re1 Qd7

12...a5 is probably weaker: 13.bxa5 c5 14.dxc5 dxc5 15.Qe2 Qxa5 16.Nxe5 0–0–0 (also 16...fxe5 17.Qh5+ g6 18.Qxe5+ Kf7 19.Rd1 is clearly better for White) 17.Nf3 Bd6 18.Bb2 and White's advantage was beyond doubt in T.Ernst-Gausel, Ostersund 1992.

13.Bb2 Be7

Tisdall suggests that 13...0-0-0 is worth consideration.

14.a4 f5 15.axb5 fxe4 16.bxa6

An interesting computer-aided line goes 16.Ng5 Qg4 17.bxa6 Rxa6 18.Rxa6 Qxg2+ 19.Kxg2 e3+ 20.Nf3 exd2 21.Rea1 Bxa6 22.Nxd2 Bb7+ 23.f3 Kd7 24.dxe5 dxe5 with equality.

16...Rxa6! 17.Ng5

17.Rxa6 is met by 17...exf3! planning ...Qg4 with a mating attack.

17...Rxa1 18.Bxa1?

18.Rxa1 Qg4 19.Nh3 Qxg2+ 20.Kxg2 e3+ 21.Kg3 exd2 22.dxe5 h5 23.f4 dxe5 24.Bxe5 g5 –+.

18...Qg4

Black is close to winning already. White has nothing to oppose the light-squared bishop.

19.Nh3 (Dia)

19...Qxg2+!

A nice demonstration of the power of Black's light-square play.

20.Kxg2 e3+ 21.Kg1?!

21.Kf1 may be slightly better but after 21...exd2 22.Rd1 e4 23.Rxd2 d5 White has no satisfactory reply.

21...exd2 22.Rd1 g5 23.dxe5 g4 24.Nf4 Bg5 25.Ne2 Be4 26.exd6 Bxc2 27.dxc7 Kd7 0–1 T.Ernst-Tisdall, Gausdal 1993.

Collins' Book Available Too?

I still haven't received my copy of Aagaard's Stonewall II, but I have good hopes it will happen tomorrow. Meanwhile there are rumors that Collins' Attacking Repertoire for Black is now available from Amazon UK. There is a small discussion at Chess Publishing Forum about the reliability of Amazon's announcement. I remain skeptical as long as the book isn't listed on Batsford's/Anova's website.

Postscript 9th September 2007
Today I received unofficial but reliable information that the book will definitely not appear before October 15th and probably not before Christmas! A pity but not really a great surprise.

Out of the Blue

Early tactical shots usually don’t appear from nowhere. You lose short games because you are too greedy, too timid or because you let long-term plans take precedence over more mundane concerns. But occasionally it's only about tactical alertness and nothing else. I have always enjoyed this opening trap because there really is nothing to warn White except the hidden forking pattern.

Dobrovolsky - Hardicsay, Prievidza, 1978
1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Bc4 e6 6.Nc3 Nf4!?

This probably is more trappy than good.

7.Qg4? (Dia)

This move is White’s most popular reaction. And what could be more natural. White is far ahead in development and Black's only developed piece is under attack. Nevertheless it's a serious blunder as was first demonstrated in this game. It's generally considered that White gets more than enough for his pawn after 7.d4! Nxg2+ 8.Kf1 Nh4 and now either 9.Nf3 or 9.Ne4. That's not at all obvious but there are some nice games that seem to support the assumption. Maybe that will be the theme for another blog entry.

7...Qh4!

In 11 out of the 15 games I am aware of that have reached this position, Black has found (or known) this amazing resource. Now the fork on g2 and the hanging bishop on c4 ensure that Black will win at least a pawn.

8.h3

8.Qg3 Nxg2+ 9.Qxg2 Qxc4 of Exposito Portillo-Torres Maesso, Dos Hermanas 2001 is no better. In Kristjansson-Westerinen, Reykjavik 1997 White preferred 8.Qxh4 Nxg2+ 9.Ke2 Nxh4 10.d4 and fought on in a long game but finally had to resign.

8...Nxg2+ 9.Kf1 h5 10.Qe2 Nf4 11.Qe4 Ng6 12.Qe2?

12.Qxh4 was sad but necessary.

12...Nxe5!

Black picks up another pawn and White has had enough:

0–1

Elburg Reviews Stonewall II

I had expected to be holding my copy of Aagaard's new Stonewall book by now, but I am still waiting for it to arrive from Niggemann (via Sjakkbutikken - the major Norwegian chess retailer).

In the meantime I try to extract some information from an early September column by John Elburg where he reviews the book together with several other interesting new books. Unfortunately there is not much new to be learned as Elburg is as blandly positive as he generally is. However, he confirms that there now are 94 games and that also the older games have been somewhat updated. A curious detail is that Elburg informs that there is no bibliography in this German edition while it obviously is in the mysterious Italian version.

Creative Passivity

There appears to be a tendency in chess that activity will defeat passivity and that attack will win against defence. But that may to some extent be a psychological effect more than an integral part of the game. Here is a remarkable example of creative passivity:

U.Andersson - M.Basman, Hastings 1974
1.Nf3 b6

This is known as the English Opening. The talented English IM, Basman probably never quite realized his full potential. Whether it was due to his penchant for unorthodox openings or not is hard to say - his provocative style certainly earned him quite a few points too.

2.g3

Andersson makes no attempt to refute Black's opening which in 1974 must have seemed a lot more unorthodox than it does today.

2...Bb7 3.Bg2 e6 4.0–0 d5 5.c4

Swedish grandmaster Ulf Andersson was known for his defensive technique, his risk avoidance and his faith in healthy if passive positions. He combined this playing style with a unique endgame understanding and a formidable willingness to play on forever in seemingly dead drawn endgames - frequently extracting that extra half point in the end.

5...Nf6 6.d4 Be7 7.Nc3 0–0 8.Ne5 h6 9.Bf4 a6 10.Rc1 Ra7 11.cxd5 exd5 12.Qb3 (Dia)

White has gained a fairly clear and stable advantage from the opening. Black is solid but he will find it hard to create counter-play. What happens now is an interesting case of psychological warfare. Basman abandons all attempts to free his position and just waits for the attack.

12...Ba8 13.Rfd1 Kh7 14.h3 Kg8 15.Kh2 Kh7 16.g4

This is a move you rarely see Andersson play in the opening or middlegame. Psychologically this may be the root to his eventual defeat .

16...Kg8 17.Bg3 Bb7 18.e3 Ba8 19.a3 Bb7 20.f4

Andersson's kingside pawns are lured forward. Probably the old Steinitz saying that the player with an advantage is obliged to attack were whispering somewhere in the back of his mind.

20...Ba8 21.Rd2 Qd6 22.f5 Qd8 23.Bf4 Bb7 (Dia)

Remarkably nothing has changed in Black's position since the last diagram. White's attacking pawn cloud looks imposing but actually his strategy may be mistaken.

24.Rg1 c6 25.Bf3 Nh7 26.Rc1 Bd6 27.Na4 Bc7 28.Kg3 Nf6 29.h4 Nfd7

Almost imperceptibly the game has turned. White has accepted too many obligations and is now actually struggling to defend his territory.

30.Nxd7 Nxd7 (Dia)

This exchange combined with the imminent exchange of dark-squared bishops frees Black's play and exposes White's king somewhat.

31.Re2 Re8 32.Kh3 Bxf4 33.exf4 Rxe2 34.Bxe2 Qe7 35.Bf3 b5 36.Nc5 Bc8 37.Qd3 h5 38.gxh5?!

38.g5 seems to keep White’s position more compact and would probably have been stronger.

38...Qf6 39.Kg3 Nxc5 40.Rxc5 Bxf5 41.Qc3 Bd7 42.Qd3 Ra8 43.Rc1 Re8

Black may be winning already thanks to White's weakened king's position.

44.Qc3 c5 45.Qxc5?

White had to try 45.dxc5. However, after 45...d4 46.Qd2 Re3 47.Re1 Rxe1 48.Qxe1 Qf5 49.Qe4 Qxc5 50.Qe5 Qc4 Black's passed d-pawn gives him a very clear advantage.

45...Qf5! (Dia)

Now all Black's remaining pieces take part in the attack - there just is no defence.

46.Qxd5 Qh3+ 47.Kf2 Qh2+ 48.Bg2

48.Kf1 Bh3+ is even worse.

48...Qxf4+ 49.Bf3 Bg4 50.Rc3 Qh2+ 51.Bg2 Qxh4+ 52.Kg1 Re1+ 53.Bf1 Bh3

0–1

(With 54.Rxh3 Qxh3 55.Qa8+ Kh7 56.Qe4+ Rxe4 57.Bxh3 Rxd4 White only reaches a completely lost endgame.)

Reversed Dutch

A reversed Dutch? Isn't that the Bird's Opening (1.f4)?

Actually not. 1.f4 d5 is indeed a reversed Dutch but I have always been slightly skeptical about 1.f4 because of 1...Nf6! which avoids the weakening of the e5-square and at least temporarily stops e4. Correspondingly I find 1...d5 a slightly illogical reply which to some extent justifies White's first move. That's why I consider 1.a3!? d5 2.f4!? an interesting sequence of moves while 1.f4 d5 2.a3 appears rather meaningless.

But is there actually any advantage in having the extra a-pawn move in a reversed Dutch? There obviously are certain Dutch lines with an early ...Na6 that simply become impossible to play with a pawn already occupying that square. However, I assume that with a deep understanding of Dutch strategy and a little imagination it should be possible to steer for positions where a3 is useful. Here is an example where White succeeded wonderfully:

N.McDonald - B.Thipsay, Banwell mem London 2001

1.a3 d5 2.f4 Nf6

Quite possibly Black should immediately ensure control of the long diagonal with 2...g6.

3.Nf3 g6 (Dia)

Black has chosen a sensible set-up that can be completed without taking on too many obligations in the centre.

4.g3

With this move White heads for a reversed Leningrad system. Actually 4.b4!? - to some extent preventing ...c5 - seems sensible too. One of Black's main problems in the Dutch is to complete the development of his queen-side. With that problem solved, this reversed version cannot be too bad.

4...Bg7 5.Bg2 0–0 6.0–0 c5

Finally Black accepts his role as White! Probably 6...c6 would have given comfortable equality.

7.d3 Nc6 8.Nc3!

Probably this is White's best chance to make something out of his pawn on a3. From a comparison with the parallel position with reversed colours it seems that 8.Qe1 and 8.c3 are sensible alternatives.

8...d4 9.Na4! (Dia)

After 1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.0–0 0–0 6.c4 d6 7.Nc3 Nc6 8.d5, 8...Ne5 is a little more popular than 8...Na5 but odds are much better that White can make use of a3 in this line.

9...Qd6 10.c4 Ng4

In the reversed position the main continuation is 10.b3 a6. However, 10...b6 could nevertheless have been considered as White's score in the reversed line is 59%. Only experience can tell how much difference one tempo can make but in a sharp position where both players pursue different plans, it may well make the difference between a win and a loss.

11.Rb1

Philosophically White can claim some success as the two main continuations in the parallel reversed position are 11...Rb8 and 11...a6. What's more: in the 28 games with these two moves, the score is 9 wins for White, 7 draws and 12 wins for Black!

11...Rb8

11...e5 seems a more consistent follow-up of Black's 10th move.

12.b4

A relevant game for comparison is Benko-Tal, Candidates Tournament Bled/Zagreb/Belgrade 1959: 1.Nf3 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.c4 Bg7 5.Nc3 0–0 6.0–0 d6 7.d4 Nc6 8.d5 Na5 9.Qd3 c5 10.Ng5 a6 11.Rb1 Rb8 12.Bd2 Qe8 13.b3 b5 14.a3 Ng4 15.Nf3 bxc4 16.bxc4 Rb3 17.Rxb3 Nxb3 18.Rb1 Nd4 19.e3 Nxf3+ 20.Bxf3 Ne5 21.Qe2 Nxf3+ 22.Qxf3 e5 23.Qd1 e4 24.Qa4 Qe7 25.Qc6 f4!? 26.Rb8 Bh3 27.Rxf8+ Qxf8 28.exf4 Qb8! 29.Ne2 Qb1+ 0–1.

12...b6 13.bxc5 bxc5 14.Rb5 Rxb5 15.cxb5 Nd8 16.Qc2 Ne6 17.f5 gxf5 18.Nh4 Bf6

Fritz suggests 18...Nc7 with roughly equal chances.

19.Nxf5 (Dia)

The pawn structure is quite murky but White's advantage is not in doubt as his piece activity is superior.

19...Qe5 20.b6 axb6 21.Nxb6 Ng7 22.Nc4 Qc7 23.Bf4 Qd8 24.Nh6+ Nxh6 25.Bxh6 e5 26.a4 Re8 27.a5 Ne6?

27...Ba6 would have been a better try.

28.Bc6!

This wins an exchange thanks to the hanging bishop on f6.

28...Bg7 29.Bxe8 Bxh6 30.Bxf7+ Kg7 31.Bxe6 Bxe6 32.a6 Qa8 33.Qb1 Qxa6 34.Qb8 Bxc4 35.Qf8+ Kg6 36.Qf5+ Kg7 37.Qxe5+ Kg8 38.Qe8+ Kg7 39.Qf8+ Kg6 40.Qf5+ Kg7 41.dxc4 1–0

Not a Defence

At the German site Freechess.info there now is a review of Aagaard's "Stonewall II" . There really isn't that much new to be learned about the book (the game Astrom –Ulibin, Göteborg 1999 was already included in the English version) but it's interesting to note that it seems to have changed title from "Die Stonewall Verteidigung II" to simply "Stonewall II". See my entry of July 25 for the "original" cover.
One can speculate what the reasons are for the change. Maybe the publishers simply decided that they didn't like the passivity that can be associated with the word "Verteidigung" which means defence. Or maybe it was the strange mix of German and English that didn't appeal. My personal theory is that the word "Verteidigung" doesn't score well on Google's rankings and may make the book harder to find for potential buyers.

As an aside there is a funny remark by the reviewer:
"Vielleicht hätte man noch ein Extrakapitel zu diversen Ablehnungen in das Buch aufnehmen können, ich denke hier in erster Linie an die Zugfolge 1.d4 f5 2.e4. Natürlich wird ein erfahrener Spieler diese mit 1…e6 umgehen, doch etwas unerfahrenere Spieler könnten hier schmerzvolle Erfahrungen machen. Wie ich unlängst erfahren habe, gibt es im Staunton-Gambit mit 1.d4 f5 2.e4 unter einigen Großmeistern eine noch geheime bisher nicht gespielte Variante, die Weiß deutlich im Vorteil sehen soll!"
In English this roughly translates to:
"Maybe an extra chapter about various early deviations could have been added; what I primarily have in mind is the the move-order 1.d4 f5 2.e4. An experienced player will of course bypass this with 1...e6, but players with less experience may collect some painful lessons. As I have long since discovered, some GMs have found a secret and not yet played variation in the Staunton-Gambit 1.d4 f5 2.e4 which gives White a clear advantage."
This is a quite central move-order question in my coming Stonewall book and I will not comment much on it in this blog. However I think I should make my preliminary conclusion clear: If you play the French against 1.e4 there certainly are some reasons to prefer the 1...e6 path to the Stonewall over 1...f5, but the Staunton gambit isn't among them.

Addendum
The publisher's have (somewhat curiously) announced that there will not be an English version of this revised Stonewall book, and the Swedish version apparently has been canceled. But today I found that an Italian version seems to be on its way.
My knowledge of Italian consists of a few tourist phrases and a little chess jargon, but doesn't "completamente rinnovata e in esclusiva mondiale per Caissa Italia" indicate that this is something more than a pure translation? That theory seems to be supported by the claim of more than 100 annotated games while the German only is said to contain 94.

The Zwaig Variation

Like most of the early developers of the Norwegian variation, IM Arne Zwaig is now a member of my chess-club, Oslo Schakselskap. One of his main contributions was his investigation of the line 7...f6 (after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 b5 5.Bb3 Na5 6.0–0 d6 7.d4) which borders between being an independent line and a pure move-order finesse. Black offers White to exchange his light-squared bishop for Black’s knight on g8 rather than the a5-knight. This may at first glance seem advantageous for White who prevents short castling and avoids doubled b-pawns, but on closer inspection it’s not at all so clear, as the open a-file after ...Nxb3 is one of White’s major assets in the mainlines.

If White accepts the offer, the game will take an independent course. However, if he declines with 8.Nc3 (as Greet recommends in his Play the Ruy Lopez), play will almost always transpose to the mainline after 8...Nxb3 9.axb3. So in reality the effect of Zwaig’s move-order is to avoid the 7...Nxb3 8.axb3 f6 9.c4 line and maybe to tempt White into inferior lines.

Let’s have a look at 8.Bxg8!? Rxg8 (Dia):

9.Nh4!?

This opens a path to h5 for White's queen and is a natural attempt to demonstrate that Black's kingside has been weakened. The main alternative is 9.b4 (to which I may return in a later entry) but White has also tried 9.a4, 9.Nc3, 9.Qe2, 9.Ne1, 9.c3 and 9.dxe5.

9...Qd7

This indirectly protects the h-pawn so that Qh5 now can be safely met by ...g6.

10.a4

White must try to stir up things early as Black's bishop pair tends to become a significant factor if the game develops quietly.

a) 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.Qh5+ g6 12.Qf3 Be7 13.h3 Bb7 14.Rd1 Qc6 15.Nc3 f5 16.g3 fxe4 –+ R.Rodriguez-Alvarez Ibarra, San Sebastian 1996

b) Fritz' suggestion 10.Nf5 g6 11.Ne3 must be taken seriously as 11...c6 12.d5 c5 13.Bd2 Nb7 14.a4 b4 15.Nc4 is very good for White.

c) 10.Nc3 and now:

c1) 10...Qg4 11.Nd5 (11.Nf3 Bb7 12.a4 b4 13.Nd5 0–0–0 14.Re1 f5 was unclear in Ostojic-Johannessen, Amsterdam 1969) 11...Ra7 12.Nf3 +=

c2) 10...c6 11.b4 Nc4 12.a4 Bb7?! (12...Qg4 looks like an improvement, e.g.: 13.Qxg4 Bxg4 14.dxe5 dxe5 15.axb5 Bxb4 and Black is clearly better) 13.Qd3 g6 14.Nf3 Rg7 15.d5 c5 16.axb5 axb5 17.Rxa8+ Bxa8 18.Bh6 +/- Y.Gruenfeld-Moen, La Valetta 1980

10...b4 11.c3 Rb8 12.Nd2 g6 13.Nhf3 c5 14.dxc5 dxc5 15.Qe2 Rg7 16.Ne1 b3 (Dia)

17.g3?!

17.f4 seems to be a better attempt and may be sufficient for a small advantage. Black's king will be exposed but may escape danger via f7 and g8.

17...Qc6 18.Ng2 c4 19.Ne3 Be6 20.Nd5?!

Tactically this is a correct pawn sacrifice; if Black accepts it immediately his king will be dangerously exposed. However, strategically White is not able to support this knight so in a relatively short perspective this move will either be an incorrect pawn sacrifice or a double tempo loss.

20...Rf7 21.f4 Bc5+ (Dia)

It's already obvious that Black is better - mainly because his king now is ready to run to f8.

22.Kg2

After 22.Ne3 Qd6 Black is more active and has the bishop-pair as a bonus.

22...Rd8

Also the direct 22...Bxd5 23.exd5 Qxd5+ seems to be sufficient for a clear advantage.

23.Nf3 Bxd5 24.exd5 Rxd5 25.Be3 Bxe3 26.Qxe3 Rd3 27.Qe2 Re7 28.Rae1 e4 29.Nd4 Qd5

Now Black's advantage is beyond doubt, and it's hard to see how White can keep his position together.

30.Qg4 f5 31.Qg5 Nc6 32.Qf6

32.Nxc6 Qxc6 33.Kh3 Rd2 is no better.

32...Nxd4 33.cxd4 Rd2+ 0–1 Hecht-Zwaig, Raach 1969 (34.Kh3 e3 35.Rg1 Qf3 decides immediately)

Not a Ghost After All

It seems "Die Stonewall Verteidigung" by Aagaard has become a reality after all. After numerous delays Niggemann now announces it as 'Neu'.

The Table of Content according to Niggemann (see below) is a bit disappointing as it seems the book's structure is exactly the same as Aagaard's earlier 'Dutch Stonewall'. However, the 'Katalog' (German language) informs that there are 94 annotated games. That are 17 more than the older English version.

5 Vorwort
7 Einleitung
65 Weiß zieht 7.b3
97 Weiß zieht 7.Lf4
123 Weiße Alternativen im 7.Zug: 7.Sbd2, 7.Se5, 7.Dc2
145 5.Sh3
171 Andere Abspiele im Stonewall
183 Weiß spielt frühzeitig e2-e3

Well, I will buy the book anyhow, and it will be very interesting to see how much new material there is.

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.

The Prie System

To me the main problem with starting a game 1.a3 always has seemed to be the closed defences, 1...d5 and 1...Nf6. That is still so, but lately a new system has appeared that is very relevant for 1.a3 players - the Prie System which goes 1.d4 d5 2.a3 (Dia) and may at first seem mysterious. The move is not new - it was first used (repeatedly) by Somacarana in the eighteen-fifties - but it seems Prie deserves the naming rights as he is the first top player not only playing it successfully but also writing about it.


I believe Prie's reasoning goes roughly like this:
1) 2.c4 is White's best move but some lines demand quite a lot of study.
2) Systems with an early bishop development to f4 or g5 fail to gain an advantage and possibly even to achieve equality because of lines with an early ...c5 and ...Qb6.
3) 2.a3 to some extent discourages 2...c5 and a3 is a useful 'extra' move against most reversed Queen's Pawn openings.
4) a3 is useful in a few of White's normal Queen's Gambit lines, so White may well consider a delayed c4 should Black play too passively.
5) The possible switching between black and white strategies and speculating in which lines a3 is useful, irrelevant or even damaging can be quite confusing.

In short the Prie System may not lead to any objective advantage to White but it leads to 'normal looking' positions where the strongest player is likely to win. Here is a game where Prie definitely was the stronger:

Prie - D.Adams, British Cht 2005
1.d4 d5 2.a3

This is Prie's preferred move-order. He also considers 1...e6 2.a3 a valid try but against 1...Nf6 he prefers 2.Nf3 because of 2.a3?! g6.

2...e6

2...c5 definitely is risky in view of 3.dxc5 when White may actually try to hang on to the pawn.

3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e3 h6 6.Bf4 0–0 7.Nbd2 b6 8.Ne5 Bb7 9.Qf3 c5 10.c3 (Dia)

Now it looks like a London system where it's not easy for Black to make use of his extra tempo.

10...a5 11.h4 Nfd7 12.Bd3 Nc6 13.Rh3! Ndxe5 14.dxe5 Qc7 15.Qh5

Most likely White is winning already.

15...Ba6 16.Bc2 Rfd8 17.Rg3

Now it's definitely decided.

17...Bf8 18.Bxh6 Qxe5 19.Bg5 f5 20.Nf3 Qd6 21.Bxd8 Nxd8 22.Ng5 Be7 23.Qh7+ 1–0

The London is such an easy game to play!

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.

Hard-Core Opening Theory

That's what you can find in this article at Chessvibes. It refers to my and Leif Johannessen's book on the Ruy Lopez. If you want to keep up with developments this certainly is a game to be noted.

Stonewall around the Corner

Much of my attention is centered around the Dutch Stonewall these days. I was exited to see that there seem to be some progress with Jacob Aagaard's 'Die Stonewall Verteidigung II'. Quality Chess' home page has no new information but I found a new date and a picture at ChessWare Schachversand. It's a bit confusing to find it announced as 'new' when it appears to be available only from August 6th but there now seem to be good reason to believe it will soon appear.

I wonder how a competing book will influence the sale of my book for Gambit. It's not at all clear that potential customers will buy only one. Actually, based on my own experience I would expect most Stonewall players to want both.

By the way there seems to be no news about Collins' 'Attacking Repertoire for Black' for Batsford.

Update 2007-08-04
Expected arrival of Aagaards's book at Chessware is now August 10th. A new delay but nothing dramatic. Still no news about Collin's book, which is still announced for August 1st at Niggemann.

More Retro Challenges

Here are a few more reconstruction challenges. How did this happen?













First a simple one. I believe I took less than two minutes to solve it blindfolded (or at least without a board):
1) Black's 4th move is 4...Re1+.

The next one I believe is harder. But I may be mistaken, as it was one of the first I tried to solve:
2) White plays the moves 1.f3, 2.Kf2, 3.Kg3, 4.Kh4. Black's 4th move is to give mate.

The last one probably is the hardest. Some 15 years ago we were three players trying to solve it, one of us a future grandmaster. It turned out that it was the lowest rated - a 1700-player - who showed up in the chess club the next evening with the correct solution:
3) A game opens 1.a3. White's 5th move is to give mate with a rook.

Have Fun!

Kuzmin Variation

Having concluded in a previous entry that 7.Ng5?! is fairly harmless, or even weak, it's time to take a look at White's subtler replies.

After the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0–0 b5 6.Bb3 d6, it seems that 7.c3! must be the critical test.

(Dia.)

Now d4 is no longer available for Black's knight and 8.Ng5 is becoming more of a threat.
7...Na5

This is Black's most popular follow up and removes pressure from the sensitive f7-pawn. In a reply to my 7.Ng5 entry, Phil Adams brought to my notice that Soltis in his new book ' Transpo Tricks in Chess' (Batsford 2007) briefly discusses this move-order. Obviously Bisguier used it mainly as a confusing transposition tool against Robatsch in Hastings 1961, here playing 7...Be7. That allows White to look for ways to omit or delay Re1 (as the e4-pawn is already protected by Bc2), but the White rook will be nicely placed on e1 so it will normally quickly transpose to a mainline Closed Ruy Lopez.

I had a look at 7...g6 8.Ng5 d5 9.exd5 but did not find anything that really looked playable for Black.

7...Bg4 is another active move that keeps open the option to develop with ...g6. Unfortunately it seems White can keep an edge with little risk:

a) 8.Qe2 mainly has historical interest: 8...Be7 9.Rd1 Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.d3 Nc6 12.h3 Bd7 13.d4 += Stoltz-Alekhine, Salzburg 1942.

b) 8.Re1 is the start of a familiar plan for most players of the white side of the Ruy Lopez. White hopes to demonstrate that the active bishop mainly is a target and will play d3, Nbd2-f1-g3 and only then put the question to the bishop with h3. A relevant game went 8...Na5 9.Bc2 c5 10.d3 g6 11.Nbd2 Bg7 12.Nf1 0–0 13.h3 Bd7 14.Bg5 h6 15.Bh4 Qc7 16.Ne3 Be6 17.d4 Nc4 18.Nxc4 Bxc4 19.d5 b4 20.cxb4 g5 (20...cxb4 21.Ba4 +=) 21.Bg3 cxb4 22.Qd2 with some advantage to White in Unzicker-Bisguier, IZ (Gothenburg) 1955.

8.Bc2 c5

This increases Black's central presence, allows him to support his central pawns with ...Qc7 and seems generally consistent with his previous move. Still, b4 doesn't seem to be much of a threat yet, so I wonder if 8...g6 9.d4 Qe7 may be a possibility.

9.d4 Qc7

This seems necessary in order to support Black's central presence (but seen in light of the further course of the game you may wonder if 9...Qe7, planning ...g6 is an option).

10.Nbd2

(Dia)

This appears to be the critical move, and only if Black can pass this test he needs to worry about the alternatives 10.Re1, 10.h3 and 10.a4.

10...g6!?

Well, this bishop development was Black's main idea. However, it's worth noting that one of Kuzmin's latest games with the line went 10...cxd4 11.cxd4 Bd7 12.Bd3 Be7 13.Qe2 0–0 14.b3 Nc6 15.Bb2 Bd8 16.a4 bxa4 17.dxe5 Nxe5 18.Nxe5 dxe5 19.bxa4 Bg4 20.Qe3 Be6 when the players agreed a draw even if White had the more comfortable position in Kindermann-Kuzmin, Panormo 2001.

11.b4!

Only this non-stereotyped move can cast doubt on Black's idea. 11.a4 b4 12.cxb4 cxb4 13.b3 exd4 14.Nxd4 Bg7 15.Bb2 0–0 16.Rc1 Nd7 17.Bb1 Qb6 was fine for Black in Vasiukov-Kasparian, Yerevan 1955.

11...cxb4 12.cxb4 Nc6 13.Bb2 Bg7

Actually the optimistic 13...Nxb4 14.Bb1 Nc6 seems playable but after 15.Qc2 Qb6 16.dxe5 dxe5 17.Nxe5 Nxe5 18.Bxe5 Bg7 19.Nb3 0–0 20.Bd4 White's advantage is fairly obvious.

14.Rc1

(Dia)

14...Qe7!?

Black's queen is exposed in the open c-file so this is a natural reaction. Black has also tried:

a) 14...Bb7? 15.Bb3 Qe7 16.Rxc6! Bxc6 17.dxe5 Nh5 18.g4 Nf4 19.exd6 +- Bronstein-Evans, Moscow 1955.

b) 14...0–0 15.Bb3 += was our conclusion in 'The Ruy Lopez: A Guide for Black', but on closer inspection it seems that Black has some quite serious problems: 15...Qb6 16.dxe5 dxe5 17.Nxe5 Nxe5 18.Bxe5 Bg4 19.Qc2 Rae8 and now Suetin-Ragozin, (URS Ch) Kiev 1954 was drawn after the moves 20.Qc7 Qxc7 21.Bxc7 Bh6 (this position is equal) 22.Rc6 Bxd2 23.Rxf6 Be2 24.Bd6 Bg5 25.Bxf8 Bxf6 26.Re1 Rxe4 27.Bc5 Bc3 28.f3 Bxe1 29.fxe4 Kg7. However, after 20.Qb2 Black has problems freeing his position.

15.Bb3 Nxd4

15...Bb7 16.a3 0–0 17.d5 Nd8 18.Rc3 gives White a clear advantage.

16.Nxd4 exd4 17.Bxd4 0–0 18.Re1 Be6 19.Nb1

Or 19.Bxe6 Qxe6 20.a4 with a small plus for White.

19...Bxb3 20.axb3

Now White will have some pressure down the semi-open a-file but his b-pawns are weak. I am not sure why White preferred this over 20.Qxb3 which seems to preserve a small advantage.

20...Nh5 21.Bxg7 Kxg7 22.Rc6 Rfd8 23.Nc3 Nf6 24.Qa1 Qe5 1/2–1/2 Vasiukov-Arulaid, Voroshilovgrad 1955.

Conclusion:

It seems Black has a slightly harder task to equalize after 6...d6 7.c3 than in the Closed Ruy Lopez mainlines, but that to some extent should be compensated by the element of surprise. It would also be interesting to see a high level game with 9...Qe7.

Frustrated

I am quite frustrated now and may decide to let this blog die unless I find an acceptable way to publish it. For some months now I have not been able to log on to my account with Internet Explorer. After a few weeks I discovered that I could blog in using Firefox and found the situation a bit more acceptable (but far from all computers have Firefox installed).

Today I discovered that my last entry (posted with Firefox) cannot be seen using Internet Explorer. That is probably around 90% of the potential readers and not acceptable. I assume there is a way around the problem but I have no time or inclination to spend time looking for it. So unless these problems fix themselves or I by accident find an easy solution, this may be goodbye.

Postscript
When I published this entry, my previous entry apparently were 'published for IE' too. This is an improvement but not really satisfactory. I assume I will try a few more posts just to see what happens.

Retro Games

I suppose everybody with any interest for retrograde games (or shortest proof games) now have had their time to solve the tasks I offered in my March 23 entry:

1) Nunn's ChessBase puzzle 7: Construct a legal game that ends with (the black move) 5...Rh1 mate. Note that the last move is not a capture: 1.g4 h5 2.Bg2 hxg4 3.Bxb7! Rxh2! 4.Nh3! Bxb7 5.0–0 Rh1 mate.

2) Construct a legal game that opens 1.e4 and ends with (the black move) 5...NxR (knight takes rook) mate: 1.e4 Nf6 2.f3 Nxe4 3.Qe2 Ng3 4.Qxe7+! Qxe7+ 5.Kf2 Nxh1 mate.

3) Construct a legal game that ends with this position after EXACTLY four moves (that is eight half moves, four by White and four by Black): 1.e4 e6 2.Bb5 Ke7! 3.Bxd7! (Dia.)

3...c6 4.Be8! Kxe8.