CHESS EXPLAINED ls PLETE Sam Collins Anew approach to understanding the chess openingsChess Explained: The c3 Sicilian Sam Collins AMBETFirst published in the UK by Gambit Publications Ltd 2007 Copyright © Sam Collins 2007 The right of Sam Collins to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hired out or otherwise circulated in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. ISBN-13: 978-1-904600-71-8 ISBN-10: 1-904600-71-9 DISTRIBUTION: Worldwide (except USA): Central Books Ltd, 99 Wallis Rd, London E9 SLN, England. Tel +44 (0)20 8986 4854 Fax +44 (0)20 8533 5821. E-mail: orders@Centralbooks.com Gambit Publications Ltd, 99 Wallis Rd, London E9 SLN, England. E-mail: info@gambitbooks.com Website (regularly updated): www.gambitbooks.com Edited by Graham Burgess Typeset by John Nunn Cover image by Wolff Morrow Printed in Great Britain by The Cromwell Press, Trowbridge, Wilts. 10987654321 Gambit Publications Ltd Managing Director: Murray Chandler GM Chess Director: Dt John Nunn GM Editorial Director: Graham Burgess FM German Editor: Petra Nunn WEM Webmaster: Dr Helen Milligan WFMContents Symbols Bibliography Introduction 1 2...Af6: Lines with cxd4 2 2...2yf6: Main Line with 6 &c4 3 2...Af6: White Avoids an Early d4 4 2...d5: Black Plays ...Df6 and ...e6 5 2...d5 with 4... Df6 5 Af3 Red (or 5...Ac6) 6 — 2...d5: Alternatives to 4... Af6 7 Second-Move Alternatives for Black Index of Variations List of GamesSymbols + check ++ double check # checkmate 1! brilliant move ! good move 12 interesting move 1 dubious move 2 bad move 2 blunder Ch championship 1-0 the game ends in a win for White Ye-Yp the game ends in a draw 0-1 the game ends in a win for Black (D) — see next diagram Bibliography Books Collins, An Attacking Repertoire for White (Batsford 2004) Collins, Understanding the Chess Openings (Gambit 2005) Nunn, Understanding Chess Move by Move (Gambit 2002) Rogozenko, Anti-Sicilians: A Guide for Black (Gambit 2003) Rozentalis and Harley, Play the 2 c3 Sicilian (Gambit 2002) Databases ChessBase Mega Database 2006 Periodicals New In Chess Yearbook Websites Chess Publishing (www.chesspublishing.com)Introduction The Chess Explained series seeks to provide the reader with a basic understanding of an opening line through the use of 25 games, annotated with relatively few variations but plenty of verbal com- mentary. I think the c3 Sicilian is a pretty good candidate for such a format, for two reasons: 1) There is less theory than in, say, the Naj- dorf Sicilian or Griinfeld. In extremely sharp openings, the assessment of many positions de- pends critically on specific and often complex variations. The opening in this text, however, lends itself to verbal explanation because the positions are inherently more rational than in those sharper lines. 2) There is quite a lot of thematic overlap between individual variations — positions with an isolated queen's pawn or e5-spearhead, for instance, come up extremely frequently, and knowledge is readily transferable from one line to the next. Why Play the c3 Sicilian? I’ve never been a fan of negative campaigning, but I'm going to indulge in a little here. Some facts about the Open Sicilian: 1) White has never, ever, shown a clear route to an advantage. 2) Learning and maintaining a complete rep- ertoire as White in the Open Sicilian requires the single largest time investment of any chess project. Turning the merits of our candidate: 1) The main reason people play the c3 Sicil- ian is because it doesn’t take much time to learn, and maintaining one’s knowledge is sim- pler because the theory develops fairly slowly. Also, developments don’t in general dramati- cally alter existing assessments, so the price of not knowing a new move will normally be pretty minimal. 2) Some, like Tiviakov, maintain that the c3 Sicilian gives better chances of an advantage than the Open Sicilian. This argument needs to be broken down a littl: 2a) Onan objective basis (i.e. assuming best play from both sides), the c3 Sicilian doesn’t give White more chances of an advantage than an Open Sicilian. Sorry. 2b) On a subjective basis, I think the c3 Si- cilian gives some extra chances of an edge, since Sicilian players inevitably devote more time and effort to learning the lines after 2 £3 and 3 d4, so they often don’t know the best re- sponses to the c3 lines Common Criticisms of the c3 Sicilian Most of these are articulated by Sicilian play- ers, who have a vested interest in encouraging more Open Sicilians. For instance, Garry Kas- parov’s criticism of 2 2f3 d6 3 &b5+ was mo- tivated in no small part by the fact that his results in that line were worse than after 3 d4. Incidentally, the great man has opted for the c3 Sicilian on 12 occasions, though most of these games are from simuls. Needless to say, he made an immense score with White in those games.The c3 Sicilian gives no advantage Fine, but nor does the Open Sicilian. The sub- jective/objective distinction, outlined above, holds true here ~ clearly White can’t win the game with best play, but he gets an edge from the opening more often than Black does. The c3 Sicilian is boring This one has a little more foundation. Certainly, the positions arising in this book are generally less complicated than in the Najdorf or Svesh- nikov. Several of the main lines result in end- games, which are not to everyone's taste. That said, White has some decent attacking chances in many lines, especially those where he ob- tains an isolated queen’s pawn (IQP) or related structure. A Note on Move-Orders After 1 e4 c5, the only certain way to get the positions arising in this book is to play 2 c3. However, many of the games herein open | e4 c5 2 3, and only after 2...2c6 or 2...06 does White play 3 3. ‘The good news about the 2 @f3 move-order is that both 2...e6 and 2...2c6 significantly cut down on Black’s options ~ the former obvi- ously precludes any systems based on ....g4 (or ...26, which wouldn't sit well with ...e6), while the latter spends a move developing a knight which is not involved in the early stages of several major systems (for instance, Black no longer has the option, after | e4 5 2.3 d5 3 exdS Wxd5 4 d4 Af 5 AE3, of 5...2g4 or 5...e6, each of which is more popular than 5...2\c6). In contrast, White loses very little by EXPLAINED: THE c3 SICILIAN putting his knight on £3, since it goes here very early in every system with the exception of some harmless sidelines. The bad news is that, after 1 e4 c5 2 £3, Black can play 2...d6, after which White can play an Open Sicilian with 3 d4 or an interesting sideline with 3 c3, but there is no path to the variations covered herein, ‘The 2 Af3 move-order is used by c3 Sicilian players in two instances: 1) If they are happy with the position after 1 e4 c5 2 Df3 d6 — this could be because they occasionally play the Open Sicilian, or know something about the 3 c3 line; 2) If they know that their opponent won’t play 2...d6. This happens quite often, since only Najdorf, Dragon, Classical and Scheveningen players can use a 2...46 move-order. The Format I considered including preliminary structural di- agrams in the chapter introductions. However, while I often find these worthwhile, I opted in- stead to discuss structural issues more fully in the concrete and practical context of the games themselves. However, I have penned brief chap- ter introductions so that the reader can get an idea of how the various lines fit together. As to suggested repertoires, the game con- clusions indicate all of my preferences. As always, my deepest thanks go to my friends and family, my publishing team, and my readers. I welcome all comments concerning the material contained herein, and these can be addressed to samcollins@bemchess.co.uk Sam Collins London, January 20071 2...Af6: Lines with cxd4 Led c5 203 Df6 This is one of Black's two main defences, the other being 2...d5. Both Tiviakov and Sveshnikoy (noted experts on the c3 Sicilian) believe that 2...4\f6 is Black's best defence. Now White can’t de- fend with 3 4\c3, since this square is occupied by a pawn. While pushing his e-pawn gains time on the knight, this is at the cost of leaving a comfortable square for the horse on d5 ~ White will be re~ luctant to move his c-pawn again to kick this piece, especially since Black already has some pawn- control over the important d4-square, 365 Much as in the Alekhine Defence, this move is a gift and a curse. White gains time and space at the cost of weakening his central control. In particular, he can’t obtain a two-abreast pawn-centre any more. 3.45 No prizes for other moves. 4d4 This is White's most direct approach. Even though he can’t get his perfect centre any more, there are benefits to having a pawn on dé. It holds the e5-pawn and, by encouraging an exchange, frees the c3-square 4nd In practice, this is pretty automatic. Other moves give White the opportunity to chase the knight with c4 and d5. 5 Of3 Even if White is planning to recapture on d4 with a pawn, it’s advisable to throw this move in. 5.06 By defending the knight, Black threatens to capture the c3-pawn. On the other hand, he has ruled out possibilities of developing his queen’s bishop to g4. Sometimes these ...e6 lines are regarded as inferior by specialists like Sveshnikov and Tiviakoy, but I don’t see any theoretical or practical ba- sis for this view. 5...8\c6 keeps Black’s options open - he might try to develop the light-squared bishop to g4, or develop his king’s bishop to g7, or just transpose into ...e6 systems. White also has some options since the d4-pawn is still pinned ~ in particular, the theory of 6 S04 has been extensively developed and will be examined in Chapter 2. However, he can also simply take: 6 cxd4 was White’s choice in Game 1, Pavasovié-Halkias. 6 cxd4 Now that Black has committed himself and locked in his light-squared bishop, White makes the natural recapture. It's arguable whether he can let Black take on c3, but this would definitely be a sacrifice. 6.86 Hitting the e5-pawn, while freeing the d7-square for either a knight or a bishop. 6...b6 is a major alternative, preparing to move the bishop to b7 or a6. Game 5, Khairullin- S.Novikov, covers this. 7 Bed Putting the bishop on an aggressive square and preparing to castle.8 CHESS EXPLAINED: THE c3 SICILIAN 7 a3 is the big alternative, preparing £d3 without allowing the annoying ...A\b4. This is exam- ined in Game 4, Markovié-Rublevsky. Now (after 7 £204): plan. 7..€b6 is the alternative, planning an interesting ide: )e6 develops and puts pressure on the e5-pawn. Game 2, Mamedyarov-Ramirez, covers this dxeS and ...@c6!?, which leads to un- balanced IQP positions. Have a look at Game 3, Stevié-Mastrovasilis. Game 1 DuSko Pavasovic — Stelios Halkias Vidmar Memorial, Terme Zrece 2003 1045203 Df 3 e5 DdS 4 d4 cxd4 5 AF3 (D) HoOsWee 2 5. D6 5...d6 6 Wxd4 is also an important line: after 6...06 7 exd6 Wxd6 8 &d3 Ac6 9 Wes Re7 10 0-0 White has some advantage since Black's pieces are less active, while White’s play is au- tomatic ~ move a rook to the d-file, the queen’s knight to d2 (and probably e4) and see what Black does. 6 cxd4 d6 Hitting the e5-pawn and preparing ...2g4. 7 Red The knight is attacked, and Black can either retreat it or protect it. 7 £42!” is an offbeat idea, preparing to de- velop the knight to c3 now that the bishop can recapture. Its main virtue is that it avoids the theory inherent in 7 &c4. Its main problem is that it is virtually unthinkable that White can achieve any advantage after such a move. TnLD06 Tarrasch was famously critical of placing knights on b6 (or b3), and this odd dictum cer- tainly applies here. The knight, apart from controlling a couple of light squares, serves a limited function and is quite difficult to relo- cate, In the game, White's pawn sacrifice is based in large part on this piece, which has a hard time pulling its weight. 7...6 ttansposes to the 5...c6 6 cxd4 d6 7 cd De6 line - see Game 2. 7...dxe5 leads to interesting play. White can take on eS with either the pawn or the knight, but the main theoretical argument has revolved around Kaidanov’s committal 8 &xd5 Wxd5 9 Dc3, when Black is in some danger of getting crushed. However, if he makes it to the middle game, his long-term chances should be favour- able. The main, and most contentious, lines occur after 9...Wd6 10 d5 @d4 11 Axd4 exd4 12 Wxd4 e5 13 Wd3 &d7 14 0-0 £5!?, when Black will follow up with ...$ef7 and ...e4, while White will try to attack the king by bringing the rooks to the centre, his bishop to b2 and his queen to the kingside. We now return to 7...b6 (D): 8 2b3!? This is a line with some bite. Scottish GM John Shaw mentioned this bishop retreat to me some years ago, and it’s definitely much more interesting than 8 £bS. Black's defence isn’t too easy, whatever theory says. 8 Ab5 dxeS 9 Dxe5 Ld7 doesn’t give White anything. This dull position has been tested in hundreds of games. A typical line now runs 102...Dy6: LINES WITH cxd4 9 1 xc6 Kxc6 11 Dxc6 bxc6 12 0-0 g6 13 Hel &g7 14 &g5. This looks dangerous, but there’s an easy tactical solution: 14...0-0! 15 &xe7 Waxd4 16 Wxd4 &xd4 17 Dd? and Black moves his f8-rook, with an extremely drawish ending. 8...dxe5 This is critical. The main defect of White's 8th move was that it left the c6-knight un- pinned, which increases Black's control over the centre and means that White can’t recapture on eS without allowing a queen exchange on dl. While there are several endgames where White can fight for an advantage after such an exchange, this isn’t one of them. 8...d5 is a tricky move, since White’s best is the unlikely move 9 hd}, preventing the light- squared bishop from developing to either f5 or 24. White then has a pretty good French. Col- Jins-Dominguez Aguilar, Turin Olympiad 2006 proceeded 9...e6 10 £3 (it’s also possible to play 10 g3 Re7 11 We4, but as an Advance French player I was perfectly happy with the simple knight retreat, because I now have a very comfortable and simple development plan which simply can’t be played in the French; also, as before, I don’t like the knight on b6) 10...2d7 11 Bc3 (it’s important to cover the b5-square in order to prevent ...a5 and ...,2.b5) 11..He8 12 0-0 (it is also possible to play 12 &g5, when Black is pretty much compelled to respond with 12...{6 since the exchange of dark- squared bishops is very unfavourable for him) 12...h6 13 23 (it’s useful to take control of the b4-square, since now White can play &c2 and Wa3) 13...a6 14 Bc2 Das 15 Ad? (D). ss R Black is now in major trouble; White has a bunch of useful moves (Wg4, &d3, De2-f4-h5) while Black has no play and won't be able to castle for ages. My opponent decided on a risky plan of advancing on the kingside: 15...267! (it was better to wait for £4 before playing this, since now my dark-squared bishop has access to the kingside) 16 &d3 hS 17 Wi3 Rh6 18 ‘Weg3 4?! (18...Weg5? loses to 19 Ades Wxe3 20 Ad6+ and 21 fxg3, but this just weakens the kingside) 19 Wg4 WgS 20 Wh3 We7 21 Df3 Db3 22 Rxh6 Exh6 23 Hadi FB 24 D2. White’s play is extremely simple — all exchanges favour him, since they just accentuate the weak- ness of Black's light-squared bishop. Alex Baburin once explained this concept to me with anice hockey analogy — if one player is sent off, a5 vs 4 advantage is useful, a4 vs 3 advantage is much larger, and a 3 vs 2 advantage is deci- sive. A similar logic can be used when playing against a bad piece — the more pieces which leave the board, the more Black will rely on his useless bishop. After 24...2xd2 (Black couldn't play 24...2xd4 in view of 25 We3) 25 Axd2 bg7 26 Bc2 Bhh8 27 Bfcl WgS 28 We3 We7 (exchanging on e3 would just strengthen the d4-pawn, give White the half-open f-file to work with, and introduce the possibility of an e4 break) 29 h3 Bc7 30 De2 Exc? 31 Exc2 Bc8 32 Exc8 Dxc8 33 Wel Wd8 34 dh2! followed by Del -f3 and WF4 White had a perfect position. 9 d5!(D) This is the key move — the dull endgames arising from a capture on e5 promise nothing, for White.