Contents

Title page
Foreword by James Altucher
Introduction

Part 1: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4

Chapter 1: 3rd Move Alternatives

Chapter 2: 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 c5
Chapter 3: 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 – Minor Lines
Chapter 4: 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 Nxh5

Part 2: 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0

Chapter 5: 5th Move Alternatives for Black

Chapter 6: 6.Be2 – Minor Lines
Chapter 7: 6.Be2 – 6...h5
Chapter 8: 6.Be2 e5 7.d5

Part 3: 6.Be2 c5 7.d5

Chapter 9: Minor Lines

Chapter 10: 7...h5
Chapter 11: 7...b5

Part 4: 7...e6 8.h5

Chapter 12: 8...exd5: 9.hxg6, 9.h6 & 9.cxd5

Chapter 13: 8...exd5 9.exd5

A Quick Repertoire
Books by Carsten Hansen

2
 The Basman-Williams Attack

by
Carsten Hansen

2021
CarstenChess

The Basman-Williams Attack

Copyright © 2021 by Carsten Hansen
All rights reserved. This book or any portion thereof may not be reproduced or used in any manner
whatsoever without the publisher’s express written permission except for the use of brief quotations
in a book review.
Printed in the United States of America
First Printing, 2021
ISBN 978-87-93812-64-2 (paperback)
CarstenChess Bayonne, NJ 07002
www.WinningQuicklyatChess.com

3
 Foreword by James Altucher

I have a problem. It’s those kids. And computers.

I hadn’t played chess in 25 years. I mean, chess in tournaments. Slow, “classical” chess. I started
playing at the late age of 17. Stopped when I went to college. And then when I was later frustrated
with my life, I started playing again at the age of 27. I played long enough to hit the magical rating of
2200 and then I “retired”.
Specifically, one of my work friends said to me, “Why are you playing this game? It’s for kids. You
should make money.”
I didn’t think it was a game for kids. As an adult I had many accomplishments thanks to chess.
When you apply for anything: college, graduate school, a job, raising money for a business, trying to
sell a business, and on and on, it always comes up that I play chess. Correctly or incorrectly,
In short: the fact that I had focused on chess for a few years opened a lot of doors. It was a good thing
for me.
But I allowed myself to be shamed into quitting. And I did make some money doing other things.
Which I promptly lost. All of it. I had to bounce back from failure and depression to make it again. I
had babies to feed. And I made it again and then lost it all again. This happened to me several times.
During the pandemic, I decided to once again play this game that long ago I loved so much. And I
realized that the love had never dampened. It was put on simmer, but it never left.
But, wait a second, the game is different. All the openings I used to play have been refuted. People
would tell me. “that’s the old main line” and then destroy me.
And then there were the kids. When I last played in tournaments in 1997 there were no kids. Now
every big tournament is filled with 2200 rated 13-year-olds on their way to IM, GM, and beyond.
They have a billion points on Chessable and their memories are lock-tight. Nothing escapes. “Negi
suggested h4! there and on Nf5 which you played, Ng5, f5, e6, Qf3, Nd7, it’s a forced mate in
eight.”
That’s ok, I thought. I can survive with strategy. And tactics.
These kids have puzzlestorm ratings of 2900! They use computers to go through 100s of games an
hour and study tactics in between their 1000s of bullet games.
I’m not making fun of them. I’m making fun of myself. They are going to be great players and I am
incredibly jealous. Computers have changed the art of studying chess.
When I was younger, I had books like Geller’s book on the King’s Indian. I would write down the
variations on index cards. I would play actual chess once a month. I would study tactics from the
“Encyclopedia of Chess Combinations.”
Now people take lessons online from former World Champions, they have access to 100s of opening
courses, they study tactics that an AI has specifically prescribed for them to fill in their weaknesses.

4
They know the openings. They know the ideas. They find infinite defensive resources.
The world has gotten better, and I have fallen behind.
But I wanted to show that I could do this. That memory is a muscle that can be exercised and built
just as strong. That my age does give me resources in understanding strategy and risk better. That
tactics can be studied and rebuilt.
But the openings are more important than I thought. You can’t play an opening that someone has
spent 100s of hours going over with a computer and expect to come out with a good position in the
middlegame.
In the Lichess database, there are 700,000 games played by people 2200 or above in the Najdorf
Variation of the Sicilian Defense. There’s a lot of theory to catch up on! And yes, the ideas are
important. Guess what? There are a lot of ideas to catch up on!
And then, you know, AlphaZero. What’s up with h2-h4-h5-h6? There are books and research papers
looking at all the new strategies that AlphaZero has introduced to the game.
What to do?
All of this is to say I am grateful for authors like Carsten Hansen and books like The Basman-
Williams Attack.
Carsten’s recent book, “The Carlsen Variation” opened my eyes to the new creativity in chess. A
novelty on move 3! 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.d4! cxd4 4.Qxd4 Nc6 5.Qd2! followed by b3!? Who
would’ve thought?
And, as a d4 player since I was a kid, this book you are reading right now.
After h4! on move 3, only 2,000 games were in the Lichess database. Compared with 700,000 for the
Najdorf mentioned above. Or 500,000 for the King’s Indian.
I’m not saying I can remember these 2,000 games. But the ideas will be easier to digest with less
theory. I am also assuming it is less studied than an opening like the Najdorf and other main lines.
And I have the winds of AlphaZero at my back. h4!
But isn’t it a bad opening to play h4 on the third move?
I don’t know. Ask Magnus Carlsen, who won with it against Maxime Vachier-Lagrave. Or Alexander
Grischuk, who seems to have made this opening his secret weapon. With the computer, almost every
set of opening moves has its merits and ideas.
Everyone brings different advantages to the table no matter what area of life: chess, business,
relationships, etc.
Find what you’re strong at and get stronger. And then find out what you CAN BE strong relative to
where you might be weak when compared with others.
Having a secret weapon can be your unfair advantage, particularly as an adult improver or someone
who has just come back to the game.
For me, this book is in my arsenal of secret weapons and I’m grateful to Carsten Hansen for writing

5
it.
h4!

James Altucher
New York 2021

6
 Introduction

The story of our opening starts in 1980 when International Master Mike Basman plays a tournament
in Israel, reaching our starting position, albeit after a somewhat different move order...

M.Basman – N.Grinberg
Ramat Hasharon 1980

1.c4 g6 2.h4!?

Unsurprisingly, Basman rocks the boat right away. Interestingly, the computer actually likes the
move. 2...Nf6 3.d4 And with this move, we now have the starting position of our new favorite
opening variation. 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 Black opts for the Grunfeld set-up, which is probably not the
best as we will cover in the book. But as children, we are being taught that premature play on the
flanks should be refuted with a counterpunch in the center. 5.h5 Nxh5 6.cxd5 c6?! Black really dives
in with the fantasy of central counterplay. 6...e6 is the better option. 7.e4! cxd5 8.e5 The knight on h5
is already in some trouble, forcing Black to play a move that indicates something has already gone
wrong. 8...Bf8 9.Nf3 Nc6 10.Qb3! Encouraging Black to play ...e7–e6. 10...e6? Normal but bad.
Black should be unconcerned about handing the pawn back and instead aim for activity with
something like 10...a6 11.Qxd5?! Bg4 when White is better, but Black is still alive. 11.g4!

7
11...Ng7 12.Bh6! Black’s pieces are hopelessly tied up, and White has an overwhelming advantage.
12...f5 This advance makes sense to avoid complete positional strangulation. 13.Bh3!? White could
also play 13.exf6! Qxf6 14.Be2! when 14...Nxd4 is not possible on account of 15.Qa4+ Nc6 16.Bg5
Qf7 17.Ne5 Qc7 18.Nxg6 and White is winning. 13...Qb6 14.Qxb6 axb6 15.Ke2 Black’s position is
obviously terrible, and there are many good moves for White, but I particularly like 15.gxf5! Nxf5
16.Bxf5 gxf5 17.Nb5! Ra5 18.a4! for White. Black is positionally finished. 15...fxg4 16.Bxg4 Bd7 It
is difficult to prescribe a good plan for Black to improve his situation, but the text move is almost
certainly not the best. The computer recommends 16...Kf7 but after 17.Ng5+ Kg8 18.Ke3, White is
clearly better. 17.Nb5?! This allows Black a little tactic that opens the game a bit. It would be safer to
play 17.a4! first. 17...Nxe5! Grabbing the chance to get back into the game with both hands. 18.Nc7+
Kd8

8
19.Nxe5? White goes for the positional hold rather than being materialistic, which is not surprising.
However, the computer tells us that this is not the best choice for White. It was better to play 19.Nxa8
Bb5+ 20.Ke1 Nxg4 21.a4 and White would have had a clear advantage. 19...Kxc7 20.Nf7 Rg8? This
is probably what Basman was anticipating when capturing on e5, thus helping him decide in favor of
that move because the position overwhelmingly favored White. However, Black had a tactical option
available (courtesy of my engine) that would bring Black some proper counterplay and decent
chances: 20...Nh5! 21.Be3 (the alternatives are not any better, e.g., 21.Nxh8 Bxh6 22.Nf7 Bb5+ or
21.Bxh5 Bxh6 and Black may even be better) 21...Rg8 22.Bxh5 gxh5 23.Bf4+ Kc8 24.Rxh5 when
White has nice positional compensation for the sacrificed pawn, but probably not much more than
that. 21.Bf4+ Kc8 22.Rxh7 Nf5 23.Bxf5 gxf5 24.Ne5

9
White is back to being completely winning. 24...Bc6 25.Rc1 Bd6 26.a3 Ra4 27.Ke3 Rg4
Desperation, but Black is lost in any case. 28.Nxg4 Bxf4+ 29.Kxf4 Rxd4+ 30.Ke5 Rxg4 31.Kxe6
Rf4 32.Rc2 Kb8 33.Ke5 Rf3 34.Rf7 Black resigned. 1–0
Despite the roaring success in this game, it took a long time before it was played again at master
level. The next adventurer was none other than Simon Williams, the Ginger GM, whose aggressive
play and creativity have found him many fans worldwide.

S.Williams – P.Hugentobler
Swiss Open ch (Samnaun) 2008

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4!? Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 Nxh5 6.cxd5 c6?! 7.e4 cxd5 8.e5 Bf8 9.g4 9.Nf3 was
Basman’s choice in the previous game. 9...Ng7 10.Bg2!

10...Be6 No ...e7–e6 this time, but also leaves the knight on g7 in a precarious position. 11.Qb3?!
11.Bf3!? intending Nh3 followed by Nf4 looks better. 11...Qd7 12.Bxd5 Bxd5 13.Qxd5 Nc6??
Black blunders. He would have been fine after 13...Qxd5 14.Nxd5 Ne6 15.Be3 Nc6 16.Ne2 0-0-0
with chances to both sides. 14.Qxd7+ Kxd7 15.Nf3 White has a massive space advantage include an
impressive center. 15...e6 16.Bh6 Nb4 17.Ke2 Ne8 18.Bxf8 Rxf8 19.Rxh7 White is now also a pawn
up. The conversion is flawless from here. 19...Rc8 20.Ng5 Ke7 21.a3 Nc6 22.Rd1 Rd8 23.Ke3 Nc7
24.f4 Nd5+ 25.Nxd5+ Rxd5 26.Ne4 Rb5 27.b4 Rd5 28.Nf6 Rdd8 29.d5 exd5 30.Nxd5+ Ke6
31.Ke4 1–0
In another game, right at the end of the year, Williams was at it again...

S.Williams – P.Poobalasingam
Hastings 2008

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 d6 Black wisely avoids the Grunfeld set-ups but does not head for the King’s

10
Indian either. 4.Nc3 Nbd7 5.e4 e5 6.d5

Of course, not White’s only move, but this is fine. 6...Nc5 7.Qc2 a5 8.Be2 h6 9.h5 9.Be3!? 9...g5?
This pawn push is an unfortunate decision, leaving Black almost without counterplay. It would have
been better to play 9...Nxh5 10.Bxh5 gxh5 11.Be3 Rg8 with an interesting position and chances to
both sides. 10.Be3 b6 11.Bd1 11.0-0-0 was very good. 11...Bd7 12.Nge2 c6? 13.Bxc5 Or 13.dxc6
Bxc6 14.Ng3 Bd7 15.Bf3 with a hideous position for Black. 13...bxc5 14.Ng3 Or 14.dxc6 Bxc6
15.Ng3 with a clear advantage. 14...cxd5 15.cxd5 Be7 16.Be2 Kf8 17.Bb5!

With the light-squared weaknesses in Black’s camp, the exchange of the light-squared bishops makes
perfect sense for White. 17...Bc8 18.Nd1 Ne8 19.Ne3 White’s position is now overwhelmingly
better. 19...Ng7 20.Be2 Rb8 21.0-0 Kg8 22.b3 Kh7 23.Bg4 Offering another chance for Black to

11
agree to exchange the bishops. 23...Ba6 Nope. No exchange for you. 24.Rfb1 Rf8 25.Qc3 Bb5 26.a3
White uses his space advantage and greater mobility to break through. 26...Be8 27.b4 axb4 28.axb4
Rb5 29.Ra7 cxb4 30.Rxb4 Qb8 31.Rxb5 Qxa7 32.Rb1 f5 33.Nexf5 Bd7 34.Qe3 Qc7 35.Qb6 Qxb6
36.Rxb6 Bxf5 37.Bxf5+ Kg8 38.Rb7 Bf6 39.Be6+ Kh8 40.Rd7 Ne8 41.Nf5 Bg7 42.Ne7 and facing
heavy material losses, Black decided he had enough. 1–0
Then it took some serious time before another strong player took up the opening.

I.Ivanisevic – M.Neubauer
European Individual ch (Plovdiv) 2012

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 c5

4.dxc5?! A curious decision. 4.d5 is better. 4...Na6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Ng4 7.Bd2 Nxc5 8.Nh3 d6
9.e3 Nf6 9...Ne5!? 10.Nf4 Nfe4 11.Rc1 0-0 Or 11...Nxc3!? 12.Bxc3 Bxc3+ 13.Rxc3 Qa5 and Black
is better. 12.Be2 Bf5 13.h5 g5 14.Nfd5 h6 Black could also consider 14...Nxd2 15.Qxd2 h6 with a
pleasant position for Black. 15.b4 Nxd2 16.Qxd2 Nd7 17.Nb5 Nb6?! A serious inaccuracy: after
17...Bh7, Black would have had the better chances. 18.0-0 Nxd5 19.Qxd5 Qd7 20.Nd4 Now White
has grabbed the initiative. 20...e6 21.Qb5 Qxb5 22.cxb5?! Bxd4 23.exd4 Rac8 24.f3 e5 25.dxe5
dxe5 26.Rc5 Be6?! 27.a4 f6? 28.Rfc1 Rcd8 29.Bc4 Bxc4 30.R1xc4

12
White has a clearly better endgame thanks to his active rooks and Black’s vulnerable king and
kingside. 30...Rf7 31.Rc8 Rxc8 32.Rxc8+ Kg7 33.Kf2 b6 34.Ke3 f5 35.Rc6 Rd7 36.Rg6+ Kh7
37.Rf6 Rd4 38.Rxf5 Rxb4 39.Rf7+ Kg8 40.Rxa7 g4 41.Ra6 gxf3 42.gxf3 Kh7 43.Rxb6 Rxa4
44.Rb7+ Kg8 45.Re7 Rb4 46.Rxe5 Kf7 47.f4 Kf6 48.Rc5 Ke6 49.Kf3 Rb1 50.Ke4 Rb4+ 51.Ke3
Kf6 52.Rc6+ Kf5 53.b6 Rb3+ 54.Kd4 Kxf4 55.Rxh6 Kg5 56.Rd6 Kxh5 57.Kd5 1–0
The following year, the adventurous Hungarian grandmaster Richard Rapport tried the opening...

R.Rapport – N.Grandelius
Malmö 2013

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 d6 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.e4 c5 6.d5 e6 7.Be2 exd5 8.exd5 0-0 9.h5 Re8 10.hxg6!?
hxg6?! 10...fxg6 looks somewhat illogical but is probably somewhat better - see chapter 13 for some
analysis. 11.Bg5 Qb6?! This move appears at first glance to make sense, getting the queen away from
the pin on the h4–d8 diagonal and attacking the b2–pawn. However, the queen is rather poorly placed
on b6.

13
12.Qd2?! The queen move is natural but not the best. White should give preference to the surprising
12.b3! which softens both the a5–e1 and h8–a1 diagonal. But Black cannot take advantage of the
latter because he must keep the dark-squared bishop and after 12...Qa5 13.Bd2! Nbd7 14.Kf1 a6
15.Nf3 and White has a small but comfortable edge. 12...Ne4 13.Nxe4 Rxe4 14.f3 Qxb2? Black gets
tempted by a material advantage but forgets to consider the consequences of this hunt for material
carefully. Instead, 14...Rd4 15.Qe3 Nd7 16.Qe8+ Nf8 kept Black in the game. 15.Qxb2 Bxb2
16.fxe4 Bxa1 Black has won a pawn, but his king is in peril, and the queenside pieces are not easily
developed. 17.Be7 Nd7 18.Nf3 Or 18.Bxd6 Bc3+ 19.Kd1 Be5 20.Be7 with a large advantage for
White. 18...Bc3+ 19.Kd1 Nf6 20.e5 Ng4?? A blunder. Black should have played 20...Ne4! after
which it would still have been anybody’s game. 21.Kc2! White has a decisive advantage at this point.

14
21...Ba5 22.Ng5 Bf5+ 23.Kb3 Bd8 24.Bxd8 Rxd8 25.Bxg4 Bxg4 26.Rh8+ Kxh8 27.Nxf7+ Kg7
28.Nxd8 dxe5 29.Nxb7 e4 30.Nxc5 e3 31.Kc3 Kf6 32.d6? White would still have had a large
advantage after 32.Nd3! Bf5 33.Ne1. 32...Bf5 33.Na6? White could have maintained some
advantage with 33.a3!? but most of the winning chances have already vanished after the previous
mistake. 33...Ke5 34.c5 Kf4 35.Nb4 Kg3 36.Nc2 e2 37.Ne1 Kf2 38.Kd2 Bd7 39.g4 g5 40.Nd3+
Kf1 41.Ne1 Kf2 42.Nd3+ Kf1 43.a3 a5 44.Ne1 Kf2 45.Nd3+ Kf1 46.Ne1 Kf2 47.Nc2 Ba4
48.Ne1 Bd7 ½–½
The Ukrainian grandmaster Anton Korobov was the next top player at the helm...

A.Korobov – R.Jumabayev
Moscow 2016

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 c5 4.d5 b5!?

With a reasonable amount of logic, Black aims for a Benko Gambit where White has played the odd-
looking h2–h4. 5.cxb5 a6 6.bxa6 White decides to accept the pawn by capturing on a6. As we will
see in the theoretical section of the book, White has other attractive options at this juncture. 6...Bg7
7.Nc3 0-0 The immediate 7...Qa5!? is also interesting, preventing White’s e2–e4. That being said,
Black does not need to be unduly concerned about e2–e4. 8.e4 e6 9.dxe6 fxe6 10.Bg5?! The wrong
idea, pinning the knight when Black’s queen is on the way to a5 or b6 anyway. It was better to play
10.Nf3!? to focus on the development. 10...Qa5 11.Qd2 Nc6 12.Nf3 Rb8!? 12...Ng4!? is also
interesting, but the text move is more in line with the position. 13.Rc1 Bxa6 14.Bxf6 Rxf6 15.Rh3
Nd4 16.Bxa6 Qxa6 17.Nxd4 cxd4 18.Nd1 d5

15
19.Rb3? A bad mistake. White tries to stem Black’s initiative by offering the exchange of rooks, but
this is the wrong way to go about it. It seems that White should have opted for 19.Qxd4 Rf4 20.Qd3
Qa5+ 21.Kf1 Rxe4 22.Nc3 and White seems to hold his own. 19...Rbf8? Black had 19...Rxb3
20.axb3 Rf7 21.exd5 exd5 22.Qe2 d3 when White is in serious trouble. 20.Ra3?? A bad blunder,
returning the favor. After 20.g3 R6f7 21.exd5 Rf5, White is still in the game, but with the king stuck
in the center, White’s position is a bit scarier to play. 20...Qd6 21.exd5 Qh2!

This is undoubtedly what White had failed to properly account for; White is completely lost. 22.Rf3
Or 22.Qxd4 Rxf2 23.Qxf2 Rxf2 24.Kxf2 Qf4+ and Black is winning. 22...Rxf3 23.gxf3 White
resigned on account of 23.gxf3 Qh1+ 24.Ke2 Qxf3+ 25.Ke1 (or 25.Kf1 exd5) 25...Qh1+ 26.Ke2
exd5 and it is curtains for White. 0–1

16
Although it did not go particularly well for White, the fact that Korobov gave it a shot may have
sparked the interest from other top players. A little less than two weeks later, Bulgarian Grandmaster
and former FUDE World Champion Veselin Topalov used it in the Candidates tournament.

V.Topalov – A.Giri
Candidates Tournament (Moscow) 2016

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 c5 4.d5 b5 5.cxb5 a6 6.bxa6 Bg7 7.Nc3 0-0 8.e4 d6 9.Nf3 Qa5

10.Bd2?! White should have given preference to 10.Nd2. 10...Bxa6 11.Qc2? This is definitely not
the best. Instead, 11.Be2 Qb4 or 11...Bxe2 is about equal. 11...Nbd7? Black would have had a
comfortable edge after 11...Bxf1 12.Kxf1 Na6, the weak squares on the a6–f1 diagonal and play on
the open files on the queenside make life difficult for White. 12.Ne2? Qb6! 13.Bc3

17
13...h5?! This advance is not necessary. Both 13...Rfe8 to open the e-file and 13...Rfb8 with strong
play on the queenside are better for Black. 14.Ng3 Ng4 15.Bxg7 Kxg7 16.Bxa6 Qxa6 17.Ne2 Nge5
18.Nxe5 Nxe5 19.0-0 White should probably give preference to 19.Rh3!?, preventing Black from
entering the d3–square. 19...Qd3 20.Qxd3 Nxd3 21.b3 Rfb8 22.Rfd1 Ne5 This is a typical Benko
endgame where the chances are about even. 23.f3 Ra3 24.Kh2 Rba8 25.Nc1 f5 26.exf5 gxf5 27.Rb1
Rb8 28.Rb2 Rb4 29.Kh3 c4 30.Re2 cxb3 31.Nxb3 Ng6 32.Kg3 Raa4 33.Red2 Kf6 34.Kf2 Rb5
35.Rh1 Rxh4 36.Rxh4 Nxh4 37.f4 Ng6 38.g3 h4 39.Rd3 hxg3+ 40.Kxg3 Nf8 41.Kf3 Nd7 42.a4
Rb4 43.a5 Nf8 44.Nd4 Ng6 45.a6 Ra4 46.Ne2 Rxa6 47.Nd4 Nf8 48.Nc2 Nd7 49.Ne3 Ra2 50.Rd1
Rh2 51.Rg1 Rh3+ 52.Rg3 Rxg3+ 53.Kxg3 Nc5 54.Kf3 e6 55.dxe6 Kxe6 56.Nc2 Kd5 57.Ne3+ Ke6
58.Nc2 Nb3 59.Ne3 Nd4+ 60.Kf2 Nc6 61.Ke2 Nb4 62.Kd2 Nd5 63.Ng2 Ne7 64.Kd3 Nc6
65.Nh4 Nb4+ 66.Kd4 Nc6+ 67.Kc4 Nb8 68.Nxf5 ½–½
Then, you would think inexplicably; it took another long while before we saw the opening in use by a
top grandmaster. That grandmaster was Russian Alexander Grischuk, who used it in two games in
two weeks against Maxime Vachier Lagrave.

A.Grischuk – M.Vachier Lagrave

FIDE Grand Prix (Riga) 2019

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 c5 4.d5 b5 5.cxb5 a6 6.e3 Bg7 7.Nc3 0-0 8.Nf3 d6?! As we will cover later,
8...e6 is a better option, but the text move is also a standard approach for Black in the Benko gambit.
9.a4 Bg4?! This deployment, however, is not standard Benko stuff.

18
10.Ra3 axb5 11.Bxb5 Na6 12.e4 Nb4 13.Be2! Making better use of the bishop now that its
counterpart is located on g4. 13...Nd7 14.0-0 Qb6 15.Re1 Qb7 16.Bg5 Bxf3 17.gxf3

Apparently, White did not like the look of 17.Bxf3 Ne5 18.Be2 c4 19.Qd2 Nbd3 20.Rb1, when
evicting the knight on e5, would weaken the dark squares around the king too much. By capturing
with the g-pawn, White has f3–f4 available without weakening the a7–g1 diagonal. Of course, there
are some other structural issues when you capture in this fashion. 17...Ne5 18.Rf1 A better move was
18.Bf4. 18...c4 19.b3!? Rfc8 20.Bd2 Or 20.Be3 Rab8 21.Nb5 c3 with about even chances, but;
20.Kg2!? may, in fact, be better. 20...Nbd3 21.f4?! Qb4 22.Nb1?! c3! Black has taken over the
initiative. 23.fxe5 Nb2 24.Qc2 cxd2 25.Qxb2 Qxe4 26.Qxd2 Rc2 27.Qd3 Rxe2 28.Qxe4 Rxe4
29.exd6 exd6 30.Nd2 Rg4+ 31.Kh1 Rxh4+ 32.Kg2 Rd4 33.Nf3?! White should have played

19
33.Ra2, although Black is better after 33...Rxd5. 33...Rg4+ 34.Kh3 Rb4 35.Rb1 Rc8 Here, Black
could have played the clever, intending to replace the rook on b4 with the bishop, holding the white
pawns while freeing the rook to attack White’s king. 35...Bc3! 36.Kg2 Rc3 37.Ng1? Rc2 38.Nf3??
In time trouble, Grischuk collapsed. 38...Rg4+ 39.Kf1 Rf4 40.Kg2 Rg4+ 41.Kf1 Rf4 42.Kg2 g5!
After a couple of repetitions, making the time control, Black continued his attack. 43.Rf1 Rg4+
44.Kh1 Rc3 45.Rg1 Rf4 46.Nh2 Rxf2 47.Rxg5 Rcc2 and White resigned. 0–1
A few days later, the same players were at it again in another city.

A.Grischuk – M.Vachier Lagrave

Grand Chess Tour rapid (Paris) 2019

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 0-0 5.e4 d6 6.Be2 c5 7.d5 e6 8.h5 exd5 9.exd5 Re8 10.h6 This
variation is covered in the final chapter of the book.

10...Bh8 11.Bg5 Qb6 12.b3! Qa5 13.Bd2 Qd8 14.Kf1 Ne4 15.Nxe4 Rxe4 16.Rc1 Rh4 17.Rxh4
Qxh4 18.g3 Qd8?! The surprising 18...Qh2, threatening ...Bd4 was better although White can gain an
advantage with 19.Bg4! Nd7 (19...Bd4 is answered by the very strong 20.Qe1!) 20.Nf3 Qh1+
21.Ke2 Qxd1+ 22.Rxd1 with an advantage for White. 19.Kg2 Nd7 20.Nf3 Ne5

20
21.Nxe5?! Here, White could have played the powerful 21.Ng5!, preparing to attack the dark squares
around Black’s king with Ne4, Bc3 and f4 and Black would be in serious trouble. 21...Bxe5 22.Bd3
Bd7 23.Qf3 23.b4!? is probably better. 23...f5 24.Re1 Qf6 25.b4 cxb4 26.Bxb4 b6 27.Bd2 Re8
28.Qd1 f4 29.Qf3 fxg3 30.Qxf6 Bxf6 31.Rxe8+ Bxe8 32.fxg3 Kf8 33.g4 Ke7 34.g5 Bd4 35.Kf3
Bd7 36.Be3 Bc3 37.Bc2 Kf7 38.Be4 Bb4 39.Bd4 Bc5 and a draw was agreed upon. ½–½
After these and other games by Grischuk, it seems like Pandora’s box had been opened, and other
grandmasters had received permission to embrace and explore the opening fully.

V.Fedoseev – A.Tari
FIDE Chess.com Grand Swiss (Douglas) 2019

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 c5 4.d5 b5 Another “Benko”. 5.cxb5 a6 6.e3 Bg7 7.Nc3 0-0 8.a4 e6 9.d6?!

21
9.dxe6 is, as we will see below in Rapport-Svidler, a better option for White. 9...axb5 10.Bxb5 Bb7
This bishop deployment looks reasonable, but Black should have given preference to 10...Qb6
11.Nge2 Nc6 12.Ra3 Ba6 with excellent compensation for the sacrificed pawn. 11.Nf3 Na6 12.0-0
Nb4 13.Qe2 Black no longer had adequate compensation for the sacrificed pawn. 13...Ne4 14.Nxe4
Bxe4 15.Ng5 Bc6 16.Bd2 Qb6 17.Bc3 f6 18.Nf3 Nd5 19.e4 Nxc3 20.bxc3 f5 21.e5 Bxf3 22.Qxf3
Bxe5 23.Bxd7 Qxd6 24.Rad1 Qe7 25.Rfe1 Qf6 26.Rd3 Kh8 27.Qc6 Bxc3 28.Rxe6 Qg7 29.Qxc5
Bf6 30.Qc4 Rad8 31.Red6 f4 32.a5 Bxh4 33.a6 Be7 34.R6d5 Ra8 35.Bb5 Rac8 36.Qd4 Rc1+
37.Rd1 Qxd4 38.R5xd4 Rxd1+ 39.Rxd1 Bc5 40.Bc6 Rf6 41.Bb7 Kg7 42.Kf1 h6 43.Ke2 f3+
44.gxf3 g5 45.Rc1 Ba7 46.Bc8 Rf7 47.Rc6 Re7+ 48.Kf1 Bd4 49.Be6 h5 50.Kg2 h4 51.Bc4 Rd7
52.Be6 Re7 53.Bd5 Kf8 54.Rc8+ Re8 55.Rc4 Ba7 56.Rc7 Re7 57.Rxa7 Rxa7 58.Bb7 Ke7 59.Kh3
Kf6 60.Kg4 Ke5 61.f4+ gxf4 62.Kxh4 f3 63.Kg4 Kf6 64.Kxf3 Kf5 65.Ke3 Ke5 66.Kd3 Kf4
67.Ke2 Kg5 68.Ke3 Kf5 69.Kf3 1–0

M.Vachier Lagrave – I.Nepomniachtchi

FIDE Grand Prix (Jerusalem) 2019

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 Nxh5 6.cxd5 e6 7.g4!?

22
The sharpest option. The alternative is 7.e4. 7...Nf6 8.dxe6 Bxe6 9.e4! White goes for the most
dynamic option, sacrificing a pawn for the initiative, a broad center, and a lead in development. White
can also play 9.g5 Nh5 10.Bg2 c6 11.Be3, but this leaves White’s pieces organized a lot less
harmoniously than the text move. 9...Bxg4 10.f3 Be6 11.Bg5 h6 12.Be3 c6 13.Nge2 Bc4 14.Qc2
Qa5 15.Nf4 Bxf1 16.Kxf1

An interesting choice, claiming that the king will be perfectly safe on the kingside and discouraging
Black from castling queenside, could be a consequence of the recapture with the rook, for instance,
16.Rxf1 Na6 17.0-0-0 0-0-0 18.Kb1 also looks pleasant for White, but Black is definitely not without
chances. 16...Na6 17.a3 Nc7 18.Kf2 g5 19.b4 Qa6 20.Nd3?! Here, I think White should have
chosen a different square for the knight: 20.Nfe2! (eyeing Ne2–g3–f5) 20...g4 21.b5 cxb5 22.Ng3

23
gxf3 23.Kxf3 Bf8 24.Nf5 with a fascinating position where nothing seems clear, but the computer
prefers White... 20...Qc4! The beginning of a powerful reorganization of Black’s pieces. 21.Rac1
Nd7! 22.Nb2 Qe6 23.Ne2 Nb5?! This knight is probably inaccurate. It seems that 23...0-0! would
have posed bigger problems for White. 24.a4 Nd6

25.Ng3? Here, 25.Nd3 would have been better, threatening Nc5 in some lines and Ndf4 in others!
25...f5! Another strong move by Nepo, forcing White to release the grip on the center. 26.exf5 Qd5!
Now, Black has the initiative. 27.Nc4 Nxc4 28.Qxc4 Qxc4 29.Rxc4 Nb6 30.Rc5 0-0 31.a5 Nd5
32.a6 Here, the players agreed upon a draw, which seems a bit premature as Black has the upper
hand. A possible continuation was 32.a6 Rae8 33.axb7 Nxe3 34.b8=Q Rxb8 35.Kxe3 Rxb4 36.Rxc6
Bxd4+ 37.Kd2 (or 37.Kd3 Bg7) 37...Rb2+ 38.Kd3 Bg7, and while White should hold the draw, it
would have been Black playing for more. ½–½
With the Covid crisis enveloping the world in 2020 and 2021, the opening took on a life on its own in
the online world. We even saw Vachier Lagrave use the opening against the World Champion

M.Vachier Lagrave – M.Carlsen

Carlsen Inv Prelim chess24.com INT 2020

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 e5?!

24
7.dxe5?! A peculiar decision, willingly entering an Exchange variation of the King’s Indian where
White has played the pointless h2–h4. If instead 7.d5!, White would have had an advantage as we will
cover later in the book. 7...dxe5 8.Qxd8 Rxd8 9.h5 c6 10.Bg5 Na6 11.Nf3 Nc5 12.hxg6 hxg6
13.Rh4 Ne6 14.Be3 Nd4 15.Nxd4 exd4 16.0-0-0 Ng4 17.Bxg4 Bxg4 18.Rxg4 dxe3 19.fxe3 Bxc3
20.bxc3 Rxd1+ 21.Kxd1 Re8

What a fascinating position and not one I would enjoy defending against the world champion. As
Magnus Carlsen himself has said, that Vachier Lagrave is a proponent of the French school of
suffering. Nevertheless, he managed to save the endgame. 22.Kc2 Re5 23.Rf4 Ra5 24.Kb3 Kf8
25.Rh4 Kg7 26.Rf4 Rg5 27.Rf2 Kf8 28.Kc2 Ke7 29.Kd3 b6 30.Kd4 Ke6 31.Kd3 f6 32.Rd2 Ra5
33.Rf2 Rh5 34.Rb2 Ra5 35.Rf2 Ra4 36.g4 Ra5 37.Rh2 g5 38.Rf2 a6 39.Rh2 b5 40.c5 Ra4 41.Rh7

25
Rc4 42.Ra7 Rxc5 43.Rxa6 Kd6 44.a4 bxa4 45.c4 Re5 46.Kd4 a3 47.Rxa3 c5+ 48.Kd3 Re8 49.Ra6+
Ke5 50.Rc6 Rd8+ 51.Ke2 Rh8 52.Rxc5+ Kxe4 53.Rf5 Rh2+ 54.Rf2 Rh3 55.Kd2 Rxe3 56.Rxf6 Rg3
57.c5 Rxg4 58.c6 Kd5 59.c7 Rc4 60.Rf5+ Ke4 61.Rxg5 Rxc7 ½–½
When over-the-board tournament chess returned, top events saw the opening again.

Ding Liren – M.Vachier Lagrave

Candidates Tournament (Ekaterinburg) 2021

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 c5 5.d5 d6 6.e4 e6 7.Be2 exd5 8.exd5 Nbd7 9.Nf3 Ng4 10.h5
Qe7 11.Bg5

11...Bxc3+! A surprising but correct decision by Vachier Lagrave. 12.bxc3 f6 13.Bd2 g5 This was
Black’s idea: build a wall on the dark squares to make White’s dark-squared bishop a miserable piece.
14.0-0 Nge5?! Precision is necessary; Black should have used the other knight to jump to e5:
14...Nde5 15.Nxe5 Nxe5 16.f4 gxf4 17.Bxf4 Bd7 with a sharp position and chances to both sides.
After the text move, White has a brilliant resource available... 15.Nd4! cxd4 16.cxd4 0-0 If Black
hangs on to the piece, White gets some nasty pressure, for instance, 16...Nf7 17.Bd3 0-0 18.Re1 Qd8
19.a4 and Black will be struggling to get his pieces to work together. 17.dxe5 fxe5 18.Be3 b6 19.a4

26
It is noteworthy that Vachier Lagrave, who has played this line as White, nevertheless ends up with a
pretty horrible position right out of the opening. White has the bishop pair and the superior pawn
structure. 19...Nc5 20.a5 Rb8 21.Ra3 h6 22.Qd2 Bf5 23.axb6 axb6 24.Rfa1 Rb7 25.Qd1 Kg7
26.R1a2 Ne4? 27.Bd3 Qf7 28.Rb2 Nc5 29.Bxf5 Qxf5 30.Bxc5 dxc5

The minor pieces have come off the board, leaving us with a pure heavy piece ending. In endgame of
this type, king safety is crucial, and it is easy to determine that White’s king is much safer than his
black counterpart. 31.Qe2!? White had a pretty straightforward way to penetrate Black’s position
with 31.Rf3! Qd7 32.Qb1 Qd6 33.Rxf8 Kxf8 34.Ra2 Qf6 35.Ra8+ Kg7 36.Re8 and White is
winning. 31...e4 32.Re3 Re8 33.Rb5 Qe5 34.g3 Qd4 35.Rb1 Or 35.Qc2 Kf8 36.Rb1 b5 37.Qa2 b4
38.Qa6 and White is breaking through on the kingside. 35...Rf7 36.Rd1 I’m not sure why Ding Liren

27
did not simply capture on b6, e.g., 36.Rxb6 Kh7 37.Re6 and White is winning. 36...Qf6 37.d6?
Another strange decision: why would you commit to something like this just before the time control.
It would have made more sense to play something like 37.Qc2 Rfe7 38.Rde1 Qd4 39.Rd1 Qe5
40.Qb1 and having reached time control, White can now figure out how to make the decisive
breakthrough. 37...Re6 38.d7 Rd6 39.Rxd6 Qxd6 40.Rxe4 Rxd7 White still has an advantage on
account of Black’s vulnerable king but things have gotten a lot more complicated as well as a lot less
concrete because the strong passed pawn is gone. To his credit, Ding Liren continued searching for
opportunities long after the advantage was entirely gone. 41.Kg2 Qc6 42.Kh2 Qf6 43.Kh3 Qf5+
44.g4 Qf6 45.Re5 Qd6 46.Kg2 Qc6+ 47.f3 Qd6 48.Qe4 Ra7 49.Qe2 Rd7 50.Qe4 Ra7 51.Kh3 Rf7
52.Re8 Qf6 53.Kg2 Qb2+ 54.Kh3 Qf6 55.Kg2 Qb2+ 56.Kg3 Qf6 57.Qd3 Qf4+ 58.Kg2 Qf6
59.Kg3 Qf4+ 60.Kg2 Qf6 61.Qe2 Rd7 62.Qe4 Rd2+ 63.Kh3 Qd6 64.Re5 Kf6 65.Rf5+ Kg7 66.Re5
Kf6 67.Rf5+ Kg7 68.Qb7+ Kh8 69.Qa8+ Kg7 70.Qa7+ Kh8 71.Qa1+ Kg8 72.Qa8+ Kg7
73.Qa1+ Kg8 74.Re5 Qf8 75.Qa3 Rf2 76.Kg3 Qf4+ 77.Kxf2 Qxe5 78.Qa8+ Kf7 79.Qb7+ Kf8
80.Qc8+ Ke7 81.Qb7+ Kf8 82.Qxb6 Qh2+ 83.Kf1 Qh1+ 84.Ke2 Qg2+ 85.Ke3 Qg1+ 86.Ke2
Qg2+ 87.Ke3 Qg1+ 88.Ke2 ½–½
The following three games made everybody pay attention to the viability of the opening.

R.Rapport – P.Svidler
Grand Chess Tour Rapid (Paris) 2021

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 c5 4.d5 b5 Svidler goes for the Benko Gambit approach. 5.cxb5 a6 6.e3 Bg7
7.Nc3 0-0 8.a4 Bb7 9.Nf3 e6 10.dxe6 fxe6 11.Qd6

This position resembles the Benko Gambit 5.e3 variation but with h2–h4 interjected. The computer
likes White’s chances, and Svidler did not manage to sway the argument. 11...axb5 12.Bxb5 Ne4
13.Nxe4 Bxe4 14.h5 Qf6?? A dreadful blunder. Black should have opted for 14...Nc6 15.hxg6 hxg6
16.Ra3 Rf5 (16...Nb4? 17.Rc3 Qf6 18.Qg3) 17.Bd2 and White would have had a nice advantage.

28
15.h6! Initiating a sequence of moves that Svidler can be forgiven to have overlooked in a rapid
game. 15...Bh8 16.Rh4! Threatening the bishop on e4. 16...Bxf3 17.Rf4! Oh yes, that was the other
threat attached to the previous move. 17...Qd8 18.Bxd7! Ouch! Black resigned. One possible
continuation was 18.Bxd7 Bd5 19.Bxe6+ Bxe6 20.Qxe6+ with mate. 1–0

S.Shankland – P.Svidler
FIDE World Cup (Krasnaya Polyana) 2021

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 Nc6 6.Nge2 0-0 7.f3 White has managed to get the
Grunfeld Indian faithful Peter Svidler to enter a King’s Indian Samisch Variation. White does not
have any significant advantage but having managed to get your opponent out of his or her favorite
opening is an important achievement. 7...e5 8.d5 Nd4 9.Be3 c5 10.dxc6 bxc6 11.Nxd4 exd4
12.Bxd4

29
Black has sacrificed a pawn but, in return, has a lead in development, open files, and a somewhat
vulnerable white king as compensation. 12...Rb8 It would have made sense to open everything up
with all of the previous points of compensation in mind with 12...d5. 13.Qc2 c5 14.Bf2 Be6?!
Black’s compensation was beginning to slip, and this did not make things better, but also 14...Nh5
15.0-0-0 Qa5 16.Be1 would have been better for White. 15.0-0-0 Nd7 16.Rxd6 The computer likes
16.b3!? but weakening the dark squares is scary. 16...Qa5 17.Be1 Ne5 18.f4?! White should have
played 18.h5 Bxc4 19.f4 Bxf1 20.fxe5 with a clear advantage according to the engines, but
Shankland’s move looks better with human eyes. 18...Nxc4 19.Bxc4 Bxc4 20.e5 Rfd8 21.Rxd8+
Rxd8 22.h5 Bxa2 23.hxg6 hxg6 24.Ne4 Qb6?? The decisive mistake. After 24...Qb5, the game
would still have been undecided. 25.Bh4! Ouch! 25...Rd4 26.Nf6+ The point behind the previous
move. 26...Kf8 27.Bf2! Double ouch! 27...Bxf6 28.exf6 Qxf6 29.Qxc5+ Rd6 30.Qc8+ and Black
resigned. 1–0

K.Alekseenko – M.Ragger
European Club Cup (Struga) 2021

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 c5 5.d5 e6 6.h5!? White sacrifices a pawn for the initiative. The
normal move is 6.e4.

30
6...Nxh5 7.g4!? Nf6 8.d6 0-0? Castling into an attack is either very brave or foolhardy. The
computer likes 8...Nc6 9.e4 b6, but obviously Black is very passive, and White has sufficient
compensation. 9.e4 White could also play 9.g5 Ne8 10.Qd3 Nc6 11.Qg3 Be5 12.Bf4 Bxf4 13.Qxf4
f6 14.Qh2 Rf7 15.Nh3 with a terrifying attack for White. 9...Nc6? 10.Qf3! h5? Making a bad
situation worse. But 10...b5 11.Qh3 Bb7 12.Bg5 Re8 13.cxb5 Nd4 14.Rc1 e5 15.Bc4 is also hideous
for Black. 11.gxh5 Nxh5

During the broadcast when the game was being played, the commentators were eagerly analyzing
11...Nd4 12.Qg2 Nc2+ 13.Kd1 Nxa1 14.h6 with a decisive attack for White. 12.Be2 Nd4 13.Qh3
Qf6 14.f4 Or 14.Nf3 Nxe2 15.Kxe2 (15.Bg5) 15...b5 16.Qg4 Qd8 17.Be3 and White would be
winning. 14...Nc2+ Also 14...Nxe2 15.Ngxe2 Re8 16.Qf3 Rb8 17.Be3 would be winning for White.

31
15.Kf1 Nxa1 16.Bxh5 gxh5 17.f5 Re8 18.Qxh5 exf5 19.Nd5 Qd4 Or 19...Qxd6 20.exf5 Re5
21.Qh7+ Kf8 22.f6 and it is curtains for Black. 20.Ne2 Black resigned on account of 20.Ne2 Qd1+
21.Kf2 Qxh1 22.Qxh1 and Black would not be able to avoid getting mated. 1–0
Many of the games played with the opening have happened in online events and games. While
making references to the players by name in some cases, in many other cases, I did not have the
names, and therefore I have made references such as “in an online game” without using the handles of
the players. However, I have only used games where the online players were rated 2500 or above,
ensuring at least a certain level of understanding, although, excluding mistakes, it did not.
While on the topic of errors, if you find any in this book, as you read this book, you may come across
ideas and pieces that contain flaws and outright mistakes; when encountering these, please do not
hesitate to let me know by emailing me at carstenchess@gmail.com.
If you enjoyed the book, please leave a review where you bought the book or on Amazon; it will help
potential readers and me.
Thanks for picking up this book, and I hope you will have fun playing this opening, hacking your way
to numerous victories, and saving yourself countless hours of opening studies from having to find
usable weapons against major openings such as the King’s Indian and the Grünfeld Indian.

32
 Part 1: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4

In this part, we are covering the following lines:

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4

Chapter 1: 3...d5, 3...c5, 3...d6, 3...Nc6, 3...c6

Chapter 2: 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 c5
Chapter 3: 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 – Black does not play 5...Nxh5
Chapter 4: 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 Nxh5

Chapter 1: 3rd Move Alternatives

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 c5

It is to think that Black intends to transpose the lines covered in the next chapter with this move.
However, Black will try to dispense with ...Bg7 for now.
Black has tried several other minor moves as well:
a) 3...d5 4.cxd5!? (this is more accurate than 4.Nc3 c5! which has been played in several games,
including Carlsen-Vachier Lagrave 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.Na4 Nf6!? (this is stronger than 6...Nc6 7.e4
Nb6? (7...Nf6 8.d5 Nd4 is fully playable for Black) 8.d5 Ne5 9.h5 Nxa4 10.Qxa4+ Bd7 11.Qa3 Qb6
12.Qc3 and White had a large advantage in Carlsen-Vachier Lagrave, Chess24.com INT 2021)
7.Nxc5 e5 8.e3 Nc6 9.Nf3 exd4 10.exd4 Nxd4 11.Qxd4 Qxd4 12.Bb5+ Bd7 13.Bxd7+ Nxd7
14.Nxd4 Bxc5 and Black equalized in Yoo-Gledura, Clayton 2021) 4...Qxd5 5.Nc3 Qa5 6.Bd2 Qb6

33
7.h5 gxh5 8.e4 Qxd4 9.Nf3 Qb6 10.Be3 Qxb2 11.Bd4 (White has a massive lead in development and
is already close to winning) 11...c5 12.Rb1 Qa3 13.Nb5 Qa5+ 14.Bc3 Qd8 15.e5 Ng4 16.e6 f6
17.Qa4 Nc6 18.Rd1 Qb6 19.Ba5 and Black resigned, 1–0, S.Williams-Platel, Dieppe 2009.
b) 3...d6 4.Nc3, and now:

b1) 4...Nbd7 5.e4 e5 6.d5 Nc5 (also 6...Be7 is pleasant for White, e.g., 7.g4 (7.Be3!?) 7...a5 8.h5
(8.Qe2!?) 8...Nc5 9.f3 Ng8 10.Be3 Bf6? (10...Bh4+ 11.Ke2 is also better for White) 11.Qd2 Bh4+
12.Kd1 Be7 13.Nge2 b6 14.Kc2 a4 15.Nc1 Bf6 16.Nd3 and White had a winning advantage in
Partos-Puscasiu, Bucharest 1971) 7.Qc2 a5 8.Be2 h5

(or 8...h6 9.h5 g5 10.Be3 b6 11.Bd1 Bd7 12.Nge2 c6 13.Bxc5 bxc5 14.Ng3 cxd5 15.cxd5 Be7

34
16.Be2 Kf8 17.Bb5 with a clear advantage for White in S.Williams-Poobalasingam, Hastings 2008)
9.Bg5 (or 9.Nf3 Bg4?! (9...Ng4!?) 10.Be3 Bxf3 11.Bxf3 Bh6 12.Bxh6 Rxh6 13.g3 a4 14.0-0-0 Kf8
15.Rdg1 c6 16.Be2 cxd5 17.exd5 Qb6 was played in Fedoseev-Giri, Moscow 2019, and now 18.Kb1
a3 19.b3 and White has a small plus.) 9...Be7?! (a better choice for Black is the surprising 9...Bh6
10.Bxh6 Rxh6 11.f3 Rh8 12.0-0-0 when I prefer White, but Black’s position is fully playable) 10.0-0-
0 c6 11.Be3 Qc7 12.Bxc5 dxc5 13.Nh3 0-0 14.Kb1 cxd5 15.exd5! (15.cxd5 Bd7 16.d6 Bxd6 17.Qd2
Be7 18.Qh6 and White has a strong initiative to compensate for the sacrificed pawn, Slavin-Rowson,
England 2011.) 15...Bf5 16.Bd3 e4 17.Nxe4 Nxe4 18.Bxe4 and White has an extra pawn.
b2) 4...Nc6 5.d5 (or 5.Bg5 Bg7 6.e3 h6 7.Bxf6 Bxf6 8.h5 g5 9.Bd3 e6 (9...Bg7 10.Nge2 0-0
improves for Black) 10.Nge2 Bg7 11.Qd2 Bd7 12.0-0-0 a6 13.f4 Qe7 14.f5 0-0-0 15.g4 and White
had the upper hand in Tarlabasi-Kiremitciyan, Antalya 2019) 5...Ne5 6.Nf3 Ned7 7.e4 Bg7 8.Be2
with a position where Black has wasted time with his queenside knight to White an improved version
of a line we will cover in a later chapter.
b3) 4...Bg7 will typically transpose to other chapters.
c) 3...h5 4.Nc3 d5 (4...Bg7 5.e4 d6 6.Be2 transposes to chapter 7) 5.Bg5 dxc4 6.e4, and here we have
a fork in the road:
c1) 6...Nc6 7.d5 Ne5 8.Nf3 Nxf3+ 9.gxf3 Bg7 10.Bxc4 and White is better.
c2) 6...c5 7.dxc5 Qxd1+ 8.Rxd1 Be6 9.Nge2 Nbd7 10.Nf4 Nxc5 11.Nxe6 Nxe6 12.Bxc4 with a
comfortable plus for White.
c3) 6...Bg7 7.Bxc4 0-0 8.e5 Nh7 9.Bf4 Bf5 10.Nf3 e6 11.Qd2 Nc6 12.Rd1 and White pieces are
better placed.
d) 3...Nc6 4.Nc3 (or 4.e3 d6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be2 with an interesting position) 4...Bg7 5.d5 Ne5 6.e4 d6
7.Be2 h5 8.Bg5 with a better position for White.
e) 3...c6

35
4.Nc3!? (another try is 4.Bf4 Qb6 5.Qd2 Ne4 6.Qc2 d5 7.e3 Bf5 8.Qb3 dxc4 9.Bxc4 Nd6 10.Nd2
Nxc4 11.Nxc4 Qa6 12.Ne5 Be6 13.Qc3 Bg7 14.h5 Nd7 15.Nxd7 Bxd7 when White seems to have
some initiative, but Black has a playable position, Duda-Howell, Chess.com INT 2021) 4...d5 5.cxd5
(or 5.Bg5 Bg7 6.e3 Nbd7 7.Qb3 0-0 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.Nxd5 cxd5 10.Nf3 Nf6 11.Bd3 Nh5 was fine
for Black in Varga-Rathanvel, Budapest 2021) 5...cxd5 6.Bf4 Nc6 7.e3, and here:
e1) 7...Ne4 8.Qb3 (8.Nf3!?) 8...Nxc3 9.bxc3 Bg7 10.h5 0-0 11.hxg6 hxg6 12.Nf3 Bg4 (12...Na5!?)
13.Be2 Na5 14.Qb4 Rc8 15.Rc1 Re8 16.Bb5 Nc6 17.Bxc6 bxc6 18.Ne5 Bf5 19.g4 Be6? (Black had
been okay after 19...Be4 20.f3 f6) 20.f3 c5 21.Qb2 f6 22.Qh2 g5 23.Qh7+ Kf8 24.Qg6, and with
mate in a few moves looming, Black resigned, 1–0, Kapnisis-Teclaf, Prague 2020.
e2) 7...a6 8.Be2 h5 (or 8...h6 9.Rc1 Bg7 10.Nf3 0-0 11.Ne5 (11.0-0!?) 11...Bd7? (11...Nd7!?)
12.Qb3 Na5 13.Qb4 b5 14.Nxd7 Nxd7 15.Nxd5 e5 16.Bg5 f6 17.Bd3 fxg5 18.Ne7+ Kf7 19.Bxg6+
Ke6 20.d5+ Kf6 21.Qd6#, 1–0, D.Wagner-Shuvalov, Chess.com INT 2021) 9.Nf3 Bg4 10.0-0 Bg7
11.Rc1 0-0 12.Qb3 Na5 13.Qb4 Rc8 14.Na4 Ne4 15.Rxc8 Bxc8 16.Rc1 and White had a large
advantage in Batsiashvili-Gvetadze, Tbilisi 2021.
e3) 7...Bg7 8.Be2 (or 8.Bd3 h6 9.Nf3 0-0 10.Ne5 Nb4 11.Be2 Bf5 12.g4 Be6 13.a3 Nc6 14.g5 hxg5
15.hxg5 Ne4 16.Nxc6 bxc6 17.Nxe4 dxe4 18.Rc1 and White had the better chances, Khismatullin-
Karpeshov, Ekaterinburg 2019), with another fork in the road:
e31) 8...h5 9.Nf3 0-0 10.Qb3 Na5 (or 10...b6 11.Rc1 Bb7 12.0-0 Ne4 13.Nxe4 dxe4 14.Ng5 Na5
15.Qa4 Rc8 16.Rxc8 Qxc8 17.b4 and White had a decisive advantage in Harsha-Rathanvel,
Mosonmagyarovar 2021) 11.Qb4 Bg4 12.0-0 Rc8 13.Rfc1 Ne4 14.Nxe4 Rxc1+ 15.Rxc1 dxe4 16.Bc7
Nc6 17.Rxc6 and White was winning in Paravyan-Matinian, Chess.com INT 2021.
e32) 8...Ne4 9.h5 g5 10.h6 Bf8 11.Bh2 e6 12.Nf3 g4 13.Ne5 g3 14.Bxg3 Nxg3 15.fxg3 Nxe5
16.dxe5 looked ridiculous pawn structure-wise, but White nevertheless had the better chances,
Valenzuela Gomez-Puranik, Barcelona 2019.

36
e33) 8...h6 9.Nf3 Bg4 10.Qb3 Qb6 (or 10...Na5 11.Qa4+ Bd7 12.Bb5 0-0 13.Bxd7 Nxd7 14.Nxd5
e5 15.dxe5 Nxe5 16.Bxe5 Bxe5 17.Rd1 was winning for White in Grischuk-Nepomniachtchi, Paris
2019) 11.Qxb6 axb6 12.Bc7 0-0 13.Bxb6 Nd7 14.Bc7 e5 15.Nxe5 Ndxe5 16.dxe5 Bxe2 17.Kxe2
Nxe5 18.Nxd5 and White simply had two extra pawns in Fedoseev-Kruglyakov, Chess.com INT
2019.
f) 3...h6 4.Nc3 d5

(Black heads into a Grunfeld, where h4 h6 has been interjected; the alternative is a King’s Indian set-
up: 4...d6 5.e4 Bg7 (or 5...c6 6.Be2 e5 7.Be3 Bg7 8.d5 c5 9.Qd2 Nbd7 10.Nh3 Nf8 11.f3 Bxh3
12.Rxh3 Nh5 13.Kf2 Nd7 was played in D.Wagner-Girinath, Chess.com INT 2021, and now 14.Nb5
Qb6 15.a4 a6 16.a5 with a clear advantage for White) 6.f3 a6 7.Be3 c6 8.Qd2 b5 9.Nh3 (or 9.0-0-0
Nbd7 10.g4 Qa5 as seen in Trent-Komiagina, Chess.com INT 2021, when 11.Kb1 Rb8 12.Rc1 would
look somewhat better for White) 9...Nbd7 10.0-0-0 Qa5 11.Kb1 Rb8 12.Nf4 with a sharp Saemisch-
like position where Black has played the unfortunate ...h7–h6 and thus White has the upper hand)
5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.e4 (this is better than 6.h5 g5 7.Bd2 Nb6 8.e3 Bg7 9.Nf3 Nc6 10.Qc2 Nb4 11.Qb3
a5 12.a3 Be6 13.Qd1 Na6 14.Rc1 and White had the upper hand in Budrewicz-Kantans, Szklarska
Poreba 2021) 6...Nxc3 7.bxc3 Bg7 (if 7...c5, then 8.Bb5+ Bd7 9.Bxd7+ Qxd7 10.Nf3 Bg7 11.0-0 0-0
12.Bf4 Nc6 13.d5 Na5 14.Rb1 b6 15.Re1 Rfe8 16.Qc1 would offer White a small plus) 8.Nf3 (or
8.Bc4 c5 9.Ne2 0-0 10.Rb1 cxd4 11.cxd4 Nc6 12.Be3 with a pleasant plus for White or 8.Be3 c5
9.Qd2 Qa5 10.Nf3 b6 11.Bc4 Nc6 12.Rc1 and White had a pleasant version of a Grunfeld) 8...0-0
9.Be2 c5 10.0-0 Nd7 11.Bf4 Nf6 12.Qd3 and White had a solid advantage.
4.d5 b5 5.cxb5
White accepts Black’s suggestion to enter a Benko Gambit-like variation. White could also try the
consistent 5.h5!? Nxh5 6.e4 (or 6.cxb5 a6 7.e4 d6 8.Nc3 Bg7 9.bxa6 Nxa6 10.Be2 Nf6 11.Bh6 Bxh6
12.Rxh6 Qb6 13.Qd2 Ng4 14.Bxg4 Bxg4 15.f3 Bd7 16.Nge2 Rb8 with chances to both sides, Kekki-

37
Luukkonen, Helsinki 2016) 6...d6 7.cxb5 Nf6 8.Nc3 h5 9.f3 Bg7 10.Be3 a6 11.a4 0-0 12.Qd2 Qa5
13.e5 dxe5 14.Bxc5 Qc7 15.b4 was Brazdzionis-Malisauskas, Vilnius 2020, and here 15...axb5
16.Bxb5 Rd8 would have provided Black with more than adequate compensation for the pawn.
5...a6 6.e3!?
With the text move, White enters a position that closely resembles the 5.e3 variation of the Benko
Gambit (to the line)(1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.e3), but where White chooses to meet 5...g6,
one of Black’s main moves, with 6.h4 which looks ridiculous. Nevertheless, it is entirely playable if it
still looks a bit odd.
The alternatives are less convincing:
a) 6.bxa6 Bg7!? (or 6...Bxa6 7.Nc3 Bg7 8.g3 0-0 9.Bg2 d6 10.Nh3 Nbd7 11.Nf4 Ne5 12.Qc2 Qa5
13.0-0 Rab8 14.b3 c4 15.Bd2 was Gholami Orimi-Eynullayev, Baku 2019, and here 15...Bc8,
intending ...Bf5, equalizing for Black) 7.Nc3 0-0 8.e4 d6 (or 8...e6 9.dxe6 fxe6?! (9...dxe6!?) 10.Bg5
(10.Nf3!?) 10...Qa5 11.Qd2 Nc6 12.Nf3 Rb8 (12...Bxa6!?) 13.Rc1 Bxa6 14.Bxf6 Rxf6 and Black
had taken over the initiative, Korobov-Jumabayev, Moscow 2016) 9.Nf3 Qa5 10.Bd2 Bxa6 11.Qc2
Nbd7 12.Ne2 Qb6 13.Bc3 h5 14.Ng3 Ng4 15.Bxg7 Kxg7 16.Bxa6 Qxa6 and Black had a
comfortable version of a Benko Gambit, Topalov-Giri, Moscow 2016.
b) 6.b6 d6 7.Nc3 Nbd7 8.e4 Bg7 9.Be2 Qxb6 10.Nf3 Rb8 11.Nd2 was played in Balla-Avinash,
Budapest 2021, and now 11...Qc7 12.Nc4 h5 is about even.

6...Bg7
An interesting try is 6...axb5 7.Bxb5 Qa5+ 8.Nc3 Ba6 (if 8...Ne4 then 9.a4 is better for White, e.g.,
9...Bg7 10.Nge2 Nxc3 11.Nxc3 Bxc3+ 12.bxc3 Qxc3+ 13.Bd2 Qe5 14.0-0 and White has a clear
advantage) 9.Be2 Ne4 10.Bd2 Nxd2 11.Qxd2 Bg7 12.h5 0-0 13.Nf3 (White may be able to improve
with 13.Bxa6 Nxa6 14.h6 Bh8 15.Nge2 although Black has excellent Benko-style counterplay)

38
13...Bxe2 14.Kxe2 d6 and Black had sufficient compensation for the sacrificed pawn, Adhiban-
Bernadskiy, Chess.com INT 2020.
7.Nc3
7.Nf3 axb5 8.Na3 b4 9.Nc4 d6 10.Bd3 Ba6 11.h5 Nxh5 12.e4 Nd7 13.Qe2 0-0 0–1 (69) Fedoseev,V
-Safarli,E Chess.com INT 2019
7...0-0 8.a4
Another option for White is 8.Nf3 d6, and now again 9.a4 Bg4 (or 9...axb5 10.Bxb5 Ba6 11.Bd2
Nbd7 12.0-0 Ne8 13.Bxa6 Rxa6 14.e4 Nc7 15.Qe2 Qa8 16.h5 Rb8 17.Bg5 Bxc3 18.bxc3 and thanks
to the absence of the Black’s dark-squared bishop, White had the better chances in Dardha-Mirzoev,
Guimaraes 2021) 10.Ra3 (White could also consider 10.Bd2 e6 11.dxe6 fxe6 12.Be2!? and Black will
find it difficult to claim sufficient compensation for the sacrificed pawn) 10...axb5 (10...Nfd7?!
11.Be2 axb5 12.Nxb5 Na6 13.0-0 Nb4 14.e4 Nb6 15.b3 h6 16.Bd2 f5 17.Bxb4 cxb4 18.Ra2 and
White was winning in Kryvoruchko-B.Clarke, Mali Losinj 2021) 11.Bxb5 Na6 12.e4 Nb4 13.Be2
Nd7 14.0-0 Qb6 15.Re1 Qb7 16.Bg5 Bxf3 17.gxf3 Ne5 18.Rf1 c4 19.b3 and White had the better
chances in Grischuk-Vachier Lagrave, Riga 2019.
8...Bb7
Or 8...e6 9.d6 (it is possible that White can play better in this position, for instance, 9.dxe6 fxe6
10.Ra3 d5 11.Nf3 Bb7 12.Be2 where I prefer White, but Benko players should not object too much to
playing this position as Black) 9...axb5 10.Bxb5 Bb7 (10...Qb6!? 11.Nge2 Nc6 is fine for Black)
11.Nf3 Na6?! (11...Nc6!?) 12.0-0 Nb4 13.Qe2 Ne4 14.Nxe4 Bxe4 15.Ng5 Bc6 16.Bd2 and White
has a small but clear advantage in Fedoseev-Tari, Douglas 2019.
9.Nf3
White achieves less after 9.h5 Nxh5 10.g4 Nf6 11.e4 d6 12.g5 Nfd7 and Black had adequate
compensation for the pawn, G.Haag-Arman, Struga 2021.
9...e6

39
10.dxe6 fxe6
Black continues in the style of the 5.e3 line of the Benko Gambit. However, in a correspondence
game, Black went for the surprising 10...dxe6 11.Qxd8 Rxd8 12.Bd2 Ne8 13.Rc1 (White can
possibly improve with 13.h5 axb5 14.Bxb5 Nd6 15.Be2 when White appears to have a small plus)
13...axb5 14.axb5 Nd7 15.Be2 Nb6 16.h5 Nd6 17.Rh4 with a complicated, queenless middlegame,
where Black has sufficient compensation for the sacrificed pawn, Leimgruber-Laghetti, ICCF email
2017.
11.Qd6 axb5 12.Bxb5 Ne4 13.Nxe4 Bxe4 14.h5

14...Qf6?

40
This loses. Black should have played 14...Nc6 when 15.hxg6 hxg6 16.Bd3 Bxd3 17.Qxd3 Qf6 18.0-0
d5 19.e4 when White should be better, but Black is still alive.
15.h6! Bh8 16.Rh4 Bxf3 17.Rf4 Qd8 18.Bxd7 and Black resigned, 1–0, Rapport-Svidler, Paris 2021.

(back to the text)

With the text move, White enters a position that closely resembles the 5.e3 variation of
the Benko Gambit (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.e3), but where White chooses to meet
5...g6, one of Black’s main moves, with 6.h4 which looks ridiculous. Nevertheless, it is entirely
playable if it still looks a bit odd.

41
 Chapter 2: 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 c5

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 c5

Black heads straight into a Benoni set up right away rather than waiting after having castled (which
we cover in chapters 9–13).
5.d5
White has also tried 5.dxc5!? Qa5 6.Bd2 Qxc5 7.Rc1 (7.e4!?) 7...Nc6 8.e4 d6 9.Be3 Qa5 10.Qd2
Ng4 11.Bf4 Be6 as played in Kukhmazov-Gusarov, Chess.com INT 2021, when 12.Be2 Nge5 13.b3
when the chances are about even, at least according to the engine, but these Maroczy style positions
are not to everyone’s liking.
5...e6
The text move does hesitate to head straight into the Modern Benoni structure and has been used in
some notable high-octane encounters, but Black does not need to play ...e7–e6 right away. The
alternative is 5...d6 6.e4, and now:

42
a) 6...0-0 7.Bg5 (or 7.Be2 e6 8.h5 exd5 9.exd5 Re8 and we have transposed to chapter 13) 7...h6
8.Bf4 e6 (White is also better after 8...Re8, e.g., 9.Qd2 h5 10.f3 e6 11.dxe6 Bxe6 12.0-0-0!? (this is
an improvement over 12.Bxd6?! Nc6 13.Bxc5 Qxd2+ 14.Kxd2 Rac8?! (14...Rad8+!? 15.Ke1 Nd7
resembles the gambit variation Black can play against the King’s Indian Saemisch Variation: (to the
line)1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3 c5) 15.Rd1 Ne5 16.Bxa7 Bxc4 17.Ke1 Red8?

(17...Bxf1 18.Kxf1 Nc4 when Black has adequate compensation for the sacrificed pawns) 18.Bd4
Bxf1 19.Bxe5 Rxd1+ 20.Nxd1 and White was clearly better in Hollan-Jansa, Czech Republic 2020)
12...Nc6 13.Nh3 a6 14.Ng5 and White has the upper hand) 9.Be2 (or 9.Qd2 h5 10.Be2 exd5 11.cxd5
a6 12.a4 Qe7 13.Bg5 Nbd7 14.Nf3 and White has a pleasant version of the Modern Benoni) 9...exd5
10.exd5 Re8 11.Nf3 (or 11.Qd2 b5!? 12.cxb5 a6 13.Bxh6 axb5 14.Bxg7 Kxg7 15.Nxb5 Ne4 16.Qc1
Ba6 when Black has excellent compensation for the two sacrificed pawns) 11...Bg4 12.Kf1 Na6?!
(12...Ne4!) 13.Qd2 h5 (13...Ne4!?) 14.Re1 Nc7 15.Ng5 (15.g3 b5 16.Kg2 was better) 15...a6
16.Bxg4 Rxe1+ 17.Qxe1 Nxg4 18.Nce4 and White has some pressure and the better game,
Kukhmazov-Budrewicz, Chess.com INT 2021.
b) 6...e6 7.Be2 exd5 8.exd5 Nbd7 9.Nf3 Ng4 10.h5 Qe7 11.Bg5!? (White could also consider 11.0-0
0-0 12.Ng5 h6 13.Bxg4 hxg5 14.Re1 Be5 15.Bxd7 Bxd7 with an interesting position and chances to
both sides) 11...Bxc3+ 12.bxc3 f6 13.Bd2 g5 14.0-0 Nge5?! (14...Nde5 was better due to White’s
brilliant next move) 15.Nd4! cxd4 16.cxd4 0-0 (the computer claims that Black should have played
16...Nf7 but 17.Re1 0-0 18.Bd3 is a positional disaster for Black; White has more than enough
compensation for the sacrificed piece) 17.dxe5 fxe5 18.Be3 b6 19.a4 Nc5 20.a5 and although White
had a clearly better position at this point, Black manages to save the draw much later Ding Liren-
Vachier Lagrave, Ekaterinburg 2021.
c) 6...h5 7.Nf3 (the move order is not super important: 7.Be2 e6 (7...Nbd7?! 8.Nf3 is very nice for
White as ...Nbd7 has been played too early) 8.dxe6 (here, 8.Nf3 is probably best, likely transposing
to later chapters in this book) 8...Bxe6 9.Bg5 Qa5 10.Qd2 Nc6 11.Nh3 Nd4 and here White went

43
wrong with 12.Bd3? in Dourerassou-R.Chen, Chess.com INT 2020, where Black missed the strength
of 12...Nb3 but nevertheless won soon anyway) 7...0-0 8.Bg5 e6 9.Be2 exd5 with a position where
White has the pleasant choice between 10.cxd5 Nbd7 11.0-0 a6 12.a4, which looks like a pleasant
Modern Benoni for White, 10.exd5 Bg4 11.0-0, which leads to a position where Black has minimal
active options and White has a space advantage, and 10.Nxd5 Nc6 11.0-0 Re8 12.Qd3 Be6 13.Rae1,
which resembles a King’s Indian Averbakh Variation, where something definitely has not gone as
Black had hoped.
d) 6...Nbd7?! is clumsy and forcing Black to play awkward moves: 7.Be2 h5 8.Nh3 (8.Nf3 is
perfectly reasonable) 8...Ne5 9.Ng5 (the computer likes 9.0-0!?, allowing ...Bxh3, because after
gxh3, White has control over the g4–square and can play f2–f4, kicking the knight on e5 away)
9...Rb8 10.f3 Bd7 11.Be3 a6 12.a4 Qb6 13.Bd2 Qc7 14.Ra2 (14.Rb1!?; or simply 14.0-0 are probably
better options) 14...0-0 15.0-0 when Black has made the best of it, but still had a worse position in
Aronyak-Sammed Jaykumar, Kolkata 2016.
After 5...0-0, 6.e4 d6 7.Be2 transposes to our later chapters, but 6.h5!? Nxh5 7.g4 Nf6 8.g5 Nh5 9.e4
leads to a different type of position that you will not encounter in any opening or variation that Black
will ever have encountered.
6.e4
In the introduction, we covered one of White’s alternatives:
a) 6.h5!? Nxh5 7.g4!? Nf6 8.d6 0-0?! (this is a mistake; Black should have opted for 8...Nxg4 9.Nb5
Na6 10.e4 but this is far from easy to navigate in an over-the-board game against a well-prepared
opponent) 9.e4 Nc6 10.Qf3! (or 10.g5 Ne8 11.Qd3 and White is better) 10...h5 11.gxh5 Nxh5
12.Be2 (White is already winning at this point) 12...Nd4 13.Qh3 Qf6 14.f4! Nc2+ 15.Kf1 Nxa1
16.Bxh5 gxh5 17.f5 Re8 18.Qxh5 exf5 19.Nd5 Qd4 20.Ne2, and Black resigned, 1–0, Alekseenko-
Ragger, Struga 2021.
b) Yet another option is 6.Bg5!? Qa5 7.Qd2 exd5 8.cxd5 0-0 9.e4 Re8 10.0-0-0 (White prioritized
getting the king away from the e-file but 10.f3!? may be an improvement) 10...d6 11.Kb1 Nbd7 12.f3
a6 with chances to both sides, Le Ruyet-Berchtenbreiter, Pardubice 2012.
6...exd5

44
7.exd5
A couple of alternatives are:
a) 7.e5!? Ne4 8.Nxd5 Qa5+ 9.Bd2 Nxd2 10.Qxd2 Qxd2+ 11.Kxd2 Na6 12.Nf3 leads to an
interesting queenless middlegame where the chances probably are about even.
b) 7.cxd5 d6 8.Nge2 0-0 9.Ng3 Re8 10.Be2 b5?! (10...Nbd7!? is better) 11.Bxb5 Nbd7 12.0-0 Rb8
13.h5 a6 14.Be2 Ne5 was played in Maevsky-Mayeregger, Chess.com INT 2021, and now 15.h6!?
would have given White an advantage.
7...0-0 8.Be2 Re8 9.Kf1
White should not play 9.h5?! Nxh5 10.Kf1 Nf6 11.Bg5 d6 12.Qd2 Nbd7 13.Qf4 Re5? (13...Qb6! is
much better, getting out of the pin, interfering with White’s queenside) 14.Nf3 Rxg5 15.Nxg5 Ne5
16.Nce4 Nxe4 17.Nxe4 f5 18.Ng5 and White had slightly better chances, Bluebaum-Salinas Herrera,
Chess.com INT 2021.
9...a6
9...h5 is possibly safer, transposing to lines we will cover later in the book.
10.a4 d6 11.h5
White pushes forward: the whole point of White’s approach.

45
11...Ne4
Another try for Black is 11...Nbd7 12.h6! (even 12.g4!? can be considered) 12...Bh8 13.Bg5, and
here Black has tried:
a) 13...Qb6 14.Ra2 (or 14.Rb1 Ne4 15.Nxe4 Rxe4 16.Bd3 Re8 17.Nf3 Nf6 18.Nd2 Ng4 19.Nf3 and
draw agreed, ½–½, in Edouard-Gozzoli, Chartres 2019) 14...Ne5 15.b3 Qc7 16.g3 Nfg4 17.Bd2 and
White has the better chances. Black’s position is playable but uncomfortable.
b) 13...Ne5 14.Rh4 (or 14.g3 Bf5 15.Rh4 with a clear advantage for White) 14...Qb6 15.Ra2 Bf5
16.Rf4 Rf8 was played in Firat-Deviprasath, Chess.com INT 2021, and here 17.a5 Qc7 18.g4 wins a
piece for White.
12.Nxe4 Rxe4 13.hxg6
White could improve with 13.Nf3 Bg4 14.Bg5 Bf6 15.hxg6 hxg6 (15...Bxg5?? 16.gxf7+ wins for
White) 16.Qc2 and White has the better chances.
13...hxg6 14.Nf3 Bg4 15.Bg5 Bf6

46
16.Be3
16.Bd3!? is possibly better, e.g., 16...Re8 17.Bf4 Bg7 18.Qd2 and White has a tiny edge.
16...Nd7 17.Nd2 Rxe3?!
Black should have played 17...Bxe2+ when Black is able to keep things balanced after 18.Qxe2 Re8
19.Qg4 b5 20.axb5 axb5 21.Rxa8 Qxa8 22.Qxd7 Qa1+ 23.Ke2 Rxe3+ 24.fxe3 Qxh1 25.cxb5 Qxg2+
26.Kd1 Qg1+. Long variation, wrong variation is typically what is being said, but here it seems to be
fairly accurate.
18.fxe3 Bxe2+ 19.Qxe2 Qe7 20.Rh3 Re8 21.Rb1 Bg5 22.Re1 Qf6+ 23.Qf2 Qxb2 24.Nf3 Qxf2+
25.Kxf2 with a clear advantage for White that the world champion eventually converted in Carlsen-
Vachier Lagrave, Saint Louis 2019.

(back to the text) King’s Indian Saemisch Variation: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Be3
c5

47
 Chapter 3: 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 – Minor Lines

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5

5...dxc4
This looks normal, but it leads to troubles for Black. In the next chapter, we will look at
5...Nxh5.However, Black has several alternatives, and we will look at those here:
a) 5...0-0, and now White has two main options:
a1) 6.hxg6 hxg6 7.Bh6 (this move is better than the other bishop move 7.Bg5 when 7...c5 8.dxc5 Qa5
was fine for Black in Azmaiparashvili-Belov, Playchess.com INT 2007) 7...Bxh6 8.Rxh6 Kg7 (Black
should avoid 8...c5? 9.Nf3?! (but 9.Rh4! improves, leaving White with a large advantage, the threat is
Qd1–d2–h6) 9...Nc6 10.cxd5 Nxd5 11.Qd2 cxd4 12.Rh8+ Kxh8 13.Qh6+ Kg8 14.Ng5 Nf6
15.Nce4 Qa5+ 16.Kd1 Qxg5 17.Nxg5 and White had the somewhat better chances, Sevian-Zeltsan,
Sturbridge 2021) 9.Qd2 c6 (or 9...dxc4?! 10.e4 (10.0-0-0!?) 10...c5?! 11.d5 b5 12.Rh4 Rh8 13.Rxh8
Kxh8? 14.e5! Ng4 15.e6 fxe6 16.Qg5 exd5 17.0-0-0 d4 18.Be2 Nf6 19.Bf3 and White had a decisive
advantage in an online game) 10.0-0-0 (this is better than 10.Nf3 Rh8 11.Rxh8 Qxh8 12.Qe3 Qd8
13.Ne5 Be6 when Black should not be worse, Castilla Leon Salas-Garcia Gimenez, Linares 2021)
10...Rh8 11.Rxh8 Qxh8 12.Nf3 Qh6 13.Ng5 Nbd7 14.f3 e6 15.g4 e5 16.dxe5 Nxe5 and now 17.cxd5
would have left White with a winning position, whereas 17.Qf4, as played in an online game, was not
as good.
a2) 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.hxg6 hxg6 8.Bh6 Natural and good, exchanging the dark-squared bishops helps
White’s attack.
Now Black has tried a few things:

48
a21) 8...c5? 9.Qd2 Nxc3 10.Bxg7? (10.bxc3! cxd4 11.Bxg7 would have been better) 10...Kxg7
(10...Ne4! equalizes) 11.Qh6+ Kf6 12.bxc3 cxd4 13.e4 dxe3 14.Nf3?! (14.Qh4+!) 14...Qa5?
15.Qxf8 Qxc3+ 16.Ke2 Qb2+ 17.Kxe3 Qb6+ 18.Nd4 e5 19.Qh8+ Ke7 20.Qxe5+ and here Black
resigned in an online game.
a22) 8...Nxc3!? 9.bxc3 e5 (the alternatives are 9...c5 10.Qd2 cxd4 11.Bxg7 Kxg7 12.Qh6+ Kf6
13.Nf3 Qd5 14.cxd4 Rd8 15.e3 Bf5 16.Be2 and White was winning in an online game or 9...Bxh6!?
10.Rxh6 Kg7 11.Qd2 Rh8 12.Rxh8 Qxh8 13.Nf3 Qh6 14.Qxh6+ Kxh6 15.Ne5 Kg7 16.e4 and
White had a slight advantage in another online game) 10.Qd2 Qf6 11.Bxg7! (or 11.Nf3!? exd4
12.cxd4 c5 13.Bxg7 (but White can improve with 13.e4! Bxh6 14.Qxh6 Qg7 15.Ng5 Nc6 16.Qh7+
Qxh7 17.Nxh7 Rd8 18.d5 and White has a significant advantage) 13...Qxg7 14.Rc1 cxd4 15.Qxd4
Nc6 16.Qxg7+ Kxg7 and Black had equalized in an online game) 11...Qxg7 12.dxe5 Qxe5 13.Nf3
Qf6 14.Ng5 and White has a large advantage; the immediate threat is Nh7, but the knight also
supports the e2–e4 advance.
a23) 8...Bxh6 9.Rxh6 Kg7 10.Qd2 Nxc3 11.bxc3 Rh8 (but not 11...Be6? 12.e4 c6?! 13.Nf3 Nd7
14.Ng5 Bg4? 15.Qf4 Bh5 16.Rh7+ Kg8 17.Rxh5 gxh5 18.Qf5 Nf6 as played in an online game, and
now 19.Nf3! would have given White decisive advantage) 12.Rxh8 Qxh8 13.Nf3 (13.e4!?) 13...Nd7
14.e4 Nf6 15.Qf4 Qh6 was played in an online game, and now 16.Qxh6+ Kxh6 17.Bd3 would have
left White with the clearly better chances.
b) 5...gxh5 6.cxd5 Nxd5, and now:
b1) 7.e4 Nxc3 8.bxc3 c5 (or 8...Bg4? as played in an online game, when White should have played
9.f3 Bd7 10.Rxh5 with a large advantage), with another fork in the road:
b11) 9.Be3 cxd4 (or 9...Nc6 10.Ne2 Qa5 11.Rxh5 f5 was played in an online game where White
quickly went wrong, but with 12.Bd2! Qc7 13.exf5 cxd4 14.cxd4 Bd7 15.Rc1 Qd6 16.Be3 White
could have secured a large advantage) 10.cxd4, and here:

49
b111) 10...Nc6 11.Ne2 Qa5+ (or 11...Bg4 12.f3 Bd7 13.Rxh5 Rc8 14.Qd2 and White had a clear
advantage) 12.Bd2! (a very powerful retreat, and better than 12.Qd2 Qxd2+ 13.Kxd2 0-0 14.Rb1 Rd8
when Black had equalized in an online game) 12...Qc7 13.Rc1 Qd6 14.d5 Ne5 15.Qb3 and White
would have had a clear advantage.
b112) 10...Qa5+ 11.Bd2!

(this bishop retreat is again better than using the queen 11.Qd2?! Qxd2+ 12.Kxd2 Nc6 13.Ne2 0-0
(both 13...Bd7 and 13...Bg4 have been played in online games but are easily better for White) 14.Rd1
Rd8 and Black has equalized) 11...Qb6 12.Nf3 Bg4 13.Rb1 Qe6 14.Qc2 0-0 15.Be3 Qc6 16.Qd2
Qxe4 (or 16...Nd7 17.Nh4 Qxe4 18.Bd3 and White has a nice plus) 17.Bd3 Qc6 18.Ng5 h6 19.Bh7+
Kh8 20.Be4 and White has a large advantage.
b12) 9.Rxh5 cxd4 10.Rg5 Bf6 11.Rd5 Qc7 12.cxd4 and White has a clear advantage.
b2) 7.Rxh5, and now:

50
b21) 7...Nf6 8.Rg5 Bh6 (or 8...Kf8 9.e4 h6 10.Rg3 h5 11.Bc4 b5 12.Bxb5 Bb7 13.e5 Ne4 (if
13...Ng4 then 14.Be2 Qd7 15.Na4 is close to winning for White) 14.Nxe4 Bxe4 15.Ne2 c5 16.Bd3
(16.Qa4!? is also strong) 16...Bd5 was played in Kanep-Lelumees, Tallinn 2005, and here 17.Nf4
Nc6 18.Nxh5 would have been winning for White) 9.Rg3 Bxc1 10.Rxc1 c5 (or 10...Nc6 11.Nf3 Bf5
12.d5 Nb8 13.Qb3 b6 14.e3 Bg6 15.Ne5 0-0 was seen in an online game, when 16.Qc4 Kh8 17.Qd4
would have given White a decisive advantage) 11.d5 Bf5 12.e4 Nxe4 13.Nxe4 Bxe4 14.Qa4+ Nd7
15.Qxe4 with an extra piece and a winning position for White.
b22) 7...c6 8.e4 Nxc3 (or 8...Nf6 9.Rh4 Be6 10.Nge2 Nbd7 11.Nf4 Nf8 12.e5 Nd5 was played in an
online game, and now 13.Nxe6 Nxe6 14.Bc4 Nec7 15.Qb3 and White would have had an
overwhelming advantage) 9.bxc3 c5 10.Rxc5 Nc6 11.Nf3 Bg4 12.Be2 Rc8 13.Bd2 b6 14.Rg5 Bxf3
15.Bxf3 Bf6 16.Rd5 Qc7 17.e5 and White was winning in an online game.
b23) 7...Be6 8.e4 Nf6 9.Rg5 Bh6 10.Rg3 Bxc1 11.Rxc1 c6 12.Nge2 Nbd7 13.Nf4 and White had a
large advantage in an online game.
b24) 7...Nb6 8.Nf3 Bg4 9.Rg5 Bxf3 10.Rxg7 Bh5 11.Rg5 Bg6 12.e4 f6 13.Rg3 Nc6 14.d5 Ne5 15.f4
and White was winning in S.Williams-Hegarty, Sunningdale 2011.
b25) 7...Nxc3 8.bxc3 with another fork in the path:
b251) 8...Bf6 9.e4 c5 10.e5 Bg7 11.Nf3 cxd4 12.cxd4 Nc6 13.Bc4 Bg4 14.Bxf7+?! (White could do
even better with 14.Rg5 Bxf3 15.Qxf3 Qxd4 16.Bxf7+ Kd8 17.Rb1 Bh6 18.Rg4 Qxe5+ 19.Re4 and
White would have been winning) 14...Kf8? 15.Rh4 h5 16.Bb3 a5 17.Be3 and Black was busted.
b252) 8...Nd7 9.e4! (this natural move is better than 9.Rb1 which gave a nice advantage in Bosboom-
Gorissen, Haarlem 2002, and 9.Nf3 as played in Liyanage-Petukhov, Chess.com INT 2021) 9...c5
10.Nf3 Nf6 11.Rg5 Kf8 12.Qd3 cxd4 13.cxd4 h6 14.Rc5 and White would have had a clear
advantage.

51
b253) 8...c5?! 9.Rxc5! Be6 10.e4 Nd7 11.Rh5 Rc8 12.Bd2 Nb6 13.Bb5+ Kf8 14.Ne2 Nc4 15.Bxc4
Rxc4 16.Rb1 and White was winning in an online game.
c) 5...c5 is natural and typical Grunfeld-like, but also completely insufficient for Black: 6.h6! Bf8
7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.e4 (here 8.Nf3 Nc6 9.e4! (9.dxc5!? was less accurate, e.g., 9...Nxc3 10.Qxd8+
Kxd8?! (10...Nxd8!?) 11.bxc3 e5 12.Ng5 Ke8 13.Ne4 (13.Ba3!?) 13...Be6 14.g4 with a clear
advantage for White, Sambuev-E.Li, Oakville 2019) 9...Nxc3 10.bxc3 will typically transpose to
8.e4, whereas) 8...Nxc3 (Black should avoid 8...Nb6? 9.Be3 Nc6 10.dxc5 Qxd1+ 11.Rxd1 Nd7
12.Nd5 Kd8 13.Nf3 e6 14.Bg5+ Be7 15.Nxe7 Nxe7 16.Bf6 Re8 17.Ng5 and Black was completely
tied up and lost in an online game) 9.bxc3 cxd4 10.cxd4, and here:

c1) 10...e5 11.Nf3 (White achieves less after 11.dxe5 Qa5+? (11...Qxd1+ was a better choice,
although White also has a clear advantage after 12.Kxd1 Nc6 13.Nf3) 12.Bd2 Qxe5 13.Nf3 Qxe4+
14.Be2 Bb4 15.Rh4 and White was already winning in an online game, but) 11...Bb4+ 12.Bd2 Bxd2+
13.Qxd2 exd4 14.Bb5+ Bd7 15.Qxd4 f6 16.Bxd7+ Nxd7 17.0-0 when White’s safer king and lead in
development assures him a large advantage.
c2) 10...Nc6 11.Nf3 (or 11.d5 Na5 12.Bb5+ Bd7 13.Qa4 b6 14.Bb2 f6 15.Ne2 Rc8 16.Rc1!
(16.Nd4?! Bxb5 17.Qxb5+ Qd7 18.Qxd7+ Kxd7 19.Ne6 was also bad for Black as played in an
online game) 16...Rxc1+ 17.Bxc1 with a clear advantage for White) 11...Bg4 12.d5 Bxf3 13.gxf3
Ne5 14.Qa4+ Nd7 15.Bb2 f6 16.Bh3 and Black was busted in an online game.
d) 5...c6 6.h6! (alternatively, 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.e4 (7.h6!?) 7...Nxc3 8.bxc3 e5 as played in M.Ratkovic-
Bogdanovski, Paracin 2012, and now 9.Nf3 exd4 10.cxd4 (or 10.Bg5 f6 11.Bc1 dxc3 12.Qb3 with a
strong initiative for White) 10...0-0 11.h6 Bf6 12.Be3 Bg4 13.Bc4 with an excellent Grunfeld Indian
for White) 6...Bf8 7.Nf3 (this is stronger than 7.Bg5 Ne4 8.Nxe4 dxe4 9.Qd2 Be6?! 10.e3 f6 11.Bf4
Bf7 12.0-0-0 with a clear advantage for White in Dambrauskas-Ivoskaite, Panevezys 2007), and here
Black has a bunch of natural-looking moves which we will take a quick look at here:

52
d1) 7...Bf5 8.cxd5 cxd5 9.Qb3 Qb6 10.Qxb6 axb6 11.Ne5 with a clear advantage for White.
d2) 7...e6 8.Qc2 Nbd7 9.e4! dxe4 10.Nxe4 e5 11.dxe5 Nxe4 12.Qxe4 Nc5 13.Qe3 Bf5 14.Be2,
White has an extra pawn and the better position.
d3) 7...dxc4 8.e4 b5 9.Be2 and White has a dream version of a Geller Gambit in the Slav Defense.
d4) 7...Nbd7 8.cxd5 cxd5 9.Bf4 and Black has serious problems with the bishop on f8, weak dark
squares, and the misplaced knight on d7.
d5) 7...Bg4 8.Ne5 Be6 9.cxd5 cxd5 10.Bf4 Ne4 11.Rc1 and White has a very large advantage.
e) 5...Ne4? 6.h6 Bf8 (the alternatives are not any better, for instance, 6...Bf6 7.Nxd5 0-0 8.Nxf6+
exf6 9.e3 c5 10.Bd3 f5 11.Ne2 or 6...Nxc3?? 7.hxg7 and White is winning) 7.Nxd5 e5 8.Qc2 Bf5
9.g4 Nxf2 10.gxf5 Nxh1 11.Qe4 Nd7 12.Qxh1 and White has a large advantage.
f) 5...Bg4? 6.h6! Bf8 7.Qb3 dxc4 8.Qxb7 Nbd7 9.e3 Rb8 10.Qxa7 Be6 11.Nf3 Ng4 12.e4 Nxh6
13.Bxh6 and White was winning in an online game.
g) 5...Bf5? 6.h6! Bf8 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Qb3 Nxc3 9.bxc3 b6 10.Nf3 f6 11.Bf4 Nd7 12.Rd1 Qc8 13.e3
and White had a decisive advantage in Mirzoev-Lansink, Guimaraes 2021.
h) 5...e6 6.hxg6 (White can once more also consider 6.h6!? Bf8 7.Nf3 a6 8.g3 dxc4 9.Ne5 and White
has a clear advantage) 6...hxg6 (or 6...fxg6 7.Nf3 0-0 8.Bg5 c5 9.dxc5 Na6 10.Rc1 Qa5 11.Qd2 dxc4
12.Rh4! and White is clearly better) 7.Rxh8+ Bxh8 8.Bg5 dxc4 9.e4 (or 9.e3 c5 10.dxc5 Qa5 11.Qd4
Nbd7 12.Rd1 when White is better) 9...c5 10.dxc5 Qa5 11.Qd2 Nc6 12.Rd1 and Black will be
struggling to get his pieces into play.
6.h6 Bf8 7.e4 c5 8.d5
This is still early in the game, but Black is already, more or less, completely busted.

53
8...e6
Black wants to get the bishop on f8 developed, but the advance creates massive structural issues for
Black. That being said, Black’s alternatives are not promising either:
a) 8...b5 9.e5 Nfd7 (or 9...b4 10.exf6 bxc3 11.Bxc4 exf6 12.Qe2+! (this is an improvement over
12.d6 which was successful in an online game, but otherwise does not do much for White, for
instance, 12...Bxd6 13.Bd5 Be5 and Black is still very much alive) 12...Qe7 13.Be3 cxb2 14.Rb1 Qe4
15.Rxb2 and White has a clear advantage) 10.Nf3 b4 11.Ne4 Bb7 12.Bxc4 Nb6 13.Bb5+ N8d7
14.e6 fxe6 15.dxe6 Bxe4 16.Ne5 Qc7 17.exd7+ and White was winning in an online grandmaster
game.
b) 8...Nbd7 9.Bxc4 (or 9.Nf3 e6 10.dxe6 fxe6 11.Bxc4 Nb6 12.Bb5+ Bd7 13.Be2 Be7 14.Bf4 a6
15.Ne5 0-0 was played in an online game, and here could have claimed a decisive advantage with
16.Qd3) 9...Nb6 10.Bb5+ Bd7 11.Bxd7+ Qxd7 12.Nf3 0-0-0 13.Be3 e6, thus far we have been
following another online game, and here 14.Bg5 Be7 15.d6 and White would have won material and,
of course, be winning.
9.Bxc4
White has several good moves. Aside from the text move, White has a great alternative in 9.Bg5 e5
(neither 9...exd5 10.e5 Qa5 11.Bxf6 nor 9...Be7 10.d6 bring Black any relief) 10.Bxc4 Bd6 11.Qf3
(the pin of the knight on f6 remains a (k)nightmare for Black) 11...Nbd7 12.Nb5 Bb8 13.d6 0-0 14.0-
0-0 a6 15.Nc7 Bxc7 16.dxc7 Qe7 17.Rxd7 Bxd7 18.Bxf6 and White was winning in an online game.
9...exd5
9...e5 10.Bg5 Bd6 11.Qf3 transposes to the previous note.
10.exd5

54
10...a6
Alternatively, Black has also tried 10...Bd6 11.Bg5 (or 11.Qe2+ Qe7 12.Nb5 0-0 13.Qxe7 Bxe7
14.Nc7 and White is winning) 11...0-0 12.Nge2 a6 13.a4 Re8; we have been following an online
game, and now 14.0-0 Bh2+ 15.Kh1 and White would have left White with a completely winning
position.
11.Bg5 Bd6 12.Qe2+ Kd7 13.Ne4 Qa5+ 14.Bd2 Qd8 15.Nxf6+ Qxf6 16.Bc3 Thus far, we have
been following an online game, and White is already winning.

55
 Chapter 4: 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 Nxh5

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 Nxh5

The main line of the Grünfeld Indian approach for Black.

6.cxd5 c6
Black must attack the white center sooner or later, and this is the most common way to do it.
Nevertheless, Black has tried a few other things as well:
A) 6...c5?! looks like a typical Grunfeld move, but it is not particularly good after 7.dxc5! (of course,
7.dxc6?! could transpose to 6...c6 7.dxc6, but that is not a line White is interested in playing) 7...0-0
(or 7...Qa5 8.Bd2! (White achieves less after 8.Qa4+ Qxa4 9.Nxa4 Bd7 10.Nc3 Na6 11.e4 Nxc5 and
Black has a pleasant position, Kratochvil-Kuchynka, Brno 2011) 8...Qxc5 9.e4 0-0 10.Be2 Nf6
11.Rc1 and White has a clear advantage) 8.e4 Qa5 9.Be2 Nf6 10.Kf1 Nbd7 11.a3 Qxc5 12.Be3 Qd6
13.Qd2 (this is even stronger than 13.Nf3 which nevertheless was quite effective after 13...Ng4
14.Bd4 Nge5? (relatively better but still bad is 14...Bxd4 15.Qxd4 Qb6 16.Rd1 and White is clearly
better) 15.Nb5 Qb8 16.Rc1 Nxf3 17.Bxg7!? (17.gxf3!) 17...Kxg7 18.Bxf3 (18.gxf3!) 18...Qf4 19.g3
Qg5? 20.Kg2 Nf6 21.Qd4 e5 22.dxe6 Qxb5 23.Rxh7+ Kxh7 24.Qxf6 and Black resigned, 1–0,
Budisavljevic-M.Milosevic, Novi Sad 2020) 13...h5 14.f3 a6 15.Nh3 b5 16.Nf2 and White has a
clear advantage.
B) 6...e6!? has been the choice of World Championship challenger Nepomniachtchi on a couple of
occasions. Now White has tried a few things:

56
a) 7.dxe6 Bxe6 8.Nf3 Nc6 9.e3 Qe7 10.Be2 0-0 11.a3 (White can possibly improve with 11.0-0 Rad8
12.Bd2 when White’s central pawns seems to offer him the upper hand) 11...Rad8 12.Qc2 Rfe8
13.Bd2 Na5 14.b4 Nb3 15.Rb1 Nxd2 16.Qxd2 Nf6 and Black had a comfortable position in
Grischuk-Nepomniachtchi, Amsterdam 2019.
b) 7.e4 exd5 8.e5 Bf8 9.g4 Ng7 10.Bh6 Nc6 11.Bg2 Be6 12.Nh3 Qd7 13.Bf3 0-0-0 14.Nf4 was
Kukula-Sieciechowicz, Kowalewo Pomorskie 2013, and now 14...Kb8 looks solid and fully playable
for Black even though White has more space.
c) 7.g4! Nf6 8.dxe6 Bxe6 9.e4 Bxg4 10.f3 Be6 11.Bg5 h6 12.Be3 c6 13.Nge2 Bc4?! (13...Nh5!?)
14.Qc2 Qa5? (or 14...Qe7 15.e5 Nd5 16.Nxd5 cxd5 17.Nc3 with a large advantage for White)
15.Bd2! (this bishop move is an improvement over 15.Nf4 Bxf1 16.Kxf1 Na6 17.a3 Nc7 18.Kf2 g5
19.b4 Qa6 20.Nd3 (20.Nfe2!? appears to be an improvement; the knight wants to jump to f5 or h5
via g3) 20...Qc4 21.Rac1 Nd7 when White has sufficient compensation for the sacrificed pawn but
probably not more than that, Vachier Lagrave-Nepomniachtchi, Jerusalem 2019) 15...Qb6 16.Na4
Qa6 17.Nc5 Qb5 18.a4 and White is winning.
C) 6...Nf6 The point behind the knight’s retreat is, of course, to avoid getting stuck on h5, as is often
the case in our main line. That being said, it is objectively not as good as the immediate ...c7–c6. 7.e4
c6 (Black does not solve his problems with 7...Nxe4?, for instance, 8.Nxe4 Qxd5 9.Nc3 Qxd4
10.Qxd4 Bxd4 11.Nd5 Be5 12.Nf3 Bd6 13.Bd2 b6 14.Bc3 f6 15.Bd3 Kf7 16.Ng5+ Kg7 17.Ne4,
and while Black has three pawns for the sacrificed piece, he is far behind in development, giving him
a lost position, Thorarinsson-Kjartansson, Reykjavik 2004) 8.dxc6, and here Black has a few options
to choose between:

57
a) 8...bxc6?! 9.Be2 Ba6 10.Nf3 Qa5?! 11.0-0 0-0 12.Bg5 h6 13.Bh4 Bxe2 14.Qxe2 when White had
a nice center and the better pawn structure, Seres-Dembo, Budapest 2001.
b) 8...Nxc6 9.d5 (this is better than 9.e5?! Nd5 10.Be2 Qa5 11.Qb3? (11.Bd2 is necessary)
11...Ndb4 12.Nf3 Be6 13.d5 Bxd5 (13...Nxd5! is clearly better for Black) 14.Nxd5 Qxd5 15.Bc4
Qe4+ 16.Kf1 Nc2 was Suto-Nogrady, Hungary 2001, and now 17.Bxf7+ Kf8 18.Bd5 Qf5 19.Qxb7
is winning for White) 9...Ne5 10.Bb5+ Kf8 (or 10...Bd7 11.f4 with a clear advantage for White)
11.Be2 and White has a clear advantage.
c) 8...0-0 9.Nf3 (White can also consider eating the pawn, for instance, 9.cxb7 Bxb7 10.f3 Nc6
11.Be3 Qc7 12.Bb5? (12.Rc1! followed by Nge2 and Kf2) 12...Qb6? (Black could punish White for
his error with 12...Qg3+!, when 13.Bf2, allowing 13...Qxg2 is necessary as 13.Kf1 can be met
strongly with 13...Ng4!) 13.Qd2 Rfd8 14.Nge2 Ba6 15.Bxc6 Qxc6 16.0-0 when Black’s active
pieces do not entirely compensate for sacrificed pawn and White has a reasonably clear advantage,
Seres-Balinov, Budapest 1999) 9...Nxc6 10.d5 Nb8 11.Bg5 Qa5 12.Qd2 Rd8 13.Be2 Bg4 14.0-0
Nc6 15.Qe3 Bxf3 was played in Wichmann-Hahn, Schwaebisch Gmuend 2018, and now 16.gxf3!
Ne5 17.f4 Neg4 18.Qf3 would have given White a large advantage.
D) 6...0-0 7.e4 Nf6 8.Bc4!? (or 8.Bh6 Bxh6 9.Rxh6 c5 10.dxc5 Nbd7 11.Rh1 Nxc5 12.e5 Ng4
13.Qd4 Qb6 14.Rd1 Na6 15.Qxb6 axb6 16.Nf3 which was played in Ciocaltea-Nacu, Bucharest
1965; the computer calls it about equal, but it looks very nice for White) 8...c6 9.dxc6 Nxc6

58
10.e5!? (an improvement over 10.Nf3 Ng4 11.e5 (11.Nd5 Be6 12.Bf4 Rc8 13.Bb3 Bxd5 14.Bxd5
Qb6 15.0-0 h5 was comfortable for Black in an online game) 11...Bf5 12.0-0 Qb6 with close to equal
chances) 10...Nd7 (or 10...Ng4 11.Nge2 Qa5 12.f3 when Black has the sacrifice the knight on e5
without getting sufficient compensation) 11.Bb3 Nb6 12.Nge2 Bf5 13.f3 and White has nice position
and the better chances.
7.e4!

White claims the center and a space advantage, leaving the knight on h5 looking a little odd. White
achieves less after 7.dxc6 Bxd4 8.cxb7 Bxb7 9.Nf3 Bxf3 10.exf3 0-0 when Black has an excellent
position.

59
7...cxd5
A worse option is 7...e6?! 8.e5 f5 9.Be2 exd5 10.Bxh5 gxh5 11.Qxh5+ and White is already winning,
Campero-Saavedra, Santa Cruz 2010.
8.e5
White should not get tempted to play 8.g4?! Nf6 9.e5 Ne4 10.Nxe4? (a better choice is 10.f3 Nxc3
11.bxc3 Qc7 12.Ne2 with chances to both sides) 10...dxe4 11.Bg2 Nc6 12.Be3 Qa5+ 13.Bd2 Qd5
14.Bc3 f6 15.f4 fxe5 16.fxe5 0-0 and Black was winning in Kadas-Gross, Budapest 1986.
8...Bf8 9.g4
An important alternative is 9.Qb3 which was played in Basman’s earliest game with the line:

9...Nc6 10.Nf3, and now:

a) 10...e6 11.g4 Ng7 12.Bh6 f5 13.Bh3 Qb6 14.Qxb6 axb6 15.Ke2 (White can do even better with
15.gxf5 Nxf5 16.Bxf5 gxf5 17.Nb5 Ra4 18.b3 and White has a positionally won position) 15...fxg4
16.Bxg4 Bd7 17.Nb5 Nxe5 18.Nc7+ Kd8 19.Nxe5 Kxc7 20.Nf7 Rg8? (or 20...Bb5+ 21.Ke3 Nh5
22.Bg5 Rg8 23.Bxh5 gxh5 24.Bf4+ Kd7 25.Ne5+ and White has a clear positional advantage)
21.Bf4+ Kc8 22.Rxh7 (White is winning) 22...Nf5 23.Bxf5 gxf5 24.Ne5 Bc6 25.Rc1 Bd6 26.a3 Ra4
27.Ke3 Rg4 28.Nxg4 Bxf4+ 29.Kxf4 Rxd4+ 30.Ke5 Rxg4 31.Kxe6 Rf4 32.Rc2 Kb8 33.Ke5 Rf3
34.Rf7 and Black resigned, 1–0, Basman-Grinberg, Ramat Hasharon 1980.
b) 10...Rb8 11.Qxd5 Bg4 12.Be3 Qxd5 13.Nxd5 Bxf3 14.gxf3 a6 15.Nb6 e6 16.0-0-0 Be7 17.f4!
(this is better than 17.Bh3 although 17...Bd8 18.Nc4 also gave White in W.Mueller-Santamaria
Perez, ICCF email 2006) 17...Bd8 18.Nc4 Bc7 19.d5 and White has a large advantage.
9...Ng7 10.Bg2

60
10...e6
In one of the Ginger GM’s early outings, Black here tried 10...Be6 11.Qb3?! (White is better after
11.Bf3 Nc6 12.Nge2) 11...Qd7 12.Bxd5 Bxd5 13.Qxd5 Nc6?? (Black could hold the balance with
13...Qxd5 14.Nxd5 Ne6 15.Be3 Nc6 16.Ne2 0-0-0 and Black is not worse) 14.Qxd7+ Kxd7 15.Nf3
(15.Bh6! leaves Black almost completely paralyzed) 15...e6 16.Bh6 Nb4 17.Ke2 Ne8 18.Bxf8 Rxf8
19.Rxh7 Rc8 20.Ng5 Ke7 21.a3 Nc6 22.Rd1 Rd8 23.Ke3 Nc7 24.f4 Nd5+ 25.Nxd5+ Rxd5 26.Ne4
Rb5 27.b4 Rd5 28.Nf6 Rdd8 29.d5 exd5 30.Nxd5+ Ke6 31.Ke4 and Black resigned, 1–0,
S.Williams-Hugentobler, Samnaun 2008.
11.Bh6
Another option is 11.Nf3 h5 12.Bg5 Be7 (12...Qb6 13.Qd2 is also better for White) 13.Qd2 a6
14.Qf4 Nd7 15.0-0-0! (this is vast improvement over 15.Bh6? hxg4 16.Ng5 Nf5 17.Ke2 Nxh6
18.Rxh6 Rf8 19.Nh7 Rg8? (19...Qb6! 20.Rb1 Rg8 is better for Black) 20.Nxd5 was Gavrilova-
Przezdziecka, Turin ol (w) 2006, and here 20...exd5 21.Bxd5 Nxe5 22.Qxe5 Qb6 with chances to
both sides was best) 15...Rg8 16.Bxe7 Qxe7 17.Ng5 and White has a clear advantage.
11...Nc6

61
12.Nge2
White has two other excellent options:
a) 12.Nf3 f5 13.Bxg7 Bxg7 14.gxf5 gxf5 15.Nh4 Qg5 16.Nb5 0-0 17.Bf1! (this is better than
17.Qd3 a6 18.Nd6 b5 19.Nhxf5 h6 20.Rg1 Ra7 21.Ne3 Rc7 with chances to both sides, M.Jacobsen-
Moe, Copenhagen 2019) 17...a6 18.Nf3 Qe7 19.Nc3 and White has a clear positional advantage.
b) 12.Qd2 f6 13.exf6 Qxf6 14.Nge2 Bb4 15.f4 0-0 16.0-0-0 Bd7 17.Qe3 Rfc8 18.Kb1 and White has
a near decisive advantage, Taddei-Dubois, Metz 2005.
12...Bd7
It makes less sense to play 12...a6?! 13.Qd2 Bd7 (this is a miserable bishop) 14.Rh3 f5 15.exf6 Qxf6
16.Qe3 Ne7 17.0-0-0 0-0-0 18.Rf3 Qh4 19.Bf4 Nc6 20.Na4! (or 20.Bg5 Qxg4 21.Bh3 Qh5 22.Bxd8
Nxd8 23.Nf4 and Black is in bad shape, Bilych-Karvatskyi, Omelnyk 2021) 20...b5 21.Nb6+ Kb7
22.Bg5 Qxg4 23.Bxd8 and White is winning.
13.Qd2 f6 14.exf6 Qxf6 15.Rh3!

62
An important move: White will often play Rf3 followed by Bg5.
15...0-0-0
Black has also tried 15...Bb4?!; but White is almost winning after 16.Rf3 Qe7 17.Bg5 Qd6 18.a3
Bxc3 19.Nxc3 (Black is completely busted: he cannot castle, the dark squares are terribly weak, and
the overall position is a mess) 19...Na5 20.Qe2 Rf8 21.Nxd5 Rxf3 22.Bxf3 Kf7 23.Nf6 Nb3 24.Rd1
Rc8 25.Bxb7 Rc7 26.Qf3 and Black could resign, Shliperman-Ady, New York 1999.
16.Rc1!
White does not need to collect material with 16.Bg5 Qf7 17.Bxd8?! (17.Rc1!? is better) 17...Kxd8
18.Rf3 Qe7 19.Kf1 h5 20.gxh5?! Nxh5 and Black was doing well, Gajewski-Owczarzak, Bartkowa
2002.
16...Kb8 17.Bf4+ Ka8 18.Bg5 Qf7 19.Bxd8 Nxd8 20.Na4 and White has clear advantage.

63
 Part 2: 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0

In this part, we are covering the following lines:

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4

Chapter 5: 5...Nc6, 5...e5, 5...Na6, 5...Nbd7, 5...h5

Chapter 6: 5...0-0 6.Be2 – 6...h6, 6...Nbd7, 6...Na6, 6...c6, 6...Qe8, 6...a6, 6...Re8, 6...a5, 6...Nc6
Chapter 7: 5...0-0 6.Be2 h5
Chapter 8: 5...0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.d5

Chapter 5: 5th Move Alternatives for Black

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 Nc6

64
The knight move has been used by Magnus Carlsen and is an attractive, offbeat alternative.
Black has several options:
a) 5...0-0 is covered in the following chapters.
b) 5...e5 6.dxe5 (6.d5!? can also be played) 6...dxe5 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 8.Nf3 Nc6 9.Bg5 h6 10.0-0-0+
Bd7 11.Bxf6+ Bxf6 12.c5 Kc8 13.Bc4 was slightly better for White in Luberanski-Raczek, Polanica
Zdroj 2021.
c) 5...c5 6.d5 transposes to several other chapters.
d) 5...Na6 6.Be2 h5 7.Bg5 c6 8.Qd2 Nc7 9.f3 Rb8 10.a4 a5 11.Nh3 Bxh3 12.Rxh3 Ne6 13.Be3 Nd7
was played in Fedoseev-Gordievsky, Chess.com INT 2019, and now 14.Rd1 would have given White
a comfortable edge.
e) 5...c6 6.Be2!? (6.h5?! Nxh5 7.g4 Nf6 8.g5 Ng8 (Black could consider 8...Nh5 9.Be2 Qb6 with a
sharp position and chances to both sides) 9.Be3 a6 10.f4 b5 11.Qf3 e6 12.0-0-0 Ne7 13.Rh2 bxc4
14.Bxc4 d5 15.Bd3 and White had a nice plus in F.Graf-Kolbus, Germany 2008) 6...h5 7.Bg5 Nbd7
8.Qd2 Qc7 9.Nf3 0-0 10.Bh6 Ng4?! (10...e5!?) 11.Bxg7 Kxg7 12.Ng5 Ndf6 13.f3 Nh6 14.0-0-0
and White was clearly better in Kosteniuk-Janaszak, Chess.com INT 2021.
f) 5...Nbd7, and here White has a couple of options:

65
f1) 6.Be2 e5 7.d5 Nc5 8.Qc2 a5 (or 8...h5 9.b4 Ncd7 10.Rb1 a5 11.a3 axb4 12.axb4 c6 13.Nf3 0-0
14.Bg5 and White had the better chances in Azmaiparashvili-Radjabov, Benidorm 2003) 9.Bg5 h6
10.Be3 h5 11.Nh3?! (White can play 11.Bxc5 dxc5 12.0-0-0 with a good game) 11...Ng4 12.Bg5
Bf6?! (12...f6!?) 13.g3 Bd7? (Black would have okay after 13...Bxg5 14.Nxg5 f6) 14.b3 0-0 15.f3
Bxg5 16.hxg5 and White was clearly better, S.Ernst-Pruijssers, Amstelveen 2019.
f2) 6.g4 h6 (or 6...e5?! 7.d5 h6 8.Be3 a5 9.f3 0-0 10.Qd2 Kh7 11.Nge2 Nc5 12.Ng3 Ng8 13.Be2 and
White was winning in Macieja-Klabis, Porto Carras 2011) 7.Be2 e5 8.d5 Nc5 9.f3 a5 10.Be3 Bd7
11.Nh3 Qe7 12.Nf2 b6 13.Qd2 and White was clearly better, B.Jacobson-Mishra, Charlotte 2019.
g) 5...h5, and now:
g1) 6.Bg5, with some choices for Black:
g11) 6...0-0, and here White has several options:
g111) 7.Be2 transposes to chapter 7.
g112) 7.f3 c5 8.d5 a6 9.a4 Qa5 10.Bd2 e6 11.Nge2 exd5 12.Nxd5 Qd8 13.Nec3 Nc6 14.Bg5 Be6
was played in Morozevich-Wang Hao, Beijing 2012, when 15.Be2 Bxd5 16.Nxd5 would have
provided White and a small advantage.
g113) 7.Qd2 c6 8.0-0-0 (8.f3!?) 8...a6 9.f3 Qa5?! (9...b5!? was better) 10.Kb1 Re8 was seen in Dao
Thien Hai-Tran Duc Tu, Ho Chi Minh City 1999, when now 11.Bxf6 and White would have had a
clear advantage.
g12) 6...c5 7.d5 b5 (or 7...0-0 8.Bd3 e5 9.Nge2 a6 10.a4 Qe8 11.a5 Nbd7 12.Na4 Rb8 13.Qb3 Qd8
14.Bd2 Ne8 as played in Meister-Maslak, Marianske Lazne 2016, when 15.Qc2 would have been
clearly better for White) 8.cxb5 a6 9.bxa6 0-0 10.Nf3 Qa5 11.Nd2 Nbd7 12.Bb5 (White can also
consider with 12.a7 Rxa7 13.Nc4 Qd8 14.Be2 with an edge for White) 12...Bxa6 13.Nc4 Qxc3+
14.bxc3 Bxb5 15.Nd2 Ne5 16.Rh3 Nd3+ 17.Rxd3 Bxd3 18.f3 when Black had decent, although not

66
entirely enough, compensation for the sacrificed queen, Mladenov-Suarez Real, England 2014.
g13) 6...Nbd7 7.Nf3 Nh7 8.Be3 c6 9.Qd2 Ndf6 10.Bh6 0-0 11.Bxg7 Kxg7 12.Ng5 e5 13.0-0-0 was
slightly better for White in Terentiev-Krasenkova, Rhodes 2019.
g2) 6.f3, with a further fork in the road:
g21) 6...Nc6 7.Be3 a6 8.Nh3 e5 9.d5 Ne7? (Black can improve with 9...Nd4! 10.Ne2 Bxh3 11.Rxh3
Nxe2 12.Bxe2 Bh6 when White is at best marginally better) 10.Qd2 Bxh3 11.Rxh3 Neg8 12.g3 Bh6
13.Rh2 Qb8 14.c5 dxc5 15.Bxh6 Rxh6 16.Qg5 and White was overwhelmingly better in V.Petkov-
Blanco Acevedo, Casabermeja 2021.
g22) 6...c6 7.Nh3 Bxh3 8.Rxh3 e5 9.d5 cxd5 10.cxd5 Nbd7 11.g4 hxg4 12.fxg4 a6 13.Qf3 and White
had a clear advantage in Jakubowski-Ballmann, Winterthur 2008.
6.d5
White has a couple of alternatives:
a) 6.Nge2 0-0 (or 6...Nh5 7.Bg5 0-0 8.Qd2 f6 9.Be3 f5 10.exf5 Bxf5 11.f3 e5 12.d5 Nd4 13.Nxd4
(this is better than 13.0-0-0 Nxe2+ 14.Nxe2 e4 when Black was better in Grischuk-Vachier Lagrave,
Paris 2019) 13...exd4 14.Bxd4 Qe7+ 15.Kf2 and White has the better chances although Black has
decent compensation for the sacrificed pawn) 7.f3 (it is premature to play 7.h5?! Nxh5 8.Bg5 f6
9.Be3 f5 10.Qd2 Nxd4?? (10...e5! is much better) 11.Rxh5?? (a strange blunder, White would have
been winning after 11.Bxd4 e5 12.Be3 f4 13.Qd5+ Rf7 14.Bd2 and White would be a piece up)
11...gxh5 12.Bxd4 e5 13.Be3 f4 and Black was fine in S.Williams-Mestel, England 2010) 7...e5
8.d5!? (but not 8.Be3?! exd4 9.Nxd4 h5? (9...Nh5! is excellent for Black) 10.Qd2 Re8 11.0-0-0 a5
12.Kb1 a4 13.a3 Bd7 was played in Ter Sahakyan-Guseinov, Lichess.org INT 2020, and here
14.Ndb5 would have been clearly better for White) 8...Nd4 9.Be3 c5 10.dxc6 bxc6 11.Nxd4 exd4
12.Bxd4 Rb8 13.Qc2 c5 14.Bf2 Be6 15.0-0-0 and White was clearly better in Shankland-Svidler,
Krasnaya Polyana 2021.
b) 6.Be2 e5 7.d5 Nd4 8.Nf3 (not 8.h5?! Nxe2 9.Qxe2? Nxh5 10.Be3 Nf4 11.Qf1 f5 when Black had
a clear advantage, Pineda Quintal-C.Moreno, Lima 1993) 8...c5 9.dxc6 Nxc6 10.Bg5 h6 11.Bxf6
Bxf6 12.h5 Bg4 13.hxg6 (13.Nxe5! Bxe2 14.Nxc6 Bxd1 15.Nxd8 would have been clearly better for
White) 13...fxg6 14.Nxe5 Bxe5 15.Bxg4 with a small advantage for White, Khismatullin-Samusenko,
Sochi 2019.
6...Ne5!?
This is much better than the passive retreat 6...Nb8 7.Be2 e5 8.g4 h6 9.Be3 Bd7? (or 9...a5 10.a3 Na6
11.f3 Bd7 12.Qc2 with a clear advantage for White) 10.f3 Nh7 11.Qd2 g5 12.h5 b6 13.Nh3 Bf6
14.Nf2 and White had a large advantage, Terrieux-Joli, Fouesnant 2007.
7.Be2

67
7...h5
7...c6 8.Nf3!? (this is an improvement over 8.Nh3 Bxh3 9.Rxh3 h5 10.Kf1 Rc8 11.Qb3 Qc7 12.Bf4
0-0 13.g3? (13.Bxe5 dxe5 14.Rd3 is about balanced according to the computer although I would
prefer White) 13...cxd5 14.cxd5 Nc4 which was better for Black in Atakhan-Darini, Teheran 2021)
8...Nxf3+ 9.Bxf3 cxd5 10.exd5 and White has a comfortable edge.
8.Bf4
White can also consider 8.Bg5 c6 9.Nf3 Nfg4 10.Nxe5?! (10.Qd2!? Qa5 11.0-0 Nxf3+ 12.gxf3 is
better for White) 10...Bxe5 11.Qd2 (11.Qc2!?) 11...Qb6 12.Bxg4?! (12.0-0 is about even.) 12...hxg4
13.Rc1 Bd7 14.b3 as played in Adhiban-Starozhilov, Chess.com INT 2020, and now 14...f6 15.Be3
c5 would have offered Black a pleasant position.
8...0-0 9.Nf3
9.Qd2!? is also possible, although it may just transpose to the main line.
9...Nxf3+ 10.gxf3 c6 11.Qd2 cxd5 12.cxd5 Kh7 13.a4 Nd7 14.a5 f5

68
Thus far, we have been following Fedoseev-Carlsen, Krasnaya Polyana 2021. Black should have
played 14...a6 15.Be3 b6 16.axb6 Nxb6 with more or less equal chances.
15.Be3 Nf6 16.Rg1 and White has some pressure, but Black’s position is fully playable.

69
 Chapter 6: 6.Be2 – Minor Lines

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 Nc6

This knight leap which resembles what we covered in the previous chapter, is just one of many minor
options that we will cover in this chapter. Black has tried several other 6th moves, which we will
quickly go through here:
a) 6...h6? 7.g4 e5 8.d5 Nfd7 9.h5 g5 10.Be3 with a clear advantage for White.
b) 6...Nbd7?! 7.h5 e5 8.d5 Nc5 9.Qc2?! (9.h6!?) 9...a5?! (9...Nxh5 was necessary, even if it is better
for White) 10.Bg5 Bd7 11.f3? (11.h6!) 11...Qc8? (Black should have played 11...h6 12.Bh4 g5 when
he would still be in the game) 12.g4 c6 13.Qd2 gxh5? 14.gxh5 Qc7?! 15.Rh2 and Black resigned, 1–
0, in Palo-J.Kristensen, Copenhagen 2000.
c) 6...Na6?! 7.h5 c5 8.d5 e6 9.Bg5?! (White could secure an advantage with 9.h6! Bh8 10.dxe6 Bxe6
11.Nf3 and White is comfortably better) 9...Nc7 10.Nf3 exd5 11.cxd5 b5 12.Qc2 b4 13.Nd1 Qe8
14.Nd2 Nb5 15.Bxb5 Qxb5 16.Ne3 with chances to both sides, Trent-Kavutskiy, Chess.com INT
2020.
d) 6...c6 7.h5 e5 8.d5 (or 8.hxg6 hxg6?! 9.Nf3 exd4 10.Qxd4 Ng4 11.Qd1 Na6 12.Ng5 Nf6 13.Bf4
Qa5 14.Qd2 Nc5 15.Rb1 Nfd7 16.Bxd6 and White was winning in Roeschlau-Bewersdorff,
Groningen 1988, but Black can improve with 8...exd4 9.Qxd4 fxg6 with a sharp position and chances
to both sides) 8...cxd5 9.cxd5 Nbd7 10.Bg5 (White can improve with 10.h6! Bh8 11.Nf3 and White
has a clear advantage) 10...Qb6 11.Qd2 Nc5 12.Bf3 Bd7 13.0-0-0 Rac8 14.Kb1 Bb5 15.Nge2 Bd3+
16.Ka1 was Varniene-Grosar, Halle 2000, when Black could have played 16...Qa6 17.Nc1 Nfxe4
18.Bxe4 Nxe4 19.Qxd3 Qxd3 20.Rxd3 Nxg5 and Black has a large advantage.
e) 6...Qe8 7.h5 Nc6 8.h6 Bh8 9.d5 with a clear advantage for White.

70
f) 6...a6 7.h5 c5 8.dxc5 dxc5 9.Qxd8 Rxd8 10.h6 Bh8 11.e5 Nfd7 12.f4 Nc6 13.Nf3 Nf8 14.Be3
Ne6 15.Nd5 Kf8 16.0-0-0 and White had a large advantage in Matlakov-Silich, Chess.com INT
2020.
g) 6...Re8 7.h5 c5 8.hxg6 hxg6 9.Nf3 Qa5 10.Bd2 and White has the better chances.
h) 6...a5 7.h5 a4 8.h6 (or 8.a3 Nc6 9.h6 Bh8 10.d5 Ne5 11.f4 Neg4 12.Rh4 e5 13.dxe6 Bxe6
14.Bxg4 Nxg4 15.Rxg4 and White has a clear advantage) 8...Bh8 9.Nf3 Bg4 10.Be3 c5 11.d5 a3
12.b3 e6 13.Rc1 and White will dictate the events.
7.d5 Ne5!?
Retreating with the knight is less attractive: 7...Nb8 8.h5 e5 9.hxg6 (9.h6! is best, e.g., 9...Bh8
10.Bg5 a6 11.b4 and White dominates on both wings) 9...fxg6 10.Bh6? (exchanging Black’s bad
bishop is not ideal, it was better to play 10.g4!, shutting Black down on the kingside) 10...Bxh6
11.Rxh6 Kg7?! (11...Na6 is fine for Black; there is no need to evict the rook from h6 urgently)
12.Qd2 Ng8? (12...a5!?) 13.Rh2 Qf6?! (13...h6!?) 14.g3 h6 15.Nf3 Rf7 16.0-0-0 Nd7 17.Nh4 and
White was clearly better in Terho-Kauko, Tampere 1990.
8.h5!
With this pawn advance, White prevents Black from playing ...h7–h5. That being said, if Black
wanted to play the pawn advance, he could have chosen the move order from the previous chapter.
Here White has tried a couple of alternatives, although they are not that problematic for Black:
a) 8.Bf4 e6 9.Qd2 exd5 10.cxd5 Re8 11.Bh6?! (11.h5 c6 with chances to both sides) 11...Bh8 12.h5
c6 13.hxg6 hxg6?! (13...fxg6! is the right way to recapture the pawn) 14.Bg5 Bg7 15.Bh6 (15.dxc6
bxc6 16.0-0-0 is better for White) 15...Bh8 16.Bg5 Bg7 was played in Gutierrez Valero-Quintin
Navarro, Linares 2015, giving White another opportunity to play 17.dxc6 bxc6 18.0-0-0.
b) 8.Bg5 h5?! (Black could consider 8...h6 9.Bf4 c6, e.g., 10.Qd2 cxd5 11.exd5 h5 with an
interesting position and chances to both sides) 9.Qd2 c6 10.f3 Bd7 11.g4 hxg4 12.f4 Nf3+ 13.Nxf3
gxf3 14.Bxf3 cxd5 was Cabaluna-Torre, Manila 1991, and now 15.Bxf6 Bxf6 16.Nxd5 would have
been somewhat better for White although the position is very sharp.
8...c6
It seems more consistent with Black’s piece placement and the board situation to attack the center in
this fashion, but is a few games, Black has also tried using the e-pawn: 8...e6 9.f4 Ned7 10.dxe6 fxe6
11.hxg6 hxg6 12.Nf3! (or 12.Qd3?! e5?! 13.f5! Nc5 14.Qh3 Ncxe4? - desperate and bad - 15.Nxe4
Bxf5 16.Nxf6+ Qxf6 17.g4 Be4 18.Rh2 g5 19.Nf3 and White was winning in Zarubitski-Silich,
Minsk 2021) 12...Nc5 13.Ng5 e5 14.fxe5 dxe5 15.Qxd8 Rxd8 16.Nd5 Nxd5 17.cxd5 Bf6 18.b4 and
Black was being crushed in Fedoseev-Zhuravleva, Chess.com INT 2019.
9.Nf3

71
9...Nxf3+
Black should not play 9...Neg4?! 10.h6! (an improvement over 10.Nd4?! Qb6 11.Na4 Qc7 12.f3
Ne5 13.hxg6 fxg6, which was fine for Black in Morozov-Smirin, Kishinev 2019) 10...Bh8 11.0-0
with a clear advantage for White.
10.Bxf3 cxd5
Or 10...Qb6 11.h6 Bh8 12.0-0 cxd5?! (12...Nd7!?) 13.cxd5 Bd7 14.Qe2 Rfc8 15.Be3 Qb4 16.Rfc1
Qc4 17.Qd1 Ne8 18.Be2 with a clear advantage for White in Diaz Perez-Hernandez Montes, Tornelo
INT 2021.
11.cxd5 Bd7 12.hxg6 fxg6 13.Be3!

72
It is less accurate to play 13.Bh6?! Bxh6 14.Rxh6 Rc8 (or 14...Qb6 15.Qd2 Rac8 with a good game
for Black) 15.Qd4 Kg7?! (Black would have had an excellent position after 15...Bg4! 16.0-0-0 Qb6!)
16.Rh1 Qb6 17.Qxb6 axb6, Black has playable position despite Black’s inferior pawn structure,
Artemiev-Dubov, Lichess.org INT 2021.
13...h5 14.Bd4 Rc8 15.0-0 Rf7 16.Qd2 Qa5 17.Rfe1 and White has a slight advantage.

73
 Chapter 7: 6.Be2 – 6...h5

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 h5

Black decides to stop the advance of White’s h-pawn at the cost of weakening the g5-square.

7.Bg5!?
I tend to prefer this move over the alternatives as it is more consistent with our choices in the
subsequent chapters. However, White has some other options available at this juncture:
a) 7.Nf3, and in this position, Black has a set of alternatives to choose between:
a1) 7...Bg4 8.Be3 (or 8.Ng5 c5 9.d5 a6 10.a4 Bxe2 11.Qxe2 Nbd7 12.Bf4 Re8 13.0-0 Rb8 14.Rae1
Nh7 15.Bd2 and White had some pressure, Ponkratov-Ozdemir, chess.com INT 2020) 8...Nc6 (or
8...Nbd7 9.Qc2 c6 10.Rd1 a6 11.e5 Ne8 12.Ng5 Bxe2 13.Nxe2 dxe5 14.dxe5 Bxe5 15.f4 Bg7 16.f5
Qa5+ 17.Rd2 with chances to both sides, Mozelius-Ruiz Jarabo, ICCF email 2017 17...Ne5) 9.d5
Bxf3 10.gxf3 Ne5 11.f4 Neg4 12.Bc1 c6 13.f3 Nh6 14.Be3 cxd5 15.cxd5 Rc8 16.Qd2 with a clear
advantage for White in Matlakov-Starozhilov, Chess.com INT 2020.
a2) 7...c5 8.d5, and here we have another fork in the road:

74
a21) 8...Bg4 9.Be3 a6 10.Qd2 Qa5 11.Bh6 (11.0-0!?) 11...Nbd7 12.Bxg7 Kxg7 13.Ng5 Bxe2
14.Qxe2 b5 and Black had solved her opening problems, Dimitrijevic-A.L’Ami, Doha 2014.
a22) 8...a6 9.a4 e6 10.dxe6?! (10.Bf4! is much better, offering White a comfortable plus) 10...Bxe6
11.Bf4 Qa5 12.0-0 Nc6 13.Ng5 Rfe8 14.Bd3 Rad8 was played in Strutinskaya-Ograbek, Walbrzych
2018, and here 15.Kh1!? promises White a tiny edge.
a23) 8...Nbd7 9.0-0 (or 9.Ng5 Ne5 10.Bf4 Nfg4 as played in Babujian-Kuljasevic, Mureck 1998,
and now 11.a4 a6 12.Qd2 would have been comfortably better for White) 9...Ng4 10.Qc2 (10.Ng5!?)
10...a6 11.a4 Re8 12.g3 Nf8 13.Bf4 Nh7 14.Rfe1 Bd7 15.Bf1 Nf8 16.e5 with a large advantage for
White, Trzcinski-Bysina, ICCF email 2019.
a3) 7...Na6 8.Ng5 e5 9.d5 c6 10.Be3 cxd5 11.cxd5 Bd7 12.f3 Qa5?! 13.a3 (13.0-0!?) 13...Rfc8
14.Kf2?! (14.0-0!?) 14...Qd8 15.Rc1 Nc7 16.a4 and White had the upper hand in Cruz Estrada-
A.Aguilar, Barcelona 2015.
b) 7.f3, with a few different tries for Black:
b1) 7...c5 8.d5 e6 9.Bf4 exd5 10.cxd5 Re8 11.Nb5 (11.Qd2!? a6 12.a4 could also be considered.)
11...Bf8 12.Qd2 a6 13.Nc3 b5 14.a4 b4 15.Nd1 Nbd7 16.Nh3 Ne5 was Alavi-Ezat, Chess.com INT
2020, and here 17.Nhf2 would have left White with the marginally better chances.
b2) 7...e5?! 8.d5 Nh7 9.g4 Bf6 10.Be3 Bxh4+ 11.Kd2 f5 12.gxf5 gxf5 13.exf5 Bxf5 14.Nh3 Nd7
15.Nf2 Bxf2 16.Bxf2 with a strong initiative for White, Tuvshintugs-Hua, Bratislava 1993.
b3) 7...Nbd7?! 8.Be3 (8.Nh3!?) 8...e5?! (8...c5!?) 9.d5 a5 10.Nh3 Nc5 11.Nf2 Bd7 12.Qd2 Kh7
13.g4 Qe7 14.Bg5 c6 15.gxh5 gxh5 16.0-0-0 and White was winning in Tuvshintugs-A.Grigorian,
Bratislava 1993.
c) 7.Nh3 Nc6 (Black can also consider, aiming for a version of the ...Bg4 lines where Black saves the
tempo of moving the bishop to g4, e.g., 7...Bxh3!? 8.Rxh3 Nc6 followed by ...e7–e5 and ...Nd4), and

75
here White has tried a few things:

c1) 8.Be3?! Ng4 9.Bxg4 hxg4 10.Nf4 Nxd4 11.Nxg6 fxg6 12.Bxd4 Bh6 13.Qd3 Be6 was played in
Ruckschloss-Mikrut, Warsaw 2009, and now 14.Be3 Bg7 15.h5 or 14...Bxe3 15.Qxe3 in both cases
with a nice advantage for White.
c2) 8.d5!? Ne5 9.f3 c6 10.Be3 a6 11.Nf4 b5 12.cxb5 axb5 13.dxc6 b4 14.Ncd5 Nxc6 15.Bb6 Qd7
16.Bb5 and White had a bit of pressure, but Black should ultimately be okay, Ruckschloss-Csala,
Tatranske Zruby 2011.
c3) 8.Bg5 Nh7 9.Be3 e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.Qxd8 Nxd8 12.Nd5 Bxh3 13.Rxh3 c6 14.Nb4 Ne6 with a
comfortable position for Black, Fyllingen-Djurhuus, Norway 1993.
d) 7.Be3 Nbd7?! (7...c5!? 8.d5 e6 is a more active and better choice for Black) 8.Qd2 e5?! 9.d5 Nc5
10.f3 (White has an excellent version of a Sämisch Variation) 10...a5 11.0-0-0 Bd7 12.Nh3 a4
13.Nf2 and White was clearly better in Ruckschloss-Kourek, Czechoslovakia 1990.
7...Nbd7
A typical move in a regular King’s Indian, but it does seem a little passive when h2–h4 and ...h7–h5
have been inserted. Black has tried several other moves in this position:
a) 7...a6 8.Nf3 Bg4 9.Qd2 Nbd7 10.Rd1 c5 11.d5 b5 12.cxb5 axb5 13.Bxb5 Qa5 and now 14.a4!
would have guaranteed White an edge, but instead White retreated the bishop (14.Be2, giving Black
an excellent version of a Benko Gambit: 14...Rfb8 15.b3 Qb4 (or 15...Nh7! 16.Rc1 Bxc3 17.Rxc3
Nxg5 18.Nxg5 Bxe2 19.Kxe2 Qxa2 and Black is massively better) 16.0-0 Nxe4!? (16...Nh7!)
17.Nxe4 Qxe4 18.Rfe1 Qb4 19.Qxb4 was played in Urazayev-Vitiugov, Chess.com INT 2021, and
now 19...Rxb4 20.Bxe7 Bc3 would have been clearly better for Black.
b) 7...c5 8.d5! b5 and we are in chapter 10, the note after Black’s 8th move.
c) 7...Na6 8.Qd2 Nh7?! (8...c6!?) 9.Bh6 Bxh6 10.Qxh6 e5 11.dxe5?! (11.Nf3! would have given

76
White a clear advantage, but Black soon returns the favor...) 11...dxe5 12.Nf3 Bg4?? (Black should
have defended with 12...Qf6 13.Nd5 Qg7 14.Qe3 when White has no more than a slight edge)
13.Ng5 Nxg5 14.hxg5 Bxe2 15.Nd5 Qf6 16.Nxf6# 1–0 Dourerassou-Golubev, Chess.com INT
2020.
d) 7...Nh7 is a peculiar move that makes very little sense unless you think it is essential to evict the
bishop from g5. White gains an edge after 8.Be3 e5?! (8...c5 made more sense) 9.d5 c5?! (Another
misunderstanding) 10.Qd2?! (White could play more accurately with the direct 10.g4! hxg4 11.Bxg4
f5 12.Bh3 Qxh4 13.Qf3 Qf6 14.exf5 gxf5 15.Qh5 and White is winning) 10...Na6 11.a3 Nc7 12.b4?!
(12.Nh3!?) 12...b6 13.bxc5 bxc5 14.Nf3 Bd7?! (14...f5!?) 15.Ng5 Nf6 16.f3 Rb8 17.0-0 and White
was clearly better in Storey-Manukian, Chess.com INT 2019.
e) 7...Nc6 8.Nf3, and now:
e1) 8...Nh7, and here we have another fork in the road:

e11) 9.Be3 Bg4 10.Qd2 (10.d5!? seems better) 10...Re8? (it was more consistent to play 10...Bxf3!
11.Bxf3 e5 12.d5 Nd4 and Black has probably equalized) 11.d5 Bxf3 12.gxf3 Ne5 13.f4 (now White
is already winning) 13...Nd7 14.f5 Ne5 15.f4 Ng4 16.fxg6 Nhf6 17.gxf7+ Kxf7 18.0-0-0 Rh8
19.Kb1 a6 20.Bd4 Bh6 21.Bxg4 hxg4 22.Qf2 Rg8 23.h5 Qf8 24.e5 Nh7 25.Qc2, and Black resigned,
1–0, in Kalmachevskikh-Karpenko, Perm 2006.
e12) 9.d5 Nb8 10.Be3 Bg4 11.Qd2 c6 12.Nd4 (White can play even better with 12.Bd4! Nf6 13.Ng5
and White has a comfortable edge) 12...Bxe2 13.Ndxe2 Nd7 14.Bd4 Ne5 15.b3 (15.Bxe5?! Bxe5
16.0-0-0 cxd5 17.Nxd5 e6 18.Ndc3 was played in Napolitano-Hayes, Germany 1954, and here
18...Rc8 would have guaranteed an advantage for Black) 15...Nf6 16.f3 a6 17.Rd1 when White’s
position is perhaps slightly preferable.
e2) 8...Bg4 9.Qd2 Nd7 10.Be3 (a better try is 10.Nh2 Bxe2 11.Nxe2 Nf6 12.f3 with somewhat better

77
chances for White) 10...a6 11.a4 a5 12.Rd1 Nb4 13.Ng5 Bxe2 14.Qxe2 e5 15.dxe5 Nxe5 16.c5 Ng4
17.0-0 (this is more accurate than 17.Bc1 Ra6 18.f3 Ne5 as seen in Chau-B.Ziska, Moscow 1994,
when 19.Be3 Qe7 would have been approximately equal) 17...Nxe3 18.Qxe3 Nc2 19.Qg3 Nd4
20.cxd6 Qxd6 21.Qxd6 cxd6 22.Rd3 and White had a marginally better endgame thanks to Black’s
inferior pawn structure.
8.Qd2!?
Logical and consistent. White has a couple of alternatives:
a) 8.Nf3, and now:
a1) 8...e5 9.d5! (this is much better than the tame and uninspired 9.dxe5?! dxe5 10.Qd2 c6 11.0-0-0
Qc7 12.Kb1 Re8 13.Bh6 Bxh6 14.Qxh6 Ng4 which left Black with a winning position in Urazayev-
Maze, Chess.com INT 2021) 9...a5 10.g4 Nc5 11.gxh5 Bg4 12.h6 Bh8 13.Nh2 Bxe2 14.Qxe2 Qd7
15.0-0-0 Nh5 thus far Muhammad Musa-Khoong Wei Quan, Kuala Lumpur 2001, and now 16.Rdg1
Bf6 17.Be3 would have left White with a large advantage.
a2) 8...c5 9.d5 a6 10.a4 Re8 11.a5?! (an easy improvement is 11.Qd2! whereas the text move allows
Black instant counterplay on the queenside) 11...b6 12.axb6 Qxb6 13.Qc2 Rb8 14.Ra2 Nf8 15.0-0 e6
with a position where I prefer White, but Black has a playable position, I.Osmak-Bodnaruk, Moscow
2020.
b) 8.f3 c5 9.d5 a6 10.a4 b6 11.Nh3 Ne5 12.Nf2 Rb8 13.g4? (White has a much better option in
13.Qd2! Re8 14.g3!? when Black is miserably passive) 13...b5 14.cxb5!? (this is much better than
14.axb5?! axb5?! 15.Nxb5? Bd7 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.gxh5 which was played in Szczepkowska-I.Agrest,
Chess.com INT 2021, and now 17...Nxc4! 18.Bxc4 Bxb5 19.Bxb5 Rxb5 would have given Black a
large advantage) 14...axb5 (or 14...hxg4 15.f4 Nf3+ 16.Bxf3 gxf3 17.Qxf3 with an edge for White)
15.axb5 and White has the better chances.
8...c5 9.d5

78
9...a6!?
Another option is the odd-looking, and, in my opinion, not particularly good 9...Ne5?!, when White
has tried several things:
a) 10.Nf3 Nxf3+ (or 10...Nfg4 11.Nh2?! (but White can improve with 11.Nxe5 Nxe5 12.Bh6 with a
clear advantage) 11...Nxh2 12.Rxh2 Bd7 13.Bh6 a6 14.Bxg7 Kxg7 15.f4 Ng4 16.Bxg4 Bxg4 and
Black had a pleasant position in Napolitano-Ladstaetter, Luzern 1953) 11.gxf3 a6 12.a4 e6? (normal
but not good; a better choice was 12...Bd7 13.Bh6 Qa5 14.Bxg7 Kxg7 15.Ra3 e6 when White has the
better chances, but Black can still fight) 13.Rg1 exd5 14.Nxd5 Be6 15.Nf4 (this position is already
very problematic for Black) 15...Qe7 16.0-0-0 Rfd8 17.Nxh5! (the sacrifice allows White to crash
through on the kingside) 17...gxh5 18.Bh6 Ne8 19.Bxg7 Nxg7 20.Qh6 f6 21.Rg6 Ra7 22.Rdg1 and
White was winning in Giri-Ozdemir, Chess.com INT 2020.
b) 10.Nh3?! Re8?! (10...b5!? is better) 11.f3 Qa5 12.Rc1 a6 13.Bh6 Bd7 14.Bxg7 Kxg7 15.f4 Neg4
16.Bxg4 Nxg4 was played in Babujian-Predojevic, Mureck 1998, when 17.0-0 with about equal
chances would have been best.
c) 10.Bh6 Bxh6! (but not 10...a6? 11.Bxg7 Kxg7 12.Nf3 Nxf3+ 13.gxf3 Qa5 14.f4 b5 15.f3 e6
16.dxe6 Bxe6 17.f5 and White was winning in Crouch-Huberty, Coulsdon 1999) 11.Qxh6 Qa5
12.Nf3 (12.Qd2 b5 is fine for Black, e.g., 13.cxb5 a6 14.b6 Bd7 with excellent Benko-style
counterplay on the queenside) 12...Nxe4 13.Nxe5 dxe5 14.Rc1 Nxc3 15.Rxc3 Qxa2 16.Bxh5 Bf5
and Black is by no means any worse.
10.a4 Ne5

79
11.f3?!
This pawn advance looks consistent with White’s overall set-up, but it also weakens the dark squares,
of course, provided Black will be able to take advantage of it. However, the untested 11.Nf3!? is
probably better, for instance, 11...Nxf3+ 12.gxf3 Qa5 13.Ra3 Bd7 14.Kf1 Rfe8 15.Kg2 and White
has slightly better chances, although there is, of course, a lot of fighting left to do.
11...Bd7
Black can also consider both 11...Qa5 and 11...b5!?, e.g., 12.axb5 Bd7! 13.Nh3 axb5 14.Rxa8 Qxa8
15.cxb5 c4 16.0-0 Rb8 17.Nf2 Bxb5 with chances to both sides.
12.Nh3 Qc7?!
Black should have played 12...b5 13.cxb5 axb5 14.Bxb5 Bxb5 15.Nxb5 Nh7 16.Bf4 with chances to
both sides.
13.Nf2 Rfb8 14.0-0 b6 15.b3

80
In an online game by one of the variations primary proponents, White went in a different direction by
playing the less accurate but perfectly logical: 15.Rae1 which aims to prepare the eventual e4–e5
advance. Now Black should have sacrificed a pawn with 15...b5 seeking active counterplay on the
queenside, but instead, he played very passively and was crushed: 15...Qd8? 16.b3?! (the immediate
16.f4! is better) 16...Ne8? (16...b5!? was once more necessary) 17.f4! Ng4 18.Nxg4 Bxg4 19.Bxg4
hxg4 20.f5 Nf6 21.e5 dxe5 22.fxg6 fxg6 23.Qd3 e4 24.Nxe4 Rb7 25.Ng3 Qd6 26.Re6 and Black
resigned, 1–0, Fedoseev-Mikhailovsky, Chess.com INT 2020.
15...Qd8 16.Bh6 Bh8 17.Ra2 and White has a clear advantage; Black is almost entirely without
counterplay.

81
 Chapter 8: 6.Be2 e5 7.d5

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.d5

7...h5
Again, we see Black blocking the h-pawn, which makes a lot of sense, but it also prevents Black from
challenging a bishop when it heads to g5. Naturally, Black has tried numerous other things at this
juncture:
a) 7...c6 8.h5 cxd5 9.cxd5 (this is more accurate than 9.exd5 which allows Black some counterplay in
the center yet was very effective for White in its one outing: 9...Qd7?! (but Black could have tried
9...Nbd7 10.h6 Bh8 11.Nh3 Nc5 when the game is anybody’s fight) 10.hxg6 fxg6 11.Nf3 Qe7
12.Ng5 e4 13.Be3 Na6 14.Qd2 Nc5 15.0-0-0 Bd7 16.Rde1 and White had a clear advantage in
Rapport-Gallagher, Caleta 2014), and here Black has tried a few different things:
a1) 9...Qa5 10.Bd2 Bd7 11.a4 Qd8 12.hxg6 fxg6 13.Nf3 Ng4 14.0-0 h6 15.Ne1 Nf6 16.Qb3 Na6
17.Nd3 b6 18.Qc4 with a small but clear positional advantage for White, Tate-Marconnet, Chicago
1989.
a2) 9...Na6 10.g4 Qa5 11.Bd2 Qb4 12.f3 Bd7 13.h6 Bh8 14.Nb5 Qc5 15.Qc1! and White had a clear
positional advantage in Ruckschloss-Rodriguez Fernandez, Pardubice 2011.
a3) 9...Nbd7 10.g4 (or 10.Be3 Nc5 11.hxg6 fxg6 12.Qc2 a5 13.Nh3 Bd7 14.Bxc5 dxc5 15.0-0-0
Ne8 16.d6! a4 17.Bc4+ and White was clearly in command of the game, Dettmann-Siemers,
Germany 1992) 10...Nc5 11.f3 a5 12.Be3 Bd7 13.Qd2 Qe8 14.Nh3 b5 15.Nf2 b4 16.Ncd1 Bb5
17.h6 Bh8 18.Bxc5 dxc5 19.Ne3 with a miserable position for Black, Ruckschloss-Kubala, Slovakia
2002.
b) 7...a5 8.h5 Na6 9.h6 (White can also play 9.hxg6 fxg6 10.Bg5! (note that 10.Bh6?? is terrible, as

82
played in Eltigani-Murzin, Chess.com INT 2020, although Black failed to find the best continuation:
10...Bxh6 11.Rxh6 Nc5 12.f3 Nh5 and White is completely busted) 10...Qe8 11.Qd2 Nc5 12.Rh4
Bd7 13.0-0-0 Na4 14.Nb5 Bxb5 15.cxb5 Nc5 16.f3 with a clear positional advantage for White,
Rajlich-Khukhashvili, Plovdiv 2008.) 9...Bh8 10.Bg5 Qd7 11.Rh4 Nc5 12.Qc2 Ne8 13.g4 f6 14.Be3
Qe7 15.Rh2 Bd7 16.0-0-0 Rb8 17.f3 and White had a strategically winning position in Netusil-
Mejzlik, Czech Republic 2014.
c) 7...Na6 8.h5 Nc5 transposes to 7...Nbd7 8.h5 Nc5.
d) 7...Nbd7, and now:
d1) 8.h5 Nc5 9.h6 Bh8, and here:

d11) 10.Qc2 a5 11.Be3 Ng4 12.Bxg4 Bxg4 13.f3 Bd7 14.g4 Bf6 15.Qd2 Bh4+ 16.Kd1 Bf6 17.Kc2
Na6 as played in V.Damjanovic-D.Stojanovic, Vrnjacka Banja 2021, and here 18.Rd1 would simply
have given White a steady, clear advantage.
d12) 10.Bg5 c6 (or 10...a5 11.f3 Bd7 12.Qd2 Qb8 13.Nh3 c6 was played in B.Jacobson-Siva,
Chess.com INT 2021, and here 14.g4 cxd5 15.Nxd5 Nxd5 16.cxd5 would have given White a very
clear advantage) 11.b4 Na6 12.a3 Nc7 13.Nf3 a5 14.Nd2 Bd7 15.0-0 Qc8 16.Rc1 axb4 17.axb4 Ra3
18.Ndb1 and White was more or less winning in Vrolijk-Das, Chess.com INT 2020.
d2) 8.g4, and now:
d21) 8...a5 9.h5 Nc5 10.f3 gxh5 11.gxh5 Ne8 12.Be3 f5 13.exf5 Bxf5 14.Qd2 a4 15.Nh3 e4 16.h6
Be5 17.f4 Bf6 as played in one of the OG games with this line, Engels-Solin, Munich ol 1936, when
18.Ng5 Kh8 19.0-0-0 would have given White a large advantage.
d22) 8...Nc5 9.f3 a6 (or 9...a5 10.Be3 Bd7 11.Qd2 Qe7 12.Nh3 Rfb8 13.Nf2 a4 as played in
Mammadova-Agayeva, Baku 2003, when 14.0-0-0 would have given White an almost decisive
advantage thanks to Black’s lack of counterplay) 10.Bg5 Rb8 11.b4 Ncd7 12.Qd2 b5 13.cxb5 axb5

83
14.Bxb5 Nb6 15.a4 Bd7 16.Bd3 Nxa4 17.Nxa4 Bxa4 18.Rxa4 and White was winning in Flores-
Naval Vidiella, Balaguer 2007.
e) 7...h6 8.g4 leaves us with a position where Black really only have insufficient options: 8...Nh7
9.Be3 f5 10.gxf5 gxf5 11.exf5 Bxf5 12.Qd2 or 8...Ne8 9.Be3 f5 10.gxf5 gxf5 11.exf5 Bxf5 12.Qd2
or 8...Nfd7 9.h5! g5 10.Be3 or 8...c6 9.g5 hxg5 10.hxg5 Nh7 11.Qd3 Re8 12.Qg3, in each case with
varying degrees of clear to a large to decisive advantages for White.
f) 7...Ne8 8.h5 f5 (or 8...c5 9.hxg6 fxg6 10.Bg4 (10.g4!?) 10...Na6 11.Nh3 Nac7 12.Bxc8 Rxc8
13.Qg4 (13.Ng5!?) 13...Nf6 14.Qh4 Nh5 15.Bg5 and White was clearly better in Bondarevsky-
Pitksaar, Moscow 1958) 9.hxg6 hxg6 10.exf5 gxf5 11.Bh6 Bxh6 (or 11...Qf6 12.Bxg7 Nxg7 13.Qd2
f4 14.Ne4 Qg6 15.Bf3 Nf5 16.Ne2 Na6 17.0-0-0 Bd7 18.Rh2 Kg7 19.Rdh1 gave White a decisive
advantage in an online game, although White failed to covert in the end) 12.Rxh6 Kg7 13.Qd2 f4
14.Rh2 Bf5 15.0-0-0 Nf6 16.Nf3 Rh8 17.Rdh1 with an overwhelming advantage for White in an
online game.
g) 7...Nfd7 8.h5, and here:

g1) 8...f5 9.hxg6 hxg6 10.exf5 (or 10.Nf3 Nf6 11.Nh4 with a clear advantage for White) 10...gxf5
11.g4 f4 12.Bd3 Nc5 13.Bh7+ Kf7 14.b4 Nca6 15.Qc2 Rh8 16.Qg6+ Kf8 was played in an online
game, and here 17.Nf3 Nd7 18.Ng5 and White would have had winning position.
g2) 8...a5 9.hxg6 fxg6 10.Nh3 (White should avoid 10.Bh6? because of 10...Bxh6 11.Rxh6 Rxf2 and
Black is better, whereas 10.Nf3 Nc5 11.Be3 Nba6, which was played in an online game, 12.Ng5 h6
13.Nh3 a4 14.Qd2 would have left White with a clear advantage) 10...Na6 11.Be3 Ndc5 was played
in an online game when 12.Qd2 Bd7 13.0-0-0 would have given White a large advantage.
h) 7...c5 8.h5 transposes to chapter 9.
8.Bg5

84
As seen in several previous chapters, the bishop deployment to g5 is quite effective and easy to
remember, particularly when Black has already committed to playing ...h7–h5. Nevertheless, White
has several other moves of interest in this particular position:
a) 8.Nf3 Ng4 9.Ng5 f5 10.exf5 gxf5 11.f3 Nf6 12.Qc2 Qe7 13.Be3 Na6 14.0-0-0 and White was
comfortably better in E.Atalik-Schleining, Stary Smokovec 2018.
b) 8.Nh3 Nh7 9.Ng5! Nd7 10.Be3 Ndf6 11.f3 Nxg5 12.hxg5 Nh7 13.Qd2 f6 14.gxf6 Bxf6 15.g3
Qe7 16.0-0-0 with a large advantage for White, Vitiugov-Antipov, Chess.com INT 2020.
c) 8.f3 Nh7 (or 8...c6 9.Be3 a5 10.g4 c5 11.Nh3 Na6 12.Nf2 Bd7 13.a4 with a dominating position
for White, Jovanovic-J.Adams, Mingara 1999) 9.g4 Bf6 10.g5 Bg7 11.Be3 Na6 12.Qd2 Nc5 13.b4
Nd7 14.c5 a6 15.a4 and Black was being crushed on all fronts, yet later managed to turn the game
around, Zhu-Shen, Daqing 2018.
8...Na6
In line with the Petrosian Variation of the Classical King’s Indian, Black has some other tries, but
here too, they come up short:
a) 8...Qe8 9.Bxf6 (White also has 9.f3 Nh7 10.Be3 with a nice version of a Sämisch King’s Indian)
9...Bxf6 10.g4 hxg4 11.Bxg4 Kg7 12.h5 Rh8 was played in Terho-Lardot, Finland 2002, and now
13.Bxc8 Qxc8 14.Qf3 Nd7 15.0-0-0 would have left White an undeniable advantage.
b) 8...Nbd7 9.g4 hxg4 10.Bxg4 Qe8 was seen in Abrahams-Polzer, Bad Gastein 1948, and here
11.Be2 Nc5 12.Qc2 would be clearly better for White.
9.f3 Qe8 10.Qd2 Nh7

11.Bh6
White could also consider 11.Be3 f5 12.0-0-0 with a clear advantage.

85
11...f5 12.Bxg7 Kxg7 13.exf5 Bxf5 14.g4
This pawn-break rips open Black’s kingside, which is one of the downsides of Black having played
...h7–h5 and allowing the dark-squared bishops to be exchanged.
14...hxg4 15.fxg4 Bd7 16.h5 g5 17.Nh3 and White had a clear advantage in Sarkar-Ichimura
Barbosa, Chess.com INT 2021.

86
 Part 3: 6.Be2 c5 7.d5

In this part, we are covering the following lines:

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.d5

Chapter 9: 7...a6, 7...Nbd7, 7...Na6, 7...e5, 7...h6, 7...Qa5, 7...Qb6

Chapter 10: 7...h5
Chapter 11: 7...b5

Chapter 9: Minor Lines

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.d5

87
7...a6
Black’s primary options 7...h5, 7...b5 and 7...e6 are covered in the following chapters. In this chapter,
we focus on the less played lines. Still, they are nevertheless seen with some frequency, mainly
because many Black players are unfamiliar with White’s variation of choice and must come up with
something viable. The text move is typical as it prepares ...b7–b5 and allows positions that could arise
in the following chapters.
Black has some additional choices:
a) 7...Nbd7 8.h5 a6 (8...Re8 looks odd but did okay in its first outing: 9.hxg6 fxg6 10.Bf4?! a6
11.Nh3 b5 12.cxb5?! axb5 13.Ng5 b4 14.Nb1 Nf8 15.Nd2 h6 16.Nh3 e6 17.dxe6 Nxe6 18.Kf1 Nd4
and White was being outplayed in Pokorny-Hromadka, Trencianske Teplice 1928, but White can
improve with 9.h6 Bh8 10.Nh3 Nf8 11.Ng5 with a dreadful position for Black), and now:
a1) 9.hxg6 fxg6 10.a4! (White should not play 10.Bh6? Bxh6 11.Rxh6 although it worked in an
online game, but in this position Black can play 11...b5! (instead of 11...Kg7?) 12.cxb5?! axb5
13.Bxb5 Ne5 and White is getting outplayed) 10...Ne5 11.Nh3! e6 12.f4 Nf7 13.dxe6 Bxe6 14.Nf2
and White has the upper hand.
a2) 9.h6! Bh8 10.a4 (this is much better than 10.f4? which allows 10...b5! 11.Qc2 Nb6 12.cxb5 axb5
13.Bxb5 e6 14.dxe6 Bxe6 was played in an online game and was also playable for Black, but
13...Bd7 14.Bxd7 Qxd7 would have given Black a perfectly playable Benko) 10...Ne5 11.Ra3 Bd7
12.f4 Neg4 13.a5 and White has a clear advantage.
b) 7...Na6 8.h5, with a fork in the path:
b1) 8...Nc7 9.a4 (or 9.Bf4 a6 10.a4 Nd7? 11.Qd2 Ne5 12.Bh6 Bg4 13.Bxg7 Kxg7 14.hxg6 fxg6
15.Qh6+ Kf7 16.Bxg4 and Black was busted in Ruckschloss-Mace, Parthenay 2000) 9...a6 10.g4?!
(10.Nh3!?) 10...Bd7?! 11.g5 Nfe8, and now rather than 12.f4?! b5 13.Nf3?! (13.Qc2!?) 13...e6

88
14.dxe6 fxe6? (14...Bxe6 was necessary) 15.hxg6 hxg6 16.Nh4 Kf7 17.Nxg6 and White’s attack
crashed through in an online game, White should have played 12.a5! Rb8 13.Nf3 with an
overwhelming advantage for White; Black is terribly passive and will struggling to activate the pieces
and get counterplay, whereas White will soon launch more pieces at Black’s king.
b2) 8...e6 9.h6 (9.hxg6 fxg6 10.Bg5 exd5 11.cxd5 Qe7 12.Qd2 Bd7, and here, in an online game,
White tried 13.f3 Nc7 14.a4 a6 15.a5 Nb5 16.Bxb5? axb5 and Black was doing very well, but White
can easily improve with 13.Nf3 b5 14.e5 dxe5 15.d6 Qe6 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.Ne4 with a decisive
advantage for White) 9...Bh8, thus far we have followed an online game, and here White should have
played 10.dxe6 fxe6 (or 10...Bxe6 11.Nf3 Bg4 12.Be3 Nb4 13.Ng5 Bxe2 14.Qxe2 Nc6 15.0-0 with
a comfortable edge for White) 11.Be3 b6 12.Qd2 Bb7 13.Nf3 Nxe4 (or 13...Qe7 14.Ng5 is clearly
better for White) 14.Nxe4 Bxe4 15.Ng5 Bxg2 16.Rg1 with strong attack and much better chances for
White.
c) 7...e5? is a terrible idea, closing the center hands White everything he wants without getting
anything in return. But...

8.h5! This is already so good for White that the computer assesses it as almost decisively better for
White, so let us look at why:
c1) 8...a6 9.hxg6 (or 9.h6 Bh8 10.a4 b5 11.axb5 Bb7 12.Bg5 Qb6 13.Qc2 axb5 14.Rxa8 Bxa8
15.Nxb5 Bb7 16.Nf3 Nbd7 17.0-0 and White was completely winning in an online game, but also
9.a4 is massively better for White) 9...fxg6 (or 9...hxg6 10.Bg5 Qa5 11.Qd2 Re8 12.Bh6 Bh8 13.0-0-
0 (but White can play even better with 13.a4 Nbd7 14.f3 Nf8 15.Nh3 with a depressing position for
Black) 13...b5 14.cxb5 axb5 15.Bxb5 Bd7 16.Bxd7! (16.Bg5! is still almost winning for White, the
threat is Rxh8+) 16...Nbxd7 17.Nf3 Reb8 and Black has more or less adequate counterplay on the
queenside) 10.a4 (once more, 10.Bh6? is a bad idea, Black simply answers 10...Bxh6 11.Rxh6 b5 and
Black has excellent play on the queenside whereas White will not threaten anything on the kingside

89
for a long time), and now:
c11) 10...Nbd7 11.Nh3 (11.g4! is even better) 11...h6 12.g4 Qe8 13.Be3 g5 14.f3 Qg6 15.Nf2 Qf7
16.Rh3 Re8 thus far we have followed an online game, and here 17.a5 b6 18.axb6 Nxb6 19.Nh1
would have given White a large advantage.
c12) 10...a5 is inexplicably bad, e.g., 11.f3 (11.g4!) 11...Na6 12.Be3 (12.g4!?) 12...Nb4 13.Qd2 Bd7
14.g4 Qe7 15.Nh3 b6 16.Ng5 Rad8 17.0-0-0 and White was winning in an online game.
c13) 10...b6 11.Bg5 Ra7 12.Qd2 Qe8 was played in an online game, when 13.Nh3 Nh5 14.Bxh5
gxh5 15.f3 was crushing for White.
c2) 8...Ne8 9.Nf3 Bg4 10.hxg6 fxg6 (or 10...hxg6 11.Bg5 Bf6 12.Bh6 and White has a massive
advantage) 11.Ng5! (offering to exchange the light-squared bishops and then jump onward to e6)
11...Bxe2 12.Qxe2 Nf6 13.Ne6 Qb6 14.Nxg7 Kxg7 15.Bh6+ and White was winning in an online
game.
c3) 8...Nbd7 9.hxg6 (9.g4! is untested but, in fact, even better) 9...fxg6 10.a4 (White should not play
the typical but bad 10.Bh6? a6? (Black should simply capture on h6, this is a typical idea, and Black
is in no danger of getting mated. 10...Bxh6 11.Rxh6 Nh5! 12.Bxh5 Qg5 and Black already has the
better chances) 11.Qd2 Qe7 12.Bxg7 Qxg7 13.f3 Nh5 14.0-0-0 b5 15.cxb5 axb5 16.Bxb5 and White
had a clear advantage in an online game) 10...Rb8 11.g4 with a significant advantage.
c4) 8...Re8?! 9.hxg6 fxg6 10.Bh6 (10.g4 Na6 11.g5 Nd7 12.Be3) 10...Bh8 11.Qd2 Na6 12.Nf3 Nc7
13.Nh2 Bd7 14.Bg5 Qc8 was played in an online game, and now 15.0-0 would leave White with a
decisive advantage.
d) 7...h6 8.g4! Ne8 9.Be3 e5? (this is a misunderstanding of proportion) 10.Qd2 Kh7 11.0-0-0 f5
12.gxf5 gxf5 13.f4 exf4 14.Bxf4 Nf6 15.e5 (or 15.exf5 Bxf5 16.Nh3 Ne8 17.Bd3 when Black’s
position is a tragedy) 15...dxe5 16.Bxe5 Ne4 17.Nxe4 Bxe5 18.Nf2 (or 18.Nf3 fxe4 19.Nxe5 and
White is winning) 18...Qd6 19.Nd3 Bg7 20.Qf4 Qxf4+ 21.Nxf4 with a dominating positional
advantage for White, Schmalhofer-Jung, Fischbach 1997.
e) 7...Qa5 is best met with 8.Bd2 e6 9.g4 exd5 10.g5! Ne8 when both 11.Nxd5 and 11.exd5 both are
clearly better for White.
f) 7...Qb6?! makes almost no sense, okay... it makes no sense. White is clearly better after 8.h5 or
8.g4.
8.a4

90
8...e6
This approach is similar to what we will cover in chapters 12 and 13, but we a few other moves to
look at here as well:
a) 8...h5 9.Nh3 (or 9.f3 Nbd7?! (9...e6!? is better) 10.Nh3 Ne5 11.Nf2 Rb8 12.g4 Qb6 13.g5 Ne8
14.f4 gave White a clear advantage in Netusil-M.Braun, Czech Republic 2016) 9...e6 (or 9...Bxh3
10.Rxh3 Nbd7 11.Bg5 Qc7 and here White opted for the direct attack in an online game: 12.g4!?
hxg4 13.Bxg4 Rfe8 14.h5 Ne5 15.Be2 gxh5 16.Bxh5 Nxh5 17.Qxh5 - White has an irresistible
attack - 17...b5 18.Qh7+ Kf8 19.Bh6 e6 20.Qxg7+ Ke7 21.dxe6 Kd8 22.Nd5 Qa5+ 23.Bd2 b4
24.exf7 and Black resigned.) 10.Ng5 exd5 11.cxd5 (here White achieves less with the recapture by
the h-pawn, for instance, 11.exd5 Re8 12.0-0 Bf5 13.f3 Nbd7 14.Bf4 Ne5 15.Re1 Qc7 16.Bf1 Nh7
17.Qd2 Nxg5 18.hxg5 Re7 and Black had effortlessly equalized in an online game), and here Black
has tried a few different things:

91
a1) 11...Qc7 12.0-0 Nbd7 13.f4 c4 14.Be3 Rb8 was played in an online game, and here White missed
15.e5 dxe5 16.d6 Qd8 17.Bxc4 and White would have a winning advantage.
a2) 11...Re8 and here:
a21) 12.Bf4 Qe7 (Black has also tried 12...Ng4 13.Bxg4 Bxg4 14.f3 Bc8 15.Qb3 Be5 16.Bxe5 Rxe5
17.f4 Re8 and here White should have played 18.0-0 with a decisive advantage) 13.0-0 (13.a5 Nbd7
14.Ra4 is slightly better for White but is completely unnecessary) 13...Nbd7 14.Bg3 Ne5 15.f4 Neg4
was played in an online game, and now 16.e5! dxe5 17.d6 and Black would have been busted.)
a22) 12.f3 Nbd7, and here we have another fork in the road:

a221) 13.Bf4 Ne5 14.Qd2 Bd7 (or 14...Rb8 15.0-0 Qa5 16.Rfb1 Bd7 17.Qc1 c4 18.b4 cxb3 19.Rxb3

92
Rec8 and Black had equalized in an online game) 15.0-0 Nh7 16.Rab1 Nxg5 17.hxg5 c4 18.b4 b5
and Black had solved his opening problems successfully in an online game.
a222) 13.g4?! is nothing for Black to worry about, e.g., 13...Rb8 14.Bf4 Qe7 and White’s position is
overextended; Black will follow up with ...Ne5.
a223) 13.Be3 Rb8 14.Qd2 Ne5 15.Ra3 Bd7 16.a5 b5 17.axb6 Rxb6 18.Bxa6 Qb8 with chances to
both sides in an online game.
a3) 11...Nbd7 12.0-0 (White should avoid 12.g4?! hxg4 13.Bxg4 Ne5?! 14.Be2 Bg4 15.Bf4? Bxe2!
16.Qxe2 Nh5! 17.Bd2 c4 was a disaster for White in an online game or 13...Nxg4!? 14.Qxg4 Nf6
15.Qg2 Bd7 with a good game for Black) 12...Ne5 13.f3 Qc7 14.Be3 Bd7 15.Qd2 Rfb8? (15...b5!)
16.Rfc1 (both players missed that White had 16.f4! Neg4 17.e5 dxe5 18.d6 Qa5 19.Nd5 Qxd2
20.Ne7+ Kf8 21.Bxd2 and White has a decisive advantage thanks to the vulnerable Black king, one
continuation runs 21...e4 22.f5 Bxf5 23.Nxf5 gxf5 24.Rxf5 Rd8 25.Bc3 Rxd6 26.Bxg4 hxg4 27.Raf1)
16...b5 17.axb5 axb5 18.Rxa8 Rxa8 19.Nxb5 was played in an online game, and here 19...Bxb5
20.Bxb5 Qb6 would have given Black full compensation for the sacrificed pawn.
b) 8...Nbd7? is too slow, for instance, 9.h5! Ne5 10.Nf3 (here, White should have considered 10.h6
Bh8 11.f4 Neg4 12.Nh3 (or 12.Ra3!?) 12...Bd7 13.f5 Ne5 14.0-0 when Black is being crushed from
a lack of breathing room) 10...Neg4 11.h6 Bh8 12.Bf4?! (White could do even better with 12.Rh4!
Ne8 13.Ng5 Ngf6 14.Be3 and Black’s position is utterly depressing to look at: White owns the entire
board) 12...Nh5 13.Bg5 f5 14.0-0 f4 15.Re1 Bd7 16.e5!? (a thematic pawn sacrifice, but 16.Qd2!?
would have been better) 16...Nxe5 17.Nxe5 Bxe5 18.Bxh5 gxh5?? (Now White crashes through;
Black should have played 18...Rf5! which is possibly what Artemiev overlooked when he played
16.e5) 19.Rxe5! dxe5 20.d6 Bg4 21.Qd5+ e6 22.Qxe5 Qd7 23.Be7 Rf7 24.Ne4 Rxe7 25.Nf6+ and
Black resigned, Artemiev-Bodnaruk, Chess.com INT 2021.
9.h5 exd5 10.exd5

93
This position is different from those we cover in the last chapter of the book by that here we have
played a2–a4 for White, which we would dispense with through the chapter 13 move order.
Alternatively, White can also recapture with the c-pawn to enter set-ups like those in chapter 12:
a) 10.cxd5 Re8 11.hxg6 (White should consider 11.h6!? Bh8 12.Qc2 when I prefer White, but there is
nothing particularly wrong with Black’s position) 11...hxg6 (or 11...fxg6!? 12.Qc2 Nbd7 13.Nf3 as
played in an online game where Black now went 13...Rb8?! but instead 13...Qe7 14.Bg5 Ne5 15.Nd2
Nf7 would have fine for Black) 12.Bg5 Qb6 (12...Nbd7!?) 13.Qc2 Nbd7 14.a5 Qc7 15.Nf3 b5
16.axb6 Qxb6 17.Nd2 when White had a comfortably better Modern Benoni position in an online
game.
b) White has also tried 10.hxg6, which normally would transpose after capture on g6 followed by one
on d5, but Black has also tried 10...d4?! (I think 10...fxg6 is best when 11.e5 dxe5 12.cxd5 leads to a
sharp position with chances to both sides) 11.gxh7+ Kh8 12.Nd5 Nxe4 13.Nf3 Bg4 was played in
S.Williams-R.Palliser, London 2000, and now 14.Qc2! Qe8 15.Kf1 Nc6 16.Nh4 Bxe2+ 17.Qxe2
would have given White the much better chances.
10...Re8 11.hxg6
White can also consider 11.h6!? along the game plan outlined in chapter 13 and then after 11...Bh8,
continue with 12.Kf1 or 12.Bg5, in both cases with an excellent position for White.
11...hxg6 12.Bg5
12.Kf1!? is worth considering.
12...Nbd7 13.Nf3
White had success with 13.Qd2 in an online game, but that is not on account of the objective merit of
the move: 13...Qa5 14.Nf3 Ng4? (both 14...Qb4; and 14...b5 are fine for Black, whereas the text
move only helps White with his plans by removing a defender from the kingside) 15.Kf1?! (White

94
could have played the clever 15.Ne4! Qc7 (or 15...Qxd2+ 16.Nfxd2 Bxb2 17.Rb1 with a positional
collapse for Black) 16.Qf4 Nde5 17.Nxe5 Rxe5 18.Bxg4 f5 19.Qh2 Rxe4+ 20.Be2 and White is
clearly better) 15...Nge5 16.Bh6 Bh8 17.Bf4 Nxf3 thus far, we have followed the online game, now
18.gxf3 Nf6 19.Bd3 Qc7 20.Kg2 intending Rag1 and Kf1 would give White a decisive attack as
Black is without counterplay and cannot move defenders to the kingside.
13...Ne5 14.Nxe5
14.Kf1!? is once more worth a thought.
14...Rxe5 15.f4 Re3
Black should have played 15...Re8! 16.Kf1 Qa5! when Black has a much better position.
16.Qd2 Qe8 17.Kf2 Ne4+ 18.Nxe4 Rxe4 19.Bf3 Bd4+??

Black entirely misses White’s tactical response. The positional sacrifice 19...Bf5! 20.Bxe4 Qxe4 is
entirely okay for Black.
20.Kg3
The immediate 20.Qxd4!! is also possible.
20...Re3 21.Qxd4!!
White does not miss it the second time around!
21...cxd4 22.Bf6! Bh3 23.Rxh3 and here, Black resigned in the online game; mate can be delayed but
not avoided.

95
 Chapter 10: 7...h5

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.d5 h5

A natural reaction for Black, wanting to stop the advance of White’s h-pawn. The consequence is that
the g5–square is, more or less, now permanently in White’s hands.
8.Bg5!?
This is our main line, immediately laying claim to the g5–square that Black has handed to us and
exerting pressure by making the ...e7–e6 advance less attractive on account of the pin of the f6–
knight. But White has a couple of alternatives that also have merit:
a) 8.Bf4, with another fork in the path:
a1) 8...a6, and with White has tried several things:
a11) 9.Qd2 Nbd7 (9...b5!? seems more consistent with the previous move and is, according to both
me and my trusty silicone friend, the better move 10.cxb5 axb5 11.Bxb5 Ba6 12.Bxa6 Nxa6 13.Nge2
Ng4 with excellent, typical Benko, compensation for the sacrificed pawn) 10.Nf3 Ng4 11.0-0 Nde5
12.Nxe5 dxe5 13.Bg3 f5 14.exf5 gxf5 15.f3 Bh6 was played in an online game, and now 16.Qe1!
Ne3 (or 16...Be3+ 17.Kh1 Nh6 18.Bxe5 f4 19.Nd1 Rf5 20.Bc3 and White is winning) 17.Bxe5 with
a large advantage for White.
a12) 9.a4 Re8 10.Nf3 e6 11.Nd2 (this knight move improves over 11.Qc2 exd5 12.cxd5 Bg4 13.0-0
Qe7 14.Rfe1 Nbd7 15.a5 Bxf3 16.Bxf3 Ng4 17.Bxg4 hxg4 and Black had a good position in an
online game) 11...exd5 12.cxd5 Ng4 13.Bxg4 hxg4 14.a5 with a comfortable edge for White.
a13) 9.Nf3 b5! 10.cxb5 axb5 11.Bxb5 Ba6 12.Bxa6 Rxa6 13.0-0 Rb6 14.Qd2 Nbd7 15.b3 Rb4
16.Rfe1 Ng4 17.Rac1 with chances to both sides in a typical Benko-style position.

96
a2) 8...b5 9.cxb5 Qa5 10.Bd2! (this is better than 10.Qd2 a6 11.bxa6 Bxa6 12.f3 Nbd7 13.Nh3 Rfb8
14.Nf2 Qb4 which gave Black excellent play in an online game.) 10...a6 11.a4 with a transposition to
8...b5 in our main line.
a3) 8...Nbd7 9.Nf3 Ng4 10.Qd2!? (our improvement over 10.Nd2 Nde5 11.f3 Nf6 12.Bxe5 dxe5
13.g4 which seemed better for White in Ruckschloss-Hebelka, Slovakia 1994) 10...a6 11.a4 Qa5
12.0-0 and Black’s pieces seem awkwardly placed, and White has a comfortable advantage because
Black will have a hard time generating counterplay.
a4) 8...Qa5 9.Bd2 transposes to 8.Bg5 Qa5 9.Bd2 below.
a5) 8...e6 9.Nf3 exd5 10.exd5 Re8 (or 10...Bg4 11.0-0 Re8 12.Qc2 Na6 13.a3 Nc7 14.Rad1 and
White has nice control over the position) 11.0-0 Bg4 (Or 11...Ne4 12.Nxe4 Rxe4 13.Bg5 Qb6?!
14.Bd3 Re8 15.Re1 and White is clearly better.) 12.Re1 a6 13.Ng5 Bxe2 14.Rxe2 Nbd7 15.Bxd6
with a large advantage for White in Plueg-Tuerk, Germany 1996.
b) 8.Nh3 is also fully playable despite scoring rather poorly in its initial encounters:
b1) 8...e6 9.Ng5 exd5 10.exd5 Re8 11.f3 (White can improve with 11.Bf4 Bf8 12.Qd2 Nbd7 13.0-0
with a comfortable positional plus for White) 11...Nbd7 12.Bf4 Ne5 13.0-0 a6 14.Re1 Nfd7 (Black
could have considered the sharp 14...b5!? 15.cxb5 c4, e.g., 16.Bxe5 Rxe5 17.Bxc4 Qb6+ 18.Kh1 Qf2
and Black is doing fine) 15.Bf1 Nb6 16.Qb3 Bf5 as played in Ruckschloss-Mrva, Piestany 2005, and
now 17.Re3 followed by Rae1 would have guaranteed White an edge.
b2) 8...b5 9.cxb5 a6 10.bxa6 Nxa6 11.a4!? (this seems better than 11.f3 Qb6 12.Nf4?! Nc7 13.g4
hxg4 14.h5 gxh5 15.fxg4 hxg4 16.Qd3? Qb4 17.Bd2 Qd4 when Black was comfortably better in
Tolush-Filipowicz, Polanica Zdroj 1964) 11...Qb6 12.Ra3 c4 13.Bxc4 Qb4 14.Qe2 Nc5 15.0-0 Bg4
(the immediate 15...Bxh3 16.gxh3 Nxa4 is also playable) 16.f3 Bxh3 17.gxh3 Nxa4 18.Nxa4 Rxa4
19.Rxa4 Qxa4 20.b3 when Black has compensation for the sacrificed pawn but not more than that.
8...e6
The typical central pawn break. But Black has a couple of frequently played alternatives:
a) 8...Nbd7

97
9.Nf3 (White has two reasonable alternatives in 9.f3 Ne5 10.Nh3 and 9.Qd2 Ne5 10.Nf3 Neg4 (or
10...Nxf3+ 11.gxf3) 11.a4 Nh7 12.Bf4 Bd7 13.0-0 Re8 14.Ng5 Nxg5 15.Bxg5, in both cases with a
pleasant edge for White) 9...a6 (or 9...Re8 10.0-0 e5 11.dxe6 Rxe6 12.Qc2 a6 13.Rad1 Qf8 14.Rd2
Qe8 15.Nd5 Nxd5 16.exd5 and White has a clear positional advantage, Terrieux-Dann, Mulhouse
2021) 10.0-0 (White has also tried 10.Qd2 Rb8 11.a4 Qa5 12.0-0 Qb4 13.Qc2 Re8 14.a5 and the
trapped queen leaves White with a winning position) 10...Rb8 11.a4 Ng4 12.Qd2 Ndf6 (Black has a
very passive position; another try was 12...b6 13.Nh2 Nxh2 14.Kxh2 Ne5 was played in an online
game and now 15.Rae1 would have given White a comfortable advantage) 13.Bf4 (or 13.Ne1 Nh7
14.Bxg4 Bxg4 15.Bh6 Bxh6 16.Qxh6 e5 17.f3 Bd7 18.g3 Qf6 was played in an online game, and
here 19.a5 b5 20.axb6 Rxb6 21.Nd3 would have promised White an edge) 13...Bd7 14.e5 dxe5
15.Nxe5 Nxe5 16.Bxe5 Rc8 17.Rfe1 e6 18.Bf3 exd5 19.cxd5 Ng4 (19...Re8 20.Bg3) 20.Bxg7 Kxg7
and now rather than 21.g3 as played in an online game, White could have won with 21.Bxg4 Bxg4
22.Ne4 Qxh4 23.Qc3+ Kh6 24.Nf6 Qg5 25.f3 Bf5 26.Qe5.
b) 8...Qa5, and here we have two main options for White:
b1) 9.Qd2 a6 (9...Nbd7 is too passive: 10.Nf3 a6 11.0-0 Re8 12.a3 Ng4 13.Rab1 Rb8 14.Qc2 b5
15.cxb5 axb5 16.b4 cxb4 17.axb4 Qc7 18.Rbc1 Ba6 was seen in Netusil-Stodolova, Prague 2005, and
now 19.Qa2 would have promised White a slight advantage) 10.f3 (on 10.a4, Black plays 10...b5
11.cxb5 axb5 (11...Nbd7!?) 12.Bxb5 Ba6 13.f3?! Nbd7 14.Bc6 Ne5 15.Bxa8 Nd3+ 16.Kd1?? Rxa8
and Black was winning in an online game) 10...b5 11.cxb5 axb5 12.Nxb5 (12.Bxb5!? Ba6 13.Bxa6
Qxa6 14.Nge2 was a better way to an advantage) 12...Qxd2+ 13.Bxd2 Na6 14.Rc1 Bd7 15.a4 (but
not 15.Na3?? Nb4 when Black has a large advantage) 15...Rfb8 16.b3 with at best a tiny edge for
White.
b2) 9.Bd2, and here Black has tried several things:

98
b21) 9...Qb6 10.Qc2 a6 11.Nf3 Bg4 12.0-0 Nbd7 13.Rfe1 Rab8 14.Ng5 Bxe2 15.Rxe2 Qc7 16.a4 b6
17.Rae1 Ne5 was reached in an online game, and now 18.b3 would have left White with a
comfortable advantage.
b22) 9...Re8 10.Nh3 Qb6 11.Rb1 e6 12.dxe6 Bxe6 13.Ng5 Bd7 14.f3 Nh7 15.Nd5 Qd8 16.Nxh7
Kxh7 17.Bg5 with a small plus for White.
b23) 9...Na6 10.Qc1 Kh7 11.Nf3 Ng4 12.Ng5+ Kg8 13.Bxg4 Bxg4 14.f3 Bd7 15.a3 Qd8 16.Qc2
and White was clearly better in De Santis-Santurbano, Verona 2005.
c) 8...b5 9.cxb5 a6 10.a4 Qa5 11.Bd2 axb5 (or 11...Qb4 12.Qc2 axb5 13.f3! (this is much better than
13.Bxb5 Ba6 14.f3 c4 15.Nge2 Qc5 16.Ra3 (16.Qc1!? Nfd7 17.Be3 is better for White) 16...Nbd7
17.Qc1? Ne5 and Black had everything he wanted in Fier-Perez Candelario, chess24.com INT 2020)
13...c4 (or 13...bxa4 14.Nb5 and White is winning) 14.Nxb5 Qb3 15.Qxc4 Qxb2 16.Bc3 Qc2
17.Nd4 Nxe4 18.fxe4 Qxe4 19.Qd3 and Black does not have enough compensation for the sacrificed
piece.) 12.Nxb5 Qb6 13.Qc2 Na6 14.Nf3 Nb4 15.Qc4 e6 (15...Ng4!?) 16.Bxb4 cxb4 17.0-0 exd5
18.exd5 Bb7 19.Qxb4 with a clear advantage for White, Praggnanandhaa-Alavkin, Chess.com INT
2021;
d) 8...a6 9.Nf3 Bg4 10.Nh2?! (White seems able to improve with both 10.a4!? and 10.0-0!?)
10...Bxe2 11.Qxe2 Nbd7 12.0-0 Nh7 13.Bd2 e6 14.Nf3 e5 15.Ng5 and White had a small edge in
Malich-Dittmann, Brandenburg/Havel 1953.
9.g4!

99
This pawn push is, in my opinion, White’s most potent option. However, White has another try main
try, which we will take a quick look at here:
9.Qd2 exd5 (or 9...Re8 10.g4 exd5 11.gxh5! (this is good and necessary as 11.exd5? Bxg4! is a
disaster for White, e.g., 12.f3 Bf5 13.Nh3 Qb6 14.Nf4 Nh7 15.Rg1 Nxg5 16.Rxg5 as played in an
online game, when 16...Bd4 17.Rxf5 gxf5 would have left Black with a winning position) 11...dxe4
12.0-0-0 Bf5 13.Nd5 Re5 14.h6 and White has a clear advantage), and here:
a) 10.cxd5 Re8 11.f3, with another fork in the road:

a1) 11...Nbd7 12.Nh3 a6 13.a4 Ne5 14.Nf2 Bd7 15.0-0 Qa5 16.f4 Neg4 17.Nxg4 Nxg4 18.Bxg4
Bxg4 was played in an online game and now 19.f5 Bd4+ 20.Kh1 f6 21.Be3 would have left the game

100
wide open and in a complete mess.
a2) 11...Qa5 12.Nh3 Nbd7 13.Nf2 a6 14.Bh6 Bh8?! (or 14...b5 15.0-0 Bxh6 16.Qxh6 Qb4 17.Rab1
with the better chances for White) 15.0-0 b5 16.a4 b4 17.Ncd1 Ne5 18.Ne3 Qc7 as played in an
online game, when 19.Bf4 and White has a clear advantage.
a3) 11...a6 12.a4 with another fork:
a31) 12...Qa5 13.Ra3 Nh7 14.Bh6 Bf6 15.Nd1 Qb4 16.Qxb4 cxb4 17.Ra1 Nd7 with chances to both
sides in an online game.
a32) 12...Qc7 13.Nh3 (it would have been better to play 13.Bh6 although Black after 13...Bh8
14.Ra3 c4 should not have any significant problems) 13...Bxh3! (but not 13...c4?! 14.Nf2 Nbd7 15.0-
0 Rb8 as played in an online game, when 16.Be3 b6 17.Rfc1 Ne5 18.b4 cxb3 19.Rab1 would have left
White with a clear advantage) 14.Rxh3 Nbd7 15.a5 (or 15.Bh6 Bh8 16.0-0-0 b5 17.g4 as played in an
online game, when 17...hxg4 18.Rg3 b4 would have given Black a winning position) 15...b5 16.axb6
Qxb6 17.Kf2, as was seen in an online game, when 17...Reb8 18.Na4 Qa7 would have left Black
with the better chances; the black pieces are much better coordinated.
a33) 12...Nbd7 13.Nh3 Ne5 14.Nf2 Qa5 15.0-0 Bd7 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.f4 Ng4 18.Nxg4 hxg4 19.g3
Bd4+ 20.Kg2 f5 and Black was clearly better in an online game.
b) 10.Nxd5 Be6 11.Nxf6+ Bxf6 12.f4 Nc6 13.0-0-0 with a sharp position where the chances are
about even, although Black must keep a cool head when White presses further on the kingside.
c) 10.exd5 Re8 11.Nf3 (less good is 11.0-0-0 when 11...Qa5! (or 11...b5! 12.Nxb5 Na6 give Black
the better chances) ) 11...Bf5 12.0-0 Nbd7 13.Rfe1 a6 14.a4 Qb6 15.a5 Qc7 (15...Qb3?! 16.Qc1 Ne4
17.Ra3 Qb4 18.Ra4 Qb3 19.Bd1 and Black’s queen was trapped in an online game.) 16.Bf4 Ne4
17.Nxe4 Bxe4 18.Ng5 Bf5 with chances to both sides, Bluebaum-Gascon del Nogal, chess24.com
INT 2020.
Finally, we have 9.dxe6, of which I could only find one example; Black seems to equalize after
9...Bxe6 10.Nh3 Qa5 11.Kf1 (11.Qd2 would have kept the chances balanced) 11...Qb4 12.Qxd6
Qxb2 and Black was already comfortably better, Harkonen-V.Fedorov, Kuopio 1992.
9...Qa5
Logical to put pressure on White’s center. The alternatives do not offer Black anything better:
a) 9...hxg4 10.e5! (in an online game, White, a grandmaster, went for 10.Bxg4 and won after
10...exd5 11.Bxc8 Qxc8 12.Bxf6 Bxf6 13.Nxd5 Qd8 14.h5 g5 15.Qf3 Bxb2 16.Rb1 Be5 17.Nh3
Kh8 18.Qf5 Rg8 19.Rxb7 Qa5+ 20.Kf1 Qa6 21.Rxf7 Qxc4+ 22.Kg2 Bg7 23.Nxg5 and Black
resigned, 1–0. A brutal beating) 10...dxe5 11.h5 gxh5 12.Rxh5 e4 13.Qd2 Nbd7 14.Rh1 Qc7 15.d6
Qc6 16.Qf4 and Black is busted.
b) 9...exd5 10.Nxd5, and now:
b1) 10...Be6 11.gxh5 Bxd5 12.exd5 Nbd7 13.Qd3 Ne5 14.Qc2 Re8 15.hxg6 fxg6 16.h5 Qa5+
17.Bd2 Qb6 18.h6 Bh8 was played in an online game, and here White’s best is 19.Bc3 Qa6 20.Nh3
and Black is completely busted.

101
b2) 10...Bxg4 11.e5 (or 11.Bxg4 hxg4 12.Bxf6 Bxf6 13.h5 and Black is busted) 11...Bxe2 12.Qxe2
dxe5 13.0-0-0 Nbd7 14.Nxf6+ Bxf6 15.Bxf6 Qxf6 16.Rxd7 when Black does not have enough for
the piece.
10.Qd2!
This simple queen move appears to be best although, White has tried 10.Bxf6!? Bxf6 11.Qd2 (in an
online game, White instead went for 11.gxh5?! Bxc3+ 12.bxc3 Qxc3+ 13.Kf1 exd5 14.exd5 Bf5 and
Black had the advantage) 11...Bxc3 12.bxc3 exd5 13.gxh5 dxe4 14.hxg6 Bf5 15.gxf7+ Rxf7 16.Bh5
Rg7 17.Ne2 Bh7 18.Rg1 Rxg1+ 19.Nxg1 with a curious position where White has a clear advantage
on account of Black’s very vulnerable king
10...exd5 11.gxh5
Another option is 11.Bxf6 Bxf6 12.Nxd5 Qxd2+ 13.Kxd2 Bxb2 14.Rb1 Bg7 15.gxh5 with positions
like we will see below; White has a sizeable advantage.
11...Nc6
The computer very much likes White’s position after 11...dxe4 12.hxg6 fxg6 13.h5 Nc6 14.hxg6 d5
15.cxd5 Nd4 16.Rc1, but it will probably be well worth it to analyze this a bit on your own because
the position is rather crazy, and mistakes of any kind can quickly change the evaluation from clearly
better to clearly worse in no time.
12.h6 Bh8 13.Bxf6 Bxf6 14.Nxd5

14...Bd8
Or 14...Qxd2+ 15.Kxd2 Bxb2 16.Rb1 Bd4 17.f4 with a clear advantage for White thanks to the
advantage in space and the activity of the white pieces.
15.f4 f5

102
Once more, the queen exchange is not of much use for Black: 15...Qxd2+ 16.Kxd2 Nd4 17.Nf3
Nxf3+ 18.Bxf3 and White has a clear advantage in the endgame.
16.h5 g5 17.Nc3 g4 18.Qxd6 with a sharp position where White has the better chances, although I
would recommend anybody playing this line to analyze the resulting positions a bit on their own to
familiarize themselves with the typical ideas.

103
 Chapter 11: 7...b5

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.d5 b5!?

This Benko-gambit style approach is a way for Black to change the conversation from focusing
around an attack on Black’s king and restraining Black’s piece play from playing on the queenside
and seeing how you deal with that and how your premature kingside advance, h2–h4, and incomplete
development will fit into that game plan. While the overall score between higher-rated players
indicates that White is doing well, the positions in the games show something entirely different.
8.cxb5
White has to capture on b5, as Black otherwise is just better, for instance, 8.h5 b4 9.Nb1 (or 9.hxg6
bxc3 10.gxh7+ Kh8 and White does not have enough for the piece) 9...Nxe4 10.hxg6 fxg6 and White
has lost a pawn for nothing.
8...a6
Going «full Benko» appears to be the way to go. Black has also tried 8...Qa5 9.Bd2 a6 10.a4! (this
advance is an improvement over 10.g4?! after which Black has a good game, e.g., 10...axb5 11.g5
Nfd7 12.Nxb5 Qa4 13.Qb1 c4 14.Nc3 Qb4 15.a3 Qb3 16.Bd1 Qb6 when Black had an excellent
version of a Benko Gambit and a clear advantage, D.Tumakov-Tukhvatullin, Kazan 2009) 10...axb5
11.Bxb5 Qb4 12.f3! (White wants to complete the development but right now, reinforcing the center
is even more important) 12...Nfd7 13.Nge2 Ba6 14.0-0 Bxb5 15.Nxb5 Qxb2 (Black has won the
gambit pawn back, but thanks to White’s control of the queenside, an advantage in space and passed
pawn on the a-file, a long-term trump, White is in control) 16.Bc3 Bxc3 17.Nexc3 Qb4 18.Qd2 and
White is clearly better.
9.a4

104
This approach, similar to the 5.e3 line in the Benko Gambit and several other lines of the King’s
Indian where Black has played...b7–b5, appears to be White’s best option. Nevertheless, I will present
an overview of each of the alternatives for your benefit as you may be able to find some new ideas of
your own that will improve White’s play. The main options are:
A) 9.bxa6, and here Black has primary alternatives:

a) 9...Bxa6, with another fork in the path:

a1) 10.Nh3 (White is still playing for h4–h5, but Black does not need to worry about this) 10...Qb6
11.Nf4 Nbd7 12.h5 Ne5 13.hxg6 hxg6 14.Bxa6?! Qxa6 15.Qe2 Rfb8 16.Qxa6 Rxa6 17.Ke2?! Nfd7
and Black had a comfortable position, Green-Lombardy, San Juan 1965.

105
a2) 10.Bxa6 Nxa6 11.Nge2 (or 11.Nf3 Nb4 12.0-0 c4) 11...c4! 12.Be3?! (12.0-0 Nc5 was better but
also comfortable for Black) 12...Ng4 13.Bd4 Nb4 14.Rh3 Bxd4 15.Nxd4 h5 16.Qe2 Qb6 and Black
had a clear advantage, Mlechev-V.Popov, Sofia 1963.
a3) 10.Nf3 Nbd7 11.0-0 Qa5! (this untried move is better than 11...Nb6; and 11...Qc8, both of which
lead to comfortable plusses for White) 12.a4 Rfb8 with a typical Benko Gambit where White has
played the odd h2–h4; Black has sufficient play for the sacrificed pawn.
a4) 10.h5 Bxe2 11.Ngxe2 Nxh5 12.f3?! (White should have given preference to 12.0-0 although
12...Qd7 13.Rb1 Na6 would have been a very comfortable Benko Gambit for Black where he has not
even sacrificed a pawn) 12...Nd7 13.Kf2 Rb8 14.Rb1 c4?! (Black’s play can be improved with
14...Ne5! 15.g4 Nf6 16.Bf4 c4 (or 16...h5 17.g5?! Nfd7, in both cases with clearly better chances for
Black) 17.Bxe5 dxe5 18.Kg2 h5) 15.g4 Nhf6 16.Kg2 Ne5 17.Bh6 Qd7 18.Bxg7 Kxg7 19.Qd2!?
(19.Ng3?! was played in Jobava-Yuffa, St Petersburg 2018, and here 19...h5! 20.gxh5 Rh8! would
have been clearly better for Black) 19...Kg8 20.Rh4 Nd3 21.Nd4 e5 with a sharp position with
chances to both sides.
b) 9...Qa5 10.Bd2 Bxa6, and now:
b1) 11.Nf3 Nbd7 (11...Qb4!?) 12.0-0 Rfb8 (or 12...Bxe2 13.Qxe2 Rfb8 14.Rab1 Qa6 15.Qxa6 Rxa6
16.b3 Ne8 17.a4 Nc7 18.Ne2 as played in Dao-El Gindy, Cap d’Agde 1998, when 18...f5 19.exf5
gxf5 20.Ng3 f4 21.Bxf4 Nxd5 would have equalized for Black) 13.Rb1 Ng4 14.h5 Bxe2 15.Qxe2
Qa6 16.Qd1 Nge5 17.hxg6 (17.b3!?) 17...hxg6 18.Ng5?! (18.b3!?) 18...Nc4 19.b3 Nxd2 20.Qxd2
Qa5 and Black had the better chances in Vitiugov-Chigaev, Chess.com INT 2020.
b2) 11.h5 scores heavily in White’s favor, but that is not on account of the objective value of the
move: 11...Nbd7 (or 11...Bxe2 12.Ngxe2 Qb4 13.hxg6 fxg6 14.Qc2 Nbd7 15.Nf4 Qc4!?
(15...Rfb8?! 16.Rb1 was clearly better for White in Badelka-Murzin, Bryansk 2021) 16.Ne6 Ng4
17.Nxf8 Rxf8 18.f4 (but not 18.f3? Nde5! 19.0-0-0 Nf2 20.Qb3 Ned3+ 21.Kc2 Nb4+ 22.Kb1 Qd3+
23.Kc1 Rb8 and Black is winning) 18...Bxc3 19.bxc3 Ndf6 with excellent compensation for the
sacrificed material for Black) 12.hxg6 hxg6, and here:
b21) 13.Kf1 Rfb8 14.b3 Ne5 (14...c4! 15.bxc4 Nb6 seems to improve for Black) 15.Nf3 Nfg4
16.Nxe5 Bxe5 17.Na4 Bxe2+ 18.Qxe2 Qa6 19.Rc1 when Black had more or less sufficient
compensation for the sacrificed pawn, but White’s position is probably easier to play, Jobava-
S.Atalik, Burgas 2012.
b22) 13.Nf3 Qb4 (or 13...Rfb8 14.Rb1 Ng4 with a comfortable game for Black) 14.Bxa6 Rxa6
15.Qc2 Ng4 16.Rh4 Nde5 17.Nxe5 Nxe5 18.a3? Qc4? (here Black missed the simple 18...Qxb2!
19.Qxb2 Nd3+ 20.Ke2 Nxb2 with a large advantage) 19.Rh3 Rb8 and the chances were more or less
even, Nestorovic-D.Popovic, Subotica 2014.
b23) 13.Bxa6 Qxa6 14.Nge2 Rfb8 15.Rb1 (or 15.Qc2 Ne5 16.Rh3 c4 17.Nc1 Nd3+ 18.Nxd3 cxd3
19.Qxd3 Qxd3 20.Rxd3 Rxb2 and Black obviously had no problems, Tica-Djukic, Portoroz 2017)
15...Rb4 16.a3 Rb7 17.0-0 Rab8 18.Qc2 Ne5 19.f3 Qd3 20.Rfc1 Qxc2 21.Rxc2 Nc4 and although
White later won the game, Black has a comfortable game at this point, Jobava-Radjabov, Wijk aan

106
Zee 2015.
B) 9.b6 Qxb6, and we have arrived in a Declined Benko Gambit, where White has played the
ridiculous-looking h2–h4. White now has a few options to choose between:

a) 10.Nh3 h5 11.Ng5 Nbd7 12.0-0 Ne5 13.Na4 Qc7 (13...Qa7!?) 14.Bf4 Nh7 15.Rc1 Nxg5 16.hxg5
Rb8 17.Bd2 a5 18.b3 Bd7 with chances to both sides, Vescovi-Leitao, Sao Paulo 2007.
b) 10.Nf3 a5 (or 10...Nbd7 11.Nd2 as played in M.Ratkovic-Indjic, Vrbas 2015, and here 11...h5
12.Nc4 Qb7 13.Bg5 Nb6 would have been approximately balanced) 11.Nd2 Ba6 12.Nc4 Bxc4
13.Bxc4 Qb4 14.Qd3 Nbd7 15.a3 Qb6 16.Bb5?! as played in Ruckschloss-Khamatgaleev, Zvolen
2000, and now (but 16.f4 Rfb8 17.Qe2 a4 is somewhat more playable for White, if still more pleasant
for Black.) 16...Ne5 would have been very nice for Black.
c) 10.h5 e6 (or 10...Nbd7 11.h6 Bh8 12.Nf3 Rb8 13.0-0 with about equal chances) 11.hxg6 hxg6
12.dxe6 (12.Nf3? exd5 13.Nxd5 Nxd5 14.Qxd5 Bb7 15.Qg5 Re8 16.Nd2 d5 and White was busted
in Bartel-Sapeta, Katowice 2019) 12...Bxe6 13.Nf3 Nc6 14.Qxd6 Rfd8 with sharp play and chances
to both sides.
C) 9.h5 axb5! 10.hxg6 fxg6 (10...hxg6! is also perfectly playable) 11.e5 (11.Bxb5? Qa5! is already
much better for Black) 11...dxe5 12.Bxb5 Ba6 13.Qb3 Bxb5 14.Qxb5 (this is better than 14.d6+?!
Kh8 15.dxe7 Qxe7 16.Qxb5 Nbd7 17.Nh3 when a draw was agreed upon, ½–½, in Kayonde-
Munenga, Lusaka 2018, although Black has the better position after 17...e4! 18.Bg5 Ne5) 14...Qd6
15.Nf3 Nbd7 with chances to both sides.
D) 9.Nf3?! axb5 10.Bxb5? (making matters worse, but also 10.Nxb5 Nxe4 11.a4 Nf6 is very
pleasant for Black) 10...Nxe4! 11.Nxe4 Qa5+ 12.Bd2 Qxb5 13.Bc3 Bxc3+ 14.bxc3 Ba6 (Black is
already winning and it quickly went even further downhill) 15.Nfd2 Qd3 16.h5 Nd7 17.hxg6 fxg6
18.Qg4 Ne5 19.Qe6+ Rf7, and White resigned, 0–1, Ruckschloss-Farkas, Slovakia 2017.

107
9...axb5 10.Bxb5 Ba6
The normal move when Black plays the Benko, but another try is 10...Bd7 11.Bc4!? (this retreat
appears best, although 11.f3 is another untested, interesting idea; in the only outing with 10...Bd7,
White instead went for 11.Be2 Na6 12.Nf3 Bg4 13.Nd2 Bxe2 14.Qxe2 Nd7 and here a draw was
agreed upon, ½–½, Budisavljevic-Stojanovic, Vrnjacka Banja 2021, which seems odd because White
has the better position, e.g., 15.0-0 Ne5 16.f4 Nd7 17.Nc4 Nb6 18.Ne3!, but Black seems able to
improve with 11...Qa5 12.Bd2 Qb4 13.Bf3 h5 (13...c4!?) 14.Nge2 Ng4 when I actually like Black’s
position) 11...e6 12.Nf3 exd5 13.Nxd5 h6 (Black should avoid 13...Nxe4?! 14.0-0 Nc6 15.Re1 Re8
16.Ng5 Nxg5 17.Bxg5 Rxe1+ 18.Qxe1 when White’s pieces are better placed, and Black’s king can
quickly become vulnerable) 14.Nc3 Bc6!? (14...Be6 15.Bb5 Bd7 16.Bxd7 Qxd7 17.0-0 Nc6 18.Bf4
and White has the better chances) 15.h5! Nxh5 (if 15...g5 then 16.Nxg5! hxg5? (Black should not
accept the sacrifice and instead give preference to 16...Na6 although 17.Rh3! would give White a
clear advantage) 17.h6 Bh8 18.Bxg5 (White also wins after 18.h7+ Nxh7 19.Rxh7 Bxc3+ (or
19...Kxh7 20.Qh5+ Kg7 21.Bxg5 Qd7 22.Qh6+ Kg8 23.Qg6+ Bg7 24.Bf6 with mate to follow)
20.bxc3 Bxe4 21.Rh5 and White is winning) 18...Re8 19.h7+ Kf8 20.f3 Re5 21.f4 and White is
winning) 16.Kf1 Re8 17.g4 Nf6 18.Bxh6 Nxe4 19.Nxe4 Rxe4 20.Bxg7 Kxg7 21.Qc1 with a strong
attack and clear advantage for White.
11.Bd2!?

A couple of alternatives for White:

a) 11.Ra3?! Bxb5 12.axb5 Rxa3 13.bxa3 Qa5 14.Qd2 Nbd7 15.Nge2 Nb6 16.0-0 Nfd7 17.Qc2 was
played in Miller-Pfatteicher, Baden Baden 2021, and now 17...Ra8 would have given Black more than
adequate compensation for the pawn.
b) 11.Qe2!? Qa5 12.Rb1 Nbd7 13.Nf3 Nb6 14.Qc2 Bxb5 15.axb5 Qb4 (15...Na4!?) 16.0-0 Nc8? (a
blunder; 16...Ng4 17.Bg5 Ra7 with satisfactory play for the pawn) 17.Re1 Na7 18.e5 dxe5 19.Nxe5!

108
(an improvement over 19.Rxe5? Nxb5 20.Rxe7 Nd4 21.Qd3 Rad8 22.Re5 Ng4 23.Re1 Qb3 24.Qd1
and a draw was agreed upon, ½–½, Ruckschloss-Talla, Banska Stiavnica 2010) 19...Nxb5 20.Nc6
and White would have had a clear advantage.
11...Bxb5
Black has tested several alternatives:
a) 11...Nbd7, with an additional fork in the path:
a1) 12.Bxa6 Rxa6 13.Nf3 Qa8 14.0-0 Rb8 15.Qc2 Ng4, and now rather than 16.b3 c4! as played in
an online game where Black achieved equal chances, White should have played 16.Ra2! Qb7 17.Qd3
Nge5 18.Nxe5 Nxe5 19.Qe2 and White has somewhat better chances.
a2) 12.Nge2 Ne8 13.h5 Nc7 14.Ng3 (it is better to play 14.Bxa6! Rxa6 15.0-0 Qa8 16.b3 when
Black does not have enough compensation for the pawn) 14...e6 (Black could equalize with
14...Bxb5! 15.axb5 Rxa1 16.Qxa1 Qb8 and Black wins back the gambit pawn) 15.h6! Bh8 16.0-0
exd5 17.exd5 Bxb5 18.axb5 Nb6 19.Nge4 Rxa1 20.Qxa1 Ncxd5 21.Nxd5 Nxd5 22.Qa6 Qb6
23.Nxd6 and White was winning in an online game.
a3) 12.Nf3 Ng4 13.0-0 c4 14.Qe2 Qc7 15.Bf4 Rfb8 16.Rac1 and White was clearly better in an
online game.
b) 11...e6? 12.dxe6 fxe6 13.Nf3 d5 14.Ng5?! (White can improve with 14.exd5! exd5 15.0-0 d4
16.Qb3+ Kh8 17.Ng5 dxc3 18.Bxc3 and White has a large advantage) 14...Qe7 15.0-0 d4 16.Ne2
Bxb5 17.axb5 Rxa1 18.Qxa1 h6, thus far we have followed an online game, and here White should
have played 19.Nf4 hxg5 20.Nxg6 Qf7 21.Nxf8 Nxe4 (or 21...Bxf8 22.Bxg5 with a decisive
advantage for White) 22.Nxe6 Qxe6 23.Bxg5 and White has a large advantage.
c) 11...Qc8 12.f3!? (this secures the e4–pawn; this appears to be an improvement over 12.Nh3 Bxb5
13.axb5 Rxa1 14.Qxa1 Nbd7 15.0-0 Ne5 (15...Qb7!?) 16.Qd1 Qb7 17.Qe2 Ra8 18.Rb1 h5 19.f3
Ne8 20.Nf2 with a tiny edge for White, Dragnev-Hillarp Persson, Batumi 2019) 12...Bxb5 13.Nxb5
Na6 14.Ne2 Nc7 15.Nxc7 Qxc7 16.Bc3 and White has a somewhat better game.
12.axb5 Nbd7
Black can also play 12...Rxa1 13.Qxa1 Nbd7 14.Nf3 (in an online game, White tried 14.f3?! Ne5
15.Nge2 Nd3+ 16.Kf1 e6 17.dxe6 fxe6 18.Nc1 Nxc1 19.Qxc1 d5 when Black had a fully
satisfactory position) 14...Qb6 15.0-0 Rb8 16.Qa6 Ne8 17.Ra1 Kf8 (this little king move is quite
important because the «normal» 17...Nc7? is refuted by 18.Qxb6 Nxb6 19.Ra7 Bxc3 20.Rxc7 and
White has a clear advantage in the endgame) 18.Qxb6 Nxb6 with close to equal chances.
13.Nf3 Rxa1
Some alternatives for Black are:
a) 13...Qb6 14.0-0 Rfb8? (Black should have played 14...Rxa1 15.Qxa1 Rb8, transposing to our main
line) 15.Qe2 Ne8? 16.h5 Nc7 17.h6 Bh8 18.Ng5 Ne5 19.f4 and White was clearly better in online
blitz games.

109
b) 13...Nb6 14.0-0 Nc4 15.Qb3 Nxd2 16.Nxd2 Nd7 17.Ra3 Nb6 18.Rfa1 Rxa3 was played in an
online blitz game, and now 19.Rxa3 would have left White with a near-winning position.
c) 13...Ne8 14.0-0 Nc7 15.Ra3 Qb8 16.Rb3 (an improvement over 16.Qe2 Qb7 17.Rfa1 Rfb8 18.Qc4
Rxa3 19.Rxa3 as played in Ruckschloss-Dobrowolski, Warsaw 2010, and now 19...Bxc3 20.Bxc3
Qxb5 21.Nd2 would have kept the chances about even) 16...h5 17.Bg5 Re8 18.Nd2 Nb6 19.g4 and
White will crash through on the kingside before Black can generate sufficient counterplay elsewhere.
14.Qxa1 Qb6 15.0-0

15...Rb8
Black has also tried 15...Ne8 16.Qa8! (this is better than 16.Bg5 Nc7 17.Bxe7 Ra8 18.Qd1 Nxb5?!
19.Nxb5 Qxb5 20.Bxd6 Bxb2 21.Qc2 with a clear advantage for White, Maatman-Kokje, Groningen
2019) 16...Bxc3 17.Bxc3 Qxb5 18.Qd8 Nef6 19.Qxe7 Re8 20.Qxd6 Nxe4 21.Qc7 and White was
winning in Ruckschloss-P.Balogh, Slovakia 2018.
16.Qa6!?
This seems to be the most accurate. In an online game, White instead tried 16.Rb1 Ng4 (16...Ne8!? is
also possible, targeting the b5–pawn) 17.h5 gxh5?! (a better option was 17...Bd4 18.Rf1 Nde5 and
Black has a comfortable position) 18.Qa6 Qxa6? (a blunder; Black should have played 18...Bxc3
19.Bxc3 Qxb5 20.Qxb5 Rxb5 21.Nh4 with approximately equal chances) 19.bxa6 Ra8 20.Ra1 Ra7
21.Nb5 Ra8 22.a7 and Black resigned. 1–0
16...Ne8 17.Ra1 Kf8 18.h5 Nc7 19.Qa4 Ra8 20.Qd1

110
White is, at best, marginally better but went on to win the game:
20...Rxa1 21.Qxa1 Ne5 22.h6 Nxf3+ 23.gxf3 Bxc3 24.Bxc3 Qxb5 25.b4 Ne8??
Black could have defended with the surprising 25...Ke8, getting the king away from the danger on the
kingside.
26.bxc5 dxc5 27.Bg7+!
This is possibly the idea that Black had overlooked when playing 25...Ne8.
27...Kg8 28.Qa8 c4 29.Qd8 Qa4 30.Kg2 Qb5 31.Bb2 and Black resigned, 1–0, Vachier Lagrave-
Svidler, Saint Louis 2021; White’s idea is to play Ba3 followed by Qxe7, and Black is defenseless.

111
 Part 4: 7...e6 8.h5

In this part, we are covering the following lines:

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.d5 e6 8.h5

Chapter 12: 8...exd5 – 9.cxd5, 9.hxg6 & 9.h6

Chapter 13: 8...exd5 9.exd5

Chapter 12: 8...exd5: 9.hxg6, 9.h6 & 9.cxd5

None of the options covered in this chapter are part of our repertoire recommendation. It should serve
only as an informational overview rather than an actual recommendation of all the lines.
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.d5 e6 8.h5 exd5

A) 9.hxg6

112
9...fxg6 10.exd5 Re8 transposes to chapter 13, whereas 10.cxd5 will transpose to the lines after
9.cxd5 below.

B) 9.h6

9...Bh8 10.exd5 Re8 transposes to chapter 13.

C) 9.cxd5

113
9...Re8
A standard move in the Modern Benoni, but so are several other moves:
a) 9...Nbd7 10.hxg6 (this is almost certainly not the best for White but is something White commonly
plays in this variation; an untried option and improvement is 10.h6 when 10...Bh8 11.Qc2 a6 12.a4
Ne5 offers something close to equal play) 10...fxg6 11.Bg5?! (11.Nf3!?) 11...a6 12.Qd2 Re8 13.f3 b5
14.a3 c4 15.Nh3 Nc5 and Black had a good game in Garcia del Campo-Arranz Calvo, Valladolid
1986.
b) 9...Qe8?! (a slightly odd square for the queen) 10.Rh4!? (with the queen off the d8–h4 diagonal,
this square is now safe for the rook; 10.h6 can once more be considered 10...Bh8 11.Rh4 and White
has the slightly better chances) 10...Na6 (or 10...a6 11.a4 Nbd7 12.hxg6? fxg6 13.Nf3 Ne5 14.Ra3
Nxf3+ 15.gxf3 Nh5, and Black had a clear advantage in Abdel Razik-Iwasaki, Istanbul ol 2012, but
12.h6! is an easy improvement for White, e.g., 12...Bh8 13.Kf1 and White has the upper hand)
11.Bg5? (11.Kf1! would have given White the advantage) 11...h6 12.Be3 g5 13.Rh2 Nxe4 14.Rc1 f5
15.Qd3 Nxc3 16.bxc3 f4, and Black was well on the way to winning, G.Garcia-Diaz Diaz, Havana
1978.
c) 9...b5!? is an interesting and attractive option for Black, not least because White best continuation
has never been played!

114
10.hxg6?! (this has been White’s preferred choice in the games so far, but White’s best choice is
actually 10.e5!, and when 10...dxe5, White continues 11.h6! Bh8 12.Bxb5! with an interesting
position and perhaps slightly better chances for White), and now:
c1) 10...b4! (it is noteworthy that this move, which was played in 1958, has not been repeated since
despite being quite excellent for Black) 11.gxh7+ Kh8 12.Nb1 Nxe4 13.Nf3 Nd7 14.Qc2 Ndf6
15.0-0 Bb7 and Black had the better chances in Bondarevsky-Vasiukov, Moscow 1958.
c2) 10...hxg6 11.Bxb5 Nxe4 12.Nge2? (or 12.Nxe4 Qa5+ 13.Bd2 Qxb5 14.Ne2 Nd7 with chances
to both sides) 12...Qa5?! (Black could improve with 12...Nxc3! 13.Nxc3 Nd7!, and White would be
in trouble, e.g., 14.Bh6 Bxh6 15.Rxh6 Re8+ 16.Kf1 Rb8 17.Qd2 a6 followed by a rook lift to b4)
13.Qa4 Qxa4 14.Bxa4 Nxc3 15.Nxc3 Nd7 16.Bg5 Rb8 with chances to both sides, Gerusel-Hug,
Berlin West 1971.
c3) 10...fxg6?! with another fork in the road:
c31) 11.Bg5? b4 12.Nb1 Qe8 13.Bxf6 Bxf6 14.Qc2 Qe5 15.Nd2 Qxb2 16.Qxb2 Bxb2 and Black
had a decisive advantage in Netusil-Juptner, Prague 2012.
c32) 11.e5! (here we see this idea again) 11...dxe5 12.Bxb5 Ba6 13.a4 Bxb5 14.axb5 Nbd7 15.Nf3
(or 15.Be3 a6 16.bxa6 Qb6 17.Nge2 Rxa6 18.Rh4 Rxa1 19.Qxa1 e4 with chances to both sides,
Rapport-Baklan, Kozloduy 2013) 15...Nb6 16.Ng5 (16.d6!?) 16...Qd7 17.Be3 Rfc8 18.Qe2 c4
19.Rd1 Rab8 20.d6 and White had a decisive advantage in Klaman-Ljavdansky, Leningrad 1963.
c33) 11.Bxb5?! Ba6 12.Bxa6 Nxa6 13.Nge2 c4 14.Be3 Ng4 15.Bd4 Nc5 16.Bxc5 dxc5 was played
in Chernikov-Keymer, Chess.com INT 2020, Black had the somewhat better chances.
d) 9...Qe7?! 10.hxg6 (White should have instead played 10.h6 Bh8 11.Bg5 with a clear advantage)
10...fxg6 11.Bg5 (normal looking but quite bad 11.f3? Nh5 12.g4 Nf4 13.Bxf4 Rxf4 14.Qd2 Be5
15.0-0-0 Na6 16.Nh3 g5 17.Bxa6 bxa6 18.Ne2 as played in Chau-Ribera Baztan, Moscow ol 1994,

115
and here 18...Rxf3 would have left Black with a clear advantage) 11...Nbd7 12.Bg4? (White does not
have time for this, although admittedly, Black does not have any problems after 12.Nf3 Ne5 either)
12...Ne5 13.Bxc8 Raxc8 14.Nf3 Nf7 15.Qc2? Nxg5 16.Nxg5 Nxd5 17.Nxh7 Bxc3+ 18.bxc3 Rf7
19.0-0-0 Nf4 20.Qd2 c4 21.Qe3 Qe5 and White resigned, 0–1, S.Williams-Gallagher, Birmingham
(4NCL) 2001.
e) 9...a6 10.a4 Re8 transposes to the note after White’s 10th move in chapter 9.
10.hxg6
Another try is 10.Qc2 Nbd7 11.hxg6 hxg6 12.Bh6 Bxh6 13.Rxh6 b5 14.Bxb5 Nxe4! 15.Bxd7??
(White should have played 15.Nge2 Qg5 16.Rh2 when Black has some initiative, but White is not
markedly worse) 15...Bxd7 16.Nxe4 Qg5! and Black gad a decisive advantage in Y.Santiago-
Gabuzyan, Varna 2014.
10...hxg6
Despite having already placed the rook on e8, the recapture with the f-pawn is an interesting
alternative: 10...fxg6, and now:

a) 11.Bg5 Nbd7 (or 11...Qa5 12.Qd2 Nbd7 13.Nf3 (13.f3!?) 13...a6 14.0-0 b5 15.a3 Qc7 16.Bh6 b4
17.Na4 Nxe4 18.Qc1 bxa3 19.Rxa3 thus far Netusil-Frolov, Prague 2017, when 19...Bxh6 20.Qxh6
Ndf6 would have given Black a clear advantage) 12.Qc2 a6 13.a4 Ne5 14.Nf3 Nxf3+ 15.gxf3 Bd7
16.Qc1 Qe7 17.Kf1 Qf7 was Zilka-Rabatin, Czech Republic 2020, and here 18.Qf4 Re5 would have
left the chances about even although I would rather play Black in this position.
b) 11.Qc2 Na6 (or 11...a6 12.a4 Nbd7 13.Nf3 Nf8 14.Bg5 Bg4 15.Ra3 Qc7 16.a5 Bxf3 17.Bxf3
N8d7 18.Ne2 with an edge for White in Tolush-Koblencs, Riga 1962) 12.a3 Rb8 13.Bh6 Bh8 14.f3
Nc7 15.a4 a6 16.a5 b6 and draw agreed, ½–½, in Vass-Borik, Slovakia 2017, Black has equalized.
c) 11.f3?! Nbd7 (11...Nh5! followed by ...Ng3 is simply better for Black) 12.Be3 (12.Nh3!?) 12...a6

116
(12...Nh5!) 13.Qd2 b5 14.Nh3 b4 15.Nd1 Ne5 16.Ndf2 Bd7?! 17.Ng5 Qa5 was played in Strehle-
Bolbochan, Zuerich 1950, and now 18.a3! would have given White an advantage.
11.Bg5

Another logical try for White is to reinforce the center with 11.f3 a6 12.a4 (12.Bg5!?) 12...Qa5?
(12...Nh5!? is better) 13.Ra3?! (13.Bh6! Bh8 14.Bd2! gives White a clear advantage) 13...Nbd7
14.Bd2? (14.Kf1!) 14...Qc7 15.g4 (15.Qc1!?) 15...Rb8 16.g5? (16.Qc1!? would still have given
White an advantage) 16...Nh7 17.Bc4 Ne5 when Black was better in Kincs-M.Braun, Hungary 2004.
11...Qb6
This queen deployment looks a little odd, but the idea is that White will likely play f2–f3 to support
the center at some point, and the queen will be ready on the g1–b6 diagonal. A couple of alternatives
are:
a) 11...Qa5?! 12.f3 a6 13.a4 (White can possibly improve with 13.Qd2!? b5 14.Bh6 Bh8 15.Bf4 Qb6
16.g4 with a clear advantage for White) 13...Nbd7 14.Nh3?! Nh5! 15.0-0 Bd4+ 16.Nf2? (16.Kh2!
was both necessary and better for White) 16...Ng3! 17.Re1 Kg7! 18.Qd2 Rh8 and Black is much
better in Vass-Berek, Slovakia 2015.
b) 11...a6 12.a4 Qa5 13.Bd2 (or 13.Qd2 b5 14.f3 Nbd7 15.Bh6 Bh8 16.Bf4 Ne5 17.Bxe5 Rxe5 with
a clear advantage for Black in Benedictsson-Schussler, Neskaupstad 1984, but White can improve
with 16.Kf1! b4 17.Nd1 Ne5 18.Ne3 and White has a comfortable plus) 13...Qc7 14.Rh4!? Nbd7
15.Nf3 Rb8 16.Kf1 c4?! (16...Ne5!?) 17.Be3 b6 18.Kg1 Nc5 19.e5 dxe5 20.Rxc4 and White had a
clear advantage in Moiseev-Baryshpolets, Kiev 2005.
12.Qc2 Na6 13.a3?
Better and less weakening was 13.f3 Nh5 14.Qd2 Ng3 15.Rh2 c4 16.Be3 with a slight advantage for
White.

117
13...c4 14.Be3 Nc5 15.Rd1 Ng4 16.Bxg4 Bxg4 17.f3?

White should have played 17.Nge2 although 17...Nd3+ 18.Kd2 Qd8 is anything but appealing for
White.
17...Nxe4!! 18.Bxb6 Nxc3+ 19.Kf2 Bf5 20.Qd2 Nxd1+ 21.Qxd1 axb6 with a decisive advantage
for Black.

118
 Chapter 13: 8...exd5 9.exd5

After looking at the Benoni structures in the previous chapter, we will now look at what represents
the biggest problem for Black.
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.d5 e6 8.h5 exd5 9.exd5
At first glance, this capture that returns the position to a symmetrical distribution can look like White
is playing somewhat dull chess. However, unless Black can develop some concrete counterplay, the
black position quickly becomes suffocating.

9...Re8
The logical move, but Black has tried other things in this position as well:
a) 9...Nbd7, and now, White has tried a bunch of things, of which two are better than the others, and a
couple are plain bad:
a1) 10.Kf1!? Ne5 (10...Re8 transposes to our main line) 11.Nf3 (11.h6 Bh8 12.g3 b5 13.cxb5 a6
14.a4 axb5 15.Bxb5 c4 16.Kg2) 11...Neg4? (Black should have given preference to 11...Nxf3
12.Bxf3 Nd7 13.Ne4 Ne5 14.Bg5 f6 15.Bf4 Re8 and Black is not worse) 12.h6! (in an online game,
White went wrong with 12.Ng5? and here Black could have played 12...h6! 13.Nge4 Nxe4 14.Nxe4
f5! 15.Bxg4 (15.Nc3 Bd4! is even worse) 15...fxg4 16.hxg6 Bf5 17.Ng3 Qf6 and Black is already
much better) 12...Bh8 13.Ng5 Re8 14.Rh4 Ne5 15.g3 and White is clearly better.
a2) 10.hxg6? A bad idea. 10...fxg6! Black is perfectly placed on f8, for the f-file to be opened.
11.Nf3 (the logical 11.Bg5 should not be met with 11...Rf7?! 12.Qd2 a6 13.Nf3 Nf8 as played in an
online game, where White here should have given preference to 14.0-0 Bf5 15.Rae1 with the better
chances, but rather 11...Ne5!? 12.Nf3 Nf7 13.Be3 Bf5 when Black has a comfortable edge), and here
we have a few options for Black:

119
a21) 11...Re8 12.Kf1 Nf8 13.Bd3 (White can probably improve with 13.Bg5 Bg4 14.Rh4 and White
has excellent control over the position) 13...Bg4 14.Bg5 Qb6 (14...N8d7!?) 15.Rb1 N8d7 16.Qd2
Ne5 (note that 16...Bxf3? 17.gxf3 Ne5 18.Bxf6 Bxf6 19.Ne4 Bg7 20.Ng5 is very bad for Black)
17.Nxe5 Rxe5 18.Bf4 with a solid plus for White.
a22) Also 11...a6 has been tried: 12.Bg5 (or 12.Ng5!? Ne5 13.f4 Nf7 14.Ne6 with exciting
complications where White appears to be better) 12...Qe8 13.Bh4 Ne5 (13...Ne4!?) 14.0-0 Nxf3+
15.Bxf3 b5?! (15...Bf5!?) 16.Re1 Qd7 17.Re6 (17.Qd2!?) 17...bxc4? (17...b4!?) 18.Qe2 with a clear
advantage for White, Grandell-Namini, Sweden 2017.
a23) However, the untried 11...Ng4!? is possibly best, for instance, 12.Bg5 Qe8 (the computer also
likes the very provocative 12...Bxc3+ 13.bxc3 Ndf6 14.Bd3 Qe7+ 15.Kf1 Bd7 after which Black
should be fine) 13.0-0 (White does not have time for 13.Nb5 as 13...Nde5 14.Nc7 Nxf3 15.gxf3
Qe5! is better for Black) 13...Nde5 14.Qd2 Nxf3+ 15.Bxf3 Ne5 and Black has a good game.
a3) 10.Bf4?! Re8 11.Bxd6? (this capture is a really bad idea; it was safer and better to play 11.h6 Bh8
12.Bg5 (whereas 12.Kf1?! Ne4 is better for Black) 12...a6 13.a4 Qb6 14.Ra3 Ne4 with about equal
chances) 11...Nb6! (this is an improvement over 11...Qb6?! 12.Nb5? which was played in Borsuk-
Janaszak, chess.com INT 2020, and now rather than 12...a6, as played in the game, Black should play
12...Ne4 13.Bc7 Qf6 with an almost decisive advantage) 12.Bxc5 Nxc4, and Black is already clearly
better.
a4) 10.g4?! is an overly aggressive and ultimately dubious approach, after which Black easily gets a
good game: 10...Ne5!? (or 10...b5!? 11.cxb5 Re8 12.f3 Nb6 13.a4 a5 intending ...Bb7, picking up the
d5–pawn) 11.f3 Re8? (Black could once more consider 11...b5 12.h6 Bh8 13.Nxb5 Qe7 14.Kf1
Nfxg4 15.fxg4 f5 16.g5 f4 when White’s kingside aggression frankly looks ridiculous) 12.Kf1
(White should have opted for 12.h6 Bh8 13.Kf1 b5 14.Nxb5 Rb8 15.Nh3 and Black does not have
sufficient compensation for the sacrificed pawn) 12...h6! (a clever improvement over 12...b5 as
played in Ruckschloss-Matejovic, Slovakia 2006) 13.hxg6 fxg6 14.Bxh6?! Bxh6 15.Rxh6 Bxg4
16.fxg4 Nfxg4 17.Bxg4 Qg5 and Black has the better position.
a5) 10.h6! Bh8 11.Nf3 (or 11.Bg5!? Ne5 (11...Qb6 12.b3 is better for White) 12.Kf1 Bf5 13.Rc1
Re8 14.Nf3 Nxf3 15.Bxf3 Qb6 16.b3 and White had a clear advantage in an online game) 11...Re8
(or 11...Ng4 12.Ng5 Ngf6? (Black can possibly improve with the surprising 12...Bxc3+!? 13.bxc3
Re8 14.Kf1 Ndf6) 13.Bf4 Ne5 14.Qd2 a6 15.a4 Qa5 16.0-0 Bf5 17.f3 Nh5 18.Bh2 Nf6 19.g4 and
White was clearly better in an online game; Black is struggling for counterplay) 12.Bg5! (this
improves over an online blitz game between two grandmasters, where Black equalized after 12.Kf1
Ne4 13.Nxe4 Rxe4 14.Bd3 Re8 15.Bf4 Ne5 16.Nxe5 Bxe5 17.Bxe5 Rxe5 and Black had a solid
position without too many problems) 12...Qb6 13.Qd2 Ng4 (or 13...Ne4 14.Nxe4 Rxe4 15.0-0!
Qxb2 16.Rae1 b6 17.Bd1! Rxe1 18.Rxe1 Ba6 19.Ba4 and Black will be struggling to free himself
from White’s stranglehold) 14.0-0 Nde5 15.Nxe5 Nxe5 16.a4! and White has a small but clear
advantage; a possible continuation could be 16...Bd7 (or 16...Qb4? 17.Nb5! Qxd2 18.Bxd2 gives
White a clear advantage) 17.f4! Ng4 18.f5 Bd4+ 19.Kh1 Be3 (note that 19...Nf2+?! 20.Rxf2 Bxf2
21.Bg4 Bd4 22.fxg6 Bxg4? 23.gxf7+ loses for Black) 20.fxg6! hxg6 21.Bxe3 Nxe3 22.Rf3 and

120
White has the better chances.
b) 9...a6 10.h6 (alternatively, White can play 10.hxg6 fxg6 11.Nf3 (or 11.Bg5 b5 12.Nf3 b4 13.Ne4
Qe7 14.Ng3 when White may have a slightly better position; but not 11.Bh6? Bxh6 12.Rxh6 Nbd7
13.Qd2 Ne5 14.f3 as played in Rossetto-Rubinetti, Mar del Plata 1969, when 14...Nh5 15.0-0-0 Qe7
would have given Black a near-decisive advantage) 11...Nbd7 12.Ng5 Ne5 13.f4 Nf7 14.Ne6 Qe7
15.Nxf8 Kxf8 16.0-0 when Black has some, but probably not full, compensation for the sacrificed
exchange) 10...Bh8 11.Bg5 Nbd7 12.Nf3 Qc7 13.0-0 Ng4 14.Qd2 Nde5 15.Nxe5 Nxe5 16.f4 Ng4
17.Bxg4 Bxg4 was played in Urazayev-Chernobay, Chess.com INT 2021, and now White could
played better with 18.Rae1 Bd4+ 19.Kh2 f6 20.Bh4 Rae8 21.b4 Bf5 22.bxc5 dxc5 23.Bf2 and White
has an advantage.
c) 9...Qe7, and now White has tried a few things:
c1) 10.hxg6?! fxg6 11.Bg5 Nbd7 12.Nf3 (or 12.Qd2 Ne5 13.0-0-0 Nf7 14.Bh4 a6 15.Nh3 Bd7
16.Rde1 Qd8 17.g4 b5 18.g5 (18.f3!? would have kept the chances about balanced) 18...Ne8 19.f4?!
Qa5 20.Nf2? was played in Szabo-Orbaan, Szczawno Zdroj 1957, and now 20...b4 would have been
much better for Black.) 12...Ne5 13.0-0 Nf7 14.Bh4 (better but unproblematic for Black was 14.Qd2
Bg4 15.Rae1 Rae8 16.Bd1 Qd8 and Black has effortlessly equalized) 14...Bg4 15.Qc2 Bxf3?! (Black
could improve with 15...Rae8! 16.Rad1 a6 17.a4 and now the brilliant 17...g5!! 18.Nxg5 Nxg5
19.Bxg5 Bxe2 20.Rde1 Qf7 21.Rxe2 Ng4 and Black has a strong attack) 16.Bxf3 Ne5 17.Be2 Qd7
18.Rae1 was played in Zagorovsky-Lohmann, ICCF corr 1980, and now 18...Rae8 19.b3 would have
been no more than marginally better for White.
c2) 10.h6! Bh8 11.Bg5 Re8 12.Kf1 and White has an advantage; the queen is prematurely placed on
e7.
c3) 10.Kf1!? Nbd7 11.h6! (11.g4?! Ne5 12.f3 Nfd7 13.Nh3 Nb6 14.Qb3 Nbxc4 15.Bxc4 Nxf3
16.Nf2 f5 17.g5 was played in Ruckschloss-Plasil, Tatranske Zruby 2018, and here 17...Nd4 18.Qd1
f4 would have given Black the better chances) 11...Bh8 12.Bg5 Re8 (or 12...Ne5 13.f4 Ned7 14.Nh3
Qe3 15.Nf2 and Black is largely without counterplay) 13.Rh4 and White is in control of the game.
10.Kf1!?

121
Scooting to f1 with the king liberates the bishop to guard on h5 and c4 as well as to move the bishop
to other squares. However, whether it is the best move is not entirely clear, and there are other options
which we will look at here:
a) 10.hxg6, and now White has a few moves to choose between: 10...hxg6 (it may be better to capture
with the f-pawn, for instance, 10...fxg6!? 11.Bg5 (a possible improvement is 11.Nf3 although
11...Nbd7 12.Bg5 Ne5 13.Nxe5 Rxe5 14.Qd2 Qf8 and Black seems fine) 11...a6 12.Kf1 Nbd7
13.Nh3 Ne5 14.Nf4 Nf7 was nice for Black in Valsecchi-E.Berg, Chess.com INT 2020) with several
options for White:

a1) 11.Bg5 Nbd7 (11...Qb6 12.Qd2 Ne4 13.Nxe4 Rxe4 14.f3 Qxb2 15.Qxb2 Bxb2 16.fxe4 Bxa1
17.Be7 Nd7 18.Nf3 Bc3+ 19.Kd1 Nf6 20.e5 Ng4 21.Kc2 and although Black later managed to save

122
a draw, White had a decisive advantage at this point, Rapport-Grandelius, Malmo 2013) 12.Qd2, with
a few options for Black:
a11) 12...Ne5 13.Kf1 Qb6 14.Rc1 (White can do better with 14.Bh6! Bh8 15.Re1 with a comfortable
edge for White) 14...Bf5 15.b3 a6 16.Nf3 Nxf3 17.Bxf3 Re5 18.Bh6 (18.Bxf6? Bxf6 19.Qh6? Bd3+
20.Kg1 Rae8 and Black was clearly better, Milicevic-Velimirovic, Portoroz 1961) 18...Bh8 19.Bf4
and White had large advantage.
a12) 12...a6 13.Kf1 Qe7 (if 13...Ne5?! then 14.Qf4! Bf5 15.Qh4 (but not 15.Bh6? Nd3?? (here,
15...Neg4! 16.Bxg7 Kxg7 is outright better for Black) 16.Qd2 Rxe2 17.Ngxe2 Bh8 18.Bg5 and
White was winning in Khalamez-Zheliandinov, Soviet Union 1956) ) 14.Nf3!? (or 14.Qf4 Qe5?!
(14...b5!? was called for) 15.Qh4 Qd4 16.g4 Qe5 17.Bh6 Nh7 18.Nf3 Qe7 19.g5 Qf8 20.Bxg7 Qxg7
21.Ne4 and Black resigned, 1–0, in Khalamez-Soloviev, Soviet Union 1956) 14...Qf8 15.Qf4 Nh7
16.Bh6 Bxh6 17.Rxh6 Ndf6 18.Rh1 Bf5 19.Nd2 Re5 20.g4 g5 21.Qh2 Bg6 22.Nf3 Nxg4 23.Qg3
and White had a nice advantage in Flohr-Liublinsky, Moscow 1952.
a13) 12...b5 13.cxb5 a6 is untried but looks like a very reasonable version of a Benko where standard
concepts do not apply, for instance, 14.0-0-0 Qb6 15.Bh6 Bh8 16.Nf3 axb5 17.Bxb5 Rxa2 18.Nxa2
Qxb5 with chances to both sides.
a2) 11.Kf1 Ne4 12.Nxe4 Rxe4 13.Qb3 (13.Nf3 is a possible improvement) 13...Rh4 14.Rxh4 Qxh4
15.Nf3 Qh1+ 16.Ng1 Be5! and Black already had a better position, Morozov-Radovanovic,
Montebelluna 2020.
a3) 11.Bh6 Bxh6 (it can be tempting to play 11...Bg4?! but after 12.Qd2! (less accurate but also very
good for White is 12.Bxg7 Kxg7 13.Qd2 Rh8 14.Rxh8 Qxh8 15.0-0-0 Bxe2 16.Ngxe2 Nbd7 as seen
in Szczepkowska-Maltsevskaya, Lichess.org INT 2021, and here 17.Ng3! Qh6 18.Qxh6+ Kxh6
19.Nge4 gives White a decisive advantage) 12...Bxe2 13.Ngxe2 Bh8 14.Bg5 Bg7 15.0-0-0 and
White has a near winning advantage) 12.Rxh6 Kg7 (Black can play better with 12...Ng4 13.Rh1 Qf6
14.Nf3 a6 15.Kf1 Bf5 16.Qd2 as seen in Trapl-Kavalek, Luhacovice 1968, and now 16...Nd7,
intending ...Re7 and ...Rae8 gives Black a pleasant position) 13.Qd2 Rh8? (after this move, Black is
more or less lost because he is almost entirely without counterplay; however, the alternatives also
look unpleasant, for instance, 13...a6 14.0-0-0 Rh8 15.Rxh8 Qxh8 16.Nf3 Bg4 17.Ng5 Bxe2 18.Qxe2
and White has a near-winning position, Artemiev-Priasmoro, Chess.com INT 2021 or 13...Ne4
14.Nxe4 Rxe4 15.0-0-0 Qf6 16.Rh2 Qf4 17.Qxf4 Rxf4 18.f3 and White has comfortable edge in the
endgame) 14.Rxh8 Qxh8 15.Qf4 Na6 (or 15...Qd8 16.0-0-0 a6 17.Nf3 b5 18.Ng5 Qe7 19.Rh1 Nh5
20.Bxh5 gxh5 21.Nce4 and Black resigned, 1–0, Artemiev-Gascon del Nogal, Chess.com INT 2021)
16.a3 Bf5 17.Qxd6 Re8 18.Qf4 Ne4 19.Nxe4 Rxe4 20.Qg3 Qe8 21.Kf1 Rd4 22.Re1 Rd2 23.Qc3+
Rd4 24.Nf3 and Black resigned, 1–0, in Artemiev-Ivic, Lichess.org INT 2021.
b) 10.h6!? is about as good as our main line, occasionally transposing to the same positions: 10...Bh8
(Black should avoid 10...Bf8? 11.Bg5 a6 12.a4 when White is comfortably better) 11.Bg5!? (this
pinning move seems more accurate than 11.Kf1 which was tried by Anish Giri: 11...a6?! (it seems
that Black’s best option is 11...Ne4 12.Nxe4 Rxe4 13.Nf3 (if 13.Bd3, then Black can take advantage
of the available h4–square: 13...Rh4 14.Rxh4 Qxh4 15.Qe2 Nd7 16.g3 Qh1 17.Qe7 Nf8 18.Qh4

123
Qxh4 19.gxh4 Nd7 and the chances are about even) 13...Bg4 14.Qc2 Re8 15.Bg5 Bf6 16.Bf4 Na6
intending ...Nc7 and ...b7–b5 or ...b7–b5 followed by ...Nc7. 11...Bf5 12.Bg5 Qb6 was tested in an
online game; here White should play 13.b3! Ne4 14.Nxe4 Bxe4 15.Rc1) 12.a4 Ne4 13.Nxe4 Rxe4
14.Qc2 Re8 15.Nf3 Nd7 16.Bg5 Qb6 17.a5 Qxb2 18.Qxb2 Bxb2 19.Rb1 Bc3 20.Bd2 Bxd2 21.Nxd2
when White’s space advantage more than compensated for the sacrificed pawn and eventually White
converted, Giri-Albornoz Cabrera,Chess.com INT 2020), and here:
b1) 11...a6 12.a4 (or 12.Nf3 Qa5 13.0-0 Nbd7 14.Qc1 Ne4 15.Nxe4 Rxe4 16.Bd3 Re8 as played in
an online game, and now 17.Qf4! would have given White a near decisive advantage) 12...Qb6 (or
12...Qa5 13.Kf1 Nbd7 14.f4 Rb8 15.Nh3 Ne4 16.Nxe4 Rxe4 and Black was better in an online
game, but White can improve with 14.Rh4 Ne5 15.Ra3 and White s comfortably better), and here:
b11) 13.a5?! Qxb2 14.Na4?! (14.Bd2!?) 14...Qe5? (Black should have played 14...Qd4!, but may
have overlooked that after 15.Qxd4 cxd4 16.Nb6, 16...Ne4!! is possible, e.g., 17.Bf4 d3 18.Rc1 Bd4
19.Nxa8 Nxf2 and Black would have had an advantage) 15.Nf3 Qe7 16.Nb6 Ra7 17.Ra3 Nbd7
18.Re3 Qf8 19.Nxc8 Rxe3 20.Nxa7 and White had a large advantage in Vrolijk-Bujisho, Chess.com
INT 2020.
b12) 13.b3 Bf5?! (Black can improve with 13...Ng4! 14.Rc1 Bd4 15.Nh3 Nd7 16.0-0 Nde5 and
Black had a comfortable position) 14.Kf1 Nbd7 15.Ra2 Nf8 16.f3 Bd7 17.Bd3 Nh5 as seen in an
online game, and now 18.Nce2! would have been clearly better for White.
b13) 13.Ra2!? is a simple improvement, e.g., 13...Nbd7 14.Nf3 Ne5 15.0-0 Nxf3+ 16.Bxf3 Qb4
17.Be2 and White has an obvious advantage.
b2) 11...Qa5 is another favorite for Black in online games. 12.Kf1 (White can also consider 12.Qd2!
which leads to interesting play, for instance, 12...a6 13.Nf3 b5 14.Bxf6!? Bxf6 15.Ne4 Qxd2+
16.Nfxd2 Bxb2 17.Nxd6 Bxa1 18.Nxe8 and White should be better) 12...Ne4 (or 12...Nbd7?!
13.Rh4! Ne5 14.a4 and White is in complete control over the game) 13.Nxe4 Rxe4 14.b3 (a logical
alternative is 14.Qc2!? Re8 15.Bd2 Qd8 16.Bc3, forcing the exchange of the dark-squared bishops
and securing White an edge) 14...Nd7 15.Nf3 Ne5 (or 15...Nf6 16.Bd3 Re8 17.Rh4 with a nagging
edge for White) 16.Nd2, thus far, we have followed an online game where Black played the overly
optimistic 16...Rxe2, but 16...Rd4 17.Be3 Bf5 18.Bxd4 cxd4 19.g4 while better also slightly favors
White.
b3) 11...Qb6 12.b3! (this idea is quite common in this line; Black cannot take advantage of it because
the h8–bishop is crucial in defense of the kingside because of White’s pawn on h6; by contrast, White
achieves less after 12.Qd2 Ne4 13.Nxe4 Rxe4 14.Kf1?! Nd7 15.Nf3 Ne5 16.Nxe5 Rxe5 17.Re1 Bd7
18.g3 Rae8 and Black had a pleasant position in Urazayev-Sukovic, Chess.com INT 2021), and now
Black has tried a few things:

124
b31) 12...Ne4 13.Nxe4 Rxe4 14.Rc1 Na6 (or 14...Nd7 15.Kf1 Re8 16.Rh4 Ne5 17.g3 a6 18.Kg2
Qa5 19.a4 Bf5 20.Nh3 Bxh3+ 21.Rxh3 with a comfortable advantage for White: bishop pair and
space advantage, Grischuk-Gelfand, Amsterdam 2019) 15.Rh4 Rxh4 16.Bxh4 Bf5 17.Bg4?! (17.g4!?
Bd7 18.Bg3 Re8 19.Kf1 gives White a comfortable edge) 17...Re8+? (Black plays the obvious move,
but there was a much better continuation available: 17...Bxg4! 18.Qxg4 Nb4! 19.Qe2 Nxd5! 20.Kf1
(20.cxd5?? Qb4+ wins for Black) 20...Nc7 21.Nf3 when White has some, possibly sufficient but no
more than that, compensation for the pawn) 18.Kf1 Bxg4? 19.Qxg4 f5 20.Qd1 Re4 21.Bg5 and
White has a large advantage; Black’s weak kingside is going to be a major problem for Black,
Paravyan-Wagner, Moscow 2020.
b32) 12...Bf5 13.Kf1 (or 13.Rc1!? Nbd7 14.Kf1 Ne5 15.Rh4 Qa5 16.Qd2 a6 17.Nf3 Nxf3 18.Bxf3
and White was better as played in an online game) 13...Na6 14.Rc1 Ne4 15.Nxe4 Rxe4 16.Rh4 Rxh4
17.Bxh4 Qa5 18.a4 Re8 19.Bd3 and White had a slight advantage in Kantor-Ganguly, Biel 2021,
Black is struggling to come up with active counterplay.
b33) 12...Qa5 13.Bd2 Qd8 14.Kf1 Ne4 15.Nxe4 Rxe4 16.Rc1 Rh4 17.Rxh4 Qxh4 18.g3 Qd8
19.Kg2 and White had a clear advantage at this point in Grischuk-Vachier Lagrave, Paris 2019,
although Black later managed to secure the draw.
b34) 12...Bg4 13.Kf1 Bxe2+ 14.Ngxe2 Nbd7 15.f3 (or 15.Rh4 a6 16.Rc1 Qa5 17.Bd2 Qc7 18.Ng3
Ne5 19.Bg5 Qd7 20.Nce4 Nxe4 21.Nxe4 and White will land a knight on f6, securing him the
somewhat better chances as seen in an online game) 15...a6 16.Kf2 Qa5 17.Bd2 Qc7 18.a4 Re7
19.Qc2 Rae8 20.Rae1 Ne5 thus far we have followed an online game, and here 21.Kf1 would have
maintained White clear advantage.
10...Nbd7 11.h6!

125
This pawn advance can seem a little counter-intuitive to close the h-file; were we not supposed to
checkmate Black, using h6 and the h-file? As AlphaZero demonstrated to us, a pawn on h6 can
represent a threat to Black’s king and help us restrain Black. White has tried several other things,
although they do not seem as strong as the pawn push:
a) 11.g4? b5! (in online blitz, Black has also tried 11...Ne4!? 12.Nxe4 Rxe4 13.Qc2 (a couple of
games have seen 13.f3? but then 13...Rd4! 14.Qc2 b5 15.Be3 bxc4 16.Bxd4 Bxd4 gives Black
massive compensation for the exchange, White’s dark squares are incredibly weak) 13...Re8 14.a4
Ne5 and Black has a good game, while 11...Ne5?! 12.h6 Bh8 13.f3 is better for White) 12.Nxb5 (or
12.cxb5 Ne4 13.Nxe4 Rxe4 14.Qc2 Qe7 15.Bd2 Nb6 when both 16.h6 Bf8! (and 16...Bh8 are better
for Black) 12...Ne4! 13.Kg2 a6 14.Nc3 (14.Na3 Rb8 is much better for Black; White’s pieces are
ridiculously placed, and the development is far from done), and now Black has an astonishing idea
14...Bxc3! 15.bxc3 Nxc3 16.Qc2 Nxe2 17.Nxe2, and it looks like Black has made a terrible mistake,
capturing on c3 with his dark-squared bishop, but Black has some amazing tactical resources
available: 17...Ne5! 18.hxg6 fxg6 19.f3 Nxf3! 20.Kxf3 Ra7! when White cannot defend or 17...Rb8!?
18.Bf4? (18.g5 is best, e.g., 18...Ne5 19.Ng3 Bg4 20.f4 Bf3+ 21.Kf2 Bxh1 22.fxe5 Rxe5 23.Nxh1
Qd7 with chances to both sides) 18...Ne5 19.f3, and now Black has the utterly amazing 19...Rb2!!
20.Qxb2 Nd3 and Black is winning!
b) 11.hxg6, and here:
b1) 11...hxg6?! (Black should not capture with the h-pawn; while playable, White seems to get an
edge after 12.Bg5! (note that 12.Bh6?! which has been played by several strong players in online
blitz, is not particularly good after 12...Bxh6 (12...Ne5?! 13.Qd2 Neg4 14.Bxg7 Kxg7 was played in
an online game, now White’s best seems to be 15.Bxg4 Nxg4 16.Re1 Rxe1+ 17.Kxe1 g5 18.Qd3
Nh6 19.Nge2 and White has a comfortable edge) 13.Rxh6 Kg7 14.Qd2 Ne5 15.Re1 and here Black
could improve with 15...Bf5! 16.Nf3 Nxf3 17.Bxf3 Bd3+ and Black is already better; also 12.Bf4?!
is nothing special after 12...Ne4! 13.Nf3 Nxc3 14.bxc3 Nf6 15.Ng5 Ne4! and with this second

126
knight leap, Black has already more than equalized) 12...b5!? (Black must play this gambit line as
other ideas tend to give White an advantage, e.g., 12...Qb6 13.b3! or 12...a6 13.a4 Qb6 14.Qd2 Ne5
15.a5 Qc7 16.Bh6 and White is better) 13.cxb5 a6 14.a4 axb5 15.Bxb5 Ba6 16.Nf3 Bxb5+ (or
16...Qa5 17.Rh4, which is probably better for White) 17.axb5 Rxa1 18.Qxa1 Qb8 with decent
compensation for the pawn.
b2) 11...fxg6!

12.Nf3 Ne5 (this better than 12...Nf8?! 13.Bg5 with better chances for White) 13.Nxe5 Rxe5 14.Bf4
Re7 was played in an online game; Black has a comfortable game, but the chances are close to equal,
e.g., 15.g3 Bf5, and it should be evident that Black has no problems.
c) 11.Bg5?! looks logical and good but is, in fact, a mistake: 11...h6! 12.Bf4 (The alternatives are not
much better, e.g., 12.Bd2 g5! 13.Nf3 Ne4 14.Nxe4 Rxe4; and 12.Bxf6 Qxf6 13.hxg6 fxg6 14.Qc2
Ne5, in both cases, Black has a clear advantage because White’s attacking potential is gone, and
Black has taken the initiative) 12...g5! (a strong, untested idea; thus far, praxis had only seen Black
test 12...Ne5, which leads to messy positions, for instance, 13.hxg6 fxg6 14.Bxh6 Bxh6 15.Rxh6 Kg7
16.Qd2, and rather than 16...Nfg4 17.Rh1 Qf6 when 18.Bxg4! Nxg4 19.Nf3 Bf5 20.Kg1 is clearly
better for White; Black should have played 16...Bf5 17.Rh1 Rh8 with excellent compensation for the
pawn) 13.Bxd6 (the pawn was hanging, but the bishop is now parked in Black’s camp while Black
takes over the initiative) 13...b5! 14.cxb5 (or 14.Qc2 bxc4 15.Rd1 Qb6 16.Bg3 Ne5 and Black is in
command, in fact, White’s position sucks) 14...a6 15.Bg3 Ne4 16.Nxe4 Rxe4 17.Nf3 axb5 18.Bxb5
Bxb2 19.Rb1 Rxa2 (19...Rb4!?) 20.Kg1 (or 20.Qb3 Qa5 21.Bxd7 Bxd7 and Black is close to a
decisive advantage) 20...Nf6 21.Qc2 Qb6 22.Bc4 Ra1 and Black has a clear advantage.
11...Bh8 12.Bg5!
Pinning the f6–knight and restraining Black’s ability to create active counterplay.
12...Ne5

127
The most active-looking move but possibly not the best, because what is the knight accomplishing on
e5? The alternatives are:
a) 12...a6 13.a4 Ne5 14.Rh4 Qb6 15.Ra2 Bf5 16.Rf4 Rf8 was played in Firat-Deviprasath, Chess.com
INT 2021, and now 17.a5! Qb4 (or 17...Qc7 18.g4) 18.Nf3 Nxf3 19.Rxf3 and Black loses material:
the threat is Bxf6 followed by g2–g4.
b) 12...Qb6 13.b3! (it is also possible to play 13.Qc2, but Black has less problems, e.g., 13...Ne5
14.Re1 Bd7 15.Qc1!? a6 16.Rh4 Qa5 with, at best, a tiny plus for White) 13...Ne4 14.Nxe4 Rxe4
15.Nf3 Re8 (Black should avoid 15...Bxa1?! 16.Qxa1 (after 16.Bd3, Black seems better able to
defend, e.g., 16...Bf6 17.Bxe4 Qd8 18.Bf4 Qe7 19.Bc2 Ne5 20.Nxe5 Bxe5 21.Qe1 f6 and Black has
a solid position, although I still prefer White) 16...f6 17.Nd2 Re5 18.Bh4 and White has a small but
clear advantage) 16.Rc1 a5 17.a4 (or 17.g3 a4 18.Kg2 axb3 19.axb3 Ne5 20.Re1 and White has the
somewhat better chances) 17...Ne5 18.Ng1 (keeping the knights on the board, whereas 18.g3 Nxf3
19.Bxf3 Bd4 20.Rh4 Be5 21.Kg2 f6 22.Bd2 Qd8 seems somewhat easier for Black to defend) 18...f6
19.Bd2 f5 20.g3 Qd8 21.Kg2 and White has a tiny plus
13.g3 a6 14.a4
Preventing Black from playing ...b7–b5 to generate counterplay on the queenside.
14...Qd7 15.Bf4
White can also consider 15.Qd2!? intending Re1.
15...Qc7 16.Bc1!? Qe7 17.Bg5
The beginning of an odd repetition of moves.
17...Qd7 18.Bf4 Qc7 19.Bc1 Qe7 20.Ra3! and White had a solid advantage in Leimgruber-Conterno,
ICCF email 2017.

128
 A Quick Repertoire

Looking at a whole repertoire book can be intimidating, and the prospect of memorizing a whole
bunch of lines is even more so. Nevertheless, I have put together a quick overview that will help get
you started. Obviously, it does not cover every line, but it gives you something against the most
common lines. The theoretical evaluations are not mentioned; you will have to refer to the individual
chapters for those.
I. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 c6 4.Nc3 d5 5.cxd5 cxd5 6.Bf4 Nc6 7.e3 Bg7 8.Be2
II. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 c5 4.d5 b5 5.cxb5 a6 6.e3 Bg7 7.Nc3 0-0 8.a4
III. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 c5 5.d5 e6 6.e4 exd5 7.exd5 0-0 8.Be2 Re8 9.Kf1
IV. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 dxc4 6.h6 Bf8 7.e4 c5 8.d5
V. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 0-0 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.hxg6 hxg6 8.Bh6
VI. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 gxh5 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.e4 Nxc3 8.bxc3 c5 9.Rxh5 cxd4
10.Rg5 Bf6 11.Rd5 Qc7 12.cxd4
VII. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 c6 6.h6 Bf8 7.Nf3
VIII. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 Nxh5 6.cxd5 e6 7.g4! Nf6 8.dxe6 Bxe6 9.e4
IX. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 Nxh5 6.cxd5 c6 7.e4! cxd5 8.e5 Bf8 9.g4 Ng7 10.Bg2
X. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 Nc6 6.d5 Ne5!? 7.Be2 h5 8.Bf4
XI. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 Nc6 7.d5 Ne5!? 8.h5 c6 9.Nf3 Nxf3+
10.Bxf3
XII. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 h5 7.Bg5 Nbd7 8.Qd2 c5 9.d5 a6 10.a4
Ne5 11.Nf3
XIII. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.d5 h5 8.Bg5 Na6 9.f3 Qe8 10.Qd2
XIV. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 e5 7.d5 c6 8.h5 cxd5 9.cxd5
XV. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.d5 a6 8.a4 e6 9.h5
XVI. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.d5 a6 8.a4 h5 9.Nh3
XVII. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.d5 Na6 8.h5
XVIII. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.d5 h5 8.Bg5 e6 9.g4! Qa5 10.Qd2
exd5 11.gxh5
XIX. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.d5 b5!? 8.cxb5 a6 9.a4 axb5 10.Bxb5
Ba6 11.Bd2 Bxb5 12.axb5
XX. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.d5 e6 8.h5 exd5 9.exd5 Re8 10.Kf1
Nbd7 11.h6 Bh8 12.Bg5
XXI. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.h4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be2 c5 7.d5 e6 8.h5 exd5 9.exd5 Nbd7 10.h6!

129
 Books by Carsten Hansen

Winning Quickly at Chess Series:

Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess Opening - Volume 1: Indian Defenses
Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess Opening - Volume 2: 1.d4 d5
Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess Opening - Volume 3: Flank Openings
Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess Opening - Volume 4: Dutch, Benonis & d-pawn Specialties
Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess Opening - Volume 5: Anti-Sicilians
Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess Opening - Volume 6: Open Sicilians
Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess Opening - Volume 7: Minor Semi-Open Games
Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess Opening - Volume 8: 1.e4 e5
Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess Opening - Volume 9: French & Caro-Kann
Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess Opening – Volume 10: Selected Brilliancies from Volumes 1-9
Entire series also available in Large Print Format
Winning Quickly at Chess Workbook Series:
Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess Opening Workbook - Volume 1: Indian Defenses
Upcoming Volumes:
Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess Opening Workbook - Volume 2: 1.d4 d5
Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess Opening Workbook - Volume 3: Flank Openings
Chess Miniatures Series:
Winning Quickly at Chess: Miniatures in the Sicilian Najdorf
Winning Quickly at Chess: Miniatures in the Queen’s Indian Defense: 4 g3
Winning Quickly at Chess: Miniatures in the Ruy Lopez: Main Lines
Upcoming Volumes:
Winning Quickly at Chess: Miniatures in the King’s Indian Defense: Fianchetto Systems
Winning Quickly at Chess: Miniatures in the Slav Defense: Main Lines
Winning Quickly at Chess: Miniatures in the Scotch Game
Opening Hacker Files:
The Carlsen Variation – a new Anti-Sicilian
Play the Orangutan: 1.b4
The Basman-Willams Attack
Daily Chess Training Series:

130
Chess Tactics – Volume 1 (404 puzzles from 2nd half of 2018)
Chess Tactics – Volume 2 (404 puzzles from 1st half of 2019)
Chess Tactics – Volume 3 (404 puzzles from 2nd half of 2019)
Chess Tactics for Improvers – Volume 1 (808 puzzles from 2019)
Upcoming Volumes:
Chess Tactics – Volume 4 (404 puzzles from 1st half of 2020)
Chess Tactics – Volume 5 (404 puzzles from 2nd half of 2020)
Chess Tactics – Volume 6 (404 puzzles from 1st half of 2021)
Chess Tactics for Improvers – Volume 2 (808 puzzles from 2019-20)
Specialized Chess Tactics Series:
Specialized Chess Opening Tactics: Budapest & Fajarowicz Gambits
Upcoming Volumes:
Specialized Chess Opening Tactics: Caro-Kann - Main Lines
Specialized Chess Opening Tactics: Caro-Kann - The Panov, Advance & Specialties
Specialized Chess Opening Tactics: Benko & Blumenfeld Gambits
Specialized Chess Opening Tactics: The Sicilian Dragon – Classical Lines
Specialized Chess Opening Tactics: The Sicilian Dragon – Yugoslav Attack
For updates and accessible material, please visit www.winningquicklyatchess.com
Other books by Carsten Hansen:
The Sicilian Accelerated Dragon: Improve Your Results with New Ideas in This Dynamic Opening
(with Peter Heine Nielsen, Batsford 1998)
The Gambit Guide to the English Opening: 1...e5 (Gambit Publications 1999)
The Symmetrical English (Gambit Publications 2001)
The Nimzo-Indian: 4 e3 (Gambit Publications 2002)
Improve Your Positional Chess (Gambit Publications 2004) - also available as e-book (Gambit
Publications 2016) and in a Spanish-language edition Mejore su ajedrez posicional (Editorial La Casa
Del Ajedrez 2008)
A Strategic Opening Repertoire (with John Donaldson, Russell Enterprises 2008) - also available as
an e-book (Russell Enterprises 2015)
Back to Basics: Openings (Russell Enterprises 2008) - also available as an e-book (Russell
Enterprises 2016)
The Sicilian Dragon: Move by Move (Everyman Chess 2016) - also available as an e-book (Everyman
Chess 2016)

131
The Closed Sicilian: Move by Move (Everyman Chess 2017) – also available as an e-book (Everyman
Chess 2017)
The Chameleon Variation – Confronting the Sicilian on Your Own Terms (Russell Enterprises 2017)
– also available as an e-book (Russell Enterprises 2017)
The Full English Opening – Mastering the Fundamentals (New in Chess 2018) – also available as an
e-book (New In Chess 2018)
The Sicilian Accelerated Dragon – 20th Anniversary Edition (with Peter Heine Nielsen -
CarstenChess 2018) – Expanded version of the 1998 edition with approximately 15% new material)
Marvelous Modern Miniatures – 2020 games in 20 or less (Russell Enterprises 2020)
Back to Basics: Chess Openings (CarstenChess 2021)
Upcoming books:
The Modernized Accelerated Dragon (Thinkers Publishing 2022)

132
Table of Contents
Title page 3
Foreword by James Altucher 4
Introduction 7
Chapter 1: 3rd Move Alternatives 33
Chapter 2: 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 c5 42
Chapter 3: 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 – Minor Lines 48
Chapter 4: 3...Bg7 4.Nc3 d5 5.h5 Nxh5 56
Chapter 5: 5th Move Alternatives for Black 64
Chapter 6: 6.Be2 – Minor Lines 70
Chapter 7: 6.Be2 – 6...h5 74
Chapter 8: 6.Be2 e5 7.d5 82
Chapter 9: Minor Lines 87
Chapter 10: 7...h5 96
Chapter 11: 7...b5 104
Chapter 12: 8...exd5: 9.hxg6, 9.h6 & 9.cxd5 112
Chapter 13: 8...exd5 9.exd5 119
A Quick Repertoire 129
Books by Carsten Hansen 130

133