RICHARD PALLISER COLIN McNRB JAMES VIGUS EVERYMAN CHESS Gloucester Publishers ple www.everymanchess.comFirst published in 2009 by Gloucester Publishers plc (formerly Everyman Publishers plc), Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V 0AT Copyright © 2009 Richard Palliser, Colin McNab and James Vigus The right of Richard Palliser, Colin McNab and James Vigus to be identified as the authors of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Allrights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a re- trieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN: 978 1 85744 594 7 Distributed in North America by The Globe Pequot Press, P.O Box 480, 246 Goose Lane, Guilford, CT 06437-0480. All other sales enquiries should be directed to Everyman Chess, Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V OAT tel: 020 7253 7887; fax: 020 7490 3708 email: info@everymanchess.com website: www.everymanchess.com Everyman is the registered trade mark of Random House Inc. and is used in this work under licence from Random House Inc. EVERYMAN CHESS SERIES (formerly Cadogan Chess) Chief Advisor: Byron Jacobs Commissioning editor: John Emms_ Assistant Editor: Richard Palliser Typeset and edited by First Rank Publishing, Brighton. Cover design by Horatio Monteverde. Printed and bound in the US by Versa Press.Contents Preface Series Introduction 1 Castling into the Argentinean Attack (1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 Be3 Bg7 5 Qd2 0-0 6 0-0-0) 2 Castling into the 150 Attack (1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 Be3 Bg7 5 Qd2 0-0 6 others) 3 ANeglected Approach in the Classical (1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 Nf3 Bg7 5 Be2 0-0 6 0-0 c6 7 Bf4) 4 Benjamin’s Flexible 6..e6 (1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 Nf3 Bg7 5 Be2 0-0 6 0-0 e6) 5 ACunning Sidestep (1 €4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 f4 Bg7 5 Nf3 c5 6 Bb5+ Bd7 7 e5 Ng4 8 e6 Bxb5 9 exf7+ Kf8) ora 51 63 8610 11 oP The Delayed Spike 100 (1 4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 Be2 Bg7 5 Be3 0-0 6 g4) Not the 150 Attack! 127 (1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 96 4 Be2 Bg7 5 Be3 c6 6 Qd2) Spicing up the Fianchetto Variation 145 (1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 g3 Bg7 5 Bg2 0-0 6 Nge2 e5 7 h3 a6) Meeting 4 Bg5 in Dragon Style 161 (1 e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 Nc3 d6 4 Bg5 Nd7) Blunting White's Bishop on c4. 173 (1 e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 Nf3 d6 4 Bc4 e6) An Early Lunge 188 (1 e4 g6 2 ha) Trumping a Tricky Transposition 200 (1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 f3 c5) Index of Variations 221 Index of Games 224Preface The Pirc and the Modern are two of Black’s more dynamic defences to 1 e4. Both openings are also enjoying something of a renaissance of late. Indeed, over the past couple of years they have been employed quite often by such players as Ivan- chuk, Mamedyarov, Morozevich and Svidler. Thus it made good sense to intro- duce the Pire and the Modern into the Dangerous Weapons series. 1am delighted to say that much of this book is by two leading Pirc and Modern exponents, Colin McNab and James Vigus. They are, of course, also noted theore- ticians: Colin co-authored the authoritative The Ultimate Pirc with John Nunn back in 1998, while more recently James has won over many to the black cause with his The Pire in Black and White. For this project, James contributed chapters 1, 2,5 and 12; Colin was responsible for chapters 3, 9, 10 and 11; and I wrote the rest: chap- ters 4, 6, 7 and 8. Thope that the existing Pirc/Modern player will find much of interest in this work, as well as those yet to take up either opening. Your authors have aimed to pro- duce a mini-repertoire for Black against most of White’s main tries, while also covering a few dangerous and quite complex ideas for White. As usual this work wouldn’t have come about without the help of various people, and we would like to especially acknowledge the assistance of Mark Nieuweboer and Jos Woolley. Richard Palliser, York & Norton-sub-Hamdon, March 2009Series Introduction The original concept behind Dangerous Weapons was to take a major chess opening and to approach it in a completely different way: to concentrate on variations that are ambitious, sharp, innovative, disruptive, tricky, enjoyable to analyse; ones not already weighed down by mountains of theory, and ones unfairly ignored or dis- credited. To me this seemed like an author's paradise, which I’m sure contributed somewhat towards the inspiration behind this series! The main motivation behind studying major openings in such a way is to be able to present the reader (not forgetting the author!) with a considerable number of fresh, hard-hitting opening weapons for both White and Black; in some cases to create repertoires and in others to enhance and rejuvenate existing ones. What is a Dangerous Weapon? For the purpose of choosing opening variations for this series, usually a Dangerous Weapon fits into one or more of these overlapping categories: 1) Moves that create complex, original positions full of razor-sharp tactics and rich positional ideas where creative, attacking play is rewarded; moves which are new, rare or very fresh, leaving plenty of scope for research. It should be pointed out that even though mainline theory produces a vast num- ber of wonderfully complicated positions, these opening variations lose out heav- ily in the ‘danger’ stakes. No matter how sharp and difficult the position, the opening phase is nowhere near as hazardous for your opponent if he is able to fall back on that comfort blanket known as theory. I’ve played plenty of incredibly sharp lines without any real fear simply because of reasonable book knowledge and some solid home preparation. Thus in Dangerous Weapons the emphasis has mainly been on non-theoretical lines, where your opponent is left to his own de- vices at a very early stage.Series Introduction 2) Moves that are highly ambitious; ones which aim for total domination. Perfect for those not satisfied with a quiet theoretical edge as White and eager to search for a big advantage or even a direct refutation, albeit at some risk; or for those as Black who prefer to strive for the initiative at any cost, preferring this over a manageable disadvantage or sterile equality. 3) Moves that have been previously ignored, discarded or discredited by theory, perhaps unfairly so or maybe for the wrong reasons. Discredited lines can be especially dangerous ~ the psychological element cannot be ignored. Facing an opening like this, I find myself asking the question, ‘Why is he playing this variation if it is meant to be bad?’ Often there is a very good reason (a logical improvement, perhaps, which overturns a previous assessment), and in any case how are you supposed to remember a hypothetical 15-move refutation when you only browsed it in a book once, and that was a few years ago? 4) Moves that are visually shocking; moves which seem to contradict the laws of the game. Disregarding the question of objective merit for the moment, there’s no doubt that a crazy-looking move has at the very least some psychological value. Unleashed on an opponent, it can produce a range of emotions: uncontrolled laughter, per- haps followed by over-confidence; anger (at being insulted by such a move) fol- lowed by over-aggression; or perhaps discomfort, followed by timidity. Of course you may instead encounter understanding followed by objectivity - you have to pick and choose your opponents. Dangerous for Whom? It would be difficult, probably impossible, to guarantee that every single variation in this book is 100% sound. You have to understand that in some cases ‘danger- ous’ can mean ‘dangerous for both sides’. What I do expect, however, is that your opponent's ride throughout the opening should be far bumpier than yours! Guiding You Through Throughout the book there are various icons together with explanatory notes to emphasize significant points. They should be fairly self-explanatory, but here’s a brief summary:Dangerous Weapons: The Pirc and Modern s wh ee Cano: WEAPON! This signifies a game, variation, sub- ‘ion or position where the Dangerous Weapon has obviously produced the desired effect. BEWARE! Pointing out immediate danger for the player using the Dangerous Weapon. ROLL THE DICE! Signifying a variation or sub-variation which is perhaps more suited for games with short time-limits or for players who enjoy taking risks. TRICKY TRANSPOSITION: This indicates a transposition to a different opening variation. Using different move orders to reach a desirable position or to trick your opponent into something with which he is unfamiliar is becoming a weapon of increasing value. As the title suggests, Dangerous Weapons may not be for the faint-hearted! More than anything, it is aimed at players of all levels who like to be entertained, those who are happy to try out fun-to-play openings at their local chess club, on the Internet, in tournaments, wherever they choose to play. Good luck studying and playing, your Dangerous Weapons! John Emms Everyman ChessChapter One Castling into the Argentinean Attack James Vigus 1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 Be3 Bg7 5 Qd2 0-0 (Diagram 1) in ae Y wy Y Eid “og iy 2 UG; Diagram 4 (W) The toughest decision a Pirc player has to make these days is how to combat the flexible 4 Be3. Most grandmasters prefer 4...c6, reckoning that after 5 Qd2 thereDangerous Weapons: The Pirc and Modern might be a more useful move than 5...Bg7 (5..-b5 or 5...Nbd7!). However, this move order has its downside. It delays Black’s development, enabling White to expand ina leisurely way with 5 h3 and 6 f4 or even 6 g4 (the Archbishop Attack). So we shouldn't reject the natural 4...Bg7 too easily, and I for one have always stuck to this immediate fianchetto. The reader might object that the line 5 Qd2 c6 6 Bh6é Bxhé 7 Qxh6 Qa5 8.Bd3 c5 9 d5 has emerged as dangerous for Black. And as for 5...0-0 - well, that’s just asking for a routine attack with Bh6, £3, g4, and h4-h5, isn’t it? Here and in the following chapter I am going to suggest that Black can indeed get away with this outrageously ‘naive’ approach. This chapter considers the critical 6 0-0-0 (preventing Black’s possible breaks 6...e5 and 6...c5), followed by £2-f3. For this set-up with f3, Mark Nieuweboer ~ a partisan of the white side who has con- tributed a great deal of research and analysis to this chapter ~ suggests the name “the Argentinean Attack’. Its first prominent exponents back in the 1930s, 40s and 50s were Argentinean players — most notably grandmasters Herman Pilnik and Hector Rossetto — and as we'll see, these older games are often still instructive to- day. (The next chapter will analyse the ‘150 Attack’ approach 6 Nf3, together with 6 Bhé6, 6 h3 and 6 £3 e5 — which all lead to quite different positions from those in the present chapter). The Argentinean Attack is obviously dangerous, but what ‘theory’ has tended to forget is that Black has a sound structure, rapid development, and a simple-but- effective method of queenside counterattack, which we see in action in the first illustrative game. OL.Yudasin ll V.Anand Munich 1991 14 d6 2 da Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 Be3 Bg7 5 Qd2 0-0 6 0-0-0 Critical, as just mentioned: White prevents the two central breaks that are effective against other moves (see the next chapter). The obvious objection to 5...0-0 is that White will now enjoy an attack in the style of the Yugoslav Attack in the Dragon, whereas Black has no way to open the c-file quickly, so will remain several tempi behind... 6...c6 7 £3 b5 (Diagram 2) However, Black also has certain advantages compared with the Yugoslav Dragon. First, he has achieved ...b5 immediately here, something that often takes time in the Dragon (think of Magnus Carlsen’s favourite ‘Chinese Dragon’ in which Black calmly plays ...Rb8 and ...b5). Second, Black controls the d5-square. Not only does this mean that White won't have the option later of Nc3-d5 (Bf1-c4 is also prevented for the time being), but also it allows Black to get his bishop to e6. And this is the basic point of ‘castling into it’: it induces White to castle too, 10Castling into the Argentinean Attack and thus provides Black with a target on a2. How White deals with the threat to his a2-pawn is the key question over the next couple of moves, although many white players won't actually realize this. 8 ga?! @ DANGEROUS WEAPON! White faces a critical choice on his 8th Ss move, and this, the most natural move to judge by its 3 popularity, is already an inaccuracy. Here's a quick sketch of the alternatives: 7x: y ahem i oie Dee be POR oR Yj WY N PE] ee EN CN Z Diagram 2 (W) Diagram 3 (W) ee B a) 8 Bh6 Qa! (8...b4 9 Nce2 Qa5 10 Kb1 Ba6 11 Bxg7 Kxg7 12 h4 h5 13 a3 c5 14 &5 Nfd7 was unclear in M.Szczepinski-D.Shkuran, Warsaw (rapid) 2007, but 13 Qg5! would have given White the edge, and earlier, 9 NbI! is more accurate) 9 Kb1?! (we'll plunge into 9 h4! in the Looking a Little Deeper section; timing is everything and as we'll see shortly, in some lines the prophylactic Kb1 benefits White, but here it allows Black to force queenside weaknesses with Sano’s accurate reply) 9...Bxh6 10 Qxhé Be6! (10...b4 first would be premature, allowing White to con- solidate with 11 Nce2 Be6 12 Ncl) 11 e5 (11 a3 was played in P.Mola-.Sarno, Ital- ian Championship, Arvier 2003, and now 11...b4 12 axb4 Qxb4 is promising for Black) 11...dxe5 12 dxe5 (R.Fernandez Murga-A.Giaccio, Buenos Aires 1992) 12...b4! (Diagram 3) 13 exf6 exf6 14 Nge2 bxc3 15 Nxc3 Nd7 and Black is ready to exploit the b-file. .@ DANGEROUS WEAPON! A bonus of our system is that this eT inaccurate move order with 8 Bhé has actually been 11Dangerous Weapons: The Pirc and Modern recommended for White in two highly reputable repertoire works by Emms and Kaufman. Thus there is a good chance of getting to play this line! b) 8 Kb1 intends 8...Qa5?! 9 Nd5!, but better is 8...Nbd7, as we'll see later. c) 8h4 is clearly a dangerous move: see Line D, below. 8...Qa5! 9 Kb1 Instead 9 h4 h5 10 e5? transposes to I.Efimov-S.Sarno, Saint Vincent 2000, and af- ter 10...dxe5 11 dxe5 b4! 12 exf6 bxc3 13 fxg7 cxd2+ 14 Bxd2 Qxa2 15 gxf8Q+ KxfS Black was already winning. IM Spartaco Sarno, by the way, isa tireless and crea- tive devotee of 5...0-0: when updating your repertoire after reading this chapter, if possible I recommend a search for his games. 9...Be6! Logically provoking a weakness, but other moves have been instructively success- ful too, and are worth considering if you want to rule out the move 10 Nd5 in the next note: a) 9...b4!? worked spectacularly in A.Horvath-K.Chernyshov, Zalakaros 2005, though I’m not keen on allowing White's knight to defend from cl - that way White doesn’t have to weaken his queenside pawn formation. In the game, after 10 Nce2 Nbd7 (10...Be6 11 Nel Nbd7 is Anand’s suggestion) 11 h4 c5 12 h5 Nb6 13 hxg6? (13 Nel! is correct) 13...Nc4! (Diagram 4) 14 gxf7+ Rxf7 15 Qcl Be6 16 b3 (or 16 d5 Nxd5! 17 exd5 Bxb2) 16...Na3+ 17 Kal Re8 the 2555-rated player with White resigned. oe g atm 4 os tasy Ye WOGHM@Oor Diagram 4 (W) Diagram 5 (W) alate RY RY b) 9...Re8!? 10 h4 h5 11 gxh5 (alternatively, 11 e5 b4! 12 exf6 bxc3 13 Qxc3 Qxc3 14 EPsCastling into the Argentinean Attack bxc3 exfé! 15 BF hxg4 16 Bxdé is unclear according to Agnos, while 11 g5 Nfd7 12 f4 Nb6 13 Qf2 Bg4 14 Rel N8d7 15 Nf3 Nad led to another miniature win for Black in An.Green-SSarno, Turin 2008 - 16 Nxa4 Bxf3! favours Black) 11...Nxh5 12 Bh3 Nd7 13 Qg2 Nbé 14 Bg4 Ne4 15 Bcl b4 16 Nee? Rb8 (now 17...Na3+ is a deadly threat) 17 Rd3 Rb6 18 Bxh5 Ra6! 19 a3 bxa3 20 b3 occurred in D.Anagnostopoulos- Sarno, Montecatini Terme 1997, and now 20...Nb2! 21 Rc3 Qxh5!, intending 22 Bg5 e5 23 Ng3 Qh/, is the way to cement Black’s advantage. 10 b3 Undesirable, but White’s choice wasn’t easy: a) 10 a3 b4 11 Nce2 (11 Na2 Bxa2+ 12 Kxa2 c5 13 dxc5 Ne6 14 cxd6 Rfd8 looks much more fun for Black than White) 11...c5! (Anand) 12 d5 Bd7 is quite promis- ing for Black. b) 10 Nd5! is best, as we'll see in Line A, below. 10...b4 BEWARE! Black must make sure that he doesn’t fall for the old trick 10...Nbd7? 11 Nd5. 14 Na4 c5! (Diagram 5) 12 g5 Anand notes the juicy lines 12 dxc5 Nc6 13 g5 Nd7 and 12 d5 Bd7! 13 Nb2 Bxg4! 14 Ne4 Qd8 15 e5 dxe5 16 fxg4 Ne4 17 Qe1 Nc3+ 18 Kb2 e4. 12...Nh5!? Anand thought that 12...cxd4 13 Bxd4 Nh5 14 Bxg7 Nxg7 was good for White, but ..Re8 and ...Nd7-c5 may be a promising way forward for Black. 13 dxc5 Nc6 14 Bh3 Again 14 cxd6 Qe5 15 c3 Rfd8! sees Black dominate. 14...Rad8 15 Bxe6 fxe6 16 Qc1 dxc5?! Instead 16...d5! would have consolidated Black’s advantage: how will White’s kingside pieces emerge? 17 Rxd& After 17 Nxc5! (now Nb7 is sometimes a threat) 17...Nf! 18 Rxd8 Qxd8!? Black’s initiative has dissipated somewhat. 17...Qxd8 18 Nxc5 Qd6 19 Nd3 Ne5 20 Bc5 Qc7 21 Ne2 a5! (Diagram 6) In what follows Anand outplays the punch-drunk Yudasin all over again, but we can skip through this relatively quickly. 22 Bd4 Rxf3 23 Nc5 Qc8 24 Rd Ng4 25 Qd2 Nxh2! 26 Bxg7 Nxg7 27 Ndq? The decisive error: 27 Qd8+ Qxd8 28 Rxd8+ Rf8 29 Rxf8+ Kxf8 would have pro- duced a very complex endgame. eeDangerous Weapons: The Pirc and Modern 27...Rf1! 28 Nad e5 29 Nb5 Nf3 30 Od5+ e6 31 Qd3 Rxd1+ 32 Oxd41 Nxg5 33 Nd6 Qd8 34 Od3 h5 35 Nc5 h4 36 Ncb7 Qb6 37 Nc4 Qgi+ 38 Kb2 Qd4+ 39 Qxd4 exd4 40 Nd2 Nh§ 41 Nf1 Nf3 0-1 y \ Ae bbe ww WY \\Fek ~ a, \ VE Diagram 6 (W) Diagram 7 (B) So in general terms, White’s most obvious response to the attack on the a2-pawn - allowing it to happen and then defending with b2-b3 ~ is not really adequate. He has two other responses, however, which are more dangerous. One of these is simply to get on with the attack and sacrifice the a2-pawn. For instance, one of those early games by an Argentinean player, H.Rossetto-A.Matanovic, Amster- dam 1954, went 5 £3 0-0 6 Qd2 c6 7 Nge2 e5 8 0-0-0 Qa5 9 h4 b5 10 g4 Na6 (the knight is misplaced here) 11 Bh6é b4 12 Nb1 Be6 13 h5 (Diagram 7) 13...Bxa2 14 Bxg7 Kxg7 15 hxg6 fxg6 16 Qh6+ Kg8 17 g5 Nh5 18 Ng3 BE7 19 Nxh5 gxh5 and White had sacrificed only a measly a-pawn to generate winning threats, as 20 g6! Bxg6 21 Bed+ d5 22 Rdgl! would have exploited. This attacking mechanism, with the knight on b1 holding together the whole queenside, is potent ~ but Black can do a lot better, as we'll now see. OW.Pietzsch ll W.Balcerowski Bad Liebenstein 1963 1 e4 g6 2 d4 Bg7 3 Nc3 d6 4 Bf4 Nf6 5 Qd2 0-0 6 0-0-0 c6 7 Bh6 Despite the peculiar move order we have reached one of our key positions. 7..b5 8 Bxg7 White frequently hurries to make this exchange, but as we'll see in a moment, it actually enhances Black’s defensive possibilities. I suggested the unclear line 8 Bd3 14Castling into the Argentinean Attack Qa5 9 h4 b4 10 Nb1 Bxh6 11 Qxh6 Qxa2 12 h5 Ng4 13 Qd2 c5 in The Pire in Black and White (hereafter referred to as TPIBAW), while the critical continuation 8 £3! Qa5! 9 hd! is a major topic of the Looking a Little Deeper section. 8...Kxg7 9 f3 Alternatives for White have been unsuccessful: a) 9 Qel!? b4 10 e5 bxc3 11 exf6+ exf6 12 Qxc3 Be6 13 Bed Bxc4 14 Qxed Qa5 15 Kb1 d5 16 Qd3 Nd7 17 h4 hS left Black’s king well protected and he enjoyed good queenside chances in M.Damjanovic-Z.Djukic, Pula 1998. b) 9&5 dxe5 10 dxe5 Qxd2+ 11 Rxd2 Nfd7 (11...Ng4 12 f4 Nd7 13 Nf3 Nc5 14 Nd4 b4 15 Nd1 Ne4 16 Re2 Bb7 17 Nb3 c5 also suited Black in Zhao Zong Yuan- A Kakageldyev, Dresden Olympiad 2008) 12 f4 Nc5 (Diagram 8) 13 g3?! b4 14 Nd1 Be6 15 Bg2 was D.Campora-A.Strikovic, Cordoba 1991, and now Black could have snatched the a2-pawn, since 16 b3? meets with 16...Bxb3. Diagram 8 (W) Diagram 9 (B) 9...Qa5! 10 h4 Once again the natural prophylactic move 10 Kb1 actually gives Black a move with which to force a weakening of the white queenside. The game G.Tringov- A Saidy, Reykjavik 1957, continued 10 Kb1 Be6! 11 a3 (11 d5 b4 12 dxe6 bxc3 13 Qxc3 Qxe3 14 bxc3 fxe6 15 Ne2 e5 favoured Black in L.Galego-S.Sarno, Lido Estensi 2002, but perhaps this is what White must resort to) 11...Na6!? 12 d5 cxd5 13 exd5 Bd7 14 Nxb5? (greedy, but 14 g4 Rfb8 intending ...b4 is also promising for Black) 14...Qb6 15 Qd4 Nc5 16 Nc3 Rfc8 17 Ne4 Bf5 18 Bd3 Nxd3 19 Rxd3, and now 19...Qa6 intending ...Re4 is very strong. 10...Nbd7 Although 10...h5 (G.Villartoel-T.Bjornsson, Tel Aviv 1964) is a playable alterna- 15Dangerous Weapons: The Pirc and Modern tive, I feel we shouldn’t invite 11 e5!. 11 h5 b4 12 Nb1 (Diagram 9) 12...g5! This lateral defence throws a spanner in White’s works. Black is taking a slight risk with his king, but White experiences some congestion on his back rank and has development problems. I can’t emphasize strongly enough how crucial this 185 defence can be. BEWARE! 12...Qxa2? is too greedy. The black queen performs a useful defensive role on a5, and the White a2-pawn isn’t likely to go anywhere - so don’t be in too much of a hurry to grab it. In case you're not convinced, take a look at the game G.Lane-T.Reilly, Melbourne 1999, which concluded 13 hxg6 fxg6 14 Qh6+ Kg8 15 Nh3 Nb6? (a bad plan, but 15..RI7 16 e5! Nh5 17 Ng5 Rg7 18 exdé exd6 19 Nxh7 is grim too) 16 Ng5 Na4 17 Be4+! Qxc4 18 b3 and Black resigned 13e5 The grandmaster playing White is perhaps startled by his opponent's cheek, and attempts a direct refutation. @ DANGEROUS WEAPON! It’s easy for White to overrate the m4 chances that an early advance of the h-pawn gives him. A correspondence game I played recently as Black continued 13 hé+ Kh8 14 Bed (I was concerned about 14 Rel threatening e4-e5, but 14...Qxa2 15 Qxb4 c5 gives Black sufficient play; 14 a3!? Rb8 15 Nh3 c5!? or 15...g4 is another plausible con- tinuation) 14...Nb6 15 Bb3 c5 16 e5? (essential was 16 dxc5 Qxc5 17 e5 Qxe5 18 Rel Qf4 19 Rxe7 Qxd2+ 20 Nxd2 d5 when the complications are still unresolved in the queenless middlegame) 16...c4! (Diagram 10) 17 exf6 exf6 18 g4? Be 19 a3 cxb3 20 axb4 Qal 21 c3 a5 22 bxa5 Rxa5 23 Ne2 Qxb1+ with mate in two to follow. 13...dxe5 14 Oxg5+ Kh8 15 Bcq A cute alternative is 15 dxe5 Rg8 16 Qf4 Nxe5 17 Rel Rg5!?, again emphasizing the virtue of fourth-rank control. 15...Rg8 16 Qd2 exd4 17 Bxf7 17 Qxd4 allows Black to activate his rook with 17...Rxg2, and after, say, 18 Bxf7 Ba6 Black enjoys very active play 17...Rf8 18 Bb3 e5 It’s curious that although White seems to have been coming forward, Black’s pawns now occupy the centre. White must now hurry one of his stabled horses into the action before it is too late. 16Castling into the Argentinean Attack 19 Qh6 Ba6é 20 Nh3 Nc5 21 Ng5 (Diagram 11) 21...Nxb3+ nae B DoEe B® Diagram 10 (W) Diagram 11 (B) Tantamount to a draw offer, whereas 21...Qc7!?, with ideas of ...Qg7 or ...Nd5, would have kept things tense. 22 axb3 d3 Inviting White's next, but not even 22...Rae8 could have prevented it. Now with his king under threat, Pietzsch bales out for a draw. 23 Ne6 Rf7 24 Ng Rff8 25 Ne6 2-2 White has a third way to deal with the attack on the a2-pawn. This is to play Kel- b1 quickly so that, as mentioned in the notes to Yudasin-Anand, ...Qd8-a5 is basi- cally prevented due to a Nc3-d5 tactic. On the face of it this approach nips Black’s whole counterplay in the bud, since everything we've seen so far has focused on that queen on a5. However, the following important game, oddly forgotten by Pirc theory, shows a reliable set-up for Black in this case: the queen comes to e7, and White's supposedly irresistible attack amounts to no more than mild pres- sure. OH.Ree Mi J-H.Donner Dutch Championship, Zierikzee 1967 14 d6 2 d4 Nfé 3 Nc3 g6 4 f3 Once upon a time this was the usual way into the Argentinean Attack before white players realized that ...Ng4 isn’t really a problem. 17Dangerous Weapons: The Pirc and Modern 4...Bg7 5 Be3 0-0 6 Qd2 e5 There have been a couple of moder adaptations of Donner's formation in the present game: 6...c6 7 Bhé b5 (7...Nbd7 8 0-0-0 transposes to A.Beliavsky- K.Kulaots, Berlin 1996, in which Black was doing fine after 8...e5 9 dxe5 dxe5 10 h4 Qe7 11 g4 b5 12 h5 Nb6 13 Bxg7 Kxg7 14 hxg6 fxg6 15 Qh2 Kg8 16 Nh3 a5 17 Ni2 a4) 8 h4 (8 0-0-0 would transpose to Pietzsch-Balcerowski) 8...Bxh6 9 Qxh6 e5 10 0-0-0 Qe7 11 h5 Nbd7 12 Nh3 Rd8 13 dxe5 dxed 14 hxg6 fxg6 15 Qg5 (Diagram 12) 15...REB 16 Qd2 NcS 17 Qd6 Qxdé6 18 Rxd6 Bxh3 19 Rxh3 Rac8 with equality, S.Brunello-S.Sarno, Cremona 2006. qe Diagram 12 (B) Diagram 13 (W) 7 Nge2 c6!? In the next chapter I’m going to recommend the more dynamic 7...exd4 in this po- sition. However, I’m not interested so much in the concrete theory here as in the defensive formation Donner is planning. 8 0-0-0 Nbd7 9 Bhé b5 10 h4 Re8 Black wants to ‘threaten’ 11...Bh8, but this is arguably slow; compare Brunello- Sarno, where the rook went directly to d8. A later game continued 10...Qe7 11 Bxg7 (11 g4 Bxh6!? 12 Qxh6 b4 13 Nb1 Nb6 14 h5 Bxg4! 15 fxg4 Nxg4 16 Qd2 Nf2 with good chances, shows one of Black’s hidden tactical possibilities) 11...Kxg7 12 h5 Nb6 13 hxg6 fxg6 14 g4 b4?! 15 Nb1 a5 16 Ng3 Be6 17 dxe5 dxe5 18 Qg5 (R.Porter-M.Klein, USA 1994), and now 18...Kg8 19 Nf5 Qc7 is reasonably resilient for Black, but earlier 14...Ng8! gives him equal chances. 11 Bxg7 Kxg7 12 h5 Qe7! (Diagram 13) The queen needs to move in order to free the knight on d7. Moreover, on e7 the queen defends neatly along her second rank. Meanwhile the b5-pawn keeps 18Castling into the Argentinean Attack White's bishop out of c4, and White doesn’t manage to find a target. Note that we are going to get such positions with an extra tempo, because we'll adopt the Don- ner formation only after White has spent a move on Kcl-b1. that offered h-pawn. Here, for instance, 12...Nxh5? 13 g4 Nhf6 14 Qh6+ Kg8 15 Ng3 Nf8 16 dxe5 Rxe5 17 g5 Ne8 18 fq is bad news for him. Hk BEWARE! Black must always be rather wary about grabbing 13 g4 Nf8 14 Ng3 Kh8 15 Be2 Fritz evaluates this as almost winning for White, but it’s hardly so simple, since no breakthrough is possible without quite a major sacrifice. 15 dxe5 dxe5 16 g5 N6d7 17 N£5!? gxf5 18 exf5 Nbé6 19 f6 is one direct attempt, but 19...Qb4 20 g6 Ne6! holds for Black, Another plausible try is 15 g5 N6d7 16 d5 b4 17 Nad, though Black has good counterplay after 17...Nb6!. 15...Bb7 16 Rdg1 Ne6 17 dxe5 dxe5 18 hxg6 fxg6 19 Qh6 Qg7 20 Oh4 Nd4 (Dia- gram 14) Diagram 14 (W) Diagram 15 (W) 21 Bd1 Nd7 22 Nb1 Qe7 23 Qh6 Nf8 24 NFS! Qc7! At last Ree punts the piece sacrifice, but there is no need for Black to gamble on the continuation 24...¢xf5?! 25 gxf5 Nd7 26 c3 c5 27 exd4 cxd4 28 Nd2. 253 White could have gained a passed pawn with 25 Nxd4 exd4, but he’s justifiably intent on reviving, his minor pieces. 25...Nde6 26 Bb3 Nf4 27 Rh2 c5 28 Qh4 Qd8 29 Oh6 Oc7 30 Oh4 Od8 ¥2-Y2 19Dangerous Weapons: The Pirc and Modern Interesting, isn’t it? White was no patzer, but a strong grandmaster, and Black al- lowed the routine attack — but with his queen planted firmly on e7, never seemed to stand worse. The Donner formation is going to come in handy when we take a Deeper Look. Looking a Little Deeper 1 e4 dé 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 Be3 Bg7 5 Qd2 0-0 6 0-0-0 6 7 f3 TRICKY TRANSPOSITION: | take 7 f3 as the main move here, since White usually plays this (to protect e4) on the next move or two, even if he begins with 7 Kb1, 7 h4 or 7 Bh6 ~ to each of which we'll also reply 7...b5. Some independent possibilities stemming from that last-named move were covered above in the notes to Pietzsch-Balcerowski, while 7 Nf3 b5 8 Bd3 Nbd7 transposes to Chapter Two. 7...b5 (Diagram 15) We now examine: A: 8 g4 B: 8 Bh6 C: 8 Kb1 D:8h4 A) 1e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 Be3 Bg7 5 Qd2 0-0 6 0-0-0 c6 7 f3 b5 8 g4?! a5 9 Kb1 Be6 (Diagram 16) 10 Nd5! For the alternatives here, as well as alternatives for Black on the previous move, see the notes to Yudasin-Anand. 10...Qxd2 Here White faces a major choice: a) 11 Nxf6+ exf6!? (11...Bxf6 12 Rxd2 Bc4!? 13 Bg2 b4 14 £4 gave White a modest spatial plus in E.Sveshnikov-V.Savicevic, Herceg Novi 1999) 12 Rxd2 d5 13 exd5?! (this can’t be right, but White's centre is under a certain amount of pressure) 13...Bxd5 14 Bg2 Nd7 15 Ne2 Rfe8 16 Bf4 Bf8 17 Bg3 Bho 18 Nf4 Nb6 19 Nxd5 Nxd5 20 Rdd1 Ne3 21 Rdg] Rad8 22 c3 b4 23 f4 bxc3 24 bxc3 Rb8+ 25 Kel Nxg4 26 Bxc6 Re3 27 Kc2 Re2+ 28 Kd3 Rbb2 29 a4? Rbd2+ and 0-1 was the fine game M.De Souza-A.Giaccio, Buenos Aires 1995. b) 11 Nxe7+!? Kh8 12 Bxd2 (or 12 Rxd2 Re8 13 g5 Rxe7 14 gxf6 Bxf6 with equality) 20Castling into the Argentinean Attack 12...Re8 13 d5 Nxe4 14 Bel Rxe7 15 dxe6 Nc5 16 exf7 d5 (Diagram 17) sees Black recapture the pawn with a balanced game. Ww oe Lad Diagram 16 (W) Diagram 17 (W) B) 1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 Be3 Bg7 5 Od2 0-0 6 0-0-0 c6 7 f3 b5 8 Bh6 Qas 9 ha! Maintaining the tension and getting on with the attack. The immediate exchange on g7 was seen above in Pietzsch-Balcerowski, where I suggested that White should maintain his bishop on hé for the time being in order to prevent Black’s defensive resource with ...g5. On the other hand, we looked at the common but mistaken 9 Kb1 in note ‘a’ to White's 8th in the illustrative game Yudasin-Anand. 9...b4, Best. Instead 9...Nbd7 10 h5! b4 11 Nb1! Qxa2 (11...Nxh5 12 g4 Nhf6 13 Bxg7 Kxg7 14 Qh6+ Kg8 15 Ne? intending Ng3 and g5 is crushing) is the unpleasant game Lane-Reilly, given in the notes to Pietzsch-Balcerowski. Otherwise in TPIBAW I suggested 9...Be6 10 h5 b4, but now I feel that 11 Nb1 Nbd7 (not 11...Bxa2 12 b3) 12 Bxg7 Kxg7 13 hxgé fxg6 14 Qh6+ Kg8 15 e5! dxe5 16 Nh3 is unpleasant. 10 Nb1 Ba6!? (Diagram 18) This both furthers Black’s development and aims to exchange a piece that might otherwise play a dangerous role on d3 or c4. Compare a cruder approach such as 10...Bxh6 11 Qxh6 Rd8!? (to obstruct e4-e5) 12 h5 Qxa2 13 Bd3 (13 Ne2 a5 14 hxg6 fxg6 15 Nf4 a4 16 Nxg6 a3 17 Nxe7+ Kf7 18 bxa3 bxa3 is not so clear) 13...Nbd7 14 hxg6 fxg6 15 f4 when Black is vulnerable on the light squares. Instead 10...Qxa2 11 h5 transposes to the game Corte-Wexler, given below. After the text, we have reached an unexplored but very rich position in which Black must defend for a while, but then has the prospect of snaffling a tasty mor- 21Dangerous Weapons: The Pirc and Modern sel on a2. The following variations are just provisional thoughts, but certainly in- dicate some interesting paths: Diagram 18 (W) Diagram 19 (B) Ba: 11 Nez B2:11h5 Ishould also mention the possibility 11 Bxa6 Nxa6 12 h5 Nc7 13 Bxg7 Kxg7 14 hxg6 fxg6 15 Qh6+ Kg8 16 Nh3 Rf7 17 Ng5 (or 17 Nf Rg7) 17...Rg7, which looks as though it might be ‘plus-equals’, but the knight on c7 usefully covers e6, the a2- pawn remains under greedy surveillance, and ...Rb8-b5 may be a productive ma- noeuvre. At any rate, immediate action with 18 e5 dxe5 19 dxe5 Qxe5 20 Nd2 a5!? is none too clear. B1) 1 e4 dé 2 d4 Nf 6 3 Nc3 g6 4 Be3 Bg7 5 Qd2 0-0 6 0-0-0 c6 7 f3 b5 8 Bh6 Qa5 9 h4 b4 10 Nb1 Ba6 11 Ne2 Nbd7 12 Bxg7 The alternative line 12 h5 Nxh5! 13 g4 Bxe2! 14 Bxe2 Ng3 reveals another point behind Black’s 10th: a) 15 Bxg7 Nxe2+ 16 Qxe2 Kxg7 17 Qh2 Rh8 18 Qh6+ Kg8 is unclear. b) 15 Rh2 Nxe2+ 16 Rxe2 (not 16 Qxe2? Bxh6+ 17 Rxh6 Qg5+) 16...Rfd8 17 Bxg7 Kxg7 18 Rh1 Rh8 19 Qh6+ (19 e5 looks desirable but gives Black time for 19... h6, intending 20 e6 Nb6 21 exf7 Ne4 22 Qel Qxa2 with advantage) 19...Kg8 20 e5 (or 20 f4 Qxa2 21 £5 Qc4) 20...dxe5 21 dxe5 Qxa2 remains rather a minefield for both sides. 22Castling into the Argentinean Attack 12...Kxg7 13 h5 (Diagram 19) 13...0xa2 At this stage a pawn in the bag is handy, as is control of the a2-g8 diagonal. In- stead 13...gxh5 is not so easy to crack, but 14 Ng3 Bxfl 15 Nf5+ Kh8 16 Rdxfl Qxa2 17 g4 looks hair-raising. 14 hxg6 fxg6 15 Oh6+ 15 Qxb4 Rab8 16 Qa3 Qxa3 17 Nxa3 Nh5 is only a fraction better for White. 15..KF7! The king guards g6, since 15...Kg8 16 Nf4 Bxfl 17 Nxg6 R7 18 Rdxfl is promising for White. After 15...K{7!, play could go on 16 g4 (16 Qg5 Kg8 17 Nf4 R&7 18 Bxa6 Qxaé 19 e5 QaS is unclear) 16...Ke8 17 Nf4 (17 g5 Nh5 18 Qxh7 Qf7 is about equal) 17...Bxf1 18 Rdxfl (Diagram 20) 18...Qf7 (safest, but 18...c5!? also comes into con- sideration), and in my opinion White has at best adequate compensation for the pawn. With each free move, Black will advance that a7-pawn a step further. Tay a TE ea Diagram 20 (B) Diagram 21 (W) B2) 1 e4 dé 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 Be3 Bg7 5 Qd2 0-0 6 0-0-0 c6 7 £3 b5 8 Bh6 Qa5 9 h4 b4 10 Nb1 Ba6 11 h5 Bxf1 Alternatively, 11...Bxh6 looks premature: for instance, 12 Qxh6 Bxf1 13 Rxfl Nbd7 14 g4 Qxa? (14...g5 15 Nh3 Kh8 16 Nxg5) 15 Nh3 Nb6 with a playable but perilous game for Black. 12 Rxf1 Nbd7 (Diagram 21) The most flexible. Otherwise 12...e5?! was played in N.Davies-L.Tegzes, Vancou- ver 2006, when 13 Bxg7 Kxg7 14 hxg6 fxg6 15 dxe5 dxe5 16 Qh6+ Kg8 17 Nh3 Qc7 looks rickety in the face of White's possible plan of Ng5, g3 and {4, while the knight on b1 is now released for active duty. 23Dangerous Weapons: The Pirc and Modern 13 Bxg7 13 g4 prepares NgI-h3, but Black now has a breathing space to strike back with 13...Qxa2: for example, 14 hxg6 (14 Nh3 Nb6 15 b3 c5 16 Bxg7 Kxg7 17 hxg6 c4 gives Black a very fast attack) 14...fxg6 15 Bxg7 Kxg7 16 Qh6+ Kh8! 17 Qxg6 (alter- natively, 17 Ne2 Qf7 18 g5 Nh5 19 f4 a5 is unclear, while after 17 g5 Nh5 18 Ne2 Qg8 — 18...Nb6!? 19 b3 Ned leads to wild complications but I don’t think it’s wholly sufficient ~ 19 f4 a5 20 f5 a4 21 Rxh5 gxh5 22 Nf4 Qg7 23 Qxh5 a3 Black seems to be reaching his goal first) 17...Qg8 18 Qxg8+ Rxg8 is unclear: White has the centre, Black a fast-looking a-pawn, 13...Kxg7 14 hxgé6 fxg6 15 Qh6+ Kg8 16 Nh3 Rf7 17 Ng5 Rg7 (Diagram 22) tm eae Diagram 22 (W) Diagram 23 (W) 18 £4 Spurning the repetition. Otherwise, 18 Rel e5 19 dxe5 dxe5 is okay for Black, and if White aims for e4-e5 with 18 Ne6 Rf7 19 Rel, then 19...Nf8! 20 Ng5 Rg7 21 5 dxe5 22 dxe5 Nd5 22 e6 Qxa2 sees Black’s counterplay kick in with the threat of ~-Nd5-c3. After 18 £4, the continuation 18...Qxa2 19 e5 Ng4 20 Qh3 h5 produces a double-edged game: for example, 21 £5 Nb6 22 £6 exf6 23 exf6 Qd5 24 Qh4 RE7 25 Nxf7 Kxf7 26 Nd2 Qxd4 and with two pawns for the exchange, Black is in decent shape. & . ROLL THE DICE! All this is untested analysis, and | can’t promise e that White won’t find an improvement somewhere. But even if your opponent does hit on this precise but rarely played move order (8 Bh6 Qa5 9 h4), you can be confident that having exchanged light-squared bishops, the black structure is sound. Then get ready for the game to descend into tactical chaos! 24Castling into the Argentinean Attack C) 1.e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 Be3 Bg7 5 Qd2 0-0 6 0-0-0 6 7 f3 b5 8 Kb1 A supporter of Line B might consider this a tempo wasted on defence that could be better used for attack. However, this prophylactic move has the useful point that 8...Qa5?! is hit by 9 Nd5!. ROLL THE DICE! In TP/BAW | gave a win by the buccaneering et Sarno after 9...Nxd5?! 10 Qxa5 Nxe3 ~ but | don’t recommend this for your repertoire! 8...Be6 also deserves further investigation; but here I concentrate on Black’s most thematic approach. 8...Nbd7 (Diagram 23) 9 ha! Once again an early advance of the h-pawn constitutes a rather critical move or- der. Compare: a) The hasty 9 e5? b4 10 exf6 bxc3 11 Qxc3?! Nxf6 12 Qxc6 Be6é gave Black a fantas- tic initiative already in MParligras-B.Jobava, European Championship, Antalya 2004 (I’ve annotated this stirring game in TPIBAW). b) 9 Bhé e5!? resembles the illustrative game Ree-Donner, but White has spent a tempo on Kb1. c) 9 g4 Nb6 10 g5 Nh5 11 b3 a5 12 Nce? £5 13 gxf6 Nxf6 14 Ng3 a4 15 h4 axb3 16 cxb3 Be6 17 Bh3 BE7 18 Nle2 Qb8 19 h5 Qa7 20 Nel Rfb8 21 hxg6 hxg6 22 NfS Ne4 23 Qg2 Nxe3 24 Nxe3 Kf8 was the unclear struggle D.Barria-D.Campora, Seville 2008. 9...e51? This is where the tough Donner formation comes into its own: Black contests the centre and keeps the queen in touch with the kingside. This seems to me prefer- able to the following: a) 9...Qa5? 10 Nd5. b) White was too fast after 9...Nb6 10 Bhé Be6 11 Bxg7 Kxg7 12 h5 in J.Hall- A.Giaccio, La Coruna 1993. c) 9...h5 10 Bh6 b4 (10...Nb6!?) 11 Nce2 a5 12 Nh3 Qb6 13 g4 just seems too risky. Admittedly here 10...e5!? intending ...Qe7 is an improvement, and after 11 g4 Qe7 12 Bxg7 Kxg7 13 g5 Nh7 White is restricted to a slight edge. 10 Bhé Instead 10 h5 (which is almost the game E.Sveshnikov-L.Van Wely, Biel 1993, ex- cept that there White had been able to play g2-g4 instead of Kcl-b1 due to Black’s inaccurate move order — a considerable difference) is now met by 1 xh5; 10 Nge2? (Ree’s placement of this piece) is now unwise due to 10...b4; and if White plays quietly, for instance with 10 Nce2, then Donner’s plan of ...Qe7 and possibly 25Dangerous Weapons: The Pirc and Modern .-Re8 and ...Nf8 comes into play. Otherwise: a) White could switch focus to the centre, but 10 dxe5 dxe5 11 Qd6 Bb7 12 g4 Nb6 13 Qa3 Qc7 14 h5 Rfd8 is okay for Black. b) 10 g4 sets up the positional threat of smothering the bishop on g7 with h4-h5- h6, but may be parried by 10...h5!?, or even better, 10...exd4! 11 Bxd4 b4 12 Nce2 c5 13 Be3 Nb6 (13...Ne5!?) and now: (Diagram 24) E AW # a wae Diagram 24 (W) Diagram 25 (W) b1) 14 Bxc5? Ne4 15 Qel dxc5! 16 Rxd8 Rxd8 17 Ng3 Nd2+ 18 Kal c4 19 h5 c3 20 b3 a5 and Black’s queenside expansion is very promising. 2) 14 Bh6 Ne4 15 Qf4 Bxh6 16 Qxh6 Bxp4 17 fxg Nxgd 18 Qf4 Nge3 19 Ng3 (19 Rd3?! £5!) Na3+! 20 Kel Nxd1 21 Kxd1 d5 is pretty unfathomable. Instead 10...Qe7 11 h5 Nb6 would not be a good version of the Donner formation, because Black’s bishop is bad and White can switch effectively to positional means, such as with 12 h6 Bh8 13 dxe5 dxe5 14 Qd6 Qxd6 15 Rxd6 Bb7 16 g5, etc. Returning to 10 Bh6: 10...Bxh6! The text makes sense because the queen on e7 will prevent any mating threats, and White no longer has the smothering option seen in the note above. d ROLL THE DICE! 10...exd4!? 11 Bxg7 dxc3 (Diagram 25) is ) almost too complicated for tournament chess, but given the right situation it could be worth a try. Here are the main lines of my analysis so far: 12 Qh6 (12 Bxf6 cxd2 13 Bxd8 Rxd8 14 Rxd2 Nb6 is equal) 12...Re8 13 Rxd6 Qa5 14 Rxf6! (better than both 14 Rxc6 cxb2 26Castling into the Argentinean Attack 15 Ne2 Rd8 and 14 Bxf6 Nxf6 15 Rxf6 cxb2 16 Qe3 Re6!) 14...Qb4 15 b3 Qa3 16 Qcl Qc5 (16...Qxcl+ 17 Kxel Kxg7 18 Rxe6 b4 leaves White a pawn up) 17 Rxc6! (17 Rxf7 Kxf7 18 Bhé a5 is not so clear) 17...Qxc6 18 Bd4 Ne5 19 h5 Baé!? (hurrying the queen's rook into play) 20 hxg6 fxg6 21 Qh6 Qd7 22 Bxc3 Rac8 23 Bb2 Qd1+ 24 Qcl Qxcl+ 25 Kxcl Nc6 with a slight edge for White in the ending. If you search, you might find improvements for both sides. 11 Qxh6 Qe7 12 h5 Nb6 13 hxg6 Play is complex too after 13 Nce2 c5!? 14 dxc5 dxc5. After the text, 13...fxg6 14 dxe5 dxe5 15 Nh3 (Diagram 26) 15...Bxh3!? 16 Rxh3 b4 17 Ne2 c5 with equality is a typical unfolding of the Donner formation. Diagram 26 (B) Diagram 27 (B) D) 1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 Be3 Bg7 5 Od2 0-0 6 0-0-0 c6 7 f3 b5 8h4 hs! When we get the chance, it’s worth holding White’s advance up. Instead 8...Qa5?! gives White a pleasant choice: a) 9 Kb1 Re8 (9...Be6 10 Nd5! is much stronger than in the same position with a white pawn on g4 rather than hd, since Black doesn’t have a ...Bxg4 resource; i.e. the line 10...Qxd2 11 Nxe7+ Kh8 12 Bxd2 Re8 13 d5 Nxe4 14 fxe4 Bg4 15 Nxg6+ £xg6 16 Rel leaves White a pawn up) 10 Bhé Bh8 (10...e5 is probably better, but Watson’s 11 dxe5 dxe5 12 g4 still looks good for White) 11 g4! b4 12 Nce2 leaves Black cramped. b) 9 h5 may be even stronger: b1) 9...Nxh5?! 10 Bh6! (Diagram 27) and now 10...Ng3? loses material to 11 Bxg7 Nxh1 12 Bxf8 Kxf8 13 Qh6+, but 10...b4 11 Nb1 leaves White menacing g4 and Ne2-g3. b2) 9...b4 10 Nb1 Qxa2 11 Bhé Rd8!? (a cunning idea to hold up e4-e5, but ulti- reiDangerous Weapons: The Pirc and Modern mately unconvincing) 12 hxg6 fxg6 13 Bxg7 Kxg7 14 Bd3!? Q£7 15 Nh3 Bxh3 16 Rxh3 Nbd7 17 f4 e5 18 Qxb4 c5 19 dxc5 dxc5 20 Qc3 favoured White in C.Corte- B.Wexler, Buenos Aires 1955, and a preliminary 14 Qh6+ might have been even stronger. 9 Bh6 White is trying to get a better version of Line C, i.e. trying to prove that it’s unnec- essary to spend a tempo tucking the king away to b1. The alternatives are not scary: a) 9 Kb] Re8!? (9...Qa5 would run into 10 Nd5! and 9...Nbd7 would transpose to Line C, but why shouldn’t Black meet one slow move with another?) 10 Bg5 Qa5 11 a3 Nbd7 12 g4 was played in Q.Bao-S.Sarno, Calvia Olympiad 2004, when 12...b4 13 Na2 hxg4 seems at least equal for Black. b) 9 Bd3 (Watson) 9...Nbd7 10 Bhé6 e5 seems fine for Black. c) 9 Nh3 Nbd/7 (it’s hard to decide whether to eliminate this piece before it reaches the handy g5-square: the evaluation of a line like 9...Bxh3 10 Rxh3 Qa5 11 Kb1 b4 12 Ne2 Nbd7 13 g4 c5 14 Ng3 depends on a lot of concrete tactics) 10 Ng5 Nb6 11 Bd3 Qe7 (11...Nc4 12 Bxc4 bxc4 13 e5 NdS is fine for Black) 12 Rdg! e5 (Diagram 28) 13 Ne2 exd4 14 Nxd4 a6?! (14...Nc4!) 15 g4 5 16 Nf5 gxf5 17 gxf5 cd 18 Bd4 Nbd7 19 Nh7 was Kr.Georgiev-J.Grigorov, Bulgaria 1984, and now 19...Kxh7 20 Rxg7+ Kxg7 21 Qg5+ Kh7 22 Be3 Kh8 is a draw. Diagram 29 (B) 9...b4! At the beginning of this chapter I argued for the move ...Qa5 in a similar position, but I think that the addition of h4 and ...h5 makes some difference. Take a look — 9...Qa5 and now: 28Castling into the Argentinean Attack a) 10 Kb] Bxhé! (not 10...Be6 11 Nd5!) 11 Qxh6 Be6 produces a position we consid- ered in the note to White’s 8th move in Yudasin-Anand, except with the h-pawns on h4 and h5. This difference helps White, though not decisively so: for example, 12 e5! (both 12 a3 b4 13 axb4 Qxb4 and 12 Qg5 Nh7 are okay for Black) 12...dxe3 13 dxe5 b4! 14 exf6 exf6 15 Ne4 Qxa2+ 16 Kel Qal+ 17 Kd2 Qxb2 18 Bd3 Rd8 with material equality but baffling complications. b) 10 e5 dxe5 11 Bxg7 Kxg7 12 dxe5 Ng8! 13 g4 b4 14 Nb] (or 14 Ne4 Qxa2 15 Qxb4 Na6) 14...Qxe5 is likewise unclear, with both sides’ armies languishing punch- drunk in their barracks. c) 10 Bxg7! Kxg7 11 Qg5! (Diagram 29) is a common theme in these positions with pawns on hé and h5, and Black must contort himself to root out the queen: 11...Re8! 12 g4 Nh7 13 Qe3 b4 14 Nb1 hxg4 15 h5 g5 with a rather precarious de- fence. 10 Nb1! More testing than 10 Nce2 Qa5 11 Kb1 and now: a) 11...Be6 12 Nel (a very snug place for the knight, and when White can defend like this it’s already a sign that things have gone wrong for Black) 12...c5?! (12...Nbd7 13 Bd3 is just slightly better for White) 13 Nge2 Be4 14 e5! dxe5 15 dxe5 Nd5 16 Bxg7 (Watson’s 16 Qg5! is even stronger) 16...Kxg7 17 Qg5 gave White a strong attack with the black queen cut off in J.Lopez Martinez-M.Gurevich, Euro- pean Championship, Dresden 2007. b) 11...c5! disrupts White’s development. Now 12 Bxg7 (12 g4!? is possible, while 12 d5 Nbd7 13 g4 Ne5 14 gxh5 Nxh5 15 Bxg7 Kxg7 16 f4 Nc4 17 Qd3 Ba6 is un- clear) 12...Kxg7 13 e5 dxe5 14 dxe5 Nfd7 15 e6 Ne5 16 Nf4 Nbc6 (Diagram 30) is a critical line, where Black seems to be okay, such as after 17 exf7 Bf5. i Diagram 30 (W) Diagram 31 (W) 29