Contents

(the numbers are page numbers in the print edition)

Title Page 1
Key to symbols used & Bibliography 6
Preface 3

Catalan
1 Introduction 7
Catalan 4...dxc4
2 5...Bd7 24
3 5...c6 34
4 5...Bb4† 51
5 5...Nbd7 63
6 Introduction to 5...c5 73
7 5...c5, 6...Nc6 and 7...Bd7 87
8 5...a6 and 6...b5 112
9 5...b5 126
10 5...a6 and 6...Nc6 134
11 5...Nc6 146
Catalan 4...Bb4†
12 Various 5th Moves 169
13 Introduction to 5...Be7 180
14 5...Be7 – Main Line 196
Catalan 4...Be7
15 Closed System 228
16 6...dxc4 252
Bogo-Indian
17 4...Be7 and 4...c5 284
18 4...Bxd2† 295
19 4...a5 303
20 4...Qe7 5.Nf3 – Various 5th Moves 314
21 4...Qe7 5.Nf3 Nc6 336
Odd Benonis
22 Catalan Benoni 362
23 Snake Benoni 376
Modern Benoni
24 Introduction 382
25 9...Re8 399
Variation Index 426
 Grandmaster Repertoire 1A

The Catalan

By

Boris Avrukh

Quality Chess
http://www.qualitychess.co.uk

First edition 2015 by Quality Chess UK Ltd

Copyright © 2015 Boris Avrukh

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any
form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior
permission of the publisher.

Paperback ISBN 978-1-907982-88-0

Hardcover ISBN 978-1-907982-89-7

All sales or enquiries should be directed to Quality Chess UK Ltd,

Suite 247-248, Central Chambers, 11 Bothwell Street G2 6LY, UK
Phone +44 141 204 2073
email: info@qualitychess.co.uk
website: www.qualitychess.co.uk
 Distributed in North America by NBN

Distributed in Rest of the World by Quality Chess UK Ltd through

Sunrise Handicrafts, ul. Poligonowa 35A, 20-817 Lublin, Poland

Typeset by Jacob Aagaard & Colin McNab

Edited and proofread by Andrew Greet, Daniel McGowan & John Shaw
Cover design by Barry Adamson; Cover photo by capture365.com
 Key to symbols used
² White is slightly better
³ Black is slightly better
± White is better
µ Black is better
+– White has a decisive advantage
–+ Black has a decisive advantage
= equality
© with compensation
„ with counterplay
ƒ with an initiative
÷ unclear
? a weak move
?? a blunder
! a good move
!! an excellent move
!? a move worth considering
?! a move of doubtful value
™ only move
# mate

Bibliography

Aagaard & Ntirlis: Grandmaster Repertoire 10 – The Tarrasch Defence, Quality Chess 2011
Antic & Maksimovic: The Modern Bogo 1.d4 e6, New In Chess 2014
Avrukh: Grandmaster Repertoire 1 – 1.d4 Volume One, Quality Chess 2008
Avrukh: Grandmaster Repertoire 2 – 1.d4 Volume Two, Quality Chess 2010
Bologan: The Powerful Catalan, New In Chess 2012
Cox: Declining the Queen’s Gambit, Everyman Chess 2011
Kotronias: Beating the Flank Openings, Batsford 1996
Petrov: Grandmaster Repertoire 12 – The Modern Benoni, Quality Chess 2013

Periodicals

The Week in Chess

Electronic/Internet resources

ChessBase Magazine
ChessPublishing.com
Preface

More than six years have passed since Quality Chess published my original contribution to its opening series,
appropriately titled Grandmaster Repertoire 1 – 1.d4 Volume One, which was followed by its companion Grandmaster
Repertoire 2 – 1.d4 Volume Two early in 2010. (These works will henceforth be abbreviated to GM 1 and GM 2
respectively.)
To my great surprise and satisfaction, these volumes were extremely successful. The recommended lines were
employed by players at all levels, and demand grew to such an extent that the volumes were translated into several
languages. Chess players took to referring to these texts as “The Opening Bible” and the term “to Avrukh” became part
of the chess lexicon, meaning to have easily obtained an opening advantage after employing one of my novelties or
recommendations.
Six years is a lifetime in the evolution of opening theory, especially in a battleground such as the Catalan, where ideas
are constantly being tested and refined by the world’s top players and their pet computers. I do not claim to have
refuted Black’s various defensive tries, but I have strived to offer fresh, challenging ideas that an opponent will find
difficult to face over the board. That is the approach I take when working with my students, including some of the
world’s top players.

Series Structure

GM 1 and especially GM 2 were hefty books, numbering well over a thousand pages between them. Many of my
original recommendations have since been tested and scrutinized by top grandmasters and correspondence players,
making this new repertoire not so much an updated edition as a complete reworking, using the original repertoire as a
loose template. In view of the many new games and discoveries that have occurred since the previous 1.d4 works, it
was necessary to divide each book into an ‘A’ and a ‘B’ volume, with some slight reorganizing in terms of the grouping
together of certain systems.

The opening moves 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 provide the starting position for the current volume 1A. By far the biggest
section of the book is devoted to the Catalan after 3...d5 4.Nf3, which is one of the ‘signature openings’ that defined
GM 1. Against certain set-ups I was able to keep approximately the same recommendations for White, although in such
cases I almost always found ways to tweak things to squeeze the best possible value from White’s position. In some
lines, however, I opted to go in a completely different direction from before. See, for instance, the main line in Chapter
16, where 8.Qxc4 has been replaced by 8.a4, which I have employed with considerable success in recent years.

Although this volume is titled The Catalan, it also covers the Bogo-Indian, as well as any Benoni variants that may arise
after 3...c5 in the aforementioned tabiya. In the Modern Benoni, important new resources have been uncovered against
the sharp set-up I recommended in GM 2. That is why, in Chapters 24 and 25, you will find the more positional 10.Bf4
as our weapon of choice.

I know that many devoted chess players of all levels have been looking forward to this new Grandmaster Repertoire on
1.d4. I hope that the new series, beginning with the present volume 1A, will provide the reader with many stimulating
ideas, and, of course, excellent practical results.

Boris Avrukh
Chicago, March 2015
A) 4...g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Qc2
A1) 7...Nc6
A2) 7...Na6
A3) 7...Nbd7
B) 4...c6 5.Bg2 Nbd7 6.0-0 Bd6 7.Nfd2! 0-0 8.Nc3
B1) 8...Re8
B2) 8...Bb4
C) 4...c5 5.Bg2
C1) 5...Be7
C2) 5...Nc6 6.0-0
C21) 6...Be7
C22) 6...cxd4
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3
This is our starting position for the Catalan, which is the primary topic of this book. In this chapter we will analyse
three options that I neglected to mention in GM 1: A) 4...g6, B) 4...c6 and C) 4...c5.

A) 4...g6

This looks like an odd choice, but it has been played quite a lot in recent years, including by some strong grandmasters.

5.Bg2
Initially I was drawn to 5.b3!? with the idea to develop the bishop to a3, but I soon realized that 5...dxc4!N 6.bxc4 c5
offers Black interesting play.

5...Bg7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Qc2

From this position Black can arrange his pieces in all kinds of ways, but I have focused on the three knight
developments: A1) 7...Nc6, A2) 7...Na6 and A3) 7...Nbd7. A couple of other ideas include:

7...b6 8.cxd5 exd5 9.Bf4 Na6 10.Nc3 c5 leads to an interesting version of a Queen’s Indian, with the bishop on g7
instead of e7.
11.Rfd1N (The premature 11.dxc5?! occurred in Unapkoshvili – Kobeshavidze, Batumi 2010, when 11...bxc5N would
have been fine for Black; 11.Rad1!?N could also be considered) 11...Bb7 12.Be5² The same position is reached at the
end of variation A2 below.

7...c6
This position has occurred many times in practice, but I was surprised to see that hardly anyone has played:
8.Bf4!?
The more popular 8.Nbd2 Nbd7 9.e4 dxe4 10.Nxe4 Nxe4 11.Qxe4 has achieved terrific results for White, but
after 11...Re8÷ the situation seems rather double-edged to me.
8...b6N
This is the most logical reply, and a definite improvement over 8...Nh5?!, when 9.Bg5 Bf6 10.Bxf6 Nxf6
11.Nbd2 obviously favoured White in Boege – Azzi, corr. 2014.
9.Nbd2 c5
9...Bb7 10.e4 dxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 12.Qxe4 Nd7 13.Rad1² gives White a pleasant space advantage.
10.dxc5 bxc5 11.Rad1
White has a promising position, for instance:
11...Nbd7 12.e4 Bb7 13.Rfe1! dxe4
13...d4 14.Bd6 would be annoying for Black.
14.Ng5
White is in good shape, as he will recapture the pawn while keeping a better structure.

A1) 7...Nc6 8.Rd1

8...Ne4
Black intends to exchange a pair of knights.
Another idea is: 8...Ne7 9.Nc3 b6 10.Ne5 (10.e4 dxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 12.Qxe4 Rb8÷ followed by ...Bb7 is not so
clear)
10...Bb7 11.cxd5 exd5N This looks natural. (The only game went 11...Nfxd5, Kekki – Merriman, London 1989, and
now the obvious 12.e4 Nxc3 13.bxc3² would have given White the better game) 12.b4 c6 13.a4² White has the more
comfortable side of a complex game.

9.Nc3 Nxc3 10.Qxc3 Ne7

I was surprised to see that the Bosnian grandmaster Bojan Kurajica has defended this position against three
opponents, all of whom chose different moves. My personal preference is:
11.Bf4 f6
Now I would like to propose an improvement over Tukmakov – Kurajica, Cetinje 1991.

12.Qc2N 12...b6
12...c6 13.e4 obviously looks great for White.
13.Rac1 Bb7 14.cxd5 Nxd5 15.Ne1 Rc8 16.Nd3 Qe7 17.Qc4
White enjoys a stable edge.

A2) 7...Na6 8.Rd1

8.a3 has been played more frequently, but it is hardly necessary, as ...Nb4 is not a threat just now.

8...b6
White is ready for the Grünfeld-like approach:
8...c5N 9.dxc5 Qa5 10.Nc3! Qxc5
Or 10...dxc4 11.Bf4 Nd5 12.Bd6 Rd8 13.Nd2! with the better game for White.
11.cxd5 Nxd5
11...exd5? 12.Be3± is unpleasant for Black.
12.Qb3 Nxc3
12...Qb4 13.Bd2 Qxb3 14.axb3² White retains annoying pressure.
13.bxc3 Qxc3 14.Qxc3 Bxc3 15.Rb1 Bg7 16.Ba3 Re8 17.Ng5
Black is doomed to a passive defence and White can play for two results.

9.cxd5N
This natural novelty improves over 9.a3 c5 10.Nc3 Bb7÷ as in Recuero Guerra – Narciso Dublan, Don Benito 2012,
when the position resembles the main line below, but a2-a3 is a redundant move.

9...exd5
White would be happy to see 9...Nxd5? 10.e4 Ndb4 11.Qe2±.

10.Nc3 Bb7 11.Bf4 c5 12.Be5²

The position is complex, but I like White’s chances against the potentially hanging pawns, and the bishop on e5 does
a good job of neutralizing its counterpart on g7.

A3) 7...Nbd7
8.Bf4 c6
I also considered:
8...b6 9.Nc3N
The tempting 9.cxd5 led to success for White in Ortega Hermida – Perez Castellano, Gran Canaria 2009, but
things would not have been so clear after 9...Nxd5N, intending 10.Bg5 Qe8! (10...f6? 11.Qc6! wins material)
11.e4 Nb4 12.Qxc7 Ba6 with a lot of counterplay.
9...Bb7 10.cxd5!
This is a more favourable moment to release the tension.
10...Nxd5
10...exd5? is bad in view of 11.Nb5±.

11.Nxd5 Bxd5 12.e4 Bb7 13.Rad1

 White is obviously better.

9.Nbd2 Re8
9...Qe7 10.e4 h6 11.c5± was great for White in Hübner – Schmittdiel, Germany 1993,

10.Rfd1 Nh5 11.Bd6 f5 12.e3²

In Srebrnic – S. Nikolic, Ptuj 2009, White had a pleasant position against the Stonewall formation, with an easy plan
of attacking on the queenside.

B) 4...c6

I neglected to mention this option in GM 1, although I did rectify the oversight by publishing an update on the Quality
Chess website. The text move might quickly transpose to a line examined elsewhere in the book, but it may also
prepare a Closed Catalan set-up with the bishop on d6 instead of e7.

5.Bg2 Nbd7
5...dxc4 leads straight to Chapter 3.

6.0-0 Bd6
6...dxc4 transposes to variation B of Chapter 5, while 6...Be7 7.Qc2 0-0 takes us to variation B2 of Chapter 15.

7.Nfd2!
A small refinement. In the aforementioned update I recommended 7.Nc3 0-0 8.Nd2!, but if White opts for that move
order he should reckon with the possibility of 7...dxc4.

7...0-0
The only real way for Black to question White’s last move is:
7...e5
This looks slightly premature, even though it was played by Radjabov.
8.cxd5 cxd5
8...Nxd5N 9.Nc4 Bc7 10.Nc3 Nxc3 11.bxc3 looks great for White.
9.dxe5 Nxe5 10.Nc3 Be6
We have been following Grischuk – Radjabov, Moscow 2012, and here White should have played:

11.Nb3!N
This definitely looks like a favourable position against the IQP, for instance:
11...Bb4
11...0-0?! 12.Bg5 wins a pawn.
12.Bf4 Nc6 13.Rc1 0-0 14.Qd3
White has a nice positional edge.

8.Nc3
Many moves have been tried here, but in most cases White simply plays e2-e4 with an easy game. We will look at the
most popular B1) 8...Re8 followed by the slightly more challenging B2) 8...Bb4.
Here is a brief example of a line where White gets an easy advantage:
8...Bc7 9.e4 dxe4
9...dxc4 10.Nxc4 e5 11.d5 Nb6 12.Ne3! The knight is perfectly placed here. 12...Qe7 13.b3 White had a pleasant
advantage in Evans – Zielinski, email 2010.
10.Ndxe4
White is clearly better. One model example continued:

10...h6 11.Nxf6†
11.f4!? has also been played, and is a worthy alternative.
11...Nxf6 12.Be3 e5 13.d5! cxd5 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Bxd5 Qe7 16.Qf3±
Despite the simplifications, White’s advantage was obvious in Koziak – Nalbantoglu, Izmir 2013.

B1) 8...Re8 9.e4

9...dxe4
Black is not ready to strike in the centre with 9...e5?! in view of 10.exd5 cxd5 (or 10...exd4 11.Nce4 Nxe4 12.Nxe4
Be5 13.Ng5! with a strong initiative) 11.Nxd5 exd4 12.Nf3 Nxd5 13.cxd5± when the d4-pawn is falling, Sundararajan
– Prakash, Calcutta 2008.

10.Ndxe4 Nxe4 11.Nxe4 Be7 12.Bf4 Nf6 13.Nc3!

By avoiding the unnecessary exchange, White obtains a dream advantage, and the c8-bishop will remain passive for a
long time.

13...Bd6 14.Be5!
This is an important detail, which is worth remembering in similar positions. White is much better, and I will mention
a recent example.

14...Qc7 15.f4 Rd8 16.Qf3 Ne8 17.Rad1

17.c5N 17...Bxe5 18.dxe5 also gives White a big advantage. The text move sets a positional trap, into which Black
now falls.

17...f6? 18.c5! Bxe5 19.fxe5 f5 20.Ne4!

With the knight coming to d6 next, White had a crushing advantage in Jakovenko – Rydstrom, Gibraltar 2015.

B2) 8...Bb4
 This seems like the only move that demands any real accuracy from White.

9.e4
9.Qb3 a5 is less clear in view of 10.e4N 10...e5!, but the text move is simple and strong.

9...e5
The only serious alternative that I would like to mention is 9...Bxc3 10.bxc3 dxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 12.Bxe4 e5 as
occurred in Olszewski – Hadzimanolis, Peristeri 2010. Here I propose 13.Bc2N, for instance 13...Re8 14.Re1 exd4
15.Rxe8† Qxe8 16.cxd4 Nf6 17.Bg5 when White’s bishop pair gives him excellent chances.

10.dxe5 d4!?N
This new move seems like an interesting try for Black.

10...Nxe5 11.cxd5 Bxc3 12.bxc3 cxd5 13.exd5 Nxd5 was played in Filippov – Tunik, Novgorod 1995, when White
failed to choose the best knight move:
14.Nb3!N 14...Be6 (Obviously the c3-pawn is untouchable: 14...Nxc3?? 15.Qe1! and Black loses one of his knights)
15.Re1 Qf6 16.Qe2! Nc6 17.Bb2 White’s bishop pair should be a telling factor in the long run.

11.Nd5
Another interesting continuation is: 11.exf6 dxc3 12.fxg7 cxd2 13.gxf8=Q† Nxf8! Otherwise Black is just lost. 14.a3
Ba5 15.b4 dxc1=Q 16.Qxc1 Bc7 17.Qe3 The position is extremely complex, but it seems to me that White has the
better prospects, as he is slightly ahead on material and has an easy plan of advancing with f2-f4 and e4-e5.

11...Nxd5 12.exd5
12.cxd5 Nxe5 13.Nb3 d3 seems less convincing.

12...Nxe5
12...cxd5 13.Nf3 dxc4 14.Qxd4 Nb6 15.Be3² leaves White strongly centralized.

13.Ne4 cxd5 14.cxd5

14...Qb6 15.a3 Be7 16.Bf4 f6 17.b4²
White’s chances are definitely preferable.

C) 4...c5

This is another option that I forgot to cover in my previous 1.d4 volumes. It is not the most popular move order in
Grandmaster practice, although I noticed that Aronian won some recent games with it.

5.Bg2
5.cxd5 exd5 leads to a Tarrasch Defence, but I intend to recommend something other than the g2-g3 variation against
that opening, as you will see in Volume 1B. (Black also has the independent alternatives of 5...Nxd5 and 5...cxd4!?.)

Black has two main continuations: C1) 5...Be7 and C2) 5...Nc6.
6...dxc4 leads to a branch of the Catalan which is covered in Chapters 6 and 7.

5...cxd4 6.0-0 is also likely to transpose elsewhere. 6...Nc6 reaches the later variation C22, while 6....dxc4 leads to
variation A of Chapter 6 on page 74.

C1) 5...Be7

This move order was recommended by Aagaard and Ntirlis in Grandmaster Repertoire 10 – The Tarrasch Defence
(abbreviated to GM 10 from now on).

6.0-0 0-0 7.dxc5 Bxc5

7...dxc4 8.Qc2 takes us a long way ahead to variation A of Chapter 16 – see page 253.

8.cxd5!
8.a3 was recommended by Marin in his English repertoire book, but GM 10 shows a good solution for Black. Without
going into details, the fact that the knight has not yet gone to c6 helps Black.

8...exd5
A lesser option for Black is:
8...Nxd5 9.Qc2! Qe7
9...Qc7 10.Nc3 Nd7 11.Bd2 is clearly better for White. 11...Bb4 occurred in the most recent game, Romanov –
Ippolito, Philadelphia 2012, and now the simple 12.Rac1± would have given White an obvious advantage.
9...Be7 10.Rd1 Qa5 11.Bd2 Qc5 12.Nc3 12...Nxc3 13.Bxc3 Qb6 Ladanyi – Kelemen, Budapest 2005, and after
14.Ne5!N White would claim an overwhelming advantage.
10.a3 Nc6 11.b4 Bb6 12.Bb2
Here too, White seizes an obvious advantage with simple and natural moves.
12...Bd7 13.e4 Nf6 14.e5 Nd5 15.Nbd2 Rac8 16.Qe4!
White has a pleasant space advantage and good chances to seize the initiative on the kingside, Bezold – Lipinsky,
Budapest 1997.

9.Qc2!?
An important moment. The inevitable development of the black knight to c6 will complete the transposition to the
Tarrasch Defence. As mentioned before, I do not intend to recommend the old main lines with g2-g3 against the pure
Tarrasch move order, so the present variation presented a real challenge. Fortunately, I found a good way to make use
of the delayed development of the b1-knight. First the queen attacks the enemy bishop, while making room for the rook
to go to d1 if needed.

9...Bb6
Other moves are inadvisable for Black. Certainly 9...Qb6? should be avoided, as 10.Nc3 threatens a fork on a4. After
the further 10...Bd7 11.Bg5 Black already had serious problems with the d5-pawn in Andriessen – Rietveld, Alkmaar
1982.

9...Be7 10.Rd1 Nc6 11.Nc3

The isolated pawn and X-ray along the d-file render Black’s position unpleasant.
11...Qa5
I would also like to mention: 11...Be6 12.Ng5! h6? (12...Rc8 13.Nxd5! Bxd5 14.Rxd5! is given in GM 10) This
was Izzat – Kowsarinia, Kigali 2011, and now 13.Bxd5!N would have won material.
12.Be3 Be6 13.a3!
The black queen is unstable on a5.
13...Rac8 14.b4 Qc7 15.Rac1 a5
Now in Ribli – Lalic, Sarajevo 1985, White missed a powerful idea.
16.Ng5!N 16...axb4
16...h6 17.Nxe6 fxe6 18.Bh3 is also excellent for White.
17.Nxd5 Bxd5 18.Bxd5 Qa5
18...bxa3 loses by force: 19.Bxf7†! Rxf7 20.Nxf7 Kxf7 21.Qb3† Kf8 22.Bf4 Qa5 23.Qxb7+–
19.axb4 Qxb4 20.Bb3
White is clearly better.

10.Nc3 Nc6
10...h6 11.Na4 Nc6 transposes to 11...h6 in the note to Black’s next move below.

11.Na4!
The more common 11.Bg5 Be6 is analysed in GM 10. The text move has only been played once out of more than
thirty games, but it is the most accurate choice, as White avoids committing the bishop prematurely.
11...Bc7
This is an obvious candidate and it was Black’s choice in the only game, so I will take it as the main line.
Nevertheless, giving up the dark-squared bishop is quite a common theme in the Tarrasch, so I considered some other
moves, a couple of which may soon transpose to existing games.

11...Re8N 12.Nxb6 Qxb6 (12...axb6 13.Be3 also looks advantageous for White) 13.Bg5! Provoking the knight jump to
e4 is a common theme to weaken the d5-pawn. 13...Re6 (13...Ne4 14.Be3! d4 15.Nxd4! Nxd4 16.Qd3 White is clearly
better) 14.b3 h6 15.Bc1! White will slowly establish control over the blockading d4-square.

11...Be6 12.Nxb6 Qxb6 (12...axb6 13.Rd1 clearly favours White; it is worth mentioning that 13.Bg5 h6 transposes to
analysis in GM 10, so you can see how White benefits from keeping the bishop flexible) 13.Bg5! Ne4 14.Be3

14...Qa6 (Black is forced to move his queen, as 14...d4 is not possible now that the knight has been lured to e4) 15.b3
(15.Qd3!? is also worth considering) 15...Bg4 16.Qb2 Rfe8 17.Rfe1 White obtained a stable positional advantage in
Malaniuk – Giorgadze, Odessa 1989.

11...h6 12.Nxb6 Qxb6

12...axb6 opens the a-file but further weakens Black’s pawn structure. A good illustrative game continued: 13.Rd1
Bg4 14.Be3 Re8 15.h3 Bxf3 16.Bxf3 Rxe3?! A desperate attempt to change the character of the game. 17.fxe3
Qc7 18.Kg2± Black failed to prove his compensation in Wojtaszek – Shkapenko, Gorzow 2012.
13.b3 Rd8
13...Be6 occurred in Gajewski – Koch, Haguenau 2013. Here White could have played 14.Be3!N, as 14...d4 can
be met by 15.Nxd4! Nxd4 16.Qb2 Nxe2† 17.Qxe2, when White gets a pleasant edge thanks to his bishop pair.
Now in Lazarev – T.L. Petrosian, Lausanne 2005, White should have gone for simple development with:
14.Bb2 Ne4
14...d4? just loses the pawn: 15.Rad1 Be6 16.Qd3±
15.Rad1 Bf5 16.Nd4 Bg6 17.Qc1
17.Nxc6 bxc6 18.Bd4 also deserves attention.
17...Rac8 18.Qa1²
White has a stable advantage, thanks to his control over the d4-square and of course the bishop pair.

12.Be3!N
12.Rd1 was played in Jumabayev – Senador, Al-Ain 2012, but I was not altogether happy with the position that might
have arisen after 12...Re8N, so I found a new concept.

12...Re8 13.Qd3!
White had better prevent the possible exchange sacrifice, which might prove effective after 13.Rac1 Rxe3 14.fxe3
Qe7°. After the text move, I believe a logical sequence is:

13...Bg4 14.Rac1 h6
14...Rc8 15.h3 Bh5 16.Bg5! is clearly inferior for Black.

15.Rfd1 Rc8 16.a3

White has completed development and should retain a slight but pleasant advantage in all lines. I will offer a few brief
examples:

16...Qe7
16...Bb8 17.Nc3 Be6 18.b4 Qd7 19.Qd2²

17.Nc3 Rcd8 18.b4 Qd7

18...Bxf3 is well met by 19.Bc5 Bd6 20.Bxd6 Rxd6 21.exf3! followed by f3-f4, when the d-pawn will come under
serious pressure.

19.Bc5! Bf5
After 19...b6 20.Be3² Black’s pieces on the c-file have been destabilized.

20.Qd2 Bh3 21.Bh1²

The position remains complex, but White is better for sure.

C2) 5...Nc6 6.0-0

 This is an important branching position, where Black’s two main tries are C21) 6...Be7 and C22) 6...cxd4.

6...dxc4 is another significant option, but it immediately transposes to a major variation of the Catalan, coverage of
which begins in variation B of Chapter 6 on page 80.

C21) 6...Be7 7.dxc5 Bxc5

8.a3!?
If you compare this position to variation C1 above, you will see that I rejected the a2-a3 plan in that line. However,
with the black knight already committed to c6, the b2-b4 idea has a bit more bite, so I decided to cover it here.

I should mention that 8.cxd5 is a good alternative. The most likely continuation is 8...exd5 9.Qc2 Bb6 10.Nc3 0-0,
reaching the same Tarrasch transposition as in variation C1 above. Black can try 8...Nxd5 instead, but 9.Qc2 looks
promising for White, who has scored heavily from this position. In short, 8.cxd5 is a decent alternative which you may
consider more convenient, but I decided to cover another option to give you a pleasant choice.

8...0-0
Black has tried several other moves, but in most cases White gets an easy advantage by developing his pieces on
natural squares.

One way for Black to alter the character of the game is:
8...dxc4 9.Qxd8† Nxd8
9...Kxd8 is worse: 10.Nbd2 c3 11.bxc3 Ke7 12.Nb3 Bd6 13.Nfd4 Bd7 (13...Nxd4 14.cxd4 Rd8 15.Bd2±)
14.Nb5 Be5 15.a4 Black was already under significant pressure in Kochyev – Yurenko, St Petersburg 1999.
10.Ne5 Bd7 11.Nc3!
11.Nxc4 Bb5 is not so bad for Black.

11...Rc8 12.Rd1 h6!?

This was played in a remarkable game.
I also considered 12...Bc6N 13.Nxc4 Bxg2 14.Kxg2 Be7 15.Ne5 Nc6 16.Nxc6 Rxc6 17.Bf4 0-0 18.e4 when,
despite the simplifications, White retains solid pressure.
13.Bf4 g5 14.Bd2 a6 15.Rac1 b5
16.Be1! Rh7 17.a4 b4 18.Ne4 Nxe4 19.Rxd7 Nd6 20.Rd1±
Black was crushed in Sharpe – Sibbald, corr. 2014.

9.b4 Bb6
The following alternative has been more popular, but it has scored less than 25% for Black:
9...Be7 10.Nbd2!
It is important to get the move order right. The more common 10.Bb2 allows 10...dxc4! 11.Qc2 Bd7 12.Qxc4 Rc8
when White’s advantage is minimal.
After the text move Black’s position is surprisingly unpleasant, due to his spatial inferiority and difficulty
coordinating his pieces. I will mention a couple of plausible continuations.
10...b6
10...Bd7 11.Bb2 Rc8 12.Rc1 a6 13.Nb3! dxc4 14.Rxc4 Nb8 15.Rxc8 Qxc8 occurred in Kengis – Ginsburg,
Zürich 2003. Now the most accurate would have been 16.Qd2N 16...Bc6 17.Rc1 Qd8 18.Qxd8 Bxd8 19.Nfd2!
Bxg2 20.Kxg2ƒ with an unpleasant endgame for Black, as White’s queenside initiative is rather serious.
11.Bb2 Bb7 12.Rc1
12...dxc4
Another good example is: 12...Rc8 13.Qa4! White intends to increase the pressure with Rfd1. Black tried 13...a5
in Kraai – Kavutskiy, San Diego 2009, and now the natural 14.b5N 14...Nb8 15.cxd5 Rxc1 16.Rxc1 Bxd5
17.Nd4 Bxg2 18.Kxg2 would have retained definite pressure for White.
13.Nxc4 Qxd1N
This is definitely a better try than 13...b5? 14.Nd4! Nxd4 15.Bxb7 Rb8 16.Na5 when Black already had a lost
position in Adhiban – Syed Anwar, Panaji 2012.
14.Rfxd1 Rac8 15.b5 Nb8 16.a4²
Black is doomed to a passive defence.

10.Bb2!
In contrast to the note above, 10.Nbd2 would be inaccurate here due to 10...e5!.
10...Qe7
10...dxc4 is no problem for White in view of 11.Nbd2.

11.Nbd2 Rd8 12.Qb3!N

For some reason almost everybody has played 12.Qc2 instead, but after 12...e5 I am not so convinced by White’s
position.

12...e5
In view of the previous comment, it seemed logical to consider this move as the main line. If Black plays a quiet
move then White will simply develop his rooks and continue improving his position.

12...d4 is another attempt to force the play, but 13.c5 Bc7 14.e3 is excellent for White: 14...e5 (14...dxe3 15.Qxe3 Nd5
16.Qe4 f6 17.Nc4 clearly favours White) 15.exd4 e4 16.Ng5 Nxd4 17.Bxd4! Rxd4 18.Qb2 Be5 19.Rae1 Black loses
his central pawn.

13.cxd5
13.b5 leads to interesting complications that seem to favour White, but one good line is enough.

13...Nxd5
14.b5!
After 14.Nxe5 Nxe5 15.Bxd5 Be6 16.Bxe6 Rxd2 17.Bxe5 Rxe2 18.Bxf7† Qxf7 19.Qxf7† Kxf7 Black’s active
pieces should enable him to hold the endgame a pawn down.

14...Na5 15.Qa4 Be6

Black has to sacrifice his e-pawn, as 15...f6? 16.e4 Nc7 17.Bc3 traps the knight on a5.
15...a6 16.Nxe5 Qe8 17.Qh4 also favours White.

16.Bxe5 Qd7 17.Ne4

Black does not have enough for the pawn.

C22) 6...cxd4 7.Nxd4

7.cxd5 is another decent option, but I would prefer to maintain the tension for a little longer.
7...Bc5
Less challenging is:
7...Be7 8.Nc3 0-0 9.Be3!
9.cxd5 exd5 leads to a version of the Tarrasch Defence where Black has exchanged on d4 prematurely. White
should be better here too, but the text move seems even stronger.

9...h6
It is hard to know what to suggest for Black.
9...Ng4 10.cxd5 Nxe3 11.fxe3 exd5 12.Nxd5 Ne5 13.Qb3± White had an extra pawn and a powerful pair of
knights in Modestov – Ananchenko, Samara 2003.
9...dxc4 was played in Ellers – Held, Fuerth 1998, and now 10.Bxc6! bxc6 11.Nxc6 Qe8 12.Nxe7† (12.Qa4!? is
also interesting) 12...Qxe7 13.Qd4² gives White a lasting edge.
10.cxd5
There is nothing wrong with 10.Rc1, but the central exchange had become rather tempting, as Black’s next move
leads to a standard Tarrasch position with a full extra tempo for White.
10...exd5 11.Qa4! Bd7
11...Na5 12.Qc2! followed by Rad1 leads to a dream position for White.
12.Nxd5 Nxd5 13.Bxd5 Nb4 14.Qb3 Qa5 15.Bf3±
White was a healthy pawn up in Benidze – Guliev, Malatya 2013.

8.Nb3
8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.Qc2 is an interesting alternative, which also gives White chances for an edge. However, it seems more
logical to fight for an advantage with a move that does not involve strengthening Black’s pawn centre.

8...Be7
The alternative is:
8...Bb6 9.Nc3!? 0-0
9...dxc4 10.Nd2 looks nice for White, as trying to hold on to the extra pawn is too risky for Black: 10...Na5 11.b4
cxb3 12.Ba3! Bd7 13.axb3 Bc6 14.b4 Bxg2 15.bxa5 Bxa5 occurred in Perez – Montiel, Havana 1993, and now
16.Nb5!N would have decided the game instantly.
10.Bg5
10.cxd5 Nxd5 11.Nxd5 exd5 12.Qxd5 Bg4 gave Black significant compensation for the pawn in Postny –
Sebenik, Legnica 2013.
10...dxc4 11.Nd2 h6 12.Bxf6 Qxf6 13.Nxc4 Bc7
This position was reached in Dathem – H. Schmidt, corr. 1986, and another more recent correspondence game.
White has good prospects on the queenside, and the only question is how best to develop his initiative. My
suggestion is:
14.Qa4N 14...Bd7 15.Rfd1 Rfd8 16.Qa3
With ongoing pressure.

9.cxd5 Nxd5
9...exd5 10.Nc3 gives Black an unfavourable version of the Tarrasch, for instance: 10...Be6 11.Be3 0-0 12.Qd2
(12.Rc1 is also promising) 12...Qd7 (12...Ne5 is a better try, although White keeps the advantage after 13.Bd4N
13...Nc4 14.Qc2 followed by attacking the d5-pawn) 13.Rfd1 Rfd8 14.Rac1 Ne5 15.Nc5 Bxc5 16.Bxc5± White was
clearly better in Karasek – Zavadil, Zlate Hory 2006.
10.Bd2!
I believe this is the only way to fight for the advantage.

10...0-0
10...Bf6 11.Qc1! 0-0 12.Nc3 Nxc3 13.Bxc3 e5 occurred in Burmakin – Laketic, Padova 2012, and here I see no
reason to refrain from winning a pawn by means of 14.Bxc6N 14...bxc6 15.Bb4 Re8 16.Qxc6.

11.Nc3 Nxc3
11...Nf6 12.Rc1 e5 fails to solve Black’s problems after:

13.Be3 Be6 14.Nc5 Bxc5 15.Bxc5 Qxd1 16.Rfxd1± when White’s bishop pair is a powerful force.

11...Nb6 12.Ne4 Nd5 13.Rc1 Qb6 14.Qc2 h6 15.Nec5² gave White solid pressure in Azmaiparashvili – Zaichik,
Philadelphia 1991.

12.Bxc3 Qb6 13.Nd4!?

13.Qd3N 13...Rd8 14.Qe4 Bd7 15.Rfd1² is a safe alternative which retains a pleasant advantage.
13...Rd8
This is the obvious way to challenge White’s last move.

13...Nb4 14.a3 Nd5 is a safer choice, when I propose: 15.Bxd5N (15.Nf5 is not so convincing, and after 15...Bf6
16.Bxd5 exd5 17.Qxd5 Rd8 18.Qe4 Bxf5 19.Qxf5 Bxc3 20.bxc3 Qc6 Black managed to hold his own in Mego –
Pikus, corr. 2010) 15...exd5 16.Qd3² White has a small but stable edge.

14.Nxc6! Rxd1 15.Nxe7† Kf8 16.Rfxd1 Kxe7 17.Rac1 Bd7 18.Bd4

White had a great position in Jankovic – Cebalo, Croatia 2013, with full material equality for the queen (once the b7-
and/or g7-pawns fall) and a strong initiative.

Conclusion

4...g6 is an odd-looking move, but there is nothing much wrong with it, and after 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Qc2 we just
have a typical Catalan situation except that Black’s bishop is on an unusual square. White should be slightly better, as
long as he avoids any early conflict in the centre, which might allow the g7-bishop to make its presence felt.

4...c6 is an important option, when 5.Bg2 Nbd7 6.0-0 Bd6 leads to a situation where the bishop on d6 has some pros
and cons compared to the main Closed Catalan positions examined later in Chapter 15. White’s most accurate move
order is 7.Nfd2! 0-0 8.Nc3, when the simple plan of e2-e4 is hard for Black to meet. 8...Bb4 is the only move that
really gives White something to think about, but Black still falls short of equality.

Finally, 4...c5 is not such a popular move among strong players, but it forced me to think carefully about possible
transpositions to the Tarrasch. After 5.Bg2 Be7 we ended up going down just such a path, but I found a good way to
make use of the fact that Nc3 had been delayed. 5...Nc6 6.0-0 reaches an important branching point, where I did not
find equality for Black after 6...Be7 or 6...cxd4. Of course Black can capture on c4 on move 5 or 6, but this leads
straight to one of the Catalan variations that you can find in a later chapter.
A) 8...Be7
B) 8...Nd5!?
C) 8...Qd7 9.e3
C1) 9...Rb8
C2) 9...0-0-0

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 Bd7

 I am quite surprised that this move remains fashionable. I assume that Black is excited at the prospect of queenside
castling in the Catalan – and this is probably the only line where he can realize his dream!

6.Ne5
Definitely the most challenging move.

6...Bc6
The most popular continuation and a logical follow-up to Black’s previous move.

Putting the other piece on c6 looks rather dubious:

6...Nc6 7.Nxc4
Black’s light-squared bishop remains passive on d7.
7...Bb4†
Another line here is 7...Nd5 8.0-0 Nb6, which occurred in Babik – Husson, Stockerau 1991. I believe the simple
9.b3N 9...Be7 10.Nc3 0-0 11.Bb2 leads to a clear advantage for White.
8.Nc3 Nd5 9.Qd3
Razuvaev’s recommendation from Chess Informant 57 also looks very attractive: 9.0-0!? Nxc3 (Much worse is
9...Bxc3 10.bxc3 Nxc3 11.Qd3. White dominates with his bishop pair, while Black cannot even grab the d4-
pawn: 11...Nxd4 12.Re1! Ndxe2† 13.Rxe2 Nxe2† 14.Qxe2 0-0 15.Ba3 Re8 16.Rd1 Qc8 17.Na5 c6 18.Nc4!+–)
10.bxc3 Bxc3 11.Rb1©
9...Qf6 10.e3
There is no point for White to enter the complications arising after: 10.a3?! Nxd4 11.axb4 Nxb4 12.Qb1 Nbc2†
13.Kf1 Nxa1 14.Qxa1 Nb3÷ With mutual chances.
10...Qg6 11.Be4
11.e4 is another strong possibility.
11...Qh5
This was Razuvaev – Klovans, Bern 1993, and here easiest is:
12.0-0N 12...0-0 13.a3 Be7 14.Bg2
With a pleasant edge for White.

7.Nxc6 Nxc6 8.0-0

 We have reached the first branching point. In this position Black has experimented with A) 8...Be7 and B) 8...Nd5!?,
but the main line continues to be C) 8...Qd7.

8...Nxd4?!
This has only occurred twice in practice, as Black quickly understood that his position was rather dubious after:
9.Bxb7 Rb8 10.Bg2

10...Qd7
10...Bc5 11.Nd2 c3 (after 11...0-0 12.Nxc4 White has a long-term advantage, thanks to his bishop pair and better
pawn structure.) 12.bxc3 Nb5 13.Qc2± Black faced serious problems in Gulko – Korchnoi, Amsterdam 1989.
11.e3 Nf5
11...Nb5 12.Qc2 is also much better for White.
12.Qc2 Qb5 13.Nd2 Nd6 14.b3 cxb3?
 This happened in Tratar – Plesec, Slovenia 1994.
The lesser evil would be 14...Be7, though White is clearly better after 15.bxc4 Qa6 16.c5 Nf5 17.Nb3 0-0
18.Rd1.
White could now grab a decisive advantage with:
15.Bc6†N 15...Kd8 16.axb3

A) 8...Be7

Once again White has a tough choice. Finally I decided to go with the following move:

9.Qa4
9.e3 seemed unclear to me after 9...e5! 10.Bxc6† (the endgame arising after 10.dxe5 Qxd1 11.Rxd1 Nxe5 12.Bxb7
Rb8 13.Bg2 0-0 is fine for Black due to his activity, as in Gyorkos – Farago, Zalakaros 1994) 10...bxc6 11.dxe5 Qxd1
12.Rxd1 Ng4 (12...Nd7 13.Bd2! is better for White) 13.f4 Bc5 with sharp play in Kallai – Anka, Balatonbereny 1995.

9...0-0
White is comfortably better after 9...Qd7 10.Rd1 0-0 11.Nc3 Rfd8 12.Qxc4 with an obvious advantage, Johnson –
Stracy, Dunedin 1999.
Unfortunately Black’s try to complicate the game falls short: 10...0-0-0 11.Nc3 Nd5 12.Qxc4 Nb6 13.Qb5! with a
nice refutation should Black take the central pawn: 13...Nxd4 14.Qa5 Kb8 15.e3 Ne2† 16.Kf1 Nd5 17.Nxd5 Nxc1
18.Raxc1 exd5 19.Rxd5 Bd6 20.Rb5 b6 21.Qa6 Qc8 22.Rxb6† Mate in two follows.
Or 10...Nb4 11.Qxd7† Nxd7 12.Na3² regaining the pawn with advantage.

10.e3
10...e5
The move which I suggested for Black in GM 1.

White is obviously better after 10...Nb4 11.a3 Nbd5 12.Qxc4² C. Horvath – Lukacs, Budapest 1994, or 10...a6
11.Qxc4² J. Horvath – Bokros, Szekszard 1996.

11.Rd1!
Other options are worse: 11.dxe5 Nxe5 12.Bxb7 Rb8 13.Bg2 Qd7 with counterplay, or 11.Bxc6 bxc6 12.dxe5 Ng4
with mutual chances.

11...exd4
After 11...Qc8 12.Qxc4 (There is no point in White giving up his light-squared bishop: 12.Bxc6?! bxc6 13.dxe5 Ng4
14.f4 Qe6 Black always will have plenty of counterplay against White’s king.) 12...exd4 13.exd4 Bd6 14.Nc3 White is
better, thanks to his strong light-squared bishop.

12.Bxc6
Black gets a solid position after 12.Qxc4 Nd7! 13.exd4 Nb6 14.Qf1 Nb4! (14...Bf6 15.Nc3 Qe7 16.Be3² is better for
White) 15.Nc3 c6 16.a3 N4d5 17.Qd3 Re8 18.Bd2 Qd7 and Black is close to equality.

12...bxc6 13.Rxd4 Qe8

White looks better in every line:

13...Nd7 14.Qxc6 Ne5 15.Qe4 Bd6 16.Nd2 Re8 17.Qg2²

13...Bd6 14.Qxc6 Qe7 15.Nd2 and White wins a pawn for nothing.

14.Rxc4 c5 15.Qxe8 Rfxe8

16.Kf1
Less clear is 16.Nc3 Red8 17.b3 Nd7 with counterplay.

16...Red8 17.Ke2 Nd7 18.Rc2

This endgame is quite unpleasant for Black:

18...Ne5
18...Nf8 19.Na3 Ne6 20.Nc4 with a clear advantage.

19.Na3 Rab8 20.Bd2

Black is going to suffer for the rest of the game.

B) 8...Nd5!?

A playable alternative that has occurred several time in tournament practice.

9.Qa4
I still like this move, despite the fact that White has lost both games in which it has been played.

9...Qd6
9...Qd7 10.Qxc4 Nb6 (10...0-0-0 11.e3 would just transpose to our main line) 11.Qd3 0-0-0 12.Qf3!² and White’s
light-squared bishop should secure him an advantage.

I also mentioned 9...Nb6 10.Bxc6† bxc6 11.Qxc6† Qd7 when White has a pleasant choice: 12.Qxd7† (12.Qf3 Be7
13.Nc3 0-0 14.Rd1² and White is slightly better, due to Black’s damaged pawn structure on the queenside) 12...Kxd7
13.e4² White’s chances are slightly preferable in this endgame, thanks to his better pawn structure.

10.Qxc4 Qb4
The point of Black’s idea.

11.Qxb4N
This was also my recommendation in GM 1.

If 11.Bxd5 exd5 12.Qxd5 Qxd4 White has nothing special, as in Sanchez Enriquez – Hernandez Carmenates, Merida
2011.

11...Ndxb4 12.Nc3 Nxd4

After 12...Nc2 13.d5! exd5 14.Rb1 (less clear is 14.Nxd5 0-0-0) 14...0-0-0 (Black cannot play 14...d4?! 15.Nb5 0-0-0
16.Bf4 Bd6 17.Nxd6† cxd6 18.Rfd1 and White will regain the d4-pawn with a clear advantage) 15.Bxd5 White is
better thanks to his pair of bishops.

13.Bxb7 Rb8 14.Be4

14.Bg2 Nbc2 15.Rb1 Bb4 with counterplay.

14...f5
15.Be3!
Only in this way can White fight for the advantage. Now Black has a choice:

15...Nxe2†
This looks like Black’s best option.

15...fxe4?! 16.Bxd4 Nc6 17.Be3 Rxb2 18.Rab1 White will regain the e4-pawn, keeping an obvious advantage in the
endgame due to his better pawn structure.

15...Bc5 16.Bb1! (16.Rad1 Nxe2† 17.Nxe2 Bxe3 is equal) 16...0-0 (White is clearly better after 16...Nd5 17.Nxd5 exd5
18.Kg2! Rxb2 19.Rd1 Rb4 20.Bxf5±) 17.Rd1 Rfd8 18.Kg2 Nbc6 19.Bd3 and White is better thanks to his bishops.

16.Nxe2 fxe4 17.Nc3

Less convincing is 17.Bxa7 Rb7 18.Bd4 Kf7.

17...Nd5 18.Bd4!
Black comfortably equalizes after 18.Bxa7 Rxb2 19.Nxe4 (19.Bd4 Kf7 20.Nxd5 Rd2=) followed by 20...Ra4.

18...Nf6
Or 18...Rb4 19.Rad1 c5 20.Be5 Nb6 21.b3².

19.Rfe1 Bb4 20.Re3!

White has the better prospects.

C) 8...Qd7

This is Black’s main continuation.

9.e3
According to the old theory Black equalizes after 9.Nc3 Nxd4! 10.Bxb7 Rb8 11.Bg2 Be7 12.e3 Nb5! as in Yusupov
– Karpov, Belfort 1988.
 In GM 1 I concentrated on C1) 9...Rb8, but now the main focus is on C2) 9...0-0-0 as alluded to at the beginning of
the chapter. There are, of course, several alternatives:

9...e5 10.dxe5 Nxe5 11.Bxb7 Rb8 12.Bg2 Qxd1

If Black continues with 12...Bc5 White has another interesting idea: 13.b3!? 0-0 14.Bb2 Rfd8 15.Qxd7 Nfxd7
16.Nd2 cxb3 17.axb3 Nd3 18.Bc3 White is clearly better.
13.Rxd1 Bd6
This was Cvitan – Vaganian, Neum 2000. White played 14.Nd2 and also achieved an advantage, but the
following line looks even more convincing:
14.f4N 14...Nd3
14...Ned7 15.Bf3! (with the idea of 16.e4) 15...Nc5 16.Nd2 and White wins a pawn.

15.Nd2! Nxb2 16.Bxb2 Rxb2 17.Nxc4 Rc2 18.Nxd6† cxd6 19.Rxd6 Ke7 20.Ra6±
 With a technically winning position.

9...Nd5
This is met strongly by:
10.Nd2 h5
10...Na5 has occurred in a few correspondence games, and in one of them White convincingly proved his
advantage: 11.Qe2 Qb5 12.Nf3 c6 13.e4 Nf6 14.Rd1 c3 15.Qc2 cxb2 16.Bxb2 Qc4 17.Qb1! White has more
than enough compensation for a pawn, Cuccumini – V. Popov, corr. 2013.
11.Nxc4 h4 12.e4 Nb6
This happened in Cheparinov – Grachev, Moscow 2011, and here I suggest the following improvement:
13.Nxb6N 13...axb6 14.Be3
A logical sequence of moves is the following:
14...0-0-0 15.Qa4 Kb8 16.Rfd1 hxg3 17.hxg3
It looks like Black has no play on the kingside, while White’s positional advantage will tell in the long term.
17...Be7 18.Rac1 Bf6 19.d5 Ne5 20.Qb3±

C1) 9...Rb8 10.Qe2 b5 11.b3

11...cxb3
Certainly not 11...Na5?! which runs into 12.Bd2 b4 13.bxc4 with an advantage to White, Nesis – Engel, corr. 1988.

12.axb3 Rb6
By far Black’s most popular option.

12...Bb4 13.Ra6 Nd5 14.Bb2 Rb6

I checked 14...0-0 15.e4 Nf6 (15...Nde7 16.d5ƒ is just bad for Black) 16.d5 exd5 17.Bxf6 gxf6 18.exd5 Ne7
19.Rxf6 when White has an obvious positional advantage.
15.Rxb6 axb6
This is definitely the stronger recapture. After 15...cxb6?! 16.e4 Nf6 17.Qxb5 Be7 as in Hofland – Westerman,
corr. 1991, White could have decided the game on the spot: 18.Rc1!N 18...Na5 19.Rc8† Bd8 20.Qxd7† Kxd7
21.Ra8 Nxb3 22.Rxa7† Bc7 23.d5+–
16.Qxb5 Na5 17.Qd3 0-0 18.e4 Nf6 19.Rd1²
White enjoys a pleasant Catalan edge, with the bishop pair and a strong centre.

13.Rd1
In GM 1 I proposed 13.Bxc6, but this time I would like to try something else.

13...a6
In the event of 13...Bb4 14.Bb2 0-0, White has the strong 15.d5! exd5 16.Bxf6 gxf6 17.Rxd5 Qe6. Now in the game
Gleizerov – C. Horvath, Budapest 1989, White could have played: 18.Qc2N (threatening 19.Rh5) 18...Ne5 19.Rxa7
With level material White’s advantage is indisputable, due to Black’s damaged structure on the kingside.

14.Nc3 Be7
This has occurred in two games, but for some reason in both cases White refrained from the following tempting
continuation:

15.d5N 15...exd5 16.Nxd5 Nxd5 17.Bxd5 Bf6

I assume that White missed the following discovered attack while calculating on move 15:

18.Bf3! Qe6
18...Qe7 loses to 19.Rxa6 Rxa6 20.Qxb5.

19.Bg4 Qe7 20.Bd7† Kf8 21.Ba3 b4 22.Bb2 Bxb2 23.Qxb2

With a pleasant advantage for White.

C2) 9...0-0-0
 Currently the most fashionable continuation at grandmaster level.

10.Qa4
For a long time I had confidence in 10.Nd2, until I saw the game Giri – Harikrishna, Biel 2014, which continued
10...e5.

10...Nd5
10...h5
This has been tried a few times by Black, but it allows White an additional option:
11.Nd2
11.Bxc6 Qxc6 12.Qxc6 bxc6 13.Nd2 h4 14.Nxc4 Bd6 15.Kg2 Rh5 16.Bd2 Rdh8 is surprisingly unclear.
11...Nd5 12.Nxc4 h4 13.Bd2 Kb8
White was ready to launch an attack with 14.b4.
14.Rfc1 f5 15.b4!
A thematic idea in this line. Accepting the pawn sacrifice with the Catalan bishop still in play looks suicidal.
15...Bd6
Apparently Black’s best idea would have been 15...Ne5 16.Qxd7 Nxd7 17.b5², but White definitely has the
better endgame with his bishop pair.
16.b5 Nce7
This happened in Stefanova – M. Socko, Warsaw 2013, and here the following idea looks very strong:

17.Qb3N
Followed by pushing the a-pawn.
17...Ng8 18.a4 Ngf6 19.a5 hxg3 20.hxg3 g5 21.b6 cxb6 22.Nxb6!
White’s attack will win the race.

11.Qxc4 h5
Obviously this is Black’s key attacking idea, otherwise the whole strategy would be foolish.

12.Bd2 h4 13.Rc1
The last preparatory move before the real action begins!
An immediate 13.b4 seems premature in view of: 13...Ncxb4! 14.Bxb4 Bxb4 15.e4 (15.Bxd5? Qxd5 16.Qxb4 hxg3 and
Black’s attack decides) 15...Nf4! 16.gxf4 Qxd4 17.Qxd4 Rxd4 I am not sure White has anything here.

13...hxg3
13...f5 occurred in Rodshtein – Shyam, Benasque 2013, with Black obtaining a good game. However, after the
thematic 14.b4N we would soon transpose into the main line.

14.hxg3 f5 15.b4!
White has to start active play on the queenside in order to maximize his light-squared bishop’s power. The only game
here continued with:

15...Bd6
15...Bxb4 16.Bxb4 Ncxb4 17.Nd2 will be too difficult for Black to defend. White has his Catalan bishop, a knight
heading for c5 and open files for his rooks.

15...Ncxb4 This seems to be critical, although White’s position looks attractive after 16.a3 Nc6 17.Nc3 Kb8 18.Qb3
Nb6 19.Ne2. Here I developed the following line:
19...e5 20.Rxc6! bxc6 21.a4 e4 22.a5 Rh6 23.axb6 cxb6 24.f3! exf3 25.Bxf3 g5 26.Bg2² White’s light-squared bishop
should be an important factor to prove an advantage.

16.b5 Nce7 17.Nc3 Kb8

This is too slow.

Black should have tried 17...Nxc3 18.Rxc3 Nd5 19.Rb3 g5, although White can switch to a positional strategy: 20.e4!
fxe4 21.Re1 Rh5 22.Bxe4 Rdh8 23.Qe2 With a serious positional advantage.

18.a4 Rh5 19.a5 Rdh8

This position occurred in Swinkels – Polaczek, Germany 2013. White has a few attacking ideas, with my preference
being as follows:
20.a6!N 20...b6 21.e4 Nxc3
21...fxe4 22.Nxe4 is clearly better for White.

22.Rxc3 fxe4 23.Re3 Rxb5 24.Rxe4

Despite his extra pawn, Black’s position is difficult. White will simply increase the pressure along the h1-a8 diagonal.

Conclusion

The first part of the chapter shares many similarities with GM 1, with some general improvements added along the
way. The overall assessment remains favourable for White.
After 5...Bd7 6.Ne5 Bc6 7.Nxc6 Nxc6 8.0-0 Qd7 9.e3 the most critical test is now 9...0-0-0, which has recently been
employed with increasing frequency at the top level. Black aims to launch a quick attack on the kingside, hoping to
crash through before the rather unsafe position of his own king is exploited. White should be alert to the danger, but I
am satisfied that my analysis shows how to maintain an initiative in all cases.
A) 6...b5 7.Nxc6 Qb6 8.Na5!
A1) 8...Qxa5†
A2) 8...Nd5 9.Bd2
A21) 9...a6
A22) 9...Nc6 10.Nxc6 Qxc6 11.e4
A221) 11...Nb4
A222) 11...Nf6
B) 6...Bb4† 7.Bd2!
B1) 7...Be7 8.e3
B11) 8...0-0
B12) 8...b5
B2) 7...Qxd4 8.Bxb4 Qxe5 9.Na3 b5 10.Bd6! Qxb2 11.0-0 Nd5 12.e4 Nc3 13.Qh5!
B21) 13...Nd7
B22) 13...h6!?
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 c6
I wouldn’t say that Black has tried hard to rehabilitate this line, but there have been some attempted improvements
recently.

6.Ne5
In my opinion this is the most principled continuation. White is aiming to regain the pawn, and maintain typical
Catalan pressure.

In this position we have to look at two major alternatives for Black: A) 6...b5 and B) 6...Bb4†. I would also like to
mention two minor options, which deserve a little attention, though not more.

6...Nbd7 7.Nxc4 Nb6 (Black’s idea is to get some play on the queenside after 8.Nxb6 axb6, but certainly White has a
different plan) 8.Ne5! c5 9.Be3 Nbd5 (9...cxd4 10.Bxd4 Bb4† 11.Nc3 Nbd5 12.0-0 0-0 13.Qb3± was also clearly
better for White in Favarel – Resnjanskij, Naujac 2012.) This is what happened in D’Costa – Richmond, Birmingham
2000. White should have continued 10.dxc5 Qa5† 11.Bd2 Qxc5 12.Na3! with a nice position.

6...Be7 7.0-0 0-0 8.Nc3 Nbd7 9.Nxc4 Nb6 10.Ne5 Once again it is the same idea: White avoids the knight swap and
maintains a clear positional edge, thanks to his space advantage and strong Catalan bishop. There are a large number of
games which have reached this position, but the evaluation is obviously in White’s favour so I will just show one
continuation: 10...Nfd7 11.Nf3 Nd5 12.Bd2 (I also like 12.Qc2 b6 13.Rd1 Bb7 14.e4 Nxc3 15.bxc3²) 12...b6 13.e4
Nxc3 14.Bxc3 Bb7 15.Qe2 a5 16.Rfd1² White had a nice version of a Queen’s Indian in Gleizerov – Racioppo, Turin
2000.

A) 6...b5

In this position White has a promising idea at his disposal. If White manages to regain the pawn he would get a very
pleasant position with typical Catalan pressure.

7.Nxc6
7.a4 transposes to a line after 5...b5 that I prefer to avoid; see 7.Ne5 in the notes on page 127.

7...Qb6 8.Na5!

This move was first played by Viktor Korchnoi in 2004. Even after more than 60 years of playing the Catalan, the
closest we have to a superhero in chess still has something new and surprising to add to opening theory. Actually the
knight jump to the edge of the board looks extremely strange, as we should not forget that Black can capture it with
check! Nevertheless, White has serious threats along the h1-a8 diagonal, and all the tactics look great for him.

We now have two serious options: A1) 8...Qxa5†N or A2) 8...Nd5.

Just bad is 8...Bb4†? 9.Bd2 Bxd2† (9...Bxa5 10.Bxa8 Nc6 11.0-0 Bxd2 12.Bxc6† Qxc6 13.Qxd2± and Black has no
compensation for the exchange) 10.Qxd2 Nd5 11.Nc3! and Black cannot avoid losing material. For example, 11...Bb7
12.Nxb7 Qxb7 13.Nxd5 exd5 14.Qe3† Kf8 15.Qg5+–.

A1) 8...Qxa5†N

Capturing the knight leads to a forced line, which has never been tested in practice, so you will have to be content with
my elaborations on Korchnoi’s analysis.

9.Bd2 c3
10.bxc3
Less convincing is 10.Nxc3 b4 11.Bxa8 bxc3 12.Bxc3 Qb6.

10...Nd5 11.c4 b4 12.cxd5 exd5

Pinning the d-pawn is possible, but White also has a promising position in this case:
12...Bb7 13.0-0 Bxd5
13...exd5 allows a tactical solution: 14.Qb3 Be7 (Black loses the pawn after 14...Nd7 15.a3) 15.Nc3! Nc6
16.Nxd5 Nxd4 17.Qc4 With a winning advantage.
14.e4 Bb7 15.a3! Be7
Or 15...Qb5 16.axb4 Bxb4 17.Na3! with a clear advantage.
16.d5!
Black faces serious problems: most probably he will lose the b4-pawn, as White is threatening simply Qb3 and then
just capturing the pawn.
Let’s return to the main line. White should be better in the long term thanks to his superior pawn structure, but the
computer claims that White can also strike immediately with the unexpected:
13.Na3!
This subtle manoeuvre was suggested to me by my computer. White is only slightly better after more ‘human’ play:
13.Bf4 Be6 14.Nd2 Be7 15.0-0 0-0 16.Nb3 Qb5 17.Nc5! Nd7
Black cannot take the pawn with 17...Bxc5 18.dxc5 Qxc5, as after 19.e4± White regains the pawn with a clear
advantage.
18.Nxe6 fxe6 19.Bh3
The pair of bishops gives White a pleasant edge.

13...Nc6
Certainly bad is 13...Qxa3 14.Bxd5 and White wins.

If 13...Be7 14.Nc2 Qb5 15.a3! Nc6 16.Nxb4 Nxb4 17.axb4 Bxb4 18.Qa4! White gets exactly the kind of desirable
position he was aiming for.

14.Nc2 Qb5
Otherwise Black gets into deep trouble:

14...Be6 15.0-0 Be7 (15...Qb5 is met strongly by 16.e4! with the idea 16...Be7 17.a4! Qa5 17...bxa3 loses to 18.exd5
Bxd5 19.Rb1+–] 18.Ne3 and Black cannot avoid losing material.) 16.a3 Qb5 17.Bxb4 Nxb4 18.Nxb4 Bxb4 19.axb4
Qxb4 20.Qa4† Black is going to lose the a7-pawn.
15.a4!
A very effective move which forces Black to accept an inferior pawn structure.

15.0-0 Bf5! would allow Black to escape to an unclear position.

15...bxa3
After 15...Qa5 the central push 16.e4 would come with great effect. 16...Bd6 (16...Be6 17.0-0 Be7 18.Ne3! is already
lost for Black) 17.0-0 Ba6 18.Re1 0-0 19.exd5 Ne7 20.Nxb4! A nice touch that secures White’s advantage. 20...Bxb4
21.d6 Bxd2 22.dxe7 Bxe1 23.exf8=Q† Rxf8 24.Qxe1 White has a healthy extra pawn.

16.0-0!
With idea of waiting for the f8-bishop to move and only then capturing on a3, winning a tempo compared with the
immediate capture on a3.

Clearly worse is 16.Nxa3 Bxa3 17.Rxa3 0-0 and White has some difficulties defending the d4-pawn.

16...Be6
If 16...Be7 then we play 17.Nxa3 Bxa3 18.Rxa3 and Black cannot take with 18...Nxd4? in view of 19.Ra5 followed
by 20.Rxd5 with decisive threats.

17.Re1 Be7 18.Nxa3 Bxa3 19.Rxa3 0-0

Black still cannot take the central pawn: 19...Nxd4 20.e4! White’s initiative is decisive.

20.Qa1 a5 21.e3
 The bishop pair and Black’s weak pawns on a5 and d5 give White a clear positional advantage.

A2) 8...Nd5 9.Bd2

Black has a wide choice of moves here, with the main two being A21) 9...a6 and A22) 9...Nc6. However, I was
unable to find a route to equality for Black in any of the lines analysed.

9...Qxd4?!
This capture is very risky for Black.
10.Nc3 a6
Other option are much worse:
10...Qc5 11.0-0 and Black is helpless against White’s simple threat of Nxd5 followed by Be3 and the d5-pawn
will fall.
 10...Nd7 11.Nxb5 Qc5 12.a4 a6 13.b4! and White wins material.
11.0-0 Nd7 12.a4 N7b6
12...b4 runs into 13.Nxd5 exd5 14.Nc6 and Black’s position collapses.
13.Qc2
Black is in serious trouble due to his poor development.

9...b4 10.Nxc4 Qxd4 11.Qc2

It is difficult for Black to deal with White’s initiative.
11...Nd7
Black cannot play 11...Ba6 12.Qa4† Kd8 13.Ne3! as White has a clear advantage.
12.Be3 Qg4 13.Nbd2 Be7
13...Bb7 is met strongly by 14.Ne4! with the unpleasant idea of Ned6†. After 14...Nxe3 15.Nxe3 Qg6 16.Rd1
Black faces serious problems with development.

14.Bxa7!
White wins the pawn, as Black cannot take the bishop.
Amazingly enough my engine likes the mysterious 14.h4!?, creating problems for the black queen.
14...Rxa7 15.Nd6†! Bxd6 16.Qxc8† Ke7 17.Qxh8
This wins for White.

9...Nd7 10.Nc3 N7f6

11.a4!
Using the fact that Black cannot play 11...a6 12.axb5 axb5 13.Nxd5 Nxd5 14.Bxd5 exd5 15.Nxc4! Rxa1
16.Nxb6 Rxd1† 17.Kxd1, when he remains a pawn down
11...b4 12.Nxc4 bxc3
12...Qxd4 is apparently the best chance for Black, though White retains a nice positional advantage after 13.Nxd5
Nxd5 14.Rc1±.
13.Nxb6 cxd2† 14.Qxd2 axb6 15.0-0
The position is clearly in White’s favour as he is able to seize the initiative, while Black will have to develop his
pieces:
15...Ba6
15...Bb4 16.Qc2 0-0 17.e4 Ne7 18.Qb3 Ba5 19.Rfc1 White has an overwhelming advantage, with one of the
threats being 20.Qa3 with the idea of b2-b4.
16.Rfc1 Rd8
The lesser evil would have been 16...Bb4 17.Qd1 Ba5! (17...0-0 loses immediately after 18.e4 Ne7 19.Qb3 Ba5
20.Qa3! followed by b2-b4, trapping the bishop on a5.) 18.e4 Nb4 19.Bf1 Bxf1 20.Qxf1 0-0 21.f3 Rfd8 22.Rc4±
Black is doomed to a passive defence.
We have been following Slugin – Kharlov, St Petersburg 2007, and here the winning idea would be:
17.a5!N 17...b5
One of the ideas comes to light after 17...Bb4 18.Qc2 Bxa5 19.Rxa5! bxa5 20.Qc6† and White is winning.
18.e4 Bb4 19.Qd3 Ne7 20.Rc7 0-0 21.Ra7+–
Black is losing the b5-pawn.

9...Na6

10.Nc3N
A natural improvement over 10.a4 b4 11.Nxc4 Qxd4, when Black was fine in Colls Gelaberto – Perez
Candelario, La Massana 2008.
10...Nab4 11.Nxd5 Nxd5
11...exd5 12.a3 and White wins material.
12.a4 Bd7
 12...b4 13.Nxc4 Qxd4 14.Rc1 transposes to a position from the 9...Nd7 line above.
13.axb5 Bxb5 14.0-0!
White doesn’t have much after 14.Bc3 Be7 15.0-0 0-0.
14...Be7
In the event of 14...Qxd4 15.Qc1 Be7 16.e4 Nf6 17.Be3 Qd7 18.Nxc4 0-0 19.Rd1 Qc6 20.e5 Nd5 21.Nd6 White
develops an initiative.
15.Qe1!
Covering the b4-square.
15...0-0 16.e4 Nf6 17.Bc3
White preserves a pleasant positional edge.

A21) 9...a6

I have promoted this move from a sideline in GM 1 to a main line. The idea is quite logical, preparing to remove the
rook from the dangerous diagonal.
10.Nc3
There is only one game in the database here, with Black choosing to capture on c3:

10...Nxc3
10...Ra7
I considered this in GM 1, and the outlook is still poor for Black.
11.Bxd5
11.Nxd5 exd5 12.Bxd5 allows Black the following tactical resource: 12...c3! 13.Bxc3 b4 14.Nc4 Qd8 with
unnecessary complications.
11...Qxa5
After 11...exd5 12.Nxd5 Qe6 13.Nf4! Qe4 14.0-0 Qxd4 15.Qc2± White’s advantage in development starts to
tell.
12.Bg2 Rd7
12...Bb7 13.e4 Be7 14.Qg4 allows White an obvious initiative.
13.d5 b4
Black cannot play 13...Bb7 14.dxe6 Rxd2 15.Qxd2 Bxg2, as after 16.exf7† Kxf7 17.Rg1 followed by Qd2-f4xb8,
White wins material.
14.dxe6
14.Qa4 Qb6 15.Be3 Bc5 16.Bxc5 Qxc5 17.Ne4 Qb5 Black has a reasonable position.
14...fxe6
14...Rxd2 15.Qxd2 bxc3 16.exf7† Kxf7 17.bxc3 Be7 18.Bd5† White has an obvious advantage, because of
Black’s exposed king.
15.Ne4 Bb7 16.Qc2
White is better positionally, due to Black’s vulnerable pawn structure.

11.Bxc3 Ra7
Now I would like to propose a different approach:
12.0-0N
12.a4 Be7 13.b3 0-0 14.axb5 axb5 15.bxc4 b4 16.c5 Qb5 17.Nb3 Bb7 was rather messy in Schneider – Feygin,
Germany 2011.

12...Rc7
12...Be7 13.d5 0-0 14.Nc6 Nxc6 15.dxc6± is clearly better for White.

13.a3
White has to prevent 13...b4.

13...Be7 14.Qd2 0-0 15.Rfc1

White’s plan is to follow up with 16.b3, exchanging Black’s c4-pawn. The following is a good illustrative line:

15...Bd7 16.b3 cxb3 17.Nxb3 Rfc8

17...Bxa3? doesn’t work in view of: 18.Rxa3 Rxc3 19.Qxc3 b4 20.Qc5 Qxc5 21.dxc5 bxa3 22.c6+–
18.Ba5 Rxc1† 19.Rxc1 Rxc1† 20.Qxc1 Qa7 21.Bb4
With a clear positional advantage for White. His Catalan bishop is proving to be extremely effective.

A22) 9...Nc6 10.Nxc6 Qxc6 11.e4

Black has tried two knight moves here: A221) 11...Nb4 and A222) 11...Nf6.

A221) 11...Nb4

Landing the knight on d3 is a tempting idea, but the problem is that Black is unable to achieve his plan as White quickly
seizes the initiative in the centre.
12.0-0 Bb7 13.a4 a6N
This must be the critical continuation.

13...Nd3?! was played in Korchnoi – Moskalenko, Barcelona 2004. Now White should have played the simple
14.axb5N 14...Qxb5 15.Ra5! Qb3 (the b2-pawn is untouchable: 15...Qxb2? 16.Qa4† and White wins) 16.Bc3 with a
clear advantage, as suggested by Moskalenko.

14.axb5 axb5

15.d5 Qb6 16.Rxa8† Bxa8 17.dxe6 Qxe6

After 17...fxe6 18.Be3 Qc6 19.Nc3 White is much better and is threatening Qd1-h5xb5.

18.Nc3 Bc5
Another line is 18...Qd7 19.Qh5 Be7 (Or 19...Nd3 20.Ra1 Bc6 21.Bh3! Qb7 22.Be3 and I do not see how Black can
prevent Ra7.) 20.Qxb5 Qxb5 21.Nxb5 Nd3 22.Bc3 and White has an extra pawn.

19.Nd5!?
19.Nxb5 0-0 20.Bxb4 Bxb4 21.Qa4 also looks strong enough, but maybe Black has some chances for survival, thanks
to his bishop pair.

19...Na6
19...Nxd5 20.exd5 Qd7 21.Re1† Kf8 22.Bc3 looks horrible for Black.
20.b4!
A welcome tactical resource, as Black was close to solving his opening problems.

20...cxb3
Other options are:

20...Bd4 21.Bf4 Be5 22.Qh5 Bxf4 23.Nxf4 Qb6 24.Qe5† with a winning position for White.

20...Ba7 21.Bc3 0-0 22.Nf4! Qb6 23.Qg4 g6 24.Nh5 with a decisive attack.

20...Bb6 21.Bc3 0-0 and now White has a beautiful manoeuvre:

22.Bh3 Qxh3 (22...Qxe4 23.Bg2 Qe6 24.Re1 leaves the black queen with no squares, for example 24...Qh6 25.Ne7†
Kh8 26.Nf5 and White wins.) 23.Ne7† Kh8 24.Qd6 White has a winning attack, with threats such as 25.Ng6†, or
25.Bxg7† followed by Nf5† and Qf6.

21.Qxb3 Bc6
21...0-0 22.Qxb5± leaves White with a healthy extra pawn.

22.Rc1
22.Ra1 0-0 23.Rxa6?! Bxd5 24.Qxd5 Bxf2† 25.Kxf2 Qxa6 should be drawish.

22...0-0

23.Be3!
The point behind White’s play.

23...Bxd5
23...Qd6 24.Bxc5 Nxc5 25.Qb4 Bxd5 26.exd5 and White wins a pawn.

24.exd5 Qb6 25.Bxc5 Nxc5 26.Qe3 Na4

26...Nd7 27.Qe7! is even worse, as the d-pawn should decide the issue.

27.Qe7
The dangerous passed pawn promises White a clear advantage.

A222) 11...Nf6 12.0-0 Bb7 13.d5! Qd7N

 The most solid response, though Black has also tried a more ambitious approach:
13...Qa6 14.Bc3 exd5
Other possibilities do not promise Black adequate play either:
a) 14...Be7 is actually not so bad, as after 15.d6! Bxd6 16.e5 Bxg2 17.Kxg2 Black has 17...b4! enabling him to
save the piece. However, White still has the better game after 18.exf6 bxc3 19.fxg7 Rg8 20.Nxc3 Rxg7 21.Qe2².
b) 14...b4 15.Bxf6 gxf6 16.Re1 Bc5 17.Nd2 0-0 (17...c3 18.bxc3 bxc3 19.Nb3±) 18.Rc1± and White is obviously
better.
15.exd5 0-0-0
We have been following Trilobit – Daverundle, Internet 2010. I found a simple improvement for White:

16.Bxf6N 16...Qxf6 17.Nc3 a6 18.Rc1!

To be followed by 19.a4, and Black’s queenside pawn structure starts to collapse.
14.Bg5 Be7
After 14...exd5 15.Bxf6 (15.exd5 Be7 16.Nc3 0-0 17.d6 Bd8 18.Bxb7 Qxb7 is quite defendable for Black) 15...gxf6
16.exd5 0-0-0 I now prefer: 17.Qh5 Kb8 18.a4 b4 19.Nd2 With a clear positional advantage.

15.Bxf6!
A clever tactical trick that gives White a promising position.

15...gxf6
The problem for Black is that he cannot recapture with the bishop: 15...Bxf6 16.e5! Be7 (16...Bxe5 17.Qh5! Qc7
18.d6! Bxd6 19.Qxb5†+– wins a piece) 17.dxe6 Qxd1 18.Rxd1 Bxg2 19.Kxg2! (An improvement on GM 1, as
19.exf7† Kxf7 20.Kxg2 Rhd8 21.Nc3 b4 gives Black some counterplay.) 19...fxe6 20.a4! b4 21.Nd2 c3 22.bxc3 bxc3
23.Ne4 Black is unable to hold the c-pawn, thanks to the following line: 23...Rc8 24.Rdc1 Bb4 25.Rab1 a5 26.Nxc3!
Bxc3 27.Rb3 White should convert his extra pawn.

16.Nc3
White is clearly better positionally.

B) 6...Bb4† 7.Bd2!
 White sacrifices a second pawn, but in return he gets a dangerous initiative for his material deficit.

Another line runs 7.Nc3 Nd5 with double-edged play.

We have reached another branching point. The main lines are B1) 7...Be7 and B2) 7...Qxd4.

7...Na6 cannot be a serious move, after which I recommended 8.Bxb4 Nxb4 9.0-0 in GM 1. Like many ideas it has now
been employed in practice: 9...0-0 was R. Popov – Dibrov, Berdsk 2008, and now the simple 10.Na3N followed by
11.Naxc4 would have secured a clear Catalan edge.
Dubious is 7...Bxd2† 8.Qxd2 Nbd7 (8...b5?! doesn’t work due to 9.Nxc6 Qb6 10.Na5! Nd5 11.Nc3 and Black loses at
least a pawn) 9.Nxc4 and, as usual, White has regained the pawn with a clear advantage. 9...0-0 10.0-0 Qe7 11.Nc3 e5
was played in Gawlikowski – Weiner, Prague 1955, and now 12.Rfd1N 12...Re8 13.e4² would have secured White’s
advantage.

B1) 7...Be7
8.e3
This is White’s best way to defend the d4-pawn.

After 8.Bc3 White’s bishop appears to be rather vulnerable, and Black gets normal play after: 8...a5 (The exchange
sacrifice 8...b5!? 9.Nxc6 Nxc6 10.Bxc6† Bd7 11.Bxa8 Qxa8 12.0-0 0-0© might be an interesting alternative as well,
and was tried in Zenzera – Kreisl, Moscow 2012.) 9.a4 (9.Nxc4 allows the queenside advance 9...b5 10.Ne5 b4 11.Bd2
0-0 and Black is fine) In Stefanova – Kurajica, Benasque 1997, the simple 9...Nd5 gave Black comfortable play after
10.Nxc4 b5 11.axb5 cxb5.

Black immediately has another decision to make. He can try B11) 8...0-0 or B12) 8...b5.

B11) 8...0-0 9.Nxc4

9.Na3 Bxa3 10.bxa3 b5 is double-edged – especially the following important line: 11.Bb4 (11.Nxc6 doesn’t work:
11...Nxc6 12.Bxc6 Rb8 13.Bb4 Qc7! and Black is simply better. 11.a4 Nd5 is unclear.) 11...Re8 12.Nxc6 Nxc6
13.Bxc6 Bd7 14.Bxa8 Qxa8© Black has interesting compensation.

9...c5
Black’s natural attempt to undermine White’s centre.

Other options are not so attractive. 9...b5?! 10.Ba5! Qe8 11.Ne5 Ba6 was Romero Holmes – Murillo, San Jose 2013,
and now White should have continued with the following accurate move:
12.a3!N With the idea of b2-b4, securing White an obvious positional edge.

10.dxc5 Bxc5 11.b4!?

The quiet 11.0-0 is also worthy of consideration. 11...Nc6 12.Nc3 e5 13.Na4 Be7 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.Nxe5 Qc7
16.Nc4 Bh3 17.Re1² Though Black has compensation for the pawn I would prefer to be White.

11...Be7 12.Qb3
After 12.0-0 Black managed to solve his opening problems in the following encounter: 12...a6 13.Na5 Nd5 14.a3 b6
15.Nc4 Bb7= Rausis – Goloshchapov, Germany 2003.

12...Qc7 13.Nba3 Bd7

So far we have followed Schwing – Becking, Merzig 1996. White should have continued with:
14.b5!N
Preventing the simplifying idea of ...Bc6.

14...a6 15.b6 Qc8 16.Na5 Nc6 17.N3c4

White has very unpleasant pressure along the h1-a8 diagonal.

B12) 8...b5

This move has been the most recent trend for Black.

9.a4
I would be tempted to grab the exchange by 9.Nxc6 Nxc6 10.Bxc6† Bd7 11.Bxa8 Qxa8 12.f3, but I have my
concerns about 12...e5!N 13.dxe5 Ng4 14.0-0 Nxe5 15.Bc3 Nd3 with an unclear game.

9...b4 10.0-0
I wasn’t satisfied with 10.Nxc4 0-0 11.0-0 Ba6 12.b3 Nbd7! which has occurred twice in practice. Black has an
adequate game here.

10...Ba6
Here I discovered an interesting idea, connected with an exchange sacrifice:
11.Qc2N
I wasn’t convinced by 11.Re1, as in the game Buhmann – Harikrishna, Germany 2011.

11...c3
Another line is 11...0-0 12.Rd1, when White will grab the c4-pawn without having to worry about a pin on the f1-a6
diagonal. 12...Qc7 13.Be1! White intends to grab the c4-pawn, but with his other knight (13.Nxc4 Nbd7 14.e4 e5 is
unclear). The following variation is instructive: 13...Rc8 14.Nd2 Bb7 15.Qxc4 c5 16.Bxb7 Qxb7 17.Nb3 Nbd7 18.Na5
Qb6 19.Qb5! With a typical Catalan pull.

12.bxc3 Bxf1 13.Kxf1

White’s Catalan bishop appears to be very efficient and the pressure along the h1-a8 diagonal promises him
interesting compensation.

13...bxc3
Another important continuation is 13...Nfd7 14.Nxd7 Nxd7 15.cxb4 0-0 16.Bxc6 Rc8 17.Qe4. Play might continue
with the following logical sequence of moves: 17...Nf6 18.Qg2 e5 19.d5 e4 20.b5 Nxd5 21.Qxe4 Nf6 22.Qd4! White
has excellent compensation.
14.Nxc6! Nxc6 15.Bxc6† Nd7 16.Bxa8 Qxa8 17.Qxc3 Qh1† 18.Ke2 0-0 19.Qc7 Rd8 20.Be1 Qxh2 21.Nc3²
Although material is balanced, White has the more active game.

B2) 7...Qxd4 8.Bxb4 Qxe5 9.Na3 b5

Definitely the only move. Black once tried 9...Qc7? and lost quickly after: 10.Nxc4 c5 11.Qd6! Qxd6 12.Nxd6† Kd7
13.Bxc5 Nc6 14.Rd1 Kc7 15.Nb5† Black resigned before getting mated in one with Bd6 in Yevseev – Paulsen,
Norway 1997.

10.Bd6!
This strong idea was employed by the former European Champion Tkachiev in his game against Ukrainian
Grandmaster Goloshchapov in 2003. I believe it poses Black serious problems.
Previously White had tried mainly 10.f4 Qc7 (10...Qxb2?? loses to 11.Rb1 Qxa2 12.Qd6 with inevitable mate)
11.Nxb5 cxb5 12.Bxa8 Bb7 13.Bxb7 Qxb7©, but, as was proven by developments in this line, Black has very good
positional compensation for the exchange. 14.0-0 Qb6† 15.Kh1 Nc6÷

Tkachiev’s move is the beginning of almost forced play.

10...Qxb2
Black does not have a real alternative to the text:

10...Qf5?! 11.Qd2 Played with the idea of castling long (less convincing is 11.0-0 Bb7). 11...Bb7 12.Qa5! Another of
the ideas of 11.Qd2 – White is threatening Qc7. 12...Na6 13.Nxb5 Rd8 (White is winning after 13...Rc8 14.0-0 Qxb5
15.Qxb5 cxb5 16.Bxb7 Kd7 17.Rfd1+–) 14.Nc7† Kd7 15.Be5 With a huge advantage.

10...Qh5? loses immediately after: 11.Bf3 Qf5 (11...Qg6 12.Nxb5+–) 12.g4! Nxg4 13.Bxb8 0-0 (13...Rxb8 14.Qd6
Rb6 15.Rd1! with a decisive advantage) 14.Bg3 Ne5 15.Bg2 Despite having three pawns for the piece, Black’s position
is lost.

11.0-0
Now White is threatening 12.Rb1 followed by 13.Nxb5 with decisive threats.

11...Nd5
Black has to block the h1-a8 diagonal.

11...a6?! is not really an option, as can be shown by the following example: 12.Rb1 Qc3 13.Bxb8 Rxb8 14.Qd6 Rb6
15.Nxc4! Qxc4 16.Rbc1 White was winning in Rodshtein – Novita, Khanty-Mansiysk (ol) 2010.

12.e4 Nc3
Once again Black doesn’t have an alternative, as after 12...Ne7 13.Rb1 Qc3 (13...Qxa2 loses to 14.Re1 followed by
Re2 trapping the queen on a2) 14.e5+– Black cannot prevent both of White’s ideas: Nxb5 and Bxe7, followed by
Qd6† and Bxc6.

13.Qh5!
 In GM 1 I only gave B21) 13...Nd7, but now we should also consider B22) 13...h6!?.

B21) 13...Nd7

This move has been entirely refuted due to the following line:

14.e5 Bb7 15.Qg5 f6 16.exf6 0-0-0

Black is ready to sacrifice two pawns to remove his monarch from the danger zone.

Black’s position is hardly acceptable after 16...gxf6N 17.Qh5† Kd8 18.Rae1 Re8 19.Qf7.

17.fxg7 Rhg8

18.Rae1!
I gave this move as an improvement over existing theory in GM 1. Since then it has been used effectively in several
correspondence games.

18...Rxg7
Other options are as follows:

18...Nd5 looks solid for Black, but White crashes through quickly: 19.Bxd5! Rxg7N (19...exd5 runs into 20.Re7 Qf6
21.Qxf6 Nxf6 22.Rc7† Kb8 23.Be5 Ne8 24.Rf7† Ka8 25.f4 with a big advantage for White, Kleiser – Murlasits, corr.
2014) Now the brilliant 20.Nxb5!! decides the issue, for example:
20...Qxb5 (20...cxb5 21.Bxb7† Kxb7 22.Qxd8 leaves Black a rook down) 21.Qxg7 Qxd5 22.Be7 c5 23.f3 Re8 24.Qf7
Rh8 25.Qxe6+– With a decisive material advantage.

I considered 18...a6 in GM 1. 19.Qe3!!

With this brilliant idea White’s queen penetrates to a7 with great effect. 19...Nd5 (19...Rxg7 20.Qa7 Nd5 21.Nxc4!
bxc4 22.Rb1 wins on the spot) 20.Qa7 c3 21.Bxd5 cxd5 22.Rb1 Qe2 23.Rfc1+– White is winning.

19.Qe3 c5
This is the most stubborn try; other moves are easier for White:

If 19...Nd5 20.Qxa7 Qf6 21.Re2 I believe Black is strategically lost, as he is completely tied up on the queenside, while
White can gradually improve his position with Rfe1, Bh3, or Nc2-e3. He can also sacrifice with Nxc4 followed by Rb1
at any appropriate moment. (Instead 21.Nxc4 bxc4 22.Rb1 N7b6 23.Bc5 Nf4 is still defendable for Black.)
19...Nb6 20.Qxe6† Rgd7 21.Bh3! c5 22.Be7 Ncd5 23.Bxd8 Kxd8 24.Qe8† Kc7 25.Qe5† Qxe5 26.Rxe5+– White is
winning.

20.Bxb7† Kxb7 21.Qf3† Ka6!

White’s task is easier after 21...Kb6 22.Rxe6 Rg6 (the only move) 23.Rfe1 Ne5. Now White has an amazing winning
line: 24.Be7†! Rxe6 25.Bxd8† Ka6

26.Qa8!! Nf3† 27.Kh1! (27.Kg2 Nxe1† 28.Kh1 also wins) 27...Rxe1† 28.Kg2 Rg1† 29.Kh3 Black cannot avoid mate.

22.Re3! Nd5 23.Rb1 Qf6 24.Nxb5 Qxf3 25.Rxf3 c3 26.Nxc3 Nxc3 27.Rxc3 Nb6 28.Bxc5
White should convert his extra pawn without too much difficulty.
 B22) 13...h6!?

This is Black’s latest attempt to rehabilitate the whole variation.

14.e5 Bb7 15.Rfb1!

A nice tactical idea which will reveal itself fully in a couple of moves time.

15...Nxb1
I also checked an obvious alternative: 15...Qe2 16.Bf3 (This is even stronger than 16.Qxe2 Nxe2† 17.Kf1 Nc3
18.Nxb5! Nxb1 19.Nc7† Kd7 20.Rxb1 Kc8 21.Nxa8 Na6 22.Nb6† axb6 23.Rxb6± where White is better.) 16...Qd3
17.Nxb5 cxb5 18.Bxb7 Nxb1 19.Qg4 Nd7 20.Bxa8 Nc3 21.Qxg7 Qh7 22.Qg4 Qf5 23.Qxf5 exf5 24.Bb4! Ne4
25.Bc6 White is close to winning.

16.Rxb1 Qxa2
17.Rxb5!
The point of White’s previous exchange sacrifice.

17...cxb5 18.Bxb7
White looks to be winning in both of the following lines:

18...a6
18...c3 19.Qh4 g5 20.Qe4+–

19.Bxa8 Qa1† 20.Kg2 Qd4 21.Nc2N

21.Qf3 has also scored heavily in correspondence games.
21...Qb6 22.Qg4! g6 23.Nd4
With a decisive advantage.

Conclusion

As in GM 1, I believe that White is doing well in all variations in this chapter. Following the sequence 6.Ne5 b5 7.Nxc6
Qb6 8.Na5 Nd5 9.Bd2, I have updated and improved my analysis of 9...a6 – with the Catalan bishop often playing a
starring role.
After 6.Ne5 Bb4† 7.Bd2! Qxd4 8.Bxb4 Qxe5 9.Na3 b5, Tkachiev’s 10.Bd6! remains the strongest move. Following
the further sequence 10...Qxb2 11.0-0 Nd5 12.e4 Nc3 13.Qh5! I now also considered 13...h6!?, which was Black’s
most recent try in the realm of correspondence chess. However, White has a powerful exchange sacrifice at his disposal
on move 15 which would appear to lead to a decisive advantage in all cases.
A) 6...Bxd2†
B) 6...c5
C) 6...Be7
D) 6...a5 7.Qc2
D1) 7...Nc6
D2) 7...Bxd2† 8.Qxd2 c6 9.a4
D21) 9...Ne4
D22) 9...b5
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 Bb4†
Black’s idea is simple: he intends to hold on to the c4-pawn for a while and so force White to waste time regaining it.

6.Bd2
Black has tried a lot of moves here. We shall look at the four important ones: A) 6...Bxd2†, B) 6...c5, C) 6...Be7 and
D) 6...a5.

A) 6...Bxd2†

This is not a popular choice at a high level, as White regains the pawn and keeps good positional pressure along the h1-
a8 diagonal.

7.Qxd2

7...0-0
It is certainly important to know the following line: 7...b5 8.a4!N (In the only game in this position, Sosonko –
Furman, Wijk aan Zee 1975, White played 8.Qg5 which is actually pretty unclear after 8...a6!N 9.Qxg7 Rg8 10.Qh6
Bb7 11.0-0 Nbd7.) 8...c6 9.axb5 cxb5 10.Nc3 b4 (even worse for Black is 10...Qb6 11.Qg5 0-0 12.Qxb5 Bb7 13.0-0±
when White is clearly better) 11.Nb5 0-0 12.Qxb4 Nd5 13.Qd6 The arising endgame will be a long-term torture for
Black, due to his weak queenside pawns.
  
8.Na3! Qe7
The character of the game is not really changed by:
8...c5 9.dxc5
Obviously there is nothing wrong with 9.Nxc4.
9...Na6
A good example of this variation is 9...Ne4 10.Qxd8 Rxd8 11.Nxc4 Nc6 12.0-0 Nxc5 as in Lupor – Klundt, Bad
Wiessee 2000, and there is no relief for Black even after the queen trade, so after the accurate 13.Rfd1N 13...Bd7
14.Rac1± White’s pressure is significant.
10.c6!?
A more original approach in this position, though White certainly would also be better after the natural 10.Nxc4.
10...bxc6 11.Nxc4 Rb8 12.0-0 Qxd2 13.Nfxd2 c5
This occurred in Ganguly – Li Bo, Qinhuangdao 2011, and White retains long-term pressure after the best line:

14.Nb3N 14...Bd7 15.Rfc1²

Black never has an easy life with this pawn structure.

9.0-0 c5 10.dxc5 Rd8

 10...Qxc5 11.Rac1 is also nice for White.

11.Qc3 Qxc5 12.Qxc4 Qxc4 13.Nxc4 Nc6 14.Rfd1²

With a typical Catalan edge for White, as in Kharitonov – Kholmov, Moscow 1998.

B) 6...c5 7.Bxb4 cxb4 8.Ne5 0-0 9.a3!?

This is a big change compared to GM 1.

My recommendation 9.Nxc4 Nc6 10.e3 has been tested quite a lot, and Black seems to be doing okay in this line by
entering the sharp sequence 10...e5 11.d5 b5!.

9...Nc6
No one has tried 9...bxa3 which is understandable, since after 10.Nxa3 Nd5 11.Naxc4 (11.Nexc4 Nc6 12.0-0 Ndb4
13.e3² is also nice for White) 11...f6 12.Nd3 Nc6 13.e3 b6 14.0-0 Bb7 15.Qa4² White has a pleasant edge, which is
exactly what he is aiming for.

9...Nd5 10.Nxc4 Qc7 11.Ne5 Nc6 12.Nxc6 bxc6 (if 12...Qxc6 13.0-0 Qb6 14.Qd2 then White has a slight advantage)
13.0-0 Qb6 This position occurred in Loginov – Hacker, corr. 2013.

I believe White should keep a slight edge after 14.Qd2N 14...Rd8 15.Rd1 Rb8 16.axb4 Nxb4 17.Na3 Ba6 18.Nc2
Nd5 19.Rdc1 and from a human point of view, it seems White retains pressure due to Black’s weak queenside
structure.

9...Qc7 occurred in one computer game, when after 10.Qc2 Nd5 11.Qxc4 Qxc4 12.Nxc4 Nc6 13.e3 White has a
nagging pull in the arising endgame.

10.Bxc6
This was my original novelty, which was found during my work with Boris Gelfand. He managed to exploit my idea
in his game versus Adams.

10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.axb4 as in Bareev – Grachev, St Petersburg 2009, is unclear due to the improvement: 11...Rb8!N

10...bxc6 11.axb4 Qb6

The aforementioned game continued: 11...Bb7 12.0-0 a5 13.bxa5 Rxa5 14.Rxa5 Qxa5
15.Qd2! A key move that clarifies White’s advantage. 15...Qa7 16.Nxc4 Rd8 (16...c5 doesn’t change much after
17.dxc5 Qxc5 18.Nba3± with an extra pawn) 17.Rd1 c5 18.Qa5 Qxa5 19.Nxa5 Ba8 (19...Ba6 20.e3 cxd4 21.Nc6±)
20.Nb3 cxd4 21.Rxd4 Rb8 22.Nc5 g5 23.Nc3± White convincingly converted his extra pawn in Gelfand – Adams,
Eilat 2012.

12.0-0 Qxb4 13.Qd2! c5 14.Qxb4 cxb4 15.Rc1!

Now this works well for White.

15...Bb7
Black tried 15...Nd5 in Baryshpolets – Simonian, Kiev 2013. Again I like 16.Nxc4N 16...Bd7 17.Nbd2 Rfc8
18.Ra5!² with a stable advantage.

In Baryshpolets – Munkhgal, Kazan 2013, White should have played:

16.Nxc4N 16...Rfd8 17.Na5! Be4 18.e3
White has a pleasant edge in this endgame.

C) 6...Be7

This move does not impress me, but we should still know how to meet it.

7.Qc2 Bd7
In the event of 7...a6 8.Qxc4 b5 9.Qc2 Bb7 10.0-0 we have a well-known position from the classical line of the
Catalan with ...Be7, but with an extra tempo for White; which is a serious achievement. 10...Be4 (10...0-0 transposes to
variation A of Chapter 13 on page 182) 11.Qc1 0-0 12.Rd1 Bb7 13.Bf4 Nd5 14.Nc3 Nxf4 15.Qxf4 Bd6 C. Horvath –
Mochalov, Rethymnon 2003, is once again a theoretical position, but White’s extra move Rd1 is crucial to the
evaluation. Now was the right time for 16.Ne5N 16...Bxg2 17.Kxg2 Nd7 18.Ne4 with a nice positional pull.

8.Ne5 Nc6
8...Bc6 has been tried only once: 9.Nxc6 Nxc6 10.e3 e5 11.Qxc4 exd4 12.Bxc6† bxc6 13.Qxc6† Kf8 14.0-0 White
was better in Urbanek – V. Ivanov, email 2008.

9.Qxc4 Nxe5 10.dxe5 Nd5 11.Qg4!

With this structure White has to show some special ideas, and his last move definitely poses Black a major headache.

11...g6
11...0-0 12.Bh6± is hardly acceptable for Black, as he loses an exchange.

12.Nc3
12.Bh6 is not so efficient, as Black can go for queenside castling.

12...Nxc3 13.Bxc3 Qc8

I also checked the natural 13...c6 when White has the same idea: 14.Be4 Qc7 (14...0-0 is dangerous in view of 15.h4
h5 16.Qf3± and 17.g4 is coming with great effect) 15.Qf3 Rf8 16.0-0 0-0-0 17.b4ƒ The black king is not safe on the
queenside either.

This was played in Lemke – Bebersdorf, Germany 1995, and now a strong continuation would have been:
14.Be4!N 14...c5
14...0-0 15.Qf3 Rb8 16.h4 is dangerous, as we already know.

15.Qf3 Rb8 16.h4 h5

Much worse is 16...0-0 17.h5 Bc6 18.Bxc6 Qxc6 19.Qxc6 bxc6 20.0-0-0± when strategically White is almost
winning.

17.0-0-0
And it’s not so clear how Black is going to solve his king issue.

D) 6...a5 7.Qc2
 Another big change from GM 1. There I gave 7.0-0, but lately Black has been doing quite well after 7...0-0 8.Bg5 b5.
We will now analyse D1) 7...Nc6 and the main line D2) 7...Bxd2†. But first there is a minor line to consider:

7...b5 8.a4 bxa4 (8...c6 is simply bad in view of 9.axb5 Bxd2† 10.Nfxd2!. After 10...Qxd4 11.Qxc4 Qb6 12.Nc3 Bb7
13.Na4! White had a substantial advantage in Gulko – Ljubojevic, Linares 1990.) 9.Ne5 Ra6 10.Qxa4† Bd7 11.Nxd7
Qxd7 12.0-0 0-0 13.Qxd7 Nfxd7 Tkachiev – Moiseenko, Santo Domingo 2002. White should have played 14.Rc1N
14...c5 15.Rxc4 cxd4 16.Bxb4 axb4 17.Rxa6 Nxa6 18.Rxd4 Ndc5 19.Nd2² when his advantage is quite annoying.

D1) 7...Nc6 8.Qxc4 Qd5

An old and well-known line, though White should be able to gain a pleasant edge:

9.Qd3 Qe4
Black has other options:

9...Qf5 10.Qxf5 exf5 11.0-0 Be6 12.Rc1 Bd5 (12...0-0 has been played three times. Here I like the simple and natural
13.Nc3N 13...a4 14.Nb5 Bd6 15.e3 Bd5 16.Ne1 with a slight edge.) 13.e3 Ne4 14.Be1 0-0 15.Nfd2 White preserves
some pressure in this endgame, as was proven by:

15...Rfe8 16.Nc3! Nxc3 17.bxc3 Bxg2 18.cxb4 Bd5 19.b5 Nb4 20.a3 Nd3 21.Rc3 Nxe1 22.Rxe1 c6 23.Rb1!² With a
positional edge, Giri – Landa, Mulhouse 2011.

9...0-0?! 10.Nc3 Qh5 11.h3! Rd8 Black’s strategy looks dubious and it’s no surprise that White retains a solid
advantage here. 12.a3 Bxc3 (12...Be7 can be met by 13.Rc1!, when it is not so clear how Black can move.) 13.bxc3
Qg6 14.Qxg6 hxg6 15.Bg5 Even without queens, White’s advantage is significant. 15...Rd7 occurred in Fridman –
Bartel, Dresden 2008, and now I like:
16.Ne5!N 16...Nxe5 17.dxe5 Nd5 18.c4 Nb6 19.Rc1 White is clearly better.

10.Qxe4 Nxe4 11.e3 Bd7

The main alternative here is 11...Nxd2, when my preference is to recapture with the f3-knight. 12.Nfxd2 a4 occurred
in Garcia Palermo – Marin, Benasque 2010, and now 13.0-0N 13...Bd7 14.Rc1 0-0 15.Ne4 Ra5 16.Na3 would promise
White nice pressure on the queenside.

12.0-0 0-0 13.Rc1! Rfc8?

Relatively better is 13...Nxd2 14.Nbxd2 a4, but White retains an advantage after: 15.a3 Bd6 16.Nc4 Na5 17.Nfd2!²

The text was played in Baumbach – Gudyev, corr. 1987, and here White missed a powerful continuation:

14.Bxb4!N 14...axb4 15.Ne5 Nxe5 16.dxe5

 Winning at least a pawn.

D2) 7...Bxd2† 8.Qxd2

8.Nbxd2 b5 9.a4 c6 allows Black to hang on to the c4-pawn.

8...c6
Black’s first choice by far, however I would also like to mention some other possibilities:
8...b5 runs into 9.Qg5! – one of the ideas behind the Qxd2 recapture. 9...0-0 10.Qxb5 Ba6 11.Qxa5 Nbd7 was
Laznicka – Kosten, Austria 2008, and here White would have been left with a healthy extra pawn after: 12.0-0N
12...Qb8 13.Qd2±

8...Nc6 was L’Ami – Balogh, Germany 2007. I think this was an opportune moment for:

9.Na3!N A possible continuation is 9...Ne4 10.Qc2 Nd6 11.Nxc4 Nb4 12.Qb3 Nd5 (12...Nxc4 13.Qxc4 b6 14.Ne5
Ba6 15.Qc3 is unpleasant for Black) 13.0-0 0-0 14.Rfe1 a4 15.Qc2 Nxc4 16.Qxc4² White has an obvious advantage.

8...Bd7 9.Ne5 Bc6 10.Nxc6 Nxc6 11.Na3 0-0

After 11...Nxd4 12.Bxb7 Rb8 13.Bg2 0-0, which happened in Huzman – Vul, Montreal 2007, White could have
secured a clear advantage with: 14.Nxc4N 14...c5 15.e3 Nf5 16.Rd1!±
12.e3 Nb4
Faure – Soldano, corr. 2013, continued 12...Qe8, and now the best continuation would have been: 13.Nxc4N
13...e5 14.0-0 exd4 15.exd4 Rd8 16.Rfe1 Qd7 17.d5. White is better after both 17...Nb4 18.d6! and 17...Nxd5
18.Rad1 Nce7 19.Qxa5.
13.Nxc4 c5?! 14.a3 Nbd5 15.0-0
White is clearly better, as Black has no compensation for the pressure along the h1-a8 diagonal. White went on to win
in Delchev – Giorgadze, Olite 2006.
9.a4
White is planning to regain the pawn by means of Na3xc4 with a thematic edge.

9.Ne5 b5 doesn’t promise anything for White.

We have reached another split, with Black’s two options being D21) 9...Ne4 and D22) 9...b5.

D21) 9...Ne4 10.Qf4 Nd6

10...Qb6
An interesting alternative, which has occurred in several correspondence games. Here I have a new proposal:

11.0-0!?N
 Black is fine after 11.Nbd2 Nxd2 12.Qxd2 Nd7.
11...Qxb2 12.Ne5 0-0
12...f6?! 13.Nxc4 Qxa1 14.Qxe4 looks scary for Black.
13.Na3 Nc3 14.Qe3 Nd7
After 14...Nxe2† 15.Kh1 Nc3, the best way to trap the black queen is: 16.Naxc4 Qb4 17.Rfc1 Nd5 18.Bxd5
exd5 19.Nd3 Qxc4 20.Rxc4 dxc4 21.Nf4 White is better.
15.Nexc4 Qb4 16.Qd3 Nd5 17.e4 Qc3 18.Qd1!
I think it’s important for White to avoid the queen swap, in order to have chances to seize the initiative on the
kingside.
18...Nb4 19.e5 Qd3 20.Qg4
White’s compensation is obvious.

11.Na3 Na6 12.Ne5 0-0 13.0-0 Nb4

14.Rfd1!N
I believe this is more accurate than 14.Naxc4 Nxc4 15.Nxc4 b6, when Black had a solid position in Cioara – Landa,
Baden-Baden 2012.

14...f6
By provoking this move White makes the e6-pawn a potential target for the future.

After 14...Nd5 15.Qc1 Nb6 16.Qc2!? Bd7 17.Nexc4 Ndxc4 18.Nxc4 Nxc4 19.Qxc4 the difference in the power of the
light-squared bishops is noticeable, and should give White a long-lasting pull.

15.Nexc4 Nxc4 16.Nxc4 b6 17.Rd2 Ba6 18.b3 Ra7 19.e4 Rd7 20.Rad1
Black is still solid, but White’s space advantage is beyond doubt.

D22) 9...b5
 This position has been contested at the highest level, so it is important to go into some detail.

10.axb5 cxb5 11.Qg5

The point behind 8.Qxd2.

11...0-0
Only one game has seen 11...b4 and, despite White’s crushing win after 12.Ne5, I prefer:

12.Qxg7N (After 12.Ne5 in Harutjunyan – Poghosyan, Yerevan 2014, Black missed the surprising 12...h6!N, when the
g7-pawn is untouchable in view of 13...Rh7, and instead 13.Qf4 Ra7 14.Nxc4 Ba6 leads to double-edged play.)
12...Rg8 13.Qh6 Bb7 14.Nbd2 The black king’s miserable position should eventually tell.

12.Qxb5 Ba6
 12...Na6?! fails to work and after 13.Qxc4 (13.Nbd2!? is also interesting) 13...Nb4 14.Qb3 e5 15.Nxe5 Rb8 16.0-0
Qxd4 17.Rxa5 Be6 18.Qc3 Black was just two pawns down in Grischuk – Moiseenko, Sochi 2006.

13.Qa4
I undertook a detailed investigation of this line in 2006 during my work with Vladimir Kramnik, and found that
13.Qxa5 doesn’t give White an advantage in view of: 13...Bb7 14.Qxd8 Rxa1! 15.Qxf8† Kxf8 16.0-0 Ra2 The game
should end peacefully.

13...Qb6!
Black must play actively to compensate for his pawn weaknesses.

14.0-0
14.Nbd2 Bb5 15.Qa3 Nc6 16.0-0 Rab8 is dead level; which was proven in Leko – Kramnik, Dortmund 2009.

14...Qxb2 15.Nbd2 Bb5 16.Nxc4 Bxa4 17.Nxb2 Bb5!

After a fairly forcing sequence of moves, we have reached a double-edged endgame. White’s idea is to coordinate his
pieces with the help of his powerful bishop and try to attack Black’s a5-pawn – which can be a serious weakness under
some circumstances. Black mostly relies on active piece counterplay, as was seen in the Kramnik – Topalov World
Championship match.
18.Ne5
I have to confess that I was the first one to discover these sequences back in 2006, an accomplishment which I am
proud of. I was shocked when Vladimir Kramnik asked me to analyse this position in detail on the first day of our
training camp before his match with Topalov, but his instincts were accurate – the position arose in the very first game!

18.Nd2!?
This move is not without venom, and has been employed twice by Gupta.
18...Ra7
This looks like the best move for Black, since after 18...Bc6?! 19.Nb3 Bxg2 20.Kxg2 Nbd7 21.Nxa5 Black lost
his passed pawn surprisingly quickly in Gupta – Greenfeld, Chennai 2011.
19.Rfe1 Rc8
19...Nc6 20.e3 Nb4 21.Reb1 allows White to comfortably regroup.
Here I found an interesting idea:
20.e3N
20.Na4 Nbd7 21.e3 was Gupta – Maheswaran, Kochi 2011. Black should now have played 21...Bxa4!N 22.Rxa4
Nb6, followed by 23...a3, when it is hard to see White’s advantage.
20...Nbd7
20...Rc2 21.Reb1! The point. Now 21...Nbd7 transposes to 20...Nbd7, while after 21...Rxd2 22.Nc4 Black would
have to play: 22...Rd1†! 23.Rxd1 Bxc4 24.Rdc1 Ba6 25.Rxa5 The endgame is quite unpleasant for Black.
21.Reb1 Rc2 22.Ne4 Bc6 23.Nxf6† gxf6
23...Nxf6 24.Bxc6 Rxc6 25.Nd3! and the white knight comes to c5.
24.Bxc6 Rxc6 25.Na4 f5 26.Ra2
White retains a slight pull here, as Black is doomed to defend passively. This all happened because White managed to
block Black’s pawn on a5.

18...Ra7
A clearly worse alternative is: 18...Ra6?! 19.Nbd3 Nbd7 20.Rfb1 Nxe5?! (20...Bxd3 was preferable, although White
is still better after 21.Nxd3) 21.Nc5! This is why the rook is so miserably placed on a6. Meier – Wojtaszek, Novi Sad
2009, continued 21...Nc6! (21...Ned7 22.Rxb5 Nxc5 23.dxc5 a4 24.Bb7 Ra7 25.Rb4 would be hopeless, according to
Meier) and now most convincing is Meier’s recommendation from ChessBase Magazine 133: 22.Bxc6!N 22...Rxc6
23.Rxb5 Re8 24.f4! Not even allowing 24...e5.

19.Nbd3
19.Bf3 Nbd7 20.Nec4 Rb8 21.Rfb1 g5! gave Black lots of counterplay in Kramnik – Topalov, Elista (1) 2006.

19...Nfd7
Much worse is: 19...Nbd7 20.Nc6!N (20.Rfb1 Nxe5 21.Rxb5 Nxd3 22.exd3 was drawish in Ushenina – T.
Kosintseva, Rijeka 2010.) 20...Bxc6 (20...Rc7 21.Rfc1! forces the exchange on c6 anyway, but in a worse version for
Black.) 21.Bxc6 Rc8 22.Rfc1² White is better as his light-squared bishop is too powerful.
20.Rfb1!
Absolutely harmless is: 20.Bf3 Nxe5 21.Nxe5 Nd7!

20...Nxe5 21.Rxb5 Nxd3 22.exd3 Rd8

22...a4 has also been tried, and here I like:

23.d5!N I believe only this move, which Cox does not mention in his QGD repertoire book, promises White winning
chances. (In the game Gleizerov – Luther, Predeal 2007, White went for 23.Ra3 Nd7 24.Bc6 Nf6 25.Rb4 Rd8 26.Raxa4
Rxa4 27.Rxa4 Kf8= and despite winning the pawn it’s an easy draw for Black, as Cox correctly points out.) 23...exd5
24.Bxd5 Rd8 25.Rb4!² White wins a pawn and has a fifty/fifty chance between winning and drawing.

23.d5 a4
 23...exd5 24.Bxd5 a4 25.Rb4 would transpose to the above note.

The text was played in Ki. Georgiev – Pavasovic, Valjevo 2007, and now White should have played:

24.dxe6N 24...fxe6 25.Ra3! Nd7 26.Rb4 Nf6 27.Bf3

Sooner or later the a4-pawn will fall and we will reach another fifty/fifty endgame, which would be no fun at all for
Black to defend.

Conclusion

This chapter saw some significant changes from GM 1, with the first coming in the variation 6.Bd2 c5 7.Bxb4 cxb4
8.Ne5 0-0. I now suggest 9.a3!?, which I originally prepared while working with Boris Gelfand – who employed it to
win a model game against Adams at the 2012 European Club Cup. Further ideas have been tried from Black’s side, but
two improvements over the games of the young Ukranian Grandmaster Andrey Baryshpolets have convinced me that
White is doing well here.

The second major change arrived after 6...a5, where I proposed 7.0-0 in GM 1. This time I am suggesting 7.Qc2, having
found some new ideas which give White every chance to fight for an advantage. This is an extremely solid line for
Black and there are no easy answers – but my analyses show the ideas and subtleties required for White to turn the
game in a favourable direction.
A) 6...c5
B) 6...c6
C) 6...a6
D) 6...Rb8
E) 6...Be7
F) 6...Nb6 7.Nbd2 c5 8.Nxc4 Nxc4 9.Qa4† Bd7 10.Qxc4
F1) 10...Qb6
F2) 10...Rc8
F3) 10...b5
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 Nbd7
A developing move, but too passive to equalize.

6.0-0

Black has a wide choice of possibilities: A) 6...c5, B) 6...c6, C) 6...a6, D) 6...Rb8, E) 6...Be7 and the main line F)
6...Nb6.
These moves cover a huge range of different motifs such as attacking White’s centre, simple development or
desperately hanging on to the c4-pawn. This variety makes it sensible to explain the themes as they arise in the analysis
rather than attempt a strategic overview now.

A) 6...c5 7.Na3 cxd4

7...Nb6 8.Nxc4 will be covered in line F.

8.Nxc4
The position is definitely favourable for White, since the black knight is misplaced on d7.

8...Bc5
Other moves are less promising for Black:

8...Be7 9.Nxd4 0-0 10.Nb5! Nc5 11.Nbd6± and White was clearly better in Timoscenko – Kholmov, USSR 1982.

8...Nb6 9.Nce5! Be7 10.Nxd4 0-0 11.Nb5! and White had a lot of pressure in Fernandez – Lopez Martin, email 2011.

9.Nxd4 Nb6
Another possibility is 9...0-0 10.Nb3 Be7 11.Bf4 Nb6 12.Qxd8 Bxd8, and now in the game Mchedlishvili – T.A.
Petrosian, Yerevan 2004, White could have capitalized on his initiative by means of: 13.Rfc1N 13...Nfd5 14.Bd6 Re8
15.Nca5 With a pleasant advantage.

After the text I believe White can improve on existing theory with a strong novelty.
10.Be3!N
Black has a tricky idea of meeting 10.Nxb6 Bxb6 11.Nb5 with a nice tactical shot: 11...Bxf2†! 12.Kxf2 Qb6†
13.Nd4 e5 Black was more or less fine in Tal – Danov, Moscow 1972.

10...0-0 11.Nb5 Bxe3 12.Nxe3²

White has lasting pressure.

B) 6...c6 7.a4 a5

7...Bd6?! 8.Nbd2 0-0 9.Nxc4 Bc7 is hardly a recommendable idea, although it has been played several times. 10.a5!
Rb8 11.Qc2N± White is much better.

7...Be7 8.Nbd2 (This is more accurate than the previously recommended 8.Qc2, as after 8...b6 9.Qxc4 Bb7 Black had a
decent game in Ozturk – Adamowicz, Pardubice 2009.) 8...0-0 9.a5! (There is nothing wrong with 9.Nxc4, but the text
is more ambitious, as White doesn’t want to allow ...Nb6.) 9...b5 10.axb6 Nxb6 11.Ne5 Qc7 12.Ndxc4 Nxc4 13.Nxc4
Nd5 14.Bd2± White was clearly better in Mester – Blasko, Eger 1997.
8.Qc2 Nb6
Trying to hold on to the pawn is too dangerous for Black:
8...b5 9.Ne5! Nxe5 10.dxe5 Nd5 11.axb5 cxb5 12.Nc3 Bb4
Other moves don’t offer Black relief either:
a) 12...Nb4?! 13.Qd2 Qxd2 14.Bxd2 Rb8 15.Rxa5 Bd7 16.Rfa1 Be7 17.Ra7± and Black is in serious trouble.
b) 12...Qd7 13.Rd1 Bb7 14.e4 Nb4 15.Rxd7 Nxc2 16.Rxb7 Nxa1 17.Nxb5 leads to a clear advantage for White.
c) 12...Bc5 13.Nxb5 Ba6 14.Bg5! f6 (14...Qxg5 loses to 15.Bxd5 exd5 16.Nc7† Kd7 17.Nxa8 Rxa8 18.Rxa5 as
the threat of 19.Qa4 decides the game.) 15.exf6 gxf6 16.Bxd5 exd5 17.Bxf6! Qxf6 18.Nc7† Kd7 19.Nxa8 Rxa8
20.Rxa5+– White is winning.
13.Rd1 Bxc3 14.bxc3 f5
All this occurred in Guzy – Salvatore, email 2006, and now White should have played:
15.e4!N 15...fxe4 16.Bxe4 Bb7 17.Ba3
White has a powerful initiative for his pawn.

9.Nbd2 Nfd5
The character of the game would not be changed by: 9...Be7 10.Nxc4 Nxc4 (10...Nbd5 happened in Arkhipov –
Shovunov, Orel 1997, when White could have improved with: 11.Nfe5N 11...0-0 12.Bd2²) 11.Qxc4

11...0-0 (11...Qb6 12.Ne5 0-0 13.e4 Qb4 14.Be3 Nd7 15.Qxb4 Bxb4 was Timman – Kuijf, Amsterdam 1996, and now
best is 16.Nc4!N) 12.Ne5 (12.Rd1 Qd5 13.Ne5 Qxc4 14.Nxc4±) 12...Nd5 13.Rd1 Bd7 This was Stajcic – Baburin,
Budapest 1992, and now I like:

14.Bd2N 14...Be8 15.Nd3²

10.Nxc4 Nb4 11.Qb3 Nxc4 12.Qxc4 Be7 13.Rd1 0-0 14.Ne5 Bd6
 This was Maksimovic – Laketic, Vrnjacka Banja 2010, and here my preference is for:

15.Bd2N 15...Qe7 16.Bc3²

White retains a small but long-term advantage.

C) 6...a6 7.a4 Rb8

A logical follow-up to Black’s previous play.

I would also like to mention 7...c5 8.Nbd2 cxd4 9.Nxc4, when White has similar pressure to that shown in variation A.
One good example is: 9...Nb6 10.Nce5 Bc5 11.Qc2 Bd6?! 12.Rd1 Qc7 13.Qxc7 Bxc7 14.Rxd4± White was clearly
better in Gonzalez Garcia – Thompson, Barcelona 2011.

8.a5 b5
 8...Bd6 9.Nbd2 b5 10.axb6 Nxb6 11.e4 Bb4 12.Ne5 Bb7 13.Ndxc4 0-0 14.Qd3 saw White regain his pawn and
maintain a solid positional edge in Meins – Proehl, Germany 1998.

8...Bb4 9.Qc2 0-0 10.Qxc4 Bd6 11.Qc2 b5 12.axb6 cxb6

13.e4 was agreed drawn at this point in Jaracz – Gaponenko, Schwaebisch Gmuend 2005. However, White is better
after the following logical line: 13...Qc7 14.Qe2 e5 15.Nc3 Bb7 16.Bg5

9.axb6 cxb6
9...Rxb6 10.Nbd2 Bb7 11.Nxc4 Rb4 occurred in Rahman – Boshku, Dresden (ol) 2008, and now I like:

12.b3N (threatening 13.Ba3) 12...Rb5 13.Qc2 Bb4 14.Ne1! Bxg2 15.Kxg2 0-0 16.Nd3 Qa8† 17.f3± With a clear
positional advantage for White.
10.Bf4 Rb7
10...Ra8 11.Nfd2 (11.Ne5 Nd5 12.Nxc4 is the same) 11...Nd5 12.Nxc4 N7f6 does not look like much fun for Black.

In Evdokimov – Burkhanov, Ufa 2004, White could have continued 13.Bg5N with the idea 13...Bb4? 14.e4 Ne7
15.e5 Nfd5 16.Nc3 0-0 17.Na2!. White has a winning advantage.

11.Rxa6 Nd5
This happened in Tukmakov – Rodriguez Vargas, New York 1988, and now my choice is:

12.Bd2!?N 12...Be7 13.Ra1 0-0 14.b3! b5

14...cxb3 15.Qxb3 b5 16.Ba5 Qe8 17.Rc1 b4 18.e4 N5f6 19.Nbd2 is also clearly better for White.

15.bxc4 bxc4 16.Ba5 Qe8 17.Nbd2±

Black is losing the c-pawn.
 D) 6...Rb8 7.a4 b6

7...a6 leads back to variation C.

8.Nfd2!
It is important to put the correct knight on this square!

8...Bb7
Black has tried other moves as well:

8...e5 9.Nxc4 exd4 10.Qxd4 Bc5 11.Qd3 0-0 12.Nc3 Bb7 13.Bxb7 Rxb7 14.Qf3 Qa8 15.Bf4 gave White a solid edge
in the well-known encounter Kasparov – Korchnoi, London (9) 1983.

After 8...Ba6 9.Nc3! White’s knight is heading for the b5-square, showing the reason for playing the other knight to d2.
9...Be7 10.Nb5 Nd5 was Tashkov – Spasov, Bulgaria 1995, and now a simple and efficient improvement is:
11.e4N 11...Nb4 12.Nxc4 0-0 13.Bf4 White has a substantial advantage.

9.Bxb7 Rxb7 10.Nxc4 Be7

Another Black try is 10...Bb4 11.Qb3 a5 12.Qf3 Qc8 13.Nc3 0-0 as played in Khalifman – Portisch, Bazna 2008.
White could obtain a solid advantage with: 14.Nb5N!±

11.Nc3 Nd5 12.e4 Nxc3 13.bxc3 Nf6

We have been following Bandza – Klovans, Lvov 1984. White would retain a pleasant edge with:

14.Qf3N 14...0-0 15.Rd1²

E) 6...Be7 7.Nbd2
I was somewhat surprised by the number of previous games to have reached this position.

7...Nb6
7...0-0 8.Nxc4 c5 leaves White with a comfortable edge, for example: 9.b3 Nb6 10.Nce5 Nbd5 11.Bb2 Shefer –
Kiripov, Moscow 2010.

Of course it is important to investigate Black’s attempt to hold on to his extra pawn:

7...b5 8.a4 c6 9.axb5 cxb5 10.Ne5 Nxe5
10...Nd5 11.Nc6 Qb6 12.Nxe7 Kxe7 cannot be good for Black, as in Pleshkov – Gorny, St Petersburg 2007.
White could have seized a serious initiative by means of 13.b3N 13...c3 14.Nc4 bxc4 15.bxc4 with a clear plus.
11.Bxa8 Qxd4 12.Nf3 Nxf3† 13.Bxf3 Qb6
White’s next move is important, as otherwise Black would be absolutely fine:
14.b3! Bd7
14...c3 doesn’t work in view of 15.Be3 Bc5 16.Bxc5 Qxc5 17.b4! Qb6 18.Qd3 with a large advantage.
14...0-0 15.bxc4 bxc4 16.Be3 Bc5 17.Bxc5 Qxc5 18.Qa4± and it looks like Black is going to lose both his
queenside pawns. White went on to win in Ni Hua – Jakubowski, Oropesa del Mar 1999.
15.bxc4 bxc4 16.Be3 Bc5
17.Ra6!!
A beautiful exchange sacrifice, which changes the course of the game.
17...Qxa6 18.Bxc5
It’s hard for Black to solve the problem of his king, and White unsurprisingly crashed through in the following
game:
18...e5 19.Qd2 e4 20.Rb1 Qe6 21.Rb8† Bc8 22.Qa5 Qd7 23.Bb4!
Black resigned in Dimitrov – Spasov, email 2010.

8.Qc2 0-0 9.Nxc4 Nxc4 10.Qxc4 c6 11.Qc2 Qb6 12.Bd2 Bd7 13.Rfc1 Rac8 14.b4²
White had a dream position in Smejkal – Unzicker, Amsterdam 1980.

F) 6...Nb6

This logical follow-up is Black’s main continuation.

7.Nbd2 c5
7...Be7 transposes to variation E on the previous page.

7...Bd7
White should react aggressively:
8.a4! Bc6
In the event of 8...a5 9.Ne5 Nfd5 10.Ndxc4 Nxc4 11.Nxc4 Be7 12.Bd2 b6 13.e4 Nb4 we can play ambitiously
and improve on Lilienthal – Kan, Leningrad 1947: 14.e5N 14...Rc8 15.Qg4 With a pleasant initiative.
9.a5 Nbd7 10.Nxc4 Be7 11.Qb3 0-0 12.Rd1 Qc8
More natural would be 12...Bd5, but even here after 13.Nfe5 c5 14.Be3² White retains definite pressure.
13.Bf4 Bd5
This occurred in Kiss – P. Horvath, Aggtelek 1997. White could have increased his advantage by means of:
14.Nfe5N 14...Bxg2 15.Kxg2 Nd5 16.Bd2 c5 17.Rac1

8.Nxc4 Nxc4
8...cxd4 is examined in the 6...c5 line.

9.Qa4† Bd7 10.Qxc4

At this point Black can choose between F1) 10...Qb6, F2) 10...Rc8 and F3) 10...b5.

F1) 10...Qb6 11.Be3! Nd5

11...Rc8 12.Ne5
12.Rfc1!? also looks powerful.
12...cxd4

13.Bxd4! Bc5
13...Rxc4 leads to a losing endgame for Black after 14.Bxb6 Rb4 15.Bxa7 Rxb2 16.Rfb1.
14.Nxd7 Nxd7
14...Kxd7 15.Qa4† Ke7 16.Bc3± leaves White with a comfortable advantage thanks to his bishop pair.
15.b4! Qxb4 16.Qxb4 Bxb4 17.Bxb7 Rc7 18.Rfc1±
The arising endgame is clearly better for White, who went on to win in Radashkovich – Razuvaev, USSR 1971.

12.Ne5 Nxe3
Just bad is 12...Bb5, as in Carlhammar – L. Schneider, Stockholm 1987. After 13.dxc5!N 13...Nxe3 14.Qf4! Qc7
15.fxe3 f6 16.Nd3 Qxf4 17.Nxf4 Bxc5 18.Nxe6 Bxe3† 19.Kh1 White’s material advantage should decide.

13.fxe3 Bb5 14.Qb3 f6

15.Nc4N
All four games here went 15.Bc6†, which looks extremely attractive. However, I found things to be less clear after
15...Bxc6 16.Qxe6† Kd8!N (16...Be7 17.Qf7† Kd8 18.Rad1 does indeed lead to a powerful attack for White).
  
15...Bxc4 16.Qxc4
Despite the presence of opposite-coloured bishops, White has a significant initiative. For example:

16...Be7 17.Bh3 f5 18.dxc5 Bxc5 19.Bxf5! Bxe3† 20.Kg2±

F2) 10...Rc8 11.Ne5 b5

Even worse is 11...cxd4 12.Qxd4 Bc5 13.Qd3 Qb6 14.Nxd7 Nxd7 15.Qe4 0-0 16.Qxb7± when White was just a pawn
up in Vukic – Cvetkovic, Umag 1972.
12.Qd3 c4
12...Bd6 13.Bg5 c4
13...0-0 14.Rfd1 c4 15.Qc2 Be7 16.a4± is much better for White.
14.Qc2 Qc7
I also checked the following line: 14...0-0 15.a4 bxa4 16.Bxf6 gxf6 17.Nxd7 Qxd7 18.Rxa4 c3 19.bxc3 Rxc3
20.Rxa7 Rxc2 21.Rxd7± It looks like White should prevail – by slowly building towards the d4-d5 break.
15.Bxf6 gxf6 16.Nxd7 Qxd7 17.d5! 0-0 18.Rad1 e5?
Even after the best 18...Qe7 19.Rd4 Be5 20.Rh4 f5 21.e4 White has a dangerous initiative on the kingside.
19.Be4
White’s advantage was undisputable in Levitt – Steckner, Hamburg 1982.

13.Qc2
White is clearly better here, with a critical line being as follows:

13...Nd5 14.a4 a6
15.e4N
As recommended by Alburt in Chess Informant 39. 15.axb5 Bxb5 16.Bd2 Bd6 was less convincing in Alburt –
Browne, Taxco 1985.

15...Nb4 16.Qc3 Be7 17.d5 0-0 18.axb5

White has a pleasant advantage after either 18...axb5 19.Be3± or 18...Bxb5 19.dxe6 fxe6 20.Bh3 Qd6 21.Bf4±.

F3) 10...b5 11.Qc3!

This uncommon move is the most attractive here. The main advantage is that the d-pawn is now protected, so White is
ready to play Ne5 on the very next move.
11...Nd5 12.Qd2!
Another strange-looking square, but White intends to follow up with 13.e4 and wants to avoid ...Nb4 coming with
tempo.

12...c4
Here I found an improvement over an existing game:

13.e4N
The only game in which 11.Qc3 occurred continued 13.Ne5 Bb4 14.Qc2, Romanov – Likhachev, corr. 2013. Black
should have played 14...0-0N 15.a3 Be7 when his position looks satisfactory.

13...Bb4
13...Nb6 14.d5ƒ leads to a serious initiative for White.

14.Qe2 Nb6 15.d5 0-0 16.dxe6 fxe6

After 16...Bxe6 17.Ng5 Qe8 18.Be3 White’s chances are better.
17.Bf4
White’s position is definitely more promising, although Black retains some chances of his own.

Conclusion

In GM 1 I stated that Black was simply worse in this line. Not much has changed in that respect, but I have added some
new lines of analysis to cover relevant games played in the interim. Variation F in particular should be studied
carefully, as Black’s play should not be underestimated. However, I am satisfied that my main line offers White
excellent prospects.
A) 6...cxd4 7.Nxd4
A1) 7...Qb6
A2) 7...Bc5
A3) 7...a6!?
B) 6...Nc6 7.Qa4 cxd4 8.Nxd4 Qxd4 9.Bxc6† Bd7 10.Rd1
B1) 10...Bxc6
B2) 10...Qxd1† 11.Qxd1 Bxc6 12.Nd2
B21) 12...c3?!
B22) 12...b5
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 c5
This remains a popular variation, and it has recently been used successfully by some top grandmasters, including
Vishy Anand.

6.0-0
In the Catalan it is quite common for White to build a lead in development while Black is mainly making pawn
moves. Black will often then revert to catching up on development while White regains the sacrificed pawn.

Sometimes Black tries to solve his opening problems by removing the tension in the centre with A) 6...cxd4, but the
more popular B) 6...Nc6 is probably a sounder approach.

6...Nbd7 transposes to variation A of Chapter 5.

A) 6...cxd4 7.Nxd4

7.Qa4† is playable, but I see no reason to change the recommendation from GM 1. The three most important replies are
A1) 7...Qb6, A2) 7...Bc5 and A3) 7...a6!?.

7...Na6
This move was awarded an exclamation mark in Chess Informant 48, but it looks strange to me, as Black is doing
nothing against White’s pressure along the h1-a8 diagonal. I found no new games since GM 1, so the following
idea remains a novelty:
8.Nb5!N 8...Qxd1
8...Nc7 9.Qxd8† Kxd8 10.N5a3!? and White will be clearly better after regaining the pawn on c4.
8...Bd7 9.Nd6† Bxd6 10.Qxd6 Bb5 11.Qxd8† Rxd8 12.Na3 Bc6 13.Bxc6† bxc6 14.Nxc4² White has a pleasant
edge, thanks to Black’s damaged pawn structure on the queenside.
9.Rxd1 Nd5

10.N1c3! Bd7 11.Nxd5 Bxb5 12.Nc3 Bc6 13.Bxc6† bxc6 14.Rd4 Nb4 15.Rxc4
White has an obvious advantage.

7...Nd5?!
This move has been employed at a high level, but it cannot be recommended.
8.Qa4† Nd7 9.Qxc4 N7b6 10.Qb3 Bd7
After 10...Bc5 Kramnik gives 11.Qb5† Nd7 12.Nb3 with White’s advantage.
11.Nc3
11.e4!?N might be a worthy alternative.
11...Bc5
11...Nxc3 12.Qxc3 Rc8 13.Qd3 leaves Black under pressure along the h1-a8 diagonal.

12.Nxd5 Nxd5
12...exd5 gives White a pleasant edge after 13.Be3 or 13.Qe3† Qe7 14.b3.
Now White found a nice tactical resource:
13.Nf5! 0-0
In the event of 13...exf5 14.Qxd5± Black loses the b7-pawn.
14.Nxg7!±
White won a pawn in Kramnik – Naiditsch, Turin (ol) 2006, as 14...Kxg7 would be met by 15.Bxd5 followed by
16.Qc3† and 17.Qxc5.

A1) 7...Qb6
 This move has some tricky ideas, but White has a clear route to an advantage.

8.Qa4† Bd7 9.Qxc4 Na6

The key move, intending to exploit the slight vulnerability of the white pieces in the centre by means of ...Rc8 and
perhaps ...Nc5.

9...e5 10.Nb3 Bc6 is hardly an improvement. In Romanishin – Podlesnik, Ljubljana 1997, White should have played
11.Bg5 Be7 12.Nc3 Bxg2 13.Kxg2 Qc6† 14.Qxc6† Nxc6 15.Rfd1± when Black faces an unpleasant endgame.

10.Qb3!
This strong move enables White to solve his problems tactically while at the same time grabbing the initiative.

10...Nb4
 10...Nc5 11.Qxb6 axb6 12.Nc3 leaves Black with an unpleasant endgame in view of his weaknesses on the
queenside.

11.a3 Bc5
Other moves also fail to bring Black much relief:

11...Nbd5 12.Qxb6 axb6 13.e4² gives White a pleasant advantage.

11...Qxd4 12.Be3 Qd6 13.axb4 Bc6 14.Bc5 Qb8 15.Bxf8 Rxf8 16.Bxc6† bxc6 17.Rc1± gave White a big advantage in
Swinkels – Van der Wiel, Groningen 2009.

12.axb4 Bxd4 13.Na3 0-0

14.e3!
14.Nc4 was not so convincing in Razuvaev – Murey, London 1983.

14...Bc5 15.Bd2 Be7 16.Nc4 Qc7

Now in Atakisi – Hofstetter, email 2005, instead of putting the knight on a5 immediately, White should have first
played:
17.Rfc1N±
With strong pressure.

A2) 7...Bc5

This move looks natural, but White has a forcing route to an advantage.

8.Qa4†! Qd7
The alternative is:
8...Nbd7
This is not covered in GM 1, but Aronian has used it twice against Gelfand, albeit at fast time controls.
9.Qxc4 0-0 10.Nc3 a6
 10...Bb6?! 11.Nf3 Qc7 occurred in Schmidt – G. Szabo, Bucharest 2010, and now the simple 12.Qxc7N
12...Bxc7 13.Rd1 a6 14.b3± leaves Black with an unpleasant defensive task.

11.Rd1!
After 11.Nb3 Ba7 12.Rd1 h6 Black eventually prevailed in Gelfand – Aronian, Zürich (blitz) 2014, although
White is still slightly better at this point.
11...Qc7
11...b5 12.Qd3 Ra7 13.Be3! is an important detail, when Black faces serious tactical problems. (13.Nc6 Qb6
14.Nxa7 Bxf2† 15.Kh1 Qxa7 is less clear.)
12.b4 b5
This occurred in Junge – F. Mueller, Germany 1995, and here White missed a strong idea:

13.Ncxb5!N 13...axb5 14.Qc2

Black is in trouble, for instance:
14...Ra4 15.bxc5 Rc4 16.Qb1 Qxc5 17.Be3 Qh5 18.Bf3 Ng4 19.Bxg4 Qxg4 20.f3 Qh3 21.Nxb5±
White emerges with an extra pawn.

9.Nb5!
The key move.

9...0-0
9...a6? 10.Nc7† was embarrassing for Black in Kiss – Gutdeutsch, Koszeg 1996.

10.Qxc4 Qe7
Clearly worse is 10...Bb6?! 11.N1c3 a6 12.Na3 Nc6. Now in Sandipan – Tari, Gibraltar 2014, the simple 13.Bg5N
would have led to clear advantage for White, for instance: 13...Na5 14.Qh4 Qd4 15.e4 h6 16.Be3 Qd8 17.Rfd1 Nd7
18.Qxd8 Bxd8 19.f4±
11.b4!
The natural 11.N1c3?! gives Black an opportunity to solve his problems by means of 11...a6 12.Nd4 b5 13.Qd3 Bb7
with equal play.

In GM 1 I recommended 11.N5c3 in order to prevent the above plan. However, to my great surprise I discovered
11...Nbd7!N 12.Qh4 Rb8, when I don’t see how White can prevent ...b6 and ...Bb7.

11...Bb6 12.a4
White is playing with great energy and aggression.

12...Bd7
In the event of 12...a6 13.N5c3 Nc6 14.Ba3 Ne5 15.Qb3ƒ White retains a lot of pressure.

13.a5 a6
13...Bxf2†? was a surprising move for an elite player, and after White was a healthy piece up in Gelfand – Aronian,
Zürich (rapid) 2014.

14.N5c3 Ba7 15.Bxb7 Bb5 16.Nxb5 Qxb7 17.Nxa7 Rxa7 18.Be3 Ra8 19.Rc1±
White had a solid extra pawn in Postny – I. Sokolov, Sibenik 2012.

A3) 7...a6!?
 This move remains relatively unexplored, but it is one of the more interesting options available to Black.

8.Nc3!N
This novelty from GM 1 remains untested, although it does briefly transpose to a game from 2009.

8.Qa4† Qd7! 9.Qxc4 b5 10.Qb3 Bb7 enables Black to neutralize the pressure along the h1-a8 diagonal and obtain a
normal game. 11.Rd1N (11.Bxb7 Qxb7 12.a4 b4 13.Nd2 occurred in Scheeren – Van der Wiel, Hilversum 1984, and
now the simple 13...Nbd7N 14.Nc4 Nc5 would have been equal.) 11...Bxg2 12.Kxg2 Bc5 13.Qf3 Ra7 Black has good
chances for equality.

8...e5!N
This seems like the only critical test. Other moves are clearly worse:

The aforementioned game continued 8...Nbd7 9.Qa4 e5, and here White should have played:
10.Nf3!N (10.Nf5 Rb8 11.Rd1 b5 12.Qc2 occurred in Czaja – Wyczawska, Rewal 2009, and now 12...Qc7!N would
have been unclear.) 10...Qc7 11.Bg5 White easily seizes the initiative, for instance: 11...Rb8 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Nd5 Qc6
14.Qa5!©

8...Be7N 9.Qa4† Qd7 (Also after 9...Nbd7 10.Qxc4 Nb6 11.Qd3 Black fails to solve his opening problems.) 10.Ndb5!
Threatening a check on c7. (Once again White should avoid 10.Qxc4 b5 followed by ...Bb7.) 10...0-0 11.Rd1 Nd5
12.Bf4 White maintains a clear advantage, for example: 12...Nxc3 13.Nxc3 Qxa4 14.Nxa4 Nd7 15.Rac1±

8...Bc5N 9.Qa4† Qd7 10.Be3!

White regains the pawn under favourable circumstances.
10.Ndb5 is less convincing here due to 10...0-0 11.Qxc4 Qe7 12.Nd4 b5! followed by ...Bb7.

10...Qxa4 11.Nxa4 Ba7 12.Rfc1 0-0

12...e5 13.Rxc4 0-0 14.Nc2± leaves White with strong pressure along the h1-a8 diagonal.
13.Rxc4 Nd5 14.Bxd5
14.Nf5!? also looks interesting.
14...exd5 15.Rc7±

9.Nc2!
9.Nf3 Qxd1 10.Rxd1 Nc6 11.Be3 Bf5 is less convincing.

9...Qxd1 10.Rxd1 Nc6 11.Bg5 Be6 12.Ne3

White’s chances are slightly preferable in this endgame. Here are a few illustrative lines:

12...Bc5
12...Be7 13.Bxf6 gxf6 14.Ncd5²
13.Bxf6
13.Rac1 is a serious alternative. 13...Bxe3 14.Bxe3 Rd8 (After 14...0-0 15.Na4! White will regain the pawn in a
favourable situation.) This way Black holds on to his extra pawn, but after 15.Bc5 Rxd1† 16.Rxd1 Nd7 17.Ba3 Kd8
18.Ne4© White has nice compensation.

13...gxf6 14.Ned5 0-0-0

14...Bxd5?! would be premature in view of 15.Rxd5 Bd4 16.e3 Bxc3 17.bxc3 Ke7 18.Rb1 Rab8 19.Rc5 and Black is
under unpleasant pressure.

15.Nxf6²
White’s position is more flexible and the knight on f6 rather restricts Black’s forces.

B) 6...Nc6 7.Qa4

From this position the main move is 7...Bd7, which is examined in the next chapter. Before then, we will focus on the
following principled alternative:

7...cxd4
Some other moves have been tried, but I do not regard any of them as serious options for Black, so I have just given a
few examples of model play by White with brief accompanying notes.

7...Nd7 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.Qxc4 0-0 10.Nc3 Such positions without c- and d-pawns, in which the black bishop remains
stuck on c8, almost always favour White in the Catalan. One example continued:
10...a6 11.Rd1 Qb6 12.Ne4 Be7 13.b3 Nf6 14.Bb2 Nxe4 15.Qxe4± White had strong pressure in Bischoff – Sonntag,
Germany 1987.

7...Qb6 8.Na3!
White immediately uses the placement of the black queen to win a tempo.
8...cxd4 9.Nxc4 Qb4
Otherwise the previous queen move would be absolutely senseless.
10.Qxb4 Bxb4 11.a3 Be7 12.Rd1
White will regain the pawn with a typical Catalan edge in the ensuing endgame.

12...Nd5
Trying somehow to neutralize White’s pressure along the h1-a8 diagonal.
13.Nxd4 Nxd4 14.Rxd4 Bd7 15.e4
 15.Ne3 Bf6 16.Rd3 was equally strong.
15...Bc5
The lesser evil was 15...Nb6 16.Nd6† Bxd6 17.Rxd6 Rc8 18.b3, although White’s bishop pair gives him a
pleasant edge.
16.Rd2 Nb6 17.Na5±
Nesis – Galdanov, USSR 1975.

A final alternative is:

7...Qa5 8.Qxc4 cxd4
8...b5 9.Qc2 Nb4 has occurred in six games, but no one found the strongest reply: 10.Qd2!N (After 10.Qd1 Bb7
Black is all right). The main point can be seen in the following line: 10...Bb7 11.dxc5 Bxc5 12.Qg5! Bf8 13.Bd2
h6 14.Qh4± Black is behind in development and his knight is in an awkward pin.
9.Nxd4 Nxd4 10.Qxd4 Bc5
This seems like the best attempt to justify Black’s 7th move.

11.Qc3! Bb4
11...Qxc3 12.Nxc3 gives White a typical endgame initiative.
12.Qb3 0-0 13.a3 Be7
Now in Machelett – Poschke, Berlin 1993, White could have secured an advantage with:
14.Nc3N
Black is under heavy pressure on the queenside.
8.Nxd4 Qxd4
Black should obviously avoid 8...Bd7?! 9.Nxc6 Qb6 (9...bxc6 10.Rd1 Nd5 11.Qxc4 Be7 occurred in the recent game
Schlosser – Sochacki, Pardubice 2013, and here 12.e4N 12...Nb6 13.Qc2 0-0 14.Bf4± would have given White an
indisputable positional advantage) 10.Nd2 Bxc6 11.Bxc6† Qxc6 12.Qxc6† bxc6 13.Nxc4² with a pleasant endgame
advantage for White, Rise – T. Olafsson, corr. 1995.

9.Bxc6† Bd7
9...bxc6?! 10.Qxc6† Qd7 11.Qxa8 Bc5
I noticed this exchange sacrifice mentioned in one of the Dvoretsky books, where he evaluated it as an interesting
idea. Indeed it looks so, but once you arm yourself with an engine things suddenly become shaky for Black!

12.Be3! Bxe3 13.fxe3 0-0 14.Nc3 Qc7

14...Ba6 15.Qf3 Bb7 16.e4 Qc7 was no better in Eslon – Gonzales, Coria del Rio 1995, in view of 17.Rad1N
 17...Qb6† 18.Qf2, with an exact transposition to the main line below, with one less move played.
14...Bb7 15.Qxa7 Qc6 16.Rf3 e5 17.Qa5 Qe6 18.Rd1! Bxf3 19.exf3± saw White return the exchange to secure
his kingside while remaining a healthy pawn up in Ladanyi – D. Berczes, Budapest 2001.
The text move occurred in Diaz Hollemaert – Aguiar, Blumenau 2013. Here White should have played:

15.Rad1N
With the following point:
15...Qb6 16.Qf3 Bb7 17.Qf4 Qc6 18.e4 Qb6† 19.Qf2 Qxb2 20.Qd4
With a clear advantage.

10.Rd1
This is the only way for White to fight for the advantage. We will analyse B1) 10...Bxc6 and B2) 10...Qxd1†.

B1) 10...Bxc6 11.Qxc6† bxc6 12.Rxd4

 This position has occurred in a lot of games, but it is obvious that Black is fighting for the draw, while White can
press for a long time without taking any risks. Many moves have been tested, but the general ideas are the same, so I
will just mention a few instructive lines.

12...c5
12...Be7 13.Rxc4 Kd7 14.Nd2 Nd5 occurred in Kessler – Farago, Triesen 2013, and now 15.e4N 15...Nb6 16.Rc2 c5
17.Nf3 Rhc8 18.Be3² would have been pretty unpleasant for Black.

12...Nd5 13.Rxc4 Kd7 14.e4 Nb6 15.Rc2 f5 was played in the recent game, Krush – Zatonskih, Saint Louis 2014. Here
the simple 16.Be3N 16...fxe4 17.Nc3 would have brought White a clear positional advantage.

13.Rxc4 Be7
This is one of the more popular continuations, and has been played by Mamedyarov, but I like White’s play in the
following encounter.

14.Bf4 0-0 15.Nd2 Nd7

15...Nd5 16.Ne4 also leads to White’s pleasant advantage.
16.Nb3 a5 17.Rd1 Nb6
This position occurred in Vladimirov – Ghaem Maghami, Kelamabakkam 2000, and here the most accurate
continuation would have been:

18.Rcc1N 18...Rfc8 19.Nd2²

Intending to put the knight on c4. Black is still a long way from a draw.

B2) 10...Qxd1† 11.Qxd1 Bxc6

For the moment Black has full material equality for the queen, but the c4-pawn is rather weak.

12.Nd2
 Now we will consider the somewhat dubious B21) 12...c3?! and the more reliable B22) 12...b5.

12...h5?! 13.Nxc4 h4 14.Bf4! is clearly in White’s favour: 14...hxg3 (14...Rd8 15.Qb3 hxg3 16.Bxg3 Ne4 17.Ne5
Nxg3 occurred in Vanheste – Blauert, Groningen 1989, and now after 18.fxg3N 18...Bc5† 19.e3± White is ready to
eliminate the light-squared bishop, after which the c6-pawn will become a target.) 15.Bxg3 Ne4

16.Ne5! Nxg3 17.Nxc6! Nxe2† 18.Qxe2 bxc6 19.Qa6 Bd6 20.Qxc6† Ke7 21.Qb7† Kf6 22.Qf3† Ke7 23.Qb7† Kf6
24.Qf3† Ke7 25.h3 In Fahnenschmidt – Herbrechtsmeier, Germany 1986, White reached what I believe to be a
technically winning position, in view of his potential to create a passed pawn on the queenside.

B21) 12...c3?! 13.bxc3

It looks tempting to damage White’s structure, but now White does not have to spend time going after the c-pawn,
and can instead activate his pieces and force favourable exchanges.
13...Rd8
13...0-0-0?! 14.Qb3 Bc5 15.Nf3 Ne4?! was too ambitious in Hjartarson – Hardarson, Neskaupsstadur 1984. At this
point, the surprising 16.Ne5!N 16...Bxf2† 17.Kf1 would already have been winning for White.

13...Be7?! 14.Qb3 Rd8 (14...0-0 15.Ba3 is also excellent for White) 15.Nf3 0-0 16.Ne5 was clearly better for White in
V. Mikhalevski – Onischuk, Gibraltar 2011.

13...Bc5 14.Nb3 Rd8 15.Qe1 Be7 was a bit more solid for Black in Nikolaidis – Bojkov, Istanbul 2001, but it gives
White an opportunity to exchange the dark-squared bishops: 16.Nd4! Bd5 17.a4 0-0 18.Ba3 Bxa3 19.Rxa3² White has
a better version of the main variation B22 which will be analysed shortly.

14.Qb3 Bc5
Now in Wood – Micklethwaite, corr. 1993, White missed a simple yet strong idea:

15.Nc4N 15...Ne4
15...Ng4? 16.Ba3! Bxf2† 17.Kf1 is winning for White.

16.Be3 Bxe3 17.Nxe3±

The trade of dark-squared bishops obviously favours White.

B22) 12...b5
13.a4 Be7
It is impossible for Black to keep all of his queenside pawns, and he should not waste his time trying: 13...a6?
14.axb5 Bxb5 (Even worse is 14...axb5? 15.Rxa8† Bxa8 16.Nxc4!+– when the b-pawn will soon be lost as well.)
15.Qc2 Rc8

16.Rxa6! Without this finesse Black would be okay. 16...Bxa6 17.Qa4† Nd7 18.Qxa6 Rd8 19.Nxc4 Be7 20.Na5! Nb8
21.Qb5† Kf8 22.Bf4+– Kochyev – Kilpi, Jyvaskyla 1996.

14.axb5 Bxb5 15.Nxc4 0-0

This position was tested several times in the mid-1980s but, even though White was having a hard time proving a
clear advantage, it then disappeared for a couple of decades before making a comeback in more recent years. When the
Dutch grandmaster Erwin L’Ami played it against me in the Bundesliga in 2008, I was forced to improvise.
16.Na3!?
This is what I came up with at the board, and home analysis has given me no reason to deviate from it.

A well-known theoretical line is 16.b3 Rfd8 17.Qc2 Rdc8! 18.Ba3 Bxa3 19.Rxa3 Rc7 20.Ra5 Bxc4 21.bxc4 h6 and I do
not see any real winning chances for White, as Black will soon trade his a-pawn for White’s c-pawn.

16...Rfd8 17.Qe1 Bc6

17...Be8 occurred in Figura – Stern, Berlin 2009, but 18.Nc4N seems promising, for instance 18...Nd5 19.Bd2 Bb5
20.Ne5± and White continues to improve his position.

18.f3!
My game continued: 18.Bd2 Rab8 19.Bf4 Rxb2 20.Qc1 Rb3! (Stronger than 20...Bxa3 21.Qxc6 Bf8 22.Rxa7 Rxe2
23.Bg5 when White has some initiative.) 21.Qxc6 Rxa3 22.Rb1 Nd5 23.Be5 Ra2 After losing the last of the queenside
pawns, White’s winning chances were diminished in Avrukh – L’Ami, Germany 2008.

The text move is my suggested improvement from GM 1, which has since been employed in one game, although the
move order was slightly different. White’s plan is to improve his position on the kingside with moves like Kg2 and e2-
e4, while avoiding unnecessary exchanges – especially of the last remaining queenside pawns. A useful point to keep in
mind is that situations with opposite-coloured bishops will tend to favour White, as he will be able to attack the dark
squares on the kingside. Black’s position is pretty solid, but he is unable to do much other than sit and defend.

18...Nd5
I considered this as a sideline in GM 1, but will look at it more closely here, as it was played in the one practical
encounter to have taken place since then.

18...Bc5†N 19.Kg2 Nd5 20.Bd2 threatens Rc1, and after 20...Bd4 21.e4 Nb6 22.Bc3 White keeps a nice edge.

18...Rab8N
I mainly focused on this move in GM 1.
19.Kg2 h6
19...Nd5 transposes to the main line.
19...Rb7 20.Nc4 Bd5 21.Ne5 Rc8 22.e4 Rc2† 23.Kh3 The king is surprisingly safe here! 23...Bb3 24.Be3 Rxb2
25.Bxa7!±
19...Rb3 20.Nc4 Bb5 21.Na5 Bb4 22.Qf1 Bxa5 23.Rxa5 a6 24.Ra3!² As mentioned earlier, the presence of
opposite-coloured bishops gives White attacking chances.
Here I found an improvement over my analysis in GM 1.
20.Nc2!
Previously I gave: 20.Nc4 Bd5 21.Ne5 (21.Ne3 Bb4 22.Qf1 Bc5 23.Nxd5 Nxd5 24.Kh3 Ne3=) 21...Bd6
22.Nd3 e5!? Trying to create counterplay. 23.e4 (23.Rxa7?! e4 24.fxe4 Bxe4† 25.Kf1 Ng4 leaves White’s king
too exposed.) 23...Bc4 24.Nf2 Now instead of 24...a6, Black can play 24...Bb4! 25.Qe3 a5 when it is hard for
White to improve his position.
20...Rb7 21.e4²
White will continue to improve his pieces, while retaining the all-important queenside pawn.

19.Kg2 Rab8 20.Nc4

This is a suitable moment to jump with the knight.

20...Bb5 21.b3 a6 22.Ba3 Bxc4

My previous analysis concluded 22...Bf6 23.Rc1².
23.Bxe7 Nxe7N
23...Re8? was an inexplicable mistake, and after 24.bxc4 Nxe7 25.Rxa6 White was obviously winning in Giemsa –
Jahnz, Berlin 2009.

24.bxc4 Rdc8 25.Qc3 Rc6 26.Rd1 Ng6 27.Rd4²

This position can be compared with the drawish 16.b3 line as given in the notes above. The big differences here are
that Black’s knight is misplaced and White has real chances to create threats on the kingside.

Conclusion

5...c5 6.0-0 remains an important branch of the Catalan. After 6...cxd4 7.Nxd4 White has good chances for an
advantage based on his thematic pressure on the long diagonal, although it helps to be aware of a few important
nuances in certain lines.
The main line is 6...Nc6 7.Qa4, when this chapter dealt with the forcing option of 7...cxd4 8.Nxd4 Qxd4 9.Bxc6†
Bd7 10.Rd1, when Black must decide what type of position to defend. 10...Bxc6 leads to a slight, risk-free endgame
advantage for White, while 10...Qxd1† 11.Qxd1 Bxc6 12.Nd2 leads to an interesting situation with queen against
pieces. With the ideas presented here, White has good chances to put his opponent under long-term pressure.
A) 8...Rc8
B) 8...Qb6 9.dxc5
B1) 9...Bxc5 10.Nc3
B11) 10...Na5
B12) 10...Qb4
B2) 9...Qxc5 10.Na3
B21) 10...Be7
B22) 10...Rc8
C) 8...b5 9.Qd3
C1) 9...c4
C2) 9...Rc8 10.dxc5 Bxc5 11.Nc3
C21) 11...0-0
C22) 11...Nb4
C23) 11...b4
D) 8...cxd4 9.Nxd4 Rc8 10.Nc3
D1) 10...Qb6
D2) 10...Be7
 D3) 10...Nxd4 11.Qxd4 Bc5 12.Qh4
D31) 12...Bc6
D32) 12...0-0

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 c5 6.0-0 Nc6 7.Qa4 Bd7

8.Qxc4
In GM 1 I wrote that 8.dxc5 Na5 9.Qc2 Bxc5 10.Ne5 Rc8 is fine for Black, and nothing has happened since then to
make me change my mind.

In this position there are four moves for us to consider: A) 8...Rc8, B) 8...Qb6, C) 8...b5 and D) 8...cxd4.

A) 8...Rc8

This looks natural, but Black will have to compromise his position to regain the pawn after White’s next move.

9.dxc5 Qa5
Black may also try:
9...Na5 10.Qh4!?
I decided to go in a new direction, since my previous suggestion 10.Qd3 does not seem fully convincing.
10...Bxc5 11.Ne5 0-0 12.Nc3 Bc6 13.Qxd8 Rfxd8 14.Nxc6 Nxc6 15.Bf4 I evaluated this as slightly better for
White in GM 1, but after 15...Bd4! 16.Rac1 Bxc3!N 17.Rxc3 Nd5 Black seems to be fine.
10...Rxc5 11.Nc3 Be7 12.Qd4 0-0
This position occurred in Molnar – Honfi, Budapest 1950, and a couple of subsequent games. Here I found an
interesting new idea:
13.Qd3!?N 13...Nc4
The main point is that 13...Bc6 runs into 14.Qxd8 Rxd8 15.Be3 Rh5 16.Bxa7 winning a pawn.
14.b3 Nb6 15.e4 Qc8 16.Bb2 Rd8 17.Rfc1²
White’s space advantage makes the difference.

10.Nfd2!?N
My previous recommendation of 10.Bg5 Qxc5 11.Nbd2 now looks pretty innocent to me, but this new idea seems
more challenging.

10...Qxc5
10...Bxc5?? would run into 11.Nb3.

11.Nc3 Qxc4
 11...Na5 12.Qd3 Bc6 13.Nde4! Nxe4 14.Nxe4 Qc4 15.Qe3 also gives White some advantage.

12.Nxc4 Be7
12...Nd4 runs into 13.Ne5 Bc6 14.Nxc6 Nxc6 15.Be3 and White is clearly better, thanks to his bishop pair.

13.Bf4 0-0 14.Rfd1 Rfd8 15.Rac1 Be8 16.Nd6 Bxd6 17.Bxd6²

The bishop pair gives White a lasting advantage.

B) 8...Qb6

9.dxc5
Here Black may opt for B1) 9...Bxc5 or B2) 9...Qxc5.
 B1) 9...Bxc5 10.Nc3

And now we have another split between B11) 10...Na5 and B12) 10...Qb4.

After 10...0-0 11.Na4 Qb4 12.Qxc5 Qxa4 it’s obvious that White is much better with his bishop pair. The most
convincing continuation seems to be 13.b3 Qa6 14.e3 Rac8 15.Bb2 Ne4 16.Qh5 with a nice edge for White, Konik –
Grass, Frankfurt 2006.

10...Be7 11.Be3 Qa5

After 11...Qb4 White can even trade queens: 12.Qxb4 (12.Qd3 is also fine.) 12...Nxb4 Hoelzl – Tsomis,
Olympus 2011, and now the aggressive 13.Ne5!N would have been strong. There is no need to fear 13...Nc2
14.Rac1 Nxe3 15.fxe3 Rb8 16.Rfd1 when White has a lot of pressure.
12.a3 0-0
12...Rc8 13.Rfd1 0-0 occurred in Nemeth – Seres, Hungary 2012. Here the right idea to seize the initiative is
14.Qb5!N 14...Rfd8 15.Rac1 (15.Ne1!? also deserves attention) 15...Qxb5 16.Nxb5 a6 17.Nd6 Bxd6 18.Rxd6
Be8 19.Rxd8 Rxd8 20.Bb6² and the bishop pair is significant.
13.b4 Qh5 14.h3!
Highlighting the misplacement of the black queen.
14...Nd5
Now in Stanciu – Bazaj Bockai, Bled (ol) 1992, White should have played:

15.Nxd5!N 15...Qxd5
Or 15...exd5 16.Qb5! intending 16...Rab8 17.Bxa7!±.
16.Nd2!
The IQP position would be favourable, but this is even stronger.
16...Qxc4 17.Nxc4
White’s advantage is obvious.

B11) 10...Na5
 This has been the most popular move in the position, but Black has scored miserably against White’s next move.

11.Qh4! 0-0
11...Bc6?! 12.Na4 (12.Bh6!? is also excellent) 12...Bxa4 13.Qxa4† Nc6 14.Ne5 Nd5

15.a3 gives White a clear advantage, and Black found a way to lose on the spot with 15...Rc8? 16.Bxd5 exd5
17.Qg4!+– in Buhmann – Bax, Hengelo 2000.

11...Be7 12.Ne5 Bc6 13.Nxc6 Nxc6 also leaves Black well short of equality. Here is a good example of what might
happen:
14.Qa4 Rc8 15.Rb1 a6?! (15...0-0N is better, though White remains on top after: 16.Be3 Bc5 17.Bxc5 Qxc5 18.Rbc1²)
16.Be3 Bc5 17.Bxc5 Qxc5 18.Rfc1 White does not even need the bishop pair, as his Catalan bishop was powerful
enough to secure a clear plus in Brito Garcia – Aleman Alamo, Las Palmas 2010.

12.Bh6!N
White has other ways to secure an advantage, but this is the most convincing. It’s also a thematic idea for this
variation, of which we will see a few more examples later in the chapter.

12...Qb4
12...Ne8 does not help, as 13.Ne5 gives White a considerable advantage.
13.Qg5!
This follow-up is key. Now White gets a big advantage with the following forced sequence.

13...Ne8 14.a3 Qxb2 15.Qxc5!?

15.Bxg7 Nxg7 16.Ne4 is a simpler route to a clear plus.

15...Nb3 16.Qb4 a5 17.Qxb7 Qxc3 18.Rab1 Bc6 19.Bxg7! Nxg7 20.Qxb3±

White emerges with a healthy extra pawn.

B12) 10...Qb4

11.Qd3!
 The black queen is rather vulnerable on b4, so White should avoid the exchange.

11...0-0
Black has also tried: 11...Rd8 12.a3 Qg4 (12...Qb3? 13.Nd2 Qb6 14.Na4 Qa5 occurred in Abhyankar – Rendon,
Thessaloniki [ol] 1988, and here White could have secured a serious advantage with: 15.Nb3!N 15...Bxf2† 16.Rxf2
Qxa4 17.Nc5 Qd4 18.Qxd4 Nxd4 19.Nxb7±) 13.Bf4 0-0 14.h3 Qg6 15.Qxg6 hxg6 16.Rfd1 White had a typical
Catalan advantage in Petrosian – Pomar Salamanca, Havana (ol) 1966.

12.a3 Qg4 13.b4 Bb6

Two games have reached this position, but White’s play was not convincing. I would like to propose a simple
improvement.

14.Be3!N 14...Qf5
14...Rfd8?! 15.Bxb6 axb6 16.Qe3 leads to a similar situation where Black has the additional worry of weak queenside
pawns.

15.Qd2!
Once again White should avoid the queen exchange, as the black queen is rather exposed on the fifth rank. The
following line confirms White’s advantage.

15...Bxe3 16.Qxe3 Rfd8 17.h3! Nd5

Otherwise the black queen may find herself in serious trouble.
18.Nxd5 Qxd5
18...exd5 19.Rac1 leaves no doubt as to White’s advantage.

19.Rfd1 Qb5 20.Nd4

White maintains the pressure and is clearly better.

B2) 9...Qxc5

This seems like the more reliable choice, and it has been used by some strong players including Adams.

10.Na3
Now most games have continued with either B21) 10...Be7 or B22) 10...Rc8.
10...Nd5 has been tried a few times. Now 11.Rd1N seems like the most useful move, and after 11...Be7 12.e4 Nb6
13.Qe2 Rd8 14.Be3 Qa5

15.Nb5 0-0 16.Bf1! White has a nice initiative.

10...Na5 11.Qxc5 (11.Qh4!?N 11...Be7 12.Rd1 is also worth considering.) 11...Bxc5 Now 12.Ne5N looks natural, and
after 12...Rc8 13.Bd2 Nc6 14.Nac4 White will soon enjoy the advantage of the bishop pair, which should secure a
long-term pull.

B21) 10...Be7

Now that Black has wasted a tempo moving his bishop, it makes sense to exchange queens.
11.Qxc5 Bxc5 12.Nc4 0-0
It is essential that White can meet 12...Rc8N with 13.Be3!, and 12...Ke7 with 13.a3!. In both cases Black experiences
problems on the dark squares.

12...Nd5 should be met by: 13.Rd1N (13.a3 occurred in Golovanj – Derjabin, Alushta 2005, but it is not so convincing
after 13...Rc8 14.Bd2 f6.) 13...Rd8 14.a3 Nb6 (Also after 14...0-0 15.b4 Be7 16.Bb2 f6 17.Rac1 White is obviously
better.) 15.Nce5 f6 16.Nxd7 Rxd7 17.Rxd7 Kxd7 18.Bd2 Nc4 19.Bc3² White’s bishop pair gives him an enduring
edge.

13.Bf4!?N
13.a3 is a sensible move which gave White a small plus in Arkell – Player, Bedford 2013. The text move poses more
concrete problems for Black.

13...Rfd8

14.Bc7!
After 14.Rfd1 Be8 15.Bd6 Ne4 16.Bxc5 Nxc5 Black is close to equality.

14...Rdc8 15.Bd6 Nd8 16.Nfe5

16.Nfd2 is a decent alternative.

16...Bb5 17.b3
White keeps some pressure.

B22) 10...Rc8
11.Rd1 Be7
This is similar to the previous line, but the inclusion of the respective rook moves just changes things slightly.

11...Nd5 12.Qb3 Qb4

13.Qd3! Qg4? 14.e4 Nb6 15.Nc4 gave White a decisive advantage in Garnica – Benyounes, corr. 2012.

11...Qb6 12.Qh4! Be7 (In the event of 12...Bxa3 13.bxa3 h6 14.Bg5 Nd5 15.Rab1 Qc7 16.Rdc1 Black is under
considerable pressure.) 13.Nc4 Qb4 14.b3 Qb5 15.Bg5 White had a huge advantage in Andersen – Dasaolu, Gibraltar
2011.

12.Qxc5 Bxc5 13.Nc4 Ke7 14.Nfe5

14...Rhd8N
14...Be8? 15.Nd3 was nasty for Black in Cifka – Simek, Prague 2011. The text move is a better try, but I found a nice
reply for White.

15.Bxc6! Bxc6 16.Rxd8 Rxd8 17.Nxc6† bxc6 18.Bd2²

White’s superior pawn structure gives him a long-term edge.

C) 8...b5

This active move remains quite popular.

9.Qd3
 Obviously 9.Qxb5? is not working for White, since after 9...Nxd4 10.Qc4 Black has 10...Bb5!.

Now Black has two major options: C1) 9...c4 and C2) 9...Rc8.

C1) 9...c4 10.Qc2 Rc8

This looks like the most natural continuation, as Black will most likely wish to remove his rook from the h1-a8 diagonal
at some point.

10...Nb4?! 11.Qd1 Bc6 is revealed to be dubious after 12.a3 Na6 (or 12...Nbd5 13.Ne5 Bb7 14.e4 Nb6 15.Nc3 a6
16.Be3 and White’s advantage is obvious) 13.Nc3 Nc7 14.e4 when White had a clear advantage in Stean – Ristic,
Smederevska Palanka 1982.

10...Be7 has been quite a popular choice in recent years. Here I like the relatively unexplored 11.e4 0-0 12.Qe2 Qb6,
and now the new idea:

13.Be3N (13.Rd1 Rfe8 was played in Wen Yang – Xiu Deshun, Ningbo 2011. I couldn’t find anything special here; it’s
just an extremely complex position.) 13...Ng4 The logical reply, as the black queen did not have a convenient retreat
square. 14.Bf4 Rad8 15.h3 Nf6 16.Rd1 The position remains complex, but I like White’s pawn centre. A possible
continuation is 16...Be8 17.Be3 Qb8 18.Ne1 a6 19.Nc2 when White has a harmonious position with good central
control. Possible pawn breaks include a2-a4, b2-b3 and d4-d5.
11.e4
11.Bg5 was my previous recommendation, but the following game, played after the release of GM 1, shows the right
way for Black: 11...Be7 12.Nc3 Qb6 13.Rad1 0-0 14.Ne5 Rfd8 15.Nxd7 Rxd7 Black was doing all right in Gourlay –
Cernousek, Hinckley Island 2009.

11...Be7
11...Nb4 12.Qe2 Nd3 occurred in Sanna – Passerotti, Napoli 1981. Now I believe White should have tried 13.Bg5N,
with the following point: 13...h6 14.Bxf6 Qxf6 15.b3!

White is ready to meet 15...e5 with powerful play: 16.a4! exd4 17.e5 Qb6 18.axb5 Bxb5 19.bxc4 Bxc4 20.Nbd2
Black has problems with his development.

11...Qb6 12.a4!?N
 This looks like an interesting novelty, especially taking into account that after 12.Rd1 Nb4 13.Qe2 Nd3 Black
was doing fine in Badea – Berescu, Brasov 2004.
12...Nb4
This looks critical, although it is worth checking a few other options:
12...a6 is too compliant, and after 13.axb5 axb5 14.Nc3 Nb4 15.Qe2 Nd3 16.Bg5 it is obvious that the opening of
the a-file has benefited White.
12...Nxd4 13.Nxd4 Qxd4 14.axb5 also favours White in view of 14...Qd3 15.Qa4 Qb3 16.Nc3 Bc5 17.Qxb3
cxb3 18.Be3!, followed by grabbing the a-pawn with a clear advantage.

13.Qd1 bxa4
13...Nxe4? is too risky in view of 14.Ne5 Nf6 15.Nxd7 Nxd7 16.axb5 Be7 17.Nc3, followed by Be3 and Qa4,
with a clear advantage.
14.Nc3 Nd3 15.Nxa4 Qb3
Black is hanging on, but White’s chances are better, for example:
16.Nc3 a5 17.Ne5 Qxd1 18.Rxd1 Nxe5 19.dxe5 Ng4 20.Rxa5! Bc5 21.Rxc5 Rxc5 22.f4©
Black will suffer with his knight on the edge of the board.
12.Qe2 0-0 13.Rd1
The position is playable for both sides, although it looks like a pretty good version for White compared with the
10...Be7 line noted earlier.

13...Re8 14.Ne5!
This idea was not available in the 10...Be7 line. I found one practical example from this position, which we will
follow for a few more moves.

14...Qc7 15.Bf4

15...Bd6?
An unfortunate decision, but even after the improvement 15...Qb7 16.a4 a6 17.Be3 Nb4 18.Nc3 White maintains a
nice edge.

16.Nxd7 Nxd7 17.e5 Bb4 18.a3 Bf8 19.Nc3 a6 20.d5±

Black was in serious trouble in Badea – Itkis, Bucharest 2003.

C2) 9...Rc8

This way Black develops more fluidly but risks being saddled with some pawn weaknesses on the queenside.

10.dxc5 Bxc5
Worse is:
10...Nb4?! 11.Qb3! Bxc5 12.Nc3 a6
12...Nbd5 13.Nxd5 Nxd5 14.Ne5± secures a clear advantage for White.
12...Bc6 13.a3 Nbd5 was played in Tanacs – Izso, Kecskemet 2012, and here White missed the simple 14.Ne5N
with a clear plus, in view of 14...Nxc3 15.Bxc6† Rxc6 16.Nxc6 Nxe2† 17.Kh1 Qb6 18.Qf3!± when Black does
not have enough for the exchange.
Now in Mate – Peredy, Hungary 2000, White could have got some advantage with:
13.Bg5!N
The following analysis from GM 1 still looks good:
13...Bc6 14.a3 Nbd5 15.Ne5 Ba8
15...Nxc3 runs into 16.Bxc6† Rxc6 17.Nxc6 Nxe2† 18.Kg2 Qa8 19.Bxf6! Qxc6† 20.Qf3 with a decisive
advantage.
16.Rac1 Nxc3 17.Rxc3 Bxg2 18.Kxg2 Qd5† 19.Qxd5 Nxd5 20.Rc2!
The pin along the c-file decides.
20...f6 21.Bxf6! gxf6 22.Nd3
White should eventually win the endgame with his extra pawn.

11.Nc3

At this point Black’s three most important options are C21) 11...0-0, C22) 11...Nb4 and C23) 11...b4.
11...a6?!
This slow move gives White an easy initiative.
12.Bg5 Nb4
This was a recent attempt to reanimate this line for Black.
12...h6 13.Bxf6 gxf6 (13...Qxf6? loses to 14.Ne4 Qe7 15.Qc3!, attacking both the bishop and the g7-pawn)
14.Rad1 Be7 15.Rd2± gave Black serious problems in Badea – Marjanovic, Bucharest 1998.
13.Qd2 Bc6 14.Qxd8† Rxd8 15.a3 Nbd5
Even without queens, White has the makings of a strong initiative. In Farago – J. Pinter, Paks 2012, he should
have played:

16.Ne5N 16...Ba8 17.Nxd5 Bxd5 18.Rfd1

With a clear advantage.

C21) 11...0-0
 This looks natural, but White can energetically exploit the disharmony of Black’s pieces with:

12.Bg5 Nb4 13.Bxf6 gxf6 14.Qd2!

14.Qe4 is also promising, but I like the idea of transferring the queen to h6.

14...Bc6
14...Kg7 guards the h6-square, but enables White to seize the initiative in the following instructive way: 15.a3 Na6
16.Rad1 (16.b4!? is a good alternative, playing against the misplaced knight on a6.) 16...Bc6 17.Qf4 Qc7 18.Qg4† Kh8
19.Qh5± With an obvious advantage.

15.Qh6 Re8
Intending ...Bf8 to expel the queen.

15...Qe7 16.a3!
This recommendation from GM 1 has since been tested in a few games.
16.Rad1 is less accurate due to 16...Rfd8 17.a3 Nc2! 18.Rxd8† Qxd8 and Black was fine in Pribyl – Ivkov, Nice
1974.
16...Nd5
16...Na6 was tried in C. Horvath – Guido, Vaujany 2010. Here White could have played 17.Rfd1N 17...b4
18.axb4 Nxb4 19.Ra5! Rfd8 20.Rxd8† Rxd8 21.g4!, followed by trading the light-squared bishops, with a clear
advantage.
17.Ne4 Bb6 18.Rad1 f5
19.Rxd5! f6 20.Nxf6† Rxf6
In GM 1 I gave the almost identical 20...Qxf6 21.Qxf6 Rxf6 22.Rd2 Bxf3 23.Bxf3².
21.Qg5† Qg7 22.Qxg7† Kxg7 23.Rd2 Bxf3 24.Bxf3
The opposite-coloured bishops offer Black some chances to survive. Nevertheless, White was still able to convert his
extra pawn in Reinhart – Gach, email 2011.

16.Rad1 Bf8 17.Qh5 Qe7 18.a3

Black has some coordination problems, and the queen on h5 plays a key role in attacking the b5-pawn.

18...Nc2
18...Nd5? is refuted by 19.Nd4!.

18...Bxf3 19.Bxf3 Nc6 20.Nxb5± gave White a healthy extra pawn and a clear advantage in Anastasian – Kaidanov,
Lucerne 1997.

The text move was played in D. Berczes – D. Horvath, Budapest 2012. Here there was no reason to refrain from the
obvious capture:

19.Nxb5N 19...Bxb5 20.Qxb5 Rb8 21.Qa4 Rxb2 22.Rd2 Rc8

23.Rfd1!
Black has serious coordination problems, and he cannot get away with taking the a3-pawn:

23...Qxa3 24.Qg4† Kh8 25.Rd7!

White has a decisive attack.

C22) 11...Nb4
12.Qd2!
A deep study of this variation convinced me that the text is stronger than 12.Qd1. I won an easy game with the latter
move after 12...Bc6 13.Qxd8† Rxd8 14.Bg5 Be7? 15.a3 Na6 16.Ne5 Bxg2 17.Kxg2± when Black was unable to avoid
the loss of a pawn in Avrukh – Moiseenko, Maalot 2008. However, a much better continuation is 14...0-0 15.Rac1 Rc8
16.Bxf6 gxf6, when Black should hold without much trouble.

12...0-0
This has been played in several correspondence games.

12...Nbd5 13.Nxd5 Nxd5 (13...exd5?! 14.b3 0-0 15.Bb2 gave White a stable advantage in Zhang Zhong – Wang Yu,
Manila 2007.) This was Wessman – Jepson, Stockholm 1993, and now 14.Ne5N² leads to a typical situation where
White’s bishop pair gives him the advantage.

12...Bc6 13.a3 Qxd2N

13...Nbd5 14.Ne5! gave White a pleasant edge in Hase – Dodson, corr. 1994.
14.Bxd2 Na6
14...Nbd5 15.Ne5!± is problematic for Black.
15.b4 Bb6 16.Rac1
The misplaced knight on a6 is a serious factor, for instance:
16...0-0 17.Ne5 Bxg2 18.Kxg2 Rfd8
Both 18...Nc7 19.Nc6! leave White with a clear advantage.
19.Bf4
Black has a difficult position.

13.Ne5 Be8 14.Qxd8 Rxd8

This position occurred in M.A. Dos Santos – Sutkalenko, Internet 2010, and several other games. Here I found a new
idea:

15.Bf4N
14.Bg5 h6 15.Bxf6 gxf6 has been played in all the games so far, but Black has been pretty successful at neutralizing
White’s slight initiative. That is why I prefer the slightly more reserved development of the bishop. A brief illustrative
line is:

15...Nfd5 16.Bd2 f6 17.Nxd5 Nxd5 18.Nd3 Bb6 19.Rfc1

White has typical pressure on the queenside.

C23) 11...b4 12.Nb5

12.Ne4 has been played in quite a lot of games, but the text move is much more principled.

12...0-0 13.Nd6!
I also considered 13.Bf4 and 13.Be3, but Black has clear paths to equality against both of them.

13...Nd4
This initiates serious complications, but White has a well-defined path to an advantage.

Black can hardly hope to equalize by giving up his dark-squared bishop: 13...Bxd6 14.Qxd6 Qe7 15.Bf4 White had a
definite advantage in Poluljahov – Koniushkov, Novorossijsk 1996.

13...Rc7
This rare yet interesting move has a hidden idea behind it.
14.Bf4
Obviously the critical continuation. Stohl analysed it in Chess Informant 87, and it has been tested a couple of
times since GM 1 was published.
14.Bg5 occurred in Verat – Hartereau, Paris 1991, and here the surprising 14...Bc8!N would have threatened
...Rd7. White must therefore simplify with 15.Nxc8 Qxd3 16.exd3 Rcxc8 17.Rac1 Bd6, when Black has the d5-
square at his disposal, and I believe White’s advantage is rather symbolic.
14...Ne7
14...Nd5? allows 15.Ng5+– and White wins material.
15.Ng5! Ng6 16.Nde4 Nxe4
16...Rc8 occurred in Yotov – Davidov, email 2009. Here I propose 17.Rfd1N 17...Nd5 18.Bd6! Bxd6 19.Nxf7
Rxf7 20.Nxd6 Qe7 21.Nxc8 Bxc8 22.Rac1 Bb7 23.Qd4 when, despite the approximate material equality, White
dominates the board.
17.Bxe4
I also considered: 17.Bxc7N 17...Nxf2 18.Qxg6 Ng4† 19.Kh1 hxg6 (Stohl gives only 19...fxg6? 20.Bxd8±.)
Now a logical sequence is 20.Bxd8 Rxd8 21.Nxf7 Rf8 22.Bf3 Nf2† 23.Kg2 Kxf7 24.Rac1 Bb6 25.Rxf2 Bxf2
26.Kxf2 Rc8 27.Rxc8 Bxc8 when the endgame looks drawish, although White can certainly play on for a while
with no risk.
17...e5 18.Be3 Bxe3 19.Qxe3 Qe7 20.Rac1 Rfc8 21.Bd5 Be8 22.Rxc7 Rxc7
This position occurred in Petukhov – Rawlings, email 2009, and here I would prefer:
23.Rc1N²
Black’s position has two clear drawbacks: the exposed queenside pawns and the misplaced knight on g6.
14.Bf4 Nd5 15.Ng5!
This is the point of White’s play. The following sequence is relatively forced.

15...g6 16.Nge4 Nxf4 17.gxf4 Bb6!

Worse is 17...Bc6 18.Nxc8 Bb5 19.Qh3 Nxe2† 20.Kh1 Qxc8 (20...Nxf4 21.Qh6 Bxf1 22.Rxf1+–) 21.Rac1± with a
material advantage to White.

18.Nxc8 Bb5 19.Qd2!

This improvement was introduced by Stohl in 2003. Previously White had tried only 19.Qh3, with horrible results.

19...Qxc8
After 19...Nxe2† 20.Kh1 Qxc8 21.Qxb4± White is the exchange up for no compensation, and has achieved a huge
score from this position.

20.e3 Bxf1 21.Rxf1 Nf5

21...f5 22.Ng3 Qc2 23.Qxb4 was similar in Stohl – A. Sokolov, Germany 2003.

22.Qxb4±
White was a pawn up for minimal compensation in Bang – Kuiper, email 2006, and several subsequent games. Black
ended up drawing quite a few of them, but I cannot see why anyone would want to defend such a position.

D) 8...cxd4 9.Nxd4

Several top GMs have played this way with Black. Compared with the previous variation, he avoids weakening the
queenside and tries to neutralize White’s opening initiative.

9...Rc8
9...Nxd4 10.Qxd4 Bc6 11.Bxc6† bxc6 is occasionally seen, but the weakening of Black’s pawn structure gives White
an automatic advantage. Here I suggest the simple 12.Be3N 12...Qxd4 13.Bxd4 c5 14.Bxf6 gxf6 15.Na3 f5 16.Nc4
Bg7 17.Rad1 Ke7 18.Rd3² with an unpleasant endgame for Black.

10.Nc3
Here we will consider D1) 10...Qb6, D2) 10...Be7 and D3) 10...Nxd4, the last of which is the main line by far.

D1) 10...Qb6

Black is trying to provoke an exchange on c6.

11.Nb3!?
In GM 1 I gave 11.Nxc6 Bxc6 12.Be3, but I discovered an unpleasant surprise in 12...Bc5!. All other moves were
working perfectly for White, but now I don’t see how we can pose Black serious problems. For instance, 13.Na4 Bxa4
14.Qxa4† Ke7 15.Bxc5† Rxc5 16.Rac1 Rhc8 17.Qa3 Ke8 was close to equal in Hardicsay – Oger, email 2009.
11...Na5
This was played in both of the existing games from this position.

I also considered 11...Qb4N, but 12.Qxb4 Bxb4 13.Rd1 0-0 (or 13...b6 14.Nb5) 14.Ne4! leads to a typical endgame
edge for White.

11...Be7N is well met by 12.Be3 Qc7 13.Bf4!, intending 13...e5 14.Bg5 Be6 15.Qa4 0-0 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.Nc5 with
some advantage.

12.Qh4!N
White needs to improve on the harmless 12.Qd4 Qxd4 13.Nxd4, as played in Miguel Lago – Almagro Mazariegos,
Linares 1998, when 13...Bb4N would have given Black a comfortable game.

12...Nxb3
12...Be7 13.Nxa5 Qxa5 14.Bxb7 Rb8 15.Bf3 0-0 16.a3 can be compared with the later variation D32. Here White has
a better version of the position with an extra pawn.

13.axb3 Be7 14.b4!

White maintains definite pressure, for instance:

14...a6 15.Be3 Qc7 16.Qd4 0-0 17.Rfc1

17...e5
Also after 17...Bc6 18.b5 Bxg2 19.Kxg2 Qb8 20.Qa4 White maintains the more active position.

18.Qd3 Qb8 19.Nd5 Nxd5 20.Bxd5

White’s excellent piece activity means that Black still faces a battle for equality.

D2) 10...Be7

This is a pretty solid option for Black, but solid does not necessarily mean equalizing.

11.Rd1 Na5
Other options are worse:
11...Qa5
White may use the exposed position of the queen to develop his initiative. Recently a new move appealed to me:
12.Be3!?N
Previously I recommended 12.Nb3, but things are not so simple after 12...Qh5!.
12...0-0
12...Ne5 13.Qb3 b6 14.Ndb5 0-0 15.Bf4 Nc4 16.a4 gives Black problems connected with his bad queen position.
12...Nxd4 13.Qxd4 Bc5 14.Qe5 clearly favours White. One illustrative line is 14...Qb6 15.Bxc5 Rxc5 16.Qb8†
Rc8 17.Qxb7 Qxb7 18.Bxb7 Rb8 19.Ne4! Nxe4 20.Bxe4 Rxb2 21.Rab1 Rxb1 22.Rxb1 and White will win the a-
pawn, reaching a winning endgame.

13.Qb5! Qc7
13...Qxb5 14.Ndxb5 is obviously better for White.
14.Nxc6 Bxc6 15.Bxc6 bxc6
Black must weaken his pawn structure, since 15...Qxc6 runs into 16.Bxa7 Qxb5 17.Nxb5 Rc2 18.Bd4 Rxe2
19.Rac1 with a big plus for White.
16.Qa6 Rb8 17.b3²
White has a pleasant edge, as is customary for this pawn structure.

11...Qb6 12.Nxc6 Bxc6 13.Be3 Qa5

13...Qxb2? is no good: 14.Rab1 Qc2 The most stubborn attempt. (14...Qa3? was played in Korniushin – Kofanov,
Novgorod 1997, and here 15.Nb5N+– followed by Nxa7 would have decided the game on the spot.) 15.Bxc6†
bxc6 (15...Rxc6? 16.Qxc6†! bxc6 17.Rb8† Bd8 18.Rbxd8† Ke7 19.Bc5 is mate!) 16.Rd2 Qf5 17.Rb7! White has
a winning advantage.
14.Bxc6† Rxc6
Black can hardly hope to equalize with 14...bxc6, and after 15.Qa4! Qxa4 16.Nxa4 Nd5 17.Bd4 White’s
advantage is obvious.
15.Qb3 Qa6
Now in Shlykov – Kunitson, Narva 2006, White could have played more energetically with:
16.Rd4!N
With the unpleasant threat of Ra4.
16...Qb6 17.Qxb6 axb6
Worse is 17...Rxb6 18.Rc4!, when 18...Rxb2? loses to 19.Rc8† Bd8 20.Rd1 Nd7 21.Na4! followed by Nc5.
18.Rad1 0-0 19.Ra4
Black faces a difficult endgame in view of the weak pawns on b6 and b7.

12.Qd3 0-0
Now White must play energetically to prevent Black from developing his pieces freely.

13.Ndb5 Qb6
13...Bxb5?! 14.Qxb5 Qb6 15.Qxb6 axb6 16.Bf4± gave White an obvious advantage thanks to his bishop pair in
Kraemer – Faibisovich, Bad Wiessee 2013.

14.Be3 Bxb5 15.Qxb5

15.Nxb5?! Bc5 allowed Black to equalize comfortably in M.M. Ivanov – Lie, Gausdal 1996. By exchanging queens,
White gives himself better chances to exploit the bishop pair.

15...Qxb5 16.Nxb5 a6

17.Nd4N
This improves over 17.Nd6 Bxd6 18.Rxd6 Nc4 19.Rd3 Nxe3 20.Rxe3 Rc7 with an easily holdable endgame for
Black, Voelzke – Joppien, Kiel 2003.

17.Na7!?N
This alternative is ‘inhuman’, but the computer likes it.
17...Rc2 18.b3!
White should avoid 18.Rac1?! Rxb2 19.Rd2 Rxd2 20.Bxd2 b6, when he has nothing better than 21.Bxa5 bxa5
22.Nc6= with a drawn endgame. Refusing the draw with 21.Nc8?! is rather dangerous in view of 21...Bc5
22.Rxc5 bxc5 23.Ne7† Kh8 24.Bxa5 Rb8! when White is in danger of losing the a-pawn.
18...Nd5
18...Rxe2?! 19.Bb6 Bb4 20.a3 Bc3 21.Rac1 Rd2 22.b4 Nb3 23.Rxd2 Bxd2 24.Rc7± gives White excellent
winning chances.
19.Bxd5 exd5 20.Rxd5 Bf6 21.Rc1 Rxa2 22.b4 Nb3 23.Rc7²
White’s pieces are much more active.

17...Rfd8
Another line is 17...Nc4 18.Bf4! when the two bishops are starting to work: 18...Rcd8 19.Bxb7 Nxb2 20.Rd2! Nc4
21.Rd3

Black is under pressure, and 21...Nb2? is strongly met by 22.Nc6! Nxd3 23.Nxe7† Kh8 24.exd3 Rd7 25.Bxa6 Rxe7
26.Bd6 with a winning endgame.
18.Rdc1!
I prefer this over 18.Rac1 Rc4!.

18...Nd5
After 18...Rc4 19.Bd2! Rdxd4 20.Bxa5 White has a comfortable edge with his pair of bishops.

19.Rxc8 Rxc8 20.Bxd5 exd5 21.b3²

White is slightly better, as he has easy play against the isolated pawn.

D3) 10...Nxd4 11.Qxd4 Bc5 12.Qh4

This way Black develops his bishop to a more active square, but in doing so he drives the queen to a good location
where it sets up the thematic idea of Bh6. From here we will analyse D31) 12...Bc6 followed by the main line of D32)
12...0-0.

12...Qb6? allows the typical strike: 13.Bh6!

13...gxh6 (Black’s main problem is that 13...0-0? runs into 14.Bxg7! Kxg7 15.Qg5† with a winning advantage.)
14.Qxf6 Bd4 15.Qxh6 Qxb2 16.Ne4± Black is facing a dangerous attack with his king stuck in the centre, Zigura –
Mancini, Massy 1993.

D31) 12...Bc6 13.Rd1

13...Qa5
13...Qb6
This allows a familiar idea.
14.Bxc6† Qxc6
14...Rxc6 15.Bh6! gxh6 16.Qxf6 0-0 17.Ne4 was clearly better for White in Portisch – Radulov, Buenos Aires
(ol) 1978.
15.Bh6 0-0

16.Rac1!N
This is stronger than 16.Bxg7 Bxf2† 17.Kxf2 Qc5† 18.Kg2 Kxg7² when Black managed to hold the draw in G.
Davies – Gysi, corr. 1995.
16...e5 17.Na4 b6 18.Be3±
White has a serious advantage.

13...Nd7 14.Bxc6 Rxc6 15.Qg4

White should keep the queens on the board.
15.Qxd8†?! Kxd8 16.Bf4 Ke7 gave Black nothing to worry about in Grigoryan – Hayrapetian, Yerevan 2013.
15...Qf6 16.Ne4 Qg6

17.Qf3!N
 This is stronger than 17.Qf4 e5 18.Qf3 as in Hoffmann – Bartels, St Ingbert 1999. Here Black has a surprising
resource in 18...Bd4!N 19.e3 Bb6, when White can hardly develop much of an initiative with his bishop blocked
in.
17...Be7 18.Be3 f5 19.Nc3 a6 20.Rac1
There is no doubting White’s advantage.

14.Bxc6† Rxc6 15.Bg5!

Now 15.Bh6 is not so strong in view of 15...0-0 16.Bxg7 Bxf2† 17.Kxf2 Kxg7 with unclear play, Csom – Peters,
Hastings 1978.

15...Be7 16.Ne4 Qe5

16...Qf5 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.Nxf6† Qxf6 just transposes.

17.Nxf6† Bxf6
17...gxf6 18.Bh6! leaves Black’s king stuck in the centre.

18.Bxf6 Qxf6
In the event of 18...gxf6 19.Qg4 h5 20.Qg7 Rf8 21.Rd2 Ke7 22.Rad1 Rc7 23.h4² Black is doomed to a passive
defence.

19.Qxf6
After 19.Qb4 Qe7! 20.Qd4 0-0 21.Qxa7 Rc2 Black was fine and a draw was agreed in F. Olafsson – Ciric, Wijk aan
Zee 1969.

19...gxf6 20.Rac1
This innocent-looking endgame is actually quite dangerous for Black.
20...Ke7
After 20...Rxc1 21.Rxc1 Kd7 22.Kg2² Black’s problem is that 22...Rc8 is impossible, as White can exchange rooks
and march his king towards the h7-pawn.

21.Rxc6 bxc6 22.Rd4 Rb8 23.b3 Rb5 24.Ra4 a5 25.Kg2²

The game Lein – P. Littlewood, Hastings 1980, demonstrated that it is by no means easy for Black to hold this
endgame.

D32) 12...0-0

I faced this move the very next day after GM 1 was launched, in a match between Israel and Denmark at the 2008
Dresden Olympiad. My opponent was Peter Heine Nielsen, one of the world’s top theoreticians. I had noticed this idea
when writing my first book, but it was rather unexplored. Nowadays there are over fifty games in the database.

13.Bxb7
White has to accept the challenge if he is to fight for an advantage. There are several games showing that 13.Bg5 h6
14.Bxf6 Qxf6 15.Qxf6 gxf6 16.Bxb7 Rb8 17.Bf3 Rxb2= gives Black nothing to worry about.

13...Rb8

14.Bf3
I gave this as a novelty in GM 1, and it has since been played in a lot of games.

One of the key differences with 14.Bg2 is control over the g4-square. 14...Rb4 15.Qg5 Qb6 16.a3 (The previous point is
illustrated after 16.b3 Ng4! 17.Nd1 h6 18.Qd2 Rd4 19.Qc2 Rc8 when Black has a lot of activity.) 16...Rc4 17.Qd2 Bc6
18.Bxc6 This was Batchuluun – Omar, Istanbul (ol) 2012, and now the simple 18...Qxc6N would have left Black with
sufficient compensation.

14...Rb4 15.Qg5
Obviously White should refrain from e2-e4, as this would lose control over the d4-square while leaving White’s
queen cut off from the centre.
15...Bd4
15...Qb6? allows 16.b3 when White develops more comfortably. 16...h6 17.Qd2 e5 was played in Nyback – Brunello,
Rijeka 2010, and now 18.e3N 18...Bc6 19.Bxc6 Qxc6 20.Rd1 would have left Black with no compensation for the
missing pawn.

16.Qd2
16.Rd1 has been played a couple of times, but I am not completely happy with the position after 16...Qb6!?N.

16...Qc7 17.Nd1!
This move was first employed by Kramnik against Naiditsch, and I now believe it to be White’s best.

17.Qd3 was my superficial recommendation from GM 1. However, it is hardly dangerous for Black in view of 17...e5
18.Rd1 Bc6 19.Bxc6 Qxc6, when it is hard for White to untangle his queenside without returning his extra pawn. This
has been tested in some correspondence games, all of which ended in draws.
17.Rd1 was my choice in 2008, but I got nowhere after 17...Rfb8 18.Qd3 Qc5 19.e3 Be5 20.Ne4 Nxe4 21.Qxd7 Nf6
22.Qc6 Qxc6 23.Bxc6 Bxb2 24.Rb1 g5 and a draw was soon agreed in Avrukh – P.H. Nielsen, Dresden (ol) 2008.

17...Rfb8
17...Qb6 has been played in one game, and here 18.Rb1N appeals to me the most. (18.Ne3 Rc8 19.Nc2 Bxb2
20.Qxb4 Qxb4 21.Nxb4 Bxa1 22.Be3 Bc3 was fine for Black in Li – Alavi Moghaddam, Zaozhuang 2012.) 18...e5
19.b3 White should be able to solve his queenside problems and remain with a healthy extra pawn, as seen after
19...Rc8 20.Bb2 Bh3 21.Re1 and so on.

18.a3 Rc4
An important alternative is:
18...Ra4 19.Ne3 e5 20.Qc2!
The key point. Now Black has tried a few different queen moves.
20...Qxc2
20...Qa5 is not the best square for the queen. I suggest the surprising novelty: 21.Bc6!N (I found that 21.b4 is not
that clear. White went on to score a beautiful win in Kaidanov – Yang, Saint Louis 2011, but Black’s play can be
improved.) 21...Bxc6 22.Qxc6 Qb5 23.Qxb5 Rxb5 24.Nf5 White has a healthy extra pawn.
20...Qd8 21.Rb1!N Another important novelty. (21.Nf5? Rc8 22.Qb3 Rb8 23.Qc2 Rc8 24.Qd1 Rac4 gave Black a
lot of compensation in Yanayt – Yang, Arlington 2011.) 21...Rc8 22.Qd2 Bxe3 Otherwise White will just play
b2-b3. 23.Qxe3 Bf5 24.Ra1 e4 25.Bg2! Black does not have enough for the pawn.
21.Nxc2 Bxb2 22.Rb1 e4 23.Rxb2
23.Bg2 Be5 is close to equal.

23...Rxb2
23...Rc8 24.Bg2 Rac4 25.Bg5 Rxc2 26.Rxc2 Rxc2 27.Rd1 reaches an endgame where Black will be tortured for a
long time by the bishop pair.
24.Bxb2 exf3 25.exf3
White has a solid extra pawn with several pieces remaining. His winning chances are quite real, although the
opposite-coloured bishops give Black some hopes of salvation.
19.Ne3 Bxe3
This improvement over the stem game was recommended in different sources, and has been tested in some
correspondence games.

Black is short of resources after: 19...Ra4 20.Rb1 e5 (20...Bxe3 21.Qxe3 Nd5 22.Qd3 Bb5 23.Qd1± leaves White with
a healthy extra pawn.)

This position occurred in Kramnik – Naiditsch, Dortmund 2010, and now 21.b3!N is the most convincing
continuation. (In the game White played 21.b4 and won in good style, but Black could have made things more
difficult.) 21...Ra6 22.Bb2 Bxb2 23.Qxb2 e4 24.Bg2± Black has no real targets for counterplay.

20.Qxe3
20...e5 21.b4
I remember seeing 21.Bd2 Rxb2 22.Rab1 recommended somewhere, with a supposed advantage for White, due to his
bishop pair. However, after 22...Rxb1 23.Rxb1 h6, Black seems totally fine.

21...Rc3 22.Qd2 Re8!?

22...Rc2 23.Qd3 Re8 24.Bg2 Bg4 25.Qb3 Be6 26.Qb1 led to an eventual victory for Black in Bobarnac – Kovalsky,
corr. 2011, but the result was due to White’s subsequent mistakes. At this point Black does not have sufficient
compensation.
The text move occurred in Antonenko – Foulds, corr. 2013. This is incredibly tricky play from Black, who is trying to
stay flexible, while White is suffering from a lack of activity. However, I believe I have found a suitable solution.

23.Bg2N
 My idea is to give up the extra pawn, in return for activating the dark-squared bishop. The following illustrative line
looks most logical to me.

23...Bb5 24.Qd1 Rd8 25.Bd2 Qc4

25...Rc2 is not dangerous in view of 26.Rc1.

26.Rc1 Rxc1 27.Qxc1 Qxe2

28.Be3
White has the bishop pair and should be able to create a passed pawn on the queenside, which makes his chances
clearly preferable.

Conclusion

After 5...c5 6.0-0 Nc6 7.Qa4, the 7...Bd7 variation remains an important battleground, with many new games having
occurred since GM 1 was published. After the automatic 8.Qxc4 we looked at four main options.
8...Rc8 and 8...Qb6 are playable, but both moves suffer from a similar problem. The point is that, after 9.dxc5,
recapturing the c5-pawn will require Black to misplace his pieces in one way or another, thus ensuring a slight initiative
for White.
8...b5 is an interesting move, although it carries certain strategic risks after 9.Qd3. Black may proceed with the space-
gaining 9...c4, but this grants White full control over the centre. On the other hand, if he maintains the tension with
9...Rc8, then 10.dxc5 Bxc5 11.Nc3 leaves him with some holes on the queenside, as well as a bishop that would be
better placed on b7 than on d7.
The most solid and popular option is 8...cxd4 9.Nxd4 Rc8, when the main line continues 10.Nc3 Nxd4 11.Qxd4 Bc5
12.Qh4. Now 12...Bc6 allows White to develop his initiative, putting Black under pressure without taking much risk.
The most critical line is 12...0-0, when 13.Bxb7 Rb8 14.Bf3 reaches a key position that has been tested many times
since GM 1 was published. The position is challenging for both sides, but my overall feeling is that Black does not have
quite enough activity for the sacrificed pawn.
A) 7...c6
B) 7...Nd5 8.a4 Bb7 9.e4 Nf6 10.axb5 axb5 11.Rxa8 Bxa8 12.Nc3 c6 13.d5
B1) 13...cxd5
B2) 13...Bd6
B3) 13...exd5
B4) 13...Be7 14.dxe6 fxe6 15.Qe2 0-0 16.Bh3
B41) 16...Kh8
B42) 16...Qc8
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 a6 6.0-0
6.Ne5 is an important alternative for White in this position, but I am sticking with my preference from GM 1.

6...b5
This is the most direct way to hold on to the extra pawn and Black’s second most important choice in this position.

7.Ne5

This is the first branching position in this variation. Black’s only playable alternative is A) 7...c6, while the main line
is B) 7...Nd5.

7...Ra7?!
This is clearly inferior in view of:
8.a4!
Breaking up Black’s pawn structure.
8...Bb7 9.axb5 Bxg2 10.Kxg2 Qd5† 11.Kg1
Though this is good, I prefer 11.e4!?N 11...Qxb5 (Or 11...Qxe4† 12.f3 Qb7 13.Qa4 Nfd7 14.Nc3 Bd6 15.Nxd7
Nxd7 16.bxa6 Qb3 17.Qxb3 cxb3 18.Nb5 Ra8 19.Rd1+–. Black is helpless against White’s idea of picking up
the b3-pawn by means of Rd1-d3xb3.) 12.Nc3 Qb3 13.Qe2 Bb4 14.Be3 Nbd7 15.Nxc4± White has a big
positional advantage.
11...Qxb5
Two games have reached this position, when White should play the simple:
12.Nc3N 12...Qb3 13.Ra4
Regaining the c4-pawn and maintaining a clear positional advantage.

A) 7...c6
White has a strong idea at his disposal:

8.b3
8.Nxc6 Qb6 is another line, which we will not go into at this point.

8...cxb3 9.Nxc6 Qb6 10.Na5! Ra7 11.Nxb3 Rd7

11...Be7 does not change the character of the game: 12.e4 0-0 13.Be3 Rd7 14.N1d2 Qd8 15.a4! bxa4 16.Rxa4² with
definite positional pressure, Razuvaev – M. Gurevich, Riga 1985.

11...Bb7?! allows White to seize an early initiative with 12.d5!, creating the threat of 13.Be3. After 12...Qc7 13.Be3
Ra8 14.dxe6 (my engine gives the amazing 14.Nc3!, when the knight is untouchable in view of 14...Qxc3 15.Rc1 Qe5
16.dxe6! and White is winning) 14...fxe6 15.Bxb7 Qxb7 16.Nd4± White was clearly better in Lingnau – Thesing,
Germany 1992.

12.e4 Bb7 13.Re1 Be7

Most probably Black should have tried the more active 13...Bb4, but even then after 14.Bd2 Bxd2 15.N1xd2 0-0
16.a4² White has clear targets on the queenside.
14.e5! Nd5 15.Qg4
As always, this queen sortie is unpleasant for Black. We will follow his most recent attempt to hold the position:

15...Kf8
15...g6 16.Bh6 Nb4 17.Bxb7 Qxb7 18.Re2 (defending against ...Nc2) 18...N8c6 19.Nc3± Black’s king will be stuck
in the centre for a long time and his prospects are grim, Krasenkow – Kohlweyer, Ostend 1990.

16.Bg5 h5 17.Qh4 Bxg5 18.Qxg5 Qd8

19.Qxd8†
White maintains the pressure in the arising endgame, though I would prefer to keep the queens on by means of
19.Qd2N.
19...Rxd8 20.Rc1 Ke7 21.Nc3
White maintains a nagging edge, Querci – De Carlos Arregui, email 2011.

B) 7...Nd5

This is by far Black’s most popular reply.

8.a4
Definitely the most ambitious continuation. White’s main alternatives are 8.Nc3 and 8.e4.

8...Bb7
8...c6 9.axb5 cxb5 10.b3 cxb3 11.Qxb3 Bb7 transposes to Chapter 9. See page 128 for the continuation, beginning
with 12.e4.

9.e4
The most popular move for White has been 9.b3, but I believe Black has a great positional piece sacrifice at his
disposal: 9...c3! 10.axb5 axb5 11.Rxa8 Bxa8 12.e4 b4!! 13.exd5 Bxd5 With unclear play.

9.axb5 axb5 10.Rxa8 Bxa8 11.e4 Nf6 is just another move order that transposes to our main line.

9...Nf6
This is the black knight’s only retreat according to theory. It is very important for Black to control the h5-square,
otherwise the queen’s sortie to h5 will pose Black definite problems.

I also checked another knight move: 9...Nb4?!N 10.axb5 axb5 11.Rxa8 Bxa8 12.Qh5! g6 (12...Qe7 13.Bg5 g6 14.Qh4
looks even worse for Black) 13.Nxg6! This is the point behind White’s 12th move. 13...fxg6 14.Qe5 N8c6 15.Qxh8
Qxd4 16.Qxh7 White has a technically winning position.

10.axb5 axb5 11.Rxa8 Bxa8 12.Nc3 c6

12...b4?!
This dubious move has rarely been played, and for good reason:
13.Qa4† Nbd7 14.Nb5 Bxe4
14...Bb7 does not change anything: 15.Qa7 Qb8 16.Qxb8† Nxb8 17.Nxc7† Ke7 18.d5± with a large advantage.
15.Bxe4 Nxe4 16.Nc6 Nb6
I also examined the following funny line: 16...Qc8 17.Qa8! Nb6 18.Nxc7† Kd7 19.Ne5†! Kxc7 (19...Ke7
20.Qa7+– is also hopeless for Black) 20.Qc6† Kd8 (20...Kb8 allows mate in four after 21.Qxb6†) 21.Qxb6†
Ke8 22.Qb5†+– White wins.
17.Qa7
White was winning in Cirino – Wingender, email 2001.

13.d5
I have no doubt that this central thrust is the most challenging move. 13.Bg5 is the main alternative, but it does not
look effective to me.
 Finally we have reached the main branching position of this line. Black has a choice of four different moves: B1)
13...cxd5, B2) 13...Bd6, B3) 13...exd5 and B4) 13...Be7.

B1) 13...cxd5 14.exd5

White has no advantage after 14.Nxb5 Qa5!.

14...Bxd5
Naturally Black has other possible recaptures:

14...exd5 15.Nxb5 Qa5? (The best move is 15...Bc5!, as examined in variation B3, arising from the 13...exd5 move
order.) This position has occurred three times, but for some reason White has never played the simple 16.Qe2!N when
Black’s position is hopeless. For instance, 16...Be7 (16...Qxb5 loses to 17.Ng6† Kd7 18.Nxh8) 17.Nd6† Bxd6
18.Nxc4† wins the black queen.

14...Nxd5 15.Qh5 (15.Nxb5!? also comes into consideration.) 15...g6 (15...Qf6 16.Bxd5 Bxd5 17.Nxd5 exd5±
transposes to the position from the game Kohlweyer – Nisipeanu, Germany 1997, which is examined in the note to
Black’s 15th move in the main line below.) 16.Nxg6! We will see this blow again in the main line. 16...fxg6 17.Qe5
Nxc3 18.Bxa8 Ne2† 19.Qxe2 Qf6 20.Bd2± White’s initiative looks very powerful.

15.Bxd5!
White should get a clear advantage by playing in this way. Less clear is 15.Nxd5.

15...exd5
15...Nxd5
This loses control over the h5-square, after which the standard queen lift is very effective.
16.Qh5! g6
After 16...Qf6 17.Nxd5 exd5 18.Re1 Be7 (18...Bb4? loses to 19.Ng4†) White could have decided the game with
the smooth 19.Bg5!N (19.Nxc4? 0-0 led to an equal position in Kohlweyer – Nisipeanu, Germany 1997)
19...Qf5 (19...Qxg5 20.Qxf7† Kd8 21.Qxd5† Kc7 22.Qxb5+– doesn’t help either) 20.Ng6! with a decisive
advantage.
17.Nxg6!
 As promised, this tactical blow returns.
17...fxg6 18.Qe5 Nf6
18...Qf6 19.Qxb8† Kf7 20.Qxb5 would leave White with an extra pawn, as the c4-pawn is falling next.
19.Qxe6† Qe7
If 19...Be7 then 20.Rd1 easily decides the game: 20...Nbd7 21.Nxb5+–
20.Qc8† Qd8
The most tenacious defence. 20...Kf7 21.Qxb8 b4 22.Nb5± leads to an obvious advantage for White.
Now we have a logical sequence of moves:
21.Re1† Be7 22.Qe6 Rf8 23.Nxb5 Qd7 24.Qxc4 Qc6 25.Qb3 Na6 26.Bh6
Black is in serious trouble, as was proven in Evans – Sindelar, email 2009.

16.Ng4!
This fine move opens the e-file for White’s rook and allows him to use his lead in development.

16...Ne4
16...Be7 17.Nxf6† Bxf6 (17...gxf6 18.Nxd5 looks hopeless for Black) 18.Re1† Kf8 (18...Be7 loses by force after
19.Nxd5 Nc6 20.Bg5 f6 21.Bxf6! gxf6 22.Qh5† Kf8 23.Re6!+–) 19.Nxd5 and White has a decisive initiative for the
pawn. 19...Nc6 20.Be3 h5 (20...Be7 21.Qh5 also leads to a large advantage for White). In GM 1 I stated that 21.Bc5†
would be decisive here, and this was shown to be the case in the following game:

21.Bc5† Kg8 22.Be7! A beautiful solution. 22...Qc8 23.Bxf6 gxf6 24.Nxf6† Kg7 25.Nxh5† White had a winning
position in Eljanov – I. Novikov, Israel 2011.

17.Nxd5 f5
Black’s most recent attempt to hold the position.
17...Be7 loses to 18.Qd4.

17...Bc5 18.b4!! Brilliantly played: this advance allows the white queen to enter the game with great effect. 18...cxb3
19.Qd3 f5 (19...Nd6 loses to 20.Qc3, attacking both the bishop on c5 and the g7-pawn) 20.Qxb5† Nd7 21.Ne5
White’s advantage proved to be decisive in Ghafari – Skulteti, email 2002.
18.Nh6!
An amusing yet powerful response.

18...Qd7 19.Re1 Bc5 20.Be3 Bxe3 21.Rxe3

There is no saving Black now.

21...Kf8

22.Rf3! gxh6 23.Qd4 Kg8 24.Rxf5

White delivered checkmate shortly afterwards in Zawadski – Kruk, corr. 2012.

B2) 13...Bd6
This looks fairly natural, but with his next move White uses the vulnerable position of Black’s bishop on d6 to grab the
initiative.

14.Bf4
Less convincing is 14.Ng4 Be7!.

14...Bxe5
Black has a wide choice of moves, but nothing really helps.
Certainly 14...g5? does not work: 15.dxe6 fxe6 16.Nxc6!+–

14...Qc7 is rather critical:

15.Nxf7! Kxf7 16.dxe6† Ke7 (The e6-pawn is untouchable in view of 16...Kxe6 17.Bh3† Ke7 18.e5! Bxe5 19.Bxe5
Qxe5 20.Re1 and White wins.) 17.Bxd6† Qxd6 18.Qa1! (the point of White’s sacrifice) 18...Bb7 19.Qa7 Qc7 20.e5! (I
recommended 20.Qc5 in GM 1, but this is much more convincing.) 20...Ne8 21.Rd1 Bc8 22.Qc5† Kxe6 23.Ne4 Qe7
24.Nd6 White crashes through.

After 14...cxd5 15.Nxb5 Bxe5 16.Bxe5 0-0 Black has almost unravelled his position, but 17.Bd6 wins the exchange and
it doesn’t seem as if Black has sufficient compensation. For example:

17...Nxe4 (or 17...Qb6 18.Bxf8 Qxb5 19.Be7± Feldmann – Rolle, email 2009) 18.Bxf8 Qxf8 19.Bxe4 dxe4 20.Qa4!
Bc6 21.Qxc4 White’s material advantage should decide the game, as in Hollands – Laczay, email 2010.

14...exd5 15.exd5 cxd5

Black has no time for 15...0-0, as after 16.Nxc6 Nxc6 17.dxc6 Bxf4 18.Qxd8 Rxd8 19.gxf4 White’s passed pawn
easily decides the issue.
16.Qa1 Bxe5
16...d4 is met by 17.Qxa8 Bxe5 18.Bxe5 dxc3 19.Qa3!, which wins on the spot.
16...Bb7 is nicely refuted by 17.Qa7 Qc8 18.Nd7!!, with two lines to consider:
a) 18...Bxf4 19.Re1† Ne4 (19...Kxd7 obviously loses to 20.Bh3†) 20.Nxe4 dxe4 21.Bxe4 Bxe4 22.Rxe4† Kd8
23.Nxb8 Qxb8 24.Rd4†! Ke8 25.Qd7† Kf8 26.Rxf4 Qe8 27.Qd2 and White will at least pick up both of Black’s
queenside pawns.
b) 18...Qxd7 19.Bxd6 Qxd6 20.Re1† Kf8 (20...Ne4 21.Qxb7 0-0 22.Nxd5 Nf6 23.Qxb5 and the c4-pawn will
soon drop) 21.Nxb5 Qd8 22.Qxb7 g6 23.Nc7 Nbd7 24.Bxd5 Kg7 25.Bxc4 Qb8 26.Qxb8 Rxb8 27.Nb5 White is
a healthy pawn up.
17.Bxe5
We have reached the position from our main line with 14...Be5.

15.Bxe5 exd5N
15...0-0 leads to a clear advantage for White after: 16.dxe6 fxe6 (there is no doubt the endgame after 16...Qxd1
17.exf7† Kxf7 18.Rxd1 is very difficult for Black, due to his poorly placed minor pieces on the queenside) 17.Bd6 Re8
18.e5 Nd5 19.Ne4± White has every chance of deciding the game with a direct attack, Tolstikh – Paramonov, St
Petersburg 2002.
16.exd5 cxd5
Probably more stubborn is 16...0-0, but even here after 17.Qa1 Nbd7 18.Bd6 White is clearly better.

17.Qa1
By transposition we have reached a position from a game by Ulibin, which continued:

17...Nc6 18.Bc7!
Only this elegant tactical blow allows White to develop a dangerous initiative.

18...Qxc7
18...Qc8 19.Re1† Kf8 20.Bd6† Kg8 21.Nxd5 is strategically lost for Black.
19.Qxa8† Nd8
19...Nb8 20.Re1† Kd8 21.Nxd5 wins for White as well.

20.Re1† Kf8 21.Qa3† Kg8 22.Nxd5+–

White won in a few moves in Ulibin – Antunes, Cuba 1991.

B3) 13...exd5 14.exd5 cxd5

14...Nxd5? would be a serious mistake, as it allows 15.Qh5 Qf6 16.Nxc6!+– and Black’s position collapses.

15.Nxb5 Bc5!
This line looks to be the only playable alternative to the main variation with 13...Be7.
15...Qa5? was discussed on page 115, in the note to Black’s 14th move of variation B1.

16.Qa4
Black has no reason for concern after 16.Nxc4 0-0 17.Be3 Nbd7=.

16...0-0 17.Qxa8 Qe8!

This double attack is the point behind Black’s 15th move. There have been only two games where this position arose,
and in both of them Black was perfectly okay from a theoretical point of view. For this reason I would like to
recommend the following improvement:
18.Qb7!?N
White has tried 18.Nc3 Qxe5 19.Bf4 and now instead of 19...Qh5?! as in V. Mikhalevski – Naiditsch, Heviz 2008,
Black should have played 19...Qe6N 20.Nxd5 Nbd7 21.Nxf6† Nxf6 22.Qa5 Bd4 23.Re1 Qb6= when I believe the
bishop pair is not so relevant, as Black will be able to swap the queenside pawns.
18.Bxd5 Qxb5 19.Bxc4 Bxf2† 20.Rxf2 Qxe5 was Plauth Herr – Daw, corr. 1996. White is marginally better, but the
slightly exposed position of his king allows Black sufficient counterplay.

18...Qxe5 19.Bf4 Qe7

The piece sacrifice hardly works: 19...Qxb2?! 20.Bxb8 Ng4 (or 20...d4 21.Be5 Ng4 22.Qc6 and White should be
winning) 21.Bd6 Bxd6 22.Nxd6 Qxb7 23.Nxb7 d4. Now best is 24.Na5 c3 25.Be4 and White should convert his
material advantage.
19...Qe8 20.Nc7 Qa4 21.Nxd5 Nbd7 22.Nc3 Qa5 23.Bc6 (White should watch out for tactics, for example the most
natural 23.Rd1 runs into 23...g5!) 23...Qb6 24.Na4 Qxb7 25.Bxb7² and Black is doomed to long-term suffering.

20.Bxd5 Qxb7
After 20...Nxd5 21.Qxd5 Black loses the c4-pawn.

21.Bxb7
Black cannot swap the queenside pawns, so White keeps definite pressure with his pair of bishops.
21...Nbd7 22.Rd1 h6 23.Kf1 Nb6 24.Nc3 Re8 25.Bf3²
Black is still far from equality, as White has the advantage of the two bishops and the c4-pawn could become a target
in some endgames.

B4) 13...Be7

By far the main continuation and the move you are most likely to face in practice.

14.dxe6 fxe6 15.Qe2 0-0

15...Na6
Here I believe White has an opportunity to react energetically:

16.Rd1!
 The novelty which I recommended in GM 1 has now been successfully employed.
After 16.Be3 Black has only tried 16...Nc5?! 17.Rd1 Qc7 18.Nxc4! e5 (It was better to accept the sacrifice with
18...bxc4 19.Qxc4 Ncd7, though after 20.Qxe6 Qe5 21.Qb3© White has two pawns and a powerful initiative for
the piece.) 19.b4 Ncd7 20.Qa2 Bb7 21.Na5± and White had a great positional advantage with equal material, J.
Horvath – Hoelzl, Budapest 1994.
However, Black can improve with the simple 16...0-0 17.Bh3 Qc8! and get a good version of our main line.
16...Qb6
16...Qc8 17.g4! To tell the truth, I have never come across this idea in this variation before, but it appears to be
very strong in this case. For example: 17...0-0 18.g5 Ne8 19.Nd7 Rf7 20.g6! hxg6 21.Ne5 Black has to give up
the exchange.
17.Bh3 Nc5 18.Be3 Qb8 19.f4 Qc8 20.Kf1 Nd3 21.Nxd3 cxd3 22.Qxd3
White regained his pawn with a clear positional advantage in Curator – Gbsalvio, Internet 2010.

16.Bh3

At this late stage in the chapter, we still have two options to look at. The alternative to protecting the e6-pawn is
rather surprisingly to give it up with B41) 16...Kh8. As Black is a pawn up, he should consider this, but it appears to
make too much of a monster out of White’s e-pawn. Therefore B42) 16...Qc8 continues to be the main line.

16...Qe8 17.Bxe6† Kh8 is a simple transposition to variation B41 below.

B41) 16...Kh8 17.Bxe6

In a grandmaster game 17.Be3 was tested. I believe Black should calmly defend his pawn with 17...Qc8 and not play
17...b4 18.Nb1² as in V. Mikhalevski – Nisipeanu, Heviz 2008.

17...Qe8 18.Rd1
Somehow I do not like 18.Bf5, which was played in Krasenkow, – Kaidanov, Gausdal 1991. For example, Black can
try 18...Nbd7 19.Nxd7 Nxd7, when he has a clear plan of penetrating with his knight to the d3-square.

18...Bb7
Another line to consider is 18...c5 19.Bf4 Nc6 20.Nxc6 Bxc6 when White has the strong: 21.Nd5!N (The solid and
positional 21.f3, restricting the mobility of Black’s minor pieces, might be a serious alternative.) 21...Nxd5 22.exd5
Bb7 23.d6 The d-pawn should easily decide the game.

19.Be3
This is my new suggestion.

In GM 1 I recommended:
19.Bf4
Threatening to play 20.Nf7† as Black’s knight will be hanging at the end of the variation.
19...Na6 20.Nd7 Nxd7 21.Bxd7 Qf7 22.e5
22.Bd6?! allows Black to create counterplay: 22...Nc5 23.e5 Bxd6 24.Rxd6 Nd3„
22...Qg6N
I now believe this to be a strong improvement.
22...Nc5 23.e6 Qg6 24.Bd6± and White’s passed pawn decided the game quickly in Danailov – Maksimovic,
Cannes 1990.
23.Be3 Nb4
In the case of 23...Nc5 24.Bxc5! Bxc5 25.Ne4 Be7 26.Nd6 White has a clear plus, thanks to his e-pawn.
24.Ra1 c5!
A powerful idea indicated by my computer.
I had previously only considered 24...Ra8 25.Rxa8† Bxa8 26.e6 Nd3 27.Qd1! with an edge for White, as his
queen is aiming to penetrate via the a-file into Black’s camp. 27...Qf5 28.Qa1 Qf8 29.Qa6 b4 30.Na4 c5 31.Bc6
Bxc6 32.Qxc6 White’s chances are clearly preferable.
25.Bxb5 Nc6!
Due to his problems along the h1-a8 diagonal, White has to settle for a draw:
26.Nd5 Qe4 27.Nc3 Qg6=

19...Bc8! 20.Bxc8 Qxc8

This was my original solution for Black, but this time I decided to go deeper in my analysis.

21.f4 Na6 22.Ra1!? Qb7

The threat of White penetrating with Ra7 stops Black from moving his a6-knight.

23.Nf3!
Pushing the e-pawn is always a key idea in this type of position.
23...Ra8 24.e5 Ng4 25.Bd4!? Nb4
25...c5 26.Bf2 is good for White.

26.Rxa8† Qxa8 27.Ng5 Nh6

27...c5 28.Qxg4 cxd4 29.Nf7† Kg8 30.Qe6 is promising for White.

28.e6
White has a healthy initiative.

B42) 16...Qc8 17.Nf3

This looks to me to be the most logical continuation. First of all, White threatening to increase the pressure against the
e6-pawn with Ng5. Secondly, the idea of pushing e4-e5 followed by Ne4 appears in some lines and makes a pleasant
impression.
According to theory White has an important alternative in 17.Rd1 but, for the reasons mentioned above, I prefer the
text.

17...Na6
Played with the idea of defending the pawn with ...Nc7.
After 17...Ne8 I would like to suggest a new move:

18.Bg5N (18.Ng5 looks attractive, but after 18...Nc7 19.Bf4 Nba6 White had nothing special in Molina – Santiago,
Laranjeiras 2012) 18...Rxf3 (18...Bxg5 19.Nxg5 Nc7 20.Qg4 Re8 21.e5! h6 22.Nge4 is clearly dangerous for Black)
19.Bxe7 Rf7 20.Ba3! Grabbing Black’s dark-squared bishop is definitely an achievement for White. 20...Na6 21.Rd1
Nec7 22.Bd6 White’s positional advantage is obvious.

18.Ng5
It’s too early for 18.e5?!, which only helps Black to activate his pieces: 18...Nd5 19.Ne4 c5³

18...Nc7
Clearly worse is 18...Nc5? 19.Be3! Kh8 20.Bxc5 Bxc5 21.e5 and White had a winning attack in Haba – Meier,
Pardubice 1999.

19.Bf4 Nfe8
Black also cannot solve his problems with: 19...h6 20.Bxc7 hxg5 21.e5 Nd5 (21...g4 allows White to develop a
powerful attack with 22.exf6 Rxf6 23.Bxg4 Qxc7 24.Bxe6† Kf8 25.Re1!) 22.Bd6 Nxc3 23.bxc3 Qd7 24.Qg4!± With a
clear advantage to White, Jardorf – Schroll, corr. 1993.
20.Rd1!?
My proposal from GM 1 has now been tested a few times.
20.Qg4 Nf6!? 21.Qxe6† Nxe6 22.Bxe6† was V. Zilberstein – I. Novikov, Blagoveschenk 1988, and now of course
Black should have continued 22...Qxe6 23.Nxe6 Rc8. Despite White’s extra pawn I am not sure about the assessment
of this position. Without queens on the board, Black’s pawn mass on the queenside can quickly become a powerful
force.

20...Bb7
With 20...h6 Black is weakening the g6-square, which could become significant at a later stage. One game continued:

21.Nf3 Kh7 (21...Bc5 22.Ne5 Nf6 23.Ng6 Re8 24.e5 Nfd5 25.Ne4± with a dangerous initiative was the line from GM
1) 22.Ne5 Bd6?! 23.Qh5 Bxe5 24.Qxe5 White had a clear advantage in Geisler – Galanov, email 2009.
21.Qe3N
Once again White plays a quiet move. The queen takes control of the g1-a7 diagonal and prepares the move Be5,
which is useful in some cases.

After 21.Qg4 I believe that 21...Nf6N is critical (21...Bxg5 22.Qxg5 h6 23.Qc5 doesn’t required much comment,
Critter – Rybka, Internet 2012). 22.Qh4 h6 23.Bxc7 hxg5 24.Qxg5 Nd5 (24...Qxc7 loses on the spot to 25.Bxe6† Rf7
26.e5) 25.exd5 Bxg5 26.Bxe6† Rf7 27.Bxc8 Bxc8 Despite White’s extra pawn, I feel that Black has decent chances to
hold thanks to his bishop pair.

21...h6
Black has virtually no useful options, so perhaps he has to play this weakening pawn move.

22.Nf3 Na6
Black cannot solve his problems with 22...g5 23.Be5 Na6 (23...c5 runs into 24.Nd5!±) 24.Nd4 Nc5 25.f4 Ng7 26.f5
Qe8 27.Bxg7 Kxg7 28.e5! with a winning attack.

23.Ne5 Nec7 24.Ng6 Bc5 25.Qe2

This is even stronger than 25.Qd2 as suggested in GM 1.
25...Rd8
If 25...Rf6 26.Ne5 Bf8 27.Qh5, then White’s initiative on the kingside should easily decide the game.

26.Bd6! Bxd6 27.Rxd6

Having successfully traded dark-squared bishops, White’s initiative looks extremely powerful.

Conclusion

The 5...a6 and 6...b5 variation seems to me to be slightly risky for Black, as White obtains rich play for the sacrificed
pawn. I have always had the opinion that it would be too easy if Black could solve his opening problems in such a
direct way. It has been especially pleasing to see many of my ideas and novelties from GM 1 successfully tested in this
line. I have also added some other improvements, and can say with confidence that White is in great shape here.
A) 12...Nf6 13.d5
A1) 13...Bd6
A2) 13...exd5
B) 12...Nb4N

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 b5

Nothing could be more natural than Black’s last move: he defends his extra pawn, planning later to complete
development and convert his material advantage.
Of course matters are not that simple, and essentially the whole variation is known to be quite dangerous for Black:
White’s advantage in development allows him to seize the initiative in many lines.
6.a4
In my opinion this is the best move order.

6...c6
Obviously Black cannot play 6...Bb4†? due to 7.Bd2 Bxd2† 8.Nfxd2! c6 9.axb5± with a clear advantage.

7.axb5
Once again this is the correct move order.
7.Ne5 allows Black 7...Bb4† (or even 7...Nd5 8.axb5 Bb4†!?N and after 9.Nc3 Nxc3 10.bxc3 Bxc3† 11.Bd2 Qxd4
12.Nf3 Bxd2† 13.Nxd2 c3 Black should easily hold the position) 8.Nc3 Nd5, and this leads to a different line from the
one I want.

7...cxb5
7...Bb4†? 8.Bd2 Bxd2† 9.Nfxd2±

8.Ne5 Nd5
9.0-0!
This is a simple solution compared to the complex lines covered in GM 1. There are not many games in which this
move has been played, so there is great scope for creativity.

9...Bb7
The only move which Black has chosen, but it was also important to check the alternatives:

After 9...Be7 White easily develops an initiative by means of 10.Nc3 f6 11.e4!, when one illustrative line is: 11...Nxc3
12.Qh5† g6 13.Nxg6 Ne2† 14.Qxe2 hxg6 15.e5! Unfortunately for Black this move gives White a decisive advantage.
15...Bd7 (15...Qxd4 16.exf6 Qxf6 17.Bxa8+– is hopeless for Black) 16.Bxa8 Nc6 17.Bb7!? Qb6 18.Bxc6 Qxc6
19.exf6 Bxf6 20.Qg4± White is winning.

9...f6 runs into the same idea, but with a different execution: 10.e4 Ne7 11.Qh5† g6 12.Nxg6 Nxg6 13.e5 White has a
huge advantage.

10.b3!
Before striking in the centre White activates his queen.

10...cxb3 11.Qxb3 a6
Black’s only choice in practice.

I also checked a natural attempt to give the pawn back: 11...Nc6 12.Nxc6! (12.Qxb5 Qb6 allows Black to simplify into
a decent endgame after 13.Qxb6 axb6 14.Rxa8† Bxa8) 12...Bxc6 13.e4 The following sample line shows how
dangerous Black’s position is: 13...Nb6 14.d5! exd5 15.exd5 Bxd5 16.Qxb5† Qd7 17.Nc3! Qxb5 18.Nxb5 Bxg2
19.Kxg2± The black king is horribly exposed.

11...b4
This runs into an elegant solution:
12.Nc3!
Now Black’s lack of development begins to tell.
12...Be7
Other moves are no better:
a) 12...a5 13.Qa4† Nd7 14.Nxd5 Bxd5 (14...exd5 15.Qb5 is even worse for Black) 15.e4 Bb7 16.d5 Bd6
17.Nxf7! Kxf7 18.dxe6† Kxe6 19.Qb3† Ke7 20.Bg5† Nf6 21.e5 Bxe5 22.Rfe1 and White is winning.
b) 12...f6 13.Nxd5 Bxd5 14.Qa4† Nd7 15.e4 Bb7 16.Nd3 Bd6 (Black cannot hold the pawn with 16...a5, since
17.Nf4 Ra6 18.d5! gives White a decisive initiative.) 17.Bf4 Be7 18.Nc5! Now White is not even interested in
regaining the pawn immediately: 18...Bxc5 19.dxc5 Qc8 20.Rfd1 Bc6 21.Qxb4 e5 22.Be3 0-0 23.Bh3 White has
a huge advantage.
13.Qa4† Kf8
13...Nd7 14.Nxd5 Bxd5 15.e4 Bb7 16.d5! is pretty hopeless for Black.
14.Nxd5 Bxd5 15.e4
15.Bxd5 Qxd5 16.Bd2 also looks good.
15...Bb7 16.d5
White has a clear advantage.

12.e4
 At this point the most common move is A) 12...Nf6, but we must also consider B) 12...Nb4N.

12...Nc7

13.Qf3!N
This is even more convincing than the continuation 13.d5 Bd6 (13...Nd7 is also worthy of consideration) 14.Nc4!
bxc4 15.Qxb7 0-0 16.Nd2, when after 16...exd5 17.exd5 Nd7 18.Nxc4± White had regained his pawn and kept a
pleasant advantage in Iskusnyh – Sarana, Samara 2013.
13...Qf6
13...Qe7 runs into 14.Ba3 b4 (14...Qf6 15.Qc3! Qd8 16.Rc1 is winning for White) 15.Bxb4 Qf6 16.Qb3± with a
huge advantage.
14.Bf4 Bd6 15.Qh5! Qe7
15...g6 16.Qh6 Bf8 17.Qh3 looks horrible for Black.
16.Bg5 Qf8 17.Rc1 Bxe5 18.dxe5 Nc6 19.Ra2!
Black will lose material when the white rooks double up on the c-file.

A) 12...Nf6 13.d5

We have reached another split, with Black’s main continuations being A1) 13...Bd6 and A2) 13...exd5.

13...Nbd7N meets a simple yet elegant refutation: 14.Nxf7! Nc5 15.Nxd8 Nxb3 16.Nxb7 Nxa1 17.dxe6 Rc8 18.e5
Nb3 19.Bb2 Ng4 20.Nd6† Bxd6 21.exd6+– Black will not be able to hold this.
13...Qb6 14.Nc4!
A nice idea, although White is also better after the natural 14.Be3 Bc5 15.dxe6.
14...Qc7
The main point behind White’s idea is that 14...Qd4 runs into: 15.Nba3! (less convincing is 15.Ra4 Qc5 16.Na5
Bxd5 17.exd5 bxa4 18.Qb7 Qxa5 19.Bf4 Qd8 20.dxe6 fxe6 21.Qxa8 Nbd7) 15...Qxa1 16.Bb2 Qxf1† 17.Kxf1
White’s deadly threat of Na5 give him a clear advantage.
15.Na5 e5 16.Be3 Bd6 17.Rc1 Qe7
This happened in Agzamov – O. Foisor, Sochi 1985, and now the strongest continuation was:
18.Bg5N 18...0-0 19.Bh3!
Black can hardly move any of his pieces – White’s advantage is decisive.

A1) 13...Bd6

14.dxe6N
Surprisingly, this is even stronger than capturing on f7, thanks to an amusing idea on the 17th move.

It is admittedly hard to refrain from: 14.Nxf7 Kxf7 15.dxe6† Ke8 16.e5! (the main finesse of White’s combination)
16...Bxg2 17.exf6 Qxf6 18.Kxg2 Qxa1 19.Qd5N (An improvement over 19.Bb2 Qa4 20.Qf3 as in Giri – Morozevich,
Beijing [rapid] 2012. White won quickly, but it seems like the astonishing 20...Qc2!!N may hold the game for Black.)
19...Qe5 20.Qxa8 Qxe6 21.Nc3± Obviously White has a dangerous initiative, but Black has some defensive resources.
14...fxe6 15.Rd1 Qe7 16.Nd3 e5
The last sequence was forced, but now a brilliant blow comes from nowhere:

17.Nxe5!! Bxe4
White wins easily after 17...Bxe5 18.Ba3+– or 17...Qxe5 18.Bf4 Qxa1 19.Bxd6+–.

18.Bxe4 Nxe4 19.Re1 Qxe5 20.Nc3

It’s curtains for Black.

A2) 13...exd5 14.exd5!

14...Bxd5
It transpires that Black cannot develop with 14...Bd6, as 15.Nc6 Qc7 16.Re1† Kf8 17.Ba3 Nbd7 18.Rc1+– leaves
White with a decisive advantage.

15.Qe3 Qe7
The only move, since 15...Be7 loses to 16.Rd1.

16.Ba3 b4
16...Qe6 17.Re1 doesn’t change a lot.

17.Bxb4 Qe6
White’s next sequence of moves comes naturally:

18.Bxf8 Kxf8 19.Bxd5 Nxd5

19...Qxd5 20.Nc3 only helps White.
20.Qc5† Ne7 21.Re1 Nbc6 22.Nc3 Nxe5 23.Rxe5 Rc8 24.Qa5+–
Black cannot hold such a position for long.

B) 12...Nb4N

According to my engine this is the best square for the black knight.

13.d5!
This central break is an obligatory move for White in this line.

13...exd5
There are two important alternatives to consider:
13...Bd6 runs into a familiar theme: 14.Nxf7! Kxf7 15.dxe6† Ke8 Now the most convincing is 16.Nc3 N8c6 17.Rd1
Qc7 18.e5 Nxe5 19.Rxd6 Qxd6 20.Bxb7 Rb8 21.Bg2± with a large advantage to White.

13...f6 14.Ng4!
At first I was excited about 14.Qf3 fxe5 15.Qh5†, but somehow after 15...Kd7 16.dxe6† Kc7 17.Qxe5† Kc8
things become less clear.
14...exd5
After 14...e5 15.Na3! Black has a hard time stopping White’s Bd2 idea. 15...Nd7 16.Rd1! White can even afford
to not rush with Bd2; after 16...Bc5 17.Bd2 a5 18.d6! White has a huge advantage.
14...Qc8with the idea of ...Qc4) is easy to parry with 15.Na3. Now 15...exd5 16.exd5 Qxg4 doesn’t really work
for Black as 17.Re1† Kd8 18.Qe3! wins on the spot for White.
15.exd5 Bxd5 16.Re1† Kf7
16...Be7 is impossible in view of 17.Qxb4.
17.Rd1 Bxb3 18.Rxd8 Ra7 19.Rxb8 Nc2
20.Ra5!
The only square for the rook, but it is enough to retain an advantage. An important line is as follows:
20...Rd7 21.Nd2 Nd4 22.Nxb3 Nxb3 23.Rxa6 Rd1† 24.Bf1 Rxc1 25.Ra7† Kg6 26.Kg2±
Black has regained his piece, but White is clearly better.

14.exd5 Bd6
14...Bxd5
The only worthwhile alternative, although Black will find it surprisingly difficult to solve all his problems:
15.Qe3 Qe7
15...Nc2 16.Qe2 Nd4 17.Qh5! Ra7 (or 17...g6 18.Nxg6 hxg6 19.Re1† Ne6 20.Qxh8 Bxg2 21.Ba3 Nd7 22.Bxf8
Ndxf8 23.Kxg2 and Black does not enough for the exchange) 18.Bxd5 Qxd5 19.Nc3 Qc5 20.Re1! Qxc3 21.Be3
and Black is helpless against White’s crushing attack.
16.Bxd5 Nxd5 17.Qe4 Qe6 18.Rd1 Nc7
The last sequence has been fairly logical, but now comes the key move:
19.Ra2! Be7
19...Bd6 loses to 20.Rad2.
20.Rc2 0-0 21.Rxc7 Bd6 22.Qxa8 Bxc7 23.Nf3±
White should convert his material advantage.

15.Bf4 0-0 16.Nc3

Even though he has managed to castle, Black is still some way from overcoming his difficulties.

16...a5
A logical attempt to keep the knight protected on b4. I also checked some other possibilities:

16...Re8 17.Nc6! N8xc6 18.dxc6 Nxc6 19.Rfd1 and Black is unable to avoid material losses, for instance 19...Re6
20.Ne4±.

16...Qb6 17.Rad1
Black has an unpleasant choice here; to either give up his dark-squared bishop or to allow Nc6.
17...Bxe5
17...a5 18.Be3 Qa6 (after 18...Bc5 19.Ne4! Bxe3 20.fxe3 the open f-file only helps to increase White’s initiative)
19.Nc6 Nd7 20.Ne4 Bc7 21.Ne7† Kh8 22.d6 Bb6 23.Ng5 With a decisive initiative.
18.Bxe5 a5 19.Bd4 Qa6
Or 19...Qg6 20.Nxb5 N8a6 21.Nc3 and, having regained the pawn, White has a comfortable positional advantage
thanks to his bishop pair and strong passed pawn.
20.Rfe1 Nd7 21.Re7 Rad8 22.Rde1
White has more than sufficient compensation for a pawn.

17.Rfd1 Qb6
17...Bxe5 18.Bxe5 Re8 19.Bf4± offers Black no relief.

18.Be3 Bc5
18...Qa6 19.Nc6 is just bad for Black.

19.Bxc5 Qxc5 20.Rac1

White has full compensation for the pawn, with the only question being whether or not Black can hold the position.
One important line runs as follows:

20...a4 21.Qb1 a3
22.Ng4!
The idea of Ne4 is almost terminal for Black.

Conclusion

After 5...b5 6.a4 c6 7.axb5 cxb5 8.Ne5 Nd5 I have decided to now recommend 9.0-0. This move has not been played
often, which gave me the chance to include many fresh ideas. 9...Bb7 10.b3! is an important follow-up – activating the
white queen. Then 10...cxb3 11.Qxb3 a6 12.e4 Nb4N seems like the critical test, but White stands well in my main
line. There are some wonderful attacking themes in this chapter, which I hope the reader will thoroughly enjoy.
A) 7...Nd5
B) 7...Rb8 8.Nfd2
B1) 8...Qd7
B2) 8...e5 9.Bxc6† bxc6 10.dxe5 Ng4 11.Nxc4 Be6 12.Nbd2
B21) 12...h5
B22) 12...Bb4
C) 7...Bd7 8.Qe2 b5 9.b3!? cxb3 10.axb3
C1) 10...Bb4
C2) 10...Be7
C3) 10...Bd6 11.Bb2 0-0 12.Rc1
C31) 12...Nb4
C32) 12...Nd5
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 a6 6.0-0 Nc6
This is an ambitious choice from Black. In most of the lines he will retain his extra pawn, but White has a few
interesting ways to fight for the initiative.

7.e3
This is another significant change from GM 1, in which I recommended 7.Nc3 Rb8 8.e4. There have been many
developments in that line, and overall I am not completely satisfied with White’s prospects. Here is one relevant
example: 8...Be7 9.Qe2 b5 10.Rd1 0-0 11.d5 exd5 12.e5 d4 13.exf6 Bxf6 14.Qe4 Bb7 15.Nd5 Nb4! 16.Nxf6† Qxf6
17.Qf4 c5! 18.Qxf6 gxf6 19.Bf4 Rbc8 With highly unclear play, Caruana – Cheparinov, Villafranca de los Barros
2010.

Here Black has three main options: A) 7...Nd5, B) 7...Rb8 and C) 7...Bd7.

7...Bd6?! is hardly a good idea, as after 8.Nbd2 Na5 White has the strong 9.Ne5!. In the event of 9...Bxe5, as in
Yevseev – Khuseinkhodzhaev, Peterhof 2009, White can even try 10.Qa4†!?N 10...c6 11.dxe5 b5 12.Qc2 Nd5 13.b3
Bb7 14.Ne4 0-0 15.Bd2 with a serious advantage.
 A) 7...Nd5

This move is not as bad as I suspected it might be when I first saw it. Black wants just to play ...Nb6 in order to keep his
extra pawn.

8.e4 Nb6
Other squares are much worse:
8...Ndb4? 9.Be3 Bd6 10.a3 Nd3 occurred in Weiler – Grzeca, Altenkirchen 2012, and now White could have
obtained a huge advantage with:

11.Qc2N 11...b5 12.e5 Be7 13.b3! It is hard to suggest anything for Black. A possible continuation is 13...Na5 14.bxc4
bxc4 15.Nfd2! Rb8 16.Nxc4 Nxc4 17.Qxc4 Nb2 18.Qc2 and Black’s knight is in big trouble.

8...Nf6 9.Nc3 b5 (Other moves allow White to regain the pawn, for example 9...Be7 10.Qa4 Bd7 11.Qxc4 0-0 12.Rd1
b5 13.Qe2 with a comfortable edge, Kachiani – Burtman, Azov 1990.) 10.d5 Nb4
11.a4! Beneficially opening up the a-file. 11...exd5 (After 11...Rb8N 12.axb5 axb5 13.Bg5 Be7 14.Nd4 White’s
initiative plays itself.) Now in a couple of games White failed to find 12.axb5!N when Black is in serious trouble. For
instance, 12...Be7 13.e5 Ne4 14.Nd4! Bb7 15.Nf5‚ with an almost decisive initiative.

9.Be3 Be7 10.Qe2 0-0 11.Nc3 Re8 12.a3 Bd7 13.Rad1

White has promising compensation for the pawn, Kireev – Kruk, corr. 2012.

B) 7...Rb8
 This is the first of Black’s more challenging alternatives.
8.Nfd2
8.Qe2 b5 9.b3 cxb3 10.axb3 is an interesting alternative, but it gives Black a better version of variation C below,
since his light-squared bishop can be developed comfortably to b7.

Here the two main options are B1) 8...Qd7 and B2) 8...e5.

8...Bd7 9.Nxc4 b5 works out well for White after 10.Ne5! Nxe5 11.dxe5 Nd5 as in Le Quang – Ponkratov, Moscow
2013. Here White should just continue with normal development as follows:

12.Nd2N 12...Be7 13.b3 0-0 14.Ne4 White has good chances to seize the initiative on the kingside, for instance 14...c5
15.Bb2 c4 16.Qg4 g6 17.Rfd1 and Black’s dark squares look rather vulnerable.
 B1) 8...Qd7 9.Nxc4 b5 10.Ncd2

10...Bb7
10...e5 11.Nb3 Bd6 was a less challenging alternative seen in Gorelov – Kharitonov, Volgodonsk 1981. At this point
12.dxe5N 12...Nxe5 13.e4 Nc4 14.Qc2 0-0 15.N1d2² would have given White a comfortable advantage.

11.Nb3N
I like this idea more than 11.a4 and 11.Nc3 as played previously. The knight establishes control over the c5-square
and prepares e3-e4 and Be3.

11...Nd8
This has been Black’s choice in games featuring the other moves mentioned above, but it does not work so well here.
I also considered:

11...e5 proves to be premature after 12.d5 Nd8 13.e4 c6 14.Bg5, when Black is not ready for such a tense clash in the
centre, since his king is still uncastled.

11...Bd6 also does not work well after 12.e4 e5 13.dxe5 Bxe5 14.Nc5! Qxd1 15.Rxd1 Bc8 16.Nc3 0-0 17.Be3 with an
unpleasant endgame for Black.

Finally, 11...a5 runs into 12.a4! bxa4 13.Rxa4 Bb4 14.Bd2 when the a5-pawn is a clear target. The continuation might
be:
14...Nd8 15.Nxa5 Bxa5 16.Rxa5 Bxg2 17.Kxg2 Rxb2 18.Qc1 Rb8 19.Qa3 Despite the simplifications, Black is a long
way from solving his problems.

12.f3!
There will be no bishop trade! I don’t see what Black can do to oppose White’s simple plan of expanding in the
centre.

12...h5
My engine recommends this advance, but I don’t see what Black accomplishes after the ‘human’ reply:

13.e4 h4 14.g4 h3 15.Bh1

 White dominates the centre and his light-squared bishop will get back into the game easily enough, while the h3-pawn
is a long-term target.

B2) 8...e5

Definitely the most ambitious option. White has no real choice but to accept the challenge.

9.Bxc6† bxc6 10.dxe5 Ng4 11.Nxc4 Be6

Other options are clearly worse:

11...Qd5? 12.b3 Qe6 13.f4 Qh6 14.Qe2 Bc5 15.Ba3± Zaichik – Anikaev, Telavi 1982.

11...Qxd1 12.Rxd1 Be6 13.Nbd2 Rd8 14.b3

 White maintains a comfortable edge in the endgame, for instance:
14...Bxc4 15.bxc4 Bb4 16.Rb1 c5
Another game continued 16...Ba5 17.Kf1! 0-0 (17...Nxh2† 18.Ke2 Ng4 19.Rb7 Bxd2 20.Bxd2 0-0 21.f4±)
18.Ke2 Bxd2 19.Bxd2 Nxe5 20.Be1!? with a nice edge for White, Lissang – Welin, Sweden 2007.
17.h3 Nxe5 18.Bb2 Nc6 19.Nb3 0-0
Now in Kunte – Istratescu, Montreal 2008, White could have secured a clear plus with:

20.Rd5!N 20...Rxd5 21.cxd5 Ne7 22.Rc1 Nxd5 23.Nxc5

Black is destined to suffer with his queenside weaknesses.

12.Nbd2
From this position Black’s two main ideas are B21) 12...h5 and B22) 12...Bb4.

12...Qd5 13.b3 h5 was Carlhammar – Schneider, Helsingborg 1991. Now I believe White could have simply played
14.h3N 14...Nxe5 (14...h4 fails to work due to 15.hxg4 hxg3 16.Qf3 Bxg4 17.Qg2!±) 15.e4 Qc5 16.Ba3 Qb5 17.Bxf8
Kxf8 18.Nxe5 Qxe5 19.Kg2 Rd8 20.Qe2 Qb2 21.Rfd1± with a clear positional advantage.
 B21) 12...h5 13.f3!

White needs to be accurate. I went wrong with 13.h3, and after 13...h4! 14.hxg4 hxg3 15.fxg3 Qd3! Black obtained a
dangerous attack in Avrukh – A. Mikhalevski, Israel 2010.

13...h4
13...Nh6? 14.Qc2 Qd5 15.b3 leaves Black clearly worse.

14.fxg4 hxg3

15.Qf3! gxh2†N
This seems like a better try than 15...Qd3 16.b3 Rxh2 17.Qxg3 Rh6 as played in Postny – A. Mikhalevski, Israel
2009.

Here the most convincing way to deal with the ...Bxg4 threat would have been 18.Rf4!N 18...Bd5 19.Rf3!, intending
to complete development with Bb2 and Raf1, when Black does not have much to show for his material deficit.

16.Kh1 Qd7 17.b3 Bxg4 18.Qg3 Be6 19.Bb2±

Black hardly has any dangerous ideas.

B22) 12...Bb4

13.Qc2!?N
I propose this new move as an improvement over 13.Qe2, when 13...h5 was double-edged in M. Muzychuk –
Kosteniuk, Warsaw 2013.
13...h5
This is Black’s principal idea in these positions.

13...Bxd2 is no problem for White after the accurate: 14.Bxd2! Bxc4 15.Qxc4 Nxe5 16.Qf4 Qd5 17.Bc3 Nf3† 18.Kh1
0-0 19.Rad1 Qh5 20.h4±

14.b3 h4!
Of course not 14...Bxd2? 15.Nxd2 h4 16.Nf3 hxg3 17.hxg3 with a big advantage for White.

15.Nf3 hxg3

16.fxg3!
Obviously we should avoid 16.hxg3? Qd7, when the open h-file is a source of great concern.

This critical position requires further investigation and testing. I like White’s chances, and will present one illustrative
line:

16...Qd5 17.Bb2 Bc5 18.Rad1 Bxe3† 19.Nxe3 Nxe3 20.Rxd5 Nxc2 21.Rd2 Nb4 22.Nd4
White is obviously better and can continue playing without much risk.

C) 7...Bd7
8.Qe2 b5
In a number of recent games Black has tried 8...Bd6 9.Qxc4 0-0, returning the pawn and aiming for a quick strike in
the centre. I suggest following Gelfand’s example: 10.Rd1 Rb8 11.Nbd2 e5 12.dxe5 Bxe5 (Apparently Black was not
satisfied with 12...Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Bxe5 14.Nf3 Bd6 15.e4, when White indeed has good prospects.) 13.Qe2 Qe7
14.Nc4 Rfd8 15.Bd2

15...Bd4!? This was an interesting try for Black in Gelfand – Wang Hao, Tashkent 2012. Perhaps Boris got confused by
Black’s last move, as the direct 16.Nxd4N 16...Nxd4 17.Qf1 Nc6 18.Bc3! Ne4 19.Be1² would have reached a position
where Black can hardly claim to have sufficient compensation for White’s bishop pair.

9.b3!?
This strategic pawn sacrifice greatly appeals to me.
9...cxb3 10.axb3
We have reached the main tabiya for the 7...Bd7 variation. Unlike the previous lines, White has made no real effort to
regain the c4-pawn, instead simply exchanging it in order to open the a- and c-files and expose Black’s structural
weaknesses, leading to long-term positional compensation.

Black has three sensible developing moves: C1) 10...Bb4, C2) 10...Be7 and C3) 10...Bd6.

C1) 10...Bb4
This gives White an opportunity to carry out a strong manoeuvre.

11.Ne5! Nd5
The exchange sacrifice does not work: 11...Nxe5?N 12.Bxa8 Qxa8 13.dxe5 Ne4 14.f3 Nc5 15.Qc2±

12.Nd3 0-0 13.Bb2

This move has only been played in correspondence games, but it is undoubtedly the most logical choice. The
following game gives a good illustration of how play may proceed.
13...Be7 14.Nc3 Ncb4 15.Nxb4 Bxb4 16.Nxd5
White accepts the challenge.

16...exd5 17.Bxd5 Bh3 18.Bc6!

A fresh positional sacrifice.

18...Bxf1 19.Kxf1 Qf6

Now in Schiller – Wharrier, email 2012, White rushed to take on a8. A stronger and more thematic option would have
been:

20.Qc2!N
White has superb compensation; his light-squared bishop is more valuable than the black rook.
 C2) 10...Be7

This is not the most active choice, but Black is hoping to keep things solid.

11.Bd2!?
Somehow this move appeals to me the most, despite the fact that 11.Bb2 and 11.Nc3 are more popular.

11...0-0 12.Rc1 Nd5

I would also like to mention: 12...Ra7 13.Nc3 Nb8 (I also checked 13...Be8!?N, which looks better than the text
move. Nevertheless, after 14.Ne1! Nb4 15.Na2! Nxa2 16.Rxa2 Nd5 17.Nd3 White has excellent compensation.)
14.Ne5 Be8
15.Na2! Intending Nb4 – a strong manoeuvre which is worth remembering. 15...Nd5 16.Qe1!? Bd6 17.Nd3 White was
clearly better in D. Berczes – Goloshchapov, Griesheim 2011.

13.Nc3 Nxc3
Other moves are hardly satisfactory for Black. For instance, both 13...Ndb4 14.Ne4 f6 15.Ne1 and 13...Qc8 14.Ne1
Ndb4 15.Ne4 give White clearly better play.

14.Bxc3
This is better than 14.Rxc3?! Ra7 15.Rc2 a5 16.Ne1 Nb4 17.Bxb4 Bxb4 18.Nd3 Bd6 when Black was fine in Arun
Prasad – Arnold, Paris 2011.

14...Ra7
This position first occurred in Kachiani Gersinka – Ar. Petrosian, Dortmund 2000, and it has since been repeated
numerous times.
15.Ne1!N
I find it strange that nobody has played this logical move yet.

15...Nb4
I also analysed: 15...a5 16.Qxb5! It is best to accept the challenge. 16...Nxd4 17.Qc4 Nb5 The only move. 18.Rxa5
Rxa5 19.Bxa5 Despite the simplifications, White maintains definite pressure, as shown after 19...Bd6 20.Nd3 Qe7
21.Nb4!.

16.Bxb4 Bxb4 17.Nd3 Bd6

17...Qe7 does not change the character of the game after 18.Qc2 Rc8 19.Bc6!© with good positional compensation.

18.b4 Qe7 19.Qb2©

 White has great compensation for the missing pawn.

C3) 10...Bd6

This has been the most popular choice. The bishop is more active here than on e7, but less exposed than on b4.

11.Bb2 0-0
11...Qe7?!
This has been played a few times, but it allows White to develop a quick initiative.
12.Rc1 0-0
12...Ra7? 13.Ne5! is already winning, and after 13...Bxe5 14.dxe5 Nd5 15.Nc3 Ncb4 16.Nxd5 Nxd5 17.Bd4 Ra8
18.e4 Nb6 19.Rxc7 Black was in a hopeless situation in Gupta – Stockmann, Bad Wiessee 2013.
13.Ne5! Bxe5 14.Bxc6!?
14.dxe5N 14...Nd5 15.Nc3 is also great for White.
14...Bd6 15.Bxa8 Rxa8 16.Nd2 e5 17.dxe5 Bxe5
Somehow White went on to lose from this position in Evdokimov – Shinkevich, Ufa 2004. The simplest way to
maintain a clear advantage would have been:
18.Bxe5N 18...Qxe5 19.e4±
Intending Qe3 and f2-f3. Black clearly does not have enough for the exchange.

12.Rc1
Here we will consider C31) 12...Nb4 followed by the more popular C32) 12...Nd5.

C31) 12...Nb4 13.Ne5 Rc8

13...Nfd5? is no good in view of 14.Nxd7 Qxd7 15.e4 Nb6 16.e5 Be7 17.Bxa8 Rxa8 18.Nd2± when Black does not
have enough for the exchange.
 13...Ra7 is playable, but 14.Na3 Be8 15.e4© gave White great compensation in Bucek – Hnatovsky, Internet 2011.

14.Na3!?
I like this, although 14.Nd2 Qe7 15.Nd3 Rfd8 also looked dangerous for Black in Zilka – Navara, Czech Republic
2009. A logical continuation is: 16.Nxb4N 16...Bxb4 17.Rxa6 c5 18.dxc5 Rxc5 19.Rxc5 Bxc5 20.Bxf6 Qxf6
(20...gxf6?! 21.Ne4 is riskier for Black.) 21.Ne4 Qe7 22.Nxc5 Qxc5 23.Qd3 Qc7 24.Rd6 Kf8² Black should be able
to hold, although White can certainly keep playing for a while without risk.

14...c5N
This seems like a logical attempt to improve on 14...Bxe5 15.dxe5 Nfd5 16.Bd4, when White had great compensation
in Fortune – Weiss, email 2011.

15.dxc5 Rxc5
In the event of 15...Bxc5 16.Nc2 a5 17.Na3 Qb6 18.Nxd7 Nxd7 19.Nxb5² White maintains a pleasant edge, thanks
to the bishop pair.

16.Rxc5 Bxc5
17.Nc2! Nxc2 18.Qxc2 Qb6 19.Nd3 Be7
Also after 19...Bd6 20.Bd4 Qb8 21.Rxa6 Black is under considerable pressure.

20.Bd4 Qd6 21.Bc5 Qc7 22.Rxa6²

White has regained the pawn, and can continue pressing with no risk.

C32) 12...Nd5

This is by far the most popular move in the position, although most of the games are from correspondence/email play.
Most of the ideas are the same as in the previous lines, and White does not have to do anything fancy to maintain his
compensation.
13.Nc3
White does not mind exchanging pieces, as the removal of the d5-knight will help to increase the pressure on the long
diagonal.

13...Ncb4
13...Nxc3?!N is too compliant, and after 14.Bxc3 White’s initiative is quite potent. A sample line is: 14...Ne7 15.Ne5
Nd5 16.Ba5 Be8 17.Nd3 f5 18.Rc2 White has typical compensation, with an even better version than in some of the
other lines given.

13...Qe7 14.Ne4 The knight is heading for c5. 14...a5 15.Ne5 Ncb4 White has several interesting ideas here, but I
prefer 16.Nc5 Bxe5 17.dxe5 with rich compensation, as in Foulds – Coyne, corr. 2014. White’s pieces are perfectly
placed, and he has good chances to seize the initiative on the kingside.

14.Ne4 a5 15.Nc5 Bc6

15...Bxc5 is well met by 16.dxc5!©, opening a path for the dark-squared bishop, as in Tinjaca Ramirez – Sheretyuk,
corr. 2013.

16.Ne5 Bxe5 17.dxe5

Again White’s compensation was obvious in Oppitz – Hirr, Internet 2011.

Conclusion

5...a6 6.0-0 Nc6 is a challenging system, which is generally played with the intention of holding on to the c4-pawn. I
recommend departing from GM 1 with 7.e3, when Black has two main options.

7...Rb8 leads to dynamic play after 8.Nfd2 e5 9.Bxc6† bxc6 10.dxe5 Ng4 11.Nxc4 Be6 12.Nbd2, when White has gone
from being a pawn down to a pawn up, but has been forced to part with his important ‘Catalan bishop’. Black has some
attacking prospects with ...h5-h4, but my analysis indicates that White can keep control and steer the game towards
favourable simplifications.

7...Bd7 8.Qe2 b5 sees Black firmly protecting his extra pawn on c4, so I like the straightforward plan of swapping it off
with 9.b3!? cxb3 10.axb3. White has long-term positional compensation and the black bishop is misplaced on d7. We
analysed three moves for Black but, although some of the finer details vary from one line to the next, the general ideas
remain similar. In all cases, White gets a lasting initiative with natural, easy-to-understand moves.
A) 6...Bd6
B) 6...Bd7 7.Qxc4 Na5 8.Qd3 c5 9.0-0
B1) 9...Qb6
B2) 9...Rc8
B3) 9...Bc6 10.Nc3
B31) 10...cxd4
B32) 10...Be7
C) 6...Nd7 7.Qxc4 Nb6 8.Qb5!
C1) 8...Bb4†
C2) 8...Bd7
C3) 8...a6 9.Qd3
C31) 9...Nb4
C32) 9...e5
D) 6...Bb4† 7.Bd2
D1) 7...Bd6 8.Na3
D11) 8...Ne4
D12) 8...Bxa3
 D2) 7...Nd5 8.Qb5!?
D21) 8...0-0
D22) 8...Bxd2†

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 Nc6

6.Qa4
This chapter resembles the corresponding chapter of GM 1. Broadly speaking, I have mostly recommended the same
basic lines for White, but with some fine tuning based on more recent games and analysis.

Black has four main options: A) 6...Bd6, B) 6...Bd7, C) 6...Nd7 and D) 6...Bb4†.

6...Nd5 7.Qxc4 Nb6 takes us directly to variation C.

A) 6...Bd6

This is a pretty rare choice, but it is quite natural to develop while preparing ...e5.

7.Ne5!?
7.Nbd2 was my recommendation in GM 1, but after 7...0-0 8.Nxc4 Black came up with a useful improvement in
8...Rb8!, when 9.Nxd6 cxd6 10.0-0 b5 11.Qb3 Bb7 led to equality in Evans – Buczinski, email 2010.

7...Bxe5
7...0-0?! 8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.Nd2 will lead to a serious positional plus for White after he regains the c4-pawn.

8.Bxc6† bxc6 9.dxe5 Nd7

9...Qd5 10.0-0 Ne4 has also been played. A similar situation can arise via the 6...Bb4† 7.Bd2 Bd6 variation, but there
exists a vital difference: the bishop is not hanging on d2 here! This allows White to seize the initiative as follows:
11.Na3! (This important move would obviously not be available with the bishop on d2 instead of c1. That is why, in
variation D1 on page 160, I recommend a different course of action with Na3 instead of Ne5 a few moves earlier.)
11...Nc5 12.Qa5! 0-0 13.Be3 Nd7 14.Qxc7 c3 15.bxc3 White was clearly better in Ragger – Baumegger, Vienna 2010.

10.0-0 0-0 11.Qa5!

Here too, this is an excellent move.

11...Rb8
Another game continued 11...f6 12.Rd1 fxe5 13.Nc3 and Black’s pawn structure was a sorry sight in Sherwood –
Keevil, Internet 2012.

12.Rd1 f6 13.Na3 c3 14.b3 fxe5 15.Be3±

White was much better in a game between engines with unknown names.
 B) 6...Bd7 7.Qxc4 Na5

Objectively this line is not so bad for Black, but it does not lead to full equality and has fallen completely out of
fashion.

8.Qd3 c5 9.0-0
This is a significant branching point, where Black’s main options are B1) 9...Qb6, B2) 9...Rc8 and B3) 9...Bc6.

9...c4? can be considered an inferior version of variation C1 of Chapter 7, which can be found on page 94, as Black has
played the decentralizing ...Na5 instead of the more useful ...b5. Here is the model example: 10.Qc2 Bc6 11.Nc3 Bb4
12.Bg5 0-0 13.Rad1 h6 14.d5 exd5 15.Bxf6 Qxf6 16.Nxd5 Bxd5 17.Rxd5± Black’s minor pieces were badly misplaced
on the queenside in P.H. Nielsen – Hjartarson, Copenhagen 1996.

B1) 9...Qb6 10.Nc3

10...cxd4
The alternative is:
10...Bc6 11.Be3 Rd8
The b2-pawn is obviously poisoned: 11...Qxb2? 12.Ne5 Bxg2 13.Rab1 Qa3 14.Kxg2 and Black is just lost.
12.Rfd1 Qxb2?
This pawn grab is too dangerous.
White is also better after other moves, for instance: 12...cxd4N 13.Nxd4 (13.Bxd4 is also promising.) 13...Bxg2
14.Kxg2 Be7 15.Na4 Qb4 16.Qb5† Nc6 17.Qxb4 Nxb4 18.Nb5!ƒ
13.Ne5 Bxg2

14.Rab1! Qa3 15.Kxg2

White was winning, and he smashed his opponent in a few more moves:
15...Nc6 16.Qb5 Qxc3 17.Nxc6 bxc6 18.Qxc6† Nd7 19.dxc5+–
Golombek – Ed. Lasker, Hastings 1953.

11.Qxd4
11.Nxd4 Bc5 12.Be3 Ng4 looks fine for Black.

11...Qxd4
11...Bc5 12.Qh4! produces a surprising transposition to variation B11 of Chapter 7 (with one extra move played here)
– see page 90.

12.Nxd4 Bc5
Now I like the following slightly surprising idea.

13.Nb3!? Nxb3 14.axb3

White has serious pressure on the queenside, for instance:

14...Ke7 15.Bf4 Bc6 16.Bxc6 bxc6 17.Ra6 Bb6 18.Na4 Nd5 19.Ra1 Rad8 20.Nxb6 axb6 21.Be5!±
Black was in real trouble in M. Grabarczyk – Taimanov, Germany 2002.

B2) 9...Rc8 10.Nc3

10...cxd4
Another direction is:
10...Bc6 11.Rd1 c4
11...cxd4 12.Nxd4 Bxg2 13.Kxg2 Bc5 14.Qb5†! causes problems before Black can complete his development:
14...Qd7 (14...Nd7 15.Bg5! practically decides the game instantly, for example: 15...Qb6 16.Nf5! Qxb5
17.Nxg7† Kf8 18.Nxb5+–) 15.Qxd7† Nxd7 16.Ne4 Nc4 (16...Be7 17.Nb5± is also bad for Black.) 17.b3 Nce5
18.Nb5! Black was losing at least a pawn in Nogly – Halasz, Dortmund 1992.
12.Qc2 Bb4
Black is trying to control the light squares and restrain White’s central pawns, but the next move shatters that
illusion.

13.d5! exd5 14.e4 0-0

 14...Bxc3?! 15.exd5 Nxd5 16.bxc3 0-0 17.Ng5 g6 was even worse in Ftacnik – Lechtynsky, Czechoslovakia
1979. Here the simple 18.Bf4!N 18...Re8 19.Rd4 would have given Black serious trouble along the d-file.
15.exd5 Bd7 16.Bf4 b5 17.Ne5±
White’s advantage was obvious in Gofshtein – Berkovich, USSR 1976.

11.Nxd4

11...Bc5
11...Qb6 has been played almost as often. 12.Rd1 Nc4 (12...Be7 13.Ne4 Nd5 14.Nf5! exf5 15.Qxd5 Be6 16.Nd6†
Bxd6 17.Qxd6 Qxd6 18.Rxd6 Ke7 19.Rd1 Rhd8 20.Bd2 Nc6 21.b3² White kept an edge thanks to the bishop pair in
Schueppen – Feco, email 2010.) 13.Ne4 Nd5 Now in Schuster – Shpakovsky, email 2009, White could have developed
his initiative with:

14.Ng5! The key idea is 14...h6 15.Ndxe6! Bxe6 16.Nxe6 fxe6 17.Qe4!!, an amazingly calm move which would be
hard to find over the board. 17...Nf6 18.Qg6† Ke7 19.b3 White has an extremely dangerous initiative for the sacrificed
piece.

The text move is more solid for Black, and was played in Gustafsson – Groszpeter, Austria 2005, and several
subsequent games. In GM 1 I gave 12.Rd1 as a novelty leading to an edge for White, which seems like a valid
assessment, but in practice Black has been quite successful neutralizing White’s slight pressure. Therefore I would like
to propose a new direction here.

12.Ne4!?N 12...Nxe4
12...Be7 13.Nxf6† Bxf6 14.Nb5ƒ is problematic for Black, as both of his queenside pawns are under attack.

13.Bxe4 Bc6 14.Nxc6 Qxd3 15.Bxd3 Nxc6 16.Rd1 Ke7 17.Kg2 Rhd8 18.Bd2²
Black is unable to do anything special with his slight lead in development. White will soon get coordinated, and his
bishop pair provides real chances for a long-term pull.

B3) 9...Bc6 10.Nc3

 Now Black can either remove the central tension with B31) 10...cxd4 or maintain it with B32) 10...Be7.

B31) 10...cxd4 11.Nxd4 Bxg2

11...Bc5 12.Rd1 Bxd4 (12...Bxg2 13.Qb5†! Nd7 14.Kxg2 transposes to 11...Bxg2 12.Kxg2 Bc5 13.Qb5†! Nd7
14.Rd1, as covered in the main line below.) 13.Qxd4 Qxd4 14.Rxd4 Bxg2 15.Kxg2 Nc6 16.Rd1² White keeps a
pleasant edge in this endgame.

12.Kxg2

12...Bc5
12...a6 is no better: 13.Rd1 Be7 (13...Bc5 transposes to 15...Nf6 in the notes to the main line, with two fewer moves
played – see 12...Bc5 13.Qb5†! Nd7 14.Rd1 a6 15.Qd3 Nf6 below.) 14.Qf3 White had an obvious initiative in Solari –
Rivas Mongrut, corr. 2007.

12...Nc6 was played in Antic – Lazarevic, Niska Banja 1996. Here the only chance for White to fight for the advantage
is 13.Be3!N, as pointed out by Marin. Play may continue: 13...Be7 (13...Nxd4? 14.Bxd4 Be7 15.Qb5†! Qd7 16.Qxd7†
Kxd7 17.Rfd1 Ke8 18.Nb5 leaves Black in serious trouble.)

14.Rfd1 This looks like the best way to develop White’s initiative. 14...Qc8 (After 14...Qd7 15.Qc4 Ne5 16.Qb5 Qxb5
17.Ndxb5 0-0 18.Bxa7± White safely grabs a pawn.) 15.Rac1 0-0 16.Ne4² White has a pleasant edge which may easily
become more serious.

The text move runs into a thematic idea.

13.Qb5†! Nd7 14.Rd1

14.Nf3!?N
 This new idea may be even stronger. However, I have kept the rook move as the main line because Black can also
reach it via the 11...Bc5 or 12...a6 move orders, as noted earlier.
14...a6
14...Qb6 15.Rd1 Nc6 16.Qa4! Rd8 17.Qg4! gives White a clear advantage.
15.Qa4 Be7 16.Rd1 Nc6
16...b5 17.Qe4 leaves Black in an unpleasant pin along the d-file. An important detail is that 17...Qc8 can be met
by 18.Rxd7! Kxd7 19.Qd4† Ke8 20.Qxg7 Rf8 21.Bh6 with a huge advantage.

17.Qb3 Na5
17...b5 18.Ne4 0-0 19.Nfg5±
18.Qc2 Qc8
18...0-0? allows 19.Ne5±.
19.Bf4 0-0 20.Rac1²
Black has managed to castle, but he is a long way from equalizing, as White’s pieces are much better placed.

14...a6 15.Qd3 Rc8

This move has been played at World Championship level, but it does not solve Black’s problems.

15...Be7 16.Bf4 Rc8 (16...0-0? allows 17.Nxe6!) 17.Nf3 Nc4 18.Na4 b5 19.b3 Ncb6 20.Nxb6 Nxb6 21.Qxd8† Bxd8
Black has managed to simplify, but after 22.e4 he still faced an unpleasant endgame in Tkachiev – Solozhenkin, France
2000.
15...Nf6 is the most solid choice for Black, but it still does not equalize. 16.Be3 (It is also worth considering 16.Bg5!?,
for instance 16...Bxd4 17.Qxd4 Qxd4 18.Rxd4 Nc6 19.Rd3 Rd8 20.Rxd8† Kxd8 21.Ne4 Ke7 22.Nc5 Rb8 23.a3² and
White maintains nagging pressure) 16...Be7 17.Bf4 0-0 18.Qf3 Qb6 This position occurred in Villar Ramos –
Semenov, email 2007. Here I suggest:
19.b3N 19...Rac8 20.Na4 Qa7 21.Be3 Qb8 22.Nb6 Rcd8 23.Bf4 Bd6 24.Bd2 Bc5 25.Bxa5 Bxd4 26.Rac1 White
maintains a pleasant edge.

16.Bg5!
A very nice move, which gives White the opportunity to seize a dangerous initiative.

16...Nf6N
The bishop is untouchable: 16...Qxg5? 17.Nxe6 Qe7 18.Nxg7† Kd8 19.Nd5 with a decisive attack.

16...Be7 was played in Kramnik – Topalov, Elista (3) 2006, and now 17.Ne4! would have given White a considerable
advantage, as mentioned in numerous sources.

17.Bxf6 gxf6
 17...Qxf6? runs into 18.Ne4 Qxd4 (18...Qe7 loses to 19.Qc3!) 19.Qxd4 Bxd4 20.Nd6†+– winning an exchange.

18.Qe4 Qe7 19.Qg4

White is clearly better.

B32) 10...Be7

By refraining from exchanges, Black avoids the possibility of an unpleasant check on b5.

11.Rd1 0-0
If Black switches to the other plan, he runs into a familiar problem:
11...cxd4 12.Nxd4 Bxg2 13.Qb5†!
Once again, this intermediate check allows White to seize the initiative.
13...Qd7 14.Qxa5!N
14.Kxg2 Qxb5 15.Ncxb5 0-0 16.Bf4 a6 allowed Black to escape with equality in Ilincic – Brkic, Teslic 2006, but
the text move keeps him under real pressure.
14...Bd5 15.Nxd5 Nxd5
After 15...exd5 16.Bf4 0-0 17.Qb5! Black has no activity to compensate for the isolated pawn.
16.e4 Bb4
16...Nf6 17.Bf4 also gives White a significant plus.
17.Qb5 Qxb5 18.Nxb5 a6 19.exd5 axb5 20.Bf4
Black is under pressure and it will be hard for him to avoid the loss of a pawn.

12.e4 Qb6
This is definitely Black’s best.
12...cxd4?! 13.Nxd4 Qb6 has been played in a few more games, but it is significantly inferior. 14.Qe2 is a good
answer, and now 14...e5? made things even worse in Govchiyan – Sulava, Nice 2004. For some reason, White avoided
the obvious and strong:
15.Nf5N 15...Bc5 16.Bg5 Ne8 17.Rab1! With a decisive advantage.

13.Be3 Rfd8
So far nobody has played the risky 13...Qxb2N, and indeed after 14.d5 c4 (14...Rfd8? loses to 15.Rab1 Qa3 16.Bc1!)
15.Qd4 Bb4 16.Bd2 White is clearly better.

14.Ne5 cxd4 15.Bxd4 Qc7?!

An unfortunate square for the queen. The lesser evil was 15...Qb4N, although after 16.Qe3 Nc4 17.Nxc4 Qxc4
18.Bf3! White maintains the better chances.

16.Rac1 Bc5 17.Nd5!

The clever point of this move is not so much the simple tactical justification of winning back the piece, but rather
about the evaluation of the position two moves later.

17...exd5 18.Rxc5 Nxe4 19.Rcc1

Despite the extra pawn, Black’s position is quite unstable, and in the game he went down quickly.

19...Qe7 20.Ng4!? b6 21.Ne3 Qe6? 22.b4 Nc4 23.Bxe4

Black suffered a fatal loss of material in Eljanov – Goloshchapov, Dubai 2014.

C) 6...Nd7
 With this concrete approach, Black forces White to take on c4, and intends to attack the queen and create active play
in the centre.

7.Qxc4 Nb6 8.Qb5!

I consider this idea of Tkachiev to be White’s only real chance for an opening advantage. The idea is to provoke ...a6
in order to destabilize the knight on b6, which may prove useful for White in some endgame positions. Black has three
main moves: C1) 8...Bb4†, C2) 8...Bd7 and C3) 8...a6.

8...Qd5 9.Nc3 leaves Black with nothing better than 9...Bb4, transposing to variation C1 below.

C1) 8...Bb4† 9.Nc3 Qd5 10.Qd3 e5

This concrete approach is the idea behind bringing the queen to d5. If instead 10...Qc4 11.Qxc4 Nxc4 12.0-0² White
enjoys a pleasant endgame.
11.0-0
11.e4 Qc4 is fine for Black.

11...Bxc3 12.Nxe5!
This is the only way to fight for the advantage.

After 12.bxc3 e4 13.Qe3 f5 Black has a comfortable position with full control over the light squares.

12...Qxd4 13.Nxc6!
In GM 1 I gave 13.Bxc6† bxc6 14.Qxc3 Qxc3 15.bxc3 as my main recommendation, believing that White had a risk-
free edge. However, some time afterwards I noticed that 15...c5!N should enable Black to hold without too many
problems. (Instead 15...Na4 16.c4 Be6 17.Be3 gave White a pleasant edge in Roiz – Gofshtein, Israel 2007.)

I also considered the text move in the notes in GM 1, and have updated the analysis here to take into account a recent
game.

13...Qxd3 14.exd3 Bf6

White retains a clear advantage after 14...Bd7 15.bxc3 Bxc6 16.Re1† Kd8 (or 16...Kd7 17.Bh3† Kd8 18.Be3 Nd5
19.Bd4±) 17.Bxc6 bxc6 18.Ba3±.
15.Re1† Kf8
In the event of 15...Be6N 16.Na5 0-0 17.Bxb7 Rad8 18.Be4 Black is a pawn down for no compensation.

16.Ne5
Previously I recommended this as a novelty, and it has since been tested in one game.

16...g5
16...c6 was the move I analysed in GM 1, as it seemed like the most obvious try to develop Black’s queenside.
However, after 17.a4 White keeps the initiative everywhere, for instance: 17...Bxe5 (or 17...g5 18.a5 Nd5 19.a6 Kg7
20.axb7 Bxb7 21.Ng4 with advantage for White) 18.Rxe5 f6 19.Ra5 Be6 20.Be3 Kf7 21.b4 and Black remains under
pressure.

In the following game Black tried to organize his pieces in a different way, but he still failed to equalize.

17.a4 a5 18.f4 h6 19.Be3 gxf4 20.gxf4 Ra6

20...Be7N looks better, although after 21.Rac1 Bd6 22.Bxb6 cxb6 23.d4² White has a pleasant, risk-free edge.

We have been following the game Perez Ponsa – Tristan, Resistance/Saenz Pena 2013. Here White could have obtained
a serious advantage by means of:
21.Bc5†N 21...Kg8 22.Kh1!±
Preparing to use the open g-file. Black is under pressure across the board.

C2) 8...Bd7

Black logically breaks the pin and chases the queen away, but at the same time he blocks the pressure against the d4-
pawn and allows White to arrange his pieces comfortably.

9.Qb3 Na5
This is the principled follow-up, although the modest 9...Bd6 seems like the best way to minimize Black’s
disadvantage. 10.0-0 0-0 11.Nc3 a5 occurred in Zueger – Ekstroem, Switzerland 2007, and now the simple 12.Qc2N
12...a4 13.e4 e5 14.dxe5 Nxe5 15.Nxe5 Bxe5 16.Be3 would have given White the better game.
10.Qd3 c5 11.dxc5 Bxc5 12.Qc3!
This triple attack poses serious problems.

12...Rc8
This tactical defence does not quite work, but the alternative 12...Nd5 13.Qxg7 Qf6 14.Qxf6 Nxf6 15.Ne5 just
leaves Black a pawn down for no compensation.

13.Qxg7 Bf8
This position first occurred in Kramnik – Naiditsch, Dortmund 2006, when, unbelievably, White did not capture the
rook.

14.Qxh8!
Instead Vladimir settled for 14.Qg5 Qxg5 15.Bxg5 Bg7, when Black was perfectly okay.

14...Rxc1† 15.Kd2
No doubt the position looks a bit scary, but the white queen can always come back to d4 to block the discovered
check.
15...Rc5 16.Nc3 Nbc4† 17.Ke1
White was winning in Khenkin – Martinsen, Dresden 2006.

C3) 8...a6 9.Qd3

This is the main line, where White hopes to benefit from having provoked Black’s last move. Now C31) 9...Nb4 is a
fresh idea that has been tested a few times since GM 1 was published. The most popular move, however, is still C32)
9...e5.

C31) 9...Nb4 10.Qd2!

This is the best square for the queen. 10.Qd1 can be met by the interesting reply: 10...e5!? (10...c5 11.0-0 cxd4 12.Nxd4
e5 13.a3 exd4 14.axb4 Bxb4 was also decent for Black in Houriez – Anikaev, Figueres 2011) 11.a3N (11.Na3?! exd4
12.Qxd4 Qxd4 13.Nxd4 occurred in Batsiashvili – Poulopoulos, Kavala 2013, and now the accurate 13...Be7N 14.0-0
0-0 leaves Black with no problems in the arising endgame) 11...e4 With complex play.

10...c5
I only found one game in the database from the above position, which was contested by two computer engines. I
considered a couple of other candidate moves:

10...e5?! 11.a3 e4 12.axb4 exf3 13.Bxf3 is clearly better for White.

10...Be7 11.a3 Nc6 12.0-0 0-0 13.Nc3² gives White a comfortable edge.

11.dxc5 Bxc5
Exchanging queens only helps White to develop: 11...Qxd2† 12.Bxd2 Bxc5 (After 12...Nc2†? 13.Kd1 Nxa1
14.cxb6± White will soon pick up the knight in the corner.) 13.0-0 0-0 14.Rc1 Bd6 15.Nc3² White maintains solid
pressure in the endgame – just compare the Catalan bishop to its undeveloped counterpart on c8.
12.0-0 0-0 13.Nc3 Qxd2
Avoiding the queen trade with 13...Qc7 does not solve Black’s problems. 14.a3 N4d5 15.Nxd5 Nxd5 16.b4 Bb6
17.Qb2! White keeps a nice pull.

14.Bxd2 Be7 15.Rac1 Rd8 16.Rfd1

Normally it would be enough to stop here and say that White has the more pleasant game, as all his pieces are in play,
while Black has yet to solve the typical problem of his light-squared bishop. However, it is worth showing a few more
moves of the computer game, as it featured a remarkable idea.

16...f6 17.b3!? Kf7 18.a3 N4d5

19.Nb1!!
 Suddenly it becomes clear that Black’s knights are poorly placed.

19...Nd7 20.e4 N5b6 21.Be3

White was clearly better in Hannibal – Deep Junior, Internet 2012.

C32) 9...e5 10.Nxe5

I once played 10.Be3 and scored a good victory after 10...exd4 11.Nxd4 Nxd4 12.Qxd4 Qxd4 13.Bxd4 Bb4† 14.Nc3 0-
0 15.0-0-0 in Avrukh – Berg, Santa Cruz de la Palma 2005. This game nicely illustrates the usefulness of provoking the
...a6 move, as the knight on b6 has become vulnerable, and Black is unable to stabilize his queenside with ...c6.
Unfortunately, as I noted in GM 1, Black can improve with 10...Nb4!, when both 11.Qe4 Qd5 and 11.Qd1 exd4
12.Nxd4 c5 should be fine for him.

10...Nb4
This has been played in all games so far. 10...Nxd4N 11.Be3! c5 gives White more than one route to an advantage;
even the simplistic 12.Bxd4!? (12.Nd2 is more ambitious) 12...Qxd4 13.Qxd4 cxd4 14.Nd2² gives White a slightly
better endgame with virtually no risk.

11.Qc3 Qxd4 12.Qxd4

12.Qxc7 is less convincing: 12...Be7 (The ambitious 12...Be6!? can also be considered) 13.Nf3 Qc4 14.Qxc4 Nxc4
15.Nd4 Bf6 16.a3 Nxa3! 17.Nxa3 Bxd4 18.0-0 0-0 Black has held this position in a couple of correspondence games.

12...Nc2† 13.Kd1 Nxd4 14.Be3

I have always felt that this was a pleasant position for White, who enjoys a slight pull without much risk.
14...Nf5
14...c5 occurred in one game, Brandstetter – Neubauer, Graz 2012. Strategically, this consolidation of the knight in
the centre looks risky, as several light squares have now been weakened. In principle, White would like to exchange on
d4 at an appropriate moment, obtaining the excellent d3-square for his e5-knight, but there is no hurry for the time
being. I propose 15.Nd3!?N in order to put the c5-pawn under observation and prevent Black from moving his knight
away from d4 – especially to f5. 15...Nc4 16.Bxd4 cxd4 17.Nd2

17...Nd6 (In the event of 17...Nxd2 18.Kxd2 it will be hard for Black to cope with the activation of a rook along the c-
file, for instance: 18...Bd6 19.Rhc1 Ke7 20.Rc4±) 18.Rc1² The arising endgame is quite unpleasant for Black.

15.Bxb6 cxb6
White’s superior pawn structure gives him a strategic advantage, but Black’s bishop pair should not be
underestimated.

16.Nc3
In GM 1 I recommended 16.Nd2, but have since changed my mind about White’s optimal set-up.

16...Bc5 17.e3 0-0 18.Ke2 Re8 19.Nd3 Rb8

19...Bd6?! significantly eases White’s task. 20.Nd5 b5 21.Nb6 Rb8 22.Nxc8 Rexc8 23.Bh3 g6 24.Bxf5 gxf5 25.Rac1
It will be hard for Black to hold the endgame with such a damaged pawn structure.

At this point I would like to suggest a surprising new idea.

20.Nxc5!N
20.Rhc1 led to an eventual success for White in Kramnik – Naiditsch, Dortmund 2007, but 20...Bf8N 21.Nd5 b5
would have led to a tense position.
20...bxc5 21.Rhd1 Be6 22.Nd5
White has received some clear benefits in return for improving the enemy pawn structure. Black no longer has the
bishop pair, and White has reached a completely safe position where he keeps long-term pressure. Here is a nice
illustrative line.

22...b6
Otherwise Nb6 will leave Black in a bind.

23.Nc7 Bc4† 24.Ke1 Re7 25.Nd5 Bxd5

25...Re6?! is worse: 26.Bh3 Nd4 27.Rxd4! cxd4 28.Bxe6 fxe6 29.Ne7† Kf8 30.Nc6 Rc8 31.Nxd4±

26.Rxd5 g6 27.Rad1²
Black is doomed to a passive defence.

D) 6...Bb4† 7.Bd2

From here Black sometimes tries D1) 7...Bd6, but the main line is D2) 7...Nd5.

D1) 7...Bd6

This is not a trendy move, but it is played from time to time by strong grandmasters. There have been only minor
developments since I analysed it in GM 1.

8.Na3
Surprisingly, this remains in the shadow of more popular moves such as 8.Ne5 and 8.0-0. It is highly desirable to
capture the c4-pawn with the knight, as this will significantly complicate Black’s idea of freeing his position with ...e5.
We will focus on D11) 8...Ne4 and D12) 8...Bxa3, after having a look at Black’s other possibilities:

8...Bd7 9.Nxc4 Ne4 10.Qb3!N (10.e3 was played in Khotenashvili – Tregubov, Konya 2012, but this unnecessarily
allows Black to simplify with 10...Ne5!N) 10...Nxd2 11.Ncxd2 0-0 12.0-0 e5 13.d5 Ne7 (13...Nd4? is hardly a good
idea in view of 14.Nxd4 exd4 15.Nf3 Qf6 16.Rfd1± when the d4-pawn falls) 14.Nc4 White has a pleasant edge.
8...a6?! 9.Ne5!
9.Nxc4 b5 10.Nxd6† cxd6 11.Qa3 Bb7÷ is reasonable for Black.
9...Bd7
9...Bxe5 10.Bxc6† bxc6 11.dxe5 is clearly better for White.
10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.0-0 c5 12.Qxc4 cxd4 13.Bxa8!?
This is the maximalist try.
13.Qxd4N 13...e5 14.Qd3 is a safe alternative, when White keeps a solid positional edge due to Black’s weak
pawn structure.
13...Qxa8 14.Qxd4 e5 15.Qh4 h6 16.Nc4 Be7
All this happened in Mamrukov – Salvatore, corr. 2013. Here I believe White should play:

17.Bg5!N 17....0-0 18.Bxf6 Bxf6 19.Qh5 Qe4 20.Ne3 Bc6 21.Qf3 Qxf3 22.exf3 Bxf3 23.Rac1
Black does not have enough for the exchange.

8...Rb8 9.Qxc4!
Obviously the main idea behind Black’s last move was to meet 9.Nxc4 with 9...b5, after which 10.Nxd6† cxd6
11.Qc2 Bb7 left Black in good shape in Michalik – Zakhartsov, Aix-les-Bains 2011.
9...0-0
10.0-0N
This natural move is much stronger than 10.Rd1?! Bd7 11.Qc2 Qe7= as occurred in Beliavsky – Farago, Hungary
1998.
10...Bd7
10...e5 is no problem due to 11.dxe5 Nxe5 12.Nxe5 Bxe5 13.Qc2!, intending Nc4, when White gets nice play.
11.Rac1 Qe7 12.Qd3
Preparing Nc4.
12...e5 13.dxe5 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Bxe5 15.Nc4 Bb5 16.Qb3 Bxc4 17.Qxc4
White’s bishop pair should enable him to exert long-term pressure.

D11) 8...Ne4 9.Nxc4

9...Nxd2
I neglected to mention 9...0-0 in GM 1. White has two decent replies:
a) 10.e3 seems fine, and after 10...Bd7 11.Qb3 the position resembles the main line below, and an exact transposition
might occur after 11...Nxd2 12.Nfxd2. The engine suggests 11...b5 instead, but 12.Nce5 looks better for White.

b) 10.Be3!? is a more ambitious alternative. After 10...Bb4† 11.Kf1 White has lost the opportunity to castle, but Black’s
pieces are shaky in the centre and White preserves an obvious space advantage. After 11...Nf6 12.Rd1 Be7 13.a3 a5
14.Bc1 Ra6 15.Qc2 White was better in Shimanov – Frolyanov, Irkutsk 2010.

10.Nfxd2
10.Ncxd2 0-0 11.0-0 enables Black to carry out his main idea of 11...e5, with complicated play.

10...Bd7
10...0-0 gives White the useful option of 11.Bxc6! (11.e3 is obviously fine, and may transpose to the main line)
11...bxc6 12.0-0 with a favourable change in the pawn structure. After the natural sequence 12...c5 13.dxc5 Bxc5
14.Rfd1 Bd7 15.Qc2 Black is under unpleasant pressure, and there is every chance for the white knights to outwork the
enemy bishops.

11.e3!?
I found no reason to change the recommendation from GM 1.

11...0-0 12.Qb3 b5
This looks like the most challenging continuation.

12...Rb8 enables White to comfortably meet the ...e5 advance with: 13.Rc1 e5N (The only game here saw the rather
passive 13...Qe7 14.0-0 Rfc8. In Iskusnyh – Vasilov, Samara 2011, the strong 15.f4!N would have secured a solid
positional advantage.) 14.d5 Ne7 15.Ne4! White has a clear plus.

13.Nxd6
13.Ne5 could be checked, but I am not sure how to assess the situation after 13...Nxe5 14.dxe5 Bxe5 15.Bxa8 Qxa8
16.0-0 Bc6.

13...cxd6 14.d5!
Otherwise White has nothing special.

14...Ne5 15.0-0 Rc8 16.Rfd1

Previously I assessed this as slightly better for White, and I found one practical example.
16...Qb6 17.Bh3! exd5 18.Bxd7 Nxd7 19.Qxd5 Rc5 20.Qd4 Qc6 21.Qe4!
White obtained a favourable situation playing against the isolated pawn in Murin – Pavlicek, email 2012.

D12) 8...Bxa3 9.Qxa3

After 9.bxa3 Qd5! 10.0-0 b5 11.Qd1 (or 11.Qc2 Bb7) 11...Bb7 Black was perfectly okay in Loetscher – Doettling, Pula
2003.

9...Ne4
This is the main continuation, but Black has two other moves:

So far nobody has grabbed the second pawn with 9...Nxd4 10.Nxd4 Qxd4, which is understandable, as 11.Rd1© gives
White fantastic compensation. His bishops are strong and the black monarch will most probably have to remain in the
centre for a long time.

9...Qd6 10.Rc1 (10.Qc3!? has also been played successfully, but I would prefer to regain the pawn without any
adventures.) 10...Qxa3 11.bxa3 Bd7 12.Rxc4 0-0-0 13.0-0 Nd5 14.Rfc1 f6 15.R4c2² After a logical sequence, White
retained an edge thanks to his bishop pair in Ingersol – Mueller, email 2011.

10.Be3 Qd6 11.Rc1 Qxa3

11...0-0N might soon transpose after 12.Ne5, but Black’s last move gives White the useful extra option of 12.Qa4,
avoiding any damage to the queenside structure.

12.bxa3 Nd6 13.Ne5 Bd7

13...Nxe5?! 14.dxe5 Nf5 15.Bd2 reaches a difficult position for Black.

14.Nxc4
After 14.0-0 f6 15.Nxc4 Nf5 16.Rfd1 Nxe3 17.Nxe3 0-0-0 18.Nc4 Rhe8 19.e3² White retained definite pressure
thanks to the powerful Catalan bishop in Tkachiev – Schenk, Gonfreville 2006. Nevertheless, I like the text move even
more.

14...Nf5 15.Bf4 Rc8

After 15...Nfxd4? 16.Bxc7 0-0 17.Nd6± Black is most probably going to lose his b7-pawn.

Another game continued 15...0-0-0 16.e3 Nfe7 17.g4! h5 18.h3 hxg4 19.hxg4² and White retained the usual pressure
thanks to his bishop pair in Godat – Muttoni, email 2009.

16.e3 f6
In GM 1 I mentioned 16...Nfe7 17.g4, when White preserved the dark-squared bishop and maintained a pleasant
advantage in Gustafsson – Khenkin, Altenkirchen 2005. The text move was played in a more recent game, but it
changes nothing.

17.g4 Nfe7
 This occurred in Cernousek – Haba, Czech Republic 2011, and now the right idea for White would have been:

18.h4N 18...0-0 19.Rg1!?

White has an enduring edge, the main factor being the bishop pair once again.

D2) 7...Nd5

8.Qb5!?
In GM 1 I mentioned this as an interesting alternative to 8.Bxb4 Ndxb4, which I gave as my main recommendation.
Since then the theory has developed a lot in this line, and Black currently seems to be close to equality. I will not go
into further details about this, other than mentioning that 9.Nc3 Bd7 10.0-0 a5 11.Qd1 0-0 12.e3 a4 is one important
line that I looked at.

Black can either return the c4-pawn with D21) 8...0-0, or play for a material advantage with the critical D22) 8...Bxd2†.

D21) 8...0-0 9.Qxc4 Nb6

This is obviously one of the ideas behind Black’s 7th move.

10.Qd3 e5
This pawn push is highly thematic for this variation. Black can also do it after trading bishops: 10...Bxd2† 11.Nbxd2
e5 Now White should simply play 12.Nxe5, transposing to the main line. (Instead after 12.dxe5?! Qxd3 13.exd3 Rd8
Black was doing well in Zubritskiy – Duzhakov, St Petersburg 2014.)

11.Nxe5!
I overlooked this move in GM 1, but it is the only way to fight for the advantage.

11...Bxd2† 12.Nxd2 Nxd4

A natural alternative is:
12...Nb4 13.Qb1!
This is the best retreat square, avoiding the queen trade.
13...Qxd4 14.Ndf3
White is not about to refute his opponent’s set-up, but his superior piece coordination and extra central pawn
should offer him a persistent edge.
14...Qd6
Another good example is: 14...Qd8 15.a3 N4d5 16.0-0 Qe7 17.Qc2 a5 18.Rad1 a4 19.e4 Nf6 20.Rfe1 Be6 De
Boer – So. Polgar, Breda 1996. Black is pretty solid, but I like White’s position after 21.Rc1N 21...c6 22.Nd4².
In this type of structure it is always easier for White to advance his pawn majority.

15.0-0 Re8
15...f6 16.Rd1 Qe7 17.a3 Na6 (White is also better after 17...fxe5 18.axb4 Bf5 19.Qc1²) 18.Nd3 c5 19.b4! c4
20.Nb2 Be6 21.Nd4 Bf7 22.Qc2 White kept an advantage due to the passivity of the black knights in W. Schiller
– Markus, email 2008.
16.Rd1 Qe7 17.a3 N4d5 18.e4 Nf6 19.Qc2 c6 20.Re1 Qc7 21.Qc3 a5 22.h3²
This was Deep Junior – Hiarcs, Internet 2012. Once again, White’s advantage is not huge, but his pieces are much
better coordinated, his e4-pawn is restricting Black’s minor pieces, and he has the more mobile pawn majority.
13.e3 Nf5
Black has also tried: 13...Ne6 14.Qc3!N (White should keep the queens on the board, since after 14.Qxd8 Rxd8 the
arising endgame was perfectly playable for Black in Chabanon – Lautier, Aix-les-Bains 2003, and he soon got the
upper hand after further unconvincing play from White) 14...Qe7 (14...Nd5 15.Qb3 c6 16.0-0 is also slightly better for
White) 15.0-0 c6 16.Ndf3 Nd5 17.Qc2 White has a typical slight plus, for similar reasons to those mentioned in the
lines above.

14.Qc3
Once again, White should avoid the queen exchange. The less challenging 14.Qxd8 Rxd8 15.Ke2 was seen in Mads –
Harutyunian, Yerevan 2014, and now 15...Re8N 16.Nd3 c6 would have left Black with no serious problems.

14...Qe7 15.0-0 c6 16.e4 Nd6 17.a4! Be6 18.Nd3 f6

We have been following Tosi – Andersen, corr. 2011. Here I favour:
19.Rfe1!N 19...Rad8 20.Nf3
White has a definite edge, as his pieces are better coordinated and the e4-pawn limits the movement of Black’s minor
pieces.

D22) 8...Bxd2† 9.Nbxd2

9...c3
Black does best to accept the challenge, otherwise he may find himself in a worse position without many active
prospects.
9...Nb6 10.Ne5!N
But not 10.Nxc4 Qd5 11.Na3 a6 12.Qd3 e5! 13.dxe5 Qxd3 14.exd3 Bf5 and Black was fine in Ulibin –
Arnaudov, Marrakesh 2010.
10...Qxd4
I also considered 10...0-0 11.Nxc6 (11.Bxc6!? bxc6 12.Qc5 is an interesting alternative) 11...bxc6 12.Qc5 Qd6
13.0-0 Rb8 14.Rfd1² which looks promising for White.
11.Nxc6
11.e3 Qd6 12.Nxc6 Bd7 13.Nxc4 Nxc4 14.Qxc4 Bxc6 15.Rd1 Bxg2 16.Rxd6 cxd6 17.Rg1 Bd5 18.Qa4† Bc6
19.Qb4 0-0 is not so clear.
11...bxc6 12.Bxc6† Bd7 13.0-0-0 Bxc6 14.Qxc6† Qd7 15.Qxd7† Nxd7 16.Nxc4²
White has an enduring advantage thanks to his better pawn structure.

10.bxc3 Nxc3 11.Qd3 Nd5 12.0-0 0-0

After a relatively forced sequence of moves, we have reached an important position for the 8.Qb5!? line. Black has a
healthy extra pawn, while White has a significant space advantage, along with open b- and c-files, and the clear
superiority of the Catalan bishop over its counterpart on c8. These factors promise White long-term compensation,
although accurate play will be required to prevent Black from untangling his queenside.

13.Rfc1
It is best to start with this move. It is useful to remain flexible, especially with regard to the e-pawn, which may
advance one or two squares.

13...h6
I will take this as the main line, as it was used by Frolyanov to draw with Ponomariov. Three other moves have been
tried:

13...Qe7 gives White more than one decent option. 14.Rab1N (There is also 14.e4 Nb6 15.Qe3, transposing to the game
Duzhakov – Eryshkanova, St Petersburg 2011, which continued 15...Rd8 16.Nb3 with good compensation.) 14...Rd8
15.a3 f6 16.e3 Qf7 17.Rc5© With continuing pressure for the pawn.

13...Nb6 14.Rab1 Qe7

Here I found an improvement.
15.e3!?N
After the more aggressive 15.h4 h6 16.e4 Rd8 17.Qe3 Bd7 18.g4 Be8 Black’s defensive resources proved more
than adequate in Gundavaa – Zhao, Khanty-Mansiysk (ol) 2010.
15...f6
15...Rd8 runs into the tactical trick 16.Rxc6! bxc6 17.Ne5 Qf8 18.Nxc6 Re8 19.Ne4© with great compensation.
16.Ne1 Nd5
16...Bd7 is met by 17.Ne4 followed by the unpleasant Nc5.
17.Qc4 Rd8 18.Nd3©
White has regrouped his pieces in the ideal way.

13...Nce7
This is a slightly more challenging move, intending ...b6 followed by ...Bb7. I believe White should react by
switching to a different plan.
14.e4!N
14.Rab1 has been played a couple of times, but it allows 14...b6N 15.e4 Nf6 followed by ...Bb7, which is
something I would like to prevent.
14...Nb4
14...Nf6 is met by 15.Qc3 c6 16.Ne5© when Black is still a long way from solving the problem of the passive
bishop on c8.
15.Qc3 Nbc6 16.Rd1 b6 17.Nc4! Bb7 18.Ne3©
Black has succeeded in developing his light-squared bishop, but White has arranged his pieces harmoniously and is
ready to seize the initiative in the centre by means of d4-d5.

14.e3!?N
As you may have noticed from some of the previous lines, I would tend to favour this set-up unless there is a
compelling reason not to.

14.Rab1 was used successfully by Tkachiev in the stem game, which I quoted in GM 1. However, Black subsequently
improved with 14...Nde7!, and after 15.Nb3 a5 16.Qc2 Ra7 17.e3 b6 18.a3 Bb7 19.Nbd2 Qa8 he easily solved his
problems in Ponomariov – Frolyanov, Olginka 2011.

14...Nde7
14...Qe7 15.Rab1 Rd8 16.a3 Nb6 17.Qc3 Nd5 18.Qb2© does not really alter the evaluation.

15.Qc3! Nd5
An important detail is that 15...b6 is impossible due to 16.Ne5!.

16.Qb2©

White retains solid compensation.

Conclusion
After 5...Nc6 6.Qa4 we covered four main branches. 6...Bd6 is playable, but the ambitious 7.Ne5!? damages Black’s
queenside structure, leading to an advantage for White with correct play. The three other branches are rather more
popular.
6...Bd7 7.Qxc4 Na5 8.Qd3 c5 9.0-0 is out of fashion for Black, but it should not be forgotten. The most popular
continuation is 9...Bc6 10.Nc3, when White’s lead in development gives him a pleasant initiative. An important
recurring theme is seen in positions where Black exchanges on d4 and g2, after which a timely queen check on b5 may
seriously disrupt Black’s development.
6...Nd7 7.Qxc4 Nb6 is another important line, when 8.Qb5! is an important refinement. Most of the
recommendations are similar to those in GM 1, with just a few refinements here and there.
Finally, 6...Bb4† 7.Bd2 gives Black a choice. 7...Bd6 is quite playable, when the position of the bishop on d2 instead
of c1 gives White good reason to take a different path from variation A. 8.Na3 is my preference, and my analysis
shows that it leads to an edge, regardless of whether Black tries to eliminate the bishop with 8...Ne4 or gives up his
own bishop with 8...Bxa3. The other main option is 7...Nd5, after which 8.Qb5!? has gone from being my number-two
suggestion in GM 1 to my top recommendation here. The critical line involves a pawn sacrifice, after which my
analysis shows that White can obtain a lasting initiative.
A) 5...c5
B) 5...Bxd2† 6.Nbxd2 0-0 7.Bg2
B1) 7...Qe7
B2) 7...b6
B3) 7...c6
C) 5...Bd6 6.Nc3!
C1) 6...c6
C2) 6...0-0

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 Bb4† 5.Bd2

 From this position the most common continuation has been 5...Be7, hoping to show that the bishop is misplaced on
d2. In this chapter we will consider the three main alternatives: A) 5...c5, B) 5...Bxd2† and C) 5...Bd6.

5...Qe7 looks odd with the pawn already committed to d5, and after 6.Bg2 Black will probably end up with an inferior
version of some other Catalan or Bogo variation.

5...a5 6.Bg2 transposes exactly to variation C of Chapter 19, although Black can also change directions with 6...dxc4, in
which case we transpose to 4...dxc4 5.Bg2 Bb4† 6.Bd2 a5, which was covered in variation D of Chapter 4.

A) 5...c5

This is pretty rare, but it seems quite playable.

6.Bxb4
The alternative 6.cxd5 exd5 7.Bg2 0-0 8.0-0 Nc6 does not give Black as many problems.

6...cxb4 7.Nbd2 0-0 8.Bg2

This position might also arise from the Bogo-Indian with 4...c5. In that variation, however, Black normally plays the
more flexible ...d6. I believe the set-up with the pawn on d5 to be slightly inferior, and White should get easy play with
mostly natural moves.
8...Nc6 9.0-0
Many games have been played from this position. I will present a few instructive examples to show White’s ideas.

9...b6
9...Qe7 10.Qc2 Rd8 11.Rad1!? (11.Rfd1 looks like a good alternative) 11...Bd7 12.e4 dxc4 13.Nxc4 Rac8 14.Qe2 b5
15.Nce5²

White had a nice positional edge in Sumets – Haroutjunian, Neustadt an der Weinstrasse 2012.

10.Rc1 Bb7 11.e3 a5

11...Qd6 12.Qa4 Rfc8 13.Rc2 occurred in Ivanchuk – Gulko, New York 1988. White followed up with 14.Rfc1 and,
step by step, Black came under serious pressure.
12.cxd5 Nxd5 13.Nc4 Rc8 14.e4 Nf6 15.Qd3 Ba6 16.Rfd1 Ne7 17.Nfe5²
White had a pleasant edge, with a better pawn structure and excellent central control in Maiwald – Hertneck,
Germany 2013.

B) 5...Bxd2† 6.Nbxd2 0-0 7.Bg2

Black’s 5th move seems like a concession, as he swaps off his more active bishop while facilitating White’s
development. Nevertheless, several top GMs have played this way, so I will analyse it in a bit more detail than in GM 1.
Black’s three main moves are B1) 7...Qe7, B2) 7...b6 and B3) 7...c6.

There is also:
7...Nbd7 8.0-0 c5
8...c6 leads straight to variation B3.
9.cxd5 Nxd5 10.e4
This is more ambitious than 10.dxc5 Nxc5 11.Rc1 b6, when Black had a decent game in Cheparinov – Naiditsch,
Bol 2013.
10...Ne7
10...N5f6 11.e5 Nd5 occurred in Astrakhantsev – Shutemov, Dagomys 2004, and now 12.Re1N would have been
most accurate. Play may continue 12...b6 13.Ne4 Bb7 14.Nd6 Rb8 (14...Bc6? 15.Rc1±) 15.Nd2 cxd4 16.N2c4²
and White remains on top.
Now in Ibrahim – Malkawi, Beirut 2007, White could have claimed an edge with:

11.dxc5!N 11...Nxc5 12.Qc2

The c5-knight is more of a target than a strength, for instance:
12...b6 13.Rfd1 Bb7 14.b4 Na6 15.Qb3
White’s space advantage definitely counts.

B1) 7...Qe7 8.0-0 b6

Another possible set-up is:

8...Rd8 9.Qc2 Nc6
This looks a bit too passive, and White should get easy play by carrying out the thematic e2-e4 advance.
I also paid attention to 9...c5 10.cxd5 cxd4 11.Nxd4 Nxd5, as in Balog – Kosic, Budapest 2009, and now the
simple 12.Rfd1N 12...Bd7 13.Nc4 Be8 14.e4 Nb6 15.Na5 Na6 16.a3² retains a pleasant edge for White.
10.Rad1 Bd7
Another good example continued 10...a5 11.Rfe1 Bd7 12.e4 Nb4 13.Qb1 dxc4 14.Nxc4 Bb5 15.Ne3² and White
was beautifully centralized in Postny – Radulski, Barcelona 2008.
11.a3 a5 12.e4
It is generally not a good sign for Black that White is managing to play e2-e4 so easily.
12...dxe4 13.Nxe4 Nxe4 14.Qxe4 Rab8 15.Rfe1 Qf6
In Jovanic – Zelcic, Otocac 2010, White could have increased his advantage with:
16.d5!N 16...exd5 17.cxd5 Na7 18.Ne5 Be8 19.Qc2±
The difference in piece coordination is obvious.

9.Rc1 Bb7
With the bishop committed to b7, this is a good moment for White to remove the tension in the centre.

10.cxd5 exd5
10...Bxd5?! 11.Re1 threatens e2-e4, and after 11...Ne4 12.Nxe4 Bxe4 13.Qa4!± Black will find it hard to develop the
knight from b8.

11.Qa4 c5
After 11...a5?! 12.Rfe1 c6 13.e4! Nxe4 14.Nxe4 dxe4 15.Ne5 White obtained a dangerous initiative thanks to his
development advantage in Salov – I. Sokolov, Amsterdam 1996.

12.Ne5 Rc8 13.Rfe1 Nc6 14.Nxc6 Bxc6 15.Qa3 Bb7

We have been following the game Philippeit – Pukropski, email 2010. This would have been a good moment to
define the central structure with:

16.dxc5!N 16...Rxc5
16...bxc5? runs into 17.Nb3 Nd7 18.Bh3± when Black loses at least a pawn.

17.Rc3 Qf8 18.Rec1 Rxc3 19.Rxc3 Qxa3 20.Rxa3²

Black has to defend an inferior endgame.

B2) 7...b6
8.cxd5
Good timing! If White delays this exchange, then Black will have the additional option of recapturing with the bishop
on d5.

8...exd5
8...Nxd5 does not equalize, as the following recent game convincingly demonstrates: 9.0-0 Bb7 10.Rc1 Nd7 11.e4
N5f6 12.Qe2 Rc8 13.Rfd1 Qe7 14.e5 Nd5 15.Ne4 h6 16.a3 a5 17.h4² White got a significant advantage in Cernousek
– Bokros, Slovakia 2014.

9.0-0 Bb7 10.Rc1

This is the most natural. I would also like to mention 10.b4 c6 11.Qc2N 11...Nbd7 12.a4, when I believe White can
claim a modest edge.

10...Nbd7
10...Re8 demands a new approach from White: 11.Ne5!?N (11.Re1 was played in Postny – Huzman, Beer Sheva
[rapid] 2013, but there is no need to commit the rook so soon) 11...c5 (11...Nbd7?! would allow 12.Nc6) 12.e3
12...Nbd7 (12...cxd4 13.exd4 Nbd7 14.Re1 maintains the pressure) 13.Nxd7 Nxd7 14.dxc5 bxc5 15.Qa4² White has
good prospects against the hanging pawns.

11.Ne5!
I like this aggressive idea, which pretty much forces Black to trade knights.

11...Nxe5
11...c5?! 12.Nxd7 Nxd7 13.dxc5 bxc5 14.Nb3! c4 15.Nd4 gave White an obvious positional advantage in Mareco –
C.E. Toth, Osasco 2012.

12.dxe5 Ng4 13.Nf3 Qe7

Another interesting path is: 13...c5 14.b4! (This is much more challenging than 14.h3 Nh6 15.g4 Qe7, when the
position was unclear in Ragger – Salgado Lopez, Warsaw 2013.) 14...c4 15.Qd4 h5 16.Nh4! Qe7 17.f4 Qxb4 18.Nf5
White obtained a dangerous initiative for the pawn in the computer game Hannibal – Vitruvius, Internet 2013.

14.Qd4 f5 15.b4!
15.exf6N 15...Nxf6 16.b4 looks marginally more comfortable for White, but the text move is more ambitious.

15...c6 16.h3 Nh6 17.Ne1! Nf7 18.f4 Nd8

This position was reached in Novoa – Rudolf, Gibraltar 2013. Here the most logical continuation would have been:

19.Nc2N 19...Ne6 20.Qd3

White retains a positional advantage and is ready for Nd4 next. The following line is critical:

20...a5 21.b5 Nc5 22.Qd2

22...cxb5 23.Bxd5† Bxd5 24.Qxd5† Kh8 25.Ne3
White is better thanks to his strong passed pawn and more threatening pawn majority.

B3) 7...c6 8.Qc2 Nbd7 9.0-0

This position has occurred in hundreds of games, but once again we will focus on a few key examples that best
illustrate the main ideas.

9...b6
This seems best. 9...Re8 allows 10.e4 with an easy advantage for White. A good example is: 10...dxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4
12.Qxe4 Nf6 13.Qc2 Qc7
14.c5! Playing against Black’s light-squared bishop is a basic idea in this type of position so, once the opportunity for
c4-c5 pops up, I prefer not to wait and give Black a chance to play ...c5 himself. White’s advantage is obvious, and it is
not surprising that he has won most of the games from this position.

10.e4 Bb7
Black can also exchange some pieces:
10...dxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 12.Qxe4 Bb7 13.Rfd1
Once again, White will make it as hard as possible for Black to carry out ...c5.
13...Qc7
This is the most popular move. Notice that Black is keeping the knight on d7 to control the c5-square.
14.Ne5
This is the natural follow-up, but I found another attractive possibility: 14.c5!?N 14...bxc5 15.Ng5! Nf6 (After
15...g6 16.dxc5 Nxc5 17.Qb4! Na6 18.Qh4 h5 19.Ne4 Rfd8 20.Rac1± White has a dangerous initiative and the
weak dark squares are starting to tell) 16.Qe5 Rfc8 17.Qxc7 Rxc7 18.dxc5 Nd5 19.Ne4 a5 20.Rd4² White keeps
the better chances in the arising endgame.
14...Nxe5 15.dxe5 Rfd8 16.b4 Rab8
This position occurred in Sheremeta – V. Tomashevsky, Pechora 2011. Here White could have obtained a clear
advantage with:
17.c5!N 17...bxc5
The immediate 17...Rd5 is met by 18.Qf4 Rxe5 19.Rac when Black is severely tied up.
18.bxc5 Rd5
This is surely what White was concerned about, but he has a powerful reply.
19.Qc4! Rxd1†
In the event of 19...Rxe5 20.Rab1 Rf8 21.Rd6 Ba8 22.Qc3± Black’s bishop is completely out of the game.
20.Rxd1 Qxe5 21.Qa4! g5
After 21...Qxc5 22.Rb1! Black cannot avoid material losses.
22.Qxa7 Bc8 23.a4±
Black is in serious trouble.

11.e5 Ne8 12.cxd5

 This time White should refrain from 12.c5, when 12...bxc5 13.dxc5 a5 14.Rfe1 Nc7 was unclear in Meier –
Margvelashvili, Lubbock 2013.

12...cxd5 13.Rfe1
A thematic idea to vacate the f1-square for the bishop.

13...a5
13...Ba6 was played in Tutisani – Savenkov, Maribor 2012, and now the natural 14.Qa4N 14...Bd3 15.Re3 Bg6
16.Rc1± would have given White a substantial plus.

14.Bf1 Rc8 15.Qb3 Nc7 16.Rac1 Na6

17.Nb1!
The knight is heading for c3 – a great square to control the queenside.

17...Qe7 18.Nc3 Nab8 19.Nb5

White was clearly better in Stohl – Kovacevic, Rabat 2003.

C) 5...Bd6
 This retreat has become popular in recent years. It has been employed by several strong grandmasters and Black has
statistically been doing well.

6.Nc3!
After the more popular 6.Bg2 c6 7.0-0 Nbd7 there are a lot of games showing that Black seems to be okay.

I believe that the surprising knight move constitutes White’s best chance for an opening advantage, the point being to
prepare a quick e2-e4. We will consider C1) 6...c6 and C2) 6...0-0.

C1) 6...c6 7.Qc2 Nbd7

It is also worth mentioning 7...Bb4 8.Bg2 dxc4 9.e4 b5, as in Rombaldoni – C. Horvath, Bratto 2008. Here 10.a4!N
would have been strong, for example 10...a5 11.axb5 Bxc3 12.bxc3 cxb5 13.0-0 and White has a great deal of
compensation with Black’s dark-squared bishop missing.
8.e4 dxe4 9.Nxe4 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 0-0
Black has tried a couple of other moves:

10...c5 11.Bg2 0-0 12.Bc3 Qe7 13.0-0 cxd4 14.Nxd4 Nf6 15.Qc2± White emerged from the opening with a lot of
pressure in Ax. Smith – Pedersen, Skanderborg 2010.

10...Nf6 11.Qc2 b6 12.Bg2 Bb7 13.c5! Bc7 14.0-0 Nd5 15.Rfe1 h6 16.Ne5 0-0 17.Rad1± The thematic plan of c4-c5
against the bishop on b7 yielded a clear advantage in Llanes Hurtado – Meier, Belfort 2012.

11.Bd3 Nf6

12.Qh4!
White should not be satisfied with the positional 12.Qe2, and can instead play for an attack.
12...b5
Another game continued 12...Re8 13.0-0-0 b5 14.c5 Be7 Diermair – Matt, Linz 2011.

Here White could have easily seized the initiative with 15.Ne5N 15...Bb7 16.Kb1, for instance 16...a5 17.Bg5 h6
18.Bxf6 Bxf6 19.Qe4± with a strong attack.

13.Bg5 h5
Black also fails to solve his problems with: 13...h6N 14.Bxf6 (after 14.Bxh6 gxh6 15.Qxh6 bxc4 White has a
perpetual, but I don’t see anything more) 14...Qxf6 15.Qe4 Qf5

16.c5! (16.Qe3 is less clear after 16...Bb4† 17.Ke2 Qh3 18.cxb5 e5! with some complications, as White’s king is a bit
exposed) 16...Bc7 17.Ne5 White is clearly better.
14.c5!
White has some other options, but it is difficult to argue with Ragger’s execution of the attack.

14...Bxc5 15.0-0-0 Be7 16.g4! Bb7

Other moves also fail to solve Black’s problems, as the reader may verify if he wishes.

17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.g5

White had a winning attack in Ragger – Braun, Solingen 2010.

C2) 6...0-0 7.Bg5!

7.Qc2 c5! shows the advantage of Black’s move order, so White should alter his plan from the previous variation.
7...c6 8.Bg2 Nbd7 9.e4
Definitely the most challenging idea.

9...dxe4 10.Nxe4 Bb4† 11.Nc3!

11.Bd2 Bxd2† 12.Nexd2 is well met by 12...e5! 13.dxe5 Re8 14.0-0 Nxe5 15.Nxe5 Rxe5 when Black was perfectly
okay in Ghaem Maghami – Moiseenko, Jakarta 2013.

11...Qa5
Black has also tried 11...c5, without much success. 12.0-0 cxd4 13.Qxd4 Nc5 (13...h6 14.Bf4 Nb6 15.Nb5ƒ does not
help Black) 14.Qe3 Qd3

This was Kunin – Klek, Wunsiedel 2013, and now White could have secured a big advantage with 15.Rfd1!N
15...Qxe3 16.Bxe3±.
12.Bd2
12.0-0!? also deserves attention, since 12...Bxc3 13.bxc3 Qxc3 14.Qe2© leaves White with great compensation.

12...e5 13.a3 Bxc3 14.Bxc3 Qa6

Black’s position was rather suspicious in Meier – Adams, Baden-Baden 2013. White’s strongest continuation would
have been:

15.0-0!N 15...e4
15...Qxc4 16.dxe5 Ne4 17.Bd4±

16.Nd2 Nb6 17.b3 Re8 18.Re1±

With a serious advantage.

Conclusion

5...c5 is not really a serious equalizing attempt, and White gets a good game after exchanging on b4, followed by
developing normally and preparing e2-e4.

5...Bxd2† 6.Nbxd2 0-0 7.Bg2 is also rather pleasant for White. Black’s position is reasonably solid, but we saw that
White could maintain pressure in all three of the lines examined.

5...Bd6 is the trickiest of the three main lines examined, since the stereotypical development of the bishop on g2 does
not give White anything special. Fortunately for us, 6.Nc3! has a lot more bite. Depending on how Black continues,
White will play either Qc2 or Bg5 next, intending to force through a quick e2-e4.
A) 7...dxc4?!
B) 7...Nbd7
C) 7...c6 8.Qc2 b6 9.Bf4
C1) 9...Ba6 10.cxd5 cxd5 11.Rc1! Nbd7 12.Nc3
C11) 12...Nh5
C12) 12...b5
C2) 9...Bb7 10.Rd1
C21) 10...Nh5
C22) 10...Na6
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 Bb4† 5.Bd2 Be7 6.Bg2 0-0
If Black plays something else, then the game will just continue along similar lines as the variations below, with a
probable transposition after both sides castle.

7.0-0

This is the main tabiya for the entire 4...Bb4† variation. Black’s three most popular moves are A) 7...dxc4?!, B)
7...Nbd7 and C) 7...c6.

Black’s most popular system involves ...c6 and ...Nbd7, and it will be discussed in detail in the next chapter. Needless to
say, variations B and C of this chapter will cover the various possibilities involving one move but not the other.

7...b6 8.cxd5 gives Black a choice:

a) 8...Nxd5 is unusual but worth a quick look: 9.e4 Nf6 10.Nc3 Bb7 11.Re1 Nbd7 Now I like 12.Qc2N, intending to
meet 12...c5 with 13.d5! exd5 14.exd5 when the d5-pawn is untouchable due to some simple tactics: 14...Nxd5?
15.Nxd5 Bxd5 16.Rxe7! Qxe7 17.Ng5 and White wins.

b) 8...exd5 9.Nc3 Bb7 10.Bf4 Na6 (10...Nbd7 11.Qc2 would transpose to variation B12 of Chapter 15, although via
this move order 11.Rc1! looks more accurate, in order to keep the option of developing the queen to a more active
square such as a4 or b3.)
 This position has occurred in hundreds of games (mostly via a Queen’s Indian move order), and it would take a few
pages to analyse it in detail. I do not feel it is necessary to do so, as it has fallen out of fashion from Black’s
perspective, and the chances of reaching it via a Catalan are minimal. I will just mention that a logical continuation is
11.Rc1 c5 12.Ne5! Nc7 13.dxc5 bxc5 14.Qa4 Ne6 15.Rfd1, when White has strong pressure against the hanging pawns
and has achieved a heavy plus score.

7...Nc6
This can be mentioned as a playable sideline for Black, but my feeling is that White will always be better with the
knight on this square. Here are a few illustrative lines.
8.Qc2 Ne4 9.Rd1
I find this to be the most flexible set-up for White.
9...f5
9...a5 10.Nc3 f5 11.a3 Bf6 12.e3 Kh8 13.Rac1 Ne7 14.Ne2 c6 15.Nf4 Bd7 16.Be1 Ng6 17.Nd3 gave White an
excellent game in Sjugirov – Fressinet, Moscow 2013.
10.Nc3 Bf6 11.Be1 a6 12.cxd5!?
There was nothing wrong with maintaining the pressure with the simple 12.Rac1N².
12...exd5 13.Ne5
The point behind White’s trade in the centre.
13...Ne7 14.Rac1 c6 15.Qb3 Kh8
Now in El Debs – Korobov, Moscow 2011, White should have continued:
16.Nxe4!N 16...fxe4 17.Bb4
Followed by f2-f3, with a clear advantage.

A) 7...dxc4?! 8.Qc2

There is little sense in this line for Black, as he simply has an inferior version of the 4...Be7 variation with the white
bishop on d2 instead of c1, which is a useful extra tempo.

8...a6
8...Bd7 9.Qxc4 Bc6 10.Nc3 Ne4 11.Rfd1 also gives White easy play, for instance: 11...Nxc3 12.bxc3 (It is also
worth considering 12.Qxc3 Nd7 13.Rac1 Nf6 14.Qa5!² with the better game) 12...Qd5 13.Qb3 Qxb3 14.axb3 Bd5
15.c4 Be4 16.Ne5 Bxg2 17.Kxg2 White reached a clearly favourable endgame in Miroshnichenko – Peschel, Plovdiv
2010.

9.Qxc4
9.a4 is also playable, but in that case it is not so clear if the bishop will be useful on d2. The text move is a more
principled way to utilize the extra tempo.

9...b5 10.Qc2 Bb7

If you skip ahead to Chapter 16, you will see that I am no longer advocating this position for White against the
4...Be7 variation with ...dxc4. However, with White to move instead of Black, it is a totally different story.

11.Rc1
This is the most natural way to take advantage of the free tempo.

11...Bd6
11...Nc6 12.e3 reaches a known position with the free move Rf1-c1 for White. I don’t see much point in analysing
this in detail here, but if you have a copy of GM 1 on your shelf, you can find the position without the free tempo
analysed from page 208.

12.Bg5 Nbd7 13.Bxf6!?

There are other ways to fight for the advantage, but this direct approach still seems fine.

13...Nxf6
The natural 13...Qxf6 runs into 14.Ng5! (14.Ne5 Nxe5! 15.Bxb7 Ra7÷ is not so clear) 14...Qxg5 15.Bxb7 Rab8
16.Bc6 Nf6 17.Nd2± when White has prevented the ...c5-advance and is in full control.

14.Nbd2 Rc8 15.Nb3 Be4 16.Qc3

Here too, White has succeeded in stopping ...c5, and his chances are better. There is certainly no need to memorize
any more than this, and the following examples are just included for instructive purposes.
16...Bd5
16...Nd5 17.Qa5 Bb4?! (17...Nb6N is better, but still does not bring much relief after 18.Nfd2 Bxg2 19.Kxg2²)
18.Qxa6 c6 19.Ne5 Bxg2 20.Kxg2 Ne7 21.e4± White was simply a pawn up in Hoffmann – Berger, Germany 2009.

Another game continued: 16...Qe7 17.Nc5 (17.Ne5!? is a worthy alternative) 17...Bxc5 18.Qxc5 Qxc5 19.Rxc5 Nd7
20.Rc3 c5 21.dxc5 Rxc5 22.Rxc5 Nxc5 23.Rc1 Even after carrying out ...c5, Black experiences definite problems.
23...Na4 24.b3 Nb6 25.Ne5 Bxg2 26.Kxg2

Despite the simplification, the endgame was unpleasant for Black in Larsen – Cu. Hansen, Copenhagen 1985. It is
worth mentioning that the further simplifying 26...Rc8N 27.Rxc8† Nxc8 28.Kf3 f6 29.Nc6 Kf7 30.Ke4 reaches a
knight endgame that will be difficult, perhaps even impossible, for Black to hold.

17.Nfd2 Bxg2 18.Kxg2 Nd5

 18...b4? is a clear positional mistake that renders Black’s queenside highly vulnerable. 19.Qc6 e5 20.dxe5 Bxe5
21.Nc4± White had a strategically winning position in Khalifman – Tissir, Shenyang 2000.

18...c6N looks like the lesser evil, although White is obviously better after 19.Nf3², as pointed out in GM 1.

19.Qc6 Nb4 20.Qf3 f5 21.a3 Nd5 22.Nc5 Qe7 23.Rc2 Ra8 24.Rac1 Rf6 25.e3±
White’s positional advantage was beyond any doubt in Quaresma – Salvador Marques, corr. 2011.

B) 7...Nbd7 8.Qc2

The great majority of games from this position have continued with 8...c6, transposing to the next chapter. In this
section I will mention a few other possibilities.

8...Ne4
Black is intending to play in the spirit of the Stonewall, having avoided the thematic plan of b2-b3 and Ba3.

8...b6 can be dealt with quickly. (There is a reason why most players prefer to preface this move with ...c6.) 9.cxd5!
Nxd5 (9...exd5 10.Bf4 c5 11.Nc3 Bb7 transposes to variation B12 of Chapter 15, with one extra move having been
played – see page 234.) The text move is an independent alternative, but it is not much of an equalizing attempt. The
simplest answer is 10.e4N 10...Nb4 11.Bxb4 Bxb4 12.a3 Be7 13.Nc3 Bb7 14.Rad1 and White has a pleasant edge
thanks to his central superiority.

9.Bf4 c6
I was surprised to find well over a hundred games from this position, including Game 9 of the Moscow 1963 World
Championship match, in which Botvinnik held with Black against Petrosian. Black’s idea is to establish a Stonewall
set-up with ...f5 and quite possibly ...g5.
10.Nfd2
This looks like the best way to fight for an advantage.

Initially I was optimistic about the natural 10.Nc3, but I noticed the strong reply: 10...g5! (10...f5 gave White time to
arrange his pieces optimally with 11.Rad1 g5 12.Bc1 Kh8 13.Ne1² in Levin – Karpman, Lvov 1988) 11.Bc1 f5 12.b3
Bf6 13.Bb2 Qe7 (Botvinnik put his bishop on g7 instead, but the text move is more accurate) 14.e3 Qg7 Black was
solid enough in Rogers – Papaioannou, Agios Nikolaos 1995.

10...Nxd2
Worse is:
10...f5?! 11.Nxe4! fxe4 12.Nd2
White has the simple plan of f2-f3, breaking up Black’s pawn chain and opening a path towards the weak e6-
pawn.
12...Bf6
12...Bg5 13.Bxg5 Qxg5 14.Qc3 Nf6 15.f3 exf3 16.Nxf3 Qh5 17.Ne5!± gave White a clear positional advantage
in Tukmakov – Boric, Pula 2000.
13.Bd6
13.Rad1!? has also been played, and looks like an interesting alternative.
13...Rf7 14.e3 e5
It is understandable that Black wanted to take action before f2-f3 was played, but White is much better suited to
deal with the opening of the centre.
15.Qb3 exd4 16.cxd5 cxd5 17.Qxd5 Nb6 18.Qc5±
Black’s pawn on e4 was doomed in Kaidanov – Benjamin, Long Beach 1993.

11.Nxd2
If White is allowed to carry out the e2-e4 advance he will have an obvious advantage, which explains Black’s next
couple of moves.

11...g5 12.Be3 f5 13.f3 Rf7

 Black should not rush with 13...f4?!, when 14.Bf2 Nf6 15.e4 gave White a clear advantage in the old game Fine –
Steiner, Washington (2) 1944.

13...Bd6 14.Bf2 Nf6 15.e4

White should not delay this move, otherwise ...g4 might prevent it.
15...fxe4
15...dxe4 16.fxe4 Ng4 leads to a different type of structure, but after 17.Nf3! f4 18.e5 Bc7 19.gxf4 Rxf4 20.Bg3
White retains an obvious advantage.
16.fxe4 Ng4 17.Nf3
In GM 1 I suggested something else, but actually the game continuation is fine for the next few moves.
17...dxc4 18.Bh3!
An excellent move by Tukmakov.

18...Nxf2 19.Rxf2 b5 20.e5!N

It is important to insert this move. In Tukmakov – Cifuentes Parada, Wijk aan Zee 1992, White played 20.Raf1?!
instead, when Black missed the opportunity to complicate the game with 20...e5!N.
20...Be7 21.Raf1
White has a dangerous initiative on the kingside.

14.Bf2 Nf8 15.e4 Ng6

This position occurred in Lautier – Bareev, Dortmund 1995. Now White has an interesting idea at his disposal.
16.exf5N 16...exf5 17.cxd5 cxd5 18.f4!? gxf4 19.Qb3
White has changed the character of the position to good effect, as the following short lines demonstrate.

19...Rf6
Black cannot defend the pawn with 19...Be6, as after 20.Rae1 Qd7 21.Rxe6! Qxe6 22.Bxd5 Qf6 23.Qxb7± White
emerges with an extra pawn.

20.Bxd5† Kg7 21.Bg2! Rb6 22.Qc2

22.Qf3 Rxb2 23.Nc4 Rb4 24.Qc3© is also interesting, as the vulnerability of Black’s rook gives White good
compensation.

22...Bd7 23.Nc4 Rc8 24.b3

 White’s chances seem preferable, as Black’s king is slightly exposed.

C) 7...c6

This is Black’s first choice by a long way. Let me remind you that ...Nbd7 on the next move or two will transpose to
the next chapter, so here we will only deal with lines where Black delays the knight’s development for longer.

8.Qc2
This is the most accurate move order. 8.Bf4 allows Black the additional option of 8...dxc4, when 9.Ne5 b5 10.Nxc6
Nxc6 11.Bxc6 Bd7 12.Bxa8 Qxa8 led to a fascinating game in Anand – Topalov, Sofia (7) 2010.

8...b6 9.Bf4
Now Black’s two main possibilities are C1) 9...Ba6 and C2) 9...Bb7.

C1) 9...Ba6 10.cxd5!?

Previously I recommended 10.b3, but I later realized that this would be an interesting moment to make the central
exchange.

10...cxd5
10...Nxd5 11.Rd1 Nd7 12.Nc3 Rc8 13.Ne5 transposes to variation C131 of the next chapter on page 209.
11.Rc1!
This is the key to White’s idea. The point is that it will not be easy for Black to develop his queenside.

11...Nbd7
This has been by far the most popular continuation, but I considered some other possibilities.

11...Bd6 12.Ne5! This strong move has been played in a computer game. (After 12.Nc3 Nc6 13.Qa4 Bb7 Black had no
problems in Sengupta – Vaibhav, New Delhi 2010) 12...Nh5 13.Be3 Nf6 (I also considered the logical 13...Nd7 14.f4
Nhf6 15.Nc3 Rc8 16.Qb3 Qe7 17.Nb5 Bxb5 18.Qxb5 Nb8 19.a4² and White retains definite pressure)

14.Nc3 Bxe5 15.dxe5 Ng4 16.Bd4 Nc6 17.Qa4 Bb7 18.f4 Nxd4 19.Qxd4 Nh6 20.Bh3! White’s positional advantage
was clear in Komodo – Spike, Internet 2012.
11...Nh5 12.Be3 (After 12.Bc7 Qc8 13.e4 dxe4 14.Qxe4 Bb7 15.Qe3 Qe8 White fails to achieve anything significant)
12...Nf6 13.Ne5 Nfd7 14.Nd3 Nf6 15.Bf4 Nh5 Again we have a computer game, Naum – Gull, Internet 2014, but this
time I have an improvement:

16.Bc7!N 16...Qc8 17.Nc3! The bishop is untouchable, and after 17...Nd7 18.Nf4 Nhf6 19.Qa4 Bc4 20.b3 Qxc7
21.bxc4± White is clearly better.

11...Qd7 12.Ne5 Qb7

13.Qd1N
This is my idea to improve on 13.Qc7 Qxc7 14.Rxc7 Bd6 15.Rc2 Nh5, when Black equalized without much
difficulty in Aronian – Topalov, Nice (rapid) 2009.
13...Nh5
After 13...Bd6 White can develop his play with 14.Nc3 Nbd7 15.a3 followed by b2-b4.
14.Bd2 Nf6 15.Nc3 Nbd7 16.b4!
Once Black’s queen has landed on b7, advancing the pawn to b5 is White’s main idea.

16...Bxb4
This is more or less forced, as 16...b5 17.a4 is too dangerous for Black.
17.Nxd5 Nxd5 18.Bxb4²
White will enjoy long-term pressure, thanks to his bishop pair.

12.Nc3
At this point Black’s two main tries are C11) 12...Nh5 and C12) 12...b5.

12...Qc8 has done okay for Black in a few games, but I found a promising new idea in 13.Qb3!N, trying to exploit the
unsafe position of Black’s queen. 13...Qb7 14.e4! Bc4 (The e4-pawn appears to be untouchable: 14...dxe4? 15.Ng5 are
both bad for Black) 15.Qd1 dxe4 16.Nxe4 White has a dangerous initiative.

12...Bb4 13.Qa4!
This interesting pawn sacrifice seems more promising than 13.Bf1, when 13...Rc8 14.Qa4 Bxc3 15.bxc3 Bc4
16.Nd2 Ne4 was unclear in Wang Yue – Lysyj, Zürich 2010.
13...Bxc3 14.Rxc3 Bxe2 15.Rac1 Bc4
Originally I found White’s 13th move as a novelty, but then it was played in Laxman – Vidit, Kottayam 2014.
The next move of my prior analysis improves on that game.
16.Nd2N 16...b5 17.Qd1 Nb6 18.R3c2!
18.b3 b4 19.R3c2 Bd3 20.Rc7 Ne8 is less convincing.
18...b4 19.Qe1 Bd3 20.Rc6
White’s compensation is beyond any doubts.

C11) 12...Nh5

13.Qa4! Nxf4
13...Bb7 runs into the thematic 14.Bc7!. When this idea works, Black will usually be in trouble, as his knight will be
left misplaced on h5. 14...Qe8 15.Qb3 Nb8 This position was reached in Kuzubov – Sivuk, Alushta 2011, and now the
simple 16.a4N 16...Nc6 17.a5 would have won a pawn.
14.Qxa6 Nxg2 15.Kxg2 Qc8 16.Qxc8 Rfxc8 17.Nb5!
The arising endgame is rather unpleasant for Black.

17...g5
After 17...Rxc1 18.Rxc1 a6 19.Rc7 axb5 20.Rxd7 Kf8 21.a3 White went on to convert his advantage in Tkachiev –
Pavlidis, Skopje 2014.

The text move seems to be Black’s best resource, and it was played in Avrukh – Mitkov, Chicago 2014.

18.Nc7!N
In the game I chose 18.Ne1, when my opponent missed a chance to relieve the pressure: 18...Rxc1N 19.Rxc1 a6
20.Nc7 (20.Rc7 axb5 21.Rxd7 Bf6 is not dangerous for Black) 20...Ra7 21.Ne8 I was pinning my hopes on this
unexpected resource, but the engine immediately points out the amazing 21...Nc5!!, when Black traps the knight and
simplifies into a drawish endgame.

18...Rab8 19.a4²
White keeps a risk-free edge.

C12) 12...b5 13.a4!

 It goes without saying that this is the only way for White to fight for the advantage. In fact, no other moves have even
been tested.

13...Qb6
13...bxa4? 14.Qxa4 Bb7 15.Nb5 already puts Black in big trouble. 15...Nb6 16.Qb3 Ne8 was played in Beckhuis –
Sprenger, Germany 2006, and now 17.Nc7 Nxc7 18.Rxc7+– would have won material.
13...b4 14.Nb5 is also difficult for Black. A good example is: 14...Qb6 15.Qc6 Rac8

16.Bc7! Qxc6 17.Rxc6 Bb7 18.Rcc1 Ra8 19.Bd6 Bxd6 20.Nxd6 Ba6 21.e3± White had serious pressure thanks to his
domination over the c-file in Sychevsky – Bortnyk, Mukachevo 2013.

14.axb5 Bxb5 15.Nxb5 Qxb5 16.Bf1

With the two bishops and more active rooks, White can exert lasting pressure without any risk. The following lines
show the most accurate ways of achieving this.

16...a5
16...Qb7 can be met by 17.Qc6N 17...Qxc6 18.Rxc6 a5 19.Rc7 with the prospect of long-term torture for Black.
16...Qb6 17.Bc7 Qb7 18.e3 a6 19.Qc6 Qxc6 20.Rxc6 Nb8 occurred in Lim – Myo, Nay Pyi Taw 2013, and now the
obvious 21.Rb6N 21...Rc8 22.Rb7 would have left White with a clear plus.

17.e3 Qb7
17...Qb4 is well met by 18.Ne1! followed by Nd3.

18.Qc6 Qxc6 19.Rxc6 Ra7

This is apparently the best way to defend Black’s inferior position.

The stem game continued: 19...a4 20.Bb5 a3 21.bxa3 Bxa3 (21...Rxa3N 22.Rxa3 Bxa3 23.Ra6 Bb4 24.g4!±) 22.Rc7
Surprisingly, trading the last of the queenside pawns has not solved Black’s problems, as White’s bishop pair and more
active pieces give him ongoing pressure. 22...Nb6 23.Rb7 Nc4 24.Bxc4 dxc4 25.Rc7 White won a pawn and eventually
the game in Gelfand – Wang Hao, London 2012.
20.Bb5!N
20.Rc7 Rfa8 did not achieve much in Vivante-Sowter – Lautenbach, corr. 2012.

20...Rfa8 21.Ba4
Black is doomed to passive defence.

C2) 9...Bb7 10.Rd1

I consider this White’s most flexible move. Now Black’s main continuation is 10...Nbd7, which transposes to
variation C2 of the next chapter on page 214. In the rest of this chapter we will focus on C21) 10...Nh5 and C22)
10...Na6.
10...a5 is sometimes a useful move in similar positions, but I do not see much point in it here. 11.Nc3 Na6 (11...dxc4
12.Ne5 Nd5 13.Nxc4 Nxf4 14.gxf4 gives Black an inferior version of a thematic type of position, as he has wasted a
tempo and weakened his queenside with ...a5.) 12.a3! Simply restricting the knight. 12...dxc4 13.Ne5 Nd5 14.Nxc4
Nxf4 15.gxf4 Qc7 16.e3 g6 17.Rac1 Rfd8 18.Ne5 White was clearly better in Verduyn – Roeder, Vlissingen 2010.

C21) 10...Nh5 11.Bc1

This is a better square than d2; the bishop avoids blocking the d1-rook, and may be developed on b2 later.

11...Nf6
11...f5 is always an option when the knight has moved from f6, but it fails to equalize here. 12.Ne5 Bd6 (12...Nd7N
allows 13.cxd5 cxd5 14.Nc6² when White eliminates one of the bishops) 13.Nd2 Nf6

14.Nd3N (In the only game White prematurely released the central tension with 14.cxd5, and after 14...cxd5 15.Ndf3
Ne4 he failed to achieve anything in Pashikian – Jojua, Istanbul 2007) 14...Nbd7 15.b4!² White has a promising
position and is already getting active on the queenside.

Black has also tried:

11...Nd7 12.Nc3
In GM 1 I recommended 12.Ne5, but it is hard to say if White has much of an advantage after the cool-headed
12...Nhf6. Still, after 13.cxd5 cxd5 14.Nc6 Bxc6 15.Qxc6 Rc8 16.Qb5 I had the two bishops and eventually won
in Avrukh – Nisipeanu, Germany 2014, so you may wish to keep this as a playable alternative.
12...f5
12...Nhf6 transposes to 11...Nf6 12.Nc3 Nbd7, as covered in the main line below.
13.Bd2!?
This is an unusual way of developing against the Stonewall, and it looks especially odd after retreating the bishop
to c1 a few moves ago. The surprising point is that Black is short of useful developing moves. This position has
occurred only once with Black to move, in a computer game.
13...Qe8
13...Nhf6? is not possible in view of 14.Ng5!.
13...Rc8 is met by 14.Qa4! a6 15.Qb3 when the b6-pawn may become a target in some lines.
14.Rac1 dxc4
This ruins Black’s pawn structure and gives White a lot of compensation.
15.Ne5! Nxe5 16.dxe5 Qc8 17.Bf3 g6 18.Bh6 Rf7 19.Rd2 b5 20.Rcd1
White had plenty of play for the pawn in Houdini 4 – Stockfish, Internet 2013.

12.Nc3 Nbd7
12...Na6 should be met by: 13.b3 (13.a3 dxc4 was not so clear in Gupta – Tiviakov, Bhubaneswar 2009) 13...c5
(White should not worry about 13...Nb4, as 14.Qb1 c5 15.dxc5 bxc5 16.a3 Nc6 17.cxd5 Nxd5 18.Bb2² leaves him
with a pleasant edge) 14.dxc5 bxc5 This was Bereolos – Scekic, Schaumburg 2006, and now my preference would be
15.a3N 15...Qc8 16.e3² with a pleasant edge.

13.b3 Rc8
This has been by far the most common move, but it may not be best.

13...c5 gives White a favourable version of a Queen’s Indian position: 14.cxd5 Nxd5 15.Nxd5 exd5 16.Bb2 Rc8
17.dxc5! Nxc5 (After 17...bxc5 18.Ne1 Nb6 19.a4 White’s pressure is obvious) 18.Bh3 Ne6 19.Qd2² White had a
pleasant game playing against the IQP in Postny – Nigalidze, Yerevan 2014.

13...Ba6!? is quite interesting, despite the loss of a tempo with the bishop. 14.Qd3!?N Usually I am not a big fan of this
move, but in this position it looks sensible, as it prevents Black’s main idea of ...b5. (In a recent game Black easily
solved his opening problems after 14.Nd2 b5! 15.e4 dxc4 16.bxc4 bxc4 17.Na4 c5 with a double-edged game, Chandra
– Boros, Saint Louis 2014) 14...c5 15.Bb2 We have reached a typically tense Catalan middlegame position. A brief
illustrative line is:

15...Rc8 16.Nb5! Bxb5 17.cxb5 White’s bishop pair should give him a long-term edge. An important point is that
17...c4 18.bxc4 Rxc4 19.Rdc1 is clearly in White’s favour.
14.e4
This should lead to a comfortable advantage.

14...c5
14...dxe4 15.Nxe4 Nxe4 16.Qxe4 As usually happens in this type of Catalan position, if Black is unable to carry out
...c6-c5 right away, he will probably fall into trouble. 16...Nf6 (Another good example continued: 16...h6 17.Bf4 Ba8
18.Qe2 Qe8 19.Rd3 White is now ready to meet ...c5 with d4-d5. 19...Nf6 20.Rad1 Rd8 21.Ne5 White was clearly
better in Paehtz – Ushenina, Konya 2012.) 17.Qe2 Qc7 18.Bf4 Bd6 19.Ne5 Nd7

20.c5! A thematic idea, blocking Black’s light-squared bishop. 20...Bxe5 21.Bxe5 Nxe5 22.dxe5 bxc5 23.Rd6 Rcd8
24.Rad1 White had a clear advantage in Mamrukov – Tanda, email 2011.
15.exd5!
In 2007 I played 15.dxc5 and eventually won a nice game against Neverov, but Black’s play can be improved.
Nowadays I consider the text move a more convincing route to an advantage.

15...exd5 16.Bb2
White’s active pieces give him excellent chances, despite the symmetrical pawn structure. It is worth following the
game for a few more moves.

16...Qc7
16...dxc4 runs into 17.d5! cxb3 18.axb3± and White threatens both d5-d6 and Rxa7.

17.cxd5 Nxd5 18.Nxd5 Bxd5 19.dxc5

Black is forced to give up his light-squared bishop.

19...Bxf3 20.Bxf3
20...Qxc5N
Black would have to do something to improve on 20...Bxc5? 21.Qf5! Nb8 22.Be4 when he could already have
resigned in De Boer – Tindall, Hoogeveen 1997.

20...Nxc5N 21.Bd5 gives White a clear positional plus.

21.Qe2 Bf6 22.Rac1 Rce8 23.Rxc5 Rxe2 24.Bxe2 Nxc5 25.Bxf6 gxf6 26.b4±
Black will have to defend an extremely unpleasant endgame.

C22) 10...Na6

This has been played quite often by Tiviakov. I think White should take a moment to restrict the knight.
11.a3
One of the points behind Black’s last move can been seen after 11.Nc3 dxc4 12.Ne5 Nd5 13.Nxc4 Nxf4 14.gxf4
Nb4! when the knight comes into play with tempo. 15.Qd2 Nd5 Black had a decent position in V. Mikhalevski –
Tiviakov, Hoogeveen 2000.

11...Rc8
Black is not ready to open the centre, as was clearly demonstrated in the following game: 11...c5 12.Nc3 cxd4?!
13.Nxd4 Qc8 (The natural 13...Rc8 is met strongly by 14.cxd5 Nxd5 15.Ndb5!±)

14.cxd5 Nxd5 15.Nxd5 Bxd5 16.Bxd5 (16.Nc6N± was equally strong) 16...Qxc2 17.Nxc2 exd5 Now in V.
Mikhalevski – Vasovski, Ohrid 2001, White could have simply grabbed the pawn with 18.Rxd5N 18...Bf6 19.Rb1.

Black has no compensation.

11...Qc8 12.Nbd2 c5 13.Rac1 h6
Pawn exchanges do not solve Black’s problems: 13...dxc4N 14.Qxc4 Nd5 15.dxc5 Nxc5 16.b4 Nd7 17.Qb3 Qd8
18.Nd4² White retains a lot of pressure.
This position occurred in Cordts – Graf, Bad Wiessee 2013. Here White could have obtained an advantage against
his 2600-rated opponent as follows:

14.cxd5!N 14...exd5
14...Bxd5 15.e4 Bb7 16.dxc5 Nxc5 17.Qb1 Qe8 18.Ne5 Rc8 19.b4 Na4 20.Ndc4 gives White much the better
game.
14...Nxd5 15.Be5 cxd4 16.Nc4! also clearly favours White.
15.dxc5 bxc5 16.Nb3 Qd8
There is no better way for Black to stop Na5.
17.Qd2! Ne4 18.Qe1
White will follow up with either Ne5 or Na5, and his position looks clearly preferable.
12.Ne5!
This is where I am diverging from GM 1.

12.Nc3 dxc4 13.Ne5 Nd5 14.Nxc4 Nxf4 15.gxf4 Nc7 16.e3 Nd5 transposes to a position mentioned in the next
chapter, which I now prefer to avoid, for reasons explained on page 214 in the note to move 11.

12...dxc4 13.Qxc4!N
An obvious improvement over 13.Nxc4 Nd5 14.Nc3, which transposes to 12.Nc3 above.

13...Nd5 14.Nc3 Nxf4 15.gxf4²

With the queen placed on c4 and the knight active on e5, White has a favourable version of this thematic pawn
structure.
Conclusion

7...dxc4?! is a pointless move that leaves Black a tempo down compared to normal lines.

7...Nbd7 will usually transpose to the next chapter after a subsequent ...c6, but switching to a Stonewall set-up with
...Ne4 and ...f5 is an interesting alternative. White should keep the Nfd2 idea in mind, intending to eliminate the strong
knight and get active in the centre with f2-f3 and e2-e4.

7...c6 8.Qc2 b6 9.Bf4 is the most important branch of the chapter. Now 9...Ba6 looks active, but my new
recommendation of 10.cxd5 cxd5 11.Rc1 is deceptively unpleasant for Black, as White often retains a nagging, risk-
free advantage, even after multiple exchanges. 9...Bb7 is a bit more solid. I still like the white position after 10.Rd1,
especially taking into account the new discoveries I have made since GM 1 was published.
A) 9...Nh5
B) 9...a5 10.Rd1 Nh5 11.Bc1
B1) 11...f5
B2) 11...b5
C) 9...b6 10.Rd1
C1) 10...Ba6 11.Ne5
C11) 11...Qc8
C12) 11...Nxe5
C13) 11...Rc8 12.cxd5!
C131) 12...Nxd5
C132) 12...cxd5 13.Nc6
C1321) 13...Qe8
C1322) 13...Bb5
C1323) 13...Nh5
C2) 10...Bb7 11.Ne5!
C21) 11...Nxe5
C22) 11...Nh5
 C23) 11...b5
C24) 11...Rc8 12.Nc3 Nh5 13.Bc1
C241) 13...f5
C242) 13...Nhf6

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 Bb4† 5.Bd2 Be7 6.Bg2 0-0 7.0-0 c6 8.Qc2 Nbd7

This is Black’s most popular set-up.

9.Bf4
Improving the bishop seems most logical to me. Black has three main ideas: A) 9...Nh5, B) 9...a5 and C) 9...b6.

A) 9...Nh5 10.Bc1 f5

10...Nhf6 transposes to variation B2 of the next chapter, with three extra moves played, after which 11.Nbd2 reminds us
of why the bishop is better on c1 than d2.

11.b3 Bd6
Black has tried numerous other moves, but in most lines White keeps a typical edge, as is the case in most Stonewall
positions with the bishop on e7 rather than d6. I decided not to devote too much space to this section, as I don’t see any
special way for Black to make use of the ...Nh5 move. Moreover, I think the probability of encountering this line is
pretty low since, if Black really wanted to play a Stonewall structure, he could have just played a Dutch in the first
place.

If Black is going to try and make use of the knight on h5, then the most interesting opportunity is 11...g5. White should
simply carry out his main positional plan of trading the dark-squared bishops: 12.Ba3 (In GM 1 I gave 12.e3, but I
subsequently realized that after 12...g4 13.Ne5 Nhf6!, as in Jirka – Kaspi, Israel 2012, White is deprived of the crucial
plan of opening the centre with f2-f3 and e3-e4) 12...g4
 This occurred in Antic – Maksimovic, Vrnjacka Banja 1998, and now the simple 13.Ne1N would have been good for
White. It is important to realize that 13...f4 is no problem, as 14.Nd3 Bxa3 15.Nxa3 Qf6 16.Qc3 keeps everything
under control for White.

12.Ba3 Bxa3 13.Nxa3 Qe7 14.Qb2 Nhf6

Another game continued: 14...b6 15.Nc2 Bb7 16.a4 (16.Nce1 allows 16...dxc4! 17.bxc4 c5 when Black is fine)
16...a5 17.Ne5 Nhf6 18.Nd3 Rae8 19.Ne3!? A slightly surprising square for the knight, but from this spot it restrains
Black’s central pawn breaks. 19...Ne4 20.Rac1 White maintained a slight edge in Evans – Petters, Internet 2011.

15.Nc2 b6 16.Nce1 Ba6

Even after the more accurate 16...Bb7N 17.Nd3 dxc4 (17...c5 18.cxd5 Bxd5 19.Rac1² also favours White) 18.bxc4 c5
19.e3 Rac8 20.Rac1 White’s position remains slightly more pleasant.
17.Rc1 Ne4 18.Nd3 Rac8 19.Nfe5 Ndf6?
This occurred in Nyback – Yusupov, Puhajarve 2011, and here both players overlooked an important resource for
White:

20.c5!N
Putting serious pressure on Black’s queenside.

B) 9...a5

This was played in a bunch of games in the 1990s, but it became more fashionable after Topalov employed it against
Kramnik in the 2006 World Championship. It has been played many times since GM 1 was published.
10.Rd1 Nh5
It may seem strange to make two consecutive moves on opposite flanks, but the logic will soon become clear.
10...b5 has scored amazingly well for Black, but White has a good answer: 11.c5 Nh5 12.Bd6! This implies a pawn
sacrifice, but White gets some significant positional trumps in return. 12...Bxd6 13.cxd6 Nb8 (I also considered
13...Bb7N 14.Nbd2 Qb8 15.e4 Qxd6 16.e5 Qe7 17.Nb3 a4 18.Nc5 Nxc5 19.dxc5 when White’s compensation is
obvious) 14.Nbd2 f5 Here it is easy to improve White’s play from Meier – Postny, Copenhagen 2010.

15.Qc5!N 15...Nf6 16.Ne5 Ne8 (16...Nfd7 17.Qc2 Nf6 18.Nxc6 Qxd6 19.Nxb8 Rxb8 20.Nb3 leaves White with a
small but stable edge.) 17.d7! Bxd7 18.Rac1 White has a lot of compensation.

11.Bc1

From this position B1) 11...f5 has scored well for Black and deserves attention, but the main line is B2) 11...b5.
11...Nhf6 12.Nbd2 allows White to play a quick e2-e4, which is usually an indication that the opening has gone well for
him. 12...b6 (12...b5 is well met by 13.c5!, for instance 13...Qe8 14.e4 Nxe4 15.Nxe4 dxe4 16.Qxe4 Nf6 17.Qc2² and
White got a typical advantage thanks to Black’s long-term problem with the light-squared bishop, Marin – Pogorelov,
Barcelona 1993.) 13.e4 Ba6 Now White should not rush to take action in the centre, but should instead take a moment
to consolidate.

14.b3!N (After the hasty 14.e5 Ne8 15.Bf1 Nc7 16.Bd3 h6 Black was all right in Colon Garcia – Potkin, Barcelona
2013) 14...Rc8 15.e5 Ne8 16.Nf1! With the c4-pawn secure, White can bring his knight to the ideal e3-square. 16...c5
17.dxc5 Nxc5 18.Ne3 Nc7 19.Nd4 Black is under pressure.

B1) 11...f5

It is quite reasonable for Black to switch to a Stonewall structure before taking action on the queenside.
12.Nc3!?
12.b3 Nhf6 was not so special for White in Wempe – L’Ami, Dieren 2013. Since Black has already weakened his
queenside position with ...a5, it makes a lot of sense to bring the white knight to a4 in some positions.

12...Bd6
12...dxc4N 13.e4 promises White a lot of compensation for the pawn.

12...b6N 13.Ne5 Bb7 14.Nxd7 Qxd7 15.Na4! looks unpleasant for Black.

13.Bg5
13.Na4N 13...Nhf6 14.c5 Bc7 15.Bf4!? also deserves consideration.

13...Qe8 14.e3!
The idea is to play Bf4 and, after Black takes, to recapture with the e-pawn, changing the structure in White’s favour.

14...h6
I also considered 14...Rb8N 15.c5 Bc7 16.Bf4 e5 17.dxe5 Nxe5 18.Nxe5 Bxe5 19.Bxe5 Qxe5 20.Na4 when the weak
a5-pawn will give Black headaches.

15.Bf4 Be7
Now in Rahman – Adhiban, Sharjah 2014, I believe White should have played:
16.Bc7!?N 16...Nhf6 17.c5 Bd8 18.Bxd8 Qxd8 19.Na4
Once again, White has clear ideas to seize the initiative on the queenside, thanks to the weakening ...a5 move.

B2) 11...b5

Before setting up the Stonewall, Black first intends to clarify the situation on the queenside.

12.Ne5!
I believe this is White’s only chance to fight for an advantage. In the event of 12.c5 f5 Black has a solid position and
does not have to worry about his queenside like he did in the previous variation.

After 12.cxd5 cxd5 13.e4 dxe4 14.Qxe4 Rb8 White has scored well, but it seems to me that Black is okay. See, for
instance, Radjabov – Topalov, Wijk aan Zee 2007, where the former World Champion improved on Game 10 of his
famous match encounter against Kramnik.

12...Bb7
Black has no time for 12...Nxe5 13.dxe5 bxc4?, as 14.g4 traps the knight.

13.c5
White has also tried 13.Nxd7 Qxd7 14.c5 f5 15.Nd2 Qc7 16.Nf3 Bf6, as in Gelfand – Kamsky, Sochi 2008. At this
point GM Lysyj pointed out that 17.Qc3N would have retained an edge for White, thanks to the positional idea of Qe3
followed by Ne5. Nevertheless, I believe it is more promising for White to keep both pairs of knights.

13...f5
Black has also tried doing without this move by means of 13...g6 14.Bh6 Ng7 in Bromberger – Onischuk, Bavaria
2010. Here the simple 15.Nxd7N 15...Qxd7 16.Nd2 f5 17.a3! would have kept some advantage. The last move is a
useful way to prepare future ideas on the queenside. For instance, White may attack the a5-pawn to provoke ...a4, and
later open things up with b2-b3.

14.Nd2 Nhf6
After 14...Nxe5 15.dxe5² Black’s knight has no good route into the game, and White has a clear plan of strengthening
his position by transferring his knight to d4. Black’s position remains solid but passive.

15.Nd3
This is the proper moment to remove the knight from the centre, as Black was threatening to exchange it and retreat
the other knight to d7.

15...Qe8
Defending against a possible Nf4.

Black’s most recent try was 15...Ne4 16.Nf3 Bf6, Wagner – Banusz, Sibenik 2012. White should be able to claim a
positional edge in any case, but the move I like most is:
17.a3!N This flexible move prevents Black’s idea of ...b4 and ...Ba6 to activate the bishop. 17...Qe7 (17...g5 runs into
the unpleasant 18.Nfe5! followed by f2-f3) 18.Bf4 g5 19.Be5 g4 20.Bxf6 Nexf6 21.Nfe5 White retains a pleasant
edge.

16.Nf3 h6
Now in Miroshnichenko – Macieja, Halkidiki 2008, White should have played:

17.Bf4N 17...g5
17...Ne4 18.Nfe5 Nxe5 19.Bxe5 looks excellent for White, who can confidently make all the necessary preparations
for the e2-e4 advance.

The text move is probably what White was concerned about, but there is a good answer available.
18.Bc7!?
With the following point:

18...Qc8 19.Bd6! Bxd6 20.cxd6 Ne4

21.Nc5 Nxd6 22.Nxe6 Rf6 23.Nc5 Nxc5 24.Qxc5

White has a clear positional advantage. There is even an interesting alternative in 24.dxc5!? followed by Nd4.

C) 9...b6

This is the most important and popular set-up.

10.Rd1
Now Black must make an important choice between C1) 10...Ba6 and C2) 10...Bb7.

C1) 10...Ba6 11.Ne5

It is important to start with this move, since 11.cxd5 cxd5 12.Ne5 allows Black an important additional possibility in
12...Nxe5 13.dxe5 Rc8 (or 13...Ng4 immediately) 14.Nc3 Ng4, as played in Anand – Topalov, Nanjing 2010.

Black may respond with C11) 11...Qc8, C12) 11...Nxe5 or C13) 11...Rc8.

C11) 11...Qc8
12.Nc3
12.cxd5 cxd5 13.Nc6 allows the tactical trick 13...Bc5! 14.Qxc5 bxc5 15.Ne7† Kh8 16.Nxc8 Rfxc8= when Black is
fine.

12...Nh5!?
The knight jump is a common motif in such positions.

12...Bxc4 13.Nxc4 dxc4 has occurred in several games, but I am not so concerned about this. After 14.Ne4 b5 15.Nd6
Bxd6 16.Bxd6 Rd8 17.a4 White’s strong pair of bishops gave him excellent compensation in Wojtkiewicz – Zubarev,
Moscow 2002.

White retreated the bishop to e3 in Sambuev – Smirnov, Krasnoyarsk 2003, and one other game, but I believe Black is
okay after returning with the knight to f6. That is why I developed another plan.
13.Bd2!?N
The bishop is less vulnerable here than on e3, which makes a difference in certain lines.

13...Nhf6
An obvious alternative is 13...Nxe5 14.dxe5, when Black has to play 14...g6 to rescue his knight. 15.cxd5 cxd5
(15...exd5?! 16.Rac1 leaves White with a lot of pressure) 16.Bh6 (16.Qa4!? looks interesting as well) 16...Rd8 17.Rd2
Ng7 18.Rad1 White’s pieces are much better coordinated, and he should be able to carry out e2-e4 in the near future.

14.Qa4! Nxe5
14...Bb7 15.Rac1 obviously cannot be good for Black.

15.dxe5 Nd7
15...Ng4 would have been an annoying reply in the analogous line with the bishop on e3, but here 16.cxd5 exd5
17.Bh3 h5 18.f3 b5 19.Qc2 Bc5† 20.Kg2 favours White. Even though the black knight cannot be captured
immediately, the pin looks pretty awkward for Black.

16.cxd5 cxd5
16...exd5 runs into 17.Bh3! Rd8 18.e6 fxe6 19.Bxe6† Kh8 20.Be3 with White’s advantage.

17.Rac1 Qb7
Now White can exploit the awkward position of the enemy queen with the following forcing continuation.
18.Be3 b5 19.Nxd5! exd5 20.Bxd5 Qxd5 21.Qxa6 Nb8 22.Rxd5 Nxa6 23.Rxb5
The arising endgame is difficult for Black.

C12) 11...Nxe5 12.dxe5

Exchanging knights is a principled reaction.

12...Nd7
12...Nh5? is clearly inferior, and 13.Be3 already threatens to win the knight. After the further 13...f5 14.cxd5 cxd5
15.Nc3± Black has an unpleasant position due to the misplaced knight, Tkachiev – Tukmakov, Porec 1998.

Also risky is:

12...Ng4 13.Bf3!N
 This move is new, but somehow I have a feeling that many players who have worked on this variation are aware
of it.
It is essential to understand the problem with 13.h3. A recent example continued 13...Nxf2! 14.Kxf2 Bc5†
15.Be3 Bxe3† 16.Kxe3 Qg5† 17.Kf2 f6 with promising counterplay, Shaydullina – Kovalenko, Khanty-
Mansiysk 2013.
13...g5!?
I also considered:
13...h5 14.cxd5 cxd5 15.Qa4! shows one of the benefits of the bishop on f3: the e2-pawn is protected! 15...Bb7
16.h3 g5 17.hxg4 gxf4 18.Qxf4 Black is a pawn down with an exposed king.
13...f5 14.exf6 Nxf6 15.Nd2 Bd6 16.Bxd6 Qxd6 17.Rac1 White has the more comfortable position, and will soon
carry out e2-e4 to attack Black’s centre.

14.Bxg4 gxf4 15.Nd2

The position is complicated, but I like White’s chances. An illustrative variation is:
15...Kh8 16.cxd5 cxd5 17.Qa4 fxg3! 18.hxg3! Bb7 19.Kg2!
The open h-file might turn into a serious headache for Black.
13.cxd5 cxd5 14.e4 Rc8
14...g5? is poor, and after 15.Be3 Nxe5 16.exd5 Rc8 17.Nc3± Black had no compensation for having weakened his
kingside in Wojtkiewicz – Kustar, Sioux Falls 2000.

14...d4 15.Rxd4 Bc5 (15...Rc8 16.Nc3 transposes to the main line below) 16.Rd1 g5 17.Bc1 Qe7 Black is about to
regain the e5-pawn, but White has just enough time to get active. 18.Qa4 Bc8 19.Nd2 Nxe5 20.Nb3 Bd7 21.Qa6
Despite the material equality, Black’s position is rather unpleasant, as the following game illustrates.

21...Rad8 (21...f6N is a better try, although 22.Nxc5 Qxc5 23.Be3² still favours White) 22.Nxc5 Bc8 23.Qe2 Rxd1†
24.Qxd1 bxc5 25.Qd2 f6 26.Qc3± White clearly had the better game in Tkachiev – Filippov, Fuegen 2006.
15.Nc3 d4
This pawn sacrifice is forced. Black hopes to obtain compensation due to the doubled pawns in the centre. An
important point is that the e4-pawn blocks both the Catalan bishop and the knight’s route towards d6.

15...dxe4?N is effectively refuted by 16.Qa4! Bd3 17.Nxe4 b5 18.Qxa7 Rc7 19.Qe3 when Black is a pawn down
anyway, but under highly unfavourable circumstances.

16.Rxd4 Qc7
This is the main line.
Nakamura once experimented with 16...Bc5?! in a blitz game. Despite his eventual victory, there is no doubt that after
17.Rd2 Bb7 18.Rad1 Bc6 19.h4 Qe7 20.a3 a5 21.Na4!± his position was poor in Gelfand – Nakamura, Moscow (blitz)
2010.

17.Rad1 Rfd8
Please note that 17...Nxe5?? is refuted by 18.Qa4! Bb7 19.Rd7.

One game continued 17...Nb8 18.h4 b5 19.a3 Bc5 20.R4d2 Bxa3, and now a clear improvement is:
21.Qb3!N (After 21.bxa3 Qxc3 22.Qxc3 Rxc3 23.Be3 Nc6 Black was okay in Verat – Shchekachev, Paris 2001)
21...Bc5 (An important point is that 21...Bxb2 runs into 22.Nd5! exd5 23.Qxb2 dxe4 24.e6 with a decisive initiative)
22.Nxb5 Qb7 23.Bf1± White still has an extra pawn and his pieces are much more active.

18.h4
It is essential to prevent ...g5.

18...h6
This has been the clear first choice, but I would like to mention two other possibilities.

18...Bc5 19.R4d2 Nb8 was played in Kengis – Kayumov, Arad Abudhabi 2003.

And now the simple 20.a3N would be a clear improvement, for example: 20...Rxd2 21.Rxd2 b5 22.Qb3 Qb7 23.Na2!
Qb6 24.Nb4 Bb7 25.Nd3 Bd4 26.Qd1± White keeps an extra pawn plus a space advantage.

18...Nb8 19.Rxd8† Rxd8 20.Rxd8† Qxd8 occurred in Gelfand – Alekseev, Moscow 2008. The exchanges have removed
the pressure from the e5-pawn, giving White an opportunity to free his bishop.

21.Be3!N 21...Nd7 22.f4 Nc5 23.Bf1! White has an obvious advantage.

19.h5
This ensures that White will never have to worry about ...g5 ideas, while also securing a space advantage on the
kingside, which might be useful in a future endgame. We now have an interesting situation where Black is unable to
recapture on e5 yet (as Rxd8† followed by Qa4 will be devastating), but White faces a challenge over how to improve
his position while maintaining the indirect defence of his extra pawn.

19...Bc5
Black has tried three other moves, all of which seem reasonably sensible.

19...Nb8 20.Rxd8† Bxd8 21.Qa4! Qc6 22.Qxc6 Nxc6 23.Bf1 Bxf1 24.Kxf1 a6 occurred in Colovic – Pogorelov, Sort
2009. It is understandable that Black wanted to take away the b5-square from the knight, but White could have
exploited the last move as follows:
25.Na4!N Black’s queenside looks extremely vulnerable, for instance: 25...b5 26.Nc5 a5 27.Nb7 Bb6 28.Rc1 Rb8
29.Rxc6 Rxb7 30.Bd2± White has excellent winning chances.

19...Nc5 20.Bf1! Bxf1

Worse is 20...Bg5?! 21.Bxg5 Rxd4 22.Rxd4 Bxf1 23.Bf4 Ba6 24.Qd1 Qe7 25.Rd6± and White went on to win
convincingly in Tkachiev – Jakovenko, Dresden 2007.
21.Kxf1 Rxd4 22.Rxd4 a6
22...Nd7 23.Qa4! Nc5 24.Qd1 Qc6 occurred in Afanasiev – Demianjuk, Anapa 2012. Here White could have
slowly improved his position by means of: 25.a3N 25...b5 (25...a5? 26.a4!±) 26.b4 Na6 27.Bd2² Followed by f2-
f4, with the better game.
23.Qd1 b5

24.a3!N
 Improving over the hasty 24.b4 Nb7 25.Rd7 Qc4†! 26.Qe2 Bxb4 when Black was fine in Kobo – Baert, Gibraltar
2014.
24...Rd8
I also considered 24...Qc6 25.b4 Nb7 26.Bd2 and White slowly improves.
25.Rxd8† Bxd8 26.Qd6! Qc8 27.Kg2
Black is a long way from equality.

19...Kf8!? is partially a waiting move, but it also serves a specific purpose, as shown in the next note. I propose:

20.R4d2!N (In the only game to feature Black’s last move, White played the hasty 20.Bf1, and after 20...Bxf1 21.Kxf1
Nxe5! 22.Rxd8† Rxd8 23.Rxd8† Bxd8 24.Qa4 Bf6 Black had equalized in Kovalenko – W. Zhou, Moscow 2011.
Black’s 19th move served an important function in covering the e8-square.) After the text move Black may play
20...Kg8!?, which transposes to the main line below. Other moves are possible, but White’s general ideas remain the
same as in other lines. However, it should be noted that 20...Nxe5? still does not work in view of 21.Rxd8† Rxd8
22.Rxd8† Bxd8 23.Qa4 Bc8 24.Nb5± winning pawn.
20.R4d2 Be7
Now we face an interesting question: how should White improve his position if Black just sits and waits? I have two
possible solutions.

21.a3
21.Bf3 is another way to improve. White frees the g2-square for the king, keeping in mind the possibility of a future
g4-g5 push. 21...Kf8 22.Kg2 Kg8N 23.Rd4!? Preparing Be2, while also setting up some possible tactics:

23...Bc5 24.Nd5! Qb7 (In the event of 24...exd5 25.Rxd5 Nf8 26.Rxd8 Rxd8 27.b4! White is much better) 25.Qd2!?²
Black is under some pressure.

21...Kf8
After 21...Nc5?! 22.Rxd8† Rxd8 23.Bf1 White significantly improves his position.
22.Rd4 Bc5
Now in Vitiugov – Tomashevsky, Moscow 2008, White settled for the draw. However, I discovered an interesting
way to play for more.

23.Rd6!?N 23...Bxd6
23...Kg8 can be met by the thematic 24.Nd5!?, when the following line is more or less forced: 24...exd5 25.R6xd5
Nf8

26.b4! Bxf2† 27.Qxf2 Ne6 28.Qf3² White retains an extra pawn plus the initiative, and can increase the pressure with
moves like Rd6 and Bh3.

24.exd6
 White enjoys rich compensation thanks to his strong passed pawn and pair of bishop.

24...Qc5
I also considered 24...Qb8 25.e5 Kg8 26.Qe4 Rc5 27.Rc1 Qc8 (after 27...Rdc8 28.Qe3 the rook is in danger on c5)
28.Bf3 with long-term compensation.

25.e5 Kg8 26.Re1 Qd4 27.Qc1

White remains in control, and has more than enough compensation for the exchange.

C13) 11...Rc8

12.cxd5!
I believe this is the only way to fight for the advantage. 12.Nc3 is more popular and has scored better, but after
12...Bxc4 13.Nxc4 dxc4 14.e4 b5! I believe Black is doing well.
Black may recapture with C131) 12...Nxd5 or C132) 12...cxd5.

12...Nxe5N has not yet been tested. White should react with 13.d6! (Surprisingly, 13.dxe5 Nxd5!? 14.e4 Nxf4 15.Rxd8
Ne2† 16.Kh1 Rfxd8 is not so clear) 13...Nf3† 14.Bxf3 Bxd6 15.Bxd6 Qxd6

16.Qa4!? Bb5 The only move. 17.Qb3 Ba6 (17...e5 18.dxe5 Qxe5 19.Nc3² is unpleasant for Black) 18.Nc3 White has
the more pleasant position. An important point is that 18...c5?? is refuted by 19.Qa3! when the bishop has nowhere to
go.

C131) 12...Nxd5

13.Nc3
White should refrain from 13.Nxc6 in view of: 13...Nb4! 14.Qa4 Nxc6 15.Qxa6?!N (15.Bxc6 is objectively better,
although 15...Bxe2 16.Re1 b5! 17.Qxa7 Rxc6 18.Rxe2 Nf6° still gave Black a great game in Krotov – Shkuro, Azov
2010) 15...Nc5! 16.Qc4 Na5 White will have to fight for a draw by giving up his queen for some pieces.

13...Nxe5
13...Nxf4 14.gxf4 gives White a good version of a well-known pawn structure. I only found one example from here,
which continued: 14...Nxe5 15.fxe5 White intends to fortify his central position with f2-f4 and e2-e3.

15...b5? A bad positional error, restricting the light-squared bishop. Now in Gleizerov – Rigo, Banska Stiavnica 2010,
White could have played 16.a3N± followed by b2-b4, with a serious positional advantage.

14.Bxe5
14.dxe5 Qc7 is nothing for Black to worry about.

14...Nxc3 15.bxc3 Bc4!

Otherwise White will play c3-c4, claiming an obvious positional advantage.

16.Be4
This is White’s only challenging idea.

16...g6
An obvious alternative is: 16...h6 17.Bh7† Kh8 18.Bd3 Bxd3 19.Rxd3 b5 20.c4 Bf6 This logical sequence occurred
in Maletin – Volokitin, Moscow 2011. Now the natural continuation would have been:
21.c5!N 21...a5 22.Rad1 White retains an obvious positional edge.

17.Bd3!?N
So far White has played 17.h4 in three games, all of which have been drawn. Clearly a fresh idea is needed, and I
consider the text move the most promising new direction.

17...Bxd3 18.Rxd3 Bf6 19.Qa4!

Without this important resource, I don’t see anything special for White. Now it is not so easy for Black to defend the
a-pawn.
19...a5
19...Bxe5 20.dxe5 Qc7 21.Rd6! obviously favours White.

20.c4 Bxe5 21.dxe5 Qg5 22.f4 Qf5 23.Qb3²

 Black is under some pressure.

C132) 12...cxd5

13.Nc6
This is the main point of exchanging on d5. White will exchange on e7 and attempt to take advantage of the bishop
pair. We will examine C1321) 13...Qe8, C1322) 13...Bb5 and C1323) 13...Nh5.

C1321) 13...Qe8 14.Nxe7† Qxe7 15.Nc3

15...Nh5
Other moves also fail to equalize:
15...Bb7 occurred in Naumann – Levin, Mulheim 2009.

I believe White should have taken the opportunity to control the f1-a6 diagonal right away with 16.Qd3N, for
instance 16...a6 17.Rac1 Rc6 18.f3² and White is improving the position nicely.

15...b5?! looks interesting at first sight, but after 16.Qd3! Nb6 17.b3! it transpires that Black is in trouble. 17...Qb7
(17...b4N 18.Qxa6 bxc3 19.Rac1± does not bring him any relief.)

18.Nxb5 Ne4 19.Rdc1 Rxc1† 20.Rxc1 Rc8 21.a4 Rxc1† 22.Bxc1 Qc6 23.Ba3± White had won a pawn and smoothly
executed his opponent in Le Quang Liem – Nabaty, Gibraltar 2012.

16.Be3
White has a typical slight edge, and it is only a matter of time before he gets his bishops working. In the one game
from this position, Black soon went downhill.
16...Bc4?! 17.b3 Ba6 18.a4 f5

19.Bc1!
The bishop heads towards its best diagonal.

19...Qb4 20.Na2 Qd6 21.Qd2! Bb7 22.Nc3 Qb8 23.Ba3

White was clearly better in Bacrot – Ibrahimov, Basel 2011.

C1322) 13...Bb5 14.Nxe7† Qxe7 15.Nc3

So far Black has achieved solid practical results, drawing every game from this position. However, I believe in
White’s long-term chances with the bishop pair.
15...Nh5
15...a5 is a logical move which has been played by Grischuk. Here I like the following idea: 16.Qd2 Ba6 17.Rac1
Rfd8 (17...h6 18.Bf3 Qb4 19.h4 also favoured White in Stupak – Almasi, St Petersburg 2012) The present position was
reached in Yefremov – Cleto, email 2011. Since Black’s last move prepared the plan of ...Nf8-g6, I suggest countering
with:

18.Bf3!?N 18...Nf8 19.g4! Ng6 20.Bg3² White has preserved the bishop’s placement on the optimal h2-b8 diagonal,
while also gaining some space on the kingside. Later he may consider h4-h5 when the time is right. Overall White’s
advantage is not that large, but he maintains a pleasant pull.

16.Bc1!N
I find this new idea perfectly natural. The unopposed dark-squared bishop is key to White’s opening strategy, and it
makes sense to try and activate it via a3. White failed to impress after 16.Be3 Nhf6 17.Qd2 Ba6 18.Bf4 Nh5 19.Bg5
Nhf6 when a draw was agreed in Wen – Yu, China 2014.
16...Nhf6 17.Qd2
17.b3? allows 17...Bxe2! winning a pawn.

17...Ba6 18.b3 Rc6 19.Bb2!

19.a4 is premature in view of 19...Qb4, and after the forced 20.Na2 Qxd2 21.Rxd2 Rfc8 Black gets a lot of activity.

19...Rfc8 20.Rac1
Even though the bishop has not yet made it to a3, White has still achieved a good level of harmony, and can aim to
improve his position with f2-f3 and later e2-e4. Here is a brief illustrative line.

20...Qb4 21.f3 h6 22.Rc2

22.e4 is a bit premature due to 22...dxe4 23.fxe4 e5 when Black looks to be okay.
22...Bb7 23.e3²
Black has a solid position and his queen and rooks are active, but it is hard for him to threaten anything. Meanwhile
White can continue making small improvements, with the e3-e4 advance being the primary objective.

C1323) 13...Nh5

This has been the most popular move.

14.Bc1!
Once again, White should aim to post his bishop on a3. Amazingly, this strong move has only been played in one out
of thirteen games on my database.

All the other games continued 14.Be3 Nb8! 15.Nxe7† Qxe7 16.Nc3, after which Black has yet to lose a single game.
16...Nc6 looks like the most natural move, when Black is doing fine.

14...Nb8 15.Nxe7† Qxe7 16.Qd2!

It makes sense to keep the knight on b1 for the moment, in order to facilitate the plan of b2-b3 and Ba3.

16...Nc6 17.b3 b5
18.Bb2N
This simple move seems more promising than 18.a3 Nf6 19.Nc3 Qc7 20.Na2 Qb6 21.Qb2 h6 22.Bf4 Rfd8 23.Nb4
(23.Rac1 Bb7) 23...Nxb4 24.axb4 Bb7 25.Rac1 Nd7 when White could hardly improve his position in Leko –
Ponomariov, Saratov 2011.

18...Nf6
18...b4? runs into 19.a3! Na5 20.Qe3 Rc2 21.Rd2± when Black is in trouble.

19.Nc3 Rfd8 20.Rdc1 h6 21.e3²

Taking into account that ...b4 would be a positional error, Black has to remain with the pawn on b5, which makes his
position feel rather awkward. White is undoubtedly slightly better.
 C2) 10...Bb7

This has been the most popular choice. The bishop is slightly less active here than on a6, but it supports the c6-square
and the centre in general.

11.Ne5!
I have chosen to depart from the recommendation in GM 1 at a relatively early stage. It is worth briefly mentioning
the problem I found: 11.Nc3 dxc4 12.Nd2 Nd5 13.Nxc4 Nxf4 14.gxf4 Nf6 15.e3 Nd5 16.a3 Rc8 17.b4 I considered
this position to be rather promising for White, but in the following game Black came up with an excellent plan:

17...f5! By fixing the pawn structure, Black gets significant chances to seize the initiative on the kingside by means of
...g5 or ...Rf6-h6. The stem game continued 18.Rac1 g5 19.fxg5 Bxg5 20.f4 Bf6 21.Qf2 Rc7 22.Ne2 Kh8 and Black
was at least not worse in Gupta – Maiorov, Metz 2011.
Black may react to my recommended move with C21) 11...Nxe5, C22) 11...Nh5, C23) 11...b5 or C24) 11...Rc8.

C21) 11...Nxe5 12.dxe5 Nd7 13.cxd5 cxd5 14.e4

The position bears an obvious similarity to the earlier variation C12, but this time Black is not forced to sacrifice a
pawn.

14...dxe4
I believe this is Black’s best bet. He has two other reasonable options at his disposal:

14...d4 15.Rxd4 Bc5 16.Rd2!N (This is an obvious improvement over 16.Rd1 g5! 17.Bc1 Qe7 18.Nd2?! Nxe5 19.Nb3
Rad8 when Black was perfectly fine in Anwesh – Sethuraman, Porto Carras 2010) 16...g5 (In the event of 16...Qe7
17.Nc3 Rfd8 18.Rad1± White comfortably retains his extra pawn.)
17.Qd1! It is not just the second rook that can utilize the d1-square! 17...Bc6 (17...gxf4 18.Rxd7 Qc8 19.gxf4±) 18.Qg4
Be7 19.h4 White has a powerful attack in addition to his extra pawn.

14...Rc8 15.Nc3 d4
Black has also tried this familiar pawn sacrifice, just like in the earlier variation with the bishop on a6.
15...dxe4?! 16.Bxe4 Bxe4 17.Qxe4 clearly favours White, for instance: 17...Qc7 18.Nb5 Nc5 19.Qf3 Qb8 20.b4
Na6 21.Nd6± White was dominating in V. Mikhalevski – Vescovi, Sao Paulo 2002.
16.Rxd4 Bc5
16...Qc7 has been played, but it was practically refuted after: 17.Qe2 a6 (17...Nxe5 18.Nb5 Qb8 19.Nxa7 wins a
pawn) 18.Nd5! exd5 19.exd5 Qc5 20.Rdd1!? White had a huge initiative for the sacrificed piece in Terreaux –
Aiken, corr. 2012.
17.Rdd1
I like this move, although 17.Rd2 also looks promising.
17...Bb4
17...Bc6 18.Qd2 Qc7 runs into the familiar 19.Nd5! exd5 20.exd5 with a decisive advantage.
Now in Bugalski – Mallek, Solec Kuj 2003, White missed a strong continuation:
18.Qa4!N 18...Bxc3 19.Rxd7 Qe8 20.Qd1!
It is easy to overlook such a move.
20...Bc6 21.Rxa7 Bxb2 22.Rb1
White is clearly better.

15.Bxe4 Bxe4 16.Qxe4 Nc5!

This is obviously better than 16...Qc7 17.Nc3 Rad8, when the active 18.Nb5 Qb8 19.b4! Rfe8 20.Nd4 Nf8 21.Nc6
Qb7 22.b5 gave White a stable edge in Schreiner – Oparin, Athens 2012.

17.Qe2!
This is more accurate than 17.Qf3, after which Vladimir Kramnik convincingly demonstrated that Black has a reliable
game: 17...Qe8 18.Nc3 (18.Nd2 Rd8 19.Ne4 Qb5 gives Black no problems) 18...Na4! 19.Nxa4 Qxa4 20.b3 Qa3
21.Rd7 Bc5 22.Qe2 a5 23.Rad1 a4 The players soon agreed a draw in Giri – Kramnik, Dortmund 2011.
17...Qc7 18.Nc3 a6
Here another game pops up, which reached this position via a different move order. 18...Rad8 19.Nb5 Qc6 Now in
Stachowiak – Grabarczyk, Wroclaw 2013, White should have played 20.Nxa7!N, when 20...Qa4 21.Nb5 Rxd1†
22.Rxd1 Qxa2 23.Be3 Qb3 24.Nd6 leaves Black under some pressure. The knight is powerful on d6, and exchanging it
would give White a dangerous passed pawn.

19.Rac1
19.b4 would be met by 19...Nb3!.

19...Qb7 20.b4 Nd7 21.Ne4!?

This pawn sacrifice seems quite promising, but it is not essential. The calm 21.a3N is also fine, for instance 21...b5
22.Ne4 Nb6 23.Bg5 Bxg5 24.Nxg5 Rad8 25.Rd6! and White keeps a slight pull.
21...Bxb4 22.Rc4 Be7
In the event of 22...Bc5 23.Qg4 Kh8 White can develop his initiative with: 24.Qh5! Kg8 25.Ng5 h6 26.Ne4 f5
Otherwise Bxh6 will decide the game. 27.exf6 Nxf6 28.Nxc5 bxc5 29.Qe2² White regains the pawn and keeps the
better chances thanks to his superior structure.

23.Nd6!N
This is my idea to improve over 23.Rcd4?! Nc5 24.Nxc5 Bxc5 25.Rd7 Qc6 when White did not have enough
compensation for the pawn in Meier – Schlosser, Belfort 2012.

23...Bxd6
If Black ignores the knight with 23...Qa7, then 24.Qc2 Nc5 25.Be3 sees White win back the pawn while retaining the
better chances.

24.exd6 Nc5 25.Bg5!

This strong move threatens to put the bishop on e7, while also clearing a path for the rook to go to the kingside, which
may lead to a serious attack.
25...Rfc8
After 25...f6 26.Be3± White regains the pawn and his mighty passed pawn should easily decide the game.

26.Qh5 f6
Otherwise Rh4 will be hard to meet.
27.Bxf6! Nd7
27...gxf6? 28.d7 Nxd7 29.Rg4† Kh8 30.Qf7 wins for White.

28.Rxc8† Rxc8 29.Bb2

Material is equal, and White has an obvious advantage thanks to his powerful passed pawn and active pieces.

C22) 11...Nh5 12.Bd2 Nhf6

I found more than sixty games from this position.

13.cxd5
I regard this as the only serious way to fight for the advantage. Not for the first time, White’s strategy involves an
early trade of a knight for an enemy bishop, followed by gradually improving his position.

13...cxd5 14.Nc6 Bxc6 15.Qxc6 Rc8

This has been the most popular choice, but it is worth mentioning some other moves:

15...Qc8 has led to a couple of draws for Black, but it is not too hard to improve White’s play. 16.Qb5 Ne8

17.Rc1N (17.Nc3 Nd6 18.Qd3 Qc4 19.Qb1 Nf6 20.e3 Qc6 21.Be1 Rfc8 22.Rc1 Qb7 was nothing special for White in
Artemiev – Movsesian, Loo 2014) 17...Nd6 18.Qd3 Qb7 19.Nc3 Nf6 20.Rc2 Rac8 21.Rac1 We have reached a normal
type of middlegame with a lot of play ahead, where White’s bishop pair makes him the slight favourite.

15...a6 16.e3 b5 is sensible, placing the pawns on the opposite colour to the remaining bishop. I think White’s most
interesting continuation is: 17.Rc1!?N (17.Qc2 Qc8 18.Qd3 Qc4 19.Bf1 Ne4 20.Be1 led to a pleasant edge and an
eventual win for White in Giri – Meier, Dortmund 2011, but after the improvement 17...Nb6!?N 18.b3 b4 I think Black
should be okay)
17...Nb6 (In the event of 17...b4 18.a3 a5 19.axb4 axb4 20.Ra6! White can develop his play on the queenside) 18.Ba5
Nfd7 19.Nd2 Qb8 20.Qc2 Rc8 21.Qd1 White has the slightly better prospects; his bishop pair may prove crucial in the
long term.

15...Qb8 has also been played at the elite level. 16.Qc2 b5 17.Qd3 b4 18.Be1

This move offers a convenient way of developing the knight to d2, which is obviously necessary after Black’s last
move. 18...Qb6 (In the event of 18...e5 19.Nd2 e4 20.Qa6! White clearly has the better game) 19.Nd2 a5 20.Rac1 Rac8
21.e3 e5 (After 21...Rc6 22.Bf1 Rfc8 23.Rxc6 Qxc6 24.Qb5 Qa8 25.Rb1² White slowly starts to take over on the
queenside) It is understandable that Black wanted to create some counterplay in the centre, but his last move makes
White’s light-squared bishop a more dangerous piece. In Caruana – Gelfand, Zürich 2013, White could have obtained a
big advantage with:
22.Bf1!N 22...e4 (22...exd4 23.exd4 Rfe8 24.Nf3 Bd6 25.Qa6±) 23.Qa6 Qxa6 24.Bxa6 Ra8 25.Bb5 Black is under
pressure, for example: 25...Rfb8 26.Bf1 Rc8 27.Nb3 a4 28.Nc5±

16.Qb5
16.Qa4 has been played a few times, including by Gelfand against Kramnik, but I am not so sure about the position
after 16...Rc4!?N 17.Qxa7 Rxd4 18.Nc3 Rc4. My feeling is that the pawn trade has helped Black, who now boasts a
central majority.

16...Ne8
16...Nb8 has also been tried in several games. After the natural 17.Nc3 there are two main directions:

a) 17...a6 18.Qd3 b5 Despite solid practical results for Black, advancing the queenside pawns is slightly risky, as it
gives White a potential pawn lever on that flank. 19.Rac1 Nc6 20.e3 Qb6
21.a4! Proving the above point. 21...b4 22.Ne2 Bd6 23.Bf1 When the light-squared bishop starts to get active, it is
generally an encouraging sign for White. 23...e5 As usual, aiming for central counterplay is natural, but there is an
obvious risk that the light-squared bishop will become even more powerful. 24.dxe5 Nxe5 25.Qf5² Acevedo Villalba –
Muck, corr. 2011.

b) 17...Nc6 18.e3 Na5 (18...Ne8 is a worse version for Black, as White can keep his queen more active: 19.Qa4! Nd6
Now in Vorobiov – Clery, Cappelle la Grande 2013, the simple 20.Be1!N 20...Qd7 21.Bf1 would have left White with
an ideal position) At this point in Sasikiran – Alekseev, New Delhi 2012, White unnecessarily retreated his queen to e2.
Instead I would prefer the more active alternative:

19.b3!?N 19...Ba3 (19...Nb7 20.f3 Nd6 21.Qa6 Qd7 22.Rac1 also favours White) 20.Rab1 Qe7 21.Ne2 Qc7 (21...Rc2
runs into 22.Qa4! threatening b3-b4, and if 22...Rxa2 23.Nc3 Rb2 24.Nb5 White has a big advantage) 22.Be1 Be7
23.Rdc1² White is steadily increasing the pressure.
17.Qd3
17.Nc3 Nd6 18.Qd3 is an equally acceptable move order.

17...Nd6 18.Nc3
Here is an important point regarding move orders. 18.b3 has been played just as frequently as the text move, and
sometimes transposes; it was even the choice of Caruana in both of the games mentioned below. However, I would
argue that it is less accurate, as it allows Black the useful possibility of 18...Nb8! 19.Nc3 Nc6 20.e3 Qd7, when he has
regrouped his pieces harmoniously and has scored well in practice. For instance, after 21.Ne2 Rc7 22.Rac1 Rfc8 Black
had good prospects on the queenside and drew fairly effortlessly in Perez Ponsa – Illescas Cordoba, Tromso (ol) 2014.

18...Nf6
18...Nb8 has only been played in a single game, Sandipan – Wojtaszek, Jurmala (rapid) 2013. The difference from the
previous note could have been emphasized by 19.e4!N, and after 19...dxe4 20.Nxe4 Nxe4 21.Bxe4 h6 22.d5 the
opening of the position makes White’s bishop pair into a significant advantage.

18...Nc4 does not achieve much for Black. 19.Bc1 Bb4 20.a3 Bxc3 21.Qxc3 a5 occurred in Ilincic – Acs, Hungary
2008, and now the accurate 22.Qe1!N 22...Nd6 23.a4 Nf6 24.b3 would have nullified Black’s activity, leaving White
with great long-term prospects with two bishops against two knights.
19.b3 Qd7 20.f3 Nf5 21.e3 h5
Surprisingly, this move has occurred in three games. Another example continued: 21...Rfd8 22.Ne2 Qc7 23.Rac1
Qd7 24.Rxc8 Qxc8 25.Rc1 Qd7

26.a4 White slowly improves his position all over the board. 26...Ba3 27.Rc2 a5 28.Qa6 Rb8 29.Nf4 Bd6 30.Nd3²
Black was still solid, but there is no doubt that White had made progress and enjoyed the better chances in Caruana –
Yu Yangyi, Tromso 2013.

22.Ne2 Rfd8 23.Rac1 a5 24.Rxc8 Rxc8

This position occurred in another game of the Italian superstar, Caruana – Nisipeanu, Bucharest 2013, which took
place a couple of months after the aforementioned game against Yu Yangyi. I believe White should have kept one pair
of rooks on the board, and continued to improve his other pieces. This could have been achieved by:
25.Be1N 25...Rd8
Abandoning the open file is not ideal, but Black must be mindful of e3-e4.

26.Bf2 Nd6 27.h3

White can continue preparing e3-e4 or g3-g4, with the aim of gradually opening lines for his bishop pair.

C23) 11...b5

This has still only been played in two games as yet, but it is quite challenging. The following analysis contains some
instructive points which may prove useful in other positions involving a similar pawn structure.

12.Nxd7 Nxd7 13.c5 g5!?

 With the queenside more or less closed, it makes sense to gain some space on the kingside, and especially to prevent
e2-e4.

14.Bd2
14.Bd6 looks tempting, but after 14...Bxd6 15.cxd6 Qb8 I was unable to find any advantage for White.

14...f5 15.a4
It is essential to play this before Black has time for ...a5, which would prevent any future opening of the queenside.

15...a6

16.Bc3!N
After 16.axb5 axb5 17.Rxa8 Qxa8 18.Qc1 h6 19.h4 Qd8 Black is just in time to hold the kingside together. 20.hxg5
hxg5 21.Nc3 Rf7 22.Na2 Bf6 The position remains interesting, but it seems to me that Black was in good shape in
Ovetchkin – Alekseev, Yekaterinburg 2013. The point of the text move is to maintain the tension on the queenside and
bring more pieces into play before taking any direct action.

16...e5!?
This is the most principled reaction, though other moves can of course be considered. Here are a couple of examples:

After 16...a5 17.axb5 cxb5 we have the important resource 18.c6! Bxc6 19.Bxa5 Qc8 20.Rc1 Qa6 21.Nd2 Rfc8 22.Nb3
Qb7 23.Qd2, when the opening of the queenside clearly favours White.

16...Nf6 17.Nd2 Qc7 18.Nb3

Black’s passive light-squared bishop could become an important positional factor, but things are still not simple
due to the closed nature of the position and the number of other pieces that remain on the board.
18...Rae8 19.Ba5 Qc8 20.Rdc1!
The point of this move is to prevent Black from recapturing on b5 with the c-pawn, as can happen after 20.axb5
cxb5! 21.Be1 Nd7 22.Na5 Nb8, followed by ...Nc6, when White will have a hard time breaking through.
Now Black’s queenside is under pressure, and his counterplay on the other flank might easily backfire, as the
following line illustrates.
20...f4 21.axb5 axb5 22.Nd2!
Heading for f3.
22...Ng4 23.Nf3 fxg3 24.hxg3 Nxf2 25.Kxf2 g4 26.Rh1 Rf7 27.Bd2! gxf3 28.Bxf3
Black is vulnerable on the kingside.

17.dxe5 Nxc5 18.axb5 axb5 19.Nd2 g4

19...Ne6 20.b4 leaves White in control.

20.Bd4 Ne6 21.Rxa8 Qxa8 22.Nb3 Rf7 23.e3

White has an obvious positional superiority.

C24) 11...Rc8
 This position has occurred in more than sixty games, and the number jumps to more than a hundred after the
transpositional effect of White’s next move.

12.Nc3 Nh5
This has been Black’s most popular choice by far. It is worth mentioning a couple of alternatives:

12...Nxe5 13.dxe5 Nd7 14.cxd5 cxd5 15.e4 transposes to a position covered earlier on page 215 – see 14...Rc8 15.Nc3
in the notes to variation C21.

12...b5 13.c5
Once again, the blocked structure yields a slight plus for White.
13...Nxe5
Black can try to activate his problematic bishop by means of 13...b4 14.Na4 Nxe5 15.Bxe5 Ba6, but the b-pawn
makes an inviting target after 16.b3! Bb5 17.a3, when White’s queenside play gets underway.
14.Bxe5 Ng4 15.Bf4 f5
Black must prevent e2-e4, and he should certainly avoid 15...e5? 16.dxe5 Bxc5 17.Ne4! Be7 18.h3 when White
has an overwhelming advantage, Aronian – Ghaem Maghami, Mainz 2010.
16.b4 a6
16...a5 is met strongly by 17.a4!, when the queenside opens up in White’s favour.
17.a4 Ra8 18.Ra3 Qd7 19.Na2!
The knight is heading for d3 and e5.
19...g5 20.Bc1 Kh8 21.Bb2 f4 22.h3 Nf6 23.g4
The position remained tense but preferable for White in Avrukh – Sargissian, Gibraltar 2005. Black’s light-squared
bishop may prove to be a serious problem in the long run.

13.Bc1

From this position C241) 13...f5 is a significant option, but the most popular choice has been C242) 13...Nhf6.

Another line worth mentioning is:

13...Qc7 14.Nxd7 Qxd7 15.e4 dxc4
15...Nf6 is definitely a concession and White is comfortably better after: 16.e5 (Maintaining the tension with
16.b3!?N also looks promising) 16...Ne8 17.Qa4! Nc7 This position occurred in Shchekachev – Bunzmann,
France 2002. The present moment would have been an appropriate time for the central exchange: 18.cxd5N
18...exd5 19.Be3! (19.Qxa7 Ba6 20.Qxb6 Rb8 21.Qa5 Ra8 is rather unclear) 19...a5 20.Rac1 White has a solid
positional edge.

16.e5!N
White failed to impress after 16.Qe2 Nf6 17.Qxc4 c5! 18.dxc5 Qc7 in Ernst – Stohl, Germany 2007.
16...g6
White’s position is rich with potential. I like the following line:
17.Bh6 Ng7 18.Qe2 Rfd8 19.g4 Ne8 20.Qxc4 Nc7 21.Rac1 Nd5 22.Ne4
Material is equal and White remains more active.

C241) 13...f5
14.Qa4!
A key move. If Black was given time to stabilize his position, he would be perfectly fine.

14...Nxe5
14...a6 is risky: 15.Nxd7 b5 (Obviously Black cannot be satisfied with 15...Qxd7? 16.cxd5 exd5 17.Nxd5 when he
was just a pawn down in Slavin – Almond, Newport Pagnell 2010) 16.Nxf8! The key point. 16...bxa4 17.Nxe6 Qe8

All this happened in Wojtaszek – Korobov, Warsaw 2013. At this point the simple 18.Nxa4N 18...dxc4 19.Nec5 Ba8
20.Bd2 would have given White a clear positional plus, as he has full material parity for the queen while Black is pretty
much playing without his light-squared bishop.

15.dxe5 a6
Black has also tried: 15...Qc7 16.Bf3 g6 17.Bh6 Rf7 (17...Ng7 does not change much, for instance: 18.Rac1 Qb8
19.e3 Rf7 20.h4 a6 21.Qb3 b5 22.cxd5 cxd5 23.Bf4²) 18.Rac1 Qxe5 19.cxd5 cxd5

20.Nxd5! Bc5 (The knight is untouchable: 20...exd5? 21.Rxc8† Bxc8 22.Qe8†+–) 21.b4! White was better in Hammer
– Clery, Cappelle la Grande 2010.

16.Qb3 b5 17.e4!
I found this strong idea in 2004. It is a clear improvement over 17.cxd5 cxd5 18.Be3 f4! when Black had real
counterplay in Van Wely – Spassky, France 2002.

17...fxe4
17...dxc4? is impossible in view of 18.Rxd8 cxb3 19.Rd7! and Black loses one of his bishops.

18.Bh3! Kh8
18...Qd7? is refuted by 19.cxd5 cxd5 20.Nxd5 Bxd5 21.Rxd5! and White crashes through.

19.Bxe6 d4
Another important point is that 19...Bc5 does not work in view of 20.Nxe4 dxe4 21.Rxd8 Bxf2† 22.Kg2 Rcxd8
23.Be3 and White wins.

This position occurred in Skoberne – Predojevic, Plovdiv 2008. Here White should have played:
20.Bxc8!N
The weakness of the light squares will not be a serious problem, as Black is unable to get his pieces into the necessary
positions to take advantage.

20...Bxc8
After 20...Qxc8 21.Rxd4 Bc5 White simply returns the exchange with 22.Be3 Bxd4 23.Bxd4 c5 24.Be3, keeping an
extra pawn and a clear advantage.

21.Nxe4 Bg4 22.cxb5 axb5 23.Re1

Black does not enough compensation, and White should win with careful play.

C242) 13...Nhf6

Chasing the bishop away and returning with the knight to f6 is a thematic occurrence in the Catalan.
14.e4 dxc4
Black does not have much to offer aside from this move. It is worth mentioning the tricky 14...c5!? 15.exd5 cxd4
16.Nxd7 Qxd7 17.Rxd4 exd5 18.cxd5 Bc5 19.Rh4 h6 20.Bh3 Qe7, when Black exploited some subsequent
inaccuracies and scored a quick win in Lingnau – Farago Hungary 1993. However, at this point White could have
established his superiority with:

21.Bxh6!N (Accepting the exchange sacrifice is inadvisable: 21.Bxc8? Qe1† 22.Kg2 Rxc8 and White’s pieces are
completely uncoordinated) 21...gxh6 22.Qd2 Nh7 The only move. 23.Re1 Qf6 24.Ne4 Qg7 25.Bxc8 Rxc8 26.d6 After
this virtually forced sequence, White stands clearly better.

15.Nxc4 b5 16.Ne3 Qb6

The only decent alternative is 16...Re8 17.b3 Bf8 18.Bb2, when Black hardly has anything better than 18...Qb6,
transposing to the main line.
17.b3 Rfe8
White is ready to meet 17...c5N with 18.d5.

The main alternative is: 17...Rfd8 18.Bb2 a6 (18...Nf8 looks too passive. 19.a4 a6 20.Qe2 This is a good square for the
queen. 20...Ng6 21.h4 White was clearly better in Vaganian – Gyimesi, Antwerp 2008.) 19.Qe2 (It is also worth
considering 19.Ne2!?, heading for f4) The only game from this position continued 19...Re8, and after 20.Rac1 Bf8
21.e5! Nd5 22.Ne4 White had a clear positional plus in Laznicka – F. Berkes, Paks 2010.

18.Bb2 Bf8
This is a logical follow-up to Black’s previous move. He has also tried striking in the centre:

18...e5?! proved to be an unfortunate choice after 19.dxe5 Nxe5 20.Na4! bxa4 (20...Qc7 21.Nc5 is also not much fun
for Black) 21.Bxe5 Qc5 22.Bc3 and White was clearly better in Maletin – Pogorelov, Mumbai 2010.

18...c5 19.d5 exd5 20.Ncxd5 Nxd5 21.exd5 Bf6 (21...Bg5 is well met by 22.Re1! when the following example provides
a convincing demonstration: 22...Bxe3 23.Rxe3 Rxe3 24.fxe3 c4 25.Qd2 f6 26.Bd4 Qd6 27.bxc4 Rxc4 28.Bxa7! Nc5
29.Rd1 Black was unable to demonstrate compensation for the pawn in Terreaux – Barbalic, email 2011.) This position
occurred in Dziuba – Tiviakov 2010. In order to fight for the advantage, White has to play:
22.Bxf6!N 22...Nxf6 (White’s task is easier after 22...Qxf6 23.a4 a6 24.Bh3! Red8 25.axb5 axb5 26.Qe2±) 23.a4 a6
24.Rac1 White retains a lot of pressure.
19.e5
I think this is the right moment to advance the e-pawn.

19...Nd5 20.Qd3
After 20.Ncxd5 cxd5 21.Qd2 b4 22.f4 f5! White did not have much in Rozum – Lafuente, St Petersburg 2010.

20...Nxe3
I also considered 20...a6 21.Rac1 Red8 22.Ne4 h6 23.Qe2 when White retains an edge. An important point is that
23...c5 can be met by 24.dxc5 Nxc5 25.Bd4! with an advantage.

21.Qxe3 Red8
22.a3!? c5
22...a5 is well met by 23.Ne4 with the following idea: 23...c5 24.dxc5 Nxc5 25.b4 axb4 26.axb4 Na4 27.Bd4 Qa6
28.Nd6±

23.d5
White was undoubtedly better in Muck – Rattinger, email 2007.

Conclusion

The set-up with ...c6 and ...Nbd7 presents a serious challenge, especially as the bishop on d2 prevents the otherwise
desirable plan of Nbd2 followed by e2-e4. After 9.Bf4 we reach our tabiya. The relative sidelines of 9...Nh5 and 9...a5
10.Rd1 Nh5 should not be underestimated; the latter in particular has become quite popular, but I found some ways to
put the black queenside under pressure by taking advantage of the weaknesses created by the ...a5 advance.

The main line is 9...b6 10.Rd1, when Black must decide where to develop his light-squared bishop. 10...Ba6 11.Ne5 is
an important variation where Black has several options. The analysis of 11...Nxe5 runs quite deep, but in general White
should be quite happy to play a position with an extra pawn, even if it is doubled on the e-file. The main line is 11...Rc8
12.cxd5! cxd5 13.Nc6, when White’s strategy is simple: get coordinated and eventually exploit the bishop pair. It is
worth remembering the idea of retreating the dark-squared bishop all the way to c1, in order to reroute it to the optimal
a3-square.

The final part of the chapter covered 10...Bb7, when once again 11.Ne5! seems like the best way forward. The game is
rich in possibilities, and White should be ready for various position types. After 11...Nxe5 12.dxe5, followed by cxd5
and e2-e4, he will have a space advantage and initiative in the centre. 11...Nh5 12.Bd2 Nhf6 leads to a different
situation where 13.cxd5 followed by Nc6 forces the exchange of Black’s light-squared bishop. Next we looked at
11...b5, when 12.c5 leads to another version of the blocked centre and queenside. And finally, the most popular
11...Rc8 12.Nc3 Nh5 13.Bc1 reaches another thematic Catalan position where it seems to me that White keeps the
better chances.
A) 6...c6
B) 6...Nbd7 7.Qc2
B1) 7...b6 8.cxd5
B11) 8...Nxd5
B12) 8...exd5
B2) 7...c6 8.Nbd2 b6 9.e4
B21) 9...dxe4
B22) 9...Bb7 10.e5 Ne8 11.cxd5
B221) 11...exd5
B222) 11...cxd5 12.Re1
B2221) 12...Ba6
B2222) 12...Qc7
B2223) 12...Rc8
B23) 9...Ba6 10.b3 Rc8 11.Bb2 c5 12.exd5 exd5 13.Rfd1!
B231) 13...Re8
B232) 13...cxd4
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.0-0

From this position Black’s most popular continuation has been 6...dxc4, which will be discussed in the next chapter.
The present chapter will focus on the Closed Catalan positions that may arise after A) 6...c6 or B) 6...Nbd7.

A) 6...c6

This usually leads to the main lines after a subsequent ...Nbd7, but there are some independent possibilities. Recently
Black came up with an interesting idea of developing the knight to a6.

7.Qc2 b6 8.Nbd2 Bb7

8...Ba6
This prevents e2-e4 for the moment, as the c4-pawn would be hanging after a double capture on e4, but White has
another strong move at his disposal.
9.Ne5
A typical move in the Closed Catalan.
9...Nfd7
Nobody has tried 9...dxc4?! yet, and rightly so, as after 10.Ndxc4 the d4-pawn is untouchable: 10...Qxd4? 11.Rd1
 Qc5 12.Be3 Qb5 13.a4 Qb4 14.Bd2 Qc5 15.b4 Qd4 16.Be3+– Black’s queen is trapped.

10.Nd3!
White has a space advantage, so it makes sense to avoid the knight swap.
10...Nf6
10...Bf6 11.e3 Bb7 12.b4 gave White a pleasant edge in Ovetchkin – Mokshanov, Tyumen 2012.
11.Rd1!
Only this accurate move – which I recommended in GM 1 and has since been tested in one game – promises
White an advantage.
11.e3 soon led to a clear advantage for White in Gheorghiu – Radulov, Budapest 1970, but only because Black
failed to play 11...c5!N, which would have given him a reasonable position.
11...Nbd7
11...dxc4 12.Nxc4 Qxd4? 13.Nde5 transposes to 9...dxc4?! 10.Ndxc4 Qxd4? 11.Rd1 as mentioned above.
12.e4 Rc8
 This position occurred in Brunello – Tristan, Porto Madryn 2009. Instead of pushing the pawn to e5, I would
prefer to maintain the tension for a moment longer with:
13.b3!N
Black’s position is not easy, as the obvious freeing move runs into a problem:
13...c5 14.exd5 exd5 15.dxc5 Nxc5 16.Nxc5 Bxc5 17.Ne4!
Black will soon lose the d-pawn.

9.e4 Na6!?
This move has been known since the late 1980s, and it has become fairly popular recently, mostly thanks to the
efforts of GM Kovalyov, as well as the young Indian talent Vidit.

9...dxe4 10.Nxe4 Nbd7 and 9...Nbd7 transpose to the later variations B21 and B22 respectively.
10.a3
This modest move is White’s best chance for an advantage.

Black’s main idea is revealed after 10.e5 Nd7 11.cxd5 Nb4!, when a subsequent ...Nxd5 and ...c5 will give Black an
easy game.

10...c5
This is the main move, but Black has also tried:
10...Rc8 11.e5 Nd7 12.cxd5
12.b4 c5 13.dxc5 bxc5 14.b5 Nc7 15.a4 is interesting but rather double-edged.
12...cxd5 13.Qd1
This looks like the most convenient square for the queen.
13...Nab8 14.Re1 Qc7 15.Nb1!
This is White’s key idea, anticipating ...Qc2 and preparing to post the knight on c3, where it seriously hampers
Black’s play on the queenside, leaving White with excellent prospects on the kingside.
15...Ba6
15...Qc2N 16.Qxc2 Rxc2 17.Nc3 f6 Black does not have much choice, as White was threatening to trap the rook
with either Bf1-d3 or Rd1 followed by Ne1. However, White has another unpleasant idea: 18.exf6 Rxf6 19.Bf4!
Rxb2 (19...Nc6 20.Reb1! leaves Black helpless against the plan of Be3 and Ne1.) 20.Ng5! Nf8 21.Nd1! White
wins material.
16.Nc3 Qb7
Now in Plischki – Stross, Prague 2014, the right way to seize the initiative was:

17.Ng5!N 17...Rfe8
17...h6 18.Nxe6! fxe6 19.Qg4 looks extremely dangerous.
18.Qh5 Bxg5 19.Bxg5 Nc6 20.Qg4
White has good attacking chances.
11.exd5 exd5 12.dxc5 Nxc5 13.b4 Ne6
This move has been played in all the games where this position arose. I also considered the natural-looking
alternative: 13...Nce4N 14.Bb2 Rc8 (14...Nxd2 is more solid, but after 15.Nxd2 Qc7 16.Rfe1 dxc4 17.Bxb7 Qxb7
18.Nxc4² the difference between the dark-squared bishops is significant, despite the symmetrical pawn structure.)
15.Rad1 Qc7

16.Nd4! Nxd2 17.Qxd2 dxc4 (After 17...Qxc4 18.Rc1 Qa6 19.Nf5 White’s attack is decisive.) 18.Nf5! Surprisingly
enough, White’s attack is crushing, for example: 18...h6 19.Rfe1 Rfe8 20.Rxe7 Rxe7 21.Bxf6+–

14.Bb2 Rc8
14...Qc8 15.Rac1 Rd8 16.Rfe1 a5 occurred in Wojtkiewicz – Velz, Neuchatel 1996. Here I found a nice improvement:
17.Ng5!N 17...d4 (Worse is 17...Nxg5?! 18.Rxe7 Rd7 19.Bxf6 gxf6 20.Rxd7 Qxd7 21.h4! Nh3† 22.Kf1 and Black will
lose his knight.) 18.Bxb7 Qxb7 19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.Qb3± Black will have a hard time defending the d4-pawn.

15.Ne5 Qc7 16.Rac1 Rfd8

I also checked 16...dxc4N 17.Qxc4 Qd8 (17...Qb8 runs into the unpleasant 18.Bc6!) and now the queen sacrifice
18.Bxb7!? Rxc4 19.Ndxc4 is surprisingly promising for White, whose main idea is to install a knight on c6.

16...d4N may be Black’s best try, although 17.Bxb7 Qxb7 18.Rcd1 maintains an edge for White.

17.Qf5! g6 18.Qf3N
18.Qh3 d4 occurred in Hergott – Hoffman, Matanzas 1993, and now White should have played: 19.Bxb7N 19...Qxb7
20.Rfe1 Threatening Nxf7. 20...Rd6 21.f4 With a nice initiative.
The text move seems like a simpler way to maintain the pressure. A possible continuation is:

18...dxc4 19.Qxb7 Rxd2 20.Rxc4 Qxb7 21.Bxb7 Rxc4 22.Nxc4 Rc2 23.Rc1 Rxc1† 24.Bxc1²
The endgame will be torture for Black, as the light-squared bishop is too strong.

B) 6...Nbd7 7.Qc2

At this point we should consider the Queen’s-Indian-like B1) 7...b6, although B2) 7...c6 is, of course, the most
popular continuation by far. The following alternatives can be dealt with quickly:

7...c5 8.cxd5 Nxd5 (8...exd5 9.Nc3² will either result in a Tarrasch Defence where Black’s knight is misplaced on d7,
or a transposition to variation B12 below after 9...b6 etc.) 9.Nc3 White stands better and has achieved a huge score
from this position. One example continued 9...Nb4 10.Qb3 cxd4 11.Nxd4 Qb6? 12.Be3 Nc5 13.Qc4!+– and Black
was already losing material in Espig – Moehring, Potsdam 1974.
7...Ne4 does not make much sense, as after 8.Nc3 Black does not have time to set up a Stonewall formation. 8...Ndf6
(After 8...Nxc3 9.Qxc3 Bf6 10.Rd1 c6 11.Bf4 White obtained a pleasant edge thanks to his space advantage in
Miroshnichenko – Boons, Leuven 2006.) 9.Ne5 Nxc3

10.bxc3! This structural change is highly beneficial for White. 10...c5 11.Rd1 dxc4 12.Nxc4 cxd4 13.cxd4 White had a
stable positional advantage in Hillarp Persson – Archer, Guernsey 2012.

B1) 7...b6 8.cxd5

I think is this is more precise than 8.Nc3 Bb7 9.cxd5 Nxd5! 10.Nxd5 exd5 11.Bf4 c5, when the knight exchange had
improved Black’s chances in Plenkovic – Rogic, Zupanja 2008.

We will check both recaptures: B11) 8...Nxd5 and B12) 8...exd5.

B11) 8...Nxd5 9.a3

White should cover the b4-square, as 9.e4 Nb4 10.Qb3 c5 leads to double-edged play.
9...Bb7 10.e4 N5f6 11.Nc3 c5
Without this White would have a comfortable advantage.

12.Rd1
12.d5 exd5 13.exd5 looks tempting, but the critical 13...Nxd5!N has not yet been played. After 14.Nxd5 Bxd5 15.Rd1
Be6 16.Bf4 Bf6 the position seems pretty double-edged. White can try 17.Nd2 (17.Rd2 also deserves consideration),
but after 17...Bd4! it is Black who will get reasonable compensation for the exchange.

12...cxd4 13.Nxd4
Black faces some problems with the coordination of his pieces.

13...Qc8
This has been the usual choice.
13...Rc8 14.Qe2 Bc5 occurred in Quinteros – Medina Garcia, Olot 1971, when for some reason White refrained from
the strong and obvious 15.e5±.

13...Qc7 14.Qe2! once again sets up the unpleasant threat of e4-e5. Black tried 14...Nc5 in Barcza – Liebert, Debrecen
1969, and here 15.Ncb5!N 15...Qb8 16.Bf4 e5 17.Nf5 Bd8 18.Bg5± would have emphasized White’s advantage.

14.Qe2!
Another novelty from GM 1 which has since been tested in practice.

14...Ba6
Other moves are possible, but it is not hard for White to maintain some advantage. After the text move I would like to
show a simple improvement over Trella – Konijn, Netherlands 2014.
15.Ncb5N 15...Bc5 16.a4 Ne5 17.Nb3
White is clearly better; he controls more space and Black’s pieces are highly unstable.

B12) 8...exd5

9.Nc3
9.Qc6 Rb8 10.Bf4 seems tempting, but after 10...Bb7 11.Qxc7 Qxc7 12.Bxc7 Rbc8 13.Bf4 2 Black had reasonable
counterplay in Zelcic – Dusi, Madonna di Campiglio 1991.

9...Bb7 10.Bf4
We now have a typical Queen’s Indian position, with a pawn structure that slightly favours White – especially as
Black has lost the option of developing his knight via a6. I don’t see much point in analysing this position in detail, as it
is only a rare occurrence via the Catalan move order, so I will just focus on a few key lines.

10...c5
10...c6 is rather passive, and after 11.Rfd1 Re8 12.Ne5 Nf8 13.e4 Ne6 14.Be3² White had a pleasant edge in Kunte –
Lalith, Mumbai 2008, and a few other games.

11.Rfd1 Rc8 12.Qf5!?

This is actually quite a common motif in this type of structure.

12.dxc5 Nxc5 13.Bh3 Ne6 14.Be5 Nd7 15.Bd4 Rc4 was decent enough for Black in the recent game Goganov – T.L.
Petrosian, Yerevan 2014.

12...Re8
12...g6?! looks too weakening after 13.Qh3.

13.Rac1 Nf8 14.dxc5!

Good timing.

14...bxc5
Both 14...Bxc5 15.Bg5 and 14...Rxc5 15.Nd4 give White a favourable version of the IQP structure.
Here I found a significant improvement over Goksel – Yildiz, Antalya 2004.

15.Ng5!N
I also considered 15.Ne5!?N, but found it less convincing after 15...g6! (15...Bd6?! 16.Ng4! removes a key defender
and wins the d5-pawn) 16.Qd3 Bd6 17.Nxd5 Bxd5 18.Bxd5 Bxe5 when White does not seem to have a route to an
advantage.

15...g6 16.Qc2
White maintains pressure against the d5-pawn. A logical continuation is:

16...Ne6 17.Nxd5! Nxd5 18.Nxe6 fxe6 19.e4²

Black remains under pressure.
 B2) 7...c6

We have already covered the similar position where the white bishop has been lured to d2. Here White can prepare
e2-e4 much more conveniently.

8.Nbd2 b6
This is the main line by far. Many moves have been tried, but in most cases White will simply play e2-e4 and get an
advantage in a similar fashion to the lines examined below. Therefore I will only mention one alternative, which leads
to a different type of game.
8...b5?!
This is premature in view of White’s strong reply.
9.c5!
Black should only allow this type of position if he able to prevent e2-e4, which is obviously not the case here.
9...Qc7
9...a5 10.e4 dxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 12.Qxe4 leads to a thematic situation where Black’s light-squared bishop is too
passive and White has good chances to seize the initiative on the kingside. One model game continued 12...Nf6
13.Qc2 (13.Qxc6?! Bd7 14.Qb6 Qxb6 15.cxb6 Rab8 gives Black a reasonable endgame) 13...Nd5 14.Re1 Bf6
15.h4 a4 16.a3 Qc7 17.Bg5 and White was clearly better in Khismatullin – Stanojoski, Plovdiv 2008.
10.e4 e5
This avoids the fate of the previous note, but Black is not ready to create this level of tension in the centre.
11.exd5 Nxd5
11...cxd5 12.dxe5 Nxe5 13.Nb3 Nxf3† 14.Bxf3 Ne4 occurred in Ibragimov – Marcelin, Linares 2001, and now
15.Rd1N 15...Bb7 16.Bf4± would have given White a clear positional advantage.
12.Re1! exd4 13.Nxd4 Bxc5
No better is 13...Nxc5 14.N2b3 Nxb3 15.axb3 Nb4 16.Qc3 and White will recover the pawn with interest.

14.N2b3 Qb6 15.Nxc5 Nxc5 16.Nxc6

This small combination works fine, although 16.Bd2!?N followed by Rac1 might be even stronger.
16...Qxc6 17.Be3 Be6 18.Qxc5 Qxc5 19.Bxc5
With two bishops in an open position, White had strong positional pressure in Petursson – Sorensen, Copenhagen
1981.
9.e4
This move brings us to the main branching point of the chapter. B21) 9...dxe4 has been played in a lot of games, but I
consider it a clear concession from Black. Our main focus will be on the more challenging options of B22) 9...Bb7 and
B23) 9...Ba6.

B21) 9...dxe4 10.Nxe4

Black’s main problem is that he usually fails to free his position with ...c5 in a favourable situation, and thus may end
up in a passive position with an inferior light-squared bishop.

10...Nxe4
10...Bb7 11.Rd1 is likely to transpose to one of the lines below after a subsequent knight exchange.

11.Qxe4 Bb7 12.Rd1 Qc8

This is the only critical line, as Black it trying his hardest to prepare ...c5.

If Black plays passively then he may soon find himself in a positional bind. A good illustration is: 12...Nf6 13.Qc2
(13.Qe2 is also promising) 13...Qc7 14.Bf4 Bd6
15.Bxd6 Qxd6 16.c5! Qc7 17.Ne5± White has succeeded in shutting Black’s light-squared bishop out of the game, and
he has the strong positional plan of Ne5-c4-d6. The database contains a long list of games from this position, consisting
of many white wins and a few draws here and there.

13.Bf4 c5
Sometimes Black starts with 13...Re8, but after 14.Qc2 c5 15.d5 it transposes.

14.d5 Re8
14...Bf6 15.Qc2 exd5 16.cxd5 leaves Black with nothing better than 16...Re8, transposing to the main line.

15.Qc2 exd5 16.cxd5 Bf6

We have reached a critical moment. After investigating this position for the second time, I concluded that a slight
change of direction was needed.
17.a4!
In GM 1 I gave this as an interesting alternative, but now I believe it should take centre stage.

My previous recommendation of 17.Ng5 does not look so convincing now in view of: 17...Bxg5 (17...Nf8?! runs into
18.Ne4! followed by Nd6) 18.Bxg5 Ne5! (I overlooked this in GM 1 and only mentioned a game with 18...Nf8) 19.h3
Qd7 Black was fine in Maurer – Dreis, corr. 2001.

17...Nf8 18.a5 Ng6

19.Be3!N
Improving over 19.Bg5 as played in Yevseev – Lovkov, St Petersburg 2006, after which 19...Qd8!N would have been
unclear.
The text move sees White refrain from the bishop trade, leaving Black in a passive position without much
counterplay.

19...Qd7 20.Nd2
White is significantly better.

B22) 9...Bb7
10.e5
I believe White has to play this in order to fight for the advantage.

10.b3 Rc8 11.Bb2 c5 12.exd5 exd5 can be compared with the later variation B23, but the position of the bishop on b7
instead of a6 clearly helps Black.

10...Ne8 11.cxd5
Now B221) 11...exd5 should be considered, but the main line is B222) 11...cxd5.

B221) 11...exd5

The arising pawn structure gives Black the clear plan of transferring his knight to e6, followed by attacking the centre
with ...c5. Nevertheless, White should be able to obtain the better chances by regrouping his pieces behind the strong
d4-e5 pawn wedge.

12.Re1 Nc7 13.Nf1

The knight is heading for e3 and hopefully f5 later.

13...Ne6
13...c5 14.Ne3 should lead to the same thing, as the knight will surely go to e6 in the near future.

14.Ne3 c5
14...Re8 gives White time to improve his bishop with 15.Bd2 c5 16.Bc3. An important game continued: 16...cxd4
17.Nxd4 Nxd4 18.Bxd4 Bb4 19.Red1 Nxe5

20.Qb3! Nc6 21.Bxd5 Qd7 22.Bc3 Bxc3 23.Qxc3 Rad8 24.Rac1 Despite the simplifications, Black was under heavy
pressure in Bruzon Batista – Cuartas, Barcelona 2010.

14...g6
This prevents White’s knight from coming to f5, but weakens the dark squares around Black’s king.
15.b3
15.Ng4 is premature due to 15...h5, as in Schreiner – Lautner, Aschach 2011.
15...Rc8
The more active 15...c5 was met by 16.Bb2 Rc8 17.Qe2 and White got a nice edge, which significantly increased
after 17...cxd4 18.Nxd4 Ndc5 19.Rad1 Ba6 20.Qg4 in Meier – Schloetzer, Dresden 2010.
16.Bb2 Re8 17.Qd2 a5 18.Red1
I prefer this modest move to 18.a3, which was played in Khetsuriani – Pelletier, Athens 2005. A possible
continuation is:
18...f5 19.exf6 Nxf6 20.Ne5 Bd6 21.Rac1²
White maintains a pleasant edge.

15.Nf5 Re8
This seems like Black’s best idea.

15...cxd4?! removes the tension prematurely, and after 16.N3xd4 Nxd4 17.Nxd4 Nc5 18.Be3 White has excellent
prospects. 18...Rc8 19.Bh3 Rc7 occurred in Diermair – Kubinger, Aschach 2010, and now the simple 20.Rac1N 20...a5
21.Qd1 would have stabilized White’s positional advantage.

15...Rc8 16.Qd1 Re8 has been played in a couple of games, and both times White exchanged on e7. Instead I would
prefer 17.Be3N 17...Bf8 18.Bh3!, when White keeps the better chances in a complex position.

The present position first occurred in Montalvo – De Toledo, Mermaid Beach 1997, and has been repeated in a few
subsequent games. I propose a simple improvement:

16.b3!N
Other moves were less convincing to say the least.

16...Bf8
After 16...cxd4 17.Nxe7† Qxe7 18.Bb2 Rac8 19.Qd2 White will regain his pawn and exert lasting pressure against
the isolani.

17.Bb2 g6 18.Nd6!
An interesting pawn sacrifice.

18...Bxd6 19.exd6 Qb8 20.Qc3

20.Rad1 Qxd6 21.Qd2 also looks pretty good.
20...f6 21.h4 Qxd6 22.h5 Rac8 23.Qd2
White has promising play for the pawn.

B222) 11...cxd5 12.Re1

White’s last move is almost an automatic choice when this ‘French’ pawn centre occurs. Depending on
circumstances, White may activate his light-squared bishop with Bf1-d3, or improve his misplaced knight with Nd2-f1-
e3-g4, perhaps developing the dark-squared bishop to f4 or g5 along the way. White’s general aim is to active his pieces
in a way that will enable him to generate kingside attacking chances, while at the same time keeping Black’s queenside
activity in check, as well as preventing a queen exchange, which would significantly ease Black’s defensive task.
I have identified three main continuations in B2221) 12...Ba6, B2222) 12...Qc7 and B2223) 12...Rc8, although I should
make it clear that the last option has been the most popular by far.
12...Nc7 13.Nf1 Rc8 14.Ne3 a5 15.h4 Re8 16.a3² gave White a comfortable edge in Tukmakov – Lalic, Tucepi 1996.

12...b5 13.Nf1 b4 does not make much sense to me, and White can easily develop his initiative: 14.h4 Qc7 15.Qd3 Rc8
16.Bg5! Bxg5 17.Nxg5 Qc2 18.Qb5± White won a pawn in Baumegger – Velcheva, Budapest 1997.

B2221) 12...Ba6 13.Nf1

It is also worth considering: 13.Bf1!? Nc7 (13...Bxf1 14.Nxf1 Qc7 15.Qa4 a6 occurred in Avrukh – Trajkovic, Internet
2004, and now 16.Bd2N 16...b5 17.Qb3 would have been the most accurate, when White’s advantage is beyond any
doubt.) 14.a3!N (In GM 1 I only mentioned 14.Bd3 Bxd3 15.Qxd3 Qc8, followed by ...Qa6, when Black is fine.)
White can continue making useful waiting moves, and it is not clear how Black should organize his pieces. If 14...Rc8
15.Bd3! White just continues with his regrouping, while Black’s counterplay is under a cloud now that the ...Qc8-a6
manoeuvre has been prevented.

13...Rc8 14.Qd1
Black’s main problem is the passivity of his minor pieces, especially his knights, so it is logical to try and improve
their positions.

14...Nb8
Here is another example where White instructively seized the initiative on the kingside: 14...Nc7 15.h4 h6 This move
prevents the bishop from going to g5, but also creates a target for possible sacrifices. 16.h5 Nb8 17.Ne3 Nc6 18.Ng4
Re8 19.Bxh6! gxh6 20.Rc1 With Qd2 coming next, White had a dangerous attack in Filippov – Frolyanov, Sochi 2005.

15.h4 Nc6
Another option is:
15...Qc7 16.Ne3
Certainly White should prevent Black’s queen from coming to c2: 16.Ng5 Qc2 17.Qg4 Nc6 18.Ne3 Qg6! White
cannot avoid the queen swap (after ...h6), as 19.Qd1 is answered by 19...Qd3!.
16...Nc6
And now instead of creating additional targets for Black on the queenside with 17.a3, as in Mandekic – Tratar,
Zadar 2004, I would recommend:
17.Bd2N 17...Bd3
17...Nb4?? loses material after 18.Qa4.
18.Bc3 Be4 19.Bf1
White will follow up with Nd2, chasing the bishop from e4 and gaining plenty of space to develop a kingside
initiative.

16.Bg5
This is quite a tricky move.

16...Bxg5
White does not need to worry about 16...Nb4?! 17.Ne3 h6 in view of 18.a3! Nc6 (18...Nd3? runs into 19.Bxe7 Qxe7
20.Re2± and Black’s knight is trapped) 19.Bf4 when Black has achieved nothing, while White’s attack plays itself.
The natural 16...h6 gives White a pleasant choice: 17.Bd2!? (The simple 17.Bxe7 Qxe7 18.Rc1² also gives White an
edge thanks to his space advantage.) Retreating the bishop to d2 is an ambitious choice, aiming for a future sacrifice on
h6. It should be noted that 17...Nb4?! is no good, as 18.Qa4! Bxf1 19.Rxf1± leaves White with a clear positional
advantage.

17.hxg5
Now White can look to prepare a future knight sacrifice on f6.

17...Ne7 18.Ne3 Qd7 19.Qd2 Nf5

At this point a draw was agreed in Filippov – Khenkin, Fuegen 2006, but White has every reason to play on.

20.Bf1!
In GM 1 I gave 20.Nxf5N 20...exf5 21.Qb4!, with ideas of a positional sacrifice with e5-e6. However, I later realized
that the text move was a much simpler route to a clear advantage.

20...Bxf1 21.Kxf1 Qa4 22.Kg2 Nxe3† 23.Qxe3 Rc2 24.Re2±

White has the simple plan of attacking along the h-file, and it is hard to suggest a good answer for Black.

B2222) 12...Qc7
 This also looks pretty logical.
13.Qb3
13.Qd3 will probably transpose after a couple more moves. There is also 13.Qa4 Qc6 14.Qb3, which should reach
the same position with an extra move played.

13...Rc8
After 13...a5 14.Nf1 even a high-level grandmaster and theoretician failed to create any serious counterplay for
Black: 14...Rc8 15.Ne3 Ba6 16.Bd2 Qc6 17.Rac1 Qb7 18.Rxc8 Qxc8 19.Rc1 Nc7 20.h4 Qd8 21.Qc2! Na8 22.Ng5
Bxg5 23.hxg5 White had an overwhelming advantage in Swinkels – Tiviakov, Haaksbergen 2009.

14.Bf1 Nb8
The older move is:
14...Qc2 15.Qe3!
It is essential for White to avoid the queen trade. In the event of 15.Qxc2N 15...Rxc2 16.Bd3 Rc8 he is only
marginally better, and Black should hold without any serious difficulties.
15...Qg6
This seems stronger than 15...Nc7 16.Bd3 Qa4, when Black’s queen is misplaced. 17.b3 Qa5 This position
occurred in Zakharevich – Geller, Tula 2001, and here I like 18.Bb2. In Chess Informant 81, Zakharevich gives
18...Ba3 (18...Nb5 19.a3), but White has a strong riposte: 19.b4! Bxb4 (19...Qxb4?? loses to 20.Bxa3 Qxa3
21.Bxh7† followed by 22.Qxa3) 20.a4! Threatening to trap the queen with Nb3. 20...b5 21.axb5 Qb6 22.Qe2!±
The strong b5-pawn seriously limits Black’s activity on the queenside.
16.Bd3 Qh5
This position occurred in Larrass – Flemm, corr. 1988. A good continuation for White is:
17.Nb3N 17...Nc7 18.Bd2 Ba6 19.Rac1
19.Bc2 f6! gives Black counterplay.
19...Bxd3 20.Qxd3 Qg6 21.Qe2²
White is better, as Black’s pieces lack coordination.

The text move was first played in Alburt – Westerinen, Reykjavik 1982, and it has recently emerged as Black’s latest
attempt to rehabilitate this line. His practical results have been decent, but so far nobody has found the best
continuation for White.

15.Nb1!N
A great regrouping move, which slows down Black’s counterplay significantly.

15...Nc6
 A key point is that 15...Qc2? is impossible in view of 16.Qxc2 Rxc2 17.Nc3 Bb4 18.Re3 when the black rook is
trapped behind enemy lines.

16.Nc3 Na5 17.Qd1 Nc4 18.Bd3

White has succeeded in keeping the queenside under control, and it will not be at all easy for Black to do the same on
the other flank.

B2223) 12...Rc8 13.Qa4

13.Qd3 is less accurate due to 13...Nb8! (13...Qc7 14.Bf1 Qc2 15.Qe3! transposes to the note to Black’s 14th move in
the previous variation) 14.Nf1 Ba6 15.Qd1 Nc6 16.Ne3 Nb4 17.Bf1 Bxf1 18.Rxf1 f6÷ with counterplay for Black,
Villamayor – Sandipan, Calcutta 2001.

13...Bc6
Black has tried several moves, but White has achieved good results against all of them, and it is hard to call any of
them the definitive main line. For the sake of simplicity, I have kept the same main line as in GM 1.

13...Qc7 14.Bf1 gives White easy play, and not much has changed since GM 1. 14...a6 15.Bd3 Nb8 16.h4 a5 17.a3 Ba6
18.Bb1 f6 A logical reaction, as Black clearly lacks space, but now the e6-pawn becomes a permanent weakness.
19.exf6 Bxf6 20.Nf1 Qf7 21.Bf4 White was comfortably better in Stefanova – Molchanova, Sochi 2005.

13...a5 14.Nf1!
14.Bf1 Nc7! transposes to 13...Nc7 14.Bf1 a5, which I now prefer to avoid, for reasons explained under the
13...Nc7 line below.
14...Ba6 15.Qd1!
In GM 1 I referenced a game after 15.h4 Bd3 where White kept an edge, but preventing the bishop move is more
ambitious.
15...Nb8
15...b5 was once played against the young Carlsen, but the future world champion convincingly prevailed after
16.h4 b4 17.Ng5 Qc7 18.Ne3 Bxg5 19.hxg5 Qb6 20.Bf1!? Bxf1 21.Kxf1 f5? 22.exf6 gxf6 23.Ng4 in Carlsen –
Leer Salvesen, Oslo 2006.
16.h4 Nc6 17.a3 Bb5 18.b3!?
Not the only good move, but it certainly limits Black’s counterplay. In the following game Black tried a rather
desperate pawn sacrifice, which soon backfired.
18...a4?! 19.bxa4 Bc4 20.Ne3 Na5 21.Nxc4 dxc4 22.Rb1!
White was clearly better in Mchedlishvili – Karakehajov, Konya 2010.

13...Nc7
This seems like quite a logical try, improving the passive knight and preparing ...Ba6.
14.Nf1!
In GM 1 I gave 14.Bf1 a5 15.Bd3 Ba6 16.Bb1 as my main line. It looks tempting to involve the light-squared
bishop in the kingside offensive, but it turns out that Black can exploit White’s temporary lack of coordination to
create counterplay. 16...f5! (Improving over 16...Nb5 17.Qb3 as seen in Avrukh – Filippov, Halkidiki 2002.)
17.exf6 Rxf6 With double-edged play, Halldorsson – Kuzubov, Reykjavik 2010.
14...b5 15.Qd1 b4
This has been Black’s most popular plan in this line, but White has achieved a huge practical score. I will just
mention one practical example.
16.h4 Nb8 17.Bg5 Nc6 18.Ne3 f6 19.exf6 gxf6 20.Bh6±
Black was in trouble in Izoria – Agrest, Las Vegas 2003.

14.Qb3
I prefer not to allow 14.Qd1 Bb5, even though 15.Bf1 Bxf1 16.Nxf1 still gives White the better chances thanks to his
space advantage.

14...b5
Obviously Black should try to get some activity on the queenside.

15.Bf1 Qb6
After 15...b4 I won a smooth game: 16.Ba6! This strong intermediate move disturbs Black’s coordination. 16...Rb8
17.Bd3 Bb5 18.Bb1 Rc8 19.Nf1 Nb6 20.h4 Qc7 21.Bg5 Bxg5? (21...Nc4N is a better try, although 22.N1h2 keeps a
clear advantage for White) 22.Nxg5 h6 23.Nh7+– Avrukh – Al Tamimi, Bajada de la Virgen 2005.

16.Bd3 b4 17.Nf1 h6
Covering the g5-square. In a more recent game Black neglected to do so, and after 17...Bb5 18.Bg5! Bd8 White
suddenly switched to a positional approach: 19.Bxd8! Rxd8 20.Bxb5 Qxb5 21.Rac1 Black had no easy life with his
knight stuck on e8 in Hillarp Persson – Carstensen, Copenhagen 2010.

18.Ne3!N
Improving on 18.Bf4 Bb5 19.Bb1 f5 20.exf6 Nexf6÷ when Black obtained decent counterplay in Izoria – Nadera,
Dubai 2004.

18...Nc7 19.Bb1
Black was threatening ...Nb5.
19...Rfd8 20.Bd2 a5 21.Ng2!²
White’s chances are preferable, as he has good prospects of developing an initiative on the kingside by means of Qe3-
f4-g4, and/or Nf4-h5.

B23) 9...Ba6

This leads to a different type of game from the previous bishop move. If White blocked the centre with e4-e5 then the
bishop would be more active on a6, but if we maintain the central tension then the opposite is true.

10.b3 Rc8
10...c5 11.exd5 exd5 12.Bb2 almost always transposes after 12...Rc8. The only noteworthy independent path is
12...cxd4 13.Nxd4 Rc8, when 14.a4!N transposes to a game that turned out nicely for White: 14...Bb4 (14...dxc4
15.Nxc4 Ne5 16.Nb5! also favours White) 15.Rfd1 Re8
16.Nf1! Qe7 17.Ne3 dxc4 18.Nc6 Qf8 19.Nxc4± The c6-knight had become a monster in Kirov – Boehm, Lyon 1995.

11.Bb2 c5
The modest 11...Qc7 has been played, but I don’t understand it, as the simple 12.e5! Ne8 13.Rfe1 left the knight
clearly misplaced on e8 in Kostiukova – Mironenko, Evpatoria 2007.

11...dxe4 12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.Qxe4 b5

13...c5 14.Rad1 clearly favours White, as Black’s bishop is misplaced on a6 and Black will hardly want to capture
on d4, as White’s knight would be heading straight to c6.
The present position has been considered worse for Black ever since following game from 1979, which remains
as instructive as ever.
14.c5 b4 15.Rfd1 Bb5
Black has managed to activate his light-squared bishop but, in doing so, he has created other weaknesses in his
camp, which White expertly exploits.
16.Qe1! Rb8 17.a3 bxa3 18.Rxa3 Rb7 19.Bc1!
Another strong move; the bishop will be more active on the c1-h6 diagonal.

19...Nf6 20.Bg5 Nd5

In the event of 20...h6 21.Bd2 Nd5 22.Ne5 Black cannot chase the knight away with ...f6, as it would decisively
weaken the g6-square.
21.Bxe7 Nxe7 22.Ne5²
White had an obvious positional advantage thanks to Black’s weak queenside pawns in Quinteros – Petrosian, Buenos
Aires 1979.
12.exd5 exd5 13.Rfd1!
This is a major departure from my previous recommendation of 13.Qf5 g6 14.Qh3, when 14...b5! is a recent
invention that seems to solve Black’s opening problems. For instance: 15.cxb5 I checked some other moves, but was
unable to find anything convincing for White. 15...Bxb5 16.Rfc1 Bd3!? 17.dxc5 h5 18.Nd4? Black eventually lost due
to subsequent mistakes in Jaworski – Rojicek, Czech Republic 2011, but at this point 18...Nxc5N would have left him
with a clear advantage.

Apart from posting the rook on an active square, White’s last move also has the advantage of preparing the Nf1-e3
manoeuvre. Black’s two most important continuations are B231) 13...Re8 and B232) 13...cxd4. I would also like to
mention a couple of minor options:

13...b5 14.cxd5
I also considered the remarkable 14.b4!?, although after 14...cxb4 15.c5 Bb7 16.Qd3 Bc6 (16...a6 17.Bh3©) 17.a3
bxa3 18.Qxa3 Ne4! Black was doing okay in Kalinitschew – Dgebuadze, Meisdorf 1996. This could be
investigated in more detail, but the main continuation seems more straightforward.
14...c4
In the event of 14...Nxd5N 15.dxc5 Nxc5 16.Nf1 Bb7 17.Qe2 Qe8 18.Ne5 Nb6 19.Bxb7 Nxb7 20.Ne3 White
has a serious initiative thanks to his much more active pieces.
This position occurred in Grigorian – Ilinsky, Moscow 1983, and seven subsequent games.
15.Ne5!N
Surprisingly, 15.bxc4 has been the unanimous choice so far.
15...c3 16.Bxc3
This is my preference, although 16.Nc6 is also worth considering. I analysed 16...cxb2 17.Qxb2 Rxc6 18.dxc6
Nb6 19.Ne4! and White’s position looks promising.
16...Nxd5 17.Bxd5 Nxe5 18.Qe4 Nd3 19.Ba5! Qxa5 20.Qxd3
Black does not have enough compensation for the missing pawn.

13...Bb7
This was played in Polovodin – Lputian, Irkutsk 1983, and several subsequent games. (The position has also
occurred with Black to move quite a few times.)
14.Nf1!?N
This typical knight manoeuvre looks best, especially taking into account that 14.Qf5 dxc4 15.Nxc4 b5÷ has
proven pretty reliable for Black.
14...dxc4 15.d5! c3
The pawn is poisoned: 15...Bxd5? 16.Ng5 Bxg2 17.Bxf6 wins material, while 15...Nxd5? 16.bxc4 Nb4 17.Qf5
Rc7 18.Ne5± also leaves Black in trouble.
16.Qxc3 Ne8 17.Ne3
17.d6 seems tempting, but after 17...Bf6 18.Qc2 Bxb2 19.Qxb2 Qf6! I am not sure about the future of the d6-
pawn after the queen exchange, even though the computer still prefers White.
17...Bf6 18.Qc2 Nd6 19.Nc4
White is definitely better; the d5-pawn is well supported, and Black has no real counterplay.

B231) 13...Re8

14.Nf1!
Surprisingly, this strong move has been tested only once. 14.Qf5 and 14.Rac1 have been more popular.

14...b5
14...cxd4N is obviously an important alternative. Play continues 15.Nxd4 dxc4 16.Ne3! with the following idea:
16...cxb3

17.Qb1! Rc7 18.axb3 Qc8 19.Qa2 Bb7 20.Nb5 Rc5 21.Nxa7 Qb8 22.b4 Rc7 23.Nb5 Rcc8 24.Qb3 Bxg2 25.Kxg2
White has a large positional advantage.
The text move was played in A. Mikhalevski – Zoler, Israel 2010. According to my analysis, White has only one way
to fight for an advantage.

15.cxd5!N 15...Nxd5
15...Bb7 16.Ne5 Bxd5 (16...Nxd5 17.Qf5 transposes to the main line) 17.Bxd5 Nxd5 18.Qd3! cxd4 19.Bxd4 Bf8
20.Ng4! is better for White, who can meet both 20...b4 and 20...a6 with 21.Bxg7!.

16.Ne5
16.dxc5 Rxc5 17.Qd3 Bb7 does not seem like anything special for White.
16...Bb7
In the event of 16...cxd4 17.Nc6 Ne5 18.Rxd4 Rxc6 19.Qd1 Black is under unpleasant pressure.

17.Qf5 N7f6 18.dxc5

White retains the better chances, thanks to the following critical line:

18...Rxc5 19.b4 Qc8 20.Nd7! Rc7 21.Bxd5 Nxd5 22.Rxd5 Bxd5

23.Qe5 f6 24.Qxd5† Kh8 25.Nc5 Bxc5 26.bxc5 Rxc5 27.Qb3²

White’s two minor pieces are stronger than Black’s rook and pawn.

B232) 13...cxd4 14.Nxd4

14...b5
This seems critical, and was the reason why I rejected 13.Rfd1 previously. However, I changed my mind after taking
a fresh look at the ensuing complications.
The most popular alternative is 14...Re8, but the following game offers a convincing argument for White: 15.Qf5 g6
16.Qg5! The queen does not have to retreat to h3, which it usually does after Qf5 in these positions. 16...Bf8 17.Nf5
dxc4 18.bxc4 Rc5 19.Nh6† Bxh6 20.Qxh6 Rh5 21.Qf4 Qb8 22.Qxb8 Rxb8 23.Ne4 White had a clear advantage in
Lima – Pelikian, Santos 2001.

15.Nf5!
This rare move is stronger than the more popular 15.Qf5.

15...bxc4
15...Bc5? was played in Eljanov – Azarov, Ohrid 2001. Apparently both players overlooked 16.Bxd5!N 16...Nxd5
17.Ne4! with a winning position for White.

15...Re8 resembles our main line below. 16.Bxd5! Nxd5 17.Nxg7 Bf6 18.Nxe8 Qxe8 occurred in A. Mikhalevski –
Kaganskiy, Israel 2011, and here White could have obtained some advantage with:
19.Re1!N (19.Ne4!?N 19...Bxb2 20.Nd6! Qe5 21.Nxc8 Bxa1 22.cxd5 also favours White, but the text move seems
clearer) 19...Qd8 20.Ne4 bxc4 21.Rad1! The following sequence is more or less forced. 21...Bxb2 22.Rxd5 Bb7
23.Rdd1 Be5 24.Qe2 Bxe4 25.Qxe4 Bg7 26.Qf5 Rc7 27.bxc4 White has good winning chances.

16.bxc4

16...Re8!N
This untested move seems like the only playable option for Black. Others are much worse:

16...Bc5?N 17.Nb3 Bxc4 18.Nxc5 Nxc5 19.Nxg7! Kxg7 20.Qf5 h6 21.Rd4! White’s attack is too powerful.

16...Bxc4? 17.Nxc4 dxc4 (17...Rxc4N 18.Qd3 also leads to serious problems for Black, who must worry about ideas
such as Bxd5, Nxe7† followed by Ba3, and Qe3 followed by Qg5.) 18.Bc3 g6 19.Nh6† Kg7 occurred in Gregory –
Gray, England 2012.

And now 20.Qc1!N would have left Black without a good defence against Ng4.

17.Bxd5! Nxd5 18.Nxg7

This piece sacrifice is an important attacking motif, which we also encountered after 15...Re8 in the notes above. The
position can be investigated more deeply, but I consider it promising for White, and will just show a few illustrative
lines.

18...Bc5 19.Nf1 N5f6 20.Nxe8 Qxe8 21.Re1 Qd8

21...Qf8? 22.Rad1 is much worse for Black.

22.Qf5!
22.Ne3 Qb6 23.Rab1 Qc6 24.Qf5 Qe4 is not so clear. Now a logical sequence might be:
22...Qb6 23.Rab1 Bd4 24.Bxd4 Qxd4 25.Qg5† Kh8 26.Ne3 Rg8 27.Qf5
White has an ideal situation, with realistic winning chances and not much risk at all.

Conclusion

The Closed Catalan remains a popular choice for Black, making the present chapter one of the more important ones in
the book. Starting with the sidelines after both 6...c6 and 6...Nbd7, we dealt with a variety of position types resembling
different variations of the Queen’s Indian, where White’s chances seem preferable.
The main lines occur after 7.Qc2 c6 8.Nbd2 b6 9.e4, when Black has three main moves. 9...dxe4 is the worst-scoring
option for Black, who needs to play accurately just to avoid sinking into abject passivity. Even after his most resilient
continuation, I found a suitable improvement over GM 1 to maintain White’s pleasant advantage.

9...Bb7 10.e5 Ne8 is a popular continuation, when the usual 11.cxd5 cxd5 reaches a French-like structure. The overall
verdict is the same as in GM 1, as White has enough resources to limit his opponent’s counterplay while generating real
attacking possibilities on the kingside. However, I was able to fine-tune the recommendations, with several refinements
at key moments.
Finally we looked at 9...Ba6 10.b3 Rc8 11.Bb2 c5 12.exd5 exd5, which leads to an extremely tense middlegame where
multiple pawn captures might be available at any time. 13.Rfd1! is an important departure from my previous
recommendation, when the Nf1-e3 manoeuvre offers White excellent chances in many lines, although a good level of
tactical awareness will be needed.
A) 7...c5
B) 7...Bd7 8.Qxc4 Bc6 9.Nc3
B1) 9...a6
B2) 9...Nbd7
C) 7...b5!?
D) 7...a6 8.a4
D1) 8...b6
D2) 8...c5
D3) 8...Nc6
D4) 8...Bd7 9.Qxc4 Bc6 10.Bf4
D41) 10...Nd5
D42) 10...Bd6
D43) 10...Nbd7 11.Nc3
D431) 11...Bd6
D432) 11...Rc8
D433) 11...Nb6
D44) 10...a5 11.Nc3 Na6 12.Rac1! Nb4 13.Ne5 Bxg2 14.Kxg2 Nfd5 15.Nxd5
 D441) 15...Qxd5†
D442) 15...Nxd5 16.Bd2
D4421) 16...Bb4
D4422) 16...c6

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.0-0 dxc4
This is Black’s most popular reaction to the Catalan. He can also shuffle the move order, for instance by starting with
4...dxc4, without it making much of a difference.

7.Qc2

This is by far White’s most popular continuation. Needless to say, it is a permanent battleground for the world’s elite
players. We will start by analysing A) 7...c5 and B) 7...Bd7, neither of which have the best reputation, but which
demand a degree of accuracy all the same. Next we will consider C) 7...b5!?, which, amazingly, only came to be
regarded as a serious option in the years after GM 1 was published. Finally, the main line is of course D) 7...a6.

A) 7...c5

Obviously this is not the way to solve Black’s problems, as White keeps unpleasant pressure along the h1-a8 diagonal.

8.dxc5 Bxc5
8...Nc6 9.Nbd2 gives Black nothing better than transposing to the main line with 9...Bxc5.

9.Nbd2!
I believe this to be more precise than 9.Qxc4 Qe7 10.Nc3, though not for the exact reasons given in GM 1.
10...Nbd7! (Previously I suggested that 10...a6 should be okay for Black, but this does not look at all convincing after
11.Ng5!?, for instance 11...b5? 12.Qh4 Bb7, Straub – Bader, Germany 2003, and now the elegant 13.Nxh7!N would
have won a pawn.) 11.Na4 b6 Black was more or less okay in Vesely – Janosi, Internet 2012.
9...Nc6
9...Nbd7 10.Nxc4 obviously favours White. 10...h6 has been played by Smyslov and has brought Black two draws,
but the simple 11.Rd1N 11...Qe7 12.a3 a5 13.Be3 gives White a clear advantage.

10.Nxc4 Qe7
Definitely the most natural move, although a couple of alternatives are worth mentioning.

10...Bd7 11.Nce5
White exploits the hanging bishop on c5 to obtain the two-bishop advantage.
11...Qb6
This has been used recently, and seems like the best option available.
11...Qe7 12.Nxd7 Nxd7 13.Bg5 Qe8?! (Black should probably have tried 13...f6N, but after 14.Bd2 Rac8
15.Rac1² the weakening of the e6-pawn and the h3-c8 diagonal gives White additional targets.) 14.Rad1 Be7
15.Bf4± Wojtkiewicz – Voelker, Philadelphia 1999.
12.Nxd7 Nxd7
This was Boos – Dunlop, email 2012, and now I recommend the accurate:
13.Bd2N 13...Rac8 14.Rac1 Rfd8 15.a3²
White would retain a pleasant edge, thanks to his bishop pair.

10...Nb4!?

This is perhaps the most interesting try for Black, and it was not mentioned in GM 1.
11.Qb1 b5
I also considered 11...Bd7N 12.Nfe5 Nbd5, but found that 13.a4!? Qe7 14.b3 Rfd8 15.Bb2 retains a pleasant edge
for White.
12.Ng5!?
Otherwise Black would solve his problems by neutralizing the Catalan bishop with ...Bb7.
12...Nbd5
Now in Azarov – Berndt, Panormo 2001, White could have maintained some initiative with:
13.Be3!N 13...Nxe3
13...Bxe3 14.Nxe3 h6 15.Nxd5 exd5 16.Nf3² gives White a pleasant position playing against the isolated pawn.
13...Qc7 14.Bxc5 Qxc5 15.Ne5 h6 16.Ne4 Nxe4 17.Qxe4 Qd6 18.Qd4² also favours White.
14.Nxe3 Rb8
Black has no time for 14...Bxe3??, as after 15.fxe3 White threatens Rxf6 in addition to the rook on a8.
15.Rd1 Qe7

16.Ng4! g6 17.Nxf6† Qxf6 18.Ne4 Qe5 19.Nxc5 Qxc5 20.b4

20.Qd3 is also possible. In both cases the position is rather simplified, but White’s pieces are more active and he can
keep playing without any risk.
11.Nfe5
Increasing the pressure along the h1-a8 diagonal.

11...Nxe5
White should not be afraid of 11...Nd4, when 12.Qd1 Rd8 13.e3 Nc6 14.Nxc6 bxc6 15.Qa4 gave him an obvious
advantage in Kern – Siepmann, Recklinghausen 2001.

12.Nxe5 Qc7
12...Bd6 13.Nc4 Bc7

14.b3! Rd8 15.Ba3 Qe8 16.Rfd1± is obviously not an improvement for Black, Tukmakov – Ekstroem, Zürich 1999.

12...Bd4 13.Bf4 Nd5 14.Rfd1 Nxf4 15.gxf4 Qc5 is a recent try, but hardly an improvement. (15...Bb6 16.e3 f6 17.Nc4
Bc7 18.Rd2 Rb8 19.Rad1 gave White a serious advantage in Yusupov – Gerusel, Moscow 1981)

16.Qxc5 Bxc5 17.Rac1 Bb6 18.Nc4! The endgame was extremely unpleasant for Black in Zhao Xue – Ding Yixin,
Xinghua 2010.

13.Be3 Bd6
13...Qxe5 occurred in V. Mikhalevski – Goletiani, Kapuskasing 2004, and now 14.Bxc5N 14...Re8 15.Rfd1 would
have given White a large advantage.

14.Qxc7 Bxc7 15.Bd4

I recommended this as an improvement in GM 1, and it has since been played in one game.

15...Nd5 16.Rac1
16...Bxe5
16...f6 17.Nd3±

17.Bxe5 Bd7 18.e4 Nb6 19.Rfd1 Bc6 20.f3²

With the bishop pair and more active pieces, White had achieved a Catalan player’s dream position in Saric – Zorko,
Nova Gorica 2009.

B) 7...Bd7

Black intends to post the bishop on c6. There is an obvious parallel with the later variation D4, coverage of which
begins on page 268. You can think of this as a ‘lazy version’ for Black: he has avoided the major theoretical paths of
7...a6 8.Qxc4, but the absence of the moves ...a6 and a2-a4 helps White, as Black will not have the b4-outpost for his
pieces.

8.Qxc4
8.Ne5 may look promising at first sight, but after 8...Nc6! (but not 8...Bc6 9.Nxc6 Nxc6 10.e3²) I found no
advantage for White: 9.Nxc6 (9.Qxc4 Nxe5 10.dxe5 Nd5÷) 9...Bxc6 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.Qxc4 Qd5! Black was fine in
Kiss – Bakos, Fuzesabony 2004.

8...Bc6 9.Nc3
This is the first concrete difference from the parallel variation D4, where ...a6 and a2-a4 have been played. In the
latter position, the knight development runs into the annoying ...b5!, when Black equalizes comfortably.

9.Bf4 is less convincing after 9...Nbd7 10.Nc3 Bd6!. Sure, White can play 11.Bd2N and get a modest edge, just as in
the later variation D431, but the text move is stronger and more ambitious. Our aim should be to make Black suffer for
avoiding the 7...a6 variation.

Black has two main options: B1) 9...a6 and B2) 9...Nbd7.

9...Ne4 has also been played, but 10.Qd3 Nxc3 11.bxc3 Nd7 12.Re1 leads straight to variation B2.

B1) 9...a6 10.Bg5 b5

Another direction is 10...Nbd7 11.Rfe1, when Black has tried two ideas:

a) 11...Rb8 prepares ...b5, as after Qxc6 Rb6 the queen will be trapped. However, the simple 12.a4 is a good answer, and
after 12...Nd5 13.Bxe7 Nxe7 14.e4 a5 15.b3 White was clearly better in Vaganian – Smagin, Germany 1993.

b) 11...Nb6 12.Qd3 h6 occurred in the recent game Sethuraman – Surendran, Calcutta 2014, when White exchanged on
f6. I would prefer to keep the dark-squared bishop with 13.Bd2N (or even 13.Bc1!?N); there is no need to eliminate the
knight, as White has already established control over the e4-square. Play may continue 13...Nfd5 14.e4 Nxc3 15.Qxc3
with a pleasant edge to White.
11.Qd3 Nbd7 12.a3!
This move is a further reminder as to why the version with the pawn on a2 instead of a4 is favourable for White. Now
...b4 has been prevented, and White’s control over the e4-square has been strengthened. The last move also prepares
b2-b4, which will prevent the ...c5 advance.

12...Bb7
Practice has also seen: 12...h6 13.Bxf6 (This has always been played, but 13.Bf4!?N certainly deserves
consideration.) 13...Nxf6 14.Rac1 Bxf3? This is an obvious concession which gives White a big positional advantage.
(14...Qb8N is better, although 15.Rfd1 Qb6 16.Qc2 Bb7 17.e4 maintains a pleasant edge for White) 15.Bxf3±
Stefansson – Delgado Ramirez, Havana 2001.

13.b4
 Needless to say, White does not intend to grant Black permission to play ...c5.

13...Nd5
This is a recent innovation, but it does not really change anything.

13...h6 14.Bxf6 Nxf6 15.Ne5 Bxg2 16.Kxg2 Bd6 17.Nc6! Qe8 18.Qf3 gave White a big positional advantage in
Gleizerov – Akhmadeev, Kstovo 1997.

13...a5 14.Qxb5 axb4 15.Qxb7 bxc3 occurred in Wojtkiewicz – Berset, Geneva 1995, and now I would like to point out
an improvement that I overlooked in GM 1:

16.Ne5!N 16...Rb8 (16...Nxe5 17.Qxa8! wins the exchange) 17.Qc6 Nxe5 18.dxe5 Nd5 19.Bxe7 Qxe7 20.e4 Nb6
21.Rfc1± White will soon be a pawn up with a clear advantage.

14.Bxe7 Qxe7
15.Nd2!N
A significant improvement over 15.Ne4 f5! 16.Nc5 Nxc5 17.bxc5 Nf6! when White had only slightly better chances
in a double-edged position in Laxman – Liew Chee Meng, Kuala Lumpur 2014.

15...f5 16.Rac1 Rac8 17.Rfe1 Ba8 18.e4 Nxc3 19.Qxc3±

White is in full control, and Black will suffer for his pawn weaknesses.

B2) 9...Nbd7

This natural developing move has been the most popular choice.

10.Re1
 I prefer this calm move over the more popular 10.Qd3.

10...Ne4
White was threatening e2-e4, establishing full control over the centre.

10...Nb6 11.Qd3 leaves Black unable to prevent White’s plan. A good illustrative example continued: 11...Nbd5

12.e4 Nxc3 13.bxc3 b5 14.Ne5 Be8 15.c4 c5 16.d5 White was clearly better in Pogonina – Sukhareva, Moscow 2009.

11.Qd3!
Previously I recommended 11.d5 exd5 12.Nxd5 Nb6 13.Nxe7† Qxe7 14.Qc2 as played in Jovanic – Lazovic, Pula
1999, but White’s advantage is not that great, especially after the accurate 14...Nf6!N.

11...Nxc3 12.bxc3 f5
 A natural attempt to prevent e2-e4.

12...b6? is just a blunder, and after 13.Ng5! Bxg5 14.Bxc6 Black had to part with the exchange in Ki. Georgiev – Can,
Sarajevo 2011.

13.Nd2
The fight for the e4-square continues!

13...Bxg2 14.Kxg2 Nb6

Another game continued 14...c5 15.Rb1 Nb6 16.e4 cxd4 17.cxd4 Qd7 18.Nf3 Rac8 19.Bf4 and White retained a solid
advantage in Grochowski – Krygier, email 2008.

15.e4 Qd7 16.Rb1 Qc6

16...Rac8 makes White’s task was easier after: 17.exf5! Rxf5 18.Qe4 Rcf8 19.f4 Ra5 20.Ra1 Nd5 21.Qxe6† Qxe6
22.Rxe6 Kf7 23.Re5 Bf6

24.Nb3! Bxe5 25.Nxa5 Bf6 26.Bd2± White emerged with an extra pawn in Ahleao – Andriytx, email 2012.

We have been following Szczepanski – Ottesen, email 2009. Here I like:

17.Rb3!N 17...Rab8 18.Qb5 Qxb5 19.Rxb5
White has a pleasant endgame with continuing pressure.

C) 7...b5!?

This move was practically unknown when GM 1 was published, but it has since come to be recognized as a serious
alternative to the main line.

8.a4 b4
It is well known that 8...c6? is a serious mistake due to 9.axb5 cxb5 10.Ng5! when White is almost winning: 10...h6
(Obviously 10...Nd5 is not possible due to mate on h7.) 11.Nxf7! (even stronger than 11.Bxa8) 11...Rxf7 12.Bxa8
Qxd4 13.Be3 Qg4 14.Bf3 Qh3 This occurred in Plassmann – Blanke, Germany 2007, and now the simple 15.Rxa7N
would have given White an easily winning position.

9.Nfd2!
Several games have shown that 9.Ne5 Qxd4 10.Bxa8 Qxe5÷ is extremely double-edged, and most strong players
have switched to the text move.

9...c6
Other options are rarely played, and not without reason.

9...b3
This forcing approach is too risky.
10.Qxc4 Ba6 11.Qxb3 c6
This position first occurred in Ashwin – Rusev, Golden Sands 2013. Instead of the natural 12.Nc3, which
somehow failed to impress in the game, I propose:
12.Ne4!N 12...Bxe2
Capturing the central pawn with 12...Qxd4 enables White to generate serious pressure after: 13.Be3 Qc4
14.Nxf6† Bxf6 15.Qa3! Nd7 16.Nc3²
13.Nxf6† Bxf6 14.Re1 Ba6
14...Bg4 15.Qc4 Nd7 16.a5 Rb8 17.Nc3² also favours White.
15.Nc3 Bxd4
15...Qxd4? is much worse due to 16.Be3 Qc4 17.Qa3! when the threat of Ne4 is close to decisive.
16.Nb5 Bb6 17.Be3©
White has powerful compensation.

9...Nd5
This has occurred in several games, but without much success for Black.
10.Nxc4 c5
In the event of 10...Nc6 11.e3 Ba6, White should be careful and anticipate Black’s possible ideas. A strong
stabilizing move is 12.b3!N± which leaves White with a clear positional superiority. Instead the seemingly
natural 12.Nbd2 was played in Yevseev – Serrano Salvador, St Petersburg 2012, when Black could have
obtained counterplay with 12...b3!N 13.Qxb3 Rb8 14.Qd1 Ncb4©, followed by ...c5, with a lot of compensation.
11.dxc5 Bxc5
12.e4!?N
I consider this a natural improvement over 12.Nbd2 Nd7 13.e4 N5b6 14.e5?! Melkumyan – Can, Sarajevo 2011,
when 14...Ba6!N would have given Black a comfortable game.
12...Nb6
In the event of 12...Nf6 13.Bg5 Bb7 14.Nbd2 White has a stable advantage.
13.Ncd2!
I prefer this calm regrouping over 13.Ne5, which seems less clear after 13...N8d7 14.a5 b3!.
13...Qc7
Black cannot play 13...Be7? in view of 14.a5 N6d7 15.e5 and White wins.
14.Nb3 Na6 15.Rd1 Bb7 16.a5 Nd7 17.Bf4 e5 18.Be3
White has a clear positional edge.
10.Nxc4 Qxd4
Grabbing the pawn is the only challenging idea. Instead after 10...Ba6 11.Rd1 Nbd7 12.Nbd2 Rc8 13.e4 Nb6 14.a5
Nxc4 15.Nxc4 White had a stable positional advantage in A. Mikhalevski – Hess, Wheeling 2012.

11.Rd1 Qc5 12.Be3

White has a lead in development and a brilliant outpost on c4. This, along with Black’s undeveloped queenside, gives
him a lot of play for the sacrificed pawn.

12...Qh5
So far nobody has tried 12...Qf5N, and indeed after 13.Qxf5 exf5 14.Nbd2 Be6 15.Na5 followed by Rac1, Black is
doomed to passive defence.

13.Nbd2 Ng4
13...e5 14.Ne4 Ng4 15.h4 Bf5 occurred in Bu – Yang, China 2014. Black has some activity on the kingside, but it is
hard to believe he can succeed this way when three of his pieces have yet to come into play. White could have obtained
a clear advantage as follows:

16.Qc1!N With ideas of Bc5 or Ncd6. 16...Bxe4 (16...Nxe3 17.Qxe3±) 17.Bxe4 f5 18.Bf3 e4 19.Bxg4 Qxg4 20.Ne5
Qxe2 21.Rd2 Qh5 (21...Qa6 22.Bc5 also puts Black under serious pressure) 22.Qc4† Kh8 23.Rad1 White has a huge
initiative.

I also considered:
13...Ba6 14.Bf3!N
This is stronger than 14.Nf3 when, in Gupta – Munkhgal, Sharjah 2014, Black should have continued 14...Nd5N
with unclear play.
14...Qg6
14...Ng4 15.Bxg4 Qxg4 16.f3 Qg6 17.Ne4© also gives White a lot of compensation.
15.Ne4! Nbd7
After 15...Nd5 16.Ne5 Qf5 17.Bd4± the black queen is in danger.
16.Na5
White easily develops his initiative, for instance:
16...Ne5 17.Nxc6 Nxf3† 18.exf3 Rfe8 19.Nxe7† Rxe7 20.Qc5 Ree8 21.Nd6±

14.Nf3 Nxe3
Eliminating the bishop is natural. I found two examples where other moves were tried:

14...Nd7?! 15.Bd4 Bc5 (15...c5N 16.h3! Ngf6 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.g4 Qg6 19.Qc1! also gives White a clear advantage.)
16.h3 Ngf6 This occurred in Sieglen – Kutzner, Berlin 2012.
 And now the simple 17.g4!N 17...Qg6 18.Qc1+– would have decided the game on the spot, thanks to Black’s
vulnerable queen.

14...e5 15.Bd2!
The threat of h2-h3 is a pain for Black here too.
15...b3
15...Bc5N 16.Be1± does not help Black.
The text move was played in Edvardsson – Zumsande, Reykjavik 2012. Instead of capturing on b3, which might
have allowed Black some counterplay, I would prefer:

16.Qd3!N
Luring the enemy rook to d8.
16...Rd8
 16...Bc5 17.Be1 Be6 18.Rac1 is clearly better for White, as Black cannot do much against the plan of h2-h3 and
g3-g4.
17.Qxb3 e4
The main point of White’s play is that 17...Bc5? loses to 18.Be1!, when the position of the rook on d8 starts to
tell.
18.h3 Nxf2
18...exf3? 19.hxg4 Bxg4 20.exf3 Be6 21.Bb4! is winning for White.
19.Kxf2 exf3 20.Qxf3

20...Qc5†
20...Qxf3† leaves White with an endgame advantage after any of the three possible recaptures; the computer’s top
choice is 21.Kxf3!? Be6 22.Na5.
21.Ne3
White has an obvious initiative thanks to his lead in development.

15.Nxe3 a5
16.Nd4!
16.Nc4 was played in the stem game, but after 16...Ba6 White failed to prove any advantage in Gelfand –
Ponomariov, Olginka 2011. The text move has since emerged as an improvement.

16...Ba6
16...Ra7 17.Rac1 Ba6 transposes to 17...Ra7 below.

17.Rac1
White continues to improve his position with every move. His compensation is beyond any doubt, but it is important
to understand that he can fight for an advantage.

17...Rc8
Black can also try:
17...Ra7 18.Bf3! Qe5 19.Ng4!N
A clear improvement over 19.Nxc6?! Nxc6 20.Qxc6 Qb8!, when Black had absolutely no problems in Ju Wenjun
– Wei Yi, Ho Chi Minh City 2012.
19...Qc7 20.Bxc6 Qc8
20...Rc8 runs into 21.Qe4! Qb6 22.Bb5 and White retains serious pressure.
21.Bb5!
Exchanging the light-squared bishops will enable White to attack the enemy pawns on the queenside. The
following line looks pretty logical.
21...Qxc2 22.Rxc2 Rd8 23.Bxa6 Rxa6
23...Nxa6?! 24.Ne5±
24.Rd3 Rad6 25.Nb3²
With ongoing pressure.

18.Bf3 Qg6
18...Qe5N is a logical alternative, when 19.Ng4 Qc7 20.Qe4! Ra7 21.Ne5© seems like the right way to develop
White’s initiative.

19.Be4
It is too early for a queen swap: 19.Qxg6 hxg6 20.Nb3 Kf8 and Black should hold easily.

19...Qh5
20.Rd2!?N
This is more flexible than 20.Nc4 Bxc4 21.Qxc4 Ra7 as occurred in Helbich – Kupsys, email 2011.

20...Ra7 21.Rcd1©
It goes without saying that White has great compensation for the pawn. Black’s position remains solid, but I would
definitely prefer to be playing White’s side.

D) 7...a6

This is the classical main line, which remains popular at all levels. Here we have perhaps the most significant change
of direction from GM 1 in the entire Catalan.
8.a4
 Previously I recommended 8.Qxc4 b5 9.Qc2 Bb7 10.Bd2, but my impression at the moment is that Black has found
more than one route to equality. 10...Be4 11.Qc1 Bb7 is one main line, while 10...Bd6 has become Black’s most
popular move at high levels in recent years.

The text move leads to a radically different type of game, where White prevents his opponent’s queenside expansion at
the cost of a slight weakening of his own queenside, especially the b4-square. At this point D1) 8...b6, D2) 8...c5 and
D3) 8...Nc6 are all playable, but D4) 8...Bd7 is the main line by far.

D1) 8...b6 9.Ne5

9...Ra7
Black intends ...Bb7 to exchange the light-squared bishops. I was surprised to see that this has been played by such
strong players as Spassky and Short.

9...Nd5 does not make much sense, and after 10.Qxc4 Bb7 11.Nc3 c6 12.Rd1 White had a dream Catalan position in
Morovic Fernandez – Rodriguez Vargas, Copenhagen 1990.

10.Rd1
I consider this more accurate than 10.Qxc4, which allows 10...c5.

10...Bb7 11.e4!
An important move, as after 11.Bxb7 Rxb7 12.Qxc4 c5 13.Nc3 cxd4 Black is close to equality.
11...Nc6 12.Nxc6 Bxc6 13.Nc3 Ba8
13...Bb7 was played in Adamski – Luczak, Piotrkow Trybunalski 1977, and a couple of other games, but for some
reason White never chose the obvious plan of regaining the pawn with 14.Qe2N. A logical continuation is 14...Bb4
15.Bg5 Bxc3 16.bxc3 h6 17.Bxf6 Qxf6 18.Qxc4² and White maintains a pleasant edge.

14.Qe2 c6 15.Qxc4 b5

16.Qf1!N
An important nuance. Instead after 16.Qe2 b4 17.e5 bxc3 18.exf6 c2! 19.Qxc2 Bxf6 Black had a decent position in
Hübner – Spassky, Bad Kissingen 1980.

16...b4 17.e5 bxc3

 17...Nd5 18.Ne4 is clearly better for White.

18.exf6 Bxf6 19.bxc3²

Having prevented the ...c2 idea, White changes the pawn structure and maintains an edge.

D2) 8...c5 9.dxc5 Nc6

9...Bxc5 is likely to lead to the same thing after 10.Nbd2 Nc6 11.Nxc4.

10.Na3 Bxc5 11.Nxc4 Qe7

This has been by far the most popular choice in the position. Other moves also fail to bring Black an easy life, as the
following brief lines illustrate:

11...Nb4 12.Qb3 Qe7 13.Bd2 Nbd5 14.Nfe5± was clearly better for White in Koshy – Parameswaran, New Delhi 1982.

11...Bd7 12.Nce5 Qe7 13.Nxd7 Nxd7 occurred in Menezes – Kleiser, Vienna 2014. White has more than one way to
maintain an edge, but I especially like 14.Bg5!?N 14...f6 15.Bd2, when the slight weakening of Black’s light squares
increases the value of the Catalan bishop.

12.Nfe5 Nxe5
Other options hardly improve Black’s chances:

12...Nd4?! 13.Qd1 Rd8 14.Bd2 Ne8 occurred in D. Gurevich – Schwarz, Biel 1991, and now the simple 15.e3 Nf5
16.Qb3± would have given White a strategically winning position.
12...Nb4 13.Qb3 a5 14.Bd2 Nfd5 15.Rfd1 b6 16.e4 Nc7 (16...Nf6N is a better try, although 17.Rac1 Ba6 18.Be3 still
gives White a clear plus) 17.Bxb4! axb4 18.Nd3± White was much better in Franco Alonso – Barez Menendez, Madrid
2005.

13.Nxe5
Many games have been played from this position, but the general assessment is obvious, as White keeps a pleasant
advantage thanks to his powerful Catalan bishop. The following game remains as good an example as any:
13...Nd5 14.Nd3 Bd6 15.Bd2 Bd7 16.Qb3 a5 17.Rfd1²
Black was under annoying pressure in Tukmakov – Petursson, Bern 1991.

D3) 8...Nc6 9.Qxc4

Black has tried many different moves from here, but in most cases White will get an easy advantage with natural play.
Rather than wasting space discussing a lot of inferior options in what is already a sideline, I will focus on a few of the
more forcing options.

9...Qd5
This natural move has been the most popular choice by far. It is also worth briefly mentioning:
9...Nb4 10.Bd2 a5
 10...b5?N fails to 11.Qb3 bxa4 12.Rxa4 a5 13.Ne5 and Black is in trouble.
11.Na3
11.Rd1!?N is also worth considering.
11...Ne4 12.Bxb4 Bxb4
12...axb4N 13.Nc2 Bd7 14.a5 c6 15.a6 Rxa6 16.Rxa6 bxa6 17.Qxa6 c5 18.Ne5 Nf6 19.dxc5 Bxc5 20.Nd3 leaves
White with thematic Catalan pressure.
Now in Sturm – Raedeker, Wuerttemberg 1998, a logical continuation would have been:

13.Qc2N 13...Nf6 14.Nc4²

White enjoys a pleasant edge.

10.Nbd2 Rd8
It is important to understand that the queenless position after 10...Qxc4 11.Nxc4 a5, as occurred in Quinteros –
Sharif, Jakarta 1978, is quite pleasant for White. I suggest 12.Bd2N 12...Rd8 13.Rfc1 Bd7 14.e3 Nd5 15.Ne1 Be8
16.Nd3 when White maintains a small but stable edge.

11.e3
I was surprised to find well over a hundred games from this position. Once again, I will just focus on the few
continuations that I consider most logical for Black.
11...Qh5
11...a5 was played in a recent game, which continued: 12.b3 (12.Qe2!?N also comes into consideration) 12...Qh5
13.Bb2 Bd7 Zhou Weiqi – Wei Yi, China 2013. Now 14.Rac1N looks natural, and if 14...Rac8 15.e4!? Nb4 16.Ne5 c5
17.Bf3 Qh6 18.Qe2 White has a clear advantage.

11...Qxc4 12.Nxc4 Rb8

12...Bd7 13.Bd2 a5 14.Rfc1 Nd5 transposes to 10...Qxc4 11.Nxc4 a5 12.Bd2N, as covered in the note to Black’s
10th move above.
13.Rd1!
This is more accurate than 13.Bd2 Ne4 14.Rfc1 Nxd2 15.Nfxd2 Nb4 16.Nb3 f6 when Black had an adequate
game in Ftacnik – Beliavsky, Yerevan (ol) 1996.
13...Bd7 14.Bd2 Ne4 15.Be1
By keeping the dark-squared bishop alive, White maintains some pressure.
15...Be8 16.Rdc1 Rdc8
16...f6N 17.Nfd2 Nxd2 18.Nxd2 Bb4 19.Nc4 Bxe1 20.Rxe1² also gives White the better game.
17.Nfe5 Nxe5 18.Nxe5 Nf6
Now in Wen Yang – Wei Yi, Danzhou 2013, White should have played:
19.Nd3N
With a typical Catalan edge.

12.h3
I like to secure the kingside, while preparing a possible g3-g4 at a suitable moment. I will just mention one example
from this position.

12...Nd5!? 13.e4 Ndb4

14.Nb3!?N
14.Qc3 brought White a convincing victory after 14...a5?! 15.Nc4 Bf6 16.Be3 h6 17.Rfd1 b6 18.Bf4 Rd7 19.Ne3±
when he was clearly better in Banusz – Sebenik, Sarajevo 2013. However, Black can improve with 14...f6!N 15.Nc4
b6, with an adequate position.

14...b6 15.Bd2 Bb7 16.Rfc1 Rac8 17.a5!²

White has a pleasant game, with more space in the centre and some pressure on the queenside.

D4) 8...Bd7 9.Qxc4

9...Bc6
This is the obvious follow-up to Black’s last move.

9...b5 is a risky move which weakens the queenside unnecessarily. 10.Qc2 Nc6 11.Ne5! Nb4 occurred in Hoffman –
Franco, Sao Paulo 2001, and now White should have played 12.Qd2!N 12...Rb8 13.Nc3 bxa4 14.Nxa4 Bb5 15.Rd1²
with a pleasant edge.

10.Bf4
10.Nc3 b5! is fine for Black with the knight on c3 as a target. I also failed to find anything interesting after the most
popular 10.Bg5, but fortunately the text move is more promising.

Black now has several options: D41) 10...Nd5, D42) 10...Bd6, D43) 10...Nbd7, and the most popular D44) 10...a5.

D41) 10...Nd5 11.Bd2!

11.Nc3
Despite having achieved a most memorable victory with this move, I must confess that it is not the best.
11...Nxf4 12.gxf4 Bd6!
This seems most accurate. My game continued: 12...a5 13.Ne5 Bxg2 14.Kxg2 c6 15.Rad1 Na6 16.e3 Nb4
17.Rg1 Nd5 18.Kh1 f6?! This weakens the light squares and the kingside, and I was able to take full advantage.
19.Nf3 Qb6 20.Qf1 Qxb2 21.Nxd5 cxd5 22.f5! Qb6 23.Qh3 Rfe8 24.Rxg7†! Kxg7 25.Rg1† Kh8 26.Nh4 h6
 27.Ng6† Kh7 28.fxe6 Ra6 29.Qf5 Qxe6 30.Nf8† 1–0 Avrukh – Sanikidze, Novi Sad 2009.
13.e3 Nd7
There was a time when I felt inspired by this type of structure with a half-open g-file, but objectively speaking the
position is just unclear and double-edged. A good illustrative line is:

14.Kh1 Nf6 15.Rg1 Bxf3!N

15...Ne4?! 16.Nxe4 Bxe4 17.Ng5! Bxg2† 18.Rxg2² was good for White in Kraai – Rosen, Indianapolis 2009, as
his remaining knight was stronger than Black’s bishop.
16.Bxf3 c6
Black has a solid position with balanced chances.

11...Nd7
It is important to mention that 11...Bb5?? does not work in view of 12.axb5 axb5 13.Qxd5! Qxd5 14.Rxa8+– as first
occurred in Kozul – Lekic, Neum 2004.
12.Rd1 a5 13.Qc2
I prefer this to 13.Qb3, which encourages 13...Ra6 followed by ...Rb6.

13...Nb4 14.Bxb4 Bxb4 15.e4

White has gained space in the centre and enjoys a pleasant edge.

15...Nb6

16.Nc3N
There is no point in leaping forward with 16.Ne5 Be8 17.Nc3 as in Buhmann – Poetsch, Schwaebisch Gmuend 2012,
as Black could have played 17...f6N 18.Nf3 Bh5, activating his light-squared bishop.

16...Be8
Obviously White should take the possibility of 16...Bxc3 17.bxc3 Qe8 into consideration. Black indeed grabs a pawn,
but White gets fantastic compensation after:
18.Rdb1 Bxa4 19.Qd3! followed by c4-c5.

17.Na2 Be7 18.Nc1²

White retains a pleasant advantage.

D42) 10...Bd6

This recently came into fashion and has been played several times at the highest level.

11.Qc1!
This rare move is White’s most promising option. He fails to achieve any advantage after 11.Nc3 Bxf4 12.gxf4 a5, or
11.Bg5 Nbd7 12.Nc3 h6 13.Bxf6 Nxf6. The latter line has been tested extensively at grandmaster level, but Black
generally holds the position without much effort.
11...a5
I will take this as the main line, as it seems like the most logical move and was used successfully by Kramnik last
year. Here are a few other possibilities:

11...Bxf4 12.Qxf4 Qd6 13.Qc1!N

This is a pretty obvious improvement over 13.Qxd6 cxd6 14.Nbd2, when the arising endgame is harmless for
Black, who can even simplify with 14...Bxf3!? 15.Bxf3 d5 16.Rfc1 Nc6= as in Nowak – Bielavsky, Warsaw
1979.

13...Bd5
13...Nbd7 14.Nbd2 White intends Qc2 followed by e2-e4, and if 14...Ne4 15.Nc4 Qb4 16.Nfe5 Nxe5 17.Nxe5
Bd5 18.e3² he maintains the better game.
14.Nc3
14.Nbd2?! Nc6 15.e3 Nb4 looks solid enough for Black.
14...Nc6 15.e3 Rad8 16.a5²

11...Nbd7 12.Nc3 Ne4 13.Rd1!

After this useful move, it transpires that all the central tension is favourable for White.
13...Bxf4
I also considered the ambitious 13...Nxc3!?N 14.bxc3 Nb6, but after 15.a5 Nc4 16.Qc2 Bxf4 17.gxf4 Qd5
18.Qa2! Nd6 19.Qxd5 Bxd5 (or 19...exd5 20.Ne5) 20.Ne5 White has the better endgame.
14.Qxf4 Ndf6
All this happened in P.H. Nielsen – Antonsen, Koge 2013. Here White could have increased his pressure by
means of:
15.Ne5! Nxc3 16.bxc3 Bxg2 17.Kxg2 Nd5 18.Qf3
White has a pleasant edge, with a central pawn majority, more active pieces and pressure on the queenside.

12.Nc3
12.Bd2?! is too passive, and after 12...Nbd7 13.Rd1 Qe8 14.Bc3 Ne4 15.Nfd2 f5 16.Nxe4 fxe4 17.Be1 Qh5 18.Nc3
Nf6 Black easily obtained a comfortable position in Giri – Kramnik, Stavanger 2014.

12...Na6 13.Rd1N
The only game from this position continued 13.Bg5 h6 14.Bh4 Bxf3 15.Bxf6 (15.Bxf3 c6 does not change much)
15...Qxf6 16.Bxf3 c6 17.Rd1 Rad8 and Black had easily solved his problems in Fridman – Boruchovsky, Warsaw
2013.

The text move seems like an obvious attempt to improve. I will offer some illustrative lines showing logical play on
both sides.

13...Nb4 14.Bg5
This seems like the most ambitious try.

14.Nb5!? also deserves some attention. It is not clear if White will want to exchange on d6 with either the knight or the
bishop, but it certainly gives Black something to think about. You may wish to explore this in more detail by yourself,
but I will just mention that 14...Bxf4 15.Qxf4 seems to favour White, for instance: 15...Nfd5 (or 15...Bxb5 16.axb5
Qd7 17.Qg5! Nbd5 18.Bf1!²) 16.Qc1 Nb6 (16...Nf6 17.Ne5 Bxg2 18.Kxg2²) 17.b3 Bd5 18.Qb2 White keeps a slight
pull.

14...h6
We will take this as the main line, as Black reacted similarly in the aforementioned Fridman – Boruchovsky game.

14...Be7 is a playable alternative. White does not have anything serious, but he has the freedom to choose between two
decent types of positions of differing characteristics. 15.Ne5 Bxg2 16.Kxg2 Nd7 17.Bxe7 Qxe7 18.Nc4 reaches a
solid position with a slight space advantage, while 15.Bxf6!? Bxf6 16.e4 is a more ambitious idea, relinquishing the
bishop pair in order to establish a strong pawn centre and stifle the c6-bishop.

15.Bh4 Bxf3
15...Be7 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.e4 can be compared with 14...Be7 15.Bxf6!? above. The extra ...h6 move slightly favours
White, as the typical plan of ...g6 followed by ...Bg7 will leave Black’s kingside slightly less secure.

16.Bxf3 c6 17.e4
Compared to the Fridman – Boruchovsky game, the inclusion of the moves Rd1 and ...Nb4 means that Black is
unable to meet this move with ...e5.

17...Be7
18.e5 Nfd5
In the event of 18...Nd7 19.Bxe7 Qxe7 20.Ne4 White keeps a slight pull.

19.Bxe7 Qxe7 20.Ne4

We have reached a complex position where both sides have their trumps, but I slightly prefer White. One of the many
possible ideas is to try and generate some kingside play with Ra3, Bh5, Rf3 and so on.

D43) 10...Nbd7

This has been quite a popular choice. The drawback is that Black passes up the opportunity to make use of the
weakened b4-square.
11.Nc3
Now the three most important options are D431) 11...Bd6, D432) 11...Rc8 and D433) 11...Nb6.

It is worth briefly mentioning:

11...Nd5 12.Nxd5 exd5
In the event of 12...Bxd5N White should not rush to capture the c7-pawn, as 13.Qxc7 Qxc7 14.Bxc7 Rfc8
15.Rfc1 Nc5! gives Black excellent chances to hold. 13.Qc2! is stronger, when Black must either allow e2-e4
with tempo or give up his light-squared bishop, both of which give White an obvious advantage.
13.Qc2
13.Qb3!?N could also be considered.
13...Re8 14.Rfd1 a5 15.Ne5! Ra6
Now in Parappalli – Ganesan, Calcutta 1992, White should have played:

16.Nxc6!N 16...bxc6
16...Rxc6 17.Qb3 Nb6 18.Bd2! wins the a5-pawn, but the text move is not much fun for Black either.
17.e4
White has a serious advantage.

D431) 11...Bd6
 This move has been tried by several strong players, but White’s best reply is almost unknown.

12.Bd2!?
This is almost a novelty, having occurred in just a single email game.

12...Ne4
The quiet 12...Qe7N enables White to establish control over the e4-square: 13.Rfe1 Bb4 14.Ne4 Nd5 15.Bxb4 Qxb4
16.Qc2²

I also considered 12...Nb6N 13.Qd3 Nbd5 14.Nxd5 Bxd5 (14...exd5 15.Ne5 looks promising for White) 15.Bg5 Be7
16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.e4 Bc6 18.Rfd1 Qd7 19.b3 Rfd8 20.Rac1 and White is slightly better.

13.Nxe4 Bxe4 14.Ng5!

A well-timed operation. Once again, the main idea is to win control over the e4-square.

14...Bxg2 15.Kxg2 Nf6

16.Rac1!N
There is no point in rushing with 16.e4 h6 17.e5 when a draw was agreed in Kipso – Dmitriev, email 2010. Indeed,
after 17...Nd5 18.exd6 hxg5 Black is not worse.

The text move just leads to a calm position where White has a slight space advantage and better central control.

16...h6
16...Rc8 runs into the annoying 17.Qb3!.

17.Nf3 Ne4 18.Ba5

White maintains some pressure.

D432) 11...Rc8 12.Rfd1

 This seems like the most flexible choice. The next few moves are logical, and have occurred a few times in practice.

12...Nb6 13.Qb3 Nbd5 14.Bg5!

This strong move enables White to develop some pressure.

14...Nd7
14...h6 15.Bxf6 Bxf6 16.Ne4! Qe7 occurred in Buhmann – Oud, Bad Wiessee 2010. At this point the most
convincing way to increase White’s advantage would have been 17.Ne1!N, for instance: 17...Rfd8 18.Nxf6† Qxf6
19.e4 Nb6 20.a5 Nd7 21.Nc2±

15.Bd2 Nxc3 16.bxc3 b6

This position occurred in Miton – Bulski, Warsaw 2010, and now I like the following idea.
17.Qc4!N 17...Bb7 18.Ne1 Bxg2 19.Kxg2 a5
From now on, the thematic ...c5 will leave Black with a permanent weakness on b6.

20.Rab1 Nf6 21.Bg5 Qd5† 22.Qxd5 Nxd5

22...exd5 23.e3 leaves White with the straightforward plan of Rdc1, Nd3, Bxf6 and c3-c4, with a lot of pressure.

23.Bxe7 Nxe7 24.e4²

Despite the simplifications, White can continue pressing for a long time.

D433) 11...Nb6

This has been the most popular choice by far.

12.Qd3!
12.Qb3 has scored slightly higher, but I failed to discover any advantage for White after 12...Nfd5!.

12...Nbd5
An important alternative is:
12...Nfd5 13.Bc1!N
This is my new idea, offering a pawn sacrifice. Most games have continued 13.Nxd5 Nxd5 14.Bd2 Nf6 when
Black is perfectly okay.
13...Nxc3
13...Nb4 should be met by 14.Qd1, which explains why the bishop went to c1 rather than d2 on the previous
move. Now White is nicely coordinated and ready for e2-e4.
14.bxc3

14...Nxa4
14...Bxa4 15.c4 gives White excellent compensation while also setting a nice trap: the logical 15...c5 runs into
16.Bd2! when it is hard for Black to deal with the Ba5 threat.
15.c4
White’s powerful centre gives him plenty of compensation for the pawn.
13.Bg5
Several players have exchanged knights on d5, but I see absolutely no point in doing so.

13...Nxc3
13...Nb4 has been played twice, but for some reason neither White player chose 14.Qb1N, fighting for control over
e4. A logical continuation is: 14...h6 15.Bxf6 Bxf6 16.e4 Qd7 (16...Bxd4? 17.Rd1 e5 18.Nxe5! is clearly better for
White) 17.Rd1 We have reached a typical double-edged middlegame, where I would favour White’s strong centre over
Black’s bishop pair.

14.bxc3 Be4 15.Qe3

15...Bd5
 15...Bc6 16.a5 h6 17.Bxf6 Bxf6 has been played a few times. A good example for White is: 18.Qd3! Qd6 (18...Rb8
19.e4²) 19.Rfb1 Bb5 20.c4 Bc6 21.e3 White maintained a favourable position in Djoudi – Migliorini, email 2005.

16.Rfd1
White should not force the issue with 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.Qd3, as 17...c5 18.e4 Bc6÷ led to double-edged play in
Cummings – Upton, Pula 1997.

16...c5
In the event of 16...Rc8 White is better placed to take action in the centre: 17.Bxf6! Bxf6 18.Qd3 c5 19.e4 Bc6 20.d5!
exd5 21.exd5 Bd7 22.Nd2²

This position occurred in Luppi – Lotti, corr. 1998. Here I found a remarkable idea:

17.c4!N 17...Bxc4 18.dxc5 Qc7

18...Bd5 19.Ne5 retains some pressure for White.

19.Bf4!
An important follow-up.

19...Qxc5
If the queen moves somewhere else then White’s bishop comes to d6 with a lot of power.
20.Qxc5 Bxc5 21.Rdc1 Rac8
21...b5 is hardly a good idea in view of 22.Ne5! Rad8 23.Nxc4 bxc4 24.Rxc4 with a clear advantage for White.

22.Rxc4 Bxf2† 23.Kxf2 Rxc4 24.Nd2

Materially Black is okay for the moment, but White is still the clear favourite, with two strong bishops against a rook.

D44) 10...a5

This is Black’s most popular choice by some margin. By fixing the b4-square as an outpost, Black highlights one of
the main drawbacks of the 8.a4 variation.

11.Nc3 Na6
 This logical follow-up has been almost universally played.
I found one example where Black placed his bishop on b4 instead of the knight: 11...Bb4 12.Ne5 (I also like
12.Rfd1N 12...Nbd7 13.Ne5 Bxg2 14.Kxg2 Nb6 15.Qd3 Qe7 16.e4 Rfd8 17.Nf3 with a pleasant edge.) 12...Bxg2
13.Kxg2 Nd5 14.Nd3! (This is stronger than 14.Bd2, when 14...Nb6 15.Qd3 N8d7 16.Nf3 Qe7 17.e4 e5 leads to
balanced play.) 14...Nc6 This was Diermair – Boensch, Austria 2013, and now the simple 15.Rfd1N would have
maintained a nice edge for White.

12.Rac1!
All of White’s sensible-looking rook moves have been tested numerous times, but a deep investigation convinced me
that the text move is the best way to fight for an advantage.

12.Ne5 Bxg2 13.Kxg2 is the main alternative, which has been tested extensively at a high level. Black’s most reliable
reply seems to be 13...Nd5 14.Rad1 Nxf4† 15.gxf4 Bd6!. Sergei Karjakin has demonstrated the viability of Black’s
position, having scored two wins and three draws with no defeats, against world-class opposition.

12...Nb4
Many other moves have been tried, but the text is the most logical and popular.

I will not discuss every Black option in detail, as the general plans will tend to remain pretty similar. Here is one
alternative which slightly alters the character of the game:
12...Bd6
This has been tested by such strong players as Bacrot and Beliavsky.
13.Bg5!
13.Ne5 can be met by 13...Bd5!N 14.Nxd5 exd5 when Black is perfectly okay.
13...h6 14.Bxf6 Qxf6 15.e4 Qd8
15...e5 is a playable alternative, although in Pawlus – Zawadka, corr. 1992, the accurate 16.Nd5!N 16...Qe6 17.Qc2!
Rad8 18.Rfd1 would have retained better chances for White.
16.Rfd1 Nb4
In Harika – Melia, Plovdiv 2010, White definitely had the better game, the only real question being how to improve
his position. I would recommend the knight manoeuvre:
17.Nd2!N Be7 18.Nf1
Followed by Ne3 and, at a suitable moment, advancing the f-pawn.

12...h6
This move has brought Black a good score, but I am not a big fan of it. True, Black prevents a future Bg5, but the
weakening of the g6-square may make it harder for Black to chase the white knight from e5 later.
13.Rfd1!
13.Rfe1 Bb4 makes it hard for White to carry out e2-e4, so it is better to put the rook on the d-file.
13...Bb4
This is a typical idea to establish control over the e4-square, but it leaves the knight misplaced on a6.
13...Nb4N immediately transposes to another game, and after 14.Ne5 Bxg2 15.Kxg2 White had a pleasant edge
in Mastrovasilis – Forsaa, Gibraltar 2013. The position is the same as the main line, except for the insertion of the
moves Rfd1 and ...h6, which undoubtedly favours White.
13...Bd6 was played in Stoll – Gerigk, Germany 1997, and now I don’t see any reason to refrain from the standard
plan: 14.Ne5N 14...Bxg2 15.Kxg2 Nb4 (15...Nh5 16.Bd2 does not help Black) 16.e4² White achieves his
optimal set-up.
14.Ne5 Bxg2 15.Kxg2 Nd5
15...c6 16.Qb3 Nd5 17.Bd2² did not change much in Morrow – Wilhelmi, corr. 2014.
16.Bd2 c6 17.e4 Nf6 18.f3 Nd7 19.Nd3²
White had a nice edge in Johnston – Reis, corr. 2013.

13.Ne5
13.Rfe1 has been tried by several strong players, including Kasparov, but it seems to me that 13...Bd6 should be fine
for Black.

13...Bxg2
This is the only move to have been played, with good reason.

13...Bd5?! is a thematic idea in similar positions, but after 14.Nxd5 exd5? 15.Qxc7 White wins a pawn while
highlighting the importance of placing the rook on c1, rather than some other square, on move 12. Black would
therefore have to resign himself to 14...Nfxd5, and after 15.Bd2 c6 16.Rfd1 White’s bishop pair gives him a pleasant
edge.

14.Kxg2 Nfd5
This is Black’s first choice by far. Without it, he risks falling into a passive situation.

14...c6 allows White to seize space in the centre, although Black remains pretty solid. A good example continued: 15.e4
Nd7 16.Nf3! Avoiding unnecessary exchanges. 16...Qb6 (16...Qc8 17.Qe2² brought me a recent victory in Avrukh –
Fedorovsky, Germany 2014.) 17.Rfd1 Nf6 18.Ne5 Rfd8 19.Be3 Qa6 20.f3 Nd7 21.Qxa6 Rxa6 22.Nc4!² White
maintained an edge in Sasikiran – Talla, Czech Republic 2012, and went on to win a nice game.

14...Nbd5 15.Bg5!?N
White can of course play 15.Nxd5 and transpose to one of the two main lines given below. The text move could
also be considered as an attempt to punish Black’s last move.
15...h6
15...Nb6 16.Qd3 h6 (16...c6 17.e4 Nfd7 18.Bxe7 Qxe7 19.Nf3 Having a stable space advantage, White is not
interested in trading a pair of knights. 19...Rad8 20.b3²) 17.Bf4 (I generally prefer to keep my bishop, although
17.Bxf6 Bxf6 18.Nf3 is another route to a slight edge.) 17...Nfd5 18.Nxd5 Nxd5 19.Bd2 The position is similar
to variation D4422 below. The position of the white queen on d3 instead of c4 is pretty inconsequential, but the
inclusion of ...h6 is slightly unfavourable for Black, as he may find it harder to chase the knight away with ...f6
due to the weakening of the g6-square.

16.Bxf6
This time I think White should exchange, as 16.Bd2 Nb6 17.Qd3 Nfd5 is not so clear.
16...Nxf6 17.e4
White keeps a typical slight pull. Even the more restrained 17.Rfd1!? c6 18.Qb3 Rb8 19.Nc4 Bb4 20.e3 looks
sufficient for a tiny edge. I am not sure if this line is really any better than transposing to the lines below with 15.Nxd5,
but it is always useful to have more than one decent option.
15.Nxd5
Now Black must decide whether or not to exchange queens. We will analyse D441) 15...Qxd5† and D442) 15...Nxd5
in turn.

D441) 15...Qxd5† 16.Qxd5 Nxd5 17.Bd2

This endgame is deceptively tricky for Black to handle, and he will have to work hard to equalize. According to the
database, White has won more games than he has drawn from this position, and has yet to suffer a single defeat.

17...c6
Worse is: 17...Rfd8?! 18.e4 Nb6? (18...Nf6N is a better try, but after 19.Rxc7 Rxd4 20.Nf3 Rd7 21.Rc4² Black’s
position is quite unpleasant.) 19.Rxc7 Bd6 Now the strongest continuation would have been:
20.Rc2!N (20.Rxb7 gave White an advantage and an eventual win in Wang Yue – Onischuk, Ningbo 2011, but the text
move is even better.) 20...Bxe5 21.dxe5 Nxa4 22.Ra1 Nc5 23.Rxa5± White has a serious advantage.

18.Rfd1
I also like 18.Nd3!?N, with the idea to jump to c5 at a suitable moment. A plausible continuation is 18...Rfd8 19.e3 f6
20.Rfd1 Kf7 21.h4 and White retains some pressure.

18...Rfd8 19.Nc4 Nb4 20.e3 f6 21.b3

Black remains pretty solid, but the position is much easier to handle for White, as evidenced by a practical score of
4/4 from here.

21...Kf7
Another instructive example continued 21...Ra6 22.Kf3 h5 23.Ke2 Rd7 24.h3 Kf7 25.g4 hxg4 26.hxg4 Na2 27.Ra1
Nb4 28.g5!² when White managed to seize the initiative on the kingside in Stefanova – Xu Yuhua, Ulaanbaatar 2010.

22.f4 b5?!
This is not a good idea, as Black will be left with a permanent weakness on c6. Objectively he should have defended
passively, even though it would not have been much fun.

23.Nb2 bxa4 24.Bxb4! axb4 25.Nxa4 Ra6 26.Kf3 h6 27.h4 h5 28.Ke4 g6 29.Rc4
Black was doomed to suffer for a long time in Meyner – Wosch, email 2013.

D442) 15...Nxd5

This seems like a better choice for Black, avoiding the passivity of the previous line.

16.Bd2
Now we have a final split. D4421) 16...Bb4 has been played by a few strong GMs, but the most popular choice has
been D4422) 16...c6.

D4421) 16...Bb4 17.Bxb4 Nxb4 18.e4 c6

19.Rfd1
19.f4 is a bit too aggressive, and after 19...Kh8 20.Rfd1 f6 21.Nf3 Qd7 22.b3 Rad8 23.Rd2 Rfe8 24.h4 Qf7 25.Re1
Qh5 White was left without many constructive ideas in Topalov – Jakovenko, Nanjing 2009.

19...Qe7 20.Qc5!
20.Qe2N 20...Rad8 21.Nc4 Qc7 22.e5 is another possible plan, but White must take into account the possible
exchange sacrifice 22...Rd5 23.Nd6 Rxd6!? 24.exd6 Qxd6, when it will be hard to break Black’s defence.

20...Qc7 21.Nc4 Rfd8

I also considered 21...f5!?N 22.Qd6! (but not 22.f3 fxe4 23.fxe4 Qf7 24.Rf1? Qg6 when suddenly White is in
trouble) 22...Qxd6 23.Nxd6 Rab8 24.f3 Rfd8 25.Nc4 b6 26.Rd2 and White retains a slight advantage.

White had a small but stable advantage in Ni Hua – Kravtsiv, Dubai 2012. At this point the best way to increase the
pressure would have been:
22.Rc3!N
The rook may go to b3, creating the tactical threat of Nxa5, or it may go to the kingside via f3 and f4 to create threats
there. White definitely keeps the better prospects, and can continue probing without taking any risks.

D4422) 16...c6

17.Rfd1!
White had better include this useful supporting move before he advances the e-pawn, as demonstrated by the
following game:
17.e4 Nb6!
17...Nb4 was Anand’s choice in a rapid game, but the text move gives White some problems with the defence of
his pawns.
18.Qb3
18.Qd3 Bf6! (Black should not rush with 18...Nxa4?! 19.Ra1!) 19.Nf3 Nxa4 20.Qa3 Nb6 21.Bxa5 Ra6! 22.Qc3
was played in Ashwin – A. Rychagov, Paleochora 2011, and now the simple 22...Qd7N 23.Bb4 Rfa8 leaves
Black with nothing to worry about.
18...Qxd4 19.Nf3 Qd8 20.Rfd1
Black only has one move, but it is good enough.

20...Ra6! 21.Bxa5 Qc7 22.Qc3 Rfa8 23.Bxb6 Rxb6

Black held relatively easily in Wang Yue – Wang Hao, Shenzhen 2011.

17...Nb6
Black has also tried:
17...Bb4 18.e4!?N
18.Bxb4 Nxb4 19.e4 transposes to variation D4421 above, and was the actual move order of the Ni Hua –
 Kravtsiv game. The text move is an independent alternative which also gives White some advantage.
18...Nb6 19.Qc2 f5!?
Obviously the d4-pawn is untouchable, as 19...Qxd4? 20.Bf4! wins material.

20.Qb3 Qd6 21.f3 fxe4 22.fxe4 Nd7

22...Qxd4? 23.Qxe6† Kh8 24.Bxb4±
23.Bxb4 axb4 24.Nc4 Qe7 25.e5²
White clearly has the better game.

18.Qc2!
18.Qb3 enabled Black to equalize comfortably with 18...Qd5† 19.Qxd5 exd5= in Z. Tan – Melia, Mardin 2011.

18...f6
18...Qxd4? is a bad idea in view of 19.Bxa5! Qxe5 20.Bxb6 when White is clearly better, thanks to his control over
the d-file. The continuation might be: 20...Ra6 21.a5 Bb4 22.Rd7 Raa8 (After 22...Bxa5 23.Bc5 Re8 24.Rxb7 Black is
helpless against the simple plan of Rd1-d7.) 23.Rxb7 Bxa5 24.Be3± White will soon be able to pick up the c-pawn.
19.Nf3 Qd7 20.e4 Nc8 21.Be3²
We have been following the game Martinez Martin – Bieliauskas, corr. 2012. White maintains a typical slight edge
for such positions. His centre is secure and he can continue making small improvements, while Black must constantly
be on the lookout for ideas such as d4-d5.

Conclusion

The set-up with 4...Be7, 5...0-0 and 6...dxc4 can perhaps be considered the absolute main line of the Catalan. After
7.Qc2 we started by checking the sidelines 7...c5 and 7...Bd7, both of which are pretty respectable, yet also have clear
drawbacks that we can aim to exploit. On the other hand, 7...b5!? has proved to be something of a revelation since GM
1. I believe that the pawn sacrifice starting with 8.a4 b4 9.Nfd2! is promising for White, but careful study is needed.

The big main line is 7...a6, when 8.a4 is a major departure from GM 1. After the standard 8...Bd7 9.Qxc4 Bc6 10.Bf4, it
took me a lot of analytical effort, as well as my own practical testing, to identify the most promising paths. Perhaps the
most important general rule is that White should almost always avoid having his bishop exchanged on f4 by an enemy
knight. Many strong GMs (including myself) have allowed it, believing the open g-file and additional central control
(after gxf4) to be beneficial. However, it has become clear to me that this structure ‘only’ leads to an interesting game,
with no objective advantage if Black plays correctly.
Thus, whenever a black knight goes to d5, we should generally retreat the bishop to d2, or occasionally even c1.
White’s general aim will be to take control over the e4-square and seize some space in the centre. This often leads to
nagging pressure, even after further piece exchanges. Another important point in the most popular D44 variation is that
the outpost on b4 does not seem to be of much use to Black. Although White’s advantage is often pretty small, it will
often persist into the endgame, without involving much risk at all.
A) 4...Be7
B) 4...c5 5.Bxb4 cxb4 6.Bg2
B1) 6...d5
B2) 6...0-0 7.e4 d6 8.Ne2 e5 9.a3
B21) 9...bxa3
B22) 9...Na6
B23) 9...Qb6 10.0-0
B231) 10...Nc6
B232) 10...Bg4
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 Bb4† 4.Bd2
Besides the main line of 4...Qe7 Black can play several other moves that will take us into Bogo-Indian territory.

In this chapter we will consider A) 4...Be7 and B) 4...c5.

A) 4...Be7

One of the main lines is ...Bb4-e7 followed by ...d5, but here I will consider a different idea.

5.Bg2 0-0 6.Nf3

In this case 6.e4 is not so clear, as after 6...d5 7.e5 Ne4 Black is doing okay.

6...c5
6...d5 (or 5...d5 on the previous move) will transpose to one of Black’s main set-ups against the Catalan – see
Chapters 13 and 14.

7.Nc3 cxd4
If 7...d5 8.cxd5 exd5 9.0-0 Nc6 10.dxc5 Bxc5 11.Rc1, then White has a favourable version of a Tarrasch-type
position. This could be improved even further by 11...Be7 12.Bf4!N when White has reached a well-known Tarrasch
position with an extra move in Rc1.

8.Nxd4 Nc6
Black is unable to obtain a good version of a Hedgehog-type position by playing slowly, for example: 8...a6 9.0-0
Qc7 10.Rc1 Nc6 11.Nb3 Creating the typical threat of Nd5. (11.Be3!? is also possible) 11...d6 12.Nd5! As usual this
move proves to be very strong. White was clearly better after 12...Nxd5 13.cxd5 exd5 14.Ba5 Qd7 15.Bc3± in
Retamozo – Torres, Lima 2013.

9.Bf4 a6
Black has some other options:

9...Qb6 must be met accurately:

10.Nb3!N (10.Ndb5 a6 11.Bc7 Qc5 12.Bd6 was unimpressive for White in Gaerths – Kaiser, Berlin 2003, when Black
should have responded with the natural 12...Bxd6N. After 13.Nxd6 Nd4! 14.e3 Qxd6 15.Qxd4 Qxd4 16.exd4 Rb8,
followed by ...b6 and ...Bb7, Black would have solved his problems.) 10...d5 11.cxd5 exd5 12.Be3 Qa6 13.0-0 Be6
14.Rc1² White will have an easy game playing against the isolated pawn.

9...Nxd4 10.Qxd4 d6 occurred in Petrik – A. Zhigalko, Dresden 2008, with White retreating his queen to d2. I believe
11.Qd3N to be much better, as after 11...Nh5 12.Be3 Nf6 13.b3² White keeps a nagging edge.

9...e5 was employed successfully by Gashimov. 10.Nxc6 bxc6 (Black can hardly claim compensation after 10...dxc6N
11.Qxd8 Rxd8 12.Bxe5 Be6 13.b3 Ba3 14.Na4!) 11.Bxe5 Qa5 was Dominguez Perez – Gashimov, Nice 2010, and
now I like the following improvement:

12.Bd4N 12...Ba6 13.Qd3 d5 14.0-0 Bxc4 15.Qc2² By giving up his extra pawn White has managed to stabilize his
positional advantage.
10.0-0

10...Nxd4
Once again, 10...d5 11.cxd5 exd5 12.Rc1 leads to a favourable version of a well-known Tarrasch line.

11.Qxd4 d6 12.Qd3
This is the most flexible square for the white queen.

12...Qc7 13.Rfd1 Rd8 14.Rac1 Nh5 15.Be3

15.Bd2 Rb8 16.Ne4 Nf6 17.Nxf6† Bxf6 18.Bf4 e5 19.Be3 Be6 20.b3 h6 21.a4² was also better for White in Topalov
– Kramnik, Las Vegas 1999.

15...Bd7
Black has achieved some good results from here, but White’s position is clearly better. My personal preference is as
follows:

16.b3 Nf6
16...Rac8 can be met by 17.Na4! Bxa4 18.bxa4 and White’s pressure on the queenside is significant.

17.Bf4 Ne8
17...Be8 runs into the annoying 18.c5!±, while 17...Bc6 allows the typical 18.Nd5!±.
18.Be4!
White cleverly regroups his pieces.

18...g6N
18...f5? is not possible in view of 19.Bxf5! exf5 20.Nd5.

18...h6 19.Qf3 left White in control in Greig – Tocklin, corr. 2014.

19.Qf3 Rab8 20.c5!±

White has a large advantage.

B) 4...c5
 In my opinion this allows White an improved version of the corresponding position with a white knight on f3 rather
than a pawn on g3. The reason for this is that White now has the extra option of developing his knight to e2.

5.Bxb4 cxb4 6.Bg2

Now I would like to mention B1) 6...d5, although B2) 6...0-0 is clearly Black’s first choice.

B1) 6...d5

In general I don’t believe this to be a good idea for Black, as the arising structures are not well suited to his doubled b-
pawns.

7.Nd2 Nc6 8.Ngf3 0-0 9.0-0

Everything has remained similar to the lines given in GM 2, and I have added some new examples. Here I will
consider two possibilities for Black:

9...Bd7
Another line runs:
9...b6 10.Rc1 Bb7 11.e3 Qd6
A relatively recent example was: 11...a5 12.cxd5 Nxd5 (12...exd5 was strongly met by 13.Qa4 Qe8?! 14.Qb5
Ra6 15.Rc2 Ne7 16.Qxe8 Rxe8 17.Rc7± with a clear plus for White in Baraeva – Butneva, St Petersburg 2011.)
13.Nc4 Rc8 14.e4 Nf6 15.Qd3 Ba6 16.Rfd1 It feels as if White is playing with an extra pawn. 16...Ne7 17.Nfe5
Ne8 This was Maiwald – Hertneck, Germany 2013, and now the simple 18.Qe3N² would keep a pleasant edge
for White.
12.Qa4 Rfc8 13.Rc2 Rc7 14.Rfc1 Rac8 15.cxd5!
A well-timed decision.
15...exd5?
Black misses White’s next idea.
The correct recapture was 15...Nxd5, although after 16.Ne1 White retains a pleasant edge.
16.Bh3! Nd7 17.Ne5+–
Black cannot avoid losing material, Ivanchuk – Gulko, New York 1988.
10.e3 Qe7
A fresh example here is: 10...Rc8 11.Qe2 dxc4 12.Nxc4 Na5

13.Nce5! Qb6 14.Nxd7 Nxd7 15.Rfc1 White was definitely better in Cernousek – Plat, Slovakia 2013.

11.Qe2
Also 11.Ne5 Rfc8 12.Qe2 Be8 13.Rac1 comes into consideration, with better chances for White.

11...Rfd8
This position occurred in Braun – Jojua, Batumi 2006. Commenting on this game in ChessBase Magazine 115 Braun
proposed the following improvement:

12.e4!N 12...dxe4 13.Nxe4 Be8 14.Rad1 Rac8 15.Rfe1

White has a clear positional advantage.
 B2) 6...0-0 7.e4

As I mentioned already, this is the difference from the more common position with a knight on f3.

7...d6
7...d5
This move hasn’t had many followers. A convincing line is:
8.cxd5 exd5 9.e5 Ne4
This is a more interesting try than 9...Ne8 10.Ne2 Nc6 11.0-0, and now:
a) 11...Bg4 is met comfortably by 12.f3.
b) 11...Nc7 12.a3 Quite a natural idea, as White wants to gain the c3-square for his knight. (Also worthy of
consideration was 12.Nd2. I examined the following line: 12...Bg4 13.Nb3 f6 14.f3 Bf5 15.f4 b6 16.Rc1 Qd7
17.Na1! A remarkable move: White’s knight is heading for e3 via c2. White is better.) 12...Bf5 13.axb4 Nxb4
14.Nbc3 White has the advantage, thanks to his better pawn structure.
c) 11...Bf5 This move occurred in De Marchi – Gueneau, Aix-les-Bains 2003. I believe White should play the
simple 12.Nd2N 12...Nc7 13.Nb3 Ne6 14.Qd2 with better chances.
10.Ne2 Nc6 11.0-0 f6 12.Nd2 Bf5
Both sides have played logical moves up until now.
13.Nxe4 dxe4 14.Qb3† Kh8 15.Rad1 a5?
Black should have played 15...Bg4N, but after 16.Qe3 fxe5 17.Qxe4 Bxe2 18.Qxe2 exd4 19.Bxc6 bxc6 20.Qc4²
he will still be suffering for the rest of the game.
16.e6! Qd6 17.Qe3±
The e6-pawn is untouchable and 18.d5 is coming next. White’s advantage was obvious in Mason – Hatipoglu, email
2011.

8.Ne2 e5 9.a3
White has to trade the annoying b4-pawn in order to gain more space for his pieces – especially his queenside knight.

9.0-0 is still considered to be the main line, but I am concerned about the position that might arise after: 9...Bg4 10.f3
Be6 11.Qd3 (11.b3 a5 12.a3 Na6 13.axb4 axb4 14.Kh1 was Bosiocic – Farago, Graz 2011, and now play should have
continued 14...Qb6N 15.Qd2 exd4 16.Nxd4 Nc5 17.Rxa8 Rxa8 when Black’s activity compensates for his damaged
pawn structure.) 11...Qb6 12.Kh1 exd4 13.Nxd4 Nbd7 14.b3 This was Coelho – Leitao, Santos 2008, and now
14...a5N would lead to double-edged play, for example 15.Nb5 a4 16.Nd2 Ra5! and Black has active pieces.

At this point I checked B21) 9...bxa3 and B22) 9...Na6, which are Black’s two main alternatives to B23) 9...Qb6.

B21) 9...bxa3 10.Nxa3 Nc6 11.0-0

 In my opinion this position is favourable for White, thanks to his extra space. Nothing has changed since GM 2 in
terms of evaluating the position.

11...Qb6
Another line is 11...Bg4 12.f3 Bd7 (12...Bh5 is not the best place for Black’s bishop; it was better was to leave it on
the h3-c8 diagonal. 13.Qd2 Qb6 14.Rad1 Rad8 15.Kh1 White had a clear positional advantage in Gleizerov – Bindrich,
Stockholm 2006.)

13.Qd2N This looks like the most accurate decision. (13.Nb5 occurred in Elsness – Lien, Fagernes 2013, when
13...Qb6N would have left White in some discomfort over his d4-pawn.) 13...Qb6 14.Rfd1 Rfe8 15.Kh1² White has
neutralized all Black’s active ideas and his positional advantage is beginning to tell.
12.Qd2 exd4
The critical test. Black’s other moves are hardly acceptable:

12...Nxd4 would lead to an inferior position for Black after 13.Nxd4 exd4 14.Rfd1±.

12...a5 13.Nb5! Rd8 14.b3 (14.Nec3 is also strong) 14...Nb4 15.Nec3± and White was clearly better in A. Horvath –
Toth, Budapest 2006.

13.Nb5 Re8

14.Qd3!?
A very interesting move. 14.Nxd6N is also worth considering, when 14...Rd8 could be met by 15.Rfc1!?.

14...Qc5?!
Much better was 14...Bg4 15.Nexd4 Ne5 16.Qc3 a6 17.Na3 Rac8. Black has some activity, but after 18.Rfe1 it seems
like White keeps everything under control and his better structure should tell in the long term.

We have been following Makhmutov – Zhurikhin, Loo 2014, and now White should simply recapture on d4:
15.Nexd4N 15...Nxd4 16.Qxd4
White maintains a clear positional edge.

B22) 9...Na6 10.axb4 Nxb4 11.Qd2 a5 12.0-0 Be6!?

Black tries to create some counterplay by attacking the white centre. He would be happy to see d4-d5, weakening
White’s dark-squares.

Passive tactics would not work well for Black, as was proven by the following encounter: 12...b6 13.Na3 Ba6 14.Rad1
Qe7 15.f4 Rac8 16.b3 Rcd8 17.Nc3 White had an obvious advantage in Grischuk – Yemelin, Sochi 2004.

13.Na3
An interesting alternative is 13.b3 Qb6 14.Nbc3.

13...Qb6
14.c5!N
This is a strong improvement over 14.Nc3, which seems inaccurate, as it allows 14...exd4N (14...Qxd4 15.Qxd4 exd4
16.Ncb5 d3 17.Nxd6 led to a favourable position for White in I. Porat – Ilincic, Budapest 2005) 15.Na4 Qc6 when I do
not see how White can fight for an advantage.

14.Rfd1 is a more positional move which also looks good for White.

14...dxc5 15.d5 Bd7

No better is: 15...Rfd8 16.Nc4 Qc7 17.Nc3 (I definitely prefer this move to 17.f4 exf4 18.Nxf4 b5 with unnecessary
complications) Now White has a clear advantage, as he is not only threatening to play Qg5 regaining the pawn, but also
the simple f2-f4 advance is very powerful, as I cannot imagine how Black can stop White’s central pawns. 17...Bd7
18.f4± White is much better.

16.Nc4 Qc7 17.d6 Qb8 18.Nxe5

White has a promising position.

B23) 9...Qb6 10.0-0

This is the best move order.

10.Qd2
The problem with this move is that Black has an interesting resource:
10...b3!
Amusingly, I once mixed up my move order and played 10.Qd2, but my opponent wasn’t familiar with the 10...b3
resource and soon found himself in a passive position: 10...Nc6 11.axb4 Nxb4 12.Na3 Bg4 13.f3 Be6 14.0-0
Rfc8 15.b3 Rd8 16.Kh1 Black was under unpleasant positional pressure in Avrukh – Moiseenko, Eilat 2012.
11.Nbc3
After 11.Qc3 Black has 11...Nc6 12.d5 Na5 13.Nd2 Nd7 14.Nc1 Nc5 15.Nd3 Na4 16.Qb4 Bd7 with an unclear
game.
11...Nc6 12.Rd1
This position was reached in Iskusnyh – Maletin, Nizhnij Tagil 2007, and now Black should have played:
12...exd4N 13.Nxd4 Ne5 14.Nd5
Unfortunately White cannot play 14.Qe2 in view of 14...Bg4 15.f3 Bd7 followed by ...Rac8.
14...Nxd5 15.cxd5 Bd7 16.0-0 Rac8
With double-edged play.
B231) 10...Nc6 is a serious alternative to our main continuation of B232) 10...Bg4.

It’s important to mention 10...bxa3 11.Nxa3 Qxb2? 12.Nb5 when Black is in trouble.

After 10...Re8 11.axb4 Qxb4 12.Na3 Bg4 13.f3 Bd7 14.b3 a5 15.Qd3 Na6 both sides gradually conclude their plans.
16.Rfc1 exd4 Probably Black should refrain from releasing the pressure in the centre. Now White consolidates his
advantage. 17.Nc2 Qb6 18.Qxd4 Nc5 19.Rcb1 Ra6 20.Nc3² White had an edge in Avrukh – Kosashvili, Israel 2004.

B231) 10...Nc6 11.d5

This seems promising for White.

11...Nb8
 The best of Black’s available knight retreats.

11...Ne7 12.Qd2!
I believe this is stronger than 12.axb4 Qxb4 13.Qd2 Qxc4 14.Rc1 Qb3 15.Na3 Bg4 with an unclear game,
Prusikin – Laznicka, Steinbrunn 2005.
12...bxa3
Inferior is 12...b3 13.Qb4! when the b3-pawn is a serious target.
13.Nxa3 Bg4
13...a5 looks natural, but is well met by: 14.c5! (White should prevent Black from maintaining control over the
dark-squares on the queenside [b4 and c5], which might happen after the natural 14.Nb5 Bd7 15.Nec3 Bxb5
16.Nxb5 Nd7 with reasonable play for Black.) 14...Qxc5 (Clearly bad for Black is 14...dxc5 15.Nc4 and his
pawn structure in the centre collapses.) 15.Rfc1 Qb4 16.Qxb4 axb4 17.Nc4 Now the following sequence is fairly
forced: 17...Rxa1 18.Rxa1 Ne8 (much worse is 18...Rd8 19.Ra5! Ne8 20.Rb5 f5 21.Rxb4 fxe4 22.Nc3 with a
clear plus to White) 19.Ra7 White obviously has the initiative, and after 19...f5 20.exf5 Nxf5 21.Nb6 Nf6 22.Ra4
White is better.

14.Nc1!N
A clear improvement over 14.b4, which occurred in Schachinger – Radnetter, Oberwart 2010. 14...a5!N would
allow Black to build up a blockade on c5.
14...Rfc8 15.Nd3 Qd4 16.Rfe1
To be followed by 17.b3 and 18.Nc2 – White is clearly better.

12.axb4 Qxb4 13.Qc2 Na6 14.Nc1 Nc5

This happened in Andersen – Slavin, London 2010, and now White could have played an elegant manoeuvre:
15.Ra3!N
Black cannot stop White from seizing the initiative on the queenside by means of Na2 followed by b2-b4.

B232) 10...Bg4 11.axb4

I couldn’t find anything significant after 11.f3 Be6 12.b3 Nc6 13.Kh1 Bd7, as in Sogin – Horwitz, corr. 2013.

11...Qxb4
Another direction is:
11...Nc6 12.f3 exd4
12...Be6 13.Na3 Nxb4 (13...exd4 14.Kh1 Qxb4 15.Nxd4² leaves White with a positional advantage.) 14.Qd2
transposes to my game against Moiseenko on page 291.
13.Rf2N
13.fxg4 d3† 14.Kh1 dxe2 15.Qxe2 Nxb4÷ was unclear in Troff – Timman, Wijk aan Zee 2014.
13...Be6 14.Na3!
It seems like White will retain definite pressure, for example:
14...Ne5 15.Nxd4 Bxc4 16.Nxc4 Nxc4 17.Nf5!²

12.f3 Be6 13.b3

I now checked an obvious unexplored continuation:

13...a5N
13...b5 immediately attacks White’s pawn structure, but I found a good reply:
14.Qd2!N (Much stronger than 14.Na3 bxc4 15.d5 as in Berry – Slavin, Rogaska Slatina 2011. Now Black could have
grabbed the initiative with a piece sacrifice: 15...Bxd5!N 16.exd5 cxb3) 14...Qxd2 (The main point is 14...Qxb3 15.Ra3
Qxc4 16.Rc1+–) 15.Nxd2 bxc4 16.d5 White seizes the initiative on the queenside.

14.Ra4
After 14.Nbc3 a4! 15.Nxa4 b5 16.Nac3 Rxa1 17.Qxa1 bxc4 18.bxc4 Qxc4 19.Rd1 Rc8 White’s positional advantage
is rather symbolic.

14...Qb6 15.Nbc3 Bd7

Or 15...Nc6 16.Nb5².

16.Ra2 Nc6 17.Rd2²

White retains a slight positional pull.
Conclusion

We began this chapter by examining 4...Be7 – concentrating on lines where Black chooses not to play an immediate
...d5 and transpose to a Catalan. If Black does decide to play ...d5 at a later stage, White should stay alert to the
possibility of transposing to a favourable Tarrasch-type position. Our main line ends favourably, and although Black
has some options along the way, I am confident White stands well in all cases.

The main branch of the chapter was devoted to 4...c5. This move leads to interesting positions, but White is better with
accurate play. White benefits, compared to the main lines of the Bogo-Indian, from the increased flexibility caused by
not having committed his king’s knight to f3.
The above paragraph was my conclusion in GM 2, and the overall assessment has not changed much since then. I
have added some new examples and ideas to keep the reader fully updated and equipped to tackle Black effectively in
this line.
A) 5.Qxd2 d5 6.Nf3 0-0 7.Bg2 Nbd7 8.0-0
A1) 8...dxc4
A2) 8...c6
B) 5.Nxd2
B1) 5...d6
B2) 5...Nc6

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 Bb4† 4.Bd2 Bxd2†

This move may look simplistic compared to the 4...a5 and 4...Qe7 options we will see in the following chapters, but
the exchange on d2 is a highly respectable choice. If White can secure even the smallest edge, then we should consider
it a success.
There are two options for White to consider: A) 5.Qxd2 was my chosen line in GM 2, but Black has found several
reasonable ideas to deal with it. This time I will recommend the knight recapture B) 5.Nxd2 followed by a very rare
idea. I will explain my objections to 5.Qxd2 in some detail. Even though I do not think White should play this way,
studying this line is useful to gain a deeper understanding of the opening, and what works and what doesn’t.

A) 5.Qxd2 d5

This is considered to be Black’s main option and seems the most convincing to me. The same position can be reached
after 5...0-0 6.Bg2 d5.

6.Nf3 0-0 7.Bg2

7...Nbd7
Another option is:
7...b6
This leads to a typical Queen’s Indian type of position, but with dark-squared bishops exchanged, White has a
pleasant advantage. I like the following example:
8.cxd5 exd5 9.0-0 Bb7 10.Nc3 Nbd7 11.Rac1 Re8 12.Rfd1 a6
Black refrains from 12...c5 and indeed after 13.Nh4 then 13...c4 is needed, as otherwise it’s not clear how to hold
on to the d5-pawn (13...Ne4 runs into the strong 14.Nxe4 dxe4 15.Nf5! when White has the advantage). 14.b3
cxb3 15.axb3 With a positional advantage.
13.Qc2 Nf8 14.b4 Qe7 15.Qb3 Ne6 16.e3
White enjoyed a small but stable positional edge in Beliavsky – Kasimdzhanov, Pune 2004.

7...dxc4
This is a playable idea for Black.
8.Na3
8...Bd7
The point: Black’s light-squared bishop transfers to the h1-a8 diagonal, neutralizing White’s Catalan bishop.
Clearly worse is 8...c5 9.dxc5 Ne4 10.Qxd8 Rxd8 11.Nxc4 Nc6 12.0-0 Nxc5 and now in Lupor – Klundt, Bad
Wiessee 2000, White could have gained an advantage by simple means after 13.Rfd1 Bd7 14.Nd6 with serious
pressure.
9.Nxc4 Bc6 10.0-0
White’s space advantage should guarantee him a slight edge.
10...Nbd7
10...Bd5 was recommended by Vlatko Kovacevic in Chess Informant 45 and in this case White should continue
with 11.Rac1 Nc6 12.Rfd1 Ne4 13.Qc2 retaining the better chances.
11.Rfc1 Bd5 12.b4
Gaining more space on the queenside. The following encounter proves that Black is far from equality.
12...Qe7 13.Qb2 Rac8 14.Na5 Nb8 15.Ne5 Bxg2 16.Kxg2
White was significantly better in Portisch – Nikolic, Linares 1988.

8.0-0
 Black’s two main options are: A1) 8...dxc4 and A2) 8...c6.

A1) 8...dxc4
In this position I came up with a novelty:

9.a4!?N
The main point of Black’s idea is that he would meet 9.Na3 with 9...e5! when the critical line is: 10.dxe5 Nxe5
11.Qxd8 (after 11.Qc3 Nxf3† 12.Bxf3 Qe7 13.Nxc4 c6 Black gets a perfectly playable position) 11...Nxf3† 12.Bxf3
Rxd8 13.Rfd1 (or 13.Nxc4 Be6) 13...Be6! Black was alright in Timman – Schebler, Antwerp 2008.

9...c5
I also analysed a few other options:

9...b6 doesn’t solve Black’s problems, for example 10.Ne5 Nd5 11.Nxc4 Ba6 12.Nba3 c5 13.e4 Nb4 14.e5 Nd5
15.Nb5 with serious pressure.

9...a5 10.Na3 e5 11.Nxc4² is simple and pleasant for White.

9...Qe7 10.Na3 e5
11.Nxc4
11.Nxe5 Nxe5 12.dxe5 Qxe5 13.Nxc4 Qe7 does not offer White much, although he did manage to win a tempo
with Nc4.
11...e4
If 11...exd4 12.Nxd4 and White’s pressure is annoying.
12.Nfe5 Nb6
Here I focused on:
13.Ne3
Although White has other options to fight for the advantage.
13...Be6
If 13...c5 14.dxc5 Qxc5 15.a5! Qxe5 16.axb6 a6 17.Ra5 and White keeps some pressure.
Also after 13...a5 14.Qc2 c6 15.Qc5 Qxc5 16.dxc5 Nbd7 17.Nxd7 Bxd7 18.Nc4² White retains a pleasant
advantage.
14.a5 Nbd5 15.a6 b6 16.Nc6 Qd6 17.Rfc1 Nxe3 18.Qxe3 Bd5 19.Qa3!²
White definitely has pressure, thanks to his strong knight on c6.
10.Rd1
This is the best choice. 10.Na3 allows Black to develop his light-squared bishop comfortably, because 10...b6 11.Ne5
is now met strongly by the exchange sacrifice 11...Nxe5! 12.Bxa8 cxd4 with double-edged play.

10...Qe7
We can understand the value of White’s previous move if Black tries 10...b6. The line continues: 11.Ne5 Nd5 12.e4
N5f6 (it’s important to note that Black cannot play 12...Nxe5? due to 13.dxe5 and here we see the point of 10.Rd1, as
Black’s queen is hanging on d8) 13.Nxc4 Ba6 14.Nba3 cxd4 15.Qxd4 White is better.
The last couple of moves are one of the reasons I want this section to remain in the book, even though it is no longer
part of my recommended repertoire. One needs to understand how to fight against Black’s light-squared bishop, and
have a feel for the standard ideas against ...b7-b6, and know when they will not work (as with 10.Na3).

11.Na3 cxd4 12.Qxd4

Black has no problems after 12.Nxd4 Nc5 13.Qb4 e5.

12...e5
 Now White should play:

13.Qc3!
13.Qxc4 Nb6 doesn’t pose Black any problems.

13...e4 14.Nd4 Nc5

Or 14...Ne5 15.Nxc4 Nxc4 16.Qxc4 is also an edge.

15.Nxc4 Bd7 16.Qb4

White is slightly better. It’s important to mention that Black cannot play:

16...Nd5
 In view of the pleasing reply:

17.Nf5!
And after the forced:

17...Nxb4 18.Nxe7† Kh8 19.Nd6

White’s advantage is undisputable.

A2) 8...c6 9.Ne5

This move was recommended by yours truly in GM 2.

9...Nxe5 10.dxe5 Nd7 11.f4 b5

Equally common is: 11...Nb6 12.Na3
 And now Black has two main choices:

a) 12...dxc4 This capture seems quite principled, but White can secure an edge. 13.Rfd1 Qxd2 14.Rxd2 Bd7
15.Nxc4!?N This is White’s best chance (In Avrukh – Khetsuriani, Athens 2005, I instead opted for 15.Rad1 Rfd8
16.e4 Kf8 17.Bf1, but after 17...Ke7 18.Bxc4 Be8 Black is not worse.) 15...Nxc4 16.Rxd7 Rab8 17.Rad1²

b) Another game continued:

12...Qe7 13.Rac1 Rd8 14.Rfd1 Bd7 15.c5
White decides to remove the tension in the centre and rightly so, as Black is doomed to passivity.
15...Nc8 16.e4 b6
Obviously Black is seeking counter-chances. This is Dorfman – Spassky, France 2003, where White missed a
beautiful tactical solution:
17.Nb5!N
17...Be8
17...bxc5 18.Nc7 Rb8 19.Na6 Rb6 20.Nxc5 is of course great for White.
Black can try to accept the knight sacrifice with 17...cxb5 but after 18.exd5 Bc6 (18...exd5 19.Qxd5 Rb8 20.c6 is
awful for Black) 19.cxb6 Black has to give back the piece: 19...Nxb6 (19...Bxd5 20.Rc7 Qe8 21.b7 Rb8
22.bxc8=Q Rbxc8 23.Rxc8 Rxc8 24.Bxd5 Rd8 25.Qg2 Qd7 26.Qh3! A very important resource, as now White is
threatening 27.Bf3. 26...exd5 27.Qxd7 Rxd7 28.Kf2± The rook endgame is difficult for Black.) 20.Rxc6 Nxd5
21.Qc1 White definitely has pressure.
18.exd5 exd5
18...cxd5 19.c6 is hardly playable for Black.
19.cxb6 axb6 20.Nd4 Na7 21.Re1!
With the idea of pushing the f-pawn; White’s advantage is obvious.

Also possible is 11...f6 12.exf6 Nxf6 13.Qd4!? with a slight edge to White in Hechl – Vecek, email 2011. I could
investigate this line further, but since it is not part of the repertoire, I will stop here.

12.cxd5

12...Qb6†
A useful intermediate check to avoid 12...cxd5 13.Qd4.

13.e3 cxd5 14.Nc3 Bb7

White has very few ways to improve his position; mostly they are connected with transferring the knight to d4.

15.b4 Bc6 16.a4

Black is just in time after 16.Ne2 Qc7 following up by ...Nb6-c4.

16...bxa4
This occurred in a game between two engines; Black has no problems in reaching equality.

B) 5.Nxd2
 After White recaptures with the knight, Black’s best option is considered to be to switch to the idea of playing ...d6
and ...e5, when he can claim the white knight is misplaced. Black may start with B1) 5...d6 or B2) 5...Nc6.

Instead you can find 5...d5 6.Bg2 (or 6.Ngf3) 6...0-0 7.Ngf3 via the 3...d5 and 4...Bb4† move order in variation B of
Chapter 12 on page 171.

B1) 5...d6

This is pretty much the same idea as variation B2, but with some different nuances. Strangely enough, I came to the
conclusion that in order to get a position similar to line B2, White has to play a novelty:

6.e3!?N
6.Bg2 runs into 6...e5 7.e3 exd4! and Black easily solves his problems, as in the game Volokitin – Khairullin, Aix-les-
Bains 2011, which continued 8.exd4 0-0 9.Ne2 d5 10.0-0 Nc6 11.cxd5 Ne7 12.Nc3 Nexd5 with equality.

6...0-0
Or 6...e5 7.Ne2 with the idea of having the option of recapturing on d4 with the knight. 7...0-0 8.Bg2 transposes to
our main line.

7.Bg2
This position has arisen several times from the move order 6.Bg2 0-0 7.e3.

7...e5 8.Ne2
White is definitely not claiming to have anything huge here, but obtaining a position with good chances of an edge is
quite an achievement nowadays.

8...c6
Obviously Black has other options:
8...exd4 9.Nxd4 The main point of White’s set-up: the knight recapture secures a favourable pawn structure for White,
thanks to his strong light-squared bishop. The stem game continued 9...Nbd7 10.0-0 a5 11.Nb5! Nc5 12.Nb3 Nfe4 and
in Dolezal – Volfl, Czech Republic 2009, the accurate choice 13.Qc2N 13...Re8 14.Rfd1² would have retained a
pleasant edge.

8...Re8 9.0-0 c6 transposes to the main line, but it is important to mention that 9...e4?! does not work for Black in view
of 10.Nc3 Bf5 11.f3! with a clear advantage for White.

9.0-0 Re8
 As in Salgado Lopez – Bruzon Batista, Barcelona 2010, which is definitely the key game in this line. The game
continued 10.Nc3 which allowed 10...exd4 when White must recapture with the pawn. So instead I suggest:

10.Qc2N 10...Qe7 11.b4 e4 12.Nc3 Bf5 13.b5²

B2) 5...Nc6 6.e3

This is my preferred set-up, instead of the common e2-e4 lines.

6.Ngf3 d6 7.e4 e5 8.d5 Nb8 9.Bg2 0-0 10.0-0 a5 11.Ne1 Na6 12.Nd3 Qe7 Finally, via a different move order, the
players reached an important theoretical tabiya (I assume Black could try to play without ...Qe7 with 12...c6!?). 13.a3
One of many possibilities for White. 13...Bg4 14.f3 Bd7 15.b4 axb4 16.axb4 c6 With unclear play in Rogozenco –
Parligras, Hamburg 2008.

6...0-0 7.Bg2 e5 8.d5

Here Black always chooses:

8...Nb4
It’s hard to give a serious analysis after Black’s other knight retreats, but I want to mention the following lines where
theory might be developed in the future:

8...Nb8 9.Ne2 d6 10.Nc3 a5 11.Qc2!? I prefer not to allow ...Bf5. 11...Na6 12.a3 This is a typical position for the
Bogo-Indian, but White’s pieces are well placed for the coming fight.

8...Ne7 9.Ne2 d6 10.Nc3 Nd7 11.0-0 f5 12.f4 with an interesting and complex game.

9.Qb1 c6
Another encounter between two engines continued 9...a5 10.Ne2 Qe7 11.a3 Na6 12.Nc3 Nc5 13.b3² when White
seemed better to me in Rybka 4 – Gull, Internet 2013.

10.a3 Na6 11.Ne2 cxd5 12.cxd5 d6 13.Nc3

13...Bg4
After the more natural 13...Bd7 White should start with 14.b4! not allowing ...Nc5, as then Black would have the a4-
square available for his knight after b2-b4. Then after 14...Rc8 15.Qb3 I like White.

14.0-0 Rc8 15.Rc1 Qd7 16.Qd3²

White had a pleasant edge in Kasimdzhanov – M. Gurevich, Essen 2001.

Conclusion

In this chapter I covered 4...Bxd2† in the Bogo-Indian, and I have completely changed my choice since GM 2. The
‘rejected’ 5.Qxd2 is still worthy of study, as the ideas involved will prove useful in other lines. But my
recommendation is 5.Nxd2 followed by a set-up with e2-e3. Note how we benefit from our 3.g3 move order, rather
than 3.Nf3 allowing a ‘normal’ Bogo, as our king’s knight instead goes to e2 with a harmonious set-up.
My chosen line leads to relatively unexplored territory, but my analysis and the few games so far suggest that White
has good chances of an edge. We must accept that White’s advantage is not huge, as Black has chosen a safe and
respectable line.
A) 5...d6
B) 5...0-0 6.e4
B1) 6...d5
B2) 6...d6
C) 5...d5 6.Nf3 0-0 7.Qc2
C1) 7...b6
C2) 7...c6
C3) 7...Nc6
C4) 7...c5
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 Bb4† 4.Bd2 a5
This is the typical Bogo-Indian reaction. Black wants to keep his bishop on b4 for a while with the idea of either
provoking a2-a3, or exchanging the bishop for White’s dark-squared bishop or queenside knight at a suitable moment.

5.Bg2
Because of the flexible nature of the position, Black has a number of sensible moves at this point. He can play A)
5...d6, B) 5...0-0 and C) 5...d5.

A) 5...d6

This is quite a popular set-up for Black; next he intends to develop his b8-knight to d7, followed by ...e6-e5.

6.e4 Nbd7
6...0-0 transposes to variation B2 on page 306.

7.Ne2 0-0 8.0-0 e5

So far we have followed Agovic – Schein, Graz 2001, but now White should vary with:

9.Nbc3N
The following line is not forced, but it does show typical play:

9...exd4 10.Nxd4 Ne5 11.b3 Bc5 12.Nf5

White seems to me to be better after:
12...Bxf5 13.exf5 c6 14.Qc2
White’s chances are preferable, as he has a clear plan of improving his position – first Rad1 and then h2-h3, Kh1(or
h2) f2-f4, g3-g4 and so on.

B) 5...0-0

6.e4
This idea should now be very familiar. We benefit from our early fianchetto set-up by developing the g1-knight to e2,
while at the same time avoiding a major theoretical tabiya that could arise after 6.Nf3 b6. We will consider B1) 6...d5
and B2) 6...d6.
 B1) 6...d5 7.e5

Certainly this is much more accurate than 7.a3 Be7 8.e5 as was played in Cipra – Willim, Bechhofen 1994, because
Black could have created excellent play after 8...Ne4!N followed by ...c7-c5.

7...Nfd7 8.cxd5 exd5

Here the play might continue:

9.Nc3 Nb6
Another option is:
9...c5 10.a3 Bxc3
Clearly worse is 10...cxd4 11.axb4 dxc3 12.Bxc3 Nc6 as in Kappeler – Ovsejevitsch, Leukerbad 2011. White
should have played 13.Nf3!N with the much better game, for example: 13...b6 14.Qxd5 Bb7 15.Rd1 axb4
16.Qxd7 Qxd7 17.Rxd7 Ra1† 18.Ke2 Ba6† 19.Ke3 Rxh1 20.Bxh1 bxc3 21.bxc3±
11.Bxc3
I recommended this recapture in GM 2 and still I believe it to be better than 11.bxc3, which occurred in the
computer game Rybka – Gull, Internet 2012. The position was unclear after 11...Nb6 12.Nf3 cxd4 13.cxd4 Nc4.
11...Nc6
My preference now is for the following pawn sacrifice:
12.Ne2
12.f4!? looks good as well.
12...cxd4 13.Nxd4 Ncxe5 14.0-0
White has a lot of compensation.

10.Nge2 Nc6
10...c6 11.0-0 leads to a complex position, where in my opinion White has every chance of fighting for the advantage
after, for instance, 11...Bf5 12.h3.

11.0-0 Bg4 12.h3 Bxe2

It is not the best idea to give up the light-squared bishop.

13.Nxe2 Qd7
This was Collins – Rochev, Dun Laoghaire 2010. Now the most accurate move would have been:
14.Be3!N
White retains an obvious advantage.

B2) 6...d6 7.Ne2 e5

8.0-0
I have changed my opinion in favour of this move, since my recommendation from GM 2 didn’t fully satisfy me.

8.a3 Bxd2† 9.Nxd2 (9.Qxd2 allows Black to play a nice positional idea: 9...a4 10.Nbc3 Nc6 and the possibility of
...Na5 is somewhat annoying) 9...a4 I now believe that Black is doing fine here and so we shouldn’t allow this. An
example line is:
10.0-0 Nbd7! 11.h3 (or 11.Qc2 exd4 12.Nxd4 c6 13.Rfe1 Nc5 14.Rad1 Re8) 11...c6 12.Qc2 Re8 13.Kh2 exd4 14.Nxd4
Nc5 15.Rae1 Bd7 16.f4 Qc7 17.N4f3 h6 The situation is unclear. Black’s positional achievements on the queenside
were seriously restricting White’s ideas in Genutis – Fedorchuk, Salou 2011.

8...Re8
I checked two other natural options for Black:

8...exd4 9.Nxd4 Nc6 (9...Re8 10.Qc2 will be covered in our main line) In this case White experiences some difficulties
in arranging his pieces in an optimal way, taking into account that Bxb4 is hardly a good idea, while Black’s dark-
squared bishop might be transferred to c5. 10.Nxc6 (10.Bc3 Bd7! 11.a3 Bc5 12.Nxc6 Bxc6 13.Nd2 a4 leads to
complicated double-edged play) 10...bxc6 11.Nc3N (There is one computer game which continued 11.a3 Bxd2
12.Nxd2 Nd7 and Black was absolutely fine in Sting – Deep Sjeng, Internet 2013.) 11...Re8 12.Qc2 Again transposing
to a position from our main line.
8...Nc6 9.d5 Ne7 10.Nbc3 Bd7 was Stohl – Fauland, Vienna 2011. Now I like the following improvement:
11.Nc1N This significantly improves White’s coordination. An illustrative line is 11...c6 12.Nd3 b5 13.b3 bxc4 14.bxc4
Qc7 15.Rc1² and White still retains better chances thanks to his space advantage secured by the d5-pawn.

9.Qc2 exd4
After 9...Bxd2 10.Nxd2 c5 11.d5 Na6 Black was certainly solid in Munteanu – Machan, Prague 2012. However, I
believe it’s always White who controls the game in these kind of positions. 12.Rae1N 12...Bd7 13.Nc3 followed up
with f2-f4 would give White a promising game.

10.Nxd4 Bc5
I also considered the natural 10...Nc6N 11.Nxc6 (11.Bc3 Bd7 seems rather double-edged to me) 11...bxc6 12.Nc3.
The position is complex and it is not possible to analyse anything concretely, but I would like to mention the following
direction: 12...Bc5 13.Na4 Bd4 14.Bc3 Bxc3 15.Nxc3² I prefer White’s chances.

11.Bc3 Na6
Apparently not the best square for the knight.

11...Nbd7 looks more natural. After 12.Nd2 Ne5 13.Kh1! I still prefer White, though the position is complicated.

12.a3! a4 13.Nd2 Nb8

Black has realized that his knight has no future on a6, but he has lost important time. In Lesavouroux – M. Urban,
email 2010, White should have continued to improve his position with:

14.h3N 14...Nbd7 15.Rad1²

White has the better game.

C) 5...d5 6.Nf3 0-0

6...dxc4 transposes to a position covered in the Catalan section – see variation D of Chapter 4 on page 56.
7.Qc2
7.0-0 was my choice in GM 2, but after 7...dxc4 we reach a position that no longer fits our repertoire. Black has a
wide range of choices here: C1) 7...b6, C2) 7...c6, C3) 7...Nc6 and C4) 7...c5.

C1) 7...b6 8.0-0

8...dxc4
8...c6 transposes to variation C2 below.

8...Bb7 9.cxd5 Bxd5 was played in Demina – Ubiennykh, Sochi 2004. (9...exd5 10.Bg5² should be a good version of a
Queen’s Indian position.)
 Now the logical 10.Bg5N 10...Nbd7 11.a3 Be7 12.Nc3 Bb7 13.e4² would lead to a pleasant game for White.

9.Ne5 Ra7
9...Qxd4N is an important line. 10.Bxa8 Qxe5 11.Bf4 Qh5 12.Bf3! Ng4 13.Bxg4 Qxg4 14.Bxc7± and Black hardly
has enough for the exchange.

10.Rd1 Bb7 11.Bxb7 Rxb7 12.Qxc4 c5

This occurred in Kachiani – Vasilevich, Chisinau 2005, and now I found the following improvement:

13.Bxb4!N 13...axb4
13...cxb4 14.Rc1² promises White a long-term advantage thanks to his better pawn structure.

14.a4! Rc7
 14...bxa3 15.Nxa3²

15.Nd2 Qxd4 16.Qxd4 cxd4 17.Ndf3

The arising endgame is unpleasant for Black.

C2) 7...c6 8.0-0 b6

After 8...Nbd7 9.Bf4 White threatens 10.c5 with the idea of trapping Black’s dark-squared bishop. After the more or
less forced 9...Be7 10.Rd1 we again transpose to a Catalan position.

9.Bg5 Be7 10.Nbd2

Now Black has a choice between developing his light-squared bishop to b7 or a6.

10...Bb7
Or 10...Ba6 11.Ne5! Nfd7 12.Bxe7 Qxe7 13.Nd3! As always, it is essential to keep both pairs of knights. 13...Nf6
This was Ilincic – Raicevic, Nis 1996, and now White should have continued 14.Rac1N 14...Rd8 15.Rfe1 Nbd7 16.e4
Rac8 17.e5 Ne8 18.Nf4² with better chances.
11.e4
Given as a novelty in GM 2, but it has now been played.

11...dxe4
11...h6 is met by 12.Be3!. Of course White has no intention of giving up his dark-squared bishop. 12...Na6 13.Rfd1
White has a promising version of a Catalan position.

12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.Qxe4 c5

White is ready to meet Black’s last move:

15.d5!
I can say that the following game was decided thanks to GM 2:
15...Qf6?! 16.Ne5 exd5 17.cxd5 Rd8 18.Rfe1 Na6 19.Nc6 Bxc6 20.dxc6+–
White was winning in Domogaev – Biriukov, Bogoroditsk 2011.

C3) 7...Nc6 8.0-0 dxc4

Black has also tried some other moves:

8...Ne4
This makes a lot of sense for Black. Here I like:
9.Rd1 Nxd2
Another direction is 9...f5 10.Nc3 Nxd2 as in McDougall – Hanley, Eastleigh 2011. Now the correct recapture
would be 11.Qxd2N. White shouldn’t worry about: 11...dxc4 (if 11...a4 12.a3 Bxc3 13.Qxc3² White retains a
pleasant edge) 12.a3 Be7 13.Qc2 White will have no problems regaining the pawn, while Black’s pawn structure
has collapsed.
10.Nbxd2
The stem game continued as follows:

10...a4 11.Nb1! Be7 12.Nc3

12.a3!?N deserves attention as well.
12...a3 13.b3 Nb4 14.Qd2 Bd7 15.Rac1 c6 16.c5²
White was better in Greenfeld – Laxman, Chennai 2011.

8...Be7 9.Rd1 Nb4

a) 9...Ra6 has been played by Topalov, but to tell the truth it looks too artificial to me, and after 10.a3 Bd7
11.Bf4N I do not really understand what Black’s rook is doing on a6.
b) 9...Ne4 is comfortably met by: 10.Nc3 Nxd2 (White enjoys a pleasant edge after 10...f5 11.a3!, as was proven
in the following example: 11...Bf6 12.e3 Kh8 13.Rac1 Ne7 14.Ne2 c6 15.Nf4 Bd7 16.Be1 Ng6 17.Nd3
Sjugirov – Fressinet, Moscow 2013) 11.Rxd2 Black’s main idea here is 11...Nb4, and now I believe 12.Qd1 to be
White’s best retreat. There is only one example from this position: 12...dxc4 (after 12...c6 13.a3 Na6 14.Qc2²
White retains a pleasant edge) 13.Ne5 c6 14.Nxc4 Nd5 15.Rc1 White obtained a thematic, long-term Catalan
edge in Lombart – Rattay, email 2011.
10.Qc1 dxc4
 This is Avrukh – Ferguson, Internet 2004. In the game I played the slightly inaccurate 11.Qc4 and allowed Black
to gain reasonable play after 11...b6, while instead I had a simple improvement:

11.a3!N 11...Nbd5 12.Qxc4

This would secure White a pleasant advantage, with the following point: 12...b6 is now strongly met by 13.Qc2! with
the idea of 14.e4.

9.Qxc4 Qd5
Black can also try 9...Bd6 with the idea of carrying out the ...e6-e5 advance, but after: 10.Nc3 e5 11.d5 (also worth
considering is 11.Rfd1 exd4 12.Nxd4 Nxd4 13.Qxd4 Qe7 14.Bg5 Be5 15.Qe3!?) 11...Ne7 12.Rac1 In both cases ...a5
is not exactly a move Black is happy to have played. White was better in Van der Stricht – Sarakauskiene, La Fere
2002.

10.Qxd5
I believe this is the simplest road to an advantage.

10...exd5
Recapturing with the knight would lead to an advantageous position for White, as his Catalan bishop is very strong.
For example, 10...Nxd5 11.Nc3 Bd7 12.Rac1 Nxc3 was Tanggaard – O. Larsen, Aalborg 1993. Here I believe White
should keep the pressure along the c-file by playing 13.Bxc3N with a pleasant edge after 13...Rfd8 14.a3 Bd6 15.Nd2.

11.Bf4 Bg4 12.a3 Be7

Black has also experimented with 12...Bd6 13.Bxd6 cxd6. Now instead of the natural 14.e3 White temporary
sacrificed a central pawn with: 14.Nc3 Bxf3 15.Bxf3 Nxd4 16.Bg2! Black did not manage to challenge the validity of
White’s idea and ended up in a clearly worse position after: 16...Nb3 17.Rad1 d4 18.Nb5 Rac8 19.Nxd4 Nxd4 20.Rxd4
Rc2 21.Rb1 Rxe2 22.Rxd6 Once again the a5-pawn is not really helping Black, Van der Sterren – Garcia Ilundain,
Linares 1995.
13.Nc3N
This looks strong here, although 13.Rd1 Rfc8 14.Nc3 is also advantageous for White. 14...Nd8 Obviously Black
wants to play ...c6 as soon as possible to remove White’s pressure against the d5-pawn. 15.Ne5 Be6 was Vittorino –
Morales Rivera, Bogota 2006, and now White could have played more strongly: 16.Bg5N 16...c6 17.Na4 Ra6 18.Rac1
White’s pieces are much better coordinated.

13...Bxf3 14.Bxf3 Nxd4 15.Bxc7 Nxf3† 16.exf3²

Black has an unpleasant endgame ahead.

C4) 7...c5 8.dxc5 d4

Another important direction here is: 8...Bxc5 9.cxd5 Qxd5 10.Nc3 Qh5 11.h3 The black queen is clearly misplaced
on h5. 11...Nc6 12.g4 Qg6 13.Qxg6 fxg6 14.0-0 a4 15.Rac1 White had a lot of pressure in the arising endgame,
Zuchowski Filho – Almeida, corr. 2003.

9.Bxb4 axb4 10.0-0 Nc6 11.Nbd2 e5

11...Qe7
Now it is only White who can fight for an advantage.

12.Ng5! e5
After 12...Qxc5 White executed his idea perfectly in the following game: 13.Nde4 Nxe4 14.Nxe4 Qe7 15.c5! e5
16.Nd6 Be6 17.a3 b3 (Black understandably avoids 17...bxa3 18.bxa3 as his b7-pawn would be a serious target.)
18.Qd2 f5 Morcin – Silva Filho, email 2011. White should now have played 19.e3!N 19...dxe3 20.Qxe3² with
the better game.
13.Nge4 Nxe4 14.Nxe4 Bf5
15.a3!
Again an important positional idea, which enables White to seize the initiative on the queenside.
15...g6 16.axb4 Nxb4 17.Qb3 Bxe4 18.Bxe4 Qxc5 19.Rxa8 Rxa8 20.Bxb7 Rb8 21.Bg2
Black definitely has some compensation for the pawn, but he will have to fight hard for the draw, Mihai – Foulds,
corr. 2013.

12.Ng5 h6
If 12...Bg4 then White has 13.Nde4 Nxe4 14.Nxe4 Bf5 as in Gagarin – Osmanodja, Pardubice 2012. White should
have gone for 15.Qb3N 15...Bxe4 16.Bxe4 Qe7 17.a3 Qxc5 18.Bxc6 bxc6 19.axb4 White is simply a pawn up.

13.Nge4 Ne8 14.a3!

As usual White seeks to open up the queenside at the right moment. Here we have two games:

14...f5
Another game continued: 14...bxa3 15.Qb3! Ra5 16.Rxa3 f5 17.Nd6 Nxd6 18.cxd6 Rc5 Black’s strategy had failed in
Shen Yang – Zhao Xue, Jiangsu Wuxi 2011, and White could have easily decided the game with:
19.Bxc6N 19...Rxc6 20.c5† Kh7 21.Qd5+–

15.Nd6 Nxd6 16.cxd6 Qxd6 17.c5 Qf6 18.axb4 Be6

Black managed to hold in Buhmann – Fressinet, Germany 2014, but here I found an improvement:

19.Rxa8N 19...Rxa8 20.Bxc6 bxc6 21.b5! cxb5 22.c6

Black will have a hard time fighting against White’s passed pawn.

Conclusion

Our first major departure from GM 2 came after the moves 4...a5 5.Bg2 0-0 6.e4 d6 7.Ne2 e5. I now recommend 8.0-0,
when my analysis shows that White enjoys the better prospects.
Another significant change arose after 5...d5 6.Nf3 0-0, when in GM 2 I continued with 7.0-0. Should Black then
reply with 7...dxc4 we would reach a position no longer in our repertoire, and for that reason I gave 7.Qc2. Some of
Black’s subsequent replies will transpose back to previously covered territory, with my previous recommendations
standing the test of time.
The final variation of the chapter saw us follow a high level game between Buhmann and Fressinet, when my
improvement leaves Black struggling to defend against White’s powerful passed pawn.
A) 5...Bxd2† 6.Qxd2
A1) 6...d5 7.Bg2 0-0 8.0-0
A11) 8...dxc4
A12) 8...Rd8
A13) 8...Nbd7
A2) 6...Nc6 7.Nc3 d5 8.Ne5 dxc4 9.Bg2 Nxe510.dxe5 Nd7 11.Qd4
A21) 11...Qb4
A22) 11...0-0
B) 5...b6 6.Bg2 Bb7 7.0-0
B1) 7...0-0
B2) 7...Bxd2 8.Qxd2
B21) 8...d6
B22) 8...d5
B23) 8...0-0
C) 5...0-0 6.Bg2 Bxd2† 7.Qxd2 d6 8.Nc3 e5 9.0-0
C1) 9...Nc6
C2) 9...c6
 C3) 9...Bg4
C4) 9...Re8

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 Bb4† 4.Bd2 Qe7 5.Nf3

After this we reach a usual Bogo-Indian position, which I have always been happy to see with White over the board.

5.Bg2 is quite possible, but after 5...Nc6 6.Nf3 Black captures on d2 with 6...Bxd2† forcing the knight recapture, as
7.Qxd2 runs into 7...Ne4 followed by ...Qb4† with a great game for Black. After 7.Nbxd2 d6 in general Black is doing
well according to current theory.

The options we must consider in this chapter are: A) 5...Bxd2†, B) 5...b6 and C) 5...0-0. Many transpositions are
possible, but for clarity I will consider ...d7-d5 plans in line A, and ...d7-d6 then ...e6-e5 ideas in line C.

5...Nc6 is examined in the next chapter.

A) 5...Bxd2† 6.Qxd2

Unlike 4...Bxd2†, which we saw in Chapter 18, this time we recapture with the queen, since after 6.Nbxd2 Black is fine
if he plays 6...d6 and switches to the ...e6-e5 plan we saw in the earlier chapter.

Now there is a further split: A1) 6...d5 or A2) 6...Nc6.

A1) 6...d5 7.Bg2 0-0 8.0-0

It might be slightly confusing that after 3...Bb4† 4.Bd2 Bxd2† we do not capture with queen, avoiding the type of
position we see right now. However there is one important detail – in this chapter Black is already committed to the
move ...Qe7, which is redundant in my opinion, since he can quickly go for ...Nbd7, ...c6, ...b6, ...Bb7. This small
detail makes a difference and allows White to fight for an advantage in this line.
 One more split is needed: A11) 8...dxc4, A12) 8...Rd8 and A13) 8...Nbd7.

8...c6 generally transposes to variation A13 after 9.Qc2 Nbd7.

A11) 8...dxc4

The always seemed like a concession to me, as the capture opens up White’s light-squared bishop.

9.Na3 Rd8
The alternative is 9...c5 when the following example looks convincing: 10.dxc5 Qxc5 11.Rac1 Nc6 12.Nxc4 Rd8
13.Qg5 (13.Qf4 is an interesting alternative, as several games have shown) 13...Qxg5 14.Nxg5 Nd4 In Aronian –
Hübner, Internet 2004, White should have played: 15.Rfd1N 15...h6 (15...Nxe2†? loses to 16.Kf1 Nd4 17.Ne5) 16.e3!
hxg5 17.Rxd4 Rxd4 18.exd4 Ne8 (otherwise 19.Nd6 is highly unpleasant) 19.Rc3 White clearly has a dangerous
initiative.

10.Nxc4 c5 11.Rfd1 Na6

I also checked the natural 11...Nc6 when 12.Qe3 Nd5 13.Qb3 would keep serious pressure.
 So far this is Speelman – Andersson, London 1982. Now White should have continued:

12.Nce5N
I examined the following line:

12...Bd7

To my great surprise, I realized the following capture works very well:

13.Nxf7!
My recommendation from GM 2 was 13.Nxd7 Rxd7 14.Qa5 Rad8 15.e3² which obviously secures a pleasant edge
for White.
13...Qxf7 14.Ne5 Qe8 15.Bxb7 Bb5 16.Qa5 Bxe2 17.Rd2 Qb5 18.Qxb5 Bxb5 19.a4
White regains the piece with a clear advantage.

A12) 8...Rd8

A popular alternative.

9.Rc1
Even more popular is 9.Qc2, but in my opinion our queen is not so badly placed on d2 and might be transferred to the
f4- or e3-squares; especially after 8...Rd8 this idea works well for White.

9...c6
Black has also tried another set-up with 9...Nc6 and now I like the following play for White: 10.Ne5 Bd7 11.Qe3 Be8
12.Nd2² White had a preferable position in Su. Polgar – Garcia Trobat, San Sebastian 1991.

10.Qe3
A good square for White’s queen, controlling the important central squares e4 and e5, and vacating the d2-square for
the queenside knight.
10...b6
This has recently been played by Short, so I will consider it the main move. There are a couple of other options.

Removing the tension in the centre is hardly a good idea: 10...dxc4 11.Rxc4 Nbd7 12.Qa3!? An interesting idea (though
the natural 12.Nbd2 Nd5 13.Qe4 would also keep a pleasant edge). 12...Kf8 13.Rc1 Qxa3 14.Nxa3 The endgame
clearly offers White an advantage, which he managed to increase with the next series of moves: 14...Ne4 15.Nc4 f6
16.Ne1 Ng5 17.a4 Nb6 18.a5 Nd5 19.Nd3± Boensch – Kveinys, Augsburg 1994.

10...Bd7 11.Nbd2 Be8 12.Nb3

A remarkable concept. White’s knight is heading for a5, where it will put additional pressure on Black’s
queenside.
A worthy alternative is 12.a3 a5 13.c5 a4 14.Ne5² as in Timman – Nikolic, Reykjavik 1988.
12...Nbd7
Other options for Black are:
12...a5 13.Nc5 Na6 14.Nd3² was the assessment of Kasparov in Chess Informant 48.
12...Na6 13.a3 Rac8 was Razuvaev – Kholmov, Moscow 1991, and now Kholmov’s recommendation from Chess
Informant 52 seems to me to be very good for White: 14.c5! White’s chances are better, as he has a clear plan of
a queenside offensive (Na5, b4, a4 and so on) while it will not be so easy for Black to create counterplay in the
centre.
13.Na5 Rab8 14.Rab1
Preparing the b2-b4 advance.
14...Rdc8
14...Nf8 15.c5 Ng6 16.b4 would leave White with a pleasant edge.
14...Qb4 15.Qc3 Qxc3 16.bxc3±
15.cxd5
As always, Kasparov takes a concrete approach to the position, while the alternative would have been 15.c5!?
with a slightly better position for White, as he has a clear offensive plan on the queenside.
15...Nxd5
15...cxd5 would leave Black a pawn down for questionable compensation after: 16.Rxc8 Rxc8 17.Nxb7 Qb4
18.Qb3 Qxb3 19.axb3±
16.Qd2 c5?!
This move was condemned by Kasparov in Chess Informant 48, and he instead recommended 16...N5b6 as the
road to equality, but I disagree with this evaluation, since after 17.b4 f6 18.e4 e5 19.a3 Bf7 20.Qe3 White seems
pleasantly better.
17.e4 N5b6 18.e5!
White seized the initiative in Kasparov – Timman, Belgrade 1989.

11.cxd5!
This is the right moment to release the tension in the centre.

11...cxd5
Instead 11...Nxd5 allows White to take control over the centre: 12.Qb3 Bb7 (12...c5?! 13.dxc5 bxc5 14.Nc3 is clearly
inferior for Black due to the weakness of the c5-pawn) 13.e4 Nf6 14.Nc3 With a pleasant edge.

12.Ne5 Bb7 13.Na3!

Black is experiencing definite problems in trying to develop his pieces.

13...Ne8 14.Nb5 a6
14...Nd7 allows 15.Nc6 (though maybe even stronger is 15.Qb3!?) 15...Bxc6 16.Rxc6 and White retains pressure.

15.Nc3 Nd7 16.Na4!

 White has managed to seize an initiative on the queenside. In one game Black tried to simplify with:

16...Nxe5 17.dxe5 d4
But after:

18.Qa3! Qxa3 19.bxa3 Bxg2 20.Kxg2 b5 21.Nc5²

White kept serious pressure in the arising endgame in Hengl – Stegariu, corr. 2012.

A13) 8...Nbd7

This is definitely Black’s most popular continuation. It’s important to mention this line can arise via different move
orders, for instance 8...c6 9.Qc2 Nbd7.
9.Qc2
This time we choose another plan. As we know already, White can leave his queen on d2 and continue with 9.Rc1,
but I failed to discover anything special for White after 9...c6. Black has easy play; after both 10.Qf4 and 10.Qe3 his
plan includes ...Bb7 or ...Ba6 and then eventually carrying out ...c6-c5.

9...c6
The most playable alternative is 9...c5, but this seems to me absolutely not in the spirit of this variation. White gains
better chances by simple means: 10.cxd5 Nxd5 11.Nc3 Nxc3 12.Qxc3 cxd4 13.Nxd4 Nf6 14.Rfd1 e5 15.Nb5 Bg4 In
Gordenko – Semenov, Kiev 2006, White could retain strong pressure in various ways, but the most accurate is
16.Qe3N.

10.Nbd2
White intends to carry out e2-e4 quickly. Black has two options: either allow White to execute his idea, or play
10...e5 himself.

10...e5
The other path is:
10...b6 11.e4 dxe4 12.Nxe4 Bb7
In another game Black tried 12...Nxe4 13.Qxe4 Bb7 and now after the best line 14.Rfe1 Nf6 15.Qc2 we get the
same position as after 12...Bb7.
After the text move, Black easily made two quick draws from this position, but neither of the White players went
for the simple:
13.Nxf6†!N
My recommendation from GM 2 of 13.Rfe1 is not so convincing.
13...Nxf6
13...Qxf6 allows an immediate 14.c5.
But after the knight recapture, White should not rush with c4-c5, and instead simply continue with:
14.Rfe1
In fact, 14.c5 bxc5 15.dxc5 a5 is also a little better for White, but Black will gain some counterplay when his
knight gets to d5, his bishop to a6, and so on.
14...Rad8 15.c5
White has a pleasant edge.

11.cxd5
11...Nxd5
11...e4? would be a serious mistake in view of 12.d6! Qe6 13.Ng5 Qxd6 14.e3! and Black loses his central pawn.

11...cxd5
This would allow White a pleasant choice between:
12.e4!?
Or 12.dxe5 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Qxe5 14.Nf3 with a nice position playing against the isolated pawn.
12...dxe4
Or 12...exd4 13.exd5 Nxd5 14.Rfe1 Qc5 15.Qxc5 Nxc5 16.Nxd4 with serious pressure.
13.Nxe4 exd4 14.Rfe1!
An important move.
14...Nxe4 15.Rxe4 Qc5 16.Qd2!? Nf6 17.Rxd4 a5
17...Be6 allows 18.Ng5!.
18.Rc1 Qb6 19.a3
And despite the simplifications, Black was under severe positional pressure in Rychagov – Kholmov, Moscow 2003.

12.e4 N5b6
The knight also has a couple of other options:

12...Nb4 13.Qc3 exd4 14.Nxd4 Qc5

14...Nb6 15.a3 Na6 16.Rac1² and White is slightly better.
14...c5? Moving the c-pawn is really not a good idea. 15.Nf5 Qe5 16.Nc4± White was clearly better in Plaskett –
Hund, London 1982.
After the text move I like the way White played in the following game:
15.Rfc1 Qxc3 16.Rxc3 Nb6 17.a3 Rd8 18.N2b3 Na6
In Camarena Gimenez – Granero Roca, L’Alfas del Pi 2011, White missed the important follow-up:

19.a4!N 19...Nc7 20.a5 Nd7 21.Rd1

With a pleasant edge.
12...N5f6 13.Rfe1 Rd8
Or if 13...exd4 there are two lines worth analysing:
a) 14.e5 Nd5 15.Nxd4 was Carlsen – Galego, Khanty-Mansiysk (ol) 2010, when I believe Black should have
 tried the principled 15...Nxe5N. White’s best reply is 16.Nc4 (obviously 16.f4 Qb4! doesn’t work) 16...f6
17.Nb3 but after 17...a5! this is not something I would be happy to play with White, especially since the
alternative offers a clear positional superiority.
b) Thus I still prefer my recommendation 14.Nxd4 over Carlsen’s choice. After 14...Qc5 15.Qxc5 Nxc5 16.Nc4
the endgame is unpleasant for Black.
14.Rad1
White naturally enjoys a space advantage, but Black’s position is quite sound. It’s really remarkable how Anatoly
Karpov handles this position.
14...exd4 15.Nxd4 Nb6 16.N2b3 Bg4 17.f3 Be6 18.Qc5
I would also consider 18.Nxe6 Qxe6 19.Nc5 Qe7 20.f4 with better chances, but Karpov prefers to keep more
tension.
18...Qe8 19.e5 Nfd7
19...Nfd5 20.f4 looks much better for White as well.
20.Qc1 Nf8 21.f4
White had a solid edge in Karpov – Andersson, Reykjavik 1991.

13.Rac1!?N
A move that was recommended by Pelletier in ChessBase Magazine 124 but it has not been tested yet.

It’s important for White to maintain control over the c5-square, thus preventing Black’s idea of ...Qc5 trying to trade
queens, as happened in the following encounter: 13.Rfe1 exd4 14.Nxd4 Qc5 15.Qxc5 Nxc5 And the arising endgame
was reliable enough for Black, Pelletier – Schebler, Germany 2008.

After the novelty I examined the following natural line:

13...Rd8 14.Nb3 exd4 15.Nfxd4

And White is setting the tone after both:

15...Ne5
Or 15...Nf8 16.Rfe1.

16.f4 Nec4 17.Qe2 Na5 18.Qf2 Nxb3 19.Nxb3²

 A2) 6...Nc6

7.Nc3
7.Bg2 runs into the annoying 7...Ne4 followed by 8...Qb4†.

7...d5
This has recently been Black’s top choice in the Bogo with ...Qe7, at least among strong players. Eventually I came to
the conclusion that White’s best chance of fighting for the advantage is in the following line:

8.Ne5
A pet continuation of Kozul.

8...dxc4
Black’s only decent choice.

9.Bg2
Now Black mostly plays:

9...Nxe5
Only a couple of games have tested 9...0-0 when it seems White’s best idea is to play 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.0-0 c5 as in
Fages – Glinz, email 2010, and now I like 12.Na4N which forces Black to play: 12...cxd4 13.Qxd4 White retains a
small but pleasant edge after both 13...Ba6 14.Rfd1 Bb5 15.Nc3 Rfd8 16.Qf4² and 13...Rd8 14.Qxc4 Rd5 15.f4! Qd6
16.Rac1.

10.dxe5 Nd7 11.Qd4

 In this position Black has tried four different moves. A21) 11...Qb4 is an option but my main continuation will be
A22) 11...0-0. The two other alternatives are:
11...a6 12.Rd1 0-0 13.f4 will be covered via the 11...0-0 move order of line A22.

11...Nb6 12.0-0 Rb8 13.Rfd1 Bd7 14.Rd2 0-0 15.Rad1 Qe8 (15...Bc6 leaves White with typical compensation after
16.Bxc6 bxc6 17.Ne4 h6 18.a3 a5 19.h4©) This occurred in Kozul – Zelcic, Zadar 2013, and now I found a remarkable
solution:

16.Qh4!N It’s always important to remember about attacking ideas, since Black has hardly any pieces on the kingside.
16...Bc6 17.Bxc6 Qxc6 18.Ne4! And suddenly Black is in trouble. 18...h6 (18...Nd5 19.Nf6† is very strong for White)
19.Rd4 Kh8 20.Nf6 Nd5 21.Rxc4 Qa6 22.Nxd5 exd5 23.Rxd5 Qxa2 24.Qd4 And White dominates.

A21) 11...Qb4
 I recommend starting with:

12.f4N
This has never been played, but should eventually lead to a normal position.

After 12.0-0 I am not happy with Black having the option of 12...Qb6. The following example is quite instructive:
13.Rfd1 Qxd4 14.Rxd4 Nxe5 15.Nb5 Ke7 16.Re4 c6 17.Rxe5 cxb5 18.Rxb5 Rb8 19.Rc1 Rd8 Black had no problems
whatsoever in Corfield – Catt, email 2011.

12...0-0
If 12...Qxb2 then White has a lot of compensation after: 13.Rb1 Qa3 14.Qxc4 c6 (it is very important that Black
cannot play 14...Qc5 in view of 15.Qxc5 Nxc5 16.Rb5±) 15.Ne4!

13.0-0
This position has been reached several times, but usually via the 12.0-0 move order.

13...Qb6
Nobody has been brave or foolish enough to take the b2-pawn with 13...Qxb2 and indeed after 14.Rab1 Qa3
15.Qxc4© White has too much for the pawn.

13...Nb6
 This is a significant alternative to the main continuation. Now I like a new idea:
14.Rfc1!?N
Since I failed to find anything for White after 14.Rfd1 Qxb2 15.a4 c5 16.Qe3 Nd5! as has occurred in a few
games.
14...Rb8
After 14...Qxb2 15.a4! Nd5 16.Rab1 Qa3 17.Bxd5 exd5 18.Nxd5 White will regain the c4-pawn and his central
pawn mass looks more dangerous than Black’s queenside majority.
15.Ne4 Qe7 16.Rd1 f6
Another logical line is 16...Bd7 17.Qc5! Qxc5† 18.Nxc5 Bc6 19.Bxc6 bxc6 20.b3! with great compensation.
17.exf6 gxf6 18.Qc5!?
White has alternatives, but this way obtains clear compensation.
18...Qxc5† 19.Nxc5 e5 20.Bf3©

14.Rfd1
Several correspondence games have arrived at this position and in all of them Black chose:

14...f6
 Now the best idea for White is:

15.exf6 Nxf6 16.Na4N 16...Qxd4† 17.Rxd4²

Black faces a lot of hard work to try to hold the game.

A22) 11...0-0 12.Rd1

This important move anticipates 12...Qc5, which would work well after 12.0-0 Qc5 13.Qxc5 Nxc5 14.Rfc1 c6.

12...a6
12...Qb4 can be met by the calm 13.Rd2. The following game shows how careful Black must be: 13...a6 14.0-0 Rb8
15.Rfd1 b5? (much stronger would have been 15...Qc5 but even so after 16.f4 b5 17.Ne4 Qxd4† 18.Rxd4 f5 19.exf6
Nxf6 20.Nc5 White has excellent compensation) 16.Bc6 Nb6 17.Qh4+– Suddenly Black is lost as the threat of Rd8 is
decisive, Kozul – A. Saric, Opatija 2012.

13.f4
Every game has continued:

13...Nb6
And now I recommend:

14.Rd2!? Rb8 15.Ne4 Re8

15...Nd5 makes life easier for White: 16.Kf2 b5 17.Qc5! Qe8 18.Nc3 c6 19.Ne4! White was clearly better in Schoch
– Zatko, corr. 2013.

16.Kf2 Bd7 17.Nc5 Bc6 18.Bxc6 bxc6 19.Rhd1 h6 20.Kf3©

This position occurred in Legrand – Fransson, email 2012. White’s last move looks funny, but it shows that Black
cannot do much and has to wait passively. Obviously the main question is if White can break through. But what is
guaranteed is that nobody would be happy to reach such a position with Black.

B) 5...b6

The following set-up is of course in Queen’s Indian style.

6.Bg2 Bb7 7.0-0

 Now the best idea for Black is to swap dark-squared bishops, but we should also consider the alternative, so we will
analyse B1) 7...0-0 and B2) 7...Bxd2.

B1) 7...0-0

White can underline the drawback of Black’s arrangement with:

8.Bg5
More frequently White opts for 8.Bf4 with the tricky idea of meeting 8...d5 with the strong 9.c5 when Black faces
serious problems. The problem is that the correct 8...Bd6 9.Bxd6 cxd6 gives Black reasonable play.

8...h6
The most playable alternative to the text is:
8...d5
But in this case quite strong is the natural reply:
9.Ne5 h6
Otherwise the pin along the h4-d8 diagonal is annoying.
10.Bxf6 Qxf6
 Now the simplest and most convincing continuation is:
11.Qb3N 11...Bd6
11...c5 12.cxd5 cxd4 13.dxe6 Bxg2 14.exf7† Kh8 15.Kxg2 Qxe5 16.Qxb4± just leaves White with extra
material.
12.cxd5 Bxe5
Or 12...exd5 13.Nc3 c6 14.f4! Na6 15.e4± and White is clearly better.
13.dxe5 Qxe5 14.f4 Qxe2 15.Bf3
The point behind White’s play.
15...Qa6 16.dxe6
Black is in trouble.

9.Bxf6 Qxf6 10.a3 Be7 11.Nc3 d6

 Black’s position would be fine if his queen was on d8, but with the black queen misplaced on f6, White has every
chances of an advantage.

11...d5 12.Ne5 is clearly better for White. For example: 12...c6 13.e4 Rd8? (somewhat better was 13...dxc4 14.Nxc4
although White’s advantage is obvious) 14.Ng4 Qg6 15.cxd5 cxd5 16.exd5 exd5 17.Ne3 Black lost his central pawn in
L. Bronstein – Fuentes, Buenos Aires 1991.

A vital line to note is: 11...c5 12.d5 exd5 13.Ne1! This secures White’s advantage, as he will recapture the black pawn
with a piece. 13...Nc6 14.Nxd5 Qd6 15.Qc2 Rad8 16.e3 White was clearly better in the computer game Gull –
RobboLito, Internet 2013.

12.Qc2
White creates the tactical threat of 13.Ng5.

In my opinion the new and natural 12.d5N also comes into serious consideration.

After the text move, the most recent game continued:

12...Nd7
There are other moves to consider:

12...Qg6?! 13.Qxg6 fxg6 14.Bh3 Kf7 15.d5 was clearly better for White in Kulaots – Zavoronkov, Tallinn 2003.

12...c6
This is hardly a good idea.
13.Rad1 Nd7
Black has no time to play 13...d5, as after 14.Ne5 Bd6 White has the strong idea of 15.e4! Bxe5 16.dxe5 Qxe5
17.exd5 cxd5 18.cxd5 when he is clearly better.
14.d5
The key move in White’s concept.
14...exd5 15.Nd4!
The play in this game of my good friend Vladislav Tkachiev made a great impression on me.
15...Rfe8

16.b4
A fine positional idea. White is not satisfied with a slight edge after 16.cxd5 c5 17.Nc6, but instead intends to
undermine Black’s pawn structure, and especially the d5-pawn, by means of b4-b5.
16...a6 17.b5 cxb5 18.cxb5 Bf8
Unfortunately Black cannot play 18...Rac8 as White has the strong 19.Bh3 and if Black plays 19...Rc7 then
20.bxa6 Bxa6 21.Bxd7 Rxd7 22.Nxd5 is horrible for Black.
19.Bxd5 Bxd5 20.Nxd5
 White had a clear positional advantage in Tkachiev – Nikolaidis, Belfort 2004.

13.Rad1
Also good was 13.Ng5 hxg5 14.Bxb7 Rad8 15.Rad1² when White would gain a pleasant positional edge.

13...a6 14.h4 g5?

This is just a blunder, but even after 14...Rab8 15.d5² White has a solid edge.

15.Nxg5 hxg5 16.Bxb7+–

Black could have resigned in Wang Yue – Akylbekov, Khanty-Mansiysk (ol) 2010.

B2) 7...Bxd2 8.Qxd2

 Now Black has a serious choice: B21 8...d6, B22) 8...d5 or B23) 8...0-0.

Instead I believe it is premature for Black to jump in with his knight:

8...Ne4 9.Qf4 d5 10.Nfd2
White gets a good version of a Queen’s Indian.
10...Nxd2 11.Nxd2 0-0 12.Rac1 c5?!
Much stronger was the modest 12...Na6 but then after 13.cxd5 exd5 14.Nc4! White would be better, with the
following point: 14...Qxe2 15.Rfe1 Qh5 16.Re5 Qg6 17.Ne3 And White will regain the pawn (on d5) with
dividends, as Black cannot play 17...c6, due to 18.Rg5 Qe6 19.Bh3!! Qxh3 20.Qf6 g6 21.Nf5 winning on the
spot.
The text move was played in Poljakov – Subaric, Novi Sad 1945, when White overlooked a strong possibility:
13.cxd5 exd5 14.dxc5 bxc5 15.b4!±
With a clear positional advantage, as White will establish control over the d4-square.

B21) 8...d6

This is a serious alternative to the main line.

9.d5!
An important improvement over 9.Nc3, which allows 9...Ne4 10.Nxe4 Bxe4. The line from GM 2 continued 11.Qe3
Bb7 12.d5. Otherwise White can hardly fight for an advantage. And somehow I didn’t pay enough attention to 12...Nd7
which has brought Black very good results in practice. My new idea was 13.b4 but for some reason I missed the simple:
13...exd5 (13...0-0 14.Nd4 and 13...e5 14.Nd2 are both fine for White) With the following point: 14.Qxe7† Kxe7
15.Nd4 a5! Black either gets the c5-square for his knight, or gains counterplay along the a-file.

9...exd5
This is the critical line in my opinion.

9...e5 10.Nc3 Despite Black’s great score, I believe White should always be better in this kind of position when the b7-
bishop is blocked by White’s d5-pawn. For example: 10...a5 11.a3 Na6 Not the best square for the knight, but Black
obviously missed that White is able to play b2-b4. 12.b4 axb4 13.axb4 0-0 (instead 13...Nxb4? does not work in view
of 14.Rxa8† Bxa8 15.Ra1 0-0 16.Ra7! Qd8 17.Nb5 c6 18.Nc7 with a decisive advantage) 14.Qb2 White was clearly
better in Stoll – Schmidt, Germany 1982.

10.Nh4 Ne4
 Now in Ikonnikov – Vaysberg, Esslingen 2012, White should have played:

11.Qe3!N
With the following point:

11...dxc4 12.Nf5 Qe5 13.Nc3 d5 14.f3 Qxf5 15.fxe4 Qe5 16.Rf5 Qe7 17.Qd4 0-0 18.exd5
White has a great position.

B22) 8...d5

This is a normal move in this type of position, but after:

9.cxd5 exd5
I consider that this structure is always very playable for White and here I would say we have a favourable version, as
the black queen is misplaced on e7 and the trade of dark-squared bishops makes White’s life easier.

9...Nxd5 10.Re1 0-0 11.e4 Nf6 12.Nc3 Rd8 13.Rac1² offered White a pleasant advantage in Rybka 4.1 – Gull, Internet
2013.

10.Nc3 0-0 11.Rac1

I have changed my mind compared with GM 2 and now I recommend this move rather than 11.Nh4 as I first
suggested. Now I am not sure what we achieve after 11...g6. Let’s see a fairly recent example: 12.Qg5 Qd8 13.Rac1
Na6 14.Nf3 c6 15.Rfe1 Kg7 16.Qd2 c5 In Bars – Gunkel, corr. 2013, I still believe White is slightly better, but it’s
obvious that we didn’t achieve much with our knight jump to h4.
11...Na6
There are a couple of other moves to consider:

11...Nbd7 12.Nh4 This time the knight hop to h4 is stronger. 12...c6 (12...g6 13.Qg5 and Black is struggling to protect
his d5-pawn, since 13...c6 runs into 14.e4!) This is Sokolowski – Sadomsky, corr. 1980, and now I like the following
idea for White: 13.f3N 13...c5 If White carries out e2-e4 then he would be clearly better. 14.Nf5 Qe6 15.Bh3 Kh8
16.Kg2 g6 17.Ne3 Qe7 18.dxc5 Nxc5 19.Nc2 White has good play against the isolated pawn.

Premature is 11...c5 12.dxc5! bxc5 13.Nh4 Qd7 14.Rfd1 d4 15.Na4± with a clear advantage, as in Khismatullin –
Fedoseev, Khanty-Mansiysk 2013.

12.Rfd1 Rfd8 13.Nh4 c6

White also has an edge after: 13...g6 14.Qg5 Qe6 15.Nf3 Ne4 16.Qf4²

14.Nf5 Qf8
 In Wells – Czaja, Liverpool 2008, White should have continued:

15.Qf4N 15...Re8 16.a3 Re6 17.b4²

With a pleasant edge.

B23) 8...0-0 9.Nc3

9...Ne4
There are two other options to consider:

9...d5 10.cxd5 Nxd5 (the more popular 10...exd5 would transpose to line B22 above) 11.Rac1 White’s position is
preferable; Black’s best chance is: 11...Na6 12.Ne5 c5 13.dxc5 Nxc5 14.Nxd5 exd5 15.Nf3 White had a slight but
long-lasting advantage in Tukmakov – Reshevsky, Vilnius 1978 (and 15.Nd3 also looks good).
9...d6 10.d5! e5
This position has occurred many times in practice but, as I already mentioned above, in my opinion this type of
position with a white pawn on d5 blocking Black’s light-squared bishop is always better for White.

11.e4
Worthy of consideration is 11.b4N. It is a novelty in this concrete situation, but in two moves it transposes to the
game Huch – F. Schmid, Germany 1999. 11...a5 12.a3 Ba6 13.Qa2 Nbd7 14.Qb3 Ng4 15.e4 f5 Definitely a
premature decision. 16.exf5 Rxf5 17.Ne4 White had a nice positional edge.
11...a5 12.Ne1
It’s pretty pointless to play 12.Nh4 since after 12...g6! it would be hard to carry out f2-f4 and recapture with the
g-pawn, since the knight would be vulnerable on h4.
12...Na6 13.b3 Nc5 14.Nc2
I like White’s position as he can combine play on both sides.
14...Nfd7
Even after the best option 14...Bc8 15.Rae1 Bd7 16.f4 White has the better game.
15.Rab1 f5
A premature idea, which only helps White.
16.exf5 Rxf5 17.a3 Nf8 18.b4 Ncd7 19.Ne4±
White had a clear positional advantage in Yevseev – E. Levin, St Petersburg 2007.
10.Nxe4 Bxe4 11.Qf4
White attacks both Black’s light-squared bishop and the c7-pawn, so Black is almost forced to play:

11...d5
11...Bxf3 is obviously a concession, and after 12.Bxf3 c6 13.Rac1 Na6 14.Rc3 Rfc8 15.a3 White’s advantage was
obvious in Tatai – Kopec, London 1978.

12.Rac1 Na6
I also found the following line quite interesting:
12...c5 13.cxd5 exd5 14.dxc5 bxc5 15.Qe3! Qb7
This is Black’s best continuation; the rest are much worse:
15...Qf6 16.Rxc5 Qxb2 17.Qd2! White is clearly better. After 17...Qb7, as in Arkell – Dive, Norwich 1994, the
natural 18.Rfc1N 18...Na6 19.Rc6 Rac8 20.Nd4 would have secured White a big advantage.
15...Na6 is also not good. 16.Nd2 Rfe8 17.Nxe4 dxe4 18.Rc4 f5 19.g4! gave White a clear advantage in Stupica –
Lagudin, Slovenia 1996.
16.Qxc5N
I believe this new move is White’s best option. To compare with 15...Qf6, now after 16.Rxc5 Black has the
intermediate 16...Nd7 at his disposal, which would allow him reasonable play.
16.b3 is too soft and after 16...Na6 Black had a normal and safe position in Tal – Cardoso, Las Palmas 1975.
16...Qxb2 17.Qc3!?
Intending to go into a favourable endgame, with play against Black’s isolated pawn.
17...Qxa2
Black can also try to capture the other pawn: 17...Qxe2 18.Nd4 Qh5 (White is clearly better after 18...Qa6
19.Bxe4 dxe4 20.Nf5 Qf6 21.Qxf6 gxf6 22.Rfe1±) 19.f3 Bg6 20.Qc7 Qg5 21.Rfd1 Qd8 22.Bf1! White’s
powerful compensation is obvious.
18.Nd4 Qa6
White was threatening 19.Ra1, while 18...Bxg2? loses to 19.Nf5 f6 20.Qc7.
19.Bxe4 dxe4 20.Nf5 Qf6 21.Qxf6 gxf6 22.Rc4
In my opinion this endgame is difficult for Black.

13.cxd5 Bxd5
Black can also recapture with the pawn: 13...exd5 In Budo – Bondarevsky, Tbilisi 1937, I believe White should have
played: 14.Bh3 f6 (otherwise 15.Ne5 might cause Black serious problems, for example 14...c5 15.Ne5 f6 16.Nc6 Qe8
17.Qd6±) 15.Nh4! (in GM 2 I suggested the positional 15.a3 which is good enough for an edge) The more ambitious
knight jump is stronger, for example: 15...c5 16.f3 g5 17.Nf5! Bxf5 18.Qxf5 Qe3† 19.Kh1 Rad8 20.dxc5 bxc5 21.f4
White has the advantage.

14.Ne5
A strong and concrete method, which proves sufficient for an advantage.

14...c5
The following option has no independent significance: 14...Bxg2 15.Kxg2 c5 16.dxc5 bxc5 (Unfortunately for Black,
the desirable recapture with the knight doesn’t work: 16...Nxc5 17.b4 Qb7† 18.Qf3! Qxf3† 19.Kxf3 Na6 20.Nc6±
With a large advantage for White.) 17.Qa4 This would transpose to 14...c5.
15.dxc5 bxc5

16.Qa4
16.Rfd1 might be even stronger.

16...Bxg2 17.Kxg2 Qb7† 18.Kg1 Rfd8

The b2-pawn is untouchable: 18...Qxb2 19.Nc4 Qb7 20.Rb1 and Black loses his knight.

19.Nd3 Rd4 20.Rc4 Rxc4 21.Qxc4

White had secured a stable advantage in Hübner – Larsen, Las Palmas 1976.

C) 5...0-0 6.Bg2 Bxd2† 7.Qxd2

7...d6
This move is quite thematic for the line with ...Qe7. Certainly 7...d5 would transpose to the 4...Bxd2† line.

8.Nc3 e5 9.0-0

The main branching position in this line. I decided to investigate four main possibilities for Black: C1) 9...Nc6, C2)
9...c6, C3) 9...Bg4 and C4) 9...Re8.

C1) 9...Nc6

This is clearly inferior, due to:

10.Nd5!
10...Qd8
After 10...Nxd5 11.cxd5 Nxd4 12.Nxd4 exd4 13.Rac1 White gains a serious strategical advantage, due to the
permanent weakness of the c7-pawn. A good illustrative line is: 13...Re8 14.Rfe1 Qf6 This attempt to create some
counterplay fails short (however after 14...Bf5 15.Qxd4 Qd7 16.Rc4± it’s not a fun position for Black, Bilobrk –
Jezidzic, Sesvete 2011). 15.Rxc7 b6 16.Rc4 d3 17.Rf4 Qg6 18.e4 Black’s d3-pawn was falling in H. Olafsson – Bonin,
New York 1986.

11.Rad1 Re8
After the natural 11...Bg4 White favourably releases the tension in the centre by 12.dxe5 Nxd5 (12...dxe5 also fails to
solve Black’s problems, as White has the strong: 13.Qe3! In Euwe – Henneberger, Bern 1932, he was clearly better
after 13...Nd7 14.Rd2 Bxf3 15.exf3! as Black cannot maintain a strong outpost on d4. For example: 15...Nd4 16.f4 f6
17.fxe5 fxe5 18.f4!±) 13.cxd5 Nxe5 14.Nd4 Once again White had a desirable type of position with Black’s c7-pawn a
permanent target, Zirngibl – Handel, Leipzig 1959.

12.dxe5 Nxe5
12...dxe5 could be met strongly by 13.Qe3 followed by doubling rooks on the d-file.

13.Nxe5 dxe5
13...Rxe5 14.Nc3 leaves White with a pleasant edge.

14.Qa5! Nxd5 15.cxd5 Qd6 16.Rc1 Re7 17.Rc3

White was better in Pinter – De Guzman, Manila (ol) 1992.

C2) 9...c6
 The move feels too passive and White obviously sets the tone in this line, as the following examples illustrate:

10.e4 Bg4 11.Nh4

11.Ne1!? also works very nicely. For example: 11...exd4 12.Qxd4 c5 13.Qe3 Nc6 14.Nc2 Qe5 15.h3 Qh5 16.Nd5!±
White had a big advantage in Ki. Georgiev – Lajthajm, Cetinje 2012.

11...Na6
After 11...Be6 we have a fresh example: 12.b3 c5 13.d5 Bc8 In Halkias – Musalov, Yerevan 2014, White refrained
from the obvious 14.f4N. Maybe the reason was 14...exf4 15.gxf4 Nxe4 but after 16.Nxe4 Qxh4 17.Nxd6 White is
much better.

12.Rae1 Rfe8 13.f4 exf4 14.Qxf4

White had a promising position in Radjabov – Sadiku, Kemer 2007.

C3) 9...Bg4 10.Ne1!

 A key idea in this line; obviously White should not allow Black to solve the problem of his light-squared bishop.

10...exd4
Another option is:
10...Nc6
But this could run into the thematic reply:
11.Nd5!?N
The natural 11.d5 in my opinion also leads to a slightly favourable position for White, but Black was very much
in the game after 11...Nb8 12.e4 c6 13.Nd3 cxd5 14.cxd5 Na6 in Malaniuk – Moiseenko, Krasnodar 1999.
11...Qd8
One point is that Black cannot play 11...Nxd5 12.cxd5 Nxd4? as he would lose material after 13.e3 Nf5 14.h3
followed by 15.g4.
12.dxe5 dxe5
After the other recapture 12...Nxe5 then 13.Ne3 attacks both the b7-pawn and Black’s light-squared bishop.
Following 13...Bc8 14.Rd1 Qe7 15.Nd3 White definitely has pressure.
13.h3 Be6 14.Rd1 Re8 15.Nc2²
White has the better chances, as his central knight is very annoying for Black.

11.Qxd4 Nc6 12.Qd2 Qd7 13.Nd5

As the reader has no doubt noted, this move is a thematic idea in this type of structure.

13...Nxd5 14.cxd5 Ne5

 In Huzman – Azarov, Izmir 2004, White had reached a desirable pawn structure, but Black has some activity. Now I
found the following improvement:

15.Rc1N 15...Qb5 16.Nf3!

A very strong move.

16...Bxf3 17.exf3 Rac8 18.Rc3

White will follow up with Rfc1 and f3-f4, when he will have serious pressure.

C4) 9...Re8 10.e4 Bg4

11.Ne1
 Despite being only White’s second most popular choice, I prefer this move, as I believe the right concept is to prevent
Black from trading his poor light-squared bishop so easily.

More often White chooses 11.d5, but after 11...Bxf3 12.Bxf3 a5 followed by ...Na6, we get a thematic double-edged
position, which is typical for this line.

11...Nc6
Another option is:
11...exd4
Now I like the following example:
12.Qxd4 Nc6 13.Qd2 a5
A fairly recent game used another approach: 13...Qd7 14.f3 Bh3 15.b3 Bxg2 16.Nxg2 This time White doesn’t
mind trading light-squared bishops, since he has a favourable pawn structure. 16...Re5 17.Ne3 Rae8 18.Rac1 Nd8
19.Ncd5± White was much better in Damljanovic – Ratkovic, Obrenovac 2013.

14.f3
Another reasonable choice is 14.Rc1 Qd8 15.b3 as in Manor – Adams, Adelaide 1988.
14...Be6 15.Nd5 Qd8 16.Nc2 Ne5 17.Nce3
White retained clearly the better chances in Tukmakov – Kurajica, Solin 1999; note that Tukmakov was right to
deploy the knights before the rooks.
12.Nc2!
The point of White’s idea; he has no intention of playing d4-d5.

12...Nxd4 13.Nxd4 exd4 14.Qxd4

This is the sort of favourable position White should aim for in this line. The main line continues:

14...Qe5 15.Qd2 Qh5

It is no wonder that Black wants to solve the problem of his misplaced light-squared bishop.

16.f3 Bh3
Black manages to trade his troublesome bishop, but White still retains the better chances after:

17.Rac1
With the idea of playing Nd5 at a suitable moment.
17...Re7
If instead 17...Bxg2 18.Kxg2 Qe5 19.Rfd1 Rad8 20.Qf2 and Black fails to create any play, while White’s position
improves naturally. 20...a6 21.Rd2 b6 22.b4 Nd7 23.Nd5± was Vyzmanavin – Landenbergue, Manila (ol) 1992.

18.g4!
White takes the opportunity to head for a favourable endgame.

18...Qc5† 19.Qf2 Qxf2† 20.Rxf2 Bxg2 21.Kxg2 c6

Naturally Black wants to cover the d5-square, but now the d6-pawn becomes a permanent weakness.

22.Rd2 Ne8 23.h4

23...h5
23...g6 was played in the recent game Guramishvili – Khurtsidze, Tbilisi 2014, though it obviously doesn’t change
anything. After 24.Kg3 Rd8 25.Rcd1 White still has excellent chances due to her space advantage.

24.g5 a5 25.Na4 Ra6 26.Rcd1 Kh7 27.Kg3 Kg6 28.c5

White had obviously gained the upper hand in Cvitan – Kovacevic, Pula 1996.

Conclusion

After 3...Bb4† 4.Bd2 Qe7 we reply 5.Nf3, and then this chapter considered three main moves: A) 5...Bxd2†, B) 5...b6
and C) 5...0-0.

The first point to note after 5...Bxd2† is that we recapture with the queen, not the knight as we did in Chapter 18. In the
...d7-d5 plans that follow, there are plenty of details to study in my analysis, but the general impression is that White
has slightly the better chances. Studying those details is essential, as often White should choose a totally different
approach in reaction to different defences by Black.

5...b6 leads, unsurprisingly, to play in the style of the Queen’s Indian Defence. The QID is highly respectable, but in this
chapter White gains a pleasant version of lines against it.

Variation C covered ideas with ...d7-d6 and ...e6-e5 after 5...0-0. In this case there are a couple of general ideas that can
guide White: Nd5 is a standard theme, and making it awkward for Black to exchange his light-squared bishop is also a
useful concept.

Overall, the Bogo-Indian with 4...Qe7 is a respectable defence, but after 5.Nf3 the lines I suggest will offer White good
chances of an edge.
A) 6...d5
B) 6...0-0 7.Bg2
B1) 7...d6 8.0-0
B11) 8...a5 9.Rc1
B111) 9...e5
B112) 9...Bxc3
B113) 9...Bd7
B12) 8...Bxc3
B2) 7...Na5 8.b3 b6 9.0-0 Bb7 10.Qc2
B21) 10...d5
B22) 10...Rac8
C) 6...Bxc3 7.Bxc3 Ne4 8.Rc1
C1) 8...d6 9.d5! Nxc3 10.Rxc3
C11) 10...Nd8
C12) 10...Nb8
C2) 8...0-0 9.Bg2 d6 10.d5
C21) 10...Nb8 11.dxe6
 C211) 11...fxe6
C212) 11...Bxe6
C22) 10...Nd8 11.0-0
C221) 11...Nxc3
C222) 11...e5 12.Nd2 Nxc3 13.Rxc3
C2221) 13...b6
C2222) 13...f5 14.c5 Nf7 15.Qb3 b6 16.cxd6 cxd6 17.Qa3
C22221) 17...Bb7
C22222) 17...e4
C22223) 17...a5

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 Bb4† 4.Bd2 Qe7 5.Nf3 Nc6

By far Black’s first choice.

6.Nc3
In my opinion this is the most promising line for White. Black now has three choices: A) 6...d5, B) 6...0-0 and C)
6...Bxc3.

After 6...b6 7.Bg2 Bb7 8.0-0 0-0 (8...Na5 9.b3 0-0 transposes to variation B2 on page 344) I like the simple 9.a3 Bxc3
10.Bxc3 Ne4 11.Qc2 Nxc3 12.Qxc3. This looks like an innocent position, but actually Black’s knight is misplaced on
c6. 12...Nd8 (Black is immediately trying to find a better square for his knight) 13.c5 f6 14.b4 Nf7 15.Rac1 Be4
16.Nd2 Bxg2 17.Kxg2 White was better in Rawlings – Pezikov, corr. 2012.

A) 6...d5 7.a3 Bxc3 8.Bxc3

8...a5
 Sooner or later Black should opt for this move. It would make no sense for Black to play 8...dxc4, as after 9.Qa4
White regains the pawn with dividends, as his Catalan bishop becomes strong along the h1-a8 diagonal. Of course
Black has other options:

8...Ne4 9.Qc2 a5 10.Bg2 transposes anyway.

8...0-0 9.Bg2 Rd8
9...Ne4 10.Qc2 a5 11.0-0 would lead to the same position after 10...a5.
10.0-0 Ne4 11.Qc2
Now Black usually plays 11...a5, transposing to the 8...a5-variation, otherwise:
11...Bd7
11...Nd6 gives White a nice choice between 12.c5 Ne4 13.b4 Nxc3 14.Qxc3 a6 15.Rfe1 Qe8 16.Qd3 f6 17.e4²
RobboLito – Stockfish, Internet 2013, and 12.b3!? dxc4 13.Ne5 cxb3 14.Nxc6 bxc6 15.Qxb3© with great
compensation in Shadrin – Karayilan, corr. 2013.
12.b4 Nxc3
Otherwise White can keep his bishop with Bb2.
13.Qxc3
White’s stable advantage is obvious.

13...Rac8 14.Rfe1
14.e3!?N is also a possibility.
14...Be8 15.e4 dxc4 16.d5 Nb8 17.Qxc4²
White went on to win in Harika – Karason, Reykjavik 2011.

9.Bg2 0-0 10.0-0 Rd8

I also checked:
10...Ne4 11.Qc2 a4
This looks quite tempting, but in fact it is nothing special, as Black hardly can carry out his idea of ...Na5-b3.
11...Rd8 transposes to our main line.
12.Rac1 Bd7 13.Rfd1 Rfd8 14.Be1
Also worthy of consideration is 14.Ne1!?.
14...Be8
14...Nd6, as played in Razuvaev – Rozentalis, Geneva 1990, might have allowed White 15.cxd5N 15...exd5
 16.Ne5! Nxd4 17.Rxd4 Qxe5 18.Rxd5± with a clear advantage.
15.Nh4 Nf6
So far this is Babula – Vehi Bach, Dresden 2007, and here I worked out the following line for White:

16.cxd5N 16...exd5 17.Nf5 Qe6 18.f3

In such situations it is essential for White to activate his dark-squared bishop.
18...g6 19.Nh6† Kg7 20.Qd2 Ng8 21.Ng4!?
21.Nxg8 Kxg8 22.Bf2 is better for White as well.
21...Nf6 22.Nf2
With an advantage for White.

11.Qc2 Ne4
This is the main arrangement of the pieces for Black. As was proven in the following encounter, this is not a good
moment for Black to play 11...a4 12.Ne5! Bd7 13.Rfd1 Be8 14.Rac1 and Black could hardly generate any activity in
Razuvaev – Rashkovsky, Moscow 1989.

12.b3 Bd7
Another idea is to exchange the knight for the bishop:
12...Nxc3 13.Qxc3 e5
This attempt to create immediate counterplay in the centre falls short.
After 13...Bd7 14.e3 I like the following example: 14...Be8 15.Rfc1 b6 16.Ne1 Ra7 17.Nd3 Nb8 18.b4± White
was clearly better in Kharitonov – Khasin, Kursk 1987.
14.dxe5
Also quite promising looks 14.Nxe5N 14...Nxe5 15.dxe5 d4 16.Qb2 Qxe5 17.e3².
14...d4 15.Qb2 Bg4 16.Rfd1 Qc5
Of course Black can regain the pawn with 16...Bxf3 17.Bxf3 Qxe5, but after 18.Rd3 his position is very
unpleasant, as the d4-pawn appears to be a serious target. White went on to win in Jankovic – Hecht, Zadar 2011.
17.Rd2 a4 18.b4 Qxc4 19.Rc1 Qb3 20.Qa1! Bf5
This was Nikolic – Adams, Hastings 1989, and now White has an improvement:

21.Ne1!N
This would have been extremely strong. The idea is to play Nd3-c5, while after:
21...Qe6 22.Bxc6 bxc6 23.Rxd4
White is just a pawn up with a winning position.
13.Bb2
It is always nice to keep the bishop pair.

13...Be8 14.Rac1 f6
Black intends to activate his bishop along the e8-h5 diagonal, but his position in the centre appears to be vulnerable,
as was shown in the following encounter:

15.Nh4! g5 16.cxd5 exd5 17.Nf5 Qe6 18.Bh3 Kh8 19.f3 Nd6 20.e4! Bg6 21.exd5
The computer recommend a tactical solution with 21.Nxd6 Qxd6 22.e5!, but my move is good enough.

21...Qxd5 22.Ne3 Qf7 23.Qf2

The position had opened up clearly in White’s favour, Avrukh – Rashkovsky, Biel 2002.
 B) 6...0-0 7.Bg2

In general 7...Bxc3 8.Bxc3 Ne4 9.Rc1 would transpose to the main line, but we have to eliminate Black’s other ideas:
B1) 7...d6 and B2) 7...Na5.

B1) 7...d6 8.0-0

I recommended 8.d5 in GM 2, but I now prefer this direction. Black can either play B11) 8...a5 or B12) 8...Bxc3.

Clearly inferior is 8...e5, as it allows the powerful 9.Nd5! Nxd5 10.cxd5 Bxd2 11.dxc6! when White gets a clear plus.
For example, 11...Bh6 12.dxe5 dxe5 13.Qd5 bxc6 14.Qxe5 Re8 15.Qxe7 Rxe7 16.e3 Rb8 17.b3 Bd7 18.Rac1 and the
arising endgame was difficult for Black due to his damaged pawn structure in Cvek – Kulhanek, Ostrava 2003.
 B11) 8...a5

I do not see much point in this waiting strategy for Black.

9.Rc1
At this point I analysed three options: B111) 9...e5, B112) 9...Bxc3 and B113) 9...Bd7.

B111) 9...e5

10.dxe5!
10.Nd5 may appear good for White after 10...Nxd5 11.cxd5 Nxd4 12.Nxd4 exd4 13.Bxb4 axb4 14.Qxd4 and
occurred in Khalifman – Yermolinsky, Manila (ol) 1992. However, 14...Rxa2N 15.Qxb4 Qxe2 16.Rxc7 Qxb2 17.Qxd6
Qd4! looks to be enough for a draw.

10...Nxe5
10...dxe5 11.Nd5 Nxd5 12.cxd5 Nd8 was Epishin – Ikonnikov, Schwaebisch Gmuend 2011. White has a favourable
pawn structure, and now 13.Bg5N 13...f6 14.Be3 would retain a pleasant edge.

11.Bg5
The following sequence is fairly logical:

11...Bxc3 12.Rxc3 h6 13.Bxf6 Qxf6

14.Nd4! c6 15.Qd2
White had a small but pleasant edge in Piket – Sjoberg, Ostend 1991.

B112) 9...Bxc3 10.Bxc3

10...e5
The alternative is 10...Ne4, when I like 11.d5. Black’s main option is then 11...Nxc3 12.Rxc3 Nb4 13.a3 Na6, and
now the following game is a great example of White’s play in this line:
14.dxe6 fxe6 15.Nd4 c6 16.Re3! (it transpires that the white rook can be very useful on the third rank) 16...Bd7 17.f4
Rae8 18.Nf3 Bc8 19.Qc2 Qc7 20.Ng5 g6 21.Qc3 With a big advantage for White, Prohaszka – Tratar, Sarajevo 2010.

11.d5 Nb8
11...Nb4 forces White to play 12.Ra1 but the idea of a2-a3 appears to be too strong for Black. In the following game
Black tried: 12...Bd7?! (Apparently best would have been 12...Ne4 13.Be1 b6, but still after 14.a3 Na6 15.b4 f5
16.Qc2 White is better due to the exposed position of Black’s queenside.) 13.a3 Na6 14.Bxa5 Nc5. Now White kept
everything under control with precise play: 15.Bb4 Ba4 16.Qe1 Nb3 17.Rb1 e4 18.Nd2 e3 19.Nxb3 Bxb3 20.Qc3!±
Timman – Djuric, Oviedo 1993.

There have been several high-level games to reach this position, but for some reason nobody has played the most natural
(in my opinion) move:
12.Ne1N
In most of the games White continued with 12.c5, but it is nothing special after 12...Nbd7 13.cxd6 cxd6 14.Nd2 b6.

I considered the following direction:

12...Nbd7 13.Nd3 b6
It is not a good idea to open the diagonal for White’s dark-squared bishop by means of 13...e4 14.Ne1 Ne5 15.Qd4
Bf5 16.Nc2, when White stands better.

14.b3 Ba6 15.e4

White is ready for the following logical sequence:

15...b5 16.Bxa5 bxc4 17.bxc4 Bxc4 18.Rxc4 Rxa5 19.Rxc7 Rfa8 20.Qb1 Rxa2 21.Qb7
 With an initiative for White.

B113) 9...Bd7 10.d5

White’s pieces are well placed to start a concrete plan of action.

10...Nd8

11.Bg5!
A nice positional idea.

11...h6 12.Bxf6 Qxf6 13.Nd4 Bc5

13...e5 would leave Black with a difficult position after 14.Ndb5 as his knight is badly placed on d8.

14.e3 Qe7 15.dxe6 fxe6

This was Razuvaev – Osnos, Moscow 1979, and now I like:
16.Qc2N 16...Nc6 17.Rcd1
White has secured a positional advantage.

B12) 8...Bxc3 9.Bxc3 Ne4

Another option is clearly worse:

9...e5 10.d5 Nb8 11.Qc2!
White covers the important e4- and f5-squares and prepares a kingside offensive with Nh4, e2-e4 and f2-f4. Now
most of the games continued:
11...a5
11...c6 occurred in Rohde – Yermolinsky, Los Angeles 1991, and now White should have changed direction with
the more positional: 12.dxc6N 12...Nxc6 (clearly worse would be 12...bxc6? 13.c5 with a huge advantage for
White) 13.Rad1 With better chances for White, as his bishop pair should tell in the long term.
12.Nh4 Nbd7 13.e4 Nc5 14.Rae1 Nh5 15.Qd1 g6 16.f4
White was clearly better in Lagarde – Ider, Sautron 2013, using the fact that 16...exf4? runs into the devastating
17.Nf5!.

10.Be1!
White should take the opportunity to save his bishop.

10...f5
10...e5 allows a favourable opening of the position for White: 11.Nxe5! dxe5 12.d5 Nxg3 13.fxg3!? (an interesting
approach, although there is nothing wrong with the natural 13.hxg3) 13...Nd4 14.e3 Nf5 15.Qd3 g6 This was Yevseev
– Gasanov, Alushta 2001, and now the natural 16.Rc1N, followed by 17.c5, would have led to a clear advantage for
White.
11.d5 Nd8
Now I have a new suggestion, which I am surprised hasn’t been tested before:

12.Qc2N
If 12.dxe6 Nxe6 Black is very much in the game, thanks to his active pieces. This gives him good compensation for
White’s bishop pair, as in Gleizerov – Bocharov, Abu Dhabi 2004.

12...e5
Black cannot play 12...Nf7 in view of 13.Nd4, when he will at least have to give up his light-squared bishop.

13.Nh4! Ng5

14.f4! exf4 15.Rxf4 g6 16.Nf3

 I believe the strength of White’s dark-squared bishop should tell in the long term.

B2) 7...Na5

This is probably the most interesting sideline. An important position arises after the following sequence:

8.b3 b6 9.0-0 Bb7 10.Qc2

Now B21) 10...d5 is an interesting alternative to the more popular B22) 10...Rac8. I also considered some additional
options:

10...c5 has occurred in a few games. White should play 11.a3N 11...Bxc3 12.Bxc3 when he looks to be better, for
example: 12...cxd4 13.Nxd4 Bxg2 14.Kxg2 Nc6 15.Rfd1²

10...Rfc8 11.Rfd1 c5
11...d5 12.cxd5 exd5 13.Ng5!?N (13.e3 was Baldomero Garcia – Suarez Sedeno, email 2000) 13...c6 (13...h6
14.Nxd5 Bxd5 15.Bxb4 Qxb4 16.Bxd5 Nxd5 [16...hxg5 17.Bxa8 Rxa8 18.Qxc7±] 17.Qh7† Kf8 18.Qh8† Ke7
19.Qxg7 hxg5 20.Qxg5† Kf8 21.Qxd5²) 14.a3 Bxa3 (14...Bxc3 15.Bxc3²) 15.e4 h6 16.Nxf7 Kxf7 17.e5 Nd7
18.Nb1 Bb4 19.e6† Qxe6 20.Bxb4 With an initiative for White.
Here I offer a new idea:
12.d5!?N
12.a3 Bxc3 13.Bxc3 Be4 14.Qb2 d5 was Czebe – A. Horvath, Balatonlelle 2007, and now I suggest: 15.dxc5N
15...dxc4 16.Bxa5 bxa5 17.bxc4 Qxc5 18.Ne5²
12...exd5 13.Nxd5 Bxd5 14.cxd5 Bxd2 15.Qxd2 d6 16.Rac1²

B21) 10...d5 11.cxd5 exd5

Here I would like to take a positional approach:

12.e3
Strengthening the d4-pawn and preparing to move the knight from f3.

12...Rac8
 I found an improvement over an existing game after 12...Nc6.

13.Ng5N (The idea of 13.a3?! unfortunately doesn’t work. Black reacted well with 13...Bxa3 14.Ng5 Nb4 15.Qb1 h6
16.Nh3 Na6 when he was just a pawn up in Kunte – Sagar, Bhopal 2013.) 13...g6 14.Rfe1 Rad8 15.Nh3 The knight is
coming to f4 and in general I would prefer White’s chances in the forthcoming battle.

13.a3!
Now this move works well for White.

13...Bxa3N
This is the most principled move. 13...Bd6 obviously allows 14.Nb5, grabbing the bishop: 14...Qd7 15.a4!? Nc6
16.Nxd6 Qxd6 (relatively better was 16...cxd6N, but after 17.Qd3² White still retains a long-term advantage) 17.Bh3
Rce8 18.a5 White had a pleasant initiative on the queenside, Saidashev – Romm, corr. 2012.
14.Bh3! Ba6
The main point of White’s idea is that 14...Rb8 runs into 15.Nb5 Bb4 16.Bxb4 Qxb4 17.Nxc7² with the better
structure. Importantly, the tactics connected with 17...Rfc8?! don’t work for Black: 18.Bxc8 Rxc8 19.Rfc1 Qe7?
20.Nxd5!+–

15.Rfe1 Rce8
15...Rcd8 16.e4± is an even better version for White.

16.Ng5! c6 17.e4 h6 18.e5±

White is clearly better.

B22) 10...Rac8 11.a3!?

This was recommended as a novelty in GM 2, and has been tested several times now.
11...Bxa3
The most principled reply.

11...Bxc3 12.Bxc3 Be4 13.Qb2 Nb7

After 13...d6 we get a typical Queen’s Indian position, but I believe White should be better after 14.Bh3 (with the
idea of playing Nd2), as Black’s knight is slightly misplaced on a5.
14.Bh3!? Bf5
White is not concerned about 14...Bxf3 15.exf3 d5. After 16.Rfe1 c6 17.Rac1 White had a pleasant edge in
Nechaev – Chubukin, email 2010.
14...c6 is strongly met by: 15.Nh4!N 15...d5 16.f3 Bg6 17.Nxg6 hxg6 18.Rac1² and the bishop pair should be a
factor in the long term.
15.Bxf5 exf5 16.d5 Ne8 17.Nh4 g6 18.Ng2²
White was better in Reinhart – Morgan, email 2011.

12.e4 Bb4 13.e5 Bxf3

It appears that Black has to give up his light-squared bishop, as 13...Ne8 runs into a strong reply: 14.Ng5 f5
15.Bxb7!N (This is much better than 15.exf6 Nxf6 16.Bxb7 Nxb7 17.Rxa7 Na5 as in Andraschko – Loew, Forchheim
2010.) 15...Nxb7 16.Rxa7 Regaining the pawn and keeping clearly better chances.

14.Bxf3 Ne8 15.Bg2

White could have won the pawn back with 15.Ra4 c5 16.dxc5 Bxc5 17.Nb5 Nc6 18.Nxa7 Nxa7 19.Rxa7, but after
19...f6 Black should be alright.

15.Be4!?N also gives White good compensation: 15...Kh8 16.Rfe1©

The main point of 15.Bg2 is to remove the bishop from the f-file, and thus to be ready to meet ...f6 with f2-f4. There are
no concrete lines, but I believe White has wonderful positional compensation for the pawn, due to Black’s poorly
placed minor pieces. There have been two games played in this position since I recommended my new idea:

15...c6?!
15...d6 was not much better in Berczes – Adamski, Warsaw 2010. It allows a simple tactical trick:
16.Nd5!N 16...exd5 17.Bxb4 White’s bishop pair is too powerful, for example: 17...Nc6 18.Bc3 dxe5 19.dxe5 d4
20.Bb2 Nxe5 21.Bxd4 c5 22.Qf5! With a clear advantage.

16.Ra4! c5
This occurred in Golod – Chernov, Germany 2010, and now White could have played:

17.dxc5!N 17...Bxc5 18.Ne4 Nc6 19.Nxc5 bxc5

Or 19...Qxc5 20.Bxc6 Qxc6 21.Bb4 d6 22.Rxa7 and White is clearly better.

20.Bxc6 Rxc6 21.Rxa7

Despite the massive simplifications, White retains a lot of pressure.
 C) 6...Bxc3

Black’s most common choice.

7.Bxc3 Ne4 8.Rc1

At this point Black is all about development. There is no need to take on c3 as of yet, so the two main moves are C1)
8...d6 and C2) 8...0-0.
8...Nb4 is hardly a serious option; the following example seems quite convincing: 9.Qa4 a5 10.Bg2 0-0 11.Nd2 Nxc3
12.bxc3! With Black’s pawn on a5, recapturing with the b-pawn looks logical and strong. 12...Nc6 13.c5 d5 14.cxd6
cxd6 15.Rb1 Qc7 16.Qb3 White had much better chances in Tukmakov – Rashkovsky, Minsk 1987, as Black had
seriously weakened his queenside pawn structure with the ...a7-a5 move.

C1) 8...d6 9.d5! Nxc3 10.Rxc3

 This is a big theoretical tabiya. Obviously Black has two knight moves: C11) 10...Nd8 or C12) 10...Nb8.

C11) 10...Nd8 11.Bg2 0-0

Playing 11...e5?! before castling would be dubious in view of the following impressive game: 12.c5 0-0 13.cxd6 cxd6
14.Qc1 Bd7 15.0-0 f5 16.Rc7 Qe8 17.Qe3 (this is the point behind 14.Qc1) 17...Bb5 18.Rfc1 Ba6 19.Nh4! Black’s
bishop is missing from the defence, so White immediately starts playing on the kingside. 19...h6 20.Bh3 Qh5 21.Qf3!
White had a decisive advantage in Yevseev – I. Smirnov, Alushta 2002.

12.0-0
12.dxe6 Nxe6 is quite playable for Black.

12...e5 13.c5 dxc5

Definitely the critical response.
After 13...f5 14.cxd6 cxd6 15.Qd2 White quickly seizes the initiative on the queenside: 15...Nf7 16.Rfc1 Qd8
(16...Qf6 looks more natural, but still after 17.Rc7 b6 18.e3 White is much better.) 17.Rc7 Kh8 18.h4 h6 19.R1c3±
White had the better chances in Leupold – Carter, email 2006.
14.Qc2 e4
Black’s best choice.

14...c6 leads to an advantage for White after: 15.Rxc5 Bf5 16.Qc3 f6 (The natural 16...cxd5?!, as in Moiseenko – Amin,
Egypt 2012, allows 17.Rc7!N 17...Qe6 18.Qxe5± with a clear positional advantage) 17.Nd2N 17...cxd5 18.Bxd5† Be6
19.Ne4 White is left with a pleasant edge.

14...b6
Of course White should now carry out his plan of d5-d6.
15.Re3 f6 16.Nxe5! fxe5 17.d6 Qxd6
Black has also tried: 17...cxd6 18.Bxa8 Ne6 19.Bd5 Kh8 20.Bxe6 Bxe6 21.Rd1 Black only has one pawn for the
exchange, which is obviously not enough. White won convincingly in Chuchelov – Vasilchenko, Cuxhaven
1993.
18.Bxa8
I also found the following surprising idea: 18.Rd1!?N 18...Qf6 19.Bd5† Kh8 20.Rf3 Bf5 21.Rxf5 Qxf5 22.Qxf5
Rxf5 23.Bxa8 Ne6 24.Rd7 Despite being a pawn down, White definitely has the better game.
18...c6
This occurred in Morrison – Arkell, Hinckley 2013, and now White should have played:
19.Qa4N 19...Qc7 20.Rd1 Bd7 21.Rd2 Nf7
White is ready to meet Black’s last:
22.Rxd7 Qxd7 23.Bxc6
With a clear positional advantage.

15.Ne1 f5 16.f3 exf3 17.Bxf3 c6

In this position I like the simple recapture:

18.Rxc5 Bd7 19.Nd3 Kh8 20.Qc3! cxd5 21.Rxd5 Nc6

This was Shpakovsky – Fineboim, email 2009, and here an improvement is:

22.Nf4N 22...Rad8 23.Rfd1 Bc8 24.a3

White retains a serious positional advantage.
 C12) 10...Nb8 11.dxe6 fxe6

11...Bxe6 leads to a stable advantage for White after 12.Nd4 0-0 13.Bg2 c6 14.0-0. Recently one of my own games
reached this position:

14...Nd7 15.e4 (15.Re3!?, intending to keep the h1-a8 diagonal open, is another approach which might be good)
15...Nb6 16.b3 a5 17.f4 f6 18.Rd3 Nc8 19.a4 Bd7 20.Re1 Black’s position was really tough in Avrukh – M. Porat,
Israel 2013.

12.Nd4
The most accurate move order.
12...0-0 13.Bg2
Now Black has mainly tried two moves:

13...e5
This is Black’s most popular choice.

It is important to note that 13...Nd7? would just be a blunder, as 14.Nxe6!+– makes clear. This shows that one of the
ideas behind 12.Nd4 is to prevent Black comfortably redeveloping his knight.

A more respectable alternative is:

13...c6 14.0-0
Now Black’s best option is 14...e5, when 15.Nc2 reaches 14...c6 15.0-0 in the notes on the next page.
14...Nd7
14...a5 is a risky concept, as was shown in the following encounter: 15.Qd2 Nd7 16.Rd1 Ne5 17.Nf3! Black’s d-
pawn is a serious target. 17...Nf7 18.Ra3 Qc7 19.Ng5! White immediately takes the opportunity to exchange
Black’s knight, which will make the d6-pawn more vulnerable. 19...d5 This is certainly not a move Black wants
to play, as now his bishop remains passive, while the weakness of the dark squares in the centre is a significant
detail. 20.Rf3 Nxg5 21.Rxf8† Kxf8 22.Qxg5 Qe7 23.Qd2 In Davies – Arkell, London 1989, White gained a
clear advantage, as it is difficult for Black to develop his bishop. For instance, 23...Bd7 just loses a pawn to
24.e4!.
15.e4 Nf6
Here I like the following example:

16.Re1 e5 17.Nf5 Bxf5 18.exf5

This structure promises White the better game.
18...Rad8 19.g4! d5 20.cxd5 Nxd5 21.Qb3 Kh8 22.Rc4²
White had definite pressure in Ciciotti – Boschma, email 2010.
14.Nc2 Nd7
This is Black’s most popular move, but let’s have a look at some others:

14...Nc6 15.0-0 Be6 16.b4

This leads to a pleasant edge for White, as was proven in the following game:
16...a6
Black cannot play 16...a5 17.b5 Nb4, as after 18.Bxb7 Rab8 19.Bg2 Nxa2 20.Ra3 Nb4 (20...Bxc4? loses to
21.Ne3 Be6 22.Nd5+–) 21.Rxa5 he remains a pawn down.
17.b5 Nd8 18.Nb4 axb5 19.cxb5 Kh8 20.a4 Qd7 21.Qc2
White had a clear advantage in Malaniuk – Fedorchuk, Ordzhonikidze 2001.

14...c6 15.0-0
Black has three logical continuations here:
15...Nd7
White has easy play on the queenside after both 15...Be6 and 15...Na6:
a) 15...Be6 16.b4 a6 (16...a5 makes no sense, as after 17.b5! cxb5 18.cxb5 Bxa2 19.Ne3 White has powerful
compensation, with the following nice point: 19...a4 20.Bd5† Bxd5 21.Nxd5 Qf7 22.Rf3! is winning.) 17.Ne3
Nd7 18.Qc2 Nf6 19.Rd3 White doubles his rooks on the d-file, putting pressure on Black’s d-pawn. 19...Rfd8
20.Rfd1 Rd7 21.Qb2 Rad8 22.a4 Black is pretty solid, but White obviously had some pressure in Zakharevich –
Kulikov, Tula 2002.
b) 15...Na6 16.b4 Be6 17.Qd2 Nc7 18.Ne3 Rad8 19.Rd3 Rf6 20.a4 and Black’s position was deeply unpleasant
in N. Pert – Kobese, Gibraltar 2005.
This was Ulko – A. Filippov, Moscow 2011. I found nice improvement here:
16.Rd3N 16...Rf6 17.Qd2 Nc5 18.Ra3 Bf5 19.Ne3 Be4 20.f3 Bg6 21.Rd1 Qe8 22.Bh3²
White has a pleasant edge.

14...Na6 15.0-0 c6 16.Rd3

My new move. In GM 2 I recommended 16.Qd2, but I found something that I would like to avoid: 16...Nc5
17.Rd1 Na4! 18.Rb3 Nb6 Black deflects White’s natural play with a permanent attack on the c4-pawn. The only
example here continued 19.Qxd6 Qxd6 20.Rxd6 Nxc4 21.Rd1 Nb6 and Black was close to equality in Schild –
Koch, email 2011.
16...Rf6
16...Be6 17.Ne3 Rad8 18.Ra3² is similar.

17.Qd2N
The problem with 17.Ne3, as in Yrjola – Zvan, Pula 2013, is that Black missed the following resource: 17...Nc5N
 18.Ra3 Ne6! Black is okay.
17...Nc5 18.Ra3²
White has every chance to seize the initiative on the queenside.

15.0-0 Nf6
If 15...a5 White has the unpleasant 16.Ra3! and he was clearly better after 16...Nc5 17.b4 Ne6 18.Rxa5 Rxa5 19.bxa5
Nc5 20.Nb4 in Shneider – Naiditsch, Istanbul 2003.

16.Ne3 c6
Good or bad, Black has to take control over the d5-square.

Black has mistakenly opted for 16...Rb8 twice. In both games White missed the simple 17.Nd5N 17...Qf7 18.Nxf6†
Qxf6 19.c5! with a clear advantage.

17.Rd3 Rd8 18.Qd2

We will examine Black’s latest try here:
18...e4
18...Be6
This is the most popular move here, but White is allowed a simple game.
19.Rd1 Ne8
White has mobilized his pieces optimally, so now this is the right moment to push the b-pawn.
20.b4 Rd7
A couple of other moves are worth mentioning:
20...Rac8 21.b5 (I would prefer the modest 21.a4 but the game move is good enough) 21...cxb5 22.cxb5 Rc5
23.Qb4 White was obviously better in C. Horvath – Sulc, Pula 1998.
20...a6 21.a4 Rd7 22.b5 axb5 23.axb5 Rc7 (23...cxb5 24.cxb5 with unpleasant pressure for White) 24.Rb3 Qf7
25.bxc6 bxc6 26.Rb6 Rac8 27.Qc3 White had a big advantage in Archer – Maltez, email 2010.
21.b5
White combines pressure along the d-file with activity on the light squares.
21...cxb5 22.cxb5 Rc8
This is Tkachiev – Adams, Cannes 2001. Now as correctly pointed by Ftacnik, who annotated this game in
ChessBase Magazine 82, White could have increased his pressure as follows:
23.Nd5!N 23...Qd8
23...Bxd5 24.Bxd5† Kh8 25.Ra3±
24.Ra3 Rc5 25.Rxa7 Rxb5 26.Nc3
White has a clear advantage.

19.Rd4 Be6 20.Rd1 d5 21.cxd5 cxd5

Now in Malek – Taylor, email 2010, the right idea was:

22.f4!N 22...Re8 23.h3

Intending to push his kingside pawns – White should be better here.

C2) 8...0-0 9.Bg2 d6 10.d5

 Black now has a familiar choice: C21) 10...Nb8 or C22) 10...Nd8.

C21) 10...Nb8 11.dxe6

We immediately reach another split: C211) 11...fxe6 or C212) 11...Bxe6.

C211) 11...fxe6 12.0-0 Nxc3

Black second most popular move here is 12...Nd7. In this case White has the chance to keep his dark-squared bishop by
means of: 13.Be1 (even stronger is 13.Bd4N 13...e5 14.Be3 Ndf6 15.Nd2² with a pleasant edge) 13...a5 14.Nd2 Nef6
15.Nb3 a4 16.Nd4 e5 17.Nb5 Nc5 18.Bb4² White definitely had the better game in Laznicka – Bologan, Khanty-
Mansiysk 2009.
13.Rxc3
Here I considered three moves for Black.

13...Nd7
13...e5 14.c5 Nc6 15.cxd6 cxd6 has been played in several games, and now I like the following new idea:

16.Nh4N 16...Bd7 17.Qd2 Kh8 18.Bd5 Rf6 19.Nf3 White’s better pawn structure promises him a long-term edge.

13...Nc6 14.Nd4 Nxd4

14...Bd7 15.c5! A key idea in this pawn structure. 15...d5 (White stabilized his positional advantage after
15...Nxd4 16.Qxd4 d5 17.Re3 Qf6 18.Re5± in Viterbo Ferreira – Mateus, Amadora 2010) 16.e4 Nxd4 17.Qxd4
c6 18.Qe5 Rf7 19.f4² White was better in Christiansen – Herder, USA 1996.
15.Qxd4 Qf6 16.Qd2 Rb8 17.c5! d5 18.Rf3 Qe7 19.Rxf8† Qxf8 20.e4 c6 21.Qa5±
White is clearly better, Michalik – Straka, Brezova pod Bradlom 2010.
14.Nd2
I like this knight move, although 14.Nd4 also looks promising.

14...c6
We can see White’s main idea from the following line: 14...e5 15.Ne4 Rb8 16.c5! dxc5 17.b4 With a serious initiative
on the queenside in Eingorn – Hasan, London 1989.

15.Qc2 a5 16.Rd1 d5 17.Nf3 a4 18.a3 Ra5 19.e3 g6 20.h4

White retained the better prospects in the computer encounter Critter – Gull, Internet 2013.

C212) 11...Bxe6 12.Nd4 Bd7 13.0-0 Re8

13...Nc6 allows the following regrouping: 14.Nb5! Rac8 15.Bd4 b6 16.Nc3 Nxd4 17.Bxe4 Nc6 This was Romm –
Alfredo, email 2008, and now the simple 18.Qd2N 18...Rfe8 19.Rfd1² would leave White with the better position.
14.Be1 Nc6
This occurred in Kurowski – Ravnik, email 2008, and now White should continue:

15.f3N 15...Nf6
15...Nc5 16.Nb5²

16.e4²
White has a pleasant edge.

C22) 10...Nd8

This is the most popular move for Black.

11.0-0
As in the 10...Nb8 line we arrive at an immediate split. Black can capture on c3 immediately with C221) 11...Nxc3,
while the main continuation is C222) 11...e5.

11...f5 12.Nd2 Nxc3 13.Rxc3 Bd7 (13...e5 14.c5 transposes to the main line) has been played in two correspondence
games. Black would be perfectly okay were it not for:

14.c5!N With the following important line: 14...dxc5 15.Nb3 Ba4 16.Qc1 Bxb3 17.axb3 White regains the pawn and
has a positional advantage.

C221) 11...Nxc3 12.Rxc3

Now 12...e5 transposes to variation C11 above, where White has a clearly better game after 13.c5. Therefore I would
like to consider other Black possibilities.
12...a5
12...f5 13.Qc2
I believe it is most important to anticipate Black’s ...f5-f4 idea. Most games now continued:
13...e5
White is ready for 13...f4 14.Qe4 e5 15.c5 Bf5 16.Qb4 and Black is under a lot of pressure.
14.c5
Again we have a favourable version of the main line, since White hasn’t even committed to Nd2.
14...Nf7 15.cxd6 cxd6 16.Rc7 Qf6
Here White has tried different approaches. I will present the line I believe to be most convincing.
17.Rc1 e4 18.Nd2 Qd4
If 18...Ne5N I propose the following idea: 19.Nc4 Nxc4 20.Qxc4 Qxb2 21.Rc3! (threatening 22.Qd4) 21...Qd2
22.Rc2 Qg5 23.Qd4± With a clear advantage.
19.Nb3 Qxd5 20.Rxc8! Raxc8 21.Qxc8 Rxc8 22.Rxc8† Nd8 23.Rxd8† Kf7
This was Margvelashvili – Samsonkin, Wheeling 2014, and after gaining material White should have now played:
24.Rd7†N 24...Kf6 25.e3
Securing a nice outpost on d4 and obtaining an almost-winning position.

13.Nd2
13.Nd4 also deserves attention. 13...e5 14.Nb5 b6 was Arabidze – Khurtsidze, Anaklia 2011, and now the natural
15.f4 would give White a pleasant game. For example: 15...Nb7 16.Re3 f6 17.Nd4 Nc5 18.f5!²

13...e5 14.c5!
The tactics are in White’s favour; the ...a5 move is not really a good idea for Black.

14...dxc5 15.Nb3 a4?! 16.Nxc5 Ra5 17.Nxa4 b5 18.Nc5 b4 19.Nb3! Rxa2 20.d6 Qf6
This was Tkachiev – Chabanon, Cannes 1999, and now play should have continued:
21.Rc2N+–
White is winning.

C222) 11...e5 12.Nd2 Nxc3

12...Nxd2 is not such a good idea, as White’s dark-squared bishop will eventually become very powerful. For example:
13.Qxd2 b6 14.b4 f5 15.f4! An important move in White’s strategy, as he has no intention of allowing Black to play
...f4 himself. At the same time, opening up the a1-h8 diagonal is one of his main strategic ideas. 15...Nf7 16.Rce1 With
the intention of opening up the position with the advance e2-e4. 16...e4 17.Qd4 Nh6 18.h3± Black had a strategically
difficult position in Cvitan – Matijevic, Zadar 1995. Black is tied to the defence of the g7-pawn, while White controls
the long diagonal and slowly prepares c4-c5.

13.Rxc3
 At this point we must consider C2221) 13...b6 and C2222) 13...f5.

13...a5 transposes to variation C221 above.

13...Bd7
This does not help Black as White can play his planned advance anyway.
14.c5 f5
If 14...dxc5 then White has the e4-square for his knight: 15.Ne4 (this is more precise than 15.Nb3 Ba4) 15...b6
16.Nxc5 bxc5 17.d6 cxd6 18.Bxa8 Black does not have sufficient compensation for the exchange.
15.cxd6 cxd6 16.Rc7
Since the d7-bishop blocks Black’s queen, the c7-square is available for White’s rook; he has seized the intiative.
16...Rc8 17.Rxc8 Bxc8 18.Qa4 a6 19.Rc1 Bd7 20.Qa5 Bb5 21.Bf1 Qf6 22.Rc8 Nf7 23.Qc7!±
White had a clear advantage in Gyimesi – Ikonnikov, Vlissingen 2002.

C2221) 13...b6

This is quite a tricky move to deal with. I believe White should switch to the kingside.

14.f4
After 14.b4 a5! 15.a3 axb4 16.axb4 f5 Black gets an improved version of our main line with a couple of pawns
exchanged on the queenside and an active rook. 17.c5 bxc5 18.bxc5 Nf7 19.Qc2 f4 20.cxd6 cxd6 21.Rc7 Qf6 22.Qc3
Bg4 led to balanced play in Tkachiev – Benjamin, Cap d’Agde 2000.

14...exf4
I believe this is critical.

14...f6 should be met by 15.f5. All three games here continued 15...a5, which transposes to the 14...a5 line directly
below.

14...a5 15.f5! f6 16.g4 Nf7 (The most recent example here was 16...Nb7 17.b3 Nc5 18.Rg3 Bd7 19.Ne4 Rf7 20.Qd2
and White was definitely better in Gibas – Daroczy, corr. 2013.) 17.Ne4 White has easy play on the kingside, while
Black lacks any counterplay. In Zakharevich – Ulibin, Azov 1996, it is not surprising that Black tried to change the
course of the game with the risky 17...h5 18.gxh5 Nh6, but this only helped White to build his kingside offensive by
19.Bh3 Bd7 20.Rg3 Be8 21.Qd2 Kh8 22.Kh1 Bxh5 23.Rfg1 with a dangerous attack.

15.gxf4
After 15.Rxf4 Black can set up a solid position with 15...f6 followed by ...Nf7-e5.

15...f5
Black has tried other moves, but without much success:

15...Nb7 16.f5!? Nc5 17.f6! gxf6 18.b4 Nd7 19.Ne4 f5 20.Rxf5 f6 21.Qf1 saw White easily seize a dangerous initiative
on the kingside in Matlakov – Khismatullin, Sochi 2012.

15...Re8 16.e4 Nb7 17.Re3 Qh4 18.e5± left White with a solid plus in Sjugirov – Oms Pallisse, Barcelona 2012.

At this point I found a new move:

16.e4N
16.Nf3 Nb7 17.b4 would allow Black to create counterplay after 17...a5 18.a3 axb4 19.axb4 Ra2 20.Nd4 Qf6! with a
double-edged position.

16.Nb3 Nb7 17.Nd4 is what I recommended in GM 2, but now instead of 17...Nc5?! Black has a simple improvement
in 17...a5!. This position looks unclear, as a subsequent b2-b4 will give Black easy counterplay on the a-file.

16...Nb7 17.Rg3 Bd7 18.exf5

Black now has two recaptures.

18...Bxf5
18...Rxf5 19.Re1 Qf8 20.Bh3 Rf7 21.Bxd7 Rxd7 22.Nf3! (a key move) 22...Qxf4 23.Ng5 Rf8 24.Ne6 Qf2† 25.Kh1
White has a dangerous initiative thanks to the following brilliancy: 25...Rff7?
26.Nxg7!! Rxg7 27.Re8† Kf7 28.Re2! Qf6 29.Rxg7† Kxg7 30.Qg1† and Black loses his queen.

19.Nb3 Nc5 20.Nd4 a5 21.b3 Qf6 22.a3 Rae8 23.b4 Na6 24.Qd2²
With a positional advantage for White.

C2222) 13...f5

This is the right way to activate Black’s knight.

14.c5 Nf7
Instead of the text move Black sometimes tries:
14...dxc5 15.Nb3
15.Qc2 e4 16.Rxc5 c6! is good for Black, as has been proven in several games.
15...e4 16.Nxc5
I believe White’s chances are better, for instance:
16...b6
16...Nf7 17.f3 (I recommended 17.Qc2 in GM 2 but it seems like the text move is even stronger. Still, after
17...Qd6 18.Rd1 White’s position is preferable.) 17...exf3 This was Lange – Mohrlok, email 2007, and now in
my opinion the most natural is 18.exf3N. White’s plan of Re1 and Ne6 promises him a clear edge.
17.Nb3 Bb7 18.f3!
It is always a key idea to trade Black’s e4-pawn in these types of positions.
18...Re8
Another good example was 18...Qe5 19.fxe4 fxe4 20.Rxf8† Kxf8 21.Qd4 Qxd5 22.Rxc7± when White was
clearly better in Veng – Macieja, Copenhagen 2010.

19.fxe4 fxe4 20.Rf4 Nf7 21.Rxe4±

White was just a healthy pawn up in Gordon – Zakarian, England 2014.

15.Qb3
There is no great difference between the text and 15.cxd6 cxd6 16.Qb3.

15...b6
Black has no time for the thematic attack on the kingside: 15...f4 16.cxd6 cxd6 17.Rfc1 White is clearly better, as we
can see from the following example: 17...fxg3 18.hxg3 Qg5 19.Ne4 Qh6 20.Rc7 Bf5 21.Qxb7 Rab8 22.Qxa7 Rxb2
23.Qa3! White won a pawn and kept everything under control in Dautov – Reeh, Baden-Baden 2008.

16.cxd6 cxd6 17.Qa3

I believe this is more accurate than 17.Rfc1, as it does not allow Black the extra option of 17...Ba6.
 The final branching point of the chapter sees us examine C22221) 17...Bb7, C22222) 17...e4 and C22223) 17...a5.

C22221) 17...Bb7
This is Black’s most popular choice.

18.Rfc1 Rfc8
In his comments in ChessBase Magazine 106, Dautov gave the following illustrative lines:

18...e4 19.Rc7 Qg5 20.f4! exf3 21.Nxf3 Qh6 22.Nd4 Rac8 23.e3± with a big advantage.

18...Qg5 19.e3 e4 20.f4! Qh5 (it seems more natural to me to try 20...Qf6, but White carries out the same idea, 21.Nb3
Bxd5 22.Nd4, with excellent compensation) 21.Nb3 Bxd5 22.Nd4 a6 23.Rc7 Despite being a pawn up, Black is almost
paralysed.
19.e4
Now the key game in this line continued:

19...Rxc3
Black’s position is too passive after 19...g6 20.h4 Kg7 21.Nc4, and it is no wonder he now committed a serious
mistake: 21...b5? 22.Na5 a6 23.Nc6 Bxc6 24.dxc6 In Bocharov – J. Grant, Istanbul 2003, Black was strategically lost.

20.Rxc3 fxe4
Black once tried to keep his pawn on f5 by means of 20...g6. Now 21.h4 Kg7 was Cernousek – Zatko, Slovakia 2013,
when a strong reply would have been:

22.Bh3N 22...fxe4 23.Qb3! e3 24.fxe3 Rf8 25.e4± White clearly has the superior game.
21.Nxe4 Kh8
Black’s most recent attempt to hold this position. Other options are as follows:

It is easy to understand why Black was scared of grabbing the pawn with 21...Bxd5, as after 22.Nf6† gxf6 23.Bxd5© it
is difficult to defend such a position.

21...Qd8 22.h4 a6 (22...Bc8 was suggested by Dautov as an improvement over the game. I believe after 23.Rc6 Bd7
24.Nxd6! Bxc6 25.Nxf7 Kxf7 26.dxc6 White’s position is almost winning.) 23.Qb3! This is Dautov – Wahls,
Germany 2005. White’s positional advantage is obvious. He is threatening the positional idea of Bh3-e6, while after
23...Bc8 he penetrates along the c-file by means of 24.Qc4 followed by Qc7.

22.Qb3 Qd7 23.h4 Rc8

We have been following Cheng – Xiong, Philadelphia 2013, and here White didn’t spot the right plan:

24.Rf3!N
Switching the play to the kingside.

24...Nh6 25.Qd1!
White holds a dangerous initiative.

C22222) 17...e4
18.f3N
This novelty was given in GM 2 and has yet to be tested. I have found a further improvement for White.

18.Rfc1 Bd7 19.Nb3 Ne5 (Somewhat better was 19...Qe5, though after 20.Rc7 Rfd8 21.e3 Qxd5 22.Rxa7 White would
enjoy a pleasant advantage.) 20.Nd4 Rfc8 A serious error in an already difficult position. 21.Rxc8† Rxc8 22.Rxc8†
Bxc8 23.Nb5 White won a pawn in Kazhgaleyev – Izeta Txabarri, Cannes 1999.

18...Qe5
18...exf3 19.Nxf3 Ne5 20.Nd4 is clearly better for White.

19.Qb4
This is my new idea, which I prefer to my previous proposal of 19.Rd1 exf3 20.Nxf3 Qxe2 21.Re1 Qa6 22.Re7 when
White has strong compensation.

19...Qxd5 20.Rc7 Qe5 21.fxe4 d5 22.Re7! a5 23.Rxe5 axb4 24.Rxd5 Rxa2 25.Rb1
White holds the advantage.

C22223) 17...a5 18.Rfc1

18...Ba6
18...Bd7 was played in Bochev – Karacsony, corr. 2012, and now I suggest the following idea: 19.Rc7!?N 19...Rfc8
20.Rxc8† Rxc8 21.Rxc8† Bxc8 22.Qc3 Qd8 23.Qc6² With a pleasant game for White.

19.Rc7 Qf6 20.e3

Certainly White has no intention of allowing Black any counterplay along the f-file, as might happen after 20.e4 f4.

20...e4 21.Nb3 Qe5

It looks as if Black has managed to trick his opponent and is winning the d-pawn, but Tkachiev executes a wonderful
positional idea.

22.Nd4 Qxd5 23.f4

 Taking control over the e5-square and completely restricting the black knight. Strategically, Black’s position is very
difficult and in the game he failed to put up serious resistance.

23...Nh6
I believe 23...Rac8 was more tenacious, but even so, after 24.Qa4! Black is doomed to passivity.

24.R1c6 Rac8 25.Qc3 Rxc7 26.Rxc7 Rf7 27.Rc6

There are many ways White could end Black’s resistance, but the game continuation is quite elegant.

27...Qxa2 28.h3!
White consistently restricts Black’s knight, denying it the active g4-square. Black’s position is hopeless.

28...Qb1†

29.Kf2!
Accuracy till the end! 29.Kh2 would allow Black to complicate matters with 29...Rf6! creating the mating idea of
...Ng4† followed by ...Rh6.

29...Qd3 30.Qc1!
Black’s queen is trapped on d3 and there is no defence against 31.Rc3 that does not allow 31.Bf1, so Black resigned
in Tkachiev – Korchnoi, Biel 2002. I witnessed this game live and it made a deep impression on me, especially taking
into account that Tkachiev played this game with one eye, after being beaten up two days before by some criminal in a
bar.

Conclusion

This chapter dealt with the 4...Qe7 5.Nf3 Nc6 line of the solid and respectable Bogo-Indian. With accurate play White
retains an edge, but it is important that he is well prepared, as Black has many options at his disposal. The current
chapter contains many improvements over GM 2, while also keeping the lines in which I believe White to be doing
especially well. A thorough examination of the chapter should give the reader the best possible chance to tackle
anything Black may throw at them.
A) 8...Qe7†
B) 8...Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Bf4
B1) 10...Re8
B2) 10...Nc4!?
B3) 10...Na6 11.Re1 Bb7 12.Nc3
B31) 12...Re8
B32) 12...Nc7
B33) 12...b4
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5
This is an important possibility, which I have encountered quite often in my own praxis. I can easily understand
Black’s thinking, as the Benoni offers him more counterattacking possibilities than many of his defensive set-ups
against the Catalan. White’s fianchetto system is not considered the most dangerous choice against the Benoni, and
Black has a few different ways to handle the position, so there is decent potential to surprise an opponent.

Catalan players have tried to solve this problem in different ways. Some react to Black’s last move with 4.Nf3, leading
to a version of the English Opening. Others favour the 3.Nf3 move order, intending to meet 3...d5 with 4.g3, but this
obviously allows the major option of 3...b6 with a Queen’s Indian. Personally, I have always enjoyed playing against
all Benoni variants, and have achieved a fantastic score with White. In the next four chapters I will share my knowledge
and hopefully guide the reader towards similar success.

4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5

5...b5
This move will be the exclusive subject of the current chapter. I call it the Catalan Benoni because it almost always
arises via the 3.g3 move order which is favoured by Catalan players.

Unlike some other variations covered in this book, this one requires detailed opening knowledge from White’s side –
you don’t have to memorize every last detail, but nor can you rely solely on general principles. I remember a time when
Black’s last move was considered highly problematic for White, which was understandable, as Black normally has to
work hard to carry out the ...b5 advance in the Modern Benoni. However, the fact that Black has not yet castled gives
White chances to seize the initiative with a pawn sacrifice.

6.e4
I mentioned this as an interesting possibility in GM 2, but subsequent games and analysis have led me to recommend
it as the main line.
In GM 2 I recommended 6.Nf3, which brought White an excellent victory in Gelfand – Aronian, Mexico City 2007.
This has also been tested in many games, and the popular 6...Bb7 7.e4 Nxe4 resembles our main line, and may even
transpose. However, the text move is more forcing and reduces Black’s options.
6...Nxe4
This is obviously the critical continuation, but it is important to mention Black’s alternatives.

6...Qe7
Black is trying to deflect White’s light-squared bishop from attacking the b5-pawn. However, I found a
remarkable email game where White found a convincing antidote.
7.f3!?
Maintaining the attack on b5. Black would get a comfortable position after 7.Bg2 d6 followed by ...g6, ...Bg7 and
so on.
7...a6 8.Bh3!
Impressive play, avoiding the stereotypical development to g2 in favour of a more active diagonal.
8...Bb7
8...g6 9.Ne2 Bg7 10.a4 pretty much forces 10...b4, with similar play to the game. Instead 10...Bb7?! runs into
11.axb5 axb5 12.Rxa8 Bxa8 13.Na3! with a clear advantage.
9.Ne2 d6 10.a4 b4
Forced.

11.Nd2 Nbd7 12.Nc4 Ne5 13.Nxe5 Qxe5 14.a5! Rd8

15.Qa4† was threatened.
15.0-0 Be7 16.Nf4 Nd7 17.Nd3 Qd4† 18.Kg2 0-0 19.Bf4 h6 20.Re1 Rfe8 21.b3
White had a pleasant advantage in Bergmann – Kolar, email 2013.

6...Bb7
This prevents the e4-e5 threat, but ignores the b5-pawn.
7.Bxb5 Nxe4 8.Ne2
8.Nc3 also looks promising: 8...Qe7 9.Nge2 Nxc3 10.bxc3 Qe4 11.0-0 Qxd5 12.Qxd5 Bxd5 13.Nf4 Bf3
14.Re1† Kd8 15.Bc4 Nc6 This was Terreaux – Nyvlt, corr. 2012, and here I would recommend 16.Re3N
16...Bg4 17.Bxf7 Bd6 18.Nd3², followed by Ba3, with a pleasant edge for White.
8...Bd6
Black might try to improve, but White has easy development and should be better regardless.
9.0-0 0-0 10.Na3! Na6??
This move blunders a piece, but even after the superior 10...Re8 11.Qd3 Bf8 12.Nc3 Nd6 13.Bf4 Black is under a
lot of pressure.
11.Qd3 Nb4 12.Qxe4+–
Duzhakov – E. Levin, Peterhof 2009.

7.Bg2!?
This surprisingly rare move seems extremely promising to me, and the arising positions are much easier to understand
than after the messy 7.Qe2 Qe7 8.Bg2. I spent many hours analysing the latter variation for Vladimir Kramnik back in
2007, helping him to score a nice win over Alekseev at the Tal Memorial that same year.

7...Nd6
This is the standard reaction. White’s main idea is that the knight will block the d7-pawn for several moves, meaning
that Black will experience serious difficulties developing his queenside pieces.
Obviously 7...Nf6?? is impossible due to 8.d6, hitting the rook while threatening to win material with Qe2†.

7...Qe7? 8.Ne2!N
In both of the existing games White failed to exploit Black’s error, and merely played 8.Qe2?, transposing to
7.Qe2 as mentioned above. I find it much more logical to go for castling, since Black’s last move has left him a
long way from completing development on the kingside, and the open e-file puts him in serious danger.
8...d6 9.0-0 Nf6 10.Re1
My engine suggests the surprising positional sacrifice 10.b4!? cxb4 11.Re1 Qd8 12.a3, evaluating the position
heavily in White’s favour.

10...Qd8 11.Bg5 Be7 12.Bxf6! gxf6

Unfortunately for Black, 12...Bxf6 runs into the powerful 13.Nf4† Be7 (neither 13...Kf8 14.Ne6† nor 13...Be5
14.Nd3 are much help either) 14.Ne6! fxe6 15.dxe6 and Black is losing material.
13.Nf4
Black has a miserable position.
A final option is:
7...Qa5†!?N
This was mentioned by Petrov in Grandmaster Repertoire 12 – The Modern Benoni (henceforth abbreviated to
GM 12) as an interesting alternative for Black, but it does not really help him.
8.Nd2 Nd6 9.Ngf3 Be7 10.0-0 0-0
11.Re1!
Petrov analyses 11.a4 Na6 12.Nb3 Qd8 13.axb5 Nxb5 14.Ne5 when White has a lot of compensation. However,
I find the text move even more convincing.
11...Bf6 12.a4 Na6
Also after 12...bxa4 13.Rxa4 Qd8 14.Nb3 Na6 15.Bf4± White’s activity is too much for Black.
13.Ne5!
The threat of Ng4 is difficult to meet.

13...Bxe5
Other moves are even worse. For instance, 13...Nb4 14.Nb3 Qc7 15.Ng4, followed by Bf4, and 13...Re8 14.Ng4
Be7 15.Nb3 Qb6 16.Bf4± both clearly favour White. I also considered 13...Rb8 14.Ng4 Qd8 15.Nxf6† Qxf6
16.Nf3 and White’s kingside initiative plays itself.
14.Rxe5 Bb7 15.Nb3 Qb6 16.axb5 Nxb5 17.Na5 Rae8 18.Nc4 Qd8 19.Rxe8 Rxe8 20.Ra5! Nd4 21.Be3
 Despite being a pawn down, White has an overwhelming positional advantage.

8.Nf3
This is the right moment to share a nice story with my readers. When I played in the Croatian League in 2012, one of
my team-mates asked for my assistance in preparing the Catalan. We scheduled an appointment a few hours before the
game, and he duly arrived at my hotel room armed with his laptop. He was actually happy enough with the Catalan, but
he was worried about this version of the Benoni involving 5...b5.

The story continues under A) 8...Qe7†, the move that was troubling my team-mate. We will then move on to the main
line of B) 8...Be7.

A) 8...Qe7† 9.Be3 Nf5

I was really surprised when my team-mate told me about his approach to openings. He mentioned that he was relying
on the Houdini Opening Book, where everything is perfectly analysed with Houdini, and all that the user has to do is
memorize the moves. I started to explain to him that you cannot always trust such a source, and that there is still a need
for human reasoning when preparing openings. He proceeded to open the program on his laptop, and we quickly moved
to the present position, which Houdini had dismissed as unfavourable for White. I was surprised that nobody had tried
this line for Black, and was keen to explore more deeply. The next few moves are obvious.

10.0-0 Nxe3 11.fxe3 d6

11...Qxe3†?? 12.Kh1 is just lost for Black.

The Houdini analysis ended here with an evaluation of clearly better for Black, but I was not ready to give up.

12.e4!
White wants to break through in the centre, exploiting the fact that Black, despite having won a pawn, is way behind
in development.

A few months after our analysis session, I was lucky enough to be able to test this position for myself against the Israeli
GM Ram Soffer in a rapid tournament. He had played 8...Qe7† with a triumphant look, but you can imagine his
surprise when I blitzed out my next four moves. At this point he sank into deep thought and came up with:

12...f6
I had briefly considered 12...Bg4, but after 13.e5! Nd7 14.exd6 Qxd6 15.Nc3 Black is in big trouble, due to the
coming check along the e-file.

12...Nd7
This seems like Black’s best try. It was the main option we investigated, and it was tested in a subsequent
correspondence game.
13.e5! dxe5
14.Nc3!N
14.d6 only led to an unclear endgame after 14...Qxd6 15.Qxd6 Bxd6 16.Ng5 f6 17.Bxa8 fxg5 when Black had
three pawns for the exchange in Fordham-Hall – L. Van Damme, corr. 2013.
14...Rb8
14...c4? 15.Ne4 f5 16.d6 Qe6 17.Nfg5 wins easily for White, so the text move is the best try.
15.Ne4ƒ
Black is in grave danger. Apart from the obvious d5-d6, White also has attacking resources such as Bh3 and Nfg5.

13.e5!
This secondary sacrifice improves the scope of all of White’s pieces.

13...fxe5 14.Nc3 a6 15.a4!

I wanted to provoke ...b4 in order to get a powerful outpost on c4 for my second knight.

15...g6
My opponent realized that he needed to speed up the development of his kingside, and decided to return one pawn,
but it is not enough to save him.
16.axb5 Bh6 17.Nd2! Bf5 18.Nc4
18.Rxf5N 18...Bxd2 19.Rf1 is also extremely strong.

18...0-0 19.b6!
Black soon found himself in a completely lost position in Avrukh – Soffer, Givatayim (rapid) 2013. Already he has
no good moves, since 19...Nd7 loses to 20.g4!.

B) 8...Be7 9.0-0 0-0

This leaves Black in less immediate danger than the previous line, but he still faces problems in coordinating his pieces.

10.Bf4
 White’s strategy becomes clear. The d5-pawn seriously restricts Black’s queenside pieces, and finding a suitable way
to develop them is no easy task – especially taking into account that moving the knight from d6 (in order to facilitate
...d6) will leave him susceptible to d5-d6. In short, I believe White’s compensation is more than sufficient.

Black’s three most important moves are B1) 10...Re8, B2) 10...Nc4!? and B3) 10...Na6. It is worth pointing out that the
moves ...Na6, ...Bb7 and ...Re8 can be played in different orders, meaning there are transpositions galore. To make
things easier to follow, I would like to point out that any set-ups where the knight goes to a6 in the next few moves will
be covered under variation B3.
10...a5 11.Re1 Ra6 is hardly a good idea. In Korchmar – Taysayev, Taganrog 2014, the simple 12.a4N 12...b4 (or
12...bxa4 13.Nc3! followed by Nxa4) 13.Nbd2 Bb7 14.Nb3 would have given White a huge advantage.

10...Bb7
I only found one game where this move was played, but it gives rise to a major transposition.
11.Re1
This position has occurred in more than 60 games, most of them featuring Gelfand’s 6.Nf3 idea. However, in the
great majority of cases, Black has developed his knight to a6 in the next few moves, transposing to a later
variation.
11...Re8
11...Na6 takes us to variation B3.
12.Nc3 b4
Again 12...Na6 transposes, this time to variation B31. The text move is an independent try, but White has a good
answer.
13.Bxd6 Bxd6 14.Rxe8† Qxe8 15.Nb5 Qf8 16.Qd3!
This excellent move secures White’s advantage. Aside from the obvious idea of Re1, Black also has to watch out
for Ng5, which explains his next move.

16...g6 17.Nd2 Ba6 18.Re1

Unfortunately for Black, the simplifications have not solved his main problem: the undeveloped queenside.
18...Qd8 19.Ne4 Bf8 20.d6 Nc6 21.Nxc5 Bxb5 22.Qxb5 Rb8 23.Qd3
White was clearly better in ‘gelmonbi’ – ‘marmoloff’, email 2012.

B1) 10...Re8 11.Nc3 Na6

We have not yet transposed to the 10...Na6 variation, as the white knight does not go to c3 as quickly in that line. Of
course, we could easily converge on the same position.

12.Re1

12...Rb8
12...Bb7 takes us to variation B31.

12...b4N allows White to seize the initiative on the kingside: 13.Bxd6 Bxd6 (13...bxc3? loses to 14.Qe2) 14.Ne4 Bf8
15.d6 Bb7 16.Nfg5!ƒ

12...Nc7!? is not a bad move, and was played in the old game Csapo – Forintos, Budapest 1968. White’s best
continuation looks to be 13.Ng5!N 13...Bxg5 14.Bxd6 Rxe1† 15.Qxe1 Bb7 16.Qe2! when he has great compensation
and will most likely regain the material in the near future.

13.a4! bxa4 14.Nxa4

Surprisingly, the idea of Bf1, with potential threats against the knight on a6, is quite annoying for Black.
14...Bf8 15.Rxe8 Qxe8 16.Bf1 Ra8
This is not the most desirable move, but it is probably Black’s best defence. We have been following Schubert –
Seuchter, corr. 2009. White went on to win a good game, but at this point the most convincing way to maintain his
advantage would have been:

17.Ne5!N 17...Bb7 18.Qb3 Nc7 19.Rd1! Rb8 20.Nxc5 Bxd5 21.Qa4

Black has problems, as several of his pieces are tactically vulnerable.

B2) 10...Nc4!?

This is quite a challenging continuation, since Black is trying to insist on playing ...d6.
11.Nc3!
This looks more convincing than 11.d6, when 11...Bf6 12.Nc3 Nc6 13.Ne4 was rather unclear in Ponkratov –
Chekhov, St Petersburg 2013. White certainly has rich compensation, but Black also has a lot of defensive resources.

11...d6
This looks consistent, and was played in the one existing game. Naturally, I checked some other possible moves:

Firstly, the b2-pawn is untouchable: 11...Nxb2?N 12.Qc2 Nc4 13.Nxb5 and White wins material.

11...Ba6N looks like a serious contender, but White’s initiative develops smoothly: 12.d6 Bf6 13.Nd5! Nc6 14.Re1
Black’s position is perilous, as the following line illustrates: 14...Nxb2 15.Qb1 Nc4 16.Nxf6† Qxf6

17.Ng5! g6 18.Bxc6 dxc6 19.d7 Surprisingly, Black is already lost.

12.Nxb5 a6
I also considered another attempt to develop the queenside pieces: 12...Ba6 13.a4 Bxb5 14.axb5 Nd7 Now White can
strike with the unexpected resource: 15.b4! cxb4 16.Qb3 Ncb6 17.Nd4 with a clear advantage.
13.Nc3 Bf5 14.Re1 Bf6 15.Qe2 Na3!?
Evidently Black was not happy with 15...Nb6!? 16.a4! (16.Nd2 also looks good) 16...Nc8 (The central pawn is taboo:
16...Bxc3 17.bxc3 Nxd5? 18.Bg5 followed by Nd2 gives White a winning position.) 17.Nd2 Nd7 18.Nc4 Qc7 19.a5
White has a pleasant positional edge.

Now in Koneru – Dzagnidze, Mardin 2011, White missed the refutation of her opponent’s creative idea.

16.Ne4!N
The main point is revealed after:

16...Bxe4 17.Qxe4 Bxb2?

17...Nb5 is the lesser evil, but even here 18.a4 Nc7 (18...Nd4? 19.Nxd4 Bxd4 20.Qe7! wins the d6-pawn and the
game) 19.Nd2 leaves White with a large positional advantage.
18.Ng5 g6

19.Ne6! fxe6 20.dxe6 Ra7 21.Rad1+–

Despite the extra piece, Black has no answer to White’s domination.

B3) 10...Na6 11.Re1 Bb7

This position has arisen in more than 50 games, most of them via the 6.Nf3 move order. The earliest examples are
from 2010, making this a truly modern variation.
12.Nc3
Black has completed the task of developing his queenside pieces from their initial squares. Nevertheless, the d5-pawn
continues to act as a barrier. Black has attempted to solve his problems with B31) 12...Re8, B32) 12...Nc7 and B33)
12...b4.

B31) 12...Re8 13.Nd2

Obviously White should not rush with 13.Bxd6N 13...Bxd6 14.Rxe8† Qxe8 15.Nxb5, as Black is okay after 15...Bf8.

13.Ne5 is a playable alternative, but I prefer the text move.

13...Bf8 14.Rxe8 Nxe8 15.Nxb5 Nb4

I also found one game where Black preferred: 15...d6 16.Nc3 (I would also consider 16.Nc4!?N 16...Nac7 17.Nxc7
Qxc7 18.Rc1 with the better game for White) 16...Nac7 17.Nc4 Rb8 18.Na5 Ba8 19.Qd2 Qd7 20.a3 Nf6 It is obvious
that White has the superior position, and the unpleasant Nc6 might come at any moment. In the following game White
opted for an interesting pawn sacrifice.

21.b4!? This is in no way essential, and White can keep the advantage with just about any sensible move. Still, it is
interesting to see how he can keep some initiative even after drastically changing the nature of the position. 21...cxb4
22.axb4 Rxb4 23.Nc6 Rb7 24.Qc2ƒ The light-squared bishop was a serious headache for Black in R. Williams – Pino
Munoz, corr. 2012.
16.Nc3 Nd3 17.Be3 Ba6 18.b3
18.Bf1N is also worth considering.

18...Qa5 19.d6 Rd8

Here I found an improvement over Terreaux – Dearnley, corr. 2012.

20.Nd5!N 20...Nxd6 21.Ne4 Nxe4 22.Bxe4 Ne5 23.b4! Qb5

Surprisingly, the pawn is untouchable, as 23...cxb4? 24.Qh5! Ng6 25.Nf6† wins the queen.
24.Nc7 Qc4 25.Bd5 Qe2 26.Nxa6 Qxa6 27.bxc5
White has an obvious advantage that may easily become decisive.
 B32) 12...Nc7

13.Ne5!
In GM 12, Marian Petrov only gives 13.Nd2!?, but I believe the text move to be the most powerful option for White.

13...Rc8
This has been the most popular choice.
In the only over-the-board game, Black responded with the unfortunate 13...Re8?. Now in Ghosh – Lalith, Nagpur
2012, the energetic 14.Ne4!N would have been extremely strong. Already I see no way for Black to hold; his position
collapses amazingly quickly. A sample line is: 14...c4 15.Nxd6 Bxd6

16.Nxf7! Rxe1† 17.Qxe1 Kxf7 18.Bxd6 With a serious advantage.

13...Nde8 is playable, but it allows the forcing continuation: 14.d6 Nxd6 15.Bxb7 Nxb7 16.Nxd7 Re8 17.Bxc7 Qxc7
18.Nd5 (18.Nxb5 Qc6 19.Nc3 was also slightly better for White in Klug – Ramsden, corr. 2012) 18...Qd6 Now a
logical sequence is:

19.Rxe7 Rxe7 20.Nxe7† Qxe7 21.Qd5 Rd8 22.Rd1 Qe2 23.Kg2 b4 24.Rd3 Re8 25.Rf3 Nd8 26.Nxc5 Qb5 27.Rd3
White has an obvious endgame advantage with no risk whatsoever. Black managed to hold this position in two
correspondence games, but his position is no fun at all, especially over the board.

14.a4
This is a natural idea now that Black’s rook has left the a-file.

14...a6
14...b4?!
This has been played more frequently but, in view of what follows, it seems worse.
15.Nb5! Ncxb5 16.axb5 Bg5
 16...Nxb5?N loses to 17.d6! Nxd6 18.Bxb7 Nxb7 19.Rxa7 d6 20.Nc4 Rc7 21.Nb6! with total domination.
Despite being two pawns up, Black has no good defence against Qa1 followed by Ra8.
16...g5 allows White to seize the initiative on the kingside: 17.Bd2 Bf6 18.Qh5 Bxe5 19.Rxe5 f6 20.Ree1 Rf7
21.h4!‚ Mercadal Benejam – Hyldkrog, corr. 2013.
The text move was played in Bieliauskas – Laube, corr. 2012, and two subsequent games. Surprisingly, White did
not choose the strongest move in any of them.

17.Nc6!N
An elegant tactical trick, leading to the following forcing sequence.
17...dxc6 18.Bxg5 Qxg5 19.dxc6 Bxc6 20.bxc6 Nb5 21.Qc1!±
Black’s extra pawn has little effect, and the c6-pawn is a serious threat.

15.axb5 Ncxb5
15...axb5?!N 16.Ra7 is unpleasant for Black. At any rate, exchanging a pair of knights can only improve his chances.

16.Nxb5 axb5 17.Ra7 Bg5 18.Bxg5

18.Nxd7 Bxf4 19.Nxf8 Bh6 20.Bh3 Kxf8 has been played a few times, and looks rather messy.

18...Qxg5 19.Nxd7 Rfd8 20.h4 Qf5

20...Qh6 21.Bh3 clearly favours White.
21.Re7! Rxd7 22.g4 Qxf2† 23.Kxf2 Rxe7 24.Bf3
It is clear that White is playing for two results. In the latest game, Podvoysky – Fritz, email 2012, he eventually
prevailed.

B33) 12...b4

This forcing move has been the most popular choice.

13.Bxd6 Bxd6 14.Ne4 Be7

Black has to allow d5-d6, since after 14...Qc7 White can easily launch his initiative on the kingside: 15.Nh4! g6
(15...f5 runs into 16.Qh5! and White’s attack decides quickly)
16.Nf5! It turns out that Black’s last move did not stop the knight at all. 16...Be5 (16...gxf5? 17.Nf6† Kg7 18.Qh5 wins
on the spot) 17.Ne7† Kg7 18.d6 Qb6 19.Nxc5! Nxc5 20.Rxe5± White has a clear positional advantage and continuing
attacking chances.

15.d6 Bf6 16.Nxf6† Qxf6 17.Ne5 Bxg2 18.Kxg2

Black has almost solved the problem of his queenside, but the poor placement of the knight on a6 makes the
difference. White easily regains the pawn while maintaining powerful pressure.

18...Rad8 19.Qd5!? Nb8

19...Qe6 20.Qd3 Nb8 21.b3 is not much fun for Black either.

20.Qxc5 Nc6?!
A mistake in a difficult position.
21.Nxc6 dxc6

22.Rad1! Qxb2 23.d7 Qc3 24.Qe7

White’s passed pawn easily decided the issue in Tomashevsky – Bocharov, Taganrog 2011.

Conclusion

The Catalan Benoni has been debated in numerous games since GM 2 was published. Certain details have changed, but
overall the idea of a quick e2-e4 remains a good bet for White. After 5...b5, I now consider 6.e4 Nxe4 7.Bg2!? Nd6
8.Nf3 to be the most promising version. My game against Soffer after 8...Qe7† shows the dangers that await Black if
he neglects his development.
The main line is 8...Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Bf4, when Black has tried several different set-ups and move orders. White
keeps a strong initiative in all variations, and we saw several examples where Black’s position collapsed after just one
or two inaccuracies. Even when he defends precisely, White will usually be able to regain his pawn at some point while
maintaining some pressure.
A) 6...Bc7
B) 6...0-0 7.Nc3
B1) 7...Be5
B2) 7...Re8

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 Bd6

This is the Snake Benoni system, so called because the intended path of the bishop from f8-d6-c7-a5 resembles the
slithering motion of the elongated reptile – although nowadays Black often tries to get his bishop back to f8.
To tell you the truth I do not rate this idea highly, as it seems rather artificial, and our strategy will be to immediately
play d5-d6 once Black’s bishop moves from the d6-square. Not only does this activate White’s light-squared bishop, it
also severely hampers the development of Black’s queenside.
6.Bg2
We will consider A) 6...Bc7 and B) 6...0-0.

A) 6...Bc7 7.d6!

As I mentioned above this is always a good idea – especially when it comes with tempo!

7...Ba5† 8.Nc3 0-0

8...Nc6 9.Nh3! The best square for our knight. 9...0-0 10.0-0 b6 (10...Bxc3 11.bxc3 transposes to our main line) 11.e4
Ba6 12.Re1 Re8 13.f4 Black is helpless against White’s simple plan of advancing his central pawns followed by an
attack on the black king. 13...g6 14.e5 Bxc3 15.bxc3 Nh5 16.Bd5 Ng7 17.Ng5 Rf8 18.Ne4 White easily obtained a
decisive attack in Khismatullin – Stupak, Minsk 2008.
9.Nh3!
White should keep his light-squared bishop more active, while at the same time allowing a quick advance of his e-
and f-pawns.

9...Bxc3†
9...Nc6 is probably more stubborn – see the note on 8...Nc6 above.

10.bxc3
It seems to me that Black will struggle to prevent White from carrying out his desired plan of action.

10...Nc6
10...Qa5
This doesn’t really help Black, since the c3-pawn is not worth defending.
11.0-0 Re8
11...Qxc3 will only help White to activate his dark-squared bishop: 12.Rb1 (12.Be3 Na6 13.Rc1 is clearly better
for White as well) 12...Qd4 13.Qxd4 cxd4 14.Bg5 White’s advantage is beyond doubt.
12.Qd3 Qa6 13.c4
White’s position is completely winning despite the material equality.
13...Nc6 14.Bb2 Ne5 15.Bxe5 Rxe5 16.f4 Re6 17.Rfd1 h6 18.e4
White had a decisive advantage in Burmakin – Ardeleanu, Schwarzach 2004.

11.0-0 b6
11...Re8 12.e4! h6 (Black cannot grab the white central pawn in view of 12...Nxe4 13.Bxe4 Rxe4 14.Ng5, followed
by 15.Qh5 with a winning position.) 13.Re1 Rb8 14.Bf4 Nh7 15.e5 Re6 16.Bd5 White was winning in Sabel –
Mauermann, email 2011.

12.e4 Ba6 13.Re1 Ne5

This has occurred in three encounters. White is strategically winning in many ways, but the most convincing
continuation looks to be:
14.Bf4N 14...Nd3 15.Re3 Nb2
15...Nxf4 16.Nxf4+–

16.Qf3
White has a large advantage.

B) 6...0-0 7.Nc3

This is the main branching position of the whole line. Sometimes Black opts for B1) 7...Be5, but his main choice is
B2) 7...Re8.

7...Bc7 8.d6 Ba5 9.Nh3! transposes to variation A.

 B1) 7...Be5 8.Nf3 Bxc3† 9.bxc3 d6

Giving up the dark-squared bishop is too high a price to pay for completing development.

10.0-0 Nbd7
White was dominant in the following game: 10...Re8 11.Re1 h6 12.Nd2 b5 13.a4! b4 14.cxb4 cxb4 15.Nc4 Ba6
16.Ne3 Bb7 17.a5 Na6 18.Qd4± White was clearly better in Konstantinov – Straka, corr. 2013.

Three games have been played in this position but White’s play seemed unconvincing in all of them. Therefore I
decided to develop my own solution:

11.Re1N
A logical question is why nobody played the most natural move:
11.c4!?N
 To be followed by developing White’s dark-squared bishop to b2. The only possible answer lies in the following
idea for Black:
11...b5 12.cxb5 a6
Still, I believe White is better in this line.
13.bxa6 Bxa6
Or 13...Nb6 14.Nh4 Re8 15.Bb2 Bxa6 16.Re1 Nc4 17.Bc3 and White is clearly better.
14.Re1 Re8 15.Bf4 Ne4
Black has some compensation, but I don’t think it is enough:

16.Qc2 h6 17.Nd2 Nxd2 18.Bxd2!

18.Qxd2 Qf6 would allow Black some play.
18...Rxe2 19.Rxe2 Bxe2 20.Bc3 Ba6 21.Qf5 Nf6 22.a4²
White’s bishop pair, combined with his passed a-pawn, promises him the better game.

11...Re8
Other moves are not attractive at all:

11...b5 12.a4! bxa4 13.Qxa4 Nb6 14.Qc2 Nbxd5 15.e4 Ne7 16.e5 dxe5 17.Nxe5 Bf5 18.Qa4±

11...Nb6 12.e4 Re8 13.Qc2 looks pretty senseless for Black, as White has control of the centre and the bishop pair.

12.Qd3
I can barely imagine what Black can offer in this position, for example:

12...Ne4
12...Ng4 13.c4 Nge5 14.Nxe5 Nxe5 15.Qc3 and White will advance his central pawns while grabbing a lot of space.

13.Nh4!? Ndf6 14.c4! g5 15.f3 gxh4 16.fxe4 Ng4 17.Rf1 Ne5 18.Qc3
White stands better.

B2) 7...Re8 8.Nf3

8.Nh3 allows 8...Be5 and this time 9.d6 is unclear in view of 9...Re6!.

8...Bf8
We should also examine some other options:

8...Bc7 is again strongly met by: 9.d6! Ba5 10.0-0 Nc6 11.Nh4! Black has no way to stop the advance of White’s
central pawns. 11...b6 12.Nf5 Ba6 13.Re1 h6 14.e4 Kh7 15.f4 Nd4 This was Sidenko – Valderrama, email 2006, and
now White has a simple improvement:

16.Ne7!N 16...Bb7 17.e5 Bxg2 18.Kxg2 Ng8 19.Ned5+– White is strategically winning.

If 8...a6, White is not obliged to react with the automatic 9.a4, but can instead play 9.0-0 b5 10.e4! Bb7 (Winning the
e4-pawn only helps White to develop an initiative: 10...b4 11.Na4 Nxe4 12.Re1 Bf8 13.Qd3 Nf6 14.Rxe8 Qxe8 15.d6
with a large advantage to White.) 11.Bg5 h6 12.Bxf6 Qxf6 13.Re1 c4 14.Qd2 Bb4 15.e5 Qb6 16.Nd4± White was
clearly better in S. Saric – Runic, Croatia 2011.

9.d6!
More commonly played is 9.0-0 d6 10.Nd2 Nbd7 and, although I find it hard to understand the point behind placing
the bishop on f8 instead of the normal g7, I will admit that Black’s position has some promise.

9...Re6
Black has also tried: 9...h6 10.0-0 Re6 (10...a6 is just a waste of time, and after 11.Nh4 Nc6 12.e4 Rb8 13.f4 Nd4 as
in Huber – Raynolds, email 2002, 14.e5N would have given White a decisive advantage.) 11.Bf4 Nc6 Transposing to
our main line.

10.Bf4
White can win the exchange with 10.Ng5!?N 10...Rxd6 11.Qb3 Qe7 12.Bf4 Rd4 13.Nd5 Nxd5 14.Bxd5 Rxd5
15.Qxd5 but in my opinion the position remains double-edged after 15...Nc6.
10...h6N
The most playable continuation.

The natural 10...Nh5, which occurred in Otero Acosta – Castellanos Sanchez, Santa Clara 2010, would have led to a
winning position for White had he found the following powerful continuation:

11.Ng5!N 11...Nxf4 12.gxf4 Rxd6 13.Bd5 Rf6 14.Qd3 g6 15.Rg1+–

11.0-0 Nc6
The arising position looks like the best Black can hope for in the whole line, but after:
12.Bh3! Re8 13.e4 Nxe4 14.Nb5
White is clearly on top.

Conclusion

The Snake Benoni remains a dangerous weapon against an unprepared opponent but, as we have seen, begins to look
rather suspect when challenged effectively.
This chapter saw two main departures from GM 2. After 5...Bd6 6.Bg2 0-0 7.Nc3 Be5 8.Nf3 Bxc3† 9.bxc3 d6 10.0-0
Nbd7 I now recommend the new move 11.Re1N. Black will have to play accurately just to reach a playable position,
but even then White stands well.
My other improvement was in variation B2, after the moves 5...Bd6 6.Bg2 0-0 7.Nc3 Re8 8.Nf3 Bf8. Now I suggest
9.d6!, which is much less frequently played than the normal 9.0-0. White’s position soon becomes overwhelming, and
the reader should expect to score heavily if Black dares to test this line.
A) 9...Bg4
B) 9...b6
C) 9...Na6 10.Bf4 Nc7 11.e4
C1) 11...Bg4
C2) 11...Ng4
D) 9...Nbd7
E) 9...a6 10.a4 Nbd7 11.Bf4
E1) 11...Ne8
E2) 11...Qc7
E3) 11...Qe7 12.Rb1!
E31) 12...Nh5
E32) 12...Ng4
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.Nc3

6...g6
If Black plays ...a6 at any point over the next few moves, you should just play a2-a4 with an almost certain
transposition to one of the later lines in which these moves occur.

6...Be7 7.Bg2 0-0 8.Nf3 has occurred in quite a few games, but I find it hard to understand why Black would opt for a
Modern Benoni pawn centre without a kingside fianchetto. I will just mention one illustrative example: 8...Re8 9.0-0
Bf8 10.Nd2 Nbd7 11.h3 b6 12.a4 Ba6
13.b3! (Gashimov once employed this set-up with Black and eventually won after 13.Nb5, but the text is stronger.)
Normally such a move would lead to problems on the long diagonal, but this is obviously not an issue when the bishop
has not gone to g7! 13...Qb8 14.Nc4 Ne5 15.Na3! Ned7 16.Re1 Black had no counterplay, while White was free to
improve his position in Komljenovic – Orev, Ruse 1984.

7.Bg2 Bg7 8.Nf3 0-0 9.0-0

We have reached a major tabiya. Before going into the details of the different lines, let me make it clear that we are
going in a completely different direction from GM 2. Against most Black options, I will be recommending an early Bf4,
intending to exert positional pressure, instead of the previous recommendation of Nd2 and h2-h3.

In this chapter we will examine five options: A) 9...Bg4, B) 9...b6, C) 9...Na6, D) 9...Nbd7and E) 9...a6.

9...Re8 is perhaps the most challenging move order against the Bf4 set-up, and it will be given special attention in the
next chapter.

9...Qe7 was quite popular in the 70s and 80s, but has since gone out of fashion, although it was tried by Pavel Eljanov
against me at the 2012 Olympiad. I responded with 10.Bf4!, as I had already taken the decision to deviate from the
10.Nd2 set-up of GM 2. After the obvious 10...Nbd7, we immediately transpose to variation D on page 389.

A) 9...Bg4

Not really an impressive idea. Black tries to carry out the exchange of light-squared bishops, but he loses too much time.

10.Nd2
Here I will make an exception, as retreating the knight seems like the most logical way to question Black’s last move.

10...Qd7
Black has tried an assortment of other moves, but this is the only serious attempt to justify the bishop on g4.

11.a4
This is White’s most popular and logical choice, intending to secure the c4-square as a safe outpost for the knight.

11...Bh3
The only alternative that makes any sense is:
11...Na6 12.Nc4 Rfd8
12...Bh3 13.Bf4 Bxg2 14.Kxg2 transposes to 13...Na6 14.Bf4 in the notes to the main line below.
12...Nh5?! just loses a pawn, and after 13.Nb5 Rfe8 14.f3 Bh3 15.Nbxd6 Bxg2 16.Kxg2 White had a huge
advantage in Korpics – Szalanczy, Budapest 1993.
12...Nc7 13.Bf4 Nfe8 occurred in Lacrosse – Cuypers, Gent 2003, and now White could have simply grabbed the
d6-pawn with 14.Ne4!±.
13.Bf4 Ne8 14.Ne4!?
14.Qd2 is a good alternative.
14...Qe7 15.Bg5 f6 16.Bf4
White was clearly better in V. Mikhalevski – Tsesarsky, Givatayim 1997.
12.Nc4 Bxg2 13.Kxg2 Qe7
Having carried out her duty of controlling h3, the queen shifts to a more suitable square.

13...Rd8 14.Bf4 Ne8 is too passive, and after 15.Qd2 Na6 16.e4± White was in full control in Vesely – Hacha, Klatovy
2000.

The only other sensible option is:

13...Na6 14.Bf4

14...Ne8N
Black should obviously defend the pawn. Other moves simply don’t work:
14...Nh5? 15.Bxd6 Rfe8 occurred in Pedersen – Bradbury, Copenhagen 1997, and here the simple 16.f3N 16...f5
17.Re1± followed by e2-e4 would have left White with a healthy extra pawn.
14...Rfd8?! 15.Bxd6 Ne8 16.Be5! Bxe5 17.Nxe5 also left Black a pawn down for no compensation in Razuvaev –
Gufeld, Chelyabinsk 1972.
15.e4 f5 16.f3²
White’s chances are clearly preferable.

14.Bf4 Rd8
14...Ne8 occurred in Jirka – Simacek, Cartak 2005, and a few other games. For some reason no one has gone for the
most ambitious 15.Nb5!N. The natural reply is 15...Nd7, and now I like the following solution:
16.Qd3! (16.Ncxd6 Bxb2 17.Rb1 Be5 18.Bxe5 Nxe5 19.Nxe8 Raxe8 20.Nxa7 Nc4 leaves Black with some
counterplay, although White is still better.) 16...Ne5 17.Bxe5 Bxe5 18.f4 Bg7 19.e4± With a clear positional
advantage.

15.Qd2 Na6 16.f3!

White has an easy game, and his strong knight ties Black to the defence of the d6-pawn.

16...Nh5 17.Bg5 f6
This position occurred in B. Ivanov – Badev, Sofia 2011. White is better after any of the plausible bishop moves, but
my preference is:

18.Bh4!N 18...g5
 Otherwise g3-g4 comes anyway.

19.g4 gxh4
Or 19...Nf4† 20.Kh1 with a huge advantage.

20.gxh5±
White is much better placed to take advantage of the open kingside.

B) 9...b6

This is a rare guest in modern tournaments, but it is important to know how to deal with the bishop on a6.

10.Bf4
This is not the most popular choice, but it was my recommendation in GM 2. It makes even more sense for us in the
context of the present book, as developing the bishop to f4 is our standard plan against almost all of Black’s other
moves.

10...Ba6
In the event of 10...Na6 11.h3 Nc7, White can proceed with an immediate central breakthrough: 12.e4 Nfe8 13.Re1
b5
14.e5! White’s play is as powerful as it is simple. 14...Bb7 15.exd6 Nxd6 16.Ne5 b4 17.Na4 g5 18.Bc1 Re8 19.Nc6
Bxc6 20.dxc6± White had a strategically winning position in Greenfeld – Praveen Kumar, Calicut 2007.

11.Re1!
In GM 2 I recommended 11.a4. There is nothing wrong with this move, but it is a bit slow and allows Black some
extra options. 11...Qc7 12.Re1 Nbd7 was played in Bacrot – Derieux, Ajaccio 2007, and now 13.Qc2!?N would be my
preference. A possible continuation is 13...Nh5 14.Bd2 Ne5 15.Nb5 Qd7 16.Nxe5 Bxe5 17.f4 Bg7 18.Bc3 Bxb5
19.axb5 Qxb5 20.e4 Bxc3 21.bxc3© with excellent compensation for White, but the situation is still pretty double-
edged.

11...Nh5
This was Black’s choice in the only game. It is important to realize that White has no reason to fear 11...b5N, since
after 12.e4 b4 13.Na4 Black has hardly achieved anything, while the e4-e5 threat is extremely powerful. Black can hold
up the central break with 13...Bb7, but after 14.Rc1 Na6 15.Nd2 White’s positional advantage is beyond any doubt.

12.Bg5 Qc7
This position was reached in Yudkevich – Chasovnikova, Moscow 2010. Here I favour the simple continuation:
13.e4N 13...h6 14.Bd2 Nd7 15.a4 Rfe8 16.Qc2
With the better game for White.

C) 9...Na6

This is a typical idea for the Benoni. The knight is heading for c7, where it supports the ...b5 advance.

10.Bf4
I consider this to be White’s best chance for an advantage, as well as the most consistent choice with our Bf4-based
repertoire.

10.h3
This was my recommendation in GM 2, and it became the most popular choice among strong players after that
 book was published. However, when rechecking this line I found a problem, which I was unable to solve.
10...Re8 11.Nd2
11.Re1 is an interesting alternative, when the following line is critical: 11...Ne4 12.Nxe4 Rxe4 13.Nd2 Re8 14.a4
Nb4 15.Nc4 b6 16.Bf4 Bf8 17.Qd2 Ba6 18.b3 Bxc4 19.bxc4 Now in Li Chao – Zhou Jianchao, Xinghua 2013,
Black should have played 19...Bg7N 20.Ra3 Qd7 21.e4 a6 22.Bf1 Bd4 when I believe the position is about
balanced.
11...Nc7 12.a4 b6! 13.e4
13.Nc4 Ba6 14.Qb3 Bxc4 15.Qxc4 a6 looks perfectly playable for Black.

13...Nd7!
In GM 2 I analysed a few other options for Black, but did not pay attention to this move. I failed to find any
advantage for White here.
14.Nc4 Ne5 15.Nxe5 Bxe5 16.Be3 Na6!N
This logical move improves over 16...a6, which was played in Stamenkovic – Grujic, Vrnjacka Banja 1996.
17.Re1 Nb4
With double-edged play.

10...Nc7
Black other logical follow-up of 10...Re8 will be covered in variation E of the next chapter on page 408.

11.e4
11.a4 Re8 12.Nd2 Nh5 13.Be3 b6÷ reaches a big tabiya, where I believe Black is doing fine.

Now Black has two serious possibilities: C1) 11...Bg4 and C2) 11...Ng4.

11...Re8 12.Re1 transposes to variation E3 of the next chapter on page 411.

11...b5? is an unfortunate idea for Black, and after 12.e5! dxe5 13.Nxe5 Bb7 14.Nc6 Qd7 15.Bxc7 Qxc7 16.Nxb5 he
was a pawn down with a losing position in Orlov – Arganian, Seattle 1994.

C1) 11...Bg4 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Bxf3

 This exchange does not solve Black’s problems, since the passive knight on c7 will tell in the long run.

13...Nfe8
I also considered:
13...Qd7 14.Kg2!N
In this instance I would prefer not to rush with the central pawn break.
14.e5 dxe5 15.Bxe5 looks attractive at first sight, but 15...Rad8 16.Qb3 b6, intending to bring one of the knights
to the blockading square d6, gave Black an adequate game in Marovic – L. Szabo, Zagreb 1964.
14...Rfe8
14...b5? allows 15.e5! with much more power: 15...dxe5 16.Bxe5 Nce8 17.Re1±
15.Re1

15...b5
 It is hard to suggest anything else for Black.
16.e5 dxe5 17.Bxe5 Rad8 18.Rc1²
White retains a pleasant edge.

14.Re1
14.Qd2!?N is a good alternative.

14...Be5N
This is an obvious attempt to improve on 14...g5?! 15.Be3 b5 as was played in Heilemann – Bialas, Minden 1959.
After the simple 16.Rc1N White is clearly better, and Black’s kingside weakening has certainly not improved his
chances.

15.Be3 b5 16.Bg2
White has a clear plan of advancing his pawns, for instance:

16...b4
17.f4! Bg7 18.Na4 Nb5 19.Rc1
White has a clear advantage, as the e4-e5 break will come with a lot of force.

C2) 11...Ng4

12.a3!
With this clever move, White gets ready for the closed position that arises after Black plays ...Ne5 and recaptures
with the d-pawn.

12...f6
Black prepares to recapture with the f-pawn instead.
12...Re8N runs into 13.h3 Ne5 14.Nxe5 Bxe5 (or 14...dxe5 15.Be3 b6 16.b4!) 15.Bxe5 dxe5 16.f4 with a clear
advantage to White.

13.b4 b6 14.Re1 Ne5 15.Nxe5 fxe5 16.Be3 a6

This position arose in Sanz Algarrada – Rost, email 2011. Strategically speaking, Black has failed to create
counterplay in the centre, and his dark-squared bishop is at least temporarily out of play. I suggest the following
method of developing White’s initiative on the queenside.

17.Qb3N 17...h5 18.Reb1 h4 19.bxc5 bxc5 20.Qc2

White’s chances are definitely preferable.

D) 9...Nbd7
10.Bf4 Qe7
10...Qc7? is not possible due to 11.Nb5, but Black has two other alternatives to the queen move.

10...Nb6
Now is a good time for White to play in the centre.
11.e4 Re8
The aggressive 11...Nh5 12.Bg5 f6 13.Bc1 f5 was well met by 14.exf5 Bxf5 15.Ng5 Qd7 16.Ne6! Bxe6 17.dxe6
Qxe6 18.a4! and White was clearly better due to the powerful light-squared bishop in the computer game
Stockfish – Hiarcs, Internet 2012.
12.Re1 h6
This position occurred in another computer game, ‘DiscoCheck’ – ‘Gull’, Internet 2014. Now I like:

13.Qd3N 13...Bg4
White is ideally placed to meet 13...g5 with 14.Bxd6! Qxd6 15.e5, with a clear advantage.
14.Nd2
White has a promising position, and it is hard to see what the knight is doing on b6.

10...Ne8
After this move it is logical to focus on the queenside.
11.Qd2 a6 12.a4 Rb8 13.Rab1!
Preparing b2-b4 is a common theme in the Bf4 lines.
13...b5
13...b6 14.b4 also looks unpleasant for Black. 14...Rb7 15.Rfc1 Qe7 occurred in Sulava – Csom, Paks 2000, and
now the natural 16.e4N 16...Nc7 17.Re1 would have maintained a pleasant advantage.
14.axb5 axb5
After 14...Nb6 15.bxa6 Bxa6 16.Rfe1 Black hardly has enough for the pawn, but this may still have been the
lesser evil.
15.b4 c4 16.Nd4 Bxd4 17.Qxd4
White had a huge positional advantage in Sorokin – Capellini, Buenos Aires 1996.

11.a4!
An important decision! This semi-waiting move seems like the best option. I will briefly show you why I was not
completely satisfied with the alternatives:
11.Re1 and 11.e4 are both well met by 11...Ng4!.
11.h3 allows 11...Nh5!?, when the weakening of the g3-pawn is surprisingly relevant. The critical line continues 12.Bg5
f6 13.Bd2 f5, and now our thematic idea of 14.Ng5 runs into 14...f4! 15.Ne6 fxg3 16.Nxf8 Nxf8, when Black has rich
compensation for exchange.

11...Ng4
This looks like the most challenging idea.

11...a6 transposes to variation E3 below.

Nobody has tried 11...Nh5N, and indeed after the thematic 12.Bg5 f6 13.Bd2 f5 14.Ng5! White has a promising game.
12.Bg5!
This method of countering the knight sally to g4 is an important theme in this chapter.

12...f6
12...Qe8?N is impossible in view of 13.Nb5! and Black loses material.

12...Bf6N 13.Bxf6 Ngxf6 14.Nd2² also does not make much sense for Black.

13.Bd2 Nde5
13...a6 14.Rb1 occurred in my game against Eljanov, which is discussed via the more common 9...a6 move order in
variation E32 below.

The natural 13...Nge5 has been played a couple of times, but both times White missed the strong idea of 14.Nb5!N. The
threat is Nc7, and both 14...Nb6 15.Nxe5 fxe5 16.b4 and 14...Nb8 15.Nxe5 fxe5 16.e4 Na6 17.Na3 are better for
White.

The text move was played in Arngrimsson – Akopian, Golden Sands 2014. Here White has a strong idea at his disposal:
14.h3!N 14...Nxf3†
In the event of 14...Nh6 15.Nxe5 fxe5 16.a5! White starts to develop his play on the queenside. 16...Nf5 is no
problem due to the strong reply:

17.g4! Nh4 18.Be4 h5 19.f3 With a clear advantage.

15.exf3!
This is a thematic idea that we will encounter again later.

15...Ne5 16.Re1 Qd8 17.Bf1!

Before driving the knight away, White takes control over the c4-square.

17...Bd7
 Neither 17...c4 18.Nb5! nor 17...Bf5 18.f4 are acceptable for Black.

18.f4 Nf7 19.Qb3 f5 20.Re6!

White has a powerful initiative.

E) 9...a6 10.a4 Nbd7

The other main possibility is 10...Re8, when 11.Bf4 leads straight to variation F of the next chapter on page 414.

11.Bf4
Black has three sensible ways to deal with the attack on the d6-pawn. We will consider the sideline E1) 11...Ne8, the
more popular E2) 11...Qc7 and finally the main line of E3) 11...Qe7.

E1) 11...Ne8

This is somewhat passive, and White can easily gain some space in the centre.

12.e4 Rb8 13.Qe2

This is a slightly unusual square for the queen, but it is good to prevent ...b5, and the knight on e8 prevents the black
rook from coming to the e-file to harass the queen.

13...f6
13...Ne5 allows White to obtain a comfortable edge with 14.Nxe5 Bxe5 15.Bxe5 dxe5 as played in Orsatti –
Obregon, Buenos Aires 2002. White has more than one good continuation here, but the one I like the most is 16.f4N
16...Qe7 17.d6! Qxd6 18.Rad1 followed by Nd5, with a dangerous initiative.
14.Rab1!N
Preparing b2-b4 makes perfect sense now that Black has blocked his own bishop. Instead 14.Nd2 Ne5 15.h3 Nc7
16.Be3 f5 (16...b5!?) 17.f4 Nf7 was rather unclear in Akobian – Maze, Montreal 2008.

14...Ne5
14...b5 15.axb5 axb5 16.b4! is much better for White.

15.b4 cxb4 16.Rxb4 Bg4 17.Rfb1

All these moves seem pretty logical. The continuation might be:

17...f5
17...Qa5 18.Qe3 is comfortably better for White.
18.Qe3 Nxf3† 19.Bxf3 Bxf3 20.Qxf3 fxe4 21.Qe3
White will regain the e4-pawn while keeping a clear positional advantage.

E2) 11...Qc7

12.Qd2 Re8 13.Rfc1

By directing his rook towards the black queen, White prepares b2-b4.

13...Ne4
This looks like the most challenging idea. I considered two other options:

13...b6 14.b4 Rb8 15.Rab1 gives White nice pressure. Black can try to create counterplay with the thematic 15...Ng4
16.h3 Nge5, but White is well prepared for this: 17.Nxe5 (17.Ne4!?N is also worth considering) 17...Nxe5
18.a5! c4 19.axb6 Qxb6 20.Nd1!? White kept a positional edge in Fessler – Viard, email 2011.

13...c4 forces White to find the strong prophylactic move: 14.Qc2! Rb8 (White’s idea was to anticipate 14...Nc5, which
will now run into 15.Nd2) 15.a5 b5 16.axb6 Nxb6 17.Nd2 Ng4 18.h3 Ne5 This position was reached in Szymanski –
Meyer, corr. 2012, when White retreated the queen to d1. Instead I would like to propose a more forcing continuation:

19.b3!?N A possible continuation is 19...cxb3 20.Nxb3 Nec4 and now 21.Na5! is an important point, when White
keeps some advantage.
14.Nxe4 Rxe4 15.Ng5!?
This forcing move seems promising.

15...Rd4
15...Re8 allows White to regroup optimally: 16.Ne4 Ne5 17.b4 c4 18.a5 Bf5 19.Nc3 Rac8 20.h3 h5 21.Be3² White
keeps the better chances.

16.Qe3 Nf8 17.Ne4!

Forcing the following reaction.

17...Rxe4 18.Qxe4 Bxb2

19.Bd2!N
White went for the tempting 19.Qe8 in the only game so far, but this enabled Black to solve his problems: 19...Rb8
20.Rab1 Bxc1 21.Rxc1 Bh3! 22.Rxc5 dxc5 23.Qxb8 Qxb8 24.Bxb8 Bxg2 25.Kxg2 f5! 26.Kf3 Nd7 Black was able to
hold the endgame in Khan – Pepermans, email 2013.

My idea is to post the bishop on the long diagonal. A logical continuation is:

19...Bf5 20.Qe3 f6 21.Bc3 Bxc1 22.Rxc1 Nd7 23.Qd2!

White is ready to advance his central pawns. He has more than enough compensation for the sacrificed pawn, with
good attacking chances and a wonderful dark-squared bishop.

E3) 11...Qe7

This is the most important option.

12.Rb1!
12.h3 is the only move mentioned by Petrov, but I favour the text move in many lines. This seems like a good
moment for it, now that the black queen has left the d8-a5 diagonal.
With b2-b4 on the way, it makes sense for Black to play on the kingside. His two main tries are E31) 12...Nh5 and
E32) 12...Ng4.
12...h6 is slow and does nothing to oppose White’s plan. 13.b4 cxb4 14.Rxb4 Nc5 15.Qc1 Kh7 This was Wojtaszek –
Gajewski, Warsaw 2008, and now a small improvement would be 16.Qa3!N 16...Re8 17.a5 Bg4 18.Nd2! when Black
is under a lot of pressure.

Black has also tried:

12...Re8 13.b4 Ng4
13...cxb4 14.Rxb4 Nc5 15.Nd4 h6 occurred in Schubert – Grott, email 2009, and now I like 16.Rb6N 16...Nfe4
17.Nxe4 Nxe4 18.Qd3 g5 19.Be3 Nc5 20.Qc2 Bd7 21.a5 with continuing positional pressure.
14.Bg5!?N
This idea works well in similar positions, and I like it here too.
White failed to achieve anything special after 14.Qb3 cxb4 15.Qxb4 Nc5 16.h3 Ne5„ in Mochalov – Belichev,
Yalta 1995.
14...Qf8
14...f6 15.Bd2² is exactly what White is looking for.
15.Bd2 cxb4 16.Rxb4 Nc5 17.a5 Bd7 18.h3 Nf6 19.Nd4²
White has an ideal set-up, with a better pawn structure and good coordination.

E31) 12...Nh5 13.Bg5 f6

Black has also tried 13...Qe8, but without much success: 14.Qc2 h6 15.Bd2 Rb8 16.b4 cxb4 17.Rxb4 Nc5 18.a5 Qe7
19.Nd4 (My engine suggests the surprising 19.Qc1N 19...Kh7 20.Ne4!! with a clear advantage; the text move is also
strong though.) 19...Qc7?! A mistake in a worse position.
 This position occurred in Wojtaszek – Maciol, Krynica 2003, and now the simple 20.Ne4!N 20...Bd7 21.Rc1 Rfc8
22.Qd1 would have given White a winning position.

14.Bd2 f5 15.Ng5!
This is one of my favourite ideas against the Modern Benoni. Thanks to the bishop on g2, the knight’s arrival on e6
will be extremely powerful.

15...Ndf6
Another encounter continued: 15...Ne5 16.Ne6 Bxe6 17.dxe6 Rab8 18.b4 c4 19.b5! Kh8 20.Bd5 Nf6 21.Bg5 h6
22.Bxf6 Bxf6
 Up to now White has played perfectly in Guramishvili – Art. Minasian, Jermuk 2012, and here the simple 23.Qd2N
23...Kh7 24.a5 would have left him with a huge advantage.

16.b4 c4
Neither 16...cxb4 17.Rxb4± nor 16...b6 17.Ne6 Bxe6 18.dxe6 Rab8 19.Qb3± can be considered acceptable for Black.

17.b5!
White is clearly better, as was demonstrated in the following encounter.

17...a5 18.b6 Ne4

18...h6 19.Ne6 Bxe6 20.dxe6 Rab8 21.Rb5± does not change much.

19.Ngxe4 fxe4 20.Rc1 Nf6

 We have been following Tkachiev – David, Cannes 1999. At this point the most convincing would have been:

21.Nb5!N 21...Nxd5 22.Rxc4 Bf5

22...Nxb6 23.Rc7 is hopeless for Black.

23.Bh6!+–
Black’s position is collapsing.

E32) 12...Ng4

13.Bg5!
This is a thematic reaction against the knight on g4. I used the same idea in an almost identical position, and it
brought me my most memorable victory with the Bf4 set-up (the game can be found below, as it soon transposed to our
main line). It’s not every day that you beat a 2700 player at an Olympiad!

13...f6N
Amazingly this is a novelty, but it soon transposes to the aforementioned game. It is certainly Black’s most ambitious
move, so it deserves to be treated as the main line.

13...Bf6
This has been played a few times, but I do not understand why Black would be so keen to trade the dark-squared
bishops.
14.Bxf6 Ndxf6 15.Nd2N
15.b4?! has been played, but the timing is unfortunate, and after 15...cxb4 (15...Bf5N is also good for Black)
16.Rxb4 Ne3! White ran into some difficulties in Predein – Bazhin, Podolsk 1993.
The knight manoeuvre is a more appropriate plan at this moment. A logical continuation is:
15...Ne5 16.h3 Rb8
16...Nh5 17.b4² is also nice for White.

17.a5 b5 18.axb6 Rxb6 19.f4 Ned7 20.Nc4

20.e4 Rb4 21.Re1!? is also worthy of consideration.
20...Rb4 21.Qd3²
White retains a pleasant edge.

I found one other game, where Black retreated his queen:

13...Qe8 14.h3 h6
Unfortunately for Black, 14...Nge5? does not work in view of 15.Ne4± when he is unable to defend the d6-pawn.
15.Bc1!?
An interesting concept, although there is nothing wrong with the natural 15.Bd2N 15...Nge5 16.Nxe5 Nxe5
17.b4² with a promising position for White.
15...Nge5
After 15...Ngf6N White is well placed for 16.b4.
16.Nd2!
Obviously the point of White’s previous move. He now threatens to trap the black knight with 17.f4.
16...g5 17.b4
17.f4!?N 17...gxf4 18.gxf4 Ng6 19.Nc4 Qe7 20.Qd3! also looks quite promising.
17...cxb4 18.Rxb4 f5 19.Ba3
White was better in Straub – Koch, Germany 2005.

14.Bd2
We have now transposed to my game against Eljanov, which featured the somewhat unusual move order of 9...Qe7
10.Bf4 Nbd7 11.a4 Ng4 12.Bg5 f6 13.Bd2 a6 14.Rb1.

14...Nge5
14...f5N as usual runs into 15.Ng5! Ndf6 16.b4² with advantage to White.
15.b4 cxb4?!
This tempting move is typical for the Modern Benoni: Black gets the nice c5-outpost for his knight, but his activity
will be short lived, while his structural problems will be felt for a long time.

15...b6N would have been the correct decision, but I still like White’s position. There is a pleasant choice between
clarifying the pawn structure by means of 16.bxc5 bxc5 17.a5, and maintaining the pressure on the queenside with
16.Qb3!?, with the better game in either case.

16.Rxb4 Nxf3†
16...Nc5 17.Nxe5 fxe5 18.Be3! is also clearly better for White.

17.exf3!
17.Bxf3 f5 18.a5 Rb8 would leave Black only slightly worse.

Recapturing with the e-pawn is an important idea, especially after having provoked the weakening ...f6. White gains
control over the e4- and e5-squares, and opens the e-file.

17...f5
Black needs to free his bishop at some point. 17...Nc5 could be met by 18.a5 with similar play to the game, but
18.Ne4!? may well be even stronger.

18.a5
Now it becomes clear that the pawns on b7 and d6 are long-term targets.

18...Qd8 19.Qa4
My computer prefers the tactical alternative: 19.Na4!?N 19...Qxa5 20.Rxb7 Qd8 (after 20...Qxd5 21.f4 Qxg2†
22.Kxg2 Bxb7† 23.f3± Black does not have enough compensation for the queen) 21.Rb1 Ne5² The machine likes
White a lot, but from a human point of view it doesn’t seem like such a huge advantage. Considering the position I
achieved in the game, I do not see much point in changing the character of the position.

19...Nc5 20.Qa3 Bd7

21.Rb6 Qf6 22.Rc1 Rfe8
Black is trying to get active, but his position is just bad, and an earlier improvement was needed.

23.Bf1!±
This accurate move eliminates any possible counterplay connected with the knight jump to d3. White has a substantial
advantage, which I managed to convert to victory in Avrukh – Eljanov, Istanbul (ol) 2012, after some adventures in
mutual time trouble.

Conclusion

I am happy with my new recommendations against the Modern Benoni, with the general strategy being to place the
bishop on f4 and aim for either central play with e4-e5, or a queenside initiative with Rb1 and b2-b4, depending on how
Black responds. Although there are a few forcing lines, White’s system relies mainly on positional principles,
compared with the recommendation in GM 2 which had a lot of concrete tactics.

When it comes to specific details, variation D with 9...Nbd7 10.Bf4 Qe7 is worth mentioning, as White needs to
remember the less-than-obvious 11.a4! to maximize his chances. Another recurring theme for White is to meet ...Ng4
(or ...Nh5) with Bg5, attacking the queen on e7. If Black chases the bishop with ...f6 and then advances with ...f5, the
Ng5-e6 manoeuvre will be painful for Black. If he leaves the pawn on f6 and brings a knight to e5, then White should
be ready to meet ...Nxf3† with the dynamic exf3!. Generally speaking, it is hard for Black to generate much
counterplay in any of the lines in this chapter, and he often ends up under positional pressure.
A) 10...Bg4
B) 10...h6
C) 10...Nh5
D) 10...Ne4 11.Nxe4 Rxe4 12.Nd2
D1) 12...Rb4
D2) 12...Rxf4 13.gxf4 Bxb2 14.Rb1 Bg7 15.e4
D21) 15...Qh4
D22) 15...Nd7
E) 10...Na6 11.Re1
E1) 11...Bf5
E2) 11...Bg4
E3) 11...Nc7
E4) 11...Nh5
E5) 11...Ne4
F) 10...a6 11.a4
F1) 11...h6
 F2) 11...b6
F3) 11...Qe7
F4) 11...Bg4
F5) 11...Nh5
F6) 11...Ne4

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.Nc3 g6 7.Bg2 Bg7 8.Nf3 0-0 9.0-0 Re8 10.Bf4
This is a big conceptual change compared to my recommendation in GM 2. I have to confess that I thought it was the
most exciting chapter of that book, but modern theory keeps moving forward and often you change your preferences.
10.Bf4 leads to a more positional game, but there are still lines where the reader will find a sharp tactical battle.

For those who are looking for concrete evidence as to why I made my change, the following line is scoring well for
Black: 10.Nd2 a6 11.a4 Nbd7 12.h3 Rb8 13.Nc4 Ne5 14.Na3 Nh5 15.e4 Bd7 16.a5 b5 17.axb6 Bb5!

We will analyse six main options: A) 10...Bg4, B) 10...h6, C) 10...Nh5, D) 10...Ne4, E) 10...Na6 and the main
continuation F) 10...a6.

A) 10...Bg4 11.Nd2

The most natural move. Black should react swiftly, as he cannot afford to have a white knight on c4.

11...Nh5
Another idea is: 11...b5 12.h3 b4 (12...Bd7 is probably better, but after 13.Nce4 Nxe4 14.Nxe4 Bxh3 15.Nxd6 Bxg2
16.Kxg2 Re7 17.Nxb5 Rb7 18.Na3 White has a clear edge.) This occurred in Chlevistan – Holeksa, Ostrava 2001, and
now the simple 13.hxg4N 13...bxc3 14.bxc3 Nxg4 15.Nc4 Ne5 16.Bxe5! Bxe5 17.Qd2 would give White an obvious
advantage, as his knight on c4 is too strong.

12.Be3
Two previous encounters have reached this position, and in both of them Black was overly aggressive:
12...Nd7?!
12...f5?! was V. Mikhalevski – Piscopo, Trieste 2009. White could have won material with: 13.h3N 13...Bxh3
14.Bxh3 Nxg3 15.fxg3 Rxe3 16.Rf3! Black does not have enough for the sacrificed piece.

13.h3 Bxh3
Or 13...Nxg3 14.hxg4 Nxf1 which, with the insertion of ...a6 and a2-a4, is the topic under investigation in variation
F4. 15.Nxf1± (or even 15.Qxf1!?) looks excellent for White.

14.Bxh3 Nxg3 15.fxg3 Rxe3 16.Rf3! Bd4

16...Re8 17.Nc4 Ne5 18.Nxe5 Bxe5 19.Qd2 Rb8 20.Raf1 f5 21.g4± doesn’t change much, and White has a clear
advantage.

17.Rxe3 Bxe3†
This all occurred in Eljanov – Topalov, Wijk aan Zee 2008. Now there was nothing wrong with the natural:
18.Kg2N 18...Ne5 19.Nf3
White should slowly coordinate his pieces, for example:

19...Qe7 20.Qc2 f5 21.Re1 Re8 22.Nd1 Bg5 23.Nxe5 Qxe5 24.e4±

White’s extra piece should soon tell.

B) 10...h6

This waiting move can often be a useful resource for Black, and is currently popular when played a move later – see
variation F1. In this case I would like undertake a concrete plan:

11.Qc1 Kh7
 An obvious alternative is:
11...g5 12.Be3!?
Most previous games saw 12.Bd2, but after 12...Bf5 I couldn’t find an advantage for White.
12...Bf5N
12...Nbd7 was played in the computer game Deep Fritz – Hannibal, Internet 2015, but I see no reason for Black not to
develop his bishop first.

13.h4! g4
After 13...Ng4 14.Bd2 gxh4 15.Nxh4 Bh7 16.Bh3 h5 17.Bg5 Bf6 18.Bxf6 Qxf6 19.e4 Black’s kingside is too
vulnerable.
14.Nd2
Now the critical test is as follows:
14...Rxe3 15.fxe3 Bg6 16.Nc4
 The arising position is complex, but in my opinion Black will find it hard to prove his compensation. One
example line runs:
16...Nh5 17.Qe1 Bxc3
Or 17...Na6 18.Qf2 Qe7 19.e4 Nc7 20.a4 and White is better.
18.bxc3 b5 19.Nd2 Qe7 20.Qf2 Nd7 21.a4!±

12.Nd2N
Improving on 12.Re1, as in Gleizerov – Shilov, Barlinek 2001. Black could have played 12...Bf5N 13.Nd2 g5 14.e4
Bg6 15.Be3 Ng4 with unclear play.

12...g5
It seems like Black has to play this, since 12...Nh5 13.Nc4 Nxf4 14.Qxf4 leaves him struggling.

13.Be3 Bf5
This seems to be the most natural move.

The tempting 13...Ng4 runs into the strong reply 14.Nc4 Nxe3 15.fxe3!, when Black cannot be happy with his ...Kh7
move.

14.Nc4 Na6 15.Nb5 Bf8 16.h4 gxh4 17.Bf4

White has a pleasant initiative.

C) 10...Nh5 11.Bg5 Qb6

 This idea has been employed by top-class players such as Ivanchuk and Gelfand. Other options are less exciting for
Black:

Obviously 11...f6 12.Bd2 f5 is not a good idea. After 13.Ng5! Bf6 14.Ne6 White had a clear advantage in
Dragomirescu – Bleuzen, Split 2012.

11...Qd7 This strange move was first tried by Smyslov back in 1977. Black’s idea is thematic for the Benoni; he wants
to carry out ...b7-b5, while gaining the b4-square for his knight should White play a2-a4. 12.a4 h6

13.Be3N (In both previous games White played 13.Bd2, when the Serbian grandmaster Ivanisevic has scored two draws
after 13...Na6.) Now if 13...Na6 14.Qc1 Kh7, White has an important square for his knight: 15.Nd2! Nb4 16.Nc4
White is better.

12.Qc2
 I like this idea for White, keeping the d2-square for the bishop.

12...Nd7 13.a4
Black is fine after 13.Nd2 h6 14.Be3 Rxe3! 15.fxe3 Ne5©.

13...Ne5 14.a5 Qa6 15.Nxe5 Rxe5 16.Bd2 b5

Another example is 16...Bd7 17.Rfb1 Ree8, which was Leung – Saxena, email 2010. Here I like:

18.e4N 18...b5 19.axb6 Qxb6 20.Nd1!² White’s dark-squared bishop comes to c3, fully neutralizing the a1-h8 diagonal,
while the white knight is heading for an excellent square on e3.

17.axb6 Qxb6 18.Na4 Qb5 19.e4 Bd7

This was Akobian – Bluvshtein, Montreal 2009. Until now it was a smooth positional game by White, but at this
moment he missed the right idea:
20.b3N
White intends to transfer his knight to c4 via the b2-square. Black’s counterplay does not seem to be enough.

20...f5 21.Nb2 Ree8 22.Bc3 fxe4 23.Nc4 Qb8 24.Rfe1!

White maintains a solid positional advantage.

D) 10...Ne4

Definitely an ambitious move, which leads to sharp and double-edged play.

11.Nxe4 Rxe4 12.Nd2

After a short and logical sequence of moves we have reached a branching point. Black can choose between D1)
12...Rb4 and the exchange sacrifice D2) 12...Rxf4.

D1) 12...Rb4 13.Rb1

This is my personal preference for White, despite it only being the third choice according to theory.
In general the idea behind Black’s 12th move is to provoke 13.a3, when the exchange sacrifice is even stronger.
13...Rxf4 14.gxf4 Bxb2 is given by Petrov in GM 12 – the white rook must go to a2, which is hardly the most desirable
square, to defend the a3-pawn.

13...g5
A concrete and aggressive move, but White keeps everything under control.

I also checked the obvious novelty 13...Bxb2N, when after 14.Ne4 Rxe4 (if 14...Bf5 15.Rxb2! Rxb2 16.Nxd6© White
has huge compensation) 15.Bxe4 Bf6 16.Qc2 White’s position is definitely preferable.

14.Be3 Bf5 15.a3!

An important move to deal with Black’s threats.

15...Rxb2
15...Rb6 obviously allows 16.Be4! Bxe4 17.Nxe4 h6 18.b4± with a clear advantage.
16.Rxb2 Bxb2 17.Qb3 Bf6

18.Nc4!
A crucial moment. White shouldn’t rush with 18.Qxb7?!, as now Black can coordinate his pieces with: 18...Nd7
19.Nc4 Nb6 20.Qa6 Nxc4 21.Qxc4 Qe7 Black was better in Ligterink – Tindall, Hoogeveen 1998.

18...Bg4?
This is just losing.

I also checked 18...Bc8N, when White can develop an initiative in the centre by means of 19.f4 g4 20.Bf2 followed by
e2-e4. Black’s position is too passive.

19.Nxd6 Qb6 20.Rb1 Qxb3 21.Rxb3 b6 22.Ne8!

 White gained a decisive advantage in Stein – Buechling, corr. 2007.

D2) 12...Rxf4 13.gxf4 Bxb2 14.Rb1 Bg7 15.e4

Petrov gives 15.Nc4 as better for White, but I prefer the text move.

Now I believe that all four of Black’s possibilities are important, with the most critical being: D21) 15...Qh4 and
D22) 15...Nd7.

15...Bh6
A logical move, which has only occurred once.

16.e5N
We will see this idea again in line D21, and it works well here too.
 16.Qf3 Nd7 17.Nc4 Nb6! 18.Ne3 Qf6 19.f5÷ was unclear in Michalik – Huschenbeth, Merlimont 2011.
16...Bxf4 17.e6
The point behind 16.e5. White has a powerful initiative, a sample line being:
17...Na6 18.Re1 Qe7 19.Nc4 f5
It is always dangerous to capture on e6 – opening up White’s light-squared bishop: 19...fxe6 20.dxe6 Nc7 21.Qg4
Qf6 22.Bxb7 Bxb7 23.Rxb7 d5 24.Ne3 White holds the advantage.
20.Na5!
White manages to generate play on the queenside.
20...Bg5 21.Qe2 Nb8 22.Rb3 b6 23.Nc6 Nxc6 24.dxc6 Rb8 25.Rg3 Bf6 26.Bd5
White has a clear edge.

15...Na6 This has recently been fashionable and has brought Black good results. I have a natural and unexplored idea:

16.Re1!?N Now the critical test is: 16...Nb4 (bear in mind that 16...Bh6 17.e5 Bxf4 18.e6 would transpose to the
15...Bh6 line above) 17.Rb3! Nxa2 18.e5 I like White’s initiative after both 18...Nb4 19.e6!‚ and 18...dxe5 19.fxe5 a5
20.e6‚.

D21) 15...Qh4 16.e5 Qxf4 17.e6!

This is White’s key idea to develop an initiative, as Black is in trouble thanks to his undeveloped queenside pieces.
17...Na6
Another game went:
17...fxe6 18.dxe6 Nc6 19.Re1 Be5
19...Nd4 would run into a nice line: 20.e7 Be6 21.Rxe6! Nxe6 22.Qb3 Kf7 23.Bh3 c4 24.Bxe6† Kxe6 25.Nxc4
d5 26.Re1† Kf7 27.Ne3± White manages to hold on to his e7-pawn with a clear advantage.
20.Nf3 Bxe6 21.Nxe5 Nxe5
21...dxe5 wouldn’t help Black in view of 22.Qd6! Nd4 23.Rxb7 Rf8 24.Qxe5 Qxf2† 25.Kh1 Qf6 26.Qxf6 Rxf6
27.Rxa7+– and the a-pawn should decide the game.
All this occurred in Cooke – Borocz, Budapest 2000. White now missed a decisive idea:

22.Re4!N 22...Qf5 23.Qxd6 Bxa2 24.Rxb7 Nf3† 25.Bxf3 Qxf3 26.Qe5

White should win from here.
18.Re1 Nc7

19.Rb3!N
This is my improvement over the game Kobo – Sanal, Budva 2013, where White went for 19.Re4 Qg5 20.Re3. White
went on to win a nice game, but the position is objectively not so clear and the idea of Re4-e3 doesn’t look overly
convincing. By the way, Kobo is one of my Israeli students, so you can guess who taught him to play this line.

19...f5
If Black could manage to coordinate his pieces he would be fine, but White moves rapidly.
Another try is 19...fxe6 20.dxe6 Nxe6, but with both rooks joining in Black can hardly expect to hold:

21.Rf3 Qh4 (or 21...Qg4 22.Qb3 Be5 23.Nc4±) 22.Rfe3 Bd4 (22...Nf8 23.Re8 is hopeless for Black) 23.Nf3 Qf6
24.Nxd4 cxd4 25.Rf3 White is dominant.
20.e7 Ne8 21.Qe2! b6 22.Qb5 Bb7 23.Nc4
Black is in trouble.

D22) 15...Nd7 16.Qf3

16.Re1
It was my original intention to recommend this move, but then Bacrot came up with an amazing idea which
forced me to re-evaluate it.
16...Bh6 17.e5 Bxf4 18.e6 Ne5
Now of course there is a big difference compared to the lines where Black’s knight is still on b8.
19.Re4

19...Qf6!!
I had only considered 19...g5 20.Nf3 fxe6 21.Nxe5 Bxe5 22.h4! when White has a serious initiative.
20.e7
Another critical line is 20.Qa4 Bxd2 21.Qe8† Kg7 22.Rxe5 dxe5 23.e7 Bf5 24.Qxa8 Qxe7 25.Rxb7 Qf6 and the
situation remains unclear.
20...Bg4 21.Qa4 Bxd2 22.e8=R† Rxe8 23.Qxe8† Kg7 24.Rxb7 c4!
The position is extremely complicated, but objectively balanced, Ding Liren – Bacrot, Tromso (ol) 2014.

16...b5
The only drawback of White’s queen move is that it allows this.

16...Bh6 17.Nc4 Nb6 18.Ne3 Bd7 19.Qg3 looks promising for White, as he will follow up with f4-f5 and seize the
initiative on the kingside.
17.Rfe1 Ba6?
This appears to be a serious mistake, so I have examined Black’s reasonable alternatives:

17...Rb8N 18.Qg3 Qa5 (18...Nf6 19.Qh4 doesn’t help Black.) 19.Nf3 Without doubt this position requires serious
investigation, but I like White’s chances to seize the initiative on the kingside.

17...a6

18.Qg3N (Better than the immediate 18.e5 as played in Kobo – Rausis, Riga 2014.) The following analysis expands on
that given by Emms in Chessbase Magazine: 18...c4 19.e5 Nc5 20.Ne4! Bf5 (20...Nd3 21.Nxd6 Nxe1 22.Rxe1 also
leaves White with a pleasnt game.) 21.Nxc5! Bxb1 22.Rxb1 dxc5 23.d6 Rc8 24.f5‚ White’s attack seems increasingly
dangerous.

17...Qa5N should be critical, and now for maybe the first time I would like to leave this position for my readers to
explore. Some starting points are 18.Nb3 Qxa2 19.e5 dxe5 20.d6 Rb8, and 18.Qe2 Ba6 19.e5. The position is hugely
complicated, with exciting developments undoubtedly lurking for both sides.

18.Qa3!
Suddenly Black loses the b5-pawn.

18...Bc8 19.Rxb5 Bh6 20.Qg3 Ba6 21.Rb3! Qf6 22.e5 Qxf4 23.Ne4
White was clearly better in Eljanov – Sjugirov, Yerevan 2014.

E) 10...Na6 11.Re1

White prepares to follow up with e2-e4. This is an important crossroads, where Black has a wide choice: E1) 11...Bf5,
E2) 11...Bg4, E3) 11...Nc7, E4) 11...Nh5 or E5) 11...Ne4.
 E1) 11...Bf5

At first I was concerned that this move solves all of Black’s problems, but I managed to come up with the following
line:

12.Nd2 Nh5 13.e4 Nxf4 14.gxf4

Despite losing his dark-squared bishop, White still retains good chances due to his pawn mass in the centre. Black has
tried two bishop retreats:

14...Bc8
14...Bd7 15.Nc4 has occurred in two games:
a) 15...Qf6 16.e5! Qxf4 17.Re4 Qh6 18.e6! fxe6 19.Nxd6 Re7 20.dxe6 Bc6 was Gupta – S. Zhigalko, Tashkent 2014.
Having played with a lot of power and inspiration, White went wrong here with 21.Nf7. The simple 21.Nd5!N
21...Bxd5 22.Qxd5 would have secured White an obvious advantage thanks to his powerful passed pawn.

b) Another game was 15...Bf8 16.e5 dxe5 17.fxe5 b5 18.e6! bxc4 19.Qf3! f5 20.d6 Rb8 Li Chao – Zhou Weiqi, Tianjin
2013. Black was still in the game, but after the correct 21.exd7N 21...Qxd7 22.Rxe8 Rxe8 23.Bf1 Qxd6 24.Bxc4† Kh8
White perhaps missed the following brilliant idea:

25.Qb7 Nc7 26.Nb5! Nxb5 27.Qf7 White is winning.

15.Nc4 Bxc3 16.bxc3 b5 17.Nd2 Rb8 18.Qf3 Nc7 19.Qg3

This was Polyakov – Janisch, corr. 2014. The engine considers Black’s position to be okay, but from a human point
of view White’s chances look much more promising.

E2) 11...Bg4 12.h3

I came to the conclusion that in this concrete position we have to force an immediate trade on f3. I also have to mention
two other natural-looking possibilities:

12.Qb3 is considered by Petrov, but I would agree that Black was doing well after the unexpected 12...b5! in Grischuk –
Gashimov, Nice 2010.

12.Nd2 allowed the positional exchange sacrifice 12...Nh5 13.Be3 Rxe3 14.fxe3 Qe7© in Gleizerov – Cvitan, Zadar
2005.

12...Bxf3 13.Bxf3 Nd7

Black’s first choice according to theory, but there are three other decent options we have to consider:

13...Qb6 14.Rb1N (I am not convinced about the queen trade with 14.Qb3, as after 14...Qxb3 15.axb3 White’s structure
was damaged on the queenside in Alavi – Can, Ankara 2011.) The following sequence looks logical: 14...Nd7 15.Bg2
Nc7 16.Qa4!? Rad8 17.Rec1 The position remains complex, but in the long term White’s bishop pair should give him
better chances.

13...Nc7
Black won both games where he employed this move.
14.e4 Bf8
As in Farid – Leon Hoyos, Tromso (ol) 2014, and now I like:
15.a4N 15...Nd7 16.a5!? Ne5
Black is unable to carry out 16...b5? in view of 17.axb6 axb6 18.Rxa8 Qxa8 (18...Nxa8 19.Qa4 Nc7 20.Ra1 is
clearly better for White as well) 19.e5! with a clear advantage.
17.Be2
White has a pleasant edge, as Black is lacking any serious counterplay.

13...Qd7
The right way to meet this is as follows:
14.Kg2
The premature 14.e4 has occurred in several games, and Black can now play 14...c4!N 15.e5 dxe5 16.Rxe5 Rxe5
17.Bxe5 Nb4 with good counterplay.
14...c4
14...b5?! Somehow without the light-squared bishop this advance is not so strong, and this was convincingly
shown in the following encounter: 15.a4! b4 16.Nb5 Ne4 17.Qd3 c4 (17...f5 runs into 18.Nxd6! Nxd6 19.Qxa6
with a large advantage) 18.Qxc4 Rac8 19.Qb3 Nac5 20.Qxb4 a6 21.Nc3 Rb8 22.Qc4 Nxc3 23.bxc3 Rec8
24.Rab1 White was winning in Leitao – Saldano Dayer, Campinas 2009.
15.Qa4! Qxa4 16.Nxa4 Ne4 17.Bxe4 Rxe4 18.Nc3
The arising endgame is pleasant for White, who went on to win in Sargissian – Stellwagen, Dresden (ol) 2008.
14.Ne4!
The beginning of an original strategy which works well here for White.

14.e4 has occurred in several high-level games, but nobody chose the strong 14...c4!N 15.Bxd6 Nac5, when Black has a
lot of compensation.

14...Ne5 15.Bg2 h6
15...b5 is not as powerful as in other Benoni positions. A logical follow-up is: 16.g4 (the immediate 16.Bg5N,
provoking 16...f6 17.Bf4, also deserves attention) 16...Nc7 17.Bg5 f6 18.Bh4² White had a promising position in V.
Georgiev – Ivanisevic, Heraklion 2007.

16.g4 b5
Another game saw 16...Qe7, when White convincingly secured an advantage after 17.Rc1 b5 18.Qd2 Kh7 19.g5 hxg5
20.Bxg5 f6 21.Bf4 Kg8 22.Qa5! f5 23.Bg5 Qd7 24.Nf6† Bxf6 25.Bxf6 Qb7 26.Qd2 Antonenko – Grabliauskas, email
2009.
17.Qc1!? Kh7 18.g5 hxg5
If 18...h5 19.Bg3 Nc7 20.b3 White maintains full control over the position.

19.Bxg5 f6 20.Bh4 Nc7 21.a4!

A well-timed decision.

21...b4 22.Qc2
Black’s main problem is the lack of any serious counterplay.

22...Nf7
This was Andriulaitis – Enescu, email 2008. White now missed the strong idea of bringing his rook into play:
23.Rad1N 23...Qe7 24.Rd3!
White clearly has the better game.

E3) 11...Nc7 12.e4

At this point I checked three continuations for Black:

12...Nh5
12...Bg4 13.h3 Bxf3 14.Bxf3 transposes to the note on 13...Nc7 in variation E2.

12...Ng4 13.h3 Ne5 14.Nxe5 dxe5

If 14...Bxe5 15.Bxe5 dxe5 the play develops in more or less the same way: 16.Bf1 Qd6 17.Qb3 Bd7 18.a4 White
has the better game.
15.Be3 Qd6
16.a4!?N
This seems logical to me, especially taking into account that White failed to achieve anything special in the only
game here. 16.Rc1 Bd7 17.Nb1 b6 18.Nd2 Nb5! 19.Nc4 Qe7 was unclear in Michalik – Plat, Czech Republic
2010.
16...Bd7 17.Qb3 b6 18.Nb1!
The knight is heading for the c4-square, and White clearly has the better prospects.

13.Bg5 f6 14.Be3 b5
Black has managed to carry out ...b7-b5, but his knight is misplaced on h5.

15.Nd2 b4 16.Na4 Bf8 17.a3±

White was clearly better in Maiorov – A. Vovk, Lviv 2005.
 E4) 11...Nh5 12.Bg5 Qb6

This has been played a few times. My preference is as follows:

13.Qc1
Keeping in mind the d2-c4 route for our knight.

13...Bd7 14.e4
It is worth considering 14.Nd2!?N 14...h6 (14...Qc7 15.a4 is also good for White) 15.Be3 Qc7 (worse is 15...Kh7
16.Nc4 Qc7 17.Bf4 Bf8 18.Ne4! and Black has to give up an exchange) 16.a4 with a nice pull.

14...c4
Now White played a strong move:

15.Bf1! Rac8
15...Nc5 16.Be3 Nf6 17.Nd2 is not much fun for Black either, though admittedly it is better than the game
continuation.

16.Nd2 h6 17.Be3 Qd8 18.Nxc4

White was already winning in Docx – Edouard, Antwerp 2011.

E5) 11...Ne4 12.Nxe4 Rxe4 13.Nd2 Rb4

 Black’s most common response, but I also checked other rook moves:

13...Rd4 has been employed by Victor Moskalenko, but after 14.e4N 14...b5 15.a3± Black’s rook is totally misplaced.
13...Rxf4 14.gxf4 Bxb2 15.Rb1 Bg7 16.e4 would transpose to a position covered in the note to 15...Na6 in variation D2
on page 405.

13...Re8 is too passive, and White has an easy plan: 14.Nc4 Bf8 15.Qb3 f5 16.a4 White has a clearly better game, as
Black is tied up defending his d6-pawn. 16...Rb8 17.a5 Nc7 18.h4 Qf6 19.Qa4! h6 occurred in Soltau – Dosi, email
2007, and now the simple 20.b4!N 20...g5 21.hxg5 hxg5 22.Bd2 cxb4 23.Bxb4± would secure White a clear advantage.

14.e4!?
This seems more promising for White than 14.a3 Rxf4 15.gxf4 Bxb2.

14...Rxb2
Black has always captured this way, but I also checked the obvious: 14...Bxb2N
15.a3! An elegant exchange sacrifice. (15.Rb1 Bg7 is not so clear) 15...Bxa1 16.Qxa1 Rd4 (or 16...Ra4 17.Bh6 f6 18.f4‚
and e4-e5 will come with a lot of power) 17.Be3 Rd3 18.e5 dxe5 19.Qxe5 White has a dangerous initiative.

15.Nc4 Rb4 16.Nxd6 g5!

Otherwise Black is strategically lost. Now White must play actively.

17.Nxf7
17.Qh5!? gxf4 18.Qxf7† Kh8 19.e5 could be an interesting alternative.

17...Kxf7 18.Qh5† Kg8 19.Bxg5 Qf8 20.Rad1

20.e5 would allow 20...Bg4 21.Qh4 Bf3 22.Qh3 Bg4=.
20...Bd7
20...Rd4 21.Rxd4 Bxd4 was seen in Arngrimsson – Medvegy, Budapest 2013, and now White should have played:

22.Be3!N (stronger than 22.Bf4, which nevertheless brought White success in the game) 22...Qg7 23.Bxd4 cxd4
24.Qd1 It will be hard for Black to stop White’s pawn mass in the centre.

Here I’ll try to improve over a correspondence game played in 2013:

21.d6N
21.Bf4 Bc3 22.Bd2 Rb2 23.Qg5† Qg7 24.Qxg7† Bxg7 25.e5 was Scherer – Corbat, corr. 2013, when 25...Bg4N
looks extremely unclear to me.

21...Bd4
Another line is 21...Qe8 22.Qe2 Be5 23.Rd5 Rb2 24.Qf3 Bd4 25.Bf6! Qf7 26.Bxd4 cxd4 27.e5 and White is clearly
better.

22.Bf4 Qf7 23.Qg5† Qg7 24.e5 Qxg5 25.Bd5†! Kg7 26.Bxg5

White’s pawn mass is beginning to look scary.

F) 10...a6 11.a4

Having reached our sixth branch of the chapter, there are now another six moves that deserve serious attention: F1)
11...h6, F2) 11...b6, F3) 11...Qe7, F4) 11...Bg4, F5) 11...Nh5 and F6) 11...Ne4.

11...Qc7 12.Qd2 (At first I thought 11...Qc7 should always be met with 12.Rc1 followed by b2-b4, but now I am less
sure of any advantage after 12...Nbd7 13.b4 Nh5 14.Bd2 b6, or even 14...Qd8.) 12...Nbd7 This position was covered in
variation E2 of the previous chapter on page 392.
 F1) 11...h6

As I mentioned earlier this move has recently become trendy. You may be surprised to find names like Kramnik,
Nakamura, Bruzon, Nisipeanu and Rodshtein on the Black side.

12.Qc1
As usual, Black has two possibilities to defend the h6-pawn:

12...g5
12...Kh7 13.a5!?
This has only occurred in one computer game.
13...Nh5
White is ready for 13...Ne4?! 14.Nxe4 Rxe4 15.Nd2! Rxe2 16.Nc4 Bf8 17.Qc3± with complete domination.
14.Bd2 Nd7 15.Ra4
An exciting idea: by transferring the rook to h4, White obtains good chances on the kingside.
I believe the natural 15.e4N also should work for White.
15...f5 16.e4!
Just in time.
16...b5 17.axb6 Nxb6 18.exf5 Nxa4
18...Bxf5 19.Rh4 Bf6 20.Bxh6 Bxh4 21.Nxh4 would leave White with a nice initiative for the exchange.

19.fxg6† Kg8 20.Nxa4

White was clearly better in Naum 4.2 – Deep Junior, Internet 2012.

13.Be3
The same idea as in variation B without ...a6 and a2-a4 inserted.

13...Nbd7
13...Bf5 runs into the thematic 14.h4 Ng4 (14...g4 15.Nd2 Kh7 16.Nc4 is clearly better for White) 15.Bd2 gxh4
16.Nxh4 Bh7 17.Bh3± with an advantage for White.
14.h4

14...g4N
14...Ng4 15.Bd2 f6 16.a5 left White with an advantage in Houdini – Critter, Internet 2011.

15.Ne1
I like this more than 15.Nd2 Rxe3 16.fxe3 Ne5, when I think Black has compensation.

15...Kh7 16.Qc2† Kg8 17.Qd2 Kh7

White has improved his position and now is the right time to start play on the queenside:

18.a5 Ne5 19.Na4! Bf5 20.Nb6 Rb8 21.b4 Nfd7 22.Rc1!

White has seized the initiative.
 F2) 11...b6 12.Re1

12...Nh5
12...Ra7
This is often a thematic idea for Black in the Benoni, but somehow it doesn’t work properly for him here.
13.e4 Bg4
13...Rae7 14.Nd2! We will now follow an exemplary game by White: 14...Ng4 15.Nc4 Bd4 16.Rf1 (16.Re2!?N
also looks okay) 16...Ne5 17.Nxe5 Bxe5 18.Bg5! f6 19.Be3 Rb7?! 20.f4 Bxc3 21.bxc3 f5 22.e5! dxe5 23.fxe5
Rxe5 24.Bf4 Re8 25.Re1 White had a decisive advantage in Kaidanov – Vazquez, Andorra 1991.

14.Qd2N
This looks like a strong improvement over 14.e5, which happened in Sosonko – Seirawan, Lone Pine 1979. Black
 could have equalized comfortably with: 14...dxe5N 15.Rxe5 Rxe5 16.Bxe5 Rd7=
14...Rae7
14...Bxf3 is a positional concession. 15.Bxf3 Rae7 stops e4-e5, but now White can switch to the queenside:
16.Rab1! With the idea of b2-b4. White looks clearly better to me, as Black cannot place either of his knights on
d7 due to his d6-pawn.
15.e5 Bxf3
Or 15...Nh5 16.Bg5 f6 17.exf6 Bxf6 18.Rxe7 Rxe7 19.Bxf6 Nxf6 20.Ng5! with a clear advantage.
16.exf6
The next sequence is almost forced:
16...Rxe1† 17.Rxe1 Rxe1† 18.Qxe1 Bxg2 19.fxg7 Bh3 20.Ne4 Nd7 21.f3
Black looks to be in some danger.

13.Bg5 Qc7 14.e4 Nd7

14...h6 15.Be3 Nd7 16.h3 Qb8 17.Qd2 Kh7
Here I found a new move:

18.Rab1N
18.g4 Nhf6 19.Rab1 (19.Bf4N was better) 19...h5! surprisingly gave Black some counterplay in Michalik –
Olszewski, Livigno 2011.
18...Bb7
After 18...Qc7 White has 19.Rec1! renewing his threat.
19.b4 Qc7 20.bxc5 bxc5 21.Qc2 Rab8 22.Nd2
White has a pleasant edge.
15.h3 Bb7
It appears that playing for ...b6-b5 does not work, for example: 15...Rb8 16.g4 Nhf6 17.Bf4! b5 18.axb5 axb5 19.Bf1
c4 20.Nd4± Black is in trouble.

16.Qc2 Nhf6 17.Nd2

Black is too passive here with his bishop on b7.

17...Re7 18.Nc4 Ne5 19.Ne3! c4

White is dominating, and this attempt at counterplay failed due to:

20.f4 Nd3 21.e5! dxe5 22.Bxf6 exf4

22...Bxf6 23.Ne4 wins material.
23.Bxe7 Qxe7 24.d6! Qxd6 25.Bxb7 fxe3 26.Bxa8 Qxg3† 27.Qg2 Qf2† 28.Kh1 Nxe1 29.Qxf2 exf2 30.Bg2
White emerged from the complications with a winning position in Beecham – Deneuville, corr. 2013.

F3) 11...Qe7 12.Re1 Nbd7

12...Bg4 13.Nd2 Nh5 14.Be3 Bf5 was played in Matnadze – Kovacevic, Pedrido 2004, when White should have
continued:

15.Bf3!N Black is forced to retreat with 15...Nf6 after which White’s play is simple. 16.Bf4 Nbd7 17.e4 Bh3 18.Nc4
Ne5 19.Bxe5 dxe5 20.a5 with a clear positional advantage.
13.h3
An important prophylactic move, since the immediate 13.e4 would run into the thematic 13...Ng4 followed by
...Nge5. Now Black has two main possibilities:

13...Nh5
13...Rb8 14.e4 Nh5
Black has to stop 15.e5.
15.Bg5

15...Qf8
15...Bf6 allows White to break through in the centre with great effect: 16.e5! dxe5 (16...Nxe5 17.Nxe5 dxe5 was
Shumiakina – Art. Minasian, Cappelle la Grande 1995, and now 18.Be3!N 18...Bg7 19.d6 Qd8 20.a5! would
have been excellent for White.) 17.d6 Qf8 (17...Qd8 18.Qd2! is no fun for Black either) 18.Nd5! Bxg5 19.Nxg5
 Qxd6 20.Ne4 Qf8 21.g4 f5 22.gxf5 Ndf6! The only defensive idea which allows Black to stay in the game, but
White retains an initiative after 23.Ndxf6† Nxf6 24.Nd6! Rd8 25.Qb3† Kg7 26.Nxc8 c4 27.Qg3 Rdxc8
28.Rxe5± as in Solan – Sirius, Internet 2008.
Now the following idea is quite strong:
16.g4 Nhf6 17.Bf4!
Black cannot really do much against the oncoming e4-e5.
17...h5
Or 17...b5 18.axb5 axb5 19.e5 dxe5 20.Nxe5 Nxe5 21.Rxe5 Bd7 22.Rxe8 Rxe8 23.d6± and White was clearly
better thanks to his strong passed pawn in Drasko – Cebalo, Budva 1986.
18.e5 dxe5 19.Nxe5 hxg4 20.Nxg4! Nxg4
We have been following Shengelia – Krebs, Graz 2005, and now White should continue with:

21.Qxg4N 21...Nf6 22.Qh4±

White retains a clear advantage.

14.Bg5 Qf8
14...Bf6 has been seen several times, but after 15.Bxf6 Qxf6 16.Nd2 Qe7 as in Decroix – Sellos, Torcy 1991, White
should play 17.e4N seizing space. He needn’t worry about 17...Ne5, as 18.Re3! covers the d3-square and prepares to
follow up with f2-f4.

15.e4 Ne5
Black’s most interesting reply.

15...h6 has also been played, but it’s not so attractive after 16.Be3 Nhf6 17.Nd2 Rb8 18.a5! b5 19.axb6 Nxb6 20.Qc2
Nh7. In Dautov – Cvitan, Switzerland 2004, White should have played:
21.Bf1!N Black’s operation on the queenside hasn’t achieved much, and he is left with a weak pawn on a6.

16.g4!
It’s the right time to push the black pieces back.

16...h6 17.Bd2 Nxf3†

17...Nf6 18.Nxe5 Rxe5 19.f4 Re8 20.a5! also looks enjoyable for White.

18.Qxf3 Nf6 19.e5! Nd7

19...dxe5 20.Bxh6! shows the point of White’s idea: 20...Bxh6 21.Qxf6 Bg7 22.Qb6 White is clearly better, thanks to
his powerful d-pawn.

20.exd6 Ne5 21.Qg3 Nc4 22.Rxe8 Qxe8 23.Re1 Qd8 24.Bc1 Nxd6
 This was Prohaszka – Polzin, Germany 2010, and now a clear improvement over the game would be:

25.Be3!N
With the following instructive lines:

25...c4
Or 25...b6 26.a5 bxa5 27.Bxc5 Bf8 28.Bd4 Bg7 29.Bxg7 Kxg7 30.Ne4 Nxe4 31.Bxe4±.

26.Bc5 Bf8 27.a5±

White holds a clear advantage in both cases.

F4) 11...Bg4

An aggressive idea.
12.Nd2 Nh5 13.Be3 Nd7
A logical follow-up from Black. The exchange sacrifice 13...Rxe3 14.fxe3 Qe7 doesn’t really work: 15.Nc4 Nd7
16.h3 Nxg3 17.hxg4 Nxf1 18.Qxf1 Ne5 19.Nxe5 Bxe5 20.Qf3 Black’s compensation is insufficient.

14.h3 Nxg3
Another sacrificial idea, 14...Bxh3 15.Bxh3 Nxg3, hardly works in view of: 16.fxg3 Rxe3 17.Rf3! Bd4 (or 17...Re7
18.Nc4 Ne5 19.Nxe5 Bxe5 20.Qc2 followed by Raf1) 18.Rxe3 Bxe3† 19.Kg2 Ne5 20.Nf3 Qe7 21.Qb3 In both cases
Black’s compensation is not enough.

15.hxg4 Nxf1
Here I would prefer to recapture with the queen, but the knight recapture isn’t bad either.
16.Qxf1
16.Nxf1 Qh4 (better would have been 16...Ne5 17.g5 Nc4, but I still prefer White after 18.Bc1 b5 19.Qc2²) was
Santos – Amore, Rome 1991, and now White missed a simple idea:

17.Ne4!N 17...Be5 18.g5!± With a clear advantage.

16...Qh4
16...Nf6 runs into 17.g5 Ng4 18.Bf4 Be5 19.Bxe5 Rxe5 20.f4 and White is much better.
17.Nce4! Be5N
Two correspondence games continued 17...Qxg4 18.Nxd6±.
18.f4 Bxb2 19.Rb1 Bg7 20.g5!
White has excellent prospects.

F5) 11...Nh5 12.Bg5 Qc7

If 12...Qb6 then I like 13.Qc2, keeping the d2-square for the bishop or knight. 13...Nd7 14.e4 Qc7 occurred in Lastin –
Akopian, Sochi 2005, and here I found the following idea for White:

15.Rfc1!?N 15...Rb8 (or 15...Ne5 16.Nxe5 Bxe5 17.Rab1 followed by 18.b4) 16.Rab1 White is ready to meet 16...b5
with 17.b4, with the better chances.
13.Qd2 Nd7
13...Bg4 occurred in Ashwin – G. Szabo, Golden Sands 2012. I believe White should continue 14.h3N 14...Bxf3
15.Bxf3 Nf6 16.a5 Nbd7 17.Rfc1 b5 18.axb6 Nxb6 19.b3 when he should enjoy a pleasant edge.

14.Rfc1
I like the idea of getting my rook to c1 while the black queen is on c7.

14...b6
This continuation will be our main move, but we will take a look at three other possibilities:

14...Rb8 15.Rab1 Qa5

15...b5 16.axb5 axb5 17.b4 Ba6 18.e4 leaves White with a nice edge.
15...Qb6 was Barczay – Lengyel, Budapest 1963. Here I would recommend 16.g4!?N 16...Nhf6 17.Qf4 when
 White seems to have a promising game, for instance: 17...Qb4 (if 17...h6 18.Bxh6 Bxh6 19.Qxh6 Nxg4 20.Qh4
Ngf6 21.Ng5 then White prepares a dangerous attack) 18.h3!² White has the better chances.
The text move occurred in Tan Zhongyi – Eljanov, Reykjavik 2013. It seems to me that now was the right
moment for:

16.g4!N 16...Nhf6 17.Qf4

The following sequence looks forced:
17...b5 18.axb5 axb5 19.b4 cxb4 20.Qxb4 Qxb4 21.Rxb4 Nc5 22.Nd4!
White will retain some pressure after:
22...Nxg4 23.Nc6 Rb7 24.Nxb5 Bf8 25.h3!²

14...Qa5 15.Bh6 Nhf6 16.Bxg7 Kxg7

This was Cernousek – Cyborowski, Prague 2014. I believe White missed an interesting opportunity here:
17.Ne4!?N 17...Qb6
17...Qxd2? 18.Nfxd2 is disastrous for Black, since his d6-pawn is falling.
18.Nfg5! h6 19.a5 Qc7 20.Nxf7! Kxf7 21.Qxh6
White has good compensation, for example:
21...Nxe4 22.Qh7† Kf8 23.Bxe4 Re7!
23...Rxe4? loses to 24.Ra3 Re5 25.Rf3† Rf5 26.Re3 Re5 27.Rc4!+–
24.Qxg6 Rg7 25.Qh6 Kg8 26.Qe6† Kf8 27.Qh6 Kg8 28.f4²
White’s pawn mass looks extremely dangerous.

15.Rab1 Ndf6
Black has also tried:
15...Ne5 16.Nxe5
16.b4 brought White success in Fedorowicz – Sevian, Montreal 2014, but I found a nice resource for Black:
16...Bf5!N 17.e4 Nxf3† 18.Bxf3 Bxc3 19.Qxc3 Bxe4 20.Bxh5 f6! With an unclear game.
16...Bxe5 17.b4 Bd7 18.a5!
Attacking Black’s structure on the queenside.
18...Rab8?
18...c4 is relatively best, but after 19.axb6 Qxb6 20.Be3 Qd8 21.f4 Bg7 22.Bd4 White is still better.
19.axb6 Rxb6 20.bxc5 Rxb1 21.Nxb1 dxc5 22.Na3±
White was clearly better in Hausner – Havranek, Czech Republic 1994.

16.h3 Ne4 17.Nxe4 Rxe4 18.b4

Everything has worked out nicely for White, and his pieces are all well placed.
18...a5
Otherwise 19.a5 would be very strong.

19.bxc5 bxc5 20.g4 Nf6 21.Nd4! Rxd4 22.Qxd4 Nxg4

We have been following Wang Yue – Vallejo Pons, Bejing 2011. White can improve with:

23.Qd1N 23...Ne5 24.Bd2 Bf5 25.Rb3 Bd7 26.Rg3

Black’s compensation does not seem sufficient.

F6) 11...Ne4 12.Nxe4 Rxe4 13.Nd2

A thematic reaction to Black’s ...Ne4-idea.

13...Rb4
One of the biggest differences now that ...a6 and a2-a4 have been inserted is that Black does not have 13...Rxf4?!
14.gxf4 Bxb2, since after 15.Rb1 Bg7 16.Nc4 the above-mentioned moves are clearly favourable for White. It is
important to note that after 16...b5 17.axb5 axb5 18.Rxb5 Ba6 (18...Na6 19.Rb6± was hopeless for Black in P.H.
Nielsen – Janssen, Germany 2010) White has 19.Ra5!±.

14.a5!?
When I first analysed this position the text move was a novelty, but nowadays theory develops rapidly and we have
two games where the text was employed. Nevertheless it is still a rare choice.

14...b5
Another encounter saw 14...g5 15.Be3 Nd7, when White reacted strongly with 16.Ne4!. Black came up with an
interesting approach in 16...Qf8 17.Bxg5 f5 18.Nd2 b5 19.axb6 Nxb6 when, by sacrificing a pawn on the kingside, he
started to develop play on the queenside. Still, White was better with accurate play: 20.Ra2 a5 21.b3 Bd7 22.Bf4 a4
23.bxa4 Raxa4 24.Qc2 Rxa2 25.Qxa2 Na4 26.Bf3!² Linkov – Solar, corr. 2012.

I believe it’s also important to consider both captures of the b2-pawn: 14...Bxb2 is strongly met by 15.Ra4! Rxa4
16.Qxa4 Be5 17.Bxe5 dxe5 18.Nc4 Nd7 19.d6 with strong pressure for the pawn.

14...Rxb2 is easily refuted by: 15.Nc4 Rb4 16.Ra4! Rxa4 17.Qxa4 Bf8 18.Qb3 Black has gained an extra pawn, but he
can hardly move.

15.axb6 a5 16.Ra4!
This move is a key idea of 14.a5 and is often a strong resource in this type of position.

16...Ba6
Black is striving for counterplay. 16...Rxb6 17.Nc4 Rba6 is too passive, and after 18.Qc2 White enjoys a positional
edge.
17.Rxb4!N
A clear improvement over Troff – Bryant, Saint Louis 2013, where after 17.Ne4 Rxb6 18.Bg5 f6 19.Bd2 Black could
have played:

19...f5N 20.Ng5 Rxb2 21.Ne6 Qe7 With a complex battle.

17...cxb4
White is clearly better also after 17...axb4 18.Ne4 Qxb6 19.Qa4!.

18.b7
There is nothing wrong with 18.Ne4 either.
18...Bxb7 19.Ne4 Ra6 20.Qd2
Despite the equal material, Black’s position is almost lost. One sample line is:

20...a4 21.Qxb4 Bxd5 22.Nf6† Bxf6 23.Bxd5

Black is having a torrid time here.

Conclusion

This chapter saw us move in a completely different direction to GM 2, as I am now recommending the more positional
10.Bf4. Black has a wide range of options at this point, but I am satisfied that White is doing well against each of them.

The main bulk of the chapter was devoted to 10...Na6 and 10...a6. Against the former I recommend 11.Re1 – again
leaving Black with a choice. I was initially concerned by 11...Bf5, but a recent correspondence game has convinced me
that White stands well. Another important point occurs after 11...Bg4, when White should force the immediate
exchange of bishops with 12.h3. Black’s other moves lead to rich and interesting play, but on many occasions White
will be left with a powerful pawn mass in the centre.

10...a6 is our main line, when 11.a4 immediately leads to another branching point. After 11...Ne4 12.Nxe4 Rxe4
13.Nd2 it is important to understand here why the insertion of ...a6 and a2-a4 prevents the exchange sacrifice ...Rxf4.
There is a wealth of new material in this section and I hope that the readers – armed with a variety of novelties and
improvements – will enjoy a great deal of success in their upcoming battles against the Benoni.
Variation Index

Chapter 1
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3
A) 4...g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Qc2
A1) 7...Nc6
A2) 7...Na6
A3) 7...Nbd7
B) 4...c6 5.Bg2 Nbd7 6.0-0 Bd6 7.Nfd2! 0-0 8.Nc3
B1) 8...Re8
B2) 8...Bb4
C) 4...c5 5.Bg2
C1) 5...Be7
C2) 5...Nc6 6.0-0
C21) 6...Be7
C22) 6...cxd4

Chapter 2
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 Bd7 6.Ne5 Bc6 7.Nxc6 Nxc6 8.0-0
A) 8...Be7
B) 8...Nd5!?
C) 8...Qd7 9.e3
C1) 9...Rb8
C2) 9...0-0-0

Chapter 3
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 c6 6.Ne5
A) 6...b5 7.Nxc6 Qb6 8.Na5!
A1) 8...Qxa5†
A2) 8...Nd5 9.Bd2
A21) 9...a6
 A22) 9...Nc6 10.Nxc6 Qxc6 11.e4
A221) 11...Nb4
A222) 11...Nf6
B) 6...Bb4† 7.Bd2!
B1) 7...Be7 8.e3
B11) 8...0-0
B12) 8...b5
B2) 7...Qxd4 8.Bxb4 Qxe5 9.Na3 b5 10.Bd6! Qxb2 11.0-0 Nd5 12.e4 Nc3 13.Qh5!
B21) 13...Nd7
B22) 13...h6!?

Chapter 4
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 Bb4† 6.Bd2
A) 6...Bxd2†
B) 6...c5
C) 6...Be7
D) 6...a5 7.Qc2
D1) 7...Nc6
D2) 7...Bxd2† 8.Qxd2 c6 9.a4
D21) 9...Ne4
D22) 9...b5

Chapter 5
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 Nbd7 6.0-0
A) 6...c5
B) 6...c6
C) 6...a6
D) 6...Rb8
E) 6...Be7
F) 6...Nb6 7.Nbd2 c5 8.Nxc4 Nxc4 9.Qa4† Bd7 10.Qxc4
F1) 10...Qb6
F2) 10...Rc8
F3) 10...b5
Chapter 6
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 c5 6.0-0

A) 6...cxd4 7.Nxd4
A1) 7...Qb6
A2) 7...Bc5
A3) 7...a6!?
B) 6...Nc6 7.Qa4 cxd4 8.Nxd4 Qxd4 9.Bxc6† Bd7 10.Rd1
B1) 10...Bxc6
B2) 10...Qxd1† 11.Qxd1 Bxc6 12.Nd2
B21) 12...c3?!
B22) 12...b5
Chapter 7
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 c5 6.0-0 Nc6 7.Qa4 Bd7 8.Qxc4
A) 8...Rc8
B) 8...Qb6 9.dxc5
B1) 9...Bxc5 10.Nc3
B11) 10...Na5
B12) 10...Qb4
B2) 9...Qxc5 10.Na3
B21) 10...Be7
B22) 10...Rc8
C) 8...b5 9.Qd3
C1) 9...c4
C2) 9...Rc8 10.dxc5 Bxc5 11.Nc3
C21) 11...0-0
C22) 11...Nb4
C23) 11...b4
D) 8...cxd4 9.Nxd4 Rc8 10.Nc3
D1) 10...Qb6
D2) 10...Be7
D3) 10...Nxd4 11.Qxd4 Bc5 12.Qh4
 D31) 12...Bc6
D32) 12...0-0

Chapter 8
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 a6 6.0-0 b5 7.Ne5
A) 7...c6
B) 7...Nd5 8.a4 Bb7 9.e4 Nf6 10.axb5 axb5 11.Rxa8 Bxa8 12.Nc3 c6 13.d5
B1) 13...cxd5
B2) 13...Bd6
B3) 13...exd5
B4) 13...Be7 14.dxe6 fxe6 15.Qe2 0-0 16.Bh3
B41) 16...Kh8
B42) 16...Qc8

Chapter 9
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 b5 6.a4 c6 7.axb5 cxb5 8.Ne5 Nd5 9.0-0!
Bb7 10.b3! cxb3 11.Qxb3 a6 12.e4
A) 12...Nf6 13.d5
A1) 13...Bd6
A2) 13...exd5
B) 12...Nb4N

Chapter 10
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 a6 6.0-0 Nc6 7.e3
A) 7...Nd5
B) 7...Rb8 8.Nfd2
B1) 8...Qd7
B2) 8...e5 9.Bxc6† bxc6 10.dxe5 Ng4 11.Nxc4 Be6 12.Nbd2
B21) 12...h5
B22) 12...Bb4
C) 7...Bd7 8.Qe2 b5 9.b3!? cxb3 10.axb3
C1) 10...Bb4
C2) 10...Be7
C3) 10...Bd6 11.Bb2 0-0 12.Rc1
 C31) 12...Nb4
C32) 12...Nd5

Chapter 11
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.Bg2 Nc6 6.Qa4
A) 6...Bd6
B) 6...Bd7 7.Qxc4 Na5 8.Qd3 c5 9.0-0
B1) 9...Qb6
B2) 9...Rc8
B3) 9...Bc6 10.Nc3
B31) 10...cxd4
B32) 10...Be7
C) 6...Nd7 7.Qxc4 Nb6 8.Qb5!
C1) 8...Bb4†
C2) 8...Bd7
C3) 8...a6 9.Qd3
C31) 9...Nb4
C32) 9...e5
D) 6...Bb4† 7.Bd2
D1) 7...Bd6 8.Na3
D11) 8...Ne4
D12) 8...Bxa3
D2) 7...Nd5 8.Qb5!?
D21) 8...0-0
D22) 8...Bxd2†

Chapter 12
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 Bb4† 5.Bd2
A) 5...c5
B) 5...Bxd2† 6.Nbxd2 0-0 7.Bg2
B1) 7...Qe7
B2) 7...b6
B3) 7...c6
C) 5...Bd6 6.Nc3!
C1) 6...c6
C2) 6...0-0

Chapter 13
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 Bb4† 5.Bd2 Be7 6.Bg2 0-0 7.0-0
A) 7...dxc4?!
B) 7...Nbd7
C) 7...c6 8.Qc2 b6 9.Bf4
C1) 9...Ba6 10.cxd5 cxd5 11.Rc1! Nbd7 12.Nc3
C11) 12...Nh5
C12) 12...b5
C2) 9...Bb7 10.Rd1
C21) 10...Nh5
C22) 10...Na6

Chapter 14
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 Bb4† 5.Bd2 Be7 6.Bg2 0-0 7.0-0 c6 8.Qc2 Nbd7 9.Bf4
A) 9...Nh5
B) 9...a5 10.Rd1 Nh5 11.Bc1
B1) 11...f5
B2) 11...b5
C) 9...b6 10.Rd1
C1) 10...Ba6 11.Ne5
C11) 11...Qc8
C12) 11...Nxe5
C13) 11...Rc8 12.cxd5!
C131) 12...Nxd5
C132) 12...cxd5 13.Nc6
C1321) 13...Qe8
C1322) 13...Bb5
C1323) 13...Nh5
C2) 10...Bb7 11.Ne5!
 C21) 11...Nxe5
C22) 11...Nh5
C23) 11...b5
C24) 11...Rc8 12.Nc3 Nh5 13.Bc1
C241) 13...f5
C242) 13...Nhf6

Chapter 15
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.0-0
A) 6...c6
B) 6...Nbd7 7.Qc2
B1) 7...b6 8.cxd5
B11) 8...Nxd5
B12) 8...exd5
B2) 7...c6 8.Nbd2 b6 9.e4
B21) 9...dxe4
B22) 9...Bb7 10.e5 Ne8 11.cxd5
B221) 11...exd5
B222) 11...cxd5 12.Re1
B2221) 12...Ba6
B2222) 12...Qc7
B2223) 12...Rc8
B23) 9...Ba6 10.b3 Rc8 11.Bb2 c5 12.exd5 exd5 13.Rfd1!
B231) 13...Re8
B232) 13...cxd4

Chapter 16
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Nf3 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.0-0 dxc4 7.Qc2
A) 7...c5
B) 7...Bd7 8.Qxc4 Bc6 9.Nc3
B1) 9...a6
B2) 9...Nbd7
C) 7...b5!?
D) 7...a6 8.a4
D1) 8...b6
D2) 8...c5
D3) 8...Nc6
D4) 8...Bd7 9.Qxc4 Bc6 10.Bf4
D41) 10...Nd5
D42) 10...Bd6
D43) 10...Nbd7 11.Nc3
D431) 11...Bd6
D432) 11...Rc8
D433) 11...Nb6
D44) 10...a5 11.Nc3 Na6 12.Rac1! Nb4 13.Ne5 Bxg2 14.Kxg2 Nfd5 15.Nxd5
D441) 15...Qxd5†
D442) 15...Nxd5 16.Bd2
D4421) 16...Bb4
D4422) 16...c6

Chapter 17
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 Bb4† 4.Bd2
A) 4...Be7
B) 4...c5 5.Bxb4 cxb4 6.Bg2
B1) 6...d5
B2) 6...0-0 7.e4 d6 8.Ne2 e5 9.a3
B21) 9...bxa3
B22) 9...Na6
B23) 9...Qb6 10.0-0
B231) 10...Nc6
B232) 10...Bg4

Chapter 18
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 Bb4† 4.Bd2
A) 5.Qxd2 d5 6.Nf3 0-0 7.Bg2 Nbd7 8.0-0
A1) 8...dxc4
 A2) 8...c6
B) 5.Nxd2
B1) 5...d6
B2) 5...Nc6

Chapter 19
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 Bb4† 4.Bd2 a5 5.Bg2
A) 5...d6
B) 5...0-0 6.e4
B1) 6...d5
B2) 6...d6
C) 5...d5 6.Nf3 0-0 7.Qc2
C1) 7...b6
C2) 7...c6
C3) 7...Nc6
C4) 7...c5

Chapter 20
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 Bb4† 4.Bd2 Qe7 5.Nf3
A) 5...Bxd2† 6.Qxd2
A1) 6...d5 7.Bg2 0-0 8.0-0
A11) 8...dxc4
A12) 8...Rd8
A13) 8...Nbd7
A2) 6...Nc6 7.Nc3 d5 8.Ne5 dxc4 9.Bg2 Nxe510.dxe5 Nd7 11.Qd4
A21) 11...Qb4
A22) 11...0-0
B) 5...b6 6.Bg2 Bb7 7.0-0
B1) 7...0-0
B2) 7...Bxd2 8.Qxd2
B21) 8...d6
B22) 8...d5
B23) 8...0-0
C) 5...0-0 6.Bg2 Bxd2† 7.Qxd2 d6 8.Nc3 e5 9.0-0
C1) 9...Nc6
C2) 9...c6
C3) 9...Bg4
C4) 9...Re8

Chapter 21
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 Bb4† 4.Bd2 Qe7 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Nc3
A) 6...d5
B) 6...0-0 7.Bg2
B1) 7...d6 8.0-0
B11) 8...a5 9.Rc1
B111) 9...e5
B112) 9...Bxc3
B113) 9...Bd7
B12) 8...Bxc3
B2) 7...Na5 8.b3 b6 9.0-0 Bb7 10.Qc2
B21) 10...d5
B22) 10...Rac8
C) 6...Bxc3 7.Bxc3 Ne4 8.Rc1
C1) 8...d6 9.d5! Nxc3 10.Rxc3
C11) 10...Nd8
C12) 10...Nb8
C2) 8...0-0 9.Bg2 d6 10.d5
C21) 10...Nb8 11.dxe6
C211) 11...fxe6
C212) 11...Bxe6
C22) 10...Nd8 11.0-0
C221) 11...Nxc3
C222) 11...e5 12.Nd2 Nxc3 13.Rxc3
C2221) 13...b6
C2222) 13...f5 14.c5 Nf7 15.Qb3 b6 16.cxd6 cxd6 17.Qa3
 C22221) 17...Bb7
C22222) 17...e4
C22223) 17...a5

Chapter 22
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 b5 6.e4 Nxe4 7.Bg2!? Nd6 8.Nf3
A) 8...Qe7†
B) 8...Be7 9.0-0 0-0 10.Bf4
B1) 10...Re8
B2) 10...Nc4!?
B3) 10...Na6 11.Re1 Bb7 12.Nc3
B31) 12...Re8
B32) 12...Nc7
B33) 12...b4

Chapter 23
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 Bd6 6.Bg2
A) 6...Bc7
B) 6...0-0 7.Nc3
B1) 7...Be5
B2) 7...Re8

Chapter 24
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.Nc3 g6 7.Bg2 Bg7 8.Nf3 0-0 9.0-0
A) 9...Bg4
B) 9...b6
C) 9...Na6 10.Bf4 Nc7 11.e4
C1) 11...Bg4
C2) 11...Ng4
D) 9...Nbd7
E) 9...a6 10.a4 Nbd7 11.Bf4
E1) 11...Ne8
E2) 11...Qc7
E3) 11...Qe7 12.Rb1!
 E31) 12...Nh5
E32) 12...Ng4

Chapter 25
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.Nc3 g6 7.Bg2 Bg7 8.Nf3 0-0 9.0-0 Re8
10.Bf4
A) 10...Bg4
B) 10...h6
C) 10...Nh5
D) 10...Ne4 11.Nxe4 Rxe4 12.Nd2
D1) 12...Rb4
D2) 12...Rxf4 13.gxf4 Bxb2 14.Rb1 Bg7 15.e4
D21) 15...Qh4
D22) 15...Nd7
E) 10...Na6 11.Re1
E1) 11...Bf5
E2) 11...Bg4
E3) 11...Nc7
E4) 11...Nh5
E5) 11...Ne4
F) 10...a6 11.a4
F1) 11...h6
F2) 11...b6
F3) 11...Qe7
F4) 11...Bg4
F5) 11...Nh5
F6) 11...Ne4