CVO_128.pdf

No. 128, June 15, 2011

OPENINGS

WHAT'S HOT AND WHAT'S NOT?

XIIIIIIIIY

9RSN-+-TRK+0

9ZPP+-+P+-0

9-+-+-+-ZP0

9WQ-ZPPVLLZP-0

9-VL-SNN+-+0

9+-SN-ZP-+-0

9PZPQ+-ZPPZP0

9TR-+-MKL+R0

XIIIIIIIIY

More Queen's

Gambit Declined

By IM Merijn van Delft & IM Robert Ris

Frequency

At the Kings Tournament in Bazna (where Carlsen

leads), Sigeman (where Tikkanen was the surprise

package) and the Ukrainian Championship (where

Ponomariov leads) the Queen's Gambit Declined was

still the hit of the day.

WHAT’S HOT?

Score

Karjakin-Nakamura showed that 6.¥e3 ¤g4 in the Najdorf is still considered

playable for Black at the highest level. Hector-Tikkanen was another 6.f4

Taimanov (see last week). Anand's use of the Caro-Kann has given a

popularity boost to the opening. In Volokitin-Ponomariov, Black was solid

in the Advance Variation and below we'll discuss how Black is doing in the

traditional main line.

The QGD continues to be the hottest opening in elite tournaments at the

moment, but White is starting to win some games, including the most

prominent encounter, Carlsen-Nakamura. More can be found on p.3.

Tikkanen's Slav Defence against Shirov was remarkably tough, while

Hector scored 0.5 out of 2 against Shirov and Giri. So couldn't beat Giri, but

did beat Shirov in the Semi-Slav (see the PGN).

After Grandelius lost his game against Tikkanen in the first round with the

Nimzo-Indian, he hit back against So in our Game of the Week . In the

diagram position Black went for 13...¦e8. In Eljanov-Volokitin White chose

a non-theoretical approach for a change (1.d4 2.¤f3 3.¥g5) and got nice

play (guess one of the key moves on p. 4).

Source: Megabase + TWIC, 2500+ only

When a diehard King's Indian player like Radjabov switches to the QGD we can safely conclude that the King's Indian is not particularly

hot at the moment. While Radjabov played the QGD consistently at the Candidate Matches, in Bazna he switched back to his beloved

opening, but suffered a defeat against Ivanchuk (see below). That made him return to the

QGD against Carlsen, and successfully so. Ponomariov-Korobov was another White victory

in the KID (in the main line).

WHAT'S NOT?

1 of 4

ChessVibes OPENINGS what’s hot and what’s not?

No. 128, June 15, 2011

Attack and counterattack

In this sharp theoretical debate between the young and talented grandmasters So and

Grandelius, the big question was who was attacking who. In the end it was the white king

that got checkmated.

GAME OF THE WEEK

Charochkina-Kosteniuk, Tbilisi 2011.

17...¢f8

17...¢g7? enables the ¤ to retreat with gain of

time: 18.¤f5+ ¢f6 19.¤d4! and White is on top.

18.¥d3 ¦bc8 19.£e2 ¦xc5 20.£h5

The last couple of moves justify White ’ s novelty

17.¤xh6 as he is simply threatening mate on f7.

20...£a4+ 21.b3?

Seriously weakening the dark squares. White

should have opted for 21.¢e2 ¦c2+ 22.¢f1

(22.¥xc2? leads to mate after 22...£xc2+ 23.¢f3

£xf2+ 24.¢g4 £xg2+ 25.¢f5 ¤d6+ 26.¢f6

¦e6#) 22...¦xf2+ 23.¢g1 ¥c5 24.¤g4 ¦f5 25.h4

£c6 and it seems Black is doing fine, even

though the position remains highly complicated.

21...£d7 22.¢e2 £e6!

An excellent £-manoeuvre. Black threatens

£f6, attacking both f2 and the vulnerable entry

point on b2.

23.¦ac1 £f6 24.¤g4 £b2+ 25.¢f3 ¦e6!

XIIIIIIIIY

9-+-+-MK-+0

9ZPP+-+P+-0

9-+-+R+-+0

9+-TRP+-ZPQ0

9-VL-+N+N+0

9+P+LZPK+-0

9PWQ-+-ZPPZP0

9+-TR-+-+R0

XIIIIIIIIY

Black's last piece joins the attack. White is

absolutely helpless against these powerful

forces.

26.¦xc5?

Leads to a forced mate. White ’ s other option is

26.¦cf1 though after 26...¦f6+ 27.¤xf6 £xf6+

28.¢e2 ¤c3+ 29.¢d2 ¤xa2+ 30.¢e2 ¤c3+

31.¢d2 ¦a5 he also ends up in a hopeless

situation.

26...¦f6+!

Forcing the ¤ to abandon the protection of the

pawn on f2.

27.¤xf6 £xf6+ 28.¢g4 £e6+ 29.¢f3 £f5+

30.¢e2 £xf2+ 31.¢d1 £d2# 0–1

So,W (2667) - Grandelius,N (2547)

Sigeman (Malmö), 12.06.2011

E35, Nimzo-Indian, 4.£c2 d5

15.£xf5 ¤e4+ 16.¢d1 ¦axb8 17.¥d3 ¥xc5

18.¤b3 £b6 19.¦c1 ¥f8 and in this complex

position Black certainly wasn ’ t worse: Inarkiev-

Yemelin, St Petersburg 2001.

15...¤e4+!

A very important intermediate check. In case

of the immediate recapture 15...¦axb8? White

gets a chance to get his ¥ out with 16.¥d3 ¤e4+

17.¢f1 and Black is in trouble, as White can

easily undermine Black ’ s weakened kingside.

16.¢d1

16.¢e2 isn ’ t recommended because of the

following example: 16...£a6+ 17.¢d1 £f6 18.f3

£xf5 19.fxe4 dxe4 20.¥d6 ¦ed8 21.¢e2 ¦ac8

22.£a4 ¦xc5 23.£xb4 ¦xd6 24.¢e1 a5 25.£xb7

¦f6 26.£b8+ ¢g7 27.£g3 ¦c2 28.¥e2 a4 29.b4

axb3 30.axb3 £d5 0–1 Ibrahimov-Mamedyarov,

Baku 2006.

16...¦axb8

XIIIIIIIIY

9-TR-+R+K+0

9ZPP+-+P+-0

9-+-+-+-ZP0

9WQ-ZPP+NZP-0

9-VL-+N+-+0

9+-+-ZP-+-0

9PZPQ+-ZPPZP0

9TR-+K+L+R0

XIIIIIIIIY

17.¤xh6+

So is the first to deviate in this tricky position. In

two other games Black did fine from a theoretical

point of view. 17.¥d3?! ¦bc8 18.¢e2 ¥xc5

19.¦hd1 was seen in Maiorov-Zhigalko,A Minsk

2009 and now Black should have proceeded

with 19...¤xf2! 20.¢xf2 ¥xe3+ 21.¤xe3 ¦xc2+

22.¤xc2 £b6+ and Black is better, since White ’ s

pieces lack coordination. 17.f3 ¦bc8 18.fxe4 dxe4

19.¥c4 ¦xc5? (19...£xc5! holds the balance.)

20.¤d4 b5 21.¥xf7+! ¢xf7 22.¦f1+ ¢g8 23.£f2

¦c7 24.£f5! and Black was in serious trouble in

1.c4 e6 2.¤c3 ¤f6 3.d4 ¥b4 4.£c2 d5 5.cxd5

exd5 6.¥g5 c5 7.dxc5

The main alternative is 7.¤f3 which has been

employed a couple of times recently by Dreev.

Some examples: 7...h6 8.¥h4 (8.¥xf6 £xf6

9.a3 ¥f5 10.£a4+ ¥d7 11.£b3 ¥xc3+ 12.£xc3

0–0 13.e3 ¦c8 14.¥e2 ¥g4 15.h3 ¥h5 16.0–0

¤d7 17.£b3 £d6 with equal chances in Dreev-

Riazantsev, Olginka 2011.) 8...g5 9.¥g3 ¤e4

10.dxc5 ¥f5 11.¤d4 ¤xg3 12.£a4+ £d7

13.£xd7+ ¥xd7 14.hxg3 ¤a6 15.¦c1 ¤xc5

16.a3 ¥xc3+ 17.¦xc3 ¤e4 18.¦c2 ¢e7 19.e3

¦ac8 20.¥d3 h5! was unproblematic for Black in

Dreev-Landa, Mulhouse 2011.

7...h6 8.¥h4 g5 9.¥g3 ¤e4 10.e3 £a5 11.¤ge2

¥f5 12.¥e5 0–0 13.¤d4 ¦e8

13...¤xc3 was recently played in Yu Yangyi-

Hou Yifan and covered in CVO 124. Apparently

Grandelius didn ’ t like that line for Black and

returned to the main line. Alternatives are

13...¥g6? 14.¤b3! ¤xc3 15.¥xc3 ¥xc2 16.¤xa5

¥xc3+ 17.bxc3 b6 18.¢d2 with a clear advantage

for White in Kasparov-Short, London 1993 while

13...¤d7 14.¤xf5 ¤xe5 15.¤e7+ ¢g7 16.¤exd5

¥xc3+ 17.bxc3 ¦ad8 18.¦d1 ¤f6 19.¤xf6 ¦xd1+

20.¢xd1 ¢xf6 21.¥e2 £xc5 22.¢c1 ¦c8 23.¢b2

£b6+ was seen in Kotanjian,T-Khalifman, Budva

2009 and now 24.¢a1 favors White.

14.¥xb8

14.¤xf5 ¦xe5 15.¤xh6+ ¢g7 16.¤g4 ¦e6

17.¥d3 was played in Kuljasevic-Kleiman,

Lubbock 2011 and instead of 17...¥xc3+? (Black

should have tried 17...¤xc3! 18.0–0 ¤e4 19.a3

£xc5 with approximate equality.)

14...¤xc3

14...¥g6 15.¥d3 (15.¥c7?! £xc7 16.¥d3 ¥xc5

17.¥xe4 dxe4 18.0–0–0 ¦ac8 and Black seized

the initiative in Bareev-Topalov, Monte Carlo

2004 ) 15...¦axb8 16.0–0 £xc5 17.¦ac1 ¦ec8

and now 18.£e2! would have given White an

advantage in Atalik-Short, Sarajevo 2004.

15.¤xf5

SO - GRANDELIUS

2 of 4

ChessVibes OPENINGS what’s hot and what’s not?

No. 128, June 15, 2011

THIS WEEK'S HARVEST

Caro-Kann, main line

XIIIIIIIIY

9R+-WQ-TRK+0

9ZPP+-VLPZP-0

9-+P+PSN-ZP0

9+-+-+-+P0

9-+-ZP-+P+0

9+-+Q+N+-0

9PZPPVL-ZP-+0

9+-MKR+-+R0

XIIIIIIIIY

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.¤c3 dxe4 4.¤xe4 ¥f5 5.¤g3 ¥g6 6.h4 h6 7.¤f3 ¤d7 8.h5 ¥h7

9.¥d3 ¥xd3 10.£xd3 e6 11.¥d2 ¤gf6 12.0–0–0 ¥e7 13.¤e4 0–0 14.¤xf6+ ¤xf6 15.g4

Slowly but surely, it's becoming clear that the Advance Variation may very well be the critical course for White

against the Caro-Kann (even though ¥f5 is outside the pawn chain). The paradox is that the Advance Variation

against the French is considered less critical (even though ¥d7 is inside the pawn chain). In the traditional main

line of the Caro-Kann, on the other hand, Black is currently finding new ideas other than the tension-releasing

...c5 central break to defend against White's kingside attack. As we mentioned in CVO 63, the tricky variation with

13.£e2 0–0 14.¤f1!? with the idea of pushing the g-pawn, is well answered by 14...¤b6! 15.¢b1 ¤a4 provoking

16.b3 ¤b6 followed by pushing the a-pawn. Pikula-Berkes, played this week, is a further example of Black's

excellent counterattacking chances in that line. In the diagram position, which appeared this week in Efimenko-

Kovchan, Black played the surprising 15...¤h7!?. This move certainly appears very passive, but holding back g5

followed by a quick central break with c5 appears to be another defensive tool for Black.

QGD, Lasker

XIIIIIIIIY

9-+-+RTR-MK0

9ZP-+NWQ-ZP-0

9-ZP-+P+-ZP0

9+-ZP-+P+-0

9-+-ZP-WQ-+0

9+-TR-ZPN+-0

9PZP-+-ZPPZP0

9+-+-+RMK-0

XIIIIIIIIY

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.¤f3 ¤f6 4.¤c3 ¥e7 5.¥g5 h6 6.¥h4 0–0 7.e3 ¤e4 8.¥xe7 £xe7 9.¦c1 c6 10.¥e2 ¤xc3 11.¦xc3

¤d7 12.0–0 dxc4 13.¥xc4 b6 14.¥d3 c5 15.£c2 ¥b7 16.¥h7+ ¢h8 17.¥e4 ¥xe4 18.£xe4 f5 19.£f4 ¦ae8

Against 1.d4, the Queen's Gambit Declined seems to be the ultimate drawing weapon. During the Candidates,

white players failed to pose Black serious problems, while Carlsen couldn't do so either this week against a well-

prepared Radjabov. His 13...£e7, instead of the more common 13...£d6, seems to equalize comfortably for Black.

Ponomariov stuck to the former main line 5.¥g5, but was caught out by an inventive idea of Miroshnichenko's. In a

well-known position, the latter deviated from the normal path with 18...f5!? (18...¤f6 doesn't fully equalize). Black

seriously weakens his pawn formation, but gains some time by chasing the £ from its central post. In the diagram

position, Pono went for 20.¦d1, anticipating the opening of the d-file. However, it's obvious Black doesn't have a

better plan (e.g. if the ¤ moves from d7, then White's ¤ jumps to e5) and executed this thrust anyway. After mass

exchanges, White's ¦ entered on the 7th rank, but Black had foreseen he could counter with 24...f4! With 30...¦dxf2

Black blundered away a drawn endgame, while 30...¢g8 would have been correct.

QGD, Exchange, 5.¥f4

XIIIIIIIIY

9R+-+-TRK+0

9ZP-+NVLPZP-0

9-+P+-SNP+0

9WQ-+-+-+-0

9NZP-ZPPVL-ZP0

9+-+-+-+-0

9PZPQ+N+P+0

9+K+R+-+R0

XIIIIIIIIY

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.¤c3 ¥e7 4.cxd5 exd5 5.¥f4 c6 6.£c2 ¥g4 7.e3 ¥h5 8.¥d3 ¥g6 9.¥xg6 hxg6

10.0–0–0 ¤f6 11.f3 ¤bd7 12.¤ge2 b5 13.e4 b4 14.¤a4 dxe4 15.fxe4 £a5 16.¢b1 0–0 17.h4

In order to avoid a quick exchange of pieces in the QGD and maintain tension in the position, White may well be

advised to play the move order 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.¤c3, in other words, to avoid ¤f3. After 3...¤f6 4.cxd5 exd5 5.¥g5

White can subsequently play ¤ge2 instead of ¤f3 and follow the central strategy with f3 and e4, which is often more

powerful than the alternative strategy of a minority attack with b4-b5. After 3...¥e7 4.cxd5 exd5 5.¥f4 c6 (5...¤f6

is an important alternative, which was Black's choice in Tikkanen-So this week) 6.£c2 White can often follow the

same central strategy with f3 and e4. The model games we've selected are Topalov-Lputian, Batumi 1999 (in the

6...¤f6 variation), Izoria-Sturua, Dubai 2006 (after 6...g6 7.f3!) and Kasparov-Karpov, Valencia rapid 2009 (in the

6...¥d6 variation). And, of course, our main game, Carlsen-Nakamura, in the 6...¥g4 variation, which led to the

diagram position where White has great attacking chances. 10.0–0–0!? was actually a novelty. The critical line may

be 12...¤h5!? 13.¥e5 ¤b6 14.g4 ¤f6 followed by ¤c4.

King's Indian, Averbakh

XIIIIIIIIY

9R+-+-TRK+0

9+PWQ-ZPPVLP0

9-+-ZPLSNP+0

9+-SN-+P+-0

9P+P+P+-VL0

9+PSN-+L+-0

9P+-WQN+PZP0

9+-+R+RMK-0

XIIIIIIIIY

1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 g6 3.¤c3 ¥g7 4.e4 d6 5.¥e2 0–0 6.¥g5 ¤a6 7.f4 c6 8.£d2 ¤c7 9.¥f3

¤e6 10.¥h4 c5 11.dxc5 ¤xc5 12.¦d1 ¥e6 13.b3 a5 14.¤ge2 £c7 15.0–0 a4 16.f5

Lately, almost any possible line has been tried to deal with the KID, mainly because the Bayonet (main line 9.b4)

doesn't offer White the desired effect. The Averbakh system with 5.¥e2 and 6.¥g5 isn't a popular choice, but it's

certainly not without venom. White purposefully delays the development of his king's ¤, leaving open the option of

occupying the centre with his f-pawn. In the last couple of years Radjabov has tried several setups and this time

he went for 6...¤a6. After 7.f4 c6 8.£d2 ¤c7, Ivanchuk came up with the relatively unexplored idea of transferring

his ¥ to the long diagonal rather than automatically playing 9.¤f3. White's idea is to exert more pressure on the

central light squares, by threatening a timely e4-e5. Caught off guard, Radjabov failed to find an adequate answer

and quickly went astray with 14...£c7? and 15...a4?, allowing White to execute a thematic offensive with 16.f5! The

game is practically over at that point, even though it took Ivanchuk 19 more moves to bring home the full point.

3 of 4

ChessVibes OPENINGS what’s hot and what’s not?

No. 128, June 15, 2011

IT'S YOUR MOVE

XIIIIIIIIY

9-+-TRKVL-TR0

9+-ZP-+PZP-0

9-ZP-+-+-+0

9ZP-ZPRZPN+P0

9-+-+NZP-+0

9+P+-+-+-0

9PVLP+-+PZP0

9+-+-TR-MK-0

XIIIIIIIIY

9R+-+-TRK+0

9ZPP+-ZPPVL-0

9-WQN+-+-ZP0

9+-+P+LZP-0

9-+-ZP-+-+0

9WQPZP-ZPNZP-0

9-+-SNLZPP+0

9TR-+-+RMK-0

XIIIIIIIIY

LAST WEEK'S SOLUTIONS

XIIIIIIIIY

9R+L+K+-TR0

9ZPP+-+P+-0

9-+NWQ-+-ZP0

9+-+P+-ZP-0

9-+-ZP-+-+0

9+-+-ZP-+-0

9PTR-SN-ZPPZP0

9+-+QMKL+R0

XIIIIIIIIY

Riazantsev-Cornette, French Team Championship (Mulhouse) 2011

From a structural point of view, White has the better position. Black has to compensate for his weaknesses with

dynamic potential. The following move fits that strategy perfectly. 16...¥f5! 16...0–0?! is inaccurate, because of

17.¥d3!. 17.¦xb7 0–0 18.£a4 After 18.¥e2 Black generates counterplay by 18...¦ab8 19.¦xb8 ¦xb8 20.0–0 ¦b2.

18...¦fc8 18...¦ab8 is not so strong now, in view of 19.¦xb8 ¦xb8 20.¥b5. 19.¥e2 ¤d8! 20.¦b2 ¦c1+ 21.¥d1

¦ac8 22.¤b3 22.0–0? would fail to 22...¥d3 23.¦e1 ¥c2. 22...¦1c4 23.£e8+ ¢g7 24.£e5+ and a draw was

agreed, since after 24...£xe5 25.dxe5 ¤c6 Black regains his pawn. ½–½

XIIIIIIIIY

9R+-+K+-TR0

9+PZP-+PZPP0

9-+N+-+-+0

9ZP-+L+P+-0

9-VL-ZPN+-+0

9+-+-ZPNZP-0

9PZP-VL-ZPLZP0

9TRNTR-+-MK-0

XIIIIIIIIY

Giri-Landa, French Team Championship (Mulhouse) 2011

It may be the standard reaction for experienced players, but we still thought it was worth singling out the modest-

looking 14.¥e1! avoiding the exchange on either b4 or e4, and maintaining the tension. 14...0–0 15.¤fd2 ¦fe8

16.¤c3 ¤xc3 17.bxc3 ¥xg2 18.cxb4!? The simple 18.¢xg2 is of course a serious alternative. 18...¥d5 19.b5

¤b4 20.a3 ¤d3 21.¦c3 ¤xe1 22.¦xe1 c6 23.¦b1 with a nagging edge for White, which he converted in the

endgame. 23...g5 24.f3 g4 25.h3 h5 26.¢f2 a4 27.h4 ¢g7 28.¦b4 ¦a5 29.¦c5 ¦aa8 30.bxc6 bxc6 31.¤c4

¥xf3 32.¦xf5 ¦eb8 33.¤b6 ¦a7 34.¤d5 ¦ab7 35.¦g5+ ¢f8 36.¦xh5 ¢g7 37.¦g5+ ¢f8 38.¦xb7 ¦xb7 39.¤b4

¦e7 40.¦a5 ¥e4 41.¢e2 ¦c7 42.¢d2 f5 43.¢c3 ¢e7 44.¢c4 ¢d6 45.¦xa4 ¦e7 46.¦a5 ¥b1 47.¦e5 ¦xe5

48.dxe5+ ¢xe5 49.h5 f4 50.exf4+ ¢e4 51.h6 ¢f3 52.¤d3 1–0

www.chessvibes.com/openings

ChessVibes Openings is a weekly PDF magazine that covers the latest news on chess openings. Which openings are hot in top

level chess? Which are not? Editors IM Merijn van Delft & IM Robert Ris keep you updated once a week! Why not subscribe

for € 28 a year (that ’ s less than € 0.60 per issue!). More info can be found at ChessVibes.com/openings .

as well as posting on the web, is strictly prohibited without prior written permission.

4 of 4

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: