Download PGN of September ’25 Nimzo and Benoni games
>> Previous Update >>
Nimzo-Indian Saemisch 5...c5 6 f3 [E24]
4 a3 Bxc3+ 5 bxc3 c5 6 f3 Nc6 7 e4 d6 8 Be3 b6 9 Bd3 Na5 10 Nh3:
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
We’ve considered the idea of the knight being developed on h3 before (for example in the game Grischuk,A-Caruana,F/chess.com 2022) although not in this particular position. One of the merits is that it allows White to defend the c4-pawn with Qe2. Most games from the diagrammed position have continued 10...Ba6 11 Qe2. However, 10...e5! was played in a recent game and this turned out to be an effective response by Black. See Akbas, U - Mahdavi, R for analysis.
Nimzo-Indian Saemisch 5...c5 6 e3 0-0 7 Bd3 Nc6 [E29]
4 e3 0-0 5 a3 Bxc3+ 6 bxc3 c5 7 Bd3 Nc6 8 Rb1!? b6 9 e4 d6 10 Ne2 Ba6:
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Interest continues to grow with the tricky move 8 Rb1, which was used by Levon Aronian at the FIDE Grand Swiss. In the diagrammed position, the previously seen 11 0-0 may be met by 11...h6!. Instead Aronian played the novelty 11 Bg5, creating the pin before it’s prevented. White had chances to gain the advantage early on but Black eventually took over - see the analysis of this position in Aronian, L - Woodward, A.
Nimzo-Indian: 4 e3 0-0 5 Bd3 c5 6 Nge2 Nc6 [E47]
4 e3 0-0 5 Bd3 c5 6 Nge2 Nc6 7 a3 (7 0-0 is the most popular choice) 7...Bxc3+ 8 Nxc3!? (8 bxc3 would transpose to the Saemisch) 8...cxd4 9 exd4 d5:
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
There are more popular alternatives before, so the diagrammed position is relatively rare. 10 cxd5! looks like the best option, but in practice White has preferred 10 Be3. Against this, Black should most certainly respond with 10...dxc4! 11 Bxc4 b6, if nothing else because it leaves Black a tempo ahead of the well-known line 5 Nge2 d5 6 a3 Bxc3+ 7 Nxc3 cxd4 8 exd4 dxc4 9 Bxc4 Nc6 10 Be3 0-0. See the recent game Xu Xiangyu - Yakubboev, N, which turned out to be a convincing win for the Uzbekistani grandmaster.
Nimzo-Indian: 4 e3 c5 5 Bd3 Nc6 6 Nge2 [E41]
4 e3 c5 5 Bd3 Nc6 6 Nge2 cxd4 7 exd4 d5 8 cxd5 Qxd5!?:
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Recapturing with the knight on d5 is a far more popular choice, and what we’ve focussed on up to this point. However, 8...Qxd5 is also possible and it has the merit of avoiding a considerable mountain of theory that’s built up around 8...Nxd5. This line is important also because of its relation to the similar 4...0-0 5 Bd3 c5 6 Nge2 cxd4 7 exd4 d5 8 cxd5 Qxd5!?, and of course transpositions are possible. See the notes to the recent game Deac, B - Matlakov, M.
Nimzo-Indian: 4 e3 0-0 5 Bd3 d5 6 Nf3 dxc4 7 Bxc4 c5 [E55]
4 e3 0-0 5 Bd3 d5 6 Nf3 dxc4 7 Bxc4 c5 8 0-0 Nc6 9 a3 Ba5 10 h3 h6:
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
The ...dxc4/...Nc6 variation continues to attract attention. This is a position we’ve seen before, with both sides making useful moves with the h-pawns before proceeding further. We’ve previously studied 11 Qd3, but in a recent game White preferred 11 Bd3. After 11...cxd4 12 exd4 a typical IQP arose. In the game White soon gained an advantage, but with accurate play Black should be okay - see the notes to Theodorou, N - Daneshvar, B.
Bogo-Indian: 4 Bd2 Bxd2+ 5 Qxd2 d5 [E11]
4 Bd2 Bxd2+ 5 Qxd2 d5 6 Nc3 0-0:
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Exchanging the bishops straightaway and then choosing a QGD structure is known to be a solid choice for Black. A typical continuation is 7 e3 Qe7 8 Rc1 dxc4 (or 8...Rd8) 9 Bxc4 c5, as we’ve previously seen in Artemiev,V-Carlsen,M/Almaty 2022.
However, it seems that White can spice things up with 7 h4!?. This is a rare choice, but it looks quite challenging. White’s idea is to push the h-pawn down the board as far as possible, Alpha-Zero style. If Black prevents it reaching the h6-square by playing ...h6, a hook is created for White who can then aim for g4-g5. A recent game continued 7...Nc6 8 Rd1 Qe7 9 h5 h6 10 g4!? Nxg4!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
which led to a sharp position with chances for both sides - see Yakubboev, N - Pranav, V for analysis of this interesting line.
Till next time, John
>> Previous Update >>
Feel free to share your ideas and opinions on the Forum (the link above on the right), while subscribers with any questions can email me at JohnEmms@ChessPublishing.com.