"Mainstream" Daring Defences
Grünfeld & Dutch
Daring Defences October Update.Welcome to this month's Mainsteam Daring Defences Update. Let's get down to business straightaway with a wild game by the archpriest of Daring Chess. |
Grünfeld
Mainline 5 Bf4
I always wondered how a super brain like Kasparov would make things interesting when facing this solid system as Black.
My question was answered in the first game which is from the World No 1's clock simul' against the Czech Republic Team. It is evident that Kasparov takes these games deadly seriously. As always, his philosophy is: come up with something unexpected in the opening to get the opponent out of his familiar territory. If it can't be a new move then it should be a move that has been long forgotten. Here he uses an idea that was introduced by Sax in 1973 but since then has only been played several times mostly by unrated players.
Babula is surprised, uses up a lot of time and energy trying to refute the move and then collapses later on after a hard fight. That is often the fate of Kasparov's opponents! Have a look at Babula-Kasparov, OCT01/07.
The Russian Variation 7...a6
Recently we have concentrated on lines where White has tried to blow Black's brains out with 8 e5, but these seem to have been neutralised. Much more insidious is the quiet move 8.Be2.
                    
|
White simply develops and keeps his centre intact. Black's only response that is consistent with 7...a6 is expansion on the queenside: 8...b5 9.Qb3 and here usual is 9...c5- a freeing move which involves a temporary pawn sacrifice- 10.dxc5. Now Black must choose between putting his bishop on b7 or on e6. As you will see on ChessPub, after 10...Bb7 11.0-0 Nxe4 12.Nxe4 Bxe4 13.Bg5 Nc6 14.Qe3 Qd5 15.Rad1 Qe6 16.Bh6 Leko succeeded in holding the draw against Kasparov, but I think a lesser mortal might struggle here as Black. According to eye witnesses, it took a lot of persuading from Leko at the postmortem before Kasparov agreed that Black was OK here!
The alternative is 10...Be6. This was thought to be OK for Black, if a little dull. However, a recent game by Bareev casts doubt on this verdict. He succeeds in holding onto the pawn on c5 and defeats Grunfeld expert Van Wely.
Have a look at Bareev-Van Wely, OCT01/08.
All this is rather discouraging for Black. Therefore I have investigated the immediate attack on d4 with 9...Nc6!? It looks antipositional to block the c7 pawn, but Black is looking for dynamic play. In the mainline he has to be ready to give up three minor pieces for the queen. Take a look at the analysis in Piket-Svidler, OCT01/02.
Finally in the Russian System with 7...a6, if White played 8 Bf4 aiming at c7 would you know what to do?
|
|
This was used for the first time by Euwe in his World Championship match in 1935. Alekhine was taken by surprise and ended up in a completely lost position after 14 moves. Since then the analysts have got to work and found an antidote whereupon it has become a foot note in chess theory. However, if Black has no pregame knowledge then this move is every bit as dangerous as it was in 1935. Have a look at Hoang Thanh Trang-Gurieli, OCT01/09.
The Mainline Exchange: White plays 7 Bb5+
|
|
One of the points of this check is that after 7...Bd7 8 Be2 the Black bishop is misplaced on d7. Therefore Black often responds 8...c6. Now 8.Ba4 prepares to deploy the bishop on b3 or c2 as necessary. Compared to Bc4 lines, White avoids having his bishop molested by ...Nc6 and ...Na5.
However, Black can try to make a virtue out of ...c7-c6, rather than treat it as a 'unnecessary' stop by the pawn on its journey to c5. This can be done by carrying out a general advance of the queenside pawns. As will be seen in the illustrative game, Black can generate a lot of tactical play. Have a look at Hellsten-Delchev, OCT01/10.
Dutch
A complete repertoire for Black against 2 Bg5
I have devoted the Dutch half of the update to an in depth survey of a highly interesting variation for Black against 2 Bg5. It was prompted by the following email from a subscriber.
Dear GM McDonald:
In Gabor Kallai's More Basic Chess Openings (Cadogan, 1997), the Hungarian GM recommends 2...c6!? in reply to 1.d4,f5 2.Bg5, a line that receives no attention at all in either MCO or NCO. Kallai then gives 3.Nd2,Qb6 4.e3,Qxb2 5.Rb1,Qa3!? 6.g4!?,fxg4 7.Qxg4,Qxa2 8.Bd3,Nf6 9.Qh4,Qf7 and although White has a big lead in development, Black's two-pawn advantage compensates.
Well, searching through MasterChess 2000 yields zero games that followed this track. I found 132 games that adopted 2...c6!? in response to 2.Bg5. While 3.e3 (45 games), 3.c4 (30 games), 3.Nc3 (28 games) and 3.c3 (17 games) were all more popular replies than Kallai's recommended 3.Nd2 (9 games), Kallai is apparently correct that this is the critical reply (83% of the 3.Nd2 games led to wins for White while other replies yielded a 53-61% success ratio, 3.Nc3 being the most successful of the runners-up).
Of the 9 games of what for I'll call for want of a better name the "Kallai Defense to the Trompowski-Dutch," 5 of the 8 followed Kallai's recommended reply 3...Qb6 (3 followed 3...d5 and one followed 3...g6). All, however, led to wins for White. Of course, 5 games doth not a defense break, but still, I'm interested in your take on Kallai's idea.
Kallai's 4.e3 showed up nowhere. Three games continued with 4.e4 and the most testing, it appears, was Garcia-Pelikan, Argentina 1961
Two games continued with 4.Nb3. Only one game, however, was fought by at GM: GM Arencibia-IM Narciso Dublan, La Probla de Lillet, ESP, 1997.
I'd appreciate it if you annotated those games for your "Mainstream Daring Defenses" page and shared your thoughts about the merit of Kallai's defense. Thanks in advance.
Best,
Jerry Taylor
Thanks to Jerry for the email.
I've looked at all the important games after 1 d4 f5 2 Bg5 c6 3 Nd2 Qb6. The two main moves for White are then 4 e4 and 4 e3. First of all let me say that I think it is perfectly logical for Black to attack the b2 pawn which has been left undefended by White's second move. The idea is similar to that in the famous Poisoned Pawn Variation of the Najdorf: Black grabs a pawn or more but falls way behind in development- as much as four or five tempi. It is all a question of whether the position stays sufficiently closed to give him the chance to develop, or whether White will break open lines and deliver a fatal blow.
Obviously it is a huge risk for Black, but then that is what the Daring Defences are all about!
Kallai's idea after 4 e3 was in fact tested in a game in 1997. The French GM Vaisser always prepares thoroughly for his games and he comes up with an improvement to the system for White. He wins in crushing style. However as you will see it is by no means 100% clear. The crux of the matter seems to me the following diagram position:
   
|
[position after 1.d4 f5 2.Bg5 c6 3.e3 Qb6 4.Nd2 Qxb2 5.Rb1 Qa3 6.g4 fxg4 7.Qxg4 Nf6 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.Bd3 Qxa2 10.c4 Na6 11.Ngf3 Qa5 12.Ke2 d6 13.Qh4 Kd8 14.c5 d5]
It is White's move. He has a big lead in development- in particular he has his rooks working together whilst Black's are still uncoordinated. On the other hand, Black has good long term assets- a couple of extra pawns and the bishop pair. I have spent a long time trying to find a convincing way for White to break through- does anyone out there have any ideas? Remember that White doesn't have to hurry- he can carry on building up his game.
In the actual game itself Black went astray and White won in an elegant attacking style. Have a look at Vaisser-Narciso Dublan, OCT01/05.
The situation looks even riskier for Black after 4 e4! This is the most forcing move- Black has no choice but to capture on b2 as otherwise he has let White carry out this advance for nothing. However, I'm pleased to say that I think I have found an OK line for Black in all the main continuations here. Or at least he doesn't get wiped out immediately! I think Black's play in the Garcia-Pelikan, Argentina 1961 game was seriously flawed. I've analysed it within a recent game which sheds some new light on the resources for both players. The continuation 4 Nb3 as in the Arencibia-Narciso Dublan game mentioned above is briefly considerd in the notes to this game as well.
Check out Verhaegen-Potapov, OCT01/06.
Now let's look at some other third moves for White. Note that 3 e3 Qb6 4 Nd2 transposes to 3 Nd2 Qb6 4 e3 considered above. In fact this is the way the game Vaisser-Narciso Dublan above actually began.
Next up is 2...c6 3.c4. A popular move for White, but don't forget it weakens the d4 pawn/point. I like Stuart Conquest's energetic treatment of the opening for Black in the illustrative game. White tries to preempt Black from freeing his game but only ends up ruining his own position. Have a look at Claesen-Conquest, OCT01/03.
Then there is 2...c6 3 c3 to consider. White strengthens the d4 pawn and is ready to answer 3...Qb6 comfortably with 4 Qc2. Meanwhile he has the straightforward plan of gaining space with Qc2, Nbd2 and e2-e4. Black therefore needs a good response. I have been very impressed by a wonderfully creative knight manoeuvre by Vaisser- have a look at Nei-Vaisser, OCT01/04.
That leaves 2...c6 3 Nc3. Here Black has a wide choice of moves, but I have selected an interesting offbeat line. It sidesteps some of White's well known sacrificial lines whilst keeping a lot of dynamism in the position- the perfect recipe for a Daring Defence. Have a look at Hansen- Danielsen, OCT01/01.
That completes the analysis of 2...c6. In parts it is VERY daring- though in fact my personal experience in the Dutch is that there is more danger in a dull position where I am being slowly pushed back than when I am material up facing an attack.
Well it's goodbye for now. I hope you enjoyed the new games. Best of luck in your chess. Let me know if you manage to use any of the ideas here- just send an email to me at neilmc@chesspublishing.com.
Neil
Jon Tisdall is back with the Maverick DD's in November