1.e4
c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Qb6 5.Nb3 e6
The only move that I have been able to find in
the literature that I have is 5...Nf6, giving White a choice of transposing
to the more common 4...Nf6 5.Nc3 Qb6 6.Nb3 e6 line with 6.Nc3 or playing
6.Bd3, when play might continue 6...d5 7.exd5 Nxd5 8.0-0 g6 9.Qf3 etc.,
leading to an unclear position, according to ECO.
The lack of theory on 5...e6 leads me to believe
that White's correct response is 6.c4.
6.g3?
In Scheveningen setups, White often positions
his KB on f3 (from where it helps discourage ...d5) via e2. One plausible
conclusion to form from this manoever is that, if White could without penalty
place his KB on the h1-a8 diagonal with g3 and Bg2, he should do so, as
on g2 (and unlike on f3) the piece interferes neither with the KR's influence
along the f-file nor the queen's ability to swing to the kingside via the
d1-h5 diagonal.
These considerations are, however, probably more
than balanced by the facts that:
1) White will often play Bg5 and may want an escape
square (after ...h6 and ...g5) on g3.
2) White's queen will often join the kingside
attack via the e1-h4 diagonal.
3) White's KR will often join his kingside attack
along the third rank.
In this particular position, moreover, 6.g3 can
be criticized on even stronger grounds: in the Four Knights lines, White's
KB is normally played to d3, from where it threatens to add force to White's
kingside attack. For example, the main line after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4
cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Qb6 runs: 6.Nb3 e6 7.Bd3 Be7 8.0-0 a6 9.Kh1 Qc7 10.f4
d6 11.Qf3 0-0 12.Bd2 b5 13.Rae1 Bb7 14.Qh3, when White stands somewhat
better on account of his kingside pressure.
I am going to have to investigate further the
issue of when (and why) White should play his KB to d3 instead of e2 in
the Open Sicilian. I have some thoughts on this issue as it applies to
the 6...e5 Najdorf lines - White will play Be2 when control over d5 is
likely to become paramount and Bd3 when defense of e4 will be more significant
(for example, in the 6 Be2 e5 lines, White will manoever on the queenside
and attempt to exploit black's d5 and f5 squares; while in the 6.f4 e5
lines white will play Bd3 and throw his attention into a kingside buildup
involving fxe5, Qd1-e1-g3/h4, Bg5, Nh4, etc.) - but this explanation obviously
cannot be applied to the Four Knights Main Line, in which 7.Bd3 is clearly
played to increase kingside pressure and not to overprotect e4.
Nevertheless, while 6.g3 is weaker than both 6.c4
and 6.Bd3, White continues to stand relatively well.
6...Nf6 7.Bg2 Qc7 8.0-0 d6 9.Nc3
Too late for 9.c4, as 9...Ne5 would win material.
9...a6 10.a4 b6 11.f4
Best. Deserving less consideration than I gave
them OTB were:
a) 11.e5 dxe5 12.Nb5 Qb7 [--++].
b) 11.Nb5 axb5 12.e5 bxa4 [--++].
(Too bad that these two lines can't be put together!)
c) 11.a5, when either 11...b5 12.Be3 Be7 13.Bb6
Qb7, when White's QB only looks impressive but does nothing and will only
be chased away with ...Nd7; or 11...bxa5, since White cannot win material
with 12.e5 dxe5 13.Nxa5 due to 13...Bd7, would be more than adequate for
Black.
Incidentally, my opponent was apparently not the
least bit worried about any of these lines, as he played 10...b6 fairly
quickly.
11...Bb7 12.Qe2 Be7
This natural move allows White to gain a considerable
initiative with 13.e5. In playing 13.e5, however, White does make one immediate
structural concession (the vulnerable pawn on e5); and, to exploit the
initiative which he obtains, he is forced to commit his pieces to his kingside
attack, ultimately giving Black strong play on the queenside. As it turns
out, this tradeoff is a roughly balanced one, and after 12...Be7 13.e5
the position is roughly dynamically equal.
Also possible were 12...g6, when 13.e5 could be
met with 13...dxe5 14.fxe5 Nd7 15.Bf4 Bg7; and 12...e5, since White's 10.a4
has given Black's QN access to b4 and ensures that Black can keep control
over d5. In either case, the game would take a less critical turn and remain
roughly equal.
13.e5
As mentioned above, this move leads to complications
resulting in roughly equal chances for both sides.
13...dxe5 14.fxe5 Nd7
A classic Open Sicilian tradeoff has arisen: White
has the initiative, but his e-pawn is both an immediate as well as a long-term
problem, and Black will have good queenside play after White begins his
kingside attack.
15.Bf4 0-0
Best. 15...g5 16.Be3 (16.Bxg5 would lose to 16...Bxg5,
since 17.Nc4 Be7 [--++] and 17.Qh5 Be3+ [--++] would both be completely
inadequate) 16...Ncxe5/Ndxe5 would give White tremendous play for the pawn,
as the center would be ripped open and the black king would have no permanent
home. In my 2+ years of playing the Najdorf, I have on several occasions
grabbed a gambitted e5-pawn (usually in the 6.Bc4 variation) in more favorable
circumstances than those that existed in this game (i.e. I didn't have
to shatter my kingside with ...g5), and White's resulting attacks were
always fierce. I am quite certain that Black would at least stand worse
in the following lines:
|
a) 16...Ndxe5 (The more natural recapture, keeping
control over d4) 17.Qh5 h6 (Black would stand considerably worse should
he return the pawn with something like 17...0-0-0, as his king would remain
exposed, his strong bishop would be exchanged, and his central pawns would
be weak) 18.Rad1 (The slow approach is best here, as 18.Nd4 Nxd4 19.Bxd4
Bc5 and 18.Ne4 0-0-0 both give Black fewer problems), when White will continue
with 19.Ne4 and 20.Nd4, and Black lacks good moves. For example, 18...Rd8
19.Ne4 Rxd1 20.Rxd1, and Black is hurting.
b) 16...Ncxe5 (Preventing White from preventing
...0-0-0 with Rad1) 17.Bxb7 Qxb7 18.Bd4 f6 19.Ne4 (Threatening Nxg5) 19...Rg8
20.Bxe5 fxe5, when Black's position is again a nightmare.
16.Rae1 Na5!
In light of White's impending kingside attack,
Black's position seems somewhat precarious. With this move, Black:
1) Relieves some pressure from his own king by
initiating trades.
2) Prepares to make the white king somewhat uncomfortable
along the g1-a7 diagonal.
3) Prepares queenside play in order to undermine
White's attack.
4) Seeks to create a position in which White has
the inferior bishop.
How should White proceed? Since after 17.Nxa5
the open lines on the queenside would give Black additional resources for
undermining any direct attacks against his own king, White's most direct
persecution of his kingside attack involves refraining from playing 17.Nxa5,
keeping the queenside as closed as possible and thus buying time for Nc3-e4-g5
and Qh5. On the other hand, by refraining from playing 17.Nxa5, White
not only fails to accept Black's offered structural concession but
in fact makes a structural concession in return, as Black will himself
play ...Nxb3. Which factor is the more relevant?
In this particular case, the time White has for
carrying out his attack is the more relevant feature, and the proof is
a tactical one, and thus specific to this position. The correct continuation,
17.Bxb7 Qxb7 (best, giving Black control over the light squares around
White's king and threatening to relieve pressure with another trade with
...Bc5+. Note that 17...Nxb7 18.Ne4 Nxe5 would lose to 19.Ng5) 18 Ne4,
would leave the game roughly dynamically equal; while the incorrect continuation,
17.Nxa5, would leave Black considerably better.
After 17.Bxb7 Qxb7 18.Ne4 (Now, 18.Nd4 Bc5 19.Be3
would be met with 19...Nxe5; while 18.Nxa5 bxa5 would transpose to the
17.Nxa5 bxa5 18.Bab7 Qxb7 lines analyzed below [i.e. with 17.Nxa5] and
favorable for Black) 18...Nxb3 19.cxb3 Rc8 20.h4 (Creating a haven for
the king. After the immediate 20.Ng5 Bc5+ 21.Be3 h6 White's attack would
go nowhere) 20...Rc7 21.Ng5 Rfc8 22.Qh5 Bc5+ 23.Kh2 Nf8 and White retains
pressure but Black's structural advantages and upcoming queenside play
should ensure him of rough equality.
In these lines, note how long it took for Black
to finally make queenside threats; and how white needed every bit of that
time to develop his attack.
This will provide a tremendous contrast to the
lines resulting from 17.Nxa5, presented below.
17.Nxa5?? bxa5 18.Qg4?
This move exemplifies White's failure to commit
to one course of action - having opened lines on the queenside in accepting
Black's offered structural concession, he reverts to his kingside attack.
Also poor would have been 18.Bxb7 Qxb7 19.Ne4
(19.b3 Bb4) 19...Qxb2 20.Ng5 Rc8 21.Qh5 Bxg5, when Black has made too much
progress on the queenside; as well as 18.Ne4 Rab8 (note that 18...Rac8
19.c3 would be OK for White. Black is making good use of the half-open
b-file) 19.Ng5 Bxg2 20.Kxg2 Rxb2 etc. These lines demonstrate how effectively
Black is able to use the open lines on the queenside to undermine White's
attack. As mentioned above, a comparison between these lines and the lines
resulting from 17.Bxb7 Qxb7 18.Ne4, when Black's queenside play is extremely
slow, giving White a chance to build up his attack, is quite revealing.
White should attempt to keep things under control
on the queenside with 18.Bxb7 Qxb7 19.Bc1, though Black, being far better
poised to play in that sector, would stand significantly better.
18...Kh8 19.Be4 Bc5+
Here comes the counterattack!
20.Kg2 Bd4 21.Kh3 Bxc3 22.bxc3
Nc5 23.Bd3
With this move, White signals a sorry retreat,
seeking drawing chances in the endgame.
23...Nxd3 24.cxd3 Qxc3 25.Bg5
f5!
26.Qc4
The best try, though White cannot quite hold the
resulting endgame.
26...Qxc4 27.bxc4 Rfc8
The endgame is tricky but merits no further comments.
28.Rc1 Rc5 29.Bf4 h6 30.Rfd1
Re8 31.Rd7 Bc6 32.Ra7 Bxa4 33.Rxa6 Bb3 34.Ra7 a4 35.Be3 Rc6 36.c5 Rd8 37.Rc3
Rd5 38.Kg2 Kg8 39.h4 Rxe5 40.Bd4 Rd5 41.Bxg7 h5 42.Bf6 Rcxc5 43.Rxc5 Rxc5
44.Rg7+ Kf8 45.Be7+ Kxg7 46.Bxc5 Kf6 47.Bd6 e5 48.Kf3 Ke6 49.Bf8 Kd5 50.Ke3
Bc4 51.Be7 Ba6 52.Bf8 Kc4 53.Bd6 e4 54.Be5 Kb3 55.Kd2 a3 56.Bd4 e3+ 57.Kxe3
Kc2 58.Kf4 Be2 59.Kxf5 a2 60.Ke4 Kb1 61.Ke3 Bg4 62.Kd2 a1=Q 63.Bxa1 Kxa1
64.Kc2 Ka2 65.Kc3 Kb1 66.Kd2 Kb2 67.Kd3 Kc1 68.Ke3 Kd1 69.Kf2 Kd2 0-1. |