e3 Poison

(1)

(2)

e3 Poison

By

Axel Smith

Quality Chess

http://www.qualitychess.co.uk

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 978-1-78483-037-3 Hardcover ISBN 978-1-78483-038-0

All sales or enquiries should be directed to Quality Chess UK Ltd, Suite 247, Central Chambers, 11 Bothwell Street,

Glasgow G2 6LY, United Kingdom Phone +44 141 204 2073 e-mail: [email protected] website: www.qualitychess.co.uk

Distributed in North America by National Book Network Distributed in Rest of the World by Quality Chess UK Ltd through

(5)

Sunrise Handicrafts, ul. Poligonowa 35A, 20-817 Lublin, Poland Back cover photo by Calle Erlandsson

Photos on pages 117, 118 and 127 by Harald Fietz Typeset by Jacob Aagaard

Proofreading by Andrew Greet Edited by John Shaw

(6)

Structure of the Book

The big challenge with understanding how to use the e3 poison is gaining a feel for the many possible move orders, but it would be rough to delve into them without first being familiar with the general ideas.

The book thus starts with an introduction (Part 1), discussing the overall concept and why a practical player should be happy with an academic advantage.

The Indian Defences (Part 2) have one thing in common. Regardless of whether we start with 1.d4, 1.Nf3, 1.c4 or 1.e3, we often reach the same tabiya. The Grünfeld, King’s Indian, Benoni and Queen’s Indian are, in that sense, easy to handle. The Bogo-Indian and Benko Gambit, on the other hand, are often avoided, but there are antidotes covered in Chapters 7 and 8.

After that we are ready for a first fight with the various move orders (Part 3), combined with some historical background.

That leads to the ‘Junctions’ (Part 4), which are the openings that many opponents will transpose into when they meet the e3 poison, even if these openings are outside their normal repertoire. The Panov, Tarrasch, Chigorin and Irregular Slavs (Schlechter, Chebanenko and Meran) are all important to us. The Dutch is also covered in this part, since the Dutch is almost a universal weapon (only starting with 1.e4 prevents it).

The choice between different first moves is most important against opponents who play 1...d5 and the Queen’s Gambit (Accepted) or the Slav. There are three ways to deal with them:

1.Nf3 d5 2.e3 (Part 5) 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 (Part 6)

1.c4 or 1.e3, which both allow 1...e5 (Part 7)

The last section of the book (Part 8) is Exercises – a Final Test with Solutions to check that you have become an effective e3 Poisoner!

(7)

Bibliography

Important Sources

Avrukh, Boris: Grandmaster Repertoire 1 – 1.d4 Volume One, Quality Chess 2008 ChessBase Magazine:

#32 (Viswanathan Anand) #46 (Lubomir Ftacnik)

#57 (Rustem Dautov and Nigel Short) #86 (Evgeniy Solozhenkin) #120 (Mihai Marin) #124 (Levon Aronian) #164 (Martin Breutigam) #168 (Milov Pavlovic) #169 (Igor Stohl)

Delchev, Alexander: The Modern Reti, Chess Stars 2012

Emms, John: Starting Out: The King’s Indian Attack, Everyman Chess 2005

Karpov, Anatoly: Karpov’s Caro-Kann: Panov’s Attack, Batsford Chess Books 2006 Khalifman, Alexander: Opening for White according to Kramnik, Chess Stars 2002 Kornev, Alexei: A Practical White Repertoire with 1.d4 and 2.c4, Vol 1, Chess Stars 2013 Rudel, David: Zuke ’Em, Thinkers Press 2008

Summerscale, Aaron & Johnsen, Sverre: A Killer Chess Opening Repertoire, Gambit 2010 Other Sources

Aveskulov, Valery: Attack with Black, Gambit 2012 Avrukh, Boris: Grischuk vs. The Grunfeld, Internet 2013

Avrukh, Boris: Grandmaster Repertoire 17 – The Classical Slav, Quality Chess 2014 Bologan, Viktor: The Chebanenko Slav According to Bologan, New in Chess 2008 Bologan, Viktor: The Chebanenko: Still Improved (DVD), ChessBase 2012

Bronznik, Valery: The Chigorin Defence, Schachverlag Kania 2005 D’Costa, Lorin: The Panov-Botvinnik Attack, Everyman Chess 2013 Dunnington, Angus: The Ultimate King’s Indian Attack, Batsford 1998 Flear, Glenn: Starting Out: Slav & Semi-Slav, Everyman Chess 2005 Goldsmith, Jeffrey: The Last Human Chess Master, Wired 1995 Greet, Andrew: Play the Queen’s Indian, Everyman Chess 2009

Hansen, Carsten: The Gambit Guide to the English Opening 1...e5, Gambit 2009 Houska, Jovanka: Opening Repertoire: The Caro-Kann, Everyman Chess 2015 Johnsen, Sverre & Bern, Ivar: Winning with the Stonewall Dutch, Gambit 2009 Karpov, Anatoly: How to Play the English Opening, Batsford Chess Books 2007 Khalifman, Alexander: Opening for Black according to Karpov, Chess Stars 2001 Lakdawala, Cyrus: The Slav: Move by Move, Everyman Chess 2011

Morozevich, Alexander & Barskij, Vladimir: The Chigorin Defence According to Morozevich, New in Chess 2007 Moskalenko, Viktor: The Flexible French, New in Chess 2008

(8)

Nielsen, Peter Heine: Intens skak i Sibirien, Skakbladet 2011/06

Palliser, Richard; Emms, John; Ward, Chris & Jones, Gawain: Dangerous Weapons: The Benoni and Benko,

Everyman Chess 2008

Raetsky, Alexander & Chetverik, Maxim: Starting Out: Queen’s Gambit Accepted, Everyman Chess 2007 Vitiugov, Nikita: The French Defence Reloaded, Chess Stars 2012

Watson, John: Play the French 2nd Edition, Cadogan Chess Books 1996 Williams, Simon: Attacking Chess: The French, Everyman Chess 2011 Williams, Simon: The Killer Dutch, Everyman Chess 2015

Wisnewski, Christoph: Play 1...Nc6!, Everyman Chess 2007 Checked Sources

Aagaard, Jacob: Starting Out – The Grünfeld, Everyman Chess 2003 Aagaard, Jacob: Stonewall II, Quality Chess 2007

Avrukh, Boris: Grandmaster Repertoire 1A – The Catalan, Quality Chess 2015

Avrukh, Boris: Grandmaster Repertoire 1B – The Queen’s Gambit, Quality Chess 2016 Avrukh, Boris: Grandmaster Repertoire 8 – The Grünfeld Volume One, Quality Chess 2011 Bezgodov, Alexey: The Liberated Bishop Defence, New In Chess 2014

Bologan, Viktor: English 1.c4 c5 for Black, ChessBase 2012

Collins, Sam: The Tarrasch Defence: Move by Move, Everyman Chess 2013 Cox, John: Declining the Queen’s Gambit, Everyman Chess 2011

Delchev, Alexander: Attacking the English/Reti, Chess Stars 2016

Delchev, Alexander & Semkov, Semko: Understanding the Queen’s Gambit Accepted, Chess Stars 2015 Dembo, Yelena: Play the Grünfeld, Everyman Chess 2008

Emms, John: Starting Out: The Queen’s Indian, Everyman Chess 2004 McDonald, Neil: Play the Dutch, Everyman Chess 2010

Mikhalevski, Victor: Grandmaster Repertoire 19 – Beating Minor Openings, Quality Chess 2016

Ntirlis, Nikolaos & Aagaard, Jacob: Grandmaster Repertoire 10 – The Tarrasch Defence, Quality Chess 2011 Raetsky, Alexander & Chetverik, Maxim: Starting Out: Benoni Systems, Everyman Chess 2005

Ribli, Zoltan & Kallai, Gabor: Winning with the Queen’s Indian, Batsford Chess Books 1987 Rowson, Jonathan: Understanding the Grünfeld, Gambit 1999

Schandorff, Lars: Grandmaster Repertoire 7 – The Caro-Kann, Quality Chess 2010 Smerdon, David: Queen’s Gambit Accepted in Yearbook 119, New in Chess 2016 Vegh, Endre: Starting Out: The Modern Benoni, Everyman Chess 2004

Vigorito, David: Play the Semi-Slav, Quality Chess 2008 Vigus, James: Play the Slav, Everyman Chess 2008

(9)

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

¥ Symbols next to diagrams show the pieces exchanged to reach that structure.

Thanks

I couldn’t imagine how much attention Pump Up Your Rating would get. At tournaments, I was often caught for a small chat. One player used a line from the book when preparing against me. Another said that he was finally satisfied with his playing strength. The book convinced him that he was not ready to put in the effort needed to reach the next level.

I am glad for all the support. It also made Quality Chess ask me to write another book on any subject I wanted – except theoretical endings.

There is one word in the book I really regret, but so far nobody has mentioned it. I have however been criticized for one thing: I didn’t dedicate the book to my wife.

So now I asked her what I should write.

“Oh, such things are ridiculous,” she said, “even though it’s the first thing I look at in any book. There is no reason to thank me.”

I don’t agree, because it would have been harder without her support. Not least agreeing to have all her clothes, shoes and jackets in a small wardrobe, because I tore down our clothes closet to create a writing studio. That’s where I finished this book.

I am also happy that our daughter sometimes allows me to work after office hours – and that she more often does not. Finally, thanks to all the friends who read and improved the draft: Björn Ahlander, Stellan Brynell, Torbjörn Ivarsson, Martin Jogstad, Martin Lokander, Sebastian Mauritsson and Aditya Subramanian.

(10)

Axel Smith, 27th June 2017 ChessPublishing.com

(11)

In Revolution in the 70s, Garry Kasparov explained how opening theory exploded after 1972, under the influence of Bobby Fischer. Information became more accessible and the players could, instead of searching for games, focus on analysing. That suited a hard worker such as Kasparov.

A few decades later many openings were over-analysed. It became harder and harder to get a tangible advantage and to avoid being neutralized, White repertoires had to be broader. Still, the top players played for an advantage.

Things changed again when the engines made their entrance. It was easier to find out how to defend, and preparation had to be even deeper. A new move could yield better results than the objectively best move, and the main task was to surprise the opponent. But after a single game, everybody knew how to react against the idea, and it was time to find another novelty.

Then along came Magnus Carlsen.

Okay, this story is simplified. There are other views and other players, but there’s no doubt that Carlsen has changed the general attitude towards openings. Rather than an advantage, he looks for interesting positions.

When the opponent plays a dubious line there is little point in avoiding the known refutation. But against a good line, it may not be practical to use the main lines. Chess is after all a draw, and we use time and effort only to lose the surprise effect, while still not getting anything. Theory has developed to such an extent that even players who work harder and know more than their opponents have started to avoid the main lines.

And so we entered the post-theoretical era.

When I started to work on this book, Quality Chess proposed 1.Nf3 followed by 2.g3. That was for a while a good choice, but it was taken up by more and more players, and today theory has developed heavily even there. The time has come to move forward, and I think my repertoire is a good choice: 1.Nf3 and 2.e3 with options of varying the order from the very first move.

The last variation I analysed for my first draft was the Anti-Queen’s Gambit with 1.Nf3 d5 2.e3 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.b3 Be7 5.Bb2 0-0 6.Nc3.

(12)

A few hours after I finished, Sergey Karjakin played like that against Anand in the 2016 Candidates tournament, and won a nice strategic game. I was happy, of course, but also worried. Please leave the theory untouched!

When annotating the game for New in Chess, Anish Giri summarized today’s attitude among top players towards openings.

“I was surprised that even some decent players thought that this [2.e3] was a sign of bad preparation. In fact, this is

the modern approach, where surprise value and unpredictability are often the key to success. The game is evolving; deal with it.”

One person who has done so is Vladimir Kramnik. After being a consistent analyst with deep novelties, he shifted gear in the World Blitz and Rapid Championship in Berlin in October 2015. But the real fight was a week later when he played the e3 system in the European Club Cup. The opponent was none other than his big rival, Veselin Topalov. There was no handshake before the game; Kramnik even looked away when Topalov started the clock.

Kramnik in New in Chess: “It’s my new way of playing chess with White. Trying to get a game.”

Vladimir Kramnik – Veselin Topalov Skopje 2015

(13)

A signal of Kramnik’s change of attitude – he has always been a player who wanted to put pressure on the opponent, with subtle improvements far into the opening. His preparation was feared by his colleagues.

So why did he let go of that advantage? Because chess is a draw with best play. Your opponent needs to err. And that’s much easier if he isn’t familiar with the position.

With his new attitude, Kramnik’s drawing ratio dropped and he experienced a revival as a player. And it might not just be by chance that those games were played soon after he had a training camp with Magnus Carlsen in Berlin.

3...c5

If Black wants to place his bishop on b7, I think it makes sense to keep flexible with the c- and d-pawns. After 3...b6 4.Bd3 Bb7 5.0-0 Black could consider playing 5...d5, or continue to postpone the decision with 5...Be7.

4.Bd3 b6

There are many sensible choices, of course, one being to play as if Black was White: 4...d5 We will return to this position later.

5.0-0 Bb7 6.c4 cxd4

Peaceful development with 6...Be7 7.Nc3 0-0 runs into 8.d5! after which 8...exd5 9.cxd5 Nxd5 10.Nxd5 Bxd5 11.Bxh7† Kxh7 12.Qxd5 gives White a considerable advantage. Not only is his king safer, but he also has pressure along the d-file.

7.exd4 Be7 8.Nc3

Threatening d4-d5, just like in the line above. 8...d5 9.cxd5 Nxd5 10.Ne5

(14)

We have a reached an isolated queen’s pawn position where White has been allowed to place the knight on e5. Also, there are three reasons why Black would have preferred to keep the knight on f6:

a) To protect the kingside

b) To threaten the d-pawn with the queen c) To avoid the possibility of Nc3xd5

But since c2-c4 was played before ...d7-d5, White captures first. 10...0-0 11.Qg4

White threatens to win with 12.Bh6 Bf6 13.Qe4 g6 14.Bxf8.

The main line runs 11...Nf6 12.Qh4 Ne4 13.Qh3 Qxd4 14.Bf4 Nf6 15.Ne2, but as Kramnik wrote in New in Chess, Topalov was tricked into this position and not prepared to play it.

(15)

With ...f7-f5 played, Black has to keep the knight on d5 to block the bishop on c4. He also has problems in developing the queenside knight to a decent square.

At this point Kramnik writes that he was happy with the opening, and one can only agree. The rest of the game follows with just a few remarks.

13...Re8

13...Nd7 14.Nc6! wins a pawn. 14.Rd1 Nd7

After 14...Nc6 15.Nxd5 exd5 16.f4!, White has an advantage due to the strong knight on e5. The bishop on c4 is untouchable, and after 16...Qd6 Boris Avrukh gives 17.Ba6!. Exchanging Black’s bad bishop may seem paradoxical, but if 17.Bb3?! Na5, Black continues with the knight to c4 and gives up a pawn to open the diagonal.

(16)

The tactical try 17...Nxd4? 18.Rxd4 Bxe5 19.fxe5 Rxe5 doesn’t work after 20.Qf2 Bxa6 21.Bf4. Black has enough material for the exchange, but his bishop can’t challenge White’s control over the dark squares.

15.Bb5 Bxe5 16.dxe5 Qe7 17.Nxd5 Bxd5 18.Qh5

18...g6

For the second time, Topalov weakens the dark squares on the kingside.

If White was forced to retreat after 18...a6 then Black would have nothing to complain about, but there is 19.Bg5! which wins on the spot.

Kramnik gives 18...Nxe5 19.Bg5 Bf3 20.gxf3 Qxg5† 21.Qxg5 Nxf3† 22.Kg2 Nxg5 23.Bxe8 Rxe8 and although Black has enough material for the exchange, he is still a move short of consolidating. White can exploit this with 24.Rd7. 19.Qh6 Rec8 20.Bg5 Qf7 21.Bxd7 Qxd7 22.Bf6

(17)

Now follows a phase where Kramnik tries to open the kingside with h4-h5, while avoiding exchanges. 22...Qf7 23.b3 Qf8 24.Qf4 Rc2 25.h4 Rac8 26.h5 Qe8 27.Rd3 R2c3 28.Rad1 gxh5 29.Rxd5! exd5 30.e6

30...R3c7

Kramnik writes that Topalov probably missed that he has no defence after 30...R3c6 31.Rd3 Rxe6 32.Rg3† Kf7 33.Qh6!. For example: 33...Rxf6 34.Qg7† Ke6 35.Re3† and wins.

31.Rxd5 Qxe6 32.Qg5† Kf8 33.Rxf5 Rf7 34.Qh6† Ke8 35.Re5 Rc6 36.Qxh5 1–0

It must be said that Kramnik uses the e3-systems only when Black is committed to ...e7-e6, thus not being able to develop the bishop to f5 or g4. But the attitude is clear. When he caught a big tasty fish on his hook, he illustrated that

(18)

it’s time for practical openings.

The repertoire in this book suits players who like to play chess. There will be fewer games where Black loses straight out of the opening, but it also avoids the kind of dull positions that often arise from sharp lines.

Another plus is that it takes less time and effort to prepare. Over the last ten years, I have normally tried to remember a few thousand moves before a single game. But when the first draft of this book was finished, I simply read what I had written. And it was maybe no surprise that I suddenly had more energy during the games.

What is the best way to learn opening theory? Much has been written and I have probably given some advice myself. But the question already in some ways signals the wrong attitude. Moves should not be remembered, they should be understood. When memory artists remember long series of numbers, they create an artificial meaning by transforming the digits into pictures, years or places. In chess, we do not have to do that because there already exists a true meaning. (Or maybe that’s a philosophical question?)

Human memory is based on concepts. If we have understood the logic behind a move, it’s much easier to find it at the board. This book contains a lot of material, but don’t check the lines too many times; take it slow and trust your brain to organize it.

Talking about memory, I warmed up for the 2017 Swedish Championship by playing a lot of ‘Memory’ (also known as ‘Concentration’, this is a card game where all the cards are placed face down, then flipped over two at a time before being put face down again, and you have to remember where every card is). It was a way to get back into competitive mode after a long break. Insufficient focus is punished much harder than in chess. To remember the images and places, I transformed them into chess moves and openings. I gave them meaning...

To my ears, “a practical opening” and “a playable position” have both been negative phrases – synonyms for something that doesn’t give an advantage. And it’s a valid question to ask if this isn’t just a second-rate repertoire that only gives an academic advantage.

(19)

Akademia was a grove in ancient Greece with sacred olive trees, enclosed by a wall. Plato used the garden to lecture in philosophy, and his school became known as the Academy. It was given great importance and is the foundation for much of today’s philosophy.

Two thousand years later, much bureaucracy has entered huge academies, and the word academic has a second meaning: formalities that we pretend are important, but are only grandstanding.

But is an academic advantage in chess of only bureaucratic importance? Something we can use to claim that we played better than the opponent, but that doesn’t give any extra points?

No. Even top players can’t be sure to make a draw just because the position is a draw with best play. If the position is harder to play, they make more mistakes. And this is even more the case at lower levels.

When the Informant symbols appeared in the 60s, ‘²’ meant an advantage that’s not enough to win the game if the opponent defends well. However, over time we have adapted to the computer’s evaluations and today ² is seen as an advantage of between 0.3 and 0.7 pawns.

In go, on the contrary, the computers haven’t made much impact yet. Positions are “balanced” or “advantageous” – it makes no sense to try to make a more exact evaluation. A Japanese pro has claimed that you win if you always make the 80% move, a move that’s honte (proper).

Even AlphaGo’s victory over Lee Se-dol won’t change much. The computer’s knowledge is based on human games and its playing style is surprisingly humanlike.

I think it makes sense to go back to human evaluations in chess also. I don’t make it a secret that Black is okay in many positions in this book. But they are not equal either; we have a positive imbalance that often gives a tiny Carlsenesque advantage. Maybe some space on the queenside. An extra pawn in the centre. Or the bishop pair.

In each case a lot of work is required from the opponent to keep the advantage academic. And such an advantage is valuable.

Here are four sample positions.

(20)

White has an isolated pawn, but it’s not the same kind as Black gets in the Tarrasch. There is no pressure against d4, since the knight on d5 obstructs the queen, and the bishop is placed on e7 instead of g7.

After provoking the weakening move ...h7-h6, White continues by transferring the queen to e4. 12.Qe2

If it was White’s move again, 13.Qe4 Nf6 14.Qh4 would be a possibility. However, it’s probably better to develop first. The rooks belong on d1 and e1 – White focuses on the kingside since Black’s bishop is on c8. (With the bishop on g4, it would make more sense to use the c-file.)

Black’s plan is to complete development without losing control over d5, but that’s easier said than done: ...b7-b6 can be met with Nxd5, and if ...Qxd5 then Be4.

Another way is ...Re8, ...Bf8 and ...Bd7, allowing the exchange on d5 with an equal position. But there’s nothing that forces White to take.

Curiously, I reached this position two days after I had written about it. My opponent played ...Re8 and ...Bf8, which fortified his king but gave him a passive position. I decided to play on the queenside with Be3, Rc1 and Ne4-c5 and after exchanging two minor pieces (Qxe3 and d4xc5), I gained a queenside majority which made it all the way to the eighth rank.

The game can be found in Chapter 11 about the Panov.

(21)

When the bishop moved to b2, the diagonal was blocked and the pawn on d4 could move nowhere. But White relied on the fact that Black had to play ...c7-c5 sooner or later in order to free himself.

Both side’s pawn structures will be identical after the exchange of Black’s c-pawn for White’s d-pawn. But White’s pieces are better placed. He has two good bishops, a more active knight and it is easier to find a good square for the queen. 12.Qe2 is a move to consider, or 12.Rc1 first. The other rook goes to the d-file.

And we should not forget about the possibility of winning a tempo with e3-e4.

Position 3

In a blitz game between Alexander Grischuk and Ian Nepomniachtchi in Riga 2013, Black tried to play the Grünfeld, but since there was no knight on c3, he had to answer e3-e4 with the retreat ...Nd5-b6.

(22)

He has failed to get enough counterplay against the d-pawn (it should be noted that ...Bxd4 loses a piece) and he thus has no compensation for the pawn centre.

10.h3!

A good move, getting the bishop pair and opening up for the bishop on c1. It has awaited its time, but not hindered White from gaining a long-term advantage. Next he will simply complete development. Grischuk won after 55 moves.

Position 4

A messier position than the previous ones. In the King’s Indian, Black has been allowed to push the e-pawn to e4. It is better there, but it has cost quite a few tempos with ...Nbd7 (to get in ...e7-e5), ...Re8 and ...Qe7 (to defend e4).

White has used the time to run with the a-pawn. One idea behind it is to play Nc3-d5 and, after ...Nxd5 cxd5, be able to put pressure along the c-file with Ra1-a3-c3 and Rd1-c1. But if so, the pawn on d5 will be weak as well.

All in all, there are still quite a few moves before something real will be happening on the queenside. Instead, White relies on the fact that he is actually defending himself quite well on the kingside. He has answered ...h5-h4 with h2-h3, avoiding a back rank mate in the endgame (something that should not be underestimated!).

If Black had placed the knight on g5, instead of the pawn, Be2-f1 would be a standard way of defending against a piece sacrifice on h3. Instead Black is trying to use the h3-pawn as a hook to open up the position, but his last move (15...g5) has exposed the knight on h7 to some tactics.

16.a6

Exposing the rook on a8. 16...b6

Not the best move, but a logical one to keep the queenside closed. 17.Ncxe4! Nxe4 18.Nxe4 g4!

White has won a pawn since 18...Qxe4 is answered with the skewer 19.Bd3. However, it’s not over yet. 19.hxg4 Qxe4 20.Bd3 Qxg4 21.Bxh7† Kh8

(23)

White’s extra pawn would not be worth much if Black is able to claim the initiative with ...h4-h3 and ...Re8-g8. For now, he threatens ...f7-f5.

22.f3! Qg5 23.Be4

The point behind 16.a6 – the bishop retreats with gain of tempo. If Black plays 23...Qxe3† 24.Kh1 Rb8 his queen is trapped after 25.Bc1.

It’s difficult to decide whether to label the sample positions ² or = isn’t it? But the important thing is that we appreciate them, even though they are objectively unclear.

Unclear Positions

In a way, this book was more difficult to write than Pump Up Your Rating. In an opening book, it’s possible to question the evaluations, and with that the foundation of the book.

But in my opinion many authors make it harder on themselves by striving too hard in their goal to label all positions with ². In the long run, optimistic evaluations favour no one and sometimes we have to accept that the position is just unclear. So Informant symbols will be rare in this book, but I will also avoid hiding behind vague evaluations such as “with chances for both sides”.

From time to time, though, I am sure you will be frustrated by not getting a clear answer on the question if White is better or not. But I am not hiding the answer to be evil; it’s just that chess isn’t black and white.

Some of the chapters can be read on their own, but given how the material is organized, with pawn structures,

instructive games and exercises, it’s not possible to find everything in the theoretical sections. For pedagogical reasons, some lines are given in connection to a game, so you have to buy the whole package, reading the chapters from scratch. This book asks for an effort from the reader, but if you put in the energy you will be rewarded with something you can play for a long time.

But isn’t there a risk that the material will be too disorganized? It’s impossible to learn all the possible move orders. It’s very human, at least for adults, to strive for control (or rather the feeling of control). But it’s doubly beneficial to get rid of it. Organizing chess knowledge risks over-simplifying, which hampers intuition.

(24)

So are you ready to strive for interesting (and often also advantageous) positions rather than entering a theoretical battle? Go ahead! It took me ten years to understand that such an attitude also works for grandmasters.

A ‘practical repertoire’ and a ‘grandmaster repertoire’ is not a conflict. It is still about understanding the variations you play.

(25)

This book is based on a set-up with the moves d4, Nf3, c4 and e3. They could be played in twenty-four different orders, and it is possible to make a case for many of them. But before we discuss the move orders in Part Three, we have to familiarize ourselves with the general ideas. (At first I wasn’t comfortable about using we, but then I understood that I was writing the book for myself as well.)

Unfortunately, White cannot play according to a simple grand scheme. It depends on Black’s choice of opening, and every chapter will thus begin with a summary of typical plans. They will be explained from a few diagrams showing the common pawn structures, and the pieces are added only if they are necessary for the discussion. That’s often when they stand in the way of a pawn lever (a pawn move that puts the pawn in contact with a pawn of the opponent).

Then there will follow a few illustrative games, before the lines are presented just like in an old-fashioned opening book. And finally there are some exercises.

The following Q&A discusses the pros and cons of the e3 poison repertoire.

Q: Playing e2-e3 without being forced seems passive! What does White get in return for shutting in the bishop on c1? A: The question almost answers itself. By keeping the bishop on c1, White avoids the early confrontation that might

give Black space or lead to simplifications. With the bishop on g5, Black might push ...h7-h6 and ...g7-g5 (e.g. the Ragozin or the King’s Indian) or play ...Nf6-e4 as in the Lasker Defence. And a bishop on f4 can be hit by ...e7-e5 or ...Bd6.

Instead, we keep the tension. But of course, Black’s centre is not challenged as much as with the bishop on g5. Q: What about the other bishop?

A: It usually goes to e2 as long as Black is able to play ...Bg4. But if he has played ...e7-e6 it might take another step to d3. That’s also logical since then there’s no black pawn on g6, closing the diagonal to h7.

Q: Isn’t going for flexibility a strange choice as White? Black will have more information whatever we do.

A: Another negative question! Let me first explain the advantage of having the pawn on e3 rather than on e4. Just like with the bishop on c1, it keeps the tension. White is able to pressure the centre with c2-c4, but still keeps control over d4 and c4 (which would not have been the case with a kingside fianchetto).

One example that illustrates the difference is the King’s Indian. When White has played e2-e4, Black is normally able to put enough pressure on the d4-pawn to force d4-d5. With the pawn on e3, that’s no longer possible. Q: What more could be said about White’s set-up?

(26)

A: Usually he castles short and continues with Nc3. That’s already seven moves, so by that time Black has shown his cards and it’s possible to adapt the strategy to his set-up. And it should not be forgotten that e2-e3 is a developing move. If Black plays something strange, White opens up and uses the extra tempo.

Q: So you have to play several different kinds of positions?

A: True. This repertoire should not be the first you ever have. Other openings teach how to play with isolated pawns, a queenside majority, the bishop pair and positions with two pawns in the centre. In the main lines, you get experience playing those kinds of positions in their best version. With the e3-systems you might get them with less counterplay for Black, but maybe with half a tempo less. Still good, but it requires more work.

With that said, it’s also good to get acquainted with the structures in other ways than playing. Q: So we can’t always strive for the same kind of position?

A: Of course that’s not possible. But if I have to say something that White is happy with, it is positions with an isolated pawn.

Q: But I love playing against that pawn!

A: That was not a question, but okay, I often hear that objection. It seems that many players don’t understand how much of a difference there can be between different versions of isolated pawn positions. When Black gets the pawn, White is usually able to simultaneously block and put pressure upon the pawn. That’s not possible in the positions we reach in this repertoire.

Of course, an isolated pawn contains the risk of getting a bad ending. But if we handle the positions well, it’s not difficult to steer the game away from such a course of events.

Instead, the isolated pawn positions we strive for give what they in former times called “a free game”. White can move around to create threats while Black has to follow. If he manages, without stumbling, White can try another kind of dance. And even if he keeps up the pace, Black can’t take many steps on his own.

Q: So this system is not just another Colle?

A: I have to be careful not to criticize other set-ups, because I am sure there will be people who think just that. But to me it seems that many Colle players chose their opening due to laziness, not even adapting to Black’s scheme of developing.

This book is not for the lazy player. It doesn’t require memorizing many long lines, but it demands a fair amount of understanding. And I really think that it is possible to put some pressure on Black; the quiet-looking e2-e3 isn’t so peaceful after all.

Q: What if I am lazy and don’t read the whole book. Can you tell me when this system comes into its own and when it struggles?

A: It’s good against the Grünfeld. It’s not for nothing that Hikaru Nakamura and Anish Giri have used it against the Grünfeld expert Maxime Vachier-Lagrave. I also like it against the King’s Indian, because even though it usually leads to positions where White attacks on the queenside and Black on the kingside, it’s a version that the Black players are not familiar with. And if you start with a move other than 1.d4, it avoids the normal Queen’s Gambit Accepted. We will see one game by Kasparov later. Finally, Nimzo-Indian players won’t get the chance to place the bishop on b4.

Those are the positive sides.

One opening where Black gets a clearly better version is the Benoni. In the worst possible case it’s a full tempo, but luckily we use a prophylactic strategy where e3-e4-e5 is spared for later. And with the pawn on e3 rather than e4, Black can’t use some of his standard ways of creating counterplay.

Black can also play an improved Tarrasch, where White is no longer able to put maximum pressure on the isolated pawn. Remember what I said earlier about this kind of position. But instead of accepting his fate, White can try another idea.

(27)

A: The key is flexibility. White can make the first moves in many different orders. Sometimes it doesn’t matter, sometimes one is preferable over another – but often they have their own small pros and cons. To go through every one would be exhausting, and undoubtedly too much to memorize. So in fact the only way is to understand the structures. You have no choice!

Of course, I will point out when there is something important to know, but you also have to trust yourself. Thus, this opening won’t transform you into a Grandmaster (unless you are almost there already) but it will hopefully allow you to play against opponents who feel less confident than normal, especially those with a forcing style, who know theory well and often lose the thread when they have to make moves without a clear-cut plan. And meanwhile you will feel at home.

Cons – from White’s perspective

White puts no immediate pressure on the centre, so Black is free to develop in any way he likes... White will not win many miniatures...

Black can get improved versions of unfavourable positions... Black gets a safe king position...

It’s not possible to memorize every single move, so you have to trust your understanding... If you don’t play well, you might play just another Colle...

Pros – from White’s perspective ...but he can’t play against White’s dark-squared bishop or against the d4-pawn ...but Black can’t force early simplifications

...but they are still unfavourable, and if he plays a passive move we can use the development advantage to punish him

...but so does White

...which is actually a great advantage

...but if you play well, you have a dangerous repertoire while Black doesn’t smell the danger

Shameless Advertisement

In May 2016, I started to use the repertoire more often. Most of the analytical work was finished and it was a great feeling to play without preparing much.

Axel Smith – Aleksey Goganov Stockholm, 5th May 2016

(28)

10...gxf6

We will see that it’s possible to give up a pawn with 10...Qxf6. 11.Qc2 f5?

Grischuk played 11...Qb6. Moving the f-pawn is too slow. Goganov wanted to put his queen on f6, but allowing Nf3-e5 is not a good idea.

Besides a great position, I had gained 45 minutes on the clock. 12.Bb5

The positional threat is Bxc6† followed by 0-0 and Na4, when Black is completely deprived of pawn levers. 12...Rc8

(29)

13.Bxc6†!?

Giving up the second bishop to win a tempo on the rook. White can’t spend too much time to force ...b7xc6. After 13.Ne5 Bd6 14.Bxc6† bxc6 15.0-0 0-0 16.Na4 White is one move away from complete control, but it’s not enough: 16...c5!

13...Rxc6 14.Ne5 Ra6 15.Qe2!? Creating the threat of Qb5†xb7.

15...Rb6 16.0-0 Bg7 17.Na4 Rb4 18.Nc5

So far, so good. The knights are much better than the bishops, and Black has no constructive plan. The next step is to do something useful with the rooks, possibly Rac1-c3-g3. But as I have had some traumas connected to rook lifts, I played more cautiously.

18...0-0

It’s not possible to capture the pawn: 18...Rxd4 19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.Qh5† and the bishop is lost. 19.Rfd1 Bc8 20.a3 Rb6 21.Rac1 Rd6 22.f4?

Giving Black something to play for: the e4-square. I don’t play well in the following phase. 22.Rc3 would still have been a good move.

22...Re8 23.Qf2 f6 24.Nf3 b6 25.Nd3?

25.Na4 was a no-brainer, to protect the e4-square from c3.

25...Ba6 26.Nb4 Bc4 27.Re1 Rde6 28.Rxe6 Rxe6 29.Re1 Qe8 30.Nc2?!

The last chance to keep the advantage was 30.Rxe6 Qxe6 31.Nd2 keeping the queen away from e4. 30...Rxe1† 31.Qxe1 Qe4 32.Qxe4 fxe4

(30)

33.Nh4

33.Nd2 would have been a mistake due to 33...Bd3 34.Ne3 f5! 35.Nxf5 e3! 36.Nxe3 Bxd4 37.Kf2 Bxb2 38.Nxd5 Bxa3 and we have an excellent position for the bishop pair. After the text move, there is not much play left.

33...Bb3 34.Na1 Ba4 35.Nf5 Bf8 36.Ne3 Bc6 37.Kf2 h5 38.Nd1 Kf7 39.Nc3 f5 40.Nc2 Bg7 41.Ke3

½–½

Playing in the same tournament was Aditya Subramanian, who was one of the ‘test readers’ I mentioned at the start of the book. For his White openings he followed this book.

“It felt a bit daunting to use the repertoire,” he said afterwards. “I had never played most of these lines before but I

was confident in them and my understanding of the ideas. I felt that compared to other repertoire books I have used I understood the nuances of the positions a lot better. I played the repertoire 4 times out of 4 White games and had more

(31)

or less winning positions by move 15 in every game.”

He didn’t win any games with Black, but yes, the sample size could have been greater...

To nuance the picture, Subramanian didn’t like White’s position in the King’s Indian, even though he couldn’t come up with a refutation.

(32)

4...0-0 32 4...d5 32 5.Be2 d5 32 5...b6 32 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.e4 Nb6 8.0-0 Nc6! 32 8...f5 32 8...c5 32 8...Bg4 33 9.d5 Ne5 10.Nc3 e6! 33 10...c6 34 11.Bf4 34 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.e3! 4...d5

(33)

In the Grünfeld, Black gives up the centre voluntarily in order to counterattack. Such a strategy only works as intended if all the moves fit into the scheme. Retreats are not allowed.

For that reason, Black plays ...d7-d5 only when White has placed his knight on c3. It’s important that the knight on d5 (...Nf6xd5) can move forward (...Nd5xc3) when threatened with e2-e4.

The fianchetto is therefore a clever system. After 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.g3 0-0 5.Bg2, Grünfeld players don’t have any useful moves except 5...d5. (5...c5 would be great if it were not for 6.d5. The cautious 5...c6 is regarded as okay but gives a very different style of play.) But after 5...d5 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.e4 Nb6, it turns out that White’s centre is not as well protected as usual. Black can create a pin with ...Bc8-g4 to put pressure on d4. That would not have been possible with the bishop on e2.

Instead we prefer the sneaky plan of e2-e3, Be2 and 0-0. The idea is clear: the queenside knight is left on b1 to discourage ...d7-d5.

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.e3! 0-0 5.Be2 d5 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.e4 Nb6

It’s true that e2-e3-e4 costs a tempo, but Black’s dissatisfaction with the knight’s retreat is greater. In the Anti-Catalan there is in fact an identical line with reversed colours: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 c5 4.Nf3 cxd4 5.Nxd4 d5 6.Bg2 e5 – even with a tempo less Black can afford to move the e-pawn twice.

The name Sneaky Grünfeld was invented by Ken Smith and John Hall in Winning with the Colle System (1990) and referred to 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6, where Black tried to sneak into the Grünfeld. In this chapter, it is White who tries to sneak away from it!

Pawn Structures

(34)

In the Grünfeld, White has normally recaptured b2xc3 when the knights were exchanged. It seems that it strengthens the centre, but there are actually three reasons why it’s not so. In the diagram position, White can:

a) Answer ...c7-c5 with d4-d5 without leaving the pawn on c3 en prise (Black has a bishop on g7) b) Capture on c5 without getting an isolated pawn on c3

c) Stop ...c7-c5 with Rac1

So Black actually has less counterplay here.

White’s scheme of development is simple: Nf3, Be2, 0-0 and then Nc3, Be3, Qd2, Rac1, Rfd1. And a4-a5 could also be an option to harass the knight on b6 and force Black’s pieces to tread on each other’s toes.

The squeeze almost plays itself. With four minor pieces on the board, Black will sooner or later find out that it’s one too many. The thing to know is how to react against Black’s possible counterattacks.

a) If Black attacks the centre with ...Bg4, White often plays Nbd2 (the exception is the development scheme outlined above) followed by h2-h3.

b) If Black plays ...e7-e5, White can capture, win a tempo with f2-f4 and use the 4–3 majority on the kingside. Or he can move past (d4-d5) and limit the scope of the bishop on g7.

c) The first question against ...c7-c5 is if it’s good to capture the pawn. If it is – go for it. Otherwise, d4-d5 is good as well. Now a further e4-e5 would seriously cramp Black’s position, so usually Black hits first with ...e7-e6. And then we reach the next diagram.

d) Sometimes Black plays ...Nb8-c6 and manages to provoke d4-d5 without moving either the c-pawn or the e-pawn. In theory, he could then be more successful in challenging White’s d-pawn (both ...c7-c6 and ...e7-e6 are possible) but the bad news is that the strategy involves moving the knight several times (just as with the other knight). e) ...f7-f5 is discussed under Structure 3.

f) If Black decides just to sit passively, White makes use of the half-open c-file.

(35)

Strictly speaking, the d-pawn becomes passed only after the exchange on d5. But Black has no good alternatives; it is unlikely that he will manage to undermine the pawn with ...f7-f5.

After ...e6xd5, White takes back with the e-pawn and keeps the knights on the board. It makes a great difference that they are there.

a) Black has less space

b) He can’t block the pawn with ...Qd8-d6 due to Nc3-b5 c) Black’s pawn majority is hindered by the knight on b6

White’s plan is to build up behind the passer with Bf4, Qd2 and Rd1. Finally, the pawn takes a step into what is now safe territory.

(36)

White has three reactions against ...f7-f5.

a) Taking on f5, but that’s not a good idea if Black can take back with the bishop – it helps him to develop. b) Defend with Nc3. If Black exchanges, it’s White who develops for free. Black has weakened the kingside, but

White’s isolated pawn is more exposed than Black’s. So on general grounds, it’s not possible to say who it favours.

c) Play e4-e5, which is the standard reaction. Black gets an outpost on d5, but it is difficult to use. White develops with Qb3 (check!) and Nc3, plays Rfd1 and might then consider a2-a4-a5. The big problem for Black is that he can’t get in ...Bc8-e6. However, note that e4-e5 works badly if White has a bishop on e3 that then runs into ...f5-f4.

Games

On behalf of the Swedish chess magazine Tidskrift för Schack, I interviewed Rudolf Forsberg, a 98-year-old study composer. Three years earlier, he had woken up in the middle of the night and vaguely recalled a position he had seen in his dream. He immediately got up and tried to set up the position on a board, but failed. Since that day it has

occupied his time, and he has come closer to recreating the position.

His hand was sore and full of fragile veins, but it moved quickly. This, that, tic, tac, check, check, capture and Black was stalemated. Next variation. This time it’s White who is stalemated. Then he removes the bishop and we have a new problem. The bishop appears again when Black underpromotes – and so does White. It is a magical dance and I am perplexed, missing almost every word. But the 98-year-old is not satisfied. Something is missing before the study is perfect.

During the interview, Forsberg strongly criticized the chess magazine, not really understanding that he was sitting in front of the editor-in-chief. As an active player, a few decades earlier, stress prevented Forsberg from enjoying his games. Only as a composer was he able to experience the real beauty of chess. And while playing through games, he didn’t want to be disturbed by the players’ comments. He just wanted a lot of unannotated games.

As was the case when he first subscribed to the magazine in 1935. Now they were all gone.

While I might agree about the stress of playing chess, I don’t agree with his preference for bare game scores. So the games in this section will be annotated – but only briefly after (if) they stop being relevant to our topic.

(37)

But I also feel that I have to defend my habit of showing complete games. When I was young (and naïve) I didn’t like such opening books. “Just give me the moves to remember. I can study middlegames later.” However, in the long run it’s quite clear to me that the payback is higher if understanding is given priority over memorizing.

Memory also works better if we have something to hang it on. It’s easy to remember that we should play like

Kramnik. Another facilitating feature is to add a few pedagogical exclamation marks (!) to important moves that aren’t necessarily better than others, but which are in line with the repertoire.

But what happened to the dream problem? Forsberg estimated that he needs to work on it for a few more years. Meanwhile we will start with the games.

Vassily Ivanchuk – Mohammad Amin Tabatabaei Doha 2015

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nf3 Bg7 4.e3 0-0 5.Be2 d5

The Iranian player is not the only one to have insisted on playing the Grünfeld move. Wei Yi managed to escape with a nine-move draw, and Ian Nepomniachtchi played it twice in blitz (see one of the sample positions on page 16 in the introduction).

6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.e4 Nb6

With reversed colours, White (now Black) usually plays 7...Nf6. However, the tempo makes a crucial difference: ...c7-c5 has already been played in the reversed position, attacking the second centre pawn. Now Black has not achieved anything after 8.Nc3.

8.0-0 Bg4 9.Nbd2! Nc6

9...c5 is too late: 10.dxc5 N6d7 11.Nb3 and Black doesn’t get the pawn back. 10.d5 Bxf3

Nepomniachtchi played 10...Nb8 but was worse after 11.a4! followed by a4-a5 and h2-h3.

10...Ne5 11.Nxe5 Bxe2 12.Nxf7 is a well-known trick that collects a pawn, but Black gets some counterplay after 12...Bxd1 13.Nxd8 Raxd8 14.Rxd1 e6.

(38)

Instead, White does better with 12.Qxe2 Bxe5 when his advantage consists of his space in the centre. There will soon be a rook on the d-file, so Black can’t play ...e7-e6 or ...c7-c6 easily. Still, this was Black’s best option.

11.Nxf3 Ne5 12.Nxe5 Bxe5 13.f4 Bg7

14.a4! a5

Including the moves with the a-pawns has seriously weakened the b6-square. 15.Qb3 Qd6 16.Be3

If White is allowed to play Rac1, Black would be positionally lost. So Tabatabaei goes for complications. 16...Qb4 17.Qxb4 axb4

Both a4 and b2 is hanging, but they are easy to protect. 18.a5

(39)

18...Nd7

18...Nc8 19.e5 f6 would fail to 20.Bg4! and Black can’t win the e5-pawn. 19.e5 b6 20.Bb5 Nc5 21.Bc6 Ra7 22.axb6 Rxa1 23.Rxa1 cxb6 24.Ra7

White has the bishop pair, a better pawn structure and an active rook. That’s dangerous in the hands of Ivanchuk. 24...e6 25.d6 f6 26.Bd4 fxe5 27.Bxe5 Bxe5 28.fxe5 Nd3 29.Bd7 Nc5

29...Nxe5 30.Bxe6† Kh8 31.Rc7 wins as there is no defence against 32.d7 and 33.Rc8. 30.Bb5 Rd8 31.Re7

(40)

1–0

With ...Bg4 Black tried to undermine White’s centre, just like he usually does in the Grünfeld. But he failed and it’s fitting that the d-pawn had the final word.

In the next game we will see a more prudent strategy from Black.

Vachier-Lagrave, April 2016: “It’s a decent variation, there are some tries but it should be okay to play the Benoni with

a tempo up.”

Giri, April 2016: “For sure it’s a real variation, but Black could play the King’s Indian with e3.”

Anish Giri – Maxim Vachier-Lagrave FIDE World Cup, Baku 2015 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nf3 Bg7 4.e3 0-0 5.Be2 b6

Vachier-Lagrave keeps the option of ...d7-d5, while making a developing move. However, it’s not the active move that Grünfeld players prefer.

5...d6 6.Nc3 d5 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.e4 Nxc3 9.bxc3 would be a funny way to transpose into a normal Grünfeld. Even though White has a favourable version (Black has castled instead of putting immediate pressure against the centre), there is no reason to enter it. 6.0-0 keeps the knight away from c3.

6.0-0 Bb7

7.Nc3

White would be happy to find another useful move, but it’s not easy.

7.d5?! was played by Hans Tikkanen against David Howell at the Tromsø Olympiad in 2014. The pawn move is

unjustified: it doesn’t win a tempo and Black can challenge the d5-pawn with both ...e7-e6 and ...c7-c6. After the game, Tikkanen recommended 7.Nc3.

(41)

7...d5 8.cxd5

8.b4!? still has some venom. The idea is to answer ...c7-c5 with b4xc5 and Rb1, hitting the bishop on b7. 8...Nxd5 9.Bd2

9.Qb3 was played by Daniil Dubov against Vachier-Lagrave in Qatar 2014, but the bishop move makes more sense. White’s first priority is to get a rook to the c-file.

Black has two fianchettoed bishops and that’s lovely, but to be happy he also has to play ...c7-c5. 9...c5

9...Nd7 prepares ...c7-c5, but it forces Black to take back on d5 with the bishop. After 10.Nxd5 Bxd5 11.Qc2, e3-e4 follows and 11...c5 12.e4 Bb7 13.d5 leads to one of the discussed pawn structures, but with Black having difficulties in breaking with ...e7-e6.

10.dxc5 Nxc3 11.Bxc3 Bxc3 12.bxc3

With the b-pawn on b7, Black would have nice pressure along the c-file, but now he seems to be forced to close it with ...b6xc5.

12...Nd7!

A radical solution, but thematic in the Grünfeld.

12...bxc5 13.Qa4 allows White to disturb Black along the b- and d-files. As in many positions, e2-e3 was not a slow move and White has managed to open the position with an advantage in development – one tempo better than when the game started.

13.cxb6 axb6

Black argues that two open files against isolated pawns gives enough compensation for the sacrificed pawn. With White’s pawn on e4 (another weakness) that would be true. It also favours White that the dark-squared bishops have been exchanged, as the bishop on g7 would have exerted pressure against c3.

(42)

The extra pawn also gives White’s pieces more squares to choose between. Neither d4 nor b4 can be challenged by the pawn on b6.

14...Qc7 15.Rfb1 Ra5 16.Qb4 e6 17.Qe7

The queen continues its dance on the dark squares. But it is not so easy to make progress, since it’s impossible to attack the knight on d7 (with Bb5) while simultaneously threatening the b6-pawn.

17...Qd8 18.Qxd8 Rxd8 19.Rd1 Bc6 20.Nd4 Ba4 21.Rdb1 e5

To me, it seems rather unnecessary to give up control over the d5-square; Giri had still not showed anything real. But I am sure Giri wasn’t in a hurry to do so, as there are many useful moves left: doubling the rooks and bringing the king to the centre.

(43)

22.Nb3 Ra7 23.Nd2 Rc8 24.c4 Bc6 25.Rb2 Kg7 26.f3 Re8 27.Kf2

Next would be Nd2-b1-c3-d5, and Vachier-Lagrave decides that he can’t sit and wait. 27...e4

Giving up another square: d4.

28.Nb3 exf3 29.gxf3 Ba4 30.Rd1 Re5 31.Rd5 Rxd5 32.cxd5 Bxb3 33.axb3 Kf6 34.f4 g5 35.Rc2 gxf4 36.exf4

Black’s dream is to exchange rooks and set up a blockade on d6. 36...Ke7 37.Rc6 Nf6 38.Bf3 Rd7 39.Rxb6 Nxd5 40.Bxd5 Rxd5

(44)

It feels like a draw. White has two weaknesses on the kingside and can’t use his king freely.

41.Kg3 h5 42.Kh4 Rf5 43.Rb4 Rd5 44.Rc4 Kf6 45.b4 Kg6 46.Rc6† f6 47.Rc2 Rb5 48.Rb2 Kf5 49.Kg3 Ke4 50.Rb1

50...Kd3

50...Ke3 was mentioned by Giri as a draw a few hours after the game.

51.Kf3 Kc2 52.Ra1 Rxb4 53.Ra5 Rb3† 54.Ke4 h4 55.Kf5 Kd3 56.Kxf6 Ke4 57.f5 h3 58.Ra4† Kf3 59.Kg5 Rb5 60.Ra2 Rb4 61.f6 Rg4† 62.Kf5 Rf4† 63.Ke6 Re4† 64.Kd6 Rd4† 65.Ke7 Re4† 66.Kf8 Rb4 67.f7 Rf4 68.Rb2 Ra4 69.Rb6

(45)

Black can’t stop the pawn from promoting while getting the h-pawn. 1–0

White again had the final word in this game, and he will have an overwhelming score throughout the book, since those games illustrate our case best. But don’t worry, as there are also six victories for the opponent, two of which are in the next chapter.

Recap

The Sneaky Grünfeld is not a pleasant story for Black. It’s easy for him to get frustrated when he can’t get the counterplay he is used to. But he has to stay calm, not allowing d4-d5 with tempo and giving up the bishop pair, as Tabatabaei did. The improvement 8...Nc6! will be analysed in the theoretical section.

The Grünfeld move ...d7-d5 is better played in the same way as Vachier-Lagrave used it (with ...b7-b6 and ...Bb7 first). Still, to get a pleasant position, White doesn’t have to do much more than develop slowly (Be2, Bd2).

This will also be the path in the Schlechter Slav. There, it’s important to know how to react against an early ...Bg4 or ...Nbd7 (c4xd5) and how to play if Black stays passive (Ne5 or b2-b4).

Theory

(46)

4...0-0

Instead 4...d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5?! (5...0-0 transposes to the main line) 6.e4 Nb6 allows White to play something other than 7.Be2. 7.a4!! is suggested by David Rudel in Zuke ’Em (2008). The point is that Black has too many pieces that need to make use of the d7-square. 7...a5 is as always weakening b6, and White could increase the weakness by 8.Bb5† c6 9.Be2.

5.Be2 d5

5...b6 6.0-0 Bb7 7.Nc3 d5 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.Bd2 was seen in Giri – Vachier-Lagrave, World Cup 2015. And as pointed out in the annotations, 7.b4!? is an interesting possibility.

5...c6 should, after a later ...d7-d5, transpose to the Schlechter Slav (page 200). 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.e4

7.0-0 is another move order. Black could at least transpose with 7...Nc6. 7...Nb6

(47)

8.0-0

8.a4 is similar to Rudel’s idea, but without the possibility of Bb5†. The difference can be seen after 8...a5 9.0-0 Bg4 10.Nbd2 Nc6. This move would not have been possible if Black had to play ...c7-c6 to defend against the check on b5. After 11.d5 Nb4 Black gets the use of the b4-square.

8...Nc6!

8...f5 is most precisely met by 9.Qb3† Kh8 10.e5 with an advantage. After 8...c5 9.d5 e6 Boris Avrukh suggests: 10.Bg5 Qd7 11.Nc3

White has nice compensation on the dark squares after 11...Bxc3 12.bxc3 exd5 13.e5!.

If 11...exd5 then it seems good enough to play 12.Nxd5 Nxd5 13.exd5 when it’s not easy for Black to develop and blockade the d-pawn. After 13...Bxb2 14.Rb1 Bg7 15.Re1, White’s first threat is 16.Bb5 followed by 17.Be7.

(48)

8...Bg4 9.Nbd2!?

9...Nc6

9...e6 10.h3 was the previously mentioned blitz game between Alexander Grischuk and Ian Nepomniachtchi. 9...f5 10.e5 gives a pawn structure discussed in the beginning of the chapter, but with the bishop on g4 instead of c8. That’s an improvement, but Black still has problems with his light squares. White continues with h2-h3 and Qb3(†).

9...e5 is an interesting try, but after the simple 10.dxe5 Nc6 11.h3 Be6 12.Qc2 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Bxe5 14.Nf3, White will get a lot of tempos with Bf4, Rd1 and Nd4. Black has problems.

10.d5 Nb8

10...Ne5N 11.Nxe5 Bxe2 12.Qxe2 Bxe5 and Black is satisfied with the exchange of two minor pieces, but he still lacks space. If White is quick to place his rooks in the centre, he will prevent Black from playing ...c7-c6 or ...e7-e6 in a good way. 13.Rd1, 13.Nf3 and 13.a4 are all moves to consider, but 13.f4?! is too much: 13...Bd4† 14.Kh1 f5! And White’s centre collapses, with an unclear position.

(49)

11.a4! c6 12.a5 N6d7 13.h3 Bxf3 14.Nxf3 Nf6

Now Grischuk played 15.Qb3 in his second game against Nepomniachtchi. That might be good, but it was easier to enjoy the bishop pair after 15.dxc6.

9.d5

9.Be3 is a mistake due to 9...f5!. White is in general happy with the position and doesn’t wish anything other than peace and quiet until he has completed development. But with the bishop on e3, the ...f7-f5 lever is well motivated. The reason is that 10.e5 is met by 10...f4! 11.Bc1 Bg4 and Black gets counterplay against d4.

9...Ne5 10.Nc3

(50)

10...e6!

10...c6 allows 11.Nxe5 Bxe5 12.Bh6 when Black will have a weakened king whatever he plays. 11.Bf4

Instead 11.Nxe5 Bxe5 12.Bh6? fails to 12...Qh4 or 12...Bxh2†. 11...Nxf3† 12.Bxf3 exd5 13.exd5

White is ready to attack c7 with Nb5 or Rc1, but Black has a strong move that complicates matters. 13...g5!

(51)

14.Bc1

The ambition is only to complete development, for example with Qd3/c2/b3, Be3 (if there’s no ...Nc4), Rad1 and Rfe1. Black has a stable blockade on d6 and can put his knight there, but one day we hope he will regret advancing the pawn to g5. One way to force further weaknesses is Qd3 followed by Bd1-c2.

Exercises

Some exercises are positions that are covered in the theoretical section. There are two ways to work with them. a) Before reading the theoretical section. You digest the moves better if you have started by shaping an opinion of your own.

b) At the end, as active repetition. The task in all of them is:

a) Select a move. Quite often, there are many with about the same value, just like in a game. But don’t be disappointed if you don’t find a clear solution, as the journey is worth the effort.

b) Give an evaluation of the position. Use words if you consider yourself a human, or Informant symbols or a number like 0.31 if you think like a machine.

There is no scoring system other than your own conscience, so no temptation to cheat. After all, the real test takes place only when you play the positions in tournament games.

Exercise 1

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.e3 0-0 5.Be2 d5 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.e4 Nb6 8.0-0 f5 9.Qb3† Kh8

White to move

Show/Hide Solution

Exercise 2

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.e3 0-0 5.Be2 d5 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.e4 Nb6 8.0-0 Nc6 9.Be3

(52)

Black to move Show/Hide Solution

Exercise 3

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.e3 0-0 5.Be2 c6 6.0-0 d5 7.Qb3 Black to move Show/Hide Solution

Exercise 4

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.e3 0-0 5.Be2 d5 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.e4 Nb6 8.0-0 Bg4 9.Nbd2! Nc6 10.d5 Nb8

Show/Hide Solution

(53)

White to move

(54)

6...Nbd7 52 6...Nc6 52 6...Qe8 52 6...c6 52 6...c5 52 7.0-0 e5 8.Qc2 Re8 52 8...b6 53 9.Rd1 e4 53 9...exd4 54 9...c6 54 9...Qe7!? 54 10.Nd2 Qe7 11.b4 Nf8 54 11...c6 54 12.a4(!) h5 54 12...a5?! 55 12...Bf5 55 13.a5N a6! 55 13...N8h7 55 13...h4 55

(55)

14.b5 55 A) 14...Bg4 56 B) 14...h4 56 C) 14...Bf5! 57

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.e3! 4...0-0 5.Be2 d6 6.Nc3

The King’s Indian is impossible to avoid, unless you play 1.e4 or the Trompowsky, and Black almost makes his first five moves without taking notice about White’s set-up. So why on earth would White restrict himself to e2-e3 followed by Be2? It doesn’t look threatening at all.

True, 4.e3 is a move designed to meet the Grünfeld and having to play it against the King’s Indian is something that follows as part of the package. But it has its points as well, and leads to a different kind of position than in the normal King’s Indian lines. Whether you like the positions at first sight probably depends on how you feel about defending against an attack. But as we will see, there are several rules of thumb that facilitate the defensive task.

The main point behind 4.e3 in the King’s Indian is that Black can’t play ...e7-e5 without preparation. In the line 4.Nc3 0-0 5.e4 d6 6.Be2 e5, Black’s tactical point is 7.dxe5 dxe5 8.Qxd8 Rxd8 9.Nxe5 Nxe4! – but this is not possible without a pawn on e4. (But not 5...e5?? as I played when I was 13 and was talked into playing the King’s Indian in a crucial game. It took me ten years to try it again.)

So how is Black preparing ...e7-e5? 6...Re8 does not defend e5 properly (the rook has to take back on d8) and 6...Nc6 is met by 7.d5. So he has to start with 6...Nbd7 and that is already a small concession.

(56)

In the ...Nbd7 King’s Indians, Black usually follows up with ...e5xd4, ...Re8 and ...Nc5, hitting the pawn on e4. But White will take back on d4 with the pawn, so that plan is no longer available.

Black should develop the light-squared bishop, and it has two diagonals to choose between.

a) Fianchetto: 8...b6 9.dxe5! Nxe5 10.Nxe5 dxe5 With an extra tempo, Black would be fine, but now White is fast with annoying moves like Rd1, Ba3, Bf3 and Nd5.

b) Normal is ...e5-e4 followed by ...Nd7-f8 and ...Bf5. It closes the centre and allows both sides to start the wing attacks that are typical in the King’s Indian. However, there are two important differences with the black pawn on e4. 1) White’s knight on f3 is kicked away, so he has fewer pieces defending the king.

2) Black has to spend two tempos defending the pawn: ...Re8 and ...Qe7. The normal continuation is 8...Re8 9.Rd1 e4 10.Nd2 Qe7 11.b4 Nf8.

The position we get is actually a Reversed King’s Indian Attack. The original line goes 1.e4 e6 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.Ngf3 Nc6 5.g3 Nf6 6.Bg2 Be7 7.0-0 0-0 8.Re1 Qc7 9.e5 Nd7 10.Qe2 b5 11.Nf1.

(57)

It’s considered promising for White and he has about 60% in top games. And the only difference is that we have won the semi-useless Rd1 (...Rd8). The engines consider that, on average, to be worth 0.07 pawns.

It’s right that the rook doesn’t do much, but it has vacated the f1-square. We will see many positions where a knight or a bishop can use the square to defend against Black’s attack.

Alexander Grischuk believed in the white side of the Reversed King’s Indian Attack and played it in an important game against Fabiano Caruana in the 2013 Paris Grand Prix. Does that convince you? I hope not. Trust the moves, not the authorities.

The following examples navigate through the similarities and differences with the rook on d1, even though it’s like a labyrinth – especially since the theory doesn’t reach a verdict in the original position.

However, it’s a relief that it’s possible to play according to a quite clear-cut plan.

Pawn Structures

(58)

The key is Black’s e-pawn. It will be attacked with Nc3, Nd2 and Qc2, and defended by ...Nf6, ...Re8, and ...Qe7. Black can also consider overprotecting the pawn with ...Bf5 to make all of his pieces flexible.

A black pawn on e4 means no knight on f3, which in turn means that Black has good attacking possibilities. White will not try to challenge the pawn with f2-f3, but put his hope on the queenside.

Black’s attack starts with ...h7-h5, ...Nb8-d7-f8-h7 and then one of the following plans:

a) ...h5-h4, which should be answered with h2-h3. Black continues with ...Ng5, to take on h3. The sacrifice is prevented with Be2-f1.

b) ...h5-h4 followed by ...g6-g5-g4. But the pressure against the e-pawn makes it difficult for Black to recapture on g4 with a minor piece.

c) ...Ng4 with the idea of ...Qh4. White doesn’t want to give up the light-squared bishop and h2-h3 can often be met by ...Nxf2 or ...Nxe3. It’s better to try to stop ...Ng4 altogether, by keeping pressure on e4 or being ready with Nd5. d) ...Bg4 followed by ...h5xg4 in case White exchanges.

e) ...Nh7-g5-(f3) However, it’s even better for Black to start with ...Bf5 and then manoeuvre the knight via e6. It creates the tactical threat 1...Nxd4 2.exd4 e3 with a discovered attack against the queen on c2.

White has different ideas of how to get things going on the queenside. A simple plan will be recommended: running with the a-pawn as far as possible. If it reaches a6, it undermines Black’s control over the c6- and d5-squares, may open up for Ra1-a5 (a defensive move!) and creates tactical possibilities against the rook on a8.

Following in the footsteps of Fischer, Black should probably block with ...a7-a6.

White also likes to move the c-pawn. It may be an idea to start with d4-d5, to stop Black from blocking the position with 1.c5 d5, but that has its drawbacks as well. The d5-square is occupied and Black gets the e5-square for a knight or a bishop. White gets the d4-square, but the manoeuvre Nd2-b3-d4 is often too slow.

Another way to open the queenside is Nc3-d5. In case of c4xd5, White triples on the c-file with Rdc1 and Ra3-c3. But he also has to watch out so the d5-pawn doesn’t become too weak.

All in all, the structure is very complicated and even after the game it could be difficult to point out which moves were good or bad. But I think those guidelines make the position relatively easy to play over the board.

e3 Poison

Contents

e3 Poison

By

Axel Smith

Structure of the Book

Bibliography

Key to symbols used

Thanks

Position 3

Position 4

Unclear Positions

Shameless Advertisement

Pawn Structures

Games

Recap

Theory

Exercises

Exercise 1

Exercise 2

Exercise 3

Exercise 4

Pawn Structures