openings 219 | March 13n 2013

what’s hot and what’s not?

XIIIIIIIIY
Miniatures in 9rsn-wqkvl-tr0
9zppzplzpp+p0

the Dutch Defence

9-+-+-+p+0
9+-+n+-+-0
9Q+-+-+-+0
9+-sN-+N+-0
9PzP-zPPzPPzP0
IM Merijn van Delft & IM Robert Ris
9tR-vL-mKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
Tkachiev won the KO rapidplay tournament in Nancy by Frequency
beating Dobrov in the final. Amongst other events that
we take a look at are the Dutch League and the Batavia
Tournament in our hometown of Amsterdam.

what'shot?
Score
At the GM tournament in Dallas, Negi beat Zherebukh in the Breyer
Variation of the Ruy Lopez by constantly creating small threats. Macieja
preferred the Scotch Opening instead, but suffered defeat against Chirila.
We'll examine a fascinating new piece sacrifice in the Closed Sicilian. In
the French Winawer, 6...£a5 remains arguably the most tricky line for
White, as Istratescu demonstrated in his game against Edouard.

Below we'll discuss several dynamic, somewhat offbeat 1.d4 d5 openings.

Ris-Giri in the Dutch League saw Black struggling with the move order in
the Triangle System of the Semi-Slav. The variation 9.dxc5 ¥xc5 10.a3!?
may be a serious threat to the Tarrasch Defence. Fridman found a good
antidote to Winants' 1.d4 d5 2.¥f4.

As usual, Vachier-Lagrave had some exciting games in the Grünfeld,

winning against Gharamian and losing against Dobrov. In our Game
of the Week Reinderman beat Greenfeld in the Anti-Grünfeld. In the
decisive game in the final, Tkachiev got a winning attack in no time
against Dobrov's Benkö Gambit. The Stonewall was popular this week:
Pelletier beat Naiditsch with it, but lost to Dobrov, while Bauer held Bacrot
to a draw. Aagaard-Palo and Swinkels-Reinderman (see p.4) were Source: Megabase + TWIC, 2500+ only
two ultra-short games in the Dutch Defence. Kuipers beat Reinderman
impressively with 1.c4 c6 2.e4 e5 in the last round.

This week wasn't really a 1.e4 week and the Open Sicilian in particular was almost completely absent at top level. At the Candidates'
Tournament that start in only two days' time, we do expect 1.e4 and possibly the Sicilian to play a serious role since all the top players
these days are obliged to have a broad repertoire. Will Gelfand stick to his Sveshnikov and Grischuk to
his Najdorf? What has Ivanchuk prepared for the occasion? We can hardly wait to see it all happen. what’snot?
1 of 4
 openings what’s hot and what’s not? 219 | March 13n 2013

Anti-Grünfeld move order issues

The 5th edition of the Batavia Tournament in Amsterdam was an exciting one, with a field
in which anyone was capable of beating anyone else at any point. In the following game
Reinderman used a tricky move order in the Anti-Grünfeld.
gameoftheweek Reinderman - Greenfeld

Reinderman,D (2599) - Greenfeld,A (2540) played 10...¥e6 and now, for example, 11. 23...£xe4 can now be met by 24.f5! and Black
Batavia GM (Amsterdam), 07.03.2013 0–0–0 ¤8d7 12.d5 ¤xe5 13.dxe6 £e8 14.¤b5 can't defend against the mating threat on the
A15, Anti-Grünfeld and White was on top in Mchedlishvili- dark squares.
Sanikidze, Baku 2011. 24.f5 ¥c4 25.¦f2
1.¤f3 ¤f6 2.c4 g6 3.¤c3 d5 4.cxd5 ¤xd5 11.dxe5 ¤c6 12.h3 ¥e6 13.¦d1 £c8 14.f4 Also strong would have been 25.£h6 £c5+
5.£a4+ ¦d8 26.¦f2 £f8 27.£h4 and White retains a
As mentioned before in CVO, Topalov's XIIIIIIIIY devastating attack.
invention 5.£c2 is no longer popular, in view 9r+qtr-+k+0 25...£c5 26.£f4
of 5...¤c6 6.d4 ¤db4 (see CVO 174). Another 9zppzp-zpp+p0 26.£h6 transposes to the line given in the
critical continuation is 5.£b3 which we covered 9-snn+l+p+0 previous note.
in depth in the game Topalov-Caruana (CVO 26...a5
9+-+-zP-+-0
202). Black could still have tried 26...£f8 even
5...¥d7
9-+-+PzP-+0 though after 27.£h4 his position remains
6.£c2
9+-sN-vL-+P0 pretty bad. By mobilising the a-pawn, Black
More common is 6.£b3 which often transposes 9PzPQ+-+P+0 intends to disturb White's attacking plan.
to lines normally arising from 5.£b3. 9+-+RmKL+R0 27.e6! fxe6 28.fxg6 hxg6 29.¥e5
6...¤b6 xiiiiiiiiy XIIIIIIIIY
The critical test of White's set-up seems to 15.¥c5 9-+-+-+k+0
be 6...¤b4! 7.£b3 c5 8.a3 ¥e6 9.£a4+ ¥d7 White deviates from the stem game of this line 9+pzpr+-+-0
(9...¤4c6 10.e3 (10.b4 is worth considering.) which went 15.b3 ¤b4 16.¦xd8+ £xd8 17.£b1 9-+-+p+p+0
10...¥g7 11.¤g5 ¥c8 12.¤ge4 ¤d7 13.d3 0–0 f5 18.exf6 exf6 19.¥e2 and White enjoyed a
9zp-wq-vL-+-0
14.¥e2 a6 15.0–0 b5 16.£c2 ¥b7 17.¥d2 ¦c8 clear advantage in Topalov-Kamsky, Kazan
and Black had a very comfortable game in 2011 (CVO 123). The text doesn't seem to be a
9-+l+PwQ-+0
Ljubojevic-Howell, Amsterdam 2010.) 10.£d1 real improvement.
9+-zP-+-+P0
(10.£b3 ¥e6 is a well-known repetition.) 15...¦xd1+ 16.£xd1 £e8 17.£c1 ¦d8 18.¥b5 9-+-+-tRP+0
10...¤4c6 11.e3 ¥g7 12.¥e2 0–0 13.0–0 was a6 9+-+-+-mK-0
seen in Karpov-Bacrot, Cap d'Agde 1998 and 18...¥c4 doesn't solve Black's problems, in xiiiiiiiiy
now, after 13...¥f5, Black is perfectly fine. view of 19.¥xc4 ¤xc4 20.¤d5 ¤b6 21.¤xc7 29...¦g7
7.d4 ¥g7 8.e4 0–0 £d7 22.¥xb6 ¤b4 23.0–0 axb6 24.£c4 and Perhaps a better practical try might have been
8...¥g4 was tried unsuccessfully in a high- White's advantage is beyond dispute. 29...a4 and now However, stronger would have
profile game which continued 9.¤e5 ¥xe5 19.¥xc6 £xc6 been 30.g4! (30.£f6? runs into 30...£xf2+!
10.dxe5 ¤c6 11.¥b5 ¥d7 12.¥xc6 ¥xc6 19...bxc6 20.0–0 just leaves Black with a 31.£xf2 a3 and Black seems to hold on, as
13.¥e3 £d7 14.¦d1 £e6 15.0–0 and White's fractured pawn structure on the queenside. White fails to deliver mate after 32.£f6 a2
position clearly had to be preferred in 20.¥xe7 ¦d7? 33.£xg6+ ¢f8 34.£h6+ ¢e8 35.£h8+ ¢f7)
Ivanchuk-Howell, Kallithea 2009. More stubborn would have been 20...¦e8! with and White seems to be winning, e.g. 30...
9.¥e3 ¥g4 the idea of meeting 21.¥f6 with 21...¤d7. a3 31.£h6 £xf2+ 32.¢xf2 a2 33.£xg6+
After the text, play transposes to lines which 21.¥f6 ¢f8 34.£h6+ ¢e8 35.£h8+ ¢f7 36.g5! a1£
usually arise from the variation with 5.£c2. It seems White could have won immediately 37.g6+ ¢xg6 38.£g8+ ¢h5 39.£e8+ ¢h6
Another option is 9...¤c6 even though, after with 21.f5! and now, after the forcing sequence 40.¥f4+ ¢g7 41.£xd7+.
10.d5 ¤e5 11.¤xe5 ¥xe5 12.¦d1 c6 13.dxc6 21...¦xe7 22.f6 £e8 23.£h6 £f8 24.£xf8+ 30.¥xg7 ¢xg7 31.£f6+ ¢h7
bxc6 in Golod-Bok, Biel 2010, White could have ¢xf8 25.fxe7+ ¢xe7 26.¢e2, the rest is a 31...¢h6 quickly leads to mate after 32.£h8+
retained the advantage with 14.f4 ¥g7 15.¥e2². matter of technique. ¢g5 33.g3.
10.¤e5 ¥xe5 21...¤a4 22.0–0 32.¢h2 £d6+ 33.e5 £d7 34.£f8 and Black
Of course, Black isn't forced to give up his Now 22.f5? fails to 22...¤xc3 23.bxc3 £xe4+. resigned, as nothing can be done against
dark-squared ¥ and he could also have 22...¤xc3 23.bxc3 ¥xa2 35.¦f7. 1–0

2 of 4
 openings what’s hot and what’s not? 219 | March 13n 2013

thisweek’sharvest
Closed Sicilian 1.e4 c5 2.¤c3 a6 3.f4 b5 4.¤f3 ¥b7 5.d3 e6 6.g4 d5 7.¥g2 b4 8.exd5 bxc3 9.dxe6 fxe6 10.0–0
XIIIIIIIIY Last Saturday in the Dutch League, I (MvD) faced an old friend, Jaap Houben, who took up chess again a few
9rsn-wqkvlntr0 years ago. Our previous game must have been 20 years before in the regional youth championship. With 6.g4!?
9+l+-+-zpp0 he went in for a true coffee house line and after I played 7...b4 I had no idea what was going on. Only after he
9p+-+p+-+0 played 8.exd5!N did I understand what was happening: I had just run into a nasty piece of home preparation: a
9+-zp-+-+-0 tricky positional piece sacrifice. After the game he told me he had found this with the help of Rybka, on some
9-+-+-zPP+0 other occasion when he was actually preparing the line for Black. After thinking for 19 minutes I realised there
was no way back and took the piece. White has full compensation and the practical problems are considerable,
9+-zpP+N+-0
but somehow I managed to untangle and got the upper hand. Jaap put up a lot of resistance though and in my
9PzPP+-+LzP0 optimism I blundered a piece and could have resigned right away. A more practical way of playing for Black
9tR-vLQ+RmK-0 would have been 6...b4 7.¤e2 d5 with normal counterplay.
xiiiiiiiiy

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.¤f3 c6 4.g3 dxc4 5.¥g2 b5 6.0–0 ¥b7 7.¤c3 a6 8.e4 ¤f6 9.e5 ¤d5 Semi-Slav, Triangle
10.¤g5 ¤xc3 11.bxc3 ¥e7 12.£h5 g6 13.£h6 ¥f8 14.£h3 ¥e7 15.£h6 ¥f8 16.£h3 ¥e7 XIIIIIIIIY
Fianchettoing the ¥ to g2 is a popular set-up in almost any opening with 1.d4. For some reason I (RR) failed to 9rsn-wqk+-tr0
understand it never became a main weapon against the Slav, even though it contains quite some venom. Last 9+l+-vlp+p0
weekend I crossed swords with our former columnist for CVT, Anish Giri, and he evidently wasn't aware of all 9p+p+p+p+0
the ins and outs. His 7...a6?! wastes some valuable time as White can still decide to refrain from playing a4,
9+p+-zP-sN-0
undermining the chain on the queenside. Instead, White switches to the other side after advancing his e-pawn
to the 5th rank, intending to build up a powerful attack against the black ¢. A critical point arises after 12.£h5
9-+pzP-+-+0
when Black has to decide whether to give up his ¥ or weaken his dark squares. In the event of 12...¥xg5, White
9+-zP-+-zPQ0
obtains a devastating initiative on the kingside after 13.¥xg5 £c7 14.f4! with the point of meeting 14...c5 with 9P+-+-zPLzP0
15.¥xb7 £xb7 16.f5!. After 12...g6 Black can't avoid a repetition even though, objectively speaking, White should 9tR-vL-+RmK-0
proceed with 17.¤e4 h5 (otherwise 18.¥h6!) 18.a4! intending to swap off the dark-squared ¥s. xiiiiiiiiy

Tarrasch 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.¤f3 c5 4.cxd5 exd5 5.g3 ¤c6 6.¥g2 ¤f6 7.0–0 ¥e7
XIIIIIIIIY 8.¤c3 0–0 9.dxc5 ¥xc5 10.a3 ¤e4 11.¤xd5 ¥e6 12.¤c3 ¤xc3 13.bxc3
9r+-wq-trk+0 Since Quality Chess's publication of The Tarrasch Defence this dynamic opening has gained an enormous
9zpp+-+pzpp0 boost and various strong GMs have decided to play it again. Authors Jacob Aagaard and Nikolaos Ntirlis have
9-+n+l+-+0 made impressive improvements on the existing theory in various lines, with a special mention being made of the
9+-vl-+-+-0 early deviation 10.a3!? in the main line after 9.dxc5. This modest approach has recently been taken up again
9-+-+-+-+0 by many leading players such as Bacrot and Giri, and not without reason. In Greenfeld-Swinkels Black opted
for 13...¦e8 in the diagram but didn't obtain full compensation for the minus §. Instead, trading off the £s is
9zP-zP-+NzP-0
critical but after the precise 15.¥f4! the novelty 17.¤d4! gives Black some concrete problems to solve. In case
9-+-+PzPLzP0 Black intends to avoid the main line by recapturing on c5, there's still the gambit line 9...d4, which we covered
9tR-vLQ+RmK-0 in CVO 2. In L'Ami-Berelowitsch White managed to neutralise the passed c-pawn and after its elimination the
xiiiiiiiiy Dutchman converted his extra material into a full point. Quite fascinating study material!

1.d4 d5 2.¥f4 ¤f6 3.e3 c5 4.dxc5 ¤c6 5.¥b5 e6 6.b4 ¥d7 7.a3 a5 8.¥xc6 ¥xc6
9.¤d2 axb4 10.axb4 b6 11.b5 ¥xb5 12.¦b1 ¥a6 13.cxb6 ¥d6 14.¤gf3 0–0 15.¤e5 London System
In CVO 41 we presented a weapon for Black against the London System 1.d4 d5 2.¤f3 ¤f6 3.¥f4, based on XIIIIIIIIY
the moves 3...c5! 4.e3 ¤c6 5.c3 £b6! 6.£b3 c4 7.£c2 (after 7.£xb6 axb6 Black will throw both his b-pawns 9r+-wq-trk+0
forward) ¥f5! 8.£c1 h6 9.h3 e6, as in the model game Kamsky-Akopian, Ohrid 2009. Belgian Grandmaster 9+-+-+pzpp0
Winants has claimed many victims with a tricky version of the London System, though: 2.¥f4 ¤f6 3.e3 c5 9lzP-vlpsn-+0
4.dxc5!?. Black is following our general recipe against the London System, but Winants tends just to keep 9+-+psN-+-0
the extra pawn and win the game. I (MvD) had a closer look at this variation a few months ago and it seems
9-+-+-vL-+0
that Fridman's computer was indicating the same variations for Black, as this week's game Winants-Fridman
looked very familiar to me. Key moves for Black include 6...¥d7! and 10...b6!. With 11.b5? White actually made a
9+-+-zP-+-0
mistake. In the diagram position White was allowed to castle following 15...¥b7?, while instead 15...£e7! would
9-+PsN-zPPzP0
have given Black a nice edge. 9+R+QmK-+R0
xiiiiiiiiy
3 of 4
 openings what’s hot and what’s not? 219 | March 13n 2013

it’syourmove
XIIIIIIIIY XIIIIIIIIY
O 9r+-+k+-tr0 O9rsnlwqk+-tr0
9zp-zpqsnpzpp0 9zppzppzpnvlp0
9nzp-+p+-+0 9-+-+-+p+0
9+-+pzP-+-0 9+-+-+pvL-0
9-+-zP-+-+0 9-+-zP-+-zP0
9+-+-+N+-0 9+-sN-zP-+-0
9PzPPwQNzPPzP0 9PzPP+-zPP+0
9tR-+-mK-+R0 9tR-+QmKLsNR0
xiiiiiiiiy xiiiiiiiiy

lastweek’ssolutions
XIIIIIIIIY
Negi-Djukic, Cappelle la Grande 2013 9r+-+k+-tr0
Something has gone seriously wrong for Black in this Sicilian position. White can just ignore the pressure 9+p+l+nvl-0
against c3 and a2, and just continue his own attack with 17.¦hf1! which incidentally brings the final piece into 9p+-zpp+-zp0
play. 17...¥xc3 Black doesn't have much of a choice. 18.bxc3 £xa2 19.£f4 Here White could have finished 9wq-+-+-+-0
the game with the pretty 19.£xd6! ¤xd6 (Including 19...£a1+ 20.¢d2 doesn't change much.) 20.¥h5+ ¤f7
9-+-+P+-vL0
21.¥xf7+ ¢f8 22.¥xe6+. 19...0–0 20.¥e7! Now it's also over. 20...¤g5 21.¥xf8 ¦c8 22.¦d3 e5 23.£h4 ¥a4
24.¥d1 ¥xc2 25.¥xc2 £a1+ 26.¢d2 £xf1 27.¥b3+ ¢xf8 28.£xh6+ ¢e8 29.£g6+ ¢f8 30.£g8+ 1–0
9+-sN-+-+-0
9PzPPwQL+PzP0
9+-mKR+-+R0
XIIIIIIIIY xiiiiiiiiy
9-+rwq-trk+0 Cheparinov-Yilmaz, Reykjavik Open 2013
9zpp+n+p+p0 Black's doubled f-pawns are restricting the mobility of White's forces. With his next move Cheparinov aims to
9-+p+-snp+0 open the position for his ¥s. 13.g4! fxg4 14.hxg4 ¥e7 An earlier game, Lerner-Felgaer, Jerusalem 2005, went
9+-+-+p+-0 14...h5 15.gxh5 ¤xh5 and White could have retained a clear advantage had he played 16.£g2!. 14...£e7 might
be Black's best option. 15.¢g2 ¤b6 16.¥b3 £d7 17.a5 ¤a8 In the event of 17...¤bd5 White has 18.e4 ¤xc3
9PvlLzP-+-+0
19.bxc3 £xg4+ 20.£xg4 ¤xg4 21.¦b1± and White has excellent compensation for the § because of his massive
9+-sN-zPQ+P0 centre, pair of ¥s and the backward § on b7. 18.g5 ¤e8 19.¤e4 ¤ac7 20.¦h1 ¤d5 21.¥d2 ¤g7 22.¦h3 and
9-zP-+-zPP+0 White went on to convert his overwhelming advantage.
9tR-vL-+RmK-0
xiiiiiiiiy

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 € 30 a year (that’s less than € 0.60 per issue!). More info can be found at ChessVibes.com/openings.

© 2009-2013 ChessVibes. Copyright exists on all original material published by ChessVibes. Any copying or distribution (reproduction, via print,
electronic format, or in any form whatsoever), as well as posting on the web, is strictly prohibited without prior written permission.

4 of 43