Author: Albert Silver
Date: 13:52:20 06/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 08, 2001 at 13:42:01, John Merlino wrote:
>On June 08, 2001 at 08:29:36, J.Dufek wrote:
>
>>18.Rh3 in game no. 6 - if is my memory good, this is main variation in this
>>"old" line.
>>Bad is maybe all line (20.Rd1?!, better 20.Qd2), but not move 18.Rh3.
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> J.
>
>Perhaps, but MCO-14 states that, after 19...g6 there is a "small edge for
>Black". Both CM6K and CM8K defined this "small edge" as about -0.75.
>
>So, anybody want to put their engines on these positions?:
No need. I am an expert in this line and have dropped it from my repertoire. I
have studied it in great depth and have played exactly this line. 17...c6 is the
kiss of death for White in this line. 18.Rh3 isn't the culprit. Black has 2
other well known options instead of 17...c6 which are Kf8 and d5. d5 in
particular was Karpov's choice in his book, "The Open Game in Action", but
possibly because in his eyes it is sufficient to secure Black an edge, which is
all the argument you need to reason White shouldn't choose this line.
For a long time, Black only played 13...0-0 and the theory of this variation
concentrated on the knight sacrifice on h7:
[D]r1bq1rk1/ppp1nppp/3p4/3P2N1/2B1R3/8/PP3PPP/R2Q2K1 w - -
Although no way could be shown to force a win for White, there are plenty of
alternatives and White does get a strong attack, though I personally believe
that with best play a draw should be the result. Then the analysts found
13...h6!, and the line 14.Qe2 (neither 14.Nxf7 nor 14.Qh5 work) hxg5 15.Re1 Be6
(better than 15...Kf8 or 15...0-0 of course) 16.dxe6 f6!
[D]r2qk2r/ppp1n1p1/3pPp2/6p1/2B1R3/8/PP2QPPP/4R1K1 w kq -
and with this (solid blockaded position and no clear compensation for the pawn)
the line was dropped for many years.
To tell you the truth even 16...f5 (and if 17.Re3 g4!) is annoying. Then in the
late 80s, a number of correspondence games appeared in the Informants first
showing the whole Re4-e3-h3 maneuver, and the line experienced a revival. As the
theory advanced, this line was re-analyzed in depth, and was again pretty much
dropped from the higher echelons.
Having started learning this line as a complete patzer, and having scored a few
victories with it against less well versed opponents, I was very reluctant to
truly drop it from my repertoire. By 1997, I knew I should as my rating
indicated I should be looking for an alternative (I had been rated over 2200
Fide for 3 years by then) as I knew it was dubious, but my local opponents all
seemed to be even less well prepared, and continuously dodged the mainlines.
Then in a strong open, I got trampled and stomped (chalk one for human
stubbornness and stupidity), and my very kind opponent IM Everaldo Matsuura
spent some time with me explaining why I simply couldn't play it. I subsequently
checked and rechecked and then rechecked again, and that was it for me and 9.d5.
I now only play it in blitz games.
Albert
>
>Before 18.Rh3:
>
>[D]r2qk2r/pp2n1p1/2ppPp2/6p1/2B5/4R3/PP2QPPP/4R1K1 w kq - 0 1
>
>After 18.Rh3:
>
>[D]r2qk2r/pp2n1p1/2ppPp2/6p1/2B5/7R/PP2QPPP/4R1K1 b kq - 0 1
>
>Before 20.Rd1:
>
>[D]r2qk3/pp2n3/2ppPpp1/6p1/2B5/7P/PP2QP1P/4R1K1 w q - 0 1
>
>(hope I put all positions in correctly....)
>
>jm
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.