What is New in Theory?:Oct.09

Submitted by chessbibliophile on Sun, 11/01/2009 at 5:29am.

http://www.chesspublishing.com/content/

Chesspublishing.com is celebrating its 10th Anniversary.The tiny sapling that was planted a decade before has now become a banyan tree.Cheers.What is more, every one is invited to the party.If you visit the site, you will receive a nice little gift, The Best of 10 Years of ChessPublishing.

The site is a treasuretrove of happy invention.Here we shall see a game in Slav Defence, (1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6).The Slav has a reputation as a solid, but dull opening unlike its volatile cousin, the Semi-Slav. But this is far from true.The Slav also has dynamic lines, and its study can be rewarding. Unlike the Queen’s Gambit Declined (1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6) this defence allows an easy development of the bishop on c8 to f5.What is more, Black can take the pawn on c4 now that it defend it with…b5. It’s like having an improved version of the Queen’s Gambit Accepted (1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4).

One point that used to bother me all these years was whether white would allow the Black bishop on f5 to operate. All that he needs to do is to play Nh4 and Nxg6.After this, Blak’s light-squared pawns would be vulnerable as the bishop is no more available to defend them. 

 

This month’s game offers an answer to the question. Before we see the game let me first explain the logic of Black’s play.

1)White spends two valuable tempi in getting that bishop.This gives Black time and opportunity for speedy development of his own pieces.

2)With this exchange White has lost the knight, its key defender for the kingside, laying it bare to attack.

3)The opening of the h-file after this exchange is a gift for Black to attack the castled king.

But isn’t Black supposed to castle on the kingside? In this game he doesn’t. His Majesty moves to his winter palace, the queenside. Also, he does not take the pawn on c4.It’s White who takes the pawn on d5, opening up lines on the queenside. The result is an entertaining battle.

 In the heat of battle Black missed a win here.So this is your first challenge.How do you finish the game in style?

  

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 So what happened next? Carried away by sheer momentum Malakhov decided to finish the game with a flourish.Tiger, no mean attacking player himself, decided to throw himself into fire and was immediately consumed by flames.Where did he go wrong?

 


 

 

 

 

 

 


A comedy of errors!For White players who are understandably unhappy about the outcome of the opening here I would suggest two regular lines of Slav.If they are peacefully inclined, they can go for the Exchange Variation (1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.Bf4).It offers fewer chances for Black.If they are aggressively inclined, they should go for the critical Modern Line ( 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.a4 Bf5 6.Ne5). 

You would find more on these variations at the same site.Happy Hunting!

Links:

http://www.chess.com/article/view/chesspublishingcom-reviewpart-ii

http://www.chess.com/article/view/what-is-new-in-theorysept2009

 

 

 

» posted in Opening Theory
 

Comments:

by chessbibliophile - 15 days ago
Bangalore India
Member Since: May 2009
Member Points: 838

Dear Billyidle,

The Slav is quite different from the Semi-Slav.Shirov grew up in Latvia and there the influence of the Semi-Slav was very strong on account of the work done by Tal, Bagirov and Shabalov.

by BillyIdle - 16 days ago
Humboldt Park, Chicago United States
Member Since: Aug 2008
Member Points: 3578

    I noticed just yesterday (when doing a little review of the Slav Defense) that Alexey Shirov has been taking the c4 pawn in some of his games with the Semi-Slav.  He may have taken it up after Anatoly Karpov had crushed his King's Indian Defense formations. 

    It was not odd to me that Shirov was playing the Slav Defense because Alexander Bagirov was his chess coach.  Bagirov was the leading expert on the Nimzo-Larsen Attack, but oddly never played the Nimzo-Indian Defense in tournaments during the 1990's.  The Slav was his main weapon - and Bagrivov was a man who prefered to win in the endgames.  He patterned his play after Alekhine's ideas, but did not (like Alekhine play the Nimzo).  I guess he felt (at GM level) his winning chances were better with the Slav.   Others may have thought so too..

 

Add your comment:

Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.