Grünfeld Defense: Classical Exchange Variation

As some of you might know, I'm currently studying the Grünfeld Defense to add into my black repertoire. Its sharp lines and diversity make it a very interesting opening. 

However, in some lines I think it's difficult to decide what line to play. One such line is in the Classical Exchange Variation. A short introduction:

As you understand, I'm not sure what to play as my 10th move. At first I was hesitant to go into widely explored lines after 10...Bg4, especially the following line:

The 12.Bxf7 variation is very complicated, black is a pawn down but should be able to get a position that is at least equal. 

I've already played the 10...Bd7 line in one OTB game which I posted on these forums as well. See: http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-analysis/help-me-analyse-my-game2 for my game analysis.

As for the 10...Qc7 line, I'm not really known to this position. White is most likely to play an early Bf4 to chase away the queen.

I would like to have a theoretical discussion on these lines, which one do you prefer? And why? Please provide your answers with subsequent moves and possibly even with games. 

Thanks for your input!

I'm learning the Grunfeld too. Although I am much worse than you, do you think we could exchange some ideas?

That's exactly the point of this thread. Let's go a little bit further into that line. 

It is said that Kasparov had prepared this entire game, including the manoeuvre leading to perpetual check. However, other grandmasters have shown to be able to create more play with black after playing 17...b5. 

Both games show that black has good play after 15...e5. Maybe someone can show a better plan/way to go with white?

There must surely be more people interested in these lines?

I'm interested in these lines.  I'm also afraid to go too deep into theory where I have no business going.  "It is said that Kasparov had prepared this entire game, including the manoeuvre leading to perpetual check."  I'm not able to prepare that much.  That said, I have played 10...Bg4.  Did you know top grandmasters are playing 10...Na5 now?

I actually wasn't aware of that, yet. My opening book just says that 10...Na5 11.Bd3 Bg4 is not the way to avoid the Seville Variation because there is no longer pressure on d4, and white will just play 12.Rb1.

If I look at recent games with 10...Na5, they mostly play 11...b6 and later put the bishop on b7. Interesting. I should look into that.

Yelena Dembo's book was one of the first to cover 10...Na5 11...b6. It is updated a bit with an illustrated game in Delchev's more recent one. Delchev's book main recommendation is the 10...Qc7 line 11Rc1 Rd8 12Bf4 Qd7 13pxp Qe8 14Bd5 Bd7 is the line difficult for black to win from.

In the  10...Bg4 11f3 line it is the exchange sacrifice with a later d5 causing black most headaches at moment.

I agree, it's highly theoretical.

Back to the variation discussed above: I'm currently playing an interesting game in the 10...Na5 variation, of which I will post an extensive analysis when it's done.

Years ago I used to like the gruenfeld as black but so many whites were avoiding it with an english move order and I was constantly finding myself in KID lines so I switched to the KID and we all know there is hardly any theory on the KID and its not complicated at all.  

Recent Avrukh book covers 10...Bg4 11f3 Bd7, rather than the even more theoretical 11...Na5. Also 10...Qc7 11Rc1 b6, rather than Rd8.

I have often wondered why after 10...Qc7  11 dxc5 !?  isnt played more often ? according to my database it scores well for white 

Well, the question from black´s point of view is: Is white's position better with or without the pawn on f3? Obviously, it leaves the bishop on e3 undefended, but is that enough to justify giving white f3 'for free'? Plus it defends the centre pawn on e4.

I think I'd prefer 10...Bd7 right away.

Isn't that what black wants?

1. White greatly weakens its pawn structure, breaking up its strong centre.
2. How likely is keeping the pawn on c5?

I can only find two handfuls of games played in this position, so I don't know how much value to put into those statistics.

I always feel those white pawns are like an inevitable steamroller of doom, and the whole thing is a race against time to kill the opponents king. Am I right?

Black is hoping to attack/blockade the centre and show it weak. Need good opening preparation to make it work though.

After 10...Qc7 11pxp Ne5 black is regaining pawn quite quickly I think and looks better for black. The stats are favourable for white, but no games involving FIDE 2400+ so not sure how significant that is.

10...Bg4 11f3 Bd7 does look quite obscure mentions that Be3 undefended helps black in some variations. Haven't actually found any yet, but am new to opening.

At the moment 10..Qc7 Rc1 b6 makes more sense to me because not sure if find queen getting pushed around to Qe8 all that attractive in 10...Qc7 11Rc1 Rd8 12Bf4 Qd7 13pxp Qe8 line.

Also interesting is the 10. Rc1 side variation. The idea is that white refrains from castling and tries to play h4. Lets take a look:

Repeating the comment after move 12: This move is supposed to be the answer to all blacks problems. But why? Why can white not just play 13. h4 and continue his original plan?

Any ideas? I don't think this variation should cause black too many problems, but maybe some of you have original ideas?

I am just reviving this thread because it is exactly what I need. Any players out there want to make some improvements into these lines? I am mostly interested in 10...Bg4 11.f3 Bd7 12.Rb1 Qc7 

Interesting thougths Daeru, why would you allow white to play 11.f3? The advantage of f3 is that the centre is better guarded, while the disadvantage is that the bishop is left unguarded. However, in your variation, after 10...Bg4 11.f3 Bd7 12.Rb1 Qc7 13.Bf4 Qc8 , the bishop is back on a good square with no obvious reason to doubt the f3 pawn.

Having said that, if GMs play this variation (even a top GM like Svidler has employed this variation) it must have some advantages to the immediate 10... Bd7 as well. 

I also don't know the idea behind it but Svidler is one of my favourite players and I saw him play this line so I started wondering why he does it. What do you think about 13...e5?! as a way to handle Bf4. Is it just a positional error allowing white to play Bg3 followed by d5?

There are a lot of details 10...Bg4 11.f3 Bd7 in Avrukh. The Svidler game is in a recent New in chess magazine, if want more explanations.