Nova Daily - 22 March 2025

Hi!

Earlier this week I had a game that I was happy to finish with a draw quite early. I didn't play well, nor did my opponent who had more rating than I did, and I felt like a draw was an acceptable result. It turned out that both of us had missed our chances (the analysis of that game will still be forthcoming), and I thought not to miss Nxe4 next time I'd be facing this system.

Today I played against the very same opponent, again with black. I was quite sure that we were both hell-bent on setting the record straight. Spoiler alert: one of us did. Spoiler 2: that was me.

My thoughts:

The game was pretty straightforward, and I don't think I've missed much. Only the opening and the 10...Qxb2 situation are interesting to investigate; everything else seems to be good enough. With all due respect to my opponent, it felt like this was a quick and easy game.

Model games:

3...d6 is a bit of a sideline to the more popular alternatives 3...Ne4 (suggested by Alburt/Dzindzichashvili/Perelshteyn) and 3...Qb6 (proposed by Krykun). but it is the move recommended by Castellanos. What he doesn't recommend is 4...g6 because of 5.e4 (which my opponent played in the first game). Instead, he suggests 4...h6, when black fianchettoes the bishop only after white has decided what to do with the bishop.

If white answers 4...h6 with 5.Bxf6 (as recommended by Plichta), black gets a decent position with a lot of pressure on the long dark-square diagonal after g6, Bg7 and f5. I'm not going to repeat Castellanos' analysis here, and there is a bit of theoretical knowledge involved here, but there is much more to it than Plichta suggests. In the game, white played 5.Bxf6 without black having spent time on h7-h6. There is no advantage for white in having the pawn remain on h7, so the early trade means an additional gain of time for black.

I conclude that the trade on f6 may not actually work that well when white has already pushed the pawn to d5. Bearing in mind that white might not want to capture on f6, I'm wondering and pondering why black should probe the bishop in the first place.

I think that the answer lies in the moves that the bishop has. It's liable to attack on f4 and h4, and it stands in the way on e3 and d2. Castellanos concludes that the bishop's best square to go to is c1, which is an unlikely move for the unprepared player and doesn't grant white any advantage to begin with.

In the blitz game below, white, with a higher rating and a CM title, was outplayed from the start. They only got away with it because black timed out in a winning position.

The analysis:

What can I take away from this game?

1. The ideas Bxf6 and d4-d5 don't coexist well in the Trompowsky, because black will be able to fianchetto the bishop and exert a lot of pressure against the dark squares on white's queenside. Palliser already advised against pushing the d-pawn after 3.Bxf6 exf6 back in 2009, and the circumstances don't change significantly if white trades on f6 following 4...h6 (instead of 4...g6) in the 3.d5 d6 4.Nc3 variation. Black's play has been underrated in this line for a long time.
2. In Benoni structures it's often an idea for black to get rid of the light-square bishop as soon as the opportunity presents itself. It's better to trade it for a knight and put the pawns on light squares to hinder white's light-square bishop. The exf trade can come in handy for black: the pawn can move up to f5, and there's no need to do anything on the e-file because white's pawn is already stationary on d5.
3. When white has already traded the dark-square bishop, black should seriously begin to consider increasing the pressure against b2. In the game, 10...Qxb2 was the right course of action.
4. The piece sacrifice on h5 can be strong, so black has to make sure to be ready for it, either by counterattacking or by moving the queen back to f6 in time.