Alekhine played the Nimzo Indian Defense better than anyone else ever has.
He rarely played his own creation Alekhine's Defense.
I need to repeat that Vladimir Bagirov played Aklekhine's Defense better that anyone else in the history of grandmaster chess. I do not know of all grandmaster games with Alekhine's Defense but Bagirov was very rarely was confronted with the Four Pawns' Attack throughout the 1970's, 80's and 90's. Very rarely. Just for the record Bagirov went 54 - 76 - 28 with Alekhine's. Only 28 loses in 158 games. 130 games were drawn or won.
There are interesting similarities between the Nimzo Indian and Alekhine's Defense in the pawn moves. It seems odd that Bagirov did not favor the Nimzo Indian at all with the Black pieces.
In grandmaster play, the Modern Variation of Alekhine's Defense has been played by White in 50% of all games. So if there needs to be study involved, the Modern Variation would have to be the first variation being studied. The Four Pawns' Attack looks good to White, but if it were the best variation we would see it in 50% of games with the White (which we do not). The best analysis on the Four Pawns' Attack has already been done in the mid 1970's. Let us just say Black should sucessfully survive against the variation. My personal belief is that Black has nothing to fear from the White move 5.exd6. It almost makes the game an Exchange Variation, but with a White pawn on f4. Black will have resources whichever way he recaptures the pawn (as d6xe5 is not a forced move for Black by any means) if he chooses 4...Bf5. White will be weak on the e1-h4 diagonal and cannot castle in less than three moves. Thanks to all of White's pawn moves Black can remain ahead in development (and have the option of queenside castling. If this variation were that good for White more GM's would be playing it. If this refuted Black's play they would be flocking to it.
If Alekhine's Defense had been refuted by the Four Pawns Attack, then Bobby Fischer would not have played it against Boris Spassky in Iceland. People have been trying to refute Alekhine's Defense for decades with the Four Pawns' Attack. It ain't happened yet. That Alekhine's Defense has been refuted at all is like an "old wives" tale or a fairy tale. "The big bad wolf played f4" whoooooo!! The three little pigs ran away screaming. "Oh, noooooooooo". The piggies ran for their lives. The "seekers of truth and wisdom" are still trying to prove Alehine's Defense is no good. "There is something wrong with it, we just haven't proved it yet."
I can see no need for Black to respond with 5.d6xe5 here. If Alekhine's Defense seems too cramped and you have no chances of an early checkmate, then you just play a different opening. Apparently Alekhine did not like it too much either.
Alekhine Defence
1.e2-e4 Ng8-f6
What are the ideas behind the Alekhine Defence? Why is it an opening that is frowned upon by many chess players? Is it really an effective playing strategy?
These are some of the many common questions about the Alekhine Defence. Well, to understand it we need to examine it closely and learn a little history about it.
This is one of the most theoretically revolutionary openings in the history of the game. First made famous by the later World Champion Alexander Alekhine in 1921, it is based on a startling concept, which at the time bordered on heresy: to provoke White to advance his pawns in an attempt to prove that these advanced centre pawns are in fact a weakness rather than a strength.
2. e4-e5 Nf6-d5
3.d2-d4
3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 has its supporters, but it is not at all clear if White's pawn is better on c5 than on c2. 3. Nc3!? is interesting, with the idea of 3...Nxc3 4.dxc3! with active play to compensate for the doubled pawns.
3. ... d7-d6
The attack on White's pawn centre begins. After ...dxe5 and ...Nc6, the d4-pawn becomes the target. Now White must decide whether to gain further space in the centre or content himself with a quieter approach.
A) 4. c2-c4 Nd5-b6
5. f2-f4
This is the Four Pawns Attack, unquestionably the critical line of the Alekhine, at least in terms of the philosophy behind strategic theory. It should be noted that instead of supporting the centre with the f-pawn, it has recently become very popular for White to adopt the quiet alternative 5.exd6!?, contenting himself with greater piece mobility and a slight space advantage. But let's return to 5.f4. How do we evaluate such a position? Is White, with his imposing centre, reading to start a mating attack? Or is his centre a house of cards that is about to collapse? In practice, both of these events occur, and this is why we are looking at some of the most complex and exciting variations in opening literature.
Usually Black aims to put d4 under immediate pressure with
5. ... d6xe5
However, 5...g6!? or 5...Bf5 are both also possible.
6.f4xe5 Nb8-c6
The hyper-aggressive 6...c5!? 7.d5 e6 is playable as well.
7.Bc1-e3!
If 7.Nf3? Bg4, White's centre is in crisis.
7... Bc8-f5
8.Nb1-c3 e7-e6
9.Ng1-f3
Now Black generally continues with either a solid 9...Bg4, the ambitious 9...Qd7, or the normal developing move
9. ... Bf8-e7
This is considered to be the main line, at least in terms of statistical frequency.
10.d4-d5
Or 10.Be2.
10. ... e6xd5
11.c4xd5 Nc6-b4
12.Nf3-d4 Bf5-d7
13.e5-e6 f7xe6
14.d5xe6 Bd7-c6
15.Qd1-g4 Be7-h4+!
16.g2-g3 Bc6xh1
17.0-0-0
This line is not forced, but it gives an idea of the complexity of these variations. This being the case, it is not a surprise that the percentage of draws in these lines is very low. Nonetheless, years of practical experience, as well as statistics produced by hundreds of games, show that White wins more or less the same percentage of games as he would by employing any other opening. Therefore, the Four Pawns Attack does not refute the Alekhine, as some believe; nor does it give Black an advantage, as others maintain.
B) 4.Ng1-f3
Observing the Latin maxim 'in medio stat virtus', White does occupy the centre, but he doesn't overdo it! Play in this line is quiet and the variations are characterized by slow manoeuvring. Now Black can choose from the following alternatives: 4...Nc6, 4...g6, 4...dxe5 or 4...Bg4.
B1) 4. ... Nb8-c6
This is ambitious but premature. After
5.c2-c4 Nd5-b6
6.e5-e6! f7xe6
White is on top after either 7.Ng5 or 7.Nc3
B2) 4. ... g7-g6
This is known as the Alburt Variation. This line was very fashionable in the 1980s following its adoption by Fischer in his 1972 World Championship match against Spassky. Today, however, it is seldom used.
5.Bf1-c4 Nd5-b6
6.Bc4-b3 Bf8-g7
And now, White gains a promising position with either the aggressive 7.Ng5 e6 8.Qf3 or the solid 7.Qe2 Nc6 8. 0-0 0-0 9.h3.
B3) 4. ... d6xe5
This move was underappreciated in the past, but it is now very popular.
5. Nf3xe5!
In case of 5.dxe5?! Bg4, the e-5 pawn seems to be more of a weakness than a strength.
At this point 5...Nd7 is playable, but then Black exposes himself to 6.Nxf7!? Kxf7 7.Qh5+ Ke6
after which 8. c4 (or also 8. g3!?) 8...N5f6 9. d5+ Kd6 10. Qf7! is psychologically demanding for Black, even if it isn't necessarily winning for White. Therefore, recently, Black has shown a preference to prepare ...Nd7 with 5...c6, or to fianchetto the Bf8 with 5...g6, after which the game usually continues as follows: 6. Bc4 c6 7. 0-0 Bg7 8. Re1 0-0 9. Bb3 Nd7 10.Nf3! 11.h3, and White has a slight plus.
B4) 4. ... Bc8-g4
The Classical Variation.
5. Bf1-e2
White gains nothing with the hyperactive 5.Bc4 c6.
5. ... e7-e6
Flohr's move 5...c6!? is interesting. But it leaves the door open to the complications that ensue after 6.Ng5!?.
6. 0-0 Bf8-e7
7. c2-c4 Nd5-b6
8. Nb1-c3 0-0
9. h2-h3
The c4-pawn is indirectly defended, as after ...Bxf3 the b7-pawn is hanging. White can also choose not to play h3, but it is generally a useful move.
9. ... Bg4-h5
10. Bc1-e3 d6-d5
The moves 10...a6 and 10...a5 are both interesting, since 11...Bxf3 is a threat, as the a7-square is now free for the rook.
11.c4-c5
11.b3!? and 11.cxd5 are both rare, but playable.
11. ... Bh5xf3
In order to take the knight to c4 after 12.Bxf3. But, aware of this, White replies
12. g2xf3 Nb6-c8
13. f3-f4