Alekhine 4 Pawns Attack - help wanted

When you play the Alekhine Defense, you have to be prepared for White to play the Four Pawns Attack.
I have a line against it that goes something like this:

And now White's e-pawn is lost and he can't move it without losing his Bishop.
However, instead of playing 10. d5, White can opt for 10. dxc5:

And suddenly Black has two nasty, isolated, doubled pawns and a somewhat exposed King.

I don't like this position at all for Black. So much so, that I'm almost considering abandoning the entire line and look something else against the 4PA. I'd rather not do that.

So where does White go from here? What should be his plan? What is the compensation for the two isolated pawns?

I suggest u to read again what OP wants...

And to answer the OP's question, I agree, black's position (2nd diagram) is not good.

U can't really avoid, unless u play something else.

Your system with dxe5 and g6 may not be so good.

But the one with g6 without dxe5 is a well established main line.

This is advocated by Timothy Taylor in his excellent "Alekhine Alert".

 

10. dxc5 N6d7 11. e6 fxe6 is totally playable for black. Although white has a lead in development, he has no means to directly attack your e6-pawn, thanks to white’s c4-pawn blocking his own bishop. On the other hand, black can threaten the c5-pawn with Na6 or Qa5, to which white doesn’t have a good reply.

Stockfish recommends 12. Be2 Nc6 (12... Qa5 13. O-O Bxc3 is playable too) 13. O-O Bxc3 14. bxc3 Nf6. It’s not easy to calculate in such a complicated position, though I don’t think white can happy with tripled c-pawns.

I play e6 rather than d6 when I play the Alekhine. For instance:

It is another way to approach the opening, but I have had success with it. 

e6 is a bad move, blocking Bc8.

Just to illustrate my "e6 is a bad move", here a game with some light annotations, showing how e6 could be bad.

Notice the idea dxc5 instead of d5, not allowing e6xd5...

Maybe 8...c5 brings a different dynamic because you haven't castled and the white knight is not on f3 yet. Also 5...g6 is a decent move as suggested. And it seems 5...Bf5 scores well enough too! And for 2 Nc3 prepare a line with 2...e5 or 2...d5 and White will have to play chess also  

rterhart wrote: When you play the Alekhine Defense, you have to be prepared for White to play the Four Pawns Attack.I have a line against it that goes something like this:And now White's e-pawn is lost and he can't move it without losing his Bishop.However, instead of playing 10. d5, White can opt for 10. dxc5:And suddenly Black has two nasty, isolated, doubled pawns and a somewhat exposed King.I don't like this position at all for Black. So much so, that I'm almost considering abandoning the entire line and look something else against the 4PA. I'd rather not do that.So where does White go from here? What should be his plan? What is the compensation for the two isolated pawns?

Jaystone54321, I would like to know what your contribution is? Or the point you are trying to make? Thank You, when you clarify.

I think the original poster meant to ask where does Black go from here, because they talk about the problems with Black's position as with a understanding of White's dominance, and seem to be on the verge of giving up the line as Black. Maybe the original poster should clarify as well  Maybe the original poster is a poser!

 

I got the line from a (very old) video from IM Chris Dunworth, who indeed recommends playing Qa5. He gives:

and concludes: "In this position, White has better placed pieces and fewer pawn weaknesses, but let's face it, he's got fewer pawns!"

I find this a bit smug. I like my pawns, but I think I'd still take White over Black here.

inkspirit's other suggestion is interesting as well. White might be more annoyed with his tripled pawns, than Black with his doubled.

(As it happens, the free sample of Dunworth's video includes his analysis of the 4PA. You can watch it here. 4PA starts at 6.20, White's dxc5 from 12.40. And no laughing at the animations!)

 White can still play 9. dxc5 here, and Black would be in the same situation, wouldn't he?

Maybe you play without queens, 9...Qd1 10 Rd1 N6d7 11 e6 Bc3 12 cb fe 13 Nf3 Nc6 14 Bd3 e5 15 Be4 Nf6 16 Bc6 bc 17 Ne5 Ng4 18 Nc6 Bb7 19 Bd4 Rf8 20 h3 Bc6 21 hg Rf7 22 Rf1 Bg2 23 Rf7 Kf7 for example. Of course both sides have options along the way, but I would play as Black here, he may potentially have two passers to white's tripled passers, etc. You need to determine if you like imbalances like this,or vary earlier with 5...g6 or 5...f5 for example. Thanks!

Actually, that's not bad. It's a bit chaotic, but I like that. And I suspect White will be mighty annoyed with his tripled pawns, especially if Black manages to throw in a bxc6 at some point.

I will continue to play 8... 0-0, 9... c5 (instead of the immediate 8... c5), hoping White will play 10. d5 but if he does play dxc5, I now have options: I can follow Dunworth's suggestion and play Qa5, or follow your line.

Thanks for your help everyone. If the line comes up in a game any time soon, I'll let you know how I get on.

How are you going to solve this center problem.

White's moves are Leela's choices!

 

 

1.   9....  e6?? you blocked your LSB completely, black has no compensation for giving up the centre.

2. .9....... Be6 10. Qb3 Nc3 11, Be6

3.  9........ Nxc3 11.bxc3 and dead in 12 moves, lol.