An interesting Sveshnikov sideline

I only recently started experimenting with the Sveshnikov after going through a bunch of master games and what is considered the 'main lines' (since I don't have a book on the opening) ... and I've had my first outing with it two weeks ago.

I've posted the game here (with some annotations/analysis):

http://blog.chess.com/the_cheradenine/a-fun-line-in-the-sveshnikov

I decided on the move 11...Nd4 at the board, being unaware of whether it is an actual line or whether it's considered to be sound. It just seemed ok, intuitively (it's a pawn sacrifice). I've found a few games played with it, which seem ok, but my question is: Have you seen this line before? If you're playing the Sveshnikov yourself, what is your take on it? Would you have preferred 11...b4?

And also - what are the most common lines that you have faced in practice, in club/tournament play? Which do you find to be the most critical/challenging?

Thx for the feedback :)

For awhile, I gave flight to this fanciful idea:

Looks interesting... Could you maybe show a game or two of those that you've played? :)

I wish I could.  I played this back in the 1980s and I don't have any of my scoresheets from that era.  It was before I started using Chessbase also.  Since then, I've more or less dropped the Sicilian from my repertoire, using it only as a surprise weapon.  I did check and there are some games in Opening Explorer.  My gut feeling is that it can't really be sound, but it is probably usable in normal tournament chess.

Wow, I like this.  This has to have been tried by at least a master somewhere?  Positionally makes great sense, only thing holding it back is that you lose a pawn :)  I'm interested in seeing someone make this work.

Looked it up, it's been tried but had some bad results :)  I like the idea though, will save it for speed games, thanks for sharing it.

Dragan Velimirovic has played 8...d5?! in the past quite a few times. After 9.Nxd5 Bxa3 10.bxa3 Qa5+ 11.Qd2 Qxd2+ 12.Bxd2 white is simply better (bishop pair, half a pawn up).

I scored quite well in sub-2200 play in tournament time controls, and never tested it against Masters.  It's certainly "dazzling" enough to befuddle non-Masters.  But IM Pfren is quite correct - and as my intuition already knew, it just had to be bad against accurate play.  In the end, I cannot, in good conscience, advise you to play something against non-Masters that you wouldn't be comfortable with against the best available moves.  Still, those days were fun!

Thx for the info :)

Yes, such moves usually are... Though I see that some people are actually willing to play the following weird move (I only discovered this yesterday, so I guess I really have to look up some of these more obscure lines for when I'm playing White):

Punished more severely than having ruptured pawns and a deficit in development?  And is that "cheradenine" as in the book "Use of weapons"?

Haha, yes! It's one of my favorite books (as I'm really a Iain M. Banks fan :D) - but no one had recognized the name before :)

Yes, I know, the position is just hideous for Black, I am wondering why they have covered it in their book... it's obviously not a more promising response and it's dismantled quite easily... or maybe I'm missing something? After all, I haven't seen the book, I've just seen the chapter titles "Taking the Sting Out of the Open Sicilian"

http://www.chessville.com/reviews/DangerousWeaponsNimzoIndian_and_Sicilian.htm

It may look silly, but it's not that easy to "punish". For one thing, after the natural 5.Bb5 white has no advantage at all. IMO the most promising line is 5.ed5 Qxd5 6.Be3, which probably is a slight advantage for white, but the Black position is entirely playable.

Reminds me of an old smyslov game where he as white gave himself similar pawns.  The annotations said something about him not respecting his opponent :)  50 some moves later they drew.

The main drawback I see is black has no way to play for a win, and basically, like smyslov, wants to prove they can draw an ugly position.

I am not quite so optimistic... I try to prove that I can lose an ugly position.

Why? Black does have a pawn majority on the kingside, and he certainly can play for a win. I don't get you.

Haha, well, you're right.  I shouldn't have said "no way"

Well, this might be an old analysis of the line, but here is an example of how White can play for an advantage in that endgame:

http://www.chesscafe.com/text/lane124.pdf

I never regard Lane's analyses too highly, and this is just another case. Black should mobilize his majority with ...e5 and ...f5 as soon as possible- if he playes passively, then white has good chances to exploit the weakened Black queenside. Black is absolutely fine in that endgame- white may try the same but with the white squared bishops not traded: 5.Nxc6 bc6 6.ed5 Qxd5 7.Nc3 Qxd1+ 8.Nxd1. This one has better chances to achieve something, but Black again should play ...e5 and ...f5 quickly.