From Jonathon Rowson's book "Understanding the Grunfeld":
"5. Nxe4?! dxe4 leaves White with trouble developing and a funny-looking bishop stuck on g5"
He gives a game he won against an IM who played 6. Qa4+
Dangerous slip in Grunfeld
Sort:
Jan 1, 2009
0
#3
4.Bg5 isn't considered particularly strong, but you can get a decent game out of it. I do seem to encounter it quite a bit; seems a popular "forcing" variation that sidesteps the theory of the Exchange variation.
The problem with white's play started with g3, though. It looks reasonable on the surface, aiming to fianchetto the king bishop, but the problem is what it does to the "funny-looking bishop". Normally, the Bg5 will still be useful once withdrawn to f4, putting pressure on c7 and the queenside dark squares in general. (In fact, this is the more correct immediate response to 4...Ne4.) With the pawn on g3 blocking an important escape square, though, it can no longer stay on that diagonal, and in fact it's really difficult for white to even play the natural e3, protecting d4.
Another mistake was 10.Bh6. Bd4 would have been much superior, and put him in a decent position by forcing an exchange of black's only developed piece. And of course, 11.e3 was also a Bad Idea, blocking that bishop out of the action entirely and costing the exchange.
Normally, I am the one playing the Grunfeld that slips and provides an advantage to my opponent. Here is an example of a seemingly reasona
ble move (Bg5) by my opponent that really backfired and the game ended by move 12. What struck me about this game was how intuitive the three moves were that resulted in the loss to White. Bg5 placing pressure on my knight, then Bh6 to trap my king in the center, and then a simple pawn push to protect a pawn ended the game. I could see myself making the same precise moves as white. Good players would have seen this coming, but this example is for the rest of us and I think shows (again) the importance of development and not moving the same piece several times in the opening.