translated by google, sorry...
but its an interresting article!
Although Kasparov, Leko and Svidler striking simultaneously Grünfeld have passed as the main defense against 1.d4, one can hardly be regarded as a green field refuted. I think it's still a good, active and semi-solid opening. Not quite as solid as the Queen's Gambit, Slav or Nimzo-Indian, but just as good as King's Indian, and certainly better than Benoni, Dutch, etc.
Perhaps or even likely (but I will have to prove it to anyone) White gets some play in the system Abtausch a tiny advantage, but nothing special.
As for the special version of 2.Matchpartie 2000 against Kramnik, so Kasparov has shown a year later in Astana (for him it was probably a question of honor), that Black can compensate somewhat forced.
The real problem lies with the green box (as I estimate) less variation in a very concrete, but rather in the way top GMs prepare today with PCs. Green field is active and sometimes very sharply, by position type is the exchange variation (as well as large parts of Db3 systems) a half-open and not closed the opening. White has the choice between playing very forced, at the end of the 25-35.Zug is often a tiny white advantage in relatively open position and a sharp (but only if White-GM is perfectly familiar; lower levels in white is often before tripped). These positions (there are many of them tend to be investigated and a white out) are usually very good and very deeply analyzed with the PC: White can be a flattening process put into the final deal or prepare for brutal tactics to win deep trials. Where it has black and harder to find the right answer on the board. Preparation and technical white has it a lot easier probably. Something like I see it
Green box at the top level is the theory-speak, death died (at least currently). But not because of a specific variant inappropriate refutation, but because of the extent and the nature / structure of the theory.
Similarly, there are other openings, such as with 6.Bg5 Najdorf against. Many strong players still see no clear black balance against 6.Bg5, but just a bunch of chaotic PLAY (especially in the Poisoned Pawn-variant), where white in each variant may retain the initiative. But here are looking for just tend to black out his system, while White has to be prepared for all. The black defensive moves can be found on board just yet, but White's attack is so sharp and rely only on trains (the residue material is sustained during the attack), that White has to be really prepared perfectly. Anyone who has views Nunn few hundred-page "Overview" on-6.Bg5 Najdorf, has no desire to actually white. Although 6.Bg5 is good, if not the best against the Najdorf. - Another example would be in the Botvinnik Semi-Slav Gambit. Totanalysiert is like no other and what is still unclear. The theory is often proclaimed + - but against Shirov Ivanov or dares not white (not even Kasparov!) Play the main suspect beneficial variants.
One of the people I play chess with frequently playes the Gruenfeld defense against 1. d4. I have studied a few variations, so that I can navigate through the first 12-14 moves. However, I'm still unsure of the big picture, in terms of what general strategic themes tend to emerge in games that open with the Gruenfeld, what sorts of plans white (and black) tend to have in mind. All advice is appreciated!