Sicilian: Najdorf Surprise

An interesting line in the Najdorf occurred in one of my blitz games the other day. I am playing White and decide to attack with the old main line 6.Bg5 but instead of the usual 6...e6, my opponent played 6...e5. My first thoughts were that 6...e5 is a mistake, but how much of a mistake is it and if so, how does White capitalise from Blacks opening error?

6...e5 is not covered in NCO nor is it mentioned in any Najdorf books i own. This is probably a nightmare to you who learn moves off by heart and i think this is the key to this move being a surprise rather than solely being a dubious move.

I believe that White must have a good understanding of the Najdorf to get an advantage in this line. Meaning that; White cannot just play learned moves to reach a known middlegame position. So, why not as Black choose this line as a surprise (even if it carries a dubious mark) and test Whites 'understanding' of the opening rather than take the long route down the Poisoned pawn variation or the 6.Bg5 mainline which could become unclear!?

To back up that this is a worthwhile surprise move: Black played it in the game Goh Wei Ming 2413 - Odeev 2492, Turin (2006)

How would you play this position as White? What should White be aiming for?

(I will post my analysis/response after some people give their opinions or analysis)

My first instinct is that white will be better served to know the principles of the Sveshnikov variation rather than the Najdorf. In this case, the difference between the Sveshnikov is that the white knight can't go to b5. But the important similarity is the pawn structure. With the pawn on e5 instead of e6, d5 and f5 become very important squares.

Loomis wrote:

My first instinct is that white will be better served to know the principles of the Sveshnikov variation rather than the Najdorf. In this case, the difference between the Sveshnikov is that the white knight can't go to b5. But the important similarity is the pawn structure. With the pawn on e5 instead of e6, d5 and f5 become very important squares.

Interesting spot on the pawn structure. Whites Knight is being kicked from d4 but unlike the Sveshnikov/Pelikan it wont end up on a3. Probably a crucial difference but a very good point.

Could you suggest some moves then?

Thanks Loomis.

jfreitas wrote:

Bxf6 Qxf6 Nd5 Qd8 Nf5 seem's the best line.

and after 9...Bxf5 10.exf5 we reach the following position (see diagram). But, what is Whites plan? Why are those the best moves? Is it because Fritz opening book suggests them??

For those wondering about the differences between the position under discussion and Loomis`s point about the Sveshnikov here is a diagram of the Sveshnikov position with white knight on a3.

Bxf6 Qxf6 Nd5 Qd8 Nf3 seems best to me. putting both the knights on outposts seems a little ridiculous. After BxNf5 black is looking better because white has lost his e pawn and an attacker of the super crucial d5 square that he must control to win. From there white should try to get his bishop on c4, castle kingside and keep his queen on the d file to eyeball d5. f4 could be considered once the king is castled. Black should probably fianchetto his light square bishop, and take his knight from d7 to c5. The other bishop should come to e7, the queen can go to c7 and then he castles kingside.

I thought about the moves leading to the diagram in post #5 and frankly, this position doesn't give me hope as white.

I don't see why, as white, I should relieve the pin on f6. Why not just play 7. Nf3 planning Nd5 next. Well, this allows 7. ... Be6 and now I'm not sure the best way to fight for d5, Nd2 and Bc4 seems awkward.

I wonder if the piece sac works 7. Nd5 exd4 8. Qxd4 Be7 9. e5 with 0-0-0 and Re1 coming. Is white getting enough attack in this line?

My last idea is 7. Ne2 intending to play f4. But I don't like blocking the light squared bishop.

This is a tricky position! In the master games of the chess.com Opening Explorer database, the most popular move is 7. Nb3, but this moves also scores the worst! 7. Nf3 is second most popular and only scores a little better. Scoring the best are 7.  Nf5 and 7. Bxf6. Nobody tried my idea of 7. Nd5. In one game a piece sac was tried with 7. f4, the sac was offered for several moves and not taken -- black won.

Perhaps I don't have your level of analysis, but why no one is considering Nb3? It seems the most natural move to me.

depthshaman wrote:

Bxf6 Qxf6 Nd5 Qd8 Nf3 seems best to me. putting both the knights on outposts seems a little ridiculous. After BxNf5 black is looking better because white has lost his e pawn and an attacker of the super crucial d5 square that he must control to win. From there white should try to get his bishop on c4, castle kingside and keep his queen on the d file to eyeball d5. f4 could be considered once the king is castled. Black should probably fianchetto his light square bishop, and take his knight from d7 to c5. The other bishop should come to e7, the queen can go to c7 and then he castles kingside.

I would probably prefer 9.Nf3 instead of 9.Nf5 too but its not as easy as it seems for White. I think you gave a good idea of the play that should follow but i think Blacks knight should go Nd7-b6, not Nd7-c5. I think on b6 the knight is sticking to the point about the fight for the d5 square which is probably central in this position. Here is a line where i believe Black is fine.

My idea is to play a semi-ending with a Knight on d5 against a bad black-square bishop.

What about 7.Bxf6 Qxf6 8.Nd5 Qd8 9.Ne2 followed by c4/Nc3 if black doesn't play anything too violent

Else, 7.Bxf6 gxf6 maybe 8.Nf5 to get a clamp on the white squares.

Btw, jfreitas' line looks good too - white plays Bd3 Nd7 c3 (prophylactic against Nc5) with a plan like 0-0 and f4 and should keep a lasting plus thanks to the white squares control and better bishop (well, at least the position appeals to me, for what it's worth :-)

I would be more inclined to play the safer Nb3.  It's a typical Najdorf theme and White has just gotten an advantage with the hole on d5.

I don,t know how exactly it works with Bg5 but Nf5 seams to work on a positonal sence when i do loop in Nf5 in response to e5 it allways creates problems.

I feel the same way Amnesiac does, your not a GM, far from it in fact.  Its a little presumptous to think your going to be able to gain a decisive advantage because your opponent slighlty deviated from the theoretical line. Yes there are holes on d5 and f5 but that doesn't neccesarily mean a killer blow is right in front of you.  Play solid moves until your preapared (in the middlegame) to take advantage of the 'mistake'.

To Amnesiac and Chess_Lobster; i would like to see you try gain an opening advantage against me if if you play the white pieces in this variation. I am sure i can equalise or have a perfectly playable position against you in this line.

You talk in a very vague sense so lets see you put those words into practice! I challange you both to games and to prove that you dont cheat by using fritz or any other engine i want to see complete analysis giving annotations and variations. Do you take my offer???

I am willling to accept any challange where i play as Black in this variation. I will only accept challanges where White is willing to give a complete analysis of the game and provide relevant varitaions to explain the anaylsis provided. If you wont provide this i automatically presume that you have just used an engine to win, so please. Any takers?

I do believe that Black achieves perfectly playable positions from 6...e5!?

Time to put your money where your mouth is guys. I may not be a GM but i KNOW i can equalise with this system. 

Hahaha wow I've never seen someone take such offense to such an innocuous comment.  If you want to challenge me go ahead, but if you or I win it will because of one of our mistakes in the middlegame, not because of 7....e5 or whatever....COme to think of it, I don't even understand your challenge "Lets see if (Chess_Lobster) can get and advantage with the white pieces." Your original post asked how you could get an advantage with white, and I said its not important, don't worry about it.  So your challenging me to do something I said was not important???

Lets put it this way, your rated at 1500-1600 I think, you (or I) are not good enough to drive home a slight advantage obtained in the opening into a garanteed win. I get annoyed by low rate player (below 1900) asking about all sorts of opening variations, worry about the Middlegame. Start playing chess and not 'memorizing the Najdorf' you'll develop a lot more skills and judgement.

Chess_Lobster wrote:

I get annoyed by low rate player (below 1900) asking about all sorts of opening variations, worry about the Middlegame. Start playing chess and not 'memorizing the Najdorf' you'll develop a lot more skills and judgement. 

 If that annoys you, then might I suggest you stop hanging out in the openings forum?  There's a difference between "studying the opening" and "memorizing the opening".  You're accusing the poster of doing the latter, when he's really doing the former.  It's perfectly normal chess to ask "How can I take advantage of that mistake?" in the opening, middlegame, or endgame.

There HAVE to be good and bad points to playing e7-e5 in this opening and there's nothing wrong with capitalizing on it.  I, for one, study the opening so I have some sort of roadmap for the middlegame.  Because I've studied the opening, I have ideas like b7-b5 or Qc7 to hinder white's Bc4, which would be necessary since I just weakened the diagonal with e5.  Now is that "memorizing the Najdorf" or is that learning ideas for the middlegame from the opening?

Stop chastizing the Graw81 for his learning style and start answering his question.

To help with the question, Graw, after 1. BxN QxB 2. Nd5 Qd8, my engine suggests Nf3.  It's practically tied though between that and Nf5.  A very close third, and my personal choice, is Ne2, aiming for Nc3.

First, the downsides of Ne2:  It temporarily blocks Bc4, which means white will have to hurry along if he wants to play it (and he should, since the diagonal is opened by e7-e5).  Secondly, it allows the exchange sac Ra1-c8xc3.  This is less useful, however, when there's no knight on f6 to follow it up with Nf6xe4.

The upside is that it controls the d5 square in only two moves.  The alternative to do that would be Nf5-e3.  Not a bad method in itself.  I think white should be looking at Qf3, a3, Bc4(maybe then Ba2), and some kingside pawn moves.  Black should be trying for Bb7, b5-b4, Rc8 and hopefully Qb6 or Qc7.  Of course, attacking or trading off that knight on d5 is key too.  No surprise there.

The question wasn't in the opening forum, so lets scratch that adorable response of yours. Anyway, I never said to ignore the opening completely, but for low rated players, up to 1900 to me (on a legitimate server, the ratings on this are VERY inflated) there is a line between learning and obsessing. Yeah I would like to avoid blundering or making a positional mistake in the opening, so I little by little have learned opening variations.  Thats quite different then.

'I'm trying to learn the Pirc and I'm not sure how to respond when my oponent plays the 9. Bg4 variation, especially when I have indicated I might try for the Apollo Creed variation" Rating (1421)

What are they going to do once the opening is over, most players have no idea, you learn chess in the middlegame and endgame, not by learning some random theoretical line 10 moves deep.