• 18 months ago

    FM IvanMaxmillian

    after years this video made, i found

    [Event "?"]

    [Site "?"]

    [Date "2015.??.??"]

    [Round "?"]

    [White "Hindia Nimzo Hubner 9.Nd2! "]

    [Black "?"]

    [Result "*"]

    [ECO "E41"]

    [PlyCount "64"]


    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e3 c5 5. Bd3 Nc6 6. Nf3 Bxc3+ 7. bxc3 d6 8.

    O-O e5 9. Nd2 O-O 10. Rb1 b6 11. d5 (11. h3 $142 Re8 12. Qf3 Bb7 (12... Bd7 13.

    Bb2 Qe7 14. Bc2 Rac8 $11) 13. Bb2 Qd7 14. Qg3 Na5 $11) 11... Ne7 12. Qc2 g6 (

    12... h6 13. f3 Ne8 14. e4 Kh8 15. Rb2 Qc7 16. Re1 f5 17. exf5 Bxf5 18. Ne4 Nf6

    19. f4 Nxe4 20. Bxe4 Rae8 21. h3 Qd7 22. fxe5 dxe5 23. Rf1 Bxe4 24. Rxf8+ Rxf8

    25. Qxe4 Qf5 26. Qxf5 Nxf5 27. Re2 {1/2-1/2 (48) I.Ibragimov-S.Ionov, St

    Petersburg 1998}) 13. f4 (13. f3 Bf5 14. e4 Bd7 15. Nb3 Nh5 16. Bh6 Ng7 17. f4

    f6 18. f5 Qe8 19. g4 g5 20. h4 gxh4 21. Qh2 Kf7 22. Qxh4 Ng8 23. g5 Qe7 24. Rb2

    Nxh6 25. Qxh6 Rg8 26. Rg2 Raf8 27. g6+ {1-0 D.Kuljasevic-D.Wertjanz, Malinska

    2013}) 13... exf4 14. h3 $146 (14. Rxf4 $142 $5 {should be examined more

    closely} Nf5 15. Nb3 $15) 14... Nf5 $17 15. Bxf5 Bxf5 16. e4 Bd7 17. Rxf4 Qe7 (

    17... Re8 18. Qd1 $17) 18. Bb2 (18. a4 Nh5 19. Rf3 f5 $17) 18... Nh5 $17 19.

    Rf2 f5 20. Re1 Rae8 21. Bc1 f4 22. Qd1 Qg7 (22... Qf6 23. a3 $17) 23. Nf1 (23.

    Qf3 Qh6 ) 23... Re5 (23... Qh6 24. a4 ) 24. Nh2 Qe7 (24... Re7 ) 25.

    Qd3 (25. Qf3 Bf5 $17 {Deflection: e4}) 25... Rg5 (25... Bf5 $142 $19) 26. g4 

    (26. Rf3  {and White hangs on}) 26... fxg3  27. Rxf8+ Qxf8 28. Nf3

    Re5 {Deflection: f3} 29. Kg2 (29. Nxe5 Qf2+ {Mate attack Deflection}) 29...

    Re7 30. e5  (30. Rf1 Rf7 31. Qe2 ) 30... dxe5 31. d6 (31. Qe2 {is no

    salvation} Qf5 32. Qf1 Rf7 ) 31... Re6 32. Qd5 (32. Rf1 {does not improve

    anything} Rxd6 33. Qe4 Bc6 34. Qxe5 Rf6) 32... Nf6 {Laznicka-Ivanchuk 0-1}

    (32... Nf6 33. Qd2 Bc6)


    P.S Ignore all the "dollars"

  • 3 years ago


    When analyzing this opening I found this was a pretty relevant game including the line previously commented by IM @pfren...

    I think 18... a6! actually is an equalizer in this line followed by 19. b6 Bb5. which equalizes because of the pressure now on the center.

    Or if 19. bxa6 Bc8

    Again, I'm not a titled player, but analysis of this game makes me still like this variation, even though black missed this very pretty shot. 

  • 5 years ago


    Pfren and others, thanks for your insight. I might have to (re)focus on the 0-0, d5, c5 stuff again. But I guess knowing the general ideas on Huebner doesn't hurt one's chess too much either.

  • 5 years ago


    Dear pfren, sorry you don't find the video worthwhile, but you might not realize you are speaking only to someone like yourself, who already knows the history of the opening and the ideas.  For someone who knows little or nothing about the Hubner, the video is quite instructive.  I agree one needs to know the "topical" lines but historical lines could be played at any time by lower rated players, or be resurrected by higher rated players.  Just because this video is incomplete does not mean it is not worthwhile for most of us.

    BMcC333, thanks for your thoughts (very informative).  I can't check your stats as I reimaged my computer and could not find the original disks for CB 11.  59% winning is a nice statistic, but I would like to see the numbers for over 2400 and also the last 2 years / 5 years / 10 years. (From what you said I would expect to find fewer and fewer games played each year.) Also, you did not mention if there are any results / stats in the database for 10. ...Ne8!? which has been played successfully though (perhaps, I do not know) maybe not at the top. 

    As far as Hertan and the "grand plan," ...b6, ...Ba6, ...Na5, ...O-O-O, that certainly is a classical plan but even many, many years ago, I don't think that was the way people were playing the Hubner.  Fischer did not play that way against Spassky in 1972, and I think there was a book by by Pritchet, probably from the 70s, that showed ...Ne7, guarding the K-side, and not ...Na6, as the way to play the Hubner.  (I think he showed lines with ...O-O as well as ...O-O-O.)  I believe (without having access to databases to verify this) that Hubner himself played ...Ne7 and not ...Na5.

    Finally, even by your own statistics, people are playing 5. Ne2 or 5. Bd3 followed by Ne2 (combined) considerably more than Nf3, so Nf3 is not a world beater.  Of course the intention of the alternatives may or may not be to avoid the Hubner. 

    Thanks for pointing out that ...O-O / d5 / c5 is more topical (I think Karpov used to play this way) and I agree that "I would like to see an entire video devoted to Nd2 with emphasis on Rb1."

  • 5 years ago

    IM pfren

    @ rvkoivu: It already has been mentioned in this thread, but anyway: In the so-called Portisch variation, 9.Nd2! 0-0 Bareev's 10.Rb1! b6 (10...Qe7 11.d5 e4 12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.dc6 is simply depressing) 11.h3 Bd7 12.f4 is extremely annoying to meet. I have worked on this position a lot (Houdini told me after a little thought that Black is comfortably equal) but the truth is that Black has serious problems!

    After a lot of work, I simply switched to 4...0-0! and puff, all problems gone. I would really love to see a satisfactory line for Black in my beloved Huebner variation, but at a serious level, the position after 10. Rb1! looks not appetizing at all.

  • 5 years ago


    @ pfren: as a Nimzo-player, I would be interested to know what white responses were so inconvenient that you decided to quit playing this variation?

  • 5 years ago


    TQ SIR..

  • 5 years ago

    IM pfren

    I was playing the Huebner variation all the time in my youth- then at some point I played more mainstream Nimzos, because of particular problems I have met in the Huebner, and haven't resolved successfully.

    This article just touches the surface of the Huebner variation, and does not answer ANY of the critical continuations which are questioning its validity- so I consider it a poor piece of information.

  • 5 years ago

    NM BMcC333

    Retired and refuted are 2 different things. There is fashion in openings. When I say pro chess I am not referring to the many people who make a living off the game but those who appear regularly on the world stage and are covered by outlets like Crowther's "The Week in Chess, (TWIC)" . I will paraphrase an excellent article by Charles Hertan who fell victm to Rb1 in the early days while hunting for norms in Europe and reported back to us in Chess Horizons, the Northeast's best local magazine. "After Rb1, when I finally realized I had to castle short, I understood the "grand plan" (b6/Na5/Ba6 and usually 0-0-0 with Queen to a4 or other moves needed to win the doubled c4 pawn) of the Hubner was dead." The position after Nd2 is far from closed as knights usually need, although it is clearly not lost. It has been at least 10 years since I can remember a Hubner system being in TWIC. It is just not done anymore by the top pros. As to the idea that white is the one avoiding this line, after e3 there are 12,835 games where black castles, abandoning any hope of the grand plan Hubner, compared with 9844 4...c5, threatening a Hubner. Once 4...c5 is played  5261 people play Bd3 while 3046 duck out of "allowing the Hubner" with Nge2. Once Bd3 is played and Nc6 follows, 1370 play Nf3 compared to 1257 Nge2, so it is clear that most people do not avoid the Hubner, but instead happily play right into it. More people playning black choose alternatives to the Hubner than try to play the grand old plan. The scale has tipped back to the classic 0-0/d5/c5 plan as I said earlier. These stats do not track recent trends, but there is clearly no mass movement away from the Hubner by white after e3. When the Hubner was popular and working, the Queen's Indian was seen more often. Due to the play of Kramnik and others, Qc2 is also common. I said the vidoe is well worth playing through for the well explained strategic ideas but for the topical nature, once we get to move 9, there are 228 Nd2, 141 Ng5 and 110 d5, so it is very clear Portisch's Nd2 has become the dominant line. There are then 227 0-0 (some from transpositions) which abandons the classic grand plan. After 0-0 Rb1 scores 59% so the proof is in the pudding. Lines that score 41% are not popular pro lines, black never got his closed position nor has meaningful play on the c4 pawn been demonstrated. I don't think this means black is lost, but there is work to be done for this to return to its former glory. Hubner had an idea that won many games and was played at all levels. This is more than many world champions can say. The bottom line is that the glory days are gone and anyone intent on playing the Hubner should focus on Portisch's excellent pawn sac to keep the game open and not on the dream of stealing the c4 pawn and winning an ending. I would like to see an entire video devoted to Nd2 with emphasis on Rb1. Dzindzi's expertise could impact fashion in this line.

  • 5 years ago


    Yeah I'm definately impressed with the material given here as it is relevant for my repertoire as black. It's nice to know that after the Nimzo has been played, whatever direction white wants to take the game there is always a valid reply for black. Thanks Roman Cool

  • 5 years ago


    HOLD IT, all you folks who are dissing both Dzindzi and Robert Hubner:

    I went over to (including the forums) as well as other sites and they all say:  (1) The Hubner is well respected; (2) often White avoids the Hubner by playing Ne2 either before or after Bd3.  Yes, the move 10. Rb1 is topical (and it would be nice to see it covered in a second video), as is to a lesser degree 10. Re1!?.  In the game BMcC333 mentions, 10....Bd7 is probably weak.  One idea that has been played in response is 10....Ne8!? with the idea of ...f5.  It is a game.  White has chances and so does black.  The Hubner is neither refuted nor under a cloud, but the debate continues as it does with every decent opening system.

  • 5 years ago

    NM BMcC333

    It is not white who refuses to play this position at the pro level. (@ Chowie) They have been playing the classical d5/c5 set up based on improvments (Rb1) to the famous pawnn sac Portisch-Timman Wijk aan Zee 1978  8 0-0 and 9 Nd2!  I did not see Dzindzi cover this line, but did not sit through the whole video, I saw he said people usually played d5 at the position of Nd2. Maybe this video predates the popularity of Rb1. That said the strategic ideas discussed make this video well worth watching by anyone not a top pro.

    I see on chesslab that people have been experimenting on move 10 with Re1 and other ideas, but here is a prototype game from the system that "retired" the Hubner from pro chess:

    [Event "26th European Club Cup"]
    [Site "Plovdiv BUL"]
    [Date "2010.??.??"]
    [White "Korobov,A"]
    [Black "Polak,T"]
    [Result "1-0"]
    [WhiteElo "2670"]
    [BlackElo "2535"]
    [ECO "E41"]
    [Round "5"]

    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e3 c5 5. Bd3 Nc6 6. Nf3 Bxc3+ 7. bxc3 d6
    8. O-O e5 9. Nd2 O-O 10. Rb1 b6 11. h3 Bd7 12. f4 exd4 13. cxd4 Re8 14. Qf3 Qe7
    15. d5 Nb4 16. Rxb4 cxb4 17. e4 b5 18. cxb5 Rab8 19. a4 Rbc8 20. Bb2 Rc3 21. Rf2 Rxd3
    22. Qxd3 Nxe4 23. Re2 f5 24. Nxe4 fxe4 25. Qd4 Qf7 26. Qxa7 h5 27. Qd4 Qg6 28. b6 Bxh3
    29. b7 e3 30. Qxb4 Bg4 31. Rxe3 Rxe3 32. b8=Q+ Kh7 33. Qd4 1-0

  • 5 years ago

    FM CountOfMonteCristo

    Great video!

  • 5 years ago


    @chowie Your observations are very valid. One point that comes to my mind is that leaving the pawn on d4 gives black a lot of opportunities for structural changes. When the player with the white pieces plays a queen pawn opening, often (s)he wants to play a slow, positional game with a fixed set of pawn structures that (s)he needs to understand (e.g. if you play the queen's gambit for white, you probably need to be prepared to play structures with all pawns aboard, structures where white's c pawn has been traded for black's d pawn, and structures where white's c pawn has been traded for black's e pawn). The placement of the pawns usually decides the optimum placement of the pieces, which in turn dictates the pace and direction of a game. Hence, against a player who is strong at preparing for games, it could be dangerous to allow the opponent to choose from a wide range of possibly sound structural changes.

  • 5 years ago


    Dzindi has been discussing this variation on video for years.  It's solid for Black of course but tough to get someone to play the White side in a tournament now as this hasn't been topical in many years and lots of people know about these videos :)

    Interesting to see some of the updated theory since his original videos were released though.

  • 5 years ago


    very useful, thanks

  • 5 years ago


    A very helpful video :)

  • 5 years ago



  • 5 years ago


    After black plays e5, why must white play d5? is it because of cxd, cxd, b6 followed by play against the c4 pawn? it seems to me that white may get a little extra play for his bishops after this eventhough he'll eventually lose the c4 pawn, and the c file.  Can someone please explain this to me?  Thanks in advanceLaughing

  • 5 years ago


    I absolutely loved this video, thanks for explaining the strategic and tactical ideas in such detail!

Back to Top

Post your reply: