Grandmaster Repertoire

1.e4 vs
The Sicilian III
By

Parimarjan Negi

Quality Chess
www.qualitychess.co.uk

Contents

Introduction 4
Symbols & Bibliography
6

Taimanov
1 Introduction and 5...a6
7
2 6...f6 29
3 Various 7th and 8th Moves
51
4 Introduction to 8...e7 68
5 New Main Line
93
6 8...b4 Old Lines
120
7 8...b4 Modern Lines
150

Kan
8 Various 5th Moves
177
9 Introduction to 5...f6 201
10 6...c7 217
11 5...c5 Introduction to 6.b3 a7 241
12 6.b3 a7 with 7...e7 254
13 Introduction to 6...e7 267
14 Main Line 283
Scheveningen
15 4...c6 and 5...d6
312
16 Keres Attack Various 6th Moves
334
17 Various 7th Moves
359
18 7...c6 375

Sidelines
19 2...d6
402
20 2...c6 412
21 2...e6
430
22 Move 2 Alternatives
449

Appendix A Missing Line from the Dragon

Variation Index

477
479

Introduction
The variations in this book mostly revolve around the 2...e6 Sicilians. There was a time when
systems such as the Kan and Taimanov were considered relative sidelines compared to the mighty
Najdorf, but over the years they have grown immensely in popularity. One reason is that they
tend not to involve too many long theoretical lines ending in forced draws; I myself have often
played the black side of the systems covered in this book for similar reasons.
Despite the relatively non-forcing nature of the Taimanov, Kan and Scheveningen, I have strived
to maintain the spirit of the previous two Sicilian volumes by recommending active, aggressive
set-ups for White. So, for instance, even though I have enjoyed many successes with the classical
e2 line (on both sides of the board!) a set-up which, by the way, can be used against all three
of the aforementioned Sicilian variations I eventually decided it was not quite right for this
repertoire series. One reason is that I feel that some of the slower positional variations often boil
down to subjective assessments and individual playing styles, rather than the quality of your
opening preparation.

The Taimanov
The Taimanov is solid and reliable, yet also active and flexible, making it one of the most popular
Sicilians today. Nevertheless, the theory is still not so well developed in some lines. See, for
instance, variation B of Chapter 5, featuring a ...xd4 move order which only became popular
about three years ago. Since then, it has gained a huge following yet the line I recommend
against it has barely been tested at all, which highlights the vast potential for new discoveries.
Besides this, there are dozens more possible set-ups and sub-variations that Black may choose.
Some of them are a little dubious, but proving that is not always an easy task. When studying
these first seven chapters, I would advise the reader to check the lines rather carefully, without
trying to memorize them. One of the difficulties you will face in this section is that lots of the
lines look rather similar, and its easy to get them confused. I have done my best to highlight the
differences and explain why I have recommended different moves in different situations, but its
up to the reader to internalize this information.

The Kan (Paulsen)

Against this most flexible of systems I have recommended the traditional main line of 5.d3.
Generally, the positions are tough to analyse in detail the flexibility of Blacks set-up enables
him, in many variations, to deviate at various points of a line without affecting the position
or its assessment a great deal. Obviously I have tried to play actively and aggressively where
appropriate but most of the time I have tried to emphasize ideas and plans, and I recommend
that the reader does the same.

The Scheveningen
My repertoire choice here is the Keres Attack. This aggressive option is the reason why the
Scheveningen is less popular than it used to be and yet, I was surprised at how difficult it was
to find an advantage in many of the lines. Once again, a solid understanding of the main ideas,
backed up by some precise knowledge of certain key lines, should serve the reader well.

Various Sidelines
The final four chapters cover an assortment of other Sicilian variations. There are too many
for me to generalize about them, but I will say once again that several of them proved to be
surprisingly resilient. In general, I have tried to be pragmatic about things: when dealing with
a rare line that you may not encounter for several years, it is better to know a simple route to a
solid edge than attempt to remember an ultra-complicated attempt at outright refutation. Even
then, there are quite a lot of lines to consider, so I would advise you not to try and memorize
any more than the basic details, and only study these lines in depth if preparing for a specific
opponent.
***
This is the fourth book in my 1.e4 series, and it was by far the most difficult for me to write.
I think the reason was not so much that I have played these systems as Black, but rather because
Black has so many interesting sub-variations available in each of the three main systems. Every
one of them seemed to pose unique strategic problems, none of which can be solved by simply
switching on the analysis engine. This is in stark contrast to the 6.g5 Najdorf, where the
variations tend to be much more concrete, or the French and Caro-Kann, where the strategic
battles tend to take on similar contours from one line to the next. Despite the challenges, I
believe that the finished book contains some of my best work of the entire series, and I hope that
the readers will agree.
Parimarjan Negi
Stanford, June 2016

a pt

er

Ch

Taimanov
Various 7th and 8th Moves
Variation Index

1.e4 c5 2.f3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.xd4 c6 5.c3 c7 6.e3 a6

7.d2
A) 7...xd4!? 52
B) 7...d6
53
C) 7...f6 8.000
54

C1) 8...d6 9.e2!? e7 10.f4
55
C11) 10...d7 59
C12) 10...00
60

C2) 8...xd4 9.xd4! g4 10.b6 c6

11.d4 e5 12.e3 e7 13.d5 d8 14.b3
63
C21) 14...xe3 64
C22) 14...d6!?
65

A) after 9...b7

B) after 8...d7!?

C11) after 13...b7

10.e5!?N

9.g4!N

14.f5!N

52

Taimanov

1.e4 c5 2.f3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.xd4 c6

5.c3 c7 6.e3 a6

This is Blacks most popular and flexible

move, whose only drawback is that it fails to
develop a piece.
7.d2
White develops his queen and prepares to
castle. There is no need to commit any of the
kingside pawns until Black has defined his setup more clearly. In this chapter we will analyse
A) 7...xd4!?, B) 7...d6 and a few sidelines
after the most popular C) 7...f6.
7...b4 has no great significance, as after
8.000 Blacks only logical choice is 8...f6,
leading straight to Chapters 6 and 7. Of course,
White could also consider 8.a3!?, so I dont see
much point in this move order for Black.
7...b5 has been played in quite a lot of games,
but the most likely outcome is a transposition
to one of the later chapters after a subsequent
...f6, as I dont see how Black can benefit
from leaving the knight on g8. For example,
after 8.xc6 dxc6 (or 8...xc6 9.f3) 9.000
I think Black should try to transpose to
Chapter 5 with 9...f6 followed by ...e7.
However, White may be tempted to try for
more with 10.f4!? or 10.e5!?. In any case, the

7...b5 move order is not something we should

be worried about.
A) 7...xd4!?
This move makes some sense when compared
to the new main line from Chapter 5. In that
variation, Black plays 7...f6 followed by
...e7 and ...b5, keeping the option of a timely
...xd4, but allowing us to play a disruptive
xc6. This way he deprives us of that
possibility, but exchanging on d4 so early has
some drawbacks as well; for instance, White
should be able to do without f2-f3.
8.xd4
8.xd4 b5 9.000 b7 10.f3 f6 11.g4
c8 gives Black his ideal scenario: an improved
version of the set-up examined in Chapter 5.
8...b5 9.000 b7
9...e7 10.b1 c6 11.e3 e5 12.f4 c4
13.xc4 xc4 14.d4 Short Pogorelov,
Gibraltar 2004.
The present position occurred in Gonzalez
Garcia Ivanisevic, Bled (ol) 2002, and several
other games, but so far nobody has tried:

10.e5!?N
An interesting way to challenge Blacks
unusual move order. Now he will struggle to
develop because ...e7 will allow xb5!.

Chapter 3 Various 7th and 8th Moves

10...h6
10...c6 11.d3 e7 12.he1
10...b8 11.b1 c6 is slow, and we can
increase our lead in development even further
by giving up a bit of material: 12.d3! xg2
13.hg1 f3

14.e4! xd1 15.xd1 White is completely

dominating.
11.d3!?
11.f3 is certainly playable, but I have no
qualms about offering the g2-pawn. Black is
not forced to take it, but I like Whites chances
in any case.

v




p

11...xg2
11...b4 12.e2 (12.e4 f5!) 12...xg2
(12...e7 13.hg1) 13.hg1 is similar to the
main line.

53

11...c8 12.e4 f5 13.c3

11...e7 12.hg1 f5 (12...00 13.g4)
13.xf5 exf5 14.b1 00 15.g4 f4 16.xf4
12.hg1 f3 13.e2
13.de1 could also be considered in order
to keep the option of e4.
13...g6 14.e3
Blacks extra pawn will not be of much use
in the middlegame. The position remains
complicated, but I like Whites chances based
on his active pieces and the open g-file.
B) 7...d6 8.000 d7!?
8...f6 transposes to variation C1, but we
should also consider this rather sophisticated
move order. Despite the text moves odd
appearance, neither GM Ganguly nor Yu
Yangyi managed to achieve anything special
against it. By delaying ...f6, Black hopes
to confuse Whites plans which kingside
pawn(s) should we advance, and in what order?

9.g4!N
This has not yet been tried but it seems like
the obvious move to me what better way
to exploit Blacks delay in putting the knight
on f6?

Taimanov

54

It is worth mentioning the natural alternative:

9.f4 f6!
This can be compared with the later variation
C1. Since Black has avoided ...e7 here, he
is better equipped to meet the plan of e2
and g2-g4, as he can use the spare tempo
to do something more productive on the
queenside.
10.e2 c8
10...b5!? also looks fine and has score well
for Black.
11.g4
11.b3 is hardly critical, for instance:
11...b5N (11...a5 was also okay for Black
in Ganguly Wang Chen, Sharjah 2014)
12.f3 b4 13.a4 a5 14.b6 c4
15.xc4 xc4
11...xd4 12.xd4!?N
After 12.xd4 d5!? Black was doing fine in
Schmaus Wawra, Sharjah 2014.

12...e5 13.e3 xg4 14.d5 c6

White has some attacking chances for the
pawn and this could certainly be analysed more,
but it doesnt seem easy for White, despite the
impressive knight on d5. Black has some ideas
for counterplay such as ...a4, and the bishop
can be developed to g7 rather than the pointless
e7, where it would always be a target.
9...b5
9...e5 10.g5 (10.h3!? is a good alternative)
10...g4 11.f4! leaves the knight out of

place, and 11...e5? only makes matters worse:

12.d5 d8 13.h3 Black has a terrible
position.
10.g5 h6
10...ge7?? 11.dxb5! is a typical trick, and
10...b4 11.ce2 does not really help Black
either.
10...xd4 11.xd4 is also unsatisfactory for
Black as the pressure against the d6-pawn
makes it hard for him to arrange ...e7.

11.g6! fxg6 12.xc6 xc6 13.d3

Black is behind in development and he is
weak on the kingside.
C) 7...f6 8.000

Chapter 3 Various 7th and 8th Moves

This takes us a step closer to the main
lines of the Taimanov English Attack. In
this chapter we will consider C1) 8...d6 and
C2) 8...xd4.
8...b5 is covered in variation A of Chapter 5.
8...e7 is an important move which will
discussed in Chapters 4 and 5.
8...b4 is the traditional main line and can be
found in Chapters 6 and 7.
The only other option worth mentioning is:
8...g4
We will see a similar idea in variation C2
below, and this is certainly not an improved
version for Black.
9.f4 ge5
9...e5? is suicidal: 10.d5 d8 11.h3
f6 (11...xf2 12.xf2 exf4 13.xf4
d6 14.c4 Arizmendi Collutiis, Saint
Vincent 2003) In Meera Kavitha, Calicut
2003, White could have got a big advantage
with 12.xf6N xf6 13.g5 followed by
f5.

10.g3
This gives White easy play. The game could
continue in various ways, but the following
game was quite logical:
10...xd4 11.xd4 f6 12.f4 c5 13.d2 f7
14.e5 f5 15.f2 xf2 16.xf2 b5 17.g4!

55

17.g1 a7! was annoying for White in

Nepomniachtchi Macieja, Internet (blitz)
2006.

17...fxg4 18.h3!? b7 19.g2 g3 20.xg3 b4

21.e2
Grischuk Needleman, Khanty-Mansiysk
2005.
C1) 8...d6

9.e2!?
9.f4 d7! transposes to Ganguly Wang
Chen, as referenced earlier under the 7...d6
move order. Of course its possible to search
for an improvement there, but I would prefer
to avoid it altogether.
9.f3 is a decent alternative which gives White
quite a good version of the English Attack.

Taimanov

56

However,
considering
that
I
have
recommended different systems against the
Najdorf and Scheveningen variations, I dont
think it is worth spending time on a completely
different line just to be ready for a relatively
unusual transposition by Black.
The text move has hardly ever been played in
this position, but it immediately transposes to
several other games. I like this move a lot; the
ensuing positions are easy for White to play,
thanks to the natural attacking ideas of f2-f4,
g4-g5, and sacrificial ideas such as f5. The
bishop on e2 helps to restrict Blacks queenside
play, as ...b5 runs into the plan of xc6, e4-e5
and f3. Also, as we will see in several of the
variations below, the plan of ...xd4 and ...e5
tends not to work well for Black.
9...e7
9...b5? 10.xc6 xc6 11.e5! is the simplest
version of the aforementioned trick.

Black can stay in the game with 11...b4,

but after 12.f3 d5 13.exf6 bxc3 14.xc3
(14.d4 is also good but the text move is
simpler) 14...xc3 15.bxc3 a3 16.d2
gxf6 17.c4 White had a considerable advantage
in Zanaty Voros, Hungary 2004.
9...d7 10.g4!N is a strong novelty: 10...xd4
11.xd4 e5 (after 11...c6 12.g5 d7
13.f4 it is hard for Black to even continue
developing) 12.d2 xg4 13.d5 c6

14.hg1 xe3 15.xe3 e6 16.f4 Whites

huge lead in development provides excellent
compensation.
9...xd4 10.xd4 b5 (10...e5N 11.a4 d7
12.b5!) 11.g4 e5 was played in Shirov
Movsesian, Loo 2013. I think the most logical
queen retreat is:

12.d3!?N b4 13.a4 xg4 The loss of the

g-pawn is not something White should ever
worry about in these positions, as it costs Black
time and opens additional lines for us. 14.b6
b8 15.d5 c6 16.b1
10.f4
This seems like the most consistent
continuation, considering that the main point
of the 9.e2 move order was to avoid 9.f4 d7.
White is actually spoilt for choice though, as
there is a second promising continuation:

Chapter 3 Various 7th and 8th Moves

10.g4!?

We will see in the main line that White often

plays this at some point, so it makes sense to
consider it immediately. This way Black gets
the extra options of 10...e5 and 10...b5,
but White has good prospects against both
of them.
10...b5
10...e5!? 11.hg1!? (11.g5 fg4 12.f4
xe3 13.xe3 could be an interesting line
to check further, but I have some reservations
about giving away my dark-squared bishop.
At the same time, White is well ahead in
development so he might be better here
too.) 11...b5!?N (11...c4 has been played
a few times, but if I was playing Black
I would prefer to hold the knight back for a
little longer) 12.g5 fd7 13.f4 b4 14.a4
c4 15.xc4 xc4 16.b1
11.g5 d7

57

12.xc6
The fun continuation is 12.f5!? exf5
13.d5 b7 14.exf5, which led to a nice
win for White in Sulskis Izoria, Ohrid
2001, but at this stage the position is highly
unclear.
12...xc6 13.d4!? 00 14.h4
It looks like a typical Sicilian middlegame,
but I like Whites chances as I dont see an
easy way for Black to generate queenside
counterplay. At the same time, its not very
easy for White to do something crushing on
the kingside.
14...c5 15.d2 c7!?
In Dolganiuc Petruzzelli, email 2010,
White had to resort to the somewhat
undesirable 16.a3 to hold up Blacks queenside
play. He got some advantage though, and
later went on to win, so this could certainly
be checked further. For now, though, we will
return to my main recommendation of 10.f4.

Black has a surprisingly tough life here. If he

castles then White will hurl his g- and f-pawns
up the kingside, while if Black tries to be too
sophisticated he will have to watch out for
sacrificial ideas like f5.
The two main continuations are C11)
10...d7 and C12) 10...00.

Taimanov

58

10...b5?! runs into 11.e5 dxe5 (11...xd4

12.xd4) 12.xc6 xc6 13.fxe5 d5
14.xd5 exd5 15.f3 and White won a pawn
in Szumilas Motak, Legnica 2008.
10...a5 11.g4 b5 Black avoids the e4-e5
trick, but allows something else: 12.g5 d7
(12...b4 13.cb5!)

13.f5! exf5 14.d5 d8 15.exf5 (15.d4!N

is even stronger, but I want to show that White
gets good positional compensation whatever
he does) 15...b7 16.xe7 xe7 17.he1
00 18.g1 d8 19.xd6 c6 20.f6 White
had a strong initiative in Bok Spoelman,
Amsterdam 2014.
10...xd4 11.xd4 e5
This plan should always be considered, but
White is perfectly placed to meet it.
12.fxe5 dxe5 13.a4!
Spoiling Blacks plans.

13...f8
13...d7 runs into: 14.xd7! xd7
(14...xd7 15.b5+) 15.d5 d6 16.d1
d8 17.g4 00 18.c3
13...c6N is the least of the evils, but
14.xc6 (14.b5 is playable but
unnecessarily materialistic) 14...bxc6 15.b3
gives White a pleasant endgame edge.
14.hf1 d7 15.b3 c8 16.b1 e6
17.d5
Morozevich Fier, Khanty-Mansiysk 2011.
A final alternative is:
10...d7 11.g4
This position has occurred in quite a lot
of games but it seems to me that Black is
heading for trouble, so I will not spend too
much time on it.
11...xd4
11...b5 12.g5 b4 13.cb5! axb5 14.xb5
b8 (14...a5 15.xd6+) 15.gxf6 gxf6
16.xd6+ Valhondo Morales Royset,
Gibraltar 2010.
12.xd4!
Best, as the queen guards the e4-pawn while
the pressure on g7 forces Black to play ...e5.
After 12.xd4 c6 Black would gain a
tempo by attacking e4 and would thus have
time to play ...00 and ...d7, minimizing
his disadvantage.

12...c6
12...e5 is met by 13.d2 when taking on g4
looks suicidal, while 13...c6 14.f3 gives

Chapter 3 Various 7th and 8th Moves

White a dominating position from which he
has scored heavily.
13.g5 e5 14.d3 d7 15.f5
Naiditsch Grachev, Moscow 2009.
C11) 10...d7 11.g4 b5

This is an interesting way for Black to

advance his b-pawn without allowing the
e4-e5 trick, but White can benefit from not
having needed to play g4-g5.
12.xc6
12.f5!? is not required, but its tempting all
the same: 12...exf5 13.d5 b7N (13...d8
14.c3! [14.gxf5] enabled White to pick up
the crucial g7-pawn in Salinnikov Bocharov,
Tomsk 2002)

14.exf5 f6 (14...00 15.g5) 15.b6 b8

16.f3 00 17.g5 e8 18.f6

59

12...xc6 13.a3 b7

14.f5!N
14.g5 would justify Blacks decision to
retreat the knight from f6 voluntarily:
14...c5 15.hf1 c7 16.d4 (16.f3N a5!
is an important resource compare the main
line below) 16...00 17.f5 xe4 18.xe4
xe4 19.f6 fc8! 20.c3 d8 Caruana
Movsesian, Reggio Emilia 2011.
14...c5 15.hf1 c7 16.f3 a5!?
16...00 allows 17.g5 with a straightforward
attack on the kingside. The text move is a
tricky resource, based on the potential fork
on b3. However, compared with the note to
move 16 in Caruana Movsesian, the fact that
White has played f4-f5 instead of g4-g5 makes
a big difference.

Taimanov

60

17.b1! c6
17...b4? 18.b5 is hopeless for Black.
18.e5! dxe5
18...d5 is a good move in the analogous
position after 14.g5, but here we have 19.f6!
gxf6 20.exf6 f8 21.e2 with a huge initiative.
19.xc5 xc5 20.fxe6 fxe6

21.xc6 xc6 22.g5 d4 23.e2!

Blacks position is collapsing.
C12) 10...00
This time Black waits for g4-g5 before playing
...b5, as White will no longer be able to win
material on the long diagonal with f3. The
obvious drawback of his last move is that it
gives us a clear target on the kingside.

11.g4 b5
11...d5 has been played a few times, but after
12.exd5 xd5 13.xd5 exd5 14.f3 Black
had no real compensation for the weakness of
the d5-pawn in Fossan Alexandru, Gausdal
1986.
11...xd4 12.xd4
This has scored heavily, although 12.xd4
should also be nice for White.
12...e5
After 12...b5 13.g5 d7 14.f5 Blacks
counterplay seems far too slow compared to
any reputable Sicilian line. The simplest way
for White to advance his attack from here
will be with hf1 followed by f5-f6.

13.d3 exf4
13...xg4 14.xg4 xg4 15.d5 was
horrible for Black in Shirov Ljubojevic,
Monte Carlo (blindfold) 1999.
14.xf4 e6 15.g5 d7 16.xd6 xd6
17.xd6 a5 18.h4 ac8 19.d4
Black had no real compensation for the
pawn in Nijboer Van Kooten, Groningen
2008.
12.g5 d7
12...xd4 makes no difference: White
simply chooses his preferred way of
recapturing, as discussed at move 13 below, and
then meets 13...d7 with 14.f5!, transposing
immediately.

Chapter 3 Various 7th and 8th Moves

13.f5! xd4
13...de5 14.f6 opened the kingside
immediately in Veld Akkerboom, Hengelo
2002.
13...b4 14.f6!
Blasting open the kingside. Surprisingly,
Black has achieved a healthy plus score
from this position, but White only needs a
modest amount of accuracy to obtain a clear
advantage.

14...gxf6
14...bxc3 15.xc3 b7 (15...de5 16.fxe7
e8 17.xc6 xc6 18.h4 xe7 19.h5 White
controls the dark squares and eventually
even the d6-pawn will fall.) 16.fxe7 fc8
17.xc6 xc6 Konguvel Thipsay, India
1992. 18.b4!?N d5 19.hf1
The text move has been Blacks most popular

61

choice, but it leads to serious problems for

him.
15.gxf6 xf6 16.xc6 xc6

17.d4! xd4
17...bxc3? 18.hg1 h8 19.xf6 xf6
20.h6 leads to a quick mate.
18.xd4 e5 19.xb4
White went on to win in a Houdini vs.
Houdini game from 2012.
14.xd4!?
14.xd4 prevents ...b4, and thus can
be regarded as the safer way to maintain a
better position. 14...b7 In Tseitlin Sturua,
Daugavpils 1978, 15.hf1!?N would have
been the best way to prepare either f5-f6 or
fxe6 according to circumstances.

14...b4 15.f6!

62

Taimanov

This leads to fantastic complications. It is

not required of course, as 14.xd4 is perfectly
adequate, but this way is so much more fun!
15...bxc3 16.xc3 d8 17.fxg7 e8 18.hf1
If you think this is all the product of modern
computer analysis, you will be pleasantly
surprised to learn that Whites attacking
scheme was first played in 1969 by the Latvian
GM Klovans, and has been repeated in two
subsequent games. I wont analyse the position
exhaustively as its not the most important
theoretical variation, but it is worth showing
a few lines as there are some spectacular
possibilities.
18.df1!?N deserves attention as well. The
critical continuation is 18...e5! (after
18...c5? White can exploit the change
of rook to break through with 19.g6! fxg6
20.h6 e7 21.hg1!+) 19.h4!? which
could be analysed further.

18...c5
In the stem game Black erred with 18...b7
and was quickly crushed: 19.h5 e7 20.g6!
f6 21.gxh7 xh7 22.g1 10 Klovans
Zilberstein, USSR 1969.
19.g6! fxg6 20.c4!
20.h6? e7! enables Black to defend,

either by trading queens with ...g5 or by

shutting Whites bishop out of the game with
...e5.

20...a7
20...b8? allows 21.d4! threatening the
deadly f8.
20...e7 21.f4! is also dangerous, for
instance 21...b7?! 22.df1 and Black has no
good defence.
21.h4 e7

22.f4!?N
22.f6 c7 (22...xf6!?N 23.xf6 xf6
24.xd6 d7 25.xe6 xg7 26.c6
d8 27.f1 Black is barely hanging on, but

Chapter 3 Various 7th and 8th Moves

ultimately he seems to survive here too.)
23.d4 xe4 24.f4 f6 25.xf6 xf6
26.xf6 xg7 27.xd6 xf6 28.xf6 g7
29.f1 Black managed to hold this slightly
worse endgame in Enkalo Kayser, email 2013.
22.d4!?N is also tempting, but after
22...xh4 23.f8 xf8 24.gxf8= xf8
Black survives.
22...g5
22...a4 23.d4 b6 24.f6 c7 25.b3
maintains Whites initiative.
23.hxg5 xg5 24.b1

24...f7 25.xf7 xf7 26.f1 g8 27.f2

e7 28.f5!
White keeps a dangerous attack. His last
move prevents ...d7 while setting up various
threats such as h1, h5, d4 and so on.
Fascinating stuff, although some players would
no doubt prefer 14.xd4 as an easier route to
an advantage.
C2) 8...xd4 9.xd4!
9.xd4 e5 10.e3 (10.xe5?! xe5 11.f4 is
a useful attacking motif to be aware of, but
unfortunately Black has 11...c5! 12.e5 g4
when the threat of ...e3 slows down Whites

63

initiative.) 10...b4 11.f3 d6 12.a3 xc3

13.xc3 xc3 14.bxc3 e7 is pretty solid for
Black.

9...g4
9...d6 10.e2 has been covered via the move
order 8...d6 9.e2 xd4 10.xd4 see the
note to Blacks 9th move in variation C1 on
page 56.
Black can hardly hope to equalize with 9...e5
10.b6 xb6 11.xb6 d6. From this position
the sophisticated 12.c7!? d7 13.a5 gave
White the better chances in Cabrera Bellon
Lopez, Palma de Mallorca 2009, but the
simple 12.f3N e6 13.g4 would also have
been perfectly adequate.
10.b6
You may also wish to consider:
10.g5!?
This has some surprise value and leads to
much less explored territory. I will not
attempt to analyse it in depth, but will
mention a few lines to serve as a basis for
your further investigation.
10...f6
10...c5 11.d2 f6 12.f4 (12.h4!?N)
12...b5 13.e2 e5 led to another doubleedged middlegame in Navarro Cia Vila
Gazquez, Andorra 2007.
11.h4 c5 12.d2

Taimanov

64

12...00!?N
12...b5 was played in M. Popovic
Poluljahov, Cetinje 1996, when 13.e2!N
e5 14.h5 e7 (14...g6 15.xf6 00
16.xe5 xe5 17.f3) 15.he1!? would
have set up d5 ideas.
13.g3
We have reached an interesting position
with many possibilities for both sides, but its
hard to say if White is really better.

10...c6 11.d4
11.xc6 bxc6 12.b6 is a popular alternative,
but I prefer to provoke a weakening of Blacks
structure rather than to strengthen it.
11...e5 12.e3 e7 13.d5 d8 14.b3
14.b4!? is possible too, but I dont think we
need to resort to anything overly sophisticated.

Black may proceed with C21) 14...xe3 or

the more stubborn C22) 14...d6!?.
C21) 14...xe3 15.xe3 00

This enables us to get a better version of the

14...d6 variation by placing the bishop on d3,
rather than e2, after f2-f4.
16.f4!?N
It seems to me that the upcoming structure
after ...exf4 is often underestimated from
Whites point of view. Even though Blacks
position seems rather solid, Whites play is a
lot easier, particularly since he has the blunt
plan of advancing his pawns on the kingside.
The lack of a strong knight on e5 also favours
White.
16...exf4 17.xf4 d6 18.b1!
18.d3 e6 19.h4 a4! would be annoying.
18...e6 19.d3!?
Black cannot put up with the knight on
d5 indefinitely, so he will have to exchange it
sooner or later. Meanwhile White continues
with his kingside expansion to get a rather
one-sided game. The following analysis is by
no means forced, but it shows how White will
keep the better chances after logical play from
both sides.

Chapter 3 Various 7th and 8th Moves

19...xd5 20.exd5 d7! 21.h4 f6

The queen had to go to d7 to ensure that
White would not be able to play f5 to exploit
the bishop on f6.
21...b6?! is met by 22.h5 when Blacks
bishop has nothing to do.
22.h5
22.e4!? g6 23.h5 ae8 24.f3 g7 25.g4
also keeps an edge for White.
22...e5
22...fe8? 23.h6! e5 24.xh7! wins.
23.f3 ae8
23...b5 24.de1 g6 25.e4 ae8 26.h4

65

24.c3!
White could equally start with 24.g4, but
the exclamation mark is for the concept of
preventing Black from playing ...b5-b4, which
would fix Whites queenside structure and give
Black excellent counterattacking chances on
the dark squares.
Here is an illustrative line to show what
can happen if White elects not to touch his
queenside pawns: 24.df1 g6 (24...a4
25.c3) 25.g4 b5 26.h3 (26.g5 a5 27.h4
b4 28.fh1 e7) 26...b4! 27.h4 (27.xa6
a7) 27...a7! With the idea of ...d4. 28.g5
a5
24...b5 25.g4 g6 26.h3
There is no clear breakthrough as yet, but
White clearly has the initiative.
C22) 14...d6!?

I believe this to be slightly more accurate,

although it does give White a choice between
two quite promising lines.
15.f4!?N
This is the simplest continuation, leading to
something similar to the previous variation.
We can also consider:

Taimanov

66

15.e2 xe3 16.xe3!?

16.xe3 followed by f2-f4 is likely to
transpose to our main line.
16...00
16...e6? 17.c4
16...b5 17.d3 e7 18.d5 (18.f4!?)
18...e6 19.f4 exf4 20.d4!

17.b1!N
17.c4 xe4! 18.xd6 e7 19.dd1 g6
was level in Inarkiev Maletin, Moscow
2013.
17...b5
Whites idea is: 17...xe4 18.xd6 e6
19.d3!? This looks rather artificial, but after
19...c6 (19...xb3?! 20.xe4) 20.xc6
xb3 21.c5 e6 22.xe5 it is not so easy
for Black to equalize.
18.d3 e7
18...b7? 19.f3 e7 20.f5 wins a pawn.

19.d5 d8 20.g3 e6 21.f4

I am not sure how much better White will

be in the ...xd5 endgames, but at least it will
be a one-sided affair.

15...e6!
15...xe3 16.xe3 transposes to the
previous variation with 14...xe3. By delaying
the exchange for one more move, Black forces
us to develop the bishop to a slightly worse
square.
16.e2 xe3 17.xe3 exf4 18.xf4 00
19.b1

Although I would have preferred the

version with the bishop on d3, in which I
could just keep pushing on the kingside as in

Chapter 3 Various 7th and 8th Moves

variation C21, it is still not easy for Black to
equalize. The most likely scenario is that Black
will exchange on d5 at some point, leaving
White with a long-term edge due to his better
bishop. Black may even consider sacrificing his
d6-pawn to liberate his bishop, but White will
not have much to worry about in either case.
19...xd5
19...c8 20.c3 doesnt change much. Black
can continue to try and play around the knight,
but I dont see a convincing plan for him.
19...f5 20.f3 only creates weaknesses in
Blacks position.
20.xd5 c7
20...f6 21.xd6 and 20...e7 21.g4
also favour White.
21.c3!
21.h4 ae8 22.g4 e5 enables Black to
relieve the pressure by trading rooks.

21...ae8 22.d1! e5 23.b3

The bishop is ready to replace the rook on
d5, and White keeps a lasting advantage due to
his better bishop and pressure against f7.

67

Conclusion
This chapter dealt with a selection of Blacks
alternatives on moves 7 and 8.
7...xd4!? is not without purpose, but
it allows us to save time by omitting f2-f3,
leading to a promising lead in development.
We then looked at 7...d6 8.000 d7!?,
when my new idea of 9.g4! gives White great
prospects.
7...f6 is the main line by far; after the
automatic 8.000 we considered two
respectable sidelines.
8...d6 is not a bad move, but 9.e2!? e7
10.f4 makes it hard for Black to carry out ...b5,
and White generally gets a promising attacking
position by ramming the g-pawn up the board.
Finally, 8...xd4 9.xd4 g4 is an interesting
attempt to go after our bishop, but 10.b6
c6 11.d4 e5 12.e3 leaves an inviting
hole on d5. After the normal continuation
of 12...e7 13.d5 d8 14.b3 Black has
a couple of options, but the most important
thing to realize is that the structure after f2-f4
and ...exf4 is more problematic for Black than
it may first appear. The most likely outcome
is some kind of opposite-coloured-bishop
scenario where White enjoys some initiative,
while Blacks prospects for counterplay are
limited.