[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Catalan ...Bd6 System"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "E01"]
[Annotator "Avrukh,B"]
[PlyCount "29"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "13"]
[EventCountry "YUG"]
[Source "ICCF"]
[SourceDate "2008.01.30"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. g3 c6 5. Bg2 Nbd7 6. O-O Bd6 {
I don't rate this system very highly, but obviously it deserves some attention.
} (6... dxc4 {has been analysed in my book.}) 7. Nc3 $1 {This is the
difference: with Black's bishop on d6, White can develop his knight to c3.
Here we approach the main crossroads in this variation.} dxc4 {Another line is}
(7... O-O 8. Nd2 $1 {A very strong move that allows White to carry out a quick
e2-e4 advance, which underlines the vulnerable position of Black's
dark-squared bishop. In my opinion White has a very promising position, so
let's have a look at a few typical examples:} Bb4 (8... Bc7 9. e4 dxe4 10.
Ndxe4 Nxe4 11. Nxe4 e5 {Black tries to create some counterplay, as otherwise
White is much better positionally.} 12. d5 $1 cxd5 13. cxd5 {
White's passed d-pawn secures his advantage, as in this good example:} h6 {
After} (13... Bb6 {in Informator 100 Gleizerov gives the following line} 14. d6
h6 15. Be3 $1 Bxe3 16. fxe3 $16 {and White is clearly better.}) 14. Be3 f5 15.
d6 $1 Bb6 {This position is from the game Gleizerov-Rodin, Saratov 2007, and
now I believe White should play:} 16. Nc3 $1 $146 Nf6 17. Qb3+ Kh8 18. Bxb6
axb6 (18... Qxb6 19. Qxb6 axb6 20. Rfe1 e4 21. Rad1 Rd8 22. f3 exf3 23. Bxf3
$16 {This doesn't bring relief either.}) 19. Rad1 $16 {
and White is much better.}) (8... Re8 9. e4 dxe4 10. Ndxe4 Nxe4 11. Nxe4 Be7
12. Bf4 Nf6 13. c5 $1 {This is typical play in this variety of Catalan
position: the text underlines the passivity of Black's light-squared bishop.}
Nd5 14. Bd6 b6 15. Qa4 b5 16. Qc2 a5 17. Rfe1 {
White had a pleasant edge in Ivanisevic-Ascic, Zupanja 2007.}) (8... Be7 9. e4
dxc4 10. Nxc4 b5 11. Ne3 {White's knight has a perfect square on e3.} b4 {
Black activates his light-squared bishop.} 12. Na4 Ba6 13. Re1 {Black is pretty
much in the game, but practice has proven that this position is much easier to
play with White. Here is a recent example:} Nb6 14. e5 Nfd5 15. Nc5 $1 Bxc5 16.
dxc5 Nd7 17. Nxd5 cxd5 18. Qg4 {Threatening not only 19.Qb4, but also 19.Bh6.}
Kh8 19. Qxb4 Qc8 20. Be3 Nxe5 21. Qc3 Nc6 22. Bf4 $16 {In Antic-Radulski,
Serbia 2006, White had a clear edge, thanks to his two bishops and potentially
strong c5-pawn.}) 9. e4 {Instead of the text White has also tried 9.a3 and 9.
Qb3 but I do not see anything wrong with the straightforward 9.e4.} e5 {
Clearly in White's favour is} (9... dxc4 10. Nxc4 c5 11. e5 Bxc3 12. bxc3 Nd5
13. Bd2 N7b6 14. Nd6 $16 {
with a nice positional advantage, Nogueiras Santiago-Gamboa, Santa Clara 1999.}
) 10. dxe5 {I believe this is most principled reply.} Nxe5 11. cxd5 Bxc3 12.
bxc3 cxd5 13. exd5 Nxd5 {Opening up the position is clearly in White's favour,
thanks to his two bishops. And now I would recommend following Lautier's
recommendation in Informator 81.} 14. Nb3 $1 {A serious alternative is} (14.
Nc4 $5 Nxc4 15. Qxd5 {, as seen in Filippov-Tunik, Novgorod 1995}) 14... Nb6 {
Obviously the c3-pawn is untouchable:} (14... Nxc3 $4 15. Qe1 Qc7 16. Bb2 $18)
(14... Be6 {is met strongly by} 15. Nc5 {and again Black cannot take on c3}
Nxc3 $2 16. Qe1 Qd4 17. Nxe6 fxe6 18. Bb2 Rac8 19. Rc1 Rf3 20. Kh1 Rd3 21. f4
$18 {and White wins.}) 15. Bf4 {Lautier now recommended} (15. Nd4 $14 {
with some pressure, but I believe 15.Bf4 is much stronger.}) 15... Nd3 {
Another line is} (15... Nbc4 16. Qxd8 Rxd8 17. Nc5 Rb8 18. Rfd1 {
with serious pressure.}) 16. Be3 Nc4 17. Bd4 Nde5 18. Re1 Qc7 19. Nd2 $1 $16 {
White's advantage is beyond dispute.}) 8. Bg5 {As often happens in the Catalan,
White is in no rush to regain the pawn. Now I investigated three possible
continuations for Black:} h6 (8... O-O 9. Qc2 h6 {Black has to break the
unpleasant pin along the h4-d8 diagonal. He has also unsuccessfully tried} (
9... Qc7 10. Nd2 b5 $2 11. Nxb5 cxb5 12. Bxa8 {
White was just an exchange up in Adrian-Crouan, France 2002.}) 10. Ne4 Be7 {If}
(10... hxg5 $146 11. Nxd6 Nb6 12. Nxc8 Rxc8 13. Rfd1 g4 14. Ne5 {White regains
the pawn, keeping the better prospects due to the superiority of his bishop
over Black's knight.}) 11. Nxf6+ {Not so clear is} (11. Bxf6 Nxf6 12. Nxf6+
Bxf6 13. Qxc4 Qe7 {
and Black is ready to push ...e5 next, Romanishin-Velikov, Turin 1998.}) 11...
Nxf6 12. Bf4 $146 {I believe White should avoid exchanging on f6.} (12. Bxf6
Bxf6 13. Qxc4 Qe7 {transposes to the aforementioned game.}) 12... Nd5 {
A natural reaction. Also after} (12... b5 13. Ne5 Bb7 14. Nxc6 Qe8 15. Nxe7+
Qxe7 16. e4 Rfd8 17. Rad1 $14 {
White has better prospects, thanks to his strong centre and two bishops.}) 13.
Qxc4 Nxf4 14. gxf4 $14 {I believe White's chances are higher in this complex
position, as it will be very difficult for Black to neutralize the Catalan
bishop.}) (8... Nb6 {
Black holds onto the c4-pawn, but allows White to seize control of the centre.}
9. e4 h6 {And now I like the calm} 10. Be3 $1 $146 {, while} (10. Bxf6 gxf6 11.
e5 Be7 {was pretty double-edged in Lputian-Bologan, Poikovsky 2001}) 10... Be7
{The following line doesn't work:} (10... Ng4 11. Bc1 e5 {in view of the simple
} 12. h3 {and Black loses material.}) 11. Ne5 O-O 12. Qe2 {
White regains the c4-pawn, keeping a clear positional advantage.}) 9. Bxf6 Qxf6
{This position might also arise from the Moscow variation in the Semi-Slav
Defence. Another recapture is} (9... Nxf6 10. Nd2 {Not so clear is} (10. e4 Bc7
$1 {keeping control of the e5-square.} 11. Qe2 b5 12. a4 b4) 10... e5 11. d5
cxd5 12. Nxd5 Nxd5 13. Nxc4 Bc7 {And now White should have played} 14. Bxd5 {
, as} (14. Qxd5 Qxd5 15. Bxd5 Ke7 16. Rac1 Rb8 {
led to a quite defendable position for Black in Poluljahov-Lunev, Briansk 1995}
) 14... O-O 15. Qd3 Rb8 16. Rac1 Qf6 17. Rfd1 $14 {with definite pressure.})
10. Ne4 {White has tried some other moves, but the text seems to me to be best.
} Qe7 11. Nfd2 {White also gained a slight advantage after} (11. Qc2 O-O 12.
Nxd6 Qxd6 13. Qxc4 e5 14. Rad1 exd4 15. Nxd4 Qc5 16. Qxc5 Nxc5 17. Rd2 $14 {
, but Black's position should be defendable, Ruck-L'Ami, Heraklio 2007.}) 11...
Nb6 {Black could have played} (11... Bc7 12. Nxc4 O-O {, but after} 13. Rc1 Rd8
(13... e5 {is met strongly by} 14. d5 $1 cxd5 15. Qxd5 Nb6 16. Qc5 Qxc5 17.
Nxc5 {with serious pressure.}) 14. Qc2 {
White has gained a typical Catalan plus, as Black cannot push} e5 $6 {
in view of the strong} 15. d5 $1 cxd5 16. Ne3 {with a serious advantage.}) 12.
f4 $5 $146 {
White stops Black's idea of playing ...e6-e5. This is my improvement over} (12.
Rc1 {This was played in Lybin-Volodin, Frydek Mistek 1996, and now I believe
Black missed the proper moment to play} e5 $1 {with equal play.}) 12... O-O 13.
Rc1 Rd8 {Clearly in White's favour is} (13... c5 14. Nxc4 Nxc4 15. Rxc4 cxd4
16. Nxd6 Qxd6 17. Qxd4 $16) 14. Nxc4 Bc7 15. Qd3 $1 $14 {This prevents any ...
e6-e5 ideas, as now White is ready to recapture with the queen if 15...Nxc4. I
believe White has a small but long-lasting edge, as Black has failed to carry
out either of the freeing advances, ...e6-e5 or ...c6-c5.} ({Less accurate is} 
15. e3 Nxc4 16. Rxc4 e5 $1 17. fxe5 Bxe5 {when Black gets a normal game.}) *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Catalan 4...c5 5...¤d5 line"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "E06"]
[Annotator "Avrukh,B"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkb1r/ppp2ppp/4pn2/3p4/2PP4/5N2/PP2PPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 4"]
[PlyCount "29"]
[EventDate "1996.08.??"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "11"]
[EventCountry "CHN"]
[Source "ICCF"]
[SourceDate "2008.01.30"]

4. g3 c5 5. cxd5 Nxd5 (5... exd5 {would transpose to Tarrasch.}) 6. Bg2 Nc6 {
Other options are less popular, but still definitely deserve attention:} (6...
Be7 7. O-O (7. dxc5 O-O 8. O-O Bxc5 {leads to the same position.}) 7... O-O 8.
dxc5 Bxc5 9. a3 {White not only prepares b2-b4, grabbing more space on the
queenside, but by taking control of the b4-square the e2-e4 advance becomes an
important option, as now Black's knight cannot jump to b4 to use the weakness
of d3. I believe White has a pleasant edge, and the following two examples are
typical:} a5 (9... Be7 10. e4 Nb6 11. Qe2 Nc6 12. Rd1 Qe8 13. Nc3 {
White has a clear edge, thanks to his obvious space advantage.} e5 $6 ({
Somewhat better would have been} 13... f6 {, but even here after} 14. e5 {
White's advantage is beyond any doubt.}) 14. Nd5 $1 $16 {
White had a clear advantage in C. Horvath-Hmadi Budapest 1996.}) (9... Nc6 {
would transpose to the main line.}) 10. e4 Ne7 11. Nc3 (11. Qc2 {
looks quite promising as well.}) 11... Nbc6 12. Qe2 {
Creating the unpleasant idea of 13.Rd1. Less convincing is} (12. Bf4 Ng6 {
Berkes-Ehlvest, Panormo 2002.}) 12... e5 13. Rd1 Nd4 14. Nxd4 exd4 $6 {
Stronger was} (14... Bxd4 15. Be3 Nc6 16. Qb5 $14 {
, although White has a pleasant positional advantage.}) 15. Bg5 {
White was clearly better in Huzman-Ehlvest, Panormo 2002.}) (6... cxd4 7. O-O {
Now the main continuation is} Be7 {The alternative is} (7... Bc5 8. Nxd4 O-O {
And now I believe White's best line is} 9. Nb3 {Not so clear is} (9. Nc3 Nxc3
10. bxc3 Nd7 {Dlugy-Taylor, New York 1985}) 9... Be7 {, or} (9... Bb6 {
The only chance for an advantage is} 10. Nc3 $1 Nxc3 11. bxc3 {
Just one game has reached this position and it continued:} Qf6 {
This was Zhelesny-Khasin, Ozery 1997, and now White overlooked a strong idea:}
12. a4 $1 $146 {White is threatening the unpleasant a5-a6.} Rd8 {In the case of
} (12... Qxc3 $2 13. a5 Bc7 14. a6 $1 {
Black faces serious problems, for example:} Nc6 15. Bd2 Qb2 16. axb7 Bxb7 17.
Rc1 $18 {Black loses material.}) 13. Qc2 a6 14. Nd2 $1 Nc6 15. Ba3 {
White has serious positional pressure.}) 10. Bd2 Nc6 11. Nc3 {
In my opinion White retains positional pressure in every line:} Bf6 {
Other options are:} (11... Nxc3 12. Bxc3 Bd7 13. Rc1 Rc8 14. Nd4 $14) (11...
Nb6 12. Ne4 {With idea of meeting 12...Bd7 with 13.Nec5.} Na4 $2 {
Black misses White's idea.} 13. Na5 $1 {
White was clearly better in Bistric-Topalovic, Kastav 2002.}) 12. Rc1 a5 13.
Nc5 {A calm move, but} (13. a3 $5 {also comes into consideration.}) 13... Bd4 {
This position was reached in Reshevsky-Bronstein, Amsterdam 1964, and now the
simple} 14. Nxd5 exd5 15. Qc2 Bf6 16. Bc3 {
would leave White with a pleasant positional edge.}) 8. Nxd4 O-O {
Now in my opinion the strongest move is} 9. Qb3 $1 (9. Nb5 $5 {
is also worthy of consideration, while the attractive}) (9. Nf5 {
in fact doesn't promise White any advantage.} Bf6 10. e4 Nb4 11. Nd6 {
This was Kachiani Gersinska-Wagner Michel, Germany 2006, and now the natural}
N8c6 12. a3 Nc2 13. Qxc2 Qxd6 {would lead to an equal game.}) 9... Nd7 {
Other options:} (9... Na6 10. Rd1 Nc5 11. Qc4 {
This just transposes to the position that will be examined after 9...Nd7.}) (
9... Nc6 10. Rd1 {Not so clear is} (10. Nxc6 bxc6 11. Rd1 Qc7 12. Qc2 Ba6 {
with double-edged play.}) 10... Na5 11. Qf3 Qb6 12. Nc3 {
White keeps pressure, as was proven in the following encounter:} Nxc3 13. Qxc3
Bb4 14. Qd3 Bc5 15. Be3 e5 16. Nc2 Bxe3 17. Nxe3 Be6 18. Nd5 {
White had a clear edge in Koerholz-Kargoll, Germany 2002.}) 10. Rd1 Nc5 11. Qc4
$1 {An important nuance, as after the natural} (11. Qc2 {Black has} Nb4 $1 12.
Qc4 e5 $13 {with unclear play.}) 11... Nb6 12. Qc2 Qe8 {Not much better is} (
12... Bd7 13. Nc3 Qc8 14. Bf4 $1 f6 15. Nb3 Nca4 16. Na5 $1 $16 {
Sorokin-Van Riemsdijk, Boca 1997.}) 13. Nc3 Bd7 14. b3 Rc8 15. Bb2 {It may look
as if Black has managed to complete his development and should be alright, but
his poorly placed knight on b6, together with his lack of space, makes White's
chances clearly preferable. The following game is a good example of what can
happen from this position:} f6 16. e3 a6 17. Rac1 Rc7 {
This was Todorov-Genocchio, Cutro 2001, and now} 18. a4 Nc8 19. Qe2 $16 {
would keep a clear advantage.}) 7. O-O Be7 8. dxc5 {
I definitely prefer this move, while} (8. Nc3 O-O {
would lead to another theoretical tabiya.}) 8... O-O {
This is considered to be Black's best move order, as} (8... Bxc5 {
allows White an extra option:} 9. Qc2 {
This looks rather promising, for example:} (9. a3 {
would transpose to our main line.}) 9... Be7 10. Rd1 Bd7 11. Nc3 Nxc3 12. Qxc3
O-O 13. Bf4 Rc8 {
This happened in Bjork-Wedberg, Sweden (ch) 1979, and now the simple} 14. Qe3
$1 Bf6 15. Rac1 {would have given White an obvious advantage.}) 9. a3 {
White has other options as well, but the text seems best.} Bxc5 {
Black has to regain the pawn, as after} (9... a5 $2 10. Qc2 $1 {
White keeps a healthy extra pawn.}) 10. Qc2 {The alternative} (10. b4 Be7 11.
Bb2 {is also considered to be promising.}) 10... Qe7 {
Black has also tried other moves:} (10... Bb6 11. Nbd2 Qc7 12. b4 Bd7 {
I also examined} (12... a5 13. b5 Nd4 {but after} 14. Nxd4 Bxd4 15. Qxc7 Nxc7
16. Rb1 $16 {White's pressure looks annoying. As always, Black's problem is
that he cannot neutralize White's light-squared bishop.}) 13. Bb2 Rac8 14. Rac1
Ne5 15. Qe4 Nxf3+ 16. Bxf3 Qd8 17. Nc4 $16 {
With a pleasant edge in Damljanovic-Estremera Panos, Mancha Real 2000.}) (10...
Be7 {This looks rather passive.} 11. Rd1 {Also quite strong is} (11. e4 Nf6 12.
Rd1) 11... Bd7 {Clearly better for White is} (11... Qc7 12. e4 Nf6 13. Bf4 Qb6
14. Nc3 {For example:} Bd7 15. Bg5 Rfd8 16. e5 Ne8 17. Be3 Qc7 18. Qe4 $16 {
Tkachiev-Vachier Lagrave, Cergy Pontoise 2003}) 12. e4 Nb6 13. Nc3 Rc8 14. Qe2
$1 {The most accurate move. If instead} (14. Bf4 Qe8 15. Qe2 {
Black creates reasonable counterplay after} Na5 16. Ne5 Ba4 17. Nxa4 Qxa4)
14... Na5 {After} (14... Qe8 {White has a pleasant choice between} 15. e5 {and}
(15. Be3 Na5 16. Rac1 $14) 15... Na5 16. Nd4 Ba4 17. Rd3 {with the advantage.})
15. Ne5 Nac4 $2 {This is the decisive mistake. Black should have played:} (
15... Nb3 {, though here after} 16. Be3 $1 Bc5 17. Rab1 {
White keeps a clear edge.}) 16. Rxd7 $1 Nxd7 17. Nxc4 $18 {
White had a decisive advantage in Kirov-Estevez Morales, Sochi 1976.}) 11. b4
Bb6 12. Bb2 Bd7 13. Nbd2 Rac8 {The obvious alternative is} (13... Rfc8 14. Qd3
$5 {This move looks interesting, as in this case Black does not have an
f8-rook to put on d8. White easily outplayed his opponent in the following
encounter:} a5 15. e4 Nf6 16. Nc4 Bd8 17. Nd6 Rcb8 18. b5 Na7 19. a4 {
White has a huge positional advantage, Ftacnik-Moehring, Strbske Pleso 1978.})
14. Qb3 Bc7 {This position was reached in Lerner-Lputian, Moscow 1987, and now:
} 15. e4 Nf6 16. e5 (16. b5 Na5 17. Qb4 Rfe8 18. Ne5 $14 {
This also deserves serious attention.}) 16... Nd5 17. Ne4 Rfd8 18. Rac1 $14 {
Following up with Rc2 and Rfc1 will gain White a small but stable positional
advantage.} *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Slav 4...a6"]
[Black "The rare 5...dxc4"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "D11"]
[Annotator "Avrukh,B"]
[PlyCount "39"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "13"]
[EventCountry "YUG"]
[Source "ICCF"]
[SourceDate "2008.01.30"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. e3 a6 5. Bd3 dxc4 {
A relatively rare continuation, nevertheless it deserves some attention.} 6.
Bxc4 e6 ({Black can also start with} 6... b5 7. Bd3 e6 {The immediate} (7... c5
$6 {looks very suspicious.} 8. dxc5 Nc6 {
Otherwise White just holds onto his extra pawn, for example} (8... e6 9. b4 $16
) 9. a3 $1 {Not only preparing 10.b4 , but also preventing a possible ...Nb4.}
e5 {The only possible play.} 10. Qc2 {Black was threatening 10...e4.} Qe7 (
10... Qd5 {leads to the same postion.}) 11. Nc3 $1 $146 {
This move (suggested by Atalik in CBM 84) is much stronger than} (11. Nbd2 Qxc5
12. Qxc5 Bxc5 13. Ne4 Be7 {
White was only slightly better in S. Porat-Buchicchio, Spain 2002.}) 11... Qxc5
12. b4 Qb6 13. Bb2 {White has a distinct initiative with ideas such as Ne4,
Rc1, or Ng5-e4, while Black's pieces lack coordination.}) 8. O-O {
transposes to a position from the main line.}) 7. O-O b5 {If instead} (7... c5
{the game transposes to a normal QGA, which is covered in my book.}) 8. Bd3 Bb7
{Only this move leads to an independent line. Black temporarily delays the ...
c6-c5 advance, nevertheless it remains Black's main positional idea and he
intends to execute it after completing development. Again:} (8... c5 9. a4 {
leads to lines that are covered in the book.}) 9. a4 {A very important move:
White creates some pressure on the queenside, thus complicating the ...
c5-advance. Another natural continuation is} (9. e4 {After} c5 {this leads to
a complex line that has been tested in many games. It is usually reached from
a normal QGA (7.e4 b5 8.Bd3).}) 9... Nbd7 10. e4 Be7 {
Black is not ready to play} (10... c5 $2 {After} 11. axb5 axb5 12. Rxa8 Qxa8 {
The following line doesn't change the evaluation:} (12... Bxa8 13. Bxb5 Bxe4
14. Ne5 $1 {and if} Bxb1 {then} 15. Bg5 {is immediately decisive.}) 13. Bxb5
Bxe4 14. Ne5 {White's lead in development starts to tell.} Qb7 15. Nc3 Bxg2 {
This is Grebionkin-Geller, Ishevsk 2005, and now the simple} 16. dxc5 Bxf1 17.
Bxd7+ Nxd7 18. c6 $18 {would decide the issue immediately.}) 11. Qe2 {
This seems to me to be the critical continuation, but more popular is:} (11.
Bg5 {However, this allows Black a wide choice. For example, quite interesting
looking is} h6 12. Bh4 g5 13. Bg3 Nh5 {
With a complex battle in Tregubov-J. Geller, Krasnodar 2001.}) 11... O-O {
Black's second choice is} (11... b4 {
The following line looks pretty convincing to me:} 12. Nbd2 c5 13. e5 Nd5 14.
Nb3 cxd4 {Clearly favourable for White is} (14... h6 15. Bd2 Qb6 16. a5 Qa7 17.
Rac1 cxd4 18. Nfxd4 Rd8 19. Nc6 Bxc6 20. Rxc6 Nb8 21. Rc4 $16 {
White was clearly better in Agdestein-Cosma, Cappelle la Grande 1999.}) 15.
Nfxd4 O-O 16. Bd2 {Less clear is} (16. Qe4 g6 17. Bh6 Re8) 16... a5 {Understand
ably, Black wants to remove his rook from defending the a6-pawn, but the text
weakens the b5-square. This position happened in Wang Rui-Wang Hao, Beijing
2005, and now the simple:} 17. Qe4 g6 18. Bh6 Re8 19. Bb5 Ba6 20. Bxa6 Rxa6 21.
Rac1 {would leave White with a pleasant edge.}) 12. e5 Nd5 13. Qe4 g6 14. Bh6
Re8 15. Qg4 {I believe this is the best option, as White should remove his
queen from the e4-square. Not so clear is} (15. Nbd2 Qb6 {
Followed by ...c5 next move.}) 15... Qb6 $146 {I believe this to be the
critical continuation. In both games that reached this position Black opted
for the dubious} (15... Bf8 $2 {
White is clearly better after the exchange of dark-squared bishops.} 16. Bxf8
Nxf8 17. Nbd2 f5 18. exf6 Nxf6 19. Qg5 $16 {Borchgrevink-Bentsen, Moss 2006})
16. h4 $1 {White starts immediate action, not spending a tempo on Nbd2.} (16.
Nbd2 c5 {looks very unclear.}) 16... Nb4 $1 {
Luckily Black has this resource. In the event of} (16... c5 17. h5 {
Black's king looks very vulnerable.}) 17. Be4 c5 18. dxc5 Nxc5 {
White is clearly better after} (18... Bxc5 19. Nc3) 19. Bxb7 Nxb7 20. Nc3 {
I believe White's chances are preferable, as he keeps good attacking prospects
thanks to the slightly weakened position of Black's king.} *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "QGA  7 ¥b3 b5  9..cxd4"]
[Black "12...¤c6"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "D27"]
[Annotator "Avrukh,B"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rn1qkb1r/1b1n1ppp/p3p3/4P3/PpNp4/1B3N2/1P3PPP/R1BQ1RK1 b k - 0 12"]
[PlyCount "34"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "13"]
[EventCountry "YUG"]
[Source "ICCF"]
[SourceDate "2008.01.30"]

12... Nc6 13. Bg5 Qc7 14. Rc1 Nc5 15. Ba2 h6 {This move is recommended in
Rizzitano's book on the QGA. In my opinion Black's position is dangerous and
this move doesn't change the evaluation. The line I like most is} 16. Bf4 {
, though} (16. Bh4 g5 17. Bg3 Ne4 18. Nfd2 $1 {is quite promising as well.})
16... g5 {If instead} (16... Rd8 {White can play the calm} 17. Re1 {
and Black experiences definite problems finding useful moves.}) 17. Nd6+ Bxd6
18. exd6 Qb6 19. Bg3 Ne4 {I also examined:} (19... b3 20. Bb1 Nd7 21. Re1 {
It is not clear where Black can hide his king, as he cannot castle short in
view of:} O-O 22. Nxg5 $1 hxg5 23. Qh5 {With a decisive attack.}) 20. Re1 $1 {
This natural move is very strong.} ({Instead} 20. a5 Qxa5 21. Nxd4 {
leads to messy play.}) 20... Nxg3 21. hxg3 Rd8 {The point is that} (21... O-O {
still runs into} 22. Nxg5 $1 hxg5 23. Qh5 {with a winning attack.}) 22. Bxe6 $1
Rxd6 {The bishop is untouchable, as after:} (22... fxe6 23. Rxe6+ {
Black loses quickly either after} Kd7 ({, or} 23... Kf7 24. Qb3 Kg7 25. Qd3 $18
) 24. Qb3 Rde8 25. Rxe8 Rxe8 26. Qf7+ Kd8 27. a5 $1 $18) 23. Qd3 Ne7 {
One again the bishop is untouchable:} (23... Rxe6 24. Rxe6+ fxe6 25. Qg6+ Kf8
26. Qf6+ Kg8 27. Qxe6+ Kg7 28. Ne5 $18) 24. Bb3 Qd8 {
White decides the game with an elegant attack:} 25. Rxe7+ $1 Kxe7 26. Qf5 Bd5
27. Bxd5 Rxd5 28. Ne5 Rf8 29. Re1 *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Catalan ...Bd6 System"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "E01"]
[Annotator "Avrukh,B"]
[PlyCount "37"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "13"]
[EventCountry "YUG"]
[Source "ICCF"]
[SourceDate "2008.01.30"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. g3 c6 5. Bg2 Nbd7 6. O-O Bd6 {
I don't rate this system very highly, but obviously it deserves some attention.
} (6... dxc4 {has been analysed in my book.}) 7. Nc3 $1 {This is the
difference: with Black's bishop on d6, White can develop his knight to c3.
Here we approach the main crossroads in this variation.} O-O 8. Nd2 $1 {
A very strong move that allows White to carry out a quick e2-e4 advance, which
underlines the vulnerable position of Black's dark-squared bishop. In my
opinion White has a very promising position, so let's have a look at a few
typical examples:} Bb4 (8... Bc7 9. e4 dxe4 10. Ndxe4 Nxe4 11. Nxe4 e5 {
Black tries to create some counterplay, as otherwise White is much better
positionally.} 12. d5 $1 cxd5 13. cxd5 {
White's passed d-pawn secures his advantage, as in this good example:} h6 {
After} (13... Bb6 {in Informator 100 Gleizerov gives the following line} 14. d6
h6 15. Be3 $1 Bxe3 16. fxe3 $16 {and White is clearly better.}) 14. Be3 f5 15.
d6 $1 Bb6 {This position is from the game Gleizerov-Rodin, Saratov 2007, and
now I believe White should play:} 16. Nc3 $1 $146 Nf6 17. Qb3+ Kh8 18. Bxb6
axb6 (18... Qxb6 19. Qxb6 axb6 20. Rfe1 e4 21. Rad1 Rd8 22. f3 exf3 23. Bxf3
$16 {This doesn't bring relief either.}) 19. Rad1 $16 {
and White is much better.}) (8... Re8 9. e4 dxe4 10. Ndxe4 Nxe4 11. Nxe4 Be7
12. Bf4 Nf6 13. c5 $1 {This is typical play in this variety of Catalan
position: the text underlines the passivity of Black's light-squared bishop.}
Nd5 14. Bd6 b6 15. Qa4 b5 16. Qc2 a5 17. Rfe1 {
White had a pleasant edge in Ivanisevic-Ascic, Zupanja 2007.}) (8... Be7 9. e4
dxc4 10. Nxc4 b5 11. Ne3 {White's knight has a perfect square on e3.} b4 {
Black activates his light-squared bishop.} 12. Na4 Ba6 13. Re1 {Black is pretty
much in the game, but practice has proven that this position is much easier to
play with White. Here is a recent example:} Nb6 14. e5 Nfd5 15. Nc5 $1 Bxc5 16.
dxc5 Nd7 17. Nxd5 cxd5 18. Qg4 {Threatening not only 19.Qb4, but also 19.Bh6.}
Kh8 19. Qxb4 Qc8 20. Be3 Nxe5 21. Qc3 Nc6 22. Bf4 $16 {In Antic-Radulski,
Serbia 2006, White had a clear edge, thanks to his two bishops and potentially
strong c5-pawn.}) 9. e4 {Instead of the text White has also tried 9.a3 and 9.
Qb3 but I do not see anything wrong with the straightforward 9.e4.} e5 {
Clearly in White's favour is} (9... dxc4 10. Nxc4 c5 11. e5 Bxc3 12. bxc3 Nd5
13. Bd2 N7b6 14. Nd6 $16 {
with a nice positional advantage, Nogueiras Santiago-Gamboa, Santa Clara 1999.}
) 10. dxe5 {I believe this is most principled reply.} Nxe5 11. cxd5 Bxc3 12.
bxc3 cxd5 13. exd5 Nxd5 {Opening up the position is clearly in White's favour,
thanks to his two bishops. And now I would recommend following Lautier's
recommendation in Informator 81.} 14. Nb3 $1 {A serious alternative is} (14.
Nc4 $5 Nxc4 15. Qxd5 {, as seen in Filippov-Tunik, Novgorod 1995}) 14... Nb6 {
Obviously the c3-pawn is untouchable:} (14... Nxc3 $4 15. Qe1 Qc7 16. Bb2 $18)
(14... Be6 {is met strongly by} 15. Nc5 {and again Black cannot take on c3}
Nxc3 $2 16. Qe1 Qd4 17. Nxe6 fxe6 18. Bb2 Rac8 19. Rc1 Rf3 20. Kh1 Rd3 21. f4
$18 {and White wins.}) 15. Bf4 {Lautier now recommended} (15. Nd4 $14 {
with some pressure, but I believe 15.Bf4 is much stronger.}) 15... Nd3 {
Another line is} (15... Nbc4 16. Qxd8 Rxd8 17. Nc5 Rb8 18. Rfd1 {
with serious pressure.}) 16. Be3 Nc4 17. Bd4 Nde5 18. Re1 Qc7 19. Nd2 $1 $16 {
White's advantage is beyond dispute.} *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Catalan ...Bd6 System"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "E01"]
[Annotator "Avrukh,B"]
[PlyCount "27"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "13"]
[EventCountry "YUG"]
[Source "ICCF"]
[SourceDate "2008.01.30"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. g3 c6 5. Bg2 Nbd7 6. O-O Bd6 {
I don't rate this system very highly, but obviously it deserves some attention.
} (6... dxc4 {has been analysed in my book.}) 7. Nc3 $1 {This is the
difference: with Black's bishop on d6, White can develop his knight to c3.
Here we approach the main crossroads in this variation.} dxc4 {Another line is}
8. Bg5 {As often happens in the Catalan, White is in no rush to regain the
pawn. Now I investigated three possible continuations for Black:} O-O 9. Qc2 h6
{Black has to break the unpleasant pin along the h4-d8 diagonal. He has also
unsuccessfully tried} (9... Qc7 10. Nd2 b5 $2 11. Nxb5 cxb5 12. Bxa8 {
White was just an exchange up in Adrian-Crouan, France 2002.}) 10. Ne4 Be7 {If}
(10... hxg5 $146 11. Nxd6 Nb6 12. Nxc8 Rxc8 13. Rfd1 g4 14. Ne5 {White regains
the pawn, keeping the better prospects due to the superiority of his bishop
over Black's knight.}) 11. Nxf6+ {Not so clear is} (11. Bxf6 Nxf6 12. Nxf6+
Bxf6 13. Qxc4 Qe7 {
and Black is ready to push ...e5 next, Romanishin-Velikov, Turin 1998.}) 11...
Nxf6 12. Bf4 $146 {I believe White should avoid exchanging on f6.} (12. Bxf6
Bxf6 13. Qxc4 Qe7 {transposes to the aforementioned game.}) 12... Nd5 {
A natural reaction. Also after} (12... b5 13. Ne5 Bb7 14. Nxc6 Qe8 15. Nxe7+
Qxe7 16. e4 Rfd8 17. Rad1 $14 {
White has better prospects, thanks to his strong centre and two bishops.}) 13.
Qxc4 Nxf4 14. gxf4 $14 {I believe White's chances are higher in this complex
position, as it will be very difficult for Black to neutralize the Catalan
bishop.} *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Catalan ...Bd6 System"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "E01"]
[Annotator "Avrukh,B"]
[PlyCount "29"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "13"]
[EventCountry "YUG"]
[Source "ICCF"]
[SourceDate "2008.01.30"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. g3 c6 5. Bg2 Nbd7 6. O-O Bd6 {
I don't rate this system very highly, but obviously it deserves some attention.
} (6... dxc4 {has been analysed in my book.}) 7. Nc3 $1 {This is the
difference: with Black's bishop on d6, White can develop his knight to c3.
Here we approach the main crossroads in this variation.} dxc4 {Another line is}
8. Bg5 {As often happens in the Catalan, White is in no rush to regain the
pawn. Now I investigated three possible continuations for Black:} h6 (8... Nb6
{Black holds onto the c4-pawn, but allows White to seize control of the centre.
} 9. e4 h6 {And now I like the calm} 10. Be3 $1 $146 {, while} (10. Bxf6 gxf6
11. e5 Be7 {was pretty double-edged in Lputian-Bologan, Poikovsky 2001}) 10...
Be7 {The following line doesn't work:} (10... Ng4 11. Bc1 e5 {
in view of the simple} 12. h3 {and Black loses material.}) 11. Ne5 O-O 12. Qe2
{White regains the c4-pawn, keeping a clear positional advantage.}) 9. Bxf6
Qxf6 {This position might also arise from the Moscow variation in the
Semi-Slav Defence. Another recapture is} (9... Nxf6 10. Nd2 {Not so clear is} (
10. e4 Bc7 $1 {keeping control of the e5-square.} 11. Qe2 b5 12. a4 b4) 10...
e5 11. d5 cxd5 12. Nxd5 Nxd5 13. Nxc4 Bc7 {And now White should have played}
14. Bxd5 {, as} (14. Qxd5 Qxd5 15. Bxd5 Ke7 16. Rac1 Rb8 {
led to a quite defendable position for Black in Poluljahov-Lunev, Briansk 1995}
) 14... O-O 15. Qd3 Rb8 16. Rac1 Qf6 17. Rfd1 $14 {with definite pressure.})
10. Ne4 {White has tried some other moves, but the text seems to me to be best.
} Qe7 11. Nfd2 {White also gained a slight advantage after} (11. Qc2 O-O 12.
Nxd6 Qxd6 13. Qxc4 e5 14. Rad1 exd4 15. Nxd4 Qc5 16. Qxc5 Nxc5 17. Rd2 $14 {
, but Black's position should be defendable, Ruck-L'Ami, Heraklio 2007.}) 11...
Nb6 {Black could have played} (11... Bc7 12. Nxc4 O-O {, but after} 13. Rc1 Rd8
(13... e5 {is met strongly by} 14. d5 $1 cxd5 15. Qxd5 Nb6 16. Qc5 Qxc5 17.
Nxc5 {with serious pressure.}) 14. Qc2 {
White has gained a typical Catalan plus, as Black cannot push} e5 $6 {
in view of the strong} 15. d5 $1 cxd5 16. Ne3 {with a serious advantage.}) 12.
f4 $5 $146 {
White stops Black's idea of playing ...e6-e5. This is my improvement over} (12.
Rc1 {This was played in Lybin-Volodin, Frydek Mistek 1996, and now I believe
Black missed the proper moment to play} e5 $1 {with equal play.}) 12... O-O 13.
Rc1 Rd8 {Clearly in White's favour is} (13... c5 14. Nxc4 Nxc4 15. Rxc4 cxd4
16. Nxd6 Qxd6 17. Qxd4 $16) 14. Nxc4 Bc7 15. Qd3 $1 $14 {This prevents any ...
e6-e5 ideas, as now White is ready to recapture with the queen if 15...Nxc4. I
believe White has a small but long-lasting edge, as Black has failed to carry
out either of the freeing advances, ...e6-e5 or ...c6-c5.} ({Less accurate is} 
15. e3 Nxc4 16. Rxc4 e5 $1 17. fxe5 Bxe5 {when Black gets a normal game.}) *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Catalan 4...c5 5...¤d5 line"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "E06"]
[Annotator "Avrukh,B"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkb1r/ppp2ppp/4pn2/3p4/2PP4/5N2/PP2PPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 4"]
[PlyCount "23"]
[EventDate "1996.08.??"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "11"]
[EventCountry "CHN"]
[Source "ICCF"]
[SourceDate "2008.01.30"]

4. g3 c5 5. cxd5 Nxd5 (5... exd5 {would transpose to Tarrasch.}) 6. Bg2 Be7 7.
O-O (7. dxc5 O-O 8. O-O Bxc5 {leads to the same position.}) 7... O-O 8. dxc5
Bxc5 9. a3 {White not only prepares b2-b4, grabbing more space on the
queenside, but by taking control of the b4-square the e2-e4 advance becomes an
important option, as now Black's knight cannot jump to b4 to use the weakness
of d3. I believe White has a pleasant edge, and the following two examples are
typical:} a5 (9... Be7 10. e4 Nb6 11. Qe2 Nc6 12. Rd1 Qe8 13. Nc3 {
White has a clear edge, thanks to his obvious space advantage.} e5 $6 ({
Somewhat better would have been} 13... f6 {, but even here after} 14. e5 {
White's advantage is beyond any doubt.}) 14. Nd5 $1 $16 {
White had a clear advantage in C. Horvath-Hmadi Budapest 1996.}) (9... Nc6 {
would transpose to the main line.}) 10. e4 Ne7 11. Nc3 (11. Qc2 {
looks quite promising as well.}) 11... Nbc6 12. Qe2 {
Creating the unpleasant idea of 13.Rd1. Less convincing is} (12. Bf4 Ng6 {
Berkes-Ehlvest, Panormo 2002.}) 12... e5 13. Rd1 Nd4 14. Nxd4 exd4 $6 {
Stronger was} (14... Bxd4 15. Be3 Nc6 16. Qb5 $14 {
, although White has a pleasant positional advantage.}) 15. Bg5 {
White was clearly better in Huzman-Ehlvest, Panormo 2002.} *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Catalan 4...c5 5...¤d5 line"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "E06"]
[Annotator "Avrukh,B"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkb1r/ppp2ppp/4pn2/3p4/2PP4/5N2/PP2PPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 4"]
[PlyCount "31"]
[EventDate "1996.08.??"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "11"]
[EventCountry "CHN"]
[Source "ICCF"]
[SourceDate "2008.01.30"]

4. g3 c5 5. cxd5 Nxd5 (5... exd5 {would transpose to Tarrasch.}) 6. Bg2 cxd4 7.
O-O {Now the main continuation is} Be7 {The alternative is} (7... Bc5 8. Nxd4
O-O {And now I believe White's best line is} 9. Nb3 {Not so clear is} (9. Nc3
Nxc3 10. bxc3 Nd7 {Dlugy-Taylor, New York 1985}) 9... Be7 {, or} (9... Bb6 {
The only chance for an advantage is} 10. Nc3 $1 Nxc3 11. bxc3 {
Just one game has reached this position and it continued:} Qf6 {
This was Zhelesny-Khasin, Ozery 1997, and now White overlooked a strong idea:}
12. a4 $1 $146 {White is threatening the unpleasant a5-a6.} Rd8 {In the case of
} (12... Qxc3 $2 13. a5 Bc7 14. a6 $1 {
Black faces serious problems, for example:} Nc6 15. Bd2 Qb2 16. axb7 Bxb7 17.
Rc1 $18 {Black loses material.}) 13. Qc2 a6 14. Nd2 $1 Nc6 15. Ba3 {
White has serious positional pressure.}) 10. Bd2 Nc6 11. Nc3 {
In my opinion White retains positional pressure in every line:} Bf6 {
Other options are:} (11... Nxc3 12. Bxc3 Bd7 13. Rc1 Rc8 14. Nd4 $14) (11...
Nb6 12. Ne4 {With idea of meeting 12...Bd7 with 13.Nec5.} Na4 $2 {
Black misses White's idea.} 13. Na5 $1 {
White was clearly better in Bistric-Topalovic, Kastav 2002.}) 12. Rc1 a5 13.
Nc5 {A calm move, but} (13. a3 $5 {also comes into consideration.}) 13... Bd4 {
This position was reached in Reshevsky-Bronstein, Amsterdam 1964, and now the
simple} 14. Nxd5 exd5 15. Qc2 Bf6 16. Bc3 {
would leave White with a pleasant positional edge.}) 8. Nxd4 O-O {
Now in my opinion the strongest move is} 9. Qb3 $1 (9. Nb5 $5 {
is also worthy of consideration, while the attractive}) (9. Nf5 {
in fact doesn't promise White any advantage.} Bf6 10. e4 Nb4 11. Nd6 {
This was Kachiani Gersinska-Wagner Michel, Germany 2006, and now the natural}
N8c6 12. a3 Nc2 13. Qxc2 Qxd6 {would lead to an equal game.}) 9... Nd7 {
Other options:} (9... Na6 10. Rd1 Nc5 11. Qc4 {
This just transposes to the position that will be examined after 9...Nd7.}) (
9... Nc6 10. Rd1 {Not so clear is} (10. Nxc6 bxc6 11. Rd1 Qc7 12. Qc2 Ba6 {
with double-edged play.}) 10... Na5 11. Qf3 Qb6 12. Nc3 {
White keeps pressure, as was proven in the following encounter:} Nxc3 13. Qxc3
Bb4 14. Qd3 Bc5 15. Be3 e5 16. Nc2 Bxe3 17. Nxe3 Be6 18. Nd5 {
White had a clear edge in Koerholz-Kargoll, Germany 2002.}) 10. Rd1 Nc5 11. Qc4
$1 {An important nuance, as after the natural} (11. Qc2 {Black has} Nb4 $1 12.
Qc4 e5 $13 {with unclear play.}) 11... Nb6 12. Qc2 Qe8 {Not much better is} (
12... Bd7 13. Nc3 Qc8 14. Bf4 $1 f6 15. Nb3 Nca4 16. Na5 $1 $16 {
Sorokin-Van Riemsdijk, Boca 1997.}) 13. Nc3 Bd7 14. b3 Rc8 15. Bb2 {It may look
as if Black has managed to complete his development and should be alright, but
his poorly placed knight on b6, together with his lack of space, makes White's
chances clearly preferable. The following game is a good example of what can
happen from this position:} f6 16. e3 a6 17. Rac1 Rc7 {
This was Todorov-Genocchio, Cutro 2001, and now} 18. a4 Nc8 19. Qe2 $16 {
would keep a clear advantage.} *

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Catalan 4...c5 5...¤d5 line"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "E06"]
[Annotator "Avrukh,B"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkb1r/ppp2ppp/4pn2/3p4/2PP4/5N2/PP2PPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 4"]
[PlyCount "29"]
[EventDate "1996.08.??"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "11"]
[EventCountry "CHN"]
[Source "ICCF"]
[SourceDate "2008.01.30"]

4. g3 c5 5. cxd5 Nxd5 (5... exd5 {would transpose to Tarrasch.}) 6. Bg2 Nc6 {
Other options are less popular, but still definitely deserve attention:} 7. O-O
Be7 8. dxc5 {I definitely prefer this move, while} (8. Nc3 O-O {
would lead to another theoretical tabiya.}) 8... O-O {
This is considered to be Black's best move order, as} (8... Bxc5 {
allows White an extra option:} 9. Qc2 {
This looks rather promising, for example:} (9. a3 {
would transpose to our main line.}) 9... Be7 10. Rd1 Bd7 11. Nc3 Nxc3 12. Qxc3
O-O 13. Bf4 Rc8 {
This happened in Bjork-Wedberg, Sweden (ch) 1979, and now the simple} 14. Qe3
$1 Bf6 15. Rac1 {would have given White an obvious advantage.}) 9. a3 {
White has other options as well, but the text seems best.} Bxc5 {
Black has to regain the pawn, as after} (9... a5 $2 10. Qc2 $1 {
White keeps a healthy extra pawn.}) 10. Qc2 {The alternative} (10. b4 Be7 11.
Bb2 {is also considered to be promising.}) 10... Qe7 {
Black has also tried other moves:} (10... Bb6 11. Nbd2 Qc7 12. b4 Bd7 {
I also examined} (12... a5 13. b5 Nd4 {but after} 14. Nxd4 Bxd4 15. Qxc7 Nxc7
16. Rb1 $16 {White's pressure looks annoying. As always, Black's problem is
that he cannot neutralize White's light-squared bishop.}) 13. Bb2 Rac8 14. Rac1
Ne5 15. Qe4 Nxf3+ 16. Bxf3 Qd8 17. Nc4 $16 {
With a pleasant edge in Damljanovic-Estremera Panos, Mancha Real 2000.}) (10...
Be7 {This looks rather passive.} 11. Rd1 {Also quite strong is} (11. e4 Nf6 12.
Rd1) 11... Bd7 {Clearly better for White is} (11... Qc7 12. e4 Nf6 13. Bf4 Qb6
14. Nc3 {For example:} Bd7 15. Bg5 Rfd8 16. e5 Ne8 17. Be3 Qc7 18. Qe4 $16 {
Tkachiev-Vachier Lagrave, Cergy Pontoise 2003}) 12. e4 Nb6 13. Nc3 Rc8 14. Qe2
$1 {The most accurate move. If instead} (14. Bf4 Qe8 15. Qe2 {
Black creates reasonable counterplay after} Na5 16. Ne5 Ba4 17. Nxa4 Qxa4)
14... Na5 {After} (14... Qe8 {White has a pleasant choice between} 15. e5 {and}
(15. Be3 Na5 16. Rac1 $14) 15... Na5 16. Nd4 Ba4 17. Rd3 {with the advantage.})
15. Ne5 Nac4 $2 {This is the decisive mistake. Black should have played:} (
15... Nb3 {, though here after} 16. Be3 $1 Bc5 17. Rab1 {
White keeps a clear edge.}) 16. Rxd7 $1 Nxd7 17. Nxc4 $18 {
White had a decisive advantage in Kirov-Estevez Morales, Sochi 1976.}) 11. b4
Bb6 12. Bb2 Bd7 13. Nbd2 Rac8 {The obvious alternative is} (13... Rfc8 14. Qd3
$5 {This move looks interesting, as in this case Black does not have an
f8-rook to put on d8. White easily outplayed his opponent in the following
encounter:} a5 15. e4 Nf6 16. Nc4 Bd8 17. Nd6 Rcb8 18. b5 Na7 19. a4 {
White has a huge positional advantage, Ftacnik-Moehring, Strbske Pleso 1978.})
14. Qb3 Bc7 {This position was reached in Lerner-Lputian, Moscow 1987, and now:
} 15. e4 Nf6 16. e5 (16. b5 Na5 17. Qb4 Rfe8 18. Ne5 $14 {
This also deserves serious attention.}) 16... Nd5 17. Ne4 Rfd8 18. Rac1 $14 {
Following up with Rc2 and Rfc1 will gain White a small but stable positional
advantage.} *

[Event "4th Kings Tournament"]
[Site "Medias ROU"]
[Date "2010.06.21"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Ponomariov, R."]
[Black "Wang Yue"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D10"]
[WhiteElo "2733"]
[BlackElo "2752"]
[Annotator "Jacob Aagaard"]
[PlyCount "126"]
[EventDate "2010.06.14"]

{One of Boris Avrukh's novelties was in play in the Kings Tournament in
Romania a few days ago. The opening was a big success, and only at move 37 did
White let the win slip.} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. e3 g6 5. Nf3 Bg7 6.
Be2 O-O 7. O-O dxc4 8. Bxc4 Bg4 9. h3 Bxf3 10. Qxf3 Nbd7 11. Rd1 e5 12. d5 e4
13. Nxe4 Nxe4 14. Qxe4 Nb6 15. Rb1 (15. Bb3 Nxd5 16. Bxd5 cxd5 17. Rxd5 Qb6 18.
Qd3 Rfe8 19. Rb1 Rad8 20. Bd2 Rxd5 21. Qxd5 Rd8 22. Qa5 Qxa5 23. Bxa5 b6 24.
Be1 $6 (24. Bb4 $14 {was a better chance. The idea is:} Rc8 25. b3 Rc2 26. Rd1
$1 Bf6 27. Rd2 {with a winning ending.}) 24... Rc8 25. a4 (25. b3) 25... Rc2
26. b4 Bc3 27. Bxc3 Rxc3 28. b5 Rc4 29. Ra1 f5 30. Kf1 Kf7 31. Ke1 Ke6 32. Kd2
h5 33. Kd3 {1/2-1/2 Gelfand-Wang Yue, Astrakhan 2010.}) 15... Re8 16. Qc2 $1
$146 {Avrukh's novelty.} cxd5 17. Bb5 Re6 $5 {This was not in GM1, but it
seems that Ponomariov has had his own look at it, as he plays all Rybka's
moves.} (17... Rf8 {and}) (17... Re7 {were Avrukh's moves in his annotations.})
18. Qb3 Qh4 19. Bd2 d4 20. Bf1 $1 Rd8 21. g3 Qe7 22. Bg2 $14 {White is better
here. He has the two bishops and Black has little to show for it.} Qe8 23. exd4
Bxd4 24. Bc3 {Getting rid of the strong bishop on d4. Bg2 is better than Nb6.}
({I also like Rybka's suggestion:} 24. Bg5 Rd7 25. Bf3 {, which gives White a
pleasant long term pressure. I doubt many players will head this way on
purpose with Black.}) 24... Bxc3 25. Rxd8 Qxd8 26. Qxc3 Qe7 {Maybe Black can
organise his pieces better here.} 27. Rd1 h5 28. b3 $1 $16 {Good domination of
the knight.} (28. Bxb7 Na4 29. Qc8+ Kg7 30. b3 Nc5 31. Bf3 h4 $1 {was probably
what Ponomariov was not certain about. I think White is better, but in
practice it looks hard to handle.}) (28. h4 Na4 $1 {disturbs the coordination.}
) 28... h4 29. g4 Rd6 30. Rxd6 Qxd6 31. Bxb7 Nd7 {White is a pawn up, but the
conversion was not effortlessly conducted.} 32. Qc8+ Kg7 33. Qd8 Qe6 34. Kg2
Ne5 35. Qd4 $5 {Not bad, but} (35. Qxh4 Qb6 36. Be4 Qd4 37. f3 {won.}) 35...
Qf6 36. b4 $5 (36. Qxa7 Nd3 37. Qe3 Nf4+ 38. Kg1 {and the compensation for the
pawns should be insufficient.}) 36... g5 37. a4 $4 {White needs to take the
pawn!} (37. Qxa7 Nd3 38. Qe3 Nxb4 39. a4 Nc2 40. Qd2 Nd4 41. Qb2 {was one
winning line.}) 37... Ng6 $1 38. Qxf6+ $1 ({Also} 38. Qxa7 Nf4+ 39. Kh2 Qc3 40.
Qe3 Qc7 $1 {would give Black enough counterplay.}) 38... Kxf6 39. b5 Nf4+ 40.
Kf3 $1 {The best chance is activity.} (40. Kh2 Ke5 41. a5 Kd6 {would also make
the draw it seems.}) 40... Ke5 41. a5 Kd6 42. Ke4 Nxh3 43. Kf5 Nxf2 44. Bf3 Kc7
45. Kxg5 h3 {Black makes the draw by a tempo.} 46. Kf6 h2 47. g5 h1=Q 48. Bxh1
Nxh1 49. Kxf7 Ng3 50. g6 Nh5 51. Ke7 Ng7 52. Kf6 Nh5+ 53. Kg5 Ng7 54. Kf6 Nh5+
55. Kf7 Kd7 56. Kf8 Kc7 57. Kg8 Nf4 58. g7 Ne6 59. Kf7 Nxg7 60. Kxg7 Kd6 61.
Kf6 Kc5 62. b6 axb6 63. axb6 Kxb6 1/2-1/2

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2010.06.25"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Novelty by Jacob Aagaard"]
[Black "for reprint"]
[Result "*"]
[Annotator "Jacob Aagaard"]
[PlyCount "49"]
[EventDate "2010.06.25"]

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 c6 3. c4 Nf6 4. e3 Bf5 5. Nc3 e6 6. Nh4 Bg6 7. Be2 Nbd7 8. O-O
Ne4 9. g3 (9. Nxg6 hxg6 10. cxd5 exd5 11. Nxe4 dxe4 12. d5 {was the
recommendation in the first print, but this idea suffered a big blow in a
number of games and Boris noted it down as the one recommendation from this
book that should certainly not be followed.} Bd6 $1 13. g3 c5 $1 14. Qa4 Qe7
15. Bb5 O-O-O 16. Bd2 Nf6 17. Qxa7 Bb8 18. Qa3 Rxd5 19. Rfc1 Ng4 20. Ba5 Nxh2
21. Rd1 Qe6 22. Rac1 Nf3+ 23. Kf1 Rh1+ 24. Ke2 Nd4+ 25. exd4 Qg4+ 26. Kd2 Rxd1+
27. Rxd1 Rxd4+ {0-1 Hillarp Persson-Malakhov, Denmark 2009.}) 9... Nd6 {This
was Shirov's idea. It is hard to see any other reason to play 8...Ne4. After 9.
..Be7 10.Nxg6 hxg6 11.cxd5 exd5 12.Nxe4 (12.f3!?+/=) 12...dxe4 13.d5 small
edge. White has a good version of Boris's original idea, Schlosser - Marusenko,
Pardubice 2009.} 10. c5 $5 $146 (10. b3 {was played in Inarkiev - Shirov,
Poikovsky 2008. Black won a beautiful game.} Be7 11. Nxg6 hxg6 12. Qc2 Nf6 13.
Rd1 Qc7 14. Bf1 O-O-O 15. Bg2 Rh5 16. c5 Nf5 17. h3 Rdh8 18. e4 dxe4 19. Bf4
Qd8 20. g4 Rxh3 21. gxf5 Rxc3 22. Qxc3 Nd5 23. Qc1 gxf5 24. Kf1 Rh4 25. Be5 Qh8
26. Ke1 Rg4 27. Bf1 Rg1 28. Qc4 Qh4 29. Ke2 Bg5 30. Rdb1 f4 31. Rb2 f3+ 32. Kd1
e3 33. Ke1 e2 34. Rxe2 Rxf1+ {0-1.}) 10... Nf5 11. Ng2 {11.Nxg6?!  looks
dangerous, but White could also try 11.Nxf5 Bxf5 12.f3 with complicated play.}
Be7 (11... e5 $6 {was recommended by Maxim Notkin in Chess Today, but it is
refuted by} 12. g4 Nh4 13. f4 {and White will end up with a superior structure
on both flanks:} exd4 14. exd4 Nxg2 15. Kxg2 f5 16. Re1 $1 Be7 17. g5 $16) 12.
Nf4 $5 {We like this idea best, as it is most critical. 12.b4 0-0 13.Nf4 is
another idea. Black might try to break in the centre with 13/\e5 14.dxe5 Nxe5,
but after 15.Bb2 Bf6 16.Qb3+/= White is probably a bit better.} e5 (12... O-O
13. h4 $14) 13. dxe5 Nxe5 14. h4 d4 $5 {This seems to be the most logical move.
14...f6 is a computer idea, which is met with: 15.Qa4! Bf7 (15/\b5? is
punished by 16.Nxb5! cxb5 17.Bxb5+ Kf7 18.Rd1+/- with a strong attack) 16.e4!
dxe4 17.Rd1 Qc8 18.Nxe4 0-0 19.b3+/=  14...h6 might be the best move. We think
White is better after: 15.b4!? d4 (15...a5 16.Bb2!+/= axb4? 17.Ncxd5+-) 16.
Ne4! Nxe3 (16/\dxe3? 17.Bb2!+/-) 17.fxe3 Bxe4 18.Bb2!+/= White keeps the
initiative and control of the centre.} 15. exd4 Nxd4 16. Nxg6 hxg6 17. Bf4 Bf6
18. Re1 O-O 19. Bxe5 Bxe5 20. Bc4 $14 {White has some interesting attacking
ideas on the light squares. After 20/\Re8 21.Ne4 White has many threats and
ideas with h4-h5 and Qg4 can be dangerous.} g5 21. Ne4 Qe7 22. Qg4 Nc2 23. Nxg5
Nxe1 24. Rxe1 Qf6 25. Re3 {White has a winning attack.} *

