the French advance Bein CHESSSam Collins the French advance de edn ee acs Gloucester Publishers ple www.verymanchess. comTirst published in 2006 by Gloucester Publishers ple (formerly Everyman Publishers ple), Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V OAT Copyright © 2006 Sam Collins ‘The right of Sam Collins to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All tights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, clectronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording of otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data ‘A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN: 1 85744 391 8 ISBN13: 978 1 85744 391 2 Distributed in North America by The Globe Pequot Press, P.O Box 480, 246 Goose Lane, Guilford, CT 06437-0480. All other sales enquitics should be directed to Everyman Chess, Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, |ondon EC1V OAT tel: 020 7253 7887 fax: 020 7490 3708 email: info@everymanchess.com website: www.cverymanchess.com Everyman is the registered trade mark of Random Iouse Inc. and is used in this work under licence from Random House Inc. To my parents EVERYMAN CHESS SERIES (formerly Cadogan Chess) i Chief advisor: Byron Jacobs Commissioning editor: John Emms Typeset and edited by First Rank Publishing, Brighton. Cover design by Horatio Monteverde. Production by Navigator Guides. Printed and bound in the US by Versa Press.CONTENTS Bibliography Acknowledgements Preface Introduction: Key Concepts in the Advance French cb 5 DB Wh6 6 a3 cA D6 5 D3 Who 6 a3 Aho D6 5 DAE3 Wh6 6 a3 Others .Ac6 5 AB Wh6 6 Be2 6 5 D3 2A7 6 Be2 Deb 5 DB 2d7 without 6 Be2 cb 5 D3 Age & 5...6 4.86 5 D3 Ld7 Irregular Lines Rk R RP A Index of Complete Games 12 20 46 70 79 9 123 133 149 168 175BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Advance and Other Anti-V'rench Variations, Lev Psakhis (Batsford 2003) An Attacking Repertoire for White, Sam Collins (Batsford 2004) French: Advance and Other Lines, Steffen Pedersen (Gambit 2005) Nunn’s Chess Openings, John Nunn, Graham Burgess, John Emms & Joe Gallagher (Everyman 1999) Play the French, John Watson (Everyman 2003) The French Advanve, Tony Kosten (Chess Press 1998) Understanding the Chess Openings, Sam Collins (Gambit 2005) . Databases and Online Resources Chess Publishing.com and Mega Database 2005ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The support of my friends and family is too extensive and valuable to detail in full here, but thete are a few people whose influence on the current project must be mentioned: Aisling, here’s hoping for that Blue Peter badge; Linda and Rena, your constant demands for acknowledgement in a chess book were as compelling as they were baffling; Leo, for gently enquiring as to whether I had a big stack of papers prepared on a book T’d been talking about three years ago; Dave, for reading the last book; Dermot, for wine and cheese evenings; Liv, for accepting chess books as ‘presents’ without drawing attention to my cheap- ness; Kev, for great chat. Td like to also thank Byton Jacobs and John Emms for their encouragement, pa- tience and hard work. Richard Palliser had demonstrated these qualities in my previous books and deserves a lot of credit for this one.PREFACE Most of my friends have a hard time believing that chess has its own literature. The rest have similar problems believing that there can be more than about ten chess books. The American IM John Donaldson tecently showed me an English translation of Phili- dor’s L analyse des échecs from 1750, under the chatming title Chess analysed; or, instructions by which a perfect knowledge of this noble game may be in a short time acquired, and it’s almost impossible to explain why such a volume isn’t sufficient to dispose of the matter: ‘What’s yout book about?” “An opening; It looks at a position which comes up after three moves.” ‘What if the position doesn’t come up?” “You'd need another book.’ Opening monographs put unique pressures on an author, and not only to justify his contract to sceptical friends. When working on broader projects, an omission of a rele~ vant move or a superficial analysis of a key position can always be excused by a refer ence to ‘spatial considerations’; namely that a complete description of mote than one opening simply isn’t possible within the confines of a single volume (or rather it is pos- sible, but at the expense of depth, verbal explanation or selection of the best vatia- tions). Opening monographs provide no similar place to hide, You buy a whole book on one line and you deserve that book to be the best thing ever published on that line, period. Methodology Tm not sure how relevant or necessary a description of my working practices is, but I might as well share. When undertaking this book, | was scared of it being one of two things:French Advance 1) A Database Dump In any line with over 1000 games (the French Advance easily qualifies), it’s entirely pos- sible to write a whole book with no annotation. Such projects make it difficult, how- ever, to convince a publisher of one’s genius. A more sophisticated way of doing basi- cally the same thing is to supplement this method with a few Fritz suggestions while annotating by result, such as White wins and therefore White was better out of the opening’. 2) A Cut and Paste T don’t think P’'m giving too much away by saying that the decades of analysis by Israeli GM Ley Psakhis dominate the literature of the Advance French. Cicero’s comment about Caesar’s wat dispatches (‘several fools have been pleased to primp up his narra tive for their own glorification; but every writer of sense has given the subject a wide berth?) probably applies to about 50% of all chess writing, And it’s not just Psakhis — John Watson and Mikhail Gurevich are both authoritative, and there are other good authors (not least Tony Kosten who wrote this volume’s predecessor). Defer to these guys too often and a book becomes redundant; an unnecessary compilation of the thoughts of other people. I wasn’t so worried about writing a database dump as any half-decent player should be able to come up with something reasonably instructive to say about a given position. The cut and paste really did concern me, however, in that my assessments of positions could be dominated by previous texts and ChessBase annotations. Therefore, the first draft of this book was written without reference to any previous notes by anyone (my- self included!). Only once T had struggled with cach position myself did T consult previ- ous sources to sce what they thought. The result (I hope) has been more original analy- sis and explanation than would have otherwise have been the case. i Game Selection While T drew on a range of sources for this book, most of my time was spent dealing with Mega Database 2005. 27,790 games in the Krench Advance are contained in that database, and | won't lie to you, P’'m not going to play through 27,790 games. I made a working assumption that only games between good players were worth including, and so T created a more manageable database of about 1,500 games where bath players were rated at least 2400, This has been supplemented in certain instances where neces- sary for a proper explanation of the lines, but these additions have been kept to a minimum: firstly, because almost all worthwhile theory is generated by and contested between good players and, secondly, because an idea can look unrealistically attractive when it’s tried in ‘Grandmaster versus Random Punter, Weekend Congress 2005’; it’s best to assume your opponents will play sensibly, and such one-sided examples are dangerous. ‘The reader may notice that an overwhelming majority of the main games ate whitePreface wins. This isn’t because White actually achieves these tidiculous percentages, but rather because I believe the majority of my audience will be looking to play this line with White, and accordingly the book is about what White should do rathet than what he shouldn’t, That said, Black has as many chances to generate counterplay in this line as. in any other, and | think it is possible to construct an excellent black repertoire after 3 ¢5 on the sole basis of the material in this book. Consumer Protection Introductions to opening monographs often take the form of a hard sell. You have a ptoblem and I have a solution. Moreover, my solution is in some way better than cve- ryone else’s, Let’s look at everything everyone wants from an opening and sce if the French Advance gives it to them: A Slight Advantage Maybe, maybe not. The French is a good opening, and it’s extremely tesilient. Black tends to have quite a wide choice, and when one system is under threat, he can switch to another. It’s fair to say that there are more lines in this opening which lead to an ad- vantage for White than which lead to an advantage for Black, but, as Tal pointed out, the notion of a ‘slight advantage’ is rather nonsensical — a position is cither a win or a draw, and everything in between is basically a question of personal preference. Avoidance of Theory Lused to think that this was just people being lazy and J still do to a certain extent, while appreciating that people have jobs’ and ‘families’ which can cut into their analysis time. Anyway, it’s fair to say that 3 ¢5 has less established theory than 3 Ac3, and probably less than 3 Ad2, That said, there’s still a lot to know. Fashion The best chess players set the trends which everyone else follows. Kasparov has been the most obvious example here, generating surges of interest in his chosen variations before he ditches them and moves on to something else. The French Advance is less popular than its two tivals, but it does have some notable practitioners: Sveshnikov was the traditional standard bearer, but recently it has been used tegularly by Grischuk, Na- kamura, Shirov, Motylev...lots of good guys. Attacking Chances The Advance Trench is a relatively good opening for those who want to attack their opponent's king. The e5-pawn prevents the g8-knight from occupying its best defen- sive square and often Black delays castling. That said, in several main lines the white king doesn’t castle either. I think it’s a mutually difficult opening — neithet side has par- ticularly clear ways to mobilize all their pieces and this necessitates some creativity fromFrench Advance both players. I find this to be one of the opening’s appealing characteristics, but others may disagree, Importance of ‘Understanding’ This is a concept which has become quite popular, although | don’t fully get it. Strate- gic understanding is important, of course, but it doesn’t compensate if you forget what move you're meant to make. You still need to remember your theory — in my most re- cent game with the opening, I got my move-order mixed up and lost horribly! Dictating the Position T think White has good chances to dictate the type of position in these lines. For one thing, it’s impossible for Black to open the game quickly. Difficult strategic battles are the most common occurrence, and if you're happy with these then the line will suit you, Having said that, virtually every Freich Defence player I know says that the Ad- vance variation is their favourite one to face because White commits himself so early. Ease of Study ‘This is something which lots of people seem to want. However, I think it’s fictitious as chess is a zero sum game, and if you play difficult theoretical openings that means your opponent has difficult theoretical problems to solve. It also means that your openings will be more interesting. One of the main attractions of the Trench Advance is that it’s so difficult for cither side to get a real grip on what’s going on, for the following reasons: 1) Complexity of the Resulting Positions Complexity isn’t in the cye of the beholder, complexity is measured by the percentage of draws in a given position, For any mainline opening, the higher the number of draws, the greater the chance that the resulting positions give rise to problems which ate being solved by both playets on a regular basis. ‘The Advance has a very low draw- ing quotient, with the spoils being shared in just under one in four games (24%). This is lower than the Najdorf (27%), the Sveshnikov (29%) and the Botvinnik Semi-Slav (25%), all of which are noted for their difficulty. 2) Equality In these pages Pl write about the heroes of the Advance; men like Alexander Grischuk and Evgeny Sveshnikoy whose enormous scores on the-white side of this opening have provided the basis for tich and fulfilling careers. And these tales will be true. However, you should know that virtually every French Defence player Pve asked (granted, not that many) has named the Advance as their favourite variation to play against. Fur- thermore, White makes a mere 50% with the Advance in Mega Database 2005, com- pared to an average white score of 54%, although once the players are both good (2400 or higher) White scores 55%. 10Preface 3) Closure , ‘The centre is closed by White’s third move. It can and often does open again, but this doesn’t detract from the fact that both sides have enormous flexibility in deciding where to put their pieces: castling is often unnecessary or undesirable; knights make: arduous voyages to vulnerable squares, get kicked and make equally arduous return journeys; Black has a positional piece sactifice on d4 which is almost impossible to cox- rectly assess; White makes pawn moves on both sides of the board without having clearly established superiority on cither; and the cxact same pawn break which opens lines for the white rooks in one position opens lines for the black rooks in another, "Theory is stated as of 1st January 2006. Best of luck with the opening and thanks for reading Sam Collins, London, January 2006 7INTRODUCTION Key Concepts in the French Advance T hope the following material will help the reader orient himself or hersclf around the book. These concepts crop up all the time, and an initial familiarity with them should make learning this opening much easicr. Pawn Chain Tm not going to teproduce everything Nimzowitsch wrote about pawn chains; this is after all an openings book, so I won't be delving too deeply into posi- tional concepts from the middlegame. The onc thing I'd like you to appreciate about the pawn structure is that, unless Black docs something, he’s going to be crushed. White has extra space in the cen- tre and on the kingside, and if he can complete his development in comfort he'll have all the chances. Therefore all the best black systems try to dismantle the white centre, at least a little. The two natural pawn breaks ate indicated as fol- lows: hitting d4 with ...c5 and hitting e5 with ...f6. Black has to play one or both if he doesn’t want to get squashed. Black's Problem BishopKey Concepts in the French Advance In many openings Black has difficulties with one minor piece: in the Ruy Lopez, it’s the queen’s knight and in the King’s Indian, the dark-squared bishop is often entombed behind a wall of its own pawns. In the French in general and the Advance in particular, the light-squared bishop struggles to find an active role, having been restricted by Black’s first two moves and locked in by White’s third. Black will thus try to develop it with ...b6 and ....2.a6, with ...8d7 and ...b5, or with ...&d7-e8-h5. 2xh6 This is a comforting move for White to play as at a stroke he gets rid of a bishop which is hard to employ while wrecking the black pawn structure. Black’s com- pensation for this exchange lies in two factors: the minor one is the half-open g- file (minor because it’s rare that Black will actually get time to use this), while the major one is that he now owns the two bishops. ‘That means that any dissolution of the white centre (being advanced and fixed, it’s vulnerable to this) will leave the black pieces excellently suited to the new situation on the board. The explanation for this is similar to that on &xh6, except White gets a half. open befile instead of a half-open g-file, ‘There are, however, two differences which should be taken into account. ‘The first is that Black is exchanging his ‘good’ bishop, which is a strategically unhealthy thing to do, but balanced against that is the fact that as the side with less space, Black gen- erally welcomes trades of minor pieces. Thus after ...&xa3 the e7-squate can be used by a knight without any grumbling from Black’s dark-squared bishop. Pushing the f-pawn mn VES; Z G9 a Looking at the pawn structure in isola- 13French Advance tion, the £5-break is White’s natural. goal; it seizes further kingside space and opens the f-file for use by a rook. In addition, the f6-push is threatened. However, a pure and simple pawn advance is rarely pure and is never simple: rarely pure be cause White frequently needs to devote time to developing moves which don’t advance or even, as AF3 does, obstruct his fpawn; and never simple because Black can frequently meet f4 with ...g6, when the white dark-squared bishop is stuck within the pawn chain and the white rooks aren’t doing much. Pushing the h-pawn T think the modem trend of pushing the h-pawn in the Advance Variation is a con- sequence of players getting frustrated with pushing the fpawn. The h-pawn has the same goals as his brother two files along: to weaken the black kingside and to increase the activity of a rook on the file. However, there ate a number of factors which make this push easier to execute. Firstly, and mundanely, there’s no knight on £3 to stop it. Also, Black’s reactions are more prob- lematic: to do nothing, and allow the pawn to reach h6, is almost never a good idea, not least because the f6-squate falls into white hands, but to meet h4 with ...h5 turns the g5-square into a virtual outpost for a white piece and the black h5-pawn itself can tum, out to be weak. Another important concept to under- stand in relation to Black’s attempts to meet h4 is that ...g6 leaves White with two avenues of pressure not open to him after £4 and ...g6: the bishop can he played to g5 and a rook can be lifted to the file (not so tidiculous as if the rook is on hi, support- ing the h-pawn, playing it via h3 to 8 could work some magic). 'The least com- mittal way of dealing with the push is to meet h5 with ...h6, but then White can again consider pushing the f-pawn, since 26 will open lines on the kingside. In short, pushing the h-pawn is a vital part of White’s strategic arsenal and will occur time and again in this book. Attacking the f5-knight with g4 A black knight generally can’t be toler- ated on £5 from where it pressurizes d4 and doesn’t get in the way of the other black pieces. The most aggressive way to deal with this knight is to kick it with g4, when it has several options: 14a) ..h6 has the benefit of hitting the gpawa, although the knight is slightly sidelined on h6 and should be brought pack into play by ...f6 and ...A\F7. b) «eT usually sees the knight aim for the f4-square, via g6. > ..h4 is normally the best option when it’s available as the knight trades itself for its white counterpart on f3. In- deed White frequently prevents this by preceding g4 with h4. d) ..Axd4 is a piece sacrifice which obviously depends entirely on the specif ics of the position. However, it’s worth beating in mind that this move can be a good idea if Black gets both the d- and e- pawns in exchange. 2d3xf5 Rather than taking on extra kingside commitments with g4, there is another way to deal with the f5-knight. A .2xf5, ex exchange concedes a key white piece, but in return the black structure is compromised. In particular, the d5-pawn can be a target for the white knights, es- pecially from c3 and f4, and Black’s light- squared bishop tends to sit on ¢6 in order to defend it. Key Concepts in the French Advance Black seizes the kingside initiative with ...g5 "There are a broad range of French po- sitions where ...g5 can be a good idea. ‘The most common situation in the Ad- vance where it pops up is in the blocked structures with a3 and ...c4, with the white king on the kingside and his black coun- terpart on the queenside. White will gen- crally still play on the kingside, since that’s where he has his. space advantage, but he needs to be catcful about the black rooks opening files on their own terms which can leave the white king struggling to sur- vive. White ignores ...46 15French Advance A pawn chain can be hit at its base or at its head. Targeting d4 is an element of virtually every respectable black system in this book, but hitting ¢5 with ...f6 is also extremely common. If White allows Black to take on 5, he will usually have a choice between playing dxe5, and first exchanging knights on e5 before dxe5. While the former has the benefit of tc~ taining a pair of minor pieces (which gen- etally favours the side with more space), the latter is generally the preferable op- tion fot a couple of reasons: it makes the f4-push easier to achicve and it cleats the di-h5 diagonal so that the white queen can become active on the kingside. White exchanges on f6 Tn purely structural terms, meeting ...£6 with an exchange on £6 creates new weak- nesses for both sides: the white d-pawn will be isolated, while the black e6-pawn will be sitting on a semi-open file. If Black recaptures with a piece, the resulting pawn structure (white d4-pawn versus black pawns on d5 and e6) is common throughout the French, especially in the 3.66 variation of the Tarrasch. Black does indeed often have a choice as to how to recapture on £6: a) ..gxf6 captures towards the centre, which is always good positional practice, and gains some vety attractive central control. In some cases, Black even gets to execute an ...e5-advance which will leave him dominant in the centre. The general problems with ...gxf6 are that it can be anti-developmental (£6 is a good square for a black piece) and it gives White a natural plan of putting pressure on c6. b) ...Axf6 makes sense especially if the knight is on g8 when it recaptures while developing, ©) .Lxf6 creates a well-placed bishop on £6 which restricts a knight on 3 from hopping to g5 or h4, and helps to prepare ..c3 which can free the black game. d) ..Bx(6 is generally a precursor to sacrificing the exchange on f3. Trench players have to be comfortable with this idea, which frequently also bags the d4- pawn, throughout their opening (espe- cially in the Advance and 'Tatrasch vatia- tions), and it is no less common than the Sicilian exchange sacrifice on c3. Cribs: A brief survey of castling PaF Yours oe ate oie Sg BO ots In the vast majority of Advance games, 16Key Concepts in the French Advance the white king doesn’t castle on the queenside, although his route to the king- side is often a little varied. A straightfor- ward 0-0 is common, especially in some of the more classical variations, but fre- quently the king will go to f1 before nes- tling somewhere more comfortable on the g-file. This is normally because he has been checked by a bishop on b4 and White doesn’t want to offer a trade with 2d2 (sometimes ...Wa5+ is also met by Fl), although he may also go to fl uns provoked. This latter instance normally occuts when White has played h4, and plans to develop the hi-took via h3. The black king, on the other hand, is a tough piece to accommodate. The ¢5- pawn makes it difficult to immediately get the f8-bishop and f6-knight out of the way, so frequently the king will stay on e8 for a while as the black queenside is mo- bilized to put pressure on d4, If and when the black king hits the kingside, he needs to be careful because White has a natural attack based on his kingside space advan- tage. Castling queenside is also quite common, especially in the blocked posi- tions after a3 and ...c4, One thing 1 no- ticed in several positions is the viability of wed7!? and, because of the blocked cen- tre, the king can be quite safe there, while the rooks are rather neatly connected. Overprotection Nimzowitsch wrote extensively about this topic and used several examples from the Advance Variation to illustrate his argu- ments, For our purposes, however, just a brief introduction will suffice. Overpro- tection means defending something mote than is necessary. In this book, the only thing that gets overprotected is the d4- pawn. I completely missed the rationale behind overprotection until I read an ex- planation by Chernin — by devoting one extta piece to defence, every defensive piece is given the ability to move. A sim- ple example would be a white d4-pawn attacked by a queen on b6 and a knight on 6, and defended by a queen on dil and a knight on £3. As things stand, nei- ther of the white pieces can move away without dropping the d-pawn. However, if you put a bishop on 3, any of the white pieces can move and the pawn will still be guarded. Generally, the d-pawn will be guatded by a queen on di and a knight on £3, while after a3 and b4, the dark-squared bishop can be deployed on b2 ot 3. Pd also like to mention two other methods of defence: a) b3 and 2.b2 holds the d-pawn at the cost of slightly weakening the queenside dark squares, and, in particular, ...2b4+ will often have to be met by @f1 after b3, b) Aa3-c2 is a passive-looking ma- noeuvre, but a knight on c2 can be very useful in soaking up pressute against the d-pawn. 17French Advance White’s Queenside Pawn Play Vb, Wt: Yo, wie Cth oxy “yyy 6 Z WY fe Ose The only normal white pawn play on the queensice comes with a3 and b4 and this has several objectives: it gains space; it creates the option of b5, which could dislodge the c6-knight and relieve the pressure on d4; and it defends the b-pawn so the cl-bishop can move (although this is only relevant if the black quccn is on b6). However, it also creates some weak- nesses and playing ...a5 is a very tempting way for Black to soften up the white queenside, especially if he can meet b5 with ...a4! beciuse the b5-pawn is pinned to a bishop on b2. Black plays ...c4 ee \ \Y < N ES CG This can only be played after White goes a3, since otherwise he would play b3 and meet ...cxb3 with axb3 and an cxcel- lent structure. Black must even keep a firm eye on White’s b3-break with the white a-pawn on a3, as it opens up the queenside and could seriously threaten the black king if he’s residing there. Nor- mally, however, Black has control over the b3-square, although he needs to be careful that any piece he puts on b3 (normally a knight) is actually performing a positive function and, for instance, if White has moved all his queenside pieccs to the kingside, a knight on b3 isn’t too useful. Endgames At the risk of grossly over-generalizing, L would say that the majority of endgames in the Advance French are better for White. Ie can more easily generate play for his rooks, while his slight weakness on d4 can usually be covered without too much hassle. Furthermore, if Black hasn’t exchanged light-squared bishops, then the weakness of that black piece can become even more apparent with the departure of the queens.Key Concepts in the French Advance The First Few Moves Tm not going comment on stuff like 1 e4, but for the sake of completeness I might as well offer some explanation about the French Defence, as well as the conse- quences of the line proposed in this book. 1e4e62d4d5 GM Larry Christiansen once drew the useful distinction between ‘hard’ and ‘soft? openings. In the former category (in which he included several Sicilians), White has a hard time proving any rcal advantage and can easily lose the initia- tive. In the latter category (his sole in- stance was the Pire Defence), White can count on an casy cdge with rclatively little work. The French Defence falls cleanly within the first category and not only does Black contest White’s central advan- tage from the second move, but in every main variation he has ample chances for counterplay. While it’s true that the open- ing isn’t as popular amongst the 2700-set as the Ruy Lopez or the Najdorf and Sveshnikov Sicilians, ?’d put this down to fashion rather than objective factors. Mikhail Botvinnik found resources for Black which ate still causing problems today, and Victor Korchnoi has consis- tently relied on the opening throughout his decades of top-level chess. Today the best leading exponents are Evgeny Bareev and Mikhail Gurevich, both of whom arc. in or around the top 20, 305 White gains an immediate central ad- vantage, but opens himself to challenges in this very area as Black has two pawns breaks (..c5 and ...f6). Les frankly impos- sible to say whether this variation is ob- jectively better or worse than its two main competitors, 3 @c3 and 3 d2, and I think this is particularly true today. There is a body of established theory, but most of the lines tested in recent games have seen relatively new ideas contested. 19CHAPTER ONE 4...Ac6 5 Af3 Wh6 6 a3 c4 1 e4 e6 2: d4.d5 3 e5 c5 4 c3 Dc6 5 M3 Wb6 6 a3 64 I have always found this to be the most strategically difficult variation in the whole Advance Variation. Black relin- quishes all pressure on the d4-pawn to create a novel pawn structure with unique characteristics. Taking each half of the board in turn (nothing’s happening in the centre): The Queenside Here Black has a space advantage and the outpost on b3 is an inviting home for a black piece, with the ...a5-b3 manoeu- vre being a natural one. While in general this sector of the board is Black’s play- ground, he must be attentive to two dan gers: i, White’s b3-break, and if White man- ages to open lines at no cost with this pawn nudge, Black will have little to show for his lack of central pressure. ii, Inappropriate occupation of the b3- square, and, most obviously, if Black has to recapture on b3 with the c4-pawn, this pawn can itself prove weak, while White obtains prospects of a c4-break. In addi- tion, Black must be careful of a piece on b3 being isolated from the action; for instance, a knight on b3 is of no use at all if the action is happening on the kingside. The Kingside ‘The ¢5-pawn gives White more kingside space, and he will play to exploit this. Pushing the f-pawn is a logical plan, but White must ensure that this can’t be met by ...g6. A common idea is therefore to play 4\3-y5-h3-f4-h5(), ensuring that the outpost, which will be left should Black moye his g-pawn, can be exploited. White must also be attentive to the fact that a kingside advance will generally, to an ex- tent, open up his own king (Black castles queenside in this line), and be careful lest he submit his own monarch to a vicious attack. Looking at little more closely at the ini- tial moves: 1 e4 e6 2d4d5 3 e5 c5 20Black immediately strikes out, directly at d4 and indirectly at e5 because if White can’t hold d4, he won’t be able to hold e5. Jn general, he necdn’t fear dxc5 which both weakens the white e-pawn and ex- changes a primary central pawn (those on the d- and e-files) for a secondary central pawn (those on the c- and Files). 4c3 White solidly supports d4 and now his e-pawn will be supported for the foresee- able future. 4...\c6 Now that the black c-pawn is in the game, this move can be played with a clean conscience as Black develops while hitting the white centre. 5 MS White, in turn, develops his first piece while defending his centre. 5...Wb6 ‘The queen pressutizes d4 and intro- duces a secondary threat to the b2-pawn, which means that White’s datk-squated bishop will have trouble developing, 6a3 White prepares to play bd, which would seize queenside space, defend the b-pawn and force the black c-pawn to declare its intentions. If Black then takes on d4, the white queen’s knight is able to use the c3-square. 6...c4 Black abandons his plan of pressuriz- ing the d-pawn in order to exploit the hole left by White’s last move. The b3- break is now more difficult to pull off, and even if White manages it he'll be left with queenside weaknesses. The two de- veloped black pieces remain pretty well placed in the new scenario as the queen 4...2\c6 & DF3 WbE6 6 a3.c4 still hits b2, while the knight has the op- tion of heading to b3 via a5, 7 Dbd2 White develops his knight to its only available square, incidentally giving him- self the option of playing b3, 7..Da5 Black decides to stop the b3-break, but he can also choose to ignore the ‘threat’ as detailed in Games 1-2. 8 Be2 Also possible is 8 g3 which initiates two alternative bishop developments: the bishop being deployed on g2 in Game 3, on h3 in Game 4 and also on h3, but after h4, in Games 5 and 6, I’m not sure how many of my personal experiences should be related in a chess opening book, but there is a story behind 8 &c2; 2 move which is an author’s nightmare — hun- dreds of games, very few clear assess- ments, and with move-orders proving almost entirely irrelevant because the po- sition is totally blocked. I even considered abandoning the book’s format, just for this section, with either a dense theoreti- cal article of a simple verbal explanation of the key ideas, but ncither really seemed appropriate. 27French Advance The solution is seen in Games 7 and 8, In the former, Black omits ...h6 entircly, or else only plays it after the g5-square is occupied by a white bishop or knight, whercas in the latter, Black plays ..h6 before this square is occupied. There are a few reasons for this split: i. The material is divided on a thematic and structural basis, and not on a move- order basis because that makes no sense in a line with so many transpositions. ii, Though Game 7 contains many ref- erences and game fragments, they all show how White attacks the kingside when Black takes no preliminary defen- sive measures. Thus Game 7 is really an examination of whether ...h6 is,necessary atall, iii, In Game 8 White is denicd use of the g5-square, but at the cost for Black of both a tempo and some kingside flexibil- ity, and White’s attacking plans are quite different from those in Game 7. iv. For black players, the split is con- venient so that you can select one defen- sive plan (..h6 or not ...h6) and all the ial is in a single game. In such a blocked position, both play- ers can afford.to make reasonably long: term plans. White is still hortibly tangled and his basic plan involves getting his cl- bishop out while keeping everything. cov- cred. The normal way to do this is as fol- lows: Hel, to vacate fl; Eb1, to avoid being hit by ....Ab3; Wc2, to defend b2 and avoid any ...2xa3 tricks; and “AFI, to let the bishop out, followed by moving the bishop to ¢3 or f4. In general, White will then aim for kingside play, frequently initiated by gS. Black will want to seize complete con- trol of the qucenside and the best way to get this done is by playing ..Qe7-c8-b6 and ...2.a4, followed by plugging the b3- outpost, The black queen is in the way of this, and the black king will be after ..0-0-0, so some subtle move-orders have been developed to save time, The natural place for Black’s king does though remain on the queenside because kingside cas- tling would be inadvisable with so litde space in the area. Finally, Black also needs to decide how to deal with White’s king- side play: either by leaving his kingside pawns alone (as in Game 7) or with a defensive ...b6 (as he employs in Game 8). In view of the difficult nature of these structures, here’s a quick summary: i, White must be very careful: about opening’the kingside. This is his natural theatre and advances here feature in most white wins,’ but there are at least as many games where pushing pawns just opens lines for the black rooks on g8 and h8. ii, Endgames generally favour White because he can open lines on the kingside without fear for his king safety, whereas Black finds it much more difficult to 224...0c6 5 Af3 Wb6 6 a3 c4 open lines on the queenside, ‘This is par- ticularly true in those instances where the black kingside has already been weakened — just playing ...n6 is okay, but ...h6 and ..26 invites h4-h5 with pressure. iii, Positions where all the minor pieces have been exchanged are equal, iv. Positions where all the bishops have been exchanged favour White since his kenights have several good whereas the only aggressive posts for the black knights are on a4, a5 and b3. squates, Game 1 A.Motylev-V.Hort Essent Open 2003 1 04 e6 2d4.d5 305 c5 4c3 Nc6 5 2¥3 Wh6 6 a3 cA 7 Abd2 £d7 I feel this is sloppy as White’s last move contained a positional threat which Black shouldn’t ignore. 8 b3! The point, although White has also tried 8 &e2, 8 93 and 8 Hbl, all of which tend to transpose to the main lines after 8..Aa5, but note that delaying this move with 8..Qyge7? runs into 9 &xe4! which wins a pawn since 9..dxc4 10 @xc4, 11 Dd6+, 12 Axt7+ and 13 Axh8 is crush ing. However, immediately opening the queenside is best and will neutralize Black’s long-term advantage on that wing, as well as draw attention to the undet- developed black kingside. 8...cxb3 9 Axb3 Aad 10 Axa Wxad 11 &d2 Bd AE KR eS WN 11...De7 ‘The alternatives don’t change the na- ture of the position: a) 11..Wa4 12 Whit? &c6 13 243 De? 14 0-0 h6 (F.Kroeze-H.Hoeksema, Enschede 1994 deviated with 14...\c8?! 15 &xh7 Ab6 when simplest is 16 &c2 Wa6 17 2d3 and Black’s compensation is insufficient) 15 Het Ac8 16 c4 dxe4 17 Bxc4 Wh5 18 Wxb5 @xb5 19 Bxc8t Bxc8.20 Qxb5+ gave White a winning advantage in T.Sveshnikov-J.Timman, Tilburg 1992, b) 11.28 transposes to P.Haba- CRennet, Austrian Team Ch. 2004, where White had a healthy extra pawn after 12 Wb1 Wh6 13 Wxb6 axb6 14 Zbl Qxa3 15 Exb6 2c6 16 Bb5 De7 17 Be2 0-0 18 &xc6 Axc6 19 Hal Ha8 20 Bb3 Be7 21 Bxa8 Bxa8 22 Hxb7 Hes 23 ka3. 23French Advance ©) 11.83.04 12 Wb1 Wc7 13 2d3 De7 14 0-0, followed by Hcl and c4, gave White the better game in A.Praznik- A Yakimenko, correspondence 1993, 12 243 We7 13 0-0 h6 Otherwise White would consider Ag5 and, if kicked, “h3-f4-h5 to pressurize the g7-pawn. 14. D4 ‘This may seem to be shooting into thin air, but White reckons that Black can’t hold back ...g6 for long (if necessary, an f4-push should force it in any event). Pas- cal Charbonneau implemented a more conventional plan against Mark Blu- yshtein in Montreal 2003: 14 We2 Ac8 15 &c3 Abo 16 Ad2 Lc6 17 £4 g6 18 Ect Wa7 19 a4 Dxad 20 c4 Ab2 21 exd5 exd5 22 2b1 Sb5 23 WH Ads (23...2.b4 could cast doubt on the pawn sacrifice) 24 Bc3 Hc8? (swallowing his pride with 24..\b2 was best) 25 Elxc8+ Wxc8 26 Wei We3 27 Hxa7 with a win- ning position. 14...g6 15 93 cB 16 2xg6!? Y L fla Me Wa, Ue ata: ‘Typically enterprising play from Mo- tylev, whereas 16 Ag? followed by Ac3, We2 and playing for c4 or £5 is a mote sedate way of handling the position. 16...0.b5?! After this White is much better and so 16...fxg6 is superior, although 17 Axg6 Hs 18 Wns dds 19 Dxf® Axe 20 2xh6 gives White three good pawns and a centralized black king for the piece. 17 Wig4 txg6 18 Axg6 2xf1 19 Wxe6+ De7 20 AxhB 243 21 AFT Wd7 22 Ad6+ vd8 23 WFE!? After a queen exchange, White could take a fourth pawn on cither h6 or b7, but Motyley is an aggressive player and was clearly enjoying his position too much to opt for a better endgame. 23...807 24 WH3 226 25 Eb 25 c4l was even stronger, when the pawn is untouchable in view of @a5+. 25...We6 26 c4 Bd8 27 Axb7 2xb7 28 2a5+ GeB 29 OxdB APS 30 Eixb7! xb7 31 cxd5 Wo8 32 d6+ &a6 33 Wd3+ &b7 34 Wb5+ cas 35 Oc7 a6 36 Wc6+ Wb7 37 d7 1-0 Game 2 S.Erenburg-W.UhImann Dresden Open 2004 1 04 e6 2:d4.d5 3e5 05463 Ach 5 244...Ac6 5 Af3 Wb6 6 a3 c4 53 Wb6 6 a3 c4 7 Abd2 £6 This is probably the best alternative to 7..a5. Black reopens discussions on the stability of the white centre, intending to exchange on ¢5 to secure the c5-square for his bishop, and recently Pelletier has adopted this plan with good results. 8 Le2 Preparing to meet an eventual. ...2c5 with kingside castling is an obvious and good plan, In contrast to the previous game, 7...f6 puts much mote pressure on the white centre and so 8 b3 is inappro- priate: 8...fse5 9 Axe5 (9 bxc4 e4 is noth- ing for White) 9..xe5 10 dxe5 Bc5 11 Wh5+ 6°12 Wh4 was D.Bronstein- L.Roos, Hastings 1993 and now 12...cxb3 13 Bb1 De? 14 Bxb3 We7 gives Black good chances. Another standard plan, 8 g3, also falls short after 8...fxe5 9 Axe5 (9 dxe5 Aho! plans to hit the ¢5-pawn with ..2f7 and wcT) 9.6 and 10,..2d6 with equal- ity, as in J Johansson-L, Karlsson, Swedish Ch, Lindesberg 1993. However, Dvoirys preferred 8 h4!? in S.Dvoirys-G.Vallin, Cappelle la Grande 2001 and was re- warded after 8.96 (8..Wc7l? 9 Wh5+ We7 10 Wext7+ x67 is roughly equal) 9 f4 fxe5? (McDonald suggests 9...£5) 10 fxe5 Qe7 11 Ahf3! Aho 12 Vxc4! dxc4 13 Dxc4 Wao 14 Ddo+ Sd7 15 &xh6 &xh6 16 d5! with an attack. 8...fxe5 9 Dxe5 Tt makes sense to capture with the knight in order to free the f-pawn and to let the light-squared bishop out. 9...Dxe5 Preventing White from gaining a bind as he obtained after 9...f6 10 £4 2d6 11 DAdf3 in J.Prizant-D.Krashchenkov, Es- sentuki 2003, 10 dxe5 &c5 11 0-0 11...De7 By no means the only try: a) 11...8.d7 12 b1 (12 a4!? followed by b4 is another way of playing on the queenside, although the immediate 12 b4?! runs into 12...cxb3 13°Axb3 Bad) 12..e7 13 b4 cxb3 has secn White try two plans: al) 14 c4 0-0 15 23 Had8 (15.224 16 cxd5 Dxd5 17 Dc4 Was is more am- bitious) 16 Wxb3 206 17 cxd5 Bxd5 18 Wa4 Yeo was drawn in S$.B.Hansen- S.Brynell, Copenhagen 1993. a2) 14 Axb3 0-0 15 Axcd Wxc5 16 Exb7 Wc8 17 Bb4 Wxc3 18 243 2c8 19 25French Advance fb2 We5 20 Wed DES 21 Hb7 Weo 22 Wb4 also led to a draw in T-Braga- J.Vilela, Bayamo 1984. b) 11..Dh6 12 b4 exb3 13 Axb3 ALS 14 a4 Qe7 15 Bb5+ HET 16 Ad4 Has 17 £d3 Bg8 18 Bxf5 exf5 19 B23 Bes 20 Bet Be6 21 Wa3 saw White dominate in F.Prie-J.Roos, French Ch., Chambery 1994, ©) 11. Me7 12 b3 exb3 13 4 Bd4 14 Ebi &xe5 15 £3 and the exchange of Black’s dark-squated bishop will leave White with the initiative. 12 b4! Winning the bishop-pair at the cost of some queenside looseness, whereas 12 Bh5t 26 13 Bed h5 14 Be2 Bd7 15 Ebt 0.0 16 Axed dxed 17 Wad? Had8 18 Wad Bxf2 19 Bxf2 &xf2+ 20 kh Web 21 Wxc6 Axc6 22 L.g5 He8 23 L£6 gave White a slightly better endgame in F.Vallejo Pons-Y. Pelletier, Biel 2002. 12...cxb3_ 13 Axb3 0-0 14 Axc5 Wxe5 15 Wd3 15...b6 In A.Grischuk-Y Pelletier, Bicl 2001, Black preferred 15...We7 16 &e5 Ee7 17 f4 £47 18 2h5 (18 Wh is Pelleticr’s suggestion) 18..Wc5+ 19 hi Hee 20 Eabl b6 (20...2.c6 looks mote solid) 21 c4 DES 22 cxd5 h6 23 dxeo Bxe 24 By6 Wed 25 Wh3 De7 26 Ld3 Wa2 and now instead of Grischuk’s 27 Whi, 27 £5! looks very convincing as 27...2xf5 28 BxfS Axf5 29 2.£6! 26 30 Hbd1 supplies a cleat advantage. Pelletier then switched to 15.247 and 16 Bb1 (16 a4 We? 17 £4 Bd? 18 Be3 a6 19 Bp4 Hc8 20 B.d4 AES was equal in Li Shilong-J.Atizmendi Martinez, J.inares 2002) 16...b6 17 Wh3 We7 18 2.3 g6 19 Bet Wxc3 20 Lb2 Web 21 Ebel Wad7 left White struggling to show enough compensation in $.Conquest-Y.Pelleticr, France 2002, but 19 2.g5!? may improve. 16 a4 EH7 17 &h5 A standard device to weaken the king- side dark squares. 17...g6 18 294 AF5 19 8.95 ‘This position is extremely difficult for Black as after the inevitable exchange of his knight, he will be unable to control his own dark squates. 19..,Wea 20 Wh3 h5 21 2.xf5! exf5 22 fel %e6 23 216 Bc8 24 We3 Wh7 25 Hect Hfc7 26 h4 da? 26.. Wed 27 Wa2 f4, trying to create 264...Ac6 & Df3 Bb6 6 a3 c4 his own play, was much more tenacious, but after 28 £3 We3 29 a5 b5 30 a6! White will penetrate along the b-file, 27 cxd4 Wxc1+ 28 Exe1 Lixet+ 29 @h2, The black rooks just aren’t effective enough, whereas the white queen has the long-range power as well as the short- range knife requited to mount a lethal attack on the black king. 29...21¢3 30 Wd2 2d5 31 Wh2 Eb3 32 We2 Hc6 33 2e7! Introducing the possibility of 8.d6 fol- lowed by running with the e-pawn, as well as the slightly more exotic Wd2 and 2.68 to engineer a dark-squared breakthrough. 33..44 34 Wd2 13 35 218 &g8 36 Wh Lie7 37 Wxg6+ 1-0 Game 3 V.Golod-A.Finkel Israeli Championship, Modiin 2000 1 e4 eG 2 d4.d5 3 e5 cb 43 Ac6 5 3 Wh6 6 a3 c4 7 Abd2 Aad 8 g3 Pve talcen some liberties with the move- order of this game as Golod actually fi- anchettoed his bishop a little earlier, but it doesn’t really make much difference so long as White remembers not to let the black knight into b3. 2d7 9 2g2 One of three possible spots for the white bishop. On g2 it doesn’t do a great deal, of course, but it has the benefit of blocking neither the e-file nor the h- pawn. It’s fair to say, however, that this development, according to recent prac- tice, isn’t cnough for an advantage. 9...e7 Instead after 9...h6 10 0-0 Ae7 11 Bet 0-0-0 12 Eb1 @bs 13 h4 Ba8 14.5 We7 15 Aft Ab3 16 BF4 g6 17 e4 exhd 18 gxhd APS 19 Dg3 Dxp3 20 fxg3 Be7 21 DNh2 Kdg8 22 Aged Qed 23 BFL White was doing well in A-Motylev- A.Betelovich, Bucharest 1998, but Black played more precisely in B.lvanovic- V Dimitrov, Niksic 1996 with 11 bi WeT 12 Hel Ac! (saving a tempo in the journey to a4) 13 AFI Abo 14 h4 0-0-0 15 2£h3 Be7 16 dg2 Sb8 17 Ath2 BB 18 Agi Was, securing equality. 10 0-0 £5 10...65 can hardly be classed as a mis- take, but gives White the interesting op- tion of &g2-h3xfS and. in such closed structures, bishops ate generally inferior 27