French Defense: The Super-Solid Rubinstein Variation

By Hannes Langrock

A Complete Black Repertoire against 1.e4 Built around the Super-solid Rubinstein! The solid Rubinstein Variation of the French Defense – despite its having been played by world champions and elite grandmasters, it has never been subjected to detailed study. The author, German International Master Hannes Langrock, has produced a book with complete coverage of this line, along with solid recommendations for Black should White deviate on the second or third move. The first edition was widely acclaimed, and the second edition has been revised and expanded. “I never realized that Black could take such active measures in the Rubinstein Variation without significant drawbacks. This book is an eye-opener, and even top grandmasters might find that they have underestimated Black’s resources in important positions…The average tournament and online player will appreciate Langrock’s straightforward, no-nonsense style. He keeps the complexity of the analysis within bounds, and highlights relevant details without drifting into obscure page-long analytical byways. General themes are clearly presented within the context of illustrative games…The result is a book that covers a broad swath of material in a modest number of pages. I’m sure that you will be well-rewarded for its study, and come out with a useful new weapon in your chess arsenal.” – International Master John Watson in his Foreword to the first edition.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Russell Enterprises, Inc.
• Release date: Jul 26, 2018
• ISBN: 9781941270936

Book preview

Chapter 1

A Natural and Popular Line

If you take a look at big opening trees (like for example, ChessBase’s PowerBook) and always pick the most popular move, the following will be the next moves after 4…Nd7:

5.Nf3 Most natural, knights before bishops!

5…Ngf6 This had been prepared with 4…Nd7.

6.Nxf6+ Exchanging the attacked knight.

6…Nxf6 7.Bd3 White puts his bishop on the most natural square.

7…c5 Black executes the thematic break.

8.dxc5 Exchanging the attacked pawn.

8…Bxc5 9.0-0 White brings his king into safety.

9…0-0 ditto. (D)

It seems quite likely that this line will be met at club level, as all of White’s moves are very safe and natural, and not

unlikely to be chosen by a player who is not especially prepared against the Rubinstein. However, on higher levels, this line is seen rarely these days as it has turned out not to be very difficult for Black.

Black intends to follow up with …b6, …Bb7, with a good game. The most popular attempt by White is to pin the knight with 10.Bg5, and after 10…b6, play 11.Qe2 Bb7 12.Rad1. (D)

In view of the threat Bxh7+, Black’s queen should move off the d-file. The best move is 12…Qc7, when Black does not have to fear the doubled pawns after 13.Bxf6 gxf6, as the game Acs-Khalifman (game 4) shows.

A little more complex is 13.Ne5, trying to keep more material on the board and building up an active position based on the strong centralized knight. However, the game Syugirov-Grachev (game 5) shows that Black gets sufficient counterplay by relatively simple means; in this game, the line 10.Qe2 b6 11.Bf4 is discussed as well.

(4) Acs (2526) – Khalifman (2688)

Dubai Rapid 2002

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.Bd3 c5 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.0-0 0-0 10.Bg5 b6 11.Qe2 Bb7 12.Rad1 Qc7 13.Bxf6 gxf6

For a good understanding of the Rubinstein Variation, it is important to realize that the structure after …BxNf6 gxf6 is usually not dangerous for Black. Generally speaking, this structure is dangerous for Black only when White can create serious attacking chances against Black’s exposed king. This is not the case here.

14.Be4 (D)

After the exchange of light-square bishops, the following two operations are generally desirable for Black:

(1) Exchanging all rooks: After the exchange of rooks, Black’s queen usually gets quite active, which leaves Black without any problems.

(2) Playing …f6-f5: after this advance, the bishop can find a good place on f6 or g7, where it gives protection to the king.

14…Rfd8

This appears a bit more logical than 14…Rad8, as now Black has the f8-square available for his king or bishop in some lines. However, Black has also been doing fine with 14…Rad8. Another good option is 14…Bxe4!?, which activates White’s queen, but keeps the black queen on c7. This is a good square for the queen; it supports a multiple rook exchange (…Rxd1/Rxd1/…Rd8) and also controls f4. 15.Qxe4 Rfd8 16.c3 f5 17.Qa4 (or 17.Qh4 Bf8=, and 18.Ng5 can be met by 18…h6) 17…Be7 (Black brings his bishop to f6) 18.Rxd8+ Rxd8 19.Rd1 Bf6 20.g3 Rxd1+ 21.Qxd1 Qc4= 22.a3 h5 23.Ne1 ½-½ Emms-Speelman, Germany 2003.

15.c3

15.g3 Bxe4 16.Qxe4 f5 17.Qe2 Be7 18.c3 Bf6 19.Rxd8+ Rxd8 20.Rd1 Rxd1+ 21.Qxd1 Qc4 22.a3 b5 23.Ne1 a5, and Black was comfortable in Tiviakov-Speelman, China 1997.

15.Bxb7 Qxb7 16.c3 (16.Nd2 f5 17.Nb3 Bf8 18.c3 Bg7 19.Nc1 Qc7 20.Qf3 Rxd1 21.Rxd1 Rd8 22.Rxd8+ Qxd8 23.Nd3 h6 24.g3 Kh7 25.Kg2 Qc7 26.a3 Qc4= Lehmann-Langrock, Hamburg 2014) 16…Qc7 17.g3 Rxd1 18.Rxd1 Rd8 19.Ne1 Rxd1 20.Qxd1 Be7 21.Ng2 ½-½ Anand-Gelfand, Monte Carlo 2007.

15…Rac8 16.a3 a6 17.Bxb7 Qxb7 18.Rd3 Rxd3 19.Qxd3 Be7 20.Rd1 Rd8 21.Qe2 Rxd1+ 22.Qxd1 Qe4=

With such an active queen, Black has nothing to fear.

23.Kf1 Kg7 24.Ne1 f5 25.Qd3 b5 26.Qg3+ Qg4 27.Qd3 Qe4 28.Qg3+ Qg4 29.Qf3

White avoids the repetition of moves, although objectively he has no reason to do so.

29…Bd6 30.g3 Qc4+ 31.Qd3 Qc6 32.Ke2 Bc5 33.Qf3 Qe4+ 34.Qxe4 fxe4

This minor piece endgame is equal. Despite the existence of pawns on both sides of the board, White’s knight is not necessarily inferior to Black’s bishop as he has potential targets (a6 and then b5), if Black takes too many risks.

35.Nc2 f5 36.Nb4 a5 37.Nc6 a4

Now the b5-pawn looks weak at first sight, but White’s knight cannot attack it without being exchanged (or simply taken) by the bishop.

38.Nd8?

From now on White’s knight will struggle to get back into the game. 38.Ne5 was one of the moves that kept equality. 38…Bd6 (38…Kf6?? runs into 39.Nd7++–) 39.Nc6 Bc5 40.Ne5=.

38…Kf6 39.Nb7 Bf8 40.Na5 e5 41.c4 b4 42.axb4 Bxb4 43.Nc6 Bc5–+

White’s knight is out of play and cannot help to defend against Black’s plan of pushing his kingside majority.

44.h3 h5 45.f3 exf3+ 46.Kxf3 Ke6 47.g4 fxg4+ 48.hxg4 h4 49.g5 Kf5 50.g6 e4+ 51.Kg2 Kxg6 52.Ne5+ Kf5 53.Nd7 Bd4 54.c5 Ke6 0-1

(5) Syugirov (2562) – Grachev (2655)

Moscow 2009

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.Bd3 c5 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.0-0 0-0 10.Bg5

10.Qe2 b6 11.Bf4 has been tried a few times by Tiviakov. The move takes away the c7-square from Black’s queen. However, after 11…Bb7 12.Rad1 Qe7, the queen is not badly placed on e7 either. Chances are equal; here are a few examples: 13.Ne5 (13.c3 Rad8 14.Rfe1 h6 15.Ne5 Ba8 16.Ng4 Kh8 17.Nxf6 Qxf6 18.Bg3 Bd6 19.Bc2 Bxg3 20.hxg3 Rxd1 21.Rxd1 Rd8= Tiviakov-Vaganian, Gothenburg 2005) and now:

(a) 13…Rad8!? 14.c3 h6 15.Bg3 Ba8

That is why Black chose his a-rook to go to d8 on move 13. The maneuver …Ba8/…Qb7 can often be a good idea in the Rubinstein; here it serves to drive away the enemy knight from the e5-square. 16.Rfe1 Qb7 17.Nf3 Nh5 18.Be5 Qe7 19.Be4 Bxe4 20.Qxe4 Rxd1 21.Rxd1 Rd8 22.Rxd8+ Qxd8 23.g3 Nf6 24.Bxf6 gxf6= Tiviakov-Nogeiras Santiago, Havana 2008.

(b) 13…Rfd8 14.c3 h6 15.Bg3 Rac8 16.Rd2 Bd6 17.Rfd1 Bb8 18.a3 Kf8 19.Bb5 Rxd2 20.Rxd2 Rd8 21.Nc6 Bxc6 22.Bxc6 Bxg3 23.hxg3 Rxd2 24.Qxd2 Qc7 25.Bf3 Ke7= Caruana-Meier, Szeged 2007.

10…b6 11.Qe2 Bb7 12.Rad1 Qc7 13.Ne5

White forgoes the immediate exchange on f6 and tries to build up an active position with a centralized knight instead. However, this line has not proven to be very critical, either.

13…Rfd8 14.Rfe1

[preventing Rd7] are also in Black’s favor.) 20…Rh4 21.Nd6 Be5! (Of course not 21…Qxd6?

22.Bh7++– Finkel) 22.exf7+ Kf8 23.Nxb7 Rxh2+ 24.Kg1 Bd4+ 25.Rf2 and now 25…Qf4! would have won on the spot. Black threatens 26…Qh4 with mate, or 26…Bxf2+ 27.Qxf2 Rh1+–+. White has to give up decisive material, 26.Qf3 Qxf3 27.gxf3 Rxf2–+.

The move 14.c3 takes the d4-square under control and frees c2 or b1 for the bishop, although a move of White’s bishop to one of these squares would usually just lead to simplifying rook exchanges. 14…Rd5 15.Rde1!? An ambitious idea; White intends to concentrate his forces on the kingside and build up an attack with moves like Kh1, f2-f4, etc.

(a) After 15…Rad8, 16.Bc4! would have won the exchange in Miroshnichenko-Meier, Bad Zwesten 2005, as 16…R5d6?? loses to 17.b4. Black gets some compensation in lines like 16…Rxe5 17.Qxe5 Bd6 18.Qe2 Bxh2+ 19.Kh1 Bd6, but it does not seem to be enough.

(b) 15…h6!

This clears up the situation on the kingside (and avoids getting into a bit of a grip in lines like 15…Be7 16.f4 Rad8 17.Kh1). 16.Bxf6 (One important point is that 16.Bh4?? turns out to be a big blunder after 16…Rad8. Black threatens 17…Qxe5 18.Qxe5 Rxe5 19.Rxe5 Rxd3–+, and if White’s bishop leaves d3, the rook gets to d2 with disastrous consequences for White. In case of the natural 17.Bg3, 17…Rxe5! followed by …Qc6, threatening mate on g2, is a killer.) 16…gxf6 17.Ng4 Kg7 18.Be4 Rd7=.

14…Rd5

A good solution. Black threatens …Rxe5! (see the variation 15.c4? below) and asks White how he wants to react to this. Black also has no problems after 14…h6 15.Bxf6 (15.Bf4 Rd4 16.Bg3 Ne4 17.c3 Nxg3 18.hxg3 Rdd8 19.Be4=) 15…gxf6 16.Ng4 (16.Qg4+ Kf8 17.Nf3 f5 18.Qh4 Kg7 does not lead anywhere for White.) 16…Qf4 (or 16…Kg7 17.Be4 Bxe4 18.Qxe4 Rxd1 19.Rxd1 Rd8, with a comfortable position for Black.) 17.Be4 Bxe4 18.Qxe4 Qg5 19.Qf3= van der Wiel-Cifuentes Parada, Netherlands 1997.

15.Bf4

After 15.Bxf6 gxf6 16.Qg4+ Kf8 17.Nf3, Black has to be exact.

(a) 17…Rad8? 18.Qh4 Ke7 19.Qxh7 Qf4 20.Bg6 Rf8 21.Rxd5 Bxd5 22.Be4 (White is a clear pawn up.) 22…Bxa2? 23.b3 Bb4 24.g3 Qc7 25.Ra1+– Nezad-Jasim, Abu Dhabi 2006.

Kg8? 23.Re3+–.

(c) Correct is 17…h6!=. With the pawn on h6 instead of h7, the Qh4 idea loses all its power as 18.Qh4 can simply be met by 18…Kg7. White does not have enough attacking power, while Black is ready to improve his position by playing …f6-f5. So, White should take the draw with 19.Qg4+ Kf8 20.Qh4 Kg7 etc.

Nurkiewicz-Vysochin, Warsaw 2009.

15…Rad8

Also good is 15…Rd4 16.Bg3 Ne4, exchanging one of White’s bishops for a knight. 17.c3 Nxg3 18.hxg3 Rdd8 19.Be4 Bxe4 20.Qxe4 Rac8 21.g4 h6 ½-½ Kveinys-Speelman, Plovdiv 2003.

16.Bg3 Qc8 17.a3

) 22…Nh5 23.Qd2 h6 24.Re4?? A terrible blunder. 24…Ng3 25.hxg3 Rxg3+ 0-1 Yee-Khamrakulov, Bandar Seri Begawan 2011.

17…a5 18.Bh4 Qc7 19.Bg3 h6 20.c3 Qc8=

It is not easy for either side to improve their position. Hence, the competitors decided to opt for a repetition of moves quickly.

21.Bh4

21.h3 (Movsesian-Yusupov, Doha 2014) can be met with the typical 21…Ba8=, bringing the idea …Qb7 into play.

21…Be7 22.Bg3 Ba8 23.Ba6 Qc5 24.Bd3 Qc8 25.Ba6 Qc5 26.Bd3 Qc8 ½-½

Summary

We have started the theoretical Rubinstein section with a very natural line, which is often seen on club level: 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.Bd3 c5 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.0-0 0-0. After 10.Bg5 b6 11.Qe2 Bb7 12.Rad1 Qc7, weakening Black’s pawn-structure while going for exchanges with 13.Bxf6 gxf6 14.Be4 is safe, but not dangerous as the game Acs-Khalifman showed. Instead 13.Ne5 is more complex, but Black can get sufficient counter-chances – in Syugirov-Grachev he did so by doubling rooks on the d-file: 13…Rfd8 14.Rfe1 Rd5 15.Bf4 Rad8.

Chapter 2

Kasparov’s 7.c3

Now things are getting more serious; in this chapter we will take a look at one of the most critical tests of the Rubinstein Variation!

7.c3

This move became popular after Garry Kasparov beat Ruslan Ponomariov with it in 2002 and nowadays it is played by strong grandmasters regularly. At first sight, 7.c3 looks like a shy little move which only stabilizes White’s center by bolstering d4. But in reality, White has much more aggressive ideas in mind! The move c2-c3 opens the way to a4 for the queen, and if Black plays …c7-c5, White can try to pose some concrete problems with moves like Ne5, Bb5, Qa4 as well as 0-0-0.

Garry Kasparov was known for his extensive opening preparation and he has added many great ideas to the opening theory.

Given White’s aggressive ambitions, it is no surprise that the cautious move 7…Be7 has been tried in many games, and by strong grandmasters. The idea is to first castle short and play …b6, …Bb7, while carrying out …c7-c5 only later, when the king is safe and all pieces are developed. I thought that this concept was fine and played 7…Be7 myself in two games against stronger opponents. I lost both games, but that did not have much to do with the opening; it was a result of my own inferior play after the opening. Anyway, when I analyzed this variation deeply while working on this book, I came to the conclusion that the slow 7…Be7 is not sufficient for equality. I do not want to go into detail here and will only mention one difficult line: 8.Bd3 0-0 9.Qe2 b6 10.Bf4! Bb7 11.0-0-0. Black’s problems are more difficult than the computer first thinks…

If Black wants to fully equalize, he has to go for the thematic main move 7…c5!. After 8.Ne5 Black should prevent the check on b5 and play 8…a6, when the main line goes 9.Be3 Qc7 10.Qa4+ Nd7.

Now the most obvious continuation is 11.0-0-0, but after 11…cxd4 12.Nxd7 Bxd7 13.Qxd4 Bc6!, Black does not have many problems equalizing. Black’s bishop is actively placed on c6 and he is ready to follow up with …Rd8. 11.0-0-0 is analyzed in the game Navara-Meier (game 6).

More critical is 11.Bb5 cxd4 12.Bxd7+ Bxd7 13.Qxd4.

Now the idea to attack d7 one more time with 0-0-0 is a little awkward, so Black has to do something about this. With 13…Bb5 14.a4 Bd6 Black accepts quite a compromised pawn structure after 15.Nxf7 Kxf7 16.axb5 axb5. Meier has played this position six times and has more or less worked it out to a draw after 17.Ke2 Qc6!; see the game Socko-Meier (game 7). The second option is to keep the pawn structure intact and play 13…f6 14.Nxd7 Qxd7 15.Qxd7+ Kxd7 16.0-0-0 Kc7!. Black has to be exact in this line, but I believe he holds here as well. 13…f6 is discussed in Degraeve-Sumets (game 8). Overall 13…Bb5 seems more clear-cut and would currently be my preference.

There are some – generally less critical – ways for White to deviate from the main line. Alternatives to 9.Be3 after 8.Ne5 c5 are discussed in Kaplan-Meier (game 9), 8.Be3 is the topic of Istratescu-Pelletier (game 10), and 8.Bd3 is analyzed in Boudre-Benitah (game 11).

(6) Navara (2638) – Meier (2608)

Budva (Montenegro) 2009

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.c3 c5 8.Ne5 a6 9.Be3 Qc7 10.Qa4+ Nd7 11.0-0-0

The most obvious continuation, but less dangerous than the other main move 11.Bb5.

11…cxd4 12.Nxd7

12.Bxd4 Bd6 13.Nxd7 Bxd7= does not pose Black any problems. The game Nepomniachtchi-Vitiugov, Serpukhov 2008, saw 14.Qc4 Qxc4 15.Bxc4 Rc8 16.Bb3 Bc6 17.f3 0-0 18.Bb6 Bf4+ 19.Kb1 h5 20.Rhe1 h4 21.h3 Bg3 22.Re2 Rfe8 23.Bc2 f5 24.c4 g6 25.b4 e5 26.a4 e4, with a complicated ending, which Black went on to win.

12…Bxd7 13.Qxd4

Now Black cannot develop his dark-square bishop, as the g7-pawn would then be hanging.

13…Bc6!

Putting the bishop on an active square and intending to follow up with …Rd8. 13…e5 is the obvious way to chase White’s queen away from d4, but in the ending after 14.Qb6 Qxb6 15.Bxb6, Black has to suffer quite a bit as praxis has shown.

14.Bc4

Against a slow move like 14.f3, Black can easily equalize by exchanging pieces: 14…Rd8 15.Qxd8+ Qxd8 16.Rxd8+ Kxd8 17.Bb6+ (17.Bd4 h5 18.h4 Rg8 19.Bd3 Bd6 20.Kd2 Ke7= Mitkov-Barbeau, Montreal 2006) 17…Kc8 18.Be2 Bd6 19.b4 h5 20.Kb2 h4 21.Kb3 Rh5 22.Rd1 Bc7 23.Bxc7 Kxc7 with a comfortable endgame for Black in S.Kasparov-C.Burcu, Paracin 2016;

14.Qg4:

(a) 14…Rd8 15.Be2 h5 16.Qg5 Rd5 17.Rxd5 Bxd5 18.Rd1 g6 19.Qf6 Rh7 20.Bf3 Be7 21.Qd4 Bxf3 22.gxf3 h4! (with the idea …Rh5) 23.Bf4 Qc6 24.Qe5 Qc8 25.Qe4 Qc6 26.Qe5 White has nothing direct and the worse pawn structure, so he is not unhappy to go for a repetition of moves. 26…Qc8 27.Qe4 Qc6 ½-½ Kasimdzhanov-Meier, Sestao 2010.

, Black was a pawn up in the ending in El Gindy-Al Huwar, Abu Dhabi 2008.

14.Bf4 Qa5 15.Bc4 Qc5 (or 15…Rd8 16.Qxd8+ Qxd8 17.Rxd8+ and a draw was agreed in Sokolov-Pelletier, France 2012) 16.f3 Qxd4 17.Rxd4 Bc5= Guidarelli-Vaisser, Aix-les-Bains 2007.

After 14.Be2 Black has to avoid the greedy 14…Bxg2? 15.Bf4! with a lot of concrete problems. But 14…Rd8, as first played by Meier, equalizes easily following 15.Qg4 with a transposition to 14.Qg4 Rd8 15.Be2.

14…Rd8

Solid and good. There is no real need to enter the complications after 14…b5 15.Bb3 Bxg2 16.Rhe1 or 14…Bxg2 15.Rhe1, lines in which White has good play for the sacrificed pawn.

15.Qg4 h5!

This is a key move in this line. It not only drives White’s queen away from the g4-square, but Black’s rook can often be activated via the h-file later.

16.Qg5

16.Rxd8+, as tried two times against Bareev, is also not dangerous: 16…Qxd8 17.Qg3 (17.Qe2 Be7 18.Rd1 Qa5 19.f3 ½-½ Ponomariov-Bareev, Poikovsky 2006) 17…Qd6 18.f4 (18.Qg5 Qd8 19.Qe5 Qd6 20.Qg5 Qd8 21.Qe5 Qd6 22.Qg5 Qd8 ½-½ Hera-Farago, Triesen 2011) 18…h4 19.Qg4 Be4 20.Rd1 Qc6 21.Bb3 Bf5 22.Qf3 Be4 23.Qf2 Rh5 24.g4 hxg3 25.hxg3 ½-½ Anand-Bareev, Monaco 2004.

16…Rxd1+ 17.Rxd1 g6 18.Qf6 Rh7

At first sight Black’s position looks a bit suspicious. However, White does not have anything concrete, which means that Black will just finish development and equalize.

19.g3

, the white attack grinds to a halt.

19…Be7 20.Qd4 Bf3 21.Bf4 Qc6 22.Rd2 h4=

Black will activate his rook by opening the h-file.

23.Qe5 Kf8 24.Qb8+ Kg7 25.Be5+ f6 26.Qc7 Kf7 27.Qxc6 Bxc6 28.Bd6 hxg3 29.hxg3 Rh1+ 30.Kc2 b5 31.Be2 Be4+ (D)

32.Bd3?

Better was 32.Kb3 Bd5+ 33.c4:

(a) The tactical point is that after 33…bxc4+ 34.Bxc4 Bxd6, White does not lose a piece as he has 35.Rxd5, with the idea 35…exd5 36.Bxd5+, followed by taking on h1.

(b) Black has the more comfortable ending after 33…Bxd6 34.cxd5 e5 35.a4 bxa4+ 36.Kxa4 Ra1+ 37.Kb3 e4 (xf2), even though it is very drawish.

32…Bxd3+ 33.Rxd3 Rh2 34.b4

On 34.Rd2 Bxd6 35.Rxd6 Rxf2+ 36.Kb3 e5 37.Rxa6 e4, Black’s e-pawn is very dangerous.

34…Rxf2+ 35.Kb3

A pawn down, White now has to fight for a draw. After 56 moves he managed to achieve this.

(7) Socko (2644) – Meier (2638)

Lublin 2010

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.c3 c5 8.Ne5 a6 9.Be3 Qc7 10.Qa4+ Nd7

.

11.Bb5

In this line, White is looking for an endgame initiative. He will get this indeed, but I believe that in the resulting endgame Black can equalize with exact play.

11…cxd4 12.Bxd7+

The blunder 12.Bxd4?? has already been played twice. The problem is that after 12…axb5 13.Qxa8 Nxe5–+ 14.Bxe5, the black queen takes on e5 with check.

12…Bxd7 13.Qxd4

Instead, 13.Nxd7 releases the tension too early and does not pose any problems. A recent example continued: 13…Qxd7 14.Qxd7+ Kxd7 15.Bxd4 f6 16.0-0-0 Kc6 17.f4 Bd6 18.g3 Rhe8 19.Rhe1 Rad8 20.Be4 Bc5 21.Bxc5 Rxd1+ 22.Kxd1 Kxc5 and a draw was agreed in Fogarasi-Almasi, Hungary 2017.

13…Bb5

This move has been played somewhat more often than 13…f6. After 13…Bb5 14.a4 Bd6, play gets a little concrete. When the dust has cleared, Black ends up with a rigid pawn-structure but still has enough resources.

14.a4 Bd6! 15.Nxf7!

Leonid Kritz points out that 15.axb5 Bxe5 16.Qa4 does not give an advantage, as after 16…0-0 17.b6 Qe7 18.0-0 Rad8 19.Rad1 Rxd1 20.Rxd1 Rd8= (Korneev-Meier, Chalons en Champagne, 2009) White cannot make use of his advanced pawn on b6.

15…Kxf7 16.axb5 axb5 17.Ke2 (D)

The rare 17.Rd1 Rhd8 18.Qh4 b4! 19.0-0 (Not 19.cxb4?? Bxb4+ 20.Qxb4 Rxd1+ 21.Kxd1 Ra1+ and Black wins material) allows White to castle, but does not change the assessment of the

position: Black’s one remaining weakness does not seem enough for White to claim anything real. A high level game continued: 19…bxc3 20.bxc3 Kg8 21.c4 Be5 22.Rxd8+ Rxd8 23.g3 Bf6 24.Qg4 Qc6 25.Rb1 Ra8 26.c5 Ra1= Ponomariov-Akobian, Khanty-Mansiysk 2009.

17…Qc6!

Georg Meier’s move. One point is that White now cannot put his queen on the beautiful e4-square.

After 17…Rhd8 18.Rxa8 Rxa8 19.Rd1 Ra6 20.Qe4 Qc4+ 21.Kf3 Qxe4+ 22.Kxe4, Black had to defend an unpleasant endgame in Kritz-Grachev, Biel 2009.

18.Rhd1!

Other moves pose fewer problems: 18.Rxa8 Rxa8 19.Rd1 Be7 20.Qf4+ Bf6 21.g4 Ra4 22.Qf3 Ra2 23.Rd2 b4 24.Qxc6 bxc6 25.cxb4 Rxb2 ½-½ Istratescu-Meier, Antwerp 2010; 18.Qg4 b4 19.Qh5+ g6 20.Qf3+ Qxf3+ 21.Kxf3 bxc3 22.bxc3 Rxa1 23.Rxa1 Rc8 24.Rb1 Rxc3 25.Rxb7+ Rc7 ½-½ Novikov-Lysyj, Belgorod 2009.

18…Rxa1

Here Black has an important, but less tested alternative in 18…Be7, which was chosen by correspondence world champion Joop van Oosterom in a top level correspondence game. It continued: 19.Qf4+ Bf6 20.Qf3 Rhd8 21.Qxc6 bxc6 22.Rd7+ (22.Rxa8 Rxa8 23.Rd7+ Ke8 24.Rd6 and 24…Ra2= gives enough counterplay) 22…Rxd7 23.Rxa8 b4! Exchanging pawns brings Black closer to the draw. 24.cxb4 Bxb2 25.Rc8 Rb7 26.Bc5 Bc3 27.Rf8+ Kg6 28.Rf3 Be5 29.Kd3 Rd7+ 30.Ke4 Rd5 31.g3 Bd6 32.Bxd6 Rxd6 33.Rc3 (33.Ke5 Rd5+ 34.Kxe6 wins a pawn, but 34…Rb5 35.Rf4 c5 36.bxc5 Rxc5 gives Black an easy theoretical draw with two against three on one wing.) 33…Kf6 34.f4 h6 35.h3 g6 36.Rc5 Ke7 37.g4 Kd7 38.b5 ½-½ Dronov-Van Oosterom, corr Olympiad 2009.

19.Rxa1 b4! Getting rid of one of the weaknesses (20.cxb4 Qb5+). 20.Rd1

Georg Meier has written the theory of this line by playing it five times with Black against strong opposition. He has worked out how to draw this with Black, although he suffered two defeats on the way.

In a more recent game, the new move 20.c4 was tried: 20…Be7! Rerouting the bishop to f6; a nice square, after White has played c3-c4. 21.Qg4 Bf6 22.Ra5! Rd8 23.Rb5 h5 A highly concrete move, typical for correspondence play. Black wants to get in his counterplay with …Qd6 under the best tactical circumstances. 24.Qxh5+ Kg8 25.Qg4 Qd6 26.f3 Bxb2 27.Kf2 Bc3 Black has sufficient counterplay to compensate his weakened structure and the game Krzyzanowski-Andersen, corr 2015, later ended in a draw.

20…Rd8 21.Qh4

The other attempt – 21.Qb6 Qc4+ 22.Ke1 Bc7 23.Qxb7 Rxd1+ 24.Kxd1 bxc3 25.b3 Qd5+ 26.Qxd5 exd5 – leads to a drawn bishop ending as well. Again, Black still has to make a few exact moves: 27.Bd4 Bxh2! Do or die! 28.g3 Bg1 29.Ke2 The bishop is trapped, but Black can afford to sacrifice it. 29…c2 30.Be3

30…Ke6! Activating the king as quickly as possible. 31.Kf1 Bh2 32.Kg2 Ke5 33.Kxh2 Ke4:

(a) 34.b4 d4 35.Bc1 Kd3 36.b5 Ke2 37.b6 d3 38.b7 d2 39.Bxd2 Kxd2 40.b8Q c1Q 41.Qf4+ Kd1 42.Qg4+ (42.Qxc1+ Kxc1 is an easy draw, because the black king can attack the pawns from behind.) 42…Ke1 43.Qxg7 Qc2 44.Qf6 Qxf2+ 45.Qxf2+ Kxf2 46.Kh3 h5 ½-½ Guseinov-Meier, Marrakesh 2010.

(b) Centralizing the king does not win either: 34.Kg1 Kd3 35.Kf1 Kc3 36.Bc1 Kxb3 37.Ke2 Ka2 38.Kd2 Kb1= and White cannot force his opponent into zugzwang, because he has fewer tempi, while after Ba3, Black always has …Ka2. One of the drawing lines goes 39.Ba3 Ka2 40.Kxc2 Kxa3 41.Kd3 Kb3 42.Kd4 Kc2 43.f4 h5 44.f5 Kd2 45.Kxd5 Ke3 46.Ke6 Ke4 47.Kf7 Kxf5 48.Kxg7 Kg4 49.Kg6 Kxg3 50.Kxh5.

21…Be7 22.Qf4+ Kg8 23.Rxd8+ Bxd8 24.Qxb4 Qxg2 25.Qb5 Qc6 26.Qxc6 bxc6

In this ending, White still has some practical chances because of his queenside majority and more active king. However, the material is highly reduced and with a little care, Black will draw. After his loss against Dominguez, Meier entered this ending two more times, which means that he is confident that Black holds his own.

27.b4

27.Kd3 Kf7 28.Ke4 Bc7 29.h3 Bd6 30.b4 Ke8 31.Bd2 Kd7 32.c4 Be7 33.b5 cxb5 34.cxb5 Bd6 35.Bc3 g6 and White cannot really penetrate Black’s kingside with good effect. White still tried until move 71, when the game Alsina Leal-Meier, Pamplona 2009 was eventually drawn.

27…Kf7 28.Kd3

The following example shows that Black’s defensive task is not that trivial yet: 28.Kf3 Bf6 29.c4 g6 30.Ke4 Bg7 31.b5 cxb5 32.cxb5 Ke7 33.Bd4 Bh6 34.Be3 Bg7 35.Bd4 Bh6 36.Be5 Kd7 37.Kd4 Bf8 38.Bg3 Bb4 39.Kc4 Be7 40.Kd4 Bb4 41.h4 Ba3 42.b6 Kc6 43.Ke5:

(a) 43…Bc5? lost important time and after 44.Kf6! Bd4+ 45.Kf7 Bxb6 46.Kg7+–, White was winning in Dominguez Perez-Meier, Havana 2009. Black’s problem is that his king is not in time to hold the kingside together.

(b) Instead, after 43…Kxb6, Black would have been able to hold. Here are two sample lines: 44.Kf6 (44.Kxe6 Kc6 45.Kf7 Kd5 46.Kg7 Ke4 47.Kxh7 Kf5=) 44…Bb2+ (taking away the g7-square from the king) 45.Kf7 Kc6 46.Kg8 The g8-square is not as good as the g7-square, because from g8, the king does not attack the g6-pawn. 46…h5 47.Kf7 Kd5 48.Kxg6 Ke4 49.Kxh5 Kf5 50.Kh6 e5 51.h5 e4 52.Kh7 Kg5 53.h6 Bd4 and White cannot make any progress.

28…Be7 29.Kc4 Ke8 30.Bc5 Bf6 31.Bd4 e5 32.Be3 e4 33.Bd4 Bh4 34.b5 Kd7 35.b6 g6 36.Kb4 Kc8 37.c4 Be7+ 38.c5 g5 39.h3 h5 40.Kc4 g4 41.hxg4 hxg4=

There is no way for White to breach Black’s fortress.

42.Be5 Bh4 43.Bg3 Bf6 44.Bf4 Bh4 45.Bg3 Bf6 46.Bf4 ½-½

(8) Degraeve (2523) – Sumets (2534)

La Fere 2008

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.c3 c5 8.Ne5 a6 9.Be3 Qc7 10.Qa4+ Nd7 11.Bb5 cxd4 12.Bxd7+ Bxd7 13.Qxd4 f6

From an aesthetic point of view, this is nicer than 13…Bb5, as it keeps the pawn structure intact.

14.Nxd7 Qxd7 15.Qxd7+ Kxd7 16.0-0-0+

16…Kc7!

, White had long-term pressure in Dominguez-Nogeiras Santiago, Havana 2008.

17.a4!?

This threatens a4-a5 followed by Bb6+, with total domination. The other try is 17.Rd4 Rd8 18.Rc4+! (Not very ambitious is 18.Rxd8 Kxd8 19.Rd1+ Kc7 20.Kc2 ½-½ Korneev-Sumets, Neustadt an der Weinstrasse 2012) 18…Kb8 19.Bb6 Rd5 (Black has to be exact. After 19…Rd7? 20.Re1 e5 21.f4, he has a problem with his e-pawn, since after 21…Bd6?