THE ODD PUSH OF THE c-PAWN

Mr. Downie asks:

I am going back onto the tournament circuit after a four-year gap and I am looking at my opening repertoire. I have a heavy positive score with 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.c5. It received a mixed response on a correspondence chess message board and I was wondering what you think. My database research seems inconclusive and so does some work with Fritz 8.0. It at least seems useful for forcing players out of book and I should have scored a draw with it in a correspondence match against a 2015 when I was a mere 1400. Is it playable?

Silman replies:

Let's look at your third move logically: you lose a whole tempo, you turn Black's d5-pawn (which was being pressured by White's c4-pawn) into an unassailable rock, and you allow Black to blast away the c-pawn with …b7-b6. So, unfortunately, 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.c5 is not really playable since it immediately gives Black an edge after 3…b6!. Possibilities:

4.cxb6 axb6 is probably best, but all White has accomplished is an exchange of his valuable c-pawn for Black's generally lame a-pawn. Black also has a half-open a-file for his Rook, his pieces can be developed quickly and effectively, and an eventual …c7-c5 advance will generate good central play for Black since he has three central pawns (c, d, and e pawns) to White's two (d and e).

4.Qc2 tries to retain the c-pawn, but things fall apart after 4…Qe7. Now 5.Be3 (Yech! But 5.b4 a5 is a disaster for White) 5…e5 with …d5-d4 to follow wins a pawn.

4.b4 a5!

This breaks White's queenside structure apart and assures Black of an advantage (note that 4…bxc5? 5.bxc5 Bxc5?? fails to 6.dxc5 Qf6 7.Bd2 Qxa1 8.Bc3 Qxa2 9.Bxg7).

A STEADY BUT RATHER DULL SYSTEM

Mr. Ludwig asks:

I have an opening question(s) for you that I was hoping you could answer on your site. I am the (recent) proud owner of the classic text THE EXCHANGE VARIATION OF THE SLAV by Silman and Donaldson. I have been trying out a new study technique where I try to focus on learning/studying clear advantage positions when I look at an opening text, with the idea that if I can't make something of these positions, then why bother with the equal ones?

Anyway, usually what I do is set up a clear advantage position, try to figure out what the advantage is, and then try to make something of it against Fritz. What I find is, that about half the time, Fritz gives you no respect at all and calls the position equal. I am hoping that you can put the machine in its place. I give you two examples:

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Nf3 Bf5? 6.Qb3! Qb6 and now your book gives 7. Nxd5, and Fritz says equal. The point being that after 7.Nxd5 Nxd5 8.Qxd5 e6 9.Qb3 Qxb3 10.axb3, Fritz will just continue developing, and has no intention of trying to immediately recover the pawn with 10...Bc2 (a move which it agrees is bad). Apparently, Fritz doesn't put much faith in white's extra doubled-isolated b-pawn. As a side note, Fritz much prefers 7.Qxb6 axb6 8.Bf4, and now if 8...e6, comes 9. Nh4, and I think the idea is that Fritz wants to bag the bishop pair and eventually harass the b6-pawn. What do you think?

Next, a position in the 6...a6! system: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Bf4 a6! 7.e3 Bg4 8.h3 Bh5? 9.g4! Bg6 10.Ne5!, and you state that this "leaves white with threats of 11.Nxc6 (giving black a backward c-pawn) and 11.h4 (hunting down the bishop). Note that 10...Nxe5 11.dxe5 is no help at all since black's d-pawn would be devoured." Fritz on the other hand, thinks that 10...e6 11.h4 Qb6!, is equal, or even slightly better for Black.

Silman replies:

First, you should note that the book is by Silman AND Donaldson. Thus, whenever the analysis or assessment is proven incorrect, simply say, “Oh that Donaldson, he's wrong again!”

On the other hand, when an assessment is right on, you're free to think, “That Silman is a genius!”

On a more serious note, let me explain something about book writing and about Fritz: when someone writes an opening book, he quotes a lot of other sources and uses enormous amounts of theoretically accepted assessments. An author that carefully assesses each line on his own will end up taking years to finish the project, ending up penniless and on the street for his efforts. As a result, many instances of poor analysis (dredged up from other books) and incorrect assessments can be found in literally every opening book.

Fritz's assessments are quite another matter. Keep in mind that engines are strong tactically but have problems in quiet positions. In this case, the whole book is about one of the most boring lines imaginable: the Exchange Variation of the Slav! Thus, I would be careful before placing too much emphasis on what Fritz says.

Let's take a look at your first example: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Nf3 Bf5? 6.Qb3! Qb6 7.Nxd5 Nxd5 8.Qxd5 e6 9.Qb3 Qxb3 10.axb3.

Actually, in the book we give 9…Nc6 10.Bd2 Qxb3 11.axb3, which is from the 1975 game Korchnoi-Rudefer. Also note that Cernin felt that 9.Qc4!? was worth a look. I think you have a misconception about the position that occurs after the b-pawns are doubled. White isn't beating his chest in delight over the extra doubled b-pawn (though he's not complaining about it). Instead, White is happy to have an extra center pawn, which he feels will guarantee him a long-term positional advantage.

Let's have a bit of fun and look at Fritz's recommendation on move seven: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Nf3 Bf5 6.Qb3 Qb6. You have to understand that Fritz absolutely loves to double the b-pawns in this kind of situation. It also loves to chop off the f5-Bishop if it gets the chance. As a result of these “tastes,” the machine recommending the following moves is no surprise: 7.Qxb6 axb6 8.Bf4 e6 9.Nh4 Bg6 10.Nxg6 hxg6. Here Fritz feels that White has a clear advantage – two Bishops, better pawn structure, ahhh, life is good! Let's continue to let Fritz lead us (with me playing Black, of course): 11.a3 Nc6 12.Rd1 (At this point Fritz is almost having an orgasm! The poor thing just doesn't understand the position.) 12…Kd7 13.Nb5 Be7 14.Rc1 (I could swear I saw spittle pour from the sides of my machine as Fritz played this.) 14…Rhc8 15.e3 Na5 and, after a bit of a think, the German chess god began to have a breakdown as reality slowly sank in.

Okay, time for your next example of Fritz kicking our ass:

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Bf4 a6! 7.e3 Bg4 8.h3 At this point we mentioned that we were following Varnusz's analysis from a German tome he wrote in 1991 (our book came out in 1994). We didn't agree with his assessments of this line, and we proved this in our analysis of 8…Bxf3 (which is fine for Black). However, we did do shoddy work in the case of 8…Bh5, no doubt blinded by Varnusz's German-language praise for White's position (Yes, yes! It's all Varnusz's fault!). After 9.g4! (Varnusz's exclamation) 9…Bg6 10.Ne5 it seems clear that Black indeed has the annoying 10...e6 11.h4 Qb6!, when White does best to bail out with 12.Nxg6 hxg6 13.Rb1 Bb4 14.f3 Rc8 15.Bd3 with an interesting game ahead.

To be fair, Varnusz didn't mention h4. Instead, he was high on 11.Nxg6 or 11.Nxc6, neither of which offers White anything. Oddly, no less a player than Kasparov tossed out 11.h4 in a simultaneous exhibition – it's certainly a natural move in this kind of position.

Theoretically, 8…Bxf3 is the superior move (equal), since 8…Bh5 leaves Black with problems to solve after 9.g4 Bg6 10.Qb3!.