Structures

Question 1

Answer 1

Isolani

White’s plans

1. Create a kingside attack. Most standard plans will include the moves Ne5, Bg5 and the battery Qd3-Bc2. In some cases a piece sacrifice on the kingside is needed to break through the defence. Rooks are typically placed on e1 and d1 (or c1), and a rook transfer via the third rank is possible.
2. Break in the centre with d4-d5, trading pawns and opening lines with an overwhelming initiative (or even sacrificing a pawn with the same purpose) .

Black’s plans

1. Trade pieces to win an endgame. In particular, exchange White’s good bishop (the light-squared bishop) .
2. Place a knight on d5. This prevents the central break d4-d5, and controls some key squares. In an endgame a rook, bishop or even a king would be strong on this square.

Question 2

Answer 2

Hanging Pawns

White’s plans

1. Create a kingside attack. Most plans will include the moves Ne5, Bc2, Qd3, and a likely rook transfer through the third rank, say with Re1-e3-h3.
2. Break in the centre with d4-d5, either to open lines for attack, or to create a powerful passed pawn on the d-file.

Black’s plans

1. Trade off pieces atempting to neutralize the attack.
2. Pressure the central pawns, block them if possible.
3. Break the hanging pawns, either with …b6-b5 or …e6-e5. These breaks are not easy to carry out, especially because an experienced player will try and prevent them at all costs. However, if they can be accomplished they are generally very strong, as they weaken those squares covered by the hanging pawns, and often force White to accept an isolani under very unfavourable circumstances.

Question 3

Answer 3

Caro-Kann

White’s plans

The control of the centre opens up multiple opportunities for White everywhere on the board, such as:

1. Creating a direct kingside attack. This is often accompanied by placing a knight on the e5 outpost, or targeting the weak h7-pawn with the queen and a bishop from d3.
2. Gaining space with c3-c4, h2-h4 and harmoniously placing pieces to control the centre.
3. Playing c4-c5 to restrict Black’s release break …c6-c5, and to gain control of the d6-square. If White manages to keep Black’s counterplay under control, the game will be slow paced and White could even be able to combine some of these plans while Black suffers through passive defence.

Black’s plans

The main objective is to dispute White’s centre and transform the structure. This can be achieved by:

1. Breaking in the centre with …c6-c5 which usually produces a black 4-2 (kingside/queenside) versus a white 3-3 pawn structure with roughly level chances.
2. Breaking up the centre with …e6-e5 in order to obtain a symmetrical position after White captures with dxe5. This plan is rather unlikely to succeed as many of White’s pieces control e5 from their natural squares (d4-pawn, knight on f3, rook on e1, queen on e2) .
3. Putting pressure on the d4-pawn once c3-c4 has been played.
4. Challenging White’s control of the d5-square by playing …b7-b5 once White has played c2-c4.

Question 4

Answer 4

Slav Formation

The Slav formation could very well also be called the Queen’s Gambit Accepted formation, as it originates from Black capturing …dxc4 in a Queen’s Gambit position. This structure shares many common features with the Caro-Kann structure we studied in the previous chapter. To start, Black’s pawn trade …dxc4 still results in:

1. White gaining better control of the centre.
2. White having more space by virtue of a pawn on the fourth rank. Similarly to the previous chapter, White has a comfortable advantage in this structure, and Black should hope to break free with a central break.

Specific plans can be formulated as follows:

White’s plans

The control of the centre opens up multiple opportunities for White everywhere on the board. Similarly to the previous chapter, White has the plans:

1. Creating a kingside attack, this time with h2-h4-h5-h6 (or hxg6 if applicable) and possibly e3-e4-e5.
2. Placing knights on the strong outposts e5 and c5, controlling the centre.
3. Playing e4-e5 to fix the centre and control the d6-square (similar to c4-c5 in the previous chapter) .

Unlike the previous chapter, White also has the possibility of:

4. Carrying out a minority attack with a2-a4 and b2-b4-b5, in order to create a weakness on the queenside.
5. Simply gaining space with b2-b4, as well as preventing the …c6-c5 break. This is far more likely than playing f2-f4 in the Caro-Kann structure, simply because f2-f4 weakens White’s king somewhat.

Black’s plans

The main objective is to dispute White’s centre and transform the structure. This can be achieved by:

1. Breaking in the centre with …c6-c5, probably obtaining a symmetrical position after dxc5, or an isolani after …c5xd4.
2. Breaking in the centre with …e6-e5 will probably produce a 4-2 versus 3-3 pawn structure with roughly level chances.
3. Exerting pressure on the d4-pawn once e3-e4 has been played.
4. Disrupting White’s centre with …f7-f5. This is analogous to the plan …b7-b5 in the Caro-Kann structure.

Similarly to the previous chapter, White’s plans aim for an advantage, while most of Black’s plans aim to equalize by transforming the structure. Black’s Plan 3 rarely works, either because the d4-pawn can be easily defended, or because White players know when to refrain from e3-e4, exactly in order to prevent this plan. It should be noted that Black’s Plan 2 is more likely to be achieved since White can often prevent Plan 1 by placing a rook on the open c-file.

Outposts

Black may place a knight on his d5-outpost, but this knight cannot compete with White’s knights placed on the e5- and c5-squares. White can easily push e3-e4 to get rid of the knight on d5 if it is absolutely necessary. In contrast, White’s knights on c5 or e5 are harder to deal with, as they are on the fifth rank, and Black cannot easily expel them. Chasing them away with …f7-f6 and …b7-b6 would create serious weaknesses on e6 and c6 respectively.

Question 5

Answer 5

The Carlsbad, also known as the Orthodox Exchange formation, is a very well-known and thoroughly studied pawn structure. In fact, it is one of the few pawn structures which has received the attention other structures in this book deserve. The Carlsbad can be reached from many different move orders, and in some cases with reversed colours, such as in the Caro-Kann after: 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5. Despite this fact, every game presented in this chapter will have White and Black playing the roles as presented in the diagram at the left.

White’s plans

This position offers two main lines of attack for White:

1. Pursuing the so-called minority attack with b2-b4-b5 in order to create a queenside weakness.
2. Pushing f2-f3 and e3-e4 (or sometimes e3-e4 directly) gaining central space and creating tension.

Given any position, it is likely that only one of these plans will work well. This will depend on how the pieces are arranged, and how Black’s queenside structure is set up. For example, the character of the game can change dramatically if Black’s pawns are set up as a7-b6-c7 instead of the more typical a6-b7-c6. In addition, White’s queenside plan is less likely to work if the light-squared bishop has been developed on g2.

Black’s plans

1. The main plan is to place a knight on e4 and to create a kingside attack, but this is not always possible. For example, White might choose a set-up in which f2-f3 is included
2. The most common auxiliary plan is to play …b7-b6 and …c6-c5 in order to transpose into a hanging pawns position. Or sometimes just …c6-c5 is played directly, hence dxc5 transposes into an isolani.
3. An important though far less common plan is to play …b7-b5 once White has played b2-b4, in order to obtain a firm outpost for a knight placed on c4. This plan is less common because …b7-b5 also creates a weakness - a backward c6-pawn, which could cause this plan to backfire.

The first game in this chapter illustrates how necessary it is for White to place his dark-squared bishop outside the pawn chain (say on g5 instead of d2) . The second game is an ideal execution of White’s minority attack, while the third is an example of Black neutralizing this plan after some precise moves. The fourth game in the chapter explains how White must react if Black’s queenside is arranged as a7-b6-c7. The last two games show the consequences of White carrying out the e3-e4 break first successfully and then unsuccessfully.

Question 6

Answer 6

Stonewall

The Stonewall structure often arises from the Dutch Defence, the Slav or the Catalan, the first being the most common. It could also occur with reversed colours, but this is relatively rare. Of all the pawn structures we study in this book, the Stonewall has one of the worst reputations. Players from a wide range of levels would say the idea of playing …d7-d5 together with …f7-f5 is positionally unsound. There is partial merit to this claim, as the e5-square becomes permanently vulnerable. Whether this vulnerable square actually becomes a serious weakness often determines whether Black’s position is good or not. To be honest, I myself considered the Stonewall to be a relatively bad structure until I started researching it in order to write this chapter. In fact, I originally wanted to make this chapter a manual on how to defeat this pawn structure. After a substantial amount of work, I gave up on this aim, and instead decided to accept that the Stonewall is a solid system which deserves serious consideration. I hope this chapter will be enough to convince the reader that this is the case.

Then why does the Stonewall have a bad reputation?

I believe this is the effect of two types of observational bias:

1. White’s wins in the Stonewall are often visually pleasing and positionally convincing. They are likely to be used as examples in strategy books. This decision unintentionally conveys the idea that the Stonewall is positionally incorrect.
2. Black’s wins are often based on tactical resources of some sort, hence they can often be considered ‘accidental’ rather than meritorious. Many players (including myself before writing this chapter) would skip those games without further study, simply thinking: ‘Black was just lucky, this will not happen to me.’

Personally, I was surprised on checking my database to realize that among IM and GM level games, White only scores about 54% with the openings presented in this chapter. This is basically a standard result, nothing special. Hence, statistically, the Stonewall is slightly inferior but no worse than many well-respected systems.

OK, that is enough defending the Stonewall, now let’s discuss typical plans.

White’s plans

1. Obtaining firm control of the e5-square; placing a knight on this square.
2. Trade dark-squared bishops to further weaken Black’s dark squares.
3. Expand on the queenside or open the c-file at a favourable stage and pursue an invasion down this open file.

Black’s plans

1. Create a kingside attack, but without completely losing control of the central squares.
2. Improve the bad bishop with the manoeuvre …Bd7-e8-h5 or sometimes …b7-b6 followed by …Ba6.
3. Create central tension with …b7-b6 followed by …c6-c5.

Before proceeding, I would like to clarify Black’s plans somewhat. First, for Black’s Plan 1 to succeed, the control of the central squares is essential. If White has undisputed control of the e5-square, then most of Black’s attacking attempts will fail. A healthy attack for Black will keep a balance between fighting for the e5-square and advancing on the kingside. Black’s Plan 2 is important and useful, but not always necessary. Black can find a good position even with his bishop on the humble d7-square. Finally, Black’s Plans 1 and 3 should certainly not be combined. The point of Plan 1 is that the Stonewall creates a solid central structure, making a flank attack feasible. The attack would probably fail if the move …c6-c5 had already been played.

This chapter begins by showing one short example of White’s dream position in the Stonewall, simply to illustrate everything Black should fight to avoid. The second and third games are examples of White’s successful strategy, controlling the centre and keeping Black without counterplay. The last three games in the chapter illustrate Black’s ideas for counterplay by showcasing Black’s Plans 1, 2 and 3 in that order.

Question 7

Answer 7

Grünfeld Centre

The structure studied in this chapter typically arises from the Grünfeld Defence, and occasionally in the Nimzo-Indian Defence, in which case the e7-pawn will be on e6, but this does not affect the essence of the strategy. It rarely occurs with reversed colours unless White is deliberately attempting to play a Grünfeld with an extra tempo. Although there is central tension in the position presented, the most likely outcome is that pawns will be traded on d4, after which the c-file will be open, leaving White with a central pawn majority and Black with a queenside pawn majority. This will be a central theme across all positions of this type. Let’s outline plans for each side:

White’s plans

1. Create a central passed pawn with d4-d5, dominate the centre, gain space.
2. Create a kingside attack, which will probably include the moves h2-h4-h5 and e4-e5 to gain control of the f6-square, which is usually weakened when Black develops his bishop on g7.

Black’s plans

1. Create a queenside passed pawn, especially after some simplifications.
2. Pressure the centre, place a rook on the d-file and find tactical resources associated with the open position.

In general White will get pretty good middlegame opportunities since he dominates the centre and has a little more space. This advantage disappears rather easily, as the position is open and Black has multiple opportunities to trade off pieces heading into a good endgame. One major factor in this position is the control of the c-file. If White controls the c-file it will be easier for him to expand, to create a passed pawn, to neutralize Black’s play. Likewise, if Black controls the open file, White’s central or kingside play will face many difficulties. One may say that open files are always important, which is often true. But in this position the open file is even more important than usual - it is essential.

The first three games in this chapter will illustrate the importance of the c-file, and through these examples, we will see how White can create a central passed pawn and win the game. In the third game, it is Black who creates pressure by controlling the c-file and eventually obtains a near-winning endgame. The last two games are devoted to the study of White attacking with the e4-e5 advance. In the first of these White’s strategy proves successful, while in the second example Black manages to neutralize the threats to obtain a very superior endgame which is won with high class.

The first example in this chapter is the 17th game from the World Championship match of 1990. This game is annotated in the Mega Database by GMs Ftacnik and Gurevich. I shall fast-forward through the opening to reach the position of interest.

Question 8

Answer 8

Najdorf Type I

The structure studied in this chapter is typical of many Open Sicilians. It arises after White trades pieces on d5, and recaptures with the e-pawn. This frequently occurs in the Najdorf variation, but I should emphasize it is not limited to this variation.
For example, we can obtain this structure after the sequence 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Nd5 Nxd5 8.exd5.
This structure deserves careful study as the recapture exd5 dramatically changes the character of the game. Even players of the highest level transform their position with this recapture without properly assessing their chances in the resulting position. This structure provides a natural imbalance and offers interesting chances to both sides. The main plans are:

White’s plans

1. Advance the queenside majority with b2-b4 and c2-c4-c5.
2. On some occasions, after Black has played …f7-f5, it is also possible to place a bishop along the b1-h7 diagonal and play g2-g4 breaking up Black’s structure. This plan is rare, but when it works it does so spectacularly well.

Black’s plans

1. Expand on the kingside with …f7-f5 and develop a kingside attack.
2. Restrict or undermine White’s queenside expansion with a potential …b7-b5.

Bad bishops

A recurring theme in these positions is the fight between White’s light-squared bishop and Black’s dark-squared bishop. Both of these bishops are considered bad according to classical strategic theory, as they run on the same colour as their respective most-advanced pawns (on d5 for White, e5 for Black) . As we will learn in this chapter, Black’s dark-squared bishop is not bad at all, while White’s bishop is often restricted and even useless in some positions. This is a rule to be remembered. General strategy books would not teach us this rule, but we should remember it as an essential strategic element in this particular structure.

The first game in this chapter is the relatively well-known game Grischuk - Zhang Zhong from 2001, in which White carries out a powerful queenside expansion to create a winning passed pawn. Later Zhang Zhong manages to create illustrative kingside counterplay which emphasizes Black’s many attacking possibilities. The second game is an example of White’s queenside expansion, followed by a strong kingside break with g2-g4. The third game is one from my own experience: a race between Black’s kingside attack and White’s passed central pawns. The last two games illustrate Black’s plans in the fight between the bishops. The first of these examples is a positional treatment, while the second is a sharp tactical approach, both yielding convincing victories to Black.

Question 9

Answer 9

Najdorf Type II

Just as in the previous chapter, I shall emphasize that this structure is not only typical of the Najdorf but rather many other variations in the Sicilian, such as
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e5 5.Nb5 d6.
This structure is one of my favourites, as it provides a nice mix of tactical resources and strategic ideas. I grew up playing the English Attack against the Sicilian, and played this pawn structure many times. I enjoyed opposite flank attacks and most of my games took this direction for good or for bad. This chapter will not focus on these attacks. I will admit they are very exciting and complex, but they lack the strategic substance that constitutes the essence of this book. Instead, we will focus on the strategy that hides behind the combinations. In this structure, all strategic plans are in some way connected to the control of the d5-square. As the reader can easily verify on his own, pretty much every successful attack in this position works out because such central control has been achieved. Now, let’s examine how each side may fight for the d5-square:

White’s plans

1. Place a knight on d5, and have enough pieces to always be able to recapture with a piece rather than a pawn.
2. Advance g2-g4-g5 expelling Black’s knight on f6, a defender of the d5-square.
3. Play Bg5xf6 to eliminate the knight defending the d5-square.
4. Play f2-f4-f5 preventing Black from placing his light-squared bishop on e6.

Black’s plans

1. Break in the centre with …d6-d5 and, by doing so, take over the initiative.
2. Press down the c-file, so that White cannot play Nc3-d5 because of a vulnerable pawn on c2.
3. Play …b7-b5-b4 expelling White’s knight from c3 before Nc3-d5 can be played.

Overall, I believe chances are approximately level. If things work out well for White, he will have pleasant control of the d5-square and he will be able to progress slowly, either positionally on the d-file, or tactically with a kingside pawn storm. On the other hand, if Black’s strategy succeeds he will be able either to release his position with …d6-d5, or favourably transfer into a Najdorf structure of Type I.

Variants of this structure

Throughout this chapter, we will consider two other versions of this pawn structure. The first consists of White having a pawn on c4 rather than c2. Roughly speaking, this permanently prevents the …d6-d5 break, but instead gives Black the possibility to attack with …b7-b5. The second version of this pawn structure consists of White having his f-pawn on f5 instead of f3. The main difference is that such a pawn provides better chances for a kingside attack, although the e4-pawn becomes more vulnerable.

This chapter is organized around these three variants of the structure. The first two games are examples of the standard structure with the pawns on c2 and f3. The first game illustrates White’s control of the d5-square while the second is an initial example of Black’s central break with …d6-d5. The next two games showcase White’s c4-pawn. In the first, White gains a dominating position from the start and easily imposes his advantage, while the second is a complicated game in which Black gains enduring counterplay by breaking White’s central hold with …b7-b5. The last two games illustrate the structure with White’s pawn on f5. In the first White successfully prevents the …d6-d5 break and slowly grinds Black down, while in the second Black does manage to break in the centre with …d6-d5 and obtains a quick and easy win.

Question 10

Answer 10

The Hedgehog

The hedgehog structure is characterized by Black’s pawns on a6-b6-d6-e6, covering some central squares and preventing White’s forces from approaching, like a real hedgehog does! Advancing several adjacent pawns to the 3rd rank would generally be a bad decision. For example, moving kingside pawns to h6-g6-f6-e6 would be a major positional mistake as it creates multiple weaknesses. Here this is not the case, as the natural arrangement of Black’s pieces allows for the pawns to be defended rather easily, while keeping a variety of active plans at hand. White generally has a spatial advantage in the hedgehog, and Black’s main plan is to break in the centre with …d6-d5, or sometimes …b6-b5. White will typically arrange his pieces to prevent such plans, while keeping the game tense and flexible. Now, let’s discuss specific lines of action for each side.

White’s plans

l. Break on the queenside with c4-c5.

2. Break on the queenside with b4-b5.
3. Break on the queenside with a4-a5.
4. Pressure the d6-pawn, but only after some pieces have been traded.

Black’s plans

l. Break in the centre with …d6-d5.

2. Break on the queenside with …b6-b5.
3. Create a kingside attack with …Kh8, …Rg8 and …g7-g5-g4. Or maybe with …h7-h5-h4-h3.
4. Prepare all the plans above without actually executing any of them until the right opportunity comes.

White’s Plans 1 -3 are often based on arranging pieces actively to subsequently open up the queenside. Such action often gives White a big advantage because Black’s pieces are not as active due to their limited space. The most common of these breaks is c4-c5, which typically opens the b- and c-files. White’s fourth plan is not as easy to implement because the d6-pawn is not always vulnerable. Black will usually have a bishop on e7 (or c7) which easily protects this pawn from the attack of rooks down the d-file. In addition, the breaks …b6-b5 and …d6-d5 are powerful, drawing attention away from this small vulnerability. However, after some pieces are traded, Black’s chances of counterplay lose strength, giving more importance to a vulnerable d6-pawn.

If White’s bishop is on the f1-a6 diagonal, Black’s first plan is the most important. This plan is so strong that White players will devote a great deal of energy to fight against it. In most cases, White will be able to prevent this break, and Black will need a new plan to create counterplay. A popular option is to create kingside threats with the third plan. This plan often yields double-edged positions where a single slip can be very costly for either side. As we will learn in this chapter, if White cannot fight this plan with a queenside reaction, then Black’s kingside play will give him an excellent position.

If White’s bishop is on g2, then the …d6-d5 break is much more difficult to carry out, but then Black’s second plan (the …b6-b5 break) gains strength. As long as White does not have a bishop on the fl-a6 diagonal, this break is likely to work well. Something to notice is that if White has played g2-g3 and Bg2, then Black’s plan of …Rg8 and …g7-g5-g4 does not really hit anything, hence it should not be attempted at all.

Finally, something to mention about Black’s position is its flexibility. Often White will find ways to prevent or undermine Black’s attempts for counterplay. In such cases, Black can often just wait and attempt new plans without damaging his position. In many cases it is better for Black to continue preparing his plans, or to start a new plan than to execute a plan under unfavourable circumstances; this is the essence of the fourth plan.

As the reader may have noticed from the discussion above, a key factor in the hedgehog is whether White’s bishop is developed on g2 or stays on the fl -a6 diagonal. We will focus on the latter as I believe it resembles more closely the spirit of the hedgehog structure. The first four games in this chapter will illustrate White’s four plans in numeric order. The fifth example will illustrate Black’s …d6-d5 break, while the remaining examples will illustrate what Black may do if this break is not possible. Games 6 and 7 are examples of the …Rg8 and …g7-g5-g4 plan; the eighth game is an example of the …b6-b5 break, while the last game is a fragment illustrating Black’s fourth plan - the ability to wait for an opportunity without damaging his position.

Question 11

Answer 11

The Maroczy

The Maroczy structure we study in this chapter bears a great similarity with the Hedgehog from the previous chapter. In fact, some sources may call that chapter’s structure Maroczy as well, simply because White has placed his pawns on c4 and e4. In this book, I decided to give a separate treatment to these two structures because I consider they are sufficiently different. The difference is in how Black develops his dark-squared bishop. In the Hedgehog chapter, Black’s bishop was always developed on e7, hence …e7-e6 had been played. Here instead we study those positions where Black fianchettoes his bishop on g7. Most importantly, Black’s e-pawn often remains on e7. This fact has the following consequences:

1. White can place a knight on d5, which can lead to a major structural transformation if Black trades the knight.
2. The central break …d6-d5 is no longer a main theme here.
3. Black can trade pieces without worrying about the d6-pawn becoming vulnerable, as happened in the game Eljanov - Jakovenko from the previous chapter.

The structure we study in this chapter is typical of the Accelerated Dragon, but it can also arise as a transposition from the English Opening or some lines that start out as a King’s Indian. It can also occur with reversed colours if White plays the English Opening, allowing Black to reply …d5 and later …c5. Most examples in this chapter will come from the Accelerated Dragon because it is the most common source of Maroczy games. Nevertheless, the ideas transfer easily to the other lines. The main theme of the Maroczy is White’s spatial advantage, which means Black will often attempt to trade pieces and later fight on in the endgame phase.

White’s plans

1. Gain space with a queenside expansion, place a knight on d5, and/or expand on the kingside with f2-f4.
2. After f2-f4 has been played, place rooks on the central files and break with either e4-e5 or f4-f5.
3. Place a knight on d5 and wait for Black to capture on d5. Once this happens, White can transform the structure favourably with either exd5 or cxd5. Each of these replies is studied at the beginning of this chapter.

Black’s plans

1. Trade pieces to alleviate the space problem.
2. Break on the queenside with …b6-b5 and after c4xb5 and …a6xb5 then apply pressure along the a-file.
3. Break on the kingside with …f7-f5 and later create an attack against White’s king.
4. Pressure White’s queenside pawns with …Qb6-b4, and when White plays b2-b3, then …a7-a5-a4xb3.
5. On rare occasions play …e7-e6 and later …d6-d5, though this plan is more typical of the Hedgehog.

Out of the plans mentioned above, it should be said that White’s first three plans are more or less equally common, while Black’s first three plans are the most common for him. Black’s fifth plan is almost never carried out in games which originate from the Accelerated Dragon variation.

Question 12

Answer 12

Asymmetric Benoni

The asymmetric Benoni structure, usually called simply the Benoni, is a very tactical pawn structure that requires great precision from both sides. It typically arises from various Benoni openings, though it also appears in many variations of the Ruy Lopez. The main theme in this structure is the fight between pawn majorities. White has a pawn majority in the centre while Black has his majority on the queenside. The side that manages to push his majority will generally achieve a superior position, and all plans gravitate around this fact. White enjoys some spatial advantage, therefore trading pieces will often work against him. In fact, as pieces are traded, Black’s position often becomes better. The reason is that Black has the potential for creating a remote passed pawn, which can be very strong in an endgame. In contrast, White’s chances are at their best in a middlegame with many pieces still on the board, since the central majority often provides him with good chances for a mating attack.

Now let’s spell out specific plans for each side.

White’s plans

1. Break in the centre with e4-e5, either to obtain an attack or to create a central passed pawn.
2. Break with e4-e5 followed by f4-f5 in order to obtain a kingside attack.
3. Break with f4-f5 followed by a kingside attack, mainly down the f-file.
4. Prevent Black’s queenside expansion by playing b2-b4, blocking the advance …b5-b4.

Black’s plans

1. Advance the queenside majority with …b7-b5, …c5-c4, …b5-b4, etc. Create a passed pawn if possible.
2. Pressure down the e-file, preventing White from advancing his central majority.
3. Create kingside counterplay based on …h7-h5-h4, mainly when White has placed a knight on g3.
4. Break White’s centre with …f7-f5. This break can work wonderfully after White has played f3-f4 since the d5-pawn loses protection.

As we will see later in this chapter, Black’s light-squared bishop is often the least helpful piece, as it does not contribute to the advance of the majority, and it is often blocked by the queenside pawns on a6-b5-c4. The first three games in this chapter illustrate White’s Plans 1, 2 and 3 respectively. Then we use a short fragment to discuss Black’s piece arrangement, and at the same time present White’s Plan 4. Then the last two examples display a combination of Black’s Plans 1 and 4.

Question 13

Answer 13

Symmetric Benoni

The symmetric Benoni structure is one of my favourites, and it is one of the structures that motivated me to write this book. It often arises from Benoni variations in which White recaptures exd5 instead of cxd5, which yields the more typical Benoni position we studied in the previous chapter. Unlike the previous chapter in which Black had clear plans to gain counterplay, now Black faces a dilemma of what to do. Black can often develop his pieces to obtain what seems to be an equal position, but White usually retains a small spatial advantage. This advantage increases if White manages to expand on the kingside, restricting Black’s pieces substantially. Black’s play can be rather difficult, and great precision is required to avoid being asphyxiated. A main theme in this variation is whether Black manages to trade off some minor pieces to decrease his space problem. In addition, the control of the e4-square is often an important factor to determine whether Black can equalize or not. Let’s discuss specific plans:

White’s plans

1. Expand on the kingside with f2-f4, g2-g4 and potentially create an attack.
2. Attack the vulnerable d6-pawn with a bishop on the h2-b8 diagonal and a knight on e4.
3. Sometimes White will also play b2-b4, but there is really not much to be gained on the queenside. In fact, opening the queenside could give Black chances for much-needed counterplay.

Black’s plans

1. Control the e4-square and occupy it with a knight.
2. Break on the queenside with …b7-b5 , and obtain counterplay against a potentially weak d5-pawn.
3. Trade off minor pieces to decrease the space problem. Sometimes this can be achieved with the sequence …Qb6, …Bf5 and …Ne4 which can also create pressure against the b2-pawn.

White’s kingside expansion is the most important plan in the position, and Black’s plans are aimed at fighting against it. After White plays f2-f4, Black should typically reply with …f7-f5 to claim some space before it is too late. Later he should be ready to prevent g2-g4, as White could gain a decisive spatial advantage with this expansion. Black’s Plan 2 is probably the most active and interesting reaction and should be considered in a variety of positions even in the form of a pawn sacrifice. The virtue of this sacrifice is that it opens many lines, and may ruin White’s kingside expansion into a weakening.

The first game in this chapter is an older example which illustrates White’s Plan 1 being executed to perfection. Then, the second game is a more modern version where Black finds a better defensive plan, though still remaining passive. The third game illustrates White’s Plan 2, while White’s Plan 3 is not really covered simply because it is not as important or useful. Then, the last three games in the chapter illustrate Black’s Plans 1 -3 in that order.

Question 14

Answer 14

KID Type I

This structure most commonly appears in the King’s Indian, the Queen’s Indian and the Ruy Lopez. In my own games, I often encountered this structure with Black, and I lost many games without really understanding why. For this reason, when writing this book I considered this structure to be one of my main interests and I decided it deserves a separate chapter from other King’s Indian positions, as the character of the game is somewhat different.

The difference between this structure and those in the following two chapters is the open c-file. This file plays a major role and Black’s ability to stay in the game will depend on whether he knows what to do with it. The questions are:

A Should Black proceed with a kingside attack regardless of the open c-file?

B Should he fight for the control of this file?

The problem with Strategy A is that White’s forces may penetrate down the c-file, distracting Black from a kingside attack. For example, if White were to place a rook on the seventh rank, it would be difficult for Black’s kingside play to continue making progress.

The problem with Strategy B is that White’s spatial advantage often guarantees control of the c-file in the long run. White has more space thanks to his central chain e4-d5. If the position is not too simplified then this space translates into being able to manoeuvre more easily. In such cases, although Black may control the c-file at an early stage, it will be White who will ultimately profit from it, or from queenside play in general. This is not to say Black’s queenside attempts are always doomed, but the reader should understand that Black’s spatial disadvantage and White’s lack of weaknesses will make it difficult for Black to gain an advantage from queenside play alone.

Despite these difficulties, I believe approaches A and B are both valid given the right circumstances. Ideally, they could even be combined, though this is hard to accomplish in practice. Now, let’s discuss specific plans for each side.

White’s plans

1. If Black controls the c-file, the main task is to cover Black’s entry points (especially c2), and then manoeuvre to fight for the control of this file.
2. If White possesses the c-file, then prepare a seventh-rank invasion which is likely to capture the b7-pawn.
3. Expand on the queenside with a2-a4-a5 to gain space, limit Black’s mobility and create potentially strong passed pawns once Black’s queenside pawns are captured.
4. If Black plays …b7-b5, then break with a2-a4, and even the manoeuvre Nb4-c6 deserves consideration.

Black’s plans

1. If entry points are available, or if White’s c-file is vulnerable, then double rooks on the c-file, and possibly invade the seventh rank by placing a rook on c2. This is ideal, but hard to achieve.
2. Create kingside counterplay with …f7-f5xe4 to open the f-file. This can be followed by …Bg7-f6-g5 to create kingside threats, and possibly …h7-h5-h4-h3.
3. If White’s play is particularly slow, then …f7-f5, followed by …f5-f4 and …g6-g5-g4 might work.
4. Transfer the dark-squared bishop from g7 to b6 via f6-d8.

The reader should pay close attention to Black’s Plans 2 and 3. As stated above, White can easily create diversions on the c-file, preventing Black from focusing on the kingside. This means Black’s kingside play should give priority to speed. For this reason, the typical plan …f7-f5-f4 followed by …g6-g5-g4 could be too slow, and Black’s Plan 2 is more likely to yield results. Black’s Plan 3 would only work well if White’s queenside play was really slow.

Examples 1 and 2 of this chapter will illustrate how White gains control of the queenside (and the c-file) despite Black’s seemingly being in control at an earlier stage. Then, Example 3 illustrates White’s excellent winning chances in the endgame. The reader should notice the similarity between this endgame and those endgames studied in Chapter 11. After Example 3 a fragment of a game illustrates Black’s dream position in this structure, and later we see two more realistic examples of Black’s play. The first of these showcases Black’s kingside counterplay with …f7-f5 while the second illustrates Black’s queenside opportunities once some pieces come off the board. We also see Black’s Plan 4 put in practice to yield excellent results.

Question 15

Answer 15

KID Type II

The structure studied in this chapter often arises from King’s Indian and Benoni variations. It is a common variant of the most typical King’s Indian structure, which is studied in the next chapter, where Black has a pawn on c7 rather than c5. By having his pawn on c5, Black is able to slow down White’s queenside play, giving Black chances for a checkmating attack in standard King’s Indian style. Nevertheless, White has a significant spatial advantage and may attempt active play on both flanks, which is generally enough to guarantee a small advantage.

Unlike other structures studied in this book, the tightly closed nature of this structure provides both sides with multiple ways to carry out their plans. There exist so many possibilities that analyzing a position thoroughly is a rather complex task, even with the help of an engine. In addition, many games will result in opposite-flank attacks, which are difficult to evaluate as they combine many tactical and strategic elements. Finally, I believe most of today’s engines are poorly prepared to evaluate these kinds of closed positions properly, as the engines are not fully capable of foreseeing the many positional sacrifices Black may make in an attack.

As a general statement, I believe White is slightly better in most of these positions, but the resulting games are so flexible and complicated that Black always stands a chance. On the plus side, this structure’s complexity is ideal for those players who absolutely need to play for a win as Black. Now let’s outline specific plans for each side.

White’s plans

1. Create queenside tension with b2-b4, and later invade down the b-file.
2. Create central tension with the f2-f4 break, and later obtain a kingside attack, or pressure against the potentially weak d6-pawn.
3. Block the kingside with g2-g4, and then proceed with a queenside attack.
4. Trade light-squared bishops if possible, as it often reduces the strength of Black’s kingside attack.
5. If possible, respond to Black’s …f7-f5 break with Ng5-e6 and make use of this outpost. This is a good idea, though Black players will rarely allow it.

Black’s plans

1. Create a kingside attack by means of …f7-f5-f4 and then …g6-g5-g4.
2. Gain kingside activity with …f7-f5xe4 opening the f-file. This plan is faster than Plan 1, but not as strong.
3. Advance …h7-h5-h4, and possibly activate the fianchettoed bishop through the h6-c1 diagonal.
4. Play on the queenside with …b7-b5, though this is far less likely as White is going to play b2-b4 and the resulting tension is usually favourable to White due to his spatial advantage.

White’s Plan 1 is probably the most common, while Black’s Plan 4 is pretty rare, since White has more space on the queenside and is likely to dominate this side of the board. Choosing between Black’s Plans l and 2 (…f5-f4 or …f5xe4) depends on how far advanced White is on the queenside. Similarly to the previous chapter, if White is already creating threats, then playing …f5-f4 and attempting …g6-g5-g4 will be far too slow to help. In contrast, if Black has managed to neutralize White’s queenside play, then Black’s Plan 1 is certainly the most ambitious and advisable continuation.

Black will play …f7-f5 in essentially every game in this structure, which means White will probably have an option to play exf5 (or in some cases be forced to make this capture) . This capture on f5 modifies the structure significantly, and Black may recapture this pawn with the g-pawn or with a piece. The first two examples of this chapter will consider Black’s recapture …gxf5, while the third example will briefly explain what happens when Black recaptures on f5 with a piece.

The following chapter will have four additional examples of these positions, with the only difference of having a pawn on c7 rather than c5, which does not modify the character of the game so much.

After the third example the remainder of the chapter will be devoted to the study of White’s plans. One example will examine White’s queenside play with b2-b4, while the other will illustrate how White may carry out the f2-f4 central break successfully. White’s Plan 3 (g2-g4) is worthy of attention, but will not be included in this chapter, as a similar version of it is studied in Chapter 16.

Question 16

Answer 16

KID Type III

This structure most commonly occurs in the King’s Indian Defence, though it also arises from certain lines within the Bogo-Indian, such as:
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e63.g3 Bb4+ 4.Bd2 Qe7 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Nc3 Bxc3 7.Bxc3 d6 8.Bg2 e5 9.d5 Nb8
Something to notice about this position is how Black has already got rid of his dark-squared bishop, which is sometimes trapped within the pawn chain, thus this approach for reaching the King’s Indian Type III structure deserves consideration. Nevertheless, throughout this chapter we will showcase only examples in which Black possesses his dark-squared bishop, although many of the ideas transfer without much alteration to the case where Black does not have this bishop. This structure typically yields play on opposite Ranks in the style of a ‘chain-battle’. White will hit near the base of Black’s chain (the d6-pawn) with c4-c5, while Black will attack near the base of White’s chain (the e4-pawn) with …f7-f5. White’s attack is founded on gaining material on the queenside, while Black’s aim will be to create a mating attack against White’s king, which will often castle short in this structure.

White’s plans

1. Break on the queenside with c4-c5xd6 and later invade down the c-file.
2. Expand on the queenside with c4-c5-c6, and if Black replies with …b7-b6, then invade down the a-file after a2-a4-a5xb6.
3. First block the kingside with g2-g4, and only then proceed with the above queenside plans.
4. If Black allows it, respond to …f7-f5 with Ng5-e6; although similar to the previous chapter, Black is unlikely to allow White to do this under favourable conditions.
5. Trade light-squared bishops so as to reduce Black’s attacking potential.

Black’s plans

1. Create a kingside attack with …f7-f5-f4 and later …g6-g5-g4-g3, or …gxf3 attacking the f3-pawn, which becomes the new base of the chain.
2. Obtain counterplay with …f7-f5xe4 followed by action down the f-file and/or attacking the base of the chain (the e4-pawn) .
3. In some cases, play …h7-h5-h4 and even …Bg7-h6 to make use of the otherwise trapped bishop on g7.
4. Play …c7-c6 to create central tension and possibly transpose into a King’s Indian Type I structure.
5. Play …c7-c5 to slow down White’s queenside play and transpose into a King’s Indian Type II structure.

White’s Plans 1 and 2 are by far the most common, while Black’s Plan 1 is certainly the most common reply, although in many variations Black will choose any of the remaining four plans he has. Black’s Plan 3 is particularly common in the Petrosian variation, and we will see an example of this. Similarly to the previous chapter, White always has the option to reply to …f7-f5 with exf5, transforming the structure, when Black may either recapture on f5 with a piece or a pawn. These structure transformations are mentioned separately at the beginning of the chapter.

The first four examples in this chapter are devoted to the structure transformation after White captures exf5. The first two are about Black’s …gxf5 reply while the remaining two consider the case when Black recaptures on f5 with a piece. Then we briefly discuss how pieces are typically arranged once Black has played …f5-f4, after which we study one example of Black’s Plan 1.

Note that Black’s light-squared bishop plays a major role, both protecting light squares and helping in the attack. In fact, the subsequent example in this chapter (Azarov - Volke) shows how Black’s attack loses its strength once the light-squared bishops are off the board. The remaining two games examine White’s Plan 3. The first of these is a successful implementation, while the second is a great example of how Black should react. Essentially all the plans mentioned above are present in these examples, either within the game itself or within the analysis.

Question 17

Answer 17

Open KID

This structure most typically comes from the King’s Indian Defence when Black captures with …e5xd4, though the same structure can be obtained in some lines of the Bogo-Indian, or the Philidor Defence as soon as White manages to play c2-c4 to increase his spatial advantage. In most of these positions, Black will include the moves …g7-g6 to fianchetto the bishop, and …c7-c6 to prevent White from placing a knight on d5.

White often enjoys a small advantage in this structure because of his space and because the d6-pawn can be a serious target either in the middlegame or in an eventual endgame. The opening and post-opening phase are crucial, as these moves often determine whether Black will obtain counterplay or not. If White manages to arrange his pieces ideally without first falling into some tactical problems, then he is likely to have a lasting advantage, forcing Black into a dull defensive task. So why do Black players accept this structure? There are two reasons:

1. If one wishes to play the King’s Indian Defence, it is unavoidable to play this structure once in a while.
2. These positions can lead to sharp tactical complications which give Black realistic chances to play for the full point. High tactical precision is often required from both sides.

White’s plans

1. Pressure along the d-file, attacking the vulnerable d6-pawn.
2. Expand on the kingside with f2-f4, and possibly g2-g4.
3. When the right time comes, break on the kingside with either e4-e5 or f4-f5.
4. Avoid an excessive trade of pieces in order to make use of the spatial advantage.
5. If this is possible, expand on the queenside as well with a2-a3 and b2-b4.

Black’s plans

1. Trade pieces to decrease the space problem. Trading a couple of minor pieces is often good enough.
2. Place knights on e5 and c5 and then play …Qb6-b4 attacking the c4-pawn. If White replies b2-b3, then …a7-a5-a4xb3 followed by …Ra3 is a good plan. The drawback of this plan is that Black’s queen can be targeted.
3. Break in the centre with …d6-d5 to unleash his pieces.
4. Dispute White’s control of the centre with the break …f7-f5, trading the f-pawn for White’s e4-pawn.
5. Attack White’s c4-pawn with …a7-a6, …c7-c6 and …b7-b5, to reduce White’s control of the centre.
6. Create a kingside attack; place a knight on f4, and possibly play …g6-g5, to control the f4-square, and to prevent White from expanding with f3-f4.

For White, the most important task is to keep his pieces well coordinated while refraining from trading pieces if possible. If this is achieved, then the d6-pawn will remain vulnerable while the kingside expansion will be easily achievable. For Black, the most important task is to remain active and to be able to continuously create threats, or trade pieces, before White gains a stable advantage. Black’s Plan 3, the …d6-d5 break, is ideal but very hard to accomplish in practice. Black’s remaining plans are all equally important and choosing among them requires good calculating ability more than anything else.

As a King’s Indian player I was often reluctant to play the plan with …g6-g5 (Plan 6) because it seems to be a positional aberration. But it turns out that this plan can actually be very effective if applied correctly, and we will see some examples in this chapter.

The first game in this chapter is an example of White’s ideal piece arrangement and the subsequent kingside expansion. The second example illustrates how Black’s Plan 2 can backfire and his queen can become trapped. The third example briefly discusses Black’s …f7-f5 break, and then we move on to Black’s …g6-g5 plans with three examples.

It might seem paradoxical that I say this structure is superior for White and then I include only two examples in which White wins. The reason for this decision was that the first example in this chapter is good enough to describe most of White’s victories. In fact, White wins the first game in such a convincing manner that I spend the rest of the chapter providing ideas for Black players to fight against White’s seemingly superior strategy.

Question 18

Answer 18

KID Complex

This structure is most typically obtained from the King’s Indian and the Old Indian Defences, though it can also appear in the Ruy Lopez. I decided to name this structure King’s Indian Complex to be consistent with the term introduced by Soltis in the 1970’s. This structure is called a ‘complex’ because it is a highly flexible structure open to many possibilities. In fact, this structure could transpose to seven (!) structures we have previously discussed in this book, and here we still need to discuss some independent structural developments.

Here follows the outline of possible structure transformations:

1. White plays d4-d5, Black takes …cxd5 and White replies exd5, we obtain a Najdorf Type I (Chapter 8) .
2. White plays d4-d5, Black takes …cxd5 and White recaptures with a piece, we obtain a NajdorfType II (Chapter 9) .
3. White plays d4-d5, Black takes …cxd5 and White replies cxd5, to obtain a King’s Indian Type I (Chapter 14) .
4. White plays d4-d5 and Black replies …c6-c5, then we obtain a King’s Indian Type II (Chapter 15) .
5. White plays d4-d5 while Black’s pawn was still on c7, then we obtain a King’s Indian Type III (Chapter 16) .
6. Black takes …exd4, then we obtain an Open King’s Indian (Chapter 17) .

And in this chapter we will consider two additional possibilities:

7. White takes with dxe5 and Black replies …dxe5. This chapter will mostly focus on ideas about this structure.
8. White breaks with c4-c5, blowing up the centre. This break will probably give White a favourable version of a 4-2 vs. 3-3 structure, which was mentioned in Chapter 3.

Despite the long list of structures and possibilities mentioned above, I believe the most common outcomes from a King’s Indian complex are 4, 5 and 7, and since Cases 4 and 5 have been previously studied, four of the five games in this chapter will be devoted to studying the structure resulting from Case 7. The last game in the chapter will be an example of White’s c4-c5 break.

Question 19

Answer 19

French Type I

This structure often arises from the French and Caro-Kann defences, after Black challenges White’s pawn chain with the typical …f7-f6 break. The most important theme in this position is the control of the e5-square. If White is able to gain firm control of this square his position will generally be superior. For this reason Black must find counterplay rather quickly in order to avoid being dominated. Black’s counterplay will usually be based on attacking White’s d4-pawn. For this reason Black will typically play …c5xd4 rather than …c5-c4, which would release the tension on the d4-pawn, and thus allow White to have a solid centre. Specific plans are as follows.

White’s plans

1. Control the e5-square and use it as an outpost for a knight, although a rook or bishop would also be powerful on this square.
2. Pressure the backward e6-pawn by doubling rooks on the e-file.
3. If White has already gained control of e5, then expand on the kingside, possibly with f2-f4 or h2-h4-h5 in order to create an attack.

Black’s plans

All Black’s plans are essentially based on preventing White from controlling the e5-square; they are:

1. Pressure the d4-pawn, play …c7-c5xd4, …Nc6 and sometimes …Qb6.
2. Bring the light-squared bishop into the game with …Bd7-e8-h5 (or g6) . Since White typically has a knight on f3, a bishop on h5 would produce an unpleasant pin (against White’s queen on d1) while also undermining the d4-pawn.
3. Double rooks on the f-file and possibly follow up with the exchange sacrifice …Rxf3 capturing White’s knight, undermining White’s centre and kingside.
4. Achieve the central break …e6-e5, to obtain an isolated and passed d-pawn.

As the reader may notice, this position is fairly one-dimensional. Everything revolves around the e5-square, and I believe the key for both sides is to know when it is a good idea to go into this position, and when it is not. The first game in this chapter will illustrate White’s domination once he achieves control of the e5-square. Essentially all of his plans will be combined to yield a very convincing victory. The second example illustrates Black’s exchange sacrifice with …Rxf3 and the third example showcases Black’s Plan 4 and the resulting position in which the isolated d-pawn is both a potential weakness and a potential threat because it is also a passed pawn.

This chapter is relatively short because the ideas presented in this structure are rather simple. In addition, the reason I only include one victory for White is because most of White’s victories follow exactly the same path. I found many good examples, but they all communicate the same ideas over and over. What the reader must understand is: once White controls the e5-square he will have an excellent position and most of the plans listed above will be possible and strong.

Question 20

Answer 20

French Type II

This structure primarily arises from the French Defence, especially from versions of the line
1.e4e62.d4d53.c3f64.e5fd75.f4c56.f3c67.e3cxd48.xd4.
Another common way to obtain this structure is from a typical Sicilian Scheveningen structure (mentioned in Chapter 22), in which Black manages to get in the …d6-d5 break and White replies with e4-e5. This position is a mirror image of the King’s Indian Type III-B studied in Chapter 16, but the character of the game is not quite the same because of the position of the kings (which typically castle short) . In this structure White has chances for a mating attack, which he did not have in the structure mentioned before. Despite this difference, other ideas remain the same. For example, White desires to have firm control of d4 and to place a knight on this square (like the e4-square from Chapter 16) . Also, the chain reaction f4-f5 (by analogy with c4-c5 in the structure in Chapter 16) is still strong. The plans for this structure are:

White’s plans

1. Control the d4-square, place a knight on d4 and support it with c2-c3, a bishop on e3 and possibly a rook on d1.
2. Attack the base of Black’s chain with f4-f5xe6 to later target the e6-pawn.
3. Obtain a kingside attack with f4-f5-f6 together with bringing pieces to the kingside such as Qh5, Rf3-h3, Bd3.
4. Castle long and then pursue a kingside pawn storm with h2-h4-h5, g2-g4-g5, etc.

Black’s plans

1. Undermine White’s pawn chain with the central break …f7-f6. This is generally an effective way to draw attention away from White’s kingside attack.
2. Undermine White’s e5-pawn with …g7-g5, even as a pawn sacrifice.
3. Simplify the position to decrease the influence of White’s spatial advantage and the power of White’s attack.
4. Trade the bad bishop (the light-squared bishop) or find a way to place it outside the pawn chain, preferably on the b1-h7 diagonal.
5. Pursue a queenside minority attack with …b7-b5-b4. This plan can be a positional idea to create weaknesses when White castles short, or can be used as an attacking plan if White has castled long.

The first game in this chapter is an example of White’s kingside attack, while the second illustrates how Black can neutralize this action with his Plan 1 (the …f7-f6 break) . The third example illustrates how bad it can be to have a bad bishop (with reversed colours), while the fourth example showcases Black’s strong light-squared bishop on g6, combined with Plan 4. The fifth game in this chapter is an example of opposite-flank attacks once White castles long. This chapter finishes with two short examples. The first of these illustrates Black’s Plans 2 and 3 combined, while the last example shows how Black may trade light-squared bishops.

As the reader may notice, whether White castles short or long has an important effect on the nature of the game. Both options are very common, but six out of my seven examples have White castling short for pedagogical reasons. The positions resulting from long castling tend to be very sharp, and tactical complications often dominate over strategic ideas. It is good to know these games with long castling, but one is unlikely to learn strategy from them. For this reason I thought one example should satisfy the curiosity of the readers while giving me the opportunity to show at least some tactical ideas in this position.

Question 21

Answer 21

French Type III

This structure will most typically arise from the Advance Variations of the French or the Caro-Kann but it can also be obtained from other openings, such as the Catalan after
1.d4f62.c4e63.f3d54.g3e75.g2O-O6.O-Oc67.c2bd78.bd2b69.e4b710.e5
There is a strong similarity between the French Type Ill structure and the King’s Indian Type III, which we studied in Chapter 16, which is a mirror version of this structure. Both in that structure and this one, there will be a fight on opposite flanks based on chain operations. White will want to hit near the base of Black’s chain, the e6-pawn, with f2-f4-f5, while Black will try the same with …c7-c5.

Similarly to the analogy we made in the previous chapter, there is one major difference between this structure and Chapter 16, and it is the location of the kings. In Chapter 16, Black was likely to play …f7-f5-f4 gaining kingside space and therefore having chances for an attack. In contrast, it is White who has attacking chances in this structure because of his e5-pawn. Most likely Black will castle short, though we will also consider the case where Black decides to castle long.

Since this is a closed position, the colour of the bishops will play a significant role. Following the general rule, White’s dark-squared bishop and Black’s light-squared bishop will be considered ‘bad’. But in practice, White’s spatial advantage allows him to make good use of his dark-squared bishop. Even from c1, this bishop can prove helpful in a kingside attack. In contrast, if Black’s bishop is on its initial square c8, it is likely to be a terrible piece, which is similar to what we learned in the game Van Wely - Karjakin from the previous chapter (with reversed colours) . On the other hand, if the black bishop is on f5 or g6, then it’s a different story.

Now, let’s discuss specific plans.

White’s plans

1. Attack the base of Black’s pawn chain with f2-f4-f5-fxe6.
2. Create a powerful kingside attack with f2-f4-f5-f6 followed by mate threats on the g7-square.
3. Attack Black’s kingside with rooks along the third rank, a bishop on the b1-h7 diagonal, and a queen typically placed on h5. A piece sacrifice on the kingside is also likely to work well.

Black’s plans

1. Attack the base of the chain, White’s d4-pawn, with …c7-c5xd4, …Nc6, …Qb6. In some cases use major pieces to invade along the c-file.
2. Advance …c7-c5-c4, and then attack the new base of the chain (the c3-pawn) with …b7-b5-b4. This plan can be too slow if White has good attacking chances on the kingside.
3. Trade light-squared bishops on the ^fl-a6 diagonal (say with …b7-b6 followed by …Ba6) or make good use of this bishop along the h7-b1 diagonal.
4. Slow down White’s kingside attack with …f7-f5, or even fight for counterplay with the more confrontational …f7-f6.

White’s Plans 1 and 2 are very effective while the centre remains firmly closed. The pawn chain and the spatial advantage prevent Black from effectively manoeuvring and defending the kingside. This allows White’s checkmating attack and even piece sacrifices to work very well. For this reason Black must find a way to break in the centre or slow down the attack with either Plan 1 or Plan 4, that is …c7-c5, …f7-f6, or …f7-f5.

White’s Plan 3 (a kingside attack using pieces more than pawns, particularly a bishop on d3) is not one I will cover in much detail in this chapter. Tactics will dominate, so it is not a good fit for my purposes. The extreme example is the Greek Gift - the bishop sacs on h7, then a knight check on g5 and queen to h5. All great fun and still winning a few points in the 21st century, but a topic for another day.

Black’s Plan 1 can be very effective if White is unable to defend the d4-pawn or unable to cover the c2-square, which is the entry point for Black’s rooks. If White can protect both these points well, then this plan can be a big disappointment, since the capture …cxd4 means Black no longer has a queenside break to execute. Meanwhile White can proceed with his desired kingside attack. Something to note about Black’s Plan 2 is that this plan is rather slow, and therefore it is far more likely to work well if Black has castled long, away from White’s kingside play. In such a case, this plan can also be combined with a potential kingside attack based on …f7-f6, …g7-g5 and so on.

The first game in this chapter illustrates how White is able to give up control of the c-file and still have a good position as long as he can control Black’s entry points (the c2- and c1-squares) . White then proceeds with his standard f4-f5 plan.

The second example illustrates a particular type of plan that is not always relevant to this structure (and partly for that reason I did not mention it in the list above) but is important if Black’s light-squared bishop is exchanged on g6. Then once Black has recaptured with …hxg6, White can go for an h4-h5 break and subsequent kingside attack.

The third game is an example of Black’s Plan 4 while the fourth game is a combination of Black’s Plans 2 and 4. Then the last game brings together many of Black’s ideas into one elegant example.

Question 22

Answer 22

The 3-3 vs. 4-2 Structure

The 3-3 vs. 4-2 structure is very common. It typically arises from the Caro-Kann or Slav structures studied in Chapters 3 and 4. In the Caro-Kann we obtain this structure once Black plays …c5 and White captures dxc5. In the Slav it occurs after Black plays …e5 and White replies dxe5. Note that in the second case we reach this structure with reversed colours. This structure may also arise from the Scheveningen Sicilian, as we will discuss later in this chapter. The fact that this position is open allows for massive piece exchanges and it is quite common for players of all levels to agree to a draw upon arriving at this structure, just because of its seemingly drawish nature. Nevertheless, both sides have some ambitious plans.

White’s plans

1. Control the d-file and use it for a seventh-rank invasion if possible.
2. Pursue a majority attack. That is, advance the queenside pawns to create a passed pawn.

Black’s plans

1. Control the d-file and use it for a seventh-rank invasion if possible.
2. Pursue a minority attack with …a7-a5 and …b7-b5-b4. If this plan is successful Black will probably eliminate White’s a-, b-, and c-pawns using his a- and b-pawns. Thereupon Black will attempt to win an endgame with 4 vs. 3 kingside pawns.

Something to note is that both sides play on the queenside. This is quite logical since in the majority of cases the kings will be castled on the kingside. Attempting a kingside attack in such an open position is quite likely to backfire for either side. Of course there are exceptions to this rule, and an attack could succeed if pieces are already actively placed when we reach this structure. Nevertheless, I would not recommend starting a kingside attack from scratch as the opponent is likely to find a refutation in the centre or on the queenside.

Something to be aware of is that because this structure is quite open, the pair of bishops tends to be more important here than in other structures studied in this book. Overall, this structure is quite simple strategically speaking, but it is by no means drawish, and it is good to know how to proceed with either side.

Question 23

Answer 23

The Panov Structure

When you see the name ‘Panov Structure’ you might guess IQP, but instead I shall give this name to the structure you can see above, which usually originates from the Panov variation of the Caro-Kann after
1.e4c62.d4d53.exd5cxd54.c4f65.c3c66.f3 when White later plays c4-c5.
This structure may also arise from the Queen’s Indian Defence, as well as any position with a Carlsbad structure.

White’s plans

The main plan is clear: create a passed pawn on the queenside. If White is able to play b2-b4-b5 and later c5-c6, then he is likely to have a big advantage.

Black’s plans

Black can counter this plan with two different approaches:

1. Attack the front of White’s chain (the c5-pawn) with …b7-b6. This is done in order to trade the c5-pawn, eliminating White’s most dangerous threat.
2. Attack the base of the chain (the d4-pawn) by placing a knight on c6 and a bishop on f6. This is often combined with playing …f7-f5 and placing a strong knight on e4.

Black’s Plans 1 and 2 can often be combined effectively. Overall the Panov structure is a relatively simple one, though we should know its basic plans. Here I present a couple of short fragments to illustrate how White creates a passed pawn, how Black fights for counterplay, and then we finish our discussion with an example of how a Carlsbad structure is converted into a Panov.

Question 24

Answer 24

The Dragon Formation

The Dragon Formation arises almost exclusively from the Dragon or Accelerated Dragon lines of the Sicilian. It may also occur with reversed colours when White plays the English Opening and Black replies with 1…e5 followed by 2…Nf6 and 3…d5. Assuming we have the structure with colours the usual way around (say, from a Dragon) then Black almost always castles short while White must choose whether to castle short or long. This decision has a significant influence on the character of the resulting game.

White’s plans

1. If White castles long, then he will assault Black’s kingside with h2-h4-h5, and then attempt a mating attack along the h-file.
2. If White castles short, then he will play a central strategy, place a rook on the d-file and a knight on d5.

Black’s plans

1. If White castles long, then Black must create a queenside attack at all costs. Black will often play along the c-file as well as push his a- and b-pawns. An exchange sacrifice …Rxc3, with the idea of doubling pawns, is often possible.
2. If White castles short, then Black can play a more positional game along the c-file. Place a knight on c4, and again the idea of an exchange sacrifice with …Rxc3 may be possible.

Something to note about White’s Plan 2 is that if Black captures the knight on d5 with a piece, and White recaptures with exd5, then the structure is very similar to the asymmetric transformation of the Maroczy, which we studied in Chapter 11.

After such a brief overview, many readers may wonder if the infamous Dragon is really that simple. The truth is that this structure often yields extremely complex positions, but the complexity is mostly tactical. There are few strategic elements to discuss, as most games are decided by brutal tactical shots. This is the reason I decided not to give a separate chapter to this structure. Nevertheless, one interesting idea in this structure is Black’s exchange sacrifice on c3, and we will see an example of it.

Question 25

Answer 25

The Scheveningen Structure

The Scheveningen structure is one of the most exciting and complicated pawn structures in chess. This structure can arise from almost every variation of the Sicilian, such as the Najdorf, Scheveningen, Classical, Paulsen, Taimanov and many other less prominent lines. Of course, this structure also arises very often in the English Opening with colours reversed when Black plays 1…e5 followed by 2…Nf6 and 3…d5.

White’s plans

1. Launch a kingside attack with g2-g4-g5, h2-h4-h5 and then break with g5-g6.
2. Play f2-f4-f5 to pressure the e6-pawn and create an attack along the a2-g8 diagonal.
3. Play f2-f4 and then e4-e5 and then later carry out a kingside attack.

Black’s plans

1. Achieve the central break …d6-d5 to release the position and activate his minor pieces.
2. Play along the c-file, and place a knight on c4 to pressure the b2-pawn and undermine White’s knight which is typically located on c3.
3. If White has castled long, then carry out a queenside attack with …b7-b5-b4, …a7-a5-a4 and then the break …b4-b3.
4. If White plays f2-f4, in some cases Black can reply …g7-g5 to fight for the control of the e5-square.
5. In some cases, Black may sacrifice an exchange on c3, in similar style to what we saw in the Dragon structure.

Black will most likely castle short or on some occasions keep the king in the centre. Meanwhile, White’s king must choose between long and short castling, which will greatly influence the development of the game. If White castles long, then his main lines plans will be 1 and 2 while Black will most probably focus on Plan 3. Instead, if White castles short, Black will focus on Plan 1 while White can still carry out a kingside attack. White’s Plan 3 is more likely to work after short castling, because the rooks would be placed more favourably for this plan.

Structure transformations

This structure can transpose into some of the structures we have studied previously.

1. If Black plays …d6-d5 and White replies with e4-e5 then we obtain a French Type II structure (Chapter 15) .
2. If Black plays …d6-d5, White captures e4xd5 and Black recaptures with a piece, then we obtain a 3-3 vs. 4-2 structure.
3. If White plays f2-f4-f5, the pressure on e6 may provoke Black to play …e6-e5 obtaining a Najdorf Type II structure (Chapter 9) .
4. On some occasions, White may play c2-c4 arriving at a Hedgehog structure (Chapter 10) .

The second structure transformation above is often favourable for Black on a positional level. The reason is that Black often has his b-pawn already on b5, which is the starting point of Black’s minority attack, as described earlier in this chapter.

The 4th structure transformation is quite unlikely to work because White typically has his knight on c3 and cannot afford to move it away in order to play c2-c4.

Overall the Scheveningen is a very interesting pawn structure and deserves study. The reason I do not cover it in more detail is because the strategic ideas in this structure are relatively simple while most of its complexity comes from tactical details which do not fit so well with the content of this book. I am a firm believer that the reader needs most help with strategic concepts, as tactical shots can readily be studied using the ever more powerful computer engines. Here we will see only one example of White’s attack once Black plays …d6-d5 with the king still in the centre. Then we will see a brief discussion of Black’s Plan 4.

Question 26

Answer 26

The Benko Structure

This structure is actually specific to the Benko variation which begins with
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.bxa6
After the a6-pawn drops, Black is a pawn down but has some positional advantages to compensate for it. They are:

1. White has two pawn ‘islands’, while Black only has one rock-solid group of six pawns.
2. Black will place his rooks on the a- and b-files, pressuring White’s a- and b-pawns, preventing their advance.
3. White does not have obvious targets and may have to limit himself to passive play for a long time in order to stabilize his position.

Theory regards the Benko Gambit as being somewhat inferior, and in fact, it is rarely seen at the elite level nowadays. Nevertheless, it is an excellent practical weapon to be used when one absolutely needs to win with Black. Now, a big question is: How should White play?

There are two main strategies to be followed, and they are often combined:

1. White must turn his queenside pawns into a fortress, which most probably will be on b3 and a4, combined with many minor pieces surrounding and defending these pawns.
2. Advance in the centre and obtain a central break with e4-e5 or maybe f4-f5. These ideas are borrowed from the asymmetric Benoni structure from Chapter 12, and they are White’s only active plan. That is, White must try one of these breaks sooner or later. If instead White attempts to trade his b-pawn for Black’s c5-pawn, then White’s a-pawn will hardly be enough to win, as it will be an easy target for Black’s pieces.

Question 27

Answer 27

The Closed Ruy Lopez

The Closed Ruy Lopez structure pictured on the left is one that arises almost exclusively from the Ruy Lopez opening. It is a very interesting structure, but I decided not to have a full chapter about it because it originates from just one opening, and because it is closely related to the King’s Indian structures. The nature of this position most closely resembles the King’s Indian Type II structure, the only difference being the pawns on c3 vs. c4 (instead of c4 vs. c5) . This is, in fact, a big difference, as we will see in the typical plans for this position:

White’s plans

1. Create a kingside attack with g2-g4, Nbd2-f1-g3-f5, sacrifice a piece on f5 if needed.
2. Create a kingside attack with f2-f4, by analogy with Chapter 15.
3. Play on the queenside with b2-b4, a2-a4 and then invade on the a-file or attack one of Black’s queenside pawns.

Black’s plans

1. Create queenside play with …a7-a5, …b7-b5-b4.
2. Expand on the kingside with …f7-f5-f4 by analogy with Chapters 15 and 16.

A major structural difference between this structure and the King’s Indian structures is that in the Ruy Lopez White doesn’t have a spatial advantage on the queenside. Still, having a powerful pawn on d5 is always a plus and will allow White to create queenside play on occasion.

Nevertheless, kingside plans are now more significant than ever for White, and it is important to keep them in mind as queenside play will not always work for him. Unlike pretty much all King’s Indian-type positions, Black is now likely to succeed by playing actively on the queenside, though the kingside plans remain valid. But often White will pay so much attention to the kingside that Black will opt for queenside plans. For this reason, in many cases, White will first devote his energies to closing the queenside, and only then move on to a kingside attack.

Question 28

Answer 28

The Lopez Structure

Similarly to the King’s Indian Complex which we studied in Chapter 18, the Lopez Formation is a very flexible structure. The name ‘Lopez Formation’ was introduced by Soltis in the 1970’s and refers to the fact that this structure almost always arises from the Ruy Lopez. In essence, this structure is one in transition. Depending on how White and Black proceed in the centre, this structure will be transformed in one of the following ways:

1. White advances d4-d5 and later c3-c4, obtaining a King’s Indian Type II structure (Chapter 15) .
2. White advances d4-d5 and Black replies …c5-c4, to obtain a Closed Ruy Lopez, which has just been covered.
3. White captures d4xe5 (or d4xc5) and Black recaptures …d6xe5 (or …d6xc5), obtaining a typical transformation of the King’s Indian Complex (Chapter 18) .
4. Black captures …e5xd4 and after c3xd4 White proceeds with d4-d5, obtaining an Asymmetric Benoni (Chapter 12) .
5. Black captures …c5xd4 and after c3xd4 White proceeds with d4-d5, obtaining a King’s Indian Type I structure (Chapter 14) .
6. Black trades two pawns on d4 with …c5xd4 followed by …e5xd4 (or in the other order) . The resulting position has not been discussed in previous chapters, and here we will see an example of it.