ECO Volume D, 4th Edition
Ivan
Markovic
Chess Informant Editor
The purpose of Chess Informants Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings is to offer an extensive coverage of all the relevant opening lines (including a myriad of obscure ones) in sufficient detail to provide end-users with enough information to employ them in contemporary tournament practice. Since the book should appeal both to over-the-board and correspondence chess players who often need exceptionally detailed material that can stand the test of time, this calls for a rhetoric question, what does it really take to produce a new edition of a volume of Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings?
It is generally considered that an opening encyclopaedia should set the standard for opening theory as a reliable reference manual at the time of its release. However, the enormity of games available in commercial databases makes the task extremely difficult, especially in the most fashionable lines, where grandmaster evaluations (as published in the Informants, for instance) often become overrun by a multitude of games from recent tournament practice, or even refuted. Therefore, all the material inherited from the previous edition invariably undergoes serious re-examination, where critically-minded humans from the Chess Informant Editorial Board join forces with top computer engines in the process of rebuilding foundations for the new coming lines, which often leads to completely new problems, and a chaos inevitably ensues. Alas, a clear-cut structure should be maintained, which calls for tough decisions and painful compromises in order to fit everything into ECO tables and the accompanying footnotes.
To make a long story short, I should just add that the new Volume is expected to bring 56 pages more than the preceding one. However, the space devoted to each ECO code is generally in proportion to its popularity in current practice, with minor exceptions only. During the past five years D 10 (1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 without Nf3) has reached the peak of popularity, which resulted in a sharp (probably the most extreme) increase in the surveyed material: 86 lines and 455 footnotes (24 pages), make a world of difference in comparison with the 16 lines and 79 footnotes (6 pages) covered in the third edition. Our readership is treated to a fragment of the highly topical line of the Slav Defence: 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. e3 a6 5. Qc2 b5. For the sake of presentation, the material previewed in the article covers the concluding seven lines (rows 80-86) in the D 10 ECO table only.
D 10
|
1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. e3 a6 5. Qc2 |
||||||||||
|
|
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
|
|
80 |
. . . |
Nf3 |
00 |
f4 |
bc4 |
Rb1 |
and White is slightly better |
|||
|
b5 |
Bg7 |
00 |
Nbd7 |
bc4 |
c5 |
|||||
|
81 |
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
Bb2 |
Qe2 |
Rac1 |
and White is slightly better |
|
|
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
Nbd7 |
Qc7 |
|||||
|
82 |
. . . |
. . . |
Bd3 |
f4 |
bc4 |
Bc4 |
Nge2 |
00 |
unclear |
|
|
. . . |
Bg4 |
Bh5 |
dc4 |
e6 |
Bb4 |
|||||
|
83 |
. . . |
. . . |
Nge2 |
Nf4 |
Ng6 |
Bg2 |
00 |
and White is slightly better |
||
|
. . . |
. . . |
Bg6 |
hg6 |
e6 |
Be7 |
|||||
|
84 |
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
h3 |
Nge2 |
Bd3 |
equal |
|||
|
. . . |
. . . |
Nbd7 |
Be6 |
h4 |
g6 |
Bf5 |
||||
|
85 |
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
h3 |
Nf4 |
Ng6 |
Bd3 |
c5 |
unclear |
|
|
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
Bh5 |
Bg6 |
hg6 |
|||||
|
86 |
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
Be2 |
equal |
||
|
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
. . . |
Bd6 |
||||
424
6. cd5 cd5 7. a4 b4 8. Nb1 [8.
Na2 e6 9. Bd2 a5 10. Nf3 Bd6 11. Bd3 00 12. 00 Ba6 and Black is slightly
better; Radziewicz Dzagnidze, Warszawa 2001] e6 9. Nd2 Bd6 10.
a5 00 11. Nb3 Ra7 12. Bd3 (Karpov P. Charbonneau, Lindsborg (rapid)
2003) Rc7 13. Qe2 Ne4! unclear; Iv. Markovic
425
6...
Nbd7 7. Nf3 e6 see D 45;
6... e6
7. Bd3 [7. Nf3 see D 45] bc4 [7...
Bb7 8. c5 (8. Nf3 see D 45) e5 9. de5 Nfd7 10. f4 (10. e6!? fe6 11. Bh7
Bc5 unclear) Nc5 11. Nf3 unclear; Rustemov Mar. Martinez, Internet 2000]
8. bc4 dc4 9. Bc4 c5 10. Nf3 cd4 11. ed4 (Gustafsson Gisbrecht, Deutschland
1997) Bb7 equal
426
7. Nf3 Bf5 8. Bd3 Bd3 9. Qd3 Bg7 10.
00 00
a) 11. Bd2 Nbd7 12. cd5 cd5 13. Ne2 Ne4 14. Rfc1 e5 equal; Sargissian Motylev, Silivri 2003; b) 11. Ne5 Nfd7! 12. Nd7 dc4 13. Nf6! [13. bc4 Nd7 14. Rd1 Nb6 15. c5 (15. cb5?! ab5 and Black is slightly better; Pushkov Prie, Paris 1998 see 73/(409)) Nc4 unclear] Bf6 14. bc4 Nd7 15. Rd1 Nb6 16. c5 Nc4 17. e4 and White is slightly better; Iv. Markovic
427
9... Bg4 10. Ne5 Be6 see 5... g6
428
10.
Bb2 Nbd7 see 9... Nbd7
429
14.
cd5 cd4 15. ed4 Ne5 16. de5 Nd5 17. Ne4 and White is slightly better;
Polak Abou el Zein, Pardubice 1999
430
10... bc4?! 11. bc4 dc4 12. Bc4 c5 (B. Golubovic Bukal, Rijeka 2001)
13. dc5 Nc5 14. Rad1 and White is superior
11. e4 dc4 12. bc4 e5 13. c5 ed4 14. Ne2 Qe7 15. Bd4 Rfe8 16. Ng3 Ng4 17. Bg7 Kg7 unclear; Karpov Zhang Pengxiang, Moscow (m/3-rapid) 2001; 11. Rad1 Rb8 [11... e6 12. e4 bc4 13. bc4 de4 14. Ne4 c5 (Schandorff Agdestein, Gentoefte 1999) 15. d5! ed5 16. cd5 Ne4 17. Bg7 Kg7 18. Be4 Nf6 19. Ne5! Re8 20. Nc6! Qd6 21. Bf3 and White is superior; Iv. Markovic] 12. c5 Qc7 13. b4 a5 14. a3 Ra8 equal; Arlandi Hodgson, Mondariz Balneario 2000
432
11... Nb6!? 12. c5 Nbd7 13. b4
Ne8 14. Ne2 Nc7 15. a4 and White is slightly better; Nosenko Vysochin,
Kiyv 2001
433
Tsybulnik S. Rodchenkov, Voronezh
2003; 14. a3! and White is slightly better; with the idea e4 centre
Iv. Markovic
434
7...
Bh5
a) 8. a4 b4 9. Nce2 Bg6 10. Nf4 Bd3 11. Nd3 a5 12. Nf3 Nbd7 13. Bb2 e6 14. Nde5 Ne5 15. Ne5 Rc8 16. Rc1 Bd6 17. cd5 ed5 18. Qf5 00 19. Nc6 Qe8 20. Na7 Rc1 21. Bc1 Bb8 22. Nb5 Qc6 with compensation; Komarov Prie, France 2000] Nd7 16. 00 Be7 17. e4 and White is slightly better, with spatial advantage; 15. de5!? Iv. Markovic; b) 8. Nge2 Bg6 9. e4! e6 [9... de4 10. Ne4 Nbd7 (Najer Burmakin, Saint Petersburg 1998) 11. 00 e6 12. Bf4 Ne4 13. Be4 and White is superior; Iv. Markovic] 10. e5 Nfd7 11. c5 Be7 12. 00 and White is superior [with the idea f4 with attack] Sokolin Hauchard, New York 1999; 7... e6 8. Nge2 see 5. Bd3
435
8.
Nge2 e5 [8... e6 see 5. Bd3] 9. f3 [9. cd5 cd5
10. de5 Ne5 11. Bf5 Be2! 12. Ne2 Bb4 13. Kf1 00 14. Bb2 Qe7 15. Rd1
g6 16. Bh3 Ra7! unclear; Morovic Nogueiras, La Habana 1999 see 76/(341)]
Be6 10. c5 g6 11. 00 Bg7 12. b4 00 13. a4 Qc7 unclear; Litus Savchenko,
Alushta 1994
436
9... e6 10. c5!? Bg6 [10... Be7 11. Nf3 (11. Bd2?! Bg6 12. Nf3
Bd3 13. Qd3 b4 and Black is slightly better; Khurtidze Zhukova, Jugoslavija
1999) Bf3 12. gf3 and White is slightly better] 11. Bg6!? [11.
Nf3 Bd3 12. Qd3 g6 equal] hg6 12. Nf3 unclear; Shirov
437
Kozul Shirov, Plovdiv 2003; 14. Rb1! unclear; Shirov
7... Qd7 8. Ng3 h5 9. h3 Be6 (Lomineishvili Ruchieva, Warszawa 1996) 10. Bd3 h4 11. Nge2 dc4 12. bc4 bc4 13. Be4 Ne4 14. Ne4 Bf5 15. 00 e6 16. Bb2 and White is slightly better; Iv. Markovic; 7... g6 8. Nf4 Bf5 9. Bd3 Bd3 10. Nd3 Nbd7 (Tkachiev Morozevich, New Delhi (m/2) 2000 see 80/392) 11. cd5 cd5 12. a4 Rc8 13. ab5 ab5 14. Bd2 e6 15. Qa2 and White is slightly better; Morozevich; 7... e6 8. Ng3 Bd6 [8... Nbd7 9. h3 Bh5 10. Nh5 Nh5 11. Be2 (11. g3 Nhf6 12. Bg2 Be7 13. 00 00 14. Rd1 Rc8 15. e4 (Ftacnik Sommerbauer, Leon 2001) b4 16. e5 bc3 17. ef6 Bf6 unclear, with counterplay; Iv. Markovic) Nhf6 12. 00 Be7 13. Bd3 e5 14. cd5 cd5 15. de5 Ne5 16. Bb2 Rc8 17. Qe2and White is slightly better Kjeldsen Ye Rongguang, Kobenhavn 1995; 8... Nh5 9. Bd3 Bd6 10. a4 bc4 11. bc4 Nd7 12. Ba3 Ba3 13. Ra3and White is slightly better L. Hansen Sammalvuo, Reykjavik 1995] 9. h3 Bh5 10. Nh5 Nh5 11. Be2 Nf6 12. 00 00 13. Rd1 Nbd7 14. Bb2 Rc8 (Avrukh Burmakin, Ohrid 2001 see 82/325) 15. Bd3 and White is slightly better; Avrukh
439
10.
Bd3 e6 see 5. Bd3
440
11... Be7 12. 00 00 13. Rd1 Nbd7 14. e4 de4 [14... b4 15. Na4
de4 16. Be4 and White is slightly better; Lputian] 15. Ne4 Ne4
16. Be4 Rc8 17. a4! and White is slightly better; Lputian Bareev, Elista
(ol) 1998 see 74/387
441
13.
Rd1 Nb6 [13... 00 see 11... Be7] 14. c5 Nbd7 15. e4 and
White is slightly better; Matveeva Botsari, Moscow (ol) 1994
442
13... bc4 14. bc4 Nb6 15. c5 Nc4 (Tkachiev
Volkov, Neum (blitz) 2000) 16. Qa4 and White is superior;
13... de4 14. Ne4 Ne4 (Ivanchuk Bareev,
Muenchen 1994 see 60/(353)) 15. Be4 Rc8 16. Rd1 and White is slightly
better; Lputian
8. Nf4 e5 [8... e6 9. f3 Bf5! 10. e4 de4 11. fe4 Ne4 12. Ne4 Bb4 13. Kf2 e5 14. Nd6 Bd6 15. Qf5 ef4 16. Bf4 (A. Kuzmin V. Georgiev, Andorra 2000 see 79/(335)) Bf4 17. Qf4 00 18. Be2 bc4 19. bc4 c5 equal A. Kuzmin; 9. Bd3 see 5. Bd3] 9. de5 Ne5 10. h3 Be6 11. Be2 [11. cd5 cd5 12. Ne6 fe6 13. f4] Bd6 12. Bb2 00 [12... Rc8 13. Rd1 and White is slightly better; Morozevich] 13. 00 Ng6 14. Ng6 [14. cd5 cd5 15. Ne6?! fe6 16. Rac1 Rc8 17. Qd3 Bb8!? 18. a3!? Qd6 19. g3 Rc6!? 20. Rc2 Ne5 21. Qd4 Qc7! 22. Rfc1 Ba7 23. Qd2 (Popov Kobalia, Russia (ch-m/2) 1999 see 77/356) Qf7! with the idea Qg6, h5 and Black is slightly better; Kobalia; 15. Ng6 see 14. Ng6] fg6!? [14... hg6 15. cd5 cd5 16. Bf3 Rc8 17. Qd2 Bb8 18. Rfd1 Qc7 19. g3 Rfd8 20. Rac1 Qd7 21. h4 and White is slightly better; Kasparov Morozevich, Sarajevo 1999 see 75/331] 15. cd5 cd5 16. Bf3 Bb8 17. Ne2 Qd6 18. Ng3 Ra7 with counterplay; Morozevich
444
8... e5 9. h3 Be6 [9... ed4
10. hg4 dc3 11. g5 Ng4 12. g6! and White is superior; P. Nikolic Short,
London (rapid) 1994] 10. de5 Ne5 11. f4 Bd6 12. c5 Bc7 13. Nce2
Ng6 14. Nd4 Bd7 15. Bd3 and White is slightly better; S. Mohr Keitlinghaus,
Deutschland 1995
445
10. e4
a) 10... b4 11. Na4 h4 12. ed5 cd5 13. Ne2 g6 14. Nf4 Bf5 15. Bd3 Bd3 16. Nd3 dc4! 17. bc4 a5 18. 00 Bg7 19. Re1 and White is slightly better; Wells Conquest, Great Britain 2003; b) 10... h4 11. Nge2 g6!? 12. ed5 cd5 13. cb5 ab5 14. Nb5 Rc8 with compensation; Wells; c) 10... dc4! 11. bc4 h4 12. Nf5 Nb6 unclear, with counterplay; Iv. Markovic
446
12.
g4 hg3 13. Ng3 (Krasenkow Ro. Perez, Yucatan 1999) Nh5! unclear
447
Savchenko Volkov, Elista (ol) 1998 see 73/409
448
11.
g3 e5 [11... e6 12. Bg2 Be7 13. 00 00 14. Rd1 Rc8 15. e4 b4 16.
Na4 Ne4 17. Be4 de4 18. Qe4 Qa5 equal; Ftacnik Movsesian, Cesko 2001]
12. Bg2 Rc8 13. c5 Be7 14. Bb2 00 15. Ne2 Qa5 16. Bc3 Qc7 17. a4 Rfe8
equal; Radjabov Movsesian, Sarajevo 2003
449
11... e5
a) 12. de5 Ne5 13. Nd5 cd5 14. Be5 Bb4 15. Bc3 Qa5 16. Bb4 Qb4 17. Qd2 Qd2 18. Kd2 dc4 19. bc4 Rd8 20. Ke1 b4 with compensation; 13. Be2 see 11. Be2; b) 12. c5!? Qc7 13. 0-0-0 Be7 14. Kb1 (Milov Volkov, Ohrid 2001 see 82/326) ed4!? 15. ed4 Nf8 16. Bd3 Ne6 17. Ne2 and White is slightly better; Milov
450
12... Be7 13. c5 [13. Ne2 Qa5 14. Bc3 Bb4 equal; P. Nikolic Short,
Moscow (ol) 1994 see 62/(402)] e5 14. 0-0-0 Qc7 15. Kb1 e4 16.
Be2 and White is slightly better; Yevseev Alavkin, Samara 2002
451
14.
0-0-0 e5 15. Kb1 00 unclear [with the idea Re8] Fressinet
Sebag, Paris 2003
452
11... e5 12. de5 Ne5 13. Bb2 dc4!? [13... bc4?! 14. bc4 Nc4 15.
Bc4 dc4 16. 00 and White is slightly better; Karpov Bareev, Cap d’Agde
(m/2-rapid) 2002] 14. bc4 Bb4 15. Qb3 Qe7 equal; Huebner
453
12.
a3 Bd6 [12... Rc8 13. c5 g5 14. Bb2 g6 15. 0-0-0 Bg7 16. Bd3 e5
17. Kb1 and White is slightly better; Najer Amonatov, Moscow 2003]
13. c5 [13. e4 e5 with counterplay] Bc7 14. Bb2 e5 15. 0-0-0
Qe7 unclear; Iv. Markovic
454
13.
a3 00 14. Rd1 Qe7 15. Bb2 Rfd8 16. Bf3 Rac8 equal; Malakhatko Doukhine,
Saint Petersburg 2003
455
14.
ed5
a) 14... ed5 15. Na4 00 16. Bf3 Re8 17. Bg5 Qb8 18. Rfe1 Re1 19. Re1 Bh2 20. Kf1! Bf4 21. Bf6 Nf6 (Bareev Shirov, Pardubice 1994 see 61/375) 22. g3! Bd6 23. Kg2 and White is slightly better; Bareev; b) 14... bc3! 15. dc6 Nb8 16. Bf3 Qc7! 17. d5 00 18. Be3! [18. b4 ed5 19. cd5 Bb4 20. Rb1 (Alterman Ye Rongguang, Beijing 1995 see 64/(342)) a5! 21. a3 Bd6 22. Qc3 Na6 23. Rb7 Qc8 24. Be3 Nc7 and Black is slightly better; Alterman] ed5 19. cd5 a5 [19... Rd8 20. Rad1 a5 21. Qc3 Nbd7 22. g3 Nb6 23. Qc2! equal; Akopian Bareev, Las Vegas (m/2) 1999 see 76/341] 20. Rfd1 [20. Qc3 Nbd7 21. g3 equal; Bareev] Rd8 21. Qc3 Nbd7 22. g3 Nb6 23. Rac1 Bb4 24. Bf4 Bd6 25. Be3 Bb4 1/2 : 1/2 Hracek Dautov, Deutschland 2000