Eyal: <8 Nf3 Nbc6 9 Bd3 f5 10 exf6 Rxf6 11 Bg5 e5>

Btw, this position can also result from the move order <8.Bd3 Nbc6 9.Nf3 f5> - which is probably why <9.Qh5>, instead of the natural-looking Nf3, turned into the mainline here.

Eyal: <Gypsy: Critical of the retreat variations is probably <[8.Bd3 f5 9.exf6 Rxf6 10.Bg5 e5 11.Qh4 e4] 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Be2 Nf5 14.Qf4...>. Not sure that Black has enough for the x-change. Black Nf5 will be dislodged by g2-g4, and the shattered cover of Kg8 seems more serious than White problems.>

Yeah, I agree - or White might manage to exchange queens and win the endgame. Here's an example (from NIC database):

Sergey Karjakin (2566) - Salvador Del Rio de Angelis (2504) Dos Hermanas 2004 (7)

[...] 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Be2 Qa5 14.Qg3+ Kh8 15.Rd1 Nbc6 16.Qd6 Qxc3+ 17.Kf1 Bf5 18.g4 Bg6 19.h4 Rf8 20.Qxc5 Qxc5 21.dxc5 d4 22.Bc4 Ne5 23.Be6 d3 24.cxd3 Nxd3 25.Ne2 Be8 26.Bc4 Ne5 27.Be6 Nd3 28.Bc4 Ne5 29.Rd4 f5 30.Be6 Bb5 31.a4 Ba6 32.gxf5 Nf3 33.Kg2 Nxd4 34.Nxd4 Kg7 35.Kg3 Rd8 36.Nb5 Bxb5 37.axb5 Kf6 38.Kf4 Rd4 39.Rc1 Rb4 40.c6 e3+ 41.Kxe3 Rxb5 42.c7 a5 43.c8=Q Nxc8 44.Rxc8 a4 45.Rf8+ Kg7 46.Rf7+ Kh6 47.Rd7 Rb2 48.f6 1-0

Eyal: <8.Bd3 f5 9.exf6 Rxf6 10.Bg5 Rf7 11.Qh5 g6 12.Qd1 Qa5>

Here's a game where White plays <13.Qd2> instead of Bd2, and Black seems to achieve equality by playing for e5 (13...Nec6[!], 14...Nd7): Leko vs Ivanchuk, 2002.

acirce: Khalifman: <8.Bd3!> <It is only this move [...] that creates real problems for Black.> Here is an attempt at some kind of summary.

He naturally treats 8..Nbc6 as the main line and otherwise gives 8..f5 the most attention. He mentions a lot of other 8th moves, among which I think at least the pretty new 8..Qa5 should be taken seriously, as I believe it is fairly popular now. In this case Khalifman's main line goes 9.Bd2 Nbc6 10.Nf3 f5 11.exf6 Rxf6 12.Qh5 Nf5 13.g4 c4 14.gxf5 cxd3 15.Rg1 Bd7 16.Qg5 Rf7 17.f6 Qd8 18.Ne5! Nxe5 19.dxe5 which he analyses to a slight but clear advantage for White.

On 8..f5 it follows 9.exf6 Rxf6 10.Bg5 Rf7 (he analyses the exchange sacrifice possibilities in detail too) 11.Qh5! g6 12.Qd1 and now:

a) 12..Qa5
b) 12..Nbc6

After a) 12..Qa5 he does something unusual and analyses two different continuations for White without stating a preference. This decision for White is critical and involves either a1) 13.Qd2 when <the most probable outcome will be a transfer to an interesting multi-piece endgame> or a2) 13.Bd2 when <there is to be expected a complicated strategical battle in the middle game.> Objectively, he says this is a matter of taste and style. a1) may go 13.Qd2 Nec6 14.Nf3 Nd7 15.0-0 cxd4 16.cxd4 Qxd2+ 17.Bxd2 e5 18.Ng5! Re7 19.c4! with White opening up the position for his two bishops and a2) could go 13.Bd2 Nbc6 14.Nf3 Qc7!? 15.dxc5 e5 16.Ng5 [also suggesting 16.Be2!? as an interesting alternative] 16..Rf8 17.c4! etc and there is a complex struggle. But these are of course just example lines, he always gives a ton of analysis.

Or b) 12..Nbc6 13.Nf3 Qf8 (most common move) 14.0-0 c4 15.Be2 h6 16.Bc1! [idea: sometimes getting the bishop to the a3-f8 diagonal] Bd7 [alternatives here, for example 16..Kh7] 17.a4 Qg7 18.Ba3 g5! 19.h3!? [at that time not yet tested in practice according to Khalifman]

On 8..Nbc6 Khalifman of course prefers the consistent 9.Qh5! with the main line being 9..Ng6! 10.Nf3 Qc7! 11.Be3! c4

(11..Nce7 12.h4! Bd7 [12..Nf5 13.g4 Nxe3 14.fxe3 cxd4 15.0-0! is carefully analysed to ] 13.Qg4 f5 14.Qh3 etc]

12.Bxg6 fxg6 13.Qg4 with a new choice: for example 13..Qe7 14.h4 Rf5 15.Qh3 h6! 16.g4 Rf7 17.Ng5! etc, 13..Qf7 14.Ng5! Qe8 15.h4 h6 16.Nh3 Ne7 17.Qe2! etc, 13..Bd7 14.h4 Rf5 15.Ng1!? Qa5 16.Ne2 Raf8 17.Kd2 and after some more analysis the conclusion is the usual slight edge.

I'm looking at crawfb5's post. In the 8..f5 line, Khalifman uses 16..Bd7 as Black's main, but after 16..Kh7 he seems to approve of Psakhis's recommended improvement 24.h3 instead of Shirov's 24.Ne5 that apparently just equalizes. In the 8..Nbc6 line, as I said he does analyse 11..Nce7 ("interesting") and treats 13..Bd7 as the main choice.

blue wave: Eyal:"and Black seems to achieve equality by playing for e5 (13...Nec6[!], 14...Nd7): Leko vs Ivanchuk, 2002." Yes, Black does seem to equalize with this e5 move... The move Nec6! is interesting to help the advance of e5 with the support of both knights.

I'm not really a big fan of Qa5... IMHO it takes the Queen away from the real fight for the centre which to me is critical. Qc7 would be better to support the advance of e5!

I also like e5 because it gives the LSB entry into the game by being able to move to f5 and challenge White's LSB.

blue wave: [Event "Doha 2006"]
[Site "Doha"]
[Date "2006.12.06"]
[Round "01"]
[White "Shinya Kojima"]
[Black "Alexei Barsov"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "2187"]
[BlackElo "2541"]
[ECO "C18"]
[EventDate "?"]
[PlyCount "90"]

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.Qg4 0-0 8.Bd3 f5 9.exf6 Rxf6 10.Bg5 Rf7 11.Qh5 g6 12.Qd1 Nbc6 13.Nf3 c4 14.Be2 Qf8 15.0-0 h6 16.Bc1 Qg7 17.a4 g5 18.Ba3 Bd7 19.Bd6 Nf5 20.Be5 Qf8 21.Qd2 g4 22.Ne1 Nxe5 23.dxe5 Qg7 24.Qf4 h5 25.g3 Raf8 26.f3 h4 27.Qxg4 hxg3 28.Ng2 gxh2+ 29.Kxh2 Qxg4 30.fxg4 Rh7+ 31.Kg1 Ng3 32.Rxf8+ Kxf8 33.Kf2 Ne4+ 34.Ke3 Rh3+ 35.Kd4 Nxc3 36.Rf1+ Ke7 37.Bf3 Nxa4 38.Nf4 Rh2 39.g5 Rd2+ 40.Ke3 c3 41.Ne2 Bb5 42.Bh5 d4+ 43.Kf2 Rxc2 44.g6 Bxe2 45.Bxe2 d3 0-1
In this game black manages to generate a kingside attack using the Queen and advancing pawns and win. Not exactly what you would expect form the Winawer Variation where you would naturally expect a Queenside attack!

blue wave: [Event "European Individual Championship"]
[Site "Plovdiv BUL"]
[Date "2008.04.29"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Vehi Bach,V"]
[Black "M Drasko"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "2381"]
[BlackElo "2536"]
[ECO "C18"]
[EventDate "2008.04.21"]
[PlyCount "80"]

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.Qg4 0-0 8.Bd3 f5 9.exf6 Rxf6 10.Bg5 Rf7 11.Qh5 g6 12.Qd1 Nbc6 13.Nf3 Qf8 14.0-0 c4 15.Be2 h6 16.Bc1 Bd7 17.a4 Rd8 18.Ba3 Bc8 19.a5 Qg7 20.Qd2 g5 21.h3 Ng6 22.Bc5 Nf4 23.Nh2 e5 24.dxe5 Qxe5 25.Rfe1 d4 26.Bxd4 Nxd4 27.cxd4 Qxd4 28.Qxd4 Nxe2+ 29.Rxe2 Rxd4 30.Nf3 Rdf4 31.Ne5 Rc7 32.Ng6 Rff7 33.Rae1 Kg7 34.Ne7 Bd7 35.Re5 Ba4 36.c3 Bc2 37.Nd5 Rcd7 38.Ne3 Bd3 39.Nd5 Rf5 40.f3 Rxd5
0-1
Black wins this game by challenging whites pawn centre with the key move 23...e5! and follows up with 25..d4!for good measure. This equalises for black and as shown can give a good endgame with winning chances.

Eyal: <blue wave> Yeah, the Nf5-d6-e4 maneuver as played in A Volokitin vs I Farago, 2002 is certainly one of Black's potential resources in this line that's worth bearing in mind.

Note, though, that Black did not go for e5 in this game, and that this central break doesn't have to be automatically good in every situation. For example, in Tseshkovsky vs V Goncharov, 1995, where Black plays the "straightforward" Qc7-Nbc6-e5 sequence he seems to be getting into trouble after the position opens (though his game can probably be improved - for example, by avoiding 19...Bc6 which allows the extremely annoying 20.Re6).

blue wave: [Event "Capablanca Memorial PREMIER II"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2004.05.16"]
[Round "11"]
[White "Enrique Rodriguez"]
[Black "Humberto Pecorrelli"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "2407"]
[BlackElo "2420"]
[ECO "C18"]
[EventDate "2004.05.06"]
[PlyCount "172"]

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.Qg4 0-0 8.Bd3 f5 9.exf6 Rxf6 10.Bg5 Rf7 11.Qh5 g6 12.Qd1 Nbc6 13.Nf3 Qf8 14.0-0 c4 15.Be2 h6 16.Bc1 Bd7 17.a4 Kh7 18.Qd2 b6 19.Ba3 Qb8 20.g3 Nf5 21.Ne1 Nd6 22.f4 Qc7 23.Nf3 Ne4 24.Qe3 Ne7 25.Bxe7 Rxe7 26.Ne5 Nd6 27.Ng4 Nf5 28.Qc1 Rf8 29.Ne5 Be8 30.Bg4 Nd6 31.Qa3 a5 32.Rf3 Kg7 33.Re3 Rf6 34.Bh3 Rf8 35.Re2 Bf7 36.Rae1 Bg8 37.Bg2 b5 38.Ra1 Rb8 39.Qc5 bxa4 40.Rxa4 Rb5 41.Qa3 Rb1+ 42.Kf2 Nb5 43.Qc5 Qxc5 44.dxc5 Nxc3 45.Rxa5 Nxe2 46.Kxe2 Rc7 47.c6 Rb6 48.Ke3 Rbxc6 49.Nxc6 Rxc6 50.h4 h5 51.Kd4 Kf6 52.Ra1 Bf7 53.Bh3 Rb6 54.Kc3 Be8 55.Bg2 Bd7 56.Bh3 Bc6 57.Kd4 Bd7 58.Kc3 Ke7 59.Bg2 Kd6 60.Kd4 Rb4 61.Bf3 Bc6 62.Be2 Rb2 63.Kc3 Rb8 64.Kd4 Rf8 65.Bf1 g5 66.hxg5 h4 67.Ke3 hxg3 68.c3 e5 69.fxe5+ Kxe5 70.Bh3 Rh8 71.Bg4 Rg8 72.Ra6 Rxg5 73.Bf3 g2 74.Bxg2 Rxg2 75.Rxc6 Rc2 76.Rh6 Rxc3+ 77.Kd2 Ra3 78.Rh5+ Kd4 79.Rh4+ Kc5 80.Rh5 Rd3+ 81.Kc2 Kb4 82.Rh8 Rf3 83.Rb8+ Kc5 84.Rh8 Rf2+ 85.Kc1 d4 86.Rb8 d3 0-1
Here is another game in which black wins after 86 moves! Note how black again prevents the move of whites LSB to e5, but this time with Qb8. IMHO becase black doesn't play the e5 move this position bogs down into a long game of trench warefare. The move of f4 by white prevents this useful move for black. Blacks pawn at e6 is weak and backward.

blue wave: Note, though, that Black did not go for e5 in this game, and that this central break doesn't have to be automatically good in every situation. For example, in Tseshkovsky vs V Goncharov, 1995, where Black plays the "straightforward" Qc7-Nbc6-e5 sequence he seems to be getting into trouble after the position opens (though his game can probably be improved - for example, by avoiding 19...Bc6 which allows the extremely annoying 20.Re6).

IMHO I think 23...Bd7 is a blunder for black. 23..d4 would be stronger for black in this game. Black need to advance his pawns here.

blue wave: Eyal your right 23...d4 isn't good move for black in the game Tseshkovsky vs Goncharov 1995. But I still think that Black hasn't played the best he can in this game. For example 17..Bd7 isn't best IMHO. 17...Bf5 to challenge whites strong LSB or Be6 would be stronger for black. Also I slightly prefer the lines in which Black play Qf8 instead of Qc7.

I guess we can agree to disagree the importance of the e5 move in this opening line. What I am saying is that if it is not played, most games will turn into drawish games and also longer games.

I've always thought that the best way to control a game is to control the centre of the board. And the best way to counter attack is to counter attack the centre of the board. A

Eyal: <blue wave> 17...Bf5 would lose 2 pawns by force to 18.Ra/fe1 Qd6 (or any other square that defends e7) 19.Bxe7 Rxe7 20.Rxe7 Qxe7 21.Bxf5 gxf5 22.Qxd5+ followed by Qxf5 (or Qxc5 in case of 22...Qf7). 17...Be6 would lose on the e-file to 18.Re1 Qd6 (forced, this time) 19.Qe3. Black has some serious problems in activating his pieces here - which might be another indication that the e5 plan doesn't work out well in this specific case.

But actually I don't think we disagree on the principle point - I said myself that e5 is a key move for Black, provided it can be played at the right timing. So far it seems to me that, although it doesn't look so at first glance, the 12...Qa5 lines are in fact those which give Black the best opportunities for playing this move... anyway, there's still a lot of time to consider this if we're going that way.

Gypsy: It seems that Mr. Fargo has a few interesting ideas about how to play this position after <8.Bd3>.

Kamsky vs I Farago, 1989

Zsofia Polgar vs I Farago, 1989

----

<blue wave> To me, the e6-e5 is a great oportunistic resource: we can spring it if White are no cautious enough and give us a chance. But, as Tseshkovsky vs V Goncharov, 1995 illustrates, brute-forcing the move is probably not heathy while White still has the 2B advantage. -2c-

Fight for the squares of the d3-h7 diagonal, using Black Q and minor pieces and keeping things mostly blocked probably takes a strategic precedence over the preparation of e6-e5.

Eyal: <Gypsy: It seems that Mr. Fargo has a few interesting ideas about how to play this position after <8.Bd3>.

Kamsky vs I Farago, 1989

Zsofia Polgar vs I Farago, 1989>

Yeah, the 8...Nd7 idea employed in these games is interesting - one consequence is that when Black plays f5 a move later, White avoids exf6 - presumably because Black would recapture with the knight rather than the rook.

Gypsy: Actually, Ivan Farago seems to have his ducks in the row, when it comes to this variation of French. The only game I found where Farago was outfoxed and outplayed in this variant is Bronstein vs I Farago, 1990.

Bronstein switched the normal move order, <10.Qh5>, and Farago went with <10...h6> instead of <10...g6>. This normally leads to an exchange of light bishops on g6. Bronstein also does that as Black in some of his French games. But here Bronstein sprung out a crazy bishop sac instead and completely confused and demolished Black defense.

It is a jewel of a game, but it is probably prudent not to kibitz it for now.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.