Black should offer a draw

If he does, white should decline. You have white. You have to play!

I'm starting to understand the emotions of previous participants re: the spoilers. Definitely the first time a complicated position is followed by a rash of spoilers, it is going to drive me nuts. I will do my best not to make any ridiculous moves...

For personal chess reasons, I'm pretty happy to see 1.e4 in this game. Maybe six months or so ago I decided to abandon the Sicilian Dragon for the Caro-Kann, a choice which I have not regretted yet.

But although I've studied (via Schandorff's book) a lot of lines in the opening in the very recent past as a result, I don't have a lot of experience in the opening yet (just a handful of serious games), and so this game (and the commentary) will hopefully put me on firmer ground for at least one of the variations.

Definitely I don't have strong human players look at my games often enough, and I will try to share as much of my "intuition" as possible, since it will probably be pretty suspect and in need of correction :-)

Meh, Caro kann. Not a favourite of mine to play against. I have played a bunch of different lines against the caro kann and have often opted for the transition into the blackmar diemer gambit. However I remember that it has been discussed on here before and without the surprise behind it it's pretty bad and gives black an easy game.

So I'm going to stay clear of a lot of theory and play 2.c4. It will likely end up in a panov attack type of situation which should be fine for me but it allows for some other stuff to happen as well. Let's see how it develops

OK, well, 2...d5 is the only move I'm really considering here, although I guess it's possible that there are other approaches to the position, they're not really to my taste and so I don't know anything about them: briefly, playing d6 and looking for an indian defense of sorts might be possible, ...e5 looks a little silly to me (after Nf3, for example) but is probably playable by someone (Bd6, maybe, to develop outside of the pawns rather than d6?). But really I'm just filling space with those thoughts.

I've reached this position in the past via 1.c4 c6 e4, and White played a line without an early d4 that has some independent value. (Yes, I now play 1...c6 against a lot of moves that, once upon a time, I played 1...c5 against. My arms are getting shorter, I guess.) It didn't seem that troubling for Black, but if White is looking to avoid mainlines, this is probably where we'll end up. Although I guess something even more strange isn't out of the question yet if White avoids trading on d5...but if we end up there, it will be a new experience for me.

The other alternative is that White plays an early d4 (after exd5), and we get into a more standard Panov-Botvinnik, which would return to Caro-Kann lines (more typically via 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4). I have to guess that is less likely, as I don't know of any reasons why White should prefer this move order to the usual one if this is the desired result.

I've found that this approach (playing the Panov) is pretty popular among my recent opponents, and the resulting positions (although there can be a lot of theory) have been fun to play.

A bit of a move order thing taking with the c-pawn. I intend to play ex d5 after his recapture but this move order avoids a gambit after 3. exd5 Nf6. As said previously this isn't my main line against the Caro-Kann so I'm not that well versed in those gambits and it should be a pretty decent one so I would rather avoid it.

Almost certain to follow now is 4.exd5 Nf6 and then White can throw in some checks, but there's not much to add beyond my previous post. I'll wait until the fifth move to discuss any more details...

nothing to add

Nf6 is simple chess. Black intends to recapture on d5 with the knight and argue that the IQP position here isn't very good for White. Of course, White usually tries to prevent that smooth development with his next move, usually with a check to exploit the fact that c6 is not available for the knight.

So now I have to make a decision. I have two moves available (well 3 I guess but the two of them should transpose.

I can play 5.Bb5+ after which I think play will continue 5...Nd7 6.Nc3 and black has a choice of a6 or g6

Or I can play 5.d4 (Nc3) Nxd5 6.Nc3 (d4) which is a normal Panov-Botvinnik position with an IQP but I should get active play fir the weakness. However the problem is that there are as far as I know heaps of theory and I'm not that familiar with it and it has been 5+ years since I looked at it.

So I think Bb5+ will be a better choice and it will also justify the opening move order (obv. there is nothing wrong with transposing into the Panov-Botvinnik, but I don't think it's a good idea as I think most Caro-Kann player are familiar with the lines).

is this still theory? Isn't that white pawn defendable? cause if that's the case it would be a little annoying imo.....

White can hold onto that pawn for quite a while if he wants to but should eventually lose it if black plays correctly. When I used to play this as black myself I dont think anyone ever played Bb5 against me. Dont really see how this is dangerous for black because he wants to play Nd7 anyways. Well I guess white gets the option of giving pawn back via d6... Should be interesting.

Nbd7 seems most natural here to try and obtain the bishop pair (with a6 coming shortly).

And maybe Bd7 Bc4 is a little awkward for Black, when Qb3 hitting b7/f7 is in the air and Black will fall behind in development trying to parry that.

Not much to say. I'll expect either a6 or g6

Yep, still theory, this position has been reached often enough in GM games. I'm still in the process of searching my database, but the most notable game I saw on the first page of results (can't scroll while it's still searching) is Nigel Short (as white) beating Bent Larsen in a 1987 blitz event . Edit: here's that game: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1124253 Edit2: Also found games by Kasparov and Shirov (as white) and Kramnik and Leko (as black) in this line. All four of those games were drawn.

White defends d5, but Black's not in a rush. It's only a matter of time...

Here, we're still able to follow the plan outlined above: a6 to capture the bishop pair. I'm pretty sure the mainline here is 6...a6 7.Qa4 Rb8 (to lift the pin on the a6 pawn) 8.Bxd7+ Qxd7 9.Qxd7+ Bxd7. Retreating the bishop for White is pretty passive, and Black can basically play the plan below (b5-b4) anyway. If White retreats the queen instead of trading, Black can play Qg4 to take advantage of White's lack of a king's bishop (the weakness of g2).

The moves are pretty intuitive, and so this general plan is easy to remember; Black has his eye on recapturing the pawn on d5, which if he can do smoothly, he should just be a little better. And one of the goals of a6 is to prepare b5-b4, to kick the N@c3 and ensure that d5 will fall.

The last piece of Black's development is where to put the queen's bishop. If something like the mainline given takes place, than the choice is to re-route the bishop to b7 (to pressure d5) or to f5 (to support Nf6-e4). In either case, this should be decided by tactical factors, e.g., whether the N@f6 needs support/to move, or whether d5 needs a third attacker (in addition to N@f6 and R@d8). I don't remember the precise move orders here, but the general idea is probably going to be good enough to reconstruct the particulars.

The above commentary basically sums up my "book" knowledge here, but as noted, Black's play is pretty concrete now, so the moves are easy to find given the above outline/heuristics.

Taking one most look at the position before posting, I should have a move in mind after White's alternatives: 7.Bxd7+ looks like the main alternative, but if I believe what I just wrote, Qxd7 seems very natural, with b5 again in mind. I guess a5 is possible to prevent this, but that looks slow for White -- d5 is ready to fall, g2 is weak, and Black even has time for b6...at any rate, this can't be anything special for White, and ...Bxd7 instead doesn't make sense. The move Bc4 which was indicated earlier is just terrible for White here, as b5 comes with tempo. Be2 looks slow, but isn't as provocative. b5 looks good there as well. Maybe Nb6 is a possibility there, but it'd be nice to meet Bf3 with Ne5, and besides, b5-b4 is still a useful idea.

I sort of assume that any deviation from Qa5 is inferior here, and at the very least, retreating the bishop can hardly be threatening. I've written a bunch here, it seems, which is a little odd since I'm making a "book" move, but it's useful to orient myself as we move out of the phase of known moves. I think the above outline should hold up for the next 3-5 moves.

I think the main line here is 7.Qa4 Rb8 followed by exchanges on d7. I'm not a big fan of the resulting position that would arise. If I also exchanges queens on d7 the d pawn will fall and black will be on his way to a superior ending. If I don't exchanges queens something like this is likely to happen

8.Bxd7 Qxd7 9.Qf4 Ra8 10.Nf3 Nxd5 11.Nxd5 Qxd5 12.0-0 e6. In this position black seem pretty solid, has the bishop pair and is still heading towards a good ending for him. I realize that the line isn't forced but it seems like a reasonable plausible way for the game to play out.

So I'm going to deviate from what I think is the main line with 7.Be2. I'll expect something like 7...Nb6 8.Nf3 Nxd5 and white can continue with moes like 0-0 and d4. The position that will arise from this should be quite similar to regular Panov-Botvinnik postions with active white pieces for the IQP but hopefully we are out of the most theory-heavy lines in a position that should have plenty of play in it and could lead to an exciting game

Hmm...ok. Not completely unexpected, but I might not have given the move enough respect. One thing I'm realizing is that in this format one doesn't have a good sense of when one's opponent is leaving book. Compared with the usual correspondence chess which is open book, and OTB, where one has the clock, it's a little disconcerting.

Anyway, I still like b5 here. I can't really find a specific reason why Nb6 fails, so maybe it's a viable alternative, but b5 seems better. Specifically, b4 followed by Nxd5 seems like a nice combination and b7 looks like a better square for the bishop (we do need to keep in mind the other IQP's potential to advance).

This is slightly lazy thinking, but if I try to give a justification that focuses on why Nb6 is bad, it'll probably be even lazier, and would amount to how the threat of Qb3 means that Black probably doesn't develop the lightsquared bishop outside of the pawns, but it's not like playing Be6 and g6 looks so terrible. Or developing some of those other pieces first. And even in those lines, b5 often looks reasonable.

The nice thing is that from here on out, White preventing this plan is probably bad (e.g., playing a3 or Qb3), while Black's pieces naturally target d5 even if the pawn there disappears just as part of restraining the (other) IQP. So b5 it is. But from here on out, I'll take a little more time with my moves, and maybe try and write out some concrete variations...

Save some whitespace.

well 7...b5 doesn't change much. I still think blacks plan is to play Nb6-xd5 after which it is a natural move to develop the light squared bishop so it will likely transpose into the kind of position I thought we would get after Be2.

My natural moves here would be Nf3 or d4. 7...b5 has given me a couple of additional possibilities in Bf3 and d6

d6 gives the pawn back (not that I think I will be able to keep it) and gives black an IQP as well. Black has some queenside space and I basically don't think white has all that much there.

8.Bf3 is much more interesting for me I think.

After 8...Bb7 9.d6 Bxf3 10.Nxf3 exd6 11.0-0 We have the following position:



It is worth noting that if black plays the natural moves 11...Be7 12. Nd4 0-0 he loses a piece after Nc6. So Black has to prevent Nc6 but white also have plans with Nf5 and Re1 and with the black king stuck in the center for a while there is plenty of possibilities for white to generate some pressure with active pieces. This also have the advantage that the heavy piece ending isn't as bad any more if we go there.

I think this a way to try to exploit b5 which I fell might have been a bit to early. I'm certain that both Nf3 and d4 are good choices but I like the position after Bf3. I guess I should mention that 8...Bb7 isn't forced, however after 8...Rb8 I can just play d4 with the intention of playing Bf4 and I think that is fine for white.

8.-Ne5 is a very serious option not mentioned by A.E

also, after Bb7 d6 Bxf3 Nxf3 black doesn't have to take, e6 (or maybe e5?) looks pretty good for black IMO.

I'm already regretting making that off-hand comment about meeting Bf3 with Ne5, which is somewhat less clear than I had imagined because of d6. No regrets about b5, yet, but I'll be more disciplined from here on out. Maybe :-)

Not only that (getting back to Ne5), but does Black really want to waste so much time with Ne5xf3 just to help White's development? I think not. The formula here is IQP+less space+no piece play=pain, and Black should be concentrating on keeping White from expanding and activating. I guess Nge2-f4 is an idea here to support d5.

And back to Ne5, Ne5-d3+ is a threat that probably makes d6 unplayable, as after Ra7, White can really win/save the pawn with dxe7 as Rxe7 threatening Re1+ is tough to meet. Totally superfluous line is: 12.Bc6+ Bd7 since Nf3 (to cover e1) is needed, after 13. Bxd7+ Kd7 14. Nf3 Qb6. and White is toast.

After 14...Qb6.

OK, well that was just for fun (White plays 9.d4 here anyway). To save time and give my loyal fans a better experience, I'm moving on to stream-of-consciousness annotations, instead of thinking about the position first. At least for today, when I definitely don't have the energy to think about chess, and so won't be making the move.

Basically, I completely disavow all of the above analysis. Like the infomercials say, for "solely for the purpose of entertainment."

Candidates: Bb7, Ne5, Rb8. I guess I should say Nb6 too, but I doubt I want to gambit that pawn.