Previous Questions and Answers

Back to Questions and Answers

Question 1. I received it from Sverre Johnsen (Norway; Elo 2214):

"Hello! I don't know if this is what you intended for your Q and A page, but I give it a try anyway. I posted this question on the newsgroup rec.games.chess.analysis some time ago, but didn't get any really useful replies.

I am curious about the inclusion of the moves a2-a4 and ...a7-a6 in the typical IQP positions that can arise from the QGA and Nimzo Indian? (Black has a pawn on e6 and no c-pawn) Are these moves helping black or white?

I am particularly interested in the positions arising after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 c5 5.Bxc4 cxd4 6.exd4 and now either a) 6...a6 7.a4 at once or b) ...a6 and a4 after one or more of the moves Nc3, Bg5 and O-O for white and one or more of the moves ...Nc6, ...e6 and ...Be7 for black.

My first guess would be that this inclusion is favourable for black, as white rarely responds to ...a6 with a4. White weakens the square b4 which black may use for the manoeuvre Nc6-b4-d5, and the attacking formations Qc2+Bd3 or Od3+Bc2 will usually be met by the fork Nc6-b4.

On the other hand white may take advantage of the weak square b6 (maybe fixing it by a4-a5) and it may be difficult for black to develop his Bc8 (after b7-b6 the pawn on a6 may become a target).
Positions where black plays ...Bg4 before ...e6 are of less immediate interest but thoughts on that kind of position would also be greatly appreciated.

PS: I have your book, Winning Pawn Structures, (I am reading it right now). I rate it beside Tisdall's Improve Your Chess Now, Watson's Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy and Silman's Reassess your Chess as one of the very best books of chess ever written."

Well, this is a very complicated question, which has no simple answer to it. We must consider pros and contras of the inclusion of moves ...a7-a6 and a2-a4 and you already mentioned some of them. Let's have a look at the following diagram:

What Black gets from the inclusion of those moves:

1. He can use the b4-square for his knight, which will make the d4-d5 more difficult for White. Also, the possibility of ...Nb4 makes it hard for White to build the 'Qd3 + Bc2' battery on the b1-h7 diagonal, which otherwise is a very dangerous plan.

2. Black also does not have to worry about the b5-square and so he can develop his queen there - ...Qd6, followed by ...Rd8. This may tie White's pieces to the d4-pawn. Of course, in this case Black does not play ...Nb4.

What White gets from the inclusion of those moves:

1. He can use the a3-square for the rook lift - Ra1-a3-g3 (or Rh3), particularly if Black's dark-squared bishop gets exchanged.

2. If Black develops with ...b6 and ...Bb7, the a6-pawn may be weak (after Qe2) and tie the a8-rook down to it.

3. If White ever exchanges on c6 and Black takes back with the b-pawn, the a6-pawn might be fixed with a4-a5 and become a target. The b6-suare can be weak too.

I have a lot of experience in such positions (both with White and Black) and can say that Black does better with the inclusion of these moves, than without them. However, he should not underestimate the benefits, which such moves can bring White too. I'd like to show one game from my book 'Winning Pawn Structures'. Here I show it with only light notes:

Varavin - Komarov

Novosibirsk USSR-army Ch, 1989

1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 dxe4 4 Nxe4 Nd7 5 Nf3 Ngf6 6 Ng3 e6 7 Bd3 c5 8 0-0 cxd4 9 Nxd4 Bc5 10 c3 Bxd4 11 cxd4 0-0 12 Bf4

Some players prefer to develop this bishop not to g5, but to f4. From there the bishop often moves to e5, influencing both flanks. Here this move seems to be just natural.

12...Nd5 13 Bd6 Re8 14 Re1 N7f6 15 Be5 Bd7 16 a4!? (D)

At first glance White's last move makes a very strange impression - one may ask, why does White waste time and weaken the b4-square? When a2-a4 is played in order to stop b7-b5, it's understandable, but why should White play it here? Well, while the standard 16 Nh5 would give White a promising attack, the text introduces a more interesting approach. White wants to employ his a1-rook - the only piece, which is not active at the moment. However, he believes that bringing the rook to c1 won't make much sense as it would only lead to some exchanges after an eventual ...Rc8. Instead, White wants to transfer the rook to the kingside via the a3-square, and this is the reason behind the 'strange' move 16 a4. In the game, this plan worked just fine,; perhaps Black just did not sense the danger.

16...Bc6 17 Ra3 h6?! 18 Bb1! Nb4??

Completely wrong - in no instance should Black move this piece away from his vulnerable kingside, where he has few forces. Black should have preferred 18...Rc8, sitting tight.

19 Bxf6! Qxf6 20 Nh5 Qe7 21 Rg3 g5

Or 21...g6 22 Bxg6! fxg6 23 Rxg6+ Kh7 24 Qb1+-.

22 h4 f6 23 hxg5 hxg5 24 f4+- (D)

24...Rad8 25 fxg5 fxg5 26 Re5 Rd5 27 Qd2 Rxe5 28 dxe5 Rd8 29 Rxg5+ Kh8 30 Qf4 1-0

The following fine game shows that sometimes White can exploit the weakness of the b6-square:

S. Gligoric - L. Szabo

European Team Ch, Hamburg 1965

1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 e6 5 Bxc4 c5 6 0-0 a6 7 a4 Nc6 8 Qe2 cxd4 9 Rd1 Be7 10 exd4 0-0 11 Nc3 Bd7 12 Bf4 Nb4 13 Ne5 Be8 14 Bg5 Nfd5 15 Bxd5 Nxd5 16 Nxd5 Bxg5 17 Nc3 Bc6 18 Nxc6 bxc6 19 a5! (D)

This move fixes the a6-pawn and allows White to occupy the b6-square.

19...Be7 20 Qc4 Qd6 21 Na4 Rfd8 22 Rac1 Qb4 23 Nb6 Ra7 24 Qxc6 Qxa5 25 d5! exd5 26 Nxd5 Kf8 27 b4! 1-0

In positions with the isolated d4-pawn it would be nice for Black to bring his Bishop to g4, putting pressure on the isolani. Yet, Black can seldom manage this, as usually in such positions he is behind in development and has to watch out for an early d4-d5.

Finally, I'd like to mention that the line you give - 1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 c5 5 Bxc4 cxd4 6 exd4 a6, is not the best way to force a2-a4. Once Black has taken on d4, White usually won't play a4 anymore - he will allow ...b5 and then drop his bishop either to b3 (aiming for d4-d5) or to d3 (looking for kingside attack). It's better to get such positions with 1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 c5 5 Bxc4 e6 6 0-0 a6. Then after 7 a4 Black can play 7...cxd4 8 exd4 Nc6 9 Nc3 Be7 10 Re1 0-0, while after 7 Qe2 b5 8 Bb3 Bb7 9 Nc3 Nbd7 he has mobile pawns on the queenside and has not opened the c1-h6 diagonal for White's bishop yet.

I can see that my answer has turned into a small lecture on positional chess, but I felt that your question merited a serious discussion. I hope that this material will be interesting for many other players too.

Alexander

During the first few days of my site's existence on the Web, I received a few questions for this section. I will try to answer them as they come, choosing the most interesting ones. So, we start:

Question 2. I received it from Gerard Mc Aree (Ireland):

"Hello, Alex! In the 1970s I played a lot of ICCF chess (for Ireland in both Olympiad and European championships.) Here and OTB I always played Alekhine's Defence with some success - I wrote articles on the 4 Pawns attack which were published in USSR, Sweden and West Germany and an article I wrote about AS Hollis, then the top English Correspondence GM was published in British Chess Magazine. Over the board, however, most people played 2.Nc3 and I had many draws. Anyway, I am now 50 years old and am making a chess comeback after 15 years of not playing

at all. So my questions are:

a) Should I play the Alekhine Defence again and how do you assess the opening in modern times?

b) Why is your own opening repertoire so small?"

The Alekhine Defence is doing OK nowadays. Most chess pros meet it with 2 e5 Nd5 3 d4 d6 4 Nf3, which is very solid. But then Black has a wide choice - 4...Bg4, 4...g6 and 4...dxe5. All those lines are sound and lead to interesting play. I sometimes play 4...c6, which is OK too. One attraction of the Alekhine Defence is that the first player often does not devote much time to studying it and therefore Black has better than average chances of catching his opponent unprepared.

2 Nc3 is a very common reply on the amateurs level, but playing this way White deprives himself of some attractive options - after 2...e5 White cannot get the Spanish Game, as well as many other aggressive lines. If you are not happy with 2...e5, try 2...d5 3 e5 Nfd7. This leads to the French Defence after 4 d4 e6 (4...c5!? is worth considering too), which currently works well for Black. In this line you must be prepared for 4 e6!? though. Black can also play 3...Ne4. The line 3 exd5 Nxd5 gives White nothing, but you need to know how to handle it. Another option after 2 Nc3 is 2...d6, but this is a whole new opening (the Pirc Defence) to learn then.

It's true that my opening repertoire is quite limited. The main reason lays in my laziness (I am not joking!) and also in the fact that I am only a semi-professional player - I play what I can get away with! :-)

Alexander

Question 3. I received it from David Petrozzi (Philadelphia, USA):

"I would like to ask your opinion on what constitutes the best method of training without a teacher? I am a University student studying chess on my own and am open to any and all suggestions. I have the greatest problem developing the specifics a plan - not the concept (i.e. attack on kingside), but in generating the actual moves themselves. My goal is to play with the strength of a master. Currently, I am a class B/C player. Thanks for your time and expertise!"

I am afraid that I won't come up with anything new here - study chess literature and analyse your own games. It's nice to have a coach, but this is not absolutely crucial - most work will have to be done by you. The coach can help a lot with guiding you in which direction you should work though.

As for chess literature, read books where masters explain their thinking and decision making process. Games, annotated by strong players, are one of the best sources of chess knowledge.

Always analyse your own games and try to figure out where you could play better and why you make mistakes. Once you have defined them, begin to study relevant subjects and train yourself. For example, if you are weak in positional play, then it's time to study more positional themes and games, where they were used. If your calculations are bad, then solve tactics and train yourself in complicated positions.

I don't quite understand the second part of your question - surely we all look for moves, which improve our position and do something nasty to our opponent's play. If you meant some specific positions, where you have troubles finding best moves, I would need to see them. Alas, this is beyond the scope of this section.

Alexander

Question 4. I received it from Luciano dos Santos Fier:
"Mr Baburin, congratulations for your site and the CBC magazine - they are great. My question is about your opinion about chess as a profession in the future. My son (age 11) says the he wants to be a professional chess player. He demonstrates some talent (FM, second in the last Youth Chess Festival, draw with J. Polgar in a simul, etc). But I fell worried about the growth of the use of computers, the theoretical mass of information and so one. Does you think that chess still viable profession next 5-10 years? Thank you for your time."

I don't think that use of computers will destroy chess, although computers certainly affect chess - general chess public becomes more knowledgeable and chess theory develops fast. Yet, in chess best (most talented, most stubborn, most clever) players still win - the conditions remain more or less equal. For example: if your rivals use computers in their preparation and you don't, then you might be handicapped. But you can use the same technology. So, it's all down to talent, hard work and guts.

I don't think that it will be possible to make decent living in the future just from playing chess. At least, this will be possible for only very few top players. Life of an average chess pro is interesting, but not very easy. I think that those who will combine playing chess with giving lessons, will be more secure.

Your son is still very young - I would suggest that he combines playing chess with academic studies - good education won't hurt anyone! A few years later he will be in a better position to decide whether he wants to become a chess professional.

Alexander

In the past two month a received quite a number of questions. Here I'd like to answer some of them (more to follow!).

Question 5. I received it from Alan Dee (Ireland):

"Thank you for replying to my email some time ago. I have joined a chess club and am having fun, getting ready for tournaments, and studying 3-4 hours a day (I have a lot of free time!). I played a game as White last night, and analysed it afterwards. We ended up playing the Gruenfeld Exchange Variation, which I was not familiar with, but played conventionally till move eight - Bb5+. I have looked up in my reference book on openings, and cannot find Bb5+. Yet it led to a winning position for White in this game. In your opinion, is Bb5+ a sound move, positionally speaking? Keep up the excellent work! Yours gratefully, from County Meath (down the road from you).

1 d4 g6 2 Nf3 Bg7 3 c4 Nf6 4 Nc3 d5 5 cxd5 Nxd5 6 e4 Nxc3 7 bxc3 c5 8 Bb5+

(The game continued 8. ...Bd7 9 Qb3 Bxb5 10 Qxb5 Qd7, etc.)

PS Let me buy you a drink sometime!"

It's really strange that you could not find this line (8 Bb5+) in your book, as this line is quite popular. It's perfectly sound from positional point of view. White wants to upset Black's plans and this line could be a good weapon against the Gruenfeld, if you like the resulting (rather technical) positions. Black can play 8...Bd7, 8...Nd7 or 8...Nc6. Top players clearly favour the latter. For example, Kramnik-Shirov, Wijk aan Zee, 1999 went 8...Nc6 9 0-0 cxd4 10 cxd4 0-0 11 Be3 Bg4 12 Bxc6 bxc6 13 Rc1 Bxf3 14 Qxf3 Bxd4 15 Rfd1 c5 16 Rxc5 Bxe3 17 Rxd8 Bxc5 18 Rxa8 Rxa8 and White eventually won the game. After 8...Bd7 I don't like your move 9 Qb3 (I can't see its point after 9...0-0!). Instead you should have played 9 Bxd7 or 9 Be2. In the latter variation Black's bishop on d7 reduces his pressure upon d4, so Black might need to bring it to g4, but this makes his opening choice narrower. Best regards, Alex

PS I have not met too many Russians who would refuse a drink! :-)

Question 6. I received it from Harl Myers:

"I was told to pick one White opening, and two Black openings (for 1 e4 and 1 d4). I have been trying to do just that, but it is very confusing. What openings are hard to transpose into others? Which ones are good and yet do not require 40 books to learn? What openings do you suggest your students learn? And what openings do you use (I read elsewhere you had a limited one, for same reasons I also would like a small one)?"

If I understand correctly, you are not very experienced in openings. Then I would suggest that as Black you play 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6, followed by ...Nf6, Be7 and 0-0. This is classical Queen's Gambit Declined and it's very solid. Here you can obtain reasonable positions on common sense alone. You might also consider 2...c6 or 2...dxc4. Against 1 e4 try 1...e5, but here you need to learn a bit more, as in open games White can create more problems at an early stage. Alternatively, try 1...c6 or 1...e6. Openings involving ...g6 are great, but they certainly require a lot of study.

As Black I mostly play 1 e4 Nf6 (the Alekhine Defence) and 1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 (the Queen's Gambit Accepted).

Best regards, Alexander

Question 7. I received it from Janet Newton:
"Hello! Let me start first by telling you how much I admire your web site - well done, sir! My questions are these: on average, how many tournaments do you attend a year, and who generally travels with you when you attend these tournaments? Also, how many months out of a year do you typically spend attending tournaments away from Ireland? Sincerely, Janet Newton."

Sometimes I play a lot more in one particular year than in another. Let's take this year, for example. In February I played in Bunratty (Ireland), then in March I went to India for about 2 weeks. In May I played in Havana (about 2 weeks), while in July I spend 12 days playing in Copenhagen. In August I played 2 tournaments in England (3 weeks or so in total). In October I played in Germany for 10 days, then in November I took part in the Isle of Man Open and recently in Kilkenny Open (Ireland, 3 days). This year has been very busy for me, though don't know why! 9 tournaments plus 6 games in British chess league (4NCL) this year. Still, many GMs play a lot more.

Alas, playing chess does not bring secure income, so I teach chess and work as a chess journalist. This suits me fine, as when I don't play too often, I enjoy it more! Usually I go to tournaments alone, though on a few occasions my wife accompanied me. In 1997 we also took our kids to the Isle of Man, which they enjoyed a lot. Incidentally, there I had one of my best results ever! I have lots of friends in chess, so I like going to chess tournaments. In Ireland play only about 2 tournaments a year (Bunratty and Kilkenny).

With best regards, Alexander

Question 8. I received it from Manu Vlaeyens:

"Hi Alexander, Great that you are willing to invest that much effort just to help us amateurs out! I have been enjoying CBC for some time now, and it's a great blend of contents and fun to read indeed.
I would like forward you a question that has been puzzling my mind for a very long time now. In the Ruy Lopez, many variations start off like this:
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 and now Black has several options. But after Black's fourth move (Nf6, d6, ...) and the appropriate White reply to it, very often Black decides to play b5 anyway (on the 5^th, 6^th or 7^th or so move).
The question is: if Black intends to play b7-b5 anyway, why not immediately do so on the 5^th move? BTW, I'm not pleading in favour of an immediate b5, I can easily live with delaying it myself, it's just that I'm curious about it.  
Another way to ask the same question: why is 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 0-0 Be7 6 Re1 b5 7 Bb3 so often preferred above 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 b5 5 Bb3 Nf6 6 0-0 Be7 7 Re1? Or is the motivation different in the various variations in the Ruy Lopez?"

I guess that for as long as Bxc6 and Nxe5 is not a real threat, Black does not want to play ...b5. First, this may allow White to hit it with a2-a4, but more important is the fact that after 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 b5 5 Bb3 Nf6 White might go for something like 5 Ng5 or 5 d4. If you compare this to the lines like 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 Ng5 d5 5 exd5 Na5 and 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 d4 exd4 5 e5 d5, you will see that White probably does better with his bishop on b3 than on c4. Here is one illustration:

Adorjan-Bartrina, Olot 1974

1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 d4 b5 6 Bb3 Nxd4 7 Nxd4 exd4 8 e5 Qe7 9 0-0 Ng8 10 Qf3 Rb8 11 Bg5! (D)
11…f6 12 exf6 gxf6 13 Nd2 Qg7 14 Rfe1+ Be7 15 Bf4 Bb7 16 Bd5 Bxd5 17 Qxd5 Kd8 18 a4 b4 19 Nf3 Bf8 20 Nxd4 Ne7 21 Ne6+ Kc8 22 Qc5 1-0

So, Black should probably wait for White to play 0-0 and Re1 before he commits himself to ...b5. This, of course, does not mean that 4...b5 is not possible – both 5 Bb3 Bc5 and 5...Na5 are quite playable.

Question 9. I received it from Martin O'Grady, Limerick, Ireland:

"Alexander, First of all, my congratulations on your website and CBC. I find both very
entertaining and stimulating! I very much enjoyed the first question posed on your website, and your detailed answer.
My question is as follows. I was reading your comments recently in several sources about openings, and your repertoire and it suggested to me that I query your own thoughts about the subject. In the 'Best Games' section you annotated a game where you played the Nimzo-Indian, an opening you stated that you rarely play. In a game with Epishin, I think, you commented about the QGA vs. the Kings Indian, making a provocative comment about why the QGA is a better opening than the KID. I wondered why you chose to play the QGA , and not the Nimzo as the Nimzo/Queens Indian is a system which is both solid and dynamic, characteristics that I would have thought suited you.
Against 1.e4 you play the Alekhine now, where once you played the Sicilian a lot (including a 22-move demolition against myself in a Dublin weekender several years ago!).
It made me think about why players choose certain systems/openings, and what
made you choose these ones? Best Regards."

There are many factors which influence player’s decision to play (or not to play) certain openings. Fashion is one, suitability and complexity of the opening are others. I agree that the Nimzo-Indian would probably fit me nicely, but learning to play this opening against GMs would take a lot of time. And because I don’t make enough money (probably never will!) from playing chess, I can’t afford to spend much time on my opening repertoire. Besides, I am quite happy with QGA. BTW, that was purely a joke that the QGA is clearly better than the KID! Both openings are fine.

As for how I started to play it, it’s an interesting story. When I was between 16 and 18, I lost 3 or 4 games to Yuri Yakovich (now GM), when he played the QGA against me. Of course, he was a better player than me around that time, but a teenager can rarely admit it. So, I decided that the trick must be in the opening itself! :-) This is how I got hooked to the QGA. The Alekhine Defence is another opening which I play since I was 15 or so. Again, maybe the Sicilian would suit me better, but the thought of studying all lines there till move 25 or so scares me! Besides, I fear that I cannot remember those lines, while the Alekhine is the devil I know pretty well by now! :-)

Question 10. I received it from Bill Yuey, New Jersey, USA:

"Hello Grandmaster Baburin! First let me tell you that I love your website as well as CBC!  Both are great in that I almost feel I personally know a real chess grandmaster!
I have one brief question for you:  what is the current status of the Botvinnik Variation in the Semi-Slav?  Forgive me if this is a 'lazy' question.  I do not have a million game database in my computer (nor do I want one!) and even if I did, I am not strong enough to analyze the games and come to a conclusion by myself. Thanks a lot!"

I don’t really play this opening, but as far as I know, Black has problems there at the moment and on the top level Black rarely ventures into this system nowadays. One problem is that the lines are extremely committal and often Black easily crosses the point of no return. With modern GMs analysing such lines with computers ‘till the end’, it’s very risky to employ this opening as Black. This is about the top level (maybe top 20 players in the world or so) – below that it’s OK to play this line, I guess, as White may not know or remember too much theory then. Of course, this only works if Black likes sharp play and knows what he is doing.

Question 11. I received it from Alen Machina:

"Hello Alex, as your permanent reader I was delighted to find out, after downloading
a database with the Alekhine Defence games, that you quite frequently play it. I have been, following your advice in one of Chess Coffee Breaks that one has to have a 'role model' for a particular opening he uses, looking fore someone who plays Alekhine, and I finally found - you!
Recently I made an assessment of my chess playing and I decided to make some radical changes. I used to play some cautious openings with a mass of pawns in front of other pieces, with often totally blocked positions, overcrowded and rather static (my choices were as Black Caro-Cann and as White English). In order to make my games more alive I
decided to play openings with a quick pieces development, and, almost as a joke, as black I started to respond Alekhine Defence on 1.e4 and Gruenfeld Defence on 1.d4 I really enjoy playing these sharp openings, but, especially for Alekhine, it is hard to find some good learning material, apart from huge databases. I reached this year ELO 1700 points. (150 up from last year) with my new style, but I see it only as the start. Therefore, I would like to ask you for the opinion about the Alekhine Def. On your site I found your answer that it is a 'surprise weapon' but surely there must be something more. How would you describe your experience, what attracted you to use it, what you find as it's weakness? When do you decide to play it, does it depend on your opponent, your situation on the tournament? Who are the other top players that play Alekhine Defence?
What are the books you would recommend? Can you make a comment about my decision to change a playing style? With regards, Alen."

Of course, there is more to the Alekhine Defence than just its surprise value. It’s an interesting opening, where Black can choose between various acceptable systems. For example, after 1 e4 Nf6 2 e5 Nd5 3 d4 d6 4 Nf3 (D)

Black can try 4...Bg4, 4...g6, 4...dxe5 or 4...c6. When I played the latter against one IM, he was so shocked that after losing that game he asked me whether his next move (I think he played perfectly sensible 5 c4) was not a mistake... :-)

One problem with the opening is that White can easily get a very solid game, e.g. after 4 Nf3 or 4 c4 Nb6 5 exd6. Still, Black should not complain too much. When I play the Alekhine Defence, I often think that my chances to get a better position with Black against a 2600-player would be fare greater in the Naidorf Variation of the Sicilian Defence or something like that. Yet, then I think that so would be the chances to get trashed by a 2350 player! :-)

Fischer played the Alekhine Defence twice in the 1972 match and scored 1.5. Petrosian played it a few times, Ivanchuk plays the Alekhine Defence occasionally, Timman played it, Miles employs it often. Bagirov and Alburt are experts in it. Kengis and Agdestein use it. So, welcome to our (small) club – the company is not too bad! :-)

Graham Burgess wrote 2 useful books on this opening. I am also going to do a CD for Chess Base on this subject later this year – watch out!

As for the decision to change your playing style, this is harder than changing a repertoire (or a shirt) – you should play the way you like it most. You probably felt instinctively that you needed to get different positions and if you are happy with the results, one can only congratulate you on this shift!

Question 12. I received it from Doug Schwetke (Texas, USA):

"Hello, I would be interested in anything you write about the Alekhine Defense. I am a club player and it is my main defence to 1.e4. As you are a fan of the Alekhine Defense, what do you think of the Kengis Variation?  1 e4 Nf6 2 e5 Nd5 3 d4 d6 4 Nf3 dxe5 5 Nxe5 g6. I have not been able to find a game of yours in this variation. I have found one with 5...Nd7 (instead of 5...g6 in the Kengis) and with 4...g6. The most dangerous White line I have faced is 5 Nxe5 g6 6 Qf3. This involves a rather wild game with sacrifices. What do you think?"

Indeed, I have never played the Kengis Variation so far, though I think it is perfectly playable. Maybe I will try it one day! According to G. Burgess (1996), the line 6 Qf3 Be6 7 c4 Nb4 8 Qxb7 Nc2+ is critical in the variation, which you mentioned. But 6 Qf3 is not very common.
 

Finally, a couple questions not related to any opening:

Question 13. I received it from Dann Corbit:

"I am sure you are a busy person, but I wanted to get a GM's opinion and I perceive you as very personable and friendly.  If you don't have the time, please just ignore my request. Everyone seems to be stepping on Khalifman because he won the FIDE WC.  I think it enrages a lot of people (though it puzzles me greatly -- it is not as though he has knocked *them* out of a chance to win). How do you feel about what happened at the FIDE WC? What is your perception of how Khalifman is being treated? I think it might make an interesting discussion on your web page."

Alexander Khalifman was always highly regarded among chess professionals – his talent was evident since he was a teenager and he had some very good results and great games prior to his triumph in Vegas in 1999. He is also a nice guy, which counts for a lot in the chess world, which often is too competitive. So, as far as I know, his success in Vegas has been well received among professionals: he clearly deserved it, showing that he is tough player with a great will power. This does not make him the best player in the world though – Kasparov is clearly No. 1 still. There are a few more who probably would have better chances than Khalifman in the old (pre 1994) system. I must admit that I don’t see where and how Khalifman is being mistreated. Probably things became a bit hard for Alexander after the World Ch, as he suddenly started to draw lots of attention. But it seems that he is handling the pressure quite well.

Question 14. I received it from Mark Hannon:

"Dear GM Baburin, I would like to ask you how do you and other top players cope with the nervous tension in playing a chess game? Although I like chess very much, even as an amateur 2100 Elo I find the stress of knowing that just one mistake can wipe out hours of work very difficult to bear - worse than exams. It must be even more difficult if you depend on your chess results for a living. Also how do you feel about defeats. I have found making an analysis of them for my local chess magazine makes me feel better about them what do you do? Thanks in advance for any reply. Mark"

Indeed, stress can be very serious during a game of chess. I remember how I once won a game a very important game in a mutual time-trouble. 20 minutes after the game I had 39+ temperature and all my systems broke down... That was a horrific nerves break-down, though it involved purely my body and not my mind. Fortunately I did not have to play the following day and so I managed to recover. When I played Sakaev in 1995 needing a win to score GM-norm, at some point in a bad position and approaching my time-trouble I got a horrible heartbeat and nearly fainted... Then I said to myself that I did not want to die because of a game, no matter how important. So I took about 2 minutes to relax. The game was drawn and I stayed alive! :-)

Somebody (I think, Spassky) said that defeat is a miniature death. Very true and for most players it’s hard to cope with loses. As for me, practice has made it perfect! :-) I know this well, as recently I lost 3 games in one weekend (fortunately I played only three!). It’s not a nice feeling, I can tell you. I console myself that it’s all part of the game, that I have a family, many friends, lots of interesting things to do in life, etc. I also know that one day I might even win a game or two! I also analyse my loses, sometimes on the same day – in order to get it out of my system as quickly as possible, so my brain won’t come back to it again and again. Of course, it still does... I find that reading helps me to get over my defeats. A nice walk and sometimes a few drinks can help too. The latter should be executed with caution though.