The Chess Mind

After a few days without seeing a response on James West's blog to my last anti-PCG post (or to other points in its predecessors), I stopped checking for a while. A browse on Sunday revealed that he hadn't been idle, however; he had returned to the scene of the crime! Meanwhile, by a happy coincidence, reader Marvin (Joe) Barker wrote in with a nice anti-PCG idea of his own.

For those who haven't followed the fun, here's where we are. The PCG (Philidor Counter-Gambit) starts with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 f5(?!), and the dispute with West, who has played the PCG with an almost religious devotion for many years, begins after the further moves 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 d5?! (5...Nf6 seems to be stronger) 6.Neg5. We have examined 6...h6, 6...e4, and 6...exd4, but it's only the latter move we're going to look at today. Here I've offered two moves for White: 7.Nxd4 and 7.Bb5+(!?). West has something to say in Black's defense in both cases, and Barker has a contribution of his own here. Let's have a look.

(A) 7.Nxd4. One line I offered here continued 7...Qe7+ 8.Be2 h6 9.Ngf3 c6 10.O-O Qf6 11.Re1 Bd6 12.Ba6+ Kf7 13.Bd3 Ne7 14.Bd2 with the idea of following up with Bc3. White is at least clearly better here, and possibly winning. To avoid this Bd2-c3 idea, West proposes the clever 11...Bb4, and only after 12.c3 to play 12...Bd6. Now the c3 square is occupied, so that after 13.Ba6+ Kf7 14.Bd3 Ne7 White no longer has the Bd2-c3 idea.



Except that he does: 15.c4! Black's position looks better than it did in the 11...Bd6 analysis, but I still think White has a clear advantage here. For example: 15...Re8 16.Bd2 Na6 17.Bc3 Bb4 (neutralizing the c3-bishop, but now White's knight can use the e5 square) 18.Bh7 Bxc3 19.Ne5+ Kf8 20.bxc3 and neither 20...g6 nor 20...c5 reduces White's edge below +/-. (See the link below for more details.)

(B) 7.Bb5+ c6 8.Bd3 Bb4+ and now:



(B1) 9.Bd2 Bxd2+ 10.Qxd2 Nf6 11.O-O-O O-O 12.Nxd4 Re8 13.Rhe1 h6 14.Rxe8+ Qxe8 15.Re1

In West's earlier analysis of this position, he recommended 15...Qh5, and considered Black's position acceptable after 16.Nge6 Bxe6 17.Nxe6 Nd7. In my response, I pointed out that 16.Nge6 was an error and inferior to 16.Ngf3, but I didn't explain why. So let me rectify that omission: the reason Nge6 is bad is that it helps Black catch up in development, and the reason Ngf3 is good is that the knight is ready to leap into the more useful e5 square (and then follow up with Bg6).

This pertains to West's suggested improvement of 15...Qf8. His analysis continues 16.Nge6 Bxe6 17.Nxe6 Qd6 18.g4 Nbd7 19.g5 Re8 20.Bf5 hxg5 21.Qxg5 Re7 22.Rg1 Ne8 23.Nd4 Qf6 24.Qg4 Nf8, with (at least) equality, but after 16.Ngf3! Black is in trouble, whether he allows the knight to e5 or not. Again, see the link below for details.

(B2) 9.c3!? This gambit idea is Barker's, and it looks like a good one. White has a lead in development, so why not increase it? With his aggressively posted knight on g5, the well-placed bishop on d3, the open e-file, and the chance to post the second knight on e5, such a full-speed-ahead strategy deserves consideration.

Details here.