Botvinnik Semi-Slav, The (Pedersen)

ALATORTSEV'S 9.JiJd5?! 119
13 ... ..th7
Black prepares ... c5, which not only
attempts to undermine White's centre
but also gives the bishop excellent
scope on the long diagonal and gets rid
of the doubled c-pawns. There are a
couple of more direct attempts aimed
at White's queens ide, but they both
fail, mainly due to Black's poor development:
a) 13...lDxc3?! 14 bxc3..ta3 15 =tc2
b4 16 ..txc4 lDb6, Uhlmann-Nikolic,
Sarajevo 1980, and now White could
have got a substantial advantage with
17'iVf4, with the point 17 ... lDxc4 18
'it'f60-0 19'iVxh6 +- (Uhlmann).
b) 13 ... lD7b6 14 0-0 (a key move
when Black runs his knight to the
queenside like this is ..tf6, and here
even 14 ..tf6 lDxf6 15 exf6 might
promise White an edge, but I would
still prefer to wait) and now:
bl) 14 ... ..txc3 15 bxc3 lDa4 16
..tf6! (here it is!) 16 ... =tg8 17 'iVxh6
lDaxc3 18 ':c2 ..tb7 19lDg5lDxf6 20
'iVxf6 (20 lDxf7!?) 20 ... lDxe2+ 21
':xe2 'iVc7 22 f4 with a strong attack,
Bukic-Nikolic, Banja Luka 1981.
b2) 14 ... lDa4 15 ..tf6 =tg8 16'iVxh6
..txc3 17 'ir'h7!? 1:;[[8 18 bxc3lDaxc3
and now 19 ..tdl lDxf6 20 exf6 'iVa3
looked very good for Black in Amaral-Camejo,
Portuga11993. White can
improve with 19 =tc2, but perhaps it is
worth just transposing to Bukic-Nikolie
above with 17 bxc3lDaxc3 18 =tc2.
140-0 c5 (D)
14 ... lDf8 and 14 ... lD7b6 have both
been tried, but both moves are well
met by 15 ..tf6!. The text-move is the
most aggressive, and, it appears, the
best chance for Black to create counterplay.
w
15 a3
White replies by also choosing the
most aggressive move. By dealing
with the problem of the pinned knight
immediately White sacrifices a pawn.
Black must waste time taking it, while
White establishes a nice square for his
knight on d4, and is allocated more
time to build up the attack. However,
whether this is really worth the pawn
is far from clear. Other options:
a) 15 dxc5 ..txc3 16 bxc3 lDxc5
17 lWd4 lDa4 18 lDd2 (18 ..tf6!?)
18 ... lDaxc3 19..tf3 'ir'b6 20 'ir'g4