Botvinnik Semi-Slav, The (Pedersen)

IDEAS WITH .. :ila5 85
It is very possible that White can
leave the d-pawn en prise for a while
but since .i.e3 is a common part of
White's plan (vacating g5 for the
knight), White can just as well retreat
the bishop immediately.
15 ... c5
I had very much wanted this idea to
work. Other moves seem too slow.
15 ... 0-0-0 16 .i.e2 transposes to the
note to Black's 14th move above, while
15 ... .i.b7 is kind of illogical since it
permits White to fianchetto his bishop
without getting his king stuck in the
centre following a ... c3 thrust.
16:dl!
Simple and strong. 16 dxc5?! 0-0-0
17 .i.g2 lDe5 is very risky for White;
for example, 18 'il'e2 'il'd3 19 'il'dl c3
20 bxc3 'it'c4.
16 ... 0-0-0
Alternatively, 16 ... .i.b7 17 .i.g2
0-0-018 O-O! 'it'xe4 19 'it'xe4 .i.xe4 20
.i.xe4lDxf6 21.i.f3 re-establishes material
equality, but is very good for
White in view of his bishop-pair and
the exposed position of Black's king.
17 .i.g2 (D)
17 b3? seeks to exploit the fact that
the bishop on a6 is undefended and attempts
to open lines against Black's
king. However, with it, White neglects
his development, causing serious trouble:
17 ... lDxf6! 18 lDg5 (18 .i.g2 is
perhaps the lesser evil but it is obvious
then that 17 b3 was mistaken; 18 'ili'xf6
'ili'xe4 19 :gl ':xh2 is also clearly
better for Black) 18 ... 'iIi'xf3 19 lDxf3
.i.b7 20 .i.g2 c3 + Khenkin-S.Pedersen,
Schaan 1997.
B
17 ... c3
This is the thematic continuation. If
17 ... cxd4 18 ~xd4 c3, then the most
convincing is 19 .i.xc3! lDe5 20 .i.xe5
'ili'xe5 21 :xd8+ ~xd8 22 .i.f1! ±.
18 bxc3 bxc3
18 ... 'iIi'xa2 19lDxc5! wins for White,
and the attempt to reach a better version
of the line in the previous note
with 18 ... cxd4 is not good either in
view of 19 cxd4 (19 .i.xd4 lDe5 20
.i.xe5 'ili'xe5 21 ':xd8+