The Ruy Lopez Move By Move By Neil McDonald.pdf
I don't believe by posting theoretical lines I am gonna help you out with this. It needed to combine it with theory : Strategicall concepts that explain the moves. You can find plenty of important games played in those lines by searching on the web (chess games.com ) but it's not gonna help or in Chesstempo Database.
The Ruy Lopez Move by Move by Neil McDonald.pdf
The theory of the Ruy Lopez is the most extensively developed of all Open Games, with some lines having been analysed well beyond move thirty. At nearly every move there are many reasonable alternatives, and most have been deeply explored. It is convenient to divide the possibilities into two groups based on whether or not Black responds with 3...a6, the Morphy Defence, named after Paul Morphy, although he was not the originator of the line. The variations with Black moves other than 3...a6 are older and generally simpler, but the Morphy Defence lines are more commonly played.
The most commonly played third move for Black is the Morphy Defence, 3...a6, a move which forces White to decide whether to retreat or to exchange for Black's knight. The Morphy Defence thus "puts the question" to the white bishop, a traditional usage which Larry Evans attributed to Aron Nimzowitsch. The main point of 3...a6 is that after the common retreat 4.Ba4, Black will have the possibility of breaking a future pin on the queen knight by playing ...b5. White must take some care not to fall into the Noah's Ark Trap, in which Black traps White's king bishop on the b3-square with a ...a6, ...b5, and ...c4 pawn advance on the queenside.Ercole del Rio, in his 1750 treatise Sopra il giuoco degli Scacchi, Osservazioni pratiche dell'anonimo Modenese (On the game of Chess, practical Observations by an anonymous Modenese), was the first author to mention 3...a6. The move became popular after it was played by Paul Morphy, however, and it is named for him. An influential chess player at that time, Wilhelm Steinitz, did not approve of the move, however; in 1889, he wrote, "on principle this ought to be disadvantageous as it drives the bishop where it wants to go". Steinitz's opinion did not prevail, however; today, 3...a6 is played in over 65 percent of all games beginning with the Ruy Lopez.
After 4.Bxc6, Black almost always responds 4...dxc6. The similar move 4...bxc6 is rarely played due to the reply 5.d4 exd4 6.Qxd4 which gives White control of the centre. After 4...dxc6, the obvious 5.Nxe5? is weak, since 5...Qd4! 6.Nf3 Qxe4+ 7.Qe2 Qxe2+ 8.Kxe2 leaves White with no compensation for Black's bishop pair.
The flexible 5.0-0 is sometimes called the Barendregt Variation, but it was Fischer who developed it into a serious weapon in the 1960s. Unlike 5.d4, it forces Black to defend the e-pawn, usually with 5...f6, 5...Bg4, 5...Qd6 (the sharpest line, preparing queenside castling), 5...Qf6, 5...Qe7, or 5...Bd6. Some other moves that have been played are 5...Ne7, 5...Be7, and 5...Be6. The idea behind these three moves is that if White plays 6.Nxe5, Black plays 6...Qd4, forking the knight and the e4-pawn. The move ...Qd4, regaining the pawn at e4, is usually impossible in these variations once White has castled, due to the open e-file.
White may also delay the exchange for a move or two: 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.Bxc6 or 5.0-0 Be7 6.Bxc6 (the Delayed Exchange Deferred), for example; at first glance this seems a waste of time, but Black having played ...Nf6 rules out defending the pawn with ...f6, and the bishop already being on e7 means that ...Bd6 would be a loss of tempo.
The Graz Defence, Classical Defence Deferred, and Møller Defence combine 3...a6 with the active move ...Bc5.For a century it was believed that it was safer for Black to place the bishop on e7, but it is much more active on c5.White can gain time after playing d4 as the black bishop will have to move, but this does not always seem to be as important as was once thought.
The Morphy Attack (ECO C84) named after Paul Morphy who introduced the idea in a 1859 blindfolded simul, is aggressive and may lead to a very small edge for white, but less than in 6. Re1 and 6. d3. Similar to those 2 moves, white's defence of his e-pawn compels black to drive away white's bishop with 6...b5(6...d6 is also possible, but less popular). After 7.Bb3, black can play 7...0-0 or 7...d6. Note that Marshall attack-style ideas of 7...0-0 and playing d5 next, sacrificing a pawn, make little sense when white's knight on c3 both controls d5 and means white has a more developed queenside, one of the upsides of the Marshall usually being white's underdeveloped queenside. The main line of 7...d6, 8. Nd5 Na5 9.Nxe7 Qxe7 10. d3 0-0, with black eventually relinquishing white of his bishop pair with Nxb3, shows a common attacking idea in the Morphy Attack; Nd5. In the main line, 8...Nxd5? is wrong because 9.Bxd5! leaves white with a strong bishop on the outpost square d5, exerting a troublesome pin on the undefended c6 knight. After 7...0-0, 8. d3 transposes to one of the main lines of 6. d3, with 6... b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.Nc3. Paul Keres and Boris Spassky have both played the line a few times throughout their career (both playing it against one another once), and Siegbert Tarrasch played it 3 times in his 1911 match against Schlechter(scoring 1 win, 1 draw, 1 loss in that order), but it remains the least popular option for white on move 6.
In the Worrall Attack (ECO C86), White substitutes 6.Qe2 for 6.Re1. The idea is that the queen will support the e-pawn, leaving the rook free to move to d1 to support the advance of the d-pawn, although there is not always time for this. Play normally continues 6...b5 7.Bb3 followed by 7...0-0 8.c3 and 8...d5 or 8...d6.
This variation can transpose into 6.Re1 lines but with a potentially advantageous move order. For example, in the 8.a4 anti-Marshall variation which can ensue after 6.Re1, one of the mainlines is 8...Bb7 9.d3, which can also be reached by way of 6.d3 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.a4 Bb7 9.Re1. A perhaps more challenging response to the anti-Marshall is 8...b4, after which White may wish to ambitiously play 9.a5 (preventing ...Na5) d6 10.d3 Be6!, where White cannot avoid the trade of bishops (the main moves being either 11.Bxe6 or 11.Nbd2 Bxb3). If Black elects not to exchange, however, we may see 11.Nbd2 Rb8 12.Nc4 where White may retain some pull in the position. On the other hand, to be considered is 6.d3 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.a4 b4 9.a5 d6 10.Nbd2 Be6 11.Nc4!, where White has avoided the exchange and can transpose directly to the anti-Marshall line if desired by playing Re1 later. Play may also in some rare cases transpose to a traditional closed Spanish (with 7...d6) after something like 6.d3 d6 7.c3 0-0 8.Re1 b5 9.Bc2 Bb7 10.Nbd2 Re8 11.h3 Bf8 12.d4, reaching a reasonably well-trodden position in the Zaitsev system, though both players may deviate at many points in this line.
Also possible is to transpose to the Pilnik variation, after 6...b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0, where 9. Re1 would transpose to the Pilnik, with the Marshall successfully avoided(which the Pilnik does not do). In general, if 6...b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3, positions could resemble a traditional closed Spanish such as the Zaitsev, Flohr, Smyslov, Karpov, Breyer, or Chigorin where white has played 10. d3(or in the case of the Chigorin, 11. d3 with 10. Bc2 c5 included) instead of 10. d4(in the case of the Chigorin, 11. d4) if white plays Re1 and h3. In every case, 10. d3 is far less popular than 10. d4(again, 11.d4 for Chigorin), but is the only move besides d4 to ever be seriosly considered. 10. d3 in those variations are often referred to as the quiet variation of that variation (quiet Breyer, quiet Flohr, quiet Chigorin, etc). In the case of Flohr-Zaitsev-type setups, white may quickly push d3-d4 without h3 and lose a tempo compared to the traditional Zaitsev, but the move h3 is what would be lost, which is not so relevant with the bishop already committed to b7, so the only thing h3 provides is Luft(an idea shared with the Pilnik).
After 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3, Black often plays 7...0-0. White can circumvent the Marshall Attack after 8.c3 d5 and play any of the alternative moves 8.a4, 8.h3, 8.d4, and 8.d3, which are commonly referred to as "anti-Marshall" systems, as they try to deter Black from playing ...d5.
One of Black's more aggressive alternatives is the Marshall Attack: after 3...a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 Black plays the gambit 8...d5, sacrificing a pawn. The main line begins with 9.exd5 Nxd5 (9...e4?!, the Herman Steiner variation, is considered weaker) 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Rxe5 c6 (Marshall's original moves, 11...Nf6, and 11...Bb7 are considered inferior, but have also yielded good results at top levels of play for Black. GM Joel Benjamin suggests that 11...Bb7 is inferior due to 12.Qf3). The resulting position is shown in the diagram. To the casual observer it might seem that Black has been careless and lost a pawn; however, the sacrifice has also stripped off White's kingside defenders, given Black a lead in development, and rendered White's 8.c3 irrelevant. Since Black's compensation is based on positional rather than tactical considerations, it is difficult or perhaps impossible to find a refutation. Black generally goes all-in with a massive kingside attack, which has been analysed to great depth (sometimes beyond move 30) with no definite conclusion as to the Marshall's soundness. The Marshall Attack is a very sharp opening system in which a great amount of theoretical knowledge is vital, and many White players, including Garry Kasparov, avoid it by playing one of the anti-Marshall systems, 8.d4, 8.a4 or 8.h3 instead of 8.c3.[failed verification]
Karpov tried 9...Nd7 several times in the 1990 World Championship match, but Kasparov achieved a significant advantage against it in the 18th game. It is solid but slightly passive. Confusingly 9...Nd7 is also called the Chigorin Variation so there are two variations of the Ruy Lopez with that name, but 9...Na5 is the move more commonly associated with Chigorin. This defence is also known as the Keres Variation, after Paul Keres.