Category Archives: English Opening

The Janus Variation

This is not some new or obscure chess opening variation. Instead the Janus Variation is the generic term I have invented for a certain category of variation which will differ from one player to another and which may take a different form over time for each individual player. This kind of variation is hardly ever discussed in chess openings books – in fact I have only seen it mentioned once, long ago, and I can’t remember which book that was.

Confused? You won’t be. Read on. But first, an explanation of the name of this variation, for those of you without a classical education. In the religion and mythology of Ancient Rome, Janus was the god of beginnings and endings among other things. The month January is named after him (one year ends and another one starts). He is usually depicted as having two faces, each of which looks in the opposite direction.

When you think about the opening in chess, what naturally comes to mind are your chosen openings for either colour. For example I currently play the English Opening as White. My main Black defences are the Sicilian Sveshnikov vs 1.e4, and the QP Slav vs 1.d4. Actually I play a wide range of openings and these are just my current favourites.

It is a fact of chess that there is always one opening you have to play as both White and Black. This will be obvious if you ask yourself, What do I do if my opponent plays my favourite opening against me? Suppose you play 1.d4 as White and the King’s Indian Defence as Black. When you face the King’s Indian Defence as White, you play the Classical Variation with Nf3 and Be2. What do you do as Black if someone plays the King’s Indian Classical Variation against you? It doesn’t matter exactly what you play. At some point, you have to play the same line with either colour. This is what I mean by the Janus Variation. You have to look both ways.

I said that the content of the Janus Variation may differ for each individual player over time. Until recently I was playing 1.e4 as White and the Sicilian Najdorf as Black. Against the Najdorf I would play the highly-theoretical 6.Bg5 main line. So I had to be prepared to play that line as Black as well. Nowadays the Janus Variation has changed for me and I have to know the positions arising from 1.c4 c6 for both sides.

What should be the characteristics of the Janus Variation? Obviously it has to be playable for both sides. It should result in middlegame positions which offer chances to both players and which you would be happy to play as either side. Learning an opening for both sides is a good way to improve because you have to understand the typical plans and positions for both sides. This leads you towards a consideration of the best moves. It’s no good playing a trappy but inferior continuation for one side if you know how to refute it from the other side.

In my case, from my 1.e4 and Najdorf days, I have a copy of every recent and important opening work on the Najdorf for both sides, and I also have the relevant Chessable courses for both sides. I’d like to think that my understanding of this opening, and my ability to play it properly, has improved as a result.

The trend in openings books does not lend itself to this kind of study. Many years ago, openings books tended to examine the opening objectively and recommend the best play for both sides with comprehensive coverage of all lines. Sometimes these were reduced to tables of opening variations with analysis of each line and an evaluation at the end of it. Think Modern Chess Openings (MCO), 15th edition by Nick de Firmian, published 2009, or Nunn’s Chess Openings (NCO), published 1999, with the Good Doctor leading a team of openings experts.

Over time, repertoire books have become much more common. These present an opening from the point of view of either White or Black. It must be what players want these days. So for example The Iron English by Simon Williams analyses the Botvinnik Variation of the English for White (the setup with c4, Nc3, d3, e4, g3, Bg2, Nge2, 0-0) and considers everything Black might play against it. If you’re looking for something Black might play against the English, and in particular against non-Botvinnik lines, this is not the book for you. I’m not saying anything against this very popular repertoire book, which is as engaging and thorough as the man himself. I’m just making the point that it’s written from one point of view.

Where it gets interesting is when the same author produces a book on the same opening for first one colour and then the other. For example take the Keep It Simple series by IM Christof Sielicki. In Keep It Simple for Black, originally a Chessable course then published in book form by New In Chess in 2022, he recommends the Caro-Kann as Black’s main defence to 1.e4. Against the Exchange Variation he analyses a setup with …Nc6, …Nf6 and …e5, often resulting in positions where Black has an isolated d-pawn. He also has some useful things to say about the “Carlsbad” pawn structure arising from the Exchange, typically where Black doesn’t play …e5 but keeps the position closed, where White has the half-open e-file and Black has the half-open c-file, and he outlines the main plans for both sides.

Then, around the end of 2022, Sielicki publishes the Chessable course Keep It Simple for White 2.0, an update on the original course published a few years previously. In the original course, Sielicki recommends the Two Knights’ Variation against the Caro-Kann (1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3). For version 2.0, he changes course and recommends… the Exchange Variation! So here he has to present the same opening from White’s point of view that he recently presented from Black’s point of view. Sielicki is honest enough to recognise the difficulty and points out that the positions are playable for both sides. Let’s take the position arising after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Nf6 6.h3 (6.Nf3 prevents …e5 but allows …Bg4 pinning the knight) 6…e5 7.dxe5 Nxe5 8.Nf3 Nxd3+ 9.Qxd3 Bd6 10.0-0 0-0.

Sielicki goes on to say: “The move 11.Be3, now my suggestion for White, is not mentioned in KIS Black, as I focused more on the direct attempts to pressure Black. Our strategy with White is a slow grind, trying to keep Black’s pieces passive and making slight progress. I think that chances are equal, but White’s job is quite easy, and it is not every Caro player’s forte to defend IQP positions.”

I’m not sure where that leaves Black supporters of the Caro-Kann. What are they supposed to play against the Exchange Variation? I guess we’ll have to wait for Keep It Simple for Black 2.0 to find out.

Useful acronyms 1: CEM

1 Reply

The start of a short series in which we examine useful pieces of chess advice that could make your experience at the board less disastrous than it might otherwise be. For some reason the authors of such advice tend to convert it to an acronym. Maybe they think this makes it easier or remember, or else they mean something uncomplimentary about their readers’ attention span.

Today, CEM, which is short for Check Every Move. This advice features in the excellent book The Survival Guide to Competitive Chess by John Emms (Everyman Chess, 2007). The aim is to avoid the type of blunder or mistake where you have a line in mind but you overlook a good move for your opponent. Emms says that when you have worked out what you want to play, you should methodically examine the position and consider every legal move your opponent can make. In doing so you are bound to visualise the position on the board after each move and you are more likely to spot any obvious problem with your intended line. It’s not about calculation since this kind of problem almost always arises on the very first move.

Now this procedure does add to the thinking time (although many of your opponent’s potential moves can be dismissed very quickly). So Emms does not advise doing this on every move, but only where you reach a critical position and it matters that you get it right.

Here are two examples from recent games where I did not follow this procedure and only spotted a problem after making my move. In the first case I was fortunate that my opponent did not find the right continuation.

White: Rodney Barking (2073), Black: Joshua Blinkhorn (1934). London League 2023.
C82: Ruy Lopez, Open Variation.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6 9.c3 Bc5 10.Qe2 0-0 11.Be3 Qe7 12.Rd1 Rad8

This is a fairly typical position for the Open Variation. I chose 10.Qe2 to prevent Black sacrificing his knight on f2 then opening the f-file with …f6 (the Dilworth Attack). With correct play White is better but it can be complicated and I couldn’t remember all the theory as I don’t often face the Open. Then after Qe2, I was able to play Be3 and neutralise Black’s dark-square bishop.

Black’s last move, 12…Rad8, reinforces the centre but leaves his queenside unprotected. In this case the standard (and in principle best) White plan is to attack on the queenside by pushing a4. I looked at various Black attempts to hold the queenside together. 13…bxa4 14.Bxa4 is better for White, and 13…Rab8 14.Bxd5 wins a pawn. 13…b4 didn’t look problematic either (although the computer later identified this as Black’s second-best option in this position). So without checking anything else, I continued:
13.a4??
Can you see what’s wrong with this move? I could – but only after I’d played it on the board. Black has the massively-strong continuation 13…d4! with a double attack on the bishop on b3 and the bishop on e3. I can’t avoid losing material. For example 14.Rxd4 Bxd4 15.Bxd4 Bxb3 16.Qxe4 Bd5, or 14.cxd4 Bxb3 15.Rc1 Nxd4 and in both cases I can resign. If I had applied the CEM technique I would have considered all Black’s possible replies, dismissing most of them, but identifying 13…d4! as fatal to my plans. You only have to notice the move to see this instantly. Instead of 13.a4?? I would have played 13.Nbd2 retaining a definite pull.

As it happens my opponent didn’t find the killer move. The game continued 13…Na5 14.Bxc5 Qxc5 15.Bc2 and I went on to win.

You would think I learned a lesson from this, but in fact the next example is from a game that I played only two days later.

White: Chris James (1996), Black: Rodney Barking (2073). Sligo 2023.
A36: English, Symmetrical Variation.
1.e4 c5 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 g6 4.g3 Bg7 5.Bg2 e6 6.Nge2 Nge7 7.0-0 0-0 8.a3 b6 9.Rb1 Bb7 10.b4 d6 11.d3 Qd7 12.b5 Nd4 13.Nxd4 Bxd4 14.Ne2 Bg7 15.Bb2 Bxb2 16.Rxb2 d5 17.Rd2 Rad8 18.Qa4 dxe4 19.Qxa7

White’s 1.e4 turned out to be an Anti-Sicilian, converting after 1…c5 2.c4 to an English Opening, Botvinnik Variation. This must be recommended in some opening book. The Botvinnik Variation is White’s most popular choice if you’re new to the English as it’s easy to learn (with a standard piece deployment) and it’s effective against one of Black’s most common responses to the English, which is a King’s Indian formation. There are several good ways of responding to the Botvinnik Variation. In this game I chose the Symmetrical Variation with 1…c5 and a later …e6, which Fischer used to play, and which was recommended by GM Victor Bologan in a DVD with a Black repertoire against the English some years ago. I was happy with the position I got from the opening as Black has active development and no obvious problems.

Perhaps recognising this, my opponent decided to go in for complications with 18.Qa4, since I was threatening to win a pawn by capturing on c4 or e4, and preventing this by capturing on d5 himself is nothing for White. After 18…dxe4 19.Qxa7 we reach the diagram position. Now the best continuation for Black is 19…exd3, when the tactics work out well for Black after either:
(1) 20.Bxb7 Nc8 21.Qa6 dxe2 22.Rxe2 Nd6 23.Bc6 Qc7, or in this line 22.Rxd7 Rxd7 23.Re1 Rd1 24.f3 Rxe1+ 25.Kf2 Ra1, or else
(2) 20.Qxb7 Qxb7 21.Bxb7 dxe2 22.Rxe2 Nf5.

Note that in the diagram position, even if Black makes a quiet move such as 19…Nf5, White can’t take on e4 because the d3 pawn is pinned, e.g. 20.Bxe4 Bxe4 21.Qxd7 Rxd7, exploiting the undefended White rook on d2. The problem with quiet moves is that White is threatening to win a pawn with Qxb6. I can defend it with 19…Nc8, but after 20.Qa4 exd3 21.Rfd1 this time the pin on the d3 pawn (which is now a Black pawn) works against me. Then 21…dxe2 22.Rxd7 Rxd7 23.Re1, or 21…Bxg2 22.Rxd3 Qxd3 23.Rxd3 Rxd3 24.Kxg2, are both quite good for Black but you feel White has rather got away with it.

You can see what’s coming next. If only I could defend the pawn on b6, and also remove my queen from the potential pin on the d-file, I would not only be threatening to take on d3, but also to win White’s queen with …Ra8. So without really considering what White might do about this, I played 19…Qc7?

As soon as I had played this move, I saw that White could capture on e4 with the bishop and win a pawn. Yes, his d3-pawn is still pinned because the rook on d2 remains undefended, but more importantly my queen on c7 is no longer defended by the rook on d8, so my bishop on b7 is pinned and I can’t recapture on e4. Again if I had applied the CEM technique when considering 19…Qc7, I would have thought about 20.Bxe4 (among all the other moves White might play, all of which lose for White) and I would instantly have seen the problem.

The game continued 20.Bxe4 Rd7? (one bad move leads to another: instead the problem-like 20…Nd5! 21.Qa4 Ne3! 22.fxe3 Bxe4 is fine for Black) and now 21.Qxb7 Qxb7 22.Bxb7 Rxb7 23.Ra1 would have cemented the extra pawn. However, White played the inferior 21.Nc3? and after 21.Qe5 22.Bxb7 Qxc3, I went on to win.

Since these games I have been trying to apply the CEM technique in my games and in most cases it has helped me to avoid some obvious errors that I might otherwise have made.

Winning with the English 1

Leave a Reply

Rodney Barking has recently moved across to 1.c4 as his main opening as White. The English used to have a reputation for being a boring positional opening until players discovered its potential as an attacking kingside opening. Also it is less heavily analysed than 1.e4 or 1.d4 so you are more likely to reach original positions.

Rodney has been very successful with the English so this is the start of a new series showcasing his games. You can play through the unannotated game on Lichess online, or alternatively set up the board and follow the game and annotations in the old-fashioned way.

Rodney Barking (2070) – Ewan Wilson (2142)
Surrey Border League, 16 March 2023
A13: English Opening
In the Surrey Border League, public transport is scarce and you have to make most journeys by car. That’s OK when the venue is within about 10 miles of your home club (Guildford in my case). However, this match was away against Reading A which is an hour’s drive on a good day so the travel is much more of an effort.
1.c4 e6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 d5
There are many ways to play against the English. Black chooses a solid Queen’s Gambit Declined setup. I already knew this would happen. You can’t normally predict your opponent in league matches but Ewan Wilson is their strongest player and has been playing board 1 all season. Also the Border League rules gave me White as the away player on top board. So I spent an hour before the match checking the theory and recommended lines in the Anti-QGD English. For this I used the Chessable course “Lifetime Repertoires: 1.c4 / 1. Nf3 – Part 2” by IM Christof Sielicki. I was not so interested in the exact move order as the plans for both sides, which he explains very clearly.
4.e3 Be7 5.b3 O-O 6.Bb2 b6
The basic idea of this variation is to delay playing d4 until absolutely necessary (otherwise you would have the QGD proper which is a different opening). Instead White relies on controlling the centre from afar in hypermodern style. The main issue is at what point White should clarify the centre with cxd5. Sielicki explains that the right time is when Black has committed to a particular pawn structure with …b6 or …c5. In these cases the exchange on d5 will eventually leave Black with either an isolated d-pawn or hanging pawns on c5 and d5. In contrast, Sielicki explains that White should not exchange on d5 if black has played …c6, because after recapturing with the e-pawn Black would have a solid pawn chain on b7-c6-d5 with no weaknesses.
7.cxd5 exd5 8.d4 c5
8…Bb7 is theory. After 8…c5, either White can inflict hanging pawns by capturing on c5, or Black will close the centre with …c4 and leave White a free hand on the kingside.
9.Bd3
This is slightly inaccurate since Black could now play …Nc6 with pressure on d4 and could also hassle the bishop on d3 with …Nb4. Instead Sielicki recommends 9.Rc1. However, my opponent didn’t take advantage. I suspect his chosen system involved playing …Bb7 and …Nbd7, and he didn’t see a need to deviate from that.
9…Bb7 10.O-O Nbd7 11.Rc1 Bd6 12.Ne2
This is a key idea that I picked up from Sielicki’s course. The knight transfers to the kingside with the manoeuvre Ne2-g3-f5 where it takes up an attacking position.
12…Re8 13.Ng3 Rc8 14.Nf5 Bb8
I can see why he played this as he wants to follow up with …Qc7 and his own kingside attack. But 15…Bf8 defending was safer.
15.Bb1 c4
This is one of the turning points in the game. Black’s plan is now to create a protected passed pawn on the queenside. He must have decided that my kingside pressure was not a threat.
16.Ba3
The idea was to exploit the dark squares with Nd6 gaining the bishop pair. Black’s only way to prevent this is with …Nf8, but then Ne5 and the attack builds. Ne7+ winning the exchange is a secondary theme. However, Stockfish prefers to clarify matters in the centre with 16.bxc4 dxc4 17.Ne5 Nxe5 18.dxe5 Bxe5 19.Bxe5 Rxe5 20.Rxc4 Rd5 21.Rxc8 Bxc8 22.Nd4.
16…b5 17.Nd6 Bxd6 18.Bxd6 a5
Continuing with the queenside plan as my attack is a slow burner.
19.Bf4
The bishop has no future on the queenside. From f4 it controls the h2-b8 diagonal (this becomes important much later in the game) and prepares Ne5.
19…b4 20.Ne5 Nxe5 21.dxe5 Nd7
Now unless I do something Black will follow up with …c3, …Nc5 and …Ba6. But Black’s pieces are temporarily uncoordinated and this gives me the chance to clarify the centre and develop the attack.
22.bxc4 dxc4 23.Bf5 Nc5
Black is more or less forced to give up the exchange in this way:
A: 23…Rc7? 24.e6 wins for White.
B: 23…Re7 24.Bg5 f6 25.exf6 gxf6 26.Bh6 leaves the black king exposed.
C: 23…Nxe5 24.Bxc8 Qxc8 25.Bxe5 Rxe5 26.Rxc4 is also very good for White.
24.Bxc8 Qxc8 25.Rxc4
And now I decided to return the exchange for a pawn, otherwise black plays …Ba6 and …Nd3 with counterplay and the queenside pawns could become dangerous.
25…Ba6?
This is the obvious move, skewering the rooks, and he played it quickly, but actually it’s a blunder since I could create a lasting pin on the c-file and win the knight on c5. However, it’s not easy to see how this is done, and in fact I didn’t see it during the game.
26.Qc2?
Stockfish points out the correct manoeuvre: 26.Rc1 Bxf1 27.Qxf1 Qc6 28.Qc4 Rc8 29.e6 fxe6 30.Be5 with Bd4 to follow.
26…Bxc4 27.Qxc4 Ne6 28.Rc1
I’m a pawn up, but Black has compensation and my back rank is vulnerable. The safest course was to gain time by attacking the a5 pawn and create a bolthole for the king: 28.Qb5 Qa8 29.h4. I considered Qb5 but decided to take queens off and go for the ending with rook and bishop against rook and knight.
28…Qxc4 29.Rxc4 g5
The attack on the bishop gains a tempo and ensures Black won’t get mated on the back rank, so freeing his rook for active play.
30.Bg3 Rd8
The mate threat wins the pawn on a2, creating two connected passed pawns on the queenside for Black. However, I get to activate my king and push my pawns on the kingside. The race is about to start…
31.f4 Rd1+ 32.Kf2 Rd2+ 33.Kf3 Rxa2 34.f5 Nf8??
This natural move loses. My opponent played it very quickly. Instead Stockfish points out that Black can reach a drawn rook and pawn ending by pushing the b-pawn and sacrificing the knight: 34…b3 35.Rc8+ Kg7 36.fxe6 fxe6 37.Rb8 b2 38.Rb7+ Kg6 39.Rb6 Kf7 40.Be1 (there’s nothing better) 40…Ra1 41.Rxb2 Rxe1 42.Ra2 h5 43.Rxa5 is +0.00.
35.Rc8
Now e6 and Bd6 winning the knight is a real threat.
35…Kg7 36.f6+ Kg6
This allows me to win material and chase Black’s king around. Instead 36…Kg8 37.e6 fxe6 38.Bd6 Kf7 39.Rxf8+ Kg6 wins for White.
37.Rxf8 b3 38.Rg8+ Kf5
38…Kh5 39.e6 b2 40.Rb8 is no good as White queens and stops Black queening.
39.e4+ Ke6 40.Re8+?!
I had seen all this and played it automatically intending to follow up with Re7+ and a strong attack. However, if I’d stopped for a moment, I would surely have found the better continuation 40.Rd8 forcing immediate resignation as Black can’t prevent mate on d6.
40…Kd7 41.Re7+ Kc6
His only hope is to run to the queenside and try to stop my rook coming to the b-file where it would control the queening square.
42.e6 b2 43.Rc7+ Kb6 44.Rc8!
The position is now so sharp that this is the only winning move. Everything else loses for White. If Black queens first then White is in big trouble. After Rc8, Black can’t queen on b1 because the x-ray move Rb8+ picks up the queen for nothing.
44…Ka7 45.Rb8 Ra3+ 46.Kf2
Alternatively 46.Kg4 Rxg3+ 47.hxg3 Kxb8 48.exf7 b1=Q 49.f8=Q+ and white will win because the queen can support the promotion of the advanced pawn on f6.
46…Ra2 47.Ke1! fxe6
My last move allowed black to queen with check, winning the rook, but… 47…Ra1+ 48.Ke2 b1=Q 49.Rxb1 Rxb1 50.exf7 and crucially black can’t get back to stop the f7 pawn from queening because the bishop on g3 guards the b8 square.
48.f7 Ra1+ 49.Ke2!
Better than 49.Kd2 Rf1 50.Rxb2 Rxf7 although white will still win this eventually. Black has nothing left in the locker and so he resigned.
1-0

It’s time to get jingoistic in the words of an old song:
“The English the English the English is best /
So up with the English and down with the rest!”