[Event "GMA, Wijk aan Zee NED"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2003.??.??"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Ponomariov,R"]
[Black "Kramnik,V"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Annotator "Hathaway"]
[BlackElo "2805"]
[ECO "E46"]
[PlyCount "75"]
[WhiteElo "2730"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 { Black controls the center and pecks away at White's efforts. } 3. Nc3 { This classical approach is aimed at supporting e2-e4, so that he will have three strong pawns (Pc4, Pd4, Pe4) with which to bludgeon Black. Naturally Black shouldn't allow this. } 3... Bb4 { Nimzo-Indian Defense - very popular in this event } 4. e3 { White recognizes the need for further piece development and begins a slow build-up. There is also the possibility of Ng1-e2 and a2-a3 to force Bb4 away, thus keeping Black cramped. } ( { Avoiding doubled c-file pawns is very popular. } 4. Qc2 ) 4... O-O { Another plan, the Hubner Variation, is to capture at c3, giving White doubled pawns, and then to play the Black central pawns onto dark squares, thereby replacing (to some extent) the missing dark-square bishop. Some players are reluctant to relinquish the bishop. } 5. Ne2 { This Rubinstein Variation aims to force Bb4 to trade for Nc3 or to retreat. Trading gives White a small gain with no cost and the retreat leaves Black without sufficient central control. At least that's the Classical take on this position. I think the first part is right, but the second has to be taken with a grain of salt because Ne2 isn't very good and Bc1 is blocked-in behind Pe3. If Black plays ...d7-d5 or possibly even ...c7-c5 then he's probably alright. It doesn't take a lot of pawn moves to control the center. } 5... d5 6. a3 { Curiously, this pawn appears to be a small prod to Bb4, but later it serves as a threat, inhibiting Black from playing ...b7-b5 because of the danger that Pc7 might be kept backward and weak after b2-b4. } 6... Be7 { Now Black has a pawn controlling e4, so Ne2 is awkwardly blocking Bf1. On the other hand Bc8 is also blocked by another pawn on a light square. Both players have problems to solve. } 7. cxd5 { This seems to me to be a little premature (it doesn't give Black an opportunity to try to solve his own development problems) and that after this Black isn't worse. } ( 7. b3 ) ( 7. Nf4 ) 7... Nxd5 $6 { Black can't be cramped by e3-e4 if he's trading off minor pieces! But, is he trading the knight? White will only trade on favorable terms, so perhaps ...exd5 is better. } ( 7... exd5 { Though White has the opportunity for a queen-side minority attack there is still a Nc3, blocking the c-file, so Black's easier development should compensate fully for the weaker Pc7. } ) 8. Bd2 Nd7 ( 8... b6 $6 9. Nxd5 Qxd5 { when there are at least two good approaches: } ( 9... exd5 { and Black can still develop ...Bc8-e6, but c6 is weakened and b2-b4  is surely soon to clamp down on the open c-file } ) 10. Nf4 { preparing for Bd2-c3 and Bf1-d3 and king-side play } ( 10. Nc3 Qd7 11. Qf3 $5 { threatening Ra8, but aiming for king-side play } ) ) 9. g3 $1 $14 { He's still maintaing coordination of his pieces and maintaining all the options for his central pawns. This makes it difficult for Black to know how to develop or where to counter. White's position is very safe and yet has good offensive potential. } 9... b6 10. Nxd5 exd5 11. Bg2 Nf6 12. O-O { avoiding any King Safety problems after ...Bc8-a6 } 12... Ne4 { I think he's rather trade this knight for Ne2 (should it go to c3) or Bg2, but White will avoid those trades. } ( 12... Bf5 { Mark and Fritz7 agree! } 13. Rc1 Qd7 { and to some extent the backward weak Pc7 should be balanced by the inactive Bd2 } ) 13. Rc1 Bb7 $2 { Why play here when it's not forced and there's no White bishop which can exploit the weak light squares by Bb5 or Ba6? } ( 13... Bf5 { Mark and Fritz7 agree! } ) 14. Qc2 Rc8 15. Rfd1 { threatening Bg2-h3 } 15... Bd6 ( 15... Qd7 $2 16. Nf4 { and Bh3 is still threatened } ) ( 15... a6 $11 { Fritz7 } ) 16. Bb4 $5 { neither player's dark-square bishop is very good, but Black's serves a defensive purpose, so White chooses to trade them. The curious part is that ...Bd6xb4 forces a3xb4 when it's not clear how good White's doubled b-file pawns might be. } 16... Qf6 { This has the benefit of forcing White to move Ne2 (Bxe4 is terrible) and that allows Black to trade Ne4 for the White knight, rather than for Bb4. } ( 16... c5 $2 17. Bxe4 dxe4 18. dxc5 bxc5 19. Bxc5 Rxc5 20. Qxc5 Bxc5 21. Rxd8 Rxd8 22. Rxc5 $16 ) ( 16... Bxb4 17. axb4 a6 $11 { Fritz7 } ) 17. Nc3 Nxc3 18. Qxc3 c6 ( 18... c5 19. dxc5 Qxc3 20. Bxc3 { and Pd5 will fall } ) 19. Bxd6 Qxd6 { After this trade White's pieces are in attacking positions and Black's are defending. Pc6 is obviously weak, but White will need to provoke at least one more weakness (the Principle of Two Weaknesses) if he's to find a way to win. } 20. b4 Rc7 21. a4 { Apparently he wants to open the a-file with a4-a5xb6 and then he can try to make Pb6 the target. } 21... Bc8 ( 21... Ba6 { aiming to block the c-file with ...Ba6-c4 and possibly ...b6-b5 } 22. b5 Bb7 23. bxc6 { else Black gets in ...c6-c5 } ( 23. a5 $14 { Fritz7 } 23... c5 24. a6 Bc8 25. dxc5 Rxc5 26. Qb2 $16 { when ...Rd8 or ...Be6 are equal in value } ) 23... Rxc6 24. Qb3 Rfc8 25. Rxc6 ( 25. Qb2 Ba6 $17 ) 25... Qxc6 $15 ) 22. a5 Ba6 ( 22... Bf5 $11 { Fritz7 } ) 23. Ra1 ( 23. e4 Rfc8 $14 { Fritz7 } ) 23... Bb5 ( 23... Bc4 $11 { Fritz7 } ) 24. Rdc1 { White has the a-file and still controls c5, but Black has gotten Bb5 to defend Pc6 and guard against Ra6. White probably has to trade-off Bb5 with Bg2-f1, thereby weakening a6, Pb6 and Pc6. } 24... Re8 25. axb6 axb6 26. Bf1 Bxf1 27. Kxf1 Rb8 28. Ra6 Qd7 { Again Black has everything defended, so White has to force another trade, to remove perhaps Rb8. } 29. Kg1 h6 30. Qa3 Rcc8 31. h4 Qf5 { Staying "active" this way isn't really beneficial since there is no weakness Black's queen could exploit by herself. } ( 31... Rc7 32. Ra1 Qe6 $11 { Fritz7 } ) 32. Ra7 g5 $2 { Should White trade-off Ph4 or advance it? Sometimes it's good to pose your opponent with even the smallest of questions (like this) as the game nears the time control. It seems hxg5 can be answered by ...Qxg5 and then ...h6-h5-h4 might well continue to threaten White's king. On the other hand h4-h5 isolates the pawn and might lose it. Technically it's possible both are good because weakening Kg8 can't be good without greater piece activity in that region to defend. } ( 32... Qe6 $11 { Fritz7 } ) 33. h5 $5 ( 33. hxg5 hxg5 34. Re7 Ra8 35. Qb3 Qf3 $11 { Fritz7 } ) 33... Qf3 ( 33... g4 34. Qa6 { and 34...Kh8, 34...Kg7 or 34...Qxh5 are all dead equal according to Fritz7 } ) 34. Qd3 ( 34. Qa6 Qxh5 35. Rb7 Ra8 36. Qxb6 $14 { Fritz7 } ) 34... Kh8 ( 34... Qxh5 35. Qf5 Qg6 ( 35... Kg7 $2 36. Rc7 Rxc7 37. Qe5+ Kg8 38. Qxc7 $16 ) 36. Qxg6+ fxg6 37. Rd7 { Mark and Fritz7 agree! } ) 35. Qa6 { threatening b4-b5 to smash the queen-side while Black has his queen terribly misplaced at f3 or h5 } ( 35. Rd7 $16 { Fritz7 } ) 35... Kg7 $16 ( 35... Qxh5 36. Rb7 Ra8 37. Qxb6 $14 { Fritz7, though White's threats look awfully imposing to me. } ) 36. b5 $18 c5 37. dxc5 bxc5 ( 37... Rxc5 38. Rxc5 bxc5 39. Qg6+ Kf8 ( 39... Kh8 $4 40. Rxf7 $18 ) 40. Qd6+ $18 ) 38. Qg6+ { What I found interesting about the Fritz7 notes is that it continued to "believe" the position was equal or only slightly better for White, but when the White plan came to fruition it suddenly "saw" it was clearly or decisively to White's advantage. It's horizon effect was rather distinctly noticable. } 1-0