My opponent in this game was Emilio Bellatalla of San Margherita Ligure, on the northwest coast of Italy. San Margherita Ligure is within the orbit of Genoa, hometown of Christopher Columbus, my own city's namesake. Columbus is, of course, an Italian hero, and my opponent shared with me that there is a memorial to the great explorer in Genoa's Piazza DeFerrari. Strange to say, there is a little suburb of Columbus, Ohio named San Margherita, founded by immigrant Italian quarrymen and stonecarvers in the last century. But the particular San Margherita for which the Columbus suburb is named is not the Ligurian one in which my correspondent lives.

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.e4 b5

Due to my unfamiliarity with ICCF standard notation, I was under the false impression here that Black had played 2...e6 rather than 2...c6. For a while I was pleasantly surprised by my opponent's last move, and I even prepared a card with 6. Nxb5. Fortunately, I thought to review my opponent's cards, and I discovered that I was playing a Slav, not a Queen's Gambit Declined.

6.Qc2

Position after 6. Qc2

This move was motivated by my desire to avoid well-trodden pathways. The Slav is a highly technical system, and those who play it can be expected to be well acquainted with theory. Whatever the theoretical merits of 6. Qc2 may eventually be found to be, for White simply to play chess with pawns on d4 and e4 is not so easy for Black to combat.

There exists an exhaustive theory of 6.e5 Nd5 7.a4 with a double-edged game, though Black with best play has little to fear.

6...e6

Black thus acquieses to a transposition into a sideline of the Botvinnik System. He can try for something better, but it seems that White always obtains good compensation. I sketch out some possibilities in what follows.

6...Na6 7.b3

A) 7...Nb4 8.Qb1 cxb3 9.Qxb3 e6 10.a4 and I prefer White in spite of his pawn-minus;

B) 7...Qa5 8.bxc4 Nxe4 9.cxb5 Nxc3 10.bxa6 is promising enough for White, for example 10...Bf5 11.Bd3 Bxd3 (11...Nxa2+ 12.Bd2 is highly favorable to White) 12.Qxd3 Ne4+ 13.Nd2 Nd6 14.0-0 e6 15.Ba3 with balanced chances;

C) 7...cxb3 8.Qxb3 e6 9.Bf4

C1) 9...Qa5 10.Bd3 Bb4 11.Bd2 with balanced chances in a double-edged position (but not 11.Rc1? c5) ;

C2) 9...b4 10.Qa4 Qb6 11.Rb1 and to me it seems that White has about enough compensation for his pawn;

6...Bg4 7.a4 (7.e5? Bxf3 8.gxf3 Nd5; 7.Be2?! Bxf3 8.Bxf3 Qxd4 9.Be3 Qe5)

A) 7...Bxf3 8.gxf3 Qb6

A1) 9.b3 cxb3 10.Qxb3 b4 11.Ne2 e6 and White lacks compensation for his pawn;

A2) 9.Be3 is a little too slow:

A2a) 9...e6 10.axb5 cxb5 11.b3 cxb3 12.Qxb3 and Black is in trouble in view of 12...b4 13.d5;

A2b) 9...Qb7! 10.axb5 (10.Be2 e6 11.axb5 cxb5 12.b3 b4 13.Na4 c3) 10...cxb5

A2b1) 11.b3 b4 12.Ne2 (12.Na4 cxb3 13.Qxb3 e6 leaves White with too little compensation) 12...cxb3 (12...c3 13.d5 e5 14.dxe6 fxe6 15.Bh3 and White has good compensation) 13.Qxb3 e6 and Black is better;

A2b2) 11.e5? 11...Nd5 (11...Qxf3? 12.Rg1 Ng4 13.Qe2 Qxe2+ 14.Bxe2 and White stands quite well, because Black can't maintain his queenside pawns.) 12.b3 e6! 13.bxc4 bxc4 and Black is much better;

A2c) 9...Na6 10.axb5 Nb4 11.Qa4 is excellent for White;

A3) 9.e5! 9...Nd5 10.axb5 Nxc3 (10...Nb4 11.Qa4 e6 12.bxc6 Qxd4 13.f4 is significantly better for White) 11.bxc3 cxb5 12.Qe4 Qc6 13.d5 Qg6 (13...Qc8 14.e6 with excellent play for White; 13...Qb7 14.e6 fxe6 15.dxe6 Qxe4+ 16.fxe4 transposes into 13...Qg6) 14.e6 Qxe4+ (14...Qf6 15.exf7+ Kxf7 16.Rb1 a6 17.Bh3 Ke8 18.d6! Ra7 19.Be3 with advantage to White; 14...f5? 15.Qb1) 15.fxe4 fxe6 16.dxe6 Nc6 (the same is 16...g6 17.Bg2 Nc6 18.e5) 17.e5 g6 18.Bg2 Rc8 19.f4 and White has compensation for his pawn-minus;

B) 7...Qa5 8.Bd2 Bxf3 9.gxf3 Qb6 (9...Qa6?! 10.b3 cxb3 11.Qxb3; 9...b4?! 10.Nd1) 10.e5 Nd5 11.axb5 Nxc3 (11...Qxd4 12.Qe4 Qxe4+ 13.fxe4 Nb4 14.Ra4 e6 15.Bxc4 and White's two bishops hold promise) 12.bxc3 cxb5 13.Qe4 Qc6 (13...Nc6 14.Rb1 is also good for White) 14.d5 Qg6 (14...Qb7 15.Rb1 is excellent for White) 15.e6 Qxe4+ 16.fxe4 fxe6 17.dxe6 Nc6 18.e5 Rc8 19.Bg2 g6 20.f4; 6...a6 7.Be2 Bg4 8.a4 Nbd7 9.e5 (9.Be3!?; 9.Bf4!?) 9...Nd5 10.axb5 axb5 11.Rxa8 Qxa8 12.Ng5 Nb4 13.Qe4 f5 14.Qf4 was unclear in Ehlvest-Dreev, 1985.

7.Bg5 h6

7...Nbd7 8.Be2 with a likely transposition into lines considered below. (Mayer-Fabrizio, Compuserve 1993, went 8.d5?! exd5 9.exd5 Bb7 10.0-0-0 Bb4 with the better game for Black; In Madria-Crouch 1997 White played 8.Rd1?! and suffered for it after 8...Qa5 9.a3 c5 10.d5 b4 It is a difficult decision to bring the a-rook to d1, since it may be needed to support a2-a4.) For example, 8...h6 9.Bh4 Be7 10.a4 returns to the game.;

7...Qb6 8.Be2 Nbd7 9.0-0 Bb7 was chosen in Malinin-Kobalija, Novgorod Open 1999, and here I think White should have played 10.b3 (instead he played 10.a4 a6 11.b3 h6 12.Bxf6 cxb3 13.Qxb3 Nxf6) 10...cxb3 (or 10...h6 11.Be3) 11.axb3 with compensation;

7...Be7 8.Be2 (8.a4 Qa5 9.Bd2 Qb6 10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 offered balanced chances in Zboron-Kaczorowska, Poland 1987)

A) 8...Bb7 9.0-0 Nbd7

A1) 10.Rad1 Qc7 11.Rfe1 Bb4 and Black is better (but not 11...0-0? 12.e5 Myllyniemi-Zinovjev, Finland 1991) ;

A2) 10.a4 10...a6 11.b3 cxb3 12.Qxb3 0-0 13.Rfc1 appears to offer White adequate compensation;

B) 8...h6 9.Bh4 g5 10.Bg3 g4 11.Ne5

B1) 11...Qxd4

B1a) 12.Nxc6 Nxc6 13.Nxb5 Nb4 14.Nxd4 Nxc2+ 15.Nxc2 Nxe4 16.Bxc4 (16.Bxg4 Bf6 17.0-0-0 c3 gives Black a good game) 16...Nxg3 17.hxg3 and Black's two bishops balance White's better pawns;

B1b) 12.Rd1! 12...Qb6 (or 12...Qc5 13.Nxg4) 13.Nxg4 and White has good compensation for his pawn;

B2) 11...b4 12.Na4 Qxd4 13.Nxg4 (Risky but possibly playable is 13.0-0 Qxe4 14.Qd2 Ba6 15.Rfe1 Qd5 16.Qf4 Nbd7 Littlewood-Whiteley, England 1971, when 17.Bxc4! offers White compensation, according to Kortchnoi) 13...Nxg4 14.Bxg4 b3 15.axb3 cxb3 16.Qxb3 Qxe4+ 17.Be2 Qb4+ 18.Qc3 Qxc3+ and here a draw was agreed in Flockert-Borgstaedt, Germany, 1988. White should have played on, since he has more than enough compensation for his pawn. For example, 19.Nxc3 Bb4 20.0-0 Nd7 21.Rfd1 Bxc3 (otherwise Ne4) 22.bxc3 a5 23.Rd4;

C) 8...0-0 9.0-0 Qc7 10.e5 Nd5 11.Bxe7 Qxe7 12.b3 Nxc3 13.Qxc3 cxb3 14.axb3 looks about even.

8.Bh4 Nbd7

8...Qa5 9.Bxf6 gxf6 10.Be2 Bb7 11.0-0 and White had compensation in Pachman-Jovcic, Yugoslavia 1966;

8...g5 see Morss-Thompson;

8...Be7 9.Be2 g5 10.Bg3 see 7...Be7 above, note B.

9.Be2 Be7

Position after 9...Be7

9...Bb7 10.0-0 a5 (10...a6 11.Rad1 unclear) 11.a4! for example, 11...g5 (11...Qb6 12.Rad1 with unclear play) 12.Bg3 b4 13.Nb1 Nb6 (13...c5 14.e5 cxd4 15.Nxd4 Nd5 16.Bxc4 and White is good) 14.Nbd2 g4 15.Ne5 Qxd4 16.Ndxc4 Nxc4 17.Nxc4 Qxe4 18.Bd3 Qd4 19.Be5 Qd8 20.Rfd1;

9...Qb6 10.0-0 Bb7 11.a4 with unclear prospects.

10.a4

10.0-0 0-0 11.a4 (11.Rfd1 Bb7 favored Black in Spragett-Norgueiras, Taxco 1985) 11...b4 12.Nd1 c5 13.e5 Nd5 14.Bxe7 Qxe7 15.Ne3 cxd4 16.Nxc4 Ba6 17.Rfd1 Rac8 18.Rxd4 Rc7 19.Qe4 Nc5 20.Qc2 Nd7 21.Qe4 Nc5 22.Qc2 Nd7 ½-½ Pyrich-Sorensen, corr 1997

10...Qb6

Equally difficult for both sides is 10...g5 11.Bg3 Qb6 12.0-0 , for example 12...a5 13.axb5 cxb5 14.e5 Nd5 (14...Nh5 15.d5 Nxg3 16.hxg3 with compensation) 15.Nxd5 exd5 16.b3 g4 17.Nh4 Bxh4 18.Bxh4 Qxd4 19.bxc4 dxc4 20.e6!

11.0-0 a5

Position after 11...a5

Black gives his opponent a chance to stir up trouble.

I expected 11...Bb7 when White can try:

A) 12.a5

A1) 12...Qa6 13.e5 Nd5 14.Bxe7 Kxe7 15.b3 (15.Nxd5+!? cxd5 16.Qc3) 15...c5 16.bxc4 bxc4 17.dxc5 Rac8 18.Na4 with balanced chances;

A2) 12...Qc7 13.a6 Bc8 14.e5 Nd5 15.Bxe7 Nxe7 (15...Kxe7 16.b3) 16.Ne4 and White's out-of-gas a-pawn looks funny, but the position is perhaps roughly balanced. For example, 16...0-0 17.b3 cxb3 18.Qxb3 Qb6 19.Qa3 Nd5 20.Rfc1;

B) 12.Rfc1 g5 13.Bg3.

12.axb5! cxb5 13.e5 Ng8?!

Position after 13...Ng8

It seems that one encounters such counter-intuitive moves more often in correspondence chess than over-the-board, where the clock, common sense, and the opponent's glare are antidotes to a player's analytical fancies. White's reply should be obvious.

Correct was 13...Nd5 14.Nxd5 after which I was planning 14...exd5

Analysis position after 14...exd5

And now 15.e6! with plenty of compensation for the lost pawn, for example 15...Qxe6 (15...Bxh4 16.exd7+ Bxd7 17.Nxh4 Qxd4 18.Nf3 and the piece is worth more than the pawns; 15...fxe6? 16.Qg6+ Kf8 17.Bxe7+ Kxe7 18.Qxg7+) 16.Bxe7 Kxe7 17.Bxc4.

14.d5! Bxh4?

Worse and worse.

Black's defense task was much more hopeful after 14...exd5 15.Nxd5 Qc5 16.Nxe7 Nxe7 though I think White has the advantage after 17.b3 , for example 17...Nxe5 (17...0-0 18.Bxe7 Qxe7 19.bxc4 b4 20.Qe4 is Noteboom-like but it appears good for White) 18.Nxe5 Qxe5 19.bxc4 Bf5 20.Qd2 b4 21.Bf3 Rd8 22.Qa2.

15.dxe6

Equally sufficient for advantage is the less flashy 15.Nxh4 and now:

A) 15...Nxe5 16.Qe4 Qb8 (16...Qd8 17.Qxe5 Qxh4 18.Nxb5) 17.d6;

B) 15...Ne7 16.dxe6 fxe6 17.Bh5+;

C) 15...exd5 16.Nxd5 Qa7 (16...Qb7 17.Bf3) 17.e6.

15...Be7 16.exf7+ Kxf7 17.Nxb5 Nc5

17...Kf8 18.Bxc4 is similar.

18.Bxc4+ Kf8

18...Be6 19.Qf5+ and White is winning.

19.b4 Nb7 20.Qe4 Bd7

20...Bxb4 21.Qf4+ is also winning for White.