King's Kalashnikov Sicilian: A Dynamic Black Repertoire for Club Players

Introduction

1.e4 c5 2.♘f3 ♘c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.♘xd4 e5 was one of the first serious openings that I played with Black, under the tutelage of my coach at the time, International Master Nigel Povah. I must have been about 12 years old, and it was an exciting initiation into the mysteries of the Sicilian Defence. I didn’t realise it, but this was a great place to start as the variations, at least for a couple of moves, are forcing, and decent options for White are surprisingly limited. After 4...e5 White has the choice of six moves with the knight, and five of them give Black an easy game. The odds were already in my favour!

The best move is 5.♘b5 and at that time the only acceptable way for Black to play the opening was 5...a6 6.♘d6+ ♗xd6 7.♕xd6 ♕f6. This is the so-called Löwenthal Variation, named after Johann Jacob Löwenthal, one of the strongest players of the mid-19th century. Since that time it has had little bursts of popularity – until players of the white pieces remember what to do and it shuffles off again to the dusty pages of an old text book.

In the late 1980s, the reputation of the opening changed when Evgeny Sveshnikov – he of the Sveshnikov Variation – started experimenting with 5.♘b5 d6. In the past this was always frowned upon as it was thought that 6.c4 gave White a significant grip on the position. As we will see, Black has often been able to prove that this is a dangerous over-extension...

It is extraordinary that when Sveshnikov began playing 5...d6, it had never been taken too seriously. A few notable players had tried it – I might mention Sultan Khan in 1930, Larry Evans in 1955 and Bent Larsen in 1960 – but according to my database they didn’t explore the system too much in subsequent games. The Austrian International Master Franz Hölzl was an exponent of the system in the late 1970s and 1980s, creating a little trend along with compatriots Walter Wittmann and Alexander Fauland. But it was when Evgeny Sveshnikov came on board that it became a serious weapon. As with so many openings, he was a formidable creator and flag bearer.

Following him, there were players like Smbat Lputian, John van der Wiel and Ketevan Arakhamia who incorporated the opening into their repertoire. Latterly, it has achieved a high mark of respectability as Magnus Carlsen has employed it with some success, if only in rapid and blitz games. Perhaps the strongest adherents of the opening these days are Teimour Radjabov and the Iranian Parham Maghsoodloo; but as you will see from the games in the book, there is a stellar line-up of players who on occasion like to load up the Kalashnikov.

Why should you play the Kalashnikov? See my first paragraph! At club level, in my experience as a teenager, many players already got it wrong on the fifth move and failed to play 5.♘b5. This is borne out by the games of my current students: somehow players at a certain level are unsure when it comes to moving the knight out towards the edge of the board.

Actually, it is very understandable that the thought of 5.♘b5 causes nervousness. After 5...d6 it will take some time before the knight re-routes to a better location, and this forms the basis of a lot of the subsequent play. Black has a lead in development and White has two main tasks to handle: bringing the knight back into play as well as completing development, not to mention looking up occasionally to see what Black is doing.

I recommend the Kalashnikov to my students for practical reasons. In most of the variations after 5.♘b5 d6, the pawn structure is fixed. Pawn structure determines strategy, and if one can rely on the structure as a constant, then it is easier to get a handle on middlegame strategy.

In the Kalashnikov there are fewer sharp lines than in many other openings. In the Najdorf or the Dragon, for example, a good recollection of precise move orders and tricky moves is sometimes required to avoid immediate opening disaster. That is rarely the case with the Kalashnikov. A general understanding of pawn structures, piece placement and strategic ideas will often be sufficient to carry you through the opening – which is why I lay so much emphasis on the Model Games section where the strategy is explained.

This book is based on the online Kalashnikov course that I produced for Chessable. What are the differences? First and foremost, the medium. There is certainly something appealing about the ‘gamification’ of learning an opening that the Chessable format offers. But for an overview, I find it easier to consider a subject in book form, where with a quick flick of the page one can appreciate how the material is laid out and how much attention is devoted to different sections.

I have simplified some sections, improved some variations based on feedback (and my revisions), included a few theoretically significant games that have appeared since the course appeared online, and added a few more model games in the first section.

I have structured the book according to how I learn an opening. First of all, there is the Model games section where I explain opening and middlegame strategy. Only by examining complete games can we get an idea of what an opening is really about. The second section comprises my detailed repertoire for Black, and there you can fill in the gaps of your knowledge. A good way of learning an opening is to play it first, and to look it up afterwards. This section can be used as a reference manual to do exactly that. I should emphasise that I have not attempted to write a comprehensive survey of the Kalashnikov. In the digital age, we are bombarded by masses of information, and selecting what is relevant becomes increasingly difficult. I have simplified matters by providing clear recommendations of practical variations. For example, the main line of the Kalashnikov used to be 1.e4 c5 2.♘f3 ♘c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.♘xd4 e5 5.♘b5 d6 6.♘1c3 a6 7.♘a3 b5, but instead I have gone with 7...♗e7 which was originally the choice of the formidable Ukrainians Pavel Eljanov and Alexander Moiseenko, and has also been give the seal of approval by Magnus Carlsen.

Occasionally, I have offered a choice of variations, notably in the main line where the path splits between the more orthodox 10...0-0 and the enterprising 10...h5.

And finally, why is the opening named after the most notorious automatic rifle in the world? It is certainly fitting that Kalashnikov rhymes with ‘Sveshnikov’ as the two systems are closely related and Evgeny Sveshnikov developed many of the key ideas. But who actually coined the name? All can be revealed.

John van der Wiel, a Dutch Grandmaster who was one of the earliest adopters of the opening in the 1980s boom, introduced the name in the magazine New In Chess – yes, the publisher of this book. As he explained to me:

‘It was an inside joke amongst some players from my region in the Netherlands back then. Something like a primitive weapon, but it never jams. To my great surprise, others embraced this name and now it is the official name.’

There you have it – from the horse’s mouth, so to speak.

The humour of the name ‘The Kalashnikov’ is dark and for some does not read well in the context of our troubled times. I considered unilaterally renaming the opening and retitling this book, but that would just be a euphemism. In the chess community, ‘The Kalashnikov Variation of the Sicilian’ is the name that has stuck over decades and that won’t change for a long while. Thankfully, the struggle on the chessboard is unrelated to the painful reality of actual conflicts around the world.

Daniel King, London, April 2022

PART I

Model Games

I am first attracted to an opening by strategies – not by examining dry variations. In other words, I will have seen a complete game and will think to myself: that works well, I could do that too! Only afterwards is it time to question the opening moves in detail and to examine specific variations. That’s how I’ve ordered this book: the games first, the variations second.

The following twenty games contain the most important strategies and themes in the Kalashnikov. Having got to know them, and when to apply them, you will have gained a good understanding of the opening, so that even if you can’t recall the exact moves I recommend, you will be able to navigate your way through the middlegame. Let me mention a few of the themes you will be encountering in these games: Liberation Station (the ...d7/6-d5 pawn break); the Steamroller (the e- and f-pawn attack); the Minority Attack; the Bad-Bishop Bounce (...♗e7-d8-b6); the Trojan Horse (throwing the knight onto d4); Hammer Time (attacking White’s pawn chain with ...b7-b5). And much more too...

By focusing on these ideas in the context of the games, you will begin to see recurring patterns of play and that’s when your understanding develops.

The games have been selected for their instructive value but, as a bonus, many are beautiful too. My two personal favourites are Tomczak-Shirov (Game 10), a masterful technical performance highlighting the positional qualities of the Kalashnikov; and Anand-Maghsoodloo (Game 19), demonstrating the counter-attacking, dynamic side of the opening.

Seventeen games were shown in the Chessable course but I have included three more for this book.

Game 1

Mikhail Postupalsky

Sergey Burimov 2058

Tula 2005 (4)

In this game we see the ...d7-d5 pawn break. This is perhaps the most common and most important early middlegame strategy in the Kalashnikov.

1.e4 c5 2.♘f3 ♘c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.♘xd4 e5 5.♘f5

This move is not at all challenging and gives Black the opportunity to break in the centre straightaway.

5...d5

All aboard at Liberation Station. The pawn break immediately liberates Black’s pieces. It usually isn’t quite as easy to execute as here!

6.♘g3

A poor move, wasting time. White’s best is 6.♕xd5 ♕xd5 7.exd5 ♗xf5 8.dxc6 bxc6, although as you will see from the repertoire, Black is comfortably placed.

6...♘f6

Black already has a lead in development.

7.exd5 ♕xd5 8.♕xd5 ♘xd5

Black heads into the endgame, confident that he can still use his lead in development and superior pawn structure. After the pawn break, Black has an extra centre pawn (e5) which provides him with greater control in the middle of the board.

9.c3 ♗e6 10.♗e2 ♗e7 11.0-0 0-0 12.♘d2

Evidently, Black’s pieces are well centralised and harmoniously placed. There is nothing to thwart the natural plan of advancing the kingside pawn majority.

12...f5

The Steamroller. This is often an excellent plan when the queens are on the board as it can set up a kingside attack. Even in this endgame, the pawns are dangerous, preventing White’s minor pieces from occupying central squares.

13.♔h1 ♖ad8 14.♘f3 h6

Black is playing tidily, taking away the g5-square from the knight before pushing on.

15.♗c4 e4 16.♖e1

If 16.♘d2, 16...♘e5 17.♗b3 ♘d3.

analysis diagram

A picture of centralisation!

16...♘c7 17.♗xe6+ ♘xe6 18.♘d2 ♘c5 19.♘c4 ♘d3

Many moves ago, White played the pawn to c3 to prevent Black’s knights from moving into the b4- and d4-squares, but it created a huge hole which has been occupied by a rangy octopus knight. What central control! This is a logical consequence of the pawn break at move five.

20.♖f1 b5 21.♘a3 ♗xa3 22.bxa3 ♘ce5

Knight No.2 enters the fray with cover from the central pawns.

23.♗e3

A blunder, but it’s miserable anyway.

If instead, 23.♔g1 ♖c8 keeps up the pressure: 24.♗d2 ♘c4 25.♗e1 ♘xa3, for example.

23...f4 0-1

A successful outcome for the Steamroller.

Game 2

Divek Surujhlal

Vladimir Belous 2426

Akhisar Manisa ol U16 2009 (10)

1.e4 c5 2.♘f3 ♘c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.♘xd4 e5 5.♘xc6 bxc6

This is not the most challenging continuation for Black as it brings the b-pawn closer to the centre, covering the all-important d5-square. It’s difficult for White to find good prospects for the knight on c3. Yet this remains a reasonably popular move at club level.

6.♘c3 ♘f6 7.♗d3 ♗b4

In this case, with the c-file closed, I don’t think this bishop move is as effective as in the 5.♘f3 or 5.♘b3 variations. I might prefer to play the bishop to c5 or simply e7. Nevertheless, it is still quite satisfactory for Black.

8.0-0 0-0 9.f4

This is the reason that I selected this game. So many players on the white side of the Sicilian like to advance the f-pawn, the irresistible automatic attacking move, yet it can often do more harm than good. Nevertheless, we need to take it seriously as lines open.

9...d6 10.fxe5

I suspect that White had overlooked Black’s next move.

10.♕f3 is better, but Black is comfortable after 10...exf4 11.♗xf4 ♘g4 and the knight spins back to the e5-square.

10...♘g4

Hitting the h2-pawn (watch out for ...♕h4) and setting up a nasty check from b6. This is a reminder that once the f-pawn advances, it is so often White’s king that becomes weaker. Have a look at the three solid pawns in front of Black’s king.

11.♕e1

Covering the h4- and f2-squares and so averting immediate disaster.

If instead 11.exd6 ♗xd6 12.♗f4 (or 12.h3 ♕b6+ 13.♔h1 ♘f2+; and 12.g3 ♘xh2) 12...♗xf4 13.♖xf4 ♕d4+ wins.

11...♘xe5

White has parried the initial threats to his king and so the knight bounces back to this glorious central square, blockading the e-pawn and reaching over at key squares across the central divide. Compare this with White’s knight. Because of the anti-positional exchange, 5.♘xc6, the knight no longer has access to the d5-square and struggles to get into the game.

12.♗d2 ♖e8

A cunning move, stepping opposite the queen, provoking it to move.

13.♕g3 ♖e6

That was the plan! The rook swings across to a dangerous position on the sixth rank and it is Black who takes the initiative on the kingside.

14.♔h1 ♖g6 15.♕e1 ♗g4

A provocative move, hoping perhaps that White will play 16.h3 ♕d7! with dangerous threats on the kingside.

16.♘e2

White decides to relieve some of the pressure by exchanging pieces, but it doesn’t change the fact that Black has a long-term positional advantage in respect of the superior pawn structure and beautiful knight on e5.

16...♗xd2 17.♕xd2 ♕h4

Instead, 17...♗xe2 18.♗xe2 was also promising, when Black has the typical ‘good knight versus bad bishop’.

18.♕f4 ♖h6 19.♖ae1 ♖f6 20.♕g3 ♖xf1+ 21.♖xf1 ♕xg3 22.♘xg3

White has taken the pressure away by exchanging, but has just landed in a poor endgame.

22...g6 23.h3 ♗e6

Compare Black’s bishop and knight with White’s. That’s the difference between the two positions.

24.b3 a5 25.a3

White cracks – a pawn drops. But 25.♗e2 a4 26.♔g1 c5 puts White under sustained pressure. Black has lots of ways to creep forward and White has a long