Bf4-g5 After ...Bd6

Before I get to the topic that I would like to discuss, I should announce that I am finally going to enter another chess tournament because it fortunately falls on a weekend on which I do not have a baseball tournament.  I will be playing in the Hart House Summer Open on Canada Day weekend.  I am very excited that I will finally get to play chess again and going in my expectations will be high based on my strong performance at the Kitchener Rapid Tournament.  I will still be nervous though, as I am far removed from a standard rated event, and my most recent one in Hamilton was far from successful.

Today I intend to touch upon the discomfort that I feel when playing the Black pieces against a White Bishop on f4.  This sort of formation usually occurs from the London System after 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4, where after 3...e6 4.e3, when Black's 4...Bd6 runs into the 5.Bg5 pin.  I know that after 5...Be7 it is as if White has just played the Torre Attack instead of the London system, but I feel that Black deserves better due to White's greedy Bishop.

I will begin the topic by showing Hugo Ortiz (1493 Active, 1516 Standard) vs Patrick O'Sullivan (1750 Active, 1856 Standard).  In this game the theme of ...Bd6 with immediate Bg5 arises but I am able to handle it and eventually win the game.  This game was played at the Kitchener Waterloo Spring Active, so I do not remember the game and as such I do not remember all of the themes.  As a result, my annotations may be a bit bare, but I hope to explore in detail the Bg5 pin.  I am not sure if I won this game on purely strong play, or if I was aided by the fact that I was playing a weaker opponent.  I will explore my idea in handling Bg5 and any improvements that White could make following Bg5.
Hugo Ortiz (1493) vs Patrick O'Sullivan (1750)- Active
1.d4 c6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bf4 e6- I have no problem with locking in the light-square Bishop here because it will be an effective defender of the a4-e8 diagonal should White choose to exchange on d5.
5.e3 Bd6!? 6.Bg5- According to Rybka Bg5 surrenders a minuscule edge to Black; however I feel that if Bg5 is left alone, White's initiative will grow.
6...Nbd7- The first order of business is to hold the Knight to potentially free the Queen.  Rybka evaluates castling here as a fine move, but I once again disagree as I feel it is necessary to keep the option of jostling that Bishop at will.  You will see that I never castle here when my Kingside pawns may be more effective when advanced.
7.c5- This is a positional mistake.  In my opinion, 7.c5 is a waste of a tempo, and it gives my bishop the choice of 2 good squares, both of which are better than d6.  It also allows me to later peel open the Queenside which, if I'm not mistaken, I did twice in that tournament; once in this game and once in another.
7...Be7- I now have an extra protector for my Knight, and I am prepared to now hunt down the White dark-square Bishop.

Though cramped, Black has a fine game as White's most effective resource is the target of Black's assault.
8.Bd3 h6- Getting the pawn off of the light square and starting the pressure on the White Bishop.
9.Bh4 e5- Perhaps white has put too many eggs in one basket and is too committed to hanging on to his investment, so I strike in the weakly contested center.  The light-square Bishop will soon come to life.  Every one of Black's moves after the first few has been centered around evicting the Bishop and White's efforts to preserve it are costing him too much time.
10.f3- Stopping ...e4 and ...Ne4, but perhaps the other intent is to pull the dark-square Bishop back.
10...exd4- Once again a move to exploit the Bishop; this time indirectly.  Now that the e-pawn is off of the board ...Nf8 is possible to prepare to threaten the Bg4.
11.exd4 Nf8 12.Nge2 Ne6- I chose 12...Ne6 instead of 12...Ng6 because I wanted to keep the Bishop sitting on h4 where its precarious position can be exploited.  12...Ne6 also pressures d4 which is especially weak now because of 10...exd4.
13.Qc2 Bd7 14.b4 Nh5- I decided that since my opponent has left the Kingside for the moment there would be no danger in placing my Knight on the edge of the board, and loosening the cramp.  Instead of 14.b4 my opponent should have tried 14.O-O when the abstract idea of 14...Nh5 15.Be1 is possible, which better prepares b4.
15.Bxe7 Qxe7- The only thing all of those wasted moves on the White Bishop has caused me is a "poor" Knight, which can be reconciled immediately with ...Nhf4 or ...Nf6.  It turns out that my Knight does not have to move from its post for a long time in this game, so the White Bishop really turned out to be a liability.  With that said, 15.Bf2 deserved consideration to support the center, as in that case I would be tripping over my own dark-square Bishop.

 Black has achieved a fine position here and will look to exploit the extended Queenside.

16.g3? Qf6?- I completely missed 16...Nxd4, but I am still significantly better here.  I will not annotate the remainder of the game because it lacks significance with regard to the concept.
17.f4 Nxd4 18.Nxd4 Qxd4 19.O-O-O Qxb4 20.Re1+ Kd8 21.Na4 b5 22.cxb6 axb6 23.Nc3 Ra5 24.Kd2 Rc5 25.Rb1 Qa5 26.Qb2 d4 27.Qxb6+ Qxb6 28.Rxb6 dxc3+ 29.Kc2 Kc7 30.Ra6 Kd6 31.Ra7 Rb8 32.Rd1 Rb2+ 33.Kc1 Rd5 34.Ra3 c2 35.Bxc2 Rxd1+ 36.Bxd1 Rxh2 37.Rd3+ Kc7 38.Kb1 Rg2 39.Bb3 Rxg3 40.Rd2 f6 41.Rh2 Nxf4 0-1

This game shows that Black does not have to worry about Bg5 if White is not coordinated on the Kingside.  Instead of  7.c5 a move like 7.Nf3 should be tried instead in order to make something of the Kingside that White has invested so much time in.  Other than that, my opponent played solidly out of the opening and I was simply able to prove that Bg5 is not always scary.  In my next post I will show a game where I thought it would be scary and as a result preceded ...Bd6 with ...h6.  Interesting to note is that during my game against Hugo Ortiz a fire alarm disrupted play for approximately 10 minutes.  That is the first time I have experienced that.