The Panov Botvinnik Attack is busted!

Below is the game Dolmatov - Adams. Adams didn't lose it in the opening, so we may conclude that there is still plenty of play left in the PB for both sides.

Hi Sundown,

Always good to hear a discussion between two experienced OTB players
who play the same opening yet have differing views.

"And the reason why I think those 2 variations [The Advanced and the Panov-
Botvinnik Attack] are so poor for White is that backward, isolated d-pawn
White gets, an easy target for Black."

I play the Advanced and the White d-pawn is blocked by a Black d-pawn so
I'd not class it as a real backward pawn weakness. (get rid of the Black d5
pawn then it's genuine weakness.)

True in the Advanced Black has the c5 break (a tempo down compared with
the French) Black can hit it with natural moves (Nc6 and Qb6) but White too
holds it with natural moves. It was the well timed f6 break by Black that IMO
needed watching.

Anyway, In the Advanced I used to get involved in the Nc3 -g4-h4 lines.
There c5 was usually met with dxd5 so 'the weak backward d-pawn' never appeared.


In the P.B.A. attack true White gets a IQP but the plan is to shove it ASAP as in
the game DataFly posted. Some strong players have as White have
accepted the Panov-Botvinnik IQP. It's not that critical a weakness to
judge the whole opening on.

But it is easy to imagine some lad playing a P.B. A.as White being just
a tad too cautious with his IQP giving Black time to block it and then
hammer into it. I've seen examples of both.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi Sundown,

Always good to hear a discussion between two experienced OTB players
who play the same opening yet have differing views.

"And the reason why I think those 2 variations [The Advanced and the Panov-
Botvinnik Attack] are so poor for White is that backward, isolated d-pawn
White gets, an easy target for Black."

I play the Advance ...[text shortened]... ith his IQP giving Black time to block it and then
hammer into it. I've seen examples of both.

Hi greenpawn,

In the P.B.A. attack true White gets a IQP but the plan is to shove it ASAP as in the game DataFly posted.

Is this generally the case with IQP's, or specific to the Panov-Botvinnik? I know the intention is to push it eventually, with the idea of some kind of attack, and the player with the isolated pawn doesn't want it going into the ending, but should it always be pushed as soon as it can be?

Hi Deep Thought,

Well that's the way I see it. A timed advance of your IQP before it
get's blocked is the way. Of course positions differ, another plan is
to use the two open or ½ files to generate play or use the potential
outposts at e5 and c5 (e4 & c4 if Black has the IQP).

I think the worse thing you can do is say 'right I have an IQP so it's
everyman on defensive duty to hold it.' That is asking for trouble.
Though there again it may be the only path open to you.

Niimzovitch gives the IQP a whole chapter claiming it is weak but it does
contain dynamic possibilities which cannot be ignored and dismissed lightly.
One should study how to handle both sides.

Me?
If I see an IQP I ignore it - my opponent will be expecting me to block it,
chop wood and play for an ending.
Sod that for a game of chess. There's a King somewhere on the board,
that is what I'll be aiming my bits at!

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi Deep Thought,

Well that's the way I see it. A timed advance of your IQP before it
get's blocked is the way. Of course positions differ, another plan is
to use the two open or ½ files to generate play or use the potential
outposts at e5 and c5 (e4 & c4 if Black has the IQP).

I think the worse thing you can do is say 'right I have an IQP so i ...[text shortened]... game of chess. There's a King somewhere on the board,
that is what I'll be aiming my bits at!

Hi greenpawn,

thanks, that answers my question. I think your statement about not obsessing about an opponents IQP sounds right, but it's handy to have something to distract his pieces away from his king with.