Slav Defense: Chebanenko Variation (Chameleon) 

That's a good question. Thank you. In the video my position is that a beginner can't understand it fully cause there are many possible transpositions into other openings and variations, with the a6 (or a6 and a4) included, which only an experienced, advanced player may properly evaluate and thus choose or reject those paths. However, if a beginner is facing another beginner, the simplicity behind the move a6 may be good enough to even outplay the opponent in the opening (winning the c4-pawn, or having at least a clean, obvious plan). So, I guess the question is still open, but definitely it is not the simplest among openings. 🙂

@@BadBishopChess thanks for your reasoned reply. I had the impression from GM Colovics Chessable course that it is simple and the 'purest' Slav in the sense that we do not give up the center by taking on c4 and still manage to develop the bishop to f5, kind of like a reversed London system. Maybe it also depends on which lines we play, as the lines shown in the video were new to me. Can you give the name of an opening that there is a transposition to?

The Slav's original idea is to develop their LSB before playing e6. Unfortunately it doesn't work that easy for them, and the usual price is trading their d- for the c-pawn of white. With the move a6 Black is trying to get their bishop out, indeed, by either provoking (1) c4-c5, (2) c4xd5, or (3) e2-e3 after which b7-b5 may be done, and finally - again - the c8-bishop may become free to go to f5 or g4 (typicaly better then f5, when possible). Those who think that after a7-a6 things are set for black to go with Bf5 or Bg4 are planning to answer Qb3 with the move like Ra7. That's fine, but a bit odd and I prefer White in those positions, but since there are ways to avoid this unpleasant Ra7 thing, I prefer those lines. One of the main lines where Black can't really get what they want easily (the c8-bishop out) is when white goes with the 5. a4, and there are many transpositions available for Black. You have a way to get into (1) the Grunfeld structure (g6), (2) play the Bf5 and end up in that ugly situation with Ra7, where White has an advantage (lichess database results are supporting that statement, Stockfish as well), or (3) go into the Semi-Slav/Meran (e7-e6). Now, after this e6, white can choose to get into (3a) some sort of a Catalan by playing g3, (3b) accept the Semi-Slav main line with e2-e3, or (3c) go for the Queen's gambit or invite the Botvinnik Semi-Slav by playing Bg5. Now, Black can again choose in case of (3b) to reply with c6-c5, which transposes in some sort of a Tarrasch defence (with a4 included), while in case of (3c) Black can use the classical Queen's Gambit, Cambridge Springs, Lasker or Orthodox variation, with the a2-a4 inclusion. Those are things that came to my mind, which one playing this variation of the Slav should know about in order to know what to choose and why, considering that white has either a2-a4 or something else included in the original system. When someone is selling something, they can say things like - this is the simplest opening or so, just to buy someone's attention and rise their expectation/excitement. You can see that on RU-vid, when people put such titles only for the viewers to click on their thumbnails and titles.

@@BadBishopChess wow, thanks so much for your thorough reply! I'm amazed. Indeed, I might be too susceptible to premature excitement induced by Chessable's marketing machine. I noticed, too, that I concern myself far too much with (concrete) openings and decided to do tactics instead. In early November, I'll have my first FIDE-rated tournament and I'm already very anxious about it. I checked GM Colovic's repertoire, and indeed as you said, after 5. a4 he transposes to the Semi-Slav, locking in the bishop on c8, failing to achieve the goal of getting it out and allowing plenty of transpositions with some of these lines looking quite crazy to me (e.g. one line where his final comment is "The bishop pair in an open position more than compensates for the doubled f-pawns. " [note: in front of the king, while queens are on the board]).

That's done in order to show what was Black's idea of playing a6. I think that is the best way of presenting ideas, asking what one intends next to play (if we play something irrelevant or "skip a move").

For sure, but I have a plan first to cover all solid openings using this structural approach, and then expand each of them with model games and positions, as it is - indeed - the best way to learn openings.

That's another great question! I think it is valuable to know different structures and types of middlegame, but is there a better way to spend time studying chess? 🤔 I will leave this open, although probably it depends on one's level of chess understanding, and their weaknesses, needs, etc. Maybe someone needs more to study and improve understanding of the pawn structures arising from their own opening repertoire 🧐

Thank you! 🍻