Main line: 3.d4 Philidor Defence

1 main line: 3.d4

1.1 3...exd4
1.2 hanham variation

1.2.1 alternative move order
1.2.2 black experiments reach hanham variation


1.3 philidor countergambit: 3...f5
1.4 3...bg4?!

main line: 3.d4

with 3.d4 white challenges black in centre. black has several options.

3...exd4

the common black response 3...exd4 relieves central tension, although gives centre. after 4. nxd4 nf6 5. nc3, black continues ...be7 , ...0-0 (the antoshin variation) , achieves strong defensive position.

in line black can fianchetto bishop g7, although uncommon. bent larsen tried in few games, including draw against mikhail tal in 1969.

instead of 4.nxd4, white can play 4. qxd4, paul morphy favoured, intending 4... nc6 5. bb5 bd7 6. bxc6 bxc6 7. nc3 nf6 8. bg5 followed 0-0-0. line played in many 19th-century games.

hanham variation

the other main option black maintain central tension , adopt setup ...nd7, ...be7, , ...c6. plan named hanham variation (after american chess master james moore hanham) , favoured aron nimzowitsch. common line is: 3... nf6 4. nc3 nbd7 5. bc4 be7 6. 0-0 (6.ng5 interesting alternative: after 6...0-0 7.bxf7+ rxf7 8.ne6 qe8 9.nxc7 qd8 10.nxa8, white material up, black can develop strong initiative after, example, 10...b5 11.nxb5 qa5+) 6... 0-0 7. a4 (to prevent ...b5) 7... c6 (see diagram).

grandmaster larry kaufman notes hanham variation aims maintain black s pawn on e5, analogously closed lines of ruy lopez, , opines quite popular , on par major defences 1.e4, except annoying detail black can t reach hanham position force.

as alternative 4.nc3 in response black s 3...nf6, according both kaufman , grandmaster christian bauer, white retains advantage with: 4. dxe5! nxe4 5. qd5! (the rellstab variation; 5.nbd2 sokolsky variation) 5... nc5 6. bg5 be7 7. exd6 qxd6 8. nc3.

alternative move order

black tries 3... nd7 intending 4.nc3 ngf6, reaching hanham variation. 4. bc4! awkward black meet, since 4...ngf6 loses 5.ng5, , 4...be7 loses pawn 5.dxe5 nxe5 (5...dxe5?? 6.qd5! wins) 6.nxe5 dxe5 7.qh5! 4... c6 best black, leaves white advantage of bishop pair after 5. 0-0 be7 6. dxe5 dxe5 (6...nxe5 loses pawn 7.nxe5 dxe5 8.qh5) 7. ng5! bxg5 8. qh5! qe7 , 9.bxg5 or 9.qxg5.

black experiments reach hanham variation

in recent years, black has experimented other move orders in attempt reach hanham variation while avoiding 3...nf6 4.dxe5! , 3...nd7 4.bc4!

one such line 1. e4 d6 2. d4 nf6 3. nc3 nbd7 intending 4.nf3 e5. white can deviate, however, 4.f4!? or 4.g4!?
another try 1. e4 d6 2. d4 nf6 3. nc3 e5 transposes hanham after 4.nf3 nbd7, white can instead try gain small advantage 4. dxe5 (kaufman opines 4.nge2 promising ) 4... dxe5 5. qxd8+ kxd8 6. bc4. after 4.dxe5, bauer concludes white stands trifle better provided plays accurately, black doesn t have fear following 6.bc4, choosing of 3 valid replies, 6...ke8, 6...bb4, or 6...be6. 7.bxe6 fxe6 position remains hard nut crack.

philidor countergambit: 3...f5

a more aggressive approach black after 3.d4 3...f5!? (see diagram), philidor s original intention , recommendation. in 19th century, 3...f5 played paul morphy. move can lead more open positions other lines, considered dubious. others maintain 3...f5 valid idea. grandmaster tony kosten considers move respectable in monograph on opening. move played david bronstein , teimour radjabov.

after 3...f5 white has several ways proceed:

4.nc3 (the zukertort variation) , white obtains clear advantage:

4...fxe4 5.nxe4 d5 (if 5...nf6 6.nxf6 gxf6 7.dxe5 fxe5 8.bc4 qf6 9.ng5 +/− polugaevsky) 6.nxe5 dxe4 7.qh5+ g6 8.nxg6 nf6 (if 8...hxg6 9.qxh8 be6 10.qe5 +/− larsen) 9.qe5+ kf7 (if 9...be7 10.nxh8 nc6 11.bb5 qd5 12.bg5 +/− zukertort) 10.bc4+ kg7 11.bh6+ kxh6 12.nxh8 bb4+ 13.c3 qxh8 14.cxb4 +/− (keres).
4...exd4 5.qxd4 fxe4 (if 5...nf6 6.e5!) 6.bg5 nf6 7.nxe4 be7 8.bc4 nc6 9.qe3 +/− (sozin).
4...nf6 5.dxe5 nxe4 6.nxe4 fxe4 7.ng5 d5 8.e6 bc5 9.nxe4! +/− (sozin, sokolsky).


4.bc4 leads clear advantage white:

4...exd4 5.ng5 nh6 6.0-0 (6.nxh7, jaenisch variation, leads unclear position after 6...ng4! 7.nxf8 kxf8 8.qxd4 nc6) 6...nc6 7.re1 f4 (or 7...fxe4 8.nxe4 ne5 9.bxh6 gxh6 10.f4 nxc4 11.nxd6+ +/−) 8.bxf4 qf6 9.qd2 ne5 10.be2 bg4 11.f3 bd7 12.bg3 0-0-0 13.f4 +/−.
4...nf6 5.ng5 qe7 (or 5...d5 6.dxe5 dxc4 7.qxd8+ kxd8 8.exf6 +/−) 6.bf7+ kd8 7.bb3 exd4 8.0-0 +/− (berger).
4...fxe4 5.nxe5 d5 6.qh5+ g6 7.nxg6 nf6 8.qe5+ be7 , continuing either 9.qxe7+, 9.nxh8 (steinitz), or 9.bb5+ (keres).


4.dxe5 forces black complicate matters further 4...fxe4 5.ng5 d5 unclear position.

after 6.e6 (the del rio attack), white obtains upper hand after 6...bc5 7.nc3 (the berger variation), or 6...nh6 7.nc3! (berger); however, black can maintain lack of clarity 6...nf6!? 7.nf7 qe7 8.nxh8 bxe6, or 6...bb4+ 7.c3 bc5 8.nf7 qf6 9.be3 bxe6 10.nxh8 bxe3 11.fxe3 qh4+ 12.g3 qh6 13.qd2 nd7 14.c4 ne5 15.be2 dxc4 16.nc3 nd3+ 17.bxd3 exd3 (makarov).
white has 6.nc3!? (steinitz) , 6.c4.


4.exf5 e4 5.ng5 bxf5 6.nc3 , white has slight plus after 6...nf6 7.f3 (sozin), or 6...d5 7.f3.

3...bg4?!

inferior 3...bg4?!, in light of 4. dxe5 bxf3 (black cannot recapture since 4...dxe5? 5. qxd8+ kxd8 6. nxe5 wins clean pawn; or, black can gambit pawn 4...nd7, albin variation) 5. qxf3 (or white can obtain endgame advantage 5.gxf3 dxe5 6.qxd8+ kxd8 7.f4 +/− maróczy) 5... dxe5 6. bc4 giving white advantage of bishop pair in open position large development advantage. black cannot block attack on f7-pawn natural 6...nf6? because white wins pawn 7.qb3. (this played in famous opera game , paul morphy white refrained taking b7-pawn , retained strong initiative after 7...qe7 8.nc3.) black better 6...qf6 7.qb3 bc5 8.0-0 bb6 9.a4 a5 10.nc3 ne7 11.be3 nd7 12.rad1 +/−, or 6...qd7!? (maróczy).