Nimzo-Indian Defense: St. Petersburg Fischer Variation
Nimzo-Indian Defense, St Petersburg (Fischer) Variation
Definition
The St Petersburg (Fischer) Variation is a branch of the Nimzo-Indian Defense that arises after the moves 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 c5 5.Ne2 (5.Nge2 is played almost as often). By developing the king’s knight to e2 instead of the more common f3, White keeps the f-pawn free for an eventual f2–f3–e4 pawn break and preserves the option of recapturing on d4 with a knight. Black, for his part, has already challenged the centre with …c5 and usually follows up with …d5, aiming at an IQP-type structure or symmetrical hanging pawns.
Typical Move Order
- 1.d4 Nf6
- 2.c4 e6
- 3.Nc3 Bb4
- 4.e3 c5 (The Rubinstein move 4.e3; Black immediately strikes in the centre.)
- 5.Ne2 (The hallmark of the St Petersburg line.)
- 5…d5 (Main line) or 5…cxd4 6.exd4 d5
- 6.a3 Bxc3+ 7.Nxc3 0-0 8.dxc5 (or 8.Be3) – branching into several sub-lines.
Strategic Ideas
- White
- Maintain a healthy pawn structure by avoiding the doubled c-pawns that often follow Bxc3.
- Prepare the central break f2–f3 followed by e3–e4 to seize space.
- Use the bishop pair (Black usually gives up Bb4 for a knight) on the long diagonals once the centre opens.
- Black
- Pressure the d4 pawn with a quick …c5 and …d5, sometimes exchanging to reach an isolated queen’s pawn (IQP) ending.
- Exploit the temporary awkwardness of the knight on e2, which can block White’s bishops and delay kingside development.
- Transition to hanging-pawn structures after …cxd4 and …exd4, gaining dynamic piece play.
Historical Background
The line first appeared in master praxis in pre-war Soviet events, notably a series of tournaments in St Petersburg/Leningrad; hence the geographical nickname. It later became a pet system of Bobby Fischer, who adopted it as White in the early 1960s, refining the move orders and demonstrating its attacking potential. Many databases therefore annotate the variation as the “St Petersburg – Fischer” line.
Illustrative Games
- Fischer vs Uhlmann, Buenos Aires 1960 – Fischer uncorked the f3–e4 pawn-storm and won a crisp kingside attack.
- Kasparov vs Karpov, Linares 1993 – A heavyweight struggle in which Kasparov (White) employed 7.dxc5, traded into an IQP ending, and eventually converted the bishop pair.
Example Position
After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 c5 5.Ne2 d5 6.a3 Bxc3+ 7.Nxc3 cxd4 8.exd4
we reach a typical structure: White has the bishop pair and potential for f2–f3–e4; Black possesses an isolated pawn on d4 to target and quick development to generate activity.
Typical Plans for Both Sides
- White
- Development: Be2, 0-0, Re1, Bf1–d3 or f1-e2.
- Central break: Prepare f2–f3 followed by e3–e4, challenging Black’s d5-pawn and opening the bishops.
- Minor-piece pressure: Maneuver Nc3-e2-f4 targeting d5 and h5 squares.
- Black
- Counter-pressure: …Nc6, …dxc4 (when possible), and …Qb6 hitting d4 and b2.
- Piece activity: Reposition the dark-squared bishop via …Bd7-c6 or …b6-Bb7.
- Endgame transition: Exchange queens to highlight White’s isolated pawn and head for favourable minor-piece endings.
Interesting Facts & Anecdotes
- In Fischer’s private notebooks, several pages are devoted to the pawn lever f2–f3 in this exact structure; he famously quipped that the move “pulls the plug on Black’s Nimzo.”
- Modern engines evaluate the position after 5.Ne2 as dynamically equal, yet the variation continues to appear in rapid and blitz due to its strategic richness and surprise value.
- Grandmasters such as Vladimir Kramnik and Levon Aronian have used the line as a low-theory alternative to the heavily analysed 4.Qc2 systems.