Nimzo-Indian Defense: Spielmann Variation

Definition

The Spielmann Variation of the Nimzo-Indian Defense arises after the moves 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Qb3. By immediately attacking the bishop on b4 and the pawn on b7 with the queen, White hopes to avoid doubled c-pawns after …Bxc3+ while exerting early pressure on Black’s queenside.

Typical Move Order & Key Branches

Main Line

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Qb3

4…c5 – The most popular reply. After 5. dxc5 Nc6 Black sacrifices a pawn for quick development and central control.
4…Nc6 – Defends the b-pawn and keeps options flexible. Play often continues 5. Nf3 d5.
4…Qe7 – Reinforces b7 and prepares …e5 in one go, at the cost of blocking the f8-bishop temporarily.
4…Bxc3+ 5. bxc3 – Black gives up the bishop pair immediately, betting that White’s split pawns will become targets later.

Strategic Themes

Early queen activity. The queen on b3 eyes both b7 and d5, but can be chased with …Nc6-a5 or …c5-c4.
Bishop pair vs. structure. If Black exchanges on c3, White gains the two bishops but must nurse the pawn weakness on c4/c3.
Pawn sacrifice motifs. Lines with 4…c5 5. dxc5 often see Black invest a pawn for open lines, reminiscent of Benko-style compensation.
Flexibility for both sides. Because neither side has committed the king’s-bishop pawns (f-pawns), transpositions to Queen’s Gambit or Bogo-Indian-type positions are common.

Historical Context

The variation is named after the great Austrian tactician Rudolf Spielmann, who first essayed the idea in the 1920s. It never became mainstream—players such as Capablanca and Alekhine were skeptical of early queen moves—but it has periodically served as a surprise weapon.

1970s-1980s – Adopted by Yugoslav grandmasters who preferred dynamic sidelines against the highly theoretical 4. e3 systems.
1990s – Revived by Gata Kamsky; his successes prompted renewed interest at the top level.
Modern day – Seen occasionally in rapid and blitz by players like Anish Giri and Richard Rapport, where surprise value is critical.

Illustrative Game

Kamsky – Kramnik, Biel Interzonal 1993

[[Pgn|d4|Nf6|c4|e6|Nc3|Bb4|Qb3|c5|dxc5|Nc6|Nf3|Ne4|Bd2|Nxd2|Nxd2|O-O|e3|Bxc5|Be2|b6|O-O|Bb7|Rfd1|Qe7|Ne4|Na5|Qc2|f5|Nxc5|bxc5|Qa4|Nc6|Bc3|d6|Bf3|Rb8|Rd2|Nb4|Bxb4|Bxf3|Bxd6|Qg5|Bg3|Rb4|Qxa7|Ra8|Qc7|Be4|Rd7|Rxc4|Rcd8|Rxd8|Qxd8|Qxd8|Rxd8|Bxe4|fxe4|h3|Nd3|b3] ]

Why Play (or Avoid) the Spielmann?

For White

Pros
- Sidesteps the heavily analyzed Rubinstein (4. e3) and Classical (4. Qc2) systems.
- Immediate pressure on Black’s queenside can win a pawn if Black is careless.
Cons
- Early queen development grants Black tempos with …Nc6-a5 or …c5-c4.
- If Black equalizes, the misplaced queen may become a liability in endgames.

For Black

Pros
- Dynamic counterplay via central breaks (…d5 or …c5) and piece activity.
- Possibility to seize the initiative by sacrificing the b-pawn.
Cons
- Inaccurate play can leave the b-pawn undefended or allow White a safe extra pawn.
- Black must know multiple sidelines because the variation is less forcing than mainstream Nimzo lines.

Interesting Facts & Anecdotes

Spielmann reportedly introduced Qb3 after joking that “the queen is the strongest piece—why not bring her out first?”
In his famous book The Art of Sacrifice, Spielmann dedicated a chapter to “disrupting the opponent’s harmonies,” citing this line as a perfect illustration.
The engine era has given 4. Qb3 new life: modern engines show that Black must tread carefully after the tempting pawn grab 4…c5 5. dxc5 Bxc5? 6. e3! when b7 still hangs.

Related Terms & Further Study

Nimzo-Indian Defense
Queen’s Gambit Declined (transpositional possibilities)
Benko-style pawn sacrifice – the motif that often appears after 4…c5 5. dxc5.