Nimzo-Indian: Classical, Pirc, 6.a3

Nimzo-Indian: Classical (4.Qc2)

Definition

The Classical Variation of the Nimzo-Indian Defence arises after the moves
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2. By placing the queen on c2, White supports the knight on c3 and plans to recapture on c3 with the queen, avoiding doubled pawns after …Bxc3+. The line is called “Classical” because it revives a 19th-century idea of rapid piece development combined with control of the center.

Typical Plans & Strategic Ideas

• White
  • Aims to keep a healthy pawn structure (no doubled c-pawns).
  • Often advances e2–e4 quickly (e.g., 5.e4) to seize space.
  • May play g2–g3 and Bg2, transposing to Catalan-like setups.
• Black
  • Chooses between several setups—​4…0-0, 4…c5, 4…d5, 4…Nc6, or the solid 4…b6.
  • Counter-attacks the center with …d5 or …c5, relying on easier development.
  • Tries to prove the queen is slightly awkward on c2, blocking the c-pawn.

Historical & Theoretical Significance

The Classical system was experimented with by Emanuel Lasker but truly popularized by José Raúl Capablanca in the 1920s. Theory blossomed in the 1980s when Garry Kasparov and Anatoly Karpov both adopted it in their World-Championship matches, prompting a huge analytical arms race in lines such as 4…c5 5.dxc5 0-0.

Illustrative Game

This fragment (Kasparov – Karpov, World Championship 1990, game 18) shows Black steering for queenside play while White prepares a central break.

Interesting Facts

• The move 4.Qc2 was nicknamed “the poor man’s 4.f3” because it also defends e4 without weakening the king-side dark squares.
• Modern engines evaluate the position after 4.Qc2 as roughly equal, yet it remains one of the most deeply analyzed branches of the entire Nimzo-Indian.

Pirc (or “Pirc Defence”)

Definition

The Pirc Defence begins 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6. Named after Slovenian Grandmaster Vasja Pirc, it is a hyper-modern response to 1.e4: Black allows White to build a classical pawn center (e4-d4) and later attacks it with pieces and pawn breaks (…e5, …c5).

Main Set-ups

1. Austrian Attack — 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.e5. White grabs space; Black strives for …c5 or …e6.
2. Classical (Two Knights) — 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Be2 0-0 6.0-0. A flexible, strategic battle.
3. 150 Attack — 4.Be3 Bg7 5.Qd2 0-0 6.f3, echoing the English Attack vs. the Najdorf.
4. Fianchetto — 4.g3 Bg7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.Nge2, a slow squeeze.

Typical Ideas

• Black fianchettos the king-bishop and keeps the central pawns flexible.
• Breaks with …e5 or …c5 challenge White’s center; …a6 & …b5 counterplay on the queenside is common.
• White often decides the character of play—​either a quick pawn storm (Austrian, 150) or a restrained build-up (Classical).

Historical Tidbits

Although named for Vasja Pirc, early pioneers included Teichmann (1910s). Bobby Fischer tried the Pirc only once in a serious game (vs. Olafsson, Reykjavik 1960) and lost—​he called it “too passive,” yet the defence has thrived in modern praxis thanks to players like Timman, Kramnik, and Topalov.

Model Game

The sharp Austrian Attack duel Gurevich – Timman, Tilburg 1990, illustrates both sides’ chances.

Interesting Facts

• Some call the Pirc “the King’s Indian Defence against 1.e4.” Indeed, many thematic maneuvers (…e5 break, …c5 counterplay) overlap.
• The move order 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 transposes to the Pirc but denies Black the option of …d6, leading instead to the Pribyl (Czech) Defence.

6.a3 Bxc5 7.Nf3 Nc6 (Queen’s Gambit Accepted, 6.a3 Variation)

Context & Move-Order

This position typically arises from the Queen’s Gambit Accepted (QGA):
1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 e6 5.Bxc4 c5 6.a3 Bxc5 7.Nf3 Nc6. White’s 6.a3 chases the bishop on b4 (if present) and prepares b2-b4. Black captures on c5 first, then develops the knight to c6, entering a balanced, dynamic middlegame.

Strategic Themes

• White
  • Wants to expand on the queenside with b4-b5, kicking the knight from c6.
  • Often places the dark-squared bishop on d3 and castles short, eyeing the h7 pawn.
  • Central break e3-e4 can appear once development is finished.
• Black
  • Aims for …a6 and …b5, meeting b4 with …Bb6, stabilizing c5.
  • May strike in the center with …e5 or …d4 if the moment is right.
  • Piece activity compensates for White’s slight space edge.

Theoretical Status

The line is considered sound for both sides. Engine assessments hover around equality, but practical chances abound, especially regarding pawn breaks on the queenside.

Sample Continuation

After 14…Be6 Black activates pieces, while White eyes the b5 break. Both kings are safe, but tension persists in the center and on the queenside.

Historical Note

The idea 6.a3 was championed by Soviet master Semion Furman (trainer of Anatoly Karpov). It became fashionable in the 1970s when players looked for alternatives to the heavily analyzed 6.dxc5 lines.

Interesting Anecdote

In the 1974 Leningrad Interzonal, Boris Spassky surprised rising star Alexander Beliavsky with this very sequence. Spassky’s pawn roller b4-b5-b6 forced concessions and he won in 33 moves—​a striking demonstration that “modest” moves like 6.a3 can still generate a whirlwind.