These are positions taken from two different games analyzed in a book by Danny Kopec. The only difference between the positions is white's Be3 in game A vs white's Kh1 in game B. In both games the next move was 10.Nb3. The author's comment to 10.Nb3 in game A was "This move is primarily aimed at avoiding exchanges which generally favour black's strategic goals in the Sicilian". A few pages later in the book the author's comment to 10.Nb3 in game B was "This move is rather passive and the source of white's later troubles.
My conclusion is that the author considers 10.Nb3 an OK move if Be3 is played instead of Kh1, and considers it a bad move if Kh1 is played instead. Can somebody explain the logic behind this? Also, what would your comment be to 10.Nb3 in the two games?
54 ( +1 | -1 ) Bd7I guess in this case the author's comments were depending on the results of the games. 10.Nb3 is of course a good move in both games. The main idea of this move is to make the Bishop on d7 look stupid. That guy was heading for c6. The Bishop is badly placed on d7 because it blocks the best retreat square of the Nf6. This one will probably be hit by either e5 or g5. In both cases d7 would be the best square to retreat to. In case of e5 the Knight would attack this very pawn and in case of g5 it would be ready to jump to e5 if f5 follows.
50 ( +1 | -1 ) We can think for ourselves here. In line B the a7-b1 does look weak for White, and Black might try to exploit it with Qb6, but the attempt would fail because Be3 can be played after Re1 and Bf3 (chessbase agrees with this plan). Sualksnh is also correct that Bd7 takes away the square for the knight. I would like to see the complete games you are writing about. Otherwise your author is just one of those laconic chesswriters who lists strings of moves and says "white has an edge."
23 ( +1 | -1 ) Much more popular than 6.Be2 is 6.g4!, which is why many players who play the scheveningen dont play it through its pure form. Most players now days play it through either the najdorf or taimanov to avoid 6.g4
47 ( +1 | -1 ) giboI play the scheveningen and I don't mind facing 6.g4. The reason for that is since I play the "pure" scheveningen I have become familiar with the positions which can arise after 6.g4, for example patterns, strong and weak points, strategic goals etc.
Perhaps I can score a point or two from the fact that opponents usually don't get the chance to play 6.g4 that often and therefore aren't familiar with the opening. That's what I hope for anyway :)