Sicilian: Najdorf 6.Rg1!?

I recently joined ICC and this is an interesting Sicilian Najdorf game which sidesteps the mainlines. I chose the move 6.Rg1 which has been tried in tournament play by British GM Michael Adames among others.

Thoughts and comments welcome!

Really nice game!

I'm hosting a Najdorf Tournament here. You can join by clicking here 

 Yup, but its understandable that anyone can play sub standard during online blitz. We did play a couple of games that went his way too and he seemed like a fair player. I guess blacks 11th and 12th moves set him up for a bad game. Sometimes weaker players dont play as bad as 2000+ players but sometimes the mistakes 2000+ players make are more crucial. for example; you can get sure but lasting advantages against sub 1800 players yet they can last alot longer than the game above, but it doesnt say they had any chance of winning. on the otherhand, a 2000+ player may make a dubious move after playing opening theory but essentially they could have given up a particular square/file which allowed a quick defeat making them look over-rated. 

 To Achterberg; wow i didnt know Kasparov had a loss against this line. *searches database*

wher did u found this??give the example please...

 The way to counter a flank attack is by striking in the centre! The best move (and most common) is 8...d5! It is quite an obvious move really. Black is usually planning to play a d5 push in order to get rid of his backward pawn (d6 and e5 set up) so it should not be hard to find.

The fianchetto idea is a good one but i am always sceptical about fianchetto with black on kingside in Sicilians with the pawns on d6 and e5 . The d6 pawn is weak and may need protection from the dark square bishop.(after an eventual d5 the bishop will come to life)

Kasparov played 6...g6 against Ivanchuk so it must be okay. I just dont think it puts the question to black. After fianchetto on g7 Kasparov ended up moving his bishop back to f8 to protect d6. 8...d5 is just more straightforward for black.

a few of my initial thoughts just looking at the screen:

 12.Rh1! wins a piece. be2 is definitely dubious, even if rh1 wasnt a possibility stronger would have been be3 with qd2 and 0-0-0.

 instead of 15. Nd5 ( which breaks up your knight pair, lets him control the game for a few moves, etc.), 15.Bg4 is preferable because 1: he cant trade because the f4 pawn will be indefensible. 2: it forces him to cede control of the diagonal, and after a qf3 later the f pawn will be pretty much indefensible. 3: it forces him to either trade off his bishop (with the knight, which gives you an amazing position after axb3) or maintain a very passive position, etc.

 16 ex instead of qx is probably better (although this is debatable) because it 1. forces your opponent to play "your  game", 2. the queenside structure is temporarily hampered by the f4 pawn you may as well have tried for a superior kingside structure.

blacks 16...qe7 was terrible (he had to play qd7) as was his  12...nh5. his 0-0-0 is a pretty bad ?, but 18.qc7 (threatening Nb4) is a huge improvement on  18...bxa6??. white is still winning, but it is not quite as easy.

20.qxa6+ is better than the games move, as you pointed out. 

 overall good game! that rg1 line seems like a very sound way of confusing regular nadjorf players.

Thanks for the comment and analysis pyromaniac579. I think i already included most of what you say  in 'Move List'. Bg4 instead of Nd5 is a definate possibilty but i disagree about 16 exd5. 16.Qd5 is almost a certainty i think. On Bg4, the light square bishops can come off and white has a great knight on d5 but if black gives up his light square bishop for blacks knight, white can then use his light square bishop to take advantage of the weak light squares in blacks camp. Just a thought!

Of course Rh1 was the winning move, well, punishing move for blacks Kh5?  Maybe i should integrate this line into my repitoire and know it a little better next time.

 I think that brings an end to the thread! Thanks for the comments and input from everyone, greatly appreciated!  pyromaniac579 who provided some good analysis/feedback thanks to you!

YEARBOOK (I dont remember which number) talks about it as well..