Semi-Slav Botvinnik variation

The botvinnik variation goes 

*jaw drop*

That's all opening theory?

To some extent yes. The Anti-Moscow Gambit (which I play if black plays h6 instead of dxc4) is probably just as complicated if not more.

in the second game cant black just play bishop takes queen on move 18...

i think your missing sometihng

Actually, many openings are now analyzed deep into the middlegame and opening books are showing more than just the opening these days.....

18.Qd5??? Bxd5

As pointed out 8 years ago, in the second game got wrong order of moves in diagram, should have been 18e7 Bxf1 19Qd5

lol, that was exactly my reaction when I first saw that variation  it's real real fun, though

The line is a book draw, just like the Dragon.

Way back in the early 2000s, I had basically the second scenario the OP gave (8 years ago) with moves 18 and 19 inverted.  I was Black, and instead of taking the book draw, White played 24.Nxf7 (instead of 24.Nxc4+) and I ended up winning.

I have long since quit playing these long, theoretical lines like the Botvinnik Semi-Slav.  Too old for that sh*t these days!  Give me the King's Indian Defense or the Dutch Defense, and in another 20 years, I'll be playing slow stuff like the Slav!  LOL!

Anyone that has seriously studied the Semi-slav at any point (myself in 2000) has seen this game.  Yes, Ivanchuk won, but there is no brilliancy prize for the Queen sacrifice.  It has long since been figured out that Black is fine after 23...Rxg7.  23...d4 is a blunder.

I sometimes play the Semi-Slav (either side) and even I'm sometimes impressed by its deep theory. To be honest, I only knew these lines maybe three quarters deep - but not this far into way is basically the middlegame

i aint rememberin allat

lol You don't have to. Openings aren't that important at a certain rating. Players disagree on what that rating is though lol

Generally speaking, everyone agrees that anyone under 1200 should not focus on openings at all and should instead just follow chess "opening principles." Some opening theory probably becomes relevant around 1400+ rating I'd say, although even at 1800 or so games are seldom decided by the opening. I also have some chess.com friends around 2200-2400 level which claim they NEVER focused on opening theory study! I find it amazing they could reach that level with so little opening theory, so I guess that helps illustrate how the opening stage is the most forgiving in chess.

Giving my best estimate, I'd say opening theory becomes fairly important at 1800+ level though and even then opening theory probably shouldn't be the primary focus of study.

Here is a chess.com blog post I wrote a few years ago on chess opening principles. Hope it helps

https://www.chess.com/blog/KeSetoKaiba/opening-principles-again

Not true, there is some disagreement about this. Everyone agrees that opening principles are important but saying that openings aren't important below 1200 is dubious advice.

It's true that a lot of games are decided by blunders and innacuracies in the middlegame, rather than openings, but that doesn't mean openings aren't important. It means that reducing blunders and improving middlegame play is important as well as opening play.

I never said openings "aren't important" as all I said was that "Generally speaking, everyone agrees that anyone under 1200 should not focus on openings..."

Everything in chess is important to some degree. The Opening, Middlegame and Endgame are all important regardless of your rating; it is a part of the game and therefore important. Note that my original statement begins "Generally" and thus describes that this is a generalization at the majority and not necessarily that there aren't exceptions. Maybe you just so happen to be the 1 in a 1000 player to benefit from openings most below 1200. I don't know. Statistically, I don't think you should assume that is you though.

Next, note that I say should not "focus" on openings; this is not the same as saying ignore everything to do with openings and hope for the best. It simply means that there are probably better places where you can invest your learning/study time to get more results for your time invested. Especially below 1200 rating (but really for most ratings), more beneficial than focusing on openings is studying endgames, or routinely solving chess puzzles.