|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
Jul-04-08
 |
| ganstaman: <offtherook: How come ALL of the "notable games" are just patzer-ish blunders? No Spassky-Fischer from their match? Nothing from Alburt or Bagirov?> Two good reasons.
1) This is only B02. There are other ECO codes for other Alekhine's Defense games, where some of the games you are thinking of may be. 2) According to "What's this?" link by the notable games, <The lists of notable games are calculated by finding the games which most frequently appear in our users' game collections.> |
 |
| Jul-04-08 |
| pacorrum: anybody knows the name or code of this defence?
<1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6>
It looks like an interesting spinoff of the Alekhine but I cannot find games. Thanks in advance! |
|
Jul-04-08
 |
| Benzol: <pacorram> Have you looked at Sicilian, Nimzovich-Rubinstein (B29) variation? |
|
| Jul-05-08 |
| pacorrum: You're right, <Benzol>, thanx for the feedback! |
|
| Aug-10-08 |
| drukenknight: This one's for Keypusher, I havent forgotten about you. All this time I have been thining about you every day...Okay let's figure this out: look at white's move 23, he has two ways to hit the Q. Which one is better? After 22..Qb4 white to move:
click for larger view23 a3 is better because it prevents ...Bf5+ which swaps B, and removes white's defender Q. Here is the actual game after 24 Kc2. Black should play 24...Bf5+ trading Bs and then removing defender, whites Q from the N on b5: 
click for larger viewWhite had a choice of two pawns to hit the Q and he actually chose wrong, if instead: 23 a3 Nc4+
24. Qxc4 Bxc4
25. axb4 Bxb5
26. dxe5 dxe5
27. Rd6 Kh8
28. c4 Be8
29. Ra1 a6
30. Rb6 Bc6
31. Bxc6 bxc6
32. Raxa6
White seems to be winning
|
|
| Oct-02-08 |
| The Rocket: "Does anybody know a good way to handle the four pawns attack (e4 ... e5 ... d4 ... c4 ... f4)?" the four pawn attack is no trouble for me even against 2700 opponents like chessmaster 11 engine.. just play the trifunovic variation...
5 bf5. and then 6 e6(preparing to castle kingside) and dont exchange any pawns in the center this way you will avoid sharp play the arrises if you instead play 5 dxe5. I drew the chessmaster geller(2700 elo level) as black in a 3min game with this variation after 86 moves. |
|
| May-21-09 |
| shutupimthinking: Does anybody know any unusual early deviations for white which might allow me to mix things up against a very experienced opponent? I've experimented with 2.Bc4 before (with fairly good results), but never against really strong opposition, and I'm not convinced it's sound. I'm more interested in getting away from the main lines than keeping an advantage (in fact, a drawish line would be ideal!) |
|
| May-21-09 |
| fromoort: <shutupimthinking>Try 2.d3 - the game might transpose into a normal e-pawn game like a Philidor (with colors reversed?). |
|
| May-22-09 |
| shutupimthinking: <fromoort> Thanks, I'll have a look at that. |
|
| Jul-18-09 |
| drukenknight: Strangest Alkehine's eh-VAR. I think they call that 4 Bc4 Lasker var..But anyhow: Anybody want to comment on this? 1. e4 Nf6
2. e5 Nd5
3. d4 d6
4. Bc4 Nb6
5. Qe2 dxe5
6. dxe5 Nxc4
7. Qxc4 e6
8. Nf3 Nc6
9. Nc3 Be7
10. h4 O-O
11. Bg5 Bxg5
12. hxg5 Na5
13. Qe4 g6
14. Rd1 Qe7
15. Qh4 (he actually didnt see the relative pin on the g pawn but no matter) Position after 15 Qh4. "Hey's dead, Jim." Anyone find out where black went wrong? 
click for larger view |
|
| Jul-26-09 |
| muwatalli: against the alekhine's defense i've always played 2nc3 and have gotten good results, i enjoy when the game transposes to the vienna game (i play the vienna gambit) because i have studied it, and the gambit line 1e4 nf6 2 nc3 d5 3 e5 nfd7 4 e6!? is great fun. but one line 1e4 nf6 2 nc3 d5 3 e5 ne4 seems to lead to a quite balanced and boring game, anyone have any suggestions to liven up play a bit? the book move ne2 doesn't really seem to give white much, but i may be wrong there. thanks in advance |
|
Jul-26-09
 |
| keypusher: <drukenknight> Hello! and nice game. My beginner opening book, <Starting Out: Alekhine's Defence> doesn't even mention 5. Qe2, giving only 5. Bb3. An early alternative for Black would be 5....Nxc4 6. Qxc4 d5 7. Qd3 g6. The issue with 5....dxe5 6. dxe5 Nxc4 7. Qxc4 is that the queen may wind up exposed on the d-file and, eventually, driven out of play on c8 or something. 7....e6 strikes me as a bad move. Black has just taken White's light-square bishop, and then immediately bottles up his own. Makes no sense. One alternative is 7....Nc6 8. Nf3 Be6 and if 9. Qb5 then 9....Qd5 seems playable, since if 10. Qxb7 Rb8 11. Qa6 Nb4 12. Qxa7 then 12....Nxc2+ 13. Ke2 Rd8 14. Qa6 Qc4+ 15. Qxc4 Bxc4#. Of course 9. Qb5 is a silly move. Better would be something like 9. Qe2 Nd4, with Black trying to solve the problem of queen development. Another simple plan for Black is 7....Nc6 8. Nf3 Bf5, followed by ...e6, ...Be7 and ...0-0, or fianchettoing the kingside bishop. In these lines, though, at some point White will play Rd1 and the black queen will wind up filing her nails on some inactive square. This is why I am not crazy about 5....dxe5. 8. Nf3 Nc6
9. Nc3 Be7
10. h4 O-O
Pretty risky! Maybe better is 10....h6, since White is obviously intending Bg5. But maybe then White can try to crash through with 11. g4. What do you think of 11....0-0 12. g5 h5? Black can take some liberties, because White doesn't have a light-square bishop. But surely White will be better after 13. h5 with g4-g5 coming later. Another possibility is 10....f6. After 11. exf6 Bxf6 the e-pawn is a definite weakness, but Black has cleared e7 for the queen and made his kingside much more defensible. Maybe White does better with 11. Bf4 0-0 12. Rd1, after which Black is probably best advised to offer a pawn with 12....Qe8. 11. Bg5 Bxg5
It seems absolutely nuts to open the h-file. 11....f6 is surely better. 12. hxg5 Na5
Pointless, since the queen has a winning square to go to. I would be desperate enough to try 12....f5 at this point. 13. Qe4 g6
14. Rd1 Qe7
White can also play 14. Qh4 at once, I think.
15. Qh4
Seems like Black should at least try 15....h5, though 16. g4 looks crushing and 16. gxh6 Qxh4 17. Rxh4 is surely winning too. |
|
| Jul-26-09 |
| WhiteRook48: I play the Alekhine as Black and have about 75% winning percentage with it |
|
Jul-26-09
|
| keypusher: <muwatalli> I am not the right person to ask, but my Alekhine book seems to think that White is doing pretty well after 3....Ne4 4. Nce2. This is the example game the book gives: Hector vs I Anagnostou, 1992 There are some funny tricks in this line. 4....d4 5. c3 dxc3 does <not> lose a piece after 6. Qa4+ Nd7 7. Qxe4 Nc5 with ...Nd3+ and ...cxb2 on tap. But just 6. bxc3 leaves Black in a bad way. |
|
| Jul-26-09 |
| muwatalli: alright, thanks for the help keypusher |
|
| Aug-02-09 |
| drukenknight: Hello KP, thanks for making comments on my game. I like to think about the game conceptually in order to determine what is going on. The losing move seems to be 11...Bxg5 as you allude to.. look what has happened: Earlier: Black exchanged NxB and allow white to move his Q twice, okay maybe that's fine. Now he wants to exchange again, B/B and open the KR file. Swatting the Q w/ Nh5 simply allows the Q to take advantage of this open file...That doesnt seem quite right. Look if he swats the Q immediately with Nh5 the position seems quite even (sez the crap pc). He probably saw ...Nh5 just one move too late...Instead he exchanges B and the game goes downhill. It's interesting to think about the game in terms of concepts or motiffs; that is the only way I can keep straight what is happening rather than pure calculations... I didnt really see how bad it was, as it was blitz, but the post game analysis seems to confirm what a conceptual approach could tell us quickly. Thanks for comments. |
|
| Aug-02-09 |
| drukenknight: KP: by the way 5 Qe2 does appear to be the novelty. I dont know where I heard this called Lasker variation, (4 Bc4) it seems that Showalter/Torre Chicago 1926 was the original.... |
|
Aug-05-09
|
| keypusher: <drukenknight> Lasker variation is, I think 1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. c4 Nb6 4. c5 Nd5 5. Nc3. |
|
| Aug-05-09 |
| drukenknight: yes KP you are right on the nomenclature. |
|
| Aug-06-09 |
| drukenknight: More quick mates in ALkehine's def. Maybe august should be alkehines month? Anyhow I violated one of my own principles here just to put pieces in a formation that looks like the Alek-Chatard attack, that's not a good way to play. Try to spot black's mistake, he violates a very basic principle that is not really mentioned by Tarrasch or anyone I can think of so this is another learning exercise.. 1. e4 Nf6
2. e5 Nd5
3. d4 e6
4. Bc4 c6 (this is actual novel and quite interesting way to play) 5. Nf3 (the most straightforward way to play this would be to BxN and double his pawns and then work from there. At least I can see a definite weakness and function accordingly. Rather than let this go and let black play some prepared line) 5... Be7
6. h4 O-O
7. Ng5 h6
8. Bd3 Bxg5
9. hxg5 Ne7
10. gxh6 g6
After 10...g6 this is very bad:
click for larger viewGoes on for a little longer:
11. h7+ Kh8
12. Bg5 f5 etc..and 1-0 |
|
Sep-08-09
 |
| Robin01: How about this variation -- 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Ne4. I faced this over the weekend as white. I know the theory move for white is d3, but I decide to go for d4 (decided I was not going to chase the black knight) here and got a good game. Anyone else ever faced this from the white side? I will try to post more of the game later.
click for larger view |
|
Sep-08-09
 |
| whiteshark: <Robin01: How about this variation -- <1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Ne4.>> is called <Mokele Mbembe>. It has been invented/analysed by Stefan Buecker http://www.chessville.com/UCO/CN/Mo... (Nakamura)
http://gambits.blogspot.com/2006/11...
... |
|
Sep-08-09
|
| Robin01: <whiteshark>Thanks. Here is the position from later in that game. The queens came off shortly and we played out this endgame for another 50 moves. The game ended in a draw. It is white's move in the position. 
click for larger view |
|
Sep-08-09
 |
| tamar: <whiteshark> You could have said it was <Clyde> Nakamura! |
|
Sep-09-09
|
| whiteshark: Tkanks for pointing out, <tamar>. I didn't know that there are more Nakamuras
(4: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches...) It's one of those split-second non-awarenesses that make you look like a patzer. Like todays puzzle. :D |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
