|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
| Oct-29-06 |
| Kriegspiel: <keypusher: <4) p.187 (II.) 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f4 Bg7 "The premature 5.e5? leads to the dismemberment of White's own centre: 5..Nfd7 6.Nf3 c5!? 7.exd6 o-o 8.dxe7 Qxe7+ 9.Qe2 Qd8 10.Be3 Re8 11.o-o-o Qa5 with a dangerous queenside initiative for Black (...Nc6, ...Nf6)." Well, I sure hope so, since Black is down a pawn, but details, please, about this dangerous Black initiative? I can find only one game at chessbase.com where play proceeds along these lines (Eley vs. Adorjan, 1973?) and I just don't see this "dangerous Black initiative" on the queenside at work following these moves.> Kallai or whoever is overselling his wares, as tends to happen with opening books. 5. e5 is not a bad move; Bronsten used it to beat Benko in a famous game: Bronstein vs Benko, 1969.> I don't see Kallai as having an axe to grind, here: it isn't a personal opening system, and the book covers (however briefly) nearly all major openings beginning with 1.e4 (omitted except for a paragraph is the Robatsch/Modern). The book is not written for either Black or White, but both. <Black can play the endgame. 5...de 6. de Qxd1+ 7. Kxd1 Ng4 8. Ke1 and now 8...f6 instead of Benko's 8...c6. (It really is a theme in the Pirc -- if you're not attacking White's center, you're in trouble.)> Can't White play 6.fxe5 instead? <The pawn sacrifice looks pretty promising to me, but I've never seen it before. Why not play it a few times and see how you do?> It would help if you told me why you find it promising. I do not disagree, but Kallai has already described it as promising and I found that insufficient (for a player of my intermediate level) as an insight. Kriegspiel
|
 |
| Oct-29-06 |
| Kriegspiel: <keypusher: <(5) p.187 (II.B.) 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc6 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 c5!? "Black has nothing to fear after 6.e5 Nfd7". Why?? How does Black proceed from there?? > Well, I only know 5...0-0. But Black is threatening ...cd followed by ...de, winning a pawn. If 7. dc, then ...de looks good for Black.> I think this loses Black the right to castle as well as forcing the exchange of his dark-squared bishop for White's knight after 8.fxe5. <Keypusher: If 7. Be3, then 7...cd 8. Bxd4 Nc6 looks good.> 9.exd6 Nxd4 10.Nxd4 exd6 11.Ncb5 is a real problem for Black. The knight is attacking both the d6 pawn and threatening Nc7. It looks to me like Black loses a pawn any way you slice it. <keypusher: If 7 de [you mean ed], you have the pawn sacrifice with 7...0-0 or just 7...cd and then 8. de? Qxe7+ wins or 8. Nxd4 0-0 is another pawn sacrifice that looks pretty good (I am not sure about 8...ed 9. Ndb5).> I don't like the look of 7.exd6 cxd4 8.Nb5 exd6 9.Nxd6+ followed by 10.Nb5. And the sacrifices do lose Black a pawn, though -- perhaps with compensation. Kriegspiel
|
|
| Oct-29-06 |
| Kriegspiel: <keypusher: <6) p.187 (I.B.) 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Be2 o-o 6.o-o Bg4 "7.h3 Bxf3 8.Bxf3 Nc6 9.d5 Ne5 10.Be2 c6 11.f4 Ned7 12.Bf3 Qa5 grants Black promising queenside counterplay. Again, what is this counterplay?> First of all, a reality check is in order. White has made sensible and solid if not brilliant moves, so there is no reason to expect that his position will suddenly crumble. If you were white here, you wouldn't be expecting disaster, would you? That said, Black can play ...cd followed by a rook to c8 and ...b5, ...b4 and ...Nb6, thus developing pressure on the c-file and the pawn on d5. You're not going to blow white out of the water, but you should be OK.> What if 13.dxc6 bxc6? I can see some possible lines for Black, but where is the promising *queenside* counterplay? Kriegspiel
|
|
| Oct-29-06 |
| Kriegspiel: <keypusher: In any line of the Pirc, it's always a good idea to see if Botvinnik has played it.> Sounds like *great* advice. A cg.com search for Botvinnik as Black playing the Pirc shows 20 games: of these, Botvinnik wins 15 and draws 5. There are NO losses. Is this a case of database bias, and if not, why didn't Botvinnik play the Pirc more often? In any case, he sure seems to know what he was doing. Kriegspiel
|
|
| Oct-29-06 |
| Kriegspiel: <keypusher> Botvinnik's Robatsch record (as you have noted elsewhere) is also quite remarkable. Only 9 games in the cg.com database, but of those he won 7 and drew 2. Outstanding. Since I am considering the Modern Defense (which cg.com calls the Robatsch when it begins with 1.e4) I should look at those games too. Kriegspiel
|
|
Oct-30-06
 |
| keypusher: Botvinnik took up the Pirc/Modern in the 60s, at the end of his career, when he was generally playing in weaker events, which partly explains his very high success rate. But he played it very well and very creatively -- <IMLDay> site has noted on this site his influence on players coming of age in the 60s and early 70s. It's regrettable that the Botvinnik-Fischer match of 1970 never came off for any number of reasons, but one reason to be sorry is that we probably would have seen some very interesting Pircs. I have the vague impression that Botvinnik's disciple helped drive the Pirc out of style as the 70s wore on--he was a scourge of hypermodern defenses. But Mr. Day or <RayKeene> could speak to that more intelligently. |
|
| Oct-30-06 |
| Softpaw: <Kriegspiel: <keypusher> Botvinnik's Robatsch record (as you have noted elsewhere) is also quite remarkable.> Quite a few of those Moderns (Robatschs) transposed to Pircs (early Nf6's). And the Bc4 variations are not considered a main threat to the Pirc these days. |
|
| Oct-30-06 |
| mang00neg: 4. Bc4 is a "paper tiger" says Lev Alburt.
4. f4 The austrian attack requires a lot of theoretical knowledge.
4. Nf3 The classical isn't daunting as long as you know the general themes involved.
4. g3 seems nonthreatening but actually has some bite.
4. Bg5 is a serious enemy of the pirc, but for some reason not very popular.After having played more than 3000 total games with the Pirc as my sole defense to 1. e4, I've 99% left it. I've beaten 2300+ players with this opening and have enjoyed a decent measure of success. However, in my hands it seems that this opening just doesn't pose enough difficulty for white and that it's too easy for him to obtain/retain an advantage out of the opening. |
|
| Dec-16-06 |
| mobiegobie: In <starting out:Pirc/Modern> Gallager,Joe 2003 states that 4.Bg5 is played more at the master level and 4. Bc4 is played more on the club level because it is "tricky".
I am looking at this opening and playing it right now solely. What i have learned,read and blundered into black can have a tuff game no matter what opening it employed due to white built in advantage. So that said, i feel that i can with the Pirc play a manageable game as black and some games more than managable. Since no opening is bullet proof the un-manageable games that i have had i at least could follow play well enough to make it a bitter-ugly name-calling fight to the end.Which is what i was looking for in this opening.
A couple of other points and i'll shut up: the Modern is a transpostional tool to go into the Pirc... and that "classical" is difficult for black to get a good game. Where i got that last one i will have to look and get back to you on that... |
|
| Mar-07-07 |
| BohdanL: Good aftenoon,
could someone, please, give some tips for Black on 1.e4 d6 2.Nf3
As player who play mostly on internet or at local chessclub i often meet this move when trying Pirc. I cannot find suggestions in any of Pirc books, also for the White's 2.d3 thanks in advance |
|
Mar-07-07
 |
| WannaBe: Try the Opening Explorer...
Opening Explorer |
|
| Apr-12-07 |
| independentthinker: <mang00neg:
After having played more than 3000 total games with the Pirc as my sole defense to 1. e4, I've 99% left it.>What do you think of the Modern Defence and the Kings Indian Defence? Have you experimented with these, and if so, have you had any luck? -Mike
|
|
| May-16-07 |
| Tomlinsky: Nigel Short: Playing the Pirc is a bit like wearing flares and platform shoes. One may have done it once, but one does not wish to be reminded of the fact. |
|
| Sep-04-07 |
| NitrousPeak: Is 2. Nf3 or 2. Nc3 solid for white? |
|
| Sep-04-07 |
| a30seclegend: i think in either case it allows black to play e5 allowing a philidors defense. |
|
| Sep-04-07 |
| MaxxLange: Supposedly this gives Black better Philidor options, too: http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_re... |
|
| Jul-11-08 |
| madeinholland: What is considered to be the least theoretical variation for White when facing this defense? I would like to play against the Pirc by mostly using general principles and ideas rather then razor sharp theoretical lines such as the Austrian, Be3 and Bg5 systems. Is the classical variation best suited for that? |
|
Nov-10-08
 |
| freeman8201: what is considered to be the least theoretical variation for White when facing this defense?
As white try a h pawn attack or f3 system aiming for a king side attack |
|
| Mar-08-09 |
| FiveofSwords: <freeman8201> well I often play systems with f3...however it is not avoiding theory at all. For me at least its an attempt to transpose to a saemish king's indian, I play for Be3, c4, f3, Qd2, 0-0-0, etc. It may or may not involve an attack on the kingside but it does generally involve the move g4 to discourage the black freeing move f5. The saemish is quite a nice opening but it is, of course, highly theoretical. Thats the thing with the pirc, you can play moves that attempt to avoid theory but theres a lot of transpositional elements to many opening so if you arent doing something highly forcing to make it an independant character, its fairly impossible to avoid theory. |
|
| Mar-08-09 |
| chessman95: Sometimes I play a CK or Sicilian Pirc. Instead of preventing e5 with d6, I open up the diagonal for the queen with c6 or c5, so that it white plays e5 after Nf6 then I have the tactic Qa5+ gaining a pawn. This works well as a Sicilian, because most people play 2.Nf3 looking for an Open Sicilian and then I play 2...Nf6 and go into the Pirc, where white cannot advance the f-pawn because the knight is blocking it, which helps black a lot. |
|
| Mar-08-09 |
| geniokov: Well madeinholland,choosing style against Pirc depend upon if the "style" fits you.If you want to use Classical Variation against Pirc,donīt expect for lively play,all you can have is just a small advantage whereas if you are an agressive player...Austrian attack is the best choice.....Why not try Saemisch Pirc? |
|
Apr-24-09
 |
| ray keene: according to the database i have 69 black games -one more than the "leading" black practitioner cited above :azmaiparashvili! |
|
| May-25-09 |
| returnoftheking: Ergo: you are not a leading player. Azmaiparishvilli has a much better score with the Pirc anyway. Not to mention the numerous modern games he played, related to the pirc. Besides all that, I am afraid Mr. Keene's comment makes little sense: there are 151 Pircs (not just B07) of Azmaiparishvilli in the database. |
|
| May-25-09 |
| returnoftheking: To illustrate:
Azmai played to times Pirc against Karpov in his prima and got 1,5 point. Karpov vs Azmaiparashvili, 1983
This happened to our "leading practicioner" in spe.. Karpov vs Keene, 1977 |
|
| Jun-07-09 |
| WhiteRook48: Oh, man!! That went different |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
