< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Mar-03-04|| ||BiLL RobeRTiE: Yeah, the Svesh sure is unique. =] |
|Mar-03-04|| ||OneBadDog: <Also does anyone have advice on how to improve ones middlegame? I'm poor in the middle game, after usually doing quite well in the opening.>|
The opening and middle game are closely related to each other. Improvement in the middle game depends on what your strengths and weaknesses are. If tactics are your weakness, reading The Art Of Attack In Chess in conjunction with a book like 1001 Chess Sacrifices And Combinations would help you. If strategic play is your weakness, then something like Pawn Structure Chess or Judgement And Planning In Chess would probably be best. If you have a hard time figuring out what to the best plan is once the opening is over, you can look at Everyman Chess Starting Out series.
|Mar-03-04|| ||PaulKeres: Thanks everyone for your responses. <boordgamer>, I am also just starting to use the Sicilian as my defence, before I used 1...e5 classically. Hmmmm, <prophylactic thinking>, something I'm interested in, because I don't do nearly enough of it! Wasn't Karpov the expert in this? |
|Mar-03-04|| ||PaulKeres: I wonder whether your opening develops as you're level of opponent develops. For example, I am starting to consider the Sicilian now as Black because I face it myself as white such a lot. You certainly notice that beginners play entirely different opening from more advanced players. I find d4 players tend to be more experienced (either that or just scared of the sicilian ;) !) Also Kings indian lines and/or hypermodern openings tend to be used more by more advanced players and not by less experienced players.
I think it is sensible to play openings which suit the level you are at, ie mainly you should not perhaps play into openings that you cannot cope with before your game can take it (eg closed games, or grunfeld). A good site with these types of views is http://www.ex.ac.uk/~dregis/DR/Open... |
|Mar-03-04|| ||PaulKeres: <The opening and middle game are closely related to each other. >, that's good to hear < OneBadDog >, so hopefully my middle game can still improve as my opening theory does.
It is very important to know what type of play you are and develop your plan around that, however I'm not sure which type I am. I would like to be a dynamical tactical player, but in reality I might well be more of a positional player. Ofcourse getting a opening reportoire together will help a great deal, but that is easier said than done! Thanks for the book references, do you know anything good <on the web> for developing the middle game? |
|Mar-24-04|| ||ruylopez900: It drives me crazy when people play this! Not only is it drawish (check the stats at the top of the page) but it also side steps my favourite variation! The Dragon! .....or maybe that's why they do it..... |
|Mar-24-04|| ||refutor: <boardgames> why is 5.a3 prophylactic? what is it protecting against? <ruylopez900> you can still play "the dragon" v. the canal-sokolsky...just play 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Nc6 and follow it up with ...g6, ...Bg7, ...O-O, ...Bd7 etc. that's the great thing about a dragon setup, you can play it vs. basically any anti-sicilian line |
|Mar-24-04|| ||ruylopez900: Good Point <refutor> Maybe I was caught up in playing the "book" lines to the Canal. I'll try that out next chance I get! |
|Mar-27-04|| ||boordgamer: <refutor> it prevents the Anderssen counter attack..B-b4, but he still put it there because of my oversight but then moved it again. |
|Mar-27-04|| ||refutor: what anderssen counter attack? look at the position 1.e2e4 d7d5 2.e4xd5 d8xd5 3.b1c3 d5a5 4.d2d4 c7c6 5.a2a3 black hadn't even played ...e6 yet so 5.a3 wasn't protecting vs. anything |
|Mar-27-04|| ||BiLL RobeRTiE: I think the anderssen counter-attack is the not-so-sound Pin Variation 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 Bb4. |
|Mar-27-04|| ||boordgamer: Just because ...e6 was not played yet doesent mean it dident have the future intention of preventing the bishop going there. Basically I was expermenting with the computer, taking him out of book lines early on. I have analyzed this move further lately and its really a waste of time losing move. |
|Mar-27-04|| ||boordgamer: And my bad for posting this opening on the sicilian page,wont happen again. |
|Nov-07-04|| ||Knight13: I've played this opening many times in the sicilian. But I don't think white has any good moves to respond. |
|Sep-30-05|| ||rexeterna: Looks like Morozevich is using this opening today against Topalov.|
|Dec-16-06|| ||hamworld: The Pin Variation is usually a bit unsound. Computers (mine for example) have a little bit of tactical difficulty when playing the second side of The pin Variation, 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Bb4 6. e5!( I like e5) Qc7? I know this loses but would anyone like to explain why for those who don't know why this move loses?|
|Jan-02-07|| ||Haeron: Can I just ask, what if Black plays 4. ...Nxd7? I don't see the problem with developing the knight.|
|Jan-02-07|| ||WannaBe: <Haeron> That is what I usually do, if white wants to trade the light squared bishops, I then usually play my queen out to c7 or, if my b-pawn is pushed, I sometimes move my queen to b6.|
|Feb-23-07|| ||DMBFan23: All,
I am wondering about the immediate 5. c4 in this line. it seems that 5...Qg4 wins the e-pawn after 6. 0-0 Qxe5, but many say that's not a problem as I can play d3 or d4 with plenty of compensation for the pawn. However, I find that against my chess computers (crafty on a crappy setting, because I'm crappy at chess) I can't make up for the lost pawn. am I playing to hold the draw at that point, or what is my plan?
|Feb-23-07|| ||Swapmeet: <DMBFan23> I can't say I know much about that line in particular, but it seems to share a similar tactical idea with the Steinitz variation of the Scotch (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Qh4), and that is to threaten a knight fork at c7. This can be done via 7.d4 cxd4 8.Nxd4, followed by Nb5. If black doesn't take on d4, then Nc3 followed by either Nb5 or Nd5. Black is hard pressed to meet this threat, and often will either have to move the king to guard c7 or castle queenside, leaving the black king vulnerable in either case. |
Like I said I'm not familiar with this line, so black may have ways around this, but I hope that at least gave you some ideas.
|Dec-17-07|| ||WannaBe: I do not like this line for white, it seems to me, after 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bb5+ Bd7 4. Bxd7+ Nxd7 white gave up a tempo...|
|Feb-29-08|| ||Bob726: <Wannabe> The reason most players play Qxd7 rather than Nxd7 is that white can pretty much force Black to play a Hedgehog type position, which most sicilian players don't like to play. If black plays g6 and flanchittos his bishop, than it would be stupid to put the knight on d7, it's much better on c6. If black is comfortable with a Hedgehog type position, Nxd7 is a good choice. Furthermore, it isn't really a lost of a tempo because in the hedgehog/maroczy bind type postions, white often has pawns on b3, c4, e4, and f3, making it a very bad piece, and it would be a good idea to trade it off.|
|Mar-25-09|| ||rangek: <refutor: you can still play "the dragon" v. the canal-sokolsky...just play 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Nc6 and follow it up with ...g6, ...Bg7, ...O-O, ...Bd7 etc. that's the great thing about a dragon setup, you can play it vs. basically any anti-sicilian line>|
well after Nc6 White will play 4. d4 and transpose into the chekhover variation...so erm no dragon?
|Mar-25-09|| ||chessman95: I hate the <Rossolimo>, so I usually play 2...e6, transpose into the Scheveningen, and then tranpose into the Najdorf. Sometimes I just play the Najdorf through the 'normal' line though.|
|Jan-08-10|| ||Not: Ah, the Love Shack line.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·