|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 8 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jan-12-07 | | unsound: <FLCLlove> You were right--author of Batsford's "Larsen's Opening" is Tim Wall -- a former British U-16 champion, I believe. |
|
| Jan-12-07 | | FLCLlove: Ah, yes, thank you. |
|
Jan-16-07
 | | wwall: I wrote Larsen's Opening, published by Chess Enterprises, in 1986. - Bill Wall |
|
| Jan-16-07 | | FLCLlove: Huh, apparently both wrote a book. Would you care to share any analysis on the opening? Maybe you'll make us pick up the book... however it was written twenty years ago and was game analysis. It would certainly be appreciated. |
|
| Apr-12-07 | | gambitfan: OPOD 12/04/2007
Opening of the Day |
|
| Apr-12-07 | | gambitfan: Opening of the day OPOD Thu 12/04/2007 |
|
| May-21-07 | | ChessHistoryBuff: I played an interesting Queen trap against a player that was over 300 points below me. Still an interesting game. 1. b3 d5
2. Bb2 Nc6
3. e3 e5
4. Bb5 f6
5. Ne2 Bd7
6. O-O Qe7
7. Ba3 Qf7
8. Bb2 O-O-O
9. Ng3 g6
10. c4 a6
11. cxd5 Qxd5
12. Bc4 Qa5
13. Bc3 Qb6
14. Ne4 Be7
15. a4 Re8
16. Na3 g5
17. Nb5 axb5
18. axb5 Nb8
19. Ba5 Qa7
20. Bxc7 Na6
21. b6 Qa8
22. Qc2 Nh6
23. Rxa6 bxa6
24. Bxa6+ Qxa6
25. Bd6+ Qc4
26. Qxc4+ Kb7
27. Qc7+ Ka6
28. Qa7+ Kb5
29. Nc3+ 1-0 |
|
| Jul-02-07 | | alter: I had a nice win with 1.b3 earlier today so I figured I'd post something on the A01 page!
On the books mentioned below I'd say that Jacobs & Tait (2001) is a really good book that covers virtually everything you'd need to know to play this opening - it covers both the 1.b3 move order and the 1.Nf3/2.b3 move order. Plus, because this isn't exactly a cutting edge opening, you can get away with having a 6 year old book as your opening bible (try that in the Najdorf!).
Keene's book was first published in 1977. Despite the criticism he gets these days this book is actually rather good, and certainly it was good in the context of 1977. I'm not a Keene fan but credit where credit is due - while writing the book he played the opening in competitive games vs Korchnoi, Timman, Bellon, Schmidt, Radulov, Penrose & Sosonko (scoring +3/=3/-1), and as a bonus he includes a final chapter devoted to Owen's Defence, 1.e4 b6 (this chapter is credited primarily to Nevil Coles and consists almost entirely of games played by Rev J.Owen from the C19th, i.e good stuff).
The Jacob & Tait book I bought very soon after it came out and it's great. A few years later I saw the Keene book in a 2nd hand bookshop and bought it for £3 because I love the opening. Having read it I can say it is worth much more than £3 to a N-L Attack addict (or even to a ...b6 addict). The thematic chapter split is a real lesson to most of today's openings writers (e.g one chapter on ...f6 systems, one chapter on systems with g4, one chapter on b3/g6 lines, etc, and these are just extras added on after the more mainline variations).
The Wall book I cannot comment on because I've not seen it, but I'd be interested in getting it if anyone has any positive comments on it.
Just one final comment on nomenclature; I think that 1.Nf3/2.b3 should be called the "Nimzowitsch Attack" while 1.b3 should be called the "Larsen Attack". Nimzowitsch's 1.Nf3 d5 2.b3 (often transposing to a reversed Nimzo Indian) is completely different to Larsen's 1.b3 e5 2.Bb2 (tending to transpose to a reversed Owen's Defence).
Hope these notes are of some assistance to anyone looking at playing either of these systems... |
|
| Jul-24-07 | | Morphyisgod: Can anyone give me a list of games they think are really notable for this opening? that would be very appreciated |
|
| Jul-24-07 | | ganstaman: <Morphyisgod> If no one else responds, or if you just get bored waiting, checking out Larsen's games can't be a bad place to start: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches...(A01)+as+White+ He did so well and got his name attached -- they must be good. |
|
| Jul-24-07 | | savagerules: 1. b3 was in vogue in the early 70's, Fischer even played it a few times, most memorably when he beat Mecking with it in 1970 or 71.
The King Indian type setup for Black equalizes rather easily against it, which is why I suppose it isn't played much anymore. |
|
| Jul-25-07 | | whiskeyrebel: I play A01 frequently OTB. I've got the Jacobs & Tait book and enjoy it..particularly the way the authors have grouped different positions rising from 1.b3 ( Larsen's preferred approach as Alter pointed out) or 1.Nf3 followed by b3 ( Nimzo's way). Check out the A01 games here at CG's by Pavel Blatny and participating member Gerard Welling. |
|
| Jul-26-07 | | Morphyisgod: <ganstaman> thank you, |
|
| Aug-03-07 | | alter: There is a good collection of 1.b3 and 1.Nf3/2.b3 games which has been set up on this site by willyfly. Go to Morphy vs Owen 1858 and you can access the collection from there. Basically it is all(?) of the games in Keene's book.
Regarding savagerules comment on Black adopting a KID formation, surely White has the option of just transposing to an English in that case. If you want to play the N-L Attack it is useful (although not vital) to have a smattering of English and Reti theory up your sleeve so you can look for transpositional possibilities. |
|
| Feb-27-08 | | independentthinker: Tim,
Where can I get a copy of your book from on Larsen's opening? -Mike |
|
| Apr-16-08 | | TheBB: I'm considering 2. b3 as a way to avoid the mainline sicilians. Thoughts? |
|
| Apr-16-08 | | square dance: in that case 1.d4 works just as well. there are plenty of good anti-sicilians. you can play the grand-prix, 3.Bb5 is plenty good, also. you could even try a closed sicilian/KIA setup. some people even play the weenie, ahem, wing gambit. ;-) im generally against playing gimmicky sideline type openings, especially if you're sub-2000. |
|
| Apr-16-08 | | Edwin Meyer: <square dance>: but there is a world of difference between playing 1.d4 or 1.b3 theoratically. <TheBB>: I think 1.b3 is an excellent choice and if i were you i would certainly give it a try. But if you don't mind the theory, involved then you could also try 1.d4, which avoids the Sicilian period. |
|
| Apr-16-08 | | square dance: <edwin meyer> theBB isnt thinking of playing the nimzo-larsen "attack", but rather playing 1.e4 c5 2.b3. my point of recommending 1.d4 is that if you dont want to play against sicilians you should just play 1.d4. they're nothing to be afraid of, and they're some of the most fun type of games one could hope for. at least imo. my thinking is that if you dont like sicilians you're not really a 1.e4 player. |
|
| Apr-16-08 | | Edwin Meyer: <square dance>: How silly of me. Only now do i see he was refering to move 2. My bad :) |
|
| Apr-17-08 | | TheBB: Yeah, well, I don't want to give up the odd Ruy Lopez either, see. :\ |
|
| Apr-17-08 | | square dance: <edwin meyer> it happens to the best of us, and even me on occasion. ;-) <theBB> yes, the ruy is rather interesting and is to be missed if you give up on 1.e4. rather than 2.b3 i would recommend either the grand prix attack, or the rossolimo; 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6/Nc6 3.Bb5. both are completely respectable openings, which 1.e4 c5 2.b3 may or may not be. |
|
| Apr-17-08 | | TheBB: <square dance> Ok, thanks. I will look into them. |
|
| Apr-17-08 | | unsound: Personally I'd go for the Closed Sicilian (delaying f4) rather than the Grand Prix attack--and look through the wealth of Spassky games in that opening. |
|
| Apr-17-08 | | Edwin Meyer: However <TheBB>, if you keep thinking of 2.b3 vs the Sicilian, you should look up Tamaz Gelashvili on chessgames. He's probably the number one expert on that line. With very good results too! |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 8 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
