< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Jul-31-05|| ||EmperorAtahualpa: Although he was born in Romania, he was ethnically Hungarian. (That also explains where he died).|
|Jul-31-05|| ||SneechLatke: <sneaky pete> Ha, I like your title better than the actual. I'll add my two cents worth:|
Inspiring Maestro of Chess
|Sep-20-05|| ||admeyer: I can’t believe all of this talk about chess titles and I’m super surprised that nothing is mentioned of the opening that bears his name. It is a complete system which I can best explain by showing you the following message that I sent Keith Hayward. He plays the opening and has annotated games on (I believe it was) ChessCafe.com:|
Thanks for your coverage on the line: 1.d4 d6 2.e4 f5!? I did a web search for info on this opening because there are not a whole lot of games in databases and opening books tend to ignore it for the most part. I know it is not the greatest system for black, but it virtually is all you need to play against any of white's most mainline first move choices. I got to it because of my need to avoid the Pirc with black. Against d4 players, my favorite is, 1.d4 d6 2.c4 e5! where I have an excellent record. The only set back was that when I played against tougher opposition, I would too often get: 1.d4 d6 2.e4 and I would go into the Modern which I was never too crazy about. I started looking for early deviations against this and saw the best way out was 2.f5, and although white should retain an opening advantage, the position is more than playable for black. I was then shocked to see so little of this system mentioned anywhere.
|Sep-21-05|| ||Benzol: <admeyer> Thanks for your input.|
|Sep-28-05|| ||Mating Net: <admeyer> I am as intrigued by you are as far as the 1.d4 d6 2.e4 f5 opening is concerned. When White replys with 2.c4, I practically jump for joy because 2...e5 follows, along with a Queen exchange, and, usually, a good game for Black. As you pointed out, 2.e4 is a bit tricky for Black because the traditional replys are lacking, IMO. 2...f5!? is certainly worth a look. Too bad there aren't more games in the database that we can examine because I want to really analyze it and see what the best lines are for Black. I've checked out the page you mentioned and it was somewhat helpful.|
I take it you've played some games with the 2...f5!? approach. How were your results? Should Black capture the e pawn right away, or wait for White to capture the f pawn?
|Oct-26-05|| ||admeyer: <Mating Net> I will respond to this over the next few days.|
|Oct-26-05|| ||Saruman: This site is rather good for that purpose; http://www.chessville.com/instructi...|
|Feb-08-06|| ||ganstaman: Not sure if anyone is still reading here...:
I've played the Bird as white (and still do most of the time) and the Dutch as black (I was weaker then and knew less of the theory, so I figured it to be a failed experiment, but I may get back into the Dutch). So naturally I searched and found the Balogh Counter Gambit and really do kinda like it. Do you think it's sound, or does it give black too many weaknesses that he doesn't need?
Also, concerning 1.d4 d6 2.c4 e5, someone said trade pawns then queens, then the game is good for black. Do others agree? What general plan does black then have, and where should his king end up?
|Feb-08-06|| ||Mating Net: I am a firm advocate of 1.d4 d6 2.c4 e5 as Black <ganstaman> The early Queen exchange totally favors Black, as White has weakened the d4 square with the move 2.c4. The opening explorer shows a 58% WINNING percentage for Black, which is rather phenomenal. With the Queens off the board, that moves serves no purpose. Black's King usually settles comfortably on c7 and awaits the arrival of the endgame. With the Q's off the board, the Black King is able to take part in the action for the center and become much more active, sooner, than his castled counter part.|
I have played this line dozens and dozens of times and I have many higher rated scalps to my credit. In post game analysis, everyone says the same thing: "After the Q exchange I thought I was winning, but then, suddenly, I didn't know what to do." This is because Black has so many more natural moves. White's light squared Bishop is usually a weak piece because the pawn on c4 deprives it of one of its most useful squares. Check out this game as a model example of how Black goes about his business: Aung Aung vs Krasenkow, 2000
Feel free to check out my game collection Game Collection: Black plays 1...d6 as well.
As far as the Balogh Counter Gambit goes, I'm not convinced, yet, of its overall soundness for Black.
|Feb-08-06|| ||ganstaman: <Mating Net> Thanks. I started to look through some of those games and they do seem easy for black to play. I think I'll give them next time I play.|
How do you like handling (after 1.d4 d6 2.c4 e5) 3.d5 and 3.Nf3? To me, it looks like the first can be met with ...f5, ...g6, ...Nf6, ...Bg7, ...0-0, etc and with the second perhaps 3....e4 and 4...f5?
These seem to be somewhat worse for black than the exchange variations, but I'm wondering if you find them playable at least.
Hmmm, maybe we should move this discussion to the proper opening page (wherever that would be)? Eh, we seem close enough regardless.
|Feb-09-06|| ||Mating Net: <ganstaman> I think 3.d5 is also very good for Black as the reply ...3f5 is quite strong. Black has achieved an almost dream Dutch defense setup in only 3 moves! Black has equalized, IMHO. ...Nf6, ...Be7, ...Qe8 are the logical moves that follow and Black is ready to mount a solid Kingside attack. White has very little. D5, which is a tender spot in the Black position in a Dutch setup has a White pawn, not a piece. Therefore, it's not nearly as dangerous for Black.|
When I play the Dutch proper, I have to prep the ...e5 break very carefully. Sometimes I don't get it in at all.
The problem with all this, is that White avoids this whole mess by simply playing 2.e4. That's the tough move for Black to meet. I find it very difficult to get a good game and I've tried lots of different things. Do you have any ideas?
|Feb-10-06|| ||ganstaman: Well, I dislike the Pirc because I find it too cramping. One reason we play the Dutch is so that we can attack instead of forming solid defenses (not that the Dutch is terrible at defense, it's just not the main goal). So I was kinda hoping that the Balogh Defense would be my way out of the Pirc. Even if it's not great for black, I just want something that gives me a playable position without having to risk boredom (I originally explored this opening because as black I got into too many 4-knights games and Guiocco Pianos which I find too slow and boring).|
I think I just need to play a lot of games one day and see how I really like 1...d6. Thanks for the help -- now I know who to blame when I start losing every game... :)
|Jun-16-06|| ||VargPOD: I have played 1...d6 very much since I bought and studied the book "Explosive chess opening repertoire for black - a complete system based on 1...d6" by Finnish GM Jouni Yrjölä and IM Jussi Tella.|
I have found 1.d4 d6 2.c4 e5 very useful, because very often it goes 3.dxe5 dxe5 4.Qxd8+ Kxd8 with a very promising position for black, as <Mating Net> has said. It's counterintuitive, because usually early queen exchange coupled with the loss of castling right is bad, but in this case, it helps black.
Also I have found 1...d6 useful against 3. d5 and 1.c4/Nf3, because black can play d6-e5-f5 and get a good position.
Like <Mating Net>, I also have found that the Achilles Heel of the 1...d6 system is Pirc, which can lead to very cramped positions, if white knows what he's doing. There are also very aggressive variations, so you might be defending almost entire game.
Nowadays I usually play 1...d6 only occasionally against 1.e4, but regularly against other opening moves, because 1.d4 players are usually not so keen on transposing to Pirc.
|Jul-18-08|| ||myschkin: Winner of the first international correspondence tournament, in 1932.|
|Sep-29-08|| ||GrahamClayton: Balogh also has a variation of the Albin Counter-Gambit named after him: 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e5 3. de5 d4 4. ♘f3 ♘c6 5. ♘bd2 ♕e7|
Source: David Hooper and Kenneth Whyld "Oxford Companion to Chess", OUP, 1992
|Sep-10-09|| ||WhiteRook48: how about 3 d5 g6 4 e4?|
|Sep-10-09|| ||stoy: Balogh's defense to the Staunton gambit: 1 d4.. f5 2 e4.. d6. How about that?|
|Sep-09-10|| ||GrahamClayton: Here is Balogh winning a miniature with his own opening|
[White "Dr Duhrrssen"]
[Black "Balogh, Janos"]
1. e4 d6 2. d4 f5 3. ♘c3 ♘f6 4. ♗d3 ♘c6 5. exf5 ♘xd4 6. g4 h5 7. f3 hxg4 8. fxg4 ♕d7 9. h3 ♕c6 10. ♖h2 ♕c5 11. ♗f4 e5 12. ♗g5 ♘e6 0-1. If 13.♘f3 ♘g5 14.♘g5 ♕e3+/♕g1+ winning a piece.
|Sep-10-12|| ||BIDMONFA: Janos Balogh|
|Jan-23-14|| ||Karpova: II. Hungarian Chess Congress in Temesvar
Minor tournament A, August 3 to 18, 1912
1. Balogh 8.0
2. Fischer 7.5
3-4. Gaspar 6.0
3-4. Hajma 6.0
5. Vecsey 5.0
6. Schwarz 4.5
7. Dr. Strobl 3.5
8. Antal 2.5
9. Ludwig 1.5
10. Nemcsek 0.5
Prizes (probably in <Kronen>): Balogh 250, Fischer 150, Gaspar and Hajma shared 100 + 80, Vecsey 60, Schwarz 40.
Balogh remained undefeated, scoring +7 -0 =2, Fischer managed +7 -1 =1 (he lost to Balogh).
Minor tournament B (August 3 to 18)
1. Bikics 6.5
2. Matievich 6.0
3. Hody 5.5
4-5. Agliceriu 4.5
4-5. Netzko 4.5
6. Turudia 4.0
7. Niciphor 3.0
8. Toth 2.0
9. Brummer 0.0
Prizes (probably in <Kronen>): Bikics 120, Matievich 80, Hody 50, Agliceriu and Netzko shared 30.
Bikics scored +6 -1 =1, Matievich +5 -1 =2 (he beat Bikics). Brummer played only 3 games (losses to Bikics, Niciphor and Toth) and forfeited the rest.
Source: Pages 271-272 of the September-Oktober 1912 'Wiener Schachzeitung'
|Apr-13-14|| ||offramp: He sounds like that villain in <Raiders of the Lost Ark>.|
|Sep-10-14|| ||Nosnibor: Although he performed reasonably well in the World Correspondence Chess Championships he always fell balogh some of the stronger players ! However he was no walkover witness his win against Keres in a 1937 Correspondence game.R.I.P ICM Balogh|
|Sep-10-14|| ||Penguincw: R.I.P. Janos Balogh.|
|Jul-26-15|| ||ljfyffe: Balogh finished 8th in the World Chess Correspondence Championship II Final (1956-1959) with 6 and a half points of a possible 14; 9th in III Final (1959-1962) with 3 and a half out of possible 9 points.|
|Apr-25-18|| ||Stonehenge: Aka Ioan Balogh, see e.g.
http://www.stere.ro/biobibliografie... and http://www.stere.ro/wp-content/uplo...
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·