< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 20 OF 20 ·
|Feb-27-14|| ||Shams: <FSR> Thanks. He did end up going with someone from Eugene and seems happy with his choice.|
|Feb-27-14|| ||FSR: <Shams> Glad to hear it. I wish him luck.|
|Feb-27-14|| ||FSR: <Shams: <FSR> Interesting historical note on that line. As it happens I had seen a couple of those games-- unhappy with my treatment of Nimzo's gambit, I looked for improvements and was impressed by the simplicity and power of Mikhail Moiseyevich's idea with ...Qa5. I still lost when that variation came around again, though. Turns out that Botvinnik was making it look easier than it was.>|
Yes, he was good at that. Most of us who play Black against the Richter-Rauzer aren't enthralled when our opponent doubles our f-pawns with Bxf6 gxf6. But Botvinnik would say, "Hey, free bishop pair!," play 7...h6 8.Bxf6 gxf6 and (often) crush his opponent. http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches...
Have you tried the Classical Sicilian? It rules, especially now that I've decided that 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qd2 a6 8.0-0-0 h6 9.Nxc6! bxc6 10.Bf4, which used to be considered practically winning for White, is OK for Black after 10...d5 11.Qe3 Bb4 12.Be2 0-0 13.e5 Nh7! Opening Explorer Titz shows the way for Black (seriously): G Schnider vs H Titz, 2002 Just don't fall for 2...Nc6 3.Bb5! I play 2...d6! to avoid that.
|Feb-27-14|| ||Shams: <FSR> I'm never going back to the Sicilian! It just doesn't play to my strengths. If I ever decide the French is too tough for me to handle, I'll pick up the Spanish. |
A better question for me is whether I'll be switching to <1.d4> soon.
|Feb-27-14|| ||FSR: <Shams> To each his own. I think the Berlin is essentially a theoretical refutation of 1.e4 - not that Black wins, of course, but White cannot get an advantage. But if you're trying to win prize money in Swisses, obviously you can't have that as your everyday weapon.|
|Feb-27-14|| ||FSR: Have you ever tried the Caro-Kann? That's a fine opening. I never lost with it.|
|Feb-27-14|| ||Shams: <FSR> Just a bit when I was first starting out. Bit of a grandpa opening though. As Bent Larsen said, "if you play the Caro-Kann when you're young, what are you going to play when you're old?"|
|Feb-27-14|| ||FSR: A "grandpa opening"? Maybe the 4...Bf5 line where both sides castle on the same side. I wouldn't consider any of the other variations "grandpa" lines. I played 4...Nd7 myself, apart from one time I played 4...Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6. I don't care what names you call an opening as long as I like it and do well with it.|
|Feb-27-14|| ||Shams: <FSR> Of course you're right; I'm just being a turkey. Who knows, maybe I'll take up the CK after all.|
|Feb-28-14|| ||FSR: If you must play the French, you'd best be prepared for White's best-scoring lines. According to CG.com's database, they are 2.h4!! (100%) - only played in the Immortal Overprotection Game, Nimzowitsch vs Systemsson, 1927; Bird's 2.Bb5! (64.2%) - but 2...Qg5! equalizes - R Moravcik vs M Bronis, 2003; and Chigorin's 2.Qe2! (58.6%). Note that Opening Explorer claims that White played the shocking 2.d5?!?!? in Schlechter vs G Marco, 1894 - but he didn't.|
|Feb-28-14|| ||hedgeh0g: I've had some fun messing around with 1.b3 recently. A fairly standard way of meeting it by weaker players is to play a quick ...d6 and ...e5, upon which I fianchetto the other bishop :)|
Unfortunately, Black probably equalises fairly easily with 1...Nf6, intending ...g6. The symmetrical variation with 1...b6 is also fine and the "mainline" e5/Nf6/Nc6/Bd6 setup, doesn't seem to offer White much, either.
But at least you get an unbalanced position out of the opening :)
|Feb-28-14|| ||hedgeh0g: <Shams> If you're going to take up the Caro-Kann, I would suggest knowing what to do against the Advance Variation, otherwise you will probably get blown out of the water.|
|Feb-28-14|| ||hedgeh0g: Although 3...c5 is worth considering if you don't mind a sharper game.|
|Feb-28-14|| ||Shams: <hedgeh0g> Sure, 1.b3 leads to interesting positions. So Black can equalize, who cares? As long as you like your position. |
I assume you've seen these videos?
|Feb-28-14|| ||hedgeh0g: <Shams> No, but I might check them out later. Thanks for the tip.|
Baadur Jobava's games in the Nimzo-Larsen are pretty instructive, although after 1...Nf6 2.Bb2 g6, he plays 2.Bxf6, which looks pretty innocuous to me.
But who am I to argue?
|Feb-28-14|| ||Shams: <hedgeh0g> Not to my taste either. It rather looks like White's opening idea is to cede the bishop pair as soon as possible.|
|Feb-28-14|| ||FSR: I used to play 1.b3 a lot in blitz. Never played it in a "real" game. And yes, one has to know the Advance these days. Schandorff in his book on the C-K writes something to the effect that one has to learn exactly how to handle the Advance, not just generalities about how to play against it. http://www.amazon.com/Grandmaster-R... Don't follow Akobian's play in The World vs Akobian, 2012, whatever you do. For that matter, if you play 1.b3, don't follow S Williams vs The World, 2013.|
|Mar-07-14|| ||Shams: White has just taken on c5. Do I retake with the knight, accepting the IQP for piece play, or do I play ...bc and take the hanging pawns? |
click for larger view
In the game I had the vague feeling that I preferred Nc6 to Nd7 if I was going to take the hangers, but for some reason I took with the pawn anyway.
|Mar-07-14|| ||perfidious: <Shams....I had the vague feeling that I preferred Nc6 to Nd7 if I was going to take the hangers, but for some reason I took with the pawn anyway.>|
In the quiet line 4.e3 against the Queen's Indian, I got a difficult position in the decisive game of the 1992 Vermont championship after putting the knight on c6 instead of d7 and eventually lost. Believe the stronger line is usually ....Nbd7, though that was a long time ago.
|Mar-07-14|| ||Shams: <perfidious> Interesting. I'd love to see the game if it's available. |
So...do you have an answer to my question? :)
|Mar-07-14|| ||perfidious: <Shams> At a glance, I probably would prefer ....bxc5--not that this statement constitutes anything like a thorough analysis!|
No idea where the scores of those games are; all I have to go by is recollection these days.
|Mar-08-14|| ||moronovich: With the pawn definately.The pair of hanging pawns,give you a lot of space,though no clear plan is in sight.But that goes for white as well.
Taking with the knight will hand white
two monstrous bishops and the square d4,and a target on d5.
So my logic is boiled down to:the position after -bxc5 may not be what you wanted,but if the alternative is worse,then...
|Mar-08-14|| ||moronovich: All said above:it provides that white doesn´t win the d-pawn without compensation after the natural Rd2.And if that is the case the conclusion must be that you should look for another line in this opening,cause after -Nxc5 you still look positionally busted to me.|
|Mar-08-14|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: <Shams> I would also play ...bxc5.|
I'm not sure ...Nxc5 is outright losing (though <moronovich>, admittedly, is a stronger player than me and has more experience in this type of position). As long as Black can maintain a knight on e4 that square is almost as good as d4, and while a pawn there would still be a target it would at least no longer be isolated; it seems to me White would have to play f3 at some point if he wanted to empty e4 of Black's units, and that would limit the scope of the Bg2. But it would be a very ugly game - once White manages to force some exchanges (which seems extremely likely) Black has to forget about doing anything active and just patiently defend that pawn on d5, hoping White can't find a way through.
|Mar-08-14|| ||Shams: Thanks much to both of you. I'm not averse to taking either the IQP or the hanging pawns if circumstances dictate, but I've only played this ...b6 line a handful of times. Mostly I essayed it because I end up on the White side of this double-fianchetto line often enough that I'd like a better feel for Black's defensive resources. |
What I probably should play is 1...d5, since 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 d4 is putting me off the Reti for White.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 20 OF 20 ·