< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 21 OF 21 ·
|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.
|Mar-12-14|| ||sevenseaman: Thanks <Shams>. I have the best wishes for <Vishy> but sadly not much hope.|
|Mar-13-14|| ||RcfM: Kramnik vs Carlsen, 2008|
|Mar-13-14|| ||Shams: <RcfM> Love that game. Carlsen's first victory over Big Vladdy, though the latter was a bit sick during the game as Magnus magnanimously pointed out in the post-game.|
|Mar-14-14|| ||RcfM: <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?>|
The answer: Kramnik vs Carlsen, 2008
|Mar-14-14|| ||Shams: <RcfM> Neither player in that game had the kind of choice presented in the question I posed...|
|Mar-25-14|| ||Diademas: Since both my rating and my IQ is in the low 80's, my advice would be to do the old switcheroo...|
Replace your opponents queen, king and rooks with pawns at his next toilett break, while trying to keep a dead pan look when he returns.
This is a free advice, but I would not object to a deposit on my Nigerian bank account.
|Mar-31-14|| ||Shams: <Diademas> I'll keep your strategem in mind for when the chips are down, thanks. :)|
|Apr-21-14|| ||Shams: <Everett> You asked me how my Reti was going. The answer is it's going, going, gone! I decided to switch to 1.d4. I just had this realization that eventually I'd make the move, so why not do it now? I feel like 1.d4 will be more educational for me. |
Basically I decided that I feel about the Reti how I feel about sailing-- I love the idea of it, but when it comes to actually doing it it's not as satisfying as I'd hoped. And that's not even to mention all the Symmetrical English games I had to suffer through.
The only downside is I don't get to talk theory with you. Sorry, bro.
|Apr-21-14|| ||Everett: It's all good!
The Symmetrical English stuff does indeed suck. And I agree with the advanced variation, too. The reversed-Benoni material just did not suit me at all. It may be good to know that Reti rarely played the 2.c4, but often 2.g3 and see what Black does.
In any case, if you ever want to pick up the Reti again, I have some clunky lines vs the advanced that you can try, such as <after 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.e4>
Hope d4 serves you well! Are you using Watson's book on it?
|Apr-21-14|| ||Shams: <Everett> I have Watson's book and I probably should have recourse to it more. But so far I've just been playing according to the 1.d4 repertoire of IM Christof Silecki ("chessexplained" on youtube), a nifty 15-part video series.|
|Apr-21-14|| ||Everett: I will check it out. BTW, I've been playing 1.c4 almost exclusively, save against a buddy of mine who likes to play the Dutch, so he eats the King's Pawn and it usually turns Rosso-Sicilian which I'm quite happy with.|
I get Mikenas-Carls or Botvinnik Formation (Queenside Stonewall) positions. Lots of space and nice pressure.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 21 OF 21 ·