|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 63 OF 598 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Sep-25-13 | | zsoydd: . Hi <stunningmove>,
Have you seen the list of corr games I've posted a few pages ago? These are only modern high level games (both above 2300 elo, games only from 2009 on). 3...d5 has solid results in the games among strong players, which also seem to have a higher preference for d5 than weaker corr players. Nearly all those 3..d5 losses (I only refer to these modern cc games!) result from older games with 1. b3 e5 2. Bb2 Nc6 3. e3 d5 4. Bb5 Bd6 5. f4 Qh4+(??). The more recent games went
1. b3 e5 2. Bb2 Nc6 3. e3 d5 4. Bb5 Bd6 5. f4 f6 and in one of those
even the "3. e3 guru" Punzon Moraleda lost with white (against Funke). I wonder where this verdict comes from that 3...d5 is a high risk choice. Best regards
zsoyd(d) |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | joupajou: Gotta go now. Could someone keep an eye on the votes, please? |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | kwid: Sep-25-13 < zsoydd: <stunningmove>,> Here is my pgn data for the < 7. Qh4 exf4 8. Nf3 fxe3 9. O-O> line: [Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "A 01/11"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "A01"]
[Annotator "kwid"]
[PlyCount "52"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]
1. b3 e5 2. Bb2 Nc6 3. e3 d5 4. Bb5 Bd6 5. f4 f6 6. Qh5+ g6 7. Qh4 exf4 8. Nf3
fxe3 9. O-O Bd7 (9... Bc5 10. dxe3 Qd6 11. Nd4 a6 12. Bxc6+ bxc6 13. c4 Bd7 14.
Nc3 O-O-O 15. Rac1 Qe7 16. Nd1 Qd6 17. Nc3) (9... Qd7 10. Nc3 a6 11. Bxc6 bxc6
12. Rae1 Ne7 13. Qxf6 Rf8 14. Qg5 exd2 15. Qxd2) 10. Nc3 Nce7 11. Bxd7+ Qxd7
12. dxe3 O-O-O (12... c5 13. Rad1 O-O-O 14. Rd3 a6 15. Rfd1 Qe6 16. Qe1 b6 17.
e4 d4 18. Na4 b5 19. Qa5 bxa4 20. Qxa6+ Kd7 21. Qb5+ Kc8 22. Bxd4 cxd4 23. Nxd4
Bxh2+ 24. Kh1 Qxe4 25. Rc3+ Bc7 26. Qa6+ Kd7 27. Qxa4+ Kc8 28. Qa6+ Kd7) 13. e4
g5 14. Qf2 Kb8 15. Nxd5 Nxd5 16. exd5 Nh6 17. c4 Ng4 18. Qd4 Rhe8 19. Rae1 Rxe1
20. Rxe1 Re8 21. Rxe8+ Qxe8 22. Qxg4 (22. h3 Ne5 23. Nxe5 Bxe5 24. Qf2 f5 25.
Bd4 b6 26. Kf1 Qh8 27. Bxe5 Qxe5 28. Qe1 Qf4+ 29. Qf2 Qe4 30. Qe2 Qf4+ 31. Kg1)
22... Qe2 23. Bxf6 (23. Qe6 Bc5+ 24. Nd4 Bxd4+ 25. Bxd4 Qd1+ 26. Kf2 Qxd4+ 27.
Kf3 Qf4+ 28. Ke2 b6 29. g3 Qd4) 23... Bf4 24. h3 (24. Bxg5 Qd1+ 25. Kf2 Qc2+)
24... Qd1+ 25. Kf2 Qc2+ 26. Kg1 Qd1+ 1/2-1/2 |
|
Sep-25-13
 | | Tabanus: <zsoydd> That verdict comes from chickens that just want to toss out a knight! ;) Fortunately, voting closes 3 hours after bedtime. |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | zsoydd: . hi <stunningmove>,
3...d5 4.Bb5 Bd6 is a solid fallback if
3...d5 4.Bb5 Nge7 doesn't work.
Since I have analyzed the Nge7 main line yesterday interactively for about two hours I can confirm that black has dynamic pressure which definitely at least compensates more than half a pawn from my point of view. The engines say it's even equivalent to an entire pawn. Anyway. 3...d5 will lead us into terra incognita - far more for our opponent than for us. (Hägar the Horrible: "ignorance is the mother of all adventures"). |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | DcGentle: By the way, when the game started and we were talking about what to do against <1. d4>, everyone was content to play the KID. Now look what may emerge after <3... Nf6>: 
click for larger viewWhite to move.
Does this resemble a KID position or not?
And bishop b2 is blunted.
:-) |
|
Sep-25-13
| | Tabanus: Propaganda, nothing else. The obvious move is 3...d5. I'll go back to my tournaments now before getting heart attack. Hasta la vista! |
|
Sep-25-13
 | | Domdaniel: It seems that 3...a6 is going nowhere, so I'd better switch. Unfortunately, my 2nd choice - 3...d6 - has little prospect either. I'm not very happy with either of the leading moves: I think 3...d5 is too loose, and 3...Nf6 blocks the f-pawn, preventing both ...f6 and ...f5. On balance, maybe it's marginally the better option. Incidentally, I see there are some votes (listed separately) for "NF6" (with capital F) -- if it's close, I assume they'll be counted as ...Nf6?? |
|
Sep-25-13
 | | PawnSac: i would think so, but as soon as they appeared i posted a notice to change move to Nf6 but they musta left right away. |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | cormier: 3...d5 4.Bb5 Bd6 5.f4 f6 6. Qh5+ g6 7. Qh4 exf4 8. Nf3 fxe3 9. O-O:
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 3 Pro w32:
9...Qd7 10.dxe3 a6 11.Bxc6 Qxc6 12.Nc3 Qc5 13.Rad1 Ne7 14.Qxf6 Rf8 15.Qg7 Bf4 16.Rde1 Nf5 17.Qxh7 Bxe3+ 18.Kh1 Qd6 19.Nd1
 (-0.27) Depth: 14/45 00:00:03 3969kN
9...Qd7 10.dxe3
= (-0.19 --) Depth: 15/45 00:00:04 5757kN
9...Bc5 10.dxe3
= (-0.19 --) Depth: 15/45 00:00:07 9883kN
9...Kf7 10.dxe3 Kg7 11.Bxc6 bxc6 12.Nbd2 Qd7 13.Ng5 h6 14.Nge4 dxe4 15.Nxe4 g5 16.Nxf6 Nxf6 17.Bxf6+ Kg8 18.Qh5 Rh7 19.Qg6+ Rg7 20.Bxg7 Qxg7
(-0.36) Depth: 15/45 00:00:15 19830kN
9...Kf7 10.Nc3
= (-0.12 --) Depth: 16/45 00:00:23 29354kN
9...Nge7 10.Qxf6 Rf8 11.Qg7 a6 12.Bxc6+ Nxc6 13.Qxh7 Bf5 14.dxe3 Nb4 15.Na3 Qd7 16.Qxd7+ Kxd7 17.Bg7 Rfe8 18.Nd4 Rxe3 19.Nxf5 gxf5 20.Rxf5 Rg8 21.Bd4 Re2 22.g3 Rf8
= (-0.19) Depth: 16/45 00:00:30 38878kN
9...Kf8 10.dxe3
= (-0.12 --) Depth: 17/52 00:00:50 64668kN
9...Bd7 10.Nc3 Nce7 11.dxe3 c6 12.Bd3 Qb6 13.Rae1 0-0-0 14.Na4 Qc7 15.c4 dxc4 16.bxc4 c5 17.Nc3 g5 18.Qh5 g4 19.Nd2 Bc6 20.Nd5 Nxd5 21.cxd5 Bxd5 22.Bc4 Bc6 23.Nb3 Kb8 24.Nxc5
(-0.30) Depth: 20/52 00:02:20 185mN
9...Bd7 10.dxe3
= (-0.06 --) Depth: 21/64 00:07:00 571mN
9...a6 10.Bd3 Bc5 11.dxe3 Nce7 12.Nd4 Qd6 13.Nd2 Bd7 14.c4 Qe5 15.Qf2 Nh6 16.h3 Nhf5 17.Nxf5 Qxb2 18.Nxe7 Bxe7 19.cxd5 0-0 20.Rac1 Bd6 21.Ne4 Qxf2+ 22.Rxf2
= (-0.16) Depth: 21/64 00:12:19 1002mN
9...a6 10.Bd3
= (-0.08 --) Depth: 22/64 00:13:40 1111mN |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | DcGentle: <Domdaniel>: NF6 voters must be counted as Nf6 voters, this should be no problem, I guess. The vote is rather clear. |
|
Sep-25-13
| | PawnSac: < another Nakamura vs. Caruana 3min ICC game with 3..Nf6 > [Event "ICC"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2013.09.25"]
[White "Smallville"]
[Black "Adaptation"]
[Result "*"]
[TimeControl "180+0"]
1. b3 e5 2. Bb2 Nc6 3. e3 Nf6 4. Bb5 Bd6 5. Nf3 Qe7 6. O-O O-O 7. d4 e4 8. Nfd2 a6 9. Be2 Qd8 10. c4 Be7 11. d5 Nb8 12. Nc3 d6 13. Ncxe4 Nxe4
14. Nxe4 Nd7 15. Qd4 Nf6 16. Bd3 Bf5 17. Ng5 Bg6 18. Rad1 Nh5 19. Bxg6 hxg6 20. Nf3 Bf6 21. Qd2 Re8 22. g4 Bxb2 23. Qxb2 Nf6 24. h3 Ne4 25. Nd2
Ng5 26. Kg2 f5 27. gxf5 gxf5 28. Rg1 Qe7 29. Kh2 Nh7 30. Rg6 Rf8 31. Rdg1 Rf7 32. Nf3 Nf8 33. R6g2 Re8 34. Ng5 Rf6 35. Ne6 Nxe6 36. dxe6 Kf8
37. Qd4 c6 38. Qh4 Kg8 39. Rxg7+ Qxg7 40. Qxf6 |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | MuzioFan: Wow, I'm gone for a couple of hours and look what happened. Anyway, taking the advice that <my vote will be wasted> if I stick with the (in my opinion best) move <3..d6> I've changed my vote to one of the top two options. But which one to choose?? The arguments I have read (I'm about to take a look at the recent correspondence game by 2300+ players, thanks <zsoydd>!!) are that Nf6 can get us a KID setup, which would be sweet. Alternatively we can play a completely amazing pawn sac in the d5 line, and get out of opening theory on move 4 without losing equality (as we're told by Houdini). Truth be told I think the two moves are roughly equally good, meaning that it boils down to personal preference and strategic considerations. Getting GMSW out of his theory might sound good, but <Boomie>'s wisdom tells us that we need positional chess, not tactical chess. Complicated, complicated. My vote is currenly 3..d5, but I'm completely torn (3..Nf6 seems just a tiny bit stronger, but how can I possibly resist sacrificing a pawn on move 4. Take note of my name). I hope the correspondence games posted give me more insight. |
|
Sep-25-13
| | Tabanus: From <alter> at Nimzovich-Larsen Attack (a01): <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)> Is it this you are afraid of, the reversed Owen's Defence? |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | ajile: <Domdaniel: It seems that 3...a6 is going nowhere, so I'd better switch. Unfortunately, my 2nd choice - 3...d6 - has little prospect either. I'm not very happy with either of the leading moves: I think 3...d5 is too loose, and 3...Nf6 blocks the f-pawn, preventing both ...f6 and ...f5. On balance, maybe it's marginally the better option.> Pretty lame. People actually believe that we should make moves based on .1-.2 differences in evals. And in the opening no less when no contact has been made. I'm of the opinion we could outplay him positionally but maybe that's a minority position. |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | cormier: fritz 12 opening: 3...d5 4.Bb5 Bd6 if 5.Ne2 Nf6 and searching |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | Tiggler: <cormier> I think that posting Houdini lines and evaluations at less than 20-ply does nothing except to muddy the waters. |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | stunningmove: <Tabanus> d5 may seem obvious but there are 5 moves in this position worthy of considering. Some rather good players have voted for all of them at some point. That should tell us it is a matter of style and what type of middle game each player desires. |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | lost in space: Unfortunately I already voted 3...d5, so I can not switch to it. |
|
Sep-25-13
| | PawnSac: < another Nakamura vs. Caruana 3min ICC game with 3..Nf6 > [Event "ICC"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2013.09.25"]
[White "Smallville"]
[Black "Adaptation"]
[Result "*"]
[TimeControl "180+0"]
1. b3 e5 2. Bb2 Nc6 3. e3 Nf6 4. Bb5 Bd6 5. Nf3 Qe7 6. O-O e4 7. Ne1 a6 8. Be2 Be5 9. Nc3 d5 10. f4 Bd6 11. d3 exd3 12. Qxd3 Nb4 13. Qd2 Bc5 14. Nd1 Bf5 15. a3 Nc6 16. b4 Bb6 17. Bd3 Bg4 18. Nf3 O-O 19. Re1 Ne4 20. Bxe4 dxe4 21. Nd4 Nxd4 22. exd4 Bxd1 23. Raxd1 Rad8 24. c4 c6 25. f5 Bc7 26. Qf2 Rfe8 27. Re3 Qg5 28. Rde1 Qh5 29. h3 Qg5 30. Rxe4 Rxe4 31. Rxe4 h5 32. h4 Qh6 33. Qe3 Qd6 34. Kf2 a5 35. Bc3 b6 36. Qg5 f6 37. Qg6 axb4 38. axb4 Ra8 39. Re8+ Rxe8 40. Qxe8+ Kh7 41. Qxh5+ Kg8 42. Qe8+ Kh7 43. Qe3 b5 44. cxb5 cxb5 45. Qf3 Bb6 46. Qe4 Bc7 47. Ke2 Qg3 48. Be1 Qb3 49. Qd3 Qd5 50. g3 Bd6 51. Kd1 Qa2 52. Bc3 Qb3+ 53. Qc2 Qd5 54. g4 Qf3+ 55. Kc1 Qxg4 56. Qd3 Qxh4 57. Qxb5 Qf4+ 58. Kb2 Qf2+ 59. Kb3 Qg1 60. Qd3 Qg2 61. d5 Qg4 62. b5 Qf4 63. b6 Bc5 64. b7 Qb8 65. Qb5 Bd6 66. Bd4 Kg8 67. Qd7 Bc7 68. Qc8+ Kh7 69. Qxb8 Bxb8 70. Kc4 Kg8 71. Kc5 Kf7 72. d6 Ke8 73. Kc6 Kd8 74. Bb6+ Black resigns |
|
Sep-25-13
| | PawnSac: <DcGentle>
ok. well my point in posting these games is that they are good "idea variations" which Simon will be familiar with, so if we're going to play Nf6 we must assume he has studied (or will study) them and has looked for improvements for white. |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | DcGentle: <PawnSac>: Black can do better in both Caruana games. Blitz is something else than correspondece, fortunately. |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | Tiggler: <ajile: <Domdaniel: It seems that 3...a6 is going nowhere, so I'd better switch. Unfortunately, my 2nd choice - 3...d6 - has little prospect either. I'm not very happy with either of the leading moves: I think 3...d5 is too loose, and 3...Nf6 blocks the f-pawn, preventing both ...f6 and ...f5. On balance, maybe it's marginally the better option.>
Pretty lame. People actually believe that we should make moves based on .1-.2 differences in evals. And in the opening no less when no contact has been made. I'm of the opinion we could outplay him positionally but maybe that's a minority position.> Maybe not. I agree, anyway. But the prospects of a positional middlegame are fast disappearing, so our advantage may not arise until the endgame, when I feel sure our analysis will be better (and engines will be almost useless). With that in mind, I would be very reluctant to sacrifice a pawn. A sacrifice that he would accept, that is. There are countless possibilities of offering poisoned pawns that he won't take. Especially our g-pawn! In the endgame these are some of the things that will count (apart from analysis) 1. Number of pawns
2. Mobile pieces, especially King
3. Pawn structure (number of groups)
4. Advanced pawns
5. Advanced outposts, especially Knights
6. Bishops vs Knights: B better in open positions with pawns on both sides, N better in blocked positions. Early to think about the endgame? Not if you want to win, because most decided games especially in cc are decided in the endgame. |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | DcGentle: <PawnSac>: I know what you mean, I guess we won't see Bb5 at all, it's a likely possibility. |
|
| Sep-25-13 | | jamennib: < kwid: Sep-25-13 <Tabanus: 3...d5 4.Bb5 Bd6 5.f4 f6 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qh4 exf4> This Boomie's concern lines thinking that we have no prospects to look forward to.> The actual position at this point is
click for larger view Then after 8. exf4 Bd7 9. Bxc6 Bxc6 10. Ne2 Qd7 11. 0-0 0-0-0, we arrive at the position below, with black having the bishop pair, no doubled pawns and valuations in its favor. I've crawled through this line with a win for black. 
click for larger viewBTW, In the CC game (referred to previously) in which black plays
7 ... exf4, white replies with Nf3 and also loses. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 63 OF 598 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
