|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 7 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Dec-23-04 | | Avion: Well, as a Pirc defence's player, I encounter from time to time the move 2.f4 and 95% of the time, it's converting into a austrian attack(1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3)
and black's clever reply is 5....c5.
If, like it's sometime applies, white doesn't play d4(d3 or no move by the d-pawn), then the e4-f4 pawns-chain is rather not good. Black'only have to not castle kingside as long as white haven't castle KS. Just don't castle into the pawn storm(quite easy to find!!) Anyway, the point is that 2.f4 often transpose into the Austrian attack and since Black had found antidote to that opening, White must know how to play it very well. For those who dislike to face the Pirc, I can suggest you 2 systems. First, Chernin suggest the system with the KS bishop fianchettoed in g2 for non-professionnal. However, I hate that one. Black equalize and it's often boring. Chernin thinks that Pirc defence is really good and that White should aim for equality. I don't think so. I recently found out something outside of theory for White that is quite amuzing. White goes for Austrian attack and aim to push e5 with maximum effect as usual except that the 5th move isn't Nf3.
Instead, try a3!?.
The point is to prevent Black's 5...c5
As for White, I could also not suggest the system with the white bishop on c4. The bishop is quite hanging and often, there is the fork with Nxe4 fellowed with d5 which make Black at least qualized most of the time. Anyway, hope that I bring somethine new and I REALLY hope that you understand something in my typing. I live in Montréal, Québec, Canada, so French is my first language. |
|
| Dec-23-04 | | holierthanthou: <zorro> I didn't mean it's the BEST reply but I wanted to point it out as it's pretty sneaky. I compared it to the Grand Prix attack because it attacks the e4 f4 falang in a similiar style. Say 1.e4 d6 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 Nf6, and black has caught up the lost tempo. Also, since e4 c5 f4 d5 is considered atleast equalising for black, <e4 d6 f4 c5> can ALSO be considered "playing a tempo down". ..c5 is a natural move in the pirc, but it's more powerful when delayed a bit and prepared more I believe. In a way 2.f4 already loses a tempo. It's a logical move, sure, but it doesn't develop and it's weakening. Besides, losing a tempo is not necessarily even a bad thing (in hypermodern openings atleast) if it gives counterplay and targets, which I think 2. ..d5 in cu8sfan's line does. I'm no pirc-player myself but I might try it (1.e4 d6 <2.f4> d5) in a few friendly games, out of curiosity. Btw, the Austrian Attack is considered pretty dubious, overextending. I used it as a regular reply to the pirc for some time and noticed it gives black excellent chances, just like <Avion> said (I did get to play sacsacmate-games too, but too rarely). <cu8sfan> Instead of the AA setup I'd recommend you the system with (1.e4) 2.d4 3.Nc3 4.f3 which in my experience leads to very comfortable positions for white, with good attacking chances. |
|
| Dec-23-04 | | Avion: <holierthanthou>
The line with 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f3 can be met exactly like 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.f3. White aims for a Saemish KID which Black may want, since Black scores kinda well versus a S-KID. Black can easily answer with e5 to f3 in order to enter these lines. Note that dxe5 et dxe5 with the exchange of queens doesn't favor White in the ending. It's just heading for a book draw and can be use if you think you can overwhelm your opponement in an ending.Emms suggest to White the 150 attack which is 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.Be3 It's containing his dose of poison and here Black should responded 4. ... c6! 4. ... Bg7 favors White since black will lose 1 tempo moving his bishop. The point of c6 is to start a Q-side attack since White's king will castle there. Also, the queen on h6 doesn't matter for Black. Delaying castling in that position isn't really important since his king will not suffer from threats in the middle of the board for a little time, which is use to build up a Q-side attack. Anyway, I like the 150 attack which both sides since it leads to sharp lines, but I do prefer Black side with 4. ... c6 |
|
| Dec-23-04 | | Dave Murray: <holierthanthou> 1.e4 d6 2. f4 d5!?! look really, really good. I played 1.e4 d6 2. f4 as white and usually got some kind of closed Sicilian. I know a move like 2. d5 would've through me off. I actually think that black pawn on c7 might be better than on c5. Having a pawn on c7 still give black an option of playing c6. For example white can't try to hold on to a pawn with 4. c4, because of 4...c6 5. dxc6 Nxc6 and there is a big hole on d4. Not having a pawn on c5 allows d4, but I don't really see anything for white here. |
|
| Dec-23-04 | | Avion: My question is if 1.e4 d6 2.f4 d5?! why doesn't White play 3.e5? It may lead to a French defence where Black had lost a tempo? Or I'm just lost in my world... |
|
| Dec-23-04 | | Dave Murray: <Avion> I think after 1.e4 d6 2.f4 d5?! 3. e5 black doesn't have any problems, they can develop their dark squard bishop. They also can play c5-c7 in one move and not waste a tempo like they do Caro-Kann, and for the tempo black lost from playin d7-d6-d5 white only got their pawn from f2 to f4 which seems pretty useless. |
|
| Dec-24-04 | | Avion: Well, then I'll come back to my original non-asked question. Why the hell White would play 2.f4??? I mean, it's horrible. White scores well with 2.d4, why do you wanna change?? To get out of the book is really easy in that opening. White only needs to play a waiting move like a3 and Black's position become ok, but still out of the book. |
|
| Dec-24-04 | | Dave Murray: I played 2. f4 to get out of the book, I usually got something that looks like closed Sicilian. Objectively white probably loses all the advantage after 1. e4 d6 2. f4!?, but usually I liked the type of position I got. After 2...d5!?, however, I don't like my position any more. |
|
Dec-24-04
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: tomh72000, I did mean 3...Nbd7, the line I had in mind was 1.e4,d6; 2.d4,Nf6; 3.f3,Nbd7. The idea is *not* to commit to the fianchetto too soon: 4.Nc3,e5; 5.Bc4,Be7 is one possibility. Regarding 2.f4, I faced this sometimes in blitz and simply replied 2...g6. White really doesn't have much of an alternative to transposing back into the Austrian. But I must admit that holierthanthou has one heck of a clever idea with 2...d5. |
|
| Dec-25-04 | | BiLL RobeRTiE: Wouldn't 2...e5 going for a KGA Fischer Defense (3. Nf3 exf4) be acceptable as well? |
|
Dec-25-04
 | | cu8sfan: <Wouldn't 2...e5 going for a KGA Fischer Defense (3. Nf3 exf4) be acceptable as well?> Yes, that's why I originally came up with the idea of 2.f4 but I doubt that a Pirc player is willing to transpose to a King's Gambit. |
|
| Dec-25-04 | | Avion: <Yes, that's why I originally came up with the idea of 2.f4 but I doubt that a Pirc player is willing to transpose to a King's Gambit.> Mr.Brown has the point!! d6 is really not the same as e5... |
|
| Dec-25-04 | | Dave Murray: After 1. e4 d6 2. f4 e5 white can avoid main lines of Kings Gambit with 3. d3. I am not sure if thats a better move though. |
|
| Jan-05-05 | | morostyle: hi all iam asking all the e4 players 2 questions. 1)its harder for you guys to play against the pirc defense or the sicilian dragon accelerated fiancetto? 2)in wich defense white has the better attack? pirc or sicilian dragon acceleratd fiancetoo? thanks all |
|
| Jan-08-05 | | Avion: I am a 1.e4 player and a Pirc supporter.
However, I don't play open sicilian because praticonners of that defense are just playing their pet lines too much. I go for Alapin or 2.c3. Anyway, I think sicilian lines are very sharp, especially something like the Dragon, but White "knows" normal lines of attack like the Yugoslav. I prefer to go with the Pirc since it's less known then the Sicilian. |
|
| Jan-20-05 | | pkjohn146: I read on another site that this opening is pronounced "Peerts" instead of "Pirk" (as in "smirk") |
|
| Feb-05-05 | | deshad: I've been running into 4.Bf4 lately (or 5.Bf4). It looked questionable the first time I saw it, but I didn't really see any weakness. There are hardly any Pirc games on here where white immediately positions his bishop on f4, so I'm interested in getting people's thoughts. |
|
| Feb-05-05 | | hintza: <I read on another site that this opening is pronounced "Peerts"> I have heard Kramnik and probably others pronounce it in this way, so I presume it is correct. |
|
| Feb-13-05 | | Avion: <deshad> I personnaly play it like a classic one(Nf3)...It doesn't insure weekness neither any advantage for White. I am working on the d6-d5 break since c5 or e5 doesn't really work in classical... Anyway, good chances I'm wrong, but for my level, it do works well... |
|
| May-26-05 | | dzanone: Does anyone remember the articles Bobby Fischer wrote for Boy's Life magazine, the magazine of the Boy Scouts, back in the 60's. I was about 15 and was very impressed with his article on the Pirc-Robatsch, with the K-side fianchetto. He refuted it in my young impressionable mind. Since then I've always wondered how he ever connected with the Boy Scouts to do those articles in the first place. |
|
May-26-05
| | An Englishman: Good Evening: dzanone, I remember those articles and found one of the games he annotated for the magazine: M Matov vs Fischer, 1968
Pretty simple stuff, but I vaguely remember that Fischer pumped up Matov as some kind of champion. |
|
| May-26-05 | | PARACONT1: I posted this on the Topalov page but should have directed it here: - can anyone tell me if they've come across a game with the following starting moves? 1. e4 d6
2. d4 Nf6
3. Nc3 g6
4. f4 Bg7
5. Nf3 0-0
6. Be3 c5
7. e5 Nd7
8. Ng5
followed by a sac Nxf7? I recall coming across this game in the 80s but can't find it since. I believed it was Andrei Sokolov who was White and the game played in 1984 or 85. There's no such game in his collection, nor am I sure if the moves are accurate in order. But it's a neat idea that was actually played over the board. Help, someone? Thanks. |
|
| May-26-05 | | pyryk: <PARACONT1> I think this is the one you mean, even though the moves aren't quite the same. I found this one on chesslive.de. [Event "Biel Interzonal"]
[Site "Biel"]
[Date "1985.07.01"]
[Round "14"]
[White "Sokolov,Andrei"]
[Black "Partos,Charles"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Eco "B09"]
1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.f4 Nf6 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be3 b6 7.e5 Nfd7 8.Ng5 h6
9.Nxf7 Rxf7 10.e6 Rf8 11.exd7 Bxd7 12.Qf3 c6 13.0-0-0 Qc8 14.h3 Kh7 15.g4 d5 16.Rg1 Qe8
17.Qg3 Qf7 18.Bd3 c5 19.f5 Kh8 20.Qh4 1-0
|
|
| May-26-05 | | PARACONT1: <pyryk> Thanks a million! This is the one alright! Brings back lots of teenage memories playing through it again. Thanks again! It's amazing how fast things get solved when one seeks help - I'd been looking for this minature for years! |
|
| May-26-05 | | dzanone: <An Englishman>, Thank you for the game. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 7 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
