|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jun-22-05 | | Dudley: Make that ...Rb8, ...Bb7. |
|
| Jun-22-05 | | vampiero: that maneuvre seems like it might give white alot of time to get a strong kingside attack in place |
|
| Jun-22-05 | | Dudley: Possibly, but its's pretty hard to run a decent wing attack when the center is falling apart (referring to the Ng8 retreat). I dont't think that Nd5 is that good of a move- it is a !? or ?! kind of move. |
|
| Jun-22-05 | | vampiero: the thing is i have the accerlated Dragon dvd by Bad Bishop and they guy says that the pawn sacrifice gives black strong counterplay, it jsut seems that by the time blacks development is done and ready for an attack, white could easily have finished and set its defense, or possibly have already started a counter-attack. |
|
| Nov-21-05 | | Dim Weasel: Hi all you Sicialian experts! Pls tell me, is this English Opening game
T Nyback vs Li Chao, 2005 also a Maroczy Bind Sicilian Dragon by transposition? |
|
| Nov-21-05 | | Dim Weasel: Oops, sorry. Just noticed the B38 in the move list part. Well, check the game anyway. Nyback is Finland's current #1 player. |
|
| Nov-21-05 | | Dudley: Yes, Dim Weasel that is a Maroczy, and Black probably never knew what hit him. If you use a fianchetto in respond to flank openings, you need to know this pattern. |
|
| Jun-24-06 | | Kwesi: An early ...e5 goes wrong...
White: Kwesi
Black: http://www.mathsnet.net/puzzles/che...1. e4 c5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. d4 cxd4
4. Nxd4 g6
5. Be3 e5
6. Nb5 Nf6
7. N1c3 Bb4
8. Nd6+ Bxd6
9. Qxd6 Ng4
10. Bc5 b6
11. Ba3 Nd4
12. O-O-O Qg5+
13. Kb1 Nc6
14. f4 exf4
15. g3 fxg3
16. Bc4 Nge5
17. Bb5 g2
18. Rhg1 f5
19. exf5 gxf5
20. Rde1 Kd8
21. Bxc6 Nxc6
22. Rxg2 Qh4
23. Reg1 Re8
24. Rg3 Bb7
25. Nd5 Rc8
26. Nf6 Qd4
27. Nxe8 h6
28. Rg8 Qxd6
29. Nxd6+ Kc7
30. Nxc8 Bxc8
1-0 |
|
| Nov-16-06 | | FICSwoodpusher: How about an acclerated dragon in the following move order:
1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 c5 ?
I have not played this opening before, I have been told that the idea is for black to get in d5 in one move. How is this achieved? |
|
| Nov-16-06 | | mack: <FICS>
What you've got there is a Pterodactyl. For a brilliant demonstration of this system, see D Howell vs L Day, 2005 |
|
| Nov-17-06 | | FICSwoodpusher: <mack> I have seen this opening before and that is indeed how the game could go. What I had in mind with the above line was a transposition to the accelerated dragon sicilian. 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 c5 4. Nf3 cxd for example. What I want to know is how black is able to play d5 in one move instead of first playing d6 and then later d5. I don't know if this is possible since I can't remember where I saw this claim being made. |
|
| Nov-17-06 | | jjp: If white fails to control the d5 square with his light square Bishop or his c pawn then black can develop and play d5 in one move I.e.. 1. e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Be2 0-0 8.0-0 d5 (=). Black can also play d5 in one move if he winds up with a slight lead in development and would benefit from the open lines I.e, 1. e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4 0-0 8.Bb3 a5 9. f3 d5. (Which is one of the mainlines). That being said doesn’t your move order allow white a great deal of flexibility? What about 3. c4 are you going to play some sort of Benoni the Maroczy bind or pick a different system? |
|
| Nov-17-06 | | FICSwoodpusher: <jjp> The idea is that after 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 c5 white can no longer move the c pawn. If instead 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nf3 ... I have the option of not playing c5. Instead I might go for a more flexible system such as 3. ... d6. |
|
| Nov-26-06 | | Kriegspiel: <FICSwoodpusher> Is there anything to stop White from playing like this: 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nf3 c5 4.c4
Kriegspiel
|
|
| Nov-26-06 | | jjp: Kriegspiel
I know your question wasn’t directed at me, but I am going to answer it anyway. White can play 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nf3 c5 4.c4. This position is given in Donaldson and Silman’s Accelerated Dragons as a line coming from the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon. Attempts to avoid the Maroczy’s Bind most notably 4.Qb6 do not seem to give black better wining chances then the mainlines of the Maroczy. Then again, I am using an outdated source for this analysis and there could be new developments in this line. I agree with FICSwoodpusher’s attempts to use the non-Maroczy lines of the Accelerated Dragon to form part of a repertoire for black, (he has indicated that he will only attempt to transpose into the accelerated dragon if white plays Nc3). The Maroczy’s Bind is a very drawish opening. Unless white blunders black should not be able to win. |
|
| Nov-27-06 | | Kriegspiel: <jjp> That's fine, it was really a general question to all parties (especially those involved in the recent exchange regarding this question) but I thought I might have better chances for a reply if it was directed toward one of them, and <FICSwoodpusher> had initiated the thread of discussion. It may simply be that I don't have enough experience, but for some reason openings of this sort where White has pawns on e4 and c4 but no d-pawn, don't seem to me as problematic as those where he has a united pawn front giving him flexibility in the advance of various members of a coherent line of pawns. <The Maroczy Bind is a very drawish opening. Unless White blunders Black should not be able to win.> Well, at the risk of being facile, isn't every opening a theoretical draw unless one side or the other blunders? The question is, does the opening lend itself more to a closed game and positional play, or an open game and more immediate tactical maneuvering, and which suits one's taste? The Maroczy bind is almost a middle course, because, while White has control over the d5 square, he doesn't have a full classical pawn center either. Having said that, I don't think it is necessary (or perhaps desirable) to transpose to an Accelerated Dragon in such a case -- in the further sense of the opening, that is. If Black is opening 1...g6 2...Bg7 then White has the option of the Maroczy bind regardless. So, for me it isn't a question of stopping White so much as a question of how Black is to reply. Offhand, giving myself control over d4 as well as an egress for the queen and more room for queenside development with an early ...c5 doesn't seem like such a bad idea. Kriegspiel |
|
| Nov-27-06 | | Kriegspiel: P.S. One sense in which I would be reluctant to transpose to the Accelerated Dragon is that the latter puts a knight on f6 almost immediately; whereas after (for example) 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nf3 c5 4.c4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Black has accomplished several things all of which tie together as assets: (a) He has eliminated the White pawn on d4 obstructing the diagonal of his strong fianchettoed bishop; (b) He has prevented White from getting the White queen to d4 early on (recapture with 5.Nxd4 is forced, as it would not be with ...g6 but without ...Bg7, as is the case in some versions of the hyper-accelerated Dragon); (c) Black's queen may move to c7, b6 or a5 as desired, thus working with the fianchettoed bishop in various ways. Now, at this point, to put a knight on f6 is a little like putting a pawn on e5; justified in some cases, in order to equalize, but contrary to the logic of a fianchetto opening, that logic being to narrow White's options by keeping the possibility of action along the diagonal open. Kriegspiel |
|
| Nov-27-06 | | jjp: I suppose the Maroczy’s bind is particularly drawish because black’s methods of equalizing tend to simplify the position. Exchanging a pair of minor pieces and playing b5 can easily lead to a drawn or nearly drawn heavy piece endgame. Playing a5 to create an artificial support point on c5, maneuvering a knight to that point, and playing f5 leaves black with weaknesses in the center and can liberate white’s king’s bishop. If white develops naturally, the f5 break should not even equalize. The good knight bad Bishop scenario does not seem to be realistic. This leaves playing Bxc3 when white has to recapture with a pawn. This seems to lead to a more lively game then the other options. However, white usually plays Qd2 early, which stops this option. Please note that I am trying to explain something that I have observed from playing these positions as black. I am not a particularly strong player, but I have read comments from strong players that the bind is drawish. This quote is from a GM “Against 1.e4 I used to play the Accelerated Dragon, an opening with zero winning chances as well, can you believe it” ( http://www.jeremysilman.com/chess_o...). I would be looking at the other black knight or 5…Qb6 if I were attempting to give this move order independent significance. Once Nc6 is played, an Accelerated Dragon has been reached. The king’s knight does not seem to be very flexible; Nh6 intending f5 or changing black’s pawn structure into some sort of hedgehog with e6 and d6 and putting the king’s knight on e7 are really the only other things to do with this knight. I may try my hand at some analysis of 5…Qb6 and other attempts to give this move order significance. If I do, I will post what I came up with here. |
|
| Nov-28-06 | | Kriegspiel: <jjp> I think that under these circumstances, ...Nc6 without ...Nf6 is along the lines of the Modern Defense, especially if one intends to put the king's knight elsewhere. As far as Black's winning chances, here are some stats I recently posted to the B06 page, which also starts out 1.e4 g6 (I had a hard time getting the margins justified there and probably the problem will repeat here): Here are recent Robatsch stats by year over the last four years, using games found in this database catalogued under B06. They look *good* for BLACK. 2003 2004 2005 2006(ytd)
---- ---- ---- ----
54B 77B 105B 103B
56W 86W 114W 153W
87D 56D 87D 81D
Percentages (won games by side):
2003 2004 2005 2006(ytd)
---- ---- ---- ----
35.8(B) 35.2 34.3 30.6
37.1(W) 39.3 37.3 45.4
For each of the years 2003-2005 Black is nearly at parity with White regarding won game percentages. 2006 has seen a nosedive in Black win rates. Any or all of these statistics could be interpreted as an artifact of the selection and/or classification of games included in this database. (I might also add that Eric Schiller has said that "many recent games" falling under the B06 rubric are Pterodactyls. But I don't know what "recent" means in this context, and all caveats apply, so it's anyone's guess whether that has had a good or bad influence on recent Black stats in B06 (or even a statistically significant influence). Kriegspiel
|
|
| Nov-28-06 | | Kriegspiel: <jjp> Also, for whatever it's worth, Black equalizes against Jester very quickly in this opening: 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.c4 c5 4.Nf3 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Qb6 6.Nb5 (essentially equalized here, according to Jester) 6...a6 7.Be3 Qc6 8.Nc3 (still at par). I'm not saying that this is the way to go, but I think that Black has a lot more options in a Robatsch-type opening than you suggest, and a certain amount of unexplored (or poorly explored) territory. Kriegspiel |
|
| Nov-28-06 | | Kriegspiel: <jjp> OK, here's a notable difference, found using the Opening Explorer: statistically, after 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nf3 c5 4.c4, it looks like 4...cxd4 5.Nxd4 (Maroczy Bind) is dim for Black; but if instead 4...Qa5+ Black's chances improve significantly. However, the opening does still look drawish, especially if White plays 5.Bd2; if instead White plays 5.Nc3 Black actually looks better than White, win-stat wise. Of course, the OE's win-stats seem to fluctuate in ways that are mysterious, and with each new move all that has gone before may be as chaff in the wind. But here is the page, anyway: Opening Explorer As a non-registered user, I can't take it any further, and the number of games played that way are under 100 including both of White's 5th move variants. Kriegspiel
|
|
| Nov-28-06 | | Kriegspiel: <jjp> Actually, you may be right about the Maroczy Bind situation with ...Nc6 being classified (or classifiable) as a type of Accelerated Dragon. Have a look at the page Sicilian, Accelerated Fianchetto (b37) The win stats there (overall -- I haven't checked recent stats there) are 34% White wins and 29% Black wins, which doesn't look either drawish or like Black "has no winning chances"; but, unfortunately, as soon as White plays 6.Be3 (next move) these stats change radically for the worse (from Black's perspective), and indeed seem to qualify for van der Weide's comments. So, I'm not sure how to interpret this; I'll have to take a closer look at recent B06 games to see what the difference is in Black's play, between those games in similar situations, and in the AD. Incidentally, I see no option for Black to follow up 6.Be3 with 6...e6 in the OE -- which needn't mean it isn't playable. Kriegspiel |
|
| Nov-28-06 | | Kriegspiel: <jjp> Here's a different way of handling it -- and I can't say that I understand it. Black gambits a pawn, and then -- why? -- White kindly hands it back to him. J Dworakowska vs I Rogers, 2005
Kriegspiel
|
|
| Feb-28-07 | | vik2137: I have a question. I'm considering playing against the accelerated dragon as white in this way: 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 g6 5. Nc3 Bg7 6. Be3 Nf6 7. f3 0-0 8. g4!? Does anyone know anything, or have any opinions, on this idea? Similar to the normal dragon, it prevents d5 because white responds g5, driving away the knight and capturing the pawn. One of the critical lines is if black replies 8...Qb6. White plays 9. Ncb5 a6 10. Nf5 Qd8 (Or whatever - Qa5+ Bd2) 11. Nxg7 axb5 12. Bh6. It's true that the white knight is trapped at g7, but I don't think black will have time to take advantage of this, white can immediately attack the king with h4-h5, castling queenside, etc. It's a sharp variation, but that's exactly what I want |
|
| Jul-11-20 | | Xeroxx: Wow, only 4 games in this variation. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
