|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Feb-13-04 | | PaulKeres: Is this a kind of improved Trompovosky Attack (can't spell), that is 1. d4 Nf6 2. Bb5, where Black usually goes for 2...Ne4, but here this isn't such a strong move? Any views here please? |
|
| Feb-13-04 | | marcus13: Do you mean 2.Bg5 ?? I dont think this is an improvement beacuse white c pawn is blocked. I think we need a more expert view of this opening, since i am only a weak player. |
|
| Feb-14-04 | | PaulKeres: <marcus13 Do you mean 2.Bg5 ?? I dont think this is an improvement beacuse white c pawn is blocked. I think we need a more expert view of this opening>
Yes, I mean Bg5, sorry about that. I am only a patzer as well.
Does the c pawn normally get advanced in the Trompowski Attack? I know 1. d4 games often follow with c4 for white at sometime, but is this true of Trompowski Attack as well. I need to check really, looking at some games would quickly sort that. |
|
| Feb-14-04 | | marcus13: I have a big questio, what is a patzer? |
|
| Feb-14-04 | | Catfriend: We all:) Well, most of us! Patzer is a very weak player |
|
| Feb-14-04 | | marcus13: You don't seem to be a Patzer. |
|
| Feb-15-04 | | PaulKeres: <marcus13: You don't seem to be a Patzer. > Sorry for the confusion over the Patzer thing. It is easy to appear better than you are with big words, believe me I am a Patzer, but thats Ok.
I'm a little confused by your profile, are you French, or do you like playing the French opening?
As for this opening, I like the element of surprise in 2. Nc3, exactly because one is not expected to block the c pawn, but followed with 3. Bg5, it seems you get quite a different game. |
|
| Feb-15-04 | | Catfriend: I know I AM a patzer for sure! and agaisnt the french it's nice to play 3.♗e3!? |
|
| Feb-17-04 | | PaulKeres: < Catfriend: I know I AM a patzer for sure! and agaisnt the french it's nice to play 3.e3!? >. You mean after the standard mainline 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 I guess. How did we get into all this French talk from the Sicilian anyway? Have I missed something / some kibitzers elsewhere? |
|
| Mar-28-04 | | ruylopez900: This seems a little weak since Black blocks in his c-pawn. I would suggest the following line 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c6 and then playing out some pieces...make him pay for that blocked c-pawn! |
|
| May-07-04 | | morphyvsfischer: After 3...Nbd7! (...Bf5 is more natural, but 4 f3 makes Black lose some time while White makes his center and gets a slight plus), The agressive line (4 f3) was slaughtered by Tal (see an Alburt vs. Tal game), and the positional line (4 Nf3) gives Black a microscopic edge because of the blocked c pawn. One line I like is 4 Nf3 g6 5 Qd2 (White wants the pawn at e4, so he tries to delay e3 as much as possible. Queenside Castling is also where the king should head) Bg7 6 0-0-0 0-0 7 e3 b6! (this is mainly to prepare ...c5, not fianchetto the Queen Bishop. If possible, it belongs on e6.) 8 Bd3 (Be2 is possible, but this makes more sense, preparing e4) c5 9 e4 e6 and Black has a slight plus with his better placed pieces and better hold on the center while White's dark-squared Bishop is going to be missed on the Qside. |
|
May-08-04
 | | tpstar: <morphyvsfischer> Great analysis! It's worth pointing out that 10. e5 needs to be met with 10 ... cd - 11. exf6 dxc3 12. Qxc3 Bxf6, or 12. fxg7?! cxd2+ 13. Rxd2 f6 14. gxf8=Q+ Qxf8 with R&B for Q&P. But how should Black handle 10. ed and the Nf6 is now pinned? 10. ed cd 11. Nxd4 e5 12. Nc6 looks very good for White (12 ... Qc7 13. Nb5; 12 ... Qe8 13. Rhe1). Here's that Tal game: Alburt vs Tal, 1972 |
|
| Nov-15-04 | | joeyam30: win29.3%??! |
|
| Dec-22-04 | | zorro: Can Anyone help me out with this...Thing? Especially 3...Nbd7 4. f3 lines. <morphyvsfischer> I would hardly say that <The agressive line (4 f3) was slaughtered by Tal> since 8. ef6 doesn't seem White's best. Morozevich played this line more than once in the '90s going 4. f3 c6 5. Qd2 instead of 5. e4 leaving the possibility of e3 open. What do you think is best response to 4. f3 for black, 4...c6, 4...c5 or 4...e6?
Thank you! |
|
| Jan-12-05 | | MidnightDuffer: It looks like an awesome layout; but look how often White Loses above? I had to check out the percentages, when a review at amazon for Gufeld's book on this says it only wins 25% of the time (with the book stating this)! Spassky played it and I've seen two of his successes; but if this is the winning percentage; who might use it? Then again, maybe a lesser used line, means it was not played by true proponents of the system. |
|
| Jan-16-05 | | Rosewood: I've played both sides of the Veresov opening 3 wins with White and 7 wins with black and 2 draws in tournament. I'd rather be on the blackside of the Veresov :) all possible replies
he's just fine and can equalize anything white can muster. |
|
| Sep-02-05 | | Capafan9: Personally I have always liked the black side of this opening, and i do play the trompowski on a rare occasion. I really dont like the Nc3 move first because it blocks the c-pawn. In my opinion this is a worse form of the trompowski because whites options are far less numerous involving the movement of the c pawn. And i sometimes prefer nbd2 in some lines of the trompowski but that is just my opinion, and id really appreciate some concrete analysis from someone more familiar with this position. |
|
| Jan-02-06 | | morphyvsfischer: <zorro> I like 4 ...c5 better now, as it doesn't allow White to grab all the center for himself, and after 5...cxd4, Black can play ...e5 depending on White's 5th move. However, 3...c5!? seems to be a very ambitious try, and my personal favorite. 4 Bxf6 gxf6 5 e4 seems forced, due to Black wanting to get an improved version of 4...c5, as the knight can go to c6 now. Refuting my old analysis: the queenside is not a good place for the king. Ever notice that Black's play almost always seems to come over there? Also, Bd3 and Nf3 can be met by ...cxd4 and ...e5! if White played e3, gaining the advantage. All in all, Black has several good replies to the Veresov (and doesn't need to have much theroetical knowledge, as even 3 ...Bf5 seems to be fine for Black), and as such the Trompowsky, the Torre, and the London System (Bf4) seem better ways of avoiding the main line Indians (the London in particular causes me a few problems). |
|
| Feb-19-06 | | Lampshadow: I have just recently started to play this opening and one thing I like about it, is that it is rather transpositional. It can easily transpose into French or less easily into Caro-Kan or Pirc (if Black plays 1...Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.d4 etc.) I used to be a e4 player and these were the only openings I liked to play against. ruylopez900 suggested the following line: 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c6, but then white can transpose to Caro-Kan with 3.e4. My first try with Veresov was against a 2200 player and it started like morphyvsfischer suggested, that is 1 d4 Nf6 2 Nc3 d5 3 Bg5 Nbd7 4 Nf3 g6 5 Qd2 but here my opponent played 5...Ne4! which I think is the best move. After 6 Nxe4 dxe4 I had to retreat my knight back to g1 and eventually lost the game (7 Ne5 is dubious because of 7...Nb6 and the knight on e5 is trapped altough it might probably be saved with 8 a4). I have since played it in 3 other games and won all them, one transposed into French, another into French-like position and the third was something irregular. |
|
Feb-19-06
 | | redlance: Jude Acers,plays this opening 24-7,
at his table in New Orleans |
|
| Mar-06-06 | | LluviaSean: Wow...please play this opening against me when white!! |
|
Mar-07-06
 | | Chnebelgrind: A nice game with this opening was played by Smerdon against Lane in the Australian Championship 2006. See http://www.ozchess2006.com/results.... (Championship --> pairings --> round 7 -->view games) |
|
| May-05-06 | | DeepBlade: interresting piece of information.
The Richter-Veresov Attack is a chess opening. It is characterized by the moves 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 (see algebraic notation). Along with the Colle System and Torre Attack, the Richter-Veresov attack is one of the more common branches of the Queen's Pawn Game. After the Black reply 3...Bf5, <the German master Kurt Richter>, after whom the opening is half-named, <usually replied 4.f3>, hoping to build up a large pawn centre. <Soviet player Gavril Veresov>, on the other hand, usually <played 4.Bxf6>, damaging the Black pawn structure. Today, these two variations are known as the Richter Variation and Veresov Variation respectively. The opening has never been very popular at the top level, but various prominent players have employed it occasionally. In 1959, for example, David Bronstein played the Richter Variation against Veresov himself; the game was drawn in 16 moves. The more famous Ruy Lopez opening looks like mirrored Richter-Veresov Attack. Of course, since the d-pawn is protected from the start by the queen, the dynamics of play are quite different. Source: Wikipedia |
|
| May-21-07 | | ongyj: <Lampshadow>I've been looking into this opening recently, and I'd like to recommend the simple 4.Qd2[For 0-0-0 as soon as possible] or 4.f3[To possibly save the dark Bishop and put a foothold on e4.] |
|
| May-21-07 | | ongyj: Against 3...Bf5 4.Qd2 looks fine. Of course White doesn't try to play e4 at all cost, but "act according to the situation" and retain castling possibilities on both sides. Say 4...Nc6[Are both players playing 0-0-0 ?] 5.e3 and now if 5...Nb4 White has 6.Bb5+ Though of course 5.e3 can't save the dark suqare Bishop if Black plays 5...a6 |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
