Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

page 1 of 56; games 1-25 of 1,379  Game   Result Moves Year Event/Locale Opening 1. Euwe vs G Fontein   1-0 40 1924 DD-ASC E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 2. Rubinstein vs O Antze   1-0 27 1926 Hannover E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 3. Euwe vs Alekhine   ½-½ 41 1926 Alekhine - Euwe Training Match E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 4. Nimzowitsch vs Marshall 0-1 30 1927 London E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 5. Flohr vs E Richter 1-0 41 1928 Kautsky mem 5th E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 6. Capablanca vs Nimzowitsch ½-½ 39 1928 Bad Kissingen E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 7. Capablanca vs Nimzowitsch ½-½ 15 1928 Berlin E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 8. G Norman vs Colle   0-1 29 1928 Hastings 1928/29 E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 9. R P Michell vs G Norman   1-0 26 1928 Hastings 1928/29 E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 10. G Norman vs S Takacs   0-1 63 1929 Hastings 1928/29 E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 11. Anderson / Stockwell vs Alekhine 0-1 35 1929 Consultation game E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 12. R Cintron vs Kevitz   0-1 42 1929 Bradley Beach E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 13. J van den Bosch vs Olland   1-0 52 1929 NED-ch E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 14. A Becker vs Yates 1-0 35 1929 Karlsbad E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 15. Nimzowitsch vs E Canal ½-½ 49 1929 Karlsbad E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 16. Rubinstein vs Przepiorka   ½-½ 33 1929 Budapest E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 17. Rubinstein vs E Steiner 1-0 33 1929 Budapest E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 18. Rubinstein vs G A Thomas   1-0 33 1929 Budapest E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 19. Przepiorka vs Capablanca   ½-½ 32 1929 Budapest E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 20. K Havasi vs Capablanca 0-1 33 1929 Budapest E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 21. Rubinstein vs E Canal   ½-½ 54 1929 Budapest E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 22. Rubinstein vs Colle 0-1 46 1929 Budapest E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 23. Flohr vs Opocensky   1-0 28 1930 Prague (Czech Republic) E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 24. Rauzer vs S Von Freymann   1-0 52 1930 Tournament E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation 25. Kmoch vs M Monticelli 0-1 43 1930 San Remo E34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation  page 1 of 56; games 1-25 of 1,379

REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)

Oct-27-03    Benjamin Lau: This variation has become a little more popular in recent years. I adopted it because I couldn't stand watching white play 4. e4 after 4. Qc2 o-o in the classical Nimzo. After all, the whole stategy of the Nimzo is prophylaxis on the e4 square, so why would anyone let white play it so easily? Anyway, going bad to my previous statement, this version has gotten more popular because of the following line: 4. Qc2 d5. 5. cxd5 Qxd5!? (a move that lets the black queen come into the center without being subject to easy harassment due to the pinned knight, but means that if the pin is threatened via a3, black must cede the bishop advantage.) 6. Nf3 Qf5!? (if white exchanges queens with 7. Qxf5, he loses a lot of attacking chances and opens up both the e and d files for black, giving black free piece play. 7. Qb3 instead means that white loses a tempo and allows the black queen to occupy the deadly spot on which she sits.) Oct-27-03    Bears092: Wouldn't this lead to an inferior version of the QGD Exchange (ie. the Bishop at b4)? In the exchange, and the positional line (Qc2), the bishop should stay home on the Kingside. Oct-27-03    Benjamin Lau: Bears092, I don't see any reason why the bishop is better at e6 for example than at b4. Why must the bishop stay home on the kingside when it can do so much more on the queenside? I don't play the QGD exchange anymore, so maybe I'm missing something, but I can't seem to comprehend your post. Oct-27-03    Bears092: Opening Explorer Not a single case of the bishop swinging queenside. Oct-27-03    Benjamin Lau: <Bears092> So that means it must be bad- just because it never gets played? With that kind of mentality, it's a surprise that new lines are ever invented at all. Anyway, I think that Bb4 is simply not thematic in the variation of QGD which you are discussing. I don't think it is necessarily bad. Also, you still haven't proved that Bb4 is bad or that the bishop should stay on the kingside, just letting you know. Oct-27-03    Benjamin Lau: It's also worth noting that in the example you cite, the pawn structure is quite different as well, and thus, the play is not the same as in the Nimzo. There are a few other differences, but this is the main one. Oct-27-03    Bears092: <So that means it must be bad- just because it never gets played?> You'd think if it was good someone of GM strength would play it quite regularly by now. Oct-27-03    Benjamin Lau: <Bears092> Two main points: (1) First, you still have not managed to prove it is inferior, neither through concrete variations nor through positional analysis and evaluation. Instead, you rely on the tired, old, and utterly lethargic argument of authority. Can't you come up with something better than that? If we blindly did only the things that players better than us did, where would we be now? (2) Even the example you cite to show this variation of the Nimzo might be inferior doesn't resemble the variation enough to matter. By the way, Kasparov and Kramnik recently began testing out this variation for their repertoire, so it can't be too bad. Oct-28-03    Diggitydawg: : <BL> I admire the spirit of experimenting with a new opening. This question can only be resolved with OTB play, so please let us know how you progress with it. Oct-28-03    Benjamin Lau: As I said before, the line I mentioned is not new at all, it's just gotten more popular lately. I've been doing pretty well with it, considering that I switched over from 4. Qc2 o-o a while ago. Oct-29-03    Open Defence: In fact after cxd5 exd5 Bg5 h6 the game can become very sharp and complicated, look at the Kasparov-Short match for example, no doubt Gary is an absolutely fabulous player so he won (though I haven't checked out the games in a long time so if he didnt .. oops) The Qxd5 line was used by Anand sucessfully in the Kasparov-Anand match and Kasparov played e4 then on as he wasnt making headway against the Nimzo, in fact many recommend the d5 line in the classical variation as it has less "book" than c5 or 0-0 (correct me if I am wrong) Jan-05-06    Sneaky: I agree that one ought not spend too much time analyzing the product of blitz games, but I played one today that is worth a second look. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 <Very few games feature this move. Normal is ...exd5 or even ...Qxd5 6.e4 Nxc3 7.bxc3 click for larger view 7...Qxd4!? <This move took my by surprise. Have I fallen for some trap?> 8.Qa4+! <As far as I can tell, this is the only way to preserve an advantage> Nc6 9.Qxb4! Nxb4 10.cxd4 Nc2+ 11.Ke1 <Kd2 might have been better> Nxa1 12.Bb2 click for larger view and I went on to win in 20 more moves. I'll spare you the moves, but an interesting nuance of my play was that I left the knight on a1 for a long time before bothering to recapture it. Anyhow, is White really better here? Did I have stronger moves earlier in the game? What is the consensus for 5...Nxd5? See Opening Explorer for more info. Jul-12-09    RoseJunkie: I realize the argument was years ago, but <bears092> Bb4 in the QGD exchange is not really played in conjunction with c6 but more often with c5. So obviously you won't find very many games in the variation you posted (since you've already inserted c6). I Sokolov vs Aronian, 2006 is a pretty neat example of play.

NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community! If you already have an account, you should login now.

Please observe our posting guidelines: No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any gratuitous name-calling of any members—including Admin and Owners—or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. Nothing in violation of United States law. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times. See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a Moderator. NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific opening and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.

Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC