|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Oct-04-03 | | refutor: does anyone know why larsen's name was associated with this opening as well? i realize that bronstein played this line quite a bit, but larsen only played 6 games, and had a negative score! http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches... |
|
| Dec-20-03 | | rochade18: Bronsteins 16 games aren't much either, seems like this variation is not that popular. Castling long makes it too risky. |
|
Apr-19-04
 | | Gypsy: Actually, Bronstein was very feared in this variation. Most of his oponents diverged early. (There were whole tournaments where nobody even played 1.e4 to him.) At one point, this variation was named after Nimzowich, like all the rest of the opening theory :-). Then, I guess, an advertising agency thought that there was a time for new branding. Historically in this variation, Nimzowich played first two rather dim games to Leonhardt and then one fine game to Lasker. But Lasker escaped with a draw. Thus the first realy successful use of this variation comes from Duras, who, in a competely modern treatment of it, destroyed Bogolubov. Unfortunately, that was one of the last competitive games Duras ever played. (The Duras game is chronologically younger than the Leonhardt-Nimzowich games but older than the Lasker-Nimzowich game). Maybe because Duras was a hero in Prague, Czech masters used the variation with good success and a reasonable frequency (Pachman, Hort).
But Bronstein realy is a great label to have on the variation. And Larsen? Well he is a markee player and he did win a fine game against Spassky with it... Bronstein/Larsen is a structural gambit, where structure is traded for open lines. Its a kind of king-side Benko. If you like to attack the king and if you have the skills and imagination of Bronstein, Larsen, or at least Duras, this may be a great weapon for you. |
|
| May-11-04 | | ruylopez900: It seems quite interesting. White could definitely get caught in some ugly traps if he's not careful. |
|
| May-12-04 | | ruylopez900: For those wondering how to play AGAINST this opening, checkout Alenrama's collection of wins against it. Game Collection: Caro-Kann, Bronstein-Larsen Variation (B16) |
|
| May-12-04 | | BiLL RobeRTiE: I heard somewhere that a White setup with g3 and O-O as in Tal vs Bronstein, 1982 is very strong against the Bronstein-Larsen Variation, even a 'refutation' of sorts. Blocking the half-open g-file and pointing the White bishop at the Black king's queenside residence certainly seems like a reasonable idea. After 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nf6 5. Nxf6+ gxf6 6. c3 Bf5 7. Nf3 White wins well over 50% of games where he plays g3 on the next move (see Opening Explorer). |
|
| May-12-04 | | ruylopez900: I was conmsidering playing this in a few skittles games, any tips from players of this line? I already know some basics, just any fine points? |
|
May-13-04
| | Gypsy: First, <ruylopez900> you need to know how you'd handle Advance Variation, second how you'd handle Panov-Botvinnik. (Bronstein had to play a lot of Panov; few would face him in Bronstein-Larsen.) Third thing to know is that neither of the kings realy has a safe haven. Black can go K-side, Q-side, or stay in the center; none of the three places is realy bad, none is realy good. White king should not stay in the center, but both Q-side or K-side can colapse on him fast. Fourth, recent books (e.g., Gallagher) started to recomend g3 Bg2 0-O for White. So figure a couple of plans against this structure. Definitely look at MChess vs Bronstein, 1994
for some good ideas and at Tal vs Bronstein, 1982
for some bad ones. (If black goes 0-0-0 and White bishop is on g2, it seems suicidal to push c6-c5.) Using the h-pawn as a battering ram is a naively simple, but often effective plan. There are other, more convoluted approaches, too. Although essentially attacking the king, you probably will want to engage on the whole board. Good luck, have fun, and let us know how it goes! |
|
| May-13-04 | | ruylopez900: <Gypsy> alright, thanks for the indepth info :D an I didn't even have to give Everyman Chess $25.00 for it hehe. An update soon (tho the Panov shouldn't be too hard since that is my current system as White against the Caro-Kann) |
|
| Aug-22-04 | | ruylopez900: <Update> Well it's been a while, I don't think this is really going to wrok since around here no one will play through this line, everyone plays something else, so I guess it's back to the Sicilian... |
|
| Aug-22-04 | | dragon40: <ruylopez900> Sorry, but I didnt see the previous postings until recently. I favor either the classical Caro (4..Bf5 or the Korchnoi Variation 4...ef6). The main problem with the Bronstein line is that open G file does look appetizing for Black, but if White plays a cople of simple preventative moves, it really renders that horrid pawn structure Black incurs to be a total liability and not many players with the black pieces want to endure that into the endgame!
I have always been a fan of the Caro with the black pieces, Sicilian is too analyzed and always being played...it stinks to "have to have" the most current issue of NIC or an Informant to play a variation of a Sicilian in a chess game ( to me, at least)!
Neil McDonald, in his chapter on this variation does give it praise, saying it deserves to be seen more in International competitions..but specific variations can be very sticky and very dynamic for both sides..I think it does well for Black when the opponent is perhaps lower rated and not familiar with the key points of the variation...it gets a little more complicated when the White pieces know what the "proper strategy" is against it. |
|
Oct-16-04
 | | offramp: I used to play this variation regularly as black. One thing I came to realise was this it was very useful to play the Q♘ to b6, then 0-0-0 and play ♔b8 and ♖d8. I then had the choice of playing the ♘b6 to either d5 (to attack) or c8 (for defence).
This is a good line to play against computers but they don't fall for that ♙h3x♗g4 trick any more than humans do. I also used to like to play ...♕c7 as early as possible; I noticed that once white plays ♗f4 black's attacking chances are severely reduced. |
|
| Feb-09-05 | | suenteus po 147: I once saw <ray keene> write that 6.c3 was the toughest move to have to respond to in the Caro-Kann/Bronstein-Larsen. Looking over my game with Vigorito in the simul way back when I see that he did in fact play that against me. What makes 6.c3 so challenging to respond to? is it because of the support it gives to d4 while opening the file for the queen's bishop? |
|
Feb-10-05
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: suenteus brings up a good question. 6.c3 is a high-class waiting move. It usefully bolsters the d-pawn, does not allow 6...Bg4, and prevents ...Qa5 with check. But the real beauty of 6.c3 is this: White doesn't know where to place his/her minor pieces, and neither does Black. For example, if White plays 6.Nf3, Black can respond with ...Bg4 and/or ...h7-h5. And where is the best square for the Bf1--c4, d3, or e2? So White makes this useful c3 move and then challenges Black to do something. Everything Black chooses allows White to know exactly where to post his minors. Black can equalize with care (lots of care), but doesn't have the usual tactical chances in this line. |
|
Feb-10-05
| | Gypsy: <An Englishman> Very clear and convincing. With a bit of a poetic license: 6.c3 puts Black in an opening zugzwang. |
|
| Feb-10-05 | | suenteus po 147: <An Englishman> Good evening to you, sir. Thank you for the helpful insight into the question of 6.c3 and its advantages for white. I will have to start working on variations against 6.c3 as I still plan to incorporate this line into my defensive repetoire. I now knoe the goal is determining where I want white to develop his minor pieces in response to my sixth move. |
|
| Feb-10-05 | | whiskeyrebel: There's a Caro-Kann book written by Neil McDonald (I believe it was published in 2002) that discusses the strategic goals for both sides of this line better than a few other CK books I own. |
|
Feb-10-05
| | Gypsy: < whiskeyrebel: There's a Caro-Kann book written by Neil McDonald ... > Good to know that. I just recently got his "Benko Gambit" simply because it was the best opening manual I ever run across. |
|
| Feb-10-05 | | dragon40: <whiskeyrebel> you are right, the name of the book is "Main Line Caro-Kann" and it is a really well written work!
It explains all of the main variations very wll, plenty of games and reasons as to why the opening variations are played the way they are, and good moves/bad moves as well! It is one of the best books on the Caro out there now, in my oppinion! |
|
| Mar-15-05 | | Basqueknight: Ive recently taken up the Caro-Kann and after about of month of playing it i like this line best. Sure the early g3 causes black to rethink his plan but it doesnt make blacks opening bad its just more posistional than it was before. I think the people who say sure it works on people more if they dont know the plans but DUH!! so does any opening. I used to play the frech and on USCL I was surprised how many 1700s i could take down with it when i was only a 1300is player. But now my new love is this line in the caro-kann most likely because when i did play the french i played a burn gxf6 and i loved that too. either way i think that this line while not as popular as other lines in th caro-kann is respectable none the less and anyone who disagrees can look me up on uscl and ill show you a thing or two. My tag is BasqueKnight there too. |
|
Apr-07-05
 | | keypusher: Here is a really nice example of this defense from the 1984 US championship (not in the database for some reason) where Seirawan just demolishes Peters (game 3, scroll down): http://folk.uio.no/vahansen/victor/...
It inspired me to take up this variation, with disastrous results. Some of us just aren't meant to play with doubled pawns. |
|
| Aug-01-05 | | Giancarlo: The variation in itself is very risky for Black. Personally I think that this particular line is in contradiction to the direct principles of Caro-Kann play, which is to maintain a favourable end-game pawn structure. What it also does is make it impossible or dangerous(!) for KS castling. Again, a Caro-Kann principle for Black's side. I think it is no surprise there are not a whole lot of games on it. I'm sure if it was sound, we would have seen Karpov play it more than a few ;-) |
|
Aug-01-05
| | offramp: 6.c3 is the killer move for white. I have a feeling that the best reply might be 6...h5. |
|
Aug-02-05
| | An Englishman: Good Evening: offramp, it might be more accurate to say that *at this time* 6.c3 is the most challenging move for Black. You know how theory keeps changing. Botvinnik's original interpretation of the CK-BL was an odd one, but effective for him: ...Bf5, ...Bg7 and 0-0. Maybe this would work vs. 6.c3? My remedy was always 6...Bf5; 7.Nf3 (or g3),Qd5!?, which was good for sterile equality, but offered almost no winning chances. I've noticed that 6...Nd7 has excellent results, but I've looked at some of the games and I doubt that the Knight move was the reason. |
|
Aug-02-05
| | offramp: Actually I think that when I have faced 6.c3 - and it has not been often - I have played 6...Qc7. I think this is a good move because it stops white putting his bishop on f4. I think c7 is definitely the best square for the Q. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
