|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 12 OF 14 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-19-07 | | e4Newman: woops, i mean lsb (light square bishop) |
|
| Mar-30-07 | | Bob726: Why can't white recapture cxb3 instead of axb3? It seems safer to hold onto the kingside |
|
| Mar-30-07 | | Bob726: 
click for larger view |
|
| Mar-30-07 | | Bob726: In this picture, it seems as if black must play hxg6, if even it unportects its king along the h file because if he captured fxg6 the pawn on e6 is very, very weak. But in <Wannabe> diagram, if black plays bxb3, cxb3 dosn't weaken anything and seems to protect the king on b1 better than if he captured with his a pawn. |
|
| Apr-08-07 | | IMDONE4: <WannaBe>, being a najdorf player for years, I must say that the light squared bishop is vital for several reasons. First, it is needed to exchange for the other knight if it ever comes to d5; using the knight on f6 to exchange leaves the kingside too defenseless. Second, it has important attacking possibilities on the queenside. Third, whites e3 bishop and blacks e6 bishop are the "good bishops," u dont want to go trading them for no reason. Fourth, there are variations where blacks bishop will go to c4, force the white bishop to trade, then have the semi-open b file for his disposal. And finally, a white pawn on b3 (and possibly a white knight on a4) completely blots out black's counterplay on the queenside. Doubling white's pawns really does not do much, even if the game does go to an endgame. |
|
Apr-09-07
 | | WannaBe: Thanks everyone! |
|
May-22-07
| | WannaBe: The (%) differences between ...e5 and ...e6 are huge!!! Opening Explorer |
|
| May-22-07 | | Vash854: AdrianP, Najdorf was born 1910, not 1929. |
|
| May-24-07 | | AdrianP: <Vash> Oh, OK. Thanks. <Wannabe> Bxb3 - all the points mentioned have their force (and control of the d5 square is v. important) but the main point is that after cb, although the pawn structure looks weak, it is all but impregnable in terms of an attack on the king. It is counterintuitive but this structure is even stronger than pawns on a2, b2, c2 - Black will not in the near future get a half-open file and white can contest the c-file. Meanwhile, White's kingside attack rages unabated. |
|
| May-26-07 | | tonsillolith: Is there a difference in name between the e6 Najdorf and the e5 Najdorf? Are there common terms for all Sicilians where black plays e5 as opposed to e6 or vice-versa or e6 and eventually e5, regardless of having played a6? |
|
May-26-07
 | | paulalbert: <tonsillolith> Naming systems of openings do get very confusing because of transpositions. I consider e5 to be true Najdorf because I think idea of a6 was to keep N off b5 after attack by e5. e6 leads more to Scheveningen type positions. In fact if you play e6 on move 5 and then immediately a6 on move 6 it gets classified as Scheveningen: See Gligoric vs. Najdorf 1946 game. I guess the real point is that to understand openings and opening theory as GMs do ( and I'm nowhere near that description ) you must understand the purpose of each move and the nuances of the exact move order. Mere memorization does not get very far against a player with geater understanding. Paul Albert |
|
| Jul-22-07 | | notyetagm: Does anyone know where I can find more information about the line <6 h2-h3!?> against the Sicilian Najdorf, the so-called <Adams Attack>?
click for larger viewAn SOS article from New In Chess magazine that describes this line is exactly what I would be looking for. Thanks.
|
|
| Mar-05-08 | | Whitelouts: My opponent played 9...d5 in the English attack, basically exchanging off a load of pieces and going for the draw. It doesnt seem such a bad idea and I cant find an obvious refutation. Anyone have any ideas? The line is:1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 e5 7.Nb3 Be7 8. f3 Nbd7 9.Qd2 d5 10. exd5 Nxd5 11. Nxd5 Qxd5 12. Qxd5 Bxd5 |
|
| Apr-24-08 | | KingG: <Whitelouts> I assume you meant 8...Be6 instead of 8...Nbd7.
click for larger viewI think the problem with this is after 13.0-0-0 Black must lose one of his bishops after 13...Be6 14.Nc5 or 13...Bc6 14.Na5. Alternatively Black can play 13...Bxb3. So White has a slight lead in development, control of the open d-file, and two Bishops in a fairly open position. This must give White a significant advantage in this endgame. It would take a strange person to play the Najdorf only to simplify into a much worse endgame in the hope of maybe getting a draw after a lot of suffering. |
|
| Apr-25-08 | | MaxxLange: <Whitelouts> are all those exchanges forced? |
|
| Sep-08-08 | | Funicular: Funny thing, najdorf and fischer are not among the list of practitioners |
|
| Sep-08-08 | | RookFile: Excellent point Funicular. |
|
| Sep-13-08 | | Cactus: To me 6.a4 is white's most logical move in this position. You prevent one of blacks basic plans with ...a6, that is, to play ...b5. If black plays 6...Qc7, you play 7.f4, with an improved 6.f4 variation. If black plays 6...e5, then you have something like 6.Be3, but with the option of putting your bishop on a more aggressive post. And if black plays 6...e6 or 6...Nc6, then you've got a good position, and you'll probably know the variation better than him, which is a big plus. |
|
| Sep-30-08 | | kingnemesis: hi i want to use the adams attack when i face the sicilian najdorf.problem is what will be white's best move if black plays 6...h5 to stop white's standard 7.g4?thanks |
|
| Sep-30-08 | | MaxxLange: <Cactus> 6.a4 is logical, sure, but it hasn't scored that well in GM level chess. Down in the fish tank, though, any playable system that you study and believe in can work..club players are often booked up in a few main lines, but not in the sidelines. I won some nice games in the B class really bluffing with 6. f4 against the Najdorf, for example. I had some model Tal games in mind, and some preparation, but I had no idea of the theory after moves like 6....Qb6. Fischer won a game against GM Najdorf with 6.h3, of all things...Shabalov's 6. Rg1, also preparing g4, is worth a try, too. 6.f4 is not an obscure line theoretically, but these guys had never seen it, you could tell. |
|
| Sep-30-08 | | Cactus: <MaxxLange> Good point. But what used to happen in all my Najdorf games (I played 6.Be3) was that I'd develop my queenside pieces, castle, and maybe even start to develop, and then just when I was ready to attack, I realise that I need to defend my queenside. In the end, I never get my attack off the ground. With 6.a4, that doesn't happen, so I'm quite happy. |
|
| Oct-30-08 | | hrvyklly: <WannaBe: Makes you wonder, why black doesn't play Bxb3 and double white's pawns...> Well the knight on b3 isn't really doing anything offensively, and the bishop on e6 is there to guard against White's bishop on c4, and/or to swap itself off for a White knight landing on d5. |
|
| Oct-30-08 | | hrvyklly: <MaxxLange: <Cactus> 6.a4 is logical, sure, but it hasn't scored that well in GM level chess. Down in the fish tank, though, any playable system that you study and believe in can work..club players are often booked up in a few main lines, but not in the sidelines.> Agreed. At GM level, after 6.a4 Black could switch to a Dragon or something, but at our patzer it's quite a dangerous move. My preference is to play 6...Nc6 aiming for a Boleslavsky-type of position (weak b4 square after 6.a4). |
|
| Nov-07-08 | | Cactus: Well put. |
|
| Mar-26-09 | | pankajdaga: noob question: What is the point of a6 for black? Is it simply to take away the b5 square from the knight or the white bishop? |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 12 OF 14 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
