If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
which is the critical main line? 4. ...Bg4? from my less than lofty perch, i find white just grinds for an advantage. i've experimented with 4. ...dxe5 5.Nxe5 c6 and spent far too much time trying to make 4. ...dxe5 5.Nxe5 Nd7 6.Nxf7 work for Black :)
By critical main line, I meant simply the position after 4.Nf3. The line that looked of remote interest to me was 4...dxe5 5.Nxe5 g6, after which play may continue 6.Bc4 c6 7.0-0 Bg7 8.Re1 (I've seen an old book by Burgess where in the line 8.Nd2 0-0 9.Ndf3 Nd7 10.Nd3 a5 11.a3 he gave 11...Bf5 as leading to a slight plus for Black) 8...0-0 9.Bb3 and now a footnote in ECO gives Kasparov-Adams, Linares 1997 which continued 9...Nd7 10.Nf3 N7f6 11.c4 and White gained a big edge eventually. Bagirov's suggestion 10...a5!? is provided, without evaluation. It's probably +/= though.
Another part of the footnote that may lend itself to comparison is 9...a5 10.a4 Be6 11.c3 Qc7 12.Nd3 Nd7 13.Nd2 Rfe8 14.Ne4 h6 +/= Godena-Kveinys, Debrecen, 1992. In all these cases I couldn't shake the feeling that Black's game was somewhat passive and still needed to be freed properly.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
I had imagined diagrams really should be shown at least for every labelled variation's starting point. I also tended to put one before a minor (unlabelled) variation was offered. It may be feasible to keep these criteria and otherwise use the 4-8 half move diagram rule you suggest, in case I or anyone else make similiar posts regarding openings/games/analysis in future, assuming there are not too many labelled variations.
I assume slow loading of diagrams is, for this thread (so far) at least, only really a problem for dial-up users, of which I assume you are one.
Btw, though I now have high speed myself, by some quirk I sometimes get 'disconnected' (though at all times while I'm on the internet I apparently have a dial tone on my phone line). Perhaps it's because we previously had a dial-up account, and it may not have been discontinued properly .
No, I'm not a dialup user. I just like pages to appear quickly. And I still find there are just too many diagrams which is actually my larger complaint.
No, I'm not a dialup user. I just like pages to appear quickly. And I still find there are just too many diagrams which is actually my larger complaint.
From my Scavenging Junkyard Openings thread:
"Originally Posted by Egidijus Zeromskis
Probably it would better to dedicate a thread to every analyzed opening, and add more diagrams"
Sadly, as the old saying goes, you can't please everyone. If I do more of these posts with multiple diagrams, I'll try to compromise by reducing the total number of diagrams, e.g. in a manner like I described in my previous reply to you.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
By critical main line, I meant simply the position after 4.Nf3. The line that looked of remote interest to me was 4...dxe5 5.Nxe5 g6, after which play may continue 6.Bc4 c6 7.0-0 Bg7 8.Re1 (I've seen an old book by Burgess where in the line 8.Nd2 0-0 9.Ndf3 Nd7 10.Nd3 a5 11.a3 he gave 11...Bf5 as leading to a slight plus for Black) 8...0-0 9.Bb3 and now a footnote in ECO gives Kasparov-Adams, Linares 1997 which continued 9...Nd7 10.Nf3 N7f6 11.c4 and White gained a big edge eventually. Bagirov's suggestion 10...a5!? is provided, without evaluation. It's probably +/= though.
Another part of the footnote that may lend itself to comparison is 9...a5 10.a4 Be6 11.c3 Qc7 12.Nd3 Nd7 13.Nd2 Rfe8 14.Ne4 h6 +/= Godena-Kveinys, Debrecen, 1992. In all these cases I couldn't shake the feeling that Black's game was somewhat passive and still needed to be freed properly.
Baburin plays 5. ...c6, so that if 6.Bc4 then he can play ...Nd7, ...N7f6, ...Bg4/e6 and not have to make a decision which diagonal to put the other bishop on.
Baburin plays 5. ...c6, so that if 6.Bc4 then he can play ...Nd7, ...N7f6, ...Bg4/e6 and not have to make a decision which diagonal to put the other bishop on.
Not sure which line in the Alekhine you mean. After my given 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 dxe5 5.Nxe5, my ECO doesn't mention 5...c6 at all.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Not sure which line in the Alekhine you mean. After my given 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 dxe5 5.Nxe5, my ECO doesn't mention 5...c6 at all.
are you sure? chessgames.com has it as the most popular line...first try was by Miles in 1995 and it has blown up in popularity since then
Mamedjarov, Baburin, Nisipeanu,among others have played it. here's a game from the recent 2010 USA Women's championship...it transposed back into your line but doesn't have to
Yep, ECO B (4th Ed., published 2002) doesn't mention 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 dxe5 5.Nxe5 c6. Nor does MCO-15 (published 2008).
ECO does have footnotes that show Baburin on the Black side of (other!?) 4.Nf3 lines in which Black plays ...c6 sooner or later.
It's possible ECO considered 4.Nf3 dxe5 5.Nxe5 c6 must/should transpose to other lines. Or they're just biased against the Alekhine's and maybe didn't do a careful job covering it, or were actually indulging in a bit of editorial fashion-steering. The editors are known to take a dim view of offbeat lines/openings, according to Nunn (I believe).
MCO-15 similarly tows the conventional wisdom line in its evaluations of various lines (i.e. the evaluation of += for this defence as a whole), though in their intro to the Alekhine's they say that this defence may pick up in popularity if a new champion for it steps forward, and it scores well in practice as it is. I might dispute the first or last part of how I summed up their intro, since in my biggest database (circa 2000) in the few top level conflicts I see there, White does very well.
If this 4.Nf3 dxe5 5.Nxe5 c6 line is considered promising for Black to equalize, or my own research later on suggests it is, then the Alekhine's might start to be of more interest to me. I'll check my databases later (they're on the other side [Windows '98] of my partitioned computer along with other chess software - my internet access is only on this [the Windows XP] half :().
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Yep, ECO B (4th Ed., published 2002) doesn't mention 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 dxe5 5.Nxe5 c6. Nor does MCO-15 (published 2008).
one of the knocks against MCO, if i remember correctly, is that often they would just give the same analyses from previous years. i have MCO-13 or 14 at home...how thick is the section on the Caro-Kann Advanced for instance in MCO-15?
ECO does have footnotes that show Baburin on the Black side of (other!?) 4.Nf3 lines in which Black plays ...c6 sooner or later.
It's possible ECO considered 4.Nf3 dxe5 5.Nxe5 c6 must/should transpose to other lines. Or they're just biased against the Alekhine's and maybe didn't do a careful job covering it, or were actually indulging in a bit of editorial fashion-steering. The editors are known to take a dim view of offbeat lines/openings, according to Nunn (I believe).
i think it doesn't have to tranpose...like i said earlier, it allows you to play ...Nd7 without allowing the (infamous) Nxf7 line...c7 is a nice hiding spot for either the knight on d5 or the king(!) depending on how much he gets chased around. if you like it and give it a shot, be sure to give me credit in your annotations :)
Yes, I got some info already from a Bucker article (provided in a link within a post on page 1 of this thread) that covers 9...Bc5 (Bucker gives 10.b4!, like Silman, in the latest Silman Splat the Lat article you gave a link to).
If you read an earlier post of mine (on page 1 of this thread) you will see that I came up with 9...Nf6 instead, with the idea if the natural 10.Re1 then 10...Kd8, which at least my puny Fritz6 seemed unable to find more than += for White (in its opinion) in the amount of time I devoted to examining it. The hope for Black is that he can avoid running into any nasty sacs by White while trying to develop. Having his knight on the ideal f6 square may help, since it covers d5 and e4. He may have to at least concede the bishop pair to White at some point, which is something concrete (besides his dislocated king position).
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
one of the knocks against MCO, if i remember correctly, is that often they would just give the same analyses from previous years. i have MCO-13 or 14 at home...how thick is the section on the Caro-Kann Advanced for instance in MCO-15?
I bought MCO-15 mainly to get DeFirmian's overall opinion on the overall theoretical status of most openings circa 2008, while hoping for some analysis or evaluations I didn't find elsewhere...I think I got my money's worth, though the binding busted badly soon after I bought the tome. The Advanced Caro-Kann has only a page of sheer analysis to it, with just 6 columns including 25 footnotes (the info for the footnotes listed on the following pages). Do remember that MCO pretends to cover all openings in one book, but covering every conceivable minor sub-variation (even some arguably popular ones) is impossible this way.
i think it [1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 dxe5 5.Nxe5 c6] doesn't have to tranpose [to other lines with ...c6] ...like i said earlier, it allows you to play ...Nd7 without allowing the (infamous) Nxf7 line...c7 is a nice hiding spot for either the knight on d5 or the king(!) depending on how much he gets chased around. if you like it and give it a shot, be sure to give me credit in your annotations :)
I looked at my more recent database yesterday and discovered 4.Nf3 dxe5 5.Nxe5 c6 is quite popular (at least between 2004 and 2007); Chessbase's opening indicies don't even mention 5...c6 on its own as a sub-variation worth noting either :). On the downside, I noticed Carlsen (as Black) only managed to draw a mere 2550 player with it. On the upside, I recall Spraggett mentioning he was taking up the Alekhine's as Black, so this 'hot' sub-variation may have something to do with it. Also, the juicy trap 6.c4 Nb4!? 7.a3? Qxd4 has caught at least one victim in my databases. It could happen easily enough in many peoples' games.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Haven't seen the Topalov game before, no. A good result for the line, and it would mean even more, perhaps, if one knew it was true that White only wanted to draw.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Here's another one for Caro-Kann players...note, i have never seen this before, i'm sure it's either heralded by theory or derided but i think it's interesting...
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 Qb6
i always used to play 3. ...dxe4 4.fxe4 e5 and always felt like i was half a move from being checkmated. i got the idea on Mark Ginsberg's blog but apparently it's been approved by a higher power...
Tweet
.
Comment