chess related :)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: P.S.

    Originally posted by Craig Sadler View Post
    i really dislike the black side of the exchange variation...maybe i should just bite the bullet and learn to take on the exchange? thoughts?
    I suspect you may dislike the Exchange Lopez as Black if you agree with Nigel Davies' opinion in his book 'play 1.e4 e5!':

    "From Black's perspective the main problem has been generating counterplay; all too often he finds himself in a miserable and rather passive endgame with few winning chances".

    If you decide to take the bull by the horns after all, but are stuck for what to do as Black against the Exchange Lopez, Davies' recommendation for Black after the standard 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0-0 is 5...Qf6, which he says Beliavsky and Adams have used to obtain the kind of active counterplay unheard of in most of the standard lines.

    The standard lines Davies refers to would probably be 5...Qd6, and above all those starting with 5...f6, the latter move being the most reliable way for Black to formally equalize. Looking at these two moves myself, I wouldn't rule out playing for a win with them as Black.

    Other moves that catch my eye, looking at just the results of some of my database games, are 5...Bg4 (and if 6.h3 Bh5!?, which if memory serves I think Carlsen beat someone with), and 5...Bd6 6.d4 exd4 7.Qxd4 f6 (and if 8.Be3 Be6 9.Nbd2 Qe7!? [or even first 8...Qe7!?]).

    After 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 moves other than 5.0-0 are considered fairly insipid in theory. For example, 5.d4 exd4 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 (which is a tempo up for Black in a theoretically also harmless line [5.0-0 Qf6 6.d4 exd4 7.Qxd4 Qxd4]), though Lasker did famously beat Capa with it. However nowadays a book on the Lopez will tell you how Black should have played more actively later.

    Perhaps you are reluctant to play the Berlin Lopez instead (rather than 3.Bb5 a6), if you finally reject allowing an Exchange Lopez (or not), because play may seem similar to an Exchange Lopez in the mainline of the Berlin. However in the mainline, 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Nxe4 5.d4 Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 Nf5 8.Qxd8+ Kxd8, Black has not spent a move on ...a6, and White's dark-squared B is unhappy with the White pawn stuck on e5 indefinitely. Not only that, but the advancement of the e-pawn makes it harder for White to break through with his kingside pawn majority, since the f5 square is more under Black's control. It's true Black has lost castling rights, but that is not necessarily much of a drawback, although any time spent later relocating the Black K might matter somewhat.
    Last edited by Kevin Pacey; Monday, 16th November, 2009, 10:23 PM.
    Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
    Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Ideas for Non-Big Theory

      For non-major theory I picked the following 2 books

      1)The Black Lion-Van Reekom/Jansen(New In Chess-2008)
      1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.d4 Nbd7 followed by 4...e5.
      This move order can transpose into a Philidor or if white plays 1.d4/2.c4 this structure will arrive at an Old Indian both of which are not major theory but are becoming more popular.

      2)The Flexible French-Moskalenko(New In Chess 2008)
      Full of games and ideas in the French defence using not quite main lines.

      Both are excellent books. The Black Lion has the coolest cover though by far.

      Hope this helps.

      Mike Yip

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Ideas for Non-Big Theory

        Originally posted by Michael Yip View Post
        For non-major theory...
        1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.d4 Nbd7 followed by 4...e5.
        This move order can transpose into a Philidor or if white plays 1.d4/2.c4 this structure will arrive at an Old Indian both of which are not major theory but are becoming more popular.
        Craig may be interested in using 1...e5 after 1.e4 partly because it gives White the chance to play second-rate stuff like the Bishop's Opening. He could play a Phildor's Defence, as you recommend allowing transposition to by your 1.e4 d6 etc. move order. The Philidor only allows one way for White to get a theoretical edge in ECO, the last time I looked, if memory serves, so it might take minimal repair work to try to make the Philidor viable in Craig's eyes, if he cares about theoretical verdicts. Not many 'traps' for White to fall into though :).

        I used to own an old book on the Old Indian, but both it and ECO indicated that White had a several routes to a slight plus. Again, not many traps for White, afaik. Maybe the theory has changed, or maybe Craig can eventually plug all those theoretical holes with repair work. For example, I keep playing 1.e4 Nc6 and 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nc6 as Black in spite of all the routes White is supposed to have to an edge according to most books. Not that I fully trust all my repair work, especially since few big shots play these defences regularly nowadays. Repair work that incorporates actual games, backed up by (computer) analysis is of course the most reliable, especially if one is not at least a master.

        Originally posted by Michael Yip View Post
        The Flexible French-Moskalenko(New In Chess 2008)
        Full of games and ideas in the French defence using not quite main lines.
        I've checked this book out and I've seen lots of stuff here that would catch out a lot of opponents not aware of Moskalenko's games and analysis. However, cross referencing with other books that I have, there are some lines in ECO, for example, that Moskalenko does not provide an absolutely airtight remedy for, but the reader could attempt his own repair work in such cases. Perhaps Moskalenko is holding back, or simply disagrees that Black is worse in these cases.

        On the other hand, something tells me Craig is not a French player. It's an opening which players, especially below IM level, seem to love or hate with a passion (mostly it seems to be the latter). I've only seen Craig's posts admitting to playing Sicilians, Alekhines, Caro-Kanns and Double King Pawn. The French has been conspicuously absent ;).
        Last edited by Kevin Pacey; Friday, 20th November, 2009, 09:58 PM.
        Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
        Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: chess related :)

          Yes Kevin Pacey,

          We all have access, though not necessarily in such a strongly centralized fashion politically, possibly(ur in ottawa, c'est pas?), to Starting Out at chess gambit blogspots (R.A tourney games are a career -- n'est pas??).If you are indeed not a child as the esteemed, if not yet toothless, senior sniper ICCF IM Wannabe Heather's best friend, then at least become marginally less obtuse. Obviating Sincerely, David McTavish

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Black Lion(Philidor) and Old Indian

            Hi

            a)Black Lion/Philidor
            NIC Yearbook 91 has an article by Alexi Kuzmin on the Hanham Philidor for recent games. The games can be downloaded from the new in chess site. The Black Lion is as complete as one could wish for as a source of information and instruction guidance on 4...e5.

            b)Old Indian
            Spraggett's games and other specialists like Hickl/Malaniuk are a good source of inspiration. I'm using Megabase 2009+TWIC updates to stay in the loop. I would assume that anyone with a computer and access to Internet would also have a database but maybe I'm wrong there.

            Mike Yip

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Black Lion(Philidor) and Old Indian

              Originally posted by Michael Yip View Post
              Hi

              a)Black Lion/Philidor
              NIC Yearbook 91 has an article by Alexi Kuzmin on the Hanham Philidor for recent games. The games can be downloaded from the new in chess site. The Black Lion is as complete as one could wish for as a source of information and instruction guidance on 4...e5.

              b)Old Indian
              Spraggett's games and other specialists like Hickl/Malaniuk are a good source of inspiration. I'm using Megabase 2009+TWIC updates to stay in the loop. I would assume that anyone with a computer and access to Internet would also have a database but maybe I'm wrong there.

              Mike Yip
              Hi Mike

              Incomprehensible and rude posters aside, I would put the Philidor and the Old Indian in a similar category as the Classical Orthodox QGD, which I use myself (now that I have been a master for a long time), in that these defences do not try to trick or challenge White much in the opening.

              I think that it is well into the middlegame, generally, that in these openings Black begins to show any sign of substantial activity (provided he has not fallen into trouble first). For higher levels of play this is okay, but if I were still a class player, as Craig is, I think I would want to play a bit more actively with Black, at least most of the time. Just my opinion, however. It's up to Craig whether he wants to play such defences, or the Black Lion via 1.e4 d6 etc., the last of which I understand is indeed more of an active defence, at least when it doesn't transpose to a Philidor or Old Indian.
              Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
              Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Ideas for Non-Big Theory

                Originally posted by Kevin Pacey View Post
                Craig may be interested in using 1...e5 after 1.e4 partly because it gives White the chance to play second-rate stuff like the Bishop's Opening.

                ...
                playing a correspondence game recently (not looking for analysis as it's within the first dozen moves, may post when it's over) with 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d4 (Urusov gambit)

                toughest decision was whether or not to transpose to two knights after 3. ...exd4 4.Nf3 Nc6. i will do that if i ever get it over the board...lots of analysis both online and otherwise has proven to me that white gets equality and a little more i think (although that's debatable) but it is definitely messy. in any case, i'm itching to try it over the board myself :)

                which leads me to my theory question is there anythign else decent v. the bishop's? i used to play the philidor line 2. ...c6 (and try to build up a big center) but is it possible that 3.f4 would be strong and would favourably transpose to a King's Gambit where Black took the time to include 2. ...c6

                if 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nc6 is there anything better than 3.Nf3? i'm sure all sorts of things have been played...
                Last edited by Craig Sadler; Monday, 12th July, 2010, 02:14 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Ideas for Non-Big Theory

                  Originally posted by Craig Sadler View Post
                  playing a correspondence game recently (not looking for analysis as it's within the first dozen moves, may post when it's over) with 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d4 (Urusov gambit)

                  toughest decision was whether or not to transpose to two knights after 3. ...exd4 4.Nf3 Nc6. i will do that if i ever get it over the board...lots of analysis both online and otherwise has proven to me that white gets equality and a little more i think (although that's debatable) but it is definitely messy. in any case, i'm itching to try it over the board myself :)

                  which leads me to my theory question is there anythign else decent v. the bishop's? i used to play the philidor line 2. ...c6 (and try to build up a big center) but is it possible that 3.f4 would be strong and would favourably transpose to a King's Gambit where Black took the time to include 2. ...c6

                  if 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nc6 is there anything better than 3.Nf3? i'm sure all sorts of things have been played...
                  One reason 2.Bc4 is used is to avoid the Petroff without playing the KG or the Vienna, perhaps also with the hope of transposing to an Italian variation.

                  The ECO way to try to 'punish' the Bishop's Opening (i.e. by clearly equalizing) starts with 2...Nf6 (perhaps followed by ...c6) but if you play 2...Nc6 objectively there isn't much better for White than transposing to an Italian (e.g. by ECO's 3.d3 Nf6 4.Nf3 move order [this is all ECO gives after 2...Nc6]).

                  I would note that if White plays (after 2...Nc6) 3.f4 instead then 3...exf4 4.Nf3 (recommended by ECO 'C', 5th ed. via the 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.Nf3 move order instead) is an unusual KG position (ECO 'C' said see section C34 of their book, but unfortunately I can't that find that position covered in that book's C34 section - only 4.d4, not 4.Nf3, is given in C34 [i.e. in ECO's 5th ed.] :( - I'd recommend you check out databases and/or another book with KG or Bishop's opening coverage).
                  Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
                  Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Ideas for Non-Big Theory

                    Originally posted by Kevin Pacey View Post
                    ...

                    The ECO way to try to 'punish' the Bishop's Opening

                    ...
                    what is the year is the current ECO and where could i buy it? i have an old ECO B and D (mid 80s) but C would be helpful methinks ;)

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Ideas for Non-Big Theory

                      Originally posted by Craig Sadler View Post
                      what is the year is the current ECO and where could i buy it? i have an old ECO B and D (mid 80s) but C would be helpful methinks ;)
                      The latest (5th) edition of ECO 'C' was published 2006. If Amazon/(the CFC) can't supply it then maybe Strategy Games might sell it. Larry can feel free to jump in here :).

                      MCO-15 is a little more recent (published 2008) but though thick, it would have much less substantial coverage of any particular opening. Chapters sells it.
                      Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
                      Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Ideas for Non-Big Theory

                        Originally posted by Craig Sadler View Post
                        what is the year is the current ECO and where could i buy it? i have an old ECO B and D (mid 80s) but C would be helpful methinks ;)

                        Strategy Games of course :) :

                        http://strategygames.ca/boutique/sto...ue=EN&code=OI4 for ECO C


                        http://strategygames.ca/boutique/sto...e=EN&code=OI49 for ECO D

                        Go to www.startagygames.ca and search for ECO

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Ideas for Non-Big Theory

                          Originally posted by Larry Bevand View Post
                          Go to www.strategygames.ca

                          Larry, Larry, how many times do I gotta tell ya? SPELL the site name correctly!!
                          lol
                          ...Mike Pence: the Lord of the fly.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Ideas for Non-Big Theory

                            Originally posted by Kevin Pacey View Post
                            One reason 2.Bc4 is used is to avoid the Petroff without playing the KG or the Vienna, perhaps also with the hope of transposing to an Italian variation.

                            The ECO way to try to 'punish' the Bishop's Opening (i.e. by clearly equalizing) starts with 2...Nf6 (perhaps followed by ...c6) but if you play 2...Nc6 objectively there isn't much better for White than transposing to an Italian (e.g. by ECO's 3.d3 Nf6 4.Nf3 move order [this is all ECO gives after 2...Nc6]).

                            I would note that if White plays (after 2...Nc6) 3.f4 instead then 3...exf4 4.Nf3 (recommended by ECO 'C', 5th ed. via the 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.Nf3 move order instead) is an unusual KG position (ECO 'C' said see section C34 of their book, but unfortunately I can't that find that position covered in that book's C34 section - only 4.d4, not 4.Nf3, is given in C34 [i.e. in ECO's 5th ed.] :( - I'd recommend you check out databases and/or another book with KG or Bishop's opening coverage).
                            ECO doesn't mention it, but now that I think of it, after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 Nc6 (or 2.Bc4 Nc6 3.f4 exf4) the move 4.Nf3 (4.d4 leads to equality in C34), which as I said isn't covered as promised in C34 of ECO 5th ed., can be met by 4...g5 when we reach a position that is properly covered by ECO in the KG under C37, in footnote 11 there, which gives 5.d4 Bg7 6.c3 h6 7.0-0 d6, transposing to C38 in turn. This is a major line of the KG (that probably more often would start with 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.Bc4 Bg7 etc.). Here C38's ultimate main variation starts with 8.h4, which can lead to the sort of messy position KG players like. Same story for 8.Qb3, which is mentioned in a footnote. Instead 8.g3 is a major alternative, but ECO thinks Black should get a slight edge against it.
                            Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
                            Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: chess related :)

                              re : Ruy Lopez Exchange

                              last year, while going through Fischer's 60 Memorable Games i played through his game v. Smyslov which started

                              1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.d3, with the idea of Nbd2, Nf1, Ng3/e3 before castling so the rook is on f1 instead of e1 which would support an f-pawn push. one of the problems in this line is the lopez bishop...either he ends up on b3 and Black can eventualy trade it off with ...Na5, or White has to take time to play c3, Bc2, d4 etc etc and find a different way to protect the e-pawn, nullifying the tempo saved by Nf1 before O-O

                              i'm sure theoretically it is awful but wouldn't it make more sense to play d3 and part of the exchange variation and push the kingside pawns then...

                              1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.d3, 6.Nbd2, 7.Nf1, 8.Ng3/e3, 9.O-O etc. it's slow but is it too slow? is there a good way in the Ruy Lopez to try and save a tempo by getting in Nf1 before castling? in the 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.d3 lines, White is doing okay if Black plays passively with ...Be7, ...d6 etc but it's hard to get much play if Black plays for ...Bc5, ...d5

                              thoughts? am i just totally confused? :) the main closed Lopez lines are good enough for White, but i was impressed by the idea of Fischer's...

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: chess related :)

                                Originally posted by Craig Sadler View Post
                                1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.d3, 6.Nbd2, 7.Nf1, 8.Ng3/e3, 9.O-O etc. it's slow but is it too slow? is there a good way in the Ruy Lopez to try and save a tempo by getting in Nf1 before castling? in the 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.d3 lines, White is doing okay if Black plays passively with ...Be7, ...d6 etc but it's hard to get much play if Black plays for ...Bc5, ...d5

                                thoughts? am i just totally confused? :) the main closed Lopez lines are good enough for White, but i was impressed by the idea of Fischer's...
                                Well, the manouver of the Q's knight via d2, f1, g or e3 and then on to f5 or d5, is an idea that goes back at least to Steintz, but seems to be rather beside the point here. The position is more open for black and d5 is unavailable to the knight. What if black, as is pretty normal in the Exchange variation, castles Q side? What's the point of this manouver then?

                                Rybka 3's opening book gives white a result of only 33% after 5. d3 here, but on a sample of only four games, hardly reliable. But both chess engines I have available score the position after d3 as roughly equal.

                                My bet is that black equalizes here rather more easily than he does in the mainline Exchange, let alone the mainline Ruy. But someone with a master or better rating should be consulted if you want a more authoritative answer.

                                If you spend some time studying the resulting lines with a computer to point out the idiotic ideas, you might well be able to get and advantage against someone who's never seen it before. On the other hand I doubt that anyone is going to avoid 3. ... a6 for fear of it.

                                Perhaps some GM will take a close look at it some time and come up with some good ideas that make things hard for black, who knows? Stranger things happen.
                                Last edited by Ed Seedhouse; Wednesday, 25th August, 2010, 08:02 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X