10 May 08
Originally posted by gaychessplayerIn current position black central pawns will compensate white bishop pair, as white will not be able to keep d6 square.
You raise a very important question!
I don't know if the advantage of the two B's can in fact be exploited. I was just suggesting that since virtually all masters consider a Bishop to be worth more that a knight in most positions, that unless there is something special in the position under discussion that makes that generality not apply, that W ...[text shortened]... takes precedence over evaluating a position merely on the basis of some general rule of thumb.
30 May 08
[gid]4969103 [/gid]
a Nbd7 taimanov benoni
9Nf3 also possible is the immediate e6 leading to the extremely tactical 2 minors for a rook & pawn trade.
11Be2 incorrect, Bd3 seems stronger and would have avoided the tactic eventually started on ...12 b5.
...18 Qe7 better than Qb6 with 19Nf2 ...Rae8 20Nc4 repels the queen
22Qa2? Why not Nb5, if ...Rb8 Ra5 and the black Queen cannot help without abandoning the Rook on the 2nd rank
Please comment if you notice other important possible variations, or inaccuracies in these.
30 May 08
Originally posted by dzhafnerGame 4969103
[gid]4969103 [/gid]
a Nbd7 taimanov benoni
9Nf3 also possible is the immediate e6 leading to the extremely tactical 2 minors for a rook & pawn trade.
11Be2 incorrect, Bd3 seems stronger and would have avoided the tactic eventually started on ...12 b5.
...18 Qe7 better than Qb6 with 19Nf2 ...Rae8 20Nc4 repels the queen
22Qa2? Why not Nb5, if . ...[text shortened]... k
Please comment if you notice other important possible variations, or inaccuracies in these.
8...Nbd7? is no good as white can start decisive attack after 9.e5! (instead of 9.Nf3 in game). The correct move is 8...Nfd7!
14.a3? is no good - better was 14.Bf3.
14...b4?! is inaccurate - better was 14...Nxd5! 15.exd5 Bxc3 with Rxe2.
16.Nd1? is bad - why not 16.Na4 where knight would not make trouble for other pieces to coordinate?
17.exd5? is capitulation - white had to try make some activities by 17.f5!? which could give some practical chances.
02 Jun 08
1 edit
Originally posted by drumianAnd what will you suggest after 1.d4 c5 2.d5 f5 3.e4! ?
1.d4 c5 2.d5 f5 is the not so well known Clarendon Court defence.Provided you keep an eye on your weak e6 square it is perfectly playable and leads to exciting games.Tukmakov used it to beat Lputian in 1994.
02 Jun 08
Originally posted by gaychessplayerKnight versus bishop depends completely on the position. And there are loads of possible positions. Squillions. The knight and bishop each have their own pros and cons- the knight is easier to manouevre short-range through jumping, can fork pieces dangerously at any point, the bishop can cover a8 and h1 at the same time, for example. I know I am not the strongest player but I am still entitled to my own opinion. And Capablanca: Q+N is superior to Q+B because generally the bishop is just an extension of the queen. The knight is the only piece that can move to spaces the queen cannot (except en passant and castling! 😉)
You raise a very important question!
I don't know if the advantage of the two B's can in fact be exploited. I was just suggesting that since virtually all masters consider a Bishop to be worth more that a knight in most positions, that unless there is something special in the position under discussion that makes that generality not apply, that W ...[text shortened]... takes precedence over evaluating a position merely on the basis of some general rule of thumb.
02 Jun 08
Originally posted by drumianTukmakov and Lputian don't ring bells with me I'm afraid. 😳 A more modern or famous example please? Fischer? Kasparov? Kramnik? Anand? Topalov? Ivanchuk? Morozevich? Svidler? Gelfand? Carlsen? Grischuk? Shirov? Khalifman? Yusupov? Xiangxhi?
1.d4 c5 2.d5 f5 is the not so well known Clarendon Court defence.Provided you keep an eye on your weak e6 square it is perfectly playable and leads to exciting games.Tukmakov used it to beat Lputian in 1994.
If you could post the games here that would be much appreciated. Thanks. 🙂
02 Jun 08
Originally posted by drumianIn club level you can afford to play almost every opening which you know much better than your opponent.
Sorry I don't know of any famous or modern examples for you.I'm only a 1600 graded player,but I have had some success over the board mainly because of surprise value and have gained time on the clock.It may well be unsound but at club level it has served me well.
02 Jun 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Korch5...exf3 6.Nxf3 g6 then for instance 7.Bg5 Bg7 8.Qd2 0-0 is perfectly ok for Black though isn't it? Black does have issues, but also has good central control & open lines.
After 1.d4 c5 2.d5 f5 3.e4 fxe4 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.f3 white will get Staunton gambit in better version that in main line (1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3) where 4...d5 is considered the best option for black.
...d6 to follow is the plan.
02 Jun 08
2 edits
Originally posted by SquelchbelchAfter 1.d4 c5 2.d5 f5 3.e4 fxe4 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 g6 I would aim my bishop to kingside with 7.Bd3 for example 7...Bg7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Ng5
5...exf3 6.Nxf3 g6 then for instance 7.Bg5 Bg7 8.Qd2 0-0 is perfectly ok for Black though isn't it? Black does have issues, but also has good central control & open lines.
[fen]rnbq1rk1/pp1pp1bp/5np1/2pP2B1/8/2N2N2/PPPQ2PP/R3KB1R w - - 0 1[/fen]
...d6 to follow is the plan.
White can make very uncomfortable pressure on black kingside and/or e-file which seems to be more than enough compensation for pawn.