Originally posted by robbie carrobieany of you dudes face or play the Caro Khan, whats with c6, whats wrong with c5, is c6 not a little passive,
any of you dudes face or play the Caro Khan, whats with c6, whats wrong with c5, is c6 not a little passive, how can white take advantage of this, any ideas most appreciated and finaly is this sound - regards Robbie
1.e4 c6
2.d4 d5
3.Nf3 !? dxe4
4.Ne5
Basically you can divide black's responses to white opening 1. e4 in 3 kinds.
1) black tries to stop white from also establishing a pawn on d4 (this would give him a nice pawn centre to work with). 1. ..c5 Sicilian defense or 1. ..e5 are examples.
2) black does not try to prevent d4 but instead wants to challenge the e4-pawn. examples: french defense, scandinavian, and caro-kann.
3) black does not challenges white's centre pawns at all and prefers to control it from afar or wait before striking at it. almost all other responses to 1. e4 fall in this category.
The caro-kann falls in category 2. It is slower than the scandinavian, so it might be described passive, but black will be able to retake on d5 with a pawn instead of the queen. Typically, white will have the more active game, but black has no weaknesses and so it might be very frustrating to play against - the reason why it is described as solid.
how can white take advantage of this
a couple of different ways for white to deal with the caro-kann:
1) if you do not mind taking on a severe pawn weakness in return for attacking chances, the Panov-Botvinnik attack is for you: 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 cxd5 4. c4.
2) if you are satisfied with a small spatial advantage you want to try to grind out without any risk, play the classical 3. Nc3.
3) if you want to have a wild, double-edged game you can try the advance variation 3. e5.
3. f3, the fantasy variation, is also double-edged, but don't expect to come out of the opening with an edge.
4) finally, if you are familiar with a kings indian like structure, try the two knights variation (1. e4 c6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Nf3) or 2. d3!? - white will often have a kings indian attack setup.
and finaly is this sound: 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nf3 !? dxe4 4.Ne5
No. Don't try it. It's crap.
hi, I was looking at the 'advance variation ?', when white plays an early e5, for example 1.e4 c6, 2.d4 d5, 3.e5 c5, now this just seems good for black to me, its like the advance variation of the French but black does not have to worry about his white squared bishop being passive, and also black in a similar fashion to the French defence can then build up pressure against whites centre particularly d4, for example if, continuing on from above white tries 4.c3 then ..Nc6, 5. Nf3 Bg4, and things are not very promising for white. if white tries 4. dxc5 and then tries to hold on to the pawn black gets a good game very reminiscent of the French defence, for example 4. ..Nc6, 5.Bb5 e6 etc etc.
I am working on a kind of wing variation, playing g3, Bg2, c4 to try to undermine the d5 square from the wings, i will post once its perfected as my other efforts have met with less enthusiasm than i had originally anticipated, adjectives like 'crap', 'cack', come to mind. :'(
I love the Caro-Kann, it is my go-to defense against 1.e4. I recently got playing again about 8 months ago, so I am really trying to learn as much as I can. I have "Play the Caro-Kann" by Jovanka Houska and it's fantastic in how she explains the plans and shows examples. I recommend it for both sides if you do play e4 so you can see what you are up against and the best of white's options.
I don't think it's a staid or "passive" opening at all. Sure, it's not as aggressive as the Sicilian or even 1...e5, but it's a very dynamic and balanced opening that can be both strategic and tactical. I actually play 1.e4 most of the time as white, so I am not afraid of tactics.
Definitley don't think that you you can "take advantage" of black's whimpy 1...c6; not understanding the positional subtleties can cause white to overextend and then wonder what happened to his position! It's actually a great opening to use against mindless attackers because they will eventually get frusterated and overextend themselves, result in an easy advantage for black.
One of the posts above (schakhur?) had very good recommendations with what to play as white. If you like open positions and tactical possibilities try to panov-botvinnik attack: 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd4 cxd5 4.c4 and study up on Isolated queen pawn positions. Yes, it's a weakness in the endgame, but can be a dynamic strength in the middlegame with natural attacking chances because of the extra space, open lines, etc. IQP positions give winning chance for both sides and (I think) lead to fun and interesting games. Many Caro-Kanners don't like those type of positions, but like I said, I play 1.e4 so I love all types of games!
The advance variation is actually now my favorite opening playing the black pieces. 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5. 3.e5 c5! This is what Houska recommends and I love it! Botvinnik used it a few times in the 1961 rematch, with not too great results, but that wasn't necessarily the openings fault. Not a whole lot of theory is out there on it, and it remains extremely viable. The ideas behind it are great, and white has no "safe" way to meet it. If white takes the pawn he ruins his pawn structure and enter into early complications...which may be good or bad depending on what types of positions he likes. If he keeps the structure with 4.c3, prepare for heavy pressure on white's center pawns. Plus, it can not be treated as a french type position because of the now good bishop...and the best part is that instead of developing the white square bishop to f5 on move 3, which is the usual line, he waits to see what the best square is first. If 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3....then Bg4 ! g4 would be the stronger square to develop to in order to put pressure on the center and perhaps concede the bishop pair and trade the knight for the bishop because the position will be closed and knights are normally better than bishops in closed positions. Check out the my recent OTB game at my local club below to see an example of this opening. I defeating a much higher rated player (than myself "for the time being"😉in this variation.
As to the variation that you mentioned, I would be circumspect. I believe that 1.e4 c6. Nf3 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Ne5 is called the Armageddon attack, and is similar to what you mention. I haven't put much study in it but I know black shouldn't have much trouble if he pays attention. I think the fantasy variation is a bit more respected for gambit type aggressive play: 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3
Here is my most recent OTB game, not annotated (I was black of course). I did do a self-analysis and fritzed it afterwards. If you would like to see my notes message me. Feel free anybody to offer your comments on the game below. I am learning and would love to hear any comments. Also feel free to send a challenge if you would like to practice these variations.
1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 c5 4. c3 Nc6 5. Nf3 Bg4 6. Be2 e6 7. h3 Bxf3 8. Bxf3 cxd4 9. cxd4 Bb4+ 10. Nc3 Nge7 11. O-O Nf5 12. Be3 Qb6 13. Ne2 Rc8 14. a3 Be7 15. b4 h6 16. Bg4 Nxe3 17. fxe3 Bg5 18. Qb3 O-O 19. Nf4 Nxd4 20. Qd3 Bxf4 21.exd4 Bxe5 22. Kh1 Bxd4 23. Rad1 Be5 24. Qe2 Bb8 25. Qb2 Qd6 26. g3 Qxg3 27. Rg1 Qe5 28. Qg2 Qe4 29. Bf3 Qg6 30. Qd2 Rc2 31. Rxg6 Rxd2 32. Rxg7+ Kxg7 33. Rxd2 Rd8 34. Bd1 f5 35. Kg2 e5 36. Bh5 e4 37. Kf1 d4 38. Rg2+ Kf6 39. Rg6+ Ke5 40.
Rxh6 Rc8 41. Ke1 Rc3 42. Bf7 Kf4 43. Bg6 Ke3 44. Kd1 d3 45. Bxf5 d2 46. Rc6 Rxc6 47. Bxe4 Rc1# 0-1
Originally posted by robbie carrobie3. ..c5 is not the mainline but the same principles apply to the whole 3. e5 complex.
hi, I was looking at the 'advance variation ?', when white plays an early e5, for example 1.e4 c6, 2.d4 d5, 3.e5 c5, now this just seems good for black to me, its like the advance variation of the French but black does not have to worry about his white squared bishop being passive, and also black in a similar fashion to the French defence can then b ...[text shortened]... iasm than i had originally anticipated, adjectives like 'crap', 'cack', come to mind. :'(
Ofcourse the main advantage for black compared to the french advance is that he can place the light squared bishop outside the pawn chain before playing ..e6. However there are also two disadvantages:
1) the bishop is a nice target for white to attack outside the pawn chain
2) when black opens up the queenside with ..c5 he may well find that he sorely misses the bishop as a defender when the position is blasted open.
About the 3. ..c5 variation I'd say that white can give black lots of trouble if he plays an early c4. I think Rublevsky played a few good games with this line.
Originally posted by schakuhrSchakuhr....you are correct about some disadvantages in the 3...c5 in the advance. Actually Houska mentions 4.Nf3!? and 4.c4!? These are definitely aggressive tries that black needs to be aware of. 4.c4 tries to blow black apart right away, while Nf3 followed by c4! is also dangerous. Black definitely needs to be careful in both lines, but they do look fun to play! Houska shows some lines where black should still be ok, but, of course, the question is still out there.
3. ..c5 is not the mainline but the same principles apply to the whole 3. e5 complex.
Ofcourse the main advantage for black compared to the french advance is that he can place the light squared bishop outside the pawn chain before playing ..e6. However there are also two disadvantages:
1) the bishop is a nice target for white to attack outside the pawn ch ...[text shortened]... s of trouble if he plays an early c4. I think Rublevsky played a few good games with this line.
Another thing that could be mentioned is that in the 4.dxc5 variation, black is not really sure about regaining the pawn. He gives it up for positional advantages in the first place, but if white plays accurately he can hold onto the pawn. Whether or not the pawn is worth it or not....that is the question!!!
Originally posted by schakuhrmost interesting indeedee, yes apparently 3...c5 is not the main line but it makes things a lot simpler, for example if one plays 3...Bf5 after the e5 advance then one must know how to deal with a whole host of different lines, for example, 4.h4, 4.c4, 4.Ne2 or 4.Nf3 e6, 5.Be2 and even Be3.
3. ..c5 is not the mainline but the same principles apply to the whole 3. e5 complex.
Ofcourse the main advantage for black compared to the french advance is that he can place the light squared bishop outside the pawn chain before playing ..e6. However there are also two disadvantages:
1) the bishop is a nice target for white to attack outside the pawn ch ...[text shortened]... s of trouble if he plays an early c4. I think Rublevsky played a few good games with this line.
Its a great point about the white bishop, therefore would it not be more in harmony with the French style of this position to use the bishop for defensive purposes to d7. eg. 1,e4 c6, 2.d4 d5, 3.e5 c5, 4.dxc5 Nc6, 5.Bb5 e6, 6.Be3 Nge7, 7.c3 Bd7.
I play CK exclusively against e4 and I'd definetly prefer to use d7 for a knight. I'm aware there are lots of ways for White to try and treat the bishop developed to f5 as a target but if you know a bit of theory it doesn't cause too much difficulty.
Its a great point about the white bishop, therefore would it not be more in harmony with the French style of this position to use the bishop for defensive purposes to d7. eg. 1,e4 c6, 2.d4 d5, 3.e5 c5, 4.dxc5 Nc6, 5.Bb5 e6, 6.Be3 Nge7, 7.c3 Bd7.
Having said that, the advance variation is one of the best ways to meet my favourite defence - along with the Panov-Botvinnik attack and the 3. Nc3 mainlines.
The advance of the h pawn that you observed is part of the classical mainline and is intended to gain kingside space with gain of time as Black must prevent his bishop from being trapped if the pawn reaches h5. Once the bishop has been chased to h7 after Black plays ..h6 and ..Bh7 in response to h4 and h5, White will play Bd3 and Black must swap these bishops leading to an overall loss of tempo for Black (who has moved his bishop many times and now swaps it for a piece that has moved only once). The h6 pawn can now be a hook for a g pawn advance by White which will open the g file. However, the h5 pawn does often turn into an endgame target for Black.
Be aware that there are many ways for Black to play as well as White - you could end up facing a good deal of counterplay if Black plays 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nf6!? 5. Nxf6 gxf6!? which leads to a broken pawn structure for Black but possibilities of attack down the g-file.
I would add to the sentiment of others that you will not bash this opening in a few moves with gambit play against strong opposition - it is extremely solid and has served me well for a long time. I'd be happy to give you a game if you like? 🙂
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHow about the old but steady Exchange variation against 1. ...c6?
any of you dudes face or play the Caro Khan, whats with c6, whats wrong with c5, is c6 not a little passive, how can white take advantage of this, any ideas most appreciated and finaly is this sound - regards Robbie
1.e4 c6
2.d4 d5
3.Nf3 !? dxe4
4.Ne5
Doesn't it lead to a small but persistent advantage against the Kann?
(as with the Slav also?)
How does Houska deal with the exch. variation in her book?
(Or Sadler in his book on the Slav?)
I played against a Caro-Kann in an OTB tourney this weekend. I had intended to use a King's Indian setup but the game went:
1 e4 c6 2 d3 d5 3 Nd2 Nf6 4 Ngf3 Bg4 and I decided to break the pin right away by 5 Be2; Black followed with e6. I then sprung the almost novelty 6 Ne5!? (maybe ?!) (I've found one game in the databases) and he captured at e2 and I recaptured with the Queen. He then made the inexact 7 ....... Bd6. I dropped the Knight back to f3 threatening the pawn fork at e5 and he had to waste a tempo moving his Bishop back to e7 and I had a slightly superior position (though the game wound up a draw).
Looking it over, I missed the shot 8 Nxf7! which would have forced him to recapture with his King after which I could have executed the pawn fork at e5 which would have regained the piece and left his King trapped in the center and vulnerable. 😞 Oh, well.
Originally posted by Crushing DayThe Slav exchange leads to a symmetrical pawn structure, CK exchange does not. Black will play for the minority attack on the queenside, white has an initiative on the kingside. As usual in the CK the long-term (or static) advantages lie with black, and the initiative lies with white.
How about the old but steady Exchange variation against 1. ...c6?
Doesn't it lead to a small but persistent advantage against the Kann?
(as with the Slav also?)
I don't think white will have good chances for a tangible advantage in the exchange, unless he means to play the panov-botvinnik attack.
Originally posted by no1marauderbrilliant, absolutely brilliant. i had toyed with the idea of the Kings Indian setup, but dismissed it as impractical until black commits himself to an early e6, his white squared bishop being the reason, however this little sortie seems very reasonable indeedee. did you know of the novelty beforehand or was it inspired on the day.
I played against a Caro-Kann in an OTB tourney this weekend. I had intended to use a King's Indian setup but the game went:
1 e4 c6 2 d3 d5 3 Nd2 Nf6 4 Ngf3 Bg4 and I decided to break the pin right away by 5 Be2; Black followed with e6. I then sprung the almost novelty 6 Ne5!? (maybe ?!) (I've found one game in the databases) and he captured at e2 and ...[text shortened]... d have regained the piece and left his King trapped in the center and vulnerable. 😞 Oh, well.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieActually Kings Indian setup is very practical response to French & Caro-Cahn. Mainly because of
brilliant, absolutely brilliant. i had toyed with the idea of the Kings Indian setup, but dismissed it as impractical until black commits himself to an early e6, his white squared bishop being the reason, however this little sortie seems very reasonable indeedee. did you know of the novelty beforehand or was it inspired on the day.
1) You dont need to study a lot of theory;
2) Black players who play these openings are prepared to be attacked and defend. and if opponent does not attack they may feel discomfort.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIt's worth remembering I suppose; 7 ...... Bd6? seems like a "natural" response when it is actually a blunder.
brilliant, absolutely brilliant. i had toyed with the idea of the Kings Indian setup, but dismissed it as impractical until black commits himself to an early e6, his white squared bishop being the reason, however this little sortie seems very reasonable indeedee. did you know of the novelty beforehand or was it inspired on the day.
I played it on the fly; Emms' KIA book briefly discusses the line up to 5 Be2 though it's not technically a KIA as there is no kingside fianchetto. The "book" line is 6 O-O which seems perfectly adequate, too.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThanks for the compliment!
mmm, i dunno anything about Schiller but I have respect for gaychess player dude...
Eric Schiller has published a zillion (or so) medicore chess books, most of which have apparently been proofread by an eight-year-old who somehow was left behind in spite of No Child Left Behind education-reform legislation. Having said that, many of his books contain some intreresting ideas, and Gambit Opening Repertoire for White is one of the books. He analyzes some wierd, but to my feeble mind, playable stuff. Some examples from the book:
Halasz Gambit: 1 e4 c5 2 d4 cxd4 3 f4!? ( a Smith-Morra Gambit/Grand Prix Attack hybrid).
Alapin Gambit: 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Be3!? dxe4
Ulysses' Gambit: 1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 Nf3 dxe4 4 Ng5!?
Tennison Gambit: 1 e4 d5 2 Nf3!? dxe4 3 Ng5
Even though with incisive play Black obtains at least equality in these variations, they lead to highly complex tactical situations that should suit the player willing to take risks to score the full point (and maybe even play a brilliancy!).
The companion volume, Gambit Opening Repertoire for Black is actually better IMO than the White volume.