12 Aug 08
Originally posted by KorchSay you get
I would say that KIA may not be effective if black plays early e5 - after 2...e6 they will have to waste tempo for it.
e4 c5
Nf3 Nc6
at this point I may be getting a classical which is fine and i may be getting a kalashnikov or a shevishnikov which I don't want to play against.
so I might play:
3. d3
An immediate e5 doesn't terrify me here. d6 followed by e5 isn't that terrifying either. In either case I play something like g3, c3 Bg2, O-O Nd2, and aim for the pawn break f4.
What are your thoughts?
12 Aug 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Red NightI agree that it`s not bad plan, but personally in KIA schemes I prefer to put on e5 my pawn as it gets more space and black are cramped in king side. It seems much more pleasant perspective for me.
Say you get
e4 c5
Nf3 Nc6
at this point I may be getting a classical which is fine and i may be getting a kalashnikov or a shevishnikov which I don't want to play against.
so I might play:
3. d3
An immediate e5 doesn't terrify me here. d6 followed by e5 isn't that terrifying either. In either case I play something like g3, c3 Bg2, O-O Nd2, and aim for the pawn break f4.
What are your thoughts?
12 Aug 08
Originally posted by Red NightIt depends on situation. Probably after castling kingside and putting my queen to e2 (when d4 square will be covered with c3).
How fast would you do it?
But for example in my favorite 2.c3 Sicilian Rozentalis system (1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.g3) I`m doing it in 3rd move.
12 Aug 08
Originally posted by KorchI don't think I have ever played an early e5 as white in the KIA.
It depends on situation. Probably after castling kingside and putting my queen to e2 (when d4 square will be covered with c3).
But for example in my favorite 2.c3 Sicilian Rozentalis system (1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.g3) I`m doing it in 3rd move.
I usually aim for a slow build up to f4 and a closed position. I guess in most cases I am looking for a K-side pawn storm or weak central squares for my knights.
12 Aug 08
1 edit
Originally posted by najdorfslayerthis is the system I thought Korch was talking about to begin with (and I think that is what he was talking about) and then we got on the subject of an early e5 for white. (about which I know less)
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d3 d6 4.g3 g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.0-0 e5 7.Nd2 Nge7.
[fen]r1bqk2r/pp2npbp/2np2p1/2p1p3/4P3/3P1NP1/PPPN1PBP/R1BQ1RK1 w - - 0 1[/fen]
I have always found this set up good against the KIA, following up with moves such as ...0-0 ...Be6 ...Qd7 and I will try to get a favourable...f5 in.
Here, I think for white I would play c3 to protect the hole at d4, followed by Ne1 and f4.
a4 and Nc4 also look interesting.
these positions always feel a little cramped. I think Nd2 i(and I almost always play it) s correct but the Knight is a little in the way.
blacks position looks strong. i think it was botvinnik who favored that sort of set up generally.
12 Aug 08
Originally posted by Red NightIt`s the matter of taste. I prefer to play on center instead of early flank attacks.
I don't think I have ever played an early e5 as white in the KIA.
I usually aim for a slow build up to f4 and a closed position. I guess in most cases I am looking for a K-side pawn storm or weak central squares for my knights.
12 Aug 08
Originally posted by KorchI'm sure there is nothing wrong with what you are suggesting. (Actually, I am fairly certain that at higher levels your 2. c3 approach is superior to my KIA)
It`s the matter of taste. I prefer to play on center instead of early flank attacks.
I like closed positions, particularly against stronger opponents
13 Aug 08
Originally posted by najdorfslayerMaybe it's the move that second-rate engines without an openings book play. Or maybe they're confusing it with the Margate Variation (6.Bg5 e6 7.Bb5), which isn't totally unreasonable. Indeed I've tried it once or twice myself.
Greenpawn
You are getting confused
I completely agree [b]3.Bb5 is a very good respectable Anti-Sicilian, and yes I agree it is one of the more annoying Anti-Sicilians I have to face. (Although I have had it very rarely on this site).
However I was talking about 6.Bb5
[fen]r1bqkb1r/pp2pppp/2np1n2/1B6/3NP3/2N5/PPP2PPP/R1BQK2R w KQk ...[text shortened]... can you (a pirc player
😵) say the Sicilian is a poor opening (which is what you insinuating).[/b]
13 Aug 08
3 edits
Originally posted by najdorfslayerI didn't see any responses to your suggestion of this move order (in the original post in this thread). If you play this move order, you will have to be prepared for some Maroczy bind type positions, specifically 6. Nb5 (the immediate 6. c4 is considered harmless) d6 7. c4 Nf6 8. N1c3 a6 9. Na3 etc. Although this line is considered playable for Black, it certainly does not have the same themes as the Classical variation.
...text shortened...
Maybe I will try the following
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e6 5.Nc3 d6
Any views on this?
13 Aug 08
2 edits
Originally posted by AlboMalapropFoozerI would be more than happy playing ths line of the Taimanov as I like "Scheveningen" set ups.
I didn't see any responses to your suggestion of this move order (in the original post in this thread). If you play this move order, you will have to be prepared for some Maroczy bind type positions, specifically [b]6. Nb5 (the immediate 6. c4 is considered harmless) d6 7. c4 Nf6 8. N1c3 a6 9. Na3 etc. Although this line is considered playable for Black, it certainly does not have the same themes as the Classical variation.[/b]
I would be more unfamiliar with
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e6 5.Nb5 d6 6.Bf4 e5 7.Be3 Nf6 8.Bg5 set ups.