@ linksspringer

Pumi doesn't own it but after reading this, the book is in order now
Thanks.

@ all

I found something interesting here:www.chessmix.com/en/eshop/ebooks/

Quote:

You are heartly invited to my home and "Play the Chaos" with my kids (6 yrs, 4 yrs, 1/2 yrs) 

pumi wrote on 06/24/08 at 02:09:33:


White has no special problems after 7...Qa5 8.Qc2 (for example, 8...Nf6 9.fxe4 Nxe4?! 10.Bd3), and eventually Black will come to regret this placement of his queen.

I understand that Black "dominates" e5 after 7.f3 Nf6 8.Qc2 d6 9.fxe4 Nbd7 10.Nf3 Ng5 and so forth (or similar), but in the absence of anything concrete to the contrary from fluffy, I will maintain my view that Black can look forward to trouble on the kingside.  An opinion based on vastly less talent and experience than fluffy's, I freely admit.

drkodos wrote on 06/20/08 at 19:28:03:


Looks like a tranposition to the Clarendon Court defence upon which there is also a video by Johnathan Levitt. A very good surprise weapon indeed as I mentioned in some other threads.

Toppy

Postscript: The theoretical recommendation to Markovich's 6.e4! is 6...fxe4 7.f3 Nf6!? 8.fxe4 d6!? intending Nbd7 and Ng4 with a firm grip on the critical e5 square. Instead of 7.f3 the move 7.h4!? is also considered critical.

I seem to recall Johnathan Rowson claiming somewhere to have more or less refuted this defence, and I'm pretty sure it has something to do with an e4 gambit at some point, so perhaps Markovich is on to something.   

NIC Yearbook 59 has an slightly euphoric article on the Chaos Attack "An A-OK line" about 6.h4. It also mentions 6.g4 and 6.e4 (but no games) as further White tries.

Just one sentence from the introduction: "We feel that Garry would rather be Black here!" - well thats advertising 

pumi, thanks for the comments, but sorry I am not really interested in analyzing 1.d4 g6 2.c4 Bg7 3.e4 d6 4.Nc3 f5. it is off topic and clearly inferior imho.

I will say that after 6.h4, 6...Nf6 is not the only move.

@kylemeister

I take my ideas from this forum , ECO, different databases as chess base, chess assistant and......,but you will not find a lot of material about the "chaos" we are talking about.
So you face a huge field for proper thoughts and that's exactly what I like.

Second:What is written today can be refuted tomorrow. Look for example the april update in this forum, where i find a strong idea OTB in the owen defense with 8.Nb5 and 9.Qg4. Before this, black had an equal position and even some IM's gave the variation some exclamation marks.
So, what is equal ? What is slightly better ??

Third: Don't we all make the same mistake in just looking for variations with a clear advantage for the colour we like to play and where an equal position after x moves is allready critical ?

I have a deep respect for fluffy, not because he is on my side in this topic , but for his original analysis in his latest works. 
In his books, we see also unclear, slightly better or critical conclusions.
So when he writes: come on it's a clear += , I like to know why and where I missed something.

@ Pantu

After 6.e4 fxe4 7.f3 e5 can be played (I prefer 7..Qa5, but that's a matter of taste). 
But after 8.dxe6 the best move is 8..Nc6! with a good game for black

fluffy wrote on 06/22/08 at 22:59:51:

Still I wonder if Black can use this Bxc3+ variation to limit White's options. Can White after 1.d4 g6 2.c4 (I would play 2.e4 btw, but I am originally a 1.e4 player) Bg7 3.e4 still reach the Fianchetto Variation of the KID (4.g3)? Can Black try to reach the Modern Benoni or even the Volga Gambit after 3.Nf3 c5 ?

I'd say Black's (playable, non-KID) options after 3. e4 number about a half-dozen, but there seems to be a consensus that they all give White a better chance of advantage than he gets in the KID.

I lost a rather horrible game as white in this line a few years ago, but have never faced it since.

1 d4 g6 2 c4 Bg7 3 Nc3 c5!? 4 d5 Bxc3+ 5 bxc3 f5 and now:

6 e4 is not something I'd ever looked at but does seem to make sense.  Looking at the database I'd guess 6...fxe4 7 f3 e5!? 8 dxe6 d6!? isn't quite so clearcut?

I personally have not worried about this line since the defeat since I think that 6 h4!? is quite strong e.g.

6 h4!? Nf6 7 h5! Rg8 (7...Nxh5 8 e4 Qa5 9 exf5 Qxc3+ 10 Bd2 Qe5 11 Be2 0-0 12 fxg6 'would be a slaughter' according to Speelman 8 hxg6 hxg6 and now Speelman suggests that 9 Qa4! is best, presumably aiming to hinder black's development, although 9...Qb6 intending 10...Ne4 doesn't seem to have anything immediately against it (black is ahead in development after all...!)

But even more to the point I that I would simply play 3 e4 here.

fluffy wrote on 06/21/08 at 19:37:45:


Fair enough. You being such a strong player and having plenty of experience in the line, I can only bow to your authority.  But I wish you would say how Black plays against 5.e4 fxe4 6.f3 Nf6 (it seems Black should play this) 7.Qc2 or 7.fxe4 d6 7.Bd3.  I fullly agree that Black has his share of the center; and that the light-square bishop is a problem piece for the time being; but personally, I would be worried about my brittle kingside and the possibility of invasion along the f-file.  That CC game I won, as I recall, did I seize the f-file.  I'll see if I can dig it up; it was played on postcards, but I may have them around here.

statistically speaking after the move Bxc3+ yes black has a 55% win ratio. However after the move ...f5 white has a 75% win ratio with Qc2 a 66% win ratio with e4 a 55% win ratio with Nh3 and a 50% win ratio with f3... black has a 90% win ratio with any other move. So yes... I would never play this as black and as white even with no prep i'd laugh. Black has given up the bishop pair, surrendered the center, and created tons of weak squares! What is it white is supposed to fear?

IMJohnCox wrote on 06/20/08 at 11:36:40:


Yes, I do mean 6.e4.  I was thrown off by misnumbering in the original post.

drkodos wrote on 06/20/08 at 20:18:06:


In my database, the Beefeater scores better for black than the BGD does for white! But I get what you are saying- and you make a number of interesting points.

It's quite possible that the information vaccum is the reason for its success (my opinion thats its just good notwithstanding). However, there is no real reason to believe the information situation will change. It's not really a new opening. I knew about it at least 18 years ago. It's poorly covered in almost all books. I believe Yermolinsky in his 'Road to Chess Improvement' dismisses it with "wait until someone tries it against Kasparov..." ok... I guess- but thats not too helpful!

And as you state, there are no pawn breaks for white- and hence, to a degree- no plans. To me it seems that whites best bet is to try to turn it into a tactical brawl right away (such as with the line suggested by Markovich above). But:

1. that is not everyone's forte
2. when you are playing into someone's pet line- and you dont know the theory, human nature is too not play the most critical/tactical lines...

But then again, I'd be very reluctant to make it a major part of my repertoire too...

John

Whatever it is called (I always thought it was called the Beefeater)- there is little doubt (in my mind) that it is a very dangerous system. In fact, I think its just good for black. Statistics would seem to back this up- as its extremely high scoring.

As far as I know the Dzindzi-Indian is 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 a6 (and if 4. Nc3 c5 5. d5 b5 à la the Blumenfeld).

The Djin is some QID with a6 thrown in indeed. The whole chaotic thing also goes by the name 'Beefeater'.

pumi wrote on 06/20/08 at 09:12:37:


I encountered this in a U.S. Absolute CC Championship a few years ago and destroyed my strong opponent, I forget who just now, with 7.e4.  After 7...fxe4 8.f3 Black does not capture on f3 unless he wants to die soon, but White gets a good game anyway.  I understand the strategic basis of Black's system, but I think that it is nevertheless quite bad.

I thought this was the "Dzindzi Indian," by the way.  Anyway it has been advocated by Dzindzihasvili.  I believe that 7.e4 was proposed by Christiansen.