Latest Updates:
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Revolution in the 00s (Read 9036 times)
chk
God Member
*****
Offline


a pawn is a pawn

Posts: 1063
Location: Athens
Joined: 10/26/06
Gender: Male
Re: Revolution in the 00s
Reply #14 - 02/13/14 at 10:21:54
Post Tools
ErictheRed wrote on 02/11/14 at 18:03:42:
...
Of course the Short System was an entirely new interpretation, but that happened before the 00's. 


Yes, I was going to comment on that as I feel that a game in the Short system develops a lot differently than with other (sharp) systems in the C-K Advance.
  

"I play honestly and I play to win. If I lose, I take my medicine." - Bobby
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2512
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Revolution in the 00s
Reply #13 - 02/11/14 at 18:03:42
Post Tools
Regarding the Caro-Kann, reading some older notes, a lot of people thought that the advance was White's best option back in the 80's (Seirawan, Petrosian), and even back in the late 50's and 60's (Tal's use of it in his second match against Botvinnik).  I've read some comments (I forget where) saying that Tal might have lost the return match to Botvinnik because despite him achieving good theoretical positions out of the opening, the closed nature of the Advanced Caro suited Botvinnik's skills more than his own.  So despite winning the theoretical/opening debate, he only scored 3.5-4.5 as White against Botvinnik's Caro-Kann.

Of course the Short System was an entirely new interpretation, but that happened before the 00's. 

I'd have to agree that the kingside castling lines in the 11.Bf4 classical main line were the biggest revolution within the Caro.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
lnn2
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1504
Location: nc
Joined: 09/22/04
Re: Revolution in the 00s
Reply #12 - 02/11/14 at 17:39:38
Post Tools
I would pick the Berlin as the most important development for the 00s, and as runner-up, the d5 pawn sac in the 4. g3 QID.

In my beloved Caro-Kann: the kingside castling lines in the Classical was the most important development for the 00s, this is not a new concept but was taken to an astonishingly deeper theoretical level. These lines really boosted the popularity of the Caro-Kann in general. I do not rate the development of other lines (e.g. Short system, panov ...g6) as important as this.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2512
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Revolution in the 00s
Reply #11 - 02/08/14 at 22:35:33
Post Tools
I'm glad that you started writing in English Brabo; thank you, I like your blog!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 982
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Revolution in the 00s
Reply #10 - 02/08/14 at 17:35:58
Post Tools
A few months ago an opponent + 2500 rated played against me 1.Nf3 f5 2.b4!? and after only 4 moves we had an original position. I wrote last week an article about it: http://chess-brabo.blogspot.be/2014/02/the-lucky-one.html
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
nocteus
Full Member
***
Offline


'Help your pieces, they
will help you.' Morphy

Posts: 127
Joined: 04/29/11
Re: Revolution in the 00s
Reply #9 - 02/08/14 at 16:39:31
Post Tools
TN wrote on 09/10/13 at 07:03:30:
In the future I think we'll see both sides continuing to use this approach of aiming for a long fight with tension in the position, but the nature of this struggle will change. There are still a gigantic number of new plans that haven't received much practical or theoretical attention, but as this number decreases, I think a new approach of finding a little-known but interesting continuation will become a lot more popular. This trend is already becoming popular among some strong players but by 2020 I think this will be the dominant approach at the elite level. It won't totally surprise me if continuations such as 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Be2 or 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 h6 become popular ways of avoiding the increasing theoretical workload in favour of reaching a struggle.


I guess Lasker was right - only took a century to realise it!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 982
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Revolution in the 00s
Reply #8 - 10/17/13 at 09:00:00
Post Tools
I just used this thread in my latest blogarticle as body for some analysis about the Rauzer with g6.
For Dutch : http://schaken-brabo.blogspot.be/2013/10/revolutie-in-het-millennium.html
For English: http://chess-brabo.blogspot.be/2013/10/revolution-in-millenium.html
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
tony37
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 615
Joined: 10/16/10
Re: Revolution in the 00s
Reply #7 - 09/27/13 at 16:25:37
Post Tools
brabo wrote on 09/10/13 at 08:20:08:
TN wrote on 09/10/13 at 07:03:30:
There is also the possibility of chess being solved by a 32-man tablebase.

I wrote in my blogarticle about tablebases: http://schaken-brabo.blogspot.be/2012/06/tablebases.html
Around 1986, positions of 4 pieces were solved.
In 1995, all 5 piece-endgames were available.
In 2004, we had the 6 piece-endgames.
This year, a team achieved to solve the 7-piecetablebases.

It takes about 9 years per extra piece to solve all the positions. If we would continue with this speed then we still have 225 years so I am not worrying about chess being solved in the near future.

about the 8 man tablebases:

Regarding the question of more practical 8-men endings, I quote Victor Zakharov of the Lomonosov-team (they created the Lomonosov-tables with their supercomputer and massive parallel computing): “6+2 tables. We even don’t consider the plan of generating 8-men tables. There are some trivial 8-men tables that can be generated with current hardware. but these tables have no practical sense. Any useful 8-men ending demands too many resources for it. Possibly we even can consider practical steps to compute it, but keeping many terabytes only for one ending is a big luxury currently.”
http://www.deknaller.nl/tablebases/perfect-play-endgame-kbbbbkrr/
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
dfan
God Member
*****
Offline


"When you see a bad move,
look for a better one"

Posts: 739
Location: Boston
Joined: 10/04/05
Re: Revolution in the 00s
Reply #6 - 09/10/13 at 12:40:13
Post Tools
This thread has been very interesting, especially TN's response. I'd love to see a similar list for every decade since 1900. I'm getting a bit of a sense of the evolution of opening theory by reading My Great Predecessors in order but Kasparov doesn't usually call a lot of attention to the larger trends in opening fashion.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 982
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Revolution in the 00s
Reply #5 - 09/10/13 at 08:20:08
Post Tools
TN wrote on 09/10/13 at 07:03:30:
There is also the possibility of chess being solved by a 32-man tablebase.

I wrote in my blogarticle about tablebases: http://schaken-brabo.blogspot.be/2012/06/tablebases.html
Around 1986, positions of 4 pieces were solved.
In 1995, all 5 piece-endgames were available.
In 2004, we had the 6 piece-endgames.
This year, a team achieved to solve the 7-piecetablebases.

It takes about 9 years per extra piece to solve all the positions. If we would continue with this speed then we still have 225 years so I am not worrying about chess being solved in the near future.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
TN
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 3420
Joined: 11/07/08
Gender: Male
Re: Revolution in the 00s
Reply #4 - 09/10/13 at 07:03:30
Post Tools
I think the real revolution in the last thirteen years is not so much the emergence or renewal of a particular system but a complete change in approach by both colours. In the 1990s it was accepted by most that White should emerge with a small edge with best play out of the opening, but computers have shown many new defensive resources and greatly expanded the number of playable variations. It's not at all clear what White's best try for an advantage is with White: after 1.e4 the Berlin Wall, Marshall, Najdorf, Sveshnikov, Caro-Kann and French have proved incredibly hard for White to even press for an objective advantage against, while against 1.d4 the Grunfeld, Slav and Nimzo-Indian have emerged as openings where even a symbolic edge with White is extremely hard to achieve. For this reason both 1.Nf3 and 1.c4 have risen to equal respectability with 1.d4 and 1.e4.

The player most responsible for this revolution is Kramnik - in a number of Black openings he came up not just with new ideas and new plans, but a completely different way of playing with the Black pieces - using extremely detailed preparation to construct a 'fortress' to achieve a draw, or even win if the opponent overpresses. This in turn led to the revolution about five years ago of elite players abandoning their fight for a real advantage with the White pieces in favour of reaching a tense, strategically rich position where a long fight was guaranteed, and the better player would maximise their chances of success. There are tons of examples of this in practice but the d3 Ruy Lopez is one of the most obvious examples of this approach. This approach itself is as old as chess itself, but Carlsen was probably the first elite Grandmaster to fully appreciate the importance of this method and his successes definitely contributed to the popularity of it at all levels.

So, what does the future hold for chess opening theory?

In the future I think we'll see both sides continuing to use this approach of aiming for a long fight with tension in the position, but the nature of this struggle will change. There are still a gigantic number of new plans that haven't received much practical or theoretical attention, but as this number decreases, I think a new approach of finding a little-known but interesting continuation will become a lot more popular. This trend is already becoming popular among some strong players but by 2020 I think this will be the dominant approach at the elite level. It won't totally surprise me if continuations such as 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Be2 or 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 h6 become popular ways of avoiding the increasing theoretical workload in favour of reaching a struggle.

There is also the possibility of chess being solved by a 32-man tablebase. It is assumed that this will kill the game of chess but I highly doubt this as no human being would be able to remember the entire tablebase. Additionally, this hypertheoretical approach does not pay any attention to the practical side of chess and will not tell you how easy the position is to play for either side, or how difficult the route to a draw for the inferior side is. Even memorising all of the opening theory in a 32-man tablebase would be nearly impossible. Chess will always have a future and be immortal, but I do not see a significant change in today's approach occurring. If a player tries to win out of the opening, the opponent will just deviate with some sideline and we will still have a real game of chess.

And for the record, I predict that the main line of 2020 will be 1.c4. Wink See you here in seven years! Grin

Edit: Corrected a typo.
« Last Edit: 09/10/13 at 12:06:41 by TN »  

All our dreams come true if we have the courage to pursue them.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TalJechin
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no secret ingredient.

Posts: 2892
Location: Malmö
Joined: 08/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Revolution in the 00s
Reply #3 - 09/08/13 at 09:26:28
Post Tools
On Bonsai's #5, the Scandinavian, The rise of 3...Qd6 and White more and more starting to play Nf3 without an early Nc3, which has had a toothless reputation for decades, but suddenly it's apparently the way of holding on to a tiny edge...

Another trend of the 00s may be the adding of a rook pawn move one step in several openings just to surprise and avoid preparations. (e.g. Prie's 1.d4 d5 2.a3, 3.Nd2 h6 in the French, SOS suggesting a3 in the EO and h3 vs the Chebanenko etc etc)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bonsai
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 622
Joined: 03/13/04
Gender: Male
Re: Revolution in the 00s
Reply #2 - 09/08/13 at 08:45:00
Post Tools
  1. Carlsen's way of playing an early d3 in the Ruy Lopez (obviously played before, but before him, would you have expected that as regular guest at the Super-GM level?). Or perhaps it is just a symptom of world-class players trying to play chess rather than overdo the opening preparation, while before the trend sometimes seemed to be the other way around?
  2. Lots of rather concrete stuff like 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 Nbd7 7. f4 e5 8. Nf5 Qb6 in the Najdorf, which looks weird for black, but somehow just works.
  3. How the Sicilian Taimanov has risen in  popularity.
  4. The discovery of 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 0-0 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.Qxc3 d5! in the Nimzo-Indian.
  5. Rise (more in the 90s - see e.g. its use in Kasparov - Anand) and fall of the Scandinavian, particularly of the 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 c6 5.Bc4 Bf5 variant.
  6. In the aforementioned Modern Benoni, in particular the discovery of new ways of playing the b5 line vs. the MML.
  7. Lots of great new ideas in the semi-slav.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
dfan
God Member
*****
Offline


"When you see a bad move,
look for a better one"

Posts: 739
Location: Boston
Joined: 10/04/05
Re: Revolution in the 00s
Reply #1 - 09/08/13 at 00:03:26
Post Tools
I'd add the Chebanenko (4...a6) Slav. It got respectable in the early 1990s but took off in the 2000s.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Aziridine
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 146
Joined: 04/07/09
Revolution in the 00s
09/07/13 at 23:23:32
Post Tools
I was reading Kasparov's "Revolution in the 70s" recently and wondered: what would a book called "Revolution in the 00s" talk about? I think there's no question that the extraordinary increase in strength of chess software over the last decade and its global availability has allowed us to reexamine every nook and cranny of opening theory, and I wonder what the most significant findings have been so far. I don't follow the entire spectrum of theory (I play 1.d4), nor was I watching opening developments in the 90s, so my perspective is extremely limited. Nevertheless I did come up with the following things (in no particular order):

1. The rise of 1.d4 as White's first move of choice at top level.
2. Kramnik's construction of the Berlin Wall.
3. The death (Kramnik-Kasparov) and rebirth (Anand-Gelfand) of the Grunfeld.
4. The explosion in popularity of the Catalan.
5. The emergence of the Slow Slav (4.e3) as a serious opening.
6. The popularization of the Anti-Moscow Gambit.
7. The discovery of White's dynamic chances against the Queen's Indian. (Topalov's games, and especially the 4.g3 Ba6 5.Qc2 Bb7 6.Bg2 c5 7.d5 sacrifice)
8. The revival of the Modern Benoni.
9. The revival of the Tarrasch. (and more recently, the Semi-Tarrasch)
10. The establishment of the MacCutcheon as the main line of the Classical French.
11. The establishment of the Advance as White's main weapon against the Caro-Kann.
12. The development of systems involving ...a6 in the Pirc, Modern and the Dragon.
13. The discovery that various gambits are more playable than previously thought. (Albin, Blumenfeld, Schara-Hennig, Morra, Schliemann, etc.; and people thought computers were going to kill gambit play)

Now it's your turn! Notice I haven't said anything about the Sicilian, since I don't really know what "revolutionary" things happened after the English Attack and Rossolimo exploded in popularity in the 90s (or was the latter a more recent phenomenon? You tell me.)

Have fun Smiley
« Last Edit: 09/08/13 at 02:19:33 by Aziridine »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo