did anyone ever refute the 5.nbd2 qe7 line for black? It looks tricky at least

MNb wrote on 12/31/04 at 07:57:14:


1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.de d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Nbd2 Bf5 6.a3 Qd7 MNb also mentions 7.b4, but I found some interesting games with 7...Bxb4, and also a game with 7...Qe6, looking to regain the gambit pawn since white is playing somewhat slowly (the pin set up on the d file with a ...000 looks nice for black).

In this thread, MNb also gave 6.Nb3 Bb4+ 7.Bd2 Qe7 8.Bb4 Qb4+ 9.Qd2 as better for white, but why not 9...Qd2+? For example: 10.Nbd2 000 11.000 Nge7 12.e3 Ng6 to play ...Nxe5?  

I too am an ex Albin player, MNb (but I prefer 5...Bf5 over 5...Nge7 in answer to 5.g3 or 5.Nbd2) so the Albin's soundness is interesting to me for some of the same reasons.


Here's one reason why I'm reluctant to play the Albin:

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.de d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.g3 Bf5 6.Bg2 Qd7 7.00 (the line '5...Bf5 Albin players' hope for!?) 

Now 7...Bh6 (7...000 8.Qb3 has been miserable for black, although IM Tim Taylor tried 7...000 against GM Varuzhan Akobian who prefered 8.Qa4 Bh3 9.a3 Bg2 10.Kg2 h5 11.h4 Nh6 12.b4 Kb8 13.b5 Ne7 14.Bg5 in 03'; white eventually won. I offer 9...h5 as a possible improvement, with the idea of getting in a quick ...h4 before white can block it with h4 as GM Akobian did.) 

8.e6 ("...buys white a move. In this position, black would have no qualms about that at all, but in another situation..." C.Ward) 8...Be6

But now I have a qualm with 9.Qb3. I tried 9...Na5 but then lost to 10.Qd3, which seems to give white a nice advantage, while 9...Rb8 looks wrong although it may threaten 10...b5 to win the pinned c4 pawn.

alumbrado wrote on 12/20/07 at 11:36:27:



As well it should, as this line is not so good for white giving away all initiative and fighting for equality after move 3.

If anyone wants to try something off-beat against the Albin, take a look at

http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1122821205/105#116

dealing with 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.Nc3. This seems no as innocent as theory wants us to believe.
Please scroll down a bit.

GM Flear,

If you can't advertise yourself here, where can you promote your work?

As you may have read in some other posts, I loved your The Slav for the Tournament Player and hope you'll write an updated version soon.  I know that you recently published a Starting Out book on the Slav and Semi-Slav, but it just made me hungrier for a more theoretical book on the Slav itself.  Do you have any plans for such a book in the future?

Urusov, 

I took a look at your website and you have some interesting information there.  The Albin seems well suited to players such as Morozevich who like to fish in murky water.   

Moro is well known for his love of obscure lines that work well in blitz, and even in longer games but he never sits still.  His repertoire would probably not withstand the close scrutiny of repeatedly playing the same lines against other 2700+ players so he is wise to mix things up quite a bit.

Of course, if he can be successful this way at the elite level an expert should be able to do similarly well at the expert level.  I know from personal experience that I face the Albin about 3 times in a decade.  My record in my last three were 1-2.  The one win was in a slow time control and the two losses were in fast time controls.  I don't think that's a coincidence.

My opponent all three times was the same expert who is a very nice guy with lots and lots of tricks up his sleeve.  But I just don't believe in his opening. 

Unfortunately for me though, I don't invest very much time working out the middle game plans in the Albin because I just don't see them very often.  And my laziness bites me every time I play him a quick game!

Your website mostly confirms what I already know:  The Albin is very tricky, but it isn't a reliable weapon unless you have many such tricky openings in your repertoire or you don't play in very many tournaments.

That's right.  Also explains Nakamura's success.

- Lost Highway