Could you name numbers or games? For example, how high is your rating?

Actually, it's pretty much ok for me to see the lines proposed by Mikhalevski against the Nbd2 line. If White wants nothing, then we make a draw and get on. And these are not dead drawn lines, Black just gets equality. I'm not sure if the Bg4 lines are that nice for Black because White can simply put up an attack on the kingside with pretty easy motivs. Maybe one can fix the lines, but me surely not

CarriedbyGg wrote on 04/05/15 at 14:38:53:


[edited a couple of numbers]

I had the same problem. Mikhalevski clearly worked hard on the book, but the repertoire doesn't seem like a great choice of lines for ordinary players. I looked into Bg4 a bit, but mostly just succeeded in convincing myself that White is better there. It seems like against everything other than 9.c3 (which White is kind to keep playing OTB at all), Black either gives White a healthy advantage, or grovels for a draw.

My way of dealing with this was to basically just give up on the Open Defense. In my opinion it is more trouble than it is worth. Honestly not sure why anyone plays it at this point. Heck, in 46 games with the Open in the last 10 years, Mikhalevski himself has a performance rating (I mean performance minus actual rating) of -98. By contrast, his performance rating after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 is -6! Probably as a result of this, his performance against 1.e4 on the whole is -73 whereas his performance against 1.d4 is -9. Maybe he would benefit from learning a new defense to 1.e4 himself. 

PANFR wrote on 11/18/14 at 19:48:16:

maybe he does, but the game isn't in the database yet because the tournament still isn't finished

PANFR wrote on 01/14/14 at 18:30:05:

seems like Mikhalevski has discovered 17.Na3 too now (see his last update)

ErictheRed wrote on 03/08/14 at 11:56:22:



White was slightly better in the game and also on my analysis 

Now you've changed your line again; previously you had 15...Qd7 which looked perfectly acceptable to Black to me. 



Black hits e4 with tempo and will then swing the queen to g6, which looks perfectly fine (without doing serious analysis) to me.

I'm glad that you supply variations (lots of other posters don't!), but some explanation of why you don't like a line would be helpful.  Anyhow Black seems to be OK in multiple lines here.

PANFR wrote on 03/07/14 at 19:14:40:


I am sorry but I am not able to understand which c5 are you talking  ...Please tell me

Chandra,

I won't pretend to know anything about the Open Lopez, but my first thought is: is there anything wrong with 13...Rb8, which looks natural to me?  That was played by Timman against Nunn back in the 80's and analyzed somewhere, though I don't remember where I saw it.  Maybe Glen Flear's older book, maybe Secrets of Grandmaster Chess, I have no idea. 

By the way, it isn't clear to me at all what's wrong with your 13...Bc5 line.  Black looks OK there to me, but maybe there's something I'm missing. 

I might not be the best person to help, but my point is that if you want help, you'd better explain what's wrong with your sidelines (and even main line), as I don't see much problem with Black's game after 17...Nxg5 in your 13...Bc5 line, among other confusions.