(UTC)
  ChessPub Forum › Chess Publishing Openings › d-Pawn Specials › BDG › BDG againtst the Dutch
(Moderators: CraigEvans, Bibs)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Topic Tools
Normal Topic BDG againtst the Dutch (Read 3682 times)
feb
Junior Member
**
Offline



Posts: 73
Location: maastricht
Joined: 01/31/04
Gender: Male
Re: BDG againtst the Dutch
Reply #4 - 07/18/04 at 14:44:38
Post Tools
I am also under the impression that Black is not worse after 1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 [or in the BDG move-order 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5!?]. I looked into my books on the Dutch which discuss this variation (Beim's "Understanding the Leningrad Dutch", Pedersen's "The Dutch for the Attacking Player" and Gufeld's "An Opening Repertoire for the Attacking Player").
A) 4.f3 e5! is given by all
B) 4.Bf4 Nf6 5.f3 e6 [5...exf3 recommended by Beim and Gufeld, but Pedersen's e6 looks like a good alternative to me] 6.fxe4 fxe4 7.Bc4 Nc6 8.Nge2 [so far Benjamin-Malaniuk 1987] Be7 [Pedersen prefers this to the game continuation 8...Na5, because 8...Na5 9.Bb5+ Bd7 10.0-0 += according to Dautov] 9.a3 0-0 
C) 4.Bg5 is not mentioned
D) 4.Bc4 is not mentioned either, but 4.Bc4 Nc6 5.Bf4 e6 6.Nge2 Nf6 is quite similar to variation B, just White delays f3. I guess White will have to play f3 eventually.
This is all I found, and I wouldn't mind to be Black. Isn't there more about it in the BDG books?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10778
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: BDG againtst the Dutch
Reply #3 - 07/15/04 at 05:14:57
Post Tools
Diemer's evaluations are usually very unreliable.
The reason I care, is this. I know that 1...f5 and in the BDG 3...f5 are considered dubious. But the examples given until now, indicate that Black has as easy equality at least.
Sounds like the BDG is refuted!?
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
AmateurDragoneer
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 387
Location: NY
Joined: 06/17/03
Gender: Male
Re: BDG againtst the Dutch
Reply #2 - 07/14/04 at 13:16:48
Post Tools
Quote:



Schach-Archiv from 1990, gives 5.-Bg7 6.d5 h6 7.Bf4 e5 8.dxe6 Qxd1 9.Rxd1 Bxe6 10.Bxc7 = (4.Bg5 is also given "?!")

More promising accoding to S-A, is either Diemer's 4.Bc4 (or 4.Bf4 e6 5.f3 which later ends with "mit ausreichender Kompensation.") Nc6 5.Bf4! e6 6.Nge2 "und weiss steht aktiv". 4.-Nxd4 "Schlagen auf d4 ist gefährlich." 5.Nd5!


For those who don't understand German:

"mit ausreichender Kompensation" ----- "with sufficient compensation

"und weiss steht aktiv" ----"and white stands active"

"Schlagen auf d4 ist gefahrlich"---------- "The capture at d4 is dangerous"

Grin
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Panda
Guest


Re: BDG againtst the Dutch
Reply #1 - 07/14/04 at 06:19:35
Post Tools
Interesting transposition! 

f5, defending a gambited e4 pawn, is usually considered dubious. So maybe 2.-Nf6 is the soundest. But many people thinks 1.-f5 is dubious as well, so should one care??  ???  Cheesy

Anyway, here's my 2 cents on the matter:

Quote:
C)4.Bg5 (not mentioned by W) and according to S best is g6 5.f3 Nf6 6.Bxf6 exf6 7.fxe4 fxe4 8.Nxe4 = but that is questionable of course.


Schach-Archiv from 1990, gives 5.-Bg7 6.d5 h6 7.Bf4 e5 8.dxe6 Qxd1 9.Rxd1 Bxe6 10.Bxc7 = (4.Bg5 is also given "?!")

More promising accoding to S-A, is either Diemer's 4.Bc4 (or 4.Bf4 e6 5.f3 which later ends with "mit ausreichender Kompensation.") Nc6 5.Bf4! e6 6.Nge2 "und weiss steht aktiv". 4.-Nxd4 "Schlagen auf d4 ist gefährlich." 5.Nd5!



Leisebein - Mallina [D00]
corr corr, 1988

1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.Bc4 e5 5.Bxg8 Rxg8 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxh7 Rg7 8.Qh8 exd4 9.Bh6 Rf7 10.0-0-0 Qf6! 0-1

S-A 1989, recommends 5.dxe5! +=


Perhaps black should take a more solid stance, with e6 and c6, as in the following game? That is probably how I would play it I think. For example:

Milanovic,V (2240) - Lukasiewicz,G (2330) [A80]
Kecskemet Dutep op Kecskemet, 1989

1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.Bf4 e6 6.Qd2 c6 7.0-0-0 Be7 8.Nge2 0-0 9.f3 b5 10.Bb3 a5 11.a4 b4 12.Nb1 Nd5 13.fxe4 fxe4 14.g3 Nd7 15.c4 N5f6 16.Qc2 c5 17.dxc5 Qe8 18.c6 Nc5 19.Nd4 e5 20.Bxe5 Ng4 21.Bf4 Nd3+ 22.Rxd3 exd3 23.Qg2 Bf6 24.Nb5 Qe2 25.Qxe2 dxe2 26.c5+ Kh8 27.Re1 Nf2 28.Rxe2 Nd3+ 29.Kd2 Nxc5 30.Be5 Bg4 31.Re1 Rad8+ 32.Nd6 Na6 33.Kc1 g5 34.Nf7+ Rxf7 35.Bxf7 Bxe5 36.Rxe5 Nb8 37.Be6 Bxe6 38.Rxe6 Kg7 39.Nd2 Rc8 40.Kb1 Rxc6 41.Re8 Nd7 42.Ra8 Nc5 43.Rxa5 Nd3 44.Rb5 Rc1+ 45.Ka2 Rc2 0-1

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10778
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
BDG againtst the Dutch
07/14/04 at 05:09:22
Post Tools
Some time ago I noticed a peculiar transposition:
1.d4 d5 2.e4 (2.Nc3 f5) dxe4 3.Nc3 f5!?
1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 dxe4
My sources are Sawyer's book on the BDG 1st version and Williams' book on the Dutch
A)4.f3 e5! (both S and W)
B)4.Bf4 is Benjamin-Malanjuk, Moscow 1989. S thinks that White has good chances; W states that Black is better.
C)4.Bg5 (not mentioned by W) and according to S best is g6 5.f3 Nf6 6.Bxf6 exf6 7.fxe4 fxe4 8.Nxe4 = but that is questionable of course.
Is this another solid defense against the BDG or a dangerous way to combat the Dutch? I must admit, that both outcomes will suit me well.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Topic Tools
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board Top  

ChessPub Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge