(UTC)
Latest Updates:
  ChessPub Forum › Chess Publishing Openings › French › C10-C14: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
(Moderators: proustiskeen, Smyslov_Fan)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) C10-C14: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French (Read 6394 times)
Strptzr
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 207
Location: Gent
Joined: 11/05/05
Re: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
Reply #14 - 11/08/05 at 12:01:48
Post Tools
Perhaps this is not a concern of yours but the Classical is inescapable against the Van Geet (1.Nc3) and the Veresov(1.d4, d5 2. Nc3 etc...) So, if you want to be prepared to those transpositions the answer is clear...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10758
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
Reply #13 - 11/07/05 at 21:45:21
Post Tools
Thanks for this link. As a simple patzer I must admit, that I do not like the Qd1-d2-e2 manoeuvre. Is there a justification for this loss of tempo?
  
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
 
John Simmons
Guest


Re: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
Reply #12 - 11/07/05 at 10:12:20
Post Tools
Hello,

Hunted a bit to find a suitable thread, but found some nice analysis of the already classic Berg v Bareev 05 game. Particularly interesting for Burn variation fans...

http://www.e3e5.com/eng/petersburg/creativity/article.html?120

Bye John S
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
basqueknight
Ex Member


Re: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
Reply #11 - 04/26/05 at 23:31:07
Post Tools
I play a rubinstien only against 3.Nd2 and i play a classical any other time but i never have to worry about Chatard-Alekhine Attack because i play a burn variation with gxf6 a very dynamic and fun way to play a french popularized by Morozevich on of the great french heroes of today.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
lnn2
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1504
Location: nc
Joined: 09/22/04
Re: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
Reply #10 - 04/13/05 at 22:35:51
Post Tools
As a C-K player i have also investigated the rubinstein and burn. The latter is slightly more preferable in my opinion. Because White is committed to Bg5, which he might not want to play. 

I also like the MacC. Anything except the classical 4...Be7.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
M.Nb
Guest


Re: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
Reply #9 - 04/13/05 at 21:09:38
Post Tools
I have played the Anderssen Attack (not Anderson, it is named after the first Wch) for several years, with reasonable success, as it is a bit underestimated. But I run into a strong defence one will not find into the books: 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.Bxf6 Bxf6 6.e5 (6.Nf3 c5) Be7 7.Qg4 o-o
A) 8.Bd3 f5 9.Qh3 c5 10.dxc5 Nc6 11.f4 Qa5 12.o-o-o d4 13.Nb1 Nb4 was better for Black in Firmenich-Unterbusch,1943.
b) 8.o-o-o c5! 9.dxc5 Nc6 10.f4 Bxc5 11.Nf3?! f5 12.Qh3 Be3+ and alas I have forgotten the name of my opponent. Somewhat better is 11.Bd3 f5 12.Qh3 a6 13.g4 Nb4 14.gxf5 Nxd3+ 15.Rxd3 Rxf5 16.Nge2 Qf8 17.Rhd1 Honfi-Czerniak, Pecs 1964, b5 and Black is at least equal.

In the same thread on the Alekhine-Chatard attack you can find my opinion: 6...h6 is interesting for both sides.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Willempie
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 4312
Location: Holland
Joined: 01/07/05
Re: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
Reply #8 - 04/13/05 at 17:42:33
Post Tools
Dont know much about the Nf6 variations as I play Winawer, though if you play this it is very good to combine it with Nf6 against the Tarrasch as the structure after 4e5 in both variations is essentially the same. I wouldnt recommend the Burn/Rubinstein as it is very passive and imho the only risk white really runs is losing on time because he fell asleep. So if you dont like the Winawer I agree with the other posters who recommend either the MacCutcheon or the classical. I am not very knowledgeable on the Mac, but the Be7 variation has a couple of annoying options for white, like the Anderson (Bxf6) and the above mentioned C-A attack(which I know as the A-C).
  
If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Fernando Semprun
Senior Member
****
Offline


Be nice to others. Life
is to be enjoyed!

Posts: 402
Location: Madrid
Joined: 04/29/03
Gender: Male
Re: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
Reply #7 - 04/13/05 at 17:29:57
Post Tools
When I studied the French (Classical) I decided to play 4.Bg5 de4 5.Ne4 Nbd7 (here you could also play Be7 and gf6 for a dynamic position)

I lost horribly to Kharlov and did not play the French anymore. It is not really suited for my play although I consider it good.

You may want to look into this...
  
Fernando Semprun
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HgMan
God Member
*****
Offline


Demand me nothing: What
you know, you know

Posts: 2330
Location: Up on Cripple Creek
Joined: 11/09/04
Gender: Male
Re: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
Reply #6 - 04/13/05 at 12:42:27
Post Tools
Quote:
I think the true Classical (with 4.Bg5 Be7) interesting, especially the variations with an early a6 and b5, leaving the king in the centre for a while.


I've become rather pessimistic with the Classical with 4 ... Be7.  I've been playing in a Chatard-Alekhine Attack (4 Bg5 Be7 5 e5 Nfd7 6 h4) thematic correspondence tournament, and I really don't think Black has good chances (see other threads on C-A Attack).   

I prefer the Classical to the Rubinstein, but would strongly recommend the MacCutcheon over 4 ... Be7.

MNb has an impersonator?
  
"Luck favours the prepared mind."  --Louis Pasteur
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10758
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
Reply #5 - 04/13/05 at 05:27:23
Post Tools
The last post of M.Nb is not mine.
  
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
 
Fernando Semprun
Senior Member
****
Offline


Be nice to others. Life
is to be enjoyed!

Posts: 402
Location: Madrid
Joined: 04/29/03
Gender: Male
Re: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
Reply #4 - 04/13/05 at 02:07:37
Post Tools
Classical is richer in content... more theory to learn.

Rubinstein is conceptual, you'll have to be an endgame wizard to squeeze a win unless white overpresses, but you do not need (almost any) theory...
  
Fernando Semprun
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
M.Nb
Guest


Re: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
Reply #3 - 04/12/05 at 23:43:59
Post Tools
Well i think the rubinstein is quite good.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
M.Nb
Guest


Re: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
Reply #2 - 04/12/05 at 20:46:13
Post Tools
I think the true Classical (with 4.Bg5 Be7) interesting, especially the variations with an early a6 and b5, leaving the king in the centre for a while.
The Rubinstein is probably too passive to create winning chances for Black. White can foster a small, but enduring advantage, because he has better control of the centre and Black has problems with his Queen's Bishop. White can also strive for a king's attack by castling queenside.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JEGutman
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


Psychological draw offers
are the key to success.

Posts: 41
Location: Pasadena
Joined: 12/09/04
Gender: Male
Re: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
Reply #1 - 04/12/05 at 19:35:39
Post Tools
Of those two (I'm assuming you're not just limiting yourself to Nf6 Bg5 Be7 which is the true classical) I would play the McCutcheon, but I think of different winawer lines you're more likely to find something you like.  I realize there is a lot of theory in the winawer, but most of it is very logical and easy to understand.  I suggest considering the winawer line I play with e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 a3 Bc3 bc Ne7 Qg4 0-0 Bd3 f5, it's pretty trick, good chances to equalize quickly if you understand the position.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Nausikaa
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 20
Joined: 12/02/04
C10-C14: Rubinstein v.s. Classical French
04/12/05 at 16:10:45
Post Tools
Hi, 

Iwant to start playing the French. I am thinking oplaying either the Rubinstein variation or the Classical French (with 
3... Nf6) as they seem to be easier to play than the Winawer. Which of these two variations would you recommend? Advantages - Disadvantages? Is there a reason why the Rubinstein isn't that popular anymore?

« Last Edit: 08/02/11 at 20:21:05 by dom »  
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 © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge