Dick wrote on 05/12/06 at 05:03:55:


See my post on Roman's DVD in this thread.

Tumshie:  Welcome to ChessPublishing.com.  Don't worry about your rating and focus on whether or not you're having fun and improving your game.  As for the Pirc, I think few strong players would argue it offers Black as much as the Najdorf, the Spanish, etc. at the highest level.  But at club level...well, just about any decent system that you undertand will probably serve you well.  After all, people make it to GM using the only the Colle or the London System.   

For mere mortals like us, the emphasis is on you and your game, and not the opening itself.  So, play the openings you like and try not to blame your opening for your losses (or your wins).  Also, try to look at annotated games from strong players in other systems to improve your overall game and broaden your understanding of openings in general. Don't just focus on Modern or Pirc games against 1.e4  You'll find ideas in lots of unexpected places.

BTW, watch out for transpositions!  Some players are very crafty with their move orders.   I was amazed to discover that a Nimzo can transpose into a Caro-Kann and a Pirc can sometimes become an Alekhine.

So, the Pirc is not well received at the top right now, but it is still an interesting system and will definitely improve your understanding of the game.  I think 'Pirc Alert' and 'Tiger's Modern' will serve as an excellent foundation.  I've won many games against players rated higher than me and easily (surprisingly easily) beat a national master in a line consider to be clearly better for white by theory.  The main reason was that when theory ran out, I understood the position better than he did.    
 
Anyway, don't give up but also don't forget that there are probably other reasons you went from 1220 to 1570 besides the opening.   Stay objective!  Finally, Tiger Hillarp Persson is a very strong player and he plays the Modern against all comers.  Keep the Faith!

Folks:
Has anyone made an evaluation of "Die Pirc, Die!" on the Roman Site?  I have had good luck with the Classical approach he suggested there.   

Roman gives The classical variation with an early h3. where white strives hard to limit blacks counterplay. If white is loaded with patience I think this defense can be quite annoying for black.

Roman and Alburt will most likely have the classical variation in the repertoire of their coming book.
I bought Romans DVD "Easy way to beat the Pirc and Modern."  Good DVD!!

Quote:


I found when playing the Czech variation that pretty much everyone trots out 4. f4 against it, unlike the main Pirc. I'd tried the 6. ... Bg4 lines which I think are ok, but I 've given 6. ... Nbd7 a try for some variety. So I was interested to see what Khalifman had to say against it. 

I'll now direct you to page 107 and the final diagram in this Chapter. Up to now, I don't think Khalifman has has demomstrated anything scary for Black in this line. He gives 15. ... Ng4 16. h3 +=. OK. But in the Paragraph above he gives "After 15. ... Bb4, White can sacrifice: 16. exf6!" But in this line, rather than 17. ... Be6 or 17. ...gxf6, Black can play 17. ... Bf5! 18. Re5 Bxd3 19. Rxh5 Bxf1=

I'm very impressed with Khalifman's analysis of these offbeat variations, even if he did include one of my games to demonstrate how not to play as Black, but it shows that even ex-World Champions aren't infallable 

i have played the pirc for awhile but found it difficult to remember how to counter the various White tries (all seem to require very different, and frequently tactically-specific maneuvers). 

The biggest problem for Black in the Pirc is not any specific line per se, but that White's position is *extremely* easy to play in general, so the onus to study theory is more on Black than White. 
In this aspect i think it is possible to study less in the Sicilian than the Pirc, and still get a playable position out of the opening.

Quote:


OFWATA 4 gives systems based on f4 for White (the so-called Austrian Attack);

Emms gives 4 Be3;

Collins gives 4 Bg5;

Kaufman gives 4 Be3 against the Pirc but 3 Nf3 and 4 c3 against the Modern.

I started playing the Pirc about 25 years ago after reading Keene and Levy's Opening Repertoire for the Attacking player. I've dabbled with other stuff, but I'm now back playing it after a 7 year break (not counting 2 years with the Czech variation). 

Before taking it up again I hit the books and recent game databases and saw nothing to put me off returning to it. Quite the opposite!

I scored 2/3 in my first tournament after this break and the loss was mainly because of a schoolboy 0-0 error at the wrong time in the Byrne variation error (all the Pirc players will be tutting now  ). When normal looking moves are bad, it can put you off the opening, but actually I still could have turned it round after that. 

My two wins were very satisfying, one where I had to defend well, and one where I got a good attack. All in all, I'm happy to be back with my old friend 

Thats an interersting point from Paddy about conceding space advantage. I'm currently reading Chinese School of Chess where the authour mentions his SSS principle, Strategy, Structure and Space and theorises that Space may be the most important one. But he then goes onto show some fine wins by Chinese Players with the King's Indian!

He also mentions the importance of analysing your own games. He's spot on with this one. Are you really losing games because of the opening? I find in my case it's rare.

As for gaps in book theory, well I see that as an opportunity to fill them myself. I find it very satisfying to do this. In Khalifman's OfWatA, I found an instant equality against one of the lines he recommends against the Czech variation. 

So I wouldn't dispair about the Pirc. If some lines are causing you trouble, then study them. If all lines are, then maybe this isn't the defence for you!