(UTC)
Latest Updates:
(Moderators: proustiskeen, Jupp53)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Slav or QGA (Read 16460 times)
slates
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 507
Location: England
Joined: 01/27/05
Gender: Male
Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #23 - 02/19/06 at 19:25:38
Post Tools
One other line that could put people off the QGA, in addition to those mentioned by Semkov and the 3 e4 variation, is the one mentioned by Geoff Strayer where Black scores very poorly -  1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 a6 5.Bxc4 e6 6.0-0 c5 7.dxc5.  I've been looking at this in Rizzitano's book where he gives nearly a page worth of text discussing this 'deceptively quiet continuation'.  This line is also mentioned by the reviewer at Seagaard as being 'One line that could really scare me off from taking on the QGA' - he also notes that Semkov's book (first edition at least) doesn't spend much time on the line, focussing on 7...Qxd1. This weighting may be right, as Geoff's database search showed it to be the most common move for Black, but the score was quite worrying for Black - the reviewer at Seagaard makes reference to Kasparov's choice of 7...Bxc5 in his draw with Kramnik at Linares 2004, and Rizzitano concludes that Black's seventh move is primarily a matter of taste (he offers both moves as part of his repertoire), but for people like myself and possibly Scott who began this thread then moves like this should not be forgotten in our attempts to get to grips with the viability of the QGA.  In the shadows of 7 a4, 7 Bb3, and 3 e4 lurk the very real dangers of such lines as this, the Two Knights and the Furman (a separate thread discusses this one and is worth reading).  Not to try to put anyone off the QGA, myself included, but there are a multitude of options that White can use.  Geoff Strayer's point is to be remembered;
Quote:
2)   Required Preparation:  There is a lot of theory on both openings.  My feeling is that 
      the QGA may have a greater number of dangerous lines for Black than a  
      solid variation of the Slav, in the sense that you can't necessarily survive by  
      playing natural moves.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
slates
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 507
Location: England
Joined: 01/27/05
Gender: Male
Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #22 - 02/19/06 at 18:56:25
Post Tools
I found that Semkov thread where he kindly gives some opinions on the QGA and in particular the game mentioned in this thread, Beliavsky-Sermek.  It's worth reading again;

Quote:
There were some important topics about QGA problems, so I decided to cover them in a separate thread. 
1. The game 
Beliavsky,A (2599) - Sermek,D (2532) [D20] 
XVI Vidmar Mem Portoroz SLO (1), 09.07.2005 
does not change my overall evaluation of the 5...Nc6 line as being slightly better for White. Still I prefer 12.b3 or 12.Qd3 0-0 13.h3. 
 
1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 e5 4.Nf3 exd4 5.Bxc4 Nc6 6.0-0 Be6 7.Bxe6 fxe6 8.Qb3 Qd7 9.Qxb7 Rb8 10.Qa6 Nf6 11.Nbd2 Bd6 12.a3 0-0 13.b4  
   This is an ambitious plan. If it works tactically, White will be clearly better. It seems that 13...Ng4 14.Bb2 Nce5 15.h3 is in White's favour, so Sermek's decision to change plans looks consistent. White has committed himself with b4, so Black can obtain counterplay with a5.  
 
13...e5 14.Ne1 Rb6 (preparing a5) 15.Qe2  
    White's plan is clear now. He wants to block the d4-pawn by knight. 
 
15...Qe6 (I'd think about 15...Rbb8 intending a5) 16.Nc4 Rbb8 17.Bd2 Nd7  
 Critical is 17...d3!? At least this is the way to exploit the absence of the queen from d3. The sacrifice of the d-pawn (often on d4) is a typical resource in that line. 18.Qxd3 Rbd8 19.Nf3 Bxb4 20.Qc2 Bxd2 21. Ncxd2 Nh5 with unclear position. 
 
2. In the 7.Bb3 system the most testing answer is 7...b5. 
The IQP positions may be playable and complex, but Black is unable to reach them if the opponent does not comply! For instance 7...Nc6 8.Qe2!? and I do not see how to get tangled play. 
 
3. For those that are looking for a killer system against the QGA, 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 is a good field to investigate. It is far from comfortable for Black and still unclear. 
Semkov 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
slates
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 507
Location: England
Joined: 01/27/05
Gender: Male
Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #21 - 02/19/06 at 18:11:54
Post Tools
@ Michael

Good! Nice that it's sparked your interest. I looked at the Tango very briefly after reading your comments, but I dare not go down that road just yet.  Admittedly it's one of the few defences to 1 d4 I haven't tried properly, but even so I don't feel that it is going to be the end of my quest, if indeed there is one.  I feel that the QGA or the NID/QID complex may be my solution, but there's a little part of me that keeps telling me I'll end up back where I started, i.e. the QGD.  I hope that doesn't happen, though..... I yearn for something new, but sound, that can become my 'opening for life'.  

Both the Slav and the QGA could be such a thing for people - I don't think the Slav is right for me, but I'm still working it out about the QGA.   Such is chess, as you say....
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1976
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #20 - 02/18/06 at 23:24:50
Post Tools
@ Inn2.  I agree, the h4 ideas are the most critical Tango lines. They're also, I confess, lines on which I haven't done enough homework, though I did look a lot at 5 h4 a while back. I'll try to start a thread on these lines sometime soon.

@ slates.  You may not be interested in the Tango just yet, but you've got me interested in the QGA! Such is chess ...

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



Posts: 507
Location: England
Joined: 01/27/05
Gender: Male
Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #19 - 02/18/06 at 16:28:47
Post Tools
Thanks for the game reference.  I've had another look at this game - I remember now, Sermek played 13...e5 instead of 13...Ng4 as had been played in the Rogozenko-Ibragimov game we mentioned in (yet) another thread on this line.  I don't know whether or nor Semkov's post on this game still exists - I'll take a look in a minute - but I wonder if the line is covered in the second edition of Semkov/Sakaev's QGA book?  I know Rizzitano doesn't mention 13...e5, but I recall that both Semkov and also I think Inn2 or John Simmons both expressed the opinion that White's plan with a3 and b4 looks dangerous for Black.   

Anyway, the Black Knight's Tango is going to have to wait a while longer before I can discover it...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
lnn2
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1504
Location: nc
Joined: 09/22/04
Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #18 - 02/18/06 at 03:25:39
Post Tools
i read Palliser's Knights Tango book some time ago, and thought h4 lines are most problematic. Among various h4 variations, especially didn't like 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 Nc6 3. Nc3 e5 4. d5 Ne7 5. Nf3 Ng6 6. h4 for Black (game was Ward-Palliser i believe?), which may well be even stronger than the 5.e4 Ng6 6. h4 recommended in Palliser's Play 1. d4. 

and yes Beliavsky-Sermek is the game mentioned in QGA thread.. where Semkov kindly pointed out some improvements.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1976
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #17 - 02/17/06 at 14:28:11
Post Tools
I'd strongly second John Cox's recommendation of the "Black Knights' Tango" (= the Kevitz-Trajkovic Defence)! It normally (not quite necessarily) also involves playing the Zurich variation of the Nimzo, but I hope that wouldn't put you off, and Richard Palliser's book on it (which fully covers the Nimzo lines) is a great guide!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
slates
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 507
Location: England
Joined: 01/27/05
Gender: Male
Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #16 - 02/17/06 at 14:06:31
Post Tools
Incidentally - I just bought your d4 deviations book - it's not arrived yet (come on, amazon) but I'm looking forward to it..... what's your next project?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
slates
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 507
Location: England
Joined: 01/27/05
Gender: Male
Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #15 - 02/17/06 at 14:05:24
Post Tools
Thanks John.  Thought about that book as I'd heard good things about it but I was scared to go looking as I already own too many chess books and play too many openings (poorly!)......
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
John Cox(Guest)
Guest


Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #14 - 02/17/06 at 13:52:47
Post Tools
Think the game you want is probably Belyavsky-Sermek, don't know where, don't know when.

Many good posts earlier, but if you are looking for a slightly different defence to d4, you might want to have a look some time at Richard Palliser's book on the Black Knight's Tango.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
slates
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 507
Location: England
Joined: 01/27/05
Gender: Male
Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #13 - 02/17/06 at 13:29:06
Post Tools
Thanks Inn2 - Geoff's post was indeed excellent but yours is also extremely useful; concise and thought-provoking.  I find myself agreeing with everything you say - we touched on this in a thread (or two) on the Slav, but I now also feel that everything after 6 Ne5 in the Slav is unsatisfactory for me.  I know that stronger players than myself continue down this road, but it isn't right for me personally, neither is the bishop sac line in the Slav.  Neither is the ...a6 Slav - tried it for a few months but as you say I only ever really felt I got passive positions that I was incapable of playing well.  The Semi Slav appeals to me but again I am incapable of playing it well - it's too complicated for me both tactically and strategically.  Also, against both the Slav and Semi Slav the Exchange variation is hardly something to look forward to - and as Geoff says, the Semi Slav via a 2...e6 move order and the potential for a QGD exchange is not something most Black players would welcome, either. So for all those reasons you guys have reminded me of, the QGA doesn't seem a bad idea at all....

One more thing - I seem to remember Semkov posting analysis to a game (someone-Beliavsky???) featuring the QGA 3.e4 line with the Bishop exchange on e6 and talking about his thoughts that White may be able to improve/consolidate on his better position in this line.......does anyone else remember where this thread is, or did it get lost in the crash?

Thanks all
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
lnn2
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1504
Location: nc
Joined: 09/22/04
Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #12 - 02/17/06 at 12:59:14
Post Tools
hello, geof's excellent post summarises everything. But also consider the critical lines of each openings and see if you are satisfied. 

Slav  4... dxc4 5. a4 Bf5 6. Ne5: I much prefer White here. Aronian-I.Sokolov Corus06 looks like a severe blow to 11... f6 as a whole (see related thread), and i can't remember a significant game when Black last won with 11... g5. Also sidelines like 6... Nbd7 7. Nxc4 Nb6 8. Ne5 a5 9. f3 and 7... Nd5 8. f3 look a bit too comfortable for White, especially over long OTB games. Not to say any of these variations aren't playable, and improvements can still be found with computers!

Slav 4... a6: Does White have a clear edge here?! Black is slightly passive in all the major variations (5. e3, 5. c5, 5. a4), but its not easy for White to score the full point.

Semi-Slav: well you got to like the Black side of the Botvinnik/Moscow... if so, then this is very rewarding.

Actually, compared to all of the above, some might well conclude that Black is actually in better shape in the critical QGA lines (3. e4, 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3, and 7. Bb3)  than the crtical Slav lines mentioned above! I think both Slav and QGA are roughly of equal theoretical value, and much depends on taste in the end.  Huh
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
slates
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 507
Location: England
Joined: 01/27/05
Gender: Male
Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #11 - 02/17/06 at 08:59:11
Post Tools
Good advice. I know that what you say makes sense, I just haven't found a defence I am comfortable with yet.  I think the key thing, as you say, is to study the middlegame positions that arise.  I've looked at pretty much every defence there is to 1 d4, but not in enough detail.  I instantly liked positions in the Sicilian, so 1 e4 was fine, but against 1 d4 there is nothing much I like consistently.  I prefer the QGA to the Slav, though, to keep things at least a little on topic - I think I'll look more deeply at both the QGA and the NID/QID complex.  It'll take maybe a year or so to formulate an opinion and get used to the positions, and even doing this is perhaps wrong (ie studying both at the same time), but at least I need to spend some quality time with something rather than hopping around.  Thanks for the advice and apologies for straying from the original post - but one thing leads to another.  There certainly seem to be many things in favour of the QGA, so that might be a more practical choice for me (I don't play in tournaments yet - maybe one day) against my opponents.  The NID/QID appeals to me as a more 'correct' defence, but as Geoff Strayer's post should remind me, the QGA has been used at the highest levels too, so I guess I'm splitting hairs.  Finally, I should note that you're right to support Rizzitano, if for nothing other than producing a high quality opening book IMHO - if only all authors put in as much effort.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RotGut
Junior Member
**
Offline


HUH!?!

Posts: 98
Location: Suburb North of Boston
Joined: 01/26/06
Gender: Male
Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #10 - 02/16/06 at 17:39:34
Post Tools
While I can understand your frustration in trying to find a comfortable defense against 1.)d4 you must find something you can feel happy with and stick with it. May I suggest you take a look at all the defenses against 1.)d4 and really look at the middlegame positions that commonly arise from these openings. When you do this you will find the middlegame positions you most feel comfortable with & that should solve you problems in regards to jumping from opening to opening. Simply put work backwards Shocked & you will find the opening for you Wink 
 
When I first started out my defense to 1.)d4 was kind of shaky and I toyed with the Kings Indian & Grunfeld for awile. I settled on the Nimzo & Queens Indian because I liked alot of the different lines & middlegame positions. Be aware though these two openings require a great deal of time just to get a reasonable amount knowledge to keep you from getting blown off the board. 

If your really going to devote yourself to the Nimzo let me suggest that instead of adding the Queens try the Bogo instead. There is a great deal less theory than the Queens Indian and it is just as effective.

Again, in regards to the QGA I find myself resorting to it more frequently. My reasons as stated above is just for variety & I like the positions. I play a lot of tournament chess & with databases, in which some of my games do appear, I want to make my opponants preperation as difficult as possible. Also remember this key fact: THE OPENING IS JUST ONE PHASE OF THE GAME. The great majority of chess games are won or lost in the middlegame. 

  The book 'How to Beat 1d4' is being warmly received. Though it is a book that is geared toward the more serious tourney player. I have ordered a copy of it and plan to see what lines the author is focusing on and his reasoning for it. Besides the author is a fellow New Englander so I gotta support the home team! Cheesy  
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
slates
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 507
Location: England
Joined: 01/27/05
Gender: Male
Re: Slav or QGA
Reply #9 - 02/16/06 at 17:17:51
Post Tools
OK, thanks, that makes sense.  I hop around from opening to opening far too much when looking for something against 1 d4 - I'm fine with 1 e4, but the Queens Pawn gets me every time.  Still, I'm going to have another look at the whole NID/QID thing as I'm not doing so well with the QGA.  Rizzitano's book, whilst not as daunting as Semkov/Sakaev's perhaps, is still a lot of work ...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
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