This does get tricky.  I had imagined making the Nimzo-Indian the main plank of my defense to 1 d4, but needed a response to 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3.  I may still opt for the Queen's Indian, but the Blumenfeld realy appeals.  But it does seem as though committing to 3 ... c5 means that Black should prepare not only 4 d5 b5, but also 4 Nc3 d5 and the Semi-Tarrasch.  For correspondence chess, this kind of preparation is less immediately onerous, as less memorization is required, but I'll have to think seriously about the compatibility of these various positions when it comes to middlegame ideas (it makes the QID seem more attractive, though I'm not sure I'm ready to give up on the Blumenfeld)...

MNb wrote on 03/27/06 at 02:29:27:


MNb: Thanks again for sharing this game.  8 e4 looks awful and 12 ... Bb4+ is a nice move.

I was interested, though, in your comment after move 6 that Black should only enter into the Blumenfeld after Nf3, and that got me to thinking about a couple things:

1. Why?

2. It seems as though Black can enter into the Blumenfeld through either a Benoni approach (1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 c5 3 d5 b5 4 cxb5 e6) or through a Nimzo-QID (1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 c5 4 d5 b5).  All roads eventually lead to Rome, I suppose, but is there any merit to one over the other?  It would appear that the Nimzo-QID would ensure that White plays Nf3 first.  Presumably, one needs to have the Nimzo ready in case 3 Nc3 is played, but it also seems to avoid the anti-Benoni lines.

I've now read in a couple of places NCO (Burgess) 1.d4 (Palliser) that "the Blumenfeld deserves to be more popular" -- I'll check later when I have a chance, but I think something very similar to that appears in both.  I was never sure whether that was an indication of surprise on the part of the author, or some sort of backhanded compliment (in case that phrase doesn't translate well: meaning that the Blumenfeld is not good, but worse opening are more popular).

I wonder, with HgMan, whether it would be worth learning, and I am finally on the verge of actually sitting down and figuring out whether it would be a reasonable choice.   As a result, I am a bit curious as to why MNb has given it up -- is it because of a particular critical variation, or simply in order to have a more generic response to d4 (and not have a Nf3/Nc3 split in one's repertoire)?

I think everyone has dabbled in the Blumenfeld at one time or another, it almost became semi-respectable one time.

I agree that the Blumenfeld is synonomous with the Benoni, but isn't it usually covered here as a daring Defence? At any rate, enjoy Black's play in the great scrap: Tregubov-Ward, Reykjavik 2006.

MNb wrote on 04/05/06 at 02:33:25:


I withdraw my original statement. I had originally based my defense of the position on 14.Nf2 Nxf2 15.Kxf2 but have just noticed that, instead of 15....Ng6 Black has a powerful piece sac in 15....Be7. If White takes with 16 fxe5 then I don't give much for his chances after 16...0-0. If he declines with 16.Kg1 then his position looks most unpleasant after 16...c4 17. fxe5 Bc5 18.h4 d3+ 19.Kh2 0-0.

Ah well, I'm sorry I ever doubted you    , and I count myself fortunate that my opponent didn't find this continuation.

HgMan wrote on 03/26/06 at 15:11:27:


You'll find it in the "Daring Defenses" section.