Don't you think Black could have done better than Gutman's 6...Nh6 ?
And Stohl could have played 5...a6 (for the Najdorf player) or 5...e6 (for the Scheveningen player).
It is up to White, to show that he can do without e2-e4.

[/] as the 'need' for e4 is concerned (Gulko-Gutman).

Is 1 Nc3 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 g6 such a problem? Maybe 5 g3 is a little awkward though, although I'd have thought Black should be able to equalise.
I quite like 1 Nc3 c5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 g6 when Dunnington's book suggested 5 Be3 (5 Bf4 d6) 5...Bg7 6 Nxc6 bxc6 (6...dxc6 also looks very playable) 7 Bd4 Nf6 8 Ne4, but 8...Qa5+ 9 c3 Qf5 is just very equal as I've had as Black.
On the 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 Nc3 Nf6 (surely not '?!' !) 4 e5 dxe5 5 Nxe5 front, 5...a6 as suggested by Ametanoitos is sensible when White may try 6 g3.  I also think that Black's fully OK after 5...e6 6 Bb5+ Nbd7 7 d4 a6!?.

Why should they be happy ? They are playing against a  Reti, and this time a viable one (see attached game).

Just that line 1 is unlikely to happen : 1.Nc3-players prefer 3.d4 unless there is good reason to switch plans, i.e. if Black plays 2....Nf6. 

hwarangdo wrote on 04/05/06 at 07:33:10:


There are obviously many routes for Black here; it boils down to which sidelines Black prefers to face.  There's nothing wrong with 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Nc3 Nf6 since 4.e5 dxe5 5.Nxd5 Nbd7 seems OK for Black.  Perhaps I'm not punishing White enough for his deviations -- that would be a fair criticism; but since White can force the positions after 3...Nc6 against a dragon player (by playing the move order 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Nf3 d6), it is worthwhile to know those lines anyway.

1.Nc3 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.e4 d6 is just a transposition of the above.  These lines can be a bit tricky, especially if White continues with stuff like 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 g6 6.Nd5, but ultimately Black is fine.

If you had another move order in mind, I probably didn't understand your comment.  As far as playing 1.Nc3 c5 2.Nf3 d6, I guess it's fine; it just seems less flexible to me (even if the most likely result is transposition).  Against MNb's 3.d4, I'd rather have played 2...Nc6 than 2...d6, especially since I am likely to play 1.Nc3 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 d5 anyway.

Scholar wrote on 04/05/06 at 01:00:31:


ok but is it really necessary to play Nc6, d6 also controls the e5 square und what to play after 3. e4 in ur variation, if u play Nf6 it can be attacked by e5 also, so g6 seems to be more adequate ?!

do u think that 3.Nf6 followed by e5 and dxe5 is that bad? or are there any possibilities for black to come into an -at least- dragonish position? how to continue after the forced(?!) pawn exchange on e5?

regards

hwarangdo