HgMan wrote on 05/18/06 at 23:56:20:


If you're looking to liven things up and put early pressure on White, it's well worth looking at 5...cxd4 - a Keres favourite

kylemeister wrote on 02/23/07 at 16:18:56:


yes nice but 7...cxd4?! 8.Nxd4 is a  sideline the real test is 7...Be7 8.0-0 0-0 and here 9.Nxd5 or 9.e4

Check out the Smyslov-Ribli candidates match from 1983 for some nice 6.e3 games

HgMan wrote on 02/18/07 at 16:50:09:


Isn't 6. e3, reaching positions that are sometimes treated in the Caro books, equally critical for the Semi-Tarrasch?

The more I look into the Semi-Tarrasch, the more convinced I am that this opening is very sound for Black.  It's probably not the best bet to play for a win, but after a number of tries in correspondence chess, I am becoming rather confident that I can hold a draw here against stronger opposition.

I have been approaching the Semi-Tarrasch by offering a Nimzo, and then playing 3...d5 after 3.Nf3, in order to avoid 3.Nc3 and 4.Bg5 or 3.cxd5:

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 c5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.e4 Nxc3 7.bxc3 cxd4 8.cxd4 Bb4+ 9.Bd2 Bxd2+ 10.Qxd2 0-0 11.Bc4 Nc6 (I'd like to explore 11...Nd7 a little more here; it looks as though it has some merit) 12.0-0 b6 13.Rad1 Bb7 14.Rfe1 Rc8

The debate then focuses on whether White can push the d-pawn, created an isolated and passed pawn on d5 and exploit that and/or a strong attack on the kingside.  Against correct play, I think White has a difficult time, and also has the difficulty of playing correct moves else this drift into equality much earlier than it needs to.  Black has a difficult defense, but White must play very accurately as well.  If Black can simplify, the endgame doesn't look too bad at all.  All in all, I'm not sure White can exploit those two central pawns the way the position suggest s/he should.  I remember a few other people expressing some interest in the Semi-Tarrasch earlier in this thread.  I think there are some real advantages here:

1.White rarely has something carefully prepared for this since it is generally disparaged.
2.The first dozen moves are very easy and straightforward to play.
3.Black gets very familiar and thematic positions; familiarity has its advantages.
4.In my experience, White tends to overpress.
5.I am pairing this with the Nimzo and Caro, and find a number of similarities in pawn structure and ideas.
6.Not the most swashbuckling of openings, but Black can stand well in the endgame.

My sense is that the Semi-Tarrasch might not be the best bet to play for a win against weaker opposition, but I'm putting together a decent record of holding against stronger opponents...

So I open my beloved Taimanov's Damengambit bis Holländisch (1980) once again. The Russian GM writes (apologizes if my translation is poor):

In a game against Lasker (Petersburg 1895/96) Pillsbury took the pawn with the queen (that's why Taimanov calls 5.Bg5 the Pillsbury Variation). ....... The whole variation was considered advantageous for White for a long time. Euwe has shown though, that Black can defend after 10...Be7 (iso 10...Ne5). Also possible is 10...f5.

What are the opinions a quarter of a century later?

Surely, 5.Bg5 Be7 6.e3 cxd4 transposes into a Panov Caro...

Doesn't the early Bg5 turn this into a Dutch-Peruvian Gambit (1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 c5)?  And what are the advantages and disadvantages of Nf3 here?

In the semi-Tarrasch 5.cd5 is the automatic move but what about 5.Bg5
It seem interesting to me . The natural 5...cd4 is met by 6.Qd4 Be7 +=

So what 5...dc4 ? or something else ?