Greetings,

Which is why I always answer 1 d4, with 1 ..., d5.  

If White then plays a Reti/Catalan system with the fianchettoed KB, I use a reversed-Colle type of system - ideally with ..., d5; ..., c6; ..., e6; ..., Nf6; ..., Bd6; ..., Nbd7; ..., Qe7; with the rooks on the e- and d-files.

Not necessarily in that move order, but pretty close to it!

If White's played Bg5, then at the appropriate moment ..., h6 forces the issue of exchanging the bishop for the knight on f6 (Black recaptures with the Nd7 whilst gaining the two bishops) or retreating to f4 allowing an exchange there or on d6.

If White plays c4 and cd, then ed maintains the "spike" (b7, c6, d5) against White's KB, whilst opening the e-file and h2-b8 and h3-c8 diagonals for Black's bishops.

Of course, this is in an ideal world!  

As I stated earlier, I only use the move order 1 ..., e6 against 1 c4.

In my ealier post, I wondered if the problems arising from using it to get into a Nimzo might be avoided by entering it through a Vienna/C-S transpostion !?? In other words, slightly later.

As I don't play the Nimzo, I don't know how feasible that is... [*Paging Nimzo-Indian Specialist - Please come to the "Cox's 'Deviations' book and 1...e6?" thread*   ]

It seems to me, however, that since so many White players seem to try to evade it by playing 3 Nf3, that Black players should forget the Nimzo-Indian and just concentrate their efforts on the QID!

That way, you'd only have to learn ONE complex opening as against TWO!

(I'll probably start getting pelted by "NimzoManiacs"!!   )

Kindest regards,

James

Greetings,

Personally, I only use 1 ..., e6 against the English (1 c4) as a tacit offer of a QGD (2 d4, d5).

I came up with this over-the-board solution on facing the English for the first time back in the late 70s.

As was pointed out earlier, one "risks" being transposed into the French - after 1 d4, e6 - with either 2 e4, d5 or 2 Nc3, d5.

Or one could even transpose/be transposed into the Alekhine - after 1 d4, e6; 2 e4, Nf6 - with 3 e5, Nd5; 4 c4, Nb6. (A plug for another one of John Cox's books!    - and, no, he's not paying me; nor do I play it - though if I ever get to play Baburin, I might play 1 e4 for the first time ever using that book!)

However, I wonder could one transpose to the NID at a slightly later stage - say through a Vienna-style transposition? As if Black had played a Nimzo with ..., d5!?

I know myself, having played the White-side of QGDs, that the one defence which caused me most concern was this (Vienna) and the Cambridge-Springs; my first experience of this as White was a bad one - I dropped my Bg5 following ..., Qa4 and pawn exchanges in the centre!  

I was never worried by Nimzo-Indians (70+% score using the Rubinstein  ) - I don't avoid them, as so many seem to do with 3 Nf3(!) - just the ..., Qa5 with or without ..., Bb4 in QGDs due to that one bad experience!

Perhaps other White players might feel the same way - if only because the Vienna and Cambridge-Springs don't occur often enough in most d-pawn players' experience. Thus, Black would have a certain psychological edge.

Or perhaps I'm over-emphasizing my own reaction to my first bad experience with these!

Kindest regards,

James

Actually there is one issue with playing 1...e6 to get a Nimzo/QID/Benoni and using the lines in my book and that is the Catalan. If you don't want a standard ...e6...d5 reply then the advantage of 1...Nf6 is that you can meet 2 g3 with ...d5 the ..c6 and ...Bf5, or 2 Nf3 e6 3 g3 with 3...b5. White has nothing much in either case. With 1 d4 e6 2 g3 it's much trickier; you can play 2...c5 3 Nf3 of course, but I don't cover that and my feeling is that White is basically getting away with avoiding the ...Bb4 lines after ...cxd4 because he hasn't got c4 in.

So there is a price to pay. Also, of course the Torre and Colle are much easier to play against if you have ...d5 in instead of ...e6l thus 1 d4 Nf6 2 Nf3 d5. So if you were playing 1...e6 en route to a QGD there would be an additional overhead.

IMJohnCox wrote on 07/12/06 at 12:30:20:


Indeed, it's why I prefer 1...e6 to begin with.  When about a quarter of my d-pawn defenses transpose back over into my favorite e-pawn defense by move two, that's never a bad thing.  Thanks for the info.  Straight from the horse's mouth, as it were.

And yeah, I figure if anybody Trompowskies me after 1...e6, the fallback plan of simply going up a piece for nothing strikes me as fairly sound.

By playing 1 d4 e6 you won't be able to use Cox's anti-Tromp weapon, but you will transpose to his repertoire after 2 Nf3 Nf6. However, Black can also gamble and exploit his 1...e6 move order with 2 Nf3 c5!?, daring White to play 3 e4 (how many Colle/Torre types will?) and aiming to restrict White's options: i.e. 3 e3 Nf6 is a Colle, but with the London and Torre ruled out.