Interesting thread.
I found out about ... Qd5 not by reading Davies' book (which, as others have said, doesn't cover it) but because Fritz played it against me at just about every time control I could find.

One of the things that I don't like about The Dynamic Reti is Davies messing about with the opening moves of games to make them fit his suggested repertoire.  Doing that, to my eyes at least, just loses the opportunity to discuss the pros and cons of various move orders.

E.g.
Davies has the famous Kasparov-Karpov (24), Seville opening as:-

1. Nf3 d5, 2. c4 e6, 3. g3 Nf6 4. Bg2 ...

when in fact Gazza played b3 before putting his Bishop on g2.

I'm not saying Kasparov played 4. b3 to avoid the ... Qd5 line but he's chosen moven order certainly suggests he wanted to avoid Black trying ... dxc4.


Curiously, after 4. Bg2 dxc4 Ivanchuk played Qa4 against Adams at Wijk today.  I wonder if he was avoiding ... Qd5



[ps: My inner pedant also demands I make clear Davies has Karpov's moves in the wrong order too but that's less relevant to the point of this post/thread]

I just took a fresh look at this…


1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 e6 3.g3 dxc4 4.Bg2 Qd5 5. Qc2 Nf6  The queen going to d5 so early just can’t be good!
 
I’m not  happy with 4. Bg2 and 5. Qc2  (in consideration of 4…Qd5 and 5…Nf6)   How about 4. Qc2!? And if  4…Qd5 then  5.e4!? Attacking the Queen and causing Black to loose a tempo


1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 e6 3.g3 dxc4 4.Qc2 Qd5 5.e4!? 

Basically IMO black has three responses 

5...Qh5
5...Qa5
5...Qd8?!
 

5…Qh5 6.Be2 Nf6 7.Qxc4 Qa5 Moving the Queen three times....this can't be good for Black[7...Qg6? 8.Qxc7]  

5...Qa5 6.Bxc4 Nc6 7.Nc3 Nb4?! (7...Bc5 8.d3 Nf6 9.0–0 0–0 10.Bd2 Bb4 11.d4 Qh5 12.Be2 Bd7 13.a3 White gets a good game

a)                13.Qd1 Bxc3?! (13...Qa5 14.a3! Bxc3 15.Bxc3 Qb6 16.Qc2) 14.bxc3 Nxe4 15.Ne5! +=; 
b)             13.Qd3; 13...Bxc3 14.Bxc3 Qh6 15.a4+=) 


5...Qd8?! 6.Qxc4 Nf6 7.Nc3 Nc6 8.d4!  Black's position looks pretty passive to me] 

Although I'm still not sure about 3.g3  (yes I'm aware of McNab-Davies Blackpool 2003) 


1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 e6 3.g3 Nf6 4.Qc2 dxc4 5.Qxc4  is probably White's best reply with 5...Nc6 6.d4  Not much of an opening advantage here



 thoughts anyone?

I think the following would be a much more accurate way of putting the above ...


Quote:
"A great idea played by Reti himself and Dunnington promotes it in his book is to play the Reti as it was intended “Like a reversed Benko. 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 e6 3.b3 c5!? 4.d3 d4 5.Bb2 Nc6 6.g3 e5 7.Bg2 Nf6 8.0–0 Bd6 9.b4!? ! Disregard b3 then b4  as a waste of tempi by white, because black had to spend two tempi himself on the pawn at e6."

 
 
I agree about the dubious worth of the 3 g3 gambit, but I don't quite understand the above. It's in the position after 1 Nf3 d5 2 c4 d4 3 g3 c5 that Dunnington (p. 37) advises a Reversed Benko with 4 b4!?, to avoid the tedium as he sees it of 4 Bg2 Nc6 5 0-0 e5 6 d3 Nf6 7 e3 Be7 (where Davies, p. 60, suggests 8 Re1!?). Has any game actually followed the move order you give? The position after 8 0-0 here has actually been reached rather seldom, and one sees why: an early d2--d3 seems to limit White’s options, and while White is still sort-of a tempo up on the 2 c4 d4 lines (because of Black’s tempo-loss in moving his e-pawn twice) it’s perhaps unclear if this tempo is useful when White’s QB is committed to b2 without Black even being committed to Ng8--f6. Moreover in the position you give, doesn't 9 b4 just lose a pawn? The b4-square is defended, meaning that Nf3xe5 doesn't work, so I don't see why Black can't just play 9 ...Nb4!

JokernTP wrote on 12/26/06 at 10:43:40:




I still don’t see a real advantage in playing the white side of this line. I think its a great idea for black.  (I think it was MNB that showed me a similar line involving an idea in the English where black essayed the Queen to d5 and a quick e5. Just like in this case, IMO ....Black mucks of the harmony of white’s pieces and while white figures out how to untangle himself, Black develops (equality) and in some cases launches an attack himself 

1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 e6 3.g3 dxc4 4.Bg2 ¤f6 5.Qc2 Qd5 6.Na3 Bxa3

[Obvious is  6...b5?? 7.Nh4 Qd7 8.Bxa8] 

7.bxa3 0–0 [7...Nc6 IMO  leads to equality for black 8.Bb2           8...e5!? looks aggresive maybe with....  9.d3 cxd3 10.Qxd3 Qxd3 11.exd3 0–0 12.0–0; 7...e5 8.Nh4 Qc5 9.d3? c3!] 
8.0–0 Qe4 This was the problem that I saw when I looked at this before. Even if black gets a swap of the queens, the pawn at c4 is still a thorn it white's side. I just think that while white figures out what to do about the pawn, black develops and obtains equality.. I also didn't see any way to really ignore the pawn and play in a gambit style with a quick e4 or d4 
9.d3 cxd3 10.exd3 Qc6 11.Qe2 [11.Qxc6 Nxc6µ] 
11...Qb5?! 12.Bb2 Nbd7 13.Rac1 c6 [13...c5!?]         IMO…  As of this point in the game Black is doing fine. But after this, Black starts to underscore the importance of the open files and how fast white can develops his pieces into an attack. 
14.Rfe1 Rd8 15.Rc4    “and here we go!”   
15...Nb6 16.Bxf6! gxf6 17 Rg4+ Kh8?! [17...Kf8 18.Nd4 Qc5 looks like it holds] 
18.Qd2 e5 

19 Rxe5!! This was a great move that saved the day for white, 19...fxe5 20.Qh6 Bxg4 21.Ng5 Qxd3 22.Be4 Qd1+ 23.Kg2 Bf3+ 24.Nxf3 f5 25.Qf6+ Kg8 26.Bxf5 Qd5 27.Be6+ Qxe6 28.Qxe6+ Kh8 29.Nxe5 1–0  

Markovich wrote on 09/27/06 at 13:03:36:


well, yes and no...Yes to g3 ......I guess.  Strictly speaking.. 1.Nf2 2. c4 lines where white gambits the c pawn..  Seems that white has to play d4 anyway in these lines, so why not just open with d4.  Playing  1.Nf3 with the intent of transposing into a QueensGambit Accepted.. isn't for me.

 

Antique?  yes and no....also... how many opening were considered antique and have been cleaned up and put into modern pratice?  Quite a few.  I don't believe antique lines  are  outdated.   Opening theory is fickel at best...If anything old lines have a surprise value in OVB play and depending on the opening are very solid just not in vouge..   I scored big with the Tartakower varation of the Classical French for about a year till people in my neck of the woods figured it out.   This line was in vouge in the 20-30's  then fell of the map (and is darn near unheard of...).  look at Kasparov,  how many times did he pull out an old opening, dust it off  pop in novality, and win with it.  

but...hey this is the cool thing about chess..different strokes for different folks and we all get to play  be on the cutting edge or look for improvements in the past its all good.  

 

 
I play the Reti and the 5…Qg5 caught my attention!  

But???

1.Nf3 d5 
2.c4 e6 
3.g3?!  I don’t see the point of this.    

I’ve always played 3. b3….   The whole purpose of  1. Nf3 and 2. c4 imo is to attack from the flank?  In the event of black doing dxc then bxc and at the very least black pawn structure in the center is in the minority ( aka a long term advantage for white…)
 

  I’m not a big fan of Davis’ book.   After years of playing flank openings (primarily the Reti, Davis’ concept of 1. Nf3 cuts across my repertoire, hence my bias.   Some of the lines he suggests lead to some pretty un-Reti position and have un hypermodern ideas/positions.  IMO he promotes using 1. Nf3 as a transitional weapon.   Not that there is anything wrong with that.  I myself use 1. b3 to the same effect.  

Angus Dunnington’s “Easy Guide to the Reti Opening” is a good book on the opening and looks for  advantages using hypermodern principles. Although unlike Davis’ book it is not a repertoire book so one will have to find answers to 1…c5, 1…Nc6  and others etc…

Davis gives the following game to promote 3. g3 dxc4     1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 e6 3.b3 c5 4.e3 Nc6 5.g3 Be7 6.Bb2 d4 7.exd4 cxd4 8.Bg2 Nh6!? 9.0–0 0–0 10.Re1 f6 11.d3 Nf7 12.Na3 e5!  And black is solid   McNab-Davis, Hilton Premier, Blackpool.  

However 3. b3 it totally playable  

A great idea played by Reti himself and Dunnington promotes it in his book is to play the Reti as it was intended   “Like a reversed Benko.    1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 e6 3.b3 c5!? 4.d3 d4 5.Bb2 Nc6 6.g3 e5 7.Bg2 Nf6 8.0–0 Bd6 9.b4!?   !  Disregard b3 then b4  as a waste of tempi by white,  because black had to spend two tempi himself on the pawn at e6.

So 3. b3 is fine and should be played in my book  

If anything to avoid ideas like alumbrado suggested (Which appears very solid!!!!)    

1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 e6 3.g3 dxc4 4.Bg2 Nf6 5.Qc2 [5.Na3 Bxa3 6.bxa3=+  yuk!] (Lines with 5. Qa4+ are imo much better than lines with 5. Qc2  The Queen seems out of placed waiting to deny a bishop that will never appear on f5
    5...Qd5!? 6.Nc3 the only real response that I see.  6… Qc5!? [6...Qa5; 6...Qc6; 6...Qh5; 6...Qd8  these are either to passive or get in trouble when white plays Nc3 to e4] 7.d4  I looked at some different reply’s like 7.0–0 and 7. a4 and found it hard for white to attack c4 and results in black getting a pawn majority on the queenside 7...cxd3 8.Qxd3 Nc6!?  I like this reply the best for black [8...Ng4 9.0–0 Nc6 10.h3 Nb4? (10...Nge5 11.Nxe5 Nxe5 12.Qb5+ (12.Qc2) 12...c6 13.Qxc5 Bxc5) 11.Qb5+] 9.Be3 Qd6 10.Qxd6 cxd6 11.Nb5=  

Certainly a solid response for black!!  Its got me stumped....Nice job Alumbrado

Smyslov_Fan wrote on 08/08/06 at 03:09:14:


Oh I don't know, I don't think you have to be a GM to be suspicious of an idea like Qxc7, which spends a whole tempo, threatens nothing, exposes the queen, and wins only the miserable c-pawn.