Thank you all for helping us out deciding and the winner is ...Bc4! I talked to my coach and we're set on that afterall..

Cheers again

@Edward_Dearing:
I tried to locate your games with this line, but without success (I'm new in using the Chessbase & the databases installed there did not produce the desired results ). But I'll try again (especially if we decide to use this system).

@JEH:
"It depends on whether you prefer investigating your own ideas or memorising the work of others." Intersting thought, I'd say I am 50%-50% on that and when I don't find sth that suits me well, I may try my own stuff with reasonable success (and a lot of fun!).

@antillian:
"On that note the Be3/Qd2/f3 are a lot easiar to play for White than for Black even with a minimum of theory."
This sounds good, but I suppose that theory does not develop for no reason, hence against higher-rated players I may still have to book up. Now thinking that I may not use the system I learn now as my main weapon for life, but could possibly use it as a secondary option for life, I wouldn't want to book up twice for Pirc (or any other opening to be honest). So, the "more theory" part of Qd2/Be3/f3 puts me off a bit.
"But I think the Bc4 system is harmless against the Pirc proper. It might scare a weak player who does not know how to repsond. But the treatment with Nc6 give Black a good game."
I suppose the Kholmov is not a sideline for no reason, hence point taken. However, it looks as though you can play this stuff (as a first or secondary choice) against up to 2200 opposition, which is what I am looking for (i.e. trying to forecast my strength after 5-6 years).

chk wrote on 10/30/06 at 09:42:43:


This system seems to be popular at the GM level, so even if it might have less theory than the Austrian, it may well grow at pace. It needs special treatment by Black. I'd have recommended it too if it was on your list of choices.

However the Kholmov system receives virtually no attention at the GM level AFAIK (which might tell you something about it  ), but I don't see any reason why improvements can't be found for White and so from a training point of view it might be a more interesting choice than parroting theory from the well trodden lines. It depends on whether you prefer investigating your own ideas or memorising the work of others.

OK, been doing a bit of thinking over the matter and we both decided to go for the Kholmov system (Bc4). However, while talking to another Pirc practicioner, he suggested that the Qd2/Be3/f3 system seems to be dangeorus for Black.

Now I have seen the discussion in another thread (started by Mnb) and I see the point, however, do you think that the amount of theory is a bit too much (i.e. starting to resemble the Austrian attack)? In that case, I'm afraid we would rather stick to the Kholmov..

Cheers,

Chris

Willempie wrote on 10/27/06 at 11:33:11:


I see the Gurgenidze as a Modern with c6 and d5 or a Caro-Kann with a fianchetto which is why it is in Book 3.

Here's some threads that have discussed these three systems ...

http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1059052787

http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1142696237

http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1143012834


As a Pirc player, I meet the classical a lot and I suspect Black will in general be prepared for it. Well they should be! Not so much scope for a White attack though. 

The Chinese variation might have been a surprise in the past, but Black has a choice of ways to deal with it, and it seems too commital. 

The Bc4 system seems to be maligned by theory, but I reckon there is more scope for interesting novelties and attacking play to be found here, so out of these three I'd go for this one. 

Against the Gurg, the Austrian attack and the plan detailed in Khalifmann's Anand series book looks strong for White. It seems logical to go Austrian if Black goes c6 since the plans of Nc6/e5 and c5 are curtailed. But check out the Bc4 thread too.