Latest Updates:
Normal Topic 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.f4 (Read 2663 times)
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4488
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.f4
Reply #5 - 12/05/06 at 04:56:06
Post Tools
Walter Browne had a video some years ago (also "starring" GM Ron Henley) presenting a Najdorf repertoire for Black; it covered this Grand Prix with early ...d6.  I don't recall any specifics, but surely it would be worthwhile to take his suggestions into account.  (For those who don't know, Browne is a 6-time US champion who has been a Najdorf player since, I think, 1969.)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Glenn Snow
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1674
Location: Franklin
Joined: 09/27/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.f4
Reply #4 - 12/05/06 at 02:38:36
Post Tools
I believe the game I'm remembering is given in Plaskett's Sicilian Grand Prix Attack. book.  From a theoretical perspective I'm satisfied with the variations and games you quoted.  I just wondered why nobody seems to have repeated Hodgson's method in that game.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10358
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.f4
Reply #3 - 12/05/06 at 02:23:54
Post Tools
The most famous one is of course Hodgson-Nunn, London 1978. It went 6.o-o Nf6 7.d3 o-o 8.f5 gxf5 9.Qe1 fxe4 10.dxe4 Bg4 11.Qh4. Lane's annotations of this game show how sloppy he can be: iso of Nunn's recommendation 22...c3 he means 23...c3, leading "to a slight advantage for Black." He omits to analyze this any further; I think 24.Rxg6+ very strong. White prefers 11.Bf4 these days.
But this is probably not the game you mean. I must disappoint you: Hodgson according to my database never has played 6.o-o e6 7.d3 Nge7 8.Qe1. Against Shamkovich, Brighton 1982, he preferred 7.f5 exf5 8.d3 Nge7 9.Qe1 and the game ended in a draw.
At the other hand the games in which Hodgson played Rxf5 (Strauss, London 1979 and Carr Brighton 1984) did not have a queen on g3.
The only game with 6.o-o e6 7.d3 Nge7 8.Qe1 h6 9.Qg3 with that exchange sac involved is Otten-Muhren, NEDch W Leeuwarden 2004. But then again, 9...d5 is known as satisfactory for Black since Sax-Gelfand, Wijk aan Zee 1992.
Sorry.  Sad
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Glenn Snow
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1674
Location: Franklin
Joined: 09/27/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.f4
Reply #2 - 12/04/06 at 23:59:47
Post Tools
Many thanks MNb for the helpful and very informative reply.  I, however, am still curious about this Hodgson game I have in my head, although it's probably not theoretically critical.  I think it began 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.f4 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Bc4 Nc6 6.d3 (or 6.0-0 then d3) 6...e6 7.d3 Nge7 8.Qe1 h6, and now Chesspub.com covers 9.Bd2 some but I could have sworn Hodgson played Qg3 and got a strong position with f5 and an exchange sac at some point with Rxf5.  Anyone know the game? (if I didn't imagine it that is)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10358
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.f4
Reply #1 - 12/04/06 at 03:44:57
Post Tools
From White's perspective I like 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.f4 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Bc4 Nc6 6.o-o with an early f4-f5 best:
a1) 6...e6 7.f5 gxf5 8.exf5 d5 9.Bb5 is interesting, while 8.d3 Nge7 9.Ng5 (9.Bg5 f6 10.Bd2 o-o or 9.Qe1 o-o 10.Bg5 f6 and 11...Ng6) h6 10.Nxf7 is dangerous, but dubious.
a2) 6...e6 7.f5 exf5 8.d3 Nge7 9.Qe1 h6 10.Bd2 Be6 (Ne5 11.Nxe5 unclear) 11.exf5 (11.Nd5!?) Bxf5 12.Nh4 and 13.Nd5. White has won a tempo compared to Glek-Gavrikov, Minsk 1983.
b1) 6...Nf6 7.d3 e6 8.f5 gxf5 (exf5 9.Qe1 o-o 10.Qh4 fxe4 11.Ng5 or 11.Bg5, but not 11.dxe4 Be6!?; o-o 9.fxg6 fxg6 10.Qe1 d5 11.Bb3 is unclear) 9.Qe1 o-o 10.exf5 unclear.
When I still thought the GPA a viable option (thanks to Ostapbender I don't anymore  Sad ), I found it harder to prove compensation after ...gxf5 than after ...exf5. Here I seem to disagree with Lane.
b2) 6...Nf6 7.d3 o-o 8.f5 Nd4 (gxf5 9.Qe1 e6 and e6 9.fxg5 transpose to b1) 9.Nxd4 cxd4 10.Ne2!? with interesting play.

In the famous games Short-Gelfand, Brussel 1991 and Anand-Gelfand, Wijk aan Zee 1996, Black was not necessarily worse after the opening. Moreover I suspect, that 8...o-o 9.f5 gxf5 (again!) is playable for Black. With a knight on g6 (even if the ugly ...f6 has to be played) I don't see, how White gets an attack.
Neither do I like 6...Nf6 7.d3 o-o 8.Qe1 Nd4 (e6 also is good) 9.Bb3 Be6 for White.

There is also 5.Bb5 (+) of course. Generally speaking I must say, that I find Lane's book not very helpful on several important lines.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Glenn Snow
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1674
Location: Franklin
Joined: 09/27/03
Gender: Male
1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.f4
12/04/06 at 00:37:12
Post Tools
As has been mentioned on the forum before this is probably the best variation for White when playing the GPA, but I believe theoretically Black is still supposed to be OK.  I remember some games where Black delayed castling with ...h6, but I also remember an interesting game by Hodgson where he did well against this.  I'll try and find the specific game at some point (it was quite a few years ago), but basically I'm wondering what the best way for Black to play against White's standard GPA ideas of Bc4, f4-f5, and Qe1-h4 are.  Anyway care to enlighten me?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo