(UTC)
Latest Updates:
  ChessPub Forum › Chess Publishing Openings › 1. d4 d5 2. c4 › QGD Mainline › Good Reply to Tartakower
(Moderators: proustiskeen, TN)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Good Reply to Tartakower (Read 16869 times)
lnn2
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1504
Location: nc
Joined: 09/22/04
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #28 - 08/23/07 at 05:53:11
Post Tools
i seem to vaguely recall a quick ... Ne4 is a solution to 8. Rb1 no?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Ametanoitos
God Member
*****
Offline


The road to success is
under construction

Posts: 1427
Location: Patras
Joined: 01/04/05
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #27 - 08/22/07 at 18:38:41
Post Tools
The ultimate reply to the tartakower is 8.Rb1! I played the tartakower foe a couple of years until some guys analysed 8.Rb1 deeply and although i was aware of the latest theory i went down a couple of times, so i dropped it!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
sssthepro
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 439
Joined: 12/16/06
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #26 - 07/21/07 at 00:36:19
Post Tools
I dont have the book. Can you give some info on what Watson suggest?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #25 - 07/03/07 at 12:11:08
Post Tools
I've just stumbled on another great general opening book:

John Watson's Mastering the Chess Openings vol. 2. 

I haven't had a chance to go through everything, in fact I opened the book to the section on the King's Indian Defense and perused that.  Watson gives some key games and more importantly, discusses the ideas behind them.  This method works very well in this second volume.  (I wasn't as impressed with the first volume by the same name.)

Watson devotes about 70 pages to the QGD proper, and explains many of the most current trends in each of the key variations.  This is an excellent resource for filling in gaps in White's repertoire, including the Tartakover Defense. 

Check it out!

Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Willempie
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 4312
Location: Holland
Joined: 01/07/05
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #24 - 07/02/07 at 23:45:00
Post Tools
Non but this one is a real starting out book, so not much on novelties and move-order intricacies.
Thanks for the game, I am currently going through it, looks like a cever idea Smiley
  
If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LeeRoth
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 1520
Joined: 10/22/05
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #23 - 07/01/07 at 22:49:42
Post Tools
Yes, Vallejo Pons -Kasimdzhanov, Linares 2005, which AFAIK put Black's line of play with 8..c5?! under a cloud.  Here's the game:

1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 e6 3. c4 Nf6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bxf6 Bxf6 7. Qc2 O-O 8.
O-O-O c5 9. dxc5 d4 10. Nxd4! Bxd4 11. Qe4! TN

GM Postny comments in annotating the game, "It looks like this novelty refutes the whole line started with 8..c5.  White wins back the piece, but Black is not able to get back the pawn."

11.. Nc6 12. e3 f5 13. Qf3 Qg5 14. h4 Bxe3+ 15. Qxe3 Qxe3+ 16. fxe3 Ne5 17. Be2 Bd7 18. Rd6 Kf7 19. Bf3 Rac8 20. Rhd1 Rc7 21. b4 Ke7 22. Nb5 Bxb5 23. cxb5 b6 24. c6 g5 25. R6d4 Kf6 26. a4 Ng6 27. hxg5+ hxg5 28. Rd7 Rfc8 29. R1d6 g4 30. Bd1 Nf8 31. Rxc7 Rxc7 32. Bb3 Ke7 33. Rd1 Nh7 34. Rh1 Nf6 35. Rh6 Rc8 36. Kc2 Kf7 37. Bc4 Rd8 38. Rh1 Ke7 39. a5 Rb8 40. Kb3 Rd8 41. axb6 axb6 42. Ra1 Ne4 43. Ra7+ Kf6 44. Rd7 Rh8 45. Bd3 Nf2 46. Bc2 g3 47. Rb7 Ng4 48. Rxb6 Rc8 49. Ra6 Nxe3 50. b6 Nxc2 51. b7 Rxc6 52. b5 Rc5 53. Rb6 Nd4+ 54. Kb4 Rxb5+ 55. Rxb5 Nc6+ 56. Kc3 f4 57. Rc5 f3 58. Rxc6 fxg2 59. b8=Q g1=Q 60. Qf4+ 1-0

Does McDonald not mention this?? Shocked

LeeRoth
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Willempie
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 4312
Location: Holland
Joined: 01/07/05
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #22 - 07/01/07 at 19:24:19
Post Tools
Markovich wrote on 06/01/07 at 15:43:43:
ErictheRed wrote on 05/30/07 at 14:49:41:
I think you're only real choices to avoid it are the Catalan, 5.Bf4, and the Exchange Variation 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5.  Besides those, I guess you can play 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e3 h6 6.Bxf6 as well.


You can avoid Tartakover's, at least in its ...h6 form, with 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Qc2.  The point is, 5...0-0  6. Bg5 h6  7. Bxf6 is good for White, who intends 0-0-0 and e2-e4 in some order.  It also avoids Lasker's.  This comes at a price, of course.  For one thing, you allow the Semi-Tarrasch and the Ragozin.  But I think this way of playing the QGD is a little bit underrated, and definitely dangerous for unwary Blacks.

Just going through the Starting out QGD by McDonald, which is excellent so far. Is there anything new since Malanjuk-Barsov Tashkent 1987?
  
If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #21 - 06/29/07 at 19:44:51
Post Tools
cma6:

The same books I recommended above plus Karpov's The Closed Openings in Action and Kasparov on My Great Predecessors  (volumes 2-5) will help.

There are many, many games that you will need to review as Black, and I'm not sure it will help you in CC.

I mentioned the TMB in another thread.  That's an abbreviations for the Tartakover-Makagonov-Bondarevsky line.  It's pretty  much the main line.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
belgian
Full Member
***
Offline


Passionate about chess
and poker...

Posts: 129
Location: Toronto
Joined: 05/14/07
Gender: Male
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #20 - 06/29/07 at 15:31:43
Post Tools
cma6 wrote on 06/29/07 at 00:00:59:
Can anyone recommend good books on the Tartakower and/or online sources, especially from Black's point of view, for a strong correspondence player?


"The Queen's Gambit & Catalan for Black" by Lasha Janjgava is good, although a bit dated.

<pierre/>
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
cma6
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 169
Location: US
Joined: 07/17/04
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #19 - 06/29/07 at 14:15:57
Post Tools
Smyslov_Fan wrote on 06/29/07 at 06:20:00:
I don't know how strong a "strong correspondence player" is.  But presuming you are competitive, then almost any book won't be good enough.  However, a couple of books that may get you started in your search for the Lasker defense include:
The Queen's Gambit Declined by Matthew Sadler and The Queen's Gambit for the Attacking Player by Burgess and Pederson.

These books will give you the basics that any player from either side should know.

Khalifman's Opening for White According to Kramnik vol. 5 chapter 15 gives some game stems that will be interesting to a correspondence player.

Apparently, the single most important game in the theory of the Lasker opening is Karpov-Yusupov (London, match game #8) 1989.  It was mentioned in all three books.  Most of the theory hasn't really changed much since the 1950s in this line, so I suggest going back to the oldies and seeing if modern computer analysis can put some new wrinkles into the old shirts.


Thanks, Smyslov_fan, I was not clear in my post. I know the Lasker Defense. I was looking for references on the Tartakower.
                           CMA
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #18 - 06/29/07 at 06:20:00
Post Tools
I don't know how strong a "strong correspondence player" is.  But presuming you are competitive, then almost any book won't be good enough.  However, a couple of books that may get you started in your search for the Lasker defense include:
The Queen's Gambit Declined by Matthew Sadler and The Queen's Gambit for the Attacking Player by Burgess and Pederson.

These books will give you the basics that any player from either side should know.

Khalifman's Opening for White According to Kramnik vol. 5 chapter 15 gives some game stems that will be interesting to a correspondence player.

Apparently, the single most important game in the theory of the Lasker opening is Karpov-Yusupov (London, match game #8) 1989.  It was mentioned in all three books.  Most of the theory hasn't really changed much since the 1950s in this line, so I suggest going back to the oldies and seeing if modern computer analysis can put some new wrinkles into the old shirts.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #17 - 06/29/07 at 02:24:14
Post Tools
As you have quoted me, I feel obliged to answer. Alas I have to disappoint you. The only sources I know, are ancient works by Taimanov (in German) and Euwe/Van der Sterren (in Dutch).
  
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
 
cma6
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 169
Location: US
Joined: 07/17/04
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #16 - 06/29/07 at 00:00:59
Post Tools
[quote  author=MNb link=1180502183/0#10 date=1180795878]Definitely yes, it is one of the best around. The general consensus is, that Black's activity outweighs the hanging pawns.[/quote

I have played the Lasker Defense in response to 1 d4. I can draw against strong players but Blacks' Queen side is often quite inferior. Winning with the Lasker as Black is very difficult, so I wanted to undertake a study of the Tartakower.
  Can anyone recommend good books on the Tartakower and/or online sources, especially from Black's point of view, for a strong correspondence player?
              Thanks in advance
« Last Edit: 06/29/07 at 14:14:50 by cma6 »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #15 - 06/06/07 at 02:45:10
Post Tools
kylemeister wrote on 06/05/07 at 02:11:56:
Outweigh = zwaarder wegen/meer gelden dan (...).    

Incidentally the Tartakower was, I believe, the most popular form of QG for Black in GM play about 20 years ago (before the rise of e.g. the QGA and especially the Slav).  


Thank you. In that case, read compensates for.
  
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
 
krugman
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 123
Location: France
Joined: 05/03/03
Re: Good Reply to Tartakower
Reply #14 - 06/05/07 at 10:36:31
Post Tools
I would say that the Tartakower is less played nowadays, mostly because it is such a respected opening, most grandmasters prefer the exchange or the 5.Bf4 variation.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board Top  

ChessPub Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge