Latest Updates:
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Taimanov move order: 4...e6 or 4...Qc7? (Read 5165 times)
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Taimanov move order: 4...e6 or 4...Qc7?
Reply #10 - 07/31/07 at 05:34:02
Post Tools
Thanks to all for sharing why Black shouldn't grab the e4 pawn.  I don't know if Black can hold against sub-optimal play, but I also have no idea why Black would risk it after these high-class massacres and the analysis provided here.

I've learned two things from chesspublishing today:  Not to play 6...Nxe4 in this position, and the second meaning of interlocutor!  This has been a good day.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Viking
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 673
Location: Norway
Joined: 10/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Taimanov move order: 4...e6 or 4...Qc7?
Reply #9 - 07/30/07 at 18:39:26
Post Tools
JEH and UD,

Thanks. Nb5! was an awkward answer for black.
Nf6 intending c4 Nxe4! is clearly superior having liqvidated one of the white pieces.
I will look with a board next time  Embarrassed
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bonsai
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 622
Joined: 03/13/04
Gender: Male
Re: Taimanov move order: 4...e6 or 4...Qc7?
Reply #8 - 07/30/07 at 17:52:43
Post Tools
[quote author=Uberdeker link=1184654042/0#7 date=1185790444] Yes, this is certainly not recommended for Black. However, 5. ...Ktf6 ; 6. Ktc3 Ktxe4 leaves White struggling to prove he has something for the pawn. [/quote]
The Ivanchuk - Movsesian to me seems to show how one ought to play this as white, but I remain unsure as to how one should assess the resulting positions.
[quote author=Uberdeker link=1184654042/0#7 date=1185790444]If he wants a Maroczy against this move-order, better is 5. Ktb5 Qb8 ; 6. c4[/quote]
Actually, can white not just transpose after 5...Nf6 6.Nb5 Qb8? So does the first move 5.c4 or 5.Nb5 actually matter if white is willing to play the Nb5 + c4 combination?

Also, what about 5.c4 Nf6 6.f3, presumably black should aim for 6...e6 7.Nc3 Bb4 with the idea to play d7-d5 as quickly as possible? 7...a6 seems to have been played more often though.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Uberdecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 624
Joined: 03/21/06
Re: Taimanov move order: 4...e6 or 4...Qc7?
Reply #7 - 07/30/07 at 10:14:04
Post Tools
[quote author=JEH link=1184654042/0#6 date=1185729244][quote author=Viking link=1184654042/0#5 date=1185708588]regarding the move order:
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Qc7 5.c4
is there anything wrong with [b]5..Qe5[/b] which seams to win a pawn?

Whit does get compensation of course, but..... Is the price taking it too high?[/quote]


6. Nb5 and something nasty on c7.[/quote]

Yes, this is certainly not recommended for Black. However, 5. ...Ktf6 ; 6. Ktc3 Ktxe4 leaves White struggling to prove he has something for the pawn. If he wants a Maroczy against this move-order, better is 5. Ktb5 Qb8 ; 6. c4
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JEH
God Member
*****
Offline


"Football is like Chess,
only without the dice."

Posts: 1456
Location: Reading
Joined: 09/22/05
Gender: Male
Re: Taimanov move order: 4...e6 or 4...Qc7?
Reply #6 - 07/29/07 at 17:14:04
Post Tools
Quote:
regarding the move order:
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Qc7 5.c4
is there anything wrong with 5..Qe5 which seams to win a pawn?

Whit does get compensation of course, but..... Is the price taking it too high?



6. Nb5 and something nasty on c7.
  

Those who want to go by my perverse footsteps play such pawn structure with fuzzy atypical still strategic orientations

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, stuck in the middlegame with you
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Viking
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 673
Location: Norway
Joined: 10/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Taimanov move order: 4...e6 or 4...Qc7?
Reply #5 - 07/29/07 at 11:29:48
Post Tools
regarding the move order:
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Qc7 5.c4
is there anything wrong with 5..Qe5 which seams to win a pawn?

Whit does get compensation of course, but..... Is the price taking it too high?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JudgeDeath
Junior Member
**
Offline


I'm Wakko!

Posts: 67
Joined: 03/17/07
Re: Taimanov move order: 4...e6 or 4...Qc7?
Reply #4 - 07/21/07 at 16:49:29
Post Tools
In the Hracek game, 13...Be7 (as in Kuzvinov-Jezek) looks OK. However I find 11...f5 less convincing. 12.b3 looks unambitious. 12.Be3 seems better and then there is the wild 12.g4!?

I think you're right about 8.Be3 being better. There's also the interesting 8.Bd3!? Qxd4 9.Be3!?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bonsai
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 622
Joined: 03/13/04
Gender: Male
Re: Taimanov move order: 4...e6 or 4...Qc7?
Reply #3 - 07/20/07 at 22:18:55
Post Tools
JudgeDeath wrote on 07/18/07 at 20:26:23:
Hmmm. If 6...Nxe4 is really worth a ! how come looking at 2400+ games from 1995 I find +3=2-0, with an ELO + of 199 for White if I exclude 1 Grandmasterly draw (and one of the two draws is where White played a sub-optimal line)?

After 7.Nxe4 Qe5, White has won with 8.Be3, but 8.Nb5 appears better. Just get hold of the game Grischuk-Hracek, Bremen 2003, if you want to see Black being demolished.


Let's see:

Grischuk,A (2712) - Hracek,Z (2601) [B32]
Bundesliga 2002-3 Bremen GER (14), 29.03.2003

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Qc7 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3 Nxe4 7.Nxe4 Qe5 8.Nb5 Qxe4+ 9.Be2 Qe5 10.f4 Qb8 11.0-0
http://www.france-echecs.com/diagramme/imgboard.phpfen=rqbxkbxr%2Fppxppppp%2Fxxn...
10...e6


I think black should not play e6 the whole idea with e6+a6+Bd6+Bxh2+Be5 looks very slow to me. The other objection I have is the weakening of the dark squares, but it's not necessarily so bad to play ...e6 and if one gets away with it (and I don't think this looses) it's alright....

A very important alternative is 11...f5
http://www.france-echecs.com/diagramme/imgboard.phpfen=rqbxkbxr%2Fppxppxpp%2Fxxn...
from Parligras-Macieja 1/2-1/2 (12) 5th IECC 2004, which looks quite solid, doesn't it? One game where they actually played on was  Berthelot,Y (2317) - De Sousa,J (2294) TCh-FRA Top 16 Clichy FRA (9), 01.06.2007:
12.b3 a6 13.Nd4 e6 14.Bb2 Bc5 15.Kh1 0-0 16.Nc2 b6 17.Qd2 Qd6 18.Qc3 Qe7 19.Rab1 a5 20.a3 Bb7 21.Rf3 e5 22.fxe5 Rae8 23.Bd3 Nxe5 24.Rxf5 Nxd3 25.Rxf8+ Rxf8 26.Qxd3 Rf2 27.Rg1 Rxc2 28.Qxc2 Bxg1 29.Qc3 Bf2 0-1 At first glance this looks very solid for black to me.

I've wondered whether the untried 10...g6 might be quite good too. The idea is of course to avoid such a non-developing move as 11...f5 (however much it may stabilize the kingside). The obvious objection would have to be 11.f5, when 11...a6 12.Nc3 Bg7 13.Nd5 0-0 certainly is quite logical play by both players and white's compensation doesn't seem to be quite enough if white can finish develop me like this.
http://www.france-echecs.com/diagramme/imgboard.phpfen=rqbxxrkx%2Fxpxpppbp%2Fpxn...
After move ten white is by far ahead in development, but now it's not so bad anymore, however I don't see what white could have done earlier. Now the computer suggests stuff like 14.Bf4 d6 15.f6 exf6 16.c5 Ne5, which is certainly somewhat tactical, but I'm not sure whether black has any trouble or whether he is even slightly better?!


Anyway, continuing with Grischuk- Hracek:
12.f5 a6 13.Nc3 Bd6 My computer actually likes this for black, but I really do wonder whether he couldn't play something a bit more "sensible" than this in combination with Bxh2... Why go after a second pawn when you already have one and are behind in development?! 14.Ne4 Bxh2+ 15.Kh1 Be5
This is definitely better than 15...exf5 from Mista,L - Matulovic,M Reggio Emilia 1967, which fininshed 16.Rxf5 d5 17.Rxf7 Kxf7 18.Qxd5+ Ke8 19.Bh5+ g6 20.Nf6+ Ke7 21.Bg5 Be6 22.Ng8+ Kf7 23.Nh6+ Kg7 24.Qxe6 Rf8 25.Rd1 Bd6 26.Rxd6 Rf1+ 27.Kh2 Qc7 28.Qd7+ Qxd7 29.Rxd7+ Kf8 30.Bf3 a5 31.Rf7+ Ke8 32.Bxc6+ bxc6 33.Rxf1 1-0
16.f6 16.Bh5 g6 17.Bg5 is something interesting the computer points out and which looks rather wild. 16..g6 Maybe 16...gxf6 is better? 17.Be3 d5 This seems like another point for a possible improvement for black. Why is he opening up the position?! Admittedly it's difficult to know what to do with your king and there's another game in this line with a somewhat different sequence: Lupulescu,C (2556) - Djukic,N (2449) [B32] Constantin Ungureanu Mem Bucharest ROM (1), 15.04.2004: 8.Nb5 Qxe4+ 9.Be2 Qe5 10.f4 Qb8 11.0-0 e6 12.f5 a6 13.Nc3 Bd6 14.f6 Bxh2+ 15.Kh1 g6 16.Ne4 b6 17.Be3 Bc7 18.Qd2 Ne5 19.Rad1 Bb7 20.Qb4 Nc6 21.Qa3 b5 22.Nd6+ Bxd6 23.Rxd6 0-0 24.Bc5 h6 25.Qh3 Kh7 26.Be3 h5 27.Bd3 Kg8 28.Qg3 1-0, which in a way also shows what can go wrong even if one refrains from opening the position with d7-d5.
18.cxd5 exd5 19.Qxd5 0-0? That's the move that definitely loses. Bf5 might be alright, but the black kingside position does have some holes... 20.Qd2 Rd8 21.Qc1 Be6 22.Bc5 1-0




While looking at my database, I also found the following interesting game:
Ivanchuk,V (2739) - Movsesian,S (2628) [B32]
6th EICC Warsaw POL (8), 26.06.2005
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Qc7 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3 Nxe4 7.Nxe4 Qe5 8.Be3  This is an approach for white that I find more logical than the variation with 8.Be2. Be2 doesn't really do much besides preparing to castle kindside, while prepares to castle queenside and also potentially targets the dark squares on the queenside (in case of a6-a7).
[/b]8...Qxe4 9.Nb5 Qe5 10.Qd2 a6 11.f4 Qb8 12.Nc3 e6 13.0-0-0[/b]
http://www.france-echecs.com/diagramme/imgboard.phpfen=rqbxkbxr%2Fxpxpxppp%2Fpxn...
On first sight I cannot find a fault with white's compensation. Okay, two fairly good players as black have gone for b5 (presumably hoping to open up the position against white's king, but it's difficult for me to really evaluate this (and it's less obvious where to improve black's play here).
13...b5 14.cxb5 axb5 15.Bxb5 Qc7 16.f5 Be7

Another game got to this point, namely Fontaine,R (2369) - Fressinet,L (2424) FRA-chT FRA (7), 1999, which continued 16...Bb4 17.fxe6 fxe6 18.a3 Na5 19.Kc2 Be7 20.Bf4 Qd8 21.Rhf1 0-0 22.Bd6 Nb7 23.Bxe7 Qxe7 24.Kb1 Rxf1 25.Rxf1 d5 26.Qe3 Qd6 27.Qf3 Nd8 28.Bd3 Ba6 29.Bxh7+ Kxh7 30.Qh5+ Kg8 31.Qe8+ Kh7 32.Rf3 Qxh2 33.Rh3+ Qxh3 34.gxh3 Bd3+ 35.Ka2 d4 36.Qh5+ Kg8 37.Qf3 Bc4+ 38.b3 Bxb3+ 39.Kxb3 Rb8+ 40.Ka2 dxc3 41.Qxc3 Ra8 42.Qc7 Kf8 43.Kb3 Nf7 44.a4 e5 45.Qc5+ Kg8 46.Qc6 Rb8+ 47.Ka3 Rd8 48.a5 Rd3+ 49.Kb2 Rd2+ 50.Kc1 Ra2 51.a6 e4 52.Qe8+ 1-0
17.fxe6 fxe6 18.Rhf1 Bf6 19.Bc5 Qe5 20.Rxf6 Qxc5 21.Rxe6+ dxe6 22.Qd8+ Kf7 23.Qxh8 Qg5+ 24.Kb1 Bb7 25.Qxh7 Qxg2 26.Rf1+ Ke7 27.Qh4+ Kd6 28.Qf4+ e5 29.Rd1+ Kc7 30.Qf7+ Kb8 31.Qf8+ Kc7 32.Nd5+ Qxd5 33.Qxg7+ 1-0
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JudgeDeath
Junior Member
**
Offline


I'm Wakko!

Posts: 67
Joined: 03/17/07
Re: Taimanov move order: 4...e6 or 4...Qc7?
Reply #2 - 07/18/07 at 20:26:23
Post Tools
Hmmm. If 6...Nxe4 is really worth a ! how come looking at 2400+ games from 1995 I find +3=2-0, with an ELO + of 199 for White if I exclude 1 Grandmasterly draw (and one of the two draws is where White played a sub-optimal line)?

After 7.Nxe4 Qe5, White has won with 8.Be3, but 8.Nb5 appears better. Just get hold of the game Grischuk-Hracek, Bremen 2003, if you want to see Black being demolished.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MarinFan
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 425
Location: Leeds
Joined: 04/04/06
Gender: Male
Re: Taimanov move order: 4...e6 or 4...Qc7?
Reply #1 - 07/17/07 at 08:55:27
Post Tools
Hello,

Only thing I can think of is that Ng-e7 ideas are not good with an early Qc7. Also the g3 line for white is more effective when black is commited to Qc7 and a6, but if following the Delchev Rep anyway this should not be a problem.

Bye John S
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bonsai
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 622
Joined: 03/13/04
Gender: Male
Taimanov move order: 4...e6 or 4...Qc7?
07/17/07 at 06:34:02
Post Tools
Assuming that one is willing to play the 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4
http://www.france-echecs.com/diagramme/imgboard.phpfen=rxbqkbnr%2Fppxppppp%2Fxxn...
move order to reach the Taimanov, I have been wondering about the relative merits of 4...e6 and 4...Qc7. I've only found a side-remark in Rizzitano's Chess Explained - The Taimanov Sicilian and don't have any other background on this, so I did some thinking for myself.

After 4...Qc7 Rizzitano points out there's 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3 Nxe4!, which is a justification for how this move order might make c2-c4 systems less attractive. However he doesn't say much more on the topic, which I would have found quite interesting.
I suppose white can still try 4...Qc7 5.Nb5, but I suppose 5.Nb5 Qb8 6.c4 Nf6 7.N5c3 e6 8.Be3 b6 could be an improved version of the corresponding lines after 4...e6 5.Nb5 d6 6.c4? My thoughts were e.g. 9.Be2 Bc5 10.Qd2 0-0 11.0-0 Bb7 12.Rd1 Rd8 13.Kh1 Bxe3 14.Qxe3 d5 15.cxd5 exd5 16.exd5 Nb4. Khalifman in Anand 9 recommends to simply transpose to the standard lines with 5.Nc3.

Okay, after 4...e6 black has to deal with 5.Nb5 d6 6.c4 and 5.Nb5 d6 6.Bf4. On the other hand one still has the option of playing Qa5 in one go against the English attack (assuming one is not worried about 5.Nc3 a6 6.Nxc6, which one might have to be...).

I guess my question is whether (as long as one is willing to play 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 allowing primarily 3.Bb5 as an extra option for white) one can cut down on a lot of Taimanov theory by playing the 4...Qc7 move order? Or are the further downsides that I am missing?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo