TonyRo wrote on 08/17/14 at 04:36:14:


Indeed.  I wondered if Grobmeister might have confused it with 1. d4 d6 2. c4 e5 3. de de 4. Qxd8+ Kxd8, though that should be equal as far as I know.

I have the impression that after 1. e4 d6 2. d4 e5 3. de de 4. Qxd8+ Kxd8 White should, plausibly enough, be going for an approach with f4.  I wonder if e.g. Khalifman had something to say about this.  (edit:  I see that he just went with 3. Nf3)

JEH wrote on 08/16/14 at 13:27:23:


I don't know, but offhand I thought White would probably prefer the version without the knight moves, e.g. to have the possibility of steering his QN to c4 in the event of Black taking on the doubled isolated e-pawns.  ECO had it as leading to +=, giving some stuff (from a couple of Informant games) in which Black meets 5. Bc4 with 5...f6, and White then plays Be3 and Nd2-b3.

Speaking of lesser players getting outplayed as White, this took me back to something from Larry Evans' Q&A column -- someone proposed this 2...e5 line as in no way inferior, citing a win by Em. Lasker against Janowski.  (Evans' reply was along the lines that White has an initiative and not many would care to defend as Black.)

kylemeister wrote on 08/15/14 at 21:38:46:


At least it is better for Black than the Englund gambit, I suppose...

Of course, the beauty of 1...d6 is that you can play it against virtually anything with many transpositional possibilities. I played several variations of it over the years, beginning with the Philidor (Improved Hanham Variation). And then experimented with the Pirc Defense (Pribyl Variation) which was popularized by GM Joel Benjamin in the mid to late 80's and finally toyed around with the hypermodern King's Pawn Game i.e. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 e5! which offers a queen exchange and oddly enough gives Black a slight edge should White accept. But all in all, my experience with 1...d6 is that it leads to alot of drawish games. But then, it always comes down to the engame which separates the patzer from the master. And so against lower rated players it can fare well enough.

Michael Ayton wrote on 02/07/14 at 19:30:21:


Here's the latest...





Oh, err, hang on, got that date sort inverted...

I am now showing this DVD. I think, that Davies's DVD are one from best from Chessbase (maybe because i like his repertoire).

As last i watched part about 1.d4 d6 2.c4 e5 3.de5 - i think, that this line is undervaluated, because this way plays only weak players
I think, that Davies's evalution for game Janakiev-Popchev Podgorica 1991 is totally wrong - after placing white rook on d5 there is no chance speaking about black advantage. I am feeling, that white is clearly better, but this only my opinion based about "easy" principle, that advadvantage in position holds side with chance for pawn break - and here i don't show possibility how to make pawn break with black pawns (b5 looks impossible and on king's flank there is no possibility)

Quote:


I did some investigation into these lines a number of years ago, but sadly the laptop with my analysis on was nicked    

I must revisit doing that, good for a refresher anyway. In the meantime, here's some sample lines...

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Qxd4 Nc6 5.Qd2 Nf6 6.g3 [6.b3 a5 7.Bb2 a4 8.Nxa4 d5 9.cxd5 Ne4 10.Qd3 Rxa4 11.a3 Nc5 12.Qd1 Re4] 6...Be6 7.e4 a5 [7...Be7 8.b3? Nxe4! 9.Nxe4 d5] 8.b3 Nxe4 [8...a4!?] 9.Nxe4 d5

Here's some games...

Weissel,G (2158) - Zaynard,A (2035) [A21]
Vienna-ch Vienna (9), 30.10.2005

A nice quick scalp for a >100 rating difference 

1.d4 d6 2.c4 e5 3.Nc3 exd4 4.Qxd4 Nc6 5.Qd2 Nf6 6.b3 a5 7.Bb2 a4 8.Nxa4 d5 9.cxd5 Ne4 10.Qe3 Rxa4 11.bxa4 Bb4+ 0-1

Franco Ocampos,Z (2475) - Romero Holmes,A (2460) [A21]
Leon Leon (10), 1990

This game is annotated in the Soltis 1. ...d6 book.

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Qxd4 Nc6 5.Qd2 Nf6 6.g3 Be6 7.e4 Be7 8.b3 Nxe4 9.Nxe4 d5 10.Bg2 Bb4 11.Nc3 d4 12.Bb2 Qf6 13.Nge2 0-0-0 14.Qc1 dxc3 15.Bxc3 Qe5 16.Bxc6 bxc6 17.Bxb4 Bh3 18.Qc3 Qf5 19.g4 Bxg4 20.f3 Rd3 21.fxg4 Qe4 22.Qxd3 Qxd3 23.Rd1 Qh3 24.Ng3 Qxg4 25.0-0 h5 26.Kh1 h4 27.Nf5 Qe4+ 28.Kg1 Rh5 29.Rd2 Rg5+ 30.Kf2 Rg2# 0-1


Polak,T (2450) - Jansa,V (2490) [A21]
Lazne Bohdanec Lazne Bohdanec (5), 1997

Jansa, of course ...

1.d4 d6 2.c4 e5 3.Nc3 exd4 4.Qxd4 Nf6 5.g3 Nc6 6.Qd2 Be6 7.e4 a5 8.b3 Nxe4 9.Nxe4 d5 10.cxd5 Bxd5 11.Qe2 Bb4+ 12.Bd2 Qe7 13.f3 Nd4 14.Qd3 Nxf3+ 15.Nxf3 Bxe4 16.Qe3 Bxf3 17.Bb5+ c6 18.Qxe7+ Kxe7 19.Rf1 Bd5 20.Bd3 Rhd8 21.0-0-0 Bxd2+ 22.Rxd2 Be6 23.Kc2 a4 24.Kc3 axb3 25.axb3 Ra3 26.Bc2 Rxd2 27.Kxd2 h6 28.Kc3 Ra5 29.Rf2 Kd6 30.h4 Rc5+ 31.Kd4 g6 32.Re2 Rd5+ 33.Kc3 Bf5 34.Bxf5 Rxf5 35.Re3 g5 36.hxg5 hxg5 37.Rd3+ Rd5 38.Rf3 f5 39.Re3 Re5 40.Rd3+ Ke6 0-1



Huebner,R (2605) - Kasparov,G (2715) [A21]
Hamburg m Hamburg (1), 1985

The Game

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 d6 3.d4 exd4 4.Qxd4 Nf6 5.g3 Nc6 6.Qd2 Be6 7.Nd5 Ne5 8.b3 Ne4 9.Qe3 Nc5 10.Bb2 c6 11.Nf4 Ng4 12.Qd4 Ne4 13.Bh3 Qa5+ 14.Kf1 Ngxf2 15.Bxe6 fxe6 16.Nxe6 Kd7 17.Nh3 Nxh3 18.Qxe4 Re8 19.Nc5+ Qxc5 20.Qg4+ Kc7 21.Qxh3 Be7 22.Bxg7 Rhf8+ 23.Bxf8 Rxf8+ 24.Ke1 Qf2+ 25.Kd1 Qd4+ 26.Kc2 Qe4+ 27.Kd2 Bg5+ 28.Kc3 Qe5+ 0-1

HgMan wrote on 09/22/07 at 18:58:37:


I don't think I've come across a repetoire book without such holes, and some are riddled, although less nowadays with comps available to check. Actually, I think the challenge of finding and fixing them is part of the process of developing your repetoire. Yes, don't just parrot opening lines! Actually, I like books produced by a GM without computer aid, as it's the ideas I'm after. I like to dig into old pre-comp books for ideas. Anyone with a decent engine can do the rest of the work themselves.