5.d5 exd5 6.cxd5 (6.exd5 Qe7+ 7.Be2 Ne5 =) Nxe4 (6 ... Ne5!? 7.f4 Ng6 8.e5 Ne4 ∞) 7.dxc6 Nxc3 8.bxc3 Bxc3+ 9.Bd2 Bxa1 10.Qxa1 0-0 ∞

jaki wrote on 01/20/08 at 01:12:48:


And what if 5.d5?  If 5...Nxe4, it seems that White ends up with two minor pieces for a rook and pawn; am I mistaken?

looking at it again I see that 10. Qe2 is better than O-O. The point is that Ne7 or Be7 are not possible because of Nb5 + Qe5. So, black has to play Qe6 or Kd8 and then white can win his pawn back with h4 and a better position.
I think that 8. .. d6 is too early. 8. .. Bg7 looks better.

mefisto6 wrote on 11/15/07 at 14:16:48:

Counterplay is overrated

13..c6 14.Nc3 Bxd4+ might be fun albeit prolly a bit too risky.
I think 13..0-0 is possible too as you can play Ng6 or Bf5.

But I think that in a game I will prolly go 13..c6 14.Nc3 0-0. Nothing better than a pawn up and some options in the defence as I dont think white can blitz through.

Why play g4?
A move like 8..d6 looks more logical to me. I think hindering that move was one of the ideas behind 8.c5 in the first place.

I found one game in that line:

[Site "Israel"]
[Date "2002.01.10"]
[White "Manor,Ilan"]
[Black "Kosashvili,Yona"]
[Result "0-1"]
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 e5 4.f4 exf4 5.e5 Ng8 6.Nf3 h6 7.d4 g5 8.c5 b6 9.h4 g4 10.Bxf4 bxc5 11.d5 gxf3 12.Qxf3 Bb7 13.0-0-0 Bg7 14.Qh5 Ne7 15.Bc4 g6 16.d6 cxd6 17.Rhf1 Qe7 18.Bg3 0-0 19.Qxg6 Nc6 20.Rxf7 Rxf7 21.Nd5 Qe6 22.Nf6+ Rxf6 23.Bxe6+ Rxe6 24.Qe4 Rae8 25.Qf3 Ba8 26.Rxd6 Rxd6 27.exd6 Nd4 28.Qg4 Bc6 29.Bf2 Re6 30.b4 Ne2+ 31.Kd2 Re4 32.Qg6 Nf4 33.Qg3 Re2+ 34.Kd1 Ba4+ 35.Kc1 Rxf2 0-1

I think white's 8th needs improving, but attacking is really difficult with a pawn on c4 iso a bishop. And I dont really see a good plan for white so far.

Note that in my previous post I missed to mention 9.Bxf4 d6
So it is
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 e5 4.f4 exf4 5.d4 Bb4 6.Bd3 and if 6...c5 7.d5 Bxc3 8.bxc3 Qe7 9.Bxf4 d6
-10.Qa4+ Nbd7 11.Nf3 0-0 (e5 is not possible yet I think) 12.0-0 Ng4 and e5 is still not possible.
-10.Qc2 Nbd7 followed by Ng4
-10Qe2 Bg4 11.Nf3 Nbd7 or 11.Qe3 Nbd7

mefisto6 wrote on 11/14/07 at 13:46:40:



Yes, there are ways to avoid the Mikenas system, but I don't see the relevance to the topic.

I wonder whether White can't gambit his e-pawn with 9.Nf3!? Nxe4 10.0-0.  Looks as if it could get quit dicey for Black.  But even if not, 9.Qe2 looks quite nice too at first glance.  More later - in an airport lounge and my flight has just been called!

mangler wrote on 11/12/07 at 21:59:45:


That's what I thought at first, but one must wonder.  It seems like the sort of position where White would almost prefer it to be Black's move.  For instance on 5. g3 Bc5, 6. Nxe5 is not on.  5. Be2 Bb4 produces a position where it seems White would rather be playing g3 and Bg2.   5. d4 seems critical, but in comparison to 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. d4, having the pawn on e4 already doesn't look like an unalloyed good (target for ...Bb4; even 5...ed 6. Nxd4 Nxe4 [like a line in the Scotch] comes to mind but is bad).  Or comparing 5. d4 Bb4 or 5. d4 ed 6. Nxd4 Bb4 to their Scotch counterparts, might not the c4-pawn interfere with some 4th-rank stuff by White's queen?

5. d3 may offer an edge in the case of the tempo-up normal line which arises after 5...Bb4 6. g3, but Black can play 5...Bc5 (then 6. Nxe5 and d4 loses back the tempo and transposes to a normal line which is supposed to be about equal).  5. a3 is a thought (à la the 4. a3 Four Knights English, or the Mengarini thing in the Vienna), but is that likely to lead to any advantage after, for example, 5...g6?  I suppose one plausible line is 6. d4 ed 7. Nxd4 Bg7 (7...Nxe4 bad) 8. Be3 0-0 9. Be2 Re8 10. f3 d6, producing a KID which is reckoned to be slightly better for White without the extra move a3, but the inclusion of that move looks like it has "negative usefulness" for White.      

I think the way for White to go is (1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 e5 4.f4 exf4) 5.d4 Bb4 6.Bd3 and if 6...c5 7.d5 (7.a3!? is quite interesting too) when I am not convinced that the Benoni structure is very good for Black with his bishop all the way over there on b4 - as someone who plays both the Nimzo and the Modern Benoni, I much prefer my bishop on g7 in these positions.  It may be that Black is OK here but it looks like a very risky way to play to me.

Hello,

Yes, I agree with Alumbrado, when I had quick look at it found that Alekhine had played a few games with f4 in the tempo down situation. In that case black could play Bc5, and not have too many problems, but here d6 looks forced, and black's game does not look very attractive.

Bye John S

exigentsky wrote on 11/09/07 at 20:29:14:


Do you mean (1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4) 3...e5(!?) ?

If so, what is your answer to 4.f4(!)? Seems to give a sort of Vienna or King's Gambit Declined, where the extra move (c2-c4) means Black cannot play 4...d5.  Obviously White is not as aggressively placed as his Bf1 cannot come to c4, but in the longer run he seems well placed to control the centre (and a good hypermodernist can't ask for more than that!).

I actually like the surprising e5 move against this system. Black has a solid position and the tempo won't mean much.

Hello,

In the Milenas/Flohr System itself in the 3... c5 line there were two Kasparov games, that put top level black players off playing this. This was sometime ago now, so maybe there are repairs for black. (Alumbrado seems to think this is the case).
                    In the 3.Nf3 Bb4 4.g4 line as somebody mentioned in another thread 4... g6 4Rg1 b6 or d6 look ok for black, and Michael Adams as also played 4...BxN immediately. The main problem maybe is that these positions are quite unusual,and not very well covered in English books. So two areas were chess publishing could be useful.

Bye John S

Markovich wrote on 11/05/07 at 15:30:50:


My point was about the line 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.Nf3 (or various other move-orders to the same position) and now 4...Bb4 4.g4!? was mentioned by Kosten. So white's knight IS already on f3. As far as I can see, it is entirely possible to have a consistent repertoire with the Nimzo-Indian, the Semi-slav (or Ragozin etc.), and the Mikenas System, while consistently avoiding both the Marshall Gambit and the Exchange with Nge2. I.e. after 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6:
- 3.e4 Mikenas
- 3.d4 Bb4 Nimzo-Indian
- 3.Nf3 d5 4.d4 Queen's Gambit with white committed to Nf3
- 3.g3 d5 a strange Catalan

What am I missing?

Markovich wrote on 11/05/07 at 15:30:50:


One option vs e6/d5 is the Reti. Some players actually play the English/Reti to avoid the QGD (+ some other d4 openings). Do you include the slav in the QGD family? Then 1.c4 c6 2.e4 is a way of avoiding it.

Stigma wrote on 11/05/07 at 14:25:33:


Well, no one plays the English for the purpose of avoiding the QGD. Further, White doesn't have to allow a Ragozin or a Semi-Tarrasch after 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4, as he does after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3: it's a main line QGD with all White's options still open -- including the Exchange with Nge2. Black's only path to a Semi-Slav now is 4...c6, which is just plain inferior with Black's knight already on f6 and White's not on f3.  So if 2...e6 and 3...d5 is your answer to the English, you might as well drop the Nimzo, since White can always get his uncompromised QGD via 1.c4.

Isnt 3..e5 a cute option? Followed by Nc6/Bb4/exd4 in some order.
At the very least it should be very unfamiliar territory for the English player.

alumbrado wrote on 11/05/07 at 09:18:27:


I completely agree, and as a Nimzo player I would like to play this way against the English, but very rarely do, as apart from the Mikenas there is also the 4 g4 stuff which can be quite dangerous.

I have tended to prefer the other main line, 3...c5.  Then after 4. e5 Ng8 White can play 5. d4 cd 6. Qxd4 Nc6 7. Qe4, or sac a pawn for dark-square-based compensation with 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. d4 cd 7. Nxd4.