Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3 (Read 18149 times)
linksspringer
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 376
Joined: 09/25/07
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #32 - 05/08/08 at 20:05:45
Post Tools
My apologies to all players of the Scandinavian that the "Nc6 wars" have spilled over from the daring defences forum  Wink My last word on this: I have played many classical and modern openings over the years, but discovered I enjoy playing systems with an early Nc6 most. They score well for me. And I like to discuss specific variations. I am not asking anyone to follow in my footsteps. Specific challenges are welcome, I even carry them out myself (eg in the Tango, I even had a "thank you" from Markovich).

However, the line under discussion from the title  is highly relevant for the Scandinavian. I am still mulling over the various points that have been raised (thanks Toppy, Michael, realpolitik!) and hope to post something tomorrow.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1977
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #31 - 05/08/08 at 19:12:06
Post Tools
I take it you've a good line against the trendy Hecht-Reefschlager then?  Smiley Will you share?

(When I last looked, I wasn't convinced that 3 ...de 4 d5 Nb8!? was so bad either, but I stand to be corrected here!)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2211
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #30 - 05/08/08 at 19:01:15
Post Tools
Michael Ayton wrote on 05/08/08 at 18:45:06:
@ Toppy

A logical point of view about the Alekhine/Nimzo, I’d agree. On the other hand, isn’t it the case that Hypermodern openings can “chip away later” at a classical encampment without that encampment necessarily having made an early concession? Moreover, in some lines of the Nimzo, for example the 2 d4 e5 3 de Ne5 4 f4 line, you could argue that White has made a small concession fairly early on since his centre (here the e4 point) may be subject to attack. I’m not saying I don’t think your point is a strong one -- on the contrary, it poses a constant “question” to the Nimzo -- but I suspect getting too formalistic about these things could be an error. Better (sounder?), I think, to focus on concrete moves/plans.

As for the 2 d4 / 2 Nf3 debate, if you can tell me that the latter is most often chosen by GMs for pragmatic reasons rather than for any perceived superiority I must take your point, since you have more contact with these players than I do. Several written sources, though, imply that 2 Nf3 actually is equally strong (or even stronger). My own view, to the extent that I deserve to have one, might depend largely on (a) the fate of the 2 …d5 3 ed Qd5 line being discussed here, and (b) challenges to the 2 …e5 line in the other thread (if only there were some!). As regards Black’s best course after 2 Nf3, until linksspringer (in the third Nimzo thread) mentioned 2 …g6 and made me look at it again I felt certain that 2 …e5 is really the only satisfactory move, but now I’m not so sure. Can you demolish the cheeky 2 …g6?

I don’t myself see any move as the “complete answer” to 1 e4, and I certainly don’t obsess myself with the Nimzo, nor would I want to play it (or any opening) exclusively. Your point about the drawbacks of attempting Hypermodern systems would indeed make a fascinating thread, but I think your position is dauntingly radical, as well as raising some obvious questions like, precisely when does a player earn the right to go Hypermodern? At one time or another, I’ve played almost everything under the sun and my grasp of most openings, Classical and Hypermodern, is surely neither commanding nor totally feeble but moderate. In the end I guess it comes down to why we’re playing chess. As an amateur, while I’m certainly not careless of improvement and results, for me they come second to my broad enjoyment of the game. I simply don’t want to deny myself the pleasure of playing systems I find congenial and which work well at my level and which I feel teach me and enthuse me about chess, including about its history and culture in the sense Markovich alludes to. These include Hypermodern systems, and while I’m always keen to learn how to play them better I don’t feel troubled about them being “beyond” me -- moreover the modern approach to chess opening strategy to some extent blurs/complicates the Classical/Hypermodern distinction anyway, does it not?


In addition to 3.exd5 isn't 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 also good for White?

Toppy Smiley


« Last Edit: 05/08/08 at 21:26:04 by TopNotch »  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1977
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #29 - 05/08/08 at 18:45:06
Post Tools
@ Toppy

A logical point of view about the Alekhine/Nimzo, I’d agree. On the other hand, isn’t it the case that Hypermodern openings can “chip away later” at a classical encampment without that encampment necessarily having made an early concession? Moreover, in some lines of the Nimzo, for example the 2 d4 e5 3 de Ne5 4 f4 line, you could argue that White [i]has[/i] made a small concession fairly early on since his centre (here the e4 point) may be subject to attack. I’m not saying I don’t think your point is a strong one -- on the contrary, it poses a constant “question” to the Nimzo -- but I suspect getting too formalistic about these things could be an error. Better (sounder?), I think, to focus on concrete moves/plans.

As for the 2 d4 / 2 Nf3 debate, if you can tell me that the latter is most often chosen by GMs for pragmatic reasons rather than for any perceived superiority I must take your point, since you have more contact with these players than I do. Several written sources, though, imply that 2 Nf3 actually is equally strong (or even stronger). My own view, to the extent that I deserve to have one, might depend largely on (a) the fate of the 2 …d5 3 ed Qd5 line being discussed here, and (b) challenges to the 2 …e5 line in the other thread (if only there were some!). As regards Black’s best course after 2 Nf3, until linksspringer (in the third Nimzo thread) mentioned 2 …g6 and made me look at it again I felt certain that 2 …e5 is really the only satisfactory move, but now I’m not so sure. Can you demolish the cheeky 2 …g6?

I don’t myself see any move as the “complete answer” to 1 e4, and I certainly don’t obsess myself with the Nimzo, nor would I want to play it (or any opening) exclusively. Your point about the drawbacks of attempting Hypermodern systems would indeed make a fascinating thread, but I think your position is dauntingly radical, as well as raising some obvious questions like, precisely when does a player earn the right to go Hypermodern? At one time or another, I’ve played almost everything under the sun and my grasp of most openings, Classical and Hypermodern, is surely neither commanding nor totally feeble but moderate. In the end I guess it comes down to why we’re playing chess. As an amateur, while I’m certainly not careless of improvement and results, for me they come second to my broad enjoyment of the game. I simply don’t want to deny myself the pleasure of playing systems I find congenial and which work well at my level and which I feel teach me and enthuse me about chess, including about its history and culture in the sense Markovich alludes to. These include Hypermodern systems, and while I’m always keen to learn how to play them better I don’t feel troubled about them being “beyond” me -- moreover the modern approach to chess opening strategy to some extent blurs/complicates the Classical/Hypermodern distinction anyway, does it not?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #28 - 05/08/08 at 15:55:21
Post Tools
TopNotch wrote on 05/08/08 at 15:26:08:


The Hypermodern school of chess is a very demanding and difficult one, and should not be attempted unless one first has a commanding grasp of the principles that form the Classical school. A detailed discussion explaining why one must master classical principles first, before attempting the anarchy of the Hypermoderns would take us too far afield, but would perhaps make an interesting topic for another thread.

   


If I'm not mistaken, it was Max Euwe who said that the development of a chess player recaptulates the development of chess.  It seems to happen faster these days though, when you have 16-year-olds demonstrating deep understanding of difficult, modern systems.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2211
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #27 - 05/08/08 at 15:26:08
Post Tools
The Nimzowitsch is much worse than the Alekhine in that it does not attempt to force any concession from White. In the Alekhine Black is provoking White to lunge forward with his pawns , in the hopes that he will overextend himself in the centre, allowing it to be undermined later. 

In the Mimzowitsch however White can do whatever he wants, and  GM's who play the Ruy or Scotch are content to play 2.Nf3 mostly to be economical, knowing that Black's best course is to tranpose back to 1.e4 e5 which they were going to play anyway. A GM such as Johnny Hector, who loves to play the Vienna game, may choose 2.Nc3 for the same reason given above.

I myself meet 1.Nc6 with 2.Nf3 because in slots in nicely with my repertoire, and invites Black to return to his senses and face up to the Spanish torture or acquiesce to a disadvantage by insisting on a dubious independent course. 

Psychologically 2.d4 is probably the move that Black most wants to see if he likes 1...Nc6. Having said that though, 2.d4 is in no way inferior to 2.Nf3 and he can gain a comfortable advantage either way, particularly in the latter case if Black insists on being original.

Painful as this maybe to accept for some 1...Nc6 is not the complete answer to 1.e4, and for the life of me will never understand why amateur players are attracted to and spend all their time on this difficult contorting stuff when they should be aiming to get a handle on a more classical approach.

The Hypermodern school of chess is a very demanding and difficult one, and should not be attempted unless one first has a commanding grasp of the principles that form the Classical school. A detailed discussion explaining why one must master classical principles first, before attempting the anarchy of the Hypermoderns would take us too far afield, but would perhaps make an interesting topic for another thread.

Toppy Smiley

  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1977
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #26 - 05/08/08 at 13:40:19
Post Tools
[quote]I regret if I gave offense.[/quote]
No problem, Markovich.

The “comparison” I was suggesting was between openings as well as between people. Alekhine’s Defence is controversial, might credibly be considered suspicious, and might (or might not) turn out to be bad/inferior. You yourself, however, could not have made the contributions to the theory on it that you have without an objective attitude towards it, including a preparedness (however great your wariness) to think it could be sound/OK (whether or not you actually like it much) and, obviously, a principled refusal to write it off as a serious defence without serious analytical proof. What is it about the Nimzo (with 2 …e5 and with 2 …d5) that puts it in a different bracket here, such that TopNotch’s basic attitude/approach should be justified rather than linksspringer’s more objective one? After all, both branches of the opening have a real positional basis -- respectively, fluid dark-square play/counterplay against e4 and French- (or Scandinavian-) related themes -- and shouldn’t the fact that many GMs have felt that White might best seek an advantage by 2 Nf3, allowing Black to transpose out of the Nimzo altogether, rather than by 2 d4 put us on our guard against over-hasty dismissal? (I’m not at all arguing here against “gut feeling”, but you don’t express that by vehement declarations of “rubbish”.) All this bears on my last post in the Kevitz-Mikenas thread on the tension between necessary “judgement” and proper openmindedness. I’m not getting at you or anyone else here, but I’d rather hoped this might have generated some sort of debate …
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
realpolitik
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 66
Joined: 01/15/07
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #25 - 05/07/08 at 21:32:54
Post Tools
topnotch we havent met before so far as i am aware (though maybe in a previous life!) in fact i can understand to some extent why strong players such as collins and yourself lump 1...nc6 into the garbage bracket. maybe it is the pedant in me coming to the surface but i don't think its quite accurate, a difficult defence rather than a garbage one would be a better description imo. garbage defences are those like the englund, colorado, latvian, and any number of bizarrely titled rarely played variations with Zilbermints stuck somewhere randomly on. i dont think the nimzovitch defence deserves such a tag but at the same time if a beginner came to me looking for advice on what opening to choose as black it wouldnt be on the tip of my tongue as a recommendation either.
linksspringer to be honest i am not so familiar with the Qf5 lines so i cannot offer a suggestion against 8Nc3 i used to play Qh5 but these lines did not crop up so often as nearly everyone i played the nimzovitch against would respond 2Nf3 and a few 2d4 followed by 3Nc3. i have more or less stopped playing the nimzo now as i think  there are easier albeit more welltrodden paths for players of the black bits. if i were to play this as black i would be looking at 8...e6 followed by h5 as in the game you quoted in a previous post, if you are well prepared here it might not be easy for white to navigate the complications. of course there is also 4...e5 as discussed earlier in the thread when Black cannot be much worse if at all imo but the position may not be to the taste of the nimzovitch player
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #24 - 05/07/08 at 17:55:25
Post Tools
Michael Ayton wrote on 05/07/08 at 17:49:45:
Quote:
I wasn't calling you a swine. "Casting pearls before swine" is a hyperbolic expression in this language, which signifies giving things of value to those who don't understand or appreciate them.  In light of all the foregoing, it seemed appropriate.

"Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you." Matthew 7:6.


I'm not impugning your motives, Markovich, but I can't believe the naivety of this!


I regret if I gave offense.  As to naivety, others must judge.
« Last Edit: 05/07/08 at 23:55:17 by Markovich »  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1977
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #23 - 05/07/08 at 17:49:45
Post Tools
Quote:
I wasn't calling you a swine. "Casting pearls before swine" is a hyperbolic expression in this language, which signifies giving things of value to those who don't understand or appreciate them.  In light of all the foregoing, it seemed appropriate.

"Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you." Matthew 7:6.


I'm not impugning your motives, Markovich, but I can't believe the naivety of this!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #22 - 05/07/08 at 17:44:22
Post Tools
linksspringer wrote on 05/07/08 at 15:43:03:
Yes, thanks for calling me a swine markovich. BTW, my response is a few posts back for anyone interested (bottom page 1).


I wasn't calling you or Michael Ayton a swine. "Casting pearls before swine" signifies giving things of value to those who don't understand or appreciate them.  In light of all the foregoing, it seemed appropriate.

"Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you." Matthew 7:6.

@Michael Ayton: I am not sure what comparision you wish to draw.  Usually when a titled player lectures me at length concerning any given chess position, glib contradition is not my very first choice of reply.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1977
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #21 - 05/07/08 at 17:04:04
Post Tools
@ Markovich

Yes, thanks from me too – I just love being thought of as ‘swine’! As for linksspringer, far from your characterization it’s obvious to me that he’s an insightful and objective researcher of 1 e4 Nc6 just as you have been of 1 e4 Nf6. There’s a point latent in that comparison, which I’m sure I needn’t tediously spell out.


@ linksspringer

In the …Nb4 variation, I was referring to the 12 Be4 line (with 15 g4). But all this may be history thanks to TopNotch’s sac!

Re 7 …Bf3 – no, I was indeed referring to 6 …Qh5 7 Be3 Bf3 – I haven’t seen the Informant analysis. It wouldn’t surprised me in the slightest if this line is dubious for Black. I agree with you about 6 …Qh5 7 Be3 Nf6.


@ realpolitik

Agree re Moro--Rogers. If nothing else white can transpose into Nun-Oral with 11 Bd4 and I don’t like Black. (18 a4!? --?)

Your comments on TopNotch’s posts are, I think, spot on!  Cool


@ TopNotch

It seems to me that Collins isn’t necessarily damning 1 …Nc6 altogether, but more likely is echoing the published (final?) view of Tony Miles -- that the ‘Nimzo’ may well be OK after 2 d4 e5 but that after 2 Nf3 Black should play 2 …e5, which is what Nimzowitsch, who tried a number of different second moves, didn’t do. (Of course, it might be relevant here that C. may have been writing before the re-evaluation of the Hecht-Reefschlager and the …Nc6 Classical Pirc.)

More generally, I’m afraid I can’t but agree with realpolitik that your judgements are sometimes dogmatic – and this I think can serve to obscure the great analytic suggestions and strategic summaries you also frequently produce! See also my last post in the Kevitz-Mikenas thread. It’s got nothing to do with sugar-coated pills, but I do think your sometimes slightly over-bumptious tone can get in the way too. You admitted yourself you can sometimes misjudge things here, but it looks to me that instead of building on this awareness you’re in some danger of reverting to the old Toppy in this discussion!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
linksspringer
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 376
Joined: 09/25/07
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #20 - 05/07/08 at 15:43:03
Post Tools
Yes, thanks for calling me a swine markovich. BTW, my response is a few posts back for anyone interested (bottom page 1).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #19 - 05/07/08 at 15:32:52
Post Tools
TopNotch wrote on 05/06/08 at 15:33:33:
linksspringer wrote on 05/06/08 at 09:54:46:
On to 8...e5 9.d5. Challenging white in the centre looks like a better idea than trying to contain with 8...e6.

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Now black has a few ideas to play with: knight to b4 or d4, pawn e5-e4 or not, Bxf3 or not, and it seems they have all been played. But I'll focus on the moves black with rating 2495+ has played.
1) pawn sacrifice with Bxf3 and Nd4:
9...Bxf3 10. Bxf3 Nd4 11. Bxd4 exd4 12. Qxd4 Re8+ 13. Kd2 {13.Be2?! Ne4 ; 13.Kf1 Bb4 Steininger -Schlenker (0-1, 38)} 13...g5 14. h3 h5 15. Qd3 Qd7 16. Qd4 Qf5 17. Qd3 Qd7 18. Qd4 Qf5 1/2-1/2 Lopez Martinez (2437) - De la Riva Aguado (2552) 

2) invading with Nb4/Nc2
9...Nb4 10. O-O Bxf3 11. Bxf3 Nc2 12. Rc1 {the engine line is 12.Be4 Nxe4 13.Qxc2 Ng3 14.Qxf5 Nxf5 but black has no problems} 13...Nxe3 13. fxe3 Bc5 with equality Pasko (2303)-Krivoshey(2495) (0-1, 116)

As I said, there are other black tries as well, but in particular line 2 convinces me black has no major problems to solve.


Yes certainly Black has many tries, but it is important to recognise and fully appreciate some important re-occuring key tactical and strategical motifs in all these positions.

A) Strategically, White's King is safer on the Kingside than Black's on the Queenside.

B) Tactically, White is often able to mount an attack on the opposing King faster and more effectively than his opponent. This is so mainly because he has a lead in development and his pieces are better placed.

c) A very important feature of the position also is White's advanced mobile queenside pawn majority, which lends great force to any mating attack he might pursue.

d) A chess engine has no regard for motifs, themes or intuition and once their horizon has been exceeded they often miss the plot entirely. That is why on this forum I emphasis greatly the importance of developing a good thought process rather than simply number crunching with an engine, not that I am insinuating that this is what you are doing, but as these threads are read by many of varying strengths I like to breakdown what I say and offer guidance.

Now to apply my evaluation consisting of a, b, c, d to the position you categorise as "line 2 convinces me black has no major problems to solve":

Pasko (2303)-Krivoshey(2495)

9...Nb4 10. O-O Bxf3 11. Bxf3 Nc2 12.Be4! The engine move as you called it, is actually best here but not for the reasons you may think [12.Rc1?! as played in the game is not as good, but may still be sufficient for an advantage if followed up correctly] Nxe4 13.Qxc2 Ng3 14.Qxf5 Nxf5 you claim that Black has no problems in this ending, but after 15.Ne4 White is certainly for choice although one could argue it is nothing to write home about.

Returning to the position after 13...Ng3, White has a more intriguing and thematic option, i.e 14.Qa4 simply giving up an exchange for a very dangerous attack, for e.g 14...Nxf1 15.Rxf1 and already it is difficult to offer Black good advice. The natural reply 15...a6 is strongly met by 16.c5 intending c6 with what looks a winning attack. Fritz suggests Black try 15...Qg6 supposedly intending some defense with Qa6,  but after 16.Nb5! I think he's toast. 

You seem to have made a special point of emphasising Black's rating in the game under consideration as if it validates the approach used, but a high rating alone should not paralyse us from thinking objectively for ourselves. A compatriot of mine relatively recently deafeated Nigel Short with the Elephant gambit, and once at an Olympiad got a semi playable position with it against Greek GM Kotronias, nevertheless that has done nothing to dispel my views on the matter that objectively the Elephant is rubbish and this is more or less how I feel about 1...Nc6.

Toppy Smiley


Pearls cast before swine, Toppy.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2211
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nf3
Reply #18 - 05/06/08 at 22:17:07
Post Tools
Well, your handle Linksspringer translates into something like Knight on the Left, so your addiction is hardly a surprise to me. Grin

Here's to hoping that someone breaks you of that addiction, before the damage becomes truly irreversible.

Toppy Smiley
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo