(UTC)
Latest Updates:
  ChessPub Forum › Chess Publishing Openings › 1. d4 d5 2. c4 › Slav › white against the slav
(Moderators: proustiskeen, Jupp53)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) white against the slav (Read 5946 times)
CheckMate
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 167
Location: Uppsala
Joined: 07/18/06
Gender: Male
Re: white against the slav
Reply #11 - 09/20/08 at 13:55:09
Post Tools
kylemeister wrote on 09/17/08 at 14:30:22:
I'm not sure what you mean by "good for Black," but White has decent possibilities; for example with that move order he might play a counter-Stonewall (as sometimes played by e.g. Karpov).


With "good" I just mean that it may be a little bit more playable than the usual dutch stonewall. I don't think Black has an advantage or something like that. White certainly has his plans against this setup but it seems playable anyway. Aagard discusses this type of opening in his stonewall book and he seems to like it. My main point though was merely to point out this added possibillity when White plays e3 at move 3.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10775
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: white against the slav
Reply #10 - 09/17/08 at 21:02:41
Post Tools
CheckMate wrote on 09/17/08 at 14:03:21:
Another option against 3. e3 is to play a Stonewall: 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. e3 f5!? I think this Stonewall structure is good for Black when White have chosen the passive e3 setup.


I strongly disagree. White's setup with Bd3, Qc2, b3, Bb2 and 0-0-0 going for a kingside attack is very dangerous, even with a knight on f3. And indeed the move order 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e3 f5 gives White some additional possibilties, like playing the knight to e2 iso f3.
  
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
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4969
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: white against the slav
Reply #9 - 09/17/08 at 18:25:19
Post Tools
I would have thought that the Stonewall thing is dubious when White hasn't played e3.

As for trying to play Nh4 later (in the line I mentioned above), I would think that White might at least be losing some flexibility, but there's also the definite possibility that Black will just throw in ...h6.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
cyronix
Ex Member
*
Re: white against the slav
Reply #8 - 09/17/08 at 17:36:34
Post Tools
checkmate: actually this one of the points of my early e3,
to counter this stonewall setup!
after 3.Nf3 e6 4. Nc3 f5, my knight is already placed on Nf3,
so I can't play anymore the plan with Bd3,Ne2,f3 and soon e4,
as advocated by Palliser in his repertoire book, and I myself like this plan also much better.
And many GM's play 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3, and now black can also play Bf5 or even Bg4, so far I do not see any disadvantages in 3.e3.
A typical plan is to wait for black to play e6 and then get the bishop pair with Nh4, and play on with g3, b3, the position is still quite level,
but I have the bishop pair Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4969
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: white against the slav
Reply #7 - 09/17/08 at 14:30:22
Post Tools
I'm not sure what you mean by "good for Black," but White has decent possibilities; for example with that move order he might play a counter-Stonewall (as sometimes played by e.g. Karpov).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
CheckMate
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 167
Location: Uppsala
Joined: 07/18/06
Gender: Male
Re: white against the slav
Reply #6 - 09/17/08 at 14:03:21
Post Tools
Another option against 3. e3 is to play a Stonewall: 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. e3 f5!? I think this Stonewall structure is good for Black when White have chosen the passive e3 setup.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4969
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: white against the slav
Reply #5 - 09/17/08 at 03:17:42
Post Tools
Yes, that's similar to how Palliser (in "Play 1. d4!") advocated playing after 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. e3 Bf5.  In the case of "our" line (which can transpose to the "Palliser" line), ECO and NCO give the continuation of Nogueiras-I. Sokolov, Yerevan (ol) 1996 as the main line. 
   
With regard to Khenkin's games, ECO likes the ...Ne7 approach as in Khenkin-Hector.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10775
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: white against the slav
Reply #4 - 09/17/08 at 02:43:35
Post Tools
This point is taken. So I looked a bit at the line and discovered 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e3 Bf5 4.cxd5 (a logical move if Black plays ...Bf5 before ...Nf6) cxd5 5.Qb3 Qc7 6.Bb5+. GM Khenkin has 4½/5 with this. One idea is the exchange manoeuvre Bc1-d2-b4.
  
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
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4969
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: white against the slav
Reply #3 - 09/17/08 at 02:15:43
Post Tools
I would think that one of the ideas is 4. Nf3 e6 5. Nc3 Nd7, when there's no Nh4.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10775
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: white against the slav
Reply #2 - 09/17/08 at 02:00:30
Post Tools
Doesn't 3.e3 Bf5 4.Nf3 just transpose?
  
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
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4969
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: white against the slav
Reply #1 - 09/16/08 at 18:50:25
Post Tools
3. e3 is generally reckoned to allow an equalizing 3...Bf5.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
cyronix
Ex Member
*
white against the slav
09/16/08 at 18:41:12
Post Tools
I play 1. c4, after 1. ... c6, 
2.e4 doesn't appeal to me, so I play 2.d4,
after 2. ... d5, the exchange slav 3. cxd5 cxd5 is not my kind either,
so I play 3.e3 to avoid 3. ... dxc4 variations,
how can black make use of this move order?
all the gm's I see play a knight either on f3 or c3 on the third move,
and only play e3 in the 4th move ...
soon I might play normally 3.Nf3 and 4. Nc3, but not now Smiley

against the semislav I like shabalov g4 ...
against the a6 slav or Bf5 I play a setup with b3 Bb2 0-0 ...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
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 © 2000-2025. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge