Girkassa wrote on 01/25/09 at 23:54:16:


Unfortunately that's probably not saying very much.  It needs to be as good as Black's 3rd or 4th move alternatives. 

Sleepy kitten wrote on 12/01/08 at 02:17:56:

Instead of 6...Bc8, what about 6...Nc6? This seems like quite a promising gambit to me (and Fritz & Rybka).

This has virtually never been played (I found a few games where this position is arrived at by transposition, but probably Black got here by accident rather than intending to play the gambit.)

Has anyone seen this analyzed anywhere?

Or can anyone come up with a refutation?

I see the main line as being something like this:

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e3 Bf5 5.cxd5 cxd5 6.Qb3 Nc6 7.Qxb7 Bd7 8.Qb3 Rb8 9.Qd1 e5 10.Nf3 Bd6 11.dxe5 Nxe5 12.Be2 O-O 13.O-O Qe7 14.Nd4 Rfc8 15.Nb3 Qe6 and I think Black has enough compensation for the pawn.

on a personal note as white i open 3.Nc3 hoping black will allow a marshall gambit after 3...e6. the only downside to opening with 3.Nc3 for me is that black can play a winawar in with 3..e5!? that can be rather unpleasant to face IMHO.

The following thread could be useful: http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1203715431.

3.Nf3 is better. The real question is whether to meet 3...Nf6 with 4.Nc3 or 4.e3, something that 'sleepy kitten' discusses in the opening post.

There is a question which is often neglected and I can't find a clear answer to it in the books I have nor on chesspublishing. In the Slav, after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6, what are the respective merits of 3.Nc3 and 3.Nf3?

Here is what I could find.

3.Nf3 Nf6 gives White the opportunity to play the "Slow Slav" 4.e3 after which the White queen's knight can eventually settle on d2 (most notably if Black answers 4...e6). However, this is considered a bit less challenging than 4.Nc3, not least because Black can develop his problem queen bishop outside the pawn chain with 4...Bf5 (or, less usual, 4...Bg4) while white's queen bishop remains inside the walls. Yet it is a system which prevents Black from getting his usual positions, whether he plays Slav, Semi-Slav, Chabanenko. It is often the choice of repertoire books (including the recent Avrukh book, which must say it remains theoretically dangerous).

3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e3 and now (since 4...Bf5?! 5.cxd5 cxd5 6.Qb3 Bc8 is not excellent):
- 4...a6 might transpose into the most popular line against the Chabanenko (3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 a6 5.e3) so this move order doesn't look too dangerous for a Chabanenko player.
- 4...g6 gives a risk-free plus for White, according to Glenn Flear.
- 4...e6 should transpose into the Meran.
- 4...Bg4 is a possibility about which I know little. (It looks weird.)
I see nothing for the Slav player in those variations.

If Black tries to get the Noteboom, 3.Nc3 e6 and White can play the Marshall gambit 4.e4, and 3.Nf3 e6 and White has 4.Qc2 and 4.Bg5, but I have no idea of the theoretical status of both these moves.

About the independent Black possibilities, there is 3...dxc4 and 3...e5 if White plays 3.Nc3 ; I know no remarkable Black possibility if White plays 3.Nf3 (which explain why 3.Nc3 is less popular).

So, against those moves, what should one play?

For a Semi-Slav player:
-3.Nf3: 3...Nf6 and if 4.e3, either playing 4...e6 knowing the additionnal White options, either playing 4...Bf5 or 4...Bg4 assuming it is not a too frightening white system.
-3.Nc3: 3...Nf6 and if 4.e3 then 4...e6 and White has nothing else than going into the Semi-Slav.

For a Chabanenko player:
-3.Nf3: 3...Nf6 and if 4.e3 then ???? going for 4...Bf5 or 4...Bg4 ? I see little sense to try for an a6-Slav.
-3.Nc3: 3...Nf6 and if 4.e3 then 4...a6 and White has nothing else than going into the a6-Slav.

For a Slav player:
-3.Nf3: 3...Nf6 and if 4.e3 then 4...Bf5 or 4...Bg4 (I see no choice).
-3.Nc3: ??? Here is my main problem. If 3...Nf6 4.e3, what should play a Slav player here?
I see no way to get the Slav, nor to get an improved version of an other opening, or even a system where White would have forfeited a significant portion of his advantage. As if this move order was entirely critical. Yet, opening books do not give it a huge portion to this move order. And we don't see it often in top level events, and it would be hard to believe that it is only because White can't play anymore 5.Bg5 against the Semi-Slav. What is the critical theoretical option against it?

For a Noteboom player:
-3.Nf3 e6 and I don't know how annoying 4.Bg5 and 4.Qc2 are.
-3.Nc3 e6 and 4.e4 is the dangerous Marshall gambit whereas 4.e3 and 4...f5 is an improved Stonewall.

What do you think of this? Do I miss a critical important option for a side or the other? Or even a significant deviation?