(UTC)
(Moderators: Bibs, CraigEvans)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 19
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) NEW BDG BOOK (Read 267732 times)
Jonathan Tait
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 617
Location: Nottingham
Joined: 07/11/06
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #81 - 02/01/11 at 08:38:47
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 01/30/11 at 19:07:49:
I should point out that 8 00 Bf5 9 Qh4 Bxc2 10 h3 can transpose to the Studier-Zilbermints Attack after say, 10...Nc6 11 Rf2! Bf5 12 Bh6! Bh6 13 Qh6 Nd4 14 Ng5 e6 15 g4 e6 16 gf5 Nxf5 17 Rxf5 with White advantage.


or just to a normal Studier line after 10...Bf5 11 Bh6 Bxh6 12 Qxh6 (i.e. equivalent to 10 Bh6 Bxh6 11 Qxh6 Ng4 12 Qd2 Bf5 13 h3 Nf6 14 Qh6)

but 9...Bxc2 isn't really very good is it?
  
blog inspired by Bronstein's book, but using my own games: http://200opengames.blogspot.co.uk/
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1397
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #80 - 02/01/11 at 06:34:00
Post Tools
You are conflating two different variations. Let me explain in more detail, so you can understand:

5...g6 6 Bc4 Bg7 7 00 00 8 h3 Bf5 9 Qe1 Bxc2 10 Qh4 Nc6 11 Rf2 is the transposition by the Studier-Zilbermints line.

5...g6 6 Bc4 Bg7 7 00 00 8 Qe1 Bg4 9 Qh4 is a totally different variation!
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10780
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #79 - 02/01/11 at 03:19:55
Post Tools
ArKhein has asked my question. How does this 11.Rf2 idea solve the ...Bg4 problem? I thought your remedy was 8.h3. As long as this hasn't been answered I am not particularly interested in ...Bf5.

Gambit wrote on 01/30/11 at 19:07:49:
I should point out that 8 00 Bf5 9 Qh4 Bxc2 10 h3 can transpose to the Studier-Zilbermints Attack after say, 10...Nc6 11 Rf2!  Bf5 12 Bh6! Bh6 13 Qh6 Nd4 14 Ng5 e6 15 g4 e6 16 gf5 Nxf5 17 Rxf5 with White advantage.

Well, once again, please point out. I don't see it. How does this transposition go?
  
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
 
ArKheiN
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 728
Location: Belgium
Joined: 03/30/05
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #78 - 01/31/11 at 17:07:56
Post Tools
11.Bh6 doesn't deserves a "?!" mark, but Black has full equality against that with best play. So I agree that 11.Rf2(!) is an improvment. Of course the lines with Bf5 are not very good despite it's popularity (very good winning chances for White while it's not fully clear that Black can equalize here).

Lev, I don't understand your antidote of your last message: What if Black plays 8..Bg4 or 8.Qe1 Nc6 9.Qh4 Bg4? This is one of the few lines of the whole BDG where I am not sure White can equalize. 8.h3 Nc6 and I don't know how White should continue...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1397
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #77 - 01/31/11 at 04:08:38
Post Tools
The actual move order is 1 d4 d5 2 e4 de4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 exf3 5 Nxf3 g6 6 Bc4 Bg7 7 00 00 8 Qe1 Nc6 9 Qh4 Bf5 10 h3 Bxc2

Here I suggested 11 Rf2! as an improvement over the inferior 11 Bh6?!

11...Bf5 12 Bh6 Bh6 13 Qh6 Nd4 14 Ng5 e6 15 g4 Qd6 16 gf5, 1-0, Lew Hucks - Volker Drueke, corres. BDG thematic 1998.

Tom Purser and I analyzed the whole 11 Rf2 line via telephone back in 1996. The above game was published in Timothy Sawyer's The Blackmar-Diemer Keybook II,(1998)  pages 292-294.
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10780
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #76 - 01/31/11 at 02:39:53
Post Tools
No, they don't. From a scientific point of view it is perfectly OK these days to state that the Sun revolves around the Earth. The mistake they made was thinking that this hypothesis was superior to the Heliocentric model. It isn't, but it isn't inferior either. They are of equal value.
It's just not handy when calculating the rotation of the other planets. It is very handy when calculating the rotation of the Moon and even the position of the Moon relative to the Sun (not that I know why anyone should want to calculate that one).

What puzzles me is how LDZ wants to transpose: 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bc4 Bg7 7.0-0 0-0 8.h3 Nc6 as 9.Qe1 just invites Nxd4.
So how on Earth will he reach the position after 8.Qe1 (and not 0-0 - you are sloppy, Lev) Bf5 9.Qh4 Bxc2 10.h3 Nc6 ?
Or is he suffering from the Diemer-syndrome once again, ie systematically neglecting the best defense for Black?
  
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
 
TonyRo
God Member
*****
Offline


I'm gonna crack your skull!

Posts: 1849
Location: Cleveland, OH
Joined: 11/26/07
Gender: Male
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #75 - 01/30/11 at 19:23:04
Post Tools
People also thought that the Sun revolved around the Earth, but they were wrong, and now they appear silly don't they?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1397
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #74 - 01/30/11 at 19:07:49
Post Tools
The points you raise are good ones. Diemer played the Bf4 line sometimes. As I recall, White plays  Bf4 - 000 - Qd2, with an attack on the Kingside. Worth taking a look at.

Now, regarding the regular Studier Attack. After 8 00 Qe1 Bg4! 9 Qh4 Bxf3 10 Rxf3 Nc6 11 Be3 e5! what are you supposed to do? Surely 12 d5 Na5 13 Raf1 e4 14 Nxe4 Nxe4 15 Qxe4 Re8 16 Qg4 Nxc4 17 Qxc4 Bxb2 18 Re1 is good for Black?  If 11 Ne2 Nd5 12 Bg5 Nb6 13 d5 h6 14 Rh3 Nxd5 15 Rd1 Re8 16 Rxd5 hxg5 17 Qxg5 with some compensation for the pawn.

I should point out that 8 00 Bf5 9 Qh4 Bxc2 10 h3 can transpose to the Studier-Zilbermints Attack after say, 10...Nc6 11 Rf2!  Bf5 12 Bh6! Bh6 13 Qh6 Nd4 14 Ng5 e6 15 g4 e6 16 gf5 Nxf5 17 Rxf5 with White advantage.  The move 8...Bf5 is not as critical as you think, is it?

I will take my chances with the Studier-Zilbermints Attack against the Bogoljubow Defense. It has served me well so far. You don't want to take risks, well, that is your business. Me, I think risk is an inevitable part of chess strategy. Gambits were created before positional chess ever appeared. First Giachinno Greco (1600s) and only much later, Steinitz (1880s).

  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
SWJediknight
God Member
*****
Offline


Alert... opponent out
of book!

Posts: 916
Joined: 03/14/08
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #73 - 01/25/11 at 20:32:27
Post Tools
In addition, this isn't even about a dubious early gambit- it's about a dubious sideline of one!  I cannot see how 8.h3 unbalances the position except to unbalance it in favour of Black by losing valuable time.  Christoph's antidote to the Bg5, Qd2 approach are convincing, while 8...Nc6 9.d5 Na5! 10.Be2 c6 or 10.Bb3 Nxb3 11.axb3 b6 are both clearly better for Black.  9.Be3 is a better try than 9.d5, but again 9...Na5 10.Bd3 Nd5 11.Nxd5 Qxd5 is better for Black.  I'm yet to see a reasonable alternative to 8.Qe1 in this position, which according to the extract gives White good chances of getting full compensation.

The extract also raised an interesting point about 6.Bg5 being well met by an early ...c5, meaning that if White prefers the queenside castling, h-pawn hack approach then 6.Bf4 is the way to go- I wasn't aware of this and might well have gone 6.Bg5?! if faced by 5...g6 in an OTB game.  I'll be interested to see how 6.Bf4 fares theoretically as I generally prefer the long castling approaches in the BDG (another argument for purchasing this book when it comes out).

In my opinion White probably has full compensation after 5...g6 with both 6.Bc4 and 6.Bf4, and I think of 5...Bf5 as most critical- again it will be interesting to see what turns up in the book.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #72 - 01/25/11 at 19:35:57
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 01/25/11 at 17:17:14:
That's your problem, guys. You seem to think in terms of practical versus theoretical value. However, when you sit at the chessboard in an over-the-board, not correspondence, tournament, it is the practical value that rules the day. Theoretical is very nice for correspondence, with a computer to give you all the answers. Not so in OTB chess, where you have to think for yourself.

Yesterday I completed the final leg of the Bergen Chess Mates (Ridgewood, New Jersey, USA) Quick Championship. My total score is 12.5 points, netting me first place for the third year straight! I won the Quick Championship in 2009 and 2010 as well.


You're the one talking about CC, Lev; I didn't raise the issue nor did I see anyone else do so.  For the record, I've played my share of OTB chess as well.  I haven't played it in years, but I do have an USCF NM rating, and you don't get one of those playing CC.  Everything I said above goes for OTB.

Now if we're talking speed chess, that has a whole different rationale.  But since you didn't raise that, I won't raise it either.  I assume we're talking about real, OTB chess.

I don't dispute that risk-taking is an essential element of the game.  I only deny that this necessarily implies playing dubious, early gambits.  But if this goes on much more I'll have to divert it to General Chess, so I suggest that we all get back to discussing the Blackmar-Diemer.
  
The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jonathan Tait
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 617
Location: Nottingham
Joined: 07/11/06
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #71 - 01/25/11 at 18:23:56
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 01/25/11 at 17:17:14:
You seem to think in terms of practical versus theoretical value.


Only in regards to the non-coverage of irrelevant sub-variations of dodgy sidelines in opening monographs.

Gambit wrote on 01/25/11 at 17:17:14:
However, when you sit at the chessboard in an over-the-board, not correspondence, tournament, it is the practical value that rules the day.


Quite so.

Or to put it another way: in OTB amateur chess you can play any old rubbish Wink
  
blog inspired by Bronstein's book, but using my own games: http://200opengames.blogspot.co.uk/
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1397
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #70 - 01/25/11 at 17:17:14
Post Tools
That's your problem, guys. You seem to think in terms of practical versus theoretical value. However, when you sit at the chessboard in an over-the-board, not correspondence, tournament, it is the practical value that rules the day. Theoretical is very nice for correspondence, with a computer to give you all the answers. Not so in OTB chess, where you have to think for yourself.

Yesterday I completed the final leg of the Bergen Chess Mates (Ridgewood, New Jersey, USA) Quick Championship. My total score is 12.5 points, netting me first place for the third year straight! I won the Quick Championship in 2009 and 2010 as well.
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #69 - 01/25/11 at 14:54:40
Post Tools
I can never decide whether these discussions of theory versus practice are on topic.  We have Lev, of course, who refuses to recognize theory at all, but his posts are interesting enough that I suppose they should be allowed even in forums devoted to chess theory.  But understanding that, it perhaps would be best to refrain from taking issue with him on this point, which can lead to prolonged, fruitless disputation.

I fully agree with Lev that it's necessary to take risks in chess.  Frankly, my chess skill is so slight that just sitting down to a chess board is a tremendous risk.  But within the limited scope of my chess knowledge, like Lev I prefer challenging moves in preference to safe ones, but only so long as the win is in doubt.  Once I have what I perceive to be a win, I prefer safe moves to possibly better, riskier ones that might jeopardize it.  Without claiming to be a very strong player myself, I believe that this is the policy of essentially all strong players.  A point seldom observed is that the cost of inaccuracy increases once a win is on the board.

Also I would rather not play what I perceive to be a dubious move just to create problems for the opponent.  Unlike Lev, I prefer to do that within the bounds of soundness.  

You'd think from listening to Lev that doubtful gambits were the only way to destabilize a chess position, and the earlier played the better.  That, I regret to say, is a characteristic symptom of Gambit Psychosis.  But that's Lev's business, not mine.
  
The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jonathan Tait
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 617
Location: Nottingham
Joined: 07/11/06
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #68 - 01/24/11 at 09:21:24
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 01/24/11 at 04:00:09:
Second, I am aware of 8 h3 Nc6 in the Bogoljubow Defense. There are ways to play against that, including 9 d5 and 9 Ne2. A detailed article is in the works, based on my tournament praxis, Internet Chess Club, and extant database games. From what I have seen, 8...Nc6 is rather infrequently played. Most often you see 8...c6 or 8...Nbd7 .

In chess, you must be willing to take risks. Those who are afraid of risk will never get anywhere. Wars are won or lost with a certain risk strategy. It is the same with chess.

Such is my opinion.


Yes indeed. I play all sorts of dodgy lines as White and Black and score with them because opponents don't know what they're doing. But this is practical value - it doesn't mean these lines are of any theoretical value. There's no reason why an author should cover all the weak responses to a theoretically bad line (especially a bad sideline), even if the weak responses are the most common ones.

As for:

Gambit wrote on 01/24/11 at 04:00:09:
First, the few 7...Nc6 -Euwe Defense games in the databases suffer from a poor understanding of the theory by the White player. I pretty much have most, if not all, games played with 1 d4 d5 2 e4 de4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 ef3 5 Nxf3 e6 6 Bg5 Be7 (also, 6...Bb4) 7 Bd3 Nc6 8 00 Nxd4 (also, < 8...Nxd4) and its derivatives.
Thus, I am THE EXPERT on this line. I tell you that most White players who lose with 7...Nc6 8 00 Nxd4 9 Kh1 do not  find the best moves for White.


Personally I don't think this line is of any theoretical value either. But we can discuss this when the book comes out.
  
blog inspired by Bronstein's book, but using my own games: http://200opengames.blogspot.co.uk/
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Glenn Snow
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1720
Location: Franklin
Joined: 09/27/03
Gender: Male
Re: NEW BDG BOOK
Reply #67 - 01/24/11 at 05:56:05
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 01/24/11 at 04:00:09:
First, the few 7...Nc6 -Euwe Defense games in the databases suffer from a poor understanding of the theory by the White player. I pretty much have most, if not all, games played with 1 d4 d5 2 e4 de4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 ef3 5 Nxf3 e6 6 Bg5 Be7 (also, 6...Bb4) 7 Bd3 Nc6 8 00 Nxd4 (also, < 8...Nxd4) and its derivatives.
Thus, I am THE EXPERT on this line. I tell you that most White players who lose with 7...Nc6 8 00 Nxd4 9 Kh1 do not  find the best moves for White.

Second, I am aware of 8 h3 Nc6 in the Bogoljubow Defense. There are ways to play against that, including 9 d5 and 9 Ne2. A detailed article is in the works, based on my tournament praxis, Internet Chess Club, and extant database games. From what I have seen, 8...Nc6 is rather infrequently played. Most often you see 8...c6 or 8...Nbd7 .

In chess, you must be willing to take risks. Those who are afraid of risk will never get anywhere. Wars are won or lost with a certain risk strategy. It is the same with chess.

Such is my opinion.


Isn't just playing the BDG already a risk?  I suppose playing something unexpected certainly has practical value but I'm not sure you're variation has more of that than the line recommended in the book!?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 19
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 © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge