Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical (Read 43506 times)
TonyRo
God Member
*****
Offline


I'm gonna crack your skull!

Posts: 1826
Location: Cleveland, OH
Joined: 11/26/07
Gender: Male
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #30 - 02/17/10 at 16:48:35
Post Tools
I agree with Markovich. I own both of her Everyman books as well and fine them to be quite good. Her assessments are sometimes vague, for instance "Black has the initiative" or "I'd prefer Black", but that's fine for me in a repertoire book. I think it should be up to the reader to take further steps and investigate all of her critical positions anyway.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #29 - 02/17/10 at 16:21:59
Post Tools
PatzerNoster wrote on 02/14/10 at 19:01:24:
Fllg wrote on 02/13/10 at 23:22:41:
Overall Dembo is probably a bit too optimistic about Black´s chances here.


I think this is the understatement of the year!
I have the feeling that every opening Dembo writes on seems to win by force!  Grin

I have her book on the Gruenfeld and a friend of mine once told me that in her view "with perfect play white can reach a worse endgame which he might be able to hold with very precise play".  Wink

Actually I find this lack of objectivity a bit annoying, if you trust her as a player you are bound to be disappointed. It is always necessary to question the assessments.
At least an objective coverage might point the reader to variations that are a problem or could become a problem in the future, but her books are written with rose-tinted spectacles.
With a little objectivity they would be much better!


I don't agree that Dembo's work is seriously marred by lack of objectivity.  I have both her Gruenfeld and her Beating the Anti King's Indians.  In each case she's writing a repertoire book, and her case is for the Black side.  Most of her judgments are pretty sound, it seems to me.  She often enough spins it for Black when White could well argue differently, but that's about the most that could be said against her.  It's not as if she routinely serves up bad positions and calls them good.

Nobody should trust any chess book, particularly a repertoire book, but that's no criticism of Dembo.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
PatzerNoster
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 152
Joined: 10/22/09
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #28 - 02/17/10 at 15:21:01
Post Tools
Sorry, I wasn't clear, I meant 8.Be3 Re8 9.d5 Nh5 10.g3 Bf8 11.Ne1.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4909
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #27 - 02/17/10 at 04:11:15
Post Tools
8...c6 is the old main move; the aforementioned Poles appear to think it is better than 8...Nh5.  By "the very main line" I would think PatzerNoster means 8. Be3 c6 9. d5 c5 10. Ne1.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
motörhead
Full Member
***
Offline


Here comes the bass, thunder
in the guts...

Posts: 226
Joined: 10/09/08
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #26 - 02/17/10 at 03:18:30
Post Tools
PatzerNoster wrote on 02/16/10 at 01:10:47:
I also see it this way: always listen to your doubts, instead of easily calming them with the author's suggestions.
Only after a careful examination you should do so!

For example I don't see how black should get satisfactory play in the absolute main line of Nbd7 after a white Ne1.


Thanx, I agree off course. But: Sorry. give me hints. I'm not lazy at all, but how can I deal with 8.Qc2 ff. ? Is 8....Nh5 really an idea or is it a flaw? Would 8...c6 be better? What do you think? Sorry, I cannot deal with your Nbd7, Ne1-quotation... There isn't a moveorder at all.
As I remember it, 8...c6 leads to a somewhat passive position. But, as I feel, 8... Nh5 is extraordinarary, but no better. Now what?
Any hints?
Thx, cheese
  

A walk trough the ocean of most souls would scarcely get your feet wet.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
PatzerNoster
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 152
Joined: 10/22/09
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #25 - 02/16/10 at 01:10:47
Post Tools
I also see it this way: always listen to your doubts, instead of easily calming them with the author's suggestions.
Only after a careful examination you should do so!

For example I don't see how black should get satisfactory play in the absolute main line of Nbd7 after a white Ne1.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
motörhead
Full Member
***
Offline


Here comes the bass, thunder
in the guts...

Posts: 226
Joined: 10/09/08
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #24 - 02/15/10 at 22:20:33
Post Tools
ANDREW BRETT wrote on 02/15/10 at 08:56:55:
Dembo is right - most of the time but you must use your own brain too- no opening book can be 100% right.

You might want to look at Van Wely's play for white in the main anti Be3 line. Mcshane has tried nbd7 a few times with reasonable results .


Hmm. May well be, that Dembo is right most of the time. And, don't be surprised, I am willing to use my brain too. That was the very reason for my question here.

In the exact variation 8.Qc2 Nh5!? 9.Bg5 f6 10.Be3 Nf4 11.Bxf4 exf4 my feeling was that Dembo's verdict is too optimistic and overall that this section was worked out in a superficial and confused way. And that slightly reminded me on John Nunn's words in the chapter "Books on offbeat openings" in "Secrets of Practical Chess".

May be that there were no usefull games on the item. But then the author is obligued, to produce variations and indications on his/her own. That's what I pay for.

Up to now no one has given me hints that relieve me from my doubts. The reverse ist true. 

cheese
  

A walk trough the ocean of most souls would scarcely get your feet wet.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ANDREW BRETT
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 622
Joined: 07/07/06
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #23 - 02/15/10 at 08:56:55
Post Tools
Dembo is right - most of the time but you must use your own brain too- no opening book can be 100% right.

You might want to look at Van Wely's play for white in the main anti Be3 line. Mcshane has tried nbd7 a few times with reasonable results .
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Fllg
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 647
Joined: 05/30/09
Gender: Male
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #22 - 02/14/10 at 20:34:06
Post Tools
PatzerNoster wrote on 02/14/10 at 19:01:24:
It is always necessary to question the assessments.


That is true about every analysis.

Apart from "Dangerous Weapons: KID" I only have Dembo´s book "Fighting the anti-King´s Indians" which seems decent and objective enough to me.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
PatzerNoster
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 152
Joined: 10/22/09
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #21 - 02/14/10 at 19:01:24
Post Tools
Fllg wrote on 02/13/10 at 23:22:41:
Overall Dembo is probably a bit too optimistic about Black´s chances here.


I think this is the understatement of the year!
I have the feeling that every opening Dembo writes on seems to win by force!  Grin

I have her book on the Gruenfeld and a friend of mine once told me that in her view "with perfect play white can reach a worse endgame which he might be able to hold with very precise play".  Wink

Actually I find this lack of objectivity a bit annoying, if you trust her as a player you are bound to be disappointed. It is always necessary to question the assessments.
At least an objective coverage might point the reader to variations that are a problem or could become a problem in the future, but her books are written with rose-tinted spectacles.
With a little objectivity they would be much better!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Fllg
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 647
Joined: 05/30/09
Gender: Male
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #20 - 02/13/10 at 23:22:41
Post Tools
Playing g6-g5 doesn´t mean to follow with g5-g4 immediately. Instead Black may play Re8 an Nf8-g6 first.


I wasn´t able to find Lalic´s game cited by Kylemeister. I agree that White is slightly better here but instead of 13...Qe7 in this case more critical looks 13...a5 14.a3 f5 intending 15.exf5 Rxf5 16.c5 d5.

Overall Dembo is probably a bit too optimistic about Black´s chances here.

Cheesemate, perhaps you should look into the lines after 8.Qc2 c6. White is surely slightly better here too but Black´s game is more solid than after 8...Nh5.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4909
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #19 - 02/13/10 at 21:37:41
Post Tools
P&I cite 12. Rad1 c6 13. b4 Qe7 14. c5 (from a game of Bogdan Lalic's) as leading to a slight advantage for White, and they think the same should apply to 13. Bd3.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
motörhead
Full Member
***
Offline


Here comes the bass, thunder
in the guts...

Posts: 226
Joined: 10/09/08
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #18 - 02/13/10 at 21:01:25
Post Tools
Fllg wrote on 02/13/10 at 17:34:20:
What about following the game Ikonnikov-Kornev, Russian Championship 2000? There Black refrained from f6-f5 and instead choose a setup with g6-g5 and Qe7.


I'm not really convinced about that. What is Black heading for? I can't see it. A pawnroller on the king's side? May be, but after g5-g4 there may follow Nf3-h4, direction f5. If White is carefull I think Black achives nothing. Despite the pawn formation f6-g5-f4 and d6 sheds no light on black's king's bishop.
As I saw Ikonnikov played b2-b4 in that game offering the opportunity to lever with a7-a5.
The question to me is how black can do something active. If he sits waiting, white will build up on the e-file.

Over all the comments, Dembo gives to that exact variation in the DW book are incoherent to may feeling. She gives some moves in four subvariations after 11...exf4 but no plans. And she judges black to be fine in positions where some further explanation would have been helpfull. In one game there followed 12.b4?! (in my view) 12...a5 13.a3 f5 14.exf5 Rxf5 "seizing the initiative". Well, may be, but what if white doesn't compromises with 12.b4 but plays say 12.Bd3 or even 12.a3...
which way should black go?

@ kylemeister: What is the main variation your quoted authors give to 9.Bg5 etc.? Would be nice if you give some moves.

Thx

cheese
  

A walk trough the ocean of most souls would scarcely get your feet wet.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4909
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #17 - 02/13/10 at 17:50:17
Post Tools
I haven't tried to do any real thinking about this, but I noticed that the Panczyk/Ilczuk book from last year thought highly of White's chances after 8. Qc2 Nh5, in all kinds of lines (including 9. Bg5).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Fllg
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 647
Joined: 05/30/09
Gender: Male
Re: Dangerous Weapons: 7…Nbd7 in the Classical
Reply #16 - 02/13/10 at 17:34:20
Post Tools
What about following the game Ikonnikov-Kornev, Russian Championship 2000? There Black refrained from f6-f5 and instead choose a setup with g6-g5 and Qe7.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo