ChessPub Forum - Caro-Kann exchange variation

MNb God Member Offline Rudolf Spielmann forever Posts: 10762 Location: Moengo Joined: 01/05/04 Gender:	Re: Caro-Kann exchange variation Reply #7 - 10/02/09 at 21:32:14	Post Tools	Print Post
	The way you compare with the QGD Exchange is not entirely logical. There, as Black, we will be satisfied with equality. In the Caro-Kann Exchange, with colours reversed, COWE claims an advantage for White. So your point of not fearing the minority attack is not really valid. Black only needs it to equalize, nothing more. This is not the case in the QGD Exchange. So please keep in mind that I do not dispute White being equal in this variation; I dispute COWE's way to prove an advantage. I suspect that in reality it favours Black for the reasons outlined above. If I am right White should deviate between move 11 and 15. 18...Re8 19.h5 Nxh5 (there is also Kylemeister's 19...gxh5) 20.g4 Nf6 21.Kg2 (I had looked at ideas like these) Nd7 22.Rfh1 f6 23.g5 (a neat idea indeed) Nxe5! 24.gxf6 Nd3 and I doubt any white advantage. But Black can deviate: 21...Ne4!? (iso Nd7) 22.Nxe4 dxe4 23.Rfh1 f6 and White's attack is stuck. Note how you silently divert from my main point. Even if you prove that h4/Rh3 is playable I maintain: ADP not searching for Black's best defence = lack of integrity.

	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
	IP Logged

Keano

God Member

Offline

Money doesn't talk, it
swears.

Posts: 2922
Location: Toulouse
Joined: 05/25/05
Gender: Male

Re: Caro-Kann exchange variation
Reply #6 - 10/02/09 at 08:57:33

Post Tools

Print Post

MNb wrote on 10/02/09 at 03:21:28:

Typically they only give 18...Qa6 and do not any effort to improve here. The point of White's attack is the weakness of square g7, on which the exchange sac on h5 is based. So 18...Re8 19.h5 Nxh5 20.Qg4 and now bxc3 (iso of Kylemeister's Nf6) 21.bxc3 Bf8 as 22.Rxh5? does not work. White suffers from weaknesses on the Queen's Wing while I don't see a convincing way to continue the attack.
So Black has a choice between a forced draw (Kylemeister) and an attempt for the win. Great recommendation! Nobody who knows Spielmann's attacking principles should be surprised. White starts an attack while two pieces (Rf1 and Nd2) are still not involved. At the same time Black has sufficient pieces in the defence (Kg8, Rf8, Nf6, Be7). How can an attack be successfull then?

Ok, now we have something to work with - I´ll have a serious look at this 18...Re8 move, but straight away just glancing at the position my reaction is that if Black takes time out on a move like ...Re8 then White should continue 19.g4 as in the Dzindzi-Karpov game, and his attack is faster than that game with the rook on h3 now. We cannot just play the same moves no matter what Black plays!

I´ll not say anything conclusive one way or the other yet because I am just thinking aloud, but as a QGD player I should say the dreaded "minority attack" does not exactly leave me quaking in my boots. In the given position I would be much more concerned about the Black king - depending on the next few moves the f1 rook will also enter the attack on g1(after Kh1) or h1 (Kg2). We need to do some analysis but at first glance I prefer White. I´ll post some analysis when I get around to it, probably wont be for a couple of days though as I have a busy weekend coming up.

Edit: My first glance opinion 19.g4 doesnt look too good because of 19...Nd7(!) or ...Nh7. I´ll check for alternatives and post when I have something ...the ball is in my court Huh

What about 19.h5 Nxh5 20.g4!? Nf6 21.Kg2 intending Rf1-h1. That looks a tad dangerous to my eye. Black needs an escape hatch at f7 for his king so something like 21...Nd7 22.Rfh1 f6 and now 23.g5!! to try and continue

- if 23...fxe5? 24.Qf3 White wins so Black must try something like 23...Nxe5 or 23...Nf8 but either way Whites initiative looks dangerous....to be continued! Its interesting that this kind of attack would not work with a Black rook on f8, so maybe there is some kind of mad logic here.

« Last Edit: 10/02/09 at 13:58:05 by Keano »

IP Logged

MNb God Member Offline Rudolf Spielmann forever Posts: 10762 Location: Moengo Joined: 01/05/04 Gender:	Re: Caro-Kann exchange variation Reply #5 - 10/02/09 at 03:55:24	Post Tools	Print Post
	We all know. As Watson does not investigate the chapter on the Caro-Kann I refer you to http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1254285369

	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
	IP Logged

Bromstein YaBB Newbies Offline Greetings Posts: 44 Joined: 05/25/09	Re: Caro-Kann exchange variation Reply #4 - 10/02/09 at 03:45:17	Post Tools	Print Post
	Watson comments this book. http://www.chess.co.uk/twic/jwatsonbkrev77.html


	IP Logged

MNb God Member Offline Rudolf Spielmann forever Posts: 10762 Location: Moengo Joined: 01/05/04 Gender:	Re: Caro-Kann exchange variation Reply #3 - 10/02/09 at 03:21:28	Post Tools	Print Post
	A long time ago I have seen criticism on COWE's anti Caro-Kann somewhere on internet, but don't have the slightest idea where. So I can't check if I have seen Kylemeister's defensive idea before. ADP give 18.Rh3 as an improvement on Dzjindzi-Karpov, Mazatlan 1988. An excerpt can be found here: http://www.chesscafe.com/text/skittles283.pdf Typically they only give 18...Qa6 and do not any effort to improve here. The point of White's attack is the weakness of square g7, on which the exchange sac on h5 is based. So 18...Re8 19.h5 Nxh5 20.Qg4 and now bxc3 (iso of Kylemeister's Nf6) 21.bxc3 Bf8 as 22.Rxh5? does not work. White suffers from weaknesses on the Queen's Wing while I don't see a convincing way to continue the attack. So Black has a choice between a forced draw (Kylemeister) and an attempt for the win. Great recommendation! Nobody who knows Spielmann's attacking principles should be surprised. White starts an attack while two pieces (Rf1 and Nd2) are still not involved. At the same time Black has sufficient pieces in the defence (Kg8, Rf8, Nf6, Be7). How can an attack be successfull then? I don't think I will recommend playing like this to my son. I certainly will not recommend him studying COWE because of Quote: The following analysis reveals the true power of White’s attack. This perfectly shows that COWE lacks scientific integrity - their analysis only shows the power of White's attack in case of inaccurate defense. That's logic a la Diemer and LDZ. Of course this does not mean that the Exchange (4.Bd3) is bad. White has several options between move 11 and 15. One idea is 15.f4 idea Ne8 16.Nf3 f6 17.Nh4; another one is ironically the refinement 15.h4 with the idea to delay Black's minority attack a little. But if we have to look at options like that my question will be: what do need COWE for?

	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
	IP Logged

kylemeister God Member Offline Posts: 4943 Location: USA Joined: 10/24/05	Re: Caro-Kann exchange variation Reply #2 - 10/01/09 at 21:45:09	Post Tools	Print Post
	Looking at a .pdf sample from the book some time ago, I noticed that Dzindzi et al continued after 18. Rh3 only with the obliging-looking 18...Qa6; just off the top of my head I'd be inclined to play 18...Re8, with ideas like 19. h5 gh 20. Bxf6 Bxf6 21. Qxh5 g6 or 19. h5 Nxh5 20. Qg4 Nf6 21. Qh4 Nh5.


	IP Logged

notagmyet Junior Member Offline I heart the Caro-Kann Posts: 72 Location: Oldham Joined: 08/26/03 Gender:	Re: Caro-Kann exchange variation Reply #1 - 10/01/09 at 21:00:38	Post Tools	Print Post
	I play the CK exchange variation and enjoy the positions I get from it. White's development is free, easy and straightforward: -Aim all your pieces at the e5 square, stick a Knight there and play f4 if it takes your fancy -play Re1-e3-h3 and mate on the Kingside. Having said that, I also like playing against it as Black. You've got a ready-made minority attack, and can also break in the centre with ...e5 if your opponent lets you. It's an equal position in which both sides can play chess. But Fischer played it a few times so it's not that bad. I'm not going to discuss COWE, as I've only read Watson's review and not brought the book, but I'd recommend the Exchange Variation to anyone who just wants a solid, low-maintenance variation against the CK.

	"When I am White, I am because I am White. When I am Black, I win because I am Bogolyubov" (?!) - Efim Bogolyubov, noted chess player and optimist.
	IP Logged

Keano God Member Offline Money doesn't talk, it swears. Posts: 2922 Location: Toulouse Joined: 05/25/05 Gender:	Caro-Kann exchange variation 10/01/09 at 08:54:07	Post Tools	Print Post
	MNb wrote on 09/30/09 at 11:49:12: It amazes me that Keano, usually a very sensible and reasonable guy, defends this book. He neglects the two main complaints: the three authors systematically evaluate equal positions as slightly better for White way too easy. The three authors haven't done any reasonable effort to present optimal play for Black. A typical example is the line which was tested in Hübner-Timman, Bugojno 1982. Even Schiller in White to play 1.e4 and win, who recommends the same variation, admits that Black has equality. COWE gives a game Dzjindzji-Karpov, suggests an "improvement" that would have lead to a winning attack - but only if Black cooperates like the authors expect him to do. As a consequence they rate the position around move 15 as slightly better for White. In reality, if anyone has an edge, it's Black (minority attack). MnB - this is a line I have no personal experience with, but you may be interested in this - this morning I did a database search for recent games by 2500+ players with this line - I came up with only 2 - one by Aagard as White where he won with a Bg5 plan, but the other one is the one that is interesting - I´ll paste it below. It seems that GM Lie has followed the Dzindzi line exactly and wins without any real exertion... Maybe we can discuss improvements for Black in this line and come up with the critical line, I confess I havent seriously investigated it: [Event "TCh-NOR 2006-7"] [Site "Oslo NOR"] [Date "2007.??.??"] [White "Lie,K"] [Black "Ogaard,L"] [Round "8"] [Result "1-0"] [WhiteElo "2529"] [BlackElo "2394"] [ECO "D00"] 1. d4 d5 2. e4 c6 3. exd5 cxd5 4. Bd3 Nc6 5. c3 Nf6 6. Bf4 Bg4 7. Qb3 Qc8 8. Nd2 e6 9. Ngf3 Be7 10. O-O O-O 11. Ne5 Bh5 12. Rae1 Nxe5 13. Bxe5 Bg6 14. Bxg6 hxg6 15. Qd1 b5 16. Re3 a5 17. h4 (the whole plan 15.Qd1,16.Re3,17.h4 is from the Dzindzi book) 17...Ra6 (the Karpov game was 17...b4 when Dzindzi continues with 18.Rh3(!)) 18. Rh3 (Interesting - Lie plays exactly the same plan recommended by Dzindzi) b4 19. h5 bxc3 20. bxc3 Rc6 21. hxg6 fxg6 22. Qc2 g5 23. Qg6 Qe8 24. Qxg5 Qf7 25. Qh4 Qg6 26. Rb1 Qc2 27. Bxf6 Rxf6 28. Rb8+ Kf7 29. Qh8 Rf5 30. Qg8+ Kg6 31. Qh7+ Kf7 32. Rg3 Qd1+ 33. Nf1 1-0 (White has won the game following a set plan against a decent 2394 player without too much effort - MnB maybe this could be the line to recommend to your son! I intend to investigate it myself, at the moment I play main-lines against the Caro) Even if we find a good way for Black here, you cant deny that this is an interesting and appealing idea - I dont deny the book has holes but for me the inspiring ideas more than make up for it. Backed up with some independent research there are the makings of some dangerous weapons here. Watson gives zero credit however which in my view is very disingenuous.


	IP Logged