(UTC)
Latest Updates:
  ChessPub Forum › Chess Publishing Openings › 1. d4 d5 2. c4 › Slav › Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
(Moderators: proustiskeen, Jupp53)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense (Read 19117 times)
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #18 - 07/24/12 at 00:40:30
Post Tools
I'm not going to release the analysis on this particular line until after "Play 1.Nf3!" is finished, and that's still a ways off. Sorry to disappoint.

(And no, it's not the line chosen for the book, but I am focusing/discussing strictly on book-related stuff right now)
  
2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #17 - 07/21/12 at 18:56:22
Post Tools
Any updates on this?

Khalifman's OFWAK recommended 6.Nh4, but 6...e6 leads to equality in the games I've seen. Khalifman, who drew against Kramnik in one of the critical games, probably knew that 6.Nh4 isn't quite good enough for an advantage.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #16 - 10/17/11 at 22:35:51
Post Tools
No, but I remember the idea so I should be able to recreate it. After I'm finished with something I'm writing right now for work I'll revisit this topic.

I'll save it to come back to it when I'm done, because people deserve to see it. If I remember right and the analysis still holds up it's an instructive insight into pawn structures.
  
2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
fling
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1591
Joined: 01/21/11
Gender: Male
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #15 - 10/17/11 at 11:49:50
Post Tools
BPaulsen wrote on 03/20/11 at 08:04:31:
Blast from the past here.

I actually worked out accepting the exchange to an advantage for white at some point (engine assistance and a lot of trial and error before I got the right approach to work), I'll have to see if I can find the analysis (if I even still have it).


Did you find anything? It would be interesting to see the analysis.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #14 - 03/20/11 at 08:04:31
Post Tools
Blast from the past here.

I actually worked out accepting the exchange to an advantage for white at some point (engine assistance and a lot of trial and error before I got the right approach to work), I'll have to see if I can find the analysis (if I even still have it).
  
2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
Klick
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 528
Joined: 01/31/03
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #13 - 03/20/11 at 07:42:54
Post Tools
Nobody mentioned 6.Nh4 Bd7 7.e4. Whats supposed to be wrong with it?

Seeing this line for the first time makes me wonder why black doesn`t play 7..b5 instead of accepting dangerous gambits after ..e6/e5,..Nxe4. I only found two games with this move. Wasn`t b5 one of the main points of Bd7 after all? For instance 8.bxc bxc 9.e5 Nd5 10.Nxd5 e6 regains the knight with a good position.

The only high-level game available:

[Event "Khanty Mansiysk ol (Men) 39th"]
[Site "Khanty Mansiysk"]
[Date "2010.09.30"]
[Round "9.3"]
[White "Cmilyte, Viktorija"]
[Black "Peralta, Fernando"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D17"]
[WhiteElo "2513"]
[BlackElo "2572"]
[PlyCount "86"]
[EventDate "2010.09.21"]
[EventType "team-swiss"]
[EventRounds "11"]
[EventCountry "RUS"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
[SourceDate "2010.11.18"]
[WhiteTeam "Lithuania"]
[BlackTeam "Argentina"]
[WhiteTeamCountry "LTU"]
[BlackTeamCountry "ARG"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. a4 Bf5 6. Nh4 Bd7 7. e4 b5 8. axb5
cxb5 9. e5 Nd5 10. Bg5 h6 11. Bd2 e6 12. Qg4 g6 13. Be2 Be7 14. Nf3 Nxc3 15.
bxc3 Bc6 16. O-O Bd5 17. Rfb1 a6 18. h4 Nc6 19. h5 g5 20. Nh2 Na5 21. Nf1 Nb3
22. Ra2 a5 23. Ne3 Bc6 24. Bf3 Qd7 25. Be4 a4 26. Re1 a3 27. d5 Bxd5 28. Nxd5
exd5 29. Bf5 Qc6 30. e6 f6 31. Bg6+ Kd8 32. Be3 Kc7 33. f4 Kb7 34. Rd1 Rad8 35.
Kh1 Rhf8 36. Bf7 b4 37. cxb4 d4 38. fxg5 dxe3 39. g6 f5 40. b5 fxg4 41. bxc6+
Kxc6 42. Rf1 Rd2 43. Rxd2 exd2 0-1

If 7..b5 is good, why does almost nobody play it?
  
There just isn't enough televised chess - DAVID LETTERMAN
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #12 - 11/11/09 at 08:44:13
Post Tools
Smyslov_Fan wrote on 11/11/09 at 04:16:35:
I don't think BPaulsen needs to apologise since he was clearly comparing the two moves against each other and not making an absolute statement. (At least, that's how I read it). 


That's how I intended it. Obviously theory changes, so my position on 6. Ne5 compared to 6. e3 could very well change in the future.
  
2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #11 - 11/11/09 at 04:16:35
Post Tools
The few times I 've spoken with titled players about the merits of Ne5 vs e3, they have unanimously supported 6.Ne5. They usually describe 6.Ne5 as "sharper", "more critical", and "more dangerous". 

I don't think BPaulsen needs to apologise since he was clearly comparing the two moves against each other and not making an absolute statement. (At least, that's how I read it). 

I still play 6.e3 as White because I don't particularly like either side of the piece sac 6.Ne5 e6.  As Black, I have difficulties winning against 6.e3, but I lose more games against 6.Ne5. 

I know it's a cop-out, and goes against the grain of top theoreticians, but at my level the choice is more a matter of taste than certainty.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #10 - 11/10/09 at 15:44:32
Post Tools
I should rephrase myself - 6. e3 is not as critical as 6. Ne5.

Obviously it's an important variation. Yes, black needs to know theory to equalize, but I'm not aware of any particular variation that black is struggling in.
  
2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #9 - 11/10/09 at 13:54:34
Post Tools
Well it is indisputable that 6.Ne5 is currently considered to be White's best try against the Slav; what else would the strong preference for this among top players signify?  So I understand where BPaulsen is coming from when he says 6.e3 is not considered critical.  But I think it would be an exaggeration to say that Black's path to equality is easy there (that's not what BPaulsen said, of course).  I'm trying to bring up my repertoire so as to play some serious OTB chess once again, and so far I've been unable to decide between these two moves. 

6.Ne5 looks good, but so do the lines with 6.e3 and 9.Nh4.  Further I have seen some nice recent games where White won with the older plan of Qe2, Rd1, e4, e5 and so forth.   I understand that Black is supposed to be OK there, but when I look at those positions, I always think that I would rather be White than Black.  6.Nh4 I don't find so very attractive.
  
The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #8 - 11/09/09 at 06:06:06
Post Tools
trw wrote on 11/09/09 at 04:25:24:
cute your claim to prove 6. e3 is = is just to say it is unless I prove it isn't. Sorry burden of proof works the other way, you made the claim.


What you're asking for is unrealistic (I'd have to cover all of the theory from 6. e3 onward).

It's easier if you show the critical line you think white is better in, and go from there.

Quote:
And the game you cite does not disprove that 6. Ne5 is in the dustbin of =. Black blundered badly in an obvious position. This game contributed zilch to theory.


White was += before any "obvious blunders" in the analysis I've seen done by other titled players.

If the game contributed nothing to theory Chesspublishing wouldn't have covered it, for starters.

Quote:
Shirov's dvd was published after this game where he stated he thought 6. Ne5 would permanently leave serious play because of this line.


Unless Shirov actually covered the game in question your point is moot.

In fact, his conclusion about the line comes from 2007 from what I see, whereas this game is from 2008.
« Last Edit: 11/09/09 at 08:26:30 by BPaulsen »  
2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
trw
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1414
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #7 - 11/09/09 at 04:25:24
Post Tools
cute your claim to prove 6. e3 is = is just to say it is unless I prove it isn't. Sorry burden of proof works the other way, you made the claim.

And the game you cite does not disprove that 6. Ne5 is in the dustbin of =. Black blundered badly in an obvious position. This game contributed zilch to theory.
Shirov's dvd was published after this game where he stated he thought 6. Ne5 would permanently leave serious play because of this line.

EDIT: Nevermind neither 6. e3 or 6. Ne5 is the subject of this thread.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #6 - 11/09/09 at 03:53:13
Post Tools
trw wrote on 11/09/09 at 02:46:03:
BPaulsen wrote on 11/09/09 at 02:25:07:
trw wrote on 11/09/09 at 02:00:11:
Is there a problem with accepting the exchange? Am I missing something obvious?

9. Bxb7 Bc6 10. Bxa8 Bxa8 11. d5 exd5 12. 0-0 d4 13. Nb5 Nc6 14. Bf4 Nd5 15. Bd2 a6 16. Na3 seems pretty level.

No advantage sure but there is no advantage from 6. Ne5 either.


6. Ne5 offers better chances for an edge than 6. Nh4, especially when black can reach a position, practically by force, that gives him good chances for an edge, not just equality.

White has nothing of note to play for after accepting the exchange sacrifice. Sure, he's up the exchange for a pawn, but he has no play. Black has all the chances.

Aside from that, I don't know if I'd go claiming there's no edge in 6. Ne5, because if true then white has no critical tries at all (6. e3 is not considered as critical when trying for an advantage) against the Slav.



Well according to Shirov and Kramnik and Shulman... 6. Ne5 is in the dustbin in light of this easy line to =

6. Ne5 e6 7. f3 c5 8. e4 Bg6 9. Be3 cxd4 10. Qxd4 Qxd4 11. Bxd4 Nfd7 12. Nxd7 Nxd7 13. Bxc4 a6 14. h4 Rc8 19. Ba2 h6 16. Rc1 Bc5


I could've sworn I remember an improvement for white in this line coming out after the Topalov-Kramnik match, I'll hunt it down.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I do recall it distinctly.

Edit: It occurred in Gyimesi - Bindrich. Chesspublishing apparently covered in the April '08 update.

As for 6. e3 - black's been equal there for years from what I've been aware of. Maybe you can elighten me on which line black is struggling to equalize against.
  
2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
trw
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1414
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #5 - 11/09/09 at 02:46:03
Post Tools
BPaulsen wrote on 11/09/09 at 02:25:07:
trw wrote on 11/09/09 at 02:00:11:
Is there a problem with accepting the exchange? Am I missing something obvious?

9. Bxb7 Bc6 10. Bxa8 Bxa8 11. d5 exd5 12. 0-0 d4 13. Nb5 Nc6 14. Bf4 Nd5 15. Bd2 a6 16. Na3 seems pretty level.

No advantage sure but there is no advantage from 6. Ne5 either.


6. Ne5 offers better chances for an edge than 6. Nh4, especially when black can reach a position, practically by force, that gives him good chances for an edge, not just equality.

White has nothing of note to play for after accepting the exchange sacrifice. Sure, he's up the exchange for a pawn, but he has no play. Black has all the chances.

Aside from that, I don't know if I'd go claiming there's no edge in 6. Ne5, because if true then white has no critical tries at all (6. e3 is not considered as critical when trying for an advantage) against the Slav.



Well according to Shirov and Kramnik and Shulman... 6. Ne5 is in the dustbin in light of this easy line to =

6. Ne5 e6 7. f3 c5 8. e4 Bg6 9. Be3 cxd4 10. Qxd4 Qxd4 11. Bxd4 Nfd7 12. Nxd7 Nxd7 13. Bxc4 a6 14. h4 Rc8 19. Ba2 h6 16. Rc1 Bc5

Granted, at the club level some black players will try other lines cause they want winning chances. But still this line proves 6. Ne5 is no better try than 6. Nh4

I still think white has a major pull in the main Dutch line though: 6. e3 e6 7. Bxc4 Bb4 8. 0-0
What is your claim that proves 6. e3 is just = ?! It is still the only critical line imo.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: Interesting Variation in 6. Nh4 Slav Defense
Reply #4 - 11/09/09 at 02:25:07
Post Tools
trw wrote on 11/09/09 at 02:00:11:
Is there a problem with accepting the exchange? Am I missing something obvious?

9. Bxb7 Bc6 10. Bxa8 Bxa8 11. d5 exd5 12. 0-0 d4 13. Nb5 Nc6 14. Bf4 Nd5 15. Bd2 a6 16. Na3 seems pretty level.

No advantage sure but there is no advantage from 6. Ne5 either.


6. Ne5 offers better chances for an edge than 6. Nh4, especially when black can reach a position, practically by force, that gives him good chances for an edge, not just equality.

White has nothing of note to play for after accepting the exchange sacrifice. Sure, he's up the exchange for a pawn, but he has no play. Black has all the chances.

Aside from that, I don't know if I'd go claiming there's no edge in 6. Ne5, because if true then white has no critical tries at all (6. e3 is not considered as critical when trying for an advantage) against the Slav.
  
2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
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 © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge