Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) B76: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0 (Read 56485 times)
Glenn Snow
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1719
Location: Franklin
Joined: 09/27/03
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #20 - 11/09/10 at 18:21:59
Post Tools
XChess1971 wrote on 11/09/10 at 15:32:21:
Glenn Snow wrote on 09/09/10 at 07:40:14:
From STLChess.com

Quote:
The main Varuation runs...

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 Nc6 8. Qd2
O-O 9. O-O-O d5 10. Kb1 Nxd4 11. e5 Nf5 12. exf6 Bxf6 13. Nxd5 Qxd5 14. Qxd5
Nxe3 15. Qd2 Nxd1 16. Qxd1 Be6 17. Bb5! The idea is to exchange the white squared Bishops, leaving White with a winning position.

All the other side variations, having been shown as better for White.


Ron


17.Bb5! does look good for White to me but wasn't 12...exf6 still considered playable for black?  I know this has been analyzed a lot here on the forum.  Also what is White's refutation of the interesting 10...Rb8!? variation?


As far as I understand 17.Bb5 looks ok for white. But exchanging bishops doesn't make you a winner. Actually, I remember that I discussed a little bit about that position with somebody, and I told this person that probably I would try to play 17...Be6 and 18...Rfd8 with the idea of doubling rooks on the "d" file. Keeping control of the "d" file plus avoiding weaknesses as in many different game that I have seen should hold for black. Deep analysis is required for this. Otherwise, we are just supposing.
It is a matter of taste whether you play 12...Bxf6 of 12...exf6.

I can't comment on 10.Kb1 Rb8. If Carlsen got to play that, I think he must have something under his sleeve. And he will not disclose that to anybody for free because he plays for a living.


Are you talking about 16...Be6 and then 17...Rfd8 (I think you've added one to the move count)?  This is not enough to ensure that a pair of Rooks aren't exchanged.  Black must play 16...Be6 17.Bb5 a6 18.Ba4 Rfd8 19.Qe2 Rd4 attacking the Bishop and gaining time to take over the d-file.  This has been known for a long time.  After the exchange of Bishops on g3, Dzindi recommends White play g4 followed by and advance of the Kingside pawns.  I'm not sure if g4 is the best way to implement this but the plan seems critical to me.  This is one of those positions that could use some correspondence tests or a chesspublishing group game perhaps.

In regards to the 10.Kb1 Rb8 11.h4 variation, I'm sure Carlsen did have something in mind.  Hopefully someone will figure out what it was and share it with us here!  I've tried pretty hard and haven't been able to find a good continuation for Black.
« Last Edit: 11/09/10 at 20:29:41 by MNb »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TonyRo
God Member
*****
Offline


I'm gonna crack your skull!

Posts: 1777
Location: Cleveland, OH
Joined: 11/26/07
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #19 - 11/09/10 at 16:41:27
Post Tools
XChess1971 wrote on 11/09/10 at 15:32:21:
Glenn Snow wrote on 09/09/10 at 07:40:14:
From STLChess.com

Quote:
The main Varuation runs...

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 Nc6 8. Qd2
O-O 9. O-O-O d5 10. Kb1 Nxd4 11. e5 Nf5 12. exf6 Bxf6 13. Nxd5 Qxd5 14. Qxd5
Nxe3 15. Qd2 Nxd1 16. Qxd1 Be6 17. Bb5! The idea is to exchange the white squared Bishops, leaving White with a winning position.

All the other side variations, having been shown as better for White.


Ron


17.Bb5! does look good for White to me but wasn't 12...exf6 still considered playable for black?  I know this has been analyzed a lot here on the forum.  Also what is White's refutation of the interesting 10...Rb8!? variation?


As far as I understand 17.Bb5 looks ok for white. But exchanging bishops doesn't make you a winner. Actually, I remember that I discussed a little bit about that position with somebody, and I told this person that probably I would try to play 17...Be6 and 18...Rfd8 with the idea of doubling rooks on the "d" file. Keeping control of the "d" file plus avoiding weaknesses as in many different game that I have seen should hold for black. Deep analysis is required for this. Otherwise, we are just supposing.
It is a matter of taste whether you play 12...Bxf6 of 12...exf6.

I can't comment on 10.Kb1 Rb8. If Carlsen got to play that, I think he must have something under his sleeve. And he will not disclose that to anybody for free because he plays for a living.


It's not clear to me that the argument "Carlsen played it" or "Radjabov played it" holds any ground. In modern times, GM's play all kinds of things as both colors because opening theory has advanced so far way up there. If you play the same thing every time, you're busted, so GM's mix it up and play things as surprise weapons all the time. It doesn't have to be totally sound, just sound enough to work for a game or two while people struggle OTB to find the best lines.

It's also possible that he just missed something that someone with a strong computer and lots of time on his hands finds later after 60 cups of coffee and 3 nights of missed sleep. Not saying that's what happened here, just that it's possible.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
XChess1971
Full Member
***
Offline


Born with a Dragon Book!

Posts: 193
Location: USA
Joined: 09/07/04
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #18 - 11/09/10 at 15:32:21
Post Tools
Glenn Snow wrote on 09/09/10 at 07:40:14:
From STLChess.com

Quote:
The main Varuation runs...

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 Nc6 8. Qd2
O-O 9. O-O-O d5 10. Kb1 Nxd4 11. e5 Nf5 12. exf6 Bxf6 13. Nxd5 Qxd5 14. Qxd5
Nxe3 15. Qd2 Nxd1 16. Qxd1 Be6 17. Bb5! The idea is to exchange the white squared Bishops, leaving White with a winning position.

All the other side variations, having been shown as better for White.


Ron


17.Bb5! does look good for White to me but wasn't 12...exf6 still considered playable for black?  I know this has been analyzed a lot here on the forum.  Also what is White's refutation of the interesting 10...Rb8!? variation?


As far as I understand 17.Bb5 looks ok for white. But exchanging bishops doesn't make you a winner. Actually, I remember that I discussed a little bit about that position with somebody, and I told this person that probably I would try to play 17...Be6 and 18...Rfd8 with the idea of doubling rooks on the "d" file. Keeping control of the "d" file plus avoiding weaknesses as in many different game that I have seen should hold for black. Deep analysis is required for this. Otherwise, we are just supposing.
It is a matter of taste whether you play 12...Bxf6 of 12...exf6.

I can't comment on 10.Kb1 Rb8. If Carlsen got to play that, I think he must have something under his sleeve. And he will not disclose that to anybody for free because he plays for a living.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Glenn Snow
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1719
Location: Franklin
Joined: 09/27/03
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #17 - 11/08/10 at 05:33:48
Post Tools
[quote author=74585041545B5A5C415A46350 link=1284001550/16#16 date=1289170824]I was talking about 12...exf6 and 10...Rb8 11.h4 variation [/quote]

As far as the 12...exf6 variation goes I've just been following the threads here on the forum which is still fairly unclear but looking like it's favoring White. 

[b]10.Kb1 Rb8 11.h4 e5[/b] (I've also looked at 11...Re8; 11...dxe4: 11...Nxd4; 11...e6; and 11...h5) [b]12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.exd5 cxd5[/b] (13...Nxd5 14.Nxd5 cxd5 15.Qxd5 Qxd5, transposes to 13...cxd5; 13...Qa5 14.dxc6 Be6 15.b3 Rfd8 16.Bd3 with the idea of Ne4 and if 16...Qc7 then 17.h5 seems strong for White.) [b]14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxd5 Qxd5 16.Rxd5 e4 17.Rb5[/b], is my main line which favors White after [b]17...Bd7 18.Rb3 or 18.Rxb8.[/b]

I'd love to be proven wrong on any of this.  I've also wondered about Korchnoi's suggestion that after 10.Kb1 Nxd4 11.e5 Nxf3 12.gxf3 Nh5 13.Nxd5 e6 14.Nxf6+ Bxf6 15.exf6 Qxd2 16.Rxd2 b6 17.Bh6 Bb7 18.Bxf8 Kxf8 19.Be2 Nxf6 20.Rhd1 Ke7.  Korchnoi suggested that Black had compensation for the exchange while Dearing thought it wasn't an endgame he'd want to play as Black (if memory serves correctly).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Ametanoitos
God Member
*****
Offline


The road to success is
under construction

Posts: 1427
Location: Patras
Joined: 01/04/05
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #16 - 11/07/10 at 23:00:24
Post Tools
I was talking about 12...exf6 and 10...Rb8 11.h4 variation
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Glenn Snow
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1719
Location: Franklin
Joined: 09/27/03
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #15 - 11/07/10 at 18:02:41
Post Tools
Quote:
I have no knowledge at all of the chess of this, but in my data base, 82 games continued from 17.Bb5 without a notably crushing score for White.


For the record, I don't really know either.  However, for what it's worth, I think this is a depressing position to have to play from the Black viewpoint against a prepared White player.  I've seen some of the Dzindi analysis and for the most part it looks good to me (One variation he offers the Ka2 improvement which completely busts that line.  I'm sure a lot of you know what I'm talking about.  In the instances I disagree, I've found what I think are improvements for White.  Ametanoitos, which variations did you want more analysis on?  I wasn't sure if you were talking about g4 and h4 against ...Rb8 or this Bb5 line.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #14 - 11/07/10 at 16:21:46
Post Tools
Glenn Snow wrote on 09/09/10 at 07:40:14:
From STLChess.com

Quote:
The main Varuation runs...

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 Nc6 8. Qd2
O-O 9. O-O-O d5 10. Kb1 Nxd4 11. e5 Nf5 12. exf6 Bxf6 13. Nxd5 Qxd5 14. Qxd5
Nxe3 15. Qd2 Nxd1 16. Qxd1 Be6 17. Bb5! The idea is to exchange the white squared Bishops, leaving White with a winning position.

All the other side variations, having been shown as better for White.


Ron


17.Bb5! does look good for White to me but wasn't 12...exf6 still considered playable for black?  I know this has been analyzed a lot here on the forum.  Also what is White's refutation of the interesting 10...Rb8!? variation?


I have no knowledge at all of the chess of this, but in my data base, 82 games continued from 17.Bb5 without a notably crushing score for White.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Ametanoitos
God Member
*****
Offline


The road to success is
under construction

Posts: 1427
Location: Patras
Joined: 01/04/05
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #13 - 11/07/10 at 01:29:39
Post Tools
I'd be gratefull if you'd be more specific about these two lines. Cannot you give some sample variation?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Glenn Snow
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1719
Location: Franklin
Joined: 09/27/03
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #12 - 11/06/10 at 19:58:46
Post Tools
Menake Halonot wrote on 09/12/10 at 18:04:43:
TN wrote on 09/09/10 at 13:42:02:
Reverse wrote on 09/09/10 at 03:05:50:
Some 2200 USCF thinks he has found some refutations to the Dragon based on the 9. 0-0-0 variation. I don't play the opening so im not sure. Here is a link to his claims in a thread on some other forum. Does he seem correct?

http://stlchess.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2571


Interestingly, he doesn't have anything to say about 10...Rb8 except that it 'misplaces the rook'. Clearly Carlsen had other ideas when he played this against Nisipeanu.


in fact, in his dvd (roman's lab 75) dzindzichashvilli suggest something strong against 10... Rb8: 11. g4! (you can watch the analysis on the dvd)


I've done some research on 10...Rb8 11.g4 and so far I think that Black is fine there.  However, it seems that 11.h4! refutes the variation so it's rather pointless now.  Analysis on the forum seem's to indicate that 12...exf6 (after 10...Nxd4 11.e5 Nf5 12.exf6) is in some trouble too.  If that's the case then Dragon may really be struggling to survive (again, but it's always bounced back before).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Menake Halonot
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline



Posts: 34
Joined: 09/11/10
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #11 - 09/12/10 at 18:04:43
Post Tools
TN wrote on 09/09/10 at 13:42:02:
Reverse wrote on 09/09/10 at 03:05:50:
Some 2200 USCF thinks he has found some refutations to the Dragon based on the 9. 0-0-0 variation. I don't play the opening so im not sure. Here is a link to his claims in a thread on some other forum. Does he seem correct?

http://stlchess.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2571


Interestingly, he doesn't have anything to say about 10...Rb8 except that it 'misplaces the rook'. Clearly Carlsen had other ideas when he played this against Nisipeanu.


in fact, in his dvd (roman's lab 75) dzindzichashvilli suggest something strong against 10... Rb8: 11. g4! (you can watch the analysis on the dvd)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bragesjo
God Member
*****
Offline


CCE at ICCF 2021

Posts: 1677
Location: Eskilstuna
Joined: 06/30/06
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #10 - 09/10/10 at 12:20:42
Post Tools
At internet I am meeting 10 Kb1 more often than usual but white players often divert from 10 Kb1 theory leeding dynamical balanced postions.

About 10 .. Rb8 I think that h4! is also strong.

About exf6 white might be minimum better in a opposete colour Bishop scenario after

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 O-O 8. Qd2
Nc6 9. O-O-O d5 10. Kb1 Nxd4 11. e5 Nf5 12. exf6 exf6 13. Nxd5 Nxe3 14. Qxe3
Be6 15. Bc4 f5 16. c3 Qh4 17. f4 Bxd5 18. Bxd5 Rae8 19. Qd2 b5

since black has a double pawn and f7 is slightly more easy to attack than b2 or c3.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
TN
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 3420
Joined: 11/07/08
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #9 - 09/10/10 at 06:56:01
Post Tools
Sacapawn wrote on 09/09/10 at 21:45:35:
I looked at the discussions going on at the Saint Louis chess forum, are they sloppy with their database updates?

Ron Luther wrote this Wed Sep 08, 2010

"...So far no one has shown any answers for black. Perhaps Carlsen has an answer, however he seems to be keeping it to himself for now. Perhaps Joey or Ray should give him a call and see if he will devulge it?"

The answer was provided 10 months ago: Carlsen played 12...exf6 vs Short (½-½) in London December 2009.

Radjabov has also played 12...exf6 in two games (draws).



I had the impression that 12...ef6 13.Nd5 is better for White, but if someone has a major improvement over the analysis in the Yearbook then I'd be interested to know.

After 10...Rb8, I'd recommend 11.g4 which has only been played once but deserves further practical tests. If 11...e5, Black's compensation for the pawn is insufficient following 12.Nc6 bc6 13.Ba7 Rb7 14.Bc5 Re8 15.ed5 Nd5 16.Ne4.
  

All our dreams come true if we have the courage to pursue them.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Schroeder
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 89
Location: Hamburg
Joined: 03/28/08
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #8 - 09/10/10 at 00:33:39
Post Tools
Sosonko made the same claim in New In Chess Yearbook 91, based on an analysis by Dzindzichashvili.
http://www.newinchess.com/Archives/PDFs/021Corner91.pdf

But here, too, they consider only 12.-Bxf6, not 12.-exf6.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Sacapawn
Full Member
***
Offline


International Master

Posts: 119
Location: Stockholm
Joined: 05/27/05
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #7 - 09/09/10 at 21:45:35
Post Tools
I looked at the discussions going on at the Saint Louis chess forum, are they sloppy with their database updates?

Ron Luther wrote this Wed Sep 08, 2010

"...So far no one has shown any answers for black. Perhaps Carlsen has an answer, however he seems to be keeping it to himself for now. Perhaps Joey or Ray should give him a call and see if he will devulge it?"

The answer was provided 10 months ago: Carlsen played 12...exf6 vs Short (½-½) in London December 2009.

Radjabov has also played 12...exf6 in two games (draws).

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bragesjo
God Member
*****
Offline


CCE at ICCF 2021

Posts: 1677
Location: Eskilstuna
Joined: 06/30/06
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #6 - 09/09/10 at 15:15:41
Post Tools
When I read this thread I thought that the Dragon was in trouble becouse of many novelys in 12 Bd4 line line or something like that. Dragon appears to remain fully playable including agianst 10 Kb1...
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo