Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) B76: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0 (Read 58442 times)
TN
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 3420
Joined: 11/07/08
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #5 - 09/09/10 at 13:42:02
Post Tools
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.
  

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


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 683
Location: europe
Joined: 09/09/04
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #4 - 09/09/10 at 12:29:14
Post Tools
Magnus plays the dragon, inspite of Garri`s Najdorf influence, so it must be definitely playable.
  

The older, the better - over 2200 and still rising.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
linksspringer
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 376
Joined: 09/25/07
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #3 - 09/09/10 at 11:11:49
Post Tools
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


FYI, I believe the analysis referred to ("Rybka, as well as this GM") is by Dzindzichashvili in Sosonko’s Corner NIC Yearbook 91.
http://www.newinchess.com/Archives/PDFs/021Corner91.pdf
There is also a survey in NIC Yearbook 94 mentioned by bragesjo in an earlier thread.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Reverse
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 212
Location: USA
Joined: 11/11/09
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #2 - 09/09/10 at 07:43:40
Post Tools
The guy seems a little nutty. I read more of what he posted. He basically just turned on rbyka. He doesn't address either exf6 or Rb8. Since I started this thread I have spent a few hours researching these lines. I wouldn't mind playing the black side after exf6 or Rb8 honestly.
  
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 #1 - 09/09/10 at 07:40:14
Post Tools
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?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Reverse
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 212
Location: USA
Joined: 11/11/09
Gender: Male
B76: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
09/09/10 at 03:05:50
Post Tools
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
« Last Edit: 07/18/11 at 15:24:42 by MNb »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo