Latest Updates:
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) B76: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0 (Read 58470 times)
bragesjo
God Member
*****
Offline


CCE at ICCF 2021

Posts: 1702
Location: Eskilstuna
Joined: 06/30/06
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #65 - 04/23/11 at 13:11:03
Post Tools
It is possilbe that Matematix g3 (idea h4 first before g4?) is better but g4 g5 Qe3 is still not easy for black. White is plan is f4 at some point, perhaps supported by a rook at f1 or f2.  Once gpawn is remmoved h4g5 can sometiems by played and blacks position looks a bit worse.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Matemax
God Member
*****
Offline


Chesspub gives you strength!

Posts: 1302
Joined: 11/04/07
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #64 - 04/23/11 at 11:00:03
Post Tools
XChess1971 wrote on 04/21/11 at 16:26:53:
I wanted to post this game that I played myself as an example of the variation.

i dont like 22.g4 cause after your move ...g5 I dont see how White should continue. Pawns cant move back - so 22.g3 may be an idea or another useful move - "wait and see" what Black does...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bragesjo
God Member
*****
Offline


CCE at ICCF 2021

Posts: 1702
Location: Eskilstuna
Joined: 06/30/06
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #63 - 04/23/11 at 10:13:34
Post Tools
Interesting game but is whites h4 forced? I think black is better after whites h4. How about something like Qe3 thretening to play f4 at some point, sometimes after a pawn sac by h4 gxh4 in some lines and sometimes prepered by Rf1?.

But you have a point, anything can happened in a chessgame and white Bb5 does not win by force.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
XChess1971
Full Member
***
Offline


Born with a Dragon Book!

Posts: 204
Location: USA
Joined: 09/07/04
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #62 - 04/21/11 at 16:26:53
Post Tools
I wanted to post this game that I played myself as an example of the variation.



« Last Edit: 04/22/11 at 12:06:24 by GMTonyKosten »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
YaBB Moderator
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10620
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #61 - 04/06/11 at 17:05:25
Post Tools
Glenn Snow wrote:

Here's a little bit I've found from this and other threads:

"Well, I have had problems with the 9.0-0-0 d5 10.Kb1 - line as well. Black's chances after the queen sac look very limited, especially if White plays 17.Bb5, e.g. 17..a6 18.Ba4 b5 19.Bb3 Bxb3 and now 20.axb3! (which Dearing says is "surprisingly bad", but I believe only his analysis is inaccurate, since he doesn't mention 20..a5 21.Qe2 a4 22.Ka2! when black cannot make real progress any more and is facing problems on both sides of the board). I recently tried 18...Rfd8 19.Qe2 Rd4 20.Bb3 Bxb3 21.axb3 Rad8 and after 22.g4!? it was no fun at all to play the dark side. Sad Does anybody have ideas to improve Black's play or can anybody criticize my assessment of the arising positions?" ,   Swiss_Dragon

"In the line swiss_dragon gave after 17.Bb5 a6 18.Ba4 b5 19.Bb3 Bxb3 20.axb3 a5 21.Qe2 a4 22.Ka2 I do not see how white can make progress after 22...b4 (threat a3) 23.bxa4 Rxa4+ 24.Kb3 Rfa8 as white's rook will be tied down to the b-pawn after e.g 25.Rd1 Ra2 26.Rb1 Ra4. However this doesnt give any winning chances to black either  Sad . Any improvements on this?",  goldaxe

"Goldaxe's line seems the best black has, but there is some play left on the kingsside where Black has to be very careful, e.g. 25.g4!? (Rd1 looks like a loss of a tempo to me, although this may actually not make a big difference) Ra2 26.Rb1 and let's say 26..e6 27.f4 h6 (allowing g5 creates problems on the back rank) 28.f5!? At one point Black might play Rxb2 Rxb2 Ra3 Kxb4 Bb2 and hope to create some fortress while giving up the bishop for the c-pawn, but I don't see an easy fortress as long as the h-pawns are still on the board. I think, Black has really very limited play and any mistake may be fatal, while I'm not sure whether the position is a draw at all. Who likes to play such a position?",  Swiss _Dragon
---------------------------------

"What do you think of this variation in queen sac line 17.Bb5 a6 18.Ba4 Rfd8 19.Qe2 Rd4 20.Bb3 Bb3 21.ab Rad8 22.g4?What is the idea of 22...Bh4,as played by swiss dragon?What do you think of Vocaruto's 22...g5?",  keerik

"Well, the idea of 22...Bh4 was to prevent White' plan of h4, g5 followed by h5. The move 22...g5 has the same idea.
At that time 22.g4 was new to me and 22...Bh4 was an over-the-board idea, maybe not the best one. However the computer gives White an advantage after 22...g5 and other moves as well. So I would hesitate to play the same line again.",  Swiss_Dragon

"@SwissDragon: search the position after 22.g4 in the Chessbase Online database. There were two correspondence games where black sat still with 22. ... e6 and made 1,5/2, perhaps your 22. ... Bh4 was a bit of a panic reaction?"  (From another thread but included because it might be relevant.)

"Well right, 22...Bh4 was a bit of a strange move. I didn't know that 22.g4 had already been played and so running into my opponent's preparation I wanted to play something surprising, too. Smiley It didn't turn out so badly, as I think the game was drawish until move 53(!), when I took a poisend pawn beeing already far way behind on the clock. So 22...e6 may be more natural, but still I would clearly prefer White here. The game Krohalev-Berriot stops after move 26, when I would really be interested, what Black plays after the move 27.Re1!? threatening hxg6 hxg6 Rxe5 Rxe5 Qh8+, e.g. 27..Bg7 28.h6 and there are always problems on the back rank. You see, there are some traps in the position and it's not so funny to defend against them for a long time. It is certainly a different thing in correspondence chess, when your friends Rybka and Fritz can warn you.",   Swiss_Dragon

"I'm not sure White can win by force after either of those two moves but then again despite Dzindi's recommendation, I'm not sure 22.g4 is White's best move.  I've wondered if 22.g3!? with an eventual followup of h4 then g4 wasn't better.  I suppose it depends on what Black can do in the meantime. ",   Glenn Snow  (I'd forgotten about Blacks 21...e6!? apparently.)

There's also this idea for Black which might be good enough to draw but I'm not too excited about it which is why I keep forgetting about it.

Glenn Snow wrote on 03/03/11 at 08:11:02:
Schroeder wrote on 03/02/11 at 20:05:05:
Glenn Snow wrote on 11/08/10 at 05:33:48:
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).


Dearing gives 13.-Be6 as the main line, but also mentions Korchnoi's line starting with 13.-e6. But can't Black better avoid the loss of the exchange by 13.-e6 14.Nxf6+ Bxf6 15.exf6 Qxd2 16.Rxd2 16.-a6 instead of 16.-b6?


That's a very good question.  White has some tries that attempt to keep Black from finishing his development but so far I don't see anything too clear.  It looks a easier to play for White but this should be looked into further.
  

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
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
YaBB Moderator
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10620
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #60 - 04/06/11 at 17:02:38
Post Tools
Bragesjo wrote:

Try to get a copy of the DVD Dragon in Jeapardy by Dzindzi, it covers Kb1 for white and only known error I heard of is that the exf6 Bc5 d4! variation  is dissmisted after 5 seconds and 0 moves stating that this is not a serious option and says somethink like "look in databases to see why" while I think it is the best move.
I actaully think queensac line is more riskier than exf6, white will simply swap of rooks and can keep presuering without any risk at all. I think black is fine i queensac line in all liens except Bb5. If black tries top play active with pawns, they can easesly become weak. About a6 + b5 lines from your book, I think there was some sort of major improment over those line where white moved the king somewhere (and somehow) in some line and black has no play at all.
  

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
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
YaBB Moderator
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10620
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #59 - 04/06/11 at 16:57:20
Post Tools
Off-Topic replies have been moved to this Topic.
  

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
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Edward_Dearing
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 113
Location: England
Joined: 01/08/03
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #58 - 03/30/11 at 10:12:07
Post Tools
12...exf6 is interesting, and may well be black's best, but it's also more risky than the queen-sac system.  Hence my curiosity to see what Dzindzichashvili considers to be white's winning plan.  I haven't seen any analysis on this board showing why 17...a6 18.Ba4 b5 isn't still just fine for black (although obviously please direct me to the analysis if I have missed it...).
  
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 #57 - 03/30/11 at 08:33:41
Post Tools
Quote:
Before progressing this analysis any further, could someone please post an explanation of why white is thought to be winning (or even better) after 17.Bb5?

In particular, any reason why black isn't just fine after the usual a6, Ba4 b5 stuff would be helpful.

All the best,

Eddie


Some analysis has been posted which is partially based on some analysis by GM Dzindzichashvili.  I've looked at it quite a bit myself and think the ending is better for White but I don't know if it's winning or not.  Of course I'm no where near IM strength so my judgement on this is very much open to question.

Quote:
Bragesjo seems worried that f7 is weaker than White's queenside. I don't really see the specifics of this, after like 20. g3 Qe7 21. Rhe1 Qc7, I don't see any real concrete plan for White. h4 is always met by ...h5. If White tries to double on the e-file, then Black will just trade one pair of rooks. Maybe it isn't the most exciting position ever, but Black certainly has some winning chances. After all, opposite bishops can be good for attacks.


I for one am not worried about this variation.  But I have mentioned at least twice about the variation after 12...exf6 which I think is the most troublesome.  I still, for the moment anyway, think this is Black's best in this variation and that Black isn't worse in a theoretical sense if he knows exactly what he's doing.  I still think practically speaking that the variation is easier for White to play but this is admittedly subjective.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Spree K
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 26
Joined: 10/22/08
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #56 - 03/30/11 at 01:38:11
Post Tools
I know this has been discussed earlier in the thread but why are we so scared of the opposite colored bishop position, arising after 12...exf6 13. Nxd5 Nxe3 14. Qxe3 Be6 15. Bc4 f5 16. c3 Qh4 17. f4 Bxd5 18. Bxd5 Rae8 19. Qd2 (or 19. Qf3) b5.

Bragesjo seems worried that f7 is weaker than White's queenside. I don't really see the specifics of this, after like 20. g3 Qe7 21. Rhe1 Qc7, I don't see any real concrete plan for White. h4 is always met by ...h5. If White tries to double on the e-file, then Black will just trade one pair of rooks. Maybe it isn't the most exciting position ever, but Black certainly has some winning chances. After all, opposite bishops can be good for attacks.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Edward_Dearing
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 113
Location: England
Joined: 01/08/03
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #55 - 03/30/11 at 00:12:53
Post Tools
Before progressing this analysis any further, could someone please post an explanation of why white is thought to be winning (or even better) after 17.Bb5?

In particular, any reason why black isn't just fine after the usual a6, Ba4 b5 stuff would be helpful.

All the best,

Eddie
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #54 - 03/24/11 at 12:48:40
Post Tools
March 23rd is Korchnoi's birthday and March 24th is Smyslov's birthday!

Smiley
  
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 #53 - 03/24/11 at 05:52:56
Post Tools
Smyslov_Fan wrote on 03/23/11 at 04:17:18:
Glenn, I appreciate your undogmatic approach. The St Louis site has almost certainly not busted the Dragon, but you respect the analysis enough to show that Black is still struggling even after Carlsen's Rb8.

The Dragon isn't busted, but this line certainly does test Black.


Thanks Smyslov_Fan and I agree with your assessment.  I believe I read it's Smyslov's birthday today as well!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
986
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 105
Location: Germany
Joined: 06/11/05
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #52 - 03/23/11 at 17:58:37
Post Tools
Against h5 instead of e5 I think g4 is strong but I'm not sure, nobody has played g4 before and there are only seven games with h4 in my database, so there must be a good answer for black  Roll Eyes.
  
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 #51 - 03/23/11 at 16:46:44
Post Tools
bragesjo wrote on 03/23/11 at 13:13:40:
About Rb8 line h4 line, are there something wrong with 11 .. e5 12 Nxc6 bxc6 13 exd5 Nxd5 14 Nxe5 cxd5 15 Qxd5 Qf6? If white makes any mistkae both Bf5 and Be6 can create nasty threats and pawn to e4 is always in the air.

If think whites best is probely 16 Bg5 Qb6 17 b3 e4 18 Qd6 exf3 19 Qxb6 axb6 20 gxf3 Bb7 geives black some compensation. However not shure if black has enough compensation.


This was one of the first lines I tried too when I started investigating the ...Rb8, h4 variation but I don't think Black does have enough compensation.  Even if he can draw, however, it's not a very inspiring variation for the Black pieces.  I have another variation which ends in opposite colored Bishops with Black one pawn down (but there are still Rooks on the board) which I think is closer to equality but it's not the kind of dynamic equality I would want with this opening.  Better to give white plus over equals with middlegame dynamism than that me thinks.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bragesjo
God Member
*****
Offline


CCE at ICCF 2021

Posts: 1702
Location: Eskilstuna
Joined: 06/30/06
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #50 - 03/23/11 at 13:13:40
Post Tools
About Rb8 line h4 line, are there something wrong with 11 .. e5 12 Nxc6 bxc6 13 exd5 Nxd5 14 Nxe5 cxd5 15 Qxd5 Qf6? If white makes any mistkae both Bf5 and Be6 can create nasty threats and pawn to e4 is always in the air.

If think whites best is probely 16 Bg5 Qb6 17 b3 e4 18 Qd6 exf3 19 Qxb6 axb6 20 gxf3 Bb7 geives black some compensation. However not shure if black has enough compensation.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #49 - 03/23/11 at 04:17:18
Post Tools
Glenn, I appreciate your undogmatic approach. The St Louis site has almost certainly not busted the Dragon, but you respect the analysis enough to show that Black is still struggling even after Carlsen's Rb8.

The Dragon isn't busted, but this line certainly does test Black.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
986
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 105
Location: Germany
Joined: 06/11/05
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #48 - 03/22/11 at 19:55:15
Post Tools
Thx, I haven't read your post carefully enough. I knew the game where White had played 14.Bc4 instead of 14.Nxd5 and lost. I thought 13.ed  Nxd5 14. Nxd5 cd  15. Qxd5 Qc7 gives Black compensation as in he other mainline but looks like you are right and Black has hard to fight for a draw here.
  
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 #47 - 03/22/11 at 17:05:50
Post Tools
986 wrote on 03/22/11 at 14:54:43:
13...Nxd5 is stronger. What have you gained compared to the mainline with ...d5 ed Nxc6?

regards
Tom


Actually in this case 13...cxd5 looks much more flexible.  After 13...Nxd5 14.Nxd5, what other move than 13...cxd5 does Black have and he gets the same position as after 13...cxd5 14.Nxd5 Nxd5.  After 13...cxd5 14.Nxd5, besides 14...Nxd5, Black can investigate 14...Be6!? which I already mentioned as well as 14...e4, which unfortunate I don't think works.

Of course there's also the possibility that Black shouldn't take back at all but I haven't seen convincing variations after say either 13...Qa5 or 13...e4.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bragesjo
God Member
*****
Offline


CCE at ICCF 2021

Posts: 1702
Location: Eskilstuna
Joined: 06/30/06
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #46 - 03/22/11 at 16:02:18
Post Tools
Black has got a rook to b8, meaning it is on an open file and no Qxa8 variations exists (, even throght they are good for black). However the drawback is that the Bishop at g7 is hitting his own e5 pawn. If black somehow could manage to activate the queen to a better sqaure are perhaps manage to advance the epawn he we have compensation. However busy at work right now and hes not got any board to give any exakt variation with compensation for black, we will have to wait and see,
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
986
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 105
Location: Germany
Joined: 06/11/05
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #45 - 03/22/11 at 14:54:43
Post Tools
13...Nxd5 is stronger. What have you gained compared to the mainline with ...d5 ed Nxc6?

regards
Tom
  
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 #44 - 03/22/11 at 07:10:53
Post Tools
keerik wrote on 03/21/11 at 18:23:53:
11...e5!


Ok, so let's say White goes 12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.exd5 cxd5 14.Nxd5, how should Black continue or is there a better deviation earlier?  At this point 14...Be6 looks the most interesting to me.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
keerik
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 41
Joined: 08/19/10
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #43 - 03/21/11 at 18:23:53
Post Tools
11...e5!
  
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 #42 - 03/21/11 at 13:40:31
Post Tools
keerik wrote on 03/21/11 at 07:04:10:
Personally,I think that black is perfectly ok after all of the complications after 10...Rb8.Dzindzi doesn't cover many important moves.His ...Qa5 at some moment is weak.


Except he doesn't recommend the best move for White either.  After 10...Rb8 the move 11.h4! is stronger than 11.g4.  What does Black do then?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
keerik
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 41
Joined: 08/19/10
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #41 - 03/21/11 at 07:04:10
Post Tools
Personally,I think that black is perfectly ok after all of the complications after 10...Rb8.Dzindzi doesn't cover many important moves.His ...Qa5 at some moment is weak.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bragesjo
God Member
*****
Offline


CCE at ICCF 2021

Posts: 1702
Location: Eskilstuna
Joined: 06/30/06
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #40 - 03/20/11 at 16:51:39
Post Tools
I can add that white position in exf6 lien I gave is much easier to defend as well, either by pawn to c4 (after b4) or pawn to a4 depening on how black advances pawns or not.

However, I am not shure if I will play the Dragon next season, I still have good stats with it in every line but I have almost played 2200 dragon games now and dont have time to maintain everything do to work. However, the study of Dragon has increase my geneal chess understanding of everything from material imbalances, play for pawn or exchange, when to enter endgames, attack and defence etc. I have not decided what to play instead, I am thinking about e6 sicilian systems since I find Bb5(+) variations to boring and like to play sicilian positions as both black and white, it will be a matter of thinking on the summer if I have time to switch defence or not.
  
Back to top
WWW  
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 #39 - 03/18/11 at 20:41:35
Post Tools
Quote:
Yes, but even if I studied it for a hundred hours and couldn't find an answer for Black I would know there was one and it hasn't been refuted. Maybe you could call something "weakly refuted", but Black is not clearly worse.


Maybe you know this, but this thread discusses a "refutation claim" put forth from another site.  I don't think many of us here believe this is a refutation including myself.  I think in the exf6 variation Black can hold his own (as I already stated in an earlier post on this thread).  I'm not so sure about the other lines and at the least they are fairly depressing.  My problem with this variation is that Black seems to have to react to White's tries and is unable to really begin a plan of his own.  Maybe others like the position for Black but I'd like something else satisfactory to be found.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Uhohspaghettio
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 510
Joined: 02/23/11
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #38 - 03/18/11 at 19:35:42
Post Tools
Glenn Snow wrote on 03/18/11 at 09:20:24:
Have you actually looked at the analysis here?


Yes, but even if I studied it for a hundred hours and couldn't find an answer for Black I would know there was one and it hasn't been refuted. Maybe you could call something "weakly refuted", but Black is not clearly worse.
  

"I don't recall saying good luck."
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 #37 - 03/18/11 at 09:20:24
Post Tools
Uhohspaghettio wrote on 03/17/11 at 23:50:50:
No bother.  Smiley

The score given by Houdini doesn't reflect how hard Black will have to work for the next ten moves to maintain equality. If Black has to defend extremely precisely for the next hour and a half with only drawing chances and with little attacking opportunities, but gets to a tablebase-puzzle style ending to force a draw, then that position can be correctly shown as "level" by the computer. The computer doesn't say how accurately one side will have to play to reach its conclusion (if a computer could solve chess it would have something like +300.00 immediately for White).    
   
However the Dragon gives a lot of dangerous chances for Black also and is still in really good shape, it's at least playable at the Super GM level (unlike perhaps KG for example). No refutation or clear advantage is known, and that's after thousands of hours of human and computer analysis. 
   
Similar things are true of the Scheveningen (although the Scheveningen is held in a bit higher regard at the elite level). But I just find it a bit pretentious for an average club player to be critical of openings like that, if they got bust by a pawn storm it was because they didn't understand how to defend it properly.... NOT because of advances and preferences in opening theory at the GM level. And they will have roughly the same chances whether their opponent plays the Dragon or Najdorf. Super GMs are playing and preparing at a completely different level to the average player or anyone sub-IM.
    


Have you actually looked at the analysis here?
I like the Dragon and of course it's very playable at my level but I still don't like the thought of having to defend this 9.0-0-0 d5 10.Kb1 variation at the moment.  I wish there were a more dynamic option that even if a little worse gave more possibilities of all three results.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Uhohspaghettio
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 510
Joined: 02/23/11
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #36 - 03/17/11 at 23:50:50
Post Tools
No bother.  Smiley

The score given by Houdini doesn't reflect how hard Black will have to work for the next ten moves to maintain equality. If Black has to defend extremely precisely for the next hour and a half with only drawing chances and with little attacking opportunities, but gets to a tablebase-puzzle style ending to force a draw, then that position can be correctly shown as "level" by the computer. The computer doesn't say how accurately one side will have to play to reach its conclusion (if a computer could solve chess it would have something like +300.00 immediately for White).    
   
However the Dragon gives a lot of dangerous chances for Black also and is still in really good shape, it's at least playable at the Super GM level (unlike perhaps KG for example). No refutation or clear advantage is known, and that's after thousands of hours of human and computer analysis. 
   
Similar things are true of the Scheveningen (although the Scheveningen is held in a bit higher regard at the elite level). But I just find it a bit pretentious for an average club player to be critical of openings like that, if they got bust by a pawn storm it was because they didn't understand how to defend it properly.... NOT because of advances and preferences in opening theory at the GM level. And they will have roughly the same chances whether their opponent plays the Dragon or Najdorf. Super GMs are playing and preparing at a completely different level to the average player or anyone sub-IM.
    
  

"I don't recall saying good luck."
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
YaBB Moderator
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10620
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #35 - 03/17/11 at 16:54:16
Post Tools
I have to offer my sincerest apologies to Uhohspaghettio. Without any intention to do so I have removed his post. I hope he won't take it too hard and that he will be so kind to repost it here.

Embarrassed

My only comfort is that it has happened to other moderators as well.
  

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
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Fausto Alava-Moreno
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love Holistic Chess!!

Posts: 160
Location: Oviedo, SPAIN
Joined: 04/24/08
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #34 - 03/17/11 at 14:24:37
Post Tools

If you make a Google Search: houdini 1.5 download you will find the following link:

http://www.cruxis.com/chess/houdini.htm

keerik wrote on 03/17/11 at 12:27:04:
Do you know where it's possible to download Houdini? Could you post me the link,please?

  

--

Best regards, Fausto.
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
keerik
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 41
Joined: 08/19/10
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #33 - 03/17/11 at 12:27:04
Post Tools
Do you know where it's possible to download Houdini?Could you post me the link,please?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bragesjo
God Member
*****
Offline


CCE at ICCF 2021

Posts: 1702
Location: Eskilstuna
Joined: 06/30/06
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #32 - 03/16/11 at 09:31:03
Post Tools
First I made a post at this forum with some ideas from blacks point of view. Some weeks later Radjabov played it an later also Carlsen, both games analysed by Jones and Ward. Then a article in a New in Chess Yearbook appered. But the idea of exf6 is older than that, it has been played by a 2600 GM called Jabova (I think) where I had an idea of an major improvment, and after the post i turned out that the improvment had been played as well, but only in a single unknown game. I even think that Ward played a game as well annotated by Chesspub, but not in a critical line.

Dzindzi made a comment in the New in Chess article (written by an other player) that 13 Nxd5 Nxe3 14 Qxe3 was the way to go but I is hardly a refutation, it often leeds to an opposote coloured Bishop scenario after something like Be6 15 Bc4 f5 16 c3 (article recommendation) Qh4 17 f4 Bxd5  18 Bxd5 Rae8 followd by b5 where engins like Houdini, Firebird and Rybka calls in equal. I think white has the slightly better chanses in that position since f7 is a potential weak square and black has a double pawn, but the outcome is still far from clear.
  
Back to top
WWW  
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 #31 - 03/16/11 at 03:52:13
Post Tools
Stigma wrote on 03/16/11 at 03:15:34:
Did you read anything in the forum before posting? Glenn Snow mentioned 12...exf6 in this very thread 6 months ago. I'm sure it has been discussed in other threads here too, but I don't follow Dragon theory that closely.

At any rate, don't expect anyone here to be surprised by your big revelation...


This possibility has indeed been discussed for sometime in the forum (particularly by bragesjo I think) and of course on the Dragon chesspub site itself by GM Ward.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4713
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #30 - 03/16/11 at 03:18:15
Post Tools
It was also the subject of a Yearbook article about a year ago.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3210
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #29 - 03/16/11 at 03:15:34
Post Tools
Did you read anything in the forum before posting? Glenn Snow mentioned 12...exf6 in this very thread 6 months ago. I'm sure it has been discussed in other threads here too, but I don't follow Dragon theory that closely.

At any rate, don't expect anyone here to be surprised by your big revelation...
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
dragos
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


1.e4 is best met by the
Sicillian Sveshnikov

Posts: 13
Location: Montréal
Joined: 02/26/11
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #28 - 03/16/11 at 02:29:02
Post Tools
OK first of all dragon players don't panick i'm here to save you
Secondly Dzinzichasvili'sDVD on slay the dragon is an ecxellent DVD to completly destroy the draogn BUT BUT TBUT BUT BUT ,in his DVD he actually bipassed a variation wich my friend expert on the dragon has shown me and actually RYBKS thinks that it s equal. Embarrassed
the line goes 9.0-0-0 d5 (pawn sac) 10.Kb1! Nxd4 11.e5 (aggresive) Nf5 (preparing a queen sac) 12.exf6 (NOW THIS IS THE BIG MOMENT BE VERY A GrinTTENTIVE CAUSE NOW PLEASE INSTEAD OF TAKING WITH YOUR BISHOP YOU HAVE TO TAKE WITH YOUR PAWN e7
« Last Edit: 03/16/11 at 09:24:26 by MNb »  
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 #27 - 03/03/11 at 08:11:02
Post Tools
[quote author=7D4D465C414B4A4B5C2E0 link=1284001550/26#26 date=1299096305][quote author=447C7D607D7D767F74130 link=1284001550/17#17 date=1289194428] 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).[/quote]

Dearing gives 13.-Be6 as the main line, but also mentions Korchnoi's line starting with 13.-e6. But can't Black better avoid the loss of the exchange by 13.-e6 14.Nxf6+ Bxf6 15.exf6 Qxd2 16.Rxd2 16.-a6 instead of 16.-b6?
[/quote]

That's a very good question.  White has some tries that attempt to keep Black from finishing his development but so far I don't see anything too clear.  It looks a easier to play for White but this should be looked into further.
  
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 #26 - 03/02/11 at 20:05:05
Post Tools
[quote author=447C7D607D7D767F74130 link=1284001550/17#17 date=1289194428] 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).[/quote]

Dearing gives 13.-Be6 as the main line, but also mentions Korchnoi's line starting with 13.-e6. But can't Black better avoid the loss of the exchange by 13.-e6 14.Nxf6+ Bxf6 15.exf6 Qxd2 16.Rxd2 16.-a6 instead of 16.-b6?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bragesjo
God Member
*****
Offline


CCE at ICCF 2021

Posts: 1702
Location: Eskilstuna
Joined: 06/30/06
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #25 - 12/14/10 at 11:43:36
Post Tools
Interesting idea, Nc6 is unmentioned in all my books.
However instead of 14 Bc4 , white has 14 Bb5 playing to get the better endgame by exchanging at c6 at the right moment and the idea of Bc5 can be problematic in some lines.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Gil-galad
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 19
Joined: 09/08/06
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #24 - 12/13/10 at 20:48:36
Post Tools
Hi All;

Just taking this variation back a little does black have to go 11..... Nf5 ? How does 11....Nc6 look?
It has been rarely played according to my database.

Possible continuation is 12. ef ef 13.Nxd5 Be6 14.Bc4 Na5

Any ideas?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dragan Glas
Senior Member
****
Offline


"If I, like Solomon, ...
could have my wish -
"

Posts: 424
Location: Ireland
Joined: 06/25/06
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #23 - 11/19/10 at 18:20:36
Post Tools
Greetings,

[quote author=370F0E130E0E050C07600 link=1284001550/17#17 date=1289194428][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).[/quote]
Was there a "bust" of the 10.Kb1 Nxd4 line given in Sapi/Schneider's book, where they gave Moro-Rigo, Milan 1982 as a example?

Also the 11.h4 de line of Kopel-Sapi, Budapest 1983?

I grant you that these are old examples and there may well have been improvements for both sides since then...

Kindest regards,

James
  
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 #22 - 11/10/10 at 07:23:30
Post Tools
Quote:
I am not sure if you have to play 17...a6 necessarily.


I'm not sure either but if Black wants to make sure there's no immediate exchange of Rooks then it's the only way to gain enough time to double on the d-file before Rd1 becomes possible.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
XChess1971
Full Member
***
Offline


Born with a Dragon Book!

Posts: 204
Location: USA
Joined: 09/07/04
Gender: Male
Re: Refutation Claim based on 9. 0-0-0
Reply #21 - 11/09/10 at 19:59:13
Post Tools
Glenn Snow wrote on 11/09/10 at 18:21:59:
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.


Yeah. You got that right. I added one more move. I am not sure if you have to play 17...a6 necessarily. It looks to me that if black can build up a blockade position, he will be fine. Unfortunately, I can't trust just suggestions, even from GMs. Deep analysis is required. I still remember since I was a kid that you had to be cautions with books. Any GM or good coach recommended. I play correspondence as well, and I know that through analysis I discovered bad ideas suggested in books by some GMs. The feeling that I have nowadays is that without deep analysis you can't evaluate a position.
  
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 #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: 1780
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: 204
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: 1702
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: 1702
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
 
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
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo