(UTC)
Latest Updates:
  ChessPub Forum › Chess Publishing Openings › Daring Defences to 1. d4 › Dutch › Dutch Krause Variation
(Moderators: CraigEvans, Hadron, proustiskeen)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Dutch Krause Variation (Read 11441 times)
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1976
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: Dutch Krause Variation
Reply #14 - 04/21/12 at 16:14:52
Post Tools
So how is this working after 7 d5?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stefan Buecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1386
Location: Germany
Joined: 02/11/09
Gender: Male
Re: Dutch Krause Variation
Reply #13 - 04/21/12 at 16:04:45
Post Tools
kylemeister wrote on 04/21/12 at 15:06:00:
MNb wrote on 04/21/12 at 14:53:53:
Polugajevsky played 5.Bg5 once


Incidentally that was cited by Ivkov and V. Sokolov in the first edition of ECO (1979) as ±.

Yes, silly grandmasters. 5...Ne4 6.Nxe4 fxe4 ... = (p. 40 in #10). In the 1996 edition ECO ignores 4...Nc6 entirely.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1976
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: Dutch Krause Variation
Reply #12 - 04/21/12 at 15:40:18
Post Tools
Yes, blast, I underestimated this! Sad So far can't see a good defence, unless 5 ...Ne4 can be made to work. In the 1 ...Nc6 move order I suppose Black could try 4 ...e5 iso 4 ...Nf6, but it doesn't look good enough ...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4989
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Dutch Krause Variation
Reply #11 - 04/21/12 at 15:06:00
Post Tools
MNb wrote on 04/21/12 at 14:53:53:
Polugajevsky played 5.Bg5 once


Incidentally that was cited by Ivkov and V. Sokolov in the first edition of ECO (1979) as ±.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10777
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Dutch Krause Variation
Reply #10 - 04/21/12 at 14:53:53
Post Tools
Challenging evaluations of 50 years ago is never naive.
1.d4 d6 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c4 f5 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Bf4 (Polugajevsky played 5.Bg5 once) e6 6.e3 (6.d5 e5 7.dxc6 exf4 8.cxb7 Bxb7 looks OK) Ne7 7.h3 Ng6 8.Bh2 Be7 9.Bd3 O-O 10.Qc2 looks pretty good for White. I'd rather play simply 6...Be7 as d4-d5 always can be met with the immediate e6-e5. This version of the IZ should benefit Black.
More good news is that this defence is not in IM Bronznik's Beating the Guerilla's.
And of course there is 1.d4 d6 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.e4.
  
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
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1976
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: Dutch Krause Variation
Reply #9 - 04/21/12 at 10:03:05
Post Tools
Thanks Stefan! I knew you had investigated this, but I hadn't realised how deeply.

Call me naive, but I don't immediately see why Schwartz's line 5 d5 Ne5 [u]6 e3[/u] should be better for White. What impressive plan does he have after the obvious 6 ...Nf3 6 Qf3 g6? [u]6 Ne5[/u] is obviously an alternative, but I'm tempted to think Black is OK after say 6 ...de 7 Bg5 e6. Another fascinating possibility is [u]6 Nd4!?[/u], played only once so far as I can see.

I don't argue that it's profitable for Black to delay ...Nf6 [i]per se[/i] -- I'm just interested in the transpositional possibilities, and the independent line(s), after 1 d4 Nc6!? 2 Nf3 d6 3 c4 f5. Now on 4 d5 (I guess 4 g3 is less critical?) Ne5 5 Ne5 de, I suppose TN's [u]6 e4!?[/u] must be the critical line since 6 g3 looks less critical(?) and 6 Nc3 Nf6 is back to the ML (though there's also 6 ...e6). So far I think Black's position is quite playable after 6 ..e6, but it's early days ...


« Last Edit: 04/21/12 at 11:47:53 by Michael Ayton »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TalJechin
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no secret ingredient.

Posts: 2892
Location: Malmö
Joined: 08/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Dutch Krause Variation
Reply #8 - 04/21/12 at 09:41:30
Post Tools
Well, I just assumed he'd forgotten to include ...Nf6, as I don't really see a point with delaying it.

Anyway, a few months ago I dabbled with a new idea of mine in the Iljin, basically I wanted to play something like: 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.0-0 Nc6 5.c4 Ne7 6.Nc3 Ng6 as it seemed to me that Nb8 would be optimal on g6 while exposed on c6. I didn't really get it to work vs Houdini & Co though... 

So, when seeing some of the games with Bf4 in Stefan's pdf, I wonder if maybe black can change plans and instead of ...h6 play ...e6 with the above idea of ..Ne7 & ...Ng6 regaining some time on Bf4 and improving the knight's position. The ideal scenario is probably cases where black has full control over d5 - i.e. c4 isn't played so ...e6 can't be met by d5.

With the knight on g6 there's no real threat of d4-d5 and from g6 the N supports both e6-e5 and a later f5-f4. A downside is that it blocks the typical Iljin manoeuvre Qe8-h5, but if black can be confident about getting in an eventual e6-e5 it should be worth it I think. - Perhaps in some cases black might even use a Stonewall set-up, since Bf8 hasn't declared its intentions yet.

It's just an idea without any engines started, so it will be interesting to see if anyone here comes up with something good for white against it...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stefan Buecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1386
Location: Germany
Joined: 02/11/09
Gender: Male
Re: Dutch Krause Variation
Reply #7 - 04/21/12 at 08:50:16
Post Tools
TalJechin wrote on 04/21/12 at 07:43:23:
There was an article on the Krause variation in Kaissiber 12, 1999 and Stefan also wrote about it here: http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kaiss55.pdf

In his OP, Michael said he was interested in 3...Nc6, postponing Nf6. In the main lines of the Krause Black does postpone the development of the Bf8, but the move Nf6 is rarely missing. 

Anyway, I guess the Nimzowitsch-Krause System is relevant for Michael, too, if only as a reference point for his own research. My main article on the Nimzo-Krause was in Kaissiber #10, filling 34 pages. Hans Berliner, who had not included the Dutch in his inspiring work The System, wrote on "The System vs the Dutch" in Kaissiber #11. In one critical line, however, there was an analytical error, as shown by Bent Larsen in Kaissiber #12. The later ChessCafe article focused on a central tactical motif in the Nimzo-Krause, checked with faster equipment. Kaissiber #10 remains relevant for other lines.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1976
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: Dutch Krause Variation
Reply #6 - 04/21/12 at 08:02:55
Post Tools
Thanks TalJechin! Taking a look now ...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TalJechin
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no secret ingredient.

Posts: 2892
Location: Malmö
Joined: 08/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Dutch Krause Variation
Reply #5 - 04/21/12 at 07:43:23
Post Tools
There was an article on the Krause variation in Kaissiber 12, 1999 and Stefan also wrote about it here: http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kaiss55.pdf
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Dutch Krause Variation
Reply #4 - 04/21/12 at 02:09:28
Post Tools
I'm a complete idiot. I didn't read the moves and assumed he was.talking about the Krause Attack in the Slav (6.Ne5).
  
The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TN
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 3420
Joined: 11/07/08
Gender: Male
Re: Dutch Krause Variation
Reply #3 - 04/20/12 at 23:33:28
Post Tools
The Dutch Defence comes under 'Daring Defences' so there's no issue with the thread location.

By analogy with MNb's line, 1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 d6 3.c4 Nc6 4.d5 Ne5 5.Ne5 de5 6.e4 or 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.e3 (Schwartz) looks favourable for White.
  
All our dreams come true if we have the courage to pursue them.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Dutch Krause Variation
Reply #2 - 04/20/12 at 23:26:29
Post Tools
Wrong section.  Belongs under 1.d4 d5.
  
The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10777
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Dutch Krause Variation
Reply #1 - 04/20/12 at 21:47:43
Post Tools
Of course the Krause Variation is mentioned in the 1964 book of Rolf Schwartz. His line runs 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 d6 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.d5 (5.Bf4? h6 6.h4 Ng4 7.d5 e5! Euwe) Ne5 6.e3 +=.
  
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
 
Michael Ayton
God Member
*****
Offline


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1976
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Dutch Krause Variation
04/20/12 at 18:43:48
Post Tools
There's mention of this line in one or two places on the Forum, but I can't see any analysis of it, anywhere! I'm not [i]even[/i] entirely sure what it is, precisely: I assume 1 d4 f5 2 Nf3 d6 3 c4 Nc6!?. (At any rate that's what I'm interested in.) Can anyone provide a basic low-down on this? (I suppose transps to the I-Z or 7 ...Nc6 Leningrad might be possible if Black plays ...e6 or ...g6 ISO ...e5, but should he?)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
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 © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge