Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Gajewski 2.0 (Read 31246 times)
Ametanoitos
God Member
*****
Offline


The road to success is
under construction

Posts: 1427
Location: Patras
Joined: 01/04/05
Re: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #25 - 09/19/12 at 15:47:33
Post Tools
In the new Yearbook no 104 issue, Kaufman touches the subject of the Neo-Gajewski and gives 12...Re8 13.d3 Qxd5 14.Qe3 Qd8 as satisfactory for Black. I guess that the idea is that the move ...Bf5 will be usefull at some point. Intuitevely i preffer Mr PFREN's solution with 12...Bb7 followed by ...Bd6, but maybe this new published analysis can promote further investigation here?

My first thought is what happens after 15.b4 followed by 16.a4, but i haven't looked at this more than 2 minutes really! Smiley
  
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: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #24 - 09/07/12 at 12:03:24
Post Tools
trw wrote on 09/07/12 at 00:42:51:
Ametanoitos wrote on 08/11/12 at 10:01:39:
You can play many things in corr chess that are not entirely correct and be ok with them. The drawing margin of our game is wide.

In the game PFREN shared with us i have only this to say. There is no doubt that Black has play and compensation for his pawn. But also i have no doubt at all that his compensation is not enough for a pawn. For example why not 19.c4? I am not sure if i could won this in corr play but i am sure that i'd feel more comfortable playing White in an OTB game.



I am amazed that someone who wrote a book on the Tarrasch would somehow insinuate that the Gajewski is incorrect.


In my opinion Gajewski is not 100% correct but fine in practice. I agree with PFREN. I cannot understand the comparison with the Tarrasch at all. The Tarrasch Defence is here for 150 years, has been played by many world champions and elite players and has survived world championship matches. Also i didn't wrote a book where Black's primary way to get an active play is to sacrifice a pawn. Please help me understand your argument.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stefan Buecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1386
Location: Germany
Joined: 02/11/09
Gender: Male
Re: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #23 - 09/07/12 at 05:10:12
Post Tools
trw wrote on 09/07/12 at 00:42:51:
I am amazed that someone who wrote a book on the Tarrasch would somehow insinuate that the Gajewski is incorrect.

Are you saying that Siegbert Tarrasch played unsound stuff?  Grin
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
YaBB Moderator
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1414
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #22 - 09/07/12 at 00:42:51
Post Tools
Ametanoitos wrote on 08/11/12 at 10:01:39:
You can play many things in corr chess that are not entirely correct and be ok with them. The drawing margin of our game is wide.

In the game PFREN shared with us i have only this to say. There is no doubt that Black has play and compensation for his pawn. But also i have no doubt at all that his compensation is not enough for a pawn. For example why not 19.c4? I am not sure if i could won this in corr play but i am sure that i'd feel more comfortable playing White in an OTB game.



I am amazed that someone who wrote a book on the Tarrasch would somehow insinuate that the Gajewski is incorrect.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
tony37
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 619
Joined: 10/16/10
Re: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #21 - 09/05/12 at 12:09:25
Post Tools
PANFR wrote on 09/04/12 at 14:30:16:
I fail to see why Black isn't in good shape after 19.c4 Bf7, and anyway, if you want a bulletproof draw, then simply play the Marshall proper...

I think Ametanoitos wouldn't agree with you on that, as he talks about the Marshall here:
http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1311509071/404#404
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
PANFR
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 256
Location: Greece
Joined: 10/31/11
Gender: Male
Re: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #20 - 09/04/12 at 14:30:16
Post Tools
Ametanoitos wrote on 08/11/12 at 10:01:39:
For example why not 19.c4? I am not sure if i could won this in corr play but i am sure that i'd feel more comfortable playing White in an OTB game.


I fail to see why Black isn't in good shape after 19.c4 Bf7, and anyway, if you want a bulletproof draw, then simply play the Marshall proper... 
The Gajewski 2 is for slightly ambitious players, who don't mind taking some risk to create unbalanced positions. I wouldn't bother much about computer's evaluations here- Black has fair practical chances, even if he isn't objectively 100% equal.
  
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: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #19 - 08/11/12 at 10:01:39
Post Tools
You can play many things in corr chess that are not entirely correct and be ok with them. The drawing margin of our game is wide.

In the game PFREN shared with us i have only this to say. There is no doubt that Black has play and compensation for his pawn. But also i have no doubt at all that his compensation is not enough for a pawn. For example why not 19.c4? I am not sure if i could won this in corr play but i am sure that i'd feel more comfortable playing White in an OTB game.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
YaBB Moderator
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1414
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #18 - 08/10/12 at 01:41:53
Post Tools
Ametanoitos wrote on 07/19/12 at 21:24:15:
I cannot disagree on that. The d4 variation, as recommended by Bologan, against the Gajewski looks strong, but in the "Neo-Gajewski" (maybe a better name that "Gajewski 2.0"?) it looks harmless.


I am gonna go out on a limb and say as a regular Gajewski player that the d4 move did not scare me. I haven't lost a game yet in 30 correspondence games with the Gajewski... but now I might start trying this 2.0 just for fun.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
PANFR
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 256
Location: Greece
Joined: 10/31/11
Gender: Male
Re: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #17 - 08/09/12 at 18:13:35
Post Tools
Here is another correspondence sample game, where Black played a different plan than Halkias, and had no particular trouble holding the balance:

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Merovingian
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


The question is, do *you*
know why you are here?

Posts: 12
Location: Winnipeg,Canada
Joined: 10/28/10
Gender: Male
Re: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #16 - 08/02/12 at 16:20:51
Post Tools
Cool line guys, I'll throw my hat in the fun. I like the try for black.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 O-O 9.h3 Na5 10.Bc2 d5 11.exd5 e4 12.Ng5
Now here I played in a blitz game,

12...Bg4 13.f3 ex3 14.d4 f5 (14...c5!? 15.a4 c4 unclear-Rybka) and I obtained an interesting and complicated game akin to Marshall/Gajewski Spanish. My opponent played 15.Nbd2 and Rybka likes the line 15...Bh4 16.Re2 c6 17.Nb3 Bxf3 18.gxf3 and reads (-0.23). Improvements can be made for each side, but already I prefer to take the black pieces.

Brabo, I am happy to see your interest in this interesting new line, and yes noticed later that 11...Ng4! is an improvement. I suppose the 11...Bg4 line might still prove to have some use in the future. I look forward to more analysis with you here.

~Merovingian

  

You see there is only one constant. One universal. It is the only real truth. Causality. Action, reaction. Cause and effect.
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: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #15 - 07/19/12 at 21:24:15
Post Tools
I cannot disagree on that. The d4 variation, as recommended by Bologan, against the Gajewski looks strong, but in the "Neo-Gajewski" (maybe a better name that "Gajewski 2.0"?) it looks harmless.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 1068
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #14 - 07/19/12 at 17:48:00
Post Tools
Ametanoitos wrote on 07/19/12 at 12:30:59:

I don't see the reason why not having the move h3 does harm to White!

If you look to the game Kotronias - Halkias black got extra possibilities thanks to no h3.
See 20. Nxc4 Bxc4 21. dxc4 Qxd1 22.Rxd1 Ra1 23.Re1 Na5 24.Rxe7 Rxc1+ and now white doesn't have 25.Kh2 Rxc4? 26.Ne5 winning. I am sure that there are tricks in other variations also existing based on the backrank.

As mentioned by Girkassa, in the game Gopal - Karavade, white has after 19....c5 20.Bf4 g5 21.Bh2 which is regarded as promising by Houdini. This possibility doesn't exist in the Gajewski 2.0 and the evaluation is much closer to equal therefore.

Anyway I believe more grandmastergames are needed to find out more about the real value of the new variation. Today I believe it is an improvement, certainly because after 11.d4 (the chose of most top grandmasters today) it looks like white is in different variations having a big advantage which is certainly not the case in the 2.0
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Girkassa
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 433
Joined: 04/07/07
Re: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #13 - 07/19/12 at 17:10:46
Post Tools
It does look promising for White. Black's 19...f4 looks bad since 20.c4! works tactically, but also after stronger alternatives like 19...Bf6 or 19...c5 it seems that Black is struggling to claim full compensation for the pawn.

One additional possibility White gets by having h3 is to play Bf4 and answer ...g5 by Bh2. However, after the further ...f4 the bishop usually just ends up looking silly on h2. I haven't found any line where Bf4-h2 looks good for White.
  
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: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #12 - 07/19/12 at 12:30:59
Post Tools
I looked at the line a bit. Look at this game:



The move 17.Ne5 seems promising to me. I analysed also 13...Bf5 Re1 14.Re8 d4 15.Qxd5 Nbd2 with the idea Nf1-Ne3 and i think that White is better. Also after 15.Re1 in the above game Black shouldn't play 15...c5 due to 16.Bf4! and if he goes with 15...Bd6 then Houdini likes 16.Nbd2! with the idea of playing b3-Bb2. In this case i am not convinced by the evaluation of the engine, s maybe Black is close to having enough compensation, but in any case i think that this is a critical position where White can play for an edge.

I don't see the reason why not having the move h3 does harm to White! So, according to what i believe now, this is the way forward for White against both versions of the Gajewski line.
  
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: Gajewski 2.0
Reply #11 - 07/19/12 at 10:04:28
Post Tools
PANFR wrote on 07/09/12 at 15:08:03:
Ametanoitos was a contributor to that event, so he probably knows some details.


No, i haven't heard anything about this game, except from what i saw which is that Halkias was relaxed after the game (we spoke briefly) and he didn't seem worried (so, i assume that he got the half point without problems and no surprizes)


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo