Latest Updates:
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4! (Read 22805 times)
Master Om
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 187
Joined: 02/20/10
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #39 - 01/21/13 at 16:04:01
Post Tools
Thanks. Cheesy
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Vass
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1105
Joined: 06/22/11
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #38 - 01/20/13 at 08:12:40
Post Tools
As I already said, it depends on your level of playing OTB chess.

But the books I can recommend to anyone are:

Nimzowitsch, Aron - My System
Watson, John - Secrets Of Modern Chess Strategy
Baburin, Alexander - Winning Pawn Structures
Sokolov, Ivan - Winning Chess Middlegames, An Essential Guide To Pawn Structures
Bronstein, David - Zurich International Chess Tournament 1953
Nunn, John - Understanding Chess Middlegames

...as well as Artur Yusupov's "Beyond The Basics" and Mark Dvoretsky's "School Of Chess Excellence" series.
Wink
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Master Om
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 187
Joined: 02/20/10
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #37 - 01/20/13 at 02:31:15
Post Tools
Vass wrote on 01/19/13 at 13:42:12:
MartinC wrote on 01/19/13 at 11:50:19:
...
Computers have always had something of a blind spot about these sorts of trapped pieces. And of course are known not to do so well early in the game Smiley

MartinC, that's what I meant when I said that operating chess engines is not enough to play a good correspondence chess.
Master Om, here on this forum there are guys who can help you better than me with all the necessary books. The more the better, of course, but there is a good order in this matter which depends on the level of your OTB chess.  Wink


Well Vass, I said you before, when I play I seek to check MY LINES rather the engine suggested lines. Many times It cost me a game though Sad.
Regarding help Lets start wid you ? Any Suggestion friend!! Specially on middle game planning ?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Master Om
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 187
Joined: 02/20/10
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #36 - 01/20/13 at 02:29:03
Post Tools
MartinC wrote on 01/19/13 at 11:50:19:
Yes those looked like good, human moves Smiley

It was white's play which seemed rather comptuerish. (And he was seemingly by his own admission experimenting a bit.).

In particular a human would have been very reluctant to take on that pawn structure unless they were sure they were going to be able to free themselves with f4. Well just maybe h4,Bh3 instead.

If white can't do that then he may as well resign Smiley So indeed once you were theatening f4 you'd likely have seen quite drastic measures against it.

Computers have always had something of a blind spot about these sorts of trapped pieces. And of course are known not to do so well early in the game Smiley


Very True. Thats why Human Interaction so necessary. I never trust on analysis of an unaided engine.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Vass
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1105
Joined: 06/22/11
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #35 - 01/19/13 at 13:42:12
Post Tools
MartinC wrote on 01/19/13 at 11:50:19:
...
Computers have always had something of a blind spot about these sorts of trapped pieces. And of course are known not to do so well early in the game Smiley

MartinC, that's what I meant when I said that operating chess engines is not enough to play a good correspondence chess.
Master Om, here on this forum there are guys who can help you better than me with all the necessary books. The more the better, of course, but there is a good order in this matter which depends on the level of your OTB chess.  Wink
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MartinC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 2014
Joined: 07/24/06
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #34 - 01/19/13 at 11:50:19
Post Tools
Yes those looked like good, human moves Smiley

It was white's play which seemed rather comptuerish. (And he was seemingly by his own admission experimenting a bit.).

In particular a human would have been very reluctant to take on that pawn structure unless they were sure they were going to be able to free themselves with f4. Well just maybe h4,Bh3 instead.

If white can't do that then he may as well resign Smiley So indeed once you were theatening f4 you'd likely have seen quite drastic measures against it.

Computers have always had something of a blind spot about these sorts of trapped pieces. And of course are known not to do so well early in the game Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Master Om
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 187
Joined: 02/20/10
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #33 - 01/19/13 at 00:36:57
Post Tools
Vass wrote on 01/18/13 at 17:28:15:
Well, I didn't want to start a war or something..
And I didn't want to spoil this topic, too..
All I wanted was to tell you why Bibs reacted like this.
It seems he, as well as I, didn't like your assessment of the position from this game of yours.
Please, don't take it as offence! I won't give you advice anymore.
And even if the engines are better than humans in the middle game I'll continue to learn how to play it, study plans and pawn structures.
Poor Carlsen, if he doesn't know how to operate with an engine!
Roll Eyes

i didn't too want a war. I know what u n bibs sayin. I agree we need to increase our chess knowledge. But its other side of the coin. You need to be master in both. regarding the assessment of the game I neither expected g3 nor h3. I dont like pawn moves in opening. But after calculating further I found white can open up the position but with slight disadvantage but not winnable for black. So I had to stop those moves before he can play. Thats the reason of playing f5-f4 and h5! (prophylaxis). If white plays those he activates the bishops with attack!!.
I have taken your advice though of learning and reading books of chess as there is no harm in learning(if i return to OTB in future). What book you suggest to start with planning?  Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Vass
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1105
Joined: 06/22/11
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #32 - 01/18/13 at 17:28:15
Post Tools
Well, I didn't want to start a war or something..
And I didn't want to spoil this topic, too..
All I wanted was to tell you why Bibs reacted like this.
It seems he, as well as I, didn't like your assessment of the position from this game of yours.
Please, don't take it as offence! I won't give you advice anymore.
And even if the engines are better than humans in the middle game I'll continue to learn how to play it, study plans and pawn structures.
Poor Carlsen, if he doesn't know how to operate with an engine!
Roll Eyes
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Master Om
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 187
Joined: 02/20/10
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #31 - 01/18/13 at 16:50:25
Post Tools
Vass wrote on 01/18/13 at 08:01:51:
An advice as a friend: if you are really addicted to the correspondence chess, do not waste your time playing some games against some anonymous players which you accidentally meet through various chess forums! Just start working over your overall chess knowledge (reading books and so on..) while taking an account in ICCF and start playing for real! With your multi-core computer you can easily reach a good rating (say, 2250 ICCF), which would give you a chance to play against some really strong correspondence chess players. In the meantime, if you start to work on your chess understanding, your chess knowledge will raise to some level which will help you to progress more and more.


I am already into ICCF and AICCF.
See my games here and here.
Tell me if i am an operator only  Roll Eyes
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Master Om
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 187
Joined: 02/20/10
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #30 - 01/18/13 at 16:32:03
Post Tools
Vass wrote on 01/18/13 at 08:01:51:
Hi, Master Om!
First we "met" each other at chess.com, then here and as well as some computer forums, too..
I respect your chess addiction, as well as your addiction to the computer chess.
But, let me say something! Take it as a good advice from a friend!
What Bibs was trying to say is that computer chess engines are not all in chess. First, a player has to learn some chess basics. It's absolutely necessary to step on the firm ground. Then you'll be able to use your chess knowledge when corresponding with the powerful "calculators" such as Houdini, Rybka and alike. I use this word, because all these engines are just calculators and they cannot replace in full the absence of chess understanding. They don't make plans - they just calculate moves - kind of type...if this - then that. Ok, you may say they calculate in depth 35-36 plys and no plans are needed. Wrong, completely wrong! Plans are always needed in chess...and the calculators are the ones that can help you to achieve your plans, not the opposite.
I for one, read Nimzo's "My System" book in 1978 (and many, many books as well) and my chess playing before and after that was completely different. Many years after, my first engine was Fritz 5.32 version and I was able to observe its weaknesses very easy because of my chess knowledge I had acquired. Ok, you can say that Houdini or another modern chess engine can beat Carlsen very easy. Yes, maybe, but believe me, if Carlsen could have a much weaker engine from time to time just to calculate some tactics while playing against Houdini, I doubt if Houdini can even make 33% against him in any possible match between them!
By the way, I see you are deep into the correspondence chess.. It's my obsession, too.  Wink
I have some very good relationship with some of the best correspondence chess players in the world - mostly Russians (I speak Russian language fluently) as well as the best Bulgarian correspondence chess players, too. We often communicate in some closed forums sharing some knowledge and experience to each other. Anyway, I can guarantee you, that if you don't acquire at least the basic chess principles, even with your multi, multi-core computer you won't achieve more than 2400 ICCF ELO. Such players we use to call them "operators". Sometimes operators can even win against a strong player, but that will be an exception to the common rule. And not a slightest chance for an operator to even reach some higher levels!  Roll Eyes
An advice as a friend: if you are really addicted to the correspondence chess, do not waste your time playing some games against some anonymous players which you accidentally meet through various chess forums! Just start working over your overall chess knowledge (reading books and so on..) while taking an account in ICCF and start playing for real! With your multi-core computer you can easily reach a good rating (say, 2250 ICCF), which would give you a chance to play against some really strong correspondence chess players. In the meantime, if you start to work on your chess understanding, your chess knowledge will raise to some level which will help you to progress more and more..
That's all I have to say! And please, don't take offense on Bibs or me, or whoever which wastes time to advise you to teach!  Smiley



First I don't recall you in chess.com. Yes I know you in immortal chess forum as I am one of the oldest guy there.
Well It is not advised to advise someone who knows about something already. It won't work.

What Bibs was trying to say is that computer chess engines are not all in chess. First, a player has to learn some chess basics. It's absolutely necessary to step on the firm ground. Then you'll be able to use your chess knowledge when corresponding with the powerful "calculators" such as Houdini, Rybka and alike. I use this word, because all these engines are just calculators and they cannot replace in full the absence of chess understanding. They don't make plans - they just calculate moves - kind of type...if this - then that. Ok, you may say they calculate in depth 35-36 plys and no plans are needed. Wrong, completely wrong! Plans are always needed in chess...and the calculators are the ones that can help you to achieve your plans, not the opposite.

I myself play OTB in open tournaments. Due to time constraint I shifted from OTB to CC since 5 Years. So I am not a computer chess ignorant. As I have OTB skills I have lots of books and I still study but I study only endgames as I feel Its where engines fail (If they do and they do). In opening no engines are optimized for it for the piece probability. They rule in Middle game. Yes They are calculators. But they are better than Humans as far as Tactics is concerned. To be able to play in CC a more Computer knowledge is required than Chess Knowledge. Thats what rules in Freestyle or advanced chess. Humans use it to assist the game not to use it to copy paste. A good cc player does that -  steer the game to a position where engines fail (or rule if he has better hardware.)

Ok, you can say that Houdini or another modern chess engine can beat Carlsen very easy. Yes, maybe, but believe me, if Carlsen could have a much weaker engine from time to time just to calculate some tactics while playing against Houdini, I doubt if Houdini can even make 33% against him in any possible match between them!

Absolutely wrong. If Carlsen doesnot know how to operate a program his GM skills are waste. He wont go more than 5% wins. A better software + Hardware + Computer operating skills rule against Super GM and computer program Noob. Seems you have no idea what you are talking.
Let Me give an example. Have you heard of ZackS ? two amateurs(in chess) winning 1st freestyle chess tour involving GMs and IMs ?
Then read here.
I dont deny that chess knowledge helps but computer chess knowledge is important too. I there still read endgame books of Averbakh and Dvroetsky.
Gone are the days when human exeled against computers. This is now an necessary evil in CC.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Master Om
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 187
Joined: 02/20/10
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #29 - 01/18/13 at 15:12:11
Post Tools
Bibs wrote on 01/18/13 at 02:30:09:
Are PCs really used in this way? I despair.
Sigh.
Point forward and press? Houdini is an analytical engine.
Not a bazooka. This isn't the truck blowing up scene from the end of Beverley Hills Cop.
I give up.
Well, good luck with the 'analysis'. I depart these shores.



First of all Yes Houdini is an Analysis engine and I do not use only  Houdini. My analysis methods are a bit different. I tend to find what I want Rather what Engine Suggests as correct. This thing cost me few games too in my CC career. Well last time I analysed and posted analysis on fyfe Gambit on that thread. See it and tell me.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Vass
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1105
Joined: 06/22/11
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #28 - 01/18/13 at 08:01:51
Post Tools
Hi, Master Om!
First we "met" each other at chess.com, then here and as well as some computer forums, too..
I respect your chess addiction, as well as your addiction to the computer chess.
But, let me say something! Take it as a good advice from a friend!
What Bibs was trying to say is that computer chess engines are not all in chess. First, a player has to learn some chess basics. It's absolutely necessary to step on the firm ground. Then you'll be able to use your chess knowledge when corresponding with the powerful "calculators" such as Houdini, Rybka and alike. I use this word, because all these engines are just calculators and they cannot replace in full the absence of chess understanding. They don't make plans - they just calculate moves - kind of type...if this - then that. Ok, you may say they calculate in depth 35-36 plys and no plans are needed. Wrong, completely wrong! Plans are always needed in chess...and the calculators are the ones that can help you to achieve your plans, not the opposite.
I for one, read Nimzo's "My System" book in 1978 (and many, many books as well) and my chess playing before and after that was completely different. Many years after, my first engine was Fritz 5.32 version and I was able to observe its weaknesses very easy because of my chess knowledge I had acquired. Ok, you can say that Houdini or another modern chess engine can beat Carlsen very easy. Yes, maybe, but believe me, if Carlsen could have a much weaker engine from time to time just to calculate some tactics while playing against Houdini, I doubt if Houdini can even make 33% against him in any possible match between them!
By the way, I see you are deep into the correspondence chess.. It's my obsession, too.  Wink
I have some very good relationship with some of the best correspondence chess players in the world - mostly Russians (I speak Russian language fluently) as well as the best Bulgarian correspondence chess players, too. We often communicate in some closed forums sharing some knowledge and experience to each other. Anyway, I can guarantee you, that if you don't acquire at least the basic chess principles, even with your multi, multi-core computer you won't achieve more than 2400 ICCF ELO. Such players we use to call them "operators". Sometimes operators can even win against a strong player, but that will be an exception to the common rule. And not a slightest chance for an operator to even reach some higher levels!  Roll Eyes
An advice as a friend: if you are really addicted to the correspondence chess, do not waste your time playing some games against some anonymous players which you accidentally meet through various chess forums! Just start working over your overall chess knowledge (reading books and so on..) while taking an account in ICCF and start playing for real! With your multi-core computer you can easily reach a good rating (say, 2250 ICCF), which would give you a chance to play against some really strong correspondence chess players. In the meantime, if you start to work on your chess understanding, your chess knowledge will raise to some level which will help you to progress more and more..
That's all I have to say! And please, don't take offense on Bibs or me, or whoever which wastes time to advise you to teach!  Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Matemax
God Member
*****
Offline


Chesspub gives you strength!

Posts: 1302
Joined: 11/04/07
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #27 - 01/18/13 at 07:02:33
Post Tools
Bibs wrote on 01/18/13 at 02:30:09:
Are PCs really used in this way? I despair.
Sigh.
Point forward and press? Houdini is an analytical engine.
Not a bazooka. This isn't the truck blowing up scene from the end of Beverley Hills Cop.
I give up.
Well, good luck with the 'analysis'. I depart these shores.


I come with you  Grin
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2237
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #26 - 01/18/13 at 02:30:09
Post Tools
Are PCs really used in this way? I despair.
Sigh.
Point forward and press? Houdini is an analytical engine.
Not a bazooka. This isn't the truck blowing up scene from the end of Beverley Hills Cop.
I give up.
Well, good luck with the 'analysis'. I depart these shores.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Master Om
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 187
Joined: 02/20/10
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #25 - 01/18/13 at 01:10:24
Post Tools
Bibs wrote on 01/17/13 at 22:01:18:
Master Om wrote on 01/17/13 at 13:59:32:
Bibs wrote on 01/17/13 at 12:38:24:
Agree, h3 just seems terrible.


May be. But my analysis didnot find any fault. The real good move was h5!!. It was not found by any top 5 engine I used.


I do presume you are joking.
'Analysis'?!
I wish to be helpful below. It is meant to be frank, not unkind, I earnestly assure.
As kylemeister has suggested elsewhere I think, it really is necessary for many people here to:
1) switch off the PCs
2) put the opening books away
and...
3) get out the Chernev, Reinfeld books. Study some basic chess.


Well Yes!!, Analysis. I use All 5 engines on my two PC (8+6 cores) on all possible positions on single core programs including brainware Wink. Although h3 is unsound, white had sufficient resources to activate the two bishops and my opponenet missed it. That was the Idea off f4, h5.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2237
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #24 - 01/17/13 at 22:01:18
Post Tools
Master Om wrote on 01/17/13 at 13:59:32:
Bibs wrote on 01/17/13 at 12:38:24:
Agree, h3 just seems terrible.


May be. But my analysis didnot find any fault. The real good move was h5!!. It was not found by any top 5 engine I used.


I do presume you are joking.
'Analysis'?!
I wish to be helpful below. It is meant to be frank, not unkind, I earnestly assure.
As kylemeister has suggested elsewhere I think, it really is necessary for many people here to:
1) switch off the PCs
2) put the opening books away
and...
3) get out the Chernev, Reinfeld books. Study some basic chess.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MartinC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 2014
Joined: 07/24/06
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #23 - 01/17/13 at 15:00:48
Post Tools
Nice to see that even very modern computers still can't understand positions with smothered pieces Smiley

The combination of h3 and g3 is a tiny bit odd strategically but also really doesn't really make logical sense.

h3 before g3 would be a logical thing to look at, as would be h3 after g3, Bg2. Or of course sundry ideas with delaying/ommiting h3 entirely.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Master Om
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 187
Joined: 02/20/10
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #22 - 01/17/13 at 13:59:32
Post Tools
Bibs wrote on 01/17/13 at 12:38:24:
Agree, h3 just seems terrible.


May be. But my analysis didnot find any fault. The real good move was h5!!. It was not found by any top 5 engine I used.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Master Om
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 187
Joined: 02/20/10
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #21 - 01/17/13 at 13:57:53
Post Tools
MartinC wrote on 01/17/13 at 09:39:05:
Well surely g3 then h3 in that game was just a really terrible combination of ideas from white? As your opponent said in the later comments it looked basically resignable after you got f4 in.

There may not be an advantage elsewhere but surely better play Smiley


Well What I found is its not bad move. I did not find any refutation of it. May be strategically unsound. The real bad move was Rd2 Though and Bd2 later on.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2237
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #20 - 01/17/13 at 12:38:24
Post Tools
Agree, h3 just seems terrible.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MartinC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 2014
Joined: 07/24/06
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #19 - 01/17/13 at 09:39:05
Post Tools
Well surely g3 then h3 in that game was just a really terrible combination of ideas from white? As your opponent said in the later comments it looked basically resignable after you got f4 in.

There may not be an advantage elsewhere but surely better play Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
fling
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1591
Joined: 01/21/11
Gender: Male
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #18 - 01/17/13 at 07:28:33
Post Tools
Yes, please, that would be very interesting! And a great game btw.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Master Om
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 187
Joined: 02/20/10
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #17 - 01/17/13 at 01:28:56
Post Tools
BPaulsen wrote on 11/06/12 at 19:56:01:
1.Nf3 d6 2.d4 does not allow a Leningrad transposition (white can always sidestep advantageously).

1.Nf3 g6 (posing the Grunfeld/harmless English question) 2.e4 is not headed towards a harmless Pirc. If I can ever get "Play 1.Nf3!" finished, then everyone will get to see what I mean. That chapter made me happy to write, not least of all because it varied significantly from Khalifman's 4.c3 recommendation, and still resulted in a nice edge.


Hi,
     I played this Line in WBCCC 2012 in last round against pipiper (Jose Sanz, last years tournament winner). I followed Delchev's books and found many errors.
See the gamehere. Delchev recomended f6!? and I found something better. Now am sure, in this line white has 0 advantage after that move. If you want I can/post the analysis here.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Lauri Torni
Senior Member
****
Offline


Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Posts: 276
Location: Finland
Joined: 01/09/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #16 - 11/08/12 at 08:25:34
Post Tools
OK. Looking forward to seeing all this in your book (bying one definitely Smiley
  

1.Nf3! -  beat your opponent by killing his zest for life.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #15 - 11/08/12 at 05:44:15
Post Tools
Lauri Torni wrote on 11/07/12 at 06:18:14:
BPaulsen wrote on 11/06/12 at 19:56:01:
1.Nf3 d6 2.d4 does not allow a Leningrad transposition (white can always sidestep advantageously).

1.Nf3 g6 (posing the Grunfeld/harmless English question) 2.e4 is not headed towards a harmless Pirc. If I can ever get "Play 1.Nf3!" finished, then everyone will get to see what I mean. That chapter made me happy to write, not least of all because it varied significantly from Khalifman's 4.c3 recommendation, and still resulted in a nice edge.


This is nice to hear, but hard to believe. 1.Nf3 d6 2.d4 g6 ( 2.-f5 3.Nc3 is strong) and now either 3.e4 Nf6 or 3.c4 f5

Indeed 1.Nf3 g6 2.e4 is mainly problem for g3 KI-indian players.....


3.e4 Nf6 is not a major issue based on the work I've done. I'm reasonably thorough in general concerning the Pirc, and am definitely thorough in what I believe to be the most important continuations. I don't believe that black can equalize in the important stuff, and in the less important stuff he's usually just getting mated.

Note that going into writing this book I had a high opinion of black's prospects, only to have my convictions overturned. Even if I am wrong, it will still contribute significantly to the theory of my chosen variation, and I can guarantee black's life still won't be easy.

I'm a Classical KID advocate due to favoring a particular Anglo-Grunfeld. Fianchetto advocates are left out.
  

2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
Lauri Torni
Senior Member
****
Offline


Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Posts: 276
Location: Finland
Joined: 01/09/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #14 - 11/07/12 at 06:18:14
Post Tools
BPaulsen wrote on 11/06/12 at 19:56:01:
1.Nf3 d6 2.d4 does not allow a Leningrad transposition (white can always sidestep advantageously).

1.Nf3 g6 (posing the Grunfeld/harmless English question) 2.e4 is not headed towards a harmless Pirc. If I can ever get "Play 1.Nf3!" finished, then everyone will get to see what I mean. That chapter made me happy to write, not least of all because it varied significantly from Khalifman's 4.c3 recommendation, and still resulted in a nice edge.


This is nice to hear, but hard to believe. 1.Nf3 d6 2.d4 g6 ( 2.-f5 3.Nc3 is strong) and now either 3.e4 Nf6 or 3.c4 f5

Indeed 1.Nf3 g6 2.e4 is mainly problem for g3 KI-indian players.....
  

1.Nf3! -  beat your opponent by killing his zest for life.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
WSS
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 271
Joined: 04/22/11
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #13 - 11/07/12 at 03:13:21
Post Tools
BPaulsen wrote on 11/07/12 at 00:25:59:
It's the first and last time I set the bar this high for a book (setting out to find += everywhere is a fool's errand, which makes me a fool, but damned if I didn't try).

I salute all authors of ambitious white repertoire books after this experience.


Hang in there Bryan!  We're all looking forward to a terrific book from you because we know you are giving it your all.  You have a kindred spirit in the British actor, Michael Caine, who said:

"I started with the firm conviction that when I came to the end, I wanted to be regretting the things that I had done, not the things I hadn't."

Bill
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #12 - 11/07/12 at 00:25:59
Post Tools
LostTactic wrote on 11/06/12 at 23:59:33:
BPaulsen wrote on 11/06/12 at 19:56:01:
1.Nf3 d6 2.d4 does not allow a Leningrad transposition (white can always sidestep advantageously).

1.Nf3 g6 (posing the Grunfeld/harmless English question) 2.e4 is not headed towards a harmless Pirc. If I can ever get "Play 1.Nf3!" finished, then everyone will get to see what I mean. That chapter made me happy to write, not least of all because it varied significantly from Khalifman's 4.c3 recommendation, and still resulted in a nice edge.


Sounds good. When do you think it will be published roughly? London Chess Centre has it down for April 2013. Any chance it might be out sooner?


I still have analysis on the Symmetrical English 4 Knights and Maroczy Bind to finish in full (this was my equivalent of saving the easiest for last, but now that I've said that watch some sideline cause me two weeks of work). After that, just a couple of Slav related sidelines, and then anything else I catch that I feel is worth inclusion. The rest is done as far as analysis is concerned.

Then there's improving the explanations that go with the evaluations, etc. I have no clue when it's finally going to wrap up. It's the first and last time I set the bar this high for a book (setting out to find += everywhere is a fool's errand, which makes me a fool, but damned if I didn't try).

I salute all authors of ambitious white repertoire books after this experience.
  

2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
LostTactic
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 336
Joined: 02/19/11
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #11 - 11/06/12 at 23:59:33
Post Tools
BPaulsen wrote on 11/06/12 at 19:56:01:
1.Nf3 d6 2.d4 does not allow a Leningrad transposition (white can always sidestep advantageously).

1.Nf3 g6 (posing the Grunfeld/harmless English question) 2.e4 is not headed towards a harmless Pirc. If I can ever get "Play 1.Nf3!" finished, then everyone will get to see what I mean. That chapter made me happy to write, not least of all because it varied significantly from Khalifman's 4.c3 recommendation, and still resulted in a nice edge.


Sounds good. When do you think it will be published roughly? London Chess Centre has it down for April 2013. Any chance it might be out sooner?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BPaulsen
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love Light Squares!

Posts: 1702
Location: Anaheim, CA, USA
Joined: 11/02/08
Gender: Male
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #10 - 11/06/12 at 19:56:01
Post Tools
1.Nf3 d6 2.d4 does not allow a Leningrad transposition (white can always sidestep advantageously).

1.Nf3 g6 (posing the Grunfeld/harmless English question) 2.e4 is not headed towards a harmless Pirc. If I can ever get "Play 1.Nf3!" finished, then everyone will get to see what I mean. That chapter made me happy to write, not least of all because it varied significantly from Khalifman's 4.c3 recommendation, and still resulted in a nice edge.
  

2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

FIDE based on just 27 games.
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
Lauri Torni
Senior Member
****
Offline


Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Posts: 276
Location: Finland
Joined: 01/09/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #9 - 11/06/12 at 18:39:21
Post Tools
P.S. Another slightly annoying move is 1.-d6 (or 1.-g6). Black is either allowed to play the Leningrad, or white has to play some innocuous line of Pirc.

  

1.Nf3! -  beat your opponent by killing his zest for life.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Lauri Torni
Senior Member
****
Offline


Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Posts: 276
Location: Finland
Joined: 01/09/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #8 - 11/06/12 at 17:07:05
Post Tools
WSS wrote on 11/05/12 at 18:21:58:
I'm afraid you're right... I was trying to multiplex and I must have lost track of the original point!   Embarrassed

After 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 d4 is a common and effective move.

Bill


On an occasional 1.-d4 I would even be happy as white to find a line that gives comfortable/sterile equality. But the space advantage can easily turn the long term changes for black.
  

1.Nf3! -  beat your opponent by killing his zest for life.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Seeley
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 352
Location: UK
Joined: 04/03/10
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #7 - 11/05/12 at 18:25:55
Post Tools
WSS wrote on 11/05/12 at 18:21:58:
I'm afraid you're right... I was trying to multiplex and I must have lost track of the original point!   Embarrassed

Bill


Easily done!  Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
WSS
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 271
Joined: 04/22/11
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #6 - 11/05/12 at 18:21:58
Post Tools
I'm afraid you're right... I was trying to multiplex and I must have lost track of the original point!   Embarrassed

After 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 d4 is a common and effective move.

Bill
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Seeley
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 352
Location: UK
Joined: 04/03/10
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #5 - 11/05/12 at 18:18:30
Post Tools
WSS wrote on 11/05/12 at 18:06:37:
Doesn't White retain his normal edge after 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 d4 3.c3 c5 4.cxd4 cxd4 5.Bg2 Nc6 6.Qa4 Qd5 (or 6...d3 7.Ne5 Bd7 8.Nxc6) 7.0-0 Bd7 8.d3?

Bill

I think you may have misread the preceding posts, Bill. The line under discussion involves Black playing 2...d4 in answer to 2.c4, not 2.g3. After the latter, the immediate advance of the d-pawn makes much less sense for the second player.
« Last Edit: 11/05/12 at 19:42:22 by Seeley »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
WSS
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 271
Joined: 04/22/11
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #4 - 11/05/12 at 18:06:37
Post Tools
TN wrote on 11/05/12 at 11:54:53:
But I agree that 2...d4 completely neutralises the Reti as a try for an edge and remains for me one of the main drawbacks of 1.Nf3 (without transposing to 1.d4).


I took a quick look in my databases and 2...d4 appears to be very rarely played - and not by higher rated players.  In correspondence players prefer 2...Nf6, 2...c5 and 2...c6 with obvious transpositions.

Doesn't White retain his normal edge after 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 d4 3.c3 c5 4.cxd4 cxd4 5.Bg2 Nc6 6.Qa4 Qd5 (or 6...d3 7.Ne5 Bd7 8.Nxc6) 7.0-0 Bd7 8.d3?

Bill
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Lauri Torni
Senior Member
****
Offline


Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Posts: 276
Location: Finland
Joined: 01/09/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #3 - 11/05/12 at 15:40:55
Post Tools
TN wrote on 11/05/12 at 11:54:53:
You might want to think about 1.Nf3 d5 2.e3 as well. But I agree that 2...d4 completely neutralises the Reti as a try for an edge and remains for me one of the main drawbacks of 1.Nf3 (without transposing to 1.d4). The KIA is a regular blitz/rapid choice of the world's elite so there's no reason you can't make a weapon out of that like Michael says.


I'd like to have some ambition in my openings, so I consider 2.d4 now. I used to be d4-player. The nice thing in Nf3 is that most players at my level (My elo is ca. 2100) are sloppy with it.
  

1.Nf3! -  beat your opponent by killing his zest for life.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TN
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 3420
Joined: 11/07/08
Gender: Male
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #2 - 11/05/12 at 11:54:53
Post Tools
You might want to think about 1.Nf3 d5 2.e3 as well. But I agree that 2...d4 completely neutralises the Reti as a try for an edge and remains for me one of the main drawbacks of 1.Nf3 (without transposing to 1.d4). The KIA is a regular blitz/rapid choice of the world's elite so there's no reason you can't make a weapon out of that like Michael says.
  

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


‘You’re never alone with
a doppelgänger.’

Posts: 1892
Location: durham
Joined: 04/19/03
Gender: Male
Re: 1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
Reply #1 - 11/05/12 at 11:13:18
Post Tools
Rightly or wrongly, I've always worried as White about 1 Nf3 d5 2 c4 d4!, but I've never thought of eschewing the Reti for that reason. I always play 2 g3, following up if I can with Bg2/0-0/b3/Bb2/e3 in some order and only then c4 (sometimes after Qe2!? in fact). I play only at the ~2000 level, but after 1 Nf3 d5 2 g3 the vast majority of my White games reach a Closed Reti, which is great for learning purposes! I normally reach pretty mainline positions this way, but Black does have the option of developing his KB on d6 iso e7. My feeling is that this probably benefits White if anyone, but it's not clear and I don't know of any theory!

A further advantage of this move order is that if Black develops his QB before ...e6, you have the option of going for c4 or e4, according to your mood and your feeling for what gives you the best chance of an advantage.

Another ploy is to head for a Closed Reti via 1 Nf3 d5 2 b3, etc. Obviously you have to be prepared for Nimzo-Larsen stuff but a lot of Black options (perhaps the most annoying ones) have been cut out. GM Blatny (a guy whose games are well worth following!) sometimes plays this way.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Lauri Torni
Senior Member
****
Offline


Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Posts: 276
Location: Finland
Joined: 01/09/03
Gender: Male
1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4!
11/05/12 at 08:34:49
Post Tools
1.Nf3 d5! 2.c4?! d4! =

Are the marks above too provocative, or is it really so, that white had better to play 2.d4? I'd like to see 2.c4 to work, as it e.g. avoids the sharpest open catalan lines. Also, after 2.-dc 3.e4!? is interesting.

Delchev's speculative line has at least been refuted: http://www.chess-stars.com/Reti_letter.html

3.g3 Nc6 seems very easy and equal for black. 4.Bg2 e5 5.0-0 Nf6 6.d3 and now  6.-a5, 6.-Bd6 and 6.-Nd7 are all very safe for black. White can easily be soon a little worse.
  

1.Nf3! -  beat your opponent by killing his zest for life.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo