Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed) (Read 40624 times)
Pawnpusher
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 236
Joined: 01/04/18
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #50 - 11/21/21 at 12:06:16
Post Tools
It sounds like you are debating the virtues of the ECO codes.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Online


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 440
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #49 - 11/21/21 at 06:57:31
Post Tools
Hi.

an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 11/20/21 at 22:59:34:
I don't see the deviating definition. White plays the Averbakh, black has the choice of ...Nf6 transposing to the King's Indian. If black doesn't transpose, it's considered to be still in the Averbakh. Tiger's description "any black line from the 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.c4 position that does not involve transposing to the King's Indian with... Nf6." is entirely consistent with that. I wouldn't attach too much importance to the words "black line". White plays a line, black plays a line, it's like a dance.

I mean if your proposition is that this broader definition of the term Averbakh just simply applies. One where both the white moves and the black moves both are considered Averbakh. Then two sources with one saying that these white moves are the Averbakh and the other one that these black moves are the Averbakh can of course  be non-contradictory. Each incomplete on its own but not contradictory.

To me it seems like Tiger, which to be fair actually writes "I define" as this should be a subjective definition, just by putting forward his own definition of the Averbakh without alluding to the previous one more or less created a lot of confusion about what the Averbakh actually is. In such a situation one can broaden to accomodate Tiger's definition, in theory even supplant the old definition or not consider the broadened definition valid at all. I fail to see the upside of doing anything but the third option here. Why not instead give a unique name to non-Nf6 KID? Why share a name between a white line and a black line? Is it really wise to have three things named the Averbakh?

Have a nice day
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10646
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #48 - 11/21/21 at 06:42:52
Post Tools
Confused_by_Theory wrote on 11/20/21 at 19:59:13:
So the fact that the whole name apparently was intended for white's way of playing sort of got lost there.

This I don't get. Unfortunately I can't remember nor refind where and when I met the name Averbakh Variation for the first time (in the Modern); though it was well before Hillarp Persson wrote his first book. To me there was never any doubt that 3.c4 was the move that defined it (excluding the transpositions to the KID).

Confused_by_Theory wrote on 11/20/21 at 19:59:13:
It would also be nice if there would also be names for .....

I'm not a fan of nomenclature a la the Inner-Mongolian Gambit of the Patagonian Variation of the Averbakh Variation of the Modern Defense.
  

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
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1328
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #47 - 11/20/21 at 22:59:34
Post Tools
I don't see the deviating definition. White plays the Averbakh, black has the choice of ...Nf6 transposing to the King's Indian. If black doesn't transpose, it's considered to be still in the Averbakh. Tiger's description "any black line from the 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.c4 position that does not involve transposing to the King's Indian with... Nf6." is entirely consistent with that. I wouldn't attach too much importance to the words "black line". White plays a line, black plays a line, it's like a dance.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Online


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 440
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #46 - 11/20/21 at 19:59:13
Post Tools
Hi.

Alright that pretty much explains it. Thank you.

So in effect it is a white setup with 3.c4 against the Modern. Interesting Huh. Based on the Keene & Botterill explanation white presumably is also supposed to play 4.Nc3. Tiger more or less expands on this a little bit by having 4.Nf3 games in the same Averbakh chapter as well. I wouldn't care to much about that though since it seems kinda practical. More strange is that there in effect are two pretty deviating definitions of the Averbakh (just to be clear the Modern version not KID one). since Tiger's is "any black line from the 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.c4 position that does not involve transposing to the King's Indian with... Nf6." So the fact that the whole name apparently was intended for white's way of playing sort of got lost there.

I would think the most orderly thing to do would be to retain the Averbakh anti-Modern as a name for the white setup with 1.e4, 2.d4, 3.c4. Also in my personal opinion, for simplicity, it shouldn't really matter much if black has played 1...g6+2...Bg7 or 1...g6+2...d6 and if white continues 4.Nc3, 4.Nf3 or some other move. I won't distinguish at least.

It would also be nice if there would also be names for at least the main black ways of playing. Like for example how 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.c4 d6 4.Nc3 Nc6 is known as the Kotov variation asfaik. I sort of fail to see why that should be a named variation and not 4...e5 or to a lesser extent 1.e4 g6 2.d4 d6 3.c4 e5.

Another thing to do would be to forget about subvariations entirely  and come up with some actual better name for the non-Nf6 King's Indian Defence complex than the apparently quite taken Averbakh system. Then you can always say I'm playing the 4...e5 line in the non-Nf6 King's Indian Defence complex or something to that effect and even if it's somewhat sad not to have an actual name for your subvariation people still get you.

Have a nice day.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1328
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #45 - 11/20/21 at 17:10:27
Post Tools
In the Modern, 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7, the Averbakh is the name of the white system beginning 3.c4 d6 4.Nc3. Keene/Botterill (1972) The Modern Defence page 18 says "named in recognition of Averbakh's victories with it in the 1958 USSR Ch and at Hastings 1959-60".
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RoleyPoley
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 712
Location: London
Joined: 12/29/13
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #44 - 11/20/21 at 15:18:55
Post Tools
Confused_by_Theory wrote on 11/20/21 at 10:09:57:
Hi.

Just because I was thinking about this the other day (while playing the very system Wink)

Why exactly is 1.d4 g6 2.c4 Bg7 3.e4 d6 4.Nc3 (or 4.Nf3) 4...e5 called the Averbakh? Is there actually som history behind this or is it just something Tiger came up with?

Is it related to 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Be2 (a sort of embryonic form of the already named Averbakh variation in the KID - 5...0-0 6.Bg5)
And now 5...e5!? being both similar to Tiger's Averbakh and played what looks like just enough for a GM to know about?

And if say playing e5 is the key ingredient of the system what to call 1.d4 g6 2.c4 g6 3.c4 e5? (which turns out different in many cases). Or the even more basic 1.d4 d6 2.c4 e5? (where black basic basically rarely even goes g6). Or 1.d4 d6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 (where black can still go 4...e5 but the positions doesn't really resemble Tiger's Averbakh; more or less making it an anti-move order against this very system.

Many questions...
Have a nice day.


Hi Confused_by_theory,

Interesting question. I think this variation was so named before Tiger's book, but I don't know it's history.

Best wishes,

Roley
  

"As Mikhail Tal would say ' Let's have a bit of hooliganism! '"

Victor Bologan.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Online


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 440
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #43 - 11/20/21 at 10:09:57
Post Tools
Hi.

Just because I was thinking about this the other day (while playing the very system Wink)

Why exactly is 1.d4 g6 2.c4 Bg7 3.e4 d6 4.Nc3 (or 4.Nf3) 4...e5 called the Averbakh? Is there actually som history behind this or is it just something Tiger came up with?

Is it related to 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Be2 (a sort of embryonic form of the already named Averbakh variation in the KID - 5...0-0 6.Bg5)
And now 5...e5!? being both similar to Tiger's Averbakh and played what looks like just enough for a GM to know about?

And if say playing e5 is the key ingredient of the system what to call 1.d4 g6 2.c4 g6 3.c4 e5? (which turns out different in many cases). Or the even more basic 1.d4 d6 2.c4 e5? (where black basic basically rarely even goes g6). Or 1.d4 d6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 (where black can still go 4...e5 but the positions doesn't really resemble Tiger's Averbakh; more or less making it an anti-move order against this very system.

Many questions...
Have a nice day.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Online


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 440
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #42 - 08/13/19 at 06:05:23
Post Tools
Hi.

Just a quick observation about the Modern and Tiger's book. There is quite a major shift in recommendation in the Averbakh section that is well worth noting. I played the old move recently and got an utterly lifeless position.

1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.c4 d6 4.Nc3 e5 5.Nge2!?
This is not as popular as 5.Nf3, 5.d5 or even 5.dxe5; probably because white needs to be prepared for a few different structures and people are generally ok with the alternatives.
In terms of move orders:
4.Be3 c5!? 5.Ne2 Qb6!? looks ok for black. Also 5...Nc6 seems playable. If white doesn't mind this I suppose he can go for this.
4.Ne2 seems fully viable. If there is a downside it is probably 4...Nf6 with a KID sideline (if white goes Ng3 later) or if not that then likely a Saemisch with early Ne2. I suppose not everyone would play these variations as white against the KID.
2...d6 3.c4 e5 4.Ne2 Bg7 5.Nbc3 is the move order I used. The position is a bit different if black from move four plays with a postponed Bg7, although even now I can't see how to benefit.
5...Ne7
Instead:
5...Nc6 6.Be3 Nh6 7.f3 f5 8.Qd2! (Tiger's exclam) when both 8...f4, as played by me, and 8...Nf7 are probably not great.
With the new move a plausible line is something like
6.Be3 Nd7 7.Qd2 0-0 8.f3 f5 (Diagram)
Trying to get counterplay even though the centre is not closed. Overall quite a complicated new recommendation. On the other hand if black doesn't go for this (or 5...Nd7 which is also mentioned) it is not clear to me what he should do.

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*
Have a nice day.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
gillbod
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 171
Joined: 03/26/13
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #41 - 04/13/19 at 20:26:10
Post Tools
This is old, but in that youtube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tkJiToQcIM), Tiger mentions that he doesn't like 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.f4 a6 5.Nf3 b5 6.Bd3 Nd7 7.a4 b4 8.Ne2 c5 9.c3. Consequently, he doesn't recommend ...a6 against the Austrian in the GingerGM video.

Is that line generally forcing people away from ...a6 against the Austrian? I play the line from neither side, but was just curious.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Marcellus
Junior Member
**
Offline



Posts: 92
Location: FL
Joined: 01/31/15
Gender: Male
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #40 - 03/07/18 at 02:22:24
Post Tools
The pgns also contain commentary and aren't just bare game scores.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
mn
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 538
Location: Ottawa
Joined: 09/22/16
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #39 - 03/07/18 at 02:14:07
Post Tools
The PGNs are for sale separately, so no.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
VGA
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 94
Joined: 08/13/17
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #38 - 03/07/18 at 00:02:13
Post Tools
Can the pgns be shared or are they somehow copyrighted (huh?)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
gwnn
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 472
Joined: 03/21/11
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #37 - 03/06/18 at 16:44:27
Post Tools
I have the DVD. It's great seeing Tiger talk about the opening. There's not a lot of theory, just some illustrative games and general ideas. The first 8/21 videos are on the Pirc vs the Austrian, mind you.

I checked the Hippo and the Averbakh sections. He shows some game(s) he's played recently, but doesn't show much in terms of theory or anything.

Most of the videos is Tiger trying to put into words what his general feelings about positions are. I love it. "Here I feel like the LSB is too strong." "Here Black is maybe a bit worse but he has play." "Generally I would hate to play Nb6 but here I liked it because of reason X." Simon Williams is there as a student, mostly, giving some opinions here and there. Sometimes Tiger strongly disagrees with him and Simon accepts. Maybe some of it is for didactic reasons.

edit: there's a bunch of .pgn's too. But I think mostly the selling point is having Tiger talk about his opening for 5 hours and 30 minutes.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2273
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: The Modern Tiger (Tiger's Modern 2 ed)
Reply #36 - 03/05/18 at 13:28:51
Post Tools
And made in a shed, no less.

A toss up over the last year which would come first: Man City to the title, Trump (note: an inferior Pantone orange) impeached, or this arrives.

And... The Original Orange One lands it. Carrot juice all round, and we raise our glasses. Cheers!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo