Latest Updates:
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar (Read 33595 times)
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1387
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #45 - 08/03/18 at 11:57:39
Post Tools
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit is not your typical opening.
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
Jupp53
God Member
*****
Offline


be

Posts: 952
Location: Frankfurt/Main
Joined: 01/04/09
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #44 - 07/22/18 at 00:53:47
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 07/12/18 at 17:36:17:
If Black is not careful, he can get into plenty of trouble.

Roll Eyes  Shocked
This doesn't happen in other openings?
  

Medical textbooks say I should be dead since April 2002.
Dum spiro spero. Smiley
Narcissm is the humans primary disease.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1387
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #43 - 07/12/18 at 17:36:17
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 04/07/18 at 13:56:51:
Gambit wrote on 04/07/18 at 11:20:03:
To begin with, after 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. e4 dxe4 4. f3 c5 5. d5 exf3 6. Nxf3 a6 7. a4 g6 8. Bc4 Bg7 there can follow 9 00 00 10 Bf4 Bf5 11 a5 Nbd7 12 Qd2 b5  13 ab6 Nxb6  14 Ba2 c4 15 Rad1 Qc8


Is there any great need to play .. Bf5? In a semi-Benoni structure you would consider playing .. b6 to prevent a5. You aren't forced to play .. b5 as a  response to a5 either.

Black can with care play the position in the same way as if there was a pawn on f2.


David Gedult used to play 1 d4 d5 2 e4 dxe4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 c5 5 Bf4!? here, with good results. If Black is not careful, he can get into plenty of trouble. Most of his games were blitz, yet they demonstrate how tricky this line can be.
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #42 - 04/07/18 at 13:56:51
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 04/07/18 at 11:20:03:
To begin with, after 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. e4 dxe4 4. f3 c5 5. d5 exf3 6. Nxf3 a6 7. a4 g6 8. Bc4 Bg7 there can follow 9 00 00 10 Bf4 Bf5 11 a5 Nbd7 12 Qd2 b5  13 ab6 Nxb6  14 Ba2 c4 15 Rad1 Qc8


Is there any great need to play .. Bf5? In a semi-Benoni structure you would consider playing .. b6 to prevent a5. You aren't forced to play .. b5 as a  response to a5 either.

Black can with care play the position in the same way as if there was a pawn on f2.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1387
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #41 - 04/07/18 at 11:20:03
Post Tools
To begin with, after 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. e4 dxe4 4. f3 c5 5. d5 exf3 6. Nxf3 a6 7. a4 g6 8. Bc4 Bg7 there can follow 9 00 00 10 Bf4 Bf5 11 a5 Nbd7 12 Qd2 b5  13 ab6 Nxb6  14 Ba2 c4 15 Rad1 Qc8, Jarecki, M - Leisebein, P, Remote email  correspondence, 2005.

Here White played the dubious 16 d6?! and lost later on. Instead, the computer suggests 16 Qd4, 16 Qe3, or 16 Nd4, with equality.
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #40 - 04/02/18 at 20:01:00
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 01/14/14 at 11:52:01:
SWJediknight wrote on 01/14/14 at 11:06:42:
One issue is the so-called "Long Bogo" line, 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bf4 Bg7 7.Qd2 0-0 8.0-0-0 c5 9.d5 a6,


Oddly enough, that was exactly how my recent game transposed. The possibility of d6 did vaguely bother me, so I played 9. .. Bg4 rather than 9. .. a6 intending the concession of ceding the Bishop pair to eliminate the potentially dangerous Nf3.



I played the same opponent who repeated the BDG. This time I threw in an early .. a6 which appeared to discourage my opponent from long castling.

So the opening went

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. e4 dxe4 4. f3 c5 5. d5 exf3 6. Nxf3 a6 7. a4 g6 8. Bc4 Bg7 9. Bg5 0-0 10. Qd2 Bg4 11. Ne5 Bf5 12. 0-0 Nbd7 13. Nxd7 Qxd7 14. h3 h5 . According to an engine this is advantage Black, but less than a pawn's worth. 14. .. h5 is arguably unnecessary as g4 allows Bxg4 hxg4 Qxg4+ picking up the Bishop. Perhaps Rad8 to gang up on the d pawn.

Black later won, although an engine suggests a line of play from his last chance critical position where Black keeps the extra pawn all the way to a drawn 5 man rook ending.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1387
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #39 - 03/04/14 at 06:43:09
Post Tools
I play the BDG a lot on the Internet Chess Club. Most of my games against 5...c6 come from there. For some reason, when I play the BDG in over-the-board games, I do not get 5...c6. What I do get is the Vienna, the Teichmann, the Euwe, the Bogoljubow, the 5...Bf5 Gunderam... Now and then I get some minor defenses, such as the Langeheinecke, the Weinspach, and the Elbert Counter-Gambit.

Having said that, I should point out that after 1 d4 d5 2 e4 dxe4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 exf3 5 Nxf3 c6 6 Bc4 Bf5 7 Ng5 e6 8 00 Bg6 9 Ne2 Bd6 10 Bf4! I scored some nice wins. Especially true if Black Castles Kingside. Then  my Ng5 and the Queen are a dangerous combination.
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
SWJediknight
God Member
*****
Offline


Alert... opponent out
of book!

Posts: 900
Joined: 03/14/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #38 - 03/01/14 at 01:13:01
Post Tools
There's a thread currently ongoing about Avrukh's suggestions vs. Lev Gutman's line (in the ...c6 variations) - I gave one potential improvement for White over his analysis and Stefan Bücker gave another, so I don't think things are especially clear-cut there either.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BladezII
Senior Member
****
Offline


Member of chesspublishing
.com and STC Club

Posts: 402
Joined: 11/01/04
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #37 - 02/27/14 at 23:08:25
Post Tools
SWJediknight wrote on 02/27/14 at 15:28:57:
I am not aware of any easy way for Black to get an advantage against the BDG but in each of the above lines the theoretical onus is on White to prove full compensation for the pawn rather than on Black to prove equality.

.


You have to get GM Boris Avrukh's book, beating 1.d4 sidelines.  It is a Fantastic  book.   I used and I love it.  I eagerly await any BDG games.
  

I am a participating member of chesspublishing.com since 1998.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SWJediknight
God Member
*****
Offline


Alert... opponent out
of book!

Posts: 900
Joined: 03/14/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #36 - 02/27/14 at 15:28:57
Post Tools
While 5...c6 (and the related O'Kelly variation, 4...c6) has mostly been regarded as the critical test of the Blackmar-Diemer, I would point the Black player towards the following two lines:

A) 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Bf5 6.Ne5 (6.Bd3 Bxd3 7.Qxd3 c6, followed by ...Nbd7, ...e6 and ...Be7) 6...c6 7.g4 Be6!

B) 5...g6 is the most consistent with the repertoire with an early ...c5.  I suggest that 6.Bc4 Bg7 7.0-0 0-0 8.Qe1 Nc6 9.Qh4 Bg4, and 6.Bf4 Bg7 7.Qd2 0-0 8.0-0-0 a5!? (suggested to me by MNb a while ago, by analogy with an article by Abby Marshall which advocated this move against 6.Be3) are the trickiest for White to deal with.

I am not aware of any easy way for Black to get an advantage against the BDG but in each of the above lines the theoretical onus is on White to prove full compensation for the pawn rather than on Black to prove equality.

Against 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4, Black also has 3...Nxe4 4.Nxe4 dxe4.  Then 5.Bc4 runs into trouble against 5...Nc6 intending 6...e5, and 5.Bf4 runs into 5...e6 intending ...c5 undermining the support of the d4-pawn.  Therefore White's best bet is 5.Be3, which in my opinion leaves White no better or worse off than in the normal Blackmar-Diemer.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BladezII
Senior Member
****
Offline


Member of chesspublishing
.com and STC Club

Posts: 402
Joined: 11/01/04
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #35 - 02/27/14 at 04:01:51
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 01/07/14 at 01:32:32:
I recently had to improvise something against the Blackmar-Diemar. The game started 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 ( so I'm thinking about how to play in the Veresov), but now 3. e4 (If I had thought that this was likely I would have considered playing 1. ..d5). As I don't play the French, then 3. .. dxe4 and now the expected 4. f3. I don't have a high opinion of this move, blocking the square for the Knight at g1 and the Queen at d1 ought to give Black chances. So 4. .. c5. 5. d5 isn't forced, but seems a reasonable try. Black can take on f3 and then play either 6. .. g6 or even 6. ..a6.

The position remains difficult, but Black has an extra pawn and dangerous attacking lines with Bc4 are less possible.


My suggestion is to take the BM gambit head on.  Learn the best line(s) vs the BDG and you won't ever look back.  The Blackmar gambit is one of those dubious ones.  Really, learn how to tackle it head on and you will be very happy.
  

I am a participating member of chesspublishing.com since 1998.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SWJediknight
God Member
*****
Offline


Alert... opponent out
of book!

Posts: 900
Joined: 03/14/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #34 - 02/26/14 at 00:28:48
Post Tools
I agree, after taking a closer look, that in the line 8...c5 9.d5 a6, 10.Be2, with the idea of 10...b5 11.Ne5, is superior to 10.d6.  Indeed, even after 10...Nc6 11.Qe3 exd6 12.Bxd6 Re8 13.Qxc5 Be6 (instead of 13...Ne4) 14.Ng5 (Mann-Zielinski, email 2004) Black could have improved with 14...Bh6 pinning the g5-knight, whereupon I would rather be Black.  After 10.Be2 I would rather be White.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
motörhead
Full Member
***
Offline


Here comes the bass, thunder
in the guts...

Posts: 226
Joined: 10/09/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #33 - 01/19/14 at 21:01:19
Post Tools
ErictheRed wrote on 01/19/14 at 16:26:34:
Agreed MNb, and I mean no hard feelings to anyone else in this thread, I just have no desire to analyze the BDG any more. 


Agreed by me too.
I feel sorry with you both, as you seem to be drawn to waste your time with such unimportants themes all the way.
Why do you answer when not interested?

I mean, Eric, just look at your huge contributions here. Don't have anything better to do or what?

And you, MNb: Allways around here when some discussion rises on that low profile BDG.
Why?
As indeed, there are really important musts in the world one can ponder about. The BDG does not the minimum belong to them. Nor does any chess items. Nor does chess at all.
  

A walk trough the ocean of most souls would scarcely get your feet wet.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2501
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #32 - 01/19/14 at 16:26:34
Post Tools
Agreed MNb, and I mean no hard feelings to anyone else in this thread, I just have no desire to analyze the BDG any more.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10515
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #31 - 01/19/14 at 13:40:39
Post Tools
ErictheRed wrote on 01/19/14 at 12:35:54:
But I don't want to spend any more time defending the BDG, I think I've made my point a number of times.  If Black wants to play this way he certainly can, and he still has an extra pawn.  I just don't think that he should expect an easy life.

Same for me when I arrived at your conclusion on page 1. Let me put it this way: if ...c5 were Black's most promising defence I would be far more interested in the BDG. The way things are now even a forced win for White after ...c5 would not change my mind about this opening. So I don't have any interest. At the other hand if RdC and Motorhead show an advantage for Black it's just another nail in the coffin.

motörhead wrote on 01/18/14 at 22:15:44:
So there is a must to go back and forth to find the thin line to best white play.

Undoubtedly. There are many more musts in the world - even in opening theory - and this one is very low on my priority list. At the other hand if someone thinks ...c5 an excellent defence he/she by all means should play it.
Perhaps JediKnight might take up your challenge, he likes the opening more than I do and might use the results for his blog and site:

http://tws27.blogspot.com/
http://tws27.weebly.com/
  

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
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2501
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #30 - 01/19/14 at 12:37:50
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 01/19/14 at 11:48:13:
motörhead wrote on 01/18/14 at 00:26:57:
Without that knight the Bc8 is always free for action down to g4 which makes it much more difficult for white to generate action on the king's side.


Playing the position without knowing it was either a long-Bogo or a reverse Albin, playing 9. .. Bg4 followed by 10. .. Nbd7 seemed logical. This could then enable b5 to be played even as a sacrifice.


I'm sure that's not a bad idea, either.  But I'd suspect that most BDG players would be happy with their compensation here, perhaps we'll hear from some (I'm not one).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2501
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #29 - 01/19/14 at 12:35:54
Post Tools
Motörhead, I understand the points you're making about tempi, etc.  Believe me, I do, and I've read Dvoretsky's articles about positions in reverse, and I remember specific examples from the King's Indian Attack where he basically concluded that White had no genuinely useful way of using his extra tempo and suggested that White should just play  something like Kh1!?

But I really think that you're overthinking things here.  It reminds me of Bruce Lee, who said: ""Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch, and a kick, just a kick.  After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch, a kick, no longer a kick.  Now that I understand the art, a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick."

It's clear that in this position the tempo is useful for White.  Does that mean that Black's position is indefensible?  Of course not.  But without spending hours and hours of analysis, it looks like full compensation to me, along the lines of those similar positions I posted about earlier.  And the original point I wanted to get across is that this isn't a simple, practical way of avoiding what White wants: it's very normal/typical attacking, gambit play from White, and I think that any BDG player will be comfortable in these lines.

I'm not familiar with Scheerer's work, but I understand that his lines were not necessarily what you thought was best play.

By the way, after your proposed 10.Be2 b5, I'll just play in the center with 11.Ne5 and ask what you're doing on the wing.  White has a very large advantage in development here and ideas of Ne5-c6 as well as d5-d6.  This certainly looks like "full compensation" to me, and I think that Black deserves better when facing the Blackmar-Diemer, both from theoretically and practically.

For instance 10.Be2 b5 11.Ne5 Bb7 12.Bf3 and with Rhe1 coming, I'm starting to prefer White.  If 11...Qa5 12.Qe3 hits the c-pawn and again I'm starting to like White.  And I don't really think that 11...b4 12.Na4 helps Black's cause.

But I don't want to spend any more time defending the BDG, I think I've made my point a number of times.  If Black wants to play this way he certainly can, and he still has an extra pawn.  I just don't think that he should expect an easy life.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #28 - 01/19/14 at 11:48:13
Post Tools
motörhead wrote on 01/18/14 at 00:26:57:
Without that knight the Bc8 is always free for action down to g4 which makes it much more difficult for white to generate action on the king's side.


Playing the position without knowing it was either a long-Bogo or a reverse Albin, playing 9. .. Bg4 followed by 10. .. Nbd7 seemed logical. This could then enable b5 to be played even as a sacrifice.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
motörhead
Full Member
***
Offline


Here comes the bass, thunder
in the guts...

Posts: 226
Joined: 10/09/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #27 - 01/18/14 at 22:15:44
Post Tools
ErictheRed wrote on 01/18/14 at 15:24:05:
I agree that 10...Nc6 looks better.  But I don't think I would rush with the d5-d6 push as White, anyway: maybe just 10.Be2 to complete development and trusting in the compensation.  If 10...Nd7 11.d6 should gain in strength, and if some other move I'll probably go 11.Ne5 intending Bf3 and Rhe1, because you no longer have the annoying ...Nh5 response (for instance, 10.Ne5 Nh5!).

I mean we could go back and forth like this all day, but White has compensation here.  Is he better?  Probably not.  Is the extra tempo useful?  Very much so.


Well, yes of course we should go back and forth like this. As we should be able to define the compensation somehow beyond mystic words, Or are we just romatically diemeresque?
Please remember that I referred to Scheerer's book, which is the most up-to-date source by now, and there, besides the bright words about the possible future of this variation, the standard of research to the topic is quite low, in my eyes.
As said he gave 10.d6"!"
To quote myself: "I don't think that white should push d5-d6 too early."
To quote you: "I don't think I would rush with the d5-d6 push as White."
So we both agree on this.
And my finding on 10... Nc6 etc as given is in clear contradiction to the book, where white's play rises to unjustified power as 13... Ne4! is not topic there.
So there is a must to go back and forth to find the thin line to best white play.

Btw 1:
Stefan Bücker gave "10.Bh6!" saying that the tempo plus should result in some benefit in those sharp attacking schemes. But one move is no analysis.
The question remains how white should get things going on the king's side as long as the Bc8 ranges down to g4. And I'm not sure that black is willing to obstruct it deliberately with Nbd7, as he has b7-b5 asf at hand - and that is a result of white's early castling long: giving targets to go for.

Exactly there begins the discussion of the virtue of being a tempo up. Just counting tempi does not meet the point. No side is forced to just follow common ways (well trodden paths) but can adept the play to the exact situation and information.
There is the german off beat-theoretican/nerd Rainer Schlenker who invented the term "reflex theorem" (see Keilhack "Die Tarrasch-Verteidigung"). He says that chess is a game of information and having recived a certain information will influence your play, your reflex on the very situation. In the very case: Having white's king castled long and seeing an attack coming on the king's side, black will surley refuse to play sth like Nbd7 but head for aggressive measures on his own against the given target.
I confer to another topic to make my argument clear: Just take the classical king's indian (E97etc.) and you know about the typical attacks of black's on the king's side.
And now take the exact variation in the king's indian attack. There the classical approach by black (c5/d5/e5, Nc6, Nf6, Be7) will naturally result in positions where black is a tempo down to the normal KID. And, given that black plays it best way, we can define this missing tempo on the black side: He misses 0-0.
And that completely changes the whole picture as now any avalanche of white's on the king's side (as is usual in the highly theoretical colours reversed version) will have no target there.
In other words: just counting tempi and forgeting about given informations will fail.
On your 10.Be2 (I had that too and I'm not sure about it), black can go for 10...b5 with b5-b4 in mind as the B occupies a possible retreat for the Nc3 (but there is a4 available, but then black may think about Ne4... I havn't done much on it).

Btw 2:
The idea of snatching the c5 pawn in the variation 10... exd6 11.Bxd6 Re8 was not mine. It was given in a somehow obscure way by Scheerer, and there was Bücker in Kaissiber who pointed out the fact, that white may catch the pawn c5 as there is no protecting N on d7 yet.
But that is of lesser importance. After all as black I wouldn't go for the cooperative 10... exd6 as 10...Nc6 is more to the point.
  

A walk trough the ocean of most souls would scarcely get your feet wet.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2501
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #26 - 01/18/14 at 15:24:05
Post Tools
motörhead wrote on 01/18/14 at 00:26:57:
It was pointed out here earlier that the whole Long Bogo thing is nothing but an Albin's Counter gambit reversed, and so a tempo up. I first read this interesting fact in Stefan Bücker's Kaissiber back in 1998.

But I think this tempo up gives problems - for white. As this very tempo is the missing Nb8-d7 (which as Nb1-d2 is regularly played by white in comparable Albin CG positions). Without that knight the Bc8 is allways free for action down to g4 which makes it much more difficult for white to generate action on the king's side.

It may just seem a paradox: Is the tempo plus a minus?


No, the tempo plus is certainly a plus, you're overthinking things.  Look at the position I embedded in my previous post.  In that, if Black had the additional move X...0-0-0 played it would transpose to a "Long Bogo" (with colors reversed), and it's silly to think that castling queenside is somehow undesirable.  For one, in the Albin White has the nice shot 9.Qb3 0-0-0 10.Ne5!.  Reversed and with an extra tempo for the gambiteer, Black has nothing like this.  Tempi are important, especially in opposite-side castle positions where one (or both) sides are playing for mate.

motörhead wrote on 01/18/14 at 00:26:57:
Firstly, I don't think white has much after simply 10... exd6 11.Bxd6 Re8 as after 12.Bxc5 some major exchanges may take place and white is not clearly ahead in development.


Why are you taking a pawn?  12.Bc4! and I prefer White; he has the d5-square and a weakened f7-pawn to target. 


motörhead wrote on 01/18/14 at 00:26:57:
But secondly, black too has the natural 10... Sc6...


I agree that 10...Nc6 looks better.  But I don't think I would rush with the d5-d6 push as White, anyway: maybe just 10.Be2 to complete development and trusting in the compensation.  If 10...Nd7 11.d6 should gain in strength, and if some other move I'll probably go 11.Ne5 intending Bf3 and Rhe1, because you no longer have the annoying ...Nh5 response (for instance, 10.Ne5 Nh5!).

I mean we could go back and forth like this all day, but White has compensation here.  Is he better?  Probably not.  Is the extra tempo useful?  Very much so.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
motörhead
Full Member
***
Offline


Here comes the bass, thunder
in the guts...

Posts: 226
Joined: 10/09/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #25 - 01/18/14 at 00:26:57
Post Tools
SWJediknight wrote on 01/14/14 at 11:06:42:
One issue is the so-called "Long Bogo" line, 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bf4 Bg7 7.Qd2 0-0 8.0-0-0 c5 9.d5 a6, which is met by 10.d6 with good play for White (as pointed out by Scheerer, which is why White should put the bishop on f4, not e3 or g5).


I seem to be too weak a player as I really do not understand the whole Long-Bogo thing.
Neither can I see too many differences in whether to place the dark squared bishop of white on f4 or g5 (there are cases, where the bishop is better placed on g5 to give power to d5-d6) nor can I see the virtues of that d5-d6 advance in the so called Long Bogo.
Indeed, Scheerer gives 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bf4 Bg7 7.Qd2 0-0 8.0-0-0 c5 9.d5 a6 and now he attaches an exclamation mark to 10.d6 referring to Rajmund Emanuel (whose homepage sadly vanished in the internet). But why? What the hec is so strong here?

Firstly, I don't think white has much after simply 10... exd6 11.Bxd6 Re8 as after 12.Bxc5 some major exchanges may take place and white is not clearly ahead in development.

But secondly, black too has the natural 10... Sc6 as given by Scheerer (and as allowed by the removal of control on c6 by d5-d6). Now Scheerer gives a quite interesting game with nice tactics beginning with the sequence 11.Qe3 exd6 12.Bxd6 Re8 13.Qxc5 now saying something mystifiing about active white pieces and proceeding with 13... Be6 14.Ng5 asf.
But I can't see the profits of white's action here. He played the time consuming push d4-d5-d6 and then the time consuming Dd1-d2-e3xc5 just to win back the pawn he sacrificed courageously on move 4 - five tempi for that.

And in my eyes there is an omission in Scheerer's book that reduces the relevance of the given game nearly to zero: I don't see the deeper sense in 13... Be6.
Why not directly 13... Ne4! hitting Qc5, Bd6 and Nc3? 14.Nxe4 seems forced and now after 14... Rxe4 black is the one with the truely active pieces. Esp. as there is no effective discovery attack on Qd8 by white's Bd6. Infact the black pieces are well orientated towards white's king. The strong Bg7 hits b2 and may perhaps be supported by a rook swing to b4.
When there is someone who has attacking prospects, it is surely black who has the half open c-file and may advance his queen side pawns.

And what on the other hand are the prospects of the attacker in the first degree, the BD-Gambiteer? He's doomed to defend against a naging initiative of black's.

I don't think that white should push d5-d6 too early. The argument, that it may catch the pawn c5 undefended is weak.
I'm not even sure that white should play 8.0-0-0 at such an early stage as this makes it clear very early, where black may find a target.

It was pointed out here earlier that the whole Long Bogo thing is nothing but an Albin's Counter gambit reversed, and so a tempo up. I first read this interesting fact in Stefan Bücker's Kaissiber back in 1998.

But I think this tempo up gives problems - for white. As this very tempo is the missing Nb8-d7 (which as Nb1-d2 is regularly played by white in comparable Albin CG positions). Without that knight the Bc8 is allways free for action down to g4 which makes it much more difficult for white to generate action on the king's side.

It may just seem a paradox: Is the tempo plus a minus?

(As allways this was done with a wooden board before my head - so sorry if I overlooked something Wink)
  

A walk trough the ocean of most souls would scarcely get your feet wet.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2501
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #24 - 01/14/14 at 14:23:52
Post Tools
Yuck, despite the extra pawn, that "Long Bogo" line does not look like something I'd want to play as Black.  Surely that's the kind of hacking play White wants when he gambits a pawn on the second move?  I also don't really see a way to avoid transposing to regular ...g6 lines after 4...c5, so I don't think that you're taking BDG players out of their comfort zone or anything.

Anyway regarding earlier comments, playing ...c5 and ...g6 is certainly nothing like a Benoni or Sicilian in this position.  It's exactly an Albin reversed where White has an extra tempo, though admittedly it's an extra tempo in a line that isn't considered best for Black in the Albin.  Still, the extra tempo should count for something, right?  So I'd think this is more-or-less as good for White as the Albin is for Black. 

The position is also a bit like various d-pawn openings where one side pushes their d-pawn to Q5.  Of course it's not an IQP position because White still has a pawn on c2, but some of the play will be fairly similar to various IQP lines like 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 c5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. g3 Nf6 7. Bg2 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. dxc5 d4 10. Na4, though here Black has sacrificed a different pawn than White in the BDG.

Or maybe the Winawer Counter Gambit, 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 e5 4. dxe5 d4 5. Ne4. 

It's also vaguely similar to 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 c5 4. g3 cxd4 5. Nxd4 d5 6. Bg2 e5 7. Nc2 d4 with reversed colors.  In all of these lines Black has purposely played to get his pawn to Q5, it's not a disadvantage for him.

But really it's just an Albin in reverse with an extra move for the gambiteer. Look:

White scores 65% in my database from this position, but if we gave Black an extra move like you're doing, that score would likely become much more respectable, and I'd think the evaluation would go from marginally unsound pawn sacrifice to "full compensation." 

I'm sure Black's OK and you can make this your pet defense if you'd like, but just looking at that "Long Bogo" line for instance, I'd want nothing to do with the Black pieces.  For what it's worth, I think I'd prefer White in that Long Bogo to Black in the Tarrasch with 9...d4, and the 9...d4 Tarrasch is (was?) a fairly well-regarded pawn sacrifice, which I've even played for Black so I'm not biased against it.

Play it if you want, but it looks dangerous to me.  I think there are easier ways to avoid getting hacked to death by a gambit specialist, i.e. don't give him an obvious plan of castling queenside, marching his h-pawn down the board, and sac, sac, mate. 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #23 - 01/14/14 at 11:52:01
Post Tools
SWJediknight wrote on 01/14/14 at 11:06:42:
One issue is the so-called "Long Bogo" line, 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bf4 Bg7 7.Qd2 0-0 8.0-0-0 c5 9.d5 a6,


Oddly enough, that was exactly how my recent game transposed. The possibility of d6 did vaguely bother me, so I played 9. .. Bg4 rather than 9. .. a6 intending the concession of ceding the Bishop pair to eliminate the potentially dangerous Nf3.

On a database search of conventional OTB sources, there aren't any practical examples of  the "Long Bogo".

For another view, I found this with Google "blackmar diemer long bogo"
http://blackmardiemergambit.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Rare%20BDG%20lines
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SWJediknight
God Member
*****
Offline


Alert... opponent out
of book!

Posts: 900
Joined: 03/14/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #22 - 01/14/14 at 11:06:42
Post Tools
One issue is the so-called "Long Bogo" line, 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bf4 Bg7 7.Qd2 0-0 8.0-0-0 c5 9.d5 a6, which is met by 10.d6 with good play for White (as pointed out by Scheerer, which is why White should put the bishop on f4, not e3 or g5).  If Black plays 4...c5 or 5...c5 and follows up with a kingside fianchetto, Black has to be careful of the potential transposition.

I think if Black wants a kingside fianchetto then 4...exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 is more critical (indeed, I'm not sure that it is any less critical than 5...c6 or 5...Bf5), since in the "Long Bogo" Black has a few more critical options, such as 8...Bf5, and 8...a5!? causing immediate disruption in the white queenside (suggested to me earlier by MNb, by extension of an article by Abby Marshall which recommended ...a5 against Be3).  The line with 6.Bc4 Bg7 7.0-0 0-0 8.Qe1 is dangerous if Black doesn't know what to do, but 8...Nc6 9.Qh4 Bg4 leads to advantage for Black.

3...e5 is fully playable but the snag is that it gives White a choice between near-prospectless equality with 4.dxe5, and trying to unbalance the position with 4.Nxe4 or 4.Nge2.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #21 - 01/14/14 at 10:28:03
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 01/14/14 at 10:10:58:
But I should warn you, RdC, that there are many books showing how to play against 4...c5 and 5...c5 .


There are books showing, or purporting to show, how to play against almost every opening. But if they are just database dumps and computer analysis, there's no particular reason to prefer their opinions over private analysis of what has and hasn't been played in practice.

What's marginally scary about main lines of the BDG is the way that the absence of the f pawn allows White to build an attack. So assume you take the pawn with gxf3 and White recaptures with the Knight. Then one obvious idea is Bg4, whereupon White may play h3, you take, they take with the Queen and you play c6. What then can happen is that White can triple on the f file. If alternatively you play g6, then an attacking idea is to play Bc4, 0-0 and Qe1 exploiting the missing f pawn to sneak the Queen to h4.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1387
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #20 - 01/14/14 at 10:10:58
Post Tools
But I should warn you, RdC, that there are many books showing how to play against 4...c5 and 5...c5 .
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #19 - 01/14/14 at 09:05:20
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 01/14/14 at 04:37:59:
As someone who has played the BDG for 23 years, I should say that the 4...c5 and 5...c5 lines are not very common. I do not see them that much even in numerous Internet Chess Club blitz games I play. What does that tell you? That it is rare, but one must be prepared.


It tells me exactly what I want to hear. Slight exaggeration perhaps, but in OTB chess, I face the BDG about once every ten years. Variations that are playable where my opponent is likely to have  little experience in practice are absolutely ideal.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1387
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #18 - 01/14/14 at 04:37:59
Post Tools
First of all, the correct spelling is Blackmar-Diemer, not "Diemar." If you want to criticize something, at least spell the name correctly. The surname Diemer must be more easy to spell than, say, Quaade.

Second, the variation 1 d4 d5 2 e4 dxe4 3 Nc3 e5 is nothing to be scared of. There may follow, to put it briefly:

A) 4 Qh5, the Sneiders Attack;

A1) 4...Nc6! 5 Bb5 Bd7 6 Bxc6 Bxc6 7 Qxe5+ Be7 =+

B) 4 Nge2! Rasmussen Attack;

C) 4 dxe5 Qxd1 5 Kxd1, Endgame Variation;

D) 4 Nxe4, the A. Lange Gambit;

E) 4 Be3?!

Personally, I used to play 4 Qh5 in my younger days, but since stopped. These days, I think both 4 Nge2! and 4 Nxe4 give White a decent game.

With regard to 1 d4 d5 2 e4 dxe4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 c5, this is the Brombacher Counter-Gambit. I have played both 5 d5 and 5 Bf4!? in tournament games and blitz.
Closely related to the Brombacher Counter-Gambit is the Kaulich Defense, which arises after 4...exf3 5 Nxf3 c5. I think that 6 d5 and 6 Bf4 each have their positive and negative sides.

As someone who has played the BDG for 23 years, I should say that the 4...c5 and 5...c5 lines are not very common. I do not see them that much even in numerous Internet Chess Club blitz games I play. What does that tell you? That it is rare, but one must be prepared.

  If you wish to see some games, I can share some games from a blitz-match I had back in 1997 with a friend of mine.
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #17 - 01/11/14 at 08:37:15
Post Tools
  MNb wrote on 01/10/14 at 21:57:33:
why you neglect the transposition 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c5 or 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c5. It saves you work.


I wouldn't play 3. .. Nf6. In the one game when I was expecting a Diemar, I played 1. ..d5 and then 3. ..e5. I've also tried playing e5 after Nf6, but I think it leads to potential trouble after dxe5. I'm looking for a middle game with an advantage to Black, for preference one where the advantage isn't grabbing a pawn and fending off an attack.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10515
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #16 - 01/10/14 at 21:57:33
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 01/10/14 at 21:31:33:
If the Blackmar-Diemar has any point to it at all isn't that the tabiya that White is aiming for?

No, not really. Other potential weak spots are b7 and h7.
What I don't get is this: if you like ...c5 so much (I'm not arguing it's bad or something; only that White has better prospects for full compensation than in other variations like the Hübsch 3...Nxe4) why you neglect the transposition 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c5 or 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c5. It saves you work.
  

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
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #15 - 01/10/14 at 21:31:33
Post Tools
kylemeister wrote on 01/10/14 at 21:10:37:
Well, there's the idea that the d5-pawn could get in White's way.  Smiley


Exactly, if you play 1. ..e5 against 1. e4, you are wary about a Bishop on c4, particularly if combined with a half open f file and a Rook on f1. If the Blackmar-Diemar has any point to it at all isn't that the tabiya that White is aiming for?

For that matter, not being a Caro or Scandinavian player, I wouldn't feel comfortable with a set up that was pawns on e6 and c6, Bishops on f5 and e7, Knights on f6 and d7. I would prefer a Sicilian or Benoni structure with g6, Bg7, Nf5 and c5. I don't play 1.d4 2.c4 either, so I have no particular fright of the Albin, which doesn't usually involve playing f6 anyway.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4648
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #14 - 01/10/14 at 21:10:37
Post Tools
Well, there's the idea that the d5-pawn could get in White's way.  Reminds me of Diebert-Silman, from ...How to Reassess Your Chess   Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2501
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #13 - 01/10/14 at 20:27:59
Post Tools
What's the pawn doing on c5?  I don't understand why it should be there, personally.  The point of the Albin and Budapest Gambits, for instance, are to try to make White's 2.c4 look like a waste of a tempo.

I'm not saying that Black's position is actually worse in some ultimate sense (the Blackmar Diemer is not such a great opening), but I don't understand why you'd want to invite White's pawn to d5 and have your own in the way on c5. 

Serious question: what's better for White, 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 or 1.d4 d5 2.c3 e5?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #12 - 01/10/14 at 18:37:45
Post Tools
ErictheRed wrote on 01/10/14 at 13:19:59:
You don't want to play against a tempo-up Albin, which is just about "sound" already--especially not unprepared.


It's really not a tempo-up Albin, apart from that old line with f6 someone mentioned.

I don't believe my opponent knew the opening in detail any better than I did, it's not the normal type of Diemar position you get when Black takes immediately on f3 and then plays c6 and e6. That I thought was best avoided, given you get positions where White has played Ne5 and Bc4 and an unexpected Rxf5 becomes possible.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
fling
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1583
Joined: 01/21/11
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #11 - 01/10/14 at 17:47:37
Post Tools
Sorry, a bit unclear remark. I meant that some of the main lines in 1. d4 d5 and 1. e4 c6 as in the Slav, QGD etc, or the main lines of the Caro-Kann, like the Shirov variation or The Fantasy variation, e.g, respectively, are tougher to play against. Could be suffering, but without an extra pawn.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2501
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #10 - 01/10/14 at 13:19:59
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 01/07/14 at 01:32:32:
I recently had to improvise something against the Blackmar-Diemar....


I agree with MNb that 4...c5 looks somewhat dangerous in a practical game.  You don't want to play against a tempo-up Albin, which is just about "sound" already--especially not unprepared.

For that one rated game out of 310 that I actually faced the Blackmar-Diemar (I've seen it more in Blitz) when I had to improvise something, I just played 4...e3.  The game proceeded 5.Bxe3 e6 6.Bd3 Nc6 7.Nge2 Nb4 and I was already pretty happy with my position.

Not that it's any attempt at refutation, but there are safer ways of winging it than 4...c5 5.d5.  You might argue that the popularity of 4...c6(!) is Black's attempt to profit from not having moved the c-pawn two squares, as he would have in the White side of the Albin.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10515
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #9 - 01/10/14 at 09:17:33
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 01/10/14 at 01:30:02:
I would play 3. .. e5 . So if I have notice that a Blackmar-Diemar is likely, I would play 1. .. d5 in preference to 1. .. Nf6

3...e5 is fine. It's just superfluous if you indeed intend 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.e4 dxe4 as 4.f3 just transposes. Playing 1...d5 iso 1...Nf6 doesn't guarantee anything; the logical combination is 3...e5 with the Hübsch 3...Nxe4. The latter is also fine.

fling wrote on 01/10/14 at 07:36:26:
I have looked at systems with ...c6 followed by ...Bf5 or ...Bg4. These are not very terrifying for Black, and seems more like a pawn for nothing. The main lines in these systems are something I fear more...

1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 (4...c6 5.5.Bc4 exf3 6.Nxf3 Bf5) 5.Nxf3 c6 6.Bd3 Bg4 7.h3 gives White reasonable compensation.
6.Bc4 Bf5 has been a main line since at least 30 years or something, so I don't understand your last remark. In fact this is older than the BDG itself. Milner Barry played 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 when Diemer was still a toddler.
  

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
 
fling
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1583
Joined: 01/21/11
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #8 - 01/10/14 at 07:36:26
Post Tools
I haven't seen anything that is more than a slight initiative in many of the main lines. Specifically, since I play 1. d4 d5 as Black, and intend to play 1. e4 c6, I have looked at systems with ...c6 followed by ...Bf5 or ...Bg4. These are not very terrifying for Black, and seems more like a pawn for nothing. The main lines in these systems are something I fear more...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #7 - 01/10/14 at 01:30:02
Post Tools
MNb wrote on 01/09/14 at 20:47:45:
As soon as Black takes on f3 the move neither doesn't waste time anymore nor blocks anything.
So we get 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c5 5.d5


I would play 3. .. e5 . So if I have notice that a Blackmar-Diemar is likely, I would play 1. .. d5 in preference to 1. .. Nf6

In the style of beginners, 3. ..e5 can be met with 4. Qh5. You can then sacrifice for development with 4. .. Nf6 with the point 5. Qxe5+ Be7. This parallels the idea that after 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5, you have 2. .. Nf6 "blundering" the e pawn as well as 2. .. Nc6 defending it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10515
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #6 - 01/09/14 at 20:47:45
Post Tools
In general yes but I think there might better ways for Black than playing ...c5. So does Scheerer in his book on the BDG. His main line against ...c5 runs 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c5 6.d5 g6 (he doesn't mention 6...a6, so if I'm right in my first comment the fianchetto should be questioned) 7.Bf4 Bg7 8.Qd2 O-O 9.O-O-O a6 (Nbd7 isn't mentioned by Scheerer either but gives us the Albin's reversed stuff) 10.d6!

RdC wrote on 01/09/14 at 12:09:56:
the time wasting and blocking f3 move

As soon as Black takes on f3 the move neither doesn't waste time anymore nor blocks anything.
So we get 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c5 5.d5
a) 5...e6 6.fxe4 exd5 7.exd5
b) 5...Bf5 6.g4 Bg6 7.g5
in both cases with quite good play for White, especially when compared with some other lines. So your argument doesn't apply in this case. I'm not a fan of the BDG, but don't think we should think lightly of it either.
  

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
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #5 - 01/09/14 at 12:09:56
Post Tools
MNb wrote on 01/09/14 at 09:46:25:
Then you're not familiar with Lamford's and Raetsky's books on the Albin's and have never heard of the Norwegian IM Ernst Rojahn, who played this in corr games in the 40's and 50's.

The aforementioned Rojahn preferred ...Qxf6 in similar lines.
Disclaimer: due to silicon analysis the idea is refuted. With colors reversed and an extra tempo though ....


Evidently not. The practical verdict on the Diemar is much the same as on the Kings Gambit, that there are plenty of decent lines against it and it's really just a question of maintaining the half pawn or so of advantage handed over in the opening and not falling into any of the tactical snares. Personal style, but I'd prefer half a pawn of initiative to a extra pawn but minus half a pawn of initiative. That's why I like the idea of meeting the time wasting and blocking f3 move with c5 or e5.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10515
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #4 - 01/09/14 at 09:46:25
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 01/08/14 at 14:47:02:
I don't think Black ever gives away a pawn with f6 in the Albin.

Then you're not familiar with Lamford's and Raetsky's books on the Albin's and have never heard of the Norwegian IM Ernst Rojahn, who played this in corr games in the 40's and 50's.
I know games with this idea from before WW-2. A more recent, spectacular example:

Barbora-Benesch
corr CSR 1981
0-1



I myself won a corr game with 11.Bxh3 Qxh3 12.b4 Ng4 13.Bb2 h5 14.b5 Nce5 15.Qc2 h4 16.Qf5+ Kb8 17.Qg5 Bc5 0-1 De Bruin-MNb, corr NBC 1995.
The aforementioned Rojahn preferred ...Qxf6 in similar lines.
Disclaimer: due to silicon analysis the idea is refuted. With colors reversed and an extra tempo though ....
  

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
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #3 - 01/08/14 at 14:47:02
Post Tools
MNb wrote on 01/07/14 at 16:09:04:
Black must beware not getting an Albin's Countergambit with colors reversed and a tempo less, so I distrust 6...g6.


I don't think Black ever gives away a pawn with f6 in the Albin. But I agree with an earlier poster that taking on e4 with the Knight and then playing e5 looks simpler.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10515
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #2 - 01/07/14 at 16:09:04
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 01/07/14 at 01:32:32:
So 4. .. c5. 5. d5 isn't forced, but seems a reasonable try. Black can take on f3 and then play either 6. .. g6 or even 6. ..a6.

Black must beware not getting an Albin's Countergambit with colors reversed and a tempo less, so I distrust 6...g6. Despite Rybka claiming enough compensation after 6...a6 7.Bf4 e6 8.dxe6 Qxd1+ 9. Rxd1 Bxe6 I have strong doubts.
The adventurous move is Gedult's 5.Bf4.
  

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
 
katar
Senior Member
****
Offline


look another year went
by

Posts: 433
Location: LA
Joined: 09/21/05
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #1 - 01/07/14 at 02:20:13
Post Tools
You might consider 3...Nxe4 4.Nxe4 dxe4 as a simple solution.  Idea: 5.f3 e5 or 5.Bc4 Nc6 (threat Qxd4) 6.c3 e5.
  

2078 uscf
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
01/07/14 at 01:32:32
Post Tools
I recently had to improvise something against the Blackmar-Diemar. The game started 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 ( so I'm thinking about how to play in the Veresov), but now 3. e4 (If I had thought that this was likely I would have considered playing 1. ..d5). As I don't play the French, then 3. .. dxe4 and now the expected 4. f3. I don't have a high opinion of this move, blocking the square for the Knight at g1 and the Queen at d1 ought to give Black chances. So 4. .. c5. 5. d5 isn't forced, but seems a reasonable try. Black can take on f3 and then play either 6. .. g6 or even 6. ..a6.

The position remains difficult, but Black has an extra pawn and dangerous attacking lines with Bc4 are less possible.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo