Gambit wrote on 10/31/15 at 06:06:19:


1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 or 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.e4 e6.
And I am very, very happy

I should respond to some comments here.

First, many 2700 players do not want to take chances with the BDG, not when they have all these solid lines to play. So, chalk up conservative play and a reluctance to experiment as two reasons why 2700 -rated players do not play the BDG.

Second, you talk about 5...g6 line in correspondence. Me, I prefer over-the-board chess, where the time limit is far less and computers are not allowed in the tournament room. So, that should up the odds for a honest game, head-to-head, without any computer assistance. Everyone knows computers are used in correspondence chess!

Third, I saw some under - 2700 GMs play the BDG. Check the databases. GMs Korneev, Blaaw, Tartakower all come to mind. There should be others.

Fourth, I am not surprised that high rated players avoid the fun with 4...e3.

Fifth, I regularly beat GMs and other titled players in blitz on the Internet. In regular tournaments, I win against titled players as well.

Sixth, there are many lines against 5...g6. These include 6 Bc4 Bg7 7 00 00 8 Qe1 Studier Attack; 6 Bc4 Bg7 7 00 00 8 h3!? , the Studier-Zilbermints Attack; 6 Bc4 Bg4 7 Bf4 with 8 Qd2, 9 000 and a Kingside attack.

The Albin is with black though, so it is different. I've looked a bit at the Albin, and I would be very surprised if black is objectively losing. You just get some complicated position that is favorable for white, but within reason. The BDG is the same: you get a complicated position where black is a little better. Most strong players don't want to worse with white right out of the opening.

Particularly when a strong player is playing against a patzer (no offense, I am in the same range), it is logical to not accept the BDG because you don't want to get a position that your opponent knows much more than you. I see it like this: if they accept the BDG, then they have a 15% chance of losing out of the opening and an 80% chance of winning otherwise: expect value of accepting is 0.8

If they decline, then they have maybe a 5% chance of losing out of the opening, and a 90% of winning otherwise: expect value of declining is 0.9.

If they were playing someone who was more similar to their strength, then the increased chance of winning if they get out of the opening would dominate the chance of losing in the opening, so they would accept.

I've never faced it. Looking through some correspondence games, it looks like 5...g6 does pretty well.
If the BDG was truly good then strong players would sometimes play it. In my database, only one 2600+ player has played the BDG against a title player (Gashimov-Karpov, world BLITZ 2009), and it is possible that that was actually from a Caro Kann move order. If strong players thought the BDG was good, then they would use it as a surprise weapon. They must think that their opponents can defuse it over the board, as I am sure that Kramnik (for example) doesn't have much prep for it.

I'll admit that it is fairly dangerous on the patzer level. I'm not sure that I would be OK with black against an extremely well prepared opponent. However, if someone is willing to put the work in, then they shouldn't have anything to fear.

When is the last time someone over 2700 played the BDG in a slow game? Probably never.

1...e6 !!

I agree with Tony that 1...Nf6 might be easier or as easy if Black is willing to play ...d6, since this requires London and Colle players to do the one thing they hate most: think. But if we assume that Black does not play g6 Indians then I would agree with gauss that 1...d5 is easier/stronger, though only in a very marginal sense of course.

I don't think this is an unreasonable question, as the answer is clearly 1...d5. There is no torre attack, no tromp. Richter/Jobava attack comes after both 1...Nf6 and 1...d5. The only things I can think of that black now has to face are the psuedo tromp, the psuedo torre, and the BDG, all of which are a joke.

This has been done to death before. Pointlessly.