Leon_Trotsky wrote on 06/24/19 at 05:28:15:


Demuth does comment on similar lines but is not a fan of playing b3 in this type of reverse Benoni structure.

kylemeister wrote on 06/23/19 at 16:05:19:

kylemeister wrote on 06/23/19 at 16:05:19:


Demuth comments on 2 b3 in his book The Modernized Reti (page 275 first edition & 279 second edition)....he doesn't like it because of 2... d5 but if white is happy with then playing 3 e3 perhaps it is playable.

On 2...d6 white can play 3 c4 transposes into the symmetrical lines Demuth recommends.

I read somewhere that 1.Nf3 c5 2.b3 is not correct. Anybody knows this?

thx, kyle

The more I check the lines, the more I like it. Especially the reversed nimzo.

TN wrote on 09/12/17 at 02:13:10:


You are true. But against 1.Nf3 Nf6 I play 2.c4. And against 1.Nf3 c5 I play 2.c4. So the only concern is 1...d5 and 2...c5 by Black.

I am experimenting with 1.Nf3 d5 2.e3 (I have both Cummings and Smith e3 books) and I think the most challenging line for White is the Tarrasch (the non-g3 Tarrasch).

1.Nf3 d5 2.e3 Nf6 3.c4 is OK for me (QGA with no d4, or some e3-English, or Cummings-anti-QGD...)

1.Nf3 d5 2.e3 c5 (not sure how often I would face this) 3.c4 d4 4.b4 is ok for me (reversed Blumenfeld)

1.Nf3 d5 2.e3 e6 3.c4 c5 is forcing myself to play d4 (or Black would play it) and now I have the Timid-Tarrasch XD

Any thoughts how to play in the third option (or maybe there is scope to play for a win in this structures as Smith points out with his a3) ?


The 1.Nf3 d5 2.b3 seems interesting. What type of play are you aiming for, guys? Where could I find some material on this? Or what games are interesting to check? It seems to me that a Zukertort would appear yes or yes in the board...

Thx !

I am exploring myself this move orders to also prevent 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 d4 (not the end of the world, but Black is more than ok here I think).

My first thought was to play 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3, but it can transpose to a reversed KID if Black plays c5-Nc6-e5. I don't play KID as Black myself, so maybe it's not the best option even if it's a decent option. It works ok against QGD or Slav setups by Black.

Secondly, there was 2.e3, a trendy option and with a book out there (e3 Poisson). I can play some kind of reversed Nimzo+Ragozin (as I played these openings as Black) if Black plays 2.c5 or some kind of Tarrasch if Black plays Nf6-e6-c5 in that order. I don't know if e3 Tarrasch (not Bg2 anymore) is worth investigating.

Third, play as Bologan recommends in the 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 d4 line, with b4 and Na3. These lines with d4 by Black are interesting if Black has spent a tempo already with e6 (he wants to play e5 later to strengthen the center) but directly and the possibility of f6-e5 without a Knight on f6... I am a bit skeptical.

And now I see you guys are playing with the possibility of 2.b3, to play a reversed QID maybe, or some kind of Zukertort...

We'll see how it goes...

PD: Maybe it would have been easier to make a repertoire with 1.f4 (in my case is a second rep after my normal 1.d4 2.c4 stuff) xDD

3.e3

More than the early e3, it seems to me that many of these move order issues are avoided simply by delaying c4.

I'll have to look at Axel Smith's book. I've been liking 1.Nf3, 2.b3. The early e3 seems somewhat committal: delaying it leaves options that the light-squared bishop might go to g3.

Those e3 QID lines are fascinating, though. I played them a few times in cc: really liked White's play...

Yes, from what I understand, e3 Poison is written with the specific purpose of exploring your question regarding move orders to reach the generic set-up you mentioned.

I've been bashing around with a variety of ways of getting to a fairly standard position for White: pawns on b3, c4, d4, & e3; knights on f3 & c3; bishops on b2 & e2; queen on c2, etc. The recent fun has involved starting with 1.Nf3, 2.b3 or, simply, 1.b3. I don't pretend that White has any tangible advantage here, beyond the fact that White's plan is pretty clear and relatively easy to play.

This morning at Innsbruck, Tarlev-Huber began 1.Nf3 d5 2.e3 and acquired the same set-up. Of course, White can also get there via 1.c4 and, frequently, though less reliably, from 1.d4. I doubt this has any great theoretical value, but is there a particular move order that tends to push Black into a less desirable set-up? Does anyone have any strong feelings or preferences?