(UTC)
Latest Updates:
  ChessPub Forum › Chess Publishing Openings › 1. e4 ... › Caro-Kann › Bronstein-Larsen
(Moderators: proustiskeen, Hadron)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Bronstein-Larsen (Read 55608 times)
HgMan
God Member
*****
Offline


Demand me nothing: What
you know, you know

Posts: 2330
Location: Up on Cripple Creek
Joined: 11/09/04
Gender: Male
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #99 - 07/10/18 at 15:06:41
Post Tools
6...Nd7 seems to be a specialty of Maxim Turov's. His games are quite instructive. It may be that his grasp of the ensuing positions is superior to 6...Nd7 as an independent choice, but the results are heartening. The move also gets some treatment in Dangerous Weapons: The Caro-Kann. It's in a section with 6...Qd5. We analyzed that a bit above. I doubt there's anything wrong with it, but I also recall that it failed to grab me.
  
"Luck favours the prepared mind."  --Louis Pasteur
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
CapaCat63
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline



Posts: 5
Location: Germany
Joined: 02/25/17
Gender: Male
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #98 - 07/10/18 at 14:15:54
Post Tools
I did not see the line with 6. ... Nd7 before but it seems that it was played in some high level games. Do you have sources for more info about it?

By the way: I'm not a big fan of the Bronstein-variation main line with 6. ... Bf5 but liked 6. ... Qd5 more, see e.g. Spassky-Seirawan 1989 or Tiviakov-Nisipeanu 2004.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HgMan
God Member
*****
Offline


Demand me nothing: What
you know, you know

Posts: 2330
Location: Up on Cripple Creek
Joined: 11/09/04
Gender: Male
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #97 - 07/10/18 at 05:39:14
Post Tools
Several months later, I have played the Caro-Kann consistently against 1.e4. In maybe a dozen games, however, only one wasn't an Advanced or Panov-Botvinnik Attack. Which is to say that I haven't had much opportunity to try the Bronstein-Larsen. To make matters worse, the lone opponent had to withdraw from the tournament prematurely for health reasons. The game looked like this:

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.c3 Nd7 7.g3 Nb6 8.Bg2 h5 9.Nf3 Bg4 10.O-O h4 11.h3 Bh5 12.g4 Bg6 13.Bd2 Qc7 14.Qc1 e6 15.Re1 Nc4

I'm not sure my play was terribly convincing, but I suspect Black can hold. More research and preparation to come...
  
"Luck favours the prepared mind."  --Louis Pasteur
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HgMan
God Member
*****
Offline


Demand me nothing: What
you know, you know

Posts: 2330
Location: Up on Cripple Creek
Joined: 11/09/04
Gender: Male
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #96 - 10/07/17 at 20:26:20
Post Tools
Laramonet wrote on 10/07/17 at 16:43:03:
[quote author=7B547E525D330 link=1505013226/69#69 date=1506198237]On further examination, here's what frightens me the most:

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Nf3 which shouldn't cause much grief 6...Bf5 7.Bd3!? Bg6 8.0-0 Qc7 9.c4 Nd7 10.d5! There's nothing outwardly problematic here beyond the fact that Black is about to get wiped off the board in very short order. 0-0-0 11.Be3 c5 12.Be2 Kb8 13.Rc1 f5 (13...c5 is better) 14.c5 Nxc5 15.Bxc5 e4 16.Bd4 exf3 17.Bxh8 fxe2 18.Qxe2 Bd6 19.Bf6 Bxh2+ 20.Kh1 Bf4 21.Rc4! 1-0 Matulovic-Larsen(!!) (Hastings 1972). I'm coming to terms with the fact that Larsen didn't actually play B16 particularly well. His efforts are far less theoretically significant or consistent than Bronstein's. Or Turov's, for that matter.

In short, I think there are some obvious improvements that can be made to Black's play in the game above, but rather than the 6.c3 lines with a fianchetto or with 7.Ne2 as previously discussed, I find this very natural 6.Nf3 and the rapid c2-c4 try more potentially dangerous. The absence of a bishop on c4 makes Black's thematic Nd7-b6-d5 seem slow and awkward and irrelevant. The natural try is 6...Bg4, but I think it's interesting that Turov has shifted to ...Bf5 away from ...Bg4. Nevertheless:

6...Bg4 7.Be2 Qc7 8.Be3 Nd7 9.c4 e6 10.0-0 0-0-0 11.Qa4 Kb8 looks okay for Black.


Laramonet wrote on 10/07/17 at 16:43:41:
I'm just trying to catch up. Hasn't 13....,c5 already been played on move 11 ?



Ugh. I'm sorry. That should read 11...e5.
  
"Luck favours the prepared mind."  --Louis Pasteur
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Laramonet
Senior Member
****
Offline


Gwyddbwll am byth !

Posts: 346
Location: Kidwelly
Joined: 03/16/07
Gender: Male
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #95 - 10/07/17 at 16:43:41
Post Tools
I'm just trying to catch up. Hasn't 13....,c5 already been played on move 11 ?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Laramonet
Senior Member
****
Offline


Gwyddbwll am byth !

Posts: 346
Location: Kidwelly
Joined: 03/16/07
Gender: Male
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #94 - 10/07/17 at 16:43:03
Post Tools
HgMan wrote on 09/23/17 at 20:23:57:
On further examination, here's what frightens me the most:

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6+ gxf6 6.Nf3 which shouldn't cause much grief 6...Bf5 7.Bd3!? Bg6 8.0-0 Qc7 9.c4 Nd7 10.d5! There's nothing outwardly problematic here beyond the fact that Black is about to get wiped off the board in very short order. 0-0-0 11.Be3 c5 12.Be2 Kb8 13.Rc1 f5 (13...c5 is better) 14.c5 Nxc5 15.Bxc5 e4 16.Bd4 exf3 17.Bxh8 fxe2 18.Qxe2 Bd6 19.Bf6 Bxh2+ 20.Kh1 Bf4 21.Rc4! 1-0 Matulovic-Larsen(!!) (Hastings 1972). I'm coming to terms with the fact that Larsen didn't actually play B16 particularly well. His efforts are far less theoretically significant or consistent than Bronstein's. Or Turov's, for that matter.

In short, I think there are some obvious improvements that can be made to Black's play in the game above, but rather than the 6.c3 lines with a fianchetto or with 7.Ne2 as previously discussed, I find this very natural 6.Nf3 and the rapid c2-c4 try more potentially dangerous. The absence of a bishop on c4 makes Black's thematic Nd7-b6-d5 seem slow and awkward and irrelevant. The natural try is 6...Bg4, but I think it's interesting that Turov has shifted to ...Bf5 away from ...Bg4. Nevertheless:

6...Bg4 7.Be2 Qc7 8.Be3 Nd7 9.c4 e6 10.0-0 0-0-0 11.Qa4 Kb8 looks okay for Black.


Hello Hg man,
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4904
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #93 - 10/04/17 at 04:53:48
Post Tools
HgMan wrote on 09/16/17 at 21:23:09:
But it did get me wondering: I'll have to look, but do any of the books on pawns and pawn structures treat playing with doubled pawns as an advantage? Baburin?  Marovic?


I noticed that there is an entire book (by Sergey Kasparov) about doubled pawns (Chapter 1: ...gxf6).

https://www.russell-enterprises.com/rei-publications/doubled-pawns

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5856bd64ff7c50433c3803db/t/59725effbebafb...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HgMan
God Member
*****
Offline


Demand me nothing: What
you know, you know

Posts: 2330
Location: Up on Cripple Creek
Joined: 11/09/04
Gender: Male
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #92 - 10/02/17 at 16:41:38
Post Tools
I suspect that if there's a criticism of this line, it's that it is a little too simple. It's pretty obvious what Black's strengths and concessions are. I don't think this is cheapo, necessarily, but I take your point. That said, I do think there's some interesting nuance here, and that Black can punish the White player who thinks the set-up is bunk. All in all, it comes down to learning themes and ideas more than specific move orders. Playing through dozens of games (rather quickly), I came to identify some basic rules or guidelines about when to or when not to advance a pawn—and/or which thematic response was required depending on White's play.
  
"Luck favours the prepared mind."  --Louis Pasteur
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1672
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #91 - 10/02/17 at 13:54:14
Post Tools
Dink Heckler wrote on 10/02/17 at 12:26:36:
Maybe I just need to adjust my mindset ...

It helps to know yourself. I noticed that whenever I played hypermodern openings with black, I was wanting to put a pawn in the center at the earliest opportunity, even if it was premature. (For instance, ...e7-e5?! in this Bronstein-Larsen thing.) Once I figured that out, I changed to putting a pawn in the center on move one: 1.e4 e5 and 1.d4 d5. My life in the black openings became much easier. It's true that lower-rated whites get a greater chance to draw, but at least I get to practice the endgame.

Dink Heckler wrote on 10/02/17 at 12:26:36:
if you mistime a pawn break, things can go alarmingly bad very quickly

On the flip side, this can be potentially confusing for the white player. At every move they have to consider that black might lash out. Constantly analyzing +/- positions that don't appear on the board might mess with their objectivity. I can see certain "optimistic" players doing quite badly with white.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dink Heckler
God Member
*****
Offline


Love-Forty

Posts: 878
Joined: 02/01/07
Gender: Male
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #90 - 10/02/17 at 12:26:36
Post Tools
I hear you guys - eminently reasonable comments. Maybe I just need to adjust my mindset; whenever I try this line, I can't really shake the feeling that I'm in cheapo mode. The problem I always run into here is if you mistime a pawn break, things can go alarmingly bad very quickly, so you really need quite a refined sensitivity to these matters to play this line well, which is why I suspect it's structurally unpopular. Still, it's precisely this unpopularity which creates the possibilities to navigate lesser-known positions where White players aren't likely to understand all the nuances.
  
'Am I any good at tactics?'
'Computer says No!'
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Keano
God Member
*****
Offline


Money doesn't talk, it
swears.

Posts: 2916
Location: Toulouse
Joined: 05/25/05
Gender: Male
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #89 - 09/29/17 at 16:46:41
Post Tools
Dink Heckler wrote on 09/29/17 at 11:56:16:
Interesting stuff in this thread, but it doesn't really seem to move the needle on the long-held consensus - fishing for practical chances in a slightly dubious position. Which is fine, as long as we recognise what we're up to.

Fair assessment?


Fair enough - although I would compare it to the Pirc. Most top players dont really respect that either, but the GMs who play it like it precisely because of that.

At the end of the day we dont all have to play the number one sound choice otherwise every single tournament would be Berlin Defences and Marshalls, Petroffs etc.

The advantage of the ...gxf6 line for me is that it immediately creates an imbalance. It would be a useful line to have up the sleeve IMO.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HgMan
God Member
*****
Offline


Demand me nothing: What
you know, you know

Posts: 2330
Location: Up on Cripple Creek
Joined: 11/09/04
Gender: Male
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #88 - 09/29/17 at 16:23:52
Post Tools
Probably, but I'm not sure I'm seeing the "dubious" part anymore. Yes: Black surrenders structural pawn integrity for some counterplay, but in most lines can also opt for a pretty solid equality. 5...gxf6 looks like it has the relative merit of creating some imbalances at minimal risk to the second player. No: this isn't winning for Black. But it does give Black some good chances of playing for a win while not getting run off the board. If my run through the databases suggests anything, there's also a lot of chess to be played here. In many lines, White or Black can deviate from "theory" and just play chess. In those kinds of situations, the player with greater familiarity with the position's nuances likely stands well. I don't want to oversell this, but it's rare for Black to get crushed...
  
"Luck favours the prepared mind."  --Louis Pasteur
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dink Heckler
God Member
*****
Offline


Love-Forty

Posts: 878
Joined: 02/01/07
Gender: Male
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #87 - 09/29/17 at 11:56:16
Post Tools
Interesting stuff in this thread, but it doesn't really seem to move the needle on the long-held consensus - fishing for practical chances in a slightly dubious position. Which is fine, as long as we recognise what we're up to.

Fair assessment?
  
'Am I any good at tactics?'
'Computer says No!'
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Keano
God Member
*****
Offline


Money doesn't talk, it
swears.

Posts: 2916
Location: Toulouse
Joined: 05/25/05
Gender: Male
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #86 - 09/28/17 at 18:48:47
Post Tools
I've looked at a couple of Jansa wins with the 6.Nf3 Bg4 line and it just seems too easy for White to me.

Thinking 6...Bf5 may be a more practical choice.

Or maybe not, trying to make the 6...Bg4 line work now Smiley

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nf6 5. Nxf6+ gxf6 6. Nf3 Bg4 7. Be2 Qc7
8. O-O Nd7 9. Nh4 Bxe2 10. Qxe2 O-O-O 11. c4 e6 12. g3 Rg8 13. d5 Bc5!? (TN, 13...Qe5 has been universally played)

For starters you cant take on e6 because I have a nice ...Rxg3+ cheapo lined up. Has White a good continuation here?
« Last Edit: 09/28/17 at 19:59:40 by Keano »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HgMan
God Member
*****
Offline


Demand me nothing: What
you know, you know

Posts: 2330
Location: Up on Cripple Creek
Joined: 11/09/04
Gender: Male
Re: Bronstein-Larsen
Reply #85 - 09/28/17 at 05:16:06
Post Tools
15.Bf4 appears more persuasive.
  
"Luck favours the prepared mind."  --Louis Pasteur
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
Topic Tools
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board Top  

ChessPub Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge