Latest Updates:
Normal Topic Bayonet attack (Read 1047 times)
petertohen
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 15
Joined: 01/08/18
Bayonet attack
01/12/18 at 07:26:16
Post Tools
What's your ideas about following variation (I use move order of the game Shirov-Gurevich, Prague 2002):
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Nf3 Bd6 5.Bd3 Ne7 6.oo Bg4 7.h3 (if you go to next tabla position via Kochyev-Psakhis,Tallin 1987 game, then h3 is given a ?! because of weakness on the kingside) Bh5 8.Re1 (8.Bg5 is the move in Shirov-Gurevich, but it's another story) Nc6 9.c3 Qd7.
It's the tabla position.

In the game Kochyev-Psakhis, White loses one tempo with the a-pawn advance: 10.a4 ooo 11.a5 (11.Nbd2 g5 O'Chee-Chow,Sydney 2002 ; 11. b4 g5 Bagyansky-Barva,Paks 1986 and with the help of my computer 12.Bxg5 leads to an equal and unclear game) g5! (Psakhis played 11..f6).


In the tabla position, if White loses time then Black can  play the bayonet attack with f6 added. Thus what do you think about 10.b4! (at current time I have no better move than 10..f6) ?

I add that Meijers likes the variation without h3-Bh5. ...Meijers-Berg,Stockholm 1999 or Meijers-Masserey,Geneve 2001, and maybe last game is one good example that Black must king castle and doesn't play f6 versus b4 thrust.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo