Latest Updates:
Normal Topic Why not play the Rubinstein? (Read 1073 times)
MW
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 43
Joined: 04/20/18
Gender: Male
Re: Why not play the Rubinstein?
Reply #5 - 10/16/18 at 01:12:00
Post Tools
Hi FizzySoda,

It may be worth getting a copy Langrock's second edition on the Rubinstein (2018). He offers 16 pages of coverage on the 7 c3 line. Longrock prefers 7....c5 to 7....Be7. His comment around 7....Be7 being that it does not offer equality.  Whilst he doesn't go into any detail other than to say "one difficult line following 7..Be7 is 8 Bd3 O-O; 9Qe2 b6; 10 Bf4 ! Bb7;  11 O-0-O adding the comment that Black's problems are more difficult than the computer first thinks". 

Hope this is of some help.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
FizzySoda
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 2
Joined: 10/01/18
Gender: Male
Re: Why not play the Rubinstein?
Reply #4 - 10/15/18 at 13:59:16
Post Tools
I have been looking at this as well. I have Vitugov's book on the french-- a bit dated by now.

I am a bit put off by how worked out 7.c3 (kasparov - ponomariov) line is when black plays 7..c5. Is the 7..Be7 line fine for black? I've clicked through some of vitiugov's analysis on it and it seems hair raising. His main game for that line is MVL - Tratar, Herakio, 2007.

The highest rated players that I compete against are typically FM's. I'm not even sure that they would know much in these lines. I was recently at a large Open SWISS in America, and of all the French games I saw only I and another guy braved anything but the exchange variation with white.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Leon_Trotsky
Full Member
***
Offline


Кто был никем — тот станет
всем!

Posts: 190
Location: Barcelona, CAT
Joined: 08/11/17
Gender: Male
Re: Why not play the Rubinstein?
Reply #3 - 10/02/18 at 00:48:34
Post Tools
Given that a few months ago there was a 2th edition of the Langrock book, I think it is opposite--Rubinstein is actually more popular now than before.

I think that it works well with 3. Cd2 players who learn a lot of theory on 3...Cf6 and 3...c5 and forget everything else. Especially those who either study very little of 3...a6, 3...Ae7, they probably only superficially studied a reply to 3...dxe4.

Also as an alternative to whatever you play against 3. Cc3, for some crazy attacking player who self destructs in slower positions, Rubinstein is particularly a good choice   Cheesy
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TonyRo
God Member
*****
Offline


I'm gonna crack your skull!

Posts: 1730
Location: Cleveland, OH
Joined: 11/26/07
Gender: Male
Re: Why not play the Rubinstein?
Reply #2 - 10/01/18 at 19:59:42
Post Tools
I have been playing the Rubinstein and studying with Georg on and off for a while now. He's a super nice guy, and has sold me on some of the virtues of it. Of course, it requires a certain temperament that most don't have.

There are lines that pop up here and there that are quite annoying, e.g. the Kasparov line with 7.c3!? or the line Caruana used against Meier in Dortmund. You need to be very well prepared in places to survive if White really knows what he's doing. The Negi line has been defanged in my opinion, the MVL-Meier game being the key. The good news is that I've actually never faced anyone who's known what they're doing. The 1.e4 lexicon is just so large that I think for the most part the 1.e4 are simply spending all their time elsewhere. Sensible, really!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
gillbod
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 108
Joined: 03/26/13
Re: Why not play the Rubinstein?
Reply #1 - 10/01/18 at 19:46:35
Post Tools
I don't think there's too much wrong with the Rubinstein. Georg Meier has got quite far it!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
nocteus
Full Member
***
Offline


'Help your pieces, they
will help you.' Morphy

Posts: 105
Joined: 04/29/11
Why not play the Rubinstein?
09/30/18 at 13:33:49
Post Tools
Hi,
I kept wondering what could be the reasons for prefering to play the Caro-Kann, or French Classical over the Rubinstein. They often reach similar positions but the nuances are not obvious to me. Hence this question.

From what I gather, with the Rubinstein, you get a compact repertoire but need to accept the exchange :
1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

You can build around a similar structure around the Classical, but
with the exchange still and the Steinitz added:



The Caro-Kann also reaches similar positions in the Smyslov variation, with even more early deviations, but with no symmetrical line. For instance ;
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo