Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Should the opening sections be reorganised? (Read 3628 times)
stockhausen
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing
so much!

Posts: 23
Joined: 01/19/19
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #60 - 10/13/19 at 08:18:46
Post Tools
Well Chris Ward has now quite clearly set out his opinion on the site redesign!   Roll Eyes
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Online


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3021
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #59 - 10/09/19 at 00:36:38
Post Tools
stockhausen wrote on 10/07/19 at 16:07:07:
RoleyPoley wrote on 10/07/19 at 11:31:52:
Stigma wrote on 10/06/19 at 20:24:28:
RoleyPoley wrote on 10/06/19 at 19:05:37:
Keeping the Benoni section in with the Nimzo, because some people use the Nf6 & e6 move order to reach it, doesnt really make sense to me - i used to play the benoni through that move order and i never played the nimzo.

Then what did you do against 3.Nc3? Play the Modern Benoni anyway?

"some people use the Nf6 & e6 move order to reach it" has to be an understatement. Maybe it's different on amaetur level, but among titled players I believe more than 50% of Benoni players use the 2...e6 move order, to avoid the Taimanov attack and/or get different options against the Modern main line.


Yes, at the time i was playing the modern benoni against nc3 as well. I also used the 2c5 and 1c5 move orders to reach it. I have thought about playing it again via a 1..e6 move order more recently! I play at a lower level of the chess ladder, so I didnt worry too much about the sharper stuff at white's disposal - most games would end up in classical, with me able to swap off on f3.

Is that 50+% figure compared with just the Nf6 + c5 move order or also taking into account transitions from the KI?



As I understand it, transpositions from the KID to the Benoni tend to be in less theoretically important lines (correct me if I'm wrong).

Yes, Black's most theoretically approved transpositions from the KID to the Modern Benoni are in lines like the Sämisch, the Four Pawns' attack, the Seirawan system, The Kramer/Hungarian attack and the h3 lines. These are not exactly sidelines, and h3 lines especially are considered quite critical these days, but it's fair to say the Classical and the Fianchetto are the absolute main lines of the KID.

Actually there's not much to stop Black from playing an early ...c5 against the Fianchetto either, though White doesn't have to answer d4-d5: dxc5 ideas and Symmetrical English transpositions are also on the table. If Black tries to transpose against the Classical, White can go d4-d5 but recapture with the e-pawn instead of the c-pawn (which is also a serious issue in the Makogonov with Nf3 and h3), or stay put with the d-pawn and offer a Maroczy bind.

@RoleyPoley: Theoretically the point of the 2...e6 move order "should" be to play the Nimzo-Indian against 3.Nc3, but a full Modern Benoni repertoire with 2...e6 does have some psychological point at least. I have even played it myself once in a rated game.

My "more than 50%" guess was compared to the 2...c5 move order, yes. I don't know that the transpositions from the King's Indian happen frequently enough to shake that estimate, though it propbably depends how you classify the Sämisch/Kapengut and Four Pawns' lines; they occur more often from the King's Indian move order and some consider them really KID lines for that reason.

Incidentally, two of the world's biggest experts on combining the Modern Benoni with the Nimzo-Indian via 2...e6 are long-time ChessPublishing columnists.
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
stockhausen
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing
so much!

Posts: 23
Joined: 01/19/19
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #58 - 10/07/19 at 16:07:07
Post Tools
RoleyPoley wrote on 10/07/19 at 11:31:52:
Stigma wrote on 10/06/19 at 20:24:28:
RoleyPoley wrote on 10/06/19 at 19:05:37:
Keeping the Benoni section in with the Nimzo, because some people use the Nf6 & e6 move order to reach it, doesnt really make sense to me - i used to play the benoni through that move order and i never played the nimzo.

Then what did you do against 3.Nc3? Play the Modern Benoni anyway?

"some people use the Nf6 & e6 move order to reach it" has to be an understatement. Maybe it's different on amaetur level, but among titled players I believe more than 50% of Benoni players use the 2...e6 move order, to avoid the Taimanov attack and/or get different options against the Modern main line.


Yes, at the time i was playing the modern benoni against nc3 as well. I also used the 2c5 and 1c5 move orders to reach it. I have thought about playing it again via a 1..e6 move order more recently! I play at a lower level of the chess ladder, so I didnt worry too much about the sharper stuff at white's disposal - most games would end up in classical, with me able to swap off on f3.

Is that 50+% figure compared with just the Nf6 + c5 move order or also taking into account transitions from the KI?



As I understand it, transpositions from the KID to the Benoni tend to be in less theoretically important lines (correct me if I'm wrong).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RoleyPoley
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 567
Location: London
Joined: 12/29/13
Gender: Male
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #57 - 10/07/19 at 11:31:52
Post Tools
Stigma wrote on 10/06/19 at 20:24:28:
RoleyPoley wrote on 10/06/19 at 19:05:37:
Keeping the Benoni section in with the Nimzo, because some people use the Nf6 & e6 move order to reach it, doesnt really make sense to me - i used to play the benoni through that move order and i never played the nimzo.

Then what did you do against 3.Nc3? Play the Modern Benoni anyway?

"some people use the Nf6 & e6 move order to reach it" has to be an understatement. Maybe it's different on amaetur level, but among titled players I believe more than 50% of Benoni players use the 2...e6 move order, to avoid the Taimanov attack and/or get different options against the Modern main line.


Yes, at the time i was playing the modern benoni against nc3 as well. I also used the 2c5 and 1c5 move orders to reach it. I have thought about playing it again via a 1..e6 move order more recently! I play at a lower level of the chess ladder, so I didnt worry too much about the sharper stuff at white's disposal - most games would end up in classical, with me able to swap off on f3.

Is that 50+% figure compared with just the Nf6 + c5 move order or also taking into account transitions from the KI?

  

"As Mikhail Tal would say ' Let's have a bit of hooliganism! '"

Victor Bologan.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Online


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3021
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #56 - 10/06/19 at 20:24:28
Post Tools
RoleyPoley wrote on 10/06/19 at 19:05:37:
Keeping the Benoni section in with the Nimzo, because some people use the Nf6 & e6 move order to reach it, doesnt really make sense to me - i used to play the benoni through that move order and i never played the nimzo.

Then what did you do against 3.Nc3? Play the Modern Benoni anyway?

"some people use the Nf6 & e6 move order to reach it" has to be an understatement. Maybe it's different on amaetur level, but among titled players I believe more than 50% of Benoni players use the 2...e6 move order, to avoid the Taimanov attack and/or get different options against the Modern main line.
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RoleyPoley
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 567
Location: London
Joined: 12/29/13
Gender: Male
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #55 - 10/06/19 at 19:05:37
Post Tools
stockhausen wrote on 10/06/19 at 13:39:05:
Also, I don't see a need to change the other sections. While there may be transpositions between the KID and Benoni, Benoni players are equally likely to play the Nimzo for move order reasons.


I would be interested to know the stats of how many benoni games are reached through a Nimzo move order as opposed to other lines.

Keeping the Benoni section in with the Nimzo, because some people use the Nf6 & e6 move order to reach it, doesnt really make sense to me - i used to play the benoni through that move order and i never played the nimzo.

I would imagine that it would be KI players who would benefit the most from having it in their section because the opportunities for transition beyond the second move are more numerous, and often beneficial.


  

"As Mikhail Tal would say ' Let's have a bit of hooliganism! '"

Victor Bologan.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
stockhausen
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing
so much!

Posts: 23
Joined: 01/19/19
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #54 - 10/06/19 at 13:39:05
Post Tools
Also, I don't see a need to change the other sections. While there may be transpositions between the KID and Benoni, Benoni players are equally likely to play the Nimzo for move order reasons. Plus, the Catalan doesn't need to be moved, since QGD players have to deal with it just as much as Nimzo players, so it makes sense having it in the 1 d4 d5 2 c4 section. Splitting the Open Sicilian section is OK, but the annoyance it would cause might outweigh potential benefits, whereas I think putting the Dragon with the Pirc/Modern + Alekhine and French with Caro + Scandinavian is a more useful change.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
stockhausen
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing
so much!

Posts: 23
Joined: 01/19/19
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #53 - 10/06/19 at 13:29:46
Post Tools
GMTonyKosten wrote on 09/06/19 at 08:43:51:
Glenn Flear writes:
Quote:
As for any adjustments on the site. You probably shouldn't do anything (as it would just upset people) so I would leave all the columns as they are.
If however I was starting from scratch, apart from minor adjustments here and there, the only big change I would do is combine the Dragon with the Pirc and Modern.
'1.e4: Dragon and fianchetto defences'.


It's an interesting idea, and does make a lot of sense.


Instead of this, why not have "1.e4: hypermodern defenses" - that way you can have the Alekhine there along with the Dragon and Pirc/Modern. Then the French, Caro and Scandinavian would have their own specific section, which seems quite logical to me.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4504
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #52 - 10/02/19 at 06:05:41
Post Tools
Nickajack wrote on 10/02/19 at 03:53:32:
Are you saying there are other Modern lines with c4 that are 'outside' the Averbakh's scope?

Yes, e.g. stuff arising from 1. d4 g6 2. c4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Nf3. One ancient* line which has appeared in Chess Publishing is 4...Bg4 5. e3.

*For instance it was thought to lead to += in the first edition of ECO, 40 years ago.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Nickajack
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


Yabba Dabba Doo!

Posts: 41
Location: USA
Joined: 02/21/17
Gender: Male
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #51 - 10/02/19 at 03:53:32
Post Tools
kylemeister wrote on 09/07/19 at 16:31:48:
By the way, as far as I know the Averbakh is 1. d4 g6 2. c4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. e4, so it doesn't include some lines of the Modern with c4.
                   


The Averbakh does include c4, so it is a Modern with c4. Are you saying there are other Modern lines with c4 that are 'outside' the Averbakh's scope?

Regardless, the Modern Defense (including the Averbakh) and its close cousins (Hippo, Dzindzi) should all be under the same roof with the Pirc, in my view.
  

Dubious, therefore playable Undecided
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Leon_Trotsky
Senior Member
****
Offline


Кто был никем — тот станет
всем!

Posts: 434
Location: Barcelona, CAT
Joined: 08/11/17
Gender: Male
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #50 - 09/08/19 at 03:49:53
Post Tools
The Awerbach usually is played with ...e5 but no ...Cf6 to avoid KID transpositions. Black also wants the diagonal open for the fianchetto to get the knight to d4 and cement it there.

Maybe it is not so popular. But a Modern player has to play it to avoid going to the ultra-theoretical KID.

My guess is that the Dzindzishchashchwili-Indian would be in this section too, as people who play that usually are Modern players avoiding the KID.

1. d4 g6 2. c4 Ag7 3. e4 c5 4. d5 would probably transpose to the Benonis without the knight on f6. But 4. Cf3 could transpose to the Accelerated Dragon. Unless Black plays really hypermodern with 4...Db6 or something.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4504
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #49 - 09/07/19 at 16:31:48
Post Tools
By the way, as far as I know the Averbakh is 1. d4 g6 2. c4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. e4, so it doesn't include some lines of the Modern with c4.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Online


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3021
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #48 - 09/07/19 at 16:00:00
Post Tools
Leon_Trotsky wrote on 09/07/19 at 06:38:02:
Does the Hipoótamo get included in that fianchetto section too ¿ What about the double fianchetto Hedgehog lines ¿

The Awerbach should be in that section too, since most people play it expressly to avoid the KID.

Come to think of it, where is the Averbakh Modern (Modern with c4) placed now?

I have the impression it isn't covered much at all as it's unclear whether it belongs in the KID, 1.e4... or Daring Defences section. But correct me if I'm wrong.

The Old Indian and the unique 1.d4 d6 lines have a similar issue. Though admittedly none of these are usually on the cutting edge of theory.

Edit: Looks like the Old Indian and the Averbakh Modern are in the KID section. But it would make sense for all of the Modern to be in the same section. The others I mentioned may be "Daring", but I'm not sure of all of them.
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Online


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 421
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #47 - 09/07/19 at 15:11:46
Post Tools
RoleyPoley wrote on 09/07/19 at 10:18:06:
Confused_by_Theory wrote on 09/07/19 at 04:47:47:
Hi.

I think it sounds like a decent idea to group Dragon, Acc. Dragon, Pirc and Modern. There is overlap for sure, even if the Modern and Pirc both can go towards different structures entirely. If the Sicilian section is split not having to put the dragon somewhere there could make it easier as well.

What I'm thinking though is: where would the Alekhine be grouped in case Pirc and Modern leaves the section? Alongside Caro Kann like now but only with the Caro?

Have a nice day.

How about the Alekhine, Caro Kann and the Scandinavian being grouped together as they share common structures?

Forgot about the Scandinavian obviously. Yea though. This could work.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RoleyPoley
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 567
Location: London
Joined: 12/29/13
Gender: Male
Re: Should the opening sections be reorganised?
Reply #46 - 09/07/19 at 10:18:06
Post Tools
Confused_by_Theory wrote on 09/07/19 at 04:47:47:
Hi.

I think it sounds like a decent idea to group Dragon, Acc. Dragon, Pirc and Modern. There is overlap for sure, even if the Modern and Pirc both can go towards different structures entirely. If the Sicilian section is split not having to put the dragon somewhere there could make it easier as well.

What I'm thinking though is: where would the Alekhine be grouped in case Pirc and Modern leaves the section? Alongside Caro Kann like now but only with the Caro?

Have a nice day.

How about the Alekhine, Caro Kann and the Scandinavian being grouped together as they share common structures?

  

"As Mikhail Tal would say ' Let's have a bit of hooliganism! '"

Victor Bologan.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo