So... now that some time has passed, how do you experienced Nimzo players feel about the repertoire?  Would you recommend it?  Just curious.

Syzygy wrote on 10/18/19 at 18:17:06:


I bought the chessable repertoire a week ago since I wanted to learn about the Ragozin. Today is the first day looking at it and fortunately I find this thread on chesspub.

I find it interesting that in the Qa5+ variation above, Black surrenders the center with dxc4 and moves the bishop again by Bb4-d6, nevertheless, the moves are logical.

Looking somewhat superficially at the position from the chessable repertoire after 13...Rd8 14.f4 Bxc3 15. Bxc3 Bg4 16. Rxd8 Rxd8, I felt a little uncomfortable at first White's bishop pair. The conclusion in the chessable repertoire is that "Black has equalised here comfortably. Next he can work on eliminating white's bishop pair by playing either ...Be6 or ...Ne4."

I checked a few lines myself and can confirm Black should be equal due to being able to control and occupy the e5-square, thus immobilizing White's d- and e-pawns as well as having good board control and coordination of his pieces.

Pasting some example lines:

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. Qa4+ Nc6 6. e3 O-O 7. Bd2 dxc4 8.Bxc4 Bd6 9. Qc2 e5 10. dxe5 Nxe5 11. Nxe5 Bxe5 12. O-O-O Qe7 13. Kb1 Rd8 14. f4 (14. Bd3) 14... Bxc3 15. Bxc3 Bg4 16. Rxd8+ Rxd8 17. h3 (17. Re1 Ne4 18. Bd3 Bf5 19. Ka1 h5) 17... Bd7 18. Bd4 (18. Be5 Bc6 19. Ka1 Be4 20. Bxf6 gxf6 21. Qe2) 18... Bc6 19. Ka1 Be4 20. Qc3 Nd5 21. Bxd5 Rxd5 22. Rg1 (22. Rc1 f6 23. Qxc7 Qxc7 24. Rxc7 Bxg2) (22. Bxg7 Rd3 23. Qe5 Qxe5 24. Bxe5) 22... f6 23. Rc1 c6

14.Bd3 as suggested by Syzygy and equally 14.f3 may be worth looking a bit at, both with the idea of e3-e4.

fling wrote on 10/18/19 at 06:54:33:


After 13...Rd8, 14. Bd3 is more critical than 14. f4. Looking at the line again, however, it seems 14. Bd3 Bd7 should be sufficient for Black.

Stigma wrote on 10/17/19 at 21:28:03:


From what I have seen, they give 5. Bd3 d5 6. Nge2 dxc4, with the follow up ...c5. I.e. there will often be an IQP position, with the idea that the knight on e2 is misplaced as it would be better on f2.

There is a note saying Black can play ...e5 instead, but that is not necessary as ...c5 is fine for Black.

In the Ragozin, do they consider the line:

5. Qa4+ Nc6 6. e3 O-O 7. Bd2 dxc4 8. Bxc4 Bd6 9. Qc2 e5 10. dxe5 Nxe5 11. Nxe5 Bxe5 12. O-O-O Qe7 13. Kb1? Or do they recommend 9...a6 instead? I've always found it somewhat annoying to find equality in this variation as Black.

an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 10/17/19 at 14:30:49:



Gear, Gadget, whatever. In this case: chessbooks! (And DVD's etc)

Someone has forgotten 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 O-O 5.Bd3 d5 6.Nf3 c5 and 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nf3 Bb4 5.e3 O-O 6.Bd3 c5. Is it you or the authors? This variation is not entirely irrelevant.

IM Christof Sielecki and FM Daniel Barrish have a joint repertoire up on Chessable, a general work against 1. d4 and 1. Nf3.

Main choices are the Nimzo and the Ragozin.

There are 2 related Short & Sweet courses, so it's easy to get an overview of the suggested lines:

Nimzo
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nf3 d5 (transposing)
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qb3 c5 5.dxc5 Nc6
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Bg5 c5
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.f3 d5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.dxc5 f5
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 O-O 5.Nge2 d5 6.a3 Be7
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 O-O 5.e4 d5 6.e5 Ne4 7.Bd3 c5
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 O-O 5.Nf3 c5

Ragozin
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.Bg5 h6 6.Bh4 dxc4
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.Bg5 h6 6.Bxf6 Qxf6 7.e3 O-O 8.Rc1 dxc4 9.Bxc4 c5
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.cxd5 exd5 6.Qa4+ Nc6 7.Ne5 a5
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.Qb3 c5
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Bb4+ 4.Nc3 d5 5.Qa4+ Nc6 6.e3 O-O 7.Qc2 b6
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Bb4+ 4.Nc3 d5 5.Qa4+ Nc6 6.e3 O-O 7.Bd2 dxc4 8.Bxc4 Bd6

AFAIK they play Bb4 against the Catalan as well, as well as cover the usual sidelines.

I'm curious if anyone has the repertoire or any thoughts on it. I'd have been pretty ecstatic to see something like this say a year ago, but now my mood is much more tempered. I found the Nimzo really hard to study, as white has many viable setups requiring separate treatment, and many lines are very concrete. Even if one chooses second rate/unusual lines, like Sielecki did in his previous Nimzo repertoire, there end up still being quite a few approaches and exceptions to learn. And then you need something against everything else still! So despite my G.A.S. wrt chess books, I might manage to convince myself to not get this.

Unless someone here confirms this is the bee's knees.