| |
Main
Date: 05 Jun 2006 19:37:48
From: straphael
Subject: Any gambits against 1.d4?
|
I have a friend who always starts with 1.d4, and plays a slow,
strategic game to win in the endgame. This takes a long time and it's
quite frustrating for me.
So here's my question. Do you have any offbeat gambits against 1.d4
that I could use to surprise my opponent? It doesn't have to be 100%
sound or anything, I just want to try something new and different.
Thanks
Toey
|
|
| |
Date: 16 Jun 2006 02:13:05
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Any gambits against 1.d4?
|
42N83W wrote:
> "mike" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >I have found that 1.d4 d5 followed by a quick ...c5 often leads to more
> >open games with lots of piece play.
>
> heh heh
To me, 1. d4 used to mean locked pawns, where pieces jockey for ideal
positions for 30 moves and then an all-out tactical blitz ensues when
our clocks run low. it doesn't have to be that way--it can be tactical.
You don't have to change openings. As Mike said, a simple c5 early on
often opens up the game. dxc4 or any other pawn exchange will also do
the trick. If you really want a new opening, the QGD / Tarrasch Defense
uses the first move; the QGD / Slav Defense uses the second.
|
| |
Date: 06 Jun 2006 19:58:55
From: mike
Subject: Re: Any gambits against 1.d4?
|
I have found that 1.d4 d5 followed by a quick ...c5 often leads to more open
games with lots of piece play.
|
| | |
Date: 16 Jun 2006 02:57:40
From: 42N83W
Subject: Re: Any gambits against 1.d4?
|
"mike" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I have found that 1.d4 d5 followed by a quick ...c5 often leads to more
>open games with lots of piece play.
heh heh
|
| |
Date: 05 Jun 2006 20:07:39
From:
Subject: Re: Any gambits against 1.d4?
|
The direct gambits against 1.d4 are not very sound but maybe worth a
shot. You may look up: Budapest Defence, Albin Counter, von
Hennig-Schara, Englund.
You can strive for active play without going the gambit route: the
Dutch Defence, the Nimzo-Indian, the King's Indian, the ben-Oni
Defences (and relatives), the Benlo gambit, some versions of the
semi-Slave (although White has the exchange variations.)
|
| | |
Date: 06 Jun 2006 10:43:10
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Any gambits against 1.d4?
|
<[email protected] > wrote:
> ben-Oni
This is more commonly written `Benoni', though Wikipedia says the name
comes from the Hebrew for `son of sorrow' so your version is probably
more historically accurate.
> Benlo gambit [...] semi-Slave
`Benko gambit' and `semi-Slav'.
(I point these typos out not in order to deride ttw's very helpful
post but to help the original poster search for information on these
openings.)
Dave.
--
David Richerby Addictive Cheese (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ brick of cheese but you can never put
it down!
|
|
