| |
Main
Date: 25 Sep 2006 19:27:27
From: Dave (from the UK)
Subject: Comments on 6...Nge7 in French Advance Paulsen attack
|
I played a game on ICC which I lost for reasons which are quite obvious
- most notably 25.Nf1??
But I'm interested in any comments about the move 6...Nge6 played by my
opponent. This move had me worried, yet it's not commonly played in high
rated games, and crafty thinks it was very poor. To me at least, I think
he played a good move. I think I only got away lightly since he failed
to play the way I feared. See my comments below.
I'd appreciate comments around this move.
[Event "ICC 60 30"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2006.09.23"]
[Round "-"]
[White "g8wrb"]
[Black "houseofcook"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "1238"]
[BlackElo "1400"]
[ECO "C02"]
[ICCResult "White resigns"]
[Opening "French: advance, Paulsen attack"]
[NIC "FR.03"]
[Time "14:05:05"]
[GameType "ICCStandard"]
[TimeControl "3600+30"]
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 {So far this is pretty much
to book.
Looking at a collection of high level games, the most common White
response is 6.a3 (some 63%), but the move I played (6.Be2) is quite
common (some 27%). The only other one of any real usage is 6.Bd3 at 9%.
Anything else is used very very rarely indeed. } 6.Be2 {This so far is
pretty common stuff with plenty of highly
rated players reaching this position.
I have in my database of a little over 300,000 high level games 128
examples of
this position. The reponses by Black are:
6...cxd4 (76 games or 59%)
6...Nh6 (32 games or 25^)
6...Nge7 (10 games, or 7.8%)
plus a couple of other responses (Bd7 and f7) making up the final 8%.
So the move played by my opponent on the next move (6...Nge7) is not one
of the
common responses. 'crafty' thinks it is poor.
Current score according to crafty is -0.01 at a depth of 15. It thinks
Black's best response is 6...cxd4, which is the most common one played
in my list of high ranked games.
} 6...Nge7 {According to crafty, this move is not good. The scrore
according to
crafty is now +0.58 at a depth of 15, so White (myself) had the advantage.
Yet I found this move most worrying, and I could see no logical answer
to it. Black threatens 7...Nf5, which will mean my d4 pawn is attacked
four times. It's currently defened three times (b2 pawn, Queen on d1 and
Knight on f3). I can see
no logical way of defending against this threat. The c1 bishop could
defend, but then the b2 pawn is lost.
Basically I could see no sensible answer to this.
7.dxc3 is what crafty thinks, but this would shatter my centre and leave
the e5
pawn very venurable.
7.g4 would prevent 7...Nf5, but would weaken my Kingside a lot. } 7.O-O
{Crafty
thinks its about even now (-0.02 at a depth of 14) and play should proceed
7...cxd4 8.Nxd4 Bd7 9.Nb5 Nf5 10. Bf4 Nxe5 11.Bxe5 12.Re1 etc.
} 7...Nf5 {The move I feared. The d4 pawn is attacked four times,
defended only
4 times, yet one of the pieces (Bishop on c3) is overloaded, as its also
protecting the b2 pawn.
Yet 'crafty' thinks my advantage is significant now, with a score of
+0.79 (depth 14).
It thinks I should play 8.dxc5. This seems crazy, as it would shatter my
centre. Crafty thinks
8.dxc5 Qxc5 9.b4 Qb6 10.Bd3 Bd7 11.Re1 Nce7. } 8.Qb3 {Concerned I would
loose the d4 pawn, I thought I'd try to offer a queen swap, on the
off-chance my opponent might chicken out and want to keep his queen.
(Later I found from him, he seriously considered playing 8...Qc7, but
did in fact play 8...Bd7.)
Crafty thinks +0.23 at a depth of 14.
} 8...Bd7 {Crafty thinks +0.33 at a depth of 14. It thinks the next move
should
be 9.Qxb6 axb6.
} 9.Qxb6 axb6 {I'd exchanged queens and removed the threat to the d4 pawn.
Crafty thinks +0.39 at a depth of 15 and game should process 10.g4 Nh6
11.h3 c4
12.Bxh6 gzh6.
But would not 10.g4 weaken my kingside considerably? } 10.Rd1 {Crafty
thinks +0.13 at depth of 14. } 10...c4 {Crafty +0.18 depth 14. Game
should proceed 11.Bf4
h5 12.Nbd2 Be7 etc} 11.Bg5 h6 12.Bh4 Nxh4 13.Nxh4 Be7 14.Nf3 O-O 15.Nbd2
b5 16.b4 {Probably unwise, giving myself a backward pawn.
Crafty -0.33 depth 12} 16...f6 17.Re1 {Crafty -1.42 depth 15. Game
should go 17...fxe5 18.Nxe5 Nxe5 19.dxe5 d4 20.Red1 d3.
Looks like I've throw what advantage I had into a disadvatage. }
17...Ra3 18.Nb1 Ra4 19.Bd1 Ra7 20.Re3 fxe5 21.Nxe5 Nxe5 22.Rxe5 {Crafty
makes it about equal.
-0.08 depth 14. } 22...Bh4 23.Bf3 Raa8 24.Nd2 Bg5 25.Nf1?? {Blunder.
25...Ra3 will lead to the loss of the c3 pawn. There is nothing I can do
to stop this. I should have played the knight to b1, not f1.
Crafty -2.17 depth 15 and play should go 25...Ra3 26.Bg4 Rxc3 with the
loss of the pawn for no compensation. } 25...Ra3 26.Bg4 Rf6 27.Ne3 Bf4
{Crafty
Score is -1.66 depth 19. Should proceed 28.Nxd5 Bxe5 29.dxe5 Rf7 30./nb6
etc. }
28.Rxd5 {I thought this was the most sensible way to get out of the mess
I was in. Crafty thinks not.
Score is -3.03, depth 14. } 28...exd5 29.Bxd7 Bxe3 30.fxe3 Rxc3 31.Re1
Rc2 32.Bxb5 {A bit silly grabbing a pawn then, but I am effectivly dead.
} 32...Rff2 {White resigns} 0-1
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: [email protected]
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.
http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
|
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 16:45:19
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Comments on 6...Nge7 in French Advance Paulsen attack
|
Dave (from the UK) wrote:
>
> > The queen still protects d4 indirectly, that's the charm of the move.
> > Suppose 6.Bd3 cxd4 7.cxd4--and that's where the exchanges stop. If
> > 7...Nxd4? 8.Nxd4 Qxd4? 9.Bb5+! Ke7 10.Qxd4 and White wins. This is a
> > common tactic in the French.
>
> I was not aware of that continuation. It almost seems a trap, as at
> first sight it looks like Black can win a pawn in the exchange after 6.Bd3
> > According to chessgames.com, Bd3 scores 54%, Be3 scores 47%. The point
> > is moot as 6.a3 is the mainline, but you'll see this sequence again.
>
> I actually played 6.Be2, not to Bd3 or Be3.
I meant to say Be2. I would resign after Be3?? :)
> 6.a3 61.8% 55.1%
> 6.Be2 27.1% 52.7%
> 6.Bd3 10.2% 64.5%
> So at least according to the games in my database (there are 333,776 of
> high ranked games), 6.Bd3 has a higher score (64.5%) than 6.a3 (55.1%),
I found one source comparing the three moves:
: The first one is Bf1-e2, a simple and good developing move.
: The second choice is a2-a3, with the idea of playing b2-b4,
: challenging Black on the Queen side. Black often replies c5-c4
: which takes the pressure off White's center but prepares to meet
: b2-b4 with an EN PASSANT capture.
: The third option is Bf1-d3, placing the Bishop on its ideal diagonal
: and setting a few nasty traps.
> French Advance, Milner-Barry Gambit.
As you say, it's not a gambit yet, but White often chooses to make it
one. After 7...Bd7 8.O-O, Black is free to snatch the d- and e-pawn! In
return for sacrificing two pawns, White gets a strong attack on Black's
under-developed position.
In Tal-Nei, URS 1958 Black tooks both gambit pawns:
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Bd3 cxd4 7.cxd4 Bd7 8.O-O
Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Qxd4 10.Nc3 Qxe5 11.Re1 Qd6 12.Nb5 Qb8 13.Qf3 Bd6 14.Qxd5
Bxh2+ 15.Kh1 Bc6 16.Qg5 Nf6 17.f4 h6 18.Qxg7 Rg8 19.Rxe6+ fxe6 20.Bg6+
Kd8 21.Qxf6+ 1-0
In Tal-Stahlberg, Stockholm 1960 Black only took one gambit pawn:
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Bd3 cxd4 7.cxd4 Bd7 8.O-O
Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Qxd4 10.Nc3 Qb6 11.Qg4 h5 12.Qg5 g6 13.a4 Bh6 14.Qh4 a6
15.Bxh6 Nxh6 16.Qf6 Rf8 17.Nxd5 Qd8 18.Qf4 exd5 19.Qxh6 Qe7 20.Qe3 Bc6
21.Rac1 Rg8 22.f4 Kf8 23.f5 gxf5 24.Qh6+ Rg7 25.Rxf5 Bd7 26.Rc7 Qe6
27.Qh8+ Rg8 28.Qxh5 Rc8 29.Rxc8+ Bxc8 30.Rf6 Qe7 31.Qh6+ Rg7 32.Rd6
Qxe5 33.Qh8+ 1-0
---
Become a Chess Expert
http://likesforests.blogspot.com/
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 22:47:39
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Comments on 6...Nge7 in French Advance Paulsen attack
|
Dave (from the UK) wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > Dave (from the UK) wrote:
> >
> >
> >>1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6
> >
> >
> >>Looking at a collection of high level games, the most common White
> >>response is 6.a3 (some 63%), but the move I played (6.Be2) is quite
> >>common (some 27%). The only other one of any real usage is 6.Bd3 at 9%.
> >>Anything else is used very very rarely indeed. } 6.Be2 {This so far is
> >>pretty common stuff with plenty of highly
> >>rated players reaching this position.
> >
> >
> > Those players may have had a good reason to play 6.Bd2. Do you?
> >
> > I agree that developing your bishop so you can castle is reasonable.
> > However, on e2 you bishop only control 5 squares. On d3 your bishop
> > control 10 squares. Further, after 6.Bd3 cxd4 7.cxd4 or 6.Bd3 c4 7.Bc2
> > your position seems fine. You have a first-move advantage... playing
> > passively leads to equality.
>
> The reason I played Be2, rather than Bd3 is that the latter move would
> prevent my queen from defending the d4 square.
The queen still protects d4 indirectly, that's the charm of the move.
Suppose 6.Bd3 cxd4 7.cxd4--and that's where the exchanges stop. If
7...Nxd4? 8.Nxd4 Qxd4? 9.Bb5+! Ke7 10.Qxd4 and White wins. This is a
common tactic in the French.
According to chessgames.com, Bd3 scores 54%, Be3 scores 47%. The point
is moot as 6.a3 is the mainline, but you'll see this sequence again.
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 11:38:59
From: Dave (from the UK)
Subject: Re: Comments on 6...Nge7 in French Advance Paulsen attack
|
[email protected] wrote:
>>>I agree that developing your bishop so you can castle is reasonable.
>>>However, on e2 you bishop only control 5 squares. On d3 your bishop
>>>control 10 squares. Further, after 6.Bd3 cxd4 7.cxd4 or 6.Bd3 c4 7.Bc2
>>>your position seems fine. You have a first-move advantage... playing
>>>passively leads to equality.
>>
>>The reason I played Be2, rather than Bd3 is that the latter move would
>>prevent my queen from defending the d4 square.
>
>
> The queen still protects d4 indirectly, that's the charm of the move.
> Suppose 6.Bd3 cxd4 7.cxd4--and that's where the exchanges stop. If
> 7...Nxd4? 8.Nxd4 Qxd4? 9.Bb5+! Ke7 10.Qxd4 and White wins. This is a
> common tactic in the French.
I was not aware of that continuation. It almost seems a trap, as at
first sight it looks like Black can win a pawn in the exchange after 6.Bd3
My database (scid)
http://scid.sourceforge.net/
catagories
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Bd3
as the French Advance, Milner-Barry Gambit. I can't see where the gambit
is in this case. I've heard of the Milner-Barry Gambit before, but never
studied it. Something to look at another day I guess.
> According to chessgames.com, Bd3 scores 54%, Be3 scores 47%. The point
> is moot as 6.a3 is the mainline, but you'll see this sequence again.
I actually played 6.Be2, not to Bd3 or Be3.
Of the games in my own database (I've not checked those of chessbase),
there are 467 occurances of the move sequence
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6.
The frequency of the replies does not match the score
# move frequency score.
6.a3 61.8% 55.1%
6.Be2 27.1% 52.7%
6.Bd3 10.2% 64.5%
So at least according to the games in my database (there are 333,776 of
high ranked games), 6.Bd3 has a higher score (64.5%) than 6.a3 (55.1%),
despite the fact the 6.a3 is much more common (68.1% of games) than
6.Bd3 (only 10.2% of games). The sample size (467 games after 1.e4 e6
2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6), while not huge, is probably
statistically significant.
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: [email protected]
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.
http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 22:35:30
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Comments on 6...Nge7 in French Advance Paulsen attack
|
Dave (from the UK) wrote:
> > I have the same comment as last time, why do you surrender so soon? I
> > figure a fighting spirit is worth 100 rating points
>
> He argues that if you are the equivalent of two pawns down, with no
> compensation, you should resign.or playing a new game, rather than
> fighting to win/draw one that would against decent play, result in a loss.
Tal is a decent player. In the second Botvinnik-Tal match, Botvinnik
ended up two pawns down. He played on, and managed to draw the rook and
pawn ending. Endings with bishops of opposite colors are often drawn,
even two pawns down.
> He says one will gain more by studying I know some will argue that is
> incorrect. But he is a lot stronger than me (his USCF is just under
> 2200) and since he is not charging me for the lessons, I can't complain.
That is a valid reason, then. I'm sure he has much to teach you. I do
not have a coach, so I follow advice from Polgar and Heisman, who say
to fight on until the result is very clear to you and your
opponent--whether that's a win, draw, or loss.
> In that position, it was fairly obvious I was going to loose several
> pawns and my king was in a difficult position. FWIW, crafty scores
> the final position where I resigned as -6.84 at a depth of 15.
You would end up one pawn and the exchange down. Crafty scored the
position I drew (one pawn and the exchange down) as -4.07 at depth 16.
> I think it was obvious I was going to loose that game, despite the fact I was only
> one pawn down at the point I resigned.
Following your coach's advice is probably wise. As long as you realize
there's a fair chance you would draw that game against a ~1400 ICC.
> I did spend 15 or so minutes after the game discussing it with my
> opponent. I suspect the 15 minutes doing that was more useful than
> playing on for 15 minutes longer.
I like post-mortems. My adversary and I did chat about the game
afterwards. He wasn't upset I played on as the win wasn't clear to
me... or to him! :-)
> > Yesterday, as White I also made a couple poor pawn advances, and ended
> > up the exchange and a pawn down. I fought hard and managed a draw:
>
> I'm sure you are right that in the short term, fighting it out will
> improve ones rating. It is quite possible ones opponent will blunder at
> my level anyway.
>
> Whether playing on in "lost" positions makes best use of ones time is
> another matter. If not, then it might not be so useful in the term.
It's hard to say which approach is better. If you have a coach that's
helping you for free, that's wonderful. May we both find success in our
own ways.
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 14:45:47
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Comments on 6...Nge7 in French Advance Paulsen attack
|
Dave (from the UK) wrote:
> 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6
> Looking at a collection of high level games, the most common White
> response is 6.a3 (some 63%), but the move I played (6.Be2) is quite
> common (some 27%). The only other one of any real usage is 6.Bd3 at 9%.
> Anything else is used very very rarely indeed. } 6.Be2 {This so far is
> pretty common stuff with plenty of highly
> rated players reaching this position.
Those players may have had a good reason to play 6.Bd2. Do you?
I agree that developing your bishop so you can castle is reasonable.
However, on e2 you bishop only control 5 squares. On d3 your bishop
control 10 squares. Further, after 6.Bd3 cxd4 7.cxd4 or 6.Bd3 c4 7.Bc2
your position seems fine. You have a first-move advantage... playing
passively leads to equality.
> 6...Nge7 (10 games, or 7.8%)
> 'crafty' thinks it is poor.
Crafty knows tactics, not positions.
> Yet I found this move most worrying, and I could see no logical answer
> to it. Black threatens 7...Nf5, which will mean my d4 pawn is attacked
> four times. It's currently defened three times (b2 pawn, Queen on d1 and
> Knight on f3). I can see no logical way of defending against this threat.
I would play 7.Bd3. It admits your earlier mistake, preserves equality,
and preserves a good pawn structure. Black would be foolish to play
7...Nf5 now.
8.Qb3 {Concerned I would
> loose the d4 pawn, I thought I'd try to offer a queen swap, on the
> off-chance my opponent might chicken out and want to keep his queen.
After 8...Qxb3 9.axb3, it's Black's turn and he still has more pieces
pointing at d4 than you do. Black would have the advantage.
> 15.b4
I don't like this weakening move at all. According to the
"pawn-pointing-rule", White should attack the kingside while Black
attacks the queenside.
> 32...Rff2 {White resigns} 0-1
I have the same comment as last time, why do you surrender so soon? I
figure a fighting spirit is worth 100 rating points
Yesterday, as White I also made a couple poor pawn advances, and ended
up the exchange and a pawn down. I fought hard and managed a draw:
1. c4 Nf6 2. g3 c5 3. Bg2 e6 4. Nc3 Nc6 5. e4 Be7 6. Nf3 a6 7. e5 Ng4
8. Qe2 Qc7 9. h3 Ngxe5 10. Nxe5 Nxe5 11. O-O O-O 12. f4 Nc6 13. d3 Nd4
14. Qd1 Rb8 15. Ne2 Bf6 16. Rb1 b6 17. Kh1 Bb7 18. Be3 Bxg2+ 19. Kxg2
Qc6+ 20. Kh2 Nf3+ 21. Rxf3 Qxf3 22. Qd2 d5 23. Ng1 Qh5 24. g4 Qh4 25.
Bf2 Qh6 26. g5 Bxg5 27. fxg5 Qg6 28. cxd5 exd5 29. Re1 d4 30. Bg3 Rbe8
31. Rxe8 Rxe8 32. h4 Re3 33. b4 Rxd3 34. Qe1 Re3 35. Qd2 h6 36. bxc5
bxc5 37. Qc1 hxg5 38. Qxc5 gxh4 39. Qc8+ Kh7 40. Qh3 Rxg3 41. Qxh4+ Kg8
42. Qxg3 Qxg3+ 43. Kxg3 d3 44. Nf3 f6 45. Kf4 Kf7 46. Ke3 Ke6 47. Kxd3
Kf5 48. Ke3 g5 49. Nd4+ Kg4 50. Ne6 f5 51. Kf2 f4 52. a4 a5 53. Kg2 f3+
54. Kf2 Kf5 55. Nxg5 Kxg5 56. Kxf3 Kf5 57. Ke3 Ke5 58. Kd3 Kd5 59. Kc3
Kc5 60. Kb3 Kb6 1/2-1/2
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 04:48:01
From: Dave (from the UK)
Subject: Re: Comments on 6...Nge7 in French Advance Paulsen attack
|
[email protected] wrote:
> Dave (from the UK) wrote:
>
>
>>1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6
>
>
>>Looking at a collection of high level games, the most common White
>>response is 6.a3 (some 63%), but the move I played (6.Be2) is quite
>>common (some 27%). The only other one of any real usage is 6.Bd3 at 9%.
>>Anything else is used very very rarely indeed. } 6.Be2 {This so far is
>>pretty common stuff with plenty of highly
>>rated players reaching this position.
>
>
> Those players may have had a good reason to play 6.Bd2. Do you?
>
> I agree that developing your bishop so you can castle is reasonable.
> However, on e2 you bishop only control 5 squares. On d3 your bishop
> control 10 squares. Further, after 6.Bd3 cxd4 7.cxd4 or 6.Bd3 c4 7.Bc2
> your position seems fine. You have a first-move advantage... playing
> passively leads to equality.
The reason I played Be2, rather than Bd3 is that the latter move would
prevent my queen from defending the d4 square.
> Crafty knows tactics, not positions.
Yes, although surprisingly it says to play 7.cxd7, which is the one most
commonly played and the one Antonio Torrecillas suggested.
>>32...Rff2 {White resigns} 0-1
>
>
> I have the same comment as last time, why do you surrender so soon? I
> figure a fighting spirit is worth 100 rating points
The reason I resigned so quickly is that I've been taking some lessons
from someone who basically says if you play chess to improve at chess in
the long term, rather than to increase ones rating in the short term,
one should resign such positions.
He argues that if you are the equivalent of two pawns down, with no
compensation, you should resign. He says one will gain more by studying
or playing a new game, rather than fighting to win/draw one that would
against decent play, result in a loss. I know some will argue that is
incorrect. But he is a lot stronger than me (his USCF is just under
2200) and since he is not charging me for the lessons, I can't complain.
In that position, it was fairly obvious I was going to loose several
pawns and my king was in a difficult position. FWIW, crafty scores the
final position where I resigned as -6.84 at a depth of 15. I think it
was obvious I was going to loose that game, despite the fact I was only
one pawn down at the point I resigned.
I did spend 15 or so minutes after the game discussing it with my
opponent. I suspect the 15 minutes doing that was more useful than
playing on for 15 minutes longer.
> Yesterday, as White I also made a couple poor pawn advances, and ended
> up the exchange and a pawn down. I fought hard and managed a draw:
I'm sure you are right that in the short term, fighting it out will
improve ones rating. It is quite possible ones opponent will blunder at
my level anyway.
Whether playing on in "lost" positions makes best use of ones time is
another matter. If not, then it might not be so useful in the term.
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: [email protected]
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.
http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 23:36:02
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: Comments on 6...Nge7 in French Advance Paulsen attack
|
Hello,
6...Nge7 allow the idea was 7.dxc5! followed by 8.b4 9.Be3
I think there are a Nimzovitch game very instructive about white having
good play and no problems defending e5.
AT
En/na Dave (from the UK) ha escrit:
> But I'm interested in any comments about the move 6...Nge6 played by my
> opponent. This move had me worried, yet it's not commonly played in high
> rated games, and crafty thinks it was very poor. To me at least, I think
> he played a good move. I think I only got away lightly since he failed
> to play the way I feared. See my comments below.
>
> I'd appreciate comments around this move.
>
> [Event "ICC 60 30"]
>
> 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 {So far this is pretty much
> to book.
>
> Looking at a collection of high level games, the most common White
> response is 6.a3 (some 63%), but the move I played (6.Be2) is quite
> common (some 27%). The only other one of any real usage is 6.Bd3 at 9%.
> Anything else is used very very rarely indeed. } 6.Be2 {This so far is
> pretty common stuff with plenty of highly
> rated players reaching this position.
>
> I have in my database of a little over 300,000 high level games 128
> examples of
> this position. The reponses by Black are:
>
> 6...cxd4 (76 games or 59%)
> 6...Nh6 (32 games or 25^)
> 6...Nge7 (10 games, or 7.8%)
> plus a couple of other responses (Bd7 and f7) making up the final 8%.
>
> So the move played by my opponent on the next move (6...Nge7) is not one
> of the
> common responses. 'crafty' thinks it is poor.
>
> Current score according to crafty is -0.01 at a depth of 15. It thinks
> Black's best response is 6...cxd4, which is the most common one played
> in my list of high ranked games.
> } 6...Nge7 {According to crafty, this move is not good. The scrore
> according to
> crafty is now +0.58 at a depth of 15, so White (myself) had the advantage.
>
> Yet I found this move most worrying, and I could see no logical answer
> to it. Black threatens 7...Nf5, which will mean my d4 pawn is attacked
> four times. It's currently defened three times (b2 pawn, Queen on d1 and
> Knight on f3). I can see
> no logical way of defending against this threat. The c1 bishop could
> defend, but then the b2 pawn is lost.
>
> Basically I could see no sensible answer to this.
>
> 7.dxc3 is what crafty thinks, but this would shatter my centre and leave
> the e5
> pawn very venurable.
>
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 04:23:13
From: Dave (from the UK)
Subject: Re: Comments on 6...Nge7 in French Advance Paulsen attack
|
Antonio Torrecillas wrote:
> Hello,
>
> 6...Nge7 allow the idea was 7.dxc5! followed by 8.b4 9.Be3
>
> I think there are a Nimzovitch game very instructive about white having
> good play and no problems defending e5.
>
> AT
Thanks.
I found 6 games where the *exact* same position had been reached after
6...Nge7.
Korchnoi has played 6...Nge7 a couple of times. The most popular reply
is as you say 7.dxc5 with 7.Na3 being played a couple of times too. I
found one game (Gurevich vs Dost, Round 11, US Open, Palo Alto, 1981)
where 7.Kf1 was played. I hate to think what the idea of that move was,
although Gurevich did win the game.
I'm surprised White can hold the centre together after 7.dxc5, but as
you say, it does appear to be possible.
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: [email protected]
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.
http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 23:40:36
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: Comments on 6...Nge7 in French Advance Paulsen attack
|
En/na Antonio Torrecillas ha escrit:
> Hello,
>
> 6...Nge7 allow the idea was 7.dxc5! followed by 8.b4 9.Be3
>
> I think there are a Nimzovitch game very instructive about white having
> good play and no problems defending e5.
>
> AT
>
In this game white plays the similar idea dxc5 but in your game
conditions are much better for white (and in this known game white
obtained advantage)
The game is:
[Event "Carlsbad (Game"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1911.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nimzowitsch, Aaron Isa�evitch"]
[Black "Salwe"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C02"]
[PlyCount "75"]
[EventDate "1911.??.??"]
1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 c5 4. c3 Nc6 5. Nf3 Qb6 6. Bd3 Bd7 7. dxc5 Bxc5
8. O-O f6 9. b4 Be7 10. Bf4 fxe5 11. Nxe5 Nxe5 12. Bxe5 Nf6 13. Nd2 O-O
14. Nf3 Bd6 15. Qe2 Rac8 16. Bd4 Qc7 17. Ne5 Be8 18. Rae1 Bxe5 19. Bxe5
Qc6 20. Bd4 Bd7 21. Qc2 Rf7 22. Re3 b6 23. Rg3 Kh8 24. Bxh7 e5 (24...
Nxh7 25. Qg6) 25. Bg6 Re7 26. Re1 Qd6 27. Be3 d4 28. Bg5 Rxc3 29. Rxc3
dxc3 30. Qxc3 Kg8 31. a3 Kf8 32. Bh4 Be8 33. Bf5 Qd4 34. Qxd4 exd4 35.
Rxe7 Kxe7 36. Bd3 Kd6 37. Bxf6
gxf6 38. h4 1-0
|
|
