| |
Main
Date: 26 Sep 2005 06:01:22
From: Zero
Subject: Slav vs. Semi-Slav
|
Hello,
I am trying to determine whether I should play the the normal (dxc4)
Slav, the a6 Slav, or the Semi-Slav. It seems that the both all three
oepnings are are good openings and lead to equal positions.
I was wondering though why the super GMs don't play the standard dxc4
slav (d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 dxc4). Instead, they are opting to play
the Semi-Slav (d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6) and the a6 Slav (d4 d5 c4 c6
Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 a6)
Do the other two Slav positions lead to quicker equality for black ordo
they provide better winning chances ? please help me understand. The
Semi-Slav has been really popular since the 90s when they were all
young too (Kramnik, Anand, Kamsky, Lautier, Shirov, etc.) hey all used
to play the standard Slav in the early 90s too but now they just like
to play the Semi-Slav. Also the a6 Slav has more popularity than the
standard slav.
thank you
|
|
| |
Date: 14 Oct 2005 21:11:03
From: Alfanje
Subject: Re: Slav vs. Semi-Slav
|
Hi, Zero.
Just trying to help. I am a player rated around 2200 FIDE. I have tried
all the three variations. The problem I see with 4...dxc4 is that it is
very hard for Black to fight for the whole point. You need to struggle
for a draw whereas White keeps a slight advantage (I like playing that
line as White. I think the bishop sacrifice is incorrect, but 5.e3 is
easy and safe).
The Semi-Slav is a very complex opening that requires a lot of study,
and even with that you can be destroyed in less than 25 moves (and I
wouldnt blame you, as many GMs were already beaten that way). It offers
good chances to win as Black, if you are a profound tactical player.
Perhaps, you should start with 4...a6. There's a handbook by Glenn
Flear. I do not recommend it very much, but it is helpful to begin.
Even if the book was written less than 2 years ago, is out of date, as
the defence is flavour of the month and new theory is developing fast .
I hope my advice is useful. In the end, everything is playable. It
depends on taste and strategical point of view.
|
| | |
Date: 15 Oct 2005 13:10:13
From: Toni Lassila
Subject: Re: Slav vs. Semi-Slav
|
On 14 Oct 2005 21:11:03 -0700, "Alfanje" <[email protected] > wrote:
>Perhaps, you should start with 4...a6. There's a handbook by Glenn
>Flear. I do not recommend it very much, but it is helpful to begin.
>Even if the book was written less than 2 years ago, is out of date, as
>the defence is flavour of the month and new theory is developing fast .
Your arguments are actually a very strong reason not to play this
line. Personally I can't really understand the point behind 4...a6 and
even top GMs seem not yet exactly sure what the plans for either side
should be, resulting mainly in some ugly losses for Black. If 5.e3,
then 5...e6 instead of 5...b5 should be OK for Black. I also looked at
the line 5.c5 Nbd7 6.Bf4 Nh5 7.Bd2 and then:
7... Nhf6 8.Qc2 e5!?
[Event "Gibraltar Masters"]
[Site "Caleta ESP"]
[Date "2005.01.02"]
[EventDate "2005.01.25"]
[Round "9"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "B Avrukh"]
[Black "S Erenburg"]
[ECO "D15"]
[WhiteElo "2629"]
[BlackElo "2551"]
[PlyCount "150"]
1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 a6 5. c5 Nbd7 6. Bf4 Nh5 7. Bd2
Nhf6 8. Qc2 e5 9. dxe5 Ng4 10. Na4 Be7 11. Qc3 O-O 12. Qd4 Nh6 13. e4
f6 14. exd5 fxe5 15. Qc4 cxd5 16. Qxd5+ Kh8 17. Bc4 Nxc5 18. Qxd8 Rxd8
19. Nb6 Rb8 20. Nxe5 Bf6 21. Bf4 Be6 22. O-O Rd4 23. Bg3 Nf5 24. Nf3
Nxg3 25. Nxd4 Bxc4 26. Rfd1 Ne2+ 27. Nxe2 Bxe2 28. Rd5 Nd3 29. Nd7 Rc8
30. Nxf6 gxf6 31. h3 Rc2 32. Rd8+ Kg7 33. Rd7+ Kg6 34. Rxb7 Rxb2 35.
Ra7 Ne5 36. a4 h5 37. Ra3 h4 38. Re3 Nd3 39. g3 Ne5 40. Kg2 hxg3 41.
Kxg3 Bc4 42. Rc7 Rb4 43. Rc3 Bf1 44. f4 Nd3 45. R7c4 Rb2 46. Rd4 Rg2+
47. Kh4 Rf2 48. Kg3 Rg2+ 49. Kh4 Rf2 50. Kg3 Rd2 51. Rd5 Rg2+ 52. Kf3
Rh2 53. Rd6 Rxh3+ 54. Ke4 Rg3 55. Kd4 Rf3 56. Rxa6 Rxf4+ 57. Ke3 Rh4
58. Ra8 Ne5 59. Kf2 Bc4 60. a5 Rh2+ 61. Kg3 Ra2 62. Kf4 Ra4 63. Ke3
Bd5 64. Ra7 Kf5 65. Kd2 Kf4 66. Rc2 Ra3 67. Ke2 Rh3 68. Kd2 Nc4+ 69.
Rxc4+ Bxc4 70. a6 Kf5 71. Ra8 Ra3 72. a7 Bd5 73. Rd8 Ke6 74. Re8+ Kd7
75. Rh8 Ke7 0-1
7...g6
[Event "5th Karpov It Tournament"]
[Site "Poikovsky RUS"]
[Date "2004.03.26"]
[EventDate "2004.03.17"]
[Round "9"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "J Lautier"]
[Black "V Malakhov"]
[ECO "D15"]
[WhiteElo "2676"]
[BlackElo "2700"]
[PlyCount "40"]
1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 a6 5. c5 Nbd7 6. Bf4 Nh5 7. Bd2 g6
8. e4 dxe4 9. Nxe4 Ndf6 10. Nxf6+ Nxf6 11. Bc4 Bg7 12. O-O O-O 13. Qb3
Bg4 14. Ne5 Qxd4 15. Bc3 Qxc5 16. Rfe1 Nd5 17. Nxg4 Nxc3 18. bxc3 b5
19. Be2 Qxc3 20. Nh6+ 1-0
OK, 13...Bg4? was a bad mistake, but do you want to play a defense
where even a super-GM can get a lost position in 13 moves?
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2005 19:26:14
From:
Subject: Re: Slav vs. Semi-Slav
|
An interesting comment on the Classical Slav (i.e, 4...dxc4) from IM
Semko Semkov, from a thread on the Slav in the Chesspublishing forum:
"I do not know about you, but for me the Classical Slav is one of the
most difficult openings to understand. This is an opening for champions
and the better wins. A very strong GM could lose as White (against
people with deep positional understanding) without committing any
obvious mistake. You can never learn the Classic Slav. You have to feel
it. It is full of variations with the deceiving tag "+=" which could be
true, but it is extremely easy to lose orientation. That's why most
professionals prefer to avoid it. This could be achieved exactly by the
move order we consider in our book: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e3.
Some people say that the Botvinnik is the better choice. Even if that
were true, (and I do not think so), that does not solve the main
problem - how to avoid the Classical Slav. I repeat, you just cannot
learn this opening. The Anti-Meran is many times easier, even in its
most extreme forms like 7.g4."
- IM Semko Semkov
IM Semkov has an excellent reputation as an opening theorist, and has
co-written some well-received opening books for Chess Stars with the
strong Russian GM Konstantin Sakaev.
- Geof Strayer
|
| |
I have tried both and failed miserably, unless it is against a
lower-rated player who understands even less of the position than me,
and I have analyzed the opening since I first saw Botvinnik's games.
I really think that "style" is more of a consideration than most people
realize in choosing openings. Without an active game, my game always
ends up lost, so I play Tarrasch and Tartakover, which provide me with
the positions I understand well.
I also think the Slav offers more winning chances to certain players
than Angelo gives it credit for; my friend c Plum played positions
like this regularly, with good success.
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2005 13:51:36
From: Angelo DePalma
Subject: Re: Slav vs. Semi-Slav
|
My former chess teacher, a FM who wrote a very nice CD on the slav (...dc4),
told me that if black plays perfectly he draws. Of course it's possible to
win from the Black side.
"The position" in the ...dc4 Slav appears 9704 times between 1995 and
present (Neven's "Research" database) in U-2500 games. Black scores pretty
well at 44% (27% wins).
However, if you look only at 2500+ games (both players) 54% of the games are
draws and the winning %s are about the same. Not sure what this proves,
except that the best player usually wins.
<[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I have tried both and failed miserably, unless it is against a
> lower-rated player who understands even less of the position than me,
> and I have analyzed the opening since I first saw Botvinnik's games.
>
> I really think that "style" is more of a consideration than most people
> realize in choosing openings. Without an active game, my game always
> ends up lost, so I play Tarrasch and Tartakover, which provide me with
> the positions I understand well.
>
> I also think the Slav offers more winning chances to certain players
> than Angelo gives it credit for; my friend c Plum played positions
> like this regularly, with good success.
>
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2005 09:52:07
From: Angelo DePalma
Subject: Re: Slav vs. Semi-Slav
|
I believe the ...dc4 variation, which I studied at one time, gives black the
opportunity to draw if he plays perfectly for 33 moves. One mistake and he's
dead.
I once played this variation (the one where B sacs a bishop on e4) against a
strong player and was still in theory 17 moves deep (I didn't know I was --
I was on my own from move 12 or so). I played one inaccurate move and was
crushed. Had I played the correct move at move 18 the game would have been
objectively drawn (but I probably would have lost anyway).
I don't understand the other variations, even though I have a book on the
...a6 defense. If W plays c5 at any time black is in for a long defense with
little to hope for but a draw.
"Zero" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to determine whether I should play the the normal (dxc4)
> Slav, the a6 Slav, or the Semi-Slav. It seems that the both all three
> oepnings are are good openings and lead to equal positions.
>
> I was wondering though why the super GMs don't play the standard dxc4
> slav (d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 dxc4). Instead, they are opting to play
> the Semi-Slav (d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6) and the a6 Slav (d4 d5 c4 c6
> Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 a6)
>
> Do the other two Slav positions lead to quicker equality for black ordo
> they provide better winning chances ? please help me understand. The
> Semi-Slav has been really popular since the 90s when they were all
> young too (Kramnik, Anand, Kamsky, Lautier, Shirov, etc.) hey all used
> to play the standard Slav in the early 90s too but now they just like
> to play the Semi-Slav. Also the a6 Slav has more popularity than the
> standard slav.
>
>
> thank you
>
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2005 23:34:14
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Slav vs. Semi-Slav
|
>I believe the ...dc4 variation, which I studied at one time, gives black
>the opportunity to draw if he plays perfectly for 33 moves. One mistake and
>he's dead.
That's another way of saying it.
The Slav is a great drawing line if you are a great player.
dxc4 in the queen pawn games is generally asking for it. Better be booked
out the wazoo to try that stuff.
|
| | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2005 01:48:26
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Re: Slav vs. Semi-Slav
|
"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:Wz%[email protected]...
> >I believe the ...dc4 variation, which I studied at one time, gives black
> >the opportunity to draw if he plays perfectly for 33 moves. One mistake
> >and he's dead.
>
> That's another way of saying it.
>
> The Slav is a great drawing line if you are a great player.
>
> dxc4 in the queen pawn games is generally asking for it. Better be booked
> out the wazoo to try that stuff.
Listen to Gordo. He would know. He's an Openings Grandmaster.
|
|
