Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Benoni snake - who knows this beast


  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1

    bronsteinitz

    I lost a game against this beast and would like to know more about it. I followed the advice of a d4 repertoire, but found the resulting situation utterly disappointing

    I saw that more classical play is probably an alternative, but this was turned out in an incredible pawn race which my opponent won. Am quite charmed by this variation now... Any comments?

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #2

    Metaknight251

    Is playing Bd6 a move early a line (after d5)?

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #3

    Math0t

    Don't know anything about it myself, but Mark Ginsburg made a great video about it: Modern Benoni 3: The Snake Benoni

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #4

    nameno1had

    Looks like something Tal would have liked...

    too bad we couldn't consult him, but he would probably say he wouldn't get too bogged down in the theory of it...lol

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #5

    Metaknight251

    tal played the benoni right?  I'm not sure if he played the snake though.  Probably the modern benoni. 

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #6

    Caesar_Reborn

    This forum has also spark my interest about this opening.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #7

    nameno1had

    That is what I was getting at somewhat...

    the other thing I was mentioning was that if Tal would have been interested in any modern sound theory for an opening he liked, except he probably would have skipped out on the theory side of things due to his nature and style...

    Had he been into playing according to sound theory, instead of figuring out how to out play his opponents, in spite of the theory for the positions he was in, he might have been the one to either come up with this or maybe would have expounded on it...

    I can't find anything one how Tal contributed to opening theory except that he didn't really contribute much, but I can find a ton of quotes about how and why he played in spite of the theory...

    http://www.academicchess.org/Focus/Tal/tal_quotes.shtml

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #8

    Fear_ItseIf

    Which repertoire book did you use?

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #9

    waffllemaster

    I've seen it before, but don't know much about it.  When were you utterly disappointed?  The end position doesn't seem so bad (?)

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #10

    bronsteinitz

    Ok, thanks mathot, great video. Did not know about the snake but i like openings that i lose against. Have watched it and my wedge is probably not the best way to deal with this.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #11

    bronsteinitz

    @wafflemaster: the black pawns are unstoppable.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #12

    Estragon

    If I recall correctly, the actual Snake Benoni is 4 ...Bd6, Black doesn't hurry to exchange on d5.  If White plays 5 e4 the Bd6 can "snake" to e5 with a whole different set of ideas.

    As with most oddball ideas in the opening, White does best not to try to refute it outright, just develop solidly and soundly.  Black is going to end up either spending a lot of time on his Bishop and/or have the deficiencies of the Modern Benoni without its assets.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #14

    bronsteinitz

    Thanks, typo 7.e4 i imagine. Do you think the snake is a possible defence for black? It seems to have some potential to me...

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #16

    Caesar_Reborn

    pfren wrote:

    No, I don't think so. Factly, I think white's simplest and most effective plan is the simple 6.e4, and I fail to see Black's big idea.

    Regardless of you not being able to see Black's idea, I would rather be in a Snake Benoni position as Black than a Taimanov Attack Benoni as Black.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #17

    Eseles

    nameno1had wrote:

    That is what I was getting at somewhat...

    the other thing I was mentioning was that if Tal would have been interested in any modern sound theory for an opening he liked, except he probably would have skipped out on the theory side of things due to his nature and style...

    Had he been into playing according to sound theory, instead of figuring out how to out play his opponents, in spite of the theory for the positions he was in, he might have been the one to either come up with this or maybe would have expounded on it...

    I can't find anything one how Tal contributed to opening theory except that he didn't really contribute much, but I can find a ton of quotes about how and why he played in spite of the theory...

    http://www.academicchess.org/Focus/Tal/tal_quotes.shtml

    I don't think Tal "skipped the theory"

    From the link you provided:

    "...Naturally, every chess player improvises over the board in accordance with his talent and imagination. But what is already known, must be known" Mikhail Tal

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #18

    nameno1had

    @Eseles I didn't mean it in terms of Tal never examing, using or even memorizing some theory. It would be impossible to not make use of some of it along the way, for any decent player, but especially for a GM.I meant that, once Tal began using the Benoni, beyond the first half dozen moves, he probably was already looking to improvise, instead of sticking to memorized lines It stands to reason that, a player who wants to not play theory moves, would be looking to get his opponent out of it at the first chance. It stands to reason the longer you follow a line of known theory that, your best options for leaving the line are sooner than later. Besides, by your own contribution, Tal's admission and my conclusion, What is already known, must be understood...but that doesn't include what wasn't already known at the time Tal stated it. It is on this basis that, using this context for my statement, gives it merit....
  • 24 months ago · Quote · #19

    ThrillerFan

    I played the snake once, just as a trick shot against a 1700 player, and mauled him.

    The idea behind it is to bring the dark squared bishop out to a5 (via f8-d6-c7-a5) and not weaken the Kingside by Fianchettoing.

    The problem is that White can play d6 after the Bishop goes to c7, virtually splitting Black's camp into two.  The Queenside pieces and Kingside pieces have trouble communicating (like White's issues in the Winawer, only worse).  It's not a sound system if White knows what he's doing, but it's at the same time very tricky, and if White doesn't know what he's doing, consequences can be fatal.

    Do not try this against a master.  He'll maul you.  But against a low-rated player, you'll probably win the first time you face them every time, but don't make a habit out of the system at the club.  Eventually he'll look to see what he should do, and actually study it since you are now habitually playing it at the club, and he'll maul you the next time.  Strictly meant to be a surprise weapon!

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #20

    waffllemaster

    bronsteinitz wrote:

    @wafflemaster: the black pawns are unstoppable.

    Oh, I kind of forgot you were a pawn down.  I guess black's idea is to just exchange and win an endgame... don't' think he can push right away though, surely white should play Rfd1 in the diagram and pressure black's d and/or f pawn.  But I see what you mean now by being disappointed.


Back to Top

Post your reply: