Gonnosuke: Thanks for your comment!
I did have a few questions: Do you know which is the most popular/most successful these days? The Fort Knox or the more classic (at least as I understand it) 4...Nd7? Also, how does black achieve equality with the Fort Knox if he can't challenge the d pawn with c5? Or does he hope to play this after exchanging the light squared bishop? Also, I'm assuming that the light squared bishop usually fianchettos in the 4...Nd7 Rubinstein, correct?
Regardless of what theory states, i have always found the Rubenstein a very pleasant variation to face. At low levels of play activity tends to beat solidity.
The first time ever i faced it i was playing against a played rated 2000 (at the time i was definitely weaker that now) he played an immediate Nf6 ang i got a totally winning position out of the opening (then i obviously blundered a full piece and lost the game
).
In favour of this defense i must say that i have seen some GM games where B handled the position with a lot of fighting spirit (Morozevich variation? i'm not sure) and won spectacular games. It's not necessarily as dull and passive as generally believed.
Hello everyone,
I have recently started playing the French Rubinstein (1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4)
I enjoy the french and don't mind slow and slightly passive positions, so it seemed like a perfect fit.
However, I'm not as of yet familiar with many of the major themes, goals, and strategic ideas involved in it.
Would anyone be willing to give a brief overview of these for both sides? Thanks!
-hankm