So does everybody .. it is considered one of the best defences against d4. There is no refutation and not even a sure way to get advtange.
It is not for no reason that many people play Nf3 to enter the queen indian
So does everybody .. it is considered one of the best defences against d4. There is no refutation and not even a sure way to get advtange.
It is not for no reason that many people play Nf3 to enter the queen indian
Why did you do a 16 move puzzle instead of a game diagram?
Rubinstein Variation was named after the great Arthur Rubinstein.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEl9zn8JPW8
I dont understand why Black goes d5-c5 in Rubinstein variation.. It helps white undouble his pawns and allows him to open the position where the two bishops will be a advantage.. I think black is better with something like this
thanks. I think i will go with the rubenstein. But why can't black just take on d5 with the knight. tacticasacting 123
IMHO the Saemisch variation is not the way to go against the Nimzo. Black gets a lot of play against the c4 pawn. Btw, here is a standard line in the Saemisch, for those who wonder what it is :
Either the Capablanca (4.Qc2) or the Rubinstein (4.e3) look better tries to me.
I try to go for a position like this:
I'm not saying this is best play from both sides, I'm just showing the type of position to go into.
OF course, I play e4 :P
@ Dabigone : without even book knowledge, 7...cxd4 ? in your line is a big mistake : why allow White to get rid of his doubled pawns ? Better the plan ...b6, ...Nb8-c6-a5 and ...Ba6.
BTW, I strongly recommend Reinaldo Vera's Chess explained : the Nimzo-Indian to anyone who really wants to study that opening. It's reader-friendly (unlike other books from the chess explained series) and complete (as far as <2100 opening knowledge is concerned at least).
I am having an extremely hard time facing the nimzo-indian.
Please! Help!!