Forums

problem with nimzo indian?? opening

Sort:
fanofjapan

Well i played a game recently which i lost, now i wanted to look the  moves up, where i went wrong. the moves were 1.d4 e6 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Bg5 c5
the opening explorer says that more games were won with black in that line, so did i already mess up with white?? was bg5 a mistake??

fanofjapan
pellik wrote:

Bg5 is not the best move, but at class level the subtleties of the nimzo arn't that important.

Just remember to protect your bishop pair and try to open up the position. "Where I wen't wrong" implies you think an innaccurate opening move is the cause of your loss. Bg5 was only a mistake if you didn't have any reason in your mind for playing it. Did you follow through with some sort of plan? What happened to that plan? Why did it or did it not work? 

The easiest to learn and perhaps most principled line against the nimzo is 4. Qc2. Black doesn't get to double your pawns but white is behind in development. Follow up with 5. a3 to force the exchange then be careful not to exchange a bishop without getting some other advantage for it.


 well i lost because i blundered badly... i just wanted to know if bg5 is considered bad or not.. and why.... yes of course q2.. but i think its more fun to let him ruin the pawn chain... i might be wrong but i think white is better after all... i mean you can still win with a ruined pawn chain...  well the idea behind bg5 is so that i can play e3 without the bishop locked down and take away blacks best kingside defender.. or if he moves the bishop back to e7 to dislocate his bishop. ok thx anyway...

well actually i now where i think about yes i think i even lost because of bg5, bg5 hands over to black the entire game.. cant believe people with white could even win

fanofjapan

but anyway you are right qc2 is a much better move than bg5.. is there also a mainline were white allows to get bad pawns and so remainst with initiative??

yourfutureboss
fanofjapan wrote:

but anyway you are right qc2 is a much better move than bg5.. is there also a mainline were white allows to get bad pawns and so remainst with initiative??


The Samisch(4. a3) and the 4. f3 lines both lead to pretty crazy games.

fanofjapan
yourfutureboss wrote:
fanofjapan wrote:

but anyway you are right qc2 is a much better move than bg5.. is there also a mainline were white allows to get bad pawns and so remainst with initiative??


The Samisch(4. a3) and the 4. f3 lines both lead to pretty crazy games.


 thank you verry much

TwoMove

4Bg5 in itself is a perfectly good move, called the Leningrad system, and played a lot by the young Spassky. If you played it though hoping for Queens gambit like pressure on d5, you would have been disappointed. Nimzo is designed to avoid those type of Queens Declined problems. Maybe you walked into tactical problems after 4...c5 5Nf3 Qa5, probably 5d5 is necessary.

TwoMove

After 4Qc2 0.0 the 5e4 is a lively move played quite often by Sokolov. It is more typical for solid 1.d4 club players to play 5a3 BxN 6QxB and try to milk the bishop pair after 6...b6 7Bg5 etc. More recently black has been playing 6...d5, which seems more effective for black in using development lead.

Black can reach the same position with 4...d5 5a3 BxN 6QxB  0.0 there are some other sharp posibilities for black too. Currently it is a problem for white to prove anything after 5pxp pxp 6Bg5 h6 7Bh4 c5.

Cystem_Phailure

As Black I prefer to play the Nimzo-Indian against 1.d4 , but for whatever reason, even though it's common and I know it may be coming, I find the pin of my Knight from Bg5 to be more troublesome in the N-I than when I face the same pin in other openings.  I don't know if Bg5 was best right when you played it, but it's not a bad move.

fanofjapan

ok thx a lot....