e5 should only be played as a response to d5 of course
Why are there few Caro-Kann players?
Sort:
Inyustisia wrote:
e5 should only be played as a response to d5 of course
While I can't vouch for move orders, I know it is possible to force the game into a queen's opening like line, without losing anything that your opponent wasn't capable of taking in a 1. e4 game. THe point was to get them out of their game. They are more likely to not play the best moves, if they aren't used to them. I also discovered/developed this with the idea of match play in mind. Too many people put too much emphasis on what is likely to happen in one on line chess game, where opening explorer can be used and people might even consult an engine.
it's not. :p you can't force white into c4 and if you don't take action in the center white can just autopilot with e4 d4 Nc3 Nf3 Bd3 O-O etc
i like your philosophy though.
Inyustisia wrote:
it's not. :p you can't force white into c4 and if you don't take action in the center white can just autopilot with e4 d4 Nc3 Nf3 Bd3 O-O etc
You are right you can't, but, if you aren't as aggressive and assertive in the center as you can be, many will respond with a classical two pawn center, as I believe they are correctly taught...
and how is that good for black? white has a simple advantage after 1 e4 c6 2 d4 e6 3 Nc3! when there is no escaping playing main lines a tempo down or playing a few independent lines with ..Bb4, in both cases having a worse (though playable) position. in any case these aren't "queen's opening" lines.
Team International has two thematic Caro-Kann vote chess games ongoing, that have just started. One as Black and one as White. Join the club and join the games.
With so many people using extensive databases and books on popular things, I prefer to take a slight positional risk early on. After all, it isn't as if I am advocating this for top GM's...many players at my level miss obvious tactics and there are for more likely to miss innacuracies than the ones I play in lines they know or have hard data in a database telling them my line is inferior...
Inyustisia wrote:
and how is that good for black? white has a simple advantage after 1 e4 c6 2 d4 e6 3 Nc3! when there is no escaping playing main lines a tempo down or playing a few independent lines with ..Bb4, in both cases having a worse (though playable) position. in any case these aren't "queen's opening" lines.
I stated that badly...perhaps better said would have been, to reach a position of, even if the ECO code is different. If I can reach a theme/position etc, that I am familiar with but, my opponent isn't, I'll take it. I really could care less about the .2 of a pawn difference...
i like your philosophy, though i can't help but think that your line is just bad. but hey, whatever works for you :D
Inyustisia wrote:
i like your philosophy, though i can't help but think that your line is just bad. but hey, whatever works for you :D
This why I think it is good...
You mentioned if they will play c4...
This is why I tend to think most will in my rating range. Then you could end up with this position...
This game between Karpov as black and the rest of the world made an impression on me as to how effortlessly Karpov won playing the Caro:
1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Nf3 Ngf6 6. Bd3 Nxe4 7. Bxe4 Nf6 8. Bd3 Bg4 9. c3 e6 10. O-O Be7 11. h3 Bh5 12. Bf4 O-O 13. Re1 Qb6 14. Rb1 c5 15. dxc5 Bxc5 16. Be3 Rfd8 17. Bxc5 Qxc5 18. Qe2 Qd5 19. Bc4 Bxf3 20. gxf3 Qg5+ 21. Kh2 Qh4 22. Rg1 g6 23. Rbd1 Qf4+ 24. Kh1 Qh4 25. Kh2 Rxd1 26. Rxd1 Nh5 27. Rd4 Nf4 28. Qf1 Rc8 29. b3 b5 30. Bxb5 Rxc3 31. Be2 Rc2 32. Re4 Rc1 0-1
BlackChrysler57 wrote:
Your idea isn't even new, it's in all the Caro-Kann books, and given a bad remark. No French Defense player is going to take two moves to play ...c5 when it normally takes but one move. And no Caro-Kann Defense player is ever going to want to shut in his light-squared Bishop. If he was going to do that, then why play ...c6 at all? Just play the French and get ...c5 in immediately without loss of tempo.
You're not confusing anyone, an advanced player, unlike the poor description given above is going to tear you to ribbons. We won't need an engine or a mass home chess library (none of which are allowed in over the board chess), we're just going to beat your passivity down to rubbish and ruin, and it's not going to take 50 moves, probably 30-50. Either way, you're going down with no counter-chances.
Believe me, that is really going to suck. It's far better to go down with a fight and that's what 1...e5 and 1...c5 bring to the table.
When I know that I am likely to get knocked out or knocked into a permanent state of duh, before I get unpreventably knocked out, I'd rather make someone work for it and in the end, I may be able to hit them with a counter they didn't see coming, turning the tables on them. One problem with your idea is that you comparing 2 different classes of players. I have beaten plenty of people with in my own rating range and I see some masters have played it. They wouldn't even try it if it werent playable.
BlackChrysler57 wrote:
Totally true "Fiveofswords", the good 1. e4 attacking player will enjoy attacking passive positions, while the good 1. d4 player, accustomed to winning with almost invisible advantages will totally enjoy winning with such obvious advantages as these in this move order. Even the English and Reti players won't be too upset to see this passive play. For whom is there confusion?
You are talking about players with preferred opening repertoires and I am talking about those who might know the first 3 moves of an opening without checking a book or database. That makes a big difference usually.
XPLAYERJX wrote:
@ParadoxOfNone I am going to show you a line that I would play if some1 did those moves against me so you can see the problem and I'll show you from the whites perspective so you can see how easy white plan/ attack is again I'm not doing this to discourage you just to make you aware of the situation so you can try and rethink your strategy or even line choice
In this line, I'd play d6, before I'd even consider g6. For the record, I don't like to fianchetto my kingside bishop and then castle behind it. I think that it wastes the bishop pair and leaves you vulnerable to those who are content to force trades along that diagonal, leaving you with a weakened castle structure. I can't even begin to count the number of tactics puzzles I have attempted with that theme...
I just wanted to say for the record, to all of you who are being kind enough to take the time to teach me, I don't mean to seem to quarrel against sound reason. I appreciate what you are saying and also, I am also wanting to let you know that I don't think I am above reproof or correction. Having said all of this, I wanted to let you know that I got this idea from studying how in Aronian vs Anand at 2013 Tata Steel, Anand did somethings that caught my eye.
I am not trying to mimic Anand but, I saw the benefit of trying to get to that position if possible. Anand taught 2 things to me in that game that I found both profound and compelling. If I am not mistaken, at move 11 he played the 11th best possible move. That taught me that though a weaker, subtle, or novelty move can still allow for a powerful result. Also, Aronian had better t-3 scores in that game and was still smashed. Anand did have better t-4 scores though. Sometimes the power of a well strategized, positionally played game that the opponent isn't familiar with, can prove disasterous, even if he plays well according to the computers. I realize that I am not Anand but, my opponents aren't Aronian either.
Here is the game...
Fiveofswords wrote:
well i think you could afford to be much more brave. Getting your opponent out of book is not enough justification for totally abandoning center control in the first 3 moves. If you want to deviate, try a couple moves later. Theres no need for this overly pessimistic self destructive self cramping style of play.
Notice that in your examplegame anand played 2...d5. That immediately makes it a more genuine struggle for equality than your line.
I do sometimes play d5 immediately but, I try to avoid allowing my opponent to the "E" pawn past it to e5. If I am going to potentially end up with a thorn in my side, whether try the French, or Caro-Kann, I might as well do it my way. I think the reason Anand could afford to make the immediate push is the Aronian played e3, instead of e4. That makes a world of difference.
PS...Having said all of that, I think now you see why I say, I prefer the Sicilian at this point in my chessic development. I do try to remain flexible and have a back plan for match play. I guess match play is meaningless here at chess.com, since the site doesn't have a feature for individual matches and no one here seems to care.
Posted by:BlackChrysler57
Some idiot above said that A-players and above were snobbish. Not really. We don't talk as much to you guys, not because we think we're better (though we often are), it's because you guys disappear. You beat up on weak players and then when your rating takes you to the next higher level, against stronger players, you guys disappear, nowhere to be found.
That's the real reason why we don't talk as much to you guys, you're not going to be around. We'd rather wait and see if you have what it takes, the mental toughness it takes to face strong players without being intimidated. Why befriend someone who isn't going to be around? No one does normally, even outside the chess world. The other reason is that you guys never listen, no matter what we say, so the whole thing becomes academic. Some people have to learn the hard way. I can accept that, seen it enough times.
I think another reason it is harder for players of different classes to have reasonable converstaions regularly is that, you have different mindsets, two different ways of thinking and approaching the same circumstances. There are probably bouts of pride and jealousy, underlying it all.
Sadly but rightly so, there is a part of me that had to learn to accept that I am going to lose and lose a lot, so I don't mind. For me it is always a learning experience. That may be a detriment to me. It may steal my competitive edge to a degree. Beyond that though, inspite of not wanting to quarrel against sound reasoning, I think it is healthy to not simply play moves because you know a book, coach, computer, etc tells you they are good but, if you work through things somewhat on your own initiative, you can "learn" and not be a robot.
I don't always want to play the best possible line according what masters do or a computers says, then find I don't have a clue how to proceed, blowing a great chance to win. I realize that I can learn from that point but, I learned to ride a full sized bicycle, with no training wheels and had to take off pedaling on the grass each time, because, when I started on the pavement, it hurt a lot more when I fell.
You are right, some people will feel compelled to learn the hard way and we may never agree on what the hard way is...
BTW, I am not advocating this as my primary defense. In a match, I may try to use the French Exchange, regular Caro-Kann, few lines of Sicilian and this crazy hodge podged Caro-Kann novelty.
2 minutes ago · Quote · #135
" I have come to realize if your going to try a side line at least start off solid than start to venture out."
and abandoning the center is the opposite of solid. YOu might not see it so often at your level of play but i cant count how many times my opponent handed me the center, i took it, and just smoothly won a game where my opponent never had counterplay. Often people are confused about where they went wrong. It was move 2. Your opening is about as solid as starting the game with a pawn or 2 handicap.
Many people play gambits and some of them sac not 1 but 2 pawns...
and I wouldn't try this everytime out. Consider it a surprise perhaps, if I think it may work.
Fiveofswords wrote:
paradox your move cannot be compared with a gambit. I have no problem with gambits...but the idea is to get compensation. YOur opening is giving white compensation for a pawn without actually taking a pawn....
Great point!! I never thought of it like that before...
against paradox line white should just develop normally, e4 c6 d4 e6 Nc3 d5 Nf3. even if the game goes 3 Nf3 d5 e5 you're a tempo down in the french advance
Honestly, I would probably play d6 first, since this what one should do if someone pushes their e pawn too soon in the French. It is cramped but, it is playable...