Failed Experiment: Defense Analysis

Sort:
Avatar of gxtmf1

Sure, you could call this analysis for the sake of analysis and you wouldn't be entirely incorrect; however, I feel that analyses that disprove certain ideas, even those ideas that no one in their right mind would ever consider, are just as important as those analyses that prove certain ideas. My simple reason is this: Some people learn best being told what they should do, while others learn best being told what they shouldn't do ("Stay on Sidewalk" vs. "Keep off Grass"). The defense I am analyzing this post is a "failure". It doesn't lose material, but it demonstrates the importance of tempo, development, and space in the opening, all three of which may be hard for a beginner to keep in mind or understand.

Avatar of Elubas

Not a bad idea and decent analysis. But I disagree that f4 is necessary in the ...Nd7 line. White should just play for a d5 breakthrough with fast development and shouldn't block in his bishop. He has enough space. I like the concept though. You think I should post a game where I took advantage of a strong center along the same lines as this?

Avatar of gxtmf1

Definitely. That would be much better than these hypothetical lines.