1 d4 Nf6 2 c3!? played by Rapport today, what opening is, how good is it?
Sort:
It transposed in fact into a Torre attack with Nf3-Bg5 next.
There is no name for 1.d4 and c3 but can transpose into Torre attack (with Nf3-Bg5), London system (Nf3-Bf4), Colle/Zukertort (Nf3-e3) and sometimes other systems like Pirc after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c3 g6 3.Nf3 Bg7 4.Nbd2 followed by e4.
Oct 25, 2018
0
#5
Early c3s are highly transpositional, and not bad at all, but in almost every case black should easily get equality early.
Rapport is still young. It will be interesting to see what he can do if he ever takes the time to study seriously and play top level chess instead of goofing around at the 2680-2720 level.
Just look at Mamedyarov. We had to wait until he was over 30, but he eventually decided to give it a shot and he almost won the candidates tournament.
Oct 25, 2018
0
#6
Those are all good points.
But top 10 players (like Carlsen and Mame) play 10 Berlins or QGDs for every 1 non-standard opening... and there's a difference between non-standard and plain bad. I've seen Rapport play BS benoni lines against 2500 GMs and barely manage to get lucky and win.
That might work if you're screwing around against 2500s but it's not going to get you a spot in the top 10. Mame started playing boring QGDs and poof, he was rated #2 in the world and nearly won the candidates tournament.
Yigor wrote:
Queen's Head opening.
Reversed Slav 
It can also transpose into a Chigorin
Oct 25, 2018
0
#11
DeirdreSkye wrote:
stiggling wrote:
Those are all good points.
But top 10 players (like Carlsen and Mame) play 10 Berlins or QGDs for every 1 non-standard opening... and there's a difference between non-standard and plain bad. I've seen Rapport play BS benoni lines against 2500 GMs and barely manage to get lucky and win.
That might work if you're screwing around against 2500s but it's not going to get you a spot in the top 10. Mame started playing boring QGDs and poof, he was rated #2 in the world and nearly won the candidates tournament.
Mame was rated No 2 in the world by playing several lines that were considered suboptimal like Barnes and Cozio and Kramnik won a World Championship thanks to a suboptimal line. Svidler on the other hand did nothing of these 2 despite his persistence in playing main lines and he is certainly not less talented than Mamedyarov.
By the way , I do support main lines , but claiming that Rapport doesn't study chess because he played 2.c3 is an extremely superficial assessment. Rapport and Jobava are considered today 2 of the most creative players in the world and they play the chess we like to see in top level. Uncompromising fighting chess ignoring long drawish theoretical lines and established theoretical status quo. But when we see that chess , instead of appreciating it , we accuse them that they don't study!
Yeah, c3 is not so bad, and I don't know what Rapport's main openings are. Maybe it's stuff like this all the time, but I don't know.
And yeah, I think it was Kramnik who said you have to work a lot harder when playing lines like that because you have to make your own theory. So I'm sure Rapport works hard, and I'm sure he knows a lot more about chess than I do.
So when I say maybe one day he'll study, I mean study with ambitions to be a top 10 player, which will probably mean he has to give up certain openings completely, and so at last some of that work he's been doing will be wasted.
Oct 25, 2018
0
#12
DeirdreSkye wrote:
stiggling wrote:
So when I say maybe one day he'll study, I mean study with ambitions to be a top 10 player, which will probably mean he has to give up certain openings completely, and so at last some of that work he's been doing will be wasted.
There is no study or training to be top 10 or not to be top 10. Every chessplayer of athlete , either novice, intermediate or advanced , trains to improve as much as he can. Rapport has the same ambitions as anyone else but not all are destined to be top 10 chessplayers. That's the sad reality of life.
Rapport's main deficiency is his unwillingness to play long endgames and grind down the win. He often prefers complicated risky lines, even moving on the edge of unsoundness, than a safe slightly better endgame with good winning chances. That has cost him several points and tournament wins as himself said sone years ago in an interview.
Just for the sake of discussion, lets talk about those endgames then.
At some point not playing them does affect skills because he'll have less experience playing them than his peers.
But also I disagree with your first two sentences. Not every person trains to improve as much as they can. It's common for people to avoid studying the things they don't like, even if they know it would probably help them improve.
Oct 25, 2018
0
#13
Yes, competitors are focused on competing, but still, within this group of people there is a range of seriousness.
For example I read through Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual once... and that was enough for me. I decided (and still believe) that my endgames are good enough, even though I didn't absorb even close to half what that book has to offer.
This expert I know, he very meticulously worked though Nunn's endgame books over the course of many months... that's way more work than I'm willing to do.
Others learn a few basic endgames and that's it.
So there's an example of a range of seriousness with me somewhere in the middle.
Rapport obviously doesn't take openings as seriously as some 2700 players. He prefers to do what he enjoys vs do what will give him the best best results in the long run.
Oct 25, 2018
0
#14
Just to clarify, did Mamedyarov play the Barnes Defense
or the Smyslov-Barnes Defense which seems more logical:
Oct 25, 2018
0
#15
DeirdreSkye wrote:
You describe the average amateur , I describe the average tournament player.
There is no such thing as "range of seriousness" for a tournament player.
"No true scotsman" I suppose.
congrandolor пишет:
congrandolor пишет:
stiggling wrote:
Early c3s are highly transpositional, and not bad at all, but in almost every case black should easily get equality early.
Rapport is still young. It will be interesting to see what he can do if he ever takes the time to study seriously and play top level chess instead of goofing around at the 2680-2720 level.
Just look at Mamedyarov. We had to wait until he was over 30, but he eventually decided to give it a shot and he almost won the candidates tournament.
The above opening is not a specific case in point, but Rapport is wasting his talent on playing suboptimal ( = dubious) openings. Mamedaryov's case was different (and playing the Cozio Defence or the Smyslov Defence against Ruy Lopez can't even remotely be called dubious). He was just too wild and inventive to challenge for the title (it's rare to succeed unless these instincts are dialed back at least just a tad) - but was still a World Top 10 player. Once he rounded out his style properly, he became a genuine threat.
stiggling wrote:
Yes, competitors are focused on competing, but still, within this group of people there is a range of seriousness.
For example I read through Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual once... and that was enough for me. I decided (and still believe) that my endgames are good enough, even though I didn't absorb even close to half what that book has to offer.
This expert I know, he very meticulously worked though Nunn's endgame books over the course of many months... that's way more work than I'm willing to do.
Others learn a few basic endgames and that's it.
So there's an example of a range of seriousness with me somewhere in the middle.
Rapport obviously doesn't take openings as seriously as some 2700 players. He prefers to do what he enjoys vs do what will give him the best best results in the long run.
Maybe you are right in general about Rapport opening approach, but not in this case: he came up with a novelty in this line, an interesting pawn sacrifice which gave him good play, so maybe you are a bit unfair in this case, as he seems to have prepared the line well.
Oct 25, 2018
0
#19
openings don't matter one iota; don't you watch or ever listen Carlsen? He's only 2900
BonTheCat wrote:
stiggling wrote:
Early c3s are highly transpositional, and not bad at all, but in almost every case black should easily get equality early.
Rapport is still young. It will be interesting to see what he can do if he ever takes the time to study seriously and play top level chess instead of goofing around at the 2680-2720 level.
Just look at Mamedyarov. We had to wait until he was over 30, but he eventually decided to give it a shot and he almost won the candidates tournament.
The above opening is not a specific case in point, but Rapport is wasting his talent on playing suboptimal ( = dubious) openings. Mamedaryov's case was different (and playing the Cozio Defence or the Smyslov Defence against Ruy Lopez can't even remotely be called dubious). He was just too wild and inventive to challenge for the title (it's rare to succeed unless these instincts are dialed back at least just a tad) - but was still a World Top 10 player. Once he rounded out his style properly, he became a genuine threat.
I remember the same thing being written about Moro in a book review of his Chigorin Defense book.