Edward I agree with you, except that after Tal and Fischer no one has trust it at the high levels of competition. Kasparov use it couple a times when was a kid and in the early 80's he was the first who refuted it with the Taimanov attack. He played 100 games , at least 50 with black pieces against Karpov who was 1.d4 player. He never used the Modern Benoni because now the history will have been different. The KID saved his ass until the early 90's were switched to the Gruenfeld.
Benoni From Black's Perspective
Sort:
Bishop_g5 wrote:
Edward I agree with you, except that after Tal and Fischer no one has trust it at the high levels of competition. Kasparov use it couple a times when was a kid and in the early 80's he was the first who refuted it with the Taimanov attack. He played 100 games , at least 50 with black pieces against Karpov who was 1.d4 player. He never used the Modern Benoni because now the history will have been different. The KID saved his ass until the early 90's were switched to the Gruenfeld.
this is why i suggest to look at recent books. Black learned how to counter fine the tajmanov line but this is not well explained in 30 years old books!
Nowadays the critical line is the modern line. As i already said: Gashimov played the benoni with succees against top players until he died last year, so cannot be confuted, but a simple look on his games will show how he played 'differently' from the old classical lines. Old lines has been refuted, but new solution for black arised.
I am interested a lot for the Psakhis book and his games. I heard that he gives some good solutions for the early Bf4 variation that squeeze the Benoni a lot. It's that true?!
As for the Taimanov attack let me keep my concerns! Even if they have find a way to deal with it, the position you get out of the opening can not be attractive to invest a counterplay. It's not much to invest time and memorization.
It reminds me the Sicilian Dragon against the Yougoslav attack. Everyone with enthusiasm, yes! black can find resources! New theories! Magnus won with 14...a6! but in the end of the day, White stands better!
Some things never change.
Bishop_g5 hat geschrieben:
By the way IM Pfren , how many norms of your title achieved using the Benoni in regural bases?! and why Super GM's don't trust it when they play critical games?
I don't know about Pfren, but I made my one IM norm thanks to 1,5/2 with the Benoni, one of my opponents being a certain sowjet defector GM . When I missed my second norm by a hair, there was also 2/2 with the Benoni involved, and one of the guys was an IM. Of course it helps that I have a certain basic understanding of this opening, which is rather fragile, but also quite rewarding, if you handle the balance between containment and counterplay correctly. And no, Benoni is not just about pushing your queenside pawns forward and avoiding the loss of pawn d6.
FM RUMO 75
I have no reasons to do not believe you. I understand that you feel the Benoni feats to your style but when you see thinks objective and out of styles it's impossible to do not realize how difficult is for black to play for a good position compare to other openings. The OP is a intermediate player and I don't know how he will manage to handle this even against players his level.
My personal experience using the Benoni is terrible. I don't want to remember my games. Especially those against the early Bf4 variation were if you push a6 you totally f***ed your position! Psakhis has find a solution with an early Na6!? waiting white to commit a4 and jump to b4 but I don't know the alternatives to support this game so I left it there and went to Gruenfeld. There is another variation more complicated with both Knights Nh4 , Nf6 , Ne8 knight maneuver were black equalize but I don't know all this mess if worth for a club amateur player like me to memorize and study.
This kind of chess are for professionals and highly ambitious ones! and even there, the Modern Benoni does not have much of preference cause of it nature.
Reb wrote:
When black plays a benoni you know he's not interested in a draw !
95% of my games are a win or a loss. I hate draws.
Currently I'm reading The Complete Book Of Chess Strategy by Jeremy Silman. Another book How To Open A Chess Game is on download ...
I hope I would find enough food there to help me survive a 1.d5 opening by white where I don't go for drawish copycat responses ...
You have to defend a title and keep an ELO limit, pfren. We patzers don't 
pfren wrote:
For quite a few reasons.
Bellin's book is the best for the O.P. as well as the best book to LEARN the Benoni. Old? So what? There is NO THEORY in it, only pawn structures, plans and endgame patterns, and THIS is what matters most for this opening, as well as most others.
ME: HM... this is interesting.. maybe i should give it a try...
Did you notice that the O.P.'s knowledge of the Benoni goes as far as move two?
ME: YEP ... some of what he call benoni is not benoni at all.
Petrov's book is a typical "GM Series" book, which means: not good for class players, not good for GM's, not good for correspondence players.
ME: can't talk about GM or (serious) correspondence, but i found it the least usefull of the one i own...
Franco's book is bad- half baked explanations, poor analytical work (everyone with a lo-fi engine can realize it).
ME: Forgive me if i try to defend this book. i believe that at your level what you said its true, but for a low level player that have no idea what a benoni is i found it as a good and easy introduction (not too overhelming). Obviously, once you start digging a bit more you need something else, but as first shoot , it helped me.
Psakhis' book is a "Benoni Encyclopaedia"- so you can call it outdated.
Agreed.. but I still occasinally found it usefull. Its incredible how many people answer the benoni with the old classical lines ( the one where black does Bg4 and exchage the f3 knight ) which its already a half victory for black, or at least is the easiest line black can face. Obviously this happens against players that never meet the benoni and have no idea whats going on, but this happens quite often at my level.
My wife (WIM rated currently 2181) plays the Benoni, and all she has read is the old (1981) Kondratiev's book, available only in Russian. Honestly it is a better buy than Psakhis, even today.
ME: Pitty ... never heard about this book, but anyway, my russian knowledge is null, so definetly not a book for me.
Same for other openings too: The reference book for the Nimzo-Indian is still the monumental Gligoric volume, published 30 years ago.
ME: do you mean the 'play the minzo-indian defence' ? i own the italian translaton published in 1985. is was my first chess book, and the one that convinced me to play d4 instead of e4 loooong time ago.
Charetter115 wrote:
The Benoni is honestly a bit crazy. You are just trying to get a pawn to promote queenside and white is going to try to checkmate you before that happens. Your pawn breaks should be obvious, b7-b5, a7-a6, eventually c5-c4, and then just pawnstorm and try to break through the queenside. Your pieces are really just there to support your pawns. It's very risky. Hope this helps!
you really have no idea what you're talking about
@Charetter115 look im not trying to be mean, but it's really not about "promoting a pawn on the queenside while getting mated". you're right, it can get into crazy positions, and it usually is extremely complex.
Bishop_g5 wrote:
Edward I agree with you, except that after Tal and Fischer no one has trust it at the high levels of competition. Kasparov use it couple a times when was a kid and in the early 80's he was the first who refuted it with the Taimanov attack. He played 100 games , at least 50 with black pieces against Karpov who was 1.d4 player. He never used the Modern Benoni because now the history will have been different. The KID saved his ass until the early 90's were switched to the Gruenfeld.
Benoni defense is worthy learning, especially if you are playiing otb in chess club or tournament; Benoni is so tactical and not easy to play against, one thing white cannot just develop pieces and expect to get an advantage, its good to play against low rated players, passive players and boring players who play the Trompowski, Torre attack, Colle system and London System. If you played the Sicilian it is worthy learning the Benoni. Tal, Fischer, Kasparov ( Won a game against Korchnoi in the Benoni) and Dragoljub Velimirovic, he had great faith in the Benoni and won a lot games. It should be a part of a player opening repertoire, especially if you need to win, the Grunfeld and the King's Indian is also very good attacking defense.
Aug 18, 2015
0
#34
I am personally a fan of the Benko, but if you're wondering about the Modern Benoni, Vugar Gashimov did a decent job in reviving it!
Wah wah! The booky I am reading is quite funny (and informative).
It looks like I Benko and Benoni are easily transposable. But I'm not skilled enough to use the Benko setup (opening g-h files and installing rooks there) effectively. I guess Benko is for blacks who like slow painful maneauverings on the queenside. It's ok with me, if the opponent promises me not to launch a direct assault on my kingside. Now that would be very unsportsmanly.
Boogie Indian is also too slow and complex. Talk about two chess masters fighting for the stupid c5 square. *sigh*. And I guess there is little prospect for direct assault there, too.
Botvinnik Formation is <3 
but I don't think white would sit on his arse while black sets it up. Argh!
Center Counter is a big no-no for me. As white, I have a good record (nearly 70% wins) against it. Never going to try it as black.
Now folks and masters ... tell me this: After white begins 1.d4 and I reply 1...c5, is there any dependable way to persuade white into making that pawn exchange (dxc5)? I have gone through a lot of 1.d4 openings in IM Silman's book and none really promises center-focussed game. I mean, of course they all approach center in their own ways, it's just that a rookie like me finds it hard to master the subtle bishop/knight imbalances, fianchetos and stuff right from the beginning.
Note to self: Stop grumbling and study more. At your level, chess is more luck, than skill. Before a match, pray you go lucky 
Trapper4 wrote:
@Charetter115 look im not trying to be mean, but it's really not about "promoting a pawn on the queenside while getting mated". you're right, it can get into crazy positions, and it usually is extremely complex.
No not really, but that is just an easier way to saw pawn storm queenside with an attack to break into white's position using black's control of the dark squares. It's also more of the threat to promote a pawn because black can very easily get a passed c pawn that makes white have to pay attention to your attack. I'm also somewhat embarrassed to admit the bulk of my Benoni knowledge is very outdated (some of my theory is over 70 years old). A lot has changed since then!
@pfren, you mentioned that the GM rep series is not good for the correspondence players. Is it because the lines/variations are very human like and good in practical tournament settings, but not the engine prepared artificial lines you see in alot of correspondence games?
I'm guessing top GM's don't play the Modern Benoni much as it probably doesn't pass the computer test.
While I've seen a few computer vs. computer French Winawer's and Alekhine Defenses, which I would've thought they busted. I have only seen one comp v. comp Benoni.
In that game at move 16...Qa5+, White had already sac'd a piece and has an exposed uncastled King with the B still on c1, and I guess he's still apparently better going on to grind out a pawn+ till winning at 64.
I'm guessing while playable, the Benoni's probably not worth the risk for guys who make a living at the board.
Here's the computer game:
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1754695
pfren wrote:
Nobody takes TCEC games seriously, especially when it comes to opening theory.
It's not clear as to why nobody would take these game openings seriously. Are the machines just playing random opening moves with no basis for play? Are they purposely playing weak moves, I guess just to see what happens?
I'd guess since most opening theory is probably either created on a machine, or at least verified on a machine, now days. Somebody might be interested in what they do against each other as long as the machines are honestly playing a competitive game.
Nckchris @
Machines play with out strategy. It just follow the best calculation and the most accurate wins the position. The example you gave, there is an early simplification forced from white that I doubt any Master will ever follow to get an advantage over the Benoni. Komodo ends one pawn up but it's not a chess strategic project but rather a failure from the weaker engine to calculate or evaluate the same accurate.
If we put Komodo to play vs Komodo the same opening variation the game will end a draw.
I think this one will be very useful to the O.P:
http://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Modern-Benoni-Macmillan-Library/dp/0020080913
Good luck finding it- it's 25 years old...
WTH! why the heck you are suggesting a book so old. this means that all the new lines and the confutations will be missed. I own 3 modern benoni books:
The modern benoni - Franco Zenon 2007
Excellent introduction. good variation coverages and explain well what white and black are triing to achieve. It does not provide a complete coverage, but explains the main ideas (this is a + imho). It gives you very good introduction.
Grandmaster repertoire 12: the modern benoni - 2013 Marian Petrov
the most recent book i am aware. Much better coverage than the first book, but it digs much more. Its frankly a bit difficult to follow. I dont think its intended for patzers ( like me, at least). Good when i want to dig a specific variation a bit more deeply, but i think it assumes that the reader is a very good player.
Last but not least: a bit old but its a cult for the benoni
The complete benoni - Lev Psakis 1995
Lev psakis was considered one of the greatest expert of his time. the book is very well done, but is now a bit outdated. Its another good refrence book, but would not recomend it as first one ( its too old ... the benoni theory and critical lines changed a lot, so its probably not a good reference book)