These lines are incredible. Following. Can we move 1...d6 and still transpose to the Rubinstein?
No because d6 will put you behind 1 tempo and it can transpose but you will probably fall way too behind with the loss of the tempo
Yes it seems this requires so much accuracy. Thanks.
My decision to choose the rubinstein was simple. It gives me a sound pawn structure and avoids some of the potential weaknesses that can occur in the tarrasch and or answer. White usually gives up their bishop for the f6 knight which does no significant damage at all. Open game which requires rapid development which is easily achievable. From what I've seen in the range of 700-2300 on chess.com is that white regularly wastes a few tempo going down sidelines that actually gives black the initiative. In the variations that give white a slight edge that's only a computer edge meaning the human still has to be good tactically, middlegame wise and has to have good endgame technique. I see a lot of mistakes made even by 2000+ that shows they dont have a solid understanding of the french defense in general.
The Rubinstein requires extremely precise play for both sides, and White has several options which lead to +0.40 or more like +0.25 if the computers had a longer horizon (0.00 if they solve the game). Black has many excellent plans at his disposal, but here we have the opposite problem of people who avoid theory, namely those who do NOT avoid theory, and get a dull, dry, persistent edge that most players hate to face.
With that said, the other lines of the French (particularly the Trash) require even more preparation. I chose the Rubenstein because ChessGenius (my engine at the time) loved the opening, and it's very "engine-like" in that there are several seemingly equal moves, territory in which the machines thrive. I want to learn how to play like Stockfish so I enter the mind of the engine with lines like this.
I hope that you do read to develop your understanding of the game as well and dont rely solely on a computer. But yes, in my study ive come across about 10 moves that given almost any situation would be considered candidate. Its funny to me because it is actually white ive found that has to play even more precise than black. Especially if white castles queenside and tries to go on the attack it almost always ends in disaster. Ive had several games with 2000+ who went on attacks after castling queenside that lost the game for them horribly
SUre he didnt have to give up his queen but his attack fizzled rather quickly
I think 6...b6 looks a bit suspicous, and white was probably doing quite well after something like 17Nxc5.
I think 6...b6 looks a bit suspicous, and white was probably doing quite well after something like 17Nxc5.
White is, in fact, dead even with Nxc5. Nf4 was better for black instead of Nc5
Started to attack before he was completely developed. Wasted few tempo. I prefer the Rubinstein over the Tarrasch or Winawer due to structure. Tarrasch often times leaves you with an isolated d pawn and Winawer usually gives up your bishop for the knight which i didnt like. I feel the Rubinstein is stronger
Against the 7c3 it might be a rare case of being more comfortable avoiding the principled 7...c5, in favour of developing with 7...Be7,0.0 and usually b6 before c5. c3 doesn't seem very dangerous then.
The mentioned new book based around Rubinstein, covers bd7,a6, Bb5 which I thought IM Pfren liked, or at least mentioned quite often, or is it just the coverage he doesn't like?
The line 7.c3 Be7 is a tad problematic after 8.Bd3 0-0 9.Qe2 b6 10.Bf4 Bb7 11.0-0-0.
7...c5 is the principled way to play, IMO.
I suggested 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bd7 4.Nf3 a6, which is very different from Langrock's 3...c5 4.c3 Bd7 5.Nf3 a6.
I don't like the latter after 6.Bd3! cxd4 7.cxd4 Bb5 8.Bc2. White cannot castle, but Black has more serious problems to solve.
Langrock fails to consider 13.h4! which looks very strong.
I had this variation only once on the board and I played just 8.0-0 Bxd3 9.Qxd3 and it was not bad but maybe just 8.Bxb5+ was better and also Bc2 I looked at and was interesting.
Is white obliged to take in f6 in move 6? why? it just looks as if you are allowing the d7 black knight go to a better square for free
White can hold a solid opening advantage with correct play.
Just a random defense for people with no courage.
And what would be the correct defense for people with courage?
Just a random defense for people with no courage.
And what would be the correct defense for people with courage?
Scandinavian.
Just a random defense for people with no courage.
And what would be the correct defense for people with courage?
Scandinavian.
Haha and why is that? Because it's dynamic?
Just a random defense for people with no courage.
And what would be the correct defense for people with courage?
Scandinavian.
Haha and why is that? Because it's dynamic?
Because black has the courage to give White the advantage.
Just a random defense for people with no courage.
and not much wish to play interesting chess!
Just a random defense for people with no courage.
And what would be the correct defense for people with courage?
Scandinavian.
Haha and why is that? Because it's dynamic?
Because black has the courage to give White the advantage.
The point of chess is to win sir? Why would black give white the advantage if he can have it for himself? Also, in some variations of the Rubinstein up until move 5-7 black is behind sometimes -.5 giving white quite a sizeable advantage. White can rarely hold it though.
These lines are incredible. Following. Can we move 1...d6 and still transpose to the Rubinstein?
No because d6 will put you behind 1 tempo and it can transpose but you will probably fall way too behind with the loss of the tempo