Handling the E5 Pawn Push in the Nimzo
Sort:
jsleon03
Apr 2, 2025
0
#1
I really like the Nimzo and have been trying to improve. After getting my bishop up to B2, I often see a pawn push to E5 that screws up my knight developing to F3. Most of the time I push my E pawn to block and allow my knight to develop without risking a knight trade (since most people seem to like covering their E5 pawn with a knight), but it feels like a poor solution.
I feel like there's a better method, but I'm stumped trying to figure it out.
Nimzo can be a variety of openings from nimzo indian to nimzo larsen to nimzo defense, it's important to specify. I assume you mean the nimzo-larsen in which case the entire point of the nimzo-larsen is to allow your opponent to take the center to then try and tear it down later. i'll provide a pgn of the nimzo plans.
Here's a sample of how the opening could go. Pushing e4 to help develop your knight would be a mistake since it's a waste of time and doesn't fight to attack the e5 square. Instead you should work to develop your other pieces (like your light square bishop) to pin the c6 knight and hinder your opponent's defense of the e5 square, then you develop your knight when safe. Generally speaking, when you have one bishop fianchettod on one side of the board, the pawns on the opposite side should be on the same colour as the fianchettod bishop so as to fight for that colour complex and not hinder your other bishop's development (ie e3 and f4). Hope this helps, if anything was unclear, feel free to let me know and I'll do my best to elaborate. Also posting example positions of concepts you don't understand is helps to better understand what it is you need help with.
Apr 5, 2025
0
#3
Why would Black not bolster the e pawn with f6 if he is going to weaken the a1-h8 diagonal with Bd6 (analysis recommended Qd6 instead but this was at 1600 so not sure if the text is at higher analysis)
playchessordie19 wrote:
Why would Black not bolster the e pawn with f6 if he is going to weaken the a1-h8 diagonal with Bd6 (analysis recommended Qd6 instead but this was at 1600 so not sure if the text is at higher analysis)
I played the top line for black (also the theory I use), something like depth 40 stockfish 17 at minimum. f6 weakens the a2-g8 diagonal for no reason and doesn't develop a piece for black. It also allows d4 forcing either black to be stuck with an isolated pawn or an overextended structure, both of which are white's goals. Qd6 instead also plays into white's hand by allowing Qh5 where black is forced to play e4 and fix his structure allowing white to trade queens on e5 and have 2 active bishops and numerous holes in black's structure. Hope this helps.
29 days ago
0
#5
playchessordie19 wrote:
Why would Black not bolster the e pawn with f6 if he is going to weaken the a1-h8 diagonal with Bd6 (analysis recommended Qd6 instead but this was at 1600 so not sure if the text is at higher analysis)
evaluation wise they are about the same but the flavor of the position often changes. with bd6, white will probably play f4 for counterplay with early f6,white will play d4 and get french like positions
These positions are actually fairly pleasant for white because he can trade off his "Bad french bishop" with ba3. Play will resemble an improved french winawer for white. Engine says near equal but the positions are practically favorable for white so long as he doesnt forget to parry the coming kingside attack early on.