@richie (i like ur name btw)-an Tarrasch is 3. ... c5. An Semi (heh) is 3. ... Nf6 4. Nf3 c5-which is the variation the poster quoted.
8)
HELP. I need defense to 1.d4
Sort:
Oct 21, 2013
0
#43
Nf6 will usually yield a closed structire with the KID. maybe a frechie will like it.
Here is the proof that the Englund is so good, that even top players employ it succesfully:
TheGambitKing wrote:
harryz wrote:
i might be missing something, but what about 7.Qa6?
I sure HOPE that you play this against me sometime, and play Q-R6... oh, man, that would be sweet!
Of course, chances are, I'll already have varied with 1. ...P-K4!, so we may never know...
plutonia wrote:
Yes, great to get into for white.
My database gives 50% win for white and 25% for black.
Ha ha, this guy uses 'databases' to prepare his openings? What a tool! I do it the old fashioned way, with my chessboard, my friend, my pencil, my paper, my imagination, my heart, and most of all, my BALLS. Where are your BALLS, my friend?
By the way, surely the 'Albin Countergambit' is 'Unsound' too, right--but Morozevich sure doesn't think so!
You, my friend, are a victim of results-based thinking if you're using a single game as evidence that a clearly refuted opening isn't unsound. Yes, in a given circumstance, against the right opponent, an odd opening *may* work. However, you're missing the point. The opening is unsound because, if both black and white and equally prepared for that given opening, black will get murdered, repeatedly and ruthlessly.
Remember when App. State beat Michigan in Michigan on opening day? Yea, that doesn't mean that App. State is on the same level as Michigan is football-wise. It means a fluke happened and an inferior squad got incredibly lucky. That's what your example is.
Does anyone here play the Budapest Gambit?
All you need to know :
Oct 22, 2013
0
#48
that is pretty cool, Jovanu.
Hey, GambitKing, you still use descriptive notation? That's amazing. I thought it was an extinct species. It's good to see that some traditions never die.
jovanu wrote:
All you need to know :
Your analysis has more holes than swiss cheese, I'm afraid, but this is rather irrelevant when you call this position equal:
And of course, white could earlier play 9.Bd3 (instead of 9.Bc4) when he's a pawn up for precisely nothing.
If you refuses to play 1. d4 d5, but play the French Defense then perhaps the King's Indian or Czech Benoni would work.
Eyy it was just a small analysis , Houdini is who plays Bc4 , and i think this position is very complicated to win with white .
Ok , now we go with the improvement :
Black's compensation seems minimual after 14. Nxc6 bxc6 15. Bd3
KID
liud001 wrote:
I need a new defense to 1.d4 I usually play 1...e6 to try and get into a French Defense but it never works. :'( If someone could give me a quick-and-easy-to-learn opening it would be much appreciated. (Although not 1...d5 please)
I think 1. ... d5 is fine!:
TheGambitKing wrote:
harryz wrote:
i might be missing something, but what about 7.Qa6?
I sure HOPE that you play this against me sometime, and play Q-R6... oh, man, that would be sweet!
Of course, chances are, I'll already have varied with 1. ...P-K4!, so we may never know...
plutonia wrote:
Yes, great to get into for white.
My database gives 50% win for white and 25% for black.
Ha ha, this guy uses 'databases' to prepare his openings? What a tool! I do it the old fashioned way, with my chessboard, my friend, my pencil, my paper, my imagination, my heart, and most of all, my BALLS. Where are your BALLS, my friend?
By the way, surely the 'Albin Countergambit' is 'Unsound' too, right--but Morozevich sure doesn't think so!
Yes, especially with your imagination. Because you make stuff up.
Funny how you couldn't find a game with the Schara to prove your point, and instead you posted a totally different gambit (that is much more reputable).
AdorableMogwai wrote:
plutonia wrote:
No, just don't. Budapest is the stupidest opening ever, and the most boring. For both sides. Black gives up the bishop pair for absolutely nothing. Black has no plan at all in the Budapest, other than "uh, let's hope that white gets so bored that he offers a draw".
Quite an ignorant statement, but I must admit I was hoping someone would contest me on my recommendation of the Budapest so we could discuss this, albeit not in such an ignorant way. There are basic plans inherent in all variations of the Budapest. In the Adler variation the plan can often be to work up a kingside attack via the rook lift, in the Alekhine and Rubenstein variations, playing against doubled and weak pawns.
Black doesn't normally give up the bishop pair in any of the variations except the Rubinstein, and even there he doesn't have to, as there are two good ways to avoid it, one idea was come up with by GM Pavel Blatney. But even surrendering the bishop pair white only gets a minuscule advantage, and if we're talking below 2000 level then that advantage is basically nothing because players at this level can't extract an advantage out of a bishop pair like an IM/GM could.
I have a winning record with the Budapest as black and it's definitely one of the funer openings I play. I had two games in a row with it where I was able to trap the queens of players higher rated than myself right out of the opening, and those kingside attacks in the Adler variation are so much fun to play, there is something especially enjoyable about playing black and putting white on the defensive the whole game rather than vice versa.
The only problem with the Budapest as far as I can tell is that if white plays 2. Nf3 then you can't use it, and must instead play something like the King's Indian. So to use the Budapest you actually have to learn at least 2 openings against d4.
ok so let's see some tipical positions arising from various black's defences:
so, which one is the odd one out?
Budapest is boring as hell. I bet you play the Colle as white.
wowzers strong opinions
the biggest problem with the schara is getting to play it. there is a number of nice games:
i doubt that many posters here are playing at a very high level, so just find something that suits your style, and if it's any good then results will follow.
what has happened to having fun?
FirebrandX wrote:
Try 11.Nd5! White can win a piece by force:
11.Nd5 Qa5+ 12.b4 Qxa2 13.Rb3! Bf5 14.Kd2 and black has to sac his knight with Na5 before Nc3 traps the queen.
So if you're going to base your stance of equality on such a dangerously close to losing defense for black, make sure your analysis is air-tight next time.
I have no doubt that the casual gambiteer will discover a very strong black attack in your line. Actually everything like a couple of useless checks constitutes an attack at Gambitland.
I am also surprised that you cared to reply to something that is apparently a footwork.
(For that matter, so's the Slav...er...part of the QGDizzle. Heh)