"Hypermodernism" Debate - Chess Forums - Page 3

1e4c6_O-1

Dec 12, 2020

0

#41

Do you think the pirc is modern?

What about the caro?

French?

NM darkunorthodox88

Dec 12, 2020

0

#42

Dsmith42 wrote:

darkunorthodox88 wrote:

modernist chess is a thing, and it is usually used to refer to the chess that came after the romantic era but prior to the hypermodern era and began with the positional discoveries of Steinitz.

just because an opening eventually uses center pawns to contest central squares doesnt make it not-hypermodern, although some openings are a bit more borderline than others in these classifications. Its a family resemblance term after all.

hypermodern openings where played prior to the hypermodern chess era. Strong players like Henry Bird, Howard Staunton and John Owen where playing hypermodern openings in ways we still do today in the 1850s! its just that the propriety of this type of play didnt become fully integrated into chess orthodoxy until later.

I've been working with John Owen's eponymous defense recently - and it is fascinating in its positional dynamics. Had to learn the hard way that Staunton's recommendation for an early c5 was wrong, though. Once you get past that, however, it is a lot of fun to play. Black is trying to fix, blockade, and then destroy d4 (so it's best to play 1. e4 e6 2. d4 b6, rather than playing b6 immediately), and white can't really force the d5 advance or adequately support this advanced queen pawn. White also has trouble supporting e4, and though he can advance it, this opens the long diagonal for black's b7 bishop. White gets some dynamic compensation for this central weakness, but it's an all-out fight for the center right from the beginning.

Seems to work up to the 1900 level just fine (I have not had a chance to throw it against an Expert yet). If d4 falls, white loses almost immediately, and even when it doesn't, white doesn't really have a safe way to castle. Black has weaknesses, too, such as the b5 square (which is why the c-pawn stays home rather than advancing), but the counterplay seems more than adequate.

Really fun stuff, especially for a hypermodern like me.

i happen to be a master that specializes in both the Owen's (1.e4 b6) and the english defense 1.d4 e6 2.c4 b6, although i get it from 1.d4 b6) and i play it agaisnt anyone, from class players to GM's and do fine. So if you have questions, ask away.

blueemu

Dec 12, 2020

0

#43

MISTER_McCHESS wrote:

interesting. Why do you think it is called hypermodern if there is no modern?

The name wasn't given by the people who came up with the new methods. It was given by their classical opponents, and was intended as sarcasm.

(Note: Tartakower was the first to go into print under that label, in his 1924 Die Hypermoderne Schachpartie, but the description had been previously used in conversation by classical players.)

Reti, Breyer, Nimzovich et al turned the insult around and wore it as a badge of pride.

1e4c6_O-1

Dec 12, 2020

0

#44

blueemu wrote:

MISTER_McCHESS wrote:

interesting. Why do you think it is called hypermodern if there is no modern?

The name wasn't given by the people who came up with the new methods. It was given by their classical opponents, and was intended as sarcasm.

(Note: Tartakower was the first to go into print under that label, in his 1924 Die Hypermoderne Schachpartie, but the description had been previously used in conversation by classical players.

Reti, Breyer, Nimzovich et al turned the insult around and wore it as a badge of pride.

ok

1e4c6_O-1

Dec 12, 2020

0

#45

but what does "et al" mean?

blueemu

Dec 12, 2020

0

#46

MISTER_McCHESS wrote:

but what does "et al" mean?

Latin. It means "and others" or "and the rest of them".

1e4c6_O-1

Dec 12, 2020

0

#47

oh, ok thanks @b;ueemu

Dsmith42

Dec 12, 2020

0

#48

darkunorthodox88 wrote:

Dsmith42 wrote:

darkunorthodox88 wrote:

modernist chess is a thing, and it is usually used to refer to the chess that came after the romantic era but prior to the hypermodern era and began with the positional discoveries of Steinitz.

just because an opening eventually uses center pawns to contest central squares doesnt make it not-hypermodern, although some openings are a bit more borderline than others in these classifications. Its a family resemblance term after all.

hypermodern openings where played prior to the hypermodern chess era. Strong players like Henry Bird, Howard Staunton and John Owen where playing hypermodern openings in ways we still do today in the 1850s! its just that the propriety of this type of play didnt become fully integrated into chess orthodoxy until later.

I've been working with John Owen's eponymous defense recently - and it is fascinating in its positional dynamics. Had to learn the hard way that Staunton's recommendation for an early c5 was wrong, though. Once you get past that, however, it is a lot of fun to play. Black is trying to fix, blockade, and then destroy d4 (so it's best to play 1. e4 e6 2. d4 b6, rather than playing b6 immediately), and white can't really force the d5 advance or adequately support this advanced queen pawn. White also has trouble supporting e4, and though he can advance it, this opens the long diagonal for black's b7 bishop. White gets some dynamic compensation for this central weakness, but it's an all-out fight for the center right from the beginning.

Seems to work up to the 1900 level just fine (I have not had a chance to throw it against an Expert yet). If d4 falls, white loses almost immediately, and even when it doesn't, white doesn't really have a safe way to castle. Black has weaknesses, too, such as the b5 square (which is why the c-pawn stays home rather than advancing), but the counterplay seems more than adequate.

Really fun stuff, especially for a hypermodern like me.

i happen to be a master that specializes in both the Owen's (1.e4 b6) and the english defense 1.d4 e6 2.c4 b6, although i get it from 1.d4 b6) and i play it agaisnt anyone, from class players to GM's and do fine. So if you have questions, ask away.

Thanks for the offer. I haven't run into particular difficulty with the Owen yet, but as I mentioned, I haven't had a chance to roll it out against an Expert yet, which I will as soon as the pandemic ends. I feel like I understand the basic premise and the positional dynamics of the opening, but sometimes you can't see opening flaws until you're really pressed by a stronger player. Against my near-equals, the Owen has served me quite well, at least so far.

sndeww

Dec 12, 2020

0

#49

@darkunorthodox88

1e4c6_O-1

Dec 12, 2020

0

#50

I would not play 6. O-O i would play Bg5

sndeww

Dec 12, 2020

0

#51

Bg5 isn't so good, because h6 followed by g5 with queenside castle.

NM darkunorthodox88

Dec 12, 2020

0

#52

B1ZMARK wrote:

@darkunorthodox88

this is actually bad for black, bb4 is not played if white plays nge2. swapping bishop for knight here grants black no doubled pawns and costs a bishop pair. what will end up happening, is, white will play e5, then very annoying moves like qg4, and make a mess out of your dark squares on the kingside, with two bishops and a queen down your throat, you will be lucky to limp into a draw agaisnt a strong player. When White plays both nc3 and bd3 right away, you are better off playing nf6 first, but if you insist on playing bb4 first, then black must proceed with d5 instead of nf6 next. either way 0-0 is suicidal in these lines.

actually, 5.ne2 may very well be the most testing line in the Owen's. in the past, black played 5...c5 and either gotten a sicilian like position with cxd4, d6, a6 nbd7 be7 qc7 etc, or played 6...nc6. But it was discovered that if white knows how to play it , 5.ne2 c5, 6.d5! is pretty much a refutation, and engines have verified that black has no pleasant way to deal with the pawn sac.

black must choose to play 5....d6 and try to aim for a delayed c5, or play 5...d5 6.e5 ng8!? (nd7 is busted here due to nf4!). the only problem with d6 is that if black plays 0-0, nbd7 d5!, black's position is a bit annoying.

as for the ng8 line, despite looking bizarre, black's position is ok. one interesting line is actually 6....ng8 7.nb1!? ba6, but he can also try to play without aiming for ba6, its just a little uncomfortable

1e4c6_O-1

Dec 15, 2020

0

#53

Do you guys think the caro is modern?

sndeww

Dec 15, 2020

0

#54

ew no

1e4c6_O-1

Dec 15, 2020

0

#55

why not?

dah_happyh0ppyh0rsi3

Dec 15, 2020

0

#56

CAWO

Steven-ODonoghue

Dec 15, 2020

0

#57

MISTER_McCHESS wrote:

Do you guys think the caro is modern?

Yes, if by modern you mean "classical" because the two words can be used interchangeably. But the caro isn't hypermodern because it focuses on controlling the centre with pawns, not peices.

1e4c6_O-1

Dec 18, 2020

0

#58

bump

dah_happyh0ppyh0rsi3

Dec 18, 2020

0

#59

boomp