I'm looking through your first game, and I don't know if this line works but it looks like it does. Could you analyze it to see if there was anything I missed here?
The position is definitely very interesting. If I weren't an Indian Defense main against d4, I would definitely play Noteboom/Semi-Slav positions.
Trash.....and I play a6.
Par for the course, when keep it simple is memorize lines, trappy defenses, and junk analysis.
BTW, I have played it OTB...and guess how many played 5Bg5?
None...go figure.
7...Bb7 is probably dubious because of 8pxp pxp and then 9Nxp. 7...c6 8pxp cxp 9nxp pxp 10RxR Bb4ch etc is a good exchange sac for black though.
It is an improved Botvinnik because in the Botvinnik proper main-line black often plays c6-c5 later, and the b7 - h1 diagonal is kept open.
1.d4 club players are cautious souls. Most avoid sharp lines, and good sharp lines for black will likely be even less tempting. In my experience with d5, c4xd5 is not long waiting to happen.
If like 4...a6 then 3...a6 is playable too.
7...Bb7 is probably dubious because of 8pxp pxp and then 9Nxp. 7...c6 8pxp cxp 9nxp pxp 10RxR Bb4ch etc is a good exchange sac for black though.
It is an improved Botvinnik because in the Botvinnik proper main-line black often plays c6-c5 later, and the b7 - h1 diagonal is kept open.
1.d4 club players are cautious souls. Most avoid sharp lines, and good sharp lines for black will likely be even less tempting. In my experience with d5, c4xd5 is not long waiting to happen.
If like 4...a6 then 3...a6 is playable too.
I did my analysis very quickly but I'm glad you picked up on some of my mistakes. I was playing it like the e3 variation of the Botvinnik Semi-Slav but of course, in that variation, I already have the pawn on c6.
However, I think it is a little bit better to develop Nf6 first so that way they are more inclined to attack your knight like the Botvinnik but they are both playable
Trash.....and I play a6.
Par for the course, when keep it simple is memorize lines, trappy defenses, and junk analysis.
BTW, I have played it OTB...and guess how many played 5Bg5?
None...go figure.
While this is fun to play, I do prefer the Slav more as at least if they play the Exchange Variation, I can play ...e4!? and make it transpose to the Winawer Countergambit. Good thing is that most people play Nc3 instead of Nf3
I think White should play 5. cxd5 like in the 3... a6 line (Janowski Variation).
I think White should play 5. cxd5 like in the 3... a6 line (Janowski Variation).
That’s if you want to get a Carlsbad structure. At the same time, Black does ‘waste’ a tempo like the Alapin Sicilian so it gives us time to strike
As mentioned c4xd5 is the automatic response of 1.d4 club players. Black has plenty of resources after 4c4 xd5 exd5, after 5Nf3 Carlsen has even played the funny 5...h6.
What line does Sielecki give for the case where White exchanges ( cxd ) and goes for the e4 thrust plan ( Nge2, 0-0, f3-f3, centralise rooks, then e4, or variants like 0-0-0, then thrust )? The move ..a6, while typically useful in a minority attack would largely be a waste of tempo in that scenario.
He doesn't only suggests 4Nf3 a6.
After 3Nc3 a6 4pxp pxp white has to develop black square bishop, if avoiding Nf3.
5Bf4 Nf6 6e3 Bd6 exchanging bishops, or more amibitously play c5 immediately. Not easy to setup a Botvinnik type plan.
He doesn't only suggests 4Nf3 a6.
After 3Nc3 a6 4pxp pxp white has to develop black square bishop, if avoiding Nf3.
5Bf4 Nf6 6e3 Bd6 exchanging bishops, or more amibitously play c5 immediately. Not easy to setup a Botvinnik type plan.
Ah ok, I though he was proposing it universally ( including for 4. Bg5) but at move 4 instead of 3. As he only suggests it only after 4.Nf3, it transposes to Janowski after 5. cxd exd.
Which line does he suggest after 4. Bg5 ? ( And 5. Qc2 if 4. ..Be7 )
Does he comment on why he doesn't propose the actual Janowski at move 3?
What line does Sielecki give for the case where White exchanges ( cxd ) and goes for the e4 thrust plan ( Nge2, 0-0, f3-f3, centralise rooks, then e4, or variants like 0-0-0, then thrust )? The move ..a6, while typically useful in a minority attack would largely be a waste of tempo in that scenario.
I don't have his course so I could be wrong. However, he does have a lichess account and any chess author will likely have at least tried out the lines the recommend. Here is one of those games
Lichess account is ChessExplained
What line does Sielecki give for the case where White exchanges ( cxd ) and goes for the e4 thrust plan ( Nge2, 0-0, f3-f3, centralise rooks, then e4, or variants like 0-0-0, then thrust )? The move ..a6, while typically useful in a minority attack would largely be a waste of tempo in that scenario.
I don't have his course so I could be wrong. However, he does have a lichess account and any chess author will likely have at least tried out the lines the recommend. Here is one of those games
Lichess account is ChessExplained
Thank you, very interesting, how can one find out which author has which lichess account?
After 4Bg5 he suggests 4...pxp, so that if 5Nf3 a6 again. Also if 5e3 c5 with possibility of transposing to Panov. He recommends Caro Kann against 1.e4. Similarly 5e4 c5 .Rather strange lines for me, but can't directly refute them. Can easily subsitute lines don't like, so personally prefer 4...Be7 heading for Tartakower (h6, and usually b6, Bb7.
The ChessExplained game is more or less what recommends. Another well known idea is 8...h6 (instead of 8...Bd6 ) 9Bh4 g5 10Bg3 Nh5 aiming to win two bishops, and have kingside counterplay if white castles kingside. Avoids it probably because of 11Be5 Nf6 11Bg3 etc, but this isn't a problem for black's soundness).
Avoids 3...a6 4pxp pxp because of a 5Qb3 line I think, but think black can deal with it.
After 4Bg5 he suggests 4...pxp, so that if 5Nf3 a6 again. Also if 5e3 c5 with possibility of transposing to Panov. He recommends Caro Kann against 1.e4. Similarly 5e4 c5 .Rather strange lines for me, but can't directly refute them. Can easily subsitute lines don't like, so personally prefer 4...Be7 heading for Tartakower (h6, and usually b6, Bb7.
The ChessExplained game is more or less what recommends. Another well known idea is 8...h6 (instead of 8...Bd6 ) 9Bh4 g5 10Bg3 Nh5 aiming to win two bishops, and have kingside counterplay if white castles kingside. Avoids it probably because of 11Be5 Nf6 11Bg3 etc, but this isn't a problem for black's soundness).
Avoids 3...a6 4pxp pxp because of a 5Qb3 line I think, but think black can deal with it.
Ah yes, we had discussed the transposition to Panov in another thread. This sounds like a good book tbh, I wouldn't search for a refutation, my initial attempt was because I thought he recommended 4. ..a6 always after the knight has committed to f6 and without white committing to nf3. As the Caro and the QGD are my responses to e4/d4 anyhow, I may buy the book in kindle format, though I'll probably keep the lines I already play.
I found out that IM Sielecki made another course but for Black and found this really interesting 4…a6 move. The play after 5.Bg5 reminded me a lot of the Botvinnik Variation in the Semi-Slav. Although my game was not perfect, it was a very dynamic and fun opening to play
As a reference, here is the Botvinnik Variation