Opening Creation - Novelties + Analysis

It leads to an even game. 

A very very old line. This was also very popular in steinitz's time. It's not bad, sometimes it pops up in modern Gm games as a surprise weapon. I think Ni Hua used to play this a bit.

Yereslov, if you want to create your own line i kindly suggest to avoid the d4 italian game altoghether. It has been analyzed to death in the last century and the lines are rather forcing, so the chances to find a new move which is not complete rubbish are slim. Your risk reinventing the wheel like you just did.

I agree.  White's strategy should be to calmly protect the Nc3 to disallow doubling of the pawns, and continue with O-O and f4.  Black's advantage will be structure - he has fixed pawns on dark squares with that bishop exchanged.  White's advantage is in space and time.

Interesting is 6...Bxc3+ I think, taking advantage of the only opportunity to double the pawns.

After 9.a3 the bishop has to move back to e7 since taking the knight or bishop is actually beneficial to white.

Here is a game by Lasker:

After 8. ... Bb6 the position is equal. With the pressure against d4 and the strong knight on e4 black has enough counterplay.

A sample line could be: 8. ... Bb6 9. Nc3 0-0 10. Be3 f5 (to cement the knight on e4) and black is atleast equal perhaps even having a little more comferable play because of easy piece development

Btw: There is a very nice dvd by GM Jan Gustafson about e4-e5 (from the black side) and not mainline ruy lopez where he explains all these weird gambits and variations very nice. Entry level should be rating of 1500ish as he explains stuff really well also for lower levels

@Estragon: Also consider the line 7...d6

Anyone interested in this forum may want to join the following group:

http://www.chess.com/groups/home/opening-theoreticians

In all honesty, anyone under IM/GM level trying to develop opening theory/create novelties is laughable as in critical lines where novelties are found frequently like the Noteboom, Meran, or Botvinnik Semi-Slavs or sharp Sicilians the fact remains that players under that level can't even attempt to understand the ideas in the position and are basically just selecting random moves that haven't been played before and calling a blunder a TN.  An example of this is the OP's Bd6, a move that makes simply no logical sense and would never be played by anyone who understands the basic ideas of the opening for anything other than insult or shock value.

@IrrationalTiger: I believe I supported my variation of the Snake Benoni with adequate variations and ideas. It is by no means a weak move, and it has many strategic ideas which can be fully implemented even against best play. Can you tell me why you think it so irrational?

1. It blocks the d7 pawn. The d7 pawn is vital in the Benoni. All that the bishop does on d6 is prevent the development of d7 for no reason.

All openings are playable. That's hardly enough to support your theory.

@Yereslov: The point is not for the Bishop to rest forever on d6, but to go to either c7 or e5, where it will find itself useful. As another point, not all openings are playable. Many lines, though playable in Scholastic tournaments, would fall flat in Open tournaments. The Accelerated Snake, however, has no bad qualities that would make it so.

On another matter, the chess.com database has 1787 games in your opening, so you can hardly call it the Yereslov variation. Also, in that line, I play 4...a6.

I guess I'll have to spell it out, even though I do not and have never played the Benoni.  Bd6? goes against at least a few key ideas of the Benoni and although it is possibly playable it makes litle sense with the ideas of the opening.  Here are a few reasons:

Typically, the bishop belongs on g7, where it is well placed and has at least two key tasks:

1.  It helps to prevent a break on e5.

2.  It has prospects of attacking on the h8-a1 diagonal if black gets b5 in.

Here are the reasons that Bd6 doesn't make sense (in my opinion, I'm sure a titled player or Benoni player could state this better than I can)

1.  Losing tempo to slam away what is usually one of black's strongest pieces in the position.  What I mean by this is that if black wants to move his bishop back to c7, he'll have to play d6 afterward, making his bishop entombed behind d6 for anything other than defending e5.

2.  The bishop cannot be placed on e5, as you claim, because that only enhances an f4 push by white and allows him to get extra time for e5 while black is still moving around the same bishop.

3.  The typical queenside pressure and dominance of the diagonal that can often be exerted by the bishop on g7 and the defense of the kingside it brings will be sorely missed with the bishop stuck on c7 behind d6.  

To summarize, here is a sample line:

@IrrationalTiger: Now, let me combat your arguments. First, it does not have to follow all Benoni ideas, as it is not strictly a Modern Benoni. Next, the loss of time is not there, as otherwise Black would be forced to play g6 as well, delaying him from castling as well as creating a possible Kingside weakness in view of f2-f4-f5.

As for your second point, the Bishop actually fits quite well on e5. Your diagram shows a position where Black is forced to give up the Bishop pair. Actually, though this sounds bad on the surface, the position shown is Black's dream come true. He will play 8...d6 and soon close the center, where the Knights will benefit him. Your other variation is simply speculation that is irrelevant in view of 5...Be5.

Finally, the Bishop, when it travels to c7, is not nearly as weak as it may seem. The point in the Snake (Original, not ASB) is to perform the snake-like maneuver Bf8-d6-c7-a5, where it exerts pressure on a dangerous diagonal. If it needs to prevent an e5 pawn push, it can always return to c7.

Please note that I in no way have stated this is stronger than the Modern Benoni. Though that is my belief, I only present this as a suitable alternative, not a full replacement. The Snake Benoni has long been played by prominent Grandmasters (Miesis has over 50 games with it!), and the ASB is simply a way to prevent issues with 6. g3.

Indeed irrationaltiger's post is rather arrogant (not meant as an insult to him, a single bad post might happen to everyone).

The "snake" benoni is not as strong as the regular one, but the bishop placement "makes no sense" only because you do not understand the idea.

In the final position black is not badly placed at all, in fact he has archieved his goal: he is going to set up a closed position where white's bishop pair is not that useful and the LSB is particular is a very sad piece.

Personally i do not like the resulting positions of the snake benoni, but several titled players have been willing to give it a go. 

Lecturing on something you don't really know with statements like "I guess i'll have to spell it out" as if the one you're talking with is too stupid to understand will not lead you anywhere.

Almost everyone I have mentioned this opening to considers it crap.

There is no point in playing at d6 when the bishop has to move once again. 

Just play d6.

It's incredibly unlikely that that the bishop will develop to e5.

If you want the bishop to be at c7, then just develop it there instead of wasting time placing the bishop at d6.

Who have you shown it to? Most strong chess players should be able to understand the ideas behind this opening. The Bishop goes to d6 to reach a better square. Remember in this line Black does not lose time with ...g6.

Now that I checked with Fritz, Bc7 is the only move for the bishop.

Be5 is not possible.