You need something for an early Nf3 and d4. The Reti is not so easy because White can go for it after 1.Nf3 rather than 1.c4 which might affect your choices. 1.Nf3 c5 is ok but only if you're ok with the Sicilian defense.
I'll only say that the other lines aren't as simple as they're made out to be; especially the c6 stuff. 3.d4 isn't "punishing" but simply the main line and has been for a really long time. Practically every line in that position is complicated.
I have my suspicions on the lines of 1. c4 e5 2. g3 Nf6 3. Bg2 Nc6!?. For black the Keres line after 4. d4 what about the reply 4..e4 and if 5. Nc3, 5.. d5 and I don't think black is uncomfortable and looks quite okay to me?
As for the reverse Maroczy I think black has quite a few problems compared to the white maroczy.
In the line black is almost forced to retreat the d5 knight to c7, which is not ideal as the knight is not active there and white is not under much pressure after 8. d3. I see white being able to pressure the queenside well using the financettoed bishop and weak light squares. It is not much of a bind in my opinion.
The real maroczy white's knight usually is well-placed and stays on d4 for a long time (6. Be3 to protect it is usually played) and the side facing the Maroczy has a more defensive position to start. This way the side with the Maroczy can better play in the typical binding fashion.
You need something for an early Nf3 and d4. The Reti is not so easy because White can go for it after 1.Nf3 rather than 1.c4 which might affect your choices. 1.Nf3 c5 is ok but only if you're ok with the Sicilian defense.
I'll only say that the other lines aren't as simple as they're made out to be; especially the c6 stuff. 3.d4 isn't "punishing" but simply the main line and has been for a really long time. Practically every line in that position is complicated.
Thanks for your input. You are right, it is not "punishing" - I drastically oversimplified things, I think. Also, yes I am okay with the Sicilian Defense.
I have my suspicions on the lines of 1. c4 e5 2. g3 Nf6 3. Bg2 Nc6!?. For black the Keres line after 4. d4 what about the reply 4..e4 and if 5. Nc3, 5.. d5 and I don't think black is uncomfortable and looks quite okay to me?
Actually, in Volume 1 of the English Opening, Mihail Marin gives this line to combat your suggestion (pp 349-352). All variations are his, and not mine.
As for the reverse Maroczy I think black has quite a few problems compared to the white maroczy.
In the line black is almost forced to retreat the d5 knight to c7, which is not ideal as the knight is not active there and white is not under much pressure after 8. d3. I see white being able to pressure the queenside well using the financettoed bishop and weak light squares. It is not much of a bind in my opinion.
That's really interesting. Due to my unfamiliarity with the Maroczy Bind Proper, I was unaware of this. This is a really enlightening opinion. thanks. I never thought that the Nc7 rather than the Nd5 made much of a difference.
The real maroczy white's knight usually is well-placed and stays on d4 for a long time (6. Be3 to protect it is usually played) and the side facing the Maroczy has a more defensive position to start. This way the side with the Maroczy can better play in the typical binding fashion.
I see. Thanks so much for your very helpful comments!
1...e5 and after 2.g3 (2.Nc3 Bb4) then c6 and d5.
Your line against 2.g3 (2...c6 with intention of 3...d5) is nice, but White can play 3.d4 which thows a wrench into Black's plans.
Here is what I originally said about the line:
"The Accelerated Keres - This is really a reversed Alapin Variation. However, it is easily punished by 3.d4, when black has an unpleasant game. "
Though "punished" is an exaggeration, I think that Black might have an unpleasant game due to White's early 3.d4.
Thanks for your input!
The reverse Maroczy bind is perfectly fine. But as said White can deviate earlier and black needs other systems to fully cope with various 1. c4 and 1. Nf3 move-orders.
Since op is playing the Botvinnik system as White, playing it as Black as well suggests itself.
The reverse Maroczy bind is perfectly fine. But as said White can deviate earlier and black needs other systems to fully cope with various 1. c4 and 1. Nf3 move-orders.
Since op is playing the Botvinnik system as White, playing it as Black as well suggests itself.
Very interesting feedback. So, would you recommend for me to play a Reversed Botvinnik System? If so, may you please show it to me on a board?
Thanks!
It can go like 1. c4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Nf3 e5!? (to avoid d4 lines as much as possible; 2. g3 doesn't interfere with black's setup, so that leaves only to consider what to do against 2. Nf3 and 3. d4) 4. g3 g6 5. Bg2 Bg7 6. d3 Nge7 7. 0-0 d6 8. a3 a5 (it's also possible to try to play without this move) 9. Rb1 0-0 then there are many different plans for both players (for White : Bd2-Nb5-b4, or Ne1-Nc2-Ne3; for Black it's based on either b5, d5 or f5)
@Nerwal
Methinks you have found the perfect solution for playing vs. the English Opening. I think that Reversed Botvinnik should be right up my alley!
Out of curiosity, does this same setup work vs. the Reti? I think it does ...
Based on your analysis and my analysis, I think that the Reversed Botvinnik System can be succesfully employed vs. the Reti and English right? The only deviation White has is 1.Nf3 c5 2.c4 Nc6 3.d4 (or 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4), but the positions which arise seem quite comfortable for Black to play.
Please give me your input on this. Thanks!
TT
I am not sure I like 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd 4. cxd Nxd4 5. Qxd4. The most natural way to play for White is something like 5... Nf6 6.Nc3 g6 7. e4 d6, after which we have transposed into the Gurgenidze variation of the Maroczy Bind, which doesn't suit everybody. But even more annoying is 7. g3 after which it's hard not to tranpose into the Ultra-symmetrical english : 7... Bg7 8. Bg2 d6 9. 0-0 0-0 and we're there. It's not a big secret this line is hard to play for Black and White's results are usually very good. I've tried several different moves after 10. Qd3 and haven't found a clear way to get real counterplay if White plays accurately.
That's the reason why I was of the opinion that 2. Nf3 is best met by 2... Nf6 and 2. Nc3 by 2... Nc6; in the latter case we go for a reverse Botvinnik, in the former case 3. g3 d5 is a reverse Maroczy Bind, 3. d4 can be met by the energetic gambit 3... cxd4 4. Nxd4 e5 5. Nb5 d5 6. cxd5 Bc5, and there is a wide and good choice for Black after 3. Nf3 (the only annoying thing being that 3... d5 doesn't garantee a reverse Maroczy Bind; after 4. cxd5 Nxd5, 5. e4, 5. e3 and 5. d4 all set different and quite awkward problems).
I don't really have an opinion on a5 in the reverse Botvinnik. It's simpler to play it, but it doesn't stop b4 forever. I have often tried to play for a kingside attack with f5 with or without a5, but this requires a good amount of precision and in many games I went wrong and got a bad position. The other plans are maybe simpler to implement : after 10. Ne1 Be6 11. Nc2 we go 11.... d5, and if 11. Nd5 then Rb8 and b5.
I am not sure I like 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd 4. cxd Nxd4 5. Qxd4. The most natural way to play for White is something like 5... Nf6 6.Nc3 g6 7. e4 d6, after which we have transposed into the Gurgenidze variation of the Maroczy Bind, which doesn't suit everybody. But even more annoying is 7. g3 after which it's hard not to tranpose into the Ultra-symmetrical english : 7... Bg7 8. Bg2 d6 9. 0-0 0-0 and we're there. It's not a big secret this line is hard to play for Black and White's results are usually very good. I've tried several different moves after 10. Qd3 and haven't found a clear way to get real counterplay if White plays accurately.
I agree. I've tried playing this variation with a friend, from Black's side, and I had a miserable position throughout.
That's the reason why I was of the opinion that 2. Nf3 is best met by 2... Nf6 and 2. Nc3 by 2... Nc6; in the latter case we go for a reverse Botvinnik, in the former case 3. g3 d5 is a reverse Maroczy Bind,
Ok, that sounds fine.
3. d4 can be met by the energetic gambit 3... cxd4 4. Nxd4 e5 5. Nb5 d5 6. cxd5 Bc5, and there is a wide and good choice for Black after 3. Nf3 Do you mean 3.Nc3? (the only annoying thing being that 3... d5 doesn't garantee a reverse Maroczy Bind; after 4. cxd5 Nxd5, 5. e4, 5. e3 and 5. d4 all set different and quite awkward problems). What do you recommend against 3.Nc3?
I don't really have an opinion on a5 in the reverse Botvinnik. It's simpler to play it, but it doesn't stop b4 forever. I have often tried to play for a kingside attack with f5 with or without a5, but this requires a good amount of precision and in many games I went wrong and got a bad position. The other plans are maybe simpler to implement : after 10. Ne1 Be6 11. Nc2 we go 11.... d5, and if 11. Nd5 then Rb8 and b5.
Very helpful, thanks.
After 1. c4 c5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nc3 choice depends on your tastes and other openings in your repertoire. People who like the double fianchetto or the hedgehog would be happy with 3... b6. 3... e6 breaking the symmetry immediately has a good reputation.
I don't feel comfortable with e6 systems both in the closed games and in the sicilian so I have tried only 3... d5, and got in various troubles after 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e3, 5. d4 and 5. e4. There are many positions where White can play very safely with a small advantage at hand (eg 5. d4 cxd4 6. Qxd4 Nxc3 7. Qxc3 which looks ok at first but is actually a complete torture), so I have come to the conclusion the most combative and practically best way to handle those positions is to play Nxc3 then g6, but that means a transposition to Grünfeld lines...
I play a lot of different lines with white and I HATE playing against the reversed Maroczy. It is exceptional. The knight on c7 comes back into the game at e6 and white is passive. There is only ONE way for white to get an advantage against this opening and it is not intuitive AT ALL.
I highly recomend it.
c4 c5
Nf3 Nf6 and white can do near nothing to prevent d5 next move - Unless he plays 3.d4
which allows the Kasparov gambit which many English players try to avoid
...
3.d4 cxd4
4.Nxd4 e5!
5. Nb5 d5!
6.cxd5 Bc5 which is more fun for Black
"The Keres and Accelerated Keres are both punished by 3.d4 or 4.d4, as the case may be." Typical disinformation in these opening forums. In fact may be the main problem with early g3 for white, very hard for white to show anything.
Well, many English players are not happy playing an early d4. Most realize it’s unavoidable but black always has e6 and Bb4 at his disposal as well as KID setups where white has a hole at d4.
another way of looking at it is the highest number of transpositions to strong openings from the English are a problem that each player must decide on his own because of the wide amount of defensive options available. There are as many ways to respond as black as there are set ups for white.
I personally find
Nf3 Nf6
c4 c5
Nc3 Nc6! A better option than the immediate 3...d5 because of the 4.e4! Gambit line. It’s very tricky and while not well known is a potential favorite of English opening devotees.
"The Keres and Accelerated Keres are both punished by 3.d4 or 4.d4, as the case may be." Typical disinformation in these opening forums. In fact may be the main problem with early g3 for white, very hard for white to show anything.
Hello! Thanks for your input. Please note that in Post #4, around four years ago, I retracted that claim, saying "Thanks for your input. You are right, it is not "punishing" - I drastically oversimplified things, I think."
In any case, an early g3 for white is the line recommended by Marin over 2.Nc3 (in all volumes his three-volume series on the English Opening) for a variety of reasons, including the inconvenience it poses to potential QID setups. He makes a compelling case for the merits of 2.g3 which you might find interesting (this case can be found in the last chapter of Volume 2, where he discusses his reason for choosing 2.g3 as the mainline as opposed to 2.Nc3.)
Hi,
I"ve never truly found an adequate defense to 1.c4/1.Nf3 (though ironically, I've played 1.c4 myself for 5.5 years). I guess that goes to show how wonderful the English & Reti openings are.
While that's all fine and dandy when I'm playing the white side of the English, it's not as dandy when I play the black side. My White repetoire consists of the English Opening (the Botvinnik System being my favorite) and my Black repetoire consists of Dutch Stonewall vs. 1.d4, and Sicilian Dragon vs. 1.e4. Thus, I've tried the Dutch (Stonewall and Classical) vs. English and Reti, with horrible results. I've also tried the English Hedgehog, with unfavorable results.
So, I was wondering, what should I play?
I could try the Reversed Rossolimo, but Mihail Marin recommends the gallant 5.Nd5! against it, which gives White a great game.
I could try the "safe and sound" Karpov Variation, but in that one I have a huge winning percentage as white.
The Keres and Accelerated Keres are both punished by 3.d4 or 4.d4, as the case may be.
Now, my highest-scoring openings are the Botvinnik System and the Dutch Stonewall. So, I wanted to ask you, dear forumers ... what are the merits of a Reversed Maroczy Bind?
Though I have no experience with the Maroczy Bind, I thought I might enjoy it because the Botvinnik System involves a clamp on the center with c4-d3-e4. It seems very similar to the Maroczy Bind, at least to me. Also, both openings (Maroczy Bind and Botvinnik System) give Black control of d4, which is similar to how Black gives White the e4 square in the Dutch Stonewall.
With that being said, here is the Reversed Maroczy Bind:
What is your opinion on it? It can also be used vs. the Reti. Please leave your comments ... I really need help on this!
Thanks very much!!