I think I could help you since I play the Keres Attack myself just to make sure, is this what you're talking about?
Sicilian Scheveningen 5. Nc3 a6 6.Be2 e6 7.g4!?
Sort:
diagram is faulty.
This is what I mean:
chessgames.com opening explores has only 10 games available, unfortunately the browsing stops there for free members so I couldn't browse it further:
| 7...Nc6 | 4 |
|
|||
| 7...h6 | 4 |
|
|||
| 7...Be7 | 2 |
|
Paul, you're a diamond member. Is the chess.com database of any use here? It puzzles me that at chessgames.com h6 scores extremely well for white(Ok, not too many games available) and at chesslive it scores well for black.
@RR I don't mind this later in the middlegame but I haven't really seen many games in this line so it would be difficult to come up with something OTB without using a lot of time.
For most other pawn storms vs the Sicilian (say the Najdorf English Atk), it is covered in my book and I have looked at many games in the line so I will have an idea of what to do when the game deviates from theory.
First of all 7.g4 isn't necessary a pawn storm although that can happen. 7.g4 is played to gain a positional advantage by driving away the f6 Knight to get an advantage in space and control the center. One obvious thing is to keep d7 open for your knight. You should be looking to counter in the center with either of two thematic breaks namely ...e5 and ...d5. In the Schevenigen ..d5 is the more typical break. In my own games, I have found that once I get in ...d5 Whites attack tends to dissipate. I would be happy that White has already played his bishop to e2, because a common placement in the Keres attack is to play the Bishop to g2 in a kind of super fianchetto.
paulgottlieb wrote:
Fezzick: that's interesting stuff. I did notice a absence of highly ranked players in the games I was able to find, so I was wondering if they all knew something I didn't. They usually do! Actually I was wondering if 8...d5 (after 7...h6 8.h4) was good, or 8...b5. They both looked okay to me, but we know how much that's worth!
Yes, they know that White's bishop doesn't belong on e2 in the Keres Attack.
Because of White's 6th move, White's attack is slow enough that Black has time to strike on the queenside. Another example of why a Keres type attack doesn't work well against a Najdorf move order.
Estragon wrote:
My guess is Reinaldo Castineira in the game blake78613 posts @ #17 is just an attempt to get out of book lines against a lower-rated opponent. Other than a strategic reason such as that, why would Black do this? If he plays the Nadjorf, isn't his goal to play 6 ...e5, and doesn't that account for there being so few games with ...e6?
Some people play the Najdorf aiming for 6...e5 if possible, some people play it as a move order to reach the Scheveningen if possible, to avoid some pure Scheveningen stuff like the Keres Attack.
E.g. the Kasparov-Anand 1995 WC match featured seven 6.Be2 e6 games.
Estragon wrote:
Am I missing something? How do you convince Black to play ...e6 after 6 Be2?
My guess is Reinaldo Castineira in the game blake78613 posts @ #17 is just an attempt to get out of book lines against a lower-rated opponent. Other than a strategic reason such as that, why would Black do this? If he plays the Nadjorf, isn't his goal to play 6 ...e5, and doesn't that account for there being so few games with ...e6?
Yes you are missing something, namely the whole point of the OP's original question. Look at post #4, where the OP specifically shows the line he is asking about.
As to your claim that the whole goal of the Nadjorf is play 6..e5, let me quote the 14th world champion, Alexander Khalifman, in his introduction to Vol. 13 in the series Opening for White according to Anand:
>>>Finally, in the third part of our book, we have analyzed the main lines of the English Attack arising after 6.Be3 e6 7.f3 b5 this is exactly where the main theoretical disputes are taking place nowadays, moreover that we can even say that the correctness of the Najdorf system and maybe even the entire Sicilian Defense hinges on the evaluation of this particular variation.<<<
After 6 Be2 try e5 instead. Its a najdorf then ofcourse. After whites 7 g4 in the line you give my database shows black doing best with 7... d5 ..... have you tried it ?
Reb wrote:
After 6 Be2 try e5 instead. Its a najdorf then ofcourse. After whites 7 g4 in the line you give my database shows black doing best with 7... d5 ..... have you tried it ?
What if White doesn't play 7 g4? You are then in the lines that Najdorf himself considered the possible positional refutation of the Najdorf. I wish hadn't thrown away my old HRM book on the Najdorf. It had an introduction by Najdorf where he explained why he started playing the Najdorf variation, and it wasn't to play ...e5 "come hell or high-water". Basically 5...a6 is a waiting move with both defensive and offensive ideas. Black is like a counter-puncher waiting for White to commit himself first. Black can then decide where to best place his pieces and which pawn structures to chose. It follows Lasker's philosophy of maximizing your options.
You would have left the topic of the this thread when you played 6...e5.
blake78613 wrote:
Reb wrote:
After 6 Be2 try e5 instead. Its a najdorf then ofcourse. After whites 7 g4 in the line you give my database shows black doing best with 7... d5 ..... have you tried it ?
What if White doesn't play 7 g4? You are then in the lines that Najdorf himself considered the possible positional refutation of the Najdorf. I wish hadn't thrown away my old HRM book on the Najdorf. It had an introduction by Najdorf where he explained why he started playing the Najdorf variation, and it wasn't to play ...e5 "come hell or high-water". Basically 5...a6 is a waiting move with both defensive and offensive ideas. Black is like a counter-puncher waiting for White to commit himself first. Black can then decide where to best place his pieces and which pawn structures to chose. It follows Lasker's philosophy of maximizing your options.
6 Be2 e5 scores 51% for black according to my database and its what Fischer played against 6 Be2 as well as other famous GMs that played the Najdorf. If you arent happy with 51% as black I dont know what else to say.
Estragen: You are correct we did wonder off topic. I was responding to your comment that the goal of the Najdorf styem was to play ...e5. A better (and on point) response would be that the goal of a Schevenigen player using a Najdorf move order is to avoid the Keres Attack.
Reb wrote:
After 6 Be2 try e5 instead. Its a najdorf then ofcourse. After whites 7 g4 in the line you give my database shows black doing best with 7... d5 ..... have you tried it ?
Thanks for all the replies. 7...d5 looks interesting but I seems that Black has to give up the bishop pair at least in this line. And even though white gets doubled/isolated f pawns, his bishops appear quite vicious as they cut through the position. I'm sure there are improvements though.
Hello, I'm wondering what I should play against this early move. It isn't covered in my Sicilian book and it seriously looks like some scary Keres- like Attack.The last thing I want when playing the Sicilian is being stuck in an all out pawn storm where I need to find the accurate, right plan on my feet.
The line where white goes 6.Be3 e6 7.g4-the Perenyi- is covered but this looks like something scary as white hasn't move his c1 bishop yet. White is basically storming immeadietly. You might think it will transpose after something like 7...h6 8.Be3 (White might even play something like 8. f4!? or 8.h4!? which both look scary) but it won't b/c against the Perenyi, the line with 7.g4 e5!? is covered not 7...h6.
Btw, for you people who want to play Open Sicilians but don't want to learn all the theory, this seems like something to look into...
Im thinking I need a way to somehow play in the center with a timely d5 or e5 as well as the queenside with b5-b4 but does anyone have any concrete lines against this? The thing with pawn storms is that you basically have a limited amount of time to "get ready" before you go down in flames...