Someone needs to write a book on the Bowlder attack

  • #21
    AdorableMogwai wrote:

    Why do you say that final position in the second post looks nice for black?

    Well... I missed the super obvious Qg4 winning the c4 pawn heh.

    But still, what counts in the opening is development and center control.  I just assume black's game will be more comfortable because of these two things. 

    Those are the main points, but also the half open d file and bishop pair is comforting.  Also comforting is white's natural development is very much non threatening.  I'm imagining Nc3 Nf3 d3 Be3 I guess?  Yawn :)  Meanwhile all of black's developing moves come with some purpose.  Nc6-d4 has a threat.  Be6, Bf5 or Bd7-c6 have threats, Rc8 has a threat.

    That's my blitz impression anyway, that I'd rather be black... even more I'd think black's better... but obviously that requires actual analysis not just a gut feeling Tongue Out

  • #22

    Could the black bishop go to d4 to defend the pawn? I actually found the guy's comment just now (his username is KlangenFarben and he's rated >2500)

    he says "8. Qg4 Bd4 leaves White lacking in space and initiative."


    It's on move 8 instead of 7 because apparently there's some a-pawn moves that I forgot about. You can find his full comment on the first page of this thread http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/why-have-i-been-encountering-the-bowlder-attack


  • #23

    Wow I'm really bad.  I didn't even consider Bd4 (even Qd4) to defend the pawn.

    Yeah, those moves look good too.  In fact I like Qd4 better, trying to have my cake (pawn) and eat it too (castle).

  • #24

    Not seen this before. Not sure how solid it is though.

  • #25
    AdorableMogwai wrote:

    I checked Amazon before posting and found no books on it. The Bowlder Attack is named after Dr. Thomas Bowlder. Here's a game of him playing Philidor using the Bowlder Attack in 1783

    http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1540995

    Now that I look at that game, Philidor's play against it gives me inspiration. It's kind of interesting that in Philidor's game his pieces got walled off on the queenside just as mine have a tendency to do when I'm using this same set-up against it.

    Dr. Thomas Bowdler often has his name misspelled. Check your link.

    He did play the line.  It should be the Bowdler Attack. Perhaps the frequent misspelling is humanity's revenge for his efforts to improve Shakespeare.

  • #26

    "Someone needs to write a book on the Bowlder attack"

     

    I don't see why it needs a book.  No-one asks for a book on how to play against 1. h4, or 1. a4 or 1. Nh3.   There is really not a lot of difference. The Bowdler attack just misplaces White's KB and is inferior to many other second moves.

     

    It is not popular either.  I don't know where that idea comes from. At least it is rarely played by strong players.  It might be popular with beginners who still think some secret opening knowledge will propel them to high ratings and chess fame, and have not  yet figured out that learning to play chess is a better strategy for improvement.

     

    The Bowdler is rarely played at master level, and with good reason.  Only nonsense moves like 2. h3 and 2. Qh5 and their like are less popular.  When White does risk it, and Black replies correctly with 2. ... e6,  White loses about three games in 5 and wins only 1 in 5 (the rest being draws).  As White is supposed to average a little over 50% overall that is an awful advertisement for an opening.

     

    1. e4 c5, 2 Bc4 e6 is all you need to know.  If you cannot play that position as Black with your basic knowledge and understanding of chess then a book on the line is not going to be much help.

  • #27

    Wouldn't it be a short, rather dull book, with no sales potential?

  • #28
    Lasker1900 wrote:

    Wouldn't it be a short, rather dull book, with no sales potential?

     

    Pithy and witty (i.e. You) definitely beats long winded and ponderous (i.e.  ... )

or Join

Online Now