#42
The Millner Barry Gambit is not bad, but it is not to be feared either.
Here is a recent example from Vachier-Lagrave:
https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=2097003
And here is a classical example from Tal:
https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1139522
I used to play 1.e6 2.c5 but the problem was after 3.d5 then 4.Nbd2 is a Tarrasch French and if not I thought I was out of options until I found 3.a6 avoiding all French's and going into a Drazic Variation of the Sicilian a rare sideline almost never played
Honestly, if you don't want to play any French lines it makes a lot more sense to choose another response than 1. ... e6.
I can also tell you from experience that it's a lot more useful to actually study a certain defense and get to know all the nuances (and learn to play all kinds of positions) than to play one single sideline defense.
I used to play the Hyperaccelerated Dragon (1. e4 c5 2. N.f3 g6) to avoid studying too much theory, but since I actually took the time to study the French defense and all it's (sub)variations I've become a much better player as a whole.
This is what I play nowadays :
This new idea that I came up with of fianchettoing the kingside knight to c7 and playing for the d5 or b5 pawn breaks . D5 in particular .
I used to play 1.e6 2.c5 but the problem was after 3.d5 then 4.Nbd2 is a Tarrasch French and if not I thought I was out of options until I found 3.a6 avoiding all French's and going into a Drazic Variation of the Sicilian a rare sideline almost never played
Honestly, if you don't want to play any French lines it makes a lot more sense to choose another response than 1. ... e6.
I can also tell you from experience that it's a lot more useful to actually study a certain defense and get to know all the nuances (and learn to play all kinds of positions) than to play one single sideline defense.
I used to play the Hyperaccelerated Dragon (1. e4 c5 2. N.f3 g6) to avoid studying too much theory, but since I actually took the time to study the French defense and all it's (sub)variations I've become a much better player as a whole.
This is what I play nowadays :
This new idea that I came up with of fianchettoing the kingside knight to c7 and playing for the d5 or b5 pawn breaks . D5 in particular .
You would never get that against me or anybody else that knows what they are doing.
1.d4 e6 2.e4 c5?! 3.d5!, leading to the Schmid Benoni, which is an advantage for White well beyond the slight advantage he gets for going first.
3.Nf3 merely gives in to Black's desire to play a Sicilian and a sound defense.
Where's your Schmid Benoni @ThrillerFan ?
Where's your Schmid Benoni @ThrillerFan ?
Well... in your lines Black is playing a bad version of the old Benoni (1.d4 c5 2.d5 e5) under even worse conditions: Black has wasted a tempo by playing ...e6 and then ...e5. Under such conditions, white of course won't be disappointed at all because Black has "avoided" the Schmidt Benoni.
For example, your 1.d4 e6 2.d4 c5?! 3.d5 d6 4.Nf3 e5? 5.Nfd2 (going for a4, Nc4, Nc3, Bd3 etc) Black is positionally lost, already.
I used to play 1.e6 2.c5 but the problem was after 3.d5 then 4.Nbd2 is a Tarrasch French and if not I thought I was out of options until I found 3.a6 avoiding all French's and going into a Drazic Variation of the Sicilian a rare sideline almost never played
Honestly, if you don't want to play any French lines it makes a lot more sense to choose another response than 1. ... e6.
I can also tell you from experience that it's a lot more useful to actually study a certain defense and get to know all the nuances (and learn to play all kinds of positions) than to play one single sideline defense.
I used to play the Hyperaccelerated Dragon (1. e4 c5 2. N.f3 g6) to avoid studying too much theory, but since I actually took the time to study the French defense and all it's (sub)variations I've become a much better player as a whole.