Weird Variation in 1...Nc6 Defense

I've played the Nimzowitsch in general against 1. e4 lately, and both the 2. ..d5 (main line) and 2. ..d6 continuations seem quite sound.  I've played the d6 variant against an Expert in tournament play, and didn't get killed (I lost, but it was a non-trivial endgame, which is about as well as I'd normally do against a 2000+).  I've had good results with the d5 variant against an 1850 in one of my local clubs.

2. ..e5 takes the e5 square away from the c6 knight, which completely misses the point of the opening.

Yeah, if played correctly, the Nimzovich Defence, 1...Nc6 is sound, but not perfectly so.

There are better openings to choose from.

I don't bother so much about 2.d4 against the Nimzowitz, and that because of 2...d5.

I think that Black is just fine after 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.d5 Nb8!, while 3.e5 Bf5 is not my cup of tea, either.

So, I play 2.Nf3, when Black has no better than 2...e5.

Exactly. Just play 2.Nf3 and you'll almost always transpose back into "normal" lines.

Black is hoping you'll try 2.d4 so he can get his favorite lines. So unless you're a big fan of those positions, just sidestep them.

Black is objectively worse and in a non-standard position where "ugly" moves will sometimes be required.

This is fine of course, if you think it's giving chances for both sides. Players choose lines like this all the time. They're all over chess. And because it's non-standard and "ugly" moves are required white will often screw it up.

But if you don't want this, then don't play 2...e5

As for what to do, your main source of play early on, of course, is coming from white's center pawns. Play c6 and/or f5 at some point to open lines. It's also comfortable to trade the dark square bishops since it's white's "good" bishop and your "bad" bishop. Your later play is often on one the flanks (not the center) and often based on white's relatively loose dark squares (thanks to his e4-d5 structure).

How best to do this? Look at a lot of GM games and find out.

Here's 3 games. First one turns into a game where neither pawn break is a big deal. 2nd one has c6 (which, at a glance, seems to be the usual and correct pawn break) and 3rd one with f5.

If I had to give 1 sentence to describe the strategic idea connecting all 3 games it would be:

"Solidify your structure/position on the central dark squares, and then pivot to attack on a flank."

3. e5 gives white big advantage.

The h4 line wins for white.

Così è (se vi pare).

I will not argue with illiterates.

Basta, international mast...

I have investigated this particular opening for decades, 3. e5 might even be winning.

Pity I don't have time to post games and analysis now.

But it is obvious, after e5, the knight on c6 is fully off side, so this is logically the best move.

Hai capito?

Non e molto difficile.

(This post became a lot longer than I intended. My answer is basically only 3 setnences, so I bold those below)

The closest I play to this central structure as black is a spanish/ruy where sometimes white gets e4-d5-c4 and black e5-d6).
I don't play, but am aware of that central structure in some king's indian defense games.

To me, the inclusion of h4 and h5 is weakening for both players. Usually a knight on f5 for white (and f4 for black) is a good attacking piece. Now both players get an additional square (g4 and g5).

So I think under the right circumstances either player will try to play on the kingside. f5 pawn break for black, f4 for white. What matters is having enough active pieces in the area.

All that to say, I wouldn't say either player controls the kingside. I think the kingside is more susceptible to piece-play, and neither side is completely ruling out pawn breaks there.

---

As for locking down the queenside with d6-b6-a5, IMO that's potentially good for a lot of reasons. For example if all white's pawns are on light square and you keep your light square bishop (and/or white keeps his light square bishop), then many basic endgames (rook+minor piece or just minor piece) will favor you.

But that's a lot of pawn moves in the middlegame, and basic endgames are far away, so I'd save that idea for later and keep my option to play c6. In both the Spanish and KID c6 is an important pawn break for black (in at least some lines).

Yeah the pawn on d5 traditionally makes the queenside "white's side" but space is only useful if you have pieces to make use of it.

I am lucky to avoid this connondrum since i play 2.d5 isnstead of 2.e5 (Although as others have said, 3.nf3 is the reason i avoid 2.e5 altogether, its too painful to see your opponent merrily transpose to a scotch and bypass all your traps!).

i do play 1.d4 nc6 2.c4 e5 which is similar but if white attempts, the nf3 , h4 strategy, black has more resources, for example, 

c4, instead of e4 makes all the difference, since, now, black can exchange,the bishop, play d6, and ne7 comfortably . (although 6.. nbd2, bxd2, 7. bxd2 d6 8.h5 ne7 9. h6!? looks quite interested if unexplored.

as for your line agaisnt 5. h4, it seems you have three choices. 

- play h5. i know its ugly, but you should learn these lines and know them better than your opponents, if i recall from memory, black sometimes, goes for an early c6 and qb6 to remove the bg5 pin. the eval of 0.5 is not that bad although i understand why you woudnt like this for black.

- if you see early nf3 you can settle for d6 and transpose to a sort of KID position 

-if you feel creative, play d6, then f5, nf6 and so on.

1) I have been playing the Nimzowitsch for a few years and has OK results with it, even against higher rated opponents. I personally prefer the 1. e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 line and I can say that the h4 line is a serious choice for White. However that does not mean that White is winning outright; Black has his trumps too. In that particular line, Black can equalize with good play in almost every variation that I know of.

2) For those of you who play the Colorado, I'm deeply sorry to tell you that it is most likely refuted. A sample line is given below. (unable to post diagrams for some reason)

1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 f5 3.exf5 d5 4.Bb5 Bxf5 5.d4 Nf6 6.Ne5 Qd6 7.0-0 Nd7 8.Bxc6! bxc6 9.Bf4 Nxe5 10.Bxe5 Qd7 11.c4 with the idea of c5, with a bind.

3) 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5 does not refute this opening, White may get a slightly better position (+0.40 or something) but he will still have to work for a win.

4) The system given against 2.Nf3 in the book - "The Dark Knight System" is playable, but may be a little too cramped for some players.

What's wrong with 4. ... d6 (instead of Ng6) followed by playing it like a King's Indian defense?

Black might even be able to get in ... f5 before playing Nf6, thus saving two whole tempi.

Nothing really wrong with that approach, but some people don't really know how to play like that.

im curious,  nkyu13 what do you play  vs the "dreaded" 2.nf3? 2.e5 is too big a conception for most nimzo fans.

Once I played the Colorado, but now I prefer to play the more sound 2...d6.