4.e4 is another approach, but black has 4...dxc4:
5.Nf3 b5 and you're actually in the Noteboom. So if you don't like that, you have to play
5.Bxc4 Nf6 6.Nf3 (6...Be7 7. O-O O-O +-) but then again 6...b5 7.Bd3 a6 =
What to do against the annoying Triangle/Noteboom move order?
Sort:
rowsweep wrote:
why is it called the note boom
Abrahams is asking the same question.
GodIike hat geschrieben:
4..bd6 and 5..f5, and it' a stonewall with white having played e3. I believe this is the more popular way to play against e3 and how I played when I used the noteboom.
Obviously my estimate is completely irrelevant, but I'd never play f5 here because it inherently weakens the e5 square and white says "Thanks a lot for the invitation!"
Walter_von_Entferndt wrote:
GodIike hat geschrieben:
4..bd6 and 5..f5, and it' a stonewall with white having played e3. I believe this is the more popular way to play against e3 and how I played when I used the noteboom.
Obviously my estimate is completely irrelevant, but I'd never play f5 here because it inherently weakens the e5 square and white says "Thanks a lot for the invitation!"
It's actually a very improved version of the stonewall dutch. With no g3 and bg2 played blacks kingside plans often become crushing. I scored heavily with f5, but gave up the triangle because I had to always defend against any white player who knew the noteboom lines decently.
It reallly depends on what you'd call an "improvement". White has several plans in the e3 Stonewalls, the simplest and most effective being probably the unpretentious developing scheme Nf3, Nc3, Bd3, 0-0, b3, Bb2, Ne2, and finally Nf3-e5. Sorry to say that I just cannot see how Black can "attack" against something like this. His drawing chances are pretty good, since he has no weaknesses (excluding e5), but his real counterplay is quite limited.
GodIike hat geschrieben:
[...] I scored heavily with f5, but gave up the triangle because I had to always defend against any white player who knew the noteboom lines decently.
I guess Iossif Dorfman would write a ?! behind the 5...f5 after 5.Nf3, too (weak e5 & kingside). There are much sounder ways for black to treat the Slav/Semi-Slav, i.e. 5...Nf6 + 6...Nbd7 (+= no matter what white plays). I'm tempted to say that f5 (f4) is generally a bad move in the opening (except when O-O-O), because it weakens the kingside.
Sep 24, 2014
0
#48
I'm playing a correspondence game against a FM in the line that Pfren is talking about. I agree with Pfren's assessment. It's very difficult for White to prove a practical advantage there, but White's game is more comfortable. I wouldn't recommend it to class players, or to players who must play for the win as Black.
ghostofmaroczy wrote:
rowsweep wrote:
why is it called the note boom
Ahem!
Abrahams is asking the same question.
rowsweep hat geschrieben:
why is it called the note boom
Because a note was found in the late Petrosjan's dacha on how to defend the QGD xchg for black, but it was illegibly scribbled. All that was readable was a "Boom!" after the final black winning combination.
Walter_von_Entferndt wrote:
rowsweep hat geschrieben:
why is it called the note boom
Because a note was found in the late Petrosjan's dacha on how to defend the QGD xchg for black, but it was illegibly scribbled. All that was readable was a "Boom!" after the final black winning combination.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c6 4 Nf3 dxc4 5 a4 Bb4 6 e3 b5 7 Bd2 a5 Boom!
Signed,
Florencio
Sep 26, 2014
0
#52
i guess the semi slav and the noteboom are the same thing.
because both do dxc4
Sep 27, 2014
0
#55
+1 to the 4.e4 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Bb4+ 6.Nc3 recommendation.
It's in the "hey it's a game" frame of thinking. Plus, didn't Carlsen play this way against Anand maybe?
rowsweep hat geschrieben:
i guess the semi slav and the noteboom are the same thing.
because both do dxc4
I'd suggest you focus on middlegame plans and don't worry about opening names and what moves your opponent plays. Just pick s/th you like...
rdecredico hat geschrieben:
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:
+1 to the 4.e4 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Bb4+ 6.Nc3 recommendation. [...]
Theroertically very good for Black. Kaufman had this line in his latest book but since its publication serious improvements have been found for Black in this line that leave us at =/+
Could you show us some lines about these improvements? All I can find in the DB is 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c6 4.e4 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Bb4+ 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.Nf3 c5 8.Be2 Nc6 9.Be3 Ne4 10.Rc1 cxd4 Why is this =+?
rdecredico wrote:
Check some high level Iccf games and other recent 'cc' battles.
Where did you get these games from? Trollbase probably?
i like playing e4 so i don't have to face the noteboom
Mr. Noteboom is a funny name.
who was Gedault? there is a chess opening called gedault's opening