Forums

Who plays Grunfeld and why is it awesome?

Sort:
BonTheCat
BonTheCat
May 8, 2018
0
#61
robbie_1969 escreveu:
TwoMove wrote:

It's nice to see somebody actually interested in learning a new opening, instead of the demented obsession with the first ply which has become typical of this forum. Afraid can't help you much though because Grunfeld has never appealed to me much. Awhile back Rowson wrote a decent book which highlighted the different plans available, maybe something like that would interest you

Thank you for your kind sentiments its very much appreciated. Will check out the Rowson publication for sure.  I actually really like the games and positions that results.  I think its their double edged quality, one false move and someone is walking the plank into shark infested waters for sure.

Use Rowson's book to learn the opening, and Avrukh's book as your 'go-to-encyclopedia' after your games. My brother used to play the Grünfeld for many years and he spoke very highly of Rowson's book. Good luck with your new opening choice! Btw, I can only echo TwoMove's sentiment, don't worry too much about the engine.

MetalRatel
NM MetalRatel
Show your flair!
May 8, 2018
0
#62
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

3...d5 is TOO early and a big mistake.

Ceding around 15-20cps evaluation advantage at least.

Add to that the 15-30cps first move white advantage, and, with optimal play, the Gruenfeld is ON THE EDGE of losing for black.

Not quite, but almost.

Troll or not troll, 3...d5 is a bad move and one day, with much stronger engines and deeper analysis that will become evident.

Do people really think all openings could be equivalent?

Please behave yourself Lyudo.  I am not a computer.  I do not think or play chess like a computer.  I am human. A 10-30 cps means nothing to me, absolutely nothing.  Plans and conceptual ideas though I find very interesting.  As I will not be playing much against computers because I already know I cannot beat them I would appreciate some human analysis. 

The empirical evidence is that among humans its a perfectly fine and respectable opening leading to double edged positions which are very exciting.

I behave myself perfectly.

Conceptually:

3...d5, 4. cxd5 - trades semi-central c for central black d pawn, bad

4...Nxd5 5. e4 - gains tempo by kicking the black knight, bad

Black is playing black, bad.

3 small white advantages add up, bad.

Overall, a very neat conceptual framework.

I would abstain from playing the Gruenfeld, unless drunk.

?

Do you have a specific line in mind? I mean it's not like we're analyzing a tactical opening as heavily analyzed by engines as the Grunfeld, but at least - oh n/m we are...

Seriously though, what do you think is best path forward? I suppose I would favor the modern Be3 lines, but maybe you like the Classical. White has a big center - well yes, that is obvious. If Black can trade on c3, I don't consider this a tempo loss. Black has interesting dynamics in return for White's classical center. This opening is a headache for top players - well maybe you want to keep your secrets... happy.png

RoobieRoo
RoobieRoo
May 9, 2018
0
#63

On some further investigation I think I can dismiss the ...Bg4 lines, they are simply too volatile and in my measly opinion anti positional giving white super attacking chances just for the exchange.  If you check them with a chess engine you will see that black is doing fine, but its not that simple at the board.

White gives up the exchange but with the dark squared bishop gone gets a pretty raging attack and it will take good defence to withstand it.  If black does withstand it then he/she probably stands better, but it takes nerves of steel.
 
 
 
 
StevieG65
StevieG65
Show your flair!
May 10, 2018
0
#64
I have played the Grunfeld at an amateur level for about 35 years. It is not for everyone, but if it suits you it is awesome. Why? First, white has to take it head on, with the exchange or Russian variation; otherwise black plays c5 with a full share of the centre and easy development. When white takes the centre, black has the ready made plan of attacking d4 until something has to give. Assuming white's centre doesn't just collapse he has to play either: (i) e5, opening the other long diagonal, then we mate him on g2; or(ii) d5, then we blockade d6 and e5 and constantly keep our eyes open for b5 or f5. Of course, it is not so simple, but these are some of the themes.
RoobieRoo
RoobieRoo
May 10, 2018
0
#65

I am just sifting through games and the mainlines looking for things that I think I could play.  At present I have rejected the ...Bg4 lines but its rather fascinating, its almost more like a game you get playing the Sicilian defence rather than a stodgy queen pawn game.

RoobieRoo
RoobieRoo
May 10, 2018
0
#66

LOL does it work against the London, it sounds like it must.

RoobieRoo
RoobieRoo
May 10, 2018
0
#67
pfren
IM pfren
Show your flair!
May 11, 2018
0
#68
IToldCha έγραψε:

Something went wrong in this game. Black didn't made the best move to convert his advantage.

I myself prefer Nbd7 which allows me to put a knight on e4.

 

Apparently lost on time on a flat equal position, and somewhere around move 40 white was completely winning. Say instead of the greedy 48.Nxd5 white could play 48.a6 Qxe3+ 49.Kh1 Qxc3 50.Nc2 when the game is over.

RoobieRoo
RoobieRoo
May 11, 2018
0
#69
IToldCha wrote:

Something went wrong in this game. Black didn't made the best move to convert his advantage.

I myself prefer Nbd7 which allows me to put a knight on e4.

sure that makes sense.  will try to find a game where that transpires.

RoobieRoo
RoobieRoo
May 11, 2018
0
#70

I only managed to find a single game where black was successful with the set up.  Again its a game from Athens. 

 
In other games black immediate attack on the queenside with b4 has been problematic for black.
 
 
I quite like the ideas in this game, black pressures the dark squares on the queenside and then exchanges the light squared bishops setting up a kind of stonewall pawn formation.
SmyslovFan
SmyslovFan
Show your flair!
May 11, 2018
0
#71

You do realize, don't you, that when your opponent makes different moves, an opening rarely keeps the same name. For example, if you play "the French" 1...e6 and 2...d5  against 1.d4 and 2.c4, it's no longer the French. Same with the Grunfeld. 

Pulpofeira
Pulpofeira
May 12, 2018
0
#72

It's called literature.

RoobieRoo
RoobieRoo
May 12, 2018
0
#73
SmyslovFan wrote:

You do realize, don't you, that when your opponent makes different moves, an opening rarely keeps the same name. For example, if you play "the French" 1...e6 and 2...d5  against 1.d4 and 2.c4, it's no longer the French. Same with the Grunfeld. 

Yes but we are not so much interested in names as the juxtaposition of the chess men.  Even if an opening is reached through transposition it makes little difference if it came from the English or some Queen pawn opening.

RoobieRoo
RoobieRoo
May 12, 2018
0
#74
KevinWood44 wrote:

OP 

Why do you need OTHER people to justify to YOU why YOU should play the opening????  Play it, DONT play it.....but dont it put it on other people to convince YOU why you should play it.  Besides you answered your own question as to what the Grunfeld does and why it can be effective, if you get to work for you than use it, if you cant....dont!!!

 

Hey can anyone tell me why I should wear socks??  I know what they are and what they do and why I should wear them but can YOU tell me why I should????  

I think the clue was in the wording.  My reasons were not entirely objective and low and behold some other players provided excellent reasons based on their knowledge and experience.  That's what forums are for, discussing ideas and opinions.  Choosing and wearing socks is a false analogy, that is, its too dissimilar to be relevant or effective.

 

choosing socks is like choosing an opening.

socks are an individual thing so is an opening

Therefore, no one can tell you why you should wear them

In reality choosing a pair of socks is nothing like choosing an opening and the analogy is absurd

RoobieRoo
RoobieRoo
May 12, 2018
0
#75
Pulpofeira wrote:

It's called literature.

happy.png

RoobieRoo
RoobieRoo
May 12, 2018
0
#76
IToldCha wrote:

Thx for posting the games. I play Nbd7 with great success because many LS players are really predictable. You can't expect any creativity or real chess understanding from them. This is what I see from most players who play openings that are advertised as lazy openings or magical weapons against everything. London System, Grand-Prix Attack, KIA, Philidor(e.g. black Lion) to name a few.

Its very interesting Capablanca himself advocated not going into the Grunfeld proper but instead playing a London style move Bf4.  the difference is though that the c pawn is on c4, still, maybe there are some ideas that we could utilise, i don't know.  I tell you this though the Grunfeld set up against the Colle was almost its death.  Even Colle himself was forced to employ different lines because as you stated, the star of whites position, the d3 Bishop has no prospects because of blacks kingside fianchetto.

 
I don't know anything about it but I plan on finding out
Pulpofeira
Pulpofeira
May 12, 2018
0
#77

IM Angus Dunnington favours 4. Bf4 in his book "Attacking with 1. d4".

RoobieRoo
RoobieRoo
May 12, 2018
0
#78
Pulpofeira wrote:

IM Angus Dunnington favours 4. Bf4 in his book "Attacking with 1. d4".

Yes it looks really interesting as essentially white avoids Grunfeld altogether and takes it into completely different waters.  Capa liked to keep his pawns all neat and clean and tidy wink.png

Pulpofeira
Pulpofeira
May 12, 2018
0
#79

I've tried it only once:

 

RoobieRoo
RoobieRoo
May 12, 2018
0
#80

how very interesting! black gambits a pawn!