I don't claim to be an expert, but I have surprised people with the Russian Variation against the Grunfeld. (I looked it up in the database: Kasparov, Smyslov, Karpov, Petrosian, Anand, Ivanchuk, Kramnik, Carlsen, Topalov, Aronian and Giri have played this line against the Grunfeld.)
Its quite interesting, again another line designed to avoid the Grunfeld proper. I cannot say what its most testing and critical line might be.
Its quite interesting, again another line designed to avoid the Grunfeld proper. I cannot say what its most testing and critical line might be.
Your definition of "the Grunfeld proper" is not anyone else's definition.
Svidler agrees that the Grunfeld is a lot of fun to play as Black, but he argues that White can get a small edge in a variety of different lines. There is no one "Grunfeld proper". In fact, the Bf4 line is known as the Classical Grunfeld!
What you call the Grunfeld proper is simply the Exchange Variation of the Grunfeld. It's probably the most popular variation, but it is no more or less "proper" than other lines that White can try.
ECO awards D99, the ultimate line of the Grunfeld to the Smyslov Variation of the Grunfeld.
Svidler agrees that the Grunfeld is a lot of fun to play as Black, but he argues that White can get a small edge in a variety of different lines. There is no one "Grunfeld proper". In fact, the Bf4 line is known as the Classical Grunfeld!
What you call the Grunfeld proper is simply the Exchange Variation of the Grunfeld. It's probably the most popular variation, but it is no more or less "proper" than other lines that White can try.
ECO awards D99, the ultimate line of the Grunfeld to the Smyslov Variation of the Grunfeld.
Are you going to post some analysis or engage in endless pedantry? I don't care what the variations are called, I don't care what Svidler says either, I am only interested in the juxtaposition of the chessmen and the evaluation of the resultant positions. Now if you are not going to post any analysis or evaluations of the resultant positions then perhaps this is not the thread for you.
Now getting back to the line posted by imsighked2, it appears that it was popularised by Botvinnik and dusted down by later generations. I think the consensus is that it gives white no real advantage. It will take some time to go through the variations though to ascertain if this is the case or not.
Fine.
Here's a game I played against a national master last year. He blundered, making the game less "awesome".
There is a very interesting variation that white needs to be extremely careful of.
Fine.
Here's a game I played against a national master last year. He blundered, making the game less "awesome".
Its not my favourite opening, I have never played it, infact here are my opening comments.
'but I know nothing about it other than black allows white to get a centre and then slowly chips away at it.' - robbie_1969
Now how you get from, 'I know nothing about it', to, 'its my favourite opening', is not readily discernible. Did you simply make it up? Again I have no problem with being corrected, what I do have a problem with is pedantry. Let me reiterate, I don't care what the variations are called, I don't care what the alphanumeric number is in the latest ECO, I don't care what Grandmasters say about it and I don’t care whether you take it seriously or not. What I do care about is the resultant positions and their evaluations.
Do you seriously for one moment think that knowing what ECO number its filed under is going to help one iota when we prepare to play it. I reserve the right to mock such a ludicrous proposition. My gawd he doesn’t know the ECO number, awwww the horror!
What instructional value does your game have for us?
- 8. Bg5 h6 9. Bh4 g5 10. Bg3 Nxg3
- or 8. Be5 f6
Black is left much better.
I wonder if you can ever claim something other than total nonsense- e.g. 8.Be5 f6? 9.Bxb8 Rxb8 10.Ne1 leaves Black in a sorry state.
What you guys got against Smyslovfans classical setup?
I see some ...c6 lines but I don't think they are played in style of Grunfeld, more like a slav where black is content to support the centre rather than directly attack it immediately.
Agreed, Grunfeld is only for true Vikings who have crossed the Rainbow bridge and reside safe in valour’s glory in Valhalla itself to be attended upon constantly by pretty maidens serving cups of strong mead.
Is it this line below?
I dunno L n A king, but I must find out, Qd2 is mainline you say, ok, I'm going in, this must be resolved!
Anyone read 'The Safest Grunfeld' by Alexander Delchev? Its looks pretty good as its focus is on conceptual ideas.
I don't have it, yet, but I might buy it. I also like the idea of a conceptual approach and in some suggestions they advocate actually avoiding theory altogether yet maintaining a positionally sound basis. Imagine that, your opponent is all booked up with nowhere to go.
http://www.chess-stars.com/resources/Grunfeld_Sample.pdf
No I have never played it, only in two games that are ongoing at the moment against my friends in daily chess 
It sounds really amazing, would love to see how you fare! What did I play, i played semi slav, why, because I was lazy and don't want to learn any theory, i could play semi slav without knowing very much, take away from the centre, play ...c5 and try to get a Meran type of position. It caused my opponents no problem whatsoever.
But there is NO transposition here, this is simply a DIFFERENT opening.
Man, I should get back to this forum, when people learn some good openings.
No one has claimed that there is a transposition here, the text was used as an analogy only. Please try to be more aware.