I wonder now, how does 2700+ play differs from 2400 to the extent that an opening is good for one subset but not for the other?
Afaik, the 2400 player is as a rule thoroughly versed in the intricacies of theory, games in the variations they play, strategic consideration, attacking ideas, endgame possibilities and structures, activity - everything...
So i would appreciate it if you could shed some light
Well, the difference in playing strenght is just huge. Against 2400 guys you can play any reasonable opening and usually get away with it. On a 2700 level playing 2nd rate stuff is likely to be punished. Just look at Bologan's desastrous performance in Biel 2012. Or Rapport and Jobava, when they face top opposition (against 2600 rated opponents they still do very well with their 1.b3 or 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3).
Of course - 300 rating points represent huge differences anywhere on the scale - and you see it best when you're close to the bottom of that difference yourself...
On the other hand, one asks oneself whether Bologan, Rapport and Jobava are getting better results against the stronger players using other opening - is it the opening's fault or simply lack of experience or not being quite up to that standard yet.
All of the three players you name are osciallating between 2600s and 2700s - not quite the top boys, but with a clear edge over the general 2600-something crowd (this is what ratings and results say... I can't attest to the actual quality of play for reasons that you would find obvious...)
The thing is, that I would suppose that if there is a clear refutation of the Benko, 2400s should also be able to use it convincingly
Or perhaps it's these subtle, imperceptible nuances that are patently clear to the likes of Anand and Kramnik, but which require tons of understanding, experience and calculations, and which you really need to be that class of a player in order to be able to make use of... I wonder!
So high is the sky above one's head :-) !!!!
In correspondence 12. a4 makes the Benko unplayable, so I've heard.
Of course - 300 rating points represent huge differences anywhere on the scale - and you see it best when you're close to the bottom of that difference yourself...
On the other hand, one asks oneself whether Bologan, Rapport and Jobava are getting better results against the stronger players using other opening - is it the opening's fault or simply lack of experience or not being quite up to that standard yet.
All of the three players you name are osciallating between 2600s and 2700s - not quite the top boys, but with a clear edge over the general 2600-something crowd (this is what ratings and results say... I can't attest to the actual quality of play for reasons that you would find obvious...)
In case of Rapport it's hard to say, but Bologan and Jobava have quite a history of playing main lines on top level, and not unsuccessfully. Remember Bologan's victory in Dortmund. It also has to be said though that Bologan's breakdown was not monocausal. The 0/5 in the Benkö certainly didn't help, but even as white, playing mainlines, he only collected 1,5/5. Still it left the impression that his opponents were very happy of being given a pawn on move 3, and it's certainly no coincidence that they all chose 1.d4 against him.
The thing is, that I would suppose that if there is a clear refutation of the Benko, 2400s should also be able to use it convincingly
Or perhaps it's these subtle, imperceptible nuances that are patently clear to the likes of Anand and Kramnik, but which require tons of understanding, experience and calculations, and which you really need to be that class of a player in order to be able to make use of... I wonder!
So high is the sky above one's head :-) !!!!
There is no clear refutation. It's just that in the most critical lines, black's compensation for the pawn is not fully sufficient. Good practical chances against regular IMs and GMs, yes. But those guys at the top are not impressed by practical chances. Their play is extremely precise, and then they more often than not end up just a pawn ahead, or with a successful e4-e5 breakthrough that tears apart black's position.
After cd, 6..Bc5! Gives black a good game. 5..d5 is a common gambit idea here.
Hi I am a 1700 USCF rated player. When I played d4, I noticed that Benko was a very common weapon in club level. But when you search for Benko games on databases, you will be very disappointed. It has a bad stat and there is not a lot of games in this opening. I think this is because of the mainline position that end up. They give white a very favorable position but Benko is a very tricky opening, So it is recommended in club level but I wouldn't play it if your 2400 plus. This is just my opinion and I'm not always right.
2400+ is certainly not a problem, but 2700+ probably is.