Oh no, a draw! What a terrible result for Black. Leko ought to go hang himself, or maybe hang a few pieces if he wants to feel even worse. By that I mean that the Caro-Kann is extremely solid and strong, and I'd be happy to prove it - Black does not always have to play passively, but if that route is chosen then it is hard for White to generate an attack, unless White is much stronger than its opponent.
Why respond to e4 with c6?
Sort:
birdboy1 wrote:
In my opinion, the caro kann is slightly worse than the french, because after 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5, black can get the queen's bishop out, but after that black is forced to play a french-like line a tempo down because of the c6-c5 move that black will inevitably play
Well, GMs might disagree on that. The caro-kann is played at high level, the french isn't. I'll take the word of GMs on this one. I know alot of french players swear by the french but the caro is slightly better I think.
Also, yes caro-kann is a tempo down because it takes two moves to get c5 in but you only waste one single move to make your bad bishop good. In the french that can take more moves or you sometimes don't even get that bishop out so it's not really true that you simply play the french with a tempo down.
AtahanT wrote:
Well, GMs might disagree on that. The caro-kann is played at high level, the french isn't.
Really? I'd bet money that there were more WC's who played the French than the CK.....
I'd probably lose, though.
A friend of mine always calls the French Botvinnik's Laboratory :)
At the highest level you'll rearely see the french at all. The caro-kann you will see.
Fiveofswords wrote:
you shouldnt focus so much at what openings you see at the 'highest level'. It doesnt mean what you seem to think it means, seriously.
That is ofcourse true but my point is that you can't argue that the french is better because caro-kann "loses" time on the c5 move. It's obivously not true that the caro-kann is worse then the french. If anything the opposite.
FirebrandX wrote:
AtahanT wrote:
At the highest level you'll rearely see the french at all. The caro-kann you will see.
Tell that to GM Nigel Short, whom has the ability to draw anyone on the planet when he trots the french out.
And this whole point of "well GMs rarely play it" have absolutely NOTHING to do with its soundness. For example, you see a lot of sicilians because it is more risky and double-edged, not because it is more sound than other defenses. We as club-level players (and even lower rated masters) have zero use for such a falacious point about the frequency a main defense being played at top level. It's not going to magically imbue us with better play merely because once defense is more popular than another by elite GMs. As has often been seen, openings they play will fall out of favor from time to time, only to make a comeback some years later.
1. Short is known to play dubious openings like the vienna etc. He plays anything and it has nothing to do with how sound the opening is.
2. My point is (as said) that you can't argue that the caro-kann is worse then the french because "it loses a tempo" on the c5 move. If caro-kann was a french a tempo down it obviously would not be played more often at higher levels then the french. So obviously that argument is bogus. If anything there is something wrong with the french and not the caro-kann.
So yeah, ofcourse it doesn't matter at our level but you can't claim that the caro-kann is worse then the french. No way.
"The modern answer to the eternal question 'what to play to get a sharp position with good winning chances for Black' - the Caro-Kann." - Peter Svidler in 2003.
Fiveofswords wrote:
the caro kan is not worse than the french and the vienna isnt dubious. Anyway besides short plenty of other people play the french occasionally. anyway the fact that people can play 'dubious' openings like morozevich, kamsky, short, etc, and still get decent results against world class players only means one thing imo...they arent dubious...
Kasparov has played the London System against weaker players. It does not mean that the London System is sound. It is still dubious and you won't see them play stuff like that against stronger opponents. Many are of the oppinion that short limited himself because he didn't play 100% sound openings where he needed to. There are some openings that have stand the test of time and have been used at all levels and are still not theoretically in trouble. These are everything from QGD, slav to caro-kann. I can't say the same about the london, vienna nor the french.
Now this does not mean that london, vienna or the french isn't playable for us but you'll be hard pressed to convince people that they are better then those openings that have withstood time and high level of play, like QGD, slav, caro-kann etc.
AtahanT wrote:
Fiveofswords wrote:
the caro kan is not worse than the french and the vienna isnt dubious. Anyway besides short plenty of other people play the french occasionally. anyway the fact that people can play 'dubious' openings like morozevich, kamsky, short, etc, and still get decent results against world class players only means one thing imo...they arent dubious...
Kasparov has played the London System against weaker players. It does not mean that the London System is sound. It is still dubious and you won't see them play stuff like that against stronger opponents. Many are of the oppinion that short limited himself because he didn't play 100% sound openings where he needed to. There are some openings that have stand the test of time and have been used at all levels and are still not theoretically in trouble. These are everything from QGD, slav to caro-kann. I can't say the same about the london, vienna nor the french.
Now this does not mean that london, vienna or the french isn't playable for us but you'll be hard pressed to convince people that they are better then those openings that have withstood time and high level of play, like QGD, slav, caro-kann etc.
Which particular element of the London system do you consider unsound I will play that line as Black I could use some easy points
Sceadungen wrote:
AtahanT wrote:
Fiveofswords wrote:
the caro kan is not worse than the french and the vienna isnt dubious. Anyway besides short plenty of other people play the french occasionally. anyway the fact that people can play 'dubious' openings like morozevich, kamsky, short, etc, and still get decent results against world class players only means one thing imo...they arent dubious...
Kasparov has played the London System against weaker players. It does not mean that the London System is sound. It is still dubious and you won't see them play stuff like that against stronger opponents. Many are of the oppinion that short limited himself because he didn't play 100% sound openings where he needed to. There are some openings that have stand the test of time and have been used at all levels and are still not theoretically in trouble. These are everything from QGD, slav to caro-kann. I can't say the same about the london, vienna nor the french.
Now this does not mean that london, vienna or the french isn't playable for us but you'll be hard pressed to convince people that they are better then those openings that have withstood time and high level of play, like QGD, slav, caro-kann etc.
Which particular element of the London system do you consider unsound I will play that line as Black I could use some easy points
I meant london system for white.
Fiveofswords wrote:
Ok i did a search on ym 3.8 million game database (which i update) on the statistics within the past 10 years for the french and the slav when both palyers were over 2600 rating. The french scored 60% for white, with 40% of the games drawn. The caro Kan scored 58% percent with 44% of the games drawn. This is hardly an astonishing difference. By contrast, an openign everyone agrees is fine for black, the petroff, scored 57% in favor of white, with 66% drawn.
So I was correct?
The caro kann is seen at the elite level more than the french because a draw with black is ok at that level and the ck has a higher % of draws than does the french. The french tends to win more, and lose more, with a smaller % of draws than the ck. Korchnoi used the french exclusively against 1 e4 in one of his matches with Karpov and did not lose a single game. After such a showing in a WC match and against a player the stature of Karpov I dont see how anyone can consider the french as dubious/unsound. Botvinnik and Petrosian were also fond of the french and played it often.
Reb wrote:
The caro kann is seen at the elite level more than the french because a draw with black is ok at that level and the ck has a higher % of draws than does the french. The french tends to win more, and lose more, with a smaller % of draws than the ck. Korchnoi used the french exclusively against 1 e4 in one of his matches with Karpov and did not lose a single game. After such a showing in a WC match and against a player the stature of Karpov I dont see how anyone can consider the french as dubious/unsound. Botvinnik and Petrosian were also fond of the french and played it often.
Yes, that seems very resonable.
DrizztD wrote:
Well, the idea is to spoil all fun for white and ruin the game with extra boring play.
No. Just no. c6 is a brilliancy which leads to strategic but intense games. It is black's best response to e4 in my opinion.
In my opinion, the caro kann is slightly worse than the french, because after 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5, black can get the queen's bishop out, but after that black is forced to play a french-like line a tempo down because of the c6-c5 move that black will inevitably play
The majority of GM's disagree with you. I'will quote GM Lev Alburt and GB Dzindzichashvili:
"In the french the light squared bishop is often hemmed in by its own pawns. In the Caro-Kann, that bishop is free and will soon move to f5."
That's not saying that they disagree with me that the c6-c5 is a wasted tempo. That's just stating the fact that after 3. e5, Bf5 is possible(which it is)
once the bishop is out and e6 has been played, it can be harrassed endlessly by knights and pawns, and c6-c5 is still a waste of a tempo.