I don't quite understand what White hopes to accomplish by his a-pawn advance in this book variation of the Bishop's Opening. Ordinarily White plays a4 to prevent ...b5, but here White keeps advancing that a-pawn until it's at a5. It doesn't even seem to stop ...b6 if Black wants to recapture after axb6 ...cxb6. Even if White pushed that pawn all the way to a6 and Black responded with ...b6, I don't see that advanced pawn does much for White. Even if White intended to prevent Black's attack on the bishop via ...Na5, White could have accomplished the same thing with merely a3 and Ba2. Does somebody here understand the reasoning behind this a-pawn attack?
Why White's a-pawn attack in Bishop's Opening?
Sort:
Sqod
Mar 4, 2016
0
#1
Mar 4, 2016
0
#3
White will follow with a possible b4, and if needed, c4 and then b5.
Mar 4, 2016
0
#4
Robert_New_Alekhine wrote:
White gains space on the queenside in a closed position.
That makes good sense, thanks. I'd never seen that particular maneuver done before.
The main reason must be to prevent the exchange of white's bishop with Na5 but as you noted this could also have been achieved with a3. Probably a4-a5 is a more promissing way to gain space on the queenside than b4 and having the a3-square available for a knight or a rook lift might also be usefull sometimes.
Black doesn't usually voluntarily allow the formation white pa6 vs. black pa7, pb6 because this creates certain weaknesses that often persist deep into endgame.
Mar 5, 2016
0
#6
Shakaali wrote:
Black doesn't usually voluntarily allow the formation white pa6 vs. black pa7, pb6 because this creates certain weaknesses that often persist deep into endgame.
Interesting. I was wondering about that. I've lost a few games to computers just because they had far advanced pawns like that, even though the pawns were blocked and not doing anything, because when a pawn is that close to queening, all it takes to queen is a sacrifice at a7 while Black's king is too far away to stop the pawn from queening. On the other hand, I've also won games against computers because they left that pawn isolated, whereupon my king could snap off the pawn after the pieces had been traded off. Do you have any more ideas about what type of weaknesses are incurred by an a6-pawn?
Sqod wrote:
Shakaali wrote:
Black doesn't usually voluntarily allow the formation white pa6 vs. black pa7, pb6 because this creates certain weaknesses that often persist deep into endgame.
Interesting. I was wondering about that. I've lost a few games to computers just because they had far advanced pawns like that, even though the pawns were blocked and not doing anything, because when a pawn is that close to queening, all it takes to queen is a sacrifice at a7 while Black's king is too far away to stop the pawn from queening. On the other hand, I've also won games against computers because they left that pawn isolated, whereupon my king could snap off the pawn after the pieces had been traded off. Do you have any more ideas about what type of weaknesses are incurred by an a6-pawn?
Good question.
Obviously fixing pawn a7 is one thing and as you noted some kind of sacrifice in b6 creating a passer might be possible since a6-pawn is very near promotion. Also c6-square has become somewhat weak. I wish I could say more but I really can't which probably means that I don't yet understand this structure very well.
The endgame weakness is something I've read about and also experienced in my own games but I cannot really explain why it's worse than, say, white pa5 vs. black pa6, pb7.
Mar 5, 2016
0
#8
Shakaali wrote:
I wish I could say more but I really can't which probably means that I don't yet understand this structure very well.
The endgame weakness is something I've read about and also experienced in my own games but I cannot really explain why it's worse than, say, white pa5 vs. black pa6, pb7.
OK, thanks, good enough. I'll just watch that situation in the future, in my own games and in games of others.