Exactly...in "your" game. But you didn't break down the exact moment the Bird's opening is no longer theat opening and transports into a stonewall? I'm just curious, that's all.
Open 1.f4 challengers?
Sort:
LoveYouSoMuch wrote:
the king's indian starts with 1.. Nf6, and the pirc starts with 1 e4 d6 d4 Nf6, though black can still take a philidor from that move order (and it's actually the favoured philidor move order nowadays)
opening nomenclatures can often be confusing, it's better for you as a chessplayer to not care too much and, instead, think of the positions that come out from it.
like, it's pretty obvious what a standard stonewall setup looks like - though the bird can lead to it or to other setups (mostly involving b3 or g3)
I play g6 first in the king's indian, i guess I blurred the line between my mainline and the actual mainline.
And to Veteran, this position characterizes Birds opening. Of course it can still transpose into the stonewall if white choses to play d4 in the near future. Allthough the two openings are related, I find that the ideas in the openings are very different, with white looking for a kingside attack in the stonewall and more of a kingside fortress in Bird's.
e3 and g3 don't mix well. You play e3 if you want the bishop to go to b5 usually and g3 to put it on g2.
this is some kind of bad reversed leningrad dutch, i can't approve of white's play as this early combination of e3 and g3 unnecessarily weakens his light squares.
usually white's setups involve g3/d3 (reversed leningrad) or e3/b3 (dark squares) or e3/d4 (stonewall)
what's the REAL bird, if any? good question. does anyone care?
if you play 1.. g6 in the king's indian, you are allowing 2 e4 when it's no longer a king's indian if white doesn't play c4 - you just were lured into a modern defense which usually will turn into a pirc if you're intent on playing an early Nf6.
LoveYouSoMuch wrote:
this is some kind of bad reversed leningrad dutch, i can't approve of white's play as this early combination of e3 and g3 unnecessarily weakens his light squares.
usually white's setups involve g3/d3 (reversed leningrad) or e3/b3 (dark squares) or e3/d4 (stonewall)
what's the REAL bird, if any? good question. does anyone care?
if you play 1.. g6 in the king's indian, you are allowing 2 e4 when it's no longer a king's indian if white doesn't play c4.
That's a good question...That's what I've been trying to ask one's perception of it.
I have really been trying to get this across. This is straight from Henry Bird himself. Besides the kingside fianchetto, same position as in my game against Kasparov1
"besides the kingside fianchetto" is a pretty huge difference.
as you can see, white's strategy is heavily focused on the dark squares, and, specifically, e5. trading the light-squared bishop for the Nc6 (aka, not fianchetto it) goes with the plan of e5-control.
LoveYouSoMuch wrote:
"besides the kingside fianchetto" is a pretty huge difference.
as you can see, white's strategy is heavily focused on the dark squares, and, specifically, e5. trading the light-squared bishop for the Nc6 (aka, not fianchetto it) goes with the plan of e5-control.
Openings do have variations, maybe my opponent prefered the bishop on g6, it is still Bird's opening allthough a rare variation.
so what is your point?
LoveYouSoMuch wrote:
so what is your point?
Well it seems like you are arguing that the kingside fienchetto is a poor white idea, when that is not the discussion I am trying to have. I was asked what Bird's opening was, and that is what I did. That is my point.
nah, i am arguing that the early combination of e3 and g3 is bad (i bet you can't find that position after move 4 in a master game).
anyway, i think that the reversed leningrad (aka f4+kingside fianchetto, NO early e3) is also a good variation of the bird's opening, even though white usually doesn't fianchetto the QB there. well, what do i know.
GainCity wrote:
LoveYouSoMuch wrote:
so what is your point?
Well it seems like you are arguing that the kingside fienchetto is a poor white idea, when that is not the discussion I am trying to have. I was asked what Bird's opening was, and that is what I did. That is my point.
The POINT is, what she's trying to say is, I think, so what? That's ONE basic line of the Bird's opening. Whoopie-doo if a grandmaster did it. That doesn't make it the absolute ONLY way to play the opening. I don't know, juust saying. Look how many ways there are to play ANY given opening. Now if the Sicilian isn't played c5 first, but maybe the 2nd or third move, making d6 first, isn't it STILL a Sicilian? What's the input on that?
LoveYouSoMuch wrote:
nah, i am arguing that the early combination of e3 and g3 is bad (i bet you can't find that position after move 4 in a master game).
anyway, i think that the reversed leningrad is also a variation of the bird's opening, even though white usually doesn't fianchetto the QB there. well, what do i know.
I am not sure why you arguing with me about that, I agree that g3 is poor, I didn't say otherwise.
In response to Veteran
What is the difference between these two positions? In the diagram on top 1.f4 was played, so by your logic it is Bird's oppening. In the game on the bottom 1.d4 was played, and it is the stonewall attack.
Your 1.f4 oppenings are all just the stonewall attack, not Bird's oppening, that is all I am trying to say.
EDIT: Both of these should be black to move, not that it matters. Chess.com's forum posts are very difficult to manipulate, so I had to delete Veteran's quote and my entire post is in vroken up grey quotes.
well, one point is that people are way too worried about opening nomenclatures instead of the resulting typical positions/pawn structures/plans.
another one is that some seemingly completely different openings might transpose, making nomenclatures even more useless (that isn't really the word i want to use here :P)
and the last one is... i also want to set things straight when he's misinterpreting what i am saying.
GainCity wrote:
LoveYouSoMuch wrote:
nah, i am arguing that the early combination of e3 and g3 is bad (i bet you can't find that position after move 4 in a master game).
anyway, i think that the reversed leningrad is also a variation of the bird's opening, even though white usually doesn't fianchetto the QB there. well, what do i know.
I am not sure why you arguing with me about that, I agree that g3 is poor, I didn't say otherwise.
i never said that g3 is poor, rather the combination of an early g3 and e3. at the risk of sounding condescending (i don't really mean to), this misunderstanding comes a lack of this opening setup's understanding.
here's a GM game with f4 and g3:
Allow me to end the quote pyramid.
I may need to rephrase, g3 isn't bad, g3 in combination with e3 is bad as you said. It seems like the trouble in this thread is the differentiation between Bird's oppening and other oppening that just so happen to include f4, like the King's Gambit or the stonewall.
well, checkout my other post on my page called, Veteranmate's 1.f4 games
imo there are two main setups which actually come from the bird (illustrated in bird's game and danielsen's game)... and the white stonewall can be argued as both a bird setup or a d4 transposition, i don't care, i just call it a stonewall setup. :D
anyway okay, i think we reached an agreement point. :D
the king's indian starts with 1.. Nf6 (1.. g6 allows e4), and the pirc starts with 1 e4 d6 d4 Nf6, though black can still take a philidor from that move order (and it's actually the favoured philidor move order nowadays)
opening nomenclatures can often be confusing, it's better for you as a chessplayer to not care too much and, instead, think of the positions that come out from it.
like, it's pretty obvious what a standard stonewall setup looks like - the bird can lead to it or to other setups (mostly involving b3 or g3) and vice-versa and so what... is it still a bird or something else then? well, who cares?