That is precisely 1 move of this game. Whites 2nd move diiffers from Bogoljubow. Had white played 2. d5 I might reconsider but white did not play that, he played dxc the Qd4. Can you find me any Benoni with those as whites moves.
If you can I will reconsider my commengts but until then, as I said, this looks like no Benoni I have ever seen.
Originally posted by Dragon Fire That is precisely 1 move of this game. Whites 2nd move diiffers from Bogoljubow. Had white played 2. d5 I might reconsider but white did not play that, he played dxc the Qd4. Can you find me any Benoni with those as whites moves.
If you can I will reconsider my commengts but until then, as I said, this looks like no Benoni I have ever seen.
OK, I accept it is something of a theory avoiding sideline - and just so happens one I play OTB. In fact it could be called a Queens Gambit Accepted with the colours reversed if Black plays d5, and some lines of the Qc2 Nimzo Indian will transpose. It warrants a footnote in Nunns Chess Openings but I have an early example by Marshall see below. I suppose it is an (old) Benoni by virtue of the 1...c5
Marshall,F - Blackburne,J [A43]
ENG-USA cable m (1), 1909
Originally posted by Mister Meaner OK, I accept it is something of a theory avoiding sideline - and just so happens one I play OTB. In fact it could be called a Queens Gambit Accepted with the colours reversed if Black plays d5, and some lines of the Qc2 Nimzo Indian will transpose. It warrants a footnote in Nunns Chess Openings but I have an early example by Marshall see below. I suppose it is an (old) Benoni by virtue of the 1...c5
Yes but surely to be an (old) Benoni it takes more than just a single move.
No that is a Benoni. For some reason people just assume that the Modern Benoni is the only Benoni. 1. d4 c5 is I think called the Schmid Benoni, although taking on c5 like White did in the game is worse than 2. d5, leading to a Benoni structure.
Originally posted by !~TONY~! No that is a Benoni. For some reason people just assume that the Modern Benoni is the only Benoni. 1. d4 c5 is I think called the Schmid Benoni, although taking on c5 like White did in the game is worse than 2. d5, leading to a Benoni structure.
If 1.d4 .. c5 is all that makes a (old) benoni suppose I then play
2. e4 .. cXd
3. c3 .. dXc
4. Nc3
and we have a Sicilian, Morra Gambit from this Benoni. I can't accept that just that single move 1. .. c5 can, by itself, constitute a Benoni although I agree it can move into (old) Benoni lines or even transpose into the (modern) Benoni but surely that is not what happened in this game.
The characteristic of the Schmid Benoni is 2. d5 which does lead to a Benoni structure whereas dXc does not.
Maybe I am wrong! I am not the world best theoritician and as I don't use any databases I am relying on my own knowledge only.
It's funny how times and nomenclature changes. The Centre Counter is now The Scandinavian Defence, The Greco Counter is now The Latvian and so on.
My 1965 copy of Al Horowitz's Chess Openings Theory and Practice (they don't make them like that any more and more is the pity) gives 1.d4 c5 as the main line Benoni first discovered in 1825 and played in the Staunton Amant match 1843. 2. dxc5 e6 3. c4 Bxc5 is a sideline with one reference Meyer Schmidt Nuremberg 1952 - although you will see 2...Qa5+ and 2...Na6 here too. By MCO 12 (Walter Korn 1985 ish)
2. dxc5 is characterised as a QGA colours reversed, but is still a footnote.
Nunn's Chess Openings has split 1...c5 from the 1...Nf6 2...c5 lines and called it the Schmid Benoni and the other the modern benoni. 2.dxc5 is still a footnote! Horowitz in 1965 however only attributes the line 1.d4 c5 2.d5 d6 to Schmid and says 2...e5 (the blockade system) was a favourite of Alekhine.
This has become somewhat archeological in nature and I can now see why the ECO code system was invented.
Personally, I have had abysmal record against the Benoni and Benko and over the past few years have experimented with this 2. dxc5 line (and 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.dxc5) which has the advantage/disadvantage of being a theoretical backwater. I have discovered that some games appear to be a QGA with colours reversed a la MCO and others are similar to a 4.Qc2 Nimzo Indian. Others go their own way. Attempting to hold the pawn with moves such as 3.Qd4 I believe flawed. 2.dxc5 may not be objectively strong as 2.d5 or as swashbuckling as transposing into a Morra Gambit - but it does for me. Against the Benoni I have given up trying to win the opening.
In the end I think Gerald Abrahams was right when he wrote, "Openings, like ladies' hats, are affairs of fashion."
Benoni
26 Aug '06 04:14
Back to Top