Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 20 Jan '08 04:27
    I have been revamping my opening trying to be more tactical, or at least aggressive. I left 1.c4 behind and took up 1. e4 with the intent of playing the italian game. In particular, the fried liver against the two knights and a plan of c3, d3 and when the time is right d4 otherwise. I am moderately happy playing against open sicillians, but I cannot stand the Caro. I have tried the advance and it's had the best results so far, the panov just gets me in trouble and 3. Nc3 doesn't seem to offer much.

    So I decided to take a look at the craziest line I could find.
    1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 Bf4 4. Nc3 e6 (I know this isn't the only move here, but it's by far the most common) 5. g4 Bg6 6. Nge2

    Does anyone know the current state of theory or have any advice on this line. In particular this line has come up many times.

    6... h6 7. Bd3 Bxd3 8. Qxd3 c5 9. Be3 and while white has a huge lead in development, the kingside attack doesn't seem to be panning out and 0-0 probably won't be very helpful due to the weak dark squares.

    The key idea I've come across is making g6 into a weak point and invading from there, but if black plays well, I need a second resource.


    As a side note.
    1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e3!? is a worthy play if you enjoy your endgames.
  2. Standard member irontigran
    Rob Scheider is..
    20 Jan '08 04:42
    Originally posted by zebano
    I have been revamping my opening trying to be more tactical, or at least aggressive. I left 1.c4 behind and took up 1. e4 with the intent of playing the italian game. In particular, the fried liver against the two knights and a plan of c3, d3 and when the time is right d4 otherwise. I am moderately happy playing against open sicillians, but I cannot stand the ...[text shortened]...
    As a side note.
    1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e3!? is a worthy play if you enjoy your endgames.
    i dont do this one in general, but im a caro player who likes when my opponents do the advance... would you like to play me in it?
  3. Standard member chessisvanity
    THE BISHOP GOD
    20 Jan '08 04:43
    I like the caro-kann exchange with 4.c4

    1.e4...e6
    2.d4...d5
    3.exd...exd
    4.c4!

    thats definatly an open game. some may say drawish....but thats only with perfect play.
    and that is way beyond us usual rhp crew.
  4. Standard member irontigran
    Rob Scheider is..
    20 Jan '08 04:44
    Originally posted by chessisvanity
    I like the caro-kann exchange with 4.c4

    1.e4...e6
    2.d4...d5
    3.exd...exd
    4.c4!

    thats definatly an open game. some may say drawish....but thats only with perfect play.
    and that is way beyond us usual rhp crew.
    thats the panov that hes talking about
  5. Standard member chessisvanity
    THE BISHOP GOD
    20 Jan '08 04:47
    me? my line? or his line? (is the panov?)
  6. Standard member irontigran
    Rob Scheider is..
    20 Jan '08 04:52
    Originally posted by chessisvanity
    me? my line? or his line? (is the panov?)
    your line is the panov, ive heard it called panov-botvinnik attack as well...

    his is the advance hes talking about
  7. 20 Jan '08 04:59
    Originally posted by zebano
    I have been revamping my opening trying to be more tactical, or at least aggressive. I left 1.c4 behind and took up 1. e4 with the intent of playing the italian game. In particular, the fried liver against the two knights and a plan of c3, d3 and when the time is right d4 otherwise. I am moderately happy playing against open sicillians, but I cannot stand the ...[text shortened]...
    As a side note.
    1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e3!? is a worthy play if you enjoy your endgames.
    Hm, well I'll try to offer some advice on the Caro-Kann if I can remember anything, I do remember that when I played 1.e4 I used the Advanced - didn't bother with theory either, but the games never really seemed all that tactical anyhow. The Caro-Kann is really quite boring, but since you're revamping your opening rep. as white, why don't you consider 1.d4 - when played correctly it can be incredibly tactical.
  8. Standard member irontigran
    Rob Scheider is..
    20 Jan '08 05:06
    Originally posted by cmsMaster
    Hm, well I'll try to offer some advice on the Caro-Kann if I can remember anything, I do remember that when I played 1.e4 I used the Advanced - didn't bother with theory either, but the games never really seemed all that tactical anyhow. The Caro-Kann is really quite boring, but since you're revamping your opening rep. as white, why don't you consider 1.d4 - when played correctly it can be incredibly tactical.
    i agree with the d4 thing, i have a book on ways to get 1.d4 to tactical places, and its nice..

    anyways, i think the reason you get boring places in the caro is that you release central tension with the 3rd. move...
  9. 20 Jan '08 05:23
    Originally posted by zebano
    I have been revamping my opening trying to be more tactical, or at least aggressive. I left 1.c4 behind and took up 1. e4 with the intent of playing the italian game. In particular, the fried liver against the two knights and a plan of c3, d3 and when the time is right d4 otherwise. I am moderately happy playing against open sicillians, but I cannot stand the ...[text shortened]...
    As a side note.
    1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e3!? is a worthy play if you enjoy your endgames.
    Looks like the Advance variation, or what I can make of it since there's an error in your line: you give 6. Nge2 followed by 7. Bd3 which obviously isn't possible with the a N on e2.

    Not trying to be a wise @ss btw, as I'm also interested in anything that takes the Caro out of its usual territory since I too have never liked playing against it.
  10. 20 Jan '08 07:57
    Originally posted by zebano
    ....

    As a side note.
    1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e3!? is a worthy play if you enjoy your endgames.
    that must be a typo: 1.e4 and 3.e3!? And I doubt that the pawn sac with 3.c3 is very convincing.
  11. 20 Jan '08 10:43
    Well 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 cxd5 4. c4 (the Panov-Botvinnik attack) often leads to sharp games. And the setups are often similar to those of QGD except that c7 and e2 pawns are gone.
  12. 20 Jan '08 13:49
    Originally posted by zebano
    I have been revamping my opening trying to be more tactical, or at least aggressive. I left 1.c4 behind and took up 1. e4 with the intent of playing the italian game. In particular, the fried liver against the two knights and a plan of c3, d3 and when the time is right d4 otherwise. I am moderately happy playing against open sicillians, but I cannot stand the ...[text shortened]...
    As a side note.
    1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e3!? is a worthy play if you enjoy your endgames.
    Good luck in changing your repertoire, zebano. But give the Ruy Lopez a chance against the italian. Play two or three games and you'll get hooked.
  13. 20 Jan '08 17:15 / 1 edit
    Thanks for the responses.

    First off I have tried 1. d4 for about 6 months and decided I liked 1. c4 better.


    Second the immediate endgame line should have been
    1. e4 c6 2. f4 d5 3. d3!? my apologies. Of course black is not obliged to play 2. ... d5. but most go for 3. d3 dxe 4. dxe QxQ+ 5. KxQ


    As far as the line I'm looking at that should have been 7. Be3 (defending d4).

    Re: The Panov
    I used to play it as a trasposition from the english
    1. c4 c6 2. e4 d5 3. exd cxd 4. d4. It's ok, and I will probably fall back to it if this line doesn't work out.
  14. 20 Jan '08 17:22
    Originally posted by jvanhine
    i dont do this one in general, but im a caro player who likes when my opponents do the advance... would you like to play me in it?
    I tried to offer you a game, but it seems you're at your max (3).
  15. Standard member irontigran
    Rob Scheider is..
    20 Jan '08 17:23
    Originally posted by zebano
    I tried to offer you a game, but it seems you're at your max (3).
    thats higher than your max (0)
    ill add you to the buddies list..