Originally posted by ExumaThanks for the input! Your game was very close to the style of game I tend to play.
Hi Paul - I play the Nimzo (and Bogo) and have enjoyed watching the Weyerstrass variation of the Queen's Indian on RHP (the latter seems to start from the idea of simply eliminating the c3 knight and controlling the e4 square). Either white knight gets Bb4. After the other knight plays (to the position in your diagram) I really feel like the three moves you ...[text shortened]... 6 Bg7 45. Rxa6 Rc1
46. Rc6 Rxg1+ 47. Kxg1 Bd4+ 48. Kh1 Rb8 0-1
Originally posted by Paul LeggettHere is a good Weyerstrass one - he is entering from e6 after d4 before Nf6 - hoping for the French!
Thanks for the input! Your game was very close to the style of game I tend to play.
What really interested me in the Nakamura game was that the black position reminded me of a Kan/Paulsen Sicilian- I could see Nimzo players prefering that form of the Sicilian and vice versa.
I'll also have to check out Weyerstrass's games- I did not even consider that.
Originally posted by GatussoThis is good stuff. As an aside, I have had two games recently with Nc3 and Nf3. One game started as a QID, but the guy played 4. Nc3 and we transposed back, while the other game started 3. Nc3 and 4. Nf3.
After Nf3 (which is quite a rare move, I play the nimzo and have only seen it once).
4...d5 is indeed a ragozin, if you like this kind of play its a decent move.
4...b6 leads to either a queens indian (after 3...b7 4.Nc3) or the Rubinstein variation of the nimzo (5. e3 Bb7 6. Bd3)
4...0-0 is not that good, after 5. Bg5 c5 6. e3 white has a much bette ...[text shortened]... d4, after which 6.Nxd4 leads to a variation of the English opening.
Hope this helped a bit...
Originally posted by ArtardoI really appreciate the work you put into this, and I am definitely going to give the Leningrad some serious attention. This is good stuff.
[b]Gatusso's correct! It's the lines with ...O-O and Bg5 that are bad for black, not ...c5 and Bg5 in general. My atrophied Patzer brain mis-remembered. Sorry for the misinformation.
If you're going to play the Nimzo, it's worthwhile to look at a couple of Leningrad games so that it doesn't catch you by surprise. Spassky was a big proponent of the Lenin ...[text shortened]...
Originally posted by ExumaHopefully Artardo or Gatusso will provide some insight, as I am still learning the Nimzo myself. Black's play certainly looks pretty strong, so there is definitely no shame in losing a good game like that!
Hi Paul - here is one I played just recently as white and lost rather badly (I am clearly outmatched). Would love some analysis and or feedback, I'll go through it myself too and post more later.
Edit - actually - 22 e4 was the first mistake, a forehead slapper, just gave away the central pawn, and most of my play was about that push ...[text shortened]... b7 - just missed it altogether. Resigned as it was no fun even trying to be a pain anymore
Originally posted by BadwaterI don't have time to take a very close look (I will later though) but dxc5 is a horrible move, don't take pawns on c5 in closed openings! (ok, that may be too much of a generalization) But seriously, don't take that pawn, just as you shouldn't take on c5 in an exchange grunfeld. You give away a centre pawn and can do nothing with that open d-file.
[Event "April 2010 Quartets III"]
[Black "Bob Wade"]
1. d4 Ng8f6 2. c4 e6 3. Nb1c3 Bf8b4 4. Qd1c2 c5 5. dxc5 Nb8a6 6. N ...[text shortened]... Kg1h1 Nf6e4 28. Qb2d4 Ne4xd2 29. Qd4xd2 f6 30. Nf3d4 Qc7b7 0-1