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

Only Chess Forum

  1. 30 Aug '07 01:29
    What are the positional implications of the different responses:
    Bd7;
    Nd7;
    Nc6?
  2. 30 Aug '07 01:44
    Are you trying to write your own version of NCO?
  3. 30 Aug '07 02:10
    Originally posted by Squelchbelch
    Are you trying to write your own version of NCO?
    I am simply interested in playing the Sicilian. However, I just felt that I should ask people first before enterprising in more complex studies and whatnot.
  4. 30 Aug '07 02:29 / 2 edits
    Ok, fair enough.
    I've played against this at least twice - I'll try to dig the games up.
    [edit]
    Game 2618138
    Game 2939355

    I think after:
    1.e4...c5
    2.Nf3...d6
    3.Bb5+?!

    I would instinctively play
    3...Bd7 simply because
    a) 3...Nc6? leads to 4.Bxc6+...bxc6 which lumbers black with poor development & doubled c-pawns. The usual Sicilian route of QS counterplay isn't helped here!
    b) 3...Nd7 blocks in your light-square B & just seems rather passive to me, with 4...a6 to follow kicking the Bb5 away.
    3...Bd7! is forcing, obviously because it attacks Bb5, so white must either lose his active B by exchanging or move it away. Either case he is made to look rather foolish.
    After
    c) 3...Bd7!, 4.Bxd7 I like 4...Qxd7 which keeps black's position open with ...N6c to follow at some stage later.

    That good enough for you?
  5. 30 Aug '07 02:40
    Originally posted by Squelchbelch
    Ok, fair enough.
    I've played against this at least twice - I'll try to dig the games up.
    [edit]:
    Game 2618138

    I think after:
    [b]1.e4...c5
    2.Nf3...d6
    3.Bb5+?!

    I would instinctively play
    3...Bd7 simply because
    a) 3...Nc6? leads to 4.Bxc6+...bxc6 which lumbers black with poor development & doubled c-pawns. The usual Sicilian ...[text shortened]... lack's position open with ...N6c to follow at some stage later.

    That good enough for you?[/b]
    Let's see what the others have to say.
  6. 30 Aug '07 03:06
    The line that Squelchbelch posted is the mainline as it stops an early d4 (because of Nc6 possibility).
  7. 30 Aug '07 12:35
    I'd just like to say that 3...,Bd7 4.Bxd7,Qxd7 by no means makes White look foolish.White's whole point of the Bb5 line is to trade his bishop!
    I find it particularly useful when white then opts for the so called Maroczy bind,with 5.c4, as otherwise the light squared bishop is of little use being hemmed in by it's own pawns while Black's would be very useful in attacking the bind.
  8. Standard member Korch
    Chess Warrior
    30 Aug '07 12:58
    Originally posted by Squelchbelch
    Ok, fair enough.
    I've played against this at least twice - I'll try to dig the games up.
    [edit]
    Game 2618138
    Game 2939355

    I think after:
    [b]1.e4...c5
    2.Nf3...d6
    3.Bb5+?!

    I would instinctively play
    3...Bd7 simply because
    a) 3...Nc6? leads to 4.Bxc6+...bxc6 which lumbers black with poor development & doubled c-pawns. ...[text shortened]... lack's position open with ...N6c to follow at some stage later.

    That good enough for you?[/b]
    I would not mark 3.Bb5+ with ?! - its solid opening choice played by some GMs.

    Also I would disagree that 3...Nc6 is mistake - after 4.Bxc6 bxc6 black have normal play - defects of pawn structure is compensated by bishop pair.
  9. 30 Aug '07 13:23
    Originally posted by ouwe belg
    I'd just like to say that 3...,Bd7 4.Bxd7,Qxd7 by no means makes White look foolish.White's whole point of the Bb5 line is to trade his bishop!
    I find it particularly useful when white then opts for the so called Maroczy bind,with 5.c4, as otherwise the light squared bishop is of little use being hemmed in by it's own pawns while Black's would be very useful in attacking the bind.
    I don't understand the rationale behind white getting rid of such an active piece as your light-square B so early, with black's pawn structure as it is.
    Maybe I don't fully understand the reasons - after all, I tend to play 1...e5 now & avoid 99% of the Sicililan lines as white.

    I rub my hands when someone plays this against me - active counterplay is almost guaranteed for black in these lines.
  10. 30 Aug '07 13:36
    Originally posted by Squelchbelch
    I don't understand the rationale behind white getting rid of such an active piece as your light-square B so early, with black's pawn structure as it is.
    Maybe I don't fully understand the reasons - after all, I tend to play 1...e5 now & avoid 99% of the Sicililan lines as white.

    I rub my hands when someone plays this against me - active counterplay is almost guaranteed for black in these lines.
    If White goes for the Maroczy bind that light-squared bishop isn't active at all.If he opts for another setup I'm in the same boat as you,I don't fully understand the rationale behind it either
    In the past I've played various of these Bb5 lines many times,and achieved good results.I think it creates equal chances to play for a win allthough,as I said before,I don't really understand where White's compensation lies in non Maroczy bind lines.
    As for the guaranteed Black counterplay.Doesn't Black get that in every sicilian if he plays it correct?
  11. 30 Aug '07 14:27
    Originally posted by Squelchbelch
    Ok, fair enough.
    I've played against this at least twice - I'll try to dig the games up.
    [edit]
    Game 2618138
    Game 2939355

    I think after:
    [b]1.e4...c5
    2.Nf3...d6
    3.Bb5+?!

    I would instinctively play
    3...Bd7 simply because
    a) 3...Nc6? leads to 4.Bxc6+...bxc6 which lumbers black with poor development & doubled c-pawns. ...[text shortened]... lack's position open with ...N6c to follow at some stage later.

    That good enough for you?[/b]
    No, it isn't.
    3...Nc6 is a perfectly respectable move for black and has become quite fashionable in recent times among strong players. As for 3...Nd7, far from being passive, it is in some respects black's most active reply and a common choice of strong players (e.g. Kasparov) who wish to play for a win and avoid some of the more drawish lines available to white after 3...Bd7.
  12. Standard member najdorfslayer
    The Ever Living
    30 Aug '07 14:34 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Squelchbelch
    Ok, fair enough.
    I've played against this at least twice - I'll try to dig the games up.
    [edit]
    Game 2618138
    Game 2939355

    I think after:
    [b]1.e4...c5
    2.Nf3...d6
    3.Bb5+?!

    I would instinctively play
    3...Bd7 simply because
    a) 3...Nc6? leads to 4.Bxc6+...bxc6 which lumbers black with poor development & doubled c-pawns. lack's position open with ...N6c to follow at some stage later.

    That good enough for you?[/b]
    3...Nc6 has been played by Topolov on many occasions, apparently he is quite good at chess

    3...Nd7 is probably the must fun to play
    3...Bd7 is probably the most safe way to play
  13. 30 Aug '07 15:55
    Originally posted by najdorfslayer
    3...Nc6 has been played by Topolov on many occasions, apparently he is quite good at chess

    3...Nd7 is probably the must fun to play
    3...Bd7 is probably the most safe way to play
    Aah, but would you recommend 3...Nc6 for a -1600?
    I think they'd suffer because of the reasons I outlined earlier.

    Anyhow, I was only giving my personal POV & that is 3...Bd7 to keep a nice balanced position.
    I would never play any other option.

    Some people reply to 1.d4 with 1...d5 but again, that is just not for me - though I understand it is a reasonable response
  14. 30 Aug '07 17:15 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Squelchbelch
    Ok, fair enough.
    I've played against this at least twice - I'll try to dig the games up.
    [edit]
    Game 2618138
    Game 2939355

    I think after:
    [b]1.e4...c5
    2.Nf3...d6
    3.Bb5+?!

    I would instinctively play
    3...Bd7 simply because
    a) 3...Nc6? leads to 4.Bxc6+...bxc6 which lumbers black with poor development & doubled c-pawns. ...d5 but again, that is just not for me - though I understand it is a reasonable response [/b]
    I don't understand you. You're a 1600 player, no doubt a mediocre amateur, yet you talk like your an experienced master. I think anyone who asks for advice and listens to you will be lead far astray and be unable to follow their own ideas.

    How can (dare) you mark decent chess moves with a ? and a ?!

    "a) 3...Nc6? leads to 4.Bxc6+...bxc6 which lumbers black with poor development & doubled c-pawns. The usual Sicilian route of QS counterplay isn't helped here!"

    Nc6 is a perfectly good move and if white takes the knight black has a perfectly reasonable position and possibility for central control. You're noob mind can't handle the thought of doubled pawns.

    "b) 3...Nd7 blocks in your light-square B & just seems rather passive to me, with 4...a6 to follow kicking the Bb5 away."

    Do you even understand why people play Nd7? People often play Nd7 unprovoked instead of Nc6 in the Sicilian to direct it to c5 or another better square. Do you understand ANYTHING about manuevering or ANY sort of positional chess? Do you even know that after an a6 by black white mostly trades off his bishop for the knight anyway?!

    "3...Bd7! is forcing, obviously because it attacks Bb5, so white must either lose his active B by exchanging or move it away. Either case he is made to look rather foolish."

    Again just absolute complete noobishly retarded talk. Bb5 is a perfectly correct opening and you're talking about it like it's a crazy gambit. Do you know anything?? How are you even 1600? Do you realize that the light squared bishop is the good bishop for black and white can exchange it off?? How is Bd7 forcing? What kind of analysis is that?

    And even when Korch corrects your insane comments like a decent, experienced player would do, you come up with an even more ballistic comment.

    "Aah, but would you recommend 3...Nc6 for a -1600?
    I think they'd suffer because of the reasons I outlined earlier."

    So basically you're saying that your rating, 1600, is the dividing line between good players and bad players. So anyone under 1600 has no merit to play Nd7 or Nc6? You just automatically assume your "reasons outlined earlier" are extremely correct? What kind of learner are you?

    Then at the end, you say you're just recommending based on your own POV. What is your POV? Do you even know the ideas behind the moves before you mention your POV?? You say you liked a nice balanced position, but you don't like to play d5.

    That's the biggest self-contridiction I've seen from you so far.

    Go read a book or do something else because you're in no place to be offering ideas with your attitude to other players.
  15. 30 Aug '07 17:17
    sqelch bech is better player i think?on the moscow varioation i believe.