Aye but the point is, white is probably better not taking as without the dark squared bishop he struggles to get an attack going on the compromised kingside. Black is often also able to make use of the 2 open kings files after the thematic ...f6 break. If white doesn't take we can transpose into the main line advance with ...Nf5 or play something a little different such as ...f6 and ...Nf7 with a lot of pressure on e5.
David (2257) - Wulebgr (1738) [C02]
City Championship 2008
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Nh6 Michael Adams calls this move dubious in his annotations in Informant 69: Adams-Lputian 1997 1–0.
John Watson recommends it in his book Dangerous Weapons: The French (2007). 6.dxc5 White's idea to lure Black's dark squared bishop to the
queenside made its first top level appearance in Sveshnikov-Bareez 1991 1–0 6...Bxc5 7.b4 Bb6 8.b5 Ne7 9.Bd3 Ng4 10.0–0 Ng6 11.Bxg6 fxg6
12.h3 Nh6 13.Bxh6 gxh6 14.Qd2 [ 14.Nbd2 Grischuk-Bareev 2001 0–1] 14...0–0 Black gets activity for the pawn [ 14...g5?] 15.Qxh6 Bd7
16.Nd4 [ 16.Ng5 Qe7 the mate threat is easily parried, and Black will gain a few tempi driving the knight and queen back]
16...Bxd4 Giving up the bishop pair to win back the pawn seemed like a reasonable idea against a player of David's caliber
17.cxd4 Bxb5 18.Rc1 Black's bad bishop (the French cleric) is outside the pawn chain but has few targets. 18...Qb6
19.Nc3 Bc4 [ 19...Bc6 renders the piece a tall pawn] 20.Qe3 Rf5 21.Rab1 Qa6 22.a4 Raf8 23.f3 R5f7 action is shifting to the
queenside 24.Nb5 Bxb5 25.axb5 Qb6 26.Rc5 a6 27.Qd3 Ra8 [ 27...a5!] 28.bxa6 Qxa6 29.Qxa6 bxa6 [ 29...Rxa6 30.Rcb5
Ra2 31.Rxb7 Rd2 32.Rxf7 Kxf7 33.Rb7+ Kf8 34.Rxh7+-] 30.Rb6 Re7 [ 30...a5! 31.Rxe6 a4 32.Rec6 ( 32.Rc2 a3 33.Ra2 Rf4=
( 33...Rb7 34.Kf2² ) ) 32...a3 33.Rc8+ Rf8 34.Rxa8 Rxa8 35.Rc1 a2 36.Ra1 Kf7 37.h4=] 31.Ra5 Kf7 32.Raxa6 Rc8 Black's
practical chances seem better with two rooks. 33.Rc6 Rb8 34.Ra4 Rb2 35.Kh2 g5! prevent the king's penetration
36.Rc8 Rd2 37.Kg3 Kg7 38.Rca8 Kf7 39.R8a7 h5 40.h4 gxh4+ 41.Kxh4 Rxg2 [ 41...Rxa7! 42.Rxa7+ Kg6 43.Ra4 Rxg2=;
41...Rxd4+ is an interesting tactic 42.Rxd4 Rxa7 43.Kxh5+-] 42.Rxe7+ Kxe7 43.Ra7+ Kf8 44.Kxh5 Rg1 [ 44...Rg7?? leads to
an elementary win for White 45.Rxg7 Kxg7 46.Kg5+-] 45.f4 Rg2 46.Rd7 Rg1 47.f5+- exf5 48.Rxd5 Ke7 49.Rd6 Rg4 50.d5 Rg1
51.Rf6 Rd1 52.d6+ Kd7 53.Kg6 f4 54.Kf7 Re1 55.Rf5 f3 56.Kf6 f2 57.Rxf2 Re3 58.Kf5 Re1 59.Rf4 Re2 60.Ra4 Rf2+
61.Ke4 Re2+ 62.Kf5 Rf2+ 63.Rf4 Re2 64.Ra4 Rf2+ Black can claim a draw by repetition 65.Ke4 Re2+ 66.Kf5 Re1
67.Ra7+ Kd8 68.Kf6 Rh1 69.Ke6 Rh6+ 70.Kd5 Rh1 71.Ra8+ [ 71.Ra8+ Kd7 72.e6#] 1–0
I think you'll find that 5...Nh6 is actually reccommended for black in that book as I have been going through the chapter on ...Nh6 today. I was just looking for opinions from people who actually play it.
As for the dxc5 line, Schveshnikov was the founder and it still stands strong at the highest levels. Problem is, white then usually plays b4 and drives it back to where it is strongest anyway - on f8 where it can go to g7 to support ...f6.
Originally posted by chesstony82What book?
I think you'll find that 5...Nh6 is actually reccommended for black in that book as I have been going through the chapter on ...Nh6 today. I was just looking for opinions from people who actually play it.
As for the dxc5 line, Schveshnikov was the founder and it still stands strong at the highest levels. Problem is, white then usually plays b4 and drives it back to where it is strongest anyway - on f8 where it can go to g7 to support ...f6.
Originally posted by chesstony82hi, i have always considered the best move to be 5...Bd7!
Does anybody play this line and would anyone like to comment about it please? I'm thinking of playing this now instead of my usual 5...Qb6.
why? well it plays against whites own white squared bishop,
preventing 6.Bb5, preventing 6.Bd3 and forcing white to play
6.Be2. After this then we can decide to play either 6....Ne7
heading for f5 or 6...Nh6 heading also for f5 and puting
pressure on whites centre. i myself when i played the
French did not like 5....Qb6, for the queen is very powerful
on d8 as it is, and although 6...Qb6 is a good move combining
an attack against the centre and the b2 pawn, one can
question whether it really improves the position of the queen.
here is position after 1.e4 e6, 2.d4 d5. 3.e5 c5, 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7!,
if white tries 6.Bb5 he loses a pawn like nothing after 6.Nxe5
here is position after 1.e4 e6, 2.d4 d5. 3.e5 c5, 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7!,
if white tries 6.Bd3 then he must be prepared to sacrifice a pawn,
for after 6...cxd4 7.cxd4 Qb6 there is no way to protect the d and
b pawn as in the position below
conclusion is that 5...Bd7 is a brilliant move after which we can
choose either 6..Ne7 heading for f5 or 6..Nh6 heading also for
f5 which leads to different positions if white is foolish enough
to take on h6.
A french player came home one day from the club, hung up his coat, took off his hat and walked into his bedroom shouting "honey I'm home!"
What should he see but his best friend in bed with his wife. Infuriated, he rushed to the cupboard, pulled out his gun and put it to his head. His wife started laughing. "Don't laugh!" he screams. "You're next!"
I had a quick look in my CC database and could find 3 games where black played 5...Nh6. I was actually quite surprised by this, because to be perfectly honest this isn’t a move I would play in a CC game.
The other thing that surprised me was that black actually scored 2-1 with no draws.
With a closed look at the games I noticed that black was a reasonable good CC- player (two of the three games were won by players with a rating 2300+). On the down side all three white players were actually rubbish players or/and clearly didn’t understand the opening.
Anyway, it looks like an interesting opening move and if players like Sveschnikov and Lputian play the move, it can’t be that bad.
Originally posted by chesstony82I'm not convinced 5. ... Nh6 is an objective improvement over 5. ... Qb6 or 5. ... Bd7.
Does anybody play this line and would anyone like to comment about it please? I'm thinking of playing this now instead of my usual 5...Qb6.
Subjectively, certainly at the level of those of us who play our chess on RHP, it's a different story and it's all just a question of taste.
Personally, I like the plan of ... Nh6-f5 very much but only after White's wasted a tempo on a3.
As for Watson taking a look at 5. ... Nh6 in Dangerous Weapons - it will be interesting to see if he includes it if he ever writes a 4th edition of Play the French. I'm guessing probably not.
Originally posted by JonathanB of LondonIt's not an improvement, but a surprise weapon. It's an offbeat line that makes it possible to book-up much deeper than a superior opponent. That's why I played it in the city championship against a FIDE Master that was rated 500 Elo above me. As you can see by the annotations. I held my own for most of the game and had good drawing chances.
I'm not convinced 5. ... Nh6 is an objective improvement over 5. ... Qb6 or 5. ... Bd7.
Subjectively, certainly at the level of those of us who play our chess on RHP, it's a different story and it's all just a question of taste.
Personally, I like the plan of ... Nh6-f5 very much but only after White's wasted a tempo on a3.
As for Wats ...[text shortened]... includes it if he ever writes a 4th edition of Play the French. I'm guessing probably not.
The annotations do not tell you that I was 25 minutes ahead on the clock after twelve moves because I was still in my prep. They should.