18 Apr 06
Currently, I play the HAD. It goes 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6. Chess Openings for Black, Explained recommends this response to e4. However, lately, I've been having some trouble with a few lines. For example: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4 O-O 8.Bb3 a5 9.O-O Similarly, the Maroczy bind is not a great deal of fun to play. It can go like this: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3 d6 7.Be2 Nxd4 8.Qxd4 Bg7 9.Bg5 O-O 10.Qd2 Be6 11.O-O Qa5 12.Rad1 Rfc8 In the Maroczy bind, Black's winning chances are quite small and in fact, it's a fight just for a draw. Putting all this in perspective, the opening is by no means bad and black can always pull out a draw if he plays well. However, I want to be able to hope, even in the most challenging lines, for more than a draw.
This is why I'm considering purchasing Starting Out: Sicilian Najdorf. Do you guys think it is wise to do this? Should I adopt two opening defenses for Black or just stick with the HAD or switch to the Najdorf?
BTW: I welcome any improvements on the lines I gave. 🙂
18 Apr 06
Originally posted by exigentskyDepending on the price and how sure you are about playing the Nadjorf.
Currently, I play the HAD. It goes 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6. Chess Openings for Black, Explained recommends this response to e4. However, lately, I've been having some trouble with a few lines. For example: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4 O-O 8.Bb3 a5 9.O-O Similarly, the Maroczy bind is not a great deal of fun ...[text shortened]... the HAD or switch to the Najdorf?
BTW: I welcome any improvements on the lines I gave. 🙂
I read through starting out the sicilian by Emms. Great book, my first opening book i have read. It not very detailed but covers most of the sicilian variations and after you pick which system you like, you can buy an opening book for that system.
18 Apr 06
Originally posted by exigentskyI have a general question. Why is the Maroczy Bind benificial to white. From a logical standpoint, it seems to me that c4 doesn't make sense. It makes black's c-file pressure more potent, costs a move, and creates some structural weaknesses. What is accomplished? I see that d5 and b5 are better defended, but is that crucial? Black doesn't try to play d5 much in the dragon anyway, right?
Currently, I play the HAD. It goes 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6. Chess Openings for Black, Explained recommends this response to e4. However, lately, I've been having some trouble with a few lines. For example: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4 O-O 8.Bb3 a5 9.O-O Similarly, the Maroczy bind is not a great deal of fun ...[text shortened]... the HAD or switch to the Najdorf?
BTW: I welcome any improvements on the lines I gave. 🙂
18 Apr 06
Originally posted by ark13Black however has no good means to attack that c-pawn. a6 and b5 tend to be double edged and hurt black as much as help him (note that the c3 night also makes this break harder to accomplish).
I have a general question. Why is the Maroczy Bind benificial to white. From a logical standpoint, it seems to me that c4 doesn't make sense. It makes black's c-file pressure more potent, costs a move, and creates some structural weaknesses. What is accomplished? I see that d5 and b5 are better defended, but is that crucial? Black doesn't try to play d5 much in the dragon anyway, right?
Compare it to english positions where black adopts a hedgehog and white has pawns on c4 & e4 (in one the bishop is on e7, in the HAD it is on g7, a worthwhile difference). In both cases the c & e pawns join up to make it impossible for black to play the d5 break, thus subjecting him to a slow torurous game. In the HAD (and without provocation in the hedgehog) black often plays d6 in response to Nd5 thus subjecting the d6 pawn to a long slow buildup of pressure.
In short, the Maroczy bind is a slight but very longlasting plus for white.
18 Apr 06
1 edit
Originally posted by ark13The Maroczy bind is not imminently dangerous for Black, but it gives White a much easier game. White simply needs to maintain the tension and consolidate his space advantage. If played correctly, a very slight advantage is almost guranteed. The problem for Black is that he has little space to maneuver and create his own counterplay and thus, he is relegated to pure defense. Of course, this isn't always true and I still think the Maroczy bind is completely playable by Black. There are still many tactical shots in the Maroczy bind and Black may even come out on top if White makes a few inaccurate moves. White has to always consider the dangers created by his overextension. It does not concern me half as much as this line: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4 O-O 8.Bb3 a5 9.O-O
I have a general question. Why is the Maroczy Bind benificial to white. From a logical standpoint, it seems to me that c4 doesn't make sense. It makes black's c-file pressure more potent, costs a move, and creates some structural weaknesses. What is accomplished? I see that d5 and b5 are better defended, but is that crucial? Black doesn't try to play d5 much in the dragon anyway, right?
This is a line that, according to the Shredder database, scores 70% for White out of 55 games. Not pleasant at all. Unless I find some great improvement soon, I think I may have to give up playing 8. ...a5 or maybe even the whole Dragon. I haven't analyzed enough lines to make sure there isn't something just as bad if I play some other 8th move.
Also, if anyone has a tough line for the HAD, please post it so I can evaluate it. Many people select openings that they know have a counter which sets them at a clear disadvantage, (Alekhine) but they just hope no one will find that magical line. I'm not that kind of person, I want to play an opening that I can trust even in the MOST DIFFICULT lines.
BTW: The book on the Najdorf is $14 with shipping.
18 Apr 06
Here is the opening of a game I just lost in this line:
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 g6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6 5. Nc3 Bg7 6. Be3 Nf6 7.
Bc4 O-O 8. Bb3 a5 9. O-O d6 10. Ndb5 a4 11. Nxa4 Nxe4 12. Bb6 Qd7 13. c4
As you can see, 9. ...d6 is not the cure to Black's problems. His queenside play is compromised and he is left with a cramped position. 🙁
19 Apr 06
Originally posted by exigentskyYou can transpose to a normal dragon, Jansa variation, when 7.Bc4 is played, which is fairly equal.
Here is the opening of a game I just lost in this line:
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 g6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6 5. Nc3 Bg7 6. Be3 Nf6 7.
Bc4 O-O 8. Bb3 a5 9. O-O d6 10. Ndb5 a4 11. Nxa4 Nxe4 12. Bb6 Qd7 13. c4
[fen]r1b2rk1/1p1qppbp/1Bnp2p1/1N6/N1P1n3/1B6/PP3PPP/R2Q1RK1 b - - 0 13[/fen]
As you can see, 9. ...d6 is not the cure to Black's problems. His queenside play is compromised and he is left with a cramped position. 🙁
7.Bc4 d6 8.h3(to prevent ..Ng4) O-O 9.Bb3 Bd7 10.O-O Qa5 11.f4 Nxd4 12.Bxd4 Bc6 13.Qd3 Rad8, with ideas of ..Nd7, ..Nc5, ...e5,...Nxb3
19 Apr 06
Originally posted by ark13The book I read mentions that blacks goal in the sicilian is to play d5 and he equalizes and has a great game. I read this in other books and online sites as well.
I have a general question. Why is the Maroczy Bind benificial to white. From a logical standpoint, it seems to me that c4 doesn't make sense. It makes black's c-file pressure more potent, costs a move, and creates some structural weaknesses. What is accomplished? I see that d5 and b5 are better defended, but is that crucial? Black doesn't try to play d5 much in the dragon anyway, right?
With a pawn on e4 and the maroczy pawn on c4, d5 is prevented further by the c4 pawn. Plus it gives white more space also.