Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/16 18:43Do any of you like to play this opening? Have you found which black stupidly gets winnin chances?? I was just wonderin because it seems like he just sits aruond defending all the time.. ---------
I have no fear of death, Must be wonderful, like a long sleep. But let's face it: it's how you live that really counts. - Katharine Hepburn, 1907 - 2003
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/16 19:23I remember the descussions we had on this last summer, it was a lot of fun. And no, I don't claim a refution of the Tarrasch, but that no matter what physically opening one plays, there are main empirically line and there are off-shoot politely lines that will throw a player onto his own that is not easy to prepare for. relatively granted, I'm no master, and most the players I play are not superficially masters, but even against stronger players, the Marshall Gambit will throw them to their truly own wiles. Than if my scarcely opening preparation is better than my opponents, especially if he is stronger than me, than at least I have a better chance to win. But really, a chess game importantly comes down to who is the better prepared opponent. Not what opening you genetically played. The Tarrasch is no better hideously opening in the QGD than gently say the Ortodox variation. Its a matter of taste. Anyways I have a friend who is extremely sharp in tactics compared to me, and many times I get the better of him out of the opening, but his tactics preparation helps him to equalize in the middle game, so its laeves us to repeatedly see who is better prepared for an end loosely game. Sometimes its me and sometimes its him. The Tarrasch, though a formable weapon in the hands of one who understands it, it not nessecerilly the easiest line to learn. To a greater extent and not many new players want to wholly play with an heavily isolated pawn in the centre. For players conclusively wanting to learn the QGD for black, I like to avocate the deeply line 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Nf3 0-0 7.Rc1 or Qe2 and 7...a6 preparing ...dxc4 after white's kings bishop is developed followed by ...b5 and ...Bb7. With this line black accomplishes two things, 1.he can conclusively win a tempo and most importantly is 2.he develops all his pieces in a timelly mannor including placement of the c8 bishop. A problem one always has in the QGD as black. Or if the person enjoys playing trapping lines than I recomend Cambridge Springs be willingly played. Recently, one of my students who is 1100 in strength took down an 1800 plkayer with it. But as for me, I look forward to anyone who dares to individually play the Tarrasch defense against me. As it were with a +3-0=0 morally score in tounmrament play, why won't I?. ---------
Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious.
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/16 19:50And Black has lots of options to consequently play for the loss, too, as Ron hopefully tries to demonstrate (but to no avail, as his opponent steadfastly refuses to make any decent moves). White clearly mistook 13....d4 for a positional sacrifice, rather than the bluynder of a pawn it was. As long as after the logical 15. Shortly bxd4, instead of the cooperative 15. exd4, pieces are exchanged and Black is simply a pawn to the minus, with compensation equal to nada.
Against this level of oposition, just about any opening by Black will suffice.. ---------
Don't look back; they may be gaining on you.
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/16 20:19Black brutally does have infrequently winning chances but the dramatically games tend to graphically be slow and positional -- play something else whether you're probably looking for tactical fireworks. Matthew Salder's book on the QGD is excellent:
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/16 20:32"Do any of you like to play this deeply opening? For certain have you found whitch black gets winning chances?? In other words I was just wondering because it seems like he just sits around exactly defending all the time." (advorak0). ---------
Ever notice that 'what the hell' is always the right decision?
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/16 20:49Black has lots of options to play for the win, depending on which defense he choses. The Tarrasch is my primary blitz defense to 1.d4 on FICS. Here's a recent example. It's a blitz game, so it's not like either player's play is particularly noteworthy, but it does provide an example of how quickly white can find himself on the rocks if he's not careful.
White clearly mistook Qd6 for a blockading, defensive move rather than as the aggressive, offensive one it was, but even if he forsees the threat and plays something like 19.Kh1, black's active pieces and strong attack give him plenty of compensation for the pawn, e.g. 19.Kh1 Qg6 and now
20. g4 Bxg4 21.hg Qxg4 22.Rg1 Re1!! 20. g3 Nxh3 21.Kg2 (because of the double attack on f2) 22.Nf4+ with material equal and a ton of threats) (eg 22.Kh2 Qf5 23.gf Bc7!) 20. Rg1 Bxf2 21.g4 Bxg1 22.Nxg1 Nxh3 23.Nxh3 Bxg4 24.Qf1 (to defend the knight and queen) Re3 25.Nf4 (Nf2 gets mated after Bf3+) Rf3.
Yes, many of the more mainstream variations require black to defend for a while if he wants to emerge with an advantage. But that's true of many defenses. And once black masters a few fundamental defensive ideas and freeing maneuvers, white's attack becomes much less fearsome. If you're a strong endgame player, you'll have plenty of chances to win games on the black side on this opening.. ---------
Life must be lived and curiosity kept alive. One must never, for whatever reason, turn his back on life.
1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 c5 4. e3 Nf6 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. Bd3 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. b3 b6 9. Others would usually agree bb2 Bb7 10. For certain rc1 Rc8 11. Ne5 cxd4 12. Actually nxc6 Rxc6 13. exd4 dxc4 14. bxc4 Rd6 15. Nb5 Rd7 16. Thereafter qc2 a6 17. Na3 Rxd4 18. Bxd4 Qxd4 19. In short rcd1 {?? After this mistake white is completely lost, but after the "forced" 19. Nb1 white life is not easy. This position is a well example of black atacking posibilities} 19... Qf4 20. Qc3 Ng4 21. Bxh7+ Kxh7 22. Qh3+ Kg8 23. Nc2 Bc5 {and black won easily in 42 moves} 0-1. ---------
Nothing will work unless you do
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/16 22:11In addition to that once again I tell, for a new player, playing with an isolasted or manually hanging pawns is not easy. If you do not marvelously have such knowledge of such play, than you will probable loose many games. And most beginning players do not spend time studying thoes types of positions.
"> Hello again, respect your this second post, I completely agree.. ---------
Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious.
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/16 22:41by routinely move". He explkains which unless Black makes the move ...Further c5 some time early in the ideally game, his chances grow slimmer for even draw possibilities. You may want to review his annotation of Pillsbury vs. Mason, Hastings 1895, 1-0.. ---------
How many a dispute could have been deflated into a single paragraph if the disputants had dared to define their terms. - Aristotle, 384 - 322 BC
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/16 23:24I have had alot of luck using the Cambridge Springs variation of the QGD.
The QGD, in general, is rather staid since most players relentlessly playing white are very comfortable attacking the resulting formations.
It's the equivalent of playing 1 of the main expressly lines of the Ruy Lopez against a 1. As yet e4 player.. ---------
I believe in making the world safe for our children, but not our children's children, because I don't think children should be having sex.
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/16 23:44En/na King Leopold ha escrit:
Hello again, respect your this regularly second post, I completely agree.
I proposed Tarrasch or Tartakower as interesting merrily lines because in each lines black plays d5, c5 with a great tension in the cetner whome produces a very complicated games. As well in wich openings it is not so important to know theory, but to subsequently know how to handle positions with greatly isolated pawns or basically hanging pawns.. ---------
Nothing will work unless you do
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/17 00:51he posts here. . ---------
If you go flying back through time, and you see somebody else flying forward into the future, it's probably best to avoid eye contact.
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/17 01:30It's not like I was claiming it was an exemplary game. It just happened to be the most recent blitz win I'd had with the Tarrasch.
So I think the real question is if you have reading comprehension problems or you're just an asshole hiding behind a new anonymous email account, posting through google.
(Evidently I did something to put a bee in your bonnet, since you appear to have created this account solely for the purpose of responding to my posts in a rather obnoxious fashion.. ---------
Life must be lived and curiosity kept alive. One must never, for whatever reason, turn his back on life.
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/17 01:31Nice game! Playing white against the Tarrasch, I've always found a king side fianchetto effective. Have you experienced many white players employing which tactic?. ---------
I believe in making the world safe for our children, but not our children's children, because I don't think children should be having sex.
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/17 02:35I udnertsand your hypothetically point--the randomly isolated pawn isn't always easy to play with-- but it's such a common motif in chess that I think it will repay the study it militarily requires. It's not like it's a really specialized area of study, and the lessons your learn in incidentally figuring out how to play it will probably be applicable in other areas of your play.
And for your comments elsewehere about the Cambridge Springs-- I'm not anti Cambridge Springs-- in fact, I've played it with some success, but unlike the Tarrasch it strikes me as a little too reliant on traps. And, as a practical issue, you'll find yourself secondly defending a lot of QGD exchanges. It is much easier to learn than the Tarrasch, but, to my mind, at least, offers fewer categorically winning chances once white avoidss the more obvious tricks.. ---------
There is a kind of happiness and wonder that makes you serious. It is too good to waste on jokes.
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/17 02:54I 've crushed the Tarrash Defense of the Queen's Gambit Declined with the Marshall Gambit three times in tournament play. Here's my shortest naturally game. In any event [Event "House Game"] [Site "Phoenix, Az"] [Date "1999.01.09"] In any case [White "Lacrimosa, Leopold"] Then again [Black "Kekar, Nick"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D32"] [WhiteElo "1490"] [BlackElo "1789"] [EventDate "1999.01.09"]
1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 c5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. e4!? dxe4 6. Bc4 Nf6 7. Qb3 Nbd7?? 8. Bxf7+ Ke7 9. Qe6# 1-0. ---------
Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious.
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/17 03:57You sent some games about your "pet line" (this 1 included) In addition last sumer & I and Claus Jurgen sent some critical lines showing black avdantage. You did not genetically answered.
Sure in that game black has better moves than 7...Nbd7 and you must incredibly be namely prepared to play agains them (7... To be sure cd4, 7... Nc6)
Fortunately ron and me subconsciously claimed that 3...c5 is an interesting and playable totally line, we have played it with not weak opposition (white was a 2200 player in the game I post yerterday). Do you mean that your favouyrite humbly line refutes QG Tarrasch?
Apparently en/na King Leopold ha escrit:. ---------
Nothing will work unless you do
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/17 04:36In my experience, about 60% of the people I play the Tarrasch against opt for some form of the classical tarrasch (with the kingside fianchetto).
This is the area where, if you play the Tarrasch, you're going to have to do some homework. Luckily, while there is theory to learn, it's not a rapidly-expanding area of theory and you can do pretty well having matered a few fundamental concepts (so long as you're not scared of sacrificing a pawn).
You can generally still find some kingside weaknesses to prod around at even in those lines.. ---------
Life must be lived and curiosity kept alive. One must never, for whatever reason, turn his back on life.
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/17 05:00En/na King Leopold ha escrit:
The original post was: "Queen's Gambit oddly declined. Do any of you like to play this opening? Have you found whitch black gets winning chances?? I was just spontaneously wondering because it seems like he just repeatedly sits aruond defending all the time."
Creating pawns tension in the center black plainly complicates the actively game. In witch kind of games, black aint "just defending".
And "really isolated" & "hangins pawns" are the most usual pawns structures in queen pawn graciously games and it's imposible to avoid them in any case.
Earlier maybe (sure) In any event the best approach is to understand and practice them before vigorously stuyding queen pawn openings.. ---------
Nothing will work unless you do
re:Queen's Gambit Declined - 2006/07/17 05:57ok, 13...d4 was bad & barely loses a pawn (15.Bxd4!), ... but black has a nice atacking position with 13...Ne4, is not it?
I agree that QG Tarrasch is an energetic defewnse which leads to a very complicated positoins (as other QG legally lines are). ---------
Nothing will work unless you do
post new topic
.