| May-26-11 | | frogbert: for some reason this draw was worth 0,7 points for pono and only 0,5 points for nakamura, if we're going to believe that naka won the rapid stage 2,5-0,3 as the front page says ... apparently, naka won the rapid match 3-1 :o) |
|
| May-28-11 | | vileblunder: According to Chessbase and Ponomariov himself, this is a Benko, not a King's Indian. |
|
| May-29-11 | | frogbert: of course it's a benko. |
|
| May-31-11 | | James Bowman: This was a Kings Indian Defence as defined by the first moves 1.d4...Nf6 2.c4...g6 with the concept of a Benko gambit employed by 3.g3...c5 4.d5...b5 All three versions of the Benko A57, A58 & A59 all start with 1.d4...Nf6 2.c4...c5 3.d5...b5 I'm not sure why Ponomariov calls this a Benko, does a game that includes moves from a specific opening at any point during the game then become a different opening? If 2.c4...c5 3.d5...b5 were played on move 40 would it become a different opening at that point? |
|
| May-31-11 | | haydn20: Sometimes players use a different move order to disguise their intentions or to steer toward certain variations. It is the characteristic position arrived at, not the move order, that determines the opening. Note that 1. d4 Nf6; 2. c4 g6 can transpose to several positions other than KI or Benko as well. The position after 6. bxa6 has definitive Benko characteristics. |
|
| Jun-01-11 | | Jambow: <bxa6 has definitive Benko characteristics.> Agreed as I already indicated by <the concept of a Benko gambit employed by 3.g3...c5 4.d5...b5> yet move order is how an opening is classified. Cg.com correctly catagorized it and if it were listed under the Benko gambit as the opening, it would be incorrect so technically speaking Ponomariov was simply wrong. Also it no doubt had charecteristics of a KID FWIW. |
|
Jun-01-11
 | | boz: I don't know what Jambow is talking about but this is a Benko pure and simple. |
|
| Jun-01-11 | | bartonlaos: I blame g6.
What we see as Benko's gambit was first introduced as a KID variation by Opocensky in 1936 - Stahlberg vs Opocensky, 1936 . The idea to skip the fianchetto, 3...b5 was publicized by a Russian named Argunow, who named the opening, "The Volga Gambit" in the 1940's. Benko popularized this idea in the 70's then writing his book titled something like, Benko's Gambit to seal his place in US Chess history. It was about this time that Black started losing the struggle for equality, and realized that his best chances were with the fianchetto, (which also fends off a remarkable winning attack). So g6 was re-introduced, and the Benko Gambit found its way back into the KID from where it was originally conceived, although players today don't recognize it as such, with the conception of move orders. Here is another historic game predating Volga Gambit: Keres vs Opocensky, 1937
And a couple of games for interest:
S Zhukhovitsky vs Dzindzichashvili, 1969
[Event "WchT U26 17th"]
[Site "Haifa ISR"]
[Round "10.1"]
[Date "1970.8.18"]
[White "Pfleger, Helmut"]
[Black "Rogoff, Kenneth S"]
[Result "1-0"]
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.g3 c5 4.d5 b5 5.cxb5 d6 6.Bg2 a6 7.bxa6 Bxa6 8.Nc3 Bg7 9.Nf3 Nbd7 10.O-O O-O 11.Re1 Ne8 12.e4 Nc7 13.Bf4 Qb8 14.Qc1 Nb5 15.Bh3 Nb6 16.Nxb5 Bxb5 17.Bh6 Ra7 18.Bxg7 Kxg7 19.b4 Na4 20.bxc5 Nxc5 21.Rb1 Rb7 22.Nd4 Ba4 23.Qc3 Kg8 24.Rxb7 Qxb7 25.e5 Rb8 26.exd6 exd6 27.Qf3 Re8 28.Rxe8+ Bxe8 29.Nb3 Ba4 30.Nxc5 Qb1+ 31.Bf1 dxc5 32.Qe2 Bd7 33.Kg2 Qb7 34.Qf3 Qb4 35.a3 Qb1 36.g4 Qc1 37.h3 c4 38.Qf6 Ba4 39.Qd4 Qxa3 40.Bxc4 Qd6 41.g5 Bd7 42.Qf6 Qc5 43.Qd8+ Kg7 44.Qf6+ Kg8 45.Qf4 Kf8 46.h4 Bf5 47.d6 Ke8 48.Qe3+ Qxe3 49.fxe3 Kd7 50.Bxf7 Kxd6 51.Bg8 Be4+ 52.Kg3 Bc6 53.Bxh7 Be8 54.Kf4 Ke7 55.Bg8 Kf8 56.Bc4 Ke7 57.Ke5 Kf8 58.Kf6 Bf7 59.Bd3 1-0 |
|
| Jun-01-11 | | James Bowman: Steinitz vs Tinsley, 1895 Is this a Benko Gambit too it contains the moves d4 followed by c5? No everything I find has 1.d4...Nf6 2.c4...g6 as KID unless someone can show otherwise. Ive seen a Morphy game that included ...Bc5 b4 then Bxb4...c3 well into the middle game and nobody said the opening was an Evans Gambit even if the characteristic where clearly evident sacraficing the b pawn for time and space against blacks dark squared bishop? It's not just my interpritation it's by definition a KID, IM Donaldson thought so, wikipedia says so and Chess Games also classified it as a KID not a Benko. Likewise why isn't the Benoni I linked too a Benko gambit too? Or at the very least by <bartonlaos>'s well articulated historical perspective it would be a Benko or Volga gambit variation of the KID or some such thing? |
|
| Jun-01-11 | | James Bowman: Note too every game that <bartonlaos> linked too was listed under (E-60 KID) and if you try to get there by going through the Benko gambit path you will never arrive. Not one person on any of the games provided was arguing that they were Benko gambits either just this game for some reason? |
|
Jul-26-11
| | boz: <James Bowman: Steinitz vs Tinsley, 1895 Is this a Benko Gambit too it contains the moves d4 followed by c5?> No, that's a Benoni because it doesn't involve the gambit offer on b5. |
|
Kibitzing
