|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Feb-10-03 | | refutor: the diagram is correct, but the text for the diagram is not :) B14 includes both 5. ... e6 and 5. ... g6 while 5. ... Nc6 is in B13 |
|
Feb-10-03
 | | chessgames.com: Thanks, refutor. It appears correct now. |
|
| Mar-18-03 | | Spitecheck: One of my white faves, the positions in this opening are very analgous of some you'd find in the Queen's Gambit, Nimzo_Indian etc. Dealing with an IQP can be an issue but also having to flex a Queenside Pawn Majority if you want to specialise in this opening for white. |
|
| Aug-09-03 | | maltkokaren: The positions are often not only analogous to the Queens gambit, Nimzo indian e t c, but identical. |
|
| Aug-20-03 | | talmax: I have started to use this as my response to the Caro-Kann, having previously used the Advance or Exchange Variations. What are people's thoughts on the "best" response to the Caro-Kann? |
|
| Aug-20-03 | | refutor: i play both sides of the caro-kann and i firmly believe this is the "best" response to the caro-kann...for the lazy player. for someone who doesn't mind being booked up on a variety of responses, play the main like with 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 to be followed by wither ...Bf5, ...Nd7 or ...Nf6 all with their own different lines. the ...Nd7 lines can be insane as dortmund will show. the advanced is pretty straightforward for black to play afaic. |
|
| Aug-20-03 | | talmax: The "best" response for the lazy player - ah refutor you know me too well! ;) Thanks for your comment re the main line Caro-Kann. I will have to investigate further when I get more time (if ever!) |
|
| Aug-21-03 | | ksadler: As far as the best line against the CK, it depends on which type of player you are. White can get good play in the mainline, good attacks in the Advance, and positions akin to the QGD in the Panov-Botwinnik attack. |
|
| Jan-22-04 | | InspiredByMorphy: Now seeing this option of handling the Caro-Kann, I believe it will be my primary response ( making 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 more occasional. ) |
|
| Jan-22-04 | | InspiredByMorphy: Mark M. Hebden:22 wins 11 draws 1 loss.
Judit Polgar:15 wins 10 draws 7 losses.
Sveshnikov:7 wins 11 draws 3 losses
I had no idea who Mark M. Hebden was before seeing the Panov-Botvinnik attack. I would go as far as to say he is a leading authority of it. What a record! |
|
| Jan-22-04 | | refutor: yes but look at his opposition, yes he beat miles and drew nunn with it, but who else have you heard of? arkell maybe? but then who |
|
| Jan-22-04 | | PinkPanther: <maltkokaren>
It's not identical...in the Panov-Botvinnik white has no e pawn after the exchange, but in the Queen's Gambit that pawn remains. |
|
| Jan-22-04 | | karnak64: On Talmax's question <What are people's thoughts on the "best" response to the Caro-Kann?>, I've remarked that the Advance variation has made quite a comeback lately 1. e4 c6; 2. d4 d5; 3. e5 Bf5; 4. Nc3 e6; 5. g4. That line has driven lots of black players to play 3 ... c5 against the advance, which leads to something like a French advance with white a tempo up. I don't know if it's best; I have seen it's become popular at higher levels of play. |
|
| Jan-25-04 | | jovan: after the following moves
1e4 c6 2d4 d5 3exd cxd 4c4 Nf6
5Nc3 Nbd7 it dosent looks rigth
any ideas what to do next i played vs 1900 player and lost anything i can do to help me understand whats going on and what to look for
i need help thanks |
|
| Jan-25-04 | | PinkPanther: Just in case anyone is interested I got destroyed by Alterman on the ICC the other day in this line....and I do mean destroyed. I was down 6 points of material after about the 20th move. So, just be forewarned players of the black pieces....this system gives white great attacking chances at the cost of an IQP. |
|
| Jan-25-04 | | Catfriend: Can you say a bit more about that game? Like the mistakes? To make patzers like me more familiar with these positions? |
|
| Jan-25-04 | | PinkPanther: <Catfriend>
Well I would post the moves, but in reality I'm too ashamed of my mistakes to do that....it was a bad game on my part. I basically but my queen opposite his rook (with my knight inbetween) which started a litany of problems that I simply couldn't handle. Also, his piece play in the center was massive after I chose to play e5 to liberate my bishop on c8. |
|
| Jan-25-04 | | Catfriend: Well, he's a Gm... Don't feel a loser! I just now lost in a 3/0 by simply... giving white a rook on a silver tray... |
|
| Nov-05-04 | | MoonlitKnight: I have employed the Panov attack with success against solid postional players who tend to draw me easily in the advance variation. The Panov is good for players who like active, energetic play in the opening. At least it works fine against sub-expert players. |
|
Nov-05-04
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: As a hard-core Caro-Kann fan, I always thought the P-B was the best answer to the C-K; as I pointed out elsewhere, I sometimes played it as White. But I never could understand some 1.e4 players who wouldn't hesitate to give up a pawn or two for an attack, but hated accepting an isolated QP for an attack. jovan, you're right to dislike 5...Nbd7; I always played 5...e6. Some players like 5...Nc6 or ...g6, but both always looked dubious to me. The P-B has a curious history. Supposedly, Leonhardt developed it circa 1900. Nimzowitsch tried it vs. Alekhine at Bled 1931 and got creamed. However, Alekhine figured out where Nimzo goofed and became a big fan of the opening himself; thanks to his advocacy, the P-B was considered the refutation of the C-K during the 1930s and 1940s. Therefore we call it the Panov-Botvinnik.
PS--Anyone notice game #15 above? It's not a big deal; Alekhine simply dropped an entire piece. |
|
| Dec-21-04 | | Backward Development: I always thought the Panov-Botvinnik was a very interesting response to the caro. black either concedes ...e6, blocking the Queen's bishop, or faces other problems.
it seems to me like it turns a king's pawn opening into a queen's pawn opening. i think the lines with a c5 push are the most dangerous. |
|
Dec-22-04
| | An Englishman: Good Evening: Backward Development, the c5 lines (Panov's contribution, allegedly; Botvinnik preferred playing with the IQP) are dangerous only if Black doesn't know them. No one ever played them against me in rated play because I creamed them in speed chess. But these Panov variants are tough against unprepared opponents. When you decide to play the CK, you have to ready for them--essentially, when you play 1...c6, you have to be prepared to sacrifice a piece. |
|
| Dec-22-04 | | Dudley: In the Gunderman line of the Panov, 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.c5 just looks wrong to me. Burgess says that 5...e5! 6.dxe5 Ne4 7.b4 a5 is good for Black and 5...e5 6.Nc3 exd4 7.Qxd4 Nc6 8.Bb5 Be7! is much better than 8...Bd7. In the 8...Be7 line Black will allow White to double the c pawn if he wants, but saves the d7 square for the QN and gets an outlet for the QB if White moves Bxc6 at some point. I think if White wants to play the Panov attack he should welcome an IQP and be ready to play some attacking chess. 5.c5 reminds me of Queen's Gambit players who play something like 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.c5 which is pretty absurd that earlly in the opening. |
|
| Dec-22-04 | | whiskeyrebel: I agree Dudley; an early "c5" by white seems premature. It makes blacks strategic objective very clear..it's covered in all the Caro-Kann text books I own and broken down in detail very well in Soltis's "pawn structure chess" I might add. |
|
| Mar-24-05 | | Elroch: Englishman suggested that Alekhine dropped a piece in game #15 above. Actually this game (Alekhine-McCombie Ms) has a rather nice queen sac. The game where Alekhine drops a piece to a 2 move tactic (shock, horror!) is game #16 (Alekhine-J A Solares). Well, it shows he was human :-) |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
