Thursday, January 22, 2009

Going to war


















.
.
.
Tomorrow the Corus tournament begins for us with the nine-round events. After the tournament in Groningen last Christmas I wasn't satisfied with my 3. ... Qd6 of the scandinavian. Allthough I wanted to focus solely on positional play I couldn't but help to study the Caro Kann. The book of Houska has given me enough understanding to dare to give it a try tomorrow.
I will play for the first time in group four and I hope to manage to uphold myself in that group, but it will be tough, I guess. Margriet will be playing in group 8.

9 comments:

  1. Good luck! That's one heck of a tourney, I'm sure you'll have fun. :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Have loads of fun and (hopefully) good results!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good Luck and don't be scared of any Panov Botvinik attacks!

    ReplyDelete
  4. do you want me to send you what i sent BDK on the Caro-Kahn?, and, i can assure you, no missing parts. you would have to download chessBs Lite, but worse has happened. also all the pdf's, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  5. DK, please do. I need to see how the typical CK-player handles the pawnbreaks on c5 or e5 for instance.

    ReplyDelete
  6. IF you have bookup, I could send you my C-K book I made with annotations and verbose descriptions.

    ReplyDelete
  7. BP,
    yes, I do have bookup. I would be delighted.

    ReplyDelete
  8. sorry, email forward's didnt come through, but catch up here. send six big emails now.

    ReplyDelete
  9. there was a time in the past that this would have been a private email, not a public post, but time and again you say you prefer this. here it is. my god, its even spell checked:
    ----------

    Now that I have dispensed an obligation—the sending of extensive Caro-Kann material to you—I turn to a very different subject: the proffer of a question if not an implicit critical remark. So there I am—first supporting then a something else…

    I was as once gladdened then surprised at your remark here that you were going to study the Caro-Kann. I hope that i am not reading too much into it, but having deliberately held off from any study of the opening for a VERY long time as a matter of principle, now that I am doing so, am employing a rigorous approach.

    In fact, you might laugh, but a student of mine who is a candidate to be an International Master ASKED me about organizing his opening study, asked me about how best to approach it. Yes, I coach him—I give him coaching in organization and effectiveness, and he is on hand for me in my chess. It has not been an equal trade for a LONG time, but he has become a friend, believe in him greatly, and the little help and assistance he has given has been truly invaluable to guiding my chess development.

    That said, I believe that at your level you should already have had an opening repertoire mapped out or established by now, and if you either have not or are deviating at times as you describe here yet already have one, is a sign of weakness, or disorganization. Ok, I said it.

    I believe that at a certain point you make decisions. Good or bad, you say: ‘To 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc, I will always play 3.e3.’ I am not talking ten or twelve moves out, but fundamental chess decisions that go to the bedrock of ones own stability, and sense of definite certainty.

    Now, whether this is a good decision or not, and I am not sure as I still very much WANT to play 3.Nf3, this provides STABILITY, AND allows me to KNOW my own territory with more predictability. I am not sure if I need to revert back to 3.Nf3, but did a LOT of prep against it, and it became a zoo of variations. A fucking smoke belching Greek monster with twenty seven heads spinning round and round.

    Similarly, early on found that I hated to play against g6, so adopted 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 and 3.Bg5 as my anti-indian approach. My coach suggested this instead of 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 as it was ‘more classical’. I only play this, and am very, very glad to have this established. Against the Dutch, only play 1.d4 f5 2.Bg5. Kasparov played it. The main thing is a coherent approach.

    For me it all started to come together when I gave up the Catalan, Reti, English, and KIA as Wht, the Reti and only played 1.d4 each and very time. I found that against higher rated opponents, always did better. It clearly fit me. It solidified when as Blk I gave up the Benko and a medley of variations to only play the Slav. And in the Caro-Kann only, each and every time ONLY play the Bronstein-Larsen variation 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.cf3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6 gxf6.

    I don’t want to sound or be dogmatic. Everyone must find his or her own lines. But whatever they may be, apart from the individual decisions, there is very great value in making decisions upon a coherent approach to the openings taken as a whole, and sticking with them till when and if such time comes as you may no longer go forward with them.

    But I am not gonna wake up one day and say: ‘now I will play the French’, or the KID, etc. That aint gonna happen. I am too systematic for that, and encourage you to get this resolved. Its getting too late not to.

    ReplyDelete