Search
Member List
Calendar
Help
|
Setup vs ...g6 (KID or Grunfeld)
|
|
02-03-2010, 02:05 AM
Post: #11
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Setup vs ...g6 (KID or Grunfeld)
(10-27-2008 09:30 PM)soldner Wrote: Great games! Thanks, Rookpawn! So after reading Norowitz's analysis at the Kenilworth Chess Club website; and reviewing the other anti-KID threads - what is the issue with Norowitz's B/b2 idea that has lead to the development of other (more 'un C-Z like') lines against the KID? I can see that aiming to swap off dark Bishops via the a1-h8 diagonal (rather than via [f4]-h6-g7) might be problematic if the game remains closed - but I didn't think KID games tended to lead to that type of play... In summary, is this type of line viable? 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. e3 Bg7 4. Be2 O-O 5. b3 d6 6. Bb2 Nbd7 7. O-O e5 8. dxe5 Perhaps 7. c4 would be better before the fireworks being? I rarely come up against a K-side fianchetto in the games I play, so I don't have a good feel for evaluating these types of positions. Thanks. |
|||
|
|
02-03-2010, 02:42 AM
Post: #12
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Setup vs ...g6 (KID or Grunfeld)
(02-03-2010 02:05 AM)lucioperca Wrote: So after reading Norowitz's analysis at the Kenilworth Chess Club website; and reviewing the other anti-KID threads - what is the issue with Norowitz's B/b2 idea that has lead to the development of other (more 'un C-Z like') lines against the KID? I must admit that I have not read Norowitz's analysis, but it seems that if Black plays an early ...c5 he just gets White stuck in a weird Benoni. In particular, I don't like 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.e3 Bg7 4.Be2 0-0 5.b3 c5! 6.Bb2 cxd4 7.Nxd4 d5 8.0-0 Re8, with ...e5 next. This matches the Kamsky game except he went for 8...Qc7 instead. [Keep in mind that was rapid-play...] |
|||
|
|
|
02-03-2010, 04:20 AM
Post: #13
|
|||
|
|||
|
RE: Setup vs ...g6 (KID or Grunfeld)
Okay, I see now. Yes, ..c5 does change the look of things....
By the way, here is the link to Norowitz's analysis: http://www.kenilworthchessclub.org/games...ecture.htm and here is a segment of that analysis pertaining to his Anti-KID: The Anti-KID Zukertort System Yaacov Norowitz - Analysis [E60] Yaacov Norowitz Lecture Notes/Kenilworth, NJ USA 2006 1. d4 Nf6 2. e3 g6 3. Nf3 Yaacov mentioned that he switched to this system against KID formations after losing a game to GM Dzindzindashvili with 3. f4?! Bg7 4. Bd3 d6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. O-O Nbd7 7. Nbd2 (7. e4 e5 8. fxe5 dxe5 9. c3 c5) 7... e5! 8. fxe5 dxe5 9. dxe5 (9. c3 c5) 9... Ng4 , however NM Mark Kernighan pointed out that White is not really busted here after 10. e6! Nxe3!? (10... fxe6 11. Qe1=) 11. Qe2!! Nxf1 12. e7 Nxd2 13. exd8=Q (13. Bxd2!?) 13... Nxf3+ 14. Qxf3 Rxd8 3... Bg7 4. Be2 More flexible than 4. Bd3 4... O-O 5. b3! The key concept of Yaacov's Zukertort system against the KID is that the dark-squared Bishops are likely to be exchanged at some point along the long-diagonal, creating serious weaknesses in Black's kingside. Though he does not get to play his favorite Stonewall formation, the game still revolves around the dark squares. 5... d6 6. Bb2 Nbd7 7. O-O e5!? a) 7... c5!? has the advantage of keeping a pawn at e7 to defend the potentially weak f6 square. b) 7... Re8?! 8. c4 e5 9. dxe5 dxe5 10. Nxe5! Nxe5 11. Qxd8 Rxd8 12. Bxe5 8. dxe5 Ng4 9. c4 Ngxe5 10. Nxe5 Nxe5?! 10... dxe5! makes it harder to exchange the Bishops, though it leaves Black with a less dynamic position. 11. Qd2! The Queen goes to a dark square in keeping with the theme. I think it's worth remembering that Norowitz is a Stonewall (rather than a C-Z) practitioner. He may well evaluate positions slightly differently based on his Stonewall outlook. Thanks for the feedback. |
|||
|
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|