| |
Main
Date: 24 Sep 2008 17:23:24
From: Dave
Subject: Gambiting a pawn in the French Tarrasch
|
I played the French Tarrasch game below (as white), and made what I
thought was a mistake, with 8. O-O.I almost resigned, as I was a bit
disgusted with myself playing what I thought was a rather stupid move in
an opening I play sometimes. Basically 8. O-O loses a pawn.
Looking at the opening in a database, I found that castling, rather than
playing 8. Nf3 (which saves the pawn) is not exactly unknown. It is
rare, but not unknown. Whilst I can't recall the figures in my database,
sacrificing a pawn appears to be played on average by much stronger
players than the more common 8. Nf6.
I had a quick win in this, as my opponent got greedy and tried to grab a
second pawn, which had he not resigned would have lost his queen.
I'd be interested if someone can explain the merit of gambiting the
pawn, as I can't see any, and feel I only got away with it due to an
even bigger mistake by my opponent.
[Event "ICC 30 0"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2008.09.23"]
[Round "-"]
[White "g8wrb"]
[Black "ajitsampat"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ICCResult "Black resigns"]
[WhiteElo "1463"]
[BlackElo "1511"]
[Opening "French: Tarrasch, closed variation"]
[ECO "C05"]
[NIC "FR.17"]
[Time "13:42:40"]
[TimeControl "1800+0"]
1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7 5. Bd3 c5 6. c3 Nc6 7. Ne2 Qb6
8. O-O cxd4 9. cxd4 Nxd4 10. Nxd4 Qxd4 11. Nf3 Nxe5 12. Bb5+ {Black resigns}
1-0
|
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2008 20:49:05
From: Chris F.A. Johnson
Subject: Re: Gambiting a pawn in the French Tarrasch
|
On 2008-09-24, Dave wrote:
> I played the French Tarrasch game below (as white), and made what I
> thought was a mistake, with 8. O-O.I almost resigned, as I was a bit
> disgusted with myself playing what I thought was a rather stupid move in
> an opening I play sometimes. Basically 8. O-O loses a pawn.
>
> Looking at the opening in a database, I found that castling, rather than
> playing 8. Nf3 (which saves the pawn) is not exactly unknown. It is
> rare, but not unknown. Whilst I can't recall the figures in my database,
> sacrificing a pawn appears to be played on average by much stronger
> players than the more common 8. Nf6.
>
> I had a quick win in this, as my opponent got greedy and tried to grab a
> second pawn, which had he not resigned would have lost his queen.
>
> I'd be interested if someone can explain the merit of gambiting the
> pawn, as I can't see any, and feel I only got away with it due to an
> even bigger mistake by my opponent.
>
> [Event "ICC 30 0"]
> [Site "Internet Chess Club"]
> [Date "2008.09.23"]
> [Round "-"]
> [White "g8wrb"]
> [Black "ajitsampat"]
> [Result "1-0"]
> [ICCResult "Black resigns"]
> [WhiteElo "1463"]
> [BlackElo "1511"]
> [Opening "French: Tarrasch, closed variation"]
> [ECO "C05"]
> [NIC "FR.17"]
> [Time "13:42:40"]
> [TimeControl "1800+0"]
>
> 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7 5. Bd3 c5 6. c3 Nc6 7. Ne2 Qb6
> 8. O-O cxd4 9. cxd4 Nxd4 10. Nxd4 Qxd4 11. Nf3 Nxe5 12. Bb5+ {Black resigns}
> 1-0
12. Nxd4
--
Chris F.A. Johnson, webmaster <http://Woodbine-Gerrard.com >
===================================================================
Author:
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
|
| | |
Date: 28 Sep 2008 01:37:38
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Gambiting a pawn in the French Tarrasch
|
Chris F.A. Johnson <[email protected] > wrote:
> On 2008-09-24, Dave wrote:
>> [Event "ICC 30 0"]
>> [Site "Internet Chess Club"]
>> [Date "2008.09.23"]
>> [Round "-"]
>> [White "g8wrb"]
>> [Black "ajitsampat"]
>> [Result "1-0"]
>>
>> 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7 5. Bd3 c5 6. c3 Nc6 7. Ne2
>> Qb6 8. O-O cxd4 9. cxd4 Nxd4 10. Nxd4 Qxd4 11. Nf3 Nxe5 12. Bb5+
>> {Black resigns} 1-0
>
> 12. Nxd4
Are you just suggesting that as a more obvious move? If so, I agree
but, after 12.Bb5+, the queen isn't going anywhere so Nxd4 (or maybe
Qxd4 if Black interposes the Ne5 against the check) can follow.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Dangerous Homicidal Newspaper (TM):
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ it's like a daily broadsheet but it
wants to kill you and it could explode
at any minute!
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2008 19:45:46
From: Arfur Million
Subject: Re: Gambiting a pawn in the French Tarrasch
|
"Dave" <[email protected] > wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>I played the French Tarrasch game below (as white), and made what I thought
>was a mistake, with 8. O-O.I almost resigned, as I was a bit disgusted with
>myself playing what I thought was a rather stupid move in an opening I play
>sometimes. Basically 8. O-O loses a pawn.
>
> Looking at the opening in a database, I found that castling, rather than
> playing 8. Nf3 (which saves the pawn) is not exactly unknown. It is rare,
> but not unknown. Whilst I can't recall the figures in my database,
> sacrificing a pawn appears to be played on average by much stronger
> players than the more common 8. Nf6.
>
> I had a quick win in this, as my opponent got greedy and tried to grab a
> second pawn, which had he not resigned would have lost his queen.
>
> I'd be interested if someone can explain the merit of gambiting the pawn,
> as I can't see any, and feel I only got away with it due to an even bigger
> mistake by my opponent.
>
> [Event "ICC 30 0"]
> [Site "Internet Chess Club"]
> [Date "2008.09.23"]
> [Round "-"]
> [White "g8wrb"]
> [Black "ajitsampat"]
> [Result "1-0"]
> [ICCResult "Black resigns"]
> [WhiteElo "1463"]
> [BlackElo "1511"]
> [Opening "French: Tarrasch, closed variation"]
> [ECO "C05"]
> [NIC "FR.17"]
> [Time "13:42:40"]
> [TimeControl "1800+0"]
>
> 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7 5. Bd3 c5 6. c3 Nc6 7. Ne2 Qb6 8.
> O-O cxd4 9. cxd4 Nxd4 10. Nxd4 Qxd4 11. Nf3 Nxe5 12. Bb5+ {Black resigns}
> 1-0
>
It's a known idea - White has a lead in development and the possibility of a
quick attack with (after 11 ...Qb6) Q-a4-g4/h4. Black is probably better off
not taking the pawn.
Regards,
Arfur
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2008 02:23:43
From: Arfur Million
Subject: Re: Gambiting a pawn in the French Tarrasch
|
On 25 Sep, 13:41, Dave <[email protected] > wrote:
> Arfur Million wrote:
> > "Dave" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected]...
> >> I played the French Tarrasch game below (as white), and made what I thought
> >> was a mistake, with 8. O-O.I almost resigned, as I was a bit disgusted with
> >> myself playing what I thought was a rather stupid move in an opening I play
> >> sometimes. Basically 8. O-O loses a pawn.
>
> >> Looking at the opening in a database, I found that castling, rather than
> >> playing 8. Nf3 (which saves the pawn) is not exactly unknown. It is rare,
> >> but not unknown. Whilst I can't recall the figures in my database,
> >> sacrificing a pawn appears to be played on average by much stronger
> >> players than the more common 8. Nf6.
>
> >> I had a quick win in this, as my opponent got greedy and tried to grab a
> >> second pawn, which had he not resigned would have lost his queen.
>
> >> I'd be interested if someone can explain the merit of gambiting the pawn,
> >> as I can't see any, and feel I only got away with it due to an even bigger
> >> mistake by my opponent.
>
> >> [Event "ICC 30 0"]
> >> [Site "Internet Chess Club"]
> >> [Date "2008.09.23"]
> >> [Round "-"]
> >> [White "g8wrb"]
> >> [Black "ajitsampat"]
> >> [Result "1-0"]
> >> [ICCResult "Black resigns"]
> >> [WhiteElo "1463"]
> >> [BlackElo "1511"]
> >> [Opening "French: Tarrasch, closed variation"]
> >> [ECO "C05"]
> >> [NIC "FR.17"]
> >> [Time "13:42:40"]
> >> [TimeControl "1800+0"]
>
> >> 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7 5. Bd3 c5 6. c3 Nc6 7. Ne2 Qb6 8.
> >> O-O cxd4 9. cxd4 Nxd4 10. Nxd4 Qxd4 11. Nf3 Nxe5 12. Bb5+ {Black resigns}
> >> 1-0
>
> > It's a known idea - White has a lead in development and the possibility of a
> > quick attack with (after 11 ...Qb6) Q-a4-g4/h4. Black is probably better off
> > not taking the pawn.
>
> > Regards,
> > Arfur
>
> Thank you for that. I looked over a few games where this got played and
> I can see white does get an attack. I'm not convinced I will play it
> myself again though
You'd be in good company, I noticed Svidler used it a couple of times.
Regards,
Arfur
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2008 13:41:16
From: Dave
Subject: Re: Gambiting a pawn in the French Tarrasch
|
Arfur Million wrote:
> "Dave" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> I played the French Tarrasch game below (as white), and made what I thought
>> was a mistake, with 8. O-O.I almost resigned, as I was a bit disgusted with
>> myself playing what I thought was a rather stupid move in an opening I play
>> sometimes. Basically 8. O-O loses a pawn.
>>
>> Looking at the opening in a database, I found that castling, rather than
>> playing 8. Nf3 (which saves the pawn) is not exactly unknown. It is rare,
>> but not unknown. Whilst I can't recall the figures in my database,
>> sacrificing a pawn appears to be played on average by much stronger
>> players than the more common 8. Nf6.
>>
>> I had a quick win in this, as my opponent got greedy and tried to grab a
>> second pawn, which had he not resigned would have lost his queen.
>>
>> I'd be interested if someone can explain the merit of gambiting the pawn,
>> as I can't see any, and feel I only got away with it due to an even bigger
>> mistake by my opponent.
>>
>> [Event "ICC 30 0"]
>> [Site "Internet Chess Club"]
>> [Date "2008.09.23"]
>> [Round "-"]
>> [White "g8wrb"]
>> [Black "ajitsampat"]
>> [Result "1-0"]
>> [ICCResult "Black resigns"]
>> [WhiteElo "1463"]
>> [BlackElo "1511"]
>> [Opening "French: Tarrasch, closed variation"]
>> [ECO "C05"]
>> [NIC "FR.17"]
>> [Time "13:42:40"]
>> [TimeControl "1800+0"]
>>
>> 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7 5. Bd3 c5 6. c3 Nc6 7. Ne2 Qb6 8.
>> O-O cxd4 9. cxd4 Nxd4 10. Nxd4 Qxd4 11. Nf3 Nxe5 12. Bb5+ {Black resigns}
>> 1-0
>>
>
> It's a known idea - White has a lead in development and the possibility of a
> quick attack with (after 11 ...Qb6) Q-a4-g4/h4. Black is probably better off
> not taking the pawn.
>
> Regards,
> Arfur
>
>
Thank you for that. I looked over a few games where this got played and
I can see white does get an attack. I'm not convinced I will play it
myself again though.
|
|
