| |
Main
Date: 16 Nov 2005 09:39:42
From: Lloyd Regner
Subject: Question About Light Bishop in KIA/Reti Systems
|
I have been exploring the KIA/Reversed and Reti systems as a backup opening
as White.
I have looked at quite a few master games. I have noticed that in master
games, while Black often plays ...Bg4, he relatively rarely plays to swap
light square bishops by following up with, say, ...Qd7. Instead, Black
often plays an early ...e6 or ...Nbd7. However, the idea of swapping off
light square bishops is probably the most common ploy in the games where I
have trotted out this system. And I'll tell you, it makes me a little
uncomfortable as White.
Here are a few examples of this idea from my games:
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.b3 Bg7 4.Bb2 0-0 5.g3 Nc6 6.Bg2 d6 7.0-0 Bf5 and later
...Qd7
1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 Nc6 4.0-0 e5 5.d3 Be6 6.Nbd2 Qd7
1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 c6 3.Bg2 Nf6 4.0-0 Bf5 and later ...Qd7
1.Nf3 d6 2.g3 e5 3.Bg2 Nf6 4.d3 Nc6 5.Nbd2 Bg4 6.0-0 Qd7
My questions:
1) In master games, why doesn't black play to exchange White's fianchettoed
bishop more often? I understand that there are some variations where this
idea is used, but it does not seem to be the main line, or black's main
objective.
2) Since I face this positional threat all the time as White, should I try
to stop it? If so, what is the best way? (The idea h3 and Kh2 seems very
bad here).
Thank you
|
|
| |
Date: 17 Nov 2005 10:13:30
From: VdSM
Subject: Re: Question About Light Bishop in KIA/Reti Systems
|
after Qd7 : Rfe1 and after Bh3 : Bh1 : standard procedure
"Lloyd Regner" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I have been exploring the KIA/Reversed and Reti systems as a backup opening
>as White.
>
> I have looked at quite a few master games. I have noticed that in master
> games, while Black often plays ...Bg4, he relatively rarely plays to swap
> light square bishops by following up with, say, ...Qd7. Instead, Black
> often plays an early ...e6 or ...Nbd7. However, the idea of swapping off
> light square bishops is probably the most common ploy in the games where I
> have trotted out this system. And I'll tell you, it makes me a little
> uncomfortable as White.
>
> Here are a few examples of this idea from my games:
>
> 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.b3 Bg7 4.Bb2 0-0 5.g3 Nc6 6.Bg2 d6 7.0-0 Bf5 and later
> ...Qd7
>
> 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 Nc6 4.0-0 e5 5.d3 Be6 6.Nbd2 Qd7
>
> 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 c6 3.Bg2 Nf6 4.0-0 Bf5 and later ...Qd7
>
> 1.Nf3 d6 2.g3 e5 3.Bg2 Nf6 4.d3 Nc6 5.Nbd2 Bg4 6.0-0 Qd7
>
>
> My questions:
>
> 1) In master games, why doesn't black play to exchange White's
> fianchettoed bishop more often? I understand that there are some
> variations where this idea is used, but it does not seem to be the main
> line, or black's main objective.
>
> 2) Since I face this positional threat all the time as White, should I try
> to stop it? If so, what is the best way? (The idea h3 and Kh2 seems very
> bad here).
>
> Thank you
>
|
| | |
Date: 17 Nov 2005 09:40:11
From: Lloyd Regner
Subject: Re: Question About Light Bishop in KIA/Reti Systems
|
Thank you -- I will search for some games with this maneuver.
"VdSM" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> after Qd7 : Rfe1 and after Bh3 : Bh1 : standard procedure
>
|
| | | |
Date: 17 Nov 2005 17:03:52
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Question About Light Bishop in KIA/Reti Systems
|
> Thank you -- I will search for some games with this maneuver.
>
> "VdSM" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> after Qd7 : Rfe1 and after Bh3 : Bh1 : standard procedure
White can be vulnerable to a kingside attack if he goes for this formation.
An alternative plan is to let Black waste a few tempi by forcing the
exchange of bishops, and using that time to launch a central advance or
strengthening.
|
| | | | |
Date: 17 Nov 2005 11:25:10
From: Lloyd Regner
Subject: Re: Question About Light Bishop in KIA/Reti Systems
|
You may have a point there.
Of course the kingside is often White's playground in, for instance, the KIA
or KID Reversed. Can Black so easily take this away?
Thanks for the suggestion.
"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> Thank you -- I will search for some games with this maneuver.
>>
>> "VdSM" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> after Qd7 : Rfe1 and after Bh3 : Bh1 : standard procedure
>
> White can be vulnerable to a kingside attack if he goes for this
> formation.
>
> An alternative plan is to let Black waste a few tempi by forcing the
> exchange of bishops, and using that time to launch a central advance or
> strengthening.
>
>
>
|
| | | | | |
Date: 17 Nov 2005 21:45:49
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Question About Light Bishop in KIA/Reti Systems
|
> You may have a point there.
>
> Of course the kingside is often White's playground in, for instance, the
> KIA or KID Reversed. Can Black so easily take this away?
Sure: f6, e5, d5, Be6, Qd7, then Bh3, and it's gone (this is a reversed
Samisch formation for the most part). Your options are to let me exchange
on g2, or for you to exchange on h3. If I exchange on g2, castling kingside
gets perilous after h5, g5, and an all-out assault on the king that even the
computers can't figure out, so most strong players I know just castle
queenside to neutralize any counterplay. The resulting positions are
usually equal objectively and very imbalanced.
I played that against Nakamura and the computer said I was a half-pawn
better all the way to move 22. I lost in 28 moves after one mistake too
many (one), and he came crashing down on me, but that's not the fault of the
opening.
The key to any opening is formations. No matter what line you encounter,
you should know which formation is ideal to shoot for from that line. Once
you understand formations, you'll rarely be outplayed in the opening.
|
| |
Date: 16 Nov 2005 16:49:24
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Question About Light Bishop in KIA/Reti Systems
|
>I have been exploring the KIA/Reversed and Reti systems as a backup opening
>as White.
>
> I have looked at quite a few master games. I have noticed that in master
> games, while Black often plays ...Bg4, he relatively rarely plays to swap
> light square bishops by following up with, say, ...Qd7.
He'll do that if he plays f6, but otherwise will either trade for the knight
or just leave the Bishop on g4.
>Instead, Black often plays an early ...e6 or ...Nbd7. However, the idea of
>swapping off light square bishops is probably the most common ploy in the
>games where I have trotted out this system. And I'll tell you, it makes me
>a little uncomfortable as White.
Which is why I go for the swap as Black.
> Here are a few examples of this idea from my games:
>
> 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.b3 Bg7 4.Bb2 0-0 5.g3 Nc6 6.Bg2 d6 7.0-0 Bf5 and later
> ...Qd7
>
> 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 Nc6 4.0-0 e5 5.d3 Be6 6.Nbd2 Qd7
>
> 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 c6 3.Bg2 Nf6 4.0-0 Bf5 and later ...Qd7
>
> 1.Nf3 d6 2.g3 e5 3.Bg2 Nf6 4.d3 Nc6 5.Nbd2 Bg4 6.0-0 Qd7
>
>
> My questions:
>
> 1) In master games, why doesn't black play to exchange White's
> fianchettoed bishop more often? I understand that there are some
> variations where this idea is used, but it does not seem to be the main
> line, or black's main objective.
When Black doesn't go for the exchange, he's going for more direct control
of and pressure upon the center.
> 2) Since I face this positional threat all the time as White, should I try
> to stop it? If so, what is the best way? (The idea h3 and Kh2 seems very
> bad here).
Castling queenside is usually the best way to neutralize this threat, or
allowing it and seeking counterplay in the center.
The Sicilian Dragon also has this theme, as does the Pirc.
|
|
