Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules

Forum rules

(1) Posts are to be made in the relevant forum. Users are asked to read the forum descriptions before posting.
(2) Off topic posts are limited to active members who have actually posted on-topic in one of the chess-oriented sections in the past. Any user whose first post does not relate to chess will be banned permanently. Posts in the Introduction section do not count.
(3) Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users. Be tolerant at any time. Flaming or abusing users in any way will not be tolerated.
(4) Discussions on political and religious topics are not allowed. Posts containing elements thereof will be redacted or deleted and a temporary or permanent ban may be placed upon the user.
Discussions on politics in chess organisations and the way politics affect chess are allowed.
(4a) Drug use references are not allowed and discussions on drugs are not allowed.
(5) Members are asked to not act as "back seat moderators". If members have something to report they are welcome to bring it to the attention of moderator either by a PM or in this thread: http://www.chessforums.org/forum-new...moderator.html
(6) If you wish to report a PM please forward the PM to a moderator and leave a post here: http://www.chessforums.org/forum-new...moderator.html. Don't hesitate to report a PM if you believe it violates the forum rules, even if someone else has already reported a (similar) PM by the same user; having more reports makes it easier for the moderators to take action.
(7) These rules apply to forum posts as well as private messages (PMs).
(8) Members should post in a way which is consistent with "normal writing". That is users should not post excessive numbers of emoticons (smilies), large, small or coloured text, etc. Similarly users should not SHOUT or use excessive punctuation (e.g. ! and ?) in topic titles or posts.
(9) Members should use an appropriate, descriptive title when posting a new topic. Examples of bad titles include; "Help me!", "I'm stuck!", "I've got an error!", etc. Examples of good titles include; "New Game: Perseus - SomeOtherPlayer", "Two Knights Defense: Fritz Variation and sidelines", etc.
(10) Spam is not tolerated here under any circumstance.
(11) Continuously linking your own website to promote it is not allowed. You may use your signature (which will come up beneath all your posts) for this purpose.
(12) Members should refrain from posting without adding to the discussion. Posting just to increase postcount is not allowed.
(13) Combine your comments into one post rather than making many consecutive posts to a thread within a short period of time. This can be done by clicking the 'edit' button next to your post.
If your last post, which is the last in the thread, is very old you may use the following trick to make sure it's bumped up to the new posts. Click on the 'edit' button of your last post. Copy the content of the post. Click delete and delete your last post. Paste the content of the now-deleted post in a new post, add what you will and click 'submit reply'.
(13a) You are not allowed to make consecutive posts. If you post more than once without a reply from another user, all posts after the first will be deleted.
(13b) Exceptions may be made for specific types of threads.
(14) Warez are intellectual property (software/music/movies/tv-series/tv-shows/etc) either through download, serial, or crack in a manner that breaks its copyright and/or license. You are not allowed to give/link to/ask for/advocate/provide information for obtaining and the use of warez.
Bittorrent links are not allowed.
(14a) The following international treaties apply:
-Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Berne Convention) (Berne, 1886)
-Universal Copyright Convention (UCC) (Geneva, 1952)
-Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) (Marrakesh, 1994)
-World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty (WIPO Copyright Treaty) (Geneva, 1996)
(15) Books published before 1920 are considered free of copyright and e-books thereof are not warez. Books published after 1920 with permission from the author are considered free of copyright and e-books thereof are not warez provided it can within reason be established that permission has been given. All other books are considered copyrighted and e-books thereof are considered warez.
(16) Usernames that contain obscene or vulgar language or denigrate individuals and/or organisations are not allowed.
(17) Users may only delete their own posts on the grounds that they constitute a severe breach of these rules. Even when this is the case, the editing of the post to effect repairs must at all times be considered first.
The emptying of posts (substituting the content by non-content) is explicitely considered a breach of this rule.
Deletion of whole batches of posts harms thread continuity and the forum as a whole and the Moderation team will take action; in the most extreme case an account may be permanently banned to preserve the posted.
(18) Administrators (Admins) and Moderators (Mods) reserve the right to edit or remove any post at any time. The determination of what is construed as indecent, vulgar, spam, etc. is up to them and not to forum members.
(19) Aforementioned Admins and Mods reserve the right to edit this list of rules at anytime.
See more
See less

1.b4 IDEAS...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dustinkinney
    started a topic 1.b4 IDEAS...

    1.b4 IDEAS...

    Sokolsky Opening (also known as the Orangutan or Polish Opening).

    1) Meets Opening Principle #1 (Development after Bb2 w/ Good: Central Control, might I add...)
    2) Offers: Protection of Rook on a1.
    3) Threatens at least a Pawn after Bb2. (My Principle: Intimidation)
    4) The dream of b5 CAN be Realized, if Provoked w/ a5 or c5, which has the Advatadge of gaining Tempi of Black's queen-side knight OR taking away, those squares from it....
    5) b4 can be Protected w/ a3, or Exchanged for the e-pawn (usually).... (Key Variations) I don't know which is Better, but as of Now, I like the Added Protection because it makes Black's Bishop, Bite on Granite.... Although, looking at Statistical Results: People seem to play the exchange better! (Probably because Nf3 can be easily played without the Fear of e4 (by Black).
    6) The Plan is: e3, c4, Nc3 (all supporting a b5 PUSH)
    7) It makes more sense to Bring Pieces to Bear on the Black King-side, as that is usually prefered to castle too... whereas the Queen can "jump" stay on her side, or FOCUS on the king side, if Needed....
    8) The pawns which are pushed are the Pawns to be Promoted or Traded off.... Good if Black plays 0-0. (Or, if Traded, then open File Attack!)


    Now, I need a Good way of Playing these thoughts (with commentary of these points - If you want)..... Any Suggestions?

  • JustMe
    replied
    Originally posted by thedarkknight View Post
    This has been fun, but I'm not a Polish opening advocate. So maybe the OP can take it from here and make his case for some of these lines. Again, I really prefer the 1...f5 setups even though I've never liked f3 or f5 openings as a general rule. It's been real educational.
    Also, in many mainline Dutch openings one of white's thematic plans is a queenside pawn storm, and b4 is a big part of that. Also, not only that, but after 1.b4 white didn't yet commit a pawn to d4, so he can very well go through with his thematic plans with a pawn on d3 instead.

    I really like playing the Dutch (especially Leningrad) as black, though against 1.Nf3 and other non 1.c4 (and even then...) and 1.d4 moves doesn't seem viable due to d3-Nd2-e4.

    Leave a comment:


  • JustMe
    replied
    Originally posted by dustinkinney View Post
    Over-Protection isn't a Bad Idea.... (but is secondary to the Primary Principles of Chess). Sometimes, it's Good to know, that if an Exchange Happened, then you'd be able to Recapture.... Did you see the Line I posted, up to move 7, in the Discussion?

    True, it isnt HARD for Black to defend.... but, isn't it GREAT, that you, as white, still have the Initiatiave?

    Sure, the b5 PUSH plan, may Not be the case for ALL situations, but it's there, And is Supported....

    King Hunting is the Objective of the Game.... (usually done, when Favorable Odds have already been obtained) But, should NOT be the Case - where weakening your Position, such as the 4 move....

    Think outside YOUR BOX. Sound, Classical Chess is a BOX, your in. Is that BOX even 99% Perfect? BTW: being in Boxes, even Classical Chess Boxes - isn't Necessarily a BAD idea, as in Profiling Drivers based upon their Records.... Maybe, your Auto Insurance rates are Cheaper, because of Less Accidents, but maybe NOT.... Are you Reaching YOUR destination?????

    Also, why NOT bring something to the Table..... all I heard was complaining! If you see an Obvious Flaw to b4, then "show me the Flaw in a Line...." Note: DEEP BLUE is Not an Easy Opponent!
    Your (possessive) vs. you're (contraction of you are), less is for nouns denoting mass whereas fewer denotes quantity so you want to write "fewer" accidents, what goes in the proverbial "box" has been established by strong chess players over the centuries, and while exceptions do exists (check out the exercises in How to Think in Chess (book titles are either underlined or italicized), and creativity is important, one should never forget the foundations of chess that all chess players should know.

    We even do tactical drills to add to and build upon basic principles of tactics, and whole game studies to learn planning, positional assessment, calculation, and sometimes even technique (and endgame skill) depending on the game. Usually, I'll take three or four positions out of (usually) at least an IM game, copy them into a Word document, and write down my calculation and positional assessment. Sure it isn't perfect, especially when we forget committing to (not to commit to, if you find yourself writing to x to, go back, delete the first "to", and add -ing to x) a chosen candidate and why another candidate or move not even considered is superior.

    This exercise requires a prior knowledge of good vs. bad pieces, what open lines, if any, are important, right vs. wrong rook, weak squares, tactical themes, and even then if the attempted win of material is sound, weak color complexes, pawn structure, the type of center, what mating threats, if any, will help you weaken their position, and assessing which of these is the most important in the position, but it also reinforces and teaches us about these principles as well. You should start by looking for forcing moves first, such as checks, exchanges, threats, attacks, etc., if none of these are feasible then look at quieter moves, and finally passive defense, which should only be a last resort.

    Can you leave a piece en prise and get away with it? In Think Like a Grandmaster Kotov recalled a GM friend of his saying he sees what he can leave en prise and work from there, so don't be too attached to material and don't be afraid to counter threaten their material if possible instead of passively defending what you have attacked.

    In summery we can say that chess is about thinking, calculating, and learning about its basic components and how they interact is critical.

    Leave a comment:


  • ryan_c
    replied
    Originally posted by Skwerly View Post
    Yup, the thing is, if you are playing black and see 1. b4, don’t rejoice just yet; the game isn’t a sure loss for white. As I said, this is all relative. If two 1500s go at it and one of them plays 1. b4 well, who knows? If a 2200 plays 1. b4 against a GM, however, he can resign after he punches the clock.
    A good analogy is this. Let say we have two developing boxer(does not know many things in boxing), one of the boxer's fighting post is hands down(which is a no no, specially if you are a developing boxer), the other one hands up. I will give the one with hands up the better chance to win.

    I can compare the developing boxer fighting hands down(ignoring principles) to a 1500 player opening with 1.b4..

    A lower rated player has a higher chance to win or draw against a higher rated player if the higher rated player open with 1.b4 compare with if the higher rated instead open with 1.d4, 1.e4 etc...
    Last edited by ryan_c; 08-02-2012, 01:23 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • thedarkknight
    replied
    Originally posted by Perseus View Post
    Hmm, not my kind of thing, but it'd work well enough, I guess.

    Starting from the top:
    3.e4 is likely best, but a3 and b5 are also on the consideration list.

    4... Qe7 looks a bit iffy if okay, 4... Ne7 is the first that jumps to mind.

    5... Nh6 smells funny, plannign Nf7 most likely but still rubs me the wrong way.

    7... Bc5 alright this one mistake I can put my finger on. That bishop is better on a5.

    11.Nd2 Nc6 12.Qb3 Nf7 13.Nf3 O-O
    Nothing wrong with black's game here when compared to white, but more than white should get. Needlessly complex at any rate.



    Alternative line (this one's not book, but on-the-fly)
    1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 f6 3.e4 Bxb4 4.Bc4 Nc6 5.Nf3 Nge7 6.c3 Ba5 7.d4 d5 8.exd5 Nxd5
    Black's doing just fine without any real effort.
    Nice comments.

    The last suggested line is "book" for the first 4 moves. Then this book gives 5.f4 d6 6.f5 Nge7 7. Qh5+ g6 8.fxg6 Nxg6 9. Nf3 and finishes with a correspondence game played by Sokolsky in 1963. Whatever. I'm sure we can find better moves for black.

    I think what I learned is that white allows black too much freedom. There are no real main lines because nothing is forcing. White isn't dictating the game but merely reacting.

    This has been fun, but I'm not a Polish opening advocate. So maybe the OP can take it from here and make his case for some of these lines. Again, I really prefer the 1...f5 setups even though I've never liked f3 or f5 openings as a general rule. It's been real educational.

    Leave a comment:


  • Perseus
    replied
    Originally posted by thedarkknight View Post
    This is the "book" line for the e5 / f6 black setup (Sokolsky Opening 1981). Looks like a mess to me. Maybe someone can make some sense out of this. Would black castle queenside in this line? Suggestions on a better choice of moves?

    1. b4 e5
    2. Bb2 f6
    3. e4 Bxb4
    4. Bc4 Qe7
    5. Ne2 Nh6
    6. O-O d6
    7. c3 Bc5
    8. d4 Bb6
    9. a4 a6
    10. a5 Ba7
    Hmm, not my kind of thing, but it'd work well enough, I guess.

    Starting from the top:
    3.e4 is likely best, but a3 and b5 are also on the consideration list.

    4... Qe7 looks a bit iffy if okay, 4... Ne7 is the first that jumps to mind.

    5... Nh6 smells funny, plannign Nf7 most likely but still rubs me the wrong way.

    7... Bc5 alright this one mistake I can put my finger on. That bishop is better on a5.

    11.Nd2 Nc6 12.Qb3 Nf7 13.Nf3 O-O
    Nothing wrong with black's game here when compared to white, but more than white should get. Needlessly complex at any rate.



    Alternative line (this one's not book, but on-the-fly)
    1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 f6 3.e4 Bxb4 4.Bc4 Nc6 5.Nf3 Nge7 6.c3 Ba5 7.d4 d5 8.exd5 Nxd5
    Black's doing just fine without any real effort.

    Leave a comment:


  • thedarkknight
    replied
    Here is the line discussed early on in this thread. It's the only line ECO gives a + to white.

    1.b4 c6
    2. Bc2 Qb6
    3. a3 a5
    4. c4 axb4
    5. c5 Qc7
    6. axb4 Rxa1
    7. Bxa1 Nf6
    8. e3 g6
    9. Nc3



    Black seems a little more cramped.

    What do you think?

    (I think after looking at these, I still like the 1...f5 setup the best for black)

    Leave a comment:


  • thedarkknight
    replied
    This is the "book" line for the e5 / f6 black setup (Sokolsky Opening 1981). Looks like a mess to me. Maybe someone can make some sense out of this. Would black castle queenside in this line? Suggestions on a better choice of moves?

    1. b4 e5
    2. Bb2 f6
    3. e4 Bxb4
    4. Bc4 Qe7
    5. Ne2 Nh6
    6. O-O d6
    7. c3 Bc5
    8. d4 Bb6
    9. a4 a6
    10. a5 Ba7

    Leave a comment:


  • Skwerly
    replied
    Yup, the thing is, if you are playing black and see 1. b4, don’t rejoice just yet; the game isn’t a sure loss for white. As I said, this is all relative. If two 1500s go at it and one of them plays 1. b4 well, who knows? If a 2200 plays 1. b4 against a GM, however, he can resign after he punches the clock.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ronaldinho
    replied
    Originally posted by dustinkinney View Post
    Over-Protection isn't a Bad Idea.... (but is secondary to the Primary Principles of Chess).
    Over-protection is a fine idea. The problem is that you don't understand it. This isn't an example of over-protection. This is an example of unnecessary protection.

    "Over-protection" actually means something in chess. I think it's indicative of your approach that you're throwing that word around without knowing what it means, or what the point of it is.


    True, it isnt HARD for Black to defend.... but, isn't it GREAT, that you, as white, still have the Initiatiave?
    A series of shallow threats don't constitute the initiative.

    Sure, the b5 PUSH plan, may Not be the case for ALL situations, but it's there, And is Supported....
    So what? Because it's not like you get that "threat" for free - you get it because you neglect other areas of the game (like your development, control of center, etc) and other threats. The question is if the threat is worth all the threats you have to give up to get it. In this case, the answer is a clear no.

    King Hunting is the Objective of the Game.... (usually done, when Favorable Odds have already been obtained)
    Your parenthetical is the point. Strong players attack the king when they have an advantage. Until they have an advantage, they don't worry about attacking the king - they seek to maximize their advantage.

    In this case, you're seeking to attack the king without an advantage. This is doomed to fail.

    Think outside YOUR BOX. Sound, Classical Chess is a BOX, your in. Is that BOX even 99% Perfect?
    I'm a much stronger chess player than you are. I don't play "sound classical chess" - but when I was a weak player, like you, I did ... and it helped me become much stronger.

    Also, why NOT bring something to the Table..... all I heard was complaining! If you see an Obvious Flaw to b4, then "show me the Flaw in a Line...."
    You know, one of these days you're going to realize that while you beat very weak players with your trappy, shallow play, you're really struggling to take it to the next level. At that point, hopefully you'll have dropped some of the arrogance against people who are trying to teach you something.

    Leave a comment:


  • NewbieWoodpusher
    replied
    Funny... the day after this thread appeared, someone challenged me on Red Hot Pawn starting with 1.b4. It's been, um, entertaining...

    I tried the 1...a5 response for s's & g's, and it's getting borderline absurd. Only 6 moves in, though, so a long way to see how this develops.

    Leave a comment:


  • thedarkknight
    replied
    Ooops. I noticed I put the c pawn on c5 instead of c4 in that last diagram. Sorry.

    Here is the line given in the book from a 1972 postal game with 4.a3 instead of 4.b5.

    1. b4 f5
    2. Bb2 Nf6
    3. e3 e6
    4. a3 Be7
    5. c4 O-O
    6. Nf3 d5
    7. Bxf6 Bxf6
    8. d4 c6
    9. Nbd2 Nd4





    I like black's position better in this line than in the other one. I'd have to agree that this gives black too much free reign to do whatever he wants. Also, all things equal, if both sides castle kingside, I would rather have the side with the kingside attack rather than a queenside attack.

    Anyone see any positives on the white side that would give black difficulties?

    Leave a comment:


  • Perseus
    replied
    Originally posted by dustinkinney View Post
    1) Was white's 4th move, a Premature Advance? Maybe, 4.a3, instead?
    2) Does white's 7th move, BLOCK, his own Bishop, or are there Plans of Attack here? How about using the c4 "shield" to hide behind, with Nc3?
    3) Move #6 seems safe enough.... Nf3, and is Normally the Best place for development, and there's Little Chance of being Dislodged here.... maybe Ne2 is Better, I don't know...
    I'm glad to see you decided against reading my post. [/sarcasm]

    Leave a comment:


  • dustinkinney
    replied
    Originally posted by thedarkknight View Post
    OK. Let's discuss a specific line. Someone mentioned a preference for a Dutch defense setup. The book I have gives this line.



    1. b4 f5
    2. Bb2 Nf6
    3. e3 e6
    4. b5 Be7
    5. c4 O-O
    6. Nf3 d6
    7. d4

    Black will have a hard time unravelling his queenside. White needs to get castled.

    So who stands better? Are there better moves for black in this 1...f5 line?

    Does white play Bc4 and Qb3? Does white castle into Black's kingside attack?

    Are white's queenside pawns too far advanced to do any good? If black eliminates them, does it help black to get his queenside developed?

    1) Was white's 4th move, a Premature Advance? Maybe, 4.a3, instead?
    2) Does white's 7th move, BLOCK, his own Bishop, or are there Plans of Attack here? How about using the c4 "shield" to hide behind, with Nc3?
    3) Move #6 seems safe enough.... Nf3, and is Normally the Best place for development, and there's Little Chance of being Dislodged here.... maybe Ne2 is Better, I don't know...

    Leave a comment:


  • ryan_c
    replied
    Originally posted by Skwerly View Post

    1. b4 is bad, objectively. But it can be fun! so play it!
    You are correct, sir; I only brought up bullet because Naka beats other GMs in it like they learned chess yesterday. Donít think he could beat another GM with 1. b4 in classical time controls? Maybe not a super GM, but quite possibly a 2500, which is no joke.

    That's the only point if you want only for fun then play 1.b4,other wise it's not recommendable...

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X