Monday, September 14, 2009

want to know what my prep for Norowitz was?

I'm writing this Sunday night, but post-dating it so it won't (hopefully) appear until Monday 8:15 pm, when I should be well out of the opening. In case you are wondering if I got what I wanted, it was this:

1. d4 d5
2. e3 c5
3. c3 cxd4
4. exd4 Nc6
5. Bd3 Qc7
6. Ne2 Bg4
7. f3 Bd7
8. Bf4 e5
9. dxe5 Nxe5
10. 0-0 Bd6

and black has supposedly enough activity to compensate for the pawn. A couple interesting games I saw were Brynell - Luther (2003) and Semeniuk - Dreev (1999).


Anonymous said...

well, don't know if you got this line and don't know how the game turned out, but don't like this line much for Black...

So many good lines against Colle System, no need to sacrifice anything. Easy way to play is ..g6and Bg7.

But hope you kicked ass anyway....

LinuxGuy said...

I'll say that Black is doing well here. ...f6,...0-0-0,...g5. If BxN...BxB, g3...h5 looks ample, also.

Tom Chivers said...

Do you mean to compensate for the isolated pawn? Or have I missed an implied sacrifice?

Michael Goeller said...

Pretty close to the actual game, which began 1.d4 d5 2.e3 c5 3.c3 cxd4 4.exd4 Nc6 5.Bd3 Qc7 (so far so good -- an interesting transposition to the Caro Kann Exchange Variation) 6.h3!? and I think your 6...e5!? 7.dxe5 Nxe5?! was over-reaching.

Elizabeth Vicary said...

probably overreaching, true, thanks, but I thought the pawn sac was at least interesting, and in many of these positions, it's better to have the g8 knight on e7, for example it guards f5 which can be important after white plays a knight to d4.

In a more general sense, while *my* prep might not be the most fascinating thing in the world, I hope other players will consider posting their prep, as I imagine the audience would love to see (while they are playing) what two GMs had been expecting.

Bill Brock said...

In his best games collection, Alekhine is often harshly critical of c5xd4 when it can be met by e3xd4. His thesis was that the e-file is more valuable than the c-file, especially when both sides castle K-side.

Hopelessly vague general principle, I know. But an interesting one....

Elizabeth Vicary said...

Thanks Bill, of course the pawn on c5 should be a better pawn than the one on e3, but I didn't want to play a Stonewall type position, since Yaacov has such vast experience in this. I was not looking to play the "best" move, just one that got me an interesting position where I wouldn't just get killed because he knew more.

LinuxGuy said...

I play c3 against ...Bc5 in the Scotch, that's why I commented on the original position; sometimes I have to play f3 as well.

In the original diagram, c3 and f3 are almost like wasted tempos, in the attacking sense. Also, the diagonal to the Kg1 is compromised, so Kh1 often gets played (another loss of tempo).

In the actual game (just flipped through it for a couple seconds) White gets the knight to f3 and Be3, so there is no tempo wasted with f3, nor weak diagonal leading to the king, so while it looks similar, I would only imagine it leading to a different game.

In the game, it's simply a dropped pawn as far as I can tell. I paid no attention to the move order in the original diagram, was just commenting "if" you got that specific position in the diagram, things appear alright for Black to me.

ben daswani said...

don't really understand the comments about overreaching or a dropped pawn... after 8.Bb5+ Bd7 9.Bd7+ Qd7 it seems pretty equal imo

Gurdonark said...

The whole line looks fun to play, but much harder than just playing
a more basic d5 line. The Colle is fun to play with white, but not because it offers some huge advantage. It's got a few great bishop sac tricks against the totally unwary, but those are kinda like the Nd3 mate in the Budapest, only gonna happen with extreme neglect by one's opponent.

The early e5 push does change things about, but there are lots of other, simpler ways to do that, from a King's Indian formation to one of the early c6 and develop the QB plan.