47 ( +1 | -1 ) 1.e4 c6 2.f4!?Does anybody know who this is called? I never saw f4 against Caro-Kaan until last Friday. I played and I think my postion wasn't bad until I made a big mistake. How to play against it with black? Here the game:
26 ( +1 | -1 ) f4habe ich jetzt auch n paar mal als Eröffnung versucht aber meistens hab ich mir damit schwere Probleme eingehandelt. Ich werde mir mal in Ruhe Dein Spiel anschauen, mal sehen, wie sich f4 im 2. Zug so macht.
24 ( +1 | -1 ) It's important.........to react before White can build up a strong pawn-mass. So I would have played 3...c5, temporarily preventing 4.d4. I know this looks like a loss of tempo after 1...c6, but the needs of the position should take priority.
115 ( +1 | -1 ) 2.f4?!Just some quick thoughts about 2.f4?! (mainly in Advance type of positions)
2.f4?! simply isnt good move. It seems it has some fans in internet blitz play - always go for an early f4 and hope for f5 -> opening an f-file & mating attack. IMO this is just a dream, but making Bc1 a sorry piece is reality, and so is weakening of kingside and a7-g1 diagonal...not to mention losing a tempo to "accomplish" all this. Black can even play radical g6-(h5) and thematic Nf5, locking kingside completely, partly thanks to an opponent who has played f4?! making it more difficult to exploit the weakening of dark squares on Black kingside (since Bc1 has no access to kingside, thanks to pawn in f4). Then he can play c5 and organize heavy positional pressure on queenside, aiming for his usual attack against d4...also for example Qb6 and he has more than good chances to take a7-g1 diagonal into his control - naturally f4?! means Black will benefit even more from this than usual.
My conclusion - 2.f4 isnt !? or even ?!
Its 2.f4? :)))
Other options such as 3.exd5 and 3.Nc3 simply lead to positions where it has been premature (and waste of time) to play 2.f4?
34 ( +1 | -1 ) 2.f4 !Saying that 2.f4 is not a good move based on theoretical grounds is the same as saying that 1. .. c6 is not a good move. Because it does nothing towards development and it robs the Knight from his best place. About the name of the variation, I only know 1.e4 c6 2.f4 d5 3.Nf3 which is the Reuter Gambit with very dynamical play.
24 ( +1 | -1 ) Don't think that......1. ...c6 is bad... some GM's plays it (Karpov). That's why I was surprised when my opponent play 2. f4??! I also thought it was bad, but, after all, I lost, so it can't be that bad, can it? But generally, I think peppe_l is right. :)
4 ( +1 | -1 ) keiserpaul is a devotee of unorthodox openings.
49 ( +1 | -1 ) hey gutschi!white got a good game out of 2.f4 at the olympiad
Just like you, I'm fond of playing Caro-Kann Defence (this is the reason why I looked into this forum thread). In my opinion, you played very well except for allowing the move f5! That is what make the defence weak. Whenever I play, I always keep in mind to keep the d5, e6, f7 pawns intact. Early disrupts of this chain always result in a disadvantage position because you get a weak e6 pawn. So to avoid this kind of disaster, I maybe continue on playing....
5. ... Nd7
and white always do want the Bishop exchange, right?
This time let the white do the honor.
6. ... h5 7. Bxf5 Nxf5 etc..
I hope these moves don't sound absurd. I maybe wrong, you know. =)
14 ( +1 | -1 ) year...that's not a bad idea... The knight would have a good place at f5 and if white plays g4 the king side will get really weak...
98 ( +1 | -1 ) i found a little analysis...from Correspondence IM Maurizio Tirabassi's book "Caro-Kann Defence : Advance Variation (B12-CK4" (this btw, is a fantastic book filled with original analysis...if anyone has a chance to pick up a book on their favorite opening by a correspondence player do it! it has analysis on sidelines that ECO and NCO don't even touch...from the back of the book, other books in the series include "King's Indian Defense Samisch Variation", "Caro-Kann Def. Knight Variation 4. ... Nf6", "SIcilian Defense Najdorf Variation 7. ... Qc7", "The Bird variation in the RUy Lopez", "Queen's Gambit Keres Variation", "Benoni Defense Taimanov vaariation", "The Goring Gambit in the Scottish Defence", "English Opening 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Bb4", "Sicilian Defense Najdorf Variation (B98-B99)", "Semi-Slav Defense Botvinnik Variation", "The Leningrad Var. in the Dutch Defense 7. ... Nc6", and "The Exchange Variation in the Ruy Lopez"
IM Tirabassi gives 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.f4?! with the following game