chess opening

Chess Opening

Grant and you will uncover!
Funny name, real matters
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
gutschi 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:

White: Höchtel Harald, 1703
Black: me, 1549

1.e4 c6
2.f4 d5
3.e5 Bf5
4.d4 e6
5.Nf3 Nd7
6.Bd3 Bxd3
7.Qxd3 Ne7
8.Nc3 c5
9.dxc5 Nc6
10.a3 Bxc5
11.b4 Be7
12.0-0 Nb6
13.f5 Nc4
14.fxe6 fxe6
15.Bf4 0-0
16.Bg3 Qb6+
17.Kh1 Rf5??
18.Nxd5! 1-0

Did I play right? Or was it complete bullshit? Please help and tell me! :)

der-nico 26 ( +1 | -1 )
f4 habe 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.

Dauert aber n wenig Zeit.

Bis dann Nico
More: Chess
refutor 11 ( +1 | -1 )
advance variation with f4 that's what it is by transposition

1.e4 c6 2.f4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.d4 e6 -> 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.f4 e6

i couldn't find any theory on it in my caro-kann books, NCO or ECO so i'm assuming it's no good ;)
gutschi 14 ( +1 | -1 )
Well... ... I didn't find anything in my Caro-Kann book, too. That's why I ask! It's rather strange, isn't it? So many pawn moves, that can't be good.
philaretus 24 ( +1 | -1 )
It's important.... 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.
peppe_l 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?
keiserpaul 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.
peppe_l 8 ( +1 | -1 )
Keiserpaul How about giving a move ! based on fact that its rare and NOT used by GMs? :>
gutschi 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. :)
jbmac 4 ( +1 | -1 )
keiserpaul is a devotee of unorthodox openings.
refutor 49 ( +1 | -1 )
hey gutschi! white got a good game out of 2.f4 at the olympiad

[Event "Olympiad"]
[Site "Bled SLO"]
[Date "2002.11.02"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Da Silva,J"]
[Black "Bukhalaf,E"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "2064"]
[BlackElo "2009"]
[EventDate "2002.10.26"]
[ECO "B12"]

1. e4 c6 2. f4 d5 3. e5 Bf5 4. Nf3 e6 5. d4 Nd7 6. Bd3 Ne7 7. O-O Qb6 8. b3
Bg4 9. c3 c5 10. Be3 Nf5 11. Bxf5 Bxf5 12. a4 Rc8 13. a5 Qd8 14. Nbd2 Be7
15. c4 dxc4 16. Nxc4 O-O 17. Qe1 Bd3 18. Rd1 Bxf1 19. Qxf1 Qc7 20. d5 exd5
21. Rxd5 Rfd8 22. Rd1 b5 23. axb6 Nxb6 24. Rxd8+ Rxd8 25. Nfd2 Nd5 26. Qf3
Nb6 27. f5 Nxc4 28. Nxc4 Qd7 29. Kf2 Qd3 30. f6 Qc2+ 31. Ke1 gxf6 32. exf6
Qc3+ 33. Kf2 Qxf6 34. Qxf6 Bxf6 35. Bxc5 Bd4+ 36. Bxd4 Rxd4 37. Ke3 Rd1 38.
h3 Kf8 39. Ke2 Rg1 40. Kf2 Rb1 41. Nd2 Rb2 42. Ke3 Ke7 43. g3 Ke6 44. Kd3
f5 45. Ke3 Kf6 46. Kd3 Ra2 47. Ke3 Ra1 48. Nf3 Rc1 49. Kd3 Rc8 50. Nh2 Rb8
51. Kc3 Rg8 52. Nf1 Ke5 53. Kd3 h5 54. Ke3 f4+ 55. Kf2 Rd8 56. Ke2 h4 57.
gxh4 Kf5 58. Nd2 Re8+ 59. Kf2 Re3 60. Nf3 Rxb3 61. Nd4+ 1-0
gutschi 16 ( +1 | -1 )
well... ... this game was certainly won for black if he doesn't play such a weak endgame... And the white position wasn't really better, in any time of the game
maykx 73 ( +1 | -1 )
Hi Guts!

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?

6. Bd3

This time let the white do the honor.

6. ... h5
7. Bxf5 Nxf5

I hope these moves don't sound absurd. I maybe wrong, you know. =)

gutschi 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...
refutor 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

4. ... e6 5.Nf3 Nh6 6.Be2 Qb6 7.O-O c5 8.c3 Nc6 9.Kh1 cxd4 10.Nxd4 Bc5 11.Nf5 Nf5 12.Bd3 g6 =+ from Schiffers-Jurevic, Kiev 1903

hope this helps
gutschi 2 ( +1 | -1 )
I don't understand ... Nh6... what should he do on h6??
atrifix 9 ( +1 | -1 )
Nh6 intends Nf5 (or merely to exercise control over f5). Bxh6 is illegal because of the f4-pawn.
gutschi 0 ( +1 | -1 )
well year... ...I see... not bad... :)