GameKnot: Chess related, another question: Nimzo-Larsen Attack

Chess related: another question: Nimzo-Larsen Attack

« Back to forum

From

Message

doctor_knight
27-Feb-09, 16:25

another question: Nimzo-Larsen Attack

Here is the line:

1. b3 e5
2. Bb2 Nc6
3. e3 d5
4. Bb5 Bd6
5. c4 Nf6
6. Nf3 e4
7. cxd5 a6
8. dxc6 axb5
9. Nd4 bxc6
10. Qc2 Bb7
11. Nxc6 Qd7
12. Nd4 c5

So my question is this: why doesn't White play Nxc6 on move 10. What if Black plays 10. ... c5. Is that a mistake? Another line mentioned in the book is 11. Nc3 and 12. Nxe4. Was the whole point just to keep White's options open? (the lines go on further. the first line continues 13. Ne2 b4 where White has trouble developing. The second line is this 11. Nc3 0-0 12. Nxe4 Nxe4 13. Qxe4 Re8 14. Qg4 Be5 15. b4 Ra4! or 14. Qf3 Ba3!? 15. Bxa3 Qxd4 16. 0-0 Qxd2)

Also, do you think 7. cxd5 is the best response?

(this is an alternate line given to 6. ... Qe7 from W. Wolf-Wrobel, Germany 1989 in the book: "Nimzo-Larsen Attack" by Byron Jacobs and Jonathan Tait)

jeroenn
28-Feb-09, 13:58

If you ask me, I don't really think it makes a whole lot of difference wether white plays Qc2 first and then Nxc6 or first Nxc6 and then Qc2. It transposes to the same position.

When black plays 10 ... c5 (after 10. Qc2), the white Knight simply takes on b5.

I think white should have played Ne5 on move seven, instead of the less fortunate line actually played.

tactical_abyss
06-Mar-09, 06:50

I don't have the time to analyze your first question,since i'm not setting up the pieces,but looking over my scoresheet from a game I played at the Philadelphia Open a while back,your question about 7.cxd5 appears to me to NOT be the best response for white.I played white against a 2500 rated player and the game is identical up to move #6 but the game proceeded as follows for move #7:

7.Ne5,Bxe5
8.Bxe5,0-0
9.Bxc6,bxc6
10.Nc3,Re8
11.Bxf6,Qxf6

At this point we both agreed to a draw,since the game appeared "equalized" only after move 11!The only footnotes I have on the game is that black has doubled pawns on #9 and a "disconnected" "a" pawn,which in both cases would be somewhat disadvantageous.So it appears to me,without setting up the pieces that 7.cxd5 would have eventually given black a superior game.

P.S. dr_knight:
Do you have the book "Play 1.b3" by llya Odessky?
The entire book is devoted to the Nimzo-Larsen Attack.Its 230 pages.
If you don't have that book and you like the Larsen that much then it is a "must" buy.
The USCF online lists it for around $28.00.

yusuf_prasojo
26-May-09, 00:18

10.Qc2!...

1) 10.Nxc6 and 10.Qc2 is equally good, but 10.Qc2 is better in that it opens possibilities for BL to make weak moves (compare with 10.Nxc6 that will almost certainly lead to 10...Qd7 11.Ne5 Qe6 12.f4 0-0).

10...c5 is one example of the weak move, because after 11.Nxb5! WT has enough compensation for BL's good position. BL's doubled pawns + WT's a-passed-pawn == BL's double bishop + open room for bishops manouver (and the disturbing e4 pawn).

In your line above, even 10...Bb7 is a weak move, because WT has a tempo to attack the disturbing e4 pawn with 11.Nc3! while at the same time developing his pieces. To defend the e4 pawn WT should do immediate 10...0-0! to provide e8 square for the queen to protect e4 and at the same time to attack WT's piece at c6.

7.Nd4...

7.cxd5 is not the best response, because WT should not release the tention prematurely while he has the chance to develop his piece and win an extra tempo. WT should release his knight from e4 pawn attack and strengthen the tension with 7.Nd4!

« Back to forum

chess online