TL Chess Match 3

3.f3 or 3.Nc3? I think that activating our Knight might be a good idea considering he has stronger diagonal control.

I have no clue about Karo Cann, but let me share my thoughts : I dont like f3, because we`ll destroy our pawn structure in front of the king and dont think Nc3 is good move either.

Nc3, e5, and exd5. f3 seems a little adventurous, but maybe it's okay? Where are our resident theory experts?

If I recall both e5 and Nc3 are both very playable, with Nc3 being 'main line' and e5 being the advance version, and exd5 (the exchange variation, which intuitively seems bad). I do not know about the viability of f3. I just remember in highschool we played another highschool and in every tournament every single one of their players would play the Caro-Kann if we played e5, so we all were semi-forced to learn it.

Nc3/d2 are mainlines. e5 is an advanced variation. Often transposes to a french with white up a tempo but black with no french bishop. I like Nd2 because it sidesteps b5 lines.

I like the idea of playing the advance variation, maybe into the bayonet attack? (3.e5 Bf5 4. Nc3 e6 5.g4)

If you move f3 then you must move your knight after.

If 3. e5 ... c5 4. be3 cxd4 5.bxd4 nc6 6. Bb5 leaving an even position.

If 3. f3 dxe4 4. nc3 (... e5 5. dxe5 qxq nxd1) or g6 fianchettoing his bishop giving him a better position imo. ( I hate playing against fianchetto, messes up a lot of things.)

I like f3 still better than e5. e5 is playing a draw game anyway.

Vote f3

I'm not a big fan of 3. e5, considering it becomes similar to the french defense, but with black being able to free his weak light squared bishop before blockading the pawn structure with e6. IMO livelier play with Caro-Kann is 3. Nc3

Yeah we already commited our followup here.
4. Nxe4
I like our position after that.

to 7.Nf3

if he goes h6, nf3, otherwise, h5 and his bishop is trapped.

6. h4 h6
7. Nf3 Nd7 (or e6 or Nf6 maybe or something else? not sure)

Eventually if we can support h5 and force his bishop to h7, bringing our bishop to d3 for the trade seems like a decent plan.

if the purpose of this sequence leads to d3 trade, why not just 6. Bd3 and trade without committing to a pawn push so early on? my point is that the option of kingside castle is poor as a result of h4.

6. h4 commits us to the later h5, which leaves us with an awkwardly advanced pawn on h5, a target in the middle and end games. I prefer to follow my previous line, 6. Nf3 Nd7 7. Bd3 Bxd3 8. Qxd3, getting rid of the light squared bishops without weakening our pawn structure. 6. h4 does nothing but give us a weak h4 pawn. The advanced pawn may look aggressive, but it really does nothing, and will soon be attacked when black plays his knight to f6, tying down the g3 knight to the defense of the pawn.

Never push a pawn without looking at the consequences first. Pawn moves cannot be reversed, unlike piece moves. What results from the pawn push is a bishop trade. And a weak pawn. And a weaker kingside. What results from the above 6. Nf3 line, is a bishop trade, without a weak pawn or a weak kingside.

Black isn't forced to play 7...Bxd3 after 7.Bd3 in your line. The point of the h4 push is to force him to accept the bishop trade. He could play Ngf6 or e6 in preparation of a central knight.

If black declines the bishop trade, white is still ok. We just develop normally.

Even if black plays 7. ... e6 or 7. ... Nf6, white can still develop on normal lines without pushing the h pawn and compromising our pawn structure. We also maintain Bxg6 to mess up black's pawn structure if it benefits us. And a future Bxd3 is fine for us.

7. ... e6
8. Bf4 Nf6
9. 0-0

White is fine. We don't need the bishop trade to complete our development. The Bd3 move can exist merely to challenge black's light squared bishop. We can still play around it and maintain Bxg6 in the event that we want to take that route. The bishop trade on g6 could benefit black if he has not yet castled/has castled queenside. So maybe keeping the bishops on stops black from castling kingside. So we can prepare a queenside pawn storm.

8. ... Qa5+
9. c3

Likewise, Qa5+ doesn't do that much for black. After 9. ... Ngf6 10. Bxg6 hxg6 11. 0-0, we're doing fine against black, who must castle kingside or leave his king in the center.

7. ... Ngf6 basically transposes into the above lines as far as I can see. And we're doing fine, without a compromised pawn structure.

I just wanted to castle queenside one game.

Seriously though, I'm not sure that an advanced h-pawn in this position is as awkward as it seems. Granted, it's not like it would be doing much of anything stuck on h5 anyway. I wouldn't complain with 6. Nf3 at all though if that's what's decided, as it seems like the more practical choice.

Then vote for it! We're being flooded by h4s here. (We can still castle queenside after Nf3 too )

Seriously I dont get why people are feeling the need to justify opening theory so much. Given that we didnt go for a sideline and we're in the Capablanca, it only makes sense to play the best moves.

Now as more of a positional player I dont like the look of h4 (although I never play the caro), even though statistically it might be OK. Nf3 is the logical developing move here which doesnt create any weaknesses.

Did you forget about the Rook on h1? I've never seen the pawn on h5 become a positional liability because White's pieces are all heavily active in the middle of the board in the Caro Kann. The h4 move followed by h5, then supported by g4 provides a solid kingside threat. You're also forgetting how hard that pawn is to attack. It's near impossible to attack with a queen or rook, and Black's Knight is the only real piece that can contribute to the attack. White constantly threatens ripping open the kingside with a pawn push, which is our one major threat in the Caro Kann against Black. I'll stick by h4.

anything else is uncivilized

So Nf3 if we stick to the opening h4 if we want to prepare for the Caro... Honestly I am leaning towards sticking with Nf3 even thou h4 might be our best shot if the game develops how we want.

No, I did not forget the h1 rook. I plan to castle kingside. Even if we were to castle queenside, the rook is not going to want to sit on h1 playing babysitter to the h5 pawn.

My plan is to castle kingside, play the Bishop to d3 in order to challenge black's bishop, and maybe trade on g6, forcing black's king to go queenside or to stay in the center. Then a queenside pawn storm will be good for us.

If we were to play h4/g4, then we'd pretty much be forced to castle queenside. All our pieces will be on the kingside, and black will simply castle queenside to safety and maybe build up a queenside attack. When black castles queenside, h5 looks pretty ridiculous. And will be an endgame vulnerability, even if it can't be assaulted immediately.

For example,

6. h4 h6
7. Nf3 Nd7
8. h5 Bh7
9. Bd3 Bxd3
10. Qxd3 e6
11. Bf4 Qa5+
12. Bd2 Qc7
13. 0-0-0 Ngf6

What does white have here? Not much, imo. Black is poised to castle queenside, where he will be safe. The kingside then can be g4 can support the h6 pawn, but sadly, the f6 knight eyes g4. How does the h1 rook do anything? Its not attacking much from h1, and its only defending the lowly h5 pawn. And once black plays Bd6, he can chop off our g3 knight, leaving the kingside awkward to defend. And leave us with kingside vulnerabilities. The caro is known for giving black a superior pawn structure to white's, especially for an endgame. In the h4 main line that is. We can avoid that by Nf3.

Unless you can provide a better alternative to the line above, Nf3 I think will be clearly better than h4. A few questions people might have is around 11. Bf4, where white may think it could stop Qa5+ by playing the immediate Bd2. This is possible. However the point of Bf4 is control the critical h2-b8 diagonal. Always a key diagonal in most caro games I have played, because usually both the queen and the dark squared bishop want to use it. As in my 6. Nf3 line, the white bishop wants to go to f4 to give black a hard time taking that diagonal. Bd2 would probably transpose into the same lines as Bf4, except with both black and wasting a move. Why not 12. c3 you say? Well, that makes it awkward for queenside castling, when the black queen can stay on a5 and give us trouble. Plus, the a5 square eyes that weak h5 pawn...

So the question for all you h4 people is, do you plan on castling queenside or kingside?

My 2 cents:

Nf3 is fine if you like positional play and end games but h4 applies pressure and will help develop into an eventual king side attack. However, IMO the liability of the h4 is not as great as you think.
Finally, Incongnito isn't the Bf4-Bd2 line you are thinking of redundant (wait just read the comment at the bottom n/m)... Lastly even if it plays out as above (in the line you mention), which it may or may not, we are much better developed and can create threats in the center or on the kingside.

As for your plan of Nf3 into queen side pawn storm... I am not sure that is as easy or as viable as you think...

The pressure applied from h4 is not as great as you think. Where does the h pawn go after h5? It has no targets to attack. What does the h5 pawn stop? It controls g6. But black really has no interest in putting a piece/pawn on g6. So the h4 pawn doesn't really put that much pressure on black.

Could you give an example of how we have better piece development after 6. h4? As far as I can see, we have the same amount of piece development in both the h4 and the Nf3 lines. The h4 push just means both white and black waste a couple moves pushing pawns/moving bishops redundantly. We end up with the same development in the 6. h4 line and the 6. Nf3 lines. Except that in the 6. Nf3 line, we can keep our bishop on f4 instead of retreating it back to d2 after Qa5+. This is because we don't need to castle queenside in the near future, so c3 does just fine. And I would argue that the bishop is better developed on f4 than on d2. Meaning that 6. Nf3 would lead to much better development which we can use to create threats.

Queenside pawn storm may not be as easy as I think, but its certainly easier than a kingside pawn storm. We would have to wait to see where black castles before making a queenside pawn storm, but a kingside pawn storm certainly isnt very viable. Unless we protect the g4 square somehow.

Lets see, kingside attack. Well, we can't really move our knights to f5 or g5, and the h5 square is occupied by our h5 pawn. e5 is also not viable since black will have that critical diagonal I was talking about. So we won't really be able to use knights in our kingside attack. Our dark square bishop would be useless for a kingside attack. f4 g5 and h6 are all guarded by black. The pawn, like I said before, is doing little else but to control the g6 square. Which is useless to white at the moment. The rooks can't really do anything on the kingside besides support a g2-g4 pawn push. The queen has no good squares to penetrate. There are no obvious weaknesses in black's kingside. We have no attack.

I'll go on from my previous line in my last post:

14. Kb1 Bd6
15. Ne4 Nxe4
16. Qxe4 Nf6
17. Qh4 0-0-0

We could move the queen to e2, but it doesn't really do much there. On h4 it at least prepares for g4. Where do we go after here? The immediate g4 doesn't work, because of 18. ... Bf4. The resulting trade leaves black in control of the center, while the kingside attack has gotten nowhere. 18. g3 c5 gets us nowhere either. Black has threats of his own in the center. 18. c4 b6. The kingside attack is dead.

Therefore, the 6. h4 line forces white into a central attack. On move 15, we could try 15. Ne2, trying to avoid trades. Black would probably then simply castle kingside and he's safe. 16. c4 pushing for a central break. 16. ... c5 and black can counter our large center. Black's pieces are already near the center anyway, so we can't really get that far there either.

Obviously if I plan to go h4 I won't castle kingside that's just silly. My plan is to cramp the black kingside with pawns. H5 contributes to this strategy by binding black's kinside pawns. If we could get a pan on e5 with a knight exchange on e5, all the better. If there's one weakness that I have seen in the Caro Kann when played at the professional level, it's that black is never able to comfortably castle in either direction if h4 is played. Either white gets a relatively safe king or black has a threat against his king.

Anyway, the only time that I feel h4 becomes a liability is when black is able to get his king QUEEN (lol) into the center, which if white plays correctly, he can prevent to some degree.

I don't like h4 immediately because the pawn attack is easily avoidable with h6/f6 and that bishop's in a pretty trapped spot as it is.

I've seen plenty of games when 0-0-0 has been fine for black. Usually when white also castles queenside. I've seen less 0-0 by black, but it is definitely playable. White can't get past black's solid kingside pawn structure without some sort of piece sacrifice. The pawns may cramp black on the kingside, but black really wants to play on the queenside or in the center. The advanced pawns shouldn't scare black unless white is confident with a piece sacrifice.

Black is perfectly capable of castling either way in the Caro. I've seen it many times. I've also seen black win when he doesn't castle. I don't see any evidence that points to h4 hindering black from castling. I also don't see any reason why black is forced to castle, Caro Kann games are semi-closed, so the king is actually quite safe in the center.

The other time when h4 becomes a liability is in the endgame. Which is what the caro-kann is all about. And I don't think white can really stop getting into an endgame unless he is really sharp or black makes a blunder. Which, sadly, I think is not the case in this game.

Recently though, I saw games played where h5 never became a liability. It actually become the star of the show so to speak. It gives White a clear space advantage on the king side, and it also divides Black's attention between the king side and queen side. I'm specifically looking at games played in Gibraltar this year, which have most certainly shown the viability of h4 and the Classical variation of the Caro Kann.

Could I have some links to some of these games? I'm curious.

You'll find a lot of them for free on chessgames.com. Here are some, both wins and losses. I didn't find any recent Nf3 games, but there's probably some in there that I didn't catch.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?page=76&eco=B18

There are a lot of Caro Kann classical games. The ones played at Gibraltar are mostly h4 variations. The ones played earlier are mostly Nf3s. I think both are playable, it's just the modern style prefers h4.

mdb Inc isn't bashing anyone he is just saying why he thinks h4 is not as good a s Nf3. You kind of have to do what he's doing if you are tying to convince people to play your move.

I played out Inc's lines and they look pretty good.

Malathion could you please explain yourself a little bit more, this goes for everyone else that is not voting for h4 based on preference but that actually believe Nf3 is inferior. Some of us are not so good at chess and maybe getting more arguments for the move would help us.

+ Show Spoiler +

Why is h4 so much better versus Caro? :S

and just for the record the fact that you suggested h4 (the classical mainline) scares me. Makes me feel that you have some serious tricks up your sleeve.

Spoiler the whole thing? Anyway yes, jfazz does have something prepared against the 6. h4 line. Read the last chess game to know what it is.

Would you have a link to an explanation of why h4 is the best response? Do we actually want an early trade down of minor pieces? From the looks of those games that you linked, it seems like black has tried to play an aggressive game, which I think has led to his demise. In my point of view, black should play the caro by looking to trade down when possible into a favorable endgame. Black's chances lie in the endgame in the caro. Yes, black can pull off some decent middle game threats (with 0-0-0), but that also allows white chances. Black is already better in an endgame, so I think there is no harm in him trading down. We know jfazz is a positional player, unlike lightman, so I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a tradedown.

That's exactly what I've been trying to find since quite a while. Your post finally pushed me to look for it again, and I inferred the answer from this:

http://www.ericschiller.com/pdf/Caro-Kann Basics.pdf

Down at page 18, with 3 games as an example. I haven't played through the example games myself, but I think the document clearly dictates our goals as White in this game (though I think a draw is far more likely for obvious reasons).

1. As black I would castle queenside in the 6. h4 caro if I wanted to play for an endgame.
2. Kingside attack sounds nice. If black castles kingside. I did mention that a piece sacrifice is probably in order for this to happen though, and sure enough, this game illustrates that point.

Game 1. First off, it does use the 6. h4 line, but does not follow up with the bishop trade. I'd probably categorize this opening more with the 6. Nf3 lines, as the light squared bishops do not come off the board. This game doesn't say anything about the 6. h4 mainline.

Game 2. Ah a 6. h4 mainline. Looks nice for white, since for some reason Black seems to be undeveloped. How did that ever happen? Anyway, sure, the advanced h5 pawn has a good effect. Unfortunately I don't know how we can realistically entice black into this kind of position.

Game 3. Exploiting the light squares with pins. Interesting. I noticed a few of these ideas in the other games you linked. The idea can be used with the Nf3 lines I think though. Although yes, it would require a light square bishop exchange, which is facilitated through the h4 line.

Game 4. Not really utilizing the advanced h4 pawn.

Games 1 + 4 are the only ones which seem to me that black is playing ok. In games 2 + 3 black seems undeveloped and without a plan. So I'm going to discard those games because I don't think those types of positions will arise in our game.

Games 1 + 4 feature ultra-aggressive plays from white, where black also allows white to play aggressively in return for some counterattacking chances for black. All the games feature 0-0 from black, or the king is left in the center. Games 3 and 4 just seem like terrible play from black, who for some reason plays the rook to g8. These games show specific situations which I doubt will occur in our game. I think 0-0-0 is more likely, along with a slow positional maneuvering game, as opposed to a sharp tactical game.

I can easily see black with 0-0-0, Qc7, Bd6, Nd7, Re8, Nf6, leaving us with little to attack on the kingside.

So when we play 6. h4, we better find some ways to force an offensive tactical game. But that requires us to force black to castle queenside. Which we can't really do, unless you have some suggestions.

Your win percentages are wrong/don't count draws.

Personally would not have minded 6. f4, e6 or some slightly odder variation. As Incognito said, having played 6. h4, we can pretty much fast-forward to move 10. Qxd3, where black has a choice between e6, Ngf6 or Qc7.

Sample games, if you care to browse:

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?page=44&eco=B19&node=553257&eresult=

PS: I know I am not voting, so if I am aggravating with the posts let me know and I'll watch silently!

Im using the 3.5mil games statistic updated up to 31-12-09 that comes with aquarium; I consider these pretty trustworthy

No popular opening can have a win percentage over 50%. Black would never play it if it were that bad! As I said before, this percentage excludes draws.

Maybe he is taking the white win % + (1/2)raw percentage?

e6 bd3 bxd3 qxd3 nf6 nf3 bd6 bd2 nd7 0-0-0 etc.

I have no intention to teach basic statistics. Given that there is such a large number of games even small imbalances are significant.

Consider these examples:

1) 35% W, 35% B, 30% D - The expected value for white here is 0.500

2) 11% W, 10%B 79% D - Expected value here for is 0.505

Therefore it is easy to conclude that given the large amount of games played by players such small edges are much more important than the huge draw percentages. Therefore when dealing with large sample sizes they are meaningless. Again I apologize for the digression and am sorry if non maths inclined people still find reasons to disagree. Lets put this to rest.

Anyway I agree with citizen, a quick update of the main line will be cool so we can get into the fun bit.

Followed by Queen-side castle I assume?

11. Bf4 Qa5+
12. Bd2 (c3 makes 0-0-0 awkward) Qc7
13. 0-0-0 Ngf6

So why not just skip Bf4 and play Bd2 then?

If 11. Bd2 black doesn't have to play Qc7. He can do something like Bd6 or Ngf6.

I don't understand that move at all.

11.Bf4 Qa5+
12. Nd2 Ngf6
13. 0-0-0? Nd5 I don't know what you're plan is but it doesn't look great really.

If you do that you've lost your bishop position anyway and your Queen's side castle looks very weak.
You can't be giving your opponent free tempo at this stage of the game.

c4 and then 0-0-0 is the idea i believe? I think this is a better move order than having 11. Bf4 since black can force a transposition via queen check.

12. ... Qc7
13. 0-0-0

Is 12. Qd2 playable? I'm thinking either
...12. Qxd2 13. Bxd2 or
...12. Qb6 13. 0-0-0
Is there something I'm missing?

It's playable but anti-positional since h5 is centered around gaining space for midgame advantage. There's no reason to enter an endgame here since we are slightly better in the middlegame due to a space advantage, but the h5 pawn becomes a liability in an endgame

What I see him going for is the undefended pawn on f2, and if the knight gets there, he's attacking the two rooks and the queen.
To below: I guess I don't have to worry about that move for this turn, seeing that he'd have to get his knight in a bad spot, and then maybe play Rhf1; I suppose Qe2 would work too but I was thinking about getting the queen on c3 afterwards and maybe push the d-pawn forward to pin both black pawns to the king and queen.

There are much better ways to defend this pawn. After Ng4?! a simple Qe2 leaves the queen better positioned and the knight awkwardly out of place. Don't worry too much about one-move threats to the point that you play passive moves like this.

The plan is 14. Ne4 O-O-O 15. g3, threatening Bf4 later on, and preventing infiltration in some lines where we do c4-Bc3

I think we should consider Qe2. 14. Qe2 practically forces 0-0-0 because otherwise 15. Nf5. So 14. ... 0-0-0 15. Ne5.

Then either 15. ... Nxe5, or 15. ... Nb6.

15. ... Nxe5 is good for us, because we simply play 16. dxe5 Nd5 and we have more space.

15. ... Nb6 16. Ba5 and we also seem to be good.

If we're planning to attack, we better do so now. We should put a knight on e5 and use that as a provocation for Black to attack us. From here, we can activate all of our pieces that are sitting on the d file and play aiming for center control.

They're probably being sheeple and are just following the line jfazz posted in the last game:



Lol.

Anyway Nxf6 doesnt seem to get us anywhere. Black just takes back with his knight, and if we play Ne5 immediately, c5 attacks the pinned pawn.

Anyway, I don't seem to see whatever "winning chances" that we were supposed to have by playing the h4 line. If someone could show it to me that would be great.

You expect White to have a winning advantage 15 moves into a line established by theory as a solid response to the Caro Kann? I doubt we'd be winning with the Nf3 line either. Anyway, we haven't done anything with h5 yet .

And lol brain fart with the Ne5. Scratch that move then, and we'll go Rh4 instead

As for g3, I see it as basically a waiting move unless I'm missing something.

The main function of g3 is to threaten an immediate Bf4, which is very annoying. It also takes control of f4 which is useful in some lines where black puts a knight on d5, and anchors h4 for Rh4. tl;dr: Good move all around that accomplishes several useful functions

I know I can't vote since I'm not on the team, but I've been watching all TL chess matches and since now people are complaining about lack of posts, I wanted to share my semi-noob opinion on this.

First of all, while g3 seems good, I don't think it's the best idea. It seems kinda forced to me, and you don't need to do it now. There's no way that black can get an "immediate" Bf4, and the knight is not on d5 yet, which means that this move is not necessary just yet. In case a knight goes to d5 or the bishop threatens f4, then you can make the g3 move.

If white plays g3, then black can play Kxe4 forcing Qxe4 (which is what I would do pretty much regardless of what white moves), and then perhaps place the bishop on d6 anyway, even if it doesn't threaten f4 immediately.

As for right now, I'd play a quiet move, such as Kb1, in order to make an attack on the queen side a bit harder to organize. Right now, a2 seems the only "weak" spot in white's position, even if it's not attacked by anything just yet. Also, it's somewhat "usual" to do this after a 0-0-0 in order to tuck in the king a bit better and make sure all three pawns have some extra coverage. This obviously depends on the placement of other pieces, but I think it would be safe to do it in this game.

This also forces black to take initiative for now, while white doesn't have to make any changes to the solid placement of the middle pieces.

If black goes Bd5 after this, in order to try Bf4, you can simply trade the Knight on e4 for it with check, forcing a Qd6 and creating a little "breeze" around black's king. After that, a rook on e1 (Rde1) would take control of the open file and white would be in a better position in my eyes.

A more interesting alternative after my idea of 15.Kb1 would also be Nc4 16.Nxc4 and then Bxc4, which makes for an interesting placement of the dark squares Bishop, but I don't have a lot of time to analyze this alternative too.

I hope this helps in a way. I bold-ed the main ideas to make it easier to read.

Played around a little bit with this line and it is pretty interesting. Might be what we need to take down jfazz. I think g3 is not the right move YET, after all we do have the initiative and that is way to pre-emptive for my taste specially versus Caro.

...and 15. Nc5 leads to Nxc5 which can't be re-captured since the pawn on d4 is pinned to the white Queen by the rook on d8 in this variation. If you mean 15. Nc3, then that can also go into Nc5 which threatens the white queen, and I don't really see an advantage of the white knight on c3. It looks better to me where it is right now

so... please go into more detail.

With this you're basically trading your e4 knight for his d7 knight (and white's was better placed, so it's a positional advantage for black). Not only that, but then the pawn on d4 will be pinned to the queen which means it's not really covering c5 and e5 until the white queen moves. Overall I think it slightly complicates white's position, even though the material stays even. Not too much though, but I don't see the advantage in doing that. Is there a line I'm missing?

It's generally a bad idea to volunteer trades when you have a space advantage, and I think that generalization holds here- with the good Ne4 traded for the redundant Nd7, the activity of the d8 rook after o-o-o is maximized. This move only improves black's position and not ours. Not a good use of our time.

This makes sense. Cramping the kingside even more if you want the game to go that way.