http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/ Thu, 11 Mar 2010 23:44:05 +0000 MyBB http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-315.html Sat, 06 Mar 2010 16:34:46 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-315.html
didn't even wait for e3.

The obvious move is c4 or even Bg5. However I couldn't find anything in zukem so I played e3 to transpose into the sneaky covered in chapter 9.

my reason was that if i play c4 before he plays d5, he will play d6 and then i'm completely in new territory and don't want to have to learn a new line. So here is my question.

Is it better to play an inferior position that I know well or a better position that i don't know?

I vote for the former which is why i playe.d e3 and blocked in my Bishop. That way I could practice the chapter 9 material.

What are your opinions?
rj]]>
didn't even wait for e3.

The obvious move is c4 or even Bg5. However I couldn't find anything in zukem so I played e3 to transpose into the sneaky covered in chapter 9.

my reason was that if i play c4 before he plays d5, he will play d6 and then i'm completely in new territory and don't want to have to learn a new line. So here is my question.

Is it better to play an inferior position that I know well or a better position that i don't know?

I vote for the former which is why i playe.d e3 and blocked in my Bishop. That way I could practice the chapter 9 material.

What are your opinions?
rj]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-314.html Sat, 06 Mar 2010 06:48:22 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-314.html
Just a quick note to say "thank you" for your wonderful books and this
website.

I am just getting back into active play (recently retired) and purchased both of your books last week.

I truly enjoy your writing style and I wish more authors would follow your
example. I can't begin to tell you how many books I have on openings that are just a solid mass of variations with very little explaniations as
to why a certain line or move was played.

Again, thanks David.

Nick Omregcik
West Virginia]]>
Just a quick note to say "thank you" for your wonderful books and this
website.

I am just getting back into active play (recently retired) and purchased both of your books last week.

I truly enjoy your writing style and I wish more authors would follow your
example. I can't begin to tell you how many books I have on openings that are just a solid mass of variations with very little explaniations as
to why a certain line or move was played.

Again, thanks David.

Nick Omregcik
West Virginia]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-313.html Thu, 04 Mar 2010 04:19:27 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-313.html
First of all I thanks David for suggesting me to register to this forum and for all the information about the Colle-System.

As I told him, most of the time my plans of playing Colle-Zuckentort (Phoenix variation) is denied with the push of black pawn.

This is a recently game I played (today). I ask you some suggestions about. Is my "b3" plan right? Are there other plans? Was I too fast with "b3"?

[Event "GameKnot Blitz"]
[Site "http://gameknot.com/"]
[Date "2010.03.04"]
[Round "-"]
[White "riccardo80"]
[Black "stanefield"]
[Result "1-0"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 d5 4. Bd3 c5 5. c3 c4 6. Bc2 Bd7 7. Nbd2 b5 8.
b3 Nc6 9. bxc4 bxc4 10. O-O Be7 11. a4 Qa5 12. Bb2 Rb8 13. Qc1 O-O 14.
e4 dxe4 15. Nxe4 Nxe4 16. Bxe4 h6 17. Nd2 Qa6 18. Bf3 Na5 19. Be2 Rfc8
20. Ba3 Bxa3 21. Qxa3 Nb3 22. Nxb3 Rxb3 23. Qxb3 cxb3 24. Bxa6 Rxc3 25.
Rfb1 1-0


Thank you everybody.
Riccardo (ITA)]]>
First of all I thanks David for suggesting me to register to this forum and for all the information about the Colle-System.

As I told him, most of the time my plans of playing Colle-Zuckentort (Phoenix variation) is denied with the push of black pawn.

This is a recently game I played (today). I ask you some suggestions about. Is my "b3" plan right? Are there other plans? Was I too fast with "b3"?

[Event "GameKnot Blitz"]
[Site "http://gameknot.com/"]
[Date "2010.03.04"]
[Round "-"]
[White "riccardo80"]
[Black "stanefield"]
[Result "1-0"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 d5 4. Bd3 c5 5. c3 c4 6. Bc2 Bd7 7. Nbd2 b5 8.
b3 Nc6 9. bxc4 bxc4 10. O-O Be7 11. a4 Qa5 12. Bb2 Rb8 13. Qc1 O-O 14.
e4 dxe4 15. Nxe4 Nxe4 16. Bxe4 h6 17. Nd2 Qa6 18. Bf3 Na5 19. Be2 Rfc8
20. Ba3 Bxa3 21. Qxa3 Nb3 22. Nxb3 Rxb3 23. Qxb3 cxb3 24. Bxa6 Rxc3 25.
Rfb1 1-0


Thank you everybody.
Riccardo (ITA)]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-312.html Wed, 03 Mar 2010 16:02:35 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-312.html
http://www.chesscafe.com/hansen/hansen.htm

(above URL will expire, but the review will be available from chesscafe archives.)

Any reactions?]]>
http://www.chesscafe.com/hansen/hansen.htm

(above URL will expire, but the review will be available from chesscafe archives.)

Any reactions?]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-311.html Tue, 02 Mar 2010 23:59:47 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-311.html
So here was the move order at the beginning:

1. d4 d5
2. Nf3 Nc6

I basically went ahead with the normal CZ development plan...but I feel like I shouldve made a stronger move to exploit the fact that his c pawn was blocked by his Knight... 3. c4 perhaps?

Hope this isnt too trivial a question...]]>
So here was the move order at the beginning:

1. d4 d5
2. Nf3 Nc6

I basically went ahead with the normal CZ development plan...but I feel like I shouldve made a stronger move to exploit the fact that his c pawn was blocked by his Knight... 3. c4 perhaps?

Hope this isnt too trivial a question...]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-308.html Thu, 25 Feb 2010 07:19:55 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-308.html http://gameknot.com/mt.pl?id=43064
I managed to write Zuckertort instead of Zukertort ;-p

Oh well.. nice book Mr. Rudel! Is that you on the front cover? ]]> http://gameknot.com/mt.pl?id=43064
I managed to write Zuckertort instead of Zukertort ;-p

Oh well.. nice book Mr. Rudel! Is that you on the front cover? ]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-307.html Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:51:47 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-307.html
my final blunder didnt go unpunished.

[Event "www.ChessWorld.net Tournament number #139099"]
[Site "www.ChessWorld.net "]
[Date "2009.11.17"]
[Round "NA"]
[White "RookPawn"]
[Black "M.P.knight"]
[Result "0-1"]
[Board "6340108"]
[Termination "White resigned"]

1.d2d4 d7d5 2.Ng1f3 Ng8f6 3.e2e3 e7e6 4.Bf1d3 c7c5 5.b2b3 Nb8c6 6.O-O Bf8d6 7.Bc1b2 O-O 8.dxc5 Bd6xc5 9.a2a3 Qd8e7 10.b3b4

10... Bc5d6 Obviously moved to support e5 and to threaten the enticing fork on e4.

11.Nb1d2 e6e5

12.c2c4; 12.e5e4 is playable but I didn't like the look of his central pawns. 12.c4 is the best move. My continuation was a poor choice.

12... e4 Forking both Bishop and Knight.

13.cxd5?! Not the best continuation. 13.Bxf6! Qxf6 14.Bxe4 and now black has the choice between 14...dxe4 or Bxh2 chances being equal or slightly better for white.

13... exf3 14.dxc6 fxg2 15.Kg1xg2 bxc6 16.Nd2e4?? (16.Nc4 is best) Nf6xe4 17.Bd3xe4 Qe7xe4

{White resigned} 0-1




[Event "www.ChessWorld.net Tournament number #139099"]
[Site "www.ChessWorld.net "]
[Date "2010.2.14"]
[Round "NA"]
[White "RookPawn"]
[Black "Londa"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[Board "6340106"]
[Termination "Draw agreed"]

1.d2d4 d7d5 2.Ng1f3 Ng8f6 3.e2e3 e7e6 4.Bf1d3 c7c5 5.b2b3 Nb8c6 6.O-O Bf8d6 7.Bc1b2 O-O 8.dxc5 Bd6xc5 9.a2a3 Qd8e7 10.b3b4 Bc5b6 (10... Bd6 see previous game!)

11.Nb1d2 e6e5 12.b4b5 e5e4 (The Bishop/Knight fork again. This time it was a reaction to my attack on the Nc6 instead of my reaction to the fork in the last game.)

13.bxc6 bxc6 14.Bb2xf6 gxf6 (14...Qxf6 15.Nxe4 dxe4 16.Bxe4)

15.Bd3e2 exf3 16.Nd2xf3 Ra8b8 17.Nf3d4 Bb6c7 18.g2g3 Rb8b6 19.Be2d3 Qe7e5 20.c2c4 dxc4 21.Bd3xc4 Bc8h3 22.Rf1e1 Qe5e4 23.f2f3 Qe4e7 24.Qd1c2 c6c5 25.Nd4b3 Kg8h8 26.Ra1d1 Rf8g8 27.Rd1d2 f6f5 28. Kg1f2 h7h5 29. f3f4 h5h4 30. Re1g1 Rb6g6 31. Rd2d1 Rg6h6 32. Qc2c3 Kh8h7 33. Bc4e2 Bc7b6 34. Be2f3 Bh3g4 35. Bf3xg4 fxg4 36. Qc3c2 Kh7h8 37. Qc2c3 Kh8h7 {Draw agreed} 1/2-1/2]]>
my final blunder didnt go unpunished.

[Event "www.ChessWorld.net Tournament number #139099"]
[Site "www.ChessWorld.net "]
[Date "2009.11.17"]
[Round "NA"]
[White "RookPawn"]
[Black "M.P.knight"]
[Result "0-1"]
[Board "6340108"]
[Termination "White resigned"]

1.d2d4 d7d5 2.Ng1f3 Ng8f6 3.e2e3 e7e6 4.Bf1d3 c7c5 5.b2b3 Nb8c6 6.O-O Bf8d6 7.Bc1b2 O-O 8.dxc5 Bd6xc5 9.a2a3 Qd8e7 10.b3b4

10... Bc5d6 Obviously moved to support e5 and to threaten the enticing fork on e4.

11.Nb1d2 e6e5

12.c2c4; 12.e5e4 is playable but I didn't like the look of his central pawns. 12.c4 is the best move. My continuation was a poor choice.

12... e4 Forking both Bishop and Knight.

13.cxd5?! Not the best continuation. 13.Bxf6! Qxf6 14.Bxe4 and now black has the choice between 14...dxe4 or Bxh2 chances being equal or slightly better for white.

13... exf3 14.dxc6 fxg2 15.Kg1xg2 bxc6 16.Nd2e4?? (16.Nc4 is best) Nf6xe4 17.Bd3xe4 Qe7xe4

{White resigned} 0-1




[Event "www.ChessWorld.net Tournament number #139099"]
[Site "www.ChessWorld.net "]
[Date "2010.2.14"]
[Round "NA"]
[White "RookPawn"]
[Black "Londa"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[Board "6340106"]
[Termination "Draw agreed"]

1.d2d4 d7d5 2.Ng1f3 Ng8f6 3.e2e3 e7e6 4.Bf1d3 c7c5 5.b2b3 Nb8c6 6.O-O Bf8d6 7.Bc1b2 O-O 8.dxc5 Bd6xc5 9.a2a3 Qd8e7 10.b3b4 Bc5b6 (10... Bd6 see previous game!)

11.Nb1d2 e6e5 12.b4b5 e5e4 (The Bishop/Knight fork again. This time it was a reaction to my attack on the Nc6 instead of my reaction to the fork in the last game.)

13.bxc6 bxc6 14.Bb2xf6 gxf6 (14...Qxf6 15.Nxe4 dxe4 16.Bxe4)

15.Bd3e2 exf3 16.Nd2xf3 Ra8b8 17.Nf3d4 Bb6c7 18.g2g3 Rb8b6 19.Be2d3 Qe7e5 20.c2c4 dxc4 21.Bd3xc4 Bc8h3 22.Rf1e1 Qe5e4 23.f2f3 Qe4e7 24.Qd1c2 c6c5 25.Nd4b3 Kg8h8 26.Ra1d1 Rf8g8 27.Rd1d2 f6f5 28. Kg1f2 h7h5 29. f3f4 h5h4 30. Re1g1 Rb6g6 31. Rd2d1 Rg6h6 32. Qc2c3 Kh8h7 33. Bc4e2 Bc7b6 34. Be2f3 Bh3g4 35. Bf3xg4 fxg4 36. Qc3c2 Kh7h8 37. Qc2c3 Kh8h7 {Draw agreed} 1/2-1/2]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-303.html Sat, 13 Feb 2010 23:08:15 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-303.html I was wondering if it was any good?]]> I was wondering if it was any good?]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-300.html Sun, 07 Feb 2010 05:23:13 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-300.html [Site "SGA"]
[Date "2010.02.06"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Bannink"]
[Black "Boutens"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D05"]
[WhiteElo "2279"]
[BlackElo "2166"]
[PlyCount "65"]
[EventDate "2010.02.06"]

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. e3 e6 4. Bd3 Be7 5. b3 O-O 6. Bb2 Nbd7 7. Nbd2 b6 8. c4
Bb7 9. Rc1 Rc8 10. O-O Ne4 11. Qe2 Bd6 12. Ne5 Bxe5 13. dxe5 Nxd2 14. Qxd2 Nc5
15. Rfd1 Nxd3 16. Qxd3 dxc4 17. Qxc4 Qg5 18. e4 Rfd8 19. f4 Rxd1+ 20. Rxd1 Qxf4
21. Qxc7 Qe3+ 22. Kh1 Qe1+ 23. Rxe1 Rxc7 24. Re2 Rd7 25. Kg1 h6 26. Bc3 Rd3 27.
Bb4 a5 28. Bd6 b5 29. Kf2 a4 30. Re3 Rd4 31. Bc5 Rxe4 32. Rxe4 Bxe4 33. g3
1/2-1/2]]> [Site "SGA"]
[Date "2010.02.06"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Bannink"]
[Black "Boutens"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D05"]
[WhiteElo "2279"]
[BlackElo "2166"]
[PlyCount "65"]
[EventDate "2010.02.06"]

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. e3 e6 4. Bd3 Be7 5. b3 O-O 6. Bb2 Nbd7 7. Nbd2 b6 8. c4
Bb7 9. Rc1 Rc8 10. O-O Ne4 11. Qe2 Bd6 12. Ne5 Bxe5 13. dxe5 Nxd2 14. Qxd2 Nc5
15. Rfd1 Nxd3 16. Qxd3 dxc4 17. Qxc4 Qg5 18. e4 Rfd8 19. f4 Rxd1+ 20. Rxd1 Qxf4
21. Qxc7 Qe3+ 22. Kh1 Qe1+ 23. Rxe1 Rxc7 24. Re2 Rd7 25. Kg1 h6 26. Bc3 Rd3 27.
Bb4 a5 28. Bd6 b5 29. Kf2 a4 30. Re3 Rd4 31. Bc5 Rxe4 32. Rxe4 Bxe4 33. g3
1/2-1/2]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-298.html Wed, 03 Feb 2010 23:27:36 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-298.html I am new to this forum.
I from IT field. I am using internet and forums from last 3 years.
I love to play chess and watch movies.
I want to thank administrator for giving us the space for sharing our knowledge.]]> I am new to this forum.
I from IT field. I am using internet and forums from last 3 years.
I love to play chess and watch movies.
I want to thank administrator for giving us the space for sharing our knowledge.]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-297.html Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:51:46 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-297.html http://www.chesscafe.com/Reviews/books.htm]]> http://www.chesscafe.com/Reviews/books.htm]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-296.html Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:25:44 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-296.html
[Event "Wageningen 4- De Toren 5"]
[Site "Wageningen"]
[Date "2010.01.21"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Stallinga Hein"]
[Black "Matser-Niels"]
[ELO white: 1645]
[ELO Black: 1746]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D05"]

1.Nf3 c5 2. e3 e6 3. d4 d5 4. b3 Nc6 5. Bd3 cxd4 6. exd4 Nf6 7. Bb2 Bd6 8. Nbd2 O-O 9. a3 (time for 0-0) Re8 10. Ne5 Qb6 11. Ndf3 Ne4 12. Qe2 Qa5+ 13. Kf1 f5 14. Rg1 Bxe5 15. dxe5 Bd7 16. c4 Ne7 17. b4 Qc7 18. Rc1 Qd8 19. Nd4 Ng6 20. Nb3 Rc8 21. g3 Rf8 22. f4 b6 23. Kg2 Qe8 24. cxd5 exd5 25. Nd4 h5 26. Ba6 Rxc1 27. Rxc1 h4 28. Rc7 Ba4 29. Bb5 Bxb5 30. Qxb5 Nxf4+ 31. gxf4 Qg6+ 32. Kf3 ??(mate in five!) Qg1 33. Qe2 ? Qh1+ ? (g5) 34. Ke3 Qg1+ 35. Kd3 Nf2+ 36.Kc2 Ne4 37. e6 Re8 38. Nxf5 1-0]]>
[Event "Wageningen 4- De Toren 5"]
[Site "Wageningen"]
[Date "2010.01.21"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Stallinga Hein"]
[Black "Matser-Niels"]
[ELO white: 1645]
[ELO Black: 1746]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D05"]

1.Nf3 c5 2. e3 e6 3. d4 d5 4. b3 Nc6 5. Bd3 cxd4 6. exd4 Nf6 7. Bb2 Bd6 8. Nbd2 O-O 9. a3 (time for 0-0) Re8 10. Ne5 Qb6 11. Ndf3 Ne4 12. Qe2 Qa5+ 13. Kf1 f5 14. Rg1 Bxe5 15. dxe5 Bd7 16. c4 Ne7 17. b4 Qc7 18. Rc1 Qd8 19. Nd4 Ng6 20. Nb3 Rc8 21. g3 Rf8 22. f4 b6 23. Kg2 Qe8 24. cxd5 exd5 25. Nd4 h5 26. Ba6 Rxc1 27. Rxc1 h4 28. Rc7 Ba4 29. Bb5 Bxb5 30. Qxb5 Nxf4+ 31. gxf4 Qg6+ 32. Kf3 ??(mate in five!) Qg1 33. Qe2 ? Qh1+ ? (g5) 34. Ke3 Qg1+ 35. Kd3 Nf2+ 36.Kc2 Ne4 37. e6 Re8 38. Nxf5 1-0]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-295.html Wed, 27 Jan 2010 09:51:07 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-295.html
Hi,
I have recently been looking at some online resources that relate to the "Sneaky Dutch" [1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 f5].

Zuke 'Em redirects readers to Summerscale's Bg5 line in response to ..f5 (not possible in this line.)

The two main sources I found were mini-articles from Gary Lane (Opening Lanes, #s 56 & 94 - attached [attachment=28] [attachment=29]).

As an alternative to simply laying down and giving into Black with 4. c4 and a regular stonewall Dutch, he suggests/reviews the following:

4. Bd3 Nf6 5. c4 c6 6. 0-0 Bd6 7. Ne5 0-0 8. b3 Nbd7 9. f4
4. Bd3 Nf6 5. c4 c6 6. 0-0 Bd6 7. Ne5 0-0 8. b3 Qe7 9. Bb2

With the idea that playing b3 will allow extra support for e5 or even a reverse "Bishop Killing" line with Ba3 since the B/d6 is such an important 'Dutch' piece.

He also comments on the accelerated 4. Ne5:

4. Ne5 Nf6 5. Nd2 (with Ndf3 to follow)
4. Ne5 Nd7? 5. Qh5+

So my question really amounts to whether trying to stay C-Z'ish with Bd3 etc. is a good idea, or whether to accept that some other plan is required against an early ..f5 (that comes after e3).

Finally, has anyone had any quick wins with 4. Ne5...?]]>
Hi,
I have recently been looking at some online resources that relate to the "Sneaky Dutch" [1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 f5].

Zuke 'Em redirects readers to Summerscale's Bg5 line in response to ..f5 (not possible in this line.)

The two main sources I found were mini-articles from Gary Lane (Opening Lanes, #s 56 & 94 - attached [attachment=28] [attachment=29]).

As an alternative to simply laying down and giving into Black with 4. c4 and a regular stonewall Dutch, he suggests/reviews the following:

4. Bd3 Nf6 5. c4 c6 6. 0-0 Bd6 7. Ne5 0-0 8. b3 Nbd7 9. f4
4. Bd3 Nf6 5. c4 c6 6. 0-0 Bd6 7. Ne5 0-0 8. b3 Qe7 9. Bb2

With the idea that playing b3 will allow extra support for e5 or even a reverse "Bishop Killing" line with Ba3 since the B/d6 is such an important 'Dutch' piece.

He also comments on the accelerated 4. Ne5:

4. Ne5 Nf6 5. Nd2 (with Ndf3 to follow)
4. Ne5 Nd7? 5. Qh5+

So my question really amounts to whether trying to stay C-Z'ish with Bd3 etc. is a good idea, or whether to accept that some other plan is required against an early ..f5 (that comes after e3).

Finally, has anyone had any quick wins with 4. Ne5...?]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-294.html Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:36:58 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-294.html
I enjoy playing the C-Z as white - but I have a question about using the C-Z as black in response to 1.d4 2.c4 or 1.d4 2.Nf3:

What are the downside[s] to basically playing the C-Z a move down from the black side against QG/QP, and are there any move order subtleties that help in trying to achieve this as black?]]>
I enjoy playing the C-Z as white - but I have a question about using the C-Z as black in response to 1.d4 2.c4 or 1.d4 2.Nf3:

What are the downside[s] to basically playing the C-Z a move down from the black side against QG/QP, and are there any move order subtleties that help in trying to achieve this as black?]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-293.html Mon, 25 Jan 2010 02:49:57 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-293.html [Site "New Delhi (India)"]
[Date "2010.01.17"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Himanshu Sharma (IND)"]
[Black "Muminova Nafisa (UZB)"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D05"]
[WhiteElo "2457"]
[BlackElo "2347"]
[PlyCount "82"]
[EventDate "2010.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2010.01.16"]

1. Nf3 Nf6 2. d4 e6 3. e3 c5 4. Bd3 Nc6 5. O-O d5 6. b3 Bd6 7. Bb2 cxd4 8. exd4
Qc7 9. c4 dxc4 10. bxc4 O-O 11. Nc3 Be7 12. Rc1 $6 {Il y a beaucoup mieux} (12.
d5 $5 exd5 13. cxd5 Nb4 14. Nb5 Qa5 15. d6 Bd8 16. Bc4 Bd7 17. a4 Bf5 18. Ng5
a6 19. Bc3 Qb6 20. Bxb4 axb5 21. Bxb5 h6 22. Nf3) 12... Nb4 13. Be2 Bd7 14. a3
Na6 15. Ne5 Rad8 16. Nb5 Qb8 {Clair avantage blanc} 17. Qb3 (17. Qa4) 17... Bc6
18. a4 (18. Qg3 Be4 19. Qe3 h6) 18... Ne4 19. Qe3 Nd6 20. Bd3 Nb4 21. Bb1 Be8
22. Qh3 (22. f4 a5 23. Qh3 f5 24. Rfe1 Bf6 25. Qg3 Bc6) 22... h6 23. f4 a6 24.
Nc3 Qc8 25. Ne2 f6 26. Ng4 $4 (26. c5 {simplement} Ne4 27. Bxe4 fxe5 28. Qb3
Bc6 29. Bxc6 Nxc6 30. fxe5 Bg5 31. Rcd1 Qd7 32. Kh1) 26... f5 $4 (26... Nxc4
27. a5 Rd6 28. Qg3 h5 29. Ne3 Rc6 30. Nxc4 Rxc4 31. f5 Bf7 32. fxe6 Qxe6 33.
Nf4 Qg4 34. Ng6 Nc6 35. Qxg4 hxg4 36. Rxc4 Bxc4 37. Rc1 Bf7 38. Nxf8 Bxf8 39.
Bc3 g6 40. Bd3 Nb4 41. Bxb4 Bxb4 42. Rc8+ Kg7 43. Rc7 Bxa5 44. Rxb7 Kf8 45. Kf2
) 27. Ne5 Nc6 28. d5 Nxe5 29. fxe5 Nxc4 30. dxe6 Rd2 31. Bd4 b5 32. Rxf5 Qc6
33. Rxf8+ Bxf8 34. Qf5 g6 35. Qf2 Qd5 {les noirs ont au moins égalisé} 36. Rf1
$4 (36. Kh1) 36... Bb4 37. Ba7 $2 (37. axb5 Rxe2 38. Qxe2 Qxd4+ 39. Kh1 axb5
40. Ba2 Ne3 41. Qf2 Kh7 42. Rc1) 37... Qxe5 {La partie est finie} 38. Bd4 Qxe2
39. Qxe2 Rxe2 40. axb5 axb5 41. h4 Rxe6 0-1

[Event "It \"]
[Site "New Delhi (India)"]
[Date "2010.01.18"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Rahman Ziaur (BAN)"]
[Black "Priyadharshan K (IND)"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D05"]
[WhiteElo "2548"]
[BlackElo "2362"]
[PlyCount "61"]
[EventDate "2010.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2010.01.16"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 b6 4. Bd3 Bb7 5. O-O d5 6. b3 c5 7. Bb2 Nc6 8. Nbd2
Be7 9. Ne5 O-O 10. f4 Nb4 11. Be2 cxd4 12. exd4 Rc8 13. c3 Nc6 14. Bd3 Re8 15.
Qf3 Bf8 16. Rae1 g6 17. Qh3 Bg7 18. Ndf3 Nxe5 19. fxe5 Ne4 20. Bxe4 dxe4 21.
Nd2 Bxe5 22. Rxf7 Bg7 $4 {la partie est finie} (22... Kxf7) 23. Rxb7 Qd5 24.
Rxg7+ Kxg7 25. c4 Qf5 26. d5+ Kg8 27. Nxe4 Qxh3 28. gxh3 Re7 29. Ba3 Rec7 30.
dxe6 Kg7 31. Nd6 1-0

[Event "It (open)"]
[Site "Sevilla (Spain)"]
[Date "2010.01.15"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Munoz Martin Pablo (ESP)"]
[Black "Coimbra Margarida (POR)"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D05"]
[WhiteElo "2255"]
[BlackElo "2109"]
[PlyCount "37"]
[EventDate "2010.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2010.01.16"]

1. d4 d5 2. e3 Nf6 3. Bd3 e6 4. Nf3 c5 5. b3 Nc6 6. Bb2 Be7 7. a3 O-O 8. Nbd2
b6 9. Ne5 Bb7 10. Qf3 Qc7 11. O-O c4 12. bxc4 (12. Nxc6 Bd6 13. bxc4 Bxh2+ 14.
Kh1 Bxc6 15. cxd5 Bxd5 16. Qh3 Bd6 17. e4 Bf4 18. exd5 Bxd2 19. dxe6 Bf4 20.
Rae1 fxe6 21. c4 Rae8) 12... dxc4 13. Ndxc4 Nxd4 14. Qh3 Nf5 15. g4 Nd6 16.
Nxd6 Qxd6 17. Rad1 Qc5 $4 {donne la partie} 18. Nd7 Qc6 $4 (18... Ne4) 19.
Nxf6+ {mat en 2} 1-0]]> [Site "New Delhi (India)"]
[Date "2010.01.17"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Himanshu Sharma (IND)"]
[Black "Muminova Nafisa (UZB)"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D05"]
[WhiteElo "2457"]
[BlackElo "2347"]
[PlyCount "82"]
[EventDate "2010.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2010.01.16"]

1. Nf3 Nf6 2. d4 e6 3. e3 c5 4. Bd3 Nc6 5. O-O d5 6. b3 Bd6 7. Bb2 cxd4 8. exd4
Qc7 9. c4 dxc4 10. bxc4 O-O 11. Nc3 Be7 12. Rc1 $6 {Il y a beaucoup mieux} (12.
d5 $5 exd5 13. cxd5 Nb4 14. Nb5 Qa5 15. d6 Bd8 16. Bc4 Bd7 17. a4 Bf5 18. Ng5
a6 19. Bc3 Qb6 20. Bxb4 axb5 21. Bxb5 h6 22. Nf3) 12... Nb4 13. Be2 Bd7 14. a3
Na6 15. Ne5 Rad8 16. Nb5 Qb8 {Clair avantage blanc} 17. Qb3 (17. Qa4) 17... Bc6
18. a4 (18. Qg3 Be4 19. Qe3 h6) 18... Ne4 19. Qe3 Nd6 20. Bd3 Nb4 21. Bb1 Be8
22. Qh3 (22. f4 a5 23. Qh3 f5 24. Rfe1 Bf6 25. Qg3 Bc6) 22... h6 23. f4 a6 24.
Nc3 Qc8 25. Ne2 f6 26. Ng4 $4 (26. c5 {simplement} Ne4 27. Bxe4 fxe5 28. Qb3
Bc6 29. Bxc6 Nxc6 30. fxe5 Bg5 31. Rcd1 Qd7 32. Kh1) 26... f5 $4 (26... Nxc4
27. a5 Rd6 28. Qg3 h5 29. Ne3 Rc6 30. Nxc4 Rxc4 31. f5 Bf7 32. fxe6 Qxe6 33.
Nf4 Qg4 34. Ng6 Nc6 35. Qxg4 hxg4 36. Rxc4 Bxc4 37. Rc1 Bf7 38. Nxf8 Bxf8 39.
Bc3 g6 40. Bd3 Nb4 41. Bxb4 Bxb4 42. Rc8+ Kg7 43. Rc7 Bxa5 44. Rxb7 Kf8 45. Kf2
) 27. Ne5 Nc6 28. d5 Nxe5 29. fxe5 Nxc4 30. dxe6 Rd2 31. Bd4 b5 32. Rxf5 Qc6
33. Rxf8+ Bxf8 34. Qf5 g6 35. Qf2 Qd5 {les noirs ont au moins égalisé} 36. Rf1
$4 (36. Kh1) 36... Bb4 37. Ba7 $2 (37. axb5 Rxe2 38. Qxe2 Qxd4+ 39. Kh1 axb5
40. Ba2 Ne3 41. Qf2 Kh7 42. Rc1) 37... Qxe5 {La partie est finie} 38. Bd4 Qxe2
39. Qxe2 Rxe2 40. axb5 axb5 41. h4 Rxe6 0-1

[Event "It \"]
[Site "New Delhi (India)"]
[Date "2010.01.18"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Rahman Ziaur (BAN)"]
[Black "Priyadharshan K (IND)"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D05"]
[WhiteElo "2548"]
[BlackElo "2362"]
[PlyCount "61"]
[EventDate "2010.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2010.01.16"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 b6 4. Bd3 Bb7 5. O-O d5 6. b3 c5 7. Bb2 Nc6 8. Nbd2
Be7 9. Ne5 O-O 10. f4 Nb4 11. Be2 cxd4 12. exd4 Rc8 13. c3 Nc6 14. Bd3 Re8 15.
Qf3 Bf8 16. Rae1 g6 17. Qh3 Bg7 18. Ndf3 Nxe5 19. fxe5 Ne4 20. Bxe4 dxe4 21.
Nd2 Bxe5 22. Rxf7 Bg7 $4 {la partie est finie} (22... Kxf7) 23. Rxb7 Qd5 24.
Rxg7+ Kxg7 25. c4 Qf5 26. d5+ Kg8 27. Nxe4 Qxh3 28. gxh3 Re7 29. Ba3 Rec7 30.
dxe6 Kg7 31. Nd6 1-0

[Event "It (open)"]
[Site "Sevilla (Spain)"]
[Date "2010.01.15"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Munoz Martin Pablo (ESP)"]
[Black "Coimbra Margarida (POR)"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D05"]
[WhiteElo "2255"]
[BlackElo "2109"]
[PlyCount "37"]
[EventDate "2010.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2010.01.16"]

1. d4 d5 2. e3 Nf6 3. Bd3 e6 4. Nf3 c5 5. b3 Nc6 6. Bb2 Be7 7. a3 O-O 8. Nbd2
b6 9. Ne5 Bb7 10. Qf3 Qc7 11. O-O c4 12. bxc4 (12. Nxc6 Bd6 13. bxc4 Bxh2+ 14.
Kh1 Bxc6 15. cxd5 Bxd5 16. Qh3 Bd6 17. e4 Bf4 18. exd5 Bxd2 19. dxe6 Bf4 20.
Rae1 fxe6 21. c4 Rae8) 12... dxc4 13. Ndxc4 Nxd4 14. Qh3 Nf5 15. g4 Nd6 16.
Nxd6 Qxd6 17. Rad1 Qc5 $4 {donne la partie} 18. Nd7 Qc6 $4 (18... Ne4) 19.
Nxf6+ {mat en 2} 1-0]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-292.html Thu, 21 Jan 2010 04:10:48 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-292.html innocent question posed by a new user, Joe Feagin, may have led to a great way to get around what is possibly the most challenging line of the C-Z.

After the Phoenix Attack showed up, the most difficult lines in the C-Z (counting only ...d5/...e6 lines) were:

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 c5 5.b3 Nc6 6.0-0 Be7 7.Bb2

and then:

7...0-0 8.Nbd2

or

7...cxd4 8.exd4

It looks like the former (and perhaps the latter) may have been defused. When writing the Phoenix Attack edition of Zuke 'Em, I realized White could not play the Phoenix against a ...Be7 defense because dxc5 does not come with tempo against the Black Bishop and so Black can simply play ...Nfd7 and pick up the pawn that way:

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 c5 5.b3 Nc6 6.0-0 Be7 7.Bb2 0-0 8.dxc5 Nd7

But if White delays castling for two moves, we get:

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 c5 5.b3 Nc6 6.Bb2 Be7 7.dxc5, when 7...Nd7 would lead to 8.Bxg7 Rg8 9.Bc3 Rxg2, an interesting position that favors White I think.

Of course, delaying castling has its own issues, but some quick analysis suggests none of them are particularly problematic, though a couple could land you in trouble if you don't know how to react [I think they call that "most of chess" though]

Now, after 6.Bb2, Black could still play 6...cxd4 7.exd4 Be7, inviting that latter option...but perhaps even in this case White has some new ideas since things have not completely transposed yet.

This is definitely worth looking into!
Thanks Joe!]]> innocent question posed by a new user, Joe Feagin, may have led to a great way to get around what is possibly the most challenging line of the C-Z.

After the Phoenix Attack showed up, the most difficult lines in the C-Z (counting only ...d5/...e6 lines) were:

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 c5 5.b3 Nc6 6.0-0 Be7 7.Bb2

and then:

7...0-0 8.Nbd2

or

7...cxd4 8.exd4

It looks like the former (and perhaps the latter) may have been defused. When writing the Phoenix Attack edition of Zuke 'Em, I realized White could not play the Phoenix against a ...Be7 defense because dxc5 does not come with tempo against the Black Bishop and so Black can simply play ...Nfd7 and pick up the pawn that way:

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 c5 5.b3 Nc6 6.0-0 Be7 7.Bb2 0-0 8.dxc5 Nd7

But if White delays castling for two moves, we get:

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 c5 5.b3 Nc6 6.Bb2 Be7 7.dxc5, when 7...Nd7 would lead to 8.Bxg7 Rg8 9.Bc3 Rxg2, an interesting position that favors White I think.

Of course, delaying castling has its own issues, but some quick analysis suggests none of them are particularly problematic, though a couple could land you in trouble if you don't know how to react [I think they call that "most of chess" though]

Now, after 6.Bb2, Black could still play 6...cxd4 7.exd4 Be7, inviting that latter option...but perhaps even in this case White has some new ideas since things have not completely transposed yet.

This is definitely worth looking into!
Thanks Joe!]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-291.html Wed, 20 Jan 2010 19:55:27 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-291.html
Details are here.

Voting for the first round ends Jan. 25th. I was only aware of this because Terese Hatch [co-author of Dogs of War] had voted for Zuke 'Em as book of the year.]]>
Details are here.

Voting for the first round ends Jan. 25th. I was only aware of this because Terese Hatch [co-author of Dogs of War] had voted for Zuke 'Em as book of the year.]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-290.html Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:25:28 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-290.html
thanks, I am new hear. Love your book, Joe]]>
thanks, I am new hear. Love your book, Joe]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-289.html Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:25:53 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-289.html [Site "corr"]
[Date "1973.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Serebriansky, I."]
[Black "Van Gompel, Hugo"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D05"]
[Annotator "Ton van Bladel"]
[PlyCount "37"]
[SourceDate "2005.12.01"]

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. e3 e6 4. Bd3 c5 5. O-O Nc6 6. b3 Bd6 7. Bb2 O-O 8. Ne5
$2 {Van Bladel:?, sorry David!} 8... Qc7 9. f4 cxd4 10. exd4 Nb4 11. Nc3 Nxd3 12. Qxd3 a6 13.
Rf3 b5 14. Rh3 Bb7 (Refutation 14... Qe7 15. Ng4 g6 16. Nxf6+ Qxf6 17. Rf1 b4 18. Ne2 a5
19. g4 Ba6 20. Qd2 Rfc8 21. Rff3 Ra7 22. Ng3 Rac7 23. g5 Qe7 24. c3 Bb5 $19)
15. Ng4 Ne4 16. Nxe4 dxe4 17. Nf6+ gxf6 18. Qg3+ Kh8 19. Qh4 1-0]]> [Site "corr"]
[Date "1973.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Serebriansky, I."]
[Black "Van Gompel, Hugo"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D05"]
[Annotator "Ton van Bladel"]
[PlyCount "37"]
[SourceDate "2005.12.01"]

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. e3 e6 4. Bd3 c5 5. O-O Nc6 6. b3 Bd6 7. Bb2 O-O 8. Ne5
$2 {Van Bladel:?, sorry David!} 8... Qc7 9. f4 cxd4 10. exd4 Nb4 11. Nc3 Nxd3 12. Qxd3 a6 13.
Rf3 b5 14. Rh3 Bb7 (Refutation 14... Qe7 15. Ng4 g6 16. Nxf6+ Qxf6 17. Rf1 b4 18. Ne2 a5
19. g4 Ba6 20. Qd2 Rfc8 21. Rff3 Ra7 22. Ng3 Rac7 23. g5 Qe7 24. c3 Bb5 $19)
15. Ng4 Ne4 16. Nxe4 dxe4 17. Nf6+ gxf6 18. Qg3+ Kh8 19. Qh4 1-0]]> http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-288.html Tue, 19 Jan 2010 11:43:56 -0600 http://www.zuke-dukes.com/forum/thread-288.html
While I enjoyed reading Zuke Em, and the Colle-Zukertort seems like a fun opening to play, I have to wonder what the point is, if we never actually get to play it. And as I said, I see the Barry Attack even less, though I like the 150 Attack so much that I'd rather be playing that after g6, anyway, so no complaints there. I will say that I like the early Bg4 lines, which I've played more than the actual Zuke, but I didn't switch to 1. d4 to play the white side of the Dutch, Slav, and Queen's Indian all the time, which have made up a significant portion of my games since making the switch.

Bearing in mind that I'm rated 1744 USCF, playing opponents in the 1500-2000 range, am I just having a run of bad luck with my opponents' opening choices, or is it always like this?

--Fromper]]>
While I enjoyed reading Zuke Em, and the Colle-Zukertort seems like a fun opening to play, I have to wonder what the point is, if we never actually get to play it. And as I said, I see the Barry Attack even less, though I like the 150 Attack so much that I'd rather be playing that after g6, anyway, so no complaints there. I will say that I like the early Bg4 lines, which I've played more than the actual Zuke, but I didn't switch to 1. d4 to play the white side of the Dutch, Slav, and Queen's Indian all the time, which have made up a significant portion of my games since making the switch.

Bearing in mind that I'm rated 1744 USCF, playing opponents in the 1500-2000 range, am I just having a run of bad luck with my opponents' opening choices, or is it always like this?

--Fromper]]>