This game refers back to the post below Chess Improvement: A Slow Slav and Wit; it provides some insights into the Slow Slav and provides an opportunity to work on calculation and evaluation. The positions that arise are difficult and require a consistently accurate assessment.
A blog devoted to chess and especially chess theory, correspondence chess, and USCF elections
Showing posts with label Slow Slav. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Slow Slav. Show all posts
Dec 27, 2009
Semi-Slav 101: Bg4 vs. the Slow Slav
In the Slow Slav White delays Nc3 and invites Black to play other than the usual Semi-Slav lines, principally by allowing development of the black light-squared bishop outside the pawn chain. Black can develop the bishop before playing e6 because there's no need to fear the exchange at d5 as when there's a knight at c3. (Note that Black also plays 4...a6 against the Slow Slav.) Black nevertheless will most often attempt to steer the game back into the more usual Meran or Qc2 lines with 4...e6, and now the only significant independent line involves White developing the knight to d2 instead of c3. So long as Black is familiar with the lines, there's not much reason for concern. In sum, the common moves against the Slow Slav are 4...e6, 4...Bf5, 4...Bg4, and 4...a6.
If Black, however, wants to try to take advantage of White's slow system, he will play 4...Bf5 or 4...Bg4. For an illustration as to why they're possible against the Slow Slav but not against the more usual Semi-Slav games, see, e.g., Walters-Poole in the second game below. Respecting the two bishop moves, Black chooses whether to interfere with White's development of the light-squared bishop to its usual d3 square (Bf5), or whether to harass the f3 knight and threaten to damage White's kingside (Bg4).
Black cannot play 4...Bf5 against mainline development.
If Black, however, wants to try to take advantage of White's slow system, he will play 4...Bf5 or 4...Bg4. For an illustration as to why they're possible against the Slow Slav but not against the more usual Semi-Slav games, see, e.g., Walters-Poole in the second game below. Respecting the two bishop moves, Black chooses whether to interfere with White's development of the light-squared bishop to its usual d3 square (Bf5), or whether to harass the f3 knight and threaten to damage White's kingside (Bg4).
Black cannot play 4...Bf5 against mainline development.
Dec 23, 2009
Chess Improvement: A Slow Slav and Wit

I'm sharing two positions here from the same game. The game is against a bot on the ICC. The rating of this bot ranges from about 1750 - 1950 in ICC Elo. I try to play at least one or two such games every week, as I just don't have many OTB experiences otherwise. You may ask why a bot, and it's a good question. I find that about 1 in several of my long ICC games gets interrupted by life, and the bots are far more forgiving than a human player when I run out of the room not to return. In any event, the first is a known position that arises out of the Slow Slav. The moves are: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3 Bf5 5.cxd5 cxd5 6.Qb3 Qc7 7.Nc3 e6 8.Bd2 Nc6 9.Bb5 Be7 10.Ne5 O-O 11.Rc1 [diagram] Stop now, and from Black's perspective (mine), take a look at the positions arising after 11...Nxe5. Calculate and evaluate the positions that arise. What do you think?
Did you play 11...Nxe5 12.Nxd5 Qxc1+ 13.Bxc1 Nxd5 14.dxe5 ? Now if you could choose, which side of the game would you take, and is it a close call? Stop now and take a look. Actually, this is very close to winning, if not winning, for Black. I'll circle back around in a few days to add some narrative analysis. If you care to, you can do the same in the meantime, and we can compare notes so to speak, then. And by the way, without silicon assistance, what's Black's next move after 14.dxe5?
The last position is from the end of the same game. I show it for entirely different reasons. It's White to move. Analyze the position.

Okay, so you've probably noted that it's lights out for White. I've managed to outplay the bot to this point, but not by so much as it might appear. As bots are apt to do, rather than resign, he sacs his queen to delay the inevitable. But the point I want to make here, is that at the time the bot made the queen sac, about 30 seconds after my last move, I was still analyzing White making luft by pushing the h pawn. I had not noticed that Rxg2 was mate, which almost assuredly means that I not included it in my analysis of the prior move, or the move before that, etc. I find this oversight perplexing to put it politely. What to do about such oversights? More later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)