| Sep-05-05 |
| azaris: 3...Bb4 is not often mentioned but seems to crop up regularly. I play 4. e3, but 4. Nf3 would seem to allow NID type positions. Both are quiet lines where White has a small positional edge but Black has no trouble throwing in c7-c5. So how about something more exciting? 4. a3!? Bxc3 5. bxc3 dxc4 6. e4 b5 7. Qg4 leaves Black with the option of Ne7 since he hasn't played Nf6 yet, but White has more space. I'm not sure how many people will snatch the pawn though. |
 |
Jun-23-06
 |
| refutor: i don't get what the advantage is of the noteboom (1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.nc3 c6 4.Nf3 dxc4) is to the normal slav...can someone educate me? |
|
Jun-23-06
 |
| KingG: <refutor> I don't play it myself, but i know a bit about it. Basically, in the Noteboom, Black is better prepared to try and hang on to the extra pawn, since he hasn't yet played ...Nf6. Eventually, White can get the pawn back, but it leads to a strange pawn structure, where Black has two connected passed pawns on the Q-side, but White has a huge pawn centre. So White will try and win in the middlegame and black tries to hang on until the endgame where his passed pawns will be a big advantage. The main line is:
1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 c6 4. Nf3 dxc4 5. e3 b5 6. a4 Bb4
7. Bd2 a5 8. axb5 Bxc3 9. Bxc3 cxb5 10. b3 Bb7 11. bxc4 b4 12. Bb2 Nf6 
click for larger view |
|
Jun-23-06
|
| refutor: what if 5.a4? it's just a bad slav where black's light squared bishop is inside the pawn chain...i'm just curious |
|
Jun-23-06
|
| KingG: <refutor> The difference is, in the Slav, Black doesn't have the quick ...Bb4, making it difficult for White to regain the pawn. In this variation, a4 doesn't prevent ...b5 like it does in the Slav, so after 5.a4 Bb4 6.e3 b5, we've transposed back into the line i gave above. |
|
Oct-12-06
 |
| jahhaj: Anyone have any experience with the move 7...Qe7 in the Noteboom variation? See Opening Explorer The idea is to support a pawn advance to b4 (something that normally takes two moves in the main line), so White's normal plan of b3 is prevented. It's not obvious at all to me how White should respond. |
|
| Oct-12-06 |
| soughzin: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c6 4.e3 and black has to transpose to the semi-slav Meran instead of playing the noteboom right? I guess that's one benefit of playing the Meran as white instead of the Botvinnik/Moscow to the semi slav, no noteboom and no backdoor Cambridge Springs defenses. |
|
Oct-12-06
 |
| MaxxLange: Anyone seen Kasparov's QGD dvd? Is it good? |
|
Oct-13-06
|
| jahhaj: <soughzin> You could play 4...f5 if the Stonewall Dutch is to your taste. Having played e3 White has commited to quite a passive line as well. |
|
| Oct-13-06 |
| soughzin: Yeah that's a good choice although I don't play the noteboom,I play against it so thanks for fueling my opponents!; ) |
|
Oct-16-06
|
| jahhaj: <soughzin> Should have figured that out, Sorry! Maybe you could play 4.e4 instead? |
|
| Oct-16-06 |
| RookFile: I once saw a game go 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 f5 4. e4 !? dxe4 5. f3 and thought that was an interesting idea. |
|
| Dec-18-06 |
| soughzin: Speaking of the noteboom... I'm looking for a teammate to my semi-slav as I don't really enjoy the Botvinnik or Moscow(guess I'm picky!) So it's this or the Cambridge. I like the unbalanced nature of the noteboom but I'm slightly weary of the goal of "holding on" until the endgame. But bascially I was wondering which is more dangerous,(and which black should concentrate more on) the mainlines or the marshall gambit? Also it'd be nice to know if there's any good books or sites on the noteboom.
Thanks! |
|
Dec-19-06
 |
| plang: The only book I am aware of is "Play the Noteboom" by Mark Van Der Werf and Teun Van Der Vorm (Cadogan 1996) It is certainly not a great book but it is OK. |
|
