 |
| I did not know my opponent played 2...a6, and I had nothing prepared |
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
All I could recall was that 3.d4!? was considered a mistake, and that White should play a line in which ...a6 would not prove useful, eg going into an Alapin setup with 3.c3.
I cannot recall where this advice came from, but in the end I rather went against it by playing 3.c4, intending to play a Maróczy Bind, even though ...a6 in the Maróczy is a common move as, among other things, it helps prepare the break ...b5.
Imagine my surprise when I discovered, after the game, 3.d4!? is easily the commonest continuation in ChessBase's 2026 Mega database (I also found that I had played 3.d4!? last year, albeit with the special intention of switching into a Morra Gambit).
So, was the advice in my mind simply wrong, or had I misremembered altogether? Maybe not, on both counts.
For starters, the top two recommendations of Stockfish18 and Dragon1 are 3.c4 and 3.c3, although the former engine comes to like 3.g3!? the more time it is given to consider the position.
And then there are the stats to consider. 3.c4 scores 56% in Mega26, 3.c3 scores 54% and even 3.g3!? scores 52%, whereas 3.d4!? turns in a miserable 40%.
The main line in Mega26, after 3.d4!?, runs 3...cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3, and now Black gets to play what is effectively an Accelerated Najdorf, ie 5...e5!?
 |
| Position after 5...e5!? |
*****
*****
*****
*****
The engines agree Black has already at least equalised, eg after the main move in Mega26, 6.Nf3, they reckon 6...Bb4!? starts to tip the balance in Black's favour.
So it seems the half-remembered advice I had at the back of my mind was sound after all. But it would have been nice if I had originally spent some time learning the reasons behind the advice, rather than just noting it.
LESSON: as usual in chess, knowing something is good, but knowing why it is good is much better.
No comments:
Post a Comment