ive seen simaler openings but not this what is the purpose of the opening as im still trying to play the scotch and rut lopez stuff and playing againsy the scicillian which im having a crash course in on here
White Hippo
Sort:
kirkland wrote:
ive seen simaler openings but not this what is the purpose of the opening as im still trying to play the scotch and rut lopez stuff and playing againsy the scicillian which im having a crash course in on here
Well it may look horrible and passive but it can't just be dismissed as it's been played by many strong GMs as Black including Borris Spassky to name one (who managed to draw both his WC games against Petrosian using it).
The side playing it will generally look to bide their time and encourage the other to over-extend I think, and many consider it to be really very hard to break down. Also as Black the Hippo player will usually eventually look to strike out with either a c5 or e5 break and attack on the K-Side much like the King's-Indian, but having never faced it as Black before I'm not sure whether White's strategy would be exactly the same..
Although I think that it's highly un-ambitious to play it in every single game as Black and White, but that is what my opponent does so I have to try and deal with it.
In our 1st team game as White I put him under a lot of pressure by employing a Torre-type set-up to get him out of his comfort zone by forcing him to face a situation he wouldn't have faced very often and to make him actually have to think of new ways of developing, but I wasn't able to break it down even though I put him under some strong pressure:
So if there are any similar, solid, recommendable systems for playing against it as Black which may possibly force him into developing differently to a standard Hippo it would be appreciated.
Minja wrote:
I usually used so-called Botwinik-pawn set-up (c5-d6-e5), fianchetto on g7, Nge7, Nc6, and Be6-Qd7 battery, to exchange light squared bishop on h3. The point is that opening isn't bad for white, and you can't beat him from nothing. But, this is so passive set-up, and reactive one (he awaits for your mistake), so patience would be a good way to build-up a strong position...In fact, he give you time to made a strong positional preassure, and to use that for normal play...
Interesting recommendation, does anyone else endorse this as a good way of playing against it? I just don't want to jump into it before making absolutely sure it will work if I play it correctly..
Catalyst_Kh wrote:
Nothing will work for sure, it is game, just overplay him, find his weaknesses, play against the man, not against the board, there can be no better system. Pick one system you like and understand better, or even dont pick any system - just accomodate to his moves and try to collect a lot of positional advantage before the attack.
And i didnt understand why you agreed to the draw in your last example? You may block him very badly and march your king towards c7 pawn (after trading one of rooks) - good chances to win. Also your bishop is free to control or penetrate a4-e8, so you may play for win, why draw?
Well I try to actually play against mostly the board and not the man. I can't remember which old Master when asked who he is playing against tonight replied "tonight I'm playing against the Black pieces", Or something like that..
Well we both agreed that because of the opposite coloured Bishops one pawn won't be enough to give me much chance of gaining the full point, especially since c7 should be easily defended against as it's the opposite colour to my Bishop. According to Jeremy Silman in his book 'Silman's Complete Endgame Course' opposite coloured Bishops can be a useful weapon in an Endgame where there is lots of material still on the board and there is a certain point to focus on which can't be easily defended, but unfortunately c7 in this case could be easily defended and since he also said that most of the time just one pawn advantage will be insufficient to win in such an Endgame we called it a day.
Catalyst_Kh wrote:
His bishop cant protect c7 and d6 sumiltineously, so you may take at c7 with the rook, then take at d6 with the king and then have 3 passed pawns already advanced good enough, while your king and bishop already with them. There are other ways to play for win. With correct defence maybe and just maybe black can hold, but if you give up such good winning chances (you was risking nothing, you may agree to draw later, after your efforts) that means you are probably missing many other opportunities during the game, so be more attentive next time, dont limit your thinking with such patterns like this endgame pattern. In this case, even within the pattern and Silmans statement - two rooks and a lot of pawns are anough "lots" of material, plus your free attaking king and more active bishop with pawn majority, sum up all this - a lot of advantage.
I don't think my passed pawns would be already advanced enough to ensure an advantage, it would be a very risky strategy and something I wouldn't want to try at risk of blowing the whole point. And yes my pieces were more active than his but once I had marched my King out to the Q-Side and my Bishop to a4-e8 it would have achieved nothing, they'd just be going after something which isn't achievable. In fact I don't even think I had a one percent chance of victory really, where is he going to go wrong? Also you say I have a pawn majority, which may be techniqually true but in reality it's impossible to advance without great risk. If one of my doubled d-pawns were instead on the c-file then I would have some advantage. What "many other opportunities" did I miss during the game then? The only thing I can see is probably simplifying too soon into a drawn Endgame because of greed for the forced win of a pawn.
Catalyst_Kh wrote:
Maybe you are right about a draw, but you could try to win anyway, because before sacrificing the exchange there was no risk for you. If you are so sure that your opponent are making no mistakes, how can you hope to win ever with black? :) I didnt analize your game, i barely have time to make moves in my own games now, but there was a couple of interesting lines, you may inspect them by fritz or any other engine and get your answers.
You're right and maybe if I was playing against a 1200 rated player I would have, but against someone rated 2200 who makes lots of strategical errors but almost never blunders material for free it would have been entirely pointless. As i said before I would have carried on if there was a chance of the win but there was virtually none. Yeah, I plan to look over it in more detail with my coach when I get the chance, but for now I can't see much I could have done better.. Then again I feel that with him making 1 or 2 pretty dreadful strategical errors (12. Bxd5?, 18. b5?) there must have been ways of pushing home the advantage somehow..
I'd like to hear any suggestions for ways to counter this potentially tricky opening when playing as BLACK, preferably a response which won't leave me having to rely on attacking like a madman. I have a team game coming up and I know my opponent will play this as White..
For those of you who don't know this is the typical Hippo formation: