Forums

Petroff or the Philidor

Sort:
chessterd5
Compadre_J wrote:

Just in case your wondering why 2…d6 is an error.

When White plays Grand Prix Attack, It is a very aggressive King side attack (Flank Attack).

Black best way to survive the attack is be counter attacking in the middle with the moves e6 + d5.

If you play d6, Your D pawn will have moved 2 times because you ideally want pawn on d5 in that position.

So the move d6 is an error because it gives white an extra move.

If you play d6 + e6 + d5, You have played 3 moves.

If you play e6 + d5, You have played only 2 moves.

Thank you. Point taken. But the extra move may not be as big of a hindrance as it seems. I have been playing c6-c5 in the Caro kann for years. Same idea different pawn. I would need to see some definite concrete lines to evaluate farther. The price of an extra move may actually be reasonable:

A) if it immediately removes white from their intended game into a much different style of game. And if they have no intimate understanding of the Gran Prix Attack theory because they thought that they were going to play a Kings Gambit. You of course would have studied it because you are the one with the plans to go there to begin with.

B) The trade off is now white is committed to playing a certain variation of the Sicilian. When if he wished to play a Sicilian by the proper move order could have had a much broader variation of Sicilian to choose from to begin with.

chessterd5
ThrillerFan wrote:
RalphHayward wrote:

Personally, Philidor. White has fewer choices of different plan, making it easier to learn and I don't have much time to devote to opening study. I know that's not a good objective reason for a preference, but in the world as-we-have-it one must cut one's suit to fit one's cloth. Black keeps White guessing about his broad intentions a little longer too; as in, "Is this going to be a classical Philidor or a Hanham/Lion or even a Mestel-style Philidor Gambit?".

You are sadly mistaken!

In fact, the Philidor can be completely avoided! What if I told you I could force you into a Saemisch Kings Indian or Saemisch-Style position against the old Indian? Yep! Even with the whole theory that 1...d6 is a better move order - try again! There are also many anti-philidor lines in that move order!

After 1.e4 e5, it is the same options for White to avoid the Philidor as it is to avoid the Petroff.

After 1.e4 d6, the following all avoid the Philidor:

2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e5 4.dxe5 dxe5 5.Qxd8+

2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nbd7 4.f4

2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nbd7 4.g4

And then there is my favorite:

2.d4 Nf6 3.f3! Where 3...g6 4.c4 Bg7 5.Nc3 is a Saemisch King's Indian and 3...e5 4.d5 can lead again to a saemisch kings indian or an old Indian setup, depending on what Black does with the Bishop.

Hello ThrillerFan, good information and yes the Philidor, the Old KID, and the KID are interrelated. They are sister openings in my opinion. One could make a repertoire out of the Philidor and the Kings Indian against 1.e4 and 1.d4.

Your 4 lines in the 1.e4, d6 move order do look good and correct. But just some thoughts upon further evaluation. I will answer in order

A) the line with Qxd8+. This is the Philidor end game line. Black can protect the pawn on e5 and once the king can move to e7 then black actually has the advantage in this position. You can look at any or every database and you will find almost no games played from this position above about the expert level. It reminds me of the KID end game line which is what allows black to play e5 in the KID to begin with.

B) the two lines with 3...,Nbd7, don't play Nbd7 play e5 with the intention of going into a exchange Philidor. White has to allow it or we reenter the endgame line in line one.

C) the line with 3.f3,... yes it does appear that it leads to a Saemisch Kings Indian. And it is probably in Black's best interest to go there.

chessterd5

I still think that what I am suggesting is less theory than playing the Petroff and everything that one must face with it.

We play

A) the exchange Philidor or the endgame line the majority of the time.

B) the kings Gambit Fischer defense or the Gran Prix Sicilian with or without any inclusion of g3 and Bg2 by white.

C) any of the systems involving Nc3 which should generally transpose into our original exchange Philidor anyway.

D) weirdness on White's part which we cannot control anyway

E) or potentially a Saemisch Kings Indian. But how many white players are wanting to go into a Saemisch if they start the game with 1.e4?

Compadre_J

I want to give an example:

It’s move 2!

If we want to play Philidor, White would have to play Knight f3. Than we can play d6 to get into our line.

The issue is White has several different moves they can play besides Nf3.

- f4 - Kings Gambit

- Bc4 - Bishop Opening

- Nc3 - Vienna

White has all these different moves they can play which we will have to prepare other lines to deal with the different moves.

These other lines are not terrible or anything.

They are just different which can be a factor.

Compadre_J
chessterd5 wrote:
Compadre_J wrote:

Just in case your wondering why 2…d6 is an error.

When White plays Grand Prix Attack, It is a very aggressive King side attack (Flank Attack).

Black best way to survive the attack is be counter attacking in the middle with the moves e6 + d5.

If you play d6, Your D pawn will have moved 2 times because you ideally want pawn on d5 in that position.

So the move d6 is an error because it gives white an extra move.

If you play d6 + e6 + d5, You have played 3 moves.

If you play e6 + d5, You have played only 2 moves.

Thank you. Point taken. But the extra move may not be as big of a hindrance as it seems. I have been playing c6-c5 in the Caro kann for years. Same idea different pawn. I would need to see some definite concrete lines to evaluate farther. The price of an extra move may actually be reasonable:

A) if it immediately removes white from their intended game into a much different style of game. And if they have no intimate understanding of the Gran Prix Attack theory because they thought that they were going to play a Kings Gambit. You of course would have studied it because you are the one with the plans to go there to begin with.

B) The trade off is now white is committed to playing a certain variation of the Sicilian. When if he wished to play a Sicilian by the proper move order could have had a much broader variation of Sicilian to choose from to begin with.

The below is a very nice game example:

The game has few errors, but look how natural the position looks.
Black gets in trouble by playing very normal moves.
RalphHayward

@ThrillerFan I hesitate to disagree with you on any level: I see that you are a much better player than I am now and a somewhat better player than I used to be. However, I suspect we might be at cross purposes to some extent. I will try to be more precise and I much appreciate your insights.

I wholly agree with everything you say about the 1...,d6 move order. It's not one which I've ever thought leads to an easy Opening Theory life.

I obviously wholly agree that after 1. e4, e5 it matters not one whit whether Black intends the Petroff or the Philidor should White play something other than 2. Nf3. The amount of theory the 1..., e5 player needs to learn against other White second moves is identical in either event.

But if one replies to 1. e4 with 1..., e5, then...

In the Petroff, one encounters what I at least believe to be fundamentally different White plans after 3. Nxe5 and 3. d4 and 3. Nc3 and even 3. Bc4 with the Boden-Kieseritsky Gambit. Much to assimilate with differing position 'geographies'.

In the Philidor, there are to my mind major and significant and radical differences between at least 3. d4 and 3. Bc4 but Black seems to me to have a better chance of setting the strategic agenda; at least after 3. d4.

I do not claim that the Philidor is Objectively Better than the Petroff (and the relative frequency with which they're played at Master level suggests I'd be singularly brave or foolish to make any such suggestion): merely that learning it functionally can be less demanding for a time-poor amateur.

ibrust

I actually don't dislike this line, you have to play very precisely to maintain advantage as white... this is how I'd play it if I did play it -

Compadre_J
RalphHayward wrote:

@ThrillerFan I hesitate to disagree with you on any level: I see that you are a much better player than I am now and a somewhat better player than I used to be. However, I suspect we might be at cross purposes to some extent. I will try to be more precise and I much appreciate your insights.

I wholly agree with everything you say about the 1...,d6 move order. It's not one which I've ever thought leads to an easy Opening Theory life.

I obviously wholly agree that after 1. e4, e5 it matters not one whit whether Black intends the Petroff or the Philidor should White play something other than 2. Nf3. The amount of theory the 1..., e5 player needs to learn against other White second moves is identical in either event.

But if one replies to 1. e4 with 1..., e5, then...

In the Petroff, one encounters what I at least believe to be fundamentally different White plans after 3. Nxe5 and 3. d4 and 3. Nc3 and even 3. Bc4 with the Boden-Kieseritsky Gambit. Much to assimilate with differing position 'geographies'.

In the Philidor, there are to my mind major and significant and radical differences between at least 3. d4 and 3. Bc4 but Black seems to me to have a better chance of setting the strategic agenda; at least after 3. d4.

I do not claim that the Philidor is Objectively Better than the Petroff (and the relative frequency with which they're played at Master level suggests I'd be singularly brave or foolish to make any such suggestion): merely that learning it functionally can be less demanding for a time-poor amateur.

Everything you said was fine, Ralph.

You have Chess Wisdom beyond your level.

The Philidor as a whole does have less theory vs. a lot of other chess openings.

So your not in the wrong for saying the above.

————————————

I think Thrillerfan is being a little tricky/devious that’s all.

Thrillerfan is doing a scare tactic.

It’s good Thrillerfan is bringing this information to the forum so people can be aware of the transpositional aspects of the d6 Philidor line, but at same time it is sort of bad for Thrillerfan to say your wrong Ralph based on the fear of a transposition.

————————————

Most players who willingly play the Philidor with the 1…d6 move order are not afraid of the KID.

Most players who play the d6 Philidor welcome any KID transpositions because the KID is what they plan to play against 1.d4.

————————————

If we go back to basics, Every chess player is told to start with 3 Openings.

1 - White Opening

2 - Black Opening vs. 1.e4

3 - Black Opening vs. 1.d4

————————————

If a player plans to play Philidor + KID, The Philidor with 1…d6 move order is perfect for them.

They have nothing to fear.

If a player plans to play Philidor + Lets say Queen Gambit Decline, Than the player should consider playing the Philidor with 1…e5 (Classical move order) to avoid any unpleasant transpositional problems.

So yeah - I just wanted to say that your not really wrong Ralph.

Compadre_J
ibrust wrote:

I actually don't dislike this line, you have to play very precisely to maintain advantage as white... this is how I'd play it if I did play it -

Funny enough

Most strong players don’t like playing into that Queen-less line as White.

Black position is surprisingly strong even though they lose castling rights.

Very difficult line to crack.

———————

It’s crazy because most of the players I faced would play 3.Nf3.

Another shocking thing is I didn’t get a lot of players playing 3.d5.

I figured the positional players would love the idea of d5 to gain space, but nope.

ibrust

Everything leading up to the mainline philidor looks good to me, but there's just no continuation I've seen that appeals very much in the mainline position. exchange just seems like a straightforward position for white where you're simply worse.

I've considered maybe this nimzo line but I'm not convinced it's worth the effort when there are so many other things black can play instead, like the sicilian -

RalphHayward

Thankyou @Compadre_J. Your kind and supportive thoughts are sincerely appreciated. I used to be wayyy better than I am now: the theory is still there in my head but I can no longer put it into practice as well as was once the case. Which probably explains why I now talk a better game than I am currently capable of playing.

Doctor-Advanced-Pawns

love this forum

pcalugaru
HelloLocustMan wrote:

love this forum

Agreed... I just posed the simple question wondering people what thought about these defenses... And we got a dearth of knowledge (by people a lot more skilled and knowledgeable than most here)

Way better content than "I created a new opening called Rocket Man 1. a4! lol

Compadre_J

All the Philidor talks inspired me to play the Philidor for fun, yesterday.

I am a little rusty with the Philidor as you will soon find out. LOL

However, I had a great match + great games vs. a player.

I ended up losing 1 of the games, but I will show games.

——————————

I put my rating range to infinity so I could get quick game going.

I also made the game unrated just for fun.

I got matched up with a nice player named Gyouri.

Gyouri was very kind in chat and didn’t mind facing me even though we have rating mismatch.

1st Game - I was Black and a Philidor emerged!

I figured I would play the Classical Philidor move order for these games.

I like the Exchange variation of the Philidor because it is very speedy.

You develop the King Knight + King Bishop and your ready to castle.

I like castling fast so I can start attacking fast!

The only downside is my opponent surprised me here!

My Chess Theory lasted for about 5 moves. LOL

I don’t remember ever studying 6.Bd3?

What a strange move - I didn’t panic.

I kept my poker face going!

I decided to castle to give myself more time to think.

I wanted to castle any way so it wasn’t a huge impact move.

——————————

My next idea was to trap or fork his Bishop on d3.

It was a 3 move combo I had in mind.

c5 + Be6 + c4 - It seemed like good idea and so I decided to try it.

I did the above plan, but at the ended I decided to do change up.

My opponent saw what I was doing and moved his pieces away so the move c4 didn’t seem as great. This is why I ended up not playing it and playing Nc6 instead.

We both developed a little bit more.

———————————————

At this point, around move 11, I thought my position was better.

All my pieces went to 1 square - very normal squares.

‘When you look at my opponent Light Square Bishop, the Bishop started on d3. Than went to e2. Than went to b5. You can see my opponent doesn’t know where to put the Bishop at.

My opponent is fumbling around with his pieces because he doesn’t know the ideal squares they belong on. So I was really liking my position because I felt my pieces were not fumbling around. I was developing with a purpose and the squares I put my pieces on were well protected. My opponent couldn’t chase them away.

I looked at this position and I though about the move d5.

I thought my position was strong enough to be liberated.

Philidor is very similar to Sicilian.

D5 pawn break is a very staple move for both of these different openings.

If you can push thru d5, you can really start owning the game.

I was thinking of playing it and I chickened out!

I was thinking if I play d5.

My opponent would take my Knight on c6 with his Bishop. Than play his e pawn to e5.

I’m liberating my D pawn and my opponent would be liberating his E pawn.

Yeah, I chickened out.

I decided to defend my Knight with my Queen to avoid any pawn structure damage.

I literally walked straight into 2 different tactics.

After, the game the computer showed me I could of lost a pawn.

My opponent played a different move, but it took me some time to unravel my way out of that disaster.

In the end, my opponent lost on time.

He had me on ropes though.

It was a crazy interesting game.

A lot of evaluation shifts which makes Philidor fun

Compadre_J

After, I played 1st game, I won on time.

I did a rematch and my opponent accepted.

I don’t want to show the 2nd game because I was playing with White pieces.

I played a messed up Evans Gambit and barely managed to win.

——————————————

So at this point, I am 2-0 against my opponent named Gyouri.

Truthfully, I should be 0-2 against this player because he is putting the hurt locker on me.

If it wasn’t for time + time pressure, my opponent would be winning for sure!

—————————————

My opponent has had plenty of opportunity to crush me.

Against a player my own strength, I would have been annihilated!

I am having fun, but it definitely isn’t high caliber chess and I’m not playing the Philidor as well as I would have liked to do.

—————————————

So we are entering game 3 - I am with Black pieces.

My opponent is out for revenge.

My opponent is telling me in chat it is our last game because they are trying to go to sleep.

They want to go to sleep, but they want to get that last win before he goes.

In addition, I am still trying to get a satisfying win.

I have been craving for that nice wonderful Philidor victory!

The stacks have never been so high for random unrated match.

Its completely nuts and yet it is happening.

‘The Stage of the game has been set!

What really stands out to me about this game is at move 19.

Sure, we can talk about a lot of moves which happened before move 19.

However, The move 19 is really the highlight of this game!

IT IS HILARIOUS! Because my opponent was freaking out.

My opponent didn’t say anything mean or anything.

They was very kind and respectful during the game, but you could tell they was completely caught off guard.

My opponent played move 19. Nd5.

My opponent is attacking my Bishop + Queen.

My opponent was probably thinking I was going to play a defensive move.

BUT I WASN’T THINKING ABOUT DEFENSE!

I’m telling you people out of no where and attacked appeared!

It was back to back Brilliancy Moves.

————————————

At move 23, I thought the position was a draw!

Their is nothing the opponent can do to stop a forced draw.

I spent so much time trying to see if I could get something more vs. a draw.

I am 2-0 already in match.

I don’t really want a draw!

I want the taste of victory, BUT at the same time I don’t see the win.

———————————

At this point, I came up with a strategy!

It is the worst strategy I have ever came up with.

Their is no checkmate, but their is a fear that a checkmate may occur!

My strategy was to scare my opponent into resigning!

————————————

I put my Bishop in front of my Queen!

A discovered check is on the horizon!

It looks completely terrifying even though it is harmless.

Trying to win the game thru intimidation, not skill!

————————————

This right here is worst vs. Hope chess.

This is sick and depraved - I’m telling you I’m such weird chess player.

I played g5 because it looks like checkmating net!

Oh My Gosh - It’s not funny, but I can’t stop laughing.

My opponent was using his time trying to figure it all out.

The things that I do to my poor opponent is just so bad.

————————————

In the end, I lost on time!

I am 2-1

It was well deserved win by my opponent.

I should of took the draw, but I just couldn’t pull trigger.

I feel bad because my poor opponent probably had trouble going to sleep after this game.

Anyway, I just wanted to share some funny games.

chessterd5
Compadre_J wrote:
chessterd5 wrote:
Compadre_J wrote:

Just in case your wondering why 2…d6 is an error.

When White plays Grand Prix Attack, It is a very aggressive King side attack (Flank Attack).

Black best way to survive the attack is be counter attacking in the middle with the moves e6 + d5.

If you play d6, Your D pawn will have moved 2 times because you ideally want pawn on d5 in that position.

So the move d6 is an error because it gives white an extra move.

If you play d6 + e6 + d5, You have played 3 moves.

If you play e6 + d5, You have played only 2 moves.

Thank you. Point taken. But the extra move may not be as big of a hindrance as it seems. I have been playing c6-c5 in the Caro kann for years. Same idea different pawn. I would need to see some definite concrete lines to evaluate farther. The price of an extra move may actually be reasonable:

A) if it immediately removes white from their intended game into a much different style of game. And if they have no intimate understanding of the Gran Prix Attack theory because they thought that they were going to play a Kings Gambit. You of course would have studied it because you are the one with the plans to go there to begin with.

B) The trade off is now white is committed to playing a certain variation of the Sicilian. When if he wished to play a Sicilian by the proper move order could have had a much broader variation of Sicilian to choose from to begin with.

The below is a very nice game example:

The game has few errors, but look how natural the position looks.
Black gets in trouble by playing very normal moves.

I see your point but black did make some errors in that game. Probably because of rapid play.

But he neglected to expand and control the queenside with b5 harassing the LQB. he did not protect e6 properly which is a common motif in Najdorf and Shevenigen Sicilians. He should not have taken on f5. He could have let it sit at least for a little bit. If fxg then fxg and open up the f file for both players use and fight about it. Personally I never liked Dragon type variations of the Sicilian. Bobby Fischer talked a lot about how to attack it in his book My 60 Most Memorable Games.

chessterd5

Sometimes in the Exchange Philidor I like to play c6 to dominate the knight on c3. Put the rook on e8, the Bishop on f8. Sometimes you can even play b6 as well and go into a hedge hog formation. This allows one idea of knight to a6 to c5 to possibly double up on the e4 pawn. Just ideas, nothing concrete.