GameKnot: Chess related, Philidor plays the Philidor

« TAP TO LOG IN

Chess related: Philidor plays the Philidor

« Back to forum

From

Message

blake78613
11-May-12, 14:05

Philidor plays the Philidor

When Philidor played the Philidor Defense who had very ambitious ideas of a broad pawn front.

On of the earliest known examples of the Philidor Defense was against Count Bruhl in 1702

1. e4 e5 2. Bc4

This was also Philidor's favorite opening. Philidor did not believe it was correct to place a knight in front of a bishop pawn. The Count follows Philidor's example.

2...c6 3. Qe2?!

Better would be 3.Nf3 fighting for the center, but the Count is not going to violate Philidor's principles when playing the great man himself.

3... d6

Transposing into what today is recognized as the Philidor Defense. One wonders how Philidor would have proceeded against Nf3 on move 2 or 3. Did he intend to play ...f5. There are no recorded games of Philidor playing against that position. He must have recognized the flaw.

4. c3 f5

This Philidor's concept and he quickly grabs control of the game and wins in typical Philidor fashion.

5. d3 Nf6 6. exf5 Bxf5 7. d4 e4 8. Bg5 d5 9. Bb3 Bd6 10. Nd2 Nbd7 11. h3 h6 12. Be3 Qe7
13. f4 h5 14. c4 a6 15. cxd5 cxd5 16. Qf2 O-O 17. Ne2 b5 18. O-O Nb6 19. Ng3 g6 20. Rac1
Nc4 21. Nxf5 gxf5 22. Qg3+ Qg7 23. Qxg7+ Kxg7 24. Bxc4 bxc4 25. g3 Rab8 26. b3
Ba3 27. Rc2 cxb3 28. axb3 Rfc8 29. Rxc8 Rxc8 30. Ra1 Bb4 31. Rxa6 Rc3 32. Kf2
Rd3 33. Ra2 Bxd2 34. Rxd2 Rxb3 35. Rc2 h4 $1 36. Rc7+ Kg6 37. gxh4 Nh5 38. Rd7
Nxf4 39. Bxf4 Rf3+ 40. Kg2 Rxf4 41. Rxd5 Rf3 42. Rd8 Rd3 43. d5 f4 44. d6 Rd2+
45. Kf1 Kf7 46. h5 e3 47. h6 f3 0-1

The Count learned from Philidor and that same year plays the Philidor in a game against Atwood.

Atwood - Bruhl

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 f5
4. dxe5

Today we know that White gets a good game with 4.Nc3

fxe4 5. Ng5 d5 6. e6 Nh6 7. g3 c6 8. Bh3 Na6
9. O-O Nc7 10. f4 Bc5+ 11. Kg2 O-O 12. f5 Qf6 13. c3 Kh8 14. g4 Ng8 15. Bf4 Ne8
16. Nf7+ Rxf7 17. exf7 Qxf7 18. Be5 Bd7 19. g5 Qe7 20. Bf4 Nd6 21. Bc1 Rf8 22.
f6 Bxh3+ 23. Kxh3 gxf6 24. gxf6 Qe6+ 25. Kg2 Rxf6 26. Bf4 Rg6+ 27. Bg3 Nf5 28.
Qe1 Nxg3 29. hxg3 Bd6 0-1

Had Philidor spotted the flaw in his idea. It would seem so. I conclude with a blindfold game Philidor played against Atwood. Philidor is now using his favorite defense 2...c5.

Atwood-Philidore, London 1794

1. e4 c5 2. f4 e6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. c3 d5 5. e5 f5 6. d4 Nh6 7. a3 Nf7

8. Be3 Qb6 9.Qd2 Bd7 10. Qf2 c4 11. Bxc4 dxc4 12. d5 Qc7 13. dxc6 Bxc6 14. Bxa7 Bxf3
15. gxf3 g5 16. Be3 gxf4 17. Bxf4 Nxe5 18. Bxe5 Qxe5+ 19. Qe2 Qxe2+ 20. Kxe2 h5 21. Nd2
Rc8 22. Rhg1 Kf7 23. Rg2 Be7 24. Rag1 Bf6 25. Nf1 e5 26. Ne3 Ke6 27. Rd1 Rhg8
28. Rxg8 Rxg8 29. Nxc4 Rg2+ 30. Kd3 Rxh2 31. Rd2 Rh3 32. Ke2 b5 33. Ne3 Rh2+ 34.
Ke1 Rxd2 35. Kxd2 Bg5 36. Ke2 Bxe3 37. Kxe3 h4 38. Kf2 e4 39. Kg2 e3 40. Kh3 e2
0-1

shamash
11-May-12, 20:15

Philidor's phalanx

An enjoyable discussion of all the games, thank you.

The stem game was perhaps actually played in 1783,
Philidor shortly thereafter having to scoot over to London
(where this game had been played) to avoid the sans-cullottes of the French Revolution.

Philidor's 13th move 13...h5
(which sets up 35...h4 twenty-two moves later, ultimately resulting in those dandy
advanced, passed, connected black pawns at e3 and f3 [47...f3]!)
sure does show how committed he was to his pawn phalanxes.

My fave is his dancing rook move 32 R...d3.
sort of a Nimzo-Switch move, switching files on his opponent.

Quite the modern chessplayer,can only imagine a Radjabov-Philidor encounter.

shamash
11-May-12, 20:34

those inspired Ur-games

Since the ideas behind the moves are so key, it's enlightening, yes -- but more so,
it's always fun to see the first time one of these venerable openings was first trotted out, the
Grünfeld by Grünfeld (Ok it was actually 1st played by Moheschunder Bannerjee, but after all
America is called America and not Columbia), the Réti by Réti -- or the Philidor by Philidor.

blake78613
12-May-12, 05:51

The date 1702 is a typo, the year of the first two games is 1792.

baronderkilt
12-May-12, 10:00

Thx for a Great Thread~!

I was just thinking yesterday, how great it would be if some of us each took a favorite GM or player and did a Report on them, as a Forum Thread. And here we are !
***
Just for the record then, adding a very basic Philidor's Legacy MATE. With BL to move: 1... Nf2+ 2. Kg1 Nh3+ (Discovered double check !) 3.Kh1 Qg1+ 4.Rxg1 Nf2#

The most essential and noteworthy of smothered mates, Philidor's Legacy.

shamash
12-May-12, 13:17

Bruehl-Philidor 1783

Another discussion of that first game (from 1783)
between John Bruel and Philidor can be found at:
www.chessgames.com

Interesting to see that Philidor played this game blindfold, in a simul of 3 games.

blake78613
12-May-12, 14:02

The 1792 date is the date given by GM GM Christian Bauer in his book The Philidore Files.
Also at chessgames.com is analysis by Philidor from his book Analyse du jeu des Échecs 1749 . Philidor analyses a game called NN - Philidor. I think I read that most authorities think that it is not a real game but a game constructed by Philidor. In that analysis Philidor is advocating 3...f5 after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bc4.

www.chessgames.com

chessgames.com gives 1781 as the date of the Atwood - Bruhl game.

tactical_abyss
13-May-12, 13:04

Deleted by tactical_abyss on 13-May-12, 13:14.

tactical_abyss
13-May-12, 13:14

While the score seems somewhat incomplete,according to the oxford Encyc.Of Chess Games,the first recorded Philidor Defense game was in 1575.Philidore,however,popularized it.In my opinion,it may have been played earlier,perhaps in the 1400's,but then no one knows without written records.Perhaps some of you may find this quick game from the 1500's interesting.

www.chessgames.com

baronderkilt
13-May-12, 16:48

Hey Joe !

THAT is a GREAT BOOK to read !! I forgot about it, but have read it from the library. It certainly deserves to be a part of anyones Chess Library. Fantastic reading. I must cite it in the thread asking for books to get! Or am I thinking of Oxford Enc. of Chess? And is it a different book, do you know?

tactical_abyss
13-May-12, 17:28

Yes,the Oxford Ency.OF Chess.Thats the only one I know of.Now,back in 1575 that opening defense of course,wasen't called the Philidor Defense,it probably had no name?But it does appear that it was being tinkered around with between 127 years and 208 years prior to Bruhl or Pilildor.

baronderkilt
13-May-12, 18:10

Speaking of which ... The Philidor Defense

Usually starts out with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 (or 3.Bc4 is common, but imo d4 is a bit better with its immediate pressure. And If I recall BL equalizes earlier vs Bc4. Based on my 20 year old review of it, probably MCO-12. lol. It may have changed ... )
***
Now after 3.d4 there are three mainlines:

3... exd4 Name ?
3... Nf6 Name ?
3... Nd7 the Hannam Var.

Now the Hannam, which I play can get a bit scary. So I've been using a little trick in Blitz play, of making a Delayed Hannam but playing it this way.
1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nd7

with delay of ...e5 and chances to transpose to a Pirc. Depending how WT plays. Its done pretty well so far. I call it a Backdoor_Philidor lol.

Just a thought to ponder, for Philidor players.

blake78613
13-May-12, 20:59

3. ...exd4 generally leads to Larsen's variation where Black generally fianchettos the King Bishop.
3...Nf6 usually leads to Antoshin's Variation where Black develops his King bishop to e7.
3...Nd7 would be the Hannam Variation.

The Hannam Variation is alive and well and played by several Soviets as Azmaiparashvili, Beliavsky, Nisipeanu and Hamdouchi. It is also played by by the French Grandmasters Baracrot and Bauer. However they use a Pirc move order to get to the Harman. 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e5. The traditional Philidor move order had some problem lines for Black.

blake78613
13-May-12, 21:02

Correction: I should have said former Soviets.

tactical_abyss
14-May-12, 03:01

I personally prefer offbeat defenses or openings,especially in blitz where you can experiment with a higher frequency of games and see how you par with opponents close to ones rating.Blake is correct that the traditional Phil.had some problems for black.The stats are generally white wins 44%,black wins 26.6% and draws 28.6% in the last database I checked with 3653 games played from 1575-2012.It seems solid to me but passive.Playing the variants of the Phil should be better for black,atleast possibly.Sort of reminds me of the Caro....somewhat solid,but passive and in my experience,drawish.As generally known,blacks second move 2...d6 locks in his Kings Bishop and many times this creates a passive game.And again,whites 3.d4 and good developing moves will give white some decent spacial advantage but with a cramped game....good for very patient players.

Stats,however do not necessarily always fall in line with ones personal success rate.I tried telling that to someone in another string but got stones thrown at me!Combining what Baron said above and my experiences through many USCF games both OTB and a huge # of blitz games,both OTB and online(which stats do not have the same accuracy due to personal blitz tactics one can employ)....the Phil can probably outdo the stat charts with the right opponent.And by the "right"opponent,I do not necessarily mean someone rated a beginner or hundred of rating points less.

And not to change the subject...(you guys continue with the Phil.),but my success rates using the Basman for example as black far far exceeds the stat database and I used that against many masters and "A"rated opponents throughout the years.I will have to perhaps experiment again with some of the Phil variations.So far,i've had too many draws with it using the traditional Phil. lines,but perhaps I can change that one day.

blake78613
14-May-12, 05:09

I have the Bauer Book on the Philidor. I had toyed with the idea of learning the Philidor as a second string defense. But when I examined the book, I was somewhat overwhelmed by the amount of analysis and the amount of work one would have to do in order play the Philidor competently. According to Bauer the Philidor is not passive but dynamic. The following if from his introduction:

"...whereas White can more easily go wrong. indeed, his space advantage and the apparent slowness of Black's counterplay may lull White into a false sense of security. Even though the Philidor leads to quieter positions than most other openings, notably the Sicilian, this doesn't mean White can be content with routine moves. To gain an advantage, he must take a certain amount of risk. Then the position becomes more lively and the Philidor can become quite bloodthirsty! ...initially I wrongly considered the Philidor to be passive, but then I used it against very strong grandmasters (for example, versus Onischuk and Leko) and obtained dynamic and very playable games. True, I lost those two games in question, but this is quite a common phenomenon when the opponent is stronger!"

For anyone interested, here is Silman's review of the book: www.jeremysilman.com

tactical_abyss
14-May-12, 08:09

Yes,Blake,it depends upon the authors viewpoint of their opinion about the Phil.Some GM's will classify the Phil as "passive",others will deem it as you said "dynamic" on some of the top levels.While outdated a bit,MCO -15 by Nick de Firmian a GM and 3 time US champion writes that it is"too passive and that white will obtain a more aggressive position in the center".Yet he goes on to say...."This may be true,but there is no large advantage that white can force and the defense is respectable".Basically I see it as a waiting game for Black.If you are patient enough(and strong enough)to wait for positional weakness from white,then by mid or endgame you may very well take that initial small advantage away from white.

My exposure on the club level however in real time is that most club players avoid the Phil.
I suppose this has alot to do with the fact that club players want more aggressive action and counterplay rather than a game of patience,hoping to overcome whites advantages.I have noticed that the Caro is avoided alot for many of the same reasons.I think all openings have worth,depending upon the strength of the user and reasons behind the use.Take for example the Petrov Defense.Considered highly drawish and dull on many levels due to the fact that both sides,(but especially white)can practically force a draw by trading down to a symmetrical endgame.Yet,I love this dull,passive and drawish type of defense.Why?Its a great weapon to use against much stronger opponents FOR A DRAW for that half point tourney win and/or rating increase.
I mean,for example if I was lucky enough to play Carlsen for just one game,I think that if I could,i'd play a Petrov!Just a miracle of a draw against him would tickle me pink.And the Petrov makes that atleast a bit more probable!

« Back to forum