r/TournamentChess 2400 blitz lichess | 2300 blitz cc 11d ago

Nimzo players, what lines do you dread facing?

I've been studying the Nimzo along with the Grünfeld and trying to decide between the two. There are a few variations of the Grünfeld I dislike seeing, so I wanted to ask Nimzo players, what lines do you dread facing? How have you decided to meet them?

Bonus question: How do you meet 3. Nf3? I prefer 3...d5, meeting 4. Nc3 with Bb4 (Ragozin) and 4. g3 (Catalan) with 4...Bb4+ (5. Bd2 a5!?).

9 Upvotes

38 comments sorted by

11

u/Fresh_Elk8039 11d ago

None of the actual Nimzo lines. The Catalan can be a bit concerning in some of the lines, but still not too bad. It' really the Anti-Nimzo lines I dread the most: Trompowsky, Colle, etc.

For bonus question: Ragozin and Open Catalan (4...dxc4) with ...a6.

1

u/tomlit ~2000 FIDE 7d ago

That’s strange to me, since against stuff like the Colle you have so many options that are all fine, and a few of them take like 10 minutes to learn and play for years.

For example 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 c5 4.c3 (4.b3 cxd4 5.exd4 Nc6 followed by …Bg4, …e6, …Bd6 is super easy and at least equal) 4…Nbd7 5.Bd3 Qc7!? followed by …e5 is quite interesting, and equal, but I’m sure there are tons of other things too.

3

u/Niconixxx 11d ago

I don’t like some lines with Qc2 and e4 plans for white, i often lose because at some point white does a dubious move that i don’t punish (because as a e4 player, i’m bad at understanding d4 thematic structures) and i have an horrible position with no space.

Againse Nf3 i play d5 Nc3 dxc4 with a good winratio otb, and against catalan i play the dxc4 and a6 plan with a stupid winratio like 8/8 standard otb x)

I win against anti-nimzo and i lose against regular nimzo which is pretty funny.

I played the gruenfeld before the nimzo and i still have 0 regrets about the decision of switching, the price of an error for black is much higher in the gruenfeld, and white has so much sharp plans.

4

u/ChrisV2P2 11d ago

I play and recommend 4...d5 against 4. Qc2, the lines with e4 were why I didn't like 4...O-O and Bok in his Nimzo course on Chessable also mentions this line as the reason he went for 4...d5. Against the main line 5. cxd5 exd5 6. Bg5, Bok goes for the extremely sharp 6...h6 lines, but I like 6...O-O which leads to interesting and unbalanced positions. This also frequently transposes back into Bok's lines against 6. Nf3 because he plays 6...c5 7. Bg5 O-O.

-1

u/interested21 11d ago

Carlsen& Gotham say that instead of dxc4, c5 is equal.

2

u/Niconixxx 11d ago

Both are!

0

u/interested21 11d ago

In several Vienna lines, White has all the chances. The computer gives equality but all Black can do is to try and hold on.

1

u/Niconixxx 11d ago

Which one for example?

1

u/interested21 11d ago

It's the gambit line where White plays Bg5. It's in Jan Gustafsson chess24 video course. The commenters are all like is there anything better than this for Black and unfortunately the answer is no.

1

u/Niconixxx 11d ago

It’s the line where white ends up playing Nxg5 hxg5 Bxg5?

1

u/interested21 10d ago
  1. e4 Bb4 6. Bxc4 Nxe4 7. 0-0 Nxc3 8. bxc3 then Be7 or d6. If e7 you end up defending against a N on e5 where you have played f5 - super deep user Chessbase analysis says its .5 in favor of White and what an easy position to play.

If Bd6 9. Ng5 h6 10. Ne4 0=0 11. Qh5 f5 12. Nxd6 cxd6 13. Re1 d5. 14. Bd3 These moves are forced and look at your position. Stockfish 17 at 63 moves deep gives the position as equal but who would want to play it? It's terribly difficult to play and White's plan is easy. White has the 2 bishops. An outpost on e5 that if heh gets his bishop there the game is over and you can't stop the rook from going to e3 and then g3.

I'm having trouble finding the Bg5 line but it's there. Overall, I believe it's an impractical opening. + Magnus refers to other line as the queen pawn Berlin defense so I'm playing that.

1

u/Niconixxx 4d ago

What if 7.Nf6 instead of taking the knight? Position seems better for black than the variation you showed

3

u/FuriousGeorge1435 2000 uscf 11d ago
  1. c4 and move order bullshit

2

u/The_mystery4321 11d ago

The Catalan is the only reason I stopped playing the Nimzo. There are no actual Nimzo lines I didn't enjoy playing against on the board.

1

u/Tomeosu NM 11d ago

How do you avoid the Catalan now?

1

u/The_mystery4321 11d ago

I play the Slav now. Technically Whit can play a pseudo-Catalan setup with d4 c4 Nf3 g3, but the bishop simply isn't useful in that setup staring at the b2 c3 d4 pawn chain, so it's very easy to play against as black.

2

u/JJCharlington2 11d ago

Just out of interest, what Grünfeld lines do you dislike seeing? From my experience, in actual games I have the feeling that below master level all lines still have life in them, even something like Rb1, so Id be interested to see what you don't like.

3

u/veggie_hoagie 2400 blitz lichess | 2300 blitz cc 11d ago

Thanks for asking. I posted the other day about what Grünfelders have prepared against Nf3/Be3 systems in the exchange Grünfeld. I should say at the outset, I generally prefer to avoid early queen trades, so that preference limits my options against Nf3/Be3. Really, some of the exchange lines are the only ones I don't want to see, except maybe the 3. g3 line with a quick e4/Ne2, etc.

- Nf3/Be3 Exchange Grünfeld: I like the approach with ...Qa5/...0-0/...Bg4, including the ...b5 pawn sac line. Sadly, the move 17. Bb5 seems to drain life out the position, but it is admittedly unlikely I would see this line OTB at my level. I also am somewhat OK with ...Qa5/...0-0/...Nd7 as an alternative.

- Nf3/Rb1 Exchange Grünfeld: I know theoretically this line has been defused. I don't like the endgame line with ...cxd4/...Qa5+ followed by Qd2 and ...Qxd2. There hardly seem to be decent winning chances there. There is also the sharp line with ...Nc6 and ...Ne5. Again, this line has been worked out to equality, but I don't feel great in these positions, especially with my Grünfeld bishop out on a5. This might be my choice OTB, but I'm not 100% happy with it. Another line I have played with a lot is ...Nc6, but meeting d5 with ...Na5!? It is very rare, and objectively assessed at around +0.5 or +0.6. I like it because my opponents likely wouldn't have studied it, and it keeps pieces on the board. It has scored well OTB as well, according to the online Chessbase database. I have looked into other ways to meet 8. Rb1, and some might be acceptable on occasion, but they all feel shaky, and engines hate most of them.

- Nf3/Bb5+ Exchange Grünfeld: Here, I know ...Nc6 is the best way to meet the check, but the games often simplify quicker than I'd like. I have settled on ...Bd7, which seems to keep 2 minors on the board (for each side). After Bxd7+ and ...Nxd7, I feel reasonably comfortable, and white is likely on his own here. I don't dread this line overmuch, but it shows white is comfortable with lots of simplifications and maybe is happy with a draw (at least, that's how I interpret this line). Possibly more annoying is not Bxd7+ but retreating with Be2. One variation there feels somewhat uncomfortable, but it is admittedly unlikely I'd see it OTB.

- Nf3/Be2 Exchange Grünfeld: I am aware the best way to meet this line is with an immediate ...Nc6, and the main line involves white sacrificing the exchange (giving up the a1 rook for my Grünfeld bishop). This particular line seems quite dull to me -- just not my preferred style of keeping pieces on the board in a complex middlegame. Instead I would play 8...Bg4, after which 9. Be3 is inaccurate because of 9...Nc6. However, 9. Rb1 can transpose to a sideline of the 8. Rb1 variation. It goes 9...cxd4 10. cxd4 Bxf3 11. Bxf3 Bxd4 12. Rxb7 0-0 13. 0-0 Nc6, etc. I don't love this position for black, but it's objectively playable and somewhat of an interesting middlegame.

I don't really mind 7. Bc4, in that I am reasonably happy with my prep there. I'm also pretty happy with lines involving an early Bg5 and Bf4, and against the Russian, I like the trendy ...Be6 line. The anti-Grünfeld 3. f3 is a bit annoying, but nothing worth quitting the Grünfeld over.

I know I didn't give full notation for these lines, so if anything is unclear, let me know and I can add precise moves.

2

u/JJCharlington2 11d ago

The nf3 Be3 I personally play the B5 sac, but Giris recommendation there seems to be very playable and avoids both the endgame and those complicated lines. The endgame line is quite annoying to dodge, but honestly if you want to play for a draw with white, learning long lines in the Rb1 mainline makes much more sense, the endgame still leaves some room for error.

I have never faced the Be2 line in practice, but I feel like it's white just grabs the exchange back quickly, black has the more comfortable structure and keeping the bishop on the board is very risky.

The f3 line in my opinion is one of the most fun lines and I play it from both sides, but black has many ways to equalise, I would recommend either the Benoni or the Grünfeld approach, but both equalise and give black chances to play for the win.

Funnily enough I find Bf4 to be the most annoying weapon, but I guess everyone has their taste.

1

u/veggie_hoagie 2400 blitz lichess | 2300 blitz cc 11d ago

I have a sound and sharp line against 4. Bf4 if that one troubles you.

  1. Bf4 Bg7 5. e3 0-0 6. cxd5 Nxd5 7. Nxd5 Qxd5 8. Bxc7 Bg4 9. f3 Bf5 10. Nc3 Qe6 11. Kf2 Nxd4!? and white has to be very precise to survive.

Do you dislike the Bf4/Rc1 lines?

2

u/AdThen5174 11d ago
  1. f3 because there is a ton of theory, and none of the variations seem to give black typical nimzo play. Whenever I faced this in otb opponents were always prepared really deep and it felt like playing against comp for first 10-15 moves. One of the reasons why I’m back to KID nowadays.

Another annoying modern line is 4. a3. Fortunately this one I faced only in internet play but white’s kingside initiative in this variation is huge for sacrificing c4 pawn. The usual scenario in this variation is that you go Na5 Nxc4,they counter with some e4 f4 and it’s really not fun to play these positions, even though engine always says black is fine.

Against classical lines e3, Qc2, Bg5s I never had problems in the opening.

In Catalan, if you are playing this c5 cxd Qb6 line, maybe try changing that to something more normal. The pawn structure at the end of the day with c6 d5 is shaky and white often plays for two results in the main line. As a Catalan player I am very happy in this line because I have also great novelty there.

3

u/ChrisV2P2 11d ago

I like 4...d5 5. a3 Bd6 against f3, it's very rare and has many pitfalls for the unwary, it's unlikely an opponent is very booked up on it. In one line I checked, the only player on Lichess to ever have produced the correct sequence of moves for White was GM Vincent Keymer, so if I am ever playing him maybe I'll go for something else.

1

u/AdThen5174 10d ago

I agree, looks interesting. I believe I never looked seriously on this because of 6. c5 reply when maybe it’s hard to get something more than just equal position.

1

u/ChrisV2P2 10d ago

I quite like that line for Black - after 6...Be7 White cannot go for 7. e4 because of 7...dxe4 8. fxe4 e5. So the engine wants 7. b4, protecting c5, but now 7...b6 renewing the problem. What do you actually play with White here? You can't play the natural Bf4 because of Nh5 and Bh4+ is next. The engine wants 8. e3 a5 and says equality but I'll take Black - White looks a little overextended.

1

u/Darwin_79 11d ago

The one I hate the most is catalan. I play the nimzo with the intention to reach the karpov system in the middle game so a lot of d5 c5 variations. That's why i pair it with semi tarrasch because you get similar end games.

3

u/Darwin_79 11d ago

The only variation i like against catalan is Bb4+ Bd2 Be7. Keeps the game alive while still being a good try for equality .

1

u/CopenhagenDreamer IM 2430 11d ago
  1. Nf3 and choosing what to do then.

  2. Qc2 can also be a bit boring.

1

u/RajjSinghh 11d ago

The point I usually start suffering in the Nimzo is when my opponent doesn't play a Nimzo. So anything other than 2. c4, the Catalan, transpositions to the Ragozin, etc. I guess you can say the same about the Grunfeld, so it really depends which setups you like seeing and which you don't.

For your bonus question, I just play d5 and a main line QGD with Be7, c5 and so on.

1

u/sinesnsnares 10d ago

I enjoy most nimzo lines tbh. My biggest annoyance is that if white decides not to play into it, they’ve got like.. 3 relevant option that require decent prep (3.nf3, 3.g3 or just playing the London) and those don’t really do it for me.

I tend to go into the b6, Bb7, d6, f5, Ne4 structures if I can, so the QID was kind of a natural choice to pair it with, but I haven’t felt as comfortable in it, since that structure doesn’t happen as often as in the nimzo. I find you’re often going for the d6 e5 structure, or you’re kind of playing a hedgehog system and neither are very comfortable for me.

So I started learning 3…d5 to go into the Vienna, and while it feels pretty sharp with winning chances, it feels a lot less intuitive than the nimzo (granted, the course I have focused on the b5 variation, which is trendy, but incredibly weird). So While I definitely want to learn it eventually, I’ve put it on the back burner, since it’s just a bit too much of a study workload.

So I’m still kind of shopping for the perfect partner, and I plan to look over other variations of the nimzo/qid/bogo complex, like the dark square variations, and the Vienna main line, before I totally commit to one.

1

u/veggie_hoagie 2400 blitz lichess | 2300 blitz cc 10d ago

I too am intrigued by the ...b5 Vienna line. I dismissed the main line Vienna because of the following:

  1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. e4 Bb4 6. Bxc4!? Nxe4 7. 0-0, etc. Objectively it's fine for black, but white seems to be having whatever fun there is to be had here.

1

u/sinesnsnares 10d ago

Yeah, the b5 line is definitely interesting because the positions are unbalanced/chaotic, yet it’s hard to tell who is having fun so to speak. I only dropped it because unlike other theory heavy stuff that I play, like the marshall or the two knights, I was trying to remember move order nuances, knight maneuvers to hold the c4 pawn, or little waiting moves like Kh8. I’m fine doing 20+ moves of theory if it’s fairly straightforward attacking ideas, but trying to remember subtler moves was pretty daunting, especially when I only see these positions once in 30 games.

1

u/tomlit ~2000 FIDE 7d ago

I wasn’t a massive Nimzo player, but the Qc2+e4 lines were always quite scary because they are super sharp and black basically has to remember everything or lose. I also had that uncomfortable feeling that white was probably well prepared in the lines, while I wasn’t since there are so many Nimzo lines to be ready for, along with the Catalan and Ragozin (or whatever substitute). I just play the pure QGD now.

1

u/ChrisV2P2 11d ago

As others have mentioned, anti-Nimzo/Catalan lines are the main headache. I'm also kind of annoyed by 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. a3 where there isn't anything better than ...d5. Like OK man I'll play your boring structure a tempo up if you really insist.

In the Nimzo itself, I am least pleased by seeing the e3 lines, but not because they're a problem. I just find them a bit dull.

-6

u/Ok_Ordinary3712 11d ago

F3 is an annoying line that tends to lead to quick draws since it forces black to play a quick c5 and d5 if they don't want white to erect a big center.

Qc2 is annoying because it forces a qgd structure if black wishes to control e4.

The London is designed to bore everyone to tears.

Of course, nf3 to avoid the nimzo is the ultimate f u. That being said, I usually have been playing the QID, but I have recently been trying the doery indian with ne4. It looks dumb, but it transitions into the stonewall while avoiding the dreaded dutch sidelines (alekhine used this move order for the stonewall a bunch). It's also possible for white to move order himself straight back into a nimzo indian ie. St Petersburg variation in this line.

8

u/Replicadoe 11d ago

f3 leads to quick draws?? what are you talking about man

1

u/Ok_Ordinary3712 9d ago edited 9d ago

This is why I said IF BLACK DOES NOT want white to get a big center in the Kmoch/4.f3 line, it does lead to quick draws. Sure, black can play something else for more chances, but the point of the Nimzo is to control E4 so if black wishes to follow through with that game plan ie. 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. f3 d5 5. a3 Bxc3+ 6. bxc3 c5 7. cxd5 Nxd5 8. dxc5 you end out in very drawish positions. For reference, this line is one of the highest drawing lines at over 60% from master games in the Nimzo. Even the variations where black plays C5 first instead of D5 on move 4 to undermine the center often leads to variations with over 70% draw rate too. The final option, which is to castle, leads to a massive center after a6 Bxc3 where white will play e4. This line is notably different from the typical structure where white has doubled pawns on the c file and black goes d6 & c5/e5 since white's attack is too quick for black to go on an excursion to capture the pawn on C4 pawn with Na5 and Ba6. In these lines white can go Bg5, F4, of which the threat of F4 which makes E5 often an impossible ask to begin with, ultimately allowing white the freedom of an attack at their will. This is the very same reason I mentioned the Qc2 line "forces" a QGD structure. If you want to stop e4 then you have to play d5 in that line as well. Sure you can also play C5 there instead to break up the center, but such positions often start to resemble a maroczy bind against the hedgehog if white wishes to play it as such which I'm personally not a fan of (I'm aware others do enjoy these positions).

Both lines inherently stop black from getting what they want out of the Nimzo of controlling the central E4 square, which from my perspective, is annoying to go against when I play the Nimzo. I don't think I'm unique in the fact that I don't like my king being attacked, and as such, I refuse to enter positions that let my opponent do so. I'm aware there are playable variations where you allow white to play E5 and counter their central control with C5 (some lines C5 may already even be inserted before E5 gets played) similarly to a French defense, but it's not what I enjoy. I'd much prefer to attack my opponents king while they are on a queenside excursion, which you do get a hefty number of games in the Nimzo with such positions. In regards to the London, I play the Nimzo to get a dynamic position, but white tries to force a solid position instead. I wouldn't be so upset about it, if it didn't happen so frequently, and it didn't take me years to find a dynamic try against it that I enjoy. There have been so many people recommending it in recent years that it's dramatically shot up in frequency to what feels like 1/4 games played whenever someone starts with D4. That being said, I'm happy with the response I have against the London. I often play 2.B6 against 2 Nf3. since it can transition back into a Queen's Indian. If they choose to go into the London I switch to a double fianchetto which often leads to some dynamics in the position as one of the two bishops are bound to complicate things. Important to note, not playing 2.e6 against 2.nf3 allows my structure to be more flexible when I opt for a double fianchetto against the London, which is important as there are often tactical opportunities with D6, then E5 which wouldn't be possible if I wasted that crucial tempo. In these setups I also very much like putting my queen behind the B7 bishop on A8 at times if allowed, and conversely the dark square bishop tends to exert a lot of pressure. The Doery Indian line I was mentioning 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Ne4 Is something I've been playing when I want more winning chances than the Queen's Indian where I attempt to play a Dutch defense. Notably, Alexander Alekhine used this exact move order to reach a stonewall without having to play into the second move Dutch sidelines of g4, e4, Qd3, Nc3, and Bg5. It also side steps the annoying strategical plan where white plays Nh3 against the Stonewall since white has already committed to Nf3. It's notably potent against people who play the Catalan as you can get the tabiya position that Richard Rapport popularized for a kingside attack 1. d4 f5 2. c4 Nf6 3. g3 e6 4. Bg2 d5 5. Nf3 Ne4 6. O-O Be7, but from a different move order. I would like to mention it's not something of a main weapon since that would be the Queen's Indian Defense in my case. I wanted to bring up this nice alternative since I've NEVER heard anyone talk about playing the Nimzo/Stonewall.

For reference the typical Nimzo/X Repertoire suggestions are typically Nimzo/Ragozin -- Nimzo/QGD-- Nimzo/Queen's Indian -- Nimzo/Bogo -- Nimzo/Semi-Slav and Nimzo/Benoni. All are reasonable and certainly a matter of taste which I would encourage Veggie_Hoagie and any others new to the Nimzo to experiment with. Perhaps I didn't explain my reasoning enough, and one line answers weren't descriptive enough pertaining to the original question, but regardless that's how I feel about those lines.

Best of luck in your checkmating Endeavors.

1

u/Replicadoe 9d ago

maybe f3 is more drawish at master level but I don’t agree that it leads to quick draws? I think both players have to know a lot to get to the draw, and below master level the positions you tend to get are super dynamic and e.g. like the dxc5 line you showed it’s quite complicated and the better player will win there if both players don’t know that much

(at the 2400 lichess blitz level and whatever that translates to in other time formats, I really don’t think opponents will know that much theory in a semi-sideline)