Talk:Tarrasch Defense

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Old talk

When White plays against the Tarrasch, the most common setup is to fianchetto his king's bishop. This is because Black's 3...c5 has ruled out any possibility of blocking such a fianchettoed bishop by means of ...c6.

I don't play 1.d4 very much, so I may be wrong about this, but I thought the main idea of fianchettoing the bishop was to exert pressure on the isolani on d5 (after all, if Black playing ...c5 was in itself a good reason to fianchetto that bishop, everyone would play 2.g3 against the Sicilian!). Am I wrong? --Camembert

No you're not. I will go ahead and add that as a reason. As for the Sicilian analogy, White often fianchettos his bishop in the Closed Sicilian (2.Nc3), but such a plan is a little time consuming in the main, open lines of the Sicilian where speed is critical. Sjakkalle 14:54, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Semi-Tarrasch

I believe the section on the Semi-Tarrasch belongs with the QGD, not here, as it has nothing to do with 3....c5, really. Any other opinions on this? Hushpuckena (talk) 07:26, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Books such as Modern Chess Openings classify it as you said, so I say go ahead and make the change. This article would then need to link to the Semi-Tarrasch section. Bubba73 (talk), 19:44, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of where the Semi-Tarrasch is placed, the defining moves of the Semi-Tarrasch are 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 c5, i.e. what makes it an S-T is Black having the opportunity to recapture on d5 with the knight, not necessarily 5. cxd5 Nxd5 being played immediately. (The exchange is most common but 5. e3 is a book alternative.) I'm going to amend the diagram to give the position after Black's 4th. 91.105.18.180 (talk) 17:08, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]