Trompowsky Attack

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article uses algebraic notation to describe chess moves.
Image:chess zhor 26.png
Image:chess zver 26.png a8 rd b8 nd c8 bd d8 qd e8 kd f8 bd g8 h8 rd Image:chess zver 26.png
a7 pd b7 pd c7 pd d7 pd e7 pd f7 pd g7 pd h7 pd
a6 b6 c6 d6 e6 f6 nd g6 h6
a5 b5 c5 d5 e5 f5 g5 bl h5
a4 b4 c4 d4 pl e4 f4 g4 h4
a3 b3 c3 d3 e3 f3 g3 h3
a2 pl b2 pl c2 pl d2 e2 pl f2 pl g2 pl h2 pl
a1 rl b1 nl c1 d1 ql e1 kl f1 bl g1 nl h1 rl
Image:chess zhor 26.png

The Trompowsky Attack is a chess opening starting with the moves 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5. It is named after the one-time Brazilian champion Octavio Trompowsky (1897–1984) who played it in the 1930s and 1940s. It has also been called the Zot. [1]

With the second move, White is intending to exchange his bishop for Black's knight, inflicting doubled pawns upon Black in the process. This is not a lethal threat; Black can choose to fall in with White's plan.

After 1.d4 Nf6, the Trompowsky is a popular alternative to the more common 2.c4 and 2.Nf3 lines. By playing 2.Bg5, White avoids the immense opening theory of various Indian Defences like the Queen's Indian and the King's Indian. White can also play 2. Bg5 after 1. d4 d5, when Black can play 2...Nf6, transposing into one of the variations below or vary with, for instance, 2...c6, intending 3...Qb6 to attack White's b-pawn. Some of the grandmasters who often play the Trompowsky are Julian Hodgson and Antoaneta Stefanova.

[edit] Main lines

Black has a number of ways to meet the Trompowsky, some of which avoid doubled pawns, while others allow them. The most common Black responses are discussed here.

  • 2...Ne4 is the most common response. Although Black violates an opening principle ("Don't move the same piece twice in the opening"), Black's move attacks White's bishop, forcing it to either move again or be defended.
    • 3.h4 defends the bishop, and Black should avoid 3...Nxg5? since that will open up a file for the White rook. Instead Black can start making a grab for the centre and kick the White bishop away with a timely ...h6 advance.
    • Usually, White retreats with 3.Bf4 or 3.Bh4. In this case, Black will try to maintain his knight on e4, or at least get a concession before retreating it. For instance, if White chases the knight away with f3, he will have taken away the best development square from his own knight.
    • 3. Nf3? is rarely seen except among amateurs; after 3... Nxg5 4. Nxg5 e5! Black gains back the lost time by the discovered attack on the knight; White's center is liquidated and he has no compensation for the bishop pair.
  • 2...e6 also avoids doubled pawns since the knight is now defended by the queen. Also 2...e6 opens up for the Black king's bishop to be developed. On the debit side, the knight is now pinned, and this can be slightly annoying.
  • 2...d5 makes a grab for the centre, allowing White to inflict the doubled pawns on Black. If White does so, Black will try to show that his pair of bishops is valuable, and that White has wasted time by moving his bishop twice in order to trade it off. By capturing away from the center, Black will preserve a defensible pawn structure and open diagonals for his queen and dark bishop.
  • 2...c5 also makes a grab for the centre, planning to trade off the c-pawn for White's d-pawn. Again, White can inflict doubled pawns, and again Black will try to make use of his bishop pair.
  • 2...g6 is another line, practically begging White to inflict the doubled pawns. Black's development is slightly slower than in the two lines mentioned above. Black is intending to fianchetto his dark-squared bishop which is unopposed by a White counterpart, and will try to prove that this is more important than the doubled pawn weakness.
  • 2...c6 is an offbeat line in which Black intends ...Qb6, forcing White to defend or sacrifice his b-pawn. White can play the thematic 3.Bxf6 or 3.Nf3, but must avoid 3.e3?? Qa5+, when White resigned (in light of 4...Qxg5) in Djordjević-Kovačević, Bela Crkva 1984, "the shortest ever loss by a master" (Graham Burgess, The Quickest Chess Victories of All Time, p. 33).

[edit] References