68 ( +1 | -1 ) Laskers Defence1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 Be7 5. Bg5 O-O 6. e3 h6 7. Bh4 Ne4 8. Bxe7 Qxe7 9. cxd5 Nxc3 10. bxc3 exd5. This is Lasker's Defence. I have been reading about in a book I have got called "How to think ahead in chess" by I.A. Horrowitz & Fred Reinfeld. It recommends this line as a wepon to deploy against the queens gambit. I have looked this line up on the internet and it seems that there is a certain prejudice against it with comments such as its drawish. What do you think of this line. Is it worth while or is there some refutation. Please get back to me and just PM if you want a game with this line, I would be happy to play the black side. Regards Tom
94 ( +1 | -1 ) The Wiseacres ...... allege the line is drawish, probably owing to the early exchanges, but as these are intended to ease Black's game, and if Black can "hold his own in all variations" (according to MCO 11), then maybe that's good enough for Black's purposes. Besides, if you know that you are more comfortable in simple positions (by which it is to be understood "positions with not many pieces left"), then that will give you a psychological edge in the ensuing middlegame. (Very early in my chess development, about age 14, I discovered I was a deal stronger in simple positions than my schoolmates, whilst having no edge at all in the opening, or in complex or closed positions with lots of pawns. Guess who adopted an opening policy of early exchanges!
My one caveat (if you haven't considered it already, or Horowitz and Reinfeld don't mention it) is that White can vary quite a lot before the 10th move! You might want to see how that affects Black's play. Cheers, Ion