[chessmind] Dennis Monokroussos: The Famous Vallicella Trap?!

[Email subscription to blog articles]

Posted by Dennis Monokroussos:
The Famous Vallicella Trap?!
http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/posts/1210226860.shtml


   I was browsing IM Jovanka Houska's 2007 book Play the Caro-Kann, and
   while looking through the introductory section on the Panov/Botvinnik
   Attack I read something incredible. In a subsection called 7th move
   sidelines, I came across this:

     1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 exd5 cxd5 4 c4 Nf6 5 Nc3

     5 Nf3 is known as Vallicella's Caro-Kann trap - Black has to watch
     out for one big trick. Best is simply to play 5...Nc6, transposing
     to the main line after 6 Nc3, but 5...Bg4? would be a mistake after
     6 c5! Nc6 7 Bb5. The point is that Black has big difficulties
     defending the c6 point; for example, 7...e6 8 Qa4 Qc7 9 Ne5 Rc8 10
     Bf4 and White is winning!

   There's nothing objectionable about the analysis*; rather, what struck
   me was the reference to Vallicella's Caro-Kann trap, as if this was
   standard lore in treatments of the Caro-Kann. How did [1]Bill
   Vallicella, an outstanding philosophical blogger but a 1500-1700 club
   player not engaged in publicizing his games, suddenly achieve such
   fame? I had come across his trap either from an email by him or on a
   post on his predominantly philosophical blog, but when did a move he
   may have played but a single time turn into an idea requiring mention
   in a pretty major new theoretical work?

   Houska doesn't cite a source, and I certainly didn't recall seeing it
   in any published materials, so naturally it was off to Google.
   Entering "Vallicella Caro-Kann", I discovered the main source,
   conveniently entitled "Vallicella's Caro-Kann Trap"...and you can, too
   - just click [2]here. Then laugh.**

   * Actually, while I wouldn't disagree with her positive suggestion, I
   don't believe 5...Bg4 is in fact a mistake; the real error comes
   later. After, e.g. 7...e5 I don't see a White advantage after 8.dxe5
   Ne4 or 8.Qa4 Bxf3 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.Qxc6+ Nd7 11.gxf3 exd4, and even the
   arguably best 8.Nc3 promises little or nothing after 8...Nd7 9.dxe5
   Bxf3 (10.Qxf3 d4; 10.gxf3 a6).

   ** If anyone knows IM Houska personally, or the woman herself is an
   occasional reader of this blog, please ask her to write me (via the
   Contact link) - I'd like to trace the path from Vallicella's idea to
   her book.

References

   1. http://maverickphilosopher.powerblogs.com/
   2. http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/openings/archives/archive_2005_08.shtml