Talk:Semi-Slav Defense

Meran

My knowledge of the main-line Meran is limited, as the only variation I ever played for White was the Reynolds (6.Bd3 dxc4 7.Bxc4 b5 8.Bd3 a6 9.e4 c5 10.d5), on numerous occasions in the 1980s, before switching to 6.Qc2, in order to avoid all the theory of the main line, and I haven't any knowledge of the current state of theory in this, other than seeing the occasional game featuring 10.e5-a line I've never played with either colour, and know nothing about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hushpuckena (talk • contribs) 07:55, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone agree with this POV: the Meran rates an article in its own right, what with the manifold options for both colours, e.g., the Wade Variation (7....b5 8.Bd3 b4), not to mention the above named Reynolds line, plus the old main line, 10.e5 and all the complexities which follow from that? Hushpuckena (talk) 01:15, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I support the creation of a Meran article. SunCreator (talk) 13:29, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not so sure. First, I don't know much about this opening. But MCO-15 gives 30 of the 48 Semi-Slav columns to the Meran, (and it has 4 of 7 ECO codes) so it is the bulk of the Semi-Slav. Bubba73 (talk), 20:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

My opinion is that an opening variation can have its own article if there is at least one opening monograph devoted to it. The existence of the book Chess Explained: The Meran Semi-Slav by Reinaldo Vera, and the ChessBase DVD Meran Variation (D47-D49) indicates to me that a separate article on the Meran can be justified. On the other hand, article spinouts mean that readers need to read two articles instead of one, and I would only recommend doing so if we have enough material to justify that inconvenience. Hence, I would not support a separate article consisting only of the paragraph we currently have on the Meran, but I would be delighted if someone wrote a more extensive article on this opening line. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:45, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm willing to have a go at starting this, bearing in mind my lack of experience with certain of the lines, as mentioned.

Hushpuckena (talk) 07:59, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Semi-Slav: 5.e3 variations

Reference is being made to Section 2, 'Semi-Slav: 5.e3 variations', where it is stated:

"The main line continues with 5... Nbd7. The bishop moves 5...Bd6 and 5...Be7 are seldom seen, as masters realized early on that at e7, the bishop was passively placed and does nothing to further one of Black's aims, the freeing move ...e5."

An explanation of why the bishop is passively placed is provided for 5...Be7, but no such explanation for 5...Bd6, which does support ...e5!

Joe Gatt (talk) 22:44, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Catalan Opening

In the article, in the section titled Slav move order: 2...c6 there is the sentence "Third, it prevents White from entering the Catalan opening with 3.g3." I made an edit removing the part "with 3.g3" since after the QGD 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6, the move 3.g3 is not an accurate way to reach the Catalan, being met with 3...dxc4 and an extra tempo on Open Catalan lines (rather 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.g3 is needed). However my edit was reverted. I was wondering why it's better to have this inserted? I'm a new editor so I'd like to understand better what other more experienced editors think. RainyDayCafe (talk) 17:24, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for this explanation. I have reverted my revert to restore your edit. Quale (talk) 15:30, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

80% or 90% 5.Bg5 or 5.e3

At first in the article, it says 80% but later more than 90% in the alternatives section?! Jishiboka1 (talk) 05:12, 2 February 2023 (UTC)