Talk:Tarrasch Defense

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)


 * 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)


 * 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)