All the 
best 
in chess.
(TM)

  Player # 1 (1600) - Player # 2 (1600)  
[B10]
  Opening Traps - Caro-Kann # 1 
  Pensacola, FL (USA)  04,08,2003.    

[A.J.G.]

**********************************************************************************

  (This page is completely TEXT-SCORE, (with only three diagrams) ... you will need a chess board.)   

  Click  here  to see an explanation of the symbols I use.   

**********

A funny little trap that a {former} Internet student sent to me. He claimed that it happened in one of his games, and I guess anything is possible. 
(But forgive me if I remain a little doubtful. It took me quite some time  to find this in one of my nearly 30 books on opening traps.) 

This is Trap # 79,  (page # 99); from the excellent book by Master (and also a real chess celebrity!) ... 
 Bruce Pandolfini. ("More Chess Openings: Traps and Zaps, Volume 2.") 

(This is not an actual game - as far as I know - but a chess trap. Although many traps started as a game between two players.)

**********************************************************************************

1.e4 c6;  2.Nc3!?,   
A developing move ... but one that can (and often will) cost White a tempo - especially when (and if) Black plays a later pawn advance of (...d7) ...to-d5-d4. 

So is this good/playable? Yes! 
--->  Do I recommend it? Hmmm, not really. 
---> "Should I play this?" That's entirely up to you!! 

     [ The normal continuation is:  >/=   2.d4 d5;  with a good game for both parties from this position. ]   

2...d5!;   
Black should NOT be deterred from his planned counter-strike on the center of the board. 

     [ Playable is:  2...g6!?;  but I can't really say that this is a completely reliable system. ]    

3.Nf3!?,  
A perfectly reasonable and normal developing move. 

White controls the center, gets a piece off the back row, protects the King and also prepares castling ... all with this one move. 

Play has now transposed to the  "Two Knight's Variation." (For lack of a better name?) 

This is a tricky line ... that even GM's have gone astray in. (But White does NOT get his normal advantage that he gets in  the main lines ... at least, in my opinion.)  

     [ After  3.d4!? dxe4;  4.Nxe4,  we have - once again - transposed back into the main lines. ]   

3...d4!?;  (Hmmmm.)    {See the diagram - just below.}  
Black 'gains' a tempo by forcing White's Knight to move. But you should also remember that this move cost Black a tempo as well. The move also takes the pressure OFF White's e4-square. So this move definitely has its pluses ... AND its minuses!! 

My only (other) question would be: Is Black forcing the White Knight to move  ...  to a better square? 

Another concern Black should give a GREAT deal of thought to: Is this pawn push going to allow White to play a King's Indian Defense with colors reversed? And won't Black be down like TWO or THREE tempi ...  as compared to the 'normal' lines of the K.I.D.? 

  **********  

    **********  

   [  The main line of this variation is:  
         3...Bg4!?;  4.h3 Bxf3!?;  5.Qxf3, "+/="  {Diagram?}  
         when White probably maintains a (very) slight advantage.

         [ See MCO-14;  page # 188-189, 
            columns # 49 through col. # 54. {Mainly cols. # 49 - 51.} 
            See all applicable notes as well. ]  

         I must have at least 10 books on the Caro-Kann Defense. 
         My favorite, even though it is a little dated, is the following book:  
         "The Caro-Kann: Classical 4...Bf5"  by  GM G. Kasparov 
         and  IM Aleksander Shakarov. 
         Copyright (c) 1984, Macmillian Publishing Company. 
         {Collier?}  ISBN:  0-02-011490-7   
         (I like this book better than many of the other books I have 
          purchased on the Caro-Kann in the last 20 years. Of course 
          it does not cover anything but the move ...Bf5 on move four.) 

         Another good book - whose coverage of the Caro-Kann is 
         VERY good, nearly encyclopedic, is: 
         "Nunn's Chess Opening's,"  by  GM John Nunn. 
         (But this book also is getting old and really needs to be 
          updated.)  

         The latest  GM  example I could find in the database was:  
         F. Vallejo Pons - Victor Bologan;  it Pamplona, ESP;  2002.  ]  

***

4.Nb1!?, (dubious?)  
Pandolfini does not comment ... at this particular point, but this looks a little strange and unusual to me. 
(I think Ne2 is the normal line here.) 

Was White (overly) concerned that Black might push his d-pawn to d3?

White's Knight has been returned to its home square ...  for no good reason, as far as I can see. 

***

     [  A superior way to play this line would have been:  
        >/=   4.Ne2! c5!?;  5.d3!?,  {Diagram?}    
        I like this ... although most books condemn it as too passive. 
        (Supposedly it is better for White to play Ng3 at this point, 
         but I am not really 100% convinced.)  

            ( According to theory, a better line for White is as follows:     
               >/=  5.Ng3, (!)  5...Nc6; 6.Bc4 e5; 7.d3 Be7; 8.0-0 Nf6;    
               9.Nh4!?,  {Diagram?}    
               GM P. Keres - GM S. Tartakower;    
               The 'Two Countries' Match. (France vs. the U.S.S.R.)    
                Paris, FRA;  1954.    

               [ See ECO-B, page # 92, lines [B10], {Filip} section # 3;    
                row # 16, and also note # 82. ] )     

        5...Nc6;  6.g3 e5;  7.Bg2 Nf6;   8.0-0 Be7;  9.c4! 0-0;   
        10.Ne1!? Bd7;  11.h3 Qc8;  12.Kh2 a6!?;  13.f4 b5; 
        14.b3, "~"  {Diagram?}    

         A.J. Goldsby - NM D. Barrows;  
         The U.S. Open, (USA); 1977.  

         White went on to win a long and very difficult game. 
         (White's position resembles an improved King's Indian 
          Defense, but with colors reversed.)  ]     

***

4...f6?!;  (Maybe - '?')  
A horrid little move. 

I suppose Black wants to play ...e5; but this is simply one pawn push too many! (Black also severely weakens his King-side with this move.) 

     [  According to one (very old) book that I have, Black 
        should play:  

        >/=  4...c5;  5.Bc4 Nc6;  6.a3 e5;  7.d3 Be7;  8.Nbd2,  
        8...Nf6;  9.h3 0-0;  10.0-0, "+/=  {Diagram?}   
        and White has a small advantage.  
        (No source is quoted, and I could not find any games 
         in the database from this particular position.)  ]   

5.Bc4!,    {See the diagram - just below.}  
If Black is going to be so nice as to send White an invitation to completely dominate a key diagonal, (and a lot of light-colored squares to boot); then the first player should be polite and simply accept.  

 **********  

    **********  

      [  Another trap book gives:  
         5.c3!? d3?!;  (Maybe - '?')  {Diagram?}  
         A terrible move - that is given an exclam in another 
         little book!  

         6.Qb3!,  {Diagram?}   
         A large improvement over the trap in the book.  

            (The trap goes:  </=  6.Nd4? e5; "=/+"  etc.     
              But the moves are so inane, I will not reproduce     
              them here.)       

         6...e5;  7.Qc4 Bg4;  8.Qxd3 Qxd3;  9.Bxd3 Nd7;  
         10.Bc2,  "+/="  (Maybe - "+/")  {Diagram?}    
          and White is simply a pawn up. 
          (Analysis line ... by yours truly.)    

***

         White could also play d3. This move looks very harmless, 
         but sets a nasty trap as well:   
         5.d3!? c5;  6.g3 e5?;  {Diagram?}  
         Risk for no reason. By playing the move ...Nc6 first, 
         Black avoids any problems or sacrifices on e5.  

         7.Nxe5?!,  {Diagram?}  
         The author of one trap book praises this move. 
         (He gives it an exclam.) But it is not even clear if this 
         sacrifice is sound.  

            (Much better would be:     
              >/=  7.Bg2 Bd6; 8.Nbd2 Ne7; 9.Nc4 Bc7;    
              10.a4 0-0; "="  {Diagram?}    
               when Black stands no worse, at least in my opinion.)     

         7...fxe5;  8.Qh5+ g6??;  {Diagram?}  
         This move is just a blunder.  

            ( With simple moves like:     
              8...Ke7;  9.Qxe5+ Kf7; 10.Qf4+ Qf6; "/+" {Diag?}    
              Black escapes the checks, and comes out on top. )     

         9.Qxe5+ Kf7;  10.Qxh8 h6;  11.Qe5 Nc6;  12.Qf4+, "+/-"  
          ... "and White has won enough material to win the game." 
         (From: "The Little Book of Chess Traps.")   

         But the whole thing is simply unsound!!  ]     

*******

5...Bg4?, 
Simply dreadful.  

I guess the idea is Black would like to play this, then ...Nbd7; and follow this up with ...e5. (Maybe then Black will develop his King-side?) 

But its too slow ... and bad to be any good. (Emanuel Lasker once said: "Knight's BEFORE Bishops."  While not true all of the time - the Ruy Lopez is an obvious  exception; this nugget of wisdom is right the majority of the time.)  

     [ Black had to try something like:  
       >/=  5...b5!?;  6.Bb3 a5!?;  7.a4, "+/="  when White has a small advantage in this position. ]  

6.Ne5!,  (thematic)  
Simply brilliant. A beautiful and a logical refutation to the second player's inconsistent play.  

     [ Or  6.h3!? Bc8!;  7.d3, "+/="  and White is still better. ]   

6...fxe5[];  
This is - obviously - forced.  

     [ Of course Black could not play: 6...Bxd1??;  7.Bf7#,  which is a relatively simply mating pattern.  ]    

7.Qxg4, '±'  (White is clearly better here.)   {See the diagram - just below.}    

 **********  

    **********  

7...Qd6?;  (Really - '??')  {Diagram?}  
Why this turkey of a move? 

Pandolfini's traps are all culled from actual play, so I bow to his knowledge here ... but this is one silly move. 
(Perhaps the idea is to prevent White from playing Qe6?) 

     [ My {former} student gives the following line ...  
        claiming it represents the best play, or forced moves ... 
        for both sides:  
        >/=  7...Nd7!?;  8.Qe6 Nh6;  9.d3 Qa5+?!;   
       10.Bd2!?,  {Diagram?}  
        A simple move. 

           ( >/=  10.Nd2!, '±' )     

       10...Qd8??;  {Diagram?}  
        This is a blunder.  
        (Black should try ...Qb6;  ... ... ... 
         or possibly consider resignation!!) 

       11.Bxh6 gxh6??;  12.Qf7#.  ]   

Now White wins simply with:  
8.Qc8+! Qd8;  9.Bf7+! Kxf7;  10.Qxd8, ("+/-")  {Diagram?}  
and White has an overwhelming material advantage.

***

 The great teacher & author says:    
"Black makes several questionable moves. Advancing the f-pawn weakens Black's position and wastes time. Developing the Queen Bishop is premature.   
  Defending with the Queen fails. That's enough to lose most chess games."  - NM Bruce Pandolfini.    

RELATED ZAP: 
1.d4, d5;  2.c4, e6;  3.Nf3, c5;  4.dxc5, Bxc5;  5.Nbd2, dxc4; 6.Nxc4, Bxf2+; 7.Kxf2, Qxd1. ("-/+")  (Queen's Gambit Declined.)