Named pawn structures page - need review

@RuyLopez1000 said ^

It is a pawn structure which you discriminate against simply because it's not common, and seemingly because it's not in those books/articles.

Give me the authoritative source for this structure and I will add it.

And if those articles/book are the gold standard then why make a thread asking for advice.

Because I can't be certain the plans and descriptions are accurate.

@TotalNoob69 said ^

It is a pawn structure which you discriminate against simply because it's not common, and seemingly because it's not in those books/articles.

Give me the authoritative source for this structure and I will add it.

Grandmaster Alex Colovic thinks its a pawn structure:

https://thechessworld.com/articles/openings/the-rauzer-pawn-structure-from-botvinnik-to-magnus-carlsen/

He calls it the Rauzer in the title.

In the article he says " the so-called Richter-Rauzer pawn structure"

His image clearly shows this is real:

@TotalNoob69

I should say WGM Raluca Sgircea, IM Renier Castellanos instead of GM Alex Colovic.

He often write articles on that site, but sometimes other people write the articles.

Done, @RuyLopez1000 ! You can review it for correctness.

Any other suggestions?

@TotalNoob69 said ^

Done, @RuyLopez1000 ! You can review it for correctness.

Nice work! The themes are accurate.

The only small thing is in the heading:

"The open c-file and Black's weakened kingside balance White's loss of the dark-squared bishop"

Since the open c-file balances White's loss of bishop, it makes it sound like it is a bad thing for Black.

However, the open c-file is fine for Black:

From the article: "Black takes more risk by leaving his king in the center but on the other hand, he is able to organize faster and stronger counterplay against the white king along with the C file."

Other than that it's looking good!

@TotalNoob69

I guess this line was the source: "The rook can attack black’s “h” pawn from h3 or it can go to the queenside (b3 or c3) in order to attack the black king."

So it's double edged.

But typically it's Black that uses the c-file, and it's not considered to be a weakness in the way that the doubled pawns are.

@TotalNoob69 said ^

Any other suggestions?

The c3+d4 Pawn Structure. The closest on your list is Hanging Pawns, but the pawn is on c4, rather then c3. This changes the dynamic of the position:

https://thechessworld.com/articles/middle-game/the-c3d4-pawn-structure-complete-lesson/

@RuyLopez1000 said ^

In the diagram the OP posted, imo calling it the Richter-Rauzer formation is not helpful. Perhaps more appropriate would be calling it a Scheveningen formation

This is back to front.

This is like saying "The Nadjorf structure is not helpful. More appropriate would be the Sicilian structure."

which to my mind is characterized by Black's e6,d6 p...

That's not what guys like Flores Rios and Sokolov have to say. Flores Rios states quite clearly that the Najdorf structure features black pawns on d6 and e5. And the Scheveningen structure features black pawns on d6 and e6. He also states that the Scheveningen structure can arise from the Najdorf, the Classical, the Paulsen ( aka Kan), the Scheveningen itself, the Taimanov, etc etc.

The formation with doubled black f-pawns can arise from Scheveningen and Najdorf also. Just because it can arise from the Classical (the Richter Rauzer) doesn't mean that we should call it the Richter-Rauzer pawn structure. The whole point of books like those from Flores Rios and Sokolov is that the pawn structure approach allows us to see common themes across different opening variations. Tieing the pawn structure to a particular variation defeats the purpose.

@fwh2026 said ^

Tieing the pawn structure to a particular variation defeats the purpose.

You don't realize that this is a case of a unique pawn structure which arises out of a particular opening.

It's not a variation being chosen, it's a pawn structure that happens to only arise out of one variation.

The formation with doubled black f-pawns can arise from Scheveningen and Najdorf also

This is like saying 'the variation with doubled c-pawns can arise from the French, so why bother calling Winawer a pawn structure, just call it the French structure'.

Flores Rios states quite clearly that the Najdorf structure features black pawns on d6 and e5. And the Scheveningen structure features black pawns on d6 and e6. He also states that the Scheveningen structure can arise from the Najdorf, the Classical, the Paulsen ( aka Kan), the Scheveningen itself, the Taimanov, etc etc.

This is correct, but doesn't support your point.

You want to generalize but you are going to far.

The doubled f-pawns change the dynamic of the position, and gives rise to specific plans which are different from the regular Scheveningen.

allows us to see common themes across different opening variations

The Richter Rauzer is very different from a regular Scheveningen.