| |
Main
Date: 25 Jul 2006 12:58:21
From:
Subject: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
|
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3
How should Black reply to this? I played 7...Bxe3 8.fxe3 O-O and got
into a lot of trouble, escaped with a draw thanks to the clock.
|
|
| |
Date: 05 Aug 2006 07:52:11
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
|
> 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3
Passive. Try 4. exf5 e4 5. Ng1! Nf6 6. g4! and you get a Black Muzio
formation for White, without having to sacrifice!
>4...fxe4 5.dxe4
How nice of him to open your game back up.
>5...Nf6 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3
> How should Black reply to this? I played 7...Bxe3
8.fxe3 O-O and got
> into a lot of trouble, escaped with a draw thanks to the clock.
You need to learn how to defend against attacks based on the back rank and
smothered mate. That would stop this opening cold.
--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918
|
| |
Date: 27 Jul 2006 12:03:43
From:
Subject: Re: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
|
David Richerby wrote:
>
> I'd guess that the explanation here is that the exchange on e3 has
> been shown to be better for White so Black's options are Bb6 or to
> find another square on the f8-a3 diagonal. But the only other square
> on that diagonal is e7 and, if you wanted the bishop there, you'd have
> put it there.
Thanks again for your detailed reply and for posting all those games.
If you're tired of giving me free advice, maybe somebody else will
answer my next question.
> In fact, the explanation is probably this: in the database games where
> this is played, White plays 7.Nc3 and Be3 comes after 7... d6. This
> cuts down the options somewhat and doesn't help with the position
> we're actually talking about. :-)
Yes, because of the interpolated Nc3 d6, the question of the pawn-grab
(which may be why I rejected Bb6 in the game) never came up. So, what
about 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3
Bb6 8.Bxb6 axb6 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.Nxe5 O-O 11.f3? Does Black have any
compensation? I don't see it, but I'm just a patzer.
|
| | |
Date: 28 Jul 2006 11:32:14
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
|
<[email protected] > wrote:
> Thanks again for your detailed reply and for posting all those
> games. If you're tired of giving me free advice
Not at all. It lets me feel useful and gives other people a chance to
criticize my reasoning so I might learn something, too. You could
always pay me if you wanted but there are much better things to spend
your money on. :-)
> David Richerby wrote:
>> In fact, the explanation is probably this: in the database games where
>> this is played, White plays 7.Nc3 and Be3 comes after 7... d6.
>
> Yes, because of the interpolated Nc3 d6, the question of the pawn-grab
> (which may be why I rejected Bb6 in the game) never came up. So, what
> about 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3
> Bb6 8.Bxb6 axb6 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.Nxe5 O-O 11.f3? Does Black have any
> compensation? I don't see it, but I'm just a patzer.
Fritz seems to think the resulting position is fine for Black,
suggesting 11... Qe7 12.Nd3 d5 13.Nc3. I think the point is that
Black can now either choose to exchange on e4, leaving White with an
isolated pawn and a slightly airy-looking king or wait for White to
exchange on d5, allowing Black to undouble his pawns and get quite a
nice pawn centre. Alas, Fritz gets side-tracked and thinks that
13... d4 is Black's best ( to ply) and I'm not sure what that's all
about.
That's the problem with engines: all they do is suggest moves and tell
you how well you'd do with that move if you were the engine playing
another copy of yourself. You still have to do the understanding on
your own.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Strange Radioactive Tool (TM):
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ it's like a screwdriver but it'll
make you glow in the dark and it's
totally weird!
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2006 11:46:07
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
|
David Richerby <[email protected] > wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> So, what about 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6
>> 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3 Bb6 8.Bxb6 axb6 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.Nxe5 O-O 11.f3?
>
> Fritz seems to think the resulting position is fine for Black,
> suggesting 11... Qe7 12.Nd3 d5 13.Nc3. [...] Alas, Fritz gets
> side-tracked and thinks that 13... d4 is Black's best ( to ply) and
> I'm not sure what that's all about. ^^^^^^^^^^^
Sorry -- that should read `+0.34 to 15 ply'. I was letting the engine
run for a bit but forgot to fill in the results before I posted.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Swiss Puzzle (TM): it's like an
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ intriguing conundrum but it's made
in Switzerland!
|
| |
Date: 26 Jul 2006 14:34:22
From:
Subject: Re: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
|
David Richerby wrote:
> [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3
> > Bxe3 8.fxe3 O-O I don't see any killer attack by White.
>
> Me neither.
>
> > 9. Nc3 d6 10. Bc4+ Kh8 11. Ng5 Bg4 12. Qe1
>
> This position is Sinowjew-Van Beers, World U20 Championship 1991, by a
> slight transposition. Black played 12... Qe8 and went on to lose the
> endgame (39 moves).
Many thanks for your comments. 12...Qe8 was my move too. Could you
kindly post the rest of that Sinowjew-Van Beers game?
> Fritz 8's database has plenty of games where Black has castled short
> in the 4.d3 Schliemann and won. The problem here is that the f-file
> is fully open (rather than half-open for Black) which makes g8 a much
> more dangerous place to stick the Black king. Fritz's opening book
> ks 7... Be3 with a question k, because of the Sinowjew-Van Beers
> game and recommends 7... Bb6 instead.
It gets a question k because of one game, won by White after 30
additional moves? There's gotta be more to it than that?
> But knowing moves isn't going to help: you need to understand the
> ideas behind them.
Yes. I considered 7...Bb6 but I didn't think I could afford to lose a
developing tempo like that, in this kind of game. Exchanging on e3 also
seems to lose tempo, insofar as 8.fxe3 is a useful developing move for
White, opening the file for his rook. At least, by exchanging on e3, I
get some endgame compensation for the lost tempo, in the form of
White's doubled pawns. Without having studied the theory, was there any
way to see at the board that Bb6 is better? (That was a silly question.
If the answer is "no" at Van Beers' level--don't know him, but he was
good enough to be playing in a world junior championship--obviously
it's "hell no" at my level.} By the way, are there any high-level games
with Bb6, and did Black win any of them?
|
| | |
Date: 27 Jul 2006 10:33:05
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
|
<[email protected] > wrote:
> David Richerby wrote:
>> [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3
>>> Bxe3 8.fxe3 O-O 9. Nc3 d6 10. Bc4+ Kh8 11. Ng5 Bg4 12. Qe1
>>
>> This position is Sinowjew-Van Beers, World U20 Championship 1991,
>> by a slight transposition. Black played 12... Qe8 and went on to
>> lose the endgame (39 moves).
>
> Many thanks for your comments. 12...Qe8 was my move too. Could you
> kindly post the rest of that Sinowjew-Van Beers game?
[Event "Wch U20"]
[Site "Mamaia"]
[Date "1991.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Sinowjew, Juri"]
[Black "Van Beers, Eddy"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C63"]
[WhiteElo "2305"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 f5 4. d3 fxe4 5. dxe4 Nf6 6. O-O Bc5 7. Nc3 d6
8. Be3 Bxe3 9. fxe3 O-O 10. Bc4+ Kh8 11. Ng5 Bg4 12. Qe1 Qe8 13. Qg3 h6 14.
Nf7+ Kh7 15. Rxf6 gxf6 16. Qxg4 Rxf7 17. Qf5+ Kg7 18. Rf1 Rf8 19. Rf3 Ne7
20. Rg3+ Kh8 21. Qg4 Rg8 22. Bxg8 Qxg8 23. Qd7 Qd8 24. Qe6 Qf8 25. Nb5 a6
26. Nxc7 Rc8 27. Nd5 Nxd5 28. exd5 Rxc2 29. Rg6 Rc1+ 30. Kf2 Rc2+ 31. Kf3
Rc8 32. Kf2 Rc2+ 33. Kg3 Rxb2 34. Rxf6 Qg8+ 35. Rg6 Qxe6 36. dxe6 Rc2 37.
e7 Rc8 38. Rxd6 Rg8+ 39. Kf3 1-0
>> Fritz's opening book ks 7... Be3 with a question k, because
>> of the Sinowjew-Van Beers game and recommends 7... Bb6 instead.
>
> It gets a question k because of one game, won by White after 30
> additional moves? There's gotta be more to it than that?
Well, I believe Fritz's opening book is derived mainly from the games
in Chessbase's databases. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say
that it gets a question k because of that game and Fritz's inabil-
ity to find significant improvements. But that's just speculation --
I'm not sure exactly how Fritz's book is built.
> Yes. I considered 7...Bb6 [...] Without having studied the theory,
> was there any way to see at the board that Bb6 is better? (That was
> a silly question. If the answer is "no" at Van Beers' level--don't
> know him, but he was good enough to be playing in a world junior
> championship--obviously it's "hell no" at my level.}
It's not necessarily a silly question. It could be that there's an
explanation that's simple to understand but hard to find, if you see
what I mean. (`Apples fall out of trees because there's an attractive
force called gravity between any two massive objects.')
I'd guess that the explanation here is that the exchange on e3 has
been shown to be better for White so Black's options are Bb6 or to
find another square on the f8-a3 diagonal. But the only other square
on that diagonal is e7 and, if you wanted the bishop there, you'd have
put it there.
In fact, the explanation is probably this: in the database games where
this is played, White plays 7.Nc3 and Be3 comes after 7... d6. This
cuts down the options somewhat and doesn't help with the position
we're actually talking about. :-)
> By the way, are there any high-level games with Bb6, and did Black
> win any of them?
Yes and yes. And Black lost some of them, too.
Dave.
[Event "Stara Zagora zt-B"]
[Site "Stara Zagora"]
[Date "1990.??.??"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Sznapik, Aleksander"]
[Black "Inkiov, Ventzislav"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C63"]
[WhiteElo "2485"]
[BlackElo "2510"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 f5 4. d3 fxe4 5. dxe4 Nf6 6. O-O Bc5 7. Nc3 d6 8.
Be3 Bb6 9. Nd5 O-O 10. Bg5 Kh8 11. Bxf6 gxf6 12. Nh4 Rg8 13. c3 Bg4 14. Qd2
Qf8 15. Bc4 Rg5 16. Nxb6 axb6 17. f4 Rh5 18. g3 Qh6 19. Kh1 exf4 20. Qxf4
Ne5 21. Bd5 Rf8 22. Qxh6 Rxh6 23. Nf5 Rh5 24. Nd4 c6 1/2-1/2
[Event "Wch (Women)"]
[Site "Manila"]
[Date "1991.??.??"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Xie Jun"]
[Black "Chiburdanidze, Maia"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C63"]
[WhiteElo "2465"]
[BlackElo "2495"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 f5 4. d3 fxe4 5. dxe4 Nf6 6. O-O Bc5 7. Nc3 d6 8.
Be3 Bb6 9. Nd5 O-O 10. Bg5 Be6 11. Qd3 Kh8 12. Bxf6 gxf6 13. Nh4 Nd4 14. Bc4
Bxd5 15. Bxd5 c6 16. Bb3 d5 17. c3 f5 18. cxd4 Qxh4 19. exd5 1/2-1/2
[Event "Moscow4"]
[Site "Moscow"]
[Date "1992.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Laketic, Gojko"]
[Black "Ivanov, V."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C63"]
[WhiteElo "2480"]
[BlackElo "2355"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 f5 4. d3 fxe4 5. dxe4 Nf6 6. O-O Bc5 7. Nc3 d6 8.
Be3 Bb6 9. Nd5 O-O 10. Ng5 h6 11. Bc4 Kh8 12. Nxb6 axb6 13. Nf7+ Rxf7 14.
Bxf7 Nxe4 15. f4 Nf6 16. fxe5 Nxe5 17. Bb3 Bd7 18. Bd4 Qe7 19. Qe2 c5 20.
Bf2 Bc6 21. Rae1 Ne4 22. c4 Nxf2 23. Rxf2 Re8 24. Bc2 Qh4 25. Ref1 Kg8 26.
Rf4 Qg5 27. Qf2 Qe7 28. Qg3 b5 29. cxb5 Bd5 30. a4 Bf7 31. Rxf7 Nxf7 32.
Bb3 c4 33. Bxc4 d5 34. Bb3 Rd8 35. Qf2 Ng5 36. Qf4 Kh8 37. Rd1 Ne4 38. a5
Nc5 39. Bc2 Ne6 40. Qe3 Qb4 1-0
[Event "Kstovo op"]
[Site "Kstovo"]
[Date "1994.??.??"]
[Round "9"]
[White "Anisimov, A."]
[Black "Abrosimov, Alexandre"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C63"]
[BlackElo "2325"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 f5 4. d3 fxe4 5. dxe4 Nf6 6. O-O Bc5 7. Nc3 d6 8.
Be3 Bb6 9. Qd3 O-O 10. Qc4+ Kh8 11. Bxc6 bxc6 12. Qxc6 Bg4 13. Nd2 Bd7 14.
Qc4 Ng4 15. Bxb6 axb6 16. h3 Nf6 17. Qd3 Nh5 18. Ne2 g5 19. Qe3 Qf6 20. a3
Rg8 21. f3 Nf4 22. Kh2 Qh6 23. Ng1 Rg7 24. Rf2 Rag8 25. g4 Qg6 26. Nf1 h5
27. Ng3 hxg4 28. fxg4 Bxg4 29. hxg4 Rh7+ 30. Nh5 Rxh5+ 31. gxh5 Qxh5+ 32.
Nh3 g4 33. Rxf4 exf4 34. Qxf4 g3+ 35. Kg1 Qxh3 36. Qf6+ Kh7 37. Qf5+ Qxf5
38. exf5 Re8 39. Kg2 Re2+ 40. Kxg3 Rxc2 41. Kf4 Rxb2 42. Re1 Kh6 43. Rc1
Rf2+ 44. Ke4 Re2+ 45. Kf4 Rf2+ 46. Ke4 Re2+ 47. Kf4 Rf2+ 1/2-1/2
[Event "Valle d'Aosta op 8th"]
[Site "Saint Vincent"]
[Date "2000.02.18"]
[Round "7"]
[White "torelli, Antonio"]
[Black "Fregonese, Giulio"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C63"]
[WhiteElo "2271"]
[BlackElo "2117"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 f5 4. d3 fxe4 5. dxe4 Nf6 6. Nc3 Bc5 7. O-O d6 8.
Be3 Bb6 9. Bxb6 axb6 10. Nd5 O-O 11. Ng5 h6 12. Bc4 Kh8 13. Nxf6 Qxf6 14.
Nf3 Qg6 15. Qd3 Rf4 16. Nd2 Bd7 17. Rae1 Raf8 18. Re3 Bg4 19. c3 Qf6 20. f3
Bc8 21. a3 Ne7 22. Kh1 Qg5 23. Ree1 Rh4 24. g4 Ng6 25. Rf2 Nf4 26. Qe3 h5
27. gxh5 Qxh5 28. Bb3 Rf6 29. Bd1 Qh7 30. Nf1 Rg6 31. Qd2 Rg5 32. Ne3 Rg3
33. Ref1 Qg6 34. Re1 Kh7 35. Ref1 Bh3 36. Re1 Bd7 37. Nf5 Bxf5 38. exf5 Qh6
39. Bc2 Qf6 40. Bd1 Rgh3 41. Kg1 Kh8 42. Bc2 Rh5 43. Be4 c6 44. c4 Rh6 45.
Qe3 Rxh2 0-1
[Event "St Petersburg op (Women)"]
[Site "St Petersburg"]
[Date "2000.04.14"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Stjazhkina, Olga"]
[Black "Semenova, Irina"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C63"]
[WhiteElo "2319"]
[BlackElo "2272"]
[PlyCount "39"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 f5 4. d3 fxe4 5. dxe4 Nf6 6. O-O Bc5 7. Nc3 d6 8.
Be3 Bb6 9. Nd5 O-O 10. Bg5 Kh8 11. a4 Ne7 12. Nxf6 gxf6 13. Bh6 Rg8 14. a5
Bc5 15. Bc4 Rg6 16. Be3 Bxe3 17. fxe3 Qf8 18. Rf2 Qh6 19. Qd2 Bg4 20. Raf1
1/2-1/2
[Event "Cappelle op 18th"]
[Site "Cappelle la Grande"]
[Date "2002.02.13"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Luther, Thomas"]
[Black "Pirrot, Dieter"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C63"]
[WhiteElo "2573"]
[BlackElo "2436"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 f5 4. d3 fxe4 5. dxe4 Nf6 6. O-O Bc5 7. Nc3 d6 8.
Be3 Bb6 9. Bg5 O-O 10. Nd5 Kh8 11. a4 Bg4 12. Be2 Qd7 13. Bxf6 gxf6 14. Nh4
Be6 15. Bc4 Bc5 16. Kh1 Qg7 17. Ba2 f5 18. b4 Bxd5 19. Bxd5 Nxb4 20. Nxf5
Rxf5 21. exf5 Bd4 22. Bxb7 Rb8 23. Ra3 Rxb7 24. c3 c5 25. cxd4 cxd4 26. Rg3
Qf7 27. f6 Qxf6 28. Qg4 Rb8 29. Rc1 Nc6 30. h3 Ne7 31. Rc7 Rg8 32. Qe4 Rxg3
33. fxg3 Qg6 34. Qa8+ Ng8 35. Qxa7 d3 36. Qe3 e4 37. Qd4+ Qf6 38. Qxe4 1-0
[Event "St Petersburg-ch (Women)"]
[Site "St Petersburg"]
[Date "2002.04.16"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Epstein, Anna"]
[Black "Stjazhkina, Olga"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C63"]
[WhiteElo "2108"]
[BlackElo "2265"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 f5 4. d3 fxe4 5. dxe4 Nf6 6. O-O Bc5 7. Nc3 d6 8.
Be3 Bb6 9. Nd5 O-O 10. Ng5 Kh8 11. Bc4 Bg4 12. Qd2 Qd7 13. h3 Bh5 14. Nxb6
axb6 15. f4 exf4 16. Rxf4 Ne5 17. Bd3 h6 18. Rh4 Kg8 19. Bd4 hxg5 20. Qxg5
Ra5 21. Qg3 Qf7 22. Rf1 Qg6 23. Bxe5 Rxe5 24. Bc4+ Kh7 25. Qb3 Rg5 26. g4
Nxg4 27. hxg4 Rxg4+ 28. Rxg4 Qxg4+ 29. Kh2 Qh4+ 30. Kg1 Qg5+ 31. Kh2 Qe5+
32. Kg1 Qd4+ 33. Kh2 Rf2+ 34. Kg3 Rxf1 35. Bxf1 Qe5+ 36. Kh3 Qf4 37. Bd3
Qf3+ 38. Kh2 Qf2+ 39. Kh3 Qf3+ 40. Kh2 Qf2+ 41. Kh3 g5 42. e5+ Kg7 0-1
--
David Richerby Carnivorous Chicken (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a farm animal but it eats flesh!
|
| | |
Date: 27 Jul 2006 01:04:11
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
|
En/na [email protected] ha escrit:
> David Richerby wrote:
>
>>[email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3
>>>Bxe3 8.fxe3 O-O I don't see any killer attack by White.
>>
>>Me neither.
>>
>>>9. Nc3 d6 10. Bc4+ Kh8 11. Ng5 Bg4 12. Qe1
>>
>>This position is Sinowjew-Van Beers, World U20 Championship 1991, by a
>>slight transposition. Black played 12... Qe8 and went on to lose the
>>endgame (39 moves).
>
> Many thanks for your comments. 12...Qe8 was my move too. Could you
> kindly post the rest of that Sinowjew-Van Beers game?
I would prefer 11...Qe8 directly, ... it seems black can play Qe8-g6
achieving a good position for the queen in both attack and defence
(attacking the Ng5, g2 and e4 and defending f7 and h7).
It seems too that white plan is Qe1-h4.
I ask me if after 11....Qe8 12.Qe1 anyone would consider 12...Bg4.
We can think the actual move in the game 11...Bg4 to be a "waste" of
time because it develops a piece to a square where it is hanging (see
forest variation where a Qh4xg4 can be good in some lines and it helps
white to play his plan). Curiously that move apparently gains a tempo.
AT
|
| | | |
Date: 27 Jul 2006 11:26:46
From: Peter Billam
Subject: Re: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
|
On 2006-07-26, Antonio Torrecillas <[email protected] > wrote:
>>>>After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3
>>>>Bxe3 8.fxe3 O-O I don't see any killer attack by White.
>>>>9. Nc3 d6 10. Bc4+ Kh8 11. Ng5 Bg4 12. Qe1
>
> I would prefer 11...Qe8 directly, ... it seems black can play Qe8-g6
> achieving a good position for the queen in both attack and defence
> (attacking the Ng5, g2 and e4 and defending f7 and h7).
White could consider 12. Nd5 because
12. Nd5 Nxd5? 13. Rxf8+ (or 13. Qxd5 is also good) Qxf8
14. Qh5 h6 15. Bxd5 g6 16. Qxg6 hxg5 17. Rf1 1-0
so Black probably continues
12. Nd5 Qg6 13. Nxc7 Qxg5 14. Nxa8 Bg4 15. Qxd6 Rxa8 16. Rae1
and White has 2 pawns and a rook against two knights...
e.g. 16... Bh3 17. Rf2 or probably better 16... Rd8 17. Qc5 Rc8
where White's queen is hard to re-group. Perhaps Black could
reposition the Nc6-b8-d7 to cover the weak f8 and free up the Nf6
for an attack ? Unclear, interesting...
Regards, Peter
--
AUS/TAS/DPIW/CIT/Servers hbt/lnd/l8 6233 3061 http://www.pjb.com.au
Pasar�, pasar�mos dice el agua y canta la verdad contra la piedra
-- Pablo Neruda
|
| |
Date: 25 Jul 2006 23:53:22
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
|
It seems like you were able to spot and defend against all your
opponent's attacks. The priy mistake, in my opinion, is suboptimal
piece placement. I've pointed a few cases of that out. A stronger
player may give better comments.
[email protected] wrote:
> 9.Nc3 d6 10.Bc4+ Kh8 11.Ng5 Bg4 12.Qe1 Qe8 13.Qh4 Qh5 14.Qxh5 Bxh5
> 15.Nb5 Rac8 16.Rf2 a6 17.Nc3 h6 18.Nf3 Bg6
I don't like 18...Bg6. You finally have the initiative, this is your
chance to push back with 18...Na5! and 19... Ng4. Instead, you are on
the defensive again.
> 19.Nh4 Bh7 20.Raf1 Nd7
I prefer 20...Ne7. Currently your c6 knight is idle, and in the new
position it could prevent White from posting knights on the dangerous
d5 and f5 squares. You've also unfortunately aligned your rook and
knight on an unprotected light-colored diagonal.
> 21.Be6 Ncb8
I prefer Rd8, keeping your knight on c3, hopefully later to deploy to
e7. This also moves your rook onto a dark-colored square, which is
safer. You will have to make sure no enemy knights land on e6, but none
are near yet.
|
| |
Date: 25 Jul 2006 17:38:42
From:
Subject: Re: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
|
[email protected] wrote:
> > I played 7...Bxe3 8.fxe3 O-O and got into a lot of trouble, escaped with a draw
> > thanks to the clock.
>
> The resulting position only gives White a draw. If you "got into a lot
> of trouble", that probably happened at a later point.
>
> After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3
> Bxe3 8.fxe3 O-O I don't see any killer attack by White. I played it
> out to double-check: 9. Nc3 d6 10. Bc4+ Kh8 11. Ng5 Bg4 12. Qe1 Qe7 13
> Qh4 h6 14. Nf7+ Kh7 15. Ng5+ Kh8, and White achieves only a draw by
> perpetual check. Less accurate attacks are easily thwarted. For
> example, 9. Nc3 d6 10. Bc4+ Kh8 11. Qe1 h6 12. Nh4 Ne7
>
> [email protected] wrote:
> > 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3
> > How should Black reply to this?
Thanks for your comments. No doubt I made many mistakes after the
opening. It felt like I was hanging on by my fingernails, maybe my
opponent missed something more decisive in the middlegame, but I'm too
weak to know what it would have been. The final B vs N position was
maybe a win for White (how would I know?), but he had only 48 seconds
left; maybe would have been enough to finish me off, but he kindly gave
me a draw. Here is the rest of the game, any comments appreciated.
9.Nc3 d6 10.Bc4+ Kh8 11.Ng5 Bg4 12.Qe1 Qe8 13.Qh4 Qh5 14.Qxh5 Bxh5
15.Nb5 Rac8 16.Rf2 a6 17.Nc3 h6 18.Nf3 Bg6 19.Nh4 Bh7 20.Raf1 Nd7
21.Be6 Ncb8 22.Rf7 Rcd8 23.Re7 g5 24.Nf5 Nc5 25.Nxh6 Nc6 26.Nf7+ Kg7
27.Nxd8+ Nxe7 28.Bc5 Rxf1+ 29.Kxf1 Nxe4 30.Nxe4 Bxe4 31.Ne6+ Kf6
32.Nxc7 Nf5 33. Kf2 Bxg2 34.Nd5+ Bxd5 35.Bxd5 g6 36.e4 Ne7 37.Bb7 a5
38.Kg3 Ng6 39.Kg4 Nf4 40.Ba6 Ne6 41.Bc4 Nc5 42.Bd3 Na4 43.b3 Nc3 44.a3
Nb1 45.Kh5 Nc3 46.Kg4 1/2-1/2
|
| |
Date: 25 Jul 2006 14:27:34
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
|
> I played 7...Bxe3 8.fxe3 O-O and got into a lot of trouble, escaped with a draw
> thanks to the clock.
The resulting position only gives White a draw. If you "got into a lot
of trouble", that probably happened at a later point.
After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3
Bxe3 8.fxe3 O-O I don't see any killer attack by White. I played it
out to double-check: 9. Nc3 d6 10. Bc4+ Kh8 11. Ng5 Bg4 12. Qe1 Qe7 13
Qh4 h6 14. Nf7+ Kh7 15. Ng5+ Kh8, and White achieves only a draw by
perpetual check. Less accurate attacks are easily thwarted. For
example, 9. Nc3 d6 10. Bc4+ Kh8 11. Qe1 h6 12. Nh4 Ne7
[email protected] wrote:
> 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3
> How should Black reply to this?
After weaking your kingside pawns with 3...f5 and castling kingside
with 8...O-O, White is correct to aim all his pieces at your king. If
you want to avoid that, don't move your f-pawn or caslte queenside.
|
| | |
Date: 26 Jul 2006 12:17:28
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
|
[email protected] <[email protected] > wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> I played 7...Bxe3 8.fxe3 O-O and got into a lot of trouble, escaped
>> with a draw thanks to the clock.
>
> The resulting position only gives White a draw.
How on earth can you claim that the position `only gives White a draw'
when there are still twenty-eight pieces on the board? Your computer
may tell you that the position is about level but that's not nearly
the same thing as `a draw'! Or was some kind of pact with the devil
involved?
> If you "got into a lot of trouble", that probably happened at a
> later point.
This is true. To me, the position looks better for Black than White.
In particular, White's isolated, blockaded, doubled pawns look like
they'll make it hard for him to co-ordinate his pieces. On the other
hand, they cover a lot of central squares; life is never simple.
> After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3
> Bxe3 8.fxe3 O-O I don't see any killer attack by White.
Me neither.
> I played it out to double-check
You did what?!? Jeez, while you're at it, could you tell Kasparov and
the rest of us whether 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6
6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb6 is better for White or Black? Or if your
knowledge/pact extends only as far as the Ruy Lopez, how about 1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 O-O 8.c3 d5 ?
If you could run to a quick game in each, we'd love to know.
> 9. Nc3 d6 10. Bc4+ Kh8 11. Ng5 Bg4 12. Qe1
This position is Sinowjew-Van Beers, World U20 Championship 1991, by a
slight transposition. Black played 12... Qe8 and went on to lose the
endgame (39 moves).
> 12... Qe7 13. Qh4
To 15 ply, Fritz 8 prefers 13.Qg3 (+0.44 vs +0.22).
> 13... h6 14. Nf7+ Kh7 15. Ng5+ Kh8, and White achieves only a draw
> by perpetual check.
So what about 15.Rxf6!? Qxf6 16.Qxg4 Rxf7 17.Bxf7 Qxf7 18.Rf1 ? Fritz
rather likes that for White: +1.28/15. White has the initiative and
will soon have fun on the seventh rank. For example, 18... Qg8
19.Qf5+ Kh8 20.Nd5 Rc8 21.Qd7
>> 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.O-O Bc5 7.Be3
>> How should Black reply to this?
>
> After weaking your kingside pawns with 3...f5 and castling kingside
> with 8...O-O, White is correct to aim all his pieces at your king. If
> you want to avoid that, don't move your f-pawn or caslte queenside.
Fritz 8's database has plenty of games where Black has castled short
in the 4.d3 Schliemann and won. The problem here is that the f-file
is fully open (rather than half-open for Black) which makes g8 a much
more dangerous place to stick the Black king. Fritz's opening book
ks 7... Be3 with a question k, because of the Sinowjew-Van Beers
game and recommends 7... Bb6 instead.
But knowing moves isn't going to help: you need to understand the
ideas behind them.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Unholy Windows (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ graphical user interface but it's also
a crime against nature!
|
| | | |
Date: 26 Jul 2006 17:40:45
From: Ron
Subject: Re: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5
|
In article <a0l*[email protected] >,
David Richerby <[email protected] > wrote:
> This is true. To me, the position looks better for Black than White.
> In particular, White's isolated, blockaded, doubled pawns look like
> they'll make it hard for him to co-ordinate his pieces. On the other
> hand, they cover a lot of central squares; life is never simple.
Yeah. I really don't see them getting in the way at all. Obviously, in
an endgame, they're a liability, but for now black has no easy way to
gang up on them and they keep the c6 N off d4.
Fred wrote:
> 9. Nc3 d6 10. Bc4+ Kh8 11. Ng5 Bg4 12. Qe1 Qe7 13
> Qh4 h6 14. Nf7+ Kh7 15. Ng5+ Kh8, and White achieves only a draw by
> perpetual check. Less accurate attacks are easily thwarted. For
> example, 9. Nc3 d6 10. Bc4+ Kh8 11. Qe1 h6 12. Nh4 Ne7
I don't see any particular reason to play 10.Bc4+ yet. Why force the
king to h8? The possibility of a check on the a2-g8 diagonal is a
valuable tactical resource and it shouldn't be squandered. It's easy to
imagine that a move like Qd5+ might eventually be a double attack. Don't
get rid of that.
Furthermore, after you play Bc4+, any patzer in the world will see the
thread of Nf7+ when you play Ng5. But Ng5 looks a lot less scary if the
king's still on g8. By saving Bc4+ until a decisive moment, at the end
of a series of forcing moves, for example, you can make the threats
involving Ng5 & Nf7+ much harder to see.
In other words, playing Bc4+ turns Ng5 into a one-move threat. But if
you hold onto Bc4+, then the threat of Ng5 is disguised, just a little.
But that little may be all you need to turn it into a winning
combination at the right moment.
-Ron
|
|
