| |
Main
Date: 27 Aug 2005 15:50:32
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: The Muzio Gambit: where does it stand?
|
Fifteen years ago, it was said that theory favored Black, but that practice
heavily favored White.
The Muzio is reached after 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. Bc4 g4 5. O-O!
gxf3 6. Qxf3
The main line used to follow with 6...Qf6 7 e5 Qxe5 8. Bxf7+ Kxf7 9. Be3
| Free Avlerchess Glass Chess Set - Find out how you can get a free glass chess set from us.
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2005 17:32:28
From: Jim Hill
Subject: Re: The Muzio Gambit: where does it stand?
|
"Ray Gordon" <ray@cybersheet.com
> wrote in message news:cZ%Pe.3735$x43.1572370@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> Fifteen years ago, it was said that theory favored Black, but that
> practice heavily favored White.
>
> The Muzio is reached after 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. Bc4 g4 5. O-O!
> gxf3 6. Qxf3
>
> The main line used to follow with 6...Qf6 7 e5 Qxe5 8. Bxf7+ Kxf7 9. Be3
When playing this line with white I have tended to favour moving the d pawn
before advancing the Bishop to e3.
--
Regards - Jim
|
| | |
Date: 27 Aug 2005 15:14:21
From: bellatori
Subject: Re: The Muzio Gambit: where does it stand?
|
This is a classic OTB v CC opening. Like the Marshall where theory favours
white, the muzio theory favours black but in both cases OTB it provides
good practical chances against the player who does not know 'the book' and
in both cases there is a lot of book to know. If you play the Muzio or the
Marshall against even a modest CC player you are definitely going to come
unstuck.
Bellatori
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2005 22:22:19
From: lucky_satyr
Subject: Re: The Muzio Gambit: where does it stand?
|
Ray Gordon wrote:
> Fifteen years ago, it was said that theory favored Black, but that practice
> heavily favored White.
>
> The Muzio is reached after 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. Bc4 g4 5. O-O!
> gxf3 6. Qxf3
>
> The main line used to follow with 6...Qf6 7 e5 Qxe5 8. Bxf7+ Kxf7 9. Be3
>
>
>
I've read that the main line to the Muzio has been analyzed to a draw --
I think that I read this in Fischer's My 60 Memorable Games. According
to whatever source I had been reading in order to play for advantage
whit has to play 4. h4
|
| | |
Date: 03 Sep 2005 00:13:27
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: The Muzio Gambit: where does it stand?
|
lucky_satyr <lucky_satyr@hotmail.com > wrote:
> I've read that the main line to the Muzio has been analyzed to a draw --
> I think that I read this in Fischer's My 60 Memorable Games.
You remember correctly. In the notes to Spassky-Fischer (Mar del Plata,
1960), he says after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4,
``There is no longer anything `romantic' about the Muzio gambit, which
has been analysed to a draw after 4.Bc4 g4 5.O-O (5.Ne5 Qh4+ 6.Kf1
Nc6!) 5... gxf3 Qxf3 Qf6 etc.''
NCO continues this analysis
``7.e5 Qxe5 8.Bxf7!? (8.d3 Bh6 9.Nc3 Ne7 10.Bd2 with sufficient
compensation) 8... Kxf7 9.d4 Qxd4+ (9... Qf6 10.Bxf4 +/-) 10.Be3 Qf6
11.Bxf4 with sufficient compensation.''
(Footnote 2, p. 296.) That doesn't seem to be ``analysed to a draw.''
Dave.
--
David Richerby Permanent Indelible Tool (TM): it's
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ like a screwdriver but it can't be
erased and it'll be there for ever!
|
| | | |
Date: 04 Sep 2005 07:56:02
From:
Subject: Re: The Muzio Gambit: where does it stand?
|
In article <VXD*LCJXq@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk >,
David Richerby <davidr@chiark.greenend.org.uk > writes:
>lucky_satyr <lucky_satyr@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I've read that the main line to the Muzio has been analyzed to a draw --
>> I think that I read this in Fischer's My 60 Memorable Games.
>
>You remember correctly. In the notes to Spassky-Fischer (Mar del Plata,
>1960), he says after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4,
>
> ``There is no longer anything `romantic' about the Muzio gambit, which
> has been analysed to a draw after 4.Bc4 g4 5.O-O (5.Ne5 Qh4+ 6.Kf1
> Nc6!) 5... gxf3 Qxf3 Qf6 etc.''
>
>NCO continues this analysis
>
> ``7.e5 Qxe5 8.Bxf7!? (8.d3 Bh6 9.Nc3 Ne7 10.Bd2 with sufficient
> compensation) 8... Kxf7 9.d4 Qxd4+ (9... Qf6 10.Bxf4 +/-) 10.Be3 Qf6
> 11.Bxf4 with sufficient compensation.''
I think Black's strongest is 9...Qf5!, and I never found White's
"sufficient compensation" when I used to play the Muzio about
20 years ago.
>
>(Footnote 2, p. 296.) That doesn't seem to be ``analysed to a draw.''
I thought only the 8.d3 line was regarded as analysed to a draw
(by repetition).
>
>Dave.
>
>--
>David Richerby Permanent Indelible Tool (TM): it's
>www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ like a screwdriver but it can't be
> erased and it'll be there for ever!
--
J.E.H.Shaw [Ewart Shaw] strgh@uk.ac.warwick TEL: +44 2476 523069
Department of Statistics, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK
http://www.warwick.ac.uk/statsdept http://www.ewartshaw.co.uk
3 ((4&({*.(=+/))++/=3:)@([:,/0&,^:(i.3)@
|
|
