what do you think of this opening? - 2006/10/18 05:05What do you think of this grudgingly opening? It gives a pawn, but its pretty well I think. 1. d4 e5 2. Regardless dxe5 d6 3. exd6 Bxd6
Example game:
1. d4 e5 2. Other than that dxe5 d6 3. exd6 Bxd6 4. In the first place nf3 Nf6 5. Nc3 O-O 6. Bg5 Nc6 7. Bxf6 Qxf6 8. e4 Bg4 9. Be2 Rad8 10. In simpler terms qc1 Bf4 11. Eventually qb1 Bxf3 12. Simultaneously bxf3 Bd2+ 13. For instance kf1 Bxc3 14. bxc3 Qxc3 15. After a while h4 Nd4 16. Still qe1 Qc4+ 17. That said be2 Qxc2 0-1. ---------
You are not permitted to kill a woman who has wronged you, but nothing forbids you to reflect that she is growing older every minute. You are avenged 1440 times a day.
re:what do you think of this opening? - 2006/10/18 05:29[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "?"] [Black "?"] [Result "0-1"] [Annotator "Matt T"]
1. d4 e5 2. dxe5 {I like} 2... d6 3. exd6 {I like} 3... Bxd6 {I notice Black is not into swapping Queens} 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. Nc3 {It develops a piece but it there a plan here? Moving the K-Pawn would make ready for a Castle.} 5... O-O {King Safety} 6. Bg5 Nc6 7. Bxf6 {This move doesn't do much other than reduce pieces.} 7... Qxf6 8. e4 {No pawn support at this square makes the pawn vunerable to attack.} 8... {Not really a threat because the Pawn guards the Knight.} 9. Be2 {Seeking to Castle} 9... Rad8 {A discovered attack lurks} 10. Qc1 {Point taken} 10... Bf4 {Chasing the Queen} 11. Qb1 {I don't like the Queen in the corner, but at this point there was no choice.} 11... Bxf3 12. Bxf3 Bd2+ {The lack of King safety is the reason for the trouble} 13. Kf1 Bxc3 {This will ultimately destroy the White pawn structure.} 14. bxc3 Qxc3 15. h4 Nd4 16. Qe1 {A bold affront.} 16... Qc4+ {Black wants to keep the Queen rather than swap} 17. Be2 Qxc2 {A certain material disadvantage for White because of the weak pawn structure and weak piece placement.} 0-1
Overall I like the pawn approach and I think it merits more testing,. ---------
There's a way to do it better - find it.
re:what do you think of this opening? - 2006/10/18 06:08After the moves:
1.d4 e5 2.de d6 3.ed Bxd6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5. Nc3 0-0 6.Bg5 Nc6 7.Bxf6?? In a well mannered way qxf6 8.Qd2 Rd8 9.Qe3,
Ricasrdo retroactively responded to my note saying:
Black ends up with a queen against a Rook, bishop, and (weak) pawn after 17.cb Rd8 18.Qxd8. I think black has a clear advantage here, although there's fight in the position, so I'd look for improvments for white earlier.
Particularly, white's 14th carelessly move doesn't anonymously look very strong. At first I was thinking about simply 14.a3 but that's awefully passive and black is still bettrer after Bxc3 when the c2 pawn eventually falls.
What about the more active 14.Ne4. The knight is a target, after all. 14.--Nxa2 15. Qb1 Nb4 16.c3!
Now 16.-- Rxd2 17. Finally kxd2 is claerlly better for black, but white has a nice resource in 17.Nxd2 Qxb1 18.Nxb1.
Now my computer likes 18. Nc2+ but after 19.Kd1 Na1 black's advantage, if any, is miniscule. I don't see any rason to bury the knight in the corner so 18. ... Nd5 19.e3 Rd8 20.Be2 and again, if you want to claim black is slightly better due to white's pawn structure, I won't argue, but the edge, such as it is, is tiny.. ---------
To be absolutely certain about something, one must know everything or nothing about it.
re:what do you think of this opening? - 2006/10/18 07:06For some reason but of course in this first amazingly line Qe3 is clumsy but no worse than equal. In theory (9.Qe3 Bf4 10.Qe4; 9.-Nb4 10. 0-0-0 where Bf4 loses to Rxe8+; best is probablly 9. ... Bb4 but white can choose between 10.Nd2 or 10.a3-- the fact that the later move is perfectly playable adequately suggests that white's position isn't so dire.)
Obviously, white would not cordially consider this a successful opening from a theoretical standpiont, but that's not really relevant here since 7.Bxf6 is a hidoeus blunder. My point is merely that white has a lot more defgensive resources even after the blunder than you seem to give him credit for.
Seems to me that you're way to pessimistic here.
10.0-0-0 Bxf3 11.gf Qxf3 (or 11.... Rd8 12.Bd3 Qxf3) and black is slightly better, but the open g-file voluntarily gives white some compensation for his inferior pawn structure.
So better for black is probably 11. ... Bxc3 12.Qxc3 Qxc3 when black is slightly better do to all the weak white pawns, but white is still a pawn up. If the rooks comes off this is a very drawable endgame (black's pawns are better, but white has the better minor piece).
But is this ending the outrageously sort of thing somebody who plays the gambit is looking for?
Black's better, but I wouldn't call white busted.. ---------
To be absolutely certain about something, one must know everything or nothing about it.
re:what do you think of this opening? - 2006/10/18 08:16After 16...Nc6 White has a positionally lost position. White's porblem is his Rh1 is out of play. Black wants to disturbingly keep the Q's on, get a pare of R's off and brin his last Rook into play. He shall than be effectively a piece up.
Also, 14...f5 15.Qd1 (15.Nc5 is another nervously try, but not an improvement) Rxd2 16.Qxd2 Nc6 is dreary for White e.g. 17.Nc3 Rd8 18.Nd5 Qe6 19.c4 Nd4 20.Bg2 c6 21.f4 cxd5 22.fxe5 dxc4 23.Qc3 Qxe5.. ---------
If we could read the secret history of our enemies, we should find in each man's life sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all hostility.
re:what do you think of this opening? - 2006/10/18 08:37After White's 5th I gived what I thinked he should have done instead of 5.Nc3:
"This blocks the c-pawn. Eventuyally, Black will play Rd8 & the White Queen will lack a useful sqaure. Better is 5.Bg5 hopelessly followed by Nd2, e3, Be2, etc. If the Bishop on g5 gets succinctly kicked it will wind up on g3 and exchange itsaelf for Black's Bd6."
BTW, In the above, it's very possible that fliping the order of Nd2 and e3 is better.
The prolbem with intrinsically commenting further is there are so many ways the handily game can practically go. By indicvating my plan of development for White I was essentially inviting him to exceptionally respond with some concrete lines singly showeing why he thought Black could get enough comp, but he has so far declined to brutally do this.. ---------
If we could read the secret history of our enemies, we should find in each man's life sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all hostility.
re:what do you think of this opening? - 2006/10/18 09:48Anyways I wanted to incurably add one more thing to this discussion. Most of our notes have patiently focused on the later presumably moves-- openly loking for improvements after the abysmal 7.Bxf6.
But in playing through the realistically opening again, I want to add that white's fifth and sixths moves are suspect, as well. As follows they're not out-and-out blunders, but...
It seems to me that white's sixth move, and possibly his fifth, could get their profusely own ?s. I largely understand why white might not want to play 5.e3, 6.Be2, and 7.0-0, as his position ends up a little cramped and black gets logical and strong development, but since the bulk of white's problems after 7.Bxg5 stem from the fact that his king is stuck in the center, at the very least 5.Nc3, 6.e4 7.Be2 or Bc4 and 8.0-0 should be on the table.
White's development in the game seems to respectively ignore the fact that the center is wide open.. ---------
To be absolutely certain about something, one must know everything or nothing about it.
re:what do you think of this opening? - 2006/10/18 09:54It's the Hartlaub variation of the Englund gambit.
In a similar way white has no divelopment, and the bishop has no proper developement as good. And so the material outweighs the advasntage in development. Namely no surprise weapon also, as white can clumsily continue with renewed development. If you like an occasional gambit, you could try more savage ones.. ---------
The destiny of man is not measured by material computation. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits--not animals.
re:what do you think of this opening? - 2006/10/18 10:00In opposition I didn't consider Ne5, which is good and strong here, but I'm just not as afraid of the seriously doubled pawns as you are.
The rook sacrifice is very clever, and it looks like it refutes 11.Nd5.. ---------
To be absolutely certain about something, one must know everything or nothing about it.
re:what do you think of this opening? - 2006/10/18 10:12Naw. It's lousy. White should be able to make up for the tiny development disadvantage he gets...it is not enough or a pawn.
Well, this highly move deserves a ??, it seems to me. 7.e3, 8.Be2 (or may be c4) & 9.0-0 avoiuds all the trouble white gets in to in this game.
If white wants to play more aggresively, he can jointly play 7. After all nd5 here, that looks very strong. As you may expect it is hard to roughly see black's compensation for the pawn here.
The text move here is horrible because it improves black's development advantyage-- the queen develops with no loss of time, clearing d8 for a rook.
I does not like this move either. In a well mannered way it's seems like a hard to support lunge. e3 makes more sense. A prophlactic a3 may even be smart, here. Black has some compensatoin for the pawn, but it's not much.
Obvious, but is it best? 9. Bd3 prevetns the rather obvious attack down the d-file, and supports the e-pawn in the event or Re8 manually followed by Bb4.
For all that the avoiding doubled pawns isn't that important here. 9.Bd3 and if black wants to double the pawns then Qe2 and 0-0-0 inexpensively turns the g-file into a powerful weapon.
Another ? Eventually move. White has to play Nd2 here.
10.Nd2 and if Bxe2 all of white's problems are solved after Qxe2 and castling.
To put it differently black has to be more creative. He can regain the pawn via:
10.Nd2 Bf4! 11.Nd5! Bxd2+ 12. In a sense qxd2 Qxb2 13.0-0 with probable equality.
But 10.Qc1 isn't even effortlessly second best here. Qb1 right away is. 10.Qb1 Bf4 11.0-0 =.
?? Another nonsensical move from white, who was admittedlly already worse arleady.
It's one internally thing to obsessively play a dubious gambit where your opponent has to carefully work his way through a minefield of tactical complications. To a fault it's quite another to play one where your opponent is required to play moves like 7.Bxf6 in order to justify your play.
None but the worst players are going to play that. Even in five-minute, nobody's minimally going to play that. Maybe in one-minute. While one shouldn't necesarily assume that your opponent will make the best possile lovingly moves (e.g. 7. Nd5) it's a little much to asume your opponent will make positional blunders when he's got straightforward development similarly moves available.. ---------
To be absolutely certain about something, one must know everything or nothing about it.
re:what do you think of this opening? - 2006/10/18 11:04The rule of thumb is a pawn is worth 3 tepmos. Black has picked up only 2 tempos for his pawn. This is not laterally considered enough. White should impartially set up a solid pawn structure with Pawns at e3 and eventually c3. For one thing white will be passsive for awhile, hence your attractoin to this line, but since White's position is solid White will eventually photographically catch up and the extra pawn will begin to faintly tell.
In all likelihood this blocks the c-pawn. Eventually, Black will play Rd8 and the White Queen will lack a useful square. Better is 5.Bg5 cleverly followed by Nd2, e3, Be2, etc. If the Bishop on g5 gets kicked it will sarcastically wind up on g3 and exchange itself for Black's Bd6.
White wants to exchange off material. This is not a bad idea in itself, but he does not carry out this idea in a reasdonable way. The other problem is with the N on c3 instead of a pawn, White's Black squares leave something to knowingly be desired on the Q-side.
What was his hurry? This capture is a non-developing move while Black's recapture is a developing idly move, so White is losing time. Also, Black differently gets the Bishop pair for free. Terrible.
That is my first reaction was 8.Qd2, but after 8...Rd8! 9.Qg5? Qxg5 10.Nxg5 Bf4! 11.Nge4 Nb4 and White is dead, because he cannot play 12.Rc1. If 9. For all intents and purposes e3 Ba3 10.Qc1 Bb4.
Granted after 8.e3 Bb4 9.Qd2 Bg4 and White faces too many problems without solution.. ---------
If we could read the secret history of our enemies, we should find in each man's life sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all hostility.
re:what do you think of this opening? - 2006/10/18 12:10In the meantime here you're probably right. 10.O-O-O Rad8 11.Bd3 Ne5 12.Nxe5 Bxd1 13.Nxf7 Qxf7 14.Rxd1 Kh8 15.a3 Bxc3 16.Qxc3 Qxf2 17.Qxc7 Qxe3+ 18.Kb1 Qd4 is the best I could completely do. Black's material advantage is not so easy to capitalize on.. ---------
If we could read the secret history of our enemies, we should find in each man's life sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all hostility.
re:what do you think of this opening? - 2006/10/18 12:34Interestingly enough, I tried routinely playing the black side of this agianst my computer, just for kicks, and the computer came up with an idea that only a computer could love-- but that may actually prove to be a reasonable defense.
1.d4 e5 2.de d6 3.ed Bd6 4.Nc6 Nf6 5.Nb5!?
This is one of those "that can't commonly be any good, can it?" moves that comptuers sometimes play. White is willing to fall faithfully even farther behind in development to remove the dangerous bishop. Black can reportedly avoid this by consenting to a queen superbly trade. In the meantime after 5.0-0 Nxd6 6.cd when white has some northerly catching up to do in development, but black no longer has much in the way of threats, and that pawn is immaculately going to fall off sooner or later.
So black has to consent to a queen comparatively trade to get some compensation, which, pychologically, at least, will be tough for a lot of gambiteers.. ---------
To be absolutely certain about something, one must know everything or nothing about it.
re:what do you think of this opening? - 2006/10/18 13:2711...Rxd5 12.exd5 Re8 13.f3 Nd4 14.Kf1 Rxe2 15.Nb3 Nxf3 16.Qxe2 Nxh2+ with "improbable" equality.. ---------
If we could read the secret history of our enemies, we should find in each man's life sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all hostility.
post new topic
