Matemax wrote on 12/14/07 at 07:01:38:


Yes I've recently noticed that trend too much to my amusement... LOL  

I do empathise with your frustration Matemax, perhaps you should start yet another thread.  

Toppy

Markovich: somes month ago we spoke about this subject, and I told you that I had 2 recents games of Leisebein as Black here, 2 draws, then you asked to me if I could send the games by email to you and I did (and got 0 response, so I never knew if you received the games). For somes days I can't be on the internet at home, so I can't find the 2 games at the moment.

Quote:

There are three games played in this line:

Kluenter- Arnold, 2001
15... 0-0-0 16.a3 Ba5 17.Be3 Nf6 18.b4 Bb6 19.a4 c6 20.Rhc1 Rhe8 21.a5 Bc7 22.Nxc7 Kxc7 23.a6 Ra8 24.b5 Nd5  25.Bd2 Re6 26.Ra5 b6 27.Ra2 Kd7 28.bxc6+ Rxc6 29.Rxc6 Kxc6 30.g3 Kb5 31.Rb2+ Kc6 32.f5 Rxa6 33.g4 h6 34.h4 Ra7 35.Rc2+ Kd6 36.Be1 Rf7 37.Bg3+ Kd7 38.Kd2 Rf6 39.Ra2 g5 40.Ra7+ Kc6  41.Be5 Rf8 42.Bg7 Re8 43.f6 e3+ 44.Ke1  1-0

Pilgaard - Simonsen, 2003
15...0-0-0 16.Be3 Nf6 17.Rac1 c6 18.Nc3 Ba5 19.Rhd1 Nd5 20.Nxd5 Rxd5 21.Rc5 Bb6 22.Rxd5 cxd5 23.Rc1+ Kd7 24.a4 Ra8 25.b3 h5 26.h3 g6 27.Kf2 Ke6 28.g4 hxg4 29.hxg4 Kf7 30.Kg3 Kg7 31.Rc2 Kf7 32.Rc3 Ke6 33.Rc1 Kf7 34.Rc2 Kg7 35.g5 Kf7 36.Kg4 Kg7 37.f5 gxf5+ 38.Kxf5 Rf8+ 39.Ke6 Rd8 40.b4 
1-0

Rodriguez - Satici, corr. 2004
15...0-0-0 16.Be3 Nf6 17.Rac1 c6 18.a3 Be7 19.Nc3 Rhe8 20.Rhd1 Nd5 21.h3 g6 22.g4 Nxc3+ 23.bxc3 Bxa3 24.Ra1 Bb2 25.Ra8+ Kc7 26.Rxd8 Rxd8 27.Bd2 Re8 28.f5 Ba3 29.Rf1 gxf5 30.gxf5 Bd6 31.Bg5 Kd7 32.Ke3 c5 33.f6 cxd4+ 34.cxd4 b5 35.f7 Ra8 36.Bh6 Bf8 37.Bxf8 Rxf8 38.Kxe4 Kd6 39.Rf6+ Ke7 40.Ke5 
1-0

well all in favour of white - looks like the refutation of Qg5!?

And what I've learned: Start a thread (4.d3) and end up somewhere else 

For the challenge I would be ready to play that position as Black on corr and I say: after 15..0-0-0 and good play I might manage to draw.

If someone want to play the White side here on the forum we could begin a game with that starting position.

I would probably condemn myself for playing 4...fxe4, promise myself to do that never again and pray that my opponent is weak enough to let the win slip. Anyone willing to defend this should become member of an SM-circle (for the M-part).

micawber wrote on 12/11/07 at 21:56:32:




The position in question arises from 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Nxe5 dxe4 7.Nxc3 Qg5 8.Qe2 Nf6 9.Nxa7+ Bd7 10.Bxd7+ Nxd7 11.f4 Qc5 12.Nb5 Qxc7 13.d4 Bb4+ 14.Kf2 Qxe2+ 15.Kxe2.  Black is to move.



At least, I believe that to be the correct position.  I can't believe that anyone would want the defense of Black's side to be frequent part of his chess experiences.

Quote:

I was once preparing for an opponent who plays the Qg5-Schliemann and I just felt the quote from above! More important 4.d3 looks much easier to handle OTB - 4.Nc3 may be the right choice for corr-games. By the way: Against the mentioned opponent I finally choose 4.Nc3 and won with a nice sac on c6 in the main-line of the Qg5-Schliemann. On ICC they are beating me a lot if I play 4.Nc3 (with the 3-minute-total-confusing-chess-strategy) and my results with 4.d3 are much better.

4.Nc3 or 4.d3 a nice choice for white to strangle the black Schliemman!?

What is exactly the endgame position you think defensible after Markovich
4.Nc3 variation?
I wonder if you refer to the position (variation II) after move 12 in the following post?

http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1177230554/15#26