(UTC)
  ChessPub Forum › Chess Publishing Openings › 1. e4 e5 - Non-Spanish › 2 Knights › question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
(Moderators: Smyslov_Fan, trw, Jupp53)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights (Read 27164 times)
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10780
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #30 - 11/27/09 at 02:28:07
Post Tools
ArKheiN wrote on 11/26/09 at 13:10:41:
10.0-0! Rb8 11.Bc6 exd4 12.d3 Qf5 (or 12..Nf4 13.Na3!) 13.Re1 seems better for White (but Black may have attacking chances in the long run in White's king)
10.0-0! exd4 11.Bc6 Rb8 12.d3 and see my previous line.
10.0-0! Nf4 11.Bc6 Rb8 12.d3 (12.dxe5!? Rb6 13.Bf3 Nd3 14.Be4 Rh6 and improvments for White are probably possible over the game Essegern-Sobeck 0-1, corr 1974) 12..Rb8 (12..exd4 13.Na3!) 13.Be4 where White seems to be better again


Thanks a lot. Our friend has posted so much that I had forgotten about this.
Are you aware of Pirrot-Karpatchev, Dresden 2006? 13.Na3! looks like an improvement indeed. Fritz thinks Black is OK, but not Rybka. At the other hand I am not convinced by White's advantage after 12...Qf5 13.Re1 Nf6. But I must admit that Black's play looks somewhat artificial.
If that bishop on c6 indeed is that annoying Black should look at 10...Bb7 11.Qf3 exd4 12.d3 and again neither the available games nor Rybka's evaluation seem very helpful. At this moment I have no idea which move is best for Black.
All this seems to need intensive and extensive analysis, something I haven't the time for at the moment. Perhaps during the next holiday.

On one point I think you are right. From White's perspective 8.cxd4 looks far more interesting than previously thought. At the moment I think it more challenging than other attempts. That is good news for someone who wants to play the Evans Gambit.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ArKheiN
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 728
Location: Belgium
Joined: 03/30/05
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #29 - 11/26/09 at 13:10:41
Post Tools
Yes I will refresh your  memory, because I began that discussion in the "sloughter's thread" page 6-7 about 11 month ago: 

http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1230634273/75

where I have nothing to add since that. Here is the quote from what I have said:

Quote:
Quote:
Posted by: MNb Posted on: 01/17/09 at 15:41:56 
I don't like Black's position after 12.dxe5 Ne3 etcetera, even though Black has done quite well in practice. So I prefer 10...exd4 and a fun line is 11.Bc6 Nf4 12.Bxa8 Ba6. If White plays 10.0-0 instead there is again 10...exd4.



Indeend, I couldn't find anything for White after 10.Qf3 exd4! 11.Bc6 Nf4 etc.

But I switched back with 10.0-0 because I don't see any drawback of playing 10.0-0 withe my previous idea. And the advantage now after 10..exd4 is that White's king doesn't stay in the center. 

So :
10.0-0! Fb7 11.Qf3 Rb8 12.dxe5 is what I wanted.
10.0-0! Rb8 11.Bc6 exd4 12.d3 Qf5 (or 12..Nf4 13.Na3!) 13.Re1 seems better for White (but Black may have attacking chances in the long run in White's king)
10.0-0! exd4 11.Bc6 Rb8 12.d3 and see my previous line.
10.0-0! Nf4 11.Bc6 Rb8 12.d3 (12.dxe5!? Rb6 13.Bf3 Nd3 14.Be4 Rh6 and improvments for White are probably possible over the game Essegern-Sobeck 0-1, corr 1974) 12..Rb8 (12..exd4 13.Na3!) 13.Be4 where White seems to be better again.

Any improvment/other evaluation somewhere? MNb Iam interested by your toughts because you seemed to advocate 10..exd4 after 10.0-0 too.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10780
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #28 - 11/26/09 at 02:03:22
Post Tools
Could you refresh my memory? What was the problem with 10/11...exd4 again?
I don't think I ever disputed the endgame advantage for White after 12...Ne3. But I seem to remember that I posted something on this 10...exd4 idea before. What I have forgotten is if Black should play 10...exd4 at once, after 10...Bb7 or after 10...Rb8.
Your claim is still premature I opine.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ArKheiN
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 728
Location: Belgium
Joined: 03/30/05
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #27 - 11/25/09 at 21:20:27
Post Tools
So I gave a new look into the Fritz-Ulvestad after watching the video again and I still don't find a way to equalize with Black. In fact in the video after the ending with 12..Ne3 13.Qh3 Qxg2+ 14.Qxg2 Nxg2 15.d4 Nh4 (not the only move but the one gived in the video) 16.Bg5+ Be7 17.Bxh4 Bxh4 18.Nc3, it follows a line given in Pinski's book with 18..Bf3 19.b3 19..Rb6!? with the idea to give the exchange after 20.Bd3 Rg6+ 21.Bxg6 where the autor of the video admits himself that White should be better, and it's true that the 2 bishops are strong but White should have the advantage with correct play. So the Fritz-Ulvestad is still at leat +/= to me Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2211
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #26 - 11/02/09 at 17:19:28
Post Tools
endali wrote on 11/02/09 at 08:48:10:
i am pleasantly encouraged to learn that a player as strong as Friedel plays the Ulvestad. are there any other strong players whose games i could look at in this line?


Aleksandr Karpatchev seems to play this line quite a bit as Black.

Tops Smiley
  
The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
endali
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 35
Joined: 08/06/09
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #25 - 11/02/09 at 08:48:10
Post Tools
i am pleasantly encouraged to learn that a player as strong as Friedel plays the Ulvestad. are there any other strong players whose games i could look at in this line?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
urusov
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 147
Location: Kenilworth
Joined: 08/04/05
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #24 - 11/02/09 at 02:00:27
Post Tools
Thanks.  I checked ICC, and I could only find the three games you offer.  But that is sufficient evidence that he does prefer the Ulvestad, so I stand corrected.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2211
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #23 - 11/01/09 at 23:52:43
Post Tools
According to my regular database Friedel has only met 4.Ng5 on three occasions in tournament play, two of which he chose the Ulvestad move 5...b5.  Supposedly you already know of those database games, so instead here are some of his ICC blitz games played with the line:

[Event "ICC 3 0"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2003.09.21"]
[Round "-"]
[White "CIS"]
[Black "Sea-Hawk"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ICCResult "White checkmated"]
[WhiteElo "2736"]
[BlackElo "2744"]
[Opening "two knights defense: Ulvestad variation"]
[ECO "C57"]
[NIC "KP.01"]
[Time "01:03:34"]
[TimeControl "180+0"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 b5 6. Bf1 h6 7. Nxf7 Kxf7 8. dxc6 Bc5 9. Bxb5 Ng4 10. O-O Qh4 11. Qf3+ Ke8 12. h3 Rf8 13. Qb3 Nxf2 14. d4 Bxd4 15. Be3 Nxh3+ 16. Kh2 Nf2+ 17. Kg1 Qh1# {White checkmated} 0-1

[Event "ICC 5 0"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2003.10.14"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Sage"]
[Black "Sea-Hawk"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ICCResult "Black resigns"]
[WhiteElo "2370"]
[BlackElo "2302"]
[Opening "two knights defense: Ulvestad variation"]
[ECO "C57"]
[NIC "KP.01"]
[Time "22:50:42"]
[TimeControl "300+0"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 b5 6. Bf1 h6 7. Nf3 Qxd5 8.Nc3 Qe6 9. Bxb5 Bd7 10. O-O Bd6 11. d4 e4 12. d5 Nxd5 13. Nxd5 exf3 14. Bxc6Bxc6 15. Re1 Bxd5 16. Rxe6+ Bxe6 17. Qxf3 O-O 18. Bf4 Rab8 19. Bxd6 cxd6 20.b3 d5 21. h3 Rfc8 22. c3 Rb7 23. Rd1 Rbc7 24. Rd3 g6 25. g4 Kg7 26. h4 a5 27. Qf4 Kg8 28. Qd4 Ra8 29. h5 gxh5 30. gxh5 Kh7 31. Rg3 Rg8 32. Qd3+ Kh8 33. Rxg8+ Kxg8 34. Qg3+ {Black resigns} 1-0

[Event "ICC 3 0"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2006.01.30"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Killabeezonatak"]
[Black "Sea-Hawk"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ICCResult "Black resigns"]
[WhiteElo "2595"]
[BlackElo "2589"]
[Opening "two knights defense: Ulvestad variation"]
[ECO "C57"]
[NIC "KP.01"]
[Time "23:57:25"]
[TimeControl "180+0"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 b5 6. Bxb5 Qxd5 7. Nc3 Qxg2 8. Qf3 Qxf3 9. Nxf3 Bd7 10. O-O Bd6 11. Re1 O-O-O 12. d3 Rhe8 13. Bg5 Nd4 14. Bxd7+ Kxd7 15. Nxd4 exd4 16. Ne4 Be5 17. Nxf6+ gxf6 18. Bd2 Rg8+ 19. Kh1 Rg4 20. Re4 h5 21. Rxg4 hxg4 22. Kg2 Rh8 23. Rh1 Rh3 24. Bc1 f5 25. Kf1 Bxh2 26. Kg2 Bd6 27. Rxh3 gxh3+ 28. Kxh3 Ke6 29. Kh4 Be7+ 30. Kg3 c5 31. Kf3 Bh4 32. Bf4 f6 33. Bb8 a6 34. Ba7 Kd5 35. Kf4 Bxf2 36. Kxf5 Bh4 37. Bb8 Bg5 38.
Bc7 c4 39. Bd8 cxd3 40. cxd3 Bc1 41. b3 Kc5 42. Bxf6 Bb2 43. Ke4 Kb4 44.Bxd4 Bc1 45. Be3 Bb2 46. Kd5 Ka3 47. Kc4 Kxa2 48. d4 Ka3 49. d5 Be5 50. Bc5+ Kb2 51. d6 Bf6 52. d7 Bd8 53. b4 Kc2 54. Kd5 Kb3 55. Kc6 Ka4 56. Bb6 Be7 57.Ba5 Kb3 58. Kc7 Kc4 59. d8=Q Bxd8+ 60. Kxd8 Kb5 61. Kc7 {Black resigns} 1-0

Tops Smiley

  
The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2211
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #22 - 11/01/09 at 23:18:53
Post Tools
Ok I will try to find some, but it could be that he does not meet 4.Ng5 very often in tournament play. I know he prefers the Ulvestad, as he told me as much a few years back on the WCN website when asked a few questions concerning the key game in this line: Howell vs Volzhin 1-0, 1996. 

At the time he confided that he preferred the complications of 6...h6 to the positions arising after 6...Nd4 and that he had improvements on the Volzhin game. Sadly he never revealed these improvements to me, nor did I find anything significant for black in my own investigations.

Tops Smiley
  
The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
urusov
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 147
Location: Kenilworth
Joined: 08/04/05
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #21 - 11/01/09 at 23:00:00
Post Tools
TopNotch wrote on 11/01/09 at 22:14:55:

This is misleading, Josh had always played the Ulvestad before the Nakamura encounter and switched to 5...Na5 in an attempt to avoid  a possible Naka refutation of the Ulvestad. 

Probably Friedel returned to the Ulvestad relying on the fact that his foreign opponent would hardly know that it was his pet line. Judging by the non critical path chosen by White it was clear that Black had made the right practical choice.
 


I'd be very interested in any games of Friedel's that feature the Fritz-Ulvestad, since I searched for them but found none.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2211
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #20 - 11/01/09 at 22:14:55
Post Tools
urusov wrote on 11/01/09 at 19:05:59:
"GM Josh Friedel Plays the Ulvestad" now, after suffering a loss in the last round of the US Championship against Nakamura with the 5...Na5 line.  I have posted here:
http://www.kenilworthchessclub.org/kenilworthian/2009/11/gm-josh-friedel-plays-u...

I think Katar's video offers some good comments on the cxd4 line.


This is misleading, Josh had always played the Ulvestad before the Nakamura encounter and switched to 5...Na5 in an attempt to avoid  a possible Naka refutation of the Ulvestad. 

Probably Friedel returned to the Ulvestad relying on the fact that his foreign opponent would hardly know that it was his pet line. Judging by the non critical path chosen by White it was clear that Black had made the right practical choice.

My feeling is that were Friedel to play Nakamura tommorrow he still would avoid the Ulvestad, since if White is well prepared he can pose some serious concrete problems there. 5...Na5 has some problems too at present but ultimately I think it's the most flexible continuation and offers the best chances against the 4.Ng5 line.

Tops Smiley
  
The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ArKheiN
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 728
Location: Belgium
Joined: 03/30/05
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #19 - 11/01/09 at 20:12:57
Post Tools
Indeed, I just watched his video, that's a nice video and I will give a new look at this position.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
urusov
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 147
Location: Kenilworth
Joined: 08/04/05
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #18 - 11/01/09 at 19:05:59
Post Tools
"GM Josh Friedel Plays the Ulvestad" now, after suffering a loss in the last round of the US Championship against Nakamura with the 5...Na5 line.  I have posted here:
http://www.kenilworthchessclub.org/kenilworthian/2009/11/gm-josh-friedel-plays-u...

I think Katar's video offers some good comments on the cxd4 line.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
ArKheiN
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 728
Location: Belgium
Joined: 03/30/05
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #17 - 11/01/09 at 18:50:01
Post Tools
Some months ago there was a discussion about the Fritz/Ulvestad and my conclusion has not changed since then: White seems to be better after 7.Ff1 Nxd5 8.cxd4 Qxg5 9.Bxb5+ Kd8 10.0-0, etc. Of course I can't say that White is winning but it's at least += (if not more) to me while I don't know if White can say the same against ..Na5.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10780
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: question about the 4.Ng5 Two Knights
Reply #16 - 11/01/09 at 11:31:35
Post Tools
If White does not allow the bishop on d7 it he/she has to do concessions. It's allright to prefer 5...Na5 as a better way to seek a development advantage but it is silly to state that 4...Bc5 is sounder than the Fritz-Ulvestadt. Of course I will withdraw these words as soon as you or somebody else shows up with a clear road to a white advantage.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 
Topic Tools
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board Top  

ChessPub Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge