MNb wrote on 07/23/07 at 23:39:11:

I looked up my stats overnight. I had the position after 5...Nc6 in nine games, scoring +7=1-1. Two of the wins and the draw were against much stronger players. I played 6.c3, 6.0-0 and once 6.Bg5. On the other hand, if you look at the position in Mega Database 2007, you'll find White scores abysmally, albeit there are just 17 games and there appear to be no strong players involved and most people seem to reach the position somewhat randomly, as indicated by the most popular move, 6.h3 (not the way to play a Morra, delayed or otherwise!).
I suspect my success was due to a) deliberately playing a delayed Morra as opposed to reaching the position almost by random, b) most Blacks prepare just one line against the Morra - delaying the gambit often takes them away from their prepared line.
I reckon the Delayed Morra is a good surprise weapon but I wouldn't fancy playing it against a prepared titled (FM+) player

TopNotch wrote on 07/21/07 at 10:37:53:

I used to play a delayed Morra as above but with 4.Bc4 (c3 to come later). Then 4...Nf6 can be met by 5.Qe2

By the way, can`t white reduce black`s options by using the move-order 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cd 4.c3 instead of the normal 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cd 3.c3 dc 4.Nxc3 and now black can play a6, d6, e6, g6, etc. whereas in the former he is already committed to d6?

Quote:


The Morra-smith gambit is quite dangerous, and has been used by some very strong players such as GM Adams in the British Championships.  I have written a technical article about it which can be found here:-

http://www.insight.demon.co.uk/Technical_Articles/beatingsicillian/sicillian_bea...

If you want to see how a top correspondence chess grandmaster played against it in a recent game, look at the following line adopted by ICCF GM Peter Coleman:-

[Event "www.ChessWorld.net server game"]
[Site "www.ChessWorld.net "]
[Date "2004.3.8"]
[Round "NA"]
[White "Mulleady, Peter"]
[Black "ICCF GM Peter Coleman"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[Termination "Draw agreed"]
[WhiteElo "1800"]
[BlackElo "2160"]
[Mode "ICS"]
[DateLastMove "2005.1.22"]
[ECO "B21"]
[Board "510656"]

1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Nb1xc3 Nb8c6 5. Ng1f3 d6 6. Bf1c4 a6 7. O-O Ng8f6 8. Bc1g5 e6 9. Qd1e2 h6 10. Bg5f4 g5 11. Bf4e3 Nf6g4 12. Be3d2 b5 13. Bc4b3 Bf8g7 14. Rf1d1 Qd8e7 15. Ra1c1 Bc8d7 16. Nf3xg5 hxg5 17. Qe2xg4 Bg7f6 18. Bd2e3 Nc6a5 19. h3 Bd7c6 20. Qg4g3 Bf6e5 21. Qg3g4 b4 22. Nc3a4 Rh8h4 23. Be3xg5 Rh4xg4 24. Bg5xe7 Rg4xg2 25. Kg1xg2 Ke8xe7 26. f3 Ra8g8 27. Kg2f2 Rg8h8 28. Na4b6 Be5xb2 29. Rc1c2 Bb2c3 30. Kf2g3 Bc6b5 31. h4 Na5b7 32. Nb6a4 Bb5xa4 33. Bb3xa4 Nb7c5 34. Ba4b3 a5 35. Rd1h1 a4 36. Bb3c4 f5 37. exf5 d5 38. Bc4e2 exf5 39. h5 Rh8g8 40. Kg3f2 Bc3d4 41. Kf2e1 Rg8c8 42. h6 b3 43. axb3 axb3 44. Rc2xc5 Rc8xc5 45. Ke1d2 b2 46. h7 Bd4c3 47. Kd2c2 f4 48. Be2d3 Bc3h8 49. Kc2d2 Rc5c3 50. Rh1b1 Ke7d6 51. Rb1g1 Kd6c5 52. Rg1b1 Rc3a3 53. Rb1d1 Kc5d4 54. Bd3b1 Kd4c4 55. Rd1f1 Bh8c3 56. Kd2e2 Ra3a7 57. Rf1h1 Ra7e7 58. Ke2d1 Re7e8 59. Rh1g1  {Draw agreed} 1/2-1/2

Best wishes
Tryfon

I have heard that there is a really good way to play against the S-M:  e4 c5 d4 cd c3 dc nc3 e6 bc4 a6 qe2 b5 bb3 bb7, followed by developing queens knight to d7; all this in Najdor fashion. Could this--COULD THIS--be the black line ALL OF US SICILIANS HAVE BEEN SEARCHING FOR? Please elaborate further. Tanks.   

In Nepustil-Geissler the idea 14.g4 is remarkable - Black has difficulties completing his development. Maybe he must try 13...Bd7.

12...Qb8 13.e5 Nh5 14.Bg5 dxe5 15.Bxe7 Nxe7 16.Nxe5 Nf4
After 16...Nf6 17.Bc2 b5 18.g4 h6 I am curious, if RE wants to continue with 19.h4 ?

17.Qe3
Indeed better than 17.Qe4, but not a novelty. The honour goes to the game Starck-Hobusch, DDRch Plauen 1980. The game ended in a draw; 20.Nb6 seems to be an improvement. My first glance tells me, that Black still has difficulties in the endgame.
MGteers should investigate RE's ideas seriously, as they contain an interesting try to establish an advantage in a line that is considered safe for Black.

In 1992 Andrew Martin in his booklet Trends in the Smith-Morra Gambit gives the corr. game Belenko-Rivlin, in which White played the line until 15.Nce4. Now Martin gives 15...o-o 16.g3 but after Nd4! I think Black is better.

As the winner himself apparently is too modest to publish this game, I will do it for him:

Hague,B (2264) - Plaskett,J (2490) [B21]
4NCL Nottingham ENG (6), 23.01.2005
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Pxc3 Pc6 5.Pf3 e6 6.Lc4 d6 7.0-0 Pf6 8.De2 Dc7 9.Td1 Le7 10.Lf4 a6 11.e5 Ph5 12.Lg5 dxe5 13.Lxe7 Pf4 14.De4 Kxe7 15.g3 Pg6 16.h4 f5 17.De3 e4 18.Dc5+ Ke8 19.Pd4 De5 20.Db6 Pge7 21.Pce2 Kf7 22.f4 Da5 23.Db3 Pd8 24.Tac1 Te8 25.Kh2 Pec6 26.g4 Pxd4 27.Pxd4 Kf8 28.gxf5 exf5 29.Lg8 h6 30.Lh7 Ke7 31.Txc8 Txc8 32.Pxf5+ Kf6 33.Dg3 Dxf5 34.Lxf5 Kxf5 35.Dh3+ Kf6 36.Dxc8 e3 37.Txd8 1-0

Congratulations. Played according Rolf Schwarz' advice: "Machen Sie Ihre Gegner opfernd mundtot!" Still I wonder, how Ben would have continued after 12...Bxg5.