[rant mode]
Following this thread has brought back some fond memories, both of the utter tripe I used to play (and still do in 1 minute games), and also of the folly of some of these move-order transpositions.
The point is that, if you play the Austrian attack/GPA (which many, many people do at club level), then 1...d6 does not prevent a KG by any means, at least not favourably. 1.e4 d6 2.f4 seems the logical way of playing the position, since after ...d6 black either has to accept a transposition into a KGD, an Austrian Pirc, or else a GPA sicilian where black has committed to ...d6 and will therefore have to spend an extra tempo on the ...d5 thrust which has proven so effective to meet the GPA. Further, if play runs along the lines of 1.e4 d6 2.f4 c5, white can also consider 3.Nf3 intending 4.d4 with a transposition to the open sicilian, albeit where he has committed to f4 a little early. However, since f4 is playable in pretty much every open sicilian, I can't imagine this would be too much of a hindrance, whereas black, trying to avoid this KG, has now got to learn heavy theoretical lines to (at least) three other openings. Congratulations there, you've just bluffed your way into a nightmare.
With all the analysis we've done on the forum, it makes me wonder why so many people are still so desperate to avoid the KG at all costs, especially to play something like the Philidor which is considered inferior for black anyway. And a player who plays the KG probably plays an early f4 in most other openings, so 1...d6 is no more than a transpositional device after 2.f4, and black has to learn one hell of a lot more to play it than white (since white will be playing it with a transposition to a line he already knows in mind, whereas black will have had his bluff called).
So please, I beg all you philidor players, keep on trying the 1...d6 move order!
As for the blackburne-hartlaub gambit, how the heck can you say black is equal, or close to equal?? Even if black has some semblance of compensation for the pawn (and, in all honesty, I doubt he does), he is a central pawn down for very little, and this equals +- in my opinion. The compensation seems to be getting his bishop to d6 a tempo, and since white can look to play Nc3-b5 or Nc3-e4 to hit this thing anyway, it's hardly a worry. Or white can adopt a Be2, Nf3, Nbd2, O-O position where there are no threats with Bxh2, then Re1, Nf1-e3 etc. Yes, just moves with no variations including black's moves, but the fact is that black has nothing particularly forcing which can force white's hand, and any wild kingside lunge can easily be answered since there is not one weakness in white's position, and not even a real lead in development for black.
The reason the morra is effective and, imho, playable - white already starts a tempo up. Add to this that 1...c5 doesn't in any way aid black's development, after 2.d4 cd 3.c3 dc 4.Nc3 white has gained extra tempi, and his pieces are now all free to develop. However, black needs at least two more pawn moves to allow his bishops to move, thus acquiring more tempi. The morra aims to directly show that 1...c5 is a wasted move.
In the BH, however, 1.d4 e5 2.de d6 3.ed Bxd6 (if I'm thinking of the right opening) and white is only one tempo down, since he can already develop his knights and the c1 bishop. Further he only needs one pawn move to develop the f1 bishop (my preference would be g3 and Bg2, since now that Bd6 is biting on granite), and black seems to only have hopes and dreams for the pawn. He doesn't even have any tactical shots based on the open f-file, which is why I'd prefer the Soller Gambit, or even the Englund gambit proper, over this stuff anyday.
If I ever thought my opponents would play such utter garbage, in blitz, OTB or in correspondence, even at my meagre levels, I would play 1.d4 in a heartbeat. Even as a card-carrying member of the gambit club, I can not condone this stuff and, unless you're looking to play 1 minute games (which, you should bear in mind, is what Mr McGrew usually uses them for), I would not expect this opening to bring you a particularly good score. At any level. Ever.
Seriously folks, go back to an early Qh5 a la Nakamura. It's much better.
[/rant mode]
i can't speak for anyone else, but i have never played 1...d6 to avoid the KG. as i said above, one reason i might play that move is simply because you get d4 out of white a lot more, as opposed to 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bc4 which is not much fun at all.
if 1.e4 d6 2.f4 is so dismal for black, then why is it that 2.d4 has always been so much more popular than 2.f4? i mean, to hear you tell it, black can do no better than defending against the austrian attack, so why wouldn't white allow him to make that choice since the austrian is his strongest plan after 1.d4 anyway? i'm pretty sure black isn't in trouble after one move
as for the B-H, i don't like it, and i don't play it. all i'm saying is that its better than it looks. i used to feel the same way as you do about it until i saw how much the newer engines could squeeze out of the extra time. try setting up the position against fritz 9 and see how many times you can make it to move 15 or 20 and still hold an advantage. i guarantee you that its harder to do than you think.
Pages: [1] 
Should I play the Philidor? (Read 22574 times)
