(UTC)
Latest Updates:
  ChessPub Forum › Chess Publishing Openings › 1. e4 e5 Spanish › Schliemann › Schliemann Ruy Lopez
(Moderators: proustiskeen, trw)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Schliemann Ruy Lopez (Read 2254 times)
Jonathan Tait
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 617
Location: Nottingham
Joined: 07/11/06
Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #33 - 07/11/06 at 14:51:25
Post Tools
CraigEvans wrote on 03/21/04 at 11:05:13:
To get the ball rolling, let's consider the main line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4. Which do people consider stronger, 5...Nf6 or 5...d5? If 5...d5, does anyone have some improvements, since this line has had a poor reputation as of late? I have found in a correspondence game that even 10.Nxa7+, long considered to be harmless, gives white material and black not necessarily enough of an attack to compensate.


I've always played 5...d5.
but you're right, 10.Nxa7+ is almost a forced win for White, and 9.Nxa7+ is also very strong.
I wouldn't worry about it if you're playing OTB though.
you can play any old rubbish in OTB games. Smiley
  
blog inspired by Bronstein's book, but using my own games: http://200opengames.blogspot.co.uk/
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
BeatleFred
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 3
Location: NewYork
Joined: 09/07/05
Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #32 - 05/23/06 at 03:48:42
Post Tools
A friend of mine is a Schliemann/Jaenisch player, but after 4) Nc3, the move he plays is NOT fxe4, his weapon is 4.... Nd4!

I havent played Chess with him in a long while, but when we used to play often, I tried all the feasible 5th moves against Nd4, but never really found any lines that ended up giving White any clear advantages (my reference book at the time was the book on the Schliemann by Shamkovich & Shiller).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #31 - 04/10/06 at 16:23:43
Post Tools
BigBen wrote on 04/10/06 at 16:12:29:
Markovich wrote on 04/04/06 at 17:08:46:
BigBen wrote on 04/03/06 at 17:08:06:
After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 cant see anything wrong with the simple 4... fe4 5.Ne4 Nf6 .... 6.Qe2 then looks best and black can reply maybe with either 6...d5 or 6...Qe7

Regards


Let's see if I can remember this right:  5...Nf6  6. Nxf6 Qxf6  7. Qe2 Be7  8. Bxc6 dxc6  9. Nxe5 Bf5 was for a long time considered pretty good for Black, the idea being to meet 10. d4 with ...0-0 and 10. d3 with ...0-0-0.  I played a number of games with the black pieces myself, with fair success.  But somebody eventually figured out 10. 0-0! and, whichever way the black king goes, the white d-pawn goes to the square most inconvenient for Black.  10...Bxc2? just fails.  So that is why you don't see 5...Nf6 in serious chess anymore.

I agree with those here who say that 4. d3 is a reasonable system against the Schliemann; I just don't think it is much, if any, better than the initial position is.  Certainly 4. d3 is an excellent practical choice, but there is no doubt that the most testing move is 4. Nc3.


Hi,
    The more we looked at your suggestion the more we had to agree with your evaluation especially the 10.O-O idea ... We tried many lines mainly based on black playing O-O-O, Bc5(Bd6), Rhe8 but in the end it seems white is simply better .... So what if black plays the delayed Schliemann with 3... a6 4.Ba4 f5!? do you think everything still holds true?

Regards



I shared 10. 0-0!, which is not my idea, on www.net-chess.com, and there were a number of players who opined that Black was fine anyway.  But I suspect the playing strength of many on that forum, and in any case, I just don't think Black is O.K. after 10. 0-0.

I have not looked seriously at the deferred Schliemann, but if I recall correctly, 5. d4! is an excellent answer to it.  4. d4 against the Schliemann proper is, on the other hand, a dicey proposition.  Also, for me, one of the attractions of the Schlieman was that I didn't have to play 3...a6.
  
The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BigBen
Junior Member
**
Offline



Posts: 50
Location: UK
Joined: 09/17/03
Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #30 - 04/10/06 at 16:12:29
Post Tools
Markovich wrote on 04/04/06 at 17:08:46:
BigBen wrote on 04/03/06 at 17:08:06:
After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 cant see anything wrong with the simple 4... fe4 5.Ne4 Nf6 .... 6.Qe2 then looks best and black can reply maybe with either 6...d5 or 6...Qe7

Regards


Let's see if I can remember this right:  5...Nf6  6. Nxf6 Qxf6  7. Qe2 Be7  8. Bxc6 dxc6  9. Nxe5 Bf5 was for a long time considered pretty good for Black, the idea being to meet 10. d4 with ...0-0 and 10. d3 with ...0-0-0.  I played a number of games with the black pieces myself, with fair success.  But somebody eventually figured out 10. 0-0! and, whichever way the black king goes, the white d-pawn goes to the square most inconvenient for Black.  10...Bxc2? just fails.  So that is why you don't see 5...Nf6 in serious chess anymore.

I agree with those here who say that 4. d3 is a reasonable system against the Schliemann; I just don't think it is much, if any, better than the initial position is.  Certainly 4. d3 is an excellent practical choice, but there is no doubt that the most testing move is 4. Nc3.


Hi,
    The more we looked at your suggestion the more we had to agree with your evaluation especially the 10.O-O idea ... We tried many lines mainly based on black playing O-O-O, Bc5(Bd6), Rhe8 but in the end it seems white is simply better .... So what if black plays the delayed Schliemann with 3... a6 4.Ba4 f5!? do you think everything still holds true?

Regards
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10776
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #29 - 04/05/06 at 01:54:17
Post Tools
"At least, I have never heard of anyone who was given the white pieces more than his fair share of times and complained about it"
Well, not exactly complained, but for about two years I preferred playing Black to playing White. The reason was, that I found it easier as Black to bring up a mess on board; my opponents cooperated more as they usually were more ambitious having White. It has been a while ago, though, when I used to play the Jänisch-Schliemann on a regular base.
  
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
 
Alias
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1512
Location: East of the river Svartån
Joined: 11/19/04
Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #28 - 04/04/06 at 18:47:20
Post Tools
The Kramnik and Anand series give white advantage in (almost?) all lines.
  
Don't check me with no lightweight stuff.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4971
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #27 - 04/04/06 at 18:12:32
Post Tools
Well, going by recent editions of ECO (which are for the most part compilations of the games/evaluations that have appeared in Informant), I think you could now readily construct a repertoire for Black in which he is assured of reaching equality (or "unclear," or "compensation").  The holy grail of "plus over equals" seems generally to be reached/retained in what might be termed secondary defences/variations (such as the Schliemann), but not in most main variations of major openings/defences.  I recall, though, that Nunn's Chess Openings seemed to show White getting an edge more often than the ECO series.  (Hmm, isn't it time for a second edition of Nunn?)

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Alias
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1512
Location: East of the river Svartån
Joined: 11/19/04
Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #26 - 04/04/06 at 17:46:40
Post Tools
Okay, the statement was not as clear as I wanted it to be.

I think it's difficult (impossible?) to choose a repertoire as white where you can claim with some advantage in all lines. You have to accept equal positions (worse than the initial position?) or unclear.

A similar statement can be done for black where one has to accept (slightly) worse positions. 

The key is to find equal positions as white or slightly worse as black and still feel comfortable. [Maybe still not clear...]

---------------

My last game for my team was as white. Before that I had played 31 games in a row as black. This has made my tournament play as white to become worse.

---------------

I feel that after 4.d3 white has improved his chances compared to the initial position.
  
Don't check me with no lightweight stuff.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #25 - 04/04/06 at 17:18:29
Post Tools
Alias wrote on 04/04/06 at 11:22:10:


More philosophically, I don't think white can prove += and black can't prove = from the initial position.


Well, since all positions are either won, lost or drawn, += is an impossible evaluation.  If it means anything, it is that, while a draw may exist, one side's play is notably easier than the other's.  That, I think most would agree, does apply to the initial position.  At least, I have never heard of anyone who was given the white pieces more than his fair share of times and complained about it.

More generally, I think that a very good question about any line of play in the opening is whether it produces better chances than the initial position.
  
The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #24 - 04/04/06 at 17:08:46
Post Tools
BigBen wrote on 04/03/06 at 17:08:06:
After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 cant see anything wrong with the simple 4... fe4 5.Ne4 Nf6 .... 6.Qe2 then looks best and black can reply maybe with either 6...d5 or 6...Qe7

Regards


Let's see if I can remember this right:  5...Nf6  6. Nxf6 Qxf6  7. Qe2 Be7  8. Bxc6 dxc6  9. Nxe5 Bf5 was for a long time considered pretty good for Black, the idea being to meet 10. d4 with ...0-0 and 10. d3 with ...0-0-0.  I played a number of games with the black pieces myself, with fair success.  But somebody eventually figured out 10. 0-0! and, whichever way the black king goes, the white d-pawn goes to the square most inconvenient for Black.  10...Bxc2? just fails.  So that is why you don't see 5...Nf6 in serious chess anymore.

I agree with those here who say that 4. d3 is a reasonable system against the Schliemann; I just don't think it is much, if any, better than the initial position is.  Certainly 4. d3 is an excellent practical choice, but there is no doubt that the most testing move is 4. Nc3.
  
The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
juniorplankton(Guest)
Guest


Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #23 - 04/04/06 at 15:15:52
Post Tools
Well, I have been playing the Schliemann (aka the Yanish) for many years. IMHO, the worst line (for Black) is 4. Nc3. Even though it is playable, it is the most dangerous.
I am very happy (relatively speaking, of course  Wink) to meet 4. d3, 4. d4, not mentioning 4. ef or 
4. Bc6
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
alumbrado
God Member
*****
Offline


Esse quam videri bonus
malebo

Posts: 1418
Location: London
Joined: 02/17/03
Gender: Male
Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #22 - 04/04/06 at 14:59:55
Post Tools
Alias wrote on 04/04/06 at 11:22:10:


To me 4.d3 seems to be a very good choice. Not much theory, while white still has a good chance for += (and in many cases in the Nic yearbook article it turns out to +/-). My experience in blitz games has been very good. Several easy wins.


I concur.  I recently beat a Schliemann adherent, an FM rated 2235, with 4.d3.  It wasn't exactly easy, but I got a clear edge out of the opening and he was obliged to sac a pawn to get some play and ithe compensation was never really enough.
  
If sometimes we fly too close to the sun, at least this shows we are spreading our wings.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Alias
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1512
Location: East of the river Svartån
Joined: 11/19/04
Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #21 - 04/04/06 at 14:05:40
Post Tools
I was just commenting on Markovich's remark about a += birthright. I was referring to the position before 1.e4. The use of the word "prove" was not correct.
  
Don't check me with no lightweight stuff.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Viking
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 673
Location: Norway
Joined: 10/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #20 - 04/04/06 at 13:44:39
Post Tools
Alias wrote on 04/04/06 at 11:22:10:
More philosophically, I don't think white can prove += and black can't prove = from the initial position.

Sooo, your point being: It is impossible to prove anything in chess? (at least after the 3rd move...)  Undecided
In case you mean something like an exact mathematical proof (ending with Q.E.D.)- I have to agree Smiley

Btw, I think this is irrelevant no matter what kind of "initial position" you refers to... ( do u mean before 1.e4 or after ..f5? )
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Alias
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1512
Location: East of the river Svartån
Joined: 11/19/04
Re: Schliemann Ruy Lopez
Reply #19 - 04/04/06 at 11:22:10
Post Tools
Quote:
Life is not exactly rosy for Black after 4. d3, but I think if he plays 4...fxe4! it becomes +=, no more than White's birthright.


To me 4.d3 seems to be a very good choice. Not much theory, while white still has a good chance for += (and in many cases in the Nic yearbook article it turns out to +/-). My experience in blitz games has been very good. Several easy wins. 

More philosophically, I don't think white can prove += and black can't prove = from the initial position.
  
Don't check me with no lightweight stuff.
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 © 2000-2025. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge