Not at all, MnB, this a new concept of Online Analysis!
You can discuss the moves, take them back, and it is over only when you can agree on an indisputable assessment of the position, out of the opening, after having 'exhausted' all the tracks.
Everybody is invited to participate, and their analysis, when relevant, will be mentioned in the updates !
It is very useful when you study a line with little or highly specialized (or biased
) theory on it.
For instance, in what is considered as the main line of the Sneiders, there is only one single game in the database, as given by Teyko ! in which actually the final position is completely ‘flat’. Already a little success for Black…
Anyway, I did think of another move instead of 11…Qd5…as Teyko sensed by playing the better 11.Ne2 to which I reply by castling 11…0-0.
This is a real debate of ideas : Black has a slight lead in development, in this symmetrical structure, and in consequence is the first to hit the opponent’s e pawn but in return has conceded some annoying black squares weaknesses on the king side.
The more I study this position the more I get interested into 5…g6, on which I have found 7 games, on the other hand, and 4 with 6.Qg5 including that one :
Sneiders,E - Morin,J
corr, 1988
1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Cc3 e5 4.Dh5 Cc6 5.dxe5 g6 6.Dg5 Fe7 7.Df4 f5! 8.exf6 Cxf6 9.Cxe4 ? Cxe4 10.Dxe4 Cb4 ! -+ 11.Fb5+ ? (11.Bg5 Bf5 12.Bb5+ c6 13. Qe5 is a lot more complicated) c6 12.Fa4 Da5 13.c3 Ff5 0–1
As for 9.Rc1 Qd7 10.Nge2 I am rather optimistic after 10…0-0-0
Pages: 
Lemberger counter-gambit (Read 26076 times)
