Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 17
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) C47: The Belgrade Gambit (Read 149547 times)
bamonson
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 31
Location: Colorado
Joined: 07/25/04
Re: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #140 - 05/15/05 at 23:46:54
Post Tools
Quote:
Sadly The Belgrade Gambit is a dead end.  Grin

While white has to know everything about this gambit to get a playable game, black only needs to know one thing.

I think I mentioned the line responsible for the unpopularity of The Belgrade in OTB play elsewhere in this thread, and it is the line chosen by most GM's when confronted by this gambit: Rather than make you wade through this thread trying to find it, I will repost it:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.Nd5 Be7!

White over the past 30 years has never been able to prove anything worthwhile against the above line. Black players looking for a reliable antidote need look no further than the above. Ten editions of Monson's book won't change that fact.

If you doubt my words and want a second opinion, start a thread seeking GM Eric Prie's thoughts on the matter, as he used to practice this gambit in the 90's.

Peace and love.

Top  Grin  



As usual, the safely anonymous "TopNotch" is running his mouth again about things he obviously knows nothing about.  But then we've come to expect that from him.  He is forever talking as though the BG is somehow refuted, which is undoubtedly what he *wants* to be so, but simply is not so.

FACT: The BG is completely sound and playable at the GM level.  While it is true that, like most *true* opening gambits, it's not going to be a primary weapon, that does not mean that it is unplayalbe, let alone refuted.

FACT: Below the GM level it is particularly strong, especially when black heads for somber 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 waters.

BTW, I'd be more than happy to talk with Eric Prie about the BG.  He may be interested in all the new developments that have occurred over the years--developments that have done rather well in strong correspondence tournaments, no less.

Bruce Monson
  
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: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #139 - 05/15/05 at 20:48:39
Post Tools
Sadly The Belgrade Gambit is a dead end.  Grin

While white has to know everything about this gambit to get a playable game, black only needs to know one thing.

I think I mentioned the line responsible for the unpopularity of The Belgrade in OTB play elsewhere in this thread, and it is the line chosen by most GM's when confronted by this gambit: Rather than make you wade through this thread trying to find it, I will repost it:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.Nd5 Be7!

White over the past 30 years has never been able to prove anything worthwhile against the above line. Black players looking for a reliable antidote need look no further than the above. Ten editions of Monson's book won't change that fact.

If you doubt my words and want a second opinion, start a thread seeking GM Eric Prie's thoughts on the matter, as he used to practice this gambit in the 90's.

Peace and love.

Top  Grin  

  

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
 
Zarvox
Junior Member
**
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 72
Location: California
Joined: 05/15/05
Re: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #138 - 05/15/05 at 20:23:19
Post Tools
Any updates on the 2nd edition of the book? I'm interested in learning the Belgrade Gambit, but don't want to track down a copy of Bruce Monson's book if a new one is coming any time in the near future.

Also, is there a website to replace the Thomas Stock one?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #137 - 01/09/05 at 23:46:22
Post Tools
I believe that Black's best defense to the "Trajkovic" variation of the Belgrade Gambit, 1. e4 e5  2. Nf3 Nc6  3. Nc3 Nf6  4. d4 exd4  5. Nd5 Nxe4  6. Bc4, is 6...Be7!  7. O-O O-O 8. Re1! Nf6  9. Nxe7 Nxe7  10. Qd4 Ng6! (as I said before, I think 11...b6 =, but 11...Ng6 improves)  11. Bg5 Qd6!.  (Monson's book gives the passive 11...c6.)

Black unpins and prepares ...c5 to mobilize his pawn majority.  If 12. Bxf6 Qxf6  13. Qxf6 (13. Qxd5 Qxb7 is good for Black, I think) 13...gxf6, I don't thing Black's shattered kingside is sufficient comp for White's lost pawn.  White may be able to get a knight to f5, but in the mean time, Black can get a rook to e5.  The position somewhat compares to a Scotch 4 Knights where Black accepts the same kingside pawn structure even without being a pawn up.

Or 12. b4 a5  13. b5 c5  14. bxc6 bxc6 and Black seems to be doing quite well, whether or not White exchanges on f6.

A third try is 12. Rad1 c5  13. Qc3 b6  14. Bxf6 Qxf6  15. Qxf6 gxf6  16. Bxg6 fxg6  17. Rxd5 Bf5 =+.  If Black wants even more he can try 14...gxf6!? after which it is not so obvious how White will justify his lost pawn; various frontal assaults on d5 do not seem to work.

Unlike the 11...b6 that we discussed before, here White's pieces do not get dance around on e5 and in front of Black's castled 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: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #136 - 01/09/05 at 22:37:25
Post Tools
Quote:
Dutch theoretician AC van der Tak has written some short articles on the Belgrade Gambit in the Dutch corr. chess magazine Schaakschakeringen. In nr.350, april 2001, he mentions 5.Nd5 Nxe4 6.Bc4 Ne7 7.Ne5
a) 7...Nxd5 8.Bxd5 Qe7 9.Bxf7+ Kd8 10.Qd4 Qb4+ 11.Qxb4 Bxb4+ 12.c3 Bd6 and there is nothing wrong with Black's position.
b) 7...Nd6 8.Qf3 Nxd5 9.Bxd5 Qf6 10.Qe2 Be7 11.h4 h6 12.Rh3 (with an attack, according to Gutman) d3! (not mentioned by Monson in an earlier post) 13.cxd3 Nf5 14.Bxf7+ (14.Bg5? hxg5 15.hxg5 Rxh3 16.gxf6 Bb4+) Kd8 15.g4 Nxh4 16.Rxh4 Qxh4 17.Ng6 Qf6 18.Nxh8 g5 19.Be3 Qxh8 with about equal chances, Barnsley-Bormida, em 1997.
VdT clearly does not have the opinion, that 6...Ne7 <black has serious problems that persist to a white edge.>

[a] After 12...Bd6 in your first line.  There is nothing structurally wrong with Black's position, but White has a considerable lead in activity.
[b] This line with 9...Qf6  10. Qe2 Be7 really does not smell like good chess to me.  If Black has nothing better than this, then I would be reluctant to play 6...Ne7.
« Last Edit: 01/09/05 at 23:47:48 by Markovich »  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #135 - 01/09/05 at 21:36:31
Post Tools
Rudolf Spielmann would have been baffled and hardly have known what to do, as happened when he faced 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6 (Nimzovitsj was Black).
The Wagenbach Defense is treated on Thomas Johansson's website:

http://hem.passagen.se/tjmisha/
Click chess
Click King's Gambit stuff
Click The Wagenbach Defence

A discussion should take place in another thread.
  

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
 
John_Toscano
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 3
Location: Lome
Joined: 01/09/05
Re: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #134 - 01/09/05 at 16:37:16
Post Tools
I thought the line 3..h5 looked ridiculous when it was played against me but I had to take it seriously after I lost the game, especially as Jonathan Tait was playing Black and he chooses his openings very carefully. The line was invented by his club colleague Wagenbach and is now widely known as the ‘Wagenbach Gambit’. I did find a good reply in the end but  the fact that Black could get away with stuff like this put me right off the KG.

There are reams of analysis of this gambit all over the internet and if you want to know more (I don't!), I believe Jon Tait and Joop Simmelink are both authorities. 3...h5!? Unbelievable! What would Rudolf Spielmann play, I wonder?
  
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: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #133 - 01/09/05 at 13:51:31
Post Tools
I was wondering.  Grin

Why is the line:  1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 h5!? so terrifying for White? I would have thought that if anything this would encourage Kings Gambiteers.

Just a thought.

Top  Grin
  

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
 
John_Toscano
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 3
Location: Lome
Joined: 01/09/05
Re: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #132 - 01/09/05 at 07:40:02
Post Tools
I recently registered on this forum and was both pleased and astonished to see the ongoing and, at times, heated debate about the merits of the Belgrade Gambit. As something of a specialist in this gambit, I want to give my own opinion on both the gambit itself and a lot that has been written about it.

I started playing the Belgrade back in 1994. Before then, I had spent a decade trying virtually everything against 1...e5, with mixed results. The Vienna Game, the Ruy Lopez, the Ourosoff Gambit, 3.Bc4, I studied them all and tried them out, all with varying success. For two years I became pre-occupied with the Kings Gambit and even became known as a bit of an expert on this opening, but I began to see many holes in it. When I lost an important game in the line 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 h5!? and afterwards couldn't find a good way to answer this move, then saw the game widely published, it was time to give it up.

Then I started looking seriously at the Belgrade and have played it ever since. My results? I have lived in various African countries for the past ten years so I don't play much otb chess, except for meaningless blitz games on the ICC, but in e-mail chess I have played the BG 29 times (nine times with Black), often against 2200+ opposition, scoring 19 wins, 8 draws and 1 loss. My e-mail rating is 2290 in all games, with the Belgrade it works out at about 2400.   

The Belgrade introduces a rich diversity of positions, depending on how Black plays. The game can become a tactical slugfest or a complex strategical struggle and often leads to fascinating endgames. I do not believe that White can force a clear advantage in many of the main lines but there is scope to play for a win in every one of them. Ultimately, in the postions which arise, the player with the better understanding is likely to come off better and that, I believe, is how a good chess game should be settled. I lost one game in ths gambit, with White, because my opponent played better than me, not because the opening was wrong, though his choice of defence was very good. Like Bruce Monson, I relish playing the Black side and often win, again because I understand what I am doing.

I play this gambit not because it is a gambit, but because I have found, by long trial and error, that it suits my style of play and gives me better winning chances against 1..e5 than anything else I have tried. There is nothing 'dicey' or 'speculative' about it, because White has clear plans against different replies and there is no need to look for 'cheapos'. As for the fact that 4..Bb4 is a good alternative, that's rather dodging the argument, but White also has good prospects of an advantage anyway.   

I think the weatlth of analysis and debate on this site settles the argument anyway! I have enjoyed reading all the contributions and look forward to more.Meanwhile, I'll keep playing the Belgrade with the help of all this extra analysis!

John Toscano
Lome
Togo     Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ygramul
Junior Member
**
Offline



Posts: 62
Location: Roma
Joined: 11/18/04
Gender: Male
Re: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #131 - 12/23/04 at 10:30:49
Post Tools
At a first glance 12...d3 doesn't impress me at all: Why not 13.Rxd3 instead of 13.cxd3?

After 13.Rxd3 White seems to have good attacking chances:
i.e.
13....Qxh4 14.Bxf7+ Nxf7 15.Ng6 or
13...0-0 14.g4! (defending h1 and therefore preventing Qxh4)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bamonson
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 31
Location: Colorado
Joined: 07/25/04
Re: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #130 - 12/22/04 at 21:56:49
Post Tools
Quote:
Dutch theoretician AC van der Tak has written some short articles on the Belgrade Gambit in the Dutch corr. chess magazine Schaakschakeringen. In nr.350, april 2001, he mentions 5.Nd5 Nxe4 6.Bc4 Ne7 7.Ne5
a) 7...Nxd5 8.Bxd5 Qe7 9.Bxf7+ Kd8 10.Qd4 Qb4+ 11.Qxb4 Bxb4+ 12.c3 Bd6 and there is nothing wrong with Black's position.
b) 7...Nd6 8.Qf3 Nxd5 9.Bxd5 Qf6 10.Qe2 Be7 11.h4 h6 12.Rh3 (with an attack, according to Gutman) d3! (not mentioned by Monson in an earlier post) 13.cxd3 Nf5 14.Bxf7+ (14.Bg5? hxg5 15.hxg5 Rxh3 16.gxf6 Bb4+) Kd8 15.g4 Nxh4 16.Rxh4 Qxh4 17.Ng6 Qf6 18.Nxh8 g5 19.Be3 Qxh8 with about equal chances, Barnsley-Bormida, em 1997.
VdT clearly does not have the opinion, that 6...Ne7 <black has serious problems that persist to a white edge.>


Tony Barnsley happens to be a good friend of mine, and we discussed this game shortly after he played it.  Suffice it to say that those who would dare contend the line Bormida pursued (including 12...d3) would be in for some nasty surprises.  I'll leave it at that...

Bruce Monson

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


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #129 - 12/22/04 at 20:42:51
Post Tools
Dutch theoretician AC van der Tak has written some short articles on the Belgrade Gambit in the Dutch corr. chess magazine Schaakschakeringen. In nr.350, april 2001, he mentions 5.Nd5 Nxe4 6.Bc4 Ne7 7.Ne5
a) 7...Nxd5 8.Bxd5 Qe7 9.Bxf7+ Kd8 10.Qd4 Qb4+ 11.Qxb4 Bxb4+ 12.c3 Bd6 and there is nothing wrong with Black's position.
b) 7...Nd6 8.Qf3 Nxd5 9.Bxd5 Qf6 10.Qe2 Be7 11.h4 h6 12.Rh3 (with an attack, according to Gutman) d3! (not mentioned by Monson in an earlier post) 13.cxd3 Nf5 14.Bxf7+ (14.Bg5? hxg5 15.hxg5 Rxh3 16.gxf6 Bb4+) Kd8 15.g4 Nxh4 16.Rxh4 Qxh4 17.Ng6 Qf6 18.Nxh8 g5 19.Be3 Qxh8 with about equal chances, Barnsley-Bormida, em 1997.
VdT clearly does not have the opinion, that 6...Ne7 <black has serious problems that persist to a white edge.>
  

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
 
lnn2
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1504
Location: nc
Joined: 09/22/04
Re: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #128 - 12/19/04 at 08:46:37
Post Tools
I just stumbled onto this thread only because now it's the longest thread on the forum and that made me curious. I don't play 1.e4 e5 with either colour so am a rather "neutral" outsider to this.

Having played through a few lines...White appears to have sufficient compensation for the material. The worst that can happen to White is equality. I don't think White is worse out of the opening like in the BDG.

bruce: when is your book coming out? will definitely buy it Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #127 - 12/17/04 at 08:37:17
Post Tools
Quote:
"Red" book?  Er, well my book has a white cover with black lettering and a black pen and ink illustration.  If you have something other than that then you do not have my book.

Bruce Monson




I don't have it in front of me; I thought I remembered that it was red.  It has a drawing of, I think, you and Trifunovich(?).
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ygramul
Junior Member
**
Offline



Posts: 62
Location: Roma
Joined: 11/18/04
Gender: Male
Re: The Belgrade Gambit
Reply #126 - 12/17/04 at 03:04:02
Post Tools
Bruce when the second edition of your book will be available?
I'm very interested in it since I have only Schiller's book which, I must say, is very bad and completely useless!

(perhaps the best of it is the coverage of the 4.d4 Bb4 line which, by the way, is not the Belgrade Gambit).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 17
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo