Ah Mr Evans. Do you have a copy of this book? If so maybe I could borrow it for a week or two, seeing as we are members of the same club. If not I will try e-mailing him as you suggest.

Kafka = Richie.

Cheers

I'm thinking about incorporating the Belgrade Gambit into my own repertoire. However, I can't seem to find anywhere which sells Monson's book. I dont want to start playing it without some degree of theoretical knowledge. Does anyone know where I can obtain a copy of this book? If not are there any other resources out there.

That game was a beat-down, and almost inspired me, someone who doesn't even play 1. e4, to take up the Belgrade.

George Jempty wrote on 03/29/09 at 12:32:45:


MONSON:
First off, love may be blind, my friend, but so are computers.  Just plugging a given position into a computer program and exclaiming that because the computer evaluates the position as "1.25-1.75 in Black's advantage.  This then translates to White 'having insufficient compensation' for the piece." is a recipe for disaster!  

If there is one thing I've learned about computers over the years, it is that when dealing with deep positional sacrifices that have no clear-cut punchline within their horizon, they are highly susceptible to serious, often fatal, mistakes.  

Second, I wonder if it has ever occurred to Mr. Jempty that there might be other reasons why white's bishop might advantageously be placed on b5 (other than the obvious mate should black take the bishop), and that by achieving that location with a free tempo (i.e., with black placing his queen on d7 instead of e7) might be of some value to white's attack?

Finally, about three months ago I received a private email from George Jempty challenging me to an email correspondence game in the Belgrade Gambit!  

Having not been on this forum in a while I did not realize that he had written this vitriolic message here!  "Gross Disservice"? "Intellectual dishonesty"?  Wow!  But now that I've read it it makes sense that his email challenge to me read as "Death to the Belgrade Gambit!"

Well, of course I accepted his challenge.  For those who are interested here is the game with light notes.  It's not an especially great game, but does demonstrate just how quickly black's position can fall apart.

B. Monson-G. Jempty
Queen Alice Internet Chess Club
Belgrade Gambit corr. challenge game
Mar-June, 2009
3d/move +14 days

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. d4 exd4 5. Nd5 Nb4 6. Nxd4 Nxe4 7. Nb5 Nxd5 8. Qxd5 Qe7 9. Nxc7+ Kd8 10. Bf4 d6 11. O-O-O Kxc7 12. Qc4+ Kb8 13. h4 Qe6 14. Qd4 Qxa2? [Black gives back the knight voluntarily, perhaps thinking that he will be able to relieve some of the pressure and yet come out of the opening two pawns up.  Needless to say, it turns out bad.] 15. Qxe4 Qa1+ 16. Kd2 Qxb2 17. Be2! [We're still in my home analysis.  Black had expected 17.Bc4, which is a move most computers like, but the text is stronger since black is denied his time-gaining check on b4 and the bishop will find excellent service on f3.]  17...g6 18. Rb1 Qa2 19. Bf3 [Natural and strong.  I briefly considered 19.Qe5, threatening mate and the Rh8, but didn't want to allow any needless counterplay with 19...Bf5. 19...Qa5+ 20. Kc1 Qa3+ 21. Kd1 Qa6 22. Qe8 1-0

After 22...Bg7 white has the simple but pretty 23.Rxb7+ Qxb7 24.Bxd6+ Qc7 25.Qb5+ Bb7 26.Qxb7#

To his credit, Mr. Jempty apologized for his poor showing in this game (which I also construe as somewhat of an unspoken apology for some of the above comments), and even expressed a desire to play the Belgrade from the white side.  I certainly encourage him to do so! He'll have a lot of fun and a healthy success rate to boot.

Cheers,

Bruce Monson

There is no reason to be hesitant - we are here to share knowledge of ideas, and seek the truth in these lines. I am certainly never  against this in principle, as long as both participants are open to ideas.

However, I am not sure that 6.Nxd4 has ever been regarded as white's main try against 5...Nb4. Certainly, the line with 9...f6 is quite appealing, but the 9...d5 has always put me off the whole idea. However, instead of 8.Nf5, it may well be that 8.Bc4 is an improvement, although there seems to be very scant material on the move. I'll accept that on first glance it might not look particularly promising after 8...Qe7+ (untested to my knowledge, but appears to me to be critical) 9.Kf1 Nb6 10.Bb3 d6 11.Bf4, but it is surprisingly difficult for black to continue, e.g. 11...Qf6 12.Qe2+ Kd8 13.Qd2 Be7 14.c4! and white has definite compensation.

However, also as noted by TopNotch, I believe that 6.Nxf6+ Qxf6 7.Bc4 is regarded as white's main try, and that the positions resulting after e.g. 7...Bc5 8.O-O d6!? 9.e5!? dxe5 10.Ng5 are sharp and complicated enough to keep most black players away. However, I do believe that ultimately black should be able to prove some advantage here.

So, the question has to be, is black better in the position after 9...d5 10.Bxe7 Bxe7 11.Nxg7+ Kf8 12.Qh5 Qd6 13.Be2 Qb4+ (the greedy approach looks critical) 14.c3 Qxb2 15.O-O and, okay, black has the bishop pair, but to me it looks unclear and that white will have his own chances. 15...c6 looks obvious but after 16.Qd4 Rg8 17.Rae1 white is fine, so black probably needs to grab on c3 as well, but after 15...Qxc3 16.Qxd5 c6 17. Qe4 Bd6 18.Qh4 again looks like compensation to me.

I'd be interested to see how you would continue for black after 13.Be2 as you are a much stronger player than I and I have a vested interest in this line... but at the moment, I'm not seeing an advantage for either side, just a position where both sides have plus and minus points and can both play for a win.

I know from having had private conversations with Monson, not recently, that he has built up a vast store of information about all sorts of Belgrade Gambit lines.  It would be wonderful if he would produce another edition of his book.

Mr Melchor, I would be the first to ask for this resource, and if I can contribute anything to your eBook from my analysis then I would be happy to do so. I'm not a master-strength player and there are few openings that I "know", but this is one of the few I feel confident to comment on given my experience and record. Somewhere on my PC I have a fairly extensive set of notes on the opening (though, in the case of 5...Nxe4, sadly not overly positive) and would be happy to share any analysis which may be of use.

I was not aware of the Spielmann game though, as with many gambits, it seems fitting that Spielmann was one of the originators. Still, with the amount that Trakjovic and his compatriots contributed, the opening has been designated correctly. Ironically, one of the rarest lines, 5...h6, has been one of the few lines which concerns me in the opening. Other than 5...Nxe4 (or 5...Be7 6.Bc4!? Nxe4) and possibly 5...Nb4 (though I think I can navigate these waters safely), there is no critical test to the Belgrade - white is at least equal in all other lines, and whilst 5...Be7 is the most popular response, I believe 5.Nd5 to be the most pressing try in the Four Knights.

Yes, that is my claim. The Scotch Four Knights gives white nothing - I personally prefer black in the main lines. The 4.Bb5 lines were de-fanged some time ago as well. 4.g3 is a nice "system" for white to learn and play game after game, but objectively offers nothing.

The Belgrade offers black the opportunity to cold-bloodedly try and refute white's opening play. They seldom takes up this opportunity, and when he or she does, they often go wrong quickly. More likely, however, is that they choose the "easy" equality after 5...Be7 and suddenly find things not to be so easy. Look at most/all of the games on this thread after 5...Be7 - how many times does a lower-rated white player easily draw with his higher-rated opponent? How many times does a highly-rated black player grind down a weaker white player? I defy anyone to tell me that 5...Be7 is a worthwhile line if black wants anything other than a draw.. the objective merits of such a result as black notwithstanding, against this opening surely black has to be hunting for more?
I still objectively feel 5...Nxe4 leads to a draw, but white has to play a LOT more accurately to achieve this. After 5...Be7, "easy equality" though it may be, white is most likely to be able to press for a victory, with few losing chances. I'll take those odds against any player, any day.