Quote:


People don't, of course, learn the chess openings, or the theoretical endings, by rote.  But those interested in playing chess -- as opposed to playing at chess -- do make some attempt to learn these things.   No one here is "spewing" openings theory.  They discussing theory, which one would hope were permissible to do on a board whose expressed purpose was to enable such discussion. If discussing chess openings theory doesn't suit you, please be absent.

It was, if I recall correctly, Lajos Portisch and not some computer that discovered the refutation of the Moeller Attack (or at least, first played it an a high-level game of chess).

No, I recommend learning how to play chess rather than spewing out oodles of theory learned by rote.

btw, there's no need to hope players of my level and below won't know the theory - my experience taught me they dont.

kamiel wrote on 09/03/04 at 08:04:26:



I haven't looked at this for ages but it used to be my favourite line as white.

If memory serves there's definitely more than one 'draw' (e.g I believe Black can play ...f6 and draw instead of ...f5).

Also, the last I heard the main line wasn't a draw anyway and that some computer had found an improvement for Black that avoids the classic repetition of position line.

Has the improvement been counter-improved?


That all said, I would also heartily recommend the line as a way to sharpen tactical ability for the improving player.  Perhaps not for the very serious very strong player though.

I'd still punt it from time to time now (current rating around 1750 elo equivalent) but my tastes have changed and I prefer stodgier stuff these days.
I don't find the "your opponents might know the refutation" argument valid - well not for players of my strength anyway.  In the real world they don't.

@rowrulz

I think u are right. Your Line seems to defend Black´s Position. After 19.Ne6 - fxe6 20.dxe6 - Kh8(!) 21. e7-Nxe7 22. Rxe7
White looks quite attractive, but 22...Re8 stop White brutaly. No more attack to see. Maybe White can fight for a draw, but this was not his Idea in this Line...

Bye

I wouldn't call a well defended passed pawn on the 6th rank a weakness; but it is true that the pawn blocks white attacking lines like in the Qe2-main line.
But this situation should be an improvement to the Qe2 as the differences are that the queen is now on e3 and the black king is on f8 instead of e8. Both seem to be an improvement as the queen on e3 has more relevant squares to go to and also attacks g5, while the black king should  be more dangerously placed on f8 than on e8. Ideas with f4 or h4 are sometimes possible for white now but I agree that this position needs serious analysis to come to a conclusion.

But anyway if this line is better for black in the end (something I don't believe) then white can still play 16.Rxe7 Qxe7 17.Rxe7 Kxe7 18.Qe3+ Kf8 19.Bb5! Bf5 20.Qf3 which draws.

Quote:


  I will simply say that I have looked deeply at Black's exchange-winning ideas after 6...Ne4  7. Bxf4 Qh5+  8. g3 Nxg3  9. Bxg3 Qe5+  10. Kf2 Qxh1 and similarly after 5...Ne4  6. Bxf4 and concluded that White is at least equal and that the path to a draw is not so obvious for Black.  I have not given any attention, that I can recall, to 6...Bg4 in your Chigorin line; I shall.

Sometimes after 5...d5,  6. Bd3 has been played, but I am not sure about it since, if Black does go for the exchange, it is good for the bishop to be on the a2-g8 diagonal.

I respect Markovich not wanting to publish his analysis, but in another thread I mentioned 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.d4 Nf6 5.e5 d5 6.Bb3 Bg4 Charousek-Tsjigorin, Budapest 1896, which is not that good for White.
In fact I think 3...Nc6 underrated.