Well, this forum is definitely serving its purpose! I bought the book just after reading a few entries...

My results with the Spanish have been dismal (=1 -3) and with the KG are excellent, although I will stick to the Spanish as a means of learning chess... I have started playing the Spanish in 2004, and played the KG for 30 years...

I tried to put up a repertoire with the bishop gambit but didnot like a couple of lines, I'll see if this book provides some answers to these. 

I would like to thank alumbrado for his contributions to the forum... they are excellent

Regards,


Fernando Semprun

I have a new idea in the Obstruction Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.d4 Nf6 5.Bd5).  After 5...Nb4 6.Bb3 Nxe4 7.Bxf4 Qh4+ 8.g3 Qe7 9.Ne2 c6, instead of 10.0-0, how about 10.a3 Nd5 11.Bxd5 cxd5 12.0-0.  Now a sample line with fairly good defense by Black (I think) is: 12...Qe6 13.Nec3 Be7 14.Nxe4 dxe4 15.Nc3 0-0 16.d5 Qb6+ 17.Kg2 d6 18.Nxe4 Bf5 19.Qd3, and Fritz eventually rated this as equal.  But you know what they say, "Long variation, wrong variation".  Is that from Larsen?

MNb - Apologies if I accidently dropped you in it there...

TalJechin - thanks for the reply! It's good to know that your book injects new ideas into these old lines.

I suppose I'm generally suspicious of the closed centre that results (temporarily at least) from 3...Nc6 4.d4 Nf6 5.e5 d5. Allowing the blocking of the a2-g8 diagonal surely plays into Black's hands.* White needs an open game with pressure on f7 (that's the theme of 2.f4 & 3.Bc4).

Hence 5.Nc3 (5.Bd5 ???) 5...Bb4 6.Ne2 does indeed look like a better try, although after 6...f3 7.gxf3 d5, I just don't see it. Oh well, I guess I always was a fan of 3.Nf3, and when that turned into a forced draw my enthusiasm for the King's Gambit waned...

Sorry folks.

But don't worry, I'll come crawling back when all those Petroffs finally grind me down...

* The Schallop Defence is the exception (3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 Nh5 5.d4 d5), but in comparison to the above line, White doesn't lose a tempo with his light-squared bishop.

Well, that 8...f3! was a very cold shower when I found it, especially since I'd spent a very long time on the supposed main line with black's queen picking up Rh1, finally more or less refuting black's exchange snatching idea, but all in vain due to the presumed inferior 6...Bg4...

5.e5 d5 6.Bb5 Ne4 7.Nf3!? is unclear I think. 6.Be2 is bordering on a forced draw, but there are so many different and similar ideas that it may still be playable in practice as black needs to be rather booked up not to get nervous OTB... And finally, after 6.Bb3 white will be forced to sac an exchange, fritz doesn't approve but it's probably not completely out of the question that white might dig something up here... 

If you're really interested in these variations I think you should get the book! But I can give a general direction:

My main recommendation is a new gambit, 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.Ne2!? The Modest Gambit (named thus as it resembles another new gambit, the Humble...)

I also spent a lot of time and energy on 5.Bd5!? The Obstruction Gambit, though here I'm not 100% convinced - one could say this is something of a Muzio in the Bishop's gambit... 

Anyway, as this is an open forum and all, I don't want to discuss just my analysis...  If there should be any reasonably high level games in these lines it would be more interesting - since with all analysis it's hard to foresee what will prove to be the main line in practice.

One could compare with the exchange snatching idea mentioned above - there's been written a whole lot about it, making it 'the main line' - but as far as I know it has never been played!

But unofficially I wouldn't mind discussing these lines via email, if anyone should find a hole in my analysis or better yet a strong improvement!  

My email? - just add @telia.com after my username here. Will soon be getting broadband, so either use the address on my site (click the crow on the starting page) or send an internal message here at the forum, (available for registered user here.) though it might take a while before I'd notice it...

Quote:


10.Qe2 as in Yoos,J-Jiganchine,R Keres Mem, Vancouver 2001, does indeed look best, as it is likely to persuade black not to play ...Nc6, but just ...c6 when white may have a small technical edge. Still, the stem game Y-J also ended in a draw despite that black was clearly lower rated, but it seems to me & fritz that Yoos could've gotten an edge with Qd3 and Kg1 at some point.

I've also looked at 10.Re1 as it's hard to imagine that such a natural move should be wrong. After 10...Be7 One idea could be 11.b3 (fritz mentions 11.Re5 but Nd7 seems a good reply) 11...Nc6 12.Na4 Qa5 13.c4 Fritz seems overly optimistic for black here I think (-/+) but slowly drops to a modest -0.44 after a while if you go into the main line. My point here being that the comp may like black in this line, but I'm not so sure a human opponent would be all that happy... Even if the position probably is roughly equal.

I'm still looking for someway to make Qb6 more uncomfortable, though so far I have to concede that Qb6+ is indeed an improvement - but I still have a hard time believing the simplistic Qe6+ would turn out to be black's best defence after Nc3...

Quote:



that's great. i've wanted to see something new on those lines for quite some time now, although i suppose it might not be so great that i will have to stop using that defense. 

p.s. i highly recommend 2. a3 against the scandanavian!

sounds like a fun book. just out of curiosity, is there any mention of 2...Qf6 in it? i used to play it a lot, because someone or other, maybe it was schiller, don't remember, published a bust to the line that was a bust itself 

i haven't really read anything about the line since, and i'm kind of wondering if there has been anything new printed about that line. i think it was called the norwalder.