Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Urusov v. Boden Kieseritsky (Read 6979 times)
God Member

Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10413
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Urusov v. Boden Kieseritsky
Reply #1 - 02/05/05 at 21:13:00
Post Tools
I do not agree, that the Boden Gambit and the Urussov Gambit lead to similar positions. In the Urussov Gambit there is an open e-file, which White can use for his attacking plans. When you consider to take up the Urussov Gambit I advise you to purchase at least two books:
Danish Dynamite by Müller and Voigt;
The fascinating King's Gambit by Johansson because of the transposition 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nc6 3.f4.
You might also want to buy books on the Evans Gambit because of 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.b4 and on the Four Knights Game because of 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nf3 Nc6.

The good new about the Boden Gambit, is that White has several move orders available:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bc4 Nxe4 5.o-o.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Nc3.
1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Nf3.
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nxe4 4.Nc3.

The bad news is, that White's play is highly dubious.
4...Nxc3 (there is no objection against Nc6 5.o-o Nxc3 see under) 5.dxc3 f6 (or Qe7 first) 6.Nh4 (6.o-o g6! or Nc6 with a transposition) g6 7.f4 (7.o-o c6!) Qe7 (c6 or Nc6 are playable too) 8.f5 Qg7! 9.o-o d6 and White has a hard time to open the necessary open lines.

Also in the Four Knights Game 5.o-o Black can play Nxc3 6.dxc3 f6 (Be7 is about equal) 7.Nh4 g6 8.f4 Qe7 with the same idea of meeting f4-f5 with Qe7-g7.
White struggles, probably in vain, for compensation.

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
Kyle Truhe

Urusov v. Boden Kieseritsky
02/05/05 at 02:24:57
Post Tools
i am currently in the process of putting back together and refreshing on my openings for tournament play, and i was wondering if there were any bishop's opening folks that have any opinions on which of these two openings is a stronger choice, and why. let me say upfront that i am not a master, and that both openings are sufficiently sound for my taste and my level of play.

i used to know both openings well, and i liked them both, but i only want to refresh on one for the time being, because i have a lot of other things to cover.

both openings are very similar type games. they are gambits with some tactical bite to them, and also have a good gambit effect on players, meaning that the right moves are very hard to find over the board when defending if not educated.

also, they are both positionally strong. if an opponent defends well, you still have good space, good squares, and plenty of chances to win in a non-swashbuckling manner.

and finally, they will both be declined by everyone, every single time, and i'll end up playing the exact same game against the 2 knights that i have a million times before. i'll be ready for the first hypothetical guy that doesn't though!

Back to top
IP Logged
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo