Quote:LOL!! I had a feeling that this Smirin vs Johannessen game reference might have come up.
Now allow me to show you an important game that was played afterwards:
[Event "Metalis op 8th"]
[Site "Bizovac"]
[Date "2001.02.22"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Kovacevic,Blazimir" 2457]
[Black "Zelcic,Robert" 2500]
[Result "0-1"]
[Eco "A28"]
1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.d4 e4 5.Ng5 h6 6.Ngxe4 Nxe4 7.Nxe4 Qh4 8.Qd3 d5 9.cxd5 Nb4 10.Qb1 Bf5 11.Nd6+ Bxd6! [As it turns out this is now considered better than 11..cxd6] 12.Qxf5 g6 13.Qb1 Qxd4 14.a3 0-0-0 15.Bd2 Nxd5 16.e3 Qf6 17.Qc2 Rhe8 18.Be2 Kb8 19.0-0 Nf4 20.Bf3 Nh3+ 21.Kh1 Ng5 22.Bc3 Qe7 23.Be2 Ne4 24.Kg1 f5 25.Rae1 h5 26.Bd3 Bxh2+ 27.Kxh2 Qd6+ 0-1
Botvinnik was a great Champion, who introduced many important and sometimes deep Opening ideas. However theory marches on.
Take a long look at the position after 13.Qb1, would you really want to be White here? But then again I am just looking at this in my head, as I am at work and don't have a board in front of me or Fritz.
To repeat, for those tuning in late. For some reason whenever I play the above line as Black, White players seem totally shocked. Maybe they are shocked that Black can equalise so easily in this way.
I really really really do spoil you chaps.
Regards
Top
Thank for that info; you could've saved us a long go-round if you'd posted the >whole< idea in the first place. Just offhand, and yes, with the help of the chess engine, it looks like 14.e4 was a sterner test of Black's play Kovacevic-Zelcic. E.g.:
14...f5 15. Be3 Qxe4 16. Qxe4 fxe4 17. Bb5+ Ke7 (17...Kf7 18. O-O Nxd5 19. Bc4 c6 20. f3) 18. O-O-O.
14...Qc5 (best, I suspect) 15. Kd1 Qxf2 (15...Qd4+ 16. Ke2) 16. a3 Qd4+ (16...Na6 17. b4) 17. Ke2. All very machine-like and unclear, but it would seem that White's horse is not entirely dead, nor is Black's play necessarily justified.
I don't know what you were trying to prove with the rest of your post, but if you want to show me why Black is even in that Dragon ending and not somewhat worse as I think, I would be happy to receive a chess lesson. And yeah, I was at work and without sight of the board when I wrote that post about it.
As for Botvinnik, my point was not that he was an infallible god of chess, only that when a line is taken up by one of the great ones with the white pieces in a WC match, it usually means that it doesn't lead to a dead draw.
You know, the notion that you might know a lot more about chess than I do really does not bother me in the slightest. I am not even an FM, just somebody who likes chess. I am much happier to converse with stronger players here than weaker ones -- the stronger the better. But if you are such a godawful chess genius and not a poseur with a high-powered chess engine, it would be nice if you would just lay out your specific chess ideas in refutation of those of others, and not taunt them. It really does not lead to one to wish to converse with you.
Except in the Dragon thread, your posts here are way long on bravado an way short on specifics. If you want to talk chess, talk chess, and don't brag so much.
Pages: 
English Opening - Online studying resources... (Read 11784 times)
