1st of September, I am back
Of course I accept the draw! This is only a demonstration game to provide material for a future update and definitly close the 4.Nge2 Lemberger and the whole BDG world, Hubsch included, at the same time.
After my mistake on move 4 (Nc6 instead of Bb4) I was dragged, against my will, into the kind of complications that make think the BDGer his variation is alive.
Indeed, it is very hard to resist against such initiative and Patrik's other games on this site have brightly proved it right. I am pretty sure he shall keep doing it against any greedy opponent in any line of its accepted version.
That is why I am at the same time the best advocate of the BDG and its worst nightmare
with the Lemberger, the practical approach.
Now, I am not one but two pawns up because 25.Qe2 f6 26.Bg6+ Kf8 27.Bxh5? loses to 27...Qb5 28.c4 Qxb2+ the idea spotted by Nexirae, with a safe king on f8 and a monster on e5 (and a miserable rook on h6, true
)and I am very sorry Patrik, after having already make you a liar...only I have winning chances that the presence of the opposite coloured bishops actually relativize.
In fact, I only continued this painful game because I like to disappoint people when they want to mate me
but I had a hard time in defence to be put my opponent's credit.
Nevertheless, this unpleasantness is simply not in the spirit of the Lemberger and I spent much to much time on this game related to what it was designed for.
Do not worry, Patrik, you did not miss anything, I would have always come up with a defence, it is the position that claims it, as I predicted from the very beginning!
Perhaps, but I think you were fortunate that White did not play 19. Rdf1.
You're the GM, but I think that accepting a gambit of doubtful soundness is not necessarily a bad way to try to win, though it does involve one in practical difficulties. E.g. 4. Ng5 is objectively best against the Two Knights, I opine, and analogously here.
Pages: [1] 
Schoupal - Prié, 2005, BDG Challenge Match (Read 43092 times)
