Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation (Read 52593 times)
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #42 - 03/29/10 at 20:07:12
Post Tools
Schroeder wrote on 03/29/10 at 17:06:26:
ArKheiN wrote on 03/19/10 at 18:41:48:
I don't know what is the verdict but I imagine that this line is not considered as a serious winning try for White because 6.Bf1 or 7.Bf1 is the "main move", where I did not find a way to equalize for Black. So your line might just be equal.


I remember that in another thread (unfortunately I cannot recall where exactly) someone argued that the Ulvestad (5.-b5) move order is the better way to enter the Fritz/Ulvestad main line (6.Bf1 Nd4). The reason was that in the Fritz move order 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 White has the promising alternative 7.cxd4 bxc4 8.dxe5 Qxd5 9.exf6 Qxg5 10.Qf3 Rb8 11.Qe3+ which was supposed to be +/=.



I'm rather sure that Berliner himself used the Ulvestad move order, for whatever that's worth.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Schroeder
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 89
Location: Hamburg
Joined: 03/28/08
Gender: Male
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #41 - 03/29/10 at 17:06:26
Post Tools
ArKheiN wrote on 03/19/10 at 18:41:48:
I don't know what is the verdict but I imagine that this line is not considered as a serious winning try for White because 6.Bf1 or 7.Bf1 is the "main move", where I did not find a way to equalize for Black. So your line might just be equal.


I remember that in another thread (unfortunately I cannot recall where exactly) someone argued that the Ulvestad (5.-b5) move order is the better way to enter the Fritz/Ulvestad main line (6.Bf1 Nd4). The reason was that in the Fritz move order 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 White has the promising alternative 7.cxd4 bxc4 8.dxe5 Qxd5 9.exf6 Qxg5 10.Qf3 Rb8 11.Qe3+ which was supposed to be +/=.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #40 - 03/29/10 at 16:28:01
Post Tools
Off-Topic replies have been moved to this Topic.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Master Om
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 187
Joined: 02/20/10
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #39 - 03/22/10 at 17:45:22
Post Tools
Schroeder wrote on 03/19/10 at 12:48:14:
In this thread, the discussion so far focussed on the line
1. e4  e5 2. Nf3  Nc6 3. Bc4  Nf6 4. Ng5  d5 5. exd5 b5 6. Bf1  Nd4, which also occurs via the Ulvestad move order.

But what is the verdict about the "Fritz proper"?
1. e4  e5 2. Nf3  Nc6 3. Bc4  Nf6 4. Ng5  d5 5. exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.cxd4 bxc4

In a recent game on chess.com I was not able to demonstrate a white advantage.

[Event "Bite-sized Tourney - Round 1"]
[Site "Chess.com"]
[Date "2010.03.19"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Schroeder"]
[Black "3155"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C57"]
[WhiteElo "1940"]
[BlackElo "1878"]
[Annotator "Schroeder"]
[PlyCount "29"]
[EventDate "2010.??.??"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nd4 6. c3 b5 7. cxd4 bxc4 8.
dxe5 Nxd5 9. Qa4+ Bd7 (9... Qd7 10. Qxc4 Nb4 11. O-O h6 12. a3 (12. Qe4 $6 hxg5
$1 13. Qxa8 Nc2 14. Qe4 $6 Nxa1 15. Nc3 $6 Rh4 $15 {
Chierici,M (1922)-Bentivegna,F (2287)/San Marino 2006/}) 12... Ba6 13. Qe4 Nd5
14. Nf3 Bxf1 15. Kxf1 $14) 10. Qxc4 Qxg5 (10... Nb6 $4 11. Qxf7# {
1-0 Veenstra,P-Wulffers,S/Hengelo 1997/EXT 2001}) (10... c6 $2 11. d4 $16 {
Sipek,M (1876)-Schoupal,P (1957)/Brno 2004/}) 11. Qxd5 Rd8 (11... Rb8 $6 12.
Nc3 Qg6 (12... Be6 $2 13. Qc6+ Kd8 $2 (13... Bd7 14. Qe4 $16) 14. d4 $18 {
Jardine,L (1730)-Swinkels,M (1500)/Le Touquet 2004/}) 13. Qe4 $16 (13. e6 $2
Bxe6 14. Qc6+ {Momo,S-Olsson,A/Leningrad 1960/} Bd7 15. Qxg6 hxg6 $11) 13...
Bf5 14. Qa4+ c6 15. Qxa7 $16) (11... c6 $6 12. Qe4 $16) 12. Nc3 (12. O-O Qg6
13. Qf3 (13. d4 $4 Bc6 $19 {Farmani Anosheh,A-Mueller,J (2166)/Ottenau 2005/})
13... Bc6 $6 (13... Bc5 $44) 14. Qh3 $2 (14. Qg3 $14) 14... Bc5 15. d4 $2 (15.
Nc3 Rd3 16. Qc8+ Rd8 17. Qh3 $11) 15... Rxd4 $17 {
Van Gysel,A-Becx,C (2315)/Guernsey 1988/}) 12... Qg6 13. Qe4 Bf5 14. Qa4+ (14.
Qf3 Bc5 $44) 14... Bd7 (14... Rd7 $2 15. O-O $16 {
Berenyi,T (2126)-Bernat,R (2186)/Hungary 2000/}) 15. Qe4 1/2-1/2


Why not 9.Qf3 which seems the best move here?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Master Om
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 187
Joined: 02/20/10
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #38 - 03/22/10 at 17:35:32
Post Tools
Markovich wrote on 07/31/06 at 12:02:03:
THUDandBLUNDER wrote on 07/31/06 at 01:32:00:
How about if, instead of 5...Nd4 (Fritz), Black replies Nxd5 inviting the Fried Liver?
If White plays 6. d4 is Heisman's 6....Nxd4 7. c3  b5 (or f6) good enough?


That's offtopic.  But I will say, I would not wish to be Black after 6. d4.  Certainly not OTB, and probably not even in CC.

6.....Be6 is the move that white cant refute so easily. Black holds on its own after Qh5 or Qg4. Fried liver is a better option to play for black and you have better chances to win.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ArKheiN
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 718
Location: Belgium
Joined: 03/30/05
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #37 - 03/19/10 at 18:41:48
Post Tools
I don't know what is the verdict but I imagine that this line is not considered as a serious winning try for White because 6.Bf1 or 7.Bf1 is the "main move", where I did not find a way to equalize for Black. So your line might just be equal.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Schroeder
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 89
Location: Hamburg
Joined: 03/28/08
Gender: Male
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #36 - 03/19/10 at 12:48:14
Post Tools
In this thread, the discussion so far focussed on the line
1. e4  e5 2. Nf3  Nc6 3. Bc4  Nf6 4. Ng5  d5 5. exd5 b5 6. Bf1  Nd4, which also occurs via the Ulvestad move order.

But what is the verdict about the "Fritz proper"?
1. e4  e5 2. Nf3  Nc6 3. Bc4  Nf6 4. Ng5  d5 5. exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.cxd4 bxc4

In a recent game on chess.com I was not able to demonstrate a white advantage.

[Event "Bite-sized Tourney - Round 1"]
[Site "Chess.com"]
[Date "2010.03.19"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Schroeder"]
[Black "3155"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C57"]
[WhiteElo "1940"]
[BlackElo "1878"]
[Annotator "Schroeder"]
[PlyCount "29"]
[EventDate "2010.??.??"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nd4 6. c3 b5 7. cxd4 bxc4 8.
dxe5 Nxd5 9. Qa4+ Bd7 (9... Qd7 10. Qxc4 Nb4 11. O-O h6 12. a3 (12. Qe4 $6 hxg5
$1 13. Qxa8 Nc2 14. Qe4 $6 Nxa1 15. Nc3 $6 Rh4 $15 {
Chierici,M (1922)-Bentivegna,F (2287)/San Marino 2006/}) 12... Ba6 13. Qe4 Nd5
14. Nf3 Bxf1 15. Kxf1 $14) 10. Qxc4 Qxg5 (10... Nb6 $4 11. Qxf7# {
1-0 Veenstra,P-Wulffers,S/Hengelo 1997/EXT 2001}) (10... c6 $2 11. d4 $16 {
Sipek,M (1876)-Schoupal,P (1957)/Brno 2004/}) 11. Qxd5 Rd8 (11... Rb8 $6 12.
Nc3 Qg6 (12... Be6 $2 13. Qc6+ Kd8 $2 (13... Bd7 14. Qe4 $16) 14. d4 $18 {
Jardine,L (1730)-Swinkels,M (1500)/Le Touquet 2004/}) 13. Qe4 $16 (13. e6 $2
Bxe6 14. Qc6+ {Momo,S-Olsson,A/Leningrad 1960/} Bd7 15. Qxg6 hxg6 $11) 13...
Bf5 14. Qa4+ c6 15. Qxa7 $16) (11... c6 $6 12. Qe4 $16) 12. Nc3 (12. O-O Qg6
13. Qf3 (13. d4 $4 Bc6 $19 {Farmani Anosheh,A-Mueller,J (2166)/Ottenau 2005/})
13... Bc6 $6 (13... Bc5 $44) 14. Qh3 $2 (14. Qg3 $14) 14... Bc5 15. d4 $2 (15.
Nc3 Rd3 16. Qc8+ Rd8 17. Qh3 $11) 15... Rxd4 $17 {
Van Gysel,A-Becx,C (2315)/Guernsey 1988/}) 12... Qg6 13. Qe4 Bf5 14. Qa4+ (14.
Qf3 Bc5 $44) 14... Bd7 (14... Rd7 $2 15. O-O $16 {
Berenyi,T (2126)-Bernat,R (2186)/Hungary 2000/}) 15. Qe4 1/2-1/2

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Schroeder
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 89
Location: Hamburg
Joined: 03/28/08
Gender: Male
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #35 - 10/27/09 at 20:40:02
Post Tools
There is a video (25 min) about the Fritz/Ulvestad:
http://www.chessvideos.tv/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5953
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2040
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #34 - 04/09/08 at 02:06:47
Post Tools
micawber wrote on 04/09/08 at 00:15:27:
@Mnb:
I agree with your judgement on the line
10.0-0 Bb7 11.Qf3 Rb8 12.dxe5 Ne3 13.Qh3 Qxg2+ 14.Qxg2 Nxg3 15.d4
I probably misjudged this position. Black should be able to keep white's advantage to a minimum with  15...Be7 followed by a quick f6.

In the line
10.Qf3 exd4
11.Bc6

Black has an interesting possibility in 11...Nf4!? (iso Nb4)

11.Bc6, Nf4         11.0-0,Rb8 and black is OK
12.Bxa8,Bg4       Does white have anything better than Bxa8? (12.g3,Qc5! unclear; Frejdle-Boschetti, Schweiz 1993)

And now the following branches:
I. [13.Qe4,Bd6 14.Bc6 Barros-Valderama, Cali, South American Ch. 2007
and now 14...f5! would have given black a huge advantage.

note
Other 14th moves dont solve whites problems:
14.0-0,Re8! 15.Qc6,Nh3 16.Kh1,Nxf2 etc.
14.g3, Re8 (or even 14....Qb5 threatening Ng2 15.gxf,Re8)



II. 13.Qc6,Nd3+ 14.Kf1,Bc5 15.h4,Qf4
and I dont see anything better for white than a perpetual.


@Topnotch: I am curious about your discoveries.



I will probably not be able to do that post before the weekend, however it was going to include 11...Nf4 that you mentioned above, which I think is even more effective and shocking than the often played 11...Nb4.

The endgame after 15...Be7 or 15...f6 maybe tenable but extremely unpleasant if White plays accurately and I cannot imagine anyone with black knowingly heading for this line. I will just add that for the moment White should avoid f4 ideas in favor of f3 as g5 features prominently in Black's plans should f4 be played prematurely.

The problem as I see it with your 10.0-0 Rb8 suggestion can be traced to two important games featuring the same player as White:

IM Pirrot, D vs GM Karpatchev, A  2006 result 0-1

IM Pirrot, D vs Daeubler, H           2008 result 1-0

Pirrot improved on his earlier game with 13.Na3! instead of 13.Qf3 and I think it gives White the advantage.

I think that the rarely played 10.0-0 Nf4!? deserves much closer scrutiny and it is here that I am currently focussing my rehabilitative efforts.

Wish me luck.

TN Smiley

 
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #33 - 04/09/08 at 01:00:57
Post Tools
@Mnb:
10.Qf3 exd4 eg 11.Bc6 Nb4 12.Bxa8, Nc2+
This line is still rather unclear.
Tim Harding has pointed out Dikman-Ivanovic, corr. 2002
where white was able to free himself and win.

But even here new discoveries were made.
Berliner analysed another method for black in Kaissiber:
12.......Bd6 13.0-0,Bg4 14.Qe4,Re8 15.Qxd4,Be2 and apparently
black has sufficient compensation.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #32 - 04/09/08 at 00:15:27
Post Tools
@Mnb:
I agree with your judgement on the line
10.0-0 Bb7 11.Qf3 Rb8 12.dxe5 Ne3 13.Qh3 Qxg2+ 14.Qxg2 Nxg3 15.d4
I probably misjudged this position. Black should be able to keep white's advantage to a minimum with  15...Be7 followed by a quick f6.

In the line
10.Qf3 exd4
11.Bc6

Black has an interesting possibility in 11...Nf4!? (iso Nb4)

11.Bc6, Nf4         11.0-0,Rb8 and black is OK
12.Bxa8,Bg4       Does white have anything better than Bxa8? (12.g3,Qc5! unclear; Frejdle-Boschetti, Schweiz 1993)

And now the following branches:
I. [13.Qe4,Bd6 14.Bc6 Barros-Valderama, Cali, South American Ch. 2007
and now 14...f5! would have given black a huge advantage.

note
Other 14th moves dont solve whites problems:
14.0-0,Re8! 15.Qc6,Nh3 16.Kh1,Nxf2 etc.
14.g3, Re8 (or even 14....Qb5 threatening Ng2 15.gxf,Re8)



II. 13.Qc6,Nd3+ 14.Kf1,Bc5 15.h4,Qf4
and I dont see anything better for white than a perpetual.


@Topnotch: I am curious about your discoveries.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
peon4rey
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 39
Joined: 05/24/06
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #31 - 04/08/08 at 01:43:08
Post Tools
Well, I never wrote opinions here because there are better players, but i played this defense. I think that this variation is good for black only when the white player dont know about it. At move 14 black is a pawn down, he has a lead in development but i find it difficult to show this over the board. In chesscafe you can find articles about this variation.
Thanks
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2040
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #30 - 04/08/08 at 00:32:57
Post Tools
It is pleasing that others share my interest in this line and I appreciate all the interesting input thus far to my query, but admittedly the ideas put forward  did not escape my attention and I have already been examining them quite extensively for some time now and it still appears to me that Black is struggling.

Rather than stretch this thread any further though, I will start a new one featuring the tabiya discussed in my initial post along with my findings so far.

Stay tuned.

Toppy Smiley
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SWJediknight
God Member
*****
Offline


Alert... opponent out
of book!

Posts: 900
Joined: 03/14/08
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #29 - 04/07/08 at 23:59:11
Post Tools
I looked at Tim Harding's article at http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kibitz60.pdf but it doesn't give much on the line.  It does appear that 10...Rb8 is better, but I reckon the main problem is the main line 8 Ne4, as 8...Qh4 is now considered dubious (as Harding points out) and 8...Ne6 doesn't give many winning chances as was pointed out at the beginning of this thread.

Stefan Bucker did a recent article on the Traxler suggesting that the "refutation" with 7 Ke3 was nothing of the sort, but he did suggest a closer look at 5 d4.  I think you need to know what you're doing in the Traxler though, I tried it a couple of times and got beaten in short order both times. 

OTB, I generally play 5...Na5, as I generally feel that 5...Nd4, or the alternative move-order 5...b5, gives White far more options.  I agree with Markovich on 5...Nxd5, wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10505
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Two Knights Defence : Fritz variation
Reply #28 - 04/07/08 at 17:17:41
Post Tools
Maybe Micawbers evalution +- is too harsh after 10.0-0 Bb7 11.Qf3 Rb8 12.dxe5 Ne3 13.Qh3 Qxg2+ 14.Qxg2 Nxg3 15.d4 as White only has 1/3, but it's not what Black wants in the Fritz. If 10.0-0 Rb8 is best the question arises how about 10.Qf3 idea Bb7 11.0-0.  There is 10.Qf3 exd4 eg 11.Bc6 Nb4 12.Bxa8 Nc2+ 13.Kd1 Galyas-Richardson, Budapest 1996 and I suggest Nxa1 14.Qxf7 Bg4+ 15.Bf3 Qf5 (Bd6 might even be better) 16.Qxf5 Bxf5 and positions like this offer Black enough compensation due to his enormous lead in development. The next logical step is to look at 10.0-0 exd4 11.Qf3 and I like Bd6 12.d3 Qe5 13.Qg3 Nf4 as White must give up the pair of bishops.
Is this fresh and useful enough?  Wink
  

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
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo