Yes, White's play was not so good; I listed this game to show Black's possibilities.  The h4-h5 plan you suggested is much stronger than the game continuation which just exchanges dark square bishops and plays into Black's hands.  But I think Black has sufficient resources to defend against a plan involving h4-h5.  This demands accurate defense; however, I believe I have found a defensive plan that neutralizes White's attack.

My reason for pointing this line out is that many defenders of the Black side seem to ignore potentially promising continuations out of fear of a nebulous attack.  (I have been guilty of this myself!)  It is better to confront a kingside attack head on with a principled defense, than to lie in wait, dodging every feint of an attack.  Such an overly cautious approach can allow White to gain very real positional advantages!

Also I don't like 8...h6 for the following two reasons:
1)  It compromises the kingside pawn structure before Black has completed development.  BDG players thrive upon opportunities like this.
2)  It does not seem very consistent with 6...Bxf3.  Black has just relinquished the bishop pair with the exchange of the light-squared bishop for the knight.  In such situations, Black would like to limit the influence of the bishop pair by protecting the squares of the missing light-squared bishop.  If Black is to move a kingside pawn, ...g6 seems more desirable than ...h6 from this perspective.

I understand that one of the main objectives of ...h6 is to castle queenside; however, preparing for this at such an early stage can be a cumbersome maneuver.  For instance, take a look at Schoupal-MNb.  Even when accomplished, it is not clear that this is a safe place for the king.  For myself, 8...h6 at this stage violates a number of guiding principles in development, especially against the BDG.

Quote:

I'm not sure White's better.  That continuation as well as 19...Qc5+ seemed unclear to me.  There are a few lines which result in lots of material being traded and a more or less equal endgame resulting.  At any rate, my interest in the entire 8...e6 complex is quite light, especially so after a move like Nb4, and I won't worry too much even if you are correct.
Quote:

Sure.  As I'm sure you're aware, Fritz is not very reliable here for either side, so its numerical scores are basically meaningless to me.  Of course, White does have an attack, and I agree that Black will probably have to give back some material and defend carefully.  That said, I think Black has good ways of doing this.  h6 seems to be an interesting way of activating the Black kingside, and it may be the way to an advantage after 11.Qf2, say.

Of course, the 8...h6 line seems like a safe way to leave Black with basically all of the winning chances and keep the tactical complications to a minimum.  I would be quite happy to enter those lines OTB knowing only this idea.
Quote:

Here, I must respectfully dissent.  What this thread shows is that every Black player can pick out his favorite line -- even ones which BDGers have ignored as 'not critical' -- and show that Black has good play; equality and maybe an edge.  The fact that there are two ways for Black to reach a better game even after 6...Bxf3 (surely a sideline of a sideline for the BDG complex) is not a good sign for the health of the gambit.  I recall someone, speaking of some variation in the dragon, that one critical (i.e., lost for black) line can be patched; two critical lines and the variation is dead.  This is something of an overstatement, but there are dozens of critical lines against the BDG, and one can spend (waste?) a lifetime trying to patch them all.

Quote:


But after 18..Nd7 19.Bh4 Nf6 20.Qe2 White is better!

Quote:


You are maybe right, but was is sure is that 10..Bb4, giving a tempo compared to 10..Be7 can only be inferior to 10..Be7 (It's not like if I had no good moves to play, and commit my position with a move)

About 8..Qxd4 9.Be3, I think only 9..Qd6! 10.g5 Nfd7 can give problems to White. With 8..Qb4, 8..Qe5 or 8..Qd8, Black have no advantages. But theses positions after the double pawn sacrifice are really hard to assess. In theory, it seems that there is not always a concrete way to compensate the 2 pawns, but in practice it's a lot different. If I wanted to analyse 8.g4!? it's because this move is very sharp, and it's at least equal (or real winning chances)against every Black's responses,(other than 8..Qxd4 9.Be3 Qd6 10.g5 Nfd7 where I am myself quite septical) like we have seen in our analysis. The other reason I gave 8.g4!?, is Peter Leisebein's favourite, where he have a very good results, but he admit that theses positions are difficults to judge and to play for both side. After 8..Qxd4 9.Be3 Qd6 10.g5 Nfd7 (I think this is the critical variation of the whole 8.g4!?, because in any other lines, I don't fear anything), Leisebein prefered first 11.Bd2 and after 11..Ne5 Qe2 I have 2 wins from him.(but like you Scholar, I am quite septical here) and in the recent years, he seems to prefer 11.Qf2 but here too, I am not sure about White's compensation. My general conclusion of 8..Qxd4 is that the game is very sharp, theorically better for Black because of the material advantage, but hard to play for both side, and not that bad in practice (still goods results of course, but I am not convinced by White's real compensation in line with 9..Qd6) And for curiosity, I watched to Fritz's evaluation after 11.Qf2, and despite the fact that he is generally materialist, he agree that White have a compensation of 75% for 2 pawns (about -0.50, 1 pawn totally compensated and an half pawn compensated in a material point of view, and somes times in a normal BDG position he give -0.50 where Black is "only" 1 pawn up. And generally when you continue to play best moves from White side, Fritz himself "improve"White evaluation gradually, moves after moves to finally reach an equality. )It was just an interesting point of view, but Fritz is not always a reference, it's even more true in the BDG when he sometimes gives defensives and passives moves to White because he plays like if he had to survive with a pawn down, which is contrary to the gambit spirit : attacking at all cost (and 8.g4 is in this spirit). But if White is doubt of White's compensation, or is just scared to offer another pawn without anything concrete, (only dynamics compensation, that can often be used to regain material with (=) or even more, but not sure they always can.) you can still play the classical 8.Be3 (Fritz the materialist seems to prefer this move, but was the old mainline I think) or 8.Qf2!?(Ciesilsky variation) which are more conventional and not bad.

This tread is just another example of the complexity of the BDG, and the differents positions that can arrise from differents strategies, and the theory of the BDG still evolue, and even you (anyone in this forum), or me can contribute to add a little thing to the theory, which is still growing and evoluting, sometime only one little improvement from one side can change an entire defense or attack! When you realise that theses analysis is just a part from my works and researchs of existing analysis, it just deserves the right to have some respects for the BDGers, who are also chess lovers, like any of you, and fights hard to defend a meprised line (only somes guys are concerned, generally the type of guys who love to uses only words to say that the gambit is so bad).

Global Chess Server, i.e., USCL.  Feel free to sign on, it's still in your game history.  Not blitz, simul though, so we can forgive you.   

Anyway, I did miss Bf5, and must say it's good.  Give me some time please  

NeX iRae

Come on Lev, your itch to move your b pawn 2 squares forward is historical!
Someone must have been willing to make an innocent joke about it...

Nexirae, you can compare the line given by Sacapawn and X to the main line of 4.dxe5 Qxd1 5.Kxd1 Nc6 6.Nxe4 Bg4+! (6...Nxe5 7.Bf4 Bf5 8.Bxe5 Bxe4 9.Bxc7 Rc8 10.Bb5+ Ke7 11.f3 Bxc2+ 12.Kxc2 Rxc7+ 13.Kb3 dead drawn) 7.f3 0-0-0+ and share your further conclusions with us 

Arkhein 5.Nf3 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Bxd2+ 7.Qxd2 Nf6 8.Nxf6 Qxf6 pretty equal, maybe too much for Black's legitimate ambitions, I concede, half-heartedly.

I savour your voice Smyslov_fan, keep burning   

@nexirae:

In your variation 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e5 4.Nge2 Bb4 5.dxe5 Qxd1+ 6.Kxd1 Nc6 7.Nxe4 I suggest the very natural 7.-,Bf5

And it seems Black has at least equality.

E.g. 8.N2g3 0-0-0+ 9.Bd2 Bxe4 10.Nxe4 Bxd2 11.Nxd2 Nxe5 12.f3 Nf6 and Black is better.