Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Please, refute the BDG if you can. (Read 33939 times)
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #80 - 11/14/05 at 15:41:08
Post Tools
Quote:
Ok, so maybe GM Eric Prié who defended the Black's side in a game in the forum against sevenviolet is an amateur? Or somes others players like Markovich who defended the black side against me? Sevenviolet and myself scored 65% after 4 games in the forum and I am ready to challenge anyone with my BDG on blitz or CC play. Yes, CC, you have all your time to find your "refutation" against my gambit, and databases to find the "serious" defenses. As an e4 player, with the BDG move order, it doesn't change anything if my oppopnent plays the French, but if he doesn't, I avoided the 2 mains responses to 1.e4 : 1..c5 and 1..e5, that's the good point of the BDG's move order. Oh and if I play a standard opening, for example 1.d4 and 2.c4, etc, I can say I refuted his Najdorf, he just could not play it, and I avoided it after only 1 move! What a refutation!

More seriously, you, like many others, failed to show that the BDG is REALLY bad. If you want to defend the Black side in a game, and if you believe you can do better than the previous players, let's play a new game here. See you.



If you would care to play on www.net-chess.com, I will be happy to take Black's side of the BDG in some more games against you.  In our game here, you played better moves than I did; but that is not an argument for the BDG.  I admit that it's not an argument against it, either.  I would like to try again, but play here is inconvenient.  www.net-chess.com is public, so anyone here will be able to go there and see our games.  My handle there is "cornstalk."
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
m.emers
Guest


Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #79 - 11/08/05 at 11:17:06
Post Tools
Hello,

I have been reading this and other similar threads on BDG Accepted with great interest. Here is a partial BDG Opening Chart:

1. d4 -----
1. d4 Nf6  2.(Tromp)??
1. d4 g6
1. d4 d6
1. d4 f5
1. d4 d5  2.e4 ------
             2.e4 e6  see C01-C19
             2.e4 c6  see B10-B19
             2.e4 dxe4 (Accepted)

If BDG Accepted is sound and playable for White, there would be a wholesale migration to the BDG. Can you imagine no Sicilian or e5? How about no QGA,QGD,and Slav? That is the soundness of BDG Accepted offers. Nothing but other 1st move defense, French, CK, and BDG Accepted to study as White. Looks good!!---------------------but is Accepted sound and playable???

Have a nice day
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Esiotrot
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 2
Location: London
Joined: 09/28/05
Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #78 - 11/08/05 at 06:09:13
Post Tools
This is not a Staunton gambit.

In the Staunton Black captures with the f-pawn. Here he has captured with the d-pawn.

As Mnb states, this is a very important difference, so I have raised it here in this forum as I believe that it is essentially a BDG line not a Dutch one.

From what I can see there are 4 main move for white on move 4.

f3
Bf4
Bg5
Bc4

f3 is a mistake. As Mnb has shown 4.... e5 is very strong here.

Williams and Pinski give Bf4 (to stop e5) as their main line.

Williams gives :-

4. Bf4 Nf6 5. f3 e6 6. fxe4 (6. Bc4 ? Nd5) fxe4 7. Bc4 Nc6
8. Nge2 Na5! 9. Bb3 Nxb3 10. axb3 Bd7 11. Ng3 Bc6 12. 0-0 and now 12 ...Be7 ?! was Benjamin - Malaniuk
- but Williams give 12....Bd6! as =/+ (all annotation is Williams' not mine).

I haven't got Pinski in front of me at the moment, I will check tonight.

Sawyer in BDG Keybook 2 gives 4. Bg5 as his main line. Here 4....g6 (intending Bg7 and Nc6 putting pressure on d4 ) looks interesting, although he does give several other lines.

4.Bc4 is Pocket Fritz's favourite move - it won't play anything else. I haven't gone to deep into it but there are many transpositions into the Bg5 and Bf4 lines.

Esio

Cheesy
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10757
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #77 - 11/07/05 at 21:21:50
Post Tools
No. There are similarities, but the difference (Black has not played Nf6 yet) is very important:
1.d4 f5 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4?! dxe4! 4.f3 e5! =+Milov-Kramnik, USSR 1990. Williams does not mention 4.Bg5 though and at the moment I cannot remember, what my objection was against this move.
It looks like 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 is a very underestimated defence.
  

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
 
ArKheiN
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 728
Location: Belgium
Joined: 03/30/05
Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #76 - 11/07/05 at 12:39:33
Post Tools
Esiotrot : the lines you gave are close to the Staunton gambit : 1.d4 f5 2.e4!? which is perfectly playable. And then : 2..fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 and here you have 2 main choices, the classical 4.Bg5 and 4.f3!? like in the BDG.

And about 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5!? it's in the Dutch territory, close to the positions I just gave (often it transposes), where I think that 4.Bg5 is a bit more precise than the immediate 4.f3.

Here I copy and past what I have said somes month ago about the Staunton gambit in another thread :

"I think the Staunton gambit, with 4.Bg5 is not that bad. But as a BDG player, I like 4.f3 where a line can also arrise from the BDG move order : 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5!? 4.f3!? Nf6 5.fxe4 fxe4 and from Staunton gambit move order: 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Cc3 Nf6 4.f3!? d5 5.dxe4 dxe4 reaching the same position, and the play can follow 6.Bg5 Bf5 7.Bc4 Nc6 8.d5!?(Nge2 is more common)Ne5 9.Bb3 with about equal chance, so I don't say that 4.f3 is better than 4.Bg5 but it is maybe as good. "

If you have any question about the pure Staunton gambit (1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 Bg5) tell me, I will try to respond. Maybe the insertion of 2.Nc3 before playing e4 is less precise than the immediate 2.e4 and could explain the ?! from GM Simon Williams.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Esiotrot
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 2
Location: London
Joined: 09/28/05
Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #75 - 11/07/05 at 11:59:03
Post Tools
I would like to propose an investigation of the following line if I may:-

1 d4 d5 2 e4 dxe4 3 Nc3 f5

The reason why I am raising this is GM Simon Williams has just this line (by transposition ) in his "Play the Classical Dutch" book. (1 d4 f5 2. Nc3 d5 3. e4 ?! ( the ?! is Williams' ) fxe4).

Pinski also mentions the above line in his book on the Classical Dutch - but awards it !?.

I tried this line in a blitz game and it does have a shock value. However I would like to find out if it's sound in theory as well as practice as I would like to play it over classical time limits.

It would seem that if they are prepared to discuss it, then the line must be worth a further look.

Esio

Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
7
Guest


Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #74 - 11/07/05 at 07:16:40
Post Tools
Quote:
BDG is unsound. I agree with Roman Dzindzichasvilli about that.

He explains :

1. d4  d5  2.  e4  

black answers  2. e4 with   2...e6  and white is now playing against the french defense!!

or  2....c6 and you have the Caro-kann to face.

= BDG refuted.

You are suddenly in an opening that has NOT been refuted for hundreds of years !!!

Thats why the BDG is a totally unsound opening.

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


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 728
Location: Belgium
Joined: 03/30/05
Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #73 - 11/06/05 at 12:06:13
Post Tools
Quote:
GM Prie has indeed shown, in several posts, that specific lines of the BDG is bad.  By bad I mean that the best that White can hope for is equality.


But SevenViolet did draw against him, and he failed to find Rdf1 instead of Qf2 with a +/= instead of (=).

I know many lines in the BDG where White have no more than equality, but not under equality too. For me that's not a refutation, because many normal openings are about equal . For me a refutation would be a solid and clear =/+, and for the moment, nobody showed that.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #72 - 11/06/05 at 00:53:11
Post Tools
By the way, I consider being called an "amateur" to be a compliment!  An amateur is one who does something for the love of doing it!  I hope that even the most well-paid players are amateurs at heart!

I just thought I'd add another!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #71 - 11/06/05 at 00:51:01
Post Tools
Arkhein,

GM Prie has indeed shown, in several posts, that specific lines of the BDG is bad.  By bad I mean that the best that White can hope for is equality.  The Hubsch (a name I just learned today!) certainly looks good to me.  If your move order allows you to transpose into the French instead of the BDG, then perhaps your move order is good! 

Notice, I'm not saying that Black's usage of the French or Caro-Kann refutes White's play.  I'm saying that White's transpositions to these openings rather than playing dubious lines of the BDG suggests that there are real problems for White.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ArKheiN
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 728
Location: Belgium
Joined: 03/30/05
Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #70 - 11/05/05 at 21:01:27
Post Tools
Ok, so maybe GM Eric Prié who defended the Black's side in a game in the forum against sevenviolet is an amateur? Or somes others players like Markovich who defended the black side against me? Sevenviolet and myself scored 65% after 4 games in the forum and I am ready to challenge anyone with my BDG on blitz or CC play. Yes, CC, you have all your time to find your "refutation" against my gambit, and databases to find the "serious" defenses. As an e4 player, with the BDG move order, it doesn't change anything if my oppopnent plays the French, but if he doesn't, I avoided the 2 mains responses to 1.e4 : 1..c5 and 1..e5, that's the good point of the BDG's move order. Oh and if I play a standard opening, for example 1.d4 and 2.c4, etc, I can say I refuted his Najdorf, he just could not play it, and I avoided it after only 1 move! What a refutation!

More seriously, you, like many others, failed to show that the BDG is REALLY bad. If you want to defend the Black side in a game, and if you believe you can do better than the previous players, let's play a new game here. See you.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kalle99
Full Member
***
Offline


They say I have Aspbergers
syndrome.

Posts: 144
Location: Stockholm
Joined: 11/05/05
Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #69 - 11/05/05 at 20:39:00
Post Tools
The point is that if it is so easy to steer away a gambit into one of the most solid openings that exists!! It must be something wrong with it.  It must because of that be a bad choice to play  2. e4

Its a way to refute the gambit .......yes it is!! (in principle it is)


But I am sure that the best thing black can do is to pick a line and study it in depth.

Many BDG players live on the fact that the black players (amateurs) do not have a worked out response to that unsound opening.



  

"I Often see in chess forums people asking : " What is the current status of that line ?"&&&&Its a good reasonable question,but who can claim that he knows the answer ?!&&&&Semko Semkov Januari 2008
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ArKheiN
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 728
Location: Belgium
Joined: 03/30/05
Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #68 - 11/05/05 at 18:59:44
Post Tools
And it's like saying that the Smith-Morra Gambit is refuted because of cxd4 followed by Nf6. No, a transposition is not a refutation! To refute a gambit, you have to accept it or to gain somes advantages by declining it. I agree with lost highway. Here, with the French or the Caro, you didn't gain an advantage by avoiding the gambit. Like I have said previously, a BDGer should be prepared to fight against the Caro, the French, the Pirc and somes independent lines. And for the Caro, 1.d4 c6 2.e4 d5 WOW you declined it with your favorite opening? 3.Nc3 the standard move, dxe4 standard move also, 4.f3! and now we have a sort of BDG (it can transpose or have that type of play)

For the Pirc, I am happy with the Austrian attack, and for the French, I recommand to play standard, because you can't force Black to take on e4 (I don't like so much the Alapin-Diemer gambit), but if he does, f3 is interesting in somes lines.

Many guys says that the BDG is bad from a theorical point of view, but nobody have shown that the pawn up give more than equality.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
lost highway
Senior Member
****
Offline


I may be crazy.

Posts: 471
Joined: 06/17/05
Gender: Male
Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #67 - 11/05/05 at 18:39:50
Post Tools
That's a ridiculous explanation.  Allowing a transposition into the French or Caro-Kann makes the BDG unsound?  Does that make the white side of the French or Caro-Kann unsound?

There are plenty of logical reasons why the BDG is not a good opening, but this transpositional argument is silly.

- Lost Highway
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kalle99
Full Member
***
Offline


They say I have Aspbergers
syndrome.

Posts: 144
Location: Stockholm
Joined: 11/05/05
Re: Please, refute the BDG if you can.
Reply #66 - 11/05/05 at 17:11:26
Post Tools
BDG is unsound. I agree with Roman Dzindzichasvilli about that.

He explains :

1. d4  d5  2.  e4 

black answers  2. e4 with   2...e6  and white is now playing against the french defense!!

or  2....c6 and you have the Caro-kann to face.

= BDG refuted.

You are suddenly in an opening that has NOT been refuted for hundreds of years !!!

Thats why the BDG is a totally unsound opening.
  

"I Often see in chess forums people asking : " What is the current status of that line ?"&&&&Its a good reasonable question,but who can claim that he knows the answer ?!&&&&Semko Semkov Januari 2008
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo