Gambit wrote on 03/16/11 at 15:28:59:
All of a sudden, you guys start saying the Zilbermints Gambit offers practical chances. Wasn't it a couple of days ago that you were claiming refutation this, refutation that? LOL!
And now, after I post all that analyses, you say, "Oops! We were wrong!"
Lev, this line does offer some practical chances. Very few gambit lines don't. I don't know who was here saying that this doesn't offer practical chances. I wasn't and I didn't see anyone else saying that either.
The debate is about the soundness of the gambit, not whether or not it offers practical chances. The main idea is really a trap: 9...Nxf3? gives White a good game. If you want to stake your chances as White on an unsound gambit, be my guest.
If Black plays 9...c5, I don't think that White's chances are anywhere near enough to make up for the lost pawn. And 9...Nc6 also looks promising for Black.
Gambit wrote on 03/16/11 at 15:28:59:
I told you before, I analysed all the variations. But you did not want to listen, throwing out different moves.
People came here and as a favor to you analyzed your gambit. The conclusion that stands so far is that
it's unsound. You didn't analyze
all the moves.
Gambit wrote on 03/16/11 at 15:28:59:
When I posted games, MNb started writing bull, and I responded accordingly. I do not take s--- from anyone. In my college days, I put both the Graduate Dean and the President of the University Senate in their proper place. They were mad at me for that, but I did not care.
I should delete that but I will let it stand just because everyone has grown so used to your juvenile histrionics. I am left with the feeling that I've been much too lenient with you in this thread. Watch your step. Nobody wants to hear about your dislike of MNb or your alleged triumphs over your college deans or your high school gym teacher.
Gambit wrote on 03/16/11 at 15:28:59:
So yeah, an interesting re-evaluation of the Zilbermints Gambit. Now it offers practical chances, is a nasty trap, etc. I don't think it is unsound, as there is plenty of room for Black to go wrong. And you guys finally admitted as much.
"Room for Black to go wrong" bears on practical chances, not on soundness. Do you understand the distinction? The ball is in your court on soundness. To demonstrate soundness you'll have to find sufficient comp for White after 9...c5 and 9...Nc6.
@SWJediknight: You think it's only =+ after 9...c5 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.Nxd4 Bxd4? That surprises me. I probably agree, however, that 11.Nxd4 looks better than Lev's 11.Ne4. 11...Bxd4 12.Qh5 g6 13.Qh6 Bd7 and Black at least is inconvenienced by his inability to castle kingside.
I also agree that with 11...Nd7!, 9...Nc6 works out well too.