Any French player (a self-selecting group, of course) will tell you 3 exd5 is not particularly drawish. I had pretty close to 100% with Black against it when I used to play the French, and I think most would say the same. The Petroff ending may be different.

I looked up Kramnik with the Petroff and, interestingly, he scores very poorly. 80 or so below his ELO over 100 odd games.

Keano wrote on 11/07/06 at 08:50:23:


The player I had in mind that uses this line fairly regularly is V. Afromeev (2500+). The ending is less common in this line, and if it does it occur its usually in a more favourable form for Black.

Wow, chess sure is vast - So many wrinkles so little time.

Tops

   

Keano wrote on 11/06/06 at 12:11:07:


No need for humble pie, I still firmly maintain that the Petroff is drawish and a poor choice for black if wants winning chances. Of course a particular match or tournament situation could make it an excellent practical weapon against an opponent who needs to win, however for everday use you can't really expect more than a draw, White need only exchange Queens and thats that: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Qe2.

While pondering the above variation, I stumbled across the unusual line 3...Qe7 and noticed in my database a strong player that uses it regularly. Remarkably it is far more durable than one would think at first sight and contains quite a few subtleties.

All in all I would say the Petroff is a good choice against ambitious White players, but lacks the flexibility to be used as ones sole 1...e5 defence. I mean who wants the position as Black against an opponent two or three hundred rating points below you.

Now I would like to see some more activity in The Philidor - Antoshin threads, as I suspect there is much to be discussed in the critical line: Be7 6. Bf4 O-O 7. Qd2 a6 8. O-O-O b5!? The big question now is can White maintain an advantage here? 

Toppy

   

Smyslov_Fan wrote on 11/05/06 at 08:20:28:


I agree completely, in fact I would say it can be played for a win above 2400 level also  - The Petroff has a reputation as a "boring" opening and as "drawish", I think it will not be long before these old-fashioned theorists will be forced to eat humble-pie. The current trend, with Shirov paving the way especially, is turning up quite a number of "interesting" games, and a lot of them quite interesting for Black  I am a 1.e4 player and I am still working on a system I am completely happy with against this awkward Petroff defence.

Almost 20 000 games lasting longer than 19 moves score 43/31/26 %. Both players having ELO <2501 show 41/35/24 %. Looks quite normal to me.

alumbrado wrote on 10/28/06 at 13:48:46:


Maybe its piffle but I really do think that below master level one would be better served and learn more by first studying the positions arising after 2...Nc6, and then only later moving to 2...Nf6 if one desires. To me that's an easier and more systematic transition than the other way round.

I will take a look at Marshall's games with the Petroff when time permits.

Regards,

Tops  

Quote:


Sharp, Unsound, Off-Beat, Unclear - These are the kind of Opening choices that sell better at the lower levels. I can't really envisage a Petroff repertoire book aimed at club players having much mass appeal, and with good reason. For an aspiring amateur player trying to develop his overall chess skills, particularly in the open games, the  Petroff/Petrov has little to offer, unless of course he already plays 2.Nc6 and is just adding to his repertoire.

Toppy