MNb wrote on 06/05/06 at 01:58:44:


Thanks for posting the very interesting Rachbauer-Giessmann game with your comments on the critical position.

Starting with 5…Qe7 6.Qe2 Nc6 7.d4 0–0–0 8.d5 

After 8.Be3 Bg4 9.d5 I don’t understand the point of 9...Nb4 which seems to be answered by simply 10.a3

(8.Be3 Bg4 9.d5) 9…Ne5 makes more sense and then 10.Nc3 Nfd7 11.0–0–0 and White is better as in Hergert-Leisebein, corr 1996

8...Nb4!? 9.a3 

When you give 9.dxe6 Nd3+ 10.Qxd3 Rxd3 11.Bxd3 Qxe6+ 12.Kf1 Bc5 do you mean this is also good for White?

9...Bf5 10.axb4 Qxb4+ and now 11.Qd2 looks like a blunder

Again for 11.Nc3 Bc5 – presumably you mean this is what White should play.  It's still complicated, but I think White should be winning here.

11...Re8+ 12.Be2 Qxc4? 

12...Rxe2+! 13.Kxe2 Qxc4+ 14.Kd1 Bb4 15.Nc3 Re8 This is a nice line.  Black is winning here?

Icelandic Gambit

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.c4 e6 (to avoid the Panov: 3...c6 4.d4 or 4.Nc3) 4.dxe6 (4.d4 is the French Exchange and a reasonable alternative) Bxe6 5.Nf3 (5.d4 Bb4+ offers Black chances and 5.f4 c5 is an unlikely transpostion to the GPA of the Sicilian Defence)
a) 5...c5 6.d4 cxd4 7.Qxd4 Nc6 8.Qxd8+ Rxd8 and I think Black's lead in development does not offer sufficient compensation.
b) 5...Bb4+ 7.Nc3 Ne4 8.Bd2 Nxd2 9.Qxd2 Qe7 10.o-o-o +-Dolmatov-Boissonet, Buenos Aires 1991. Has Black improvements here?
c) 5...Qe7+ (unnatural, but with a threat) 6.Qe2 Nc6 7.d4 and how must Black proceed? 7...Bf5; 7...Bg4 or 7...o-o-o. One unclear variation is 7...o-o-o 8.d5 (8.Be3 Bg4 9.d5 Nb4 or 9.Nbd2 Ne4) Nb4!? 9.a3 (9.dxe6 Nd3+ 10.Qxd3 Rxd3 11.Bxd3 Qxe6+ 12.Kf1 Bc5) 9.a3 Bf5 10.axb4 Qxb4+ 11.Qd2 (11.Nc3 Bc5) Re8+ 12.Be2 Qxc4? (Rxe2+! 13.Kxe2 Qxc4+ 14.Kd1 Bb4 15.Nc3 Re8) 13.Nc3 Rxe2+ 14.Qxe2 Bd3 Rachbauer-Giessmann, Finkenstein 2000, 15.Qe5 Bd6 16.Qd4 Re8+ 17.Be3 and the Black attack is over.

Bogoljubov Variation:
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.Bb5+ Nbd7 4.Nc3 (I like this more than 4.c4 a6!? 5.Ba4 b5! 6.cxb5 Nxd5 with chances) a6 (just g6, 5...Bg7 and 6...o-o looks playable) 5.Be2 Nb6 6.Nf3 g6 (to avoid Nbxd5 7.Nxd5 Nxd5 8.c4) 7.d4 Bg7 8.o-o o-o. White hopes to maintain a minute advantage, but denies Black all counterchances.

Portuguese Variation:
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.d4
-3.Nf3 Bg4 4.Bb5+ Nbd7 5.h3 Bh5 has been debated in another old thread. Black's only reasonable alternative is 3..Qxd5 4.Nc3 Qd6 and White's early Nf3 is a slight concession.

3...Bg4
-A personal favourite of mine is the Kieler Gambit 3...Nxd5 4.c4 Nb4!? which is better than its reputation. In corr. games I have 2½/3. Alas 4.Nf3 Bf5 5.Bd3 Bxd3 6.Qxd3 e6 7.o-o is much less fun.

4.Bb5+
-4.f3, 4.Nf3 and 4.Be2 are the other main variations.

4...Nbd7 5.f3 Bf5 6.Nc3
-6.c4 a6 7.Ba4 b5! is unclear again.

6...a6 7.Ba4 8.Bb3 Nb6 9.Nge2 Nbxd5
-Some time after the game I found 9...b4!? 10.Ng3 Bg6 11.Nce4 Nfxd5 12.o-o e6 13.f4 Be7 14.f5 exf5 15.Nxf5 o-o 16.Nxe7+ Qxd7 17.Nc5 Qh4! with pressure against c2 and d4. Comments?

10.Nxd5 Nxd5 11.o-o
-3.Bb5+ Bd7 4.Bc4 Bg4 5.f3 Bf5 (Bc8 6.Nc3 Nbd7 7.d4 Nb6 8.Bb5+ Bd7 9.Bd3 +=) 6.Nc3 Nbd7 7.Nge2 (or 7.d4 Nb6 8.Bb5+ Bd7 9.Bd3 again, Sznapik-Zoltek, POLch 1973) Nb6 8.Bb3 Nbxd5 9.Nxd5 Nxd5 10.Ng3 Bg6 11.o-o e6 12.d3 Be7 and the plan f3-f4-f5 offers White prospects for an edge. Compared to the game Black has weakened the queenside; therefor White is better. So when the game was played, I thought I had found a positional refutation of the Portuguese Variation. But see 9...b4.

11...e6 12.Ng3 Bg6 13.f4 Qd7 14.f5 exf5 15.Qf3
White has a very nice position, MNb-Officier, corr NBC H-428.

Dzambus and dsanchez:

regarding

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. dxe6 Bxe6 5. Nf3 Qe7 6. Qe2 Nc6 7. d4 O-O-O 8. d5 Qb4+ 9. Nc3 Bf5 10. dxc6 Bc5

I know of this line, but haven't faced it in a serious game.  NCO gives:

11. cxb7+ Kb8 12. Be3 Ng4 13. Rd1 Rxd1+ 14.Qxd1 Nxe3 15. fxe3 +/-

It may be there's more to this than I thought (wouldn't be the first time such a thing has happened  ).

BTW, has there been a thread on the Icelandic Gambit?  If not, maybe this would be a good time to start one.  I'd certainly be interested in getting some discussion going on this, perhaps more complex than I thought, gambit.

dsanchez wrote on 06/03/06 at 12:35:20:


The Icelandic Gambit is not something White should fear.  IMHO the gambit may not even be entirely sound - although it requires a bit of knowledge from White.  Although it certainly can prove deadly to the unprepared player, facing the Icelandic Gambit only requires a modest amount of theoretical preparation.  In short, you only need avoid the Icelandic Gambit if you are incredibly lazy...  

Black's best line after 3.c4 is 3...c6 tranposing to the Panov Attack after 4.d4 cxd5 (4.dxc6 is a very bad idea, BTW - accepting THIS gambit actually is dangerous for White).  Successfully playing the Panov Attack does burden White with a good deal of preparation, however.  

Dinomike100 wrote on 06/03/06 at 09:43:20:


But it is actually a fairly nasty move. 3...Qxd5 is a transposition black should not enter into, because after 2...Qxd5 3.Nf3 he is usually supposed to play 3...Bg4, while 3...Nf6 is supposed to be not so good (there's a commented game that explains the disadvantages of 2...Qxd5 3.Nf3 Nf6 for subscribers).

On the other hand after 3...Nxd5 white can play d4+c4 later and the c4-c5 plan (in case of Nd5-b6, while Nd5-f6 is just passive) that is very dangerous for black can be implemented.

Finally I suppose that after 3...c6 white is better prepared for dxc6 than after most other moves.

Quote:


What I like best for black here is 3...Bd7 4.Bc4 Bg4 5.f3 Bc8! with the idea of placing the bishop on b7 after provoking some weaknesses in white's camp.

Quote:


I suspect trying to both keep the pawn and to give black no serious compensation is too ambitious. I find the idea to allow black to recapture the pawn attractive, because white seems to get little bit more than his usual little advantage in return for that (while taking very little risk himself). On the other hand it may well be that one of the attempts to hang onto the pawn is even better, but black will always have some compensation (whether it's sufficient is another matter).

The moves are:

1.  e4 d5
2.  exd5 Nf6
3. ??

So far I have seen 3. d4, 3. Nf3, 3. c4, and 3. Bb5+.

3. d4 seems to be one of the main lines, but I don't really want to do it because it transposes (I think) into the panov-botvinnik attack caro-kann, which i don't want to learn.  Also, it gives back the pawn.

3. Nf3 I'm not sure about this one, but it also gives back the pawn.

3. c4 I'm not sure about this one either, but I think there may be some gambit with 3. ...e6 which is kind of obscure.

3. Bb5+ --> This looks ok, I think white may be able to stay a pawn up, but I don't know for how long: 

3. ... Bd7 
4. Bc4 Bg4+
5. f3 Bf5
6. Nc3

Does anyone have any idea for white against the Scandinavian Marshall Gambit?  Is it best to give back the pawn or try to hold on to it?  If there are any lines where white can hold on to the pawn and stay about equal in terms of everything else, that would be very good.  Thanks for reading this post .