Latest Updates:
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit (Read 69031 times)
Katalyst
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 128
Joined: 10/01/07
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #55 - 03/10/08 at 06:44:13
Post Tools
Hi, I'd agree that the 8. e5? 9. Ng5! exf4? line is very bad for Black, only 9...Be6 10. Nxe6 fxe6 11. Be3 appears to be playable, leaving White with great compensation.

Are most people agreed now that 9. h3 is the best move, as there seems to be a growing consensus here?

My reason for posting though is I've done some analysis of the interesting piece sac from earlier in the thread.

[1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 e6 10.Be2 Qb8 11.Rfe1 Be7]

12.e5!? Nh5 13.Bxg5 14.Nxg5 Bxe2 15.exd6!?

The 3 main choices are 0-0, h6 and Bg4:

15...0-0 16.Nxe2 Qxd6 17.Qxb7 Rab8 18.Qxa6 Qd5 19.Rad1 Qxg5 20.Qxc6 Rxb2 21.a4 Nf4 22.Nxf4 Qxf4 23. Rf1 as given earlier, leaves White with the outside passed pawn. Maybe 17...Ra7 18.Qb3 is better and looks about equal, but I wondered if Black can escape with any of his ill-gotten gains.

15...h6!? 16.Nxe6 fxe6 17.Qxe6 Kf8 18.Rxe2 Qe8 (18...Nf6 19.d7 Qc7 20.Rd1 Rd8 looks too scary to me) 19.Qg4 Qf7 20.Rae1 Kg8 21.Rd2 Nf6 22.Qg3 Kh7 23.Red1 Rad8 and Black can try to exchange off pieces and round up the d-pawn,

15...Bg4 16.h3 (this is where it gets messy)

  i) 16...h6?!
     17.d7+?!
             17...Kxd7? 18.Nxf7 Rf8 19.hxg4 Nf4 20.Rad1+ Ke7 (20...Kc7 21.Rxe6+-) 21.Nd6+-;
           17...Kf8 18.hxg4 hxg5 19.gxh5 Rxh5µ;
     17.Nxf7!? Kxf7 18.hxg4 Nf4 19.Rad1 Re8 ÷ (19...Nd8!?)  (19...Rd8? 20.g3 Nh3+ 21.Kg2 Ng5 22.f4 Na5 23.Qa4 Rxd6 24.fxg5 Rxd1 25.Rxd1 Nc6 26.Rd7++-; )
     17.hxg4 hxg5
           18.d7+?! Kxd7 19.gxh5 Ke8 20.Rxe6+
                 20...fxe6 21.Qxe6+ Kf8 (21...Ne7? 22.Re1) 22.Qf5+ Kg8 23.Qe6+=  perpetual;
                 20...Kf8 21.Qa3+ Kg8 22.Rd6 Rxh5 23.Ne4;
           18.gxh5 18...Qxd6 19.Qxb7 0–0 (19...Rb8?! 20.Ne4 Qd7 21.Qxa6 Rxh5±) 20.Ne4 Qd5 21.Rad1 Qb5 22.Qxb5 axb5 23.a3²;            
 
   ii) 16...Bxh3 17.d7+ Kf8 18.gxh3 Nf4 19.Ne2 Qd8 20.Nxf4 Qxg5+ 21.Ng2 (A)

   iii) 16...Bf5 17.g4
     17...h6? 18.d7+ Kxd7 (18...Kf8 19.Nxf7 Kxf7
       20.gxf5 Nf4 21.fxe6+ Kf8...yikes) 19.Nxf7 Rf8 20.gxf5 Nf4 21.fxe6+ +-;
     17...Bxg4 18.hxg4 Nf4 19.Re4 Qxd6 20.Qxb7 0–0
       21.Rc4 (21.Nxf7? Rxf7 22.Qxa8+ Rf8 23.Qxa6 Nh3+–+)  (B)
     17...Bg6 18.gxh5 Bxh5 19.Nd5 0–0 20.Nf4
         20...Bg6? 21.Nxg6 hxg6 22.Rad1 ±;
         20...Qd8?! 21.Qg3
           21...Bg6?? 22.Nxg6 fxg6 23.Nxe6 +-
           21...Nd4? 22.Nxh5 Qxg5 23.Qxg5 Nf3+ 24.Kg2 Nxg5 25.h4 (the sting in the tail) 25...Rfd8 26.hxg5 Rxd6 ±
           21...h6 22.Ne4 Bg6 23.Nxg6 fxg6 24.Qxg6 White gets his material back with a better position;
         20...h6!
           21.Ne4 Nd4 22.Qg3 Bg6 23.Nxg6 fxg6 24.Qxg6 Nf3+ 25.Kh1 Nxe1  26.Qxe6+ Rf7 27.Rxe1 Qc8! 28.Qb3 Qc6 µ
           21.Nxh5 21...hxg5 22.Rad1 (22...Rd8? 23.Qc3 f6 24.Rxe6) e5 ÷ (C)

So I think that if Black plays 15...Bg4 he should aim for position A, B or C, with the other option being the 15...h6!? line. I think position B might be the best to go for as the king is safely castled and the kingside pawns are intact, but would appreciate any thoughts on the final evals.

After Bg4 turned out to be so messy it's also tempting to go for 15...h6!?, but there may be some improvements there as well.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dragonslayer
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 248
Location: Odense
Joined: 06/13/04
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #54 - 02/05/08 at 20:02:01
Post Tools
Hi

I remember Ben Hague's suggestion 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 (here 9.h3!? is perhaps playable) 9...e6 10.Ng5!? being analyzed. It occurred in B.Hague-P.Wells, England 2007.
I have checked my notes but nothing on 8...e5 9.Ng5 except for the game Musalov-Allemann, Biel 2001.
Since 8...Bg4 is critical I did not analyze 8...e5 in any detail. However I did consider the greedy 9.Ng5 exf4 10.Nxf7 Qe7 11.Nxh8 with 12.Nd5 to come. If White wants to take the rook, why should he first pitch the e4-pawn?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #53 - 01/29/08 at 03:24:04
Post Tools
If my memory serves me right the line 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bf4 e5 9.Ng5! (exclam for bravery, not because it proves an advantage) exf4 10.Nxf7 has been analysed somewhere on this forum. But I cannot refind it. So here are some lines.
a) 10...Qe7 11.e5
a1) 11...dxe5 12.Re1 g6 13.Qa4 Bd7 14.Nxh8 Rc8 15.Bf7+ Kd8 16.Nd5 and White went on to win, Musalov-Allemann, Biel 2001.
a2) 11...Nxe5 12.Nxh8 Nxc4 13.Qa4+ b5 (Kd8 14.Qxc4 Be6 15.Qxf4 g5 16.Qe3 with play along the e-file) 14.Nxb5 axb5 15.Qxa8 Qb7 16.Qxb7 Bxb7 17.a4 with a weird endgame.
b) 10...Qd7 11.Nxh8 Ne5 12.Qb3 (I think 12.Be2 and 12.Qd4 less convincing) f3 (g5 13.Na4 f3 14.Rfc1 b5 15.Nb6 Qg4 16.Bf1 +-) 13.Rfc1 fxg2 (13...Qg4 14.Bf1) 14.Nd5 Nxd5 (Nxe4 15.Nc7+) 15.Bxd5 g5 16.Rc3! Bg7 17.Rac1 Bxh8 18.Rc7 Qg4 19.R1c3 and I prefer White.
Improvements are likely, but at the moment the verdict unclear seems fitting.
  

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
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #52 - 07/17/07 at 01:02:02
Post Tools
Just for fun, because I felt like and had nothing better to do (actually I had, but I needed an excuse to postpone some duties) and all other amateur reasons, that sound so silly in GM ears, I have tried to revive the Morra Gambit in some variations, which were causing trouble.
Now it is my opinion, that 6...a6 is met best with 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bf4
a) 8...Bg4 9.h3
a1) 9...Bxf3 10.Qxf3 e6 11.Rfd1 Qa5 Allahmehzadeh-Jens, Hengelo 1996, 12.Be2 (maybe even 12.Bb3) Ne5 13.Qg3 Be7 eg 14.b4 (14.Bd2) Qxb4 15.Rab1 Qa5 16.Rxb7 with decent compensation.
a2) 9...Bh5 10.Qb3 e5 (after e6 11.Qxb7 White is better off compared to 9.Qb3) 11.Bd2 (maybe 11.Bg5 with a similar idea) Na5 12.Qa4+ b5 13.Nxb5 axb5 14.Qxb5+ Ke7 (Nd7 15.Bd5, Qd7 15.Bxa5 Qxb5 16.Bxb5+ +-) 15.Nxe5 Qb8 16.Bb4 Qxv5 17.Bxb5+ unclear. It is a pity, that the queens are exchanged, but two connected passed pawns and especially the lack of harmony in Black's camp offer compensation.
b) 8...e5 9.Ng5!
c) 8...e6 9.Qe2 Be7 10.Rfd1 transposes to well known lines, while 9...e5 and 9...b5 10.Bb3 e5 are met again with 10(11).Ng5.

All these efforts to not change a bit to my general opinion, that on patzer level the Morra Gambit is impractical. The last count netted no less than 10 more or less decent defences after 3...dxc3 and at least 4 playable ways to decline. For Black of course only one suffices.  Sad
  

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
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #51 - 10/19/06 at 00:57:15
Post Tools
Oh, don't bother, I don't dare to count how many times that happened to me ...
Once again my memory has deceived me ... Patrik's variation is nice and changing move order with 10...Na5 does not work either.
What about 10.Be2 Qb8 11.Rfe1 Be7 12.e5 Nh5 13.Bg5 Bxf3 14.Bxf3 (after 14.Bxe7 Nxe5 15.Nb5 Kxe7 White has enough for one pawn, but not for two) Bxg5 15.Bxh5 d5 ? Critical seems 16.Nxd5 exd5 17.Qxd5 0-0 18.e6, but it is not enough after the nice Qf4!
I beg your pardon, if I miss something obvious here, as I am suffering from a flu and my brains work even worse than usual today.  Angry
  

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
 
Uberdecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 640
Joined: 03/21/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #50 - 10/18/06 at 17:27:26
Post Tools
[quote author=MNb link=1154029852/15#25 date=1154724725]Decent move, but 10...b5 11.Rfd1 Na5 also was to be considered. The white queen has some shortage of good squares.
[/quote]

But this is not nearly as laughable as 9. h3 Bxf3 ; 10. Qxf3 g6 ; 11. Rfd1 Qa5?? By the way, 12. Bd6 is much less a cheap tactic than the deserved punishment of a patzer's blindfold suggestion.
Patrik is setting us some annoying problems. As I haven't done any serious analysing yet, I will refrain from any more flippant comments but I will post again soon.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #49 - 10/17/06 at 20:32:56
Post Tools
What does White have after 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3 e6 (g6? 11.Rfd1 Qa5 12.Bxd6! is another example of cheap tactics, preventing Black from realizing his strategical dreams  Wink) 11.Rfd1 Qa5 intending 12...Ne5 ?

And I did not suggest 10...b5? but 10...Qb8 11.Rfe1 b5, not considered by Patrik. With the queen already on b8, the sacs on b5 don't work, as far as I can see. Critical seems 12.e5 dxe5 13.Bg5 h6 (not dxe5 14.Nxb5!), but 14.Be3 Nxe5 15.Nxe5 Bxg4 16.Nxf7 looks good enough for White.

I also think, that Patrik's line after 11...Be7 12.e5 is far from a draw yet: White can try 19.Nc3 Qxg5 20.Qxc6 Rxb2 21.a4 Nf4 22.Qf3, hoping to capitalize the passed a-pawn.
  

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
 
Sevenviolets
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 176
Location: Brno
Joined: 05/19/05
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #48 - 10/17/06 at 18:18:27
Post Tools
1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Nxc3 Nc6 5. Nf3 d6 6. Bc4 a6 7. O-O Nf6 8. Bf4 Bg4 9. Qb3 e6 10. Be2 Qb8
11. Rfe1 Be7 12. e5 Nh5

(12... dxe5 13. Nxe5 Nxe5 14. Bxe5 Qxe5 15. Bb5+ Qxb5 16. Nxb5 axb5 17. Qxb5+ Kf8 18. h3 Bh5 19. a4 b6 20. Qxb6 g5 21. g4 Bg6 22. Qb7 Rd8 23.Rad1+/-)

13. Bg5 Bxg5

(13... dxe5 14. Bxe7 Kxe7 15. Nxe5 Nxe5 16. Bxg4 Nf6 17. Qb4+ Ke8 18. Be2 Qc7 19. Ne4 Nc6
20. Nxf6+ gxf6 21. Qc3 Ke7 22. Qc5+ Qd6=)

14. Nxg5 Bxe2 15. exd6 O-O 16. Nxe2 Qxd6 17. Qxb7 Rab8 18. Qxa6 Qd5 19. Rad1 Qxg5 20. Qxc6 Rxb2 21. a4 Nf4 22. Nxf4 Qxf4 23. Rf1  1/2-1/2

This line offers no progress for both sides. The result is a draw.

Let´s try to discuss 9.h3!? as this is obviously more interesting than weird Qb3-Be2 sequence of move. As Uberdeker correctly said, if white cannot take on b7, there is no need to play Qb3 for the time being.


The reason for playing h3 and only then Qb3, see the two lines below:

1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Nxc3 Nc6 5. Nf3 d6 6. Bc4 a6 7. O-O Nf6 8. Bf4 Bg4

a) without h3, black can retreat his bishop after 12.Qa4+
9.Qb3?! e6 10. Qxb7 Na5 11.Qb4 e5 12. Qa4+ Bd7 -+

b) with h3-Bh5, black is forced to play 13..Nd7
9.h3!? Bh5 10. Qb3 e6 11. Qxb7 Na5 12. Qb4 e5 13. Qa4+ Nd7 14. Bg5 +/-



  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Sevenviolets
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 176
Location: Brno
Joined: 05/19/05
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #47 - 10/16/06 at 18:44:59
Post Tools
Uberdeker, actually, I like your style of argumenting. I also like provocative style of arguments - as they provoke new thoughts;) I will be glad to continue with analysis. I hope I will manage to do some analysis during next few days. I would like to advocate 9.h3 more, as this is the main line in my personal opening book.
Recently, the more Im devoting myself to Freestyle chess tournaments, the more objective I need to be. Im testing my lines on playchess and it is very tough testing there. Unsound gambit lines have not a tinniest chance to survive. Therefore Im leaving them behind. Only real gambits which offer real compensation can survive.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Uberdecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 640
Joined: 03/21/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #46 - 10/15/06 at 21:02:53
Post Tools
P.S. If your audacious sac truly does hold up to analysis, Black can always change his move order with 11. ...Ktd7, a move which fits in with his plans in any case. Also, ...Bxf3 can be played at any time to defuse e5 advances, but unless you come up with some more hidden tactical problems, Black is in no hurry to do this.
P.S.2 10. ...b5 did look shaky to me, but I didn't think MNb would suggest a move which ends in +/-. No doubt he will have some comments to submit on this.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Uberdecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 640
Joined: 03/21/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #45 - 10/15/06 at 13:15:03
Post Tools
Dear Patrik,

 Welcome back to the forum, and thank you for reviving this thread. Since Ben hasn't been in touch for several months, and now one else has expressed any interest in championing the White cause until now, perhaps you would care to continue the game. We can go back a few moves if you like. Certainly it will take someone with your strong belief in gambit play and unshakeable optimism to defend White's position. But before anything else, I suggest we both commit ourselves to conducting the discussions in a polite tone, unlike our past altercations in BDG threads (this I will also undertake once more to refute sometime in the future).

As for your analysis, very interesting stuff! The two deviations I had mentionned in my penultimate post also happen to be 9. h3 and 10. ...Qc7.

Regarding the latter, I gave 10. ...Qb8 preference so as not to expose the Queen on the open c-file, but 10. ...Qc7 ; 11. Rc1 Rc8 is to be preferred if Black can then calmly tuck the Queen on -b8 later. I seem to recall rejecting it because White had some tactical response, but maybe there's nothing to be worried about. I'll get back to you on this later.

As for 9. h3, I completely agree with you. If White cannot regain his pawn on -b7, there is simply very little point in putting the Queen on -b3 and then retreating the Bishop to -e2. Furthermore, it seems at first sight that after 9. h3 Bxf3 ; 10. Qxf3 White is full tempo tempo up on the line 8. Qe2 Bg4 ; 9. Rfd1 e6 ; 10. h3 Bxf3 ; 11. Qxf3 (clear Black advantage). Indeed, this should probably be considered the main line of the Morra.
[u]Bu[/u]t there is an important difference here. Black has not played ...e6 and thus has not weakened his structure in any way. He may instead develop with ...g6/ ...Bg7. How exactly Black should implement this plan is not yet clear to me. Perhaps 11. ...g6 ; 12. Rfd1 Qa5. More on this soon.

Finally, in the line chosen by Ben, 12. e5 / 15. ed!?!? is very ingenious. A lot of tactics going on there, but I can't bring myself to believe this is sound for White. Detailed analysis required.

You have certainly provided much food for thought.

                                      Regards,
                                           Hubert
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Sevenviolets
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 176
Location: Brno
Joined: 05/19/05
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #44 - 10/15/06 at 09:51:59
Post Tools
And here comes a top level demonstation of Morra. Unfortunatelly this time not succesful for our team. This involves 8..e5 move, which was considered by Uberdeker.

Equidistance (2429) - Vvarkey,Rybka 1.1 32-bit (2439)
2nd PAL/CSS Freestlye Tournament - Main playchess.com #062594 (7), 19.03.2006
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 e6 6.Bc4 d6 7.Bf4 Nf6 8.Qe2 e5 9.Ng5 Be6 10.Bxe6 fxe6 11.Nxe6 (11.Be3! with compensation) Qc8 12.Nd5 exf4 13.Rc1 Rb8 14.0–0 Qd7 15.Ndxf4 Rc8 16.Qc4 Ne7 17.Qb3 Nxe4 18.Rxc8+ Qxc8 19.Qa4+ Qc6 20.Qxa7 g5 21.Qa8+ Qc8 22.Qa4+ Nc6 23.Qxe4 gxf4 24.Nxf8+? Equidistance offers a draw [24.Re1!=] 24...Kxf8 25.Qxf4+ Ke7 26.Re1+ Ne5 27.Qd4 Kd7 28.Rd1 Nf7 29.Re1 Qc7 30.Qf4 Rf8 31.Rc1 Qa5 32.Qg4+ Ke7 33.Qh4+ Qg5 34.Rc7+ Kf6 35.Qxh7 Qd2 36.Qh4+ Ng5 37.f4 Qd4+ 38.Kf1 Ke6 39.Qg4+ Rf5 40.Qe2+ Kf6 41.Qe7+ Kg6 42.Qe8+ Kh6 43.g3 Qd1+ 44.Qe1 Qf3+ 45.Qf2 Qh1+ 46.Ke2 Kg6 ' 47.Rc4 Ne4 48.Qe1 Qg2+ 49.Ke3 d5 50.Rb4 Rf7 51.Qe2 Qg1+ 52.Kd3 Rh7 53.Rxe4 Qb1+ 54.Kc3 Qxe4 55.Qg4+ Kf6 Equidistance resigns 0–1
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Sevenviolets
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 176
Location: Brno
Joined: 05/19/05
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #43 - 10/15/06 at 09:48:10
Post Tools
Hello everybody.

Just today I have found these beautiful discussions about Morra. Let´s enter the story!

1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Nxc3 Nc6 5. Nf3 d6 6. Bc4 a6 7. O-O Nf6 8. Bf4 Bg4

(8... e5? 9. Ng5 Be6 10. Bxe6 fxe6 11. Be3 with advantage)

9. Qb3 e6 10. Be2 Qb8!?

(10... Qc7!? in my opening book considered to be the best choice 
10... b5? 11. Rfd1 Be7 (11... Na5 12. Qa3 d5 13. b4 Nc4 14. Bxc4 bxc4 15. exd5 Bxf3 16. gxf3 exd5 17.Qa4++/-)
12. Nxb5!)

11. Rfe1 not sure about this move Be7 12. e5 this should be the way for white to save the position

e.g. 12..Nh5 13. Bg5 Bxg5 14. Nxg5 Bxe2 15.exd6=

My preference is 9.h3! Bh5 10.Qb3 or 9..Bxf3 10.Qxf3 Rc8 11.Rfd1 with compensation.

Hope it gives fresh wind to this discussion.




  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Meat
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 184
Joined: 06/27/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #42 - 09/13/06 at 15:25:31
Post Tools
I figure that for a further discussion on this position we would need somebody who disagrees that white has no compensation and must fight hard for the draw now...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Uberdecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 640
Joined: 03/21/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #41 - 09/13/06 at 14:53:17
Post Tools
Well, back to the grind. I suppose I am a bit disappointed that there has been no further contribution to this discussion during my absence, but since no time-limits were fixed at the beginning of the game, Ben is entitled to as long a think as he sees fit, athough it would be nice to at least hear from him whether he is still analysing or has entirely lost interest.

Indeed, White's resignation, although premature, would not be unfounded, and is in fact the logical follow-up to his 2nd and 3rd  moves (his 1rst as well, but let's not get into that just yet...)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #40 - 09/12/06 at 02:40:31
Post Tools
Überdeker has posted his last move on 22-8: 20 days ago. Does this mean 0-! by forfeit?
  

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
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #39 - 09/01/06 at 21:25:03
Post Tools
Point.  Grin
  

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
 
Uberdecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 640
Joined: 03/21/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #38 - 08/31/06 at 09:23:05
Post Tools
Off to the greek islands for a fortnight. Probably won't get access to internet, so Ben has another couple of weeks to think up a clever swindle...
I've had a better think about the moves we've played so far, and I've got some ideas of deviations for both sides from the starting position 8. Bf4 (best chance in my opinion and the only line I wasn't quite sure about), but I think we should leave those till the game is over.
However, it would be good to see more comments on the game as it unfolds. For those Morra aficionados lurking in shadows : If you wish to defend your beloved gambit from extinction on these boards : It's now or never !

                                                               See you all later

P.S. MNb, I loved the analysis in your last post : exactly 1 ply deep, "goodfellow"!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #37 - 08/25/06 at 20:55:35
Post Tools
Well, if you refute 12.h3 and I the rest, that everything is fine, isn't it?  Grin
I maintain 12.a4 0-0 13.h3 Bh5!? 14.Rad1 Nd7 15.Bg3 as Nc5 looks good.
And remember, my task is to dampen your optimism  Wink.
Seriously, I have strong doubts on White's compensation. I certainly would not like to have this as White, neither in otb nor in corr chess. No return to the Morra Gambit for me.
  

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
 
Uberdecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 640
Joined: 03/21/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #36 - 08/25/06 at 10:04:02
Post Tools
Dear Mark,

  The option of ...Bh5 does not appear to be relevant at all. Continuing your line a bit, 12. a4 0-0 ; 13. h3?! Bh5?! ; 14. Rad1 Ktd7 ; 15. Bg3 (just waiting for Black's mistake), 15. ... Ktde5?? loses, though admitedly Black can repair his 13th move with 15. ...Bxf3 when no, it isn't clear that the Bg3 is more aptly placed on -g3 than -f4, but probably 15. Be3 is better, which might lead White consider the alternative to 13. Rad1 : 13. Rac1 0-0 ; 13. Be3, hoping for play on the c-file and Queenside, instead of the solidly defended d-file and centre.

Now let's see what happens if 13. h3?! Bh5?! is omitted : 13. Rad1 Ktd7 ; 14. Bg3 (or 14. Be3) Ktde5? ; 15. Ktxe5 Ktxe5 ; 16. f3 Bh5 when the Bishop is completely misplaced on the Kingside.

The unprompted exchange on -f3 is an integral part of Black's dark-square strategy in these lines (unlike with 8. Qe2 Bg4 when the pin requires White to play 9. Rad1 e6 ; 10. h3).

All in all, I maintain that White has no interest in playing -h3, and even less so in the line 12. a4 0-0 ; 13. h3?! Bxf3 ; 14. Bxf3 when Black has the additional option of 14. ...Ktd4 with more simplification.

But what is this??? Weren't we supposed to champion the Black cause? We should let Ben work out the intricacies of his own move-orders ! I suppose our shared admiration of his disconcerting coolness got us a little carried away there...

                                                                 Regards,
                                                                   Hubert

P.S. Concerning Ben's mysterious Ktd5 idea, I am not as pragmatic a player as yourself, so even if it didn't threaten anything (what about the Be7?) I would immediately chop the thing off. You are aware by now of the fact that my gluttony knows no bounds!  
« Last Edit: 08/25/06 at 12:41:39 by Uberdecker »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #35 - 08/25/06 at 04:22:50
Post Tools
If White does not play 12.h3 at once, Black will have the option ....Bh5. Eg 12.a4 0-0 13.h3 Bh5 or 12.Rad1 0-0 13.h3 Bh5.
There is a little trick to be avoided: 12.Rac1 0-0 13.h3 Bh5 14.Na4 Nxe4? 15.Nb6, but 13...Bxf3 14.Bxf3 Nd4 should do.
If White does not play h3 at all, then Black continues with Nf6-d7-e5. This indeed is a refinement of Nc6-e5.
I don't see, how White can make the piece sac Nd5 work, especially as Black is not forced at all to accept it.
All in all 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Bxf3 0-0 14.a4 Nd7 15.Rad1 looks like a logical continuation; here Black can chose between Nde5 and Nc5.
  

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
 
Uberdecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 640
Joined: 03/21/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #34 - 08/24/06 at 09:33:01
Post Tools
[quote author=MNb link=1154029852/30#31 date=1156298610]
Maybe 12.h3 Bxf3 (Bh5 13.e5!?) 13.Bxf3 Ne5 14.Be2 0-0 15.a4 offers compensation.
[/quote]

I don't think Black should commit himself with 13. ...Kte5 since White can try 14. Bxe5. Now although Black retains a middlegame advantage thanks to his control of both -d5 and -d4, he no longer has the simple plan of exchanging pieces in order to reach a winning endgame, as opposite coloured Bishops and the fact that Black no longer has a true Kingside majority would offer White excellent drawing prospects.
Instead, I think I might choose 13. ...Ktd7 keeping White's pawnpush under control and introducing the option of ...Ktde5 when Bxe5 can be met by either ...Ktxe5 or ...de when Black's Knight is much better placed on -Ktc6 than on -f6. Another idea would be ...Bf6-e5, though 14. Rad1 would prevent this. But then again, the threat of 14. e5 can simply be side-stepped with
13. ...0-0. In view of this, White appears to have no reason to clarify the situation immediately with 12. h3.
I do agree with MNb on one point though : White should play a4 at some point in order to prevent Black from completely freeing his game with ...b5 and ...Qb7. And it fits in well with Ben's calm and positional approach (or is he going to make me swallow my words with that Ktd5 sac he mentionned!?)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #33 - 08/23/06 at 16:44:13
Post Tools
OstapBender wrote on 08/22/06 at 16:48:10:
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 e6 10.Be2 Qb8 11.Rfe1 Be7


current position


I don't see enough comp here.  Does someone disagree?
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Uberdecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 640
Joined: 03/21/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #32 - 08/23/06 at 13:42:57
Post Tools
[quote author=MNb link=1154029852/30#31 date=1156298610] Your moves are far more prudent than your mouth .... [/quote]
I wish I could say the same for you, my dear Mark, but prudence and soundness do not come across as being your main concerns in either chess or e-correspondence...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #31 - 08/23/06 at 02:03:30
Post Tools
[quote author=Uberdeker link=1154029852/15#29 date=1156263424]  Nevertheless, I feel boldly optimistic for Black here, despite MNb's warning that such thoughts would "spell disaster" for me...

                                                            Regards,
                                                                 Hubert[/quote]

Your moves are far more prudent than your mouth ....  ;) and that is how it ought to remain.
Maybe 12.h3 Bxf3 (Bh5 13.e5!?) 13.Bxf3 Ne5 14.Be2 0-0 15.a4 offers compensation.
  

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
 
OstapBender
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no spoon.

Posts: 1491
Location: not in Kansas anymore
Joined: 10/16/04
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #30 - 08/22/06 at 16:48:10
Post Tools
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 e6 10.Be2 Qb8 11.Rfe1 Be7


current position
  

"If God had wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates."  -Jay Leno
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Uberdecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 640
Joined: 03/21/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #29 - 08/22/06 at 16:17:04
Post Tools
Dear Ben,

Sorry for the delay but I haven't had any time for chess in the past week. Just had a quick look at  the lines mentioned by Meat and I see no reason not to go into that so [b]11. ...Be7[/b] is my reply.
By the way, I'm rather perplexed by your cool attitude towards White's predicament. You sac a pawn and then play moves such as Qb3, Bc4-e2 and Re1 as if nothing was the matter. White recognises that the concept behind his 2nd and 3rd moves was faulty and from then on decides to play sound positional chess!! But perhaps that truly is the best chance for a draw, especially in a correspondance game where tactical questions can be calmly pondered and fed into various programs. Nevertheless, I feel boldly optimistic for Black here, despite MNb's warning that such thoughts would "spell disaster" for me...

                                                            Regards,
                                                                 Hubert
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
OstapBender
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no spoon.

Posts: 1491
Location: not in Kansas anymore
Joined: 10/16/04
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #28 - 08/14/06 at 03:41:21
Post Tools
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 e6 10.Be2 Qb8 11.Rfe1


current position
  

"If God had wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates."  -Jay Leno
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Meat
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 184
Joined: 06/27/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #27 - 08/12/06 at 18:23:33
Post Tools
So now Be7 should be blacks most natural move. The question is whether to exchange first on f3. Yet I can't figure out any problems for black in the line 11... Be7 12. e5 Nh5 (but not dxe5 Nxe5!) 13. exd6 Nxf4 14. dxe7 Nxe2+ (maybe there's even something better) 15. Nxe2 Bxf3 16. Qxf3 Nxe7 and black is better.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Ben_Hague
Full Member
***
Offline


I'm always happier when
I'm a pawn down.

Posts: 157
Location: Oldham
Joined: 06/20/03
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #26 - 08/12/06 at 15:24:13
Post Tools
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 e6 10.Be2 Qb8 and now my next move is 11.Rfe1 Very difficult to decide where to put my rooks. Normal would be d1 and c1, but without a queen to annoy that does lose some of its point. Doubling on the d file was also possible, but after say 11.Rad1 Be7 12.Rd2 0-0 13.R1d1 Rd8 the d6 pawn is solidly defended. I also thought about e1 and f1, shift everything off f3 and f4 and shove the f pawn, but it seems a bit too slow to be a real problem for Black.

So eventually settled on 11.Rfe1 with ideas of Nd5 and e5 in the air, the bishop on e2 and pawn on e4 are now a bit better defended and the other rook can go to c1 or d1 as appropriate.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #25 - 08/04/06 at 20:52:05
Post Tools
Decent move, but 10...b5 11.Rfd1 Na5 also was to be considered. The white queen has some shortage of good squares.
I suppose we will see something like 10...Qb8 11.Rfd1 Be7 (b5 12.Rac1) 12.a4 (12.Rd2 and b5 13.Rc1 o-o is possible) o-o (Na5 13.Qb6 Nc6 14.Rd2) 13.Qd1 Rd8 and an interesting plan is Rd7, Qf8 and Rad8. Black seems to be a little better.
  

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
 
OstapBender
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no spoon.

Posts: 1491
Location: not in Kansas anymore
Joined: 10/16/04
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #24 - 08/04/06 at 16:13:40
Post Tools
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 e6 10.Be2 Qb8


current position
  

"If God had wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates."  -Jay Leno
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Uberdecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 640
Joined: 03/21/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #23 - 08/04/06 at 15:34:34
Post Tools
Strangely enough, no seems to have noticed my last post, in which I was wondering whether to go for 8. ...e5 ; 9. Ktg5 ef. Now that I've had a proper look at the position, I'm definitely rejecting it. While Black is busy rounding up the horse in the corner, White is drumming up more than sufficient compensation. He can even try 9.Bg5 when opposite coloured Bishops and the backward d-pawn give him excellent drawing chances. Another thought is 8. ...Qa5, but then 9. Ktd5 is a bit annoying. That leaves 8. ...e6 and 8. ...Bg4. The first gives rise to a kind of Old Main Line (6. ...e6) where White has commited his Bishop to -f4, which is of course by no means a poor square. With ...Qc7-b8 and ...Ktf6-d7-e5 manoeuvres , Black should manage to contain White's activity and remain on top, but there definitely is some compensation. Therefore, I will follow Ben's line of [b]8. Bf4 Bg4 ; 9. Qb3 e6 ; 10. Be2[/b] and I respond with [b]10. ...Qb8[/b]
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dragonslayer
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 248
Location: Odense
Joined: 06/13/04
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #22 - 08/02/06 at 21:01:32
Post Tools
Don't know if 10.Be2 is a TN, my database only contains games with 10.Qxb7.
I recommended 8.h3 because I thought the alternatives 8.a3, 8.Bg5, 8.b4, and 8.Qe2 were all inferior. I also thought 8.Bf4 was bad but this solely rested on disapproval of the line 8...Bg4 9.Qb3 e6 10.Qxb7.
Yes 8.h3 allows Black to transpose into various other defences with White committed to h2-h3. However, I don't think the Chicago defence with or without h3 is such a good choice for Black. In other lines (Qc7; Bd7 or clasiscal) h3 is not such a bad move.
Indeed, is the positional compensation for White bigger after Ben's 10.Be2 than after 8.h3 e6 9.Qe2 ? Hopefully this game will brings us closer to answering this question.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Ben_Hague
Full Member
***
Offline


I'm always happier when
I'm a pawn down.

Posts: 157
Location: Oldham
Joined: 06/20/03
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #21 - 08/02/06 at 09:26:05
Post Tools
OstapBender wrote on 08/01/06 at 20:06:30:
Is the last position current, or still contingent on Uberdeker accepting  the sequence 7...Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 e6 (this is not entirely clear)? 

As near as I can tell we have: 7.0-0

with the conditional moves: if 7...Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 e6 then 10.Be2

and we are waiting for Uberdeker to reply to either 7.0-0 or, if he accepts the conditional moves, to 10.Be2.

Sorry, if I missed something.



Yes, you're right. For some reason I keep getting you and Uberdeker confused.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #20 - 08/02/06 at 01:41:48
Post Tools
Is 10.Be2 a TN?

A couple of years ago Dragonslayer in a CCN article recommended 8.h3. Is that still the case?
  

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
 
Dragonslayer
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 248
Location: Odense
Joined: 06/13/04
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #19 - 08/01/06 at 23:10:50
Post Tools
Hi guys. Just back from Holidays  Cool

I didn't necessarily agree with Ben's choice of 8.Bf4 but would love for it to work.

I think 10.Be2 is a wise decision. I don't trust 10.Qxb7 and my attempts to make 10.Ng5 work proved futile. I even tried 10.e5 but 10...Bxf3 ended that adventure.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
OstapBender
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no spoon.

Posts: 1491
Location: not in Kansas anymore
Joined: 10/16/04
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #18 - 08/01/06 at 20:06:30
Post Tools
Is the last position current, or still contingent on Uberdeker accepting  the sequence 7...Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 e6 (this is not entirely clear)?  

As near as I can tell we have: 7.0-0

with the conditional moves: if 7...Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 e6 then 10.Be2

and we are waiting for Uberdeker to reply to either 7.0-0 or, if he accepts the conditional moves, to 10.Be2.

Sorry, if I missed something.

  

"If God had wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates."  -Jay Leno
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Ben_Hague
Full Member
***
Offline


I'm always happier when
I'm a pawn down.

Posts: 157
Location: Oldham
Joined: 06/20/03
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #17 - 08/01/06 at 19:33:15
Post Tools
Sorry for the delay, but this is clearly a critical position and I wanted to give it some thought.
After 10.Ng5 Na5 11.Qa4+ Nd7 12.f3 Nxc4 13.Qxc4 White has sufficient compensation if he can force e5 (as at the moment one bishop is locked out of the game, if the other one is as well then Black could run out of pieces that he can move). Unfortunately I can't find a way to force e5. I'd love this to work, but barring bright ideas I think this is another line for the scrapheap.

After 10.Qxb7 Na5 11.Qb4 e5 12.Bd5 then after 12...Nxd5 13.exd5 exf4 14.Qxf4 Bxf3 15.Qa4+ Qd7 16.Rfe1+ Be7 17.Rxe7+ Kxe7 18.Re1+ Kd8 19.Qza5+ Qc7 or 12...Rb8 13.Qa4+ Bd7 14.Qd1 exf4 15.Ng5 Nxd5 16.Qxd5 Be6 17.Nxe6 fxe6 18.Qxe6+ Be7 I think that White has good practical compensation, at any rate I wouldn't be too unhappy to reach either position OTB. However I really don't trust them theoretically.

So I'm going to play 10.Be2. The idea being that the brute force approach doesn't seem to be working so I'm going to switch to the positional approach and try to claim that my better development coupled with the weaknesses on b7 and d6 give me enough compensation.


http://www.france-echecs.com/diagramme/imgboard.phpfen=r2qkb1r/1p3ppp/p1nppn2/8/...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #16 - 07/29/06 at 20:31:09
Post Tools
Dji wrote on 07/29/06 at 14:25:46:
6...a6 7.Bg5! Nf6 8.Bxf6 gf6 9.0-0 (I 'm oblige to admit 9.Nh4?) Bg4 10.Qb3 e6 11.Qxb7 Na5 12.Qb4 Bxf3 and then simply 13.gf3 (Palkovi 13.Qa4+) and I prefer withe besause first no pawn down!! and second the withe king can be safe on h1 and the black is still in the middle.
Dji


I already gave 9...e6! 10.Nd4 h5, compare Suetin-Botvinnik, Moscow 1952.
  

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
 
OstapBender
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no spoon.

Posts: 1491
Location: not in Kansas anymore
Joined: 10/16/04
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #15 - 07/29/06 at 17:42:57
Post Tools
Ben_Hague wrote on 07/28/06 at 17:49:31:
So my next move will be 7.0-0

1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0-0


current position


Ben_Hague wrote on 07/28/06 at 17:49:31:
offering the sequence 7...Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 e6.


analysis position


Ben_Hague wrote on 07/28/06 at 17:49:31:
After this I'm not sure what to play. I suspect that 10.Qxb7 is best, but my pet line in this position is 10.Ng5 so I'm really tempted to give it a punt. If we reach that position I'll have to give it some thought.


  

"If God had wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates."  -Jay Leno
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Uberdecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 640
Joined: 03/21/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #14 - 07/29/06 at 15:06:24
Post Tools
I'm not so sure 8. Bf4 e5 should be so easily dismissed. I don't have a board with me but the line I'm thinking of runs 9. Ktg5 ef ; 10. Ktxf7 Qe7 ; 11. Ktxh8 and now either 11. ...Be6 or 11. ...Kte5 followed by ...Be6 with ideas of ...0-0-0, ...g5, ...Bg7 and ...f3 at some point.
Must look at this in more detail before deciding whether or not I should avoid the whole thing.

P.S. Dji, Ben has not chosen 7. Bg5 "!", so any long discussion of that will be out of place in this thread, but it should be mentioned that there's no need to give back the pawn with ...Bg4, since the Knight is misplaced on -f3 anyway.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dji
Full Member
***
Offline


Just a Spirit in this
material World

Posts: 169
Joined: 07/16/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #13 - 07/29/06 at 14:25:46
Post Tools
6...a6 7.Bg5! Nf6 8.Bxf6 gf6 9.0-0 (I 'm oblige to admit 9.Nh4?) Bg4 10.Qb3 e6 11.Qxb7 Na5 12.Qb4 Bxf3 and then simply 13.gf3 (Palkovi 13.Qa4+) and I prefer withe besause first no pawn down!! and second the withe king can be safe on h1 and the black is still in the middle.
Dji
  

Eternity it's very long especially towards the end!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Meat
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 184
Joined: 06/27/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #12 - 07/29/06 at 10:23:17
Post Tools
Black can also try to reach calm waters after 10. Ng5 with 10...Na5. Play could continue 11. Qa4+ Nd7 and now:
12. f3 Nxc4 13. Qxc4 Rc8 14. Qe2 Nh5 and black is ok
12. Be2 Bxe2 13. Nxe2 Be7 14. h4 0-0 where black has completed his development and white has no immediate threats.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #11 - 07/29/06 at 03:19:35
Post Tools
Browsing through my notes on the MG I found the following analysis by Ben Hague:

<1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.O-O Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 e6 10.Ng5 b5 11.Nxb5 h6
(11...axb5 12.Bxb5 Rc8 13.Rfc1 +-)
(11…Na5 12.Qa4 axb5 13.Bxb5 Nd7 looks like the main line. I'm not sure what's happening here, white can get another pawn for the piece with 14.Nxf7 Kxf7 15.Bxd7, and there is clearly some compensation for the material, but if it's enough is hard to say. My gut feeling is that while there are good practical chances it may not be quite enough)

12.Bxe6
(12.Nxe6 fxe6 13.Bxe6 axb5 14.Bxg4 Nxg4 15.Qe6+ Qe7 16.Qxg4 unclear)

12…hxg5 
( 12...fxe6 13.Nxe6 Bxe6 14.Qxe6+ +- )
( 12...axb5 13.Bxf7+ 
( 13.Nxf7 Nd4 14.Qe3 Ne2+ 15.Kh1 Nxf4 16.Qxf4 Bxe6 17.Nxd8 Rxd8 +/- )
13...Ke7 14.Bh5 Qd7 15.Qf7+ Kd8 16.Bxg4 Nxg4 17.Ne6+ Kc8 18.Qf5 +/- )

13.Bxf7+ Kd7 The critical position
( 13...Ke7 14.Bxd6+ +- )
14.Bxg5 
( 14.Nxd6 gxf4 
( 14...Bxd6 15.Bxd6 Kxd6 16.f3 unclear)
15.Nf5 Kc7 16.Rfd1 Qc8 17.Qc4 Bxd1 18.Rxd1 unclear)

14...axb5 15.f3 Nd4 16.Qd3 Be6 17.Bxe6+ Nxe6 18.Qxb5+ unclear

I'm not sure that all this works, but I think that at least it deserves analysis.>
End quote.
Überdeker, I have done my best for you. You have work to do.

@Arkhein:
This variation is pretty good for White: 11.Bf4 Qb8 (b4 12.Nd5) 12.Rd2 (Palkovi suggests 12.Nd5) Be7 (b4 13.Nd5) 13.a3 0-0 14.Rad1 Nc5 15.Bc2 e5 16.Bg5 and I won a friendly corr game MNb-Peeters, 1994. Black should have played Rc8. Moreover there is 13.Nd5 (already getting bored?) b4 (Ne5 14.Nxb5! axb5 15.Nxe5 0-0 Zelic-Armanda, Split 1998, 16.Nxf7!? with interesting complications) 14.Rxd6 Nc5 15.Qc4 bxc3 16.Rxe6 fxe6 17.Bxb8 Rxb8 unclear.
No Open Sicilians with an extra pawn here. Cool

  

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: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #10 - 07/28/06 at 23:18:12
Post Tools
Hi everyone, Ben_Hague is defending the Morra Gambit? I have a question for him.

What do you play against it?

1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 e6 and now, would you continue like this?

5.Nf3 a6 6.Bc4 b5 7.Bb3 Bb7 8.Qe2 d6 9.0-0 Nd7 10.Rd1 Ngf6 do you still agree with this line as White? And now what would you play here? Im asking that because I think this line by Black is dangerous for the Morra player, and not easy to play against.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Ben_Hague
Full Member
***
Offline


I'm always happier when
I'm a pawn down.

Posts: 157
Location: Oldham
Joined: 06/20/03
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #9 - 07/28/06 at 17:59:22
Post Tools
[quote author=Uberdeker link=1154029852/0#1 date=1154083774]
P.S. Interesting game you played with Speelman (published in latest NIC), I'm especially impressed at your choice of the Modern against such an expert

[/quote]

It was nice to get a game into NIC, although it was a shame it was a loss. I was quite pleased with the game itself as it was the first game I've played against someone decent where I felt I was actually playing the same game. Previously I'd just blindly hack away and hope to get lucky (not always unsuccessfully). Sadly since then I've been playing trash. The choice of opening was partly because I don't really know anything else, partly to learn more about the opening, and partly because the chances of surprising someone with his experience are nil.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Ben_Hague
Full Member
***
Offline


I'm always happier when
I'm a pawn down.

Posts: 157
Location: Oldham
Joined: 06/20/03
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #8 - 07/28/06 at 17:49:31
Post Tools
Looking at the various options after 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 we seem to have:

1) 7.Bg5 Nf6 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.Nh4
2) 7.b4 (or 7.0-0 Nf6 8.b4)
3) 7.0-0 Nf6 8.h3
4) 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 e6

Of these I don't trust the first three. I know that line 1 has been played a lot and clearly has a few supporters here, but it looks to me that Black's position is very solid. In particular 9...Qa5 cuts out the Qh5 manouver and if anything Black's king is looking safer than White's.
In the lines with b4 I don't really understand what White has gained if Black waits for b5 and then plays axb5. He must still have reasonable practical chances and this would be my second choice.
h3 isn't refutable, but the best White can do is get back into one of the main lines and there are plenty of ways for Black to try and show that it's just a wasted tempo.

So my next move will be 7.0-0 offering the sequence 7...Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.Qb3 e6. After this I'm not sure what to play. I suspect that 10.Qxb7 is best, but my pet line in this position is 10.Ng5 so I'm really tempted to give it a punt. If we reach that position I'll have to give it some thought.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Meat
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 184
Joined: 06/27/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #7 - 07/28/06 at 16:26:37
Post Tools
Quote:
PS Meat: computers are bad gambit players.

Ya, I somewhat figured that  Wink

By the way, there's also the b4 stuff: 7.b4 and 7.0-0 Nf6 8. b4

I'm not sure how black should meet those as nobody has ever played it against me.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #6 - 07/28/06 at 16:01:32
Post Tools
Two other options: 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bg5 e6 (Bg4 9.Qb3 e6 10.Qxb7 Na5 11.Qb4 Nxc4 12.Qxc4 += as White's lead in development is more important than the pair of bisops) 9.Qe2 h6! (takes benefit of White's 8th move; Be7 10.Rfd1 offers White interesting positional compensation) and White has done badly after both 10.Bh4 and 10.Be3, but the various games I have found are not convincing.
7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 (e6 is what White wants and e5 9.Ng5! is nasty) 9.Qb3 e6 10.Qxb7 Na5 11.Qb4 e5 (White will not mind Nxc4 12.Qxc4 Bxf3 13.Qc6+ Nd7 14.gxf3 either) 12.Rad1?? Rb8 13.Qa4+ Bd7 14.Qc2 Nxc4 Mayers-Bates, Hastings 1995. Critical is 12.Bd5 of course
a)12...Nxd5 13.exd5 exf4 14.Qxf4.
b)12...Rb8 13.Qa4+ Bd7 14.Qd1 exf4 15.Ng5.
and I will leave it to Überdeker to put his teeth in this tasty stuff.
I am also very curious, with what ideas the Hague/Dragonslayer team will show up.

PS Meat: computers are bad gambit players.
« Last Edit: 07/29/06 at 03:22:09 by MNb »  

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
 
Meat
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 184
Joined: 06/27/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #5 - 07/28/06 at 15:57:25
Post Tools
Quote:
Regardless of this, I think 9...Qa5 is actually quite a challenging move, asking White to justify 9.Nh4 which just looks all wrong to me.


You are absolutely right. I don't think black has too many problems after 9...e6 though.

If after 9... Qa5 white continues with the natural 10. 0-0 the we have Haas - Schmidt, Baden 2002:

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "?"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[PlyCount "80"]

1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Nxc3 Nc6 5. Nf3 d6 6. Bc4 a6 7. Bg5 Nf6 8.
Bxf6 gxf6 9. Nh4 Qa5 10. O-O e6 11. Kh1 Be7 12. Qd2 Qg5 13. Nf3 Qxd2 14. Nxd2
b5 15. Be2 Nd4 16. Bd3 Bb7 17. a3 Rg8 18. f3 h5 19. g3 Rc8 20. Kg2 Bf8 21. Rad1
Bh6 22. Kf2 Ke7 23. Bb1 h4 24. Rfe1 h3 25. Nd5+ Bxd5 26. exd5 e5 27. Nf1 Kf8
28. g4 f5 29. Rxd4 exd4 30. Bxf5 Rc1 31. b3 Rxe1 32. Kxe1 Bc1 33. a4 bxa4 34.
bxa4 Ke7 35. Kd1 Bf4 36. Ke2 Kf6 37. Bd7 Rb8 38. g5+ Ke5 39. Bxh3 Rb2+ 40. Ke1
d3 {0-1 Haas,F-Schmidt,S (2232)/Baden 2002} *

And here black may even have the improvement 12...f5 with the idea 13. exf5 d5 or Bxh4.
So I wanted to look for alternatives to whites 10.0-0 and guess what move my engine suggested? 10. Nf3, lol!  Grin
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #4 - 07/28/06 at 14:59:04
Post Tools
Überdeker has chosen one of the best defences available, so I am delighted.

Haas,F - Schmidt,S [B21]
VBN 0203 Baden (8.2), 06.04.2003
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.Bg5 Nf6 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.Nh4 Qa5 10.0–0 e6 11.Kh1 Be7 12.Qd2 Qg5 13.Nf3 Qxd2 14.Nxd2 b5 15.Be2 Nd4 16.Bd3 Bb7 17.a3 Rg8 18.f3 h5 19.g3 Rc8 20.Kg2 Bf8 21.Rad1 Bh6 22.Kf2 Ke7 23.Bb1 h4 24.Rfe1 h3 25.Nd5+ Bxd5 26.exd5 e5 27.Nf1 Kf8 28.g4 f5 29.Rxd4 exd4 30.Bxf5 Rc1 31.b3 Rxe1 32.Kxe1 Bc1 33.a4 bxa4 34.bxa4 Ke7 35.Kd1 Bf4 36.Ke2 Kf6 37.Bd7 Rb8 38.g5+ Ke5 39.Bxh3 Rb2+ 40.Ke1 d3 0–1

Jenull,M (2147) - Rau,H (2302) [B21]
DEM U18 Winterberg (2), 2002
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.Bg5 Nf6 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.Nh4 e6 10.0–0 b5 11.Bb3 Qb6 12.Qh5 Nd4 13.Bd5 exd5 14.Nxd5 Qd8 15.Rac1 Ne6 16.Qf3 Bh6 17.Rcd1 Bb7 18.Nf5 Ng5 19.Qa3 Bf8 20.Rfe1 Rc8 21.b3 Rg8 22.Re3 Rc2 23.Nd4 Rc5 24.b4 Rc4 25.Qb2 Rg6 26.h4 Ne6 27.h5 Rh6 28.Nf5 Bxd5 29.exd5 Rxh5 30.Qb1 Qd7 31.Rde1 Rf4 32.dxe6 fxe6 33.Rxe6+ Kf7 34.Qb3 d5 35.Ng3 Rg5 36.Qe3 Rxb4 37.Rxa6 Ra4 38.Rxa4 bxa4 39.f4 Rg4 40.Rc1 Bd6 41.Ne2 Bb8 42.Qd3 Kg7 43.g3 Rg6 44.Kg2 h5 45.Rh1 Kh6 46.Rh4 Ba7 47.Nd4 Bxd4 48.Qxd4 Qe8 49.Qd1 Qe4+ 50.Kf2 Qf5 51.Qxa4 Rg8 52.Rh1 Rc8 53.Re1 h4 54.Qb3 Rc2+ 55.Re2 Rxe2+ 56.Kxe2 h3 57.Qb8 Qe4+ 58.Kd2 Qg2+ 59.Kc1 h2 60.Qh8+ Kg6 61.Qg8+ Kf5 62.Qc8+ Ke4 63.Qe6+ Kd3 64.Qa6+ Ke3 65.Qa3+ Kf2 66.Qc5+ Kxg3 67.Qe3+ Qf3 68.Qe1+ Kh3 69.Qe6+ Kg2 70.Qg8+ Kf2 0–1

Buth,L - Von Ehr,M [B21]
Baden-ch JS Waldshut (9), 06.04.2002
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.Bg5 Nf6 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.Nh4 e6 10.Qh5 Ne5 11.Be2 Ng6 12.Nxg6 fxg6 13.Qh3 Bd7 14.0–0 Be7 15.Rad1 Rc8 16.Qh6 Kf7 17.Qe3 Kg7 18.Kh1 Rc5 19.b4 Rc8 20.f4 b5 ½–½
This last game gives more questions, than answers. I suggest eg 10...b5 11.f4 Ng6 as the natural square for the bishop is b7.

There is the fragment Shipman-Gray, 2000: 9...Rg8 10.Qh5 Ne5 11.Be2 h6.

Smith,C - Pendergast,D [B21]
corr IECC Trio, 1996

1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Pxc3 Pc6 5.Pf3 d6 6.Lc4 a6 7.Lg5 Pf6 8.Lxf6 gxf6 9.Pd4 Pxd4 10.Dxd4 Tg8 11.g3 Lh6 12.Lb3 Le6 13.Lxe6 fxe6 14.Da4+ b5 15.Db3 Dc8 16.0-0 Dc4 17.Dd1 Tc8 18.a3 Tg6 19.Te1 Kf7 20.Dh5 Tc5 21.Dd1 Kg8 22.Tb1 f5 23.exf5 Txf5 24.Te2 Tf8 25.Tc2 Tgf6 26.b3 Dc6 27.Dg4+ Lg7 28.Tbc1 Df3 29.Db4 Th6 30.De4 d5 31.Dxf3 Txf3 32.Kg2 Thf6 33.Tb1 T6f5 0-1
Alumbrado calls 9.Nh4 all wrong. But after 9.Nd4 we really must wonder, if White has been tricked into an Open Sicilian with a pawn down. Compare eg Botvinnik's plan in the Richter-Rauser.

Palkovi gives 9.0-0 Bg4 10.Qb3 e6 11.Qxb7 Na5 12.Qb4 Bxf3 (Nxc4 13.Qxc4 Bxf3 14.Qc6+ draws) 13.Qa4+ Ke7 14.gxf3 Nxc4 15.Qxc4 Bh6 and Black has the initiative. But White grants Black a tempo to connect the rooks. So I am not sure of just 13.gxf3 Nxc4 14.Qxc4 Bh6 15.Kh1.
So I suggest

Haas,F (2200) - Schwing,H (2315) [B21]
Oberliga Süd W 9798, 1998
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 d6 5.Bc4 Nc6 6.Nf3 a6 7.Bg5 Nf6 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.0–0 e6 10.Nd4 h5 11.Kh1 Qb6 12.Nb3 Bd7 13.f4 0–0–0 14.Be2 h4 15.Rf3 Be7 16.a4 Kb8 17.a5 Qc7 18.Rc1 Bc8 19.f5 Qd7 20.Na4 h3 21.g4 d5 22.Nb6 Qd6 23.exd5 exd5 24.Qd2 d4 25.Rd3 Qe5 26.Bf3 Bb4 27.Qc2 Rde8 28.Kg1 Qf4 29.Bxc6 bxc6 30.Qxc6 Bb7 31.Nd7+ Ka8 32.Nb6+ 0–1
Black's play is very reminiscent of the famous game Suetin-Botvinnik, Moscow 1952.
  

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
 
alumbrado
God Member
*****
Offline


Esse quam videri bonus
malebo

Posts: 1418
Location: London
Joined: 02/17/03
Gender: Male
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #3 - 07/28/06 at 14:08:46
Post Tools
[quote author=Uberdeker link=1154029852/0#1 date=1154083774]Dear Ben,

Glad to pick up the gauntlet. I have to ask you to bit a bit patient though, as I haven't much time to devote to chess at the moment.

As for the choice of critical lines, I'm not in entire agreement with MNb (when have we ever fully agreed on anything?!) : I don't trust the finachetto defence one bit and I consider the Finegold Defence and some Qa5 lines to be serious candidates.

But the 4. ...Ktc6 ; 5. Ktf3 d6 ; 6. Bc4 a6 variation still strikes as being the most reliable, so I'll be sticking with that. If then you choose 7. Bg5 Ktf6 ; 8. Bxf6 gf ; 9. Kth4, I am sure Dji and Meat will gladly take part the debate.
                                
                                                              Regards,
                                                                   Hubert

P.S. Interesting game you played with Speelman (published in latest NIC), I'm especially impressed at your choice of the Modern against such an expert
[/quote]
[color=#660066][font=Arial][size=14]
I would be interested to see this also.  I have won at least three games at ICC with Black which have continued 9...Qa5!? 10.Qh5?? Qxh5 White disconnects and forfeits.

Regardless of this, I think 9...Qa5 is actually quite a challenging move, asking White to justify 9.Nh4 which just looks all wrong to me.[/size][/font][/color]
  

If sometimes we fly too close to the sun, at least this shows we are spreading our wings.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
OstapBender
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no spoon.

Posts: 1491
Location: not in Kansas anymore
Joined: 10/16/04
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #2 - 07/28/06 at 14:06:37
Post Tools
Assuming Ben accepts the conditional moves we now have:
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6


current position (?)


and here 7.Bg5 Nf6 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.Nh4 would give


analysis position
  

"If God had wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates."  -Jay Leno
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Uberdecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 640
Joined: 03/21/06
Re: Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
Reply #1 - 07/28/06 at 10:49:34
Post Tools
Dear Ben,

Glad to pick up the gauntlet. I have to ask you to bit a bit patient though, as I haven't much time to devote to chess at the moment.
As for the choice of critical lines, I'm not in entire agreement with MNb (when have we ever fully agreed on anything?!) : I don't trust the finachetto defence one bit and I consider the Finegold Defence and some Qa5 lines to be serious candidates.

But the 4. ...Ktc6 ; 5. Ktf3 d6 ; 6. Bc4 a6 variation still strikes as being the most reliable, so I'll be sticking with that. If then you choose 7. Bg5 Ktf6 ; 7. Bxf6 gf ; 8. Kth4, I am sure Dji and Meat will galdly take part the debate.

                                 
                                                              Regards,
                                                                   Hubert

P.S. Interesting game you played with Speelman (published in latest NIC), I'm especially impressed at your choice of the Modern against such an expert

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Ben_Hague
Full Member
***
Offline


I'm always happier when
I'm a pawn down.

Posts: 157
Location: Oldham
Joined: 06/20/03
Gender: Male
Ben_Hague v Uberdeker, Smith-Morra Gambit
07/27/06 at 19:50:52
Post Tools
OK, I'll get the ball rolling. I'm assuming that Uberdeker is interested, if not then hopefully someone else will take up the cudgels.

1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 ...

I know that MNb has already given a summary of the critical lines, all I would add to that is that in my opinion the d6,a6,Nf6 and e6,a6,Nge7 lines are the most serious tests.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo