Hello.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.0-0

6...d6
and
6...Bc5 

Are both covered in the Spanish repertoire thread. In the thread presently nothing major has been shown against 6...d6 (maybe some new effort is required), while against 6...Bc5 there is some analysis on a pawn grabbing line which looks moderately advantageous for white. 


Jonathan Tait wrote on 11/06/16 at 12:07:16:

Had to think about this and can't really say I see 6...d6 as either passive or active.

Probably the best thing accomplished by 6...d6 (besides it not losing any pawns) is to put a question to white's placement of his b5 bishop. Does it really want to exchange on c6 now that black has stabilised the position? Is a fall-back to c4 (or a4-b3) the way to go?

Also a major plus is that 6...d6 prepares a set up with d6 and Be7+Bd7 which is surprisingly solid (d6+Bg4 - not so much).

Glenn Snow wrote on 11/06/16 at 15:09:38:

Certainly looks worth a look. And he covers:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Nf6 6.0-0 Bc5 7.Bxc6 bxc6 8.Nxe5 0-0 9.Nc3 d6 10.Na4!?
(Line proposed in Spanish repertoire) For about 15 min .

Have a nice day.

Markovich wrote on 08/28/06 at 19:22:14:


Tseitlin always played 6...d6, which is perhaps differently active rather than passive.

I agree with the earlier commenter that 6...Bc5 gives Black much better chances. The Schliemann is designed to be played actively!

Thanks Markovich.  Martin does comment on 6...Bc5 as good alternative.  Against it, Martin proposes (I think) the safe, sound, solid 7.Qe2.

Which prompts another question.  Against 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fe 5.de Nf6 6.0-0 d6, Martin recommends 7.Qd3 as a way to protect the pawn, prepare Qc4, and sidestep the pin ...Bg4.

However, against 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fe 5.de Nf6 6.0-0 Bc5 I *think* Martin recommends 7.Qe2 (at least this is the move I have in my training database -- I need to go back to the DVD to be sure).  This seems inconsistent.  If one believes in 7.Qd3 in the above line, then it makes sense to play 7.Qd3 here as well.

Of course, neither is the critical test of this line, so Qe2 or Qd3 may simply be a case of tomato tomahto.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.d3 fe 5.de Nf6 6.0-0 d6 7.Qd3

As recommended by Martin on his DVD.  Develops the Q, supports e4, sidesteps pin after ...Bg4 and prepares to interdict Black's castling (e.g., 7...Be7 8.Qc4!).

The problem I'm having is 7...Bg4, anyway.  Martin dismisses this with 8.h3 Bxf3 and White goes about his business.  He fails to mention 8...Bh5, which on the face of it looks like a duffer's move, but which also is going to be played 9 times out of 10 at amateur level.  In this specific variation I wonder if it's maybe a little better than "not good but playable."

The point of ...Bh5 being to prevent White from carrying out his Qc4 plan and maybe buying enough time for 0-0.

Or, if White still wants to play his Qc4 plan, it seems like he must take a time out first with 9.Nbd2 Be7 10.Qc4, but now I'm thinking Black can get away with 10...Qd7, creating a few interesting possibilites, such as an eventual ...0-0-0 or maybe even ...Bf7.

So, if 8.h3 is good, how would you respond to 8...Bh5?

Or is it better to avoid this altogether with 8.Bg5