Hello Uberdeker,
in my opinion your Deferred Fromīs Gambit seems to be a very strong answer to 1f4.
Not in its independent lines but more as a clever order to reach a traditional Froms
Gambit while avoiding the feared Kingīs Bishop Gambit .
Iīm talking about:
1.f4 d6 2.Nf3! e5! 3.fxe5! dxe5! 4.Nxe5! Bd6! 5.Nf3! unclear
Some remarks (from White's point of view):
(a) After 1.f4 d6 obviously 2.Nf3 is white's strongest move. 2.d3= is nothing and 2.e4
is comfortable for Black after both 2...Nf6 or 2...d5(!)
(b) 2.Nf3 should be answered by 2...e5 as after 2...Bg4 3.e4! looks nice for white.
(c) I donīt want to delve into the secrets of KG Fischer Defence as I am no specialist for that.
In my opinion (just an opinion) itīs very unclear and White shouldnīt be worse. But for
practical reasons many white Bird players (like me) would like to avoid a sharp theoretical
argument with an experienced and booked black player.
(Btw, in KAISSIBER issue #25 thereīs some interesting stuff about 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d6 3.Nf3 f5?!)
As 3.d3 is nothing White should play 3.fxe5.
(d) After 1.f4 d6 2.Nf3 e5 3.fxe5 Black can (and should?!) play 3...dxe5. 3...Bg4 4.exd6 Bxd6 is another
transposition to From lines, but this should be better for White. The same for 3...Nc6 4.exd6.
(e) After 3.fxe5 dxe5 White has no real alternative to 4.Nxe5 Bd6 5.Nf3 with a usual From. In fact it is
Black who has additional possibilities with 4.Nxe5 Nc6!? 5.Nf3! and now 5...Bg4 or 5...Nf6 instead
of the transpositional 5...Bd6 ?!
In correspondence chess I have no problems on the white side of an accepted From (and thereīs even
a white win of mine in Taylorīs book!). But otb itīs no fun to play these lines with White and I have
always preferred 2.e4 (and of course 2...exf4 3.Bc4!).
So MY problem is that I have to prepare sharp&theoretical lines of either KG Fischer or From main lines.
* * *
And there is, of course, your independent line 1.f4 d6 2.Nf3 e5 3.fxe5 g5?!
Thereīs not much material on this, but both Oleinikov (Chessbase-CD, chapter "Declined From")
and V.Ivanov (A02 Bird, small booklet from Russia Chess House) recommend (i) the piece sacrifice 4.e4 g4 5.Bc4
and (ii) the "safe" defence 4.d3 . I wonder why 4.h3 (?!?) is discussed and not these lines ...
(i) 4.e4 g4 5.Bc4 gxf3 6.Qxf3: According to Dunnington (without further variations in: Winning Unorthodox Openings) White has no sufficient compensation, but Dunnington cites Larsen (source?) that
White should have. White has two pawns for a knight (even good chances to get a third one) and a lasting initiative. And the black knights will find no secure and active places. Thereīs no immediate mate but White need not hurry. All my engines prefer White (material down!). I my opinion White has at least sufficient compensation. In the only important game (White lost) White could have improved 6...Nh6 7.0-0 Qe7 8.Nc3!? - In my opinion itīs on blackīs turn to show a reliable defence strategy.
(ii) 4.d3 g4 5.Bg5 and Black has a choice between 5...Be7 6.Bxe7 Nxe7 7.exd6 Qxd6 8.Nfd2 (unclear, maybe Black has sufficient compensation) and 5...Qd7 (equal material, but no black attack, the kingside is positionally a real mess for both players)
Uberdeker, I see no reason for White to avoid these lines.
He isnīt much better but shoudnīt be worse.
Maybe you or your book has some improvements for Black?!
tracke
Pages: [1] 
Bird's (Read 31418 times)
