You are totaly right!That was what I tried to say all the time.To be objective is difficult,if you have only your opinion.Sometimes I realize that some of the members here even dont look at the posts and try to convince someone with just their opinion.
E.g. if someone dont belive in the Bpg he just say everything against it not to accept the facts.I hope for the future that everyone can discuss here without fearing to become  an ... only because he has a different opinion.
Also in my opinion it is not right to use instead of me or I ,us and we.This has the intention to present your own opinion as if it is the opinion of all the members here.
OK may I close this topic and go on with the Bpg?(Maybe this discussion is important and can be continued at the folder "Discussion")

"Sure, but I still don't see a satisfactory antidote against White's plan Nd2-b1-c3-d5. That knight is very strong there; it makes castling queenside for Black almost equal to suicide. If Black castles kingside White's progress will be slower, but once again the question will arise: were will Black's counterplay come from?"

Well,I think you overestimate the plan with Nd5 .To bring this Night to d5 White has
1. to waste time to drive the Bishop away,that he cant take this Night
2. White has to cover the c4 pawn and last but not least
3.he has to bring his Night to c3 and then to d5.
Black can use this time to  get counterplay.
OK here is a game played by a very strong player in my chessclub who play the Bpg for a long time and often analyze ideas for black with me.I dont want to show you the whole game,because black won it in an unimportant endgame,but I think the opening was really instructive.

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e5 3. dxe5 Ng4 4. Bf4 Nc6  5. Nf3 Bb4+ 6. Nbd2 Qe7 7. e3 Ncxe5 8.Nxe5 Nxe5 9. Be2 d6 10. O-O Bd7 11. Nb1 Qe6!(I think I can give this move an exclamation mark,because this move looks to me unusual ,but effective) 12.a3 The first part of the plan is to drive the Bishop away Ba5 13. b4 Bb6 14.Qb3second part of the plan is to cover the c4 pawn Ng6!Black has no intention to castle now he want to attak on the KS,because white has to support the QS-pawns and lost a little bit of his center-control 15. Bg3 h5 16. h4 Ne7! with the intention not only to make his g-pawn moveable ,but also to bring his Night on the strong square f5 17. Nc3Now the last part of the plan Nf5 18. Nd5 Nxg3 19. fxg3 Bc6suddanly it appears that black will give up his Bishoppair for the Night which had to fight itself all the way to d5 20.Kh2 Bxd5 21. cxd5 Qe5 =
Black now has the better pawnstructure ,but with the different lightened Bishops white can hold the position easily with a good positional knowledge(That means e.g not to exchange too much peaces...).


Well I think that the variation with 4.Bf4 is playable for black,if black knows the ideas and moves like Qe6.What I am worry about is the line with 4.Nf3
If someone has some questions left to the line 4.Bf4 please post it,otherwise I would like to analyze the 4.Nf3 line.

I am not sure, if I understand you, maybe because I don't know what anima means. Anyhow, speaking for myself, I don't feel addressed personally at all in this thread. If others do, by me, I apologize, I had no intent.
In fact, I am enjoying myself. Moreover I hope, Udav shows up again with something interesting. The Budapest is one of those openings I don't trust, but would like to work one way or another.
As I finally (after years!) have decided to switch from 1.e4 to 1.d4, this 4.Bf4 variation will be my weapon against the Budapest. It feels good to me.

Sure, but I still don't see a satisfactory antidote against White's plan Nd2-b1-c3-d5. That knight is very strong there; it makes castling queenside for Black almost equal to suicide. If Black castles kingside White's progress will be slower, but once again the question will arise: were will Black's counterplay come from?

I am afraid there is a little misundertanding. As ...a5 worked so nicely in answer to 15.a4, I have investigated if this move also was possible somewhere after 15.Nc3. The answer is a firm no, mainly because of x.Nd5xb6.

Udav18 wrote on 08/06/07 at 09:31:00:


No, (smiley intended, but somehow I have lost that option) but maybe I can teach you a bit. One important rule, when attacking, is: involve as many pieces as possible.

12.a3!? Ba5 13.b4 Bb6 14.Qb3 O-O-O!? 15.Nc3 idea 16.Nd5 (another important attacking idea: centralization of the knight) maintaining an advantage. A sample line is 15.Nc3 Ng6 16.Bg3 h5 17.h4 (White can use such ideas as well!) f5 18.Rfe1 Rdf8 19.Nd5 Bc6 20.a4 f4 21.exf4 Bxd5 22.cxd5 Qf6 23.a5 Bd4 24.Rac1 and White's attacking chances are more concrete. Another one is 15.Nc3 Rhg8 16.Nd5 g5 17.Bg3 h5? 18.c5 winning. Your idea to play ...a5 leads to disaster.

Udav18 wrote on 08/04/07 at 19:56:03:


I sincerely think this is the wrong way to use computers for developing opening theory. It is not that I am against Silicon Power. It is OK to steal ideas from them (like applying ideas from other variations or other openings). That is what S_F did when mentioning 14.Qc2 iso 14.Rc1. It is also OK to check tactics (S_F's mistake 16.b4?). But it is always the human chess player, who has to formulate plans and find out if they work.
The way I see it (but being a patzer there is no reason to believe me), White can make progress by gaining space on the queenside, evt. make use of the open a-file (after axb4; axb4) and/or prepare c4-c5. I don't see a good plan for Black. Like S_F wrote: "Black can only react to White's advances, and White does have targets all over the board." Hence my evaluation +=. Such evaluations cannot be made by computers (yet?).
So use your computers to analyse if you like (many of us do that here), but developing plans and evaluating positions remain your (our) task.
Even if you let your computers play 100 games in each variation, I will only shrug my shoulders. If you want to convince us, that Black's position is playable, show us a good plan for Black after 11.Nb1.

@ HgMan: of course. That is why I posted the game in the first place.

@S_F: I would say, that White must answer ...a4 with b3-b4. The weakness of that pawn a4 might be more important than its strength.
It is probably me, but I don't see White's advantage after 11.Nb1 a5 12.a3 Bc5 13.Nc3 a4 14.Rc1 0-0 15.Nd5 Qd8. Black now has a concrete plan: play the bishop to c6, take firm control of square e4 with ...f5. In the right circumstances Black may even attack with ...g5.
As you very well know, I am member of the Incurable Gambiteer's Association. After 14.Bxe5 Qxe5 15.Bf3 0-0 16.Bxb7 Rab8 17.Qf3 f5 18.Rfe1 f4 19.Bd5+ Kh8 20.exf4 Qxf4 21.Qxf4 Rxf4 I see active Black pieces and three weak White pawns.
I don't find 14.Ne4 convincing either. Black plays ...Bb6, 15...0-0 and again ...Bc6 and ...f5.
Fritz wants Whtie to play 14.b4 here. While I find this move counterintuitive, I have not found a road to equality. 14.b4 axb3 15.Qxb3 Bc6 16.Nd5 Qd8 17.Nb4 and now what? Black suffers from not having castled yet.

Udav18: You need to have the computers play several games in each line to be able to draw any conclusions at all about the lines in my opinion. The only way to accomplish that is if the engines can play against each other with you making moves on two computers. How do you match them against each other?

I just checked with Fritz, and it found a serious flaw in my second variation: 16.b4 is probably losing.

14.Rc1 threatening 15.Ne4 and 15.Bxe5.  14.Rc1 f5?! (probably more to the point than 14...0-0) creates weaknesses that can probably be exploited. 15.Nd5 Qd8 and now  not 16.b4?? ab3 17.Qb3 c6! -+ but 16.Bh4+ g6 17.Bf3!? leads to a very nice advantage for White.

Fritz doesn't even consider 14.Rc1 among its main choices.  It rather likes 14.Qc2 with similar ideas.  Also, in the Rc1 line, it recommends 14...0-0, but gives White a small advantage.  I think the advantage is rather bigger than Fritz does.  Black can only react to White's advances, and White does have targets all over the board.