The Worrall is an interesting and brave choice for a book. I used to play this as a kid I think I saw it recommended by Leonard Barden! In those days avoiding the open was certainly a bonus, although these days I dont think the open variation is really something that should be avoided. 

The question really (in the over-all picture of things) is whether the Worrall positions are more interesting to play than the standard anti-Marshall stuff. I have no idea why it is not more fashionable, since the lines with d3 are very similar in tone to the Italian game quiet lines with d3 which all the GM´s are happy to play.

Only teasing. Besides judging from recent supertournaments the elite agree with you that Black basically can force an anti-Marshall with 7...00.

Educate me here; is there any variation Black is better positioned to meet if he starts with 7...d6 rather than 7.....00? Why would you ever prefer the former even if you're actually not going to play the Marshall?

Interesting Freudian slip suggesting that BLACK can force an Anti-Marshall!

ano wrote on 12/18/06 at 23:03:54:



Another excellent question, to which it is very hard to give a definitive answer. Ultimately it probably depends on one's point of view...

It is possible that, if we are talking in strict theoretical terms, then 5.0-0 may give slightly more chances for an advantage, given extensive theoretical knowledge and model play by both sides. So from that perspective, one might say it is the stronger move. But if we took that line of thinking to an (admittedly somewhat ridiculous) extreme, we could say that both moves should almost certainly lead to an eventual draw assuming perfect play by both sides, and so both moves are equal! Of course this kind of thinking would have little or no relevance to a practical game between 2800s, let alone the rest of us.

I prefer to think in more practical terms. A move like 5.Qe2 prevents the opponent from playing their own 'pet system', whatever that might be, and forces them to think for themselves at an early stage. Most of the time, for the majority of players, I believe that these benefits will more than compensate for any possible 'theoretical' drawback compared with 5.0-0.

So to summarise: from a theoretical perspective, 5.0-0 may ultimately be a marginally stronger choice. In real life, I believe that 5.Qe2 can more than hold its own for the reasons outlined.

OstapBender wrote on 12/17/06 at 17:23:51:



No offence taken whatsoever - I think this is an important question to ask of any author. I address this fully in the introduction, but the short answer is that yes, I do have a lot of experience on both sides of the Lopez, and especially as White.

I should mention, for the benefit of any particularly diligent researchers who wish to test this claim by searching for my Lopez games on Chessbase, that you will not find very many! You will have to take my word for it; I have played a lot of games over the years in events, such as (but not limited to) British weekend tournaments which never make it on to Chessbase. I hope that the book will 'feel' as though it has been written by a specialist, but readers will have to judge that for themselves.

In terms of the Worrall specifically, it is a different story - I had never played it before I began writing the book. I was beginning to think that maybe I would do well to convert to... or at least to include in my repertoire, a comparitive sideline instead of churning out the same old main line stuff in every game. So I researched it for the book, as well as with a view to playing it in my own games.

(so far I have had just a single opportunity to test it, against an FM a few months ago, and won the game)

Quote:


At the moment 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0-0 Qf6!? is doing quite well for Black and has become increasingly popular after the publication of Nigel Davies book advocating it. This line with 5...Qf6 has in general been poorly covered in the theory on the exchange variation.

Regarding the Worrall Attack, I gave this up around the same time as Tiviakov did. Nevertheless new books on the Ruy Lopez for White or Black are always welcome, and I think I will snap this one up when its released if only because the Worall Attack has recieved so little theoretical coverage in the past, not counting a couple of excellent surveys I think by Tiviakov himself in New In Chess yearbooks sometime back.

Seasons Greetings and good luck with book sales.

Topster

P.S:- Recently many authors especially the British ones come here to "SHAMELESSLY" plug their work, so you are not alone. Moreover, if the work is good your bravery will be rewarded ten fold but if its not?! .....well.....lets not go there. 

Yes, a lot of the ideas and manoeuvres are quite thematic for the Ruy Lopez generally. The c3/d4 idea is absolutely standard, but in the Worrall it is often supported by Rf1-d1 after castling, which could give Black an extra headache over the position of his queen opposite the rook. The Nbd2-f1-g3 manoeuvre is also frequently seen.
Another nice point is that in many lines where Black plays ...b5, the thematic a2-a4 thrust can obviously be much more effective with the queen already on e2.

To summarise, by playing the Worrall we are hoping to implement some familiar ideas, in slightly more favourable circumstances. Naturally, Black also has a few different options which may not have been available in the main line positions, but overall I think this system has a lot going for it.

Just one general question. I am not really familiar with the Worrall, but are the lines similar to the standard (closed) lines? Ie going for c3 and d4, plus the standard manouvres with Nb1-d2-f1-g3.