Latest Updates:
Normal Topic A marshall line that I think is refuted (Read 3493 times)
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10607
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: A marshall line that I think is refuted
Reply #4 - 02/19/07 at 20:17:39
Post Tools
As long as it is valid:

http://www.chesscafe.com/fromarchive/fromarchive.htm

Else

http://www.chesscafe.com/archives/archives.htm#The%20Kibitzer

Harding's the Kibitzer, May 1998.

There is also an article on the Marshall in feb 2007.

  

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
 
ANDREW BRETT
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 622
Joined: 07/07/06
Re: A marshall line that I think is refuted
Reply #3 - 02/19/07 at 17:52:19
Post Tools
An interesting post but i seem to reading about this about 8 years ago !

18 ...ba  is forced if you want to play the f5 idea as played by Nigel Short v Ivanchuk many moons ago.

Now if you have a refutation of 18.....Qh5 now that would be worth looking at - Black is fine IMHO.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: A marshall line that I think is refuted
Reply #2 - 02/19/07 at 15:58:51
Post Tools
IMJohnCox wrote on 02/19/07 at 12:24:04:
'Well-known theory', I think. Black has some transpositional method of side-stepping this and getting to the real debate round about move 25, I believe. Some expert may be along in a minute to tell what.


I am no Marshall expert, but I thought that 18...Qh5 was preferred these days.  But while we are discussing the Marshall, may I ask if anyone here can say say anything about the current appraisal of White's anti-Marshall ideas?
  

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


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1547
Location: London
Joined: 01/28/06
Gender: Male
Re: A marshall line that I think is refuted
Reply #1 - 02/19/07 at 12:24:04
Post Tools
'Well-known theory', I think. Black has some transpositional method of side-stepping this and getting to the real debate round about move 25, I believe. Some expert may be along in a minute to tell what.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
sssthepro
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 439
Joined: 12/16/06
A marshall line that I think is refuted
02/19/07 at 12:16:44
Post Tools
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 0-0 Be7 6 Re1 b5 7 Bb3 0-0 8 c3 d5 9 exd5 Nxd5 10 Nxe5 Nxe5 11 Rxe5 c6 12 d4 Bd6 13 Re1 Qh4 14 g3 Qh3 15 Be3 Bg4 16 Qd3 Rae8 17 Nd2 Re6 18 a4 f5 19.axb5!!

After this, I think white is winning, at least better. I found the variations on the internet, and they seem to hold. Any comments?

Oh yah, 19...f4 is refuted by 20.Bxf4! Black may be a piece up, but White crushes through on the queenside.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo