Strategy_Rules wrote on 05/25/07 at 10:56:59:


In theory a good version because you've got a close spanish with d3 instead of the more ambitious d4.
This line (ECO: C90) was considered innocent until these last years but now practice have shown that it's not so easy to equalize (you know chess is difficult )



Quote:

If you want to play this line you have to check the game Predojevic- Short  21 may 2007!
  5.0-0 0-0 6.a4 d6 7.Re1 Be6 8.Nbd2 probably stronger than 8.Be6 from a strategical point of view 8...Qd7 9.Nf1 a typical spanish's plan! Rae8 10.Ng3 a6 11.Bd2 control a5 and permit b4-b5 11...Nd8 and only now 12.Bxe6 Ne6 13.b4  White have space and a better bishop .....1-0 in 59 moves 
Thanks. [/quote]

I think you guys may already be beyond the books in terms of analyzing these lines, but for what it's worth and in case you're still wondering, I can tell you that Emms and Davies both recommend 4..Be7.

After 5.0-0 0-0, Davies looks at 6.Bb3 and 6.Re1.  He mentions 6.Nc3 in passing.  He doesn't cover any of White's other 6th move tries.  Emms's coverage is more comprehensive.  He spends 10 pages on 4.d3 Be7 and looks at virtually all of White's 6th move tries.  I'll try to give a summary of the main recommendations in both books.

After 6.Re1, both recommend 6..d6 7.a4 Kh8.

After 6.Bb3, Davies's main line is 6..d6 7.c3 Na5 8.Bc2 c5 9.Nbd2 Qc7 10.Re1 Be6 11.Nf1 Rad8, not hurrying to return the Na5 to c6.  Emms looks at both 6..d5 and 6..d6.  After 6..d6 he gives lines similar to Davies, but usually returns the Na5 to c6 at an earlier stage.   

Davies doesn't consider 6.c3 as a separate line.  Emms analyzes 6..d5!? and also notes that 6..d6 will transpose to the other lines after 7.Re1 or 7.Bb3 (which is probably why Davies doesn't consider 6.c3 separately).

Davies says that 6.Nc3 d6 7.a3 is well met by 7..Be6.  He stops there without giving any further analysis.  Emms calls 6.Nc3 a "rare continuation, but certainly not that bad."  He prefers 7..Nd7!?, but notes that 7..Be6 and 7..Bg4 look like worthwhile alternatives.  After 7..Nd7, he gives a game by Hebden.

Emms also looks briefly at 6.h3?! ("too slow") 6..d6 7.Re1 Na5!; 6.Nbd2 and 6.a4!? Davies doesn't consider these more minor alternatives.

Regards,
LeeRoth

Willempie wrote on 05/25/07 at 11:35:03:


Why not? Black plays like the Marshall Gambit (Ruy Lopez version), which is in excellent shape these days, but has not weakened his queenside.
After both 6.Nc3 and 6.Re1 I always found the plan ...Kh8 and ...f5 most interesting. As I am not typing at home at the moment, I don't have the exact move orders ready.

In answer to Strategy's question in the next post, I have copied a post of mine from this thread: http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1178282942

MNb wrote on 05/04/07 at 22:18:46:


In the meantime I have done some research at home. It appears, that this idea has never been played after 6.Nc3. Except by me of course, 20-25 years ago, but very understandably these games of the lowest thinkable levels have never made it to any database.  
I also appears, that Black has done very well with the plan ...Na5 against this Four-Knights setup. Indeed, if Black conquers the pair of bishops and is able to play ...d5, he must be somewhat better.
I also can add, that 4.d3 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.c3 d5! scores less than 50% for White. This confirms my impression, that Black has an improved version of the Marshall Gambit.

Willempie wrote on 05/25/07 at 11:51:41:


Oh, I don't know about this.  Not that many pieces have been exchanged, and the pawn structure is fluid.  I don't think this closed Italian stuff should be all that hard to win if you're very much the better player, or even if you're just somewhat the better player.

Strategy_Rules wrote on 05/25/07 at 11:44:49:

Something like Be3 or h3 or even just Nd5. That way you get very boring positions where black will have great difficulty in obtaining anything even if he is rated 300 points higher. In other words the game is equal, but there is not much chance of outplaying your opponent.

Dont have Davies' book, but 6.Nc3 is a very annoying option as well. I dont know the analysis from the book, but 6.c3 d5 is not as strong as some may think.