Markovich wrote on 05/29/07 at 13:17:32:
Pardon me for intruding with some thoughts about chess. The Danish fails rather simply in what has historically been regarded as its main line: 1. e4 e5 2. d4 exd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Bc4 cxb2 5. Bxb2 Nc6 6. Nf3 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Nf6 8. Qc2 0-0 9. 0-0-0 d6 10. e5 Nfg4. This used to be considered quite dangerous for Black, but it has been solved. White's main problem is that 11. Nd5 Bc5 12. h4 fails to 12...Ncxe5! and if the exchange occurs on d6, Black's queen rook leaps into decisive action on c8. That is my understanding, anyway. There are certainly other good ways of playing against the Danish, but if there is an outright refutation, this is certainly it.
On the other hand, if someone simply wants easy equality, it is much more clearly obtained by 3...d5 than by 3...Qe7. Everyone knows about 3...d5 4. exd5 Qxd5 5. cxd4 Nc6 6. Nf3 Bg4 7. Nc3 Bb4 8. Be2 Bxf3 9. Bxf3 Qc4 =.
On a purely theoretical level JN may be right that the Danish just throws two pawns away, but in any given practical setting, it is unlikely to be so simple. I only accept it in CC, never OTB.
The problem with the traditional Danish move-order is that Black is given so much leeway. For example he has 3...Qe7, not a bad move, not a new or necessarily winning one either, but annoying. If someone wants to play the Danish, and this could make sense especially for young and improving players, better start with the Goering move order and then offer the second pawn, as recommended by MnB. If you simply must play gambits, versus the Petroff, you can always play the Boden-Kieseritzky or even the Cochrane.
Theoretically the Danish is refuted by the variation Markovich gave indeed according to Müller/Voigt, though Markovich is a little imprecise:
1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Bc4 cxb2 5.Bxb2 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bb4+ 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Qc2 0-0 9.0-0-0 d6 10.e5 Nfg4 and now either 11.h4 Ncxe5 12.Ng5 g6 13.Nce4 c6 (Harding) or 11.Nd5 Bc5 12.exd6 cxd6 13.h4 Bxf2 (Firnhaber). See for details Müller/Voigt's book.
Markovich is also right, saying that this is too complicated and risky to try OTB.
But he is wrong, saying that the Göring move order is to be preferred. While this avoids 3...Qe7, it gives Black extra possibilities (especially the sharp 4...Nf6 5.e5 Ne4). It also denies White some options, especially 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 d5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.cxd4 Nc6 6.Be3. This is equal, but avoids the far less interesting 6.Nf3 Bb4+ (or Bg4 7.Be2 Bb4+ 8.Nc3) 7.Nc3 Bg4 8.Be2 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Qc4 10.Bxc6+ bxc6.
The simplest way to obtain equality, I have stated this several times, is 3...Ne7 (or 4...Nge7 against Göring's move order). The idea of course is to get an improved version of the Capablanca line. Everybody also knows, that a knight is a better blockading piece thant the queen. Where the Capablanca line (3...d5) gives White the choice between a complicated middle game (6.Be3) and a dead draw (6.Nf3), 3...Ne7 preserves winning chances for Black.
Above all Markovich forgets to mention the version Alekhine preferred: 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3. Black is theoretically OK, but not more than that. This is what I would recommend to youngsters etcetera. This way the Danish remains playable, despite of all fast food swallowing couch potatoes. In fact I would say, that their health might improve by playing the Danish more often.
It would get their adrenaline running faster.
Pages: 
Refutation of the Danish? (Read 21886 times)
