It looks like 4...c5 5.d5 leads to a reversed Albin Counter-Gambit with the extra move f3 for White. The Albin Counter-Gambit, while a decent practical try, is not completely sound for Black, so I find it hard to see how the extra move f3 would favour White in the long-term (he is sacrificing a pawn for faster development, which is not so relevant once Black gets his pieces out).

Returning to concrete variations: 5...ef3 6.Nf3 a6 (a3 is a common move for White in the Albin; I have suggested 6...g6 in a previous post, while 6...Nbd7 also seems at least equal for Black by analogy to the Albin) 7.Bg5 and instead of 7...e6, which is playable but probably not best (8.Qe2 h6 9.Bh4 and with 0-0-0 coming White has some compensation, but 9...Be7 is critical), 7...b5 is stronger.

For example, 7...b5 8.Bf6 (otherwise the d5-pawn is in danger) 8...ef6 (even 8...gf6 is possible, intending ...f5 and ...Bg7, but taking with the e-pawn is stronger) 9.Bd3 Bd6 and ...0-0, when I don't see White's compensation.

7.a4 is an alternative, but then 7...Nbd7! seems better for Black (7...e6 8.Bc4 is not so clear, but possibly still favourable for Black). 8.Bg5 h6! is obviously better for Black, which leaves 8.Bc4 Nb6 9.Ba2 e6 when Black is up a pawn for nebulous compensation.

Conclusion: 4...c5 seems like a good antidote to the BDG. 5.d5 ef3 6.Qf3 is possible, but I doubt that it would hold up to close scrutiny.

Matemax wrote on 02/06/08 at 11:35:00:



You claim a truth appears using a fake quote?
Convincing.

ArKheiN wrote on 02/06/08 at 07:43:23:



Please, read it again, and focus.
It´s only one sentence. I´m sure you can pick out subject and object in that.

The game is in my BDG-file, collected from everywhere and exchanged with people all over the planet during the past decade. I havn´t bought anything, so I can´t check if it´s in a commercial base or not, but someone else might have.

ArKheiN wrote on 02/04/08 at 12:53:29:

I was looking at this ending and think I have found a plan that is winning for Black involving putting the king on e6, rooks on c7 and d7, and gradually advancing the queenside majority. However, it seems that White may have been taking too many risks to win here, as 17 exf6 Bd6+ 18 Kg1 Qxh3 19 Qxe6+ will lead to a draw as White will capture one of the black minor pieces and Black will have no choice but to check on g3 and h3.
So the line is a draw unless I have missed something?

Iam new in the FIDE rated list, I will get 2100+ in april's rating, but Iam still young and improving. In fact, with Black I play "normal theory" and as White I played long time 1.e4 and normal theory, then I stopped to play competition for 3 years but at the same moment I began to study the BDG and to play it on corr. I restarted to play OTB last year.

To DoubledPawns, yes, 4..c5 is not played that much but this is a good move, Black can fight for an advantage in this line. I don't know what is the objectively best move for White but I play 5.d5. When you say that the c1 bishop is blocked, it can still be useful on c4,  and Black side can't developp very freely too.

You strike me as being a talented tactician and diligent analyst, Arkhein. However, I can't help thinking that your belief in White's equal chances after best play in the BDG is incompatible with a true chess understanding. Please don't take this a personal attack, I know that no one here (I the least of all) has come up with a definitive refutation of the gambit, and I'm sure you manage to get good results with it OTB and even in correspondance, but it seems to me that all the work you put into maintaining the thing above water must detract your attention from openings that are strategically infinitely richer. Anyway, just curious, what is your rating ?

wey hey.
Carl v Arkhein about BDG.
Two bald men fighting over a comb.

Would suggest pistols at dawn, but if accuracy is carried over from chess to shooting,  both would still be there past dusk.

Actually, appearances can be deceiving. Warzecha and I did indeed play that game in 1996 by correspondence; however, the game lasted a bit more than 12 moves shown here. Then Warzecha broke off our game, at which I claimed the win.

Here is my game against Bernhard Theis, never before published, with the same line:

Theis - Zilbermints
10 moves/30 days
Correspondence 1996

1 d4 d5 2 e4 de4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 ef3 5 Nxf3 e5 6 dxe5 Qxd1 7 Nxd1 Ne4
8 Bd3 Nc5 9 Resigns

Here Theis resigned the game and withdrew from the tournament.

Helmut Bliss - Zilbermints, correspondence 1996 continued (moves 1-5 same) 6 Nxe5 Bd6 7 Bd3 00 8 Bg5 Be7 9 Bc4 Be6  10 Bxe6 fxe6
and here Bliss stopped responding.

So... 0-1.

Another game from the 1996 correspondence tournament, 

Kurt Stummer - Zilbermints continued:

5 Nxf3 e5 6 Nxe5 Bd6  7 Bg5 00 8 Be2 Be7  9 Bc4 Nbd7  0-1.

Here Kurt's responses stopped. I mailed him a repeat on 6 June 1996. Thirteen days later, on 19 June 1996, I received his resignation in the mail. These games were played by regular mail, not email! 

Later, after searching my papers, I'll post the complete gamescore against Helmut Warzecha. Actually, I won that game, not Warzecha!