After 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 c5 4.e5, will you play e6 as Black? if yes there is nothing wrong for White in this French-type position.

1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 c5 3.d5 will generally lead into the King's  Indian Saemisch/Benoni hybrid which are ok too for White. The most usual move order is 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0-0 6.Bg5 c5 7.d5.

These endless silly posts on the BDG always make me laugh !

     

CraigEvans wrote on 09/14/07 at 08:16:19:


Look who is talking! Craig Evans, someone who is more interested in analyzing everything ad infinitum, without the benefit of checking that theory in practice games! 'The BDG being something of a coward' is rank heresy -- on the contrary, it is no more ' "cowardly" ' than the King's Gambit, the Evans Gambit, the Scotch Gambit, or the Danish Gambit!

And these are gambits that Mr. Craig Evans plays! Dude, you need to realize that theory is *one* thing. *Practice* is another.

You would analyze everything, in the quiet of your cabinet, without a chess clock ticking away at your side, and an opponent sitting across you at the chess board. Then you say, "Eureka! I found the right move!"

Sorry, but it does not work like that.

For your information, I used to play the regular openings back in the 1980s.  It is just that I like playing original, unorthodox openings. What's so unorthodox about the Giuoco Piano, the Three Knights, the Ruy Lopez? Give me the Grob
(aka Kolibri, Spike, Althausen's Opening), the BDG, the Zilbermints Benoni, the Zilbermints Gambit... all interesting, original unorthodox openings.

That said, even regular openings have wild side-lines to them. I play these too from time to time.

As for your idea of ...Ba6 followed by ...Bxd3, well, it's feasible, but needs to be looked at in a game. I think in some lines, c3 - Bc2 is possible. Again, I'll have to look at the board before telling you my ideas.

5...c6 is played to avoid all the fun.

Not to worry, there are plenty of ways to defeat those who play this move.

Gambit wrote on 09/13/07 at 19:46:23:


I'll have a look at the 7.Bd3 lines when I get home, before I comment. As I recall I thought this bishop retreat was weaker still now black has started his queenside counterplay, and ideas of ...b4 and ...Ba6 to swap off the bishop came in - still, off the top of my head I won't go into a debate.

Secondly... *takes a deep breath*... Please Lev, read this next sentence carefully; don't ignore any of the words I use, every one is required:

I am not afraid to play other defences; I play 5...c6 because it is strong, not because I'm scared/afraid/a coward.

In fact, I would offer the theory that you, Lev, are the coward. You are afraid to fight in the main battlegrounds of chess, where other people can draw on their practical experience and knowledge. So, you lead them down a dimly-lit side-street, one you've walked hundreds of times but the poor would-be-victim has never noticed. The BDGer could almost be looked at as more of a coward. 5...c6 is just a good move.

So, you're a coward eh Lev?

CraigEvans wrote on 09/13/07 at 17:31:15:


4.f3 is called Milner Barry gambit, because Philip Stuart showed up with this idea around 1930. 4.Bc4 is called the Von Hennig Gambit, because Heinrich already played it in Goteborg 1920 - a long time before Diemer decided to conquer the world with his gambit iso with more violent means. Let alone that anybody knew who Ziegler was (I still don't know).

As far as I know Martin only investigates 7.Ne5, which has been know as good for Black at least for 25 years. He neglects the Alchemy Attack 7.Ng5.

There are quite a few threads on the Von Hennig Gambit; all came to the conclusion that White has not enough. There is no need to go over this stuff again, unless LDZ presents us with something original after 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.f3 exf3 6.Nxf3 Bf5 7.Ne5 (iirc he prefers this to 7.Ng5) e6 =+ at least.
If 6...b5 7.Bd3 is that good for White (which I doubt) I propose a little change in move order: 5...b5 6.Bb3 and only now exf3. In case of the BDG we get 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 (well, c6) 3.Nc3 Nf6 (uhh, c6) 4.f3 c6 5.Bc4 (5.fxe4 e5) b5.
Regarding 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 Nf6 6.Bd3 I propose g6 iso giving up the pair of bishops with Bg4 7.h3 Bxf3. Both moves might be good though.
Finally there seems to be a little problem with language. In BDG world the word cowardly does not mean the opposite of brave. It means something like favouring Black. Please make a note in your (chess)dictionary.

Instead of 6 Bb3?, White should play 6 Bd3!, when Black does not have a target anymore. That's first.

Secondly, if you are pro-gambit, Craig, you should not be afraid to play other defenses than 5...c6. What's wrong with the Bogoljubow, the Euwe, the Teichmann, the 5...Bf5 - Gunderam?

Well, it is the the yellow chicken line, of course. That said, there are ways to defeat this line, which only someone who is afraid of open positions would play.

After 5...c6, I would recommend 6 Bc4. Now if 6...Bg4? then 7 Bxf7! (or even 7 Ne5!) Kxf7 8 Ne5+ Kg8  9 Qxg4. You would be surprised how many people fall for this trap.

6 Bc4 Bf5 7 Ne5 e6 8 00

Gambit wrote on 09/13/07 at 08:42:45:


the Ziegler Defence is a tough nut to crack. I have played it myself in fixed openings tournaments. I may post some analysis later. thanks for telling what line is given.