Latest Updates:
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Wilkes-Barre variation (Read 8644 times)
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #16 - 05/23/08 at 17:25:34
Post Tools
Here is a more complete set of links, that should keep Wilkes-Barre/Traxler fans busy for a while: Wink

Tim Harding
www.chesscafe.com/text/kibitz58.pdf

Maarten de Zeeuw (5 of the 6 cited articles from earlier posts)

http://www.newinchess.com/Yearbook/pdf/YB63_146.pdf
http://www.newinchess.com/Yearbook/pdf/YB65_137.pdf
http://www.newinchess.com/Yearbook/pdf/YB66_113.pdf
http://www.newinchess.com/Yearbook/pdf/YB67_130.pdf
http://www.newinchess.com/Yearbook/pdf/YB68_142.pdf

Stefan Bücker
The following articles comment upon and correct the series by
Maarten de Zeeuw

http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kaiss23.pdf
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kaiss24.pdf

Note that the last link contains an import correction over the first article by Stefan Bücker.
This correction was based on the discussion of the
articles by Maarten de Zeeuw on the following site by

John Jerz
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzesz4a6/current/id12.html
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
cheitan
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 4
Joined: 05/23/08
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #15 - 05/23/08 at 10:53:25
Post Tools
And here is the link:

http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kaiss23.pdf

In my first post I wasnt allowed to post links Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
cheitan
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 4
Joined: 05/23/08
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #14 - 05/23/08 at 10:52:11
Post Tools
TonyRo wrote on 03/31/08 at 20:56:20:
I'm curious about this line as well. What yearbook #'s are these? I have one of them, and it only covered Nf7 and Kf1, if my memory serves me correctly. I always thought the line 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 Bc5 5. Bf7 Ke7 6. Bb3 Rf8 7. d3 d6 8. Be3! was annoying. Pinski suggests 7...h6 but I never thought that this was very convincing for Black either.



Stefan Buecker suggests...

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 Bc5 5. Bxf7+ Ke7 6. Bb3 Rf8 7. d3 d6 8. Be3 Qe8

It not that funny tactical play as in 5.Nxf7, but IMHO Black seems to be okay.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
YaBB Moderator
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1364
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #13 - 05/06/08 at 23:10:21
Post Tools
I have taken a personal interest in the Traxler for quite sometime now. I find the lines given by Alexander Beliavksky in the two knights defence to be quite sound. The problem is that if your attack ever does windle... well white has the material to follow up a win.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
condor
Junior Member
**
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 63
Location: Norwich
Joined: 08/13/05
Gender: Male
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #12 - 04/15/08 at 16:51:57
Post Tools
TonyRo wrote on 03/31/08 at 20:56:20:
I'm curious about this line as well. What yearbook #'s are these? I have one of them, and it only covered Nf7 and Kf1, if my memory serves me correctly. I always thought the line 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 Bc5 5. Bf7 Ke7 6. Bb3 Rf8 7. d3 d6 8. Be3! was annoying. Pinski suggests 7...h6 but I never thought that this was very convincing for Black either.


Play 6...d6 straight away, inviting the trap 7 Nf7? Qf8; it is much stronger. I think 6 Bb3 is worse than Bd5 because white cannot swap on c6, although Bd5 is ultimately better for black as well.

I think the Traxler is the perfect opening, an endless tactical mindfield where black always manages to punish whites greed. I miss playing it.

There are too few themed tournaments and far too many safe players playing safe, boring openings, more concerned about their grade, tournament record or petty personal satisfaction than discovering new lands.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4646
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #11 - 04/03/08 at 01:35:52
Post Tools
Murray Chandler?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
flaviddude
Senior Member
****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 329
Location: Australia
Joined: 01/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #10 - 04/03/08 at 01:01:47
Post Tools
edgy wrote on 04/02/08 at 20:31:52:
Fernando Semprun wrote on 04/01/08 at 11:20:47:
edgy wrote on 04/01/08 at 02:53:44:
Matemax wrote on 03/30/08 at 06:54:59:
Anyway its a tactical minefield - is it really suiting for someone rated 1200?


Absolutely yes!  Back when I was a 1300 player (about 12 years old), I spent a summer studying the Nxf7 lines of the Wilkes-Barre.  (I was forced indoors all summer, recovering from an accident.)  I wasn't looking at theory so much as just analyzing on my own, trying to find the mates and the perps and the lines where all the material comes back.

When I started playing tournaments again, my rating leapt to 1800.  I didn't even play the variation more than a couple of times.  It's a tactical education.



Absolutely NOT. As your words imply, you were a lot stronger than 1200... Smiley


I was a lot stronger only after studying the variation, in fact because I studied it. 

So again, absolutely YES.  Fastest way for a weak player to improve is to thrpw himself into analysing a sharp attacking line like the Wilkes-Barre.  (Keeping the computer off, please!)



Many years ago there was a junior in New Zealand whose positional sense was much greater than his tactical ability (always a sign of a potentially very strong player). So for about eighteen months he played the Polugaevesky line in the Sicilian Nadjorf. Did he become a Grandmaster? Did he ever.   
  

I am hopelessly addicted to the King's Gambit
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
edgy
Junior Member
**
Offline


lacking the master touch

Posts: 77
Location: New York
Joined: 08/09/04
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #9 - 04/02/08 at 20:31:52
Post Tools
Fernando Semprun wrote on 04/01/08 at 11:20:47:
edgy wrote on 04/01/08 at 02:53:44:
Matemax wrote on 03/30/08 at 06:54:59:
Anyway its a tactical minefield - is it really suiting for someone rated 1200?


Absolutely yes!  Back when I was a 1300 player (about 12 years old), I spent a summer studying the Nxf7 lines of the Wilkes-Barre.  (I was forced indoors all summer, recovering from an accident.)  I wasn't looking at theory so much as just analyzing on my own, trying to find the mates and the perps and the lines where all the material comes back.

When I started playing tournaments again, my rating leapt to 1800.  I didn't even play the variation more than a couple of times.  It's a tactical education.



Absolutely NOT. As your words imply, you were a lot stronger than 1200... Smiley


I was a lot stronger only after studying the variation, in fact because I studied it. 

So again, absolutely YES.  Fastest way for a weak player to improve is to thrpw himself into analysing a sharp attacking line like the Wilkes-Barre.  (Keeping the computer off, please!)

  

Caissa have mercy on a miserable patzer: http://altergoniff.blogspot.com
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #8 - 04/01/08 at 12:27:51
Post Tools
I also, as a teenager, used the Traxler as a tactical tooth-cutter.  I remember spending long hours at my desk, or at a little table in the garden, analyzing it and taking notes.  I did the same with the Belgrade.  I was probably about 1600 at the time, and I am sure that all that analysis improved my chess.  Nothing special about the Traxler or the Belgrade, of course, but those were easy and attactive paths into complications.  The first time I defeated a master, it was with one of my prepared lines in the Belgrade.

I would be hesitant before I would recommend the Traxler to a player at the 1200 level, and I do not recommend it to my young students, many of whom are under 1000.  At that level piece coordination doesn't come easy, and you can't conduct a mating attack without it.

The first improvements a player makes in chess have nothing to do with sacrificing material for initiative or attack, but just with activating the pieces and recognizing tactics sufficiently well to be able to hold onto his peices and perhaps win some of the opponents, then persevere in the ending.  You can win a lot of chess games even if the only mating "attacks" you understand are K+Q vs. K, or K+R vs. K.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Fernando Semprun
Senior Member
****
Offline


Be nice to others. Life
is to be enjoyed!

Posts: 402
Location: Madrid
Joined: 04/29/03
Gender: Male
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #7 - 04/01/08 at 11:20:47
Post Tools
edgy wrote on 04/01/08 at 02:53:44:
Matemax wrote on 03/30/08 at 06:54:59:
Anyway its a tactical minefield - is it really suiting for someone rated 1200?


Absolutely yes!  Back when I was a 1300 player (about 12 years old), I spent a summer studying the Nxf7 lines of the Wilkes-Barre.  (I was forced indoors all summer, recovering from an accident.)  I wasn't looking at theory so much as just analyzing on my own, trying to find the mates and the perps and the lines where all the material comes back.

When I started playing tournaments again, my rating leapt to 1800.  I didn't even play the variation more than a couple of times.  It's a tactical education.



Absolutely NOT. As your words imply, you were a lot stronger than 1200... Smiley
  

Fernando Semprun
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Matemax
God Member
*****
Offline


Chesspub gives you strength!

Posts: 1302
Joined: 11/04/07
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #6 - 04/01/08 at 11:04:00
Post Tools
Quote:
I'm curious about this line as well. What yearbook #'s are these? I

Yearbook 63
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 Bc5  (Another look at the traxler gambit (1)-  p. 146)

Yearbook 65
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 Bc5 5. Bf7 Ke7 6. Bd5 (Another look at the traxler gambit (2): 5. Bf7 Ke7 6. Bd5 - p. 137)

Yearbook 66
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 Bc5 5. Bf7 Ke7 6. Bb3 (Another look at the traxler gambit (3): 5. Bf7 Ke7 6. Bb3 - p. 113)

Yearbook 67
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 Bc5 5. Nf7 Bf2 6. Kf2  (Another look at the traxler gambit (4): 5. Nf7 Bf2 6. Kf2 - p. 130)

Yearbook 68
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 Bc5 5. Nf7 Bf2 6. Kf1! (Another look at the traxler gambit (5): 5. Nf7 Bf2 6. Kf1 - p. 142)


Yearbook 70
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 Bc5 5. Nf7 Bf2 6. Kf1 Qe7 8. Nh8 d5 (Its hard to kill the traxler gambit - p. 136)

Quote:
Anyway I think it is a good way to get "advanced beginners" into tactics.

Yes - I think thats the way to describe it. Maybe I just underestimated 1200 as too much beginners, sorry guys  Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Willempie
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 4312
Location: Holland
Joined: 01/07/05
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #5 - 04/01/08 at 07:16:54
Post Tools
Matemax wrote on 03/30/08 at 06:54:59:
Quote:
What is the theoretical status of this variation?

There have been several article in Yearbook the last years - "Another look at the Traxler Gambit" 5 parts trying to find a refutation. Afterwards some corr. players did an article "Its hard to kill the Traxler Gambit" where they tried to show its still alive and kicking.

Anyway its a tactical minefield - is it really suiting for someone rated 1200?

Well in the foreword of the book by Estrin on the Traxler, Petrosjan(how's that from a defensive player) says the TKD is very good for beginners because it is all about tactics.
Anyway I think it is a good way to get "advanced beginners" into tactics. After all it is prolly not the opening which will decide a game and then tactics from the start may be a good option.
  

If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
edgy
Junior Member
**
Offline


lacking the master touch

Posts: 77
Location: New York
Joined: 08/09/04
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #4 - 04/01/08 at 02:53:44
Post Tools
Matemax wrote on 03/30/08 at 06:54:59:
Anyway its a tactical minefield - is it really suiting for someone rated 1200?


Absolutely yes!  Back when I was a 1300 player (about 12 years old), I spent a summer studying the Nxf7 lines of the Wilkes-Barre.  (I was forced indoors all summer, recovering from an accident.)  I wasn't looking at theory so much as just analyzing on my own, trying to find the mates and the perps and the lines where all the material comes back.

When I started playing tournaments again, my rating leapt to 1800.  I didn't even play the variation more than a couple of times.  It's a tactical education.
  

Caissa have mercy on a miserable patzer: http://altergoniff.blogspot.com
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
TonyRo
God Member
*****
Offline


I'm gonna crack your skull!

Posts: 1772
Location: Cleveland, OH
Joined: 11/26/07
Gender: Male
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #3 - 03/31/08 at 20:56:20
Post Tools
I'm curious about this line as well. What yearbook #'s are these? I have one of them, and it only covered Nf7 and Kf1, if my memory serves me correctly. I always thought the line 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 Bc5 5. Bf7 Ke7 6. Bb3 Rf8 7. d3 d6 8. Be3! was annoying. Pinski suggests 7...h6 but I never thought that this was very convincing for Black either.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
flaviddude
Senior Member
****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 329
Location: Australia
Joined: 01/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #2 - 03/30/08 at 09:08:36
Post Tools
Matemax wrote on 03/30/08 at 06:54:59:
Quote:
What is the theoretical status of this variation?

There have been several article in Yearbook the last years - "Another look at the Traxler Gambit" 5 parts trying to find a refutation. Afterwards some corr. players did an article "Its hard to kill the Traxler Gambit" where they tried to show its still alive and kicking.

Anyway its a tactical minefield - is it really suiting for someone rated 1200?


1200 players usually can attack comparatively well, but do not have much positional understanding, endgame ability or defensive skills.
A line where they have a big initiative and know the theory is likely to give them better results than more normal lines. I played through one of my mates games with him on Friday night. Just when he had messed up a position totally his opponent overlooked a knight fork.
  

I am hopelessly addicted to the King's Gambit
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Matemax
God Member
*****
Offline


Chesspub gives you strength!

Posts: 1302
Joined: 11/04/07
Re: Wilkes-Barre variation
Reply #1 - 03/30/08 at 06:54:59
Post Tools
Quote:
What is the theoretical status of this variation?

There have been several article in Yearbook the last years - "Another look at the Traxler Gambit" 5 parts trying to find a refutation. Afterwards some corr. players did an article "Its hard to kill the Traxler Gambit" where they tried to show its still alive and kicking.

Anyway its a tactical minefield - is it really suiting for someone rated 1200?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
flaviddude
Senior Member
****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 329
Location: Australia
Joined: 01/12/04
Gender: Male
Wilkes-Barre variation
03/29/08 at 13:47:06
Post Tools
During the weekend I passed on to a 1200 rating player some stuff on the wilkes-Barre variation. At his level of ability I believe that it will be easier for him to play than the main line of the Two Knights. Also most of his opponents will never have seen it.

What is the theoretical status of this variation?
  

I am hopelessly addicted to the King's Gambit
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo