MNb wrote on 11/06/08 at 02:17:03:


I was always taught to conquer my fears, not run from them.  Which is what led me to register here and ask minds more familiar with the subject than my own for advice.

But back on subject, I've played 20 games since my last post with the aforementioned line of...

1)d4...Nf6, 2)Bg5...Ne4, 3)Bf4...e5?!

Half of the games played with 4)dxe5 and half played with 4)Bxe5

Most players 1900-2000 become extremely aggressive with 4)dxe5 while with 4)Bxe5 most often led to a slower, more tactical game (after either 4)...d6 or 4)...Nc6)

Thoughts?

Dante88 wrote on 11/05/08 at 05:24:39:

Then play 1.a4.

I have played the Trompowsky with White, buying into all the "easy", "non-theoretical", "attacking", "suprising" etc. sales pitches over the years. But now having discovered (!) that 2.c4 is also a good move, I play the Tromp less and less.

Anyone who says the Tromp is easy for White is simply lying, probably to sell you something. Any opening that commits you to giving up the bishop pair early and/or delaying development for several moves (the two most common concessions White has to make in the Tromp) requires good strategic understanding. If I want to take the Tromp seriously again, I will do it the hard way: Sit down with a bunch of Julian Hodgson games, Peter Wells' book and the games annotated here on ChessPublishing and make a serious study of the key positional concepts: Playing against the bishop pair, advantages and disadvantages of doubled pawns, how to play with delayed development and so on.

For Black I recommend either 2...e6 (solid, but long-term winning chances with the bishop pair) or 2...c5 (more immediately challenging, and suprisingly rarely played on amateur level). For 2...e6 you can start from the following article by Andrew Martin: http://www.jeremysilman.com/chess_bits_pieces/091203_trashing_tromp.html

Note that Martin later switched sides (a favorite trick of prolific chess writers ). On his DVD "The Trompowsky - The Easy Way"  he studied Igor Miladinovic's handling of the Torre (2...e6 3.Nf3) so 2...e6 players on amateur level should pay special attention to Miladinovic's games and have an answer ready.

I've experimented with early ...e5 gambits myself, but here I don't see much for Black after 4.Bxe5 Nc6 5.Bg3 (to stop it being hit by ...g5 and ...Bg7) e.g. 5...d5 6.Nf3 Bf5 7.c3 (cutting out ...Nb4 ideas).  Black has scant compensation for a pawn.

A good alternative is 4.dxe5.  It doubles the pawns but also reduces Black's gain in development.  The resulting position is like a Budapest Fajorowicz but with White having played Bc1-f4 rather than c2-c4, which should definitely be to White's advantage (bearing in mind that it's the weaknesses that c2-c4 creates that make the "Faj" viable)

Simply play something Slavlike 3. c4, c6. 4. e3, Bf5 (4. bf6:, e6). Easy & solid.

Quote:


What do you intend to play after 3.e3 ? Only after 3...c5 I take on f6.

I dare say that 1. d4 Nf6 2. Bg5 d5 "=+" fails the plausibility test, and that it should in fact be ...wait for it ... "=".