an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 11/22/24 at 22:00:43:


Modern engines recommend 6...Ngxe5 winning for black. I have been playing 6..d5 in 43 online games between 2008 and 2023 which shows that I am playing too much blitz and should better redo the analysis of those old lines.
See also my blogpost of August 2024 https://schaken-brabo.blogspot.com/2024/08/statistiek-deel-2.html

Just out : Arne Moll The Center (sic) Game, from New In Chess. 

The author ran a thematic blitz tournament to launch the book.
https://www.newinchess.com/blog/post/gm-friso-nijboer-wins-center-game-thematic-...

There is one game linked there. I am curious about the statistics from the tournament -- does anyone know of a link? It wouldn't surprise me if black scored better than white, since that was the result ages ago when I played a thematic white/black blitz match with this opening against an FM (now IM). I like the format where each pairing sees the players swap colors, since it's a fairer test of the opening. In serious play my white record after 3.Qxd4 is 3 wins, 1 draw, 0 losses, for a +150 Elo performance. But the draw was the last game, and it was pretty tedious, so never again. For the record, what I was aiming for was: 

1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.Qxd4 Nc6 4.Qe3 Nf6 5.e5?! Ng4 6.Qe4 d5 7.exd6+ Be6 8.Be2! 
(I saw this in a letter to Larry Evans in Chess Life & Review back in the day.) 
8...Nf6 9.dxc7 Qxc7 10.Qa4. 

after 10.Qa4. White has a pawn, but will he live to enjoy it?

And one of the serious wins was in fact from this position. I didn't have an engine at the time, but later (dismal) blitz tests, plus my own analysis, pretty much convinced me that black is better here. Still, I thought it remained a good surprise weapon for a resourceful defender, but the dull draw in a non-critical line convinced me otherwise. Fortunately, in the classical openings no analytic effort is wasted. Thus in serious games my black record after 3.Qxd4 is 3 wins, 0 draws, 0 losses, for a +140 Elo performance.

Jack Rudd wrote on 09/13/08 at 00:51:13:



8.Qf4 is a nice try, at least for blitz. (But who plays classical time controle OTB these days anyway?)  Nepomniachtchi played it a couple of times, albeit without great succes.

Carlsen also beat Tang with it in bullet, with the nice trick 8.Qf4  Bxc3 9.Bxc3 Nxe4? 10.Bc4 Nxc3? 11.Bxf7+ Kh8 12.Bxe8 ( threatening Qf8 mate!) Nxa2+ 13.Kb1 Qxe8 14.Kxa2. 

Black can improve with 10..Nf6, which is probably objectively balanced, but black still has to take extreme care, for example after 11.Nf3 d6 12.Ng5 Be6 13.Nxe6 fxe6 14.Rhe1 d5 15.Qg5 a6? ( Kh8  the only move, but black has to see what's coming to consider it) 16.Rxe6! Rxe6 17. Bxd5 is winning, like i had the pleasure of executing myself once.

However, still better is 9.Bxc3 Rxe4! 10.Qg3 d6!  =+ (After 10..d5 11.f3 Re8 (11..Re6 (Anand) 12.Ne2 Rd6 13.Nd4 Nxd4 14.Bxd4 Bf5 15.h4 Rc8 16.Qf4 with compensation) 12. Ne2 Bf5 (12..a5!? 13.Nf4? ( better a3 which is about equal)Nb4 14.Kb1 Bf5-/+ Nepomniachtchi-Carlsen )13.Nf4 d4! (13..Bg6 14.Bxf6 Qxf6 15.Nxd5 Qf5 16.Rd2 Rac8 17.Bc4 +=) 14.Bb5 Qd6 15.Bxc6 Qxc6 16.Rxd4 Re3 17.Nd3 Rae8 18.Nb4 Qb6 19.Nd5 Nxd5 20.Rxd5 Bg6 21.Rhd1 is approximately level)

11.f3 Re8  12.Ne2 Ne5 13.Nf4 Bf5 14.h4 Qd7  when white's compensation is probably not quite sufficient.

However, since 95% of my opponents play Nxe4  like Tang instead, this line gives me a huge score in blitz. 

Wouldnt recommend it for correspondence play though...

@micawber: Unfortunately I don't think white can solve his problems, just that 11.f4 might be his best try. Anyway, the variations you give appear convincing to me.

Considering your suggestion 11.f4 d5 12.Bd3 Bh4 13.Qf3 Re8 14.Ne2, 

I think white has insufficient compensation after 14. ... d4!? 15.Be4 Be6 16.Be1 Be1: 17.Rhe1: Ba2: 18.Nd4: Nd4: 19.Rd4: Qf6 20.Red1 c6.

Alternatively there is 18.Bc6: bc6: 19.Nd4 Qf6 20.Re8: Re8: 21.Qc6: Qf4:+, when black is also better, but with his strong knight on d4 white can hope to hold.

Perhaps also 14.Nd4: Nd4 15.cd4: Qd4: 16.Bc3 Qc5 17.Bc2 is interesting.

Rybka likes 14. ... a5!? best, although I think that white has some counterplay after 15.Be1!?

In any case, I fear that the whole position is just worse for white and he has to play very inventively to make a draw!   
One of the basic problems is that black's kingside has no weaknesses, while on the white queenside there is already a 'hook' on c3.

Hey Jack,

in the database I have seen that you took up my suggestion 11.f4 and played 2 games with it! What do you think of the move?

I have heard that 11.f4 was also a recommendation of Buecker, but can't say anything about it as in the original Centre Game article in Kaissiber 7 there is no mention of it.

@cheesemate:

Sorry for the mix-up in my line two:

6...Ngxe5 7.f4 d5 8.Qe2 Bg4 9.Nf3,Bc5 10.h3

What I did have in mind was.
10.h3,
10....., Bxf3  (Although cheesemate's 10...0-0 11.hxg,Nxg 12.Ne5,Nxe5 is interesting as well)
11.gxf3,0-0
12.fxe5,Nxe5




With the intentions:
13.Kd1, Re8  or 13.f4,Nc4 14.Kd1,Re8 (or 14...Qd6)
It is quite difficult for white to bring out his Q-side pieces.
(13.Bd2,Nc4-+; 13.Nc3,Qh4 14.Kd1,Rfe8 -/+ [followed by Nc4/Nf3] 13.Nbd2,Re8 -/+;13.b3?,Qh4 14.Kd1,Qd4-+)

micawber wrote on 10/12/08 at 09:24:11:




Thanks for the quick answers mirawber,
they are impressive.
I think it’s time to write an article „At the sickbed of the Center Game“ resembling the comparable article on the King’s Gambit, Spielmann (if I am not erring) once wrote. I feal that there is a tremondous amount of concrete analysis that crack down older and now as superficial detected analysis. In my first post I emphasized my overall feeling on the Center Game as being not reliable enough. Mirawbers ideas strengthen this feeling. The CG basically breaks several rules of opening play and that in an open position: do not move the queen to early, do not move a peace twice or at least not to often. Yes, these are only rules of thumb but they apply especially good to open games.
Mirwaber is right with 7...d5 as a sensible answer to remedy 3 cause it ripps open the center an thus stopps this idea right in the tracks. The only sensible – and whimpy - continuation seems to be 8.0-0-0 (to get away with the king) 8...Bd6 9.Qd3 (the queen restlessly stumbles around – I refer to my words introducing remedy 7) 9...dxe4 10.Nxe4 Bf5 11.Nxf6+ Qxf6 an Black is better.
mirawbers blow to remedy 5 (5.e5 Ng4 6.Qe4) 6...Ngxe5 was given a „?“ in Bilguer 1916/1922 (according to Stefan Bücker in Kaissiber 7/1998 who didn’t deal with it beyond 7.f4 d5 8.Qe2 Bg4 9.Nf3 which is mirawbers line 2 an seems best.mirawer continues with 9...Bc5 10.h3 but now has a typo (10...Nxe5 as he gave is not possible) A may be to superficial analysis of mine goes 10...0-0 11.hxg4 Nxg4 12.Ne5 Nxe5 13.fxe5 Te8 14.Kd1 Nxe5 (I think mirawbers line will be the same). We have reached a slippery ground. Three pawns can be enough for piece or not (in a recent corr-game from another opening I had this ratio with the piece on my side and I won easiely. Yes, White’s army is still asleep while his king is yet on the road but there are no files open for heavy fire on him yet. May be with sensible defence White can hold his own emerging with a better endgame. One should never underestimate the defencive ressources. Defence is sadly enough a widely neglected field of chess, seemly because it is difficult to get a grip on it. Oftenly it is simply – but difficult to do – inverse tactics where one tries to find escapes and a single - and all to often well hidden - one suffices. I only know four books on that item and I am not sure whether they are usefull) Those who want to play remedy 5 – in the Netherlands the correspondence-player Etmans several times used to play like this at least in the 90ies – should analyse this in depth.
The others should head for remedy 6 (the riscy Halász-Gambit) if they are wild and willing, or to remedy 7 (Warschauer Angriff) if they like a solid game.
Conclusion: The acutal main lines are more than a bit under clouds today and that with absolutely normal play by Black: 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.Qxd4 Nc6 4.Qe3?! (4.Qa4!) 4...Nf6 5.Nc3?! (5.Bd2! as in remedy 4, 5.e5!? to ?!) 5...Bb4!? (Nb4!) 6.Bd2 0-0 7.0-0-0 (7.Qg3? - Bücker, 7...d5 – mirawber) 7...Re8 8.Qg3? (But what else? Most likely White should play 8.Bc4, the classical main line advocated once by Steinitz. Kaissiber 7/1998 gave a closer look – I havn’t got into it because I decided not to play the CG at all) 8...Nxe4 9.Nxe4 Rxe4 and White has problems as Rudd - Haslinger has shown.
Is the circle closed now? 

Roger Williamson wrote on 09/26/08 at 15:16:02:

Hmm, I thought that was the Mengarini Opening. Where does the name Surtees come from?