My remark was not directed at the position after 4...Bb4. 

kylemeister wrote on 10/28/08 at 17:39:50:


Nice, but not entirely true. After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.Bb5 Nd4 5.Nxd4 exd4 6.e5 even stronger players will find it very hard to beat an ELO-2000 player. Having that said I agree with Markovich. If the Petrov is your cup of tea, by all means play it. It's not mine.

I remember a great Raetsky quote on this topic:

"Emotional players are scared off by the symmetrical trend in the Petroff Defence; they are afraid of the drawish aspirations of weaker opponents who play White.  But what can be more symmetrical than the initial position in chess...? A more skilful strategic player triumps in the Petroff Defence regardless of the colour of his pieces and the position's symmetry."

I would add that you don't accept draw offers but continue to play the game until the bitter end, its remarkable how many points you can pick up in the endgame against weaker opposition.  Especially, if your repertoire allows you to reach your "typical endgames" frequently.

the main thing is black wants to play aggressive, white has ways to make it more drawish.  The petroff can be very sharp, but white often choose more dry positions.

It seems to me that 2...Nf6 is just another way to play 1...e5, neither significantly better nor significantly worse than 2...Nc6.  Frankly I think it has a lot to recommend it, since it obviates the Spanish, the Italian and the Scotch, White's three most challenging systems.

It may be that among strong players, it's more difficult to score the full point with 2...Nf6, but I doubt that that applies at 2100 or below, or possibly even higher.  It's a game of chess, you know?  

There is so much opinion on this board that this system or that system is boring or drawish.  When I hear that I wonder, are these people chess players?  If he understands the position well enough and there is any play at all, any given amateur will have good chances of beating an opponent of equal strength, let alone a worse one.  So go ahead and play 2...Nf6 if that's your cup of tea, and don't worry about anything but understanding the positions that result from it.

By the same token, I don't know why anyone below 2100 or so ever gives a draw, since the probability that one's opponent will make an absolutely terrible move is far from trivial.

Just play 1...e5 as usual and then try 2...Nc6 instead- after 3.Bc4 you have the Two Knights (3...Nf6), in the Scotch (3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4) you have 4...Nf6 and 4...Bc5, and against the Lopez (3.Bb5) you don't have to go into the Closed mainline- you could try the Classical, Deferred Steinitz, Moller/Archangel, Open (if White allows it), all of which are perfectly sound and, while insufficient for full equality, give counterchances.  Against the exchange Ruy, 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0-0 Qf6!? has recently been getting positive attention.

There are various gambits at White's disposal (King's, Danish, Goring, Belgrade etc) which can be dangerous, but all of them offer Black as many winning chances as White.

Quote:

This is certainly the choice of lower rated players than you or of someone trying to get a cheap draw with White - knowing that you should certainly go for 1...c5! against these opponents.