Gentlement--I got off on the wrong foot. For that I apologize. I am so certain my theories are correct e.g. when I saw 12...Be6 for the first time, I almost fainted it was so bad. Within a minute, using nothing but my theories, I came up with two winning plans for White 13.Nc3 and 13.Qf2. So if you think my theories have no value, just consider that I found two winning plans for White which I would have found in a blitz game, that were missed by two World Champions for decades!
Why does the Berliner Variation lose? Because Black is required to lose two tempos in development during the course of the attack i.e e4 and the maneuver Bg4/Be6. After 12...Be6, I never even looked at book, 13.fxe4 because it loses a tempo in the middle of the attack. However, 12...O-O doesn't gain a tempo here because White keeps his extra piece, and, 13.fxe4 Bxg3 14.Kd1 gains White what can be described as a latent tempo. Sooner or later, White is going to connect his Rooks, which means that the Bishop on g3 is hanging. The only way for Black not to lose time is to win a piece on the b8/h2 diagonal (but, of course, not on the e7 square) . Thus it is just a question of how to punish Black for this waste of time.
It took me half an hour to realize that White cannot allow a Knight in the 8...Ne6 (I should have known that this was superior to the Berliner Variation, because all of Black's moves gain time. If a Knight gets to d3, it is game over, hence the need to play 11.d4 which fails tactically) The positional bind after Nd3 cannot be broken.), variation to gain time so easily. Thus, my move Qa4 loses because, position forces me to play d4, which allows the shot Nxgech. Ke2 over Kf1 gains time but tactics here are more important than time. White may not even have equality here.
Another example of why time/tactics are important is in the variation 9.d4 exd4! This costs Black a tempo, but regains the pawn. Here are a couple of examples of time/tactics and why my theories should be deadly against a computer. If a computer blindly follows my theories, it might play 9...Bd6, so that 10.dxe5 can be met with 10...Bxe5, not realizing that the Bishop does nothing on that diagonal because of the pawn link b2/c3 completely neutralizing the power of the Bishop. The computer then might think that it can restrict White's development after Bxb5ch/Qa4/Bxd7ch/Qxd7ch/ by playing Rb8, not realizing that White has the simple refutation, b3/Bb2/Na3/Nc2/Nd4.
On the other hand, Black can gain a tempo by the following maneuver: 8.d4 exd4 9.Bxb5ch Bd7 10.Bc4 Bc6! You will note, according to my theories (and no one else's?), Bc6 gains a tempo because the Bishop gets to a square it cannot access in less than two move. So this makes sense both in terms of time and tactics.
Going back to the beginning, in hindsight, 7.Bf1?? is incredibly bad. It wastes two tempos, absolutely guaranteeing that Black has a very powerful initiative for the pawn. Black cannot play 6.b5 here, because the tactics result in a bad position for his pawn structure i.e. if 6...b5 7.cxd4 bxc4 8.dxe5 Nxd5 (Qxd5 is even worse) 9.d4 gaining a tempo which either permits White to keep his pawn or gain more time after cxd4 e.p. 9.Qxd3 gaining a tempo. It is clear that Black is going be stuck with too many pawn islands in the endgame.
Based on this observation, Black's best move probably is to meet 6.c3 with Nf5 to avoid the loss of time.
You will note that Tony wired me after 12...O-O, because 13.Qf2 is correct positionally i.e. it gains a tempo, but loses to tactics. I was blindly following my theories, not realizing that tactics trump position after 8...Ne6. or 12...O-O.
sloughter wrote on 01/08/09 at 04:27:41:
One last improvement for White and it's time to call it a Knight. Here is the refutation of the Fritz (?) 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 6.cxd4! bxc4 7.dxe5 Qxd5 8.exf6! Qxg5 9.Qf3! (Not O-O) Rb8 10.Qe3ch! Qxe3
11.dxe3 & I'll let you evaluate the endgame.
HgMan wrote on 01/08/09 at 03:32:31:
Do I get to be head monkey? I'm sure an infinite number of us, working on an infinite of chessboard, could ultimately... oh, never mind. Must go find that opposable thumb. I know I left it around here somewhere...
Pages: 
refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6? (Read 219185 times)
