(UTC)
  ChessPub Forum › Chess Publishing Openings › 1. e4 e5 - Non-Spanish › 2 Knights › refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
(Moderators: Smyslov_Fan, Jupp53, trw)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 27
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6? (Read 219281 times)
TN
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 3420
Joined: 11/07/08
Gender: Male
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #311 - 02/21/09 at 00:21:19
Post Tools
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Moody
  
All our dreams come true if we have the courage to pursue them.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TN
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 3420
Joined: 11/07/08
Gender: Male
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #310 - 02/21/09 at 00:20:25
Post Tools
http://www.masschess.org/Chess_Horizons/Book_Review/review_content.asp?id=3

A quote from the above review: "I could give this book a few marks for originality, but everything else is bothersome and sometimes infuriating." 

http://chessbooks.nl/elburg123.html

It is amusing to read how the author sarcastically praises your book. Note that every single product in that link has been given a very positive review by him, e.g. he claims that 'Play 1.b4' is a very important reference work and that 'Chess for Scoundreds' is a must for every chess player, both of which are incorrect.
  
All our dreams come true if we have the courage to pursue them.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Hand
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 55
Joined: 01/02/09
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #309 - 02/20/09 at 20:43:13
Post Tools
They shoot horses, don't they?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10778
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #308 - 02/20/09 at 20:29:41
Post Tools
Henri wrote on 02/20/09 at 18:30:16:
MNb wrote on 02/20/09 at 01:56:37:
Here is a simple way to achieve a plus in the Fritz: 

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.cxd4 bxc4 8.d4 Nxd5 9.Qa4+ Black moves 10.Qxc4 +/=


8.d4 is also illegal !
Do you mean 8.dxe5 ? In that case, books suggest 9.Qa4+ Qd7 10.Qxc4 a5 11. Nc3 Nb4


True - except that I did not write it. I suppose Sloughter meant 8.dxe5. I have my doubts on the book evaluation though. And so I switched to 5...b5 instead, which avoids all this nicely.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Kramnikaze
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 26
Joined: 03/09/08
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #307 - 02/20/09 at 20:26:51
Post Tools
micawber wrote on 02/16/09 at 15:15:24:
@Kramnikaze

You should continue your variation a little longer:
8.Qf3, Be7 9.Bxc6,Nxc6 10.Qxc6, Bd7 11.Qc4, 0-0 12.Nc3,Rc8 13.Qe2

And now Black should play
13....h6! with suficient compensation

A) 14.Nge4, Nxe4 15.Qxe4,Bc6= (Vouldis-Sheram, 2006)

B) 14.Nf3, e4! 
  B1) 15.Ne4,Nxe4 16.Qxe4,Bb5! with (17...Re8 to follow) =/+ (Mas-Iuldachev, 2008)
  B2) 15.Ne5, Be6!= 16.b3?,Rxc3 -/+ (Sacharov-Bakhmatov, 1960)





Hi Micawber,

I didnt say anywhere its leading to the +-  Wink
Just wanted to reflect the posters refutation,that also with a plan like Nc3 and Qe2,you are not just winning out of the blue.Open lines,diagonals and the bishop pair count for enough compensation!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Henri
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 4
Location: Cergy
Joined: 08/18/05
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #306 - 02/20/09 at 18:30:16
Post Tools
MNb wrote on 02/20/09 at 01:56:37:
Here is a simple way to achieve a plus in the Fritz: 

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.cxd4 bxc4 8.d4 Nxd5 9.Qa4+ Black moves 10.Qxc4 +/=


8.d4 is also illegal !
Do you mean 8.dxe5 ? In that case, books suggest 9.Qa4+ Qd7 10.Qxc4 a5 11. Nc3 Nb4
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Uruk
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 351
Joined: 02/03/09
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #305 - 02/20/09 at 15:13:21
Post Tools
Take a look at today's game Mamedyarov-Tomashevsky at the Aeroflot Open.

The way he understands chess, poor Mamedyarov found no advantage.

He has to wait, down with the rest of us,
for the holy day when sloughter's intuition will kick in
and enlighten us,
and blow away the arm-waving and flying unbelievers.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10778
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #304 - 02/20/09 at 01:56:37
Post Tools
sloughter wrote on 02/19/09 at 22:59:40:
Here is a simple way to achieve a plus in the Fritz: 

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.cxd4 bxc4 8.d4 Nxd5 9.Qa4+ Black moves 10.Qxc4 +/=

Congratulations. You have finally found out why Black should prefer the move-order 5...b5 6.Bf1 Nd4. Something I already knew for a decade - and I was late. In the meantime 5...b5 stands as strong as ever. I admit (for the third time) that 8.Nh3 etcetera is an interesting idea, but it is way too early to claim even the slightest advantage for White. Your other "refutations" are non-refutations.
And of course, despite all the pseudo-philosophies on practice vs. theory, += still is not the same as 4.Ng5 +-.

sloughter wrote on 02/19/09 at 23:43:16:

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.cxd4 bxc4 7.Qe2 Qd5 8.f4 e4 9.Nc3 Qxc6 10.Ngxe4 +/=

Now only if you get your moves correct ....
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #303 - 02/20/09 at 01:42:12
Post Tools
sloughter wrote on 02/19/09 at 23:43:16:
Here is the latest analysis of the Ulvestad and the Fritz:

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.cxd4 bxc4 7.Qe2 Qd5 8.f4 e4 9.Nc3 Qxc6 10.Ngxe4 +/=

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.cxd4 bxc4 8.dxe5 Nxd5 9.Qf3 Qd7 10.O-O +/=



What, the very latest?  Do you think you're the only one with a chess engine?  Do you think Chess Truth comes out of those things?

When they design a Truth Engine, I'll pay attention to it, but not to its poorly educated, self-appointed priests.
  
The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ghenghisclown
God Member
*****
Offline


Pedicare Vestri Latin

Posts: 1022
Location: HollyWeird
Joined: 07/19/06
Gender: Male
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #302 - 02/20/09 at 00:13:31
Post Tools
The Hand wrote on 02/19/09 at 23:17:04:



One time after I drew with him, GM Ivanov said my move" Did not suck."  I am waiting for the appropriate publication to blurb with that. 




LMAO,TH.  Grin
  
"Experience is a dim lamp, which only lights the one who bears it."
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
sloughter
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 619
Location: schoharie
Joined: 12/29/08
Gender: Male
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #301 - 02/19/09 at 23:43:16
Post Tools
Here is the latest analysis of the Ulvestad and the Fritz:

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.cxd4 bxc4 7.Qe2 Qd5 8.f4 e4 9.Nc3 Qxc6 10.Ngxe4 +/=

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.cxd4 bxc4 8.dxe5 Nxd5 9.Qf3 Qd7 10.O-O +/=

sloughter wrote on 02/10/09 at 12:43:27:
Here is the definitive analysis and practical play in the 8.Nh3 variation. From a book I published in 1999, 

"Theory pretty much ends with the move sequence 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.Bf1 Nxd5 8.Nh3 although the author and GM Alburt analyzed this variation in detail in EMPIRE CHESS, Winter 1988 p.6. We also recognize the contributions of ICM van der Tak, NM Alon Bochman, FM Craig Mar and the pretty tactical shot pointed out by Pete Tamburro (8...Bg4 9.Qxg4?? (Bb5ch!) Nc2ch 9.Kd1?? Nce3ch! -+), and minor computer-assessed analysis of 8.Nh3 Bxh3 by NM Eric Schiller."

"GM's Alburt's concept, first recognized in the game Alburt-Gulko, USSR Student Cham., Dubna, 1970 is a profound idea that places the onus on Black to equalize. The first point is that White prepares to exhange off a pair of Knights after say Ne6/Nef4. This is obviously not possible in the variation 8.Ne4 Ne6 9.Bxb5ch Bd7 10.Qa4 Nef4 when Black has compensation. We now follow Alburt-Gulko: 8...Ne6 9.Bxb5ch Bd7 10.Bxd7ch; we prefer 10.Qa4 see below: 10...Qd7 11.O-O Be7 12.Qe2 Bf6?! 13.d3 (d4 +/=) O-O 14,Ba3 Rfe8. Black has a variety of alternatives to 8...Ne6 e.g. 8...Nc6 9.Bxb5 +/- or 8...Bg4 9.Bxb5ch Nxb5 10.Qxg4 or 8...Nf5 which leaves the Knight on a peculiar square and, of course, 9.Bxb5ch wins a pawn. This narrows the choices to 8.Nh3 Bxh3!? and 8...Ne6.  If 8...Bxh3 9.cxd4 (gxh3 Qh4! with comp: ICM van der Tak) 9...Bd7 (To defend b5). If now 10.dxe5 +/= GM Alburt. Black only has partial compensation for the pawn, but, NM Eric Schiller maintains that Black is okay after 10...Qh4. This is difficult to accept after 10.Nc3! White hits d5 and bv5; if 11...Nxc3 12.dxc3 Qe4ch 13.Qe2 +/-. and on 11...c6 12.Nxd5 cxd5 13.Be2 Qg5 14.O-O Qxe5? 15.Re1 looks pretty good for White. Other tries like 10...Nb4 or Be7 don't promise Black very much either.

"Thus the stem game, Alburt-Gulko appears to have revealed the main line very early. The key continuation for White appears to be 8.Nh3 Ne6 9.Bxb5ch Bd7 10.Qa4!. White either forces Black to accept an inferior middlegame or an inferior endgame: 10...Nb6 11.Bd7ch Nxd7 12.d4 exd4 13.cxd4 Be7 14.Nc3 O-O 15.d5 +/=. 

"Black avoids an endgame but is not out of the woods yet; with best play, White should win this. There are a host of similar endings Black can achieve a pawn down, with no real compensation for the pawn. Obviously, this is unacceptable to the majority of chess players.

Black can also try 8...Ne6 9.Bxb5ch Bd7 10.Qa4 Nc5 11.Bxd7ch Nxd7 12.O-O Be7 13.d4 +/= Black is shy of equality. The decision to enter an endgame is only marginally better: 8...Ne6 9.Bxb5ch Bd7 10.Qa4 Nc5 11.Bxd7ch Qxd7 12.Qxd7ch Kxd7 13.d4! (Ke2 e4 14.Na3 Nd3 15.Nc2 Nd5f4ch 16.Nxf4 Nxf4ch 17.Ke3 Nd3: and NM Bochman wonders if White can dig out) 13...exd4 14.cxd4 (O-O dxc3 =) 15.Nc3! Nxd4 (Nb4 16.d5 +/- or Nxc3 16.bxc3 +/- Evaluations by GM Alburt) 16.Nxd5 Nc2ch 17.Kd1 Nxa1 18.Bd2! +/= (GM Alburt)

"One final try is 10.Qa4 Bc5 but 11.d3 f5 +/= (GM Alburt)" There doesn't appear to be any simple pathway to equality for Black here.sloughter wrote on 02/08/09 at 21:10:54:
In order to keep the analyzed lines in one place, here is a way to avoid the complicatons of 8.Ne4 Ne6 i.e. 8.Nh3!? Bxh3 (Ne6 9.Bxb5ch Bd7 10.Qa4 & White is better than the 8.Ne4 line because he can oppose Knights when one of them gets to f4) 9.cxd4! Bd7 10.dxe5 +/= (I'll have to check my analysis here; Black may have a draw by repetition in one of the subvariations). So far, not one menber of this post has tried to engage in an analytical battle over even one variation. Since many are controversial e.g. my latest attempt at an advantage against 8.Ne4 Ne6!sloughter wrote on 02/01/09 at 20:00:15:
In order for the post to have any impact on the development of theory, it is necessary to sort the wheat from the chaff. Here is the analysis posted to date, as well as, original analysis not quoted to date. It is up to the members of the post, if they are so inclined, to accept, modify, or ignore this material in the hope of providing the basis for additional theory and practical play. 

Wilkes-Barre/Traxler

    4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Bxf7ch Ke7 6.Bd5 Rf8 (or d6 or Qe8) 7.Bxc6 dxc6 (or bxc6) 8.Nf3 Kf7 (Nxe4 9.Qe2 +/-) 9.d3 +/-

Fried Liver from Pincus

    4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.d4 Bb4ch 7.c3 Be7 8.Nxf7 Kxf7 9.Qf3ch Ke6 10.O-O!

A) 10...Na5 11.Bd3 Bf6 12.Re1 Nc6 13.Be4 g5?! 14.c4 Nxd4 15.cxd5ch Kf7 16.Qd3 Kg7 17.Nc3 Bd7 18.Be3 Rc8 19.Rad1 a6 20.Rd2+/-

B) 10...b5 11.Bxb5 Bb7 12.Bxc6 Bxc6 13.c4 Rf8 (Nb4 14.d5ch Nxd5 15.Rd1 +-) 14.cxd5ch Bxd5 15.Qe2 +-

C) 10...g6 11.Qe4 Rf8 12.f4 Rb8 13.Bb3 a5 14.fxe5 Rxf1ch 15.Kxf1 a4 16.Qg4ch Kf7 17.Qf3ch Kg7 18.Bxd5 +-

Berliner Variation (Ulvestad move order)

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.Bf1 h6 7.Nxf7 Kxf7 8.dxc6 Bc5 9.Be2 +/=
                                                           8.dxc6 Qd5 9.Qf3 +/=

5.exd5 b5 6.Bf1 Nd4 7.c3 Nxd5 8.Ne4 Ne6 (Tentative) 9.d4 exd4 10.Bxb5ch Bd7 11.Bxd7ch Qxd7 12.O-O dxc3 13.Nbxc3 Nxc3 14.bxc3 Qxd1 15.Rxd1 f5 16.Ng5 Nxg5 17.Bxg5 Bd6 18.Rd5 O-O 19.Rad1+/=

Berliner Variation:

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.Bf1 Nxd5 8.Ne4 Qh4 9.Ng3 Bg4 10.f3 e4 11.cxd4 Bd6 12.Qe2 Be6 (12...O-O 13.fxg4 Bxg3ch 14.Kd1 +-; 12...Bxg3ch 13.hxg3 Qxh1 14.Qxb5ch Bd7 15.Qxd5 +/-) 13.Nc3 (13.Qf2+/-) 13...Nxc3 14.dxc3 Bxg3ch 15.hxg3 Qxh1 16.Qxb5ch Kf8 17.fxe4 +-

The 5...Na5 material will be provided in a separate postMarkovich wrote on 02/01/09 at 17:25:08:
TN wrote on 02/01/09 at 08:48:11:
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=dx-J71v3JkU

The video highlights one of several holes in your childish attempt at refutation.


May I suggest that we all remain civil?  Even chilldish, even obnoxious attempts are deserving of respect.  We all love chess.




  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Hand
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 55
Joined: 01/02/09
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #300 - 02/19/09 at 23:17:04
Post Tools
ghenghisclown wrote on 02/19/09 at 22:43:50:
sloughter wrote on 02/19/09 at 21:09:21:
From my book, "We receive a steady stream of letters proposing rules changes, more than on any other subject. This one we almost dismissed right away until we saw the writer's name---when the idea comes from someone with a proven history of thinking of chess in a fresh way, it must be taken seriously. (Moody already came up with a new third move in the ancient King's Gambit, a move that Kasparov called, "Perfectly playable." Editor: Chess Life



.....this is an appeal to authority (Kasparov paid me a compliment therefore I'm right when I say I've busted a major opening) type of fallacy.




I believe calling a move "playable" is no more a compliment than
calling it "legal."  


One time after I drew with him, GM Ivanov said my move" Did not suck."  I am waiting for the appropriate publication to blurb with that. 

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
sloughter
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 619
Location: schoharie
Joined: 12/29/08
Gender: Male
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #299 - 02/19/09 at 23:02:11
Post Tools
MNb---you seem to have done little to contribute to this post except be critical. It is much easier to destroy rather than create. Why don't you go to some other post and take your great intellect with you. Yawn.MNb wrote on 02/19/09 at 22:27:04:
sloughter wrote on 02/19/09 at 21:04:27:
You are obsessed with the move order 8.Ne4 Ne6. Basically, it can be refuted three separate ways. Perhaps you can find solutions to all three.

Grin I don't have to explain the feeble logic here, do I?

sloughter wrote on 02/19/09 at 21:04:27:
4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.cxd4 bxc4 8.dxe5 & if Qxd5 9.exf6 Qxg5 10.Qf3 Rb8 11.Qe3ch and Black can flounder around in an endgame with a busted pawn structure.

Thank you for explaining my preference for Ulvestadt's move.

sloughter wrote on 02/19/09 at 21:04:27:
7.cxd4 bxc4 8.dxe5 Nxd5 9.d4 & White either reinforces the e5 pawn or forces Black to give up a tempo with 9...cxd3 10.Qxd3+/=

Please consult a book.

sloughter wrote on 02/19/09 at 21:04:27:

The Ulvestad is no better e.g.

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.dxc6 bxc4 6.Qe2 Qd5 7.f4 e4 8.Nc3 Qxc6 9.Ngxe4 +/= Perhaps you should enlarge your universe.

Again - why don't you consult a book? Ah, I get it, books don't belong to your universe.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
sloughter
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 619
Location: schoharie
Joined: 12/29/08
Gender: Male
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #298 - 02/19/09 at 22:59:40
Post Tools
Here is a simple way to achieve a plus in the Fritz: 

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.cxd4 bxc4 8.d4 Nxd5 9.Qb5ch Black moves 10.Qxc4 +/= Once again, we see a post member waving his arms so much, he can almost fly.bragesjo wrote on 02/19/09 at 21:46:57:
This is the supidest thread I have ever seen.
Quck look with Rybka 3 suggests that black is equal in almost all lines and thats callled += and sometimes that scale reaches -.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ghenghisclown
God Member
*****
Offline


Pedicare Vestri Latin

Posts: 1022
Location: HollyWeird
Joined: 07/19/06
Gender: Male
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #297 - 02/19/09 at 22:43:50
Post Tools
sloughter wrote on 02/19/09 at 21:09:21:
From my book, "We receive a steady stream of letters proposing rules changes, more than on any other subject. This one we almost dismissed right away until we saw the writer's name---when the idea comes from someone with a proven history of thinking of chess in a fresh way, it must be taken seriously. (Moody already came up with a new third move in the ancient King's Gambit, a move that Kasparov called, "Perfectly playable." Editor: Chess Life



At absolute best this is an appeal to authority (Kasparov paid me a compliment therefore I'm right when I say I've busted a major opening) type of fallacy.

In your case perhaps we should spell it phallacy.

The move Kasparov blessed with "playable" as a adjective takes place too early to be considered a noteworthy innovation. Many times I have played around with a database and I can find moves played by GM's. Generally, the earlier it is in the game, the easier to find.

This doesn't mean I can follow it up with precision or with full knowledge of all the penumbras entailed or consequent moves.

When Kosten pointed out a line you advocated leads to (for White) undesirable situation with Black boasting a huge lead in development...your response amounted to "Well, not according to me...I have my own definition of development and tempos." 

You don't seem to be able to acknowlege how that opens you up for all kinds of criticism.












"Hey only us PUBLISHED GODS who are smart enough to pay someone to play blitz against us need comment on esoterica." *






















*OK, I'm paraphrasing, but that's what the dude said, common.
  
"Experience is a dim lamp, which only lights the one who bears it."
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 27
Topic Tools
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board Top  

ChessPub Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge