Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 27
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6? (Read 219193 times)
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 #71 - 01/13/09 at 15:07:50
Post Tools
sloughter wrote on 01/13/09 at 01:24:13:


Perhaps there is a consensus growing that the Wilkes Barre/Traxler is unsound. The true test may be 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Bxf7ch Ke7 6.Bd5 Nxd5. 


Personally I am very happy with White's game after 6.Bb3.

Also, I mean no disrespect, but I don't think that anyone is very interested in your experiments versus Fritz.  I'm sure you will find these educational, but no one here or elsewhere will think that they signify much for theory -- not unless something interesting comes up that's worthy of further investigation, anyway.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HgMan
God Member
*****
Offline


Demand me nothing: What
you know, you know

Posts: 2330
Location: Up on Cripple Creek
Joined: 11/09/04
Gender: Male
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #70 - 01/13/09 at 14:09:58
Post Tools
Fritz 8??
  

"Luck favours the prepared mind."  --Louis Pasteur
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 #69 - 01/13/09 at 01:24:13
Post Tools
Greetings Ladies and Gentlement. For the record, I hate emails; they get you to say and do things you would never say and do in the presence of a person. They are anonymous and destructive. To that end, I will refrain from commentary and provide you just with score of annotated games. For the next year, I will be playing against Fritz 8 at the rate of one move per hour in the endgame produced after the move sequence 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.cxd4. I will also try the idea of 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.Be2. I will also try what may be the true main line, 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 Nf5

Perhaps there is a consensus growing that the Wilkes Barre/Traxler is unsound. The true test may be 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Bxf7ch Ke7 6.Bd5 Nxd5. I will also play this against Fritz 8 at an hour per move. I will provide the score of these games when completed. Again i apologize for my grandiose and thoughtless emails.micawber wrote on 01/10/09 at 12:08:14:
Congrats Sloughter,
After a great many tries, you did produce a small innovation.
Indeed. 1.e4,e5 2.Nf3,Nc6 3.Bc4,Nf6 4.Ng5,Bc5 5.Bxf7+,Ke7
6.Bd5,Rf8 7.Bxc6,dxc6 8.Nf3! is indeed new and sensible, and should provide White whith an advantage (+=; +/-), although I would not bet on the probability of Black following your further analysis.

You should have considered 7...bxc6 as well as it leads by transposition to a variation also known to be better for white:
7...bxc6 8.0-0,d6 9.Nf3!,Bg4 10.d3,Qe8 11.Be3,Qh5 
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

And now not
12.Bxc5?,Nxe4! 13.dxe,Rxf3 14.Nd2,Rh3! 15.f3,Rxh2 16.Bxe3,Rf8
17.Qe1 (Black threatened to increase the preasure with Rf6), Bxf3
18.Rxf3,Rh1 0-1 (Noble-Sharma, Frankfurt,2006)
But
12.Nbd2!,Bb6 13.a4,Bxf3 (..Bxe3 was the lesser evil but white is better anyway; even though it will not be as easy as it seems to convert the extra pawn) 14.Qxf3,Qh4 15.Bxb6,axb6 16.Qg3 (+/-)
(Asrian-Minasian, Yerevan, 2007)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.M. after 7...dxc6 8.Qe2,Ng4 9.f3 neither Bf2 nor Nf2  appeal to me. After the modest 9...Nf6 chances seem roughly equal.White will probably regret having to play f3 as his knight has few prospects)

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


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #68 - 01/11/09 at 12:03:32
Post Tools
MNB
Quote:
In fact he produced another one. The advantage of the trial and error method is that it sometimes delivers something useful, even if the inventor does not realize it himself.

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.c3 Nd4 7.Bf1 Nxd5 8.Ne4 Ne6 9.d4 exd4?! 10.Bxb5+ Qxd7 11.Qa4 is a small improvement on 10.Bxb5+ Bd7 11.Qa4 Ndf4 12.d4.
By far not enough to justify "8...Ne6" +-, but it is something.

8...Ne6 9.d4 exd4 10.Bxb5+ Qxd7 11.Qa4 Ndf4 (but Black might have better) 12.g3 Nd3ch 13.Ke2 Nxc1ch 14.Rxc1 Rb8 (FM Dikkie), but this is probably not the last word.


I think the innovation is more or less yours MNB
To clarify (and correct a typo in MNb's post):
Sloughter's line: 8...Ne6 9.Bxb5+,Bd7 10.Qa4,Ndf4 11.d4,exd4?! 
(when we both agreed that 11...Nxg2+ is superior)

MNb has taken a different line and applied Sloughter's idea:
8....Ne6 9.d4 exd4 10.Bxb5+ Bd7 11.Qa4 (the new move
Which improves over 11.Bxd7+,Qxd7+ 12.cxd4)
Now 11....Ndf4 transposes back to "Sloughter's variation"
But as MNb allready indicated Black has probably a better move here

I propose 11...Rb8!?
12.Bxd7+,Qxd7 13.Qxa7,Rd8 is probably allready better for Black
(who threatens now ...Qc6 followed by Ra8 trapping white's Q)
12.Bxd7,Qxd7 13.Qxd7,Kxd7 seem OK for Black as well
  
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 #67 - 01/11/09 at 11:10:02
Post Tools
sloughter wrote on 01/05/09 at 20:47:26:
The way I count development, you have made ten moves with your Knights in this opening and made one useful move, Nxd7 with your Knights. With the other 9 moves, you have won the minor exchange.


sloughter wrote on 01/08/09 at 00:15:22:
When you people don't realize that White invested ten tempos just to compromise Black's Queenside structure in the endgame, while all the Two Knights' Tango does is to dance around and accomplish nothing useful.


sloughter wrote on 01/11/09 at 03:20:21:
I am convinced with your analysis that White gains nothing with 8.Ne4 because the Two Knights' Tango all are developing moves as I define development. No wonder 8...Ne6 works so well!


sloughter wrote on 01/06/09 at 07:37:02:
Time is on my side.


sloughter wrote on 01/08/09 at 13:40:30:
I am so certain my theories are correct


sloughter wrote on 01/08/09 at 13:40:30:
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!


MNb wrote on 01/06/09 at 00:16:06:

sloughter wrote on 01/05/09 at 14:04:27:
There is not the slightest doubt in my mind that 8...Ne6 is +-.

Doubt is a source of knowledge, as we know since Descartes. And the fact that some pretty strong players have chosen 3...Nf6 is a good reason for doubt.


Antillian wrote on 01/08/09 at 12:58:58:
I have not seen such an entertaining thread since .....


Roll Eyes

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.Be2 and not surprisingly some books of 20 years ago - or more - recommend Nd4. It's not clear to me why 6.Be2 should be better than 6.Bf1, but I'll see what I can find.
  

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
 
drkodos
God Member
*****
Offline


I see....stars.

Posts: 778
Location: Jupiter, and beyond
Joined: 03/29/07
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #66 - 01/11/09 at 03:42:37
Post Tools
9. ...g5 may have some merit in the Nh3 line.   

Run it through your Star Bellied Sneetch Machine and let me know if I should be wearing one or not.   Undecided



Wait.....is this like a free copy of the book we are getting here?   

Or just an extended preview?  Wink
  

I know I've made some very poor decisions recently, but I can give you my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal. I've still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in the mission.
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 #65 - 01/11/09 at 03:30:24
Post Tools
My inclination in the Lolli is to play cxd4/O-Og2-g4 wrote on 01/10/09 at 19:34:06:
Well, since Fritz variation is already refuted  Wink, let's refute, say, Lolli attack!
I would like to ask the experts, if there exist any refutation of 6.d4 Kxd4 7.c3 b5!? counterattack?
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*
Heisman in his "Fried Liver/Lolli" suggests 8.Bd3 h6 9.Qh5 as winning line for White. He proceeds with 9...hg 10.Qxh8 e4 11.Bxe4 Qe7 12.Nd2 Nc2+ 13.Kd1 and here he misses 13...Bf5! after which rather Black seems to have decisive attack. Also I've tried to look at 9.Nxf7 and 9.Ne4, but could see no edge for White. Is Black's compensation for his knight in 8.Bxd5 Qxd5 9.cd or 9.f3!? variations sufficient (at least for draw)?

  
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 #64 - 01/11/09 at 03:20:21
Post Tools
I am convinced with your analysis that White gains nothing with 8.Ne4 because the Two Knights' Tango all are developing moves as I define development. No wonder 8...Ne6 works so well! However, I am going to check with GM Alburt about 7.cxd4 bxc4 8.dxe5 & get his take on the positions.

Amazingly enough, in the Steinitz variation, 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5ch c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Be2 h6 9.Nh3?! Bd6 10.d3 Qc7 11.Ng1! O-O, Black has nothing unless someone can find a way for Black to get in e4 with advantage. 

White has a Universal Position, the most difficult kind of position to attack. According to Kasparov (If you want a textbook case of what a Universal position is, just check out the World Championship games between Kasparov and Short with Garry on the Black side of the Sicilian.) it is necessary to advance your own pawns to break up a pristine pawn position.

The King's Indian Saemisch is probably favorable to White, because it is, to the best of my knowledge, the only major opening by White where White stays in Universal mode in the opening. Has anyone tried the following strategy c4/d4/Nc3/e4/f3/g3/Bg2/Nh3/Nf2 & then just push the Queenside pawns, rearrange your pieces behind the pawn wall and then break through? 

In the Steinitz variation, a huge lead in development dissipates by pushing the Kingside pawns and permits White to catch up in development and push the Queenside pawns. Qb8 is an attempt to stop that strategy. The main problem is that White can play Nbd2 & Nc4 or Ne4 & the Black Bishop must move off the d6 square (Bxh2 is never a threat as long as White hasn't castled; all it does is "develop" White's King Rook by giving it an open file, and, even worse, stops the Kingside pawn roller). This then permits the King to step out of the center with Kf1 or O-O-O)

Correct against the Steinitz is 9...Bd6 10.d3 Bd7! (To keep the e6 square for the Knight on a5) 11.Ng1 Qb8!! so that a Knight hit on d6 can be met with Bc7. More importantly, Black forces White to deal with the hit on the b-pawn. If Black plays b3, then he has to be concerned about ideas like a5/a4. However, Nbd2/Nb3 is bad because it slows down the pawn roller on the Queenside, so Black wins on the Kingside.
The Rook isn't trapped because it has a Rook lift on the seventh or sixth.

In the Steininz, White only wins when Black rushes in; the correct way to beat White is to stay in Universal mode on the Kingside (i.e. all of your pieces are behind your pawn wall, push them forward in a coordinated manner until you win something big) and Classical mode on the Queenside (active piece play), deny White space, and then use Karpov's boa constrictor style.



MNb wrote on 01/10/09 at 19:50:58:
micawber wrote on 01/10/09 at 12:08:14:
Congrats Sloughter,
After a great many tries, you did produce a small innovation.


In fact he produced another one. The advantage of the trial and error method is that it sometimes delivers something useful, even if the inventor does not realize it himself.

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.c3 Nd4 7.Bf1 Nxd5 8.Ne4 Ne6 9.d4 exd4 10.Bxb5+ Qxd7 11.Qa4 is a small improvement on 10.Bxb5+ Bd7 11.Qa4 Ndf4 12.d4.
By far not enough to justify "8...Ne6" +-, but it is something.

8...Ne6 9.d4 exd4 10.Bxb5+ Qxd7 11.Qa4 Ndf4 (but Black might have better) 12.g3 Nd3ch 13.Ke2 Nxc1ch 14.Rxc1 Rb8 (FM Dikkie), but this is probably not the last word.

  
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 #63 - 01/10/09 at 19:50:58
Post Tools
micawber wrote on 01/10/09 at 12:08:14:
Congrats Sloughter,
After a great many tries, you did produce a small innovation.


In fact he produced another one. The advantage of the trial and error method is that it sometimes delivers something useful, even if the inventor does not realize it himself.

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.c3 Nd4 7.Bf1 Nxd5 8.Ne4 Ne6 9.d4 exd4 10.Bxb5+ Qxd7 11.Qa4 is a small improvement on 10.Bxb5+ Bd7 11.Qa4 Ndf4 12.d4.
By far not enough to justify "8...Ne6" +-, but it is something.

8...Ne6 9.d4 exd4 10.Bxb5+ Qxd7 11.Qa4 Ndf4 (but Black might have better) 12.g3 Nd3ch 13.Ke2 Nxc1ch 14.Rxc1 Rb8 (FM Dikkie), but this is probably not the last word.
  

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
 
g2-g4
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline



Posts: 38
Location: Moscow
Joined: 11/01/08
Gender: Male
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #62 - 01/10/09 at 19:34:06
Post Tools
Well, since Fritz variation is already refuted  Wink, let's refute, say, Lolli attack!
I would like to ask the experts, if there exist any refutation of 6.d4 Kxd4 7.c3 b5!? counterattack?
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*
Heisman in his "Fried Liver/Lolli" suggests 8.Bd3 h6 9.Qh5 as winning line for White. He proceeds with 9...hg 10.Qxh8 e4 11.Bxe4 Qe7 12.Nd2 Nc2+ 13.Kd1 and here he misses 13...Bf5! after which rather Black seems to have decisive attack. Also I've tried to look at 9.Nxf7 and 9.Ne4, but could see no edge for White. Is Black's compensation for his knight in 8.Bxd5 Qxd5 9.cd or 9.f3!? variations sufficient (at least for draw)?
  
Back to top
IP Logged
 
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #61 - 01/10/09 at 12:08:14
Post Tools
Congrats Sloughter,
After a great many tries, you did produce a small innovation.
Indeed. 1.e4,e5 2.Nf3,Nc6 3.Bc4,Nf6 4.Ng5,Bc5 5.Bxf7+,Ke7
6.Bd5,Rf8 7.Bxc6,dxc6 8.Nf3! is indeed new and sensible, and should provide White whith an advantage (+=; +/-), although I would not bet on the probability of Black following your further analysis.

You should have considered 7...bxc6 as well as it leads by transposition to a variation also known to be better for white:
7...bxc6 8.0-0,d6 9.Nf3!,Bg4 10.d3,Qe8 11.Be3,Qh5 
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

And now not
12.Bxc5?,Nxe4! 13.dxe,Rxf3 14.Nd2,Rh3! 15.f3,Rxh2 16.Bxe3,Rf8
17.Qe1 (Black threatened to increase the preasure with Rf6), Bxf3
18.Rxf3,Rh1 0-1 (Noble-Sharma, Frankfurt,2006)
But
12.Nbd2!,Bb6 13.a4,Bxf3 (..Bxe3 was the lesser evil but white is better anyway; even though it will not be as easy as it seems to convert the extra pawn) 14.Qxf3,Qh4 15.Bxb6,axb6 16.Qg3 (+/-)
(Asrian-Minasian, Yerevan, 2007)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.M. after 7...dxc6 8.Qe2,Ng4 9.f3 neither Bf2 nor Nf2  appeal to me. After the modest 9...Nf6 chances seem roughly equal.White will probably regret having to play f3 as his knight has few prospects)
  
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 #60 - 01/10/09 at 04:48:25
Post Tools
One request for a practical test versus theoretical evaluation of one of my innovations is provided here: Moody-Fritz 8, Wilkes Barre/Traxler 120/30. Fritz's average rating i.e. its rating in all positions, averages out around 2700. In sharp, tactical middlegames, like this one, its strength increases, so this is a valid test of my innovation. Since there are several books written on the Traxler, my innovation, if correct, would supersede those books. Perhaps someone can find an improvement in Fritz's play.

4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Bxf7ch Ke7 6.Bd5 Rf8 (or d6 or Qe8, Bxc6) 7.Bxc6! dxc6 8.Nf3! N (Qe2? Ng4 9.f3 Bf2ch! 10.Kf1 Bb6 = I got a better position against Fritz here with 11.Nh3/Nc3/Nd1/Nhf2, but it is equal) Kf7 (Nxe4 9.Qe2 Nxf2 10.Rf1/Rxf2/Qxf2 +/-) 9.d3 +/- Kg8 10.Be3! (To be able to chop on the f-file after 10...Bxe3 11.fxe3) 10...Bd4?! (A practical error as opposed to a theoretical error. Considering my playing strength 10...Bd6, avoiding simplification is a better choice) 11.Nxd4 exd4 (Improving its pawn structure) 12.Bg5! Qd6 13.Bxf6 Rxf6 14.O-O Be6 15.f3 Raf8 16.Rf2 a6 17.a4 (If White can shut down the Queenside, he can win in the center and on the Kingside) 17...Rh6 18.g3 Rg6 19.Nd2 c5 20.b3 Qf4! (A cute tactical trick to improve the position of the Queen) 21.Kh1 Qh6 22.Qg1 Rf4?! 23.Re1 a5? (Black must improve here) This is pretty much a trial and error position where it is just necessary not to make mistakes and allow the computer to allow me to make spatial inroads. 24.Rg2 Bh3 25.Rf2 (So much for that idea!) Be6 26.Rfe2 Rf8 27.Rf2 (To see if Fritz repeats the position) 27...Rgf6 28.f4 Bg4 29.h4 (Starting to crawl into Black's position) Qh5 30.Qg2 b6 31.Kg1 Qf7 (All dressed up and no place to go!) 32.Nf1? (unnecessarily cautious, Nf3 is correct) Qe6 33.Nd2 Qf7 34.Nf3 Qe6 35.f5 Qe7 36.Ref1 Bxf3 37.Rxf3 c6 38.g4 Rh6 39.g5 Rxh4 40.Qg3 Rh5 41.f6 +-

4.Ng5 SWJediknight wrote on 01/09/09 at 22:03:47:
Also bear in mind that you can't always trust Fritz in gambit lines.  For example, Fritz thinks White has equality in the Moller Attack line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 Bb4+ 7.Nc3 Nxe4 8.0-0 Bxc3 9.bxc3 d5, when in reality Black is better.  Meanwhile, it thinks Black is significantly better in the King's Bishop's Gambit, a line which in reality gives equal chances.

I remember the last time I fed the Two Knights into Fritz with 5...Na5, it thought White was +0.55 of a pawn up.

Try inserting alternative moves for Black and watch that evaluation drop after a couple of extra ply!

At least it's better than the 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 6.d4 exd4 7.0-0 Nge7 8.Ng5 d5 9.Nxf7 "!" Kxf7 10.Qf3+ Kg8 11.Bb3 Be6, when even I can't find anywhere near enough compensation.

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


Alert... opponent out
of book!

Posts: 916
Joined: 03/14/08
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #59 - 01/09/09 at 22:03:47
Post Tools
Also bear in mind that you can't always trust Fritz in gambit lines.  For example, Fritz thinks White has equality in the Moller Attack line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 Bb4+ 7.Nc3 Nxe4 8.0-0 Bxc3 9.bxc3 d5, when in reality Black is better.  Meanwhile, it thinks Black is significantly better in the King's Bishop's Gambit, a line which in reality gives equal chances.

I remember the last time I fed the Two Knights into Fritz with 5...Na5, it thought White was +0.55 of a pawn up.

Try inserting alternative moves for Black and watch that evaluation drop after a couple of extra ply!

At least it's better than the 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 6.d4 exd4 7.0-0 Nge7 8.Ng5 d5 9.Nxf7 "!" Kxf7 10.Qf3+ Kg8 11.Bb3 Be6, when even I can't find anywhere near enough compensation.
  
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 #58 - 01/09/09 at 21:39:08
Post Tools
Come on guys, let's get serious. We should be grateful that Sloughter has provided us with no less than 4 (or is it 5? I lost track a bit) refutations of the Fritz-Ulvestadt. If they don't work it's because our monkey brains can't grasp them. It doesn't mean that Sloughter's brilliant theories on development are wrong. It proves beyond any doubt that his method of trial and error is infallible! And if it takes him several days to suggest no-brainers like 6.Be2 that can be found in theoriebooks from a few decades ago this only proves that his brains ....... ooops, something went wrong. Blame it on my monkey brains..

Of course 4...Na5 must also lead to nothing if Black has nothing better than 10...Bc5! and 11...Bd6. If Sloughter says Black must lose a tempo like than that, then there is no need to find out what the forced win is after 10...Bd6??  That must be just another no-brainer.
  

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
 
drkodos
God Member
*****
Offline


I see....stars.

Posts: 778
Location: Jupiter, and beyond
Joined: 03/29/07
Re: refutation of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6?
Reply #57 - 01/09/09 at 20:38:54
Post Tools
sloughter wrote on 01/09/09 at 13:01:18:


The only equalizing try I can for Black after after 5...Na5 is 6.Bb5ch c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Be2 h6 9.Nf3 e4 10.Ne5 Bc5! 11.c3 Bd6 12.f4 Qc7* 13.d4! exd3 14.Qxd3! O-O 15.O-O Rd8 16.Qc2 Nd5 17.b4 Nb7 18.Na3 Nxf4 19.Bxf4 Bxe5 20.Bxe5 Qxe5 21.Nc4 Qg5 22.Qc1! (More or less forcing an endgame due to the threat of Qf4) 22...Qxc1 23.Rfxc1

I asked GM Alburt his opinion of this endgame. He thought that White was slightly better due to his three to pawn majority on the Queenside and his superior pawn structure. This probably can be ground out to either a forced win or a forced draw. If its a draw, then White has to play 8.Qf3.

This appears to be the best that Black can do after 3...Nf6 
*Highlight/emphasis mine.


My sincere and (mostly) serious reply:


1.  Other move 12 possibilites for Black include 12. ....exf3  and 12. ...0-0.  Lately I have been playing exf with success and like it.  If we ever were to play OTB am I forced to play 12.  Qc7 here?  

2.  13. b4! may better for White than 13. d4.  As Black, I might find it more uncomfortable otb.

3.   18. ...f6 looks like a playable alternative for Black with good play and equality as does the move 18. ...a5.  I give 18. ...Nxf4 a question mark because I consider it dubious and I think I can demonstrate that the alternatives given here offer Black better play.

4.  I agree GM Alburt is spot on w/analysis of position after 23. Rfc1, but I think this position is completely holdable for Black, especially if players are close in strength.  I believe I could hold this draw against players stronger than me.    I suspect if we took this position and gave it to GM Alburt as Black he would win it against a lot of players, certainly players <2200.  There is still some "chess" to be played, no?  

Too many pieces on the board coupled with pawn structure imbalance makes me think the stronger player has chances here, regardless of color.

I would certainly be happy with this position as Black and do not feel it is a bust whatsoever and would most likely play on w/ 23. ...f6.


There is a huge and seemingly unjustified gap in your statement:
"This probably can be ground out to either a forced win or a forced draw."

I have trouble understanding statements that read very poorly because they hold an inherent and internal contradiction to which the author does nothing to address in subsequent missives,  It seems you have even softend up on your previous stance with your choosen inclusion of the modifying word "probably."  

Is it or isn't it?

As a lousy analogy I offer this:  I would say that OJ either did or did not commit murder and that the difference between the two is most significant, could even be called the CRUX and is worth further investigation before pontificating that one has "solved the case."


So, if you woud consider deciding which argument you are actually making, I will continue to play along, even trying to follow along with your set of rules about posting length, layout & formatting.  I think I should be able to do it....monkeys are good at aping behaviour, no?  All this while trying to actually make some sense of it because I love this line with either color and believe the Two Knights is a great example of chess at its very finest.

What is your back-up strategery w/Bogoljubov line?


~ drkodos



Edited 3,491 times.

  

I know I've made some very poor decisions recently, but I can give you my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal. I've still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in the mission.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 27
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo