Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit (Read 129915 times)
Tom P
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 2
Location: Florida
Joined: 01/06/09
Gender: Male
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #32 - 01/07/09 at 01:54:20
Post Tools
IM Christoph Wisnewski wrote on 01/06/09 at 11:03:41:
MNb wrote on 01/06/09 at 10:20:32:
And who the heck is Ziegler?

Yeah, it seems strange to name a line after a guy who got beat with it by Diemer like a red-headed stepchild, especially when Gunderam deserves to be credited most; I haven't decided yet, but I will probably stick to Ziegler anyway to avoid confusion with the "real" Gunderam Defence (5...Bf5)

Diemer had a penchant for naming BDG variations after grandmasters. Sometimes the connections were rather tenuous, as with the Euwe and Teichmann. Ziegler was apparently just the first player to stumble into 5...c6 against Diemer. The only significance of that game at a 1950 Easter tournament at Wangen, as Diemer wrote in his Blackmar Gemeinde, was that it was the first time he had played 5.Nxf3 (rather than Qxf3) in a tournament game.

I corresponded with both Diemer and Gunderam. Gunderam was unhappy (bitter?) with not having 5...c6 named after him. He was equally upset when Diemer insisted on calling 5...Bf5 the Tartakower Defense (that GM thing again). In later years I think Diemer acquiesced to Tartakower-Gunderam.

I think keeping 5...c6 as the Ziegler and 5...Bf5 as the Gunderam would be good choices.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10603
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #31 - 01/07/09 at 00:57:56
Post Tools
IM Christoph Wisnewski wrote on 01/06/09 at 11:03:41:
I haven't decided yet, but I will probably stick to Ziegler anyway to avoid confusion with the "real" Gunderam Defence (5...Bf5)


You could name it the Von Hennig-Milner Barry Variation, who after all played the white side on a regular base against the Caro-Kann.
  

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
 
TonyRo
God Member
*****
Offline


I'm gonna crack your skull!

Posts: 1778
Location: Cleveland, OH
Joined: 11/26/07
Gender: Male
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #30 - 01/06/09 at 21:30:19
Post Tools
A few quick questions, since I'm excited to see a new BDG book. Did you draw on either of these online sources?

www.zimbeckchess.com

http://www.mujweb.cz/www/rajmunde/IntroEN2.htm

The first is by a player who started in my area who was a well known tactical genius. He's more well known in the puzzles world, but I bet there might be some interesting analysis. The second is a more well known site I think, but it's a complete mess.

Also, when is the book due to be out, and who's publishing it? Thanks!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
IM Christoph Wisnewski
Full Member
***
Offline


International Master

Posts: 195
Location: Kiel
Joined: 04/03/05
Gender: Male
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #29 - 01/06/09 at 18:50:29
Post Tools
Rest assured that this book will be objective. While others might be OK with neglecting important defensive resources, I couldn't sleep knowing that people pay for my book only to be surprised by (often simple!) defenses.

That said, being into exotic openings, I cannot deny my sympathy for the BDG either. And it is fun using it on ICC  Cool
  

"Chess you don't learn, chess you understand!" (V. Korchnoi)
Back to top
WWWICQ  
IP Logged
 
drkodos
God Member
*****
Offline


I see....stars.

Posts: 778
Location: Jupiter, and beyond
Joined: 03/29/07
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #28 - 01/06/09 at 18:29:28
Post Tools
IM Christoph Wisnewski wrote on 01/06/09 at 17:53:36:
Rizzitano's analysis is valid, as far as I'm concerned...

But that doesn't necessarily mean that he covered everything, if you get my drift...



Is it fair to surmise the book will attempt to be objective as opposed to the "Win with the BGD" variety that so many Chess Alchemists seem inclined to author?

I must admit to surprise that this opening would warrant a full book, but I fully support the effort and look forward to using it!  Smiley

Unless, of course, it is more Alchemy.  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
 
IM Christoph Wisnewski
Full Member
***
Offline


International Master

Posts: 195
Location: Kiel
Joined: 04/03/05
Gender: Male
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #27 - 01/06/09 at 17:53:36
Post Tools
Rizzitano's analysis is valid, as far as I'm concerned...

But that doesn't necessarily mean that he covered everything, if you get my drift...
  

"Chess you don't learn, chess you understand!" (V. Korchnoi)
Back to top
WWWICQ  
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #26 - 01/06/09 at 14:23:39
Post Tools
Christoph, did you look at Rizzitano's analysis of the so-called "Euwe Defense" in his QGA repertoire book?  If so, what is your opinion of it?
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
wcywing
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 176
Joined: 01/04/08
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #25 - 01/06/09 at 13:46:46
Post Tools
Glenn Snow wrote on 01/06/09 at 12:13:04:
flaviddude wrote on 01/06/09 at 08:24:38:
Glenn Snow wrote on 01/06/09 at 03:06:23:
Tim McGrew, known most for once doing a ChessCafe column wrote a nice booklet that he sold through ICC on the BDG and the Hubsch.  Of course there were mistakes but a lot of the analysis was quite good.  I agree that the Hubsch is unfortunately unsound and against the BDG I'd love to see what White's supposed to do against the Ziegler or whatever you call the defense with after 1.d4 d4 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 (of course 3...e5 is very critical too) 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c6.


Tim McGrew is no patzer and knows a great deal about the BDG.

There is a sparate thred on the Ziegler,



You mean this thread of 10 pages? http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1083622751/0

Looking back to find that thread, started by someone familiar to me, I was mildly surprised to see just how many BDG threads there were but not nearly as surprised as I am by IM Wisnewski's announcement of a book on the BDG.  As curious as I am to see the book, (very) I'm a little fearful of another 50 or so threads on this one opening.


yes, the BDG seems to spark constant debate, the believers and the naysayers.  i was surprised there is going to be another BDG book.  i have used BDG in speed chess and icc blitz.  i have used in tournament games but it was at club level where anything is sound.  maybe we can make this one a 100 page thread?!  Grin
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Glenn Snow
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1719
Location: Franklin
Joined: 09/27/03
Gender: Male
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #24 - 01/06/09 at 12:13:04
Post Tools
flaviddude wrote on 01/06/09 at 08:24:38:
Glenn Snow wrote on 01/06/09 at 03:06:23:
Tim McGrew, known most for once doing a ChessCafe column wrote a nice booklet that he sold through ICC on the BDG and the Hubsch.  Of course there were mistakes but a lot of the analysis was quite good.  I agree that the Hubsch is unfortunately unsound and against the BDG I'd love to see what White's supposed to do against the Ziegler or whatever you call the defense with after 1.d4 d4 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 (of course 3...e5 is very critical too) 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c6.


Tim McGrew is no patzer and knows a great deal about the BDG.

There is a sparate thred on the Ziegler,



You mean this thread of 10 pages? http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1083622751/0

Looking back to find that thread, started by someone familiar to me, I was mildly surprised to see just how many BDG threads there were but not nearly as surprised as I am by IM Wisnewski's announcement of a book on the BDG.  As curious as I am to see the book, (very) I'm a little fearful of another 50 or so threads on this one opening.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
flaviddude
Senior Member
****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 329
Location: Australia
Joined: 01/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #23 - 01/06/09 at 11:55:02
Post Tools
IM Christoph Wisnewski wrote on 01/06/09 at 09:05:48:
@DavidFlude

By no means did I want to sound disrespectful, when I talked about the books by Lane and Sawyer. I just feel that there are certain weaknesses that have to be addressed (and will be in my book):

Regarding Lane:

His coverage of the Lemberger is truly pitiful, even for yesterday's standards.

I totally agree.


In his chapter about the Ziegler he quotes old analysis from Studier that is simply flawed (yes, the one from the Rodriguez - Bricard game), which I suppose even Fritz 3 would have spotted back in 1995.

In addition to that, too many lines are covered with either irrelevant or long, uncommented white wins where Black missed one or more signifcant defensive resources. And even if Lane did point out where Black went wrong, he did not offer any improvements and how White should react to them.



As for Sawyer:

I agree that he has done a great job collecting material; unfortunately at some places less would have been more, as he even gives ICC games where Black mouse-slipped - I just don't think it is necessary to cover every move Black is legally allowed to make at any time. Instead, more verbal explanations would have been better.

Furthermore, rather dubious white alternatives are often supplied with uncommented white wins, making them look valid and playable. One example would be the so-called "Kloss Attack" (8 Kh1) in the Bogoljubow Defence.

My last point of criticism is the same as for Lane's book: Sometimes he does not mention critical defensive resources for Black, even if he must have been aware of them.

I know that, given the above statements, expectations for my book are high now, but I am ready to accept this challenge. I buried myself into all kinds of BDG sources for about a year and, assisted by Rybka 3, I feel quite confident.

I also have been using deep Rybka to check analysis and it keeps finding improvements for both sides.
@papageno

According to my analysis, the Diemer Gambit is good enough for equality, but not more.

I think that you are correct.

But as DavidFlude pointed out, White can also play 5 g4.

Here is a secret line but check it out youself

1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 Bf5 5.g4 Bg6 6.h4 exf  7.Qxf3 c6 8.h5 Bxc2 9.g5 is the new move 9...Nd5 10. Rh2 Nxc3
11. bxc Ba4 12.Bc4 in my opinion white has lots of compensation for the pawns. 


  

I am hopelessly addicted to the King's Gambit
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
flaviddude
Senior Member
****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 329
Location: Australia
Joined: 01/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #22 - 01/06/09 at 11:38:33
Post Tools
The names of the variations in the BDG are somewhat of a mess. For example Bogoljubov plaed a fianchetto after 5.Qf3. So why is 5.Nf3 g6 named after him
  

I am hopelessly addicted to the King's Gambit
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
IM Christoph Wisnewski
Full Member
***
Offline


International Master

Posts: 195
Location: Kiel
Joined: 04/03/05
Gender: Male
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #21 - 01/06/09 at 11:03:41
Post Tools
MNb wrote on 01/06/09 at 10:20:32:
And who the heck is Ziegler?


Yeah, it seems strange to name a line after a guy who got beat with it by Diemer like a red-headed stepchild, especially when Gunderam deserves to be credited most; I haven't decided yet, but I will probably stick to Ziegler anyway to avoid confusion with the "real" Gunderam Defence (5...Bf5)
  

"Chess you don't learn, chess you understand!" (V. Korchnoi)
Back to top
WWWICQ  
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10603
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #20 - 01/06/09 at 10:20:32
Post Tools
flaviddude wrote on 01/06/09 at 01:50:52:
As far as the kerosine is concerned (as an Irish mate terms the C-K ) the attempts to transpose to the BDG need to be examined in depth.


From a historical point of view it's the other way round - in the BDG Black can force a transposition to an anti-kerosine. Von Hennig and Milner-Barry played their variations long before Diemer. And who the heck is Ziegler?
  

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
 
IM Christoph Wisnewski
Full Member
***
Offline


International Master

Posts: 195
Location: Kiel
Joined: 04/03/05
Gender: Male
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #19 - 01/06/09 at 09:05:48
Post Tools
@DavidFlude

By no means did I want to sound disrespectful, when I talked about the books by Lane and Sawyer. I just feel that there are certain weaknesses that have to be addressed (and will be in my book):

Regarding Lane:

His coverage of the Lemberger is truly pitiful, even for yesterday's standards. Two pages (!) with mostly irrelevant variations for a critical line that has been known since the 1890s and that is played in about every 10th game? And on top of that, he states that the Lemberger can "easily be dealt with" by playing the Endgame Variation after 4 dxe5? Uhh...

In his chapter about the Ziegler he quotes old analysis from Studier that is simply flawed (yes, the one from the Rodriguez - Bricard game), which I suppose even Fritz 3 would have spotted back in 1995.

In addition to that, too many lines are covered with either irrelevant or long, uncommented white wins where Black missed one or more signifcant defensive resources. And even if Lane did point out where Black went wrong, he did not offer any improvements and how White should react to them.

As for Sawyer:

I agree that he has done a great job collecting material; unfortunately at some places less would have been more, as he even gives ICC games where Black mouse-slipped - I just don't think it is necessary to cover every move Black is legally allowed to make at any time. Instead, more verbal explanations would have been better.

Furthermore, rather dubious white alternatives are often supplied with uncommented white wins, making them look valid and playable. One example would be the so-called "Kloss Attack" (8 Kh1) in the Bogoljubow Defence.

My last point of criticism is the same as for Lane's book: Sometimes he does not mention critical defensive resources for Black, even if he must have been aware of them.

I know that, given the above statements, expectations for my book are high now, but I am ready to accept this challenge. I buried myself into all kinds of BDG sources for about a year and, assisted by Rybka 3, I feel quite confident.

@papageno

According to my analysis, the Diemer Gambit is good enough for equality, but not more. But as DavidFlude pointed out, White can also play 5 g4.

Concerning the Hubsch, I don't know if my publisher lets me include options against the Indians as the amount of the material about the BDG proper is quite large (and I don't know if I get any lenience toward my page count) - I'll let you know when I know more Wink
  

"Chess you don't learn, chess you understand!" (V. Korchnoi)
Back to top
WWWICQ  
IP Logged
 
flaviddude
Senior Member
****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 329
Location: Australia
Joined: 01/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Antidotes to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Reply #18 - 01/06/09 at 08:24:38
Post Tools
Glenn Snow wrote on 01/06/09 at 03:06:23:
Tim McGrew, known most for once doing a ChessCafe column wrote a nice booklet that he sold through ICC on the BDG and the Hubsch.  Of course there were mistakes but a lot of the analysis was quite good.  I agree that the Hubsch is unfortunately unsound and against the BDG I'd love to see what White's supposed to do against the Ziegler or whatever you call the defense with after 1.d4 d4 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 (of course 3...e5 is very critical too) 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c6.


Tim McGrew is no patzer and knows a great deal about the BDG.

There is a sparate thred on the Ziegler,
  

I am hopelessly addicted to the King's Gambit
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo