Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) NEW BUDAPEST BOOK (Read 72935 times)
zoo
Ex Member


Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #35 - 09/24/09 at 22:56:51
Post Tools
"Won't make much difference" : It was not meant to say that playing the BG is a more pleasant way to throw the game away, but that it's a good policy to play more aggressively against stronger players, and that your results will be no worse than with your usual (or best) openings. Two reasons for that :

1. Have you ever been suffocated by a stronger player from an equal position after playing your best opening? this is the worst experience in chess, one that makes you want to say : "no more!"

2. When playing aggressively, you randomise the game, which benefits to the weaker player. More importantly, your opponent may start to make concessions just to keep the game under control, until he makes one too many and realises that he can't win any more - or worse. I recall a game between Davoud Pira (a strong IM) and Alexei Dreev (a strong GM) won by Pira. With great modesty, he said :" First he under-estimated me, and then he over-estimated me."

As for what can be proven with a chess game I'm not too sure, but I recall an opening ceremony when the city mayor - his name was Jack Ralite - said : "I am proud to welcome this chess tournament, a battle of intelligence, in my city. But with all the problems in the world, I can't see why so many brilliant people gather just the create, out of nothing, a new set of problems for themselves to solve."
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Willempie
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 4312
Location: Holland
Joined: 01/07/05
Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #34 - 09/24/09 at 19:43:50
Post Tools
Stigma wrote on 09/24/09 at 19:34:07:
Won't make much difference?! It's precisely the players rated above yourself, and certainly as little as 150 points, you want to beat or draw to show you're improving! I try to always play my best openings (the ones I understand best, not necesserily objectively best) against higher rated opponents. Challenge them as much as I can and let them prove they're stronger! Quite often recently, they can't...

One of the reasons I have kept up with the Budapest as long as I did is because my results against stronger players were quite good. When I played regular openings against someone rated 200 points above me it was curtains after 20 moves. With the Budapest I would sometimes draw and when I lost I lost in the endgame (which is a good learning experience, though a tad frustrating at times).
  

If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3175
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #33 - 09/24/09 at 19:34:07
Post Tools
Quote:
A classical trick is to play it against 150+ more elo, won't make much difference and you'll be based as a BG player.
Moskalenko is a very good pro, rarely losing to weaker players. If it's good enough for him...


Won't make much difference?! It's precisely the players rated above yourself, and certainly as little as 150 points, you want to beat or draw to show you're improving! I try to always play my best openings (the ones I understand best, not necesserily objectively best) against higher rated opponents. Challenge them as much as I can and let them prove they're stronger! Quite often recently, they can't...

I would rather reverse this "trick"; I have many lines that I have really given up, but I still play them against patzers (at least 300 elo lower) who won't know the best lines anyway, to confuse the "basers".

True, Moskalenko does play the BG himself (I checked the database). But as a GM probably he has the broad understanding you need to win from both wild, calm and technical positions. I suspect most amateur BG players are most attracted to the opening's attacking and tactical nature, which makes the calm lines like Markovich's 4.e3/5.Nh3 all the more effective against them.
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
zoo
Ex Member


Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #32 - 09/24/09 at 17:31:17
Post Tools
Stigma wrote on 09/22/09 at 12:57:30:
I really find it hard to understand who the Budapest is suitable for.

People often threaten to play it, sometimes inducing White into 2.Nf3, but of course Black has to study this opening more thoroughly than White (N variations vs 1 or 2). A classical trick is to play it against 150+ more elo, won't make much difference and you'll be based as a BG player.
Moskalenko is a very good pro, rarely losing to weaker players. If it's good enough for him...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3175
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #31 - 09/23/09 at 02:52:34
Post Tools
LeeRoth wrote on 09/23/09 at 01:44:01:
Stohl-Blatny went 13.Ne4 Qe5 14.Nc3 when Stohl reckons that White's control over d4 and d5 gives him an edge (+/=).  

Does Moskalenko see it differently?

No, not really. He mentions both 13.Ne4, 13.Qc2 and 13.Nb3, but all these lines end in a slight advantage for White.

Moskalenko notes that Black doesn't score well in this line, and he goes so far as to recommend 6.Nbd2 to White players. From my superficial reading he seems to find most hope for Black in 9...d6!? 10.0-0 and now 10...a5!? or 10...Bd7; or alternatively 9...0-0 10.0-0 a5.

It will be interesting to see Taylor's analysis. If Black is eventually OK against both 4.Bf4/7.e3 and 4.e3/5.Nh3, I may need a new line against the Budapest...  Undecided
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LeeRoth
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 1513
Joined: 10/22/05
Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #30 - 09/23/09 at 01:44:01
Post Tools
Stohl-Blatny went 13.Ne4 Qe5 14.Nc3 when Stohl reckons that White's control over d4 and d5 gives him an edge (+/=). 

Does Moskalenko see it differently?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3175
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #29 - 09/23/09 at 00:00:35
Post Tools
TopNotch wrote on 09/22/09 at 22:50:05:
Yes, this is probably a typo. Most likely he meant Blatny's move 10...Ng6 intending 11.Bg3 and only then Bd6 with a solid game.

Tops Smiley

Sounds logical. I see now that Moskalenko's 2007 book also covered this, using Stohl-Blatny, Prague 1996 as his example game. The queen on d6 looks a bit strange, but maybe it's OK. The following game by a Budapest expert could be important:

[Event "ZMD Open"]
[Site "Dresden GER"]
[Date "2008.07.22"]
[Round "4"]
[White "Kunz, K."]
[Black "Miezis, N."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A52"]
[WhiteElo "2231"]
[BlackElo "2540"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e5 3. dxe5 Ng4 4. Bf4 Nc6 5. Nf3 Bb4+ 6. Nbd2 Qe7 7. e3 Ncxe5 8. Nxe5 Nxe5 9. Be2 O-O 10. O-O Ng6 11. Bg3 Bd6 12. Bxd6 Qxd6 13. Qc2 b6 14. Bf3 Rb8 15. g3 Ne5 16. Bg2 Bb7 17. Bxb7 Rxb7 18. Rad1 f5 19. Qc3 Qe7 20. Qd4 Rf7 21. Rfe1 Rb8 22. a3 Re8 23. f4 Nc6 24. Qc3 Rf6 25. b4 Re6 26. Nf1 a5 27. c5 axb4 28. axb4 b5 29. Qd3 Rb8 30. Qxf5 Nxb4 31. Rd2 c6 32. Ra1 Rf8 33. Qb1 Nd5 34. Rxd5 cxd5 35. Qxb5 Rc6 36. Ra5 Re8 37. Qb7 h6 38. Ra7 Rxc5 39. Qxd7 Qxd7 40. Rxd7 Rb8 0-1

13...b6 was not mentioned by Moskalenko, who focused on 13...Qe7 but felt White had an edge (14.c5!).

Kunz' 15.g3 may be too slow to fight for an advantage. White has other options on move 13 too.

  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2084
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #28 - 09/22/09 at 22:50:05
Post Tools
Stigma wrote on 09/22/09 at 12:57:30:
John Donaldson has a review up on http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_reviews_jd/Budapest_Gambit.html

One line mentioned there is 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.Bf4 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bb4+ 6.Nbd2 Qe7 7.e3. White just leaves the bishop looking sllly on b4 rather than spend a tempo on a3. 7...Nxe5 8.Nxe5 Nxe5 9.Be2 0-0 10.0-0.

Now Donaldson comments:
Quote:
"Taylor points out that Black has tried not only 10…Bxd2 but also 10…Re8, 10…d6 and 10…a5 with generally miserable results. These moves force the second player to either surrender the two Bishops or allow pawn weaknesses, or both. The author’s solution is the little known 10…Bd6!? which he spends seven pages examining."


Is this a typo from Donaldson? I just don't understand how 10...Bd6 can solve Black's problems after 11.Ne4! and now:
- 11...Bc5?? 12.Qd5 d6 13.Nxc5 +-
- 11...b6 12.Nxd6 cxd6 13.Qd4 with a R coming to d1.
- 11...Nxc4 12.Bxd6 (or 12.Nxd6 Nxd6 13.Rc1 Ne8 14.Bxc7 d6 15.Ba5 b6 16.Bb4 a5 17.Bc3. White has the bishop pair and better pawns.)12...Nxd6 13.Nxd6 cxd6 14.Rc1 with fantastic compensation.

I know some people enjoy playing with an IQP but this looks too much of a good thing! Smiley

Btw. I'm also interested in the 4.e3/5.Nh3 line you're discussing, it's a very easy solution for White.

I really find it hard to understand who the Budapest is suitable for. Even if it somehow holds up theoretically, it's a rare player who is comfortable with both patient positional play (e3/Nh3 lines), technical positions where White has the bishop pair (4.Bf4 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bb4+ lines), attacking lines with ...Ra6-h6, and playing against a big centre in lines like 4.e4 h5!? (Taylor).


Yes, this is probably a typo. Most likely he meant Blatny's move 10...Ng6 intending 11.Bg3 and only then Bd6 with a solid game.

Tops Smiley
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3175
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #27 - 09/22/09 at 12:57:30
Post Tools
John Donaldson has a review up on http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_reviews_jd/Budapest_Gambit.html

One line mentioned there is 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.Bf4 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bb4+ 6.Nbd2 Qe7 7.e3. White just leaves the bishop looking sllly on b4 rather than spend a tempo on a3. 7...Nxe5 8.Nxe5 Nxe5 9.Be2 0-0 10.0-0.

Now Donaldson comments:
Quote:
"Taylor points out that Black has tried not only 10…Bxd2 but also 10…Re8, 10…d6 and 10…a5 with generally miserable results. These moves force the second player to either surrender the two Bishops or allow pawn weaknesses, or both. The author’s solution is the little known 10…Bd6!? which he spends seven pages examining."


Is this a typo from Donaldson? I just don't understand how 10...Bd6 can solve Black's problems after 11.Ne4! and now:
- 11...Bc5?? 12.Qd5 d6 13.Nxc5 +-
- 11...b6 12.Nxd6 cxd6 13.Qd4 with a R coming to d1.
- 11...Nxc4 12.Bxd6 (or 12.Nxd6 Nxd6 13.Rc1 Ne8 14.Bxc7 d6 15.Ba5 b6 16.Bb4 a5 17.Bc3. White has the bishop pair and better pawns.)12...Nxd6 13.Nxd6 cxd6 14.Rc1 with fantastic compensation.

I know some people enjoy playing with an IQP but this looks too much of a good thing! Smiley

Btw. I'm also interested in the 4.e3/5.Nh3 line you're discussing, it's a very easy solution for White.

I really find it hard to understand who the Budapest is suitable for. Even if it somehow holds up theoretically, it's a rare player who is comfortable with both patient positional play (e3/Nh3 lines), technical positions where White has the bishop pair (4.Bf4 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bb4+ lines), attacking lines with ...Ra6-h6, and playing against a big centre in lines like 4.e4 h5!? (Taylor).
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #26 - 09/16/09 at 12:54:33
Post Tools
kylemeister wrote on 09/15/09 at 14:34:55:
5...g6 (followed by steering the QN to c5) was also Nunn's choice in NCO, where several games are cited (including the above-mentioned Gurevich-Tisdall) which supposedly led to equality.


Yeah but it isn't really equal if White gets to develop his bishop on b2.  White still can hope to grind out a win based on his space advantage and domination of d5.  It's this ...a5-a4 idea in reaction to White's Qd2 that has me bothered, and I don't recall seeing that featured anywhere; I just noticed it in my data base.  Or maybe that idea too was in Nunn or some other reference and I just missed it.  I'll have to look deeper because White also can try Bd2 and may have something even then.  It's one thing to put "=" in a book, it's another thing to play the position.
  

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



Posts: 4682
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #25 - 09/15/09 at 14:34:55
Post Tools
5...g6 (followed by steering the QN to c5) was also Nunn's choice in NCO, where several games are cited (including the above-mentioned Gurevich-Tisdall) which supposedly led to equality.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #24 - 09/15/09 at 12:02:42
Post Tools
I think Bibs is right that 6...g6 is Black's best.  A big problem then for White is that his natural idea of Qd2, b3 and Bb2 is readily stymied if Black reacts immediately with ...a5! and as soon as b3, with ...a4!.  I looked at it last night for some time and my confidence in 5.Nh3 was reduced.  White's statistics are very good, but not when Black exploits this nuance.  Black's ...Nbd7-c5 is particularly good with his bishop on g7, I think.
  

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


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 4312
Location: Holland
Joined: 01/07/05
Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #23 - 09/15/09 at 07:59:25
Post Tools
Markovich wrote on 09/15/09 at 02:51:00:
Oh, I don't know that such a specific discussion between two amateurs proves anything, but at move 14. I suppose I would play e4 and follow with Nfd5, trying to keep up my bind and willing to meet 14.e4 Bd7 15.Nfd5 f5 with something like 16.f4 N~ 17.exf5 Bxf5 18.Ne3 Bd7 19.g3.  I don't see that Black's game is all that good, but maybe I'm wrong.

Black also had 12...f5 and I'm not sure how White should play against that.

In my database, 12.Rad1 is much preferred to 12.b3 and White scores 81.8% in 11 games.  From looking at some of them, it seems that White can get by without b3.  For the time being, I'll maintain my view that Black's check from b4 is not his best plan against White's system.

Sure, but imo this line is better without the bishops than with it for black as the advance of the f-pawn lacks additional firepower (ie with the c1-bishop on the long diagonal). The black f8-bishop usually isnt much use on the q-side when e3 has been played (and is very prone to tempo losses due to a3 and b4), while I think on g7 it costs too many moves and indeed gives white the time he needs to execute the plans with the knight travel and advance of the f-pawn.

Then again we are not really discussing hot theory here as I think this e3 line is one of the many where it is black who has to prove equality. I think the lines of Palliser and Cox in their 1.d4 books are much worse for black in this respect (slight but very steady advantage to white), but that's me.
  

If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #22 - 09/15/09 at 02:51:00
Post Tools
Oh, I don't know that such a specific discussion between two amateurs proves anything, but at move 14. I suppose I would play e4 and follow with Nfd5, trying to keep up my bind and willing to meet 14.e4 Bd7 15.Nfd5 f5 with something like 16.f4 N~ 17.exf5 Bxf5 18.Ne3 Bd7 19.g3.  I don't see that Black's game is all that good, but maybe I'm wrong.

Black also had 12...f5 and I'm not sure how White should play against that.

In my database, 12.Rad1 is much preferred to 12.b3 and White scores 81.8% in 11 games.  From looking at some of them, it seems that White can get by without b3.  For the time being, I'll maintain my view that Black's check from b4 is not his best plan against White's system.
  

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


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 4312
Location: Holland
Joined: 01/07/05
Re: NEW BUDAPEST BOOK
Reply #21 - 09/14/09 at 23:44:25
Post Tools
Markovich wrote on 09/14/09 at 19:46:46:
Actually I think it's a mistake for Black to accelerate White's development in this way.  After 6...Nxe5 7.Nc3 White's obvious plan is to go Nf4-d5, Be2, 0-0, and ram his f-pawn to f6.  I once defeated CC-IM John Mousessian with this.  White can also consider playing on the queenside.

I think a great many people assume that this system is innocuous because of the funny-looking knight deployment to h3.  But it's a big deal to have this piece on f4 instead of f3, and worth the investment of time to get it there.

I am not sure what you get against a very simple black set up (as played by Mohr who played the Budapest with some success):
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.e3 Nxe5 5.Nh3 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Bxd2+ 7.Qxd2 d6 8.Nf4 0-0 9.Be2 Nbd7 10.Nc3 a5 11.0-0 Nc5 12.b3 Bf5 13.f3 f6 14.Rad1 Re8
Sure you can try for some other stuff, but you are missing that bishop sorely and black always can bail out with c6 (sometimes combined with Ng6) to kick away a knight from d5.
  

If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo