Many thanks to all those who responded.  I have begun playing the Open spanish using the berlin move order.  This seems to be a great fit for my repertoire... kind of like the 2 knights vs. the italian.  If white plays inferior lines black gets easy equality after a few tactical nuances, and if white plays the critical response (transposing to the open spanish), black gets a more imbalanced game (like the morphy 2 knights) than the quiet lines of the closed lopez.

I trust the comments of Markovich (and others) than if white deviates on moves 5 or 6, black's game is easier than the main lines of the open spanish.  However, it seems impossible to find any literature to guide the black player in the supposedly less critical lines.  I'll make another post in this forum to address these specifically.

Thanks again!

My recommendation would be to either play the Berlin Wall, using Cox's book as your reference, or follow Davies's 1.e4 e5 repertoire, but using the two Gajewski variations (9...Rb8 and especially 9...Na5 10.Bc2 d5). Very few <2000 players have seen the line, and none of those have a booked-up response to it.

TalJechin wrote on 07/06/09 at 07:22:43:


Got to agree with you about Cox's excellent book on the Berlin.

I'd also say this about the Berlin (based on my practical experience with it against the kind of opposition mentioned in this thread)

1.  You'll almost never get a Wall against this strength of opposition.  most people play 5. Re1 not 5. d4.  Re1 is very comfortable for Black.

2. As said above the Wall itself is not drawish anyway.


If not the Berlin - which many won't favour because of the potential for the early queen exchange - I found the Zaitsev fairly easy to understand and played it for many years.

Essentially, it seems to me, this is because you can boil the opening down to "attack e4" ... Knight on f6, Bishop to b7, Rook to e8 and get the other bish out the way, play ... exd4 where necessary.

No idea what the theoretical status of it is now but that won't matter for the strenghth of opposition mentioned in the thread.  Also - I found nobody ever takes the forced draw so no need to worry about that.

TonyRo wrote on 07/07/09 at 15:30:29:


You're welcome.  But no, my notes have been totally revised since writing that.  One of the newer ideas is a White's early Qd3 in the c3 line, but Black appears to be OK there as well.

Schaakhamster wrote on 07/07/09 at 13:08:42:


It's a good try for White, but I think Black is O.K.  Unfortunately I am not at liberty to share my specific ideas since this defense is relied upon, with good success I might add, by a talented and ambitious former student of mine.

One defense not mentioned so far is 3...Nf6 4.0-0 Bc5.  This is sound, in my opinion, and quite serviceable.

[quote author=nmga link=1246508743/15#17 date=1246872157]Interesting discussion. Taljechin, I'd be interested in knowing which [i]non-[/i]'Wall' Berlin set-ups you/Cox consider attractive for Black. For example, what is the status of 7 ...Ne4!? these days?
[/quote]

Que? Why do you assume I'm talking about a non-Wall Berlin??


[quote]There is certainly something to be said for the Berlin but avoiding the exchange variation shouldn't be its main appeal.[/quote]

Well, it may not be the main appeal, but it's certainly a big perk!

TalJechin wrote on 07/06/09 at 08:46:23:



I'm not going to dispute the value of the Berlin. I do feel it is an opening which will be either a hit or a miss for someone.

Quote:


okay, are you serious? We are talking about the dreaded Ruy Lopez Bishop? There is certainly something to be said for the Berlin but avoiding the exchange variation shouldn't be its main appeal.