Paddy wrote on 06/04/13 at 01:55:48:

This can be found in Dick Smit's 1982 book on the Göring Gambit (it's in Dutch, so you probably won't know it) and was played in a corr. game Feytens-Petzold, 1974. The game went 15.g4 Nxg7 16.Bxg7 and here Feytens proposed 16...Bxg4 17.Bh6 Bxf3 18.Rd7 Kg6 with complete equality. So Smit proposed 15.Nh4. I have analyzed this many years ago and didn't come to any conclusion. Note 14.Nd4 Nxg7 (Nc5 15.Nb5) 15.Rhe1+ Kf7 16.Bf4 Ne6 17.Nf5 or 16.Bxg7 Kxg7 17.Nb5 Rxg2 18.Nxc7 and 19.Rd8.
Taking the second pawn is the principled and ambitious choice; I won't object if Black feels like battling it out. Alekhine's plan is the pragmatic one.
Thanks for the compliment. The recipe is quite simple: I like to play open gambits and thus recommend the defences that bother me most.

MNb wrote on 06/01/13 at 16:33:58:


I analysed this line many years ago and concluded that Black is OK after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.c3 dxc3 5.Bc4 Nf6 6.Nxc3 Bb4 7.e5 d5 8.exf6 dxc4 9.Qxd8+Nxd8 10.fxg7 Rg8 11.Bh6 Ne6 12.0-0-0 Bxc3 13. bxc3 and now 13...f6 14. Rhe1 Kf7 and it's a game.

Then if 15.Nh4 Nc5 aiming for counterplay seems the best way to handle it, rather than rushing to capture the g7-pawn. White's best try might be 15. Re4, answering Black's most ambitious response 15...b5 with 16. Rd5!?.

The chances seem about equal, but it's tricky and my old analysis was not not engine-checked, so "caveat emptor" and all that.

Black definitely needs to know what he is doing, so I'm not really disagreeing very strongly with MNb, whose judgement, especially of open games, has proved time and time again on this forum to be pretty reliable and certainly always worth our attention.

All right, I'm going with the "manly" 9.0-0-0 0-0!. It must be so. No "yellow coward" defenses for me! Apparently I am in good company as I found a reference to the game G. Good - M. Morss, USCCC-13 Final 1999.

ChevyBanginStyle wrote on 05/31/13 at 17:43:25:

I disagree. 8.exf6 dxc4 9.Qxd8+ and the only question is if White's initiative provides more than just sufficient compensation. White can always use his/her initiative to simplify to a dead drawn endgame, because of the Bishops of opposite colours. After Nxd8 10.fxg7 Rg8 11.Bh6 Bxc3+ 12.bxc3 Ne6 White's results always have been excellent.
I understand your desire to cut some theory here, but I think with this line you pay too heavy a price. An option that might take White out of his/her comfort zone is the blockading strategy from Nyholm-Alekhine, Copenhagen 1912: 4...d5 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.cxd4 Nf6 7.Nc3 Bb4 8.Be2 Ne4 (though you might prefer to play Bf5 before castling, like Alekhine did). From a positional point of view this looks far more attractive for Black than that Queenless middlegame line.

The Modern Defense to the KID, reached via 2...d5, is one part of the repertoire for Black that is on display here:

https://1e5.chesstheory.org/p.php?z=pt&a=29&b=0&c=29&d=0

Use settings to highlight the public repertoire for Black.  The only incomplete portions of the repertoire are the Vienna and some parts of the Bishop's opening, which I expect to complete in the next couple of weeks.

After I've done that, I will move on to the Black side of the Spanish.

ChevyBanginStyle wrote on 05/31/13 at 18:14:47:

I have 10...f5 11.Ng5 Nd7 in my notes, which looks really better for black. I do agree that 3...g5 means a lot of theory and may not be practical to learn, something like 3...Ne7 may be a lot easier to play, but sharp drawing lines is not the problem as far as I know.

Personally I think that Black has plenty of chances with the Modern KID.  I don't consider playing it "settling for equality."  I also think that White is close to equality with 3...g5, in his best lines.  So I think it's more a question of what kind of game you want to play.

MNb wrote on 05/31/13 at 10:10:24:


My move numbering was off by one (just made an edit). It should be 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.c3 dxc3 5.Bc4 Nf6!? 6.Nxc3 Bb4 7.e5 d5!, but it seems like you understood what I meant. You're probably right about that being better for White than the associated Goering line and I actually agree, but I think Black is not worse and may have a slight edge in the arising endgame. This line is a practical decision to avoid the double pawn sacrifice line, although I think accepting is the most principled decision. The accepted line seems like it could be very difficult to defend over the board and I think it would take many hours of study before I could play it with confidence. I'd be happy to hear any suggestions on how to handle this dilemma, because I think 5.Bc4 is White's most dangerous way to play the accepted Goering.

Quote:


I wrestled with that issue in the King's Gambit for quite some time actually. I was deciding between 3...g5, 3...d6, and 3...h6. Eventually, I decided it was best to give White "what he wants," because I think it is simply good for Black. I now consider h6 to be a strong prophylactic move. This is where I part with convention, because most sources consider 3...g5 to be the strongest move.

Thanks for the link. I wasn't aware of it before, although I have been following the forum analysis compiled by Micawber. I'll check it out and see if I can find any new ideas.