Stefan Buecker wrote on 06/06/10 at 13:33:55:

Hi Stefan How are you ?
waited for your reply. 
1.)After 7.e5 Qe5 8.Bf7 Kf7 9.d4 Qf5 10.Bf4 Nf6 what is the best move you think ? Qe2 or Qe3 or Be5( I found in my analysis as best to hold for some time.)
2.) One doubt 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.Bc4 g4 5.0-0 gxf3 6.Qxf3 Qf6 7.d3 Nc6 8.Bxf4 d6 9.Nc3 Be6? . Why Be6 and Not 9.....Nge7!!

Regards
Om

Hadron wrote on 06/05/10 at 22:18:27:

All those who react, including you. As for the reason why - but only if you care, which I doubt given once again your poor reading - I recommend rereading all the posts which include the name McDonald in this thread.

Hadron wrote on 06/05/10 at 23:04:25:

As I agree with you that the lines discussed here are pretty irrelevant I haven't contributed analysis. I cannot help wondering why you got involved with lengty posts. A preference for the irrelevant perhaps?

Bücker attributes 13.Qe2 to MacLean. As B. is known for his meticulous research on subjects like these I rather rely on him than on someone who always finishes his posts with

and has problems with reading.

MNb wrote on 06/05/10 at 15:28:25:

If the bold type proves that McDonald did not claim to invent 9...Qf5 then why in the blue buggery bollicks would you affirm as such? Who the hell cares?
HTH

@MNb:
I apologize for misquoting MacDonnald. 
I clearly misunderstood.

@HTH
Something about the percentages.
On the basis of correspondence games:
After 11.Qe2 
White scored 40% after 11.Qe2 (70 games)
Which is pretty close to your own observation on TGT-tournaments

70% against   11....Bg7?! (10 games)
66% against   11....Qe6?! (19 games; most frequent answer)
12% against   11....Qg4 (13 games)
18% against   11....d6  (11 games)
30% against   11....Qg6 (10 games)
So the 40-50% seems largely due from 2 not very convincing replies.
'---------------------------------------------------------
@THT thx for posting Leisebein's analysis!:

Quote:



The game I referred to in an earlier post is not Leisebein-Gysi,1998 but on Blankenberg-Lagemann, 2001, corr. which followed Leisebein's analysis until the 24th move where 24.Qf4 iso Leisebein's stronger 24.Qf5 was played.

When playing over Leisebein's line I think that even in the final position after 33.....Rf6 Black still is better.

However several improvements come to mind. All having in common that Black is prepared to shed another pawn to coordinate his pieces (especially to connect his rooks) and take over the initiative. Two examples
a) 26....Ke7  (iso 26....a6) b) 30...Kd8! 31.Qxh6?!, Re8!

@HTH
Regarding the Lean-Attack
Quote:

The above variation is right on the money!, 
Hebels-Trapeaux, corr. 1999 is practical evidence....

For the owners of somewhat older opening books, it is probable usefull to now that the drawing line given by Euwe/Estrin/Keres namely
14.Qf3,Qe6 15.Qe2 with a repetition of moves, was proven wrong as well:
Since 1998 Black started to play 14...Qg6 in corr.games and - sorry about statistics again - scored a convincing 8/8 in correspondence games. Although I think that Bücker allready pointed out 14...Qg6 in the mid eighties.

Normally I don’t get involved in Markovich controlled boards but if I may:
>The diagrammed position, which arises after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf3 3.Nf3 g5 4.Bc4 g4 5.0-0 gxf3 6.Qxf3 Qf6 7.e5 Qxe5 8.Bxf7+ has been known as lost for White since at least 1986, when Bücker published his book on the KG.<
Most of the games that Thomas Stock had on his Muzio Polerio website started in 1998 and if you consult Kaissiber 13 (March 2000) Thomas Stock wrote an article in which he thinks 8.Bxf7 is better for black after 9...Qf5! suggesting that 9....Qf5! 10.Bxf4 Nf6 11.Qe2 is the best of the bunch. A move which Leisebein credits to Jack Yoos in a Chessbase magazine (64) 

>And still people kept playing it. And some of them put their money on 10.Qe2 (iso 10.g4). As far as I know this move did not score well in Thomas Stock' thematic tournaments. See Kaissiber for the details<
Of the 10 files I have from the Thomas Stock website, there 38 10.Qe2 games of which 
+14 =9 -15. That is 50/50 if you discount draws.


>Your analysis makes 3 claims:<
>11...Qg4+ is better than 11...Qg6+<
>11...Qg6+ is doubtful
>a) 11..Qg4
>11...Qg4 is actually a good move<
>Though your line 12.Qxg4,Nxg4 13.Be5+,Kg8 <
>14.Bxh8 the move 14....Nc6 never has been tried.<

My question is you have sac-ed two pieces for the attack why on earth would you consider exchanging queens for sod all compensation? I think the alternative of 12.Qc4+ is usually dismissed on the strength of  Sakellarakis v Schuller 1999 TGT1.17 but Thomas Stock points out that after 12…Kg7 Better is 13.Be5 rather than Nc3?! that was played.

micawber wrote on 06/03/10 at 21:40:13:

This is dismissed on the strength of Leisebein,Peter - Gysi,A  corr 1998  but Peter Leisebein suggests 16.Nxf6! Kxf6 17.Rxf5+ Qxf5 18.Rf1 Qxf1+ 19.Qxf1+ Ke7 (19...Ke6 20.Qf3 a5 21.Qg4+ Kf7 22.Qf5+ Ke7 23.Qg5+ Ke8 24.Qg7 Rf8 25.Qxc7 Nd7 26.Qxb7 Rb8 27.Qe4+ Kd8=) 20.Qb5 Nd7 21.Qxb7 Rab8 22.Qe4+ Kd8 23.b3 Nf6 24.Qf5 Rf8 25.g4 h6 26.h3 a6 27.c4 Ke7 28.Qa5 Rb6 29.Qf5 d5 30.Qf4 dxc4 31.Qxc7+ Nd7 32.Qxc4 Rf4 33.Qd3 Rbf6 unclear; 16.Rxf5 Qxf5 17.Nxf6 Qe6 18.Qh5+ Ke7 19.Qh4 Qxf6 20.Re1+ Kf7–+] Chessbase Magazine 64

>Incidentally, McDonald in his KG-book, claimed ...Qf5 as his own 'invention'<
>McDonald's swashbuckling book suffered from quite a few flaws, but this is not one them. Page 62: <
I do have said book and page 62 says nothing of the sort a part from appending 9…Qf5 with the ! it deserves. As for McDonald inventing it, both the Thomas Stock files and Kaissiber 13 credit the move to Steintz.

>The Lean attack is a draw at best<
You what? The Lean attack is only a possible draw if Black ops for the possibility of Alapin’s 13…b5 or 13…Nxd5. On 13.Qe2 Qe6 Whites position is on a down turn and if you are going to quote 14.Nxe7 Qxe7 15.Bc3 Rg8 16.Qh5 Qg5 17.Rf2 as being equal….don’t because 17…Rf8 rather bollicks that notion
HTH

micawber wrote on 06/03/10 at 16:46:46:

You're right of course (as always 
I saw it after I posted it, but did not have time to put it right.
The double Muzio is busted and Blackdoes not need to enter the triple muzio.
Hence, the exchange variation and the Lean attack are the remaining tries. The Lean attack is a draw at best, while the original post gave a game (calling it Hamppe-Muzio, but Nc6 only happens at move 11) with the exchange variation, which even though White lost appears to be White's best try.

micawber wrote on 06/03/10 at 21:40:13:

1.Accepeted 14...Nc6 good move with the idea Bd6!! with conjuction to Ne3
2.Please post your lines I  will analyse.
3.Well 12...Bg7 and 12...Be7 lead to same position after 14....Bxf6. So it means nothing if d6! played.

micawber wrote on 06/03/10 at 16:46:46:

McDonald's swashbuckling book suffered from quite a few flaws, but this is not one them. Page 62:

Quote:

A more typical flaw is that McDonald repeats this analysis, concludes that it is equal but misses the improvement 14...Lxg4!