ChessPub Forum - C57: Is Traxler Refuted ?

sloughter God Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 619 Location: schoharie Joined: 12/29/08 Gender:	Re: C57: Is Traxler Refuted ? Reply #52 - 12/07/12 at 19:02:40	Post Tools	Print Post
	Smyslov_Fan wrote on 12/04/11 at 17:16:17: Thanks, Micawber! I have done a fair bit of research and didn't come up with anything prior to 1996 either. The person who originally told me that Larry Evans published analysis now says it was one of Ken Smith's Chess Digest pamphlets, but he doesn't have it anymore. I'll keep looking, but I think this may be a wild goose chase. Does anyone have the Chess Digest Pamphlet on the Traxler or perhaps the Two Knights that covers this line? Here are three sources pre-1996: Gregor Cramer, Traxler-Gegenangriff Fritz Variante Ulvestad Variante, Breyer Verlag, 1993 Yakov Estrin's "Wilkes-Barre Variation," Chess Enterprises, Inc. 1978. Ken Williams, "The Real American Wilkes Barre," Chess Enterprises, Inc. 1978 See also John Donaldson, "Death Knell for the Wilkes Barre?" Inside Chess, v. 4, Issue 13, p.19.


	IP Logged

Smyslov_Fan YaBB Moderator Correspondence fan Offline Progress depends on the unreasonable man. ~GBS Posts: 6902 Joined: 06/15/05	Re: C57: Is Traxler Refuted ? Reply #51 - 12/04/11 at 17:16:17	Post Tools	Print Post
	Thanks, Micawber! I have done a fair bit of research and didn't come up with anything prior to 1996 either. The person who originally told me that Larry Evans published analysis now says it was one of Ken Smith's Chess Digest pamphlets, but he doesn't have it anymore. I'll keep looking, but I think this may be a wild goose chase. Does anyone have the Chess Digest Pamphlet on the Traxler or perhaps the Two Knights that covers this line?


	IP Logged

PANFR Senior Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 256 Location: Greece Joined: 10/31/11 Gender:	Re: C57: Is Traxler Refuted ? Reply #50 - 12/04/11 at 07:21:41	Post Tools	Print Post
	Ah, thanks for the link. 5.Nxf7 is a great move for analysts, but OTB one would always pick 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Bd5 or Bb3 and be more or less a pawn up for nothing- or even play 5.d4, which also is very annoying to meet.


	IP Logged

micawber

God Member

Offline

like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male

Re: C57: Is Traxler Refuted ?
Reply #49 - 12/03/11 at 16:18:21

Post Tools

Print Post

11.Be2,0-0 12.Kg2,Rxf7 13.Rf1,Rxf1 14.Qxf1,Be6 unclear
was given by Martin Bennedik who was an expert on this line around 1999.
11....Qe4+ 12.Kf2, 0-0 seems to be sufficient for equality as well. I am not aware of any games prior to 1996.

For those looking for some background around this line or on the schmidt attack:
http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1174512176/30

IP Logged

Smyslov_Fan YaBB Moderator Correspondence fan Offline Progress depends on the unreasonable man. ~GBS Posts: 6902 Joined: 06/15/05	Re: C57-C59: Is Traxler Refuted ? Reply #48 - 12/02/11 at 13:54:30	Post Tools	Print Post
	Thanks PANFR, I too found several minor correspondence games with Be2, but I haven't found any reference to games played by Marshall or any theoretical articles that mention it. Does anyone else know the pedigree of 11.Be2, or is it just a random move?


	IP Logged

vallescure YaBB Newbies Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 44 Joined: 09/20/11	Re: C57-C59: Is Traxler Refuted ? Reply #47 - 12/02/11 at 12:03:25	Post Tools	Print Post
	Some years ago , I proposed 5 Bxf7+ Ke7 6 b4!? ( Schmidt attack ) , and I played it myself in a corr. game I can no more find my analyzes but I remember the position is very rich and as complex as , for instance , the Cambridge Gambit in the Alekhine It desrves a further examination with "modern" engines


	IP Logged

PANFR Senior Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 256 Location: Greece Joined: 10/31/11 Gender:	Re: C57-C59: Is Traxler Refuted ? Reply #46 - 12/01/11 at 10:29:08	Post Tools	Print Post
	There are seven games with 11.Be2 in the online chesslive.de database. I see no reason trying that as white- black seems comfortably equal after 11...0-0 and 11...Qe4, and 11...Rf8!? is also interesting, with the idea 12.Kg2 Rxf7 13.Rf1 Bf5 14.d3 0-0-0 (I will admit I don't particularly like this idea).


	IP Logged

Smyslov_Fan

YaBB Moderator
Correspondence fan

Offline

Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05

Re: C57-C59: Is Traxler Refuted ?
Reply #45 - 12/01/11 at 05:39:52

Post Tools

Print Post

Hi,

I'm trying to find out the pedigree of the following line: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Nf7 Bf2 6.Kf2 Ne4 7.Ke3?!/!? Qh4 (Nunn considers 7....Qe7 to give Black an edge, but Estrin thought White has an edge after 8.c3! I don't know which was correct) 8.g3 Ng3 9.hg3 Qd4 10.Kf3 d5 11.Be2 instead of 11.Rh4, which is the only move in my database and the only move in chessgames.com's database also.

Someone told me that there was a game that Marshall played with 11.Be2, and that Larry Evans mentioned it also. However, I haven't found any such games or references. When has this been played, and is there any theory on this position beyond 11.Rh4 with a probable draw in the next few moves?

Here's the continuation of the game that raised the question (with VERY light notes):

Download game in pgn format

IP Logged

Ferit Tuncer YaBB Newbies Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 13 Location: İzmir, Turkey Joined: 11/22/10	Re: Is Traxler Refuted ? Reply #44 - 12/20/10 at 07:11:35	Post Tools	Print Post
	Djy wrote on 12/18/10 at 15:39:11: Ferit Tuncer wrote on 12/11/10 at 19:25:37: Anyone has 12.3 Little Killer Moves by Nikolay Ninov in NIC Yearbook 90 (2009)? It's a recent analysis and may contain answers for our questions. There 's an answer elsewhere in the Forum and the concensus is black is OK Of course black is okay, but this analysis may contain some improvements. If anyone has please send me.

	...You must take your opponent into a deep dark forest where 2+2=5, and the path leading out is only wide enough for one...
	IP Logged

Djy Full Member Offline Non mais y connait pas Raoul! Posts: 157 Joined: 03/21/10	Re: Is Traxler Refuted ? Reply #43 - 12/18/10 at 15:39:11	Post Tools	Print Post
	Ferit Tuncer wrote on 12/11/10 at 19:25:37: Anyone has 12.3 Little Killer Moves by Nikolay Ninov in NIC Yearbook 90 (2009)? It's a recent analysis and may contain answers for our questions. There 's an answer elsewhere in the Forum and the concensus is black is OK

	La connerie c'est la décrontaction de l'intelligence Gainsbourg La victoire est brillante mais l'échec est mat! Coluche
	IP Logged

Ferit Tuncer YaBB Newbies Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 13 Location: İzmir, Turkey Joined: 11/22/10	Re: Is Traxler Refuted ? Reply #42 - 12/11/10 at 19:25:37	Post Tools	Print Post
	Anyone has 12.3 Little Killer Moves by Nikolay Ninov in NIC Yearbook 90 (2009)? It's a recent analysis and may contain answers for our questions.

	...You must take your opponent into a deep dark forest where 2+2=5, and the path leading out is only wide enough for one...
	IP Logged

MNb God Member Offline Rudolf Spielmann forever Posts: 10780 Location: Moengo Joined: 01/05/04 Gender:	Re: Is Traxler Refuted ? Reply #41 - 11/30/10 at 19:49:30	Post Tools	Print Post
	Then perhaps you could comment on this. That would be more fruitfull than just repeating your question on page 1, don't you think? Master Om wrote on 09/01/10 at 06:54:39: de Zeeuw Refutation number 5: 5.Bxf7 Ke7 6.Bb3 and now Qe8, which scores the best in the computer for Black, is not looked at, other than to say that it might transpose back into the main line. 5...Kf8 is actually playable, but not analyzed. Note - this line is probably White's best response to the Traxler. [+0.68] d=27 6.Bb3 d6 7.d3 Qe8 8.c3 Rf8 9.Nf3 h6 10.Nbd2 (425:13.49) 54251499kN Conquistador wrote on 10/05/10 at 22:13:51: Not all is lost with 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Bb3. I have analysed four possible moves that have any real significance. A: 6...Qf8? This was one of my attempts to rehabilitate the main line. It is dubious though and more of a surprise than a good move. 7.0-0! (7.d3 Bxf2+) 7…d6 8.Nc3 Bg4 9.Nd5+ Kd8 10.Nxf6 Bxd1 11.Ne6+ Kc8 12.Nxf6 gxf6 13.Rxd1 Rxf8 14.c3 and black is struggling for a draw in the endgame. B: 6...Rf8? I am going to be bold and call this move an outright error. White has quite a few lines where they can hold the advantage and in some cases leave black in shambles. This is the old main line and should be discarded. B1: 7.0-0 d6 (7…h6 8.Nf3 d6 9.d3 Bg4 10.Be3 Nh5 11.Nbd2 and white has a significant advantage) and two more sub variations arise. B1A: 8.d3 Bg4 9.Nf3 (9.Qe1 h6 10.h3 hxg5 11.hxg4 Qe8 12.Bxg5 [12.Qd1 Qg6] 12…Qg6 13.Be3 [13.Qd2 Rh8] 13…Nxg4 14.Bxc5 Qh5 and black is winning) 9…Nd4 10.Nbd2 Qe8 (10…Nh5 11.c3 Nxf3+ 12.Nxf3 Bxf3 13.gxf3 Nf4 14.d4 Bb6 15.Kh1! with 16.Rg1 to follow up and white is winning) 11.h3 (11.Re1 Qg6!; 11.Kh1 Qh5 12.c3 Nxf3 13.gxf3 Bh3 14.Rg1 Kd8 15.Rxg7 [15.Nc4 Ne8) 15…Ne8 16.Rg8 Rxg8 17.Bxg8 Qh4 18.d4 exd4 19.Qg1 Nf6 20.Qg7 dxc3 21.Nb3 cxb2 22.Bxb2 Ne8 and black has a slight advantage; 11.c3 Nxf3+ 12.Nxf3 Qh5 13.d4 (13.Be3 Nd7; 13.Bd2 Nxe4; 13.Bc2 Nxe4; 13.Bc4 Nxe4 14.dxe4 Rxf3; 13.h3 Bxf3 transposes to 11.h3) 13…Bb6 14.Qd3 (14.Re1 Nd7=) 14…Bxf3 15.gxf3 Qh3 16.Qd1 (16.dxe5 Ng4; 16.Rd1 Nh5; 16.Qe2 Nh5 17.Bg5+ Kd7 18.a4 [ 18.dxe5 Rxf3 19.e6 Ke8 20.Bh4 Nf4 21.Qb5+ c6 22.Qg5 Bd8 23.Qxg7 {23.e7 Bb6 leads to perpetual} 23…Bxh2+ 24.Kxh2 Rh3+ 25.Kg1 Ne2+ perpetual] 18…h6 19.Bd2 Rf4; 16.Bc2 Nh5 17.dxe5 (17.Bg5+ Kd7 18.Ba4+ Kc8 followed by h6!) 17…Rxf3 18.cxd6+ Kf8 19.Qe2 Rg3+ perpetual) 16…Nd7 and black has equality) 11…Qh5 12.c3 Nxf3+ 13.Nxf3 Bxf3 14.Qxf3 Qxf3 15.gxf3 Nh5 16.Kg2 Nf4+ 17.Bxf4 Rxf4 18.Rad1 Raf8 19.d4 exd4 20.cxd4 Bb6 21.Rd3 Kf6 22.Re1 Re8 23.Kg3 g5 and white cannot make progress in the endgame. B1B: 8.Nc3! Qe8 (8…h6 9.Nh7!! Nxh7 10.Nd5+ Ke8 11.Qh5+ Rf7 12.Nb6!) 9.Nd5+ (9.d3 Qg6 10.Nd5+ Kd8 11.Nxf6 Rxf6 12.Nf3 Bg4 13.Bg5 Nd4 14.Nxe5 Qxg5 15.Ng4 Rg6 16.h3 Nxb3 17.axb3 h5 18.d4 hxg4 19.dxc5 gxh3 20.g3 Qxc5 21.Kh2 Rh6 and black has a slight advantage) 9…Kd8 10.Nxf6 gxf6 11.Nf3 Qg6 12.d3 and white is winning. B2: 7.d3 B2A: 7…h6 8.Nf3 d6 9.h3 (9.Be3 Bg4 10.Bxc5 dxc5 11.Nbd2 Nd4 12.h3 Bh5 13.0-0 Nxf3+ 14.Nxf3 Qc8 15.Kh2 g5 16.Qe2 g4 17.hxg4 Nxg4+ 18.Kg1 Qe8=) 9…Qe8 10.Nc3 Nd4 11.Nxd4 Bxd4 12.0-0 Qg6 13.Kh2 Bd7 14.Be3 Bxe3 15.fxe3 Rae8 16.Qd2 and white has a significant advantage. B2B: 7…d6 8.Be3 (8.0-0 transposes to B1A) 8…Qe8 (8…Bg4? 9.Qd2!; 8…Bxe3 9.fxe3 Qe8 10.Nc3 Qg6 11.Nf3 Bg4 12.Qe2 and white has a fantastic position with a pawn more) 9.Bxc5 dxc5 10.0-0 Qg6 11.Nf3 Bg4 12.Nbd2 and white is simply a pawn up. B3A: 7.Nc3 Bxf2+ (7.Nc3 d6 8.0-0 transposes to B1B; 7.Nc3 h6 8.Nf3 d6 [8…Qe8 9.d3 Kd8 10.Be3] 9.h3 Qe8 10.d3 Kd8 11.Be3 Bxe3 12.fxe3 Qg6 13.Qe2 Qg3+ 14.Kd2 and white is winning; 7.Nc3 Qe8 8.d3 Qg6 9.0-0 d6 10.Nd5+ Kd8 11.Nxf6 Rxf6 12.Nf3 h6 13.Nh4 Bg4 14.Nxg6 Bxd1 15.Nxe5 Nxe5 16.Rxd1 Bxf2+ 17.Kh1 Kd7 18.h3 and white has a solid extra pawn in the endgame) 8.Kxf2 Nxe4+ 9.Kg1 Nxg5 12.d4 Nf7 11.dxe5 and white has a huge initiative. It is doubtful black can survive. C: 6...d6!? This was my third attempt at trying to save black. This was one of the best I have seen for black. The only issue is that the move order is inaccurate which allows white to capitalize immediately. 7.Nf7! Qf8 8.Rf1 Rg8 9.Ng5-I have found no way around this line. D: 6...Qe8! Clearly, 6...Qe8 is the only move in this position. This avoids the above line as 7.Nf7? would be met by 7...Rf8! with an advantage to black. My theory is still a bit thin on this variation as I have not had the time to go into as deeply as I would like. My early analysis tells me that 7.d3, and 7.0-0 are equal. I have not looked into 7.Nc3 yet, but I get the feeling it is critical. Just some examples: 7.d3 d6 8.Nc3 (8.Be3 Qg6 9.Bf7 [9.Qf3 Nd4! and black has an advantage] 9...Qh6 10.h4 Bxe3 11.fxe3 Rf8 and black has an advantage) 8...Rf8 9.Be3 (9.0-0 Qg6 10.Nd5+ Kd8 11.Nxf6 Rxf6 12.h4 [12.Nf3 Bg4 13.Bg5 Nd4!] 12...h5 13.Be3 Bxe3 14.fxe3 Bg4 15.Qd2 Kd7 and white has a small advantage, but black has compensation) 9...Qg6 10.Nf3 Nd4 11.Bxd4 Bxd4 12.Qe2 Bxc3+ 13.bxc3 Bg4 and black has a slight advantage. 7.0-0 Rf8 (7...d6 8.Nc3 h6 9.Nf3 Bg4 10.h3 Bh5 11.d3 Rf8 12.Be3 and black is fighting for a draw in a pawn down ending) 8.Nc3 Qg6 (8...h6 9.Nf3 d6 [9...Kd8 10.d3 g5 11.Na4 Bd6 12.Be3 and white has a significant advantage] 10.d3 Bg4 11.h3 Bh5 12.Be3 Bxe3 13.fxe3 Kd7 and black is fighting for a draw down a pawn) 9.d3 d6 10.Nd5+ Kd8 11.Nxf6 Rxf6 12.h4 (12.Nf3 Bg4 13.Bg5 Nd4!) 12...h5 which transposes to 6.Bb3 Qe8 7.d3 MNb wrote on 10/05/10 at 22:29:40: Conquistador wrote on 10/05/10 at 22:13:51: D: 6...Qe8! 7.d3 d6 8.Nc3 Rf8 9.0-0 Qg6 10.Nd5+ Kd8 11.Nxf6 Rxf6 12.h4 h5 13.Be3 13.c3 Bg4 14.Qe1 looks much stronger to me. I don't see a constructive plan for Black, but I do see a few for White. Do you realize that 6...Rf8 7.0-0 Qe8 8.Nc3 Qg6 9.d3 is exactly the same? MNb wrote on 10/06/10 at 10:35:35: 6...Qe8 7.d3 d6 8.Nc3 Nd4 9.Nd5 Nd5 10.Bxd5 Qg6 11.c3 looks considerably stronger, but h6 might provide a playable game. So possibly 9.Nd5 is not the strongest. Djy wrote on 10/07/10 at 18:40:56: You 've right Mnb ,so probably 8.-h6 is better than 8.-Nd4 Wlodarczyk,S - Persson,B [C57] corr POL-SVE m, 1985 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Bb3 Qe8 7.d3 Nd4 8.0-0 d6 9.c3 Bg4 10.Qe1 Nxb3 11.axb3 h6 12.Nf3 Qh5 13.Qd1 Rhf8 14.Be3 Nh7 15.d4 Rxf3 16.dxc5 Rh3 17.cxd6+ cxd6 18.f3 Rxh2 19.Bc5 Rh1+ 20.Kf2 Rxf1+ 21.Qxf1 dxc5 22.Qb5 Qh4+ 23.Ke2 Rd8 24.Qxc5+ Kf6 25.Rxa7 Ng5 26.Qb6+ Ne6 0-1 Novitzkij,D - Solovjov,S [C57] Russia Cup op Minsk (4), 2001 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Bb3 Qe8 7.d3 d6 8.0-0 Bg4 9.Nf3 Qh5 10.Be3 Nd4 11.Bxd4 Bxd4 12.c3 Bb6 13.Nbd2 Raf8 14.d4 g5 15.dxe5 dxe5 16.Nc4 Bxf3 17.Qxf3 g4 18.Qf5 Qxf5 19.exf5 Nd7 20.Ne3 c6 21.Be6 h5 22.Rae1 Rd8 23.Nc4 Bc7 24.Bxd7 Rxd7 25.Nxe5 Bxe5 26.Rxe5+ Kf6 27.Rfe1 Rd2 28.Re6+ Kg5 29.R6e2 Rhd8 30.g3 Rxe2 31.Rxe2 Rd7 32.Kg2 Kxf5 33.h3 b5 34.f3 gxf3+ 35.Kxf3 Rd3+ 36.Re3 Rd2 37.g4+ hxg4+ 38.hxg4+ Kf6 39.Re2 Rd1 40.Rg2 Kg5 41.a3 a5 42.Ke3 c5 43.Rd2 Re1+ 44.Kf3 Rf1+ 45.Ke4 b4 46.axb4 Rf4+ 47.Kd5 cxb4 48.c4 a4 49.c5 Rf8 50.Rd4 Rd8+ 51.Kc4 Rb8 52.c6 a3 53.bxa3 bxa3 54.Rd5+ Kg6 55.Ra5 Rb6 56.Kc5 Rb3 57.c7 Rc3+ 58.Kb6 Rb3+ 59.Ka7 Rc3 60.Kb8 Rb3+ 61.Kc8 Rh3 62.Rd5 a2 63.Rd1 Rb3 64.Kd8 Rb1 65.Rd6+ Kg5 66.c8Q a1Q 67.Qf5+ Kh4 68.Rh6+ Kg3 69.Qd3+ Kg2 70.Qh3+ Kf2 71.Qh2+ Ke3 72.Re6+ Kd3 73.Qe2+ Kc3 74.Rc6+ Kb4 75.Qc4+ Ka3 76.Ra6+ Kb2 77.Qb5+ Kc2 0-1 Drollinger,D (2267) - Roeberg,F (2251) [C57] Hessenliga 0506 Germany (4.5), 06.11.2005 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Bb3 Qe8 7.d3 d6 8.Be3 Bxe3 9.fxe3 Qg6 10.Nf3 Qh6 11.Qe2 Bg4 12.Nbd2 Raf8 13.0-0-0 Kd8 14.Kb1 g5 15.Bd5 Nxd5 16.exd5 Ne7 17.e4 Ng6 18.Qe3 Nf4 19.g3 Nh3 20.Rhf1 Rf6 21.Rde1 Rhf8 22.Nh4 Qh5 23.Rxf6 Rxf6 24.Nf5 Bxf5 25.exf5 Rxf5 26.Qxa7 Rf2 27.Ne4 Rxh2 28.Qb8+ 1-0 Krejcik,J (2155) - Kovar,V (2150) [C57] CZE-chT2b 0506 Czechia (2), 06.11.2005 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Bb3 Qe8 7.d3 d6 8.Nc3 Rf8 9.Nf3 h6 10.Be3 Bg4 11.h3 Qh5 12.Rg1 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 Qxf3 14.gxf3 Nh5 15.Nd5+ Kd8 16.0-0-0 Nd4 17.Bxd4 exd4 18.c3 Rxf3 19.Rd2 Rxh3 20.Bd1 g5 21.c4 c6 22.Bxh5 Rxh5 23.Nf4 Rh2 24.Ng6 Bb4 25.Rdd1 Ke8 26.f4 Kf7 27.f5 Re8 28.a3 Ba5 29.Rh1 Rxh1 30.Rxh1 Kg7 31.Rg1 Kh7 32.Kd1 Bd8 33.Ke2 h5 34.Rh1 Kh6 35.Kf3 Bf6 36.Re1 g4+ 37.Kg3 Kg5 38.Rh1 d5 39.Nf4 Rh8 40.cxd5 Be5 41.Rf1 Bxf4+ 0-1 Binder,G (2386) - Beckett,P (1805) [C57] Introductory WS event for Nat. Feds., g ICCF, 01.02.2005 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Bb3 Qe8 7.d3 Rf8 8.Be3 Bxe3 9.fxe3 Qg6 10.Nf3 d6 11.Qe2 Bg4 12.Nbd2 Kd7 13.0-0-0 Rae8 14.h3 Be6 15.Bxe6+ Rxe6 16.Rhf1 Qg3 17.Qf2 Qxf2 18.Rxf2 Re7 19.Rdf1 a6 20.g4 Ke8 21.Nh4 Nd7 22.Nf5 Ref7 23.Nf3 g6 24.Nh6 Re7 25.g5 b6 26.Nh2 Rxf2 27.Rxf2 Nd8 28.N2g4 c6 29.h4 Ne6 30.Kd2 a5 31.a4 Kd8 32.Ng8 Rg7 33.N8f6 Nxf6 34.Nxf6 Rf7 35.Ng4 Rxf2+ 36.Nxf2 Ke7 37.c3 Nc5 38.d4 Nd7 39.b4 Kd8 40.Kd3 Ke7 41.d5 axb4 42.cxb4 c5 43.Kc4 cxb4 44.Kxb4 Nc5 45.Kb5 Ke8 46.Kxb6 Nxa4+ 47.Kc6 Ke7 48.Nd1 Nc5 49.Nb2 Nxe4 50.Nc4 Nf2 51.Nxd6 Nd3 52.Kc7 Nb4 53.Nc8+ Ke8 54.e4 Na6+ 55.Kd6 Nb4 56.Kxe5 1-0 Ohtake,S (2398) - Ryvova,A (2256) [C57] EM/MN/041 ICCF Email, 25.10.2001 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Bb3 Rf8 7.d3 d6 8.Be3 Bxe3 9.fxe3 Qe8 10.Nc3 Qg6 11.Nf3 Na5 12.Ba4 a6 13.b4 Nc6 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.Qe2 Bg4 16.Kd2 Kf7 17.h3 Be6 18.Raf1 Kg8 19.Nh4 Qe8 20.g4 a5 21.bxa5 Rxa5 22.a4 c5 23.Qe1 c4 24.Qb1 cxd3 25.cxd3 Qa8 26.Qc2 Nd7 27.Rxf8+ Qxf8 28.Ke2 Nc5 29.Rf1 Qe8 30.Rb1 Ra8 31.Rb4 Qf8 32.Qb1 Bc8 33.Nf3 Ba6 34.Ne1 h6 35.Nd5 Qd8 36.Kd1 Kh7 37.Qc2 c6 38.Nb6 Ra7 39.Nc4 Qf8 40.g5 Rf7 41.Nd2 Rf2 42.gxh6 Rh2 43.hxg7 Kxg7 44.Rb6 Qe8 45.Kc1 Rh1 46.Nf1 Qg6 47.Qe2 Rg1 48.Rxc6 Qf6 49.Rxa6 Rxf1 50.Rxd6 Rxe1+ 51.Qxe1 Qxd6 52.Qg3+ Kf7 53.d4 Nxa4 54.Qxe5 Qxe5 55.dxe5 Nc5 56.h4 Nxe4 57.Kc2 Ke6 58.h5 ½-½ If 8.Be3 is White's best I would not call the Traxler refuted yet: 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Bb3 Qe8 7.d3 d6 8.Be3 Bxe3 9.fxe3 Bg4 10.Nf3 Qh5 11.Nc3 Rhf8 and it won't be easy to convert the extra pawn. Not that I would like to play this as Black.

	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
	IP Logged

TonyRo God Member Offline I'm gonna crack your skull! Posts: 1849 Location: Cleveland, OH Joined: 11/26/07 Gender:	Re: Is Traxler Refuted ? Reply #40 - 11/30/10 at 16:43:07	Post Tools	Print Post
	bragesjo wrote on 11/30/10 at 09:43:06: A few years ago Ari Ziegler posted an article in swedish magazine "Tidskrift för schack" about Two Knights defence when Traxler where feutured. I think he concluded that Bxf7 was a clear safe pluss for white and that computer had found something for white even in Nxf7 lines. Unforutanlly I dont remember the number or where I put that magazine. Indeed I've said it before and I'll say it again. It's not even worth consideration until a Traxler devotee shows me what he's got against the ridiculously simple Bxf7-b3 systems with d3. It's simple and perhaps objectively best.


	IP Logged

bragesjo God Member Offline CCE at ICCF 2021 and CCM at ICCF 2023 Posts: 1839 Location: Eskilstuna Joined: 06/30/06 Gender:	Re: Is Traxler Refuted ? Reply #39 - 11/30/10 at 09:43:06	Post Tools	Print Post
	A few years ago Ari Ziegler posted an article in swedish magazine "Tidskrift för schack" about Two Knights defence when Traxler where feutured. I think he concluded that Bxf7 was a clear safe pluss for white and that computer had found something for white even in Nxf7 lines. Unforutanlly I dont remember the number or where I put that magazine.


	WWW IP Logged

Djy Full Member Offline Non mais y connait pas Raoul! Posts: 157 Joined: 03/21/10	Re: Is Traxler Refuted ? Reply #38 - 11/30/10 at 09:15:29	Post Tools	Print Post
	sloughter wrote on 11/21/10 at 19:23:50: Black has little hope of equalizing in the Qe8 lines. Here is a game in 5 against Fritz 10. Obviously White could have tried to win this but took the draw instead. 5.Bxe7ch Ke7 6.Bb3! This is simply better for White because Black has nothing better than to exchange off the Bishop on b3 with either Nd4 or Na5. The main point being that it seems pointless to play Bd5/Bxc6 if you're just to going to exchange Bishop for Knight anyway. 6...Qe8 7.d3 Kf8 8.Be3 Bxe3 (It doesn't really change matters here to play Bb6 9.Bxb6 axb6. The open a-file is at best a wash for the damaged pawn structure) 9.fxe3 Na5 10.Nd2 Nxb3 11.Nxb3 d6 12.Nf3 Kf7 13.Nbd2 Rf8 14.Qe2 Kg8 15.a3 Be6 16.b3 Rd8 17.c4 Qg6 18.O-O Qh6 19.Kh1 Ng4 20.Rae1 b6 21.Kg1 Qg6 22.h3 Nh6 23.Kh1 a6 24.Rf2 Qg3 25.Nf1 Qg6 26.Nfd2 Qg3 27.Nf1 Qg6 28.Nfd2 Qg3 1/2-1/2. Obviously, only White in the final position has winning chances. Instead of 28.Nfd2, White could try Ng3/R1f1 followed by trying to get a passed pawn on the Queenside. I thought it would be difficult to avoid a tactical mishap once files start to be open on the Queenside. At a slower time limit it would be judicious to explore Queenside expansion with ideas like either d4 or c5. According to Fritz after that move sequence its evaluation is +/-. Of course if black plays very bad move white is winning! 6...Qe8 7.d3 Kf8?? (even Rf8 is bad 7.-d6 id correct IMO

	La connerie c'est la décrontaction de l'intelligence Gainsbourg La victoire est brillante mais l'échec est mat! Coluche
	IP Logged