Do you mean 5... e6 6 Bg5 Be7 7 Bd3 Nc6 8 00 Nxd4 9 Kh1 00 ?

I did not consider it because 10 Nxd4! wins a piece after 10...Qxd4 11 Bxh7+ !

The 9...Bc5 line leaves the Nf6 undefended, and thus, White's attack is more dangerous.

9...e5 just opens up the e-file and creates a weakness.
In fact, I considered all these moves in my original analyses, back in 1993.

Scheerer has no line with 9...00, for the reason stated above. If you refer to 10...00, then please see page 156 of Scheerer's book, line b13.

Hoping to hear from you soon. I do not visit this site as much as I used to, hence the late response.

We have already covered 9...c5 10.Nxd4 cxd4 11.Bxf6 gxf6! (not 11...Bxf6 which allows White decent compensation) haven't we?  Here's an updated version of my PGN combining what we have on ZGED so far, and it doesn't look pretty for White after either 9...c5 or 9...Nc6:

Huh? Craig, where were you? I already invented a counter to 9...c5 , in case you have not looked closely enough. It has been known since 1993 at least, but you did not look at it. Thus,

9...c5 10 Nxd4 cxd4 11 Bxf6 Bxf6 12 Ne4 Be7 13 Nxf6 gxf6 14 Qf3 Qe7 15 Qf6 Qf6  16 Rf6 e5 17 Rae1 Be6 18 Bh6 Rfe8 19 Rh7 Bd5 20 Re1 Rg8 21 Re5+ Be6 22 Bc4 Ke7 23 Rxe6+ Kd7 24 Rf7+ Kc8 25 Ree7
b6 26 Rc7+ Kb8 27 Rb7+ Kc8 28 Rfc7+ Kd8 29 Bg8 Ke8 30 Bd5, 1-0, Zilbermints - GeordiLaWoog, Internet Chess Club 3 0 rated blitz, 3/20/2003.   

Zilbermints - Bolzoni
ICC 3 0 rated blitz
19 March 2011

1 d4 d5 2 e4 dxe4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 ef3 5 Nxf3 e6 6 Bg5 Be7 7 Bd3 Nc6 8 00 Nxd4 9 Kh1 c5 10 Bxf6 Bxf6
11 Nxd4 Bxd4 12 Qh5 g6 13 Qh6 Bd7 14 Ne2 Bc6 15 Nd4 Qd4 16 Rf4 Qb2 17 Raf1 000 18 Rf7 Rxd3 19 Rf8+ Rxf8 20 Qxf8 Rd8 21 Qxc5 Qxa2 22 h3 Qd5 23 Qf2 a5 24 Re1 a4 25 Re3 Qc5 26 Qe2 Rd1+ 27 Kh2 Qd6+ 28 Rg3 Rd2 29 Qf1 a3 30 h4 Bxg2 31 Qc4+ Kb8 32 Qc3 Be4+ 33 Kg1 Qxg3+ 34 Qxg3+ Ka8 35 Qxa3 Kb8 36 Qf8+ Ka7 37 Qc5+ Kb8 38 Qe5+ Ka8 39 Qxe4 1-0.

Regarding your challenge, great! I should point out that on chess.com BDG tournament, you play 10 games at the same time against various opponents.
The time limit is 1 move in 3 days. There is an elimination process, with the winners advancing to the next round. So, you will end up playing me, but I will also play against you with the Black pieces.

The BDG tournament is divided into sections arranged by ratings. My chess.com rating is currently 1679, so I am in the 1601-1800 section. For you to play me, I would suggest joining ASAP and started playing as many games as possible. That way you can get your rating to my level and face me in the same section. Otherwise, as per chess.com rules, you will end up playing in a different section.

I'm telling you like it is at chess.com, so you know what the deal is. I did not make these rules, chess.com did! I have no objection to playing you on chess.com, under the rules stated there.

With regard to "hope chess", you are missing a key point here, Craig. Chess is skill, endurance, art, science, and also luck. That's how it is. There is a little of everything in chess.   

The Caltrop Coefficient does mean something, as Tim McGrew demonstrates in his article. It is the equivalent of chess psychology, perhaps. Why don't you tell McGrew your opinion about the Caltrop Coefficient? I'm sure you two would have a lively discussion! Also, let me point out that it was not I who brought the CC into our argument here, but another poster.

You just said that in the 9...c5 line, Black has to play more accurately. Which means that White has decent chances, as my earlier analyses, posted in the other thread, demonstrated. I also posted a couple of other games here, above.

I understand that you guys are looking for both sides playing the most perfect moves. That might work away from the pressures of the tournament hall, in the quiet of your cabinet. Then you can analyze ad infinitum, with result of a draw (assuming the best moves for White and Black). But, I ask, how many grandmasters caved in under pressure of a relentless attack? How many times various factors contributed to the defeat of a chess-player? A blind spot, forgotten analysis, a surprising new move, health problems, room temperature... All these factors can influence chess-players in choosing less-than-perfect moves! We are all human, and humans have weaknesses. These are the facts of everyday life.

Might I point out that the Fischer-Spassky and Topalov-Kramnik matches were full of many factors that influenced the games?

Perfection? I don't think so.

SWJediknight wrote on 04/12/11 at 17:18:55:


Theory has to use examples from practice too, you know? As for the Caltrop Coefficient, that is true of the entire BDG. My gambit is just a rather pointed example of this.

Your response is inaccurate, Craig. We already saw that White does get chances after 9...c5, so it is hardly a refutation. As for 9...Nc6, it could well transpose. What is wrong with the transposition 9...Nc6 10 Qe1 h6 11 Bf4
to begin with?

Let me respond to your argument of 1 f3 e5 2 g4 Qh4 mate. Everyone knows that is unsound. The losing move here is 2 g4. I never said you could win by playing these two moves in such consequence. Stop putting words that I never said in my mouth.

Yes, you could win with 1 f3, 2 Kf2. I have seen a few people do it. Though why would anyone play like that is open to question. Giving up Castling prematurely?

Yes, this is about opening theory. I should point out that the ZGED fits into this category. It is an opening whose theory is being discussed. At present, the topics under discussion are 9...Nc6 and 9...c5. I deem  9...c5 to be easier to play against, since it does open the game somewhat.

The game Zilbermints - FM Eric Schiller, email correspondence 2011, continued 9...h6 10 Bf4 Nc6 11 Qe1 00 12 Rad1 Bd6 13 Ne5 Nxe5 14 Bxe5 Bxe5
15 Bh7+! Nxh7 16 Rxd8 Rxd8 17 Qxe5 c6 18 Rd1 Rxd1 19 Nxd1 Nf6 20 Qc7 Ne4 21 Ne3 f6 22 Nc4 e5 23 Na5 Bf5 24 Nxb7 Rc8 25 Qa5 Kh7 26 h3 h5 27 Kh2 Re8 28 Qa7 Re7 29 Qb8 Rd7 30 Qe8 Kh6 31 Nd8 Nd6 32 Qg8 h4 33 Nxc6 Nf7 34 Nb4 Ng5 35 Qb3 Rd2
36 Qe3 

Currently the game is still ongoing. I wish to point out that there could be a transposition after 9...Nc6 10 Qe1 h6 11 Bf4. Furthermore, there is hardly such a thing as perfect play in chess. Everyone, World Champions included, makes mistakes! And that is a fact.

You guys are invited to join the BDG tournament starting up on May 1 at chess.com website. Membership is free.

8.Qc2 in the Danish two-pawn gambit is not forced, I'm not aware of any known refutation of the more conservative 8.0-0 approach which Danish Dynamite suggested may be underestimated. 

I certainly agree about 7.Nc3 in the 5...d5 6.Bxd5 Nf6 line though.

Gambit wrote on 04/11/11 at 12:15:59:


You said that in the other thread as well, but there is no contradiction. I'm just pointing out that we are using different definitions of the word 'refuted'. This leads to misunderstandings and makes discussions very difficult. Am I getting my point across?