Short said anyone playing 3...Nf6 was taking their life in their hands after he beat Hebden, but part of me thinks he just wanted to get more Evans gambits  I appreciate the point Markovich makes, but at all levels 3...Bc5 is pretty popular also so perhaps we should try and sort out the merits of the Evans before worrying about the two Knights. I've always felt the Evans was sound and worth the effort. The game in this thread is a very interesting weapon against the ...Be7 line.  It is obvious playing through the game that the White player had prepared deeply.

TalJechin wrote on 06/01/11 at 15:29:35:


The emphasized statement certainly is not analogous to what I said, since 1.d4 isn't an opponent's move.  

Pardon my imprecision, though.  It seems that I invited quibbles by not spelling my point out in A, B, C fashion.  So let me say, A significant problem for a repertoire founded on the Evans Gambit is that you will very often see 3...Nf6, which is fully adequate for Black and which completely frustrates your desire to play in gambit fashion.  That is what I thought I implied by my saying "from a repertoire standpoint" and by my implicit recommendation of the Two Knights.

If I considered the Petroff to be fully adequate for Black I would agree that that defense is an analogous problem for a repertoire founded on the Spanish, but I do not.  But there are many who think that the Petroff is indeed a problem for would-be Spanish players, so that claim must at least be arguable.

So I modestly claim that I actually did say something.  Maybe it wasn't quite on-topic, but since it was in response to a post in the vein of "Hmm, should I take up the Evans?" it seemed appropriate.

If someone wants to base his repertoire on the Evans I wish him well.  If he tries 3.Bc4 against me, though, he will see 3...Nf6.

MNb wrote on 06/01/11 at 15:12:33:


I don't understand Markovich's reasoning either. 3.-Bc5 and 3.-Nf6 are two different commonly played defences. One could just as well state that the "problem" with the Ruy Lopez is the Petroff, which is rather irrelevant once Black has played 2...Nc6. Or that the problem with 1.e4 is 1.d4! With that line of reasoning you'll just end up like Buridan's donkey...

I play the Evan's or attempt to anyway.  More often at my level (class C) I tend to get 3...Nf6 but I have had decent results with 4 d4.  It's just all good old classical chess, let the best man win.

Here are some other recent games with the Evans Gambit:

From a repertoire standpoint a major problem with the Evans Gambit is the Two Knights Defense.  But I don't think that much should be made from Gustafsson's defeat.  Who's playing the Evans on a regular basis, after all?

This game is commented here: http://chessbase.de/nachrichten.asp?newsid=11742

Apparently both players followed a recent analysis by Yelena Dembo in Chessbase Magazine 142. Gustafsson deviated with 15.-Qd6, after which his position is lost. Probably he is already seriously worse after 12.-Nd5 13.c4!.