Markovich wrote on 08/08/11 at 17:48:13:
TopNotch wrote on 08/08/11 at 03:10:03:
It would be nice for Gawain to do an update on the Scotch Gambit around his wins over Gupta and David Howell.
As a confirmed TKD player I would love to get his take on the line he played against Gupta. The line he used vs Howell shocked me a bit, I too had been preparing this to use as a surprise weapon for white in upcoming tournaments, but upon closer scrutiny came to the conclusion that it offered White less than nothing. Funnily enough this was another line suggested on one of Dzinzi's early DVD's.
The move 4.Ng5 is a good move in theory, but not in praxis
Black has a ferocious initiative OTB and although White sometimes prevails, its always an unweidly mess and that suits Black. Interestingly Nigel Short avoided 4.Ng5 in the commonwealth championship and I think it has to do with the Coleman Variation - 8.Qf3 Rb8 9.Bd3 Bd6! after which White has to walk a tight rope to avoid a miniature. Nakamura's 8.Bd3 is well met by Nd5 with good comp for the pawn. None of the recent DVD's [Trent, Davies, Martin, Dzindzi] or Books [CBM's] will help you against the suggested lines as they are either not covered or covered superficially in passing.
Mikhailevski will never cover these lines, as he snobbishly covers only elite events to the exclusion of everything else, [Marshall Berlin Petroff and Scotch Game being par for the course]. So for varieties sake and for the rare chance to see how the other 1.e4 e5 half lives its over to you Gawain
Toppy
Nice to hear from you. It's always good to hear what a strong player thinks, but even better when it confirms your own opinion.
But say, what do you do after the almost inevitable 4.d3?
Good to be heard from.
I normally plump for 4...Be7 against 4.d3, and usually end up by transposition into Ant-Marshall lines, go figure.
Lately though I have added 4...Bc5 to my rep, I used to think that the bishop was misplaced on this square, [Yeah, I realise what a Sloughteresque statement that sounds like, but what to do.] and I still don't fully trust that whole 4...Bc5 to a7 business despite its popularity and recommendation by Gustafson on his excellent DVD. I think Black has a safer and easier to play position in the 4...Be7.
Having said all that my interest in 4...Bc5 has to do with Shirov's and Harikrishna interpretation of it, where subtlety and nuance is dispensed with in favor of the no frills no nonsense approach of Castling quickly followed by d5 against virtually whatever White does. This treatment has proven very effective and has given White a real headache in the last 5 years or so, so much so, that Emms and Kindermann both suggest fancy move orders to try and avoid it, Martin on his DVD confessed he had no idea what to suggest for White and Davies on his DVD was also stumped. What can I say, I'm sold.
Radjabov in the latest word has altered his move order for White radically, or perhaps I should say Radjacally, he goes Nbd2 before c3 or Bb3. This move order is extremely rare, and goes to show to what extent players are going to avoid the plan I mentioned.
Bye for now.
Tops
Post Script: Fresh off the presses - Doros vs. Beliavsky, 2011
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5 c6 7.dxc6 bc6 8.Bd3 Nd5 9.Nf3 Nb4 [New for me, but is it any good?] 10.0-0 Nxd3 11.cxd3 f6 [Not sure how to punctuate this move yet] 12.Nc3 [I don't like this move. At first glance 12.d4 exd4 13.Qa4 looks more challenging, but who knows, I will have to fall back on the old cliche - More practical tests required.] 0-1 in 34 moves. And the pendulum continues to swing.
Pages: [1] 
C56-C59: Aggressive white play against 2 Knights (Read 66473 times)
