SWJediknight wrote on 08/24/11 at 21:08:51:


If you look at the PGN file I posted you'll see that the 5.Nxe5 arises after 3...Bc5 4.0-0 Nf6 (3...Nf6 4.0-0 Bc5 in the file) 5.Nxe5. And based on the current analysis it looks like this may not be enough for an edge either after 5...Nxe4. After 3...Bc5 4.c3, the problem is in 4...Nf6 when according to the PGN files 5.d4 ed4 6.e5 Nd5 gives Black equality.

Maybe we should consider 4.Nxe5 which was suggested by Greet in 'Play the Ruy Lopez', though since only one decent player (Radulski) has played it since the publication of the book I don't like our chances of proving an edge for White here.

The other possibility is to leave 3...Bc5 and move on to other lines. It would be nice to have some analysis proving += after 3...d6, 3...g6 and 3...Nd4.

So is this project dead because of 3...Bc5? 

Stefan Buecker wrote on 08/19/11 at 17:07:07:

I'd like to suggest that against 3...a6 we have a brief outline of how to play 4.Bxc6 as well as the most popular move, 4.Ba4. Gustafsson stated on his DVD that he thought the Exchange was as good as try for an advantage as 4.Ba4. Admittedly I find this opinion a bit peculiar, but Gustafsson knows much more about the Spanish than I do. A model game for White against each major answer to the Exchange Variation should be sufficient for our purposes. 

Of course we still have the remaining 3rd move alternatives to examine, but I recommend that we cover an alternative to the absolute main lines briefly so that players who do not like 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 for whatever reason will still find the ChessPub Forum coverage useful.

I have a PGN file with all of the analysis from this thread so far. I have attached it to this post.

Unfortunately I won't be able to keep up the analysis/maintenance work as I have a tournament over the next week or two. 

TN, would you prepare a pgn file on the Cozio along the lines of the one that MNb has prepared on the Jaenisch?  I don't mind moving on to Smyslov's, but I note that we have yet to crack the hard nut of the Classical.

TN wrote on 08/18/11 at 17:53:56:

Instead of 18.Qxg5+, the retreat 18.Qg3! f6 19.Nh4 gives White a significant plus. More precise seems 15...Kg7 (instead of 15...d5) 16.h4! d5 17.Bd3 h5 18.Qxg5+ (now 18.Qg3 would be harmless: 18...g4 19.Ne5 Qd6) 18...Qxg5 19.hxg5 f6 20.Rae1 fxg5 21.Nxg5 Rf8 (21...Bd7 22.Ne6+ Bxe6 23.Rxe6 +=; 21...Nb4?? 22.Re7+ Kf6 23.Rf7+!! +-) 22.f4 Bxf5 23.Bxf5 Rxf5 24.Ne6+ Kf7 25.Nxc7 Rg8 26.Ne6 += with a slight edge in the ending.

TN wrote on 08/18/11 at 15:45:11:

TN, thanks for your 3...Nge7 4.Nc3 analyses. Sokolov's 2009 book doesn't consider 10.Qd2, he basically says (pp. 141-143) that lines like the following were the reason why he lost his interest in playing the Cozio: (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nge7 4.Nc3 g6 5.d4 exd4 6.Nd5 Bg7 7.Bg5 h6 8.Bf6 Bxf6 9.Nxf6+ Kf8) 10.0-0 Kg7 11.Nd5 d6 12.Bxc6 Nxc6 13.Nxd4 Be6 14.Nb5! Bxd5 15.exd5 Ne5 16.f4 Nd7 17.f5! g5 18.f6+ Nxf6 19.Nd4 "and White gets a devastating attack". 

So if you are right (I haven't checked yet) that 10.Qd2 is only equal, is 10.0-0 the way to go? Sokolov's comment on 10.0-0: "Black has different ways to proceed - and defend, but the position is simply better for White and there is little Black can do to change this verdict."

There are still many open questions regarding 3...Bc5, and even 3...f5 remains playable (+=).