Stefan Buecker wrote on 10/03/11 at 07:07:15:


The entirety of ECO offers no system that can protect a scholastic player from being outplayed tactically, or from making gross blunders.  Scholastic games are riddled with ridiculous mistakes, and the whole problem of developing scholastic players comes down to inculcating sound principles and good tactics.  My approach was to encourage players to play into open positions where tactics come to the fore.  If you go the opposite way, I think you really risk that your players won't develop the tactical acumen essential for this game.  It's great when a kid comes to you after the round and says, "I found a tactic!"

Also as a matter of principle, I would criticize a scholastic player who played 3.g3, saying that it may be a system, but why make another pawn move when your bishop already has an open path?  For us, such an observation seems stilted and even silly, but it's exactly what scholastics need to hear.  The idea that each and every move is a vital chance to pound your opponent is something you really have to develop in young players.  Later there'll be enough time for sophistication.

This thread is probably not the place to debate all that, but I thought it was worth mentioning.

P.S. If you teach a scholastic player to play g3, you substantially increase the likelihood of his being mated on g2. 

I would have said not that Black has enough comp, but that he has practical comp. Objectively I would prefer White.

Markovich wrote on 09/30/11 at 00:39:10:

Markovich healthy again! 

[1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.g3 b5 4.Bxb5 c6]

5.Bd3 d5 6.Nf3 (Vass) leads to unclear play after 6...dxe4 7.Bxe4 (or 7.Nxe4 Nxe4 8.Bxe4 f5) 7...Nxe4 8.Nxe4 c5 intending Nc6 and good chances for Black. 

5.Ba4 d5 6.exd5 Bc5 7.Qf3 O-O 8.dxc6 Qb6 9.d3 (MNb) 9...e4!? 10.Nxe4 Nxe4 11.Qxe4 Bxf2+ 12.Kf1 Bxg1 13.Rxg1 Bh3+ 14.Rg2 Na6 15.Be3 Qxb2 +=. Or perhaps 8...e4!? 9.Qf4 Qb6.

But 5.Be2 (Markovich) looks strong. After 5...d5 White can even continue 6.exd5 cxd5 7.Nf3 d4 8.Nxe5! +/-. Black can play differently (say, 5...Bb4), but basically I agree that Black has not enough for the pawn; +/-.

So is 3.g3 cheapo-free, as BPaulsen claimed above? There are 15 games in the database with the gambit d5 followed by c6, a Goering Gambit Reversed. It doesn't look too bad, e.g. 3...d5 4.exd5 Bc5 5.Bg2 c6 6.dxc6 Nxc6 7.Nge2 0-0 8.d3 Be6 9.0-0 Rc8 10.Bg5 Be7 and Black has roughly enough compensation for the pawn.

MNb wrote on 09/30/11 at 04:44:33:


I doubt it. After 9.Re1 White's ready both for d4 and for Bf1, and if Black closes the center, White can be very happy.

5.Be2 d5 6.d3 Bd6 7.Nf3 O-O 8.O-O Bh3 and Black has decent compensation.
5.Bf1 d5 6.d3 Bc5 7.Bg2 O-O 8.Nge2 and 9.O-O looks good though.

SWJediknight wrote on 09/29/11 at 14:38:32:

You are right. What about 7.Qf3 O-O 8.dxc6 Qb6 9.d3 Bg4 10.Qg2 using the free move g2-g3? It's not clear to me that a Compromised Defence here is bound to fail.
I'm not as negative as Markovich, but certainly not as enthusiastic as S_F.

Markovich wrote on 09/30/11 at 00:39:10:


I do hope you are quoting people accurately.

And yeah, I love the idea behind the move. It may not be sound, but I'd hate to have to face it in a timed game against a player such as Stefan. It's creative and has a positional idea to support it.

3.g3 may not be weak, but it certainly isn't as sharp as other 1.e4 15 systems, and Stefan's idea sharpens the game dramatically.

Stefan's 3...b5 gambit may not withstand deep analysis, but yes, it should be far more playable than most of those black gambits that involve losing a central pawn.

It isn't- the line in question runs 5.Ba4 d5 6.exd5 Bc5 7.Nf3, when I'm guessing your 7...Bc5 was a "Freudian typo" type error (I often make those myself when writing out chess moves).  Thus the bishop is on c5.