ChessPub Forum - C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit

Master Om Full Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 187 Joined: 02/20/10	Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit Reply #219 - 09/25/12 at 04:54:47	Post Tools	Print Post
	Stefan Buecker wrote on 09/24/12 at 09:55:10: Alias wrote on 09/24/12 at 07:12:52: 3) I don't think it's necessary to keep all discussions on topic and move off topic replies to a new discussion. It makes the forum less exiting. I strongly agree. But I also insist that, in this thread of mine, any mockery should come with a new move. Markovich, don't you agree that Master Om's new idea 4...Bc5!? 5.fxe5 d6!? is highly interesting and in the same spirit as your 4...d5? Maybe the idea makes even more "common" sense than d5, if you ask me. Master Om, thanks for your detailed analysis with inspiring novelties. In the variation 4...Bc5 5.fxe5 d6 6.Bf4 Ne6 7.Bg3 h5, White can also play 8.h4 (instead of 8.Qd2) when 8...c6 seems best (8...dxe5 is just equal): 9.Nf3 Qb6 10.a3 (10.Qd3 Qxb2 11.Rb1 Qa3 12.Nd2 Bb4 13.Rxb4 may be unsound) 10...dxe5 (this pawn is taboo: 11.Nxe5? Qxb2! 12.Na4 Qd4) 11.Na4 Qa5+ 12.c3 Be7 13.b4 Qd8 with a microscopic plus for Black. Chess is difficult enough, when there exists a position with Q+N vs R + N + B which is won for White in 517 moves. I didn't claim that the Bulgarian Ouch is correct. Maybe the Fyfe is correct, who knows? "Wishful thinking" - would you enlighten us, Markovich, why you believe that chess is such a simple game that you can know, just know, that 3.d4 is an error? Well 4...Bc5!? is my Idea in the spirit of what I play like against gambits in the philosophy of Lasker's Idea. This move gives more chances to black to win in OTB scenario. I have posted only 1/4 th of my analysis. All your lines mentioned are there in my analysis and is sound (not Unsound) and no Microscopic Advantage as its slightly better than that. Here are they Download game in pgn format Still Blacks advantage is not winnable. So Fyfe's idea not unsound.

	ICCF IM
	IP Logged

Markovich God Member Offline Posts: 6099 Location: Columbus, Ohio Joined: 09/17/04	Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit Reply #218 - 09/25/12 at 02:04:15	Post Tools	Print Post
	It would seem that the patients have taken over the asylum, in this thread anyway.

	The Great Oz has spoken!
	IP Logged

Hadron Full Member Offline Doctor, Doctor, Doctor..When will you ever learn? Posts: 195 Location: Levin, New Zealand. Joined: 03/24/05 Gender:	Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit Reply #217 - 09/25/12 at 01:21:59	Post Tools	Print Post
	Bibs wrote on 09/25/12 at 00:45:16: TalJechin wrote on 09/24/12 at 23:09:39: Stefan Buecker wrote on 09/24/12 at 13:05:24: Taljechin, a few weeks ago some members found it interesting to discuss about the "majority on the queenside", in the context of the Colle System. Now here we have a thread which discusses how many tempi you need to compensate for the d-pawn, in the context of the Fyfe Gambit. What's the difference? The difference: a lot of people play the Colle and no one plays the Fyfe and yet the Colle discussion took a few weeks and the Fyfe goes on and on month after month after month, with you posting replies to yourself apparently just to keep your thread on top. FYI: your last 25 posts (probably even more, but the system here only shows up to 25) were all in this thread. Is there really no other subject of interest to you in the whole forum? And is there really nothing new in major openings like the Scotch or Petroff since April 3rd when Hadron first mentioned the Fyfe? Or is this thread keeping new topics away from being noticed by hogging the top slot on the forum front? Agree. Totally agree with TJ. This is a waste of time and effort. Largely the whim of one member. Moderators? Rubbish that noone plays. Detracts from discussion of stuff that will be of interest and use to forum members. Gosh! Some pretty harsh comments, Bibs aren't you a moderator else where? I can't see how it is a waste of time and or effort if people where not interested in answering Stefan's posts then they wouldn't and the then the whole Fyfe (and whatever has stemmed from it) issue would just dry up and blow away...but it hasn't....so it is not just the whim of Stefan, people are interested in what he has to say and purport. I dunno....if you don't like wot Stefan is doing, find something new to talk about then..?! Have a nice day Hadron.

	I'm reminded again of something Short wrote recently, approximately "The biggest fallacy in chess is the quasi-religious belief in the primacy of the opening."
	IP Logged

Bibs God Member Offline Posts: 2338 Joined: 10/24/06	Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit Reply #216 - 09/25/12 at 00:45:16	Post Tools	Print Post
	TalJechin wrote on 09/24/12 at 23:09:39: Stefan Buecker wrote on 09/24/12 at 13:05:24: Taljechin, a few weeks ago some members found it interesting to discuss about the "majority on the queenside", in the context of the Colle System. Now here we have a thread which discusses how many tempi you need to compensate for the d-pawn, in the context of the Fyfe Gambit. What's the difference? The difference: a lot of people play the Colle and no one plays the Fyfe and yet the Colle discussion took a few weeks and the Fyfe goes on and on month after month after month, with you posting replies to yourself apparently just to keep your thread on top. FYI: your last 25 posts (probably even more, but the system here only shows up to 25) were all in this thread. Is there really no other subject of interest to you in the whole forum? And is there really nothing new in major openings like the Scotch or Petroff since April 3rd when Hadron first mentioned the Fyfe? Or is this thread keeping new topics away from being noticed by hogging the top slot on the forum front? Agree. Totally agree with TJ. This is a waste of time and effort. Largely the whim of one member. Moderators? Rubbish that noone plays. Detracts from discussion of stuff that will be of interest and use to forum members.


	IP Logged

TalJechin God Member Offline There is no secret ingredient. Posts: 2892 Location: Malmö Joined: 08/12/04 Gender:	Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit Reply #215 - 09/24/12 at 23:09:39	Post Tools	Print Post
	Stefan Buecker wrote on 09/24/12 at 13:05:24: Taljechin, a few weeks ago some members found it interesting to discuss about the "majority on the queenside", in the context of the Colle System. Now here we have a thread which discusses how many tempi you need to compensate for the d-pawn, in the context of the Fyfe Gambit. What's the difference? The difference: a lot of people play the Colle and no one plays the Fyfe and yet the Colle discussion took a few weeks and the Fyfe goes on and on month after month after month, with you posting replies to yourself apparently just to keep your thread on top. FYI: your last 25 posts (probably even more, but the system here only shows up to 25) were all in this thread. Is there really no other subject of interest to you in the whole forum? And is there really nothing new in major openings like the Scotch or Petroff since April 3rd when Hadron first mentioned the Fyfe? Or is this thread keeping new topics away from being noticed by hogging the top slot on the forum front?


	IP Logged

Stefan Buecker

God Member

Offline

Posts: 1386
Location: Germany
Joined: 02/11/09
Gender: Male

Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit
Reply #214 - 09/24/12 at 20:37:30

Post Tools

Print Post

The main line given by Master Om: 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.d4 Nxd4 4.f4 Bb4 5.Nf3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Nxf3+ 7.Qxf3 Qh4+ 8.g3 Qf6 9.Bc4!

An important move, I believe. White encourages Black to castle short. This matters so much that White invests a full tempo (soon this bishop retreats to d3). If instead 9.Bd3? d6 10.0-0 Ne7 11.f5 Bd7 12.Bd2 h6 13.a4 a5, and Black will be able to castle long; White has zilch compensation.

9...Ne7 10.0-0 0-0 11.f5!.

Better than 11.Bb3 =+ (Master Om), in my opinion.

11...b6 12.Bd3 Bb7 13.Qh5! Qc6 14.f6, and White has sufficient compensation for the pawns.

IP Logged

Jupp53 YaBB Moderator Offline be Posts: 988 Location: Frankfurt/Main Joined: 01/04/09 Gender:	Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit Reply #213 - 09/24/12 at 19:25:11	Post Tools	Print Post
	Intersting how the human mind works. Master OM brought a new idea looking reasonable and everybody starts cutting it down with opening a discussion about whatsoeverbutnotthetopic. You must love chess.

	Medical textbooks say I should be dead since April 2002. Dum spiro spero. Narcissm is the humans primary disease.
	IP Logged

kylemeister God Member Offline Posts: 4931 Location: USA Joined: 10/24/05	Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit Reply #212 - 09/24/12 at 16:34:50	Post Tools	Print Post
	Reminiscent of the Immortal Game (1. e4 e5 2. f4 ef 3. Bc4 Qh4+ 4. Kf1 b5). Those ...b5s after 2. Bc4 seem like they could amount to a sort of clearly inferior reversed Evans or clearly inferior reversed KGD.


	IP Logged

tony37 God Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 619 Joined: 10/16/10	Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit Reply #211 - 09/24/12 at 16:11:57	Post Tools	Print Post
	Well, 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 b5!? 3.Bxb5 c6 looks playable, Black has won 4 out of 6 games, and it dates all the way back to 1856, played by some Adolf Anderssen Btw, 3...c6! is an improvement on an earlier game from 1851 where Anderssen played the daring 3...f5, but lost (but maybe 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 f5!? 3.d3 b5!? is playable)


	IP Logged

TalJechin God Member Offline There is no secret ingredient. Posts: 2892 Location: Malmö Joined: 08/12/04 Gender:	Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit Reply #210 - 09/24/12 at 15:21:43	Post Tools	Print Post
	MartinC wrote on 09/24/12 at 13:14:43: (Very much like the frequent discussions cf trying to finally refute the BDG really.). At least the BDG does have followers who believe in the gambit and play it occasionally or in some cases every time they get the chance. If it's so interesting with bad gambits that no one plays, we can start some more threads on e.g. 1.e4 e5 Why only blunder the d-pawn, when there are seven other pawns...!? Lets start with the b-pawn: 2.b4 - a fantastic idea dating back all the way to 1921. Who knows what older sources there may be? 2.c4 b5 A completely new important discovery? 2.b4 Nf6 3.g4 Imagination beyond comprehension in juro-babylyub, ICS 1998. 2.Nf3 b5 Could the fantastic sacrificial idea work with a tempo less - who knows?! It was tried in for example babylyub-guest23 ICS unrated blitz 1998. White won, but maybe Black has some improvements? Download game in pgn format


	IP Logged

MartinC God Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 2081 Joined: 07/24/06	Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit Reply #209 - 09/24/12 at 13:14:43	Post Tools	Print Post
	Not archeology, its more like experimental phsyics The thesis is clearly that white can play a move even this utterly absurd and still not be losing by force. Obviously ones instinct is that it jolly well should be, and quite easily too! However there seems to be some good, a priori, evidence that it isn't. So its interesting to analyse. (Very much like the frequent discussions cf trying to finally refute the BDG really.).


	IP Logged

Stefan Buecker God Member Offline Posts: 1386 Location: Germany Joined: 02/11/09 Gender:	Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit Reply #208 - 09/24/12 at 13:05:24	Post Tools	Print Post
	Taljechin, a few weeks ago some members found it interesting to discuss about the "majority on the queenside", in the context of the Colle System. Now here we have a thread which discusses how many tempi you need to compensate for the d-pawn, in the context of the Fyfe Gambit. What's the difference? That the Fyfe isn't played much is quite a lousy argument. Everybody can see that the Fyfe is an extreme idea. So what?


	IP Logged

Stigma God Member Offline There is a crack in everything. Posts: 3272 Joined: 11/07/06 Gender:	Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit Reply #207 - 09/24/12 at 13:03:32	Post Tools	Print Post
	[quote author=685D5076595F5455523C0 link=1341412133/206#206 date=1348489209] I don't mind a theoretical discussion on how to punish a dubious pawn blunder, if the discussion is interesting and to the point - but by now most of the replies here seem only intended to keep this thread on top, everlasting. Maybe it could star in a new section on chess archaeology instead? [/quote] Seems like some people have way too much free time. Is the world really so boring that they have to resort to discussions like this to pass time?

	Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
	IP Logged

TalJechin God Member Offline There is no secret ingredient. Posts: 2892 Location: Malmö Joined: 08/12/04 Gender:	Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit Reply #206 - 09/24/12 at 12:20:09	Post Tools	Print Post
	This topic has been on top for what seems like an eternity - or something like six months in a row at least. And still the entire subject is rubbish if we use the usual opening criteria: 1) it's rarely played by anyone over 1300 - and when it is, the game scores sometimes suggests that it's more a faulty game score than a real game. 2) the game material is not only unreliable and low rated, it's also very old (for the games Stefan has dug up) or it's online blitz games. 3) despite the half year debate here, it's not more popular recently. The latest game with it in my base is still from 2009. 4) if no one, not even Stefan himself, believes in the opening enough to regularly play it vs reasonably strong opponents - what's the point of endlessly debating here whether the engines can manage to avoid losing as White? We could just as well discuss recipes for inedible food. A sample of the game material, 3 games = 16,66 % of the game material with the Fyfe in my biggest base... [pgn][Event "ZN.2006.0.00130"] [Site "LSS"] [Date "2006.12.01"] [Round "?"] [White "Yasaka, Anquin"] [Black "York, John"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "B00"] [WhiteElo "800"] [BlackElo "800"] [PlyCount "20"] [EventDate "2006.12.01"] [EventType "match (corr)"] [Source "Chess Mail Ltd"] [SourceDate "2008.09.12"] 1. e4 Nc6 2. Nc3 e5 3. d4 d5 (3... exd4 4. Bc4 dxc3 5. Qd5 Qe7 6. Bg5 Qe6 7. Qd3 Ne5 8. Qxc3 Nxc4 9. f3 Be7 10. Bxe7 Nxe7 11. Qxg7 Ng6 12. b3 Nce5 13. Qh6 d5 14. Qd2 Bd7 15. exd5 Nxf3+ 16. Kd1 Nxd2 17. dxe6 Bxe6 18. Kxd2 O-O-O+ 19. Kc1 Nf4 20. Kb2 Nxg2 21. Nf3 Bd5 22. Rhf1 Ne3 23. Rf2 Bxf3 24. Rxf3 Nd5 25. Rd1 Rhf8 26. c4 Nb6 27. Rxd8+ Kxd8 28. Rd3+ Kc8 29. c5 Nd7 30. b4 Ne5 31. Ra3 Nc4+ 32. Kb3 Nxa3 33. Kxa3 Rd8 34. b5 Rd5 35. Kb4 a5+ 36. Kc4 c6 37. b6 f5 { 1-0 Bolanos Gonzalez,A-Garcia Vera,A/Aviles 2003/EXT 2004}) (3... Bc5 4. Bb5 d6 5. Bxc6+ bxc6 6. Nf3 Nf6 7. O-O O-O 8. Bg5 h6 9. h3 exd4 10. Nxd4 hxg5 11. Nxc6 Qe8 12. Nxa7 Rxa7 13. a3 Bg4 14. Qd3 Rb7 15. Na4 Nxe4 16. Qa6 Rb8 17. c3 Nd2 18. Rfe1 Qd7 19. b4 Bb6 20. Qd3 Nb3 21. Rab1 Rfe8 22. Re4 Bf5 23. Rc4 Bxd3 24. Rxc7 Bxc7 25. Rxb3 Qxa4 26. Rb1 Bxb1 27. h4 d5 28. g3 Be4 29. g4 gxh4 30. g5 Qd1# {0-1 Candassamy,H-Ah Soune,G/Etang Sale 2000/EXT 2001}) 4. Nf3 exd4 5. exd5 dxc3 6. dxc6 Qxd1+ 7. Kxd1 cxb2 8. cxb7 bxa1=Q 9. bxa8=Q Ba3 10. Be2 Qxc1# 0-1 [/pgn] [quote]I also insist that, in this thread of mine, any mockery should come with a new move. [/quote] Only if every new post of yours in this thread contain a new game you have played with or against the Fyfe in an Elorated long game against an opponent rated no less than 100 points below you. I don't mind a theoretical discussion on how to punish a dubious pawn blunder, if the discussion is interesting and to the point - but by now most of the replies here seem only intended to keep this thread on top, everlasting. Maybe it could star in a new section on chess archaeology instead?


	IP Logged

Stefan Buecker God Member Offline Posts: 1386 Location: Germany Joined: 02/11/09 Gender:	Re: C25: The Everlasting Fyfe Gambit Reply #205 - 09/24/12 at 09:55:10	Post Tools	Print Post
	Alias wrote on 09/24/12 at 07:12:52: 3) I don't think it's necessary to keep all discussions on topic and move off topic replies to a new discussion. It makes the forum less exiting. I strongly agree. But I also insist that, in this thread of mine, any mockery should come with a new move. Markovich, don't you agree that Master Om's new idea 4...Bc5!? 5.fxe5 d6!? is highly interesting and in the same spirit as your 4...d5? Maybe the idea makes even more "common" sense than d5, if you ask me. Master Om, thanks for your detailed analysis with inspiring novelties. In the variation 4...Bc5 5.fxe5 d6 6.Bf4 Ne6 7.Bg3 h5, White can also play 8.h4 (instead of 8.Qd2) when 8...c6 seems best (8...dxe5 is just equal): 9.Nf3 Qb6 10.a3 (10.Qd3 Qxb2 11.Rb1 Qa3 12.Nd2 Bb4 13.Rxb4 may be unsound) 10...dxe5 (this pawn is taboo: 11.Nxe5? Qxb2! 12.Na4 Qd4) 11.Na4 Qa5+ 12.c3 Be7 13.b4 Qd8 with a microscopic plus for Black. Chess is difficult enough, when there exists a position with Q+N vs R + N + B which is won for White in 517 moves. I didn't claim that the Bulgarian Ouch is correct. Maybe the Fyfe is correct, who knows? "Wishful thinking" - would you enlighten us, Markovich, why you believe that chess is such a simple game that you can know, just know, that 3.d4 is an error?


	IP Logged