Latest Updates:
Normal Topic Petroff 3.d4,5.dxe5: still a serious line? (Read 4461 times)
Pale Horse, Pale Rider
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 287
Joined: 12/26/12
Re: Petroff 3.d4,5.dxe5: still a serious line?
Reply #4 - 12/18/14 at 21:18:36
Post Tools
DMel wrote on 12/14/14 at 09:27:04:
Yes, that is the line I'm talking about, sorry for omitting the first moves. Thanks for the reply, If you can give a look to your books as you mentioned it would be really appreciated. I used to meet the petroff very rarely until recently, so I never bothered to buy a book on the subject.


I took a look in both books now. Both authors state in- or explicitly that black has no worries in this variantion and recommend the approach you figured out as black's best try. I don't think it is necessary to go too much into detail here since you basically raised all important points in your first post.

Both authors give 11. Re1 after 10...Kh8 in the line you described and now 11...Na6 12. Bf4 Nc7 (Cohen) or the sharper 12...c5 (Sakaev) which are both fine for black according to the authors.

So, in short both author's agree that it's not a serious try for an advantage and much prefer taking on e5 with a knight for black, which is a completely different system/line though of course. By the amount of analysis given it seems that both authors consider preserving the bishop in your line, even though they do not explicitly state it is a better try.
I hope that was helpful. If you have any more specific question I can help with I will gladly do so ... it will help my results with black Wink
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
DMel
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 4
Joined: 08/28/14
Re: Petroff 3.d4,5.dxe5: still a serious line?
Reply #3 - 12/14/14 at 09:27:04
Post Tools
Yes, that is the line I'm talking about, sorry for omitting the first moves. Thanks for the reply, If you can give a look to your books as you mentioned it would be really appreciated. I used to meet the petroff very rarely until recently, so I never bothered to buy a book on the subject.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Pale Horse, Pale Rider
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 287
Joined: 12/26/12
Re: Petroff 3.d4,5.dxe5: still a serious line?
Reply #2 - 12/11/14 at 09:14:39
Post Tools
DMel wrote on 12/10/14 at 16:04:52:
Hi all, this is my first post, although I have been following the forum for a long time. I hope my question will not be seen as too basic-uninteresting.

Recently I started playing the 3.d4 petroff, broadly following Goeller's "Anti Petroff repertoire with d4" published on the kenilworth chess club website. Goeller's articles are generally meant to be inspiring rather than comprehensive, but detailed enough for my low level of play (1950 fide). In this case i'm pretty happy with the position i'm getting after 5...Nc6/5...Be7, but I am not convinced by his suggestion against 5...Nc5!?, simply going for the d3 bishop.
Basically he gives 6.0-0 Be7 7.Nc3 c6 8.Nd4 Nxd3 9.Qxd3, with advantage for white if black overreacts to the Nf5 "threat" with 9...g6?!. If instead 9...0-0 he admits that 10.Nf5?! leads nowhere (white merely gets his bishop pair back and loses time in the process). 10.f4?! also seems pretty bad to me (among others, i wonder whether black could simply meet this with 10...f5!?, the idea being that the e pawn is not going anywhere after Na6-c6-e6, black has a more mobile pawn majority with an eventual c5-d4 and white's remaining bishop is now an horrendous piece because of the blocked pawns on e5 and f4; again i'm a weak player so please tell me if this is just nonsense). This leaves Goeller's suggestion of 10.Qg3!?, which momentarily prevents the advance c6-c5 thanks to the Bh6 threat; his analysis stops here.
However after the simple 10...Kh8 i'm struggling to see a way forward for white. c5 is again in sight and 11.f4?! seems at least as unconvincing as before after either 11...f5!? or the immediate c5 (probably other moves work as well). 11.Bf4 looks natural, but then 11...c5 12.Nf3 Nc6 leaves me wondering what white is actually trying to archieve; it seems to me that black has a slightly easier position with greaer central control and a mobile pawn majority. 12.Nb5!?-d6 could be tryed, but i'm not sure it leads anywhere (and anyway I guess black could try to prevent this with 11...a6 before c5 if he wants).

Basically, my question is, in your experience:
-is this line not considered a serious try anymore?, or
-is there some hidden resource for white i'm missing because i don't understand the resulting positions well enough? or
-white should rather play 6.Be2, keeping the bishop?

Thanks in advance!


Are we talking about this line?

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. d4 Nxe4
4. Bd3 d5
5. dxe5

resulting in this position:

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Just to make sure we are talking about the same lines. I encountered this line once, play continued:

5...Be7
6. O-O Nc5 (Is there much difference here to 5...Nc5?)
7. Be2 O-O

Here is a game for this Be2 line. Though I think there is much room for improvement for black  here.



I wouldn't mind entering this line with black. If you want and confirm that we are talking about the same line I can look up what some recent books (Cohen and Sakaev) have to say about these lines.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Keano
God Member
*****
Offline


Money doesn't talk, it
swears.

Posts: 2891
Location: Toulouse
Joined: 05/25/05
Gender: Male
Re: Petroff 3.d4,5.dxe5: still a serious line?
Reply #1 - 12/10/14 at 20:05:58
Post Tools
I'd play 6.Be2 personally
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
DMel
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 4
Joined: 08/28/14
Petroff 3.d4,5.dxe5: still a serious line?
12/10/14 at 16:04:52
Post Tools
Hi all, this is my first post, although I have been following the forum for a long time. I hope my question will not be seen as too basic-uninteresting.

Recently I started playing the 3.d4 petroff, broadly following Goeller's "Anti Petroff repertoire with d4" published on the kenilworth chess club website. Goeller's articles are generally meant to be inspiring rather than comprehensive, but detailed enough for my low level of play (1950 fide). In this case i'm pretty happy with the position i'm getting after 5...Nc6/5...Be7, but I am not convinced by his suggestion against 5...Nc5!?, simply going for the d3 bishop.
Basically he gives 6.0-0 Be7 7.Nc3 c6 8.Nd4 Nxd3 9.Qxd3, with advantage for white if black overreacts to the Nf5 "threat" with 9...g6?!. If instead 9...0-0 he admits that 10.Nf5?! leads nowhere (white merely gets his bishop pair back and loses time in the process). 10.f4?! also seems pretty bad to me (among others, i wonder whether black could simply meet this with 10...f5!?, the idea being that the e pawn is not going anywhere after Na6-c6-e6, black has a more mobile pawn majority with an eventual c5-d4 and white's remaining bishop is now an horrendous piece because of the blocked pawns on e5 and f4; again i'm a weak player so please tell me if this is just nonsense). This leaves Goeller's suggestion of 10.Qg3!?, which momentarily prevents the advance c6-c5 thanks to the Bh6 threat; his analysis stops here.
However after the simple 10...Kh8 i'm struggling to see a way forward for white. c5 is again in sight and 11.f4?! seems at least as unconvincing as before after either 11...f5!? or the immediate c5 (probably other moves work as well). 11.Bf4 looks natural, but then 11...c5 12.Nf3 Nc6 leaves me wondering what white is actually trying to archieve; it seems to me that black has a slightly easier position with greaer central control and a mobile pawn majority. 12.Nb5!?-d6 could be tryed, but i'm not sure it leads anywhere (and anyway I guess black could try to prevent this with 11...a6 before c5 if he wants).

Basically, my question is, in your experience:
-is this line not considered a serious try anymore?, or
-is there some hidden resource for white i'm missing because i don't understand the resulting positions well enough? or
-white should rather play 6.Be2, keeping the bishop?

Thanks in advance!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo