It seems a good psychological choice - after all, Black probably didn't play the Budapest to get on the wrong end of a prospectless += grind.

Thanks IsaVulpes (and semper_fidelis), this is interesting!

Plichta actually does take this line seriously and tries to improve on Salgado Lopez. I still don't have the full course, only the free "Short & Sweet" version, but there he gives (stripped of most of the comments):

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.e3 Nxe5 5.f4 Nec6! 6.Nf3 d6 {If we go 6...g6? then White has 7.Bd2 with Bc3 to come. This is the line that Salgado gives for White in his book claiming - correctly - that White is much better. However, he doesn't even analyse 6... d6 [...] - Plichta} 7.Bd2 Nd7! 8.Bc3 Nc5 9.Nbd2 a5 10.Be2 Be7! 11.O-O O-O {Black prepares ... Bf6 and ... Re8 with at least equal chances - Plichta}

Just looking at this one line it seems clear that White has interesting alternatives to explore, for instance on move 9 and 10. But again Plichta may have covered most of the options in the full course.

In the two engine games IsaVulpes links to I notice both engines chose the Plichta-approved 5...Nec6 as Black, which should tell us something (unless those moves were predetermined?). But none of them answered it with Salgado's 6.Nf3 designed to keep the Bd2-c3 option open. 6.Nf3 can't be bad, but in a higher sense it may be just a strategic trap, hoping for 6...g6?.

To my mere human eyes LC0's play as White leaves a strange impression, while SF's setup with Nc3, b3, Bb2 is natural and seemed to hold on to an edge, though ultimately just the better side of a draw.

Stigma wrote on 12/28/20 at 05:56:54:

In the TCEC S17 Superfinal, both Leela and SF independently came up with a rather fresh line vs the Budapest:

4.e3 Nxe5 5.f4!?

https://chess24.com/en/watch/live-tournaments/tcec-season-17-superfinal-2020/1/1...
https://chess24.com/en/watch/live-tournaments/tcec-season-17-superfinal-2020/1/1...

Both games ended in draws, but this seems to me to be a good mixture of "simple, understandable play" (either keep your center stable + develop, or throw the kingside up the board), with "direct refutation attempt" (after all, the two strongest engines both decided that they'd like to play those moves in a long TC game), and "relatively unknown; Black is unlikely to find/know the critical moves" (never seen this outside of TCEC, gamecount on Lichess is also still relatively small).

It is similar in spirit to 4.e4 Nxe5 5.f4, but with the differences that:
- The King is substantially safer; eg ..Bb4+ can often/easily be answered with Kf2; which you would be less happy about with the pawn on e4
- The center is a lot more stable, as we havent advanced our pawns quite as far, and the f4 pawn remains defended
- Better control over the dark squares, in particular the d4 one
- The b1-h7 diagonal remains open, allowing us to play Bd3 at an opportune moment, potentially with Ng5 to follow

Some sample lines (not critical by Black, but to get some ideas across):

5..Ng6 6.h4!? h5 (6..Nxh4 7.Nc3 just normal development with e4,Be3,Nge2,etc and ask Black how happy they are about spending 2 tempi on opening up your h-file) 7.Nf3 Be7 8.Ng5 d6 9.Qd5 0-0 10.Be2 Bg4 11.Bxg4 hxg4 12.Nc3 c6 13.Qd3 (with Bd2,0-0-0,h5 etc coming next, while it's not quite clear what Black is doing)

5..Nec6 6.Nf3 g6 7.Bd2 Bg7 8.Bc3 0-0 9.h4 h5 10.g4! (..hxg4?? 11.Ng5+-); White is rolling, Black.. isn't

the "mainline" in the Lichess DB for players rated 2200+ (no Bullet) goes
5..Nec6 6.Nf3 Bc5 7.Nc3 0-0 8.Bd3 Re8, and here 9.Bxh7! is already completely winning.

E: I dont have a clue what Plichta gives against this, or whether it's even covered in the course

Spock68 wrote on 11/12/17 at 01:03:09:

No. It is only about of the Budapest, no a repertoire book. In my case my main defense vs d4 is the slav so I can try to traspose to it with d5.

Spock68 wrote on 11/12/17 at 01:03:09:


Without wishing to step on tibor toes, I’d advise against playing ...e5 after 2. Nf3 there.
Play something else, such as ...g6, ...e6, or ...d5.

Hello,

I have bought the book, but I have no enought elo strength (around 1900 FIDE) to give a proper in-deep analisys, nor I have the first edition to compare to. Anyway I can give a few comments about it:
1. It is a very good introduction to the opening, as all lines are cover in details with ideas, tricks and traps.
2. Games are very well annontated, there are even symbols for 'weapon' 'trick' 'plans' and other. This add a lot of value to your study.
3. I have been surprised by some coverage, i.e. in the Faj, the variation 4...b6 say is little explored and promise black good chances. In introduction he say this coverage is a novelty compared to first edition
4.  Author is honest with black chances. I.e. in the Bf4 line with 6.Nc3 and g3 he say white has very good and solid game, but he points that even that, black has many resources to complicate the game. In my opinion maybe at top level this variation should at least garantice white a draw and a good game to fight for a win, but after reading the entire chapter I has the feeling black could do very well in games below 2300.

I would definitly recommend the book.

If you want other datails aboud the book or any other variation, please let me know and can see that in detail and comment my opinion here.

Regards
Fer