Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten (Read 22152 times)
Pawnpusher
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 273
Joined: 01/04/18
Gender: Male
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #25 - 03/14/20 at 10:37:39
Post Tools
I have a pretty modest gpu, but there are some nets that are useful, and the LcO people have a list of suggested nets for different computer systems. It is also important to remember Stockfish and Brainfish which are still very strong, and work on anything more modern than Fred Flintstone's laptop.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jack Hughes
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 72
Joined: 07/22/19
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #24 - 03/13/20 at 09:44:32
Post Tools
trw wrote on 03/12/20 at 15:49:45:
Not sure. I would have to check it. I don't have the time atm. If it transposes, I usually still note such a move as transposing especially for a book or course.

Fair enough, I'm willing to concede that I should have mentioned it. I am now and was always intending to cover it in the course, including the independent but toothless lines it can lead to.
trw wrote on 03/12/20 at 15:49:45:
I have built my own database which takes hours every month to maintain. It is better than anything you can buy commercially... and I have seen other corr players with databases that put mine to shame in the same way mine puts MegaDatabase to shame... however they spend hundreds more hours on theirs. One issue is that I have never seen a chess database program that can really handle the amount of games out there... I would love to see a new 2020 UI built with size in mind.

Ah... that makes sense! I've pretty much listed all of my sources for games in the previous post. Are there any other free ones you would recommend? If you'd prefer to keep them a bit more secret then I would fully understand.
trw wrote on 03/12/20 at 15:49:45:
Difficult to say tbh... it's all so new and there is so many networks and variants... I don't have time to test every network nor the hardware to test that many. I have tried to come up with some heuristics to make using lc0 practical. I stayed with the jhortos t40 network for a while after testing many many t30/t40 networks... now I have upgraded to a handful of t60 nodes and only rarely go back to jhortos t40. I do try to keep up with the lc0 developments. In general, it is a time trade off of the opportunity cost. And in your situation as a cpu only vs high end cuda/blas... I am not sure there is any reason to not just take the super simple route of the link I posted above from the devs themselves.

Interesting. Funnily enough my belief that diversity of style is more important than playing strength was actually based upon my experience using crappy hardware - it's basically the only explanation I can think of for the significant help that my severely nerfed version of LC0 has provided to me in in analysis. I'll take your advice on board, thanks for sharing.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1413
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #23 - 03/12/20 at 15:49:45
Post Tools
Jack Hughes wrote on 03/12/20 at 11:00:21:
- Obviously you are correct that I failed to mention 11. Bc3. My reasoning was that I thought white had no challenging alternative to just transposing with 11... Ne7 12. Rd1. Do you not agree with this assessment?


Not sure. I would have to check it. I don't have the time atm. If it transposes, I usually still note such a move as transposing especially for a book or course.

Jack Hughes wrote on 03/12/20 at 11:00:21:
- trw I am very eager to hear what database you are using. I've checked with the latest editions of TWIC, Chessbase online and the ICCF archive and I can't find any of the games you are referring to. The only game I can find after 10... e5 is the Erastov-Uskov game referred to by fling. Is there some kind of secret super-database known only to high-level ICCF players?  Shocked


I have built my own database which takes hours every month to maintain. It is better than anything you can buy commercially... and I have seen other corr players with databases that put mine to shame in the same way mine puts MegaDatabase to shame... however they spend hundreds more hours on theirs. One issue is that I have never seen a chess database program that can really handle the amount of games out there... I would love to see a new 2020 UI built with size in mind.

Jack Hughes wrote on 03/12/20 at 11:00:21:
- Your thoughts on the use of LC0 are most appreciated, as is your generous offer to take a look at some lines - I will make sure to avail myself of that offer! I would have thought that making use of a diverse range of NNs with different styles (e.g. one LC0 from test 40, one from test 60, a version of Alliestein, a version of Leelenstein) would have been more important than just finding whichever one is the very strongest in terms of finding and cross-checking ideas. Would you agree with this view?


Difficult to say tbh... it's all so new and there is so many networks and variants... I don't have time to test every network nor the hardware to test that many. I have tried to come up with some heuristics to make using lc0 practical. I stayed with the jhortos t40 network for a while after testing many many t30/t40 networks... now I have upgraded to a handful of t60 nodes and only rarely go back to jhortos t40. I do try to keep up with the lc0 developments. In general, it is a time trade off of the opportunity cost. And in your situation as a cpu only vs high end cuda/blas... I am not sure there is any reason to not just take the super simple route of the link I posted above from the devs themselves.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jack Hughes
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 72
Joined: 07/22/19
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #22 - 03/12/20 at 11:00:21
Post Tools
Thanks to both Szygy and trw for the replies. I will make a few comments in reply.
In response to trw:
- Obviously you are correct that I failed to mention 11. Bc3. My reasoning was that I thought white had no challenging alternative to just transposing with 11... Ne7 12. Rd1. Do you not agree with this assessment?
- I will make sure to credit Chesspub and any particular users when credit is due. Even assuming that I was sufficiently lacking in integrity not to do this it would be pretty hard when I post under my real name! My condolences to trw and anyone else who has had their analysis taken without due accreditation.
- trw I am very eager to hear what database you are using. I've checked with the latest editions of TWIC, Chessbase online and the ICCF archive and I can't find any of the games you are referring to. The only game I can find after 10... e5 is the Erastov-Uskov game referred to by fling. Is there some kind of secret super-database known only to high-level ICCF players?  Shocked
- I've done only the most superficial of analyses here but what little I have done corroborates the claim that 16... h5 is superior to 16... Kf7. What 'analysis' (if that is even the right word) I had done of 9... f6 was simply to click through my database and get an idea of whether those were lines I would want to recommend. In practice so far 16... Kf7 has been overwhelmingly preferred over 16... h5 so that was what I 'analysed'. I guess the lesson to be learned is that even under these conditions I should at least turn the engine on.
- The analysis after 18... Rae8 is in variation B1.
- Your thoughts on the use of LC0 are most appreciated, as is your generous offer to take a look at some lines - I will make sure to avail myself of that offer! I would have thought that making use of a diverse range of NNs with different styles (e.g. one LC0 from test 40, one from test 60, a version of Alliestein, a version of Leelenstein) would have been more important than just finding whichever one is the very strongest in terms of finding and cross-checking ideas. Would you agree with this view?
- Your thoughts on the Noteboom are intriguing. Having not analysed the opening properly myself I will happily content myself with the Socratic approach: all I know is that I know nothing!
In response to Szygy:
- Yes 21... cxd6 22. Qxc6+ Kd8 looks like an excellent fix. My Stockfish files were saying that black was busted after both 23. Rg1  and 23. Ke2, but if you keep pressing the button it comes around to the trademark 0.00. So my current conclusion is that 15... f5 is solving the line for black. But it's all so bizarre that I'm still not going to be holding my breath! Thanks for fixing the line!
- Fair enough on LC0. I'm too much of a cheapskate to even consider paying for decent hardware, but that won't stop me from using it anyway!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Syzygy
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 82
Joined: 01/25/18
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #21 - 03/12/20 at 02:34:08
Post Tools
Jack Hughes wrote on 03/12/20 at 01:24:51:
Syzygy wrote on 03/11/20 at 23:43:02:
In the line with 5...a6 and 12...Bb4 13. b3 h5 14. Qc2 h5 15. Nf3 Black's best continuation should be 15...f5!! as originally played in Jumabayev - Gelfand 2019.

It's incredible how Stockfish's evaluation drops over time, and it's the perfect example of a sharp line that is ripe for exploration, since the computer doesn't understand it well (at least at first). That said, I don't have access to Lc0's opinion, so I had to work the details out by manually following what seemed to be the critical lines.

Right now, 16. Rd1 Qe7 17. Bb2 hxg3 18. fxg3 Rh5! 19. Rac1 Bd5 20. Qe2 seems to be the most logical continuation. After this, I focused on the absurd move 20...a5!!, which once again Stockfish misses at low depths. Black is most likely going to open up the queenside with 21...a4!

The whole line is absurd, but it's incredibly fun to find these kinds of ideas for Black. No wonder it's so trendy.

This was a line that I looked at, since it has been played in some high level games, and at one point I was also very excited about it. Unfortunately, I found a pretty large advantage for white after the courageous 16. h3 hxg3 17. hxg4 g2 18. Kxg2 Bd5 19. Kg3 Bxf3 20. Kxf3 Qh4 21. Nd6! Bxd6 22. Qxc6+ Kd8 23. Ke2 Qxg4+ 24. Ke1. Do you have a fix here?
As regards to LC0 I should emphasise that I also have very poor hardware for running it, and so I am able to use it at anywhere near its full strength. Nevertheless the fact that it is just so different in style from Stockfish makes it very useful for analysis - it has helped me to discover several important lines that I definitely would not have found relying on Stockfish alone. On that subject, this includes several variations in the mainline Marshall Gambit, but sadly for white rather than black!  I'm a complete idiot with computers so it took me longer than I would like to admit to start using it, but after watching a Youtube tutorial (link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2srCBNK8jc&t=405s) I was able to work it out. Regardless of your hardware, I would highly recommend anyone interested in seriously analysing openings to do the same.


My fix would be 21. Nd6+! cxd6! 22. Qxc6+ Kd8! since the e1 square is no longer available for the White king. Certainly a critical line, but it looks like Black achieves 0.00, and surely GMs like Gelfand would have analyzed this in depth.

With regards to Lc0, I want to wait until I can get better hardware so that I can utilize it to its full strength. Over time, however, I've learned to trust Stockfish less, and can definitely see hints of Lc0-inspired play popping up in high-level games.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
trw
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1413
Joined: 05/06/08
Gender: Male
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #20 - 03/12/20 at 02:22:57
Post Tools
Well 10... e5 is not new or not a novelty at least. It is the cutting edge of theory right now and for all practical purposes white is crushing in these lines.

Unfortunately, I have a ridiculous load of correspondence games going at the moment so I can't get too deep into this line. I will try to return to it later but for the moment here it what a cursory overview of thoughts and findings.

10... e5

You didn't even mention 11. Bc3 which may just transpose to your lines but it bears its own investigation.

As for 11. Rd1 Bf5 12. Nf3 Ne7 13. Bc3 Nc5 14. Nxe5 0-0 this can be considered the mainline as all games with this 10... e5 move reach this tabiya. Although from here, white is scoring 70% so if you don't catch someone out of prep otb... you can be in a world of hurt defending this position imo.

Aside, what chessable course? Are you producing this course or consuming it? EDIT: it appears you are writing a course. Congrats! I would be happy to take a look at what you have. Of course, I need to now share a pet peeve which is to cite chesspub as a source. Because while you have given, you have also received. In doing so, you may bring more users here. I have in the past seen my work taken without citation for books and it caused me to contribute a lot less over the years.

B1 The only game I can find white won.

Regarding B2 Na4 certainly does not deserve a ! as it has lost quite a few games. Rae8 has held once. It seems the rook ending is probably lost after 23... Rae8 requiring 23... Re7 which is apparently enough to hold the draw though maybe improvements can be found.


In your follow up post regarding 9... f6 certainly 16... h5 is a vast improvement over 16... Kf7...


Jack Hughes wrote on 02/24/20 at 10:16:26:
I've also been taking a closer look at 18... Rae8. At one point it seemed like 20... Qg2 might be an improvement, but sadly it seems that white is quite a lot better after 21. Rf1 fxe5 22. Bxe5 Qxh2 23. Rd7! (23. Qxb6 Ng5 when black keeps the initiative and is apparently fine) when the almost forced sequence 23... Rf6 24. Re7 Rxe7 25. Qxe7 Rf8 26. c5 leads to an endgame where black is probably just objectively lost.


Somewhere I lost the thread on this one... what is the full line here?

Jack Hughes wrote on 03/12/20 at 01:24:51:
As regards to LC0 I should emphasise that I also have very poor hardware for running it, and so I am able to use it at anywhere near its full strength. Nevertheless the fact that it is just so different in style from Stockfish makes it very useful for analysis - it has helped me to discover several important lines that I definitely would not have found relying on Stockfish alone. On that subject, this includes several variations in the mainline Marshall Gambit, but sadly for white rather than black!  I'm a complete idiot with computers so it took me longer than I would like to admit to start using it, but after watching a Youtube tutorial (link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2srCBNK8jc&t=405s) I was able to work it out. Regardless of your hardware, I would highly recommend anyone interested in seriously analysing openings to do the same.


On that note, I do have very good hardware and have spent an awful lot of time in keeping up with hardware/software changes to play high level ICCF games. If you have a general question, feel free to PM me. I don't promise a response same day... but I do promise to respond with as much help as I can. When my game load decreases, I am also happy to offer some use of my high level hardware for lc0 for specific lines and ideas if it helps. Side note on lc0, it's pretty terrible at endgames and has a much shorter horizon effect. It finds very novel ideas... but they need to be checked thoroughly. And if I keep going off topic on lc0, I may need to start a new thread. Still one last thought, lc0 is primarily driven by which network you select (as the "brain" for lack of a better word). The best network is always in flux... they have a handy short list here that they keep updating for those without a bunch of time...: https://github.com/LeelaChessZero/lc0/wiki/Best-Nets-for-Lc0

A caveat though is that these tests are often done with specific purposes and settings in mind (such as submitting it to an engine tournament like TCEC). It is not done analysis partner or ICCF time control ideas... as such you really will need to do some of your own testing. Each network operates in some ways like its own engine. In the end, the easiest way to keep up on networks is to see which ones the devs are submitting for competitions.
Sorry I can't contribute more at the moment. Like I said, hopefully I can circle back.

As an aside, I don't share your optimism on the noteboom. When I worked as a second for the World Cup, I had it completely busted and my player went clear sailing to the next round easily on prep alone. I haven't checked it in some time... but I doubt all the holes on that opening can ever be fixed. I think it is super sharp and like praying your opponent isn't ready. But I would advise against recommending this to anyone as anything more than a surprise weapon.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jack Hughes
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 72
Joined: 07/22/19
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #19 - 03/12/20 at 01:24:51
Post Tools
Syzygy wrote on 03/11/20 at 23:43:02:
In the line with 5...a6 and 12...Bb4 13. b3 h5 14. Qc2 h5 15. Nf3 Black's best continuation should be 15...f5!! as originally played in Jumabayev - Gelfand 2019.

It's incredible how Stockfish's evaluation drops over time, and it's the perfect example of a sharp line that is ripe for exploration, since the computer doesn't understand it well (at least at first). That said, I don't have access to Lc0's opinion, so I had to work the details out by manually following what seemed to be the critical lines.

Right now, 16. Rd1 Qe7 17. Bb2 hxg3 18. fxg3 Rh5! 19. Rac1 Bd5 20. Qe2 seems to be the most logical continuation. After this, I focused on the absurd move 20...a5!!, which once again Stockfish misses at low depths. Black is most likely going to open up the queenside with 21...a4!

The whole line is absurd, but it's incredibly fun to find these kinds of ideas for Black. No wonder it's so trendy.

This was a line that I looked at, since it has been played in some high level games, and at one point I was also very excited about it. Unfortunately, I found a pretty large advantage for white after the courageous 16. h3 hxg3 17. hxg4 g2 18. Kxg2 Bd5 19. Kg3 Bxf3 20. Kxf3 Qh4 21. Nd6! Bxd6 22. Qxc6+ Kd8 23. Ke2 Qxg4+ 24. Ke1. Do you have a fix here?
As regards to LC0 I should emphasise that I also have very poor hardware for running it, and so I am not able to use it at anywhere near its full strength. Nevertheless the fact that it is just so different in style from Stockfish makes it very useful for analysis - it has helped me to discover several important lines that I definitely would not have found relying on Stockfish alone. On that subject, this includes several variations in the mainline Marshall Gambit, but sadly for white rather than black!  I'm a complete idiot with computers so it took me longer than I would like to admit to start using it, but after watching a Youtube tutorial (link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2srCBNK8jc&t=405s) I was able to work it out. Regardless of your hardware, I would highly recommend anyone interested in seriously analysing openings to do the same.
« Last Edit: 03/12/20 at 04:44:22 by Jack Hughes »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Syzygy
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 82
Joined: 01/25/18
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #18 - 03/11/20 at 23:43:02
Post Tools
In the line with 5...a6 and 12...Bb4 13. b3 h5 14. Qc2 h5 15. Nf3 Black's best continuation should be 15...f5!! as originally played in Jumabayev - Gelfand 2019.

It's incredible how Stockfish's evaluation drops over time, and it's the perfect example of a sharp line that is ripe for exploration, since the computer doesn't understand it well (at least at first). That said, I don't have access to Lc0's opinion, so I had to work the details out by manually following what seemed to be the critical lines.

Right now, 16. Rd1 Qe7 17. Bb2 hxg3 18. fxg3 Rh5! 19. Rac1 Bd5 20. Qe2 seems to be the most logical continuation. After this, I focused on the absurd move 20...a5!!, which once again Stockfish misses at low depths. Black is most likely going to open up the queenside with 21...a4!

The whole line is absurd, but it's incredibly fun to find these kinds of ideas for Black. No wonder it's so trendy.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jack Hughes
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 72
Joined: 07/22/19
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #17 - 03/11/20 at 18:48:45
Post Tools
Syzygy wrote on 03/04/20 at 18:57:03:
I agree that 4...Bb4+ followed by Be7 is Black's best bet for full equality. I've analyzed it a lot and while I think Black is fine, there are a lot of positional subtleties to understand. I wouldn't necessarily pair it with lines like the Botvinnik, Meran, or Noteboom, but at least it leads to a Semi-Slav-like structure.

After reading your comment I've taken a fairly extensive look at some of these ...Bb4+ lines and I'm now of the opinion that black can actually have quite a bit of fun there, with a surprising number of ways for white to go non-trivially wrong early on. In regards to your point that it leads to a Semi-Slav structure I was initially inclined to disagree with you, since on my interpretation the Semi-Slav the main point of setting up the triangle structure is to prepare a capture on c4, rather than to reinforce the centre. Then it occurred to me just how similar black's setup is in the Closed Catalan to in the b3 Anti-Meran, so I'm going to have to agree with you on that point as well.
Syzygy wrote on 03/04/20 at 18:57:03:
This time, I'm not sure which slightly better rook endgame you're referring to. I think Black's best chances lie in 12...Bb4 rather than 12...h5, and there weren't many endgames there that really worried me. However, the analysis definitely required looking beyond Stockfish and playing natural attacking moves.

After 9.Ne4, Black's best is probably 9...c3 instead of 9...b5. However, 9...b5 did lead to two wins for Black in grandmaster play, so maybe there's some merit to it.

In regards to the 5... a6 rook endgame I was referring to the one arising after 12... h5. I had noticed it, but a superficial analysis didn't convince me that it was an improvement. After reading your comment I've taken a closer look at it, and honestly all I'm really confident in saying is that there is a lot of scope for future investigation: play is very sharp but there were quite a few options for both sides that I thought worth exploring. The mainline in my file right now is 13. b3 h5 14. Qc2 h4 15. Nf3 Qd7 16. e4 hxg3 17. fxg3 Rd8 18. h4 Qd3 when once again we get a slightly worse endgame for black, but white has had to show greater precision along the way and black has real options to deviate earlier (among which I spent the most time investigating 14... Bxd2, 15... hxg3, 15... f5, and 17... Bc5) - as far as I can tell they are all slightly inferior, but this line is so complicated that I can't tell very far! At the moment I haven't looked too much into 9. Ne4 yet, but based on what little I have done both 9... c3 and 9... b5 are still legitimate candidates to me.
Syzygy wrote on 03/04/20 at 18:57:03:
I think I would now prefer Jack's 16...Qa6 over the big main line with 16...Qb5. The resulting positions are fairly balanced (Black is an exchange down with a strong passed pawn), and there are less forced draws. On the other hand I would probably still choose the Moscow against a well-prepared opponent who excels at memorization.

This is definitely a point of view I can understand. Both the Botvinnik and the Moscow have legitimate upsides and which should be preferred will depend on several variables relating to your opponent e.g. their strength relative to yours, their opening knowledge, their preference for sharp or positional chess. I sincerely believe that for most amateur players the Botvinnik will usually be the better scoring choice if black is willing to do a little homework, but I am aware that opinions will differ on this matter.
Syzygy wrote on 03/04/20 at 18:57:03:
I'm not sure what Kaufman's recommended line is, but if you're talking about 15. Nd2 Qc7 16. Bc2 then it seems like the line with 16...h6!? has been holding up quite well in correspondence play.

Edit: I missed Jack's most recent post, but it seems that we both agree that 16...h6 is the way to go. Certainly a mysterious move, but it reminds me of some lines in the Semi-Tarrasch where playing a waiting move like ...h6 is the only way to maintain computer equality.

My main opinion on the Noteboom is that I just can't make up my mind about it! Based purely on an eye-balling of recent ICCF statistics I would be inclined to say that 16... h6 should be black's best, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that black is clearly okay yet. The resulting variations are surprisingly non-forcing for such a sharp line, and in the absence of any idea to concretely demonstrate equality I would be inclined to say that white's slight plus score indicates that white might still have chances for an edge. It's definitely a very interesting and playable opening, especially over the board - indeed, one of the most striking features of OTB Noteboom statistics is just how little effect ICCF games seem to be having on them (to give an example, 16... h6 has not been played once in the 10 most recent TWIC games to have reached the position after 16. Bc2). But objectively speaking I would say, very tentatively of course, that white might have at least a slightly larger advantage than in either the Moscow or the Botvinnik. Semkov's book is out now, I would be interested to hear what his assessment is from someone who has it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LeeRoth
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 1520
Joined: 10/22/05
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #16 - 03/04/20 at 20:19:08
Post Tools
Thanks, Syzygy.  I’ll take a look.  After 15.Nd2 Qc7 16.Bc2, Kaufman considers 16..e5, 16..Rfc8, and 16..Rfd8. 
I mostly concentrated on 16..e5, as played in Smirnov-Krasenkow, Canberra 2017, and thought White looked better.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Syzygy
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 82
Joined: 01/25/18
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #15 - 03/04/20 at 18:57:03
Post Tools
Jack Hughes wrote on 03/04/20 at 02:44:08:
If it's full equality you want then 4... Bb4+ is probably the way to go, but I'm reluctant to recommend it given that (i) it has already been covered on Chessable in the Nimzo-Ragozin course and (ii) I just don't find the lines as much fun for black, certainly they would are stylistically further away from the rest of the repertoire than my recommendations in the Semi-Slav.


I agree that 4...Bb4+ followed by Be7 is Black's best bet for full equality. I've analyzed it a lot and while I think Black is fine, there are a lot of positional subtleties to understand. I wouldn't necessarily pair it with lines like the Botvinnik, Meran, or Noteboom, but at least it leads to a Semi-Slav-like structure.


Jack Hughes wrote on 03/04/20 at 02:44:08:
To be honest my opinions on the 7... Rb8 line are basically the same: white can basically force a slightly better rook endgame, but at least there will be some fireworks along the way! Thanks for bringing my attention to the 9. Ne4 line, which up until reading your post had escaped my notice. I haven't properly looked at it yet but I do agree that it's quite an interesting try for white. Obviously it will be covered in the course, even if I end up making 5... a6 only a secondary recommendation.


This time, I'm not sure which slightly better rook endgame you're referring to. I think Black's best chances lie in 12...Bb4 rather than 12...h5, and there weren't many endgames there that really worried me. However, the analysis definitely required looking beyond Stockfish and playing natural attacking moves.

After 9.Ne4, Black's best is probably 9...c3 instead of 9...b5. However, 9...b5 did lead to two wins for Black in grandmaster play, so maybe there's some merit to it.

LeeRoth wrote on 03/04/20 at 15:05:06:
The Botvinnik seems fine for Black at the moment, but I tend to agree with Syzygy and I don’t think I’d want to play it either.  In the big main line, Black has to make (or remember) 30 or so precise moves to reach a drawn endgame. 


I think I would now prefer Jack's 16...Qa6 over the big main line with 16...Qb5. The resulting positions are fairly balanced (Black is an exchange down with a strong passed pawn), and there are less forced draws. On the other hand I would probably still choose the Moscow against a well-prepared opponent who excels at memorization.

LeeRoth wrote on 03/04/20 at 15:05:06:
The Noteboom lines with 15.Nd2 are interesting to me.  I’m curious about the state of Kaufman’s recommended line with Bc2.  My engine tends to favor White in this line,  although I probably haven’t let it run long enough. I assume Semkov has a good line for Black, and, as he says in the intro to his book, it does seem like the top GMs avoid the Noteboom (which maybe wouldn’t be the case if White had an easy way to an edge).


I'm not sure what Kaufman's recommended line is, but if you're talking about 15. Nd2 Qc7 16. Bc2 then it seems like the line with 16...h6!? has been holding up quite well in correspondence play.

Edit: I missed Jack's most recent post, but it seems that we both agree that 16...h6 is the way to go. Certainly a mysterious move, but it reminds me of some lines in the Semi-Tarrasch where playing a waiting move like ...h6 is the only way to maintain computer equality.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jack Hughes
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 72
Joined: 07/22/19
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #14 - 03/04/20 at 18:43:11
Post Tools
LeeRoth wrote on 03/04/20 at 15:05:06:
This thread has inspired me to take a look at the Semi-Slav.  Interesting stuff, to say the least!

The Botvinnik seems fine for Black at the moment, but I tend to agree with Syzygy and I don’t think I’d want to play it either.  In the big main line, Black has to make (or remember) 30 or so precise moves to reach a drawn endgame.  And even then, Black has to be careful.  No less a player than Shirov. blundered it against Salgado Lopez in last years Spanish championship.

With respect to the Meran, I checked the White lines recommended by Korneev and Lackwadala in their respective books, and while they each claim small edges for White, my engine thinks Black is able to equalize.  I don’t think I would mind being Black in these lines.

The Noteboom lines with 15.Nd2 are interesting to me.  I’m curious about the state of Kaufman’s recommended line with Bc2.  My engine tends to favor White in this line,  although I probably haven’t let it run long enough. I assume Semkov has a good line for Black, and, as he says in the intro to his book, it does seem like the top GMs avoid the Noteboom (which maybe wouldn’t be the case if White had an easy way to an edge).

Yes, the Botvinnik is definitely a matter of taste. In my personal experience it is far, far more likely at amateur level for white to go wrong very early and end up in a lost position than to pump out 25+ moves of critical theory but of course the higher the level you're playing at the less likely this is to be true. In general I sincerely believe that if you enjoy studying openings in general and sharp lines in particular then you can turn it into one of the best scoring lines in your entire repertoire - certainly that has been the case for me anyway. Also, let me emphasise again that I am not recommending 16... Qb5 (as played in Lopez-Shirov), but instead 16... Qa6. I do not believe play is so one-sided there.
With regards to the Noteboom I am not actually as confident in black's objective prospects. I think the fact that top players tend not to allow it has more to do with the fact they prefer the alternatives (in particular 3. Nc3 c6 4. e4 and either 3. Nf3 c6 4. e3 or 3. Nf3 c6 4. Qc2) over allowing the Semi-Slav. Unfortunately Scherbakov's coverage of 15. Nd2 has, to say the least, not held up very well. Speaking generally the main problem is that he seems to underestimate white's chances in the structure that arises when white meets an early ...e6-e5 with d4-d5. More concretely, his main recommendation for black is 15... Re8, with his main line continuing 16. Bc2 e5 17. Ba4 Qc7 18. d5 Re7, when white has scored 80% in 18 ICCF games. One example of a continuation that he missed is 19. f4 exf4 20. Rxf4, after which white has scored 88.4% in 13 games. He also covers black's main reply with 15... Qc7, but after the main reply in 16. Bc2 recommends 16... Qc7 17. d5 and either transposing to the above line with 17... Rfe8 or instead playing 17... Rfc8 with no further analysis (in a position where white where white has scored 75% in 12 games). Instead of all this the line which has proven to be black's most reliable is 16... h6 (don't ask me to explain why!), but you will not find any coverage of this in his book. All this is not to criticise Scherbakov or his book, but any eight year old book is going to have holes in its critical lines, no matter how diligent its author.
Edit: All my referencing to Scherbakov was motivated by a belief that LeeRoth had said Scherbakov must have a good line, when in fact he stated that Semkov must have a good line. This is definitely a more plausible statement, although we'll have to wait and see given that his book isn't out yet.
« Last Edit: 03/05/20 at 06:46:59 by Jack Hughes »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LeeRoth
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 1520
Joined: 10/22/05
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #13 - 03/04/20 at 15:05:06
Post Tools
This thread has inspired me to take a look at the Semi-Slav.  Interesting stuff, to say the least!

The Botvinnik seems fine for Black at the moment, but I tend to agree with Syzygy and I don’t think I’d want to play it either.  In the big main line, Black has to make (or remember) 30 or so precise moves to reach a drawn endgame.  And even then, Black has to be careful.  No less a player than Shirov. blundered it against Salgado Lopez in last years Spanish championship.

With respect to the Meran, I checked the White lines recommended by Korneev and Lackwadala in their respective books, and while they each claim small edges for White, my engine thinks Black is able to equalize.  I don’t think I would mind being Black in these lines.

The Noteboom lines with 15.Nd2 are interesting to me.  I’m curious about the state of Kaufman’s recommended line with Bc2.  My engine tends to favor White in this line,  although I probably haven’t let it run long enough. I assume Semkov has a good line for Black, and, as he says in the intro to his book, it does seem like the top GMs avoid the Noteboom (which maybe wouldn’t be the case if White had an easy way to an edge).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jack Hughes
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 72
Joined: 07/22/19
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #12 - 03/04/20 at 02:44:08
Post Tools
Syzygy wrote on 02/27/20 at 05:22:34:
I'm not yet fully convinced by the exchange sacrifice lines after 5...c6 6. Ne5 Bb4+ 7. Bd2 Be7 8. e3 b5 9. Nxc6, but I'm sure you have analyzed that in detail. I don't have access to Lc0, so I don't know what it thinks about Black's compensation.

On the other hand, I find the line with 7...Rb8 8. Nfd2 e5 to be quite fascinating - Black's kingside attacking chances there seem to be more well-established. On the other hand, White does have some annoying early deviations - notably, I'm bothered by 6. Ne5 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Nd5 8. O-O O-O 9. Ne4!? as played in Harikrishna - Nakamura 2019.

Sorry for my delayed response. I agree with you that accepting the exchange sacrifice is white's most critical approach to the 5... c6 lines. The Catalan is the line where I've done the least work so far, so my conclusions might change here, but my current opinion here is that if both sides play correctly then black should get a slightly unpleasant but basically defensible endgame. If it's full equality you want then 4... Bb4+ is probably the way to go, but I'm reluctant to recommend it given that (i) it has already been covered on Chessable in the Nimzo-Ragozin course and (ii) I just don't find the lines as much fun for black, certainly they would are stylistically further away from the rest of the repertoire than my recommendations in the Semi-Slav. To be honest my opinions on the 7... Rb8 line are basically the same: white can basically force a slightly better rook endgame, but at least there will be some fireworks along the way! Thanks for bringing my attention to the 9. Ne4 line, which up until reading your post had escaped my notice. I haven't properly looked at it yet but I do agree that it's quite an interesting try for white. Obviously it will be covered in the course, even if I end up making 5... a6 only a secondary recommendation.
« Last Edit: 03/04/20 at 05:16:52 by Jack Hughes »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Syzygy
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 82
Joined: 01/25/18
Re: Marshall Gambit Mainline - Novelty on Move Ten
Reply #11 - 02/27/20 at 05:22:34
Post Tools
Jack Hughes wrote on 02/25/20 at 00:17:03:
Against the mainlines with 7. Be2/Bd3 I am recommending an early ...dxc4, partly because I feel that this is pedagogically best for developing understanding of the Meran/Anti-Meran complex (we see how the insertion ...Bd6 and Qc2 alters the position), and partly because this is the most tried and tested way for black to play. I'm not sure I would agree that play is non-forcing here, as they typically lead to an early central confrontation and when this happens both sides will have to play precisely in order avoid being worse. There are some subtle positional nuances involved in how white initiates this central confrontation but the actual number of lines they involve is quite manageable - I think black can get in good, concrete preparation here.


Indeed, in the lines with 7. Bd3 or 7. Be2 Black does need to have concrete preparation. One line I was looking at was 7...dxc4 8. Bxc4 b5. After 9. Be2, Black can just transpose to the main lines by castling, but after 9. Bd3 Black can actually delay castling with 9...Bb7 10. O-O a6!? as played by Carlsen in 2019. I find this idea to be a very nice reflection of the variety of resources that Black has in the Semi-Slav.


Jack Hughes wrote on 02/25/20 at 00:17:03:
I'm not entirely sure what drawn rook endgame you're referring to but if it's the one recommended by Schandorff and played in Ding-Yu 2016 the you can rest assured that I am recommending 16. Na4 Qa6 (instead of that game's 16... Qb5) when the mainline with 17. a3 Bxd5 18. Bxd5 Ne5 19. axb4 Rxd5 20. Qe2 cxb4 21. Nc3 Qd6 22. Nxd5 Qxd5 leads to a very interesting and double edged position where black is an exchange down but has active pieces and a highly mobile pawn majority on the queenside and recent ICCF games suggest black is in excellent theoretical shape.


I was referring to the drawn rook endgame after 16...Qb5. I took another look at 16...Qa6, and I think Black is indeed fine in the line that you recommend.

Jack Hughes wrote on 02/25/20 at 00:17:03:
Against the Catalan I am currently intending to recommend 4... dxc4 5. Bg2 c6!?, as played in Yu-Caruana 2019, which I think leads to exciting play where black is in decent theoretical shape, and also fits well with a Semi-Slav repertoire. As this is the most experimental line I am recommending I also intend to cover 5... a6 as an alternative, where I am quite excited by the trendy line 6. 0-0 Nc6 7. e3 Rb8.


I'm not yet fully convinced by the exchange sacrifice lines after 5...c6 6. Ne5 Bb4+ 7. Bd2 Be7 8. e3 b5 9. Nxc6, but I'm sure you have analyzed that in detail. I don't have access to Lc0, so I don't know what it thinks about Black's compensation.

On the other hand, I find the line with 7...Rb8 8. Nfd2 e5 to be quite fascinating - Black's kingside attacking chances there seem to be more well-established. On the other hand, White does have some annoying early deviations - notably, I'm bothered by 6. Ne5 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Nd5 8. O-O O-O 9. Ne4!? as played in Harikrishna - Nakamura 2019.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo