Latest Updates:
Normal Topic The Nakhmanson Gambit. Any takers on this one? (Read 833 times)
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 986
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: The Nakhmanson Gambit. Any takers on this one?
Reply #8 - 09/04/20 at 01:54:05
Post Tools
I just checked my copy of Horowitz and didn't see it there. I looked in the Two Knights Defense and the Scotch Gambit sections.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4666
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: The Nakhmanson Gambit. Any takers on this one?
Reply #7 - 09/04/20 at 00:35:15
Post Tools
Speaking of old books, I think I may have first become aware of this 6. Nc3 possibility from New Traps in the Chess Opening by I. A. (Al) Horowitz.  Cover price:  $1.45.  Fuzzy memories ...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 986
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: The Nakhmanson Gambit. Any takers on this one?
Reply #6 - 09/03/20 at 23:50:50
Post Tools
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.O-O Nxe4 6.Nc3?

If black plays sharp openings like the Two Knights Defence without knowing enough theory, there are many trappy lines white could consider. This isn't one of them. The multiple problems with this line are:
  • The book response 6...Nxc3 is good enough (I won a game with this the only time I faced the line).
  • "Falling into it" with 6...dxc3 is possibly also better for black, albeit too risky to seriously consider. It's also worth noting that any reasonably suspicious black player would reject 6...dxc3 simply for being what white obviously wants.
  • 6...Nd6 and 6...Nc5 are also markedly better for black.
In short, as long as black doesn't get rattled and forget the bN/e4 is attacked, it's hard for black to go wrong.

As for Stockfish getting "confused", isn't it rather the human operator who is guilty of that? When I use an engine to look at an opening I don't know much about, I generally use multi-pv mode. Multi-pv gives a better view of how "critical" the opening is -- of how much the evaluation changes when one of the players makes a second best move. If there are a bunch of moves that lead to a similar evaluation, it doesn't make much sense to prepare a long best-play line. When I do find a line that looks more critical, then I switch to single-pv and start trying to identify the best moves.

If, as here, there are multiple candidates for black that all lead to a black advantage, that's a good indication white should play something else. But this perspective would be missing if the analysis is started in single-pv mode.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Seeley
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 342
Location: UK
Joined: 04/03/10
Re: The Nakhmanson Gambit. Any takers on this one?
Reply #5 - 09/03/20 at 20:46:32
Post Tools
This line is usually mentioned in passing in books dealing with the Two Knights or the Scotch Gambit. All the ones I have recommend taking on c3 with the Knight, and suggest that Black is then comfortably better.
Bologan gives 6...Nxc3! 7.bxc3 d5! 8.Bb5 Be7 9.Nxd4 Bd7 as his main line and continues analysing for a few further moves, while Emms mentions additionally 9.Ne5 Bd7 10.Nxd7 Qxd7 11.cd a6 12.Ba4 b5 13.Bb3 Na5. Johnsen also recommends 6.Nxc3.
This approach is indeed kylemeister's old book recommendation.

HagenWatch1 wrote on 09/03/20 at 18:59:03:
I’d like to know why the GM who is showing off the Nakhmanson Gambit doesn’t mention this 6...Nxc3 line but only the 6...dxc3 move

I'd guess that's because 6...dxc3 leads to sharp sacrificial play where White gets the exciting game he wants. 6...Nxc3 keeps things rather dull and under control and give Black a better position without any pyrotechnics, which is not a very good advertisement for this line!

HagenWatch1 wrote on 09/03/20 at 18:59:03:
And interestingly enough the GM’s version of Stockfish is also choosing this 6...dxc3 line and not this “old book recommendation” of 6...Nxc3. Curious indeed.

Not really curious at all. My engine (Stockfish 12) also decides after a while that 6...dc is slightly better than both 6...Nxc3 and 6...Nd6, but 6...dc involves Black's king being dragged out of safety (to f6 in one line). If you're an engine, then that's what you should play. For a human player, though, it makes much more practical sense to play a quiet line that gives you an advantage in a sound position than it does to grab all the material that's on offer and then march your king into the open with all the risk that entails, even if the latter option is objectively slightly stronger.
« Last Edit: 09/03/20 at 23:07:16 by Seeley »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Syzygy
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 78
Joined: 01/25/18
Re: The Nakhmanson Gambit. Any takers on this one?
Reply #4 - 09/03/20 at 20:18:07
Post Tools
The Nakhmanson Gambit is a one-trick pony: White is desperately hoping for 6...dxc3 7. Bxf7+!

Instead 6...Nxc3!? 7. Re1+ Be7 8. bxc3 d5! 9. Bb5 O-O! and I fail to see where White's play is coming from.

Even stronger might be 6...Nd6 7. Bg5 Be7 8. Bxe7 Nxe7 9. Qxd4 O-O 10. Bd3 Ndf5, i.e. 11. Qg4 d5 12. Rfe1 c6 13. Rad1 h6 and Black is very solid.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HagenWatch1
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 123
Joined: 04/08/15
Re: The Nakhmanson Gambit. Any takers on this one?
Reply #3 - 09/03/20 at 19:42:10
Post Tools
I take back my agreement about the old line because apparently White has found new ways of countering this old line. Taking the gambit by 6...Nxc3 is no longer safe. Because now the new move at 7 is Re1+ and this is much stronger.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HagenWatch1
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 123
Joined: 04/08/15
Re: The Nakhmanson Gambit. Any takers on this one?
Reply #2 - 09/03/20 at 18:59:03
Post Tools
kylemeister wrote on 09/03/20 at 18:51:42:
I wonder what's wrong with this old book recommendation:  6...Nxc3 7. bc d5 8. Bb5 Be7 9. Nxd4 Bd7 (Novopashin-Nezhmetdinov, USSR 1956).


I’d like to know why the GM who is showing off the Nakhmanson Gambit doesn’t mention this 6...Nxc3 line but only the 6...dxc3 move. And interestingly enough the GM’s version of Stockfish is also choosing this 6...dxc3 line and not this “old book recommendation” of 6...Nxc3. Curious indeed.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4666
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: The Nakhmanson Gambit. Any takers on this one?
Reply #1 - 09/03/20 at 18:51:42
Post Tools
I wonder what's wrong with this old book recommendation:  6...Nxc3 7. bc d5 8. Bb5 Be7 9. Nxd4 Bd7 (Novopashin-Nezhmetdinov, USSR 1956).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HagenWatch1
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 123
Joined: 04/08/15
The Nakhmanson Gambit. Any takers on this one?
09/03/20 at 18:16:28
Post Tools
1.e4 e5. 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d4 exd4 4. Nf3 Nc6  5. 0-0 Nxe4 6. Nc3?!. Anybody here want to take a stab at telling me how this isn’t a serious opening gambit and why Stockfish still gets confused by this line?

BTW, the latest theory says Black shouldn’t accept the gambit and just decline it with 6...Nd6. But now how does Black respond to 7. Bg5?!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo