If you just want to read the text and play through the moves rather than clicking on "review or overstudy" just click on the blue variation info at the top of the variation you want to play through and it is then kind of like an e-book.

TopNotch wrote on 03/08/21 at 20:40:58:


I may be beating a dead horse in saying that the Anti-Max Lange (5...Nxe4!) is basically equal, especially after 8...Qd7 and subsequent play. The position at move 13 looks equal. I doubt see that 13c3 changes the evaluation, but have not seen the course. According to Stockfish, the given game remains equal until move 31 when the engine identifies 31Ne4 as a (natural) mistake (31a4 still equal). At move 24 Williams states the game is probably equal, but if anyone is better it's black - bishop vs knight in the endgame. I think his judgment is right.

I think GM Williams' mistake was talking during a speed chess game vs. a fellow GM! When I talk during a speed game, it probably costs me at least 200 rating points. Also, as he admits more than once, he forgot the theory (past move 13). So he's looking for an advantage that thinks he has, but just can't find. That's a misdirection and waste of time and energy. We've all been there.

To me the game illustrates that chess is a hard game. One can easily go astray. GM Williams makes his first real mistake on move 31. Nor does he suspect that he went wrong.

The moves up to move 13 may be the most drawish sequence available. But even here there is some residual interest. I currently think 13Nc3 is best. 13Qh5!? might be the most "startling" move in the position. The dangling knight is well and truly poisoned. The game remains about equal after the precise 13...Rae8! 14Qd5!

5...Nxe4! has been known to be basically equal, since forever. Yet players can still win from either side, even at the GM level, provided that one is talking during a speed game.

50-0 is certainly not a move to build a career around. But it can be fun in a casual or speed game.

SWJediknight wrote on 03/15/21 at 11:42:52:


Some authors have been disdainful of white's chances. That includes Lokander, "White is struggling to equalize," and Fishbein, who advocates 5.e5 instead of 5.0-0. 

Burgess and Baker are the only recent authors, that I know of, who advocate 50-0. On move thirteen, they cover 3 moves for white. Fishbein covers two moves. With some overlap that is 4 moves in total I've looked at a couple more. 

As a teenager, I only looked at these lines from the black side of the board. As white, I played the Ruy Lopez. A few decades later, I am having fun playing these lines for white.

Why bother playing a line that "only equalizes"? For starters, it is hard to prepare all the lines in the Ruy. While I respect the Giuoco Pianissimo, I can't bring myself to play it for white. Secondly, I am amazed at the number of players on-line who do not basic theory that I knew as a teenager. Thirdly, I actually see these lines. It's not like burning the midnight oil finding something I like against the Marshall countergambit, only to face a Schlieman deferred. Fourthly, chess is a long game. Equality in the opening still leaves room for a middle and end game contest.

Finally this line, along with the Evans gambit, garners style points. White is clearly playing for open lines and development, casting other concerns aside. It does not given an advantage, but it doesn't lose either.

Bibs wrote on 03/11/21 at 22:14:08:


It would be nice if some of these old gambit lines could be given new life to break the monotony of slow Italians and Berlin/Marshall Ruys. These days its hard to find something to play against 1...e5 with confidence. Maybe we need to keep an eye on what Dubov is up to, his latest rehabilitation attempts has been with the Vienna Game and not with a total lack of success. 

I've seen a preview of the anti-Lange lines in the updated version of Chris Baker's book (with Graham Burgess).  

There's some interesting ideas in there such as (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.Re1 d5 7.Bxd5 Qxd5 8.Nc3) 8...Qh5 9.Nxe4 Be6 10.Bg5 Bd6 11.h4, the idea being to provoke 11...h6 and then play 12.Nxd6+ cxd6 13.Bf4 Qd5 14.c3, and then if 14...Rc8 15.c4 Qxc4 16.Rc1 and tactics start, and having played ...h6 Black is less able to bring the king out of danger with ...f6 in certain lines due to the weakening of the kingside light squares.  

That said, looking at that line, if 14...0-0 I'm not sure that White has any decent alternatives to bailing out into the standard dead drawn ending with 15.Nxd4 Nxd4 16.Qxd4 Qxd4 17.cxd4.  If 15.c4 Qxc4 16.Bxd6 Rfd8 (or 16.Rc1 Qd5) there are no tactics, the black king is safe and the passed pawn on d4 is potent.  

Thus, I'm still inclined to suggest that the best way to generate interesting and equal play against 8...Qh5 is Stefan Bücker's pawn sacrifice 9.Nxe4 Be6 10.Neg5 0-0-0 11.Nxe6 fxe6 12.Bg5 (instead of 12.Rxe6), envisaging 12...Re8 13.Re4.  The late Mark Morss provided some good analysis of 12...Rd5 some time ago, but that also lead to positions with chances for both sides.  

There is no way to an advantage for White in these lines though, 8...Qh5 equalises as do 8...Qa5 and 8...Qd7, and having played some of these lines from both sides of the board, I wouldn't agree that White has most of the fun.  Black has quite a few nice ideas as well.

Michael Ayton wrote on 03/09/21 at 10:59:02:



I think that part of the problem is that Mods come and go. 

It baffles me why people need to be so unduly combative. It's a good board game, a very good one even, but it's just a board game. Nothing life or death here peeps. Relax a bit, tone it down, be friendly. Go for a walk in the park, smell the flowers, feed the ducks, come back and then post maybe eh.

Perhaps we can see these interactions as a dance rather than as a battle. As discussion rather than debate. 

@Tony K - time to look again at the Mods situation for each zone? As an example, 'SmyslovFan', a constructive and interesting contributor in his day, has not been seen here for many a moon.

TopNotch wrote on 03/08/21 at 20:40:58:

Graham Burgess updated Chris Baker's old "Startling" repertoire book featuring these lines.  Baker called the "Deutz gambit" the "Koltanowski" variation.  Chessable also has a "Max Attack" course on the Max Lange and Deutz/Koltanowski variations for White.

‘Not for the first time’ is dead right. The overwhelming majority of people on this forum are friendly and respectful, but then every so often you get tiresome insulting stuff like #12 which seems to receive not the slightest slap-down. I’m all for light-touch moderation, but in my opinion (I appreciate others may disagree) that shouldn’t mean feather-light.