1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Bb4 3. e3 Bxc3 4. bxc3 e5

Main

Date: 12 Sep 2005 19:18:56
From: davidf
Subject: 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Bb4 3. e3 Bxc3 4. bxc3 e5

I played this sequence of moves with black. I recognize 4. ... e5 is a
bit weird, but it was a shock when I checked it with Chessbase online
database and didn't find, in more than 4 million games, any one with
this move order.

I guess the move is pretty bad.

Is it? I run that position on Schreder and didn't get any serious
tactical flaw. Didn't check it out in Fritz.

So what do you guys think of that move?

I also considered 4. ... c

Date: 14 Sep 2005 16:19:03
From:
Subject: Re: 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Bb4 3. e3 Bxc3 4. bxc3 e5

alright, how can you play 1... e5 and 4... e5, yet nobody else has any
problem with this? Am I seeing something different?

Date: 15 Sep 2005 09:28:55
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Bb4 3. e3 Bxc3 4. bxc3 e5

[email protected] wrote:
> alright, how can you play 1... e5 and 4... e5, yet nobody else has any
> problem with this? Am I seeing something different?

No, everyone else has assumed that 4... e5 is a typo for e4 and the
original poster has explicitly said as much.

Dave.

--
David Richerby Artificial Boss (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ middle manager that's made of plastic!

Date: 13 Sep 2005 12:43:30
From: davidf
Subject: Re: 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Bb4 3. e3 Bxc3 4. bxc3 e5

Sure, I'll see what he says and bring it to you guys.

Date: 13 Sep 2005 12:41:49
From: davidf
Subject: Re: 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Bb4 3. e3 Bxc3 4. bxc3 e5

Yes, sorry, 4. e4 and not of course e5 which was black's first move.

Date: 13 Sep 2005 16:02:31
From: HoM@internet
Subject: Re: 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Bb4 3. e3 Bxc3 4. bxc3 e5

How can one play 1. ... e5 AND 4. ... e5 ? Do you mean 4. ... e4?

"davidf" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I played this sequence of moves with black. I recognize 4. ... e5 is a
> bit weird, but it was a shock when I checked it with Chessbase online
> database and didn't find, in more than 4 million games, any one with
> this move order.
>
> I guess the move is pretty bad.
>
> Is it? I run that position on Schreder and didn't get any serious
> tactical flaw. Didn't check it out in Fritz.
>
> So what do you guys think of that move?
>
> I also considered 4. ... c
>

Date: 13 Sep 2005 05:07:46
From: davidf
Subject: Re: 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Bb4 3. e3 Bxc3 4. bxc3 e5

Hi Wlod

After 5. Qg4...

5. ... Nf6
6. Qxg7 Rg8
7. Qh6 Nc6
8. f3 d6
9. Bb2 exf3
10. gxf3 Be6
11. 0-0-0 Qe7
12. d3 0-0-0

And Shreder gives this position a -0.03 (practically equal).

Ok, black is down a pawn, but has a miserable pawn structure with lots
of weak pawns and squares. Black controls the only open file. What's
the plan for white here?

Again, I know the move should be less than great to say the least or
some master would have found it before but I still didn't find a
reasonable refutation of it.

I'll have a meeting with my chess club coach next week - he is a FIDE
2350 player - and see what he says but meanwhile we could exercise our
own analisys power!

Date: 15 Sep 2005 11:00:22
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Bb4 3. e3 Bxc3 4. bxc3 e5

Hello,

After 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Bb4 3. e3 Bxc3
I suppose black is in a hurry to avoid Nge2 avoiding doubled pawns.

- In my database there is a commented game Cebalo-Barlov where the GM
with black pieces commented "if 4.dxc3 b4!"
Game continuation was 4.bxc3 Nf6 5.d4 e4 which is very different of
davidf proposal

After 4. bxc3
- I see as more "natural" 4...d6 5.d4 Nc6 blocking white center in
nimzoindian style.
- The continuation 4.bxc3 e4 seems strange to me and the pawn sacrifice
after Qg4 seems compensated but uncesessary. But I do not see a big
difference between 4.dxc3 b4! 5.Qg4 and 4.bxc3 b4?! 5.Qg4
(I asume ?! not seing practical games with it from GM who are defending
the first option)

Antonio T.

En/na davidf ha escrit:
> Hi Wlod
>
> After 5. Qg4...
>
> 5. ... Nf6
> 6. Qxg7 Rg8
> 7. Qh6 Nc6
> 8. f3 d6
> 9. Bb2 exf3
> 10. gxf3 Be6
> 11. 0-0-0 Qe7
> 12. d3 0-0-0
>
> And Shreder gives this position a -0.03 (practically equal).
>
> Ok, black is down a pawn, but has a miserable pawn structure with lots
> of weak pawns and squares. Black controls the only open file. What's
> the plan for white here?
>
> Again, I know the move should be less than great to say the least or
> some master would have found it before but I still didn't find a
> reasonable refutation of it.
>
> I'll have a meeting with my chess club coach next week - he is a FIDE
> 2350 player - and see what he says but meanwhile we could exercise our
> own analisys power!

Date: 13 Sep 2005 12:42:52
From: John Sheatsley
Subject: Re: 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Bb4 3. e3 Bxc3 4. bxc3 e5

"davidf" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi Wlod
>
> After 5. Qg4...
>
> 5. ... Nf6
> 6. Qxg7 Rg8
> 7. Qh6 Nc6
> 8. f3 d6
> 9. Bb2 exf3
> 10. gxf3 Be6
> 11. 0-0-0 Qe7
> 12. d3 0-0-0
>
> And Shreder gives this position a -0.03 (practically equal).
>
> Ok, black is down a pawn, but has a miserable pawn structure with lots
> of weak pawns and squares. Black controls the only open file. What's
> the plan for white here?
>
> Again, I know the move should be less than great to say the least or
> some master would have found it before but I still didn't find a
> reasonable refutation of it.
>
> I'll have a meeting with my chess club coach next week - he is a FIDE
> 2350 player - and see what he says but meanwhile we could exercise our
> own analisys power!
>

In the line you give, Fritz8 suggests 10. Nxf3 (instead of gf)
with slight advantage to white (about 0.25). Let us know what your coach
says
next week.

Regards,
John

Date: 13 Sep 2005 00:44:17
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (wlod)
Subject: Re: 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Bb4 3. e3 Bxc3 4. bxc3 e5

davidf wrote about his 4...e5?:

> I guess the move is pretty bad.
>
> Is it? I run that position on Schreder and didn't get any serious
> tactical flaw. Didn't check it out in Fritz.
>
> So what do you guys think of that move?

5.Qg4

Regards,

Wlod

Date: 13 Sep 2005 00:44:16
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (wlod)
Subject: Re: 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Bb4 3. e3 Bxc3 4. bxc3 e5