| |
Main
Date: 07 Oct 2005 04:27:04
From: Ron
Subject: Italian Gambit trouble
|
So I'm stuck on an analysis line.
I've been playing 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4 !? (following Acers
+ Laven's "The Italian Gambit System"
The idea is simply: 4.... Bxd4 5. Nxd4 6.Be3 (a position from which
I've scored very well) or 4.ed 5.c3 where 5. ... dc gives black an
inferior defense to the Goring gambit and 5. ... Nf6 6.e5 gives me lots
of play. (There are some sidelines here which I don't need to go into
for black's other responses.)
The problem is coming on move 4.
Black can play (after 1. e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4) 4. ... Nxd4 !?
Acers and Laven are fairly dismissive of this move, giving only 5.Nxe5
Ne6?
But there's a much better more for black:
5.Nxe5 Qe7! 6.Nxf7 ?! Qxe4! yields tremendous complications, where
white's best move appears to be 7.Kd2. White will win material but his
king will come under a devastating attack. Tim Kokesh (and old-school
R.G.C.A'er) and I went over these variations and while white may have
more resources than I initially thought, it's clear black has all the
practical chances.
So that leaves 6.Bxf7+ Kd8 8.Bxf8 Qxe5! 9.Bxd5 c6 10.c3 cxd5 11.cxd3
(e5?!) 12.Qxe4+ when it looks like black is better, and, more
importantly, he's got the initiative.
I'm not looking for anything more than theoretical equality and the
initiative here with this. I'm more interested in the practical chances
of a class player than what would happen if Topalev played Anand in this
line.
So, with that in mind, can anyone help me resuscitate 4.d4 here? What's
best for white after 4.... Nxd4?
Thanks!
-Ron
|
|
| |
Date: 07 Oct 2005 20:10:36
From: gnohmon
Subject: Re: Italian Gambit trouble
|
Ron wrote:
> Acers and Laven are fairly dismissive of this move, giving only 5.Nxe5
> Ne6?
Following the Batsford book, who simply stole from Estrin.
> But there's a much better more for black:
>
> 5.Nxe5 Qe7! 6.Nxf7 ?! Qxe4! yields tremendous complications, where
> white's best move appears to be 7.Kd2. White will win material but his
Holy shit! I haven't seen this move except reading your post blindfold,
but (um, the moves you give are illegal) (but they do show the
blindfold thinker some of the difficulties) (ouch!)
In this age of computers, it;s about time that some cheap collection of
silicon should find a weakness in Estrin's work thus demonstrating that
all human endeavour is futile. Estrin has far too long been regarded as
a genius, but now we see that he was just another fallible wetware.
I think this is really irritating, because up til now I've plasyed this
line by preference if the foe would fall for it.
Computer analysis seems to leave us less and less room where we can
just have fun. Of course, computer voting machines are just the
reverse: your vote will be counted as the manufacturer dictates, so you
can save yourself the time and trouble of going to the polling place.
If only all computer technology worked so well!
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2005 00:09:34
From: Dc Gentle
Subject: Re: Italian Gambit trouble
|
Hello Ron,
Indeed your line with 5.Nxe5 Qe7! looks interesting and
Black seems to get the advantage no matter what
White does. Nevertheless White has a chance when not
playing for material but rather positional balance and also
trying to keep the initiative that is generally most important
with gambit play. But only the one taking the risk will have
the fun.
I found the following:
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. d4 Nxd4 5. Nxe5 Qe7
6. Bxf7+ Kf8 7. Bxg8 Qxe5 8. Bd5 c6 9. O-O {Surprise!}
9... cxd5 10. c3 Nc6
(10...Nb5 11. exd5 Bd6 12. f4 Qf5 13. Be3 Kf7 14. Nd2
Re8 15. Nc4 Bb8 16. Re1 Re4 17. Nd2 Re7 18. c4)
11. exd5 Ne7 12. Re1 Qf5 13. Qe2 b6 14. Be3 Bd6 15. Nd2
Bb7
(15...Qxd5 16. Nf3 Bb7 17. Rad1 Qe6 18. Ng5)
16. c4 Kf7
(16...Ng6 17. Bd4 Bxh2+ 18. Kxh2 Qf4+ 19. Kg1 Qxd4
20. Ne4 Kg8 21. Rad1 Qe5 22. Qf3 Rf8 23. Qa3 Bc8
24. b4 Rf4 25. Ng3 Qc7 26. d6 Qd8 27. Qxa7 Rxc4 28. Nf5
Qf6 29. Ne3)
(16...Re8 17. Nf3 Ng6 18. Nd4 Qf6 19. Qc2 Bb8 20. Nf3
Ne5 21. Nxe5 Bxe5 22. Qa4 Bc8
(22...Bb8 23. Qxd7)
23. Qxa7 Qh4 24. h3 Qxc4 25. Qxb6 Qxd5 26. Rad1 Qxa2
27. Bd4 d6 28. Bxe5 dxe5 29. Re3)
17. Bd4 Rhe8 18. Ne4 Bc7 19. Rad1 Kg8 20. Rd3 Ng6
21. Re3 Rf8 22. a4 Rf7 23. Ng3 Qf4 24. Bc3 Raf8 25. Bb4
Bd6 26. Bxd6 Qxd6 27. Ne4 Qf4 28. b3 Rf5 29. h3 Qc7
30. Qb2 Re5 31. Qa3 Qd8 32. Qd6 Ref5 33. Qb4 Ba8
34. R3e2 Re5 35. Qd6 Rf4 36. Nc3 Rxe2 37. Rxe2 Rf8
38. Re3 a6 39. Ne4 Rf7 40. Qg3 Nf4 41. Qg4 Rf8 42. h4
Ng6 43. Ng5 Qf6 44. Nf3 Qd6 45. h5 Ne7 46. h6 g6 47. Nh4
Qf6 48. Qg3 Nf5 49. Nxf5 Qxf5 50. Re7 Qb1+ 51. Kh2 Qf5
52. Rg7+ Kh8 53. Qe3 d6 54. Qd4 Qh5+ 55. Kg1 Qe5
56. Qxe5 dxe5 57. a5 bxa5 58. Ra7 +-
and White looks ok at the end of all these variants.
9. O-O is of course a piece sac that can't be declined.
This may be justified by the sorry state of Black's development,
especially because White gets 2 pawns, some tempos,
inactive black pieces, domination of the center, and, most
important, the initiative in return, as you can see.
The reason why White is better in the main variant is
the inactivity of White's light bishop, but it needs
quite some maneuvering.
Of course I won't claim theoretical correctness here.
(One needs to analyse a lot more subvariants to get
the full picture). But you asked for something practical
to play and I think the chances are there.
All the best,
DC
|
| |
Date: 07 Oct 2005 14:58:43
From:
Subject: Re: Italian Gambit trouble
|
Ron wrote:
>
> I've been playing 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4 !? (following Acers
> + Laven's "The Italian Gambit System"
>
> Black can play (after 1. e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4) 4. ... Nxd4 !?
>
> > 5.Nxe5 Qe7! 6.Nxf7 ?! Qxe4! yields tremendous complications, where
> white's best move appears to be 7.Kd2. , it's clear black has all the
> practical chances.
interesting indeed after Kf1, black has Qxc2! and gets an advantage.
but can you elaborate on the Kd2 line?
the line looks drawish to me..
>
> So that leaves 6.Bxf7+ Kd8 8.Bxf8
well there's also 8.Nd3, and because of this move i
suspect 6... Kf8 is better, and still gives black an advantage.
which leaves 6.Nxf7 =
>
> I'm not looking for anything more than theoretical equality and the
> initiative here with this. I'm more interested in the practical chances
> of a class player than what would happen if Topalev played Anand in this
> line.
>
> So, with that in mind, can anyone help me resuscitate 4.d4 here? What's
> best for white after 4.... Nxd4?
>
castling maybe. (with Shredder 9.1 i also went through
5. b4?! but with no result)
so your 4..Nxd4 indeed looks like a good move to me
|
|
