| |
Main
Date: 23 Apr 2007 16:11:39
From: JohnnyT
Subject: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
My son is now of the age that he is starting to run into the Fried Liver
Attack as taught by many of the local schools.
He predictably lost his first two games. But he played well and deep.
He played better against the better player, but during a g25 games and
the first time being exposed, the predictable happened, as it has
happened over the last 400 years.
But, anyways. He could treat this one of like 4 ways. Stop playing 2
knights defense (which I think suits the scholastic bravado), avoid
playing it with the morphy game (Na5 instead of Nxd5), the traxler (Bc5
instead of d4), or instead, take the forced memorization that you
learned OTB and turn it on your opponent.
Obviously I am a proponent of the last. We analyzed the games, and we
have found the problem, found solutions, and we have practiced them OTB,
and while the position is ugly, being up a rook is awefully nice at the
end of the day, and he has to make some serious mistakes to lose.
I am thinking that everything is risky, but if you *know* that your
opponent is going to use the fried liver, isn't life better if you stave
off the attack, and just play this guy a piece up?
Thoughts?
|
|
| |
Date: 05 May 2007 17:45:03
From: Zero
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
why is it called the fried liver attack? I am not a big fan of liver.
On Apr 23, 4:11 pm, JohnnyT <[email protected] > wrote:
> My son is now of the age that he is starting to run into the Fried Liver
> Attack as taught by many of the local schools.
>
> He predictably lost his first two games. But he played well and deep.
> He played better against the better player, but during a g25 games and
> the first time being exposed, the predictable happened, as it has
> happened over the last 400 years.
>
> But, anyways. He could treat this one of like 4 ways. Stop playing 2
> knights defense (which I think suits the scholastic bravado), avoid
> playing it with the morphy game (Na5 instead of Nxd5), the traxler (Bc5
> instead of d4), or instead, take the forced memorization that you
> learned OTB and turn it on your opponent.
>
> Obviously I am a proponent of the last. We analyzed the games, and we
> have found the problem, found solutions, and we have practiced them OTB,
> and while the position is ugly, being up a rook is awefully nice at the
> end of the day, and he has to make some serious mistakes to lose.
>
> I am thinking that everything is risky, but if you *know* that your
> opponent is going to use the fried liver, isn't life better if you stave
> off the attack, and just play this guy a piece up?
>
> Thoughts?
|
| | |
Date: 05 May 2007 18:12:38
From: JohnnyT
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
Zero wrote:
> why is it called the fried liver attack? I am not a big fan of liver.
From the Wikipedia...
The Fried Liver Attack, also called the Fegatello Attack (named for an
Italian idiom meaning "dead as a piece of liver"), is a chess opening.
This colourfully named opening is a variation of the Two Knights Defence
of the Italian game in which White sacrifices a knight for a
superficially impressive attack on the enemy king. The Fried Liver has
been known for many centuries, the first known game score being from a
game played in Rome in 1610.[1]. The Fried Liver Attack is classified in
the Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings (ECO) with the code C57.
One of the first known written games of chess (from chessgames.com)...
[Event "Rome (Italy)"]
[Site "Rome (Italy)"]
[Date "1610.??.??"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Giulio Cesare Polerio"]
[Black "Domenico"]
[ECO "C57, Fegatello Attack"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "41"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.Nxf7 Kxf7
7.Qf3+ Ke6 8.Nc3 Ne7 9.d4 c6 10.Bg5 h6 11.Bxe7 Bxe7 12.O-O-O
Rf8 13.Qe4 Rxf2 14.dxe5 Bg5+ 15.Kb1 Rd2 16.h4 Rxd1+ 17.Rxd1
Bxh4 18.Nxd5 cxd5 19.Rxd5 Qg5 20.Rd6+ Ke7 21.Rg6 1-0
|
| | | |
Date: 06 May 2007 17:12:22
From: Mimas
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
Cos� parl� JohnnyT:
>> why is it called the fried liver attack? I am not a big fan of liver.
>
> From the Wikipedia...
>
> The Fried Liver Attack, also called the Fegatello Attack (named for an
> Italian idiom meaning "dead as a piece of liver")
AFAIK fegatello is an Italian cooking dish consisting in a piece of
liver roasted to grill.
In chess this name does mean 'in this variation Black feels like a piece
of liver roasted to grill'.
--
/***********************************************
Mimas (Reply-To valido)
***********************************************/
|
| |
Date: 02 May 2007 11:42:55
From: Stephan Bird
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 12:02:15 +0100, in
V2k*[email protected] David Richerby
<[email protected] > wrote:
> Gilles Garrigues <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Another "good" name is the "Nescafé Frappé Attack" in the
>> Benko Gambit: 4.cxb5 a6 5.Nc3 axb5 6.e4 b4 7.Nb5 d6 8.Bc4
>>
>> I heard also of "150 Attack", "Grand Prix Attack" ...
>
> In England, there is an annual points competition across all suitably-
> registered tournaments, called the Grand Prix. Good performances in
> weekend tournaments earn points towards the Grand Prix and there are
> end-of-season prizes for the people with most points. The Grand Prix
> Attack in the Sicilian became popular during these tournaments.
>
> How did the 150 attack get its name?
Similar basis, I think. It was played quite a bit by those around 150 BCF
in Grand Prix events.
Stephan
--
Stephan Bird MChem(Hons) AMRSC
Currently in Caernarfon, Wales
|
| | |
Date: 05 May 2007 10:04:50
From: Gilles Garrigues
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
Thanks for your explanations.
But what about the "Nescaf� Frapp� Attack" ??
"Stephan Bird" <[email protected] > a �crit dans le
message de news: [email protected]...
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 12:02:15 +0100, in
> V2k*[email protected] David Richerby
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Gilles Garrigues <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Another "good" name is the "Nescaf� Frapp� Attack" in the
>>> Benko Gambit: 4.cxb5 a6 5.Nc3 axb5 6.e4 b4 7.Nb5 d6 8.Bc4
>>>
>>> I heard also of "150 Attack", "Grand Prix Attack" ...
>>
>> In England, there is an annual points competition across all suitably-
>> registered tournaments, called the Grand Prix. Good performances in
>> weekend tournaments earn points towards the Grand Prix and there are
>> end-of-season prizes for the people with most points. The Grand Prix
>> Attack in the Sicilian became popular during these tournaments.
>>
>> How did the 150 attack get its name?
>
> Similar basis, I think. It was played quite a bit by those around 150 BCF
> in Grand Prix events.
>
> Stephan
> --
> Stephan Bird MChem(Hons) AMRSC
> Currently in Caernarfon, Wales
|
| |
Date: 28 Apr 2007 10:53:56
From: Gilles Garrigues
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
How strange to give such stupid names to opening lines ...
I know it's not you :-)
"JohnnyT" <[email protected] > a �crit dans le message de news:
[email protected]...
> My son is now of the age that he is starting to run into the Fried Liver
> Attack as taught by many of the local schools.
>
> He predictably lost his first two games. But he played well and deep. He
> played better against the better player, but during a g25 games and the
> first time being exposed, the predictable happened, as it has happened
> over the last 400 years.
>
> But, anyways. He could treat this one of like 4 ways. Stop playing 2
> knights defense (which I think suits the scholastic bravado), avoid
> playing it with the morphy game (Na5 instead of Nxd5), the traxler (Bc5
> instead of d4), or instead, take the forced memorization that you learned
> OTB and turn it on your opponent.
>
> Obviously I am a proponent of the last. We analyzed the games, and we
> have found the problem, found solutions, and we have practiced them OTB,
> and while the position is ugly, being up a rook is awefully nice at the
> end of the day, and he has to make some serious mistakes to lose.
>
> I am thinking that everything is risky, but if you *know* that your
> opponent is going to use the fried liver, isn't life better if you stave
> off the attack, and just play this guy a piece up?
>
> Thoughts?
|
| | |
Date: 28 Apr 2007 08:56:22
From: JohnnyT
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
Gilles Garrigues wrote:
> How strange to give such stupid names to opening lines ...
> I know it's not you :-)
True, but even more weird. This name was attached 400 years ago in the
1600's by the Italians. (You would thing this is some modern thing).
|
| | | |
Date: 29 Apr 2007 09:24:27
From: Gilles Garrigues
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
Another "good" name is the "Nescaf� Frapp� Attack" in the Benko Gambit:
4.cxb5 a6 5.Nc3 axb5 6.e4 b4 7.Nb5 d6 8.Bc4
I heard also of "150 Attack", "Grand Prix Attack" ...
Should we hold a contest on this NG for the most ridiculous name ?
"JohnnyT" <[email protected] > a �crit dans le message de news:
[email protected]...
> Gilles Garrigues wrote:
>> How strange to give such stupid names to opening lines ...
>> I know it's not you :-)
>
> True, but even more weird. This name was attached 400 years ago in the
> 1600's by the Italians. (You would thing this is some modern thing).
|
| | | | |
Date: 30 Apr 2007 12:02:15
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
Gilles Garrigues <[email protected] > wrote:
> Another "good" name is the "Nescaf� Frapp� Attack" in the
> Benko Gambit: 4.cxb5 a6 5.Nc3 axb5 6.e4 b4 7.Nb5 d6 8.Bc4
>
> I heard also of "150 Attack", "Grand Prix Attack" ...
In England, there is an annual points competition across all suitably-
registered tournaments, called the Grand Prix. Good performances in
weekend tournaments earn points towards the Grand Prix and there are
end-of-season prizes for the people with most points. The Grand Prix
Attack in the Sicilian became popular during these tournaments.
How did the 150 attack get its name?
> Should we hold a contest on this NG for the most ridiculous name ?
My personal favourite is the Ammonia Attack for 1.Nh3 (the chemical
formula for ammonia is NH_3), followed closely by the Sodium Attack
(1.Na3).
Dave.
--
David Richerby Carnivorous Mentholated Newspaper
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ (TM): it's like a daily broadsheet but
it's invigorating and it eats flesh!
|
| |
Date: 26 Apr 2007 19:08:08
From: TlonUqbarOrbisTertius
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
On Apr 23, 6:11 pm, JohnnyT <[email protected] > wrote:
> My son is now of the age that he is starting to run into the Fried Liver
> Attack as taught by many of the local schools.
>
> He predictably lost his first two games. But he played well and deep.
> He played better against the better player, but during a g25 games and
> the first time being exposed, the predictable happened, as it has
> happened over the last 400 years.
>
> But, anyways. He could treat this one of like 4 ways. Stop playing 2
> knights defense (which I think suits the scholastic bravado), avoid
> playing it with the morphy game (Na5 instead of Nxd5), the traxler (Bc5
> instead of d4), or instead, take the forced memorization that you
> learned OTB and turn it on your opponent.
>
> Obviously I am a proponent of the last. We analyzed the games, and we
> have found the problem, found solutions, and we have practiced them OTB,
> and while the position is ugly, being up a rook is awefully nice at the
> end of the day, and he has to make some serious mistakes to lose.
>
> I am thinking that everything is risky, but if you *know* that your
> opponent is going to use the fried liver, isn't life better if you stave
> off the attack, and just play this guy a piece up?
>
> Thoughts?
5...b5 works great at the scholastic level. How often will one see
6.Bf1...? Not very. After the likely 6.Bxb5, the play for Black is
natural & easy to understand.
The biggest problem with the "real" Fried Liver is not 6.Nxf7!?, but
6.d4! (Another move that's less common in scholastic play.)
|
| |
Date: 24 Apr 2007 21:35:16
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
Some advice:
- First: To analyze all those games. A good idea is to post them here
with your notes. Maybe concrete advice here in RGCA can help your son to
improve or can help you to help him.
- Second: Once you know what happened in those games and what were your
actual options with this line, to choose between it and other options.
Some ideas here:
- Any opening is playable at that level. 5...Nxd5?! and traxler
5...Bc5?! are not playable at very high level. More common choice at
hight level are 5...Na5 (morphy?) and 3...Bc5 Italian.
- Each opening choice has his consecuences: He must decide what kind of
middlegame prefer and each move can lead to a different type of game.
Antonio
En/na JohnnyT ha escrit:
> My son is now of the age that he is starting to run into the Fried Liver
> Attack as taught by many of the local schools.
>
> He predictably lost his first two games. But he played well and deep.
> He played better against the better player, but during a g25 games and
> the first time being exposed, the predictable happened, as it has
> happened over the last 400 years.
>
> But, anyways. He could treat this one of like 4 ways. Stop playing 2
> knights defense (which I think suits the scholastic bravado), avoid
> playing it with the morphy game (Na5 instead of Nxd5), the traxler (Bc5
> instead of d4), or instead, take the forced memorization that you
> learned OTB and turn it on your opponent.
>
> Obviously I am a proponent of the last. We analyzed the games, and we
> have found the problem, found solutions, and we have practiced them OTB,
> and while the position is ugly, being up a rook is awefully nice at the
> end of the day, and he has to make some serious mistakes to lose.
>
> I am thinking that everything is risky, but if you *know* that your
> opponent is going to use the fried liver, isn't life better if you stave
> off the attack, and just play this guy a piece up?
>
> Thoughts?
|
| | |
Date: 24 Apr 2007 13:07:52
From: Ron
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
In article <[email protected] >,
Antonio Torrecillas <[email protected] > wrote:
> - Any opening is playable at that level. 5...Nxd5?! and traxler
> 5...Bc5?! are not playable at very high level. More common choice at
> hight level are 5...Na5 (morphy?) and 3...Bc5 Italian.
The nice thing about the Traxler is that white players probably don't
see it very much.
On the other hand, if they're prepared for it, I'm not sure it's really
sound. And do you really want to have to study that much theory when
white can sidestep the whole variation with the very popular 4.d4.
-Ron
|
| | | |
Date: 25 Apr 2007 00:17:57
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
En/na Ron ha escrit:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Antonio Torrecillas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>- Any opening is playable at that level. 5...Nxd5?! and traxler
>>5...Bc5?! are not playable at very high level. More common choice at
>>hight level are 5...Na5 (morphy?) and 3...Bc5 Italian.
>
> The nice thing about the Traxler is that white players probably don't
> see it very much.
>
> On the other hand, if they're prepared for it, I'm not sure it's really
> sound. And do you really want to have to study that much theory when
> white can sidestep the whole variation with the very popular 4.d4.
>
> -Ron
I not sure I have understand you.
I'm not sure to have expressed well my thoughts about this subject.
- I said Traxler 4...Bc5?! is as playable as 5...Nxd5?! or other lines
like 5...b5?! or 5...Nd4?! and, at the level we are speaking, all
dubious (or simply bad) lines are playable.
- I also said that I prefer to teach "basic ideas to understand a line"
than "theory". Of course when I prepare a game it's a different matter.
And about your last comment, white can allways avoid a line with
pleasant alternatives. That is valid for lines in move 4th and also for
other more complicated lines in move 20th (For ex: some Sicilian
Najdorf, Shveningen or Dragon. Also Some Spanish shall or Spanish
closed. Also some KID or Grunfeld). A player in formation phase can play
Traxler if He think that can help him to improve (to obtain experience
in sacrifices, tactical skills, ...)
Antonio
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Apr 2007 15:51:53
From: Ron
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
In article <[email protected] >,
Antonio Torrecillas <[email protected] > wrote:
> And about your last comment, white can allways avoid a line with
> pleasant alternatives. That is valid for lines in move 4th and also for
> other more complicated lines in move 20th (For ex: some Sicilian
> Najdorf, Shveningen or Dragon. Also Some Spanish shall or Spanish
> closed. Also some KID or Grunfeld). A player in formation phase can play
> Traxler if He think that can help him to improve (to obtain experience
> in sacrifices, tactical skills, ...)
True.
But as a player of the two knights, my experience is that I see 4.d4
more often than 4.Ng5. It's become a very popular line, I think (and
this is why I play it) because it's strategically sound and doesn't give
black the initiative he gets in the ...Na5 lines.
At a certain point, the return on the investment in studying the Traxler
has to be pretty small. Since I think you have to study it a lot to
play it, and you're not going to see it very much, I'm not sure it's a
wise choice.
That was my point. I wasn't particularly clear about it, however.
|
| | |
Date: 24 Apr 2007 21:39:48
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
correction
En/na Antonio Torrecillas ha escrit:
> - Any opening is playable at that level. 5...Nxd5?! and traxler
> 5...Bc5?! are not playable at very high level.
traxler is 4...Bc5, sorry for the typo error.
|
| |
Date: 23 Apr 2007 17:14:11
From: Ron
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
In article <[email protected] >,
JohnnyT <[email protected] > wrote:
> I am thinking that everything is risky, but if you *know* that your
> opponent is going to use the fried liver, isn't life better if you stave
> off the attack, and just play this guy a piece up?
I'm a big proponent of "practical chances" as opposed to theory. I don't
like to be put in a position where I have to make an "only move" to
survive. I think that, at a skill level where tactical shots litter the
board, it's a mistake to have to play to avoid giving your opponent one.
It seems to me that the black side of the Fried Liver is playable, if
barely, but of course white doesn't have to cooperate by playing Nxf7
right away, either. But I think his results might be better if he found
an opening where the practical chances were more in his favor, and he
used that extra time to study rook endings.
I play the Two Knights, and I meet ed with ...Na5. In my opinion this
gives black dynamic play with excellent practical chances, in an
unbalanced position which lets me play for the win. The resulting
positions are good to play, and there's some good material on the
opening widely available. (Davies' 'Play 1.e4 e5' takes a complete-game
centered approach which I found very useful. If you prefer a
tree-of-variations approach, Emms "Play the Open Games as Black" is also
excellent.)
|
| | |
Date: 24 Apr 2007 21:34:41
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: The Fried Liver Attack in Scholastics...
|
En/na Ron ha escrit:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> JohnnyT <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I am thinking that everything is risky, but if you *know* that your
>>opponent is going to use the fried liver, isn't life better if you stave
>>off the attack, and just play this guy a piece up?
>
> I'm a big proponent of "practical chances" as opposed to theory. I don't
> like to be put in a position where I have to make an "only move" to
> survive. I think that, at a skill level where tactical shots litter the
> board, it's a mistake to have to play to avoid giving your opponent one.
>
> It seems to me that the black side of the Fried Liver is playable, if
> barely, but of course white doesn't have to cooperate by playing Nxf7
> right away, either. But I think his results might be better if he found
> an opening where the practical chances were more in his favor, and he
> used that extra time to study rook endings.
I agree that "practical chances" is a better approach than "theory".
I also think Fried Lever to be playable but only at "that level".
I think that playing it, that guy can learn how important are:
development, king safety, evaluations and tactical calculations.
> I play the Two Knights, and I meet ed with ...Na5. In my opinion this
> gives black dynamic play with excellent practical chances, in an
> unbalanced position which lets me play for the win. The resulting
> positions are good to play, and there's some good material on the
> opening widely available. (Davies' 'Play 1.e4 e5' takes a complete-game
> centered approach which I found very useful. If you prefer a
> tree-of-variations approach, Emms "Play the Open Games as Black" is also
> excellent.)
I also agree that ...Na5 to be more acurate (at higher levels) and as
instructive as the previous one.
Antonio
|
|
