Originally posted by Northern LadThat's it, that's it! Perfect!!
At last we have something in common! Was on holiday in Sardinia a few weeks ago; only decent beer available was Franziskaner Weißbier, so I had a few!
Love Chess, and I love it coz both Black and White have to contribute for a brilliancy🙂
1 edit
Originally posted by Northern Lad7) 3...Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.Ne3 c6 7.Nxe4 d5 8.Ng5 (8.Ng3 h5 9.d4 h4 10.Ne2 Bd6 11.Ng1) 8...Qf6 9.Nf3 Bd6 (9...d4 10.Nc4 b5 11.Qe2+) 10.d4 Ne7 11.c4 0-0 12.Qb3 Nd7 13.Bd2!
Korch still hasn't shown any real examples of how current theory is mistaken and how black can get a playable game. He says statistics are meaningless. I agree they are not conclusive in themselves, but they can be a powerful indicator. A near 95% score for white, when the rating difference would suggest something nearer 65%, is such an indicator.
It table for black, so it's still an open question, but in any case not much fun for black.
12...Nf5!? (instead of 12...Nd7) seems to be reasonable alternative. Here is example from my RHP practice:
Position after 3...Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.Ne3 c6 7.Nxe4 d5 8.Ng3 h5 9.d4 h4 10.Ne2 Bd6 11.Ng1 seems to be good for black. For example you may look at my game with cludi, already posted in this thread.
2 edits
Originally posted by Northern Lad6) 3...Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.Ne3 c6 7.d3 exd3 8.Bxd3 d5 9.0-0 Bc5 10.Na4 Bd6 11.c4 Ne7 12.Nc3 0-0 13.cxd5 cxd5 14.Ncxd5 Nxd5 15.Nxd5 Nc6 16.Nc3
Korch still hasn't shown any real examples of how current theory is mistaken and how black can get a playable game. He says statistics are meaningless. I agree they are not conclusive in themselves, but they can be a powerful indicator. A near 95% score for white, when the rating difference would suggest something nearer 65%, is such an indicator.
It table for black, so it's still an open question, but in any case not much fun for black.
1) Actually I would choose 9...Be6 as 9....Bc5 is refuted by 10.b4!! - http://www.jeremysilman.com/chess_opng_anlys/040223_more_splat_the_lat.html;
2) In final position after 16...Be5 Black has some compensation which is enough for draw.
Here is example:
Originally posted by Northern Lad2) 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Be2 Ne7 7.0-0 d5 8.Ne3 Nbc6 9.c3 Qd6 10.Qb3
Korch still hasn't shown any real examples of how current theory is mistaken and how black can get a playable game. He says statistics are meaningless. I agree they are not conclusive in themselves, but they can be a powerful indicator. A near 95% score for white, when the rating difference would suggest something nearer 65%, is such an indicator.
It ...[text shortened]... table for black, so it's still an open question, but in any case not much fun for black.
1) 6...Ne7 is not only possible move as Black can play paradox move 6...Qd8 - practice shows that White are unable to exploit their development advantage and get more than symbolic opening advantage.
Other option is 6...d5 7.Ne3 c6 8.0-0 Bd6 with intention to sac bishop for 2 pawns after 9.f3 - 9...Qh4 10.g3 Bxg3 11.hxg3 Qxg3+ 12. Ng2 Bh3 13.Rf2 Nf6 with unclear position.
2) 9....Qd6 is not forced - I would prefer 9...Bd7 with intention to move queen on d6 after 10.f3 exf3 11.Bxf3.
2 edits
Originally posted by Northern Lad4) 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 exf3 8.Qxf3 Nc6 9.Nb5 Bg4 10.Qc3!
Korch still hasn't shown any real examples of how current theory is mistaken and how black can get a playable game. He says statistics are meaningless. I agree they are not conclusive in themselves, but they can be a powerful indicator. A near 95% score for white, when the rating difference would suggest something nearer 65%, is such an indicator.
It table for black, so it's still an open question, but in any case not much fun for black.
1) Black may not to take on f3 but sacrifice pawn with 7...Nf6 8.fxe4 Be7 with some compensation for pawn and very good practical chances. Should say that personally I doubt if Black attack after 9.e5 Ng4 is strong enough, but its not easy to refute it, especially in OTB chess.
2) 8...Nf6 is reasonable alternative to 8...Nc6.
2 edits
Originally posted by Northern Lad3) 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Ne3 Nc6 (6...c6 7.d5!) 7.d5 (7.Bb5) 7...Ne5 8.Nc3 Qg6 9.Nb5 Qf7 10.Qd2
Korch still hasn't shown any real examples of how current theory is mistaken and how black can get a playable game. He says statistics are meaningless. I agree they are not conclusive in themselves, but they can be a powerful indicator. A near 95% score for white, when the rating difference would suggest something nearer 65%, is such an indicator.
It table for black, so it's still an open question, but in any case not much fun for black.
1) I dont see problems for black after 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Ne3 c6 7.d5 Qg6 (with Nf6, Be7 and 0-0 to follow).
2) After 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Ne3 Nc6 7.d5 Ne5 8.Nc3 Qg6 9.Nb5 Qf7 10.Qd2 Nf6 I don`t see too serious problems for Black to solve.
3) After 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Ne3 Nc6 7.Bb5 a6 8.Bxc6+ bxc6 9.0-0 Qh4 black should be OK.
Gosh Korch you and Northern Lad certainly enjoy your chess debates.
Some interesting analysis, moves and ideas from both sides.
Perhaps the only way to sort this out is to play 3 or 4 games from
set postions (thus ungraded) against each other.
It's going to be interesting if you two ever meet over the board.
At least you can both have a beer after the game.
You appear to both agree on Franziskaner Weisbeer.
I wonder if the original poster is still following all of this?