Proof that From's Gambit is unsound..?

Originally posted by randolph
but his analysis ranges from lazy and unchecked

But it makes me feel so good to find mistakes/typos in his books. I feel like I'm correcting a real Chess author. 🙂

Perhaps the most annoying thing about his books is the stupid names he gives openings.

Why? oh why? oh why?...

Originally posted by pulern
{... text shortened ...}
See Stefan Bücker's Kaissiber. In issue 36 (Jan-Mar 2010), there is a 21p article by Volker Hergert. The discussion centers on the following variations:

1.f4 e5 2.fxe4

A) 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 g5
A1) 4.d4
A2) 4.h3!

B) 2...d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3
B1) 4...g5
B2) 4...Nf6!
{... text shortened ...}

I have Tim Taylor's book on Bird's Opening, so I'll summarize his conclusions on the lines mentioned in Hergert's article.

In line A, Taylor suggests that White can spoil Black's fun by playing 3.Nc3. This has the point that 3 ... d6 returns to more normal lines of the From and if Black plays 3 ... Nxe5, then White gets a good game with 4. d4 or 4. e4.

In line B1, Taylor concludes that White gets a good position in either the endgame after 5. d4 g5 6. Ne5 or in the middlegame after 5.g3.

Line B2 is very complicated and Taylor refrains from a definite conclusion, though as he plays this opening as White, it is safe to say that is where his sympathies are. However, since theory on this line is still in flux and Taylor's book is over 4 years old, Hergert's analysis may be more relevant.

Originally posted by AlboMalapropFoozer
Line [b]B2 is very complicated and Taylor refrains from a definite conclusion, though as he plays this opening as White, it is safe to say that is where his sympathies are. However, since theory on this line is still in flux and Taylor's book is over 4 years old, Hergert's analysis may be more relevant.[/b]

1.f4 e5 2.fxe4 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 Nf6!

As I mentioned earlier, aiming for a Nc4, 0-0, Kh1 situation is a fairly safe white setup here, looking something like (Black to move):
This seems nice and sensible for both sides.

You could try something weird like... f3, Bf4. It looks abit silly, but it does conform to the unwritten rule of "Concentrate only on your attack"

I notice that a variety of earthlings have mixed up their fives and fours.

Originally posted by National Master Dale
I notice that a variety of earthlings have mixed up their fives and fours.

Dammit.

Its not my fault the world moved away from the superior descriptive chess notation.

[EDIT IS HERE]
1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 Nf6!

With an eye on Nc3, 0-0, Kh1

There is a good thread on chesspub. Posts by Stefan Bucker as well - discussing lines from Kaissiber:

http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1263837092

I think descriptive notation is a sign of old age.

Originally posted by National Master Dale
I think descriptive notation is a sign of old age.

The book or the person that knows descriptive? Wait don't answer that cause I sometimes still say Pawn to King 4!

I once found "My System" in a bookstore for 1 dollar, but not even worth that little because of having to wade through the oatmeal of descriptive notation. 🙁

Originally posted by MontyMoose
The book or the person that knows descriptive? Wait don't answer that cause I sometimes still say Pawn to King 4!

I once found "My System" in a bookstore for 1 dollar, but not even worth that little because of having to wade through the oatmeal of descriptive notation. 🙁

Amen on that! I worked in northern Thailand for 2 years, was on a communications station 12 hrs a day and bought Euwe's two volume set, dynamic and static chess and it took me almost a year of steady work to wade through all that pawn to king 4 crap. I keep hoping that series gets reprinted in algebraic but no joy yet. I think it was a great duo, I wish I had had Lessons from a chess coach or something of that ilk but there was not much in algebraic at that time.

Don`t archeology student`s get those books assigned as homework

...deciphering hyroglyphics 101

Originally posted by sonhouse
Euwe's two volume set, dynamic and static chess...

Both at Amazon, algebraic and 20 bucks each US$. 🙂