The Quest to Bust MCO 9.

MCO 12 on page 82, note L lists Hájak-Richter, Prague 1949 9... Nh6 10. Ba3 Bb6 11. Rd1 Qg4 12. Bb5 f6 13. h3 Qxe4 14. Bd3 Qf4 15. Qd5 unclear. MCO12 is in descriptive notation but I substituted in algebraic notation.

MCO13 on page 106, note O does not list the players and changes the line at move 9 for Black. 9... Bb6 10. Rd1 Qe7 unclear.

MCO14 on page 28, note M says Black has an improvement suggested by GM Larry Christiansen on move 8. dxe5 Bb6 9. Nbd2 dxe5 10. Ba3 Na5 11. Qb4 c5 12. Qb2 Nxc4 (-+), Christiansen-Grétarsson, Yerevan OL 1996.

Someone else will have to provide MCO15. I never got it because of such bad reviews.

Thanks Meat Puppet,

Looks like the next Quest is to track down the Hájak-Richter, Prague 1949 game.

Someone should point Edward Winter at this thread. I'm sure he would find it interesting.

He probably has 101 better things to do.

I don't think he bothers too much with what is said in Chess forums.
If he reads them he most likely has his head buried in his hands and openly weeps.

In a lot of cases it does not matter hard he tries the myths he has exposed.
The gold coin game, Bardeleben walking out on Steinitz, etc etc and etc.
They still surface and are still quoted as facts.

Also my approach to chess research 'just rip a page out of the book.'
will not go be going down to well.

DeepThought,
When you made your own database, did you use your own games only or did you use professional games?

Does the latest MCO have +/-/= showing who is better, not as good, and equal, and does it show !/?/?!/!?/?? also?

Lastly, is MCO better than Nunn's Chess Openings?

Originally posted by KingOnPoint
Does the latest MCO have +/-/= showing who is better, not as good, and equal, and does it show !/?/?!/!?/?? also?

Lastly, is MCO better than Nunn's Chess Openings?

NCO is definitely better than MCO, but both are a bit anachronistic.

They are both very dated from the perspective of current theory, but there are still nuggets to be discovered for those willing to make the effort. Sometimes what is old is new again.

Originally posted by KingOnPoint
DeepThought,
When you made your own database, did you use your own games only or did you use professional games?

I keep my own games in a separate database. There wouldn't be a vast amount of point in including them in my main db because I'd have followed a line, but the result wouldn't necessarily depend on the objective merits of the opening. So I have a separate db to tell me how well I cope with the lines.

The games in my database are not automatically professional, they are what were in the file enormous.pgn and what is on TWIC.

Posted by vivify in the comments box.

!On the Posche - Dorrer game, wouldn't black have been fine had he just played 11.Qd6?"


Hi Vivify, this is why I said in the notes after 7...cxd2+

"This pawn grab is very dangerous as Black now falls way behind in development ."

Rather than 'this leads to a forced loss.' It is a task to hold Black's position
together. It has been done in the past and 11...Qd6 is better than 11...Qg5.
White has been obtaining good positions, or should I say, difficult positions
for Black to play with 11...Qd6 12.Qf3.

The feeling is why go through all that for a pawn you probably cannot hold
when declining the offer with 7...Qxf6 is safe and sound(er).