Page 5 of 5
Re: Does anyone have analyses/theory in this position?
Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 1:34 pm
by ethanara
OliverUwira wrote:ethanara wrote:
There is also a "trap " I have played many times, and won them all these times. After 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 , What do you think you should play?
Ah, 4. Qg4 Nd4, the Vienna Poisoned Pawn
It is.
I've actually never played agains ...Nd4, But against ...Qf6 VERY OFTEN, and i think it is lost for black after this move because everything hangs.
Maybe I'll start a Match with the positions after f4 and Qg4.
Regards
Ethan
Re: Does anyone have analyses/theory in this position?
Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 2:47 pm
by OliverUwira
ethanara wrote:OliverUwira wrote:ethanara wrote:
There is also a "trap " I have played many times, and won them all these times. After 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 , What do you think you should play?
Ah, 4. Qg4 Nd4, the Vienna Poisoned Pawn
It is.
I've actually never played agains ...Nd4, But against ...Qf6 VERY OFTEN, and i think it is lost for black after this move because everything hangs.
Maybe I'll start a Match with the positions after f4 and Qg4.
Regards
Ethan
Probably you should prepare against 4...Nd4 - the following is a citation from a review of "Dangerous Weapons against 1. e4".
Chapter eleven is a bit unusual in that it is a "Dangerous Weapon" against
something that has been considered a dangerous weapon! After 1 e4 e5 2
Nc3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5, Black’s last move has been considered inaccurate on
account of 4 Qg4!?.
For instance, Black is in serious trouble after 4...Qf6? 5 Nd5! Qxf2+ 6 Kd1. However, Emms offers 4...Nd4!? as an alternative for Black, and if White isn’t prepared, he will soon end up losing a miniature. Fascinating stuff.
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen109.pdf
Re: Does anyone have analyses/theory in this position?
Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 2:56 pm
by bretti
OliverUwira wrote:Don wrote:bretti wrote:ethanara wrote: This opening is not from any openings book, ...
Oh yes, it is: Have a look at the books from John Emms, "Beating 1e4 e5" and "Attacking with 1 e4".
By the way 5. f4 is not bad at all.
I think 5. f4 is bad, maybe not in the game losing sense but in the same sense that the goring gambit or the morra gambit is bad - it fails to give white the better position.
Yes, I think this puts it well.
I'd say the best move is 5. Be3 as 5. Nf3 is a little tame.
In my opinion 5. f4 is best. White can fight for a win and is a bit better after 5. - Ng4 6. f5 h5 7. Nh3. You should read the analysis from Emms.
Re: Does anyone have analyses/theory in this position?
Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 3:07 pm
by OliverUwira
bretti wrote:OliverUwira wrote:Don wrote:bretti wrote:ethanara wrote: This opening is not from any openings book, ...
Oh yes, it is: Have a look at the books from John Emms, "Beating 1e4 e5" and "Attacking with 1 e4".
By the way 5. f4 is not bad at all.
I think 5. f4 is bad, maybe not in the game losing sense but in the same sense that the goring gambit or the morra gambit is bad - it fails to give white the better position.
Yes, I think this puts it well.
I'd say the best move is 5. Be3 as 5. Nf3 is a little tame.
In my opinion 5. f4 is best. White can fight for a win and is a bit better after 5. - Ng4 6. f5 h5 7. Nh3. You should read the analysis from Emms.
I already said that the position after 7. Nh3 is going to be tricky for Black (a couple of posts back). I haven't got the book, though, and I had the impression that Black should not be worse if he knows what he's doing.
Would you mind to post Emms' main line here? Especially how he assesses 7. Nh3 Qh4+ 8. Kf1 Ne3+
As for 5. Be3 - this is a simple no-think setup (Ne2, O-O, f4-f5) that nevertheless contains a lot of venom and is easy to play for White.
Re: Does anyone have analyses/theory in this position?
Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 3:56 pm
by ethanara
Hi Oliver
Could you give any variations after Qg4 Nd4 ? It seems to be interesting since all my friends with the same trainer as me plays the vienna as well, though not the f4 system allways.
I Think I have the other emms book you are looking for somewhere, and I will post the variations as soon as possible.
Regards
Ethan
Re: Does anyone have analyses/theory in this position?
Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 5:16 pm
by OliverUwira
ethanara wrote:Hi Oliver
Could you give any variations after Qg4 Nd4 ? It seems to be interesting since all my friends with the same trainer as me plays the vienna as well, though not the f4 system allways.
I Think I have the other emms book you are looking for somewhere, and I will post the variations as soon as possible.
Regards
Ethan
I've only had a look into my database yesterday and posted the apparent main line somewhere earlier in this thread:
OliverUwira wrote:
4...Nd4 seems to be sound (as I already suspected - they don't include complete drivel in the "Dangerous Weapons" series). It's not been tested at higher levels, though. I've got three games, two of which had an average ELO of ~2300 and went 5. Qxg7 Qf6 6. Qxf6 Nxf6 7. Bd3 Rg8 which looks like Black has compensation. It would be interesting to know what "Dangerous Weapons" has on offer here...
Re: Does anyone have analyses/theory in this position?
Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 2:12 pm
by bretti
OliverUwira wrote:I haven't got the book, though, and I had the impression that Black should not be worse if he knows what he's doing.
Would you mind to post Emms' main line here? Especially how he assesses 7. Nh3 Qh4+ 8. Kf1 Ne3+
9. Bxe3 Bxe3 10. Nd5 Bb6 11. Dd2 "gives White a clear advantage, Honfi-Witkowski, Munich Olympiad 1958." This is too positive but in my opinion it is +=.
The mainline in the book from 2001 (Attacking with 1 e4) was 6. - Nf2 7. Qh5 (sure this is not the way black should play it; may be not 7. - Qh4+ or not 8. - Ne3+ in the line above could be better).