Author: Jeroen Noomen
Date: 07:56:16 05/29/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 28, 2000 at 22:43:20, Daniel Chancey wrote: Hi, The simple refutation is as follows: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nxe5? Nxe5 5.d4 Ng6 6.e5 Ng8 7.Bc4 d5! 8.Bxd5 c6 9.Bb3 Be6. Piece gone, only two pawns, bishop on b3 eliminated, Black simply develops pieces (Qd7, 0-0-0, or N8e7-f5 etc) and the important white squares d5 and f5 firmly in Black´s grip. No heavy discussion necessary, 4 Nxe5? is simply losing. Regards, Jeroen Noomen >Recently there's been a heavy discussion of this attack. It could be unsound. >It might not. > >All Masters and Computer programs The job is this: Prove this attack unsound >by playing dozens of games. If anyone finds the solution: give the main line >and playable alternatives and tell who has the advantage. Also add a few >opening traps > > > >Castle2000
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.