Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 15:08:55 05/17/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 17, 2004 at 16:34:59, Dan Andersson wrote: > It's the same idea as Qd6 and also locking the bishop at e2 thus not completely >without merit. But the article seems concerned with countering forced white >lines. Unclear seems to carry the meaning 'black suffers but isn't lost' in some >positions. And there are lots of reasonable white moves who are not examined. F. >ex. white castling in many positions and kingside expansion. Here are a couple >such lines off the top of my head. > >First a wild one: >1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qe5+ 4.Be2 c6 5.Nf3 Qc7 6.d4 Bf5 7.Nh4 Bg6 8.Nxg6 hxg6 >9.d5 * white gets d5 in and has the bishop pair and developement for pawns. > >Then one that isn't completely equalized: >1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qe5+ 4.Be2 c6 5.Nf3 Qc7 6.d4 Bf5 7.d5 Nf6 8.O-O Nxd5 >9.Nxd5 cxd5 10.Qxd5 e6 11.Bf4 * IQP grind I had only scanned the article before, but your post prompted me to actually take a look. I didn't examine your 1st line, but your latter line is pretty convincing. "Grind" is an understatement. It appears to be at least ±. I see I was right to feel wary of a move like Qe5. > >MvH Dan Andersson
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.