Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Defense against Fried Liver and Counter Attack!


  • 18 months ago · Quote · #1

    truatx

    Block the bishop with the king or queen pawn and bring your horses out.

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #2

    Fear_ItseIf

    omg, finally a refutation to the fried liver

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #3

    Scottrf

    Why didn't decades of theory ever think of this?!!

    I'm not sure how you will block with your king pawn though, and your knights will already be out.

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #4

    Scottrf

    I did hear TheBackyardProfessor had an excellent video on this defence.

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #5

    Metaknight251

    Oh, the one where he is condemning "random 2 piece attacks" and responded to Qf3+ with Ke8 and after Bxd5 claimed he had a clear advantage. 

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #7

    Vivinski

    Let me be helpful for a change

     

    or

     




  • 18 months ago · Quote · #8

    truatx

    Thanks so much for the comments and for the two move by move variations on defense. Also blocking the bishop with the queen pawn not the king pawn seems a better idea.

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #9

    Scottrf

    It seems the only idea, pawns can't move backwards.

    I prefer just to play 3...Bc5 rather than Nf6 and avoid it entirely.

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #10

    JamieKowalski

    truatx wrote:

    Also blocking the bishop with the queen pawn not the king pawn seems a better idea.

    It also has the advantage of being a legal move. 

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #11

    truatx

    I have also noticed that when i go for the fried liver attack first i am able to see how my opponent counters and quickly neutralizes the attack. Either that or I have a quick 4 move checkmate. For the record it has only worked once. Also i find that when i try fried liver my pieces dont get developed and i forfeit control of the center.

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #12

    part12

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #13

    rdecredico

    Scottrf wrote:

    It seems the only idea, pawns can't move backwards.

    I prefer just to play 3...Bc5 rather than Nf6 and avoid it entirely.

    I go ya one futher and play 3. ...Be7 and avoid ALL those nasty white gambit lines and sharp attacking systems...Black does not get to attack f2 as much as he likes (it's a great fantasy, tho Tongue Out) and the Bishop often needs to go back to e7 anyway (in some Guicco) lines...despite engines telling one white is clearly better, the advantage dissipates over time as we reach the engine horizon, and the Hungarian forces white to play a more Spanish like positional game than is usuall;y the case in the Bc4 lines.  Since most players with white pieces are playing Bc4 to AVOID the Spanish systems, this gives black a little psychological advantage.

    Black's position is solid and harder to crack than in the Bc5 lines. 

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #14

    Scottrf

    rdecredico wrote:
    Scottrf wrote:

    It seems the only idea, pawns can't move backwards.

    I prefer just to play 3...Bc5 rather than Nf6 and avoid it entirely.

    I go ya one futher and play 3. ...Be7

    Ugly Foot in Mouth

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #15

    JamieKowalski

    re: 3... Be7, better be careful of this:



  • 18 months ago · Quote · #16

    Vivinski

    JamieKowalski wrote:

    re: 3... Be7, better be careful of this:

     



    That's a line from the Scotch gambit, It seems like white wins a piece on the spot but that's not the case, white has to give the bishop back to defend against black's threats.

    Either Bxg7 followed by Nxc3, or Nxc3 immediately

  • 18 months ago · Quote · #17

    beerainsdone

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 18 months ago · Quote · #18

    beerainsdone

    here is one matt...

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #19

    truatx

    I always thought moving that pawn forward was a good idea.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #20

    truatx

    [COMMENT DELETED]

Back to Top

Post your reply: