Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Defense to e4 that leads to a Blackmar Diemer Gambit setup for black.


  • 9 months ago · Quote · #21

    Dark_Falcon

    FirebrandX hat geschrieben:
    tmkroll wrote:

    The Soller Gambit is an attempt, but the BDG is questionable to begin. Playing it down a tempo is only for the brave/foolish.It is actually more dangerous than it looks: http://www.chesscafe.com/text/mcgrew33.pdf

    Which of course omits the TRUE best move of e4 by white. This makes the gambit effectively unsound, both in the 2...f6 version and the proper 3...f6 version. For example:

     

     

    There's not a master alive that would prefer black's position at the end of that sequence, yet those were the best moves black could make.



    Instead of 4...fxe5 you have to play 4...Bc5 which is much stronger.

    With best play from both sides surely white has a position which is close to refutation for this gambit.

    But on club-level the Soller-Gambit is a very good weapon for tactical players...

  • 9 months ago · Quote · #22

    tmkroll

    FirebrandX wrote:

    Posting an article on a game where white blundered away the advantage doesn't mean the opening is good for black. It is theoretically unsound, and no amount of mistakes from amatuers will change that.

    That's not what I meant. You didn't address the d6 plan at all, which I think some strong players, Bucker, etc.. think is best after your e4. White overplays this game, but what if White hadn't kept pressing and sacrificed material unsoundly? Black gets a displaced King but a 2 to 1 majority in the center by simply play "around" f7. If the Bxf7 line of the Traxler is playable for Black why not this sort of position too? I'm not saying it looks "good for black" by any stretch of the imagination but you said you had the true refutation of the Soller making the gambit effectively unsound so you have to show it's losing for Black... which it might be, but all you showed us was a contuation after d5.

  • 9 months ago · Quote · #23

    FirebrandX

    Dark_Falcon wrote:

    Instead of 4...fxe5 you have to play 4...Bc5 which is much stronger.

    With best play from both sides surely white has a position which is close to refutation for this gambit.

    But on club-level the Soller-Gambit is a very good weapon for tactical players...

    4...Bc5 doesn't magically make the position better for black. White still has Nc3 and Bc4 coming either way. It's just plain fundamentally bad for black. You shouldn't play weak openings just because a weak opponent might get confused on how to handle it. WHat will happen is you'll eventually get crushed when you have to play up, and the opening gets abandoned. That's why these things just don't hold up in the long run.

  • 9 months ago · Quote · #24

    Dark_Falcon

    FirebrandX hat geschrieben:
    Dark_Falcon wrote:

    Instead of 4...fxe5 you have to play 4...Bc5 which is much stronger.

    With best play from both sides surely white has a position which is close to refutation for this gambit.

    But on club-level the Soller-Gambit is a very good weapon for tactical players...

    4...Bc5 doesn't magically make the position better for black. White still has Nc3 and Bc4 coming either way. It's just plain fundamentally bad for black. You shouldn't play weak openings just because a weak opponent might get confused on how to handle it. WHat will happen is you'll eventually get crushed when you have to play up, and the opening gets abandoned. That's why these things just don't hold up in the long run.

    Its always the same discussion...

    Yes,you are right and i have the same opinion as you have about the Soller Gambit (and other unsound black gambits)...with good or best play from the White side, it will be tough for black.

    On the other side, i really like unusual positions and when you are booked up with these bad gambits and you know the plans in the middlegame, you can have much success on club-level, as you mostly find unprepared opponents.Its easy to talk about refutation of crap openings in a forum, with the right book in your hand or with agood computer program in correspondence. But in OTB or blitz games its hard to find the right answers, if youve never or rarely met these openings before.

    Personally i raised my ratings drastically since ive started to played unsound crap like the Soller.

    Sure...you cant always play the same variation as a gambit player, but when you have a wide range of possible gambits in your repertoire, its hard for a tournament opponent to prepare for you.

    If you prepare for the Soller Gambit, i can play the Blackburne-Hartlaub- or the Felbecker-Gambit or just a Mainline in the Englund...all after 1.d4 e5 2.dxe5.

    It must be a miracle for such a good player like you are, but its definitely the truth....these openings offer you practical chances,if you know, what you are doing on the board.

    And at least, its much more fun for people like me than to memorize 25 moves in the semi-slav QGD.


  • 9 months ago · Quote · #25

    tubebender

    FirebrandX wrote:
    tmkroll wrote:

    The Soller Gambit is an attempt, but the BDG is questionable to begin. Playing it down a tempo is only for the brave/foolish.It is actually more dangerous than it looks: http://www.chesscafe.com/text/mcgrew33.pdf

    Which of course omits the TRUE best move of e4 by white. This makes the gambit effectively unsound, both in the 2...f6 version and the proper 3...f6 version. For example:

     

     

    There's not a master alive that would prefer black's position at the end of that sequence, yet those were the best moves black could make.



    Loved your explanations, Wolff. Keep them coming. For what it`s worth, I know Lev Zilbermintz very well and I have to give him credit for being the "champion" of the BGD. West, who I know a little (had a little "bad blood" with him years ago) is quite the "champion" of 3...f5 in the Philidor; he wrote a monograph on it years ago. Not a bad guy, but super intense. 

                On another note, did you ever play a guy on this site named, "blumzovitch"?


Back to Top

Post your reply: