I am a fakir, extraordinaire.

I am willing to back up my assertions otb, or even here online.

Sorry I did not address this earlier.  I did not mean to ignore it, I just never really saw it until I went back recently to catch up.  I would like to address it directly, now.

I speak from experience from the white side of the argument!

As I stated earlier, I do not believe db stats to be relevant in this issue. One reason why is because unless seriously edited, most dbs inlcude all the games, very early ones before theory congealed, and games in which both players, or either player was <2400 (FIDE).  CC db's also tend to have different numbers than otb, but despite cc databases showing better results for black than the typical Chessbase db, I still argue they are wholly unreliable for making general statements regarding the current theory of this specific line.  Morozovich has proved the same to be true with the Chigorin and the Albin Couner Gambit....

There are several excellent publications that keep up on current opening theory (and not all are available in english or west of the pond!).  These lines have been picked apart over the past 15 years since the last real book on the gambit (from a major & reputable publisher). 

The combination of high level computer assisted GM analysis, peer-review publications, current GM praxis, and known play including published analysis with improvements should all have black salivating at the prospects of playing against the Marshall in online chess (or CC).

I agree fully about the conditions that make it tough to play otb.  Heck, the Blackmar Diemar has some pragmatism behind it when the clock is ticking, doesn't it?    But, theoretically, Black is fine.

I am not a computer guy so much as a pragmatic otb player and the (few) GM's & IMs (several) I know personally that play the D31 Triangle version of Semi-slav all love playing against the Marshall and have shown me plenty of reasons (both otb and academically) for me to not play it as white anymore if I am playing a 'serious' game that I 'need' to win.

In the long haul, I think that theoretical arguments such as these are one thing that make chess compelling. Based upon the number of people posting across the forums, I would say there is something to be said that some of us enjoy this aspect of the game almost as much as the actual game play.

It's psychologically safer.

I've studied a bit of the Marshall Gambit of the Semi Slav, under the guidance of a few books and Rybka analysis. I enjoy playing the 8...Qxg2 line as Black. From my (limited) experience, White does not recieve enough dynamic compensation for those two pawns.

Hey, what do you expect from the memory of an old man.  I pulled that out from my ...... grey matter.

Was the page number at least correct? The Players names?   (Maybe it was in another book....lol)

What about the Watson work and the Hansen materials.....  Are they a disappointment to you as well? 

Either way, I stand by my assertion that this gambit is better for Black than is the Benko, am willing to play it anytime, against any player, and with monetary wagers involved.

******************

Post Script:  I only added these books as an injoke/barb because I know you are into sources.    Whenever you wish, I can give you a direct lesson....with reasonable pricing....

If you are serious with your first statement, you are being silly.

Seriously.

Track record?  Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

At the time I read that Dvoretsky book, (14 years ago!) there was no info on the line at all.  Now there are several books that include it.

If anything, you should be impressed with my memory that I could remember something from a book I haven't even owned in 10 years.  Page number and names of players were correct? 

**********************************************************

Good luck in your quest for your title!

Ozzie: I guess I need to preface all my humour with pre-emptive warnings!

WARNING!  SATIRE AHEAD...hehe

Now seriously and sincerely:  Of course I did not take that page and players from memory!  I took it from my notes I have on that line in an old notebook.  I am an old man and barely able to remember where I last put the car keys and usually even need a reminder to exhale after every breath. 

As for happiness, I am not sure I am looking to our cyber chess relationship to provide this elusive state of mind for me.  I'll stick to chemical dependencies because I can directly read on the bottle how I should soon feel.....

*****************************

But seriously, A31 is a good line for Black.  As good as any other defense, really, and better than a lot of dubious ones.  Check out ECO or any other preferred and legit source....

So, I am not going to give any Albin lines, now, as my feelings are very hurt and may even have suffered some long term injuries. 

On another note, I do not think professionals are using books too much anymore.  Most of my books are gathering dust, even the ones I recently purchased.  In fact, I have been giving them away recently hoping some one else can use them.

I think database study is the way most professionals access opening theory these days.  Even the so-called 'Grandmaster" series of books are often absolete before the are finished being printed.  The Chess Stars publishing house pumps out some great books, but are often picked apart before they even arrive on western shores.

Sites such as ChessPub and others, which provide (mostly) GM analysis of current high level games, seems to be the way to go for up to the minute theory junkies.

Sincerely,

~ richie_and_oprah

1. Yes, better than a lot of other dreck that gets essayed.

2. Yes.

3. Some people avoid it.

4. Some people choose to avoid this move order.

5. Yes.  Most white players u2400 are wholly unprepared to play this line.

6. Not very many, actually. I would play this every chance I get as black if possible.

I don't know much about it, but this is what I like to play as black. I believe it is called the Tartakower defense.

My boots were made for walking. 

And that's just what they'll do.

I am really just a avid collector of Goichberg signatures. 

Chess is merely the vehicle to do this. 

Some chess people care about ratings, I care about grabbing those signatures on little pieces of paper recognized as fungible by accredited banking institutions.  That is the measure of success in US chess, to me, NM Reb.

Also, I seek to test my mettle against titled players at every chance I get but often find they create some of the most imaginative and original excuses why they cannot play a patzer such as myself. 

 Care for a game?

2100 CC chess.

I would assume that you're somewhere above 1800, but below 2000.

Just a guess, did I come close?

Sort of ..... but  nope.

I am one of the anamolies here in that my FIDE rating is a little higher than my Chess.com online rating.  Probably because I do not use books or explorer or db in my games, I think.  My USCF floor is 2000....so that should benchmark me....