12284 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
So Short's "patent" is based on 3 games only, (ignoring the 2011 blitz game)
Ignoring databases for a moment, what are the reasons for 0-0 being better? Given that you can castle next move, and 7.Qb3 cuts out some possible responses for Black (including an immediate Nge7, although that didn't stop a 1600 playing it against me in a recent tournament lol!)
I don't think 7.0-0 is "better" having now studied 7.Qb3 and of course our Greek comrade prefers the latter
One possible reason may be the 7...Qe7 reply from black. However I've played both variations with success, but that may be the reason.
Ah fair enough, I thought you were still advocating it.
Another interesting game with 7.Qb3 is Molner-Bartholomew at Copper State Int'l 2010. Gives an example of White winning with this against strong opposition anyway!
Qe7 is actually inferior to the move played in the game because it puts the queen on the same diagonal as the bishop after a later Ba3 and can cause problems with castling. The knight is better on e7, blocking the diagonal than f6 .
Agree Scottrf, Qf6 is stronger - probably Bartholomew decided he didn't know the line that well. A practical advantage of the Evans (and another reason to favour OTB chess over correspondence!)
Haven't put it through a computer yet, but just wondering what was best on move 9 here (and any improvements elsewhere). Obviously I'd like to save that bishop but retreating to c4 allows Na5.
6...d6 is a mistake (6...Na5).
7...Qd7? is a genuine lemon, and 9.Bxg8 does not look bad, but I'd rather develop (9.Nbd2 or 9.0-0). White looks being much, much better.
Thanks. Yeah, Na5 seems a lot more challenging. With the pawn back, a good centre, easier development and a breezy black king white seems to be doing well here. Disappointingly I missed quite a few tactics, although some of them were complications I felt unnecessary (23. Bg5 doesn't make a lot of practical sense to me).
Interesting question. I played the 7. Qb3 line against an IM a week or two ago and got crushed very badly so I was motivated to have a look at it and the alternatives afterwards.
I think that 7. Qb3 is actually worse than 7. 0-0 because in the Qb3 line, Blacks idea of ...Qf6, ...Bb6 and ...Na5 is just solid as a rock. And overall, it's just a liability to park the Queen on b3, where Black is trading off potential attacking pieces without difficulty after ...Na5.
I think that in the kind of Evans position that developed in your game, that it's generally a good idea to try and and sit on your space advantage and take it slowly. For example, instead of 18. d5, an alternative may have been to play your rooks to the central files first and then think about a central break. After Rad1 and Rfe1 you've got Ne4 ideas and rooklift ideas like Re3 and maybe giving the Queen some grief on the kingside. Black is a bit bottled up and could easily be tempted to lash out and do something unsound.
Still, until 22. Qe4 your position looks perfectly playable. Maybe again, consolidating your space advantage with Rd1 and Re1 was an idea, followed by stirring up some trouble on the kingside. The black Queen could easily find itself short of squares or at least forced into a passive position amidst a compromised kingside.
I got to try out pfren's suggestion - though it's a shame the game didn't last a bit longer!
is it too early to play 19. d6??? I think opening the c file for your highly mobile rooke and queen would be better considering cxe5 Nxd5...
Would it be fair to say that switching back to 7.0-0 didn't help very much?
Seriously though, I'm still not convinced either about 7.Qb3, but haven't got the aptitude for further analysis.
Won a 45|45 game using the Evans - in a slightly different line (the one where Black takes 2 pawns (a la Fine) then gives up the bishop pair and tries to defend. It wasn't a quick knockout but I thought I played quite well - combined different ideas from this thread with Qc1 featuring, and also as padman suggested building up the pressure in the centre more slowly rather than trying to force things - worked out nicely! Might turn this into a Evans Gambit games thread - other people feel free to post too.
The main inaccuracies for White that I've already noted are 20.Re4 not being so great (20...Na5 seems to counter it quite well) and for some reason not playing 34.Ra4. I'm not even sure Qc1 was best in this specific position but I don't think it was bad with the idea of bringing the queen to f4.
Chess.com getting sued for libel?
by waffllemaster a few minutes ago
by SQUEAKERISCHESSKING a few minutes ago
12/4/2013 - Immunity
by HyperPeanuts a few minutes ago
A awesome new puzzle
by SebLeb0210 3 minutes ago
by SQUEAKERISCHESSKING 4 minutes ago
by SQUEAKERISCHESSKING 5 minutes ago
Ruy Lopez - Black
by Strange_Idiom 6 minutes ago
2200 vs 2700
by Rumo75 7 minutes ago
Anand: An Embarrassing Performance
by TitanCG 7 minutes ago
Most effective way to improve my game?
by Luvrug 8 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!