Win with the Giraffe Attack in the Vienna Game
#ViennaGame #GiraffeAttack
The Giraffe Attack is a silly opening with a silly name in the Vienna Game. It is highly dubious and has only been played only a few times at the masters level, where the Giraffe Attack has failed every time (100% win for Black in the four games listed games on chess.com).
It begins with the typically Vienna Game opening (1. e4 e5 2. Nc3) and Black must respond with the Anderssen Defense (2… Bc5). The Giraffe Attack is then the hyper-aggressive move developing the queen (3. Qg4), immediately threatening g7.
However, this seeming threat on g7 is somewhat illusory. Although I wouldn’t want to be bitten by a giraffe, they’re not carnivores! Eric Schiller in his book, “Unorthodox Chess Openings” (Cardoza Publishing, 1998) wrote, “we might call this the Giraffe Attack, because White is sticking his neck out here.” Unless Black misplays, the queen can’t take g7 safely. It is perhaps surprisingly that at the beginner-intermediate level, the Giraffe Attack does surprisingly well according to the Lichess database of lower-rated blitz and rapid games! White has a substantial win advantage (56%) vs Black (42%)! Being attacked by a giraffe would undoubtedly be surprising and disorienting! Certainly the Giraffe Attack is a rare opening occurring in less than 1 in 800 Vienna Games. At the beginner-intermediate level, is extremely unlikely you’ll encounter an opponent who understands the opening theory well.
Against the Giraffe Attack, Black does have to respond to threat on g7. Black has only one good move (3… Nf6), which is played 10% of the time. Black plays two other moves more commonly (3… g6, and 3… Qf6), both of which give the advantage back to White, but are not disastrous.
Black’s best response – (3… Nf6)
The most important thing to realise is that is that in this line, White should not capture the pawn on g7 (4. Qxg7). This is a straight up blunder with the evaluation dropping to [-4.51]. In essence, Black now gains the initiative and has a forcing line that cumulates in a brilliant potential bishop sacrifice (4… Rg8 5. Qh6 Bxf2+). If White captures the bishop back with their king, then White loses their queen with a royal fork from the knight and the game is pretty much over (6. Kxf2 Ng4+).
So what should White do? Park the Queen to g3 (4. Qg3), which places pressure on the e5 pawn. This is an option for all three of Black’s responses. If the attack on e5 is missed by Black, then this capture comes with check. More likely, chess just continues with a somewhat uncomfortable position. The position favours Black and it is penance for playing a silly opening!
Black’s second most common response – (3… g6)
Here Black defends the g7 pawn in a very direct manner by pushing it forward. As their dark square bishop has already developed, it is not possible for the bishop to take the expected fianchetto position. In essence, this represents a damaging of Black’s pawn structure on the king-side that is “worth” the queen move with an engine evaluation of [+0.39]. Here, White has a couple of options. Parking it on g3 is rated best. However, moving the queen all the way back to the home square (4. Qd1) is just as good and is probably what I would recommend.
Black’s most common response – (3… Qf6)
Here White has two options, in addition to parking the queen on g3. We need to do something about the double attack by Black’s queen and bishop on f2. If nothing is done, then it’s potentially mate in 2 and White will look very silly indeed!
A tricky option is to develop the knight naturally to f3 (4. f3). This blocks the Black queen’s access to f2 and neuters the attack. Black is now in a very precarious position. We want to play Nd5, a very powerful move that simultaneously attacks the Black queen on f6, and the pawn on c7, which comes with an absolute fork of the king and rook. So, Black’s next move must either prevent the knight move to d5 (e.g., 4… Ne7 or 4… c6), or the subsequent move to c7. It is possible that Black will not recognise this immediate threat and play a natural developing move (e.g., Nc6) that doesn’t address these threats. If that’s the case, White is completely winning with the knight advance (5. Nd5) with an evaluation of around [+6.5].
The safe option is to slide the queen to f3 (4. Qf3) which effectively invites a queen trade where White regains a single step of tempo. If they refuse this turn, then Nd5 the next turn will often result in the necessary nudge.
This is what I did in game 1 where I played it safe, and the tension is resolved with a small positional advantage to White, and chess continues!
Game 2 is an example of where I play the “tricky line” (4. f3), which I learnt after analysis from the first game. This is what I would recommend as it’s super fun and it’s probably more in keeping with the aggressive theme of the opening! In this game, it worked very well as my opponent misplayed and White then swoops in for the advantage.
My view on the Giraffe Attack is that it’s playable, but that can be said with almost any aggressive opening in the beginner-intermediate level. In fact, although White is objectively losing in the Nf6-response line when the queen immediate captures g7 (1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Bc5 3. Qg4 Nf6 4. Qxg7), it is such an audacious attack, that Black not uncommonly will blunder the position resulting in a early loss!
There are better responses against the Anderssen Defense (e.g., the “wayward” queen with the immediate 3. Qh5), but you wouldn’t be able to say that you won with the “Giraffe Attack”!
