DonaldNielsen wrote:
In this book originally published in 89’, Bruce talks about various traps related to different openings. The first scenario he presents is called “in between move” and its related to the Center Game:
1. e4 e5
2. d4 exd4
3. Qxd4 Nf6
4. Bg5 Be7
5. e5?
Here Bruce says white wants to attack the knight on f6 but fails to consider 5…Nc6. After white moves the queen to one of three squares that protect the e pawn, white falls to various tactics. The whole point being whites e5 advance was premature.
Heres the reason for my post. White can just play 6. exf6, and if black takes whites queen white will win blacks bishop and queen anyways with 7. fxe7. In fact an engine im using has the evaluation at +2.5ish on low depth even if black maximizes his knight and equalizes material (black can give a check and eventually pick up whites queen side rook).
So the bottom line is, it seems like calling out 5. e5 as a premature miscalculation isnt accurate and white is simply winning in this position.
Questions:
Has anyone else analyzed this and am I wrong here?
This book was published in 89’ which is obviously pre-engines. Is the book even worth reading at this point or is it now considered outdated?
Thanks in advance!
1. e4 e5
2. d4 exd4
3. Qxd4 Nf6
4. Bg5 Be7
5. e5?
Here Bruce says white wants to attack the knight on f6 but fails to consider 5…Nc6. After white moves the queen to one of three squares that protect the e pawn, white falls to various tactics. The whole point being whites e5 advance was premature.
Heres the reason for my post. White can just play 6. exf6, and if black takes whites queen white will win blacks bishop and queen anyways with 7. fxe7. In fact an engine im using has the evaluation at +2.5ish on low depth even if black maximizes his knight and equalizes material (black can give a check and eventually pick up whites queen side rook).
So the bottom line is, it seems like calling out 5. e5 as a premature miscalculation isnt accurate and white is simply winning in this position.
Questions:
Has anyone else analyzed this and am I wrong here?
This book was published in 89’ which is obviously pre-engines. Is the book even worth reading at this point or is it now considered outdated?
Thanks in advance!
You neglected to look at alternatives to taking the queen. If black plays 6..gxf6, the queen is still hanging AND now the bishop is hanging too.
1. e4 e5
2. d4 exd4
3. Qxd4 Nf6
4. Bg5 Be7
5. e5?
Here Bruce says white wants to attack the knight on f6 but fails to consider 5…Nc6. After white moves the queen to one of three squares that protect the e pawn, white falls to various tactics. The whole point being whites e5 advance was premature.
Heres the reason for my post. White can just play 6. exf6, and if black takes whites queen white will win blacks bishop and queen anyways with 7. fxe7. In fact an engine im using has the evaluation at +2.5ish on low depth even if black maximizes his knight and equalizes material (black can give a check and eventually pick up whites queen side rook).
So the bottom line is, it seems like calling out 5. e5 as a premature miscalculation isnt accurate and white is simply winning in this position.
Questions:
Has anyone else analyzed this and am I wrong here?
This book was published in 89’ which is obviously pre-engines. Is the book even worth reading at this point or is it now considered outdated?
Thanks in advance!