4. Nxd4 or O-O

chamo2074

Also the opponent knight is not on f7 or g5, and not a lot is going on in terms of messiness of the board

Preusseagro

The night take line in the traxler gives black some counterplay. Here not

TerminatorC800

It looks like a reversed Traxler, due to the sacrifice and knight check. It is completely different, I agree, but it has similar themes.

chamo2074

Well yes ok, @TC800 if this is what you meant

Thee_Ghostess_Lola

why waste time w/ 4. Nxd4 or 0-0 ?? just sac at f7 and go !

push that Kn offa d4 w/ c3 clearing ur Q for f3. Black's emperor is wearing no clothes !

Preusseagro
Thee_Ghostess_Lola hat geschrieben:

why waste time w/ 4. Nxd4 or 0-0 ?? just sac at f7 and go !

push that Kn offa d4 w/ c3 clearing ur Q for f3. Black's emperor is wearing no clothes !

i sugested this. 

But since you are not very understandable try using diagramms

SNUDOO

If the sac worked everyone would play it but they dont

chamo2074

yep they don't

Preusseagro
SNUDOO hat geschrieben:

If the sac worked everyone would play it but they dont

The problem is that the Blackburn-Shilling is not played very often. So if people face an move they dont know the probally try to make priciple moves (which is fine) or think, or get anxious of the oponent. 

So Bxf7 is an near to nothing played answer to an only few played gambit. So it is not well known for its merrits.

And in my experience most of the people tend to play the same opening even if they lost beacause the oponent did find the reight moves on an dobius or bad line.

SNUDOO

That's true but why try a speculative sac when you can gain an easy edge without trying

chamo2074
Preusseagro a écrit :
SNUDOO hat geschrieben:

If the sac worked everyone would play it but they dont

The problem is that the Blackburn-Shilling is not played very often. So if people face an move they dont know the probally try to make priciple moves (which is fine) or think, or get anxious of the oponent. 

So Bxf7 is an near to nothing played answer to an only few played gambit. So it is not well known for its merrits.

And in my experience most of the people tend to play the same opening even if they lost beacause the oponent did find the reight moves on an dobius or bad line.

Yes I mean that's definitely a good bluff and very triable and even playable, but be careful if this is refuted because you should always take into consideration your opponent's best defense. 

Preusseagro
chamo2074 hat geschrieben:
Preusseagro a écrit :
SNUDOO hat geschrieben:

If the sac worked everyone would play it but they dont

The problem is that the Blackburn-Shilling is not played very often. So if people face an move they dont know the probally try to make priciple moves (which is fine) or think, or get anxious of the oponent. 

So Bxf7 is an near to nothing played answer to an only few played gambit. So it is not well known for its merrits.

And in my experience most of the people tend to play the same opening even if they lost beacause the oponent did find the reight moves on an dobius or bad line.

Yes I mean that's definitely a good bluff and very triable and even playable, but be careful if this is refuted because you should always take into consideration your opponent's best defense. 

Carefull with an refutation which might be +20 moves long until it is clear that your oponent is worse. It has the potential of you going wrong. 

For example the KG is in my opinion refuted. But since it is not very clear which s the right or best refutation and these are very long so whites gains often oputurnities ofwinning because of an smaller misstake. So KG remains playable

chamo2074

yes true, but if you study the Fischer article plus get helped by the engine I think you'll be able to play against it. Now sure, nobody likes to study a hole opening but this is some people's job so seems like it's doable

Preusseagro

You know that the article is very old and not complete?

chamo2074

Very old well, not that much, and this is not very relevant because it's written by one of the best players of all times, so his ideas were probably more advanced 

Preusseagro

Ähm 

The Bishop Gambit Line is not analysed  by Fisher, which he played later with great success.

And it does not help that he was one of the best players when today you have better analasyse tools. ANd in my last disusion even an analaysiy from was called outdatet from 2000er when there were some engines developed

Optimissed

Nxd4 looks stronger because the pawn on d4 can be challenged by c3 and black isn't developed enough to take advantage of the slower opening.