Defeating the Petroff Defense

Bystanderz

WanderingWinder: Hi, eh......just curious, is the birth date in your profile your REAL birth date?!

richie_and_oprah
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

And that is the beginning of the argument, but you would then want to come up with a list of GMs who you might expect would give it a try, and then see whether they have in fact tried it.


ozzie, please refer back to my original statement in this forum.

If what you proposed to do is what you wish to do go ahead and do that. 

I do not need to do that in order for me to consider playing it otb.  I do play it otb and have played it in 'serious' games i.e. rated games at tourmaments in which money was a prize.

And I will again.  In fact, the very next time someone plays the Russian against me, I will.  Refute that.  Laughing

 

I am not trying to make a larger argument other than it is a pragmatic try at most levels of play otb.  The better player will win and it provides room for creative and original play.

If you think it is shite, then have fun busting it if you encounter it. Smile  Start playing the black side and hope for people to play it.  I promise I will.

benedictus

The reason it's not main line is not that it's bad, but that it's more risky. Most main lines tend to be more solid and don't involve very risky play. That doesn't mean that variations that include risky moves are automatically inferior to the main line.

AnthonyCG
What is weird about this is that the gambit is more popular in correspondance chess than otb.
Bystanderz
benedictus wrote:

The reason it's not main line is not that it's bad, but that it's more risky. Most main lines tend to be more solid and don't involve very risky play.


I doubt it. As far as I know, a main line become a main line because it considered to be the best continuation (or one of the several best continuations, in which case we have several main lines). What about the Samisch in King's Indian? The Poisoned Pawn in Najdorf Sicilian? The Marshall in Ruy Lopez? These lines are hardly solid.

ozzie_c_cobblepot
richie_and_oprah wrote:
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

And that is the beginning of the argument, but you would then want to come up with a list of GMs who you might expect would give it a try, and then see whether they have in fact tried it.


ozzie, please refer back to my original statement in this forum.

If what you proposed to do is what you wish to do go ahead and do that. 

I do not need to do that in order for me to consider playing it otb.  I do play it otb and have played it in 'serious' games i.e. rated games at tourmaments in which money was a prize.

And I will again.  In fact, the very next time someone plays the Russian against me, I will.  Refute that. 

 

I am not trying to make a larger argument other than it is a pragmatic try at most levels of play otb.  The better player will win and it provides room for creative and original play.

If you think it is shite, then have fun busting it if you encounter it.   Start playing the black side and hope for people to play it.  I promise I will.


Doubtful, richie. I don't know who you are in real life, and I am certain to not answer 1.e4 with e5 :-)

I didn't realize you were making such a weak claim, so I guess I agree with you in terms of what you said.

Bystanderz
Gonnosuke wrote:

By sound, I mean that it doesn't usually lose by force against strong opposition.  That's my definition of sound.  Note that "good" and "sound" are two totally different things.  A good opening gives you the best chances to win.  An opening can be completely sound without being a good opening.  Not everyone agrees of course but that's how I see it.


Huh......alright. I dub a move "unsound" when it probably increases one's losing chances more than winning chances, or when it probably reduces the advantage or increases the disadvantage one already has (or both). And that seems to roughly be the way most chess experts/authors use the word. Many lines (for example, the Steinitz Variation of Giuoco Piano and the Budapest Gambit) don't lose by force and yet are called unsound. No offense, your definition of "sound" looks a little too narrow, because not even some of the refuted openings lose by force. But if that's the way you define the word, I'm fine with that.

Again, the Topalov-Kramnik encounter is just one game, such a small sample size is virtually meaningless.

richie_and_oprah
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

Doubtful, richie. I don't know who you are in real life, and I am certain to not answer 1.e4 with e5 :-)

I didn't realize you were making such a weak claim, so I guess I agree with you in terms of what you said.


Weak players make weak claims weekly.

richie_and_oprah

FYI:  For you centi pawn lovers out there, I have beem running the positon I gave above on Deep Rybka for several hours now. It started off at -.42 =/+.  

Now showing main line to be 0.00

and gives as best play: 10 ...Qd6 11 Re1 Nd4 12. Qd1 Nc6 13. Qe2 Nd4 14. Qd1 Nc6 with a zugzwang position where any deviation by either side yields a slight advantage to the opponent.

 

Anyone else can conduct this experiement as well and confirm that White is absolutely fine and no where close to being lost.

Absolute equality and a position where the better prepared player will win more than lose.

Bystanderz
richie_and_oprah wrote:
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Ne4 d6 4. Nf7 Kf7  5. d4 c5 6. dc Nc6 7. Bc4+ Be6 8. Be6 Ke6 9. 0-0 cd 9. Qe2!

What position? Black can't possibly play 9...cd. If you meant 9...dc, nobody plays that, the most common moves here are either ...d5 or ...Kf7.

Zugzwang position?! The last move you gave was a black move, shouldn't this mean that white would be at a disadvantage since it is now his move? Then where does this 0.00 score come from? If you mean any deviation from the line Rybka gave (rather than any move) would yield a disadvantage, then where does the term "zugzwang" come from?

In some of your earlier posts you claimed that "the line to Black eqaulity is not so clear", "[white has] excellent chances of creating complications and winning chances", and "[the line offers] a better chance for white than those in the main line", now you are thrashing all these claims and claiming ABSOLUTE equality?!

Rybka is very strong, but it sure takes a lot of guts to claim something like "absolute equality" when chess is not even solved.

richie_and_oprah

here is the line:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Deep Rybka.

 

I still have it cracking and it still gives this line as best play from the positon after 10. Qe2, whcih was the original positon I gave in my first analysis.  Black's play is one line to choose and of course there are others 5. ..Qe8 may be better than c5, which is considered to be the main line and given in several texts.

richie_and_oprah

Unsound is definitely worse than dubious.

 

Dubious means bad reputation but not yet proven bad.

Unsound means: Loses for Black/gives away advantage as White.

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

The Budapest is absolutely dubious, but a crafty and savvy defender can hold as Black, even against best play by White and score a half point.  Best play vs best play equals draw.

The Englund Gambit in unsound and with best play White wins.  Best play vs best play equals Black loss.

 

Some of you need to subsrcibe to better and more up-to-date periodicals on this stuff.  Laughing

grolich

benedictus, Today, The cochrane gambit is just considered a speculative and a mistaken sacrifice, where all main lines have been analyzed to a black advantage. it's...also not really hard for black if he just doesn't fall for a quick trap. For instance:

 

For example: in the ...d5 exd line: 6...Qe8+ probably just reaches a winning position):

The piece wins against the 3 pawns easily on this board. A piece wins easily against 3 pawns if the pawns aren't immediately mobile or otherwise dangerous. Just a simple technical matter. So if you block with your queen, the endgame is an easy technical win for black (if you didn't know that, that'd explain the misunderstanding).

Most people just think 3 pawns and 1 piece are equal...not really. depends if the pawns are immediately useable.

 

So, if you don't want to exchnage queens, how to respond to 6...Qe8+

7.Kf1 looks worse: 7...Bd6 and white has another piece that is in effect out of play for now (blocked bishop), white is stuck in the center, and against an extra piece, that's a big thing.

 

If you retreat with 7.Be2 c6. white's attack is over, and black just has more chances to use his extra piece than white has his pawns.

 

I'm willing to play this opening anytime as black. If you're interested, challenge me please:)

richie_and_oprah

The Cochrane....Ambitious and speculative.

 

And ripe for some aspiring GM to take up just as a guy such as Morozovich resusitated other line considered 'dubiouds/unsound/refuted.

Back from the grave we have seen The Chigorin, The Budapest, The Albin Counter Gambit....

People are too eager to blindly accept dogma than to do their own real work.

 

 

There is a line in the Open Spanish I want to tell you about called the Riga.....Laughing

richie_and_oprah

grolich, in the d5 line, White plays e5 and holds easy. Black's centipawn advantage evaporates quickly after:

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Ne4 d6 4. Nf7 Kf7 5.d4 d5! 6.e5 Ne4 7. Nd2 Nd2 8.Bd2 and White is fine.

(6. ...Qe7? 7. Be2 Nfd7 c4 +/=)

grolich
richie_and_oprah wrote:

grolich, in the d5 line, White plays e5 and holds easy. Black's centipawn advantage evaporates quickly after:

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Ne4 d6 4. Nf7 Kf7 5.d4 d5! 6.e5 Ne4 7. Nd2 Nd2 8.Bd2 and White is fine.

(6. ...Qe7? 7. Be2 Nfd7 c4 +/=)


Heh cute. also has nothing to do with the subject of the previous posts:)

benedictus was talking about the 5.Bc4 lines and the replies have been to that. never d4. no one was talking about these. So the whole ...d5 line was reffering to the lines he posted after Bc4.

 

There are other easy ways for black with the (admittedly better) 5.d4 lines.

 

I have many wins against players many hundreds of points above me in the cochrane as black. I have done extensive work of my own on it and based it on previous theory and all I can say is this: In my opinion, white doesn't have an easy game in any variation, and black has at least one line with some advantage in every single line white chooses. I'd be happy to play it against anyone here as black.

richie_and_oprah

Ok, sorry, I am not trying to get it wrong on purpose....you did not post any full lines....

I will issue a challenge...what time controls do you like?

 

EDIT: Sent. If not to your liking the parameters, send a counter offer! Smile

grolich
richie_and_oprah wrote:

Ok, sorry, I am not trying to get it wrong on purpose....you did not post any full lines....

I will issue a challenge...what time controls do you like?


sorry:) I have a bad habit of not posting lines when replying directly to someone else's line... will have to get rid of that one to make it clearer.

 

sometimes I can finish a game in one go,

but sometimes I have lots of work, so 3 days a move (default time here I believe). even if half the game may be finished in one go.

richie_and_oprah

Can we agree to post game when finished regardless of result?

grolich
richie_and_oprah wrote:

Can we agree to post game when finished regardless of result?


Agreed