I've been reading a lot of comments from jempty and he seems to be a very arrogant person who thinks he's superior.
Also, i saw him checking 5 or 6 people's ratings, including that of the Venezuelian IM, because he always has the impression that everyone is lying except for him and that's very disrespectful.
Dont pay attention to that the forum is for discuss sharp lines against the Petrov defense... This aptitude just stop your own progress in chess.
Again, below ~2400, it's possible to play even the "boring" lines of the Petroff for a win as white. The key is just to continue playing for the win and not agree to a draw after 20-25 moves.
Magnus Carlsen has shown that almost any position with multiple pieces can be played for the win. All it really takes is the will to do so.
Wow, jempty you're a bit full of yourself recently. First off your line with 5.Nc3 led to famous losses in several high-level games recently (I enjoyed Nakamura-Giri although it was at Reggio Emilia) and most likely doesn't lead to an advantage against reasonable play by Black. It's also not that hard to play against. I'm sure at your 1400-1500 level it works fine as would any line. I seriously doubt you would win in a classical game against me if I played the Cochrane against you though.
Secondly he was clearly stating an opinion about gambits and not directly replying to your game, hence the clear white space on your monitor between his comments on your game and his comment about gambits. He was also replying to a point YOU MADE (saying Black has made no mistakes and the Cochrane is therefore unjustified, which is the same logic that would say all gambits in mainline chess openings are unsound - uh oh the Semi-Slav isn't a mistake so 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Qc2 Bd6 7.g4 is unjustified! admittedly they don't sac a piece but your comment was a bit misguided) and now you're just being a jerk to him for no reason.
Please cool it, is all I'm trying to say. You don't need to jump down people's throats because you can't read three lines of text and understand their context even when they are a direct reply to a post you made.
I'll be glad to play the Black side of the Cochrane against you at what do you call it, "classical" chess? Not sure precisely what that means, G/60 or slower, at the very least? I also get White in a game though.
Sounds like you are scoffing at my 1400-something Blitz rating. That puts me in the TOP FOUR PERCENT of players on here actually. There is severe rating deflation on this site and lots of NM's don't even have Blitz ratings of 2000. I'm surprised you are not an NM with your rating, or perhaps you are young and excel at blitz. For the record I have been 1900+ USCF OTB and 2000+ Correspondence BEFORE engine usage (do I need to send you a link to the cross-table of the 1996 US Correspondence Championship qualifiers?)
Some (you only mentioned one) recent top-level loss(es) with the Nimzovitch means nothing. I also see Topalov beat Gelfand with it at Linares, 2010. It's getting played with some regularity at the top level, and the Cochrane isn't -- that should tell everybody something. For IM JGascon to say my recommendation of the Nimzovitch Attack is going to hold back other's chess progress is absurd when he is recommending the Cochrane Gambit.
"Please cool it" is NOT all you are trying to say: then you dragged my rating into it, and essentially challenged me to a game. Now it's time for you to put up or shut up.
My reply referred directly to the Petrov/Nimzovich game that you had posted.
I then proffered my own opinion on gambits in general since you had already mentioned the Cochrane Gambit. Also (from your text) assumed when you had stated ''the far superior 5.Nc3'' you meant playing the Nimzovich in preference to the Cochrane Gambit? If that wasn't what you intended saying then what did you mean by that comment??
Perhaps in your eagerness to post the game you had worded the text badly as I was puzzled by your comment. For clarity here is your text in full: (highlighting is my own)
The Nimzovich Attack with 5. Nc3 has been mentioned a few times in this thread but instead things have devolved into an un-necessary discussion of the merits or lack thereof of the (completely un-justified: Black has made no mistakes) Cochrane Gambit 4. Nxf7?! for which I take some of the blame.
Instead check out the following very imperfect 15-minute game I just won on ICC with the far superior 5. Nc3. Black misses the saving/winning 19...f5 followed by 20...Rf7 but I think you will get the idea of this line's possibilities.
Okay accepted.
Had only replied as ocassionally play this and had always tried 5.d4 instead of Nimzovich so was interested.
Sounds like you are scoffing at my 1400-something Blitz rating. That puts me in the TOP FOUR PERCENT of players on here actually. There is severe rating deflation on this site and lots of NM's don't even have Blitz ratings of 2000. I'm surprised you are not an NM with your rating, or perhaps you are young and excel at blitz. For the record I have been 1900+ USCF OTB and 2000+ Correspondence BEFORE engine usage (do I need to send you a link to the cross-table of the 1996 US Correspondence Championship qualifiers?)
?Top 4%? Average is about 1300. 100 pts covers 2 std deviations? I think not
Percentile 90.6. That means you scrape into the top 10%. Just like me when fairly sober and rested
Keep in mind that this site also is free and caters to rank beginners (I'm implying that this contributes to your 90th percentile). I'm in the 95th percentile in USCF but I don't consider that to be a bragging point. I'm much more proud of my non-chess-related accomplishments, like scoring in the 98th percentile on the MCAT.
Game60 is fine by me. I have a medical school interview on Friday and am currently out of state. How often do you expect me to check this forum anyway? I have an extremely high win rate against current 1900s, and you were apparently stronger in the 90s than you are now (not sure what that says about this IM coach you were talking about earlier).
I'll add you to friends so I can see when you're on Live.
Also, I've never played the Cochrane gambit, I'm just confident that a one-point material deficit will not lead to my losing to you. If I drop a pawn against an Expert, it is rarely the cause of my losing the game, unless it's an endgame blunder of some kind. I don't think the Cochrane is that unsound anyway, but I would not play it.
I'm pretty decent at blitz, but my rating is inflated from playing weaker players as a NM pointed out before.
I'll be back in state on Sunday night, maybe we can play then or Monday. I'm likely to be free Monday evening. I don't know what time zone you're in but we can set something up. I'm agreeable to playing one game with either color.
Thanks to anyone who has contributed here with suggestions and analysis of how to put life into the petroff. That's all I'm really interested in.
chessteenager said: This is my personal favorate line. THe doubled pawns arent weak. The bishops get an open position and black is under developed
I agree. this is my favorite line as well. I have scored some great victories as white with this line.
frank122262cdc wrote:
chessteenager said: This is my personal favorate line. THe doubled pawns arent weak. The bishops get an open position and black is under developed
Perhaps you can show us one with annotations? I'm grateful for any opportunity to see how different opening ideas work.
I agree. this is my favorite line as well. I have scored some great victories as white with this line.
I also play the Nimzowitsch variation with 5.Nc3 although I don't think it's as good as others claim.
The Kotronius (sp?) book is very dense & very good. It may be a bit much for a beginner/low-rated player to gulp down, but it would pay dividends for those who do manage to get through it.
But for sheer fun and "interesting" play, one may as well pull out the Cochrane Gambit. If nothing else, it'll dissuade people from falling back on the Petroff for a "easy draw". 
You don't need to go to the extremes of playing the Cochrane to find winning chances in the Petroff. Take a look at 8.Re1?! in this game. From a theoretical perspective it may not be best, but it offers good practical chances to sharpen the position.
Try the fried liver attack
Gelfand very knowledgeable with Petrov yet Caruana won against him at Tata Steel last year. (Nimzovich)
Kurnosov also defeated Gelfand in Petrov later that year. (Classical)
Here are some more detailed statistics:
In my database which is built from The Week in Chess but does not include the last year or so:
14310 Petroff games. White scores 59.7% overall, 2342 average ELO and 2374 performance. Black's average ELO is 2302 and performance 2270. So White outrates Black by 40 points on average which probably contributes to the high score.
The best scoring common third move is 3.d4 which scores 62.1% average ELO 2388 and performance 2423. Black is 2336 perf 2301 in this case. A lot of the inflation here is Black playing 3...exd4 which scores over 70% for White and happens about 10% of the time.
After 3.Nxe5 d6, the 3 top moves are of course 4.Nf3 (60.3% 2367avg 2402perf 2330opp) 4.Nc4 (59.3% 2357avg 2371perf 2306opp) and 4.Nxf7 (57.6% 2221avg 2221perf 2164opp)
After 4.Nf3 Nxe4, the three top moves are 5.d4 (61.5% 2405avg 2451perf 2363opp) 5.Nc3 (63.5% 2321avg 2378perf 2276opp) and 5.Qe2 (49.1% 2357avg 2358perf 78%draws).
Following the most common lines to move 10 White's percentage drops to 57% in the 5.d4 line and 55.5% in the 5.Nc3 line.
So 5.Nc3 shows about the same overall performance as 5.d4 and they are both reasonable tries if you go by database statistics alone. However, the majority of White's score is likely to come from the fact that White is higher rated on average in these databases. So perhaps players playing the Petroff are hoping to draw a higher-rated player, and hardly ever manage to win, so any losses reflect very negatively.
Also, saying that lower rated players know how to use a piece rather than the positional advantages of the cochrane is just plain wrong - lower rated players are much better at attacking than defending, regardless of the material count. I've won plenty of games in blitz after hanging my queen just because I gained a small initiative as compensation
, and I'm not even rated that low.