Does anyone know how to put life into the petroff

jempty_method wrote:

TheProfessor wrote:

jempty_method wrote:

pat7721 wrote:

Try the fried liver attack

Not applicable vs. the Petroff, it relies on Black responding with 2...Nc6 to 2. Nf3, not 2...Nf6, which is the Petroff

It was a joke :)

The smiley was indicated with the joke then.  Problem is a lot of newbies might come along read what you wrote and said, hey I want to play the Fried Liver against the Petroff.

At least I was nice about it which I'm not always. If he didn't' know abut the fried liver or the petroff, why would he want to play the fried liver against the petroff?

don't play it

AngeloPardi wrote:

don't play it

:)

Play it to win. You bring life into the games you play. If you play it to draw, you won't win. You may lose, but you won't win.

There have been several suggestions showing how to put life into the Petroff from White's perspective. Choose one that suits you, and don't agree to an early draw. 

That's really all you need to do.

Hmmm... that's a very interesting idea but can't black get equality after Nc5?

pruess discusses the cochrane gambit in his early videos about development and white gets really gr8 practical chances on a few hrs of study.  ronen har-zvi has a lecture series which is a good introduction on some petroff lines for the icc [he neglects a few].  objectively 3.nxe5 and 5.d4 is the way to play and white has ways to a simple game and also a more complex one, and black should be suffering a bit i expect on best play.  there are a few interesting historical games here between karpov and kasparov.  3.d4 is very tactical and interesting although this has been worked out in practice to eventually be ok for  black.  this 5.bd3 idea is fine too, although Black is of course okay there as he is on other white 5th alternatives such as nc3 and c4.  in general white is slightly more comfortable given his slight advantage in space and development.

Prof, stop worrying about whether the position is equal. Worry about whether the positions are rich enough to play for a win. The answer is a resounding yes.

Thanks for posting CFOfdensen. Is interesting!

http://www.chess.com/opening/eco/C42_Russian_Game_Millenium_Attack

If 5...Nc5 then favoured option appears to be draw bishop back to e2.

For people who are below a master, there is no such thing as a drawish opening.

the cochrane really isnt that bad

that's called "Hope Chess"

Of course there is, symmetrical pawn structure is drawish even at around 1700.

I doubt that - I'm a 1700 about and I've won plenty of symmetrical pawn structures. The pawn structure isn't everything.

I'd half agree. No opening below master is at the point where playing it means that a draw has like a 80% chance of happening like it does at master level.
However, opening like the exchange slav and petroff are still drawish openings, even below master if you compare them to say the kings gambit or something.

Well, this one variation of the exchange slav after it passes a certain point apparently draws 100% of the time:

But if you don't just play for a draw a symmetrical position can have a lot more depth. In this line both sides are obviously trying to draw.

What variation of the Petrov is that?

Well, if the idea is that symmetrical pawn structures are =, then they are wrong. The French Exchange is really good for Black. Mainly because White players resort to it to avoid studying anything decent against the French.

As for Tarrantino quotes, I don't think you could quote very much without attracting mods to sanitize your posts.

yeah but playing "Hope Chess" is just hopeless.

DrSpudnik, the Exchange French is not in any way good for Black. It just seems that way because the regular French is so terrible, that getting an equal game this way makes it seem good by comparison ;)