hmm I might have to talk to Pfren about his feeling with the Danish. The mainline results in an endgame that GM Muller I believe says is equal. (I have a book that has great analysis on the danish, scotch gambit etc but its formated in a way that makes my head hurt and never became popular because of that)
a few games with the KG by top 10 players ...
most recently Carlsen was 2800+
The Carlsen- Wang Yue game is a funny one, for that level. After 9...0-0? 10.Bxf4 white has some advantage, but why not 9...g5 when it's rather hard to see white's compensation?
Also, instead of 6...Be7 Black may play 6...Be6 7.Qe2 (7.Bb3 c5 8.d4 cd4 9.Nxd4 Bc5 should be great for Black) Be7 when the insertion of the two extra moves is in Black's favor.
I agree it was funny. Carlsen admitted it as a surprise weapon because he was having a tough time in the tournament at that point and used it to shift the momenteum. It would be intertesting to know what he would have played in the lines you mentioned but I am sure he had something in mind.
if black tries to keep the pawns its dangerous.
the critical line that I know of that sounded the death of the danish is
Pfren might know something I dont but black has a lot of risks in other lines that I am aware of
The Parham is amateurish. It doesn't help develop enough pieces and gives black the initiative.
In Danish Dynamite by GM Muller and FM Voigt the endgame after Bxf7+ is considered dynamically balanced. Muller is a well known endgame expert.
Its not a chicken line its just a line that equalizes. Why allow white all the fun and defend against tons of threats? Studying this is what taught me about the need for black to play ...d5 against white's e4 pawn.
Parham attack is a bad opening, and there is a refutation of it. Black plays 2 .. Ke7!. The point of this move is that black wants to play Qe8 and Kd8 to switch the king and queen. This covers both f7 and e5 while allowing the bishop on f8 to come out freely.
@xitvono
Love that idea! Going to try that sometimes!!!
P.S. That is a joke. Very funny though.
lol :)
Reminds me though, that's why a lot of explanation doesn't instantly make people strong players. Annotations are totally arbitrary, and you can see it when a beginner annotates every move (sounds exactly like above).
The sicillian is for homos and the only reason anyone would play it is to avoid the parham. I prefer e5 though because black may play the KG and then black has an automatic win.
But, the point in all this is that the parham is the greatest opening ever and is an automatic win for white.
Actually the sicilian is for people who dont' like to get Parhamed. If the Parham attack didn't exist I'd probably play e5.
I know but i risk it because white may play the KG and then black has an automatic win.
yes but there's the parham, an instant loss. In the sicilian, there's a move called the grand-prix attack, its 1. e4 c5 2. f4, you can pretty much gurantee a win after that too.
The Gavinator will not accept challanges from us because he is stupid enough to think that we will use an engine to prove that our opening is better, I would never use a piece of silicon in a grudge match
@ alexlaw: Why do you bother challenging trolls. It's apparent that the same troll is posting here, and it's even challenging his alter ego, using two, or three diferent ID's.
Only an idiot would start a topic about the "Parham", and that idiot tries to keep this idiotic thing alive. Don't do him the favour, ignore him.
You pwn IM pfren but the parham is definately one of the best openings.
Pfren, you're pretty cool so maybe you can give me advice. What do you think would be an aggressive non-gambit? I was looking at the veresov, but that seems to only fight for a slight positional gain. The Parham fights for material or mate, the fried liver fights for material with the fork, then fights for mate after Nxf7, another I like is the vienna gambit, where white gains a large positional gain after exf4, e5. However, that only works if they play 2... Nf6, if not it usually transposes to that giuoco piano crap. What do you think is a good aggressive non-gambit?
The scotch, The Open sicilian, most Ruy Lopez variations, you just have to play agressively, if you want to garuntee agressive play, then gambits are the way to go, the Evan's seems right up your alley, positionally sound, tactically it makes sence, and you should look up the people who have used it
Heh, never mind. Didn't realize it was when Carlsen was still 2500 and it was a short draw (edited to remove the game).