Is the Ruy Lopez Exchange Variation a good idea against the Berlin?
Sort:
Nxe5 Qd4 Be3
plus why should it be a good idea gms dont play the exchange variation cause they think black bishop pair is more enough for the damaged pawn structer,why should it be better with a down for white
not really chessmicky even thoe its not a good idea its the seconde best way for white not to go in the endgame the first is the c3 line
I seem to recall Bobby Fischer playing this against strong opposition. If he could do it at that level, I'm sure you will be fine.
Yeah I think Fischer played it against a6 and not Nf6. I guess that's the difference. Yet below expert or master level I doubt it matters. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
i agree whit @fiveogswords that it dosent make sense but strong players have played so its playable but the name of this topis is it a good idea and no its plus white dosent take at once on c6 he playes d3 Bc5 Bxc6 dxc6 Be3 wining the tempo cause black will play Bd6 since he dosent want to give up the bishop pair
The 365Chess database has 415 games (amateur + professional) where White played 4. Bxc6. Interestingly, this move has the best stats for White in terms of White's win % (same for Black though; other than Ba4, but that does not count since there is only 2 games for it).
4. 0-0 White wins 37.2%; Draw 40.3%; Black wins 22.5% (10991 games).
4. d3 White wins 40.3%; Draw 35.2%; Black wins 24.5% (3573 games).
4. Nc3 White wins 40.7%; Draw 27.1%; Black wins 32.2% (1222 games).
4. Qe2 White wins 38.6%; Draw 33.5%; Black wins 27.8% (790 games).
4. d4 White wins 34.9%; Draw 34.7%; Black wins 30.4% (441 games).
4. Bxc6 White wins 44.8%; Draw 18.6%; Black wins 36.6% (415 games).
chessmicky wrote:
well, when you only include strong players, all those stats change dramatically
Which is why I use my high quality DB to answer these questions. Only games between 2400+ players in classical time controls that lasted at least 26 moves (no agreed draws or early blunders).
4. Bxc6 scores 45%, easily the worst option and it's only been played 10x since 1930. O-O and d3 are about equal. Nc3 looks to be a good sideline, transposing to the spanish 4 knights. Looks like Shirov has played this with some nice success. Nunn was also an advocate.
4. Bxc6 White wins 20%, draws 50%, Black wins 30%.
Yikes.
Do you think it matters at the class level?
When we ask if something is good we need more context. If the guy wants to be a master, maybe it's not so good. Otherwise...
its 5 bxc6 main line http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1745298
Fiveofswords wrote:
DrCheckevertim wrote:
Do you think it matters at the class level?
When we ask if something is good we need more context. If the guy wants to be a master, maybe it's not so good. Otherwise...
development is universally important. in fact only masters should try being creative.
not really i was at a otb tournament played vs a guy stronger than me i did not have a plan i thought what is his plan and i saw f3 e4 and i thank and thank and i came with Ng4(i had a bishop on d5) he played h3 (if g3 f5) okay i moved my night back to f6 he played f3 what i predicted i played a development move he played e4 and i played Bf4 playing on his dark sqares and won the game thanks to that plan
Mar 16, 2015
0
#15
As mentioned early in discussion 4Bxc6 isn't good but later in a more appriopriate position after 4d3 Carlsen and other top players have unbalanced the position by playing Bb5xN.
Mar 16, 2015
0
#16
TwoMove wrote:
As mentioned early in discussion 4Bxc6 isn't good but later in a more appriopriate position after 4d3 Carlsen and other top players have unbalanced the position by playing Bb5xN.
At least someone is pointing this <edit : I meant thanks for pointing this>... The idea is fairly popular at the highest level, but only after 4.d3 Bc5 have been inserted. Probably completely playable in both versions at the club level.
After d3,the game takes a closed character.
Mar 16, 2015
0
#17
Wernher-von-Braun wrote:
I love it when 1691 rated players pretend like they actually know something, lol.
Unless/until you prove your high online rating is honest and your chess skills are genuine, you aren't allowed to make comments like that.
Mar 16, 2015
0
#18
Wernher-von-Braun wrote:
Polar_Bear wrote:
Wernher-von-Braun wrote:
I love it when 1691 rated players pretend like they actually know something, lol.
Unless/until you prove your high online rating is honest and your chess skills are genuine, you aren't allowed to make comments like that.
This is hillarious coming from you. You have a 2300 correspondence rating yet only a 1600 live rating, and you don't play bullet. It's pretty obvious what you are and how you got that fake correspondence rating! The problem you have with bullet, is you have no time for any nonsense and have to come up with the moves using your own mind. You wouldn't know the first thing about playing chess using your own mind.
My skills have already been proven and are not in question.
Regarding myself, I retired from live chess years ago, because I wasn't content with lag management and repeated disconnections caused presumably by live chess server. My online play was analyzed for computer contamination and found clean. Unlike you, I use my real name in my profile.
Regarding you, blitz & bullet fast chess doesn't prove anything for at least 10 years since autochess-based cheating has come into existence and has become widespread, therefore you have proven nothing, except your own arrogance.
The basis to start with is true name & bio in your profile allowing to check your FIDE and national chess credentials, but it wouldn't allow you to make such comments yet, well until after at least a year when you would have presumably been scanned for computer contamination.
Mar 16, 2015
0
#19
It wouldn't be the first time to see such arrogant speech from notorious idiot cheater.
Either way, a mere week old membership and fake profile, you aren't in position to judge anybody here.
