It's up to pfren to find the refutation of Bxf7
Is the Traxler Variation Unsound?
Sort:
Robert0905 wrote:
This is what you wrote:Personally I wouldn't bother as Black- 4...d5 followed by 5...Na5 is perfectly good, so no need to enter this stupid mess of a variation.
That's Off Topic.
Nope. The DVD is about the Traxler. And why should it be off-topic, to say that the 5...Na5-line is much superior?
Jan 9, 2015
0
#25
NBKXX wrote:
Robert0905 wrote:
This is what you wrote:Personally I wouldn't bother as Black- 4...d5 followed by 5...Na5 is perfectly good, so no need to enter this stupid mess of a variation.
That's Off Topic.
Nope. The DVD is about the Traxler. And why should it be off-topic, to say that the 5...Na5-line is much superior?
Because the topic is not in any way related to Na5.
Jan 9, 2015
0
#26
Anyway, can we do some analysis of the traxler instead of arguing?
Robert0905 wrote:
Do you have any clear refutation?
I like both 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Bd5, as well as Buecker's 5.d4.
Not too interested in that stuff, as I don't play 4.Ng5 as white, and as Black I prefer 4...d5.
You can find Buecker's analysis in a pdf if you google "Buecker Traxler".
Jan 9, 2015
0
#32
pfren wrote:
Robert0905 wrote:
Do you have any clear refutation?
I like both 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Bd5, as well as Buecker's 5.d4.
Not too interested in that stuff, as I don't play 4.Ng5 as white, and as Black I prefer 4...d5.
You can find Buecker's analysis in a pdf if you google "Buecker Traxler".
I mean of 6.Bb3 after Bxf7+
Robert0905 wrote:
pfren wrote:
Robert0905 wrote:
Do you have any clear refutation?
I like both 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Bd5, as well as Buecker's 5.d4.
Not too interested in that stuff, as I don't play 4.Ng5 as white, and as Black I prefer 4...d5.
You can find Buecker's analysis in a pdf if you google "Buecker Traxler".
I mean of 6.Bb3 after Bxf7+
You will find material in the same Buecker article. There is also the little played 6.Bc4!? which is better than its reputation (not included in the article).
What the heck do you need that stuff? These variations are impractical to play OTB at class level.
poeticenvy9271 wrote:
6. b4 and you get something similar to the Evan's Gambit.
The problem is that 6.b4 d5! is more similar to an opening disaster than an Evans Gambit.
Jan 9, 2015
0
#35
pfren wrote:
Robert0905 wrote:
pfren wrote:
Robert0905 wrote:
Do you have any clear refutation?
I like both 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Bd5, as well as Buecker's 5.d4.
Not too interested in that stuff, as I don't play 4.Ng5 as white, and as Black I prefer 4...d5.
You can find Buecker's analysis in a pdf if you google "Buecker Traxler".
I mean of 6.Bb3 after Bxf7+
You will find material in the same Buecker article. There is also the little played 6.Bc4!? which is better than its reputation (not included in the article).
What the heck do you need that stuff? These variations are impractical to play OTB at class level.
can you post the link to the Buecker Article?
I will not play them. They are just of interest to me because I love chess. I doubt you can argue with that.
Jan 9, 2015
0
#37
poeticenvy9271 wrote:
Interesting line. Since after c3 the bishop ( in your analysis) goes back to a5, white can probably take on f7 now. Black is probaby fine after Bc5, though:
So black cannot take on b4. He cannot take on f2. So black will play Bb6. What is your idea then? after b5 Na5 black is OK
Jan 9, 2015
0
#38
pfren wrote:
Here is a link:
http://www.skdps.com/download/1260365765_Traxler%20Attack.PDF
Very interesting. Thank you.
pfren wrote:
Here is a link:
http://www.skdps.com/download/1260365765_Traxler%20Attack.PDF
that seems pre-engine era analysis! according to to stockfish 10... O-O is drawish
Kxf2 an black has nothing...