Is the Traxler Variation Unsound?

Sort:
Robert_New_Alekhine

Not refutation, but a playable line for black, I mean.

NBKXX
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?

Robert_New_Alekhine
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.

Robert_New_Alekhine

Anyway, can we do some analysis of the traxler instead of arguing?

Robert_New_Alekhine

Pfren, why do you think this is a stupid mess of a variation?

Robert_New_Alekhine

Do you have any clear refutation?

Robert_New_Alekhine

Another question: How to refute NBKXX's line?

kiloNewton
Robert_New_Alekhine
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+

Robert_New_Alekhine
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.

Robert_New_Alekhine
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

Robert_New_Alekhine

Very interesting. Thank you.

Robert_New_Alekhine

So it seems the Bxf7+ and Bd5 is very good for white.

kiloNewton

that seems pre-engine era analysis! according to to stockfish 10... O-O is drawish



Robert_New_Alekhine
kiloNewton wrote:

 

that seems pre-engine era analysis! according to to stockfish 10... O-O is drawish

 



engines can often be incorrect. Read Silman's Second to last ( I believe) article.

kiloNewton
Robert0905 wrote:
kiloNewton wrote:

 

that seems pre-engine era analysis! according to to stockfish 10... O-O is drawish

engines can often be incorrect. Read Silman's Second to last ( I believe) article.

where, did he analysed 10...O-O 11. Rh4 e4+ 12. Kg2 d5 13.Bb3 Rxf7  line?

Robert_New_Alekhine
kiloNewton wrote:
Robert0905 wrote:
kiloNewton wrote:

 

that seems pre-engine era analysis! according to to stockfish 10... O-O is drawish

engines can often be incorrect. Read Silman's Second to last ( I believe) article.

where, did he analysed 10...O-O11. Rh4e4+12. Kg2d513. Bb3Rxf7  line?

http://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-engines-are-not-your-friend

kiloNewton

>chess-engines-are-not-your-friend

but they can refute a refutation (proven) Smile

The_Ghostess_Lola

....can they ever !

Robert_New_Alekhine

sometimes.