Petroff Defence Thread (one line a day)

I had a game in that line. Didn't find it so easy to get a winning advantage:

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-analysis/petrov-game---how-to-create-an-advantage

EDIT: Ignore, different line.

Although this post may be interesting for a Petrov thread so I'll leave it.

A recent Cochrane game.

Thanks David, 7...Ng4 indeed looks like a problem for White.

Heres what fritz reccomended:

Great thread!

I was considering taking up the Petroff, instead of the Najdorf that I currently play, because I'm hoping to find less theory to study and just having no-nonsense positions where I have my fair share of play in the centre.

I'm a bit concerned about the Qe2 line though. If a player is lower rated and wants a draw I guess I, as black, cannot really escape that.

Perhaps I could start playing the Petroff in tournament games where I play up, and keeping the Najdorf against lower rated players.

Great thread!

As a Cochrane Gambit player from the white side, I am interested to see what you think of 5. d4 and 5. Nc3.

you can't escape a draw if white plays perfectly.  with this variation the kings castle on opposite sides leaving both sides with opportunities to unbalance the position.  

Wow, very interesting stuff. Every three days, I'll switch variations. So today I'll do one more for 16.h3!? Be4!? and then tomorrow move on to the Cochrane?! I can't believe so many people play it on here. Really, I don't know if it's sound but it sure is uncomfortable. Then after that I'll move on to 5.Qe2 Qe7. And I'll keep going around a huge circle over and over.

It's nice to see a moderator deleting off-topic posts. I am abandoning the Scandinavian and waiting on my Petroff book "An Expert Repertoire" I'lI add a sharp line when it arrives.

Puzzle format of Line #3:

May I suggest you join our Petroff Group? I'm an active admin in the group and handy with setting up different vote chess variations.

http://www.chess.com/groups/join?id=7599

We are closing out a vote chess game with a pawn up endgame, but would be happy to set up some new vote games with different Petroff variations.

That concludes a very superficial look at the 16.h3 Be4 lines. My overall assessment is that the line is too risky to play for club players and masters alike. It's too sharp and theoretical.

I'm going to have to pass on these lines. I got a lot of my analysis from Sakaev's book on the Petroff Defence. He warns that these lines are really sharp. Thankfully, he analyzes an alternative to 16...Be4, 16...h6 which he claims is more strategic and safer choice. I'll be looking forward to those lines. I'll come back to 16.h3 next month.

@Satxusa hey, man, thanks for the invite :D I used to be a member of a few groups but then I left because I hardly, if ever, contributed. I'll join the group but I have to warn you, I'll probably never participate in matches :-| Not because I don't care but rather because I'm always doing something else.

I hope you don't take offense to that! And it's great to see a player switching from the Scaninavian to the Petroff. That's quite the switch ;)

@Squarology, You're welcome and It's all good.  Play.. don't play.  Whatever floats your boat.  We dont do alot of team matches, just vote chess.

Cheers, and this Bud's for you.

Is the Petroff Defence a bad opening choice if you play against a prepared opponent which wants a draw while you want to play for a win?

i play french exchange as white 

Unfortunately, today I had to muzzle Krushnoi. His comments (which were insulting towards many top players and Chess.com members) only served to sidetrack the thread. If you sidetrack a thread with insults so that you can gain attention, I will have no choice but to muzzle you. Repeat offenders will be disabled.

Chess.com should be a place where people can contribute without having to worry about getting attacked or worry about their content being troll fodder. I'm really sorry I had to do this. In an effort to clean this place up, I've been given no choice by these who ignore this message: "Please be relevant, helpful & nice!"

Looks like someone beat me to posting the Derpy Gambit:

Yeah the certain openings should be banned remark was ludicrous.  Some stuff annoys me, but I don't think ultra-symmetrical variations and mutual queenside castling should be banned (I don't mind mutual kingside since it's so common and one usually castles queenside with the expectation of an imbalanced game, mutual queenside castling keeps it balanced.)