Petroff Defence Thread (one line a day)

Hey Squarology, here is the most horrible game i have ever played. I played white against the Petroff and played well and quickly till the last move. here is the game an embarresing one i have to admit

Anyones thoughts?

The petroff can easily lead to equel positions, still there is opportunity to slip up. I would say it depends. For me i would not, i would not play well. Say Marshall who i think played  the Petroff then Play it! As for Ivanchuck,he can play anything!

Wait yeah the gambit is after 2...d6 3.Nxf7 been awhile since I played it.  It's horrible for white just gives up a piece for nothing practically.  Good against weak computers though but that's about it. 

It's nowhere near that bad. In some lines black gives back the piece, others white wins 3 pawns for it. Which line do you believe white gets 'nothing practically' for the piece? Kramnik only drew against Topalov with it. 

When I started out I'd play it because I really wanted to go after the king and I figured a knight for two pawns wasn't a big deal, then I got crushed using it on Yahoo!  This was before I knew its real name or even that it was book. 

@Squarology, this thread is helpful since I like to play the Petrov and I wish to improve. My

main question is not so much about specific moves as general ideas: in each of these Petrov lines, what will black's middlegame goals? I like positions with straightforward and simple middlegame goals so that I am more comfortable forming a plan around them. Where does black aim to play in each of these lines in the middlegame, what pawn moves does he try to achieve and how will this help him out in the endgame?

That's the first line for the Cochrane Gambit which doesn't seem scary at all after having studied it even if superficially. I really liked David_Star's variation. It's really strong, methinks :O

@Martin0 if you have to win, I suggest playing 1...e5, 2...Nc6 against 1.e4. It's hard to create counterchances against a good, well prepared opponent especially with an opening that tends to have a symmetrical pawn structure.

@CP6033 hey, man, that was a pretty sweet game :D He set a nice trap and you fell for it :-| but you had the bishop pair before that so you didn't play terribly at all. Just that one move.

@dpnorman great question/request! that's what opening books should talk about... But my thread is not about that. It's crazy random, just jumping all over the place from variation to variation. I don't even these things myself. But this is how I learn best, just bits and pieces from here and there and then one day I wake up and I'm like, "Woah. I understand." Check back in about one year and I bet I'll be able to answer your question.

Firestopr, I like how you put 3 exclamation marks on Nc3 but this is one well known way to challenge the Petroff. I feel white is just better in that position.

@Firestopr that's the modern main line, I'll address it after the Cochrane, after 5.Qe2, and after MAPearson's funky deathmatch line. It's a pretty decent line but Sakaev (in his petroff book) deals with it well and it based heavily on what frankukai said, ...Ne5. If white takes on e5 then he gives Black a majority on the kingside and if he doesn't then he can never play Bd3 or Bc4. In short, it's good stuff and I'll definitely be happy when I get there.

While we can all agree that imbalances are good the other guy having the bishop pair in an open position especially isn't. 

What about 10.Nxe5,dxe5 11.0-0-0?  Knight for knight isn't exactly imbalanced but the opposite side castling generate some winning chances. 

ok, thx for responding. And btw, I really like the way you post a line and then make a puzzle, so we can test if we remember it.

@Squarology,

Thanks for that nice puzzle, worked through it all the way to move 9. .. (like you said, natural moves). Black is a minor peice up and looks quite solid. 

I have to agree the Cochrane is a bit dicey for black.

Here's a game where 5. Bc4+ was handled quite nicely, with black counter-gambiting a pawn.  I would expect 5.Bc4+ quite a bit in casual club play.  But that's my .02

A new book on the Petroff is on the cards for December (by NIC publications). It's written by the Israeli FM Or Cohen, and I expect it giving some attention to a few offbeat lines, like the Yaroslavtsev gambit (3.Nxe5 Nxe4!?)

In the Cochrane, white is playing just for two results- and winning is not one of them.

if somebody has ideas to give petroff players headaches [either scare them with attacks or positionally squeeze them comfortably without memorizing 20 moves of theory i'm all ears.  especially regarding ideas regarding this 5.c4 line i've been investigating and this Yaroslavtsev gambit (3.Nxe5 Nxe4!?) that I've looked at which pfren mentioned.  or maybe somebody can point out a promising idea for white that i missed. :O.

You could transpose into a Four Knights.  Now, it has a boring and symmetrical reputation, but there's a Petrosian game where he really imbalanced things I recall studying: