Ponziani: Impractical in non-computer Correspondence Chess?


  • 5 weeks ago · Quote · #381

    najdorf96

    I do my own research through books. I imagine some reading this are in shock. Heh. I just think what I do is hardcore compared to you software junkies. Heaven forbid if there is an AI takeover. Heh. Karma. Anyways.

    Euwe, in his great "book" (circa 1963 McKay) stated this;

    Chess Masters vs. Chess Amateur, Game 5, pg. 43

    (a) 4 Q-R4

    (a4) 4. ... P-B3 (solid and best, but against all.principles because it takes the natural square from the Black KN)

    5. B-N5 N-K2 6. PxP QxP 7. P-Q4 B-Q2 8.O-O PxP 9. PxP N-K4! 10. BxBch QxB (with an even game).

    Yet, in Chess Openings: Theory and Practice (by I.A. Horowitz circa 1964) Unusual King Pawn Games, pg. 227

    Ponziani's Opening Game 1

    Euwe-Speyer, Exhibition game, Gouda 1921

    We see Euwe punishing his opponent in 39 moves.

    In fact, Reuben Fine stated in his Immortal book,

    The Ideas Behind the Chess Openings, Third Edition (1991)

    [1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. c3 d5 4. Qa4]

    "4. Bd7 is also playable, but 4. ... f6 5. Bb5 Ne7 6. exd5 Qxe5 7. d4! is inferior because White has all the initiative."

    How true. In my own investigations, my NCO rates this line as equal, though MCO-14 goes further in note (s), pg. 133

    [(A) 7. ... Bd7 8. Be3{!} exd4 9. cxd4 Ne5 10. Nc3 Nxf3+ 11. gxf3 Qf5 12. O-O-O a6 13. d5 +- Maas-Mitchell, London 1912{!}]

  • 5 weeks ago · Quote · #382

    Cloudoncolorsky

    Happy New YEAR 2016 !!!

  • 5 weeks ago · Quote · #383

    najdorf96

    Happy New Year Cloud!!!

    As it is, some here have mentioned the NCO doesn't even mention the Fraser line, MCO-14 dubbed it as "winning" for White. True. John Nunn strove, in his work (with three other GM's) to essentially strip various lines deemed "obsolete" soo I'm assuming he thought it as a dead end as far as theory was concerned. Funnily, Walter Korn as editor with Nick deFirmian collaborating in MCO-13, Ponziani's Opening, pg. 129

    [1.e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. c3 Nf6 4. d4 Nxe4 5. d5 Bc5{!?} 6. dxc6 Bxf2+ 7. Ke2 bxc6 8. Qa4 f5 9. Nbd2 O-O 10. Nxe4 fxe4 11. Qxe4 Bb6(k)]

    (k) After 12. Kd1 d5 13. Qxe5 Bf5 Black's attack should be enough for his sacrificed piece.

    But Nick, with complete authorship, backtracked and noted in MCO-14:

    pg. 132

    (a) 12. Kd2 d6 13. Bd3 Bf5 14. Qxc6+- from the game, Hector-Sandstrom, Copenhagen 1991.

    I actually did my own analysis (whoa no engine? Ghastly)

    Why 12. ... d6? Just because Kd2 supports Bd3, doesn't mean Black still can't play ... d5. If 13. Qxe5 Bf5, then 14. Bd3. I think 14. ... Qd7 still holds all the trumps. I could go on but I think you get the gist.

  • 5 weeks ago · Quote · #384

    Cloudoncolorsky

    You are right


Back to Top

Post your reply: