Ponziani: Impractical in non-computer Correspondence Chess?

Apparently White can then play 4.d3 and avoid the Berlin endgame.

I have a good friend who is also NM and he has played the RL for decades . He lessens the theory he has to work on by always playing the exchange variation against 3 ... a6 , ofcourse he has to know how to play white when black doesnt play 3...a6 , with the Berlin being the most popular of the bunch . This approach has worked well for him for decades . I personally prefer 4 Ba4  to the exchange . 

Of course the Exchange is a viable option too. I prefer keeping the B on the board too. 

They are scattered about on the web and, I would say, in the hearts of Wojo's friends, but you can start with this tribute:

http://www.uschess.org/content/view/6210/154/

The introduction to the "Wojo's Weapons" book series (Hilton and Ippolito) also contain some Wojo stories, though more on the side of his shrewd understanding of chess tournament play:

During the eight years that the late Aleksander Wojtkiewicz (1963-2006) lived in the United States, he won or tied for fist place in more than 240 tournaments. He averaged over thirty tournament victories a year - or nearly three per month. "Wojo," as he was affectionately called by his fans, was arguably the most successful tournament player in the United States, winning the Grand Prix six years in a row from 1999 to 2004. During that time, however, he was not considered one of the best players in the world. Although his name was sporadically on the FIDE "Top 100" rating list, his offial ELO rating - which peaked at 2595 - never made it past the magic 2600 mark. How, then, did he achieve such success?

The answer is this: Wojtkiewicz was ruthlessly pragmatic in his approach to tournament chess. His opening repertoire was designed in such a way that he could essentially play his games on "auto-pilot."

Regarding the Fraser   If White knows latest theory, White has no chance of losing and Black has hundreds of ways to go wrong.

So, the Fraser is not by any means a problem for those who play the Ponziani and know the theory. 

I mentioned Wojo earlier because he advised one of his students who had little time for opening study to play the Ponziani. This student rode the Ponz against 1...e5 from a 1600 to 2130 rating.

Wojo didn't recommend the Ponziani because it is best play for White but because it can be quite effective in a tournament setting against regular players -- a distinction which seems to be repeatedly overlooked in chess.com discussions.

IMO the Ponz is more suitable against lower-rated players and unprepared players. Nonetheless,  Carlsen and Hou Yifan played the Ponz as White against GMs in 2013.

I repeat some of my first comments.

I don't have anything against the Ponziani as an unusual or offbeat opening. My problem has always been the religious fervor of those who have been arguing that the Ponziani and only the Ponz offers white reasonable play for the amount of work required to learn it. The orthodox Ponz followers even go so far as to say the GMs aren't playing it right!

A recent opponent played the Fraser against me and promptly lost a piece in the complications.

The beauty of the Ponz as a tournament weapon is that Black's natural moves lead him into treacherous tactical waters in which the risks are on Black and he must find solutions while the clock is ticking.

As wonderful as the Fraser may be, its success is a recent theoretical development. The Fraser isn't even listed in Nunn's Chess Openings. In MCO 14 it is mentioned in a note as leading to an advantage for White.

What are the odds that a 1600 player will be up on the latest Fraser theory and can remember OTB? Pretty remote, I'd say.

I'll take those odds and cover myself by looking up the new theory. I suspect that ponz111 is correct that White is OK in the Fraser with proper play.

As White I am more concerned with 3...d5, but not shattered by it. Black gets equality and the game goes on.

My problem has always been the religious fervor of those who have been arguing that the Ponziani and only the Ponz offers white reasonable play for the amount of work required to learn it.

I avoid categorical statements, as well as religious fervor, when it comes to chess.

However, I would say it is arguable the Ponz offers the best return on time invested for e4/e5 openings in tournament play for class players.

You can drill on the Ponz for two hours and have a decent edge over Black. Even if Black equalizes, he'll put some time on the clock doing so.

Regarding the Fraser for Black, a player cannot study this variation and learn to play so well as the theory has evolved and there are only about 3 people on this earth who know the correct lines.

Yes, there  was an exhibition [centaur] match vs a number of very good players and Black did quite well.  But, "Black" was me!  [I also played a centaur match with Black vs the Kings Gambit and did quite well]

The line 1. e4  e5  2. Nf3  Nc6  3. c3  d5  is playable for Black only if he learns some of the complicated lines and Black, at most, can equalize. 

It seems some people were never taught that modesty is a virtue .  

I do not play Centaur chess, and I have not lost a game with black while using the Fraser.  I have not won a game as white (Vote Chess) when black played the Fraser.

kantifields,  sorry but you do not know the theory.  And you have not played anyone who knows the current theory.

Unfortunately your vote chess team does not know the current theory of the Fraser.

It seems some people were never taught to not continually disparage others.

You mean like you do ?  

Ponz, please send me a personal message with the dates of your USCF tournament victories. Thanks!

What if Black has actually studied the lines and knows them well?

Black will equalize and White will play from there. The better player, usually but not always, will win.

My point is that mostly Black will not have studied the Ponz and will end up with a position deficit, material deficit or a time deficit or some combination of those.

Ponz, you are correct that the I do not know the theory that has developed recently.  Neither does anyone else (my guess is that it has something to do with an early Na3).  You would have no chance trying to play the lines you are referring to without Stockfish or whatever you are using nowadays.

That is the thrust of this thread.

That's not true tho, ipcress. If Black is faced with someone who plays the Ponziani regularly, it won't take much work at all to find out about the Fraser and to run it through some engines to make sure it's sound. Then the next time you play it against that person, it's White who's in trouble. 

That's the nature of chess these days. The life span of the average novelty is about one afternoon. If you use the Ponziani as your main repertoire weapon, your rivals will learn to play key lines against it.