Ponziani Opening

good for Houdini

on the 5. d3 line  Whaat evaluation does Houdini give after 6 hours for this position?

just curious how the chess engines work.  If you put the above position on Houdini for a week--what would be the evaluation?

against 7. d4  Bd7   probably 8. 0-0 is the correct move for White

I hope everybody realizes that this position is a loser for White:

White has just 0-0ed in the above position and e4 wins for Black.

White must play d4 rather than 0-0.

What was the evaluation?  I have a theory that the longer you put a chess engine on a given early moves of a sound opening the more the evaluation tends towards equality.  [since, for one thing chess  is a draw with perfect play]

If you put the Sicilian Defense on for a year rather than a week the evaluation would be closer to zero?

By the time the sun explodes total equality?

Sure there are diminishing returns but I will bet my theory holds and it probably has been tested by someone, sometime?

My theory is the longer a chess engine evaluates early chess moves in a sound opening the trend is more and more towards 0.00.

For example  1. e4  e5  2. Nf3  Nc6  3. Bb5--my guess is the longer the chess engine evaluates that position--the more the evaluation trends towards equality.

It is only a theory and may have already been tested.

Probably my old chess engine would be rusted by then...

If you are advocating d3 I suggest you give up on convincing people to play the ponziani unless you have concrete proof that this slow variation is better than more active but similar lines. Both the d3 ruy and the d3 italian leave the white squared bishop outside the pawn chain, and playing c3 and d3 with the bishop inside does not seem like an improvement. And you always claim the ponziani is as good as the ruy, but even if the engine wasn't giving complete equality I would argue that black has already equalized.

My claim about the Ponziani is as good as the Ruy is not a general claim.

The claim, first of all is only for the average chess player--let us say 90% of the current chess players. The claim is about practical chances for 90% of the chess players. This would not include masters etc who are in the upper 10% [or higher]

1. The theory of the Ponziani is much easier to learn than the theory of the Ruy Lopez.  This is because the theory of the Ruy Lopez is about ten times larger.  Obviously the "average" [90%] chess players could not learn all the theory of the Ruy Lopez but might learn the theory or most of the theory of the Ponziani.

2. The Ponziani is much less well known and thus much less expected than the Ruy Lopez.  Thus you will find many players even experts and masters not prepared for the Ponziani

On a practical basis I have won [in 15 minute games] dozens of games vs a combination of masters and experts. 

3. On a practical basis the 3. c3  d5  4. Qa4  f6 line and the Fraser line are seldom seen. After playing thousands of Ponziani games I have never had the Fraser line used against me.

4. Sure the Fraser Variation looks like a draw and sure the d3 line may be equal [but I have a slightly different evaluation here as after all Black has to make a weakening move (f6) to get there.]

But even in correspondence play my record with the Ponziani was very good. [I know with chess engines this would have changed my record]

But here is the rub and remember I refer to 90% of existing players.

Look at Ponziani Power Vote Chess--this is  an example of practical chess but played with a long time limit.  The stats on the Ponziani are win 41% loss 29%  draw 30%.  The team won 13 in a row and these were against strong teams with some teams with players master and above.  The pure math chance of winning 13 in a row is .41 times itself 13 times which comes out to less than 1 chance in a 100,000.

So, When I say the Ponziani is better than the Ruy it is with all these clarifications and I am talking about practical chances for 90% of all chess players.

Right now some of the more difficult Ponziani variations are being studied and I wish I could participate more. 

ponz111  

4. Bb5 does lose.  Good thing you did not play it against Firebrand.

I have the analysis, but I am not sure if it was given in confidence (jeez, I sound like Ponz)

You can play the Czech Pirc from any move order. I played it every game as Black and White in the 2010 Colorado Closed.

[Event "Colorado Closed"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2010.03.24"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Mitesh Shridhar 40/2 /G/1 5s, Doubletree Hotel"]
[Black "Brian Wall, GreenwoodVillage, C"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B07"]
[WhiteElo "2100"]
[BlackElo "2211"]
[PlyCount "89"]
[EventDate "2010.03.26"]
[EventRounds "3"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.11"]

1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 c6 4. Bd3 e5 5. Nge2 Nbd7 6. O-O Be7 7. h3 O-O 8. Be3
Qc7 9. Ng3 Rd8 10. f4 Nf8 11. Qe1 Ne6 12. Nce2 exd4 13. Nxd4 Nc5 14. Qf2 d5 15.
e5 Nfe4 16. Bxe4 Nxe4 17. Nxe4 dxe4 18. Rad1 f5 19. Qe2 g6 20. Qc4+ Rd5 21. Nb5
Qd8 22. Nc3 Be6 23. Nxd5 Bxd5 24. Qc3 Qf8 25. a3 a5 26. Bb6 a4 27. Kh2 Kf7 28.
Qd4 h5 29. c4 Be6 30. Bc7 Qc8 31. Bd6 Bd8 32. Bc5 Qc7 33. Rf2 b6 34. Bd6 c5 35.
Qc3 Qc6 36. Rfd2 Qe8 37. g3 Qh8 38. Rg2 Qh6 39. Rgd2 Qh8 40. h4 Qe8 41. Rd5 Qc6
42. Kh3 Qc8 43. Qd2 Qc6 44. Qc3 Qe8 45. R5d2 1/2-1/2





[Event "Colorado Closed"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2010.04.25"]
[Round "4"]
[White "BrianWall 40/2 / G/1 5sd, Doubletree Hotel"]
[Black "Randy Canney, Greenwood VillageCO"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "A00"]
[WhiteElo "2211"]
[BlackElo "2204"]
[PlyCount "102"]
[EventDate "2010.04.25"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.11"]

1. c3 d5 2. Qc2 c5 3. d3 e5 4. e4 Nf6 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. Nbd2 Be7 7. Be2 O-O 8. O-O
h6 9. a4 Be6 10. Re1 Qc7 11. exd5 Nxd5 12. Nc4 Rad8 13. Bf1 Bf6 14. g3 Rfe8 15.
h3 b6 16. Kh2 Bf5 17. Nfd2 g5 18. Ne4 Bg7 19. Ne3 Bg6 20. Nxd5 Rxd5 21. g4 Red8
22. f3 f5 23. gxf5 Bxf5 24. Be3 Qf7 25. Rad1 Ne7 26. Bf2 Ng6 27. Bg3 Be6 28.
Qf2 R5d7 29. a5 Bc4 30. axb6 axb6 31. Qe3 Nf4 32. Nf2 Bb3 33. Ra1 Bd5 34. Ra6
Rd6 35. Ne4 Bxe4 36. Qxe4 Nxd3 37. Bxd3 Rxd3 38. Rxb6 Rxf3 39. Re2 Qd5 40.
Qxd5+ Rxd5 41. Kg2 Rdd3 42. Bxe5 Bxe5 43. Rxe5 Rg3+ 44. Kf2 Rxh3 45. Re7 Rdf3+
46. Kg2 Rhg3+ 47. Kh2 Rh3+ 48. Kg2 Rhg3+ 49. Kh2 Rh3+ 50. Kg2 Rhg3+ 51. Kh2
Rh3+ 1/2-1/2


------------------------------------------
[Event "Colorado Closed"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2010.04.24"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Richard Herbst 40/2 /G/1 5sd, Doubletree Hotel"]
[Black "Brian Wall, Greenwood Vilage"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B07"]
[WhiteElo "2108"]
[BlackElo "2211"]
[Annotator ",abc"]
[PlyCount "32"]
[EventDate "2010.04.24"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.11"]

{[Event "2010 Colorado Closed"] [Site "[Site "Doubletree Hotel Tech Center,
East Orchard Road, Greenwood Village, CO. Phone: "] [Date "2010. 04. [Round
"2"] [White "Richard Herbst"] [Black "B-Wall"] [Result "0-1"] [ICCResult
"White resigns"] [WhiteElo "2211"] [BlackElo "2108"] [Opening "Pirc:
Ufimtsev-Pytel variation"] [ECO "B07"] [NIC "PU. 08"] [Time "10 AM"]
[TimeControl "40/2 hours, Game/1 hour, five second delay second time control
only"]} 1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 c6 4. f4 Qa5 5. Bd2 Qb6 6. Nf3 Qxb2 7. Rb1
Qa3 8. Bc4 Nxe4 9. Nxe4 d5 10. Qe2 dxe4 11. Qxe4 Nd7 12. Bb4 Qa4 13. Ne5 Nxe5
14. dxe5 a5 15. Bd6 Be6 16. Bd5 Qxe4+ 0-1

------------------------------------------------
[Event "Colorado Closed"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2010.04.26"]
[Round "1"]
[White "BrianWall 40/2 / G/1 5sd, Doubletree Hotel"]
[Black "Robert Ramirez, Greenwood VillageCO"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C44"]
[WhiteElo "2211"]
[BlackElo "2023"]
[PlyCount "64"]
[EventDate "2010.04.24"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.11"]

1. d3 e5 2. e4 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. Nbd2 Bc5 5. Be2 d6 6. c3 a6 7. O-O O-O 8. b4
Ba7 9. a4 Ne7 10. Nc4 Ng6 11. h3 Be6 12. Nh2 d5 13. Na5 Rb8 14. Qc2 Qd7 15. Bg5
Bxh3 16. gxh3 Qxh3 17. Kh1 dxe4 18. dxe4 Nh4 19. Bxh4 Qxh4 20. Bf3 Rfe8 21. Nc4
Re6 22. Ne3 Bxe3 23. fxe3 Rd6 24. Rad1 Rbd8 25. Rxd6 Rxd6 26. c4 g6 27. c5 Rd8
28. c6 b6 29. Qf2 Qxf2 30. Rxf2 Rd3 31. Nf1 Kf8 32. Kg2 Ke7 0-1


----------------------
[Event "Colorado Closed"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2010.04.25"]
[Round "5"]
[White "David Hartsook 40/2 /G/1 5sd, Doubletree Hotel"]
[Black "Brian Wall, GreenwoodVillage,CO"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B12"]
[WhiteElo "2018"]
[BlackElo "2211"]
[PlyCount "117"]
[EventDate "2010.03.24"]
[SourceDate "2009.12.11"]

1. e4 d6 2. Nc3 c6 3. d4 Qc7 4. Be3 e5 5. Qd2 Nf6 6. f3 Nbd7 7. O-O-O h5 8. Nh3
b5 9. d5 a6 10. dxc6 Qxc6 11. Nd5 Nxd5 12. Qxd5 Qxd5 13. Rxd5 Nf6 14. Rd2 Bb7
15. Nf2 d5 16. Bb6 Be7 17. Re2 Nd7 18. Ba5 f6 19. a3 Kf7 20. g3 Nc5 21. Bh3 h4
22. g4 Ne6 23. Bd2 Rhc8 24. c3 Nd4 25. Re3 Nb3+ 26. Kd1 Rd8 27. Re2 a5 28. Kc2
Nxd2 29. Rxd2 dxe4 30. Nxe4 Rxd2+ 31. Kxd2 b4 32. axb4 axb4 33. Bf1 bxc3+ 34.
Kxc3 g6 35. Bc4+ Kg7 36. Rd1 Rd8 37. Rxd8 Bxd8 38. Nc5 Ba5+ 39. b4 Bxb4+ 40.
Kxb4 Bxf3 41. Be6 Kh6 42. Kc4 Kg5 43. Kd3 Kf4 44. Nd7 e4+ 45. Kd2 f5 46. gxf5
gxf5 47. Nb6 Ke5 48. Bc8 f4 49. Ke1 e3 50. Nc4+ Kf6 51. Bh3 Kg5 52. Ne5 Bb7 53.
Ke2 Bd5 54. Nf3+ Kh5 55. Ne5 Be4 56. Ng4 Bf5 57. Nf6+ Kg5 58. Bxf5 Kxf5 59. Nd5
1/2-1/2

-----------------------

In the book I co authored Play the Ponziani there is a whole chapter devoted to why 3. c3  d5  4. Bb5 loses. [there is nothing confidential about it]

I have a story about Robert Wendling.  The very first United States Correspondence Chess Championship.  Wendling and I [and Ken Smith of Smith Morra Gambit fame] were in the same preliminary section.

I beat Ken Smith and in fact was winning against everybody except Wendling.  But I had a slight advantage against Wendling with the White side of a Smith Morra Gambit.  BUT I was too complacent and one game I was winning I allowed a simple tactic and actually lost the game.

So out of 12 games I had 10 wins and 1 loss and one game left against

Wendling.  Wendling had 11 straight wins.  But we got into this super difficult endgame where I had winning chances.  If I had won I would have qualified for the Finals on tiebreaker over Wendling. [he really complained about this]

At one point earlier I had given an"if" move and Wendling had accepted only to find it was a little trap that gave me the advantage. He complained quite a bit about that.

So we had what we called the Wendling ending--that is what we called it.

Needless to say he finally held the draw and went on to play in the First Correspondence USA Finals.  He actually came in 2nd in the Finals.

That one earlier game ruined it for me--where I was winning and then lost.

FirebrandX 

The point is I already have thousands of Czech Pirc games under my belt,

I play the Ponziani to experience new positions.

I will defend the Fraser against anyone in the world and anyone on Chess.com who wants to challenge me. 

As White in a Ponziani I am just looking to learn.

ponz111  

Im looking forward to 5.Bd3?! line. Pehaps a new mainline?

I do not know if I still have the game. It was in descriptive notatation.

I will try and find it.  I think it was Smith Morra declined. 

In Colorado Randy Schine and Joshua Samuel are still Old School enough to use Descriptive. I know many young players won't buy any books in descriptive.

Pastuszek