Ruy Lopez - Bird's Defence

I just got trashed by someone playing Bird's defence. Here's how someone more competent dealt with it:

http://www.365chess.com/view_game.php?g=2952952

I was on the main line until bd5, instead I played h3, hoping to hide the B when (of course) I should have been attacking the R/B of my opponent. 

My attack was really for the birds! :)

I looked up the game:

5...a6 is just not very good.  5...c6 (which also gains a tempo but helps Black's position more) has to be considered the main line where White has two serious tries, 6.Ba4 or 6.Bc4 (which is sharper - White ought to know how to play after 6..Nf6 7.Re1 d6 8.c3 Ng4)

After 5...a6 I am wondering if 6.Bc4 would have been more sensible, since the immediate ...b5 appears to lose to Bxf7 like in the notes of the post above.  In general White would like to choose one of two plans:

- Play c2-c3 creating tension and try to force open the center to take advantage of Black's loss of time.

- Play d2-d3 instead, f2-f4 and transfer White's remaining knight to f3.  White keeps the center closed and plays for Kside space.

It isn't completely bad, but is dubious (but not at Latvian level... maybe Latvian is simply unsound instead of dubious?).  Dubious changes the evaluation to be a little better for the opponent so is stronger than a thread losing move (reduces your advantage or increases theirs but not enough to be called dubious) while a mistake drops it more.  A blunder goes from winning or at least a clear advantage to at least only a slight advantage. 

Let's say you have an advantage of +1.50 and you play a move where an engine says it's 1.35, you are starting to lose the thread but have a clear advantage still.  A dubious move will give you a 1.20, you still have a clear advantage but you just made the win harder for yourself or their defense easier.  A mistake may slam you down to .80 while a blunder may bring you down to .35 or even give them a clear advantage or even a trivial win!  Blunder has quite a broad range to it but drastically tips the scales to help the other guy. 

By playing normally, a3 to give B an escape, as boogle points out, I missed that winning shot - by which I think he means Bd5, which the "expert" played in http://www.365chess.com/view_game.php?g=2952952

... and that 21.Nxd6 was a blunder, I played too quickly without thinking about the repurcusions for the King... a few years tactics training might help :) 

He meant Bxf7+ when a double attack will soon regain the a8 rook like he said. Bxf7+ is also the reason why 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nd4 4. Nxd4 exd4 5. O-O c6 6. Bc4 Bc5?? is unplayable. Other important tricks in the opening include 5...c6 6. Bc4 d5 7. exd5 cxd5 8. Bb5+ Bd7 9. Re1+ Be7? 10. Qg4.

Thanks for pointing that out... I just went through the variation that Boogie posted and I see it now. Great stuff! That Qh5 move is something to always look out for, I guess. I've used it in the N sacrifice attacking the Damiola defence to garner a rook. So I might have seen that if I'd been more awake...

I don't see what's wrong with the simple 5.Bc4. White prevents ...Bc5 and prepares to castle and prevent c6-d5 plans w/ Re1. 

5...Nf6 6.O-O c6 

6...Nxe4 is given in a blog on the Bird by Dana Mackenze but both the simple 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Qh5+ Kg7 9.Qxe4 Qf6 10.d3 w/ 10...c6 11.Bf4! or 10...Bc5 11.Nd2  and the complicated 7.Qh5 don't look very fun to me.

7.Re1 Now all of Black's play looks shut down. 7...d6 8.c3 and now White wants to get the pawn out of the way.

Luckily(?) Black has the crazy 8...Ng4 with ideas of ...Qh4 or just sticking the knight on e5 and playing d3. But again Black is doing backflips and summersaults just to stay in the game. Maybe it works out. Idunno but Black is working way harder than White here. 

Thanks for pointing that out, I went through Boogie's post again and now I see it. Great stuff! Bit like the N sacrifice that unhinges the Damiano defence.* 

In the blunder at move 21. I actually knew I would be down a piece for the pawn, but I thought the advanced pawn, rook on the open file, relief of pressure on my K & Q might compensate...

I guess the principle to take away is "don't swap a piece for a pawn unless you are *certain* of getting checkmate, or something almist as good..." 

But I'm not sure about Boogie's recommended alternative of Bh6. I may get his R, but I end up B & N down. 

I think i shouldn't have got my Q into that position! My really bad move, I think, was 20. Qg3. I thought "pin the Bishop" was a clever move and didn't think through any adverse consequence...

EDIT:

* What fun... immeadiately after posting my comment about the Damiano defence, someone played it. But they didn't fall for the rook losing ruse :( Still, according to my book, Black K should have been in enough trouble to have no chance. But I contrived to give Black K every chance, and was grateful when the servers went down :) In penance, I'll start a thread on the Damiano defence, and give the book version of why it's considered a bad idea.

The Bird is not weak. It's my main defence to the Ruy Lopez, actually. I'll go through this from both points of view.

After 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nd4!? 4. Nxd4 (honestly 4. Bc4 is more irritating for black psychologically) exd4, what's going on?

- White's development is definitely not ideal. Bb5 now looks pointless aside from an easily broken pin, Nc3 and d4 are not on the cards. Black's d4-pawn is cramping.
- Black's d4-pawn may turn out weak, although the usual Nf3 is not there to harass it.
- Black's main ideas are pawn push/sac to d3, and c6-d5 breaking in the centre.
- If white was looking forward to classic Spanish c3-d4 and light square pressure on the queenside, he can forget all of it. Unique play abound in this "variation" of the Spanish.

So. What to do? White's try 5. c3? runs into the interesting 5...Qg5! hitting the bishop and g2. Then 6. Be2 d3! is a typical enterprising sac, and some careful play should lead to at least equality for black.

5. 0-0 is more sensible. Then I like 5. 0-0 g6. The kingside fianchetto both guards the kingside and settles the dark bishop. Black's idea is ...Ne7 (more often than f6), ...Bg7 and castles, and always an eye on ...d5 whenever the time is right. In some extreme cases black doesn't need to castle, but that should be his first priority if permitted.

5...c6 feels a little bit inaccurate to me. It chases the bishop to where it wants to go (eyeing f7) when it was doing nothing disruptive on b5 (black wants rapid 0-0, so the d7-pin can wait.) However it is very common, and perhaps a good way to deal with it is the 5...c6 6. Bc4 mainline, or if now 6...g6!? 7. f4!? with attack; 7...Bg7 8. f5 (maybe premature) d5 9. exd5 cxd5 10. Bb5+ Kf8!? 11. Bd3!? Qg5 (11. fxg6 hxg6 and both sides can attack on the same wing!). This Kf8 idea is actually fairly interesting if white tries to blow black away with a pawnstorm.

Structurally after ...d5 exd5 cxd5 in any case (say both sides play slowly and castle uneventfully), black has doubled isolated d-pawns, but they control great central squares and cramp white's queenside. The compensation is in the form of good bishop lines and white's strangely toothless light bishop. Black has to be careful of trading down to an endgame and has barely any pawn levers, so piece activity is a must.

As white, it's rare that black plays the ...g6 lines (or does so without dying to a facerush on the kingside) so it's usually an easy game. Just avoid 5. c3?, reposition your KB as soon as reasonable (if you do it before ...c6, black's central break is slowed) and depending on taste, either wait for ...d5 to force the isolated pawns or play c3 yourself first to grab a handy central majority.

A few years ago I ran a engine tournament on my PC with Bird's Defence as the start position. There were more Black wins than White, but the games were so complex I had no Idea what was going on. I suspect some new ideas and resources for Black will appear sometime in the future. The 'theory' is by no means complete.

I have the book written by Soltis on the subject.  IIRC he seems to suggest the best attempt to positionally refute the Bird's is here:

Where White has allowed Black to win the minor exchange but has more space and can pressure Black's d6 pawn.

Thanks, I was not aware of that.  I was under the impression that 5..c6 was still the main way for Black to play.

Does anybody know any books written for this defence?

I used to play this defence using this book :

https://www.amazon.fr/Dangerous-Weapons-Dazzle-Opponents-Games/dp/1857445422

One chapter for Bird defence, which seems light but quite enough.

This is a great book giving some very interesting ideas for both sides.

Bird’s Defense to the Ruy Lopez by McCormick and Soltis.

i did ithttps://www.chess.com/play/computer

After seeing the kasparov khalifman game with the bird defense my opinion of it softened up considerably.

Its still ugly in a way only a mother could love but still better than it looks. I myself like the old steinitz and cozio but prob woudnt venture to play it. But if you do your homework it can work for you and bypass lots of theory

The Bird looks fully viable as per engine evaluations. It has a bad practical record because no one has tried it seriously and gained experience as black, and the reputation of "violates opening principle" has made people too suspicious to try.

Actually even white's best efforts have engine evaluation of 0.5 which is about 0.10 better than the absolute mainlines of the RuyLopez.