The smith morra is a really bad opening. If black plays the Siberian trap your doomed.
Smith-morra 1
Sort:
Trapper4 wrote:
The smith morra is a really bad opening. If black plays the Siberian trap your doomed.
Black is worse in the Siberian variation.
Start analysing from here. Black has a lot of serious problems to solve.
Jul 18, 2012
0
#5
Nice game there, I think you just gave me some new ideas to try out. Thanks btw :)
Oh and Trapper; just because the common opinion is that Morra is unsound, doesn't exactly make it true. AFAIK it scores quite well in the hands of an attacking player.
Don't mean to rag on you or anything, it's just that you're being mean to one of my pets ;)
Jul 18, 2012
0
#6
Metaknight251 wrote:
@subtle in the Bxe5 sideline you posted, why doesn't white recapture with the rook instead of Bd3?
Positional consideration. If allowed 18. Qh5, white will commence attack on queen side with Qh5. so black g6 and White Be4 pins the pawn at b7. Black needs a lot of manouvre to get out of this.
@ subtleknife: Nice, I did not have the Trent DVD.
IMO Black has to return the pawn immediately (the 9...a6 variation) when he is close to equal (but not quite). 12...0-0 is probably more exact than 12...d5. If he doesn't, then he is in very serious trouble.
melvinbluestone wrote:
@Post #4: After 12.Bf1 in the first sub-variation, why doesn't black play 12...a6 now? What does 12...Nd5 do?
I guess 13.Be3 Qc6 14.Rc1 ab5 15.Rxc6 bc6 16.a3 which cannot be very good for Black, and anyway 14.Na7!? may be even better.
pfren have you heard anything about the new Morra book by Quality Chess?
jontsef wrote:
pfren have you heard anything about the new Morra book by Quality Chess?
No, and don't bother, either. For me declining with 3...Nf6 is more than enough: Black is 101% solid, and also retains fair winning chances. Why getting involved in run & gun chess for the sake of being politically correct and accepting the gambit should be the indicated method of play?
If Black accepts the gambit, then the most challenging line is the so-called Taylor's defence (...Nc6, ...d6, ....a6) but I'm not convinced white's play against it is unsound.
pfren wrote:
jontsef wrote:
pfren have you heard anything about the new Morra book by Quality Chess?
No, and don't bother, either. For me declining with 3...Nf6 is more than enough: Black is 101% solid, and also retains fair winning chances. Why getting involved in run & gun chess for the sake of being politically correct and accepting the gambit should be the indicated method of play?
If Black accepts the gambit, then the most challenging line is the so-called Taylor's defence (...Nc6, ...d6, ....a6) but I'm not convinced white's play against it is unsound.
1.e4 c5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 Nf6 4.e5 Nd5 transposes into 2.c3 Sicilian (1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e4 Nd5 4.d4 cxd4) which is considered as equality for Black, but White usually has no problems to draw even vs stronger opponent.
Pacifique wrote:
1.e4 c5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 Nf6 4.e5 Nd5 transposes into 2.c3 Sicilian (1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6 3.e4 Nd5 4.d4 cxd4) which is considered as equality for Black, but White usually has no problems to draw even vs stronger opponent.
GM Jakob Aagaard has issued a very good article about an ambitious Black setup in the "Experts vs the Anti-Sicilians" book.
AcivilizedGentleman wrote:
Just transpose it to the alapin and the morra is dealt with.
the alapin is no threat
The Alapin might be a threat if white plays Tiviakov and Godena style, delaying d2-d4 for a while. But using the Morra gambit move order, white is already committed to d2-d4, which limits his possibilities.
What about this?
My game.