Smith-Morra Gambit

I'm sure plenty of people are familiar with the Smith-Morra gambit which I have seen looked down upon plenty of times while I still think it's worth the play, even at amateur level(or perhaps especially due to it being uncommon). Some might feel that this is one of the more dubious gambits opposed to say, the queen's gambit where pawn returns are more common there(wheres the gambit part!?) but not so much the king's gambit which also seems a bit uncommon nowadays.

I think that gambits, due to computer analysis and GM-level analysis are feared or looked down upon although I doubt that it's that easy to do away with them, strangely enough my rybka still feels a small white advantage when we are in the familiar smith morra position:

This is the position that I have been having fun with lately, not only because there's a few handy tricks that aren't easy to spot when behind the board without proper study but also because of the longer-term attack which is much more interesting then some boring game where you would dare consider drawing(hey winning's fun and losing makes you want to win, draws make me depressed!)

Now a common line might be

Now the a6 might either be a given or a confusing move to some but I had myself convinced that this is the most advised move for black, this is all playable and from here it will be all about player skill and knowledge but i'm convinced there's plenty of (higher rated) players who also love this opening for what it is and say nay to nay sayers!

As for a last bit i recently encountered the following:

And here I'm very confused on the continuation, so if anyone knows about this I'd love to know, a clubmember played this against me (while not being aware so much of this opening rather then thinking to try something I wouldn't like) and even though I won that time this seems a little dodgy for black as for white so I'm wondering what to do about that.

Thanks for taking your time to read and shape an opinion and feel free to comment to discuss the most fun opening there is (for me!)

Actually d3 is not so much de-fanging it rather then equalizing with the small edge white usually gets out of the opening. It's very playable such as:

I've played this a few times and got various results, of course this depends on player strength.

 So your perception is affected by this incident of you playing 3...d3 and your opponent never playing the SMG again.  But that circumstance is not the big picture.  3...d3 is not a refutation of the SMG.  I think you have been overly influenced by one event, albeit a significant success for you. 

The way I see it is that white has already developed a piece and 2 pawns against a single piece on the black side. Given that the white player lacks a center pawn I don't think this matters unless you are a really well-achieved player.

I'm not praising this as an all-win situation however but if you state this is played by high level players that means it is also played by other high level players on the other side of the board. Or are all those people in the wrong for playing it and doomed to lose? I hope not.

As for another variation I recently met on a board game:

By the logic in your first paragraph, the entire Open Sicilian is inferior for White.

I'm by no means a fan of the Morra Gambit, but you keep presenting assertions based on your personal experience as fact.  So I call BS.  Let's see some proof.

What line is it the refutes the gambit?

Which GMs advocate and practice playing 3...d3 as the means of doing so?

wikipedia states:

"[The Smith-Morra Gambit] is not common in grandmaster games, but at club level chess it can be an excellent weapon."

Your rating is not even close the rating that is required to have game be an easy win if you play d3 :). You always hope your opponent doesn't know the correct moves.

i disagreee, the most important principal is to win

I'm well aware that Grandmasters don't play the Morra Gambit much, because it's considered a marginal line.  Personally, I think it sucks, and I'm glad when people play it against me.  However, there's a distinction between "marginal" and "refuted", and this opening hasn't crossed it.

Also, when GMs do face the gambit, they play 3...dxc3 or 3...Nf6.  Look at Game Explorer; not one of the top 20 games sorted by Black's rating played 3...d3.  So if that's the line that refutes the gambit, why do none of the best players use it?  You assert that "GMs" play your line; again, who are they?

You can call it "help" if you want.  I call it bad advice.

But the vast majority of chess players don't know how to refute it.  That's why these gambits are excellent weapons in amateur matches, although they MAY be theoretically dubious

look up games by Marc Esserman in the SM

There's nothing finer than a long, Dominican or Cuban hand rolled cigar.

The intention of this topic was hardly for someone to come in, say ...d3 is an auto-win situation for black and then do away with it though. If you're that convinced it's easy to beat don't bother discussing an entire opening with one answer. I play this opening and I still win games and it sure beats going into long long lines of the Sicilian which has way too much opening theory to remember as a casual chess player.

3. ...d3 is a line played by some computer programs, I don't think that it's popular among GMs. I haven't found this line at all troublesome when playing Smith Morra as White. It doesn't "defang" anything, the White gets a normal opening advantage and the material is equal.

The point is that any game you played isn't anything usefull to be added to the theory databse.

Bye

Depends on who plays them.

Yes, I believe that you need to contact Kasparov, Anand, Carlsen, Topalov...

You didn't offer a suggestion. You offerd a complete refutation without arguments for the why solely based on a few games you played, the arrogance.

According to 365.com, 3. dxc3 is both more popular and scores more wins for the Black than 3. ...d3.

3... dxc3  4650

Atos

Dec 1, 2010

0

#20

Echeque wrote:

Atos wrote:

According to 365.com, 3. dxc3 is both more popular and scores more wins for the Black than 3. ...d3.

3... dxc3  4650

38.2 % 19.9 % 41.9 %  

3... d3  1228

34 % 27 % 39 %  

It seems that 3. ...d3 somewhat reduces the Black's chances of losing, but also of winning.

About your complaint above, nobody insulted you in any horrible way, although it seems that a few people found your smug comments rather irritating.

---

  No smug comments at all, just stating facts. What was and is irritating, are the nasty, uncalled for personal attacks. We're here to discuss chess, not attack people we don't even know.

---

There were no personal attacks. You were the one who went on about your use of 3. ...d3 in tournaments, so it's only natural to point out that your opponents were likely not top-flight players.