The Smith-Morra Gambit... Accept or Refute?

Fair enough, those little things together might give white decent compensation, though it still seems inferior to the open for sure.

I don't understand that. I always have to take more time to figure out the proper way to attack in such a complicated opening. I play the SMG much better in slow games than in blitz. But I also play any opening much better in slow play than blitz. My ICC blitz rating is 600 points below my standard rating on the same server.

That said, I almost always start with 1. e4 as white, and the Smith-Morra is the only thing I know how to play against the Sicilian, so I always play it. In fact, I'm downright happy whenever I see the Sicilian, because I know I get to play my gambit.

I do play the Morra a lot, both in CC & OTB.

One of the most annoying & under-rated systems for Black appears briefly in Langrock's book under the Early Development of Black Dark-Square Bishop chapter.  He does not rate the immediate 7...Bxc3, but a pawn on White's c-file & isolated a & c-pawns & Black well on to the road for equality is not what White wants 8 moves into this opening.

The most annoying move order I find is

true estrag & maybe the less than subtle 9 Qd6 is worth a try.

Back to post one for the OP i would suggest accepting the gambit as this is the best way to learn the ideas behind this opening for both black and white. The Nf6 line as he illustrates in diagram 1 is certainly the most aggressive and can lead to quick wins if white as frequently happens mixes the move order and allows blacks Nd4 with the setup of Ng4 and Qc7 giving a well known cheapo.

for the rather more advanced 2700 level gonno etc 7Nge7 is shown by results to be positionally better if you can handle a dour struggle and building of small advantages to eek out a win, such is the lot of the advanced player

Ive found correspondence chess gives the opportunity of more opponents than club play and better practice for openings such as this.

>:) 

After the Bxc3, definitely give up on the typical Qe2, etc. You have to know when to get out of the normal Smith-Morra formation, and when you knight on c3 is gone, that's one of those times.

As mentioned above, 9. Qd6 is white's best move. The key here is that black has abandoned his dark squares, so white has to take control of them. Qd6 locks in the d7 pawn and c8 bishop. Follow it up with moves like Ba3 and Rfd1 to really lock down the dark squares and d file. Don't worry about losing the c3 pawn. If black moves his queen that far away, then that d7 pawn is likely to go down (Bb5 to increase the pressure, then Ne5, etc). Black will have an extra pawn (or 2 if he goes after c3), but white will have ALL his pieces activated and aiming at d7, while black's pieces are nearly worthless. Actually, I'm thinking Rac1 looks like a good followup if black does take that c3 pawn, adding to the pressure on the c6 knight and stuck c8 bishop.

I wish someone would play this against me. I had one guy try it a long time ago, when I wasn't nearly as good at this, and I blew the opportunity, but my more recent opponents are too smart to play that way.

Interesting ideas - thanks

In one game in particular on another site I did play what now seems the vastly inferior 9.Qe2 in this variation.

I did hammer the d-file though, but against a significantly better player my position faltered later on.

It's not under-rated at all. It's not rated highly because it's pretty pants, for reasons that Fromper gives pretty nicely.

Too right I'm biased. I've dismantled strong opponents with the Morra and practically never lose with it. (OTB I'm talking). Good to see you're expertly talking about an opening you know nothing about. Hold on... :/

One rather good reason to play the Morra is that it's MY territory. I'm happy to concede that there are several lines which are 'equal' - but the fact is, I know these positions much better than my opponent, so how 'equal' are they?

I've played the morra smith alot and I feel like black gets an advantage in this line.

I'm sorry, you can help me out with my wrongness. I mean it's clear white doesn't have anything concrete, right? Just unclear compensation.

I said this a long time ago, at best this is equal, but it's more likely a little better for black in a position where he can slowly unravel. MCO says something much like  "black gets the advantage with correct play". Now, I'm not saying MCO must be right, but I can trust their GM, high quality, unbiased analysis. But the thing is youseem to think that you're smarter than them and know all of these ideas they never dreamed of, that makes it equal right?

I think it's one of those positions that who's side you prefer is often a matter of taste, but in this case although white has a slightly more active position it's hard to see how black must be overrun. It's a different kind of initiative than say, in the danish gambit (well if black holds the pawns), with a clear attack, if that makes sense. Because in that opening, lots of lines are open, in the smith morra, there are also open lines, but at the same time black's center pawns put up strong resistance, with the d6 e6 structure.

I've played the smith morra once, as black, yet I still am not too afraid of the smith morra, even an experienced morra player playing it. I'm a little afraid of the king's gambit or marshall attack though, why? Because unlike those openings I know that my position is solid enough to tough things out in a smith morra, but lets just say in the KG and marshall I have to deal with A LOT more.

Well, as it's my opening I have the luxury of looking at GM analysis and working on it myself to see if it can be improved. Which, oftentimes in an opening like the Morra, it can. No more of your facetiousness.

Oh cmon, you're a good player, but you really think you're going to find a lot of moves they didn't consider?

Frankly, yes. I'm strong enough that in conjunction with a strong engine I can explore lines and ideas in lines that the GMs who write things like MCO don't have time to. There have been several lines suggested by GMs that I've managed to find considerable improvements on.

It seems to be the nature of the opening... I play the Gruenfeld and Najdorf too, but it's a rarity where I think I find a better move than one covered by GM analysis, and if I do it's usually just a minor improvement rather than overturning an evaluation.

 How strong are you ? Whats your otb rating and have you ever beaten any IMs or GMs, or FMs playing the morra gambit against them in otb classic play ?

Reb, I'm 184 ECF, and I've never played any titled players OTB :)

The smith-morra gambit is a pathetic entertaining gambit: put pawns on d6 and e6 and you are absolutely fine

A very deep and precise refutation from someone rated 1300.

I agree with your evaluation. Black does seem to have an advantage in that line. This is because white traded away two pairs of minor pieces for no reason, when he needs those pieces for his attack. To keep black from getting an advantage in that line, white shouldn't play that way.

You've got a fairly normal position through 6. ... a6, which will probably transpose to a main line, but it's too early to know which one. But why would white play 7. Bg5? Normal play in this gambit says O-O, Qe2, and Rd1 next. Only then will you decide where the c1 bishop goes, depending on what black has done, unless there's a very specific reason to bring the bishop out early.

Rules of thumb for placing that c1 bishop:

1. If black plays Qc7 or Qb8 with the pawn on d6, then play Bf4 to pin and attack the d6 pawn. This counts as a good, specific reason to bring the bishop out earlier than normal in this gambit.

2. After Nge7, play Bg5 to pin the knight to the queen on d8. This also counts as a good, specific reason to bring the bishop out earlier than normal in this gambit.

3. Play Be3 most other times.

4. Bg5 against Nf6 is generally useless, because black easily breaks the pin with Be7.

Those aren't absolute rules, but they are pretty good guidelines for placing that bishop, which is the only white piece that doesn't have a pre-determined spot in this opening.

So after Nf6 in your line, white traded with Bxf6 for no reason. Remember that trading off pieces tends to favor the defender, since the attacker needs all his pieces to build pressure in his attack. If you're the attacker, as white is in this gambit, then you'd better have a REALLY good reason for any piece trades. Don't just trade for the heck of it.

So then you play Nd4 for no obvious reason, and trade that knight for the one on c6. Again, you didn't have a good reason to move that piece, or to trade it away.

The standard line for white is to play Qe2, then Rfd1 and Rac1, to create pressure up the c and d files, hoping for tactics against black's queen, or at least pressure based on tactical threats that black has to watch for.

Moving that knight from f3 shouldn't happen without a good tactical reason until after the rest of your development is completed that way. And even then, that knight tends to be among the last white pieces to move, because it's usually best placed right where it is, to capture on e5 if black puts his knight there, or to support a pawn push of e4-e5. Sometimes, that knight will even capture a black pawn on e5. But in general, that knight stays on f3 to cover e5 until the tactics dictate otherwise.

--Fromper

Unfortunately, Fromper, you're missing the whole point of that move order. 0-0, Qe2, and Rd1 turns into an epic fail when Black continues with Nf6 and Bg4 and is basically a clear pawn up. That's why 7.Bg5.

Fromper, 7. Bg5, the move suggested by Langrock, in his book on the morra smith, which by the way is excellent, he says it's the only was for white to play. I've looked into why the it's only move, but I know one of the beating the anti-sicilians books, suggests this line and gives a more detailed explanation.