well otb this might be the case but my fascination with the latvian has convinced me that some lines are NOT suited to correspondence chess.
so yes win 'sometimes' but dont expect an overall plus score
Methinks you have not put much study time into the Traxler. It is still played occasionally in correspondence games, and it's certainly better than the Latvian.
An easy game?? You must not have much experience playing against the Traxler.
pvmike, I looked at this some time back, also trying to improve things for white. Unfortunately, I think it generally improves things for black, although I have never actually played it. If I were black, I would probably try
6....d5 and assume
7 exd Bxf2+ and again assume
8 Kf1 Nd4 and I think if anything, black's threats are stronger than ever.
Lots of variations.
I think that, for white, 6 d4 followed by 7 Bd5 may be worth a shot. Immediately returning the pawn for a needed tempo. If 6...Nxd4 white might try 7 c3 before Bd5, not really sure. I think I have only played against the traxler twice, and agree with the general sentiment of this forum that it is underplayed.
As I keep saying, 4 Ng5 is the "error" in principle, although it is a common move played for years, and I do play it.
OK, I found an interesting game sort of "validating" my 6 d4 variation.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1119570
Rossilimo is one of my favorite players as I once, as a child, got to play him as he was a casual friend of my fathers. He ran a chess parlor (50 cents an hour) in New York and taught judo and drove a taxi to support the parlor. So this was nice to see.
Rossolimo - Prins was a good game. I've always heard that 6.d4 was White's best bet in this variation, but I've never played the white side of the Traxler and have never had to play against it at all as Black.
As Black, I always respond to 1.e4 with 1...e5, so I play a lot of 2 knight defenses, my favorite game as Black. Like you, I find something intrinsically wrong with Ng5 - moving a piece twice in the opening. This should shift the initiative to Black, but proving it is another story.
It's interesting to note that in the famous 1945 Radio Match between the US and the USSR, Botvinnik, who led the Soviet team, strictly warned against playing the 2 knights' defense since the Americans were considered experts in it.
Botvinnik wrote: "We know, for example, the excellent contribution of American masters to the theory of the Two Knights' Defense. As a matter of fact, at a meeting of the Soviet team before the match, it was decided to avoid that defense. Only one of our team, Master Ragozin, violated that decision and as a result almost lost his game with Master Seidman.
Needless to say, Raogzin, even though he eventually won, probably wished he never heard of the two knights' defense after that. Seidman, it should be noted, amazingly was playing this 2 game match while working 8 hrs./day at his regular job and traveling 2 hours from work to the playing hall, playing with little or no sleep.
Any Traxler questions can be anwsered by the group Traxler Analysis. We have gone indepth into the variations so we are the closest to experts you are going to find. Most of our analysis will not be found in books.
What happens to the Traxler if white makes the initial pawn capture with the bishop-right after black pushes his bishop, white gets tricky and captures with the bishop instead of the knight-and it seems to me that black is a pawn down and can't castle, with no attacks. Any takers?
I'll check it out. Thank you.
Here is another by Traxler
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1224607
sort of reminiscent of Batgirl's ? vs ? game