What if White plays 11.h3, looks a better move than Ng3.
Two Knights' Defense 5.exd5 Na5 8.Bd3 =
Sort:
Are you claiming an advantage for White in the line 8. Bd3 Nd5 9. Nf3 Nf4 10. O-O Bd6 11. Re1 Nxd3? I would think that the bishop pair and white's doubled pawns would give Black compensation.
White seems to be better with the exchange sacrifice 8. Bd3 Ng4 9. Ne4 f5 10. Be2 h5 11. h3 fxe4 12. hxg4 Bc5 13. b4 Qd4 14. bxc5 O-O 15. O-O Qxa1, which I would mark as the mainline of Ng4 line.
I have to say looking over a few master games in a database is probably a better way to do opening research then having two computers play each other.
Well what the hell was the point of 13. c5?,it neither devolped a piece or dealt with a threat. Stelios also voluntarly surrended the Bishop pair with 15...Bg4 16. h3 Bxf3.
I was planing on recylce it via the b7 square at some point it would probably move to c5 and from there I don't really know. I probably should go back to thinking things over for a day before writing them down.
13..Bxb4 instead of Qd4 getting into the exchange sacrifice is an alternative? No actually it seems Qd4 may be best. Black probably still can hold on there with with best play?
aggressivesociopath wrote:
Well what the hell was the point of 13. c5?,it neither devolped a piece or dealt with a threat. Stelios also voluntarly surrended the Bishop pair with 15...Bg4 16. h3 Bxf3.
Seems black was playing with a clear idea of controlling d4 while d2 and d3 seem to cut white's position in half. His d6 bishop may look passive but if white has no pawn breaks and black has more space I'd think the worst black can do is a draw. Clean looking game to me until black blunders.
Interesting to me if black tried 16...Bh5 if white has to play g4. If so then Bg6 and f5 open him up in a bad way meanwhile Nd4 and f5 are coming anyway.
OldHastonian wrote:
What if White plays 11.h3, looks a better move than Ng3.
I'd looked at h3 in another post; Black has all the fun and even though the final position is equal, Black has better squares for his pieces. The position is equal
13 b4 was mentioned earlier in this same thread even?
asmund_hammerstad wrote:
13 b4 was mentioned earlier in this same thread even?
13.b4 changes nothing i.e. 13...Qd4! 14.bxc5 O-O! and the mate threat gives Black time to castle. After 15.O-O Qxa1 Houdini has this as -0.07 at a depth of 25. Do you really think that White has any realistic chance of a plus?
Moses2792796 wrote:
sloughterchess wrote:
asmund_hammerstad wrote:
13 b4 was mentioned earlier in this same thread even?
13.b4 changes nothing i.e. 13...Qd4! 14.bxc5 O-O! and the mate threat gives Black time to castle. After 15.O-O Qxa1 Houdini has this as -0.07 at a depth of 25. Do you really think that White has any realistic chance of a plus?
You can't just take Houdini evals at face value, just because the playing strength of the engine is very strong that doesn't mean it's evals of every position are correct. Not that I really have a strong opinion on the specific variation, just pointing out that you really can't take much from a Houdini eval without playing through the variations, I've done enough analysis with Houdini to know that it frequently changes its mind about a position once you show it a few more moves.
pfren wrote:
19...Bf5 begs for 20.g4 Be6 21.Ba3, when you have granted white a useful extra move (g2-g4) over the more natural (and better) 19...Be6.
Either your Houdini is broken, or you have no clue how to use your rig.
Which pawn is White going to promote?
pfren wrote:
Errr, any. He has plenty of them, doesn't he?
19...Be6 must be a draw, but Black has to be careful.
As I indicated 8...Ng4 in the initial post is equal. More importantly Ng3 is superior to h3 when Black's position plays itself. All Black has to do is find in the "main" line is e3! & it's dead equal. At least with Ng3 White can complicate.
@RogerOT 13. Nc3 has been played. 13...Qd4 14. O-O O-O 15. Qe1 hxg4 16. d3 exd3 I assume Sloughterchess wants to improve with 16...g3 since he gave 16.g3 as forced, but 17. Nxe4 gxf2+ 18. Rxf2 is not very good. The knight on e4 is hitting c5, defending f2 and blocking the queen's passage to the h file. If you want a computer line how about 18...Bb6 19. Bf1 Ba6 20. c3 Qd5 21. Be3 Bxd3 22. Bxd3 Qxd3 23. Bxb6 axb6 24. Re1 with about a full pawn advantage to White according to Fritz 8 on infinite analysis with its suggested line feed to it move by move untill I decided to stop.
So 16.d3 exd3 17. Bxd3 Rxf2 18. Qxf2 Qxf2+ 19. Rxf2 g3 20. Ne4 gxf2+ 21. Kf1 Nb7 frankly I would try to preserve the bishop when looking for an improvement. 22. Bc4+ Kh7 23. Nxc5 Nxc5 24. Kxf2 with equal material, but White is left with the better pawn structure and a valuable bishop pair H, Poetsch-A, Mindlin Plovdiv 2012.
Edit no your not insane I orginally wrote 18...Bd6 when I ment 18...Bb6.
pfren wrote:
sloughterchess wrote:
After 15.O-O Qxa1 Houdini has this as -0.07 at a depth of 25. Do you really think that White has any realistic chance of a plus?
White has a record of +3 =5 -0 from that position.
You cannot really do any serious analysis with that attitude, you can trust me on that.
He's been told this numerous times on another site, Pfren. I think he's hoping to persuade people who are not so critical. But one of the hallmarks of strong players is that they tend to tear apart weak analysis, even if that analysis is computer-generated.
aggressivesociopath wrote:
Are you claiming an advantage for White in the line 8. Bd3 Nd5 9. Nf3 Nf4 10. O-O Bd6 11. Re1 Nxd3? I would think that the bishop pair and white's doubled pawns would give Black compensation.
White seems to be better with the exchange sacrifice 8. Bd3 Ng4 9. Ne4 f5 10. Be2 h5 11. h3 fxe4 12. hxg4 Bc5 13. b4 Qd4 14. bxc5 O-O 15. O-O Qxa1, which I would mark as the mainline of Ng4 line.
I have to say looking over a few master games in a database is probably a better way to do opening research then having two computers play each other.
Go w/ master,G.M. games....computers lead lower rated players into believing they can play chess.
pfren wrote:
Anyway, if Black does not wish to enter this mess, he may play 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.Qe2 Be7, which is perfectly adequate.
We start with one side line before we get to the main line.The move order is: 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5ch Bd7, a relatively uncommon visitor; even though White can retain the extra pawn for a long time, it is difficult to convert the extra material.
4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5ch Bd7 7.Qe2 Bd6 8.Nc3 O-O 9.Bxd7 Qxd7 10.O-O c6 11.dxc6 Nxc6 12.d3 Nd4 13.Qd1 Rc8 14.Bd2 h6 15.Nf3 Qc6 16.Ne1 (Houdini doesn't approve; the idea is to try to get in the freeing move c3. To do this it is necessary to overprotect the c2 square) Rfe8 17.Kh1 e4 18.dxe4 Nxe4 19.Nxe4 Rxe4 20.c3 Qb5 21.Nf3 Nxf3 22.Qxf3 Qe2 23.Qxe2 Rxe2 24.Rad1 Bc5 25.f3 Rd8 26.Bc1 Rxd1 27.Rxd1 Rc2 =
6.Bb5ch Bd7 7.Qe2 Bd6 8.Nc3 O-O 9.Nge4 Nxe4 (Bf5 10.d3 Houdini has this at a depth of 27 as +/-)
10.Nxe4 Be7 (Bxb5 11.Qxb5 c6 12.dxc6 Nxc6 13.c3 Rb8 14.O-O +/=) 11.Bxd7 Qxd7 12.c4 (At a depth of 28, Houdini has c6 and Bb4 as +.66, +/=)
6.Bb5ch Bd7 7.Qe2 Be7 8.Nf3 O-O (Nxd5 9.Nxe5 Bxb5 10.Qxb5ch c6 11.Qe2 O-O 12.O-O Bd6 11.Nf3 Re8 12.Qd1 c5 13.c3 Nc6 14.d4 exd4 15.cxd4 Rc8 16.Nc3 Nxc3 17.bxc3 White still has his extra pawn but this pawn complex is tough to advance; Black can play Na5/Nc4. Houdini gives this a +.40 at a depth of 29) 9.Bxd7 Bxd7 10.Nxe5 Qxd5 11.Nf3 Rfe8 12.O-O Bc5 13.Qd1 Rad8 14.Nc3 Qf5 15.d3 [Depth =27, +.46, +/=]Black has some but not full compensation for the pawn. Any winning chances must involve advancing his Queen Bishop pawn without losing material or allowing other positional compensation.)
Houdini and I agree here---the extra pawn is very difficult to convert.
eddysallin wrote:
aggressivesociopath wrote:
Are you claiming an advantage for White in the line 8. Bd3 Nd5 9. Nf3 Nf4 10. O-O Bd6 11. Re1 Nxd3? I would think that the bishop pair and white's doubled pawns would give Black compensation.
White seems to be better with the exchange sacrifice 8. Bd3 Ng4 9. Ne4 f5 10. Be2 h5 11. h3 fxe4 12. hxg4 Bc5 13. b4 Qd4 14. bxc5 O-O 15. O-O Qxa1, which I would mark as the mainline of Ng4 line.
I have to say looking over a few master games in a database is probably a better way to do opening research then having two computers play each other.
Go w/ master,G.M. games....computers lead lower rated players into believing they can play chess.
Do any of your GM games include e3? This moves leads to "obvious" equality
pfren wrote:
sloughter, I have absolutely no intention to bust your sort-of-analyses. I can waste my time in more productive ways.
OK, just a tip: In your last line Black has easy equality. Good luck finding it, I guess it won't take you more than a couple of months.
Also, in the first line you are missing 10.a3 (played no less than fourty times) after which Black is worse.
Is your Houdini drunk, or what?
10.a3 and 10.O-O are +/= 10.a3 is a solid candidate move---just not giving White any better chances than 10.O-O. Since White is not winning a piece with b4, Black can take advantage of the tempo-wasting a3 with ideas like b6/Nb7/Nd6. It is customary in this position for White to keep his extra pawn for a very long time. The trick is trying to mobilize that 4-3 Queenside majority. Here is what happens if White tries to win a piece: 10.a3 Be7 11.b4? Nxd5 12.Nxh7 Rfd8 13.bxa5 Nxc3 14.dxc3 Kxh7 =.
Unless you can come up with some plan to advance the Queenside pawns, just providing a move like 10.a3 claiming clear advantage White (+/-), you have not advanced White's prospects over other lines where White is +/=. It is easy to keep the extra pawn; it is far more difficult to convert it into a passed pawn.
eddysallin wrote:
aggressivesociopath wrote:
Are you claiming an advantage for White in the line 8. Bd3 Nd5 9. Nf3 Nf4 10. O-O Bd6 11. Re1 Nxd3? I would think that the bishop pair and white's doubled pawns would give Black compensation.
White seems to be better with the exchange sacrifice 8. Bd3 Ng4 9. Ne4 f5 10. Be2 h5 11. h3 fxe4 12. hxg4 Bc5 13. b4 Qd4 14. bxc5 O-O 15. O-O Qxa1, which I would mark as the mainline of Ng4 line.
I have to say looking over a few master games in a database is probably a better way to do opening research then having two computers play each other.
Go w/ master,G.M. games....computers lead lower rated players into believing they can play chess.
I often run my ideas by an IM.
Pardon my skepticism about human theory. MCO 15 gives as best for Black in the following variation: 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.Bf1 h6 as giving Black good compensation after 7.Nxf7 Kxf7 8.dxc6 Bc5 when White just plays 9.Be2/10.O-O +/- Here is what I have said elsewhere about the growth of theory:
Just as the internet was a watershed event in human communication, Houdini 3 is a watershed event in understanding chess theory. One of the authors (RM) has been studying chess theory for about 30 years and witnessed the entire chess computer revolution starting with the first really strong computer, Ken Thompson's Belle built in the 1970's and 1980's; this was the first computer to reach Master strength. It is hard to believe but state-of-the-art stand alone computers, Par Excellence and the Sphinx Legend, were rated at only 1700 in the 1980's. Mephisto Berlin, a stand alone computer increased in strength to Master Strength in the 1990's. Deep Blue defeated Kasparov in 1997 and it was the Fritz engines, programs for desk top computers, that hit GM strength. By the time Rybka 4 arrived, off-the-shelf-computers were playing beyond World Champion strength.
From my thirty years as a chess theoretician, I have seen theory by two Correspondence World Champions that is so bad that both men missed winning one move continuations. I have absolutely no confidence in the theory of World Correspondence Champion Yakov Estrin in his book on the Wilkes-Barre. It is incredibly bad.
If World Champions can't see ahead consistently even one move, why should I trust theory and play by lesser Masters? Much as you can try to convince me that analysis and play by a 2300 player is superior to analysis and play by a 3300 computer, trying to find nuggets of truth in the analysis is time-consuming particularly when you are talking about especially sharp openings when the tactical vision of even strong players shortens considerably. These are the kind of positions where computers excel and almost exclusively the kind of positions I analyze.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5ch c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Bd3
8.Bd3 is growing in popularity. Every variation I have looked at e.g. 8...Bc5 favors White, except for the critical variation where Houdini just doesn't understand long-term compensation. All too often proponents of the Two Knights' Defense will claim long-term compensation when Black is down a pawn with minimal pressure.
Here, in the starting position (see below) Houdini likes White for a very long time. However, when you let Houdini play both sides of the starting position at 1 sec/move, 5 sec./move and 10 sec./ Black consistently equalizes.
What is particularly alarming for players of the White pieces is that there are more ways for White to go wrong; in other words, at a practical level we tend to believe that there are more ways for White to lose than there are ways for Black to lose. Black's game, for the most part, plays itself. White, on the other hand, must be careful
This test below gets more to the theoretical evaluation. With best play is White equal or better? In other words should White play 8.Bd3?
To see if this was true at a slower time limit I decided to give the computer enough time to get out to a depth of 26. Here is a game Houdini 3-Houdini 3 at Depth=26:
8.Bd3 Ng4! 9.Ne4 f5 10.Be2 h5
11.Ng3Bc5 (This is the starting position---you will note that White can lose immediately with 12.O-O?? Qh4 -+)
12.Bxg4 hxg4 (What should be alarming for White is that Black has spent a great deal of time on a pawn storm but also has a lead in development! This is excellent long-term compensation)
13.d3 (What else?) O-O! It takes Houdini on the previous move a long time to find O-O. Many players looking at that great Rook on h8 would not want to castle, but you have to consider the fact that the Rook can always return to the h-file with Rf6/f4/Rh6)
14.O-O Nb7 (Houdini is beginning to see the long-term compensation and shows a steady drop in its evaluation)
15.Qe1 f4 16.Ne4 Bd4 17.g3 Be6 18.Nbc3 Bd5 19.Ne2 Bxe4
20.dxe4 Nc5 (Houdini is beginning to say that this is closer to equality than advantage White)
21.gxf4 Nxe4 22.Nxd4 Qxd4 23.Qe3 Qxe3 24.fxe3 Rad8 25.Kg2 Nd6 26.b3 exf4 27.exf4 Nf5 28.Re1 a6 29.Be3 Rf6 30.Kg1 Nxe3 31.Rxe3 Rd2 32.Rae1 Rxc2 =
In my opinion 11...Bc5 is equal, and, as indicated, there are more ways for White to go wrong so I believe that this is the critical variation in the 8.Bd3 line.