In the 16th century Portuguese chess player Pedro Damiano published one of the very first books on chess. Amongst other things he described how 2.f6 was a poor move. Unfortunately for him his name has been attached to it giving the impression that he invented the opening and thought it was good.
In the 16th century Portuguese chess player Pedro Damiano published one of the very first books on chess. Amongst other things he described how 2.f6 was a poor move. Unfortunately for him his name has been attached to it giving the impression that he invented the opening and thought it was good.
what about this one?
In think the Petrov is discussed in the book...but I'm not sure if he also condemns 3.Nxe4 as bad for black. If I were guessing I would say it's likely that this is also a variation which he says is bad.
I thought this excerpt from Bruce Pandolfini's "Ultimate Guide to Chess" was funny: "Although [Damiano] correctly analyzed 2...f6 as being inferior, someone with a vendetta named the defense after him, and it stuck. Damiano, who deserved better, was one of the first players to advocate a classical pawn center."
title