Anyone care to lend analysis...

  • #1

    In Fred Reinfeld's 1950's 'Complete Chess Course' he gives this line in the Italian Game as a definite win for White. Were the computer moves that I tacked on faulty... or how does White win after material is exchanged and it's Q and piece vs. 2 Rooks and piece?

    I guess it's not terribly important... but it just makes me want to know what I'm missing, if there is a clear-cut answer...

    Thanks!

  • #2

    (the same hasty computer check I did yielded a draw...)

  • #3

    what is this

  • #4

    The real test of this line is Bxc3 d5 Ne5 though.

  • #5

    I thought the mainline was 10. Qb3 (not 10. Ba3)?

  • #6

    Chessmicky, thanks! I didn't think I was going to get any comments at all. I didn't realize the line was totally obsolete, but that wasn't really the issue; I just figured if Reinfeld pronounced something as definitely winning, there must be a definite continuation, and I wasn't sure what it was. 

  • #7

    blueemu wrote:

    I thought the mainline was 10. Qb3 (not 10. Ba3)?

    It is, but Ba3 is better. Qb3 d5! Bxd5 0-0 and the position is equal

  • #8
    AKAL1 wrote:

    The real test of this line is Bxc3 d5 Ne5 though.

    Bf6 is more accurate and simply better for Black

  • #9

    It's a matter of opinion, but it's easier to show White has absolutely nothing after Ne5

  • #10

    I like Black in the resulting endgame, and I think that the Queen comes to d6. I don't see why nobody plays Black here...

  • #11

    Because no one plays White there..

  • #12

    chessmicky, do you know of any way for White to win if Black did 13...Qb8, or was Reinfeld wrong?

  • #13

    Just a guess:

    RxB PxR

    Ne5, but it looks drawish.

  • #14

    Thanks, I feel better knowing that! It wasn't that I needed to understand it because I thought it would happen in games, I just wanted to understand the concepts...

Top
or Join

Online Now