chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Dirk Meybohm vs Grosch
GDR (1988)
Polish Opening: General (A00)  ·  0-1

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

find similar games 3 more games of D Meybohm
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: Olga is our default viewer, but we offer other choices as well. You can use a different viewer by selecting it from the pulldown menu below and pressing the "Set" button.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Kibitzer's Corner
Nov-27-04  erasmus: 2. Bb2 already looked like white would lose. Apparently he didn't even see his b4 pawn was under attack.
Nov-27-04  azaris: So you're saying it was Grosch incompetence?
Nov-27-04  Resignation Trap: This opening is OK, but White blundered horribly with 5. f5??

1. b4 e5 2. Bb2 Bxb4 3. Bxe5 Nf6 is a critical line for the entire opening of 1. b4. Here's an extensive database: http://w1.161.telia.com/~u16118306/...

The player of the White pieces was co-originator of the line 1. b4 e5 2. Bb2 Bxb4 3. f4!?, the Kucharkowski-Meybohm Gambit http://w1.161.telia.com/~u16118306/...

Nov-30-04  erasmus: I'm not saying that Grosch is incompetent, but I just don't see the idea behind white playing 1. b4 as it's first move. It looks to me that after 1. - e5 2. Bb2 you give black the opportunity to take the b-pawn for free and let black develop his bishop naturally.
Nov-30-04  notsodeepthought: <erasmus> I suspect you missed <azaris>'s pun...
Nov-30-04  erasmus: haha, now I get it...duh...:p
Nov-30-04  DanielBryant: <erasmus> I use it sometimes when I feel like avoiding theory.
Dec-09-04
Premium Chessgames Member
  An Englishman: Good Evening:My old chess club had a Polish devotee who believed in 3.f4. I feel it is the best response, and developed this line in response: 3...f6!?; 4.fxe5,Nc6; 5.Nf3,Qe7!?; exf6,Nxf6. Black has a lead in development and the Queen Pawn to help restrain White's center, but White does have a central pawn mass. I call this equal, but most of the time, the opening left both players satisfied!
Apr-08-05  Kangaroo: Alexei (Aleksei) Sokolsky who reinvented the opening thought that after 1. b4 e5.
2. Bb2 Bxb4
3. Bxe5 ...
White has the advantage. Since one of the games
< A Urzica vs Adorjan, 1970 > played by Andras Adorjan I have been convinced that Black has at least equalized.

The other thing is when Black is eager to play a gambit: 1. b4 e5.
2. Bb2 f6, where Sokolsky recommended
3. e4!? with complications.

Had he been convinced in his analysis, he would have always played like that. But ... recommendations of a theorist sometimes are rejected by practice.

Sokolsky himself often played 3. b5 [instead of 3. e4] met with 3. ... d5, when Black has the strong occupation of the center and White can eventually start undermining it. At least, he did not achieve much of success with this moderate move [compared to the gambit style 3. e4!?]

The moves in this game [1. b4 e5. 2. Bb2 Bxb4. 3. f4 (?)] clearly show that White has been unaware of what is going on. The sacrifice of the pawn for nothing followed by the blunder.

If anyone is interested in another quick refute [from Black] of this opening, it might deserve some attention to play 1. b4 d5.
2. Bb2 Qd6 [attacking the pawn on b4]
3. a3 e5!?
so Black occupies the center with less pain... .

Feb-28-07  MaczynskiPratten: This is bad enough, but see <Meybohm v Kurcharkowski> from the same year, 1988 where White improves his play ... he lasts a whole 9 moves :-)

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
  8. Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

<This page contains Editor Notes. Click here to read them.>

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2025, Chessgames Services LLC