|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
Jul-23-07
 |
| keypusher: <Matiz>, <whiteshark> One thing to do is play it like a King's Gambit, 1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. f4. You can look Johnny Hector's games for modern examples. http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches... The other main approach is to play 1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Bc4, when 3....Nxe4 leads to the so-called Frankenstein-Dracula. Black can also play 3....Nc6, which is quieter. White often plays for a delayed f4 with d3, Nge2, f4, while Black can play a sort of Ruy Lopez reversed with ....Bb4 followed by ...d5. The latter line seems like it should be absolutely safe for Black, but in fact I am in quite a lot of trouble with it against a strong opponent in a current game on red hot pawn. |
 |
Jul-23-07
 |
| Harvestman: I've been playing the Vienna as my main opening as white for a while now, but players have started preparing for me, and going into the Frankenstein-Dracula. In my experience, this line is good for black, and I've been squashed by black's counterplay in the centre. I'm having to look at playing something else as white, at least against stronger players. |
|
Jul-23-07
 |
| micartouse: <Harvestman: I'm having to look at playing something else as white, at least against stronger players.> Have you ever tried the 5. Qxe5+ variation? Sure the queens are off the board and theory calls it equal, but it's at least worth seeing if black can unwind his pieces properly. At any rate, you don't lose the initiative as in the Nxa8 lines. |
|
| Jul-23-07 |
| nescio: <1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Bc4, when 3....Nxe4 leads to the so-called Frankenstein-Dracula.>
By whom? Is this another of <chessgames.com>'s fancy opening names? <Harvestman> Did you consider reaching the intended position via 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3 Nc6 4.Nc3 as Mitkov seems to have played regularly?
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches... |
|
Jul-23-07
 |
| ganstaman: <nescio: <1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Bc4, when 3....Nxe4 leads to the so-called Frankenstein-Dracula.> By whom? Is this another of <chessgames.com>'s fancy opening names?> No, that is the name of the variation.
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kibit...
<'One thing is certain: after 5...N-B3 sharp and often hair-raising play is inevitable; in this chapter a game between Dracula and the Frankenstein Monster would not seem out of place.' The colourful name seemed to catch on, and when I returned to analysing this line again in
my 1976 book on the Vienna Opening (also published by Chess
Player), the relevant chapter was called Frankenstein-Dracula
Variation and began with the sentence: "If the Frankenstein
Monster and Count Dracula were to sit down to a game of chess,
what would happen?" > |
|
Jul-23-07
|
| keypusher: <<Harvestman> Did you consider reaching the intended position via 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3 Nc6 4.Nc3 as Mitkov seems to have played regularly?> Of course that won't work against 1....Nf6. :-)
|
|
| Jul-23-07 |
| nescio: <1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3 Nc6 4.Nc3
Of course that won't work against 1....Nf6. :-)> One could try 1.e4 Nf6 2.Bc4 (2...Nxe4 3.Bxf7) :) |
|
| Nov-24-07 |
| Kings Indian: I have a question for 1.e4 e5 players: Have you studied the Vienna gambit? Like, is it a well known opening for most players and how often do you get it? |
|
Nov-24-07
 |
| Red October: <Kings Indian> I rarely encountered it when I played at club and provincial level... but I hear it is a popular club level opening... but not to be feared... good opportunities for counter attack |
|
| Nov-24-07 |
| Kings Indian: <Red October> Oh, well I was just asking because I would like to play it as white but it seems black can equalize easily. |
|
Nov-24-07
|
| Red October: <Kings Indian> well you could do a lot worse.. If you like tactical games then play it.. especially since you would not really have to worry about prepared improvements in a club tournament for example.. its a very under rated opening... as I said not to be feared but certainly a solid opening and not dubious or refuted |
|
Jul-16-08
|
| Harvestman: <micartouse>, <keypusher>, <nescio>: Thanks for the suggestions, especially the alternate move orders. I used to play 2.Bc4 a long time ago, and had forgotten all about it. Of course, that should be the solution. |
|
| Nov-13-08 |
| FrogC: After 1.e4 e5; 2.Nc3 Nf6; 3.f4, it's usually stated that Black shouldn't take the pawn because of 4.e5, forcing the knight to retreat to g8. But take it on a bit. After 4...Ng8, White must play 5.Nf3 to prevent the queen check at h4. Now Black plays 5...d6. What should White do here? The best I can find so far is 6.Bc4 de; 7.Nxe5 Qh4+; Kf1, which looks promising, though if White's attack doesn't break through soon he may be embarrassed by the inability to castle. Or is there something better? |
|
| Nov-13-08 |
| Shams: <FrogC> I suppose a King's Gambit aficionado would know better than I how to handle that, but I ran your line through opening explorer. after 4...Ng8 there are 11 games with 5.Nf3 plus this one with 5.Bc4 (1-0 16)
B Nielsen vs Jensen, 1926
the only game with 6...dxe5 is this one, possibly the least illuminating game I could link to:
Kreidewei vs Saathoff, 1989
yikes, this game (score) is even worse:
F Kreideweiss vs L Nebel, 1989
who knows.
|
|
| Nov-13-08 |
| MaxxLange: <FrogC> is 4 e5 really the main theoretical move? I never played the Vienna, but, when I dabbled in the King's Gambit, I was trained to play d4 as a first reaction if Black played a delayed ...exf4 my KG advisors were only 1800-200 strength, though |
|
| Nov-14-08 |
| FrogC: 4.d4 Bb4, I guess. And yes, e5 is the standard move. Many opponents play 4...Qe7, when after 5.Qe2 the knight has to retreat and White is definitely better. Thanks, <Shams> for the games, very useful. |
|
| Feb-07-09 |
| FrogC: I now have another question. What's the best reply after 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.f4 d6!? The book move is 3...d5, but I meet ...d6 more often on the internet and in OTB play against lower-ranked players. There's nothing wrong with it as far as I can see. 4.Bc4 allows Nxe4 with complications similar to the 3.Bc4 line (which I don't play). 4.Nf3 allows either ...Bg4 or ...exf4, both of which are unclear to me. 4.fxe5 and 4.f5 just look wrong. It seems odd that such a logical response isn't in the books, and I'm struggling to find the best continuation. |
|
Feb-07-09
 |
| blacksburg: after 3...d6, i'd probably just play 4.Nf3. the problem with d6 is that is locks in the f8 bishop and makes it a "bad" piece. if black wants to then play Bg4 and exchange his "good" bishop for the knight, white shouldn't be afraid of this. maybe. |
|
| Feb-07-09 |
| nescio: <FrogC> I imagine the position after 3...d6 can also be reached via 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d6 3.Nc3 Nf6, so you could try books on the King's Gambit. Even better is to study some games of the world's best: Steinitz vs G B Fraser, 1867
Spielmann vs A Kramer, 1928
Alekhine vs Alden J jr, 1933
Fischer vs T Kumro, 1964 |
|
| Feb-07-09 |
| FrogC: What great examples, <nescio>, thanks. Interesting to see Fischer and Alekhine winning bread-and-butter games against weak opposition unlike the usual masterpieces that get all the publicity. The Alekhine game follows a familiar course - I must have played dozens of openings like that on the Net, and if he does it I can't be doing that much wrong. On the other hand, both Spielmann and Fischer play an early Bb5, whereas I've always assumed the bishop has to go to c4 in this opening. It looks simple and effective, and I will certainly try it. |
|
| Feb-23-09 |
| FiveofSwords: after 1e4 e5 2 nc3 I would never play Nf6 because white can play f4 and if you play Nf6 too fast against the kings gambit then you can get in serious, serious trouble. I get into the standard KGD positions via the Bc4 move order a fair amount, but I dont generally play 2 Nc3. When Ive seen 2nc3 played against me i generally go for 2...Bc5 3 Bc4 d6 4 f4 and then either Bxg1!?, which leads to quite an interesting game and has been underestimated for black imo, or Be6, taking advantage of not having played Nc6 yet so white doesnt have the standard Bb5 response. |
|
| Feb-23-09 |
| FiveofSwords: If it goes liek this: 1 e4 e5 2 Nc3 Bc5 I suppose white could try an immediate 3 f4. Bxg1 may still be fine but im not sure. if 3...d6 then Nf3 and white forces the KGD position that he wants and that I know and like for white. Although black does have reasonable play here, id rather prefer avoiding playing that position as black especially since ive committed the bishop to c5 which isnt really what I consider the best spot for it. anyone have any feedbakc on this? if 1e4 e5 2 Nc3 Bc5 3 f4!? is Bxg1 rxg1 4 fe (Bc4 would be transposition and Im pretty certain that this line is playable and fun for black after 4..Qh4+) 4..de - is this position OK for black? |
|
| Feb-24-09 |
| FiveofSwords: <Frogc> when you assume that after 1 e4 e5 2 nc3 nf6 3 f4 ef? 4 e5!? ng8 white must play Nf3 to prevent Qh4+, you are actually very mistaken. That's the kings gambit for you. A lot of threats are actually illusions because the other guy has serious threats as well- so if you arent mating you may very well get mated. However, im sure that Nf3 is perfectly fine. after d6 white has various ideas to continue his attack. Bc4 probably is fine but there are other options that are probably stronger, such as d4 or qe2. when you say 'if' white's attack doesnt break through you speak of something completely impossible. white's attack absolutely will break through if white knows how to play the king's gambit. Besides Kf1 by the way, white would also have the interesting option of g6. This is not a position you would ever want to play as black because its simply too easy to get killed, and white can make quite a lot of suboptimum moves before he's in danger. |
|
| Mar-01-09 |
| FiveofSwords: For Matiz and Whiteshark. Just as a general overview, If you compare 2 Nc3 to 2 Nf3, you can see that white is keeping the possiiblity of TWO different central pawn breaks instead of one. He has d4, or f4 at some point. For black to handle this potential double threat, moth of white drastically alter the position, can be somewhat more tricky, from a defensive point of view. There are two possible drawbacks to the idea, however. Firstly, white is not developing his kingside very fast and as a consequence will be at least a move later in castling, and developing his rooks to open files, than typical 1nf3 openings. His exposed king is not generally much of an issue because his good development counters that nicely, so most lines for black where he tried to expose white's king turn out badly for him. However, it is rather odd and contradictory that being a move late developing the rooks means that although you have multiple breaks availible, its harder to use them once you get them. Good vienna players have learned a lot of tactical patchwork to handle this contradiction. Another issue, which is somewhat more annoying perhaps, is that the early commitment of Nc3 rules out options for white to play c3 and this makes some timely Bb4 by black, increasing pressure on the already rather insecure e4, more annoying. For this reason, (and also sometimes to avoid the highly theoretical and sharp dracula-frankenstein variaiton) many players prefer to approach vienna-esque lines via 2 Bc4. White's many move control of two seperate breaks instead of one really forces black to play energetically to fight for equality-if black tries to play 'close to the vest' then its simply inevitable that one of these breaks are going to leave him in a bad position (assuming white is familiar with the various sorts of positions either break will bring about). For this reason, the opening is often very sharp and tctical and many strange things can occur, making it difficult to speak of definate 'methods' because so many sorts of positions are possible. One must know position would be the king's gambit declined transpositions, since this is quite common when white performs the f4 break, and in practice is what black seems to go for most often (but I dont know why). However, there are many lines with similar character to the ruy lopez, a ruy lopez reversed, and a two knights/scotch/ and or ruy lopez sort of hybrid. So to make a long answer short, I consider the vienna to be a somewhat fancy approach to double king pawn openings and you really should have the strategic concpect down of five different fundamental lines (king's gambit (declined and accepted), ruy lopez, two knights, and scotch). Then the opening is highly conducive to home preperation for both sides in very sharp, dangerous lines, for both sides. My best advice if you dont do this, and are playing on a lower level, is simply continue developing as logically as you can for white, but always stare at the two possible breaks, d4 and f4... as black develops, especially if he goes a little passive, figure out if one of these breaks are seem to give you some advantage. |
|
| May-29-09 |
| Fanacas: The Steinitz gambit from the vienna is a intresting line to play with white(my faforit opening) your king wil be in the center but stil rather well gaurded you get compleet center domination only as i said the king is in the center and you wil have a lead in devolepment. 1.e4 - e5
2.Nc3 - Nc6
3.f4 - exf4
4.d4 - Qh4+
5.Ke2 - d6(is the best option for black atleast said by gm d5 is also a option but white can defend himself wel enough against it but it is more aggressive for black)
6.Nf3 - Bg4
7.Bxf4 - 0-0-0(taking the knight isent that good white takes back with the kign and the king wil soon be in safety.)
8.Ke3 - Qh5 (otherwise black wil lsoe a piece)
9.Be2 This is a quit intresitn opening if white can trade queens his postion is rather well sind the king isent in that much danger anymore. And i lvoe my opponents faces when i play my king form e1-e2-e3. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
