< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 3 ·
|Jun-29-06|| ||Poisonpawns: I remember Alekhine saying he gave up the vienna because of 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4! I think this is the only way to show whites opening is weak.Other lines such as 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6!? are playable but let white off too easy.this game O Ekebjaerg vs G Timmerman, 1991
in the scariest version of vienna, shows the best way for black,accept the challenge,give up the a8 rook.Then capatalise on whites arrogant time loss.This is a model way to play by two awsome players.|
|Jun-29-06|| ||ganstaman: I almost have to disagree with Alekhine -- I'm thinking of taking of the Vienna in part <because> of that Frankenstein-Dracula line. I really enjoy defending, especially when up material. Once I survive, I can attack (or play the endgame) with my extra material.|
The other reason I want to play the Vienna is that I love pushing my f-pawn. I've played the Bird many times already and wanted someting else to play (I've also played the Reti, but after a while it bored me. Probably because playing 1.Nf3 traps the f-pawn for a long time). 1.e4 is always a good way to go, and the Vienna seems like a good way to allow yourself to get in the f4 push without having to play the King's Gambit (The KG just isn't my style).
But back to the Frankenstein-Dracula variation -- it isn't unsound, is it? Just double edged and risky, right? I don't care if black has theoretically equalized, but I also don't want to play a 'refuted' line regularly.
|Jun-30-06|| ||IMlday: <ganstaman> in Thomas-Day White's gambit doesn't look sound but 20..dxe5?? is an ordinary blunder due to boredom/over-confidence.|
|Apr-17-07|| ||gambitfan: Opening of the day OPOD Tu 17/04/2007|
|Jul-23-07|| ||matiz: what is the strategy of the vienna? i think of playing it but i dont know anything about it?|
|Jul-23-07|| ||whiteshark: <matiz: <what is the strategy of the vienna? <i think of playing it < but i dont know anything about it? >>>>
|Jul-23-07|| ||IMlday: White overprotects e4 and stops d7-d5 while leaving the f-pawn unobstructed by a ♘f3. The Vienna is probably stronger than the White side of a Petroff (or indeed the Black side of a Schleiman). In Thomas-Day White's gambit now appears pretty strong
making ..Bc5 suspect compared to ..Bb4 which Werle played against me last year at the Staunton. A good way to get a feel for the Vienna is to do a search on Larsen's page. He was quite successful with it even against well-prepared GMs.|
|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.
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?
|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.
<'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
|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.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 3 ·