< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 6 ·
|Aug-01-05|| ||Poisonpawns: http://www.chesscafe.com/archives/a...
here is the link to analysis on the berliner variation.Go to tim hardings section and look under march 2001
|Aug-01-05|| ||SneechLatke: <Reegan Milne> Black does not need to play Qxg2, but 7. Be2 is still a weak move. Black can press his advantage with 7...Nd4 or 7...Bb7. Search by position at the database http://www.chesslive.de/, and you will see black has very good results in this line. Black could even play the line <azaris> brings up. The problem with your suggestion is that black is guaranteed at least equality, since 6.Bxb5 does nothing to challenge black's opening play. If white hopes for an advantage, practice and analysis show that 6.Bf1 is the move to play.|
|Aug-26-05|| ||DanielBryant: Last night I was looking at 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Qf3 with the professor in charge of the chess club here on campus. Here, as black, I sacrificed the exchange as recommended by Purdy in a couple of games and lost. The professor recommended I look at some new lines after white's eighth. Any suggestions?|
|Aug-26-05|| ||Swapmeet: I'm pretty sure sacrificing the exchange is bad for black in that line. I would reccomend 8... Rb8 and then if |
9.Bxc6+ Nxc6 10.Qxc6+ Nd7 <if 10... Bd7 11.Qc4 and white keeps the initiative> and black will get enormous compensation in developement for the pawns.
or 8... Qc7 9. Bd3 Bd6 10. Nc3 Bg4 11. Nb5 Bxf3 12. Nxc7+ Bxc7 13. gxf3 = (MCO)
There are other moves, but I think overall 8.Qf3 is theoretically slightly better for black. You just have to remember that the 2 Knights is about developement and attack, not material, and you should be ok. Do what I do and just ignore the pawns, and don't trade pieces unless its necessary or you get something back.
|Sep-16-05|| ||DanielBryant: Thanks.|
|Sep-18-05|| ||Averageguy: What do you guys here think about the line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.Re1 d5 7.Nxd5 Qxd5 8.Nc3 Qh5 9.Nxe4 Be6 10.Bg5!?
I have played the two knights as black for a while and on the tenth move white players usually try to restore material equality with 10.Neg5?! After which I gain the initiative with 10...0-0-0 11.Nxe6 fxe6 12.Rxe6 Bd6 and I win most games in this position. However, a few weeks ago, at my chess club the champ (a 1980 player) played 10.Bg5 Not having seen this move before and noting that 10...f6 would lose to the bishop sac on f6, I played 10...h6 but he then played 11.Bf6! And I quickly got steamrollerd. On coming home I checked my two-knights book but Jan Pinski and it suggested against 10.Bg5 to play either 10...Bd6 or 10..Bb4!? What do you guys think?|
|Sep-20-05|| ||Poisonpawns: its all theory,brush up on the two knights thats all|
|Sep-22-05|| ||Averageguy: <Poisonpawns> Thanks! Next time we played the same opening with the same colours in a blitz, and I played the reccomended 10...Bd6. He played for the same trick with 11.Bf6, but I now hit him with a simplifiying combination to keep my pawn: 11...Bxh2+ 12.Nxh2 Qxd1 13.Raxd1 gxf6 14.Nxf6+ Ke7 15.Nd5+ Kd7 (allowing him to draw by prepetual, this would be a very good result for me against a 1980-2000 rated player!) 16.Nf4 (playing for a win) 16...Rhe8 17.c3 Bf5 18.Rxe8 Rxe8 19.cxd4 Re4 (this trick regaining the pawn I had seen several moves earlier) 20.Nh5 Rxd4 (20...Nxd4 21.Nf6+) 21.Rxd4 Nxd4 and I won the endgame. The third time I have ever beat this man!|
|Oct-10-05|| ||AlexanderMorphy: This is one of the oldest openings. I think that black's thrid move is a more aggresive defnse than the giuoco piano. Actually i have heard than some masters call it Chigorin's counter attack because they think that it's too aggresive to be described as a defense. Yesterday the opeing of the day was the fried liver attack, which i dipise greatly...it's a variation of the 2 knights and can sometimes be useful..but i've lost far too many games with it and have stopped playing it!|
|Oct-31-05|| ||Paul123: I like classical opening for a couple of reasons. A) There is a lot of good solid theory on classical openings floating out there in print. B) They are solid with no refutations and often are not in vogue because of fads, so your opponent usually will be thrown to his own devises early on. |
The Two Knights defense is a perfect example of this. It is a very violent classical counter attack that is right up there in intensity with the ever-aggressive and ever popular Sicilian. If I played aggressive openings this would be one that I would specialize in.
|Dec-20-05|| ||Photophore: To "pay" my entry on this forum , here is a game I played in ETT/6 / 05/2
White : V.Marrone
Black : C. Le Page
1 e4 e5
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bc4 Nf6
4 Ng5 d5
5 exd5 b5
6 Bf1 Nd4
7 c3 Nxd5
8 h4 h6
9 Nxf7 Kxf7
10 cxd4 exd4
11 Qf3+ Nf6
12 Qxa8 Bc5
13 Bxb5 Qe7+
14 Kf1 Ba6
15 Qf3 Re8
16 Kg1 Bxb5
17 Qb3+ Kf8
18 Qxb5 d3
If Qxd3 Qe1+
20 Qf1 is not possible , because
20..Bxf2+ 21 Kh2 Qe5+ 22 Kh3 Qg3#
|Feb-15-06|| ||notyetagm: V Malakhatko vs G Timoshenko, 2003 ends in the brilliant 23 ... xf3!!, forcing White to give up his queen to avoid a Blackburne mate. |
This is a model game in playing the Black side of the Two Knights Defense. In fact, in Jan Pinski's book on this opening, this game is the very first one in the chapter on the main line 4 g5 d5 5 exd5 a5.
|Mar-22-06|| ||RandomVisitor: In the Ulvestad line:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.Bf1 Nd4 7.c3 Nxd5 8.Ne4 Qh4 9.Ng3 Bg4 10.f3 e4 11.cxd4 Bd6
What about 12.Qe2 Be6 13.Nc3!? Nxc3 14.bxc3 Bxg3 15.hxg3 Qxh1 16.Qxb5+
click for larger view
White has a pawn for the exchange (and another to come) and play: evaluation roughly +1.30
|Mar-25-06|| ||RandomVisitor: (answering my own post) Looks like 13...0-0 is better for black in the above line.|
|Mar-29-07|| ||Silverstrike: Does anyone have any thoughs on 4.Qe2 ?|
|Mar-29-07|| ||plang: I'm not sure e2 is the best square for the queen. What is the idea behind 4 Qe2?|
|Mar-30-07|| ||micartouse: I've encountered 4. Qe2 as an interesting attempt to talk black out of opening up the game with ...d5 (there is an x-ray threat on e5). From Black's perspective, I think the closed variations of the 2N are dangerous where white plays stuff like d3, c3, Bg5, Nbd2, 0-0, etc. It's like the closed Ruy. Black is stuck with slow arid play on the queenside while White gets to attack. Qe2 can be part of that whole system.|
This goes against main theory (GMs keep the game closed as black), but from a practical perspective I feel Black's best bet in such positions is to play ...Bc5, ...0-0, and ...d5 as soon as possible to avoid this. Of course this means Black must be prepared since it's double edged and sharp. Some lines require a pawn sac for Black. Some 2N players don't like ...Bc5 because of the Bg5 pin, but I try to play it if I can.
I feel Qe2 is no different. As Black, I would strongly consider something as extreme as ...
4. Qe2 Bc5
5. d3 0-0
6. Bg5 h6
7. Bh4 g5
8. Bg3 d5
I don't know if it's sound, but again I feel it's more practical at the club level. My experience has been that Black's best bet in the 2N is a brisk, tactical game with a little risk if necessary. (Also, that's just one line for White. I purposely only addressed the Bg5 pin).
As for White's perspective, there may be other reasons to play 4. Qe2 but that's the only one I've seen. And in that sense I agree with <plang> - it may not serve a point. Just play 4. d3 and see how things go before committing the queen. So I don't like 4. Qe2 so much for White.
|Mar-30-07|| ||Manic: After:
What would you play: Qf3 or Be2?
|Mar-30-07|| ||Silverstrike: <micartouse> <plang> Thanks both for responding. My idea behind 4.Qe2 was just something different and classical. I played this game against a 1981 rated player a few weeks ago:|
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Qe2 Bc5 5.Nc3 d6 6.h3 0-0 7.d3 Na5 8.Bg5 Nxc4 9.dxc4 Be6 10.0-0-0 h6 11.Bh4 g5 12.Nxg5 hxg5 13.Bxg5 Kg7 14.f4 Qe8 15.f5 Ke7 16.fxe6 fxe6 and here, up a pawn, I managed to lose my way and eventually I surrendered the game. But I think that Qe2 was helpful in this game, in that it allowed my rook to have free reign over the d-file, and made castling queenside easier.
Another point is the gambit 5.b4 .
After the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Qe2 Bc5 5.b4 .
Thanks again for posting you previous responses.
|Apr-12-07|| ||Silverstrike: <Manic> I think that 8.Qf3 is considered inferior to 8.Be2, but I don't know the exact analysis. I'll post some a little later.|
|Apr-12-07|| ||Tactic101: I feel they are both good. With Qf3, white develops another piece and has a threat. h6 could be played here. Then Ne4. Nd5 holds the position for black. Then white has to play Be2. I think this position is pretty equal to the one reached by white immediately playing Be2. Thats my idea. But I'm no opening expert and I haven't played this line for a long time, prefering the play the more solid Petroff.|
|Apr-13-07|| ||Tactic101: I have now abandoned the two knights defense entirely. It's just too risky. If white is able to solidify his position, black is dead. I may pull it out for a blitz, but not for real matches. Bc5 after Bc4 is much more solid.|
|Apr-13-07|| ||refutor: Qf3 is the reason i gave up the two knights...i had used to try 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ Bd7!? as played by a bunch of people and had an article written on it in NIC a bunch of years ago, but that ended up giving too passive of a position.|
|Apr-13-07|| ||Manic: Well, mostly Be2 has been played in recent years but apparently Qf3 is now starting to make a come back, and I play the two knights so im not sure which one to use. Sometimes when I play Be2 I get too cramped up so I was thinking of switching to Qf3.|
|Apr-13-07|| ||keypusher: Manic, here is a recent Nigel Short win with Qf3. Short vs Hebden, 2006|
The game page includes some interesting commentary and links about the Two Knights Defense generally.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 6 ·