chessgames.com
Two Knights Defense (C55)
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6

Number of games in database: 3276
Years covered: 1845 to 2013
Overall record:
   White wins 40.2%
   Black wins 29.9%
   Draws 29.9%

Popularity graph, by decade

Explore this opening  |  Search for sacrifices in this opening.
PRACTITIONERS
With the White Pieces With the Black Pieces
Leonid Yudasin  28 games
Vladislav Nevednichy  25 games
Viktor Bologan  25 games
Mark Hebden  37 games
Efim Geller  23 games
Vladimir P Malaniuk  21 games
NOTABLE GAMES [what is this?]
White Wins Black Wins
Tal vs Miller, 1988
Morphy vs NN, 1858
W Von Holzhausen vs Tarrasch, 1912
J Smith vs G H Derrickson, 1860
J A Blanco vs Capablanca, 1901
D Hermann vs Charousek, 1896
<< previous chapter next chapter >>

 page 1 of 132; games 1-25 of 3,276  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves Year Event/LocaleOpening
1. E Rousseau vs C Stanley ½-½48 1845 New Orleans m ;HCL 34C55 Two Knights Defense
2. W Bruijn vs H Kloos ½-½60 1851 AmsterdamC55 Two Knights Defense
3. Meyerhofer vs Kieseritzky 1-043 1851 Club TourneyC55 Two Knights Defense
4. Allies vs Saint Amant  0-138 1855 Paris consultC55 Two Knights Defense
5. Staunton vs Owen / Barnes  1-036 1856 LondonC55 Two Knights Defense
6. Winkel vs Alkmaar 0-134 1856 City MatchC55 Two Knights Defense
7. P Journoud vs J Grevy  1-022 1857 FranceC55 Two Knights Defense
8. Paulsen vs NN 1-041 1858 ChicagoC55 Two Knights Defense
9. Morphy vs NN 1-023 1858 New Orleans -C55 Two Knights Defense
10. P Journoud vs De Riviere  ½-½40 1859 ParisC55 Two Knights Defense
11. S Urusov vs A Petrov 0-148 1859 Warsaw m corrC55 Two Knights Defense
12. Anderssen vs De Riviere 1-032 1859 ParisC55 Two Knights Defense
13. Steinitz vs Meitner 1-026 1860 Vienna (Austria)C55 Two Knights Defense
14. J Smith vs G H Derrickson 0-117 1860 Philadelphia -C55 Two Knights Defense
15. A Carstanjen vs Kolisch 1-028 1860 UnknownC55 Two Knights Defense
16. Steinitz vs F Nowotny 1-031 1860 UnknownC55 Two Knights Defense
17. Kolisch vs R Steel 1-035 1861 LiverpoolC55 Two Knights Defense
18. Kolisch vs Paulsen ½-½25 1861 London mC55 Two Knights Defense
19. A de Lelie vs Anderssen 1-020 1861 UnknownC55 Two Knights Defense
20. N Marache vs J Leonard 0-122 1861 3rd Free Handicap TournamentC55 Two Knights Defense
21. Blackburne vs Howard 1-036 1862 Blindfold simulC55 Two Knights Defense
22. Kolisch vs Shumov 1-019 1862 St PetersburgC55 Two Knights Defense
23. Kolisch vs Shumov 1-057 1862 St Petersburg mC55 Two Knights Defense
24. Von Hanneken vs J Kohtz  ½-½68 1862 WSB-02.KongressC55 Two Knights Defense
25. E Schallopp vs F Amelung 0-124 1862 BerlinC55 Two Knights Defense
 page 1 of 132; games 1-25 of 3,276  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)  
 

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 4 OF 6 ·  Later Kibitzing>
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
0-1
If Qxd3 Qe1+
20 Qf1 is not possible , because
20..Bxf2+ 21 Kh2 Qe5+ 22 Kh3 Qg3#
Feb-15-06
Premium Chessgames Member
  notyetagm: V Malakhatko vs G Timoshenko, 2003 ends in the brilliant 23 ... Qxf3!!, 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 Ng5 d5 5 exd5 Na5.

Mar-22-06
Premium Chessgames Member
  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
Premium Chessgames Member
  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
Premium Chessgames Member
  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:
1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bc4 Nf6
4.Ng5 d5
5.exd5 Na5
6.Bb5+ c6
7.dxc6 bxc6
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 .

Any thoughts?

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
Premium Chessgames Member
  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
Premium Chessgames Member
  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.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 6)
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 4 OF 6 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other users.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
Blow the Whistle See something which violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.


NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific opening and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Little ChessPartner | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2013, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by 20/20 Technologies