|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jan-08-02
 | | Sneaky: So what's the scoop on 1 e4 e5 2 Nc3 Nf6 3 Bc4 Nxe4? Has Black equalized? |
|
| Jan-09-02 | | bishop: I think I remember reading a comment By Alekhine that said that yes ..nxe4 refutes the Vienna game. |
|
| Jul-26-03 | | Helloween: After 4.Qh5! Nd6! 5.Bb3 Nc6 6.Nb5! g6 7.Qf3 f5 8.Qd5 Qe7 9.Nxc7+ Kd8 10.Nxa8 b6! we have the dreaded Frankenstein-Dracula variation(or Monster variation), which is uneven and chaotic, and Black has strong counterplay. White, however, should be able to force a win with tactful precision play. |
|
| Jul-26-03 | | maa: why white cant take the knight? |
|
Jul-26-03
| | Sneaky: maa, White can take the knight, but Black will win the piece back: 4.Nxe4 d5 forking the bishop and knight. This manuveur is sometimes called "the fork trick." |
|
| Jul-26-03 | | Helloween: Consequently, if White tries to avoid the fork with the amateur 4.Bxf7+?, then 4...Kxf7 5.Nxe4 d5(Black has the ideal pawn centre)6.Nc3 Nc6! 7.Qf3+ Ke6 and White is inferior. If 8.Qg4+? Kd6! and 9.Nb5+? Kc5! with a great game and a safe, active King. |
|
| May-09-04 | | rochade18: I'd like to see that. Openings with a "developed" king are the best. The king is an active piece in some lines of the King's gambit and in the Steinitz gambit of the Vienna game. |
|
| Oct-19-04 | | Dillinger: refutes? Just play the gambit variation. It has never been refuted. |
|
| Oct-20-04 | | SicilianDragon: 1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. g3 is an interesting line of the Vienna which was used to great effect by Scottish GM Paul Motwani. Dillinger, what "gambit variation" are you talking about? 2. f4 or 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. f4 (the latter of which is definitely refuted by 3...d5!) |
|
| Oct-20-04 | | beenthere240: the 3. f4 Vienna gambit still has a lot of kick, even after 3...d5, as a survey of the opening exporer will demonstrate. |
|
| Oct-22-04 | | Dillinger: <dragon> I don't think it has been refuted, and yes 3.f4, not 2.f4 (king's gambit). |
|
| Oct-23-04 | | acirce: What does "refuted" mean exactly? Black can probably equalize with best play but hardly hope for more. Most lines lead to the kind of unbalanced positions that you probably want to reach as White if you play that. Purely theoretically it's clear that the Vienna is not White's best. |
|
| Oct-26-04 | | aw1988: Isn't the vienna simply e4 e5 ♘c3? |
|
| Oct-26-04 | | sneaky pete: <aw1988> Yes, it is, unless there's a later transposition, but in ECO it's divided in 5 chapters (C25/26/27/28/29). |
|
| Oct-26-04 | | Saruman: Yesterday I studied the game J Mieses vs NN, and I found the strong continuations Nb5! and -b6! within a few minutes(as a sidestep to analyze theory). This morning I was taught that the variation was called the Frankenstein-Dracula variation, I had no idea that I had entered that variation, nor had I heard of it before! |
|
| Mar-29-05 | | raydot: I don't want to insult the more advanced players (and I certainly don't have a strong sense of how many on CG are beginners and how many are advanced and how many beginners are doing things like digging into the kibbitzing of openings like the Vienna Game) by posting such a banal piece of advice, but all you novii out there, watch out for the "fork trick" that <Sneaky> mentions above (4. Nxe4 d5). You'll probably see it quite a bit if you're playing against stronger players and don't know to look out for it. |
|
| Apr-04-05 | | tintin: It also occasionally comes up in other openings, like the Two Knights defense, when White is being not very adventurous, fearing b5 or Na5, though that is not very relenvant on this page. I must mention though, that this variation (Frankenstein-Dracula) very rarely comes up in my games- i have never played it in a tournament, so it is hardly worth studying all the theory, unless you have lots of time. Just be safe and take the pawn in order to trade queens. |
|
| Apr-11-05 | | tintin: (Sorry, wrong page, ignore the above message, unless you really feel like discussing it!) |
|
| Oct-28-05 | | chesscrazy: I haven't seen this opening often. |
|
| Oct-28-05 | | Resignation Trap: <chesscrazy> You should play it in a tournament this weekend! |
|
| Oct-31-05 | | Swapmeet: I would play this variation if they could just come up with a better name than "Frankenstein-Dracula". Sheesh. |
|
| Oct-31-05 | | SneechLatke: Excellent choice for opening of the day <chessgames>. Obviously quite fitting. I've heard that the opening got its name when, in an article, the author (whose name escapes me at the moment) dubbed it "Frankenstein against Dracula" because of the extreme ugliness of the resulting positions, as though the two were slugging it out. |
|
| Oct-31-05 | | RonB52734: I happened to notice that the opening in I Rivise vs Santasiere, 1946 is described as "Monster Declined." I guess not everybody likes a Monster. |
|
| Nov-22-05 | | tintin: <bishop: I think I remember reading a comment By Alekhine that said that yes ..nxe4 refutes the Vienna game.> If you don't want to play against that line as white, play e4 Bc4 d3 and THEN Nc3, when you usually have exactly the same position as the alternative move order except Nxe4 is just stupid. |
|
| Jul-23-06 | | Knight13: I almost got beat in this opening as White really bad until I found a saving move... I was so behind in initiative and his central control was killing me and all pawns crashing into my king and all that until he played a sac, Nf3+, which I responded instead of gxf3 I did Nxf3!?, won two pawns, got my kind out of safety, and won... I don't intend to do it again. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
