In the middle game, I managed to get a massive attack on the opponent’s king, and even scored a brilliancy according to the engine on move 16! I squander that immediately, but the advantage of my better structure allowed me to force an endgame where I had two rooks to my opponent’s one.ġ. Perhaps the Austrian Master Ernst Falkbeer thought that it's best to fight fire with fire when he was playing a match against Adolf Anderssen in 1851 and decided to counter Anderssen's King's Gambit with 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4 Position after 3. Simply, someone who declines the Vienna Gambit with Bd6 is not likely to play very accurately afterwards even if you do stuff up. In the actual game, the trickiness of the Vienna Gambit saved me from my error, and I got a dominant position out of the opening. In essence, against a prepared Vienna Gambit player, declining the gambit with Bd6 is losing on move 3! White has a win advantage over Black at 80% vs 18% at this point. At the end of this sequence, the evaluation favours White at over +4, White is up in material by a full piece, and has more development. ![]() e5) which forks Black’s bishop and knight, and it is unavoidable that one of them will be lost. Then, the e-pawn marches forward again (6. However, this then allows for the forward advance by the d-pawn, to which Black must retreat their bishop (5. The only logical move is for the Black bishop to capture back (4… Bxe5), they defended the pawn with bishop for this purpose after all. That is, the line starts with immediately capturing the opponent’s e-pawn with the f-pawn (4. On post-game analysis with the Stockfish engine, the way to approach this is in the same way as the much more common decline of the Vienna Gambit with Nc6. This is a mistake – a blunder in fact according to Stockfish. My knowledge of the Vienna Gambit was such that I immediately knew that this was objectively bad, and yet at the same time, I didn’t know how to immediately punish it! In the actual game, I used the heuristic that “if you can take the full centre with pawns, you should do so” and I played d4, putting three pawns in the centre. ![]() According to the Lichess community database of lower-rated blitz and rapid games, the Vienna Gambit is declined by Bd6 only 1% of the time. They declined the gambit by defending their pawn on e5 with Bd6. Recently, I played a game where I was able to open with the standard (Falkbeer) Vienna Gambit (e4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 f4) where my opponent surprised me. There is a complicated line with 6.Bc5 7.Qe2 Bf5 (7.Bf2+ 8.Kd1 Qxd5+ 9.Nfd2 is a very important resource for White) 8.Nc3 Qe7 9.Be3, but this should favour White.One of the amazing things about chess is how quickly you can encounter something that is novel to you, even in an opening you have a great degree of familiarity. ![]() Therefore White should prefer 6.Nf3, whereupon Boris Alterman's recommendation 6.c6!? gives interesting play, though I think White should have slightly the better of the chances. 5.d3 Bb4 6.Bd2 e3 is one well-established problem.Īfter 4.d3 Nf6 5.dxe4 Nxe4, White can emerge with a good position with 6.Be3 if Black plays the obvious 6.Qh4+, but perhaps surprisingly, Black is doing quite well with 6.Bd6!?. White should challenge Black's e4-pawn immediately with 4.d3, since 4.Nc3 Nf6 brings Black closer to getting castled on the kingside, giving Black options involving letting White play d2-d3 and d3xe4, and then hammering White down the e-file. I used to think this line was bad for Black, but recent investigations, notably by Boris Alterman, have resurrected Black's chances and it is probably only slightly better for White with best play.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |