18 ( +1 | -1 ) pawn sac -- is it justifiedIn the evans, one pawn is given up for tempo gain. May I ask if this sac was justified ? can black, successfully defending, capitalise on this one pawn QS majority to go on to win under normal circumstances ?
76 ( +1 | -1 ) As with many other gambits, it doesn't work well in correspondence chess or within Master level OTB. In intermediate level, the OTB time constraint will be a problem in defending against gambits, not likely in correspondence chess. In beginner level, gambit can be very powerfull, but some concepts (like tempo) must be first understood.
Theoritically, the sacrifice is not justified. The key to play with Black is to return the pawn advantage at any suitable time, in order to make the situation even (usualy Black will have a slight positional advantage, which is very important in Master level games).
The most common pawn return is ...d4 to block White's bishop and open up his own bishop and queen (from "isolation").
27 ( +1 | -1 ) I am in trouble, already ....After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 6.d4 exd4 7.0-0 dxc3 things look rather bad for white!
Comment: (xxxxxxxxx) i guess..ur opening has not worked out for you so far. Comment: (mattafort) it does not look good, so far
I hope things will turn my way. Or I quit playing Evans Gambit. /matta
17 ( +1 | -1 ) TT2was/is a Thematic Tournament on Evans Gambit, check out the games at www.e4e6.com.
Best wishes Cairo
27 ( +1 | -1 ) Okay, thanksthanks, Cairo I found this link on the web: www.trottermath.com/EGtmt.html
Terry's Thematic tournaments
27 ( +1 | -1 ) Evans gambitIs really fascinating opening! i have read much about it, but problem is that peoples often play 3. -Nf3, but rarely 3. - Bc5, so i dint hame a chance to move to evans gambit.
18 ( +1 | -1 ) 3. Bc4 for attackYes 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 is not always played. on 3.Bc4 Nf6 I always play the offensive 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.d4 (5... Na5 6.Bb5+) Another alternative for black is 3...Be7: 3.Bc4 Be7 4.d4!
I like 3.Bc4 better than 3.Bb5 (or 3.d4) cause I like to be attacking - to have initiative
26 ( +1 | -1 ) Don't despairMattafort, don't despair. That's a normal line for the Evans. As Indiana-Jay said, it's not a good idea to play a speculative gambit in correspondence. It gives your opponent time to "book" and look at all the possibilities. Overthe board it's fine, especially in blitz.
12 ( +1 | -1 ) I knowI know it is not bad - and I like it!
first give black b4-pawn then d4-pawn and last the c3-pawn that's the way I like it .... :D
18 ( +1 | -1 ) The evans gambit is not incorrect,And it is used at the top. Kasparov has played it 3 times! www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1018648
27 ( +1 | -1 ) ...If you can ever get your hands on the book, "Chess Openings A&M" by Freeborough, that could be helpful to you in the Evans Gambit (One of my personal favorite openings!)
The book has about 120 different lines of the Evans, with a heck of a lot of notes. That's how diverse this opening can be.
16 ( +1 | -1 ) Groucho plays EvansHooray for Captain Evans, The opening explorer, He pushed his pawn to b4 and the bishop ran for cover!
Tim Harding wrote a whole book on Evans. You can find it at Amazon.
29 ( +1 | -1 ) Captain Evans sidelightWhen Capt Evans (a middling amateur) launched his gambit against MacDonnell, the greatest English master of his time, he castled FIRST before playing b4. Despite being a great player, MacDonnell was baffled by the opening and lost in a 20 move mate. You could look it up!
22 ( +1 | -1 ) mattafort wrote:"on 3.Bc4 Nf6 I always play the offensive 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.d4"
In my opinion, 5. ...Nxd5 is a blunder that should be punished, via 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 8. Nc3, after which white has a dangerous attack, and black's development is severely impeded.
13 ( +1 | -1 ) thanks, squijumthanks, squijum I will try that one next time
16 ( +1 | -1 ) It's fun to play as white, but don't get carried away; you may find yourself down three pieces, with the black king slipping, just barely, away...
8 ( +1 | -1 ) Only 3 pieces ?Only 3 pieces down ? Well, that is quite okay ............ I think????
24 ( +1 | -1 ) Don't expect a blunderIn your opinion, Squijum, and ten million others. Nobody in their right mind expects 5. ...Nxd5 and if Mattafort goes into the Two Knights Defence expecting it, he's due for a rude awakening. 5...Na5 is the usual move and then it's a bit of a struggle for white.
14 ( +1 | -1 ) I play against ...Na5, right now.I have played gainst ...Nxd5 several times. Now I play a game against 5...Na5 for the first time. I say it is a bit tricky :) But I WILL WIN - I think I can do it!
20 ( +1 | -1 ) 5... Nxd5is definitely not a blunder. It may be an inferior line, but it's not a blunder. I think 6. d4 is best, which leads IMO to a clear advantage for White with no risk, while 6. Nxf7 is extremely murky and unclear at best.
68 ( +1 | -1 ) 5..Nxd5 a blunder??I don't know what you call a blunder. It doesn't lose immediately, if that's what you mean. It is a mistake usually "out of stupidity, ignorance, or mental confusion." (Merriam-Webster). Here I think it's ignorance of the possibilities. Estrin, in his little book, Two Knights Defence, say it "leads to a difficult position for black," and I agree. Like Mattafort, I have played against 5...Nxd5 and black usually finds his king wandering around the center of the board. 5...Na5, Nd4, or b5 are some possibilities for black. Estrin prefers 6. Nxf7 to punish black. As for 6. d4 he says "Up to a few years ago theory considered 6. d4 to be preferable. However, this sacrifice (Nxf7) is now considered to be the best." But theory is always changing!
27 ( +1 | -1 ) Of course you shouldn't EXPECT Nxd5. I never said you should. I merely said that if your opponent plays 5. Nxd5, 6. Nxf7 is better than 6. d4. Maybe 5. Nxd5 isn't a blunder, but it's definitely dubious. And after 5. ...Na5 6. Bb5+ c6 7. dxc6 bxc6 8. Qf3 white isn't worse.
47 ( +1 | -1 ) A blunderusually refers to a completely overlooked move which radically changes the game, such as giving away a piece.
As you note, theory is always changing. I have Estrin's book, and, while it is very good, I believe it was written around 25 years ago, and there have been a large number of theoretic revisions on his book since then. At any rate, 6. Nxf7 is far from being clear, while 6. d4 guarantees a clearly better position.
3 ( +1 | -1 ) I guess it all depends on how bold you are.
63 ( +1 | -1 ) Fischer's move 9. Nh3After some study on the net, I decided Not to play 5. ...Na5 6. Bb5+ c6 7. dxc6 bxc6 8. Qf3
"Lane" at chesscafe.com had an article about this. Black is not too bad after 8.Qf3 Qc7, and even perhaps better off after 8.Qf3 Rb8! So I played 8.Be2 h6 9.Nh3, Fischer's move It seems to have better results than 9.Nf3
Opening Lanes, by Gary Lane www.chesscafe.com/text/lane02.txt
I had a look at Nxf7 after Nxd5. After this I will stick to d4. It is good enough. And after Nxf7, seems like white's attack will get stuck, if black plays correct.
8 ( +1 | -1 ) Good IdeasSome good ideas here, which will help everyone!
47 ( +1 | -1 ) 9. Nh3I don't know why you call it Fischer's move. Steintz used it starting in 1891 and had some pretty lousy results. I don't like it because it seems to give black and easy lead in development which is worth the pawn. Fischer goes into it in his 60 Memorable Games (against Bisguier) and Estrin discusses Fischer's ideas in Two Knight's Defence. My Fritz 8 database gives Nh3 better results than Nf3 so I guess it comes down to personal preference.
64 ( +1 | -1 ) Fischer's move 9. Nh3I call it Fischer's move, becuaseit is know that in that position Fischer made the choice of 9. Nh3
It is a little different to call it somebody's Variation and somebody's move I think you mean Steinitz variation, which is the accepted name for this VARIATION
but let's not waste time on "name calling issues" or mark words, when we both know what is meant. And that is the purpose of any language or words.
37 ( +1 | -1 ) Further investigationsSteinitz and Fischer are not the only who has tried 9.Nh3 Other less talented players has also used it: Short,N(2673)-Wedberg,T(2540) 1-0 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Be2 h6 9.Nh3 Bd6 10.d3 O-O 11.Nc3 Nd5 12.O-O Rb8 13.Kh1 Nxc3 14.bxc3 Be6 15.f4 Bxh3 Ivanchuk,V(2740)-Beliavsky,A(2690) 1/2-1/2 9.Nh3 Bd6 10.d3 O-O 11.Nc3 Nd5 12.Bd2 Rb8 13.b3 Nb7 14.Ng1 Nc5 15.Nf3 Nxc3
Maybe Fischer was hoping for Bxh3, gxh3 and Rg1 for an attack. Nh3 also gives a possibility for f2-f4, another agressive move.
23 ( +1 | -1 ) About Accepted EvansGambitafter Bxb4, c3 I guess the wisest for black is to draw back his Bishop to Be7. Bc5 I do not believe in Ba5 can do, but black can not afford the slightest mistake.
About declined Evans, I know just about nothing. But I will learn in time.
55 ( +1 | -1 ) Evans in blitzI've played the Two knights maybe a dozen times on ICC. It's great for blitz, especially when they take that pawn with the knight. I played it once as white on GK (9. Nf3) and Ithink iwon eventually, but it was a trial. I used to play it as a kid and my opponents ALWAYS took with the knight, and I always beat them (apologies to Atrifix). When I played more sophisticated players, I realized I was way behind on development and thought a long time before moving that knight to g5. Old maxim: Don't move the same piece twice in opening.
31 ( +1 | -1 ) EvansBecouse you are all talking about two knights defence here, i would like to know if it can be transformed to Evans?
What i have read, the most hardest question with Evans gambit for white is "when to castle?"
26 ( +1 | -1 ) Evans is the subject.but when you play 3.Bc4, you must be prepared for that 3.... Nf6 is a very common reply.
In accepted Evans and Ba5, white have the choice to play 0-0 and d4, or d4 first and 0-0 I have tried both now. I mastill not sure what id best? 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 5.b4 Bxb4 6.c3 Ba5 7.d4 is most often played