(UTC)
Latest Updates:
(Moderators: trw, Smyslov_Fan, Jupp53)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) C39: Kieseritzky Gambit (Read 43396 times)
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #51 - 01/29/11 at 12:24:16
Post Tools
Actually the lines with 8...Qe7 are perfectly playable for Black
9.Qxe7 (9.Nf2,Nc6 does not benefit White much),Bxe7
This position is more or less equal as has been shown by several high level correspondence games between 2007 and 2010.

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

10.Nf2,Nc6 11.c3,Bh6=

10.Be2,h5! 11.Nf2,Nh6! 13.Bxf4,Nf5 14.Rh2,Rg8 =+
And here Black is even slightly better as shown in the games
Mantu-Babychuk, 2010 and Fraser-Haraldson 2007
both played in ICCF tournaments. Both black players had an 2300+ ICCF rating.

14.g3?! (iso 14.Rh2),Ng2+! 15.Kd2,h4! -/+ (Scharf - van Damme, ICCF,2007)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Schwebbz
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline



Posts: 26
Joined: 12/19/10
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #50 - 01/29/11 at 03:30:18
Post Tools
10.Be2 allows black to get in the useful 10...h5 with tempo.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Schwebbz
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline



Posts: 26
Joined: 12/19/10
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #49 - 01/26/11 at 12:13:06
Post Tools
5...Qe7 6.d4 d6 7.Nxg4 Qxe4 8.Qe2 Qe7!?

I haven't seen blacks eight move mentioned anywhere in analysis. Korchnoi & Zak mentioned only 8...Bf5, Gallagher also has 8...d5.

9.Qxe7 Bxe7 10.Nf2 and now...?

Is blacks extra tempo here important? Is the line with 5...Qe7 salvagable?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #48 - 12/16/10 at 19:06:03
Post Tools
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

Thx Patzernoster,
To recap the discussion sofar.
9....0-0 leads to a position with equal chances

9....,Nc6 opens up a lot of interesting possibilities:

I.) 10.Bxd5,Qxd5 11.Nxc6 Qxc6! =+ (11...bxc6 Short-Howell)
II.)10.Nxc6,bx6 12.Bxd5,cxd5=+ (11...Qxd5, Short-Howell)
III).10.Nxf7,
----A 10...Kxf7 11.Rxf4+,Ke8 12.Qe2+,Nce7 13.Bxd5,Qxd5 is murky
----B 10...Qh4! 11.Qe1+,Qxe1 12.Rxe1,Kxf7 13.Bxd5+,Kg6 = is OK for Black
IV) 10.Bxf4,Nxf4 11.Bxf7+,Kf8 12.Nxc6,bxc6 13.Rxf4,Qd6 is better for Black

V) 10.Nc3! (Patzernoster makes a lot of sense)
---A 10...Bxe5 11.dxe,Nxc3 12.Qxd8+ looks about equal
---B 10....Nc3 11.Bxf7+ is more interesting:
----B1. 11....Ke7?! 12.bxc3,Bxe5 13.Bh5! looks better for white
----B2. 11....Kf8! 12.bxc3,Bxe5 13.Bxf4!,Bxf4 14.Rxf4 and white has sufficient compensation: see diagram
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*
Best is 14...Kg7 when white can force a perpetual with 15.Rxg4+!,Bxg4 16.Qxg4+
I dont trust (for Black):
14...Qd6 15.Qf1 +/- or 14...Qxh4 15.Bc4+,Ke7 16.Qf1 +/-

All in all I would say that 9....0-0 iso 9....Nc6 is the most sensible OTB choice.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
PatzerNoster
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 152
Joined: 10/22/09
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #47 - 12/16/10 at 08:19:31
Post Tools
It seems to me that white is at least equal after 10.Nc3! (development is the key  Wink)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10758
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #46 - 12/15/10 at 15:57:31
Post Tools
It think Black can be very satisfied after 10.Nxf7 Qxh4 11.Qe1+ Qxe1+ 12.Rxe1 Kxf7 13.Bxd5+ Kg6.
Ah, compatriot Micawber just beats me.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #45 - 12/15/10 at 15:55:57
Post Tools
Without the benefit of a board, I would say that Black also can decline the gambit with 10.Nxf7,Qh4!? with the potential threat Bxd4+. After something like 11.Qe1+,Qxe1 12.Rxe1,Kxf7 13.Bxd5+,Kg6 Black seems to be OK.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 868
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #44 - 12/15/10 at 09:51:33
Post Tools
Quote:
Short,Nigel (2680) - Howell,David (2611) [C39]
2nd London Chess Classic London ENG (6), 14.12.2010

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.Bc4 d5 7.exd5 Bg7 8.d4 Nxd5 9.0-0 Nc6 10.Bxd5 Qxd5 11.Nxc6
.


The commentators at the Classic suggested the idea of 10 Nxf7. Rybka though thinks Black is a bit better after the sacrifice is accepted. I don't think the players gave a direct answer at the public demonstration of the game as to whether they had looked at Nxf7 and come to any conclusions about it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #43 - 12/15/10 at 07:23:40
Post Tools
No it is not a novelty though it is rare.
8....Nxd5 was as far as I can see first played in van der Kooij-Knudsen, corr. 2000.
But 8....,0-0 9.0-0,Nxd5 has been played a couple of times.

Finally the position after 9....Nc6 has occurred after the transposition 8.0-0,Nxd5 9.d4,Nc6
in Vorobiev - Turko, corr., 2005. This game took an interesting course
10.Bxf4,Nxf4 11.Bxf7,Kf8!
(when black can answer Rxf4 by Bxe5 since the d4-pawn is pinned against the queen on d1)

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*

So 12.Nxc6,bxc6  13.Rxf4,Qd6! 
And black eventually won an exchange and the game
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10758
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #42 - 12/15/10 at 01:52:50
Post Tools
Paul Cumbers wrote on 06/17/04 at 14:31:45:
Nobody seems to have suggested how Black "wins"  Wink after 6.Bc4 yet...

It's a couple of years later, but this is an attempt by Dennis Monokroussos:

Quote:
Short,Nigel (2680) - Howell,David (2611) [C39]
2nd London Chess Classic London ENG (6), 14.12.2010

1.e4 e5 2.f4? exf4 3.Nf3 g5 Black is better. 

4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.Bc4 d5 7.exd5 Bg7
[7...Bd6 is more common.] 

8.d4 Nxd5
[8...Nh5 and; 8...0-0 are both much more popular.] 

9.0-0 Nc6 10.Bxd5 Qxd5 11.Nxc6
[11...Qxc6-/+ decentralizes the queen a little, but it may be worth it to keep the queenside intact.]


Is 8...Nxd5 a novelty? Any ideas? The exchange sac 10.Nxc6 (iso 10.Bxd5) bxc6 11.Bxf4 Nxf4 12.Rxf4 0-0 13.Nc3 Bh6 14.Rxg4+ does not look sufficient to me.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Master Om
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 187
Joined: 02/20/10
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #41 - 11/13/10 at 03:15:29
Post Tools
Quote:
I am back. To fix my problem I reinstalled java and went 
back to a restore in Windows. I found my problem when
trying to download research from my stockbroker.

Following is my article that will appear in Australian Chess. 

FROM THE SICK BED OF THE KIESERITZKY GAMBIT - PART II

A cautionary tale.

Last issue I warned readers to avoid the Muzio Gambit. Here is an example from the 2004 Victorian Junior Championship of what can happen to black.
White  Matthew Potter Black Casey Hickman

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. Bc4 g4 5. O-O gxf3 6. Qxf3 Qf6 7. e5 Qxe5 8.
Bxf7+ Kxf7 9. d4 Qf5 10. Bxf4 Nf6 11. Nd2 Bg7 12. Rae1 Nc6 13. Nc4 d6 14. Qb3 Qd5 15. Bxd6 Be6 16. Rxe6 Kxe6 17. Qh3+ Kf7 18. Qb3 Qxd4+ 19. Ne3+ Kg6 20. Rf3 cxd6 21. Rg3+ Kh5 22. Qf7+ Kh4 23. Qxg7 Rhg8 24. Rh3# 
Introduction to the traditional variation 6. Bc4 

1. e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6. Bc4

This variation was played throughout the nineteenth century until the modern variation became popular in the years before the Second World War. 6...d5
7.exd Bd6  8. d4 Nh5 (8... O-O is the original way to play this line because it was not realized that white could play his next move and live 9. Bxf4 Nh5 10. g3 f6 11. Nxg4 Qe8+ 12. Kd2 Nxf4 13. gxf4 Bxf4+ 14. Kc3 with a yukky mess)
 
Now white has multiple choices.



A. 9.0-0  

This move is good for black. 9...0-0 10.Ng4 Qxh4 11.Nh2  Ng3 12.Re1 Bf5 and black is better     

B. 9. Bb5

This line is very greedy. Black tends to win brilliantly. One example will suffice.

White Jacob Rosannes Black Adolf Anderssen Breslau 1862

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Nf6 6. Bc4 d5 7. exd5 Bd6 8. d4 Nh5 9. Bb5+ c6 10. dxc6 bxc6 11. Nxc6 Nxc6 12. Bxc6+ Kf8 13. Bxa8 Ng3 14. Rh2Bf5 15. Bd5 Kg7 16. Nc3 Re8+ 17. Kf2 Qb6 18. Na4 Qa6 19. Nc3 Be5 20. a4 Qf1+21. Qxf1 Bxd4+ 22. Be3 Rxe3 23. Kg1 Re1# 

C. 9. Kd2   

The antidote to this move was given with almost no supporting analysis in Kaissiber issue 15. 9...Kf8

D. 9. Nc3 White's best try    
                                                                 
9. Nc3 0-0 (9..Qe7 is better see the next game)Now the game white David Flude black Janko Bohak ICCF master class continued 10. Ne2 (Nxg4?? Ng3 11.Kh2 Qe7+ 12.Kd2 Re8 0-1 Arizmendi- Grischuk Rekjavik 2000 Grischuk has been known to play the King's Gambit as white)  Qf6 11. O-O Qxh4 12. Bxf4 Nxf4 13. Rxf4 f6 14. g3 Qg5 15. Nd3 Nd7 (15... Bxf4 16. Nexf4 and white has a great deal of compensation for the exchange.) 16. Rf2 Nb6 17.Bb3 a5 18. a4 (18. a3 and 18. c4 are the alternatives) 18... Qe3 19. Qc1 Re8 20. Ndf4 Qxc1+ 21. Rxc1Re3 22. Ng2 Rf3 23. Ne1 Re3 24. Ng2 Rf3 25. Ne1 Re3 1/2-1/2

9...Qe7 10.Bb5+ c6 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.Nd5 Qe6 13.Nc7+ Bxc7 14.Bc4 Qf5 15.Bxf7+ Kd8 (Emms suggests Qxf7 which is untested) 
16.Bxh5 Qxh5 17.Bxf4 Ba6 18.g3 Re8 19.Qd2 Qf7 20.b3 Nd7 
21.O-O-O Nxe5 22.dxe5+ Kc8 23.Rhe1 Qe6 24.Qd4 h5 25.a4 Rb8 
26.Qxa7 Bb7 27.Qe3 Ra8 28.Qc3 Ra5 29.Rd4 Re7 30.Red1 Rd5 
31.Rxd5 cxd5 32.Re1 Kb8 33.Qb4 Re8 34.Kb2 Ka8 35.c3 Ba6 
36.a5 Rb8 37.Qd4 Bc4 38.b4 Rb5 39.Kc2 Bb8 40.Qd2 Rb7 
41.Kb2  1/2-1/2 White David Flude Black Tor Arne Klausen ICCF master class. 

I have not dealt with lines 9....Qe7 10.0-0 as I have possible improvements in these lines which I am currently analyzing.    



Double Muzio is completely lost for white. Not even draws. 
the d3 lineholds for draw with correct play.
The above game is full of flaws.


1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. Bc4 g4 5. O-O gxf3 6. Qxf3 Qf6 7. e5 Qxe5 8.
Bxf7+ Kxf7 9. d4 Qf5 10. Bxf4 Nf6 11. Nd2 Bg7 12. Rae1 Nc6 13. Nc4 d6 14. Qb3
Qd5 15. Bxd6 Be6 (15... cxd6 16. Nxd6+ Kg6 17. Rxf6+ Bxf6 18. Qxd5) 16. Rxe6
Kxe6 17. Qh3+ Kf7 18. Qb3 (18. Ne5+ Kg8) 18... Qxd4+ 19. Ne3+ Kg6 20. Rf3 cxd6
(20... h5!!  21. Bf4 Ne5 22. Rf1 Rhe8 23. h3 Qb6 $19) 21. Rg3+ Kh5 22. Qf7+ Kh4
23. Qxg7 Rhg8 24. Rh3# *
  
ICCF IM
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambiteer
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline



Posts: 27
Joined: 04/22/09
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #40 - 11/06/10 at 18:55:55
Post Tools
MNb wrote on 11/06/10 at 14:25:32:
Gambiteer wrote on 11/05/10 at 23:52:20:
I especially love it when black replies 4...d6 and I can take the game into Hamppe-Allgaier territory.

You don't mind giving Black the option to force a draw? 5.h4 g4 6.Ng5 f6 7.Nh3 gxh3 8.Qh5+ Kd7 9.Qf5+. Perhaps you could take a look at the thread on the Mas(i)on Gambit, as Brabo argues that 5.h4 g4 6.Ng5 h6 7.Nxf7 Kxf7 8.d4 f3 benefits Black (if I got the transposition right).
I find 5.d4 way more interesting.


I don't mind the 6...f6 drawing line because in corr chess black has a very different mentality than the typical OTB player in the same situation.  In corr games black fancies his chances of winning when faced with the prospect of a piece sacrifice so he's willing to play into the storm, so to speak.  

Obviously, if there's a huge rating discrepancy and I think black would be happy to draw, I wouldn't give him the opportunity but as a means of picking a fight with an opponent who wants to win, I find the Hammpe-Allgaier (and related positions) very effective.  More importantly, the games are always a joy to play.

One of the things that I love about corr chess is that players are generally much more willing to play into double edged positions.  For example, OTB it's practically impossible for me to reach the Noteboom when playing black against an experience 1.d4 player.  In correspondence chess, I can reach the Noteboom about the half of the time.  I've tried to structure my corr repertoire around that idea in order to maximize my winning chances.  I don't mind the risk if it's a blast to play and helps avoid the draw!

I'll check out the thread you mentioned on the Mas(i)on gambit.
  
-Roy
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10758
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #39 - 11/06/10 at 14:25:32
Post Tools
Gambiteer wrote on 11/05/10 at 23:52:20:
I especially love it when black replies 4...d6 and I can take the game into Hamppe-Allgaier territory.

You don't mind giving Black the option to force a draw? 5.h4 g4 6.Ng5 f6 7.Nh3 gxh3 8.Qh5+ Kd7 9.Qf5+. Perhaps you could take a look at the thread on the Mas(i)on Gambit, as Brabo argues that 5.h4 g4 6.Ng5 h6 7.Nxf7 Kxf7 8.d4 f3 benefits Black (if I got the transposition right).
I find 5.d4 way more interesting.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambiteer
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline



Posts: 27
Joined: 04/22/09
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #38 - 11/05/10 at 23:52:20
Post Tools
TalJechin wrote on 10/29/10 at 16:58:11:
Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------
And slightly off topic:
Dragonslayer (M.Jensen) has quite recently published two
very good articles in the NIC Yearbooks 94 and 95 on the Quaade Gambit (and it's application to set Black new problems in the Fischer Defence).


Thanks, hadn't heard about that! But I think you mean YB 93 and 95 if the content summary are correct at newinchess.

Are both articles about 3.Nf3 d6 or is it in fact 3.Nf3 g5 4.Nc3 d6 ?  The content page only says 3...d6 but the Quaade is 3...g5 4.Nc3


I think the Quaade lines are actually quite nice for white.  If nothing else, it's so rare that black can't find refuge in a database (for corr players.)  

I may be wrong but I believe one of the lines discussed in the NIC articles covers a line I played in the following game:

[Event "King's Gambit Tournament - Board 1"]
[Date "2009.09.07"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Me"]
[Black "Zodiac2"]
[Result "1-0"]
[PlyCount "63"]
[EventDate "2009.??.??"]
[TimeControl "1"]

1. e4 e5 2. f4 {Thematic Game - This is the starting position.} exf4 3. Nf3 g5
4. Nc3 g4 5. Ne5 Nc6 6. Nxg4 Qh4+ 7. Nf2 Bc5 8. d4 Bxd4 9. Qf3 Be5 10. Ne2 Nge7
11. Nxf4 d6 12. c3 Bd7 13. Nh5 Ng6 14. g3 Qe7 15. Be2 O-O-O 16. Ng4 Rhg8 17.
Ne3 Qe6 18. O-O Rdf8 19. Nd5 f5 20. exf5 Rxf5 21. Qxf5 Qxf5 22. Rxf5 Bxf5 23.
Bh6 Nge7 24. Rf1 a6 25. Bc4 Rg6 26. Bd2 Be6 27. Nxe7+ Nxe7 28. Bxe6+ Rxe6 29.
Rf7 h6 30. Rh7 Ng8 31. Kf2 Kd8 32. Bf4 1-0

I must say that I've had particularly good luck with 4.Nc3.  I especially love it when black replies 4...d6 and I can take the game into Hamppe-Allgaier territory.  Imho, I think white's chances are very, very good in correspondence chess (where black is more inclined to attempt a refutation rather than play it safe and head for the draw.)
  
-Roy
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10758
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #37 - 10/29/10 at 20:48:11
Post Tools
My conclusion was that 5...d6 is more crucial, as White has problems avoiding drawish positions. Sure White cannot prove an advantage after 5...Nf6 either, but at least play remains quite complicated.
Last few years I haven't kept track though.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
YaBB Moderator
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #36 - 10/29/10 at 19:11:50
Post Tools
Thx for the links. I've gone over the "death of the king's gambit thread, which died in 2006. I know that 5...Nf6 is more crucial than 5...d6. What I don't know is whether White can gain an advantage in the 5....d6 6.Ng4 line.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #35 - 10/29/10 at 17:06:17
Post Tools
Both articles take 3...d6 as the prime move-order, but discuss 3...d6 4.Nc3 with either transposition to the quaade gambit.
(one article) and variations (the other article) that are not transpositions but still have a similar strategy (from white's point of view).
Both articles are quite interesting and have good analysis, and new ideas.

And yes you are right NiC93 and NiC95.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TalJechin
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no secret ingredient.

Posts: 2892
Location: Malmö
Joined: 08/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #34 - 10/29/10 at 16:58:11
Post Tools
Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------
And slightly off topic:
Dragonslayer (M.Jensen) has quite recently published two
very good articles in the NIC Yearbooks 94 and 95 on the Quaade Gambit (and it's application to set Black new problems in the Fischer Defence).


Thanks, hadn't heard about that! But I think you mean YB 93 and 95 if the content summary are correct at newinchess.

Are both articles about 3.Nf3 d6 or is it in fact 3.Nf3 g5 4.Nc3 d6 ?  The content page only says 3...d6 but the Quaade is 3...g5 4.Nc3
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #33 - 10/29/10 at 16:20:20
Post Tools
Actually, quite a bit happened:

On the forum the most accurate move-order to reach Fedorov-Ivanchuck 2000 was pointed out:
5...Nf6 6.d4,d6 7.Nd3,Nxe4 8.Bxf4,Nc6!

Regarding 5....Nf6 6.Bc4
A lot of new interesting ideas were introduced by
Stephan Buecker both at the chesscafe site (Over the Horizon) and in two excellent (must-have) Kaissiber articles concerning 6.Bc4.
This was discussed with the help of Stephan himself on the forum. One of the lines I proposed to avoid the greatest complications has been successfully tried in corr.chess in 2009.

One of the threads i could find quickly (there have been more)
http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1226782153/0


While in 5...d6 since Fedorov-Shirov, we have had 
the improvement  Fedorov-Carlsen (Dubai, 2004), which was discussed by Taljechin & Dragonslayer in this forum.
I dont have the exact thread, it may have been some monster-thread like death of the kg or something like that.

Finally subscribers to the e4e5 (payed) section of Chesspub can still download my (final) KG- survey updated untill march 2009.

-----------------------------------------------------
And slightly off topic:
Dragonslayer (M.Jensen) has quite recently published two
very good articles in the NIC Yearbooks 94 and 95 on the Quaade Gambit (and it's application to set Black new problems in the Fischer Defence).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
YaBB Moderator
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #32 - 10/29/10 at 06:33:50
Post Tools
This is the most recent thread I've been able  to find on the line, 1e4 e5 2.f4 ef4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 d6 6.Ng4

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*
What developments have happened in the last six years in this line?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul Cumbers
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 175
Location: Grantham
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #31 - 08/01/04 at 13:57:34
Post Tools
By switching allegiance to 7.Nf2, I seem to have jumped out of the frying pan and into the fire! Is there no escape from the party pooping draw by repetition?!  ???

Rosentreter, anyone?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dragonslayer
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 248
Location: Odense
Joined: 06/13/04
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #30 - 07/31/04 at 07:56:26
Post Tools
Cry so easy...I had only considered 11...Qe7 12.Bd2 and then the Bd7/Na5 trick does not work because pc7 is hanging.
This leaves White with 11...Bd7 12.d5 Ne5 13.Qd4 with a playable game though the central pawn structure looks good for Black.
What else is there?

10.Nd5? Nxd5 11.exd5 Qe7+! 12.Be2 Nb4 13.c4 Bf5! Fedorov-Shirov, Polonica Zdroj 2000.
10.Bb5 a6! 11.Bxc6+ bxc6 is more of the same old story.
10.Nd3 Bg4 11.Be2 Bxe2 12.Nxe2 Qe7 13.Bxf4 Bxf4 14.Ndxf4 Qxe4 15.Qd2 0-0-0 16.0-0-0 Nd5 is equal according to Korchnoi, but Black looks better to me.
10.Ne2 Ng4 (Was-Arppi, corr 1992) is annoying for White.
Very depressing.

The only other try I can find is Bangievs 8.d3!?

By the way how come people stopped playing 6...Be7 ?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10758
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #29 - 07/30/04 at 05:31:16
Post Tools
My feeling that the KG is dead by forced draw becomes stronger and stronger ...
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul Cumbers
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 175
Location: Grantham
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #28 - 07/29/04 at 16:44:47
Post Tools
Quote:
So strange that you go back to 7.Nf2. I too have been toying with this idea and has gone back analyzing the line 7.Nf2 Rg8 8.d4 Bh6 9.Nc3 Nc6 10.Qd3 (Borge-Olsen, VISA Nordic Cup Gentofte 1999 ) The critical line is 10...Rg3 11.Qc4 with even chances (see e.g. my survey in New In Chess Yearbook 66 )

Michael.

If now 11...Bd7, Black may be "threatening" a repetition with 12...Na5 13.Qb4/Qe2 Nc6 14.Qc4. Can White satisfactorily avoid this? (E.g. 12.Ne2/Nd5 b5! is no good.) Undecided
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dragonslayer
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 248
Location: Odense
Joined: 06/13/04
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #27 - 07/28/04 at 06:12:42
Post Tools
Hi Paul,

I have not found anything good against 8.Qf3 Nc6 9.Bb5 a6! 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 either. I even considered 8.d4 Nc6 9.d3 as in Pillsbury-NN, Hastings 1900 but it does not solve White's problems.
This leaves either 8.Qf3 Nc6 9.d3 or 8.Nc3 Nc6 9.d3 Be6 10.Qd2!? (suggested by me in New In Chess Yearbook 67 ) The idea is to reply 10...Nd4 11.Ne2!

So strange that you go back to 7.Nf2. I too have been toying with this idea and has gone back analyzing the line 7.Nf2 Rg8 8.d4 Bh6 9.Nc3 Nc6 10.Qd3 (Borge-Olsen, VISA Nordic Cup Gentofte 1999 ) The critical line is 10...Rg3 11.Qc4 with even chances (see e.g. my survey in New In Chess Yearbook 66 )

Michael.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul Cumbers
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 175
Location: Grantham
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #26 - 07/25/04 at 09:01:38
Post Tools
[5...d6 6.Nxg4 Nf6 7.Nxf6+ Qxf6]

In recent posts I've advocated 8.Qf3 as a way to avoid 8.Nc3 Nc6! (and then 9.Bb5 Kd8!). The critical line is 8.Qf3 Nc6 9.Bb5 a6 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.d3 Rb8 12.Qxf4 Qxf4 13.Bxf4 Rxb2 14.Kd2 Rg8 15.g3, e.g. 15...Bg7 (more solid than 15...d5) 16.Nc3 Be6 17.Rhb1 Rxb1 18.Rxb1 Kd7. However, after further consideration, it seems to me that the two bishops give Black a small plus (White's pawns are as weak as Black's) Sad. It's not easy to see a constructive plan for White. Therefore my idea behind 8.Qf3 appears flawed Sad. As I mentioned before, I think the 8.Nc3 Nc6 lines look dodgy for White, and I'm not convinced by anything else after 7.Nxf6 Qxf6. The more I look at this variation, the more I dislike it! Black gets too much piece play.

Which brings me to 7.Nf2...Shocked

In CCN45, Michael Jensen suggests that 7.Nf2 leads to equality or unclarity, but still gives this moves the dubious sign. Perhaps this is purely because at the time, 7.Nxf6+ seemed to give White the edge. Is it time to reconsider the knight retreat?

7.Nf2 has been criticised by some as inferior to 7.Nxf6+ based on general principles. However I could argue that 7.Nf2 is in fact superior!:

After winning back the gambit pawn and compromising Black's pawn structure, White calmly regroups. On f2, apart from defending e4, the knight eyes g4 so White can aim for queenside castling without having to worry about ...Bg4 (Nxg4!). 7.Nf2 doesn't really give Black any more of a lead in development than 7.Nxf6+ because the latter move obliges Black to activate his queen (7...Qxf6!). But with the knight on f6, Black's queen is hemmed in and will probably end up on the less effective square e7. From f6 though, the queen monitors d4 and h4, and crucially defends f4 (a key point of attack for White). The queen is also ready for ...Qg6, threatening to infiltrate down the g-file. White's kingside looks more vulnerable. Of course, this could all be mumbo-jumbo without some moves... 8)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul Cumbers
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 175
Location: Grantham
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #25 - 07/12/04 at 18:03:18
Post Tools
Yes I missed 8...Rg8 9.Nc3 c6 - this transposes to Nunn v Timman, Amsterdam 1995 (where the move order was 8.Nc3 c6 9.Qf3 Rg8 ). McDonald uses this game to analyse the 8.Nc3 c6 variation, but curiously doesn't mention 9.Be2!. Presumably John Nunn had his reasons for choosing 9.Qf3 - at any rate McDonald makes it look OK for White.

Quote:
I agree with your comments to 8.Qf3 that Black has numerous transpositions (even if the one I chose to examplify this was perhaps not the best one) to known lines where White has been denied the best reply.

True, but I'm hoping to show that these "second best" lines are still OK for White! If he can successfully avoid the lines stemming from 8.Nc3 Nc6! (which to me seem quite unattractive), then I think it's worth it.


I'm hesitant about the 10.Bb5+ variation because of the piece sacrifice line: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.Bc4 d5 7.exd5 Bd6 8.d4 Nh5 9.Nc3 Qe7 10.Bb5+ c6 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.Nd5 Qe6 13.Nc7+ Bxc7 14.Bc4 Qf5 15.Bxf7+ Kd8 16.Bxh5 Qxh5 17.Bxf4. Does White have enough compensation here? David Flude's game (seen in the other KG thread) is interesting, but it's difficult to know what conclusions to draw:

David Flude - Tor Arne Klausen
ICCF/EM/M/247 ICCF, 20.10.2003

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.Bc4 d5 7.exd5 Bd6 8.d4 Nh5 9.Nc3 Qe7 10.Bb5+ c6 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.Nd5 Qe6 13.Nc7+ Bxc7 14.Bc4 Qf5 15.Bxf7+ Kd8 16.Bxh5 Qxh5 17.Bxf4 Ba6 18.g3 Re8 19.Qd2 Qf7 20.b3 Nd7 21.0-0-0 Nxe5 22.dxe5+ Kc8 23.Rhe1 Qe6 24.Qd4 h5 25.a4 Rb8 26.Qxa7 Bb7 27.Qe3 Ra8 28.Qc3 Ra5 29.Rd4 Re7 30.Red1 Rd5 31.Rxd5 cxd5 32.Re1 Kb8 33.Qb4 Re8 34.Kb2 Ka8 35.c3 Ba6 36.a5 Rb8 37.Qd4 Bc4 38.b4 Rb5 39.Kc2 Bb8 40.Qd2 Rb7 41.Kb2 ½-½

I'm rooting for 10.Kd2!  Wink
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dragonslayer
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 248
Location: Odense
Joined: 06/13/04
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #24 - 07/10/04 at 09:30:40
Post Tools
Paul
Yep, still on vacation  8), as for the sceptics I did not expect them to reply since they obviously want a watertight defence against the KG and they want us to deliver it to them. E.g. the sceptics have been putting down 10.Kd2 but we are still to see a single line supporting this claim.
Sorry for not mentioning more clearly that Dragonslayer is the same person as Michael Jensen  Wink
I agree with your comments to 8.Qf3 that Black has numerous transpositions (even if the one I chose to examplify this was perhaps not the best one) to known lines where White has been denied the best reply. Black can also play 8...Rg8 9.Nc3 c6, avoding the Be2-f3 line. On the whole it seems like Black can just play useful waiting move 8...Rg8 in reply to 8.Qf3 since then White has nothing better than the transposition with 9.Nc3. The only other reasonable try is 9.d3 which should be compared with 8.Nc3 Nc6 9.d3!?
As for the other line with 10.Kd2 I did not recommend it since I like 10.Bb5+ better and did not want to spend a lot of time trying to refute Buckers 10...Kf8. Will reply to your variations when I get back to my computer (and check my analysis of 10...Kf8) next week.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul Cumbers
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 175
Location: Grantham
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #23 - 07/09/04 at 13:49:07
Post Tools
Is everyone on holiday?!  Wink Grin

Getting back to the Berlin Defence (5...Nf6), after 6.Bc4 d5 7.exd5 Bd6 8.d4 Nh5 9.Nc3 Qe7, Topnotch and Dragonslayer advise strongly against 10.Kd2, but I like this move! Shocked Now 10...Kf8! is supposed to be good (see Michael Jensen's article in CCN52), and then if 11.Re1, Black responds with 11...Qxh4. However, I reckon White can now play 12.Ne4! with a good game. The knight vacates the c3-square for the king, takes up a strong central position, and stifles Black's queen. White also threatens the cheeky Rh1!. Here is some tentative analysis (using Fritz 6):

i) 12...Ng3 13.Kc3 Nxe4+ 14.Rxe4 f6 (14...Qg3+ 15.Bd3 Qxg2 16.Bxf4 f5 17.Bh6+ with attack) 15.Bxf4! Bf5 16.Qe2! Bxe4 17.Qxe4 fxe5 18.Bxe5 with attack;

ii) 12...Qh2 13.Qe2 Ng3 (13...Bxe5 14.dxe5 Nd7 15.e6 Ne5 16.Nc3 Nxc4+ 17.Qxc4 +=) 14.Nxg3 Qxg3 15.Kd1 Nd7 (15...f6 16.Ng6+! hxg6 17.Qe8+ Kg7 18.Re7+! Bxe7 19.Qxe7+ Kh6 20.Qxf6 Bf5 21.Qxh8+ Kg5 22.Qd8+ Kh5 23.Qxc7 Qxg2 24.Qxf4 +=) 16.Qe4 Nf6 17.Qxf4 Qxf4 18.Bxf4 +=;

iii) 12...Nf6 13.Qe2 Nxe4+ 14.Qxe4 Kg7 ( 14...f6 15.Kd1! fxe5 16.dxe5 Bc5 17.Bxf4 is similar.) 15.Kd1 f6 16.Bxf4! fxe5 17.dxe5 with ample compensation;

iv) 12...Bxe5 13.dxe5 Qe7 (13...Qh2 14.e6 f5 15.Ng5 Ke8 16.Qe2 +=) 14.Kc3! Qxe5+ 15.Kb3 Nd7 16.Bd2 Qf5 17.Bc3 f6 18.Qd4 with excellent compensation.

White seems to have decent attacking chances.
Of course, the position is very complicated with many more possibilities than I've given. I'm just trying to show that I don't see why 10.Kd2 is meant to be bad for White!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul Cumbers
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 175
Location: Grantham
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #22 - 07/06/04 at 15:49:16
Post Tools
Apart from 8...Nc6 9.Bb5 Kd8, there are a couple of other Black responses to [b]8.Qf3[/b]:

([u]1[/u]) [b]8...Rg8[/b] (preventing any g3/g4 ideas) [b]9.Nc3 Be6[/b] which transposes to De La Villa v Fernandez, Salamanca 1990 (via 8.Nc3 Be6 9.Qf3 Rg8). That game continued 10.Qf2 Nc6 11.Bb5 0-0-0 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.d3 Bh6 with a good position for Black according to Gallagher. However, as McDonald points out, Gallagher allowed Black the opportunity to follow this line in Gallagher v Bryson, Hastings 1994. After 8.Nc3 Be6 9.Qf3 (Gallagher recommended 9.Qe2 in his book), instead of 9...Rg8, Bryson deviated with 9...Bh6 and ended up slightly worse. So did Gallagher have an improvement on De La Villa v Fernandez in mind?

([u]2[/u]) [b]8...Nc6 9.Bb5 a6[/b](!) taking advantage of the fact that, in contrast to 8.Nc3 Nc6 9.Bb5 a6, White can't play 10.Nd5!. Furthermore, with the Black king still on e8, there's no possibility of a check or pin on g5. I suggest [b]10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.d3 Rb8[/b] (11...Rg8 12.Qxf4 Qxf4 13.Bxf4 Rxg2 14.Nd2 is very similar to the "best" line I gave after 9...Kd8) [b]12.Qxf4[/b] (not 12.Nc3 Rg8 13.Bxf4? Rxb2!) [b]12...Qxf4 13.Bxf4 Rxb2 14.Kd2 Rg8 15.g3 d5[/b], unclear? What do you reckon?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul Cumbers
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 175
Location: Grantham
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #21 - 06/27/04 at 11:15:02
Post Tools
In Line A (1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 d6 6.Nxg4 Nf6 7.Nxf6+ Qxf6), Jensen has suggested 8.Qf3!? as one possible improvement for White, but suspects that Black can force a transposition:

"8.Qf3!? has never been tested, but after 8...Nc6 (controlling d4) I don't see how White can avoid transposition, e.g. 9.Bb5 Kd8!"

However, after 8.Qf3 Nc6 9.Bb5 Kd8 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.d3 (11.g3!?), Black must be careful:

(i) 11...Bh6?! 12.g4! +=;
(ii) 11...Rb8 12.Nc3 Rg8 (12...Bh6?! 13.g4!) 13.Bxf4, and Black can't play 13...Rxb2?? on account of 14.Bg5;
(iii) 11...Rg8 (probably best) 12.Qxf4 Qxf4 13.Bxf4 Rxg2 14.Nd2 with a reasonable position for White.

In each case, White successfully avoids transposition into other lines stemming from 8.Nc3 Nc6!
Could 8.Qf3!? be a better way for White to play?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dragonslayer
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 248
Location: Odense
Joined: 06/13/04
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #20 - 06/23/04 at 11:03:57
Post Tools
Ok, so I seem to have dropped one move in line A: (since I am relying only on memory here)

1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 d6 6.Ng4 Nf6 7.Nf6+ Qf6 8.Nc3 Nc6 9.Bb5 Kd8 it was supposed to be 10.d3 (10.Nd5 is only good after 10...a6) 10...Nd4 11.Qd2!?
As for Craig's 10...Bh6 I will have to get back to it.

In line B White should play 5...Nf6 6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Ne4 8.Qe2 Qe7 9.Bf4 Nc6 10.c3 Bf5 11.Nd2 0-0-0 12.Nxe4! (I like this better than 12.0-0-0 Re8! I'm guessing here but it seems to me that everyone is just quoting the Gallagher or Johansson books with 13.Nxe4 "relatively best" This is also where all the Black mineatures go after 13.d5?, 13.Qe3?, 13.g3?, 13.Re1 etc.)
There is lots of theory on 12.Nxe4 when White avoids the Qe6 traps and has excellent compensation. Interested parties might look in A.Bangiev: Das Angenommene Königsgambit Germany 1996 or Raingruber/Maser The King's Gambit as White 3rd ed. 1995. I think I even mentioned in one of the CCN articles that White should play like this.
It seems to me that White is spoiled for choice here: 12.Nxe4 or Paul Cumbers' idea.

David, I don't remember ever seeing your 12.Nd4.
In your other line 6.Bc4 d5 7.ed5 Bd6 8.d4 Nh5 9.Nc3 Qe7 10.Bb5+ c6 11.dc6 bc6 12.Nd5 Qe6 13.Nc7+ Bc7 14.Bc4 Qf5 15.Bf7+ Qf7 16.Nf7 Kf7 White can play 17.0-0 There is analysis of this line on Thomas Johansson's webpage:
http://hem.passagen.se/tjmisha/
Another interesting move is 13.0-0!?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
David Flude
Guest


Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #19 - 06/23/04 at 01:36:08
Post Tools
Another possibility in the Kieseritzy 

1. e4 e5
2.f4 exf
3.Nf3 g5
4.h4 g4 
5.Ne5 Nf6
6. Bc4 d5
7. exd Bd6
8. d4 Nh5 9.Nc3 Qe7 and now a supposedly discredited line going back to Paul Keres.
9. 0-0 Bxe5
10. Nb5 0-0 
11. exd a6 
12. Nd4 This is the new move. Before posting my analysis I ask "Has anyone  any examples?"
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10758
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #18 - 06/22/04 at 16:52:47
Post Tools
<nobody is claiming that 6.d4 is any good for White!>
<In line "B" after 8.Qe2 what is White's move after 8...Qe7?  Wouldn't 9.Bxf4 Nc6 transpose to variations where White is struggling to prove equality?  Johansson writes, "The old 9.Qe2 seems to give White an equal ending at best, my database is filled with Black miniatures.>
I was referring to this. In my opinion the question which is better, 6.d4 or 6.Bc4, is still open.
Paul Cumbers' idea overthrows the evaluation of a line that was thought better for Black for some decades.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Ben_Hague
Full Member
***
Offline


I'm always happier when
I'm a pawn down.

Posts: 157
Location: Oldham
Joined: 06/20/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #17 - 06/22/04 at 12:41:29
Post Tools
The only game I could find with 14...Rxe4 is this one, played between two fairly weak players.

[Event "Landesliga Nord 9697 Bayern"]
[White "Beuchler, Holger"]
[Black "Petzold, Vinzenz"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "2070"]
[BlackElo "1970"]

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4 8.Bxf4 Qe7 9.Qe2 Nc6 10.c3 Bf5 11.Nd2 O-O-O 12.O-O-O Re8 13.Nxe4 Qxe4 14.Qxe4 Rxe4 15.g3 Bg7 16.h5 Rhe8 17.Nf2 Re1 18.Bc4 Rxh1 19.Rxh1 Nd8 20.Kd2 h6 21.Be2 Ne6 22.Be3 Ng5 23.Bxg5 hxg5 24.Bxg4 Bxg4 25.Nxg4 f5 26.h6 Bh8 27.Ne3 Rf8 28.Rf1 f4 29.gxf4 gxf4 30.Nd5 f3 31.Ke3 Re8+ 32.Kxf3 Re6 33.Rh1 Kd7 34.Nf4 Rf6 35.Kg4 Ke8 36.Kg5 Kf7 37.d5 c6 38.Rd1 Kg8 39.Ng6 Rf2 40.Nxh8 Kxh8 41.dxc6 bxc6 42.Rxd6 Rg2+ 43.Kf5 Rxb2 44.a4 Ra2 45.a5 Rxa5+ 46.Kg6 Rd5 47.Rxc6 Rd8 48.h7 a5 49.c4 a4 50.c5 a3 51.Ra6 Rc8 52.c6 a2 53.c7 1-0 

White is clearly better by move 21, but there are improvements for Black. In particular 15...h5 looks good, when White has some compensation after say 16.Bg2 Re2 17.Bd5 f6 18.Rd2 Bxd3 19.Rxd3 Bh6 20.Bxh6 Rxh6, but Black must be better.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Glenn Snow
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1720
Location: Franklin
Joined: 09/27/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #16 - 06/21/04 at 18:36:29
Post Tools
After 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4 8.Qe2 Qe7 9.Bxf4 Nc6 10.c3 Bf5 11.Nd2 0-0-0 12.0-0-0 Re8 13.Nxe4 Qxe4 14.Qxe4, Paul Cumbers shows that White is probably OK (or more than OK?) after 14...Bxe4, but can't Black play 14...Rxe4 with slightly better chances?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
CraigEvans
God Member
*****
Offline


If I can't sacrifice a
pawn, I'll throw my rook
in

Posts: 588
Location: Bryn, South Wales
Joined: 07/14/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #15 - 06/21/04 at 09:31:33
Post Tools
I doubt he's referring to this Paul, my variations are in the line 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 d6 6.Ng4 Nf6 7.Nf6+ Qf6 8.Nc3 Nc6 9.Bb5 Kd8

  
"Give a man a pawn, and he'll smell a rat. Give a man a piece, and he'll smell a patzer." - Me.

"If others have seen further than me, it is because giants have been standing on my shoulders."
Back to top
FacebookTwitterYouTube  
IP Logged
 
Paul Cumbers
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 175
Location: Grantham
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #14 - 06/21/04 at 08:08:15
Post Tools
Quote:
Was it Fernando Semprun or Paul Cumbers, or someone else, who came with an important improvement in the line Craig Evans gave? Something with Be2-c4-d5 or so? I am too lazy too look into that long Death of the King's Gambit thread.

Are you referring to this?:

[1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.d4]
"...several authors give 6...d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4 8.Qe2 Qe7 9.Bxf4 Nc6 10.c3 Bf5 11.Nd2 0-0-0 12.0-0-0 Re8 13.Nxe4 Qxe4 14.Qxe4 Bxe4 15.Nf2 f5 as the best line, making some depressing comment about White's prospects.  However, Fritz seems to think that White can get his pawn back with 16.Nxe4 fxe4 (or 16...Rxe4 17.Bg5, and White will pick up the f-pawn with Bd3 [and Rf1 if need be]) 17.Bc4!  Either the e-pawn or g-pawn will drop with moves like Rhe1 & Bd5/d5+Bd3, or Bf7-h5/e6 (depending on what Black does). Of course, Black may well have some improvement somewhere..."

(I'm quoting myself by the way!)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
David Flude
Guest


Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #13 - 06/21/04 at 07:40:45
Post Tools
I am back. To fix my problem I reinstalled java and went 
back to a restore in Windows. I found my problem when
trying to download research from my stockbroker.

Following is my article that will appear in Australian Chess. 

FROM THE SICK BED OF THE KIESERITZKY GAMBIT - PART II

A cautionary tale.

Last issue I warned readers to avoid the Muzio Gambit. Here is an example from the 2004 Victorian Junior Championship of what can happen to black.
White  Matthew Potter Black Casey Hickman

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. Bc4 g4 5. O-O gxf3 6. Qxf3 Qf6 7. e5 Qxe5 8.
Bxf7+ Kxf7 9. d4 Qf5 10. Bxf4 Nf6 11. Nd2 Bg7 12. Rae1 Nc6 13. Nc4 d6 14. Qb3 Qd5 15. Bxd6 Be6 16. Rxe6 Kxe6 17. Qh3+ Kf7 18. Qb3 Qxd4+ 19. Ne3+ Kg6 20. Rf3 cxd6 21. Rg3+ Kh5 22. Qf7+ Kh4 23. Qxg7 Rhg8 24. Rh3# 
Introduction to the traditional variation 6. Bc4 

1. e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6. Bc4

This variation was played throughout the nineteenth century until the modern variation became popular in the years before the Second World War. 6...d5
7.exd Bd6  8. d4 Nh5 (8... O-O is the original way to play this line because it was not realized that white could play his next move and live 9. Bxf4 Nh5 10. g3 f6 11. Nxg4 Qe8+ 12. Kd2 Nxf4 13. gxf4 Bxf4+ 14. Kc3 with a yukky mess)
 
Now white has multiple choices.



A. 9.0-0   

This move is good for black. 9...0-0 10.Ng4 Qxh4 11.Nh2  Ng3 12.Re1 Bf5 and black is better      

B. 9. Bb5

This line is very greedy. Black tends to win brilliantly. One example will suffice.

White Jacob Rosannes Black Adolf Anderssen Breslau 1862

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Nf6 6. Bc4 d5 7. exd5 Bd6 8. d4 Nh5 9. Bb5+ c6 10. dxc6 bxc6 11. Nxc6 Nxc6 12. Bxc6+ Kf8 13. Bxa8 Ng3 14. Rh2Bf5 15. Bd5 Kg7 16. Nc3 Re8+ 17. Kf2 Qb6 18. Na4 Qa6 19. Nc3 Be5 20. a4 Qf1+21. Qxf1 Bxd4+ 22. Be3 Rxe3 23. Kg1 Re1# 

C. 9. Kd2   

The antidote to this move was given with almost no supporting analysis in Kaissiber issue 15. 9...Kf8

D. 9. Nc3 White's best try    
                                                                 
9. Nc3 0-0 (9..Qe7 is better see the next game)Now the game white David Flude black Janko Bohak ICCF master class continued 10. Ne2 (Nxg4?? Ng3 11.Kh2 Qe7+ 12.Kd2 Re8 0-1 Arizmendi- Grischuk Rekjavik 2000 Grischuk has been known to play the King's Gambit as white)  Qf6 11. O-O Qxh4 12. Bxf4 Nxf4 13. Rxf4 f6 14. g3 Qg5 15. Nd3 Nd7 (15... Bxf4 16. Nexf4 and white has a great deal of compensation for the exchange.) 16. Rf2 Nb6 17.Bb3 a5 18. a4 (18. a3 and 18. c4 are the alternatives) 18... Qe3 19. Qc1 Re8 20. Ndf4 Qxc1+ 21. Rxc1Re3 22. Ng2 Rf3 23. Ne1 Re3 24. Ng2 Rf3 25. Ne1 Re3 1/2-1/2

9...Qe7 10.Bb5+ c6 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.Nd5 Qe6 13.Nc7+ Bxc7 14.Bc4 Qf5 15.Bxf7+ Kd8 (Emms suggests Qxf7 which is untested) 
16.Bxh5 Qxh5 17.Bxf4 Ba6 18.g3 Re8 19.Qd2 Qf7 20.b3 Nd7 
21.O-O-O Nxe5 22.dxe5+ Kc8 23.Rhe1 Qe6 24.Qd4 h5 25.a4 Rb8 
26.Qxa7 Bb7 27.Qe3 Ra8 28.Qc3 Ra5 29.Rd4 Re7 30.Red1 Rd5 
31.Rxd5 cxd5 32.Re1 Kb8 33.Qb4 Re8 34.Kb2 Ka8 35.c3 Ba6 
36.a5 Rb8 37.Qd4 Bc4 38.b4 Rb5 39.Kc2 Bb8 40.Qd2 Rb7 
41.Kb2  1/2-1/2 White David Flude Black Tor Arne Klausen ICCF master class. 

I have not dealt with lines 9....Qe7 10.0-0 as I have possible improvements in these lines which I am currently analyzing.    


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
David Flude
Guest


Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #12 - 06/21/04 at 07:32:44
Post Tools
test message
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10758
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #11 - 06/21/04 at 05:36:57
Post Tools
Was it Fernando Semprun or Paul Cumbers, or someone else, who came with an important improvement in the line Craig Evans gave? Something with Be2-c4-d5 or so? I am too lazy too look into that long Death of the King's Gambit thread.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
CraigEvans
God Member
*****
Offline


If I can't sacrifice a
pawn, I'll throw my rook
in

Posts: 588
Location: Bryn, South Wales
Joined: 07/14/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #10 - 06/20/04 at 11:07:02
Post Tools
I'm getting more and more scared... I refuse to accept Top is right here though

Mr Jensen, is line A actually possible? There appears to be a pawn on d2, so Qd2 is not playable? (I'm not a sceptic here, I'm a KG player myself) 

However, a line you have already mentioned, 10.Nd5, doesn't look a good try: I would prefer 10...Qg7 to your 10...Qg6, the queen doesn't look so exposed and is very powerful on that long diagonal. 11.O-O Nd4 12.Be2 (I had some fun trying to make 12.Rxf4 Nxb5 13.Qf1 work, but while white has a strong attack it doesn't seem sufficient, and I think white's best line leaves him an exchange down) Rg8 13.Nxf4 Qg3! looks -/+ to me after both 14.d3 and 14.Rf2 - I'm not sure if white has any improvements here. 

10.d3 seems most strongly met by 10...Bh6, for example:
a) 11.O-O Rg8 12.Bxc6 (11.Nd5 Qxh4 -+) bxc6 13.Qf3 Qxh4 with better chances for black;
b) 11.Qh5? Rg8 12.O-O (what else??) Qg7 13.Rf2 Ne5 -+;
c) 11.Qd2 looks like the best try, after 11...Nd4 12.Nd5 Qg7 (this seems to be something of a key move as far as I can see) 13.Ba4 (c2 has to be defended) Bd7!? 14.Bxd7 Qg3+ 15.Qf2 Nxc2+ 16.Ke2 Qxf2+ 17.Kxf2 Kxd7 (Nxa1 could be fine for white) 18.Rb1 f5 19.Bxf4 Bxf4 20.Nxf4 Rhf8 21.g3 fxe4 I think black is probably a little better, though probably not significantly so.

As of yet I can't find anything significant in your other lines, and I hope I dont, but this one may be under something of a cloud.

Regards, 
Craig  Undecided
  
"Give a man a pawn, and he'll smell a rat. Give a man a piece, and he'll smell a patzer." - Me.

"If others have seen further than me, it is because giants have been standing on my shoulders."
Back to top
FacebookTwitterYouTube  
IP Logged
 
Glenn Snow
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1720
Location: Franklin
Joined: 09/27/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #9 - 06/20/04 at 10:10:24
Post Tools
In line "B" after 8.Qe2 what is White's move after 8...Qe7?  Wouldn't 9.Bxf4 Nc6 transpose to variations where White is struggling to prove equality?  Johansson writes, "The old 9.Qe2 seems to give White an equal ending at best, my database is filled with Black miniatures after 9...Nc6 10.c3 Bf5 11.Nd2 0-0-0 12.0-0-0 Re8,....Relatively best is 13.Ne4 Qe4 which is not much to write home about".
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dragonslayer
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 248
Location: Odense
Joined: 06/13/04
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #8 - 06/20/04 at 09:48:43
Post Tools
Ok the gloves are off! atm in Porto for the Euro 2004 (without books or database) but since some people are constantly challenging us (i.e. the King's gambiteers) to come up with something I thought it only fair that you actually tried to refute the lines that I have given in this forum and elsewhere, or maybe you guys want 3-4 improvements for White before picking one that you think you can crack?

Line A:
1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 d6 6.Ng4 Nf6 7.Nf6+ Qf6 8.Nc3 (8.d4!?) Nc6 9.Bb5 Kd8! 10.Qd2!? (see my previous post to which noone has yet replied).

Line B:
5...Nf6 6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4 (7...Nc6 8.d5) 8.Qe2! (8.Bxf4? Bg7!) with compensation.

Line C:
6.Bc4 d5 7.ed5 Bd6 8.d4 Nh5 9.Nc3 (yes it develops a piece and does not castle into Black's attack) Now TopNotch (thanks for the Ivanchuk annotations!) and others may take a look at Johansson's website and NO, no, no the idea is not Kd2. If you check my article in correspondence chess news carefully you will see that I did not recommend 9...Qe7 10.Kd2, rather I would recommend further study of the line 9...Qe7 10.Bb5+ c6 11.dxc6 bxc6 12.Nd5 I am sure you gentlemen are not objecting against 9.Nc3 on the basis of 100 year old theory or the horrible game Arizmendi-Grischuk, Iceland c. 2000? So I think it's up to the scepticals to demonstrate dead equality of a black advantage in the above lines or do you really expect me to give away stuff from my book when you are not even willing to tell me which lines you like for Black?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10758
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #7 - 06/18/04 at 05:13:27
Post Tools
For this old favourite of Steinitz: see the website of Thomas Johansson.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
X
God Member
*****
Offline


Education is a system
of imposed ignorance.Chomsky

Posts: 571
Joined: 10/04/03
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #6 - 06/17/04 at 21:10:38
Post Tools
TopNotch, the revolution is 6.Bc4 d5 7.exd5 Bd6 8.d4 Nh5 9.Nc3! (Jensen)!!

OK, I have seen this cited at least twice and I must admit that I don't know why it's such a great move.  (It develops a piece?  Embarrassed)  I am just curious...
  
Power to the People!&&http://www.gravel2008.us/           http://www.nationalinitiative.us/&&Mike Gravel for President 2008
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Glenn Snow
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1720
Location: Franklin
Joined: 09/27/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #5 - 06/17/04 at 20:16:40
Post Tools
After 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4 8.Qe2 may reduce Black's options but it also reduces Whites.  White has been exploring Be2 ideas the last several years which obviously isn't possible with the queen there.  Unfortunately I don't think Spassky's 10.Be2 helps White (in the Spassky-Fressinet game).  Instead of guarding the g-pawn I think Black should counter attack with 10...Be7 and if 11.g3 then 11...Bd6 with the better chances.  I still think White's best chance may be the 10.Nd2 Bd6 11.Nxe4 dxe4 12.Ne5 that i suggested under the other thread.  I suppose this isn't really an attractive option either though.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2211
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #4 - 06/17/04 at 19:52:53
Post Tools
Forgive my ignorance Paul  Grin

But could you explain exactly why this line is good for White: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.Bc4?!

As far as I can tell this line flat out sucks for white, so kindly share the revelation that turns the tables. Moreover, should this new revelation have anything to do with Kd2 at some point, as I suspect it does, then I suggest you take a second look or maybe a third.    

To other Kings Gambiteers reading this, please resist the temptation of quoting back raw win, loss ratios to me gleaned from Chessbase Online, Chess lab or  any other Database for that matter. Since, unless such statistics are properly analysed they are meaningless at best and misleading at worse.

It seems to me that white is hanging on by a thread in all KG lines where black accepts the gambit and follows   
up with g5, providing he knows what he is doing.

So let the analytical war begin in earnest.

Top  Grin
  
The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10758
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #3 - 06/17/04 at 17:33:31
Post Tools
Since Fernando Semprun came with an improvement in a critical line - see the very long Is the KG dead thread - I am not so sure anymore that 6.d4 is inferior to 6.Bc4.
But the big issue is: can White avoid a draw after 5...d6 6.Nxg4 Nf6 7.Nxf6+ Qxf6 8.Nc3 Nc6 ?
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul Cumbers
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 175
Location: Grantham
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #2 - 06/17/04 at 14:31:45
Post Tools
One point to note is that after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4, 8.Qe2! is considered more accurrate than 8.Bxf4 as it reduces Black's options.

However this is all rather meaningless as nobody is claiming that 6.d4 is any good for White! 6.Bc4! is the move, and then 6...d5 7.exd5 Bd6 8.d4 Nh5 9.Nc3! (as already stated by Michael Jensen). Nobody seems to have suggested how Black "wins"  Wink after 6.Bc4 yet...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
CraigEvans
God Member
*****
Offline


If I can't sacrifice a
pawn, I'll throw my rook
in

Posts: 588
Location: Bryn, South Wales
Joined: 07/14/03
Gender: Male
Re: Kieseritzky Gambit
Reply #1 - 06/17/04 at 07:56:18
Post Tools
Here's the Spassky game:

[Event "Grand Prix du Senat"]
[Site "Paris"]
[Date "2001.05.05"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Spassky,Boris V"]
[Black "Fressinet,Laurent"]
[Result "1/2"]
[Eco "C39"]
1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.d4 d6 7.Nd3 Nc6 8.c3 Nxe4 
9.Bxf4 d5 10.Be2 h5 11.Qc1 Bd6 12.Qe3 Bf5 13.Nd2 Qe7 14.Nxe4 Qxe4 15.Kd2 0-0-0 16.Bxd6 Qxe3+ 
17.Kxe3 Rxd6 18.Nf4 Ne7 19.Bd3 Kd7 20.Raf1 Rhh6 21.g3 Bxd3 22.Kxd3 c6 23.Rh2  1/2

Regards, 
Craig
  
"Give a man a pawn, and he'll smell a rat. Give a man a piece, and he'll smell a patzer." - Me.

"If others have seen further than me, it is because giants have been standing on my shoulders."
Back to top
FacebookTwitterYouTube  
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10758
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
C39: Kieseritzky Gambit
06/17/04 at 05:38:39
Post Tools
To show that I support the idea to split threads, I will do the kick off.
Anyone who thinks Fedorov-Ivanchuk shows the refutation of the KG, should also take Spassky-Fressinet, played only a few months later, into account.
« Last Edit: 07/23/11 at 01:46:28 by Smyslov_Fan »  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 
Topic Tools
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board Top  

ChessPub Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge