Urusoff Gambit 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d4 by Soren Galberg-Lund The following about 50 pages is an extensive analysis of the chess opening Urusoff Gambit. It begins with an Index of Variations and gives an complete overlook of the opening. Comments and notations of personal games are welcome - please send them to me. If you have ever played Urusoff Gambit or variations of the opening, I will welcome mails with your notations for a second edition of this paper. Games that represent variations that is not played before will be included this text mentioning the source, place, time and opponents. Copenhagen 1993 sgl@ensa1.ens.min.dk This paper of the chess opening of Urusoff Gambit is public domain by the author. Citations or reproductions may be used freely at all times if mentioned the source of origin. Another viking greets the world. Contents Page 1 Preface 2 Historical Introduction 3 The Experts Evaluation 4 Main Variation 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Nf6 3. d4, exd4 4. Nf3, Nxe4 5.Qxd4, Nf6 6. Bg5, Be7 7. Nc3 4.1 Opening Errors 4.2 Marshall Variation 6. Nc3 4.3 The 6. Bg5, Nc6 Defence 5 The 7. -, Nc6 Defence 5.1 The Keres Variation 8. Qh4, d6 9. 0-0-0, Be6 10. Bd3, Qd7 11. Bb5, 0-0 10. Bd3, a6 11. Rhe1, Qd7 5.2 The Estrin Variation 8. Qh4, d5 9. 0-0-0, Be6 10. Rhe1, 0-0 11. Bd3, h6 12. Kb1 6 The 7. -, c6 8. 0-0-0, d5 9. Rhe1 Defence 6.1 The Karpov Variation 9. -, Be6 10. Qh4, Nbd7 11. Bd3, c5 12. Ne5 6.2 The Forintos & Haag Variation 11. -, Nc5 12. Nd4, Ng8! 13. Bxe7, Qxe7 14. Qg3, Qf6! 6.3 The Larsen Variation 9. -, 0-0 10. Qh4 7 Transpositions after 4. Nf3 7.1 The d5-rejection 4. -, d5 5. exd5, Bb4+ 6. c3, Qe7+ 7.2 The c5-rejection 4. -, c5 7.3 The Bb4-rejection 4. -, Bb4+ 5. c3 7.4 The Bc5-rejection 4. -, Bc5 5. 0-0 7.5 Two Knights Defence 4. -, Nc6 5. Ng5 Index of Variations Sources Index of Variations 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Nf6 2. -, f5 3. d3, Nf6 4. f4, d6 5. Nf3 2. -, c6 3. d4 2. -, Nc6 3. Nc3, Nf6 4. d3 2. -, Bc5 3. b4! 2. -, Bc5 3. c3, d5 4. Bxd5, Nf6 5. Qf3, 0-0 6. d4, exd4 (Bishops Opening) 3. -, Nf6 4. d4, exd4 5. e5, d5 6. exf6, dxc4 7. Qh5, 0-0 8. Qc5, Rc8 3. -, Qg5 4. Qf3, Qg6 5. Ne2, d6 6. d4, Bb6 7. dxe5, dxe5 8. Ng3, Nf6 3. -, Qe7 4. Nf3, d6 5. d4, Bb6 6. 0-0, Nf6 7. Na3, Bg4 8. Ne2 3. -, Nc6 4. d4, Bb6 5. Nf3 3. d4, exd4 3. -, Nxe4? 4. dxe5 3. -, c6? 4. dxe5 3. -, Qe7? 4. dxe5 3. -, d6 3. -, Nc6 3. -, d5 4. Nf3, Nxe4 4. -, Le7 4. -, d5 5. exd5, Bb4+ 6. c3, Qe7+ 4. -, c5 4. -, Bb4+ 5. c3 4. -, Bc5 5. 0-0 5. -, Nc6 6. e5, d5 7. exf6 5. -, Nc6 6. e5, d5 7. Lb5 5. -, d6 6. b4, Lxb4+ 7. c3!, Bxc3 8. Nxc3, dxc3 9. e5! 4. -, Nc6 5. Ng5, d5 6. exd5, Qe7+ 7. Qe2 4. -, Nc6 5. Ng5, Ne5 6. Qxd4 5. Qxd4, Nf6 5. -, Nc5? 6. Bg5!, f6 7. Be3 5. -, Nd6? 6. 0-0 5. -, d5? 6. Bxd5 6. Nc3, Nc6 7. Qh4 (Marshall Variation) 6. Bg5, Be7 6. -, Nc6 7. Qh4, Bb4+ 8. c3, Qe7+ (6.-,Nc6 Defence) 7. Nc3 7. -, Nc6 8. Qh4 8. -, d6 9. 0-0-0, Be6 10. Bd3, a6 11. Rhe1, Qd7 10. Bd3, Qd7 11. Bb5, 0-0 12. Ne5, Qc8 13. Nxc6, bxc6 14. Bxc6, h6 15. Bd2 12. Nd4 ( Keres Variation) 12. -. h6 13. Nxc6, bxc6 14. Bxh6, Ng4 12. -, a6 13. Bd3, h6 14. Nxc6, bxc6 15. Bxh6, Ng4 8. -, d5 9. 0-0-0, Be6 10. Rhe1, 0-0 11. Bd3, h6 12. Kb1! (Estrin Variation) 12. -, Ne8 13. Bxe7 12. -, Qd7 13. Bxh6 12. -, Ne4 13. Nxe4 12. -, hxg5 13. Nxg5, Bd7 14. Nxd5! 12. -, Nd7 13. Bxe7, Qxe7 14. Qxe7, Nxe7 15. Nd4, Nc5 7. -, c6 8. 0-0-0, d5 9. Rhe1 9. -, Be6 10. Bd3, Nbd7 11. Qh4 11. -, c5 12. Ne5 (Karpov Variation) 11. -,Nc5 12. Nd4, Ng8 13. Bxe7, Qxe7 14. Qg3, Qf6! (Forintos & Haag Variation) 9. -, 0-0 10. Qh4 (Larsen Variation) 10. -, Be6 11. Bd3, h6 12. Bxh6, Ne4 13. Qf4, Bd6 14. Qe3, Bc5 10. -, h6 11. Bd5! 10. -, Bf5 11. Nd4, Bg6 12. Bd3, Qd7 10. -, Nbd7 11. Bd3, g6 1 Preface Back in the old literature of chess the following sequence of moves are called Urusoff Gambit: 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Nf6 3. d4, exd4 4. Nf3, Nxe4 5. Qxd4, Nf6 6. Bg5, Be7 7. Nc3, Nc6 8. Qh4, d5 9. 0-0-0, Be6 10. Rhe1, 0-0 11. Bd3, with a complicated game. There are two objections to play Urusoff Gambit. One is that black using accurate defence may obtain in the least an even game with fair chances of counterplay. The other is that black may avoid the gambit by returning the pawn when opportune. E.g. is the 4. -, d5 rejection, where white normally gets advantage, or 4. -, Sc6, which is a well known variation of Two Knights Defence. Black may very well accept the gambit-pawn providing he has a fair knowledge of the theory. That is why the Urusoff Gambit is so rarely played on a high level, it is considered unhealthy to white. There is e.g. and official refutation of the ECO variations, which I hereby state is not relevant. But does your opponent know anything of these socalled museum openings? The rejections will generally give advantage to white. Actually there are not that many rejections in proportion to other crowded variations in other openings (e.g. Blackmar-Diemer Gambit). There is several good white continuations, and in the case you are not in the mood learning to many variations, e.g. 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Nf6 3. d4, exd4 4. Nf3, Nc6 can be met with 5. Ng5, Ne5 6. Qxd4, Nxc4 7. Qxc4 and white advantage in tempo. And 5. Ne5 is still played in the GM class. However it is good logic that it is exactly white, who ought to play a gambit, because he gets - besides his tempo as white - double tempi. Furthermore is it rarely played, so you may always profit on time. Urusoff Gambit is the very example of such an enormous lead in advance for white. If attack is favourable to your style of playing in preference to a positionel build-up, you should seriously consider taking Urusoff Gambit on the repertoire. Even socalled museum openings may be brought out and dusted, when it again may be modern to show initiative an stead of the slow dance back and forth on the backline. Urusoff Gambit gives double tempi to white and as Steinitz always said: Advantage should not quietly be turned into a win, one is obliged to attack. 2 Historical Introduction The original Urusoff Gambit came into being after Petroffs defence: 1. e4, e5 2. Nf3, Nf6 3. d4, exd4 4. Bc4, where todays most common continuation is 4. e5. Urusoff Gambit today is a natural result from Bishops Game. Prince Sergei S. Urussov (1827 - 1897) was in the middle of last century the second best russian champion after Petroff. From him originates new contributions to Center Games, Scottish opening and Allgaier Gambit. It is interesting that ECO or others for the fact mentions any of Prince Urusoff own games, but refers to the oldest game of Keidanski - Lasker from 1891. In this way Urusoff Gambit sometimes also is named the Urusoff-Keidanski Gambit. Allthough there is no reference to earlier games of the Prince himself, the gambit has been named the Urusoff Gambit after the publication of an analysis in 1857. Prince Urusoff did participate in several foreign chess tournaments at this time. Being a russian nobleman the spiritual occupations were a seat of honour and among other things he was a good friend of the author Tolstoi, who was also a fairly good player at the time. The famous russian author described the Prince, in a letter dating from 1899, where Tolstoi and the Prince participated during the Krimean war as officers in the siege of the city of Sebastopol, 'as a courageous officer and one of europe best chessplayers'. Tolstoi describes an episode, where the Prince offered the english enemy to settle the battle of a trench, that for a long time had cost many human lives, over a game of chess. Prince Urusoff had submitted his proposal to his superiour general Saken, who turned it down. During the many long hours of waiting Tolstoi and the Prince undoubtedly played many games of chess together. 3 The Experts Evaluation The table mentioned below show the evaluation by several experts on Urusoff Gambit. The starting point is the methodology of ECO, and it is interesting to compare the experts different view on the variations of the opening and blacks possible continuations. Schema: Variations after ECOs C24 Cafferty Forintos Estrin Galberg- ECOs C 24 Larsen Keres Estrin Hooper Haag Glazkov Lund 4.-,d5 rejection 6 = + - = = + - + - 5.-Nc5 black errors 7 + - + - + - + - + - + - + - 6.Nc3 attack, note 39 = = = = = 6.Bg5,Nc6 defence = - + - + c6-defence 9.-,Be6 8 = + - + - = = = + - c6-defence 9.-,0-0 9 = + - = = + - + - Nc6-defence 8.-,d5 10 + - + - + - + - = + - = Nc6-defence 8.-,d6 11 = = = = + - = It is worth noticing that there apparently excists many favourable variations for white in this opening and no definite variations with black advantage. But this is only part of the truth. Without any doubt only variations 7 and 10 are of advantage to white. The danish GM Bent Larsen, who has written the chapters in ECO concerning Bishops Game, has not given any description of the alternative suggested by Keres: 6. Bg5, Nc6 as later shown is a sharp weapon and refusal of the theory. It is possible to avoid this general accepted refusal by an early play of 6. Nc3 (ECO note 39) and by this transposition go into the original variations. That is also suggested by Keres, in his analysis of Marshall - Torre, new York 1925, which has brought the Urusoff Gambit back. In general Larsen finds that black very well can play Urusoff Gambit and thus accept the knight taking the offer of the pawn on e4. Black shall only parry the different white trick moves. The opinion of Keres is that variation 11 is equal for black, and even if there is excellent defence in several of the other variations, these results in pressure on the black position. Estrin has not discussed the variations 6 and 11 and find variation 10 as the main variation with emfasis of his own winnings with white. Both Estrin and Keres finds the variation 8 as favourable to white and Keres also hint the good white propects in variation 6. Thus the scholars disagree of the best black continuation and the analysis by Larsen may well be considered the most objective. If you consider Keres conclusions of overwhelming white advantage as nominal value, you have done yourself a disservice. Black has in the least draw and a game filled with chances in variations 6, 9 and 11, and certain draw and favourable chances in the others. 4 Main Variation 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Nf6 Diagram 1 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I BP I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I WP I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I WQ I WK I I WN I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ All quite normal and the knightmove 2. -, Nf6 is a natural continuation. There are four other possibilities: A When 2. -, f5 is played, continues 3. d3!, Nf6 4. f4, d6 5. Nf3, fxe4 6. dxe4, Bg4 7. fxe5, Bxf3 8. Qxf3, dxe5 with a potent white pressure. It is not advisable to try 3. exf5, Nf6 4. d4, exd4 5. Qxd4, d5 6. Bd3, Nc6 7. Qe3+, Kf7 and chances of counterplay for black. 3. Bxg8? will not work either because of the moves: 3. -, Rxg8 4. exf5, d5 5. Qh5+, g6 6. fxg6, Rxg6 7. Qxh7, Qf6 8. Qxc7, Nc6 9. Qh7, Rxg2 10. Qh5+, Kd8. B 2. -, c6 is passive and the continuation 3. d4, d5 4. exd5, cxd5 5. Bb5+, Bd7 6. Bxd7, Nxd7 7. dxe5, Nxe5 8. Ne2, Nf6 9. 0-0-0, Be7 10. Nbc3 is likewise preferable for white. 3. Qe2 is met with 3. -, Bc5! 4. Bxf7+, Kxf7 5. Qc4+, d5 6. Qxc5, dxe4 7. Qxe5, Nf6 and advantage to black. C 2. -, Nc6 is okay and leeds to many different variations of openings. I recommend the continuation 3. Nc3 as a simpel and easy variation of Vienna Game. The continuation 3. d3, Bc5 4. f4, d6 5. Nc3 e.g. may leed to known variations of Kings Gambit. 3. Nc3, Nf6 4. d3, Bb4 5. Bg5, h6 6. Bxf6, Bxc3+ 7. bxc3, Qxf6 8. Ne2, d6 9. 0-0, g5 10. d4, h5 11. f3, h4 12. Qd3, Bd7 13. Rab1 is equal according to Keres. The continuation 4. -, Na5 5. Bb3, c6 6.d4, e.d4 7. Qxd4, d6 8. Bg5, Be7 9. 0-0-0 gives chances to both sides, as in Casper - Kaidanov, Moscow 1987. 4. Nf3 is unfavourable because of the 4. -, Be7 5. d4, exd4 6. Nxd4, d6 7. f3?, 0-0 and black wins, as in Galberg-Lund - Lethan, Copenhagen 1991. D 2. -, Bc5 is met with 3. c3 as in classical Bishops Game. The typical continuations are D1: 3. -, d5, D2: 3. -, Nf6, D3: 3. -, Qg5, Q4: 3. -, Qe7 eller Q5: 3. -, Nc6. There should also be pointed at 3. b4! as a good alternativ. The dane Allan Jensen played in the finnish jubilee tournament Finjub-30, which started in 1991 a not so dull correspondance game against the double worldchampion V. Nagorovski: 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Bc5 3. b4!, Bxb4 4. c3 (4. f4, d5! with black advantage), Ba5 5. d4, exd4 6. Qh5, d5 7. Bxd5, Qf6! 8. Nf3, Bxc3+ 9. Nxc3, dxc3 10. Ne5, Ne7 (10. -, g6 is better. Black loses already here) 11. Bxf7+, Kf8 12. Bb3, Bf5! 13. Bg5, Bg6 14. Nxg6+, Qxg6 15. Bxe7+, Kxe7 16. Qe5+, Kf8 17. Qxc7!, Nc6 18. 0-0, Qf6 19. Rad1, Re8 20. Rd6, resign and 1 - 0 to Jensen - Nagorovski, 1991. D1 3. c3, d5 4. Bxd5, Nf6 5. Qf3, 0-0 6. d4, exd4 7. Bg5, dxc3 (Keres recommends 7. -, Be7 with advantage to black) 8. Bxf6, c2 9. Nc3, Qxf6 10. Qxf6, gxf6 11. Nf3, c6 12. Bb3, f5 is equal. And likewise is the continuation 8. Nxc3, Nbd7 9. 0-0-0, c6 10. Bb3, Qe7 even according to older analysis of Bilguer and Jdnisch. Black advantage arises after e.g. 4. exd5, Bxf2+ 5. Kxf2, Qh4+ ... Qxc4. The continuation 6. Bc4, Bg4 7. Qb3, Qe7 8. Qc2, Be6 (Jdnisch states the idea 8. f3 with the subsequent b4, a4 og Ba3) 9. Bxe6, fxe6 10. Nf3, Nc6 11. d3, Ng4 12. Rf1, Qh4 13. Qe2, Bxf2+ 14. Kd1, Qg3 gives black advantage. Also the 5. Qb3?, Nxd5 6. exd5, Qg5 (6. Qxd5, Qxd5 7. exd5, Bf5 8. Nf3, f6 -+) 7. Qa4+, Bd7 8. Qe4, Bf5 9. Qxe5+, Kd8 10. Qg3, Re8 is favourably to black. The game Staunton og Cochrane, 1848 continued 5. d4, exd4 6. cxd4, Bb4+ 7. Bd2, Bxd2 8. Qxd2, Nd5 9. exd5, Qxd5 10. Nf3, 0-0 and a draw. D2 3. c3, Nf6 4. d4 exd4 5. e5, d5 6. exf6, dxc4 7. Qh5, 0-0 8. Qxc5, Re8+ 9. Ne2, d3 10. Be3, dxe2 11. Nd2, Na6 12. Qxc4, Qxf6 13. Qxe2 is equal according to Pratt. 9. Kf1?, dxc3 10. Nc3, Qb3+ 11. Nge2, Rxe2 12. Qd5, Rc2+ 13. Qxd3, cxd3 14. Be3, Be6 and advantage to black. White may try with 6. Bb5+, Bd7 7. Bxd7, Nfd7 8. c.d4, Bb4+ 9. Nc3, 0-0 with equal play. After 5. -, Ng8, black loses with 6. cxd4, Bb4+ 7. Bd2, Bxd2 8. Nxd2, d5 9. Bd3, Nc6 10. Ne2 as in Galberg-Lund - Madsen, Copenhagen 1992. 5. cxd4?, Bb4+ 6. Bd2, Bxd2+ 7. Nxd2, d5 8. exd5, 0-0 gives advantage to black according to Keres. However Stamma sees the possibility for equal play after 7. -, Ne4 8. Nxe4, d5 9. Bb5+, c6 10. Bxc6, Nxc6. D3 3. c3, Qg5 4. Qf3, Qg6 5. Ne2, d6 6. d4, Bb6 7. dxe5, dxe5 8. Ng3, Nf6 9. h3, 0-0 10. Nbd2, Nc6 11. Ndf1, Na5 makes an equal game. 9. 0-0?, Bg4 10. Qd3, Nbd7 ... 0-0-0 did give black an advantage between Norfolk - New York, corr. 1842. Both 5. d3 and 5. d4, exd4 6. c.d4, Bxd4 7. Ne2 gives equal play. D4 3. c3, Qe7 4. Nf3, d6 5. d4, Bb6 6. 0-0, Nf6 7. Na3, Bg4 8. Nc2, Nbd7 went draw between Bobourdonnais - Macdonnell, 1834. D5 3. c3, Nc6 4. d4, Bb6 5. Ne2, Nf6 6. Qd3, 0-0 7. f4, exd4 8. e5, exd4 9. Bb3, Ne4 10. cxd4, f5 11. Nc3, Be6 gives equal play. Larsen and many others finds 4. -, exd4 5. Bxf7+, Kxf7 6. Qh5+ with advantage to white. Estrin and Glazkov points out that the white continuation with 5. Nf3 must be an improvement. But, as previously stated: 2. -, Nf6 is quite normal and you will often have the possibility for 3. d4 Diagram 2 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I BP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I WP I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I WQ I WK I I WN I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ After 3. d4 black can choose between striking at d4 or e4. So early a choice can get some opponents into coma and use time early in the game. That is also worth something. Gambit enthusiasts will clearly prefer 3. d4 (which is better than 3. d3, as in Bishops Game and can leed into known variations of Vienna Game) or 3. f4, which can result in Kings Gambit or to 3. -, d5 4. exd5, e4 as in Falkbeers Gambit. In Mantovani - Flear, Aosta Open 1990 did white win after 3. Qe2, Nc6 4. Nf3, Bc5 5. c3, d6 6. d3, a6 7.Nbd2, Ba7 8. Bb3, 0-0 9. Nf1, h6 10. Ng3, Ne7 11. Nh4, Kh7 12. Be3, Ng6 13. Nxg6, Kxg6 14. Nf5, Kh7 15. g4, Bxe3 16. Nxe3, g6 17. 0-0-0, c6 18. h4, h5 19. g5 Ne8 20. Rdf1, Ng7 21. f4, exf4 22. Rxf4, Be6 23. Rhf1, Kg8 24. Rf6, a5 25. Qf2, Qc7 26. Qf3, b5 27. Bxe6, Nxe6 28. Nxf5, gxf5 29. exf5, Ng7 30. Rh6, f6 31. gxf6, Rxf6 32. Rxf6, Qe7 33. Rg6 and 1 - 0. 3. -, exd4 Diagram 3 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I BP I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I WQ I WK I I WN I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ All other moves e.g. 3. -, Nxe4, 3. -, c6 and 3. -, Qe7 must be characterized as opening errors: A) 3. -, Nxe4? 3. -, Nxe4 is answered with 4. dxe5, and 4. -, Qh4?! with 5. Qf3, Ng5 6. Qf4, Qxf4 7. Bxf4, Ne6 8. Bg3 with advantage to white. Estrin and Glazkov recommends 5. Qe2 as favourable to white. Diagram 4 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I I BN I I I BQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I WP I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I WQ I WK I I WN I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ The game Galberg-Lund - Samuelsen, 1992 continued 3. -, Nxe4 4. dxe5, Qh4 5. Qf3, Bc5 6. Bxf7+ (6. Qe2?, Nc6 7. g3, Qe4 8. Qxe4, Nxe4 9. Bd5, Nc5 10. Bxc6, dxc6 11. Ne2, Bg4 12. Nbc3, 0-0-0 og sort vinder i dorfman - Silberstein, 1974), 6. -, Kd8 7. Nh3, Rf8 8. 0-0, d5 9. Qh5, Qxh5 10. Bxh5, Bxh3 11. gxh3, Rxf2 12. Rxf2, Nxf2 13. Bg5+, Kd7 14. Kg2, Ne4 15. Bf4, Nc6 16. Bg4+, Ke7 17. Nc3, Nxc3 18. bxc3, Rf8 and white won easily. After 4. -, Bc5? white gets the advantage with 5. Bxf7+, Kf8 6. Qf3, or rather with 5. Qd5. Black lost between Pfleger and Herzand, Berlin 1960 after 3. -, Nxe4 4. dxe5, Nc5 5. f4, Ne6 6. Nf3, h6 7. f5, Ng5 8. 0-0, Nxf3 9. Qxf3, c6 10. f6, gxf6 11. Bxf7+, Kxf7 12. Qh5+, Kg8 13. Qg6+, Bg7 14. exf6, Qf8 15. f7 and 1 - 0. It went the same way in Eddy Bevi - Wayne Guy, Adelaide Open 1990 after 3. -, Nxe4 4. dxe5, Qh4 5. Qe2, Bc5 6. g3, Bf2+ 7. Qxf2, Nxf2 8. gxh4, Nxh1 9. Kf1, Nc6 10. Bf4, Rf8 11. Kg2, Nb4 12. Na3, b6 13. Nf3, Bb7 14. Rh1, Nd5 15. Bc1, 0-0-0 16. Rd1 Ne7 17. Kg3, Rde8 18. Bb5, Nc6 19. Bf4, a6 20. Bd3, f6 21. exf6, Rxf6 22. Bg5, Rf7 23. Bh7, Ref8 24. Be4, d6 25. Bd5, Rd7 26. Re1, Kb8 27. Be6, Rdf7 28. Bxf7, Rxf7 29. c3, Nb4 30. cxb4, Rf3 31. Kg4, Rf2 32. Nc4, Rc2 33. b3, g6 34. Kg3, Rg2+ 35. Kf4, Rh2 36. Re6, Rf2+ 37. Ke3, Ra2 38. Rg6, Rh2 39. Rg8, Ka7 40. Nd2, Rh3 41. Kf4, Rd3 42. Kf5, Bf3 43. Nf3, Rf3 44. Kg6, Rb3 45. h5, Rh3 46. Rg7, Kb7 47. h6, Kc6 48. h7, Rxh7 49. Rxh7, Kb5 50. Rc7, Kb4 51. Rc6, Ka5 52. Bd8, resign 1 - 0. The game Nejstadt - Gipslis, 1955 was farovourably to white after 3. -, Nxe4 4. dxe5, Nc5? 5. Nf3 (there is also whita advantage with 5. f4, d6 6. Nf3), 5. -,Be7 6. Bf4, Nc6 7. Nc3, Ne6 8. Bg3, 0-0 9. Qe2!, f5 10. 0-0-0 11. Nd5, Kh8 12. Nf4, a6 13. h4. Black won in Zwisler,Lars - Byrialsen,Kim Copenhagen, 1993 after whites error in the 6th move 3. -, Nxe4 4. dxe5, Nc5? 5. Nc3, Be7 6. Be3? (better 6. Qg4), Nc6 7. Nf3, 0-0 8. Bxc5, Bxc5 9. Qe2?, d6! and 0 - 1. In the game Ivan Hausner - Evgeny Melikset Bek, Prag VIK 1991 tried black with 3. -, Nxe5 4. dxe5, Qe7 5. Nf3, h6 6. 0-0, Nc6 7. Re1, Nc5 8. Nc3, Ne6 9. Nd5, Qc5 10. b3, Ncd4 11. Nxd4, Nxd4 12. Be3, c6 13. Nxc7 and lost 1 - 0. Subsequently did white win in Cheremisin - Korchmar, 1976 after black tried 3. -, Nxe4 4. dxe5, c6? 5. Qe2!, Nc5 6. Nc3, Be7 7. Bf4. B) 3. -, c6? Diagram 5 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I I BP I BP I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BP I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I WP I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I WQ I WK I I WN I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ In Marshall - Forsberg, New York 1925 was tried 3. -, c6? 4. dxe5, Qa5+ 5. Nc3, Nxe4 6. Bxf7+, Kxf7 7. Qf3+, Nf6 8. exf6, Qe5+ 9. Ne4, Bb4+ 10. Kf1, Re8 11. fxg7, Kxg7 12. Qg4+, Kh8 13. Bg5!, Be7 14. Nf3, Qb5+ 15. Kg1, d5 16. Qh5, Bd7 17. Nxf6 and white won easy. Staunton and Cochrane played in the 1840'th dozens of games against each other and of course they also played Urusoff Gambit. Cochrane won over Staunton in 1842 with 3. -, c6? 4. dxe5, Qa5+ 5. c3, Qxe5 6. Bd3, Bc5 7. Nf3, Qe7 8. 0-0, 0-0 9. e5, Ng4 10. Bxh7+, Kxh7 11. Ng5+, Kg8 12. Qxg4, Qxe5 13. Qh5, Qf5 14. g4, Qg6 15. Qxg6, fxg6 16. Be3, Bxe3 17. fxe3, Rxf1+ 18. Kxf1, d5. In the fight of 1842 won Staunton meanwhile after 3. -, c6? 4. Nf3, Nxe4 5. dxe5, d5 6. exd6, Nxd6 7. Be2, Be7 8. 0-0, 0-0 9. Bf4, Bg4 10. Re1, Be6 11. Bd3, h6 12. Ne5, Nd7 13. Ng6!, fxg6 14. Bxd6, Bxd6 15. Rxe6, Bxh2+ 16. Kxh2, Qh4+ 17. Kg1, Qxf2+ 18. Kh1, Rf4 (Cochrane -Staunton, 1842). Cochrane took revenge and won over Stauntons by using his own idea 7. Bd3!, Be7 8. 0-0, 0-0 9. Bf4, Bg4 10. Nc3, b5 11. Re1, Kh8 12. Qe2, Be6 13. Bxd6, Bxd6 14. Rad1!, Kg7 15. Bxh7, Kxh7 16. Ng5+, Kg8 17. Nxe6, Bxh2+ 18. Kf1, fxe6 (Cochrane - Staunton, 1842). C) 3. -, Qe7? The game Staunton - Saint-Amant, 1843 went draw after 3. -, Qe7 4. Nc3, exd4 5. Qxd4, Nc6 6. Qe3, Ne5 7. Bb3, c6 8. h3, d6 9. Nge2, h6 10. f4, Ng6 11. 0-0, Be6! 12. f5, Bxb3 13. axb3, Nge5 14. Rxa7, Rb8 15. Bd2, Ned7 16. Rfa1, Qd8 17. Na4, Be7 18. NQ4, 0-0. But such a passive move should be punished with 4. dxe5. It will not work with 4. -, Qb4+ 5. Nd2! D) 3. -, d6 In Bcp - Ostrich, 1977, the game was played straight up after 3. -, d6 4. Nf3, Bg4 5. dxe5, Bxf3 6. gxf3, dxe5 7. Bxf7, Ke7 8. Qxd8, Kxd8 9. 0-0, Nbd7 10. Bg5, h6 11. Bxf6, Nxf6 12. Nc3, Bb4 13. Nd5, Nxd5 14. Bxd5, c6 15. Be6, Ke8 16. a3, Be7 17. Rfd1, Rd8 18. Rxd8, Bxd8 19. Rd1, Rf8 20. Kg2, Bb6 21. Bf5, Rf6 22. Bc8, Rf7 23. Bf5, Kf8 24. Rxd7, Rxd7 25. Bd7, Bd4 26. c3, Bc5 27. b4, Bd6 28. c4, c5 29. b5, Ke7 30. Bf5, Kf6 31. h4, g6 32. Bd7, h5 33. a4, g5 34. hxg5, Kxg5 35. a5, h4 36. b6, axb6 37. axb6, Be7 38. Be6, Bd8 39. Bd5, Kf4 40. Bb7, h3 41. Kh3, Kf3 42. Bd5, Bb6 43. Kh2, Kf2 44. Kh3, Kf3 45. Kh2, Bd8 46. Kh3, Bg5 47. Kh2, Bf4 48. Kh3, Bg3 49. Bc6 Be1 50. Bd5 and draw. E) 3. -, Nc6 In Thomas - Milner Barry, Hastings 1938 white made a sacrifice and lost 3. -, Nc6 4. Bxf7, Kxf7 5. dxe5, Nxe5 6. f4, Nc6 7. e5, d5 8. exf6, Qxf6 9. Nf3, Bb4+ 10. c3, Re8 11. Kf1, Bd6 12. Ng5+, Kg6 13. Qd3, Qf5 14. Qg3, Qg4 15. Qxg4, Bxg4 16. h3, Be2+ 17. Kf2, Bc5 18. Kg3, Ne7 19. Kh2, Nf5 20. g4, Ne3 21. Na3, Bd6 22. Kg3, h6 23. Nf3, Re4 24. Kf2, Bf3 25. Kf3, Bf4 26. Be3, Re3 27. Kf2, Rae8 28. Rad1, Re2 29. Kf3, Bg5 30. Rd3, Bh4 31. Rf1 and 0 - 1 to black. F) 3. -, d5 Black was lucky in Pitschka - Nuer, Berlin 1984 after 3. -, d5 4. dxe5, dxc4 5. Qxd8, Kxd8 6. exf6, gxf6 7. Bf4, Bb4 8. Nc3, Bxc3 9. bxc3, Bd7 10. 0-0-0, Re8 11. f3, Kc8 12. Ne2, b6 13. Ng3, a5 14. Rd5 b5 15. Rh5, b4 16. Rh7, Be6 17. h4, Nd7 18. h5, Rb8 19. h6, b3 20. cxb3, cxb3 21. axb3, Nc5 22. Ne2, Nb3 23. Kc2, a4 24. Nc1, a3 25. Na2, Rd8 26. c4, Nd4 27. Kc3, Ne2 28. Kc2, Rb2 and 0 - 1. We continue the main variation 4. Nf3 Diagram 6 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I BP I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I WP I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I WQ I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 4. e5, d5 is favourable to black, and leads into known variations of Petroffs Defence (or Russian Defence). Anderssens analysis 4. e5, d5 5. Bb3, Ne4 6. Ne2, Nc5 7. Nxd4, Nxb3 8. Nxb3, c5 9. 0-0, Nc5 states black advantage in development. E.g. the referation in Stamen Mikhailov - Dimitur Kostakiev, Bankia 1990, where black won after 4. e5, d5 5. Bd3, Ne4 6. c3, Bc5 7. cxd4, Bxd4 8. Bb5, c6 9. Qxd4, Qa5 10. b4, Qb5 11. a4, Qb6 12. Qxb6, axb6 13. f3, f5 14. fxe4, fxe4 15. Ne2, Nd7 16. Bb2, 0-0 17. Rf1, Re8 18. Rf5, Nc5 19. bxc5, Bf5 20. Ng3, Bg6 21. cxb6, c5 22. Nd2, d4 23. Nc4, Bf7 24. Nd6, Re5 25. Nxf7, Kxf7 26. a5, Ra6 27. Kd2, Ke6 28. Kc2, Kd5 29. Kb3, e3 30. Ka4, Re6 31. Kb5, c4 32. Ne2, c3 33. Nf4, Ke5 34. Ne6, cxb2 35. Rb1, Ke6 36. Rxb2, d3 37. Kc4, d2 38. Rb1, e2 39. Kd3 d1Q and 0 - 1. My own analysis of 5. Qxd4, Nc6 (or 5. -, dxc4 6. Qxd8+, Kxd8 7. exf6, gxf6 8. Ne2) 6. Bb5, Be7 with advantage to med black. The 6. -, Ne4 is met with 7. Nc3 and gives equal play. 4. -, Qe7? will not work. Allready in London in 1834 did Alexander MacDonnell win over Louis de la Bourdonnais with 5. Qe2, Ng8 6. Nf3, Nc6 7. c3, d6 8. cxd4, Bg4 9. Bb5, d5 10. Nc3, Qe6 11. h3, Bxf3 12. Qxf3, 0-0-0 (better is 12. -, Bb4 with equal play according to Anderssen) 13. Bxc6, Qxc6 14. Qxf7, Bb4 15. Bd2, Ne7 16. 0-0, Rde8 17. Qh5, Nf5 18. a3, Bxc3 19. Bxc3, g6 20. Qd1, h5 21. Rc1, Qe6 22. f4, h4 23. Rf3, Rfg8 24. Qe1, Kb8 25. Qd2, Rh7 26. Qd3, Rhg7 27. Bd2, a6 28. b4, Qb6 29. Bc3, Ng3 30. a4, Ne4 31. b5, g5 32. f5, g4 33. hxg4, Rxg4 34. Rc2, h3 35. Rxh3, Rg3 36. Rxg3, Rxg3 37. a5, Qh6 38. Bd2, Qh3 39. Qf1, Rg8 40. f6, Qh5 41. f7, Rf8 42. e6, Ng3 43. Qf3, Qh1+ 44. Kf2, Ne4 45. Ke2, Qb1 46. e7, Qb5 47. Qd3, Ng3+ 48. Kd1, resign and 1 - 0. After 7. 0-0?, Bc5 8. h3, Be6 9. c3, dxc3 10. Nxc3, Nxc3 11. bxc3 0-0 12. Bc2, f6 did white lose in Hochart - Riviere, 1966. After 4. Qxd4, Nc6 you get in some variations of Center Games which also is favourable for black. The theory suggests 5. Qe3, Bb4 6. c3, Ba5 7. Nf3, Bb6 8. Qf4, 0-0 or 6. Bd2, 0-0 7. Ne2, d5 with advantage to black. 4. -, Nxe4 4. -, Nxe4 is the move of consequence. Black gets a pawn and resists whites center and prepares d7-d5. The backlash is that blacks development is somewhat behind and black has to withdraw. Black has one or two possibilities to avoid this risk, and it is often in the 4th move you encounter the rejections of the Gambit. The 4th move rejections is further examined in chapter 7, and a quick looksee will tell you, that they are not so terribly comprehensive. All Gambits has the possibility of rejection and a little preparation in these rejection will do opening advantage even better, and more interesting if you have Urusoff Gambit on the repertoire. 5. Qxd4, Nf6 Diagram 7 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I WQ I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ That is the original Urusoff Gambit with blacks bedst answer 5. -, Nf6. It is possibly the only one if black is determinde not to stand miserably after 5. -, Nc5 or 5. - , Nd6 or 5. -, d5. The latter is examined in chapter 4.1. 6. Bg5, Be7 Diagram 8 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I WQ I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ Again, that is the normal variation. It is better instantly to play 6. Nc3 (examined in chapter 4.2) where whites plan is castling long. Very rare but played in favorable to white is short castling. In Blocker - Sergent, USA 1988 was played 6. 0-0, Be7 7. Nc3, 0-0 8. Re1, d5 9. Nxd5, Nxd5 10. Qxd5, Nd7 11. Bf4, Nb6 12. Qxd8, Bxd8 13. Bb3, Bf5 14. Rad1, c6? 15. Bd6! and 1 - 0. 7. Nc3 Thus gives 6. Bg5, Be7 the begining of the main variation of Urusoff Gambit. As previously stated - you should immidiately consider - as white - to play 6. Nc3 in spite of the risk of the 6. Bg5, Nc6 defence, which looks favourably to black. White made an error by for quick castelling in Mats Bergqvist - Christer Hartman, Stockholm Open 1990 after 6. 0-0, d5 7. Rad1, c6 8. b4, Bxb4 9. Bb2, Be7 10. Bd3, Bg4 11. Rfe1, Bxf3 12. gxf3, 0-0 13. Re5, h6 14. Nd2, Nbd7 15. Kh1, Nxe5 16. Qxe5, Bd6 17. Qf5, Re8 18. Rg1, Re6 19. Bxf6, Rxf6 20. Qxh7+, Kf8 21. Bxf5, Rxf5 22. Qxf5, Qh4 23. Rg2, g6 24. Qd7, Qe7 and 0 - 1. 4.1 Opening Errors 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Nf6 3. d4, exd4 4. Nf3, Nxe4 5. Qxd4 Alekhine has written: 'After 4. -, Nxe4 5. Qxd4, has a very strong attack. I fundamentally avoid such material winnings in the opening, because they results in loss of tempo and poor development'. Prince Urusoff recommended in his historic analysis 6. Ne5, Ne6 7. 0-0, but that is refutated by 7. -, Nc6! 8. Bxe6, fxe6 9. Nxc6, b.c6 10. Nd2, Qf6 with black advantage. A) 5. -, Nc5? Diagram 9 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I WQ I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I WP I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I I I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 5. -, Nc5 is answered by 6. Bg5!, f6 (not 6. -, Nc6? 7. Bxf7+!, Kxf7 8. Qd5+ or 8. Qf4+, Ke8 9. Bxd8 and 6. Be7? 7. Qxg7) 7. Be3, c6 8. Nc3, d5 9. 0-0-0, Be7 10. Qh4, Nbd7 11. Nxd5, cxd5 12. Qh5+, g6 and white won after 13. Qxd5, Ne5 14. Qxd8+, Bxd8 15. Nxe5, fxe5 16 Bxc5 as in Estrin-Raimanov, Leningrad 1949. Neither 10. -, 0-0 11. Nxd5 or 10. -, Be6 11. Rhe1 is playable for black. White can also try 6. Nc3, but not e.g. 6. Ne5, Ne6 7. 0-0 with blakcs answer 7. -, Nc6 8. Bxe6, fxe6 9. Nxc6, bxc6 10. Nd2, Qf6 with advantage to black. Schlemm won over Wraney in Vienna, 1872 with 6. Ne5, Ne6 7. 0-0, Nd4? (better still is 7. -, Nc6! 8. Bxe6, fxe6 9. Nxc6, bxc6 10. Nd2, Qf6 with advantage to black) 8. Bxf7, Ke7 9. Bg5+, Kd6 10 Nc4+, Kc6 11. Bxd8, Nxc2 12. Rc1, Na1 13. Ne5, Kb6 14. Rxc7, d6 15. Rc6+, Kb5 16. Nc3+, Kb4 17. a3 and mate. B) 5. -, Nd6? Diagram 10 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I BP I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I BN I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I WQ I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I I I WR I WK I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 5. Qxd4, Nd6 can eayly be met with 6. 0-0, Qf6 7. Re1, Be7 8. Qxf6, gxf6 9. Bd3 with the idea of Bh6 and Bg7 and good pressure on black. 6. -, Nxc4? is a mistake punished quickly with 7. Re1+, Be7 8. Qxg7, Rf8 9. Bh6! In Prokes - Zander, Vienna 1925 white won with 5. -, Nd6 6. 0-0, Nc6? (no better is 6. -, Nxc4 7.Re1+, Be7 8. Qxg7, Rf8 9. Bh6! or 6. -, Qf6 7. Re1+, Be7 8. Qxf6, gxf6 9. Bd3 with the idea Bh6-g7) 7. Re1+, Ne7 8. Bb3, f6 9. Qd5, g5 10. Nxg5!, fxg5 11. Bxg5, h6 12. Nc3, Rh7 13.Qg8, hxg5 14. Qxh7 and 1 - 0. C) 5. -, d5? Diagram 11 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I WB I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I WQ I BN I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ Nor is 5. -, d5 good because of the continuation 6. Bxd5, Nf6 7. Bxf7+, Kxf7 8. Qxd8, Bb4+ 9. Qd2 and white has a sound pawn more. However Estrin and Glazkov finds favourable black chances after 9. -, Re8+ 10. Kf1, Bxd2 11. Bxd2, Bg4 with satisfacoty compensation for the pawn. If 6. -, Nd6 then 7. 0-0 gives advantage to white according to Keres. 4.2 The Marshall Variantion 6. Nc3 Rekapitulation: 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Nf6 3. d4, exd4 4. Nf3, Nxe4 5. Qxd4, Nf6. ECO's little insignificant note no. 39 should come out in the daylight at the risk of the black defence 6. Bg5, Nc6, which is examined in chapter 4.3. Diagram 12 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I WQ I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I I WB I I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ After 6. Nc3, Nc6 7. Qh4, Bb4 8. 0-0, Bxc3 9. bxc3, 0-0 10. Bd3?, Ne7 11. Bg5, Ng6 12. Qg3, a5 did black get an advantage in Marshall-Torres, New York 1925. White did not play his best because he could have a good position after the idea of Keres ide 10. Bg5 with good prospects of an attack. This will avoid the 6. Bg5, Nc6 defence: 7. Qh4, d5 is answered with 8. Nxd5! and 7. -, d6 by 8. Bg5 with transposition to the later discussed ordinary variations. Larsen suggests in ECO that black in stead of playing 7. -, Bb4? can play 7. -, Be7 or 6. -, c6 but even this gives transpositions to the later variations. 4.3 The 6. -, Nc6 Defence Diagram 13 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I WQ I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I I I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ The game Tartakower - Shories from Barmen, 1905 went: 6. Bg5, Nc6 7. Qh4 (7. Bxf6, Nxd4! 8. Bxd8, Nxf3+ 9. gxf3, Kxd8 10. Bxf7) 7. -, d5 8. Bxf6, gxf6 9. Bb3, Be6 10. Nc3, Bb4 11. 0-0-0, Bxc3 12. bxc3, Qe7 13. Bxd5, 0-0-0 with equal play. Even 7. Bxf6, Qxf6 is good for black. However Forintos & Haag suggests that black could have bettered the game and thus 'refuse' the opening of Urusoff Gambit by 9. -, Qe7+ followed by 10. Kf1, Be6 11. Nc3, 0-0-0 12. Rd1. Even this has got improvements after 6. Bg5, Nc6 7. Qh4, Bb4+ 8. c3, Be7, which prevents whites knight to c3. A possible continuation is 9. Nd2, d5 10. Bd3, Be6 11. 0-0 with white advantage. Also 8. -, Qe7+ 9. Kf1, Bc5 10. Nbd2, 0-0 gives white advantage. In an international tournament in Copenhagen 1989 did Pilgaard, Kim - Christensen, Tobias play an even game after 6. Bg5, Nc6 7. Qh4, d5 8. Bd3, Bb4+ 9. c3, Qe7+ 10. Be2, Bd6 11. 0-0, Ne5 12. Nxe5, Qxe5 13. Nd2, 0-0 14. Bd3, h6 15. Bxf6, Qxf6 16. Qxf6, gxf6 17. Rfe1, Bg4 18. Nf1, Bh5 19. Ne3, Bg6 20. Rad1, Rfe8 21. Nf5, Bf8 22. Kf1, Re5 23. g4, h5 24. h3, Rae8 25. f4, Re6 26. Be2, Re4 27. Bf3, Rxe1+ 28. Rxe1, Rxe1+ 29. Kxe1, c6 30. Ke2, a5 31. Kd2, Bc5 32. a3, a4 33. Bd1, hxg4 34. hxg4, Bxf5 35. gxf5, b5 36. Bh5, Kf8 37. Kd3, Ke7 38. Kd2, Ke8 39. Kd3, Ke7 40. Kd2, Bg1 41. Bd1, Kd6 42. Bh5, Ke7 43. Bd1, c5 44. Be2, c4 45. Bf3, Kd6 46. Bh5, d4 47. Bxf7, Be3+ 48. Kc2, d3+ 49. Kd1, Bxf4 50. Be8, Kc5 51 Bd7, Be5 52. Be8, Kb6 53. Kd2, Ka6 54. Bc6, Kb6 and draw. In Steenstrup - Pilgaard, Copenhagen 1992 was continued with 6. Bg5, Nc6 7. Qh4, Bb4+ 8. Nc3?, Qe7+ 9. Kf1, Bxc3 10. b.c3, d6 11. Nd4, Be6!, blacks only move and black won easyly after 12. Bb5, Kd7 (12. Re1?, Bxc4+) 13. Nxc6, - (black is also in favour after 13. Re1, h6) 13. -, bxc6 14. Bxc6?, Kxc6 15. Qda4+, Kb7 16. Rb1+, Kc8 17. Bxf6, Qxf6 18. f3, Qxc3 19. Kf2, Qc4 20. Rb4, Qxa2 21. Qb5, a6. In move 11 there e.g. threathens 11. -, Ne5 12. Re1, Be6 13. Bxe6, fxe6 14. Bxf6!, gxf6 15. f4, Ng6 16. Qh5, e5 17. f5 with profit for white. Black has the upper hand after 14. f4?, 0-0 15. fxe5, Ne4+. 9. Kd1 is not favourable, e.g. after 9. -, Bxc3 10. bxc3, d6 11. Nd4, Be6 12. Re1, Nxd4 13. cxd4, d5 (13. -, c6 14. d5, cxd5 15. Bb5+, Kf8 16. f4 is good for white) 14. Bxd5, 0-0-0 with black advantage. 5 The 7. -, Nc6 Defence Recapitulation: 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Nf6 3. d4, exd4 4. Nf3, Nxe4 5. Qxd4, Nf6 6. Bg5, Be7 7. Nc3 Diagram 14 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I BB I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I WQ I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I I I I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 7. -, Nc6 We are now entering the treatment of the ordinary black defences in Urusoff Gambit. The other plan of defence 7. -, c6 has been discussed in chapter 6. Both plans of defence gives black good counterplay. A to quick black castling is not recommendable because 7. -, 0-0 will put emfasis on white advantage in tempi. White won quickly in Ivan Hausner - Zbigniew Szymcsak, Prag 1989 after 7. Nc3, 0-0 8. 0-0-0, h6 9. Qh4 d6 10. Bxh6, gxh6 11. Qxh6, Nh7 12. h4, Nc6 13. Bd3, f5 14. Bc4, Kh8 15. Ng5 and 1 - 0. Black did well in Carsten Bank Fries - Francerzek Borkowski, Denmark 1991 with 7. -, h6 8. Bf4, Nc6 9. Qd3, d6 10. 0-0-0, Na5 11. Bb5, Bd7 12. Rhe1, 0-0 13. Bxd7, Qxd7 14. Nd4, Rfe8 15. Qf3, Nc6 16. h3, Nxd4 17. Rxd4, c6 18. g4, Nh7 19. Qg3, d5 20. h4, Bc5 21. Rdd1, Rxe1 22. Rxe1, Re8 23. Rd1, Nf6 24. g5, Nh5 25. Qf3, Qf5 26. Nxd5, cxd5 27. Rxd5, Re1+ 28. Kd2, Re2+ 29. Kxe2, Nf4+ 30. Kf1, Qd5 31. Qf4, hxg5 and 0 - 1. White should have played 8. Bh4. 5.1 The Keres-varianten 8. Qh4, d6 Diagram 15 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I BB I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I BP I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I I I I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 8. Qh4, d6 8. -, d6 is the best continuation for black, and it must be regarded as the main variation. 8. -, d5 gives white an advantage, and this continuation is discussed in chapter 5.2. It is not possible to play 8. -, 0-0? Look at e.g. Estrins analysis of 9. 0-0-0, d6 10. Bd3. h6 11. Bxh6, gxh6 (11. -, Ng4?, 12. Bg5!) 12. Qxh6, Nb4 (12. -, Ne5, 13. Nxe5, dxe5 14. Qg5+, Kb8 15. Bf5, and white advantage) 13. Ng5 Nxd3+ 14. Rxd3, Bf5 15. Rg3, Bg6 16. Ne6! with white advantage. 9. 0-0-0, Be6 Diagram 16 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I BP I BB I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ After 9. -, 0-0 comes white according to Estrin & Glazkov strongly again with 10. Bd3, h6 11. Bxh6!, gxh6 12. Qxh6, Nb4 13. Ng5, Nxd3+ 14. Rxd3, Bf5 15. Rg3, Bg6 16. Ne6 or 12. -, Ne5 13. Nxe5, dxe5 14. Qg5+, Kh8 15. Bf5 followed by Rd3. In the classical game Keidanski - Lasker, 1891 did Lasker lose after 9. -, Bf5? 10. Rhe1, 0-0 11. Qf4, Bg6 12. g4, Na5 13. Bd3, Qd7 14. Bxf6, Bxf6 15. Nd5, Bd8 16. Bf5, Bxf5 17. gxf5, f6 18. h4, b5 19. Nd4, Nc4 20. Qe4. As mentioned before is this the game with which the opening often is refered as the Keidanski-Urusoff Gambit. Clearly unhealthy for white as Cafferty & Hooper points out is it to try 11. Rxe7?, Nxe7 12. Bxf6, gxf6 13. Re1, Ng6 14. Qh6, Re8! 15. Nd5, Qd8 with the idea c6 and Qf8. 10. Bd3 Diagram 17 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I BP I BB I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I WB I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ By not playing Bb5 at once the castling is prevented. ECO mentions 10. Rhe1 from a 1938 correspondance game between Berlin and Budapest which continued 10. -, Bxc4 11. Qxc4, 0-0.12 Re3, Nd7 13. h4, Re8 14. Bxe7, Rxe7 15. Bxe7, Rxe7 16. Ng5, Nde5 17. Qe4, N7g6 18. f4, h6 and black got the advantage. Though certain errors in the notation comes Keres with the good idea for black in the combination 13. Rxe7, Nxe7 14. Re1, Re8 15. Nd5, Nb6! 10. -, Qd7 According to ECO can black play 10. -, h6 or 10. -, a6. But 10. -, h6 is not good. E.g. 10. -,h6 11. Rhe1, Qd7 12. Bb5, 0-0-0, 13. Qa4, Nd5 14. Rd5, Bg5 15. Rxg5, hxg5 16. Nd4, Rdg8 17. Nxc6, bxc6 18. Bxc6, Qe7 19. Qa7 and white won in Svensson,E - Rolksdorf,H in the European Correspondance Championship 1973. In Dellenbach,J-P - Scheu,L did black try 13. -, Ng8 but lost after 14. Be3, Bg5 15. Ne5. Cafferty & Hooper suggests 10. -, a6 11. Rhe1, Qd7 12. Ne4, Nxe4 13. Bxe4, 0-0-0 14. Bxc6, Bg5+ 15. Nxg5, Qxc6 16. Nxe6, fxe6 17. dg4 with equal play. The 2200 rated danish chessplayer Kim Pilgaard has played 10. -, a6 by several occasions and comments the correspondance game Zwisler, Lars - Pilgaard, Kim, Danmark, 1993 with: "The idea is to play Qd7 without getting Bb5 and Ne5 in the head. 11. Rhe1, Qd7 12. Ne4, Nxe4 13. Qxe4, d5! I had not seen whites 16th move. Now the game is quite even. 13. -, 0-0-0? is not good because of 14. Bxe7+, Nxe7 (14. -, Qxe7 15. Bxa6) 15. Bxa6!, d5 16. Bxb7+, Kxb7 17 Qb4+ with the following attack from white. Black has to stop Bxe7 and Ng5, so 13. -, h6 14. Bxe7, Qxe7 is the critical variation. After the changing the pieces it is difficult for white to get an attack, even if the black king is bound to the center on d7. 15. Nd4 (15. Bc4, Kd7), Nxd4 16. Qxd4, Kd7! 17. f4 (17. Qxg7, Rag8 followed by Qg5+ and Qxg2), g6 18. g4 (Bc4, Qf8), Qh4 eneste tr{k 19. h3 (19. f5, gxf5 20. Bxf5, Bxf5 21. gxf5, Qxd4 with explicit advantage to black) 19. -, h5 and I prefer to be black. 14. Qh4, h6 15. Bxe7, Qxe7 16. Bf5! The strongest move en this position, where white gets material overweight. 16. -, Qxh4 17. Nxh4, 0-0 Black cannot hold the pawn, because both Bxe6 and Rxd5 threathens. 18. Re6! White did natirally not like 18. Bxe6, fxe6 19. Rxe6, Rxf2 with good play for black. 18. -, fxe6 19. Bxe6, Kh7 20. Bf5, g6 21. Bxg6, Kg7 22. Rd5, Rad8. The rooks is very strong in the end game, so it is adamant to change whites lonely rook. 23. Rxd8, Nxd8 24. Bf5, Nf7 25. f3 I wondered why the horse did not go to Ng6 and the posotion is even. Black has a quality against bishop and two pawns. In this position whites extra pawns is undangerously and blacks king is placed on the correct wing. On the other hand is the rook in need of open lines. I prefer blacks position, but his advantage is to small to win." Nevertheless did black win after whites error in the 33th move, after 25. -, Sd6 26. Ld3, c5 27. Kd2, Kf6 28. f4, Te8 29. g3, c4 30. Lg6!, Te7 31. c3, Td7 32. Ke3, Te7 33. Kf2?, b5 34. Lc2, a5 35. Sg2, b4 36. Se3, Tb7 37. Kf3?, b3 38. axb3, cxb3 39. Lb1, a4 40. c4!, Kf7 41. c5, Sb5 42. Ld3, Tb8 43. Sc4, Ke7 44. Se5, Sa7! 45. Ke4, Td8 46. c6, a3 47. bxa3, b2 48. Lc2, Td2 49. Lb1, Sb5 and white ressigned in Zwisler,L - Pilgaard,Kim 1993. The danish GM Bent Larsen wrote an artikel in a newspaper in 1989 about Urusoff Gambit the following, which is below as an uncommented quotation: "I have edited the chapter in ECO about Bishops Game and now is Jorgen Axel Nielsen teasing me. He is the Danish Chess Unions representative in ICCF, the International Correspondance Chess Union, and he asks what I think of the following game, which has been published in the german periodical Fernschach Uschold - Wallinger, Bishops Game: 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Nf6 3. d4. This has sometimes been called Urusoff Gambit, after a russian nobleman from the last century. 3. -, exd4 4. Nf3, Nxe4 5. Qxd4, Nf6 6. Bg5, Be7 7. Nc3, Nc6 8. Qh4, d6. Jorgen Axel Nielsen thinks d5 is better, I disagree, with d6 hasblack a solid posotion, he should just prepare for whites different trick attacks. 9. 0-0-0, Be6 10. Bd3, h6. Mentioned in a note in ECO. Another sugestion is 10. -, a6 with the aim to continud with Qh7. In various old games was played 10 -, Qd7 11. Bb5, 0-0 and now either Ne5 or Nd4. 11. Rhe1, Qd7 12. Bb5, 0-0-0? with as I wrote an unclear position, and I did not put a ?. And I will insist that 12. Rg8 or 12. -, 0-0 is still with an unclear position. 13. Qa4! Diagram 18 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BK I BR I I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BQ I BB I BP I BP I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I BP I BB I BN I I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I WB I I I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WQ I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I WR I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ with the mighty threat Nd4. 13. -, Nd5? 14. Rxd5, hxg5 15. Nd4! and black did resign. There could follow 15. -, Bxd5 16. Nxd5, Bf6 17. Bxc6. A much too quick collapse for a correspondance game. After 13. Qa4 black had the opportunity to 13. hxg5 14. Nd4, Rh4 15. Bxc6, Qxc6 16. Nxc6, Rxa4 17. Nxe7+, Kd7 18. Nxa4, Kxe7, with a sound pawn in the center for the quality. But it might loose in the long run. 13. -, a6 is much more interesting (14. Bxa6, Nb8!), but white will play 14. Nd4, axb5 15. Ncxb5!, whereafter any defence is hopeless, e.g. 14. -, Kb8 15. Re3, or 14. -, Qe8 15. Nxc6, bxc6 16. Na7+." End citation. The main variation is now continued 11. Bb5, 0-0 Threathens with 12. Ne5, which prevents 11. -, 0-0-0. According to Tartakower comes 12. Ne5!, Qe8 13. Nxc6, bxc6 14. Ba6+, Kd7 15. Na4 with white advantage. Besides that will 12. Qa4, a6 13. Bxa6, bxa6 14. Qxa6+, Kb8 15. Nb5 also win. Keres finds that 11. Rhe1 is favourable for white, though still untested. After 11. Bb5, 0-0 could 12. Ne5 or 12. Nd4 be tried. ECO suggests 12. Ne5, which we start with. A) 12. Ne5 Diagram 19 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I I I I BR I BK I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BQ I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I BP I BB I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I WB I I I WN I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 12. Ne5 gives white a strong position of attack. In the corr.game Griffith-MacDonald, 1924 did white win with 12. -, Qe8 13. Nxc6, bxc6 14. Bd3, h6 15. f4, hxg5 16. fxg5. Estrin & Glazkov states to have found the improvement for black with 15. -, Nd5! ECO mentions Nejstadt-Burlaiev, Moscow 1958, as the main variation for Urusoff Gambit. This game continued: 12. -, Qc8 Black won in Grumme,Hugo - Pilgaard,Kim Denmark 1987 after 12. -, Qe8 13. Nxc6, bxc6 14. Bd3, h6 15. f4, Qd7 16. Rde1, Rfe8 17. Ne4, hxg5 18. Nxf6+, Bxf6 19. Qh7+, Kf8 20. f5, Be5 21. fxe6, Qxe6 22. Kb1, tab8 23. b3, Qd5 24. Qh8+, Ke7 25. Qxg7, Rg8 26. Qh7, Qd4 27. Rxe5, Qxe5 28. Rf1, Rg7 29. Qh5, a5 30. a4, Rb4 31. h3, Rf4 32. Qd1, Rxf1 33. Qxf1, Rg8 34. g4, c5 35. Qd2, Ra8 36. Bf5, d5 37. Qxg5, Qf6 38. Qe3+, Kd6 39. Qf4+, Qe5 40. Qh6+, f6 41. Qg7, Qe7 42. Qh6, Re8 43. Ka2, de5 44. Qg7, Qe7 45. Qh6, c4 46. bxc4, Rb8 47. Qd2, Qe5 48. Qxd5+, Qxd5 49. cxd5, Rh8 50. Be6, Rxh3 51. g5, Rh2 52. gxf6, Rxc2+ 53. Kb3, Rf2 54. f7, c6 and 0 - 1. 13. Nxc6, bxc6 14. Bxc6, h6 In the correspondance game Matrich - Nicovic, 1972-73 did black try 14. -, Rb8, but got 15. Ne4, Qd8 16. Rd3, Kh8 17. Nxf6, gxf6n 18. Be4 and white won. 15. Bd2, Rb8 Why not15. Bxa8? It costs two Bishops. 16. Qa4, Ng4 17. Be1, Bg5+ Diagram 20 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I BR I BQ I I I BR I BK I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I I BP I I BB I BP I BP I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I BP I BB I I I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WQ I I I I I I BN I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I WB I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ Estrin & Glazkov finds that white should have won with 17. Rdf1, Bf6 18. f4. If black tries 17. -, Ne5 thern comes 18. Nd5 with white advantage. 18. Kb1, Bf6 19. b3, Nf2 20. Bf2, Bc3 21. Qa7, Bf5 and the game Nejstadt-Burlaiev, Moscow 1958 ended draw. the variation must be characterized as full of chances to both sides. B) Keres continuation of the 7. Nc6 defence is parting after the 12th move. We rekapitulate: 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Nf6 3. d4, exd4 4 Nf3, Nxe4 5. Qxd4, Nf6 6. Bg5, Be7 7. Nc3, Nc6 8. Qh4, d6 9. 0-0-0, Be6 10. Bd3, Qd7 11. Bb5, 0-0 continues with 12. Nd4 Diagram 21 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I I I I BR I BK I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BQ I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I BP I BB I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I WB I I I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I WN I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ white has build a strong position of attack for the sacrificed pawn. Possible continuations is 12. -, h6 or 12. -, a6: B1) 12. -,h6 according to Larsen in ECO should 12. -, h6 be further investigated. Cafferty & Hooper suggests 13. Nxc6, bxc6 14. Bxh6, Ng4 which gives black advantage. The other possibility is B2) 12. -, a6 13. Bd3, h6! 14. Nxc6, bxc6 15. Bxh6, Ng4 which also should be advantageous to black. In Mieses-Rubinstein, Breslau 1912, was continued with 12. -, a6 13. Bd3, Ne5 14. f4, Nxd3+ 15. Rxd3, c5 16. Rg3, Kh8 17. Nf3, Ng8 18. Bxe7, Qxe7 19. Ng5, Nh6 20. Re1, Qd7 21. Rge3, Rfe8 22. Nce4, Bf5 23. Nf6!, gxf6 24. Qxh6, Bg6! 25. Nxh7, Bxh7 26. Rg3, Rxe1+ 27. Kd2, Re2+ 28. Kd1, Re1+ and the game ended draw by perpetual chess. According to Keres did black not play up to his best and could have got the advantage after 19. -, h6! Also 14. Bxh7+, Nxh7 15. Bxe7, Ng6 gives black good play. 5.2 The Estrin variation 8. Qh4, d5 8. -, d5 is generally advantagegous for white. Even if Estrin shines in this variation, he overlooks several other good continuation for black. 8. Qh4, d5 Diagram 22 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I BB I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I BP I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I WP I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I I I I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 9. 0-0-0, Be6 10. Rhe1, 0-0 Now is the time for black to castle. The game Terescenko - Rotlevi, Sct. Petersburg 1909 makes it plain why, 10. -, h6? 11. Bxf6, Bxf6 12. Qh5, Bxc3? (12. -, 0-0 13. Nd5!) 13. Rxe6+, Kf8 14. Rxd5, Qc8 15. Rc6, g6 16. Rxg6, fxg6 17. Qxg6, Qe8 18. Rf5+, Ke7 19. Qe6+, Kd8 20. Rd5+ and 1-0. 11. Bd3, h6 12. Kb1! Diagram 23 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I I BQ I I BR I BK I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I I BB I BP I BP I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I I BB I BN I I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I BP I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I WB I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I WR I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ That is not the most obvious move, but the other 12th moves gives black good chances of getting an equal game. ECO refers to Keres, which suggests 12. Rxe6, fxe6 13. Bxh6, gxh6 14. Qg3+, Kh8 15. Qg6, Rf7 16. Qxf7, Qg8! with equal play. Estrin & Glazkov also suggests 15. -, Qd6 16. Qxh6+, Kg8 17. Qg6+, Kh8 18. Ng5, Qxh2, which also leads to an even game. Keres himself suggests 12. Bxh6, Ne4 13. Qf4, Bd6 14. Qe3, Bc5 15. Qf4, Bd6 with equal play. Forintos & Haag has lately analyzed 12. g4, Nxg4 13. Bxe7, Qxe7 14. Qg3, Qd6, but evan that gives equal play. 12. Kb1 is therefore a very strong move, because what has black now to do? Look at the following continuations: A) 12. -, Ne8 12. -, Ne8 13. Bxe7, Qxe7 14. Qxe7, Nxe7 15. Nd4, Nc6 16. Nxe6, fxe6 17. Rxe6, Rxf2 18. Nxd5, Rxg2 (18. -, Rd8 19.Rde1 gives also a white advantage) 19. Bc4!, Kh8 20. Rde1, Nd6 21. Nxc7, Rd8 22. Bd3!, Kg8 23. Bg6 and white won in Laes - Zittorio, 1972. B) 12. -, Qd7 12. -, Qd7 13. Bxh6, Ne4 14. Bg5, Bxg5 15. Nxg5, Nxg5 16. Qxg5, Ne7 17. h4, c6 18. g4, Rfe8 19. Rg1, f6 20. Qh5 and white won in Shmelnitski - Eventov, 1957. C) 12. -, Ne4 12. -, Ne4 13. Nxe4, dxe4 14. Qxe4, g6 15. Bxh6, Bf5 16. Qe3, Bxd3 17. Rxd3, Qc8 18. Bxf8, Qxf8 and white won in the international correspondance game Galberg-Lund - Dvtzel, 1991. 13. Bxe4, Bxg5 14. Nxg5, Qxg5 15. Qxg5, hxg5 16. Nxd5, Bxd5 17. Rxd5 and 13. Bxe7, Qxe7 14. Nxe4, dxe4 15. Qxe4, g6 16. Bc4, Rae8 both gives black possibility for an even game. D) 12. -, hxg5 12. -, hxg5 13. Nxg5, Bd7 14. Nxd5! with enormous white advantage. Even 13. -, g6 is met with 14. Qh6. White threathes with 14. Rxe6, fxe6 15. Bh7+, Kh8 16. Bf5+ E) 12. -, Nd7 Diagram 24 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I I BQ I I BR I BK I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BN I BB I BP I BP I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I I BB I I I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I BP I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I WB I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I WK I I WR I WR I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ Against the above mentioned favourable white continuations, Forintos & Haag do state that 12. -, Nd7 gives equal play, e.g. with the continuation 13. Bxe7, Qxe7 14. Qxe7, Nxe7 15. Nd4, Nc5, and so is also Estrins good white variation playable for black. 6 The 7. -, c6 Defence The main variation divides after 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Nf6 3. d4, exd4 4. Nf3, Nxe4 5. Qxd4, Nf6 6. Bg5, Be7 7. Nc3, and in stead of 7. -, Nc6 can follow 7. -, c6 Diagram 25 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I I BP I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BP I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I WQ I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I I I I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ By not playing 7. -, Nc6 looses black time, but moves the c-pawn further in the center and secures more space. Just as the first plan of defence is the game equal with good chances on both sides. 8. 0-0-0, d5 9. Rhe1, Diagram 26 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I I I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BP I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I BP I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I WQ I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I WR I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 9. dxc4? 10. Qxd8 mate! There can now follow 9. -, Be6, as Karpov and others have played or 9. -, 0-0 as Larsen recommends. The latter is discussed in chapter 6.3. 6.1 The Karpov Variation 9. -, Be6 10.Bd3, Nbd7 11. Qh4, c5 12. Ne5 9. -, Be6 10. Bd3, Nbd7 It is to soon to try 10. -, Qa5 11. Kb1, Nbd7 12. Ne5, c5 13. Qh4, Nxe5 14. Rxe5, 0-0-0 15. Bd2, Qc7 16. Nb5, Qxe5 17. Bf4, Qh5 18. Nxa7+, Kd7 19. Bb5 and white won i partiet Hugo Fahndrich - Wilhelm Steinitz, Vienna 1897. 11. Qh4, Diagram 27 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I I BN I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BP I I BB I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I BP I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I WB I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I WR I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ Whites position is generally better, but Teichmann won with black over Schlechter in 1904 with 11. Nd4, Nf8 12. Nf5, Bxf5 13. Bxf6, Be6 14. Bxe7, Qxe7 15. Qd4, Qf6 16. Qe3 and white loses the bishop. Caffery & Hooper finds that 11. -, Be6 is better for black. In Heikenheimo - Crepeaux, Dubrovnik OL 1950 did white win after 11. Nd4, Qa5 12. Nxe6, fxe6 13. Rxe6, Kf7 14. Rde1, Rae8 15. Be2!, Bd8 (15. -, Kxe6? 16. Bh5+) 16. Bg4, Nxg4 17. Qxg4, Bg5+ 18. Qxg5, Nf6 19. Rxf6+ and 1 - 0. The theory as shown later is further developed with good chances for both white and black. And it is possible to play the transposition 10. Bd3, Nbd7 11. Qh4. Steinitz has recommended 10. -, Qa5, but that is rejected by Keres move 11. Bf5. 11. -, c5 Diagram 28 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I I BN I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I BB I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BP I BP I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I WB I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I WR I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ This is the idea of Karpov, which he youthfully played in Moscow 1969. The ordinary answer at the time was 11. -, Nc5 which is discussed in chapter 6.2. In Nicolai - Engert, Bamberg 1968 was played 11. -, Qc7 12. Nd4, Nf8 13. f4, 0-0-0 14. f5, c5 15. Ndb5, Qa5 16. fxe6, fxe6 17. Rxe6!, Nxe6 18. Bf5, Kb8 19. Bxe6, d4? 20. Bxf4+, Ka8 21. Nc7+, Kb8 22. N3b5, Bd6? 23. Nxd6 and white won. 11. -, Bg4? will not work after 12. Be2, 0-0 13. Rd4, Bxf3 14. Bxf3, Bc5 15. Rf4, Re8 16. Rxe8, Qxe8 and white has the advantage. Just so with 11. -, a5? 12. Nd4, Nc5 13. Bg6! according to Lane. In Firo - Kolojanu, 1965 won white after 11. -, Ng8? 12. Bxf7, Qxf7 13. Qg3, g6 14. Nd4, Ngf6 15.f4, Nh5 16. Qe3, Qf6 17. f5, gxf5 18. Bxf5, Ng7 19. g4. Estrin & Glazkov points out that even 14. -, 0-0-0 looses after 15. Ncb5!, Ndf6 16. Nxa7, Kd7 17. Nab5! Estrin won in Estrin - Klaman, 1946 after black tested 11. -, Qa5 12. Nd4, 0-0-0 13. Nxe6, fxe6 14. Rxe6, Bb4 15. Ne2, h6 16. Bxf6, Nxf6 17. Kb1, Bd6 18. Nd4. The danish veteran Granberg played 11. -, Qa5 and lost to Tronhjem in the danish correspondance championship 1985. This game continued 12. Nd4, 0-0-0 13. Nxe6, fxe6 14. Rxe6, Bb4 15. Ne2, Bc5. Tronhjems comments the game with "... black is now launching a plan which is so lousy that it quickly will bring him in a loosing position. It would be better to place the rook on e8, even if white after the exchange may attack the poorly defended pawns on g7 and h7." The game continued 16. Kb1, Qb6 17. f3, and Tronhjem writes further: "Tempting was also 17. f4 to continue with f5, but firstly was a wingattack also possible with g2-g4-g5 and secondly it appeared to me as a wise policy to take the square e4 from black to a comming knight, as it later rightly showed." 17. -, Bf2? 18. Qh3, Kb8 19. Re7, g6 20. Qe6, and Tronhjem continues: "Black is in a suddenly hurry to hold the position together. I had expected 20. -, Rhf8 and therefore planned 21. Nc3 intending Bc5 against 22. Na4 followed by Nxc5 and Rde1 with an overwhelming position. The alternative 21.-,Bd4 22. Na4, Qa5 23. c3, and now either 23. -, Be5 24. f4, Bc7 25. Bc2 and black are without sensible moves (e.g. b5 26. b4! Qa6 27. Nc5) or 23. -, Qxa4 24. Bc2 followed by 25. Rxd4, are in stead 25. cxd4 followed by Rd3 and out on the wing with the rook. Everything very unpleasant for black. Granberg had eventually found another way of covering the unlucky hero on f6." 20. -, c5 21. Qxb6, axb6 22. Bb5, h6 23. Bf4+ and Tronhjem got the 1 - 0. The game Timoschenko - Karpov, Moscow 1967 continued 12. Ne5, Nxe5 Diagram 29 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I I BN I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I BB I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BP I BP I WN I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I WB I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I WR I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ Thus Karpov continued by taking the knight on e5. I will suggests 12. -, Ng8! as a strong possibility, e.g. 13. Bxe7, Qxe7 14. Qa4, Nf6 15. Nxd5, Nxd5 16. Nxd7, 0-0-0 17. Ne5, Nb4 18. Qxa7 however with white advantage. 13. Rxe5, d4 14. f4, Nd7 14. -, dxc3? 15. Bb5+, Nd7 16. Rxd7+! And so with 14. -, 0-0? 15. Bxf6, Bxf6 16. Qxh7 mate! according to Lane. 15. Bb5, Bxg5 16. fxg5, Qc7 Diagram 30 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I I I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BQ I BN I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I BB I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I WB I BP I I WR I I WP I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I BP I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ Estrin & Glazkov finds that white had got enough compensation for the pawn and the game also ends by Karpov loosing in spite of his strong bishop in the end play. The game continued 17. Bxd7+, Kxd7 18. Qe4, Qc6? Probably the best. The alternative 18. -, Rad8 19. Nd5, Qd6 20. c3, Kc8 will not help, and according to Lane neither 18. -, b6 19. Nb5, Qc6 20. Nxd4!, cxd4 (20. -, Qxe4 21. Nxe6+, Ke7 22. Rxe4, fxe6 23. Rde1 and white has the advantage) 21. Rxd4+, Kc7 22. Rxe6!, Qxe6 (22. -, fxe6 23. Rc4, Qxc4 24. Qxc4+!) 23. Rc4+, Kb8 24. Qf4+, Kb7 25. Rc7+, Ka6 26. Qa4 and mate. 19. Rxc5! with clear advantage to white. The game Timoschenko - Karpov, Moscow 1967 ended 19. -, Qxe4 20. Nxe4, Rhc8 21. Rxd4+, Ke7 22. a4, b6 23. Rxc8, Rxc8 24. Kd2, Bf5 25. c4, Rc6 26. Ng3, Be6 27. Kc3, Rc5 28. h4, h6 29. b4, Rc8 30. Ne4, f5 31. Nf2, hxg5 32. hxg5, Rh8 33. Nh3, Bd7 34. b5, Rh5 35. Kb4, Rh8 36. a5, Be6 37. a6, Bf7 38. Kc3, g6 39. Kb4, Rc8 40. Nf4, Rc5 41. Nd3, Rc8 42. c5, bxc5+ 43. Nxc5, Be8 44. g3, Rc7 45. Rd1, Rc8 46. Re1+, Kd6 47. Nb7+, Kd7 48. Re3, Bf7 49. Rd3+, Ke7 50. Rc3, Rxc3 51. Kxc3, Bd5 52. Kd4, Bg2 53. Kc5, Bf1 54. Na5 and 1 - 0. 6.2 The Forintos/Haag Variation 11.-,Nc5 12.Nd4,Ng8! 11. -, Nc5 Diagram 31 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I I I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BP I I BB I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I BP I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I WB I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I WR I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ Most common is 11. -, Nc5, with good chances to black, but precisely white moves makes all the difference. After 11. Bd3, Nc5 should 12. Nd4, be unpleasant for black. White did however continue the build up of the position in the game between Estrin and Khatjaturov, Moscow 1943 with the sacrifice of d5!, e.g. 12. Bf5, Bxf5 13. Bxf6, Ne6 14. Bxe7, Qxe7 15. Nxd5!, cxd5 16. Qa4+, Kf8 17. Rxd5, Bg6 18. Rd7, Qc5 19. Ne5, Rc8? 20. Rxf7+, Kg8 21. Nxg6, hxg6 22. Rf3, Rxh2 23. Rc3, Qg5+ 24. f4, Qd8 25. Qb3, Rxc3 26. Qxe6+, Kf8 27. bxc3, Rxg2 28. Rd1, Qc7 29. Rd7, Qxf4+ 30. Kb2, Qf6 31. Qc4, Qb6+ 32. Qb4+, Qxb4+ 33. cxb4, b5 34. Rxa7, g5 35. a4, bxa4 36. b5, Rg4 37. c3, Rg2+ 38. Ka3, Rg1 39. Ka2, Rg2+ 40. Ka3, Rg1 41. b6, and black resigned. Keres finds that black could have played better but gives no explicit suggestions. Estrin & Glazkov has later analyzed it finding that black could have played 19. -, Qxf2 with good counterplay. 12. -, Ng8! Diagram 32 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I I BQ I BK I I BN I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I I I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BP I I BB I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I BP I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I WN I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I WB I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I WR I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ Neistadt - Volkovich, Moscow 1958 continued with 12. -, Nfd7 13. Bxe7, Qxe7 14. Qxe7+, Kxe7 15. f4, Nxd3+ 16. Rxd3, g6 17. g4, Nc5 18. Rde3, Kd6 19. b4, Ne4 20. Nxe4, dxe4 21. Nxe6, fxe6 22. Rxe4 with an unclear black position. Polugayevski has suggested 16. cxd3 with white advantage and Tartakower finds 13. f4 gives a quicker advantage. Spielmann lost as black to Prokes in 1907 after 12. -, Nfd7 13. f4, Bxg5 14. fxg5, Nxd3+ 15. Rxd3, Nc5 16. Rh3, a5 17. Qh5. 13. Bxe7, Qxe7 Earlier was 13. f4 considered as a decisive white advantage, e.g. Torre - Tholfsen, New York 1924, 13. f4, Kf8 14. b4, Nxd3+ 15. Rxd3 and 1 - 0. But Pachman has come with the following idea for equal play for black: 13. f4, Bxg5 14. fxg5, Ne7 15. Nxe6, Nxe6 16. g6, Nxg6 17. Rxe6+, fxe6 18. Bxg6+, Kd7 19. Qg4, hxg6 20 Nxd5. 14. Qg3, Qf6! Diagram 33 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I I I BK I I BN I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I I I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BP I I BB I BQ I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I BP I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I WN I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I WB I I I WQ I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I WR I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ with the idea of a later Ne7 or 0-0-0 or 0-0. This continuation comes from an analysis by Forintos & Haag, who has the opinion that black is OK in all variations and therefore calmly can accept the gambit. The most often is 14. -, g6, e.g. in Estrin - Bihovski, 1964, which continued with 15. b4, Nxd3+ 16. Rxd3, Nf6 17. Qh4, 0-0 18. Rde3, Rae8 and a little plus to black. The game Schdfer - Trezciak, 1985 continued with 14. -, g6 15. Ndb5!, Kf8 16. b4 and white won. Forintos & Haag suggests 15. -, cxb5? to be met by 16. Nxd5! Keres says that 14. -, g6 should be met by 15. Nce2 with white advantage, and Estrin & Glazkov finds white should play 15. f4, Nh6 16. dxe3, Qf6 17. f5 with white advantage. 6.3 The Larsen Variation 9.-,0-0 10.Qh4 9. -, 0-0 There may be recommended the 9. -, 0-0, even if10. Qh4 gives white a strong attack because this continuation gives good black variations with equal play. The variation by Larsen in ECO is not for softies and it is known to give a crash of a fight. 10. Bxd5? is clearly a mistake punished by 10. -, cxd5 11. Rxe7, Nc6! 10. Qh4, Diagram 34 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I I BR I BK I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I I I BB I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BP I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I BP I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I WR I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ An alternative is 10. Bd3, Be6 11. Qh4, h6 12. Re2 with equal play. 11. -, Nbd7 12. Bxf6, Nxf6 13. Ng5 gives white advantage. There is also a white advantage with the try of 10. -, h6 11. Qh4 and 10. -, Nbd7 11. Qh4, g6 12. Nd4. All variations but 10. -, h6 gives good possibilities for a black equalisation e.g. 10. -, Be6, 10. -, Bf5 and 10. -, Nbd7. A) 10. -, Be6 10. -, Be6 11. Bd3, h6 12. Bxh6, Ne4 13. Qf4, Bd6 14. Qe3, Bc5 15. Nd4 with a strong white pressure according to Keres. Forintos & Haag finds however that the continuation 15. -, Qf6 Diagram 35 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I I I I BR I BK I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I I I I BP I BP I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BP I I BB I BQ I I WB I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BB I BP I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I WN I BN I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I WB I WQ I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I WR I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ is equal for black e.g. after 16. Bxe4, Qxh6 17. Qxh6, gxh6 18. Bf3, Re8!. If white tries 13. Qh5, falls 13. -, g6! 11. Bd3, g6 12. Nd4 is however good to white. B) 10. -, h6 Completely dum is 10. -, h6 11. Bxd5! and black stands in a hopeless position, e.g. 11. -, cxd5 12. Rxe7! or 11. hxg5 12. Nxg5! 11. Bxd5, hxg5 12. Bxf7+, Kxf7 13. Qc4 is also favourable to white. Just as 11. -, cxd5 12. Nxd5, hxg5 13. Nxg5. The game Schlechter - Neustadtl, Carlsbad 1901 continued 10. Qh4, h6? 11. Bxd5, Nbd7 12. Bc4, b5 13. Bd3, hxg5 14. Nxg5, Re8 15. Bh7+, Kf8 16. Bf5!, Kg8 17. Nxf7+, Kxf7 18. Be6+, Kg6 19. f4, Nh5 20. Qg4+, Kh6 21. Bf5+ and white won easy. C) 10. -, Bf5 Cafferty & Hooper finds that 10. Qh4 can be answered with 10. -, Bf5, e.g. after 11. Nd4, Bg6 12. Bd3, Qd7 with equal play. An analysis by Lauterbach continues 12. -, h6 13. Bxg6, hxg6 14. Qxg5, Ne4 15. Bh7+, Kh8 16. Qh5, Nf6 17. Qh4, Nf6 18. Qh3, Ng5 and again equal play. But in Caro - Janowski, Berlin 1987 won white after 10. -, Bf5 11. Nd4, Bg6 12. Bd3, h6? 13. Bxg6, hxg5 14. Qxg5, fxg6 15. Ne6, Ne4 16. Qxg6 and 1 - 0. D) 10. -, Nbd7 10. -, Nbd7 11. Bd3, g6 Diagram 36 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I BB I BQ I I BR I BK I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I I BN I BB I BP I I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BP I I I BN I BP I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I BP I I I WB I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I WQ I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WN I WB I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WK I WR I WR I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 12. Nd4 makes a strong white attack according to Keres. If white tries 12. Re2 is Larsen of the opinion of equal play after 12. -, Re8 13. Rde1, Ne4 14. Bxe7, Qxe7 15. Qxe7, Rxe7 16. Nd4, Nb6! (16. Nd2, Nbc5 17. f3, f5 equal play) 17. f3, c5! But Keres suggests further 12. Nd4, as favourable to white with the idea of 13. Nf5. And Estrin & Glazkov finds that white can do better attacking with 14. Nxe4, dxe4 15. Rxe4. 11. -, h6 is on the other hand not good, e.g. by the following idea by Keres 12. Bxh6, Ne4 13. Qg4! White won in Wvber - Drukenthaner, 1988 after 10. Qh4, Nbd7 11. Bd3, h6? 12. Bxh6, gxh6 13. Qxh6, Bd6 14. Re3!, Qc7 15. Qg5+, Kh8 16. Ne5!, Nxe5 17. Qxf6+, Kg8 18. Rg3, Ng6 19. Bxg6 and 1- 0. 7 Transpositions after 4. Nf3 To recapitulate: 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Nf6 3. d4, exd4 4. Nf3 Diagram 37 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I BP I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I WP I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I WQ I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ Black has some posibilities to avoid the Gambit by 4. -, d5 or 4. -, c5 or 4. -, Bb4+ or 4. -, Bc5 or 4. -, Nc6, the latter is normally a good variation of two knight defence. The next chapters is dealing with these deviations. 4. -, Be7 is to passive. White won in Galberg-Lund - Nielsen,B.H., Copenhagen 1993 after 5. e5, Ne4 6. Qxd4, Nc5 7. Qg4, g6 8. Qg3, Ne6 9. Nc3 with white advantage. 7.1 The d5-rejection 4. -, d5 5. exd5, Bb4+ 6. c3, Qe7+ 4. -, d5 is interesting, because it is often played by opponent without knowledge of Urusoff Gambit, and the idea is relevant because it in a form of a queen pawn countergambit delivers the pawn back in the vain hope to get out of the complications. Black opponents will therefore oftens use this move, but it generally gives advantage to white - and especially if white has looked at it in advance. After e.g. 4. -, d5 5. exd5, Bb4+ 6. c3, Qe7+ Diagram 38 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I I BQ I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I WP I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I BB I WB I BP I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WP I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I I WP I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I WQ I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ In OL Novi Sad, 1990 won Jana Hajkova over Seena Koskela after 4. -, d5 5. exd5, Bb4+ 6. c3, Qe7+ 7. Qe2, Qxe2 8. Kxe2, dxc3 9. Nxc3, Bg4 10. h3, Bxf3 11. Kxf3, Nbd7 12. Re1, Kd8 13. Bf4, Nb6 14. Bb3, Kd7 15. Red1+, Bd6 16. Be3, Rhd8 17. a4, a6 18. a5, Nc8 19. Ba4, Ke7 20. g4, Nd7 21. Ne4, Ne5 22. Kg2, Nc4 23. Bd4, f6 24. g5, Be5 25. Rac1, Nb2 26. Bxb2, Bxb2 27. Rc7, Kf8 28. Rb7, Be5 29. Nc5, Kg8 30. Ne6, Rd6 31. Rg7, Kh8 32. Rf7, Na7 33. gxf6, Nb5 34. Bc2, resign and 1 - 0. After 7. Be2, dxc3 8. bxc3 or Nxc3 in the classical litterature is the whote position considered a little better though I think it is very equal. The game Estrin - Vatnikov, 1961 went draw after 8. Nxc3, 0-0 9. Bg5, h6 10. Bh4, Bf5 11. Qd4, Nbd7. Though white won in the correpondance game Laes - Flores, 1975 after 8. Nxc3, 0-0 9. 0-0, Nbd7 10. Bg5, Bxc3 11. bxc3, Qc5 12. c4, b6? 13. Nd4, Ne4 14. Be3, Nc3 15. Qc2, Nxe2+ 16. Qxe2, Qe7 17. Nc6, Qd6 18. Bd4, Bb7 19. Ne7+ and black resigned e.g. by the threat 19. -, Kh8 20. Bxg7+! It came to a draw in Vinogradov - Rovner i 1956 after 7. Be2, dxc3 8. bxc3, Bc5 9. 0-0, 0-0 10. c4, Re8 11. Bd3, Bg4. The great master Marshall won as black after whites error in Phillsbury - Marshall, Paris 1900 12. Bb2?, Ne4! 13. Nbd2?, Nxf2! 14. Rxf2, Bxf2+ 15. Kxf2, Qe3+ 16. Kg3, Qxd3 17. Kxg4, Re2 18. Kh3, Nd7 19. Rc1, h5 (truer 20. -, Qf5+ 21. Kg3, Qg4 mat) 20. Qc2, Nc5 21. g3, g5 22. g4?, Rxd2! 23. Qxd3, Rxd3 24. Rc3, f5 25. Kg2, fxg4 26. Nxg5, Rd2+ 27. Kg3, Rxb2 28. h3, Rf8 29. hxg4, hxg4 30. Kxg4, Rff2 and 0 - 1. The correspondance game Galberg-Lund - Bellinger, 1991 continued 7. Be2, dxc3 8. Nxc3, 0-0 9. 0-0, c6 10. Bg5, Bxc3 11. bxc3, cxd5 12. Re1, Be6 13. Bb5 with equal play. Black loses if other than 5. -, Bb4+ is tried. E.g. Mieses - Cohn, 1914 5. exd5, Nxd5 6. 0-0, Nc6 7. Re1, Be7 8. Nxd4, Nb6 9. Bb5, Bd7 10. Bxc6, bxc6 11. Qe2, c5 12. Nf3, Be6 13. c4 and 1 - 0. Levenfish finds 7. Nxd4 for much more decisive for white. The game Galberg-Lund - Pedersen, 1991 continued 5. exd5, Nxd5 6. 0-0, Be6 7. Nxd4, Qf6 8.Re1, Bc5 9. Nxe6, fxe6 10. Bxd5, Bxf2+ 11. Kh1, Bxe1 12. Qxe1, c6 13. Qxe6+, Qxe6 14. Bxe6, Nd7 15. Bxd7, Kxd7 16. Bf4, Raf8 17. g3, h6 18. Nc3, g5 and 1 - 0. 7.2 The c5-rejection 4. -, c5 4. -, c5 is generally not fun for black, though black won in Hropov - Korolev, 1964 after 4. Nf3, c5 5. 0-0, Nc6 6. e5?, d5 7. exf6, dxc4. Larsen recommends that white at least could have an equal play after 6. c3. Diagram 39 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I I BP I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BP I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I BP I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I WP I WQ I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ White should have played as in Akos - Csazar, 1968, where white won quickly and effectively after 5. Qe2, d6? 6. e5, dxe5 7. Nxe5, Be6 8. Nxf7!, Qe7 9. Qxe6 Forintos & Haag finds that blacks best answer is 5. -, d5, 6. exd5+, Be7 7. Bb5+, Kf8, but it gives an advantage for white because 7. -, Bd7? is met with the powerfull 8. d6! The simple 5. e5 looks efficiently enough. 7.3 The Bb4-rejection 4. -, Bb4+ 5. c3 4. -, Bb4+ is simply to early for black. In Helmut Pfleger - Francisco Benitz, Bugano 1968 won white after 4. -, Bb4+ 5. c3, d5 6. exd5, Bd6 7. Qxd4, 0-0 8. 0-0, Nbd7 9. Bg5, Bc5 10. Qd3, Nb6 11. Rd1, Nc4 12. Qc4, b6 13. Bxf6, Qxf6 14. Nbd2, Bf5 15. Ne4, Bxe4 16. Qxe4, a5 17. Re1, b5 18. Re2, g6 19. Ne5, Rfd8 20. Rd1, Bd6 21. f4, Ra6 22. g3, Bc5 23. Kg2, Rad6 24. b3, Qg7 25. c4, c6 26. Nxc6, Rxc6 27. dxc6, Rd1 28. Qe8+, Bf8 29. c7, Qd4 30. c8Q and 1 - 0. White did also win in the 1974 OL game Helmut Pfleger - Brossington after 4. -, Bb4+ 5. c3, dxc3 6. bxc3, Be7 7. e5, Ng4 8. h3, Nh6 9. Bxh6, gxh6 10. Qd5. In Galberg-Lund - Lindgren,Kaspar Denmark 1993 did white get the advantage after 7.-, Ng8 8. Qd5, d6 9. Qxf7+. Also 6. -, Ba5 7. e5, Qe7 8. Ba3, d6 9. 0-0 is favourable for white. And even 6. Nxc3 is good for white. By the OL, Novi Sad 1990 did white win in the game Carlos Reyes - Daniel Pergericht after 4. -, Bb4+ 5. c3, dxc3 6. bxc3, Bc5 7. e5, d5 8. exf6, dxc4 9. Qxd8, Kxd8 10. fxg7, Re8+ 11. Be3, Bxe3 12. fxe3, Rg8 13. Nbd2, Rxg7 14. 0-0, Be6 15. Nd4, Nd7 16. Rab1, b6 17. Rb2, Ke7 18. Nf5, Bxf5 19. Rxf5, Ke6 20. Rf4, Ne5 21. Rb1, Rag8 22. g3, Rg4 23. Rbf1, h5 24. Rf6+, Ke7 25. R6f5, R8g5 26. Rxg5, Rxg5 27. Ne4, Rg6 28. Rf5, Ng4 29. Rh5, Re6 30. Nf2, Ne3 31. h4, c6 32. Rh8, sd5 33. h5, Nc3 34. h6, Rg6 35. h7, Rg3 36. Kh1, Rg7 37. Re8 and 1 - 0. In Sandahl - Boding, 1991 did white win a quick officer after 6. bxc3, Bc5 7. e5, Ne4? Diagram 40 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BB I I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I I BN I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WP I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I I I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I WQ I WK I I WN I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 8. Qd5, Bxf2+ 9. Kf1, 0-0 10. Qxe4, Bc5 though white later lost because he forgot to play the easy 11. Bh6, as suggested by an analysis of the danish chessplayer Jan Timper. 7.4 The Bc5-rejection 4. -, Bc5 5. 0-0 This deviation is generally good for white. It is not recommendable to meet 4. -, Bc5 with 5. e5, d5 6. exf6, dxc4 7. Qe2+, Be6 8. fxg7, Rg8 9. Bg5, Be7 10. Bxe7, Kxe7 11. Nh4, Kd7, which is a favorably black variation in the Max Lange attack. Diagram 41 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BB I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I BP I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I WP I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I WQ I I WR I WK I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ The best white answer is of course 5. 0-0. And to answer 5. 0-0 with 5. -, Nxe4? is to invite oneself to a beating after 6. Re1, d5 7. Bxd5, Qxd5 8. Ne3, Qh5 9. Rxe4+, Be6 10. Re5, Qg6 11. Nd5, Bd6 12. Nf4, Qf6 13. Nh5, Qd8 14. Bg5, Qc8 15. Nxg7+, Kd7 16. Nd4, Nc6 17. Nxc6, bxc6 18. Nxe6, fxe6 19. Rxe6, Qg8 20. Re7, Kc8 21. Qg4, Kb7 22. Re3, Bc5 23. Rb3, Bb6 24. Qg3, Qd5 25. Rd3, Qb5 26. Rb3, Qf5 27. Qf4, Qc2 28. Rc1, Qg6 29. Qf6, Qe8 30. Be3, Rg8 31. Qf3, Rg6 32. g3, h5 33. h4, Rd8 34. Rbc3, Rdd6 35. b4, Rdf6 36. Qg2, Re6 37. Bxb6, axb6 38. Rxc6, Rxc6 39. b5, Re6 40. Rxc6, Rxc6 41. bxc6, Qxc6 42. Qxc6, Kxc6 43. Kf1, Kd5 44. Ke2, b5 45. f3, c5 46. g4, hxg4 47. fxg4, Ke5 48. h5 c4 49. h6 Kf6 50. g5, Kg6 51. Ke3, b4 52. Kd4, c3 53. Kd3, Kh7 54. a3, ressigning and 1 - 0 to Horatio Caro - Hugo Suchting, Berlin 1897. White did also win in the correspondance game Zwisler,Lars - Andersen,Finn, Danish Pokal 92 after 5. 0-0, Nxe4? 6. Re1, f5 7. Bg5, Be7 8. Qxd4, Bxg5 9. Qxg7, Qf6 10. Qxg5, Kf8 11. Qf4, Kg7 12. Bd5, Rf8 13. Bxe4, fxe4 14. Qxf6+, Rxf6 15. Rxe4, d5 16. Re5, c6 17. Nbd2, Na6 18. Rae1, Nb4 19. Nd4, Nxa2 20. Re8, Rf8 21. R1e7+, Kf6 22. Rxf8+, Kxe7 23. Rh8, Nb4 24. Rxh7+, Kd6 25. Rh8, a6 26. N2b3, b6 27. h4 c5 28. h5, cxd4 29. h6 Ra7 30. Rxc8, Rh7 31. Nxd4, Rxh6 32. f4, Kd7 33. Rc3, Rh4 34. g3, Rg4 35. Kf2, Rg6 36. Kf3, Rh6 37. f5, Rh1 38. Rb3, a5 39. c3, Nc6 40. Kf4, Nxd4 41. cxd4, Re1 42. f6, Re4+ 43. Kf5, Rxd4 44. g4 and 1 - 0. After 5. 0-0 will we further look at two black moves A) 5. -, Nc6 which can lead into the known variation of the Max Lange attack and B) 5. -, d6x A) 5. -, Nc6 the Max Lange attack This position can also arise after transposition of 1. e4, e5 2. Nf3, Nc6 3. d4, exd4 4. Bc4, Nf6 5. 0-0, Bc5 6. e5, and the most commonly black continuation is 6. -, d5. However - there is also seen 6. -, Ng4, e.g. Khristov,G - Popov, Bulgaria 1960 6. e5, Ng4 7. Bf4, d6 8. exd6, Bxd6 9. Re1+, Kf8 10. Bxd6, Qxd6 11. c3?, Qc5 12. Nbd2, d3 13. Nd4, Nxd4 14. cxd4, Qxd4 15. Qf3, Qf6 16. Qxd3, Qxf2 17. Kh1, Qxe1 and 0-1 because of 17. -, Nf2+. On the other hand did white have a quick win in Koltanowski,George - Rey,Guil, San Francisco 1960 after 7. Bf4, O-O? 8. h3, Nh6 9. Bxh6, gxh6 10. Qd2, Qe7 11. Qxh6, Nxe5? 12. Ng5 og 1-0. The mate is inevitable. Black has numerous chances with 6. -, Ng4, e.g.: Baldes,Dirk - Gebhardt,Ulrich, Baden Baden 1991 7. Bxf7, Kxf7 8. Ng5+, Kg8 9. Qxg4, d5 10. e6, Qf6 11. Qf4, Ne5 12. Re1, Bd6 13. Qxf6, gxf6 14. Nf3, Nxf3 15. gxf3, Kf8 16. Kh1, Ke7 17. Rg1, Bxe6 18. Rg7, Bf7 19. Bh6, Rag8 20. Nd2, Rxg7 21. Bxg7, Rg8 22. Rg1, Bf4 23. Nb3, Bg6 24. Rg4, Rxg7 25. Rxf4, Bxc2 26. Nxd4, Bd3 27. b4, Kd6 28. Nb3, Ke5 29.Rd4, Bc4 30. f4+, Kd6 31. Nc5, b6 32. Ne4+, Ke6 33. Nc3, c5 34. bxc5, bxc5 and white ressigned. The variation 6. e5, d5 is played on a high level the resent years. There are two main answers 7. exf6 and 7. Bb5. A1) 6. e5, d5 7. exf6 It went to a draw in Vatter,Hans - Nunn,John i 1986 after 6. e5, d5 7. exf6, dxc4 8. Re1+, Be6 9. Ng5, Qd5 10. Nc3, Qf5 11. Nce4, O-O-O 12. g4, Qe5 13. fxg7, Rhg8 14. Nxe6, fxe6 15. Bh6, d3 16. c3, d2 17. Re2, Rd3 18. Nxc5, Qxc5 19. Rxd2, Ne5 20. Rxd3, cxd3 21. Kg2, Qd5+ 22. Kg3, Qd6 23. Bf4, Rxg7 24. h3, Rf7 25. Qa4, Qxc6 26. Qxc6, Nxc6 and 1/2 - 1/2. 7. exf6 gives thus at least equal play as in the correspondance game Zerpe,Ingemar - Mineur,Hasse, 1984 13. Nxe6, fxe6 14. Bg5, Rd7 15. fxg7, Rg8 16. Bf6, Qd5 17. Nxc5, Q.c5 18. Qe2, e5 19. Qe4, Rdxg7 20. Bxg7, Rg7 21. Qf5+, Kb8 22. Re4, b6 23. Rae1, d3 24. c3, Kb7 25. Qe6, b5 26. a4, a6 27. axb5, axb5 28. Ra1, Rg6 29. Qe8, Qd5 30. Qa8+, Kb6 31. Ra6+, Kc5 32. Qf8+, Rd6 33. Qf3, b4 34. Qe3+, Kb5 35. Ra1, d2 36. Rd1, bxc3 37. bxc3, Qd3 38. Qxd3, Rxd3 39. Re3, Ka4 40. Rxd3, cxd3 41. Rxd2 e4 42. Rb2, Ne5 43. Rb4+, Ka3 44. Kf1, Nf3 45. h3, c5 46. Rb7, c4 47. g5, Nxg5 48. h4, Nf3 49. h5, h6 50. Rb6, Ka2 51. Rb4, Ka3 52. Rb6 and draw. Black did however win in Cobb,C - Gretarsson,H Gausdal 1992 with 7. exf6, dxc4 8. Re1+, Be6 9. Ng5, Qd5 10. Nc3, Qf5 11. Nce4, Bb6 12. g4, Qg6 13. fxg7, Qxg7 14. Qf3, O-O-O 15. Nxe6, fxe6 16. Bg5, Rdf8 17. Bf6, Qg6 18. g5, Rhg8 19. Kh1, Nb4 20. Rec1, Nd5 21. Qe2, Nxf6 22. Nxf6, Rxf6 23. Rg1, d3 24. Qg4, Rxf2 25. Rae1, Rf5 26. Rgf1, Rxg5 27. Qh3, Rxg1 and 0 - 1. White won in Migl,D - Hock,H 1985 after the continuation 11. Nce4, O-O-O 12. g4, Qe5 13. Nxe6, fxe6 14. Bg5, g6 15. Nxc5, Qxc5 16. Bh6, Rd7 17. Re6, Nd8 18. Rxe7, Rxe7 19. fxe7, Ne6 20. Bf8, Qc6 21. Qe2, Rf8 22. Qxe6, Qxe6 23. ef8Q+, Kd7 24. Qg7 and black ressigned. Black won in Mohd Noor,Y - Denny,K in theNovi Sad OL 1990 after 11. Nce4, O-O-O 12. g4, Qe5 13. Nxc5, Qxc5 14. Ne6, fxe6 15. fxg7, Rhg8 16. Bh6, d3 17. c3, Ne5 18. Re3, Nf7 19. Re6, Nh6 20. Rh6, Rg7 21. h3, Qg5 22. Re6, Qf4 23. Qf1 and 0-1. And just so did black also win in Sequera,S - Flear,C in the Manila OL 1992 after 11. Nce4, O-O-O 12. fxg7, Rhg8 13. Nxe6, fxe6 14. Bh6, Be7 15. Ng3, Qg6 16. Qc1, e5 17. Ne4, Rd7 18. b3, Bb4 19. Qg5, Bxe1 20. Qxg6, Bxf2+ 21. Kxf2, hxg6 22. Kg1, cxb3 23. axb3, Rgxg7 24. Bxg7, Rxg7 25. c3, dxc3 26. Nxc3, Rd7 27. Ne4, Rxd4 28. Nc5, b6 29. Ne6, Rd6 30. Ng5, a5 31. Re1, Rd3 32. Nf7, Rxb3 33. Nxe5, Nxe5 34. Rxe5, a4 35. h4, a3 36. Re1, a2 and 0 - 1. A2) 6. e5, d5 7. Bb5 White lost in Zelcic,R - Sekulic,D Beograd 1989 after the try of 7. Bb5, Ne4 8. Nxd4, Bd7 9. Bxc6, bxc6 10. Be3, Qe7 11. Re1, O-O 12. f3, Ng5 13. Qd2, h6 14. Kh1, Rfb8 15. Nc3?, Rxb2 16. Nb3, Bxe3 17. Qxe3, Rxc2 18. Nd4, Rb2 19. Nb3, Qb4 20. Qc1, Rf2 21. Qe3, Qh4 22. Qd4, Nxf3 23. Qxh4, Nxh4 24. Re2, Rxe2 25. Nxe2, Ng6 26. Nc5, Nxe5 27. Rb1, Kf8 28. Na6, Bf5 29. Rb2, Bd3 30. Nc5, Bxe2 31. Rxe2, Rb8 32. h3, Rb5 33. Na6, d4 34. Nxc7, d3 and 0 -1, when black pawns decides the matter. Robert Zelcic did however get a draw as white against Mikhail Tseitlin in 1990 after 7. Bb5, Ne4 8. Nxd4, O-O 9. Nxc6, bxc6 10. Bxc6, Ba6 11. Qxd5, Bxf1 12. Qxe4, Bb5 13. Nc3, Bxc6 14. Qxc6, Bd4 15. Bf4, Bxc3 16. Qxc3, Re8 17. h3, Qd5 18. Qxc7, Qd4 19. e6, Rxe6 20. Qb7, Rae8 21. Be3, Qc4 22. Qxa7, Qxc2 23. b4, Qb2 24. Qd4, Qxd4 25. Bxd4, Re1+ 26. Rxe1, Rxe1 27. Kh2, Rd1 28. Be3, and black got a draw because of the active rook. The game Berend,F - Yilmaz,R Novi Sad OL 1990 ended draw after repetition of moves after 7. Bb5, Ne4 8. Nxd4, Bd7 9. Bxc6, bxc6 10. f3, Ng5 11. Be3, Qe7 12.f4, Ne4 13. Nd2, Nd6 14. Qf3, Nf5 15. Nxf5, Bxf5 16. Nb3, Bb6 17. Qf2, O-O 18.Bc5, Bxc5 19. Nxc5, Rfb8 20. c3, a5 21. Nb3, Rb6 22. Rad1, a4 23. Nd4, Be4 24. Rd2, Rab8 25. b4, c5 26. bxc5, Qxc5 27. Ne2, Qc4 28. Qd4, Rb2 29. Qxc4, dxc4 30. Rfd1, g5 31. Kf2, Bc2 32. Rd8+, Rxd8 33. Rxd8+, Kg7 34. Kf3, Rxa2 35. Ng3, a3 36. f5, Rb2 37. f6+, Kh6 38. e6, Rb6 39. Nf5+, Kg6 40. e7, Ba4 41. e8Q, Bxe8 42. Ne7+, Kh6 43. Nf5+, Kg6 44. Ne7+, Kh6 45. Rxe8, Rxf6+ 46. Kg4, Re6 47. h4, Re4+ 48. Kf5, Rf4+ 49. Ke5, f6+ 50. Ke6, gxh4 51. Nf5+, Kh5 52. Ra8, Rf2 53. Rxa3, Kg5 54. Nd4, Rg2 55. Ra4, Rf2 56. Rc4, h3 57. Rc7, Kg6 58. Ra7, h2 59. Ra1, Kg5 60. c4, Kf4 61. Nf5, Kg5 62. Nd4, Kg4 63. c5, Ra2 64. Rc1, Kg3 65. c6, Kg2 66. c7, Ra8 67. Nf5, h1Q 68. Ne3+, Kh2 69. Ng4+, Kg2 70. Ne3+, Kh2 71. Ng4+ and 1/2 - 1/2. Black did win in Sorensen,A - Boey,Jef in the correspondance game 1983 after 7. Bb5, Ne4 8. Nxd4, Bd7 9. Bxc6, bxc6 10. f3, Ng5 11. Be3, Bb6 12. Qd2, h6 13. Nb3, O-O 14. Nc3, f5 15. exf6, Qxf6 16. Na4, Qg6 17. Kh1, Bf5 18. c3, Bxe3 19. Qxe3, Rae8 20. Qd2, Bd3 21. Rf2, Bc4 22. Nd4, Qf7 23. b3, Ne4 24. fxe4 Qxf2 25. Qxf2, Rxf2 26. bxc4, dxe4 27. Kg1, e3 28. Nc5, Rd2 29. a4, Re5 30. Ncb3, Rb2 31. Nxc6, Rg5 and black wins easily. B) 5. -, d6 Black won in Schlechter - Marshall, Cambridge Springs 1904 after 5. 0-0, d6 6. c3, dxc3 7. Nxc3, 0-0 8. Bg5, Be6 9. Qb3, Bc4 10. Qc4, h6 11. Bh4, Nbd7 12. b4, Bb6 13. e5, dxe5 14. Rad1, Qe7 15. Rxd7, Qxd7 16. Bxf6, gxf6 17. Nd5, Qe6 18. Nh4, Rfd8 19. Nf5, Rd5 20. Qg4, Kf8 21. Qh3, Bf2 22. Kf2, Qb6 23. Ke2, Qa6 24. Kf2, Qb6 25. Ke2, Rad8 26. Qh6, Ke8 27. Ng7, Ke7 28. Nf5+, Kd7 29. Qh3, Qa6 30. Kf2, Rd2 31 Kg1, Qe6 32. Qg4, Kc8 33. h4, R2d4 34. Qe2, Rf4 35. Rxf4, exf4 36. Qg4, td5 37. Ne7, Kd8 and 0 - 1. Beware of the threat for 6. -, d3! because black won in Rudolf Spielmann - Alexander Alekhine, Stockholm 1912 after 7. Qxd3, Nc6 8. b4, Bb6 9. b5, Na5 10. e5, dxe5 11. Qxd8+, Kxd8 12. Bxf7, e4 13. Ne5, Bc5 14. Nd2, Rf8 15. Ndc4, Nxc4 16. Bxc4, Ke7 17. Bg5, Bd6 18. f4, Bf5 19. g4, Be6 20. Rfe1, e3 21. Bd3, Ke8 22. h3, Nd5 23. f5, Be5 24. fxe6, Bc3 25. Bh7, Nf4 26. Rad1, Be1 27. Rd7, Bb4 and 0 - 1. Cafferty & Hooper (1986) did analyse this game to be equal with 8. Bg5, h6 9. Bh4, Bg4 10. Nbd2, Ne5 11. Nxe5, dxe5. The game Kolodzeyski - Profeta, 1961 originally ended draw after 5. 0-0, d6 6. b4, Bxb4 7. c3! The following analysis by Estrin & Glazkov gives white the better chances: Diagram 42 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I BP I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I BB I WB I BP I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WP I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I I I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I WQ I I WR I WK I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 7-,Bxc3 8. Nxc3, dxc3 9. e5! Diagram 43 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I BP I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BP I I I WN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I I I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I I WB I WQ I I WR I WK I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 9.-,Ne4 10. Re1, d5 11. Bxd5, Nd2 12. e6, Qxd5 13. exf7+, Kxf7 14. Bxd2, cxd2 15. Re5, Qd8 16. Qb3+, Kf8 17. Ng5, Qf6 18. Qf4+, Qf6 19. Qb4+. If black tries 11. -, Nc5 comes 12. Bg5, Qd7 13. Bxf7+, Kxf7 14. e6+, Nxe6 15. Ne5+. White can do better according to Estrin & Glazkov (1982) with 11. Qxd5, Qxd5 12. Bxd5, Nc5 13. Ba3, Ne6 14. Rac1. Advantage for white comes after 10. -, Nc5, 11. Bxf7+, Kxf7 12. Ng5+, Kg6 13. Qf3, Rf8 14. Qg3 and if white tries 10. Qd5, Be6 11. Qxb7, Bxc4 12. Qxa8, Nc5 13. Bg5. To try 9. -, dxe5 does not work after 10. Qxd8+, Kxd8 11. Nxe5. And so with 9. -, d5 because of the 10. exf6, dxc4 11. Qa4+, Nc6 12. Re1+, Be6 13. fxg7, Rg8 14. Bg5. It gives white the upper hand after 9. -, Ng4 10. Bg5, Qd7 11. e6, fxe6 12. Nd4 or 10. -, f6 11. exf6, Nxf6 12. Re1+, Kf8 13. Ne5. According to Estrin & Glazkov (1982), who has analysed this game very thoroughly, there is a sure white win in all variations. The point is that black can not play 7. -, dxc3 8. Qb3, Nc6 9. Bxf7+, Kf8 10. Bd5, c2 11. Nc3 with advantage to white. Neither works 8. -, d5 9. exe5, Bd6 10. Re1+, Kf8 11. Nxc3 and once again advantage to white. 7.5 Two Knights Defence 4. -, Nc6 5. Ng5 4. -, Nc6 can be met with either 5. e5 or 5. 0-0 or 5. Ng5, which all are variations of Two Knights Defence. Because our interest lies in the Urusoff Gambit it is opportune to focus on 5. Ng5, which at least gives an equal game and good chances on both sides. The risk of not playing 5. Ng5 is complicated variations of Scottish Opening and Two Knights Defence, and the benefit lies in preparing only relatively simple variations of four lines in ECO. Diagram 44 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I BN I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I BN I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I WN I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I BP I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I WQ I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ There are two variations to consider 5. -, d5 or 5. -, Ne5. A) 5. Ng5, d5 6. exd5, Qe7+ 7. Qe2 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Nf6 3. d4, exd4 4. Nf3, Nc6 5. Ng5, d5 6. exd5, Qe7+ Black lost after 6. -, Ne5 7. Qe2!, Qe7 8. 0-0, Bg4 9. f3, Nxe4 10. Qxc4, Bf5 11. Bf4 and 1 - 0 to Sokolski against Konstantinonolski, 1951. 7. Qe2, All other moves are bad. 7. Be2, Nd5 8. 0-0, h6 9. Nf3, Qd6 gives black a slight upper hand. There is an equal game after 7. Kf1, Ne5 8. Qxd4, Nxc4 9. Qxc4, Qc5 10. Qxc5, Bxc5 11. Nc3, Bf5 12. Bf4, 0-0 13. Bxc7, h6 14. Nf3, Bxc3 15. Ne1, Bf5 16. Rd1, Rc8 in Sax - Lengyel, 1973 and draw. Black got the upper hand in Sagler - Kandan, 1939 after white tried 10. h3, Rac8 14. g4, Bxc2! The game of Vaskan - Gipsler, 1966 went better for black after 10. Qe2, Be7 11. c4, Nd5 12. Na3, Nb4 13. Be3, Qf5. Cubater - Mareasyte, 1975 continued 10. -, Bd7 11. Bf4!, g5 12. Ne3! with advantage to white. 7. - , Nb4 Diagram 45 - white to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I BB I I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I I BQ I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I WN I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I BN I WB I BP I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I WQ I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ And the rest of the game went 8. Qxe7+, Be7 9. d6, Nxc2+ 10. Kd2, Bf5 11. dxe7, Nxa1 12. Na3, Bg6 13. b3, h6 14. Nf3, Ne4+ with an equal but unclear game between Poeasyajev - Rosinov, 1955. B) 5. Ng5, Ne5 6. Qxd4 1. e4, e5 2. Bc4, Nf6 3. d4, exd4 4. Nf3, Nc6 5. Ng5, Ne5 6. Qxd4! Diagram 46 - black to move: +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BR I I BB I BQ I BK I BB I I BR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I BP I BP I BP I BP I BP I BP I BP I BP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I BN I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I BN I I WN I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I WB I WQ I WP I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I I I I I I I I I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WP I WP I WP I I I WP I WP I WP I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ I WR I WN I WB I I WK I I I WR I +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 5. -, Ne5 shall be met with 6. Qxd4, because it er not healthy to play 6. Bb3. The game Pfleger - Spasski, 1966 did set the standard with 6. Bd3, h6 7. f4, hxg5 8. fxe5, Nxe4 9. Qxd4, Nc5 10. Nc3, d6! 11. Be3, Nb3 12. axb3, dxe5 13. Qxe5+, Qe7 14. Qxg5, Qxg5 15. Bxg5, Bd6 and black won. There is a slight advantage to white if black tries the continuation 10. -, c6 11. Ne4!, d5 12. exd5, Qa4+ 13. Qd2, Nxb3 14. cxb3, Qd5 15. Qe3 Gizdanu - Ungureanu, 1973. Both 9. -, Rh4 and 9. -, d5 gives advantage to white. Yakov Estrin lost with white to Koptev in 1941 with 9. Bxf7+, Kxf7 10. Qf3+, Kg8 11. 0-0, Qe8+ 12. Qxe4, d5 13. Qxd4, Be6 14. Bxg5, b6. An equal game arises if black tries 6.-, d5 7. exd5, h6 8. Qd4, Bd6 9. Nf3, Nxf3+ 10. gxf3, 0-0 11. Be3, Re8 12. Nc3, Be5 13. Qd2, Nh5 14. 0-0-0, Qf6 as in Pfleger - Mazzoni, 1966. 6. -, Nxc4 7. Qxc4, d5! 8. exd5, Qxd5 Both 8. -, Nxd5 9. 0-0, Be7 10. Nc3, Bg5 11. Nd5 and 8. -, h6 9. Ne4, Nd5 10. 0-0, Nb6 11. Qe2+, Be7 12. Rd1, Bd7 13. c4, 0-0 14. c5, Nc8 15. Nbc3 as in Pfleger - Zuidema, 1963 gives white good prospects. 9. Qe2+, Be7 White won after 9. -, Be6 10. Ne6, Qxe6 11. Qxe6, fxe6 12. Nd2 Nefc - Limbos, 1989. 10. 0-0, Bd7 11. Nc3, Qc5 It er not good to try 11. Re1 because and the good move 11. -, 0-0! with advantage to black. 12. Be3, Qf3 And the game Eeringer - Volk, 1955 continued 13. Bd2, h6 14. Rfd1, Ng8 15. Nf3, 0-0 16. Nd4, Qg4 with equal chances to both sides. Sources Yakov Estrin: Gambitspil i skak. Skakcentralens forlag. 1982. Keres: Dreispringerspiel bis Kvnigsgambit. Sportverlag Berlin. 1974. Oxford Encyclopedia of Chess Games. Volume 1. 1485-1866. Oxford. 1981. DM i corr.-chess 1985. Tronhjem comments the game Tronhjem-Granberg 1985. Mazukewitsch: Seltene Gambits. Sportverlag Berlin. 1980. Encyclopedia of Chess Openings (ECO), Beograd 1981. Chapter C24 edited by Bent Larsen. The paper Ekstrabladet 27. december 1989 pp. 52: Skak med Bent Larsen om Urusoff Gambit. Cafferty B. & Hooper Q.: A Complete defence to 1 e4. Pergamon Press. Third edition 1986. Forintos & Haag: The Petroff Defence. Batsford Btd. Bondon 1991. Gary Lane: Winning with the Bishop's Opening. Batsford 1993. Aleksei Suetin: Russisch bis Kvnigsgambit. Sportverlag. Berlin 1982. Yakov Estrin & Igor Glazkov: Double King Pawns Openings - Bishops Opening, Hungarian Defence, Ponziani Opening. Pennsylvania 1982. Kim Pilgaard: Ursovgambit 6.Bg5, Nc6. Artikel i Bronshoj Skakklubbladet. Marts 1992. Postface Soren Galberg-Bund is member of the chessclub 'Kageklubben', a small club in Copenhagen under the Danish Chess Union. Kageklubben has a certain reputation for its exclusive dinners for the elite of danish chessplayers, and it participates actively in tournaments and corresspondance chess. Another member of Kageklubben, Niels Jorgen Jensen has written and co-authered Niels Jorgen Jensen: Blackmar - Diemer Gambit. Dansk Skakforlag. Skakhuset. Copenhagen 1985. Niels Jorgen Jensen, Tom Purser & Rasmus Pape: Elephant Gambit 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d5. Blackmar Press. Warner Robins. Georgia 1988. Rasmus Pape, Niels Jorgen Jensen & Dietrich Burk: H|bsch Gambit 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3. e4 Ne4. Eleprint, Copenhagen 1991. Rasmus Pape & Niels Jorgen Jensen: Gibbins - Weidenhagen Gambit 1. d4 Nf6 2. g4. D|sseldorf 1991.