Reminder on the Pietrowsky lines

In 2011, I covered the Pietrowsky lines and concluded that 5...Nc6 6.Bb5 Bd7 was not simple to deal with. White has to be carefull in order not to overextend.

The main line is 5...Nc6 6.Bb5 Bd7 7.0-0 e6 8.d5 (diagram)

White is ahead in development at the expense of a pawn. The easiest way for black is to exchange a few pieces :

8...Nb4 !!
Forces the exchnage of the light coloured bishop, doesnt it ?

9.dxe6 (diagram)

9...Bxb5 10.Nxb5 Qxd1 11.Rxd1 (diagram)

Mission Exchanging is completed ! But does black have an advanatge ? Absolutely not, since black still needs a move to recapture the pawn on e6, but this is not possible since c7 is under attack.

So we can safely conclude that the Pietrowsky line does not offer any advantage for the defender, proviuded white plays is quitely - a task not easy for the Blackmar Diemer gambiteer.

The Viking-French-Blackmar-Diemer-... attack

I already played my opponent from yesterday evening a year or so ago. At that time, he accepted the f3 pawn and was swept away by a berserk attack. Have you ever seen the series "Vikings" ? Well, I looked like Ragnar Lothbrok and England was there to conquer.

Yesterday evening, my opponent choose the more cautious path - he initially declined the offered pawn but could not resist lateron.

Guido De Bouver - Robert De Hert
Antwerpen 2015.

1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 e6
Black steers into a French-like defense

4.Be3 (diagram)
Vikings on the horizon !

4...dxe4 5.fxe4 Nxe4 6.Nd2 (diagram)
Vikings have set ashore and immediately set camp.

6...Nxd2 7.Qxd2
King Aelle of Northumberland believes he won the first battle, but Ragnar sees it differently.


7...Bd6 8.Nf3 Nc6 9.Bd3 e5 ?
It is strange what the sight of a berserk viking does to man. King Aelle should have tried to reduce the viking forces by 9...Nb4, and if this fails, set up an outpost with Nd5.

10.000 exd4 11.Nxd4 Nxd4 12.Bxd4 0-0 (diagram)

Now Ragnar makes a premature attack, but king Aelle doesnt really benefit from this mistake.
13.Qc3 c5 14.Bf2 Qg5 15.Kb1 Be5 16.Qxc5 Qf6 (diagram)

17.Rf1 ! Bxb2 18.Bxh7+ Kxh7 19.Qxf8 Bf5 20.Qb4 (diagram)

The remainder of the game is of no interest to us - we dont want to witness the massacre that Ragnar imposes on the poor English defenders. But the suggested Viking attack certainly has some potency in it - especially as the defender is likely to make mistakes when faces with this unusual attack.

Editors note : This story is historically correct - vikings got into contact with chess when they travelled the seven seas, Ragnar did invade England, king Aelle suffered a terrible blow, and yes, the vikings would have played the Blackmar-Diemer if it had already been invented...

The Sneiders Attack - refuted.

Black does not have to be cooperative when defending against the Blackmar Diemer gambit - a timely e5 can destroy white's ambitions 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e5! White has three options now : 4.Nxe4, 4.Nge2 and 4.Qh5 (diagram). We will analyse the Schneiders Attack today.

Can black take a second pawn an survive ?? If so, we should not consider the Schneider Attack anymore since it is well known that 4...Nc6 is also quite strong,

Let's look at 4...exd4 ( realising that black can take the pawn with the queen also, maybe even stronger than the text move ). I guess the only serious white option is 5.Bc4 (diagram), since both 5.Nxe4 and 5.Qe5 are countered by 5...Qe7.

Play continues 6.Bg5 Nf6 7.Bxf6 Qxf6 8.Nxe4 Qe7.
Black might have other options here, such as 8...Bb4+ 9.c3 Qf5 resulting in equal play.

And now the killer move 9.000 (diagram)

Black is a pawn ahead, so he doesnt have to take the piece that is offered to him, eg 9...g6 10.Qe2 Bh6+ 11.Kb1 Nc6 with equality.

But what happens if black does take the baite ? 9...Qxe4 10.Qxf7+ Kd8 11.Nf3.

Scheerer suggests 11...c5 only, indicating that 11...Bd6 was suggested by Kaissiber.

11...Bd6 12.Qxg7 and now a nice improvement 12....Rf8 (diagram)

Kaissiber suggested only 12...Re8, but the text move is better.

a/ 13.Ng5 Qf4+ 14.Kb1 Qf6 15.Nf7+ Rxf7 16.Qxf7 Qxf7 17.Bxf7 c5 (=)

b/ 13.Nxd4 Qe7 (=+)

c/ 13.Rxd4 Qe7 (=+)

d/ 13.Rhe1 Qf4+ 14.Kb1 Qf6 (=+)

e/ 13.Qxf8+ Bxf8 14.Rxd4+ Qxd4 15.Nxd4 (=+)

See we see that there is no advantage for the attacker in the Sneiders Attack.

The annoying Brombacher and Kaulich defenses

Refusing a gambit is sometimes the wiser choice. But how ?

Black can refuse the Blackmar Diemer in various ways. I already covered 4..e3, 4...Bf5 and 4...e5. Let's look into 4...c5 (diagram) today.

White's next move is crtitical. 5.dxc5 exchanges queens but wins back the pawn - but this damages white's queenside considerably. Scheerer suggests 5.Bf4, but that is not really an option as balck gets the better play. That leaves 5.d5

Black strongest alternative now is 5...exf3 6.Nxf3 (diagram)

Black strongest move is now 6...g6.Scheerer now correctly indicates that white should not play 7.Bc4 and recommends 7.Bg5. However, my silicon assistant recommends 7.Bf4 (diagram)

After the obvious 7...Bg7, white has 8.Qd2 00 9.000 (diagram).

But now my system indicates 9...a6 gives black a small plus !? Seems there is some work to be done here !

That's the same, isn't it ?

I had some problems lately playing against a strange Vienna-like line, occuring after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Bf5 4.f3 exf3 (diagram).

White has two options now : 5.Qxf3 and 5.Nxf3. The Ryder-like continuation 5.Qxf3 seems more direct as it attacks both the pawn at b7 and the bishop on f5. Unfortunately, black has the simple, but very effective 5...Qc8 and white has difficulties in creating an attack

So I advise it is better to stick to 5.Nxf3 (diagram), with followng options :

a/ 5...Nf6 6.Ne5 (Gunderam defense)

b/ 5...c6 (A Karo Cann without Nf6) 6.Bd3
...b1/ 6...Bxd3 7.Qxd3 (=) and white has a nice lead in development
...b2/ 6...Bg6 7.Bg5 (=)
...b3/ 6...Bg4 7.h3 (+=)

c/ 5...e6 6.Bd3
...c1/ 6...Bxd3 7.Qxd3 (=)
...c2/ 6...Ne7 7.Bf4 (=)
...c3/ 6...Bg6 7.Bxg6 hxg6 8.Qe2 (=)

d/ 5...Nc6 6.d5 (+=)

e/ 5...Ne7 6.Nh4

The alternative 5.Qxf3 Qc8 6.Bf4 (diagram) also does not seem to bring any advantage for the attacker, eg 6...Nf6 with complete equality.

So it seems that this is a completely different line, as black has a much simpler game defending. Most lines seem to equlize rather quickly. I will remember this option if someone dares to venture a Blackmar Diemer against me !

How do I explain this to the children ?

My silicon chess friend often suggests moves that are hard to understand – at least for me, a mere woodchopper...

As an example, in the Pohlmann defense, Houdini recommends 6.Bb5+ (diagram) after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 f5 4.f3 exf3 ( Scheerer prefers 4...e5, but I doubt his analysis as he relies on Milov-Kramnik, 1990, but Milov could have improved by playing 7.Nb5 instead of 5.dxe5 Qxd1+ 6.Kxd1 Nc6 7.Nd5 ) 5.Nxf3 Nf6. Now I teach chess to children and I always learn them that giving a check like that is not so good, as it allows the defender to chase away the bishop with the simple c6. Applying that golden rule would indicate that 6.Bc4 is preferred over 6.Bb5+. Still Houdini recommends the latter over the logical 6.Bc4. Why ? Well, let's look at the different ways of dealing with the check.

a/ 6...c6 The most simple way of blocking the check 7.Bc4 (diagram)
The attacker has now taken away the natural black move Nc6.

...a1/ 7...b5 8.Bb3 e6 9.Ng5 b4 10.Na4 (=)
...a2/ 7...e6 8.Qe2 (+=)
...a3/ 7...g6 8.Qe2 (+=)
...a4/ 7...c5 8.Bf4 (+)
...a5/ 7...Nbd7 8.Ng5 (+=)
...a6/ 7...Na6 8.Ng5 (+=)
...a7/ 7...Nd5 8.Bg5 (+=)
...a8/ 7...Qc7 8.00 (+=)
...a9/ 7...Qb6 8.00 (+)

b/ 6...Bd7 7.Qe2 (diagram)
White develops pieces

...b1/ 7...Nc6 8.Bg5 (+)
...b2/ 7...c6 8.Bc4 (+=)
...b3/ 7...a6 8.Bxd7 Qxd7 9.Bg5 (+=)
...b4/ 7...c5 8.Bf4 (+)
...b5/ 7...e6 8.Bf4 (+=)
...b6/ 7...g6 8.Bf4 (+)

c/ 6...Nc6 7.d5 a6 8.Ba4 b5 9.Nxb5 axb5 10.Bxb5 (+=)

d/ 6...Nbd7 7.Ng5 c6 8.Bc4 Nd5 9.Ne6 (+)

So analysis proves that white gets a small advantage after 6.Bb5+. After 6.Bc4, black is able to equalise with 6...e6 (diagram).

In this position 7.Qd3 Nc6 (=) is probably best.

So Houdini was right, in this case 6.Bb5+ is better than 6.Bc4 as it denies black to place his knight on the c6 square. But as a general rule, I will stick to telling children that Bc4 is better...

Odd moves in the Kaulich defense

The Brombacher counter is a great weapon for black when decling the Blackmar Diemer. Why ? Not because it is so good, just because it denies white the normal attacking patterns.

The normal line is 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c5 5.d5 ( Brombacher counter gambit ).

Black's strongest move is now 5...exf3 6.Nxf3 (diagram), transposing into the Kaulich defense.

6...a6 (!?) (diagram) is now recommended by Houdini, but this strange move is not even considered by Christoph Scheerer. It seems to me Houdini wants to avoid some kind of "Gedult variatiation" with Bf4 and Nb5.

How should the attacker proceed ? Let's try some options.

a/ 7.Bf4 can be answered by 7...e7 and white has less than nothing (=+)

b/ 7.Bg5 is probably better than 7.Bf4 but black can chase away the bishop 7...h6 8.Bh4 g5 9.Bf2 Qb6 (=+)

c/ 7.Be3 Nbd7 (=) and white is fighting for equality

d/ 7.Bd3 (=+) gives black the luxury of choices between 7...g6 and 7...e6

e/ 7.Bc4 b5 8.Bd3 (=+) is even worse

f/ The modest 7.Be2 leads nowhere after 7...e6 (=+)

g/ 7.Qd3 runs into 7...b5 (=+)

h/ The waiting 7.a4 (diagram) is maybe best.

7.a4 alllows for white to put his bishop on it's strongest outpost : c4.
The line 7.a4 g6 8.Bc4 Bg7 9.Bf4 00 10.00 seems to give equlaity, but then again, other black seventh moves are possible.

Bottomline, the odd 6...a6 in the Kaulich defense needs to be considered carefully. More investigation is needed, but it seems another oddity 7.a4 is best.

What about the Pietrowsky ?

The Pietrowsky defensive 4...exf3 5.Nxf3 Nc6 (diagram) is difficult to play for both black and white.

White's careless 6.d5 is weak, as the pawn on d5 because an easy target after 6...Nb4, so white should definitely choose 6.Bb5.

Black's natural reply is 6...Bd7, preventing a doubled c pawn. White's strongest move is supposed to be 7.00, but 7.Qe2 is surely worth a try.

The position after 7.00 is doubled edged : White has some initiative for the pawn, but black has no obvious weaknesses, so white must be very carefull not to overextend.

a/ 7.00 e6 8.d5

...a1/ 8...Bc5+ 9.Kh1
......a1a/ 9...Nb4 10.dxe6 (=)
......a1b/ 9...exd5 10.Nxd5 (=)
......a1c/ 9...Nxd5 10.Nxd5 exd5 11.Qxd5 (+)
......a1d/ 9...Ne7 10.dxe6 (+=)
......a1e/ 9...Nb8 10.Bc4 (+=)
...a2/ 8...Nb4 9.dxe6
......a2a/ 9...fxe6 10.Bc4 (=)
......a2b/ 9...Bc5+ 10.Nd4 (=)
......a2c/ 9...Bxb5 10.Nxb5 (=)
...a3/ 8...exd5 9.Nxd5 (=)
...a4/ 8...Nxd5 9.Nxd5 exd5 10.Qxd5 (+=)

b/ 7.00 a6 8.Bxc6 Bxc6 9.Ne5

...b1/ 9...e6 10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.Qf3 (=)

So white's winning chances are quite limited after 7.00. Let's now look at the alternative 7.Qe2.

c/ 7.Qe2 a6 8.Bc4

...c1/ 8...e6 9.d5 Na5 10.dxe6
......c1a/ 10...fxe6 11.bxe6 (=)
......c1b/ 10...Bxe6 11.Bxe6 fxe6 12.Bg5 (+=)
...c2/ 8...b5 9.Bb3
......c2a/ 9...Na5 10.Ne5 (=)
......c2b/ 9...e6 10.d5 (=)
......c2c/ 9...Bg4 10.Be3 (=)
......c2c/ 9...Bf5 10.Ne5 (+=)
...c3/ 8...Bg4 9.Be3 (=)
...c4/ 8...Bf5 9.d5 (=)
...c5/ 8...Na5 9.Bd3
......c51/ 9...g6 10.b4 Nc6 11.Ne4 (=)
......c52/ 9...Nc6 10.a3 (=)
......c53/ 9...Bg4 10.Ne4 (=)
......c54/ 9...e6 10.Bg5 (=)

d/ 7.Qe2 e6 8.d5

...d1/ 8...Nb4 9.dxe6 fxe6 10.Bg5
......d11/ 10...c6 11.000 (=)
......d12/ 10...Nc6 11.000 (+=)
......d13/ 10...Bd6 11.Qxe6+ (+=)
......d14/ 10...Be7 11.Bxf6 (++)
......d15/ 10...Bxb5 11.Nxb5 (+=)
...d2/ 8...Nb4 9.dxe6 Bxb5 10.Nxb5 (+=)
...d3/ 8...Na5 9.dxe6 fxe6 10.Bf4 (+=)
...d4/ 8...Ne7 9.dxe6 fxe6 10.Bg5 (+=)
...d5/ 8...Nb8 9.dxe6 fxe6 10.Bg5 (+=)

e/ 7.Qe2 g6 8.d5
...e1/ 8...Nb4 9.Bg5 (=)
...e2/ 8...Na5 9.Bxd7+ (+)
...e3/ 8...Nb8 9.Bg5 (=)


So there is no spectacular chess after black's timid 5...Nc6. Playing solid seems to be the recommended approach. The problem is that there is not much else after 5...Nc6. 6.Bd3 is obviously bad because of 6...g6 and 6.Bc4 is countered by 6...e6.

So the only alternative to 6.Bb5 is moving the queen's bishop, either to e3, f4 or g5.

Anyway, seems like the Pietrowsky is a simple equalizing line for the cautious black defender.

Correctness of Lemberger

I was looking up the assessment of my latest Lemberger game in Scheerer's book.

After 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e5 4.Nxe4 Qxd4 5.Bd3 Nc6 6.Nf3, Scheerer suggests 6...Qd5 7.Qe2, indicating that 7.00 Bg4 8.Nc3 Qd6 9.h3 Bh5 10.Nb5 Qe7 11.Be4 a6 12.Bxc6+ bxc6 13.Nc3 f6 is better for black, as in the game Leisebein-Lange, 2004.

Even if black won this game, this position does not seem a clear cut. After 14.Re1, black has following lines :

a/ 14...Rd8 15.Qe2 and now

a1/ 15...Qf7 16.Qxa6 Bxf3 17.gxf3 

a11/ 17...Qe6 and Houdine gives me 7 possible moves with complete equality

a12/ 17...Ne7 18.f4 with complete equality, eg 18...Qg6+ 19.Kh2 Qxc2 20.Be3

a13/ 17...Qg6+ 18.Kh2 with small white advantage

a2/ 15...a5 16.g4 Bf7 17.Bg5 with small white advantage

a3/ 15...Bxf3 16.Qxf3 Qe6 17.Qh5+ with small white advantage

a4/ 15...Qc5 16.Be3 with white advantage

b/ 14...Bf7 15.Bf4 with small white advantage

c/ 14...Bg6 15.Bf4 with small white advantage

d/ 14...a5 15.Bf4 with equal game

So bottomline : I cant see black's advantage in the posiyion after 13.Nc3 f6. In fact, black is struggling for equality. So don't believe everything you read in the books - even the assessment of "experts" is often flawed.  Do your homework and assess the position yourself, using your style as the ultimate guideline, 

There are in fact authors who claim they can produce a chess book or DVD each day ! Needless to say they are also have a distinct opinion on the Blackmar Diemer... 

Improvement on my last Lemberger

I got an interesting comment on my last Lemberger game by Mr Sawyer.
He suggested to play 8.Bb5 ( see diagram ) after the Lemberger setup 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e5 4.Nxe4 Qxd4 5.Bd3 Nc6 6.Nf3 Qd8 7.Qe2 Be7, moving the king's bishop a second time, and following up with 8...Bd7 9.00 Nf6 10.Rd1

 

I feel quite reluctant about this move, as it 

- violates the principle of moving a piece twice in the opening

- does not allow for queenside castling ( with the subsequent rook on the open d file )

- does not seem forcing

After the suggested 10.Rd1, black can easily play 10...Nxe4

 

White has following options :

a/ 11.Qxe4 Bd6 

a1/ 12.c4 with complete equality, eg 12...a6 13.Ba4 Qe7=

a2/ 12.Be3 with black getting the initiative after12.. f5 13.Qd5 Qf6

b/ 11.Bxc6 

b1/ 11...bxc6 12.Qxe4 f6 with an interesting, but complicated position

b2/ 11...Nd6 12.Bxd7+ Qxd7 13.Nxe5 Qe6 with white regaining the pawn

So Tim's suggested 8.Bb5 is certainly safer than my continuation 8.Be3 f5 9.000 fxe4 10.Bxe4.

If it is better remains open - guess it boils down to the individual taste of the attacker - try to regain the pawn in favorable conditions or continue the attack at all cost. I obvioulsy opt for the second choice.

What can I do more ?

I got a wild Lemberger gambit yesterday evening. After the game - which I lost - I felt desperate : "What can I do more ?". The nicest girl can only give what she has - as the Flemish proverb goes. Well, the Blackmar Diemer complex has given me a lot, but sometimes it also takes...

1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 e5
The Lemberger countergambit. My opponent has read my book in detail and was convinced there was no black advantage in the main Blackmar Diemer lnes. So he prepared for this popular countergambit.

4.Nxe4
Other lines include 4.Qh5 and 4.Nge2

4...Qxd4
4...exd4 might be simpler for black

5.Bd3

5...Nc6 6.Nf3 Qd8 7.Qe2 Be7 8.Be3
Highly provocative - and black accepts the challenge

8...f5 9.000

9...fxe4 10.Bxe4 Bd7 11.Bxc6 bxc6 12.Nxe5 Bd6 13.Qh5+ g6 14.Nxg6 Nf6 15.Qh4 Rg8 16.Nf4 Rg4 17.Qh6 Bf8

White has no more options in this lost position as 18.Qh3 simply looses after 18...Rxf4 19.Rxd7 Qxd7 20.Qxd7+ Kxd7 21.Bxf4 Bd6 and black's piece proved to be stronger than my two pawns.

I felt really disappointed aftre this intense game - what can I do more ? Well maybe 13.Rhe1, with following lines :
- 13...Bxe5 14.Qh5+ Kf8 15.Bc5+ Bd6 16.Rxd6! cxd6 17.Bxd6+ Ne7 18.Qf3+ winning
- 13...Nf6 14.Qc4 winning instantly
- 13...Kf8 14.Qf3+ Nf6 15.Bc5 Be8 16.Qf4 with a tremendous attack.

So what could I have done  more - look beyond the obvious 13.Qh5+ and centralise rooks with 13.Rhe1 !