PDA

View Full Version : Philidors = winning!



Alan Shore
24-04-2004, 01:46 AM
Here's a nice game, complete with the 3.. Bg4 line. :cool:

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 d6
3. Bc4 Bg4
4. d4 Nd7
5. c3 Bh5
6. Qb3 Nb6
7. dxe5 dxe5
8. Nbd2 Bd6
9. O-O Nf6
10. a4 O-O
11. a5 Nxc4
12. Qxc4 a6
13. b4 Qe7
14. Bb2 Bg6
15. Rfe1 Rad8
16. Nb3 Nh5
17. Nc5 Bxc5
18. Qxc5 Qxc5
19. bxc5 f6
20. Ba3 c6
21. Rab1 Rd7
22. Rb4 Nf4
23. g3 Nd3
24. Rd1 Rfd8
25. Ra4 Bf7
26. Rb1 Ba2
27. Rb6 Be6
28. Kg2 Bg4
29. Nh4 Ne1+
30. Kf1 Rd1
31. f3 R8d2
0-1


____________________
Philidors rulez :hand:

Kevin Bonham
24-04-2004, 01:59 AM
Not really the ...Bg4 line (the really bad one that is). The really bad one is 3...Bg4 in reply to 3.d4 not in reply to 3.Bc4. It's not really a transposition either because White has wasted time with c3. I don't know if 3...Bg4 vs 3.Bc4 is actually all that bad.

White could have had the e-pawn for not a lot of positional compensation on move 8.

Rincewind
24-04-2004, 02:17 AM
Show us some nice games where you win after White played 3.d4.

If you play 3...Bg4 then do you have some games with 4.dxe5 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 dxe5 6.Bc4? ;)

Alan Shore
24-04-2004, 02:25 AM
Show us some nice games where you win after White played 3.d4.

If you play 3...Bg4 then do you have some games with 4.dxe5 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 dxe5 6.Bc4? ;)

Like this lovely one you mean? :)


1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Bg4 4. dxe5 Bxf3 5. Qxf3 dxe5 6. Bc4 Nf6 7. Qb3
Qe7 8. Nc3 c6 9. Bg5 b5 10. Nxb5 cxb5 11. Bxb5+ Nbd7 12. O-O-O Rd8 13. Rxd7 Rxd7 14. Rd1 Qe6 15. Bxd7+ Nxd7 16. Qb8+ Nxb8 17. Rd8# 1-0

Personally I don't play Bg4. Against 3. d4 playing 3.. Nf6 or 3.. Nd7 gives me positions I'm content with.

Alan Shore
24-04-2004, 02:35 AM
Here's one I won with black (not exactly what Barry specified, a variation on a theme really) but I don't want to give away my opening theory :p

[Event "1 0 r"]
[Site "FICS"]
[Date "2004.04.21"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Terniaku(FM)"]
[Black "DrLasker"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ICCResult "White resigns"]
[WhiteElo "2020"]
[BlackElo "1903"]

1. d4 d6
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. e4 Nbd7
4. Bg5 e5
5. Nf3 Be7
6. Be2 h6
7. Bh4 c6
8. Qd2 Qc7
9. Bg3 Nf8
10. a4 Ng6
11. dxe5 dxe5
12. O-O O-O
13. Nh4 Nxh4
14. Bxh4 Nxe4
15. Nxe4 Bxh4
16. Bd3 f5
17. Ng3 Bxg3
18. fxg3 Rd8
19. Qc3 e4
20. Bc4+ Kh8
21. Rad1 Qe7
22. Rd4 Be6
23. Rfd1 Rxd4
24. Qxd4 Bxc4
25. Qxc4 Rd8
26. Rd4 Rxd4
27. Qxd4 Qe6
28. b3 Qd5
29. Qxa7 Qd1+
30. Kf2 Qxc2+
31. Ke3 Qxb3+
32. Kf4 Qf7
33. Qb8+ Kh7
34. Qc8 Qe7
35. Qxf5+ Kh8
36. Qc8+ Kh7
37. Qf5+ g6
38. Qxe4 Qg5+
39. Kf3 Qf5+
40. Qxf5 gxf5
41. Kf4 Kg6
42. g4 fxg4
43. Kxg4 b5
44. Kf4 bxa4
45. Ke3 a3
46. Kd2 a2
47. Kc2 a1=Q
48. Kb3 Qg1
49. Kc4 Qxg2
{White resigns} 0-1

Kevin Bonham
24-04-2004, 03:13 AM
Is that time limit bullet? Cause I can't imagine anyone with a rating above 1000 let alone 2000 playing a move as dreadful as 44.Kf4?? at any respectable time limit. 44.a5 (too obvious to deserve an !) +/- :doh:

Kevin Bonham
24-04-2004, 03:28 AM
Actually looking at some databases for recent examples of 3.d4 Bg4 I just came across something I've not encountered before and am pleased to be forewarned about - a gambit!

[Event "4th Stage Russian Cup"]
[Site "Samara RUS"]
[Date "2002.07.29"]
[EventDate "2002.07.26"]
[Round "4"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "T Kosintseva"]
[Black "Yurtaev"]
[ECO "C41"]
[WhiteElo "2441"]
[BlackElo "2552"]
[PlyCount "112"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Bg4 4. dxe5 Nd7 5. exd6 Bxd6 6. Be2 Ngf6 7. Nc3
Qe7 8. Nd4 Bxe2 9. Qxe2 Bb4 10. O-O O-O 11. Nf5 Qe6 12. f3 Rfe8 13. Qf2 Bc5
14. Ne3 Nb6 15. Kh1 Rad8 16. Qe2 g6 17. Ned1 Nh5 18. Nf2 c6 19. Nd3 Bd4 20.
Be3 Bg7 21. Nc5 Qe7 22. Rad1 Rxd1 23. Rxd1 f5 24. Kg1 Be5 25. g3 f4 26.
gxf4 Nxf4 27. Bxf4 Bxf4 28. Nd3 Rf8 29. Nxf4 Rxf4 30. Qd3 Rf8 31. Ne2 Qf7
32. Kg2 Nc4 33. Qb3 b5 34. Rd3 Qf6 35. Qc3 Ne5 36. Re3 Qg5+ 37. Kh1 Rd8 38.
Ng1 b4 39. Qe1 c5 40. Re2 Qf6 41. Qf2 Rd1 42. Rd2 Qxf3+ 43. Qg2 Qxg2+ 44.
Rxg2 Kf7 45. Rf2+ Ke6 46. Kg2 Ng4 47. Re2 Rc1 48. h3 Ne5 49. b3 Ra1 50. Nf3
Rxa2 51. Nxe5 Kxe5 52. Kf3 c4 53. Rd2 Ke6 54. bxc4 b3 55. Rd3 bxc2 56. Rc3
Ra3 0-1

Know anything about this, BD? If not, maybe David Flude does ...

Lucena
24-04-2004, 09:34 PM
Like this lovely one you mean? :)


1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Bg4 4. dxe5 Bxf3 5. Qxf3 dxe5 6. Bc4 Nf6 7. Qb3
Qe7 8. Nc3 c6 9. Bg5 b5 10. Nxb5 cxb5 11. Bxb5+ Nbd7 12. O-O-O Rd8 13. Rxd7 Rxd7 14. Rd1 Qe6 15. Bxd7+ Nxd7 16. Qb8+ Nxb8 17. Rd8# 1-0

Personally I don't play Bg4. Against 3. d4 playing 3.. Nf6 or 3.. Nd7 gives me positions I'm content with.
Hey that looks kind of familiar... :hmm:

Lucena
24-04-2004, 09:37 PM
Actually looking at some databases for recent examples of 3.d4 Bg4 I just came across something I've not encountered before and am pleased to be forewarned about - a gambit!

[Event "4th Stage Russian Cup"]
[Site "Samara RUS"]
[Date "2002.07.29"]
[EventDate "2002.07.26"]
[Round "4"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "T Kosintseva"]
[Black "Yurtaev"]
[ECO "C41"]
[WhiteElo "2441"]
[BlackElo "2552"]
[PlyCount "112"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Bg4 4. dxe5 Nd7 5. exd6 Bxd6 6. Be2 Ngf6 7. Nc3
Qe7 8. Nd4 Bxe2 9. Qxe2 Bb4 10. O-O O-O 11. Nf5 Qe6 12. f3 Rfe8 13. Qf2 Bc5
14. Ne3 Nb6 15. Kh1 Rad8 16. Qe2 g6 17. Ned1 Nh5 18. Nf2 c6 19. Nd3 Bd4 20.
Be3 Bg7 21. Nc5 Qe7 22. Rad1 Rxd1 23. Rxd1 f5 24. Kg1 Be5 25. g3 f4 26.
gxf4 Nxf4 27. Bxf4 Bxf4 28. Nd3 Rf8 29. Nxf4 Rxf4 30. Qd3 Rf8 31. Ne2 Qf7
32. Kg2 Nc4 33. Qb3 b5 34. Rd3 Qf6 35. Qc3 Ne5 36. Re3 Qg5+ 37. Kh1 Rd8 38.
Ng1 b4 39. Qe1 c5 40. Re2 Qf6 41. Qf2 Rd1 42. Rd2 Qxf3+ 43. Qg2 Qxg2+ 44.
Rxg2 Kf7 45. Rf2+ Ke6 46. Kg2 Ng4 47. Re2 Rc1 48. h3 Ne5 49. b3 Ra1 50. Nf3
Rxa2 51. Nxe5 Kxe5 52. Kf3 c4 53. Rd2 Ke6 54. bxc4 b3 55. Rd3 bxc2 56. Rc3
Ra3 0-1

Know anything about this, BD? If not, maybe David Flude does ...

Interesting. Kosintseva's not a bad player, either...

Feldgrau
24-04-2004, 10:38 PM
GM Andy Solstis wrote an article about this improvement in the Duke of Brunswick defense, I think it was a Chess life from the mid 80's.. Bxf3? is a much poorer move than Nd7!? of course. I believe his assesment was that the extra tempii was not quite worth a pawn.

I had a deeper appreciation of Morphy's skill/intuition when I worked out why he rejected Bxf7+?! (instead of Nc3!) having never seen a satisfactory explanation apart from "Morphy prefers to develop"

weadley
15-05-2004, 05:45 AM
YES THAT DOES LOOK FAMILIAR~!
Look in my library at ICC . Handle weadley.
I played this game without ever having seen the original yet.
I made these moves with a different reasoning not realizing I had a mate comeing. Im a chess noob 1100.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Bg4 4.dxe5 Bxf3 5.Qxf3 dxe5 6.Bc4 Nf6 7.Qb3 Qe7 8.Nc3 c6 9.Bg5 b5 10.Nxb5 cxb5 11.Bxb5+ Nbd7 12.0-0-0 Rd8 13.Rxd7 Rxd7 14.Rd1 Qe6 15.Bxd7+ Nxd7 16.Qb8+ Nxb8 17.Rd8# 1-0