Re: Dennis M.: Quick Ruy Lopez Part 3 (Jaenisch cont'd) [38
I agree. Dennis's prior experience with the Schliemann has certainly made this portion extremely educational. As for its soundness, it has always seemed to have the edgy image of constantly flouting respectability at the highest levels, and I remember eons ago when Dennis amusingly echoed the sentiment saying that he "knows where all the bodies are buried."
It's a shame that 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Nxe5 dxe4 7.Nxc6 Qg5 8.Qe2 Nf6 9.Nxa7+
is so underrated by theory. It just seems to be a clear, somewhat safe route for White to an advantage in that line--an advantage that he can grind, grind, grind endlessly. No one plays the Schliemann just to defend pawn-down endgames all day, and if it were the only line Black would see, none of the fun-seekers would play the Schliemann at all. Well, Latvian gambiteers don't seem to have a problem with that type of misery, but they're crazy anyway.
Ivan Sokolov apparently took a fresh look at 9.Nxa7+
in his recent Ruy Lopez book, advocating new tries like (after 9...Bd7 10.Bxd7 Nxd7 11.f4) 11...Qa5
while disavowing ...Qc5
. However, neither of those were met with much hope from the ChessPub community. For example, Black appears to be very short on compensation after 11...Qa5 12.Nb5 Bc5 13.Qxe4+
(13.c3!?) Kd8 14.Qd3
(14.Qxb7 Re8+ 15.Kd1 Rb8 16.Qxc7+ Qxc7 17.Nxc7 Kxc7 18.c3 is also critical) c6 15.Nc3 Kc7 16.Kd1 Rad8 17.Re1 Nf6 18.Qg3 Bd4 19.d3
Rewatching the other parts, one thing I missed was a critical line in the Classical Variation: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Bc5 4.0-0 Nf6 5.Nxe5
(as opposed to 4.Nxe5) which is a very testing move and can also be very sharp. Overall, though, Dennis has been thorough (almost rigorous) in his "quick" coverage, and I'll probably have to go ahead and buy these too!