![]() ![]() To make matters worse Black has other options after 4.a3 such as 4…b6!? 5.Nf3 Bb7 6.Nbd2 a5 although White scored well there were moments at which I felt that Black could have done better by reining in his originality. ![]() It is not supposed to be sound, but even if there was a ‘refutation’ would I remember it on the rare occasions on which this came up? I checked for recent games and discovered that the Israeli GM Evgeny Postny has been wreaking havoc with the Fajarowicz in online blitz games, meeting 4.a3 (supposedly one of the refutations) with the natural 4…Nc6 5.Nf3 d6. In my mind the real problem is the supposedly unsound 3…Ne4, which is known as the Fajarowicz Variation. ![]() I think this may be enough for a small advantage. 9.90 Fighting for the initiative with the Fajarowicz Gambit by Robert Ris Product Description Video Have you always been looking for an attacking weapon against 1.d4 Then the Fajarowicz-variation (3Ne4) in the Budapest Gambit (1.d4 Nf6 2. In this book, you will face hundreds of tactical. The second time it appeared I had ready an unusual line with 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.e3 Nxe5 5.Nh3, aiming to bring the knight to f4 and control d5. Well, here is the answer: opening specific tactical exercises split up by variation from actual games. On the first occasion I wimped out with 3.e3, which can lead to a form of Exchange French after 3…exd4 4.exd4 d5. It’s an opening I’ve never played as Black and only recall a couple of occasions on which I met it with White. Having learned that my old friend Andrew Martin is writing a book on the Budapest Gambit (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5) I suggested ‘Bash ’em With the Budapest’ as a title. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |