When white wimps out in the Petrov

Originally posted by rotk
I have a book that say black eqaulizes after 3....d5

Originally posted by RahimK
Give me the line after:

3...Bb4 4.Nxe5 ____

Would you play 3...Bb4 or 3...Nc6?

In the database I used there were 414 games listed as Black wins in the Petrov Defence for players rated 2400 and up. White plays 3. Nc3. There are now 94 wins for Black. Black plays 3. .... Bb4. There are now 20 wins for Black. Black plays 3. .... Nc6. There are now 363 wins for Black. The GMs do not prefer 3. ... Bb4. I would have the same problem that the thread starter has. How do I continue play from this position? The GMs played the Four Knights Defence.

Originally posted by gambit3
In the database I used there were 414 games listed as Black wins in the Petrov Defence for players rated 2400 and up. White plays 3. Nc3. There are now 94 wins for Black. Black plays 3. .... Bb4. There are now 20 wins for Black. Black plays 3. .... Nc6. There are now 363 wins for Black. The GMs do not prefer 3. ... Bb4. I would have the same problem that the ...[text shortened]... starter has. How do I continue play from this position? The GMs played the Four Knights Defence.

Originally posted by Korch
If that line is not so popular it does not means that its bad.

Originally posted by Korch
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nxe5 (the best) 0-0 5.Be2 (if 5.d3 then 5... Re8 with d5 to follow) Re8 6.Nd3 (6.Nc4!?) Bxc3 7.dxc3 Nxe4

[fen]rnbqr1k1/pppp1ppp/8/8/4n3/2PN4/PPP1BPPP/R1BQK2R w KQ - 0 1[/fen]

Key position of 3...Bb4 line which I would evaluate as equal. White have 2 main possibilities 8.0-0 and 8.Nf4.

I dont play Petroff as black but as white I would prefer to play Four knights (3...Nc6).

Originally posted by RahimK
65% White wins from that position after either 0-0 or Nf4.

71 Games, 31 White wins, 10 loses. All GM games.


All the Db's prefer Nc6 over Bb4.

3...Nc6 is a solid move and very popular.

3...Bb4 is simply inferior.


And we don't recommend inferior moves.

Next thing you know, you'll be recommending 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 isntead of 3.Nf3 😛

Originally posted by Korch
[b]Statistic without analysis of these GM games are only numbers. Over the board statistic wont help you to get opening advantage.

Can you show sure way how white can get opening advantage after 3...Bb4, if its so "inferior" ?

About 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 I bet that you cant refute this line too.

Here is some GM games for your notice:

[Event "New Yo ...[text shortened]...

Shall I post the 30+ white wins after the position you posted and we can compare it to the measily 10 wins for black?

I'm sure they are all available on chesslive.

Originally posted by RahimK
There's a reason why GM's prefer 3...Nc6 over 3...Bb4 . It's more solid.

Same reason applys to KG with Nf3 over Bc4.

You can post all the games you want with wins for either side but I can post just as many if not more with loses or wins for either side.

Originally posted by Korch
You did not answer to my question so I will repeat it again: [b]Can you show sure way how white can get opening advantage after 3...Bb4, if its so "inferior" ?

Can you base your opinion about 3.Bc4 on particular lines? Such abstract expatiation as "more solid" is nothing.[/b]

Well well well....

Why don't you put in the position after 7...Nxe4 into chesslive, set 2500 limit for both players and hit search.

6 total games, 4 white wins, 2 draws....

[Event "EU-ch 2nd"]
[Site "Ohrid"]
[Date "2001.06.01"]
[Round "12"]
[White "Conquest,Stuart"]
[Black "Piket,Jeroen"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Eco "C42"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nxe5 0-0 5.Be2 Re8 6.Nd3 Bxc3 7.dxc3 Nxe4 8.Nf4 d6
9.0-0 Nd7 10.c4 Nf8 11.f3 Nc5 12.b3 Nfe6 13.Nh5 g6 14.Ng3 Qf6 15.Rb1 Qd4+ 16.Kh1 Qxd1
17.Bxd1 a5 18.Kg1 b6 19.Re1 Bb7 20.a4 f6 21.Kf2 Kf7 22.Ne2 Ng7 23.Nd4 Rxe1 24.Kxe1 Re8+
25.Kf2 Nge6 26.Nb5 Bc6 27.Be3 f5 28.Bd2 Re7 29.h4 Bxb5 30.axb5 Re8 31.Ra1 Re7 32.Kf1 Re8
33.c3 Nd3 34.b4 Ne5 35.Be2 axb4 36.cxb4 Nd4 37.Ra7 Re7 38.Bg5 Rd7 39.c5 dxc5 40.bxc5 Ne6
41.f4 1-0

[Event "Hans & Lenze"]
[Site "Lippstadt"]
[Date "1998.07.30"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Kindermann,Stefan"]
[Black "Pavasovic,Dusko"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Eco "C42"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nxe5 0-0 5.Be2 Re8 6.Nd3 Bxc3 7.dxc3 Nxe4 8.Nf4 c6
9.c4 d6 10.0-0 Bf5 11.Be3 Nd7 12.Re1 Ndc5 13.Bf1 a5 14.f3 Ng5 15.Qd2 Qf6 16.Nh5 Qg6
17.Bxg5 Qxh5 18.g4 Bxg4 19.fxg4 Qxg4+ 20.Kh1 Ne4 21.Qf4 Qe6 22.Bd3 f5 23.Bxe4 fxe4 24.Rad1 h6
25.Bh4 Rf8 26.Qxd6 Qxc4 27.Qg6 Rf7 28.Rxe4 Rf1+ 29.Rxf1 Qxf1+ 30.Qg1 Qf5 31.Qg2 g5 32.Bg3 Rd8
33.Re1 h5 34.Be5 Rd5 35.Bc3 h4 36.Qe2 Rd8 37.Rf1 Qd5+ 38.Kg1 b5 39.Qh5 1-0

[Event "FIDE World Cup"]
[Site "Khanty Mansiysk"]
[Date "2005.11.27"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Najer,Evgeniy"]
[Black "Mamedyarov,Shakhriyar"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Eco "C42"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nxe5 0-0 5.Be2 Re8 6.Nd3 Bxc3 7.dxc3 Nxe4 8.c4 d6
9.0-0 Nd7 10.Nf4 Ndf6 11.f3 Nc5 12.b3 Qe7 13.Rf2 Qe5 14.Rb1 Bf5 15.Qd2 Nce4 16.fxe4 Nxe4
17.Qe1 Nxf2 18.Qxf2 Bxc2 19.Bb2 Qg5 20.Rf1 Be4 21.h4 Qh6 22.Nh5 f6 23.Nf4 f5 24.Rc1 Re7
25.Bf1 Bc6 26.Rc3 Re4 27.Bc1 Rae8 28.Rg3 R8e7 29.Bd2 Qf6 30.Bc3 Qh6 31.Rg5 g6 32.Bd3 Re3
33.Bd2 R3e5 34.Qg3 Be8 35.Nd5 Rf7 36.Bf4 Re6 37.Bxf5 Re2 38.Bd3 Re6 39.Bf5 Re2 40.Rxg6+ hxg6
41.Bxh6 Rxf5 42.Qc3 Ree5 43.Nxc7 Bc6 44.Nd5 Kh7 45.Bg5 b5 46.Qd4 Bxd5 47.cxd5 Rf7 48.Be3 a6
49.a3 Rfe7 50.Bf2 Rf7 51.Bg3 Re2 52.Qg4 Rd2 53.h5 gxh5 1-0

[Event "Borowski mem op 15'"]
[Site "Essen"]
[Date "2000.09.02"]
[Round "10"]
[White "Glek,Igor V"]
[Black "Jussupow,Artur"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Eco "C42"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nxe5 0-0 5.Be2 Re8 6.Nd3 Bxc3 7.dxc3 Nxe4 8.0-0 d5
9.Nf4 c6 10.Be3 Nd6 11.Re1 Nd7 12.Nh5 Nf8 13.Bf4 Ng6 14.Qd4 Nf5 15.Qd2 Bd7 16.h3 Nxf4
17.Nxf4 Qg5 18.g3 Nxg3 19.fxg3 Qxg3+ 20.Ng2 Bxh3 21.Bf1 Bf5 22.Bd3 Be4 23.Bxe4 dxe4 24.Re3 Qg5
25.Rf1 Re6 26.Rf4 f5 27.Qf2 Rf8 28.Rg3 Qf6 29.Ne3 Qe5 30.Nxf5 Kh8 31.Rgg4 1-0

[Event "Elista ol (Men)"]
[Site "Elista"]
[Date "1998.09.29"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Hernandez,Gilberto"]
[Black "Barua,Dibyendu"]
[Result "1/2"]
[Eco "C42"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nxe5 0-0 5.Be2 Re8 6.Nd3 Bxc3 7.dxc3 Nxe4 8.Nf4 d6
9.0-0 Nd7 10.c4 c6 11.Be3 Ne5 12.f3 Nf6 13.c5 Ng6 14.Bc1 dxc5 15.Qxd8 Rxd8 16.Nxg6 hxg6
17.Be3 b6 18.c4 Ne8 19.Rfd1 Be6 20.g4 f6 21.h4 Nd6 22.b3 Nf7 23.Kf2 Kf8 24.a4 a5
25.Bf4 Ne5 26.Bxe5 fxe5 27.Bd3 Kf7 28.Be4 Rac8 29.Rxd8 Rxd8 30.Ke3 Rd6 31.Ra2 Kf6 32.Rd2 Rxd2
33.Kxd2 g5 34.h5 Bd7 35.Kc3 1/2

[Event "Bayern-chI Bank Hofmann 5th"]
[Site "Bad Wiessee"]
[Date "2001.10.27"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Galdunts,Sergey"]
[Black "Rozentalis,Eduardas"]
[Result "1/2"]
[Eco "C42"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nxe5 0-0 5.Be2 Re8 6.Nd3 Bxc3 7.dxc3 Nxe4 8.Nf4 d6
9.0-0 Nd7 10.f3 Nef6 1/2


Ya 3...Bb4 is playable but it isn't the best move is it?

I want you to frame this and remember the day that I made a fool out of you.

You have just been Posterized -> Short of taking off your warm-ups to reveal that you've forgotten your game shorts, there might be no more humiliating experience in basketball than being posterized.

I'm glad to see you're not letting your education get in the way of your ignorance.

Originally posted by RahimK
The numbers speak for themselves. Yes, some talent is required to use these stats.

You keep playing or suggesting these lower quality moves.

Eventually all these tiny mistakes will cost you. Maybe not immediately but they will add up.

65% wins for white, +20 score for white in GM games.

It's all there.

Originally posted by Korch
Without analysis of particular lines, numbers are nothing.
You can claim your baseless opinion as many times you want, but without analysis it have no value.

You can search some analysis made by qualified players or analyse by yourself using your brains + engine.

if you wish to post games, perhaps GM.corr games would be best. 🙂