Black can develop with d6 its Bb8 with the pawn exchange d7–d6, and then setup an attack on the light squares c2 and d3 with moves like Bf5 and Nb4. Minor variations 4.Qd3 and 4.Qd4 īoth 4.Qd3 and 4.Qd4 seem to gain a tempo by attacking the Ne4, but after 4.Nc5 followed by 5.Nc6 Black gets their tempo back and the queen remains misplaced. The response 4.Qh4?!, introduced in O'Kelly – Bisguier (1969) is dubious after 5.g3 Qh5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Qc2! The variation 4.a3 also gives Black some headache, disallowing the check on b4 and preparing to attack the knight with Qc2. As the game develops, White has to avoid several tactical pitfalls, in particular a Bb4+ at an annoying moment a Qf6 doing a double attack on b2 and f2 (after 1.d6 2.exd6 Bxd6) the pseudo-sacrifice 3.Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Bg3+ and 5.Qxd1, winning White's queen for two minor pieces and, once White has played e3, a concerted attack on the d3 square with the setup Nc5/Bf5/Nb4.Īccording to Borik, the best moves for both players are 4.Nf3 Bb4+ 5.Nd2 Nc6 6.a3 Nxd2 7.Nxd2 Bf8 when it is difficult for Black to justify their pawn sacrifice. Black makes no immediate effort to regain the gambit pawn, preferring to concentrate on active piece play. The Fajarowicz variation or Fajarowicz gambit is said to have its origins in the chess circles from Leipzig, with the first important game being H.Steiner – Fajarowicz at the 1928 Wiesbaden tournament.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |