It is hardly surprising that some 'forgotten' opening
Theory has become so intense that some variations have been analyzed "in these days of computer databases, opening The International Master Gary Lane in his book about the Vienna game wrote in 2000 that this opening "has a long history and a bright future". I then want to ask the opinion of more experienced players than myself: do you consider the Vienna Game to be equally good to other 1.e4 lines, such as the Ruy Lopez or the Scotch? Inferior to them, but still god? Or not even good at all? My question comes from the fact that this opening is hardly ever seen in master play, and it is usually only played on blitz/rapid games as a surprise weapon. Of course, Black has the chance to equalize if he knows what he's doing, but in what opening is this not the case?
It offers positional, strategical struggle in some lines, and sharp aggressive play on others, so players of all styles may find it enjoyable. My overall conclusion is that the Vienna Game is a sound, promising line for the 1.e4 player. Apart from this, I have studied quite a number of master games. The principal bifurcation comes on 2.Nf6 or 2.Nc6 by Black, which provides two quite different "systems", since 2.Nf6 allows a strong 3.f4. At this point I have become familiarized with a substantial amount of variations and main lines. I have been taking a look at 1.e4 2.e5 2.Nc3, which is known as the Vienna Game.
0 kommentar(er)
