The game began 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bg5.
This was the first time I have reached the position, with either colour.
My theoretical knowledge was virtually zero - indeed I knew no more than the basic idea behind the move, which is summed up in Wikipedia thus: "The move 6.Bg5 was Kurt Richter's invention, threatening to double Black's pawns after Bxf6 and forestalling the Dragon by rendering 6...g6 unplayable."
Ignore the first part of that sentence - Richter was at most four years old when the move was first played.
However the basic idea behind the move - an attempt to make the Dragon "unplayable" - is correct, although not everyone agrees 6...g6!? 7.Bxf6 is all that bad for Black.
Indeed it has been played by plenty of grandmasters, and is a speciality of some, including 2700+ Russian star Daniil Dubov, albeit it is a line he likes to play at fast time-controls.
I knew nothing of this, but I knew Black's commonest reply to 6.Bg5 is 6...e6, so I was slightly surprised when my opponent chose 6...Qb6!?
 |
| There are 1,778 games in ChessBase's 2024 Mega database with the position after 6...Qb6!? |
*****
*****
*****
*****
White's normal continuation, 7.Nb3, occurs 1,458 times in Mega24, and is the top choice of Dragon1.
Stockfish17 for a long time suggests 7.Be3!?, which occurs 112 times, but scores 60% - nine percentage points more than 7.Nb3.
However, given enough time, Stockfish17 comes to marginally prefer Dragon1's choice.
I played 7.Bxf6!?, which, like the other two moves, has also been played by grandmasters, and occurs 136 times, although scoring only 47%.
The engines reckon my choice is dubious - after all, it gives up the bishop-pair and strengths Black's centre, albeit weakening the black kingside.
After 7...gxf6 I felt more-or-less obliged to play 8.Nb3, although the engines prefer the rare 8.Bb5!?
Now I do not believe 7.Bxf6!? is a mistake - my choosing it places me in the company of at least two 2600+ players.
However, my reason for choosing it was a mistake, in as much as I played a move that I knew (or thought I knew) was good after 6...g6!?, but in a position in which my opponent had played something completely different.
Instead of analysing the position, I played on the general principle of wanting to punish an opponent who had not chosen the main line.
LESSON: general principles make a useful starting point for considering a position, but analysis must prevail.
