Fried Liver Redux - Beginner Breakdown - 2015.06.02

Mike Kummer has heard the arguments online that he is just plain wrong when it comes to the Fried Liver Attack. Here, he shows several games that support his case of the Attack being an ultimate devastation.
Mike Kummer vs. Preston Smith: C57 two knights defence, Fegatello attack
C58 Two knights defence
Kummer vs. Reid Doctor: C57 Two knights defence
Kummer vs. Erik Tkachenko: C57 two knights defence, Fegatello attack
Kummer vs. Ben Simon, 2011: C41 Philidor's defence

[@ywdshammy]

I don't care about his blunders or whatever, I never really liked or played chess, yet I've been binge watching his videos, his presentation and cocky attitude is just so entertaining paired with chess! he's definitely made me want to start playing some chess

[@jackcirrone8423]

Hello Mike, As you read these replies it prompted me to make a write this. First time I've never actually made an account on KZbin or felt the need to comment on anything. I've watched all these lectures on this channel, more than once. It's always the first thing I check when I go online to see if something has been uploaded. While to be honest, your ones don't personally offer me the best education value, mainly because of my rating I just want to say how much I really enjoy your lectures Mike. I put my nephews who I'm trying to teach in front of the screen for them to see it, and they love you. I sense probably because of the criticisms you're not your usual perky self in this particular video. I guess sometimes you must feel like you're competing with giants with all the GMs and all over there. Don't let any of that get you down. I think you're wonderful and loads of fun and I hope the powers over there realise that you've got loads of fans and they let you keep doing what you're doing. It goes without saying to not pay any attention to negative comments on here. People hide behind their laptops. They probably just wish they were doing what you are. Rest assured they wouldn't do an as good a job as you.

[@Urza26]

I love how in that last game, none of the queenside pieces for white moved a muscle. Knight: "Maybe I should help out..." Rook: "Nah, they got this." Bishop: *getting high on weed*

[@JaredPlane]

Mike, thanks for making this video, and featuring my comment. I understand these videos are for beginners, and beginners should probably stay away from 3. ... Nf6 in the Italian, as it can become crazy. In my previous comment I said that 3. ... Nf6 is perfectly playable for Black. However, I never said that the Fried Liver Attack is playable for Black. Btw, The Fried Liver officially starts with 5. ... Nxd5 (not 4. Ng5, just a technicality), which is questionable. The stronger line (which you say is also bad for Black) continues 5. ... Na5 6. Bb5+ c6 7. dxc6 bxc6. This line has been featured in many GM games. Black has compensation for the pawn minus.

[@adamrubinson6875]

But 3...Bc5 can lead to crazy stuff too e.g. The Evans gambit or the Sveshnikov Line

[@BixenteFabregas]

Jared Plane No, the Fried Liver begins with 6.Nxf7. Unfortunately, the Fried Liver is not so sharp according to recent analysis published in New in Chess. Better play the Lolli attack with 6.d4!

[@Occsei]

Jared Plane He responds in this same video! See 14:46

[@TacticalRab]

Been meaning to send in some games for a while. I will soon, great lecture!

[@danielmanahan692]

Thanks for putting 'Beginner' in the title of the video makes it easier for beginners to know to watch, and for advanced to know to not watch. Wish all the videos would follow this consistency in the video titling. good job.

[@canefan17]

I've come to learn that if someone puts one of their games on KZbin it will be blasted regardless of outcome. Appreciate the lecture - I enjoy watching people analyze their own games.

[@savithd1431]

How does this variation go? 1. e4,e5 2. Nf3, Nc6 3. Bc4, Nf6 4. Ng5, d5 5. ed5, Na5 6. Bb5+ Bd7

[@-_Nuke_-]

That's the best variation according to Stockfish. I wonder why nobody mentioned it in the video or in the comments... Basicaly Black can force a rook endgame being a pawn down and defend against it to a draw... Though just because computers can defend perfectly doesn't mean too much about us humans :P

[@GuillermoPaz]

It is playable for black going into the Fried Liver Attack. But it is not advisable for a beginner as there are too many complications as to find the good moves on the board.

[@Couma_fr]

why be3 at 1534 in the video time play qb3 if u r reading this pls it is 10 times better

[@Exrayed]

This video redeemed my view of Mike. I was a little disappointed from his last video against the 6 year old. This one was a lot more entertaining and educational.

[@SandroSegadora]

The problem that I have with Mike is that he always plays weaker opponents than himself and uses his wins against them to prove how certain openings are unsound, if the opening is as unsound as he makes them out to be he should have no problem beating a higher rated player in it.

[@ilmanti]

+Marko Kostic But if certain moves/openings are unsound then the higher rated players wouldn't be making them...

[@SandroSegadora]

ilmanti Well, my point is that 3.Nf6 is sound for black and that Mike is an idiot for saying otherwise.

[@ilmanti]

+Marko Kostic Holy shit I did not expect a comment this fast for a reply 3 months later :)

[@ilmanti]

+Marko Kostic I think the idea is that beginners (like myself) need 100% sound openings and moves, otherwise everything else crumbles real quick. More experience players can figure their way out of sticky situations much better than beginners can. At 16:12 he makes it pretty clear that his "rules" are targeted at beginners when he says "Is this how you want your student to play?" I'm sure a 2300 player can figure out and win from black's position at 16:15, but a student/beginner would be having a very hard time. Either way, I guess that's just my opinion and I'm pretty bad at this, so maybe I'm absolutely wrong, too.

[@SandroSegadora]

ilmanti I'm certain that if everybody read between the lines like you did people might stop saying that 3.Nf6 is unsound and citing Mike's lectures. Also, it doesn't take a PhD in chess to play the position after 16:15. It takes time to practice it but it's by no means an unplayable position.

[@cosmingeorgealexandru5168]

Looking at the comment I think that some people don't know what a beginner is. The beginner range starts whit people who are just learning how the pieces move and ends, I would say, with those that know the main lines of a few openings. Now that we know what a beginner is arguments like Jared Plane "This line has been featured in many GM games", +rosebuster "Two Knights Defense is actually one of the oldest openings and I still see it in GM games when I watch live events these days." These lectures are intended for people that are not nearly close to a GM. What I think Mike is trying to point out is that beginners should steer clear of moves that can lead to a complicated game, where you should know a lot of theory. Don't forget what a beginner is (see above). Good job Mike.

[@gratefulone8359]

At the 20:09 mark, my computer plays black PXP instead of NXC2 and I can't find a good attacking move to counter. Any recommendations?

[@Gadzinisko]

3. h6 is inviting White to blow Black off the board. In Two Knights, how about showing some games where Black is doing very well after 5...Na5. Does the word "compensation" ring a bell? Why didn't you show any of your games where Black actually plays a good 5th move?

[@keaaw]

+Gadzinisko I love 5…Na5 and play Nf6 inviting Ng5. I've won several slow club games with it as black against similar strength opponents (1500-ish at the time), and got a theoretically winning position against a master-level player in a simul with it (but couldn't convert the win in the endgame). Na5 two-knights defense gives black quick development, great piece activity on a wide-open board and allows him to frequently hold on to the initiative which is always more fun.

[@Gadzinisko]

Ken Whaley You don't have to tell me :) Just yesterday I surprised better rated opponent with 6...Bd7 in Two Knights and got a great position that resulted in a nice win. That's why this guy makes me wring my hands... 3... Nf6 is a great move!

[@dickmann1979]

+Gadzinisko its not great but playable. its no wrong move i think too.

[@Gadzinisko]

dickmann1979 It is great. What he proposes instead is unplayable.

[@dickmann1979]

+Gadzinisko he is no good player at all you are right. but nf6 is no great move, its just a normal move, not great and not bad. you may play it, but other moves are equally good.

[@InSpadez]

Good video, it demonstrates how white should play if black incorrectly recaptures d5 with the knight. But all this can be completely avoided for black with Na5 when white captures d5 with the pawn. Black should never recapture the pawn on d5 with the knight if he wants to avoid the fried liver. Also, if you want to play a better version of the Fried Liver, take a look at the Lolli attack. It is certainly winning for white.

[@InSpadez]

***** Sorry bud, but if your opponent allows white (you) to set up lolli, its a sure win if you know how top play it. Who said anything about bishop d3?

[@NovicebutPassionate]

Very informative -thanks! Just a question: what would you suggest for White if after 4. Ng5, Black responds with 4... Bc5? Thanking you in advance.

[@VernAfterReading]

Mike, thanks for these videos and don't sweat the negatives - your sessions are some of the most fun to watch! Also, all that deeper theory is no practical use to casual players like me who just want to enjoy getting better.

[@leonromary]

Hey mike, thanks for the lesson. I was hoping you could tell me why you check with bishop and he blocks with his bishop, why you captured knight and didn't take his bishop? since he cant retake your bishop with his queen as your queen is pinning.... thanks

[@briankelly7632]

Not sure if he mentions that Nxd5 is a blunder for black in the Fried Liver. Best is Na5, attacking the Bishop and living the diagonal toward f7 blocked.

[@-_Nuke_-]

correct

[@pSchnecke911]

i think some guys here miss the fact that this is a lecture for BEGINNERS. No strong clubplayers, no IMs, no GMs or whatever. For Beginners its obviously difficult to defend properly playing black. And yeah you can get active quickly in the Na5 line, but you have to know your stuff and be at least experienced in the theory. Imo 3. Nf6 is not the right response for a beginner!

[@-_Nuke_-]

Agreed! If Nf6 is not the right response for a beginner, then the beginner should never be up against the fried liver, because there is no other move...! I think the utmost BEST line against the Fried Liver is this after exd5: Na5, Bb5+ and Bd7 attacking the bishop again! White will forever be a pawn up and there is nothing that black can do about it... But at least with Bd7 you will never get isolated pawns and all White's tricks are over (well mostly because white can start attacking that lonely knight on a5 and black needs to defend perfectly again, but as long as you know the lines you will know how to defend...) For the engine the game is a draw, so Nf6 is perfectly fine, but like you said - not for beginners, I agree. I think playing d6 on mover 3 after Bc4 transposes into a philidor which prevents any fried liver nonsense which a beginner can have an easier game... But again, the 2 knights defence is not for beginners... It looks normal but it can actually become a very very very sharp defence if white wants to. The Caro-Kann or the Sicilian or even the Petrov are best by test!

[@shivnishad4037]

wat if in fried liver attack oponent plays pawn to f6 instead of knight f6......?????????????will it be better for black....

[@junuinebatoon]

is there a fried chicken attack?

[@carlosperez4494]

yeah but black uses that mainly 😂

[@Tompsf1]

carlosperez4494 haha this is too funny! :D

[@Thisismynameffs]

yes, its where the black player tries to eat all the pieces on the K, F and C squares

[@-_Nuke_-]

​@@Thisismynameffs bum dum tiss xD

[@laurencegoldman4639]

When you DON’T play fried liver attack?

[@gregoryzala136]

I don't know why he's talkin about the fried liver attack if he anyway traded down all his pieces involved in the attack.. that's not the fried liver attack I expect to see

[@paulgoogol2652]

Na5 was one of my first reactions to this attack without knowing the defense and now many years later I have great respect for it and play the calm d3 instead of Ng5.

[@paulgoogol2652]

after d5 obviously. I dont even think I noticed I had lost a pawn. well playing these lines you dont feel it and crafty says its OK.

[@milliern]

It's fun to see Kummer in a video. I got to play him on my visit to STLCC, when I played in the 2016 rapid and blitz tournaments (in March?). Fun stuff. Greta presentation.

[@andreacastro7853]

Great lecture. Loved the way you make all possible moves' game for us too see the best move of the game piece.

[@Jam1457]

Loved it!.. pretty awesome lecture.. to always look for checkmate versus being greedy and taking pieces!

[@AA-100]

*Description: Here are several games where the Fried Liver attack led to an ultimate devastation.* Well, that's because you were playing with rubbish opponents

[@Fetrovsky]

Why is it called fried liver? What does that mean?

[@d2vid5]

i dont know but its a great name :D

[@DSlulz]

"The Fried Liver Attack, also called the Fegatello Attack (named after an Italian idiom meaning "dead as a piece of liver"), is a chess opening." Wikipedia is your friend.

[@henryliewnothenryfail5979]

what if ur opponent play QF6 after NF7, sacrificing a rook for rapid development NF7 QF6, NxH8 BC5, O=O BE5.

[@molecule1221]

Two knights defense perfectly sound and no it doesn't necessarily lead to the fried liver attack. At worst black will end up down a pawn but with the bishop pair in some variations. This is a great example of how patzers approach attacking.

[@blueromeo1974]

No B.S, funny, straight to the point and willing to hear questions. ..good lecture

[@shawnlavigne9069]

nice lecture Mike!

[@andydaniel3070]

Mike seems to have conveniently ignored the fact that if at 22:42 his opponent had made the correct move..cxd5 then Mike would have been doomed. I'm an amateur player (around 1620 on chess.com) and quite happy to play this defence as black, because white often screws up just as badly as Mike did here. And as for his conclusion at 25:15 that "I'm winning now so I might as well just trade off everything", well according to Stockfish he was +0.4 after the trades, hardly decisive.

[@aryansista3904]

1.e4,e5 2.Nf3,Nc6 3.Bc4,Nf6 4.Ng5,d5 5.exd5,b5 can be played instead of 5...Na5,Magnus also played it in one of his banter blitz as black

[@ArchieT7]

An interesting line after 4. Ng5 in the Fried Liver that can lead to white's demise if he's not careful is 4. ... d5 5. exd5 Nd4 6. d6 Dxd6 7. Nxf7 Dd6 and if white tries to take the rook here then 8. ... Dxg2 9. Rf1 De4+ resulting in white either losing his queen or getting mated. I've won numerous games against less experienced players playing this.

[@peterritchie2990]

Sitting way up in the Kootenay in BC having a good time watching Kummerology. Thanks to your chess club.

[@ilijadjukic5484]

I wanted to surprise my friend with this tactics although i just started playing chess.. he stoped playing like 4,5 yrs ago but i didnt know that he is still 2.3-2.5k player and he rekt me at end game.. sooo is there anything that could help me win? XD

[@StringDogg]

Although Mike is great - entertaining and interesting to watch. He should really point out that his advise is for beginners, as lots of information here is misleading and not objectivly true. Nf6 isn't a blunder, mistake or even inaccuracy - it's the best move ( or 2nd best depending on what engine you ask). I think beginners should be taught more simple concepts than advanced but I dont think they should be out-right lied to - or does Kummer really believe that NF6 is a blunder? Either way, by teaching this wrongly it's creating a debate for no reason, that could be quite confusing to new players. End of story is Nf6 is a fine move but something like bc6 may be easier to play, to be clear thats "easier" not "better".

[@jaapbleekveld5068]

I cant understand the fact why you can be so exited about beating a player in a Fried liver attack after your opponent just played horrible moves. Knight to a5 is actually the way to deal with the bishop on the diagonal pointing at f7. And if you would give check with your bishop you might win a pawn allthough your opponent will gain tempos and rapid development, while you went against any basic opening principle, Called never move 1 piece multiple times in the opening.

[@perkalov]

You lost the second game, right Mike? The one version everyone suggests that you should play, making Nf6 a valid move.

[@perkalov]

Ohh, nearly forgot... 18:00 "you rather be on offence then defence", Yes and that is why white should play Nf6 against you. The line with Bb5+ gives black the initiative or puts black in offence rather then the defence.

[@futurefox128]

The two-knights-defense isn't that bad at all (or at least far from solved). After 5.Na5 things aren't clear. Many players (including me) play Ng5 HOPING for 5.Nxd5 (which is still really complicated but I think white has an edge in all variations after Nxf7). After Na5 however, its hard for white to come up with a good plan. According to stockfish, black even has the adventage there... which I don't think is true, BUT what I know for sure, is that they have some serious initiative and white is actually on the defensive side for the next couple of moves... and after the smog cleares... it looks kinda drawish tbh. (sure the pawns looked very bad but black had better development, center and the initiative for compensation.) tl;tr: I think its fine to keep the kids away from complications in the two-knights, but I think Instead of teaching kids to completely avoid two-knights (black) / going for fried liver (white), teach them to actually play 5. Na5 as black and look into some more variations after that.

[@paulgoogol2652]

Mr Fingold would just say the fried liver is terrible. Morphy did not know much theory but he knew the Lilli attack, going d4 before sacrifizing the Knight.

[@rhpmike]

Leelee Phoenix Why would we listen to a GM when we could have someone rated 1700 tell us how we should always go into the fried liver!

[@vasilievitsch5613]

At the first game, move 10, QxQ, (instead of QxC6) is actually a mistake, which almost evaporates white 's advantage. Without queens otb doesn 't really matter that black 's King is somehow exposed, his 2 bishops will be more useful when 3 or 4 pawns "fall" from the board and also black looks better developed at this point, since all white 's pieces (and pawns) are on their starting positions! So, at the end of the day, White MuST take on c3.

[@dylanmansper4218]

i just can't believe your name is mike kummer

[@dna8964]

thanks for the break down very helpful

[@Mal1234567]

Do you even lift, bro?

[@WilliamBarksdale]

what happens if, right after they commit to fried liver, instead of taking the knight, you move your queen and sacrifice the rook. you sacrifice the rook instead of taking the knight,

[@shivnishad4037]

although black may be able to trap your knight but still white has a lots of advantages.....more or less whites going to mate....

[@hardm0nk3y]

The point, Mike, is not that the fried liver after 6. Nxf7 is that bad - the engine actually shows it as pretty much unplayable for Black with an evaluation of about 1.5 at depth 25. The point is more that the compensation for Black in the line with Bb5+ is obvious. Black has a very good development and quite some center control. The engine shows a little less than the usual slight advantage for white. 3. h6, however, definetly is unplayable for Black. After either d4 or O-O - transposing into each other, White has a huge advantage here, the engine just shows almost a whole pawn without any compensation, whilst the position is very sharp to play for black. Where is Black' s play, where is his development in this line?

[@siddharthyadav905]

I understand that this is a beginner video BUT... Mike's analysis at 16:00 is so biased and untrue. There is a reason why Na5 is the mainline in the two knights defence; that reason being that black has dynamics (open lines etc) and initiative for the pawn sac. BUT again... this is a beginner video so we can let it pass! GREAT ENTHUSIASM MIKE!

[@Couma_fr]

that is not a good 1700

[@sqweebel1]

I worry that if people continue to post critical comments than the lecturers will be discouraged from posting videos.

[@ohsombraa2131]

nice lecture

[@socrates3793]

Great video. Wish I had the refutations when I was a beginner

[@nicucristian6030]

Mike should show games where his oponent doesn't play big blunders in the first moves. Like knight takes in the first game or blocking check with the pawn in second.

[@ajaysubramanian9157]

What about the Evans's gambit

[@Niklas2104]

3... Nf6 is a viable option... Just go with your King to e6 and you are a piece up. White has the initiative but not enough compensation for a whole piece.

[@zenontherocks]

I love to invite the Fried Liver and play the Traxler against it. Finding a lot of people know the Fried Liver but very few people know the Traxler. I win the queen in 8 moves more often than not with it, and all their queenside pieces still undeveloped.

[@Lovuschka]

At 6:05 instead of Bb6 it seems to me that c5 is a great option for Black.

[@Flxz0r]

The Wanderer jokes, I like it. A round and round and round.

[@ravitejakakarala7858]

Mike Kummer, You completely ignored Traxler Counterattack.

[@ViniciusGuitarGuy]

I'd love to see Kummer play a Traxler variation (after 4.Ng5, black plays Bc5) with a good player to see how well he does. And the main line of the Two Knights Defense that he 'refuted' at 16:04 is completely playable, white really needs to know what he is doing.

[@shreyasprabhu6233]

at 25:10 i would play ned5+ whats wrong with that??

[@josephbentley6591]

1.e4,e5 2.Nf3, Nc6 3. Bc4, Nf6 is perfectly playable because after 4. Ng5, Bc5 if 5. Nxf7 he will loose because of the Traxler attack and if 5.O-O then black will castle and be perfectly fine

[@hubomba]

+Joseph Bentley What are you talking about? 4... Bc5 just about loses on the spot. 4... d5 is the only move and it equalizes or puts Black as slightly better.

[@josephbentley6591]

+hubomba look up the traxler attack

[@hubomba]

Joseph Bentley Yes, it is unsound. You can read the theory on it and engine check it.

[@toddtrimble2555]

I'll join the chorus. If you think 4. Ng5 after 3. ... Nf6 is a forced win for White, then why don't you show us continuations played against master-level players? Not a poor game played by a 1700-ish player as Black ("the champ" -- really? huh). Continuations after 4. ... d5 5. e x d5 Na4 warrant a less dismissive analysis; Black can get nice open lines and plenty of counterplay (cf. Gadzinisko's and Ken Whaley's comments).

[@smashu2]

at start 2..Nc6 ? black must take on e4 (boden gambit)

[@StygianStyle]

should have taken the pawn instead of trading queens.

[@perkalov]

Right... First game, that is an advantageous variant in Petroff, Nc6 isn't the best defence. Fried liver attack doesn't start at third move, it starts with Nxf7. Up untill then, black could have played any of thise... Two Knights Game, Mainline Ulvestad Fritz. and white could have chosen The Lolli Attack instead of Fried Liver. As for the rest of the game... So your opponent didn't know theory? That does't make the theory unsound. Second game... Thats simply not Fried Liver Attack, its the mainline, and I would rather be black. Observe that there are other ways to decline the sacrfice on f6, personally I prefer Fritz, but it does have somewhat worse result. Back to main line, after... --- Nd5 Ne4 f5 black have at least compensation for the pawn. With nothing going for you, I assume that having control over the centre and opened up for both bishops and the Queen is of no use? I assume he lost the game since he didn't analyse it to the end. Game 3 ... gota be kidding me. Lesson to be learned here, don't make stupid moves. Game 4 How is getting a lost position an argument for fried liver? After Nxd4, the game is lost. On a sidenote, in the second game, the control of the centre and development advantage wasn't worth a pawn and a couple of bad pawns, but this is worth a knight and a pawn. After Qe4, b5 seems like a decent move. Two Knights defence is a valid opening, but you need to know how to meet Ng5.

[@RobsMiscellania]

Holy cow, I saw my comment on the screen!

[@leventeadamszabo5852]

Someone could explain him what a perpetual check is.

[@-_Nuke_-]

Stockfish says after exd5: Na5, Bb5+ and *Bd7 attacking the bishop again!* is the best move. Though black will FOREVER be a pawn down and there is nothing that anyone can do about it... The game should still end in a draw under correct play, but ... humans are no computers, though at least in this line the computer doesn't get any isolated pawns.

[@sehgaldam121]

Mike is so terrible that he once suggested that french defense is bad.However I had myself played 200 games in French defense with 132 wins.

[@BREAKocean]

if you guys see GJ dirty chess tricks video, he has a Traxler Counter-attack video. I'm sure the GJ is higher rated than Mike and would refute his fried liver.

[@speedygoddzilla1289]

i like in fried liver attack e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Jf6 Jg5 d5 exd5 Jxd5 Jxf7 Kxf7 Qf3+ Ke6 Nc3 Ncb4 a3 but that is very sharp.

[@AA-100]

Nxd5 is risky for black, black should play na5 instead.

[@Couma_fr]

i knew it since i was 800

[@bhavikinfy]

what games this guy is showing !! Players are doing all silly mistakes...These wins has nothing to do with opponent allowing Fried lever...

[@benselectionforcasting4172]

Nxf7 immediately after Nxd5 is a bit inaccurate, instead d4 is better. (of Course Nxd5 isn't the most acurate move but Na5 is). Now Instead of d5 I prefer 4... Bc5 which looks insane (and probably is) but hey its more fun than being attacked the entire game. from there you enter the crazy theoretical waters of the Traxler.

[@fminc]

very nice Mike, ty. new fan

[@extremepietbh]

Man what a terribly presented argument, just had the tone of some bitter youtube comments dispute projected into a lecture. This isn't the way to prove a move is unsound, using your first evidence being talking for like 12 minutes through ONE game from start to finish, you should quickly explore many of the continuations and talk about them, was hoping for that, got egotistical annoying exhibition of one of his games, the win alone existing as an unquestionable proof of his argument. I also assume he has never once lost against this opening. If he did a better analysis after that (the comments don't suggest he did) I couldn't be bothered. Lucky he has such stage presence otherwise this guy would get a thumbs down.

[@lemmingbcn]

Always wondered why this guy is teaching chess. Yes, he has the enthusiasm...but that's all is needed?

[@jonathanshapira5578]

16:40 what say the engines?

[@jonathanshapira5578]

I get 0.2

[@Couma_fr]

i am 1225 and i know all of that

[@pouyashahrouei7433]

Mike kummer is the man!

[@jamesl939]

Inviting the fried liver is ok against beginners and if they play Nxd5 white is winning easily. But Na5 removing the bishop is absolutely winning

[@strongside4565]

Bringing the bishop all the way back to e2 in that Nf6 on move 3 fried liver is much better than d3. You are hindering your development options with Bd3 and it saves a move, negating the attack on the queen and forced trade. The example shown was the exact line from one of Bobby FIscher's 1963 NYC championship games, only Fischer played Be2.

[@lochvids108]

alot of people play this when i play online on my phone. nice to see

[@jamesl939]

Nxd5 is a blunder, after d5,exd5,Na5,Bb4+, c3,dxc3,bxc3,Ne2 or somewhere else black is much better even though he is down a pawn he has more than enough pressure to dominate

[@bitsofskin2088]

I like this guy, alot.. He talks in real time.. Not like you feel like your in primary school.. Ya know?? Boring shit!!!!

[@AlexSosaBolivia]

Mike kinda reminds me of Ed Grimley. I keep waiting for him to pull out his triangle lol

[@MinetGros]

Hans Berliner has a pretty convincing game as black in his book "The system"

[@amandasteven1400]

Beginner Breakdown? really? then y does he move soooo fast? 19:22 the lectures r GREAT but i never(!) kno which side jst moved? i mean, it's too bad the square cant be highlighted or something?

[@cielregister8828]

the squares are always highlighted

[@misomiso8228]

2:19 is the mistake by black Na5 is the move. Btw agree with the vidoe maker beginners should avoid this as it can result in quick losses.

[@judsongordy8872]

He goes over Na5 in the next game

[@mckill2007]

Qxf6+ is bad, Qxb6 is the best move, grab couple of pawns then exchange queens

[@rubyred9436]

Qxc6 you mean? Qb6 is illegal so possibly not a great move.

[@mckill2007]

+Happy. yeah correct Qc6, tnx for correction

[@illmaculatechess]

I normally love and support the st. louis chess club channel, but not because of videos like this. I dont mind mike hummer being the patzer coach. I do mind him recommending terrible moves for his listeners such as 3....h6. please ppl play this move against any good player and u will be blown off the board. Im 1949 uscf btw so im not a master or anything just tired of mike hummers nonsense

[@xxAutoFlowxx]

26) RF4....the move you played also wins among others...but this is easy to see

[@hot-shot1100]

Hey Mike, you make my day every time i watch your videos here, i would love to be friend with you on FB i saw you have just 179 friends and i consider you are only friend with people you know?

[@diesesalpaka5498]

5...Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Be2 and white has no attack whatsoever

[@dannygjk]

If Black plays 4...Nd5 I surprise them with a different move than 5.Nf7 ;)

[@frankohero]

Hi Mike :) I like Ur lectures... But: d5 or everything else U showed 4 black is a bad move. Instead of d5 black plays Bc5. Then the Bishop takes f2 (with check). Okay? Fried liver has been refuted! For sure.

[@TacticalRab]

If Kxf2 then it is good for black. But I believe Kf1 is advantageous for white

[@TacticalRab]

frankohero and I think White can play Bxf7+ not Nxf7 to prevent the bishop sac. A more experienced player will likely correct me.

[@frankohero]

Thanks 4 the response. Ur suggestions dont work. (Im sure about that) If black plays correctly, (and Kf1 IS the best response) Black wins quite comfortably... but down a lot of material.

[@teamplayer2helper]

Bc5 is not a "good" move. It's the traxler counter attack, and it's really only good if you're playing bullet/blitz or under 1100 in rating. You need to know a lot of theory, but kxf2 wins for white, if played perfectly. The tempting move Kf1 doesn't fail, but gives up advantage. If white plays Kf1 it's about equal, but it is white that has to avoid all the traps, and black having the fun.

[@frankohero]

Really. Kxf2 - White gets mated in a few moves. There are videos about that on KZbin. I have the line on my board right behind me.

[@gringobilbo]

yeah...pretty intermediate...he needs 40 moves just being a pawn up to beat a 1700 in game one???? pretty poorly played...both sides missing out on better moves....but anyway...just saying

[@gringobilbo]

starting with the dubious decision to trade queens in the early stages...