Is there a definite refutation of the Sokolsky opening? - I

There is a definite answer to this question; and it is: no! The myth of Sokolsky's refutation is based on two pillars and of course they both belong to the exchange variation : 2 ... Bxb4!.
1) A certain Rook sacrifice on e3.
2) The advance of Black's c pawn to c5 to stop the advance of White's central pawn majority which is usually with d4.
Tha latter of these two pillars of refutation pertain to more advanced players.
But let's take the first one and examine it carefully.

 An early Re8 in the exchange variation with the pin of the Bishop on b4 and the collaboration of a Knight on d5 causes extreme pressure on e3. White does not have time to castle and hence comes the Rook sacrifice on e3. But is it sound?  The game Lapshun-Sinn  demonstrates this very well. The Queen escapes to b3 and the King retreats to d1. Black must develop his Queen side pieces in order to attack. Be6 is met by Queen exchange offer on d3 and swiftly the Rook gets to g1 and commences operations. White is not better because he is a whole Rook up but because he has active play.
Please check our annotated selection of strong games for a personal opinion:
Muri-Van der Kooij
Muri- Bjorn

The second pillar of refutation is based on the advance of the c pawn in the exchange variation.
I will soon continue with this subject which must be dealt in detail.

No comments:

Post a Comment