I'm not an opening expert by any means but my understanding is that black is fine in many of the variations, and either gets equality or a slight advantage.
That said, most of the games I've played in the variation have been interesting and it is at least playable at many levels.
I don't have time to look over the whole example game, and I might not provide much good information anyway, but I think the most common reply on move 5 for black is Na5.
Sometimes it works when you least expect it to! :
Shirov wins with Fried Liver Attack in 2014 Chess Olympiad!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfVxhL2ERok
I'm not an opening expert by any means but my understanding is that black is fine in many of the variations, and either gets equality or a slight advantage.
That said, most of the games I've played in the variation have been interesting and it is at least playable at many levels.
That is true.
The fried liver attack has been a popular opening for white, but does it actually work?
No. Unless you are playing an idiot or vegetarian
The fried liver attack has been a popular opening for white, but does it actually work?
I have ran this a lot on various engines and everytime black wins or draws after 9.a3 but 9.Qe4 prevents losing the rook and eventually you get the knight back with the black king in the center and you have a vicous attack for the rest of the game. Losing the rook is losing unless black makes some blunders. With black I play 3..Bc4 avoiding fried liver. I know I do not play engines but I too am not an engine and if you make any mistake with white you are screwed, remember that black is up a rook and a knight for a pawn. If you do not mate him you will lose and computers have proven there is no forced mate without a blunder.
If you like the two knights defense though I recommend ulvestad variation or the main line where black puts the knight on the edge of the board thawrting the bishop and advances some pawns to push the white knight into the corner.
tl;dr but i agree with your conclusion that it doesn't work (unless you play 9. Qe4).
Thx for the reply!
How did the "Fried Liver Attack" (or the Lolli Attack for that matter) even aquire a name? An opening dependant upon Black making an obvious blunder (that any average or better player would never play even if seeing this for the first time) should not have a name!
4.Ng5 is sound but it is the most passive move imaginable. Grab a pawn so that you defend, defend, and defend for the entire of the rest of the game?.. As White!.. How does this appeal to low rated players? I don't understand. If anybody should be playing this move it is GMs. They aren't, so why are amateurs? It is a terrible opening for them.
It appeals to low rated players cause they mostly play against each other and can't defend very well. At most levels this'll lead to exciting games, good opening or not, and that's enough for some people
Not being able to defend well is excatly why it shouldn't appeal to them!! 4.Ng5 leads to you having to defend for the entire game if your openent has either ever seen this before or simply isn't terrible at chess. Nobody above 1300 should even consider 5...Nxd5 for more than a couple of seconds even if they have never seen this before. It is so obviously terrible.
When I was <1300 I would've played this all the time, if I knew about it. Imo most players at that level are optimistic and apply the famous Wayne Gretzky quote to their attack. 1 tactical, attacking win could be worth the 2 losses they face playing the same opening.
Are you illiterate or something? 4.Ng5 is not an attacking move!! It is the most pawn grubbingly passive move imaginable. Their opponents are the only ones who will have the chance of winning an attacking game. All they will be doing is defending. It's like you're arguing for me but somehow don't see it...
LOL. pfren again with his gibberish that as always he doesn't even try to back up with anything at all. His word is law, I hope everybody knows that.
Anyone who says Ng5 is a bad move is either a beginner or has lost so many times playing it, that they started to believe their own failures.
Anyone who says Ng5 is a bad move is either a beginner or has lost so many times playing it, that they started to believe their own failures.
Have I missed something? I can't see a single post in this thread that says that.
You're also talking complete crap, there are lots of potential reasons for somebody to say such a thing.
Here's a pretty attacking game I created last winter from 4. Ng5. It includes a long-term queen sacrifice. Enjoy!
No, if you say Ng5 is a bad move then it's an opinion and nothing more. An opinion based on lies.
9. a3 is old school giving Black an advantage.
White per the opening must continue center pressure.
The fried liver attack has been a popular opening for white, but does it actually work?