Spanish Game, Exchange Variation

Say you're in a desperate need for a draw, and you are holding the black pieces. You were lucky enough and you are second to none in the final stages of a very strong tournament. Your opponent is considered an authority in the exchange variation of the Ruy Lopez.

For this purpose you are considering the Alapin gambit and the Bronstein variation.

The Alapin gambit

The Bronstein variation

In your opinion which of the two is more appropriate. Which of the two will give you better chances and what's your reasoning for choosing one over the other? Just out of curiosity.

Why play the exchange when the Berlin is a near garrunteed draw for Black?

After castles, 5...Qf6 or 5...Ne7. They both offer a lot of counterplay for my beginner/intermediate level of experience, which is why I prefer them.

But if I had to choose then I would pick the Bronstein variation. I don't think that gambit does anything but commits Black to a trap that doesn't work. The wasted time could result in a loss.

I have to agree with Five, if you know the opponent is an expert in an opening you don't challenge it unless you have some novelty planned or are willing to lose badly and/or quickly.

That being said, if one is moderately booked up, the Bronstein might be more dangerous for black. White probably gets more activity. But that also can loosen up his position. The ...Bg4...h5 main line often gets rid of a lot of wood and probably is easier to play for black.

For some comparisons, Mamedyarov-Svidler 2009 and Kasimdzhanov-Svidler 2014 for the Bronstein and any Guseinov as white Alapn Exchange might descent examples.

I'd play a Petrov or Philidor even though I don't know the lines well.

As for which of the two will give you better chances, I think that depends on your style and whether or not you understand the resulting middlegame.

It's actually really hard for black unless they're quite a good player. White is handed a useful majority and an endgame right away (black's majority is crippled). Guaranteed draw? It's probably closer to a guaranteed loss for players under a certain rating 

There's a reason it was considered bad for black for about 100 years until Kramnik revived it in 2000.

Yeah, if they're actually an expert in the opening, then going for a sideline is giving them everything they want... something they know really well vs something you barely know at all.

If all you did was play normally they will probably be the one to try to get you into a lesser known line in the exchange Ruy.

In the Alapin gambit one can think of a queen sac at one point, with some perpetual checks afterwards, for a quick draw, if his opponent is imprudent and overly optimistic. Anyone?

Perpetual without a queen? I'd like to see the variation.

I never said that. Say c3 is white's next move.

I'm lost.

@SG - Have you discovered any drawing lines if White refuses to open the h-file? 

No, unfortunately no such luck for white. But one can always try with a move like d3, you know, you never know, it might end up with a draw.

I'm not a Petrov fun, and in my humble opinion the Petrov, the Vienna, d4, the scotch ( gambit ) and the myriad of other ( gambit ) transpositions are altogether not all that dangerous, and while I once played the Caro-Kann I'm now a firm believer that the French is kind of sounder. The Pirc is not an option because of some transpostions that I do not wish to play.