Fried Liver Attack without Two Knights Defence

Sort:
Oldest
eimajjjj

So this was obviously a great game for me, opponent resigning after 13 moves but my idea was to try out the Fried Liver attack. Now I’ve always thought it can only be used when black uses the two knight defence but am I right in thinking that I could have still played it if instead of him -playing 4. …h6  he played 4…d5 where I would then take on d5, his knight recaptures and I bring my Queen out to f3 and the fun begins. As it happens it was a strange move on his behalf and I took advantage but it seems you only need one knight out for the Fried Liver to work (even though I didn't get round to it). Also, any tips where I could have done any better here. Pretty happy with my game.

 



ripachu
The opening moves that you played were NOT the Fried Liver attack. Fried Liver attack goes like this: 
 
 
As I pointed out in the diagram, most of the time Ng5 is dubious, even if Bc4 threatening the f7-pawn is played. Why? Because usually the knight can be chased back, and white will lose tempo that way. It was also a dubious move in the game you played, I post the correct line for black here as a puzzle. 
 
 
So, what should you learn from this game? You shouldn't play moves that break the opening principles unless you know very well what you are doing. And in this case, you didn't. You were lucky your opponent made a horrible blunder with 4. ...h6?? that gave the game away immediately. In the future I recommend focusing in the basic opening principles when playing the opening instead of trying to get into a highly theoretical opening line you don't know at all. All in all, I find that the beginners here on chess.com are way too enthusiastic about the Fried Liver attack, so much that it hurts their play and improvement.
 
And also, I recommend posting your losses, as you can learn a lot more from them.
 
 
EDIT:
AFTER (first solve it by yourself :]) solving the puzzle, click on the question mark that'd show the correct moves: that way you'll see my annotations about the position.
eimajjjj

I meant to say I didn't get to play the fried liver attack. Up to nG5 I was playing the Fried Liver, the only diffence is that he didn't play his queenside knight nor did he play d5 to block my bishop where I could have taken d5 with my bishop and then bring out my queen to continue to play the fried liver. 

eimajjjj

Also, in your puzzle, you play 5....h6! to chase the knight away. Why can't that move also be played in the fried liver since the bishop is still blocked by the pawn at d5.

Diakonia
eimajjjj wrote:

I meant to say I didn't get to play the fried liver attack. Up to nG5 I was playing the Fried Liver, the only diffence is that he didn't play his queenside knight nor did he play d5 to block my bishop where I could have taken d5 with my bishop and then bring out my queen to continue to play the fried liver. 

Lesson #1: Just because you play Ng5 doesnt mean youre playing a fried liver.

Lesson #2: Dont use words like "obvious" and "great" when describing your games.  Lying isnt a good habit to get into.  

Lesson #3: Always thank your opponent for blundering pieces.

eimajjjj

By the way, I really appreciate your annotatino and puzzle. Am I right in thinking that the reason h6 isn't played usually during the textbook Fried Liver is that their queenside knight is under attack by the pawn so if white ignored that then we have a knight exchange instead?

eimajjjj

So shouldn't h6 always be played by black then to avoid the Fried Liver? (assuming they're happy with a knight sacrifice) because then they will be a pawn up once the white d-pawn has been taken?

ChessOath
eimajjjj wrote:

By the way, I really appreciate your annotatino and puzzle. Am I right in thinking that the reason h6 isn't played usually during the textbook Fried Liver is that their queenside knight is under attack by the pawn so if white ignored that then we have a knight exchange instead?

What is the textbook Fried Liver? The Fried Liver Attack can only occur if black blunders. Why would there be a "textbook" on that?

ripachu

@eimajjj

 

The reason why h6 can't be played in the "real" fried liver is quite simple:

 

 
Black has the knight that is attacked by the pawn. That is a big difference, as you can see.
eimajjjj

Blimey guys. I'm new to the game, sorry for saying "great" and getting terminology wrong. I'll make sure to only post my losses from now on and expect a far more hostile crowd than I expected!

ChessOath

Oh right and I almost forgot. We've been requested to send people like you here, OP: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/can-everyone-please-get-a-clue-about-what-is-and-is-not-the-fried-liver

Diakonia
eimajjjj wrote:

Blimey guys. I'm new to the game, sorry for saying "great" and getting terminology wrong. I'll make sure to only post my losses from now on and expect a far more hostile crowd than I expected!

And remember to way over use words like..."tactical" "agressive" and "attacking"

ripachu

Also, It's nice to hear that you like my annotations  anyway, I don't think you should try to find the best way to meet Ng5: the situations are different, and there is no magic move that'd refute Ng5 every time.

 

Instead of focusing on a single type of opening, I think you will benefit much more if you study the opening principles and basic positional chess – along with the tactics. And I think that is the lesson you should learn from this game: don't try to get into a opening you don't know, instead judge every position as a individual and try to find the best move according to your logic (also remember: don't play hope chess). You can learn some very basic opening theory, but time for you to actually start studying it comes a lot later.

Diakonia

Any further discussion of the fried liver can be directed to any of the other 762,459,687,471,301,290,312,473,574,354,103,710,490 posts on the scubject.

https://www.chess.com/forum/search?keyword=fried+liver

eimajjjj

Well thanks anyway to the guys that bothered to make puzzles, show annotations, really appreciate that. Was helpful and I see that because both knights weren't present the knight could have easily just been pushed away with h6.

But regarding the "real" Fried Liver, it seems that h6 to push the knight away is far better than black taking the d5 pawn as that just forces knight exchanges instead?

ChessOath
eimajjjj wrote:

But regarding the "real" Fried Liver, it seems that h6 to push the knight away is far better than black taking the d5 pawn as that just forces knight exchanges instead?

On move five? Firstly, I'll point out yet again that it isn't a Fried Liver Attack at that point. Now, to answer your question, no. I strongly suspect that h6 is even more of a blunder than Nxd5.

ripachu
eimajjjj wrote:

Well thanks anyway to the guys that bothered to make puzzles, show annotations, really appreciate that. Was helpful and I see that because both knights weren't present the knight could have easily just been pushed away with h6.

But regarding the "real" Fried Liver, it seems that h6 to push the knight away is far better than black taking the d5 pawn as that just forces knight exchanges instead?

 

As I showed in my puzzle, white can play Nxf7! and get a easy win.

eimajjjj

Well white can gain an extra pawn yes

ripachu

Two extra pawns. The main moves in that position are Na5, Nd4 and b4. 

ArgoNavis

I still don't get why the Fried Liver is so overrated and overhyped.

Forums
Forum Legend
Following
New Comments
Locked Topic
Pinned Topic