Talk:Sicilian Defence, Najdorf Variation
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
English attack 8. Qd2 claim[edit]
"If White had tried to play 8.Qd2, then Black could respond with 8...Ng4. " I don't have a book reference handy, but of the 2,400 games where white plays 8. Qd2, in none of them does black respond Ng4. Recent chess engines (Stockfish 11+) don't regard it as a strong move either. I propose removing this sentence as being misguided (possibly copy/pasted from a book?). Dhalamh (talk) 10:49, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Opocensky didn't invent it[edit]
Check the databases, Tartakower, van den Bosch, Kupchik, Canal and Kevitz all played 5...a6 in the 1920s, while Kupchik and Noteboom were combining it with ...e5 in the 1930s. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 08:35, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Perenyi Attack[edit]
I fed the Perenyi Attack (6.Be3 e6 7.g4!? e5 8.Nf5 g6 9.g5 gxf5) to Stockfish and it came up with 0.00 at about ply 35. I suspect this once ubiquitous line has been abandoned as a draw at top level, but of course this is original research. Can anyone find any good material on this line? MaxBrowne2 (talk) 06:39, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Murray Chandler is not English. 119.15.100.157 (talk) 04:46, 23 March 2024 (UTC)