TWO KNIGHTS DEFENSE
[Event "Two Knights Defense"] [Site "TEST"] [Date "2012.05.2"] [Round "1"] [White "Kasparov President"] [Black "Kasparov President"] [Result ""] [ECO ""] [WhiteElo "2800"] [BlackElo "2800"] [Annotator "Mraovich,Robert"] [PlyCount "80"] [EventDate "2012.??.??"] [EventType "tourn"] [EventRounds "1"] [EventCountry "RUS"] [EventCategory "17"] [SourceDate "2012.05.2"] {Kasparov President} 1. e4 ({long line given here:} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 {signature move of the Two Knights Defense!} 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Na5 6. Bb5+ c6 7. dxc6 bxc6 8. Be2 h6 9. Nf3 e4 10. Ne5 Bd6 11. d4 exd3 12. Nxd3 Qc7 13. b3 O-O 14. Bb2 Ne4 15. Nc3 f5 16. h3 Ba6 17. O-O Rad8 18. Qe1 c5 19. Nxe4 fxe4 20. Nf4 Bxe2 21. Nxe2 Nc6 22. Nc3 Nd4 23. Rd1 e3 24. fxe3 Rfe8 25. Nd5 Bh2 26. Kh1 Rxd5 27. Qd2 Rde5 28. exd4 Re2) 1...e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 (4. d3 Be7 5. O-O O-O 6. c3 d6 7. Bb3 h6) 4...d5 5. exd5 Na5 6. Bb5+ c6 7. dxc6 (7. dxc6 bxc6 8. Qf3 Qc7 9. Bd3) 7...bxc6 8. Be2 (8. Qf3 Rb8 9. Bd3 h6 10. Ne4 Nd5 11. b3 g6 12. Bb2 Bg7 13. Qg3 Nf4 14. Qxf4 exf4 15. Bxg7 f5 16. Bxh8 fxe4 17. Bxe4 Kf7 18. Bc3 Bf5 19. d3 Bxe4) 8...h6 9. Nf3 (9. Nf3 e4 10. Ne5 Bd6 11. d4 Qc7 12. Bd2) 9...e4 10. Ne5 (10. Ne5 Qc7) 10...Bd6 11. d4 (11. d4 exd3 12. Nxd3 Qc7 13. b3 O-O 14. Bb2 Ne4 15. h3 Rd8 16. O-O f5 17. Nd2 Bh2 18. Kh1 c5 {+- better for white then... hmmmm....} ) 11...exd3 12. Nxd3 (12. Nxd3 Qc7 13. b3 O-O 14. Bb2 Ne4 15. Nc3 f5 16. h3 Rb8 17. O-O Rd8 18. Qe1 Nf6 19. Bf3 Bh2 20. Kh1 Bd6 21. Na4 Re8 22. Qd1 Ne4 23. Re1 Qf7 24. Nc3 Ng5 25. Rxe8 Qxe8 26. Na4 f4 27. Bh5 Qd7 28. Ne5 Qe7 ) 12...Qe7 13. b3 O-O 14. Bb2 Nd5 15. Nc3 Nf4 16. Nxf4 Bxf4
Two Knights

Two Knight Defense. White trys to attack black’s f7 square with 4. Ng5. Black usually reverses this with 4. ...d5. Eventhough black sacs a pawn in this variation, a lot of activity can be gained from such a move. White tries to show that black is a pawn down where black tries to show white that he has compensation for the pawn due rapid development and piece activity...