an opening variation that computers can't understand

I never play the Traxler cause the best move for white is Bxf7,more secure,white stay better, and not Nxf7,too much complicate as all the opening theory says, in this case position is draw and black and white have the same possibility to win,simply read ''enciclopaedia of chess opening'' book 3, C57.I Just wanted to say that engines suffer this opening with Nxf7,and I think it is the only way you could win against an engine if you are not Carlsen or Anand.
You instead talk about Harry Potter

Both Nxf7 and Bxf7 wins. You are not gonna have a chance against Stockfish in any of thoes lines. It's losing. It's literally one of the worst possible lines.

@lovlas Nah.....1.f3 e4 2.g4 is arguably worse.

@lello33leone You can create a game from position and show us how the Traxler beats Stockfish.

I want to see this.

using this position,when my brain was more young and fast I won agaist Fritz 14,Hiarcs 13,Shredder 8,but lost against komodo 8,Houdini 4,Ribka 4
,I don't want to say that Traxler beat Stockfish, it depends on you, the position is draw,but only that this is the best chance for to beat an engine,cause its complexity,this is just my opinion.

@lello33leone

Here's the evidence in your favor:

Your claim that you beat Fritz 14, Hiarcs 13, and Shredder 8 with the Traxler counterattack.
However, you don't have that game.
You could show you drawing against Stockfish - heck, do it against SF level 7.
You could ask a faster, younger player to do it for you.
You haven't.
So, your claim and nothing else.

Here's the evidence against you:

Stockfish.

Enough said.

Stockfish could roll over Carlsen and Anand and Kramnik and Kasparov or Karpov or Fischer, etc.

It is beyond human chess-playing strength.

When Stockfish says that a position is good for white, I believe it.

Then there's another problem with your argument: "the position is draw,but only that this is the best chance for to beat an engine,cause its complexity"

That's completely incorrect. Here's why: Strong engines don't "miss" complexities in a situation. People do - we can only think about so many things at a time. Computers are much less limited in this regard. Strong engines also don't lose drawn positions - supposing the Traxler to be drawn in the first place, which is unlikely.

TL;DR

You come to us completely un-credentialed. You show us no tangible evidence. You claim that the computer programs that can beat the best people in the world at chess are evaluating a position incorrectly. Your reasoning for this is that the position is too complex for an engine, even though engines are at their STRONGEST against humans in complex positions.

My conclusion? I think I've been trolled.

Chess engines usually cannot handle positions that are complex because there are many redundant possibilities to move pieces without ever capturing or moving pawns (=fortresses).

Chess engines are not bothered much by positions that are complex because there are many different concrete lines. In fact, that's where their brute force approach really shines.

A bloodshed like the Traxler clearly belongs to the second case.

checkin from 365chess.com seems that black is winning quite often. Probably because black player choose well agaings whom and when to play it.

In order to consider a chess engine unable to understand Traxler's counterattack, we need options. Stockfish engine at a depth of 40 is well versed in the position. I was going through a Counterattack Traxler and my conclusion is that after 5.N: f7 white won! The main option: 1.e4 e5 2.NF3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5?! 5.N: f7! B: f2 6.Kf1 Qe7 7.N: h8 d5 8. ed Nd4 9. d6! - after this move it is clear that the black Queen is distracted from the attack on the white king.

9.d6 simply cxd6,you can also try 8.....Bg4 9.Be2-Bxe2 10.Kxe2 and then o-o-o,best chances for black are if it does o-o-o

#37 Huh?? What master is still playing the Traxler?