I still try to find out if it is better to take the knight which opens up all the lines and diagonals for white or to retreat. It seems to me it is better to retreat. It might be boring but still better. On the other hand taking guarantees both interesting attacking chances and retreating means I might have to exchange my good bishop and won't have great attacking chances and a quite boring game too.
I studied those two lines. Which one do you think is better FOR BLACK? Or do you have a third option to respond as black that you consider better than those two setups? But most importantly, as a intermediate player: To take or not to take?
From a theoretical point of view, it is stronger to take a knight. After that, you can castle in the long side, you can castle in the short, in the short one is more risky, but with deep knowledge there is nothing to be afraid of. Long is also possible. The position there is safer for black. I think White does not find an advantage there. Well, if you don't want a boring game, don't play the Russian game.
Both are good options. Nf6 is arguably more solid for black but harder to efficiently develop pieces. Both Nxc3 and Nf6 lead to approximately equal positions, so it is a matter of taste: If you want a more open, aggressive game, Nxc3 is good and if you prefer a slower positional game, play Nf6.
@Serial_Checkmater But it is a lot easier for white after Nxc3, the right moves are very easy to find. I would like to play an attacking game, it just seems that white is superior. I think I'll go with Nf6 or maybe try out both, I just wanted to hear your opinions about it. I think this opening is a very good choice for white.
Are there any more thoughts on this? Maybe from masters?
Nf6 leaves white with easy development (d4, Bd3, 0-0 etc.) and essentially a free space advantage. The doubled pawns can be a liability at least. But like CyberShredder said, no one really plays the Petroff to attack.
@GrandLapin I play Nf6 to avoid the spanish, italian and two knights games, which is a lot of theory. Usually I want to equalize with black first, which is easiest with the Petroff, but then attack in some way if it is possible and if not end up in a draw. But not having a good opportunity to attack leaves me with the question what to play... just exchange pieces? I really don't know what to do with my pieces in this variation. As soon as I activated them all it leaves me with the question what to do. I will continue playing the Petroff against stronger opponents but you are right maybe I should play the Sicilian against weaker ones.
Which one of those two variations of the Petroff would you play as black if you had to decide?
@OnlyBetterNoBlitz I would take the knight. More imbalances to try and exploit and objectively the better choice.
@GrandLapin I will try out both. I was shocked when I encountered this variation. I was doing really well with the Petroff, until I saw the Nimzowitsch Attack. :/
Taking the knight is better. That is what Caruana did and Carlsen got nothing at all. Retreating the knight is loss of tempo.
