Short Smith-Morra gambit game ( your thoughts on the early e5 push mistake by white?)

I just played a short and fun game as black against user Tarasss. Hat's off to Tarasss because he used the Smith-Morra gambit, that I think makes for exciting games, and I think he was playing fairly well up until move 11. where to my delight be made a blunder and lost his dark square bishop, then resigned.

http://en.lichess.org/analyse/gsfd3nxd/black

However, there was something about this game that caused me to stop and think a bit. The basic theoretical ideas of the Smith-Morra gambit is that white is trying to play e5, (I guess this restricts black's development and opens lines towards the king side.) One of the guidelines is that if you're white playing the Smith-Morra, and you have an opportunity to play e5, then you should. And a guideline for black is that you're trying to pile up on the central dark squares precisely to prevent such a push.

In this game white played e5 way early, even before he castled. In the game, I knew something was bad about this early e5 push, I knew there was something there I could take advantage of and I stopped and thought for a minute but just then decided to go ahead with normal counter-Smith Morra moves anyway. And I did try to figure it out for myself after the game was over and was considering that I should have played d6 in response (and if rook d1 pinning the pawn to the queen then queen c7) Only then did I run a computer analysis and it said I should have played f6. This seems to be the better idea as it forces an exchange of the pawn and frees black's center, however, it also seems that this weakens black's pawn structure, creating three pawn islands and a weakness on e6 if the now free d7 pawn comes forward.

I know that often during opening play computers will suggest strange and incorrect moves. Do you think f6 in response to the early e5 push was truly the best move or was there something better?

I'm not sure about f6 but I agree your opinion about too early e5.

After white plays e5 black normally cannot push d pawn forward. White hopes to gain space and restrict blacks development, Bc8 stuck, d6 square weakness to compensate sacrificed pawn... In your game black has an option to push d pawn forward. When you do it immediately instead of Nge7 white doesn't have an option to pin your piece on d6 after trade. So immediately d6/d5 would seem logical to me black has easy development plans. White has no compensation.

About whites game/piece placement... I think first doubtful move game before e5... When black decides to go with e6 without d6 plans the ideal setup for whites minor pieces is Nf3, Nc3, Bf4, Bd3. In this setup Bf4 is making sure that d pawn isn't moving and black will fall behind in development (Bc8 stuck etc.). White square bishop is better placed on d3 looking to h7. Black is going to go 0-0 in future and black knight cannot protect h7 from f6 due e5 pawn so d3 seems most logical placement for the bishop. Black can try that same maneuver Ng8-Ne7-Ng6 to block diagonal + give pressure on e5 but in that case white has kingside attack plan with h2-h4-h5.

My conclusion : Instead of Bc4 white wants to play Bf4. Intending e5 and white square bishop comes comfortably in d3. If black plays d6 to prevent e5 then white plays Bc4 (e5 and h7 attack plans are not available so here bishop is correctly placed on c4) with normal smith-morra pressure.

Thanks so much for your input. I see you're right now about d6, at that point there would have been no way for him to pin a piece on d6 after a trade. Looking at it, it seems that d6 in response to the early e5 would have underminded the entire gambit. And I do think d6 is probably better than f6 despite the computers analysis, as it maintains more integrity in black's pawn structure. The computer seems to recommend f6 anytime white plays pawn to e5 in the opening. (Maybe the idea is if white captures on f6 it brings out the knight and now white has made 3 pawn moves in the opening for the ultimate goal of developing black's knight?, and if f6 captures on e5 it exchanges a flank pawn for a central pawn?)

In one of my early Smith-Morra games I did get checkmated on h7 when white bishop moved to d3. (the way the game played out, a white rook blocked the diagonal and he did a clearance sacrifice, if I didn't take the rook I'd lose my queen, and if I did take the rook I'd get checkmated) In that game he had marched his h-pawn down to get rid of the knight, and actually went h4 while the queen was still on d8. In the game I saw that I could have taken the h4 pawn with the g6 knight as I had the h4 square covered twice, but being so new I was worried it was some kind of trap, as I was paranoid then and hadn't studied it enough to know a mistake vs bait for a trap.

I was redeemed though when in another Smith-Morra game I played later, the white player again made this mistake of going h4 against knight on g6 while the queen was still on d8, this time I took the pawn and ended up winning the game. It seems to be a common mistake white will make at these relatively lower levels.

But let's say white prepares the h pawn march better and it's safe to march his pawn down, if white goes h4 can't black just go h6 and when white h5 hop the g6 knight back to f8 where it still covers the h7 square?

H4 push doesn't need any preparation when white hasn't made 0-0. White has rook h1 and knight f3 protecting h4. I think instead of those Ne7-Ng6 one good reaction for black is to push f5 after Bd3, closing the diagonal - while exf6 Nxf6 gives black center due his two central pawns.

Thanks for yet another good idea. That will come in handy next time I need to block the diagonal to h7 in one of these games.

H4 doesn't need preparation if white doesn't castle, but wouldn't the lack of castling be a mistake in its own right? In everything on the Smith Morra I've looked at, including the Chessbase DVD by IM Lawrence Trent, castles by white is one of the first moves by white and in none of the games have I seen them delay castling in favor of marching the h pawn down even against the nge6 lines. It seems, similar to the early e5 push in the above game, this might be a mistake that would undermine the entire gambit, since tactics could be possible against the king on e1, as well as it seems to go against the idea of the gambit with white wanting to develop pieces quickly and take advantage of these open lines and initiative that he gets in exchange for giving up the pawn.

Delaying castle is indeed bad idea if the king becomes weak. But let's say black is playing his game without too much thought, just moving basic plan... 1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Nxc3 e6 5. Nf3 a6 6. Bf4 Nc6 7. e5

we have reached kind of position where white has played e5 plan. If black is going to continue to plan we discussed he plays 7. ...Nge7 8. Bd3 Ng6 9. Bg3 and going forward with h pawn.

BTW - After Ng6 if bishop from f4 goes to g3 even after castle there is Bg3 and Nf3 protecting h pawn so h pawn advance should not end with black taking the h pawn