|
Final Vote Count 5. 0-0: 19 (Misder, Babyfactory, wuBu, Empyrean, Picklesicle, noclaninator, Sandwhale, chesshaha, Raysalis, wizard944, Ikari, Varpulis, Blazinghand, mcc, NoobieOne, Rybread, aphorism, KingStuart, Malinor, Snarfs, RAGEMOAR, Mumu) 5. d4: 26 (qrs, imBLIND, itsjustatank, ParanoiaHoT, jdseemoreglass, Malli, pburns, Empyrean, LaxerCannon, Sc1pio, Picklesickle, GreatestThreat, enigmaticcam, Jumbled, shackes, timh, EnderSword, mastergriggy, aphorism, Bill Murray, Boozerr, Chezus, lolsixtynine, Archers_bane, keystorm, hype[NZ],)
|
btw guys anyone want to play via PM?
Just PM me!
|
Oh well no 0-0, d4 it is then :D. With all the heavy analysis done for this move, I'm confident that whatever black does we will be able to follow up strongly.
|
On August 27 2011 07:27 wuBu wrote: Oh well no 0-0, d4 it is then :D. With all the heavy analysis done for this move, I'm confident that whatever black does we will be able to follow up strongly. lol I've done so much analysis and looked at so many lines I feel like I have no decisions to make for another 3 moves or so I've already got the lines I am favoring in my head.
If you guys have any questions about what I've presented at all, don't be afraid to ask. I actually enjoy going over this stuff and showing people positional/tactical ideas in chess.
|
On August 27 2011 08:14 jdseemoreglass wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 07:27 wuBu wrote: Oh well no 0-0, d4 it is then :D. With all the heavy analysis done for this move, I'm confident that whatever black does we will be able to follow up strongly. lol I've done so much analysis and looked at so many lines I feel like I have no decisions to make for another 3 moves or so data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/41f32/41f32ccbf9c308e87a90fa896d4fd874e9b79ee6" alt="" I've already got the lines I am favoring in my head. If you guys have any questions about what I've presented at all, don't be afraid to ask. I actually enjoy going over this stuff and showing people positional/tactical ideas in chess.
Likewise. jdseemoreglass, Babyfactory and qrs are clearly much more tactical than I am, but I love talking about chess (and strategic wargames). I'm a positional player, thus I love discussing the ideas, reasons and concepts behind positions and goals, and am less capable of dissecting specific lines. These kinds of games have always attracted me as you can and should be able to articulate the ideas behind every single move.
I'm pretty sure of the lines I want to avoid as traps but otherwise I also feel like I'll be doing little more than quoting myself as my reasons for the next couple of moves.
Cheers all!!
|
On August 27 2011 09:18 Picklesicle wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 08:14 jdseemoreglass wrote:On August 27 2011 07:27 wuBu wrote: Oh well no 0-0, d4 it is then :D. With all the heavy analysis done for this move, I'm confident that whatever black does we will be able to follow up strongly. lol I've done so much analysis and looked at so many lines I feel like I have no decisions to make for another 3 moves or so data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/41f32/41f32ccbf9c308e87a90fa896d4fd874e9b79ee6" alt="" I've already got the lines I am favoring in my head. If you guys have any questions about what I've presented at all, don't be afraid to ask. I actually enjoy going over this stuff and showing people positional/tactical ideas in chess. Likewise. jdseemoreglass, Babyfactory and qrs are clearly much more tactical than I am, but I love talking about chess (and strategic wargames). I'm a positional player, thus I love discussing the ideas, reasons and concepts behind positions and goals, and am less capable of dissecting specific lines. These kinds of games have always attracted me as you can and should be able to articulate the ideas behind every single move. I'm pretty sure of the lines I want to avoid as traps but otherwise I also feel like I'll be doing little more than quoting myself as my reasons for the next couple of moves. Cheers all!! Yeah, when you don't or can't look at all of the specific tactics and see several moves ahead, it represents an unknown, and people generally fear unknowns. It causes some weaker players to try and trade things off and simplify, or to avoid tactical decisions and end up playing too passive.
A starcraft analogy would be someone who doesn't think his opponent is going banshees, who has no reason to suspect his opponent is going banshees, but he just doesn't know, so he makes a couple spore crawlers in his mineral lines just to be safe, that another player would not make. Really it all comes down to experience and instinct, at least for blitz players like me. It takes a few hundred games before you can get a feel for tactics that are likely or unlikely to work in your favor. That's one of the reasons I like blitz chess, because you can play so many games in so little time.
Anyway, if anyone wants to try out some chess against human opponents and don't know where to look, try fics (stands for free internet chess server). You will have to download a client, but it is worth it. My name on there is the same here, jdseemoreglass, so look me up any of you get a chance. data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/41f32/41f32ccbf9c308e87a90fa896d4fd874e9b79ee6" alt=""
http://www.freechess.org/ <----- account http://www.babaschess.net/ <----- client
|
shit i dont have my name in the list can I discuss the strats anyway?
|
Heh. Well, then it is interesting that I tend to do very poorly in Blitz games but decent with anything over 30 minute time controls. If I do win Blitz, it tends to be on time.
Thanks, I will try fics. I played on ICC for a while many years ago but eventually not enough to justify the cost. I play most of my games in person; the business of playing across the table from another player is a skill in itself. When I don't play in person, it's all correspondence.
+ Show Spoiler +Incidentally, regardless of my vote, I don't actually think that castling would have been too passive; it's an entirely viable position, with less traps and pitfalls than d4 (but the ones that exist are really subtle and dangerous) and doesn't really cost a tempo. What you did was convince me that d4 was not unsound. Once you did that, I became curious.
|
On August 27 2011 09:34 NasKe_ wrote: shit i dont have my name in the list can I discuss the strats anyway?
I think it's fine. This type of game is about community and collective.
Heck, I'm not on there as I missed the first couple of moves and I don't shut up.
|
I will update the list and everything properly again when I kicked my internet provider to the curbs.
Internet in the US... Is really the freaking bane of me, man. I'm cursed, I tell you.
|
What I meant is - feel free to discuss even if you are not in the list. You will be - soon.
|
Countdown for move 6 begins... now!
My move as the OP says is 5... exd4
I'll spend the next hour or so with creating diagrams for the last vote and updating the first two-three posts if necessary. I will also send reminders again for the last day of the match because I have a feeling that the last move - while very active - on had a smaller portion of the roster's vote coming in.
Cheers, guys!
Edit: I just can't help this... Must... Resist...
Alexei Shirov, 2751 ELO vs. Peter Leko, 2725 ELO, 5. d4 Bb6
Vassily Smyslov (former world champion) vs. Gedeon Barcza, 5. d4 Bb6
Boris Spassky (former world champion) vs. Leonid Stein, 5. d4 Bb6
Mikhail Tal (former world champion) vs. Dirk Van Geet, 5. d4 Bb6
Nigel Short 2650 ELO vs. Boris Gulko 2610 ELO, 5. d4 Bb6
Nothing personal.
|
|
|
Updated OP with the diagrams for last move.
Just a little extra on this.
Show nested quote +Alexei Shirov, 2751 ELO vs. Peter Leko, 2725 ELO, 5. d4 Bb6
Vassily Smyslov (former world champion) vs. Gedeon Barcza, 5. d4 Bb6
Boris Spassky (former world champion) vs. Leonid Stein, 5. d4 Bb6
Mikhail Tal (former world champion) vs. Dirk Van Geet, 5. d4 Bb6
Nigel Short 2650 ELO vs. Boris Gulko 2610 ELO, 5. d4 Bb6
Basically Smyslov, Spassky and Tal are all ages old chess players - alive or not. Yes they were world champions, but the theory can change drastically within half a year or just because of one single game. Short just trollololols his way through his tournaments by using random non-mainstream openings. Which is completely fine, from particular point of views (whether he's running along those views is another question), but still isn't relevant about what the best move is, because he doesn't try to get that (in the orthodox/usual meaning) from his openings. Shirov is indeed a good example, but he's again the unusual opening guy in the top field. Out of the opponents the first three fall under the same diagnosis as their white counterparts, the fourth kind of ditto, and Leko... I can't even tell the last time when I saw Leko really fighting again... His WC match against Kramnik certainly wasn't it... Plus, Hungarians did research some of the 3... Bc5 line, so it can be just another drawing prep.
That and, guys. Correspondence and real chess is different. This is a fun event. Hopefully you're not using engines in your arguments, but the 'real' correspondence chess at ICCF is with engines - and that isn't chess, so you can't go after that to find golden examples. And long time control real chess isn't always valid here either. This is simply different. In games where you might bite your nails off in a real game you might fall asleep if you have to play them in correspondence - *cough* Grunfeld *cough cough*
Looking up databases is awesome. Looking for games again is awesome, but try to only use them for inspiration for sparkling your own thoughts and not for a golden rule.
|
6. Bxc6 + Show Spoiler [reasoning] +It's not that I'm convinced that this is a better move than e5, but it seems to me that it's a possibility that's worth considering, so I'm voting for it before 6. e5 runs away with the vote.
6. e5 keeps the position complicated while retaining our initiative, and, at least temporarily, our space advantage in the center. On the other hand, though, such an early push of the e-pawn, before Black has committed either of the two pawns that can challenge it, and without the support of the f-pawn, can lead to Black's being able to trade off our advanced pawns down the line, dispelling a lot of our advantage there. This is a concern that Sandwhale has raised.
6. Bxc6 leads to simplification, possibly a lot of it. However, as far as I can tell, it too leaves us with a strong central position--and a stronger one in that we haven't committed either of our central pawns to an early advance. Meanwhile, it also saddles Black with the long-term disadvantage of doubled pawns. I think it's worth consideration. Although it's been discussed before, some may not have read all the earlier discussion, so I'll add why e5 and Bxc6 are the only moves under consideration so far: + Show Spoiler [Why not another move?] +Black's just taken our pawn, and assuming we don't want him to keep it, we need to take it back, optionally interpolating another move that Black will have to respond to before doing anything else, such as e5 or Bxc6.
The latter two moves are the only threats at our disposal right now, so if we don't want to go down a pawn, it seems that we have three obvious choices: 6. e5, 6. Bxc6, or the immediate 6. PxP.
The problem with 6. PxP, however, is that Black can gain time with 6... Bb4+ and then play 7... Nxe4, which doesn't look very comfortable for us. The short story is: we won't actually lose a pawn there, but Black looks to have all the fun out of that position. If you're interested in the details of this, they can be found back on page 34, in the early discussion of 5. d4.
6. e5 and 6. Bxc6 each prevent ...Nxe4: 6. e5 by moving the pawn out of the way (with tempo), and 6. Bxc6 by removing a defender of the Bishop, allowing us to gain time by blocking the check of 7. ...Bb4with 8. Bd2, threatening Black's Bishop. If he exchanges Bishops, we retake with the b1 Knight, defending e4. If he plays 8... Qe2, we can again take the pressure off us with 9. BxB QxB+ 10. Qd2. edit: fixed move numbering
|
|
Right well.... I wasn't arguing what the best move was, and I wasn't talking about a golden rule. You aren't reading the spoilers, so you probably don't realize I was arguing against people who were suggesting that O-O was the only standard or safe move available when the majority of the games in my database showed 5. d4 as the most common continuation among the highest rated players. It could be that the theory is "outdated" but it is certainly still a viable move and shouldn't be disregarded on the simple premise that another move is considered "standard" by someone else.
Since this correspondence match is moving so slow I wanted to argue in favor of the more aggressive/tactical continuation. It's all preference in the end anyways, not objective fact.
I'm voting 6. e5.
|
|
Votes 6. e5: 5 (hype[NZ], Bill Murray, Raysalis, jdseemoreglass, keyStorm) 6. Bxc6: 1 (qrs)
|
|
|
|