TL Chess Match 4 - Page 43

jdseemoreglass wrote:
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 It could be that the theory is "outdated" but it is certainly still a viable move and shouldn't be disregarded on the simple premise that another move is considered "standard" by someone else.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.

samirlugel wrote:
wrong forum

jdseemoreglass wrote:
Black doesn't have to play 6. ... Ne4, and we don't have to respond with 7. O-O. Even if those two moves are both played, black doesn't have to play 7. ... dxc3, and even if he does, we don't have to play 8. Qe5.

We are putting a lot of our focus on a line that's only a remote possibility, and honestly I think both sides have better moves along the way. I say we cross that bridge when we get to it. 3 days is certainly enough time to look at any move black can throw at us.

On August 31 2011 13:29 Ng5 wrote:


But if read right that's half of what I said. The other half is that the type of chess does matter. Correspondence in this case. Sometimes what is viable in 'real' chess is not in correspondence and vica versa. I would probably be better off explaining this more in depth on stream.

It's the same as why the 4... f5 line that someone hoped for wouldn't work in correspondence or long time control chess, even though I probably have a win ratio close to, or over 80% with it in 5-minute. But that includes making other unusual attack plans that would get picked apart in a long game.

The same reason why sometimes saccing a minor piece early for two pawns is worth it in a real time game, even if the initiative is not clear - while in a correctly played correspondence game you can turn it around on several occasions, etc.

On August 31 2011 13:54 Empyrean wrote:
Gonna bandwagon onto 6. e5 since I've been busy lately X_X

On August 31 2011 23:22 qrs wrote:
I don't understand reasoning like this. If you don't have enough time to figure out which move you think is best, wouldn't it make the most sense to simply abstain? A "bandwagon" vote seems to say nothing more than "this move is the one that most of the other voters prefer", which at best is stating the obvious, and at worst could even distort the vote if for whatever reason the current prevailing opinion changed. No offense meant; I just don't understand.