|
8. Nbd2
+ Show Spoiler +Sorry I wasn't around to participate in the last vote. I didn't have quite the time to delve into the position as I would've liked, so I chose not to vote. Anyways, I agree that this is the best move. Although I like the idea of challenging Black's good bishop with our bad, unfortunately he has the choice of exchanging instead with his knight, and we would have nothing to challenge his good bishop.
qrs: In your line following 8. Qd2, what happens after: 11: Bxc6 Bxd2 12. Bf3. It seems to me white is doing well. He's up in material and has the two bishops in an open position. Black can exchange his black bishop, but that's his only active piece (and with our pawns on the black squares, his white bishop will be hard pressed to activate). White can choose to bring out his rook and walk his king into the safety net behind his pawns, or push the king forward into an active position.
Or am I being majorly trolled right now...
|
On September 09 2011 01:53 jdseemoreglass wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 01:38 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 09 2011 01:31 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 01:16 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 08 2011 15:36 jdseemoreglass wrote:100% of the vote is going to the same move before we have even discussed or analyzed the differences? It's a shame, because we have a fantastic novelty in this position. I vote for 8. Qd2!+ Show Spoiler +This is clearly the best move in this position. I keep in touch with a lot of Grandmasters and they all say this is the new uber-modern standard at the highest levels of competition. We give up our queen in exchange for black's minor pieces. After the exchange is over, we will have a minor piece majority, which is more powerful than a single queen, especially with our immobile center. Honestly I think it would be a mistake for black to accept this gambit, because the initiative we gain is too dangerous.
+ Show Spoiler +What the hell are you smoking this move loses instantly, I surely hope this is your idea of a joke ,
A queen for 2 minors is a horrible trade(unless we had some sort of tactical compensation,which we do not) . A queen is worth 9 points a minor piece 3 points . It takes three minor pieces to equal a queen or at least two minors and two pawns to get general compensation .
There is no way a Gm would EVER make this move . Please no one vote this , unless you want the game to be over in about ten moves . I would rate this position down at least six pawns worth for white . Meaning insantly and beyond recoverability..... losing . There is absolutrely no reason to sacrifice such a great deal of material so soon for absolutely zero compensation . LOL! omg, this just keeps getting better, I'm laughing hysterically. I never realized my post would have made my whole day. I've honestly gotta start trolling more often.  Lol , after seeing what youv'e had to say about chess, and prior analysis, this being your actual thoughts on the position would not be shocking to me at all . But I am glad your not that weak , once you turn your engines off I don't need an engine to tell me that a master wouldn't really favor Qe2. Also, my analysis is weak but you accuse me of using an engine? Isn't that contradictory? Anyway, you shouldn't take things so seriously. Lighten up a little please.
Are you still stuck on my qe2 , that is what this joke was about ? Really get over it .
I provided an IM game ( the one I happen to have first hand knowlegde from becuase I know the guy) from 2007 where it is played. I do not have my access to chess base this was the most modern I could think of ) Where as all of you games are 40 plus years old .( I think you would need an engine to play me past 25 moves in a one on one game , If you believe you could serioulsy compete with me come meet me at ICC for a game , or freeechess.org where engine use is closely monitered . Whats your Fide rating . or Icc even,do you have any competitive ratings ? Or just hot air .
I have a library of games online you can look at it you wish, can you offer the same ? Or just empty rhetoric.How many GM kills do you have in your carreer ? Would you like to see some of mine ? Really I am done caring what well-wishers think . But if you want I give you my name and ICC account and you can look for yourself ,
|
|
|
On September 09 2011 02:02 Raysalis wrote:
8. Nbd2
Wow someone actually saying which knight goes to d2
Nbd2 is my vote
|
On September 09 2011 02:00 MrProphylactic wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 01:53 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 01:38 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 09 2011 01:31 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 01:16 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 08 2011 15:36 jdseemoreglass wrote:100% of the vote is going to the same move before we have even discussed or analyzed the differences? It's a shame, because we have a fantastic novelty in this position. I vote for 8. Qd2!+ Show Spoiler +This is clearly the best move in this position. I keep in touch with a lot of Grandmasters and they all say this is the new uber-modern standard at the highest levels of competition. We give up our queen in exchange for black's minor pieces. After the exchange is over, we will have a minor piece majority, which is more powerful than a single queen, especially with our immobile center. Honestly I think it would be a mistake for black to accept this gambit, because the initiative we gain is too dangerous.
+ Show Spoiler +What the hell are you smoking this move loses instantly, I surely hope this is your idea of a joke ,
A queen for 2 minors is a horrible trade(unless we had some sort of tactical compensation,which we do not) . A queen is worth 9 points a minor piece 3 points . It takes three minor pieces to equal a queen or at least two minors and two pawns to get general compensation .
There is no way a Gm would EVER make this move . Please no one vote this , unless you want the game to be over in about ten moves . I would rate this position down at least six pawns worth for white . Meaning insantly and beyond recoverability..... losing . There is absolutrely no reason to sacrifice such a great deal of material so soon for absolutely zero compensation . LOL! omg, this just keeps getting better, I'm laughing hysterically. I never realized my post would have made my whole day. I've honestly gotta start trolling more often. Lol , after seeing what youv'e had to say about chess, and prior analysis, this being your actual thoughts on the position would not be shocking to me at all . But I am glad your not that weak , once you turn your engines off I don't need an engine to tell me that a master wouldn't really favor Qe2. Also, my analysis is weak but you accuse me of using an engine? Isn't that contradictory? Anyway, you shouldn't take things so seriously. Lighten up a little please. Are you still stuck on my qe2 , Really get over it . I provided an IM game ( the one I happen to have first hand knowlegde from becuase I know the guy) from 2007 where it is played. I do not have my access to chess base this was the most modern I could find ) Where as all of you games are 50 plus years old . Being a Ranked master myself I will keep my own advise on what masters favor. Whats your Fide rating . or Icc even,do you have any competitive ratings ? Or just hot air .
Yeah, my database is pretty old. And I don't have an official rating, I just play for fun on fics, and study the game as a hobby. I've got a few chess books, including on openings and endgames, I've watched many lectures on chess and I'm a big fan of Kingcrusher on youtube.
My rating on fics is about 1600 blitz and 2000 standard. I have no idea what that equates to real world. I could lie and say I'm a master but that would be kind of pathetic, and it would show in my <master analysis. This is the opening though, so rating hardly matters since it's all book moves and theory. I am very reluctant to believe that an opening move that was never played a single time in a ~800,000 game database would turn out to be the best move. It seems very, very unlikely. But it is possible I guess.
|
|
|
On September 09 2011 01:38 MrProphylactic wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 01:31 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 01:16 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 08 2011 15:36 jdseemoreglass wrote:100% of the vote is going to the same move before we have even discussed or analyzed the differences? It's a shame, because we have a fantastic novelty in this position. I vote for 8. Qd2!+ Show Spoiler +This is clearly the best move in this position. I keep in touch with a lot of Grandmasters and they all say this is the new uber-modern standard at the highest levels of competition. We give up our queen in exchange for black's minor pieces. After the exchange is over, we will have a minor piece majority, which is more powerful than a single queen, especially with our immobile center. Honestly I think it would be a mistake for black to accept this gambit, because the initiative we gain is too dangerous.
+ Show Spoiler +What the hell are you smoking this move loses instantly, I surely hope this is your idea of a joke ,
A queen for 2 minors is a horrible trade(unless we had some sort of tactical compensation,which we do not) . A queen is worth 9 points a minor piece 3 points . It takes three minor pieces to equal a queen or at least two minors and two pawns to get general compensation .
There is no way a Gm would EVER make this move . Please no one vote this , unless you want the game to be over in about ten moves . I would rate this position down at least six pawns worth for white . Meaning insantly and beyond recoverability..... losing . There is absolutrely no reason to sacrifice such a great deal of material so soon for absolutely zero compensation . LOL! omg, this just keeps getting better, I'm laughing hysterically. I never realized my post would have made my whole day. I've honestly gotta start trolling more often. Lol , after seeing what youv'e had to say about chess, and prior analysis, this being your actual thoughts on the position would not be shocking to me at all. On September 03 2011 04:34 MrProphylactic wrote:...that is quite in-depth, and for the most part very accurate analysis( you seem quite strong indeed ) Changed your mind?
On September 09 2011 01:48 MrProphylactic wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2011 13:29 qrs wrote:On September 08 2011 13:07 MrProphylactic wrote: + Show Spoiler + Was looking at Nd2(which is most likely goingt o be my vote) and I got worried all of a sudden about this line . Bb4 nd2 nxd4 nxd4 qh4 .
Edit ; But,now I think I see the defense, someone correct me if I am wrong here, but if he tries this I believe white gets a winning position from this defense. Bb4 nd2 nxd4 nxd4 qh4 0-0 nxd2 nf5!? qg5 and bd3. Winning for white as the knight is trapped . Any one see anything wrong with this ? Can the knight get out, looks trapped to me . Gonna look at it a little longer then vote
P.S. There are some interesting bd2 lines as well . Well, it looks to me that Black stays even on material if he plays + Show Spoiler +...Qe4 instead of ...Qg5 in your line but the position still looks better for us there. + Show Spoiler + In your abohve post you mention qe4 a leading to equality I must disagree .
If he playes qe4 after nf5 we play ng7 check .. I guess I should put every line ( which also looks winning ) Something like this . BB4 nd2 nxd4 nxd4 qh4 0-0 nxn nf5 qe4 nxg7+ kf8 bxd2 .. After bxd2 if black tries king x knight on g7 , he finds himself in the most unpleasant position after qc3 setting up discovered attacks and 7th rank pressure . If something like rg8 we have qg5 . If black tries qg6 the following line emergers . Qg6 bxd7! qxn qc3 bxb e6 +dc qf6 exd7 . We following up by trading queens and have a winning endgame with a pawn on d7 . This line may be LESS losing than the other one though for black . But far from equal, in fact losing in everyline I look at . I didn't say "leading to equality"; I said "the position still looks better for us there." I mentioned the line because the line you gave had Black losing a piece, and in this one, at least as far as I analyzed, he doesn't lose material, but I agree that it's certainly not a line for us to worry about.
FWIW, I analyzed as far as + Show Spoiler +After that, I had + Show Spoiler +for us, but your move does seem better. In either case, this is academic--if it wasn't clear before, I agree with you that this is not a line we need to worry about.
|
On September 09 2011 02:11 jdseemoreglass wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 02:00 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 09 2011 01:53 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 01:38 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 09 2011 01:31 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 01:16 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 08 2011 15:36 jdseemoreglass wrote:100% of the vote is going to the same move before we have even discussed or analyzed the differences? It's a shame, because we have a fantastic novelty in this position. I vote for 8. Qd2!+ Show Spoiler +This is clearly the best move in this position. I keep in touch with a lot of Grandmasters and they all say this is the new uber-modern standard at the highest levels of competition. We give up our queen in exchange for black's minor pieces. After the exchange is over, we will have a minor piece majority, which is more powerful than a single queen, especially with our immobile center. Honestly I think it would be a mistake for black to accept this gambit, because the initiative we gain is too dangerous.
+ Show Spoiler +What the hell are you smoking this move loses instantly, I surely hope this is your idea of a joke ,
A queen for 2 minors is a horrible trade(unless we had some sort of tactical compensation,which we do not) . A queen is worth 9 points a minor piece 3 points . It takes three minor pieces to equal a queen or at least two minors and two pawns to get general compensation .
There is no way a Gm would EVER make this move . Please no one vote this , unless you want the game to be over in about ten moves . I would rate this position down at least six pawns worth for white . Meaning insantly and beyond recoverability..... losing . There is absolutrely no reason to sacrifice such a great deal of material so soon for absolutely zero compensation . LOL! omg, this just keeps getting better, I'm laughing hysterically. I never realized my post would have made my whole day. I've honestly gotta start trolling more often. Lol , after seeing what youv'e had to say about chess, and prior analysis, this being your actual thoughts on the position would not be shocking to me at all . But I am glad your not that weak , once you turn your engines off I don't need an engine to tell me that a master wouldn't really favor Qe2. Also, my analysis is weak but you accuse me of using an engine? Isn't that contradictory? Anyway, you shouldn't take things so seriously. Lighten up a little please. Are you still stuck on my qe2 , Really get over it . I provided an IM game ( the one I happen to have first hand knowlegde from becuase I know the guy) from 2007 where it is played. I do not have my access to chess base this was the most modern I could find ) Where as all of you games are 50 plus years old . Being a Ranked master myself I will keep my own advise on what masters favor. Whats your Fide rating . or Icc even,do you have any competitive ratings ? Or just hot air . Yeah, my database is pretty old. And I don't have an official rating, I just play for fun on fics, and study the game as a hobby. I've got a few chess books, including on openings and endgames, I've watched many lectures on chess and I'm a big fan of Kingcrusher on youtube. My rating on fics is about 1600 blitz and 2000 standard. I have no idea what that equates to real world. I could lie and say I'm a master but that would be kind of pathetic, and it would show in my <master analysis. This is the opening though, so rating hardly matters since it's all book moves and theory. I am very reluctant to believe that an opening move that was never played a single time in a ~800,000 game database would turn out to be the best move. It seems very, very unlikely.
Honestly at this point I care little what you think . I offered to Pm you my name and Icc account, as well as Fide number . Beyond this not much more I can do . I have no reason to lie . Master is an average talent as I have always maintained I am . Yeah your about a 1500 probably, Just becuase you cannot achieve master rank , does not mean others have such a problem with it .
And btw I thought qe2 was a good chance to suprise him with a new idea that there is not alot of info on, but for some reason you want to play the positions that have been seen a thousand times( I wonder why ). Anyway I am over it . Whast you believe or think does not interest me too much at this point. You are the guy that made this entire thread of Fischer and couldnt even get the age he turned Gm correct .
( It never ceases to amaze me how 1500 level players know everything about chess. )
|
On September 09 2011 01:54 enigmaticcam wrote:8. Nbd2+ Show Spoiler +Sorry I wasn't around to participate in the last vote. I didn't have quite the time to delve into the position as I would've liked, so I chose not to vote. Anyways, I agree that this is the best move. Although I like the idea of challenging Black's good bishop with our bad, unfortunately he has the choice of exchanging instead with his knight, and we would have nothing to challenge his good bishop.
qrs: In your line following 8. Qd2, what happens after: 11: Bxc6 Bxd2 12. Bf3. It seems to me white is doing well. He's up in material and has the two bishops in an open position. Black can exchange his black bishop, but that's his only active piece (and with our pawns on the black squares, his white bishop will be hard pressed to activate). White can choose to bring out his rook and walk his king into the safety net behind his pawns, or push the king forward into an active position.
Or am I being majorly trolled right now... Yeah, I was just playing along with jdseemoreglass. Of course Qd2 would be an awful move for White, and the response I gave to it would be more or less the worst imaginable for Black. And now you're giving an awful continuation for White where he sacrifices his Queen for nothing after all...yeah, I don't know who's trolling whom any more. Let's get back to the game. :-)
|
On September 09 2011 02:19 qrs wrote:Yeah, I was just playing along with jdseemoreglass. Of course Qd2 would be an awful move for White, and the response I gave to it would be more or less the worst imaginable for Black. And now you're giving an awful continuation for White where he sacrifices his Queen for nothing after all...yeah, I don't know who's trolling whom any more. Let's get back to the game. :-)
Ok, that's what I thought  I've been out of the loop and saw this position, and I thought, "Hey, what about this?" Didn't even bother to look to see if Qd2 was worthy or not.
Hopefully this pissing contest will be over and we can get back to the game.
|
On September 09 2011 02:07 MrProphylactic wrote:Wow someone actually saying which knight goes to d2 All 17 voters for Nbd2 have said which Knight goes to d2.
|
On September 09 2011 02:17 MrProphylactic wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 02:11 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 02:00 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 09 2011 01:53 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 01:38 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 09 2011 01:31 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 01:16 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 08 2011 15:36 jdseemoreglass wrote:100% of the vote is going to the same move before we have even discussed or analyzed the differences? It's a shame, because we have a fantastic novelty in this position. I vote for 8. Qd2!+ Show Spoiler +This is clearly the best move in this position. I keep in touch with a lot of Grandmasters and they all say this is the new uber-modern standard at the highest levels of competition. We give up our queen in exchange for black's minor pieces. After the exchange is over, we will have a minor piece majority, which is more powerful than a single queen, especially with our immobile center. Honestly I think it would be a mistake for black to accept this gambit, because the initiative we gain is too dangerous.
+ Show Spoiler +What the hell are you smoking this move loses instantly, I surely hope this is your idea of a joke ,
A queen for 2 minors is a horrible trade(unless we had some sort of tactical compensation,which we do not) . A queen is worth 9 points a minor piece 3 points . It takes three minor pieces to equal a queen or at least two minors and two pawns to get general compensation .
There is no way a Gm would EVER make this move . Please no one vote this , unless you want the game to be over in about ten moves . I would rate this position down at least six pawns worth for white . Meaning insantly and beyond recoverability..... losing . There is absolutrely no reason to sacrifice such a great deal of material so soon for absolutely zero compensation . LOL! omg, this just keeps getting better, I'm laughing hysterically. I never realized my post would have made my whole day. I've honestly gotta start trolling more often. Lol , after seeing what youv'e had to say about chess, and prior analysis, this being your actual thoughts on the position would not be shocking to me at all . But I am glad your not that weak , once you turn your engines off I don't need an engine to tell me that a master wouldn't really favor Qe2. Also, my analysis is weak but you accuse me of using an engine? Isn't that contradictory? Anyway, you shouldn't take things so seriously. Lighten up a little please. Are you still stuck on my qe2 , Really get over it . I provided an IM game ( the one I happen to have first hand knowlegde from becuase I know the guy) from 2007 where it is played. I do not have my access to chess base this was the most modern I could find ) Where as all of you games are 50 plus years old . Being a Ranked master myself I will keep my own advise on what masters favor. Whats your Fide rating . or Icc even,do you have any competitive ratings ? Or just hot air . Yeah, my database is pretty old. And I don't have an official rating, I just play for fun on fics, and study the game as a hobby. I've got a few chess books, including on openings and endgames, I've watched many lectures on chess and I'm a big fan of Kingcrusher on youtube. My rating on fics is about 1600 blitz and 2000 standard. I have no idea what that equates to real world. I could lie and say I'm a master but that would be kind of pathetic, and it would show in my <master analysis. This is the opening though, so rating hardly matters since it's all book moves and theory. I am very reluctant to believe that an opening move that was never played a single time in a ~800,000 game database would turn out to be the best move. It seems very, very unlikely. Honestly at this point I care little what you think . I offered to Pm you my name and Icc account, as well as Fide number . Beyond this not much more I can do . I have no reason to lie . Master is an average talent as I have always maintained I am . Yeah your about a 1500 probably, Just becuase you cannot achieve master rank , does not mean others have such a problem with it . And btw I thought qe2 was a good chance to suprise him with a new idea that there is not alot of info on, but for some reason you want to play the positions that have been seen a thousand times( I wonder why ). Anyway I am over it . Whast you believe or think does not interest me too much at this point. You are the guy that made this entire thread of Fischer and couldnt even get the age he turned Gm correct .
Dude calm down. You've made it very clear you are God's gift to us all, but stop acting so immature about it.
|
On September 09 2011 02:25 mastergriggy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 02:17 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 09 2011 02:11 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 02:00 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 09 2011 01:53 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 01:38 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 09 2011 01:31 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 01:16 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 08 2011 15:36 jdseemoreglass wrote:100% of the vote is going to the same move before we have even discussed or analyzed the differences? It's a shame, because we have a fantastic novelty in this position. I vote for 8. Qd2!+ Show Spoiler +This is clearly the best move in this position. I keep in touch with a lot of Grandmasters and they all say this is the new uber-modern standard at the highest levels of competition. We give up our queen in exchange for black's minor pieces. After the exchange is over, we will have a minor piece majority, which is more powerful than a single queen, especially with our immobile center. Honestly I think it would be a mistake for black to accept this gambit, because the initiative we gain is too dangerous.
+ Show Spoiler +What the hell are you smoking this move loses instantly, I surely hope this is your idea of a joke ,
A queen for 2 minors is a horrible trade(unless we had some sort of tactical compensation,which we do not) . A queen is worth 9 points a minor piece 3 points . It takes three minor pieces to equal a queen or at least two minors and two pawns to get general compensation .
There is no way a Gm would EVER make this move . Please no one vote this , unless you want the game to be over in about ten moves . I would rate this position down at least six pawns worth for white . Meaning insantly and beyond recoverability..... losing . There is absolutrely no reason to sacrifice such a great deal of material so soon for absolutely zero compensation . LOL! omg, this just keeps getting better, I'm laughing hysterically. I never realized my post would have made my whole day. I've honestly gotta start trolling more often. Lol , after seeing what youv'e had to say about chess, and prior analysis, this being your actual thoughts on the position would not be shocking to me at all . But I am glad your not that weak , once you turn your engines off I don't need an engine to tell me that a master wouldn't really favor Qe2. Also, my analysis is weak but you accuse me of using an engine? Isn't that contradictory? Anyway, you shouldn't take things so seriously. Lighten up a little please. Are you still stuck on my qe2 , Really get over it . I provided an IM game ( the one I happen to have first hand knowlegde from becuase I know the guy) from 2007 where it is played. I do not have my access to chess base this was the most modern I could find ) Where as all of you games are 50 plus years old . Being a Ranked master myself I will keep my own advise on what masters favor. Whats your Fide rating . or Icc even,do you have any competitive ratings ? Or just hot air . Yeah, my database is pretty old. And I don't have an official rating, I just play for fun on fics, and study the game as a hobby. I've got a few chess books, including on openings and endgames, I've watched many lectures on chess and I'm a big fan of Kingcrusher on youtube. My rating on fics is about 1600 blitz and 2000 standard. I have no idea what that equates to real world. I could lie and say I'm a master but that would be kind of pathetic, and it would show in my <master analysis. This is the opening though, so rating hardly matters since it's all book moves and theory. I am very reluctant to believe that an opening move that was never played a single time in a ~800,000 game database would turn out to be the best move. It seems very, very unlikely. Honestly at this point I care little what you think . I offered to Pm you my name and Icc account, as well as Fide number . Beyond this not much more I can do . I have no reason to lie . Master is an average talent as I have always maintained I am . Yeah your about a 1500 probably, Just becuase you cannot achieve master rank , does not mean others have such a problem with it . And btw I thought qe2 was a good chance to suprise him with a new idea that there is not alot of info on, but for some reason you want to play the positions that have been seen a thousand times( I wonder why ). Anyway I am over it . Whast you believe or think does not interest me too much at this point. You are the guy that made this entire thread of Fischer and couldnt even get the age he turned Gm correct . Dude calm down. You've made it very clear you are God's gift to us all, but stop acting so immature about it.
I can see where you get that out of my claim to be an " average talent ". You have a skill for taking poeple out of context I will give you that . And I do not think an engine would get you any closer to understanding what goes on in the mind of a master, did not mean to imply it could .
|
On September 09 2011 02:17 MrProphylactic wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 02:11 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 02:00 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 09 2011 01:53 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 01:38 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 09 2011 01:31 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 01:16 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 08 2011 15:36 jdseemoreglass wrote:100% of the vote is going to the same move before we have even discussed or analyzed the differences? It's a shame, because we have a fantastic novelty in this position. I vote for 8. Qd2!+ Show Spoiler +This is clearly the best move in this position. I keep in touch with a lot of Grandmasters and they all say this is the new uber-modern standard at the highest levels of competition. We give up our queen in exchange for black's minor pieces. After the exchange is over, we will have a minor piece majority, which is more powerful than a single queen, especially with our immobile center. Honestly I think it would be a mistake for black to accept this gambit, because the initiative we gain is too dangerous.
+ Show Spoiler +What the hell are you smoking this move loses instantly, I surely hope this is your idea of a joke ,
A queen for 2 minors is a horrible trade(unless we had some sort of tactical compensation,which we do not) . A queen is worth 9 points a minor piece 3 points . It takes three minor pieces to equal a queen or at least two minors and two pawns to get general compensation .
There is no way a Gm would EVER make this move . Please no one vote this , unless you want the game to be over in about ten moves . I would rate this position down at least six pawns worth for white . Meaning insantly and beyond recoverability..... losing . There is absolutrely no reason to sacrifice such a great deal of material so soon for absolutely zero compensation . LOL! omg, this just keeps getting better, I'm laughing hysterically. I never realized my post would have made my whole day. I've honestly gotta start trolling more often. Lol , after seeing what youv'e had to say about chess, and prior analysis, this being your actual thoughts on the position would not be shocking to me at all . But I am glad your not that weak , once you turn your engines off I don't need an engine to tell me that a master wouldn't really favor Qe2. Also, my analysis is weak but you accuse me of using an engine? Isn't that contradictory? Anyway, you shouldn't take things so seriously. Lighten up a little please. Are you still stuck on my qe2 , Really get over it . I provided an IM game ( the one I happen to have first hand knowlegde from becuase I know the guy) from 2007 where it is played. I do not have my access to chess base this was the most modern I could find ) Where as all of you games are 50 plus years old . Being a Ranked master myself I will keep my own advise on what masters favor. Whats your Fide rating . or Icc even,do you have any competitive ratings ? Or just hot air . Yeah, my database is pretty old. And I don't have an official rating, I just play for fun on fics, and study the game as a hobby. I've got a few chess books, including on openings and endgames, I've watched many lectures on chess and I'm a big fan of Kingcrusher on youtube. My rating on fics is about 1600 blitz and 2000 standard. I have no idea what that equates to real world. I could lie and say I'm a master but that would be kind of pathetic, and it would show in my <master analysis. This is the opening though, so rating hardly matters since it's all book moves and theory. I am very reluctant to believe that an opening move that was never played a single time in a ~800,000 game database would turn out to be the best move. It seems very, very unlikely. Honestly at this point I care little what you think . I offered to Pm you my name and Icc account, as well as Fide number . Beyond this not much more I can do . I have no reason to lie . Master is an average talent as I have always maintained I am . Yeah your about a 1500 probably, Just becuase you cannot achieve master rank , does not mean others have such a problem with it . And btw I thought qe2 was a good chance to suprise him with a new idea that there is not alot of info on, but for some reason you want to play the positions that have been seen a thousand times( I wonder why ). Anyway I am over it . Whast you believe or think does not interest me too much at this point. You are the guy that made this entire thread of Fischer and couldnt even get the age he turned Gm correct .
Maybe you should have spent more time working toward having a less abrasive personality instead of improving your chess rating. I understand you might feel embarrassed that you didn't recognize the obvious queen blunder was a joke, as everyone else did, but there's no need to throw around so many insults, honestly. Yes, I stated that Fischer reached GM at 16 instead of 15 1/2. You've mentioned that fact in four posts now, which makes me wonder why you take such glee in the mistake.
|
On September 09 2011 02:27 MrProphylactic wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 02:25 mastergriggy wrote:On September 09 2011 02:17 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 09 2011 02:11 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 02:00 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 09 2011 01:53 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 01:38 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 09 2011 01:31 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 09 2011 01:16 MrProphylactic wrote:On September 08 2011 15:36 jdseemoreglass wrote:100% of the vote is going to the same move before we have even discussed or analyzed the differences? It's a shame, because we have a fantastic novelty in this position. I vote for 8. Qd2!+ Show Spoiler +This is clearly the best move in this position. I keep in touch with a lot of Grandmasters and they all say this is the new uber-modern standard at the highest levels of competition. We give up our queen in exchange for black's minor pieces. After the exchange is over, we will have a minor piece majority, which is more powerful than a single queen, especially with our immobile center. Honestly I think it would be a mistake for black to accept this gambit, because the initiative we gain is too dangerous.
+ Show Spoiler +What the hell are you smoking this move loses instantly, I surely hope this is your idea of a joke ,
A queen for 2 minors is a horrible trade(unless we had some sort of tactical compensation,which we do not) . A queen is worth 9 points a minor piece 3 points . It takes three minor pieces to equal a queen or at least two minors and two pawns to get general compensation .
There is no way a Gm would EVER make this move . Please no one vote this , unless you want the game to be over in about ten moves . I would rate this position down at least six pawns worth for white . Meaning insantly and beyond recoverability..... losing . There is absolutrely no reason to sacrifice such a great deal of material so soon for absolutely zero compensation . LOL! omg, this just keeps getting better, I'm laughing hysterically. I never realized my post would have made my whole day. I've honestly gotta start trolling more often. Lol , after seeing what youv'e had to say about chess, and prior analysis, this being your actual thoughts on the position would not be shocking to me at all . But I am glad your not that weak , once you turn your engines off I don't need an engine to tell me that a master wouldn't really favor Qe2. Also, my analysis is weak but you accuse me of using an engine? Isn't that contradictory? Anyway, you shouldn't take things so seriously. Lighten up a little please. Are you still stuck on my qe2 , Really get over it . I provided an IM game ( the one I happen to have first hand knowlegde from becuase I know the guy) from 2007 where it is played. I do not have my access to chess base this was the most modern I could find ) Where as all of you games are 50 plus years old . Being a Ranked master myself I will keep my own advise on what masters favor. Whats your Fide rating . or Icc even,do you have any competitive ratings ? Or just hot air . Yeah, my database is pretty old. And I don't have an official rating, I just play for fun on fics, and study the game as a hobby. I've got a few chess books, including on openings and endgames, I've watched many lectures on chess and I'm a big fan of Kingcrusher on youtube. My rating on fics is about 1600 blitz and 2000 standard. I have no idea what that equates to real world. I could lie and say I'm a master but that would be kind of pathetic, and it would show in my <master analysis. This is the opening though, so rating hardly matters since it's all book moves and theory. I am very reluctant to believe that an opening move that was never played a single time in a ~800,000 game database would turn out to be the best move. It seems very, very unlikely. Honestly at this point I care little what you think . I offered to Pm you my name and Icc account, as well as Fide number . Beyond this not much more I can do . I have no reason to lie . Master is an average talent as I have always maintained I am . Yeah your about a 1500 probably, Just becuase you cannot achieve master rank , does not mean others have such a problem with it . And btw I thought qe2 was a good chance to suprise him with a new idea that there is not alot of info on, but for some reason you want to play the positions that have been seen a thousand times( I wonder why ). Anyway I am over it . Whast you believe or think does not interest me too much at this point. You are the guy that made this entire thread of Fischer and couldnt even get the age he turned Gm correct . Dude calm down. You've made it very clear you are God's gift to us all, but stop acting so immature about it. I can see where you get that out of my claim to be an " average talent ". You have a skill for taking poeple out of context I will give you that . And I do not think an engine would get you any closer to understanding what goes on in the mind of a master, did not mean to imply it could .
It wasn't "average talent" before you edited it lol. But this is a lighthearted game and discussion. Why can't we just enjoy it without screaming insults at other people? I'm glad you are a master, in fact a little bit envious, but I came to this thread to enjoy a game of chess with the community. So maybe we can stick to that?
|
On September 09 2011 02:17 MrProphylactic wrote:
( It never ceases to amaze me how 1500 level players know everything about chess. )
MrProphylactic, you're missing the point of the game, I think. From what you've said about yourself, you may very well be the strongest individual player here, but this isn't about who is the strongest player; it's about playing the game as a team and having fun discussing it together. When one of us posts analysis, we're not saying, "Look, I know everything about chess." We're saying, "This is how it seems to me; if you disagree, then show me why I'm wrong." The nice thing about chess is that if you know someone is wrong, you very often can show them exactly why, and that happens, and we learn and everyone is happy. Sometimes it's not easy to prove that your assessment of a given position is correct, but even then, discussion usually leads to a better understanding of the pros and cons of a position and why each person thinks what he does about it.
I haven't been taking anyone's analysis on faith here, and I don't much care what their rating is. I think that jdseemoreglass has been contributing good analysis, not because he impressed me with his rating but because in many cases, when I followed his lines, I couldn't find anything better, or he showed me why something I thought might work was wrong. In other cases, even after discussion with him, I disagreed with his assessment, and in a case or two, it even seemed to me like he had overlooked something outright, but even if he has made mistakes from time to time (as most of us have), that's nothing to worry about because although I think he's a good analyst, I still check his lines for myself before trusting them. I would do that if he were Kasparov, because otherwise, I'm not playing the game for myself, I'm just voting along with someone else.
You've also contributed some good analysis, MrProphylactic, although I've followed less of it because, at first, your posts were hard to read (they've gotten better). I value your input to the game because it's good input. The fact that you're a master is irrelevant to me.
TL;DR: it's about playing the game to the best of our ability--each one of us--and having fun, not about winning at all costs. Don't appeal to your authority as a player, convince us of your moves by showing us why they're right. That way everyone enjoys the game, whether we win or not.
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
On September 09 2011 02:42 qrs wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 02:17 MrProphylactic wrote:
( It never ceases to amaze me how 1500 level players know everything about chess. ) MrProphylactic, you're missing the point of the game, I think. From what you've said about yourself, you may very well be the strongest individual player here, but this isn't about who is the strongest player; it's about playing the game as a team and having fun discussing it together. When one of us posts analysis, we're not saying, "Look, I know everything about chess." We're saying, "This is how it seems to me; if you disagree, then show me why I'm wrong." The nice thing about chess is that if you know someone is wrong, you very often can show them exactly why, and that happens, and we learn and everyone is happy. Sometimes it's not easy to prove that your assessment of a given position is correct, but even then, discussion usually leads to a better understanding of the pros and cons of a position and why each person thinks what he does about it. I haven't been taking anyone's analysis on faith here, and I don't much care what their rating is. I think that jdseemoreglass has been contributing good analysis, not because he impressed me with his rating but because in many cases, when I followed his lines, I couldn't find anything better, or he showed me why something I thought might work was wrong. In other cases, even after discussion with him, I disagreed with his assessment, and in a case or two, it even seemed to me like he had overlooked something outright, but even if he has made mistakes from time to time (as most of us have), that's nothing to worry about because although I think he's a good analyst, I still check his lines for myself before trusting them. I would do that if he were Kasparov, because otherwise, I'm not playing the game for myself, I'm just voting along with someone else. You've also contributed some good analysis, MrProphylactic, although I've followed less of it because, at first, your posts were hard to read (they've gotten better). I value your input to the game because it's good input. The fact that you're a master is irrelevant to me. TL;DR: it's about playing the game to the best of our ability--each one of us--and having fun, not about winning at all costs. Don't appeal to your authority as a player, convince us of your moves by showing us why they're right. That way everyone enjoys the game, whether we win or not.
Big Q hits the nail on the head with this post. I was going to make a similar point and realized that he's got it all covered already.
Also, I vote for 8. Nbd4
EDIT: HERP DERP DERP DERP OOPS I MEAN:
Also, I vote for 8. Nbd2
+ Show Spoiler +
We want to interpose, and this develops the knight and also threatens his knight. I think it works fine and it guards our other knight and in general is awesome.
I'd also like to note that, if we castled during any of the moves I said we should castle we'd be fine now.
|
On September 09 2011 02:50 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 02:42 qrs wrote:On September 09 2011 02:17 MrProphylactic wrote:
( It never ceases to amaze me how 1500 level players know everything about chess. ) MrProphylactic, you're missing the point of the game, I think. From what you've said about yourself, you may very well be the strongest individual player here, but this isn't about who is the strongest player; it's about playing the game as a team and having fun discussing it together. When one of us posts analysis, we're not saying, "Look, I know everything about chess." We're saying, "This is how it seems to me; if you disagree, then show me why I'm wrong." The nice thing about chess is that if you know someone is wrong, you very often can show them exactly why, and that happens, and we learn and everyone is happy. Sometimes it's not easy to prove that your assessment of a given position is correct, but even then, discussion usually leads to a better understanding of the pros and cons of a position and why each person thinks what he does about it. I haven't been taking anyone's analysis on faith here, and I don't much care what their rating is. I think that jdseemoreglass has been contributing good analysis, not because he impressed me with his rating but because in many cases, when I followed his lines, I couldn't find anything better, or he showed me why something I thought might work was wrong. In other cases, even after discussion with him, I disagreed with his assessment, and in a case or two, it even seemed to me like he had overlooked something outright, but even if he has made mistakes from time to time (as most of us have), that's nothing to worry about because although I think he's a good analyst, I still check his lines for myself before trusting them. I would do that if he were Kasparov, because otherwise, I'm not playing the game for myself, I'm just voting along with someone else. You've also contributed some good analysis, MrProphylactic, although I've followed less of it because, at first, your posts were hard to read (they've gotten better). I value your input to the game because it's good input. The fact that you're a master is irrelevant to me. TL;DR: it's about playing the game to the best of our ability--each one of us--and having fun, not about winning at all costs. Don't appeal to your authority as a player, convince us of your moves by showing us why they're right. That way everyone enjoys the game, whether we win or not. Big Q hits the nail on the head with this post. I was going to make a similar point and realized that he's got it all covered already. Also, I vote for 8. Nbd4+ Show Spoiler +
We want to interpose, and this develops the knight and also threatens his knight. I think it works fine and it guards our other knight and in general is awesome.
I'd also like to note that, if we castled during any of the moves I said we should castle we'd be fine now.
+ Show Spoiler +That is all I have been focusing on, providing accurate analysis. When someone attacks me as a person however I will respond, at this point, this experience is rather comical for me.
I am beginning to see why having this many players of the current average strength is a handicap in this case. But I will try to steer the natives as best I can . Most of the analysis provided by some here is so flawed(after ng5 made it clear about engines) , I would not now where to begin correcting it, .
But... I will try my best time allowed ( unless I lose interest ) to correct any lines i see that have gross tactical mistakes while putting it in simplelist way possible so people can follow. To be honest I do not know why or how I became the center of focus. Being a run of the mill master is really not that big of deal. It is just Ironic at ICC you see the same thing during tourny broadcasts . 1500 know it alls, gets on my nerves a tad sometimes ,However, I will try my best to ignore the phenomenon from now on
EDIT: how can a knight go to D4? that is illegal .
Maybe you mean Nbd2 ???
|
On September 09 2011 03:48 MrProphylactic wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 02:50 Blazinghand wrote:On September 09 2011 02:42 qrs wrote:On September 09 2011 02:17 MrProphylactic wrote:
( It never ceases to amaze me how 1500 level players know everything about chess. ) MrProphylactic, you're missing the point of the game, I think. From what you've said about yourself, you may very well be the strongest individual player here, but this isn't about who is the strongest player; it's about playing the game as a team and having fun discussing it together. When one of us posts analysis, we're not saying, "Look, I know everything about chess." We're saying, "This is how it seems to me; if you disagree, then show me why I'm wrong." The nice thing about chess is that if you know someone is wrong, you very often can show them exactly why, and that happens, and we learn and everyone is happy. Sometimes it's not easy to prove that your assessment of a given position is correct, but even then, discussion usually leads to a better understanding of the pros and cons of a position and why each person thinks what he does about it. I haven't been taking anyone's analysis on faith here, and I don't much care what their rating is. I think that jdseemoreglass has been contributing good analysis, not because he impressed me with his rating but because in many cases, when I followed his lines, I couldn't find anything better, or he showed me why something I thought might work was wrong. In other cases, even after discussion with him, I disagreed with his assessment, and in a case or two, it even seemed to me like he had overlooked something outright, but even if he has made mistakes from time to time (as most of us have), that's nothing to worry about because although I think he's a good analyst, I still check his lines for myself before trusting them. I would do that if he were Kasparov, because otherwise, I'm not playing the game for myself, I'm just voting along with someone else. You've also contributed some good analysis, MrProphylactic, although I've followed less of it because, at first, your posts were hard to read (they've gotten better). I value your input to the game because it's good input. The fact that you're a master is irrelevant to me. TL;DR: it's about playing the game to the best of our ability--each one of us--and having fun, not about winning at all costs. Don't appeal to your authority as a player, convince us of your moves by showing us why they're right. That way everyone enjoys the game, whether we win or not. Big Q hits the nail on the head with this post. I was going to make a similar point and realized that he's got it all covered already. Also, I vote for 8. Nbd4+ Show Spoiler +
We want to interpose, and this develops the knight and also threatens his knight. I think it works fine and it guards our other knight and in general is awesome.
I'd also like to note that, if we castled during any of the moves I said we should castle we'd be fine now.
+ Show Spoiler +That is all I have been , providing accurate analysis. When someone attacks me as a person however I will respond, at this point, this experience is rather comical for me.
I beginning to see why having this many players of the current average strength is a handicap in this case. But I will try to steer the natives as best I can . Most of the analysis provided by some here is so flawed(after ng5 made it clear about engines) , I would not now where to begin correcting it, .
But... I will try my best time allowed ( unless I lose interest ) to correct any lines i see that have mistakes while putting it in simplelist way possible so people can follow. To be honest I do not know why or how I became the center of focus. Being a run of the mill master is really not that big of deal. It is just Ironic art ICC you see the same thing during tourny broadcasts . 1500 know it alls, gets on my nerves a tad sometimes , I will ignore the phenomenon from now on EDIT: how can a knight go to D4? that is illegal . Maybe you mean Nbd2 ???
How's the view from up there?
|
On September 09 2011 03:48 MrProphylactic wrote:
To be honest I do not know why or how I became the center of focus. LOL
Listen, I have a good idea for you, MrProphylactic. Rather than participating in this team game, which does not seem to really be your cup of tea, why don't you do the opposite: start a new TL Chess Match, featuring you as the master who takes on the team. You could even start it now; no need to wait for this one to be over. I bet a lot of people from this game would sign up to play you too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ttQDQ.png)
