View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Wed Jan 17, 2018 3:13 am



Reply to topic  [ 74 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03] 
Author Message
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 3:48 pm
Posts: 1516
Location: Germany
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
Sorry for not explaining. Tarrasch believed Lasker's ascendancy was not due to Lasker's skill, but because of his luck. He had to write a tournament book about a tournament Lasker had won (if I remember correctly) and included a table with all the "luck" Lasker had had and how the result would have looked without Lasker's luck. If you are interested in that I can look up more details. The match I was talking about can be found here. In 1908 Tarrasch had had his last big success in Ostende.


Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:35 am
Profile
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 1:39 pm
Posts: 2856
Location: Maryland, USA
Rating: 1698
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
LOL!

Well it's nice to see (not really) that pettiness was part of GM chess back then too. I know there a lot of similar stories of pettiness and ego surrounding Nimzovich as well, some of them involving Tarrasch himself. I would love to go back in time to attend a tournament with those two guys and maybe Capa and Alekhine thrown in too just for fun.

All this caused me to order the Dover edition of "The Game of Chess". Someone on Amazon said to avoid the algebraic edition, though I'm not sure why.

_________________
illigetimi non carborundum.


Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:34 am
Profile WWW
Premium Member
Premium Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:24 pm
Posts: 2010
Location: Silicon Valley, California, USA
Rating: 1702 USCF
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
I'm sorry guys... I"m just dying here... I thought "luck table" was a typo of some sort... ROFLMAOPMP!!

_________________
I know you believe you understand what you think I just said, but you may not realize what I implied is not what you inferred.


Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:55 pm
Profile
Rook

Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 5:14 pm
Posts: 213
Rating Class: Expert (2000-2200)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
Really like your approach / philosophy as to why you are playing these openings. Good presentation / depth of coverage. Liked it alot.

_________________
1st Chessvideos.tv Tourney Winner :D
Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/strategylol
Coaching: I'm accepting *1* new student only (01/11/13). The only package I'm offering right now is 4 hours coaching for £100.
Donations: My Paypal is Andymlewis@msn.com


Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:42 pm
Profile WWW
Rook
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 7:54 pm
Posts: 168
Rating: 1550
Rating Class: Class C (1400-1600)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
Calm wrote:
Really like your approach / philosophy as to why you are playing these openings. Good presentation / depth of coverage. Liked it alot.

Yeah, just what we need... another positional maven!

It's a good thing that guys like me are here to shake things up a bit! Come on now, WHO just said the Latvian is unsound? Man, it's like I've gotta' patrol these forums every day or two just to catch some fool trying to diss the best Defence invented!

I'll bet that you think the King's Gambit is unsound, too... am I right?

Well, it is--but not in a way you'd expect!

[Event "Cappelle la Grande"]
[Site "France"]
[Date "2003.02.27"]
[EventDate "2003.02.22"]
[Round "7"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Charles Kennaugh"]
[Black "Kamran G Shirazi"]
[ECO "C30"]
[WhiteElo "2290"]
[BlackElo "2438"]
[PlyCount "84"]

1. e4 e5 2. f4 f5 3. exf5 e4 4. Qh5+ Ke7 5. d3 Nf6 6. Qg5 h6
7. Qh4 d5 8. g4 Kf7 9. dxe4 h5 10. e5 hxg4 11. Qg5 Nbd7
12. Be2 Rh5 13. Qg6+ Kg8 14. exf6 Nxf6 15. Bxg4 Rh6 16. Qg5
Be7 17. Bf3 Ne4 18. Qg2 Bh4+ 19. Kf1 Bxf5 20. Be3 Qf6 21. c3
Re8 22. Nd2 Nxc3 23. bxc3 Rxe3 24. Ne2 Rg6 25. Ng3 Bd3+
26. Kg1 Qb6 27. Qf2 Bxg3 28. hxg3 Rxg3+ 29. Kh2 Rexf3 30. Qxb6
Rh3+ 31. Kg2 Rfg3+ 32. Kf2 cxb6 33. Rxh3 Rxh3 34. Re1 Rh2+
35. Ke3 Bf5 36. a3 Rh3+ 37. Kd4 Kf7 38. Kxd5 Rxc3 39. Nc4 Be6+
40. Rxe6 Rxc4 41. f5 Rc5+ 42. Ke4 Ra5 0-1

This is my type of chess--it's actually fun, and exciting! Who's with me here?

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1261101

And by the way, I'm still takin' on all comers at http://www.freechess.org

Look up my videos--then we'll see if it's really as unsound as you say it is! LOL

Greco

_________________
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f5 3. exf5 Bc5 4. Nxe5 Bxf2+ 5. Kxf2 Qh4+ 6. Kg1 Qd4#
You can run, but you can't hide!


Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:39 am
Profile WWW
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 4:07 pm
Posts: 1492
Location: Tucson, Arizona USA
Rating: 2014U
Rating Class: Expert (2000-2200)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
King_Greco, you and 2...f5 really need to get a room :lol: . In the game you cited, Kennaugh played 6.Qg5 when 6.Qh4 is the most natural move in the world. Going to g5 gave Shirazi unnecessary play IMO. There is a lot you can play on FICS and ICC that you cannot play in serious events. The fact that Shirazi finished 35th in that tournament should mean something, isn't the idea for a player of his status to win the event?

You are trying to make a point that the Latvian is the end-all-to-beat-all defense. That's fine, if you want to believe that. The Latvian is fine for a surprise weapon for shock value and I might play it as Black once in a while but that would totally depend on who my opponent is and what the tournament standing is like.

I am putting out videos on the Goring Gambit, and though it has a very high success ratio on my databases from strong players, I still would not make the claim that this opening is as good as the more standard openings such as the Ruy Lopez, nor even as sound as the Scotch Gambit (if we want to stay in the realm of gambits). The Goring is a fun opening and I have a good number of wins with it in tournaments - but I have more wins with the Ruy Lopez.

Sadly, I don't have time to take you up on the challenge on FICS, I have to use my time more prudently these days.

I just hope you don't spend too much time on this one defense before realizing that there are other (and equally fun) defense for Black that give better chances. It just takes the determination to do some research and put in the effort to learn new things. Watching Katar's videos is a good start.

_________________
Steve Farmer
http://www.youtube.com/user/StoopidBishop?feature=mhee


Sun Nov 29, 2009 11:07 am
Profile YIM WWW
Rook
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 7:54 pm
Posts: 168
Rating: 1550
Rating Class: Class C (1400-1600)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
My bad, sfarmer... i don't mean to sound like i'm promoting something EVIL... ROFL j/k

Look here, i know that most people here don't think the Latvian Gambit is an "end-all-to-beat-all defence" in fact *READ THIS CAREFULLY*

I don't either!!

If it was, then I wouldn't play it!

I don't play things that 'normal' individuals term as good chess... or at least, not frequently. You have to be known for something in life, y'know? LOL I don't take it that seriously, but you get the idea...

Furthermore... there are MANY other gambits that AREN'T the Latvian that I support with fervor:

For instance: Panteldakis (1. e4 e5 2. f4 f5!? -- Btw, I usually don't play Shirazi's line...)
Brussels (1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 f5!? -- I've done a lot of 'original analysis' on this one... many game, my king ends up running all the way to a7! But I have a lot of initiative)
And one of my favourites: the Lean Variation (that Finnish IM Salmensuu likes to play) 1. e4 Nc6 2. Nf3 f5!? (don't let them into familiar territory!!)

For the record, I understand that you (and most of the people who post here) are much better players than I am. That's why I've got to keep making you think and keeping you off-balance to have a chance against players like you. Plus, it's a lot of fun; knowing that your opponent's strongly-held views are being challenged with each move! Anyways, just remember that if it involves sacrificing material (preferably on the kingside!), then it probably involves me! (And if it doesn't, then PLEASE show me the moves so I can get in on the fun!)

Greco

_________________
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f5 3. exf5 Bc5 4. Nxe5 Bxf2+ 5. Kxf2 Qh4+ 6. Kg1 Qd4#
You can run, but you can't hide!


Sun Nov 29, 2009 11:23 am
Profile WWW
King
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 12:19 pm
Posts: 1890
Location: Los Angeles
Rating Class: Expert (2000-2200)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
King_Greco wrote:
Yeah, just what we need... another positional maven!

Greco, give me a break. I played Danish gambit, Portuguese gambit, Icelandic gambit, Hennig-Schara gambit, Albin countergambit, From gambit (which i still play) , and (less frequently) Sicilian Wing gambit all the way up to 1800 uscf. I also played the GROB opening when i started out in chess. The Latvian is even less reputable than the above.

I'm recommending a lot of counterattacking gambit lines too, but only when justified. Against the Scotch, it's not justified! Scotch is legit, so is Ruy Lopez. Against the Kings Gambit, i will recommend some violent lines where black will sac 2 pawns or more (Rybka says -.50 or so.). In the Ulvestad, black is prepared to sacrifice a rook and some pawns for a mating attack (also sound according to Rybka).

However, getting a losing or clearly worse position on move 5 is not my idea of playing exciting chess, and studying unsound openings is simply a big waste of time that will not help you improve at chess or learn chess fundamentals. It will give you spots of entertainment here and there, and a lot of bad results too. So suit yourself, play what you will, but you'll NEVER hear a strong player recommending your approach if the objective is to win and improve. Just my opinion, peace out.

_________________
"Yes, I have played a blitz game once. It was on a train, in 1929." -Botvinnik


Sun Nov 29, 2009 11:57 am
Profile WWW
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 4:07 pm
Posts: 1492
Location: Tucson, Arizona USA
Rating: 2014U
Rating Class: Expert (2000-2200)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
Greco, I fully understand your thoughts, believe me when I say you are not the first one to make such a case. So if you use these kinds of lines to keep players like Katar and myself 'off-balance' realize that we have seen it all before, and if you come up with something totally new in the first few moves of a game our wider repertoire will enable us to come up with the correct solution or steer the game back to familiar (and most often favorable) continuations.

I recently met with a bunch of players of varying strengths and we talked about where we were and what we wanted to do with our game. The odd thing that struck me is that players up to B class wanted to win and it seemed that some B class and higher just wanted to improve in some way. There seems to be a difference here in the two thoughts; 'Wanting to win' could be interpreted as 'Anything to win', catch them off-balance etc. Those who just wanted to improve seemed more willing to accept changes to their current view of thought, even if it was something as simple as changing their opening choices.

I have a friend who plays the Colle, and plays it well, but he is a 1600 player and will perhaps remain at that level if he never experiments with other openings, this is so because he has his set plans and things differ only slightly from game to game. Now, if he were to play the Zukertort or London Systems (akin to the Colle) then he might be able to move up 100-200 points from that alone as he will start seeing more possibilities and transpositions into more favorable lines.

You said it yourself "Anyways, just remember that if it involves sacrificing material (preferably on the kingside!), then it probably involves me! (And if it doesn't, then PLEASE show me the moves so I can get in on the fun!)"

We _are_ trying to show you the moves so you can get in on the fun! If you like double KP openings then be sure to follow Katar's videos, they're great! If you like Sicilian Defenses then you will find many of these here on CV.TV.

I understand you want to have fun, we do too! There are times that I will play the Goring Gambit, but there are certain conditions that must be set before doing so, for example, will only a win put me in the money and a draw is of no use, the I can play it - but if a draw is an acceptable outcome but a win takes first place, then I play something steady like the Ruy Lopez. I will also play the Goring if I have know my opponent, especially if that person is a strong player and has made the claim that the Goring is a draw, then your thought of keeping the person 'off-balance' has a real psychological edge, it is sort of like telling your opponent "Okay, I know you think this is a draw, but now it's time to take your exam, can you still find the draw?" Who has not missed a question or two on an exam that you have studied hard for? It actually adds pressure on the second person.

When we talk of putting someone 'off-balance' here's how I see it; I want my opponent to either be intimidated by me (not what I play) or intimidated by what they do not know about themselves (i.e., do I really remember the drawing line in the Goring?). That is psychological warfare. Playing a bad gambit in the 'hopes' to throw your opponent off-balance is much different and much less effective.

We are not trying to bash you personally. Think of us as experienced players (your big brothers, if you will) who fully understand your thought process with your opening choice and that we are trying to share some advice to help you to improve - not the "win at any cost" method.

_________________
Steve Farmer
http://www.youtube.com/user/StoopidBishop?feature=mhee


Sun Nov 29, 2009 1:12 pm
Profile YIM WWW
Rook
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 7:54 pm
Posts: 168
Rating: 1550
Rating Class: Class C (1400-1600)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
Well, seeing as you're a "strong" player and I'm a "weak" player... then what you say makes perfect sense LOL...
No, I'm serious; furthermore, if the things that I'm playing were popular things that I *don't* "NEVER hear a strong player recommending*... well then I wouldn't be "King Greco"...

Here's my major contention with your above comments. You claim that since an opening is "Legit", that means that any counter-gambit played against it is destined to fail. Good for you! To be honest, this just sounds like an excuse after losing to said "counter-gambit", to prove that it shouldn't have happened... well, I'm going a little too far there, but honestly, WHO determines if an opening is "Legit"?

Oh wait, I forgot... the answer is Rybka. ROFL ROFL

The thing is, that I don't agree with Rybka all the time... actually, I'm just guessing, 'cuz I play a ton of lines that people say are 'forced losses' according to Rybka, but I don't even HAVE Rybka!
*Note: The word Rybka has hereby been banned from the remainder of King_Greco's post*
Thanks, moderator!

Anyways, different positions suit different individuals. What is an 'unsound and losing position' to one person might be totally viable for another... KEYWORD 'Might'...

Note that I'm not just throwing out a lot of rhetoric, I KNOW that 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6?! IS bad for Black...
-but-
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f5!? is not... *necessarily*

The key difference is that the knight can occupy it's natural square, and that there is a counterattack on the king's pawn! There is absolutely NO 'forced loss' from this position for Black... Chess is a much more complicated game than that.

And one more thing--if you think that you'll "never hear a strong player" recommend this approach, you'd better check your facts.

I'm not going to clog this forum any more than I already have with an exhaustive list of all players to have played something that you think is 'inferior'... but each of these openings has their own niche. Time spent studying them is not simply wasted, due to the fact that Rybka claims some 'Silicon Defence' (pun intended) is best. Any time that you can get your opponent thinking on their own two feet, it's much easier to throw them off-balance than when they can safely cling to a pillar of 'theory'. I have never lost a game to pure opening preparation--other than many, many, Ruy Lopez's and French Defence's, etc. ... I can't change your mind one way or the other... in fact, I WANT you and others to oppose me. Darkness can't exist without Light, ROFL ROFL...
But neither is the light 'inherently' good... In fact, it gave me a sunburn once!
Well anyways, I think you get the picture!

Greco

Oh, and I forgot... the major reason games are won and lost is tactics, right?

And you will be more familar with tactics if you are more familiar with the position, right?

I rest my case

And the opposite goes if your opponent is not familiar with the position...

Also, when they "find the solution" to lead the game "back into calm waters" they will invariably give up something in the process--or maybe allow you an easy draw. This almost sounds like the type of people that play 3. d3 or 3. Nc3 against the Latvian Gambit! Well, I know that doesn't apply to you "professionals" :P... but next time I play someone who isn't "blind to the light" like I am, maybe they'll have a bit of a surprise in store for them--I'll play something they think is SOUND? *naw*... that would be TOO much of a surprise! ROFL ROFL

_________________
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f5 3. exf5 Bc5 4. Nxe5 Bxf2+ 5. Kxf2 Qh4+ 6. Kg1 Qd4#
You can run, but you can't hide!


Sun Nov 29, 2009 1:37 pm
Profile WWW
Premium Member
Premium Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:24 pm
Posts: 2010
Location: Silicon Valley, California, USA
Rating: 1702 USCF
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
Hi Greco,

Steve and katar are sharing some really good and wise stuff with you. Pure gold. If you aren't interested that's cool. Chess is supposed to be fun and you should do it in a way that is fun for you.

But you really should show a whole lot more respect for guys three rating classes above you. The snotty attitude is completely out of line. And I thought somebody other than one of them should say that. Consider it said.

L8erz...
=wild=

_________________
I know you believe you understand what you think I just said, but you may not realize what I implied is not what you inferred.


Sun Nov 29, 2009 1:50 pm
Profile
Rook
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 7:54 pm
Posts: 168
Rating: 1550
Rating Class: Class C (1400-1600)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
Um... what do you mean, "Three rating classes above me?" Did any of us turn in a card with our rating to the KGB member at the turnstile who gave you nametags with "Class A" on it and me a dunce cap with "Class F" written on it (in Russian, of course :lol: )... Isn't this a site where you just brag about... ahem... *post* your rating in good faith? Well, since I didn't want to appear presumptuous, naturally, I didn't say that I was a GM or anything... LOL! To be honest, these openings transcend something as trivial as one's "rating".

And although I expect you guys to believe this even less than I expect you to start advocating playing gambits (srsly!!!), I have a *current rating* of 1867 (I'm in a losing streak currently, this is down from a peak rating of 2054)--so I'm obviously not GM-material, but I *like* to think that's mainly due to my astounding endgame blunders. LOL

I really am pathetic, aren't I? Having to plead my case, just because no one else will, not even Pobble... LOL but hey, sometimes pain isn't such a bad thing, just like *darkness* ROFL.

Basically, I'm just trying to say that I'm not some loser acting like he's someone, even though I don't doubt you will continue to believe that. In fact, I even have my own *website* devoted to one of my lines in the Latvian! LOL but who really cares, anyways? I suppose that all of the time I spent on that was *wasted* !!!

And furthermore, I can already tell that in places like this, the hierarchy is denoted by your understanding of 'sound' principles... so, in that case, I suppose that I'm the "Black sheep" of CVTV--I forgot to bow to the authorities when they came into the room--oh, the horror!

Greco

P. S.: Before I reach the end of my days, I only ask one favour: when I finally get the *BANHAMMER* (most likely sooner rather than later), PLEASE remember my legacy and get some "C-C-C-Combo Breaker!!'s" going on the forums...

Catch a koopa. Do it for me. Do it for Mario!

In other words: Don't Settle. Be Rugged!

_________________
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f5 3. exf5 Bc5 4. Nxe5 Bxf2+ 5. Kxf2 Qh4+ 6. Kg1 Qd4#
You can run, but you can't hide!


Sun Nov 29, 2009 5:53 pm
Profile WWW
Wants a custom title
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:43 am
Posts: 1358
Rating: 1694
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
Well, for what it's worth, I enjoy Greco's attitude towards the game, and the swashbuckling way he plays. I also agree with the resident experts that if you are on this site to improve your game, that a more systematic and comprehensive view of chess is necessary. Tactics do win the majority of games - at class level play. I am still rated waaaay low (USCF 1512 provisional after 13 games), but my long term goal is to become an expert. To this end, I feel that positional study and understanding, in addition to extensive endgame study will serve me best. Admittedly, I have been very weak weak in tactics and calculation which is something I strive to improve.

I guess the long and short of it to me, is that I don't think anyone should 'bash' anyone personally or for their preferences, but also to deny that expert players would have a better understanding of what is required to consistently win games is a bit naive. So, for Steve, Pobble, et al, I would just say that Greco is here having fun, playing crazy chess and that is cool, he doesn't appear overly concerned with improvement in his game and much as having fun and playing around in complicated positions, where he can try to pull off some fancy tactics. For Greco, I'd recommend trying to understand the value of what the expert class players are saying, and not getting so defensive over suggestions. To each their own, right?

I hate to sound like some lovey dovey hippie or something, cause it isn't really my style, but I really think we should be welcoming to anyone who joins this site, and realize that not everyone on cvtv is here for intensive study and improvement, some are just here for entertainment which is cool as well.

Anyways, yea... LOL

_________________
facebook: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1023375213 (I guess this is how I link it, anyway you can friend me)


Sun Nov 29, 2009 7:58 pm
Profile
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 4:07 pm
Posts: 1492
Location: Tucson, Arizona USA
Rating: 2014U
Rating Class: Expert (2000-2200)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
King_Greco wrote:
Um... what do you mean, "Three rating classes above me?" Did any of us turn in a card with our rating to the KGB member at the turnstile who gave you nametags with "Class A" on it ...

And although I expect you guys to believe this even less than I expect you to start advocating playing gambits (srsly!!!), I have a *current rating* of 1867 (I'm in a losing streak currently, this is down from a peak rating of 2054)--so I'm obviously not GM-material...


Nothing bad or nasty has been spread here, so there is no reason to even consider the ol' *BANHAMMER* as you call it :lol: Just people sharing their opinions and we can agree to disagree.

K_G, to address your question of the rating KGB, no, it's not the KGB. Both Katar and I are Experts by the definition of the USCF, US Chess Federation, a rating you only get by playing in Over The Board tournaments.

I don't play chess on the internet though I do belong to ICC. We recently did comparisons of local players and their ratings on Internet sites vs OTB ratings and in general the ratings on ICC were about 200-250 points higher than the player's OTB ratings. This means that a 2200 on ICC is about 1950-2000 OTB. Others may have a different opinion as this is based on only about 20 people I know in So. AZ who play on-line as well. Heck, we even have one guy that is 1300 OTB but keeps hovering around 2000 on ICC.

So, when you ask about the rating KGB, you now know where we got the ratings - they weren't just pulled out of a hat - they are legit.

_________________
Steve Farmer
http://www.youtube.com/user/StoopidBishop?feature=mhee


Sun Nov 29, 2009 8:29 pm
Profile YIM WWW
Rook
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 7:54 pm
Posts: 168
Rating: 1550
Rating Class: Class C (1400-1600)
Post Re: katar - 1.e4 e5 for Black: Intro and Scotch Game [22:03]
Thanks, JWhis, it seems that at least one other individual isn't so insulted that he can't do it "for teh lulz"... however, I'm here to improve, just as much as anyone else. Often 'improvement' for one person means in a totally opposite direction from someone else. If I'm missing out on something until I play a Caro-Kann Defence, then they're missing out on something until they play a Schara Gambit! You can't have it both ways... Honestly, from what I've seen so far, the 'resident experts' have just been so *superior* to me that I haven't even been able to grasp their concepts... seeing as I was *only* rated about 1900... Oh wait, I almost forgot... the whole reason that my approach is mine is because the others disapprove! You know what they say: the bigger they are, the harder they fall. (So when I fell, it didn't make a lot of noise--I'm a pathetic goalkeeper on my soccer team that lost its last four games by one goal each, AND I only weigh 68 kg!)

Greco

P. S.: Sorry about that, "EXPERTS"... I could only dream of having that good of a rating.

--HOWEVER--

You just WISH that you had a target on your back like I do... LOL!

A trade of material for obscure positional complications? Man life is really like the Latvian Gambit sometimes!

_________________
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f5 3. exf5 Bc5 4. Nxe5 Bxf2+ 5. Kxf2 Qh4+ 6. Kg1 Qd4#
You can run, but you can't hide!


Sun Nov 29, 2009 8:54 pm
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 74 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF