< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2280 OF 7037 ·
|Jul-05-06|| ||MrMelad: <aw1988> On the title of this page it is written: "General discussion". I don't think it should be banned, although I think I've gone too far with my posting.. In anycase, I'm done with the politics, unless I see something that will relly require an answer...|
|Jul-05-06|| ||MrMelad: <Mating Net>
According to the opening explorer, e4 is better then d4 for white, by about 0.5% - thats 0.005 -> (37.1% to 36.6%).
You can also find there that Na3 has 100% (4 games) and Nh3 has 71.4% (7 games). There wasn't enough games played so I sould say that the best opening acording to the OE - is g4 that has 61.7% in 222 games played.
|Jul-05-06|| ||Jilted Rook: <In anycase, I'm done with the politics> so maybe now you could turn your attention to diplomacy and then maybe to fairness, open-mindedness, objectivity and the pursuit of truth?|
|Jul-05-06|| ||MrMelad: <Jilted Rook> Deal.|
|Jul-05-06|| ||Ron: <MrMelad> You might want to look into the Torre Attack: the first three moves by white are d4, nf3, Bg5.
Study the games played in this system.
I usually further develop with Nbd2, e3, c3, 0-0.
|Jul-05-06|| ||WannaBe: <Mating Net> NLA, 1. b3. Or you can try the <WannaBe> gambit, 1. e3 followed by 2. Ke2!!|
|Jul-05-06|| ||ganstaman: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches...|
These aren't all London System games, but many are. Plus, the guy with the white pieces wrote a book on this system. But I can't help at all past this for now.
<WannaBe> Have you actually played the WannaBe gambit? If so, I'd love to see a game. And, if you could make some official sounding analysis of the opening, I feel I could justify playing it in your honor once in a while.
|Jul-05-06|| ||WannaBe: <ganstaman> Yes, I have a perfect record using the <WannaBe> Gambit, 0.00000000000% |
You're more than welcome to try it. Not only will you have the worst bishop in the world, and a rook that does nothing. =)
|Jul-05-06|| ||PhilFeeley: I know there hasn't been a page created for it here yet, but the games are available now and maybe people would like to discuss the World Open just finished in Philadelphia. Here's a game I don't understand at all. Perhaps white had an emergency and had to leave, so he just resigned. Anyone know the real story?|
[Event "34th World Open"]
[Site "Philadelphia USA"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Qa4+ c6
8. Nf3 O-O 9. Be2 c5 10. O-O Qc7 11. Bg5 b6 12. Rfc1 Bg4 13. d5 e5 14. Qd1
Najer played several more games there, so it's not that he withdrew from the tournament.
|Jul-05-06|| ||Mating Net: Thanks to all for your help. You do realize that I was only trying to get the discussion back to chess? I enjoy a little diversions every know and then, but come on.|
<WannaBe> I've have actually played, in blitz, against 1.f3 2.Kf2!? a couple of times with mixed results. If the center stays closed, White has an edge. Similar to S Williams vs M Simons, 1999
|Jul-05-06|| ||WannaBe: <Mating Net> But of course, that's why I mentioned my (in)famous <WannaBe>'s Gambit. =)|
|Jul-06-06|| ||JoeWms: I have noticed that some of my friends on this site have difficulty with the verbs <emigrate> and <immigrate>. Try this mnemonic.|
Think of the verbs and their prepositions in alphabetical order:
Note, too, that the second verb has a second M in its spelling. English is a weird language.
|Jul-06-06|| ||Swapmeet: <MrMelad> There are hundreds of examples of the London System in the database. I did a quick search here and with chessbase and was unable to find any games with Kasparov playing white. |
It is difficult because those moves can be played against almost any black set-up. Perhaps if you knew what black played in the Kasparov game, I would have an easier time locating it.
|Jul-06-06|| ||WannaBe: This web-site has plenty of zipped PGNs available... Including the London system, both as white or black.|
|Jul-06-06|| ||JoeWms: <WannaBe> Help! Somebody stole my forum page. How do I get it back?|
|Jul-06-06|| ||WMD: I note with displeasure the concerted attempt to switch the conversation back to chess. Some people...|
|Jul-06-06|| ||ganstaman: <WannaBe> 1) Did you see today's puzzle game? M Mitso vs T Gelashvili, 2000 . It opens 1.e3 2.Qe2!!|
2) What exactly is being gambitted? Can we say that white gambits his position? Or do we usually just call that a blunder?
|Jul-06-06|| ||Stevens: <<WannaBe> Have you actually played the WannaBe gambit? If so, I'd love to see a game. And, if you could make some official sounding analysis of the opening, I feel I could justify playing it in your honor once in a while.>|
there was a computer somewhere that played this a lot. i think it's the one that Short claimed was Fischer playing online. It opened a lots of its games with e3, Ke2 followed by some other bizarre moves, yet it still won most of the games!
|Jul-06-06|| ||Stevens: from chessbase : <The ICC Fischer usually starts his game with some really crazy moves, like 1.f3 d5 2.c3 Nf6 3.Kf2 e5 4.Ke3 or 1.e4 c5 2.Ke2 Nc6 3.Ke3. And he wins.>|
with a game too :
|Jul-06-06|| ||ganstaman: <Stevens> Thanks.
<All> I was reading some stuff here: http://www.chessville.com/instructi... . Saw this line: <"Use your time to think of specifics and to find the best move. Use your opponent’s time to think in generalities and of future possibilities.">
Do you guys do this? On my opponent's time, I usually try to figure out what he'll do, and then think of my response to that (of course, I consider that he could make a variety of moves). However, I'm not right all the time, and in those cases I have to rethink a lot of stuff. Also, I end up wasting a lot of thought on lines that will never get played. Thinking generally instead, and coming up with my dream position (my goal from this position), I think would be more productive. I'd be more easily able to deal with my opponent's move because I'd already know generally what I want to do.
I think I'll give this a try since it sounds good to me. I was wondering if others can attest to its greatness.
|Jul-06-06|| ||Stevens: <<gangstaman> <Thinking generally instead, and coming up with my dream position (my goal from this position), I think would be more productive.>|
this is something advocated by Jeremy Silman and his "thinking technique." I haven't seen it anywhere though that he recommends two different thinking patterns depending on whose move it is though.
I guess it makes sense though to form general plans and ideas on the opponents time and then look at specific moves in your own time.
|Jul-06-06|| ||azaris: The problem with that method is that if your opponent plays very quickly you will have to adjust your thinking pattern.|
|Jul-06-06|| ||Stevens: <azaris> yes, very true. i think this method is mainly for use in classical time controls where you should have a good few minutes per move.|
|Jul-06-06|| ||Richard Taylor: <Mr Melad> I see you're from Israel - Isreal was founded using terrorist methods (mind you I suppose - taken widely - to be devil's advocate for a moment - many states were) - but also - I read a book by an Israeli - written in Hebrew nad translated into English -who actually disguised himself as Palestinian -he went to a number of places to test out the reactons of Israelis to Palestinians he found a lot of discrimmination and injustice and he also went to the Gaza Strip -he knew Arabic and also had special letters and contacts with various leaders - this was before the first Intifada (about 1985) - it was very revealing. A kind of Isareli "Black Like Me (Howard Griffin) All is not well in the State of Denmark. |
I can understand how both Israel and Palestine come to be the way they are - this is not an attack (by myself and <acrice>. et al ) on the Israeli poeple or on or for the Palestinians (whichever Govt. or group amongst them) - or on you - I probably dont even agree with everything <acirce > says - of course it is true we are in the same or similar camp.
As someone said - these are alwats subjective reactions - but one tries to be objective. Sometimes, if you are "in the thick of it " you might have difficulty seeing the overall situation -but I also agree that no one can completely see how things are (for the Iraelis or the Palestinians).
My objection is with the Israeli (military and Government)(they are supported by the US etc)(the Iraq War doesn't help things either) methods - I can understnd the fight back by the Palestinians but I don't agree with everyting their leaders say or with all of their methods - except that recall how vastly out gunned they are (and considerig the have lost much of their original lands) - hence suicide bombing is just another tactic when you lack tanks or heavy weapons or aircraft etc - I also know there are many diverse opinions inside Israel - some want to take over the whole area - others want to negotiate - some Israelis are opposed to their own Government.
Re the Nazi support -a lot of people supported the Germans in WW2.
The question is - what to do about it all? - this maybe a case for a massive UN military intercesion and he enforced establishment of two separate states - but I don't know - that seems too much like it is an(other) invasion ...
The situation is complex and tragic.
|Jul-06-06|| ||Richard Taylor: <JoeWMs> Your forum is still there - like mine it needs someone (or you) to comment it then it is on the first page again - just "scroll back". e.g. my friend <Benzol's> is not there ("first" page I mean) - he is busy with work and doing his tournament collections etc I think. He has some great tournament collections BTW.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2280 OF 7037 ·