|Jan-15-05|| ||iron maiden: As fate would have it, I just finished a report on Ivan Pavlov for AP psychology. |
|Jan-15-05|| ||mynameisrandy: Oh, I loved AP Psyche, took it last year. I've been interested in psychology for a while and was glad to get an opportunity to learn a lot. 5 on the exam. :)|
In any case, there's this great anecdote about Pavlov, possibly apocryphal, but a great story.
Pavlov's commitment to his work was legendary. In fact, during the Russian revolution, he still demanded that all his assistants show up on their normal (busy) schedule. One day an assistant simply couldn't get to work on time safely. He took a detour to avoid some of the violence in the streets. When he got to work Pavlov began reaming him for being late and he tried to explain himself.
"But, professor, there is a revolution going on with shooting in the streets!"
Pavlov just shouted "What differences does that make? Next time there's a revolution, get up earlier!"
As for this game? It's okay.
|Jan-15-05|| ||aw1988: <mynameisrandy> Hmm, that sounds like the gangsta version of Scrooge. "But Sir, there is shooting about!" "Bah Humbug!" |
|Jan-15-05|| ||MindlessOne: hey, i forgot the name of the players in yesterdays game, can anyone give me the link to the last game please, need to view the commentary, on second note, arent these Pavlov's different Pavlov's |
|Jan-15-05|| ||mynameisrandy: <MindlessOne>, here's the link. Csank vs Albin, 1890|
And, no, this is not the Pavlov who sparked the behaviorist movement of psychology. He died in 1936.
|Jan-15-05|| ||notsodeepthought: White did seem to have a mouth-watering attack in this game but somehow could not convert it to a winning advantage. Did he have anything better or was the sacrifice (40 B:f6) unsound? |
|Jan-15-05|| ||MindlessOne: <mynameisrandy> Thank you but the link you sent isnt yesterdays game of the day. Anyone else have any clue? |
|Jan-15-05|| ||mynameisrandy: Oy, I'm sorry. Here it is. Albin vs Csank, 1890 |
|Jan-15-05|| ||MindlessOne: thank you for the game randy, as for the game, ive seen h5 a few times, is this the correct response to the move? it seems awkaward, second, does white have to let the pawn to h3, it seems too powerful there!? |
|Jan-15-05|| ||dbquintillion: clearly this game shows that 1. d4 has been refuted by h5, just as 1. e4 is inevitably defeated by h6:|
F Babar vs M Basman, 1993
this lends further weight to my controversial theory that chess solves to a win for black.
Janosevic vs Geller, 1968
|Jan-15-05|| ||mjk: <notsodeepthought> There were a couple of times where it looked like White decided to go for cheapos--maybe he didn't respect Black's ability based on the choice of opening. <dbquintillion>, that is indeed a controversial theory. |
|Jan-15-05|| ||kevin86: What a start!!! 1...h5 lol
Let's see,Pavlov...dog...that rings a bell!!
|Jan-15-05|| ||JSYantiss: Hardy har har, kevin86! rofl
As for the game, the position after 9...Qd8 is hilarious....Black has no development and loses a lot of time shuffling his Rook around ten moves later, and yet he manages a win. Interesting game.
|Jan-15-05|| ||MindlessOne: Nice game. 1.d4 h5 2.e4 d6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 d5 What is the deal with exd5? Why doesnt white play e5 attacking the knight, and forcing it to some lesser square(5.e5 Ng4 fails to 6.h3)(5.e5 Ng8 is probably one of the best moves here but still kinda sad.)(5.e5 Nd7 kinda get in the way of all his pieces, whats the point of that move? Get it to c4 maybe, im not sure) Its funny cause their is both good and evil in this world, and in everything they exist, if this is true then there is both good and evil on a chess board, not just the game but the positions as well! In this position white has another advantage in mind, having a lead in development!Also he now has the only central pawn in the game! you move down the game to move 8...h3. WOW, Once again, white continues making use of his advantage in development, just by getting more. Black focuses on getting his pawn to a dangerous square h3, because he has to make use that h5 move he made earlier. One point you can see in this game is that black is making an attemt at bringing his rook out and into the game if 1.g2xh3 Rxh3 great spot for the rook! 14.Ng5?! I dont understand this move at all,is white neglecting the weakness on his lightsquares after ...Bxe2 Maybe white thinks that no lightsquared bishop for him is a good thing, less attacks through the light squares, or nor. I think its because he once only a lead in development, and that good pawn. His pieces are developed pretty nice still and black still hasnt drummed any serious counterplay. 18.Ng6! I like this ninja move. sacrifice the knight for an possibly fatal kingside attack, or at least good pins and exposed enemy king. Now black doest have to accept this offer and wont. What do you think of 19.NxB? I like it, white can then just start planning how to open up the position into a better endgame with 20.d5! Also he then doesnt waste the fact that he moved to g6 in the first place, loss of time then he he moved back to e5. Anyone know why he did that? what if 47.Qc6!? What if 49.Re1?! I think in these moves is when white just ran out of steam, and lost his advantage, poor guy, he was doing so good too |
|Jan-15-05|| ||cloybloy: Can't resolve what happens after 18. ... fxg6. Why not? |
|Jan-15-05|| ||tpstar: 18 ... fxg6 19. Qxe6+ Be7 (19 ... Qe7!? 20. Qd6 Ne4 21. Qxg6+) 20. Bd6 Ng8 21. Re3 leaves Black in an awful bind since the Kingside pieces are stuck. Maybe 21 ... Qd7 22. Rae1 and Black gets Queens off but White regains the piece, or 21 ... Rc8 22. Rae1 Rc7 23. Bxc7 Qxc7 24. Qxg6+ with an interesting middlegame. |
|Jan-15-05|| ||crafty: 18...fxg6 19. ♕xe6+ ♗e7 20. d5 cxd5 21. cxd5 ♘xd5 22. ♖ad1 (eval 2.27; depth 14 ply; 250M nodes)|
|Jan-15-05|| ||ajile: I think 18.D5 would be crushing for White. White is almost fully centralized and black can't easily get his king out of the center. |
|Jan-15-05|| ||MindlessOne: do you have a variation for d5? I think that it isnt quite the position for d5. Although this is a typical move in the carokann |
|Jan-15-05|| ||patzer2: White in this game gets carried away trying to "punish" White's odd development. His erratic and random tactics hurt his position and facilitate Black's development. He ignores sound positional principals and sacrifices a piece for little compensation, and eventually runs out of moves trying to build an attack where none exists.|
Instead, he should have focused on solid development and control of the position. For example, the simple positional 19. Nxf8 Kxf8 20. Be5 maintaining steady pressure on the Black position would have been OK for White.
White also had the interesting try 19. g4! with an even stronger grip on the position. Play might continue 19. g4! Rh7 20. Nxf8 Kxf8 21. g5 Ne8 22. Rad1 with a clear and strong White advantage in space and development.
The game is somewhat interesting and instructive from Black's position in demonstrating defensive techniques against an unsound piece sacrifice and attack.
|Jan-16-05|| ||ThomYorke: I didnīt understand 47) Rc1. Why not something like 47) Re7 ... |
|Jan-19-05|| ||patzer2: The weak 47. Re7?? is met by 47... Qxe7 , and Black wins easy. |
|Aug-11-06|| ||oao2102: Can't believe this guy won with 1...h5. This oddball move is actually not that bad if Black plays well subsequenly. Quite often, white will ignore the pawn on h5, which can prove dangerous (especially if white chooses to castle King's side). If black develops soundly (i.e. slow, positional play) and castles Queen's side, the pawn on h5 heralds a pawn storm on the King's side. I've had such maneuvers played against me. However, all of this is irrelevant to the current game, where black does not follow any of the aforementioned ideas.|
|Aug-16-14|| ||Ke2: 1... h5 seems to refute 1. d4. According to the CG databse, it scores 100% in 4 games!|
|Aug-16-14|| ||perfidious: No wonder I never made 2400....if I'd only tried 1....h5 even once!|