< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 64 OF 64 ·
|Sep-24-14|| ||FSR: I like all of Kaufman's books. The only books of his that I know of (all of which I have) are his two repertoire books http://www.bookbyte.com/textbooks/c... http://www.amazon.com/Kaufman-Reper... and his book on 3.f3. http://www.newinchess.com/Sabotage_...|
|Sep-24-14|| ||Shams: <FSR> Wow, that looks right up my alley. Thanks!|
|Sep-24-14|| ||FSR: <Shams> FWIW, 3.f3, although a fairly rare bird, is White's best-scoring third move in CG.com's database. Opening Explorer I recently used it to roll a 1973 on GameKnot. http://gameknot.com/chess.pl?bd=206...|
|Sep-24-14|| ||Shams: <FSR> Giri had a nice win a few weeks back with <3.f3>. Your link isn't working for me but I'd like to see the game; do you think you could post the PGN?|
|Sep-24-14|| ||Shams: Here are a couple recent Giri wins with <3.f3>:|
A Giri vs Gelfand, 2014
A Giri vs M Vachier-Lagrave, 2014
|Sep-25-14|| ||FSR: [Event "Let's play chess"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. f3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nb6 6. Nc3 Bg7 7. Be3 O-O
8. Qd2 Nc6 9. O-O-O f5 10. e5 Nb4 11. Nh3 Be6 12. Kb1 Nb4d5 13. Ng5 Nxc3+
14. Qxc3 Bd5 15. h4 e6 16. Bd3 Na4 17. Qb4 b5 18. Qd2 Qe8 19. b3 Nb6 20. h5 gxh5
21. Rc1 c6 22. Nh3 a5 23. Nf4 a4 24. b4 Bc4 25. Nxh5 Rf7 26. g4 Bxd3+
27. Qxd3 Nd5 28. Bd2 Qd7 29. Rcg1 f4 30. g5 Rf5 31. Nf6+ Bxf6 32. gxf6+ Kf8
33. Rg7 Qd8 34. Rhxh7 Nxf6 35. Rf7+ Kg8 36. exf6 Rxf6 37. Rhg7+ Kh8 38. Qh7#
|Sep-25-14|| ||FSR: I was inspired by S Shankland vs Ftacnik, 2013.|
|Sep-25-14|| ||Shams: Nice crush! Is the early ...f5 a popular move there?|
|Sep-25-14|| ||Sarah Palin: <Shams> You betcha! Opening Explorer|
|Sep-25-14|| ||Shams: <Sarah Palin> Lol. Thanks ma'am. Can't say I had you figured for a chessplayer. |
I also note that you're not a premium member but somehow you were able to go up to move 9 in the opening explorer. Almost as if...nah, never mind.
|Sep-26-14|| ||Sarah Palin: <Shams> Don't misunderestimate me. I read <all> the chess periodicals - just don't ask me to name one. As for Opening Explorer, a buddy of mine at the NSA hacked it for me.|
|Sep-29-14|| ||perfidious: <FSR> Hope you have not had to leave town by air these last few days--I was supposed to fly through Chicago Friday morning on the way home, but never got there. United were kind enough to offer a Sunday morning alternative, but I declined this in favour of spending only one extra day out west and returning via Atlanta.|
Hear things are still a mess after Friday's fire; just glad the whole business is done with from my POV anyway.
|Sep-29-14|| ||FSR: <perfidious> I was lucky enough to avoid that mess.|
|Oct-06-14|| ||Jim Bartle: Hi <fsr>. In the mid-90s Valery Salov made a claim that Kasparov was no better than the other top players, he only won because he had a superior team preparing openings. Salov said Kasparov won almost all his games out of the opening.|
I wonder if there's a way to test this. Informants, and I would assume most databases, give symbols evaluating at various points. Would it be possible to test Salov's claim this way?
You could take all of games of Kasparov, Karpov, Salov, Anand, Nunn, and Seirawan (to have slightly lower-ranked players) from the Informants from 90 to 95. Using the symol evaluations, I think you could determine to what extent Kasparov won straight out of the opening, or the middlegame, or the ending. Or how many times they save lost games, or win drawn games, etc.
Of course there's nothing wrong with winning out of the opening, it's part of the game. They could say Sampras won because of his serve all they want, he still won according to the rules in force.
|Oct-07-14|| ||FSR: <Jim Bartle> Sure, it should be possible to determine how often Kasparov, as compared to other top players, got a large or winning advantage out of the opening. And I don't doubt that he in fact did so more often than others. But as you suggest, I would have a hard time going from there to conclude, "And thus, Kasparov really is no better than other leading players."|
|Oct-13-14|| ||FSR: I just started playing on ICC, which I should have done years ago. I did it mainly because I'm having technical problems with both chess.com and FICS. I'm feeling a lot better about my abilities. My openings are crap, but I just played an IM twice and drew both games. Last night I beat another IM.|
|Oct-13-14|| ||shivasuri4: I used up my one month free ICC membership a few months ago. Are you using the free membership now or the paid one, <FSR>?|
I don't know why, but it felt as if the IMs at ICC play far weaker than in OTB chess. My strength is almost certainly not above 2000 Elo, yet I hold a +6 =2 -7 record against the IMs (+1 -2 against GMs) I played against at ICC. All in 3 minute games though.
Have you tried playing over at chesscube.com? The cubits system can be a bit of a pain, but the interface is good.
|Oct-13-14|| ||FSR: <shivasuri4> Free, but I'm planning to buy a paid membership once my month is up. I agree that the IMs I've seen seem to play at much below IM strength at blitz (5-minute, in my case). I'm not familiar with chesscube.com, will have to check it out. Thanks for the tip.|
|Oct-14-14|| ||Shams: <FSR> You'll get a kick out of this:
|Oct-15-14|| ||FSR: <Shams> That is completely insane. Presumably some lawyers told Jimmy John's that this was A-OK, which is even more insane.|
|Oct-16-14|| ||Shams: I'm now one-for-one in having the Seattle Public Library acquire books I recommend they get. This one looks like a hoot. And what a fantastic title.|
|Oct-16-14|| ||FSR: <Shams> Indeed.|
|Oct-19-14|| ||TheFocus: <FSR> please look at the game <Bird - Lee, 1892>. You posted that you did not understand why Bird resigned.|
I posted the missing moves.
|Oct-24-14|| ||Shams: <FSR> What do you play against the Semi-Slav? I love the Botvinnik variation lines but I don't have the time to study the theory on it at the moment.|
|Oct-24-14|| ||FSR: <Shams> Good question. I have played the Marshall Gambit and the Botvinnik Variation online, but I wouldn't dare play them in tournament games without studying them. In tournament play I've played 3.Nf3/4.Qc2 a couple of times, but it gives White no advantage. The Slav and Semi-Slav are two of the many lines I need to study.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 64 OF 64 ·