|Feb-11-03|| ||judokausa1: Would you believe that Cyrus just earned his IM title this year!? (proof professional chess and family don't mix) He has been one of top 50 players in the US since the 80's. |
|Dec-03-04|| ||Eatman: Aye, Cyrus has been well above IM strength for some time. One of the nicest guys to get crushed by in a chess game with. :)
Actually, he has managed to combine his career in teaching chess with family quite well, just that IM/GM norm tournaments in US have been rather sparse. |
|Apr-18-05|| ||pazzed paun: IF you take a look at his opening rep.
many players below master level could adopt it and benifit from it.
|Jun-03-06|| ||Joshka: He's on the air now with Dr. Kopec, chess.fm, for today's broadcast.|
|Jun-03-06|| ||arifattar: The name sounds very Zorastrian and very Indian.|
|Jun-03-06|| ||Open Defence: very Parsee in fact ....|
|Jun-03-06|| ||arifattar: well technically Zorastrian because all Zorastrians are Parsees but not all Parsees are Zorastrians.|
|Jun-03-06|| ||Open Defence: <well technically Zorastrian because all Zorastrians are Parsees but not all Parsees are Zorastrians> well technically Parsee actually.. a Parsee who may or may not be a Zorastria.. :-D|
|Jun-03-06|| ||arifattar: alright. granted.|
|Oct-18-06|| ||calidoggg: I'm Zoroastrian, and I'm not Parsi. The Parsis were the Zoroastrians who fled Iran to India because the Arabs were persecuting them. Now you can never mention your false statement again.|
|Oct-18-06|| ||calidoggg: So therefore, all Parsis are Zoroastrians|
|Apr-12-08|| ||zoren: a powerful player who apparently is semi-retired, anyone know anything about this guy|
|Apr-12-08|| ||WannaBe: Apparently by this link: http://main.uschess.org/component/o... he plays in San Diego... Still playing!|
|Apr-12-08|| ||zoren: thanks wannabe, didnt think to look there, just poking around for anecdotes / stories of people whove played with him :)|
|Mar-10-09|| ||blacksburg: i've seen a few of this guy's games that aren't in the database. in a lot of those games, Lakdawala opens with <1.c3!?> as white, and seems to aim for some kind of reversed caro kann/slav setup, like a delayed colle system or something. it's weird. |
i've also heard <1.c3> referred to as the <Lakdawala Variation>. i have some experience in caro kann, pure slav, and scandinavian defences, so i might give it a try in blitz games. it can't be that bad, right?
none of his games in the database start with <1.c3>, though, so maybe i'm wrong, but i swear i've heard about this guy and his silly <1.c3> move, and there's no other Lakdawala. anyone else here know what i'm talking about? or did i just have a weird dream about a bad opening move and a guy with a funny name?
|Mar-10-09|| ||blacksburg: yeah, this must have been a weird chess dream. no respectable chess player would play this stuff right? |
<1.c3 e5 2.d4> - reversed caro-kann
<1.c3 c5 2.d4 d5> - reversed slav
|Jun-03-09|| ||blacksburg: <VERY> entertaining interview with Watson on ICC this week. much better than Watson's usual interviews, which i usually stop listening to half way through. |
in addition to making me laugh out loud several times, he clears up the 1.c3 question i had!
apparently, someone named 1.c3 the <lakdawala accelerated> because after 1.Nf3 c5, instead of 2.e4?? <his question marks> trying to sucker him into a sicilian, lakdawala would play 2.c3, and try to play a reversed slav, since he plays the slav as black.
|Jun-24-09|| ||Fusilli: Here's a newspaper article on him (and on Elliot Liu): http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/...|
A quote from it: The reporter asks: "Could you guess at your yearly earnings through chess?"
"It really varies. I don't want to go into salary, but it's not very great. It's like having a pretty crappy job. It's like having a job where you go, 'This is a dead-end job.' "
|Jun-24-09|| ||fromoort: <calidoggg>How about a Parsi who is an atheist?|
|Jun-25-09|| ||fromoort: By the way, <Blacksburg>, in response to your remark about a "guy with a funny name", his last name literally means "stick guy".|
|Jul-26-11|| ||wordfunph: 3 books in 2 years by IM Cyrus Lakdawala..
+ Play the London System (Sep. 2010)
+ A Ferocious Opening Repertoire (Feb. 2011)
+ The Slav - Move by Move (Aug. 2011)
|Nov-03-11|| ||whiteshark: < A ferocious opening repertoire
< by Cyrus Lakdawala >>|
First edition (February 22, 2011)
Tired of playing the same old openings? Bored with stuffy opening theory? This book provides a welcome antidote!
Former American Open Champion Cyrus Lakdawala presents a range of vicious weapons for White in a repertoire which is perfect for those who have little time for study, but enjoy taking opponents out of their comfort zones and causing them problems from the very beginning.
The repertoire's backbone is provided by the aggressive Veresov Opening <1 d4, 2 Nc3 and 3 Bg5> and this weapon is accompanied by equally hostile options against other Black tries such as the French, Caro-Kann, Dutch, Benoni, Pirc and Philidor.
These weapons are ideal choices for those who revel in forcing opponents into chaotic, uncomfortable positions. *Opening weapons to shock and confound opponents *Covers all of Black's main defences *Includes game summaries with key points to remember
|Sep-17-12|| ||Peligroso Patzer: Lakdawala has just published a book on Capablanca's games in Everyman's "Move by Move" series: http://www.amazon.com/Capablanca-Mo...|
The book (which I have barely started) seems to provide good instruction. Its treatment of Capablanca is decidedly hagiographic: on page 7, Lakdawala actually refers to his subject as "Saint Capa".
|Sep-29-12|| ||Peligroso Patzer: I am continuing to plod through Lakdawala’s book, <Capablanca: move by move>, by Lakdawala, Cyrus, Everyman Chess ©2012. It still makes a generally favorable impression, but some of the comments seem odd. |
In commenting upon Capablanca vs Bogoljubov, 1925 , after <1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 dxc4>, Lakdawala writes: “A rather odd point to enter the Queen’s Gambit Accepted …” (op. cit., at p.64), but he does not state any reason the move <... d5xc4> is less sound here than after <1. d4 d5 2. c4>, and it is doubtful there is any basis other than contemporary fashion or convention regarding move order to regard the move as questionable. In fact in Vallejo-Pons vs Kasparov, 2005 (a game mentioned by Lakdawala in his notes at p. 64), after <1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 e6 3. c4>, Kasparov played <3. … dxc4> in the identical position (reached by transposition) where Bogoljubow played it (and, FWIW, Kasparov won in 29 moves).
Perhaps the point is that if Bogoljubow wanted to play a QGA, he could (and should) have entered that system on move 2, rather than allowing Capblanca the chance on move 3 to take the game into the Exchange Variation of the QGD. (Of course, move 3 was Kasparov's first opportunity to play < ... d5xc4> in his game with Vallejo. Nevertheless, Lakdawala's comment here strikes me as odd and (in distinction to the content of his book generally) devoid of pedagogical value.