To Mr. Goldsby: please stop insulting others so frequently. Example: did you sleep through it? Were you drunk? (As posted earlier)

You as an adult should be able to converse without resorting to such immaturity.

"Most annotators are lazy! They don't want to work!"

Where do you get such a statistic? My betting is that many annotators are passionate about the game, and try to discover the truth; that is of course my personal feeling, and may not be true, but who then is to say that "most" annotators are lazy? If they are, then it is a minority, certainly not most.

Regarding your dislike of the modern school of annotation. What is this trying to prove? Listen, if a bad move is made, according to our knowledge of the game, if it is bad, it must worsen the position or whatever. They call it "bad" for a reason. I realize your policy is that annotators are too harsh on the players, since we only know the facts after 100 years or whatever of when the game was played. Well, what criticism have you? No annotator I know or have seen annotations to has ever said "Schlechter is a stupid moron, now everyone knows that this line is bad". No, they leave question marks, dictating objectivity.

Also - I DON'T CARE - if a line of discussion annoys you!!!! If it bothers you too much, do what I do to people who annoy me - - - simply click on my 'handle' here and add me to your 'ignore' list. Otherwise - shut the ____ up! OK? (Also - the 'drunk' comment was a joke of sorts - a play on the gentleman's handle - THAT HE CHOSE!!)

And after Black's ninth move ... he my be lost. My analysis certainly seems to indicate this. It is also STRONGLY indicated by the results in the database as well.

Black's move of 11...b7-b5; is the FIRST pick of most strong chess programs. So you have to ask yourself: Is this move really that bad? Or is it the best chance for Black ... in an already difficult situation?

<drunkenknight>
Does this answer your question? (above)

Your analysis was spotty and sub-standard.

The Chernev analysis.
38...Qxb5?; 39.axb5 a4!?; 40.b6 Rad7;
This is probably forced.

(Or: 40...Raa8?!; 41.b7 Rab8; 42.Na5, + -)

41.Na5 Ra8; 42.Rxd6! Rxd6; 43.b7 Rb8;
This is probably the most natural move.

< (Your line: 43...Rf8!?; 44.Nc6?!, ('?') Fritz clearly demonstrates that b3! is a much better move here. 44...Rxc6; 45.Rxc6 Rb8; 46.Rc7?,
Just plain silly. Any good program will confirm that Rb6 is the correct move. >

(Much better would be: 46.Rb6 b3; 47.Kc1 Kf6; 48.Kd2 Kf5; 49.f3! f6; 50.Kd3 e5!?; Black is nearly in zugawang. 51.Rb5 Ke6; 52.Kc3, "plus-slash-minus"
The win is boringly routine. See "The Encyclopedia of R+P Endgames," they have a position that virtually matches this one.)

< 46...Kf6; 47.Kc2 e5!?; 48.dxe5+ Kxe5; 49.Rxf7 d4?!; 50.exd4+!?, ('?!') Probably not the best. >

(Much better was: 50.Kd3!, - Fritz 8.0.)

< 50...Kxd4; 51.Rd7+ Ke4; 52.Kd2, " " Five different programs indicate that White is clearly better here, or "plus over a line." Are you saying Black should hold this?) >

The last of the Chernev analysis:
44.Rc8 Rd8; 45.Rxd8 Rxd8; 46.Nc6, "plus-slash-minus" and White is winning easily.

I checked mine, (the analysis on my web page); with about half-a-dozen of the world's best and most strongest chess programs.

If you would like list, here are a few of the ones that I use. Here we go: ChessMaster 10th Edition; Fritz 8.0, (recommended!); Junior 9.0, Deep Junior, Hiarcs, and Shredder 9.0. (All of the programs on this list were purchased in the last 6-8 months.) I also have dozens of older programs (chess engines) - like Fritz 6.0, for example - that I use on occasion.

See my analysis on my page ... it is airtight ... because it was checked meticulously. I ALWAYS check my analysis with a computer. (Humans - even GM's - might miss a simple tactic. A good program never will!)

http://www.chessninja.com/whitebelt...

Second, yes all book. My web page pretty much speaks for itself. The (old) Fritz "Power-Book" used to give this as the <best> choice ... although the brand-new version that I recently purchased, (May or June of 2005); shows 9...exd5 ('!') to be the number one choice.

I used to have a very old book on the Queen's Gambit Declined. I lost it over the years, but I remember what was in it. (I studied this game - with a group - when I was stationed at Kirtland AFB in Albuquerque, NM.)

The author said that 9...cxd5; was correct, "because Black maintains a symmetrical Pawn structure." (I remember that he did not quote this game anywhere in the book.)

A corollary of Zermelo's Theorem states:

For chess, one of the following three possibilities holds:

(i) White has a strategy which always wins.

(ii) White has a strategy which always at least draws, but no strategy as in (i).

(iii) Black has a strategy which always wins.

If you know some mathematics, the following website proves the theorem:

http://www.math.ucla.edu/~blasius/1...

Concerning your post on April 14, 2005.

I am not sure how many games this website contains, (now) ... I know that they add to it on a daily basis. (On the main page, it says over 370,000 games.)

To be honest, this is a small fraction, (of the possible total); when you consider another on-line database claims to have over 10 Million games. And the ChessBase "MEGA" database now comes with OVER THREE MILLION games!!!

My old database contained millions and millions of games, but I eventually just dumped it - as it had many doubles. Since last year, I purchased the "MEGA" database, but I also add the games from TWIC every week as well.