| Nov-06-10 | | JohnBoy: This is posted as one of MVL's notable games, but I don't see it. Black played poorly. Is there some way for white to save a rook after 16...Rb8? Maybe white is toying with black and plans 17.Rd3 Rb1+ 18.Kd2 Rxh1 19.Rh3 and having a wall of passed pawns for the bishop? Or maybe 15.Rd3 was played instead of Rd2? |
|
| Aug-03-19 | | gambitfan: tres joli carnage de Vachier Lagrave contre une Philidor |
|
Aug-03-19
 | | fredthebear: <gambitfan> French? It looks Spanish to ol' FTB. Very efficient play by White. You have a most intimidating chess stare. Who does it remind us of? |
|
Aug-03-19
 | | perfidious: <JohnBoy>, notable games as determined by CG are those featured in the greatest number of posters' collections--I agree that there is nothing at all notable about this one, nor do I believe there is anything remotely of interest. <fredthebore> obviously feels differently about things. |
|
Aug-03-19
| | fredthebear: It's a simul game; not enough drama for some. Very efficient play by White, easy to overlook supreme play. <perfidious> How many times has your knight pair beat the bishop pair in a miniature? Can you even produce a central pawn roller miniature mate w/queens off the board? Yep, that's what ol' FTB thought. You <perfidious> are just being yourself again, speaking out of your obnoxious end as usual. Back to my Spanish comment <gambitfan>... there was substance to it. Here's a similar oldie but goodie most of us will enjoy: O Feuer vs O'Kelly, 1934
A New England champion can see the opening similarity if he wants to, and it might even be entertaining! |
|
Aug-05-19
| | perfidious: <fredthebore>, even if I could produce such a game--and I rather doubt I could--what the hell would that prove? That mine is bigger and better? So what? Different strokes for different folks and all that, but I have less than no patience with someone who repeatedly patronises others and appears to believe the world here is populated solely by novice-level players. Amazing as it may sound to you, there are posters who are quite competent and do not need everything spoon-fed them. |
|
| Aug-05-19 | | Nina Myers: Out of nowhere the harmless and funny poster <fredthebear> was insulted by <pervy>. Why isn't that surprising? Because it's happened dozens of times before. Such repeat offenders hang around here. |
|
Aug-05-19
| | perfidious: <nimrod moron....Such repeat offenders hang around here.> An assertion you have just proved beyond doubt--as if such proof were needed. Stick to your endless slagging of So and stay out of firefights with those who will give as good as they get. You want to be reasonable, I can play that way too. |
|
Aug-05-19
 | | Count Wedgemore: <JohnBoy: Is there some way for white to save a rook after 16...Rb8?> 17.Rdd1 does the trick.
I agree with <perf> and <Jboy> that it's not a particularly good game at all. Black's play is of rather poor quality. Perhaps the guy had read somewhere that it's good to have the bishop pair? I mean, never mind having weak pawns, losing the exchange, etc., at least I've got the bishop pair!! <ftb: How many times has your knight pair beat the bishop pair in a miniature? Can you even produce a central pawn roller miniature mate w/queens off the board?> This question is so stupid and irrelevant that no wonder <perf> got annoyed. It is clear that MVL's opponent in this simul game was not a strong player. I'm pretty sure that the young MVL, 13 at the time I think, would have beaten this guy with knight odds. |
|
Aug-05-19
| | fredthebear: <perfidious> FTB is entitled to self-defense, and does not pick "firefights" with you whatsoever. You <perfidious> are a waste of my time. You are the only rub that attacks FTB on this entire site. It's simply not necessary, showing your complete lack of manners and good character. FTB's writing style does not excite you (who knew it was your job to approve our posts?) causing your surly overreactions to be so...perfidious. On this particular page, you attacked FTB over this being a notable game, of which FTB said nothing about. You're so hot for FTB that you don't even read the posts accurately. Furthermore, you misjudged this game. Yes, FTB's comments tend to be more instructional in nature. FTB is not writing for grandmasters. One would imagine that most of the readers on this site are below master level, and might appreciate the information. A few light comments can serve as a useful reminder, even if it lacks the excitement that you desire. Perhaps you should read some Jonathan Rowson, Zenón Franco Ocampos, and/or Cyrus Lakdawala publishing to fulfill your emotional needs on a higher level. It's not FTB's job to meet your inner chess needs. Trolling is forbidden; there are consequences. Why do you follow FTB around when you don't even like FTB? The bottom line is that FTB contributed something worthwhile to this game page for the information/enjoyment of others, and you <perfidious> just did another disingenuous routine -- unnecessarily going out of your way to target FTB again -- that is far too common. You need to stick to chess, or shut up. |
|
Aug-05-19
| | fredthebear: <gambitfan> My initial comment on this page followed your post. My comment in no way was meant to be condescending, but I do apologize if it was taken that way. It was my attempt at segueing resemblance to the Spanish Game, Modern Steinitz Defense, more so than the Philidor Defense. FTB was also trying to recall the sculpture. FTB's memory is better some days than others! I apologize if my comments were taken as standoffish. That was not my intention. |
|
Kibitzing
