Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing User Profile Chessforum

Member since May-08-11 · Last seen May-22-22
Welcome to anyone who visits my forum! I don't look much like my avatar, but that's pretty much how I think I am.

As I get older (and I think that's why), I'm much more interested in how chess works than whether I win a particular game. I want to understand a bit more before I die; I'm less interested in whether I'm better on a particular day than someone else is. So if I sometimes get a bit caustic about chess as a sport, that's why.

My interest is mostly in the older games, where the titans of the past discovered the principles we show off by knowing now.

20220226 I've no intention of playing competitive chess again, or even improving my game. But I'm enjoying the heck out of this site. It's friendly, provocative and with the great little ignore button if some kibitzers get a bit out of their tree for a while. Lots of features to explore particularly around ways of searching. And I like the family feel to it through Daniel and Susan Freeman.

20220212 <Daniel Freeman: At that point, I committed a cardinal sin of chess: I bluffed. I had fallen in love with my conception so much I decided to play it anyhow, hoping that my young opponent wouldn't be savvy enough to find the best defense. Bluffing is for poker, not chess.> Don't I ever know the feeling! Rest in peace Mr Freeman D Freeman vs Robson, 2004

20220202 "Botvinnik once wrote 'Chess is the art which expresses the science of logic as music is the art which expresses the science of acoustics' " Becoming a Grandmaster, by Raymond Keene. Batsford, 1977. p 35

20220102 For Milunka Lazarevic, chess was a "symbiosis of all arts". A "female Tal", she was a passionate if rather stern chess teacher, who would exclaim with joy if a pupil made a particularly good move. One of those people I'm very glad existed, even if she might have been uncomfortable to know. Giants aren't all friendly, just as saints aren't all easy company.

20211018 Though I loved being in Wales [as a student 1974-78], I got the feeling to be Welsh you needed to have been born there, ideally more than once. United States Championship (2021)

20210909 Words to live by: 0ZeR0: Alas, almost doing something on the chessboard counts for little.Carlsen vs A Tari, 2021

20210810 I've renewed my premium membership just now, so let's see if I can't contribute more & use the premium facilities a bit more and have fun.

20210603 CG.COM kibitzing resembles a rowdy pub near closing time, with a few sensible conversations going on in the corners, and a lot of shouty fantasists holding court and assuming status more because of their noise than their sense.

>> Click here to see Dionysius1's game collections. Full Member

   Dionysius1 has kibitzed 2558 times to chessgames   [more...]
   May-21-22 Morozevich vs Movsesian, 2008 (replies)
Dionysius1: The search engine assesses the game line as offering no advantage to White after 25.♘df5 gxf5 26.♘xf5 ♖d7 27.♘xg7 ♔xg7 28.♕c3 ♕f4 29.♖e4 ♕d2 30.♕e5 because of [DIAGRAM] 30...♖d5 31.♖g4+ ♔f8 ...
   May-20-22 Jennifer Shahade
Dionysius1: Like so many others - Ben Finegold for example
   May-18-22 Morphy vs Duke Karl / Count Isouard, 1858
Dionysius1: See here! If it wasn't for chuffing geniuses coming and showing us up, we can play perfectly decent chess and have fun doing it. Duke Karl of Brunswick vs Prince of Villafranca, 1870 White to play and enjoy himself [DIAGRAM]
   May-18-22 Petrosian vs Larsen, 1966
Dionysius1: :-) True, but it was the 3D effect of <hafnia>'s YouTube video I was admiring. I can't invert the board there.
   May-17-22 S R Wolf vs Lokvenc, 1926 (replies)
Dionysius1: I always seem to choose the hardest route these days. I went 37.Qxb7+ when 37.Qc7+ would have kept everything a lot tighter and led to a much earlier mate. In fact I ended up, after 37…♔d6 38. ♖d1+ ♔c5 39. ♕e4 ♕c3 40. ♖f3 with this [DIAGRAM]
   May-15-22 Dionysius1 chessforum
Dionysius1: Thanks for the acknowledgement <OhioChessFan>. Maybe I'm too fond of words, at the expense of analysis or creativity. But they can be great things.
   May-15-22 Capablanca vs Kupchik, 1915
Dionysius1: Very nice. I like what happens if White takes the h6 pawn and later tries to save his c1 Rook, with black's bishops and then his Rook running rampant. Eg. 28...h6 29. ♗xh6 ♖xb3 30. ♕xb3 ♗xh6 31. ♖c2 ♗a4 32. ♕b2 ♗xc2 33. ♕xc2 ...
   May-15-22 Vachier-Lagrave vs Aronian, 2022 (replies)
Dionysius1: At Superbet Romania (2022)/Levon Aronian 9...Qa5 is listed as a sacrifice. How come? Aronian just delayed retaking on f6 until after a few forcing checks. I suppose it must be difficult to design an algorithm that doesn't count that as a sacrifice? But I don't like our ...
   May-12-22 Diocletian chessforum
Dionysius1: Thanks. Some games just annoy me - though mostly when I think the players aren't trying. I wasted too many of my school opportunities playing silly opening traps - I felt the only way to play good chess was to dominate from the start. Playing in the Irish Schoolboys championships
   May-10-22 E Hussey vs H Chicken, 1884 (replies)
Dionysius1: So you could call him in for dinner going "Chuck, here, chuck. Chuck, CHUCK!"?
(replies) indicates a reply to the comment.

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 7 OF 7 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Jan-02-22  Schwartz: There's also "Bicentennial Man" with Robbin Williams. Got interrupted last time I tried to watch that. I hear it's good.
Premium Chessgames Member
  technical draw: <There's also "Bicentennial Man" with Robbin Williams. I hear it's good.>

Robin Williams was embarrassed by it but I thought it was good.

Premium Chessgames Member
  diceman: <Dionysius1:

If it's flawed, can it be art, or do I just need to accept that it's cracking entertainment?>

<flawed> is a tricky word. By definition, every game with a win is <flawed.> Theory says the result of chess should be a draw.

In your diagram, Smyslov has already <flawed> the game, by allowing Tal's combination to exist.

<In short, if it's wrong can it still be inspired?>

It would depend on how <wrong> it is. A simple defense, would probably be called <wrong>. Something only a computer would find, and we'd probably cut the human some slack.

<And isn't that giving a computer far too much authority>

The computer is simply truth.
In this case it was in Tal's corner.
In others it may not be.
You ultimately decide how to rate things.

<Flawed> humans play chess. The computer just tells you how <flawed> they are.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: Always great to see a post from you <diceman>

I get what you say, but I want to hold on to a more objective/absolute sense of chess as art before I concede your point.

But if I hold on to it too tightly I'll end up having to concede that only perfectly fought draws can be art, and that's a bit OTT.

I'll see what I can come up with. And thanks in the meantime.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: Maybe my only safe ground for chess as art is in chess problems, where a cooked solution disqualifies itself.
Jan-04-22  George Wallace: Why does chess have to be perfect to qualify as artistic? It might be the case that anything that can be measured and calculated to be perfect is by definition not a thing can be be called art.

Consider the Mona Lisa. We all agree it's art, but it cannot be measured scientifically like a chess engine can measure the moves of a combination.

Poetry, likewise, is considered art, but it is not by nature the kind of thing that can be perfected, in the sense that the perfect can only exist if there is an objective standard by which it can be measured.

I think this goes for all forms of art.

One of the main characteristics of art is creativity. When we are struck by the creative output of someone, it can come across as art. Such creative force is in a different category from those things that can be calculated and be either perfect or imperfect.

Consider now, boxing. The art of pugilism. This is a sport that is often considered both an art and a sport. Muhammad Ali was so great at boxing that many considered him an artist, yet he missed many punches, and failed to dodge them all as well - yet this imperfection does not detract from the artistic enjoyment he provided to boxing fans.

When John Coltrane would improvise, and we almost all can agree that he was a great jazz artist, he would often overreach as he explored the margins of harmony and melodic development, and when he did overreach, he would blow a clunker, or bad note somewhere, but he would use that bad note as a challenge. Instead of letting it pass as a mistake, he would use that very thing as a motif to riff off of over the next few bars, and turn it into something musical, and try to find a way to travel back to the main theme from that developed clunker.

Consider everyone's favorite laid-back painter, Bob Ross. Bob Ross used to say that when painting, there are no mistakes, just happy accidents. He would purposely make a "mistake" to demonstrate to his TV audience, many of whom were painting along with him, how to turn that into something of value, much like Coltrane did during his improvs.

I think if we are dealing with something where the perfect is the enemy of the good, then it can't be art. But if chess is an art, then we can't measure the artfulness of it by holding the moves of a combination up to the perfection of a chess engine, and if we do, then neither can the "truth" of the chess engine invalidate the measure of artistic quality inherent in a chess game, because whatever is being measured in this way can't be the artistic part of the game.

Now some people will point out that if there are any mistakes, such as those made by Coltrane or Bob Ross, then we are dealing with something objective, and that brings perfection back into play for some, but not necessarily, because we can consider a mistake merely missing the mark of one's intention, rather than missing the mark of some external objective standard.

Some may argue that there is, on the deepest level, some sort of connection between beauty and truth. In this sense, when we think of truth, we have to think of communication, because truth is about communicating, i.e. it is a description of reality. In this sense, if art is reflecting reality, perhaps even in the abstract sense, then it functions as a sort of communication, and therefore it has a relationship with Truth.

Postmoderns like Martin Heidegger dispute the entire notion of truth being an objective thing, so there's a whole school of thought out there that appreciates art but in no way considers a relationship with objective truth to be a necessary aspect.

For me, personally, I think the idea of art is just fuzzy enough to include whatever you want it to include, including chess combinations, and that perfection, as calculated by chess engines, doesn't play much of a part in it determining whether it's good chess art, bad chess art, or not artistic at all.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: Thanks <George Wallace> I do want art to be something to do with perfection - looks like I'll have to consider my defences. is a heck of a discussion chamber when it can provide space for responses like that!

Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <Dionysius1: I think I'll incorporate the balance and threats thing too.>

The third stage, the analysis of reasonable lines, is actually an effort to discern between the essential and the secondary. I suspect you will agree that this is a most important exercise, especially because of its applications outside of chess.


Good luck!

Premium Chessgames Member
  An Englishman: Good Afternoon: Thanks for writing, <Dionysius1>! Only 11 favorite games in my collection? Rather need to pay more attention to that.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: The Social Contract or the Value of Chess.
Robert Ardrey (The Social Contract, 1970) identifies 3 satisfactions essential to individuals' health: identity, stimulation and security, and claims the organisation of modern life devours the individual by depriving him or her of these satisfactions.

Raymond Keene in Becoming a GM (1977) says chess is a hugely valuable defence against that enemy. Winning a game of chess does wonders for one's sense of personal identity while losses are soon forgotten (huh?); and chess is a very stimulating struggle between 2 individuals where the outcome depends on the individual alone.

Well that's 2 out of 3, and GM Keene argues that chess, because of these qualities, should be added to school curricula like football, cricket or rugby are in England (a rather particular 1977).

I find the direction of the argument persuasive (says County Court Justice Dionysius1, donning whatever the appropriate robe is), and more engagingly expressed than many.

Heh ho!

Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: I may be more confused than I realised, but I'm staggered that the Danish Gambit is the Opening of the Day, but there's nowhere we can discuss it, at least for today.

If there was, this is what I would have posted there. And it would have been more visible there, wouldn't it?

Here’s a perspective from someone maybe wondering whether to play the Danish Gambit as white in lower grade tournaments etc.

The overall figures for games that reached what I think of as the unsophisticated position for the Danish Gambit are wonderful for White

click for larger view

Counting the White wins and Black wins in this database, gives 84 White wins, 31 Black wins, and 7 draws. Reason to be optimistic on the White side.

But it’s interesting once one digs just a little bit. If I was wondering whether to play it in tournaments, I’d look at the results since 1980. There must have been improvements in analysis for Black at some time, and with computers coming in to help in the 1980s, I chose that as a likely enough starting point.

Results on this database since 1980 give 7 wins for Black from 22 games (32%), which is better than the full figure of 31 Black wins from 122 games (25%).

So I might be a little less inclined to mug it up for tournaments as a sure-fire winner for White than if I took results over the whole 156 years into account.

But the universe of games played with this opening is maybe too small to rely on much anyway, and the play for attack or defence at the level that the games in this database are played, are maybe not reflective of what would happen in lower level tournaments.

Overall, I had high hopes of being able to get some indication of good lower level tournament openings to mug up. But the more I think about it with the figures in front of me, the more I’m beaten back into an attitude of “There’s no short cut – just look at the games that come from the opening and see if they suit you!”

Does anyone have a more sophisticated, data-led approach to suggest?

Premium Chessgames Member
  Stonehenge: I'm sure it can be discussed here:

Center Game (C21).

Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: Cheers <Stonehenge>!
Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: I'll be gone come 2nd March. See y'all on 14th April D
Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: Computer chess analysis is going to be more fun when it's capable of saying what the purpose of a player's bad move was.

Maybe that's why lower ranked games retain charm, mind you. They might represent a fantasy that only the player could explain, and even then not long after the game :-)

Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: Heh, look what I found!

So when you're kibitzing you don't have to have white figurines all the time, you can have black ones too

In narrative context it doesn't matter: 1.e4 e5 2.♘f3 ♘c6 3.♗b5

But in analysis you can have: At move 3 ♞ is under attack from ♗. The ♛ can protect it from f6, but that takes a natural development square away from the other ♞

Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: Goodness knows what has happened to the daily puzzle feature. It used to be an interesting and intelligible challenge, but over the last few weeks and particularly today it hasn't made sense any more.

I'm giving the feature a miss from now on, and will have a look at it again when I'm deciding whether to extend my subscription to in August.

There are other chess puzzle websites, and if the puzzle feature is still daft here I'll see in August whether for me is worth belonging to (free OR premium) without it.

Disappointing, but that's how things wax and wane I suppose.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: Ok, it's not that bad. Just blowing off some steam. Within the parameters of trying to please everybody at least some of the time, the daily puzzle feature's ok. I'm back onside.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Fusilli: Happy to be your spokesperson in T Gareyev vs G Milos, 2006. :)

<I'll see in August whether for me is worth belonging to>

That's a good question for reasons other than the puzzles too. I confess to be lazy with the puzzles, but I got used to how the website works even when there are better ones (e.g. Opening explorer). I like the Guess the Move feature.

What I am most disappointed about is the level of vitriol in political arguments coupled with the low level of true chess engagement. I think no one should be allowed to post 5 political comments (or more) for every chess comment they post.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: About my post here on Dec 29 last year. I've been coming up empty looking for humerous chess moves,

And then this happened. I laughed out loud when I saw the point of 33.c5 bxc5 34.Bb5

click for larger view

Oh my dear goodness. I got a FEN diagram right first time. Never done that before. Isn't it great about chess that it's possible to be really sick of the idea of ever playing it again, and still love things about it? In this case every aspect of it being a language. Time for a cup of tea.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: That came from Lasker vs Tarrasch, 1916
Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: I know better than to post stuff that will please only me, but this is an indulgence.

Sometimes words are just brilliant.

I wrote data-led a few posts ago, and it looks like a miskeying of detailed, which would be a really really good alternative word for what I meant. DododoDOOdido. What a coincidence!

And coverlet isn't a small cover. It's a couvre lit! How great is that?

Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: Yikes! Yesterday I wrote <Oh my dear goodness. I got a FEN diagram right first time. Never done that before.> Today I discover ALREADY provides a lovely FEN copying facility on the settings.

My besetting sin is going off and exploring and inventing before checking.

I did it as a toddler (always getting lost).

I did it as a student and came up with some clever stuff (professors liked it anyway and weren't too bothered that they already knew it).

And I did it at work, so my career got becalmed - other people got on quicker "reading the manual" or doing what they were told.

So I'm not too surprised. But for anyone following this, <to access the FEN function>, click on any diagram, then settings, then far right on the list of settings.

Me? I'll probably go on doing it manually, and I hope it'll give me some visualisation benefits, and that warm glow of a skill mastered!

Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: There's a few of us that love words. It can be frustrating to find a great word/phrase and not have anyone else around who shared your enthusiasm.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: Thanks for the acknowledgement <OhioChessFan>. Maybe I'm too fond of words, at the expense of analysis or creativity. But they can be great things.
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 7)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 7 OF 7 ·  Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific user only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

You are not logged in to
If you need an account, register now;
it's quick, anonymous, and free!
If you already have an account, click here to sign-in.

View another user profile:
Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC