< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 31 OF 98 ·
|May-06-13|| ||TheFocus: <FSR> Then that will have to be edited.|
|May-07-13|| ||FSR: <TheFocus> I corrected that in Wikipedia already.|
|May-07-13|| ||TheFocus: I knew you would.|
|May-12-13|| ||Shams: <FSR> You are shoring up your openings to pursue your FM title? Perhaps planning 1.e4 c5 2.c3?|
|May-12-13|| ||FSR: <Shams> I play 1.d4. 1.e4 is inferior because of 1...c5!, when White only scores about 52%. Opening Explorer And 2.c3 is <really> inferior because Black gets a plus score Opening Explorer Indeed, after 2...Nf6!, <Black> scores 52%. Opening Explorer 1.c4! actually appears to be the best-scoring opening move. Opening Explorer I like it less because it takes away some of White's more aggressive options, such as 1.d4 f5 2.Bg5! It's been played 492 times in CG.com's database, and White wins 49.2% of the games (aptly enough) and draws another 22.8%, for a total winning percentage of 60.6%. Opening Explorer|
But yes, I have been boning up on my openings. My friend Bill Brock told me of an opening preparation system he learned from Gopal S Menon, who says that a lot of GMs use it. You start by getting a database program like ChessBase. (Based on a Google search I did, it appears that there are free chess database programs available online, too.) You create two or more folders in which to put games; mine are "White Repertoire" and "Black Repertoire." (Wildly imaginative names, no?) There are perhaps 40 variations you need to know as White and 40 as Black. For each variation, you select one or more model games. (Of course, it's more inspirational if your side won or at least drew the game in question.) So, for example, if you play the Grünfeld Defense as Black, you'll have maybe one game against 4.Bg5, one game against 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Bg5, one or more games against the Modern Exchange Variation with 8.Rb1, and so on. For each line, you don't clutter it up with a lot of alternative moves for "your" side; just focus on the sequence of moves that you've decided is best, although you may want to note blunders for your side to make sure you don't fall into them. You do want to address all of your opponent's reasonable alternatives in the notes, and certainly you want to make note of traps your opponent can fall into. So I use Mega Database 2013 and Houdini 3, figure out the best lines in every opening, and copy one or more illustrative games for each line into my "White Repertoire" or "Black Repertoire" database. I add notes, largely based on Houdini's analysis of the opponent's alternative moves. It also helps to have one or more repertoire books that you like, and follow their recommendations to the extent that you like them. I largely use Larry Kaufman repertoire book "The Kaufman Repertoire for Black and White" (2012), because it advocates 1.d4 as White and the Grünfeld as Black, both of which I play. He advocates 1.e4 e5, which I don't play, so I look at books on the Sicilian as needed for that part of my repertoire. I have a huge library, so I can look up virtually anything. But that's not really essential, as long as you have access to a big database - some are even online - and a strong engine. If you use this system, you should eventually know (and, one hopes, understand) every line you play to, say, 20-25 moves deep.
|May-13-13|| ||FSR: I just submitted this game to CG.com. White's ninth move was dubious, and his tenth a terrible blunder, but it's an opening trap worth knowing.|
[Event "Internet correspondence"]
[Black "Rhine, Frederick"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. f4 e5 7. Nxc6 bxc6 8. fxe5 Ng4 9. exd6 Bxd6 10. h3 0-1
|May-13-13|| ||FSR: I just submitted this game to CG.com. A pretty nice game, I think. I annotated it at http://chicagochess.blogspot.com/20...|
[Event "Internet correspondence"]
[Black "Frederick Rhine"]
1. e4 c5 2. Bc4 Nc6 3. Nf3 e6 4. a3 Nf6 5. d3 d5 6. exd5 exd5 7. Ba2 h6 8. O-O Bd6 9. Re1+ Be6 10. Nc3 O-O 11. Nb5 Bb8 12. d4 a6 13. Nc3 cxd4 14. Nxd4 Nxd4 15. Qxd4 Ba7 16. Qf4 Ng4 17. Nd1 Bb8 18. Qd4 Bxh2+ 19. Kf1 Qh4 20. c3 Be5 21. Rxe5 Qh1+ 22. Ke2 Nxe5 23. Qxe5 Bg4+ 24. Kd3 Qxd1+ 25. Bd2 Qxa1 26. Bxd5 Qxb2 27. f3 Bf5+ 28. Kc4 Rac8+ 0-1
|May-14-13|| ||perfidious: <FSR: ....1.e4 is inferior because of 1...c5!, when White only scores about 52%...>|
Worse still, if one were the late Kenneth Smith at San Antone '72.
<....1.c4! actually appears to be the best-scoring opening move.....>
Was always a good reason for me to play it, lol.
|May-14-13|| ||FSR: <perfidious> Once I master 1.d4 maybe I'll take up 1.c4. It's weird, but I think I'm happier playing Black after 1.e4 c5 than I am playing White after 1.c4 e5. Maybe even after 1.c4 c5. In each case, I expect that White will try to play more aggressively than Black would, and I can exploit that. See the discussion in my award-winning article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-.... I also don't like being committed to having c4 on the board if Black plays 1...f5, 1...e6, 1...g6, 1...b6, or 1...c6. I'm always happy to have d4 on the board.|
|May-14-13|| ||perfidious: <FSR>: In an early game collection on Nigel Short, the annotator discusses such ideas as the relative rarity of Bird's Opening, compared to the Dutch, and how the attitude of a Dutch player bespeaks outright aggro, compared to the exponent of 1.f4.|
Don't know about that, really, though I've had games with each. The aggression, as John Curdo used to say, is in the intent.
Same as yourself, I've always had a liking for 1.d4 f5 2.Bg5, though my only effort in this DB was hardly inspiring (A Shaw vs J Curdo, 2001).
|May-15-13|| ||FSR: <perfidious: ... Same as yourself, I've always had a liking for 1.d4 f5 2.Bg5, though my only effort in this DB was hardly inspiring (A Shaw vs J Curdo, 2001).>|
Same with me, although I was fortunate enough to win it after an uncharacteristic brain fart by my opponent: F Rhine vs G S DeFotis, 1988.
|May-15-13|| ||FSR: Surprising fact: after 1.c4 c5 2.Nc3 g6! Black scores 51.3%! Opening Explorer Hard to believe that White can be worse after 2.Nc3.|
|May-15-13|| ||perfidious: <FSR> Amusing fact: my first game with 1.f4 became my first King's Gambit, too, via 1....e5 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 c6 against William Kelleher back in 1987. If I ever dig up the score, I'll submit it.|
One clear memory of that was catching Bill in the ending with this familiar winning idea, White to move:
click for larger view
|May-15-13|| ||FSR: <perfidious> 1.Nf5 Qd7 2.Qxd5 1-0|
|May-15-13|| ||perfidious: <FSR> He played on a while, as we were both short of time (game/90).|
Bill was part of a double once: in a blitz event at the former Specialiste 'd Echecs in Montreal, in the second round, I played his wife (Vesna Dimitrijevic), winning both fairly easily, then made 1.5 against him in the third round. Don't believe I ever played both spouses in an event, before or after!
|May-16-13|| ||FSR: <perfidious> I've only played two women in tournament games. The first was a Gail something in Tacoma, Washington in 1977. She played 5...e5 in the Sicilian back before it was the Sveshnikov and was just supposed to be weak. The other was Judy Rippeth of Indiana in some big open in Chicago a few years later. She played in the U.S. Women's Championship back before the flood of émigrés. In that one, I was Black in a Closed Sicilian. My king had to dance around in both games, but I won both. (Kurt W Stein had stopped looking at my game against Rippeth, assuming that I was toast. He was later amazed to learn that I had won, but when we analyzed he couldn't find a win for her after trying about five different sacrificial lines.) But no spouses in sight.|
|May-16-13|| ||FSR: I just submitted this game to CG.com:
[Event "Midwest Masters"]
[White "Stein, Kurt W"]
[Black "Karklins, Andrew"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Bc4 Nf6 5. e5 d5 6. Bb5 Ne4 7. Nxd4 Bc5 8. Nxc6 Bxf2+ 9. Kf1 bxc6 10. Bxc6+ Kf8 11. c4 Qh4 12. Nd2 Ng3+ 13. Kxf2 Ne4+ 14. Ke3 Qf2+ 15. Kd3 Nc5+ 16. Kc3 Qe3+ 17. Kb4 a5+ 18. Kb5 Rb8+ 19. Kxa5 Nb3+ 0-1
You can play it over at http://www.365chess.com/game.php?gi.... Quite the sacrificial orgy.
|May-16-13|| ||perfidious: <FSR> Heard of Judy Rippeth; wasn't she about 1750 back then?|
Here's maybe the oddest back-to-back I have experienced, including playing Joel and Alan Benjamin in consecutive rounds of a New York event: the first two rounds of the 1988 US Open, I played women: the first was the late Ursula Foster, from out west (I think), then Sharon Burtman.
The first game was an easy win; in the second I had the worse middlegame till Sharon allowed a forcing sequence which destroyed her position.
|May-17-13|| ||FSR: <perfidious: <FSR> Heard of Judy Rippeth; wasn't she about 1750 back then?>|
Close enough; my recollection is 1744. Your memory never ceases to amaze.
|May-17-13|| ||perfidious: Just came across this-good for a chuckle:
<Benzol: <FSR> Have you ever thought that if you, <perfidious> and myself manage to make another eight years we'll get to relive the 60's.>
The time's a-comin'!! We'll show them young whippersnappers a thing or three, I'm here ta tell ya!!
|May-17-13|| ||Shams: <FSR> You flew out to Tacoma for a chess tournament?|
|May-18-13|| ||The Last Straw: <FSR> There is one score of my brain pooping on ths page... (Don't let out which one).|
|May-18-13|| ||FSR: <The Last Straw> Your secret is safe with me. :-)|
|May-18-13|| ||FSR: <Shams> Not really. I was visiting my aunt, who was a law professor out there at the time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France...|
|May-18-13|| ||perfidious: <FSR>: Goddard offers a pleasant setting in which to go to school; I imagine your aunt enjoyed rural Vermont in the late sixties-quite a contrast from Chicago.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 31 OF 98 ·