|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 57 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jan-09-08
 | | alexmagnus: Hello chessfriends. Here you can discuss whatever you would like to discuss with me:) |
|
Jan-09-08
 | | OhioChessFan: Did you clean out the locker here for the New Year?
|
|
Jan-09-08
| | OhioChessFan: I'm curious if you have any insight on young players, in whether you can tell if they have a great deal of developable talent at the very youngest ages. |
|
Jan-10-08
| | alexmagnus: Well I can't tell it for sure but looks like I have kind of a good intuition on young players. I followed Lahno's games since she was completely unknown, Carlsen's since 2001, Klek's since one of her first games at all. Though it were not that first kibitzed games which made me to their fans. Those 3 games which turned me from a neutral observer into a fan may tell you how... Lahno vs A Gasik, 2001, Carlsen vs S Nyysti, 2002 and Klek-Kaphle 2005 (not in the database, Klek lost that game. Probably the only case of a lost game by my favourite player which I ever liked...) |
|
| Jan-15-08 | | Rolfo: Hey Alex, I like your game collections. Your intuition on Magnus' talent proved right! I followed him myself since 2004 more or less.. |
|
Jan-15-08
| | alexmagnus: <Rolfo> Thank you. BTW do you know if there is any limitations on the number of collections? |
|
Jan-30-08
| | alexmagnus: The <alexmagnus gambit> was supposed to be
1.e4 e5 2.Qh5?! Nf6!?. I thought of it as refuting 2.Qh5 (funnily enough, I play it myself as White sometimes). I analyzed it almost up to move 20, in all lines black came out better, but... Unfortunately I analyzed only 3.Qxe5+ Be7 4.Bc4, where 4...0-0! indeed gives Black an overwhelming advantage. Yesterday I got Nakamura's article on 2.Qh5 in my hands. His analysis of the main line (1.e4 e5 2.Qh5 Nc6 3.Bc4 g6 4.Qf3 Nf6 5.Ne2) came to the same cclusion as myself, White is slightly better (worse than in any conventional opening but better than dead equal), the opening is absolutely playable. Then I looked Nakamura's analysis of 2..Nf6!?. What I found buffled me a bit. 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5 Nf6 3.Qxe5+ Be7 4.Qf4!? I never thought of this move. Moving the Queen for the <third> time in a row while letting Black develop? . Well, I'm open for any suggestions, especaially from a player rated 1000 poits above myself, so I looked at Nak's line... The main variation in that line goes:
4...0-0 5.e5 (<hah, again no developing move!>)Re8 6.Nc3 Bd6 7.d4 c5 8.Be3 cxd4 9. Bxd4 Nc6 10. Nf3 Nxd4 11.Qxd4 Bxe5 12.Nxe5 Qe7 13. 0-0-0 Qxe5 14.Qxe5 Rxe5 15.Bc4. Just wow. White's position looks indeed not bad. Is there no way to come out better as Black at all? |
|
| Jan-30-08 | | Ziggurat: <alexmagnus> Thanks for posting Nakamura's analysis, which I find really fascinating. Maybe I'm exaggerating, but 4. Qf4 is a move that I suspect no GM from before the Fritz/Rybka generation would have suggested. (Of course, most GMs would never be analysing 2. Qh5 at all!) I don't mean that I think Nakamura found this using an engine, but rather that he seems to have developed, under the influence of strong engines, a very independent and pragmatic style which often goes against the classical "rules". The strange 4. Qf4 - 5. e5 plan is an excellent example of this. |
|
| Jan-30-08 | | Red October: this could be the way foward in chess, take some of the "accepted truths" and try to turn them on their heads |
|
| Feb-06-08 | | ongyj: Gosh that's awsome stuff <alexmagnus> thanks for sharing Nakamura's analysis. How/where did you get it from? |
|
Feb-06-08
| | alexmagnus: <ongyj> "Secrets of Opening Surprises", Book 7, Chapter 17. |
|
Feb-15-08
 | | Stonehenge: It is lonely at the top :) |
|
Feb-15-08
| | alexmagnus: hehhh? |
|
| Feb-15-08 | | whiteshark: Warum gibst Du nicht einfach ein - Dein - Thema vor ? |
|
Feb-15-08
| | alexmagnus: <Whiteshark> Du kennst mich ja aus Schachforen:) Ich bin besser im Diskutieren eines vorgegebenes Themas als in der Themenauswahl... |
|
| Feb-15-08 | | whiteshark: Wenn Du nur "mitdiskutieren" willst, brauchst Du dafür notwendigerweise kein eigenes Forum, sondern nur ein 'waches Auge' - es gibt ja bereits die verschiedensten Themen/Diskussionen auf dieser Seite.:D |
|
| Mar-05-08 | | Tactic101: Hi there!
I was taking a look at some of Kateryna's games and I began to think about her performances recently. Why is it that she has suddenly stopped improving dramatically as she was when she was 12 and got the WGM title? Any comments? |
|
Mar-06-08
| | alexmagnus: <Tactic> I don't understand it myself. Actually Katyryna <did> improve after the WGM title. She reached around 2500 (2509 was her best, when she became 6th on the rating list of women) and then fell back to 2450ish where she is still. So she stopped improving around age of 15. The reasons are hard to say. Kateryna seems to have some problems with "men's" tournaments, just look at her bad performances in 2006 (Corus, Pulvermühle...). Why? Don't know. Notice that of three GM norms, two she got in the female tourneys (European Championship Chisinau 2005 and North Urals Cup 2006). Her best performances (2550+) were all there while she was a complete failure in male tourns of the same level. While stagnation around age 13-15 is soething usual (see other chess prodigies), I think there is also something in women's chess generally. I guess women play differently (though can't say what the difference is). |
|
| Apr-02-08 | | Riverbeast: <alexmagnus> Are you AlexandarMagnus on FICS? |
|
Apr-03-08
| | alexmagnus: <Riverbeast> no |
|
| Apr-03-08 | | ongyj: I'm really a noob in chess whose very interested in openings. With light viewing from free engines Rybka1.0 beta and Togall ii 1.3.4, It seems that 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5 Nf6 3.Qxe5+ Be7 4.Qf4 is a computer move, and I'd recommend an intersting line 4...d5!? 5.e5 g5 6.Qxg5 Rg8 7.Qe3 Ng4 8.Qf4 Bg5 9.Qd4 a6 10.Nc3 Nc6 11.Qxd5 Nb4 12.Qxd8+ Bxd8 13.f3 Nxc2+ ... |
|
| Apr-03-08 | | ongyj: Oh, 5.e5 Nd5!? gives Black some advantage, on a light viewing. |
|
| Apr-03-08 | | Riverbeast: <alexmagnus> There's a guy named AlexandarMagnus on FICS, one of the most obvious computer users there is, I was hoping it wasn't you. |
|
Apr-03-08
| | alexmagnus: <Riverbeast> As I said'I'm not it. I rarely play on FICS (only sometimes in pauses between the lectures in the university) under the same nickname as here (alexmagnus). I play it totally unconcentrated (the head is still filled with uni stuff) so don't be misled by my 1100ish rating there :) |
|
Apr-03-08
| | alexmagnus: <ongyj> 5...Nd5 is also the idea I got, but never tried it in a practical game...
After I got Naka's analysis I stopped playing 2...Nf6, next time someone plays the Parham against me I'll play it again |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 57 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
